Litchfield Council Raises Water, Sewer Rates to Fund Infrastructure

Litchfield City Council Meeting | June 4, 2026

LITCHFIELD — The Litchfield City Council on Thursday, June 4, 2026, approved sweeping changes to the city’s water and sewer rates, restructured how utility bills are calculated and repealed a long-running $5 monthly fee, casting the decisions as an unavoidable response to aging infrastructure that the city says is reaching the end of its useful life.

Article Summary: The council unanimously amended Chapter 52 (water) and Chapter 51 (sewer) of the municipal code and repealed Resolution 3-16, the “utility improvement fee,” as part of a data-driven plan to fund an estimated $27 million in combined water and sewer investment, including a roughly $23 million sewer plant replacement.

Water and Sewer Rate Key Points:

• The council approved restructured water and sewer rates and repealed the $5 monthly utility improvement fee; the new rates take effect on usage beginning June 4 and will first appear on bills sent Aug. 1 and due Aug. 10.
• City officials cited a projected water-fund deficit of roughly $1 million this fiscal year and a sewer fund that has slipped into the negative, noting water rates had not been raised since 2020 and sewer rates since 2023.
• A hired rate-study firm restructured charges by usage and meter size rather than applying an across-the-board percentage increase; officials said legal counsel advised against senior or low-income discounts.
• Two residents addressed the council during public comment — one a retired water professional urging the increases, the other warning of the burden on working-poor households.

The action followed what officials described as a systemwide boil order less than a year ago. Mayor Jacob Fleming said the council had pledged at the time to “collect data” and commission a study, the results of which were presented at the council’s previous meeting and posted for public review. Thursday’s votes, he said, were the decision point that data was building toward.

“Why are we here? We’re here based on a data-driven approach,” Fleming said, framing the increases as a way to address infrastructure needs residents have consistently flagged, from boil orders to basement flooding. He acknowledged the timing was difficult for residents but said delaying would risk a repeat of the boil order “only this time it’s going to be potentially worse.”

A city utility staffer, identified in packet documents as Dave Crocks, told the council the sewer plant’s equipment is nearing the end of its lifespan and that conditions at the facility underscore the need to act.

Why a Rate Increase, and How It Was Built

City Administrator Breann Vazquez walked the council through a series of questions the city said it had collected from residents online. She explained that water and sewer are “enterprise funds,” which under state statute must be self-sufficient and recover their full operating and maintenance costs; relying on the general fund — which is supported largely by sales and property taxes and pays for police, fire and other core services — would jeopardize the city’s eligibility for the state loans it needs for the work, she said. The city is preparing to invest roughly $27 million across water and sewer, including a sewer plant replacement estimated at $23 million.

Officials emphasized the increases were not designed as a flat percentage hike. Vazquez said the city hired a professional rate-study group and “totally restructured” the rate system so that customers using the minimum amount of water would not bear the brunt, spreading costs according to usage and meter size. The council said it explored senior and low-income discounts but was advised by its legal team that case law bars creating preferential or disadvantaged “classes” within an enterprise fund. The city attorney explained that even charging commercial users more than residential users must pass a legal “factor test” to avoid impermissibly subsidizing one group at another’s expense.

The council also addressed wholesale customers, with Vazquez noting the city sells water to eight water districts under existing contracts and would pass along increases “where legally allowed,” having already renegotiated rates with two districts whose contracts came up for renewal.

The $5 Fee and the Public Response

The council repealed Resolution 3-16, which established a $5 monthly “utility improvement fee” that Vazquez said had been popularly nicknamed a “meter fee.” She said the fee was split evenly between water and sewer and was used for utility improvements — not misused, as some residents believed — but that the city was removing it in favor of a streamlined bill. The $5 charge will not appear on bills once the change takes effect.

Two residents spoke during public comment. Joe Cowan, of 43 Arrowhead Trail, identified himself as a retired water professional who had managed utilities in Colorado and California, and urged the council to raise rates, establish a dedicated water-main replacement fund and consider small annual base increases. He also raised concerns that new water main pipe had been left exposed on the ground for weeks before installation and that some fire hydrants appeared to be set too high out of the ground.

A second commenter, who identified himself as Cliff, read a prepared statement criticizing the rollout, arguing the city had not adequately notified customers of the increase or explained what it would cost them, and warning that the increases would strain the city’s working-poor residents, particularly alongside a recent Ameren rate increase. After an absent alderman’s supportive written statement was read into the record, Cliff attempted a point of order; Fleming declined to reopen discussion.

All three measures passed unanimously among the members present, on motions made by Alderman Bob Garcia. Vazquez reiterated that the new rates apply to usage from June 4 forward and, because the city bills a month behind, will first appear on the bill sent Aug. 1 and due Aug. 10.