Present: Patrick Lanning, Ron Farmer, Sandra Bishop, and Mel Menegat. Commissioner Dorothy Anderson was excused.

Staff Present: Randy Berggren, Debra Smith, Terry Bequette, Dick Helgeson, Jim Wiley, Dick Varner, JoAnn Andersen, Marty Douglass, Tom Buckhouse, and Krista Hince of the EWEB staff; and Ruth Atcherson, City of Eugene Minutes Recorder.

BOARD GOVERNANCE

• How to Handle Customer Inquiries

President Lanning called the Work Session of the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) to order.

General Manager Randy Berggren noted, prior to beginning the discussion on the topic at hand, that the Draft Legacy/Vision document from the EWEB Board Governance Retreat had been included in the Commissioners' packets. He added that the Board of Commissioners' Rules of Conduct had been included in the Consent Calendar for the Regular Board meeting, per the wishes of the Board. He asked Debra Smith, Telecommunications Project Manager, to speak to the matter of customer inquiries.

Ms. Smith listed the different kinds of customer inquiries, as follows:

• Billing issues, which include questions on the deposit policy, disconnect notices, and inability to pay, etc.
• Questions about the rates.
• Issues with customer service, such as availability of customer service representatives or someone wishing to relate a negative experience.
• Product or service availability, such as low income assistance or energy management services.
• Operational issues, which might include outages or response times.
• Community issues.
• Internal issues, concerns expressed in regard to staffing levels or salary levels, etc.

Mr. Berggren called this an ongoing issue. He commented that every Commissioner tended to handle customer inquiries differently and that it would benefit staff and the Board to establish a protocol that had consistency and an agreed upon format or approach.

Vice President Farmer noted that he had been increasingly uncomfortable with customer-initiated interactions. He recognized the need, as an elected official, to be responsive to his constituents, but was concerned that he not undermine staff or appear to keep staff "out of the loop." He related that he had recently been involved in the deposit issue as well as some of the problems that had been experienced up the McKenzie River and that he had felt a great deal of uncertainty as to how he should or should not be proceeding. He commented that he would benefit from hearing a historical perspective from some of the Commissioners who had been on the Board for a longer period of time, such as Commissioner Anderson.

Commissioner Bishop opined that it was "perfectly appropriate" for people to approach Board members in regard to issues with the utilities. She felt that the missing piece was how the staff could support a Board member once the complaint comes to the Board member. She found that what was sometimes lacking for her was feedback from the staff to the Board explaining that a situation had been handled.

Vice President Farmer stated that his concern lay with people who had exhausted other channels and then contacted Commissioners.

President Lanning said that if the issue raised was not a policy issue, he thought his role to be that of a facilitator to ensure that an issue was addressed by staff. He stressed that, if the issue was still not resolved, it was not his purview to make a ruling on such a thing and exact some sort of change. He related that, in such circumstance, he would take an issue to the General Manager.

Commissioner Bishop commented that there were instances in which customers had been through Customer Services and were still dissatisfied. She wondered if it would be possible to allow Customer Service Representatives more discretion to use "their common sense."

Mr. Berggren noted that there was a special appeal process for deposit policies.

Regarding a customer approaching the Board, Mr. Berggren stated that Commissioners always had the right to take exception to a policy, but that it should be the will of the majority of the Board. He added that a policy that the Board took repeated exception to would need to be reassessed to determine if it should be retained. He felt that there were a lot of operational things at the tactical level that could be subjectively judged.

Vice President Farmer said it was not the policy that was at issue, but rather how the policy was being interpreted. He noted that at times one staff person might interpret a policy differently from another staff person and a customer could get two different responses.

Commissioner Bishop felt that it should be formally written that a customer, after exhausting his or her options and not being reasonably satisfied, would be able to turn to the General Manager (GM).

Mr. Berggren noted that some people would not find resolution. He felt that the procedure should attain a higher level.

Vice President Farmer averred that intervention on behalf of a customer by members of the Board seemed to change the way staff acted in a customer's situation.

President Lanning shared an experience he had in which he had felt that he, as an individual member of the Board, could have swayed a situation. He related his discomfort in this instance, adding that he had withdrawn himself from it as a result.

Mr. Berggren said that the reality was that when the boss was involved, everyone paid attention. He felt this sometimes caused people to become more educated about an issue.

Commissioner Bishop reiterated her wish that staff would let the Commissioners know if a customer's issue had been resolved or if the customer had "gone away mad."

Ms. Smith summarized the conversation, stating that it seemed there were two types of situations, one in which a Board member inserts him/herself and one in which the GM would be called, and that once staff was involved, the Board should be made aware of the outcome. She said that the Board sought to have a better idea of where the point lay at which an issue should be redirected to staff.

Commissioner Menegat commented that the utility was in the business of providing utilities and not in the business of making everyone happy. He related an experience he had with a customer in which it had been difficult to discern where the trouble lay. He expressed concern that issues such as this could monopolize staff time.

Vice President Farmer opined that it would not be possible to make everyone happy. He noted that staff had done more to appease the customers in the McKenzie River valley than he likely would have agreed to do.

President Lanning felt that his role as a Commissioner was to ensure that there was a policy that addressed an issue raised by a customer or that a policy was followed correctly. He thought that part of his role was to ascertain that all channels to remedy an adverse situation for a customer had been exhausted.

Mr. Berggren asserted that policy concerns should be brought before the full board. He suggested that, should staff not be interpreting issues as the Board wishes, then the issue should be brought to the GM. He felt that some basic proposals for policy that would guide Commissioners in their responses to customer inquiries could be developed that would create a learning context for individual Commissioners that receive complaints.

President Lanning closed the work session at 7:19 p.m.

_____________ ______________________________________

Assistant Secretary President