Laserfiche WebLink
<br />8. That Ms. Smith was told at the May 23,3006, that the Council was not going to set <br />any sort of precedence regarding waiving/reducing fees, as they are working with <br />public money and the issue is not the City's fault. <br /> <br />9. That all 3,352,000 gallons of water ran through the meter. <br /> <br />10. That at the Finance Committee meeting of July 25,2006, Ms. Smith's representative <br />presented weather information that showed that the pipe could have frozen in <br />November and most likely December. <br /> <br />11. That Ms. Smith's representative stated at the July 25,2006, Finance Committee <br />meeting that there is no denying that Ms. Smith has some responsibility, but there is <br />a responsibility that the meters will be read correctly and what the City's contract <br />with Connexus Energy states. <br /> <br />12. That the contract with Connexus Energy states that the service for meter reading <br />will include new services, transfers, verification and investigation. <br /> <br />13. That Connexus Energy was contacted and they did not have any information <br />regarding why a reading was not obtained in January. <br /> <br />14. That Ms. Smith's billing information shows 0 usage for 4th quarter usage and not any <br />sort of estimate for past usage. <br /> <br />15. That the Finance Committee members received an update on July 28,2006, stating <br />that a memo from Connexus Energy showed that several accounts in the City were <br />estimated in January due to weather conditions when the weather report showed that <br />it was 31 degrees out with little snow on the ground. <br /> <br />16. That five out of eight properties (63%) surrounding Ms. Smith's property <br />received estimated water readings by Connexus in January 2006. <br /> <br />17. That Mr. Julian Jones, of Conn ex us Energy, attended the August 22, 2006, Finance <br />Committee meeting and stated that typically when a meter readingis not obtained <br />there is an investigation performed. <br /> <br />18. That Mr. Jones indicated that if a good reading had been obtained in January, that <br />bill would have been $3,000 as opposed to $6,000. <br /> <br />19. That Mr. Jones stated that there is a responsibility to the customer to get a good <br />reading, and he believes that Connexus and the City owe it to the resident to come <br />up with a fair agreement. <br /> <br />20. That the contract between Connexus Energy and the City needs to be rewritten <br />including stipulations regarding performance. <br /> <br />Resolution #06-09-294 <br />Page 2 of 4 <br />