Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br />Date: 2/26/2024 <br />Item No.: 7.d. <br />Department Approval City Manager Approval <br /> <br /> <br />Item Description: Consider Ordinance Amending Chapter 801 of Roseville City Code, <br />Water Meters <br />1 <br />2 Background <br />3 Chapter 801.10 of the Roseville City Code deals with water meters. Currently, the <br />4 ordinance requires a meter deposit be charged to all new meter installations and new <br />5 customers. When customers change when homes are sold, the old meter deposit is <br />6 returned and a new meter deposit is required from the new customer. This creates a lot of <br />7 accounting and tracking as meter deposit costs change over time. There is currently a <br />8 balance of $1,499,849 in the meter deposit account for the 10,028 meter accounts that <br />9 have a deposit associated with the account. The intent of the deposit was to make sure <br />10 meters were not removed. <br />11 <br />12 Staff has reviewed other cities’ policies and most no longer require a meter deposit from all <br />13 customers, but do charge a meter fee for new construction. The current deposit <br />14 requirement is more of an accounting burden and provides little benefit to the City. With <br />15 radios on most meters, if a meter is tampered with or removed, staff would be made aware <br />16 of the issue very quickly. Staff would have other mechanisms to deal with lost meters, <br />17 including charging a fee for the cost of a new meter. <br />18 <br />19 The new ordinance changes the deposit requirement to a fee. Only new meters would be <br />20 charged a fee. If the ordinance is adopted, staff will bring an ordinance to change the fee <br />21 schedule from a deposit to a fee at the March 4 meeting. Over time, when buildings are <br />22 sold or when buildings are demolished, the existing customer meter deposits would be <br />23 returned. It will likely take 40-50 years to deplete the meter deposit account so there is no <br />24 concern from Finance on running low on cash. <br />25 <br />26 The City Attorney helped draft and reviewed the proposed ordinance. <br />27 <br />28 Policy Objectives <br />29 It is City policy to keep City-owned infrastructure in good operating condition and to keep <br />30 systems operating in a safe condition. <br />31 <br />32 Racial Equity Impact Summary <br />33 There should be no equity impacts with this ordinance. <br />34 <br />Page 1 of 2 <br />Qbhf!75!pg!335 <br /> <br />