Twin Falls Water Dept

Thank you for the opportunity to address Ms***'s complaintThe issue at hand here, and the historybehind her displeasure, are a matter of some significant misunderstandingsThe conversations she hadwith, and information provided to her by, the Utility Services staff who answered her calls for service,and her question regarding the billing she received, was entirely within the City's established and regularproceduresMs***'s misunderstanding of our billing process, and the method she was told to use tocontrol water entering the property from the meter as they worked on that property, is unfortunate, butlies clearly within her responsibility.Ms [redacted] called our office on December 20th 2016, to request that we turn on the water at the City'smeter at [redacted] for an inspection to occur at 8:30a.mon December ***This service requestwas entered into our system, and on December ***, at 7:22a.m., City Water Department personnelturned the water on as requestedMs [redacted] writes that when she called back to discuss the question ofwhether she needed to have the water shut off that we told her that the service fee would be chargedagain when she called to have the water turned back onMs [redacted] misunderstood the differencebetween being charged the flat rates, and being charged for any water usage which would be preventedif the "main valve inside the property" was shut off, and she decided to leave the account "active."An "active" account within our system means that the water service, sewer service and sanitation(garbage and recycle) service is available to the citizen account holderWe have flat rates for waterconnection, sewer connection and sanitation service, along with a "Mandated Arsenic Charge" that paysfor federally required work on our water system, which each apply to all"active" accountsThese ratesare not dependent on consumption to be charged (the flat rate for water does include up to the first2,gallons of water used,) but are in effect for access to the systemWe do not "police" the use ofthe garbage service, nor does the contractor of that service keep tabs on the carts (provided by thecontractor to each city residence) that are full and emptied each week, so simply being in the propertyallows use of that serviceAgain, this is not about "proving" useIt is simply that such access is providedto all people who open an account at a residential property.Ms [redacted] is asserting that she did not use any water, which is not true if there was any kind ofinspection of the property by a "home inspector." Plumbing function would have been tested if therewas a need to have the water onWe only measure usage in thousands of gallons, but use of the wateris just thatThe activation fee is $10.00, and is for the turn on/turn off service on any new, orreactivated, accountPassage of time has no effect on the charge, since the service requires our WaterDepartment staff to visit the location for each on and then again for the off$for an "on and off" isnothing if you have a water issue, and need the meter operated.The explanation of the conversation regarding "leaving the water on" is that, with the water shut off atthe "main valve" inside the property, no water would be consumed unless there was a leak in theservice lineThere is a $fine for anyone but City Water Department personnel, who additionallymust have their Class I water license, to operate the City's water meters, valves, etcI have enclosedthose rules and code sections for your useThere is no way that any of the three Utility Services staffmembers would ever have told Ms [redacted] to operate the meter, or, as she wrote "turn it (the water) offat the street." That does not happen here, as you can plainly see from the code sections, which strictlyprevent that action by anyone other than licensed City Water Department staffWhat was said by us isthat property owners should operate the "main valve inside the residence," since that is the propertyowner's control over water accessing the inside of a propertyThis is what Ms [redacted] was toldShe hashad several accounts with the City over the past years, and one of these had all services, as the currentaddress doesWe addressed high bill complaints and a leak concern with her at that address, in July,2013, diagnosing the sprinkler system as having a leakDuring none of this history was Ms [redacted] evertold to simply turn off the water at the meterAgain, I would reference the code sections.My failure to return Ms***'s phone call rests squarely on my shouldersI was not immediatelyavailable to address her question when I received her first message, on February 23rd, at 12:p.m., northe following day, which was a FridayThen, at the first of the next week I contacted the WaterDepartment staff who performed the shut off service, because I noted the "water was already off"comment on the service request for the shut offThis shut off was requested, by Ms***, after shebecame aware that she was being charged for the flat rates for all servicesThe fact that the watermeter was shut off by the property owner had then introduced the issue of the fine for doing soThiscaused me to want to speak with the staff member who went out to shut off the water, and he got backto me a couple of days following my request to himHe had arrived just as another gentleman wasabout to leave the property, and spoke with the guy about needing to locate the water meterTheground had snow on it and locating it is a bit of an issue under those conditionsThe gentleman had saidhe could help, and took our guy to the meter location, where there were footprints in the snow and themeter lid was cleared indicating that people had already been thereOur staff member then told methat this gentleman left in a bit of a hurry after pointing out the meter locationSo, neither had Ireturned Ms***'s second message either, which I had received on February 28th at 1:p.mas thiswas before I was done investigating the circumstances of the unlawful meter operationIn hindsight,she apparently thought that I would simply allow the credit against the month of the "active" accountstatus, which was never a foregone conclusion.I have reviewed the interactions that occurred, given the staff notes and recollections of theconversations with Ms***As discussed above, the city has code sections that strictly prohibit theoperation of the water meter valve by anyone other than licensed City staff, so Ms [redacted] would neverhave been told to turn the water off "at the street." To save a $charge, she opted to leave theaccount "active," and fully triggered the billing that goes with that choiceIf we were to just leaveaccounts "active" around the City, then we would have no control over the service use of the citizenschoosing such an option, since we would not necessarily be billing an account if "active" was not thecriteria for billingThat is why we shut off meters at addresses where people do not want anyconsumption of waterAt this time, I will offer to split the amount normally charged for the services thatapply under the current circumstances as a solution to Ms***'s complaintThat leaves the billedamount at $We also will not assert the $penalty for the multiple meter valve turnoffs,and ons, per recent information we have, provided that this action cease immediatelyA notice from mehas been placed inside the meter tile by Water Department staff.Thank you for your time and considerationWe will work with Ms [redacted] to be certain that she no longerhas an opportunity to misunderstand the responsibilities of an account holder, or our instructions to heron how to mitigate over-consumption of water on any property that she is work on, living in ormanaging.Truly,Bill B***Utility Billing Supervisor/Finance AccountantCity of Twin Falls(208) 735-[redacted] **PLEASE SEE ATTACHED**

Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me Sincerely, [redacted] ***

Dear Ms***: I appreciate the opportunity to clarify the response, as I know that it was long, and introduced processes we use here that you may not be completely familiar withTo try to simplify the response, and tie it to your questions more accurately, I have responded within your email, below, in the blueish fontPlease let me know of any remaining questionsIt may be better to sit down face-to-face if I am still unsuccessful in outlining the processes for our billing, and how those have impacted the time your account was in “active” status on our system. Thank you, again, for the chance to get this resolved and move forward. Bill Thank you Bill for the correspondence, I did receive your response through the Revdex.com and I appreciate your taking the time to address this matter. I do however would like to get some clarification on your response As I read it your willing to split charges of $but the total amount in question is $ I said in the letter that I was willing to split the account balance in half, resulting in the $amountI rounded that, because the account balance at the time of my writing was $69.05, and that balance included the “Final Bill” of $for the period between the shut off requested on February 23rd and the billing that ended on February 15thSince you have paid the $for the “Final Bill,” let’s just call it $at the present timeI paid the first bill of $for one hours worth of water consumption when the home inspector was thereBillings for utility services, which include water, sewer and garbage/recycling services, are prorated for the number of days the account is in service for any partial monthIn addition to the prorated “flat rates” for each service, the consumption of water above the 2,gallons included in the water “flat rate” of $per month, and any related sewer consumption of 1,gallons or more, up to 8,gallons, is added to the prorated amountsThe “flat rate” for water, as mentioned, is $per month, sewer is $21.46, sanitation (Garbage/recycling) is $16.90, and the Mandated Arsenic Charge is $Your billing for January 15th was calculated for days out of 30, or ~64%, of the rates applicable, plus an additional 1,000gallons of water as estimated for the Winter Averaging period (December through February.) So the water charge was $x = $plus $for the “additional” 1,gallons of water estimated, to get a total of $The software rounds these answers so the actual amount on the billing statement came out to $The sewer charge amount was $x 0.64=$plus 3,gallons, as estimated, at $per thousand to get a total of ~$This process is used for each charge, and the rounding by the system gives a slightly different answer than my calculator, but this is how each month’s charges workFor a full month, the percentage is simply 100%So the billing you received in January, and paid, was calculated not for “one hour’s worth of water consumption” but rather for days of “service” plus the $“turn on/off” fee for the meter turn on serviceThis is how every account in the City of Twin Falls is billed, from Chobani down to your home addressOnce he left the water was turned off at the street as the main in side the house was in need of repair. If any water was to have run through the house we would have had a flooded basement, and I can assure you no water was consumed. This is where we hit the misunderstanding of what you were told by the Utility Services clerk the day of your call on February 23rdOnly City of Twin Falls Water Department staff members, with their Class I water license, are allowed to operate the City’s valve at the water meterThe $fine I mentioned in the Revdex.com response letter is assessed any time this rule is violatedThis prohibition applies to any and all plumbers, contractors, home owners, etcNo one, other than City staff is allowed, by City Code, to operate those valvesThat misunderstanding has resulted, per our Water Department staff’s and plumbing inspector’s visits, including the one with the Evans Plumbing employee, in at least two, and perhaps more, violations of the law, so I had the notice placed in the meter tileThe $fee you paid for the “turn on in December would have handled the turn off after the “inspection” and apparent winterization you had donePer the bill I received I was charged for units of water as well as other city services. This is because we do not read the meters in the winter, from late November through the latter part of February, so all billings are done on an “estimated” basisThe estimate is from the previous winter period actual usage, in an attempt to get a “close approximation” of a home owner’s actual amount for the current winterFor new owner’s or tenants in a property, we use a 3,gallons per month estimate, which is why your billings reflected that amountWhen we started the actual reading period in late February, then each account, as it is billed, is brought in line with what the meter actually showsWe do this by taking the lasts reading from October or November of the previous Fall, adding the amounts that we estimated to get the total consumption that gives us, then subtracting the “actual reading of total water used” from the meter, and getting the differenceIf it is a negative number, the account is credited for the water “not used.” If the difference is positive, the water use was higher than estimated and the additional charges are assessed at $per thousand gallonsIf you still have your billing statements, look in the upper right corner, under the Meter Readings section, and check the “Cons” item on the far rightYou will see a”-E” after the “3,” indicating that the “3” is an “estimate.” The same item shows up on the February 15th billing statement, but on the March 3rd billing statement, your “Final Bill” after requesting the “Snowbird shut off” shows a “-6” under the “Cons” headingThis is the credit of 6,gallons to bring the meter readings back down to the total reading on the meter registerThe reason that the credit for water use is showing only $is twofoldFirst the calculated amount includes days of the “flat rate” amount discussed earlier, and we only credit for the “extra” water in the estimateThe first 2,gallons of water is included in the “flat rate” so is adjusted for in the prorated calculation for the days on your first billing and the days on the “Final Bill.” The end result is that you are not being charged, given your actual use, for anything other than the “flat rate” service charges for any part of the period that your account was “active.” Again, this is how every account in the City works, so this is not an issue that is affecting you aloneThe only control we have over service use is that of either having an account in “active” or “delete” statusWe don’t turn meters on and then just wait for water use, since the sewer and garbage/recycling services still function if anything is dumped in either of thoseThe charges are always explained, especially in cases where people just want to “say” they are not using “water or garbage,” because we hear this all the timeThe discussion regarding the “main valve in the house” is a confusing one, but we are definitely clear with people that the City’s meter valve is not to be operated at allOnce I was told the correct way to not accrue monthly charges we turned the water account off So at this time we have one activation and one turn offNot an excessive amount as was implied in your response. In my letter, what I actually said was “Ms*** is asserting that she did not use any water, which is not true if there was any kind of inspection of the property by a “home inspector.” Plumbing function would have been tested if there was a need to have the water onWe only measure usage in thousands of gallons, but use of the water is just that.” The meaning that I intended to convey was that it doesn’t matter, under the “flat rate” whether you used gallon or 1,gallons, the water was used, which justifies the charges under the monthly billing for the period of time when the meter was “active.” The word “active” in this context means that the City staff had turned it on, and not yet been requested to turn it offI will again refer to the City Code section which prevents anyone but City staff from operating those valvesAccount holders can’t inactivate their accounts by going to the meter and shutting it off, because of the Code, and because an inactive account is a matter of our records here in Utility ServicesAll I am seeking is the month 1/16/2017-2/15/for charges of $to be credited, and I will then clear the Revdex.com complaint and you and I will has this matter behind usAs I hope you can see, given the discussion in the Revdex.com response, and her in this email, the “flat rate” charges are assessed under all “active” accounts until the account holder contacts us for the account to be terminated, under either a “move out,” or the “Snowbird Off” that you usedI have offered to credit one-half of these charges for the billings for February 15th and 23rdThat acknowledges that we did not make certain that you understood the methods of billing for your account, but also places some responsibility on each of us for not having developed a better understandingThe repeated use of the City’s meter valve that has occurred is also not being placed on the table, because I simply want to educate you and your plumber, but it is something that I could assess, nonethelessHopefully, given the discussion we have had, all is now clearAs I mentioned above in my leading email response, please let me know if I can answer any remaining questions, including in a “sit down” meeting, so we can be absolutely clear on the understanding. Please feel free to check my billing history as I have never had a late payment nor have I had any issues with the City water department I certainly appreciate that your account history at the previous accounts is good, and that we have had no issues, prior to this one, on any of your accountsMy hope is that you can see that this was a two way street, and that 45% of the $is a fair settlementThis means I will have $credited off of your account as our share of the misunderstanding. Again thank you for time and I look Forward to hearing back from you ** *** I apologize for not getting back as soon as you had hoped, on the concern you have with your accountInvestigation of these issues takes some time, and I was out of the office several days during the time period in question as wellMy response to the BB will hopefully be shared with you, if it has not already reached youGiven that choice, I will let the process through them work as it is intended. Thank you for your noteIt caused me to respond directly to you simply to share that I had addressed your complaint though the Revdex.com. Truly, Bill Utility Services Supervisor/Finance AccountantCity of Twin Falls(208)735-7264***
Sincerely,
** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Dear Ms. [redacted]:   I am in receipt of your letter transmitting Ms. [redacted]’s gracious offer to compromise, and I agree to the reduction of the billing in question by $34.55. This brings the balance due on the account to a total of $28.75.   Thank you for your kind assistance in bringing this issue to a successful resolution.   Truly,   Bill B[redacted]   Utility Services Supervisor/Finance Accountant City of Twin Falls (208)735-7264 [redacted]

Thank you for the opportunity to address Ms. [redacted]'s complaint. The issue at hand here, and the historybehind her displeasure, are a matter of some significant misunderstandings. The conversations she hadwith, and information provided to her by, the Utility Services staff who answered her calls for...

service,and her question regarding the billing she received, was entirely within the City's established and regularprocedures. Ms. [redacted]'s misunderstanding of our billing process, and the method she was told to use tocontrol water entering the property from the meter as they worked on that property, is unfortunate, butlies clearly within her responsibility.Ms. [redacted] called our office on December 20th 2016, to request that we turn on the water at the City'smeter at [redacted] for an inspection to occur at 8:30a.m. on December [redacted]. This service requestwas entered into our system, and on December [redacted], at 7:22a.m., City Water Department personnelturned the water on as requested. Ms. [redacted] writes that when she called back to discuss the question ofwhether she needed to have the water shut off that we told her that the service fee would be chargedagain when she called to have the water turned back on. Ms. [redacted] misunderstood the differencebetween being charged the flat rates, and being charged for any water usage which would be preventedif the "main valve inside the property" was shut off, and she decided to leave the account "active."An "active" account within our system means that the water service, sewer service and sanitation(garbage and recycle) service is available to the citizen account holder. We have flat rates for waterconnection, sewer connection and sanitation service, along with a "Mandated Arsenic Charge" that paysfor federally required work on our water system, which each apply to all"active" accounts. These ratesare not dependent on consumption to be charged (the flat rate for water does include up to the first2,000 gallons of water used,) but are in effect for access to the system. We do not "police" the use ofthe garbage service, nor does the contractor of that service keep tabs on the carts (provided by thecontractor to each city residence) that are full and emptied each week, so simply being in the propertyallows use of that service. Again, this is not about "proving" use. It is simply that such access is providedto all people who open an account at a residential property.Ms. [redacted] is asserting that she did not use any water, which is not true if there was any kind ofinspection of the property by a "home inspector." Plumbing function would have been tested if therewas a need to have the water on. We only measure usage in thousands of gallons, but use of the wateris just that. The activation fee is $10.00, and is for the turn on/turn off service on any new, orreactivated, account. Passage of time has no effect on the charge, since the service requires our WaterDepartment staff to visit the location for each on and then again for the off. $10.00 for an "on and off" isnothing if you have a water issue, and need the meter operated.The explanation of the conversation regarding "leaving the water on" is that, with the water shut off atthe "main valve" inside the property, no water would be consumed unless there was a leak in theservice line. There is a $200.00 fine for anyone but City Water Department personnel, who additionallymust have their Class I water license, to operate the City's water meters, valves, etc. I have enclosedthose rules and code sections for your use. There is no way that any of the three Utility Services staffmembers would ever have told Ms. [redacted] to operate the meter, or, as she wrote "turn it (the water) offat the street." That does not happen here, as you can plainly see from the code sections, which strictlyprevent that action by anyone other than licensed City Water Department staff. What was said by us isthat property owners should operate the "main valve inside the residence," since that is the propertyowner's control over water accessing the inside of a property. This is what Ms. [redacted] was told. She hashad several accounts with the City over the past years, and one of these had all services, as the currentaddress does. We addressed high bill complaints and a leak concern with her at that address, in July,2013, diagnosing the sprinkler system as having a leak. During none of this history was Ms. [redacted] evertold to simply turn off the water at the meter. Again, I would reference the code sections.My failure to return Ms. [redacted]'s phone call rests squarely on my shoulders. I was not immediatelyavailable to address her question when I received her first message, on February 23rd, at 12:14 p.m., northe following day, which was a Friday. Then, at the first of the next week I contacted the WaterDepartment staff who performed the shut off service, because I noted the "water was already off"comment on the service request for the shut off. This shut off was requested, by Ms. [redacted], after shebecame aware that she was being charged for the flat rates for all services. The fact that the watermeter was shut off by the property owner had then introduced the issue of the fine for doing so. Thiscaused me to want to speak with the staff member who went out to shut off the water, and he got backto me a couple of days following my request to him. He had arrived just as another gentleman wasabout to leave the property, and spoke with the guy about needing to locate the water meter. Theground had snow on it and locating it is a bit of an issue under those conditions. The gentleman had saidhe could help, and took our guy to the meter location, where there were footprints in the snow and themeter lid was cleared indicating that people had already been there. Our staff member then told methat this gentleman left in a bit of a hurry after pointing out the meter location. So, neither had Ireturned Ms. [redacted]'s second message either, which I had received on February 28th at 1:48 p.m. as thiswas before I was done investigating the circumstances of the unlawful meter operation. In hindsight,she apparently thought that I would simply allow the credit against the month of the "active" accountstatus, which was never a foregone conclusion.I have reviewed the interactions that occurred, given the staff notes and recollections of theconversations with Ms. [redacted]. As discussed above, the city has code sections that strictly prohibit theoperation of the water meter valve by anyone other than licensed City staff, so Ms. [redacted] would neverhave been told to turn the water off "at the street." To save a $10.00 charge, she opted to leave theaccount "active," and fully triggered the billing that goes with that choice. If we were to just leaveaccounts "active" around the City, then we would have no control over the service use of the citizenschoosing such an option, since we would not necessarily be billing an account if "active" was not thecriteria for billing. That is why we shut off meters at addresses where people do not want anyconsumption of water. At this time, I will offer to split the amount normally charged for the services thatapply under the current circumstances as a solution to Ms. [redacted]'s complaint. That leaves the billedamount at $34.50. We also will not assert the $200.00 penalty for the multiple meter valve turnoffs,and ons, per recent information we have, provided that this action cease immediately. A notice from mehas been placed inside the meter tile by Water Department staff.Thank you for your time and consideration. We will work with Ms. [redacted] to be certain that she no longerhas an opportunity to misunderstand the responsibilities of an account holder, or our instructions to heron how to mitigate over-consumption of water on any property that she is work on, living in ormanaging.Truly,Bill B[redacted]Utility Billing Supervisor/Finance AccountantCity of Twin Falls(208) 735-7264[redacted] **PLEASE SEE ATTACHED**