Lessons learned from the devastating winter storm

It’s been a few weeks since cold, ice and wind battered Oregon, killing at least 15 people and bringing much of the state to a grinding halt. The region has weathered many storms but this one prompted Gov. Tina Kotek to declare an emergency, enabling the possibility of federal funding and reimbursement to clean up the damages. We’re joined by Rachel Pearl and Chris Voss with Multnomah County, Drew Hanson with Portland General Electric, Jody Yates with Portland Bureau of Transportation, and Eve Gray with Lane County. We talk with them about the lessons they learned from the storm, and how they’ll apply them to the next natural disaster.

Note: The following transcript was created by a computer and edited by a volunteer.

Dave Miller: This is Think Out Loud on OPB. I’m Dave Miller. It’s been a few weeks now since cold, ice, and wind battered Oregon in a kind of rolling succession of destructive winter weather. Countless trees came down on homes and cars and roads and power lines. Hundreds of thousands of Oregonians lost power, some for more than a week. At least 15 people died. We’re going to get a few perspectives today on how public agencies responded to the storm, on what went right and what could be improved in the next disaster. We start with two officials from Multnomah County. Rachel Pearl is the deputy director of the Department of County Human Services. Chris Voss is the county’s director of Emergency Management. It’s good to have both of you on the show.

Chris Voss: Thank you.

Rachel Pearl: Thank you.

Miller: Rachel, I want to start with emergency warming shelters for people living on the streets. How many did you set up and how many people took advantage of them?

Pearl: Yeah, Dave, happy to share that with you. We opened 12 additional sites and expanded two existing sites, and had over 1,300 guests that took advantage of those warming shelters.

Miller: Was anybody turned away?

Pearl: No, nobody was turned away.

Miller: How did staffing work?

Pearl: Staffing is always a process for us, something that we are working on all throughout the year. We have county employees who support staffing. We had three of our sites that were staffed by contracted providers. Cultivate Initiatives, Do Good Multnomah, and Transition Projects, or TPI, were able to staff three of our sites and then the rest of our sites were staffed by county employees, some city employees and some other community members as well. And that kind of makes up the staffing for those sites.

Miller: Did you have enough staff to actually run everything you needed to run? I mean, it sort of sounds like a kind of patchwork that you put together. Did you have enough people?

Pearl: I think the question we’re always asking ourselves is, as we look at past activations and prepare for future activations, looking at how many people we think might need these spaces, how many spaces we need and then how many staff we need to run those efficiently, effectively and safely. And so, if you look at last February to this year, we increased our county staff involvement by 66%. And so that demonstrates the amount of increase in our recruitment and training in order to be prepared for this event.

I think as we’re reflecting and continuing to go on that journey, we will be expanding that recruitment and looking at opportunities to partner more with our community members as well. So I think it’s difficult to say, do we have enough? I think we would benefit from having more and we’re always in a process of continuing to recruit. And we look forward to doing that and expanding that out beyond our existing recruitment efforts as well.

Miller: Chris, the county has gotten some questions and some criticism for the decision to close these emergency shelters before the temperature had really risen, before the ice had melted. What was the thinking?

Voss: I do want to just take a second and add some numbers to what Rachel and her team has done and really the county, because this event was very, very unique for us. We provided over 7,650 meals, which was actually 163% more meals than our next highest event. We more than doubled the number of staffing shifts we ran this event than previous events. Even transports of people, we were up 157%. So this was really a big event for us.

With regard to that piece and sort of the closure of shelters, we rely on a lot of bits of pieces of information, and one of those pieces of information is obviously forecasting. And we know forecasting is also a little bit of an inexact science. Last February, we saw a snowstorm [where] we thought we were gonna get 0.2 inches and we saw close to a foot. And in this event, the warm up that we were expecting never quite happened. And you’re right. We are looking at how much we look at that forecasting, which is still really, really important for us, but it’s also driving decisions that we know that we’re making 24 hours later.

I want to talk about that for a second because on Tuesday morning, when we had a call about the closures of shelters, we actually were talking a little and while there are several thresholds that we look at from temperature and precipitation, wind…Tuesday night, we actually didn’t meet our standard thresholds. But when we sat down and talked about this, we’re like, well, if we’re going to see ice during the day, we can’t exactly let people out at night at 8 p.m. So the determination was, let’s extend that to the next morning where we were hearing forecasts that we were going to see temperatures well into the 40s. We were supposed to see rain overnight. Well, those things didn’t quite manifest the way that we thought that they would and we actually extended our closure hours.

Then we also did things later in the week that I don’t know were quite as publicized. We opened points of distribution to provide additional gear. And we actually opened another shelter because while we did start to see some temperatures warming up around the county, the city of Gresham and out east was not seeing temperatures. So we actually reopened another location and worked with the governments out there as well as our outreach contractors to put people in there that were still finding themselves in a position where they did need shelter.

Miller: Because since the storm, there has been some finger pointing between city and county leaders about decision making, about communication. We don’t have time to get into all those details. But most broadly, what can you do to respond to crises in the most coordinated and efficient ways, given the divisions of different governments?

Voss: That’s a great question. And I think I want people to understand that during one of these events, we are making thousands of decisions. I know sometimes people will focus on some of the differences that governments have, but I think those are really miniscule compared to the number of decisions that we’re making where we are 100% aligned in sort of the direction of what we want to do. So the differences tend to be overplayed, especially from my point of view. And certainly, we can’t do this without partners, like the city partners, like the state, even community members and our contractors. They’re all vital to us.

I’ve been married for well over 20 years and my wife and I are not 100% aligned with every decision we make. So you could imagine during an event like this, that there are obviously going to be some differences and, and I just think that that’s the nature of the business. We do our best and we continue to work with the city and all our partners to see how we can improve in it. And I met with my counterparts just late yesterday into the evening on some of those issues.

Miller: Cities and counties cannot get divorced. Chris Voss and Rachel Pearl, thanks very much.

Voss: Thanks.

Pearl: Thank you.

Miller: Chris Voss is the director of Emergency Management for Multnomah County. Rachel Pearl is the deputy director of the Department of County Human Services.

We turn from Multnomah to Lane County right now. Lane is one of the areas that was hit hardest. Eve Gray is the director of Health and Human Services for Lane County. Welcome to the show.

Eve Gray: Thank you so much. Good to be here.

Miller: Can you give us a sense for the scale of the damage in Lane County?

Gray: We were hit very significantly and across the county. We had an inch or more of ice in many places, most places within our county. At one point, more than 60% of Lane County residents were out of power. And for those areas that were the hardest hit, in particular, in south Lane County, Cottage Grove area, there were folks who were out of power for well over a week and their power outage started at the height of the cold, so right on Saturday, Sunday, the 14th or 15th. We had to work really creatively with the city officials when the entire city of Cottage Grove lost power, and how were they going to help and how were we going to help collaboratively to get resources there, generators and fuel, and making sure that there were some warm spaces that people could go to. And that was just one example.

Our city of Springfield, which is more in the metro area, right next to Eugene in Lane County had very, very significant damage, especially in the eastern portion. Again, out of power for much of the city. And a portion of the city, a large portion for more than 24 hours, was on a boil water advisory, which is incredibly difficult when you are out of power as well, to be able to boil water. And for those who are on well water, of course, didn’t have water access.

We also lost access to public transportation. Our bus system stopped operating for several days because of the danger related to the ice. And our normal government buildings and normal buildings that people would go into to get warm were all closed because of the difficulty with transportation. So in terms of the scope of the event, it was pretty significant for us and remains that way. This will be a long recovery process here in Lane County.

Miller: What are the most important lessons that you have taken away so far from the results of the storm and the county’s responses to it?

Gray: Yeah, great questions. I think that it’s a little bit different for housed and unhoused community members. In our response related to community members who are unhoused, we have a system that is reliant on public spaces being open for warming during the daytime. Our contract is with a local provider, St. Vincent de Paul. They run the Egan Warming Centers, which open at night. And the whole system is built with volunteers, with the assumption that there will be a place for folks to go during the daytime and that transportation systems will be intact for us to be able to bring people to the sites that we have available for warming. And those components fell apart for us in this particular event. That’s a big part of our focus - to look at how we create a system that can rapidly upscale to provide daytime services, to provide transportation in dangerous conditions so that we can be protecting our community.

With those who are housed, the factors were different in terms of what was complicated for us. In Lane County, we have 12 cities. We have very, very rural and metropolitan areas. And getting information about who needed what help, where, and at what priority level was, I think, the most challenging part for us and an area of a big focus as we look at preparing for other events that may impact multiple communities within our county. What are central sources that we can ask folks to go to in order to assure that we are collecting real time data on what is happening, who has the greatest needs and where we can deploy resources?

And then I think finally, really looking at what are the options for upscaling our response when the staff in the county are being impacted by the disaster personally, at the same time that the rest of the community is. And that was a big challenge for us. We are very well rehearsed in managing wildfires, where there’s one community or a couple of communities impacted, but most of the county staff are available for the response. That was different here, and I think it was an opportunity for us to explore how we can do that differently or better in the future. Really appreciate our partners at the state, Oregon Department of Human Services, Oregon Department of Forestry, the Office of Emergency Management and Oregon Health Authority, [who] all responded and assisted in the midst of this disaster.

Miller: Eve Gray, thanks very much.

Gray: Thank you.

Miller: Eve Gray is director of Health and Human Services for Lane County.

Drew Hanson joins us now. He is a public information officer for PGE, Portland General Electric. Drew, welcome to the show.

Drew Hanson: Thanks, Dave. Thanks for having me.

Miller: In total, more than half a million of your customers lost power. That could mean, what, more than a million individual people. Is that right?

Hanson: That could be correct. Those customers are counted by the meter. So there’s individuals behind the meter as well.

Miller: How many customers were out at the peak of the loss?

Hanson: So at the peak - the Portland General Electric Service area really started seeing outages tick up on January 13th, that was Saturday, when the storm really settled in on the area. And at peak on that day, we saw 165,000-plus outages happening.

Miller: When so many customers - residences, businesses, I imagine hospitals, all public agencies - all lose power at the same time, how do you prioritize the returns to service?

Hanson: That is a great question. And we do have a prioritization plan in place. And it is really starting with those critical life-safety facilities. So hospitals, water treatment centers and then kind of going down the list from there. Nursing homes are part of it as well and then going down to, say, grocery stores at a certain point. But definitely really focus on those life-safety community resources first.

And then another thing, too, is staying in very close communication with the different communities and municipalities that we serve. So if they’re standing up warming shelters, that we know where those are at, and then we can potentially prioritize those in our restoration efforts.

Miller: How did communication go? I mean, one of the themes that has been emerging in these conversations is the required coordination between different government agencies or government agencies and utilities. How did that work?

Hanson: Well, you can imagine with the totality of the storm, with the old growth Doug fir trees that were being uprooted and impacting access to different areas and neighborhoods, that coordinating across the board had to be very close to ensure that PGE crews could have safe access to those areas. So helping to clear debris and just making sure throughout the entirety of the event, that we are setting up calls on a day-to day-basis with the right individuals and having those conversations. And it’s not just during the storm too, a lot of that happens in the pre-planning stages. In blue sky days, we’re coordinating and having different meetings and emergency planning sessions with the different counties that we serve, so that we have those relationships established going into an event like this.

Miller:  Utilities do routine maintenance on trees that are, say, leaning or about to lean on power lines. But when we’re in a sprawling, very rural tree-filled state, it’s not reasonable to hope that you can just fully prevent widespread power outages when there’s a really serious storm. But where do you see room for improvement?

Hanson: That is a very good point to make. We have approximately 2.2 million trees within our service area. And then maintenance year round is a very important key factor in our reliability efforts. I think one of the questions that we get often is why don’t we just underground all the power lines? And this storm showed us…we had cases, too, where about half of PGE’s distribution lines are currently underground. And so a lot of these old growth trees were falling over with the root systems that would then pull up the lines and then that takes extra repairs and longer repairs, which could mean longer outages as well. So it’s kind of looking at the balancing of the solutions of underground versus overhead.

Miller: Drew Hanson, thanks very much.

Hanson: Thank you, Dave.

Miller: Drew Hanson is a public information officer with PGE.

We have one final stop on this series of post-storm conversations. Jody Yates joins us as the maintenance operations group director for the Portland Bureau of Transportation. Jody, welcome.

Jody Yates: Thanks for having me.

Miller: Let’s start with what went right, from your perspective, about two weeks ago. What’s on your list?

Yates: Well, on January 8th, we started watching the forecast. And we believed the forecast and started to prepare. [We] had our trucks outfitted with plows and Epokes, which is the device on the back of the truck that can spread the material. And we started prepping up for that and had all of our equipment ready on Thursday. And then all staff got to drive their routes and prepare for the events that unfolded on Saturday.

Miller: So in your mind, paying attention to the weather that was coming or that was called for, and getting preparations in place, that’s an example of what went right. Where do you see room for improvement?

Yates: Room for improvement is making sure that all of our agencies have the same common goals of serving the community and having us all know what the critical routes are at the same time and working towards that common goal, restoring together. I think we can improve in that coordination realm.

Miller: What’s an example of what you’re talking about? I mean, when you’re talking about coordination or specific routes, what do you have in mind?

Yates: Well, during the event, the Portland Bureau of Emergency Management stood up a tactical team that actually combined PBOT, Urban Forestry, and PGE so that we were working in tandem together to make sure that those critical routes for fire, life, and safety were in place. And working together, not to disparate, across the city. So we were able to open priority routes, the emergency transportation routes, together. So we stood that up.

Bear with me. It was a long event. It was, I think on Sunday or Monday, that we stood up that technical team to work in joint coordination with those two agencies.

Miller: We heard a version from Chris Voss from Multnomah County earlier. But one of the big challenges it seems for every public body, for school superintendents, for city agencies, for counties, is responding to forecasts. If you proceed as if the worst case scenario is happening or is going to happen and then the storm isn’t so bad, people can say you overreacted, they maybe won’t pay attention to you in the future. If you don’t prepare and then the worst case happens, then there could be really serious disasters. How do you balance that?

Yates: Hope you get it right. No, we actually have plans in place, varying levels, and we plan not at the most likely scenario, but not at the worst case scenario. We’re probably looking at the 10% to 20% probability range because we want to plan and serve our community in that realm. And if we’re overprepared, well, better to be prepared than be reactive. Because if we can get ahead of a storm, we serve our community better.

Miller: What happens to all of the gravel that you put down?

Yates: Well, we’re actively sweeping it up right now and we collect it back up. We have about an 80% recovery rate. Some of it goes into the ditches, some of it goes into catch basins. We’ll get that later. But we capture that material back. We take it to our Sunderland recycling facility. We actually clean it, which means remove some of the non-rock debris that’s in it and we reuse it…well, it won’t be reused in this next storm. We’ll use it next season. We do that cleaning operation in September and then reuse that rock again.

Miller: Including taking it out of bike lanes.

Yates: Yes, absolutely. We know that when we place gravel onto the bike lanes or onto the streets for that immediate need, that it creates a hazard for our bicyclists out there. And so it becomes the next priority - to remove that hazard out of the bike lanes. Currently, we’re approaching about 1,000 lane miles swept, post this event. So we are working with the priority of being the bike lanes to get that gravel out, to prevent it from being a hazard for them.

Miller: Jody Yates, thanks very much.

Yates: Thank you.

Miller: Jody Yates is the maintenance operations group director for PBOT, the Portland Bureau of Transportation.

Contact “Think Out Loud®”

If you’d like to comment on any of the topics in this show or suggest a topic of your own, please get in touch with us on Facebook, send an email to thinkoutloud@opb.org, or you can leave a voicemail for us at 503-293-1983. The call-in phone number during the noon hour is 888-665-5865.