Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Utility Operations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Franklin City utility board weighs absorbing credit-card fees, reviews leak detection, project updates and a budget carryforward
Summary
At a March meeting, the Franklin City Water Utility Board discussed whether to absorb third-party credit-card processing fees within rates, reviewed a recent large main break and leak-detection results, heard updates on the Lowers Lane water tower and other mains, and approved a resolution to carry forward $59,784.50 to buy a utility vehicle.
Get email alerts on the Water Utility Operations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At a March meeting of the Franklin City Water Utility Board, members discussed whether to stop passing third‑party credit‑card processing fees directly to customers and considered increased leak‑detection activity to address growing water loss. The board also received updates on the Lowers Lane water tower and related mains, heard a report on a major main break in Coventry, and approved a motion to carry forward $59,784.50 from the 2023 budget to the 2025 water utility budget for the purchase of a utility vehicle.
Why it matters: The board’s discussions could affect customer bills, operational workload and long‑term water loss, which staff reported has grown since 2016 and could draw attention from the state Public Service Commission.
Board members and staff focused first on fees customers pay when using the city’s online payment vendor, Invoice Cloud. Claudia (staff member) said Invoice Cloud charges customers a processing fee and “the city does not get that fee at all.” John Suganta Jr. (board member) clarified the arrangement, asking, “So the customer is paying that?” Claudia confirmed they are. Suganta recommended the board consider absorbing the fees in utility rates, saying the city could build the transaction fees into rates during a rate case so customers would not see a separate processing charge.
Staff said absorbing the fee would be treated as an operating expense and could be presented in a future rate case, possibly timed with the water tower project. Board members noted such a change would typically be handled through the rate setting process before the Public Service Commission.
On system reliability, staff reported a late‑night main break in the Coventry area near Ben Franklin School. The speaker described a 12‑inch main rupture that began shortly before 3 a.m.; crews had the line shut off by about 4 a.m. Staff estimated the event involved “about 75,000” (figure provided in the meeting; units were not specified in the transcript). The crew also found an unsecured 8‑inch main fitting nearby and reported ductile iron pipe showing signs of long‑term leakage.
Staff briefed the board on planned and ongoing capital work. Contract C for the Lowers Lane water main — described as the final piece of water main work related to the tower project — was scheduled to begin tree clearing on March 31, with laterals and service work expected to take two to three weeks. The water tower coatings work remains weather‑dependent. Staff also reported the DPW campus water main was connected and in service and that crews were making steady progress on the West Saint Martin’s Road main, with testing and laterals to be completed in the following two weeks.
The board reviewed the most recent leak‑detection report. Staff said the firm’s work this cycle cost about $75,000 and recommended repeating targeted leak detection more frequently — possibly annually or every other year — until water loss trends improve. Staff recommended budgeting roughly $25,000 to retarget the highest‑loss “hot spots” in the system. Board members noted system water loss has increased since a 2016 survey (staff cited roughly 16% then and over 20% now) and agreed reducing loss would both save money and reduce regulatory scrutiny.
In financial briefings, staff presented unaudited fourth‑quarter utility billing figures: total gallons billed were about 4% under budget and collections roughly 3.5% under budget, leaving an operating shortfall of about $3,000 (unaudited). Staff said bond proceeds for the water tower had been spent and the city is now using remaining water‑tower impact fees and cash on hand as the project continues. Staff also noted the utility borrowed about $3 million in 2023 for the tower project.
Votes at a glance - Approval of minutes from the Feb. 19 meeting — motion moved and seconded; motion carried (aye recorded). - Approval of the March voucher list — motion moved and seconded; motion carried (aye recorded). - Resolution to amend the 2025 annual budget for Franklin Water Utility and carry forward unspent 2023 funds to provide appropriation associated with the purchase of a utility vehicle in the amount of $59,784.50 — motion moved and seconded; motion carried (aye recorded). (Individual movers/seconders were not identified in the transcript.)
The board closed the meeting after routine final items. Members said they will consider timing a formal rate case — and whether to include credit‑card processing fees in rates — as the water tower project and related impacts become clearer.

