Maumee staff defend cashless utility policy; committee asks staff to draft a leak‑credit process

Finance staff told the finance committee on July 1 that Maumee’s cashless utility‑billing policy—implemented with Invoice Cloud on July 1, 2023—has sharply reduced cash payments and that staff will accept cash in limited, extenuating circumstances while encouraging alternate payment methods.

Staff presented transaction data: in February 2023, the city recorded about $56,000 in cash payments, representing roughly 202 cash payments out of approximately 20,000 transactions; in 2024 the city recorded no cash deposits after the policy and signage were in place; in 2025 to date staff had recorded one cash payment. Staff said the community has adapted to cashless options and that alternate no‑fee channels exist. Staff also said the city could consider installing an on‑site cash kiosk (staff cited a recent City of Toledo kiosk cost of about $26,000 with roughly $13,000 in annual maintenance) if council wants a permanent cash option.

Committee members raised practical concerns for residents who lack bank access or who are elderly and uncomfortable with electronic payments. Staff said they will continue to accept cash when needed—for example, when a customer faces imminent shutoff—and will note the account to guide future interactions. Staff also said utility‑billing staff can assist customers in the lobby with phone or ACH setup and can use the system’s printed receipts to document payments.

Separately, several residents had written to the committee about unusually large bills caused by leaks. Committee members asked staff to develop a consistent, documented process for reviewing leak cases and deciding whether credits are warranted—especially for the sewer portion if evidence shows the lost water did not enter the sanitary sewer for treatment. Staff said leak events are relatively rare (about three to four cases a year) but that a few incidents can involve large volumes; staff noted other Ohio jurisdictions (City of Toledo, Montgomery County, Kettering) use caps or appeals processes. Staff recommended that any relief be case‑by‑case, require proof of repair and enrollment in a leak‑alert program (AquaHawk), and that staff would draft a formal appeals/process policy and consult legal counsel about ordinance language and municipal authority.

The committee did not take a formal vote but asked staff to prepare a written policy and criteria for credits or adjustments and to return for further discussion.