Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sewer Billing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff analysis finds in‑house sewer billing would cost about $250,000 annually; recommendation is to stay with Jordan Tax Service
Summary
A staff presentation compared current sewer billing with Jordan Tax Service (~$130,000/year) against an in‑house model estimated at about $250,000/year (higher personnel and processing costs). Staff recommended not moving billing in‑house under current assumptions.
Get email alerts on the Sewer Billing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners heard an analysis of in‑house sewer collections that compared the current contract with Jordan Tax Service to projected municipal operations. The presenter reported the existing Jordan Tax Service contract costs about $130,000 per year and that an in‑house model would likely cost about $250,000 annually — an increase of roughly $120,000 driven by full‑time personnel needs, postage and printing, lockbox and e‑billing platform costs, and potential building modifications.
The presenter walked commissioners through two in‑house scenarios: continuing monthly billing in‑house (with estimated increased personnel and processing costs) or moving to quarterly billing (reducing some immediate costs but introducing cash‑flow timing issues). The staff analysis noted Mount Lebanon currently achieves about a 96% collection rate with Jordan Tax Service, and staff questioned whether the municipality could match that efficiency at scale for roughly 11,500 billed accounts.
The presenter summarized operational challenges if collections were brought in‑house: increased call volume, the need for lockbox or e‑billing integration, secure processing of thousands of payments (including cash and checks), and potential need for a dedicated full‑time staff member. Based on the review, the presenter recommended not changing the current vendor arrangement unless new information reduces projected costs.
Commissioners thanked staff for the analysis and did not direct an immediate change in vendor strategy; no formal motion or vote was recorded in the transcript.

