Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Meters And Billing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board reviews meter‑audit findings; staff cites $24,000 overpayment and explores AMR/transmitter options
Summary
The agency discussed meter audits that identified billing errors and customer overpayments (including a $24,000 refund), considered developing meter standards and remote‑reading transmitters, and confirmed a compliance hearing schedule for nonresponsive well owners.
During the consent‑agenda discussion Speaker 1 raised meter‑audit findings and billing corrections and described steps staff is taking to reduce errors and pursue possible meter upgrades.
Speaker 1 said audit work comparing meter photos and statements revealed instances where meter multipliers were applied incorrectly, producing overstated usage and overpayments. He cited one case in which James and Annika Howard were identified as having been overcharged by about $24,000 after reconciliation. “They were multiplying their meter by 10 when they didn't have to…so I went back and did a reconciliation, and they overpaid by that much,” Speaker 1 said.
Speaker 1 described planned procedural upgrades: the agency’s access consultant added a validation feature to the billing database to cross‑check meter entries against calculated values; staff will explore a grant‑funded program to install radio transmitters/AMR (automatic meter reading) on wells so drive‑by or partner reads (for example, by Casitas) could capture transmissions without easements in some cases. He cautioned that not all property owners may want in‑line transmitters and that many well meters are on private property rather than in the public right‑of‑way, complicating access.
Board members discussed units and standards (cubic feet vs. gallons or acre‑feet) and the practicalities of meter installation and data collection. Speaker 5 noted Casitas reads many meters that are in public rights‑of‑way but wells often lack easements. Speaker 1 said the agency could pursue grant funding to avoid passing costs to well owners but has not yet developed a full budget or application.
On enforcement and scheduling, Speaker 1 confirmed a 5:00 p.m. hearing that day for two well owners who had received 90‑day notices and reported audit work that identified roughly 14 additional wells (group B) with an April 30 deadline; about five of the original notices remain nonresponsive and may be handled at a future hearing.
Separately, a procedural motion to add a recorded‑line announcement (moved earlier by Speaker 2 and seconded by Speaker 4) was put to roll call and passed unanimously; that procedural vote was not a vote on the consent agenda items described above.
