Colona committee debates whether to charge utility asset-management fee per unit or per meter

City staff brought forward questions about the city’s asset-management fee and how the code defines a "user." The fee had been applied per housing unit in some multiunit properties that are served by a single meter, producing complaints from landlords and tenants.

"When we implemented the asset management fee ... it wasn't necessarily implemented on somebody who has a meter," the staff member said, describing cases where mobile-home parks or multiunit buildings were billed multiple $10 charges for each unit while the utility billing reflected a single meter. Staff told the committee they had been challenged by multiple property owners over the assessment method and sought guidance on two points: (1) define what constitutes a "user" in the code and (2) determine whether to reexamine how the fee is applied (per-unit vs. consumption-based).

Committee members raised enforcement and fairness concerns. One member noted that relying on owner self-reporting of vacancies could be gamed and that installing individual meters would be costly for property owners. The staff member said consumption-based approaches can advantage or disadvantage tenants depending on use and that per-unit charges provide predictability for revenue to meet bond and bar-screen payments. "I wanted to bring it to bring it before the committee," staff said, asking whether the committee wanted to redefine "user" or adjust assessment methods.

The committee asked staff to research approaches used by surrounding communities, to document how "user" is defined elsewhere, and to return with recommended language and operational steps, including how the city would track vacancy and meter changes.

No ordinance amendments were adopted at this meeting; staff will prepare comparative research and a draft definition for committee review.