Board agrees to pursue a study of Advanced Metering Infrastructure; Ameresco to present formal scope

The Fort Smith Board of Directors directed staff to return with a project-development agreement to begin a study of Advanced Metering Infrastructure, after a presentation from Ameresco on AMI benefits, scope and financing options.

Chad Nobles of Ameresco described AMI as an upgrade from manual or drive-by reads to a system that transmits interval meter data to a cloud platform and integrates with billing software and customer portals. "The lack of the availability of data is real," Nobles said, describing how AMI allows customers and staff to identify leaks, set high-consumption alerts and reduce unnecessary truck rolls for manual reads.

Ameresco showed sample results from comparable projects: meter testing often finds larger accuracy shortfalls on intermediate and large meters than on typical residential devices; those commercial and large-meter corrections can produce significant annual revenue recovery. Nobles said an investment-grade audit and field testing are required to determine Fort Smith's expected revenue pickup and the exact implementation price.

On cost, Nobles said the phase-one project-development ("walk-away") fee for a city this size typically ranges from about $50,000 to $125,000; that fee is frequently rolled into the construction contract if the board later approves full implementation. He estimated a typical implementation per-endpoint cost range of roughly $500 to $1,200 depending on system complexity and whether meter boxes or additional equipment need replacement.

Board members asked about timing and funding. Ameresco said a full changeout and AMI deployment commonly takes 12 to 24 months after the study and procurement. Nobles said some utilities fund AMI projects through capital leases or tax-exempt lease-purchase arrangements and that Ameresco does not take a share of recovered revenue; the city would keep any increased collections. "We don't take any percentage of that," Nobles said when asked whether the vendor shares in revenue gains.

Directors expressed general support for proceeding to a formal project-development agreement. Director Settle asked staff to return with a formal scope and cost for a study; directors emphasized they would want financial modeling that shows how implementation would affect debt-service coverage and other fiscal metrics before any final contract for a full implementation.

The board did not vote to authorize an AMI contract; it concurred to have staff and Ameresco prepare and bring a scope and contract for board consideration.