Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lodi Council Introduces Ordinance to Modernize Electric Utility Theft and Field‑Services Fees
Summary
The council introduced an ordinance to repeal and replace Lodi Municipal Code section 13.20.0.02 to broaden fee definitions (renaming several fees as dispatch/dispatch-related fees), add a disconnect/reconnect fee tied to panel upgrades, allow annual fee updates to reflect labor/material costs, and explicitly allow recovery for unauthorized energy use; the council waived first reading and introduced the ordinance.
The Lodi City Council on Dec. 17 introduced an ordinance to modernize the city’s electric utility fee language related to energy theft and field-services cost recovery and waived the first reading.
Electric utility staff explained that the existing ordinance and the fee resolution that implemented it date to 2011–2012 and no longer reflect current materials, meter types, after-hours labor, overtime or new activities such as panel upgrades tied to electrification and battery storage. Staff introduced Field Services Supervisor Kevin Kreiser to walk council through the proposed changes.
"What we've tried to do is now label them as a dispatch fee," Kreiser told council, saying the revised language would allow the utility to assess charges that reflect the actual staff time and materials when field crews are dispatched, including after‑hours and overtime costs. The revisions rename and broaden existing fees (for theft inspection, meter set, troubleshooter dispatch, and meter replacement) and add a new disconnect/reconnect fee to be charged with building-permit activities such as panel upgrades.
Kreiser said the ordinance will describe fee types and when they apply; the specific dollar amounts will be set later in a resolution so the city can update them annually (July 1) based on actual labor and material costs. He also said the ordinance would remove brand-specific meter references and reinforce the city's ability to recover costs associated with unauthorized energy use, which staff already collect under utility rules and regulations.
Council asked whether the approach is consistent with other utilities, how residential and commercial customers would be treated, and whether theft of energy could be pursued criminally. The city attorney said criminal prosecution could be pursued in some cases where there is significant damage to city property, but that fees are intended to be cost‑based rather than punitive.
The public hearing for the ordinance was opened and closed with no comment cards. Council moved to waive the first reading and introduce the ordinance to repeal and replace Lodi Municipal Code section 13.20.0.02; the motion passed (recorded as passed in the transcript). Staff said they will return in February with a resolution that sets the specific dollar amounts for the revised fee categories.
