My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1989/09/05
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1989
>
Agenda Packets - 1989/09/05
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/23/2025 11:10:07 AM
Creation date
4/23/2025 11:10:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
9/5/1989
Description
Work Session
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
56
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
1 !MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council `4T``'✓� <br />FROM: Don Brager, Finance Director -Treasurer <br />DATE: August 16, 1989 <br />SUBJECT: UTILITY BILLS <br />I have been informed that Councilmember Quick has received some <br />complaints that our utility bills are difficult to understand. I <br />feel it may be appropriate to review the billing format and the <br />reasons it was chosen. <br />Prior to billing a postcard is sent to utility customers <br />requesting that they read their meter and send the reading to <br />Us. The instructions state that an estimated bill will be sent <br />if the card is not returned in ter. days. Hear the portion of the <br />card where the meter reading is to be recorded is printed the <br />message, "Return Card by July 6 to Avoid $5.00 Est. Charge". The <br />estimation charge is intended to encourage the customer to read <br />the meter and return the card to us. A lot of additional <br />handlina is involved when an estimate is taken. The additional <br />handling is not making the estimated billing, the computer does <br />that based on past usage. The additional handling is explaining <br />to the customer, who believes the estimate to be too high, why <br />and how the estimate was made. The most difficult situation is <br />explaining a billing in a quarter subsequent to that in which an <br />estimate was made. Usually what happends is this: An estimated <br />billing is sent for a quarter in which the customer has used more <br />water than their average usage. The estimated billing is for <br />average usage and the customer has thus been under billed. The <br />next quarter the customer reads the meter. The billing is the <br />sum of the current quarter's usage plus the difference between <br />the previous quarter's actual usage and estimated usage. At <br />times that can be an unusually large bill for the customer. <br />Staff greatly prefers customers to read their meter so their <br />billings reflect their actual usage. <br />A postcard billing is sent to all utility customers. A postcard <br />billing was chosen because of cost savings associated with <br />postcards over placing the bill in an envelope. The cost savings <br />are a result of the following: <br />1. Staff time is saved by not having to place bills in an <br />envelope. <br />2. Postcards are less expensive than a bill and an envelope. <br />3. Less wear and tear on postage machine because envelopes <br />must be sealed. <br />4. Postage for a postcard is $.08 less for each piece than <br />sending envelopes. We send 2,970 bills each quarter. A <br />savings of $237.60 each quarter and $950.40 each year is <br />realized. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.