4. SR 02-20-1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• NOTES: Initially, UPA was charged based on winter quarter consumption as was the policy for all customers On November 20, 1991, the City received a letter from Doug Paumen at UPA requesting that UPA be billed 50°~ of the high and low flow meter usage because not all of the water was discharged into the sewer system. The City agreed to a 50% split even though a meter was not installed to measure the water being discharged into the sewer system and even though policy stated that 100°~ of the water usage is to be used to calculate the monthly sewer charge. The Utilities was notified of this change and started billing based on 50°~ of the actual usage. However, the bills were calculated on .585/1000 gal instead of the correct rate of 52.55/1000 gal. While reviewing sewer customer charges for a possible rate increase and to project growth rates, the City discovered that UPA was being billed incorrectly. The Utilities was notified of the error and it was corrected. UPA was not charged for the underbilling for previous years. On November 16, 1993 ,Darrell Mack sent a letter to UPA allerting them to the fact that their sewer bill would now be based on actual water usage at a rate of 52.55/1000 gal. At the same time he • stated that they had been billed incorretly in the past at 5.85/1000 gal instead of 52.55/1000 gal. so they would see a large increase in their monthly bill. In July 1994, Doug Paumen notified the City that he felt the sewer bills were high. At that time City staff and UPA staff discussed the situation; the City was told that not all of the water being used was now being discharged into the sewer system as we were lead to believe by the contractors at UPA. This was corrected and effective in July, 1994, the calculation reverted back to 50% of the usage which was what UPA had previously requested. Staff questioned why UPA had not been required to or had not installed a meter when the building modifications were made in 1988 causing part of the water to be discharged into the river. Staff suggested that it would be in UPA's best interest to install a meter so that they could be charged based on the actual volume being discharged into the sewer system. UPA requested a refund based on their estimate of usage per month. Staff felt that because UPA had been billed based on the usage they requested, it would be inappropriate for-staff to grant a large refund. Staff also felt that because UPA had been billed only 1 /3 of the correct amount for several years, both issues should be taken into consideration when determining whether a refund was appropriate. • 2/17/95 UPA.XLS Page 2 of 2