Allen Mounts E-Mail Follow Up To The Meter Upgrade Discussion At Last City Council Meeting

    11

    First – wishing you all a Happy Thanksgiving.  I am looking forward to spending time with my family.

    This is a follow up to my appearance at the last City Council meeting.  During our discussion there was a comparison of “problems” that occurred during the Mount Vernon meter upgrade project.

    I contacted Mount Vernon’s Water Utility Superintendent this week to learn if there were problems during the project.  I believe the Mount Vernon project was completed about 4 years ago.  He said the number of repairs required were substantially less than was referenced during the Council meeting.  He explained that the Mount Vernon / JCI contract had similar language to the Evansville/JCI Contract relative to any repairs needed during the meter installation.  For example, if the sub-contractor damaged the customer’s water line within two feet of the meter pit, the sub-contractor was responsible for the repairs.

    The Superintendent also noted that Mt. Vernon’s water system is different than Evansville’s system.  Mt. Vernon does not have a separate “Curb Stops” (Shut off valves).  He said  that he wished Mount Vernon had separate Curb Stops similar to Evansville’s design.  But since Mount Vernon does not have Curb Stops, the Utility’s water line runs from the Water Main to the Meter Pit.  The Utility maintains that segment of the water line and has easement rights to access that portion of the water line.  That segment of the water line would have been installed by the utility. He said the customer is responsible for the Meter Pit plus the water line that runs from the Meter to the house or building.  In Evansville’s system, the customer’s water line runs from the Curb Stop to the house or building, including the meter pit. This would have been installed by the property owner at the time the water was connected the the Utility’s shut off valve at the Curb Stop.

    The Superintendent said that the Utility did run into problems initially with the Contractor’s employees being too rough and breaking water lines that ran from the Meter to the Water Main.  This is a different contractor than the Evansville Utility is using for the meter upgrade project.  I also, learned from JCI that they no longer use that sub-contractor.  Early in the project, Mount Vernon’s sub-contractor used non-union labor that  caused the repair issues.  Once this was identified, Mount Vernon and Johnson Controls worked through a change in the sub-contractor’s work force. For the Evansville project, Hydromax is performing the meter and transmitter installations. Hydromax uses Licensed Plumbers.  Approximately 50% are Hydromax employees and 50% are hired from the Union Hall.

    In the Mount Vernon project, most of the required repairs were on City side of the meter and the repairs were performed by the Water Utility.  I learned that the repairs were fairly easy fixes and could be made in the meter pit and did not entail extensive work.  The Contractor took care of any repairs on the Customer Side of the meter pit.  While the superintendent didn’t have a count, he said the number of meter repairs home owners had to make were relatively small.  In those cases, the property owner was responsible for repairing the water lines.  Mount Vernon didn’t have special programs to help home owners fund water line repairs.  We continue to explore options to assist homeowners who are unable to make repairs to their water lines / meter pits.  Once we get a significant portion of the re-inspections completed, we will have a better insight and can provide an update and analysis of what found during the re-inspection process.

    Overall, the Mount Vernon Superintendent said the City was very pleased with their Meter Upgrade Project.

    I hope this information was helpful.

    Allen

    THIS E-MAIL WAS POSTED BY THE CCO WITHOUT OPINON, BIAS OR EDITING.

    Copyright 2014 City County Observer. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

    11 COMMENTS

    1. It wasn’t helpful, it is a cheap attempt to try to paint another attempt by the city administration to screw the citizens in a more acceptable light. I think the matter will be settled in court. The city agrees to bad contracts and gets bad legal advice. It hasn’t been faring too well in court. Winnecke and most of his department heads need to go. Evansville cannot afford them much longer.

    2. So the city is saying;
      City has from the main to stop box which city has utility easement for.
      Customer goes from stop box to meter pit, and from the meter pit to the building which is on private property and “no” easement to the utility company?
      The utility must “trespass” on the owners property to install and maintain water meters?
      By the utility trespassing, they must endure all repair because of trespassing on private property? The homeowner should be able to recoup all cost in court?

      Oh what web they weave, as they practice first, to deceive!

    3. The Utility maintains that segment of the water line and has easement rights to access that portion of the water line. That segment of the water line would have been installed by the utility. He said the customer is responsible for the Meter Pit plus the water line that runs from the Meter to the house or business.

      Well if this is how they did things in all businesses the customer would be responsible for buying and maintaining the cash registers at every business that’s used to count the money and hold the money. They would also be responsible for buying and maintaining the weigh scales at the grocery stores or the fuel pump meters at the gas stations too.

      If the customer is responsible for the meter pit and the meter that’s primary purpose is to measure the amount of water used by the customer FOR THE CITY’s RECORDS in order to charge the customer the right amount of money for using the city supplied water. What else could this be applied to. Any devices that’s used by a business or merchant that’s required to measure how much of it’s goods are sold.

      I’m sorry but I feel it’s not right for me or any other customer to pay for the businesses meters or weight scales that they are using to figure out how much to charge me for the goods I buy from said business.

      I guess in a way we all end up paying for the tools that the business needs and used as we get that charged in the price of the goods and services that we buy from those businesses. We just don’t see those extra charges broken down and applied to the bill.

    4. I am still waiting for an explanation on who payed for the repairs on the first meters that were installed before they began sending out the letters. As for as I know no one has answered that question. I am referring to Mr. Mounts or Mr. Duckworth.

      • How did your historical/arts downtown street light district come out on that dealt in smart meter projection?

    5. I interpret Mounts comments as saying that the EVV contract and installation are sub-standard.

      Who negotiated and approved this contract? My grade school grandchildren could have done a better. Thank you City Council, Ducky & Mounts.

    7. ” explained that the Mount Vernon / JCI contract had similar language to the Evansville/JCI Contract relative to any repairs needed during the meter installation. For example, if the sub-contractor damaged the customer’s water line within two feet of the meter pit, the sub-contractor was responsible for the repairs”
      This is the key. The contractor is responsible for the two feet in an the two feet out of the meter. They have to make repairs if it breaks in the pit. Why are they telling home owners to replace lines to house? The chances of them breaking the line 24″ from where they are working will happen very rarely and it is always caused by poor plumbing practices.

    Comments are closed.