EWEB Board of Commissioners — October 6, 2026

0:03 regular meeting of the junior one electric board to order. Before I get to the first agenda item, I'm going to read the facility and safety awareness and meeting logistics briefing. Um, I'd like to thank everybody for attending tonight's board meeting. EWT 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 everyone can hear you. Public testimony is welcome. Sign up forms are available at the back of the room. Visitor access is limited to the board, meeting room, and restrooms. Restrooms located on the first floor. Exit through the righth hand door at the front of the room and cross the hallway. In the event of emergency, such as a fire or security incident, follow all instructions given by staff. If evacuation is required, please calmly pro proceed to the nearest safe exit as identified, directed by staff, and evacuate away from the building to the farthest points in the parking lots to allow clear and

0:48 immediate access for first responders. So, the first agenda item this evening is the agenda check. Is there um anything that uh anybody wants to talk about? agenda, move it around or anything. So, for the record, I know we have two commissioners that were going to um chime in remotely. I think Commissioner Morris is online. Is Commissioner Slashberg online? Just for the record, >> that that's fine. Okay. Well, we'll proceed. And um logistically, uh uh Tim, can you hear me? >> Yes, I can hear you. >> Okay. So when you want to be acknowledged um somehow can you either say you know say your name or something. So I don't want to um miss you or anything else because it's the logistics of it of me not being able to see you on

1:34 the screen um if if you don't have a a button. So just somehow get my attention and I'll make sure I get you in the queue. Okay. >> Can do. Thank you. >> You bet. Thank you. Okay. Uh the next agenda item is item from board members and general manager. I'll start with uh Commissioner Carlson. Great. I just had one thing that I wanted to bring up is that the uh the run to stay warm is coming up in November on the 22nd and while I know we don't run it, it still benefits our e-webs customer care program. So, I just wanted to highlight that for folks. I think it's a great thing and gone out there before. So, hope to see you out there. Thanks, >> Mr. Barovski. Um, thank you. Um, one of the items that is in Commissioner or in general man

2:20 Haristen's report to us today was the fact that uh, EWB is severing right now its uh, relationship with the Mackenzie Watershed Alliance. Um, I've been the the board's liaison to the Mckenzie Watershed Council. I just want to let it be known that that the council and the alliance has done great work in in partnership with us over the the many years at least in the six years that I've been attending those meetings. Um it's due to circumstances beyond our control uh that happened at the alliance as far as u some things that have made it out publicly. But I just want to let it be known that that E webb and the watershed council and the watershed alliance have been great partners on the

3:06 upper McKenzie doing a lot of great work uh for habitat restoration and a lot of the recovery work that was done after the holiday fires was done in coordination with that organization. And so it's just a transitional time right now. We hope to reestablish our relationship with them or another entity that's doing the work in the future, but I didn't want it to be put out there that we feel that the alliance or the council is in any way um not a good partner with us over the years and that our eb's rate money and uh involvement with them has been uh safeguarded through our own internal uh audits and and affairs. So, I just wanted that to be put out there.

3:51 Okay. I'm I'm just um one thing I just would like to um thank um the general manager for getting back to us. I I'd mentioned um in a onetoone about some of the contractors that had done a lot of the restoration work on the South Fork and up to McKenzie didn't haven't been paid and anywhere from hundreds of thousands of millions of dollars to these contractors. There's because everything's been frozen because of the issue. And uh and that's really hard for small contractors to absorb and to hold. And hopefully um thank you for the explanation about you know we paid our part but it's out of our control and I as long as we can tell them that that there's nothing we can do about it. It's it's really unfortunate circumstance that they got caught in the middle of that but they're they're not getting paid. They've done their work and the work's all done but well um Commissioner Morris.

4:37 >> Nothing for me. Thank you. >> Okay. General Manager Harris. >> Uh yes. Um President Brown. Actually, good evening, President Brown. Um, Vice President Carlson and commissioners, uh, I just want to echo u, Commissioner Barowski's, uh, note regarding the, uh, McKenzie watershed Alliance Board. Uh, we have, uh, been a really good partner with them. They've been great in performing the work that we've asked them to do and they've been contracted to do. they've run into some challenges obviously and what we want to um provide is some space for them to go through look at their controls uh put things in place and once they go through a couple of really good clean audits uh we see an opportunity to maybe partner in the

5:22 future. So just wanted to throw that out there that while we are putting things on kind of a hiatus right now uh we are really hoping that things come around and and there's an opportunity in the future. Uh the only other thing I would mention is the um terms of the items um the um interactions, community interactions. So as you can see, I've been um reaching out and able to meet with the general manager from um Springfield um utility board. I think um there's a opportunity there to discuss uh potential um you know, partnerships to work together. So we're going to continue to meet and explore and build those relationships. And then the other thing is in terms of upcoming or pending events, um I have the e webb major

6:08 customer lunchon on the 15th of October. Uh we're going to be hosting Senator James Manning. Um providing him a tour of the um Roseville Operations Center and then on the 23rd I'll be speaking at the city club. So just wanted to make note of those. Thanks. >> Thank you. >> Next agenda item is correspondence. All right. So, as you add in your materials, u this slide under correspondence is the um McKenzie watershed recovery and restoration program. Kind of a a highle summary of some of the accomplishments is not in total. Um there's additional materials um regarding the accomplishments, but uh just want to start off by saying that

6:53 the holiday farm was incredibly impactful uh for the upriver community um and to those here at EW that really work out at our u up river facilities. Um and so the ability for us to react quickly to mitigate the impacts um of the fire on our drinking water quality was I think very impressive. Um and you know in particular we're grateful to the board um and our customers for their support for all the work that we've undertaken during this time. Um the slide shows the results of the support and it's incredible how much work was really accomplished um in these past five years. So, uh, we have additional materials. We look forward to being able to discuss, um, this in more detail at

7:40 our November meeting and really welcome any comments that the board may have and any guidance uh, for that discussion coming up in November. >> Thank you. Any any questions or comments? >> Commissioner Carlson. Uh reading through this, I was just incredibly impressed how, you know, our our team worked together and really leveraged the funding that we had to grow the pot to make a much bigger impact. And I know that that was a team effort with several groups and and internally. So, uh very impressive work. Thank you to everybody at Eb to make who made that happen. >> Anyone else? >> Yeah. Again, um this is one of the things that I'm really most proud of

8:26 that we were able to accomplish this. If you look at that, a million trees, 605 acres of flood plane restored. All of these things are are tangible generational type of effects that we had on on the water source that we get for 200,000 people in our area. And so when I see it put out like this, it's it's just very rewarding as to what we did with the help of our customers that that stepped up and and were willing to pay an extra $3 a month to help fund these things. And like like Sonia said, we were able to leverage that into much more than than just the $3 that everybody put in there. So again, to me, I'm super proud of of all the work that

9:11 the people in in this room and throughout the whole community put together. It's it's very uh I'm very proud of it. Thank you. >> All right. Thanks for those comments. And I I'll just say um I want to um also say that we're looking at once we finish the discussion in November um being able to communicate these accomplishments a little bit greater to the community. I think this is a really good story. It's the best of e webb. So really appreciate the work that everyone has um put into this. >> Okay. Anything from you, Commissioner Morris? >> I'll echo the sentiments. This was a a great outcome and uh really incredible work from the team. So thank you. >> Thank you. Okay. The next agenda item is

9:56 the um public input. Before I open public input, I'll read the preamble. I'd like to welcome to the public input session for the meeting. E e webb is a public not for-profit organization who charter is still to deliver drinking water and electricity to our community. Although this forum 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 e webb business and request 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. At this time, we have uh one caller and two in-person uh speakers to do that. So, to testify and so I'm open the public input session and the first is the caller would be Chris Daughters.

10:57 didn't Chris. You'll need to press star six to unmute. Did we want to skip Chris and come back to him? We have two other speakers. So, I just Okay, I I'm going to move on and then I I would ask uh Laura Allen um followed by David Thomas.

11:47 >> Thanks for having me. My name is Laura Allen. I'm the vice chair of Churchill Area Neighbors. I'm speaking on behalf of the neighborhood association and I'm going to read our statement on data center to express concerns that we have heard in our neighborhood. Churchill area neighbors has closely followed the recent city of Eugene land use application for a possible data center at 1830 Willow Creek Circle that lies within our neighborhood association boundaries. We have heard concerns expressed by many people in the neighborhood regarding the potential negative impacts of a data center. Concerns include excessive energy and water usage, impacts to e-web rates, as well as potential health concerns that arise from living near a data center. Churchill area neighbors expects complete transparency from eb regarding your participation with any such

12:33 applicant and subsequent actions. Thank you so much for your time and your attention to this. >> Thank you. Next is David Thomas. Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you. My name is David Thomas. Uh I'm a Eugene rate eb rateayer and living at 2553 Borders Drive in Eugene 97404. I'm also the conservation chair of the McKenzie fly fishers and the McKenzie

13:19 River Stewart for the Native Fish Society. As you might suppose, I am here to wish to raise concerns over the operation of Trailbridge Dam as it influences the fate of several threatened space fish species. The species in question are spring chinuk salmon and bull trout. Both are listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in the Wamid Basin starting in 1999. For a variety of reasons, the recoveries of these populations has failed. So that in 2025 for fisheries, Noah fisheries found that these species had continued to decline and that the maj major reason for this

14:05 was the blockage from their habitats by basin dams without changes. It has been postulated that these species could become expatri expect expatriated from the basin by 2020 2040. At this point, the McKenzie River Basin maintains the only western Cascades population of bull trout in what is considered the stronghold population of salmonid in the Wamid base. With continued warming of basin waters, this means that the that access to high headwaters of the basin is increasingly important for possible recovery of either species. So where does Trailbridgeidge Dam fit

14:50 in? Regarding bull trout, spawning surveys have documented the remaining populations of any size or above and below this this dam. I will not go into the specific waters that they inhabit as I have been asked to avoid providing that information in public because poaching of the fishery is another major problem threatening their existence. From what we know, establishing effective fish passage below and above the river up and down would allow integration of these two isolates and enhance their range to exploit. In the case of Chinuk salmon, there would be a double benefit from fish passage. Salmon are now largely

15:35 blocked from the headwaters and again due to warming expanding their range up river would be beneficial. Also one reason the bull trout have been extinguished from all the other subbasins in the last 40 years is the dam not only blocked their movement but also blocked the salmon and steel head which these carniv carnivorous fish feed on. So passage of salmon would be a double benefit uh to both. We're aware that e webb is required as part of your first license to establish fish passage at trailbridge dam by 2031. Given the information I've provided, I

16:20 hope you will make this a priority and assure that the implementation is fully effective. Thank you very much. >> Thank you for your testimony. Did we get happen to get Chris on the phone? >> was pressing um the coach unmute, but it was working for him. So, he was going to try again.

17:06 I do see him online, but it's still showing he's muted. >> Well, um given the number of people sitting here doing nothing, I'll I'll just I guess I'll close the public input and uh apologize if it's on our end. I don't think it is, but um um yeah, he he can email the board his testimony if he wants and and go from there. But uh I'm sorry, technology sometimes is worst enemy. So, um now I've closed public comment is do any commissioners wish to respond to the testimony? Sonia, >> just wanted to appreciate uh folks coming down to share their views with us. I know it's not um

17:52 usually something that people may do. Uh, so I I just appreciate you, you know, exercising your right to use the public testimony and come out to share those views. I also wanted to note that on the trail bridge side of things, we're we have been working on uh finding solutions there and working with all of the federal partners um listed and I think we're we're coming closer to a solution, but it it's the delays have primarily been around issues with sinkholes and so we're kind of at the the behest of the federal government to get through that situation and find a workable solution. But anyway, um I also wanted to note that if shinook salmon is something you care about, definitely make sure your tires are inflated because there's another killer to shinook salmon, which is 6 PPD. Um it's

18:40 a chemical that's added to tires and if your tires are deflated, it actually increases it and it can kill off the the salmon. So, another thing that you can do in your daily lives is to make sure your tires inflated. Thanks. >> Thank you, Donna. No comment. Demi, you any comments? Uh I do uh thank you for uh those who came out in person. I wish I could join you. Um but I'm uh not feeling well and losing my voice very quickly and rapidly. Um but uh I wanted to say thank you David for your uh advocacy for the Chinook salmon and bull trout. Um and Laura Allen, thank you for coming to the meeting here uh and uh testifying on behalf of the Churchill area neighborhood. um uh CAN is in my

19:25 district and so I appreciate that the neighbors have remained engaged in having conversations around data centers and and advocating for their neighborhood. So um that's uh Thank you. >> Thank you, >> John. This is Mindy. I don't know if you can hear me. >> Yes, I can. Welcome. >> Okay. >> Thank you. I just I don't know if you can see me either, but I'm having technical difficulties, but I am here at this meeting. We can't see you, but um uh you would you like did you get to hear the public testimony? >> I did. I don't I don't have any comments at this time. >> Comments. Okay. So, I'll be doing the same with you as I will Tim. I'll just call and after each item or presentation, I'll just see if either one of you had input just to kind of >> see if we can do it that way. And if you don't, that's fine. >> Yeah. There we got we got you now. All

20:11 right. We can see you. >> Okay. Great. >> Thank you. Um, and my comments, if I may, is I'd like to thank you, uh, from Churchill. Um, just know that we don't have any hidden agendas and we can share your concerns and we are very, um, very cognizant about rates and we have policies already about big big loads and uh, and water and everything else. And so everything that you're concerned about, uh, we're aware of and we're going to make sure that if anybody comes to us to look for new loads and things like that, um, we'll make sure that what we do is open and transparent and and, uh, subject to, I mean, this is consumerowned and so it's it's all of ours. And and as far as your comments about the trail bridge, it's unfortunate. We would have done this a long time ago, but we had one federal agency saying, "Don't touch the dam

20:57 because there's sink holes in the reservoir." and the other federal agencies say go ahead and build it and it was a catch22 and so if we would have built it the dam would have failed um because we had sink holes the dam now we think we've got it resolved and we're working on it so Lisa's got a good program going there so um general manager any comments public hearing >> no comments >> okay thank you very much that that item and the next agenda item is going to be the approval of consent calendar IA anybody [clears throat] have a any anything they want to pull from that if not I'd entertain a motion I move to approve set calendar A. >> Second. >> Any discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Kim

21:43 >> I. >> Thank you. Passes unanimously. Uh consent calendar B. >> I move consent calendar B. >> Second >> discussion. None. Call the question. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Passes unanimously. Thank you very much. Okay. Agenda item number eight, upcoming 2027 electric and water budgets and long-term financial plans. Deborah and Kim Marie. >> Yeah. So, while they um make their way up to the front, I just wanted to say, you know, as we present the 2027 draft budgets and long-term financial plans alongside um the financing strategy for the um Wamtt treatment plant that the board asked for to see if there were some potential um smoothing strategies

22:28 available. Um I I just want to note that, you know, these infrastructure investments are essential um to maintain safe, reliable power and water. Um but we are running into inflationary pressures. Um you know you look at whether it's inflation, supply chain constraints um or even the reduced federal funding that we're seeing. Um there's a lot of things that we have to balance and our priority is balancing those things with um our capital needs as well as customer affordability. Um I think the team has done a pretty good job at u bringing forth something that does um a lot of that. If you um look at it, our budget is going to be close combined budget is close to a half billion dollars. Um and you know that's a a pretty significant number. Uh but

23:16 more importantly when you look at the combined impacts on our customers um the increase is somewhere in around five five a.5%. Um a major component of that obvious is a water plant uh $431 million. Um, but I think we've got some approaches that are going to help us u mitigate some of that exposure and what we've seen the numbers are beginning to move in the right direction. So, um, I just wanted to kind of express my u appreciation for the team's work. U, I think we're seeing this go in the right direction, but um, I'll allow them to get into some of the details of the materials that you've got in front of you. Um, right now I'll hand it over to Deborah, our assistant GM and chief

24:02 financial officer. >> Thank you, John. Good evening, President Brown. Commissioners, uh, this evening, we're here to review the draft budgets and long-term financial plans for both the water and and electric utilities, uh, including a recommendation on finance financing strategy for the WAMIT treatment plant project. Uh we are seeking your direction on those th budgets and plans. With me tonight are Tamarie Harwood, our financial services manager, Alicia Borhees, the FPNA supervisor, and Daniel Davidson, the lead financial analyst.

24:47 Um so we have shared this situational overview with the board a few times recently but it does bear re repeating uh actually on the heels of some of what John has actually uh mentioned already this evening. This slide is illustrating some of the competing pressures that the utility is facing. The first is really the growing capital needs. uh utility infrastructure is critical to public safety, the economy, quality of life and those investments are needed to maintain safety and resiliency. Uh so at the same time that those needs are growing across the industry, costs for those projects are escalating uh due to factors that are really outside of EW's control. And

25:34 at the same time, risks continue to grow from aging infrastructure uh and natural or even human-caused disasters and then funding from federal sources is diminished. All of this is happening against the background of affordability. Uh we understand that electric water and rates are top of mind for the commissioners and for uh our rateayers and that every dollar we spent running this utility does show up on a bill. Uh due to sustained cost pressures that we discussed with the board in July and August, management has made some

26:20 deliberate tradeoffs, including deferring select capital investments to help manage rate impacts on customers. Uh the 10-year electric and water CIPs include deferring about $und00 million in large infrastructure projects, spreading out or delaying work where it's safe to do so so that we can soften that impact to the rate payers. Beyond deferrals, staff continue to sharpen their pencils across operations, identifying cost savings and efficiencies to help keep our rates as low as possible. Again, tonight we're here seeking board direction on the assumptions included in

27:05 the 2027 draft revenue requirements, budgets, and long-term financial plans, including the WAMIT treatment plant financing approach, and the water utility debt service coverage target. Also shown for the board and the public is a reminder of our rate setting price process. And we're at the first step based on tonight's direction. Staff will prepare the cost of service analysis which will apply that revenue requirement across all of our customer classes and help to determine the allocation between fixed and volutric charges. Because e webb is communityowned, this budget and rate setting process is conducted in open public meetings like this one.

27:56 This evening marks another step in a monthslong process of obtaining board direction on investment priorities via the long-term financial plans and capital investment plans. The planning process this year included dedicated discussions and board direction in August on the capacity for the Lumalamit treatment plant and on financing strategy for that project which we're going to discuss tonight. Staff will then bring resulting budget and price proposals to the board at the November 3rd meeting with a final approval requested at our meeting in December. Three public hearings specific to the budget process, including tonight, provide opportunity for community members to review the proposals and provide their input.

28:42 And with that, I'm going to hand it off to Alicia to talk about the electric long-term financial plan. Thank you, Deborah. Good evening, commissioners. Looking at the electric long-term financial plan, the central challenge in this 10-year plan is balancing needed investment with customer affordability. Much of Eugene's electric infrastructure was built in the 1960s and '7s. It is reaching the end of its useful life. While extreme weather is adding to the risks, maintaining safe, resilient service requires substantial investment. The capital investment and associated debt service shown in green in the slide behind me reflect renewal across our transmission substations distribution

29:27 and service infrastructure. The plan also includes regulatorydriven investments at C at Kerman Smith and Leeberg Walter that are not discretionary. To moderate rate impacts, we've deferred six substation rebuilds and the underground cable replacement program, which is about $65 million in investment. Those needs remain, but the spending moves later in the plan. So, what does this mean for revenue requirement? That's the portion shown in blue. Over 10 years, the cumulative increase is approximately 36%. or a compounded average of 3% annually. That's down from the approximately 38%

30:14 in July, reflecting refinements to our operating assumptions. The plan balances substantial investment needs with steps to moderate rate impacts while keeping all financial metrics above target throughout the 10-year period. Now, let's look at what it means for the 27 budget. For 2027, the main changes are a lower capital budget and a higher operating budget. Capital spending decreases by about 25 million compared with 2026, reflecting project deferrals identified to help manage rate impacts. Operations and maintenance increases by about $5 million. There are three main drivers. near-term

31:00 risk mitigation at Leeberg, planned EEES development and implementation, that's e webb enterprise services, and a shift of costs from capital to&m. Together, this budget results in a proposed revenue requirement increase of 3.5%. Of that total, three percentage points are for preunding Leeberg decommissioning. The remaining half a percentage point is the general rate increase. Tamarie will now discuss financing approaches for the WAMIT treatment plan. >> Thank you, Alicia. Moving on to the water utility. I'd like to briefly recap the board's direction over the past few months regarding the Wamit treatment plant. Eugene currently relies on a

31:48 single source of drinking water, Mckenzie River, and the single treatment plant Hayden Bridge. A second treatment plant on the Wamtt River would strengthen system resilience, secure long-term access to a second water source, and allow the 76-year-old Haydenbridge plant to be taken offline for critical repairs and maintenance. In August, the board directed staff to proceed with planning for a 19.4 million gallon per day plant with a 2027 revenue requirement not to exceed 19.75%. The board also asked staff to develop financing options that prioritize lower overall project and financing costs while exploring a more gradual rate trajectory and directed staff to pursue

32:33 a CMGC and owner's representative to improve cost certainty and schedule control. The current estimated cost of the 19.4 for MGD plan is approximately $431 million, representing roughly twothirds of the water utilities infrastructure spending over the next decade. More than 100 million of that estimate is for contingency and inflation. Recognizing the uncertainty that remains at this stage of the project, the estimate will be refined as design and procurement work progresses and the process is expected to take approximately 18 months at which point the board will have a guaranteed maximum price.

33:20 Given the scale of this investment and board's direction in August, staff evaluated a wide range of financing scenarios to balance overall cost, customer affordability, and the financial health of the water utility. The four scenarios shown here represent two primary approaches that best illustrate those trade-offs. The first prioritizes lower overall project and financing costs while the second spreads the rate impacts over a longer period. They include approaches A and B, each at the current two times debt service coverage target or DSC and at a reduced 1.7 times debt service coverage target. For context, debt service coverage is a measure of how much cash EWIB has available to cover its annual debt

34:06 payments. A two times target means we maintain twice the amount of net revenues needed to cover those payments. The target is set through board policy and tonight's discussion includes a management recommendation to address that target. A 1.75 times debt service coverage target remains well above the 1.25 times minimum legal requirement and is consistent with the president established for the electric utility in 2013 when its debt service coverage target was similarly reduced for rate management purposes. All scenarios improved the 2027 revenue requirement and overall rate trajectory compared with the August draft of 19.75%.

34:52 This was accomplished primarily through strategic use of cash and reserves, modifications to the financing structure and reducing debt service coverage target to 1.75 times. The two approaches differ primarily in how the debt is repaid. Approach A uses a 30-year traditional repayment structure and results in lower overall financing costs. Approach B uses a 35-year structure with deferred principal payments for the first 5 years, providing a more gradual near-term rate trajectory. At the 1.75 times target, approach B produces the lowest 2027 revenue requirement and near-term rate

35:37 trajectory shown here. But it does place greater pressure on the water utilities financial metrics and increases the overall cost of borrowing. So, even with the lower 10-year compound growth rate and lower average increase over the 10-year plan, approach B will cost approximately $80 million more over the life of the bonds. Management recommends approach A at 1.75 times debt service coverage. This provides near-term rate relief while maintaining stronger financial metrics and a more traditional financing structure which supports EW's credit position and helps manage borrowing cost over time. The water long-term financial plan 2027

36:24 draft budget and estimated customer bill impacts presented later reflect this recommendation. There are additional financing tools described in the board packet, including extended repayment terms and short-term borrowing. All scenarios presented here include interim borrowing in 2027 to bridge the timing gap before long-term bond proceeds are available, allowing EWB to borrow only what is needed when it is needed. Staff will return to the board with a specific recommendation once a preferred short-term borrowing tool has been identified. With that, I'll turn it over to Daniel to show how this recommendation flows through the broader water long-term financial plan. >> Thank you, Tia. So, here we show the water utilities updated 10-year

37:10 financial plan. In accordance with the board approved 2015 water system master plan, EW Webb has followed a source totap approach to improve water system resiliency by strengthening the systems res resilient spine through coordinated investment in treatment, storage, transmission, and emergency response infrastructure. These investments support compliance with the Oregon resilience plan while improving reliability, operational flexibility, and long-term resiliency. The water utilities capital investment and associated debt service are highlighted in green. Um in addition to the Wamtt treatment plant, major near-term capital projects include completion of the College Hill reservoir um and several large transmission main replacements. So similar to the electric side, the water utility has has

37:55 identified project deferrals to moderate uh to moderate impacts. Those projects include pipeline replacements and Hayden Bridge rehabilitation work totaling about $36 million in deferrals. This plan models the impact of a decreased debt service coverage target from two times to 1.75 times. With that assumption, all metrics are above target. The large bond issuances result in a stress debt service coverage ratio and drive our trajectory throughout the plan. The change in revenue requirement is highlighted in blue. We are modeling a 10-year compounded revenue requirement of about 114.99% um an average of 7.95% per year with larger rate increases in the first 5 years of the plant.

38:41 Revenue requirement increases have been smooth wherever possible and these increases will better position the utility to meet the long-term pressures on debt service. Water rates are expected to remain comparatively low to to mid-tier among regional utilities even with significant capital investment capital improvement investments and borrowings. The near-term revenue requirement impact has improved since the August board meeting. In the August presentation, we had not modeled short-term borrowing in 2027. Race stabilization fund utilization and the lower debt service coverage target to 1.75 times. All of which contributed to our ability to decrease our 2027 revenue requirement from 19.75% to 15%.

39:29 Then this slide shows the draft 2027 water utility budget compared to 2026. The 2027 capital budget is around $22 million higher than 2026 due to the addition of the Wamtt treatment plant and the riverfront transmission main. The operations and maintenance budget will increase by around $5 million to support planned EES functional development and structural uh system implementation and shifting costs from capital to onm. Based on this budget, management is recommending a 15% revenue requirement increase in 2027 following the 6% rate increase that the board approved in 2026. And now I'll pass it back to Tia to discuss the combined draft budget. The combined 2027 draft budget for the electric and water utilities totals $52

40:16 million compared with $487 million in the approved 2026 budget, which is an increase of about 3% or approximately $15 million. Overall, the draft budget continues to fund the capital investments and essential services needed to maintain reliable electric and water services while reflecting the financing and operating changes incorporated into the updated long-term financial plans. This slide provides another way to look at the estimated 2026 to 2027 bill impacts for a residential customer with moderate electric and water usage. Water has a larger percentage increase at 15% reflecting the significant investments and financing needs in the water utility. However, because water

41:01 represents a smaller portion of the total utility bill, the impact is more modest when the two utilities are considered together. On the electric side, as discussed earlier, EWIB has made deliberate project deferrals and is committed to continued efficiencies and savings to bring the rate trajectory more in line with the board's guidance. As a result, the 2027 electric revenue requirement increase is 3 and a.5%. So for a residential customer with moderate usage, which is about 1,600 kilwatt hours of electricity and 9,000 gallons of water per month, the combined bill is estimated to increase by approximately 5.4% in 2027. This provides a useful perspective on the estimated overall impact to customers when the electric and water

41:46 utilities are considered together. Final impacts to the residential bill will be conveyed when the cost of service analysis is completed. This evening after the public hearing, we will answer any questions and look for board direction on the 2027 dropped budgets and prices. Next month, we will return with a more detailed draft budget document along with proposed pricing changes and hold the first of two public hearings on proposed prices. The second public hearing on prices will be in December, at which point we will ask the board to adopt the pricing proposals and approve final 2027 budget documents. And with that, I will hand it back to President Brown to open up the public hearing.

42:31 >> Well, thank you. What I'd like to do logistically is we kind of the timing here isn't we got way ahead. So, our public hearing isn't scheduled till 6:40. And so what I'd like to do is if it's okay with the the rest of the group is continue now with the discussion and quick Q&A until 6:40 and then open the public hearing as scheduled in case we want to make fair to the process and then and then uh go from there because we got plenty of time. So any objections to that that we'll just open it up to questions now and we'll just ask them to put like can you put like 25 minutes on the timer and uh and then just go from there and just recognize that gives us each five minutes. So Sonia Great. Uh, thank you for all the work to bring this more in line with something that I mean seems a lot more palatable

43:18 than where we were before. It's still a lot to take in um and will be an ask of our community, but I appreciate that you have continued to refine and get the prices better and better. Um, can you please let me know what um what interest rates these uh assump we assume in these models? We assume 5.1%. >> 5.1%. And how does that compare to what we have like what rates would we have access to today? Do you have any >> Well, today actually 5.1 is is fairly close, but rates have been >> very volatile. >> Yeah. Yeah. That's why I'm trying to figure out how [laughter] this looks. And when uh when would we begin borrowing again? I know our rates

44:04 would change in February to kind of preund this, but when would we actually need to start uh borrowing? >> So, based on the capital spending that's planned today and that what's and what's in the plan for next year, should you all approve that budget, we would need to begin to borrow at the end of next year. It is our objective to secure a shortterm financing instrument so that we don't go out and borrow a hund00 million at a time. And in fact, we were um we uh had bankers here today to to talk about what our options were in that area. >> Great. So if interest rates uh come down hopefully um then we could

44:50 potentially see even better gains in outer years. We can hope. We can hope. It's been very volatile. It's it's really high right now. Thank you. Those are my questions. Again, uh much appreciation for the work you're doing. >> Thank you. Um I've got several different questions, some of them along the same lines as Sonia. Um so you in your presentation you mentioned that in 2000 2020 2013 we dropped our debt service coverage to 1.75. Can you tell me what the the effect on our bond rating was when we did that? Did it did it degrade it >> through one cycle? It did and then it bounced back. it bounced back once we

45:36 raised the debt coverage again or it was we stabilized at 1.75. >> The the electric utility remains at 1.75 to 2.0. So um but has uh the ratings agencies are doing a look back at how we've performed. We're modeling where we think that we'll be. So based on how we performed during that period, our ratings recovered. That is one small piece of our ratings. >> Um, it's an important one and I don't want to downplay that, but it is only one piece and it's not a given that we'll see a decline in our ratings.

46:22 So, so with that being said, I guess the qu another question that I would have is we're we're asking to give you direction on this, you know, say yes, go forward with the reduced debt service coverage in this long-term financial plan and in this in this budget process, but if we're not planning on pulling the trigger on debt service, is that something that necessarily needs to be done in this budget or is that something that could be done in the following budget so it maintains our our bond rating for another year until we actually have to borrow >> what our uh the policy is not what is impacting it. It would be our actual performance and our actual performance is above 1.75.

47:08 >> Okay. Um the next thing I have and this goes into the actual uh proposed budget. There was one thing that stood out to me and it was in the customer care funding program. Um, right now it's SK the draft budget uh maintains an EEC funding of $2.1 million level compared to a calculated need base funding level of approximately 2.2 million. Uh for me, I would probably be making a motion uh to see if the rest of the board would would uh be on line with that of of bumping that to the 2.2 million just to put us in line with the uh the calculated need

47:55 base. That 100 for me $100,000 for us to hit that benchmark is something that that I would be in in favor of. And you know, I see $100,000 things coming across on my consent calendar all the time. So, it's an important part that we give back to our community and the people that are in the most need. So, I would hope that you could find it in your uh in your proposed budget to include that to 2.2. >> I we don't even need a formal vote. If if I'm seeing around the table that that is what you all want us to bring back, I'm confident that we can find that and bring that back in the November budget. >> Yeah. I mean, if it was a million

48:40 dollars difference, I would, you know, say, let's really scour, but for $100,000, I really hope that we can do that. And I would hope that my fellow commissioners would would uh come along on that. >> Mr. Slashberg. >> Um, I don't have any questions, but I just want to um share my appreciation for staff for really digging in to the financial plan to make sure that um [clears throat] we have the lowest rate increases that we can and to be respectful of our customers for whom rate increases are a burden. So, thank you for um digging in and trying to make it as palatable as possible.

49:27 >> Thank you, Commissioner Morris. >> Yeah, thank you, President Brown. Um yeah, I want to echo the sentiments. Thank you so much to staff for um really getting into the details. Um and I think uh we had asked as a board too to also provide um what would a uh gradual uh ramp down look like as well. And so I really appreciate uh the quick math that uh staff has done in order to uh provide those numbers as well. Um and being also able to bring back actuals um or projected actuals is is great. Um I knew it would be a little bit more expensive. $80 million uh is a little more expensive than I did the quick math on. So I I really do appreciate that. Um I

50:15 uh just want to ask just for the sake of of knowledge, what are the um project what are the potential negative outcomes from reducing the debt service coverage from two to one uh 1.75. So the potential negative outcome is that it does increase the likelihood that we do experience a credit downgrade. We are highly rated and a credit downgrade for us would amount to 5 to 10 basis points on our interest. Uh so a relatively small uh risk that offers a fair amount of relief to our rateayers. On the upside,

51:01 affordability is important to our ratings agencies and from some of our financial adviserss, we've heard that this move actually supports affordability. It's such a large amount of borrowing relative to this utility that keeping us at 2.0 means we're collecting a lot more cash from our rateayers than we need to pay our bills. So, um, the risk is a downgrade. The downgrade risk exists simply because we're borrowing $400 million. Um, but it's not a guarantee and it does improve our affordability uh, ratings.

51:46 I appreciate it. Thank you. Yeah, it's it's uh, real easy to get lost in the acronyms here. So, I do appreciate the the further explanation. Um, I have no additional questions. That was my only one. Um, and I do want to uh also put my support behind uh uh Commissioner Barovsky's um not motion, but um advocacy for increasing that $100,000 for the customer carees program. Um and again, thank you to staff for your hard work on this. >> Thank you. I have several questions. I'm I've got a terrible memory, so you can help me. So, we raised water rates 73% over the next five years. Um, people are going to stop watering their lawns and that's all the profit for the water. I mean, you you know when you make your

52:31 money that 90 days in the summertime. So, have and remind me these revenue projections have not assumed a decline in consumption. >> These revenue projections are based on 95% of our average consumption. That's our conservative assumption that we've always used. Um we did do some work to look at the price elasticity to see if we could identify a correlation. Um there's no standard because every utility is off operating in different environments with different uh starting points and we don't have a lot of experience raising rates the this much

53:16 but we did a little over a decade ago and when we look at that we think that a 15% uh bill increase it was associated with about a 5.9% % um reduction in residential consumption because we split that across a fixed and a variable charge. The impact was uh closer to 2%. We did not find a correlation uh in general service. It's something that we'll have to continue to watch because it is a it is a real possibility that we'll see some some drop off. >> Okay. My second memory refresher, and

54:02 this is selfish for WS four and five, but I represent them. And when we said we were going to defer some capital projects, one of them was going to be hardening the crossings because everybody north of the river gets their water from south of the river from the reservoirs, but we were not going to harden those lines. We were going to delay that. Is that still the plan in this capital? We are delaying hardening those lines. And so I just because I'm gonna start standing up for boards four and five and saying why aren't we getting resiliency in the rest of the city is because it's I to me it's not fair that that you know 30,000 people don't have the same level of resiliency as the rest of the community by not hardening those crossings over the river. So is is that still out of the budget?

54:48 >> Did you want to answer? I'm sorry to be such a jerk, but >> in that work is still delayed in the current capital plan by a couple of years. >> Okay. >> So, I'm going to keep bringing it up and I don't know if I'll if there's any solution to it, but to me it's you know, we represent geographic portions of this community for a reason. And if I see something that is to in my opinion isn't as fair as it could be to the people I represent, I want to see if there's something I can do about it. So, I I will work with you. I'll stop being grumpy, but um I I just don't I want to make sure that if if it can be done, it gets done because it's not not fair to have water come to the river and then say we don't have water. >> So, one of the potential solutions is

55:33 some of the federal funding. Now, we Deborah mentioned that that has been reduced as of late, but there are still opportunities there that we could bring something back like that into the plan if we were successful in getting some of the the federal funding. >> You need any help, let me know. Thank you very much. >> Absolutely. >> Anything else? Um John B, >> just to follow up on that, >> it's been delayed, but it hasn't been reduced out of the 10-year CIP. Correct. So, it's still in the plan. It's just it may not be in 2030. It may be in 2031 or 2032. So, I just want I want >> 2040. >> I would I well, no 10 year. I just want that to be made clear because what what was represented what vaguely was that

56:18 the people north of the river aren't going to get their waterline hardened and this CIP that we're that we'll be approving will have hardening of those lines in it. It just may not be in the front part of the CIP. So, I I just want to make that to be clear because what what I heard was it's not getting hardened, but it is it it's just getting delayed. >> Yeah, that's that's correct. It's it's been deferred. But I I do want to, you know, be clear in respect to um the ability to to move it back. Uh you know, once you get these projects and you begin to defer them, you set in line the timetable and it's very tough to pull back forward. So, um, I do want to

57:04 confirm it's there. We're de delaying it, but I also want to be, you know, just transparent about the potential of being able to pull it up is is not going to be um, you know, there's not going to be a high probability for that. >> Fresh my memory and maybe for the others, uh, when we're talking about harder hardening the line, what is that risk that we're preventing there? What what's the purpose of that? >> Bringing it up to a seismic standards today's standards. >> Okay. So, if we had the major earthquake in the next few years, then that's when that would come into play for the the region of the community that's being delayed.

57:50 And how many um how many of the uh water stations do we have in the in the region that's in question that would be served by this the other water stations that we've been putting into place? >> Seven emergency water stations. >> And how many are in the region that would be impacted by the delay? >> None of those are impacted by the >> the water station. No, but how many of those water stations serve the region that would that's in the delay? Two. I had to phone a friend to back here. Three. Okay. Three. I'm hearing three. >> So, three of the seven are in that region to continue to provide support for the areas that would be affected by these delays. >> Okay. I mean, it's not a perfect situation, but also, I mean, if we have a major earthquake, we're going to have

58:36 all kinds of other challenges that we're going to be facing. So, you know, I personally think it's it's a calculated risk uh reduction measure that seems prudent given the other sorts of challenges that are imminent for us. So, thank you. >> Thank you. I can count. Um so, uh any other questions or comments regarding this item? All right. We're still about 10 minutes ahead of um the scheduled public hearing. Is anybody signed up to testify? >> Well, what I'm going to do is I'm going to to stay on schedule. I'm going to open the public hearing for uh the uh uh

59:22 upcoming year 2027 budget assumptions and long-term finance plan. And nobody signed up to testify, then I will close it. If somebody does show up at 6:50 or at 6:40, I will reopen it and let them testify. So, if you can just let me know if somebody does show up. So, the next agenda item, I guess if that then that concludes, does everybody have all their questions answered? Because next agenda item was going to be our discussion. And if we just knock that out, then we're done and we're going to go to Leeberg. But John, sorry, >> I would just ask of staff, do you have from us what you need? Well, let me tell you what I think I got and uh if you can confirm that we'll add $100,000 to the customer care budget

1:00:07 that will return within November. Uh the board is amendable to entertaining a resolution that would reduce our targeted debt service coverage to 1.75. uh which uh means that a 15% revenue requirement for the water utility following approach A would then be attainable. I I think that I heard that the additional cost associated with bumping principal payments out was really not tenable. Tim and Mindy, do you have any comment on what you just heard from Deborah?

1:00:52 >> Sounds good to me. That's my understanding as well. Thank you. >> All right. Well, we're good. We're good. >> Good. Thank you. >> Okay. The next agenda item is a Leer Leeberg LDAP update. >> All right. So, as the team makes their way up, um just kind of the preamble, the um this is an update on the Leeberg decommissioning action plan as well as the um strategic evaluation of Walterville hydro project. Um of course, safety and risk mitigation along the Mackenzie River remains a top priority for us. Um we are actively u executing FD directed near-term measures um to lower Leeberg Canal water levels. Um and I mean no different than what we're

1:01:38 seeing with the um trail bridge situation. Um there are regulatory challenges that we're encountering. Um but a lot of great work is happening. Um they'll get more into detail, but you know we've got runner removals um taking place and then the engineering team is also advanced designs u for the Johnson Creek reconnection and Cogwell Creek r-root. U so a lot of good stuff to talk about here. And then on the Walterville side, um you know, we are processing or evaluating um four long-term options ranging from continued generation um to potential decommissioning of that um of that unit. So, um a lot of things in play. Uh but, you know, we're also

1:02:25 mindful of the impact to the community. Um and we're going to be committed to ongoing public outreach and um coordination with the community. So um just want to reemphasize our commitment to transparency um for a what I would describe as a responsible transition. With that, I'll hand it over to Lisa and the team. >> Great. Thank you. Uh good evening, commissioners, President Brown, everyone else in attendance. I'm Lisa Crren, chief electric operations officer. Here with me tonight are Mark Zker, our generation manager, and Jeremy Samoji, our Liber decommissioning um project manager. Uh as John Harrison mentioned, we are here to give you an update on our Leeberg

1:03:10 decommissioning action plan and the associated uh paral parallel work. Next slide, please, Jeremy. As with past updates, we'll touch base on our near-term risk reduction efforts. uh the Waltfield strategic evaluation and Liber decommissioning program updates uh including a public outreach summary. And with that, I'll hand it over to Mark Zker. >> Thank you, Lisa. Yeah, f first we'd like to uh touch on a few >> There we go. Apologies. Good evening, Commissioners. Um first, we'd like to touch on a few near-term risk reduction topics. As the board knows, uh despite the canal being out of service, it does continue to convey water. Um so we've

1:03:56 been working under a FK directive to keep the canal levels low and provide additional discharge capacity. Uh we've done a lot of uh risk reduction work already and we have more under way. Uh Jeremy will talk about contractor that's currently working up there on the removal of a second runner at the Liber Powerhouse. It's an effort that matches the work that we already did on the first unit back in late 23, early 24. Uh we have a big effort underway uh currently advancing designs for reconnecting Johnson Creek. Um and um and could um and we'll be providing some uh updates um on that topic as well. So uh Jeremy uh can start us off with some

1:04:41 a few updates about the runner removal uh at the low-level outlet at the forbay. Thanks, Mark. The photo on the right shows a completed runner uh removal that was completed in January of 2024. And the photo on the left shows the second runner that is currently being removed. Work is ongoing, but is on target to be substantially complete by this time next week. This will allow for additional discharge capacity to keep the canal water level uh canal water levels lower. Uh so far so good on that runner removal and uh they completed about 80% of the actual runner removal today. In order to increase the low-level outlet capacity and efficiency, EWHIP staff is supplementing the inplace debris management system with a mobile

1:05:26 telescoping and articulating grade all excavator to help manage debris buildup at the Penn trash rack. As shown in the right SL uh right photo, uh the debris does build up and can be a challenge to pass water and it can blind the the pen stock trash rack. And as shown in the center folder uh photo, the acquired equipment is a rapidly deployable grade all and it's a versatile piece of equipment that can be used for other functions and emergent needs at the utility. The figure on the right depicts the long reach range it has and it's approximately 52 foot of reach. And this is an all-in cost delivered with two extendable uh attachments to achieve

1:06:12 that 52 foot reach for about $150,000. Uh finding and testing this equipment uh should be credited to the fleet team led by Gary Lent. >> Great. Thanks, Jeremy. Uh the work going on at the forbay is going to be really helpful. Um but we're hoping to accomplish even more substantial risk reduction by reconnecting Johnson Creek to the Mackenzie River. As shown in this aerial, the Johnson Creek reconnection project will remove a portion of the canal so that Johnson Creek can flow through its historical channel between the canal and highway 126, then pass under the highway and flow through a restored channel through agricultural fields to return to the river. Next slide.

1:06:57 Uh the reconnection project will achieve substantial risk reduction within the downstream reaches of the canal that present the most risk in terms of potential inundation of development in the event of a canal breach. The lower black line in this figure is the bottom of the canal. The light gray line is the crest of the canal and the blue line indicates the depth of water during a high flow event under current operation conditions. The green line shows an 8 to 11 ft drop in water depth within the highest risk reaches of the canal once the reconnection project is complete. It's a huge risk reduction effect and it aligns perfectly with the current visions for the ultimate decommissioning project.

1:07:43 Jeremy, could you share a few more details about the reconnection project? >> Thanks, Mark. Just as Mark mentioned and touched on, the Johnson Creek reconnection is a beneficial reduction project, risk reduction project that also dovetales well with our decommissioning program. We are expecting to submit a non-capacity amendment to the joint liberal bill license. And some highlights are we did finish our 30% plan development and we will be sharing them in full with our key regulatory and stakeholder groups in the coming weeks. And we recently shared these in a page turn uh information session with these groups in a fk specific and an all agency meeting. Our 60% plan development is in progress and we are targeting the implementation of

1:08:29 this measure in the 2028 and 29 construction seasons. In addition to reconnecting Johnson Creek, managing Cogwell Creek flows is an integral part of our risk reduction strategy to reduce canal water levels in the high-risisk areas. As shown in the left figure, we plan to install a canal a canal plug just below the confluence to isolate and route the water to our existing wasteway gate structure that is located approximately 8/10 of a mile upstream and it'll daylight directly into the Mackenzie River. The photo on the right shows our wasteway gate and that's a operable uh wasteway gate structure. It's a spillway structure that we generally leave open all all year now as a new operational condition.

1:09:16 And the canal plug will be comprised of a comprised of concrete and it'll have an operable gate that will allow flexibility and manage smaller flows as needed. as an update on our phase 2 geotechnical subsurface exploration program. We actually we actually mobilized for our phase two yesterday and we started our first boring today and that's located near Mountain View Lane. And the first phase was focused on near-term risk reduction planning and was completed in February of this year. And our phase two aims to supplement near-term risk reduction gap planning and interim dis uh and and to inform our decommissioning planning. Adam Spencer posted info in the Blue River Bulletin board and the Mackenzie River reflections to let to

1:10:03 let the Upper River community know about the drilling work and to advise of intermittent impacts to their trail use. >> Thanks Jeremy. Uh moving to Walterville, our consultant team has recently completed the development of cost estimates to support the evaluation of alternative forward for the Walterville development. The alternatives under consideration include one, operation through the current license term in 2040, followed by decommissioning, option two, operation through the current license term and relicicensing to operate until 2080. And third, moving towards decommissioning in the near term. That fourth option listed uh sale and

1:10:50 transfer of the license would require the presence of a viable third party. It's something that EWIB could be open to but would only be able to evaluate if we had a viable third party proposing terms. Um the Walterfield eval strategic evaluations currently targeted for a Q127 completion um for the decision. Next slide. So the the two alternatives that involve continued operation either through the current license period or even longer under a new license presume that EW would complete repairs to the Walterville forbay in 2027 and return to service in 2028. The final repair design was submitted to FIRK in July and if the

1:11:37 TBL analysis decision results in continued operation, the repair would be built in the summer and fall of 27. Next slide. So Jeremy, uh, finally, would you want to go ahead and provide an update on the Leeird decommissioning program at large? >> Yeah, thanks Mark. Uh, the Liber decommissioning program is ongoing. uh it's heavily supported by our consultant team led by McMillan and some of the highlights from this year are we did complete our baseline hydraologic and hydraulics report. We've been advancing our stakeholder and risk management planning and some key 2027 look aheads are we're going to confirm our regulatory approach after a Walterville determination. Uh Mark touched on some

1:12:23 of the alternatives we were uh that we're evaluating and we do plan to work to understand the future disposition of some key project features such as powerhouse, the park, boat ramp, etc. and continued budget refinement. And one of the requisite decisions for our decommissioning planning is the river crossing solution at the Leeberg Dam. And we have been coordinating with Lane County and and we also completed a TBL analysis late last year in coordination with them as well. And we shared it with the EW le leadership earlier this year. And we do continue to coordinate with the county staff and we are also planning to share the details of our TBL with the county board of commissioners in early 2027.

1:13:09 County staff did recommend that we wait until the upcoming election cycle ends so potential new commissioners are able to participate in that process. This slide depicts the highle schedule that also shows the three interdependent processes that we touched on today with the near-term risk reduction, the Walter bill assessment as well as our just general overarching Leeberg decommissioning program. Some key highlights that I will touch on in a subsequent slide are milestones that will have board direction to include proposed action in Q1 of 2028. We may be able to accomplish that in Q4 of 2027 as well, but we're on target currently for Q1 of 2028 and our approval of the FIRK

1:13:54 order in late 2030 2031, possibly Q1 to 2032. As an outreach summary, so far this year, the project staff with immense support from our incredible comms team provided at least 10 updates that include a mix of press releases, newsroom stories, direct emails, in-person meetings being available at the Walterville Fair, and we uh recently uh hosted an architectural historians conference project tour at the Leeberg Powerhouse this past Friday, and that was led by Austin Bloom. And as mentioned uh and then in the scheduling slide uh we'll be sharing uh a handful of uh board input you know

1:14:40 items throughout the the progress of our uh Leeberg program with various issues that'll include the Walterville disposition early next year the final version of our proposed action in Q1 of 2028 as well as any major changes and assumptions that that will require your guidance. Great. >> Yeah. Thank you for that summary, Jeremy. And I that was our last slide and like to open it up for questions and comments from the board. >> I'll go back to slide 31, please. Uh I I just had a question about uh the stretch where we're reconnecting Johnson

1:15:27 Creek with uh with with the river. Um we this this water flows through there but it's been constricted for 100 years. Correct. >> Yeah. We've diverted we've captured Johnson Creek and conveyed it through the canal since the late 20s. Do we have and has there been an analysis on the risk associated with all of this other water that has been diverted but now going through this channel and what the the risk to other properties and other around there. I can't tell it looks like there's some wiggle room around there but but >> would love your thoughts on it. >> Yeah. No, that's yeah. So this that's a good good slide there. So this um uh the

1:16:12 slide that Jeremy's got up right now um depicts what the water levels are going to be in the canal. Um what we're um planning around is uh the possibility of a 500year flood. Um that's uh what the ODOT is going to require that we be able to tolerate going underneath the highway. Great. Um and uh the consulting team's hydraulic modeling work today is indicating that that can be accommodated within the historical channel. No problem at all. >> Okay. >> Um minimum minimal potential for inundation of the adjoining properties there. And then the portion of the creek that would be restored channel on the other side of

1:16:57 the highway is going to be you know you know easily adjusted in terms of its configuration to maintain. >> Okay. So that that area >> flood risk yeah >> has been looked at and they they think that roughly what they currently have can accommodate a major flood even with development and other things that have you know been there over the last hundred years. >> Correct. and and we are actually designing the uh channel initially to accommodate more than Johnson Creek alone can okay uh produce um because we'll initially be conveying a portion of the other creeks that are flowing into the canal up river >> and so it's it's going to be quite conservatively designed for the long term. >> Okay. >> Um but it'll be everything will be done

1:17:42 such that it it can roll into the decommissioned state. Um, >> so we do have to on the back on that, we do have to do some additional work in that area a little bit here and there to to make sure that that canal can accommodate that extra water. >> The the portion of the the Yeah, the historical channel >> the historical will have see some modifications, but it's well within the capability of the the general topography there already. >> Okay. >> So, it's it's fairly minimal. >> Great. Um, and then can you go back to slide 29? I was just curious, can you give me a sense of scale of how big that um the device is that's being removed? >> Yeah, it's about seven seven foot diameter.

1:18:27 >> Oh, okay. >> It's quite large. Okay. Several thousant. It's just hard to tell from this picture. I mean, I know it's not that big, but >> if you've ever visited Lloyd Knox Park, the old runner is sitting there in front of the um the kiosk. >> Oh, okay. Yeah. >> Great. Okay. Um I'm excited to hear that there's this is already happening to help mitigate that risk. Um it did it did sort of bring up for me a question. Uh you know the biggest part of the Leeberg Dam removal uh costs are safety and the risks associated with canal failure. I just wonder if our in our financial planning if there would be any benefit to pushing out some of the work or if we're just required by FIRK

1:19:14 to get it done by a certain date because of our license anyway because I know that's another big cost pressure that that we have. So I'll throw that out there for >> Can I respond quickly to that, Commissioner Carlson? >> Thank you. The near-term risk reduction measures, we don't feel like we we have our own urgency from from our own concerns around risk there. So, the near-term risk reduction measures will were full force moving as quickly as as we can. The schedule for long-term decommissioning um I wouldn't say it's wholly at our discretion, but there is probably more flexibility there if we feel like we have the public safety component um you know considered. Yeah. Yeah. And that is work that we are reserving

1:20:01 for through the through the um plan that you all approve to preund that and we're lining up collection of those funds with the expected expenditure. >> Okay. Um you know I I don't want to uh delay any safety issues. I mean those for me are number one. But if there was work that we could do, and I know there's operational costs and others that are associated with operating the the dam, but if for some reason it happened that it balanced out to move that part out um in terms of the dam removal side of it, I I would be curious if there was some opportunity there given our other cost pressures and the

1:20:46 fact that our community doesn't there's certain folks that don't support it. Anyway, it was just a thought. Um, I'll I'll leave it out there. Thanks. >> I'm Apologies. Commissioner Brown just said, uh, we will continue and we do continue to think about schedule and pacing of the work as we get more information and get further down the design process, both what's feasible from a regulatory approval perspective, but also financing, whatnot. Um, so we keep revisiting it. You saw the the schedule we're we're shooting for. there are some benefits to us to move forward quickly. So, we'll need to think about that um comprehensively if we were to shift anything out. >> Yeah, thank you.

1:21:37 >> Great. Thank you. Um yeah, you can go back to the overhead. Um I'm really excited about repatriating Cogwell and Johnson Creek to the to the main stem. Uh that was something that when we first went through this, it wasn't really on the plan. we were just going to storm water conveyance all the way down. So my question being if we're going to plug at Johnson or excuse me if we're going to plug up at Cogwell and repatriate uh Johnson just straight down through the other four miles. Are there other tributaries that need to be repatriated that we could repatriate, you know, smaller tributaries with just culverts so that we could totally do away with the need for the canal and our and our

1:22:24 long-term liability of the canal of because right now you you alluded to the fact that the the plug at Cogwell would have a lift gate in case we needed to continue to use the canal. Are we looking at ways of just not going pre- canal conditions all along? >> Yes, absolutely. We that would be the pref preferred path for if we could repatriate each of the creeks. Cogwell is the tough one though, right? >> Um there are a number of additional creeks where a culvert solution um could be all that we need, but Cogwell is a tough one. >> Yeah. And I think that the the the plan that you have to repatriate

1:23:10 Cogswwell works. Plug it up, put it back through the existing spillway. That's only8 ten of a mile that we're having to maintain. But if we can stop maintaining four other four more miles by repatriating the rest of the storm water that's coming down and uh then have that liability taken away from us in perpetuity is something that that I would again >> just as I would I mentioned early on when we were talking about using the whole canal as storm water conveyance all the way down. I said, "Let's try and repatriate because that takes away our long-term liability." I I like the fact that you guys are looking at that and I want you to continue to look at that um

1:23:55 for some of the smaller ones. Um and I don't even know how many >> Yeah. >> other ones and how many we would be really required to uh be repatriated. That's that's something I'm really happy that is happening and I'm I'm uh glad with the direction that we're going on that. >> Just a quick comment on that. We we wholeheartedly agree it's it's it's I think in the community's best interest and in EW's best interest to return to pre-ro conditions to the extent possible. I did want to just take a moment and shout out to both the internal e-web team and our consultant team who who really have come up with some very creative solutions that weren't entirely on our radar when um the board you know voted to move towards

1:24:42 the partial decommissioning. We will continue um to look at at creative solutions throughout the process. >> Yeah. And and as somebody who who walks, you know, I go up there and I walk the path, you know, right now with it at low water level and the steep banks, it's it's dangerous. You know, a dog goes down there or somebody goes down and tries to to do it. It's it's not a safe environment for for our customers and the people that are walking it and our liability a as well as the water quality that is in there is stagnant and warm and and going in at at a low level. So, anything we can do to to make this whole river system as back to normal as back to pre preconditions I think is best for

1:25:29 ew as a whole and as and the river as a whole. So I I encourage you to keep looking in those directions. Indie anything. >> Nothing from me. Thank you. >> Him. Uh not I did have a question but it is escaping me at this moment. Um thank you to staff for for bringing forward um this uh this work here. Um, uh, is there any question that we haven't asked that you were hoping to answer? >> We did a pretty good job of putting the key highlights we wanted to communicate to you into the presentation and the memo.

1:26:14 Yeah, I would just say there's one highlight that probably has been overlooked in the fact that this team I want to recognize, you know, some of the things that you brought up, Commissioner Barski, the technical uh work that they've done on this and coming up with solutions and has just been really great, great work. Uh the other piece is that this is a highly contentious issue uh throughout the community and and they have done a stellar job at managing um a lot of the you know contentiousness um being transparent and and really weighing into some difficult conversations. We'll continue to have that and avail ourselves under that transparency. But I also wanted to recognize um the team, you know, Lisa, I mean Mark, Jeremy, Adam, a whole host of

1:27:01 folks have done a tremendous job. >> Hey, thank you. I'm got just a couple of quick questions. Number one, I I wholeheartedly support returning Cogwell and Johnson and, you know, getting out of the business of maintaining a a burm for perpetuity. Uh like to be able to at least sell a couple of those houses we have up there. Um, but I've been questioned by a few constituents of why do we still impound water at Leeberg if we're not diverting it? I mean, it costs us a lot of money and it's not doing any good. Why do we continue to impound water? >> Meaning, why don't we just open the roll gates all the way, >> right? >> Yeah. Um, I don't know, Mark, if you want to take that and we have a couple of additional comments from Marks. >> Sure. So we we have had um hydraulic engineers take a look at that and

1:27:47 they've demonstrated that the drop across the spillway is a it would basically look like a tail race barrier. It's perhaps the most the strongest fish could pass through there but it's be a small of the fish that need to migrate and the fish ladders would cease to be functional if we lowered the lake. >> Okay. So, we still have both both the ladders operating and so that which until we figure that out and and and knock the bottom of them out, it won't it won't happen. >> Correct. >> Okay. Thank you. That's a good explanation. I appreciate it. So, thank you very much. I'm all all in favor going forward and I'll be interesting to see what Walter Bill comes up with the economics of that because I know that's not of the two that wasn't the strongest of the two. So, it'll be interesting to

1:28:33 see that case to either extend it or >> just just a highlight since you you know we haven't done that that analysis yet, but just a reminder for folks um since Commissioner Brown brought it up, Walterville is a different um it's a different system. Um while historically it hasn't been as in the black as Leeberg was when the power plants were operating um the Walterville Canal is not designated high hazard along its entirety as Leeberg is. And so in terms of you know that the analysis looks different around what sort of improvements might be made. Again u we haven't completed that analysis yet but um there are differences between the

1:29:18 projects. Okay, thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Do you have what you need from us? John wanted one more round. Yeah, I I guess I'm going to Walterville. Um because that was part of the presentation. We kind of focused on on Leeberg on the on the canal and yeah, I'm I'm really interested in where that's going. um especially the the near-term viability of, you know, we've got it we've got it until 2040. How much is it going to cost to to do the the repairs downstream, you know, the the short-term repairs, and we've got a pretty good handle on what that's going to cost and whether FK will say yes or no to it. and then we can figure that out to make sure that it will be

1:30:05 economically viable to do it through 2040. The the question or the concern that I have is that when we were talking about relicensing the pair, you know, it not decoupling them, the price was pretty high for a relicicensing. And you know, we saw how much it was to relic Karm. I'm just wondering since it's it's like you said not as hazardous of a of a conveyance to get the water through there. Do you anticipate it being in the hundreds of millions of dollars to relicens that or is that something that that once we fix this and just say, "Hey, we just want to

1:30:50 keep this going." Obviously, there are different uh environmental regulatoratory uh things that we may have to jump through that have come in since it was rellicensed the last time, but just a deal for is it is it going to be a huge thing? And that and the reason I say that is one, I hate to lose hydro in in our portfolio, especially, you know, even if it's a small 8 megawatt or whatever hydro we're getting out of Walterville. Um, I hate to lose that out of our portfolio, but also if if it's not feasible for our rateayers to come up with that and do that in the long term, you know, one of the options was sale and find, you know, putting it

1:31:38 out there that says, "Hey, is there somebody out there?" Because I know that the the economics of a for-profit utility are different than a economics for us, the way that they can debt service and those types of things. So just kind of it >> yeah I would I would hesitate to to put a number um to it prior to you know actually completing the analysis would say relicensing costs as you're all aware um are substantial. Walterville um is a relatively small power plant when operating. So, uh, even though it's not as, uh, classified as high hazard along its entirety, from a from a canal sort of seismic stability perspective, that's less, uh, complicated than Leeberg. Uh, but overall, uh, I do think we would

1:32:23 expect relicency cost to be relatively high. And I will see if Mark or Jeremy want to rebut or add anything to that. We did receive really high level costs, but the refined capital costs are due to us within the next week and a half or so. And then we'll take those and we'll run our MPV analysis on those to get our all-in cost for the you know life of the license or a potential new license. So, uh we'll we'll be able to share that out by the end of the year. and and decommissioning is probably at least the half as much or more to de to decommission it as it would be to replace. So >> yeah, I I would say that you know we'll we'll evaluate all options but you know

1:33:08 from a philosophical perspective um I I think if to the extent possible we should be trying to maintain hydro in our u portfolio. So, we'll look really hard at those costs and try to balance it with what we think our future needs are. >> Good. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Sonia >> wanted to note that even though we have a break significantly above if we don't have that much, there's already two of the three here. If we wanted to continue, >> that's a will of the board. You guys want to go? We're we're half hour ahead of schedule. Um, if you want, next agenda item is uh 20 minutes. It's a dam safety program update. We could just kick into that and then get a break. I

1:33:54 mean, you haven't had dinner, so you good? I mean, that's Mindy and Tim, you have a preference. >> I say keep going. >> You're on ahead. >> Okay. Well, the next agenda item is going to be the M safety program if you don't mind. >> All right. Well, you know, while we transition here, I think, you know, basically, uh, you know, our fundamental responsibility is protecting public safety and our personnel and the surrounding environment. Um, over the past year, we've updated our program documentation and expanded our engineering team to strengthen the technology, our tech technical oversight and regulatory compliance uh, with our program. Um

1:34:39 we've comp completed some of the FK um annual inspections and are preparing upcoming safety reviews. Um and I think we've had some positive responses you hear about from Ferg regarding Common Smith and our seismic work there. Additionally, I would say u you know we continue to work on the emergency aspects contingency um issuing our emergency action plans and working with local first u responders. So, a lot of growth has taken place since the um last update. Um, but I just wanted to kind of kick things off in saying that I think this really demonstrates our commitment to uh maintaining the highest safety standards for our customers and and the community. So, that I'll hand it over to Lisa.

1:35:25 >> Thank you, General Manager Haristen. Uh, I would like to welcome Laura Omen to the table, our chief dam safety officer and dam safety program supervisor. And with that, I will just hand it back over to Mark to to do the initial kickoff. Thank you. >> Great. Thank you, Lisa. Yeah, tonight is our annual opportunity to share out on the dam safety program. Um, and Laura's got a lot of good highlights to share with you. Um, also an opportunity to ask questions and share any of your own observations, comments um on the dam safety topics because we do have a nice chunk of time at the end, another 10 minutes for um questions and comments. So, um, Laura's gonna present on this set of topics tonight. Um, she'll have

1:36:10 some ODSP updates. Uh, then she'll provide information on recent and upcoming FK inspections at our facilities. Um, she'll share out some highlights from both Carmen and Leeberg. And then she's going to provide some updates on the emergency action plan uh for both Carmen and Leeberg. So, there's the intro. And with that, I'll hand the slides over to Lauren. Thanks, Mark. All right. Can we hear me? Okay. Um, good evening, commissioners. I'll start with an update on Ew Webb's owner's dam safety program or ODSP. The ODSP is the framework we use to ensure dam safety remains an organizational priority. It's a FIRK requirement and it establishes responsibilities for dam safety or

1:36:56 leadership, training, communication, reporting, recordkeeping, and ongoing program improvement. EW reviews and updates the ODSP annually. Over the last year, we've continued to strengthen the program through additional dam safety procedures and systems, improved communication practices, and we're currently developing a comprehensive training program for both dam safety engineering and operations staff. [clears throat] We plan to implement those training programs in 2027. We remain fully staffed with five team members including myself, two senior dam safety engineers, an engineering

1:37:41 associate, and a regulatory compliance specialist. We're expanding the team this year to include a new engineering staff member to address the increased workload and support the significant capital work that's planned over the coming years. Our team provides program leadership, technical analysis and design review, regulatory co coordination, construction oversight, and compliance tracking. We also work closely with generation staff to make sure that dam safety is incorporated into projects and operational decisions. Both of our Mckenzie River projects had annual FK inspections this year. This [clears throat] typically includes a site inspection, review of surveillance and monitoring information,

1:38:27 and discussions about normal and emergency operations. Both inspections went quite well and had minimal follow-up items. Looking ahead, we have two significant part 12D inspections coming up. Part 12D inspections occur every five years, and there's two different types. One is a periodic inspection or PI and the other is a comprehensive assessment or CA. These two different types of part 12D inspections are much more extensive than the FIRK annual inspections and require us to contract with an independent consultant team. Both types of inspections are done in coordination with FIRK staff and include detailed field inspections and review of

1:39:12 historical analyses and records. the comprehensive assessment however includes two sets of workshops for each facility, the potential failure modes analysis workshops and a risk assessment workshop. Because of these workshops and the in-depth requirements, um the CA is much more timeconuming and more expensive. Leeberg Walterville is scheduled for a periodic inspection in 2027 and Carmen Smith is scheduled for a comprehensive assessment in 2028. We are beginning the contracting process now for both inspections and you'll see these contracts in the coming months. Next, the Carmen Smith project includes Carmen Diversion, Smith and Trail Ridge dams

1:39:58 and reservoirs. All three of these facilities continue to be operated safely and in compliance with applicable requirements with ongoing monitoring by the dam safety team. There are three conditions that we continue to monitor closely that you're familiar with. Um first is the trail ridge reservoir has existing sink holes. Those are associated with historical construction methods and the local geological conditions. We monitor these through instrumentation and bathmetric surveys. Second, the spill the Smith spillway does not have sufficient capacity to pass the probable maximum flood or PMF and an auxiliary spillway is being designed to address that condition. Third, um the Carmen diversion reservoir

1:40:44 also has existing sink holes. This is also associated with local geological conditions. We manage this condition through a lower reservoir operating level and pimet bometric surveys. The seismic hazard analysis has been completed and accepted by FK. And what this does is it tells us what type of shaking we could experience at our hydro projects um which is called seismic loading. The next step is to apply that information to our existing structures and the dam embankments to determine the impacts of a potential seismic event. That work is underway for all of our projects and any necessary improvements will be incorporated into our capital projects.

1:41:29 The board of consultants continues to provide valuable independent technical review as well as a FIRK being a FIRK required process. They provide inputs on projects including trailbridge fish passage flow release structures at Smith and Carmen diversion and the Smith auxiliary spillway. The four BOC member contracts have been in place since 2021 when we discovered the sink holes at Trailbridge. We're reviewing these four contracts right now and anticipate renewing them for another five years. In addition to being a fick requirement, we benefit greatly from their expertise and will utilize their services through design and construction phases of our capital projects at Carmen Smith.

1:42:15 Moving downstream to Liber Walterville, um Lee Canal continues to be used for storm water conveyance. So, Dam Safety continues to monitor that facility even though it's no longer used for generation. Tonight, you already heard and a detailed update from the Liber decommissioning team for the um the Walterville the Walter 4 bay has a known seepage issue that we've been monitoring closely with real-time instrumentation and alarms. Because of this issue and the risk of internal erosion, the canal has remained dewatered since February of 2024. We do have, as stated in a previous uh presentation, we do have a com a complete design for the um for a liner to repair the forbay and have submitted

1:43:00 that to FK for review and approval. In addition, over the last year, um we've completed several other additional analyses for Walterville, including seismic evaluations and hydraulic and hydraologic studies specific to the high hazard areas of that canal. EWB then did an internal risk assessment with our consultants to integrate the findings and of the new analyses and to evaluate what do they mean for the project moving forward. The assessment supported moving forward with the Walterville for bay liner project. We discussed the results with FK in June of 2026 and we submitted those reports to FK in July of 2026. So we're now awaiting FK approval. If

1:43:46 approved, we anticipate procurement and construction of the foray liner in 2027. Um, FK review timelines remain an important factor in that schedule. Next, Ebub maintains an emergency action plan for each of its Mackenzie River projects. It establishes procedures for responding to a dam safety emergency. We update the plan annually and we regularly coordinate with local emergency managers. Later this month, we will conduct the Carmen Smith functional exercise at the Mackenzie Fire and Training Sta uh center. The exercise will focus on facility awareness, inter agency coordination, and response to a simulated dam safety emergency.

1:44:32 These exercises are an important part of maintaining emergency preparedness, not only for EWE but also for our local emergency partners. Over the last year, the dam safety program has continued to make meaningful progress in strengthening the program and building the capacity that we need for the years ahead. The team has continued to build institutional knowledge, strengthen our internal processes, and develop skills and experience needed to effectively manage an increasingly complex dam safety program. We have also continued to strengthen our working relationships with FIRK staff and make effective use of the resources available to us, including our board of consultants and our dam safety owners

1:45:17 representative. These relationships and independent resources provide valuable technical expert uh perspective and strengthen our ability to make informed dam safety decisions. We have a significant amount of work ahead of us in the next 5 to eight years including the part 12D inspections, regulatory requirements and also the capital projects. We are doing the work now to build the people, the processes and the relationships necessary to be prepared for that work. So again, I want to uh express my appreciation to the board for your continued engagement and the support of the dam safety program. Your support has allowed us to invest in the resources and capabilities that we need in order to strengthen our program

1:46:02 and also prepare for all the work that we have ahead of us. >> Yeah, thanks Laura. Laura's team has done just a fantastic job um since she's taken over the group. um they face a tremendous number of challenges and they're uh work working through those problems um on a daily basis and just really proud of how they're doing. >> Sonia, >> nothing. John, >> um I got three questions. >> One, you know, in one of those slides I saw the we from Stone Creek who does the the this work for Stone Creek. Is that is that part of

1:46:48 do we do the dam safety analysis? >> We do the damn safety for yep for Stone Creek. Um it's low hazard so it doesn't require the FIRK annual inspection for example and it doesn't require the EAP but we participate in um the EAPs of um PG&E which has the upstream and downstream hydro projects. Um and yeah we and we do go up there and do inspections when necessary. Yep. >> Okay. Um then the second question is on the sink holes on the diversion on the diversion reservoir we have lower levels. Is that something that's going to be in perpetuity or is it is it something that if we find that they're not they're not leaking as much or whatever we be able to bring that back up to to full volume.

1:47:34 >> Right now our plan our path forward is to keep them in per perpetuity because it's not impacting our operations. >> Okay. Um, yep. >> Okay. And then the last question I have is a little outside the box. These are these are a lot of really uh ownorous requirements that we have to go through and and for a good reason. We want we want to make sure all of our dams are safe and and that we're doing everything we have to do to to pass perks inspections. My question is, are the dams that are managed by the Army Corps have to go through these same type of uh requirements that we as a publicly owned utility have to go

1:48:19 through? I will just say um because uh the Army Corps dams are not regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, there's a different suite of requirements and perhaps Mark or Laura uh knows how they manage their dam safety program, which I'm I'm sure you they have one, but that they aren't subject to the same specific rules that we are as FK licensed hydro facilities. And I and I bring that up just to let the public know that the the the high bar that we're expected to reach because we're a FKlic licensed agency um is something that we

1:49:05 take very seriously, but it's also a bar that is super high, super high. You know, you uh uh alluded to the spillway at Smith River and that we have to go to the probable maximum flood, which is Can you tell me what the probable maximum flood level is on that one? How many years? >> Yeah, it's it's in excess of a 10,000year return frequency. >> Yeah. up to maybe one in a million year type of a frequency that we have to make sure that that that our our spillways are built to. So, uh just so the public knows that we're we're have a very high bar that we're trying to reach and and we're doing everything in our power to make sure that we reach those bars to be

1:49:50 federally uh in compliance. But sometimes those bars are really high and and I'm just wondering if the other dams in our in our region uh could meet that bar just just to know that we're going above and in my view above and beyond uh what is is required to make sure that our the the dams that we have under our purview are as safe the safest dams that can be maintained. And I appreciate all the work that you guys are doing to make sure that they are >> Mindy. >> Nothing from me. Thanks, >> Jim.

1:50:40 >> Nothing for me. Thank you. >> Thank you. I have a real quick just a curiosity question. So we started relicensing them in Carmen in 2008 that was here and uh but we didn't discover the sinkhole till 2021. Um is that because of lidar or is that because of uh you know we just missed it or is that not part of the initial process to go that long and not know that and and have that be such a impediment to our relationship? >> Yeah, I would say there is a technological explanation there. you know the um it's the sonar that they use for the bometric surveys um is was relatively new at that time. We did conduct a survey in 2010 but the potential the possibility of sinkholes

1:51:26 that trail bridge in particular was not on anybody's radar and there were some subsequent dam safety uh events that alerted people to that possibility. So when um we had uh a follow-up survey in 2021, that was a very natural question that our regulator asked us to do is compare it to the 2010. So that 2021 comparison to 2010 is what revealed that things were changed on the reservoir bottom. >> Thank you. Thank you. Anything else from anybody? Um if not, then thank you very much. We're done. Thank you. >> Okay. Um you guys just want to go through the next two items and just call it a day. >> Yeah. >> All right. Then next is going to be the city of Egene liaison update. Um John or

1:52:12 Sonia, you want to give a report? >> Yeah. So um you know we met with the city uh our counterparts at the city I want to say on the u was it the 10th? September. Yeah. somewhere in there. Uh but you know I think as prior meetings they were pretty productive. I think the uh if I remember correctly the um main point of discussion was around the pending decision at that point on um data centers and um kind of how they were looking at that process and where um we were kind of sitting in terms of our process which was primarily waiting

1:52:57 to see where things had would come out on the zoning front. Um the other piece of it was just u making a commitment to our continued communications which um I did emphasize my appreciation to the city um and the um city manager that u the communications that we've had with them on a number of issues have been really good and I think improved um since uh we've been meeting more regularly and have made a commitment to um kind of a no surprises commitment u with each other on major issues. So, um those are the things that you know I recalled from that discussion. >> The only other thing that I would add was uh kind of an update around um you know some of the continued work that

1:53:42 you're doing to um get connections with with Springfield to continue to build that relationship and see if you know given the changing situation and cost structure and such if there's some opportunities there. And I I think the mayor gave us kind of her perspective about where we may go if the uh climate uh uh climate clean energy fund passes, who's going to administer it, how it's going to be, you know, some of the things there about the logistics of how that's going to go and the challenges dealing with that. So, any questions from uh either John or Tim or Mindy?

1:54:27 >> Nope. Seeing none, future board agendas. >> Uh, President Brown, the only question I had on the future board agendas was uh whether or not we needed the work session on October 20th. >> Does anybody need a work session coming up? >> Didn't see a need for one, but just wanted to confirm that with the board. >> Was Was that the one that was going to be in the Caribbean? because if if so, I I I would really like to make sure that we attend that one. >> I'm not even going to joke around with that one. >> All right. So, if that's it on future board agendas, board wrap-up, I'll start with Sonia. >> Nothing for me. Thanks, >> John. Uh, >> I just want to thank staff for all the

1:55:13 hard work that they've done in presenting today and throughout the months. Mindy Thanks for staff for helping me get on this meeting. I had some trouble doing that. So, thanks for the IT support >> Tim. >> Yeah. Uh, similar to uh, Commissioner Barroski, thank you to staff for navigating so many complex topics in a short amount of time. Um, and thank you, President Brown, for ensuring that Mindy and I were heard and called upon. So, thanks. >> Thank you. And I would like to wish both of you a speedy recovery and thank you for you taking your your sacrifice to staying home and especially with co. So a speedy recovery and get over that quick. John, anything for the good of the order?

1:55:58 >> Um only appreciate you hanging in there too. I know you've been dealing with some challenges with the u back there. So >> I could have been on the river today, but I decided to come in instead. So not really. I just couldn't couldn't answer the bell. So all right. Thank you. Thanks. You bet. Well, that said, I'm going to adjourn the meeting. Thank you.