Goraya to head Monterey Bay Economic Partnership • Matt Huffaker

COMMUNITY NEWS Goraya to head Monterey Bay Economic Partnership

Tahra Goraya will become president & CEO of the Monterey Bay Economic Partnership on Jan. 3, succeeding Kate Roberts, who has led the organization since 2015 and is retiring at year’s end.

“Tahra brings an amazing set of qualities and experience to the position and will Tahra Goraya build on the superb foundation that Kate Roberts has built over the last 6 years,” said Eduardo Ochoa, MBEP board chairman. “Kate has been so influential in creating partnerships in the region, expanding membership, and driving positive change through our key initiatives — affordable housing, equitable access to broadband, workforce development, and climate change. We are a better region because of Kate’s leadership.”

Goraya is a California native, an organizational consultant and executive coach in Boston, and before that, director for Zero to Three Western Regional Office, a national early childhood public policy and research organization.

She spent two-and-a-half years as district director for California State Sen. Carol Liu; was national director for the Council on American Islamic Relations, an American Muslim civil rights organization in Washington, D.C.; and almost seven years as executive director of Day One in Pasadena, a substance abuse prevention and policy organization, where she helped get legislation passed for more than a dozen policies.

Her achievements include the Barbara Jordan Award for Women’s Leadership from the Harvard Kennedy School Woman and Public Policy Program and chosen by the California State Senate and Assembly nonprofit executive director of the year.

She is the founder of Milton Muslim Neighbors, advisor to Latino Muslim Unity, and in 2019, she was elected Town Meeting Member in Milton. She’s a member of the advisory board for the Center for Women in Politics and Public Policy at UMass Boston.

She grew up in Bakersfield, the daughter of Pakistani Punjabi Muslim immigrant parents. The oldest of five children, she learned early the importance of hard work and the struggles of immigrant families, especially in farming communities.

She learned about agriculture in Kern County from her father, an agronomist.

She graduated from UC Irvine with a degree in biology, earned a master’s in organizational management from the University of Phoenix, and a master’s in public administration from the Harvard Kennedy School of Government with an emphasis in management, leadership, and decision sciences.

She and her family are excited to return to California.

“I am elated to lead MBEP during the next stage of its development and growth,” said Goraya, citing the organization’s focus on equity, environment and economic vitality. “I cannot wait to partner with various stakeholders to build upon the great legacy of the founders to improve the quality of life and economic health of the region.” n

Matt Huffaker Named New Santa Cruz City Manager

Watsonville City Manager Matt Huffaker will become Santa Cruz city manager on Jan. 3, replacing Rosemary Menard, the former water department manager who is doing the job on an interim basis.

Huffaker’s salary will be $22,199 a month, or $266,388 annually.

On Nov. 9, the city council unanimously approved his appointment.

Huffaker, 37, started as deputy city manager in Watsonville in 2016 and became city manager three years ago. Before that, he held leadership positions with the City of Walnut Creek for 10 years, advancing to deputy city manager.

In Watsonville, Huffaker doubled the city’s General Fund reserves while expanding Parks, Arts and Recreation services. He led an inclusive public outreach and education effort that resulted in a 79 percent voter approval for a halfcent sales tax, funding

Matt Huffaker for police, fire and parks and recreation in perpetuity. Huffaker spearheaded the city’s first Employee Engagement Action Plan to build a more connected, empowered, and valued organizational culture.

Before this news came out, he and Watsonville Mayor Jimmy Dutra visited staff at Jacob’s Heart Children’s Cancer Services, which is looking for 10,000 square feet for a new home.

Huffaker is vice chair of the Monterey Bay Economic Partnership and treasurer of Second Harvest Food Bank.

He’s a 2006 political science graduate of Point Loma Nazarene University with a master’s in public administration from Cal State East Bay, and he attended UC Berkeley’s Executive Leadership Program.

He’s married to Jocelyn Huffaker; they have three children and live in Soquel.

“Matt has a unique set of qualifications to make a positive impact for our community quickly,” said Mayor Donna Meyers. “Not only will he bring a wealth of operational experience to the role, but he will also arrive with deep relationships across the region already in place.”

She added, “The Council was particularly impressed with his breadth of creative ideas that stem from his experience, vision, and leadership values.”

Huffaker said, “I think my local experience and established regional partnerships will allow me to hit the ground running. I’m ready to get to work.”

One of the city of Santa Cruz regional partnerships is with Soquel Creek Water District. n

“Aptos Sports Foundation” from page 4

Aptos High School is the place that can bring everyone together to focus on the students, the next generation.

Under Bailey’s leadership, the Aptos Sports Foundation built the football facility, the baseball park, installed the marquee at the school’s entrance, put up scoreboards, resurfaced tennis courts and resurfaced the track twice.

Travis Fox, Aptos High athletic director, came here from Colorado and found the support in Aptos “truly amazing” – a level of support he hadn’t seen elsewhere in his 12 years working in education.

Because California’s funding falls short of what’s needed, many high school teams are supported by parents of children on the team donating money.

Not so at Aptos High.

Close to 700 Athletes

There’s no charge to play athletics here,” Fox said, noting the school fields 26 teams, with close to 700 of the 1,415 students involved in athletics.

Expenses add up with officiating (which the district funds 60%) and League fees totaling $17,000.

For football and basketball, fans pay admission, but there’s no charge to watch water polo.

“We break even,” Fox said. “There’s not a whole lot extra.”

The foundation’s next project is to build Holcomb’s Landing, installing concrete steps for student seating near the snack shack, replacing an area that in rainy weather gets quite muddy.

The foundation has a declaration of support and collaboration from the Pajaro Valley Unified School District, which has approved the project, and permits from the Division of the State Architect.

Because it’s a private project, the foundation will select the contractors. Bailey expects to seek donations of rebar to further lower the cost.

On the to-do list: New batting cages.

Bailey has a big idea in mind: Building an endowment fund over the next five to 10 years.

“We’re building future citizens,” he said. “Aptos Loves Aptos.” n

To learn more, visit https://www.aptos sportsfoundation.com/

“PG&E Action Required” from page 6

I am aware that PG&E has begun recalibrating its original Fast Trip settings to be less sensitive and has begun better communicating with impacted communities, however, from my current perspective, it is clear that PG&E is still in planning mode. PG&E must immediately work to address customer impacts for communities affected by these outages.

Unlike a Public Safety Power Shutoff event, by definition, Fast Trip settings do not allow for advance notice to customers of an outage. This means that customers, public safety partners, and critical infrastructure providers have no ability to plan and prepare for one of these outages.

While there are important dissimilarities between Public Safety Power Shutoffs and Fast Trip, I am worried that there are striking similarities in the obvious flaws in PG&E’s approach to its initial execution and customer communication on both programs. An approach that can only charitably be characterized as shortsighted. In both instances, care and understanding for how the loss of power may affect customers has been overwhelmingly absent. These apparent similarities are not just disappointing, they are deeply and sincerely concerning, and continue to raise questions about PG&E’s ability to evolve as a company and to internalize and prioritize customer well-being.

To the extent PG&E plans to continue use of Fast Trip settings, we understand PG&E will introduce and report on this approach in its 2022 Wildfire Mitigation Plan submission to the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety. While we expect that PG&E will continue to work with the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety and Commission staff to communicate and demonstrate where this approach falls in PG&E’s overall wildfire mitigation strategy, in the very near-term, having this program active has real consequences for the health, comfort and safety of PG&E’s customers.

I expect PG&E to take immediate action to reduce and mitigate customer impacts and ensure that all communities who may be impacted by Fast Trip are better informed and supported.

While this is my clear top-level expectation, I also expect PG&E to comply with the following directives.

“Response to County” from page 6

The reporting requirements and related directives included in my letter are intended to build transparency and drive action by PG&E in the very near-term.

The CPUC will also continue to gather and analyze information regarding PG&E’s implementation of, and communication on, Fast Trip and will take any enforcement actions as appropriate.

Thank you again for reaching out

Care and understanding for how the loss of power may affect customers has been overwhelmingly absent.

Near-Term Transparency and Action

By Nov. 8, 2021, provide a written response to the questions below to the Director of the Commission’s Safety Enforcement Division and serve it on the service lists for the Wildfire Mitigation Plan and PG&E Safety Culture proceedings. • What level of analysis did PG&E conduct in advance of deploying Fast

Trip settings regarding the potential impacts of Fast Trip on outage frequency and duration? How do the scope and duration of outages that have occurred align with estimates from any analysis conducted pre-deployment? • Describe PG&E’s understanding of how its Fast Trip settings and the specific parameters used to configure devices differ from similar settings Southern

California Edison Company and San

Diego Gas & Electric Company are using or have used on their systems to prevent ignitions. • Describe the operational details, with timelines, for how PG&E will manage its Fast Trip settings approach and how objectives such as reduced scope, duration and frequency of outages are prioritized. • What conditions or criteria will PG&E use to determine when to suspend use of Fast Trip in a particular location? • What conditions or criteria will PG&E use to determine when to deploy Fast

Trip in a particular location in the future? • How is PG&E identifying medical baseline customers, critical infrastructure providers, and public safety partners who may be impacted on the circuits where Fast Trip settings have been implemented? What specifically tailored outreach has occurred to each of these groups? If none has occurred, what are

PG&E’s plans for specifically tailored outreach to each of these groups? • What actions is PG&E taking to support these customers and minimize the impacts of outages? For example, is

PG&E working with its Disability Disaster Access and Resources program and appropriately providing funding, and are local Independent Living

Centers notified as soon as a Fast Trip outage occurs? • How is PG&E ensuring that customers who rely on electricity to maintain necessary life functions will be able to weather the full duration of a Fast Trip outage? • How many customers who rely on electricity to maintain necessary life functions, including for durable medical equipment and assistive technology, does PG&E estimate have been impacted by Fast Trip outages to date? • Does PG&E have a well-defined list of customers who rely on electricity to maintain necessary life function who are on circuits subject to Fast Trip settings? • If it does not have a list, what actions is PG&E taking to have a clear understanding of where these customers are located? • What post-Fast Trip outage outreach is

PG&E conducting to customers on circuits that have been highly impacted by

Fast Trip? • Does PG&E provide information on how to enroll in its medical baseline program and make customers aware of resiliency programs like DDAR and the portable back up battery program? • How has PG&E increased its staffing and contracting resources to ensure that outage inspections are occurring in a manner that allows for re-energizing lines quickly and safely? • How is PG&E calculating and tracking costs associated with implementation of its Fast Trip settings? • Is PG&E including unplanned outages caused by Fast Trip in the annual reliability reporting requirements for

System Average Interruption Duration

Index and System Average Interruption Frequency Index as laid out in Decision 16-01-008? If not, please explain why.

Ongoing Transparency and Accountability Reporting

Beginning Nov. 8, 2021, PG&E must provide monthly reports to the Director of the Commission’s Safety Enforcement Division and serve them on the service lists for the Wildfire Mitigation Plan and PG&E Safety Culture proceedings.

The reports shall include at a minimum the information listed below and the cadence and content of the reports may be augmented at any time at the discretion of the Safety Enforcement Division. • For every Fast Trip outage on a circuit:

Total scope of customers impacted, include specifics for: Number of medical baseline customers impacted and number of customers who rely on electricity to maintain necessary life functions impacted; number of well water customers impacted; number of schools impacted; number of hospitals impacted • Duration • Cause of outage, if known • Efforts undertaken to clear lines and restore power within 60 minutes • The total number of times that a circuit has experienced a Fast Trip event • Trends of scope and duration of outages on repeatedly impacted circuits

Cost Tracking

To the extent it is not already doing so, PG&E is directed to track all of the costs associated with Fast Trip separately from other wildfire mitigation activity costs, including costs associated with customer communication, outage response, and inspection.

While the reporting requirements and related directives included in this letter are intended to drive action by PG&E in the very near-term, the CPUC will continue to gather information regarding PG&E’s implementation and communication of Fast Trip and will take any enforcement actions as appropriate.

Customer care and safety, which consists of more than just the absence of utility-ignited wildfires, is a top priority for the CPUC. We expect PG&E to not only share this priority, but to execute its activities in a way that reflects this priority. n

about this important issue. If you would like to discuss this matter further, please contact John Baker, the CPUC’s local liaison for Santa Cruz County, at John. Baker@cpuc.ca.gov. n ••• 1: Also referred to as Enhanced Powerline

Safety Settings 2: https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/-/media/cpuc-website/ divisions/safety-and-enforcement-division/ documents/batjer-letter/cpuc-president-batjerletter-to-pge-re-fast-trip-oct-25-2021.pdf