Muncie resident urges sanitary district to change billing after receiving multiple monthly bills

5461523 ยท July 9, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At the July 9 Board of Sanitary Commissioners meeting, resident Russell O'Neil said the district's billing system produced multiple bills and unclear credits; he asked the board to change its billing structure but the board took no formal action.

Russell O'Neil, a Muncie resident, told the Board of Sanitary Commissioners on July 9 that the sanitary district's billing system produced multiple bills for the same service and did not reflect a $31 credit he was told he had.

O'Neil said he received four separate bills in one month and that after adding them he sent a single payment of $96 for what he understood was service for one month. He told the board he later received a larger bill and that district paperwork did not show the $31 credit staff told him existed. "I have 4 separate bills here that I received last month, and I totaled them all up and sent a payment in. It was $96 for service for 1 month," O'Neil said. He added, "they told me that I had a credit of $31, but none of your paperwork reflects any of that."

O'Neil said he had discussed billing and due dates with district staff, who told him the due date could not be changed; staff previously advised him to "pay your bill a month ahead of time," which he said he would not do. "I do not wanna pay you for a service you have not rendered," he said, and asked the board to "change your billing structure" so the system "accommodate[s] your customers."

The public comment period is the time for residents to address the board; the transcript records no formal response or board action on O'Neil's request during the meeting. The Board President asked if any commissioner had questions; none were recorded.

The complaint was raised during the public comment portion at the start of the meeting; the transcript does not record any follow-up assignment to staff or scheduled return on the issue.