Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Smart Meters topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City hears AMI smart‑meter presentation as officials weigh phased $1.2 million plan
Summary
A vendor presentation outlined advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) benefits — daily reads, outage and demand management, remote disconnects — and estimated roughly $1.2 million in one‑time equipment costs and recurring support, while staff and council asked for a phased rollout plan and cost scenarios.
Scott Jacobson of Fletcher Reinhardt told the council that an AMI smart‑meter system would move the utility from monthly automated reads to daily and hourly usage data, improving billing accuracy, outage detection and demand management. “Early AMI was meter reading and then being able to do remote connect disconnect,” Jacobson said, adding that the system provides voltage and loss analysis that can inform infrastructure upgrades.
Jacobson said the vendor’s estimate for full, citywide deployment in the packet was roughly $1.2 million in one‑time equipment costs with recurring software and support fees the packet showed as about $34,000 over a 10‑year spread. The vendor proposed multiple phasing options: begin with gateway infrastructure and 200–250 electric meters in a concentrated area, then add water and gas meters and further cells or gateways. “I would look at starting with no less than 200–250 electrical meters,” Jacobson said.
City staff and council members asked operational and cost questions. Staff member Josh asked for a concrete rollout and budgeting proposal: “Josh, if you could work with them and bring us back a plan over three years,” a council member requested. Jacobson said phasing was feasible and that Landis and the vendor could hold pricing for two years with a three‑year delivery schedule.
Council members pressed on battery life for water and gas devices (the vendor said many battery‑powered water/gas devices are rated for roughly 20 years of service but that some replacements would be needed), how outlying meters on cellular service would be handled (those could be deployed on cellular), and what the minimum starting package would look like. The vendor suggested the bulk of up‑front cost is gateways and routers and that the city could buy meters in batches tied to each phase.
Council members also noted operational impacts the system would have: reduced truck rolls and remote disconnects could shrink the city’s reliance on a meter‑reading position. “If you went citywide they would eliminate the meter reader position,” one council member observed; the vendor confirmed staff time savings but said there would still be field work for certain exceptions.
What’s next: council directed staff to continue exploring the proposal and return with a more detailed budget and a phased implementation plan to fit the city’s capital program and timing for meter replacements.
