Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Meters topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
St. Louis aldermen approve targeted water‑meter rule after tense debate over lead‑pipe costs
Summary
After hours of debate about potential costs for homeowners replacing lead service lines, the Board of Aldermen perfected an ordinance requiring meters for new service connections and major rehabilitation projects. Members rejected a broad exemption for tornado‑impacted homeowners but were told the water division supplies meters and that lead‑line replacement remains an owner expense.
A majority of the St. Louis Board of Aldermen on Thursday perfected an ordinance that would require water meters be installed on certain new service connections and when major rehabilitation of an existing service line is performed.
Alderman Devote (5th) framed board bill 28 as a limited modernization step, saying the measure would require meters only for new connections and for major rehab projects and that the city’s water division would provide the meters at no charge. “When a meter is installed, our residents … are being billed for the water that they use, not via a flat rate,” he said.
The most sustained argument on the floor concerned the interaction between lead‑service‑line replacement and meter installation. Alderwoman from the 12th, who introduced a floor amendment to exempt some tornado‑impacted homeowners, said constituents who received city letters about lead pipes learned that replacing a lead service line can cost roughly $10,000 and that adding a meter setter and pit may add about $2,000. “I’m supportive of meters mostly, but I am not a supporter in the case when it becomes that we may get people not to—or we may encourage people not to install—because they’re scared they’ll have to pay more money,” she said.
Alderman Devote and others disputed the inference that the ordinance would impose a blanket new cost on homeowners. He told members he had asked the water division for clarity. A staff email from the director of public utilities, circulated during the meeting, stated that replacement of a lead service line would be at the owner’s expense (the director estimated more than $10,000) and that “the estimated additional expense to add a water meter setter and pit … is about $2,000.” At the same time, Deputy/Associate Water Division staff and other aldermen urged that when a service line is already being replaced as part of required major rehabilitation, installing the meter at that time is a small incremental cost because crews are already in the ground.
“The water division fully covers the cost of residential meters,” a floor statement from the water division was read aloud; members said that answer had prompted confusion because it did not address possible incremental installation labor tied to replacing an owner’s lead line. The transcript records both statements: that the meter hardware itself is supplied by the water division and that lead‑line replacement is an owner expense under existing plumbing code.
A compromise amendment narrowly exempting a limited class of tornado‑impacted homeowners failed on a roll call (10 yes, 5 no). Several aldermen said repeatedly they support meters in principle but wanted protections for low‑income homeowners already facing large repair bills.
After extended questioning and several attempts to amend the ordinance, the board voted to perfect board bill 28 as amended on the floor (vote sustained; 10 ayes, 5 nays).
What happens next: perfection is the procedural step that sends the bill toward final passage. If the bill returns for final passage, the practical effect will be that properties undergoing major rehabilitation or new service connections would be required to have a meter installed; in cases that trigger mandatory lead‑line replacement the underlying service‑line work remains the owner’s responsibility according to the water‑division guidance provided on the floor.
Key quotes
“A meter ensures folks are billed for what they use, not a flat rate,” Alderman Devote said in support of the change.
“We can’t continue to say we care about people in tornado‑impacted areas except for when it’s not convenient for us,” the alderwoman from the 12th said as she argued for a narrow exemption.
Ending
The board’s action moves the city toward modernized metering but leaves unresolved how incremental installation costs tied to lead‑line replacements will be paid in practice. Several members urged staff to continue seeking grants and financing options that could reduce out‑of‑pocket costs for impacted homeowners.
