How Accurate Is Your Water Bill?

On Wednesday, Aug. 26, KXAN reported the story of Catt Bowen, who said her August Austin Water bill came back six times higher than the bill she was issued in July.

A household that typically used 2,300 gallons of water each month was now registering as having rolled through 13,000. Bowen told the network that she doesn’t employ an irrigation system and rarely waters her yard.

A sample water usage chart provided by an Austin Water customer who has questions about the accuracy of their bill.

The story made the rounds about South Austin, eventually posting to a Facebook group operated by the residents in the ABC Streets neighborhood, the tiny stretch of alphabetic streets located southwest of Westgate and William Cannon. The group’s members started looking at their water bills and noticed similarly steep usage hikes – and not just pertaining to bills distributed in July and August. One resident saw his bill increase tenfold between June and July. Another, Caleb Joyce, went from a June spent using 1,422 gallons less than the average resident to a July in which he was accused of using 12,895 more. (Joyce, who only lived in the house part-time this summer, and is moving to Boulder, Colo., said the city sent someone to his house and found a functioning meter and no pipe leaks on his property. His case has been escalated to higher tier of investigation.)

A third neighbor, Marie Catrett, reported that her household got charged for using 5,000 gallons during the Aug. 2014 billing period before seeing that number rise to 20,700 gallons in 2015. Catrett told the Chronicle that she called Austin Water Utility after noticing her and her neighbors’ pricy bills and was told to run a dye test on her toilets to determine if there are any leaks. She then arranged for someone to visit her house to double check the meter and potentially identify a leaker pipe. “We’re concerned about this,” she said. “We’re concerned about elderly neighbors or others who may not be paying close attention. Case-by-case is unacceptable for what appears to be a widespread community issue, and it is shocking that the city has taken no proactive action or [offered] communication on this. I was told I will be subject to late fees and that I have to pay the amount and will receive a credit in the future if I’m due one. This now feels like a scam.”

The city says it’s running no such scam. In fact, a representative from Austin Energy says the department’s billing system accuracy is “extremely good.”

“In the 99-plus percent range,” said Robert Cullick, communications manager with Austin Energy, which is in charge of obtaining meter readings and facilitating billing for Austin Water Utility. “Out of 1.2 million bills we sent out February-July of this year, we have received 526 calls that had to have some level of investigation to resolve beyond a single phone call.” He added that AE was able to resolve “all issues except five” – each of which were sent to an independent arbiter, who twice ruled in AE’s favor and the other three times urged the two parties to reach settlement. “No billing system is perfect, because humans are involved, but three partials out of 1.2 million bills represents a sound system.”

Cullick went on to note that AE determined Bowen's original complaint to be "unfounded" (AE says she had a leak on her property and will be held responsible for the water use and payment; however, Bowen told the Chronicle that she disagrees with that determination) and that AE regularly sees complaints rise during the summer months, especially ones as dry as those endured this year. He attached a copy of a memo he delivered to KXAN in response to the Aug. 26 story alleging the broadcast “[did] a disservice to customers” and temporally strained AWU and AE resources.

He said the city’s responsibility “stops at the meter,” and that any problem with pipes or usage is the owner’s. But holding the city accountable for its meter readings may be what’s driving the larger outcry.

According to a city audit conducted in Sept. 2014 on the water billing process, the city of Austin “does not have a process to determine if water reads are accurate.” Austin Water Utility pays Austin Energy to handle meter reading and billing, but it’s rare that an actual person at Austin Energy looks at either. The department hires independent vendors to conduct meter readings, and uses Customer Care & Billing software for its billings. City Auditor Kenneth Mory noted that AE hasn’t conducted a review of its third-party services since implementing the process in 2011. Furthermore, AE’s process for manually reviewing the leads that CC&B does not accept doesn’t actually ensure reads are explicitly accurate.

Cullick maintains that most reads are accurate. “Less than one half of one percent,” he wrote to KXAN, referencing Mory’s audit. (The auditor’s office conducted over 1,350 meter reads and learned that overcharged customers were docked an average of $262.) But being “accurate” with city water remains subject to interpretation. As of last September, the range in which a meter reading wouldn’t get flagged by CC&B extended from 25% to 400% – literally four times the standard amount – of a household’s historical usage. (Cullick said AE reduced the range of readings that would get flagged after last year’s audit, but didn’t specify the degree to which the figures were reduced.) According to Mory, Austin Energy doesn’t know why the range is so generous. “Auditors were unable to locate documentation to support when and why the parameters were established,” he wrote. In fact, AE management told auditors specifically that the parameters were set to generate a reasonable workload for their employees – rather, stressed Mory, “than to effectively identify potentially inaccurate reads.”

Cullick, however, chalks the rise in complaints to inadvertent overuse and a bad spell of “the social media factor ... as one person’s complaint fuels another’s and suddenly people become convinced there must be some kind of problem that affects everyone.”

Indeed, but when someone’s utility bill is going haywire and the city refuses to hold itself responsible until they’re paying more than 400% of what they usually owe for water, it’s reasonable to understand why they might feel the need to complain.

A previous version of this story incorrectly stated that Catt Bowen has no pool, and further implied that her complaint had been resolved as unfounded. While AE claims her complaint is unfounded, Bowen disagrees. The Chronicle regrets the errors.