Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Dade City pauses on $5.8M AMI plan pending legal language, financing options
Summary
After hearing a detailed presentation from Performance Services on a proposed $5.8 million advanced metering infrastructure project, the Dade City Commission agreed to have staff and counsel rewrite contract language and return with financing alternatives during budget season rather than vote tonight.
Commissioners on Dade City’s commission held off on approving a proposed advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) project after hearing a multi‑hour presentation on projected savings, financing mechanics and procurement options.
Performance Services’ lead presenter, Hector Samari, said the plan would replace aging meters, install a LoRaWAN communications network and build a platform for leak detection and other “smart water” capabilities. “This isn’t a meter project,” Samari said. “We’re doing digital twins. We’re doing artificial intelligence… It will allow you to do so much more than just an AMI system.”
The proposal in the packet showed an installation price of roughly $5.8 million and financing options over 15 years; staff and the vendor described a performance‑contract model intended to fund the work from projected utility revenue gains. Samari said financing partners could deposit funds into a city escrow account and that mobilization and payments would flow from that account, limiting near‑term cash outlays.
Commissioners pressed the vendor on scope and cost assumptions. One commissioner noted the proposal’s lifetime figures and urged competitive bids: “When we’re talking about that kind of investment from the city… I think an RFP in this situation is good use of our financial structure,” the commissioner said. Commissioners also sought clarity on upfront mobilization payments in the contract, the timing for engineering and mobilization, the assumptions behind projected revenue gains and the warranty/battery lifespans for the meters. Vendor representatives said the meters carry a 20‑year warranty and that third‑party testing would be used to verify guaranteed annual performance.
City staff and counsel flagged procurement details tied to a prior memorandum of understanding and co‑op/piggyback options; the earlier MOU included a $50,000 clause tied to prior work under the MOU if the city chose not to proceed. The city attorney said he would draft specific “whereas” clauses and confirm which purchasing exceptions apply before the commission votes.
Rather than approve the contract, the commission directed staff to return with revised contract language, a clearer financing plan and options to reduce upfront city exposure. Commissioners recommended discussion during the budget process and asked staff to explore grants, state revolving fund loans or other lower‑cost financing alternatives. The commission did not take a final vote on the AMI proposal; staff will return with modified documents for further review.
