Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears that Flint’s water fund faces large receivables; staff prepares cash analysis as leak‑detection and grants are weighed
Summary
Finance staff told council Jan. 21 that active water accounts owed roughly $23 million and inactive accounts about $10 million; administration said it is preparing a cash‑flow analysis to compare revenues, expenses and planned capital to inform whether rate changes or other measures are required. Council discussed a $192,000 leak‑detection startup estimate and options including grants, settlement interest and collection improvements.
Council members spent extended time Jan. 21 probing the health of Flint’s water fund after finance staff reported large outstanding balances and outlined next steps.
Amanda (city finance staff) reported that active water accounts owed roughly $23 million and inactive accounts about $10 million; she said the city had sent over $7 million to collections earlier in the year. Council members asked how many inactive accounts remain in collections, whether accounts represent properties or individuals, and whether payment plans or collection policies should change. Staff said inactive accounts reflect prior account holders who left balances and that the collection agency works as an agent — it negotiates payment arrangements but requests city guidance when accepting reduced settlements.
Mr. Moore (city finance) said staff are preparing a cash‑analysis statement comparing expected revenue under current rates with operating expenses and capital needs; that analysis will be provided to the city administrator and available to council if approved. He said capital work for water commonly includes valve and main replacements and plant upkeep; wastewater had larger loans and grants historically, and the availability of grants for water varies.
Council discussed preventive investments versus reactive repair costs. Howard Hudson described a proposed leak‑detection contract with an initial setup estimate of about $192,000 (Resolution 260027) that would deploy colocated data‑loggers and field crews to locate leaks; vendors said the first year contains startup costs and subsequent years could differ. Council members noted that a single large water‑main break can cost tens of thousands of dollars to repair and urged staff to collect prior survey results (2015) and vendor multi‑year pricing.
Other measures discussed included sending accounts to collections (third‑party agency), revising payment‑plan terms (current structure is 'current bill plus 10%'), pursuing settlement interest from the water‑settlement process, and seeking grants. Staff said options will be presented after the cash‑flow analysis is complete.
The committee did not take a final rate vote but instructed staff to supply the cash analysis and follow‑up vendor pricing ahead of budget decisions.
