Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sewer Fee Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Litchfield WPCA holds public hearing on proposed sewer fee billing, reserve and debt-service policies
Summary
The Litchfield Water Pollution Control Authority opened a public hearing June 18 to present proposed Rule and Regulation revisions and related policies on sewer fee billing, collection and enforcement thresholds, capital outlay authorization, and a debt service fund; specific monetary thresholds were not specified in the transcript.
The Litchfield Water Pollution Control Authority held a public hearing on June 18, 2026, to present proposed Rule and Regulation revisions and accompanying policies addressing sewer user charge billing, collection and enforcement thresholds, capital outlay authorization, and a debt service fund.
The agenda listed three new Rule and Regulation items described as Section X: a new provision to define options for collection of outstanding WPCA sewer user charges and a policy for editing enforcement thresholds; a new section defining capital outlay items and the process for obtaining capital project authorizations; and a new section establishing a debt service fund and the process for payments related to capital debt. The hearing materials also included two proposed policies: a Collection and Enforcement of WPCA Sewer User Charges policy that would mirror the Rule and Regulation language but permit the board to modify monetary thresholds as needed, and a Fund Balance and Capital Reserve Policy to establish operating reserves and a dedicated Capital Construction Reserve Fund for long‑term wastewater infrastructure work.
The transcript records the items on the agenda but does not include discussion of specific dollar amounts, concrete enforcement thresholds, or staff presentations detailing reserve targets or debt schedules. Where the agenda refers to monetary thresholds for enforcement actions, the transcript does not state the numeric thresholds; those figures are therefore not specified in the record.
No public comments relative to the agenda items were presented during the portion of the hearing captured in the transcript. The hearing was adjourned by motion from Member William Buckley, seconded by Member Kate Honan, with the record stating all members voted “aye.”
Next steps were not recorded in the supplied segments; the transcript does not show whether the board adopted the policies at this meeting, scheduled a later vote, or requested further staff analysis.
