Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Water Management topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council hears water-department report showing 24.8% unaccounted loss; agrees to stop pre-disconnect calls and seeks rate analysis

Garfield City Council · January 14, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Garfield City Council was told December's unaccounted-for water loss was 24.8%, possibly linked to an unread hydrant meter used by Big M Construction; the council agreed to stop monthly pre-disconnect reminder calls and approved hiring Jerry Kopke to perform a water rate analysis and Garland & Greenwood for the 2024 Agreed-Upon Procedure.

Council members discussed multiple water-related matters during the Jan. 14 meeting, including a reported 24.8% unaccounted-for water loss in December and steps to improve accounting and rates.

Mayor Gary Blackburn reported the 24.8% figure and noted a hydrant meter in use by Big M Construction was not available to be read during December, which could have contributed to the loss. The mayor also told the council that the Sept. 25, 2024 sanitary survey was "favorable overall" and said he is attending training for a water distribution operator's license, with testing set for March 2025.

Council Member Teeselink raised staff burdens created by monthly disconnect reminder calls placed by the Recorder-Treasurer to habitual nonpayers. After discussion, the council agreed to discontinue the pre-disconnect calls and directed that customers be informed of the change when February bills are mailed.

To improve financial oversight and rate-setting, the council approved engaging Garland & Greenwood to perform the 2024 Agreed-Upon Procedure for the Water Fund and approved entering an agreement with consultant Jerry Kopke to perform a water rate analysis. Details and contract amounts were not specified in the meeting record.

The items passed unanimously among members present. The council recorded the water loss for follow-up; no formal remediation plan or contract dollar amounts were provided in the meeting minutes.