The Electric Power Board did not intentionally overbill the city of Chattanooga.
Mr. DePrist, EPB CEO, is truthful regarding the city’s inventory of lighting fixtures. I have never seen a municipal lighting inventory that is completely accurate. Further, it is very common for municipal inventories to be riddled with error that carries for decades.
All municipalities have flawed lighting inventories. Why?
1) Municipal lighting inventories were started in the 40’s in hard copy journals. As lighting fixtures were installed or replaced, a journal entry would generally be made. Often times, loose work orders were simply placed in the journal. Translated over decades through generations of employees, the errors are monumental.
2) Inventory entries were later translated to electronic spreadsheets or databases with data entry errors. After all, we are talking about 30,000 or more fixtures that include roadway lighting, sidewalk lighting, parks, and public facilities. This is a massive list, and to expect that the inventory would be without error is unrealistic.
3) Each time a light is replaced, removed, or new construction results in new lighting the inventory would be updated. There is also carry over error in older entries that just compound the total error.
It is a massive undertaking for a municipality to inventory their entire lighting system, with a very high price tag. I dare to say the cost of a new inventory would exceed any savings in electric billing. For municipal electric billing an informed estimate is warranted as a matter of cost.
To call the error in the city’s lighting inventory intentional is farfetched, and is clearly a ploy to fleece the taxpayers out of 25 percent of the billing error. I have worked for municipalizes on this issue of light inventories, and all municipal inventories are flawed. Pick a city, any city and check their inventory. The findings will the same as Chattanooga’s.
Long and short fact, the lighting inventors of all municipalities are flawed.
Mr. Lepard should select any two cities in our region and randomly field check their inventory.
April Eidson.
How can Mr. Lepard be a whistle blower on an inventory problem that is commonly known to all that work with public infrastructure? Just asking.
Finally, why should Mr. Lepard receive 25 percent of the overbilled amount for exposing a problem commonly known in the public infrastructure sector?
* * *
As a taxpayer, I do not care if EPB meant to overbill the city or not. Additionally, I do not care if their billing system is outdated. It is EPB's job to bill customers properly and if the corporation cannot do so, then lawsuits should be filed.
If you take issue with Mr. Lepard's 25% finder's fee, I would instruct you to hold EPB accountable in the future for billing errors and contact your legislators and have them change the law.
Drew Daugherty