Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />NOVEMBER 22, 2010 <br />meters and they performed at 100 Only the outside remote was <br />malfunctioning. Based on testing, water meters are typically accurate to <br />at least 25 years of age. However, our old style remotes are showing <br />failures at a lesser age. <br />In these four instances, there was a substantial amount of water registered <br />on the water meter that had not been billed. Staff is unable to determine <br />how long these remotes may have been malfunctioning, but given the <br />amount of water registered on the water meter, it appears that under <br />registering has been occurring for several years. When the City moves <br />forward with the new water meter system, it is likely several more <br />situations like these will be discovered. Therefore, staff believes we <br />should adopt a policy to provide consistency in dealing with these <br />situations going forward. <br />It was noted that, statutorily, we could only go back a maximum of six <br />years in an attempt to recover these revenues. Staff also conducted a <br />survey of some other cities to see how they have handled this issue. The <br />survey did not reveal a uniform approach. Of the six communities <br />contacted, none had a formal policy. One tried to collect the statutory <br />maximum, one went back two years, two went back one year, and one <br />waived the amounts due. The sixth city did not respond as to their <br />practice given they did not have a formal policy. <br />Mayor Blesener indicated that he did not feel we could recover all of the <br />under registering amounts. He said he favored going back two years. <br />Council Member Keis asked the property owners present what they felt <br />would be reasonable. Mrs. Durose stated they felt they should pay <br />something and that one -year seemed reasonable. Ms. McKenzie <br />concurred. <br />Further discussion followed regarding how we would estimate past usage. <br />The City Administrator referred to the agenda memo and said three <br />possible options were identified. One involved taking each quarter's <br />reading once the new meter was installed and then comparing it to the <br />prior year's billing and to charge for the difference. A second option was <br />to apply the quarterly, city -wide percentages to a reading and then <br />calculate usage based on those percentages. A third option was to use <br />quarterly averages. <br />Some discussion followed that using quarterly averages may not work <br />because some people water their yards in the summer while other do not. <br />IT was pointed out that 2010 averages will minimize that factor given the <br />wet summer we had that resulted in less yard watering. <br />2 <br />