Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1-26-26 TranscriptSpecial Health Trust Benefits Board Meeting-20260126_110253-Meeting Recording January 26, 2026, 6:02PM 51m 57s Bill Nary started transcription Bill Nary 0:05 11:00 on Monday, January 26th. I will call the Special Board of Trustees meeting for the City of Meridian Employee Benefits Plan Trust. To order start with roll call attendance bulk area present Alex Freitag. Alexander Freitag 0:20 Present. Bill Nary 0:22 Christina Barney. Eli Daniel. Eli Daniel 0:26 Present. Bill Nary 0:27 And say Reba White is here from HR as well as Scott Howell from Gallagher. Laurie sent me this response. Scott and I can't remember. She said she wasn't gonna be here. Do you recall? Scott Howell 0:42 I think she is traveling today, so yeah. Bill Nary 0:44 That's right. That's right. She did that. She that's what she said, OK. Well, we'll see if Sean pops in later. So. Basically, there's one item only on this special meeting is really discussion of the auditor findings and then actions or directions. So we can provide a response to the Department of Insurance. I guess should we just take them in order, folks? Does that make sense? Christena Barney 1:12 Sounds good. Bill Nary 1:15 Basically, I guess if I some up number one it says to recommend the trust. Implement a process to mature does not fall below the required surplus prior to each month. Well, it's certainly not our choice either step in the desire of this board to to do this. I don't know beyond trying to fully fund it at the outset, which has always been our objective. And then having to deal with the shortfalls as they occur. Is there another method that we could do differently? I don't know what the answer is. Christena Barney 1:55 So my initial thought to on response for this one is that we have implemented going forward. Keeping the City Council apprised of where the trust lies because they're really the ones that have the financial backing for the trust. Bill Nary 2:10 Right. Yep. Christena Barney 2:18 Am ensuring that they are being. Updated at least quarterly if, if not more, notifying them of the need of additional funding. Bill Nary 2:29 Right. Eli Daniel 2:30 I think we've we've added things to make ourselves a little more hyper reactive to the lack of funding when it happens. Bill Nary 2:42 I mean, I don't know how you know. One of the things that's been a rub for the Council. Is. And I don't. There's another method, Scott, from your experience or with your other clients, but one of the things that they have been resistant is we've tell them what the what the shortfall is and what the what the requirement is. But we also give them what we anticipate based on the trends and costs and the experience that we have to say and we anticipate you know we're at this X number and we anticipate this number over the next. Month or quarter? That you will likely need to fund, and the Council has said we don't wanna fund anticipated cost. We wanna fund actual cost. And I think this finding. Sort of rubs up against that, right? 'Cause, it's saying we really want you to fund it fully. Always. So that would include anticipated costs. And I don't know if there's a better method or a better way to explain that or a better method to. To to make that pitch better, I do. You have some thoughts on that, Scott? Scott Howell 3:57 Yeah, I mean, you know, obviously so far. Our kind of the way that we've operated with the Council has been to come to them when we know that there's a shortfall and ask for that shortfall. That has been happening on a quarterly basis. Bill Nary 4:15 Right. Scott Howell 4:16 Might need to happen more often. I I think when you're in a position like this where you've fallen behind. It. It's difficult, if not impossible, to catch up. If the entity writing the checks is not willing. To to fund based on a projection. Bill Nary 4:40 Right. Scott Howell 4:41 You know, it'll just happen like it has been where, you know, we fall behind. We catch up to know to what we know we were behind. And then it it just kind of goes back and forth over that line. Bill Nary 4:52 Right, you're almost automatically behind when you catch up, because you already know you're gonna have a deficit. Scott Howell 4:58 Yeah, I think. Coming into a new year where we have increased the monthly funding. Hopefully that that trend can can stop where and the monthly funding will will keep us ahead. But I think. When we had asked the DOI for an opinion. On our current methodology and they they didn't write a letter. Now they've written a letter. So that that might help too. To next time we update the Council, we say look, the DOI has instructed us to not let a month go by where we're behind and that's going to mean that you guys are have like, you know, we're going to have to get. Ahead of this. The the new funding that we're putting in this year hopefully accomplishes that, but we won't know that until. You know, for a few weeks, at least for January. Bill Nary 6:07 I will make note for the record at 11:06, trustee Harper joined our meeting as well. Thanks for joining us, Sean. Shawn Harper 6:18 Yeah. Sorry I had to step out of another meeting to hop on this one. Bill Nary 6:21 No, no worries. Yeah, I mean, I guess that's it. Scott, it's really, it's just again explaining this finding. At some point we need to update the Council on this information and what they're asking so that they know again when we're asking. It's not because we're just asking, but because they're asked us to keep it current, keep it funded, keep it, you know, clearly solvent, I mean. Again. The I I don't know. Oh, I don't think there's a magic way to do it. I mean, yes, I would like cancer treatments to be cheaper. I would like medication to be cheaper. Yes, we all would. But I don't see in the next year with you know, I mean we all could read the news. I mean the volatility in the medical market is probably going to be very much in flux for the next 12 to 24 months. I I don't think. I don't think I'm out on a limb to say that, am I, Scott? Scott Howell 7:20 Nope, not at all. The other thing that I think it's more of a long term. Thing but. Historically, and we've talked about this with Council and as a trust. Too. We've. We've taken our actuarial projections. And been almost as aggressive as we can to fund exactly what we think we'll need without a lot of cushion and without. You know, just trying to be as responsible as we can with the budget, right, with the projections and I think our funding conversations in the future. I envision them getting more in depth saying, you know, if we wanna try and hit it on the penny, what we think we'll need, here's what we think. Maybe here's the maximum that we could potentially spend. Is there somewhere in between those two that we're most comfortable with to help maintain our surplus, maintain our reserve? I feel like all of our municipality clients especially. Like they've just tried to be so conscious of. You know, being good stewards of budget and not asking for more than. You know the minimum that we think we'll need and and I think that's that needs to change a little bit. If the if the DOI expects to maintain surplus at all times. Bill Nary 9:07 Well, I think maybe that's part of the narrative to the Council is that understanding that although we aren't necessarily wanting to build a surplus. For other programs, which was the original intent or conversation when we formed the trust. But we do need to build some surplus cushion, whatever you want to call it, to deal with the fluctuating market, to make sure we stay solvent. I think it's just a different narrative. Right. I mean that's still the same idea. We're wanting to build some level of cushion to give us some ability to weather these ups and downs of the marketplace now more than worrying about us trying to build another program out of the surplus. Scott Howell 9:36 Yeah. Bill Nary 9:52 So I think it's just how we explain the narrative better. Scott Howell 9:55 Yep. Alexander Freitag 9:57 I guess my question on this and I mean Christina, you're probably dealing with them more than anybody else, right? Is that a satisfactory answer to them for now? As far as strategy? Or is there gonna be? I mean, if they don't wreck, if they don't agree with our written response as to how to mitigate the issue, what happens then? Do they come back and say no, not good enough? You know, try again. What? What's the what's the process? Christena Barney 10:21 Yeah, my understanding is it's kind of a back and forth until they feel that we've satisfied these findings and that we will no longer be non compliant. So that's my understanding. What I want to read. What I've captured for the board so far, so that we are all on the same page as we're crafting this response. So keeping the City Council apprised of the status of the trust as the financial backer of the trust. Communicating to the Council the requirement to keep the trust surplus and reserves fully funded at all times, as referenced in the codes in this finding. The board intends to share the findings with the City Council. To reinforce these requirements. Take a different approach to establishing funding needed for the coming year with a reasonable amount of additional surplus built in, and the board has made plan design changes and implemented an increase in funding for 2026 and we are hopeful that this will resolve the ongoing DEF. Does that sound accurate? Reba White 11:27 I think we need something in there that says if we find that we are below on a month, what, how we're going to reconcile. Because we are pretty much saying, well, we're gonna still go to them quarterly, but they're saying we need it on a month. So if if. Christena Barney 11:48 Said it's projected. Reba White 11:51 Or or found within a month, right? It's 'cause we do monthly financials, but I they're one month behind. But I can always pull our bank statement. I mean, we don't have to see the loss in the income and all of that right at a trust meeting I can. Provide a bank statement that says as of this day, we have this much in the account. Is this going to be a deficit or are we gonna have surplus and we need to address it at the meeting? Bill Nary 12:22 Right. Christena Barney 12:28 I got that. Do we feel comfortable with that response? Bill Nary 12:37 I do. I'm not sure how else we would do it, so I think that's adequate. Christena Barney 12:43 Perfect. Shawn Harper 12:43 I like the response. Bill Nary 12:47 I don't know. Shawn Harper 12:50 I think with the with the findings, I think that's just better explains what the expectation is and what's needed. And I think that's the important piece is continuing to educate them and these findings look we, we got audited and this is an area that we are deficient, right. We're we're not meeting the requirements and these are the things you know. And then your statement that you're writing, Christina. I mean, this is what we have to do to stay in compliance because I mean, if anybody. With with actuaries, it's all projections, right? They're they don't have a crystal ball. They're not gonna get us down to a exact number. They're looking at data and trying to come up with kind of a a moving help or say. I think our Council has to understand that we're never gonna have the exact number. And a couple of more significant claims throws a lot of that actuarial data kinda out the window. Because they're they're unexpected. Bill Nary 13:56 Well, and I had a really good meeting with Council President Overton and explained that again. And he asked the question. The Council asked us all the time and I think he really understood the answer which his question was would it be cheaper if we went to a fully funded program? Would it be cheaper? And I said no, the answer is has been and always been no because the actuarial. Costs would of anticipated cost would not have changed really at all. Well, I mean, that's not gonna change. The only change would be that you would be paying some higher cost for the management of it for the profit, for the other things that Blue Cross provides that isn't currently provided. So you would be paying additional cost for that and then anything that you undershot that so it when the actual Orioles were lesser than what was actual cost, that would then wins your next renewal. Would would have to absorb that. Now, depending on how big that difference is, I told him that may not be in one year, right? If you had a 30% gap between what was anticipated and what you paid in premium and what you actually cost the program, they wouldn't likely try to make it. Up in one year, necessarily, but it doesn't mean they wouldn't or can't. They just don't always do that. But you'll still make it up. I mean, you're going to make it up over time and you'll keep making it up over time until that gets back to where they pay for the actual cost. And then that profit and cost recovered. So it's never gonna be cheaper. I mean, you're always gonna pay for the cost of the people. The only difference you're seeing is because we're doing it in real, real time that you're seeing it now this month, this quarter versus at a renewal. And if I stated that please please correct me. But that's basically when I told him and he understood that. Completely, he said. I get it. I understand where that is now so. Right. Are you comfortable with that for for #1, Christina? Christena Barney 16:09 I think so, yeah. Bill Nary 16:09 Right. Hey #2 says recommended that formal review and approve the annual audit and actuarial reports in board meetings with the auditor and actuary present. To summarize any findings and answer questions. Now we haven't done that, so we can do that. That's not a big deal. Reba White 16:29 So I think the process for that would be for me to once I receive the auditors findings, I would schedule, I'd Bailey to join a trust meeting and review the entire audit with us. Bill Nary 16:40 Yes. Yeah. And then ensure all meeting minutes are signed by the chair or secretary. Affirm completeness. Why we can do that? That's we haven't been doing that, but we could do that. Christena Barney 16:54 OK. Bill Nary 16:55 Establish strict protocols to prevent the inclu. I'm sorry. Christena Barney 16:57 Hold. Hold on. I'm trying to keep up with. Bill Nary 17:00 OK, sorry. Christena Barney 17:01 What we're what we're doing, OK, on two, we're doing what? Bill Nary 17:05 Says ensure all meeting minutes are signed by the chair or secretary. Affirm the completeness and accuracy we can do that we haven't been doing that, but we can do that. That's not a problem. We approved them at the board meeting. Reba White 17:17 Did you get the first one? Christena Barney 17:21 Yes, I got one. Reba White 17:22 OK. Bill Nary 17:23 Yeah. Christena Barney 17:23 I'm onto meeting minutes will be signed following the approval of the Minutes and kept for the record. Bill Nary 17:29 Yes. Shawn Harper 17:32 Where is this going to be? In regard, because the rest of these are all. Fixed. But how are we going to memorialize these for if tomorrow all of us are gone and it's a new board? Bill Nary 17:50 We could add it to the. Yeah, I think what Sean's asking is how are we going to make sure that if we say we're going to do that, where is that going to be first going to be memorialized that we're doing that. Christena Barney 17:50 You broke up. Sean. Bill Nary 18:02 And secondarily, then where is it? Is that right, Sean? Shawn Harper 18:07 Yes, Sir. Bill Nary 18:08 OK. So we could put that in the the bylaws, right? So we could put that in as this protocol. So we can amend the bylaws to include those those. Those requirements. Right now, the only thing that's kept by the city on our on the website is just the agendas we have a we have a page on the clerk's page showing where the agendas are. So do we need to establish our own website with a link to the city? So if you were a interested party, we could discuss that 'cause. I do think Sean's got a good point. We need to figure out not just protocol of doing it, but then where is it? Once you do it? And I don't know what the answer is today. Shawn Harper 19:00 I I would say. I mean, I would say we build it into the bylaws so that more importantly for trustees moving forward, that's clearly defined in our bylaws of of the rules, right. I mean, that's all this is. There's just once I read them and reread them to better understand all of it. It was really what we're doing our meetings. We just need to clean up a few things that we're doing in our meetings to to be. In in what they see as compliant. Client, so I don't think anything forward facing is needed. I just think it's more internal that it's captured so that people ahead of us are behind us. Don't fall into this again. But. Reba White 19:46 And we save our minutes. And our HR board file because I have to supply those each year for the audit. And so Christina usually gets the copy from what you send out, Bill. Bill Nary 20:06 Yep. Reba White 20:06 Send it to Christina and I and we can keep that as a copy. Bill Nary 20:11 And what I have been doing and I have a legal file for this. So people know. So I record all the meetings. I then save the recording. We have a. We have a file in our legal file. Now and again we can memorialize this to put it somewhere else, and I capture a transcript every month and the recorded meeting every month. And I've been doing. I've only been doing that for about a year now because I didn't know you could, so I've only known for about a year. You can actually do that. So I've been doing it for about a year. So we do have another besides just the minutes, which are just summary, we actually have a transcript of the meeting plus the plus the audio record or the visual recording. So we have those. So we could put those if we want to create a file in HR or wherever so that we have a repository to put all of it. That's fine. Reba White 21:05 For the wide drives, we all can access it. Bill Nary 21:08 Yeah, that'd be fine. Christena Barney 21:11 Well, those are all good, but I think the intent from DOI is to get us to publish those because it is a public meeting, it is public decisions that are made on record. So is that part of that is publishing those signed minutes? Reba White 21:31 Is somewhere in another number because it doesn't say we have to publish them. We just have to sign them. Bill Nary 21:31 Help. Reba White 21:38 And #2. Bill Nary 21:38 Yeah. Christena Barney 21:39 No, just based on the conversation I've had with them, kind of the direction that's going to be headed that likely that will be a rebuttal to our response. Bill Nary 21:47 What are other entities do? I mean, do they just have like like Rebus? Said a wide rib or something that's accessible that people can go see it. Kind of like we do with the clerk's office. Is that what we're talking about? Christena Barney 21:59 I'm not sure that's a good question. Alexander Freitag 22:03 You couldn't store these with the like all the other Commission reports, bill, you know, like, you know, solid waste or Council meetings, any of that stuff like. Christena Barney 22:03 I'm not sure. Bill Nary 22:09 Right. I I think we could. I mean, I don't know. I mean, I don't know if that's in, in your ballpark, Eli. Or is that simply just a question to the clerk's office? I don't know. Eli Daniel 22:21 It's outside of mine. I mean we yeah, we can do anything we want, but it's like for as far as the best place to put it at somebody else's call. Bill Nary 22:26 Yeah. I mean, I'm. I'm happy to follow up with the clerk's office to see if that's. A way to do it or somewhere else? I mean, if if the if their concern is is we want to publicly accessible place for the Minutes the recordings I mean again we are compliant with public meeting laws which don't require minutes or don't require transcripts and don't require recorded meetings. But we will. We can. We can add to that if we just need to find out a repository of where that is. Whether it's through the clerk's office or somewhere else, we can figure that out. I don't know the answer today, but we certainly can find that. Eli Daniel 23:06 Just. Christina, you said there's more context behind this than just the what shows up in that audit finding? Did you know if it had to be publicly available or if it could just be internally available to employees? Christena Barney 23:19 They didn't speak on that specifically, so I had a meeting with them last week. And they were asking all kinds of different questions about how how we do things, our procedures, our processes and things like that. What I'm gleaning from the conversation is they want more from the trust. They want more formalized processes. They want things documented and they want things publicly accessible. As well, what I gathered from that conversation. So instead of, my thought was instead of having them provide us a finding, let's just take that extra step, knowing that's the direction they're going. Reba White 24:04 But it would have been nice if they know it's public, public or public to the employees. Shawn Harper 24:04 I only I. Yeah. That's and that's the thing, 'cause. It's like, why would we make it forward facing to the general public outside the fact that there's tax dollars involved when it's really open to all employees within the city that have, they would have access to it. 'cause that's who the trust. Applies to. It doesn't apply to my neighbor, you know, so. Bill Nary 24:34 Is that a question? Shawn Harper 24:35 Maybe. Bill Nary 24:36 Either Christina Orriba you could ask. Like Caldwell, I mean, what do they do? Christena Barney 24:42 And I can even reach out to the auditor and ask the question, you know, as we're developing these findings, the board had a question regarding this. Can you help clarify? Bill Nary 24:45 Yeah. OK. Yeah. Eli Daniel 24:51 That'd be nice. Reba White 24:52 That'd be helpful. Bill Nary 24:58 Number C It says it OK sorry. Reba White 24:59 'Cause I think. No, I was just saying the the transcripts might be helpful too. 'cause, they're like you said, Bill, the minutes are more summarized, which is what's been supplied to DOI, which I think they're they're looking for what we're actually discussing. What kind of conversations are being had rather than. Bill Nary 25:09 Right. Reba White 25:18 Just summarization. So those transcripts might come in handy here shortly. Bill Nary 25:23 Well, and again not to want to get into a a disagreement with the Department of Insurance, but the the law doesn't require any effect. I mean the public meeting law doesn't require that it only requires that you create summary minutes. It doesn't require you even record it other than. I mean you can record it. You don't have to video it and you don't have to create transcripts. So, but yeah, we could certainly do that. Whatever, it's not a problem. Find me #3. It says it's recommended that trust implement a policy requiring all trustees to review and sign a conflict of interest statement annually and document the review within meeting minutes. This would support compliance with Idaho Code and promote proactive identification of potential conflicts. Reba White 26:09 We have to talk about PII on #2. Scott Howell 26:12 I think, yeah, I think there were a couple of things on two that we. Bill Nary 26:13 Oh, I'm sorry I missed that. Yep, you're right. Reba White 26:17 OK. Bill Nary 26:20 What's PII? What's that? Reba White 26:22 Personal information. Eli Daniel 26:23 Personal loan. Personally identified a little information. Reba White 26:31 So we had a minute or we had minutes back in 22 that addressed an employee by name. What they were addressing to the trust because they were disagreeing with what the trust covered at that point. Scott Howell 26:31 So. Reba White 26:47 And they wanted to see what the if the trust would make any plan changes for this employee and the diagnosis, and then the billing and all of that information was in the Minutes and so. They're asking us, what are we going to do? So moving forward to mitigate that potential risk of PII being out, because obviously if we have to make this information public out to the employees or to the general public, we don't want names or any identifi identification of information. Bill Nary 27:20 Well, and again I this one this I I didn't know if that's what that was asking, but in this one and then some of the other ones are asking tells me what poor legal advice we were getting from our prior attorney, right. Our attorney should have told us. That. 'Cause I because I you know, again, I don't know how to reconcile, but an employee says, you know the we had two. Scott Howell 27:41 Yeah. Bill Nary 27:48 I can think of we had employees. Asking, we changed the program, which then diminished their benefit. We then agreed with them and agreed to change the program back to include a benefit that would benefit them, and we also had a different employee saying they wanted coverage for something and both times the individual employee came to the board to ask about that. How do we how do we not include that in a public meeting? We can there. There is no, there is nothing in it and. Scott Howell 28:18 Executive session is how I've seen that handled with other trusts. Bill Nary 28:23 What's? I mean, that's the first thing you said, Scott. What was that? Scott Howell 28:27 Executive session is how I've seen that handled in other trusts. So that the. You know the the Minutes from that executive session. I don't know what the rules are, but that somehow that avoids them being part of the public meeting and that's how I've seen other trust handle it. But I I strongly agree with your first point that the new Council that you or the new legal counsel that you choose for the trust. Should should be your point on getting guidance on this issue. Bill Nary 29:02 Right. Reba White 29:06 And is an executive session. What does that look like, Scott? Like a special meeting, but not public or what? Scott Howell 29:13 Yeah, I so. What I've seen is I've seen it. Like we'd be meeting here, somebody would call an executive session that stops the recording. There's a separate little, you know, like a breakout almost or a separate teams meeting that everybody goes to, has the executive session conversation and then you come back into the public meeting. Bill Nary 29:39 OK so. This is this is my area. And they're wrong. So this is where I think we need to ask the Department of Insurance what would they? What would they recommend? Because I'm looking at the code, there is no exemption for that. There is no authority to have an executive session to discuss something that is private. It is to hire a public officer to fire a public officer, to acquire an interest in real property, to consider records that are exempt from disclosure. Which could apply, but it won't apply to an individual person. It applies to their records. Of we had a record from somebody. Yes, their medical record would be exempt. That might apply. But in our situation where a person came and said, hey, you changed the program and my condition is no longer covered. That used to be covered. But I have this condition doesn't fit that exemption, so I'm not sure how anyone's doing it. Legally, I'm not saying they're not doing it, but legally it doesn't fit. So maybe that's the question. Scott Howell 30:42 Yeah, and and most of the honestly, most of the executive session stuff that I've seen has been around. Bill Nary 30:45 Go ahead. Uh-huh. Scott Howell 30:51 Like the board making a decision on a claims appeal, which might get more into that medical record part, but I maybe for for what it sounds like this discussion was. Bill Nary 30:55 Uh-huh. Sure. Scott Howell 31:05 Just to have kind of a a policy or practice in place that we don't talk about names here. You know an employee came and asked for this. What do we think? You know. Bill Nary 31:21 I mean I I I think you're right, Scott. Shawn Harper 31:21 Yeah, and I. Bill Nary 31:23 I think, at least from a response, we can certainly not include in the Minutes that, but if we're going to save the recording and save the transcript, that's going to likely be there, right? Scott Howell 31:33 It's tricky, yeah. Bill Nary 31:33 So, but I think it's again that may be a response to them. Christina what? What do other agencies do and how do they address it? 'cause I don't know the answer. It it it? Shawn Harper 31:46 Bill, I think it's just like when we have somebody who wants to to get a mobile sales license and they have a disqualifier. They understand that if want to appeal or go on the. Bill Nary 31:54 Mm-h. Shawn Harper 31:59 And open up their criminal history. It will. It will be on the public record, so if we have an employee who wants to come forward and have a conversation, as long as they know that that this is an open meeting, then whatever they decide to share is going to be on a public record, I think. The advisement's more important than anything outside. You know, if we're meeting and we're talking about a claim, we just can't be like, oh, Susie, you know, this is her claim. Bill Nary 32:21 Right. Shawn Harper 32:30 You know, we we have to keep it broad, but if somebody's wanting to go on record or have a conversation with us knowing that it's we're meeting public meeting laws, that's on them on what they decide to share. Bill Nary 32:42 Right. And I would agree. I mean in the situation like for example we had the issue where the employee said and if I remember again not saying identify the person, but the conversation I think was around diabetic coverage. And we had an issue where we had changed the program and then then excluded some folks with either some type of diabetes or whatever. And we said, OK. Now we understand it. Now again, we didn't. We wouldn't have had to have that conversation about the person. It was more on the program. And what the program used to provide and what it didn't provide and what could we consider reconsidering it to allow it? Yeah, all of that could be done without the employees name being a part of it and identifying anybody. So yeah, I agree with Sean. Maybe we just need to make it clear on we can create that ability to do that, but I don't know what happens when an employee says you denied my claim and I would like. You to consider my claim. I don't know how else to do it. Besides them coming forward. Again, even if they told us in writing and we used the exemption to talk about an exact session and said an employee's claiming they were denied based on the circumstance, I guess maybe we could try that, I don't know. Again, it might be that might be a part of our responses. We're willing to do it. We tell us how other people do it. Alexander Freitag 34:01 ****. Christena Barney 34:11 So what? I've captured for that one is the board will not disclose any PII during meetings. Should an employee want to address the board regarding their particular situation, the board will provide a disclosure to the employees regarding the meeting and anything disclosed is part of the public record. That sounds accurate. At this point. Shawn Harper 34:37 Sounds good. Bill Nary 34:37 It does to me. Eli Daniel 34:38 Yep. Alexander Freitag 34:40 Yep. Christena Barney 34:45 Think that was all on two. Reba White 34:45 So we need to create create a disclosure. Christena Barney 34:51 Yeah. Shawn Harper 34:53 I think if anything we just need to have a disclosure statement that when. They're when they're coming on, we share that disclosure statement on record on transcript. Hey and if they choose at that point to be like, you know what, I don't want to talk about that on record. We have it all captured in transcript as well as in meeting minutes. That's my opinion. Bill Nary 35:22 Yeah. And we can try to figure out a work around if if possible. I mean, again, there may be limitations to it, but certainly there's ways we can look again, if we're just talking about a program that used to be one way used, we can want to change to another. We can talk about that. Christena Barney 35:44 Thank you. Bill Nary 35:46 All right. Are we on to #3? Christena Barney 35:54 I believe so. Eli Daniel 35:54 Yeah. Bill Nary 35:55 This was talking about conflict of interest. Reba White 36:02 So we were just saying sorry, go ahead. Christena Barney 36:02 My no go for it. Reba White 36:08 I would, well, someone from the trust would provide the the conflict of interest statements to be signed yearly and they would be reviewed at the trust meeting just like they are talking about to be approved within the Minutes. Christena Barney 36:25 So my thought on this was our vote for chair and Vice Chair, that meeting, we would just do the conflict of interest policy review annually at that point and then send it out following that meeting for signature of all the board members. Bill Nary 36:40 That makes sense. That seems reasonable. Alexander Freitag 36:41 Yeah, sounds good. Eli Daniel 36:42 Great idea. Christena Barney 36:45 Each year in January, OK. Got that one? Bill Nary 36:52 OK, #4. Just as the report would implement a formal process to review approved by resolution and record in the Minutes, all contracts and agreements affecting the trust, this includes initial contracts, contract renewals and contract amendments. I guess the question I'd ask them, Christina, what do they mean by resolution? I mean, our City Council doesn't pass a resolution every time they approve a contract. Are they asking us to formally create resolutions or I mean if we move to accept a contract and we approve it in a vote, a voice vote or a vote of the board, that's that's adoption legally. So I guess the question to them is what do they mean by? Approve our resolution. Christena Barney 37:45 So on this one, my thought is to not offer the resolution at this point. Bill Nary 37:51 OK. Christena Barney 37:52 To just Simply put it on record that we have reviewed and approved by vote, all contracts related to the board 'cause we haven't done that. Bill Nary 38:02 Right. Christena Barney 38:04 So that would be. That's my thought on it. Bill Nary 38:06 OK. I I think that that's reasonable to me 'cause you know? And if they're talking about formal resolutions, that's even beyond what at least some inhouse do. So I'm not sure why, but if they say we we need to I I wouldn't offer it. I'm with you. That makes sense. Reba White 38:24 And I've asked Gallagher that. During that time frame to give us a list of renewals so that everybody can understand if a contract is up for renewal, renewal or changing. Because even though we get like like Delta dental, we have a contract with them until 2027. So nothing has changed from then which we can discuss during that, but it'd just be nice to have the list of the dates of. Approval. So they were gonna get that to me. Christena Barney 39:07 OK. Bill Nary 39:10 All right, #5. It says it's recommended that the trust implemented procedures to ensure the timely filing and payment of premium taxes and continuation fees in accordance with the Idaho Code. I don't know what that means. We don't know. Reba White 39:26 We were not notified that we needed to pay taxes. That's when we had Kevin W come in and say I thought, you know, because we're city entity, blah blah. Bill Nary 39:33 Yeah. Reba White 39:38 But the trust does not apply to that. So we did miss two years because we were never notified that we had to pay since we have been notified every payment has been on time. And processed correctly. Bill Nary 39:53 I guess that's what threw me. I. I knew that history, but I thought we'd pay them now. So I'm not sure what what would we do. What should we do differently now? Is that what they're asking us to do? Reba White 40:04 I would just say for we agree and the process will be before March 31st. It is discussed by the trust that the premium taxes and continuation fees will be approved to pay so that I can pay them just like a billing discussion. Bill Nary 40:23 OK. Reba White 40:30 That was a surprise to all of us. Being new to the trust. Bill Nary 40:30 All right. Yeah. Again, kind of reflection on our prior legal counsel, so. So the number six. So what it's saying is the trust consult with its financial institution, explore various ways to mitigate this risk. 'Cause, they're saying we have large uninsured amounts in the bank and the bank does not insure up to 2,000,000 bucks, so. I don't know. How's the city doing? I mean, City has millions of dollars in the bank too. How do we do it? I mean, this just says ask the ask the bank how to do this. Alexander Freitag 41:12 Add. Shawn Harper 41:12 Well. Bill Nary 41:15 So I guess that's all. Shawn Harper 41:15 FDIC does only. This is a weird one because the banks only cover if the bank system collapses. That's what that insurance is there for up to 250 thousand, I believe. So I mean, if all of our money's stolen, we're out of luck. Bill Nary 41:29 Correct. Shawn Harper 41:35 But from looking into this a little bit, the only way would be to have multiple accounts. But that was a. That was a strange one in my opinion. Bill Nary 41:47 Well it it, it seems to be like the again the the question, the answer to this one is yes, we will explore with the bank, right. Alexander Freitag 41:48 Yeah. Bill Nary 41:56 Because that's all they're saying is we need to do. I do think. The the question then becomes. Obviously, the city does this and we have more money with the city than this trust does. So they they do it somehow. I don't know what it is, but I guess we start with the bank and if we want to, we can have a secondary conversation. Good finance and say they've recommended this. How do we do it? But I guess we start with the bank. Scott Howell 42:26 Yeah, I I agree with that. I'll tell you like I know at Boise. They have their finance team work with the same investment manager that that helps to maintain all of the city's large accounts. They have them help with the trust account as well. So that might be something to take a look at. Bill Nary 42:50 OK. Reba White 42:55 An insurance example like if somebody stole money from the bank or got into our account, our crime policy and our other insurance policies that we have to our bank account are covered up to a certain amount as well. Don't know that off the top of my head, but we have other means of protection. Bill Nary 43:18 Yeah, I think. I think the first step here is like we just said, I think we we say yes, we will talk to the bank and then we'll see what they suggest and then we'll go from there, so. Christena Barney 43:30 So the board will consult with First Interstate Bank on options for insuring funds. I am. Bill Nary 43:50 And #7. Says it's recommended to trust execute one or more written service agreements with the City of Meridian that provide an explanation of the services to be provided, who provide them and the fee, if any, or statement that the trust will not be charged for any. Furthermore, these service agree. Should require all individuals will handle receipts and disbursements for the trust fund be covered by dishonesty, insurance policy, or fidelity bond as prescribed in Idaho code. Additionally, all agreements, any subsequent amendments to such agreements are to be submitted. To the department, at least 30 days before the effective date of such agreement in compliance. So are they talking about? We had a question that came up on whether or not the board members were paid and the answer was no, and that was in our bylaws. But this is also asking about services like HR services like what Reba provides. I think that's what they're talking about too, right? Christena Barney 44:56 That yeah, that is what they're talking about. Bill Nary 44:59 OK. Christena Barney 45:00 We did have some discussion last week when I met with them about that and they asked. Has the board ever talked about or considered, you know, hiring a third party administrator? And I said we have do those services and then they brought up, well, you don't currently have a contract between the board and the city because Reba is a city employee using her city time to perform functions. For the trust, I did clarify that Reba is an exempt worker and that yes, we've had some discussions, but not necessarily at the board level. So I think they're looking for us to formalize and by by way of an agreement. What Reba is working on, what whether she'll be paid in addition to on all those types of things which we need to decide as a board. Reba White 45:51 And we had a city agreement. Bill Nary 45:51 Right. And I think again, I know we had go ahead. Sorry, Reba. Reba White 45:56 No, we had a city agreement when we first started in 2020. It was remember. That's what I brought up at a meeting that that had gone away and they were probably going to ask us about it. So really it's just taking a look at that contract that we had or agreement and deciding what changes need to be made because there was like the HR director was listed on their senior human resources general list and then a benefits specialist and what qualifies as. Pay for from the trust. So all of that was addressed in the agreement, but we just need to get it renewed 'cause we did not. Bill Nary 46:36 Yeah. And I put that in my list of things to have our next legal counsel. You know, do that. So I think I don't know if that's a appropriate response that we are in the midst of hiring new legal counsel and that is on the list of things that they will be required to provide for us is a a new updated agreement and then that discussion with. The city because you know, realistically, yeah, we should be reimbursing. The city Ariba. Some of her. I mean, it doesn't make sense to me. And maybe this is just me. It doesn't make sense to me to hire a third party that then has to coordinate with Reba anyway, since these were city employees. But it does make sense that the board should be paying something for the services or the city acknowledging. That Reba is an exempt employee and we we're not paying her extra. We consider this part of the city function. If they didn't want to, I I guess that's a conversation we need to have. With Debbie, I would guess. Christena Barney 47:39 Reba and I've had that conversation offline and they're at some point there will be a tipping point where we HR cannot continue to support the trust, but we're not at that point yet. Bill Nary 47:43 OK. Right. Christena Barney 47:54 And to your point, bill, it doesn't make sense at this point to hire a TPA or a part-time person that still has to work through Reba or myself to get the information they need to facilitate the day-to-day. Bill Nary 48:07 Right, yeah. So I mean I I guess I don't know from a response standpoint is. I don't know if it's adequate, but I guess do we tell them, you know, again, we're missing. We're in the process of hiring new legal counsel. That is a something the board has identified and we will. Be crafting an agreement, I guess. The question they may respond back is, well, how long is that? Is that three months? Six months a year. What is that? And I don't know and I'm hopeful we can get new legal counsel on board in the next 90 days. Ish. I don't know. Christena Barney 48:44 Mm-hmm. Bill Nary 48:46 So. Sometime after that. Alexander Freitag 48:52 In terms of cost, I do hope the Department of Insurance would understand that even bringing a third party in is a cost that the trust is ultimately going to pass along back to the city anyway. So it's not. You know whether the cost is coming out of an existing employee that is doing work for the trust or not. I certainly can see. Needing a maybe a working contract for that, but from a cost perspective, this is a more cost effective option for the trust and the city versus a third party that would come in and do those those functions. So they should understand that I would think, right, so. Bill Nary 49:25 Correct. Well, and from a logic standpoint, I mean they're not. I mean, any money the trust pays other than for a third party, like a lawyer or a auditor, or the accounting. Again, finance do the accounting. They told us they would not. Alexander Freitag 49:45 Right. Bill Nary 49:46 So I mean if HR if if HR wanted to take the position or the C take the position, we're not gonna pay for it or we're not gonna provide it. That's fine, but at any additional cost that with the trust incurs to do that, it's just going to be the cost of the bottom line to ask the city to file. So it's it's one pocket or the other. Alexander Freitag 50:03 Mm-hmm. Exactly. Bill Nary 50:09 We're not going to hold a bake sale to raise the money and we're not going to have a bake sale in a car wash to raise the money for outside counsel and for third party assistance, so. Scott Howell 50:09 Yeah. And I think as much as anything, this is just about. Yeah. And I think as much as anything, this is about just establishing clear lines between the trust in the city that the city isn't, the trust, the trust isn't the city. Bill Nary 50:34 Yep. Scott Howell 50:34 Obviously you work closely together and they just want. It documented. Bill Nary 50:40 Yep, that makes sense. Alright. Is is that good for you? Christina, to this point for a response. Christena Barney 50:55 Yep. I'll get that crafted. I'll send it out for your review. I did let them know we were meeting today and we would have responses to them by the end of the week because I wanted to have time for us to get them crafted, review them and make sure we're all good with it. Bill Nary 51:02 OK. Great. OK. All right. Is there anything else for the good of the group? Is that? OK, I will take a motion to adjourn. It's 1154. Christena Barney 51:30 Make a motion to adjourn. Bill Nary 51:32 All those in favor? Shawn Harper 51:35 Aye. Eli Daniel 51:35 Right. Alexander Freitag 51:35 No. Bill Nary 51:36 Alright, alright, we will. We'll have adjourned at 11:54 and we will look for those. Responses for input and then we can get that out the door. Christena Barney 51:48 Sounds good. Eli Daniel 51:48 Thank you. Bill Nary 51:49 Thank you, Scott. Thank you, Reba. Christena Barney 51:50 Thanks. Bill Nary 51:51 Thank you, Christina. Thanks everyone. Scott Howell 51:53 Yep, we can see you all. Christena Barney 51:54 Yep. Bill Nary stopped transcription