Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Noticing Policy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

SFPUC to review notice and appeals procedures after landlord reports $9,000 water lien

San Francisco Public Utilities Commission · September 25, 2012
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

A Bayview property owner’s son told the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission that the utility’s first notice to property owners came nearly five months after charges began, leaving landlords responsible for unpaid commercial accounts; staff will report back with options including monthly billing and an appeals review.

Tony Lee, speaking at the Sept. 25 San Francisco Public Utilities Commission meeting on behalf of his parents, urged the agency to change how it notifies property owners about tenant water delinquencies after his parents were billed for roughly "$9,000 plus" they said they did not incur.

"My parents who didn't use a drop of the water, they're not having to pay approximately, you know, $9,000 plus," Lee said during public comment, describing a sequence in which the utility's first notice to the owner arrived about five months after usage began and an eviction took an additional six months.

The Commission asked staff to examine the issue and return with recommendations. President Moran told Lee, "we'll take a look at that and get a report back to the commission." Assistant General Manager for Business Services Todd Richter described existing procedures and said the planned move from bimonthly to monthly billing under the agency's AMI program should speed notifications: "I think one thing that will help landlords in the future is our movement to monthly billing cycles as part of our new AMI program, because that will be faster notification." Richter also noted that commercial accounts typically do not have access to the Residential Users' Appeals Board.

The exchange raised two procedural questions the Commission said it will examine: whether commercial accounts can be covered by an appeal process and whether earlier notice (for example a postcard or faster digital notice) could reduce the burden on property owners who are ultimately held responsible. City Attorney staff cautioned the Commission not to resolve a particular off-agenda case during the meeting and recommended agendizing a policy review so affected parties have notice.

What happens next: Commissioners directed staff to review the SFPUC's delinquency and lien-notice procedures, assess how many accounts are affected and present options — including changes to billing cadence and notice timing — at a future meeting.