The utilities have been slow to get on the stick and realize that Dunwoody is its own city (with
I wish AT&T was equally sharp. As I scaled that mountain of paper that is on my desk this time of year, I noticed that the phone bill still had DeKalb County listed as the recipient of 911 taxes. Being a good Dunwoodian, I got on the phone to AT&T customer service to point out the discrepancy. How hard could it be? Google Maps can show you where the boundaries of the city are and the fact that my home address is inside of them. No brainer, right?
Called customer service number. Went through the "press 1 for...." maze. Got to a representative. Explained the incorporation and change in 911 services. "Oh that's a billing question. Let me transfer you."
Get to billing. Confirm my account number. Explain the 911 services change. Again. "I don't have anything to do with that, I just take payments. Would you like to make a payment?" Not on the phone, thanks. "I can transfer you to customer service." I just came from there. "Well I can't change that from here." Looks like I'm going back to customer service then.
Back to voice mail jail. Dialing to get to representative. Ask for a supervisor this time because First Dude wasn't quite on the ball. Representative stalls me and I go through the tax question. Again. "Hmmmmm... let me try to enter it manually." D-U-N-W-O-O-D-Y. "No, it isn't taking it. The city is dictated by the ZIP code." But my city has
For me, there is no difference - I pay the same $1.50 per month. But the feasibility of the ChatComm conversion was based on the projection that phone taxes would be allocated to ChatComm and not siphoned off by the county. How many taxes due to ChatComm are being lost because Dunwoody has
If City Hall wants to collect all of the fees its entitled to, they're going to have to do some legwork. AT&T at least isn't going to take the word of their customers or MapQuest.
(Thanks, Rick, for reminding me about part of 30350 being in Dunwoody. That has to be worse - overlapping with another county in addition to other cities.)
UPDATE: Terry Nall and John Heneghan forwarded this post to the City Manager's office when they read it and I received a very quick response from Kimberly Greer in Warren's office. They did the legwork I suggested and it seems my experience was the exception rather than the rule. I am very relieved that that is the case. I still believe a full, regular audit of telecoms for ChatComm fees would be a good idea to make sure that these exceptions stay exceptions and don't become a regular feature. Thanx, everybody!