EWEB Board of Commissioners — March 3, 2026

0:04 I'd like to call the um March 3rd, 2026 uh regular meeting of the Eugene water electric board to order. The first agenda evening uh item this evening is for me to give you a facility and uh safety awareness and meeting logistics briefing. I want to thank you for attending the meeting and uh the the e web management and subject matter experts are present in the room and virtually. The meeting is being streamed live and recorded. Please speak loudly and clearly so everybody can hear you. Public testim testimony is welcome. Assignment forms are over here at the back of the room. Visitor access is limited to the board meeting room and restrooms. Restrooms are located on the first floor, exit through the righth hand door at the front of the room and across the hallway. In the event of emergency such as fire security instant, follow all instructions given by staff. If evacuation is required, please call me. Proceed to the nearest near nearest safety exit as identified and directed

0:49 by staff and evacuate away from the building to the farthest points in the parking lots and allow clear and immediate access for first responders. That said is one thing. So, the next agenda item is going to be the agenda check. Is there anybody um have any changes to the agenda? It looks like our our sign up for public testimony will fall within the limits that's budgeted. So, and we'll we'll allow the full three minutes, not like last meeting. So, we're good there. Anything else? Okay. Items from board members. I'll start with Commissioner Slushberg. Nothing. Commissioner Morris, >> I do have two things. Thank you, Chair. Um, first, uh, on March, oh gosh, 6th, uh, the Elco is having a fundraising dinner. Uh, and so if you are free that night, I encourage you to join. Uh,

1:34 it's, I believe, a fundraiser for Senior Meals on Wheels. So, it's a a good a good uh a good charity as well as a good uh dinner as well. So, highly recommend that. And then I believe um other commissioners were invited. I'm sure if you were able to attend, but um I believe a couple weeks ago we were able to see the inside of the College Hill uh water storage, which was very cool. It was incredible to see. Um and staff did an amazing job explaining the process and explaining what the construction looks like, what community outreach looked like. Uh and I had the uh unbelievable pleasure to be leaving as a group of families and children were coming in. Uh and it was so so cool to see so many young folks also excited to see that. So, just wanted to highlight for y'all and staff did a really a

2:20 really great job in explaining what was going on. So, thanks thanks to the team. >> Thank you, Commissioner Carl. >> Couple of quick things. I'm bummed that I was not able to attend. Unfortunately, it was under the weather that that day. Um, but I have attended in the past and I know it's a really wonderful experience. So, um, I also um echo the Elco dinner. I will be there on Friday and u other things are happening but I'm going to announce it anyway. And then um I wanted to uh [clears throat] say a quick thing about a constituent that um contacted me with some recommendations um some recommendations around um if we do put a um a fee around smart meters or

3:07 um talking more on the bill itself around having a connection to the um the fees that are charged. I know it's it's kind of clearly delineated, but I don't think people understand how the storm water fee actually relates to the amount of water gallons used. That was one um comment they made. And then um there another person, they're they're on the budget billing system and they recommended having like a cumulative to like running total of if you're above or below so that you could kind of see. I thought that was a really good recommendation because I think there is kind of a troop over time and so if it's set at one amount and it's way over or it's way under they kind of have a sense of where that's going to go over time.

3:53 And then um they also gave a kudos um to staff. They testified last month about um the speed challenge which uh low-inccome customers have issues like it opens up and then everybody's on there and so they made some tweaks to that and it apparently helped um this this person and others access the resources in a more equitable way. So, however you all went about doing that, we appreciate it and it was noted. So, thank you, >> Mr. Bar. >> Thank you. Um, last month at the McKenzie Watershed Council, we had a presentation from the UVO uh project. We had a a presentation a few years back where we donated some land for an experimental

4:40 uh project that was being put forward by a doctoral student at the UFO regarding carbon sequestration and uh habitat restoration and how they those uh intertwine. um they are three years into that project now had a very uh so they're starting to get data um that is there it was very fascinating you know they took the land that we had donated to them plotted it all out into 10 me square type of of uh plots figured out which species of tree is growing best and sequestering the carbon the best. They're also looking at the soils uh and figuring out how much carbon sequestration is going into soils. So,

5:26 this is a 10-year study that that EWS helped to to fund and move forward. Uh some very engaged graduate students working on it um out there pulling weeds and making sure and and testing all these things. So, it was very uh encouraging to see that project moving forward. I I think that at some point if we have a a light agenda time, it would be great to get an update back from them on that in the in the coming years or so, I'm sure that would be something that they'd be interested in doing. But I know our agendas are very full. But I think this is an exciting project moving forward where in the future if we can quantify the work that we're doing in habitat restoration and how that that moves into carbon se sequestration. I

6:13 think that's a really good dovetail that can go together. So we can use our money for uh habitat restoration and yet do carbon offsetting at the same time. So, it's an exciting challenging uh research project that I was very happy to see. So, that's that. Thanks. >> Okay. Um I'll jump in and then go to the general manager. I have several items. Um as many of you know, I've spent um four days back in Washington DC last week with Jason, our lobbyist, and there was 15 of us. There were people from Wasco County, from Central Lincoln, from Springfield Utility Board. It was a good cross representation. And almost without exception, every time we'd go into either a congressman or senator's office, the very first thing that the

6:58 lobbyists would say, "Well, the one of the biggest concerns is we want to make sure that the new BPA administrator has very knowledge." And everyone looked at me and said, "Well, you caused the problem." And so, because we hired the that and so that made me feel kind of good because I know we made a good decision. Um, and so, but we had some good input. Uh there was a lot of um there's some concern about the the efforts of some people trying to privatize Bonavville which created some discussion. There was discussion about the u the 13 dams in the Wamut region that have been um you know six of them generate power but they're the worst performing dams in the entire portfolio and how we are strapped. I mean, correct me if I'm wrong about paying for part of their part of their um um the programs they're doing now and and we've kind of said we would prefer that we just stop generating power because they're so

7:43 inefficient and and things such as that. um and uh and other things about Oregon um suing Bonavville and then the court just ruled last week that to increase the spill which is going to increase our rates and uh which surprised me why why Oregon inter but that's another thing that's political but um they got a temporary injunction and they're going to increase the spill out of the Bonavville system. Um but the good news is is you know everybody was predicting that um because of low snowpack in the Cascades but the Bonavville the the ca the can Canadian water system is 104%. And so they're not predicting any shortages and power shortages and and curtailment on that. So that's number one. Number two I too attended one of the college hill sessions. Great. I want to hats off to Laura Farthing and her

8:28 group. They do an absolutely outstanding job of community relations and explaining things and bringing it down to a late person's level and uh very good. Um, the other thing I just got a notice on my email um that uh they're going to start fluctuating the flow on Cougar starting March uh March 6th and they're gonna they're going to mess with the flows on the McKenzie for a week and to try and flush the salmon out and they they're concerned about the down river people um because the river is pretty low right now because well snowpack and and how what that's going to do about fluctuating the river because it's atypical. So, the core of engineers is doing that. And this just for the record, um I may not be here for the October meeting. So, Sonia, put it on your calendar. [laughter] Okay, that's an aside. General Manager,

9:15 >> President Brown, Commissioners, good evening. Just just a couple of things of note. I just wanted to clarify um a comment uh Commissioner Barovski that you made. We did not donate the land per, you know, they're we still own the land. um they're just working with us on land that we we own. So, just want to make sure some everybody knows we didn't sell land without you knowing it. Um and um you you are correct uh Commissioner Brown on the cost allocation of the WAMIT system. That's the the issue that we we've held that uh too much of the costs are allocated toward power generation and not the other purposes that those dams serve such as flood control. And so, uh, that's that's been the issue on the WAMIT, um, um, for a

10:01 number of years now. So, that's all I have this even. Oh, and, uh, Commissioner Carlson, we can probably arrange for a special tour for you since you missed it. I'm volunteering somebody behind my back probably, but um, we we'll make it happen. >> All right, the next agenda ite is correspondence. General Manager I think there was only one piece of correspondence um this evening, commissioners. Um really a legislative update. Um I do know that um Jason Huer is feeling a little under the weather. I don't know if he's actually here to answer questions or not. Um looks like he's there. He he may not show up on camera. If you had questions for Jason, there's a lot of moving

10:47 pieces here. Um and um this is only a snapshot of of the many moving pieces. So, if you had specific questions, um I'm sure Jason be happy to answer them. >> Questions? If not, then we're done with correspondence. >> Yep. >> Okay, then. Good. So, the next agenda item is going to be the public input. And I will read the preamble to the public input before I open the public input session. I would just like to welcome everybody to the public input session for this meeting. We're a public nonfor-profit organization whose charter is to deliver drinking water and electricity to our community. Although this form is not used for an open back and forth dialogue, commissioners and staff value hearing diverse perspectives and receiving community input. Speakers are asked to keep their testimony relevant to EWE business and request

11:32 that everyone share their comments in a productive and respectful manner. Should speakers or audience members become disruptive, they may be muted and or removed from the meeting. Um at this time we have I think one caller and eight signed up to inerson speakers. So when your name called you'll have three minutes to provide your comments. The public input session is now open. Looks like I have some more. Thank you. Okay. So, the first will be uh the um the um pin caller and I believe that's Doug Myers. Doug, are you there? >> Doug, >> have you unmuted your phone? Doug, >> I'm here. >> Okay. Thank you. Well, your three minutes is ready to start, so go ahead. Thank you,

12:17 >> President Brown. Members of the board, thank you for the opportunity to speak. I am Doug Meyers, an e-web rateayer and customer living in the Bethl neighborhood in Ward 6. And thank you, EW Webb, for considering ballot measure 20-373. EW provides good services and I know you make good efforts at communicating with your constituent rateayers. However, [clears throat] I strongly oppose your draft resolution, and in my judgment, you have failed spectacularly to communicate with me why I should believe your drafted position is any other than in one adverse to me in protecting the watershed from which I am provided water. It appears to me that you're simply unable or unwilling to

13:02 raise the bar. Before I grant you the benefit of the doubt, it will be necessary for Eb first to communicate the specific history of their position on each of the acts and the rules cited in your draft resolution when each of these were under consideration and prior to their effectivity. Second, have you now engaged in good faith with the proponents of measure 20-373 as your specific concerns with that measure? Communicating after you've adopted this resolution will be considered by me to be an adverse action by e webb inconsistent with your best efforts to maintain good communication with your rate paying customers. I

13:48 respectfully urge you to table this item until you fully communicated with us as recipients of the water from our watershed. Thank you for considering my views. >> Thank you, Doug. The next speaker uh will be um Rob Dickinson, followed by Nick Squires. >> Yeah. Hi, I'm Rob Dickinson speaking in support of measure 20. Should I wait until you're Yeah. Yeah. Hi, I'm Rob Dickinson speaking in support of measure 20-373. Last month, this board delayed action on a resolution opposing the measure so

14:33 there would be time for clarification and dialogue. We took that seriously. We asked EW Webb to identify the three or four specific projects or programs they believe would face inc increased legal risk. if measure 2373 was passed and to explain why that risk is greater with the measure than without it. We also asked for our staff contact so we could review the concerns quickly with legal counsel. We had our proono legal counsel standing by ready to respond to whatever we would learn. We never received those specifics. Instead, we heard only the general claim that the measure is too broad and therefore could have implications for EW. That leaves the public and us uh responding without the information needed for a fair and deliberative process. And the too broad

15:18 critique isn't persuasive on its own. Many of our most important protections are written broadly. The First Amendment doesn't spell out every circumstance, what you can say, what you can't say, where you can say it, or every limit. It sets a principle that courts apply to real situations. Broad does not mean unworkable. broad often means durable and adaptable. In fact, many of the laws uh essential laws that we rely upon to protect our community and ourselves and our public and our health and safety were broad when originally introduced. In fact, for some major projects, the rights of nature principles that are encoded in our measure could actually help EWE. Take for example the the possible Leeberg dam removal. We've

16:04 heard commissioners acknowledge that EW Webb may be sued by adjacent residents regardless of this measure. Our legal adviserss believe recognizing wershed rights could strengthen the case for removal because it benefits river health and the species that depend upon it. In other words, this measure can reinforce rather than undermine the legal and moral basis for actions that restore a river system. And in fact, if this Liber Gam project, for example, is one of the the more important or biggest projects that you're doing in a long time, having a stronger legal footing there is probably as important of an action as you could take. Ultimately, any claim under measure 20-373 would

16:49 still turn on evidence of real harm to the wershed. If EWB is operating responsibly and protecting water quality, then the measure shouldn't create meaningful new exposure. It targets actions that pollute, impair or degrade wersheds, not the everyday work of providing cleaning drinking water and stewarding the public trust. Thank you. >> Thank you, Nick Squire. Inspired by Aaron Nielsen. I make a quick note before my time starts. I only have 50% hearing in my ear. So, if my tone comes off as loud, I have a hard time moderating the volume of my voice. I'm not trying to yell and I do that a lot as a teacher. So, I just wanted to make that clear. And I'm ready. Good evening. My name is Nick and I'm an

17:35 e webb customer owner. Every one of you sits in that chair because the people of Eugene put you there and they put you there with the understanding that your promise is to them, not a corporation, not a timber company. I'm here tonight because I'm not sure that promise is being kept. Commissioner Baroski has introduced a resolution asking this board to oppose Measure 20373 to stand against the people trying to protect our water. And the people deserve to know why. On October 7th, Commissioner Baroski asked staff for a report on 20373. Exactly one week later, according to public filings, he received a $2,500 contribution from Timber Executive Dan Justina. Justina is the largest single

18:20 donor to both his eweb and city council campaigns. This accounts for roughly one quarter of his total contributions. I will let that speak for itself, but it goes deeper. Public records show that Barasi's own campaign treasurer, Jeff Green, is also the alternate finance filer for Protect Our County. The political action committee organized to defeat measure 20373. That pack is run by the president of Oregon Forestry Industry Council. Its treasurer, Eric Parish, personally contributed to Barasi City Council campaign. I don't know whether this board was made aware of these connections, but the people weren't. The chief petitioner never heard from

19:05 the chief petitioners of our measure never heard from them. Not five minutes, not five seconds. If Commissioner Baroski did not disclose disclose these financial ties to his colleagues, that is a failure of transparency. If this board knew and move forward anyway, that's a failure of accountability. Either way, the people deserved better. I'm not here to question anyone's character. I'm here ask Excuse [clears throat] me. I'm here asking for the integrity of this vote. Recusal for Commissioner Baroski is the only way to preserve it. Mackenzie River does not write campaign checks. It only gives us our drinking water protected. Thank you.

19:53 >> Thank you, Aaron Nielsen, followed by Sue Deleggy. >> Hello. Uh, my name is Aaron Nelson, a Eugene resident and EW Webb customer. I'm here as a supporter of measure 20-373 to protect Lane County's wersheds, a goal I presumed EWB and I would share in the face of the very real climate crisis. We need to have courage to make new choices that reflect the benefit of communities, the environment, and local economies over profit, corporate greed, and extraction. This bill allows for community members to demand accountability for harm caused to the watershed via corporate pollution in a court of law beyond a reasonable doubt

20:39 founded on credible science that doesn't use uncertainty as a delay tactic when evidence of harm exists. This is not writing a blank check for lawsuits. Judges still retain the authority to dismiss meritless cases and litigants can be held financially responsible for frivolous findings. If EW Webb is doing everything in its power as a water utility to protect the watershed, this measure should strengthen their position in the community with environmental protection projects, not weaken it. It therefore stands that Eb is not being transparent about where their loyalties lie. Oregon is one of the handful of states that places no limit on how much corporations can give to political campaigns and the timber industry has for years donated more to lawmakers in

21:26 this state than anywhere else in the nation. A 2021 analysis by the Oregonian Oregon Live Found. These are the same timber industry executives that donated to John Barovsky's current campaign for city council and also when he ran for the commissioner of Eb. These are the same timber companies that had their own taxes cut to cost local governments $3 billion to be able to provide services like libraries, prosecutors, and sheriff patrols. Yet, it's our bill to protect the watersheds that will bankrupt the community and lead to service cuts. Corporations want to privatize the profit profits from their extractive activities and then leave the public to shoulder the costs. rateayers shouldn't have to choose between healthy watersheds and a healthy economy and

22:12 access to services. They should be able to have both. Polluters need to pay their fair share and be held accountable for harm caused so rateayers don't have to shoulder the burden. Vote yes on measure 20-373. Thank you. >> Next is Sue Bleggy followed by Katie Geyser. Hi, I'm Sue Pelgi and I live in W 6 and I'm here in support of measure 2373. We need better protection for our watersheds. We all know that the limited protections that we now have, if they are enforced,

22:57 are not enough and allow continued degragation of our water and the natural systems that support it. I'm going to bring up another illustration of how things can go ary. Morrow County in eastern Oregon is a cautionary tale of what could come. Their water table is con contaminated many times over what is considered safe levels of nitrates causing an unprecedented number of cases of cancer and miscarriage. Mororrow County is an agricultural area where Amazon built an enormous data center that uses massive amounts of water to cool their computers. The evaporation caused by this process

23:42 increases nitrate levels from agricultural runoff many times over safe levels. Today, mega tech companies are in a land race as they rush to build capacity. These giant companies increased investment in data centers by 81% in 2024. Who will protect Lane County from this type of development and pollution? We all know that corporations are not people and that giant corporations with Wall Street addresses only pretend to compare care about local communities with fancy window dressing. This kind of real threat from these types of companies is what e webb should

24:29 be concerned about. Measure 2373 will help. As board members, I urge you to take a stand in support of this measure. You as the e webb board need to be forwardinking, muster moral courage, and do the right thing. Thank you. >> Thank you. Katie Geyser followed by Peter Dragovich. Hello, my name is Katie Geyser and I've been an e-web rate pair for almost 40 years. In that time, I have been amazed to watch your crews at work out in our

25:14 community, especially in times of storm recovery. The public has much at stake in the quality of service provided by EWIB. I see this recognized in your recent comments in the Eugene Springfield lookout on March 2nd. You have voiced concern that measure 2373 will quote detract from the public trust in service pro in service providers unquote. Very little needs to be mentioned in response to this as we recently learned that the author of the board's resolution is backed by funding from our opponents. This is not a trustbuilding experience regarding a public entity.

26:02 The board has the ability and power to move beyond this situation and lead our community forward in supporting our environmental rightsbased measure. We live in times that are rapidly changing and we are being called upon to embolden our actions and find new leadership. The public is ripe for such change. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, quote, "Protecting our nation's healthy watersheds makes economic sense. Healthy intact watersheds provide many ecosystem services that are necessary for our social and economic well-being.

26:47 Preventing impairments in healthy watersheds protects valuable ecosystem services that provide economic benefits to society and prevent expensive replacement and restoration costs. Measure 2373 is in many ways an ally of e webb. We encourage you to support our measure. >> Thank you. Peter Dragovich followed by Michelle Hullman.

27:32 >> Peter Dragovich. Ward five regarding resolution 2607 opposing the watershed's bill of rights. If the language in the bill of rights is overly broad and vague as your resolution claims, the measure, if passed by the public, will be tested in the courts. If the courts agree with your assessment, it will be struck down and your perceived problem goes away. If the courts uphold the measure, then you are wrong in your assessment. If it is in conflict with other laws as your resolution claims, it will be tested in the courts. If a court strikes it down, your perceived problem goes away. If the court upholds the measure, then you are wrong in your assessment. The resolution states, "The bill of

28:18 rights, quote, could hinder existing conservation efforts and ultimately detracts from the public's trust in water service providers." End quote. This is the most non-rusting, fear-mongering, anti-public statement I've come across in a while. If an issue arises, explain it to the public and either succeed in convincing the public your position is just or not. Don't make a statement that presupposes passage of the measure will ultimately detract from the public's trust in water service providers. Public trust is earned issue by issue with engagement, not by avoidance.

29:03 Consider where in day-today life is will ultimately detract from the public's trust a valid statement. Does the possibility of a fender bender ultimately detract from public trust in transportation? Does the possibility of a bank robbery ultimately detract from public trust in banking? Divorce from marriage, bruises from sports. This feels like reaching or a reason when there is no substance behind the thought. The public needs to decide if the measure aligns with their desires without I say this respectfully without your misleading, ill-reasoned, heavy

29:48 thumb on the scales of public debate. Vote no on resolution 267. >> Thank you. Michelle Hullman, pill by Bernardet Barasa. I'm Michelle Holman. I'm one of the three chief petitioners for measure 20-2 uh 373. Current environmental protections are insufficient to protect Lane County's watersheds from corporate harm. Do you think it's right that big corporations

30:33 from outside of Lane County who have more should have more power and privilege to do harm in our communities than we have to protect ourselves from those harms. We wrote this law because we want better protections for nature and for all nature's creatures, including ourselves. [clears throat] We want to we want a new baseline based on rights of the entire watershed. Measure 2373 is not vague. It's fundamental. All fundamental rights are broad by design so they can respond to new threats, including the Bill of Rights. The right to clean water is no different. Courts interpret broad rights every day. What this measure does is set a clear priority. Watershed health is not subordinate to convenience or

31:18 incremental damage. Current laws regulate pollution rather than prohibit it. Toxic chemicals in our wersheds and water supplies pose measurable risks to communities. The real danger is pollution, not protection. It is reasonable to promote stra stronger protections that are long overdue to safeguard public health and the environment. There are 668 reported nature protective initiatives in 60 countries across the globe including 179 in the US according to the ecojurous prudence monitor. And now we have the very real threat of big AI data centers considering our county. Data centers require vast amounts of water for cooling which can strain local resources

32:05 and lead to health issues in nearby communities. Measure 23-73 is needed. It's clear that current environmental protection laws are not robust enough to protect Lane County from data centers. Measure 23-373 will be on the May 19th ballot. E-WIB should remain neutral. Let the voters decide and let the democratic process play out. >> Thank you. Bernardet Barasa followed by Jim New. Good evening. My name's Bernardet Barasa and I'm aware of a project that Eb is

32:53 working on to pump water from the Wamut in the near future to supplement what is now available from the McKenzie. Well, since the Wamut is not as clean as what you currently obtain from the McKenzie, I'm guessing that there's going to be a large increase in the cost of filtering and purifying the water for your customers, unless your customer is going to be a big data center. Um, our measure 2343 comes into play as some of the entities who are currently adding pollution pollutants to the Wamment would now be if this law amendment passed, they would now be required to

33:39 clean up their act and um any any pollution they add to the WAMIT, which your you know your rateayers wouldn't bear the cost of of cleaning that up. It would be on them. Um I know Eugene's sewage treatment plant is downstream from where you currently pull water for your rate payers. Um so that's not an issue, but what about the sewage treatment that goes into the Wamut from Cottage Grove and Goan and all of the rural places that um feed into the Wamut. There's there's more um like cattle grazing,

34:26 uh agricultural pollutants from people who don't grow organically. Uh I made a short list. Uh there there's been gold mining going on down in Cottage Grove area for for decades. And that pollutants that have been go ongoing and seep into the river over time, it'll be on on ew webb to clean that up. But there would be a little help if if our measure passed. Um anyway, and kind of the way that that we're envisioning it is that people don't get to pollute the water in the first place, so then it doesn't cost so

35:11 much to clean it up. Anyway, um I'd like to use my final minutes to really um applaud all the people who spoke before me. They they speak a lot of truth. Um, and I especially uh was impressed with uh Nick Squires and the gentleman whose name I didn't get. And anyway, everybody everybody did a good job and I hope you're listening. And the recusal part seems uh like a real decent thing to do. >> Thank you, Jim. New followed by Patricia Hart.

35:58 Good evening, commissioners and staff. My name is Jim New. I live in Ward 7. Uh first like to congratulate um EW on their ODOE v charging grants for your vehicles. That was good to see that. I find it ironic that the proponents and opponents of the wershed bill of rights measure 2373 all want the same result for our county. clean and safe water, drinking water protections and effective management of our watershed and ecosystem. Folks who gathered thousands of signatures to get clean water security on the ballot have tirelessly advocated for c our country county's watershed much like EW since the early 1900s. This measure looks to secure existing laws that ensure the integrity of water

36:43 resources that are being stripped and dismantled by the current federal administration as well as local polluters. Just last year, the EPA removed Clean Water Act protection for millions of acres of wetlands and streams, enacted a dirty water rule that undermines state water quality improvements, allowing the destruction of water bodies that serve drinking water to over 117 million Americans and repeal the endangerment findings that will increase air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. Ewb claims the watershed measure bill of rights is vague and broad in language and that it poses unwarranted risks to efficient management of water resources could hinder conservation efforts and detracts from the public's trust. That quote and

37:28 the mention of anticipated significant legal complications and increased regulations from EWB doesn't get much broader and vague and scare tactic messaging than the claim eb has of the watershed measure. Robert McFarland writes in his book is a river alive. I sometimes wonder if the rights of nature is just serving as a proxy in an asymmetrical sym boy proxy in an asymmetrical power situation that already exists irrespective of the river's actuality for it not be happening not just among indigenous communities or among artists and writers and fringe weirdos like us but also actors, corporate actors,

38:14 industrial actors, the whole past the power holders. We need to quit being actors and to work collectively and embrace the water bit watershed bill of rights. Thank you. >> Patricia Hine, followed by our last speaker, Joel Maul. >> Good evening, commissioners. My name is Patty Hine. I'm here on behalf of 350 Eugene in support of ballot measure 2373. 350 Eugene has been educating our community about the effects of global warming and advocating for solutions for over a decade. Our goal is to avoid the catastrophic breakdown of ecological systems caused by an overheating planet. As you may know, 350 is the safe upper

39:00 limit of parts per million of climate warming carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Before the industrial revolution, the ppm was 280 and now it's hovering around 430 and rising. We're setting temperature and drought records every day and the Earth has exceeded the 1.5C limit set 10 years ago at Paris. All the indicators of a healthy planet are accelerating in exactly the wrong direction. We need bold policy changes now to res re reverse these t trends. This measure will not solve climate change and neither will it stop all corporate harms but it is a step in the right direction and fra frames a more

39:46 holistic way of addressing environmental harms. For example, our coastal rainforest is one of nature's greatest climate solutions for its natural sequestration and storage of CO2. But we're racing to clearcut these irreplaceable forests at an alarming pace at exactly the moment we need them most. Despite the devastating effects on humans, animals, and plants, and water, we also spray poisons on these areas from helicopters. We know this practice is harmful and this measure can address such harms. Detractors, especially those funded by the timber industry, say that this law will bring about lawsuits and

40:31 litigation, but that argument is the default response whenever a new law limiting corporate power is introduced. We see this measure as a step in the right direction. We support establishing greater protections for water and watersheds. We support holding corporations to higher standards for their industrial activities. We must insist on new laws to protect our communities and nature from harm because the laws we have now are not doing the job. The environmental challenges we face are unprecedented. The window to act is closing. Nature is not the commodity to be monetized.

41:16 Unlike corporations, nature's alive and we must stop slowly killing it. We must change our thinking now and we should start by protecting watersheds. Thank you. them all. >> Chair Brown, commissioners, Joel Wall, Mackenzie River Trust. Um I'm not here to speak on the uh aforementioned described um proposal. I will just say though that on Tuesday, April 7th, the Mackenzie River Trust and several of their partners in the Upper WAMIT Stewardship Network are sponsoring an open public forum with both pro and con. And we're trying to get somebody to speak to governance at the state, local,

42:02 and national level at a site to be determined likely one of the high schools in town. We just have some logistics. So, Tuesday, um, April 7th. Um, we are also in June going to have Robert McFarland here as a speaker. he has done far more than his latest book and look forward to that. I'm here tonight because I can't be here in April and probably not May. So, I wanted to thank Frank um for the leadership that you've shown and encourage the commissioners to follow the lead under his leadership that has seen great investment in the Mackenzie River wershed with the aforementioned uh development of the water site on the main stem wall at just below the confluence. something you've heard me encourage before, continued and growing investment in in the health of the Middle Fork and the Coast Fork Rivers. I

42:48 think many of you know that we're in the midst of a public community, a community engagement, partner engagement at this stage uh uh program for the development of programs at the WMA Confluence. Yesterday, members of the Springfield Utility Board staff, EWE staff were in one of our conference rooms meeting with uh a number of other partners talking about how we can use that larger area at the WMA confluence for both protection of drinking water by investing upstream in both forks, working with the core of engineers who is manipulating dams differently, changes in sedimentation, and again, it was just a perfect example of the collaborative spirit and and meaningful action that has been taken under your leadership, Frank, so just wanted to thank you for all you've done for us. Uh, and it's been hard. You've

43:34 done two things. You have consistently supported staff by baking that investment in watershed health into the annual e webb budget and that goes miles. But you also pivoted really quickly and very creatively following the holiday farm fire in a way that made a big difference in our ability to invest in nature-based solutions in the in the upper Mackenzie River wershed. that's paying off now as we're starting to see more sedimentation following the fire. And we're going to see a lot more. There's no question about it. So, I hope that um the commissioners and all of the staff will continue to to see that legacy and build upon it. And I just want to thank you for that. And with permission to approach, I would just like to give you a small bit of thanks. It's a Mackenzie River Trust hat. If you don't like the color or the fabric, you

44:19 can come and we have a few different ones at our office. Is that a joke? >> You done? >> That is all. Thank you. >> Okay. Well, now we have a new thing. Thank Frank. >> So, >> it's just great. Let's do this. >> Okay. Well, that will close. There's nobody else signed up. Holly. >> No. >> Okay. I'm going to close the public hearing and uh public comment period and ask for comments from commissioners. Um Sonia, >> well, thank you everyone for coming out tonight. Um I appreciate uh the the passion. I appreciate the

45:06 effort. I appreciate all of the um the work that has gone into putting this measure and the the people that have spent countless hours getting signatures and and all of that for the for this and it warrants additional attention. I mean, looking at what we do here, I mean, I've spent almost 10 years of my life on this board, coming here every month, reading 500page packets when I could be sleeping or spending time with my family to help protect the watershed and the environment that that we in the community that we share. And it's it's so hard to look at this and say, "Okay, well, we have this measure

45:51 that that from the outset it sounds wonderful." I mean, from my perspective, it sounds wonderful. I mean, we don't want these chemicals in the community. We don't want people harmed by that. I support that. I actually just spent the last eight days, most of 10 hours a day, writing grants for watershed protection education. And so for me, this is such a hard measure to look at when underlying it. There are other challenges and I I asked for the pause on it last month. One, I was sick and couldn't be here in person. Um, and two, I wanted additional time because, you know, there are different viewpoints. There's the

46:36 viewpoints of the people who put the measure out there. there's the viewpoints the of their opponents and it's hard from an e-web perspective to take any of that and not think okay well it's biased in some way right so what that allowed time to do and and I did meet with the proponents of the measure um I also attended other forums so there was a forum that they were invited to there was a forum that the chamber held I attended both of those just to get feedback um I also went um we took information from the proponents of the measure and and sent those questions to our lawyers to get feedback. It was incorporated in it because the only way to get from from

47:21 my perspective I'm not a I'm not a lawyer. I don't know how this plays out in the courts. All I know is that every time we have to try something in the courts, it costs millions and millions of dollars. And I am loathed to put the line in the pockets of lawyers any more than it already happens because we put the first time I ever voted for an rate increase was right after the holiday farm fire and it was $4 million to shore up our water protection efforts. I mean, we put more money into our watershed protection efforts than any other organization publicly in this community and we weren't even consulted about this at all. And we provide the main water source for the people who

48:07 drink water here. So, for me, that's very frustrating that we weren't even talked to. And that's part of the problem with the ballot measure process is that it doesn't allow for that iteration. So now we're here. We're at this place where people who with wonderful intentions have gone through all of this effort to get it, but they didn't get feedback from other people that it's going to harm. This could actually harm other watershed protection efforts that we have. And that's not from the logging industries lawyers. That's not from the Pope. That's from Eb lawyers looking at this measure and saying what the impacts would be. They're not beholden to anybody else but us and our constituents. the people who we have to report to and pay rates to. And so for me, this is just it's

48:52 incredibly unfortunate that it does have these other consequences. I mean, broad and undefining terms, expanded standing to sue, fee shifting provisions, daily penalties, these potential potential conflicts worth with our established state and federal law. I mean, for me, this vote tonight is just to let our rateayers know that it could have a negative impact on them. And I I feel beholden to let them know that that that risk is out there. I have constituents that come to me constantly and talk about how they can't even pay their bill and they're going to lose their power, which means their food goes bad, which means they, you know, maybe they can't get up and get to work on time. like all of these cascading events

49:37 that happen and I have to look out for them too. And so for me, getting the information from the lawyers that represent Eb again, not beholden to any other interests, they are beholden to our interests, confirmed that there are some real big problems with this bill. And it tears me up inside that that this is where we're at because I care very much and and support the efforts of pollution prevention, watershed protection, but I don't think that this personally is the bill that will the measure that will get us there. And I would gleefully work with them after this pass, after this all goes forward to work on something else that that gives us the protection

50:23 and works with our partners that actually do watershed protection. I had other watershed protection people that work up river that contacted me and were also concerned about how it would impact their work. I mean, the fact that it's going to shut us down from an environmental perspective is very troubling. And that's I know I'm well over my time, and thank you for indulging me, but that's how I got to this place. And it wasn't because we were hiding anything. It wasn't because I didn't talk to the various people. I did a lot of of soularching on this because I think that's what this community deserves. Thank you, >> Dr. Ros. Nothing, Mindy. Tim. >> Um, I know that this is Thank you, Chair. I know that this is our next agenda item, so I I'll keep my comments brief. Um, and and but I just want to

51:08 thank you for for coming out and sharing your perspective. Um, my time on uh this commission so far. We've we've only had a significant amount of folks come out uh only a few times. And so, I really do appreciate you you coming and sharing your perspectives. So, thank you. >> Anything general manager? Okay, that will conclude the comments. I have nothing to say. Uh, the next agenda item is consideration of resolution 2607, watershed bill of rights, county measure 373. Um, Frank, you want to lead this discussion or you want me to? >> I might prefer you lead this. >> Okay. We know what's in front of us. We've heard public testimony. We've heard in depth um response from our

51:54 legal counsel which we rely on and uh which we've all give different weight to. So I'm going to go around and and uh by commissioner and just see where they are and then we're going to call call the questions. So Mindy, would you like to start? So, I agree with the petitioners here that industrial and agricultural runoff needs to be stemmed and that polluters should pay for their cleanup 100%. I back that 100%. I also believe that Eb has been excellent stewards of the wershed and we've shown that through our investments. the idea that we've decided to make sure that the water stays clean instead of treating the water after we taking after taking it in and cleaning

52:40 it up. Um, but I do believe after hearing from our attorneys that this this ballot measure is too broad because so much of what we do impacts the watershed. means even though we know that we're doing good work, it still opens us up to a whole host of litigation. Um, people litigate all the time. We do we pay millions of dollars in fighting lawsuits or settling with people or whatever. And I feel that if this were to pass, that would just increase that kind of litigation. Um, and it would not only cost us more money, but it might delay important time-sensitive work. Um,

53:26 and I also want to just speak to the um the concern that we didn't um name out all the different projects or programs that this would impact. But because our work touches the wershed in so many ways, both in terms of um our drinking water, but also our um hydro projects up river, I just feel like there's there's too much to say to to list out programs or projects that would be affected by this. So, I would love to see another iteration of this. Um, I would like to see one that, like Sonia said, that is um written in conjunction with the people that work on the watershed because I do think that we all want the same thing. And so, um, I am I I support

54:17 the the resolution that we have, but sadly it doesn't I don't feel good about it. >> [laughter] >> Thank you, chair. Um, uh, to the comments about, uh, financial donations to another commissioner, I'm not going to make comments on that. Um, that's outside of, I think, my scope as a commissioner here at this board meeting. So, I just want to make sure that that's heard. Um, we have a responsibility to protect our rateayers and protect our environment and protect our community. and that includes our wersheds. And I agree with my fellow commissioners u who have

55:02 spoken up so far that this measures language is broad and challenging to so many different things. Last month I said um and I'll say it again that I believe that this measure is incomplete, that it has not been fully thought through um or that all of the different perspectives of it have not been considered. And I think part of that is that um other direct providers to our uh watershed and to our rivers were not communicated with. And so a a question that comes up for example that I have in mind is our watershed uh territory our watershed um the watershed

55:47 lines do not follow county lines. So what happens when something's cut in half? I I'm I'm it just is unclear to me. There's so many other holes that I see in this, including um I I we heard testimony about uh folks who uh that there's ways to address lawsuits and that frivolous lawsuits will not go forward. I don't have that confidence and I believe that it will result in more lawsuits to this agency and to our community. And I think that two direct outcomes will come of that. One is that likely rateayer or rate increases to our customers overall because of the many amount of lawsuits and two and which I find to be extremely troubling is that anytime a new program or effort will

56:34 come forward from e webb there will be a pause or delay uh of that effort because we would be afraid of lawsuits or other issues at that point. That's my fear is that the good efforts that e webb does um would be delayed or even paused or stopped before they even make it out uh because of this measure. The the hope that it will be the barriers of this will be figured out through the court system or through our county commissioners I think is is just a pre final conversation that that should have occurred and should be a part of the measure language itself. Uh rather than

57:21 relying on our court system and relying on our county commissioners. >> Um I I am going to join my my fellow commissioners. I regardless of how this moves forward, I would love to work on a measure that addresses the needs of our community that gives our water rights and that gives the uh our our community the opportunity to advocate for themselves. But I'm not willing to do so. are not willing to advocate for that with this particular measure knowing that it could likely raise rates and pause our incredibly necessary programs uh and and efforts in in the watershed. So, I'll be supporting this resolution. Um and um

58:12 yeah, thank you for coming out. Thank you for sharing your perspective. My uh I know I'm a little over time, but my where I am on this in particular is exclusively the administrative part of it. I support everything that you're saying of addressing climate change, addressing our polluters, and fighting on this. It is just the process that has given me pause and um I think it's my responsibility as a commissioner to let my constituents know that this may cause significant harm. Thank you, >> John Barski. >> Thank you. Thank you guys for coming out. Um, again, this is something that I don't think any of our of us here sitting at this board take lightly. Uh, protecting

58:57 our watershed is something that this board was founded on 95 years ago. Um, it's my fiduciary duty as a board member to look out for my rate payers, my constituents, and the organization as a whole. the information that I've received through uh reading and studying the ordinance or the ballot measure, what we've gotten from the from our legal uh review of how it may affect us going forward has led me to uh this point. As

59:47 far as the the drafting of the resolution, there may be there may be issues with it. And I I can concur with that. I because because this was a ballot measure, staff wasn't able to draft the resolution. That was something that was done by me in consultation with with legal help. But I'm not a ordinance drafter or a resolution drafter. I did my best and if there's vagodies in there, I apologize for that, but I I put something before us that I felt uh was best for the the organization as a whole.

1:00:32 I've been following this ballot measure for well over two years when it first started gathering petitions. I did not come to it lightly. I've been following it all along. Contribut contri contributions to my campaign for city council are completely unrelated to my vote tonight. Supporting rel um I'm I'm here exclusively in my role as an e-web commissioner. Um so just let it be known that that has nothing to do with how I came to form my decision on this. I have researched this

1:01:19 and felt that it has impacts well beyond what the the petitioners are hoping to achieve. And so with that I would be in favor of the resolution before us. However, if my other commissioners feel that it would be appropriate for me to recuse myself, I would be happy to do that. But like I said, anything that I have to do with my campaign for city council has nothing to do with the vote that I'm taking tonight. >> Thank you. I'll go last like I always do. I'd like to thank uh John for you bringing this to our attention, but it was coming to our attention anyhow. And I'd like to thank Sonia for delaying it. So, make sure we had the extra time to

1:02:06 vet this properly and to give this the consideration it deserves. Um, there are some people in this room that can attest to my commitment to clean water. That's why I'm here. I still I joke that I still don't know what a kilowatt is. I probably don't. I'd want that test. But more importantly, um, I've walked the talk. I'm I've I've written a lot of checks. I've spent thousands and thousands of dollars cleaning up the rivers, hiring the sheriff's work crew, and getting work crews out. and and some of you have been lucky enough to participate with me in doing that. And uh I've physically cleaned up the rivers for decades. Can't do it physically anymore, but I still I'm I'm probably the best clean water proponent you've ever seen. But I also understand ambiguity and I understand uncertainty and and uncertainty and ambiguity creates a a risk and uh you the

1:02:52 inference that you know about the donation. I mean, we're acting on behalf of the rateayers and and to to take that to that that that imperence would say that no rateayer could make a campaign contribution because but our actions tonight are in the best interest of the rateayers. And so when you say that you can't support somebody because I mean we're we're doing this for the rateayers and for what I believe is the the good decision. If they come back and say they've got a better ordinance that's well written that has some specifics and the metrics in it and involve us in the conversation, I'm all for that. But the way it's written, I can't support it. So I too am going to support resolution 2607. So with that, I'm going to say, is there anybody else that has anything for the good of the order? If not, I'm going to

1:03:38 call the question. If not, then I'm going to call the question as all those in favor of passing resolution 2607 regarding the watershed bill of rights signify by saying I and raising your hand. I >> opposed. None. Carries unanimously. That concludes this agenda item. Thank you very much. Now, something a little easier. Consent calendar A. >> I move to approve consent calendar A. Is there a second? >> None. >> Five. >> Item five. Okay. Is so consent calendar A absent. Item five. Um all those in favor signify by saying I

1:04:24 >> opposed. Okay. Number five. Who staff gets to talk to that or John? Uh this is just something uh that I would hope to get maybe a memo on at some point. So this is the the acquisition of a new dump truck. Um and the the question I have in the in the it says the acquis acquisition replaces one existing dump truck with generation utility that has surpassed the useful life thereby ensuring continued operation. I have no problem with this. I I just would like to know um and it's probably somewhere in buried somewhere, but what is our uh replacement uh schedule on on these types of equipments and those types of things? And and this could come in a

1:05:09 memo or whatever because I'm I'm sure different equipment has different things, but but um I know that in the past on other organizations that I've I've dealt with when there were budgetary uh problems, you know, one of the areas that they looked to was saying, "Okay, maybe this truck can go one more year type of a deal." So, I just want to kind of get an idea of what our uh lifetime of our our hard assets are and how how the replacement schedule goes. I have no problem with buying a new dump truck. >> I I was uh >> I can answer that. >> Yeah, I was just going to say that we can get you the a lot of detail regarding this. Um Gary can uh who's our

1:05:54 fleet um uh supervisor can elaborate a little bit further tonight, but a lot of this depends on the the hours of the vehicle, not just the years. So there's a combination there. And we do a lot of tracking on the trade-off between capital replacement and increased maintenance costs. And so we'll we'll be happy to get you a full report on and it could vary class to class. >> Absolutely. Gary wants to elaborate since he's >> may since we've got time and we've got man here. If you want if you want to step to the microphone, state your name for the record and maybe you can eliminate a staff report by just giving John the answer. >> Good evening, Commissioner. Uh Gary Lynch, I am the fleet supervisor and

1:06:42 I've been with EW about 17 years. To answer your question, on our dump trucks, we look at miles hours and how they're used and we look at age. Our typical replacement on a dump truck starts as early as 15 years. And when we have more of a minimum maximum when they get up to around 18 years, we really start taking serious looks on them. In this particular case, we're over the 20 year mark. One of the things we look at is it capable of doing the job that we intend to. When this dump truck was purchased 20 years ago with the first initial on here up where it uses, we use this truck on the Mackenzie road and highway 26. If you know, traffic is more and more. So over time, we've increased

1:07:28 trailers. We put bigger back host. And one of the biggest challenges the crews brings up to us is we get on the road, but we can't get up to speed. We can't maintain road speed on there. So that's probably one of the drivers we looked at. We we've had a lot of purchases trying to get our line crews buying bucket trucks and getting some things in order to where they could perform on it. And we've delayed this particular truck for years and it's up to the cycle where we're able to do that. We anticipate in the next couple years we're going to be backing off, but this is the year that we kind of figured that we can't take this one any further. >> Great. Thank you very much for that. That's that's encouraging. when I heard 15 to 20 years, that's uh that's great. You know, if we can get 15 to 20 years

1:08:14 out of a a heavy piece of equipment, that's very encouraging to me. Um and I and I and I and I know that you guys do good work and we'll maintain it to the best of your ability and keep it going. But I again, I just wanted to kind of learn more. That's how that's how we make good decisions is by asking questions and learning more. So, thank you for answering that. And with that, I'll I'll reply to Frank and give you a replacement table that we use for all our equipment so as you go in future board decisions, you know, kind of what we look for when we look at it. Thank you. Frank, >> you had a last word. >> Yeah, I just had add one more thing. I appreciate and um Gary knows this. I did want to acknowledge the comment you made about sometimes you turn dials when you have budget constraints. And um I know

1:09:00 that Gary has responded and altered uh plans and decisions uh based on uh interactions with assistant general manager Deborah Hart when it comes to looking at budgets and um over time feel really comfortable uh with the process that we have that looks from time to time what's the trade-off and the constraints on the capital side versus the O andM side and and turning those dials when necessary. And I did want to acknowledge that and it's a tool we'll continue to use going forward. >> Yeah. Thank you. And and and I'm a huge proponent of of uh maintaining our assets and and making sure our assets are in the in being

1:09:45 replaced at the appropriate time. I I I'm very much in favor of that. Like I said, I just wanted to kind of get that learn about, you know, okay, this is how long we can get out of a dump truck. This is how long we can get out of a backot. This is how long we can get out of a lightning truck. Right. So, thank you. >> Okay. I will enter >> entertain a motion to for item number five on consent calendar A. >> Move to approve item number five on consent calendar A. >> Second. >> Discussion. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Passes. Consent calendar B. >> Move to approve consent calendar B. >> Second. >> Discussion. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Passes unanimously.

1:10:30 Next agenda item, Lisa. Supportive consent. Scott Jacobs, DBA CH2M Hill, Carmen Smith, Engineering Services. >> I was originally going to stay at my seat, but I understand there are some questions, so you don't have to crane your head. I'm moving up front. Um I am here uh today to just give you a little bit of context around the the pretty large consent item we have um on the calendar this evening. Um knowing that our Jacob's contract is a very large request for funds, the board understandably has had questions um about the scope and cost of implementing the license requirements at Carmen Smith, particularly around fish passage at Trailbridge Dam. We thought it could

1:11:15 be helpful to provide you with an opportunity to ask questions prior to taking action to increase the authorized spending limit. I'm going to give you just a real brief synopsis of what you're seeing tonight. Um, but in short, the scope of the license required projects has expanded over time for two primary reasons. Uh, mandates from FK to address dam safety concerns and regulatory requirements for protect protected species. These increases in scope have created additional cost. For context, um Jacobs, who's been our design engineer for many, many years, has completed a significant amount of design work for uh Carmen Smith license implementation already. Projects include completed design for the load bank and replacement of the Trailbridge debris boom. And prior to the discovery of

1:12:02 sinkholes and trailbridge reservoir, they completed 90% design packages for both upstream and downstream fish passage. Once the sinkhole analysis was complete, we reinitiated design of the upstream and downstream fish passage projects in 2025. These designs are being revised to incorporate the risk reduction measures associated with the sink holes and revised seismic and stability requirements. So, the consent calendar this evening um requests funds of 4.55 million to authorize work that's already underway on those projects I just talked about, including the load bank. Now, as you know, we worked closely with federal fish agencies in 2025 to address concerns about challenging hydraulics in the tail race um the area right before

1:12:49 or excuse me, right downstream of um Trailbridge Dam. Those challenging hydraulics raised some concerns that the trap and hall facility in that location, which is currently required by the license, would be ineffective. The outcome of those agency discussions is to move that trap and hall facility a few hundred feet downstream and um build another structure called the tail race barrier. That change requires additional design work. So in addition to the 4.55 million um that was it's already committed to to projects and would note is just under the 25% threshold for bringing u things back to the board. In addition, this evening we are asking for an additional 3.6 6 million for that

1:13:34 work for the revised location of the trap and hall facility in addition to some other projects including um Smithway expansion project uh to incorporate updated seismic requirements and then we need additional construction and dam safety review support for some of those previously designed projects. So um lastly we understand and share the board's concerns about cost. Um that's a concern for us as well. Um because we've had a recent modification to our plans for fish passage and are currently in the rel you know the design phase. We don't have uh fully updated construction cost estimates yet. Um but we will be including estimated costs and for both design and construction in the capital

1:14:20 improvement um plan uh progress in July. And then we'll also be providing a more comprehensive update to the board um later this year when we have a better sense of those full construction costs and how those compare to the initial budget. >> Okay. Um I know I have questions if I may. Yes. >> Okay. I jump the queue. Um okay. So, um, this is a significant increase and cost is, you know, when we first back in 2008 got our permit or whatever it was, uh, Carmen wasn't financially feasible. We had Ford powered prices of $220 a megawatt. Good thing is we had the survey problem. Everything got delayed. The market crashed and we're back to this now. So, here we have all this big

1:15:06 cost. This is just designed on one little aspect of it. And so, you know, all this money another 40% above what it is. But how I mean, I how does the how do we know we're getting a good deal? I mean, I I'm going to use the example of when the the state of Oregon decided to seismically upgrade the capital. They started at 300 million. They're at a billion right now because they keep telling them we we got to do more. We got to do more. How do we know we're getting a good deal on this 46% increase? How do I tell a rateayer that this is a competitive? Because this bid wasn't competitive. They just told us what it was going to cost and then if I'm wrong, tell me. But um how do we know that we're not, you know, this is a good bang for the buck? >> How do we know that? And I don't mean to

1:15:52 phmill, but uh I got to look out for the rateayers because every one of these >> is going to cost somebody some money. This money just isn't going to come out of nowhere. >> Yeah, it it is a good question, you know. Um and I would would answer it this way. Okay, Jacob's been working on this project for a very very long time. They have a lot of >> sight specific knowledge uh that they incorporate into our designs. Um if you're talking about alternatives, would we get a better deal from somebody else? I can almost guarantee you that getting somebody else up to speed um to be able to do this work um as efficiently as Jacobs is able to do would probably not be cost-ffective. That said, um we do have a pretty robust process for uh looking at bids. We don't

1:16:40 they don't just tell us what it's worked. They give what it's what it's going to cost. They give cost breaks downs that are thoroughly looked at by our engineering team and our um and Patty Bole, our our contracts supervisor. So, they're not just, you know, giving us a a sheet and saying this is what it's going to cost. It's broken down very very detailed and that's reviewed um by us and uh to ensure that we feel comfortable with what they're proposing. >> We don't have an owner's rep. I mean kind of like the private sector if you're doing a 20 or $30 million project. You hire an independent third party that doesn't have a dog in the fight to tell you whether or not this makes sense. We [clears throat] do have a dam safety's owner owners rep >> dam safety but I'm talking about this

1:17:26 >> but but most of the um the cost increases relative to this project are um from dam safety requirements. There's some things associated with protected species certainly. Um, but our our dam safety owners rep and our internal dam safety team is working with the Karman license implementation team and Jacobs to determine the scope of the dam safety, you know, requirements needed in the design. So, for for that portion, I feel pretty confident that we've had a lot of eyes on it and we feel pretty good that we're moving in the right in the right direction. to my last one, and I hate to say this, but I'm gonna say it. What if we said no? What would happen? >> Uh, what if we said no to um to

1:18:12 incorporating the damn safety? >> No. About about this. Just say, look, this thing is out of control. We need to cut costs because someday >> we're going to have to start saying this. This thing is keep costs keep going up and up and up and we're pushing our rateayers to a point where they're going to they're going to be crying more at the podium than they are already and and out in the field and we our job is to represent them. And when I hear people take tell me that they can't afford $2 a month, that tears me apart. And this this going to have to we're going to have to push this back somehow someday. >> Yeah. So, if if the board were not to approve the contract this evening, um what that means is we wouldn't be able to advance work on license required projects. Many of you know the road we've been down over the last several

1:18:58 years by being delayed due to dam safety reasons in implementing our license required projects. that has actually cost um e-web rate payers a lot of money in uh litigation costs and you know a lot of additional um sort of other ancillary scope changes over time. >> Uh I wouldn't recommend that because I I think ultimately that that would cost more money um over time. Um, your question is a fair question though and that's why we um have committed to come back to the board later this year with more with a more comprehensive look of what the Karman license implementation program looks like, what it costs, how does that compare to what uh you know the original estimates were,

1:19:45 more information on on where those scope changes have occurred and I think what I'm hearing from you is also a desire to uh have some information around how we answer that question is is this still a project that EWB wants to invest in? And in order to do that, we really need to look across the scope of our portfolio and and how that relates to what other replacement power might look like. >> I mean, I'm going to support it and we're too far into it. I mean, it would be a good business decision. It's just that at some point this board or at least I'm going to start pushing back and I just want to make sure that message gets I'm not picking on you but I told you I was going to pick on you but about costs because we have to be cost conscious and I know that and

1:20:31 you're going to have to push back on them and say you're going to have to sharpen your pencil and knock 500,000 bucks off this or 50,000 or whatever. Every dollar counts. So thank you very much for tolerating me, >> John. Thank you. Um, yeah, it's kind of like you sign a contract with Burke and with the settlement parties and then you've got to live up to that contract and things change. Um, so that's kind of where we're at. Like my question is is not to lease, it's going to be to Deborah. Where where's the money coming from?

1:21:16 >> Primarily primarily in the long-term financial plan, Carmen will be bond funded and uh yes, bonds put pressure on rates as well as cash funding and I am hearing you all uh on the topic of affordability for sure. Okay. So, just to to be clear, so possibly some of those bonds that we asked the city of Eugene for last month could be part this could be paid for out of part of that bonding capacity that we we got approved from the city. >> I expect that Karman expenses will be coming out of uh those bonds when they're issued in June. >> Any anybody else have any comments or questions? If not, then I'm Frank. Go ahead.

1:22:02 >> Just just one comment. U President Brown, commissioners, um it's it's not directly related to only this project. One of the things that we are looking at and we we think it's it's prudent to do this is to look at a number of different capital scenarios going forward. Um, this is not the only big project that the electric utility will be faced with and uh we want to have a really good understanding of the trade-offs when we come to the board and uh not only look at this strategically um but also uh relative to what we can afford and the trade-offs we're going to need to make um going into the future. And so some of that may start um with the long-term financial plan, capital

1:22:48 updates, but we know that we're going to have to turn dials in in various directions uh to be able to balance the fact that yes, we do have have assets that we need to to upgrade, modernize, maintain. We have made commitments around licenses uh but we also know that there are uh constraints and other values that are at tension with that including affordability. And so, um, there will be more to come on that. I know we're working on that. And so, um, that's that's something that, um, um, you'll start to see a little bit more of when it comes to looking at future scenarios. >> John, you had a comment? >> Yeah, I just one more question. Uh, Smith R reservoir, is that going to open this year? >> Yes. All the the um recreational

1:23:33 facilities will be open later this year. I know that Patty Bole is working with um the Forest Service and Adam Spencer are are um in our um communications team to kind of put together a you know some sort of announcement or or celebration around that. >> I want that date email. >> It's May. >> Is the board going to preview it? >> That's right. Thank you. >> Tim, you had a you had a comment. >> An entire board agenda item. Yeah, that's that's great. Um yeah, I I just want to echo my fellow commissioners. I I think that there's a lot of benefit um to come to Smith and also I'm I'm recognizing it's it's grown uh I think since uh before my time and also just since um and I there's a a special place

1:24:19 in my heart. It was the first place that I toured uh with you. And so I I'm truly grateful for this project and also affordability does come to mind I think every single time I think of Carmen Smith. Um and so um I I I still see the benefit. I still see um the the the the procon list and it's still heavy on the pro side and so I uh that's where I'm at. But I I also just want to share my concerns there. Um I think my question is going to be a question back to you and it's a uh uh is there a question that you wish that we asked uh that you were hoping to have answered tonight? That's a that's a really good question and I um I can't I can't think of anything. I I appreciated

1:25:04 the question of what happens if you if we don't if it doesn't get approved. I think that's a really important thing to note. Um but I can't think of anything otherwise. But thank you. Thank you for your work. >> Any other questions or comments before um this is a action item? They entertain a motion to adopt the increase in the contract for design services. >> So moved. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Discussion. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Passes unanimously. It's break time. And so it's um 6:55. We'll reconvene at 7:05. Thank you.

1:35:07 the utility Q4 2025 year end results. Frank Lawson, [laughter] >> President Brown, commissioners, uh good evening. um wanted to uh first of all before we get into the uh full agenda um I did want to acknowledge uh the fact that you did receive a 111page uh report associated with this agenda item. Um the reason I mentioned that is that we started to do this a few years ago. Um we did not do a quarterly report regularly. We did not do an annual report in the in the style and with the

1:35:52 information that you've been receiving. And I have to acknowledge and appreciate our management team, our executive team, the subject matter experts that um contribute to the contents of this. Um this is probably the best report that we've produced. Um it told a story. Um, it highlighted the the good, the bad, and the ugly uh of the the details of the operation, uh, where we are with our strategic and annual goals. And I did want to thank staff for uh what I consider the quality of report that that we always uh intended to produce. Um,

1:36:37 we'll continue to improve it. It's always an opportunity uh when you establish some kind of cadence or pattern that you can continue to improve it and we'll continue to do that um over time. But this is um I think by far the best one that we've produced um along the way and hopefully it'll continue to evolve. also wanted to thank Holly for wrestling through the formatting that we uh basically change every month. Uh because part of continuous improvement is you cause change and so I want to appreciate her patience um and the patience of of the people who have to contribute to this because we change the requirements often and um they're really starting to to own the results and we

1:37:22 really appreciate that. This evening, I thought I'd run through a few of the the highlights with commissioners uh in particular in two different subject areas. One is kind of operationally where we stand. Um I won't read the slides uh uh item by item um but use it to provide some guidance around some of our performance metrics and then uh finish up with the status of our goals and then also acknowledge uh some of the decisions and the work that US commissioners have made in the last year specifically 2025. Financially um we're in pretty solid shape. Um, I would say that we had positive net income in both utilities. Um, our

1:38:08 metrics are in good shape. There is one metric that we'll have to continue to keep an eye on. Uh, in both utilities, it's it's called return on net book value. Um, it's one where you're looking at your net earnings versus your book value. Uh, there are shifts to that over time. In particular, in an assetbased organization like we are, as you're replacing assets um and your net income versus your assets as your assets uh increase in their net value, that has a dampening effect on this particular um metric, but it also is something to keep an eye on over time given that it's uh the relationship of your ability to continue to make those investments and pay those investments back. And so those

1:38:55 two on both utilities uh were not quite where we want them to to be. Um and it's something that we'll be taking a look at. We also have to appreciate the fact that when we look at all of the pressures on on energy and water utilities, uh the work that that we have done at your direction. Uh this is typically part of the cycle where we bring some intended um budgets and assumptions in usually June or July and by the time we wrestle through and look for opportunities to make choices and savings uh we come back ultimately with with rates uh and 3.9% on electric um residential or that was that was average

1:39:42 and 6% on water were the rate impacts and we continue to understand and look at the affordability pieces um but also recognizing that there are a number of different influences on the financial the financials of both utilities and we are costbased and so uh we do recognize that costs directly translate into into rates um when I in 2015 the period of time just for context I think it was between 2012 and 2015 the electric rates were increased 78% in that particular period of time. I think you probably remember that, Commissioner Brown. And our affordability factor was well over four. It was probably in the 4.3 to 4.5 rate ratio. Um that is now

1:40:31 down to 3.2. Um a number of period years of work over time. We continue to look at that as in in particular as it relates to burden. Um and we refer to utility burden. That's both water and electric. The state of Oregon recognizes energy burden at 6%. Um of the of an income level. Um we did significantly increase as you can see from the chart there in our contributions to customer care. Some of that was in response to uh federal cons restrictions or limitations changes and some of those we felt like was appropriate uh given the impact that we have on on the community.

1:41:16 I won't talk as much about some of the the other slides. I think that uh as you know safety and I included wellness in this is something that we u pay close attention to. We've continued to see um I'll say solid good performance in the in the safety numbers that tend to be after the fact. They're they're post um u kind of lagging indicators. Uh we've also seen a lot more participation in some of the leading indicators like a good catch report that used to be a close call report and so we wanted it to be more positive so we changed it to the good catch report. Significant um opportunities that come out of those types of reports uh that lead to

1:42:02 improvements and changes. Um, one thing that not quite sure of whether this is a good thing or something we need to dive in further. Uh, we did have increased employee participation uh, in our EAP program. Uh, that's employee assistance program and you can see things like anxiety, depression, emotional issues um, you know various aspects. Uh some of those can be workrelated um co-worker conflict. You know, these are these are things that the positive piece of that is that this is a service and a resource that's available and we are seeing people use it. Um but the driving and root causes of those whether

1:42:47 those are just general stress in the environment we're in or whether there's something specific we can look at um as actions or things that we can look at or monitor something that we'll we'll try to assess further reliability uh with the exception of a few things that were specific metrics. Um, one thing that really gives this context is the fact that we in 2025 delivered uh 3.14 million megawatt hours. That would be a billion kilowatt hours and also 8 point almost 8.23 billion gallons of drinking water um and had uh significant support uh that went

1:43:34 along with that. And when we refer to sort of our operational flow, yes that's water, yes it's electricity, but it's also information. It's also money. It's also assistance. It's program delivery. And so we look at all those things when we consider the importance and the of the reliability of the services that that we provide. Workforce trends also operational. Uh we did see a significant increase in the number of applications. Um that um applications in particular per job opening um and so time to fill roughly the same as what it was the year before. Uh we also really saw 30% filled

1:44:19 internally and also really looked at career advancement as as a key part of our organizational secession. And so we did see some uh some increases in that. Um I thought it was interesting also the reasons that candidates applied. Um and um you can see really positive comm community impact the importance of the work that we do uh in the community is a key driver for why people are interested in e webb as an employer. [clears throat] the community impacts are are vast and far-reaching. Um, some of those just are financial contributions, uh, contribution in live taxes. Uh, the

1:45:05 other things that we do that really impact our community significantly are things related to programs and service delivery, um, uh, incentives related to energy efficiency, conservation, uh, zero to low interest loans. There's a number of different programs that um that we've been uh assisting our community with. Um 6,300 water leak notifications. Um I was one of those and I'm not special in that respect. So um really appreciated that. And and then um e webb ambassadors are employees who are part of programs and outreach for particular events that we put on in the community at least 700 hours. I'm not sure if

1:45:51 Holly is shaking her head because at some point you you I don't want to say stop counting, but you're you're estimating based on all of the different things that we're doing. And so, uh really appreciate the things that we do as part of our specific professions and roles within the organization, but also the fact that many of these areas are people who are helping in the community with different events. And so it's while it's related to work in many cases, sometimes it's not. Getting into some of the the specific goal performance. Um there there's comments about all of these in general. Um wanted to appreciate a couple things about the process this year. We did

1:46:38 start uh to look at a more formal uh e-web business management process included uh and specifically emphasize continuous improvement for our core work, but also the development and an implementation of a uh strategic compass that was going to guide the the organization around goal setting, specifically strategic goals or breakthroughs. And so while we started out the year with specific set of goals, we actually came to the board uh back to the board in August with um I'll say more goals and they were they were revised. We ended up with 18 goals. And what you didn't see was the 34 different

1:47:23 actions that those uh or milestones or or activities, groups of work, uh we called them deliverables that were used to uh gauge the progress uh of these goals. And so there's even another layer down um that drove this. and and overall of the of the 18 goals that we that we got your approval on in in August, we fully achieved 14. Um there's a couple that are sort of on track with some things rolling into uh 2026 and and the goals that we've worked with you on. And then there's a few items that we just had to look at prioritizing or tailoring a little bit. um progress made on on all

1:48:09 of them. Um but um have to say that I feel pretty good about 14 to 16 if you count halves in there. Um if you get 100% maybe you uh were sandbagging a little bit, didn't didn't stretch enough. If you are much lower than that or only make it halfway, maybe you you taxed yourself or were too ambitious. So we kind of feel like in the organizational goal world uh being able to have significant achievement progress on everything but not fully on everything is probably the right balance. Now I say that uh in the same presentation where the EAP uh participation was up uh indicating job

1:48:54 stress. So I I I have to tailor that just a little bit. um I feel good about it but I'm not sure that everybody feels good about that um depending on their role in achieving those goals. Um many of these um very aware of we reported on them at various times uh throughout the year. Um a lot of these are associated with the strategic plan and various phases and activities associated with the strategic plan. um building the the puzzle pieces to be able to uh eventually reach some of those goals around resiliency, energy optimization and delivery and and some of those things. So, I think we we have made progress on that and um uh

1:49:41 we'll we'll dive into some of these a little bit more if if necessary. I did um I did want to just take a moment at at the end, commissioners, to um thank you and acknowledge your uh guidance and um your direction not only on the goals and some of the the operational issues, budgets, capital spending, that type of thing, but also to recognize that that 2025 uh you made some really significant uh decisions um everything from a $2 billion contract to uh looking at some local resources uh Mckenzie Valley Service Territory. These

1:50:26 are just just a few uh and the oversight of almost uh and governance and oversight of almost half a billion dollars worth of of an operation. And so uh really appreciate and want to thank you for that guidance. Um, you also that very last item, I really appreciate you spent some time recruiting a new general manager and so uh I know that's a significant amount of effort uh and um um look look forward to uh seeing where the organization goes goes from here. But I did want to uh finish with that and and thank you and and really just thank staff um for um a really good 2025. Um we had a number of

1:51:12 different interests and challenges and and people telling us what was important to them along the way and and yet at the same time a lot of successes things like college hill for example progress on the Wamut treatment panel plant plant on the water side continue excellent water quality um uh water sheds in in good shape um we continue to be active in that. So, um really do appreciate that and um would open it up at this point, uh President Dan Brown, to any comments, questions, um remarks, things you might have. I'll turn it back to you. Thank you. >> Okay, I'm open to the floor. Anybody have any questions or comments,

1:51:57 >> Sonia? >> Well, thank thank you and thank you to staff for another great year. Great. It's okay. Um [laughter] um clearly >> we're just really dipping into the path on that one. Sorry about that. >> Um I [clears throat] mean many things were achieved. Um I think you're right on the kind of where we're at in the mix. You know, if you achieve everything, were we reaching enough? Um it seemed like there was a there was a good mix in there. I did notice a couple of items that I wanted to call out. Um, so our I'll get into the the comments and I'll make another our question then

1:52:42 I'll get a comment in there. The write offs that we had went to almost half a million dollars. Um, I'm curious is that reflective of some of the federal dollars too that um like the LIHE program and some of the other programs. I don't actually know where those are at right now. And I'm curious if um some of that is reflective of other funding dropping off, not being available to people. And then um it mentioned in there that we send it to collections. And I'm I'm curious if we know what that process looks like, if that's something somebody could talk to now. If not, um I'd be happy to get information later, too. >> Yeah. Um, Commissioner Carlson, I'll just make a couple remarks and then then I'll I would I would ask uh Deborah Hart

1:53:28 to elaborate a little bit. Um, I don't believe that federal dollars rolled off at the period of time when we saw the most write offs. I think many of these may have been pent up because we uh changed some of our processes. We didn't we didn't do all the normal processes as we were changing into a new system. And so I think some of that was either hold over or pent up. Um, and that number is much higher than normal. We usually have really low write offs historically. Um, and it could be that the pentup was partly because we we came off of a year or two of really heavy inflation. Um, and so customers seeing other kinds of pressures as well. But I I would I guess I would ask um, assistant general

1:54:14 manager Hart to elaborate on that if she could. I think people are actually messaging me about this question in real time. Um I don't think we have any evidence that it was lack of other funding. It doesn't mean that economic pressures on our community didn't contribute to that um problem. We did um we did have some transitional activities as we went from one system to the other at the um beginning end of the year previous and the beginning of of this reporting year. To your um uh question about collections, we write

1:55:02 those off our books. We do send them to an outside collection agency. They do make an effort to collect some of those and when we do that then we identify those as paid accounts. Does that answer your question on the process? >> It goes to like somebody is calling them or put putting other holds on them. Is that I mean some of the the process that or is it really? It's more kind of written off. They they they don't have other levers they're using other than calling and >> they're they're calling. And as to a collection agency's collection practices, I'm not entirely familiar. There are different times at which it could rise to lean status, but our bills are >> relative. We get money back. They don't

1:55:48 like purchase it and then they >> we get money back. >> We get money back when it actually gets collected >> when it gets collected. And and out of curiosity, you have any idea of like I'm guessing we don't get much back. I'm assuming. Correct. >> I think that they take a it's fair to say they take a sizable chunk, but I don't uh I don't know the details of that contract. >> All right. Thank you. >> And and Commissioner Carlson, they go through our entire process before they ever go to collections. And so there's a rather l It takes a lot for those to go to collections historically. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Um, I'll let others go and I'll get back to my other question. >> Any other questions or comments? Um, I'll I'll jump in then, John. Um, a

1:56:34 couple questions. Tree trimming. It looks like we're not keeping up to pace. Uh, on page 31 and 32, it looks like for the last year, our our units um I'm looking at units per week and target were way below the target. And the same thing with um the the miles um the target that we're way below. And now that we we're getting rid of the up river that was three crews and we've got a new tree trimming company and that concerns me about liability especially with a wildfire and South Hills and what are we doing to address that backlog? >> So there's there's a few things. So we dug a a hole a few years ago. If you actually look at the 5-year tree trimming backlog, it's dropping. Um, and that particular line is going down. And

1:57:19 that's the backlog line. And so we we are starting to make some progress. As far as priorities, we do look at high-risisk fire zones and high-risisk circuits as a priority. And so while some of them may be on a five-year cycle, we do high-risisk fire zones and spot checks on those annually. And so the as a risk mitigation measure. And so um yeah, I think there is an opportunity at this point when we look at focusing on the the urban side um of of our territory that that backlog can be be lowered even even more. >> And then another one I know we're not supposed to get in the weeds, but you gave us some weeds about getting into. So um $30,000 for a charger for a inner

1:58:05 city electric bus. the University of Oregon. Do they have electric buses? >> I don't know if that specific detail >> anymore. So, I'm just I'm I'm I'm >> I would I would putting a charger in that they would have >> the ability to use it. I But I can I can follow up on that. Commissioner, I that's a it's a fair question. It's it's a detail that I opened up. So, >> No, you you put it out there. >> I I know. I appreciate that and I appreciate you calling on it. But we'll we'll follow up on that just to make sure and I'm sure probably Deborah >> or Julie if she was here would be getting the text answer to that probably as we speak. >> Maybe they've got electric buses. I don't know. I just know they didn't work for LTD and I was just wondering about

1:58:51 the UVO. Um and lastly, I know that usually I used to be able to find out all the contracts that we don't see. You used to publish just to see where the money was going or what it was for. I didn't find that in here. >> It it is in there. It is. >> It's It's a It's a quarterly basis. So, the quarterly version of that is in there. >> Okay, that's fine. Then you can just I'll find it. If it's in there, I'll find it. Thank you. That's all. >> And I do I will tell you, um, President Brown, that staff knows that you look at that specific report and so we prepare accordingly. Just I'm this insider baseball right here. Just Just so you know. >> Just tell me where the bus charger is. Thank you. >> Uh thank you and thank you for the positive report. Uh thanks to staff that

1:59:38 helped implement all of our goals and policies. Um again, I can see why they would be stressed. We put quite a bit on them. Um, as far as the 700 hours of community service, you know, I think that Holly could put probably 10 more hours on it just from making us read this this uh 111 pages. I know it took me a couple hours and I think five of us probably the same thing. So, there's another 10 hours of community service that has gone into this community. Um, you know, when when I got on this board, uh, it seemed every year I would hear the the chime that we've

2:00:23 got a lot of really big things coming in front of us this year. And every year we have, but every year we've seemed to chew through them and accomplish a lot of them and make good progress on on the ones that we haven't, you know, fully implemented. Um, and I think that that's a testament to our to our staff, the leadership, and this board as a whole helping to set that direction. Um, so I'm didn't get I don't I'm not going to get into the weeds. Um, I'll wait for the long-term financial forecast to get into the weeds and I'll I'll leave this one alone. But thank you to everybody for all the hard work.

2:01:10 >> Sonia, you have another >> Oh, I was just gonna The contracts are on page 59. >> Thank you. of the packet. Um I did have one other question on um so on page 68 um it talks a little bit about our about the water pack and I know this is a look back at what what we're at but then it also says the summer forecast. Um and it's indicating on table four summer it says forecast for summer. Is that correct? It's saying that it's forecasting we're going to be at 101% for our for the Mackenzie watershed. I just I that blows me away given that there is zero snow pack right now. So I

2:01:55 I'm and I've heard from others that other snowpack areas like in the Bonville area and I know I'm I'm throwing this out there. I didn't get to warn you about this question. So >> that that's okay. I will um I'll take a look at that page 68. I didn't I the reference there is not >> what >> it is sorry 28 of it's 58 of or 68 of the board packet it's 28 of the >> um quarterly report >> I'm just very very scared don't know what's are you know is coming up >> and If this is actually the forecast, that's wonderful. I I don't know how we got

2:02:41 there with zero snow pack, but >> yeah, we'll we'll double check that, Commissioner. Um I I do know that just relatively speaking, um that the biggest impact for us tends to be in the Columbia Basin. um that as as far as actual water availability and and production um compared to the the uh I'll say limited relatively number of resources on the McKenzie. Um but I'll I'll take a look at that one. That that one doesn't feel quite right. >> Okay. >> If you've driven past wam past, you'll probably agree with me on that one. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Thank you, uh chair. And uh yeah, I appreciate this. It only took me an

2:03:26 hour to read this. I don't know what you're talking about. 5 hours. No, I'm joking. >> Hours per person. >> Um >> I'll just say we consider your time free so Holly doesn't count it in the 700 plus hours. Just just saying. >> Should I not be clocking in? Is that Oh no. [laughter] >> Um I ju I I want to appreciate um uh the amount of work that has gone into this, the amount of effort. Um, and I just I think that we're just in general big picture at a time where a lot of organizations and a lot of communities are talking about cuts and dangers and and challenges that they're facing and while e webb has our own um it's it's very heartening to see a lot of the the good work and good efforts going forward and seeing them all just listed here. I

2:04:11 I was reminded again I was going through the uh grant awards and just seeing in November the 500 very weedy but the $500 towards food and and uh through that effort when the federal government was threatening SNAP and and just I e webb stepping up in that way is just is is is great. Um, the one that stood out to me is the candidate reason for interest. And I don't know if candidates were maybe shy about talking about their interest in in wages. E Web pays well, but to see it so low on the reason people applied for for a position here, I think is is really telling of of the work that that this organization does and and the priorities here as well. And so, um, and that the top one is positive

2:04:57 community impact, just to tie that together. So, um I I just want to also echo the the appreciation to the the staff and the team here um that uh I think uh everyone is is laser focused in progressing and doing better and and improving our community in so many different ways and and I think this this document shows just that. >> Thank you, Commissioner. I I will just as a little bit of context I have and and this would be a good follow-up question for Dedra Williams, our chief people officer as well. Um most of the time when you look at um workforce motivation factors um compensation is not the first on the list. Um, you know, historically the

2:05:43 ones I've seen or the meaning of the work, feeling like you're part of a team, like your your your work is leading towards something that is beneficial or significant. Those tend to rise above um compensation as well as the relationship you have with your teammates, those that of which you work with the closest. Um, so it's not unusual to see that. It may be a little bit unusual to see the level of the ranking compared to uh the other things. Um but that partially that could be related to the fact that EWB is very competitive from a compensation perspective and we we continually review that so that we are competitive in the market and so that becomes not the issue as opposed to what the other issues are.

2:06:28 >> Mindy, >> just briefly thank you and staff for putting this together. Um, I think it's pretty awesome that we've achieved 14 out of the 18 goals. That's pretty remarkable. And, um, as you get ready to hand off your position to your successor, I think, um, it's really something to hand off an organization that is really doing so well and thriving. So, thank you for that and thank all the staff who make that possible. >> Yeah, I think I thank you, Commissioner. the I think there are you know combination as a number of you have mentioned it there's there's a combination of of risks and and issues so those those do exist um at the same

2:07:15 time really the opposite side of a coin of a risk is an opportunity and so we we try to look at this um as to how we can best operate for the community amongst the operating environment we're in we're we're going to have different challenges is in the next 5 to 10 years that were different from the last 5 to 10 years. Now hopefully we don't throw COVID in the middle of it again um or some kind of pandemic but we as an organization will be challenged a little bit differently and um part of our our next um steps and this we we do this pretty regularly but is to look out a number of years and say what do we think those challenges and opportunities are and

2:08:00 what do we do to set up the organization to be successful under those conditions and I think that that that will continue um especially around the business management system and and how we want to continuously improve the strategic side as well as the operational side. So we we will see challenges um and um we have to prepare for those so that we can continue to provide the the really the critical services we do and and um we'll be we'll be um asked to make some different kinds of kinds of decisions. >> Okay, that ends. I'm well done with the conversation, Frank. >> Oh, she had her microphone. >> I know. He just doesn't put it off.

2:08:47 >> And uh so well, Frank, thank you very much. Really appreciate it. And uh we'll just move on to the next agenda item unless you have something else. >> Yeah. And and if there's other questions, I I'd be happy to follow up during our one-on- ones and and get any other responses to the commissioners as a whole, the board as a whole. So, >> okay. Do you want to stay there or we can just do future board agendas? >> We can do future board agendas. Um I think that um we are are looking at a pretty busy April and May. Um May is at least my my intended last board meeting um in my official capacity. And so um no lack of items really in April or May if if you look at the content. So, I think we've got a number of things related to

2:09:33 to uh things like watersheds and fees and SDC's and and updates related to um energy supply and other things. So, that's it will be a pretty busy couple of months. Um and so um and and then as was mentioned by um Lisa earlier, some other updates um further out in the year specifically around Kermit Smith. So, we'll make sure we get those those scheduled in. >> Okay. Anything else on that? If not, then I'll >> just a heads up, I probably will be doing the April meeting virtually. >> All right, then we'll just go to um board wrapup. Sorry, it's getting over so early, but

2:10:18 we will. Mindy, >> nothing from me. Thanks. >> Y in John. Uh just thanks to commissioners for the in-depth conversation that we had on the resolution earlier. Uh I know it was a a difficult uh process to go through. I I am thankful for the thorough discussion and deliberations that we all had on it and know that it wasn't an easy uh position to take, but I I appreciate all the the thought and energy that was put into it and uh thank you. I think we have a really functional board here and it's it's a pleasure to

2:11:03 work with you all. And I I was remissed at items from the board at the beginning. I wanted to compliment Jason Huer. I I don't think we could have a better ambassador. The professionalism, his knowledge, his leadership, and I mean he of all the 15 people around those tables, he was the star in the room and and it was looked to on that. He's highly respected and and I can't give him a high high enough grade there. And then Frank, we need to get an order for your last meal. I mean, it's, you know, kind of like the last meal. So, >> it sounds very ominous, but careful what you ask for, but no, we're gonna make sure it's special. So, whatever you want, you can have three items. And, uh,

2:11:51 >> all right, I'll give that some thought, Commissioner, in my spare time. But, um, I would I would agree on the comment about Jason. Um, I'm going to use an expression that Jason uses and I think he punches above his weight um, when it comes to issues federally and at the state. And I know that's a boxing analogy, but um, it's one that he uses, so I can use it either for him or against him. Um but um he's he not only works well, Commissioner Brown, in those settings, but he works really well behind the scenes developing relationships with other utilities um and trade organizations and things like that. So uh we are lucky to have Jason and really appreciate his work. >> Yeah. Yeah, he did an excellent job.

2:12:38 Anything else for the good of the order?