EWEB Board of Commissioners — September 21, 2021

0:02 work session eweb work session september 21st 2021 welcome everybody i'm just gonna apologize in advance and i'm a little fried i just got off of a two and a half hour zoom meeting and um not a lot of recovery time so um just forgive me if i'm a little spacey and just remind me if i'm forgetting anything um but we're gonna jump right into agenda check does anybody have any thing they want to say about the agenda great then we will jump right into the lieberg project tour follow-up and q a so president schlossberg commissioners good evening um frank lawson i'm just going to have mark zinniker do

0:48 a quick two-minute recap of our tour that occurred last friday and then the intent of this agenda item was to field any additional thoughts or questions that commissioners may have either to answer now or later so mark i will just turn it directly to you great yeah thank you frank and um i'm sure glad you were able to join us and i i do hope that that tour gave you some tangible feeling for the complexities that we're dealing with up there at leiburg it was a pleasure to talk to you about it um some recaps uh we saw and talked about uh a number of environmental impacts associated with the project in terms of fish passage um we also noted

1:34 that you know fist passage facilities at leiburg are actually operating pretty well and uh there's also an opportunity for the fish agencies to get a unique opportunity to monitor upstream and downstream fish passage talked also about how libre dam might in the future facilitate permit permanent native hatchery fish sorting facility though that could be done whether the project's in service or not at that location at the same time we did note that environmental and regulatory constraints would likely increase over time in the face of climate change especially if temperature and endangered species conditions worsen on the social side we talked a lot about

2:20 the potential impacts from loss of the lake or the canal how that would impact recreation uh property owners commercial irrigators uh both the lieberg and the mackenzie hatchery while acknowledging that there were also viable solutions out there whether it's alternative access routes across the river uh transfer of surface water rights to groundwater uh construction of pump station for the hatcheries and how recreation can continue as well and the storm water conveyance condition is just be different on the economic side we talked about the various dam safety issues that are driving the need to invest in the canal you saw the close proximity of development to the canal and the

3:05 potential for consequences um there's the internal erosion vulnerabilities seismic vulnerabilities potential for high flows and debris getting into the canal during severe storms potential for landslides so to continue power generation each of those potential failure modes would need to be mitigated in a prioritized fashion over time until essentially the entire canal meets modern design standards so taking the canal out of service in october 2018 did immediately accomplish a lot of risk reduction but eweb does still need to safely convey all those tributary creeks back to the river during large storms and that would will require

3:50 significant investment we don't necessarily need to design that storm water conveyance for worst case seismic scenario and we don't necessarily need to do the entirety of the canal but we would likely be designing for very large storm events finally we talked a lot about uncertainties how uh crystal clear answers may not be possible for many of the questions because of the complex nature of our situation but we will strive to provide the board with information about both sides of the story and include sensitivity analyses in our financial modeling etc so that the board is informed from a range of perspectives when providing direction

4:36 so that's my quick summary and i think we wanted to open it up for any follow-ups that came to mind since the tour great go ahead sonia well thank you very much for that recap and thank you so much for the tour it was really fantastic to be out there and and see everything firsthand it just makes it so much more real you when you can you know talk about it and see the issues firsthand um you know one thing that came out for me personally and i'm i'm curious what others have to say but you know we think about operating lieberg as an electric generating facility it seems you know you talk about the crystal ball you're not going to have that crystal ball but what we do know is

5:21 that climate changes is making the variants more and more you know significant lower water flows and maybe higher water flows both of which are not great operating conditions we do know that we will not have you know regulatory certainty in moving forward and you know from from my perspective it it and the fact that you know leigh burke just doesn't have a very large capability to generate um it it seems less and less viable to me um to keep that as a generating facility now how we handle the canal and the storm water and and you know the other community uh impacts environmental impacts for the canal and and the people that it either threatens or supports

6:07 you know that that is a much broader issue but i do wonder if you know others have kind of a similar uh thinking i know some of the other earlier impacts that we've seen or the estimates that we've seen so it would be operating in a negative anyway so those are some of the things that i think about and i know you have a lot of there's so many different factors i i would hope that maybe as a board if others agree that we might be able to narrow that focus for you so that's not an item that we're continuing to have you spin your wheels on so that that's my quick takeaway

6:53 hey thank you for that feedback go ahead john barofsky thank you um i had a question uh and then i'll kind of speak to what sonia was was talking about um so i was up there i came back from bend on monday and you mentioned one of the people that had water rights was the lavender farm um but to me i the lavender farm seemed more towards walter i mean it was well past libra is there a separate lavender there is a separate one it's called blackberry hill nursery i believe so but i know which one you're talking about you're correct yesterday or there's another yeah that you know that's what i was like okay the lavender farm then i

7:38 looked and it was like no that's that couldn't be it because it was well outside the boundaries um so sonia i you know i i agree to a certain extent as to what you're saying but for me i i still need to have more of the data out there because when i when we got the the presentation at the board meeting before this that we got the the opinion from the lawyers and and what it would involve to do you know amend the license and all those things i was like oh gosh you know it's going to be return to services the way i'm going to fall down and then after doing this tour it's like oh storm water conveyance is the way that i think i'm going to come down so at this point i there is definitely more information

8:25 that i will need to be to be able to say yet one way or another because you can get data that will support either one of those and it's all just how you how you present it and until we do it at least a a perfunctory triple bottom line on it i i wouldn't be ready to to give direction one way or another so that's where i'm at go ahead john brown so yeah i agree with everybody uh what you've said but also uh i want to compliment again the the effectiveness of that tour that was one of the best i've had in decades of being here so that aside some of the things i'd like to see when we go down down the radical so to speak is that if

9:12 we go from threatened to endangered on chinook um is that for a 12 month period or is that for the the transitory period downright downstream migration upstream migration or i mean how how could that affect our operations because that's going to be big online because i think we're probably heading that way and if we spend 50 to 70 million dollars to return to service and then find out we can only you know are we are we shut down 60 days out of the year or 120 or 365 because that's going to affect me you don't have to answer it now those are just things that i'm concerned about the other thing is about um uh you know there's some things there that you know ferc like i go back to say they issued this license and it and it's not about

9:58 the seepage you know in the canal that's that's on us but the fact that now that you know when we look down at that home that we just bought and we're going to move it because of the fact that that you know 80 80 foot uh canal wall could cave in because of seismic that that condition was there when they issued a license and that seismic concern was there and now all of a sudden it's changing so if if this is the norm nationwide i mean about prioritize priorities and you know we're gonna have to do this up at carmen with uh trailbridge and you know i think a lookout i think of all these other facilities that are much more vulnerable than this one but uh it i'll have that question we're gonna have to tear that entire canal wall down and take those loose rocks out of there and put concrete in because nothing's gonna

10:45 change that hazard um on those walls failing with with uh seismic and i you know i i don't know where that's gonna go but we got a lot of a lot of you know i call it squeezing a balloon when we ask one question then three more pop up um and so uh those are things i'm going to look at is kind of getting into it about what if what if what if because um you're talking about economic projections and having been through several of them with carmen with uh um seneca and when we had ford price projections on making things justifiably economically uh what a pretty big disparity what uh what we initially thought about like seneca where we initially thought about carmen and i'm i'm going to be a little bit

11:30 skeptical on these future ford price curves because i don't have a good track record of saying that okay what was projected and what was reality uh have come about so those are those are areas i'm going to push back on a little bit or hope that we can you can convince me and sell it to me so i don't need answers now just so you know where i'm going to come from thank you good thank you yeah thanks mindy um like the rest of the commissioners i just want to say thanks for the tour i felt like that was a really great use of our time it was a lengthy tour but um there's no substitute for being out there and seeing the stuff on the ground

12:15 and you all really explained that um what we were looking at early and um i appreciate that lisa mark frank the full team thanks for making that happen um my comments are gonna be pretty brief uh three things that would help me uh in making a decision here would be our best guess or estimate not a guess estimate of the full cost of electricity generated i know it's going to be hard to get like the all included costs but we could at least say we know it's more than whatever a floor you know i i guess i can't say with confidence we can say that but um you know to the extent that we have kind of a range of what we think the full included cost of generated

13:01 electricity over the course of a year from the league or library fertility would be that would be helpful um uh tvl we talked about that and that and commissioner barakski brought that up as well to me um at least a preliminary tbl it doesn't have to be ranked in my view it's there's so many apples and oranges that uh i don't expect anybody to say how much something's worth compared to anything else i'm just looking for a kind of complete revealing of the full suite of impacts across environment economy and social impacts and the third thing would be some additional community conversations with the neighbors near leeberg

13:46 we certainly got a sense of that in the media that we had upriver i think that was in april um but some additional more focused conversations with folks um perhaps as a part of a tour or perhaps just after they complete a tour um you know some some really tangible conversations with folks up there to get an understanding of where they're coming from what solutions might work for them or won't um you know how um can be most supportive um that would be really helpful for me um so those are the three things and then if we have them in our best estimate of the commissioning versus recommissioning and we talked about further seismic evaluation of the canal

14:32 i know that may take time so that may not be able to happen quickly but if that were available that would be helpful those are my comments thanks very much thank you um i feel really similarly to sonia um i i agree with her like the my my first pass is the economics seem to be pretty clear um so i know what our timeline is and um kind of piggybacking on what matt said about having the getting a little bit more input from the community i know that this isn't like a all community decision kind of thing but i do think of um

15:17 kind of outreach to the community is super super important and i don't know like if somebody has like laid out a whole timeline but i'm wondering if we could have some kind of community tour not open to the whole community but just some stakeholders and have that before our upriver meeting that's in april i think i don't know if that's too aggressive of a timeline but that might be a natural time like we're going to be up there meeting with folks to um kind of uh have them have had some some kind of outreach to them um so i i guess what would be helpful to me would be maybe maybe to see like a more complete

16:02 timeline of what what it how do you envision us spending the next whatever it is 14 months um and if we really need 14 months because before i was thinking like wow this is super rushed but after that tour i thought maybe it's not so rushed so that would kind of help me figure out a little bit more what the process is um i also want to echo everybody's thanks for that i thought that was so incredibly helpful on many levels but just being out there and being able to see it and talking with each other in a more natural way and being able to ask questions of each other i just think that if there's other opportunities or things like this come up specifically around this project that

16:48 it just seems to save us a lot of time to be able to do a field trip like this i know it's pretty work intensive for all of you who arranged it and took took your day for that so i appreciate that but i think it's definitely time well spent yes frank uh yes president schlossberg commissioner so first of all um we want to thank you for your time on friday it's actually rare that we could get all five of you in the same place at the same time but i think it really showed how the conversation can be facilitated that way especially when you're talking about a complex issue i think we really view this process as

17:33 an iterative educational process um of commissioners and of the community i think both of those are incredibly important in this process and we uh before the end of the year we'll uh provide uh you and the community with the communications and outreach plan um for uh the liber gary and the neighbors and those those impacted so the stakeholders um i also think there's just a number of iterative questions that'll be answered along the way you know the the value of power is something that i i think uh is of obvious importance um especially in the context of the work that we do with other resources so it's it's really looking at either the necessity and or the cost of

18:19 replacing the attributes that are provided by lieberg so the carbon free attributes for example the the time of which it can produce and not produce so it's it's when you're looking at that in the context of our total um generation mix that's where we can provide some insight into what we think the value is and how that kind of extrapolates out for the remainder of the license and so just a number of things um i i think that um like like i said this is going to be an iterative process this is one of many steps i think it was a great step um but there's a lot more to come and it'll it'll be kind of you know you'll feel like you're getting a refresher

19:04 probably on a regular basis from the staff and i thought i thought mark and lisa and karen and others did a really great job of providing a lot of information and just answering the barrage of questions that you you pose their direction so thank you for your participation yes sonia sorry i had a quick question for staff i i just pulled up the backgrounder that we got on labor dan back in in january where it had the npv analysis you know high medium low assumptions and medium and low we lose five million and eight million dollars high we we have three million that we gain i'm curious if any of the other information that you've you know gleaned over the last

19:49 nine months has you know if you expect that that will change that economic analysis very much we i we do because one thing about that npv that was done previously is it did look at a shorter time frame that did not include the re-licensing and decommissioning considerations so this next cut that we will be taking at the net present value does go beyond that 20-year remaining life of the license and and does take into account those and the license costs whether it be dt commissioning or um re-licensing so it will look uh different for certain there's a lot more costs that are going to get lumped in

20:34 to this next analysis that doesn't sound like it's going to make it any better right right it might make it more stark that's true okay all right i just want to be clear thank you yep all right any other questions about this great well thank you for giving us that recap mark and lisa for you being here too and um allowing us to ask some follow-up questions and uh share our thoughts yeah really good input and comments we appreciate it thank you great okay so we will move on to the main part of

21:19 this work session which is the strategic revision update final discussion that's you frank president schlossberg commissioners good evening this is frank lawson again eweb general manager so go ahead with the next slide please holly so um one of our goals this year is to work with all of you to kind of evaluate and provide potential revisions for the strategic plan we did provide a background memo as part of this meeting it included a number of different observations and about the present plan some questions for you to ponder and

22:04 consider and also attached to that was a proposed revision to the strategic plan it wasn't a long read i think it was two pages in total so hopefully you got a chance to scour that and um absorb some of the content in there go ahead with the next slide um so a number of the observations that came out of the the plan um and the planning process um some of you were involved in the original plan and revisions some of you have come along more recently uh there's a few just noteworthy observations most of the key strategic priorities still exist around resource decisions emergency preparedness

22:49 we do know that the operating environment that we're in is is becoming more turbulent um technology right as we we've just discussed in the last topic the regulatory environment customer preference a lot of those are continuing to change which poses some some challenge in both operations and planning we also wanted to make sure that we captured any sort of uniqueness between the water utilities situation and the electric utility situation we think we've done that and we wanted to expand a little bit around when we talked about resiliency we wanted to make sure we weren't just talking about infrastructure that we were talking about financial resiliency and workforce resiliency and so we wanted to incorporate that into the next

23:34 revision there was also a piece that was missing which was around modernizing our i.t and is assets we've tried to incorporate that including into some of the the phases of which we're evolving and the path we're taking strategically and then we recognize that the values that are listed in the strategic plan are really a roster of sort of equally weighted values and we recognize there's some tension between those and that different commissioners being reflective of the community will interpret those and weigh those differently when there's when there's that tension and so we wanted to offer up either a prioritization of those if commissioners want to go there or if they're still comfortable with the fact

24:20 that some of those tensions can exist and that we need to wrestle through those on a opportunity by opportunity basis and then finally just a a note about governance i think one of the things that comes out of of this particular type of of planning and operating environment is that governance can change and it can change on a two-year cycle and depending on the turnover of the board it drives us to make sure that we do things within those windows that are measurable as well so we have some milestones that are developed go ahead hollywood the next slide please so where did the strategy actually end up so there's there's a few things that i just want to note uh one of them is that strategy is a privilege you know if

25:07 you're not operating well day to day then you don't really deserve the right to pursue the longer term positioning so we do recognize that even though a lot of times operational excellence isn't really considered strategic it can be a barrier and so we want to make sure that we recognize that the conditions we think we've captured um we are forecasting one of the things that that you'll note is that we talk often about the volatility and the scarcity of our supplies and sources of supply that is is both prevalent on the the water side as well as the um electric side how we would determine success and this is really you know if you want to capture the essence of uh the

25:52 the strategic plan this is this is really uh this quote here is directly out of the plan which is really how effectively we can synchronize our customer consumption uh with the futures increasing volatility and scarcity of our supply how well we do that will determine how safely reliably affordably and environmentally responsibly and equitably we deliver our services as you know even during disruptive events and so that's that's really the essence of it and you can call it synchronizing you can't balancing aligning how we how well we align the consumption with that volatility and that scarcity from time to time will determine our success

26:39 and then the path we're going to use to get there will be by developing resiliency and flexibility within our different operating aspects financial people processes and it'll eventually rely on customer participation in products and services that help mitigate some of our challenges including those that occur during disruptive events and it'll also guide many of our investments and so that's kind of the the essence of trying to capture the strategic plan next slide please so um how we're going to get there the path we're really kind of developed um three different stepping stones um you know the uh called it you know in a

27:26 chess analogy the opening uh the middle game uh and then the end game will concentrate really mostly on on the middle game and part of the reason there is is that's really where the next few years take us and what are the important important aspects of the next few years it's really to build the foundational pieces that ultimately come together for that synchronizing and alignment of supply and demand many of those pieces are listed here i'm not going to go through those i'll go through those a little bit later but those are there's some uniqueness between water and electric on the resiliency front but those if you were to say what are some of the most or the most strategic things that we're doing over the next few years that's what would occur in the

28:13 middle game those are the building blocks next next slide please so there were a few opportunities just want to address those directly that we identified distinct water and electric conditions so the scarcity piece is and these are these are quotes out of the the newly proposed and revised plan the scarcity and volatility the climate impacts the increasing occurrence of threats those occur on both sides water and electric across the organization water really the key decisions have to do with sources the potential for a second drinking water treatment plant on the willamette and simultaneously making sure that we're

28:58 recovering and protecting our existing watershed on the mackenzie it doesn't mean that other things are important we've talked about the importance of of and how strategic water storage is for example and those are part of the resiliency work but we have tried to capture at least the the priorities within the the two utilities and then the electric side it's to reassemble a power supply portfolio that really looks at the the best combination of economic environmental social benefit for our community um and at the same time recognizing you know what this ballooning comment means is basically the infrastructure that was put in in the electric division was was installed throughout the community very heavily in the 60s and

29:44 70s and all of that is aging at the same time so we have this ballooning you know aging simultaneously which means that the the replacement of that is also going to affect your financial and your resources to replace it effectively next slide so the other uh piece of the the challenge or the opportunity we saw to make the plan just that much better was to identify specific upcoming milestones um i touched on that a little bit earlier so i won't elaborate here there there are some in the electric side and some in the water side the electric side the the metering the integrated resource plan which um is incredibly important even for the discussion we just had um although it

30:31 won't actually answer the decision directly about lieberg it'll it'll start to place value on some of the attributes that we're talking about the rate design and pricing well that again is not this year over the next few years if we ultimately want to have people participate in new kinds of demand response time abuse then we will have to make sure that that we have a little better alignment between our costs and our prices and i think there's there's a lot more work to come that almost as much work as the lieberg canal um but this this will be more fun uh than dealing with some of those issues i think um depending on um if you if you get a enjoy rate design um and then ultimately

31:17 we start to launch some new products that customers can participate in and not just new products on the consumption side but also potentially new products on the conservation and energy efficiency side so those those actually go hand in hand and then you see the reservoirs and interconnecting transmission the drinking water master plan is is due to be um updated and revised and approved um in by 20 on or before 2025 and then as i mentioned earlier a second drinking water treatment plant to mitigate the fact that we have a single primary source of drinking water next slide so uh the final you know another one of the opportunities was to to look at

32:03 right now we have a roster of values those um are not ranked necessarily they all contain their own elements we've made a few changes to those we added equity into the strategic plan in a number of locations including here we also split out which was a recommendation for quite some time affordable and environmental that used to just be sort of lumped under responsible uh we think that both of those kind of warrant their their own um attention without getting an extreme long list of values and then we we expanded a little bit on the safe side to inc and include the security and integrity of cyber assets

32:48 and data and other other types of assets so these have evolved a little bit um but they they are still a roster and and they are not prioritized in any particular order we we do tend to place safety um uh when it comes to the practical application we tend to to place safety at the forefront but all of them are important and i don't think that i could really legitimately say that any of these are necessarily more important than others go ahead with the next slide i think the uh in the background memory we posed a few different questions for the board to think about um these were really designed to to make sure that um

33:33 you know sometimes you can read a read a plan and i know that you've been involved with the plan for quite some time some of you and seen it evolve sometimes it's not just what's in the plan it's what's not in the plan that you have to kind of tease out uh some of these were designed to do that uh for example the the question around are are we defining ourselves too narrowly or too widely you know you can are there predisposed disposition that the board has for example about the mckenzie valley electric territory um that's one that it's not specifically listed in our mission um it's not specifically excluded and if the board wanted to specifically include it or exclude it then um you know this is this is an opportunity

34:19 to do that the same with with growth or expansion when we look at generation assets um you know the third question there uh you know is is the board predisposed to own generation or not own generation you know and this is outside of the context of the integrated resource plan which tells us which will tell us the characteristics of the resources we want you know some might look at this and go wait being in the generation business is very expensive um and we're the size of a utility where as you as you have noticed um a significant amount of effort cost and resource goes into your generation assets those can actually be purchased or

35:05 acquired or you know power can be attained in a number of different ways you don't necessarily have to own generation now the other if by leaving it vague the potential for the integrated resource plan to help guide us is is there if the board said no we we absolutely want to be in the business because we we really think it gives us a presence on the mckenzie or for whatever reason then that's that would be good to know um you know the other thing um about you know and these these questions were in in your background or so i don't know that i'll i'll actually read these further but hopefully we'll get a chance and the board will take these into consideration

35:50 during your discussion and deliberation of the new plan go ahead with the next slide please so uh the goal of this work session is to to foster discussion alignment understanding of the newly proposed and revised strategic plan it was attached i think there's actually a reference slide where it's all of the words are actually presented on about four slides um there's other some other reference slides that are in the back here but at this point i wanted to find out and and solicit feedback comments direction from the board relative to what was presented to you in the backgrounder which included a new

36:36 strategic plan and find out if there were any comments with the goal that potentially we could approve it at our next regular board meeting so that's that's my opening remarks and with that president schlossberg we'll turn it back to you thank you great um well i'm not sure if there's anybody who wants to go ahead and jump in sonia i'm not sure if your hand is poised to be raised go ahead i mean i can go unless others want to i don't have to first but i don't see anybody else fighting for it so i guess i'll go uh okay so on the the

37:21 question of kind of the prioritization of the different values um i mean i i typically sort of see safety as one that's kind of not as negotiable as some of the others i can think of a lot of other situations where you know affordability and maybe reliability or environment and local those all have more of an interplay and i can think of a different situation where i would put each one of those kind of above one another um safety not as much but i don't know that it really i don't know that it really needs to be prioritized for me i mean i think that you know as a group and even within the organization i think we can see

38:07 where there are times when you know each of those are needed depending on the situation um i as far as some of the strategic um priorities of opportunities i am i at some point would like more information about kind of the the springfield opportunity around the water plant are are we bring that aside is that still a consideration um that we are working with springfield uh you know i've gotten some information that they think that we're stalling and we're not working with them to just utilize the water plant that they have

38:52 i don't i don't know what you know where we're at with that but i i still think it's very important that we have a secondary water source and that it's on the willamette so i guess you know in terms of how the strategic plan works um that still needs to be a conversation um and the other as for some of the other questions in there i do still you know personally wonder if you know at some point it would be helpful for us to expand to uh looking at internet broadband like we've done with the interchange and how we expand that more broadly for the benefit of eugene uh we are strategically poised to do that now

39:38 that said we have so many large projects right now that i would not put that above others but you ask so i'm throwing it out there as i still would like that to be on the back burner but you know dealing with walterville secondary water source getting our um you know our our storage tanks in all of those large projects uh certainly take priority for me and you know staff this is one of those where the interplay of uh affordability and time that staff have available and you know those all come into play those take priority for me um

40:23 as for some of the others i mean i i think our focus and where the community is at i think that you know i'm i'm good with where we're currently at i don't think that we need to expand necessarily if there was an opportunity to focus more on maybe the regions where people can actually vote for the groups that they're being represented by and or there there's a partnership that made sense to take you know some of the other territory away like the mckinsey valley i mean it may be something that that i would be open to but i think the community i don't know that the community would really be supportive necessarily that would be a much bigger conversation and i don't know that it needs to be part of our strategic focus necessarily

41:11 um i do like having um to the question number five i definitely like splitting out the climate change the environmental aspect and i do agree with the board policy and sd-15 i think that's a really critical piece that we still need to highlight and keep separate it's it's if we don't work on this as a civilization we're toast um so we need to play our part and it has to be at the forefront and that's that's what i have thanks for the opportunity to weigh in yeah commissioner carlson uh i think john brown wants to be up i would just comment a couple of on a couple of things

41:56 so um the this this strategic piece of the secondary water plant is the recognition and the willingness to make that investment a relationship with springfield utility board or somebody else or looking for grant money alternative types of financing those to me are part of the financial analysis and tactical implementation i will make the comment that springfield utility board's planned on the mckenzie is just totally inadequate for our needs we are still continuing to have discussions we recently signed a an um a purchase and sale agreement on some property in glenwood that gives

42:43 us a little bit more flexibility to work with springfield or others there's a little bit of a difference of the drivers there between what a springfield utility board and what uweb would like to achieve out of another project but we are still in in discussions but i i do see that as a um a tactical piece of that is as well as you know when we talk about that in october we'll talk a little bit about the financing and how much the rate impact of getting others to participate or grant grant participation so that's that's a technical implementation if if we were to expand into broadband for example if the board wanted to be more active with that i would probably

43:30 want to take that outside of the normal e-web operation and and staff either through some kind of consulting or skunk works type of assessment um it it we we do have just a plethora of things to do in the next five years and not that there's no potential in that we are well well suited for it probably but i would probably want to do it outside of the normal competition for resources and the board would have to be willing to to look at some separate financing for that out you know just set aside a certain degree of investment in that if that was the case

44:15 so thank you for your feedback um president schlesberger i think i saw john brown's hand up go go up briefly and then he pulled it back down so i don't know if he really wants to say anything and if it's okay um i'll go backwards on the questions because they're the like five and six are easy um six about uh the values the balanced order of uh safe reliable affordable environmental and community still work it works for me so i'm okay with that five um our stewardship in the about and uh you know i think uh st 15 is fine on ghg and things like that if we want to put more emphasis on

45:00 it i'm okay with that but i think the way it's written is fine number four when we talk about getting outside of our mission of electricity and water having lived and experienced that when we had severe budget challenges years ago and we put the educational programs and a few other things on the block and then we found out from the community how important those were i'd kind of like to not consider moving those out even though they're not in our defined mission the educational programs for the kids at the schools and everything else i learned a whole lot when we we thought we were going to ask those um and i think they're very important and i think they're they're although not direct they're indirect i think it's important that we educate the kids and everything about

45:45 alternative energy and solar programs and things such as that so i i'm okay with leaving those in um number three about uh selling or preserving generation assets i don't want to sell or get rid of our because all of our generation is green and uh and i i want to keep it you know even though if it doesn't make economic sense for us i i'm challenged how somebody else can can provide uh the electricity with the same resource and make it financially feasible so if they can do it i think we can do it because i think we're the best at doing it and so i i personally would not want to divest anything unless it was something like you know the recent things we've invested in that made no economic sense about retooling the wind

46:31 farm and things such as that um so uh that's number three as far as number two delivering drinking you know alternative things like uh i'm okay with exploring uh alternative things but not until we know the economic impacts of of that like when we go to broadband internet and things such as that if we're going to be a service provider that's a huge question and i would not want to spend a lot of time and resources on that right now because of everything else is on our plate and lastly about number one about expanding uh or narrow our community uh you know a reach um regional water i think is is going to be something that we're going to have to discuss or consider in the future i know

47:16 that you know we we provided water to bonita and we got sued but uh it it helps you know these bedroom communities aren't they don't have a glacial source of water they have a ground water source and rain water source and if they're not allowed to use storage from the core of engineers reservoirs um i think both north and south are going to be looking to us for water and i think we need to think about that as far as we've already discussed and we had it at one time a proposal and talking about selling the up river to lane electric we had that discussion and then when we immediately did that and then residents up there found out that lean electric's rates were higher than ours we got an earful and so uh but i think it makes more sense to know that you know we have

48:01 2 000 customers up there but it's 50 of our service area and and the cost of providing service i mean the numbers are the numbers and so if it made economic sense and residents wanted it i would certainly look about contracting and and selling the upriver service territory if it made sense for all the concerns so that's my those are my responses to one through six i'll look forward to adhering to others thank you commissioner brown i these these questions are actually i just want to make sure that people are clear especially if there's anybody listening in from the mackenzie valley that these questions were not posed as a as a predisposition or or a desire the way that

48:46 management historically has viewed the answer to that question is it's not a a preordained choice that if at some point the opportunity came along and it was let's say good for lane electric good for eweb and good for the customers that we would be willing to explore it it is not sort of by policy or by strategy eliminated from concern it's also not something where i'm hearing from the commissioners oh let's put it on the block let's put it up for sale so we are viewing it more as they are part of our territory we continue to support uh serve and support that community um the best way that we can um

49:31 you know aligning with all the other values and the strategies so it's it's not sort of separated out um in any particular way and the same thing with the generation i would ask you commissioner brown if if if you could choose between and this is this is hypothetical this is not these are not real numbers but if you could choose between a 15 rate decrease and being in the generation business on our own would you how would you make that choice i would keep the generation because i think we i don't want to be at the mercy of one entity like if canada cuts off our water treaty on the columbia or if we have that they take out the snake river dams and things like that we're 100 percent dependent upon

50:16 somebody else to provide our service we have no fallback and uh you know and you know the fact that where we are in competitiveness and everything else and the fact that we know that the easiest way to the most cost-effective way to generate new resources to conservation i think we're going to be able to uh to address that i'd like to keep the generation as much as we can you know i know that it may not be cost effective but it's cost effective for somebody someplace and uh i have i'm challenged to say that we could buy it cheaper than we could produce it because how can somebody else produce it cheaper than we can what are we not doing right so some of that yeah some of that is scale i would answer that through scale but

51:01 but what you've described to me commissioner if i think i would and correct me if i'm wrong i would classify that as a risk mitigation approach to generation not not just so much the attributes of what's being generated but you're willing to pay extra uh for the fact that that we're diversifying the risk from our you know as part of our mix so it's a mix of what we own versus what we procure is that kind of a fair assessment that would be my that would be my particular position because i think that to be totally reliant dependent upon outside sources when historically for the last hundred years we've had you know 35 percent generation or whatever it's worked in the past and i think it's

51:47 only there i can't envision how they're going to create more generation to meet this demand as we increase the demand we get off of carbon um and the electricity demands increase uh the the the ability availability and the resources i think are going to be very challenging to meet the demand and so i i would not want that just for a short term rate relief to give up our generation capacity yeah fair enough thank you matt or john one of you one go ahead john borowski okay thank you um so uh number one i like the idea of leaving it the way it is give that gives us uh

52:34 i think that gives us the uh opportunistic changes like you said when we see things coming up um is drinking water and electricity enough yes for me that is yes when we start talking broadband and technology investing a lot of resources in technology today that may be obsolete in five years you know we may be having satellite internet from from elon musk in five years so that gives me pause so i'm fine with water and electricity um i'm with john brown as far as the generation uh and and for me it's it it it's not just the risk

53:20 that we're trying to avoid it's also you know as more and more of the fossil fuel plants come offline finding finding carbon-free energy i think is going to get more and more uh at a premium uh i think you know we're looking right now yeah power prices are low because there's a lot of natural gas out there but if if natural gas starts going away like the way that coal is going away then carbon free is going to be at a premium i i hope and i hope having having a carbon free in our portfolio is something that's important to me um number four the give backs i'm i'm also as long as we're able to do that i i'm

54:06 in favor of that um number five i'm on yes i do have one question about sd15 and i know there's a slide a little bit later i don't know if we'll we're gonna get into that but i do have a question about that at some point when we get to that um and then the prioritizations um obviously this the safety one i think everybody's on board with that but i also feel that that if we set prioritizations as this board i don't feel comfortable with that because you say boards are going to change in in future years well yes boards change and so do uh circumstances in the community change and so for us to prioritize those now

54:53 and who knows when we're going to come back and visit this in three years there may be a different board but we may not have the opportunity to uh go through and dig through this as that board and so the priorities were set by us and and i don't feel comfortable with that i think it's a flowing material and it it may be tough for for staff to deal with but that's what a an elected board is here to do is give that direction and if there needs to be a change um i think that's appropriate i mean if you had asked the board 10 years ago is should carbon be one of our strategic goals they would have probably not put it in there and i don't want to

55:40 put on a board 10 years from now what i think the strategic goal should be so that's kind of where i'm at thanks thanks commissioner barofsky um you know they they i think that um management is is and staff are in favor of the roster of values also you know one of the examples is that when you have values such as we have whether they're not weighted you know i'll use the lieber canal as an example there's there are there are going to be tensions between the social the environmental the financial and and if we were to prioritize and i'll just use an example if we if we put

56:27 in our our mission statement that we were going to contribute to the vitality of the community by providing affordable and therefore elevated the affordable value out of the values and into this the statement then cost would start to rule over some of those those other values it wouldn't be as balanced and so well it's a little bit more challenging because it becomes more case to case it's probably appropriate given the governance structure that you mentioned and the fact that we have such a variety of different decisions to make where affordability might not be as important in one decision or another so i think we have felt like a more balanced approach works for us um

57:14 even though it has its challenges recognizing that the the one thing i was going to point out about the the the telecom because telecom was mentioned there are a number of different ways to enter the telecom arena not all of those are as a service provider you have you have different levels you could be more of a a backbone provider you could be a transport provider or you could actually supply internet services there's so there's there's different ways to enter that arena in general what i'm hearing is we have a lot to focus on now and if if we were to to get away from that maybe this isn't the right time to get away from that focus but um i just wanted to make sure

57:59 that people were clear that it wasn't put in there as a any you know any sort of preconceived notion but there are different ways that you can get into that arena if that was if that's i didn't want people to be misinterpret what the intent of that question was and then just one last thing are we going to talk to go to the other slides and uh should i hold off on my question about sd 15 um i i think you can go ahead and i don't know how much time you have left go ahead and i think you can ask your question now okay can you drop down a few slides so that it comes up because there's just one word that i have a question about if you can pull up it it's it was in the reference slides

58:46 yeah slide 14 yeah slide 14. so on this one on number two it says participate in local state and regional efforts to encourage develop and enact measures to mitigate carbon emissions in the energy sector that contribute to climate change so when we say the energy sector and that we are going to be encouraging and developing and enacting measures to mitigate that could be construed as to say that we're you know if if the city of eugene says we'd like to we'd like to ban natural gas how does how would that play in if we say

59:33 participate in regional efforts to encourage develop and enact measures to mitigate carbon in energy sector yeah the i think that particular i i don't i don't actually know if i was around in the original drafting of sd15 but i know when we when we looked at one of the revisions a few years ago it was just to acknowledge that there's a lot of overlap that occurs depending on how broadly you want to cast your net between different forms of energy you know one example of that commissioner is we've um we advocated for the the hydrogen study bill um and you know

1:00:19 that's that's an example of one where if we just limited to electricity um that's a little bit bit you know outside of the window it could have said electricity i think we chose energy because there is a lot of crossover the to a certain extent decisions made by um by others we we weigh very carefully what our position is going to be on some of those so this this is not to necessarily recognize that um it's an all or nothing we we look very closely at the impacts to got kind of a triple bottom line the social what's the impact on electricity so it was really meant to

1:01:04 recognize that there's a lot of synergies between different different parts of the energy sector that was the intent all right thank you go ahead matt thanks mindy um great questions and commentary so far it is quite a privilege to work with such a group of thoughtful people um so i'll try and go through my comments here quickly and then i have one question at the end um i think frank the update of data language here is um

1:01:49 really solid and reflects our conversations so far so i appreciate the way that you've incorporated uh what you've heard from from the board um a strikethrough version if that's possible would help me compare more easily next time whether it's this or you know some other document that we're looking at i don't know how possible that is it's possible that that's just not easy to do given the level of changes but if it is that would be great um going into specific questions i don't feel like we need to refine our geographic or community scope uh like sonia i believe we should leave some room for providing internet as a service possibly i wouldn't want to close that door it feels like there's a growing community

1:02:35 demand and it's something that you would potentially do very cost effectively so i would like to leave the door open to that i don't have really strong feelings about whether or not eweb owns generation however i do care very much about the mix of power that we purchase and like john brown i care a lot about retaining some measure of generation that is locally controlled and locally generated i think that's really important in terms of prioritizing specific values i agree with sonia that safety for me anyway makes the top of the list i think at this point in time many of these values are really mutually reinforcing rather than competing um well eugene doesn't have a great

1:03:22 influence on global greenhouse gas emissions i recognize that if we don't collectively eliminate greenhouse gas emissions it will become extremely difficult and may be impossible to address affordability and reliability values that said my understanding is that when it comes to electricity supply if we plan carefully there isn't necessarily a huge trade-off between low-carbon and affordable and reliable and safe i guess it's all a long way to saying i think leaving them mixed and balanced is the right way to go and safety certainly tops the list for me um i think it's important that we find an appropriate location or location for numerical strategic goals i don't think

1:04:08 that belongs in this strategic plan but i think it is important for this board to provide some measurable um goals that we toward which the organization could steer i think we need clear and measurable goals around equity affordability and the environmental attributes of our services specifically when we think about lieberg for example we know that customers will have questions about our commitments to low-carbon electricity and locally controlled electricity generation and to the extent that we have made clear policy commitments to strategic goals i think it will help our our customers understand

1:04:53 where we're trying to go and lastly my question for you frank i'm curious when where and how this board will wrestle with strategic goals because of the big decisions that are before this board in the next few years at a minimum minimum i would like to see us revise and update the strategic direction policy 15 within the next six months that's all i have thank you so thanks commissioner so so one so i'll i'll address a couple of your comments and then answer your question um i i did actually do uh a side-by-side track changes it it was so so bad

1:05:38 that it was basically hard to follow i i thought that might be the case you know what happened is we rearranged the sections we pulled things it basically became meaningless so um we we have used as you know track changes on a lot of different documents where there's um kind of simple additions or revisions so that that's i i think you know part of that one one of the things that i was going to and and i think it's a it's a potential to include in the plan is a reference somewhere that um the the execution of the strategic plan will be consistent and incorporated in the annual goal setting process um now that's that's actually already

1:06:23 covered in another document it's it's so it's it's actually in one of the board policies that the general manager will bring forth or the board will bring actually i think it's stated that the board will bring forth to the general manager the expectations for the year and the annual goal setting it's kind of a back and forth and i'm not sure where it starts actually um but um it is and and some of that refer to the the strategic goals of the organization so so the link is on the other end but i don't see where it would be difficult to somehow incorporate a reference that the the execution of the strategic plan

1:07:09 will be reiterated and captured and discussed and approved as part of the annual goal setting process i think that could that could that reference could be made um so i think that probably even addresses your question about how do you how do you get to that um you you have the strategy and then um you know basically every january the uh the goals associated with the execution of that strategy are are deliberated discussed negotiated um and then eventually approved so um so so i um i'll double check i see if if there's a if there's a good place to provide the link the other direction in the plan i'll try to incorporate it before we bring it back

1:07:58 great thanks and then in terms of updating the strategic direction policies i know there's quite a few of those i don't know how often or what the process is for updating those but i'd be curious your thoughts about that yeah use the board policies there's there are a few of them that get get updated when there's some sort of other change there's a lot of sort of linkages there um however if any particular board member wanted to have a discussion reviewing a particular board policy that would typically just go through the normal kind of items from board members where it could be um you know we'd like to

1:08:43 allocate some future agenda time to review and and revise and discuss you know board policy sd-15 climate change policy so that that could be um just approached in that way as with any other policy as well so any any of the board policies in particular those those are really policies of the board so um you know if any member wants to now if no other board members are interested in it and you don't get any hand hand raises then it it moves on um or it remains intact so i think i'll anticipate that at one of these upcoming board meetings that commissioner mcrae will be

1:09:29 looking for hand raises to review sd15 likely thanks frank yeah all right so i'm the last one and i guess one of the benefits of going last is that everybody's already said really great stuff and a lot of what i would say and then kind of provide a little fodder for thought for me so i will be totally honest with you frank i think my brain works really differently than yours and i get a little confused with the strategic the strategic plan stuff and i think that i get confused because like we keep seeing iterations of it and i know that you're tweaking it and we're talking about it and

1:10:14 maybe like matt's thing about seeing a strikethrough copy is i start to get confused about where we've shifted or what we've talked about um and and i also think matt's suggestion about having some measurable goals i don't know where that belongs but for me that would be helpful too because i mean this is all really big obviously long-term stuff it's strategic but i i guess i start to get a little confused about where we carry out like there's many paths of carrying out many of those things and um we talk about um like we talk about things like wanting more energy efficiency but um i'm curious like how are we specifically targeting those

1:11:00 things and how do we know like when we're looking at the strategic plan how do we know that we're meeting specific goals i know that you have a working document and you know that and maybe the other commissioners do too and i'm totally off base but i think sometimes it would be nicer not necessarily to get more in the weeds but maybe a little more streamlined about what is the target that we are trying to get and what will we be considered a success i don't know i don't know others feel that way so it's it's a it's a great question and comment um president schlossberg so i'll preface it in a couple of ways so first of all there's a recognition at least in our process

1:11:45 that not everything we do is strategic when when we talk about achieving certain target levels of energy efficiency for example that to me is covered under the direction that the board is provided as to how we're going to operate so we we already have targets those targets have been established through past integrated resource plans et cetera we we have a whole roster of metrics that we we monitored and i would describe it as when you look at what is typically the last few years been our our first goal on the annual goals it's operate the utility the way you've already told us to operate so so that's

1:12:31 that is a little bit and we i'm one of the changes that we made a few years ago we went through the strategic planning process was a recognition that not everything we do is strategic and not everybody has a strategic role what we've tried to capture in the strategy is what we need to do and why we need to do it how we do it falls back on the annual goal setting those are those are actually the milestones so when i think about a strategy it's really thinking about okay here's what we need to do and to set up the utility here's what we need to do in the next few years here's why we need to do it and then on an annual basis we to jointly develop the milestones and the

1:13:18 measurements on the strategic elements the strategic pieces which is probably going to be a few items it's not going to be a roster of 20 things those 20 things come from the precursor the prerequisite that says in order to do this strategic stuff you still have to operate the utility we the way we've told you to do it um you've you've told us to do it in a number of ways some of it is through board policy some of it is through past resolutions i i think the last time we looked we had over 40 active resolutions um that we were adhering to from the board and and i i obviously don't think that you passed all those some of those have been developed through the years so

1:14:04 um i think two two answers to your question not everything is strategic a lot of it's captured through operational metrics and then when i think about a strategy it's really the what and the why touches a little bit on the how but the how generally comes in the sort of the policies that get developed like sd15 as an example the financial policies some of the others and then the annual goal setting i don't know if that helped or confused you yeah it's kind of how i view it um then on to the the questions that you asked um so i feel very similar i mean it seems like everybody has very similar answers but should we

1:14:49 define expand or narrow our community reach i guess i'm agnostic about that one i guess it would it would depend but i'm not interested in um like actively exploring that right now um in terms of the question about broadband i actually think that internet should be a public utility i don't know that we're the utility to provide it but if that opportunity came around or there was some kind of partnership among different community stakeholders and we had an opportunity to participate in that i would say we should definitely pursue it um in terms of selling or preserving our generation assets i feel really similarly to john

1:15:36 brown about that um i know it kind of opens up a whole lot of questions especially as we're looking at lieberg but something that our community really values i think is uh local control and i also agree about the need to make sure that we have carbon-free resources or carbon-free um generation um in terms of rate pressures and community services i think one of the things that makes us special is that we have social and community services and i would um fight really hard to make sure that we maintain those otherwise we're just a company um

1:16:22 i think that's about uh board policy sd15 i mean i what i've heard from my fellow commissioners is that everybody thinks that that is a high priority so uh i'm not sure what i think about the current wording of it but if there's any way that would even strengthen it more i would support looking at at that and then for the last one about the values i mean agreed with what other people said like obviously safe but i think all those other ones it's kind of like those um magnetic poetry on the refrigerator or something like you can move them around and it might say something different but i think that they're all they're all pretty interchangeable

1:17:09 thank you president schlossberg the um so i know everybody mentions safety and safety is incredibly important to to all of us i i will point out that even within the the safety world there's a lot of discussion around risk mitigation um you you don't blindly go into even a safety discussion without looking at at both the the likelihood and the magnitude of the risk that you're facing and so it's um because if you did then then you would probably never leave the house um and um you'd spend a lot of money having um grubhub del you know you spend a lot of money in other other areas so um the these do all work together um there there are challenges and

1:17:54 trade-offs um even within some of the things that i think people recognized um earlier and i think there will be trade-offs as we reassemble a power portfolio but i don't think that you go into that creating a priority of of one over the other um so i think we we agree and support with with the balance between those those different different values so see i think i think you'll find you'll find support there um the the way i i will say that um the way that our mission is is written now um

1:18:40 is that um it says drinking water and electric electricity delivery of drinking water electricity it does not explicitly say anything else so that is not something that we would be inclined to pursue at this point um the generation was is an interesting one i appreciate everybody's comments um i would describe that as sort of we we are in that side of well i guess on both sides we're vertically integrated we we work on everything from the source through the delivery um there are a lot of utilities um that are not vertically integrated they they focus on delivery

1:19:25 um and not on generation um we we are a little bit different part of that's been part of our history what i'm hearing is that the board is interested in continuing to be vertically integrated i'm not sure that i would necessarily agree with the the fact that you cannot buy carbon free resources but i do understand the issue of local control and the localness and the risk mitigation piece so um even at a cost which i i think i also heard so we are presently vertically integrated it sounds like the board based on how the strategy is written and sort of a lot of things

1:20:10 in the priorities is is interested in continuing that as one of the sort of cornerstones as we go forward so um that was helpful for me to understand and i think helpful hopefully for you to kind of coalesce around too so commissioner mcrae yeah i just have a quick question about that is it possible to retain some local control of local generation without owning it is that something that we can purchase somehow i guess from my perspective it's not so important that he owns it it's the local control of something of an asset that's close enough that it's useful in a time of of disruption otherwise anyway i just want to put that out there yeah then i'll i'll answer directly yes that is possible you know there

1:20:55 there's there's actually a very good example at seneca um so i mean we've you know which has been in it was a 15-year uh power purchase agreement um we we could also even if if i'll just say there's a lot of options i won't get into too many what-ifs but even if you sold an asset to another independent power producer or another larger utility really more geared toward that you could make arrangements for the use of it during emergencies for example you could place special operating requirements if there was concern about um the mckenzie river for example in one case or another but um it is possible um that's not what i'm hearing though just to be clear i'm i'm hearing from the

1:21:41 board that even at a premium the diversification of resource staying vertically integrated is the preference now an integrated resource plan or something might change your opinion but you are not predisposed to either sell it off or buy more um that's going to be determined by uh the eventual need of of the community that that's the way i'm reading it i think that's the way it's written yes presidential aspect so i just want to comment about that um i mean so you just presented another option which i mean i'm not an expert so i don't know what all the options are so i guess i

1:22:27 wouldn't want to say like throw out other options because at least for me what you heard me say is that i value a locally owned carbon free uh assets i mean i think that's my preference but i would hate for that to be something that like ends up driving us when personally i don't know what the other things are so if there was like another great option i would want to hear that right the the way that the plan is written is that it doesn't preclude um or suppose that we will be in or out of the generation business it doesn't i think it's in in some ways a lot like one of the earlier discussions around

1:23:12 the the adding of different services or the selling i'll say the selling of the mckenzie territory if if we go through the integrated resource planning process and it drives us toward a certain set of resources and i'll just hypothetically say none of our present resources that we own uh fill an imminent need in that that could open up some possibilities but it's within the context of the integrated resource plan what i'm what i what i'm not hearing is i'm not i'm not hearing the board say oh we absolutely want to sell them off and get rid of it and cut our you know go back and focus on delivery i'm not

1:23:57 hearing that and i'm also not hearing i want to do everything absolutely possible to keep him independent of any opportunity so it will be driven by some other part of a decision it's it's i'm not hearing an absolute one way or the other which is way that that's the way it's written presently but it was a good question i think just just because of that anybody else any last questions for frank i guess i would uh very quickly ask the timeline for so if we're adopting this

1:24:44 uh at the next meeting the timeline for revisiting it what has that typically been so um great question um commissioner mcrae typically what we like to do is is take a snapshot and what makes the most sense from a sort of revisiting standpoint is probably in the may kind of time frame that sometimes april or may and the reason for that is that we're getting ready to come back to the board with capital plans and investment plans usually in july and it gives us the chance to do an assessment of the plan kind of before we get into that sort of heavy budgetary and capital planning process

1:25:31 so sometime in the late i'll just classify as a late spring and and we we want to do that at least on an annual basis or if there's some sort of distinguishing event in between that time but at least annually late spring and then if dictated by some sort of uh substantial situational change did that answer your question yeah great thank you well president schlossberg this this was helpful for me um i will um bring back to the board um if there's and and this will be track changes will

1:26:16 be on this time between what you saw today and and what comes back um hopefully for your approval uh in october um i've got a few good suggestions on some some modifications and and clarifications um and i will uh work to incorporate that before that meeting and i really do appreciate the comments and the feedback um it was it was useful i hope it was useful for you yes thank you okay so that takes us to our board wrap up anybody have anything to wrap up yes john brofsky

1:27:02 um a couple of things one first frank uh i don't know about how much fun you're gonna you have with rate design but you alluded to that earlier and i'm just intrigued by how much fun that's going to be um i hope it it it's as fun as you alluded to be um but the other thing i just wanted to mention so i drove back from bend yesterday and i drove the mckenzie it was beautiful day the mountains were out it was it was fabulous but i also had the opportunity to stop at the finla finrock reach just because it was there um and we had uh a rain event over the weekend and so i just kind of wanted to

1:27:48 take a look at it um it was very interesting that i i walked it i walked two tributaries that were coming into it it was monday so the turbidity was the the the tributaries were fairly clean but you could see where they went into the reach even if they were dirty there was going to be excessive filtration before it hit the main channel it was really uh encouraging to see i mean you're walking along and you just see all these logs that are just piled on to each other and you think oh what a mess but when you get down in there and kind of start walking the logs and seeing underneath it was very encouraging so i just wanted to bring that up that to actually see it to walk on the logs to watch the the

1:28:33 water you know not in the in the middle of the drought to actually see water flowing through there was very encouraging so i just wanted to mention that um president schwarzberg i i know that um we are scheduling or have have already scheduled a tour for commissioners to the rock reach i don't remember the exact um date off the top of my head but um it and we do have some scheduled sort of revisiting the mckenzie valley we did it last year we did it last spring and so we do have another one scheduled to see some of the work that commissioner barofsky oh uh ann cod just said it's october

1:29:19 22nd so um thank you anne all right anybody else have any other wrap up nope well thank you everyone for this extra meeting i know this is a busy month for us with our city of eugene joint meeting next monday but um i always really appreciate the opportunity to separate this kind of stuff out from a regular meeting because it's just i think easier for me personally selfishly to focus but um i i'm really

1:30:04 grateful that we're doing more of these work sessions so it's seven o'clock and this meeting is adjourned and we are all free to enjoy the rest of our evenings thanks thank mindy