With all of the discussion surrounding the square renovation, I thought it might be interesting to chat with Tim Rosenbury of Butler Rosenbury and Partners about the project, the situation surrounding the redevelopment and how he sees the situation.

LifeOfJason: When you heard the square was going to be redesigned, was it something that you felt should be a priority for BRP?

Tim Rosenbury: We were excited about the possibilities of improving the square, and, with a landscape architecture team in-house, we felt we would be qualified for the project. We had redesigned the streetscapes on Commercial Street, and we also redesigned the Trafficway streetscape, crosswalks and median from National to Benton, and the plazas in front of the Expo Center downtown. We thought the square would be a challenge. And it’s been that, for sure.

LOJ: What was your inspiration for BRP’s design of the new square?

TR: Virtually all of the design is in response to the community input process, which was a requirement of the project — to seek out through a series of workshops, open houses, and surveys, those issues and opportunities that we’re facing at this point in the square’s history.

The initial request for professional qualifications that went out to design firms listed several consulting firms which had expertise in community input and programming of public spaces. One of them was
Project for Public Spaces, and we were fortunate to secure them as a consultant to our proposed team. PPS took the reins at the beginning of the project, which was the community input and master planning process.

During the master planning work the leadership role was transitioned over to our firm.

LOJ: You stated to the Community Free Press that you “felt a responsibility to observe the use and revitalization criteria that came out of the public input process on the square” which included at least
750 people. The CFP then claimed that “many of the people who provided input were members of focus groups chosen by BRP’s programming partner, Partner [sic] for Public Spaces.” What is your relationship with PPS and how many of the 750 people were in focus groups chosen by PPS? Did you have
any control over the focus groups, the questions asked or the people chosen?

TR: PPS is a consultant to BR&P. I’d guess that a little over a hundred people were in the focus groups. The rest were those who had responded to surveys at Cider Days, Taste of Springfield and on web sites, as well as those who attended open house events. The categories of focus groups — downtown property owners, retailers, students, etc. — were recommended by PPS, and Urban Districts Alliance and City staff invited specific citizens who fit in those categories to the focus group sessions. At least one of us from BR&P attended each session, and was involved in the discussions, but the actual facilitation was done by PPS.

LOJ: Were you really dissuaded by the city from researching Lawrence Halprin’s involvement with the square as claimed by the president of the Cultural Landscape Foundation? If so, who was it that dissuaded you from doing that research?

TR: No one with the City instructed us to not research Lawrence Halprin’s involvement in the square.

LOJ: How involved do you think Halprin himself was in the design of the square? Is the claim by George McLaughlin that “the only one who can professionally be credited with the project design is Lawrence Halprin” just a business related declaration and not an indication of involvement or authorship?

TR: I can’t say. I don’t know these men personally, and I’ve not visited with either of them, and I should take Mr. McLaughlin at his word. One of our landscape architects researched this issue, and found little archival evidence of Mr. Halprin’s direct involvement in Park Central Square. For what it’s worth, when I refer to the designer of the square, I use the name on the letterhead, working drawings, and correspondence do — “Lawrence Halprin & Associates.” It suggests it was an effort of more than one person, as is usual in projects like this.

LOJ: Let’s flip the script and put you in the place of Lawrence Halprin. You’re a legendary architect that has been called one of the best in American history. Your firm designs a square in Boise, Idaho although you only oversaw the work of your staff and did a few crude sketches that were not used in the final design. Yet some people want to preserve it because it’s a “Tim Rosenbury square.” Would you be comfortable with people saying that or would you have to admit that you had very little actual input in the process?

TR: Well, there are lots of projects by our firm that I don’t have any involvement in. And when I get personal credit for a project that I didn’t have anything to do with, then I’m usually quick to point that
out. So I’m comfortable admitting when I had little or nothing to do with a project in our firm. But the attribution issue is tough nevertheless. Different firms and individuals do it different ways.

LOJ: Do you think your design pays enough tribute to Halprin and his work? Would you like to have included more of his firm’s design?

TR: Knowing what I know now, yes. At the time we were working through the design with the technical Committee — the group of stakeholders that acted in the client’s role during the master planning and design process prior to the plan being approved by council — I remember one meeting
during which we had proposed reworking some things, and someone in the committee said, “Yes, but will we have changed the square enough?” It seems there has been as much a desire for change as for no change to the square.

In a way, you have to discern what is useful and functional in the existing square, and what is not. What contributes to its success as a place? From what I can tell, the square designed by Lawrence Halprin & Associates was really nice when it first opened, but over the years a lot of the nice things — trees, mostly — were not maintained. And then, there have been other changes to the landscaping, paving and retaining walls that intrude on the Lawrence Halprin & Associates design. So when you start to redesign, you ask: how important is it for the square to be contemplated as an artifact, and how important is it to be a functional, engaging and shared public space? We’d like to accomplish both, but the latter is the one that designers overlook too often, I’m afraid.

LOJ: Do you think the organizations from outside the city are out of line in trying to stop the process?

TR: No, not at all. That’s their job. They’re very aware of the process, and the process allows for their involvement.

LOJ: What do you hope people say about the square designed by BRP in thirty years? Fifty years?

TR: “Time to fix it — it’s worn out from constant use!” I’m serious. If the “new” square gets lots of use, then it will have been a success. If in thirty or fifty years a different design is needed, then I’d have no problem with that.

LOJ: As a Springfield resident, do you think you could dedicate anything more important to the city than the design of it’s central square?

TR: Well, the square is mighty important, no doubt.

Schools may be more important, because they speak to our aspirations for the future, but they are neighborhood-centered — the good ones, anyway — as opposed to the whole city. Same with churches, and other civic and community institutions.

We were responsible several years ago for the exterior restoration of the Historic City Hall building. As the place of the city’s public business — the City Council chamber, it’s certainly significant to Springfieldians.

We’re finishing up final plans for the Watershed Center. I think we are only now as a whole community beginning to appreciate the significance of the practicing good stewardship of our watersheds, and this building is going to be a huge resource in making progress in our community in that regard.

But the square is one of the few places that all Springfieldians can claim — it’s not north, or south, or west or east. And it’s the same public space that John Polk Campbell laid out in the 1820’s. And, given
that people have lost their lives there — some in grisly, shameful ways — it’s like holy ground. The Halprin & Associates square is just one piece of the story of the square.

In a follow up to the previous blog concerning Brenda Cirtin, e-mails to Councilman Dan Chiles and media reports I contacted the city’s Public Information Office regarding the identity of the mystery person who made the initial request for the e-mails of Councilman Dan Chiles.  This is what I received from the PIO:

The citizen initiated this request for information via a phone call to the Clerk’s Office and Brenda took her usual step of asking the source of the information, in this case Councilman Chiles, to respond to the request. The citizen called back to the Clerk’s Office about three times within a week’s
time of the initial request to check on its progress. When the information had not been provided, the citizen declined to pursue a formal Sunshine request. Brenda told Mr. Chiles the matter was dropped.

Now, obviously, that does not identify the citizen and I’m guessing here that under state law because it was not a formal request there’s no legal obligation for Ms. Cirtin to release the name of that person.  I can understand this because what if the caller was a reporter working on a story?  Why should she be required to tell the other media outlets in town what a reporter for a competiting station is working on as an exclusive?  So there’s a good precedent for not revealing the name of this person.

Had they made a formal request, it would have been public record and Ms. Cirtin would have no choice but to release the name. As is, I really don’t have a problem with her keeping that citizen’s name confidential as the citizen wanted by withdrawing their request.

Now, completely without Ms. Cirtin’s knowledge, I have done some more digging and while I cannot reveal the identity (yet) of the person who made the request I have a source who has confirmed to me that the person making the request was NOT a member of the Springfield City Council, their spouses, their immediate family or city staff. I know there were some in the community who were questioning if this was an attempt by city staff or city council to intimidate Mr. Chiles and that is not the case. Now, the citizen in question may have been trying to do it but it is not someone within the city government.

I’ve also been able to discover that it is not someone connected to the Missouri Liberty Coalition or other groups that have been loud advocates of change within city government and sometimes insinuators of corruption among the city government. So this is not some witch hunt on the part of city critics, either.

I know I’ve said a lot of who it’s not but I thought it was important to see if it was one of those two groups before we started digging any further. At this point, it just seems like a citizen interested in the process who’s not seeking media attention nor attempting to intimidate Councilman Chiles. However, if we find the person, we’re sure going to ask them why they wanted those e-mails.

According to Springfield police, after a thorough investigation, police believe a woman faked her recent account of an attack in the Lake Shore apartment complex.

In case you didn’t hear about the incident, a Springfield woman told police she fought off an attack in her apartment late night April 28th. The woman said a man came into her house through an unlocked door and they had a struggled. However, after speaking with many witnesses and closely examining the evidence at the crime scene, police now believe the reported incident never occurred.

Follow up interviews with the “victim” confirmed the suspicions of the investigators.

The police are still investigating and considering filing charges against the woman for a false police report.  My opinion is that because she knew fully well it was a fake report not only should they file charges but also try to recoup the costs for the police investigation.  I’m sure her neighbors feared for their safety after the incident too and I’m sure they’re going to be ticked off to know they had been lied to about the incident.

I had someone ask me if I could post a link to Amy’s and my wedding website. I thought it was simple enough to remember the address was www.amyandjasongetmarried.com but they said “just post something.”

We went as eco friendly as possible with it and instead of announcements and invitations we went electronic.  (Dan Chiles would be so proud of us.)  We did send some paper invites to folks like Amy’s grandma who’s not very computer savvy.

I can’t believe it’s only 17 days away.  Seems like yesterday we said “let’s do it Memorial Day weekend.  We have plenty of time to plan it that way…”

God sometimes really does things that leave me speechless. (Which if you were to ask my fiancee or people who know me like Chris Brewer or Jim Lee that’s a hard task to accomplish.)

I was on the phone with my mother who was asking me about a wedding event when I walked outside and picked up the mail. When I saw an envelope from DiGiacinto’s Restaurant I felt that weird feeling you get when you think “I shouldn’t be getting anything from these guys.” I noticed the address on the envelope was my old mailing address (which you think I would have noticed first since it had the yellow “notify sender of your current address” sticker on it from our friends at the USPS.)

Inside was a note, a gift card and a menu.

The note read: Dear Jason: This is for you and Amy to have a romantic evening together. Enjoy it! God Bless, A Baseball fan from Buffalo.

Immediately my brain went into (as LoneStarr would say in the movie Spaceballs) HYPER ACTIVE. I started to just spin with wonder as to who I know that lives in Buffalo, knows I was a fan of DiGiacinto’s, knew my fiancee’s name and knew my old mailing address. I still haven’t figured it out but knowing me I’ll spend most of the night trying to do so.

So, until I can figure it out (if I can) and thank you in person, thank you Buffalo baseball fan. Your surprise gift humbles me and really gave Amy & I a real positive boost at a time where we are in desperate need of one. You’re another example of the wonderful people who live here in the Ozarks.

Edit:  Mystery solved…it was a friend from Buffalo, NY and not Buffalo, MO. :)  Thanks, Ryan.

If the hit log is any indication, the post tonight about Brenda Cirtin and her statement that the News-Leader did not call her before posting comments in today’s editorial about her is of interest to many of you. I’ll admit I was pretty harsh on the News-Leader in my comments and it wasn’t about defending Ms. Cirtin as much as it was my belief that if you’re going as far as to say someone’s trying to intimidate someone else you should at least call them.

Before I wrote my post, I sent an e-mail to Don Wyatt of the News-Leader asking for the N-L’s reaction to Ms. Cirtin’s letter to the council claiming the N-L was inaccurate in their editorial. I also tried calling as I noted in that post. The reason I tried to contact Mr. Wyatt was because I’d had interaction with him in the past and I had no idea who wrote the editorial because it had no byline.

Tonight, I received an e-mail from David Iseman, interim Voices editor concerning the post I had made and stating that he was the author of the editorial in question. He said that he would love to hear what people think of the editorial and that his phone number is 836-1167. (Yes, I have permission to post it here.) He said they would record any comments from readers and post a link to them online.

So I want to give Mr. Iseman props for having the tennis balls to stand up and say “I wrote this and if there’s a mistake I’m going to correct it.” No matter how you may feel about the editorial pieces in the N-L you have to respect someone in today’s usually hostile media environment who stand up and say “I wrote this.”

Now, I want to apologize to Mr. Iseman because from the tone of his e-mail I believe he thought I was saying he was deliberately avoiding accountability for his writing. I had attributed the fact there was no identification as an institutional position of Gannett (the paper’s corporate owner) and not the decision of the individual editorial writer and I apologize for not making that clearer in my post. There was no byline during the Tony Messenger days and it was a pretty common assumption then that Tony was the guy behind the editorials even with no name attached to the writings.

And I also give him props for sending me that e-mail tonight claiming ownership of the piece and giving his phone number and inviting people to call with comments. He stood up and took it head-on and I respect that. I invited him to call and have at me tomorrow morning when I’m guest hosting Morningline on KWTO and I hope he will take up the invitation.

Again, Mr. Iseman, you have my respect for standing up and contacting me tonight on all of this.

Edit: Just after I posted this, Mr. Iseman e-mailed that he was very busy in the AM so he wouldn’t be able to call the show. (Bummer.) He did want me to note here that no one has contacted the News-Leader asking for a correction to the piece. I find that more than a little interesting.

Chuck Booms is a little under the weather so I’ll be filling in for him tomorrow morning from 6-9am on Morningline on KWTO, 560 AM and KBFL, 99.9 FM.

We’ll be talking about the issue with City Clerk Brenda Cirtin and the News-Leader, the City Utilities issue I mentioned last night and other city related issues.

GUEST UPDATE:

Sometime before 7:30 we’ll be joined by Springfield City Councilman Doug Burlison and then at 7:30 we’ll be joined by Springfield Mayor Pro Tem Gary Deaver.   We’ll talk about issues impacting Springfield and take your calls.

If you’re not in the city of Springfield, your opinions are still valued!  Any idea can be considered if it can help improve the city and the quality of life in Greene County.

If you have a subject you’d like covered, e-mail me, comment here or call in tomorrow morning.

Click this link to go to the KWTO website where you can listen live.

In today’s Springfield News-Leader, the editorial saying that City Leaders Need To Stay Focused included this passage about City Clerk Brenda Cirtin:

“Chiles said the issue has gotten so serious that City Clerk Brenda Cirtin asked him to turn over e-mails pertaining to his sleuthing from his personal computer.”

OK, I can’t say I’ve been a professional journalist for two decades but I would think in a situation where you’re told this by a course…in this case Councilman Dan Chiles…that you would at least call the City Clerk and ask her about the situation. Did she really ask for the communications from his personal computer?

I spoke with Ms. Cirtin this afternoon and she informs me that no one from the Springfield News-Leader called her for confirmation, denial or explanation of that claim from Councilman Chiles.

That is inexcusable even if it is just an editorial piece. If you’re going to make claims that the city is trying to bully into silence a member of the City Council who is rattling a saber then you need to make sure your ducks are in a row.

I’m attaching a PDF of all the e-mail exchanges between Ms. Cirtin and Councilman Chiles for your consideration. If you don’t want to read through the whole exchange, this is the text of Ms. Cirtin’s first e-mail to Councilman Chiles:

Dan,

I’ve had a request from a citizen for information regarding the Square and any involvement you may have had in raising the question of its historic significance. To determine whether or not this is public record, I need to know the following:

Was any correspondence dealing with the square composed on your city-provided laptop?

Was any correspondence sent on your City letterhead?

Did you at any time, in written correspondence or by way of verbal communication, refer to yourself as a City Councilman?

If the response to any of the above questions is ‘yes’, then I will need a copy of any written correspondence, including e-mails, on this issue. Also, if there is no written correspondence, but there is verbal and you indicated that you were on City Council, then I will need a brief description of what communication there was, i.e., phone call, face-to-face, etc.

If you have any questions, please contact me.
Brenda M. Cirtin, MMC/MPCC
City Clerk
City of Springfield

I don’t see anywhere in that e-mail where she is asking him for communications from his personal computer but rather the computer given to him by the city for city business.  One could argue that she’s suggesting communications from his personal computer in the last section where she asks if he issued communication identifying himself as a City Council member…but in that case he is then acting as a City official and his communication is part of the public discourse.

While Councilman Chiles may have indeed said that to someone with the News-Leader it still should have at least been confirmed.  A simple call would have shown that Ms. Cirtin said nothing about Councilman Chiles’ personal computer records.

This is one of those times where I really get bothered by the fact there is no identification as to which member of the Springfield News-Leader wrote this editorial piece.  Clearly they dropped the ball in not confirming the information with Ms. Cirtin before making it appear to the public that she is trying to intimidate Councilman Chiles.  When I post on this blog, when other articles are written in the News-Leader, when things are voiced on a certain radio talk show at least the person making that report or opinion is identifiable and responsible for the accuracy of their reporting or opining.  We cannot get that same kind of accountability here because we simply don’t know who wrote the column.  It’s like someone who made an anonymous post on the internet with incorrect information…there’s no accountability.  (And didn’t several now-former News-Leader staffers write pieces taking people posting anonymous pieces on the internet to task?)

Look, I’m of the position I don’t think a City Council member should check their rights as a citizen at the door just because they took the oath of office.  I want passion, I want concern and I want them to strive to make a better community.  We’re all better off when the Council is seeking the best for the community as a whole.  Still, if they identify themselves as a City Council member then what they do becomes City business.  Sure, it’s hard not to realize when you’re talking to Gary Deaver or Doug Burlison or Denny Whayne or Ralph Manley that you’re talking with a City Council member but they’re also citizens and in my opinion have the right to act as such in their daily lives.

Still, Ms. Cirtin’s request was not unreasonable nor was it far reaching.  It certainly wasn’t intimidating on her part because she was simply trying to fulfill a Sunshine Law request from a citizen.  (Now, the citizen may have been trying to intimidate Councilman Chiles by asking for the information.  I’m fully open to that and would even think it could be likely.  Still, that doesn’t mean Ms. Cirtin was trying to intimidate anyone.)

I’m sure the friends I’ve had at the News-Leader are going to take me off their MySpace friends list after this column but I have to call it as I see it.  In this case, the News-Leader appears to have not done their follow-up to confirm the facts…even leaving a voice mail for her to return the call would have at least been a step in the right direction.

I’ve e-mailed the News-Leader for their response to Ms. Cirtin’s statement and providing the e-mails that contradict what they printed in today’s editorial.  When I receive it, I will post it here unedited.  I tried calling this afternoon to reach them and received only voice mail.   (The voice mail for the editorial staff said that “in honor of today’s holiday” they were closed.)

I’m passing this along to those of you who read that are connected to some of the various churches in the Springfield area.   It’s been brought to my attention that Jill Parr will be coming to Springfield the weekend of May 24-25 and has availability for area churches.  There is no cost to the church itself but rather they allow Jill to lead the worship for their services, take a love offering for Jill’s expenses in each of those services and allow Jill to make her merchandise available for the church members after the service.

Jill’s has three albums and had a top ten hit last year with “Reach” that you may have heard on our local Christian CCM music stations.

Normally she charges a few thousand for an event but she’s available for a love offering and the chance to sell her CDs.  (And with gas prices going through the roof…)  If your church might be interested in having Jill come in, e-mail me at jason@lifeofjason.com and I’ll pass along the info.

While I know Jill would never say this…just to be crystal clear this is all me, ok?…keep in mind she would be driving in from Nashville with a van and trailer full of equipment.  If your church wouldn’t be large enough that the love offering would cover gas and meals on the road (her hotel & meals in Springfield have already been donated) then please don’t offer to host Jill.  She would be unavailable during the day on Saturday but possibly available Saturday evening.  Outside of that, she might be available Wednesday through Sunday night.

I know she would be open to doing a youth rally or other youth event but I don’t think that would be on a love offering basis.

I had someone ask me why I’ve been so hard on City Utilities when I’m usually more even handed reporting on things with other City related entities.  The only answer I could give is that I’m not really being heavy handed (although I’ve heard that’s not the view at CU) but rather that I’m just posting the information I receive and it doesn’t always show CU in a favorable light.

That’s about to happen again with this post.

First, though, let me recap my coverage of City Utilities and why when I saw what I read today I became very skeptical again of City Utilities.

On April 7th, City Utilities General Manager John Twitty appeared before City Council as they requested a gas rate increase.  This was part of that live blog from that night:

Councilman Deaver’s last question revolved about how some citizens felt they were being penalized for conservation. (Editor’s note: like me…) Mr. Twitty said they don’t see it as a penalty to customers. “The bottom line is if you use less your bill is going to be less.” (Editor’s Note: However…a CU press statement said the rate increase was because people were using less gas. That means the rate is higher because people were using less gas. The “if a customer uses less…” excuse doesn’t really answer the question about people being punished for conserving and using less gas overall that is resulting in CU asking for a higher rate.)

Now I asked Mr. Twitty the same question during a session of Municipal Government Academy and received the same answer.  As I mentioned in the liveblog, Mr. Twitty’s answer doesn’t answer the question as to whether customers are being punished for conserving and using less gas.

For example, let’s take three months where you use gas at a hypothetical rate of $2 a therm.

Month 1:  200 therms at $2 each = $400 bill

Month 2:  You conserve and cut down to 120 therms at $2 each = $240 bill

Now, you keep the levels of month two and other customers do the same thing.  Conservation brings about lower usage across the system.  As a result, the utility announces they need to rate rates 40 cents a therm because people are using less gas.

Month 3:  After the increase….120 therms at $2.40 each = $288 bill

How is that not punishing the customers with higher bills because they were conserving when the rate was lower?  Of course if they only use 100 therms instead of 120 it’s going to be a smaller bill but that’s not the point.

We still haven’t received a straight answer from CU on that.

Then in this post I examined City Utilities claim made both to City Council and at Municipal Government Academy that CU’s rates were 20% below the state and national average.  In it, I took the question asked by City Councilwoman Mary Collette and looked at our area’s average income versus the state and national average (quote taken from that post):

“The average median income for a Springfield area household is $34,631. The average for the state of Missouri is $44,651. The national average is $48,201.

That means on average a Springfield household is making 22.4% less than the average median household income in Missouri. It’s making 28.1% less than the national average. So if we’re paying 20% less for utilities than the average we’re still paying more on average than other areas if it’s based on income.”

It was in the wrap up that I said many citizens don’t trust City Utilities right now that we’re being told the plain truth and not a glossed over spin of the situation.  It’s because of that feeling that a post made by Brad Haller (producer of Ozarks Fox in the Morning on KSFX and personal hair poofer to Rob Evans) made on his blog Haller.4.Me:

“Earlier this year, we got a really high utility bill. Really high. So, starting in March, we shut off the heater, which is the main gas guzzler in our townhouse. The only other thing that uses gas is our water heater. But we’re not cutting back on showers, so that’ll just have to stay put. Alright, so Springfield City Utilities sends us a bill a month later, which wasn’t terrible, and I thought that was an indication of headway. Nope. Today, we got a $245 bill!!!! Why? After several phone calls and bitch fests with the people at CU, we learn that a technician saw a HUGE drop in our gas usage, so he hiked our bill, thinking it was a mess-up on the meter. Big NO-NO. You’d think they would just adjust the $150 in question. Nope. We got an apology and were told there was nothing else they could do. CU has a monopoly on Springfield, so there’s nowhere to turn. They DID say our next bill will be back to normal… well, it better be! Otherwise, I’m calling to shut off my utilities entirely and I’ll just live like a caveman. I pretty much already do, you bastards!”  (Bolded section was bolded by me for emphasis.)

Well, let’s just say that more than piqued my curiosity.  As someone who spent the better part of February and March and April having his thermostat set on 58 degrees to try and keep the huge gas bill down it seemed really interesting to me that someone at CU could just arbitrarily raise someone’s reported usage because they thought there might be a mess up on the meter.

So I sent an e-mail to Joel Alexander, the press guy for City Utilties and asked him about it.   First, I asked if he would confirm or deny the report made by Brad on his blog.  Joel’s response was that City Utilities does not talk about a customer’s account with anyone but the customer.  OK, I can certainly understand taking that position although in this case they’re being called out by a customer publicly on that account.  In a sense, Mr. Haller’s opening himself up to rebuttal but Joel has to stick by CU policy so I can’t fault him on that.

Then I asked Joel “why is it even legal for a technician to adjust what is reported on the meter? How can we as customers believe in the integrity of our utility if workers can adjust the usage numbers at will?”

Joel’s answer was “As to your question about adjusting a meter: If a meter is suspected to be defective it is replaced. They are never adjusted in the field. Meters are read monthly, unless weather or other conditions prevent the reading, and in that case the bill would be estimated by previous account history and trued-up with the next reading. Those readings are then transferred to the account history and billed.”

I’m guessing my question wasn’t really clear because I wasn’t asking about a technician fixing the meter itself on location but rather Brad’s claim that a tech at CU saw his usage was significantly less and made the call it had to be a defective meter and therefore raised the amount on the meter.

Even if Joel was trying to address that in his comment about estimated usage for the month, that seems to contradict Brad’s claim that he was told “a technician saw a HUGE drop in our gas usage, so he hiked our bill, thinking it was a mess-up on the meter.” That means it was read by a human being…not an estimate…and that human being made the call to raise the amount on the meter when it came time for the billing cycle.

Is that legal? If so, why? If someone reads a meter and it says someone has used X amount of gas can you really conclusively prove it was a defective meter without taking it into the shop and having it examined? Shouldn’t they also inform the customer of the potential metering problem and that a replacement has had to be made?

I asked Joel for some clairification and I’ll post that here once I receive it.

I then asked Joel “If this really was a case of the technician changing the value for his bill, why can’t the difference be either credited to his account or refunded to him?”

Joel’s answer was “If a credit is due to any customer it can be applied to their account, or a refund may be requested.” That contradicts what Brad posted regarding just receiving an apology and being told nothing else could be done. So, Brad, you might want to make another few calls to the Customer Service department at CU or perhaps contact Joel to see who you need to speak with to get that credit or refund.

Now, I mentioned that I have questions about my bill now because if someone did that to Brad, how can I know if they did it to me? Or you, who’s reading this…how can you be sure it wasn’t done to you? There’s no real way to know. However, in Joel’s response he included some good information regarding conservation that I thought I should pass along:

“Regarding your account, if you have any questions or concerns about your usage, or billing, a customer service representative would be happy to assist you with those questions.
Our Energy Management and Conservation department can provide information on ways to help reduce the monthly bill. Information can be found on www.cuenergywise.com or by calling 874-8200. At CU we strive everyday to provide reliable and affordable utility service to every customer. However with today’s rising costs, the best thing anyone can do save money is to conserve.”

Now, I don’t blame Joel for not being able to really clear up what seems like a really muddy situation for CU.  He’s handcuffed by the fact he can’t talk about Brad’s account to either confirm or refute the claims Brad made within his blog.  Unfortunately for Joel and for City Utilities, this claim from Brad Haller comes on the heels of other situations where the harsh, critical light on CU is getting brighter and hotter.

If what Brad Haller said was true…and being that he’s a member of the media and his credibility would be damaged if not destroyed if that post is a lie…then it’s possible this has happened to other customers as well.  Unless City Utilities can refute Mr. Haller’s claims it might be time for some kind of state investigation into the practices at CU to make sure that people are not being charged more than they should be when the meters are read by human beings.

I am more than willing to consider this was a mistake made by a lone employee and not an overall problem at City Utilities.  The only thing that leads me to wonder if it’s not is the fact that Joel said a refund or credit could be offered to someone if a credit is due a customer and Brad is claiming that one is due but was told nothing could be done.  There’s a miscommunication somewhere in this system.

I’m sure this post isn’t going to win me any friends in the halls of power at CU.  I hate having to raise these questions but as a homeowner who has seen extremely high gas bills and had to wear two layers of clothing on the coldest days inside my own home to try and keep the gas bill at a managable level it concerns me that someone can make the claim their bill was essentially doctored by a CU staff member.

If Joel can’t talk about a customer’s account then Mr. Twitty or another member of the management team needs to come out and either refute Mr. Haller’s claims or provide an explanation for why this situation happened in the manner Mr. Haller reported on his blog.  If not, this is just another blow to City Utilities at a time where confidence in the operations is not high among customers and residents.