Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utilities Metering topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee reviews water-meter replacement policy after damaged meter case; plans website fix and fee change
Summary
With only two members present, the Harvard Administration Committee discussed an incident in which a meter was rendered unreadable and staff recommended clarifying online language and linking replacement charges to actual costs (proposed: twice the meter cost) rather than a fixed fee.
The Harvard Administration Committee met June 18 but lacked a quorum, so members discussed — rather than voted on — a proposed ordinance amendment to the city’s water meter replacement policy.
Staff member Rob described a recent case in which a tenant-painted-over meter was so damaged it had to be removed, taken to the shop and scraped clean before replacement. "They had painted over it... it was bad," Rob said, explaining why the city has sometimes assessed a charge when a meter is damaged or removed due to tenant action or freezing.
The discussion identified a discrepancy between city practice and the municipal website. Rob said a building owner found a page stating "the city will replace the meter at no cost to the building owner anytime at request," but staff said they could not find a corresponding $250 fee in the municipal code. Committee members agreed staff will remove or correct the online language so public guidance matches the code and administrative practice.
To address rising meter costs and avoid frequent revisions to an ordinance dollar amount, staff proposed setting the replacement charge to a variable amount tied to actual costs: "two times the actual cost," to cover the meter, labor and vehicle time, staff said. Members discussed that approach as a way to keep charges aligned with the market price of meters and installation costs.
Staff also walked the committee through common household leak sources and how those leaks commonly affect bills, noting toilets and dripping faucets as frequent culprits. The committee discussed adding clearer language to future bills and public materials reminding property owners they are responsible for leaks that generate higher usage charges.
Because the committee had no quorum, no vote was taken on the ordinance; staff said the matter and any formal ordinance would go to the full council or be postponed for future action.
