Energy, Utilities & Water  August 3, 2021

Firestone sues Central Weld Water for $8.6M

FIRESTONE — The town of Firestone has sued Central Weld Water District for $8.6 million, alleging the district continued to charge for some water service under agreements that ended years earlier.

The case filed in Weld County District Court alleged that a 1974 initial agreement and several addendums between 1998 and 2005, and one providing for a water main extension in 1994, included provisions for initial fees and later increases, based on the number of residential taps affected.

The complaint alleges breach of contract and negligence.

The suit said various payment surcharges, which for one addendum’s project came to $12.4 million, were to have ended by 2011.

SPONSORED CONTENT

Central Weld Water “continued to assess [additional fees] long after the expiration date for those charges and overcharged the town,” according to the suit, and “to date the district has improperly charged approximately $8.6 million to the town, which is entitled to repayment.”

The complaint doesn’t note how alleged overpayments were found, the passing of time from 2011 to the Aug. 2 lawsuit, or whether the town asked Central Weld Water for a credit or repayment.

Firestone Town Manager A.J. Krieger said via email, “The Town of Firestone has no comment at this time. We believe the complaint speaks for itself.”

Water District Manager Stan Linker said via voicemail, “At this time, we have no comment.”

An attorney for the district wasn’t listed in the complaint and couldn’t be determined by press time.

Attorneys for Firestone, Kathryn Hopping and Mikaela Rivera of Denver firm Waas Campbell Rivera Johnson & Velasquez LLP, didn’t respond to requests for comment.

© 2021 BizWest Media LLC

FIRESTONE — The town of Firestone has sued Central Weld Water District for $8.6 million, alleging the district continued to charge for some water service under agreements that ended years earlier.

The case filed in Weld County District Court alleged that a 1974 initial agreement and several addendums between 1998 and 2005, and one providing for a water main extension in 1994, included provisions for initial fees and later increases, based on the number of residential taps affected.

The complaint alleges breach of contract and negligence.

The suit said various payment surcharges, which for one addendum’s project came to $12.4 million, were to…

Related Posts

Sign up for BizWest Daily Alerts