Residents press council on unexplained water-bill spikes as utility outlines leak‑check and adjustment policies

Scores of residents used public comment time to press Georgetown City Council and Georgetown Municipal Water & Sewer Service (GMWSS) for clearer explanations and more transparency after a wave of unexpectedly high residential water bills.

Alonzo Allen opened public comment asking the city to commission an independent consultant to review meter monitoring, billing processes and data management at GMWSS. “When patterns like this appear across multiple accounts, it’s important that we take a closer and more transparent look at the systems as a whole,” Allen said (public comment, SEG 063–118).

Several speakers described the same pattern: a billing spike for one month followed by a return to normal usage the next month, sometimes after an unexplained credit. Dana Barber told the council she and others gathered accounts after a social‑media post and found many households with similar unexplained high bills; she said a meter replacement and a credit she received raised more questions than answers about consistency and oversight (public comment, SEG 356–472).

GMWSS staff summarized operational responses and the adjustment policy. For February the utility reported 91 leak checks (55 no leak found, 36 confirmed leaks) and 47 adjustments or courtesy adjustments processed that month for hidden/underground leaks, toilets, outdoor faucets and other specific causes. Staff emphasized that adjustments are typically granted when usage returns to the customer’s normal average and said customers may request third‑party testing of replaced meters (staff presentation, SEG 3241–3360). The utility also plans a new website (launch April 1) with clear step‑by‑step guidance for customers on leak checks and adjustment requests.

Councilmembers asked whether meter-reading hardware, the data collection vehicle or software might be producing false spikes; GMWSS staff said system checks have been performed and that meter errors are rare but that the utility will provide more diagnostic detail. Staff said they will make raw usage and adjustment data available to council and that the utility is open to independent review if council directs one.

Several council members urged the utility to systematically follow up with each caller whose bill spiked and to provide a written report to the council on a batch of citizen-submitted bills. Councilmember Sams said she had received 27 citizen emails and asked staff to review each case and report back. Staff agreed to accept and analyze submitted bills, subject to privacy and open-records protocols.

What residents asked for: an independent audit or statistician review of billing data; clear public procedures for leak checks and adjustments; activation or reporting from any previously discussed oversight committee; and better customer-service follow-up. What staff offered: leak-check and adjustment data, the ability to request meter testing (fee refundable if meter found faulty), an April website launch with a customer guidance page, and a commitment to provide the council with batch reviews of citizen-submitted cases.

The council did not take a formal action tonight to commission an independent audit; several members said they would consider a referral or municipal direction once staff compiles the batch review and funding/scope implications are clearer.