Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Collections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council probes 8‑year unpaid utility account linked to alderman; corporation counsel outlines collections review
Summary
Corporation Counsel told the March 25 New Britain council that one elected official’s utility account dates back eight years and showed $12,641.23; the council asked for files to be reviewed and discussed the city’s collection practices and statutory limits.
The New Britain Common Council pressed city legal staff on March 25 over a long‑running unpaid utility account tied to an elected official and the city’s collections practices.
Corporation Counsel explained the city’s standard process for delinquent utility accounts: after about 270 days a notice is sent; if unpaid for a year a lien may be placed; accounts may be referred to collections and, if necessary, foreclosure may follow. On the council’s request about elected officials, Counsel said one account of interest extended back eight years and, as reported to the council, showed a balance of $12,641.23 (Speaker: Corporation Counsel).
Council members queried whether an administrative “freeze” on collections in 2023 affected the matter; Counsel said the freeze likely did not affect this eight‑year case and that the previous practice was to refer debts over $2,000 to a private law firm (GB Law Group). Council members asked whether that practice and the prior corporation counsel’s private practice created a conflict; Counsel confirmed those referrals had occurred under the prior administration and that GB Law Group had been used to pursue collections (Speaker: Corporation Counsel).
Several council members pressed for clarity on why the account had not moved to foreclosure as in other cases, and whether liens had been properly recorded. Counsel said the office has requested all collection files back from GB Law Group for review and intends a more aggressive, case‑by‑case approach where appropriate to recover funds for the city.
The council also asked whether the city can forgive delinquent accounts. Counsel said state statute generally does not permit broad forgiveness and emphasized the need to treat residents equally; hardship exemptions may be considered where statute and policy allow (Speakers: Alderman Centeno; Corporation Counsel).
Why it matters: The case raised transparency and equity questions because the account in question involves an elected official and because the prior administration’s practices affected enforcement timing. Council members signaled they want consistent application of collection practices and review of files referred to the law firm.
What’s next: Corporation Counsel said the office will review collection files retrieved from the private law firm and pursue collection or enforcement where warranted. The meeting record shows council discussion and no disciplinary or criminal action; the matter remains subject to review by the city’s legal office.
Sources: March 25, 2026 Common Council meeting testimony and responses from Corporation Counsel.
