HARTMAN, COLORADO, Aug. 1 (Our Colorado Times) — Hartman, a southeast Colorado town of about 30 people, has been formally declared abandoned under Colorado law after its mayor and three remaining trustees resigned. The decision leaves Prowers County responsible for key town assets, including the water system.
For residents, the most immediate issue is water. Reports describe Hartman’s water supply and infrastructure as unsafe, non-potable or a health hazard. But the available records do not identify a contaminant, provide laboratory results or show a finding from a state or county health agency. Reports also differ about how long a boil-water advisory had been in effect.
The state’s decision changes who can act for the town. It does not, by itself, provide details about the water’s quality or establish that every water-related risk has been resolved.
Why was Hartman declared abandoned?
The Colorado Department of State determined that Hartman met the legal definition of an abandoned town under Colorado Revised Statutes § 31-3-201. The determination was issued in a 15-page order attributed to Deputy Secretary of State Andrew Kline.
The order followed a written application submitted in June by Jessie Simmons, identified in the proceeding as a Hartman resident, landowner and elector. The application said the town lacked a governing board and clerk, could not hold an election and owned and operated water infrastructure needed to treat and deliver water.
The state order found that Hartman had no Board of Trustees or town clerk. It also said no town officials remained who could approve contracts, spend public money, appoint replacements, certify elections or make decisions about the water system.
“Abandonment is the only legal mechanism in Colorado statute that creates an avenue for residents of the area to receive clean water,” the order said, according to The Denver Post.
In this context, “abandoned” is a legal and administrative designation. It means the town no longer had the officials needed to carry out basic government functions. It does not necessarily mean that all residents have left or that the town’s buildings have been deserted.
How did the town lose its government?
The mayor reportedly resigned in October 2025. The three remaining trustees resigned in January 2026 after a physical altercation involving four women following a Board of Trustees meeting, according to reports citing the state proceeding and local accounts.
Pam Packer, identified as a former trustee, told The Denver Post, “Our safety was more important than having a government.”
With no trustees left, Hartman could not conduct an election or appoint replacements, according to Kline’s order. A formal hearing was reported on July 13, followed by the state’s abandonment determination in late July.
The exact date varies among reports: the order is described as having been issued July 28, while the state determination is described as occurring July 29 or shortly afterward.
What happens to the water system?
Prowers County is to assume control of Hartman’s public roads, alleys, town-owned property and water infrastructure. The Denver Post reported that the county would transfer operation of the water system to a water operator, although the available material does not identify that operator.
The water system was central to the state proceeding. Reports described problems with Hartman’s water supply and infrastructure, including claims that the water was unsafe or non-potable. The state order characterized the system as part of the reason residents needed a legal path to obtain clean water.
The available material does not include water-testing results, the name of any contaminant, sampling dates or a current notice from a health agency. It therefore does not establish the specific cause or level of any water risk.
Reports also describe Hartman as having been under a boil-water advisory or order, but they do not agree on when it began or how long it lasted. The state Department of Health or Prowers County would be the sources for any current public-health instruction about drinking, cooking with or otherwise using the water; no such current instruction is identified in the available records.
Does the decision make Hartman part of Prowers County?
The state decision transfers specified town responsibilities and property to Prowers County. The available reports do not establish all of the legal consequences of that transfer or show a county document describing whether Hartman will continue as a municipality, become unincorporated territory or use another administrative arrangement.
What is clear is that county officials are expected to manage the public assets and water infrastructure that Hartman’s elected government could no longer oversee. The next practical questions are who will operate and repair the water system, what testing will be conducted and what instructions residents will receive about water use.
For Hartman’s residents, the designation is therefore less about the word “abandoned” than about restoring a functioning chain of responsibility. The state order identified the lack of local officials as the barrier; Prowers County is now expected to take over the services those officials could not manage.
