Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-16-25 MinutesTranscript July 16, 2025, 5:01PM Bill Nary 0:05 OK. We're on record. It is now 11:00 on Wednesday, July 16th. It's our monthly meeting of the City Meridian employee Benefits Plan Trust. Make note for the record bill nary President Alex Frytag. Christina Barney and Eli Daniel here for the board and then we have Cindy Teeley, Tasha Norman, Scott Howell here from Gallagher and Dan Malloy from Blue Cross. So first item of business is approval of the Minutes. Eli Daniel 0:41 I'll make a motion to approve. Alexander Freitag 0:45 I'll 2nd. Bill Nary 0:47 It's been moved and seconded. Approve the minutes. All those in favor say aye. Eli Daniel 0:52 Right. Alexander Freitag 0:52 Aye. Bill Nary 0:53 Aye, OK. So go through our normal monthly reports, 1st monthly experience reports. Is that you rebu? Reba White 1:03 Yep, let me get it. OK so. Everybody was on the committee meeting, correct? I think so. Bill Nary 1:19 I think so. Reba White 1:20 So just a quick overview, something that I said in the committee meeting that I wanted to follow up on is from here is our stop loss. So we have received three weeks of claims that do have stop loss reimbursement on it. So this number, you'll see that bump up for. Next month's experience, or the following month's experience 'cause I like I said. I I made a comment that we hadn't seen the stop loss reimbursement, but now we have. I've confirmed that. So large claims 28 versus the 21 of last year. Cost 1.8 to a 1.2 and then almost a 5050 split for whether they are less than 25,000 or over 25,000. Our medical experience so may for 118.60 giving a gross loss ratio of 119.17. So slowly coming down from our February and March. Net loss ratios, but still over 100%. The large claims, so the 25 to 50,000 range has 17 claims and then going down 100,000 and up are three and then that year to date stop loss claim we had it for May as 27,000. But like I said, we've we've received some. Claims back for rebates or or refunds back into that excess loss over the last three weeks. Some of the top large claims. So we discussed that the top one, the Med claim is where we're seeing that stop loss being reimbursed for the 362. But does anybody have any questions or wanna discuss this with Gallagher again? OK. Bill Nary 3:30 I don't think so. Yeah. I mean, nothing's changed really much from previous, so. Reba White 3:36 Yeah. There you are, Bill. You popped up. Bill Nary 3:38 There we go. Reba White 3:41 For dental, we are looking at a 75.97% loss ratio coming down from our high 126 down, giving us a 96.33% overall. Vision. We had a high April month, but then coming back down into May. So 56.82 still over 100 and our vision claims so 1/01/96. But as vision fluctuates throughout the year, we do see those higher ones early on and then they should be dying a little bit back down. And then just a rolling 12 months, so if we have questions on this, we can ask, but we didn't in the committee meeting either. Bill Nary 4:32 Any questions from anybody? So and monthly financials. Reba White 4:47 So there is going to be a change. I wanted to address for our monthly financials. Our accountant is still going to provide us the monthly financials and the time that we need it, but with the change to work day, it will. We won't be getting our contributions from the city into the Trust Bank account until after payroll has processed for the month. So we used to see the contributions at the beginning of the month and now we're switching it to the end of the month. And so that is going to be a mid year shift where you're going to see our monthly financials for this next month or when we switched you, we're going to have a huge gap because we're going a little bit longer in payment once I have those monthly Finan. Are not done quite yet. He said that that, whatever either have them done by Friday or next Monday. I will send that out to the board to review, but it won't be. It won't be that month. It'll be the following month where you see that gap occur. But I wanted to give everybody the update. And so when you see him, it's not going to be like, why do we only have 1.2 in the account? Well, it's because of that. Just waiting period that we've had to transition to. Are there any questions about that? Bill Nary 6:12 No, I guess it'll just be an adjustment. Reba White 6:12 OK. Bill Nary 6:14 Are you right 'cause? I mean it's it's. I mean the the money's just gonna be instead of being essentially front loaded, it's gonna be back loaded. Reba White 6:22 Yeah, and we. The reason why we did that was because there was a lot of administrative work up front to have it paid at the beginning of the month where then people make changes and we're having to calculate what those changes were. But now switching to work day, it does all. The retro calculations for us. Where then, Trish? And well, essentially, finance can say this is exactly what we paid for the trust cost. And this is what we're paying the trust. Rather than having to go back and forth each month to say this was missed or this person changed tears, it'll be almost an exact amount rather than the guesstimation that we were kind of doing back and forth. So that was the reason for the switch, but wanted to give you again the heads up that that is happening. Bill Nary 7:13 Will that have any? Will that be something to make note of in the either the financials that are done by the accountant or by the audit or anything? I mean is it? And at the end of the day, it shouldn't make any difference, right? Because the end of the the year is the same, but I mean is that something that make note? Reba White 7:30 Correct. Bill Nary 7:32 I mean is I I guess we just need to I guess see if. From a financial standpoint, if anybody notices or cares, or if it has any impact that. DOI notices or cares. I would assume they don't, but I guess we'll see. Reba White 7:49 So the only thing that our accountant will have to do for December is when the December payment is made. They just have to code it to the year appropriate that I'm supposed to be paid for, which we do that anyway for a lot of our billing, because our billing is in a delayed status sometimes and so end of the year we'll just look a little bit differe. For our accountant to manually pull that into the year that it was appropriate for. Rather than having it roll into the following, but there's no other issues surrounding that. Bill Nary 8:23 Yeah, I think it's like I said, it's just different. So I guess we'll just see if somebody is concerned. But again, the money's the money. It is what it is, so I don't think it's a big deal, but OK. Nothing to do with quarterly at this moment to take it. Reba White 8:39 Yep, no quarterly updates. We'll have quarterly done by August, so that will be sent out. Bill Nary 8:41 OK. OK. Renewal for 2026 is next. Tasha Norman 8:55 Yes, and do I want to start with medical claims projection, Scott. Scott Howell 9:03 Yeah, let's do it. Tasha Norman 9:06 Yeah, actually. Pull up this admin sheet. OK. Scott Howell 9:38 All right. So our underwriter updated projections with the most recent experience that we have and also with our most recent. Negotiations with Blue Cross. The kind of the biggest changes versus current that you'll see on the Blue Cross front are on the. The administrative fee side we have. The renewal proposal includes. A. Per prescription and a per employee per month administrative fee on pharmacy. And in exchange for that. We get more pass through of rebates and the elimination of what's called spread pricing, which is where. There's a there's a difference that that the PBM keeps. Between what the plan pays and what what the pharmacy receives on a claim. So a lot more transparency in the drug costs in line with the new, the new state law on on PBM reform. Um. Those. When we first receive the proposal from Blue Cross those. Those administrative fee. Those administrative fees that were proposed were. Were higher than where we ended up. Hopefully Dan didn't get to too bruised internally, but he he definitely went to bat for us. We ended up with. I think close to a couple $100,000 in concessions on those administrative fees in the end. To balance that out though, on the next page, well, I guess I'll stop and see if there are any questions on. The kind of that administrative fee change. Bill Nary 11:59 Seems like a generalized plus from where we are. Scott Howell 11:59 OK. Bill Nary 12:02 So that's OK. Thank you, Dan. Scott Howell 12:03 Yeah. Yep. To balance that out. Though. The the label didn't get changed, but the the claims experience that we're using through May. If you remember in the experience reporting May's loss ratio was like 114%. Because we look at two years of claims experience, when we add on May of 25 and we drop off May of 23 May of 23 was an 86% loss ratio may have 25 was 114. So that couple 100,000 that we gained in the negotiations with Blue Cross. We. We lost that and then some because of the. The increased claims experience that that got added on to the calculation. So in the end. The the revised projection. Yeah, this this just shows the. So I guess I'll backtrack a little bit that first slide shows kind of the sausage making right. Looking back at two years of claims, applying trend weighting the most recent experience a little bit heavier than the than the prior experience. The next slide shows where we end up on a A per employee and A and an overall basis. For the claims costs, the next slide adds in the administrative costs to get to a total. Total projected cost for the next plan year and where we end up after. After all of the changes that I mentioned, is that a 17.7? So obviously that is slightly higher than what we've talked about before. And if. Yeah, I think 16 has been the number that we've talked about. If if 16 is all of the budgets. That that we have or that we're gonna get. Then obviously it. To get that 17 seven to 16, you do that in a couple of different ways, either with. Some plan design or some employee contribution changes. Bill Nary 15:05 Well, I think the number was 17. Scott Howell 15:07 Oh, was it 17? OK, so. Bill Nary 15:08 Yes. Scott Howell 15:11 Not as far off as. Bill Nary 15:13 Right. Scott Howell 15:16 As I was thinking, OK. Bill Nary 15:20 So do you. So I guess Scott then if the question is do you think we do? Do we need to make some changes? To to get within that 17 now. Is that something that 'cause again the Council? Did understand. That we have rightfully or wrongfully, we've sort of created almost a pay as you go system. Instead of what we thought originally when we set this trust up was to. Somewhat operate a little bit like. A traditional system where you pay, you know, you budget a certain figure, you try to maintain that figure going forward, you adjust it slightly every year, a couple of percent either way and then, you know, maintain some surplus. You know the reality, and the mayor understands this. When I, he and I talked, I mean, I said basically what what we've done is a trust is it's kind of pay as you go. And that means city you you keep the money. Money. You we're not having to trust. Hold the money in and it's account so that it's used for future costs or offsetting things that you're gonna have to kind of pay as you go. And he gets that. And the other ones may or may not but. I mean is that 17.7? Is that something we need to make up that gap, that .7? Now we think that will be made-up by other. Scott Howell 16:56 So. Bill Nary 16:59 Market adjustments or is that something to let it be? And then as we need to go back for an adjustment? Come January or whatever to say, we'll just incorporate that as part of whatever we end up doing in the future. Scott Howell 17:18 Would say is if. Is that 17.7 is our best estimate of of what it will take to adequately fund the trust for the 26 plan year? Bill Nary 17:33 OK. Scott Howell 17:34 In an effort to get back to the original idea of, we have enough money in there to cover all of our expenses. If. If 17 is the budget that we that we have. Again, the crystal ball is always a little foggy, but based on our best guess. If if we fund an additional 17 instead of 17.7, our best guess is that we're gonna have to come back and ask Council for $60,000 at some point during 2026 to keep us at the level that we need to be. Or if we're willing to make .7% worth of changes. Now then. Then our projection would be that we're able to to keep the trust at a break even. By by making a change. Or, you know, either a benefit or contribution change for January of 26. Christena Barney 18:40 My my guess is that if we're, if we're set at 17. We are gonna have to make some sort of plan design changes and I say that because we have been notified by Department of Insurance that we are going to be audited for the entirety of our trust plan from 2020 to 2024 and they are not. Going to allow us to under fund our plan, so if. You know actuary. Bill is saying that we need to fund a 17.7. They're not going to allow us and we have to submit all of these documents, our plan documents and everything else. If it's saying that we need to fund a 17.7 DOI is going to require that we fund a 17.7 unless we make plan design. Changes. Bill Nary 19:36 And you're saying so? I guess so. We cannot. We can't change the budget number now. We can't get additional funding now, so we can't do anything till October one. So are you saying Christina? Based on this audit and what you say makes total sense, but what you're saying makes in this audit because I mean. This is just me. Less than a 1% difference because it is an estimate, could be less than that, or more than that. Anyway, like like Scott said, the Crystal Ball is a little fuzzy, right? We don't. Could be more than 17.7. It could be 16. We don't know so. Without this audit, would we think we needed to do this now? Or do we think you could wait and see? Where does this land? I mean, let's look at the first quarter and see if the trend is exactly where we're thinking or higher or lower. I mean, again, we're only going to get so many bytes of the apple to go back and ask for more funding. And so I don't think we want to keep going back there. It's saying, oh, now we need 60,000 more. Oh, now we need 200,000 more. Now we need 300,000 more. So I mean if but for the audit, I I think we I would suggest we wait, but because of the audit you're saying we probably shouldn't wait. Is that what I'm understanding? Christena Barney 21:07 And I'm saying that DOI is looking at us as trustees to be fiduciary responsible parties for this trust and to make these hard decisions to fund adequately. Bill Nary 21:18 Mm-hmm. Christena Barney 21:21 But so is the Council. And so although these are not fun decisions for us to have to make, we we need to make them to make sure that we're funding this. Bill Nary 21:23 Sure. No. Christena Barney 21:32 Adequately and what I'm seeing at this point is we need. To either go to council and say. This is what we need or we need to go to the employees and say this is what we need or we need to make plan design changes. Those are our options at this point. Because this is not sustainable to continue to under fund, even if it's .7%, it's not sustainable to continue to under fund this trust and we are not doing our financial responsibility by managing this. Bill Nary 21:58 Correct. Christena Barney 22:07 To continue to under fund it. Scott Howell 22:09 Yeah, I will also add a lot of our municipality clients this year. Both for sustainability but also for. Kind of partnership and perception within the municipality are saying, hey, we've had a rough year. So you know Council, we're going to work with you and make some benefit changes so that we don't have to ask for more money employees because we've had a rough year we're need. To. Make some changes to benefits to to mitigate costs. I think it helps to. To be transparent with with that message and 'cause if if the message is. It's been a rough year. But you know, luckily we didn't have to make any changes again this year like that. That can only last for so long. Christena Barney 23:04 And to that point, I mean if we if we have to make changes, right, now's the time to do it instead of waiting until things get better and then and then it's like, oh, we needed to make some changes, but we didn't. When we had the OPP. Bill Nary 23:04 Yeah, and I guess. Christena Barney 23:17 To do so. Bill Nary 23:19 And I and I totally agree. And I think you're, I think I think you're right. I guess what? I what? I don't what I what? I guess I I don't know that the Council, if they said, well, if you just told if you told us eighteen a month ago we would have spent it 18. Instead of 17. I mean, it wasn't enough to care that much, so we. But. But you're right. I think now that we're not at that, I think we're at a point that that is the most appropriate thing to do is to. Say we're going to have to make some changes and you know, and if this provides not not that this is the reason, but some again, more impetus to why some of these cost saving measures we've implemented are things you should look at and consider and use. Here's a. Good reason why. Scott Howell 24:09 Yeah, and it. Alexander Freitag 24:10 Oh, wouldn't it be fair to say that we've still got a 25 issue too? I mean, from a funding perspective, at the moment at least projected, right? So we're going to come out of this year probably with with difficulties. So I mean just amplifies the problem, right. Christena Barney 24:20 Mm-hmm. Bill Nary 24:26 Right. Right. 'cause that budget amendment that we just got approved. Only puts us back at kind of level 0, right? Alexander Freitag 24:37 Baseline. Yeah, yeah. Exactly right. Scott Howell 24:41 Yeah, well, this is always the difficulty of. You know, just because of the way that the budget cycle is, we're making these projections pretty far ahead. Alexander Freitag 24:49 S. Scott Howell 24:54 And as happened this last month, every month that goes by, the picture has the potential of changing a fair amount. And so yeah it. You know, it could get better by the end of the year. It could get worse by the end of the year, but with the information we have now. Yeah, that that's where it is. And a month ago, with the information we had then, you know 17 was was where we were so. Bill Nary 25:30 So what could we do to make up that difference? Practice contributions is that the. You know I don't which which dobs are the right ones to turn. Scott Howell 25:46 Yeah. Generally I would say my preference is plan design because that that only impacts the people who. Are are using the plan contributions obviously effects everyone? Bill Nary 26:02 Yeah. Scott Howell 26:04 But you can see here that even just. A. So there's a $750 increase in the out of pocket maximum. Saves 1.6% so. If we only need to save half that we could do, we could look at. A. You know $400.00 increase to the out of pocket or $350.00 increase to the out of pocket. So it's a relatively minor change that is only going to impact. That small percentage who's actually hitting their out of pocket? Can get everything you need. Christena Barney 26:47 Which option are you referring to, Scott? Bill Nary 26:49 Set option one. Scott Howell 26:49 That's option one. Christena Barney 26:51 1. Eli Daniel 26:51 It seems a little bit more reasonable. I think people would be a little more. On board with that, rather than seeing premiums increase. Bill Nary 27:07 And I guess the other question I would ask the group you think, I mean if you if I like what Eli just said, I mean, obviously the the not increasing the contribution is a plus for the group as a whole only impacting the out of pocket only hits. Eli Daniel 27:08 No. Bill Nary 27:25 The I don't know how many percentage of employees actually hit the out of pocket, whether it's the 2250. So I guess I would ask the question is between options 1-2 and three? And I recognize obviously the third one is a significant increase, but between those three, what is more logical and practical? Is it best to go a little bit and keep us within that margin by just a hair or does it make sense to go a little higher? To at least give us that cushion, because again, the the issue may be. Or come January, if we don't know. Again, it's only affecting a minor amount of people. I guess I'm sorry not an option two, so it'd be option one or option 3. Is the ones that. Eli Daniel 28:18 See you. Bill Nary 28:18 Looks like the. Eli Daniel 28:18 See you soon. More than just getting us a little bit close to the baseline, you wanna get us just a hair further just. Bill Nary 28:25 Right. I mean, we're talking about going from 3000 from 2250 to 3000 or 2250 to 3500. Eli Daniel 28:27 To. And does that does that? I assume double it making it for the family out of pocket? Scott Howell 28:37 Yes. Cindy Tealey 28:38 Yes. Eli Daniel 28:39 OK. Christena Barney 28:43 So then you're talking 7000 for a family. Eli Daniel 28:48 Yeah, I I still lean on option one if if that's the case, 'cause we're we're at a sixty. Yeah, yeah. Bill Nary 28:53 Verses 6. Christena Barney 28:58 And what's our FSA maximum right now I can't remember. Reba White 29:02 33. Bill Nary 29:10 And do we know if that's going to change in 26? Reba White 29:11 Turn off. Bill Nary 29:15 It goes up slightly every year, often. Eli Daniel 29:17 Yeah, couple 100 miles. Scott Howell 29:17 Yeah, they just don't. Reba White 29:18 It. Scott Howell 29:19 They don't announce it till open enrollment time. Reba White 29:20 26. Bill Nary 29:22 Yeah. Scott Howell 29:23 So it's that's always a little tricky. Bill Nary 29:24 So, so it might go up a smidge, but I mean, we're not talking, I mean, if it's at 33, it's not going to go up past 35. Reba White 29:31 No. Christena Barney 29:31 No. Bill Nary 29:32 Yeah. Reba White 29:35 But if you're, if you're comparing. Dollars. I mean, if so is the savings then we only get the savings when somebody is obviously going past the 2250 up to 3000, right? Bill Nary 29:40 Mm-h. Reba White 29:53 Whereas you're just saying like you just said, there's a smaller portion that maybe utilizing the maxed out of pocket. Scott Howell 29:53 Yep. Reba White 30:00 So that depends if the people are actually reaching their Max out of pocket that we're getting these excess funds. Whereas the $25 increase to employee contribution. For an employee to have a $25 cost and then we charge that into the family as well, that's an automatic funding for us. So that's not a guessing game. That's that's the difference is one you're guaranteed money because you're applying a cost to a contribution. The other side is do we may, depending on who reaches that now 3000 Max out of pocket. Christena Barney 30:40 I'm with you, Reba, I think. I think option one. Makes sense? But I also see the other side of it is we we need to beef up our funding mechanism. More you know, the employees need to have a little more skin in the game. I think we also need to balance that with recruitment and retention. I still agree with the idea of 0 cost for employees, so I don't know that we put a cost on the employee, but maybe on the dependents because we know our dependents are the highest cost on our plans and so that cost sharing for dependents, maybe that goes. Reba White 31:21 OK. Cindy Tealey 31:23 Hang on. Christena Barney 31:27 Up. Up and that's where we get that additional funding source into our plan. And offset some of these costs. Eli Daniel 31:38 Seems like it was back in like 2015 or 16 that we switched back to the the 8020 versus the 7525 and it was explained during that meeting that it's like hey we, we had some rough years. Christena Barney 31:47 Mm-hmm. Eli Daniel 31:51 We bumped up to 80 and we're now we're having good years. Let's go back to or bad years was 7525. But anyway, I don't see why it couldn't be the you know. Same message. Hey, we're having some bad years right now. Let's. Of course correct a little bit. Christena Barney 32:06 Yeah. Bill Nary 32:07 Well, I mean, could you get the same though response from the employees with dependents saying again? Well then we should if that's the case, why wouldn't we then charge employees something? I mean, even if it is a small amount. I mean, if we're, if we're trying to spread it to everybody's having to pay a little bit, everybody 'cause, everybody's realizing that not just people with dependents. Yes. I mean, dependents are the higher costs in general, I get that. But if you said, well, we're going to move up. The dependent cost, but still no impact to the employees and I understand as an employee don't pay my I pay for my dependents. I understand that. I don't know all the employees get that. But if you're saying it's a tough time and everybody's got to tighten their belts a little bit. Doesn't that make sense to then say well, that that's everybody? But I also know there's a recruitment issue there with that. Alexander Freitag 33:09 So if you put that chart back up just for a second, I'm just maybe to make sure I am reading this right. Eli Daniel 33:10 Twiddle. Alexander Freitag 33:19 Option 2. Which I realize increases the individual deductible up to 1000. Is there a is? Is there a percentage of impact from a fiscal perspective we we can predict that? I mean everybody. Almost everybody uses that right to some degree. If you're using your medical plan in some way, shape or form. Bill Nary 33:44 Right. Alexander Freitag 33:44 So is that is that middle ground maybe to start thinking about, OK, we're talking about trying to get everybody have skin. In the game, but you know you still are essentially a, you know, the employees not paying anything. If you know they're not using the plan. Is that a middle ground? Perhaps to look at it, I mean, the messaging is going to be difficult no matter what option we choose, right? But that's another. Maybe another thought. Cindy Tealey 34:16 Dan. Bill Nary 34:16 Well, well, and part of the messaging, go ahead. I'm sorry. Alexander Freitag 34:17 I don't know. Cindy Tealey 34:18 Dan, can you? I was just going to say, Dan, can you run a report for for 24 and 25 to tell me how many people met their deductible and how many people met their out of pocket? That'll give you at least some validation to what Reba mentioned is not everybody uses the plan because obviously if you have office co-pays and prescription co-pays and you're healthy. The out of you know it may not have a major effect on you. At least that would give you some idea as far as what number. And if we look at 23 and where we are 25, that'll give us some idea. Eli Daniel 34:55 Might be beneficial to see the out of pocket for the family too. I know that's been a a number can be a little more staggering when looking at the potential. Cindy Tealey 35:03 Yeah, absolutely. Bill Nary 35:05 Well, and I think if I mean part of the messaging is going to have to be no matter which path we chose is we have to I think be able to tell employees we could have chose these this path we could have chose this path, we chose this. Scott Howell 35:06 Yeah. Bill Nary 35:17 One so they understand. You know, we had to wrestle with. Do we raise your everybody? You know, do we raise employee contribution for in Jerusalem employees? Do we raise it for a family? Do we raise it for co-pays? Do we? We had, you know, this menu. And we chose this menu. It had the. You know the the need the necessary for the plan because of the costs and the tough times for re having. But we also tried to do the the ones that would impact you and you know, I guess the best way we could. But I mean I you know if you if you told me, hey, I'm going to raise your deductible up to 1000. Oh, I chose that. Because if you don't use it, it won't impact you versus charging you another 50 bucks more a month. For everybody. I might go. OK. I like that better. I'd rather do that, but if I didn't know that, you could have, you know, picked the lane of saying we're gonna just charge everybody 50 bucks a month. More per person versus the other than I might think. Oh well, I would have rather they did the other so. But yeah, I think if we got that information that would help us know a little bit more. But it sounds like we're gonna need to do 1 something in in this table. Eli Daniel 36:36 Essentially, do a little bit of a hybrid, right? We could do maybe a a smaller increase on option one and potentially a a small increase on contributions too. Scott Howell 36:47 Yep. Yeah, just so everybody is aware, the the way that we arrive at. Our projection that option one will save 1.6% is an actuarial model that we use that compares these plan designs and just make some assumptions based on lots and lots of data on how many people. It hit deductibles and hit out of pocket. So it's just kind of a national benchmark that gets used in in those plan design savings. Daniel Malloy 37:28 So if I could, Cindy, I I can pull that reporting as well. One other thing to think about based on the size of the group with about 480 employees that are on the plan on over 1700 members, your claims are fairly predictable from year to year. So you're not going to have massive swings other than of course for a high cost claimant here or there? So looking at these types of of changes and the benefits, they are beneficial and you you should not see a big discrepancy in what you can collect. Off of these. But yeah, I I just wanted to point out that it that the population is fairly predictable on what the claims will be. Cindy Tealey 38:12 I know the other thing that we pulled, one of the levers earlier to have the the revised. Specialty drug. Formulary change and I know that was believed to go into effect July 1, is that correct, Dan? Daniel Malloy 38:28 It is, and that did take effect July 1. Cindy Tealey 38:30 Perfect. So we should see some savings coming through there. And I think actually when we did our numbers and projections, I believe we informed the actuary that we had made those changes. So those have been also calculated and you can correct me if I'm wrong on that, Scott. But I think that we did make sure that, yeah. Scott Howell 38:48 Yeah, that that formulary change is baked in. Cindy Tealey 38:52 Perfect. Bill Nary 38:55 Well, I think I know. Like I said, we're talking about how to messages for the employees. I think the message to the mayor and the Council is a +1 because I think one of the things that the mayor has wanted to avoid. Is. The perception, because I don't think he believes this is the reality. But the perception that we simply look at these and go well cost what it costs. Folks just give us another 18% or 19 or whatever the numbers just give us a map. So I mean, I think at least if they could see, look we. We we were at this even a .7. We're trying to adjust that down. We're trying to make sure we're being physically responsible and being in front of it. I mean, not just for DUI, but for the Council to see that we've gonna have to make changes to maintain if you want us to maintain it exactly without changes, well, then it's now. It's 18%. Just give us that. But we don't think that's the right thing and that's not what. The direction we've gotten so changes have to happen and we're trying to figure out the ones that won't impact to the impact. The least. Relatively to the whole plan. So how do you want to move forward? Are we? Do we need the information from Dan to decide which option or hybrid we want to do? Do we then need to set a special meeting or continue this meeting? To get a little more data and a little time to ponder what we'd like to do, and then we're probably gonna if we don't come up with exactly column one, column two, column three, we're probably gonna need to have someone tell us. What does that mean? Eli Daniel 40:38 How long do we have? Reba White 40:42 Until August 1st, really, because we need to start processing our renewals for DOI to have all of our stuff by September. Christena Barney 40:42 Wait. Bill Nary 40:53 Well, we've to be compliant with the public meeting requirements. We can continue this meeting For more information rather than set a special meeting which gives it requires A5 day notice. But that's the only issue from a meeting standpoint. Obviously, everyone's schedule is a different issue, but from a we can certainly continue this meeting to another day. As as early as tomorrow, depending on everybody's schedule, but it's up to you whether the group, what do you want to do. Reba White 41:26 The. Christena Barney 41:27 I I think it depends on how long it's gonna take Dan to get the data we need. Daniel Malloy 41:32 I am. I am sending an. I am right now to try to find out if that's something that I can have immediately or if it's something I have to order so I will know. Hopefully in the next few minutes here. Bill Nary 41:44 OK. Cindy Tealey 41:44 Perfect. Bill Nary 41:46 All right, so we'll put a pin in that for the moment and and come back to that. So we can see about continuing of this meeting. The next issue is the the water, the next one. Are we good? OK. The next one is the deficit discussion. After that incredibly painful process, they did approve that so. The offshoot was. Did that get funded already, Reba or? Reba White 42:15 I meant to do that last week and then Christina went out and I need her. John Hancock. Christena Barney 42:20 Yeah. Reba White 42:21 So I have the paper on my printer right now. It'll get Christina's signature. Debbie's signature and I do have the request to have it funded by August 1st. Bill Nary 42:31 OK, great. Going forward in the future, the mayor suggested that we look at how we choose to present this type of stuff in the future and he would like as best as we can, to not have the trustees. Me be the person getting the most arrows for this discussion when the reality is it's a it's a, it's a, it's a. It's a system wide discussion. It's not just individuals. And that was just the nature of how this evolved and certainly wasn't my intention. Now, he suggested, just as a group, we need to think how we would bring that forward in the future. He suggested. Maybe you know if we're talking about the trust and the operations of the trust as a whole. Would it make sense to have Kevin W as the trust attorney be a part of the presentation? I haven't talked to Kevin. And I don't know exactly how much of A role. Kevin Coder can play in that conversation, certainly for legal compliance, yes, but the operational piece. No, not so much. He's not that involved with that. Would that be something Gallagher would be able to help us a little more with? I think I think so. I don't think it's gonna keep Reva or Christina out of being a part of the conversation. I think they have to deal with the mechanics of how the functionality of it works with the city. But I don't know if Scott or Cindy or Tasha has a thought. From Gallagher's perspective on your guys role as our consultants. Scott Howell 44:24 Yeah, I think there there are a lot of our clients where we we end up making that presentation that you made to to Council, whether it's, you know, if it's in the private sector, we're making that presentation to an executive team. Bill Nary 44:35 OK. Scott Howell 44:38 In the public sector. It probably more often happens that that a trust representative makes that presentation to council, but we're definitely happy to. To be more involved in in, in presenting it, you know we're we've tried to be there for questions and and usually end up coming up for parts but. If it helps that it's more of a team effort for the whole presentation, but we're happy to do that. Bill Nary 45:13 OK. Yeah, I think like you said, we don't have to make the decision today. But I think that was kind of the mayor's suggestion was. Presenting in the future, we just need to figure out a a better way so it doesn't kind of. I mean, again, I can't. None of us can control where the avenues go or where the discussion goes, but and this one certainly was not my intention or anyone's attention, but. I think the future will just look rethink it. Daniel Malloy 45:42 Bill, just so you know, I'll be there. I could be there as well from on from the Blue Cross perspective, if there's anything on a carrier side that would be raised, I'm there to be able to support Gallagher and you. Bill Nary 45:46 Great. Sure. OK. That sounds great. I think it was just being nice to say just don't make it me. So I think he's just trying to say, why don't you not be the person next time I have somebody else do it. Scott Howell 45:58 There. Bill Nary 46:04 But. Scott Howell 46:04 You know, based on the last meeting I attended, there were there were plenty of daggers coming from some of those Council members eyes to go around to anybody who came up to to present so. Bill Nary 46:16 Well, I don't know. How about the rest of you felt that? I certainly did. But that's OK. Christena Barney 46:21 You did well, Bill. Cindy Tealey 46:21 Do you think, Bill, do you think it's because they they probably felt like it kind of got sprung on them? Bill Nary 46:23 So. Alexander Freitag 46:23 As you do. Cindy Tealey 46:28 I'm wondering if it would be more advantageous to keep them abreast of maybe quarterly versus getting to the point where we're at and then letting them know that we need X number of thousands of dollars. Bill Nary 46:45 That, that, that was one of the messages. They'd like it a little more often, and they they haven't really settled. I mean, Luke was fine with just more than once a year. Council members Strader wanted quarterly. They also wanted more data, but I explained to them, you know, the more data doesn't necessarily help you 'cause there's no context to data. I mean, you could have all these reports, they're all public record stuff. Cindy Tealey 47:04 No. Yeah. Bill Nary 47:09 It's not an issue, but it it doesn't help you if you don't understand any of it or understand the the discussion. It just numbers on a page, but but I agree, Cindy and we were never gonna use the term pulse check ever again. Cindy Tealey 47:24 Ever. Christena Barney 47:25 Hmm. Bill Nary 47:25 Those that is not that is not a terminology we get to use. Cindy Tealey 47:30 Yeah, yeah. Absolutely, yeah. Bill Nary 47:34 Yes, but otherwise man, I think obviously as we look into next year and going forward and our renewals as we look at next year, they're going to want us to have a proposal and some idea of what we're doing going forward. Cindy Tealey 47:34 And I think that we'll find that it. Bill Nary 47:48 And how we're going to market our plan to make sure we are, you know, in the marketplace and doing the right things and all that so. Cindy Tealey 47:56 And I think one of the challenges Bill, and I think it it's going to always be an ongoing situation when you work with municipalities, new mayor's come and Go, Council members come and go and depending on what their breadth of knowledge regarding benefits and a self fund. Bill Nary 48:05 Yep. Cindy Tealey 48:12 Trust versus being a governmental entity versus being private sector. It's crazy because it it seems that a lot of times what can be done in private sector can't be done in a governmental entity. Because of the DOI overreach, and they don't understand that. And I think sometimes it it causes distrust on their part because I just can't believe that the DOI requires all of this financial stability. Bill Nary 48:36 Yep. Yeah, I mean, and I guess I also think they they like Christina better or they like Eli better. So it's all good. Christena Barney 48:50 I don't know about all that jazz. Bill Nary 48:51 But, but we'll figure it out. I just wanted to put out there that we, you know we we just need to rethink how we present in the future and how often. Cindy Tealey 48:55 Yeah. Bill Nary 48:59 I think that's good. And what kind of things are we bringing to them and asking for those kinds of things? Christena Barney 49:04 Bill, just a thought. I know that you have monthly meetings with the mayor, maybe at your next meeting with him you might bring up they. So the Council's has representatives with all of the different departments and different commissions and committees and things like that. Maybe he assigns a representative one of the Council members to the trust. So at least we have one Council member that's needing regularly with a trustee to get regular updates. Bill Nary 49:33 Only if we get to pick. Christena Barney 49:36 I would be happy to meet with an individual of his choosing to provide them information so that they don't feel like it's coming out of the blue. Bill Nary 49:42 But. Yeah, I I and I and I don't disagree with you. I mean, it's always a this struggle of how much control, you know, 'cause. That's one of the issues that I know DOI initially was concerned is that having council members like on the board and I brought that up to them that they didn't want that they don't they. Didn't want the Council having that level of control. And so, but yeah, I I'll mention it to them, but they haven't asked for that yet. Christena Barney 50:07 Yeah. Bill Nary 50:12 So, but I mentioned it to him. See what his thoughts are. Christena Barney 50:15 OK. Scott Howell 50:16 Yeah. And just as I think about it, you know, obviously there's a quarterly DOI filing that could provide kind of a an easy update of here's how we're doing right now. And then monthly claims experience that we present, you know, to the trust and the committee depending on. Christena Barney 50:16 Fair enough. Scott Howell 50:34 Often they want to. They want to see something. They're already. There's already kind of ongoing reporting that probably satisfies the updates that that they would like. Bill Nary 50:40 Hello. Christena Barney 50:44 Mm-hmm. Bill Nary 50:44 Right. And we are one piece of a pretty big puzzle. I mean, you know, the benefits Committee is a much larger group and much more, you know, all departments are a part of that. Christena Barney 50:49 Yeah. Scott Howell 50:49 Yeah. Bill Nary 50:55 I mean, there's a much larger group, too that sees virtually the same things we do. So it's yeah, I agree. I mean, there's certainly a lot of information out there. So we could certainly see if we can do it better, you know, Council members traders vary number oriented so. And if she really gets into those? But you know I. Councilmember Whitlock is much more involved in the medical services side. He understands that side. So he's another one who gets it so. But anyway, food for thought for the future. No bills this month, I think. I think we're caught up. We don't have anything new so. Reba White 51:31 You had a. You had a Kevin West. Parsons, Bill Lambler for $85 that has been paid. Bill Nary 51:34 Oh yeah. OK. So let's circle back to a second before we get to updates. Continuation of this meeting. Cindy Tealey 51:52 Dan, did you hear anything back on whether or not you have to order the report or if it's available? I just thought I'd ask you. Daniel Malloy 51:57 It's sort of it's that. I'm sorry. That's why I've been looking away. Bill Nary 52:01 No. Daniel Malloy 52:01 So there's two versions. There's a Phi version which will break down every individual person and what they have had for 2024 and then 25 or there's a summary that just shows how many have met on the individual and how many have met on the family side, which would. You prefer. Probably the second. OK, so I should be able to have that by the end of the day. Christena Barney 52:19 Book summary. Eli Daniel 52:21 Summary. Cindy Tealey 52:21 Yeah. Christena Barney 52:26 Oh, perfect. Bill Nary 52:29 So that says do we want to then continue this meeting and what would be? Beneficial to 1st the majority of the board needs to be available, but then the other set need to be part of the conversation like Gallagher and Dan and all that. What? This week. Next week, obviously we want to. I mean, today is the 16th. So we've probably got two weeks right to make this decision. Eli Daniel 52:58 But one week. Reba White 52:58 Say nothing past the 23rd of next week. Bill Nary 53:10 Does that work for most everyone a week from today? Same time. Eli Daniel 53:16 That sounds great. Alexander Freitag 53:17 Yep, that'll work. Daniel Malloy 53:19 That's just. Reba White 53:20 Christina, we're good. Bill Nary 53:20 OK. Reba White 53:21 We just have a staff meeting right before. Christena Barney 53:24 Thanks. Bill Nary 53:24 And then do we think we will have enough if I guess wanna make sure do we think we need anything else? And then do you think from the board's perspective we'll have enough information to make a decision? That we can pick a lane, choose if we, I guess the only question I have is what Eli raises if we decide to hybrid. Some of that, are we going to be able to feel comfortable like we picked a little this little that and that's going to give. Daniel Malloy 53:51 Well so so. Bill Nary 53:53 Us a number. We can. It may, it may only be an estimate. I understand that. But I mean, we're trying to get to at least, you know, somewhere to get within that range. Are we comfortable in a week? We're OK to that. Eli Daniel 54:07 I know this is like 90% of our committee, but is there any point in having committee have any say on this? Bill Nary 54:16 Benefits committee. Eli Daniel 54:17 Yeah. Reba White 54:17 No, I mean renewals are final by the trust, but. Eli Daniel 54:22 Right. But I'm just saying it gets a little bit more of our employee population thoughts and stuff. I I I'm just throwing it out there 'cause I'm like. Bill Nary 54:29 Yeah. What I would suggest, and I guess what police aren't here just is on vacation. I mean, they're obviously the one of the larger work groups. But I without being able to try to convene that group, which is. Difficult. It may be just behoove on us as the trustees to try to reach out to some of these work groups and say, hey, we're looking at some of these things that, I mean, there's only so much pulse checking we can do, but. Daniel Malloy 54:51 Stop. Reba White 54:56 You can't use pulse chart. Bill Nary 54:57 Sorry, I didn't mean to use that term. I apologize, sorry. Eli Daniel 54:59 Never. Bill Nary 55:02 There's there's only so much of that we can probably do, but I I don't. Yeah. I mean, I think trying to get that group together may be problematic, Eli. Eli Daniel 55:10 Yeah. No, that sounds fair. I just in that in that week's time, do you think it'd be worthwhile for some of us to reach out to some of the other departments that aren't represented here to just get a couple thoughts? Reba White 55:13 OK. Christena Barney 55:21 Yeah. Bill Nary 55:21 Absolutely. Eli Daniel 55:23 OK. Cool. Christena Barney 55:25 I think for me. I the report that Dan's getting gives me scope of impact on the plan design and then understanding from a funding perspective that the hybrid option if we change contributions, what will that bring us in funding. Those are the two pieces I need to feel comfortable making the. Decision. Bill Nary 55:51 OK. Alexander Freitag 55:52 It's probably not an easy concept to explain to anybody who's not really kind of paying attention to it, right? Bill Nary 56:01 Yeah. I mean, you're gonna have to figure out the the most simple talking points is what would you prefer? Eli Daniel 56:01 Right. Bill Nary 56:09 Yeah, we're gonna. We have to look at some planned changes. What would what? Alexander Freitag 56:09 Yeah, essentially it's, you know, yeah, guaranteed. Dollar per month increase or potential, I guess. Bill Nary 56:18 Right. Alexander Freitag 56:19 I mean, you know, really in the simplistic terms, right, so. Christena Barney 56:20 Mm-hmm. Bill Nary 56:22 Yep. Eli Daniel 56:23 Could could we put together, once we get report numbers? Alexander Freitag 56:23 But. Eli Daniel 56:25 I don't know if that falls with Christina. Ariba, but can we? Can we get a couple of options of our own for hey, do we just want to look at bumping option one up? For the out of pocket Max? Or can we make our own options of option one? Option 2. Option 3. Where there's the hybrid approach of contribution changes and. Maybe we could use that as our kind of talking points. Tasha Norman 56:50 Eli, I can put something like that together. Reba White 56:50 What? Tasha Norman 56:52 So Christine and we would don't have to, but. Eli Daniel 56:55 OK, I didn't know who would do that or. Tasha Norman 56:57 Yeah, yeah, I'm happy to help with that. Reba White 56:58 My recommendation though would be what do we want the percentage to be? Because that's our end goal. Do we want it to be 1% or just a .7 to get us to 17? Eli Daniel 57:05 Right. Reba White 57:09 Because that's what Tasha's gonna need in order to know what changes affect what. So I think that's something that. Eli Daniel 57:15 I like. I like Bill's point. I don't like going to the .7. I I prefer to shoot it over just a little bit. Bill Nary 57:22 All right. Reba White 57:23 So one or more. Bill Nary 57:25 I mean, I think if we don't, if we don't look at something that was least a 1%, the the lowest one on that option 1-2 and three was 1.6. Eli Daniel 57:25 One or one or even 1.5. Bill Nary 57:35 So I don't think we really want something less than that. Cindy Tealey 57:35 Well, I. Bill Nary 57:38 I mean that seems that seemed like and that was the most minimal change. So I think if we're anything else beyond that, I think that's all we're kind of looking for as best we can. Cindy Tealey 57:49 And I did a quick math, if you if you were to take $25 and figure out how to divide it time 483 employees time 12, that's 100 and almost 145,000, so obviously. A combination. Between that, maybe a slight benefit change and maybe a slight incremental increase to get to that number. But that way at least you have your growing your your trust balance. Versus it stands stagnant. Eli Daniel 58:22 So we could do like a. Bill Nary 58:22 And I I guess the the question and maybe we don't have to decide this right now, but I mean is maybe go back to what Riva just said is the basic premise as the trust at least at this conversation point now we are not wanting to look at. Employee contributions from individual employees changing that from currently of 0 to something else, or changing the 80%. Add to something else. Reba White 58:55 Mm-hmm. Bill Nary 58:55 Are those two things we'd like to leave intact if possible, and look at other alternatives first before we look at those. So at least you know if Tasha's going to help Reba or Christina come up with some rubrics if she knows. OK, well, we're not going to go there. Then what else could we do? If we don't do the either one of those two things? Is that where we are or do we not even that I don't. I just want to understand. Eli Daniel 59:25 I think there's a consensus we want to keep our employee contributions for just the single employee at 0, right? I don't. That's that's what I've gathered. Bill Nary 59:35 OK. Eli Daniel 59:36 I can't hear you, Alex. Christena Barney 59:41 So I can't hear you. Reba White 59:41 I can't hear you. Eli Daniel 59:47 So you're unmuted, but got nothing. Yelp really loud. Alexander Freitag 59:54 How about now? Eli Daniel 59:55 Show me the money. Reba White 59:55 Yeah. Bill Nary 59:55 Yeah, there we go. Yeah. Alexander Freitag 59:58 Something funny with the mic on this thing? Sorry about that. I was just gonna say I think that's a good starting point, right? But I think I do want to kind of see those numbers from. 1st and maybe get a feel for what that looks like. Bill Nary 1:00:12 So and and I think that's like I said, I I wasn't saying we have to you know, carve these in stone. But if we say, OK, remember what first, we're not going to change the employee contribution from zero. That's the last thing. If the 80% is the next last thing, that's fine. What else can we do before we get to those two things? I think that's fair. Anything else for the group before? We. Move on to the last things I want to let everybody go on time also on time. OK. So we will have. So any updates besides this Dan for Blue Cross? Daniel Malloy 1:00:59 No, sorry about that. Bill Nary 1:01:00 That's OK. And then Scott or Cindy or Tasha for Gallagher, we anything else besides these? Scott Howell 1:01:06 So we, we do also have dental and vision projections. Bill Nary 1:01:11 OK. Scott Howell 1:01:12 And I don't know if you wanna see those now or when we get together next. Bill Nary 1:01:17 Why don't we if if it's OK, if we can put those next week 'cause those don't generally have the same level of impact. If that's OK for the group or. Is everybody OK with that? Eli Daniel 1:01:26 It'll be $42.00 in deficit. Bill Nary 1:01:31 Yeah, I'll just write a check. I. I don't want to deal with it. Alexander Freitag 1:01:33 I'll do it, man. It's done. Bill Nary 1:01:38 So yeah, if we could put that to the the next discussion a week from now, I think we probably that won't be the that won't have probably the same level. Scott Howell 1:01:47 Yep. Bill Nary 1:01:48 OK. All right. Well then I will continue this meeting. We want adjourn. We will continue this meeting to July 23rd at 11:00. I'll send out an updated notice. For the world. And then we will reconvene. Eli Daniel 1:02:02 Thank you. Bill Nary 1:02:03 I'll send out a new appointment for next Wednesday at 11:00 the 23rd. Reba White 1:02:11 Thank you. Bill Nary 1:02:11 Awesome. All right. Well, thank you. Eli Daniel 1:02:11 Thanks. Scott Howell 1:02:12 All right. Bill Nary 1:02:13 I know there's a lot of work to be done with you now and then, so thank you for everyone that's working on that. So thank you very much. Eli Daniel 1:02:18 Yeah. Scott Howell 1:02:19 Yep. Thanks everybody. Eli Daniel 1:02:19 Thanks. Daniel Malloy 1:02:20 Thank you. Reba White 1:02:21 Home Depot. Bill Nary 1:02:21 All right. Have a good day. Alexander Freitag 1:02:22 Thank you. Cindy Tealey 1:02:23 Thanks. Bill Nary stopped transcription