Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utility Billing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident’s water use spikes to 42,500 gallons; city reports third‑party meter test and one‑time adjustment policy
Summary
A Franklin resident told the Triad City Commission that his water bill rose from about 2,000 gallons a month to 42,500 gallons in a single billing period; city staff said the meter tested 99.5% accurate in a third‑party test and that the city offers one one‑time adjustment per year.
A Franklin resident told the Triad City Commission that his water bill rose from about 2,000 gallons a month to 42,500 gallons in a single billing period, and city staff described the meter-certification process and the city’s one-time adjustment policy.
Joe Schumacher said his normal monthly use is roughly 2,000 gallons but that a recent bill showed 42,500 gallons. Schumacher said the spike produced an extra charge of roughly $800 and that he had to pay $587 when he missed an automatic payment.
City utility staff explained the city’s standard response to large, unexplained usage increases. Staff said they pulled Schumacher’s meter and sent it to a third‑party lab for testing on July 11; the meter was a positive‑displacement residential device that the lab reported was about 99.5% accurate. Staff told the commission the city uses third‑party flow testing (low/medium/high flow) so the testing is independent and removes human judgment.
The utility representative noted that a continuous leak — for example a toilet running at several gallons per minute — can generate tens of thousands of gallons over a month. “Once we certify the meter, we do not know what happens inside the property,” a city staff speaker said, explaining why the city relies on certification and on customers to check in‑home plumbing.
Staff also told the commission the city provides a one‑time billing adjustment each year for customers who can demonstrate a repair or other qualifying condition; commissioners indicated that policy was already in the city rules. In this case, the city manager said the city absorbed a $75 test fee for Schumacher as a courtesy.
Commissioners asked technical questions about the meter hardware and reading system. One commissioner asked whether the meter is digital or mechanical; staff replied the installed metering is a digital readout with a mechanical positive‑displacement element inside and that the system reads meters remotely, with manual reads used when a read fails.
No formal motion or vote resulted from the public discussion; the item was handled as an informational complaint and staff said they would follow internal procedures for adjustments and appeals.
The discussion highlighted three recurring points for residents facing unusual water charges: (1) third‑party certification is the city’s method to verify meter accuracy, (2) toilet or in‑house leaks can produce very large usage numbers over a month, and (3) the city offers one one‑time adjustment per customer per year for qualifying repair‑related usage spikes.
