Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fees Refund topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
TV POA votes to refund $80 infrastructure fee, directs staff to design refund process
Summary
The board approved refunding the $80 water/sewer infrastructure asset fee to owners who request it and tasked staff with proposing a refund mechanism by June 30, 2026; directors split 4-2 amid concerns about timing and the effect on infrastructure projects.
Get email alerts on the Fees Refund topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Tellico Village POA board voted 4-2 to refund payments of an $80 water and sewer infrastructure asset fee to current or former lot owners who request repayment, and directed staff to produce a practical refund process by June 30.
A board member moved that refunds be paid from a TV POA utility district segregated account to be established; proponents said the assessment had been imposed improperly and should be corrected. "This motion is to correct, to right the wrong," a board member said. Opponents cautioned that the account the fee was originally held in is now depleted and warned that refunding could affect planned water and sewer projects, citing recent pump‑station work and pending infrastructure needs.
Staff and advisory‑committee speakers explained the accounting choices: some funds had been spent on sewer projects, and the motion therefore required identifying where refunding funds would come from operationally. The board also approved a follow‑up motion directing interim executive staff and Trune Management to identify all lot owners who paid the fee, total refunds, and the most practicable refund methods (examples included monthly bill credits for current customers or checks for former owners).
Directors and advisory‐committee members urged transparency and suggested including finance and audit committee review; proponents countered the move was intended to be corrective and timely ahead of regulation. Management said the POA would establish a utility district‑segregated account and share records and a recommended process with the board before the end of June.
The refund motion and the directive to design the refund process were the most contested votes at the meeting and drew questions about which reserve or account would ultimately fund refunds if the preexisting WESAF account contained no balance.

