Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utilities Billing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Carbondale staff propose ending town role as middleman in landlord‑tenant utility accounts
Summary
Town of Carbondale Public Works staff told the board they want to stop acting as an intermediary in landlord‑tenant utility disputes, proposing to restrict account management to property owners or their managers and to stop prorating bills; the board signaled informal agreement and staff will implement changes without a formal vote.
Carbondale Public Works staff recommended the town step back from acting as an intermediary in landlord‑tenant utility account matters, telling the board on an agenda item that the current practice has become time‑consuming and administratively burdensome. Kevin (Public Works staff) said the town had processed “532 authorization forms in the last 5 years” and added, “we're acting like bookkeepers for landlords right now.”
Staff told the board the proposed change would make the town’s billing process more efficient and reduce staff time spent resolving lease disputes. The memo and discussion laid out several specific steps: require property owners to be the primary contact on utility accounts, permit property managers to act on owners’ behalf, allow tenants to view account information but not require the town to prorate bills or mediate lease arrangements, and accept payments from any payer so long as the payment matches the account. Scott (Public Works staff) said the recommended authorization form “takes away the tenant being able to access account, but it does give the owner of the property the ability to have a property manager that then can take care of those kinds” of issues.
Why it matters: Staff described the workload and accuracy problems that prompted the review, including the 532 authorization forms over five years and an example of a single tenant account closure that produced a 114‑page email trail. Kevin noted billing timing complicates prorations: “The bill you hit in June is actually for water that was used between the April and the May,” meaning the final amount is often not known on move‑out day.
Board members asked about alternatives and implementation. Ross (board member) asked whether the town’s imminent new metering system would change the approach; staff said remote reads may make final readings easier but would not remove the fundamental proration timing issue. Jess (board member) supported the staff recommendation, saying it would remove the town from lease disputes: “It seems like the easiest thing to do is to just do what they're recommending.” Several members said they were reluctant to remove a convenience the town has provided but that a clear rule—particularly no prorating and no mediation—could substantially reduce staff burden.
Staff described the practical effect. Under the proposal the town would: keep account information available (customers could still set up online access and make payments), stop performing prorations or adjudicating who owes what under private leases, and direct billing and official communications to property owners or their designated managers. Scott said the town would still accept payments from any source that matches the account. Kevin said the change would be phased; existing arrangements would continue until their natural end and staff would educate owners and property managers before fully implementing the new authorization form.
No formal vote was taken; the board indicated informal consensus to move forward. Kevin said staff would implement the authorization form and rollout process and return to the board if a formal policy revision or ordinance language were recommended by the town attorney.
Ending: Staff will phase the change in and provide owner/property‑manager outreach; no effective date was set at the meeting and no formal board vote was scheduled.
