Present: Dorothy Anderson, Patrick Lanning, Paul Conte, and Ron Farmer. Commissioner Sandra Bishop was excused.
Others present: Randy Berggren, Dick Varner, Andrea Mason, Debra Smith, Roseanna McArthur, Jim Origliosso, Joanne Anderson, Dick Helgeson, and Krista Hince of the EWEB staff; Joe Sams, City of Eugene Minutes Recorder; and Tim Ryer, Consultant with AON.
AGENDA CHECK
President Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:25 p.m.
There were no changes to the agenda.
APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR
Minutes
1. May 20, 2002 Regular Session
2. July 24, 2002 Special Board Meeting
Budget Amendment
3. Treasury and Cash Payment
Business Service Agreements
4. ABB Energy Interactive, Inc - Strategic Metering Project - EMS - $117,000
5. G. Cole, Inc. - Annual Asphalt Repair Purchases - Water Division - $210,000
6. Public Agency Network 2002-2003 Budget -
7. Environmental Solutions - Leaburg/Walterville Relicensing - $54,500
Commissioner Conte, seconded by Vice President Lanning moved to approve the items on the Consent Calendar. The motion passed unanimously.
ITEMS FROM BOARD MEMBERS
President Anderson noted that a woman in her district had to pay more on her utility bill because of one meter at her apartment complex. She asked if staff would follow up on it.
Commissioner Conte said he would attend a trip to Cougar Reservoir regarding the impacts of the water draw down on August 14.
CORRESPONDENCE
General Manager Randy Berggren noted that the Lane County Fair was starting on August 14, he noted that EWEB would have its standard water booth. He invited the Board to attend if they so wished.
Mr. Berggren outlined the status reports that had been sent out to the Board as informational updates.
Mr. Berggren said the next Board meeting would be on September 3, 2002. He outlined the proposed agenda items.
PUBLIC INPUT
Mich Genese, 37901 Camp Creek Road, spoke about problems with wells. He raised concern that the wells in his neighborhood were drying up. He encouraged the Board to review the problem as a significant issue in the area. He noted that several hundred people could possibly be affected. He stressed that the area could not go months on end without water. He urged the Board to address the problem.
Lonny Jenkins asked for input from the Board on the well problem. He stressed the importance of working together so that the problem could be addressed. He suggested compressing the construction schedule so that the canal that fed the wells could have water rerouted through it.
John Duke, Falon Lane, expressed his dissatisfaction with the well problem. He said he was out $3,500 that he felt EWEB owed him for a new well.
George Mason provided a presentation on retirement benefits. He said that retirees represented the largest portion of the UAL (unfunded actuarial liability) but had no representation in the planning process. He submitted graphs into the record that compared retiree benefits with active employee benefits.
Mr. Mason called attention to the report furnished by staff. He went through figures shown in the report showing medical costs.
Mr. Mason said the same report had stated that retirees would have health care coverage for life. He said the same report said the retiree and their spouse could stay on the plan for life.
Mr. Mason said, during the negotiations, retirees proposed a new years of service chart that took into account the years an employee had served with the utility.
Mr. Mason requested that, at the time of a final decision by the Board, a promise be made that no further changes be made.
Steve Hill, testified as a rate payer and customer of the utility. He expressed his trust that the Board would consider all options when making a decision on retiree benefits. He stressed that a lot of people had helped to make the utility and expressed his concern that they would not be taken care of according to the agreement they had when they were originally employed.
Max Lebrick, 200 Sunset Drive, raised concern over trespassing on his property from a power line over his property that had no easement. He said the powerline went through the center of his new planned house. He said that EWEB would not pay to move the power line even though there was no easement located on his property. He expressed his anger that there had been no action on the issue since he had brought it up in 1997. He called for an answer from the Board on when the problem would be addressed.
President Anderson called for a report on the power line easement issue from Mr. Berggren.
RETIREMENT BENEFITS PROJECT
Laurie Muggy, Human Resource Specialist II, and Jean Meyers, Human Resources Manager, provided a presentation on the retirement benefits project. She submitted written material into the record.
Ms. Meyers said there were four objectives for the evening.
A. Share information which the project team produced details in the proposal.
B. Revisit the goals and values that were the foundation for the project.
C. Make sure that due diligence had been done in framing realistic proposals.
D. Get an idea of the level of Board support for the staff proposal. Board direction.
Ms. Meyers said if the Board did not support the staff proposal then she wanted two directions from the Board:
Ms. Muggy said there were items that staff had responded to from the last session. The first was a comparison of EWEB's group plan and the PERS medicare supplement plan with other benefit plans.
Noting that written information had been provided in the meeting packet, Ms. Muggy said the benefits offered through PERS were very comparable to the EWEB benefit plan. She noted that retirees might incur more out-of-pocket costs with the PERS plan.
Ms. Muggy acknowledged that the PERS group prescription benefit did not provide the level of coverage that the current group plan provided.
Commissioner Conte stressed the importance of the retirees having a clear idea of what was being proposed and expressed a desire for those people to be able to ask questions at anytime.
Commissioner Conte noted that there were different factors in the plans that could produce differing results and raised concern that the results would be statistically worthless. He cautioned against doing anything more until a more accurate comparison could be done, saying that the bottom line of the current report did not compare the benefits in a meaningful way.
Commissioner Farmer said the contributions listed were not a weighted average. He suggested a weighted average, which he had already done, and noted that this would drive EWEB's contribution up.
Ms. Muggy said the plans staff had used for the comparison were as close as possible to the current EWEB benefits.
Ms. Muggy said EWEB's benefits, including the post 65 subsidy, were more generous than any of the other surveyed plans. She said eliminating the post 65 subsidy, for tiers four and five, would bring EWEB more in line with other employer plans.
In response to a question from Commissioner Conte regarding the prescription drug benefit, Ms. Muggy said she had not gotten a new quote on the prescription drug benefit plan but noted staff had been able to look at providing a better benefit than the proposed 25 percent and had serious concerns as to whether it could be implemented.
Tim Ryer provided a presentation on figures of the Post Retirement Medical Insurance Plan. He said all of the calculations assumed an ongoing plan but noted that there was no obligation to continue any plan. He said if the tier one plan were still in existence the cost would be $61 million as opposed to $30 million.
In response to a question from Commissioner Farmer regarding Mr. Ryer's definition of funding, Mr. Ryer said funding would be EWEB's contributions to the plan.
There was general discussion of the figures presented. Commissioner Conte noted the greatest part of the proposed plan was borne by EWEB and not retirees.
Commissioner Farmer commented there was a lot of room for error in the five year projection as presented by staff.
Ms. Meyers moved the discussion on to project goals and values. She called for input from the Board regarding whether it felt that the goals and values were correctly stated.
Vice President Lanning thanked the team for their work. He said that the team had held to the values and goals outlined by the Board.
Commissioner Farmer said he did not feel that there was a misalignment of goals. He did note that the stake holder that was not represented was the rate payer. He said the most important aspect of the plan was sustainability. He raised concern with developing and approving a plan that would have to change in five years.
Commissioner Conte reiterated Commissioner Farmer and expressed his appreciation of the response to his questions in particular. He said one of his highest priorities was to see a sustainable plan developed. He raised concern over the way that the tiers had been set up but acknowledged that they were part of the expectations of the employees.
President Anderson stressed that the Board could not make everyone happy. She noted that commitments had been made to employees and the plan could not be changed in the middle. She opined that the work team had come up with an excellent proposal.
Commissioner Conte said he would not support the proposal as it was presented.
Vice President Lanning said there were systemic issues that were not being taken into account. He noted that the employees had put EWEB into its nationally recognized position. He said that comparable analysis needed to take those employees' work into account. He stressed the importance of looking forward over a longer period of time. He opined that the work team had met the goals outlined by the Board.
Mr. Berggren read comments phoned in from Commissioner Bishop regarding the issue. He said she did not think it was wise to change the tiers. He said she was generally supportive of the staff proposal but had concerns over the cost of the proposal.
Mr. Berggren said the Board would return to the issue in September or October which would give staff time to make any changes or bring back data that the board suggested. He said the UAL target for sustainability was not yet agreed upon.
Commissioner Farmer said he would favor a plan that eventually got rid of the UAL all together.
Commissioner Conte said that retirees needed to bear more of the risk of rising costs in health care. He called for a fixed plan of what EWEB would do in the future. He said the plan would not be sustainable unless EWEB capped its contribution.
ENVIRONMENTAL WETLANDS & GEOTECHNICAL STUDIES FOR 1ST AND SENECA PROPERTY PURCHASE
Mark Oberle, Property Manager, and Tom Buckhouse, Director of Facilities Services, provided a presentation on the studies involved in the Seneca property purchase.
Mr. Oberle said the search for a new location was part of the master plan for the utility. He noted that a 22 acre site had been located at 1st and Seneca and negotiations had begun. He said there were a fair amount of wetlands on the property. He said staff felt that wetlands were not a significant issue.
Regarding the Level 2 ESA, Mr. Oberle said contaminants had shown up in the southeast corner of the property. He said the source was off site and the Department of Environmental Quality was aware of it. He said this was an area of concern.
Regarding Geotechnical studies, Mr. Oberle said the top layer of soil had a lot of woody degree that would not support a foundation. He said lower layers of soil had clay deposits that would also not be conducive of foundations or floors. He said 10 to 15 feet of top soil would have to be removed and replaced with building friendly fill. He said the site could be developed at a high expense. He said the costs of mitigation would be higher than the costs of the land. He said staff were recommending not purchasing the property. He noted that a decision of the Board was needed by August 15, 2002.
Commissioner Farmer, seconded by Vice President Lanning, moved to terminate the land purchase. The motion passed unanimously.
Vice President Lanning, seconded by Commissioner Conte, moved to direct staff to continue looking for another site. The motion passed 3:0:1 with Commissioner Farmer abstaining.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR
There were no items pulled from the Consent Calendar.
The meeting adjourned at 10 p.m.
_____________ ______________________________________
Assistant Secretary President