The agenda summary lists three connected requests with Landis+Gyr:

• Ordinance 2026-346: an AMI “Master Service, License and Services Agreement” (MPLSA) with a not-to-exceed amount of $12,799,831.51 for a fifteen-year period authorization, with execution structured over an initial 36-month period.
• Ordinance 2026-347: a separate Software as a Service (SaaS) agreement not to exceed $3,575,623.00 for 15 years.
• Ordinance 2026-348: a separate Support Agreement not to exceed $40,175.92 for 15 years.

Important: these are items scheduled for committee review—approval by the full City Council would be a separate step.

The big communications deal: $12.8M for the AMI MPLSA

In the ordinance summary, Springfield describes the MPLSA as covering the “equipment, licensing, and project delivery components” of the AMI deployment. That includes items such as AMI meters, network equipment, distribution automation equipment, along with RF tools, firmware/software licenses, training, and project delivery services. The summary also says the amount includes one annual performance bond payment.

The agenda description also flags the goal of improving billing accuracy, enhancing outage management, and supporting distribution automation—plus creating a scalable foundation for water AMI or other smart-city applications.

Why there are separate SaaS and support ordinances

The committee packet separates ongoing software operations and maintenance from the core communications/“MPLSA” piece.

• The SaaS agreement (Ordinance 2026-347) is described as providing the hosted software and cloud services needed to operate the Landis+Gyr AMI solution, including the hosted AMI software environment and related service orders, plus an “advanced security” setup fee as part of the ordinance’s not-to-exceed total.

• The Support Agreement (Ordinance 2026-348) is described as maintenance and support for the Landis+Gyr software and equipment purchased or licensed as part of the AMI deployment, including customer support, case management, troubleshooting, and software maintenance/patches/releases.

What procurement materials say AMI would change day to day

The city’s AMI communications RFP includes specific operational targets—useful for residents trying to anticipate what could feel different once deployment begins.

For example, the RFP describes an AMI system intended to support remote, automated meter reading and says the solution should include:

• Outage reporting and restoration confirmation, with the ability for the AMI network to capture outage notifications for managing restoration activities.
• Interval meter reads, with electric meters capable of providing interval meter reads at least every 15 minutes.
• Billing/customer-service expectations framed as improved accuracy in recording electricity and water usage and eliminating estimated bills.
• Integration points with CWLP systems, including the existing CWLP customer information system/billing platform and outage-management workflow integration.
• Remote capabilities, including on-demand meter reading and remote disconnect actuation/status through the CIS application or related integrations.

The RFP also describes the deployment scope as approximately 130,000 total electric and water meters and says CWLP would phase in the new AMI solution while maintaining continuity of meter reads and customer data from the existing Itron system—potentially including running the two systems in parallel during the deployment.

Smart-meter data privacy: questions Illinois residents can ask

Illinois Attorney General resident guidance explains that smart meters record electricity use during short intervals and says you should be careful about sharing smart-meter data with third parties. The Illinois General Assembly also notes that the AMI plan should secure the privacy of personal information and establish the right of consumers to consent to disclosure of personal energy information to third parties.

What residents should ask on July 28 before CWLP’s ordinances move forward

• Timing and rollout sequencing: What is expected for the initial 36-month period in Ordinance 2026-346, and what steps come first (network setup, meter swaps, testing, parallel operations)?
• Estimated-bill and data-quality impacts: The RFP describes eliminating estimated bills—how will CWLP validate interval reporting quality and minimize transition problems?
• Outage management workflows: If the AMI network is capturing outage notifications and restoration confirmation, what will residents actually see in CWLP outage tools (and how quickly)?
• Billing integration: How will interval data flow into CWLP’s CIS/billing platform, and are there any planned changes to customer account processes during rollout?
• Data access, retention, and who can see what: Under CWLP’s AMI approach, what interval data is used internally vs. shared externally?
• Consent and disclosure controls: For any third-party access, what is the process to provide consent—and what does “revocation” look like in practice?
• Security and reliability controls: The RFP lays out AMI security requirements (including encryption end-to-end). What testing, monitoring, and verification steps are planned before and during deployment?

If you want the “fine print” before the meeting, start with Springfield’s City Clerk agenda summary for July 28 and the city’s UE25-10 AMI communications RFP.

Sources

• Springfield Illinois City Clerk — 7/28/2026 Committee of the Whole agenda items (2026-346 to 2026-348)
• City of Springfield OBM — RFP UE25-10 (AMI Communications System)
• Illinois Attorney General — Smart Meter Data Collection brochure