BY MATT HERSH

Selectmen have postponed making a decision about an $1,819 water bill accrued by Salem residents Lester and Andrea Pearson.

At their Monday, Jan. 22 meeting, selectmen unanimously voted to table the matter until more information can be gathered about the functioning of the Pearsons’ water meter.

The next day, it was discovered that the meter had been destroyed after it had been taken from the home.

Town Manager Henry LaBranche said despite the news, the board will take on the issue again at their next meeting.

“We’re going to keep looking at it, make a recommendation to selectmen and then they’ll make a decision,” he said.

Earlier this month, selectmen denied an abatement request submitted by the Pearsons, who then appealed the decision and requested a public hearing.

The decision came after almost two hours of debate between the Pearsons, selectmen and members of the public.

Though the board ultimately decided to delay action, most members said they will likely deny the appeal, forcing the Pearsons to pay a bill they say they can’t afford.

Selectmen said they wanted to wait until a water meter removed from the home can be tested for accuracy.

If the meter proved to be correct, they would know the Pearsons were correctly charged based on the amount of water they used.

Selectmen were unavailable to comment on the destruction of the meter.

The issue began in September when the Pearsons, who live at 42 Matthias St., received notice from the town that they owed the money for water they had used over the past 11 years.

The bill was a result of a faulty remote measuring device outside the couple’s home.

In Salem, actual water use readings are measured by meters located in the basements of more than 6,000 homes. 

A remote device is placed on the outside of a building, which is supposed to sync with the basement meter and give the same reading to meter readers.

Sometimes, the remote meter malfunctions and discrepancies occur.  As a result, the Pearsons were not billed for a large amount of water they had used.

“I thought it was a mistake,” Lester Pearson said about the bill, which is usually about $75 per quarter.

The Pearsons said they do not contest that they used the water, but are frustrated that the town has the right to collect 11 years in back bills.

Since Salem’s water bills and regulations are not governed by the state Public Utilities Commission, they are free to seek the full amount, while other municipalities who are part of the PUC could only seek up to one year in reimbursement.

At the public hearing before selectmen, the Pearsons argued that they should not have to pay the amount because the town  was irresponsible in ensuring water meter accuracy.

“We own the meters but it is your responsibility to maintain them,” said Andrea Pearson.  “You’ve taken no responsibility and that’s scary.”

While the town policy is to check meter accuracy every five years, according to Town Manager Henry LaBranche, the Pearsons said they hadn’t had theirs checked since 1995.   

Public Works Director Rick Russell said his employees had attempted to check the meter on several occasions but were unable to because the Pearsons’ dog chased them away.

“We underestimated (what they owed) because we could not get on their property to read the meter,” Russell said.

Despite the testimony of several members of the public that the Pearsons should not be held liable for payment, selectmen were not swayed.

“I do not find the Pearsons entirely blameless,” said Selectman Arthur Barnes.  “It is not just our water system, it is your water system and I find that you are a delinquent owner.”

Barnes and other selectmen argued that the Pearsons should have paid closer attention to their bills, making note of the discrepancy before it got out of hand.

Still, the couple said they didn’t notice any changes in their usage charges.

“How would we notice,” Andrea Pearson said.  “We get a bill and we pay it.”

Such discrepancies are being discovered in Salem after the town began asking residents to read their own meters and fill out a survey with their most recent water bills, according to town Finance Director Jane Savastano.

Andrea Pearson told selectmen that she had been informed by other town officials that 47 of 209 homes surveyed showed discrepancies.

Though the Pearsons are an anomaly, town officials said the discrepancies show that something needs to be done to fix the problem.

“There’s no excuse with respect to not having a plan for checking meters,” LaBranche said.  “We don’t want to have to be in this position.”

LaBranche said the town will begin looking into replacing the remote meters which he estimated could up to $5 million and take several years to finish.

If selectmen decide to deny the appeal, LaBranche said a payment plan could be worked out and any interest accumulated on the amount will be wiped out.

Meanwhile, LaBranche said officials will be discussing the town’s current policy regarding the meters to see if changes have to be made.

“We’re going to take a comprehensive look at it,” LaBranche said.

For now, the Pearsons said they’ll wait for a decision but they’re not hopeful.

“It’s still a nightmare,” Andrea Pearson said.  “I don’t think they’re going to give it to us.”

Selectmen Chairman Michael Lyons said the board will take up the issue at their next meeting but will not entertain further discussion from the public.