$80 Surcharge Suspended
|
Less than a year after it was implemented, the Tellico Village POA Board has suspended the $80.00 water surcharge.
EMPOWERING TELLICO VILLAGE RESPONSE TO RECENT TELEGRAM June 18, 2025 #9 - NEWS UPDATE Our Mission....To communicate critical village news in a fair, clear, truthful and concise manner of key issues that impact YOU.Publisher: Mark Werner
Hello neighbors, I have combined the June 12 Townhall and the June 18 POA Board meeting in this Newsletter. So here we go!
In his opening
to the POA board meeting on June 18, 2025, Mr. Orr made some comments. I
will address them NOW.
· Concerning
this newsletter, we have, in every case, sought out experts who were
willing to speak with us before printing anything. Where opinion is
written, it is identified as “Opinion”.
· I'm
not sure who Mr. Orr reached out to, to help clear up any misconceptions
some folks might have. He did not reach out to this Newsletter. I am not
aware that he reached out to the most outspoken on ND.
· Anyone
who receives this Newsletter and does not want it can “UNSUBSCRIBE” at
the bottom of the Newsletter. We all receive unsolicited emails daily,
and most, if not all, have an “Unsubscribe” function.
· Mr. Orr's comments on the bid process at the Townhall (“we know how a bid process works”) are not in line with their proposed actions. In my YEARS experience, when an RFQ (Request for Quote) results in only one bid and a bid that is TWICE that of the estimate by your expert, you do not move forward with that one supplier. As the POA Board seems to be doing. Rather, the accepted process in successful companies, is to go back over the drawings and specs; ensure they are clear and understood. Any misunderstandings in the RFQ would be discussed and rectified. Eventually, a new set of drawings is developed and an RFQ sent to suppliers asking for a second quote. The last thing one does is move forward without new quotes. That is a mistake…That was the point the speaker was trying to make.
Notes from the POA meeting June 18, 2025….
THE $80 FEE WILL BE SUSPENDED BEGINNING IN JULY.
Mr. Reed asked, “Are we going to look at different contractor quotes for the Rehab lift station?” ANSWER… Short answer..NO. A decision has been made to go with New. The board will need to change that decision, if we want to add a rehah solution. The bid from SDI does not change that. Newsletter comment…We should not guess at what a rehab quote would show versus new. Yes, costs for some items might have changed. Still, we need at least 3 competitive bids. We can get them locally using LUB or TASS contractors.
Matt Benoit,
commented on the MOU with LUB…nice to see we are working with LUB.
The new lift
station wet well is 40% smaller than our current wet well… fact! That
decrease in size, increases the opportunity for a spill. Period!
Our sources
(on the TRDA board) are telling us the $2.1M grant is no longer
available. A portion of it will be given to TASS for their projects. The
remainder is being suggested for award to LUB.
Mr. Zika’s comments… 1. I&I start…about 1/3 of the resident tanks need remedial work to reduce I&I. The plus is that with all this rain, we have not had any overflows due to a rain event. The I&I program is working. 2. Jacobs was instructed not to interface LUB on sewer station overloads. The MOU is the first positive step in working with LUB. 3. A new lift station design is now obsolete. Working with LUB and the I&I program has resulted in a much simpler and more cost-effective solution by re working the main and neighborhood stations lift stations. 4. Gary stated that he has over $1 billion in sewer and water contracts experience over 30 years (we printed Gary's resume in the last Newsletter). In his estimation..we cannot move forward with Jacobs. 5. Regarding our water supply. Jacobs' design did not include key components that LUB has put in place to supplement our water supply. We are on good terms with both TASS and LUB. Both LUB and TASS are reviewing their bottlenecks to remove them. LUB has increased its treatment capacity to ensure an adequate water supply in the future. Cooper's design did not account for Irrigation. Management might be the only solution.
6. WE NEED TO
LET JACOBS go NOW! Let's end this relationship.
Mike Braddock commented on the irrigation issue. He was correct; nighttime watering promotes mold and fungus growth, and daytime watering is less effective due to evaporation. The best approach might be to continue promoting odd and even watering days. COMMENT… This Newsletter agrees there should be no reason the residents can't adhere to this schedule. A lawn only requires an inch of water per week.
The Reserve Study is expected to be completed by the end of July. The POA will be moving to a “FULLY FUNDED RESERVE STUDY”. What does that mean?
Very simply, A "fully funded reserve study" indicates that a reserve fund has accumulated enough money to cover the estimated costs of future repairs and replacements of common property components, as outlined in a reserve study. This means the fund is projected to have sufficient funds to cover all anticipated expenses without needing to rely on special assessments or other supplemental funding sources. Another excellent move....The POA is also removing the Roads, Underground Pipes, Fairways, and greens from the study. Roads and Sewer & Water are our largest assets by far. Golf courses place third. These changes should result in lowering target reserve.
From the Townhall Meeting June 12, 2025 This Newsletter has been reporting for months that the Loudon Utility Board has on its plans agenda a project to increase waste flow to their treatment plant. If this project proceeds, it will alleviate Tellico Village of its capacity issues… However, we must still reduce our I&I to lessen the capacity load on our system. We understand this project is targeted for completion in 2027. It appears to be in the feasibility phase at this time. This entire Task order can be found on LUB’s website. https://www.loudonutilities.org/search.php?q=mou Go to the second listing, “Call to Order 2. Items for Board Action. A. Approving Memorandum of Understanding for New Substation.” Open it and then go to page 14, TASK ORDER dated May 2, 2025. This Task Order states that LUB is seeking approval of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between LUB and TVPOA for splitting the cost of the Task Order $64, 750 - Sanitary Sewer. River Crossing.
During the POA meeting, a resident referenced this task order and asked the following questions of Mr. McCrea;
1. What are the benefits of this project to the residents of TVPOA and the timeline? ANSWER...The timeline is for the board to review the task order, discuss it, and possibly approve it at the next board meeting. He went on to say the original TAP Plan HAD A TANK IN IT. The POA has now decided to remove the 750,000-gal sewage tank. This makes sense, as the POA has been working for some time on redirecting the $2.1 million TDEC grant initially requested for the 750,000-gal tank, to the New Lift Station. The date of this TASK ORDER is May 2, 2025. Mike Lackey's comment, that Matt Benoit has been working with LUB on this Task Order for some time. This leads me to believe the tank has been out of the Jacobs plan for some time. 2. Does that mitigate any of our projects that were initially planned in TAP? ANSWER… Yes, it eliminates the need for a storage tank. This was confirmed at the June 18 POA Board meetinbg by Matt Benoit. 3. What is our relationship with Jacobs, and why do we continue with it? What are the pros and cons? ANSWER… PROS? Jacobs has already designed or is designing projects; a new engineering firm would have to start from scratch. Jacobs Engineering is experienced and high-quality, with over 50 years of combined experience. One of which is recognized globally as an expert in the field.
Newsletter Conclusions: LUB has a capacity problem that affects TV and the surrounding areas. The root cause of Tellico Village's capacity problem is the inability of LUB to handle our peak flows (the highest peak flow is between the hours of 5:00 AM and 11:00 AM, accompanied by a rain event). The major culprit is rainwater Infiltration and Inflow (I&I). I suspect the considerable growth in this area plays a role as well.
Mr. Reed and
Zika provided proof at the recent MPS meeting with the LUB flow data. It
shows that LUB “meters” our flows and those of the surrounding areas
during peak flow events. They achieve this by temporarily shutting off
our flow to their plant, allowing the surrounding areas to flow,
and then shutting off the surrounding areas and allowing Tellico Village
to flow. This process was most likely implemented as a result of the
2019 Consent Decree between LUB and the Division of Water Resources and
follows a 2017 investigation into LUB sewage spills between January 1,
2016, and December 31, 2017 (a two-year period). During that time frame,
LUB reported a total of 234,735 gallons of sewage spilled. All TDEC and
EPA protocols were followed. All the spills were reported and cleaned
up, resulting in a fine of $9.16.
Note to TVPOA: Please stop threatening residents with
potentially large fines for overflows, if we don’t implement TAP.
Furthermore, flow data indicates that LUB has shut off Tellico Village for up to 16 minutes during high-flow periods. Our current wet well can handle up to 22 minutes of storage or shutdown. Our flows are controlled through our wet well capacity. Jacobs' new design of our wet well is 40% smaller in capacity, resulting in approximately 11 minutes of storage and a significantly higher risk of spills.
Mike Braddock
should be familiar with and understand these numbers if he is genuinely
concerned about a spill.
Finally, this Task Order No. 20250502 is a solution to LUB capacity problems. A new pipe under the river will enable LUB to handle higher capacities, including those of Tellico Village. LUB’s entire system has infiltration and Inflow issues, and they are currently working on lowering them. We (Tellico Village) are working on lowering our I&I to reduce the load on our system and that of LUB.
Regarding Mr. McCrea’s answers above (e.g.), any new contractor would have to start from scratch, is not a true statement. The TVPOA owns the Jacobs designs; we paid $3M for them! They are OUR property. So, we would provide them to the next contractors. The quality of Jacobs' engineers is excellent…REALLY!
David Taylor made some excellent points.
1. Perhaps we should seriously consider revising Jacob’s proposal and evaluating the TAP 2.0 solutions? Response…Mike Lackey said, we are looking at all the options on the table. Matt is working with LUB and the MOU mentioned above. We are considering opportunities to work with other suppliers; we are currently debating this option. 2. Would we consider getting a second opinion before spending more money on the lift station? Response…Joel Reed responded, we had a $ 2.9 million quote from Jacobs for the rehabilitation of the lift station and a $3.1 million quote for a new lift station. No brainer, we went new as we could potentially redirect the TDEC $2.1M grant to the NEW lift station. It cannot be applied to a rehab project. However, when the quote from SDI came in at $8.6 million, $5.1m over the estimate from Jacobs, the plan paused. Joel further commented that Jacobs' engineers thought we had 30-year-old pumps in our main lift station! But we don’t! They are only 7 years old, installed in 2017, and they feature continuous speed. Jacobs was not aware of either of these. As a result, Jacobs' $2.9 million rehab quote included the cost for new pumps. Joel said he asked Adam (from Jacobs?) at the MPS meeting how confident he was in the Jacobs rehab quote. Adam said he has no confidence in that rehab quote. Joel went on to say that, if I understand David’s question correctly, perhaps we should consider another engineering firm to explore the rehabilitation option. YES!
Mike Braddock then chipped in, this is a very competitive environment that results in these high quotes. He said Jacobs went out to 4 or 6 electrical firms for bids. He noted that Jacobs told him these firms were so busy they didn't want to bid…Mr. Braddock, sorry, but SDI’s quote ($8.6m) was more than twice the estimate of $3.5m. That says something entirely different than they are just busy! These businesses aren’t interested in working with Jacobs. Unless they can make a considerable profit. SDI’s $8.6m quote sent the message that if you really want us to do the work, it will cost you. We can and will rearrange our resources. Mr. Braddock continued in his estimation that the biggest liability to Tellico Village is if the wet well goes down (fails). Wet wells don’t go down or fail, they overflow!!!! If he is really concerned about that, then he would have challenged Jacobs' design, as it reduces the capacity of the current wet well by 40%. So, it is more likely to overflow (or go down).
Mr. Zika spoke at the meeting…Gary has recommended several times that we move on from Jacobs. We do not need the horsepower that Jacobs has and we are overpaying them. We have spent over $3m with them and have yet to get a project out the door. Regarding the wet well, Jacobs stated in the MPS meeting that they could design a wet well however we want it. Our existing wet well has baffles, and it was designed by an engineer. It's in good shape. There is nothing wrong with our existing wet well. It should last much longer, concrete lasts 100’s of years. Especially, if maintained and it has been well maintained. Mr. Zika said that he is aware of only one PSAC member who has inspected our wet well, and he accompanied Gary on that inspection.
Opinion…
All this “dancing” by the Legacy Board MUST STOP! Until this meeting, many had not been aware of the LUB/TVPOA cost-sharing arrangement for investigating an additional pipe under the Tennessee River. A PIPE THAT WILL SOLVE OUR CAPACITY ISSUES. Why wasn’t this shared? The board knew about it well before the May 2, 2025 Task Order. Early in the plan, I CAN ONLY ASSUME THAT THE Legacy Board, plus a few others from past boards, were not aware of this project either. WHY? Because the orders they gave to Jacobs were to ignore LUB in their design. So, when they became aware of it, why didn't they ask Jacobs to adjust their design?
Jacobs was also instructed to disregard I&I. PESAC likely believed that the I&I was too complex to resolve or would be too costly. I don’t think they ever did a feasibility study to prove this. So, this was a guess. Chet even said at a POA meeting that it’s too difficult to solve. Questioning how many people do we need, and how much time would it take? I'm sure he got that from PSAC. So, they told Jacobs to ignore I&I as well. What other explanation is there for the POA and PSAC to ignore Jacobs' report of October 2021, stating that TV’s root cause problem is I&I? PSAC and the board never acted on that advice. So, Jacobs designed a plan around those two criteria. It's either that or Jacobs and PSAC are completely incompetent!
We have spent over $3 million with Jacobs and have received nothing in return. At this point, what do you do? Well, you can stay with Jacobs and hope they give us something, so we can say our money was well spent! But that would be “spending more good money after bad”. COME ON, MAN! Pull the plug. A new engineering firm, especially the ones that TASS and LUB use, can pick up where Jacobs left off. This is a common occurrence in the construction industry. Don't act like it's catastrophic! In addition, these companies would be familiar with LUB and TASS's future projects, and we would most likely end up with a more integrated solution at a much better cost.
Mr. Orr likes surveys that are supported by unbiased data…So, how about this…. The program below is what over 70% of the village voted for when they elected Mike Lackey and Joel Reed. This meets all of your and industry requirements of a “ survey”. Isn't it about time to “STOP DANCING with Jacobs” AND implement it. |
BACK
6/23/25