Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Metering Ami Amr topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council picks cellular AMI for meters; UAB had favored lower-cost AMR option
Summary
City staff told the Utility Advisory Board that City Council selected a cellular AMI metering system. The board and staff had earlier recommended an AMR option as the lower-cost path; staff will develop specifications and an RFP for the AMI procurement.
PUNTA GORDA, Fla. — Members of the Punta Gorda City Utility Advisory Board on Sept. 22 discussed the recent City Council decision to purchase a cellular advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) system and the advisory board's prior recommendation for an automated meter reading (AMR) option.
Utilities Director Tom Spencer told the board that Council selected AMI and that staff will work with engineering consultants to develop system specifications and issue a request for proposals (RFP). "Council did decide to go with AMI. So the next step is for us to go and work with the engineering consultants to develop the spec. And then once they've developed the spec, then we'll put that out for RFP and then make a selection based on the proposals," Spencer said.
Cost comparisons and operational differences presented at the meeting (10-year estimates from the consultant): - AMR (drive-by/automated collection) estimated 10-year cost: approximately $8,770,000. Advantages cited: lowest 10-year cost, reduced labor for reads, ability to passively read using existing vehicles; disadvantages: limited leak-detection capability and possible battery/module failures. - AMI (cellular communications) estimated 10-year cost: approximately $10,836,000. Advantages cited: near-real-time reads, hourly data for leak detection and conservation, resident-facing tools and operational flow data; disadvantages: highest upfront cost, greater operational complexity and concerns about battery life and digital module reliability. - Vendor-provided manual reading and in-house manual reading were also modeled; the consultant presented labor, vehicle and ten-year cost assumptions for each option.
Board members including Gary Skilikorn and Derek Rooney said they and the advisory board had supported an AMR recommendation. Several members expressed frustration that the council selected the more expensive AMI option despite the advisory board and staff recommendations for AMR; members urged staff to press for staged testing and pilot demonstrations before full deployment. Spencer and staff agreed to include testing and specification details during procurement.
Operational considerations discussed: - AMI provides near-real-time reads (commonly hourly) and supports automated leak and tamper alerts as well as resident-facing portals for conservation. - AMR is lower-cost and can be less complex to deploy; it supports passive reading from collection vehicles (e.g., trucks equipped with receivers) but offers fewer data points for immediate leak detection. - Some AMI implementations can revert to AMR-style reading, but that fallback often requires physical intervention to reconfigure the device.
Next steps recorded in the meeting: staff will work with engineering consultants to finalize technical specifications, include pilot/demo provisions in the acquisition plan, and issue an RFP for the chosen AMI approach. Board members requested that procurement include staged evaluation and demonstration units prior to ordering at scale.
Ending: The board asked staff to provide a clear upgrade path and cost breakdown to better inform future discussions and to present pilot-test results before large-scale deployment.
