Unknown: you
Unknown: good evening
SPEAKER_01: and welcome to the Policy Committee and Special Board Meeting of April 7, 2026.
SPEAKER_01: This room is equipped with a safety alarm. If the alarm sounds, please leave in an orderly manner
SPEAKER_01: via the exits to the lobby or behind the dais. Assemble in front of the building and wait to hear
SPEAKER_01: the all-clear announcement from security before re-entering. This meeting is being recorded
SPEAKER_01: and can be accessed on SMUD's website. Please remember to unmute your microphone when speaking
SPEAKER_01: in order that our virtual attendees may hear you. The microphone will display a green indicator light
Unknown: when the mic is on. For members of the public attending in person who wish to speak at this
SPEAKER_01: meeting, please fill out a speaker's request form located on the table outside this room
SPEAKER_01: and hand it to SMUD's security. Members of the public attending this meeting virtually
Unknown: who wish to provide verbal comments during the committee meeting may do so by using the
SPEAKER_01: raise hand feature in Zoom at the time public comment is called. Technical support staff will
SPEAKER_01: enable the audio for you when your name is announced during the public comment period.
Unknown: You may also submit written comments by emailing them to publiccommentatsmud.org.
SPEAKER_01: Written comments will not be read into the record but will be provided to the board electronically
SPEAKER_01: and placed into the record of the meeting if received within two hours after the meeting ends.
SPEAKER_01: Chief legal officer, please conduct the roll call. Director Kerth?
Unknown: Here. Dr. Rose? Here. Chair Herber? Here. All committee members are present. Also present are
SPEAKER_10: directors Buie Thompson, Fishman, Sam Borden, and President Tamayo. Very good. Item number one is the
SPEAKER_01: sole discussion item on tonight's agenda and requires board action tonight. Item number one
SPEAKER_01: is to approve the SMUD disclosure in the transmission agency of Northern California
SPEAKER_01: or TANK, the primary official statement for the TANK 2026 refunding bonds and authorize the CEO
SPEAKER_01: to determine that the information in the preliminary official statement is final.
SPEAKER_01: Now we would like to bring forward Jennifer Restivo, our directory, our directory, God,
SPEAKER_01: you're that too, but you're the director of Treasury and Revenue Strategy.
Unknown: Thank you, Chair Herber, again, Jennifer Restivo, Director of Treasury and Revenue Strategy,
Unknown: and thank you for doing that full mouthful because it is quite a lot to say.
SPEAKER_08: So really I'm here tonight because SMUD is a member of the transmission agency of Northern
SPEAKER_08: California. We lovingly refer to it as TANK because that's much easier to say.
SPEAKER_08: And TANK is a joint power authority that was created to build and operate a transmission line
SPEAKER_08: that goes from the California-Oregon border into California. It's known as the COTP line,
SPEAKER_08: California-Oregon transmission project. SMUD is a member of TANK, so as part of that we get our
SPEAKER_08: power from up north through that transmission line, the low and carbon free power from the northwest.
SPEAKER_08: And so just as you have the opportunity sometimes to refinance your home mortgage,
SPEAKER_08: because interest rates have changed, TANK has the opportunity to refinance its bonds that it issued
SPEAKER_08: in 2016. And so obviously there's a lot of, if you've watched the news, there's a lot of
SPEAKER_08: volatility in the markets at this point in time. And so the numbers I'm going to give you may not
SPEAKER_08: come to fruition. The current estimate is that TANK will save up to $16 million or about $2
SPEAKER_08: million a year in interest. SMUD as a member of TANK will get those savings passed on to us.
SPEAKER_08: So that could be about $700,000 a year. Obviously there's a lot of volatility happening.
Unknown: And so if for some reason that deal was not beneficial to TANK, they would not do the
SPEAKER_08: transaction. So next week the TANK commission will be likely approving the official statement
SPEAKER_08: disclosure and moving forward with that bond deal. And so we're asking for the SMUD board to approve
SPEAKER_08: our SMUD disclosure being part of TANK's official statement because we are one of the five largest
SPEAKER_08: members. And so therefore our disclosure is part of TANK's disclosure when they do a bond deal.
SPEAKER_08: So our disclosure document has gone through a lot of review from lots of people across the
SPEAKER_08: organization, Paul, executives, directors, and legal review. And so it is, and you've received
SPEAKER_08: that. And so you have this, that document will be going into TANK's and then obviously we will
SPEAKER_08: be able to reuse that document when we do our bond issuance later this year. Great. Well, once again,
SPEAKER_01: you all in finance are saving us money, which is great. Are there questions from the board?
Unknown: Just real quick, was the disclosure created for this purpose or are we using like last year's?
Unknown: Will we start from last year's and then update it? And so will this then flow into some of our
SPEAKER_02: work later this year? Yes. Yes. Timing-wise it should be, we should be able to reuse it for
SPEAKER_08: SMUD bonds. They're always, if you ever, I wish to be able to be able to be able to
SPEAKER_02: everyone at a single point of what's going on. It's a great document. So much information in there.
Unknown: Okay. Seeing no other comments, do we need to have a motion? We need to have a motion to accept
Unknown: the disclosure so that we can proceed with the TANK bond. Is there a second?
Unknown: All those in favor say aye. We'll need to do a roll call though. Sorry. I'm so sorry. I'm
SPEAKER_01: thinking I'm in my nonprofit group. Dr. Rose? Aye. Dr. B. Thompson? Yes. Dr. Fishman? Aye. Dr.
SPEAKER_10: Herber? Yes. Vice President Kern? Aye. Dr. Samhorn? Aye. President Tamayo? Yes. The motion is approved.
Unknown: Wonderful. And be sure and deliver some love from the SMUD board to Jim Shetler because he,
SPEAKER_01: I bet he had something to do with this. Okay. Well, let me ask if we have, I haven't received
SPEAKER_01: any cards about anyone who wants to testify. Chief legal officer, have we received any requests
SPEAKER_01: from virtual attendees?
SPEAKER_01: No. No, we're not. Okay. Great. Okay. So we've already done the motion, so we don't need to do
SPEAKER_01: that, right? Okay. So item number two is to discuss the monitoring report for strategic
SPEAKER_01: direction six, which is safety leadership. And the newly appointed Emily Bakhini,
SPEAKER_01: director of safety, environmental, and real estate will make the presentation.
Unknown: Thank you, Chair Herber. Good evening. My name is Emily Bakhini, and I am the director of safety,
SPEAKER_00: environmental, and real estate services. And I'm happy to share tonight with you the monitoring
SPEAKER_00: report for strategic direction six, safety leadership. This is, we come to the board twice
SPEAKER_00: a year, so this is the second half of 2025. The first objective of SD6 is to reduce the number
SPEAKER_00: of severe incidents that are with our, I'm sorry, reduce the number of severe incidents
SPEAKER_00: that cause days away or restricted time. And the board limit for that in 2025 was 13. The
SPEAKER_00: SD6 had a goal to reduce starts by 2025 to 13. And that goal was set in 2021, the year before we had
SPEAKER_00: 26 darts. So the goal was set to reduce the number of darts by 50%. And I am happy to report that
SPEAKER_00: we had 12 darts in 2025, although we never want to have any sort of workplace incident.
SPEAKER_00: We had a total of 34 OSHA recordables, including those 12 darts. And then our dart rate was 5,
SPEAKER_00: I'm sorry, .54. And the industry standard is 1.2. The dart rate is calculated based off of the number
SPEAKER_00: of dart incidents that we have relative to the total number of hours employees work.
Unknown: You may recall when I was here about six months ago, we were taking a closer look at the data to
SPEAKER_00: understand when our darts were occurring. And we found that the large majority of them are twice as
SPEAKER_00: many occurred in the third quarter. So we had a special awareness campaign to work to reduce
SPEAKER_00: or prevent that doubling of darts occurring in the third quarter. And we're successful in that.
SPEAKER_00: We were able to increase that awareness around supporting your team members, making sure that
SPEAKER_00: you had your head in the right space and were fit for duty, being mindful of other distractions,
SPEAKER_00: avoiding complacency and reminding folks that they did have the right and the obligation to
SPEAKER_00: stop work if the conditions changed or hazard presented itself. Question?
SPEAKER_11: What do you think might cause people in the third quarter to just double the incidents?
Unknown: That's a really good question. One thing that we did here after the fact too was
SPEAKER_00: often the increase in temperatures over the summer months. We have longer daylight hours,
SPEAKER_00: hotter temperatures can increase the likelihood that these incidents could occur.
Unknown: Oh, like heat stress and so forth. Or just increased fatigue from working longer shifts
SPEAKER_00: day over day in hot temperatures. Thank you. Okay. The second objective of SD6 is to ensure
SPEAKER_00: our employees receive quality care so that they can return to work quickly if they are injured on
SPEAKER_00: the job. Safety partners with integrated disability management or IDM to ensure that
SPEAKER_00: quality care is provided to employees if they happen to be injured at work. In 2025, we
SPEAKER_00: transitioned to a new telemed service which allows employees to receive triage support 24 hours a day,
SPEAKER_00: seven days a week. We continue to have reduction in indemnity benefits over the last five years
SPEAKER_00: as presented in the table here. While the number of claims in 2025 and the number of incidents per
SPEAKER_00: 100 employees increased a little bit over 2024, the cost or the rates per $100 of payroll
SPEAKER_00: was reduced to 40 cents. This points to a variety of factors, including, again, the fact that the
SPEAKER_00: injuries our employees are experiencing are less severe and so they don't have to be away from work
SPEAKER_00: as long as they might have previously. I also want to point out we received this report in
SPEAKER_00: September and it reports out on data from July 2024 through June of 2025.
Unknown: Question? Real quick, Emily, when I first saw this slide, I took it to mean
SPEAKER_15: that because I was reading it wrong, apparently, but the 40 cents was reflective of more
SPEAKER_15: people hours worked. Is that not correct? That's not correct. It's based off of the
SPEAKER_00: reflective of the cost that we spend to support the employees by providing the time away.
SPEAKER_00: Okay. So the incident per 100 employees is up a little bit, the number of claims up a little bit,
SPEAKER_15: but the cost of those incidents is up. Got you. Thank you.
SPEAKER_15: Yes. Thank you.
Unknown: Okay. The third objective under SD6 is supporting our contractors to reduce potential hazards when
SPEAKER_00: they're supporting us in performing high risk work. We continue to use the international suppliers
SPEAKER_00: net world or ISN to verify contractor qualifications. We're able to evaluate
SPEAKER_00: their safety records and performance. We take a look at contractor fatality history,
SPEAKER_00: OSHA citation history, DART and total recordable incident rates, safety culture questions, and their
SPEAKER_00: safety program review. And we currently have 174 contractors in the system. The second half of this
SPEAKER_00: year we were also able to expand our use of that tool. We're able to track individual contractor
SPEAKER_00: employees and the training that they've received so we can ensure that they're receiving the same
SPEAKER_00: training our SMUD employees are. And we have found this to be specifically helpful as it relates to
SPEAKER_00: substation entry training, UARP training, and veg management onboarding.
Unknown: We continue to conduct a lot of site visits to validate the safety performance of these
SPEAKER_00: contractors. We had over 500 visits in 2025. That was over the entire year. And we had a target of
SPEAKER_00: 250. So definitely exceeded that target. And also increased the target for 2026.
SPEAKER_00: And these visits focus on the contractors that are supporting business units such as PowerGen,
SPEAKER_00: line, substation, facilities, vegetation management, and environmental services,
SPEAKER_00: again, supporting us with high risk work. The last two objectives under SD6 are in support
SPEAKER_00: of the public and community safety. We focus on tracking public incidents and injuries that result
SPEAKER_00: from our operations or our equipment and seek to find ways to reduce those incidents and injuries.
Unknown: Our public safety team was able to attend a variety of public events throughout the community.
SPEAKER_00: And then we've also began preparing materials for first responders that is available on our
SPEAKER_00: SMUD safety.com website, including information for them on how to respond to
SPEAKER_00: incidents that may occur at a solar facility or battery storage facility. So a great resource for
SPEAKER_00: our first responders in the community. Specific to our public safety statistics,
SPEAKER_00: we had I'm sorry, there's a typo there. We had 235 incidents where a member of the public struck
SPEAKER_00: a SMUD asset with a vehicle. And there were four fatalities from those events. Three of those
SPEAKER_00: occurred in the second half of the year. There were three electrical contacts. Those are all
SPEAKER_00: from the first half of the year. And then we had 84 dig-ins with no reported incidents.
SPEAKER_00: In response to those dig-ins, our public safety team sends out notification letters to the
SPEAKER_00: contractors and customers that cause the dig-ins to provide them with additional information and
SPEAKER_00: make sure we prevent any future reoccurrence. And then there were no incidents or escalations
SPEAKER_00: as in response to those letters. The vehicle to asset collision. So basically when people drive
SPEAKER_11: into our stuff. So there's four people who died this year doing that. In 2025. And I think wasn't
SPEAKER_11: it much higher in prior years? I remember hearing like six or I don't know. I mean, clearly any is
SPEAKER_11: just horrible. But I mean, there's only so much we can do on this stuff. And especially when
SPEAKER_11: they're stationary objects. It's like outside of wrapping them in reflective tape or I don't know.
SPEAKER_11: Is there anything else we can do on those that to prevent them? We do have a ‑‑ I know we have a
SPEAKER_11: big campaign, a PR campaign. Very good. Yeah. There's a committee that is looking at that
SPEAKER_00: internally at SMUD. We've looked at measures in the past to try to address or prevent those types
SPEAKER_00: of accidents from occurring. And there isn't any tools that we're using right now or looking to
SPEAKER_00: use right now. But we'll continue to review options moving forward. Do we work with the police to find
SPEAKER_00: out why people have driven into our polls? Yeah. There is an investigation so we can determine
SPEAKER_00: the cause of the accident and what other extenuating circumstances might have been.
SPEAKER_11: Okay. Because that might help us figure out if there's something else we can do.
SPEAKER_11: Absolutely. It's just really sad. And then the dig ins we tell people all the time and we have
SPEAKER_11: all kinds of ads up about don't dig, call before you dig and all that. I don't know what else we
SPEAKER_11: can do there either. Right. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Just that regular outreach in campaigning that we provide.
Unknown: Okay. And then on our last slide, there's a lot of data on here, a lot of information about the
SPEAKER_00: programs we have as part of our safety for life program. Tonight I'm only going to focus on two
SPEAKER_00: of them. Our field ergonomics program that I want to speak to first. In August we were able to launch
SPEAKER_00: a new field industrial ergonomic contract with BRIOTICS Health marking a major step in reducing
SPEAKER_00: soft tissue injuries and improving employee well-being. The onboarding process was a success
SPEAKER_00: setting the foundation for strong collaboration and effective service delivery. BRIOTICS has
SPEAKER_00: engaged with crews and the leadership through meet and greets at safety meetings, also one-on-one
SPEAKER_00: assessments and evaluations and site visits for job task reviews resulting in actionable
SPEAKER_00: recommendations for tools, equipment and improved body mechanics. Second, I want to highlight our
SPEAKER_00: scorch program, our safely conducted observations reduce common hazards. We had a lot of positive
SPEAKER_00: interactions in the second half of the year. Over 2400 office observations occurred. The top
SPEAKER_00: safe observed behavior was good neck and head posture. And employees noted working with their
SPEAKER_00: colleagues to make sure they had the right monitor height and distance setting. The top at-risk
SPEAKER_00: behavior for that group was the hips, legs and feet posture. A lot of that was tied to not having
SPEAKER_00: their chair set up correctly. So the team raised awareness around cumulative trauma from not
SPEAKER_00: sitting straight. I see everybody sitting up straight in their seats here. Just the cumulative
SPEAKER_00: trauma and stress that can be placed on our tendons and joints over us from that behavior as a way to
SPEAKER_00: reduce it. We had over 1,000 observations of our field forces in the second half of the year.
SPEAKER_00: And the two top safe observed behaviors were hand protection to minimize exposure to injury
SPEAKER_00: and communication. Planning for success minimizing exposures to those hazards. The top at-risk
SPEAKER_00: behaviors were having tail boards, particularly after lunch. So they put out an initiative to
SPEAKER_00: ensure that regroup after the lunch break. And then the second at-risk behavior was having the
SPEAKER_00: proper protection for eyes, face and skin. And so the team committed to using that proper protection
SPEAKER_00: and adding extra backup pair of safety glasses so that they could prevent not having them at all.
Unknown: In addition, the second quarter of the year, the scorch team initiated its first
SPEAKER_00: home driver awareness observation event. This event was intended to highlight how the scorch
SPEAKER_00: behaviors we do at work and our Smith driving tools that we use when we're driving our SMUD
SPEAKER_00: vehicles translates and can be used when we're driving our vehicles at home. And that was a great
SPEAKER_00: time of year as we were approaching the end of the year. Folks are doing more traveling related to
SPEAKER_00: the holidays and other end of year celebrations. Scorch is proud of its ability to use events like
SPEAKER_00: this to display the alignment that it has with SMUD's organizational commitment to safety for
SPEAKER_00: life and world-class safety. So that completes my presentation for this evening. I'm happy to take
SPEAKER_00: any additional questions. Do we have some? Director Brandon. I won't ask a question, but I'll just give
SPEAKER_02: some praise or excellent numbers in this report. And I'm always happy to see the scorch numbers
SPEAKER_02: remain high. Thank you. Thank you. And oh, yes, Director Kurth. It's not actually a question. Thank
SPEAKER_05: you for the report. I'm glad to see the numbers high too. I'd like a little more information at
SPEAKER_05: some point on the car pole accident. You know, what's causing that or what the incidence is there.
Unknown: Just kind of doing the math in my head, that's, you know, at 20,000 bucks a pole, that's almost
SPEAKER_05: four and a half million bucks. That's a quarter percent of our rate. If we could figure out some
SPEAKER_05: way to reduce that, it'd be a significant savings for folks. Yes, well, I bet Frankie has some.
SPEAKER_04: Frankie, we've done it at the COO. We actually, just like a vehicle being damaged, we pursue
SPEAKER_04: insurance payments from those who hit our structures. So I can't tell you specifically
SPEAKER_04: what percentages. It reduces it some. Yes. Quite a bit, probably. Yes, but we'd be happy to report.
SPEAKER_04: We've had a program for years. We've done what we've done, reflective stripping. We've moved poles.
SPEAKER_04: We've done all the analysis on poles that were hit multiple times in locations.
SPEAKER_04: We used to have the SpongeBob, if you remember. I remember SpongeBob. Those around the pole. So we've
SPEAKER_04: tried many ways, but the main cause, you're probably not surprised, is distracted driving.
SPEAKER_04: We can certainly possibly put together. I do remember there was a big jump when marijuana was
SPEAKER_05: legalized. Yeah, I don't know the connection, but it is close to 250 events a year. Pretty consistent.
SPEAKER_04: That's a huge number. So we'll be having a follow-up with additional information.
SPEAKER_05: I figured you had a whole bunch of work on this. I'd like to see it. Thanks.
Unknown: I'm sorry, but also, the public campaigns we have are constant also.
SPEAKER_11: One of the things that was interesting in my day job, we found out we started seeing all these
SPEAKER_11: weird canisters coming into the hazardous waste facilities. It turns out it's nitrous oxide.
SPEAKER_11: And kids are literally getting them online at Amazon. They're buying them in vape stores,
SPEAKER_11: tobacco stores, and they're inhaling to the point where they literally, they're driving and they
SPEAKER_11: pass out. And they just drive into people and into things. And I'm just curious if we've got
SPEAKER_11: any stats, if that's starting to escalate, because there's bills to ban the sale of these things.
SPEAKER_11: But there's more ways it seems to be distracted or pass out than ever before while you're driving.
SPEAKER_11: And it's just, I don't know, I just think it's a lot of money, it's a lot of stress on us,
SPEAKER_11: it's a lot of equipment, and people are dying. So it's something to look into. I would definitely
SPEAKER_11: support getting more information on that. President Tamayo?
Unknown: Yes. Well, first of all, I think it's great that we've exceeded our dark goal. That's really a good
SPEAKER_03: thing. And hopefully, you know, I'm looking forward to the day when it gets down to zero. I know that
SPEAKER_03: that's a really hard thing to do. But I really appreciate the shape of this curve is really
SPEAKER_03: great. So I appreciate all the hard work and all the really sort of culture shift that we've managed
SPEAKER_03: to achieve over the last more than a decade. And, you know, I just think that it's a great thing
SPEAKER_03: for our employees to just be in a safer place. One thing I wanted to call out, I really like the
SPEAKER_03: stare at the stairwell signs. I think that's really cool. And I know that we have other things
SPEAKER_03: where, you know, encouraging people as they're walking through campus to pay attention to where
SPEAKER_03: they're walking rather than what's on their phone. One thing I didn't see, and maybe I
SPEAKER_03: missed it because you covered so many different things, but we used to mention quite a bit the
SPEAKER_03: near miss, paying attention to near misses. And I'm kind of assuming we're still doing that because
SPEAKER_03: it seems like it's a very valuable thing. But did you have anything to add about that?
SPEAKER_00: Absolutely. Yeah, we do. Near misses is something that we continue to track. We had 67 near misses
SPEAKER_00: incidents reported for the year for 2025. And do we have any way of measuring how
SPEAKER_03: effective that's been as far as preventing, you know, the near miss from happening again? I don't
SPEAKER_00: know that we've looked at it specifically for our organization, but there is a lot of safety data out
SPEAKER_00: there that shows kind of the triangle of events and the more of those near misses that you have
SPEAKER_00: correlates to fewer and fewer incidents, more serious incidents. I think Frankie has something
SPEAKER_00: to add. Yes, Frankie. Yes, the reporting of near misses I think speaks to our culture.
SPEAKER_04: If you feel confident actually reporting it. And also it's really important if you get to zero in
SPEAKER_04: incidents, you have no incidents to examine, to review and to look at countermeasures. So the
SPEAKER_04: near misses become more and more important. But we have a very strong culture that our folks feel
SPEAKER_04: very comfortable reporting, hey, this just happened to me. It's pretty impressive when a
SPEAKER_04: young apprentice steps up in a room of 200 people and speaks openly about what occurred. But from
SPEAKER_04: Emily's point of view, they're also investigated by our staff. We call it a taproot process where
SPEAKER_04: we go through and we find out what was the reason for that potential near miss occurring. And then
SPEAKER_04: we produce countermeasures. We don't directly correlate those countermeasures as resulting in
SPEAKER_04: zero incidents. But we're getting down to the point where we're hoping to reach zero. The next part of
SPEAKER_04: Emily's presentation we'll talk about asking you for approval for the goals for the next five years.
Unknown: Great. And I just also, it really struck me when I was at the East campus and I saw the sign that
SPEAKER_03: says you have stop work authority. I just thought that's really cool. I think because it's right
SPEAKER_03: there in orange and white and it really kind of drove it home for me how seriously we take this.
SPEAKER_03: Thank you. Great. And Director Kurth, did you have another comment? No. Okay. Are there any other
SPEAKER_01: comments? Yes. Paul Lau. Yeah. So I just want to say a big thank you to Emily, your team, and then
SPEAKER_07: especially the executive team, Frankie and Farris. We really have done an excellent job in changing
SPEAKER_07: the culture of SMUD. I mean back 15 years ago, we just have 200 people, more than 200 people heard
SPEAKER_07: a year and we thought that was okay when it's not okay. So this is our drive to get to zero. I mean,
SPEAKER_07: I absolutely agree with President DeMaio how the thing is that we want to get to zero. And so to
SPEAKER_07: see this 90% reduction in the last decade is pretty amazing. And now we're down to the last 12.
Unknown: So I really do want to say thank you. I mean, is all those things that we're doing,
SPEAKER_07: changing the culture that getting hurt is not okay. Everybody should be expected to go home,
SPEAKER_07: you know, hopefully better shaped than they are coming in, but at least minimum to go home and
SPEAKER_07: spend time with the family. So couldn't be more proud with the team accomplished. But I'll say
SPEAKER_07: big thank you to Frankie. I know your team has done a tremendous job in changing the culture
SPEAKER_07: over in the field. You know, to really get over that, it's okay to get hurt. Now, we want to
SPEAKER_07: make sure that no one's hurt. You know, and then when there's anything possible that can actually
SPEAKER_07: put our coworkers, you know, or yourself in harm's way, you do the near miss. I think the near miss
SPEAKER_07: is a huge, huge culture shift. You know, you actually see that as the more and more people we
SPEAKER_07: report the near misses, our numbers start going down because now people are comfortable and say,
SPEAKER_07: I don't want to see Rosanna get hurt. I don't see my colleague here hurt. This almost happened to
SPEAKER_07: me and by the grace of God, we were able to say, you know, we do not get hurt, but we don't want
SPEAKER_07: that to happen because you don't want to count on luck the next time not to get hurt. So I just
SPEAKER_07: want to say thank you, Frankie. You're your team. Oh, and Director Fishman. I just want to say,
SPEAKER_15: but Paul, it seems like 2030 is a good year for setting big goals. So maybe in addition to zero
SPEAKER_15: carbon, we said zero incidents by 2030. I'm just, I'm just throwing that out there. I think that's
SPEAKER_01: a good idea, Director Fishman. Well, Emily, I want to say that you and your team have done
SPEAKER_01: an exceptional job. And I want to thank Frankie because I remember the days when I worked here
SPEAKER_01: when safety was just not taken seriously and you were a big part of shifting that. And so
SPEAKER_01: you and your team have a great guy leading things. And with that, Director Bikini, you're done.
SPEAKER_01: I'm actually up next, too. Oh, you are. So I'm going to stay here. Just make sure there's no
SPEAKER_00: comments. But before we go there, let's just see if we have any people online that would like to
SPEAKER_01: make a comment. No, we do not. Okay. No virtual attendees. So now we will move on to item number
SPEAKER_01: four, which is to discuss with possible amendment governance process GP12. And here we have Emily
SPEAKER_01: and Matthew. So I was actually going to present on agenda item three, which was updating language
SPEAKER_00: to strategic direction six. Okay. All right. Well, this doesn't have anything about that. But,
SPEAKER_01: you know, let's do it. Okay. Thank you. So as we were just discussing,
SPEAKER_00: the slide here shows the current SD6 language, which had that goal of getting to 13 or fewer
SPEAKER_00: incidents by 2025. Since we met that goal, we staff are providing a proposal to update that language.
SPEAKER_00: That language is shown here on this next slide. And those changes are highlighted.
SPEAKER_00: So the goal that we're going to target is zero incidents by 2030. And there were a few other
SPEAKER_00: editorial comments or changes suggested just to provide some clarity here. So walking through those
SPEAKER_00: changes, let's see. It said injury severity incidents to severe safety incidents. We also
SPEAKER_00: removed the second part of section I because it spoke to the dart labor rate ‑‑ I'm sorry,
SPEAKER_00: the dart rate as opposed to the individual darts. Under contractor safety, we were suggesting
SPEAKER_00: changing the ‑‑ to the plural facilities to align with the sentence structure and then update
SPEAKER_00: the language under public safety to mention incidents involved as opposed to reporting
SPEAKER_00: injuries to the public. So just some opportunities to clarify the language and again focus on
SPEAKER_00: trying to get to zero darts by 2030. Looks good to me. How does the rest of the board feel?
Unknown: Okay. Looks like it's good. Thank you. Now you really can leave.
Unknown: Do we have any comments from virtual attendees? Okay. And now is item number four. And it is to
SPEAKER_01: discuss with possible amendment governance process GP12 board compensation and benefits.
SPEAKER_01: And our presenter is Matthew Powell, the interim director of people, services, and strategies.
Unknown: Thank you, Chairman Herber. My name is Matthew Powell. I'm interim director of people,
SPEAKER_14: services, and strategies. My role this evening is to share and present a little bit of an overview
SPEAKER_14: of the GP12, governance process 12, which is governing board compensation and benefits.
SPEAKER_14: Following my presentation, I'll be turning it back over to President Tamayo who will
SPEAKER_14: for the discussion of this by the board at that. So GP12 covers board benefits and compensation.
SPEAKER_14: And it requires the board to review this compensation on an annual basis. I want
SPEAKER_14: to call out a specific section from the MUD Act, 11908.1. And this says that the board may adjust
SPEAKER_14: compensation by no more than 5% for each calendar year following the operative date of the last
SPEAKER_14: adjustment. So for this year, that means that there's the ability to increase the amount
SPEAKER_14: no greater than $341 for each daily event. Or per day, I should say. It also states that the
SPEAKER_14: board is prohibited from automatically adjusting compensation every year. And for context, last
SPEAKER_14: year the board did do an update in July of 2025 to $325 per event up from $317, which was approximately
SPEAKER_14: a 3.1% increase from the previous year. On this slide, we have a couple of tables that just show
SPEAKER_14: what are some options for the board's consideration. The first one, of course, is the 5% maximum,
SPEAKER_14: which would be bringing that up from $325 at the current rate to $341 for 2026. And the other one
SPEAKER_14: is based on CPI for 2025, which is based on the December CPI rate, which was 2.7%. So that would
SPEAKER_14: be bringing it up to $334 per event. Now, of course, the board can also choose any amount up to the max
SPEAKER_14: of that $341, the 5%, that they choose to do as long as they don't go above that amount.
SPEAKER_14: A couple of other notes. Any changes will be effective July 1st of 2026, which would be that
SPEAKER_14: one full year from the previous change. And any change would be placed on the consent calendar at
SPEAKER_14: an upcoming board meeting for a vote as well to approve. So at this point, unless any questions,
SPEAKER_14: I'll turn it over to President Tumayo for discussion and conversation.
Unknown: Okay. So first, I'll just invite comments from the board members as to where you stand on this.
SPEAKER_03: Director Herbert. Yeah. For me, I think that, you know, a raise is justified. I know
SPEAKER_01: he's showing up there 5% as the top, but I'm thinking, you know, 4% is basically
SPEAKER_01: what we're going to be giving a lot of our employees. So my feeling is 4% would be good.
SPEAKER_01: Director, this is it. I know we're trying to keep pace, you know, do something on a fairly
SPEAKER_15: regular basis so that we don't have some huge increase down the line. That makes sense to me.
SPEAKER_15: By the same token, I'm not sure that we need to do it every year. And I'm perfectly happy leaving
SPEAKER_15: things where they are, revisiting next year, and, you know, at that point saying, okay, maybe we go
SPEAKER_15: up to, you know, pick a number, whatever the number is. I just don't think we need to do it
SPEAKER_15: every year. And I would prefer not to do it this year, frankly. But just me.
Unknown: Okay. Director Sanborn. Yeah. I think when I first got on the board,
SPEAKER_11: hadn't done it quite a while. It was a very big difference from previous boards that had done it
SPEAKER_11: more regularly. But I do believe we should do it every year and do it usually about CPI.
Unknown: Would be my normal. But I like even numbers. So 335 sounded good. Just a $10
SPEAKER_11: of meeting. And remember, I just wanted the public to know a lot of us do multiple things in a day
SPEAKER_11: and we do many more days than 10. So this is definitely a lot of public service, too. But
SPEAKER_11: that would be where I would probably be at. Thank you. Director Rose.
Unknown: I was going to be inclined to skip this year and come back to it next year since we increased it
SPEAKER_02: less than a year ago. That's what I was thinking. And then re-evaluated then.
Unknown: Director Bowie Thompson, do you have any comment? I could skip. But I also see
SPEAKER_13: increasing small amounts. I'm more of a small amount person rather than a large amount person.
SPEAKER_13: So something closer to making something even. Like 335 or even less. 330. I do think I just
SPEAKER_13: have always been adverse to larger increases. So I could do zero or I could do a very small one.
SPEAKER_13: Director Kirk. Thank you. I think this is the kind of thing that needs to be done regularly.
Unknown: Otherwise it gets too hard when it's time to catch up. And so with that, really all the numbers
SPEAKER_05: proposed, either the 2.7, the 335 or the 4%. I could support any one of those. Thanks.
SPEAKER_05: Yeah. I'm in the let's do it regularly rather than taking big jumps. Just kicking the can down
SPEAKER_03: the road. I think it's really almost embarrassing when you do like a big catch up. And I'd rather
SPEAKER_03: do something small. And I feel pretty comfortable doing the CPI amount and also leaning towards
SPEAKER_03: the mega 335 rather than stick to the 2.7. And I'd be uncomfortable doing more than the CPI.
SPEAKER_03: So I guess my sense of it is that yes, it doesn't look great if we give ourselves a 20% increase one
SPEAKER_15: year to catch up. That's not great. To me it looks just as bad if we give ourselves an annual
SPEAKER_15: rate increase. I mean, I would I guess it's six and a half dozen a year. I would prefer to just
SPEAKER_15: wait a year and then do like a we could it's 5% per year conceivably. So if we didn't do anything
SPEAKER_15: this year, next year we could conceivably go as high as a 10% increase. So we're talking about
SPEAKER_15: like a $5 increase, right? Or a $10 increase this year. I would just as soon put that off and do a
SPEAKER_15: $15 or $20 increase next year. That's just me. That's where I'm coming from.
SPEAKER_15: Director. Yes, Matt, what what would 4% be? It would be $338.
Unknown: 338? Okay. I still think that's the right number because, you know,
SPEAKER_01: that's what everybody's going to be getting around here, but that's just me.
SPEAKER_01: Well, I think we have just sort of counting votes. We have four directors that would be in
SPEAKER_03: support of 2.7 or or $335. And I know that, you know, we don't have to be unanimous, but
SPEAKER_03: is there severe resistance to if we went through that? I mean, you know, so.
SPEAKER_03: No, on an increase this year. That's just where I am.
Unknown: Yeah, no. So you can do it, but I'll end up having to do it in the board meeting,
SPEAKER_02: probably on discussion calendar. I'm sorry, I couldn't.
SPEAKER_03: Probably have to do it on the discussion calendar, but it's not unanimous.
SPEAKER_02: Okay. Yeah. Well, I have a sense that we'd be able to have a motion on the discussion calendar for
Unknown: 335 or 330, something like that. So. Because it's pretty clear that a couple of folks
SPEAKER_03: just don't want to do it, which is fine as well. So.
SPEAKER_03: Are we any reason not to go forward with that? Because I don't know that we're.
Unknown: Okay. All right. Thank you very much.
Unknown: Thank you, George and Paul.
SPEAKER_01: I did not receive any
SPEAKER_01: notices. Do we have anybody?
Unknown: No, no, we do not.
SPEAKER_09: Virtually.
SPEAKER_09: Yeah, no, we do not.
SPEAKER_09: We don't. Okay.
Unknown: Okay.
SPEAKER_01: 13 core and key values. And so these are the.
SPEAKER_01: The answers that we've gotten.
SPEAKER_01: Five out of the seven of us filled this out. And looks like high compliance.
SPEAKER_01: This one or the GP two has four high and one medium. Does anybody want to talk about that?
SPEAKER_01: Nope. Okay. And now we're at GP four.
SPEAKER_01: And. Any comments? I don't see any. And then board agendas.
Unknown: Five of the board members felt there was high compliance. So that is good.
SPEAKER_01: GP four. Is rather long. But let's see the score is. Okay. Finally, a comment.
SPEAKER_01: Is clause H still legal and applicable given recent changes to the Brown Act?
Unknown: Could you go back to H matters not on the agenda for regular meeting will not be considered by the
SPEAKER_01: board at that meeting except upon determination by a majority of the board that emergency situation
SPEAKER_01: exists severely impairing public health and or safety or upon a determination by two thirds
SPEAKER_01: voted the board or by unanimous vote if less than two third of the members are present
Unknown: that the need to take action arose subsequent to the agenda being posted or number three as
SPEAKER_01: otherwise permitted under the Brown Act of the California Department code.
SPEAKER_01: And so the comment is, you know, are we doing that? Is it legal and applicable? And we will
SPEAKER_01: turn to our general counsel. Laura Lewis, Chief legal and government affairs officer.
SPEAKER_10: So the amendments to the Brown Act earlier this year related to one of a board member may
SPEAKER_10: participate remotely due to an emergency. This section H is still valid. It refers to
Unknown: whether the board can take action on something that has not been placed on the agenda with the
SPEAKER_10: proper 72 hours notice or 24 hours notice of special meeting. That's still valid law.
Unknown: Okay. All right. So it is still legal and applicable. It looks like the next
Unknown: one, we have high compliance, but there is a comment. And so we should take a look at it.
SPEAKER_01: We are meeting the current language in this policy, but when we invite presenters to our meetings,
SPEAKER_01: they need to provide slides that can be posted publicly on our website for viewing by the public
SPEAKER_01: prior to the meeting and after the meeting. That sounds reasonable. Any comment?
Unknown: A comment. I have been the strategic chair for, I don't know, 15 years, I feel like. And that this
SPEAKER_13: has been a sticking point with some of our presenters. And I just don't think it's fair
SPEAKER_13: to the public or to the board, really. I'm a process learner. I don't just see everything in
SPEAKER_13: front of me. And I don't think it's fair to review in public that they have to get themselves here,
Unknown: take screenshots with their, you know, I just don't think it's a good accessibility trend that
SPEAKER_13: we've had that we've had speakers say, well, it's proprietary. Don't present. Like, if we can't post
SPEAKER_13: it and we can't have people be able to review it before, during, and after, then they need to
SPEAKER_13: change their message because it's not a closed session. So I just get a lot of pushback from
SPEAKER_13: staff on this and people don't want to present. Well, then you need to find different speakers or
SPEAKER_13: they need to present something else. It's just very strange that they're willing to
SPEAKER_13: come to our meeting but don't want us to store their presentations for people who can't attend,
SPEAKER_13: for whatever reason, or just want to process the information like myself later. And I don't think
SPEAKER_13: it just should be for the board. I think we have these meetings a lot for the public to get
SPEAKER_13: educated and to know what's going on. And it's been, I don't want to say it's battle, but it has
SPEAKER_13: been quite frustrating for me that we continually have these requests from speakers to not post
SPEAKER_13: their slides. So that's... Point well taken. Yeah, I agree. I agree too, because that's,
SPEAKER_11: to me, the radical transparency stuff. This is for people that have been invited to come and make a
SPEAKER_15: presentation, not just somebody who shows up once they're three minutes. People that know months in
SPEAKER_13: advance that they're speaking. I have one speaker who was invited that he couldn't get us their
SPEAKER_13: slides to like the Friday before. And that just shows someone that's not prepared. A, and B,
SPEAKER_13: doing, having a shroud of its proprietary. I think they were just not prepared and using
SPEAKER_13: some excuses. So I just think we should enforce timelines of submitting slides. They know well in
SPEAKER_13: advance that they're coming and that there is a vetting process by both the chair and the staff,
SPEAKER_13: right? And that the board, I do like to review the stuff before. I don't like showing up
Unknown: just from a personal time standpoint. And then for the public, I would like it to be posted.
SPEAKER_01: Does there need to be language changed? I don't know. I've been asking it for over a decade and
SPEAKER_13: it hasn't changed. So that's why I put it in here. So if we can get some consensus, it's just,
SPEAKER_13: I've asked and asked and asked. And so I wouldn't typically, me, I think I've only commented three
SPEAKER_13: times in 19 years, but nothing has changed. So does it need to be in here? I don't know.
SPEAKER_13: But maybe now that you all hear me in public, you know, we can address this in a different way. But
SPEAKER_13: it just me asking staff and the CEO has not changed anything. Okay. Heidi.
SPEAKER_11: Well, I'm just thinking, do we ask Paul for suggestion on this? And Laura to look at how
SPEAKER_11: do we address this? Because I think it looks like we all kind of agree that if we have public
SPEAKER_11: speakers coming, we should have these sites in advance and they should be posted. Is there some
SPEAKER_11: reason we can't do that? Or would we change this policy? Where's the right place to do this?
Unknown: Maybe they can think about it. But the staff have heard us, right? So.
SPEAKER_01: Yeah. I mean, I think it's clear. Paul, do you want to say something?
SPEAKER_01: Yeah. I mean, I think what it is is that we have a discussion before.
SPEAKER_07: And I think 99% of the time, I think the presentation, people making presentations,
SPEAKER_07: actually, the slide will be there before. And we had discussion before about this. There are some
Unknown: presenters in the past that actually had said, okay, well, you know what? I'm not ready to get
SPEAKER_07: the slide or not get it for the week in advance. But I think we've worked through most of those.
SPEAKER_07: So I guess what it is is that at least for the last couple of times, I remember is that we actually
SPEAKER_07: did that when the presenter said, I couldn't get the slide in time before the pre-brief.
SPEAKER_07: I think we've actually complied. But I do have one case that I remember is about economic forecasts.
SPEAKER_07: That, you know, whether they chose to do it or not, because they didn't really want the slide that
SPEAKER_07: they thought was they wanted, they won't mind coming in and talk about their specific
SPEAKER_07: reason what the economic forecast is going to be. And they didn't want it to be public until
SPEAKER_07: they actually get here to present to the board. I think that's the only time I remember
SPEAKER_07: that we couldn't get the slide ahead of time. So I guess we can certainly look at,
SPEAKER_07: I don't know how in a sense is that are you going to put it in the policy piece that we would
SPEAKER_07: actually always have the slides or else there will be no presentation. I guess that's one way to fix
SPEAKER_07: it, that you would always have the slide, you know, at the before the pre-brief. If there's
SPEAKER_07: a for if it is the outside presenter before they present, that you want the slide to be available
SPEAKER_07: for the chair to review. It's primarily for the public. So in that situation you did get it to
SPEAKER_13: the board the Friday before. Yes. But you didn't post it to the public. And so that was the
SPEAKER_13: compromise that I made because I personally wanted to see it, but we never posted it prior for the
SPEAKER_13: public. So it's more for the my issues, the public. I mean, I think we're a convenience for the rest
SPEAKER_13: of us to get it before. For the public is that I feel like it's a not negotiable if at least after
SPEAKER_13: they present it to the board, just okay, some people get sick or whatever, but after they
SPEAKER_13: present it should be posted. Yeah, I don't, I can't remember, maybe my memory's failing. I don't
SPEAKER_07: remember actually after we present it, it's not available for posting. I think we did actually
SPEAKER_07: have one case if I remember that they want, they don't want to be ahead
SPEAKER_07: of their presentation because they didn't want the slide to be taken out of context.
SPEAKER_07: So how about we actually want to go forward, you know, and so I mean, Nancy, question for you,
SPEAKER_01: do you want this in writing here or are you willing to include that question as we're
SPEAKER_01: interviewing our next general manager? I'm teasing, but you know, I don't know who the
SPEAKER_01: exec is that looks over the strategy committee, but that's usually where the PowerPoints are.
Unknown: No, I think this is with any any presentation. So it's not just, well, yeah,
SPEAKER_07: not just strategic committee. So we post all pretty much all presentations.
SPEAKER_07: Can I make a suggestion? First of all, maybe we should get Eric involved in actually writing
SPEAKER_15: the language, but something to the effect of, you know, we want presentations from the public
SPEAKER_15: under these circumstances, people that have been invited to present, you know, a minimum of, you
SPEAKER_15: know, however many days ahead of the meeting as required for the pre-brief or whatever,
SPEAKER_15: and that they will be posted at the same time as the rest of the documents for that meeting.
Unknown: At the discretion of the chair of the committee, if there's somebody says, look, I'm presenting
SPEAKER_15: information that I want embargoed until the meeting or something like that, we can do that,
SPEAKER_15: and then but then it gets posted afterwards. But if but I don't want anybody coming in saying,
SPEAKER_15: well, I'm going to present to them to you, but I'm not going to I don't want you to post my slides
SPEAKER_15: ever. I mean, that's ridiculous, because our meetings are open in public and
SPEAKER_15: it so so they need to be posted at some point, preferably ahead of time, if they can't be ahead
SPEAKER_15: of time at the discretion of the of the committee chair, they can post them that they can deliver
SPEAKER_15: them up to the, you know, the day that they're going to be presented. So I've got a suggestion.
SPEAKER_03: I think I think it ought to be just posted. They should be available at the pre-brief.
SPEAKER_03: I don't think you need to have a subsequent decision on the chair needs to make. I mean,
SPEAKER_03: things happen like that all the time. You know, whenever anybody's doing a presentation,
SPEAKER_03: things come up. And why put it on the chair? It's like, we're not going to say, no, you can't do your
SPEAKER_03: presentation because we've already got them scheduled. So why make it another decision? So
SPEAKER_03: but I do think that that if somebody is going to be presenting to us publicly and trying to
SPEAKER_03: and there may be circumstances where they're trying to convince us to think a certain way,
SPEAKER_03: that definitely should be something that that is made available to the public as part of the
SPEAKER_03: record of our meeting. And I don't think we should ever accept somebody making a presentation that
SPEAKER_03: says, no, I'm sorry, you can't make this as part of your record. Yeah. Yeah.
Unknown: So what is what is the outcome here? Well, I think we should ask Eric to come in and
SPEAKER_15: look at this and we can have give him some direction on what we what this discussion was,
SPEAKER_15: ask him to listen to the recording if he needs to. He will. And come back with some language.
Unknown: Okay, great. Well, then let's go on to GP 13.
Unknown: And that is five high five. So anybody want to make any comments? Seeing none. I think that is
SPEAKER_01: the end. Do we have any people in public who want to speak? Not here. But how about virtually?
Unknown: No, you're not. Okay, great. Well, then I'm now going to turn this over to our president,
SPEAKER_01: Dave Tamayo to talk about the work plan.
Unknown: I'm going to be out of town on the 12th of the strategic committee, so I'll be online.
SPEAKER_11: Just so you know. May 12th. Yeah, I'll be back in Michigan for me.
Unknown: Urban update coming up next next week.
Unknown: We're I don't really have anything pulled out on here. So I did want to mention that
SPEAKER_03: I will be missing the committee meeting next Tuesday. So you guys will have to carry on without
SPEAKER_03: me. And we've got the resource adequacy and summer readiness coming up on May 12th, which I think
SPEAKER_03: that one's always very interesting. And I'm going to be missing that particular meeting because
SPEAKER_03: I'll be at the CCA conference. That got switched. I think you're looking at an old
SPEAKER_12: older document on the May 12th. Oh, okay. It's not resource adequacy.
SPEAKER_03: That's under the end. Okay. So when is that going to be? That's now in June, June 9th.
SPEAKER_03: Okay. I do remember that message. Yeah, on May 12th, we're doing the Upper American River,
SPEAKER_12: the UARP climate impacts. All right. And so do we not have any items for strategic?
SPEAKER_03: On that day. On May 12th, yes. We're doing the UARP. Yeah, I think you're looking at an old one.
SPEAKER_12: It's correct here on the packet. Okay. Well, like I said, okay. Upper American River
SPEAKER_03: project climate impacts. Okay. I can barely read that. Sorry. All right. So we switched those two.
SPEAKER_03: So the UARP was going to be in June. And then we have the reliability monitoring report
SPEAKER_03: on June 10th policy meeting. And other things are kind of more routine. Looks like
Unknown: we don't have anything in the parking lot. Cleaned out. Cleaned out the parking lot. Amazing.
SPEAKER_03: All right. And looking forward to a general update on fusion. Hopefully it's somebody pulled a rabbit
SPEAKER_03: out of a hat and we're going to have magical energy all next year. So does anybody have
SPEAKER_03: anything else to add to the parking lot? Go ahead. Go ahead, Director Rose. No, I have something
SPEAKER_02: outside the parking lot. Go, Heidi. Okay. I was just wondering about the land acknowledgement.
SPEAKER_11: Did the ad hoc meet? Is that happening? Yeah. We're complete. Staff's complete. Frankie is going
SPEAKER_01: to be setting up a meeting. And the ad hoc committee will join him and then we'll bring it to the board.
Unknown: Okay. Great. Because it was off the parking lot but I hadn't heard. So I just want to make sure.
SPEAKER_11: Great. Thank you. Just to mention next week at the finance and audit we'll have the solar and
SPEAKER_02: storage rate update. And staff is intending to send a memo soon. So I would encourage you to take
SPEAKER_02: a quick peek at that before the finance and audit committee next Tuesday. So FYI.
SPEAKER_02: All right. Very good. Anything else, Mr. President? No. Thank you for that addition.
SPEAKER_03: All right. Okay. The next item on the agenda is public comment for items not on the agenda.
SPEAKER_01: I haven't received any cards. But have we had any requests from virtual attendees?
Unknown: No, we have not. Okay. Well, we just want everyone to know that written comments received on items
SPEAKER_01: not on the agenda will be included in the record if received within two hours of the end of the
SPEAKER_01: meeting. And the last item on the agenda is to provide a summary of committee direction.
Unknown: Staff will provide additional information on causes of carpool accidents in our prevention efforts.
SPEAKER_10: Staff will place the governance process GP12 board compensation and benefits on the discussion
SPEAKER_10: calendar for next week's board meeting. And the board will discuss potential changes to GP4
SPEAKER_10: board committee work plan and agenda planning with Eric Douglas.
SPEAKER_01: Wonderful. Seeing no other business, this meeting is adjourned.
Unknown: Thank you.