BWS managers want us to look forward at some new systems. They will then, at some point,  acknowledge how screwed up the current system is as a justification  to get more "new" money out of ratepayers and the public.  It would be relevant for the public to know what happened, when, by whom, etc.

In order for the public to consider any future expenditure given the recent deceptions and waffling public statements by BWS, first...independently...they have the right to know;  how bad is it?  Was there fraud then and is there fraud now?  Are people entitled to refunds?  Are the people that cooked up the original AMR system still working, or have they returned to "help" and are now collecting needed monies as a "double-dip"?  . Was there dereliction in the maintenance of the current system, etc?

Answers to the below questions could be published in the newspaper as a public notification along with the legal procedure on how to recover funds. This could be millions and millions of consumer dollars.

First,  we, as community activists or advocates (lawyers), need to ask for the records form BWS.  Second,  figure  out a way to get the feds to verify the information given.

Following are some of the questions we need to ask regarding CC&B and billing Practices, administrative and other professional oversight.

1) Computer Estimated Billing:

·    What Is the authorization to computer estimate a water bill in place of billing based upon an actual read?  What is the specific rule (whether it be by the city council, BWS, Public Utilities Commission, etc.),  when was it enacted, who enacted it, by what means was it enacted, and who enforces the permissibility of said rule.  We want to see documents and names.

Documents will determine ability; names will show individuals as advocates, administrators or potential beneficiaries (pay, bonuses, post retirement hiring, political agendas "tainted advocates")

Specifically, the public would like to know under what circumstances the BWS is authorized to initiate a "computer estimate" bill in place of the widely believed perception of the public that their bill is based upon actual, regularly read physical or electronic actual observations during the billing cycle reads. 

·      Because "computer estimates" appear on a large percentage of BWS bills, now monthly instead of the former bi-monthly bills, what gives BWS the legal right to repeatedly use "computer estimates" as a method to replace adequate staffing to replace defective hardware in a timely manner.

How many residential bills go out during each billing cycle (now monthly) and previously (every 60 days)?

How many commercial bills go out during each billing cycle, same as above, both 60 & 30 days.

From 2000, how many ( a specific number) residential bills have been computer estimated separated by commercial and residential bills.

Assuming that, as BWS has publicly said, computer estimates are only used for a very limited time and solely as a result of an unforeseen circumstance as is nationally the acknowledged practice, how many of the above computer estimates appeared multiple times (more than twice) since the AMR system was brought on line in approximately 2000?

What is specifically being requested here is twofold:

1)) From an administrative fiscal point of view, if computer estimates were too low, we want to know how much money for upgrades and repairs the BWS lost because meters were off line

2) How much were ratepayers overcharged by potentially inaccurate bills where they are possibly entitled to a refund?   What is the potential liability to the public AND rate payers.

What is the specific legal position of BWS with regard to the collecting of additional revenues months and years after the specific bill in question (as a catch up) was issued and satisfied, due to a BWS "computer estimate now being "balanced with the property meter reading" resulting from equipment repairs. Is there any notifications issued to the ratepayer that due to a computer estimate, the ratepayer may be assessed more monies in 30 days, 60 days, 90 days, etc.....1 year, 2 years!

So, on the one hand, if BWS was mismanaging its labor and maintenance to such an extent that it "looked better on the books" to continue the revenue stream by inserting computer estimates in place of actual repairs or properly verifiable reads in a timely way, can they now come back after fixing the electronics and "catch up" at the public's expense?

·     ·         Request of all directives issued to each department down to each individual permanent and temporary staff member dealing with public contact, explaining policies, procedures, what if scenarios and rights to dispute water bills.

     ·         Request any changes in worker job descriptions and any and all documents, emails,  notifications and agreements with the HGEA and the UPW.

·    How many service holders have incurred a disruption of service since the AMR system went into affect (had their water turned off, or were warned of said)? How many of those, as a result of bills that were computer generated!

QUESTION REGARDING RESPONSIBLE PARTIES

Have there been any job hiring freeze directives issued since 2001 by BWS and issued by BWS managers?

What were staff levels for all BWS departments prior to 2000 (or when AMR went on line) prior to and following the lay-off of meter readers, auditors, investigators, customer service, billing, etc. How many in each of the above (levels, as of June 15, 2013)?

Break down all staff by HGEA unionized, HGEA union/management, UPW, temp, consultants and previously employed/now consultants.  For consultants that were formerly employees we are interested in a name, what they used to do at BWS, was it related to AMR, a former rate of pay, bonuses, whether they are collecting a EUTF pension and what is the "consulting package accompanied by a job description, time and motion reports, all receipts, expenses, etc.

Who currently administers customer care?    What are the names of subordinate confidential/non-union, union or administrative employees?   What was their relationship to the previous development of the AMR program?

We would like to see all contracts, understandings and formal proposals and bids for the original AMR system,  lobbying notes or memorandums of understandings and vendor assurances with regard to the life of the hardware, its maintenance schedule and other projected costs for a 10-15 year period.

Same for CC&B!