six o'clock. We will go ahead and call this meeting of the RMLD board of commissioners to order. Um I think we have the VEC participating remotely. >> He's not on. >> He's not on yet. Okay. >> He does plan on sharing.
>> Okay. Would uh somebody like to call the meeting to order in his >> I will call the meeting of the citizens advisory board to >> Thank you. >> Okay. Um our D board of commissioners recognizes the importance of hearing public comment
at the discretion of the chair on items on the official agenda. Uh do we have anyone any members of the public? Okay. Um and when VC joins we will ask him to announce himself. Um he'll be joining
hopefully soon. Um okay so since we have no public comment uh liaison to the board any updates from >> I had no new updates. Um I think that only two things that are active that
I've connected with are just the school and the recal and I don't have anything new there. >> Okay. Um we're gonna do a policy committee update date. >> Yep. So we had our first meeting uh Bob and um Ray, myself and Vicc and uh just
kind of talk about things in a general way and we we made a basic plan to take a word doc of of the policies get input from the members go through Jason first as to get Jason's input because Jason has good ideas and go from there. So no
nothing more specific than just >> we met we met. >> We met. Okay. >> Um, do you have a timeline or plan on when you would >> We'll meet monthly. >> Okay. >> I think we'll meet monthly and I think we want to make sure we don't add to
Jason's workload. Uh, so as he has time, I would say three to four meetings, we'll probably come back with some ideas and the idea is to tighten things, streamline, maybe there's some things missing, but make it be productive and not a time s.
>> Great. Thank you for that. All right, we'll um move on to item four, procurement requests for approval. >> Good evening. How you guys doing? Yeah. >> All right. Good. Good. We got a there's four uh different bids that we're looking for approval on. The first one
is IFP 2025-21 for a 65 Digger Derek truck uh with a trade in. We're replacing a 2001 truck, truck number 17. We're looking for the approval of $785,000
and $900 to replace the truck. >> That's the first one. >> So, we vote on vote on them separately or >> I was going to do them separately. They're all different motions, right? So, I can do them one at a time or I can do it however you liked. >> This is basically the only game in town,
right? Highly >> kind of. >> Yeah. As you see, we only had one one bidder. >> Anybody want to read the motion? >> Thanks. Right. >> Move that the proposal if 2025-21
for one 65- ft digger Derek truck with trade in to be awarded to James A. Kylie company for $785,900 and no cents pursuant to master general laws chapter 164 section 60 56D on the
recommendation of the general manager. >> Thanks second. Any further discussion? >> All those in favor zero. >> Thank you. All right. The next one is ISP 2025-29. It's to replace a 50 foot dig truck with
trade in. It's a smaller truck. The 65 footer is a a tandem axle in the back. That's our heavy lift long reach truck. This is one of our standard dig trucks. It's going to replace a 2008 uh truck number 25. And we like to award it to
Kylie for $513,746. Is is the replacement what's being traded in? >> Yes. Yep. Truck 25 will be traded in. >> Move uh that proposal IFP 2025-29 for 150 foot digger truck. Digger Derek
Truck with trade to be awarded to James A. Kylie company for $513,746 no pursuant to master law chapter 164 section 560 on the recommendation of the general manager. >> Second.
>> Thanks. All those in favor carries 5. >> Great. Thank you. Uh the next bit is for grounds and landscape services IFB uh 2026-01. It's a three-year contract and we we are
looking to award this to Pathfinder Tree Service LLC for $179,61. You can see it's a three-year bid and on the spreadsheet there's a breakdown of per year price. There was two uh biders and it's going to our current bidder
path finder tree service as the lowest qualified bidder >> that they're the incumbent. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Where are they located on? >> I'm not exactly sure. >> Chris would have known, but I didn't ask him for that information.
>> This is for three years. >> Three years. Yep. >> And what is it? What's the scope other than this this property? >> Uh substations uh station three, station four. They take care of the weeds, the the bushes, the uh right away at station four, the
old pole yard, the existing pole yard at station three. A little bit of work around station five in these grounds. So anywhere we have property, >> Peter, >> what's that? >> Wall. >> Wall pole. Based out of wallpap. Thank
you. That just came to me. >> Voice from above. >> Any other discussion? >> All those in favor? >> What did we read? >> Read the motion. >> Sorry. uh moved that uh IFB 2026
01 first one of the year for grounds and landscape services to be awarded to Pathfinder Tree Service LLC for 1,79,61 no cents pursuant to Mass General Law 30B as the lowest responsive and responsible bidder on the recommendation
of the general manager. >> Second. Seconded. >> Thanks, Dave. All those in favor zero. >> All right. Thank you. Uh bid number four, excuse me, RFQ 2026-14
with the Greater Boston Police Council. This is for the purchase of two sport utility vehicles uh off their state biders list. The net delivered price will be 82,440 for two of these SUVs. We're looking for board approval for
that. Is one of these going to be your general man vehicle? >> Yes. >> The souped up one. Are >> these brand new cars? >> That's the one with the flames on the behind the rear wheels. >> Two rims. Yeah.
>> Are they brand new cars or used cars? >> Yes. New. Brand new. >> They're 2025s. >> Are they great? Somewhere >> not used. >> Sooner. I know. >> Yeah. >> Model year. Presumably, you get a good price on a previous model here. Um, this
I there's probably another place to bring this up, but one thing that I think would be interesting on these sort of if this is a light duty vehicle just to maybe think about it on the policy side, but just would be a like an EV first kind of a something that sort of
we had a policy where we would at least look for the EV market, you know, with uh light duty vehicles. Um, >> so quick comment on EV vehicles, you know, knowing and and where I work and
them having being triled. Um, they have their limitations in a utility-based environment. Um, when you need them in bad weather, they work
okay during an 8 to5 blue sky day, but when you need them more on a bad weather environment or tougher weather environments, they're not that great. >> Yeah. >> Straight up. I hate to hate to say that, but
>> and it's difficult for an electric power company that in a giant outage situation not have a vehicle to go out because it's an electric vehicle that you can't charge. >> Sure. Um because they've tried hybrid.
>> Yeah. I mean, I understand all those things. I I And so that would be part of the evaluation, you know, depending on which vehicle it is and you know, and maybe maybe there's not that many LDBs that you're, you know, that you're purchasing or that are that are part of the fleet and, you know, maybe they all
have to be sort of ready all the time, whatever. But uh yeah, just a suggestion that since we're talking about vehicles, >> yeah, >> what the other one for whole vehicle
>> the budget that was it was slated to replace two. So we are replacing two. >> So they're existing. >> Okay. Any other >> discussion? moved that RFQ 2026-14,
the Greater Boston Police Council uh two sport utility vehicles to be awarded to Liberty Chevrolet for the net delivered price of $82,440 pursuant to the town of Reading's membership with the Greater Boston
Police Council on the recommendation of the general manager. >> Second. Second. >> All those in favor? All right. 5 Z. >> Thank you very much. >> You appreciate it. >> Thanks for taking the car, Jason. This is the first time the general manager
has actually had a Carmel D vehicle in. >> It's good to know that you have your own vehicle. >> Also, I I know you've been there for a bit, but just wanted to uh note that VC joined us as well. Thanks. Byebye. >> Yeah. Hi guys. Sorry, I Yeah, because
here um okay, we're going to move on to the certificate retirement update. Thank Uh I guess this is to continue last month's discussion. So we added some
information the request of the chair. Um yeah. >> Oh. Oh okay. So the first two slides were already presented last. Oh well actually the first one was already presented last time so I'm not going to repeat that. The second one was just uh because we're
going to do a comparison of what was the estimated additional cost of retiring instead of retiring retiring 33% we were going to retire 55% and the estimate uh at the beginning of 2024 was
uh 69 cents um on the average monthly bill. And then we did the new estimate of the actual bill increase in now that we have all the data for that year. Um so uh the co the additional cost is was
$1. So if you look at the percentage is a high percentage 45% increase from that estimate even though the absolute dollar value is is is not a whole lot. Um and then we kind of applied that same
percentage increase to look at 2026 uh certificate retirement the additional cost. So the last uh row in this table was was is new information from last time. This is based on a 45% increase in
that additional cost also. So for 60% retirement, we're going to have uh an increase of about um 10 10 cents per month in terms of the bill impact. >> Do you mean you said 10 cents, but it was the range is 20 to 30 cents per
month. >> Yes. Yeah. So So the 30 cents is if the actual co additional cost is also 45% decrease. >> If your estimate is off. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah. And then the last one was also requested
just to see the distribution of our customers, our you know 26,000 residential customers. Um based on their usage, where would that bill impact be lending? So I would say a majority would be under
$1 per month that additional cost. And there's looking at looking at that there's probably 20 the the maximum we're seeing for some people like four to five dollars per month and as it goes
down that looks like 20% of the people that it it's hard to tell. It doesn't give you the percentage but obviously the great vast majority is but probably say 20% of the customers will see an impact greater than a dollar. So the um
the the y axis is a the number of customers. So for $5 that's like a hundred maybe >> not or not even >> Yeah. Maybe like 10. >> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Yeah. It seems I mean it seems like probably 90% of the customers are $2 or less impact. >> Yeah. and and the and the tail are this is is this would would you characterize those customers that exist in the tail?
Are those higher paying customers already that they're >> they use way more they use thousands of kilowatt hours. >> Would those be multi- family residences? No, those are >> residential accounts all single. Yeah. So those are like the McMansions with
the pools and three compressors and like >> it's the guy with three mini splits. >> Okay. >> Oh no. Or it could be you Pam. Right. >> Exactly. >> I got my bill today. I'm definitely on the tail somewhere. >> The trick is to turn those off. That's
the I found you really save a lot of electricity that way. You just if you turn those off. Mine hasn't been off for two months. >> Yeah, that's it's >> my ground source heat. It's been pretty >> Yeah, it's been cold >> pretty hot. >> So, you know, kind of getting back to the driver of of what you know, what
we're trying to do, 2030, we're supposed to be at 50%. >> Okay. Now, for that, I'm going to say for the sake of feeling good, we can exceed 50%. Maybe
that's not the right terminology, but we can exceed that. What's the what's the benefit of us of do of exceeding the goal? You know, it's 2026, you know, and other other than, you
know, our power supply composition is allowing us to get here. But why should we be charging C? My my big thing is why should we recharge cing customer customers more money just because we want to get to a higher
percentage now I that that's that's my driver here. I really I don't I I wouldn't care if it was a nickel. It some it matters to some people right you know $5 and it might be this this year
but hey look I saw a huge jump in my bill because it you know pass through costs those are going to hit you. So every time we increase the bill, it's not just, you know, distribution, you know, costs on our side. There's transmission costs as well that go
through and they have increased significantly. So I I I just I want to bring everyone's attention. Yes, we're doing this, but first off, we don't have to, right? We're we're we're already meeting our goals. and and and and secondly, you know, the the benefits of
it, you know, what what are they um for people other than an increased bill, right, for four and we're four years away from and we're already there. So um you know, if we keep that and we could sit on it, right? Abs, absolutely.
There's no need for us to move forward with increasing this percentage other than increasing people's bills in in in my opinion at at at this point. But >> well, okay, >> there's another view. I mean, is that
there are societal benefits and and environmental benefits to getting away from fossil fuels for many reasons. So we're we're at 1% of renewable energy according to ISO New England right now. We're running more peing plants than we
ever have before because we're shutting off natural gas. Sometimes we really need to focus on >> That's a good question actually and that's a good one. >> We have a couple of experts in the room, but if that what you're saying is true, that would be good to unpack someday if if this is really a a mirage because
peers are going on and they produce 10 or it's it's it's true. I mean peers have are have been more active almost for a straight month >> because then they're like 100x more emissions per or something like that per unit of energy and so that would be an
interesting question to get answered >> more thoroughly as Megan and Bob's nodding sagely on this one. >> Yeah. So the EPA uh actually the the D would adjust the >> emissions rate each year.
>> Yeah. >> For all utilities in Massachusetts in order to do the inventory. I would suspect that will be reflected for this year's uh emissions rate which is going to happen in two years because there's a two-year lag before they finally can determine what is the emissions rate.
>> So >> in a rears what the actual >> in Yes. including peers. >> Yes. Oh everything >> everything. >> So then that means this 55% is a mor is not is it's false and misleading. Not false but it's misleading not for any any >> it's a different metric that's >> not for anybody in this room but just we
need the state to tell us if the peakers are now making it be more than that net net. Well we need somebody to unpack that for us so we know what we're doing here. Well, it's not I mean it's not a mirage in the sense that if you say, "Well, let's go to 45%."
At 55, you're still purchasing more renewable energy than you would have for the same year given whatever fuels we burned than if we did >> 45%. >> Yep. >> So there there is you're still getting the carbon benefit if that matters to you. you're still getting the carbon
benefit of moving up the scale of percentages no matter what the peakers are doing. It's being offset certainly by natural gas peaker plants, but the offset would I mean >> if you don't mind my asking what
>> the car the carbon the absolute quantity of carbon that we are producing per year of electricity production. Um, the back misses hand. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, um, Bob, you make a
really good point. I I think, you know, it's it's this discussion is good because we really have to say, you know, the state has a mandate. We're exceeding it, but the question is what do our
customers care about? So, as part of a customer survey, whatever that's going to be done, that's one piece of information. And so it's more than just the board deciding what is important for the community. I mean the board clearly provides guidance but if there is a pull
from the community that should also be factored in and if that can be explored as part of the survey that would be useful because that's a good calibration. The other point is that one really needs
to think about what is our power supply going to be in the going in the out years, right? Because it's the it's the future contracts for renewable power that determine the number of credits you
can earn. So I I I I think somehow we should be and I think you know that's that's a point I think that Megan had made and you know that's when we look at this chart it shows that when you get to higher numbers you're having to deal
with more expensive credits right so we we need to be thinking about what customers want and also we need to be thinking about what our power supply contracts are going to be because that
determines the shape of future years. So I'm not saying that's important for today's goals for this year, but it's something that we need to think about and it's something that maybe it goes into the GM goal discussion, but I I I just wanted to mention that. Thank you.
>> Thanks for that. >> I think this is a relatively lowcost way to make a local impact. I think that's how we have to view it, that we're retiring uh renewable energy certificates
uh within our service territory to try to make an impact on the amount of emissions that that are out there. I I think like Vivic said, if we got into the next tier and we're starting to hit bigger numbers or there's less lowc cost
wrecks around for whatever reason in the future years, I think we'd have to relook at this, right? That's kind of like the Yeah. So to to me this is a relatively lowcost way to make a local a good local impact and we just take it at
face value and not really look at the big picture because the picture is changing rapidly and this was an extreme winter >> where a lot of extreme things happen and that's why it wasn't just gas fired peakers. It was really the oil fired
peers that were making uh a a big negative missions impact but it they were needed because the power the lights going to go out without them. So I I I had a couple questions. The first one is just just for clarity. We're the
motion here is the retirement rate of 55%. Which we are currently at 55%. Is that correct? Yes. So you're suggesting a motion to stay the course at 55% or that's what this >> that was the placeholder
then for discussion but >> okay so we could possibly go up to 60% for for example second question is um have have we ever explored any uh like I think they're virtual power plant or I
mean virtual power purchase agreements that are pretty far way. Are those reflected here in this uh graph on page three? >> So virtual power plan VPP there are different definitions depending on who
you talk to. >> Yeah. What I'm thinking >> most recently the VPP is just a different name for demand response which is different from this cover supply. >> Yeah. I'm what I'm thinking about is so so Cambridge recently it's like a
community solar project but it's in Illinois and it's much much bigger so they're able to buy those wrecks uh because of their subscription or something like that. I just I I guess I just wondered what that landscape
>> and those are reflected here on >> this. >> Yes, it's the same as as the table like all the all these certificates we have. >> Those are all bundled into >> are associated with a PPA which means
all the certificates are associated with the kilowatt hour that we buy. So we have not bought any certificate just for the sake of buying certificates. So, so do you know what the difference is then for those like outof region
power plants, renewable energy plants that are big? >> Speak to those two things. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Those I I uh I really don't like those because you're not making a local impact at all. and that there's some risk
involved with those because the way those virtual uh PPAs work is you're agreeing on a price for the output of the power. The price is above that
uh you could be paying more if I mean uh yeah the prices goes higher the thing could go out of business or whatever. It just I think those could really fall apart really quickly and you could be
left holding like nothing or a big mess. Uh I just don't like the >> done are they all done in the development phase? They're done in the like the low cost places to build, >> right? >> You know, solar or wind
>> really in the middle of nowhere >> that is you're not going to make much of an impact on really reducing emissions because the there you know locally, >> right? >> You know, so it's it's really signal more than
>> you want to tell a story. >> Yeah. >> That's really telling a story. That's not making an impact. All RMLD's power is within New England. Yeah. >> And the climate law. Yes. Sorry. >> And the climate law that requires MLPS
to retire this percentage >> have to be a percentage. >> It needs to be associated with to an hour purchase. >> Yeah. I mean these are I think right >> it's virtual the power
was just going into the grid in Wyoming. I understand. Yeah. >> Not getting here. >> You're just buying the >> buying. It's just a way to come up with a lowcost way to buy credits that are not impacting New England whatsoever. >> You, in my opinion, you'd be better off
taking that money you invest in that and uh investing in more insulation locally, which might cut local emissions because people are going to use less heat. >> They'll save them money. Okay.
Yeah. No, that's helpful. That that that's Yeah, that's super helpful. >> I did just want to point out um if you look on the the table on slide five, we put the word in quote stable around the effect estimate because those are the
certificates that we get from nuclear. So they're kind of somewhat stable as in the nuclear is providing the base load. So those certificates, those values, the amount that are generated a year shouldn't change drastically. uh where the re other types of certificate types are tied to more
intermittent generation sources. So those can vary and and depending on the type of year you have they could either generate more than you expect or less than you expect. Um >> can you can you explain what the those
different the ce to what those are? >> Those are similar to can I just like those are similar to nuclear uh that's similar to a nuclear power plant. 247. >> So, see also stable. >> Very stable.
>> What about the ME2? >> Those aren't so stable. >> Okay. So, we're starting to get into that. >> Yeah. Some of the hydro is also CSC. >> So, once you pass effect it, you know, some of them may may also be from the
um intermittent >> and and what is the MA2 and MA1? Yeah, all these are MA1 is all renewable solar wind. Um, MA2 is similar. >> ME2 is solar wind2.
I think some of the hydro is also ME2. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So once you pass E effect, it's likely some of it is hydro which is seasonal >> and inter intermittent in a way. And just to go back to the last month too, um these are all based on
estimates. If our load goes up and the generation goes down, it may be harder and harder to hit 55 or 60%. So we just want to give you, you know, context and when so it may seem like it's 20 20 cents to 30 cents on the average bill, but if and um I did the last math last
month, so I think it's still going to be the same, but there's roughly 11% that when you're at 60% there's like 11% certificates right now that we're estimating to be over. So if generation underperforms and our load grows and the combination of those two
add up to more than 11% we could be into the purching to purchase correct budget. >> I I know we said last time we want to make sure we're looking at the policy and right now I understand when we say 55 that means you have to hit 55 even including buying wrecks. I think we
should consider whether there's a come back to the board and have that conversation um if that is the situation. Um because I don't I don't think that is necessarily the intent. We want to go we want to make decisions based on the best information that we have. But um
>> I just wanted to give context of how >> the margin for error is >> when you start to go to 60% to start to narrow >> and it just it's it's just about how much risk are we willing to accept and want to do and balancing with all the other priorities.
>> To Bob's point, how much impact are you hoping to try to make with low cost impact? you know, that we're we're trying to balance the um increasingly non-carbon element of the goal with the reliable and lowcost part
of the goal. Um I I would just like to say to Megan and team, thank you for putting this information together because it really does help us consider the options. Um, you know, I I feel strongly about
continuing to make progress towards, you know, and doing better than the statemandated goal. Um, and it's good to see we have options to do small pieces, um, at a at a very limited impact. I'd love to see us continuing to try to strive to like every year or two making
a little bit more of an incremental impact and a low cost. And the way we do that is continue to kind of take baby steps forward. Um but at the same time totally recognize it's been a really challenging particularly this winter time. Um and we
do have to be sensitive to folks the cost people are facing in a variety of ways. >> So you had put you had put on the agenda the state the course motion. >> Um actually I don't I actually didn't
specifically say 55%. I think there was just a the idea was there was a placeholder here for discussion. Um so >> the question is if anybody wants to >> consider a vote for 60% or a different number >> what would they what would the the
average what would that chart curve look like at 60? Did you already show it? >> Well that's essent yes that's this age. >> Oh that's that would be to go to 55 to 60 >> be 55 to 60. That would be the impact and the average is somewhere between 20 and 30 cents.
>> Uh I'll make I'll make that suggested amendment that that we take this given the little bit and go to the 60. >> Anybody >> I I second that. >> I second going to 60. Um I'm definitely in the the tail paying higher with a
ground source heat pump. Um, I'm I'm certainly above average in my energy consumption, but it's to me it's worth a couple dollars to to continue to make progress on the goal. And I think it's in keeping with the
three-pronged approach of trying to be low carbon. Uh but as long as it's not a big cost impact, and I realize it's a couple bucks, it's still a couple bucks. But uh um given that we're energy, um I don't know what it would take to
heat my house with oil if I were to do that this winter. But electric heat, ground source heat pump is still far more cost effective than oil if I were to do it. a couple bucks to push energy conservation is well within that goal and objective I've set for myself.
>> Right. Just a cautionary, you know, a note again like Jason said, we we should have a retraction policy ready to go in case things change, >> things can and anything can change. We know we we know that could happen. So, >> and we can always do that.
>> Yeah, I I I agree. in the chisel. >> Yeah. >> Um I agree with that caution. >> Sorry about Go ahead. >> No, good job. >> When would this go into effect? >> This immediately >> I'm sorry. >> It would be our goal for this year essentially for 2026.
>> So, but when would people see the the effect in their bill? >> Uh that would be next year technically. >> Next year >> just because you know like because of the lag six months to
fix our >> generation. Yeah, >> we'll do the transaction next year, the first half of next year. >> We we are taking away potential capital from from us. We have to sell more wrecks, right? We can sit on them and make money from them. You know, couple things I'm again I'm going to say we are
ahead. We're four years ahead. You know, I appreciate everybody wanting to continue to steam forward, but I think we are forward. We're already there. So, I'd say stay of force. That would be my recommendation. >> I I'd like to ask Bob Castle what what
what's your recommendation? >> I would agree with with Bob. I think uh there could be other costs coming up. Uh we're going to see some big bills from this past few months. Uh
capacity prices could be increasing very soon. So, uh, there could be more increases coming that we just don't know enough about yet. So, I I would like to I think
keeping it at 55 is is reasonable at this point and not getting too far ahead of ourselves because we could be pulling back come next year uh in the year after that. And one big uh source of those CES wrecks is
that hydro Quebec contract. I think that ends in 29, right? And they're they may not renew that because they need power up in Quebec. >> So we the next source we buy is going to be more expensive Rex.
when if if there were a retraction opportunity, when does that happen relative to the actual increase on the bill? >> I guess it depends on what you mean by retract. You're retracting for the next
year or you want to you can't really go back once you settle on a NEPOG. You can't go back. >> Okay. So then you just have to readjust the next year. could go back down by% by >> which brings out the point I trying to make last time. I still don't think
February is the best time to make this decision. I think for 2026 goal we can really make a better decision next spring. By that time we'll have at least three quarters of 2023
2026 certificate generation. We'll have a very good idea whether we have enough to retire. So we won't run into that backtracking problem. >> So what you're saying So you're saying >> we would make this like let's pretend
this is 2026 right now. We would make this decision now spring of 27 for 2026 >> to know >> we could could do it you know February of next next year but you because you know for this year we got the quarter 3 2025
>> in January. So if you want to get quarter three quarters of 2026, you would have to wait till January of 2027. At least we'll get three quarters. So we can make a more informed decision about 2026. But right now we have no idea about 2026.
>> So we just speculation. >> Yeah. Why is that? >> But I feel like we're always going to be a year behind that, right? >> Well, but it's not really hurting anything by making the decision then because we still have time to actually retire whatever you decide for us to retire.
I know we didn't ask you this question, so you may not have the data, but let's assume this conversation was about 2025. >> What how would you like what would the options be for us right now? >> I will I will be able to give you this table with more confidence.
>> I'll be I you will I I won't I won't, you know, catch my answer so much like I'm doing right now for 2020. And what's the timing or what what what's your cash outlay for the Rex? When do you pay
>> you pay monthly? Do you pay? >> We pay every month. >> Every month >> along with the energy. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> So it's more like we don't receive the Yes. >> proceeds from the sales. >> Oh, we receive we we >> Yes. We we don't Yeah. >> We don't receive the pro.
>> Rex aren't meant >> Yeah. >> until like three months in a rear. Yeah. six to three to six months in a rears. >> Yeah. Yeah. So again like I explained last month um this additional cost is actually just the opportunity cost. It's
like the revenue we wouldn't be getting and there is the delay of that getting that revenue but still we're getting that dollar amount if we do uh sell them and if we instead retire them then we're not getting that additional revenue. >> Yeah. I was just wondering about the
timing of our decision. >> Mhm. >> Versus the lost opportunity cost that comes in a rears. If if we're deciding now on Rex for this year,
how our decision affects, you know, the cash flow over the next over this fiscal year. Sure. >> Can't sell or retire a rectal off. It's minted. >> Right. There's a three month lag or six months.
>> Three to six month. Yeah. Yeah. So >> if we decide now then >> you decide now we cannot do anything for six months. >> Yeah. Right. >> Or not just Well, yes. Yeah. for the first quarter of 2026, we won't know anything about it until September of
this year. >> Okay. >> So, you make a decision now. It's not affecting us anything. >> Can I ask one more question and then I'll go to Beck and then I'm going to encourage us to maybe um close the discussion and decide what we're going to vote on. >> Um you talked about the hydro being a big
impact of like what we're kind of the the margin of what we're talking about here. Would it be more appropriate for us given that to like revisit this conversation late spring when we understand what the hydro market situation is, supply
situation is and and see if that changes things or gives us at least more confidence. >> Well, so we know spring is the high production months and we know in the summer usually it's less, >> right? >> And the big uncertainty is in the fall whether we're going to have a drought or
not. Oh, I thought it was the spring that was the big impact. >> Well, last year was the fall where the production hydro production was really low. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, I guess my question was like, you know, we are looking at a difference
of like 0.2 and 3 per month. So, it's like a 10-centent difference that or like say a 30 cent difference from today's numbers. But the sense I'm getting from Jason and Megan is that there could be some hidden numbers that
are much bigger than the 30 cents, right? Is that correct? >> There's risk. >> There's risk. I guess it's hidden. It's more if we're estimating what we think is going to get generated. So if that underperforms and then our load
increases more than we think it's going to for the year that overperforms, those two things together could make this where it's not 30 cents. It could be we're we're potentially having to buy Rex on the open market. >> Yeah. So so so Jason, so so this 30
cents number which is your high estimate is really not a high estimate, right? It was >> it's it's high based on a certain assumption but it's not based on the contin based on this for the 2024 estimate the
actual was 45% increase in terms of the cost. So I applied 45% increase to the 20 cents. That's just >> I know I know Megan I know what you did but but when we we we're communicating say a 30 cent difference from today's
policy and but actually saying there is a possibility for a much bigger shock >> than 30 cents right so so so the comparison should be today's policy
versus something larger than 30 cents that that that's what hearing you say right. So >> I think the one piece that we're trying to articulate though related to that is you know I know you you mentioned again Jason there's the potential to have to
buy Rex. I think we want to have the opportunity to come back and have that conversation before that decision is made. Um understand that that's how the policy works today but I think we'd want to revisit that. In other words, >> meaning that even if we voted for 60, we could still if this if the calamities
hit it back, >> we could still not decide, okay, we don't want to buy the wreck to to fill the gap. We could do that. >> It sounds like that that's the design. >> We have to figure out the mechanics of how that would actually work. >> So that you'd come to us and say, you
know what, bad things happened and we got to buy. So he still wants to buy and meet the 60 and we'd have a chance in the summer or the fall to decide again. >> Yes. I think it's it's it's up to you to decide how to make that happen because the policy doesn't really talk about the
percentage itself. It also doesn't talk about how you would make changes to the the percentage. So, it's not so much about changing the policy, you know, goals itself, but rather the mechanics of how how you might adjust. Well, just so I read it back to you, if we voted on
60 now and things happened where oh, you have to actually buy something that you didn't think you had to buy before you did that at the at the relevant meeting, you come. >> I think the point is we we might need to figure out the mechanics of how that would work and how to define the policy to feel certain that we don't put
ourselves in a situation where we still have to buy the racks if we were would were to be in that situation. >> We would never have to buy them though, right? >> Right. We would >> based on the policy right now we they would have to buy >> so what what I'm trying to articulate is that we could
>> if we can figure out the policy >> changes that are needed then we may feel more confident that there's less risk in making these kinds of >> like policy as in our policy committ policy. >> Exactly. Getting >> I knew that. I was making sure that Bob understood. >> All right. Given given some of the uncertainty that
I'm I'm hearing around the table about where these numbers and when the Rex will come in, I suggest tableabling the decision on the certificate percentage to the fall of 2026, whether that's September or whatever fall of 2026, this
uh date we want to choose. And then we will have some information about the Rex are going. We'll have some information about pass through costs. We'll know about spring and we'll have an idea about fall. And then if we still feel comfortable that it's going to be 30 cents or less than 30 cents per average
bill, then I certainly would support an increase. But I think there's just enough uncertainty not to make that decision now and come back to that in the fall of 2026. It'll also give us a chance to look at the policy and say if we set a goal and that results in
excessive costs then the general manager and the the IDC man director will turn back and say this is causing us not to just retire wrecks that we own but buy >> uh wrecks on the market. Is that what we want to do? Are you really sure guys?
And so we can look at that at a policy level. It'll give us time to do that >> or or and then I know we want to get get off this but do the 60 by April or May we'll have our recommendations on policy that'll be hopefully voted on in June or
July and whatever we're going to do we've done including amending this to deal with this situation in time for fall which I think we are all smart enough some of us are smart not me but others of us are smart enough to do by
I'd prefer stay with kids. >> Yeah. I mean, I I think what Ray suggests is a is an excellent idea. It gives us the chance to define what policy changes need to happen and then we have a high level of confidence that what we're deciding on is not the same
level of risk. Um I think we just doesn't feel like a normal year in terms of people costs right now. And I think we just have to be extra cautious about that. And and I think it's a good reminder those that want to have a 100% renewable bill can do it through the
renewable energy choice program and we commit to buying Rex on their behalf if they want to do it on an individual basis. So it's not keeping any individual from investing in renewable energy if that's the way they want to go. And >> certainly we want to look at other ways
in which a person could do a solar choice or or other ways they might be able to take advantage of renewable energy. We're not preventing that from happening. >> Solar option too, right? >> Well, residents. >> Well, no, not right now. Uh,
>> there wasn't >> with Well, it was it was at one option. We don't have a way of of managing that quite yet. >> I thought there was a community twice. Yeah, that's the same thing. >> Got it. >> So, >> please subscribed.
>> Can I just check? Um, do we need to vote on this or can we table this for Okay. >> Yes. >> Okay. I'm going to Should we do we need to vote on tableling? >> No. >> No. I think >> Okay. We're going to table
>> um >> through the You table at the end of the year, right? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Table it to fall. Let's put it in. >> And that policy committee is going to review policy 30 prior to >> correct. >> Yes.
>> Okay. Um again, thank you so much to you and your team for putting it together. That's super helpful information. >> Thanks, Megan. >> Yep. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. >> It updates. Can we do those motions first and then I
please each first and then move on to >> We are No, we decided to table this. >> Oh, okay. doesn't want to get a >> y. So, uh, this is just broken down into some of the, uh, 2025 IT accomplishments,
some of the some of the items that are up for that we plan to do in 2026, goals and objectives, and then it goes into, and you can review that part of it, uh, the cyber security threat landscape assessment and what we're doing in our MLDD, uh, to protect our environment, our network. You can read that, you
know, if you'd like, and if you have questions, you can just let me know. uh under 2025 IT accomplishments uh we designed uh a secure communication infrastructure to support the AMI project. The AMI project is the meter
replacement throughout the all the four towns. So there's a lot of uh communication that goes on in the back end. Uh that all has to be secured and implemented to support all the new meters. We uh swapped out our phone system. We have enterprise cloud based
cloud-based telephone system. Um, we get full menu. It's so nice. You don't have to actually have somebody record it. It's text to to voice kind of stuff. It's It's nice. And uh that ended up having a net cost of zero because we were able to retire four different systems that were kind of bolted
together to make the one that we had. So that's uh that's been up and running and we've had no problems that I'm aware of with it at all. We're expanding the SCADA communication infrastructure to support automation. Uh that's part of engineering's uh ability to remotely
control switching implement an enhanced AI based email security system uh solution that goes above and beyond what comes at native with Microsoft Defender. Email and fishing is um I'm sure everyone's aware continues to be a major threat to all
organizations. They're getting better with the uh implementation the use of AI. They're getting you could tell just in the emails. Sometimes you get the emails, fishing emails, and it doesn't it just seems like the it's either machine generated or person who's doing it's not a native English speaker. It's
kind of choppy if you read and kind of easy to pick up, but they're getting much much better. Uh and they're getting harder to detect. Um IT staff um is continued to be trained uh advanced cyber security training for all of the people in IT. Uh what we
usually do is let somebody hopefully find an area of interest in cyber security. we discuss it and uh if we agree then then they attend the training that's part of the career development plan. It's something that I know Jason supports and RLD has supported for for quite some time
and user cyber security awareness training. Uh this is really important. Uh NERK SIP requires it once a year. We do it at least four times a year. Um we do different fishing things but depending upon the season we'll see then people if they you know if they were to click on a link then they get sent to to
additional training. We get all the metrics out of that. We see, you know, who's frequent flyers and maybe they just need to slow down and pay attention stuff. We have discussion with them. Um, we decided to implement a secure video surveillance system uh for substation 6. Those uh transformers are very
expensive. Um, you know, and we have eyes on that entire substation now. It comes right back to the operations room. And so that's uh that's up and running. It's been up and running for quite some time in 2025. So 2026,
some of the goals um is this is one of my my favorite ones. That's why it's right up top. Replace our current CIS ERP uh solution at least, you know, come to a uh an agreement on a replace. We get the RFP
out um by the end of Q4, right? That's we agree with you. >> Translation on CIS ERP. Those letters mean what? computer information system and >> enterprise resource planning, >> right? Resource planning, right? So that's uh that's I think everyone knows
the name of the what we use um >> support AMI implementation the infrastructure buildout and collective configuration that going to be ongoing all through 2026 and 2027. Um in 2026 we're going to uh have our
staff attend training on IA related cyber security. That's that's part of just staying up to date with as the threat landscape changes. And we're going to design a data voice communications system to support substation six. Uh that goes beyond the cameras. There's going to be uh there'll
be voice out there. There'll be card access the whole just like we have in the rest of our substations. Every year uh contribute annual NERKIP compliance evaluation. There's information that we have to uh provide. We have a company that helps us with that. But um every year, you know, has
to be up to date. It has to be factual, right? You can't just say, "Oh, yeah, we do that when we when we when we don't." So, we do uh we do pretty well. We'd like to continue doing so. Um and this is an ongoing thing to evaluate emerging technologies that may help advance RMLD's organizational goals, which
includes cyber security, right? So, we want to, you know, we find things that fit our environment for the size it is that that's a that makes sense and is all that's always changing. So we're not we're not married to one solution or one vendor. If something comes along it's
better then then we'll make the move. >> That's it. And the rest like I said is the uh is more cyber security stuff. >> Can I just ask a question on that the RFP again? So it's you're going to be selecting the technology the the ERP technology >> that you want to
>> by the end of the year. >> Well, we're going to get the RFP out by the end of the year. My goal is to as we'll talk about later is toward the RFP. >> Oh. >> Okay. So, so you'll select but not implement this year just select. >> Okay.
>> The software. >> Well, that'll that will take that'll be >> is there any like uh end of life date for the current I think you're already have. >> Yeah. Um there is and I I think they moved it. they they're supporting it,
but they're not giving any additional patches for the current uh >> some of the current stuff. I don't want to go too much into the public. >> Are there any questions on any of the other content that John put together? I guess like what what are some of the
emerging technologies that you're >> well one of them one of them would be uh a good example would be the AI based email security um that I mean defender is pretty good um but they're getting they're getting around defender they're
getting around MFA uh it wasn't that long ago MFA was the end all be all you had MFA you're good to go you know now they have fishing scams they're getting by the two factor So that's uh that that comes out really it's more um
that type of technology is is the latest I would say is AD based you know we have all the standard kind of stuff that we can talk about executive session or you can just email and ask me but um it is it is definitely changing if you if you looked at the the
logs and stuff it's all day every day anything that's you know they just keep trying and trying and trying the Iowa service. They just keep, you know, looking just running name, you know, like a password generation, they just hit the hit the firewall, hit the VPN. They're just always trying to get in all
day long. So, and still the primary way they get in is still fishing. So we're, you know, they don't they don't have to be we help them sometimes, you know, I mean, not we in general being users, not necessarily our MLDD, but um but we, you know, we've had some and we have a plan
to to address them when they come up and uh you know, to contain them, to remediate them and um and educate the users and hopefully they won't become frequent flyers. >> But back to the question that >> Yeah, thanks ma'am. So So John, thank you. um what is the time frame for the
complete implementation of AMI? So it's a two-part question. So that's my first question and the second question is you know when do you think would be appropriate to start evaluating software for engaging customers to you know help
reduce their loads or something like that because right now then that's we are hoping that the AMI would help us do that but you know there would be certain IT solutions that people have and so what is the timing for completion of the full rollout and then when do you think
it would be appropriate for you to evaluate technologies like your last bullet? >> So I I can really only comment on the Jason can can talk to the meters themselves but for the um infrastructure we're at about 40% there now you know so
I I would think um you know probably 90 or better percent by the end of this year. So that that'll be the the infrastructure to support the meters. We can't roll meters out with no communication in place. So um that that would be my my comment on that. Um
>> so so so sometime into 2027 also you'll still be rolling it out right >> because yeah you need to be at you need to be at 100% before you start doing something for customers. >> Yeah. So the meter replacement is different to replace 32,000 meters give
or take. That's at least that's all of this year and probably most of next year, maybe even a little bit more than that depending on how things break with weather and you know. >> Okay. So, so, so, so, so, so you could, so, so you could go into next year to
evaluate stuff. Okay. Thank you. >> Any other question? >> Thanks. >> Um, I'm sorry. So, a customer who wants to manage their their home usage, there's a third party application that
they use themselves that draws on information outside of RMLD's world. Is that correct? Is that that the home? >> You're talking about the AMI system. >> Are you talking about connected homes? >> Oh, connected homes. >> Yeah, connected homes is where they can enroll and then a third party can
control like the thermostat. >> That's kind of like outside RMLD. That's the c what the customer an app the customer uses to manage their it draws data from >> a program that's run by Mwork that RMLD has um subscribed to through Mwork
not exactly the see exactly how it works what MR's doing I believe it is a third party that's using all that to do that but um >> but that's separate from what John's doing in terms of the RMLD >> yeah so the network he's talking is just
for meter data to get back >> to us. Right. >> Right. And so that I asked it because I think that was partly where VC was going is that as a customer if I access the connected home software I can still manage my energy usage time of use and
and control my own energy usage um drawing on our MLDD data but that's separate from AMI and collecting data from the customer that we use for building and all the stuff that happens internally here. Yeah, there's existing interval data now that that they're using for
that. Um the new meters might have more smaller period of interval data. I think right now it's like an hour and it might go to 15 minutes. >> Might go to 15 minutes. So you have, you know, more data points with the new meters, but
>> yeah, thank thanks Rick. >> Okay. Uh thanks everyone. Appreciate it. Sorry. Thank >> Okay, we're about 10 15 minutes behind schedule. We'll try to try to make up a little bit of the
time. Um Jason, union negotiation update. >> That's actually going to get tabled to another meeting. Um we're in the union. So, >> okay. >> So, we're hoping they'd get it done by today. They they did not. >> Okay. All right. Table that. Um, so
approval of meeting minutes. Does the want to go ahead and do your first? >> Move that the RMLD citizens advisory board approved the following 2026 open session meeting minutes as presented on the recommendation of the general manager and the board secretary January
20th second. >> I guess we need a roll call vote, right? So >> yes. >> So Tim, are you chairing right? I'm sorry I was late. Jolly Roapp's eye. >> Charlie Regusa pop castle I move I
>> and anybody want to read? >> Sure >> I'll go. All right. Yeah. Move that board of commissioners approve the following 202526 open session meeting minutes as presented on the recommendation of the general manager and board secretary for
the dates December 29th and January 20th. I'll second that. >> Any discussion? All those in favor? Motion carries. 5-0. Training and travel report.
Uh oh, this is the MMA update. >> Ray, Dave, >> did it get in here? >> Yeah. Attachment six. >> Uh there. Way back. Way back. Okay. So, um,
David and I went to the MMA Connect, uh, 351 conference. Um, MMA stands for Massachusetts Municipal Association. So, it is all of the, uh, officials that make up a municipal government. Um, and
we are by definition town charter representatives of the town, uh, which have this specific role. and we we went um as town of Reading um representatives. The one of the main goals of that
meeting was to actually attend a Municipal Lake Commissioners Association uh session which was scheduled as a part of that conference. Uh it was a chance for commissioners to get together and say hi to each other and see each other.
We've done that at NEPA uh when we've been up there. Um it was a chance to kind of uh meet in this setting uh of the MMA setting. Uh it offered the advantage of seeing vendors that were present on the exhibit floor and talk to
some people that provide energy services to various towns and and um municipal lake companies as well as attend uh some of the sessions if you wanted to uh that other speakers had about goals uh for the community. But the uh session that
MLCA session specifically as it is in the um attachment is the goal was to extract from those present what topics were um things that the MLCA wanted to give
back to those commissioners that are part of it. The goal of MLCA is to be able to bring commissioners up to speed on topics um that they may need to address within their own light districts. So, it's not setting reading
policy. It's educating us, the commissioners in RMLD or whatever municipal light company about topics that are coming up so that when we come back and have discussion in our respective light departments, we speak from an educated point of view. And so a
number of things were brought up and I I roughly grouped them into various uh colored sections uh that might represent a a theme or policy or or topic. Uh I won't go into the the specific list that
they're there for you to look at. Um at the bottom of the next page, uh we've set aside some dates uh for meetings March 26th, April 30th, uh May 28th, and June 25th. as times where we might address some of
those topics and some of the ones that have come to the surface are MC financing and um how can they finance an MLP uh project legislative updates portable solar and then commissioner 101 what does it mean to be a municipal
light commissioner so those are I don't think we paired those dates with those topics um but certainly among the things that have um come to the surface of things for commissioners to talk about. So I think overall it was successful in
terms of getting some feedback on topics and helped us plan for future meetings. So, um, thank you for supporting our effort in doing that. And, uh, as these meeting dates come up, I'll update the
board on what the topic is. And, um, you're welcome to attend as is the cabin. >> Thanks. >> Thanks for attending. and looks like a
really good set of topics for the meets coming up. Okay, moving on to the GM goals discussion Okay. So, um put together some goals based on um six different kind of topic areas
that that have been identified around our world's mission of low cost reliable power uh low carbon prison low carbon and then also touched on you know customer communication and trust employee engagement and governance and
board oversight. Um I'm just going to kind of go these into blocks and we can kind of stop and talk about them um under each of these headings and then we'll move through that way. So the first sections on customer communication and trust. Um the first goal would be to
investigate for improved functionality of the customer portal to increase customer participation in that portal. I'm looking at trying to get something moving by quarter three on that. Um so there are low number of users in the portal. It actually provides good
information to your interval reads. You can compare monthtomonth or time frame. It gives you the, you know, the temperature of the high, low temperature each day. Um, so there's a lot of good information in there that help customers make decisions. So I'd really like to try to maybe improve some of the functionality or at least look at it to
see, you know, what can we do to get more people invested into using that that portal. >> Real quick question on that. Are there resources on the website for how to use the portal that people that customers can access? >> I believe so. There's definitely a link to to get access to the portal. And then
it's pretty I think it's pretty self-explanatory if you've gone on any online bill pays except that to do this to do the bill functionality, you have to click a link in there and then sign into your invoice cloud account. So I think that's one of the things that might be holding some
people back from using it is it's not necessarily streamlined in that regard. Um so I do want to take a look at that um and see what it would take to maybe bring that functionality in. So there's that. And then um we're going to
look at um the Atlantic comprehens comprehensive review to refine the Armaldi's uh county year 27 capital and operating budget process and implement uh any improvements that we find. Um as you guys have sat through it's it's
usually takes two meetings. Um, I know, uh, a couple years ago it there was a change made to look at carryover versus the the year when it comes to budgeting, what's approved. I just want to look at that to see if there's a way to improve how that looks and feels um so that it's
easier and to you know put out the information for later review and and know what what's happening without hopefully I'm going to ask a lot of questions um around you know what's exactly approved for spend this year versus last year what was spent last year but you know just look at that
whole process um I know it starts around July and takes a few months so just looking at you know the timing of things and about, you know, the process itself and just, you know, if there's anything we do to to streamline that, improve that. Um, we're going to also look at all the customer programs and make some
enhancements. I know we kind of talked about a little bit last month when it comes to like the rebates, stuff like that. So, we're going to take a complete review of that and I know um Megan is slated to come back in the near future to give some more information on some of those programs and some suggestions on on, you know, around the budgeting of
the EEC fund and what it's being used for. And We're gonna take a closer look at that, try to make enhancements on that. And then um we're gonna the website um as you know, we went to a new website
towards the end of 25. And so at first a lot of time was spent just getting all the information off the old site into the new site and into some buckets. I know um Rivick had some comments recently about where things are stored and moving around. So, we're going to take a hard now that all the data is there and sites up, we're going to take
a look at that uh and functionality and see if we can improve ways to communicate information to the customers and streamline a little bit more now that go over to the new site. >> Um, any questions on any of those?
It's a lot. So, ambitious. >> Yeah, >> just those first four is a lot. >> Yes. >> You know, >> and uh >> and that's just to do it to do it. >> One of six sections. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Depending how deep you go into it, you know what I mean? >> Do you for the for the customer facing
kind of website participation ones? It looked you know it's you've got enhance the website to improve technical communications and investigate improve functionality of customer portal. Do do you have I'm sure you have some baseline like user data like how many
people are using >> I believe they both >> Yeah. like visiting the website and so I just wondered if you know if quantitatively it's I don't know you know exactly what
is behind the goals of improved functionality but if it has to do with like more people showing up and using the function just if it's possible you know if this one stays in there is it possible to kind of like say I'd like to
see this improved by 3% or 5% or I don't know something like that. Um just to make it measurable. Um and again >> maybe it's a baseline and you just bas
>> then like setting a interimm goal between Q2 and Q4 of improvement and then that way you've got the baseline and then in the future years you can >> Yeah. I and I'm not even thinking about it so much as a specific goal as much as just like a tracking.
>> Yeah. >> You know, like how do we know that we're making improvements based on customer fulfillment? And we know that because more and more and more people are using the, you know, are using the different tools. I I I did have one more question, just a
quick one. This is kind of off topic, but I'm just curious on the customer programs part. Is the utility allowed to do its own like on bill financing of some of those programs? I know you
have the rebates, but if they don't cover the full cost, are you is RMLD allowed to do on billill financing for some remaining portion? Do you know >> that? I don't know. I do know one of the programs right now is the interest free loan
>> through reading co-op and >> through heat pumps. >> So it's not quite the same thing but you know customers can apply through reading to get to get the loan covers the interest. So >> I guess the question would be why was it
why was it done with a bank rather than just directly by >> we don't want to be a financial loan institution. We're not we're not a financial loan institution. >> Yeah, it could be. But you can I mean you could partner with a bank still to do the on bill financing too. It's just it would be a
>> I just you know you get one or two people defaulting on you all of a sudden you know now you're suing people chasing up down just a bad I I I don't know if you >> financing is a bad thing. >> Well I'm I'm just I'm just projecting out you know you get a couple of bad
partners there all of a sudden you're chasing them down for money. Uh, lots of utilities do it, right? Maybe they're bigger. Maybe I I don't know. I was just Yeah, that's enough of the discussion. I was just sort of curious. >> Interesting question for the additional light commissioner to see if he had
other way. >> It is a good question. But >> there you go, Ray. >> I just think sometimes you have to be cautious >> cautious of what programs you want to get into, right? You know, is it our our our role to let
go? Oh, great. You know, you resside your house and you put up Tyveck. >> Yeah. No, we're already way off topic from the >> Yeah, I was just I was just wondering about the >> Yeah. >> sort of the ability of the utility to do that. So, anyway, >> so let's let's try to maybe spend between five and eight minutes per
section just so we can get through it a reasonable time. And and Beck, I know you had some questions and comments, too. So, you know, please just jump in when um if I if I miss your hand, please jump in when we're getting to where you want to talk. Uh next section is around employee
engagement and organizational integrity. So, um first one was around increasing the management team training and engagement and associations around like skills, leadership, teamwork, networking. Um I have a note in here to add a measurement goal as we kind of just talked about earlier. Um, I'm
working with the team to try to figure out a way to to measure that to come up with something that we can put in here more detail that we can actually measure. Um, so I will get that done and over and emailed over to the board well in advance of the next meeting. Um,
we're going to perform an independent third party employee engagement survey sometime in around quarter three. I do want to point out that um with the with my terms of starting in January um this is back to that baseline that was brought up earlier. This would
my my mind this engagement survey this time this year would be provide that baseline data of how engaged the employees are and then we can try to work off that for future years. >> Didn't we do one of these a year or two ago? >> Years ago. >> Two years ago. Yeah, >> I thought we didn't.
>> I think we skipped it last year. Well, I believe we we requested it with Colleen. We >> No, I know it was >> drew it with Greg. Um >> my very first meeting we reviewed the engagement survey. I remember >> I don't know if we implemented it with >> No, no, it was like the results of the
engagement survey, >> but it's been at least two years if not >> three since we ran it. And one of the things that >> Jason and I discussed is like I feel like you should do an engagement survey like clockwork every year. Doesn't matter what's going on. Like you need a pulse check. you want to hear from your
employees. >> Um, so I think it's I'm supportive of the goal. >> We're also going to take a look at the employee review process uh and and around the communication of that and then implement any improvements we can
find to that process to make sure that we're consistent in applying our reviews across the organization and that we're we're effectively communicating the results of those reviews so that employees understand where they are. um >> the performance review process
>> and then uh also while while we're doing all this um we're going to try to I'm going to look to assess and try to determine some immediate needs for the organization around resources and then make sure that we incorporate some of that into the county or 2027 budget process to make
sure that if if we have to change move positions or increase positions or something like that that needs that that we take care of in the budget process. That's the uh last section. >> Any feedback question for that? >> I have a question on the first section.
Can I go back there? You want the uh capital and operating budget. Last October when we talked about the budget, we talked about the system to do more of the capital budget preparation. Is that going to be in your review?
So when you say around like the system, you mean around our our software help generate the reports. >> Correct. >> Um that type of software will fall into the ERP solution. So we're going to still be using the same software for now until that solution gets into effect.
But we can look at like some how some of the reports are generated off of that system and and see if there's way to make improvements there. Um but as far as what's coming out of the software, software doesn't remain the same. So that part of it will system part of it
will stay the same for now. Um but once the once a new ERP software >> which will be next year >> um that's going to probably be a couple year process. I was involved in one of my last thing and it was at least two years to to do
overhaul of all those systems. It's it's a lot of work. It's a lot of time. There's a lot of testing and training. Um so I I don't want to make it sound like next year and then next year we're gonna have a new software replace and it was going to be fine because I
>> I thought when I talked to John he said it was going to be late this year early next >> we're going to award the RFP to a successful bidder for for the software but then they're going to have to come in and look at what we have look at our processes
build out the new system develop the testing scenarios have us test it develop the training scenarios train all the users And some of these systems I know in my past there's enough of them that it was put in two phases. >> So a couple of the systems got replaced in year one and the other couple systems
get replaced in year two >> because it it is a lot to put on an organization. >> So yeah I'll just jump in here. So Charlie, thanks for asking that. So I think Jason, you know, last year when we saw this, there were some errors in terms of you know Excel manipulation of
stuff. So it's something that we'll need to be careful. So that I what you're saying is we'll still get some Excel reports but I just think you know there'll be additional scrutiny needed. >> Yeah. Scrutiny or process impro if it's a process related
>> processes. So I mean we'll still be stuck with some Excel reports. But I think we'll have to be careful. Yeah. >> Two very quick. >> Yep. >> Very quick. I think uh on the second set of uh goals, number four, I don't know that you need that because that's just kind of part of what you have to do anyway. You're the general manager. Of
course, you have to create a budget. Just to keep this simple, you might want to delete number four on that. You have to assess and determine the needs for the budget. Seems like >> no, I think he's defining new resources. This is through staffing or reorganizing staff. This isn't this isn't just budget. >> I requested
>> and then that labor gets put into the budget. But I think he's the question there is >> or like >> is the organizational structure do you have the right like okay you know >> so it's more than just >> what do you need in terms of resourcing and understand that so that we can budget
>> there's a budget consequence but it's really defining the needs and resources >> next section is government governance and board oversight so uh one that I have here is ongoing is the review and update of policies and procedures which was kind started with the subcommittee.
Um we'll make sure we go through that this year and get that done. Um towards the end of the year, we'll we'll I'll try to look at the strategic plan and see if it needs any refinements and then implement those. Uh and then the third would be I'll explain this a little bit better, but create and implement a town
government's engagement plan. So kind of around that uh what I'm thinking is um a communications plan for both the boards here as well as as the select boards and town management of the four towns. You know what types of communications need to go out to whom when
>> yeah and and what's the mechanism or the means of that communication. So developing that that overall communications plan and then implementing >> and it also could loop into the policy too. So when we iron that out maybe that's a good one to plug into that just a thought like
who's supposed to talk to other boards and who shouldn't talk to other boards and when does it get messy that >> yeah you got a communications director as well so that's a good kind of place to start >> any other anything on the governance and board oversight
okay so reliable power uh the first one I have is me or exceed u the following reliability metrics so with sad which is the system average duration um have a goal of less than 55 minutes and uh kind of kind of put some stretch goals in here because if things go
really well then you know maybe trying to get under the 50-minute mark um with safety which is the frequency um having the goal be less than 0.5 or about 50%. And then the stretch would be about 45%. And then the customer average
duration interruption. So that's when if so the system is you take all the duration of all the outages divide across all the customers and the average customer would see that type of duration customer one is the average of the if you actually have an outage this is the length of time that that roughly you'd be out and the goal would be less than
100 minutes with the stretch being less than 90 minutes um just the I didn't it's on the goals but uh in 2025 our sad was 50.8 8. Uh our safety was 48, the KB was 106.54.
So they're kind of in line with what we've been seeing and looking at the last five years. Um but just trying to a goal that we can try to try to make but uh shows improvement and the CD and CFP numbers that we have already are already
up are up there in the performance level compared to regional and national um numbers that you know they're already we're already there. So that's why like those goals are kind of near what the numbers are. Um then the second one would be to apply for the APA's RP3 award. This is the
reliable public power provider award. Um it's due you get a three-year designation. Um we currently have a diamond which is the top level designation that expires this year. So we're due to reapply. And that that judges um the where we are in four areas
of reliability, safety, workforce development, and system improvement. And it's a uh when you apply, there's a bunch of questions in each of those four sections that are around best business practices in those four areas. And so if you're if you're
doing well and get a high score, that means you're you're doing all the best business practices across the four areas, which means you're a healthy, reliable company. So I I I just wanted to give more a little more definition to to that goal and why it's important. Um
>> quick question about that. Do do all MLPS apply for these APA awards? Do all do you guys know? >> Not all, but quite a few of them do. Yes. >> Because we were we we're paid we pay to be members of APA. >> Yes. I would say I can't say with 100%
certainty, but I' I'd probably say 99 to 100% of MLPS in Massachusetts belong to APA. I'm pretty sure it's 100% but not all of them apply for for different some associated with it. >> Right. Yes. So you have to have some
procedures in place for the RP3. there's a there's a you have to provide documentation. Um it is a heavy lo of work to apply and and maintain that designation. But so all I'm saying is it personally it does not matter to me if you put in for that and we get something
back from APA knowing that you're hitting these other goals. It personally I don't see the the need to go through the exercise. It doesn't but others may feel otherwise. I would say it validates that the practices that you follow as a utility
are meeting industry best practice and you're either you're either meeting them or exceeding them and you're heading in the right direction. >> So it's benchmarking yourself. >> Benchmark. >> Yeah. >> So I I have a question with with the outage goals and whatnot. Uh something that's near and dear to my
heart is that Wilmington doesn't set their own you it's a Verizon poll set area and that can affect your outer time dramatically because they'll go to dinner before they go and set a poll where they get a call and >> two times >> allegedly and
>> so is Reading Municipal still trying to acquire the rights to set their own polls in Wilmington? I I know what in the past I've been told that that was the >> it's something we'd have to look at. Um a few years ago a couple MLPs were able to to hit it just right and were able to
to buy ownership back on the polls, but then um Verizon um decided that was not what they wanted to do after those couple of uh MLPs that were successful. So for a while there they they they refused they did not look to sell their rights. um it's starting to be mentioned
again that it's something that they might be looking at again. But it would really depend on on the on the negotiation and and what they're looking for because um you know you don't want to spend too much on on something that may not be of
of that much value because if the bulls are really old and depending on what their asking price is spending way more than than the assets's worth, right? So it's a business decision. It's something we can explore. I just didn't know if it was something that was currently in the
works or not because um somebody told me that it it they were in negotiations, but that was um >> I didn't ask my staff because that was something >> full disclosure. I I was here when I worked for Verizon
regarding the sale of the poles from Verizon to running light and um the cost was prohibitive. That's why it didn't move forward. That was 10 plus years ago. So >> yeah, >> that's understandable. I I just where it
stood. >> Yeah. So some major utilities have negotiated. National grid has Eversource has not. >> Um so it just moves moves forward where applicable, but it's a it's a good idea to pursue the right price point because
it makes things faster for you. Is there a risk for you for the MLP in terms of the wires? And I don't know if they're not taking care of the poles, for example. Do you ever run into a adverse situation where
you're prevented from doing something or there's some loss or something like that based on negligent from negligence from a you know, not keeping those assets? I mean, I would just be careful if if if it's an aged asset that that happens to
fail, it could cause outages and it, you know, creates more work and and stuff like that. But, um, I don't think there's any other course other than, you know, if it failed, fell over, you know, it's a liability and it
could create outages and be a safety concern when it happens. Um, but >> yeah, >> and that and that's one of the reasons why I think depending on the price why MLPs may or may not choose to buy those rights because now you're assuming
the ownership of those poles and the condition that they're in. >> Thank you. >> Um, also in reliable power, uh, we're going to complete the station six substation construction within the substation fence. So that means the substation portion without connections
to the transmission line or the distribution system. Um so that would be the transformers are currently on site. Um the switch gear is coming. They' be making up all the connections between the transformers and the switch gear. And then what I have here is begin construction on the transmission and
distribution connections. So getting the conduit, the duct bank and the and the cable out on the distribution side. And um at the last meeting with National Grid um it looks like fall timeline where they might start beginning construction on the transmission tap. Um but that's a little bit of our our
control. So right now it looks like that's going to get started by the end of the year, but we're going to focus on what we can control, which is everything internal of the fence and getting the distribution out to the street. Um and then the last one in this area is um we're going to complete the AMI meter
communication infrastructure. So that's getting the communication network up by the end of the year and then replacing 40% of the meters by the end of the year with the thought that that goes really well and having a full year to do meter replacements next year that hopefully
the remaining 60% could be done next year. >> That's the real power portion of that. >> So So Pam Pam, I think I'll jump in here >> if that's okay with you. So it's like I said around 20 minutes into the thing. So if you don't mind what I've done is
I've actually written down some comments. I have some framing comments and then some comments on the goal. So if you don't mind I'll go through this and then Erica I'll share this with you later on. Okay. Um so in terms of the framing comments I I it's nice to see the goal setting and
review process involving the cab for input. It's also good to see the framework for goals is based on the contract work that the cab was involved with for the GM selection. So, it's nice to see that you know there's good consistency in what
we're doing as an organization. Uh we are also looking forward to the CAP participation on the GM review and goal setting committee that will meet towards the end of the year for reviewing the performance of RMLD and the GM and uh vice chair Woods and
member Ragusa will represent the CAB on that committee. So I just want to recognize that you know the CAB is going to be more involved. I mean historically we have not and so this is good. Uh coming to the goals uh I think these are the goals for the organization that I
embodied in the GM's goal. So I I I I start off with the mission and I'm saying you know reliability, low cost and increasing non-carbon power that's the mission uh and I wanted to see you know what does one need to do as
an organization to make sure we have reliable reliability and so all the things that you know Jason has talked and this is something this is not a surprise to Jason because I actually called him about this point uh when we talk about reliab ability. You know, one
needs to think about people also. We need to make sure people are well trained and actively engaged. So, there needs to be some way of incorporating that. There needs to be something around processes that you know we have safe and reliable power production and supply and
also infrastructure capability and secure. So Jason when we we talked I think we talked briefly about you know the cyber security aspect that comes into reliable power and that may come in as part of your application for the APA
award but the idea is that it's the whole organization that has to be in involved the whole goal setting right so it's like an inverted tree and you know the details could so each so different departments should be able to find stuff for them then we when we
come to cost drivers you know one looks at cost in terms of capacity transmission energy and management of expenses and uh when we look at non-carbon it's like a question of power supply mix contracts and then you know in territory
solar and storage so I I just saying those are so I'm looking at you know what does the organization need to do and make sure that the goals address all the critical issues so uh I I would just encourage everyone to think about the
goals that are listed here. I I I think the categories are correct and just to make sure that you know I I think what I heard from Jason was that he's he's got a lot of detail some of which may not show up here but it's important that
that detail gets to the people in the organizations that in the various departments so that they have no that they're very clear about what they need to do and make sure they're working on the most optimal things for the organization. So I'll just stop there. Thank you.
Thanks for that. Um that was super helpful. There were there were two um things that you said that I think we probably should just edit on this. One is um you're right, it's non-carbon, not increasingly low carbon. So maybe let's just make sure we use the same
terminology as that uh mission and then I think we should absolutely put a safety goal um here. Maybe it's under reliable. Maybe it's under under employee engagement or customer trust, but
a safe an employee in linement etc. safety goal be great. >> Yeah, that could go in a couple of places like either the employee engagement or reliable power. >> Yeah, where wherever it makes sense. >> I'll change it to no carbon. I I took it
right out of the appendix of the contract. >> Did we get that wrong? If if you're going to do >> if we're going to do a safety goal filming, it's going to be like u last time accidents, you know, those type of ocean recordable incidents
>> and then uh motor vehicle incidents. you know, the the the full the full gamut of of you know, a cut, a broken bone, a car accident, you know what that there's multiple. And so just pretty st those
are pretty standard metric. >> Um I think there's a couple more sections. You want just try to spin through those quickly? >> Uh so for low cost, the first two are kind of go hand in hand. So the first one says uh one we're going to do is complete cost of service study. Um
that's where we'll look at our um our rates and the fin and the financial that does and then how it funds our capital plan and our budgets and our and funds our expenses and then we'll take that information that comes out of that study and then look at our our rates. So we'll
review the rate classes, how that distribution rate gets designed. uh we'll look at the potential for an opt out time of use and so as part of that the output of that study will feed that goal of of which we're going to implement into the road structure for for 2027.
So those two kind of go hand in hand. They're kind of broken out, but they're really kind of together. >> And then um and then as we've talked about earlier, development award, the RFP for the ERP project at the end of the year. >> That's awesome.
Increasingly non-carbon. Um but you're saying your employment contract said low carb. Uh so we'll uh forget we don't have the we don't even need the 55% anymore because
>> um first up will be complete the agreement for a station 3 battery um which is in north reading. Uh so right now um there's a plan to put two 5 megawatt batteries up again up at station three. Uh we've been that
agreement's been in the works for a little while. um we're meeting with them later this week to see where that stands. But uh that's why the goal is to to get the agreement in place um because there are um some issues around supply
chain and stuff like that. So I I I don't have a full understanding of that yet. If something comes out of meeting later this week and put more definition here for next meeting, I will. Otherwise, um if depending on how that goes, we may look if we have to look for something else
and we will and then it will still be just the by the end of the year. >> That's why it's it's worded that way. Um >> Jason, I I don't know why the reason is, but it looks like battery costs might be coming down again. Just FYI when you're talking to this. Okay,
good to know. >> Um, on this section, I I see the increased engagement and renewable choice and peak demand response. Um, any goals around kind of the additional programs like whether it's, you know, heat pump rebates, solar rebates, I know
you you talked about like wanting to make sure we're optimizing that as kind of part of the budget or part of the cost. Yeah, that goal a couple of those fell into the customer communication. >> Okay. >> Um the review of the programs and make enhancements. Um I get um this could
have fallen over here. Um >> yeah, >> where it helps um with the increasingly non-carbon um so you know it's hard to control. You can't really control people getting into these programs. So that's why we termed engagement. So, we're going to put an
effort in to engaging the customers and and I I'm still working what that measure would look like to ditch that, >> but getting customers more engaged in those programs even if they don't participate or whether it's having more information sessions, getting out or whatever we need to do, try to increase
the engagement in those two programs. Um, that's where we're going to try to put the metric around for that one. Um and then the last one was around um so APA also does a smart energy provider where that does look at all your customer programs, your rebates, etc.
And then you can get certified in that program that you're that you are working towards uh um lower non-carbon goals and and reducing uh usage. Um so we just want to and we have we have to my knowledge we have not applied for that
yet um historically. So that' be a new designation. >> This concept is is sort of a carryover and and I don't know how it'll apply to you. Um but in territory generation and and I
guess my my thought about implementing that is looking at the land area that we have that's not roof area in this kilum school or the recal that's close geographically. Is there any ways to to leverage that uh
into a a solar park or feed into the solar choice program? Um, I'm not quite sure I know what I'm advocating short of my vision of have RMLD own the parking lots and the power
generated from raised panels over parking lots. I realize that's a very expensive proposition to do it because of the the cost of the supports, but um I don't I just think we don't want to lose the concept of finding places where
we can gain increased solar generation. That means finding places where there's area that we can put solar panels up and that's not a lot of available free space. So that means being creative on where we can find it. >> I Yeah, I'm not losing sight of of that
type of thing with the goals. I'm just with all that's on here. >> Yeah. No, I understand. Yeah. >> I'm just trying to get back to some of the core basic stuff like building the substation and the MI project which um I
know we're a larger municipal so we have more capacity to do large projects than some of the other municipals but each one of those projects in their own would probably be the one and only main project for most plants >> and we're doing both of those and trying to do an ERP and look at that rate. So >> yeah, >> I don't want to It's not that I don't
want to lose sight of that. >> Yeah, >> you know, we we still are looking at land options and stuff. They haven't fallen us aside. They just maybe taking a step back in priority. >> That's fine. >> And and uh >> I I just That's good. That's a good answer for now. Yeah.
>> I mean, a simple thing is to remove the cap on how much people can get a rebate for, right? I mean I think they're capped at a thousand kilowatt something like that thousand. >> Yeah. And that's >> and we're talking about customer programs. >> 600 after a certain date and 1,200
before a date. I don't remember exactly the date. >> I mean a simple fix could be to just not have such a constraint on how big of a rooftop a warehouse could put soul. Like lift that and then we could get more solar capacity on roofs by lifting that. >> That's all.
>> Yeah. E, it's economics and RLD, right? Gota it's got to be worth your >> Yeah. >> in in initial investment on your 30-year return. And that's what returns because we're cheaper. >> I know
>> that's that's the challenge. And we shouldn't supplement being cheaper to I know it's good for the overall environment, but we're now we're just paying paying for people to get something done. It also manages the demand increase and
>> yeah there's a yeah there's a cost >> especially if it's battery if it's if it's paired with battery then it helps the peak as well but you know batteries are cheaper so >> you're paying well to do people to do the work right I I hate to say it that way but that that's that's what can come out of it you're just
>> yeah people I can afford it I didn't want to do it but now you're making it an incentive for someone who probably could have afforded it in the first >> I'm talking about not talking about residences I'm talking about parking lots and large buildings with flat roofs, which there are a lot of those in our territory.
>> Not and there's they're constrained how big they can make the projects now because our thing caps the number of panels at a certain or the the production at a certain level beyond which we will not give them the $600 a kilowatt >> like I think it's capped at a thousand
kilowatts. >> I'd have to look >> orund I forget. >> Yeah, I'd have to look. It is >> a couple of the rebates that I processed I think were residential only. So I don't know what if there's a difference for the for the commercial. >> It is it's well it is kept so and it could be it could be high right
>> but so we have that covered is what you're ultimately in terms of a goal to just continue to look at those programs. >> Yeah. I I thought last month this some of the like the solar discussion came up so Megan was looking at some of that stuff. >> Yeah. And so hopefully in the next
another month or two we'll have some suggestions for you guys to review >> and that would be something that was in her team's goals as well. >> Yeah. So back to what Vivic mentioned um so these goals so for my leadership team they they're currently are working off
of kind of like extended 2025 goals. Um, I haven't set their goals yet as once these get approved, I will then sit down with my leadership team and that their goals align with my goals and then have that help them work it down into their
ways so that we're all working in the same direction on the same stuff. So, um, I haven't set too much with my team until I knew how this was. >> So, any other additions or changes suggestions to the goals? I think the
goals are very ambitious. Um, and sometimes I'm looking at all this, I'm like, how's he going to get his work done during the day when he's got this many goals? And I don't know if we if it was overexpanded the number of
goals or we should reduce it to a more workable thing. But I just think that's a that's a >> long list. >> It's a long list. And then I don't want to sit here in November and say, "Wait a minute. you didn't do. It's It's not fair to you. Um, you know, so I'm just I
I'm not saying cut it down, but you know, it's it's just it's very very ambitious. And I it's your first year in, it's very difficult to uh transition into a new job and then all of a sudden, you know, the group of people sit there and say, you know, they pick you in
November and December and say, "Well, you didn't do this and we made 40%." And so that's all. I just I I would I can't disagree with that sentiment. And it's more like doing some of these really well rather than you're you're spreading you're spread thin here. And it's
understood that this is a lot, you know, and the customer stuff to me is the most important because that's going to get more and more important to how do we get people to do stuff that helps the peak and there's multiple ways that you're approaching that here. to me anyway, those are the things that we're we could
be a lot stronger on. So if you keep things running well, but also re revamp those in ways that really gets really starts to attack. Like I don't think we can even measure what our programs when you add them all up what they do to the peak that there's really very little that we that we're doing that we know is
is reducing the peak. We know we're communicating. We know we add some rebates. I don't think we know how much it's really reducing the peak, right? Am I am I wrong? really know potentially. I guess it, you know, the customers that kind of do it that don't necessarily partake in some of the the offerers,
then we may or may not know because we're not looking at them to see what they're doing. But >> well, I mean, I agree with the sentiment that there's a lot here, but I don't think this is like just all on Jason. I mean, this is the organization and he's going to >> have his his uh customer service people
handle some of these things. it's really more of the organization and I um yes it's a lot it's a big job it's a big utility um and I mean I think it's expectation on our end is at the end of the year we just
want to see progress I'm not sure we're looking for like a zero to 10 on on every number so >> uh some of this is just baseline for Jason getting to just know what some of these items are and then we can plan
future progress address. So yeah, it's >> maybe there's a way to rank order some. >> No, no, no, I I I I totally agree with Ry. I think Tim, you know, this is a complex organization and everyone needs to do their job, right? And so I think by having specificity, each person, each
department knows what's important for them. So it's it's more of a communication down. >> Yeah. Yeah, I mean I we could all name the leaders on Jason's team who would be >> for each >> point person for each of these categories or or objectives, right? So I
think it's probably another way to look at it is if you've got one of your leadership team members who's got five of these things, that's probably too many, right? Maybe we should dial that back. But everybody's got two or maybe three for the year that are big focused like that. I think there's some big strategic
things here. There's also some like, you know, literally keep the lights on things like reliability metrics and safety metrics and like those should be on the list every year, right? Um, but if there are some stretch things in here where you say this is, you know, this is keeping me up at night. I'm not sure I
can hit this. Maybe we need to be a little bit more um make it a little more attainable without losing sight of it. I think our goal uh today was have an initial discussion, right? Get the feedback, maybe make some changes, and
then next time we'll vote on the goals, right? Um so, >> could I summarize some of the feedback before we end the conversation? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Perfect. Okay. So, what I'm hearing, um just if I go category, category. So, the first one, um you're going to make number one measurable,
you're going to make number four measurable, and Rey is going to bring the OBF to the NLP group. So the onfill the financing situation to the LP group. Um if you go under the employee section two, you're going to make number one measurable measurable.
And then under increasingly um you're going to change that to non-carbon and you're going to make number two measurable. That was all the needs for measurability. And then you're going to add a safety goal in whichever category um we think it makes sense to be in. Um
probably around something measurable like OSHA related. Um, and then we're going to take a look at these again before next time and just see if there's anything we think we could uh maybe remove or tweak a little bit. So, Erica, I would add cyber security into reliable
power. Just make just make it more visible because it it's a it's a security threat. So, it's it's a reliability issue. >> Is there can you maybe Becca do you want to offline provide a suggestion on what
that goal would be? because I think we want to make sure that it's measurable. >> Yeah. So, I I know you wanted to be specific. So, I I would look at I I I would look at what John talked to us about and see how we could, you know, I would just take a look at what he's
proposing and see how we can make that measurable. >> Yeah. Maybe even just ask him for what the appropriate goal is. >> Yeah. because I I just want I just want to provide visibility to John saying that this is important for RMLD what
you're doing is important. So yeah. >> So if there's any other feedback maybe like within a week Jason um so that that gives you plenty of time to >> refine and bring back the final. >> Okay. Uh, one thing just about the structure since people talked about, you
know, sort of it's it seems like a lot and and this came from the the contract committee. I think it would be great to get your feedback on whether or not these sort of broad categories, you know, or how you're metabolizing these categories
as you see them sort of disseminate to the different departments within the utility. Um, you know, does it does it reflect the broad organizational structure? are there people that you can sort of envision that are going to take these things on? And so I I I think a
little bit of a feedback loop on that would be appropriate. >> Yeah, I think as I went sat down through it and started with that framework in mind and and there's a little bit some definition provided as well, not just the cateory headings as I started to think of some or work with my team and
think of some of these goals trying to some of them as we saw cross a couple of these but that's okay. Um, but I do think it does highlight a lot of the different areas that we're trying trying to do as a as an organization and hits all the different departments. It
definitely So, I think from that was fine. I think like I said, sometimes it's which bucket do you put it in, but I don't think um it kind of touches both. I don't think it matters as long as the goal is the right goal. Right.
>> Yeah, that's great. >> Great. Okay. Thanks, Jason. >> GM update. >> All right, I'll keep this pretty brief. Um, just a few things real quick. Um, between last meeting and this meeting,
we did have that one large snowstorm. We had few snowstorms, one large one. Um, we staffed it. Um, we weren't really anticipating too much where we knew it would be difficult for people to get in if something were to happen. Um so um there was really no there was one outage
and it was a transform outage and the team wasn't even sure the storm caused it. So we made the storm um pretty much pretty well. Um so that um I had it my goals around the Wington Association 6. I um the switch gear is
scheduled for delivery to the site in early March. Um so that's good. Um, last week I did go down to ENE and I and I met with the ENE group and they kind of gave me that overview and and review of what they do for us and then all the other options they do that has been
talked about that I think that Mike went to in the past last year and that was very helpful. Um, it was a good good time well spent down there. Um and um just wanted to make the board aware that the discussions with the with the auditor have started happening about
starting that the audit process up and um you should receive an email from the auditing firm in the near future just stating that that they're starting and there's a sent but um just part of a normal standard communication that they're going to do. >> They changed their name again.
>> It's still CBIZ now. Same as last year. We'll wait till we'll wait till June. >> I just want to be aware you to be aware that that email is coming. Um and then um the team also had a meeting actually earlier today with a with a consultant
that can perform a cost service study, look at financials and look at rate design. The team met with them. Uh we had a nice long hourong conversation around what they can provide for service, how they go about it. team had a good chance to ask a bunch of questions and we're going to continue
that process, but um to to look at vendors and and select and select one to do the study. But um just to make you aware that um we've already started on that um to get that out of the way. That's pretty much my GM update. >> Okay. Um scheduling.
who confirmed the fourth grade art contest is the fifth. Um, we need to >> Okay. >> Okay. Do we uh has anybody have a desire
to be present at? Has everybody been to the art ceremony before? >> No. >> I think typically new new cab members are assigned to that. I'll be h I'll be happy to go. >> One of my favorite parts of the job. >> It's the first year without Phil being
there, so we sort of have to >> Yeah, >> we got to step up. >> I I would love to go, but I I'm not available on a Wednesday night until April, which was what's it? >> The 25th at 6 PM. Um >> I might have to go to California. I just
don't know. So if I if I if I'm if I'm here, I'll go. I just don't know what what my schedule is. >> All right. So, have everybody look at your calendar maybe and just >> can you send me invite and then folks who can attend can accept >> again
should already get sent. >> Yeah. All right. Sorry about that. >> Um, okay. Any other questions on scheduling? >> Concerning we want to throw out is the April meeting change.
>> Yeah, it was it originally scheduled for the 21st. Was it moved from the 21st to the 28th? >> Yes. So that's school vacation week. Like this week is actually school vacation week. >> Oh. >> Um so I hope to be able to take that week off. So if we can move it, that'd
be great. Um if not, I'll be here. But yeah, I I'm not able to attend on that day. >> The 28th. >> I'm not able to attend on the 28th. There's a chance I may not be able to attend, but
uh that would be when is the election? >> 10th >> in April. >> Yeah, it's usually the 10th. >> Okay. So, would we be reorganizing at this meeting? >> Yeah. >> Anyone else have a constraint with the
28th? currently. >> You may end up having to do it without me. >> Um, warrant schedule. >> Well, we should do it when you're here, Pam, because I mean, you're the chair and you, you know, it's an important
meeting with the goals and everything. >> Okay. >> Um, >> well, sorry. I guess the other question is, I guess, do you guys want to reorg? You've gone back and forth. It's been April. Do you want to reorg in March or April? We do it after the election. The only reason it's done in March is that
>> election is in March. >> Not like gonna be a big surprise. >> That's true. >> You never know. >> Unless there's some like stealth writing >> big campaign >> campaign. >> Um
yeah, I mean we could let's keep it the 28th so Jason can take a vacation. He's got a lot of gold. Let's give him a break, everyone. >> He needs at least one day off. >> Yeah.
>> Um, if we did the Monday the 27th, would that work for people or does that just create make things worse? >> No, that whole week doesn't work for me. >> I know. I just travel on the I might have I might have to travel on the 28th.
>> I can do the 27th. I mean, I might be if I'm in California, I'll do it remote, but I could do it. You know, I might be able to do it remote actually. Well, just let's just get 28. >> Okay. >> Forgot about that. >> Okay. >> 28th.
>> 28th. We're just going to stick with the 28th. Yes. >> Um, looking ahead on the warrant schedule, um, have a AP sign off for the month of October. I'll be away for half that month and I'm not sure I can log in
from Indonesia. you. Um, you >> want you want to swap with me? I'll do October, you do September. >> Sure. >> They do have internet there. >> Um, not underwater.
>> Is that where you're living? >> Well, scuba diving, but yeah, that sounds awesome. >> It actually is. We'll be at a resort. That's probably some internet. That time zone was going to be really weird. I don't want to be doing a RMLD meeting at two in the morning.
Where's the drink? >> Okay. Anything else on scheduling or warrants? Great. Okay. Three minutes over. >> Move that the RMLD citizens advisory board adjourn regular session. Roll call
vote is required. Tim Woods. Charlie >> charlat. >> And we have to move to go into executive. Who would like to do that? >> I'll do it. um move that the Armany Board of Commissioners go into executive
session pursuant to Mass General Laws chapter 164 section 47D exempt from public records and open meeting requirements in certain instances under purpose number three to discuss the strategy with respect to collective
bargaining for the ASME LMS union and return to open meet uh open session for the sole purpose of a German Second, >> all those in favor zero. Okay. >> Going to executive. Thank you. Thanks.
>> Recording stopped. >> Thanks, Jim. >> Thanks, B.