A Weld District Court judge has granted the Town of Firestone鈥檚 request for a temporary restraining order that prevents the Central Weld County Water District from cutting off water service to the town.
Firestone sued the water district Tuesday, alleging that the district had violated terms of a 1974 agreement, as well as a 2023 settlement of a lawsuit filed in 2021. The town sought a TRO to prevent Central Weld from cutting off water to the town as early as June 5.
Judge Kimberly B. Schutt granted the TRO on Wednesday.
鈥淧laintiff may suffer irreparable harm or injury if this Order is not entered,鈥� Schutt wrote in her order. 鈥溾�� Plaintiff has clearly shown by sworn facts that the Defendant has threatened to cut off water service to the Town, with no alternative means of obtaining water service while these billing disputes are resolved by the court. Water is a basic and fundamental need of the public. Immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage will result to the Plaintiff and its municipal water users if water service and treatment is discontinued before the Defendants, or their attorneys can be heard in opposition to this Order.
鈥淭he Court enters this temporary restraining order restraining Defendant from shutting off water service to the Town, from ceasing to treat raw water supplied to it by the Town, and discontinuing deliveries of treated water to the Town until further order of the Court, and further orders a hearing to be scheduled on whether a preliminary injunction should issue.鈥�
Water treated by the Greeley-based Central Weld County Water District provides the sole water source for 4,259 residential properties, 105 commercial properties, 33 governmental properties, two industrial properties, two mobile-home parks, 60 multifamily properties and 69 irrigation-only properties, according to the lawsuit.
鈥淣otable commercial users that rely on the District鈥檚 service include King Soopers, Safeway, Home Depot, UCHealth Urgent Care, four schools, several hotels, and numerous restaurants,鈥� the lawsuit states.
鈥淐urrently, there is no adequate alternative water treatment service provider available that can treat and deliver the Town鈥檚 raw water sources in the amounts necessary and adequate to serve all of the existing customers in the Town.鈥�
Firestone alleging that the district had 鈥渋mproperly charged approximately $8.6 million in tap fee surcharges after the surcharges had expired 鈥︹��
That lawsuit with a new Memorandum of Understanding, a Settlement Agreement and Release, and an addendum to the 1974 agreement.
The town claims that the addendum 鈥渁ffirmed the Town and District鈥檚 intention to enter into a new water services agreement 鈥︹��
鈥淎t a meeting of the Town鈥檚 Board of Trustees, on May 28, 2025, Stan Linker, the manager of the District, commented publicly that there was no need to amend or to enter into a new service agreement, which is contrary to the express and implied terms of the Settlement Agreement,鈥� according to the most-recent lawsuit.
Firestone claims that as it prepared for a new water services agreement, it discovered that the district was charging the town both a 鈥渨ater minimum charge鈥� and a 鈥渨ater usage charge,鈥� rather than one or the other.
The town sent notice to the district on March 7, asking for an explanation of the charge, with the district responding on April 29 鈥渃laiming that its Board adopted a new policy to bill the Town for both the monthly minimum and water usage rate and that the Board鈥檚 policy superseded the 1974 agreement.鈥�
Town officials responded by informing the district that it 鈥渨ould no longer pay both the monthly minimum and the monthly usage rate. Since then, the Town has withheld $155,341.34 that has been improperly billed by the District,鈥� according to the lawsuit.
鈥淥n May 22, 2025, the District notified the Town that if it does not pay the amount withheld by June 5, 2025, it will discontinue water service to the Town, terminate the 1974 Agreement and assess penalties and interest.鈥�
Schutt鈥檚 order prevents that shutoff from occurring until further order of the court. A hearing will be scheduled within 14 days on Firestone鈥檚 request for a preliminary injunction.
Firestone asserts breach of contract, breach of good faith and other claims, and 鈥渟eeks return of amounts overcharged by the District and paid by the Town in an amount to be determined at trial.鈥�
Linker did not return a call requesting comment on the case.
Case No. 2025-CV-30520, Town of Firestone v. Central Weld County Water District, Weld District Court, filed June 3, 2025.
