Jun 24, 2026 Metropolitan Council

[Presentations and Special Recognitions]

[00:00:03]

WELCOME EVERYBODY TO THE PRESENTATION PORTION OF OUR MEETING AT EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH METROPOLITAN COUNCIL THIS JUNE 24, 2026.

WE'RE GOING TO BEGIN WITH COUNCILMAN ANTHONY KENNEY. COUNCILMAN KENNEY.

THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM COUNCILMEMBERS. TODAY I HAVE SOME VERY SPECIAL GUESTS FOR DISTRICT 2 IN THE JEWEL J.

NEWMAN COMMUNITY CENTER. I HAVE THE SUMMER 2026 CAMPERS FOR THE CARL SLAUGHTER SUMMER CAMP HERE TODAY. CAMPERS, GIVE YOURSELVES A ROUND OF APPLAUSE. COUNCILMEMBER, THIS HAS BEEN A LONG STANDING CAMP IN MY COMMUNITY CENTER FOR THE PAST COUPLE DECADES.

AND SO DURING MY TIME IN OFFICE THUS FAR, WE BROUGHT THE CAMP BACK. WE HAVE OVER 40 CAMPERS THROUGHOUT MULTIPLE SCHOOLS IN THE BATON ROUGE AREA. WE HAVE KIDS FROM AGES FROM 5 TO 12 YEARS OLD HERE TODAY. AND COUNCILMEMBER, THESE KIDS ARE VERY AMAZING KIDS. THEY'VE BEEN HAVING SWIMMING LESSONS, FIELD TRIPS, THEIR PROGRAMS, EVERYTHING. YOU CAN THINK ABOUT SOMETHING. HAVING A FUN, AMAZING SUMMERTIME THUS FAR.

AND SO TODAY WE JUST WANT TO RECOGNIZE THEM. SAY HELLO TO YOU ALL. MAYOR EDWARDS AND DENNIS DID AMAZING PRESENTATION BEFORE RECOGNITION TODAY AS WELL. BUT WITH THESE CAMPERS, WE ALSO HAVE SOME DEDICATED STAFF MEMBERS THAT WORK WITH THESE CAMPERS ON A DAILY BASIS. SO FORTUNATELY, I DON'T HAVE TO WORK WITH THEM ON A DAILY BASIS BECAUSE I KNOW I'LL BE STRESSED OUT OVER 40 ADDITIONAL KIDS. BUT I HAVE AMAZING STAFF THAT SUPPORT THEM. SO AT THIS TIME, I WANT TO BRING UP UP MS. ASHLEY MONTGOMERY, THE CAMP DIRECTOR.

LET'S GIVE MS. ASHLEY A ROUND OF APPLAUSE. ALSO, AS MS. ASHLEY IS COMING UP, I'D LIKE TO ASK ALL THE CAMP DIRECTOR AND COUNSELORS TO STAND AS WELL. ALL THE CAMP COUNSELORS AND ALSO OUR MYWEE STUDENTS OR CAMP COUNSELORS AS WELL. ALL OF OUR MYWEE STUDENTS.

INTERN, PLEASE STAND UP BEFORE LET'S GIVE THEM A ROUND OF APPLAUSE TO OUR INTERNS.

HELLO, MY NAME IS ASHLEY MONTGOMERY, AND IT IS AN HONOR TO WORK FOR COUNCILMAN THIS SUMMER. I REALLY THANK HIM FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO WORK WITH THESE WONDERFUL CHILDREN BEHIND ME. AND I THANK MY WONDERFUL STAFF FOR BEING HERE. IT HAS TRULY BEEN AN HONOR TO WORK AT JILL NEWMAN THIS SUMMER GETTING TO KNOW EACH OF THE CHILDREN.

I'VE ACTUALLY LEARNED ALL OF THEIR NAMES. IT'S BEEN TRULY A JOY GETTING TO KNOW THESE KIDS AND SEEING THE JOY ON THEIR FACES EVERY DAY AT CAMP. AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO ENDING CAMP WITH THESE CHILDREN. AND AGAIN, I THANK COUNCILMAN FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY.

ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU, MS. MONTGOMERY.

BEFORE WE TAKE A GROUP PICTURE, COUNCILMEMBERS, ALONG WITH THE JEWEL NEWMAN COMMUNITY CENTER SUMMER CAMP, WE ARE ALSO HOUSED IN ANOTHER AMAZING CAMP CALLED A HANKS SUMMER CAMP. THAT'S IN THE BATON ROUGE AREA. IT IS LED BY SOME VERY DEDICATED INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE HELPING KIDS WHO NOT ONLY AT RISK IN OUR COMMUNITY, BUT ALL YOUTH IN OUR COMMUNITY AS WELL. IT'S CALLED A HANK SUMMER CAMP, AND TODAY I HAVE ONE. THE LEADERSHIP FROM THE HANK SUMMER CAMP, MS. JUDE AUGUST.

MS. JUDE, PLEASE COME UP THIS TIME.

GOOD AFTERNOON. JUDE AUG IS PRESIDENT OF HELPING A RISK NON COMPLIANT KIDS. AND WE HAVE OUR SUMMER CAMP HOSTED AT THE GEORGE A. NEWMAN COMMUNITY CENTER. OUR SUMMER CAMP IS CALLED HANK LEEDS, AND IT'S JUST IMPORTANT THAT WE PROVIDE A SAFE SPACE FOR OUR YOUNG ADULTS TO LEARN ABOUT LEADERSHIP, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. AND WE ARE SO HONORED THAT YOU TOOK THE TIME TO HONOR US. AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HAVING US AT GEORGIA.

LET'S GIVE THEM A ROUND OF APPLAUSE. ALL RIGHT, SO TO THE HANK LEEDS SUMMER CAMP.

WE DO HAVE A CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION AND ALSO FOR ALL OUR CAMP DIRECTORS. SO AT THIS TIME, WE JUST WANT TO DO A GROUP PHOTO WITH ALL OF OUR CAMPERS. SO MS. AUGUST AND MS. MONTGOMERY, IF YOU WANT TO BRING THE KIDS UP TO THE FRONT. AND WE'LL TAKE A GROUP PHOTO AT THIS TIME. SO CAMPERS, PLEASE STAND.

YEAH.

SO ALL THE CAMPUS, COME ON.

COME. COME UP TO THE FRONT.

COME UP TO THE FRONT. CAMPUS, COME ON TO THE FRONT FOR MISS JUDE AND MISS ASHLEY. ALL RIGHT, EVERYBODY TAKE THREE STEPS BACK. THREE STEPS BACK.

EVERYBODY COUNT. ONE, TWO, THREE. THERE YOU GO.

[00:08:30]

GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCILMEMBERS. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH FOR ALLOWING ME HERE TO RECOGNIZE A FEW PEOPLE. AS WE ALL KNOW, PRIDE THIS MONTH.

JUNE IS PRIDE MONTH. AND, YOU KNOW, WITH EVERYTHING THAT GOES ON AND STUFF, YOU KNOW, YOU THINK OF PRIDE MONTH AS DIFFERENT THINGS, BUT BELIEVE IT OR NOT, WE ACTUALLY DO HAVE MOMENTS AND CLERGY AND OTHER MEMBERS THAT HELP US AND GUIDE US AND HAVE OUR FAITH AND MOVE FORWARD.

BUT I'D LIKE TO RECOGNIZE SOME DEAR FRIENDS OF MINE THAT HAVE BEEN THERE, HAVE HELPED SUPPORTED THE COMMUNITY, AND DONE LOTS OF GREAT WORK. FIRST, I WANT TO START OFF WITH ST.

MARGARET'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH SO I CAN GET A REPRESENTATIVE.

IN RECOGNITION OF ST.

MARGARET'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH

[00:10:01]

ST.

MARGARET STRIVES TO WELCOME ALL PEOPLE AS GOD CREATED THEM AND FOSTER AN INCLUSIVE COMMUNITY.

WHEREAS ALL PERSONS ARE EMBRACED BY THEIR FAITH JOURNEY, REGARDLESS OF AGE, RACE, ETHNICITY, CULTURE, GENDER, GENDER IDENTITY, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, PHYSICAL OR MENTAL ABILITY, OR ECONOMIC STATUS. GROUNDED IN THE APOSTLES TEACHING AND FELLOWSHIP, THE BREAKING OF BREAD AND PRAYER, ST.

MARGARET'S FAITHFULLY LIVES OUT CHRIST'S CALL TO LOVE AND SERVE OTHERS.

THROUGH ITS OUTREACH, MINISTRIES, HOSPITALITY, AND GENEROUS SHARING OF TIME, TALENT AND TREASURE, THE PARISH EXTENDS COMPASSION AND SUPPORT TO INDIVIDUALS, FAMILIES AND ORGANIZATIONS THROUGHOUT THE GREATER BATON ROUGE COMMUNITY.

THE CITY OF BATON ROUGE AND PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH HEREBY COMMENDS ST.

MARGARET EPISCOPAL CHURCH FOR ITS DEDICATION TO PROMOTING JUSTICE, PEACE, HUMAN DIGNITY AND SERVICE TO OTHERS, AND EXTEND SINCERE APPRECIATION FOR ITS POSITIVE AND LASTING IMPACT TO OUR COMMUNITY. THANK YOU TO ST. MARGARET'S FOR ALL THAT YOU DO.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. HOLD UP JUST A SECOND. CALL SEVERAL PEOPLE UP.

AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO RECOGNIZE THE REVEREND DEACON LESTER MARTIN MUTT, JR.

WHEREAS, THE REVEREND DEACON LESTER MARTIN MUTT, JR. HAS DEDICATED HIS LIFE TO FAITH, SERVICE AND THE STRENGTHENING OF OUR COMMUNITY. AND WHEREAS, HE WAS ORDAINED TO THE SECOND ORDER OF DEACONS ON JUNE 10, 2024, FAITHFULLY SERVING AT ST. MARGARET'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH. AND WHEREAS, DEACON LESS EXEMPLIFIES CHRIST'S CALL TO SERVANT LEADERSHIP THROUGH HIS COMPASSION, GENEROSITY, AND JOYFUL SPIRIT, INSPIRING ALL WHO KNOW HIM.

AND WHEREAS, A LONGTIME RESIDENT OF BATON ROUGE, HE HAS ENRICHED OUR COMMUNITY THROUGH HIS MINISTRY, VOLUNTEERISM, AND SUPPORT OF THE LOCAL LGBTQIA ORGANIZATION AND FAMILIES. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF BATON ROUGE AND PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE DO HEREBY RECOGNIZE AND HONOR THE REVEREND DEACON LESTER MARTIN MUTT, JR.

FOR HIS FAITHFUL MINISTRY, DEDICATED SERVICE, AND OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS.

LESTER, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR EVERYTHING THAT YOU'VE DONE. I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN A GREAT PARTNER OF ALL THE COMMUNITIES AROUND HERE, AND LIKE BOTH OF Y', ALL, THROUGH YOUR CHURCH MINISTRY AND EVERYTHING, HAVE SUPPORTED EVERYTHING THAT.

THAT WE HAVE DONE AND ACCOMPLISHED. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NOW, ONE THAT WILL BE DOING OUR PRAYER FOR THE OPENING OF THE COUNCIL MEETING, THE REVEREND TOMMY DILLON.

WHEREAS TOMMY DILLON. FATHER TOMMY DILLON, A BATON ROUGE NATIVE, HAS DEDICATED HIS LIFE TO FAITH, SERVICE, AND PURSUIT OF JUSTICE AND INCLUSION FOR ALL PEOPLE. AND WHEREAS, HE'S EARNED HIS DEGREE FROM LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY, YALE UNIVERSITY, AND WAS ORDAINED AS A DEACON AND PRIEST AT ST. LUKE'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH BEFORE BEING CALLED TO SERVE AS RECTOR OF ST.

MARGARET'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH IN 2016. AND WHEREAS, THROUGHOUT MORE THAN 24 YEARS OF MINISTRY, FATHER TOMMY HAS PROVIDED COMPASSIONATE LEADERSHIP IN PASTORAL CARE, COMMUNITY OUTREACH, PRISON MINISTRY, MENTAL HEALTH AND HOMELESS SERVICES, DISASTER RECOVERY, AND ADVOCACY FOR RACIAL AND LGBTQ INCLUSION.

AND WHEREAS, HIS FAITHFUL SERVICE TO THE EPISCOPAL DIOCESE OF LOUISIANA AND THE GREATER BATON ROUGE COMMUNITY HAS STRENGTHENED COUNTLESS LIVES THROUGH HIS COMMITMENT TO HUMAN DIGNITY, RECONCILIATION, AND SERVICE TO THOSE MOST IN NEED. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED.

THE EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH METROPOLITAN COUNCIL HEREBY RECOGNIZES AND HONORS THE REVEREND TOMMY DILLON FOR HIS OUTSTANDING LEADERSHIP, COMPASSIONATE MINISTRY, AND ENDURING CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE CITIZENS OF BATON ROUGE, EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH AND BEYOND. NOW, ONE THING.

TOMMY WILL BE LEAVING US HERE SOON, AND HE WILL BE SERVING IN NEW YORK. I THINK THAT'S A PLACE THAT HE'S BEEN LOOKING TO GO TO. AND WE WISH HIM THE BEST AS HE MOVES ON IN HIS JOURNEYS. SO, TOMMY, THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING THAT YOU HAVE DONE FOR OUR COMMUNITY IN THE PARISH.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THANK YOU.

AND AARON, THANK YOU FOR YOUR WITNESS THAT YOU DO FOR THIS COMMUNITY HERE IN THE METRO COUNCIL, IN THE CITY. BECAUSE YOU DO A LOT TO MAKE THIS WORLD BETTER. AND WHEN I LOOK AT WHAT YOU DO, WHEN I SEE YOU IN THE COMMUNITY, I SEE THE KINGDOM OF GOD. SO THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU DO.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU TURNED

[00:15:03]

YOU HERE YET? OKAY, SO SHE HAS NOT MADE IT YET. WE'LL PRESENT THIS TO HER.

BUT I HAVE A CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION FOR MS. TINA AND THE LOUISIANA WOMEN'S VETERANS ASSOCIATION, WHICH WILL BE JOINING US FOR THE PLEDGE. THANK YOU ALL.

THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN. THIS CONCLUDES THE PRESENTATION PORTION OF OUR MEETING. OUR REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING WILL BEGIN AT 4 O'. CLOCK.

[CALL TO ORDER]

OH, HELLO, EVERYBODY.

WELCOME TO THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH.

GOOD TO HAVE ALL OF YOU VIEWING OUR MEETING TODAY. WE WANT TO REMIND YOU ALSO THAT WE ARE ARCHIVING EVERY ONE OF OUR MEETINGS, AND YOU CAN ACCESS THAT@VRLA.GOV. GOOD TO HAVE ALL OF YOU TUNED IN.

AND AT THIS TIME, HERE IS THE MAYOR, PRESIDENT PRO TEM OF EAST SPANISH PARISH, WHO REPRESENTS DISTRICT NUMBER ONE UP IN THE NORTHWEST PART OF THE PARISH. I SHOULDN'T SAY THAT BECAUSE IT'S THE WHOLE NORTH PART OF THE PARISH.

COUNCILMAN BRANDON NOEL, COUNCILMAN. THANK YOU, DENNIS. WE'LL CALL THE MEETING.

ORDER. ASHLEY, DO WE HAVE A QUORUM? WE HAVE A QUORUM.

COUNCILMAN MOAK, IF YOU COULD INTRODUCE OUR INVOCATION AND PLEDGE. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE.

LET US PRAY. GRACIOUS AND LOVING GOD, WE THANK YOU FOR EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH, FOR ALL WHO CALL THIS COMMUNITY HOME AND FOR ALL WHO SEEK ITS GOOD.

BLESS THE MEMBERS IN THIS CHAMBER, FOR THE COUNCIL, FOR THE MAYOR, PRESIDENT, THE STAFF, AND ALL WHO SERVE THIS CITY AND PARISH. GIVE THEM WISDOM, GIVE THEM PATIENCE, GIVE THEM COURAGE AND HUMILITY AS THEY LISTEN, DELIBERATE AND LEAD. REMIND US THAT PUBLIC SERVICE IS A SACRED TRUST. GUIDE THIS MEETING TOWARDS THE COMMON GOOD, THE DIGNITY OF EVERY PERSON, AND THE BUILDING OF A COMMUNITY WHERE ALL PEOPLE KNOW THAT THEY BELONG. SO BLESS BATON ROUGE AND ALL OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, ALL OF OUR DIFFERENCES, ALL OF OUR STRUGGLES, AND ALL OF OUR BEAUTY. MAKE US PEOPLE WHO SEE ONE ANOTHER, CARE FOR ONE ANOTHER, AND WORK TOWARDS THE FLOURISHING OF ALL. WE ASK THIS IN YOUR HOLY NAME.

AMEN.

I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

IF I COULD HAVE MISS TINA STAY UP HERE AND JOIN ME, I'D LIKE TO GIVE THIS CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION TO MS. TINA TOBIAS FROM THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL. THE CITY OF BATON ROUGE AND THE PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE PROUDLY RECOGNIZES MS. TINA FOR HER SERVICE AND DEDICATION TO HONORING AMERICANS.

WOMEN'S VETERANS. AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE LOUISIANA WOMEN'S VETERANS, MS. DEVIAS LEADS THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN RECOGNITION OF WOMEN'S VETERANS DAY, OBSERVED ANNUALLY ON JUNE 12TH.

THIS DAY COMMEMORATES THE ANNIVERSARY OF THE WOMEN'S ARMED SERVICE INTEGRATION ACT OF 1948, SIGNED BY PRESIDENT HARRY S. TRUMAN, WHICH GRANTED WOMEN THE RIGHTS TO SERVE AS PERMANENT MEMBERS OF THE UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES. THROUGH HER COMMITMENT TO RECOGNIZING THE SACRIFICES AND ACHIEVEMENTS OF WOMEN WHO HAVE SERVED OUR NATION, MS. TOBIAS HELPS PRESERVE THEIR LEGACY AND INSPIRE FUTURE GENERATIONS OF SERVICE MEMBERS. THE CITY OF BATON ROUGE AND PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE EXTENDED SINCERE APPRECIATION TO MS. TINA TOBIAS FOR HER LEADERSHIP, HER PATRIOTISM AND DEDICATION TO HONORING WOMEN'S VETERANS.

GIVEN THIS DAY, JUNE 24, 2026, WITH ULTIMATE AND SINCERE GRATITUDE FROM THE EAST BATON ROUGE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL AND THE CITY OF BATON ROUGE AND EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH. THANK YOU SO MUCH. WE WOULD ALSO, IF MS. TINA WOULD JOIN US AND MS. REVEREND ANDERSON WOULD PLEASE COME UP AND JOIN US.

ONE OF OUR 12TH, 13TH, 14TH, 15TH COUNCILMEMBERS HERE

[00:20:01]

AND WHEREAS LOUISIANA WOMEN'S VETERANS HAS DEMONSTRATED EXCEPTIONAL DEDICATION TO PRESERVING THE DIGNITY, SACRIFICE AND LEGACY OF WOMEN VETERANS ACROSS LOUISIANA AND THROUGHOUT OUR NATION IN MILITARY SERVICE.

AND WHEREAS LOUISIANA WOMEN VETERANS EXTENDS ITS SPIRIT OF SERVICE THROUGH COMMUNITY OUTREACH, CHARITABLE FUNDRAISING EFFORTS AND PARTICIPATION IN PROGRAMS SUCH AS LSU SOFTBALL, MILITARY WARRIORS RECOGNITION HONORING WOMEN WHO HAVE SERVED OR ARE CURRENTLY SERVING IN THE ARMED FORCES. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT KNOWN THAT THE CITY OF BATON ROUGE AND PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE HEREBY RECOGNIZES AND HONOR THE LOUISIANA WOMEN'S VETERANS FOR THEIR REMARKABLE CONTRIBUTIONS TO VETERANS, THEIR FAMILIES AND OUR COMMUNITY. AND EXTEND SINCERE APPRECIATION FOR THEIR CONTINUED DEDICATION TO SERVICE, PATRIOTISM AND REMEMBRANCE TO THE LOUISIANA WOMEN'S VETERANS ORGANIZATION. AND Y' ALL TWO LOVELY LADIES SITTING UP HERE. I HOPE YOU PRESENT THIS TO THEM FROM US. THANK Y' ALL SO MUCH FOR YOUR SERVICE, YOUR DEDICATION AND EVERYTHING THAT YOU DO LOCALLY, STATEWIDE AND NATIONALLY.

WE'LL STAND HERE AT LEAST.

THANK YOU, METRO COUNCIL, AND THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN MOAK.

ANA IS ACTUALLY IN HAWAII HELPING VICTIMS BECAUSE THAT IS WHO AND WHAT SHE DOES.

BUT WE ARE SO PROUD OF THE WORK OF THE OVER 250,000 WOMEN VETERANS WHO HAVE SERVED IN LOUISIANA. AND I WOULD LIKE TO FORMALLY INVITE EACH MEMBER OF THE METRO COUNCIL. ON JULY 02, THE VETERANS TREATMENT COURT OF THE 19TH JDC WILL IN FACT HOST ITS SECOND ANNUAL GRADUATION. AND IT IS AN HONOR BECAUSE WE DO NOT LEAVE ANYBODY BEHIND. SO AGAIN, WE ASK YOU TO RECOGNIZE AND REACH OUT TO THE WOMEN VETERANS AND ALL VETERANS IN YOUR RESPECTIVE DISTRICTS, REMEMBERING THAT EVERY WOMAN THAT HAS EVER SERVED, STEPPED UP, WAS NOT REQUIRED TO, BUT STEPPED UP AND MET THE MOMENT.

THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBERS. IF Y' ALL COULD JOIN US REAL QUICK.

[00:25:23]

PLEASE.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN.

[ADOPTION AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES]

MOTION BY COUNCILWOMAN COLEMAN. SECOND BY COUNCILMAN DUNN JR. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION

[INTRODUCTIONS]

TOTAL COST FOR 10 YEARS $9,206,273.60 PAID YEARLY STARTING JULY 1, 2027 AT $1,000,000 UNTIL JULY 1, 2032 AND THEN $801,568.40 PER YEAR FOR JULY 1, 2033 TO JULY 1, 2036 BY THE FIRE CHIEF AND POLICE CHIEF. CONDEMNATION INTRODUCTIONS NUMBER 3 LUCILLE GREEN ARMSTRONG 2750 70TH AVE COUNCIL DISTRICT 2 KENNEY NUMBER 4 JOHNNY JONES ET AL. 4069 TUSCARAMA ST COUNCIL DISTRICT 10 COLEMAN NUMBER 5 WATASHA COVINGTON AND JAMIE COVINGTON 1156 PROGRESS ST COUNCIL DISTRICT 10 COLEMAN NUMBER 6 ANGEL BERGERON 2151 CEDARDALE AVE COUNCIL DISTRICT 12 RAKA NUMBER 7 PETE CITOLINO 8926 CORRELATE DRIVE COUNCIL DISTRICT 2 KENNEY NUMBER 8 LENORA DRAKE 3021 LORAIN ST COUNCIL DISTRICT 5 HURST NUMBER 9 DANIELLE GABRIEL BOWMAN 303 BONCREST AVE COUNCIL DISTRICT 2 KENNEY NUMBER 10 SATERIA ANNETTE TATE, 3852 BYRON ST COUNCIL DISTRICT 5 HURST NUMBER 11 WILBERT JONES AND WAYNE DRAKE, 5221 FORD ST COUNCIL DISTRICT 5 HEAR NUMBER 12 ALI FLEMING ET AL. 754 39TH N 39TH ST COUNCIL DISTRICT 7 HARRIS NUMBER 13 BENNETT VIDIER ET AL.

512 SEGURA AVE COUNCIL DISTRICT 7 HARRIS NUMBER 14 DONNIE NORTHERN 4370 EAST BROOKSTOWN DRIVE COUNCIL DISTRICT 7 HARRIS NUMBER 15 BCI PROPERTIES LLC 1215 EDDIE ROBINSON SENIOR DRIVE COUNCIL DISTRICT 10 COLEMAN NUMBER 16 THE ESTATE OF JAMES A. PAYNE, 1618 N 48TH ST COUNCIL DISTRICT 7 HARRIS ADJUDICATED PROPERTY INTRODUCTIONS NUMBER 17 LOT 15 SQUARE LOT 15 PLUS SQUARE 2 SUBDIVISION RICHMOND PARK COUNCIL DISTRICT 10 COLEMAN NUMBER 17 LOT 10 SQUARE 6 SUBDIVISION SCOTT COUNCIL DISTRICT 10 COLEMAN NUMBER 19 LOT 6 LOT C SUBDIVISION SHERWOOD VILLAGE CONDOMINIUMS COUNCIL DISTRICT 6 DUNN JR NUMBER 20 LOT 4 SQUARE 35 SUBDIVISION SCOTLAND ADDITION COUNCIL DISTRICT 2 KENNEY NUMBER 21 LOT 3 SUBDIVISION BALDRIGE PLACE COUNCIL DISTRICT 7 HARRIS NUMBER 22 LOT 3 SQUARE F SUBDIVISION CRAWFORD ADDITION COUNCIL DISTRICT 7 HARRIS NUMBER 23 LOT 12 SUBDIVISION VICTORIA GARDENS COUNCIL DISTRICT 7 HARRIS NUMBER 24 SQUARE 30 SOUTH DOWNS COUNCIL DISTRICT 12 RACCA NUMBER 25 LOT 25 PLUS SQUARE 12 SUBDIVISION BANKS COUNCIL DISTRICT 2 KENNEY NUMBER 26 LOT 8 SQUARE 5 SUBDIVISION SCOTLAND HEIGHTS COUNCIL DISTRICT 2 KENNEY NUMBER 27 LOT 54 SUBDIVISION DEER PARK COUNCIL DISTRICT 1 KNOLL NUMBER 28, LOT 285, SUBDIVISION, CRYSTAL PLACE COUNCIL DISTRICT 4, MOAK, NUMBER 29, LOT 7, SQUARE 28,

[00:30:03]

COUNCIL DISTRICT 10, COLEMAN.

NUMBER 30, LOT 76, SQUARE 12, SUBDIVISION, SOUTH BATON ROUGE COUNCIL, DISTRICT 10, COLEMAN. ALL ITEMS THAT REQUIRE READING HAVE BEEN READ AND MOTION BY COUNCILWOMAN COLEMAN, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN

[CONDEMNATIONS]

ALL RIGHT.

SEE YOUR SEPARATE SHEET FOR CONDEMNATIONS. I'M GOING TO READ THEM AS PRESENTED FROM DPW WITH THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS.

THEN I'LL GO OVER CHANGES, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ITEMS. RECOMMENDATIONS ARE TO PROCEED WITH ITEMS 74, 75, 76, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 90, 91 AND 92. 30 DAYS ON ITEMS 77 AND 89. I HAVE REQUESTED CHANGES OF 30 DAYS FOR ITEMS 80, 60 DAYS ON 90, 90 DAYS ON 74 AND 87. ANY OTHER RECOMMENDED CHANGES? YES, COUNCILMAN.

DELETE ITEM 82, 82.

DELETE.

ALL RIGHT.

ANY OTHER CHANGES? OKAY.

ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THESE ITEMS, PLEASE. TASHA MATER. YES, PLEASE.

I WAS REQUESTING AN ADDITIONAL EXTENSION ON MY ITEM NUMBER 89.

SO THE RECOMMENDATION ON THAT ONE IS 30 DAYS.

SO WE'RE HAVING A PROBLEM.

THE PERMIT PEOPLE WANTED US TO GET A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER.

WE HAVING A PROBLEM WITH GETTING COMMUNICATION WITH SOMEONE THAT CAN POSSIBLY HELP US WITH THAT. SO I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THAT MAY TAKE.

COUNSELOR MCCORMICK, I'M GONNA RECOMMEND THAT YOU GET WITH MY LEGISLATIVE ASSISTANT AND DO.

YEAH.

HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH HIM.

OKAY.

ALL. AND YOU GOT TO HAVE A PLAN.

YES, MA'.

AM.

ALL RIGHT.

OKAY.

WE CAN KEEP IT ON A 30 DAY.

COUNCILWOMAN. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THESE ITEMS? SEEING NONE, WE'LL GO. COUNCIL. I'M GOING TO READ THEM BACK BEFORE MOTION. WE ARE TO PROCEED WITH ITEM 75, 76, 78, 79, 81, 83, 84, 85, 86, 88, 91 AND 92. 30 DAYS FOR ITEMS 77, 80 AND 89, 60 DAYS FOR ITEM 90, 90 DAYS FOR ITEMS 74 AND 87, AND DELETE ITEM 82. WE HAVE A MOTION MOTION BY COUNCILWOMAN RACCA, SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN COLEMAN. IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION? MOTION CARRIES.

[93. 26-00617]

AUTHORIZING MAYOR PRESIDENT TO EXECUTE A COOPERATIVE ENDEAVOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BATON ROUGE, PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE AND THE BAYOU FOUNTAIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROMOTING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE BAYOU FOUNTAIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AND PROVIDING FOR RELATED MATTERS BY COUNCILWOMAN JEN RACCA. ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? CHRIS. WE HAVE KRISTEN, BILL, THERE IS A RECOMMENDATION TO DEFER THIS ITEM, I THINK FOR AUGUST 26TH. AUGUST 26TH.

BUT ANYONE. ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? THE.

THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO BE DEFERRED, BUT WE'RE GONNA STILL GONNA HAVE A. WE HAVE TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN WE'LL GO TO COUNCIL. SO IT AT YOUR PLEASURE, I'D MAKE A MOTION TO DEFER.

WAIT.

NO ONE WISHING TO SPEAK. WE HAVE A LIST OF PEOPLE. I'M GOING TO READ THROUGH THE NAMES. IF YOU DON'T WANT TO SPEAK, IT'S FINE. BUT SINCE WE HAD Y' ALL TURNED IN, I HAVE KRISTEN BEALE, REBEL CAPLINGER, CHARLIE KAPLINGER, STEVE LEJERNE, JIM BRADFORD.

NONE WISHING TO SPEAK. WE'LL GO TO COUNCIL.

COUNCILWOMAN RACCA LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO DEFER UNTIL THE AUGUST 26TH MEETING.

THANK YOU.

MOTION BY COUNCILWOMAN RACCA.

SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN AMOROSO. IS THERE ANY

[94. 26-00701]

RESOLUTION SETTING THE AMOUNT OF LOCAL HOSPITAL ASSESSMENT PAYMENTS FOR THE EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH LOCAL HEALTHCARE PROVIDER PARTICIPATION PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026. TO DIRECT HOW THE REVENUE DERIVED FROM LOCAL HOSPITAL ASSESSMENT PAYMENTS IS TO BE SPENT AND TO SET THE DUE DATE AND AMOUNT

[00:35:01]

MOTION BY COUNCILWOMAN RACCA.

SECOND BY COUNCILMAN HUDSON.

ANY OPPOSITION? MOTION CARRIES

[95. 26-00713]

MOTION BY COUNCILWOMAN COLEMAN. SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN AMOROSO. ANY. ANY

[96. 26-00714]

THE ESTIMATED COMPENSATION COMPENSATION UNDER THE AGREEMENT WILL NOT EXCEED $307,255 BY THE POLICE CHIEF.

ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. SEE NOW WE'LL GO TO COUNCIL. MOTION BY COUNCILWOMAN HARRIS. SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN COLEMAN. IS

[97. 26-00715 ]

MOTION BY COUNCILMAN GOADE.

SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN

[98. 26-00719]

IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION? MOTION CARRIES 98 AUTHORIZING MAYOR PRESIDENT ON BEHALF OF THE DIVISION OF HUMAN DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES, RYAN WHITE PROGRAM TO ACCEPT FUNDING FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES SERVICES, HEALTH RESOURCES AND SERVICES ADMINISTRATION FOR THE RYAN WHITE HIV AIDS PROGRAM IN AN AMOUNT OF 1,450,000.

FIRST ALLOCATION 550,000 SECOND ALLOCATION 1,450,000 FOR A TOTAL AWARD OF 2,000,000 BY HUMAN DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES DIRECTOR. ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM SEE NO GO TO COUNCIL. MOTION BY COUNCILWOMAN HARRIS, SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN RACCA. ANY

[99. 26-00721]

MOTION BY COUNCILWOMAN COLEMAN, SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN HARRIS. IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION? MOTION CARRIES.

[100. 26-00718]

[101. 26-00720]

ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM NOW WE'LL GO TO COUNCIL. MOTION BY COUNCILWOMAN RACCA. SECOND BY COUNCILMAN HUDSON. IS THERE ANY

[102. 26-00722 ]

MOTION BY COUNCILMAN DUNN JR.

SECOND BY COUNCILMAN GAUDET.

[103. 26-00726 ]

ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM SEE NOW WE'LL GO TO COUNCIL. WE HAVE A MOTION.

[00:40:01]

SECOND BY COUNCILMAN KENNEY IS

[104. 26-00716 ]

[105. 26-00740 ]

ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM SEEING NO GO TO COUNCIL MOTION BY COUNCILWOMAN HARRIS SECOND BY COUNCILMAN KENNEY. ANY OPPOSITION MOTION CARRIES ITEM 106 AUTHORIZING MAYOR

[106. 26-00741]

NICHOLSON PLANK NICHOLSON TO PLANK BUS RAPID TRANSIT BY THE TRANSPORTATION AND DRAINAGE DIRECTOR. ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM SEEING NONE WE'LL GO TO COUNCIL HAVE A MOTION.

MOTION BY COUNCILWOMAN HARRIS SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN COLEMAN. IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION? MOTION CARRIES ITEM

[107. 26-00742 ]

HEY FRED. I'M GONNA ASK YOU TO COME UP ON THIS ONE AND I DIDN'T GIVE YOU A ADVANCE ON THIS ONE. APOLOGIES. JUST TELL ME WHAT. WHAT ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC DATA IS NEEDED AT THIS INTERSECTION? BASED ON THE NUMBERS THAT WE HAD ORIGINALLY ON ACCOUNTS AND THAT WAS WITHOUT THE INTERSTATE BEING OPEN WITH PQ, WE FELT LIKE IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE THAT DATA SO WE CAN MAKE WHATEVER ADJUSTMENTS THAT WE NEED TO MAKE ON THE SIGNAL AT PQ IN HOLLAND TO BE SURE WITH THE PROPER TIMING. TIMING IN PLACE. YES, THAT'S PART OF.

AND THEN THERE'S SOME ADDITIONAL SIOUX SERVICE UTILITIES THAT WE ALSO GOING TO LOOK AT BECAUSE OF SOME ADJUSTMENTS THAT WE WERE GOING TO MAKE ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE AREA.

THE DITCH.

THE DITCH. YES.

THE BIG GAPING DITCH.

OKAY.

DOES THIS ADD TIME TO.

NO SIR. NO SIR, IT DOES NOT.

THANK YOU.

THEY'VE BEEN DOING SOME OF THE WORK ALREADY BUT WE WANTED TO BE SURE THAT WE HAVE THAT BECAUSE IT IS.

IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE THE RIGHT DATA. NUMBER ONE. BUT NUMBER TWO, IF ANYBODY HAS SOME CONCERNS ABOUT WE'LL BE ABLE TO SHOW THEM THE NUMBERS AND REFLECTIVITY OF THAT AS FAR AS ANY DELAYS, THEY ARE MOVING FORWARD WITH THE PROJECT ASPECT. I'M TOLD THAT WE PROBABLY WILL HAVE SOME PROJECTED RIGHT AWAY MATCH PROBABLY IN THE NEXT MONTH, MONTH AND A HALF. SO THEN THEY WILL GET REVIEWED AND THEN FROM THAT POINT THEN WE'LL DO APPRAISALS AND MOVE FROM THERE.

GREAT. THANK YOU. I'LL BE ON RECORD HERE FROM THE COUNCIL SEAT SAYING ANYTHING WE DO TO EXPEDITE WOULD BE APPRECIATED AND THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU'RE DOING. FRED.

YES, SIR.

IS THAT A MOTION COUNCILMAN? IT ABSOLUTELY IS.

MOTION BY COUNCILMAN GAUDET.

SECOND BY COUNCIL MCKINNEY.

[108. 26-00744 ]

ITEM 108.

AUTHORIZING MAYOR PRESIDENT TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES WITH VECTURA CONSULTING SERVICES LLC FOR TRAFFIC DATA COLLECTION NEEDED FOR THE MOVE BR CORRIDOR ENHANCEMENT COLLEGE DRIVE PERKINS ROAD TO I10 AND AN AMOUNT OF IT EXCEED $96,100.03 BY TRANSPORTATION DRAINS DIRECTOR.

ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM SEEING NOW WE'LL GO TO COUNCIL HAVE A MOTION.

MOTION BY COUNCILWOMAN AMOROSO. SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN RACCA. ANY

[109. 26-00743]

ITEM 109. AUTHORIZING MAYOR PRESIDENT TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES WITH LIFE SHARE BLOOD CENTER.

THIS CONTRACT IS FOR LIFE SHARE TO PROVIDE THE DEPARTMENT OF EMS WITH BLOOD, BLOOD COMPONENTS AND CERTAIN LAB SERVICES ENABLING THE DEPARTMENT OF EMS TO PROVIDE LIFE SAVING TREATMENT WHEN CLINICALLY INDICATED. NOT TO EXCEED $235,000

[00:45:01]

THANK YOU SIR. MORE PROCESS RELATED QUESTIONS. JUST HAVE WE DONE THIS TYPE OF AN AGREEMENT BEFORE? AND CAN YOU KIND OF WALK ME THROUGH WHAT THIS WILL PRODUCE FOR YOUR DEPARTMENT? WHAT THIS PRODUCES FOR US IS IT GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY TO INTRODUCE BLOOD PRODUCTS INTO THE PRE HOSPITAL SETTING.

IT'S RELATIVELY THE TREND THAT'S GOING AROUND NATIONWIDE. BUT IN TRAUMA, I'LL GIVE YOU SOME BRIEF STATISTICS IS THAT BASICALLY ABOUT 40% OF PATIENTS THAT RECEIVE BLOOD PRODUCTS PRE HOSPITAL INCREASE THEIR SURVIVABILITY RATE BY OVER HALF.

THIS COULD BE WHEN YOU RESPOND OR IN THE AMBULANCE RIDE.

WHEN WE RESPOND, WE'LL HAVE BLOOD IN THE FIELD CURRENTLY NEW ORLEANS AND THERE'S SEVERAL OTHER ENTITIES AND PLUS AROUND THE NATION. SO AGAIN IT'S NOT THAT WE TRY TO BE TRENDSETTERS AND WE'RE NOT.

WE'RE TRYING TO FILL THE GAP THAT IF WE CAN BUY TIME AND GET THESE TRAUMA PATIENTS TO THE HOSPITAL AND GET THEM TO THE SURGICAL CENTER AND THEN ALSO TOO WE'RE GOING TO TAKE IT DEEPER THAN JUST TRAUMA. WE'LL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO GIVE BLOOD PRODUCTS. WE'RE CLINICALLY INDICATED FOR POSTPARTUM HEMORRHAGE FROM DELIVERY AND OR OTHER BLUNT TRAUMA OR GI BLEEDS OR ANYTHING ELSE. SO IF IT'S INDICATED FOR US TO GIVE YOU BLOOD BECAUSE OUR GOAL IS TO GET YOU TO THE OPERATING ROOM.

CRYSTALLOIDS AND THE NORMAL FLUID VOLUME REPLACEMENTS THAT WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST, WHILE THEY DO FILL THE TANK BACK UP, THEY DON'T TRANSPORT OXYGEN, BUT BLOOD DOES. SO THE KEY TO US GETTING YOU AND GIVING YOU A VIABLE CHANCE AND A FIGHT TO BE ABLE TO SURVIVE IS PUTTING BLOOD IN YOUR BODY AND GETTING YOU TO A SURGEON.

THIS IS THE FIRST CONTRACT OF THIS KIND WE'VE DONE FOR US IN THE PARIS EMS. YEP.

OKAY, GREAT KUDOS.

US ENTERING INTO THIS GET OPENS THE DOOR AND IN OUR THE HOLY GRAIL IS WE'RE STARTING OFF WITH PACK RED BLOOD CELLS WITH THE GOAL OF BEING ABLE TO GIVE A WHOLE BLOOD WHICH IS THE HOLY GRAIL AND THE BEST THING YOU CAN GIVE. BUT YOU GOT TO CRAWL BEFORE YOU CAN WALK AND THEN RUN. SO OUR GOAL IS TO GIVE EVERYBODY A FIGHTING CHANCE.

WONDERFUL. IF YOU GET SOME DATA ON IT, YOU THINK IT'S WORTH PRESENTING. I THINK IT'D BE PHENOMENAL INFORMATION TO HEAR FROM.

I CAN GIVE YOU YOU ALL THE DATA YOU WANT.

WELL, I MEAN AS YOU, AS YOU GO THROUGH IT.

WELL YEAH, WE TRUST ME THAT WE'RE GOING TO TRACK THIS BECAUSE AGAIN, THIS $235,000 CONTRACT, THAT'S, THAT'S A MAX. WE DON'T INTEND ON THAT BEING THE INITIAL EXPENSE, BUT WE WANTED TO PAD ENOUGH ROOM BECAUSE WE PLAN ON GROWING THIS. AND AGAIN, WE'RE GOING TO START OFF WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY.

WE'VE HAD TO, WE DO HAVE SOME CAPITAL EXPENSES THAT WE'VE EATEN TO BE ABLE TO BUY THE EQUIPMENT AND ALL OF THE STUFF THAT WE HAVE TO DO THERE, SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT, MONITORING, REFRIGERATION, ALL KINDS OF THINGS THAT YOU HAVE TO DO TO MAINTAIN COMPLIANCE. SO OUR ULTIMATE GOAL IS TO GET EVERYTHING STARTED AND THEN AGAIN IT ALSO, WE CAN RECOVER A LOT OF OUR COSTS BECAUSE WE CAN BILL FOR IT AS WELL. IT'S BE ABLE TO BILL AT THE ALS2 RATE, WHICH IS THE HIGHEST RATE. AND WE WILL AT SOME POINT LOOK INTO BEING ABLE TO ADJUST OUR BILLING RATES IN ACCORDANCE. BUT THE REALITY OF IT IS THERE'S REALLY NOT A PRICE THAT YOU CAN PUT ON SAVING LIVES.

WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE.

THANK YOU, MR. DIRECTOR.

APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN MOAK. SO GIVE ME.

I'D JUST LIKE A LITTLE QUICK RUNDOWN.

IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WE RECONFIGURED THE UNIT, ALL THE UNITS FOR, FOR REFRIGERATION, STORAGE OR.

NO, WE DIDN'T. THERE IS ASSOCIATED TRAINING AND NOT JUST ANYBODY CAN DO IT. AND WE DID HAVE TO BUY SOME SPECIALIZED EQUIPMENT TO BE ABLE TO ADMINISTER THE BLOOD.

THERE'S SOME RAPID INFUSERS, THERE IS SOME SPECIAL REFRIGERATION AND DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO BUY BECAUSE THAT'S PART OF BEING ABLE TO STAY IN COMPLIANCE BECAUSE THERE'S VERY TIGHT TOLERANCES THAT YOU HAVE TO MAINTAIN WITH THE BLOOD, THE INITIAL STUFF WITH THE PACKED RED BLOOD CELLS.

AS LONG AS WE FOLLOW ALL OF THOSE THINGS, THAT'S THE OTHER THING IS WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO EXCHANGE IT. SO IF WE DON'T USE IT WITHIN ABOUT TWO WEEKS OF THE BLOOD EXPIRING, WE CAN TAKE IT BACK TO THE BLOOD CENTER, EXCHANGE IT AND THEN GET OTHER STUFF.

BUT AGAIN, WE DID HAVE TO SPEND THE MONEY ON THE FRONT END TO BUY THE EQUIPMENT BECAUSE IT HAS VERY TIGHT TOLERANCE, IT HAS TO BE MONITORED, IT'S ALL WIRELESS AND EVERYTHING HAS TO STAY WITHIN THOSE SPECS. SO WE'RE TRYING TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO LIMIT ANY WASTE.

BUT AGAIN, IT TAKES A LITTLE MONEY ON THE FRONT END TO BE ABLE TO SAVE LIVES.

SO.

SO THESE UNITS, THESE MODULES AND STUFF, THEY. THEY'LL BE BROUGHT IN BLOCK BY THE BLOOD BLOODSHARE PEOPLE TO Y'. ALL.

WE'LL GO PICK IT UP AND THEN REFRIGERATE IT. WE'LL HAVE.

WE'LL HAVE A COUPLE BASE REFRIGERANT UNITS THAT ARE LIKE A CONNELLS VILLAGE STATION IN THE MIDDLE OF.

THAT'S WHAT I WAS WONDERING.

DOES THE STATION HAVE TO BE INVOLVED WITH IT? WELL, WE HAVE. WE'LL HAVE THE PROPER REFRIGERATING WITH HAS THE MONITORING SYSTEMS AND STUFF THERE THAT'LL STORE. AND THEN OUR SPRINT UNITS AND OUR BULLET PROGRAM GUYS THAT'LL CARRY IT, THEY'LL GO THERE, THEY'LL SWAP IT OUT THERE.

THEN WE HAVE SOME PORTABLE REFRIGERATION THAT THEY KEEP IN THE UNITS SO WE DON'T.

WE'RE NOT PUTTING IT ON EVERY UNIT. THAT'S NOT VERY COST EFFECTIVE BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT IT RIDING AROUND IN THE

[00:50:01]

IT'LL BE ON OUR ALS RESPONSE UNITS BECAUSE THEY'LL BE TARGETED SPECIFIC. THESE TYPES OF CALLS THAT ARE THE MVA, THE SHOOTINGS, THE STABBINGS, ALL OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT GO ON.

THANK YOU. THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY NEXT ONE. IS THIS LIKE, YOU KNOW, DATA DRIVEN AS FAR AS WHAT UNITS AND WHERE AND SO ON? WE HAVE THE ABILITY THAT WE CAN LOOK AT OUR HEAT MAPS, WE CAN LOOK AT CERTAIN CALLS, WE CAN REALLY LOOK AT WHERE THE INDEX OF CALLS ARE IN THE HIGHEST CALL VOLUME VERSUS WE WOULDN'T NECESSARILY STAGE BLOOD IN THE NORTH END OF THE PARISH, BUT BECAUSE BELOW FREQUENCY OCCURRENCES VERSUS IN THE CENTER OF THE PARISH AND THEN ALSO TOO, OUR PLAN IS ALSO TO EXPAND AND GO OUT FURTHER WITH OTHER AGENCIES IN THE PARISH. ST. GEORGE AND OTHER PEOPLE HAVE CAPABILITIES TO BE ABLE TO DO SOME THINGS WITH US, TO BE ABLE TO EXPAND THIS PROGRAM AND MAKE IT BIGGER. AND THEN THAT WAY WE CAN HAVE A BIGGER FOOTPRINT AND GET BLOOD TO PEOPLE FASTER AND MAXIMIZE OUR RESOURCES.

THANK YOU.

YES.

ANYONE ELSE? MOTION BY COUNCILMAN GAUDET.

SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN COLEMAN. ANY OPPOSITION?

[Items 110 - 130]

IRMALEE COUNCIL DISTRICT 2, KENNEY HIGH BIDDER JERMAINE COZY $100 LOT 73 SUBDIVISION EAST DAYTON COUNCIL DISTRICT 7 HARRIS HIGH BIDDER PHARAOH JOHNSON III. $7,500 LOT 19 SUBDIVISION SWART ADDITION COUNCIL DISTRICT 10 COLEMAN HIGH BIDDER WAYNE LAWRENCE.

$2,800 LOT D SUBDIVISION ROBERT A. BRIAN TRY COUNCIL DISTRICT 4 MOAK HIGH BIDDER GERALD EDGE AND $17,000 LOT 03, SQUARE 54 SUBDIVISION, GREENVILLE EXTENSION COUNCIL DISTRICT 7 HARRIS MOTOR OWN.

THERE'S BEEN A REQUEST TO DELETE ITEMS 113 AND 121.

I'D LIKE TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE ALL ITEMS WITH THE EXCEPTION AND DELETE ITEMS 113 AND 121. ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THESE ITEMS SEE NOW WE'LL GO TO COUNCIL. COUNCILMAN HURST.

YEAH. CAN I TAKE 111 AND GIVE ME 30 DAYS ON IT OR WHATEVER THE NEXT MEETING IS? DEFER IT. YEAH, DEFER ITEM 111. OKAY, DEFER1. JULY 22ND.

OKAY. COUNCILMAN COLEMAN.

YES. I'D LIKE TO RECOMMEND THAT 125 AND 128, I GUESS. DEFER. I HADN'T HEARD ANYTHING FROM THEM, SO DEFER IT. SHOULD DELETE IT.

125 AND 128. OKAY. OKAY.

[00:55:01]

[ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS (Part 1 of 2)]

ALL RIGHT.

LET'S GO TO OUR SEPARATE CHIEF FOR ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS.

ADMINISTRATIVE MATTER EMERGENCY ITEM AUTHORIZING MAYOR PRESIDENT TO EXECUTE AN AMENDED AND RESTATED SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH THE EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH HOUSING AUTHORITY AND RELATED PROJECT PARTIES, INCLUDING PARTNERS FOR PROGRESS INCORPORATED, DOING BUSINESS AS PARTNERS SOUTHEAST AND CYPRESS AT ARDENDALE PHASE 1. LP FOR THE CYPRESS AT ARDENDALE PHASE 1 AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PROJECT FUNDED IN PART THROUGH AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT CORONAVIRUS STATE AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUNDS SO AS TO CLARIFY AND REALIGN THE EXISTING AGREEMENT WITH THE PROJECT'S LOW INCOME HOUSING HOUSING TAX CREDIT FINANCING STRUCTURE, DOWNSTREAM LOAN DISBURSEMENT FRAMEWORK, PAYMENT TERMS AND COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS WITH NO INCREASE TO THE EXISTING ALLOCATION AND NO CHANGE TO THE APPROVED PROJECT PURPOSE BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR. REASON IT'S BEING REQUESTED AS AN ADMINISTRATIVE MATTER IS TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNAL DEADLINES. WE NEED A MOTION TO WAIVE THE RULES. A MOTION TO WAIVE THE RULES. MOTION BY COUNCILWOMAN RACCA. SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN COLEMAN. HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE MOTION TO WAIVE THE RULES. ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THE MOTION TO WAIVE THE RULES SEE NOW WE HAVE A VOTE ON THE MOTION.

WAVE THE RULES THERE. ANY OBJECTION ON THE MOTION TO WAIVE THE RULES? OBJECTION, MY COUNCILMAN HURST. ITEM CANNOT BE HEARD.

MOVING ON.

WE'RE GOING TO DO APPOINTMENTS 131 THROUGH 134. WE'RE GOING TO TAKE TOGETHER 131. BOARD OF APPEAL CONCURRENT WITH THE MAYOR PRESIDENT'S REPLACEMENT OF MICHAEL ABBAS WHO IS NOT SEEKING REAPPOINTMENT. THIS. THIS IS A THREE YEAR TERM. BUILD BATON ROUGE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FILLING AN UNEXPIRED TERM FOR RODNEY BRAXTON'S TERM ENDS DECEMBER 31, 2027. CURRENT BALLOT CAROLYN COLEMAN. 133 CAPITAL HOUSING TAXING DISTRICT BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS.

CONSIDERATION OF REPLACING GEORGE JEAN. THIS IS AN INDEFINITE TERM. NOBODY ON THE CURRENT BALLOT. AND 134. HOUSING AUTHORITY OF EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH. ONE APPOINTMENT MUST FILL THE UNEXPIRED TERM OF CHRIS BROWN. HIS TERM EXPIRES AUGUST 09, 2030. MUST BE A RESIDENT COMMISSIONER. REQUEST US TO DEFER ALL OF THESE ITEMS UNTIL THE JULY MEETING. ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THESE ITEMS SEEING NONE WILL GO TO COUNCIL. MOTION BY COUNCILWOMAN COLEMAN. SECOND BY COUNCILMAN DUNN JR. ANY

[135. 26-00801]

ITEM 135 HOUSING AUTHORITY OF EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH.

CONSIDERATION OF REAPPOINTING OR REPLACING BRANDON KELLY. THIS IS A FIVE YEAR TERM. CURRENT BALLOT IS BRANDON KELLY REQUESTING REAPPOINTMENT. ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM SCENE. I WILL GO TO COUNCIL.

HAVE A MOTION. MOTION BY COUNCILWOMAN COLEMAN. SECOND BY COUNCILMAN HURST. IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION? IT WAS DEFERRED. MOTION CARRIES ON 135. WE DEFERRED 131.

LET'S GO BACK TO 134.

YOU WANT TO RECONSIDER 134? YES. BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO MAKE A. A MOTION FROM THE FLOOR FOR BEVERLY CLAIBORNE TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THAT APPOINTMENT, PLEASE.

SO WE HAVE TO CONFIRM THAT THESE PEOPLE ARE RESIDENTS.

OKAY.

SO IT MIGHT BE BEST TO DEFER IT, AND THEN WE CONFIRM IT.

ALL RIGHT.

WE CAN. WE CAN HAVE THE APPOINTMENT BACK ON UNTIL I 22ND.

OKAY. CONFIRM THAT SHE IS A DISTRICT 10 RESIDENT.

[Items 136 - 138]

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. CHANGE ORDERS.

WE'RE GOING TO TAKE 136 THROUGH 138 TOGETHER.

136EVANGELINE, ALAMANSTER DRIVE AND EVANGELINE STREET AREA. ADA TRANSITION PROJECTS. CONTRACTOR PRO CIVIL, LLC. CHANGE ORDER AMOUNT $134,579.12. 137. SALES TAX.

STREET AND ROAD REHABILITATION PROGRAM, PROJECT 19, 7 HOLLYWOOD STREET. AIRLINE TO SCENIC AND EVANGELINE STREET. AIRLINE TO BATON ROUGE. CONTRACTOR, BARBER BROTHERS CONTRACTING, LLC. CHANGE ORDER AMOUNT $479,912.24. AND 138 GROOM ROAD, MAKUTA PLANK ROAD, PHASE 1. CONTRACTOR KCR CONTRACTOR, LLC. CHANGE AUTOMOTIVE, $69,656.34. ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THESE ITEMS? NO.

GO TO COUNCIL. WE HAVE A MOTION. MOTION BY COUNCILMAN KENNEY. SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN AMOROSO. IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION? MOTION CARRIES.

[139. 26-00642]

[01:00:01]

GOOD EVENING, COUNCILMEMBERS.

SO, MY NAME IS AISHA MIRZA. I'M THE INTERIM DIRECTOR OF CFIRS. WE HAVE BEEN REQUESTED TO COME AND PRESENT.

ABOUT A YEAR AGO, THE METRO COUNCIL REQUESTED THAT WE DO A PENSION REVIEW. AND SO WE HIRED AN OUTSIDE ACTUARY TO DO SO.

ALSO AT THE REQUEST OF METRO COUNCIL, WE HAVE. THE BOARD HAS COME UP WITH POTENTIAL CHANGES SHOULD ANY CHANGES BE MADE. I HAVE WITH ME TONIGHT A GOOD PORTION OF PEOPLE. I HAVE MY ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, SALLY WITHERS. I HAVE MY CHAIRMAN, JAY DANIELS. I HAVE OUR ACTUARY, SHELLY JOHNSON. I HAVE OUR OUTSIDE COUNSEL, LAURA GAIL SULLIVAN. I HAVE OUR INVESTMENT CONSULTANT, JOHN BREATH. AND I HAVE KEVIN SULLIVAN FROM USI.

AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO CALL UP KEVIN TO PRESENT THE FINDINGS.

KEVIN.

GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE.

SO I'M GOING TO TAKE A FEW MOMENTS TO GO THROUGH A SUMMARY OF OUR ANALYSIS AND OUR RESULTS. AND I'M GOING TO JUMP AROUND A LITTLE BIT HERE. SO MY APOLOGIES TO WHOEVER'S RUNNING THE SLIDE. I'M GOING TO START ON SLIDE THREE BECAUSE I THINK THIS IS IMPORTANT TO KIND OF SEE A LITTLE BIT OF THE HISTORY OF THE PLAN. SO US COMING IN AS INDEPENDENT ACTUARIES, WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS KIND OF LOOK AT THE HISTORY OF THE PLAN AND GIVE YOU A SUMMARY OF WHAT WE SEE WHAT WHEN WE LOOK AT THE PLAN. ONE MORE SLIDE OVER, PLEASE. THIS SHOWS A HISTORY AT THE TOP OF THE FUNDED STATUS OF THE PLAN, ASSETS AS A PERCENTAGE OF LIABILITIES. AND YOU SEE A GENERAL SLOW DECLINE IN THE FUNDED RATIO OF THE PLAN. BACK IN 2013, THE FUNDED RATIO WAS OVER 70%, DECLINING TO BETWEEN 60 AND 65% AS OF 2024. THE BLUE LINE REPRESENTS THE ACTUARIAL VALUE OF ASSETS. THAT'S A SMOOTH VALUE THAT WE ACTUARIES USE TO SMOOTH GAINS AND LOSSES OVER A FIVE YEAR PERIOD. THE ORANGE LINE REPRESENTS MARKET VALUE, WHICH HAS MUCH MORE VOLATILITY AT THE BOTTOM. THAT GREEN LINE REPRESENTS THE EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION RATE AND THAT HAS BEEN INCREASING OVER TIME. SO THROUGHOUT THIS PERIOD IT HAS INCREASED FROM UNDER 30% TO AT THIS TIME, JUST UNDER 40.

BUT WITH THE JANUARY 1, 2026 VALUATION, THAT NUMBER IS NOW OVER 40%. SO THIS KIND OF HIGHLIGHTS THE CHALLENGE.

YOU'VE GOT A DECLINING GENERAL FUNDED RATIO AND AN INCREASE INCREASING EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION RATE. AND WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO SKIP BACK OVER TO SLIDE ONE AND TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT COST VERSUS RISK. THIS IS SOMETHING YOU'LL HEAR ME TALK A LOT ABOUT. WE AS ACTUARIES LOOK AT PLANS AND TRY TO VALUE THE LIABILITIES BASED ON A NUMBER OF THINGS.

EVERYTHING FROM INVESTMENT RETURN, PARTICIPANT MORTALITY, BUT ALSO THINGS THAT ARE MORE DIFFICULT TO VALUE THAT MAY RELATE TO PARTICIPANT BEHAVIOR IN TERMS OF WHEN FOLKS WORK OVERTIME, WHEN FOLKS DECIDE TO RETIRE, WHAT FORM OF PAYMENT THEY DECIDE TO TAKE, DO THEY CHOOSE TO ENTER THE DROP, AND IF SO, AT WHAT TIME AND FOR HOW LONG. AND THOSE THINGS CAN TEND TO DRIVE UP PLAN COSTS BECAUSE THEY ARE MORE DIFFICULT TO PREDICT. GENERALLY, ANYTHING THAT IS RELATED OR PARTICIPANT CHOICE IS INVOLVED, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE UNEXPECTED COST VARIATION. AND THOSE VARIATIONS TEND TO BE TO THE UPSIDE AS OPPOSED TO THE DOWNSIDE. SO THEY TEND TO COST THE PLAN MORE. AND SOMETIMES THESE RISKS CAN OFFSET SUCH THINGS AS HIGH INFLATION MAY BOOST INVESTMENT RETURN, WHICH HELPS THE PLAN, BUT IT MAY ALSO DRIVE UP SALARIES, WHICH HURTS THE PLAN OVER TIME AND ALSO EARLIER THAN EXPECTED RETIREMENTS AND LONGER LIFESPANS CAN COMPOUND OTHER COSTS OF THE PLAN.

ON THE NEXT SLIDE, THIS KIND OF BREAKS DOWN THE EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION COST AND EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION COSTS, BOTH AT 2015 ON THE RIGHT AND 2020, 2015 ON THE LEFT, 2025 ON THE RIGHT. AND THOSE GREEN BARS REPRESENT THE EMPLOYEE NORMAL COST, SO THE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTIONS AT 9.5%. THOSE BLUE BARS REPRESENT THE EMPLOYER COSTS, WHICH ARE NOW IN 2025 AT ABOUT 6%. THE YELLOW REPRESENTS PLAN EXPENSES THAT ARE JUST NORMAL AND CUSTOMARY. BUT THEN THE RED BAR REPRESENTS THE AMORTIZATION OF THE UNFUNDED ACCRUED LIABILITY. THAT'S THE SUM TOTAL OF ALL OF THESE UNEXPECTED PLAN VARIATIONS, THESE LOSSES THAT HAVE OCCURRED OVER TIME. AND YOU'LL NOTICE THE DRAMATIC CHANGE FROM 2015 TO 2025, WHICH KIND OF, IN A NUTSHELL, SUMMARIZES THE CHALLENGE WITH THE PLAN. THIS VARIATION OF COST THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN EXPECTED, THAT'S DIFFICULT TO PREDICT, AND TEND TO BE ALL TO THE UPSIDE IN TERMS OF RAISING LIABILITIES. AND THIS IS WHAT HAS DRIVEN UP THE TOTAL CONTRIBUTION, INCLUDING THE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTIONS, FROM JUST

[01:05:01]

THAT'S THE PREDICTABLE PART.

WE'D LIKE TO REDUCE THOSE THINGS THAT ARE CREATING THE UNPREDICTABLE PART, THE PART IN RED. SO NOW JUMPING OVER A COUPLE SLIDES JUST FOR SOME SLIDE 4, THAT IS SOME SUMMARY OF OBSERVATIONS. SO OVER 60% OF THE CURRENT NEW BENEFITS IS ACTUALLY PROVIDED BY THE MEMBER CONTRIBUTIONS, NOT BY CITY PARISH CONTRIBUTIONS.

IT'S ABOUT 6% FOR THE EMPLOYER AND ABOUT 9.5% FOR EMPLOYEES. IF WE BREAK THAT APART INTO PUBLIC SAFETY AND NON PUBLIC SAFETY, THAT 6% BREAKS APART AS ABOUT 15.1% FOR PUBLIC SAFETY, ABOUT 0.8% FOR NON PUBLIC SAFETY, WHICH MEANS THAT FOR NON PUBLIC SAFETY, THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE BENEFIT IS PROVIDED BY THE MEMBER'S OWN CONTRIBUTIONS.

AND THE CURRENT HIGH CONTRIBUTION REQUIREMENTS ARE GENERALLY DUE TO A HISTORY OF LOSSES VERSUS EXPECTED. AS I MENTIONED, WHICH WE'LL GET INTO IN JUST A MOMENT, MANY OF THESE ARE THE SOURCES ARE VERY CLEAR, OTHERS ARE NOT AS CLEAR. SO WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT MITIGATING THE COST GOING FORWARD, THIS MAY BE MORE ABOUT REDUCING RISK TO THE PLAN AND LESS ABOUT TRYING TO REDUCE OVERALL BENEFIT LEVELS. SO ON SLIDE FIVE, JUST A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW WE AS PENSION ACTUARIES MEASURE GAINS AND LOSSES, WE MEASURE ALL GAINS AND LOSSES VERSUS WHAT WE EXPECT TO OCCUR. SO, FOR EXAMPLE, ON THE INVESTMENT SIDE, WE ASSUME A 7% RETURN. THAT MEANS THAT A 6% RETURN, WHILE STILL A POSITIVE RETURN, IS A 1% LOSS VERSUS EXPECTED.

SO THAT'S HOW WE MEASURE GAINS AND LOSSES. SO THIS SHOWS A FOUR YEAR HISTORY HERE OF 7% IS EXACTLY AS EXPECTED.

SO THAT'S NO GAIN OR LOSS, BUT A 6% IS A 1% LOSS, A 3% ACTUAL RETURN IS A 4% LOSS, AND A 12% RETURN IS ONLY A 5% GAIN VERSUS EXPECTED. SO ON THE NEXT SLIDE, THIS SHOWS A HISTORY OF THE GAINS AND LOSSES. AND I APOLOGIZE, THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OF A BUSY GRAPH, BUT KIND OF SOME KEY TAKEAWAYS HERE.

ABOUT TWO THIRDS OF THE WAY UP IS THE ZERO POINT. SO THAT IS WHERE IN A PERFECT WORLD ALL OF OUR GAINS AND LOSSES WOULD OFFSET, SO THAT EVERYTHING WOULD TEND TO BE ON AVERAGE AS EXPECTED.

SO WE MAY HAVE BETTER THAN EXPECTED EXPERIENCE SOMEWHERE, BUT IT'S OFFSET SOMEWHERE ELSE.

BUT AS YOU'LL SEE, THE VAST MAJORITY OF THESE BARS WHICH REPRESENT THE INDIVIDUAL SOURCES OF LOSSES, WHICH, BLUE BEING INVESTMENT RETURN, ORANGE BEING SALARY, YELLOW BEING RETIREMENTS, AND ON THE OTHERS TEND TO BE SMALLER COMPONENTS.

BUT I WILL POINT OUT THAT OTHER CATEGORY WHICH IS KIND OF THE UNIDENTIFIED AMOUNTS, WHICH I'LL GET INTO IN A MOMENT.

BUT IF YOU'LL NOTICE, THESE LINES TEND TO ALL BE TOWARDS THE BOTTOM, WHICH MEANS WE ARE HAVING VASTLY MORE LOSS THAN GAIN. SO THIS KIND OF DEMONSTRATES WHY WE'RE SEEING THE CONTRIBUTIONS GO UP WHILE WE'RE SEEING THE FUNDED RATIO COME DOWN BECAUSE WE'RE HAVING LOSSES VERSUS EXPECTED. NOW THE BIGGEST SOURCE IS THE INVESTMENT LOSS WHICH IS IN BLUE. YOU'LL SEE IT'S TO THE DOWNSIDE, EIGHT OF THE 10 YEARS SHOWN HERE WITH 2021 BEING AN EXCEPTION AND 2020 BEING A SMALL EXCEPTION AS WELL. NOW THIS IS ON OUR ACTUARIAL VALUE BASIS.

SO THIS IS AFTER WE INCLUDE THE FIVE YEAR SMOOTHING OF GAINS AND LOSSES.

SO.

SO THESE RESULTS MIGHT BE VERY DIFFERENT FROM WHAT YOUR INVESTMENT ADVISOR REPORTS BECAUSE THEIRS IS BASED ON A MONEY WEIGHTED RETURN FOR THE INDIVIDUAL YEAR. THIS IS BASED ON A DOLLAR WEIGHTED FIVE YEAR AVERAGE. SO IT COULD BE VERY DIFFERENT. BUT AGAIN, THESE OTHER LOSSES ARE THINGS THAT ARE NOT REPRESENTED BY INVESTMENT RETURN OR SALARY EXPERIENCE OR MORTALITY OR THE TIME FOLKS RETIRE. IT TENDS TO BE THINGS THAT ARE IN THE PLAN THAT TEND TO BE EXPENSIVE COST OR EXPENSIVE RISK WISE AND THEREFORE TRANSLATES INTO EXPENSIVE COST WISE. AND THAT'S SUCH THINGS AS THE DROP.

THE DROP IS SOMETHING THAT IS DIFFICULT TO PREDICT WHEN FOLKS ARE GOING TO TAKE IT. ALSO, THE DROP IS SOMETHING THAT IT ALMOST BECOMES A MATH PROBLEM FOR EVERYONE. THEY CAN LOOK AT IT AND DETERMINE IF SOMEONE REALLY PUTS PENCIL TO PAPER, THEY CAN FIGURE OUT THE OPTIMAL TIME TO RETIRE AND GET THE MOST VALUE OUT OF THE DROP. ALSO, THINGS LIKE MILITARY TIME THAT'S PURCHASED AND ALSO TERMINAL COMPENSATION ITEMS THAT GET INCLUDED, KIND OF A SURPRISE RIGHT AT RETIREMENT THAT TENDS TO BOOST THE PENSION. ALSO FOR FOLKS WHO ARE RETIRING OVERTIME COULD BE ANOTHER FACTOR THAT GETS LUMPED INTO THAT OTHER CATEGORY. SO WHEN I IN A MOMENT, WHEN I TALK ABOUT THINGS THAT WE MIGHT RECOMMEND THAT WOULD HELP IMPROVE MAYBE THE FUTURE STATUS OF THE PLAN, IT'S GOING TO TEND TO BE REMOVING THESE RISKY COMPONENTS TO THE PLAN.

ON SLIDE 7 VERY QUICKLY. THIS JUST SHOWS WHAT THAT TRACK OF FUNDED RATIO MIGHT LOOK LIKE WITHOUT SOME OF THESE LOSSES. SO THE RED IS THE ACTUAL ACTUAL VALUE OF ASSET FUNDED RATIO. IF WE TAKE OUT THOSE OTHER LOSSES, THAT'S THE BLUE LINE. IF WE TAKE OUT THE ASSET LOSSES, THAT'S THE ORANGE LINE, WHICH IS ALREADY LARGELY INCREASING AND THE GREEN LINE, MINUS ALL LOSSES, WHICH CERTAINLY WOULD HAVE BEEN INCREASING OVER THIS 10 OR 12 YEAR PERIOD,

[01:10:04]

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S DIFFICULT TO PREDICT TO A LARGE EXTENT.

PARTICIPANTS GENERALLY HAVE SOME CHOICE AS TO WHEN AND HOW THEY WORK OVERTIME. AND THEREFORE FOLKS CAN CHOOSE TO WORK OVERTIME RIGHT IN THE FIVE YEARS LEADING UP TO THE RETIREMENT DATE OR LEADING UP TO THE TIME THEY ENTER THE DROP AND THEREFORE KIND OF MAXIMIZING THEIR BENEFITS.

ALSO THOSE TERMINAL COMPENSATION ITEMS, THERE'S A RISK OF A COST SHOCK WHEN THOSE AMOUNTS GET ADDED TO THE BENEFIT VALUE. ALSO, THE DROP, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, IS SOMETHING THAT DOES TEND TO CREATE LOSSES FOR THE PLAN SIMPLY BECAUSE IT IS A COST FACTOR. AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S DIFFICULT TO PREDICT.

ARGUABLY, AS TIME GOES ON, WE THINK MORE, MORE PEOPLE ARE ELECTING THE DROP BECAUSE THEY ARE REALIZING THE VALUE OF THE DROP. THEN LASTLY, ONE QUICK COMMENT I'LL MAKE ON THIS IS THE COLA. THERE'S NOT A COLA IN THE PLAN, WHICH OBVIOUSLY COSTS LESS BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT PROVIDING A COLA.

BUT FOR MANY PENSION PLANS OVER THE LAST 20 OR 25 YEARS, THEY'VE HAD BETTER THAN EXPECTED INFLATION EXPERIENCE.

SO THAT'S HELPED TO OFFSET SOME PERHAPS WORSE THAN EXPECTED INVESTMENT RETURN EXPERIENCE.

SO SOMETIMES THAT'S AN EXAMPLE WHERE CERTAIN RISKS CAN HELP OFFSET. SO THE LACK OF A COLA MEANS YOU DON'T HAVE THAT TO OFFSET. SO GOING OVER A FEW SLIDES, WHEN YOU LOOK AT SOME INITIAL PROPOSALS, WE MADE OR SUGGESTIONS WE MADE FOR PLAN DESIGN CHANGES. MANY OF THEM ACTUALLY INCLUDED A COLA. SO I'LL HOP OVER TO SLIDE 10 AND I'LL GO THROUGH THESE FAIRLY QUICKLY.

THESE ARE. I THINK WE HAVE SIX OPTIONS ON NON PUBLIC SAFETY AND A FEW OPTIONS AS WELL ON PUBLIC SAFETY SAFETY FOR PLAN CHANGES. GENERALLY THIS WOULD DO SUCH THINGS AS LIMIT COMPENSATION TO BASE SALARY, SO EXCLUDE THE OVERTIME. ALSO ELIMINATE THE TERMINAL COMPENSATION ITEMS THAT COULD BE INCLUDED FOR COMPENSATION OR SERVICE.

ARGUABLY, OPTION ONE LARGELY KEEPS THE BENEFIT STRUCTURE IN PLACE, ALTHOUGH IT'S 2.5% VERSUS A MAXIMUM OF THREE, BUT STILL ALLOWS A MAXIMUM BENEFIT OF 90% AT SLIGHTLY MORE YEARS OF SERVICE. AND MAKE SOME MODEST CHANGES TO THE EARLY RETIREMENT PROVISION. IT WOULD CHANGE THE DROP FROM A DROP LIKE YOU CURRENTLY HAVE TO WHAT WE WOULD CALL A PARTIAL LUMP SUM OPTION SO THAT WHEN A PARTICIPANT RETIRES AFTER THEY'VE MADE THE DECISION TO RETIRE SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO DO THIS YEARS IN ADVANCE, THEY CAN CHOOSE TO GET A PORTION OF THAT BENEFIT UP FRONT AS A LUMP SUM AND THEN THEIR ONGOING BENEFITS ARE ACTUARIALLY REDUCED TO FOR THAT. SO THAT MEANS IT IS TRULY COST NEUTRAL TO THE PLAN. MANY FOLKS WILL ARGUE THAT DROPS IN GENERAL ARE COST NEUTRAL, BUT THEY RARELY ARE IN PRACTICE AND I THINK YOUR EXPERIENCE KIND OF DEMONSTRATES THAT.

OPTION ONE AND SEVERAL OF THESE OPTIONS ALSO WOULD INCLUDE SOME AMOUNT OF A COST OF LIVING INCREASE. THEY TEND TO BE SOMEWHAT OF A DILUTED OR MUTED INCREASE.

SO FOR EXAMPLE 80% OF THE CPI IN EXCESS OF 1% BUT BUT WITH A CAP OF 2%, SO IN MANY YEARS THEY'D BE GETTING SOMETHING BETWEEN 0 AND 2%.

BUT AGAIN THAT'S AND THAT'S TO HELP PARTIALLY OFFSET FOR THE OTHER CHANGES MADE TO THAT OPTION. I WON'T GO THROUGH ALL OF THESE IN DETAIL, BUT OPTIONS TWO AND THREE, FOR EXAMPLE, SLIGHTLY REDUCE THAT BENEFIT MULTIPLIER FROM 2.5% TO SOMETHING LESS.

ON SLIDE 11. A COUPLE OF QUICK COMMENTS. SO THESE OPTION FOUR, FOR EXAMPLE, REDUCED THE BENEFIT MULTIPLIER TO 1% AND ADDED A A MORE SIGNIFICANT DEFINED CONTRIBUTION OR A SIGNIFICANT DEFINED CONTRIBUTION COMPONENT.

I WILL SAY THAT WE DID LOOK AT A DEFINED CONTRIBUTION OPTION OR A SOCIAL SECURITY OPTION.

GENERALLY, IF YOU WERE TO MOVE TO A DEFINED CONTRIBUTION OPTION, YOU WOULD BE REQUIRED TO INCLUDE SOCIAL SECURITY AS PART OF THAT. THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS THAT THAT 6.2% THAT BOTH MEMBERS AND THE CITY PARISH WOULD CONTRIBUTE TO SOCIAL SECURITY WOULD ALREADY OFFSET THE FULL AMOUNT THAT THE CITY PARISH IS PUTTING INTO THE PENSION, WHICH IS ABOUT 6% AND OFFSET 2 THIRDS OF WHAT THE MEMBERS THEMSELVES ARE PUTTING IN. SO ARGUABLY YOU WOULD REPLACE THE PENSION WITH SOCIAL SECURITY AND NOT GIVE PARTICIPANTS ANYTHING IN ADDITION TO THAT AND YOU HAVEN'T BROKEN EVEN YET.

YOU'RE STILL PAYING MORE THAN YOU WOULD HAVE UNDER THE CURRENT PLAN. SO THAT'S WHY WE DON'T THINK SOCIAL SECURITY AND A DEFINED CONTRIBUTION OPTION IS VIABLE.

SEE ON SLIDE 12. THIS SHOWS WHAT WE WOULD CALL THE REPLACEMENT RATIOS FOR PARTICIPANTS UNDER THESE VARIOUS OPTIONS.

FOR NON PUBLIC SAFETY, CURRENTLY TYPICAL PARTICIPANT WITH 30 YEARS OF SERVICE AT AGE 60 WOULD GET AN 85%

[01:15:01]

JUST BE RESPECTFUL OF YOUR TIME. SLIDE 13 HAS SOME 10 YEAR COST SAVINGS NUMBERS FOR DATA EACH OF THESE DIFFERENT OPTIONS.

AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT MAKING A PLAN CHANGE, THESE CHANGES DO NOT IMPACT YOUR CURRENT PARTICIPANTS. THEY WOULD ONLY IMPACT PARTICIPANTS AFTER A CHANGE IS MADE. SO THIS IS LESS ABOUT CHANGING WHAT THE PLAN LOOKS LIKE RIGHT NOW AND MORE ABOUT CHANGING WHAT THE PLAN IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE IN 30, 35 YEARS.

ON SLIDE 14, JUST ANOTHER COUPLE OF QUICK COMMENTS ON THE DROP AND MAYBE A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHY I'M NOT A HUGE FAN OF THE DROP BASED ON HOW PARTICIPANTS TEND TO USE THE DROP. THE DROP IS PROVIDING A BENEFIT IN ADDITION TO THEIR NORMAL BENEFIT.

PARTICIPANTS IN MANY CASES HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAX OUT THEIR BENEFIT, ENTER THE DROP, AND THEN GET AN ADDITIONAL BENEFIT IN ADDITION TO WHAT THEY WOULD HAVE ALREADY GOTTEN HAD THEY RETIRED AT THAT DATE. IN PRACTICE, PARTICIPANTS ARE GENERALLY NOT CHOOSING BETWEEN, FOR EXAMPLE, RETIRING AT 55 OR ENTERING THE DROP AND RETIRING AT 60. THEY WERE ALWAYS GOING TO RETIRE AT 60 ANYWAY. IT'S JUST A QUESTION OF DO THEY ENTER THE DROP AT 55? AND THAT'S WHY IT DOES COME DOWN FOR MANY PEOPLE TO A MATH PROBLEM. WHEN'S THE BEST TIME TO ENTER THE DROP AND MAXIMIZE MY BENEFIT? UNFORTUNATELY, NOT EVERYONE FOR THEMSELVES MAKES THE BEST DECISION. THAT'S ANOTHER REASON I'M NOT A FAN OF THE DROP.

IT'S NOT ALWAYS EQUAL AMONG EVERYONE. ALSO, A LITTLE COMMENT ON SLIDE 16 ON THE MILITARY SERVICE. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT ALSO IS CREATING KIND OF SURPRISE COST FOR THE PLAN. DUE TO THE FACT THAT IT'S DIFFICULT TO PREDICT HOW MANY FOLKS ARE GOING TO ELECT THIS. IT TENDS TO BE A SMALL NUMBER, BUT THE DOLLAR AMOUNT PER PERSON CAN BE QUITE SIGNIFICANT. IT CAN BE 75,000 TO 250,000 PER MEMBER, BUT THAT'S HALF A MILLION TO A MILLION AND A HALF ACROSS THE PLAN ON A TYPICAL YEAR. SO ON SLIDE 16, 17, 18 AND 19, I WON'T GO THROUGH THESE IN GREAT DETAIL, BUT THESE ARE OPTIONS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY AS WELL HERE.

OPTION ONE IS WE'RE KEEPING THAT BENEFIT MULTIPLIER A LITTLE HIGHER AT 2.75 WITH A MAXIMUM OF 80%. IT DOES INCLUDE A COLA AND ALL OF THESE OPTIONS. JUST AS WITH THE NON PUBLIC SAFETY, WE WOULD PROPOSE ELIMINATING THE DROP AND REPLACING IT WITH A PARTIAL LUMP SUM PLAN BECAUSE WE DO SEE THE DROP AS A KIND OF A KEY SURPRISE COST DRIVER FOR THE PLAN. ALL RIGHT, WELL, THAT KIND OF BRINGS ME TO THE END OF MY PREPARED COMMENTS. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE OR UNLESS THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE TO REPORT ON, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE REPORT.

BUT WE'VE GOT MORE.

WE'VE GOT MORE. OKAY, THANK YOU, KEVIN. NO, WE HAVE A LOT MORE FOR ALL OF YOU. I DID WANT TO GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO OUR INVESTMENT CONSULTANT, JOHN BREATH, TO HAVE HIM KIND OF GIVE A LITTLE BIT, SHED A LITTLE COLOR ON OUR INVESTMENTS AND WHERE WE ARE, BECAUSE I KNOW WHAT KEVIN SPOKE ABOUT CAN LOOK A LITTLE DAUNTING.

DON? THANK YOU, AYESHA.

SO I THINK AISHA DID CIRCULATE TO EVERYONE JUST A BRIEF MEMO THAT I HAD WRITTEN JUST REGARDING PERFORMANCE.

THIS IS TITLED MARINER.

AGAIN, MY NAME IS JOHN BREATH.

I WORK WITH MARINER INVESTMENT CONSULTING. WE'RE FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO WORK WITH NINE DIFFERENT PLANS WITHIN THE STATE OF LOUISIANA, SEVERAL STATEWIDE SYSTEMS, AS WELL AS A HANDFUL OF LOCAL SYSTEMS. YOU KNOW, ONE THING THAT I WOULD TALK ABOUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT KEVIN'S REPORT, AS HE REFERRED TO THE INVESTMENT RETURNS THAT YOU SEE THERE, THOSE ARE THE ACTUARIAL INVESTMENT RETURNS. THOSE ARE GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN ANY OF THE REPORTS THAT YOU MAY GET FROM US ON A QUARTERLY BASIS REPORTING ON THE PERFORMANCE OF THE SYSTEM. THE NUMBERS IN THERE, AND SHELLEY CAN GO INTO GREAT DETAIL, THOSE ARE ESSENTIALLY KIND OF AN AVERAGE OVER FIVE YEARS WHERE THEY'RE TAKING ESSENTIALLY 20% OF EACH YEAR'S RETURN TO CREATE A COMPOSITE RETURN.

SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.

WHAT I WANTED TO JUST TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WAS JUST THE OVERALL INVESTMENT PERFORMANCE OF THE SYSTEM, HOW IT'S ALLOCATED RELATIVE

[01:20:01]

SUBSEQUENT TO THAT, WE'VE ULTIMATELY WORKED TO ADD A FEW THINGS HERE AND THERE, MAKE A FEW SMALL CHANGES, NOTHING IN TERMS OF WHOLESALE CHANGES. BUT DURING OUR TIME WORKING WITH THE SYSTEM, WE HAVE BEEN INVOLVED WITH THE SYSTEM AS IT'S BROUGHT DOWN ITS ASSUMED RATE OF RETURN. SO AT ONE POINT IN THE PAST, IT WAS AS HIGH AS 8%. IT CAME DOWN TO SEVEN AND THREE QUARTERS, SEVEN AND A HALF, SEVEN AND A QUARTER. AND MORE RECENTLY, FOR ABOUT THE LAST FIVE YEARS OR SO, IT'S BEEN AT 7%. WHAT THAT AFFORDS A BOARD IS THE ABILITY TO LOOK AT KIND OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RISK AND REWARD IN ITS PENSION SYSTEM.

IN TODAY'S DAY AND AGE, BECAUSE INTEREST RATES ARE SO LOW, THAT HAS PUSHED INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS, PENSION PLANS, FOUNDATIONS, ENDOWMENTS, AWAY FROM TRADITIONAL FIXED INCOME, WHICH IS VERY SAFE, DOESN'T EXHIBIT A LOT OF VOLATILITY. IT HAS PUSHED THEM INTO THINGS LIKE THE STOCK MARKET, REAL ESTATE, MARKET, INFRASTRUCTURE, PRIVATE EQUITY, THINGS LIKE THAT. A LOT OF WHAT WE HEAR TODAY FROM THE ADMINISTRATION IN TERMS OF THINGS THAT ARE NOW GOING TO BE OFFERED IN 401K PLANS, FOR INSTANCE. SO THESE ARE ALL WIDELY ACCEPTED INSTITUTIONAL ASSET CLASSES. AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE PORTFOLIO FOR CPIRS AS OF 1231, IT'S VERY BROADLY DIVERSIFIED. IT INCORPORATES US STOCK MARKETS, NON US STOCK MARKETS, PRIVATE EQUITY, FIXED INCOME, HEDGE FUNDS, REAL ESTATE, AND INFRASTRUCTURE. WHEN I LOOK AT THAT ASSET ALLOCATION, IT IS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT I WOULD CONSIDER THE AVERAGE OR THE NORM FOR LARGE RETIREMENT SYSTEMS IN THE UNITED STATES. AND WHEN I SAY LARGE, I'M GENERALLY TALKING ABOUT ROUGHLY $500 MILLION AND HIGHER SYSTEMS. ONE THING THAT I PUT TOGETHER IN MY MEMO WAS JUST A COMPARISON OF CPR'S PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE AND ASSET ALLOCATIONS RELATIVE TO SOME OF THE OTHER STATEWIDE SYSTEMS. AND SO ONE THING THAT I HIGHLIGHTED, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A COUPLE SYSTEMS, THE SCHOOL EMPLOYEES, THE TEACHER'S RETIREMENT SYSTEM.

THESE BOTH HAVE OVER 40% OF THEIR ASSETS IN ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENTS.

AND WHEN I TALK ABOUT ALTERNATIVES, I'M TALKING ABOUT REAL ESTATE AND INFRASTRUCTURE, PRIVATE EQUITY, HEDGE FUNDS. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THOSE, THE RETURNS OF CPIRS RELATIVE TO THESE PLANS, THEY COMPARE VERY FAVORABLY.

ONE THING, THOUGH, THAT HAS CERTAINLY STOOD OUT, AND IF YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF ANY OTHER SYSTEMS, ESPECIALLY IN THE STATE OF LOUISIANA OVER THE LAST THREE YEARS, YOU HAVE WANTED TO BE AS HEAVILY INVESTED IN THE STOCK MARKET AS POSSIBLE.

WE ALL HEAR ABOUT THINGS LIKE MICROSOFT AND APPLE AND NVIDIA, THIS AI CRAZE THAT'S REALLY DRIVEN STOCK MARKETS HIGHER. IF YOU'RE A SYSTEM THAT OWNS PRIVATE ASSETS, BE IT INFRASTRUCTURE, REAL ESTATE, PRIVATE EQUITY, THOSE DON'T PRICE EVERY DAY.

AND SO WHEN NVIDIA IS GAINING 03,000% OVER A FIVE YEAR PERIOD, IF YOU'RE IN A PRIVATE EQUITY FUND, IT'S NOT APPRECIATING AT THAT SAME RATE OVER TIME, IT'S ALL GOING TO EVEN OUT.

WE'VE CERTAINLY SEEN THAT IN THE PERFORMANCE OF THE CEPRS PORTFOLIO. BUT IN THIS THREE YEAR PERIOD YOU HAVE SEEN CEPRS KIND OF SLIGHTLY FALL BEHIND THE LOUISIANA STATE AVERAGE. BUT IT ACTUALLY IMPORTANTLY HAS OUTPERFORMED BOTH OF THOSE OTHER LARGE SYSTEMS IN THE STATE WITH A VERY HEAVY ALLOCATION TO PRIVATE INVESTMENTS. YOU KNOW, A COUPLE THINGS I INCLUDED, I KIND OF TOOK A LOOK AT THE LAST FIVE CALENDAR YEARS OF PERFORMANCE AND WHAT YOU SEE IS ESSENTIALLY CEPRS OUTPERFORMING THE LOUISIANA AVERAGE THREE OUT OF THOSE FIVE YEARS. THE TWO YEARS WHERE WE DIDN'T, 2023 AND 2024 WERE AGAIN REALLY TIED TO THAT BREAKOUT STOCK MARKET PERFORMANCE WHERE WE DIDN'T HAVE QUITE AS MUCH EXPOSURE.

AND THEN WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE LONG TERM, WHAT YOU SEE IS ESSENTIALLY A CEAPIRS RETURN THAT'S IN LINE WITH THE LOUISIANA AVERAGE. NOW OBVIOUSLY WHAT WE WANT TO DO AS ADVISOR TO THE PLAN IS GENERATE A PORTFOLIO THAT'S SUBSTANTIALLY OUTPERFORMING OUR LOUISIANA PEERS AND OUR NATIONAL PEERS.

BUT WHERE I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR YOU ALL AS YOU'RE LISTENING TO THESE COMMENTS, IS TO UNDERSTAND CEPRS IS NOT OUT IN THE COLD. IT IS NOT EXPERIENCING INVESTMENT PROBLEMS, WRITE OFFS, FRAUDS, ANYTHING LIKE THAT. WE ARE IN LINE WITH NATIONAL SYSTEMS OF OUR SIZE IN TERMS OF THE ASSET CLASSES WE USE, THE ASSET ALLOCATION THAT WE USE AND THE UNDERLYING MANAGER PERFORMANCE.

BUT WHEN YOU START LOOKING AT HOW THESE NUMBERS GET ADDED TOGETHER FOR THE ACTUARIAL REPORT, TIMING CAN BE A BIG ISSUE.

RIGHT NOW WHAT I WOULD SAY IS HAVING A CALENDAR YEAR END CAN BE HARD BECAUSE YOU THINK ABOUT THE LAST FEW CALENDAR YEARS WHEN WE HAVE A LOSS. AND KEVIN

[01:25:02]

IT HAS NOT BEEN ANY MISMANAGEMENT OR MISALLOCATION OF THE SYSTEM. SO WAS HOPING JUST TO KIND OF COME IN, OFFER A LITTLE BIT MORE BACKGROUND AGAIN. HOPEFULLY MY MEMO KIND OF SUPPORTS A LITTLE BIT OF THAT AND KIND OF HELPS JUST OFFER A LITTLE BIT MORE CLARITY.

SO NEXT, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT IS THE BOARD MET AFTER HAVING THE USI PRESENTATION. THE BOARD MET AND THEY COLLECTIVELY FELT THAT IF CHANGES NEEDED TO BE MADE BY THE METRO COUNCIL, THAT THE CHANGES NEEDED TO BE DONE FIRST. THE EMPLOYEE BASE NEEDED TO BE SPLIT INTO TWO BASES, ONE PUBLIC SAFETY, ONE NON PUBLIC SAFETY SAFETY.

AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS THE EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION RATE CHANGES AT THAT POINT. THE BOARD DID AGREE THAT THAT SHOULD BE MADE. I DO WANT SHELLEY TO SPEAK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE SPLIT RATE AND WHAT THAT DOES TO THE OVERALL FUNDING AND THE BUDGET. AND I THINK THAT WILL PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT MORE COLOR TO GO ON TO THE OTHER CHANGES THAT WERE RECOMMENDED. SHELLY.

THANK YOU, AISHA. MY NAME IS SHELLY JOHNSON AND I'M THE ACTUARY FOR CPIRS. SO THERE'S ACTUALLY, FOR THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS THERE'S BEEN, I'VE BEEN REACHED OUT TO AND ASKED WHAT WOULD THE CONTRIBUTION RATE LOOK LIKE IF WE WERE TO SPLIT IT BETWEEN PUBLIC SAFETY MEMBERS AND NON PUBLIC SAFETY MEMBERS.

SO JUST TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT, THE AGGREGATE EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION RATE, IF WE CALCULATE THE SAME RATE FOR ALL EMPLOYERS BASED ON THE LAST VALUATION, THE CONTRIBUTION RATE FOR 2027 IS 38.1%. IF WE WERE TO SPLIT THAT AND RECOGNIZE THAT THE PUBLIC SAFETY MEMBERS HAVE ONE SET OF BENEFITS AND THE NON PUBLIC SAFETY MEMBERS HAVE ANOTHER SET OF BENEFITS. AND LET ME QUALIFY THAT BY SAYING THE BENEFIT STRUCTURE WAS SPLIT IN 2015, SEPTEMBER 2015.

ANYONE HIRED BEFORE THAT HAS THE SAME PLAN OF BENEFITS. ANYONE HIRED AFTER THAT PUBLIC SAFETY HAS A DIFFERENT SET OF BENEFITS. SO WHEN I CALCULATE A SEPARATE RATE FOR EACH, WE ARE PUTTING ALL PUBLIC SAFETY MEMBERS, EVEN IF THEY HAVE THE SAME BENEFITS AS OTHER MEMBERS, JUST SEGREGATING THE PUBLIC SAFETY CONTRIBUTION RATE FROM THE NON PUBLIC SAFETY CONTRIBUTION RATE. WHAT THAT WOULD DO IS IT WOULD REDUCE THE NON PUBLIC SAFETY CONTRIBUTION RATE TO 34.5% FOR 2027.

FOR PUBLIC SAFETY, IT WOULD INCREASE THE CONTRIBUTION RATE TO 48.8%. AND SOME OF THE ASSUMPTIONS BEHIND WHAT WE'VE DONE HERE IS WE'RE ONLY SEPARATING THE NORMAL COST.

THE NORMAL COST IS THE COST OF THE BENEFIT THAT'S CURRENTLY BEING ACCRUED BY CURRENT MEMBERS. THE UAL PAYMENT WOULD STILL BE SHARED AS THE SAME PERCENTAGE OF PAYROLL FOR ALL EMPLOYERS.

SO THEY'RE CURRENTLY PAYING THE UAL AS A PERCENTAGE OF PAYROLL. ALL EMPLOYERS ARE PAYING THE SAME PERCENTAGE OF PAYROLL TOWARDS THE UAL.

THAT WOULD CONTINUE UNDER THIS PROPOSAL. THE ONLY THING THAT WOULD BE DIFFERENT IS THAT WE'D BE RECOGNIZING THE COST OF THE ACCRUING BENEFIT BEING HIGHER FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY MEMBERS.

SO THAT WOULD TAKE US FROM 38.1%. AND I SHOULD ALSO SAY THAT 38.1% IS NET OF A PAYMENT THAT'S BEING MADE SEPARATELY FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. IF WE INCLUDED THAT IN, IT WOULD BE THE 40.1% AND THEN IT'S THAT 40.1% THAT GETS SPLIT BETWEEN THE 34.5 AND THE 48.8.

SO I KNOW THAT'S A LOT OF NUMBERS I'M THROWING OUT AT YOU. DOES Y' ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? NOT TO CONFUSE YOU ANY WITH ALL THOSE NUMBERS, BUT I DID WANT TO HAVE SHELLEY COME UP AND SPEAK FIRST BECAUSE THE BOARD FELT THAT IF WE SPLIT THE TWO GROUPS OF MEMBERS, THEN IT MAKES IT A LITTLE BIT EASIER TO KIND OF DIGEST WHAT BENEFITS SHOULD BE CHANGED IF CHANGED FIRST. WE DECIDED

[01:30:03]

IT'S REALLY THE BOARD FIRST ACROSS THE BOARD. CURRENTLY OUR SYSTEM ALLOWS FREE MILITARY TIME. SO IF A MEMBER COMES IN AND SAYS, HEY, I'VE GOT THREE YEARS OF MILITARY TIME, HERE'S MY FORM, WE ACCEPT IT AND WE ADD THREE YEARS OF SERVICE CREDIT TO THEIR TIME. WE ARE THE ONLY SYSTEM IN THE STATE THAT ALLOWS FREE TRADE. EVERYBODY ELSE SAYS, SURE, I'LL TAKE YOUR MILITARY TIME, BUT YOU HAVE TO BUY IT AT AN ACTUARIAL RATE. SO IN ELIMINATING THE FREE TRADE AND STILL ALLOWING THE MEMBER TO HAVE IT, BUT NOW THEY HAVE TO BUY IT, IT JUST KIND OF PUTS US IN LINE WITH OUR PEERS. AND THAT WOULD BE FOR BOTH PUBLIC SAFETY AND NON PUBLIC SAFETY. THE NEXT IS THE NEXT CHANGE PROPOSED IS THE NON VESTED DEATH BENEFIT. AND THAT IS IMMEDIATELY DAY ONE ON EMPLOYMENT. MEMBERS ARE GIVEN THIS BENEFIT. SO DAY ONE, YOU HAVE A GREAT DAY AT THE OFFICE. THAT NIGHT YOU GO TO WALMART, YOU SLIP ON A GRAPE AND YOU PASS AWAY.

THAT MEANS FROM THAT DAY FORWARD, YOUR SPOUSE UNTIL AND IF THEY EVER GET REMARRIED, GETS EVERY MONTH $600 A MONTH.

SO YOU AS A MEMBER, DAY ONE, RIGHT, SLIP ON A GRAPE, YOU'RE GONE. WE NOW AS A PENSION PLAN WILL PAY YOUR SPOUSE. IT COULD ALSO HAPPEN 9 YEARS, 11 MONTHS AND 29 DAYS.

NOW, ONCE YOU HIT THAT 10 YEAR MARK AND YOU'RE VESTED, IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT. WE HAVE DIFFERENT OPTIONS FOR PROVIDING A BENEFIT.

BUT WHEN YOU'RE NON VESTED.

THE ONLY THING WE HAVE IS THE $600, THAT'S FINE, EXCEPT IT'S NOT SERVICE CONNECTED. NOW IF YOU'RE AT THE OFFICE AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THE BUILDING JUST FALLS DOWN ON YOU, THAT MAKES SENSE. YOU WERE AT THE OFFICE, YOU WERE DOING YOUR JOB. IT MAKES A LITTLE SENSE TO HAVE A SERVICE CONNECTED DEATH BENEFIT. A DEATH BENEFIT THAT'S NOT SERVICE CONNECTED DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. WE ARE ON AN ISLAND BY OURSELVES ONCE AGAIN WITH OUR STATE PEERS. SO THE BOARD FELT THAT YES, WE SHOULD PROBABLY CHANGE THAT TO GET RID OF IT. I WOULD MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION THAT IF YOU DO ELIMINATE IT, IT PROBABLY IS ELIMINATED IN THE REGARDS THAT IT IS NON WORK RELATED. SO IF THERE IS A SERVICE CONNECTED DEATH, MEANING ELEVATOR GOES DOWN AND YOU DEMISE, THEN SURE THERE IS A SERVICE CONNECTED DEATH BENEFIT. BUT IF YOU SLIP ON A GRAPE AT WALMART, NO, NOT SO MUCH. I WOULD KIND OF MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION FOR YOU ALL TO THINK ABOUT.

THAT IS NOT WHAT THE BOARD APPROVED, BUT I DO WANT YOU TO THINK ABOUT THAT. THE NEXT TWO CHANGES WERE ONLY MADE TO NON PUBLIC SAFETY. SO PUBLIC SAFETY BECAUSE THEIR RATE IN THE SPLIT RATE IS SO HIGH.

CHANGING THEIR BENEFITS DID NOT MAKE SENSE. THEY'VE GOT GREAT BENEFITS BUT THEY'RE ALSO PAYING FOR THEM. SO KEEPING THEM AND THEIR BENEFITS THE WAY THEY ARE MADE SENSE FOR NON PUBLIC SAFETY.

HOWEVER, THERE WERE TWO CHANGES THAT WERE RECOMMENDED AND THE BOARD FELT YES. THE FIRST IS CHANGING THE DROP FROM A THREE YEAR. I'M SORRY, FROM A FIVE YEAR PROGRAM TO THREE YEARS. CURRENTLY MEMBERS ARE ALLOWED TO DO A FIVE YEAR DROP.

AT THE END OF THAT FIVE YEARS THEY HAVE TO TERMINATE EMPLOYMENT. THEIR DROP INTEREST STARTS FROM THE DAY THEY START THE DROP PROGRAM. THE CHANGES THAT ARE RECOMMENDED ARE TO DO A THREE YEAR DROP. ONCE THE THREE YEARS ARE DONE, YOU THEN CAN CONTINUE WORKING.

THIS WOULD ALLOW YOU TO EARN A SUPPLEMENTAL BENEFIT.

THAT MEANS TO ADD ON MONEY TO YOUR PREVIOUS RETIREMENT BENEFIT. ALSO YOUR DROP INTEREST DOES NOT START UNTIL YOU TERMINATE. SO WHAT IT DOES IS IT ALLOWS THE EMPLOYEE TO CONTINUE WORKING IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO, BUT THEY'RE NOT EARNING THE DROP INTEREST. THE INCENTIVE FOR THEM TO THEN LEAVE AND TO ENJOY RETIREMENT WOULD BE TO START GAINING THAT DROP INTEREST. SO THAT IS ONE OF THE BIGGER CHANGES. THAT IS WHAT OUR STATE PEERS DO. MOST OF OUR STATE PEERS DO. IT BRINGS US IN LINE WITH OUR PEERS. AND NOW IT'S AN APPLES TO APPLES IF SOMEONE WANTS TO GO AND WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT. AND THE LAST CHANGE THAT THE BOARD RECOMMENDED, I WILL HAVE SALLY WITHERS COME UP HERE AND SPEAK TOO. IT IS REMOVING THE TWO FOR ONE LEAVE TRADE.

SALLY? YES. OH, YOU ARE THE EXPERT ON BENEFITS, MA'. AM.

HI.

YES. SO I DON'T KNOW HOW FAMILIAR Y' ALL ARE WITH THE CITY'S ACCRUED LEAVE, BUT EVERY CITY EMPLOYEE CAN ACCUMULATE SICK AND VACATION TIME. AND WHEN THEY COME IN TO SEE US FOR RETIREMENT ESTIMATES, THEY CAN TRADE IN THOSE HOURS OF LEAVE FOR RETIREMENT CREDIT. SO IF THEY HAVE ROUGHLY A YEAR OF LEAVE ON A ONE FOR ONE BASIS,

[01:35:01]

ON THE FLIP SIDE, THERE'S ALSO WHAT WE CALL A TWO FOR ONE OPTION. SO IT WORKS OPPOSITE. FOR EVERY TWO DAYS OF LEAVE YOU TRADE IN, YOU GET ONE DAY OF RETIREMENT CREDIT. SO IF YOU GAVE US THAT SAME YEAR, WE WOULD ONLY GIVE YOU CREDIT FOR SIX MONTHS. SO IT SEEMS SILLY. WHY WOULD I DO THAT? WELL, WHEN YOU RETIRE, YOU COULD POTENTIALLY GET PAID DOUBLE THE AMOUNT OF LEAVE. SO THE RETIREMENT OFFICE WILL PAY YOU UP TO 960 HOURS OF YOUR LEAVE, AND YOUR DEPARTMENT WILL PAY YOU UP TO 960. SO IT'S A COMBINATION OF 19, 20 MATS WHEN YOU RETIRE.

SO THE RETIREMENT OFFICE HAS BEEN PAYING SICK LEAVE BALANCES AS PART OF THE RETIREMENT PACKAGE. SO THIS RECOMMENDATION WOULD REMOVE THAT OPTION.

SO THOSE ARE THE CHANGES THAT THE BOARD WOULD RECOMMEND TO THE METRO COUNCIL SHOULD THE METRO COUNCIL WANT TO MAKE ANY CHANGES TO THE PLAN. AND AT THIS POINT NOW I AM COMPLETE WITH OUR PRESENTATION.

OKAY, WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING.

IS ANYBODY WISHING TO SPEAK ON THE REPORT? ANYBODY? AND I'M GONNA GO TO COUNCIL COUNCILMAN DUNN JR.

THANK YOU. I'M GONNA START WITH SHELLY. CAN YOU COME BACK UP, PLEASE? SHELLY? I'M GONNA GO BACK TO THE BENEFIT SPLIT STARTING IN 2015. IF YOU CAN JUST KIND OF WALK US BACK THROUGH THOSE PERCENTAGES, THE DIFFERENCES, AND BE SPECIFIC FOR US AND THOSE WHO ARE WATCHING AT HOME. WHO YOU'RE REFERENCING WHEN YOU'RE SAYING THE 40% VERSUS THE 30%, IS THAT THE EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTING THAT TO THE EMPLOYEE? IS THAT THE EMPLOYEE? BECAUSE I THINK IT WAS A LITTLE VAGUE ON WHO THAT WAS COMING FROM.

AND ALSO WHEN YOU MENTIONED EMPLOYERS, I ASSUME YOU MENTIONED DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS AS THE EMPLOYER.

BUT JUST CLARIFY ALL OF THAT.

BE A LITTLE BIT MORE SPECIFIC IN DETAIL ABOUT WHO YOU'RE ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT.

OKAY, SO THESE, THESE CONTRIBUTION RATES THAT I WAS REFERRING TO ARE SPECIFICALLY EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION RATES.

THE EMPLOYEES, WHETHER THEY'RE PUBLIC SAFETY OR NON PUBLIC SAFETY, PAY 9.5%. THE PROPOSED SPLIT IS ONLY APPLICABLE TO THE EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION RATE.

OKAY.

SO, I MEAN, OF COURSE IT COULD BE CHANGED. YOU KNOW, THIS IS JUST WHAT'S, WHAT'S.

AND I'M NOT EVEN SURE IS THIS PART OF THE SPECIFIC PROPOSAL OF THE BOARD. OKAY.

AND GO AHEAD AND GIVE ME THE PERCENTAGES AGAIN. OKAY, SO POST 2015, I GUESS, BECAUSE IT WAS THE SAME PRIOR TO THAT.

RIGHT.

THIS, THIS SPLIT WOULD BE APPLICABLE REGARDLESS OF YOUR DATE OF HIRE. SO ALL EMPLOYER EMPLOYERS FOR ALL NON PUBLIC SAFETY MEMBERS WOULD BE 34.5% THE CONTRIBUTION RATE FOR EMPLOYERS FOR ALL PUBLIC SAFETY MEMBERS, WHICH ARE FIRE EMS CONSTABLES, THAT CONTRIBUTION RATE WOULD BE 48.8%. AND THAT IS SIMPLY BASED ON THE DIFFERENCE IN BENEFITS FOR THE MEMBERS WHO WERE HIRED AFTER 2015 FOR PUBLIC SAFETY.

A COUPLE MORE THINGS YOU TALKED ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE IN BENEFITS. WHAT ARE SOME OF THOSE DIFFERENCES? PUBLIC SAFETY VERSUS NON PUBLIC SAFETY.

OKAY, LET ME GO TO MY SUMMARY OF BENEFITS PAGE.

AND WHY ARE YOU LOOKING FOR THAT? IF THIS HELPS, MAYBE YOU CAN COME WITH THIS ONE OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD WITHOUT FINDING THAT JUST KIND OF TALK ABOUT THE JUSTIFICATION. IS THIS BEST PRACTICES? IS THIS SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, RECENTLY CAME ABOUT BY, YOU KNOW, GIVING PUBLIC SAFETY WORKERS A HIGHER BENEFIT VS REGULAR EMPLOYEES? TALK ABOUT THE JUSTIFICATION OF THAT.

OKAY, SO IT'S VERY COMMON FOR PUBLIC SAFETY MEMBERS TO HAVE A DIFFERENT PLAN OF BENEFITS. I'M ALSO THE ACTUARY FOR THE STATE EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM IN LOUISIANA. AND THEY HAVE ONE SET OF BENEFITS FOR WHAT THEY CALL THEIR RANK AND FILE MEMBERS. AND THEN THERE'S A DIFFERENT PLAN OF BENEFITS FOR ALL OF THEIR, WHAT THEY CALL THEIR HAZARDOUS DUTY MEMBERS. BASICALLY, PUBLIC SAFETY. AND THE BENEFITS VARY.

THERE'S LIKE NINE OTHER PLANS,

[01:40:02]

AND SO PUBLIC SAFETY MEMBERS WILL OFTENTIMES BE OFFERED A HIGHER ACCRUAL RATE SO THAT THEY'RE EARNING A HIGHER BENEFIT FOR THEIR YEARS OF SERVICE. AND IT'S VERY, VERY COMMON TO HAVE A DIFFERENT PLAN OF BENEFITS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY MEMBERS.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

AND I DID PULL UP IF YOU WANTED ME TO PROVIDE JUST A FEW EXAMPLES.

OKAY, SO MEMBERS HIRED PRIOR TO. AND I'M SAYING 2015, BUT IT'S SEPTEMBER 1, 2015. SO MEMBERS HIRED PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 1, 2015 ARE ELIGIBLE FOR A 2.5% ACCRUAL RATE AT THE EARLIER OF AGE 55 AND 10 YEARS OF SERVICE OR THE COMPLETION OF 20 YEARS OF CREDITABLE SERVICE HIRED AFTER 9 1, 2015, THE NON PUBLIC SAFETY MEMBERS, THEIR AGE ELIGIBILITY INCREASED TO AGE 60 WITH 10 YEARS OF CREDITABLE SERVICE OR THE COMPLETION OF 20 YEARS OF CREDITABLE SERVICE.

FOR PUBLIC SAFETY MEMBERS, IT REMAINED THE SAME AT AGE 55, 10 YEARS OF CREDIBLE SERVICE AND. OR THE COMPLETION OF.

COUNCILMAN? YES, THANK YOU. HE WAS TALKING TO ME.

I'M SORRY.

OKAY, SO ESSENTIALLY WHAT HAPPENED IN 2015 IS THE BENEFIT REMAINED THE SAME FOR EARNING THE 2.5% FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY MEMBERS, AND THEY INCREASED THE AGE REQUIREMENT FOR THE NON PUBLIC SAFETY MEMBERS, BUT THEY DID NOT DO THAT FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY MEMBERS.

IF THE MEMBERS WORK A LITTLE BIT LONGER, THEY CAN BE ELIGIBLE FOR A 3% ACCRUAL RATE. SO MEMBERS HIRED PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 1, 2015, IF THEY COMPLETE 25 YEARS OF CREDITABLE SERVICE, THEY'LL HAVE A 3% ACCRUAL RATE AFTER HIRED AFTER 91 OF 2015 PUBLIC SAFETY MEMBERS HAVE TO HAVE AGE 50 AND 25 YEARS OF CREDIBLE SERVICE. NON PUBLIC SAFETY MEMBERS HAVE TO BE AGE 55 AND 25 YEARS OF CREDIBLE SERVICE TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR THE 3% ACCRUAL. SO LIKE I SAID, THERE'S DIFFERENT ELEMENTS OF THE BENEFIT. AND FOR CPIRS, IT'S A COMBINATION OF THE ACCRUAL RATE AND. AND AGE.

ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU, MA'.

AM. KEVIN, COME ON DOWN. AND I PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE PREFERENCED MY STATEMENTS WITH HER WITH REINFORCING SOMETHING YOU SAID, BUT I THINK IT APPLIES TO.

TO BOTH. AND ALL THESE CHANGES AND YOU MENTIONED EARLIER THAT ANY CHANGES MADE NOW WOULD NOT IMPACT ANY CURRENT EMPLOYEES, WOULD ONLY IMPACT EMPLOYEES MOVING FORWARD.

WITH THAT BEING SAID, WE DID A PAY STUDY RECENTLY AND THAT PAY CAME BACK WITH AT LEAST TWO RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE FELT WAS MONUMENTAL AND NEEDED. ONE WAS INCREASING THE PAY, WHICH WE'VE DONE SOME OF THAT. THE OTHER WAS PENSION REFORM OR GOING AWAY FROM OUR CURRENT VERSION OF WHAT WE CALL OR WHAT RETIREMENT LOOKS LIKE. DID YOU GUYS MAKE ANY OF THESE RECOMMENDATIONS WITH THAT IN MIND? AND IF SO WHAT SPECIFICALLY WERE THEY? WELL, FIRST ON THE PAY ADJUSTMENTS, THAT WAS NOT SOMETHING WE KNEW UNTIL LATER IN THE PROCESS, BUT I THINK WE DID KIND OF EVALUATE WHAT THE IMPACT OF THAT IS. AND AS YOU MIGHT EXPECT, IT'S A CORRESPONDING INCREASE IN THE LIABILITY FOR THE ACTIVE MEMBERS, THE RETIRED MEMBERS. IT HAS NO IMPACT ON THEM. THOSE, THERE'S A FEW WHO THINK IT'S SEPARATED FROM SERVICE AND NOT STARTED TO BENEFIT. NO IMPACT ON THOSE. BUT FOR THE ACTIVES IT DOES HAVE AN IMPACT.

FOR THE OVERALL ANALYSIS.

IN TERMS OF LOOKING AT THE RETIREMENT PLANS, WE KIND OF STARTED WITH THE IDEA THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHAT YOU WANT FROM A RETIREMENT SYSTEM, YOU WANT IT TO MEET YOUR NEEDS FOR RECRUITING AND RETAINING THE EMPLOYEES. YOU WANT IT TO BE SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO PROVIDE A MEETING MEANINGFUL BENEFIT TO MEET THEIR NEEDS.

AND SINCE IF PARTICIPANTS HAD THIS AS THEIR SOLE RETIREMENT BENEFIT, YOU WANT THIS TO BE A MEANINGFUL BENEFIT THAT'S GOING TO COME TO MEET THEIR INCOME NEEDS, BUT ALSO YOU WANT IT TO BE VIABLE,

[01:45:01]

AND SO WITH THOSE IN MIND, WE STARTED WITH THE IDEA THAT WE WANT SOMETHING THAT'S NOT TOO DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT FROM THE THE CURRENT SYSTEM.

SO THAT WHETHER YOU'RE PUBLIC SAFETY OR NON PUBLIC SAFETY, IF YOU'RE WORKING RIGHT NEXT TO SOMEONE WHO WAS HIRED FIVE YEARS AGO, YOUR BENEFIT IS AT LEAST SIMILAR TO THE BENEFIT OF YOUR CO WORKERS. IT'S NOT DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT. SO THAT'S ANOTHER THING WE KEPT IN MIND AND THAT'S WHY. AND THAT COUPLED WITH THE IDEA THAT WHEN WE LOOK AT THE PLAN, IT'S NOT THOSE BENEFIT WHAT WE CALL THE BENEFIT MULTIPLIERS OR THE ACCRUAL RATES THAT SHELLY WAS TALKING ABOUT, THE 2.5, 2, 0 POINT OR 3 THAT'S CREATING THE CHALLENGE FOR THE PLAN. WE THINK IT'S A LOT OF THESE ANCILLARY FACTORS THAT ARE DRIVING UP COST AND CREATING SURPRISES IN COST. THINGS LIKE THE OVERTIME, THINGS LIKE THE MILITARY SERVICE, THE DROP, THOSE ARE THINGS THAT, THOSE DON'T IMPACT THAT 2.5 OR 3% MULTIPLIER, BUT IT'S ADDING UNEXPECTED COSTS TO THE SYSTEM. SO THOSE ARE REALLY THINGS THAT WE KIND OF TARGETED AS WE THOUGHT.

THOSE THINGS CAN BE PULLED OUT, KEEPING THE UNDERLYING STRUCTURE OF THE PLAN LARGELY INTACT, NOT GREATLY CHANGING RETIREMENT DATES OR EARLY RETIREMENT PROVISIONS OR BENEFIT MULTIPLIERS, KEEPING IT SIMILAR TO WHAT'S CURRENTLY THERE, BUT REDUCING THE RISK FROM THE SYSTEM.

I GOT 40 SECONDS LEFT AND MAYBE ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES DIG A LITTLE BIT DEEPER INTO THIS.

BUT AGAIN, ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS WAS PAY INCREASE. WE'VE DONE SOME OF THAT. YOU RECOGNIZE THAT.

THE OTHER ONE WAS THAT THEY FELT THAT OUR RETIREMENT BENEFITS WERE TOO HANDSOME AND OUTDATED AND OTHER MUNICIPALITIES HAD STARTED TO GO AWAY FROM THIS. WHAT'S YOUR OPINION ON IT? I THINK IT'S SOME OF THOSE SAME FACTORS. I THINK THE DROP IS SOMETHING THAT WAS VERY ATTRACTIVE YEARS AGO AND MANY SYSTEMS HAVE, BUT I THINK SYSTEMS ARE SLOWLY TRYING TO MODIFY THOSE, JUST AS THE CURRENT PROPOSAL WOULD DO, BECAUSE THEY ARE REALIZING THERE'S SURPRISES TO THE COST. SO TOO HANDSOME. I THINK THERE'S CERTAINLY AN ELEMENT OF THAT AND THAT THAT'S SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE WERE PROPOSING TO BE KIND OF DRAWN DOWN.

THANK YOU.

SURE.

COUNCILMAN HURST, I WANT TO FEED OFF WHERE HE LEFT, BUT THEN I'M GOING TO LET YOU HAVE A SEAT.

OKAY.

THE DROP PORTION OF IT IS I WAS. I WAS TOLD THAT PENSIONS DO NOT HAVE COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENTS.

YEAH, THAT'S CORRECT.

SO THE DROP PROGRAM IS PUT IN PLACE TO ENSURE THAT AS THINGS HAPPEN OVER TIME AND EXPENSES INCREASE LIKE $5 A GALLON GAS, IT DOESN'T AFFECT MY. MY MONTHLY BUDGET BECAUSE I HAVE SAVINGS THAT I CAN PULL FROM OVER THAT LIFE EXPECTANCY SO THAT IT DOESN'T IMPACT MY FAMILY IN A NEGATIVE WAY. SO REDUCING THE DROP, THE WAY WE'RE TALKING, HOW WOULD THAT AFFECT SOMEBODY BASED ON LIFE EXPECTANCY AND CURRENT EMPLOYEES, ENROLLED OR FUTURE EMPLOYEES? YEAH, WE HEARD THAT AS WELL, THAT THE DROP WAS VIEWED AS KIND OF A MEANS OF OFFSETTING THE LACK OF A COLA. AND THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS IN OUR. SOME OF OUR PROPOSALS, WE PROPOSED CURTAILING OR ELIMINATING THE DROP WITH A SMALL COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT.

SO THAT.

THAT WAS THERE.

SO NOW YOU WOULD ADD COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT IN THERE? YES, BUT ONLY WITH THOSE OTHER CHANGES.

BECAUSE THE COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT RAISES COSTS.

CORRECT.

SOME OF THOSE OTHER THINGS WOULD HAVE TO OCCUR TO CREATE A COST REDUCTION TO ALLOW YOU TO HAVE THAT.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT, THANKS.

SO. THANK YOU SO MUCH. ASHA, CAN YOU COME UP? I HOPE I SAID IT RIGHT. AISHA. AISHA. ALL RIGHT, SO WE'VE HAD A NUMBER OF CONVERSATIONS, AND SHELLY, I'VE SPOKEN WITH YOU AND ANGIE AND JAY AND EVERYBODY BEFORE.

SO I CAME TO YOUR MEETING AND I SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR THE STUDY TO BE DONE.

YES.

AND THE STUDY WAS NOT AROUND.

WHAT WOULD A NEW PENSION LOOK LIKE? IT WAS EXPLORING GETTING AWAY FROM PENSION PLANS IN GENERAL AND MOVING A 401K, A HYBRID PLAN, OR PITCHING ONLY NOT TO MAKE THE MOVEMENT, BUT TO EXPLORE WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE AND HOW IT WOULD IMPACT THE BOTTOM LINE OF THE CITY PARISH.

CORRECT.

SO WHEN I TALK TO YOU ANYBODY CURRENTLY ON A PLAN THAT GOES TO A 401K INCREASE THE UAL.

RIGHT. IF WE WERE TO SWITCH SOMEBODY TODAY BECAUSE THEY WOULD STILL HAVE, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, DEBT TO THE SYSTEM THAT WOULD NOT BE CONTINUOUSLY FUNDED FROM THAT PARTICULAR WELL.

SO FIRST, ANYONE WHO'S CURRENTLY IN THE PLAN, THEY WOULD HAVE TO HAVE THE OPTION TO EXIT THE PLAN.

CORRECT. BUT LET'S SAY THEY HAD THE OPTION TO DO IT.

SO YEAH.

AND THEY MOVED TO A 401.401K.

IT WOULD INCREASE THE UAL BECAUSE IT'S NOT BEING PAID INTO THE SYSTEM.

IT POTENTIALLY.

POTENTIALLY, YES.

OKAY, GOOD DEAL. SO WHAT I HEARD TODAY WAS THAT IT'S 9% EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION, AM I SAYING THAT CORRECTLY? Y' ALL PUT A LOT OF NUMBERS OUT THERE.

NINE AND A HALF PERCENT.

NINE AND A HALF PERCENT. SO WHEN I WORK IN THE CORPORATE WORLD, I'M TYPICALLY PUTTING IN AT 3 TO 5% PER YEARS. IF THEY WHERE I'M GETTING EMPLOYEE MATCHES IN MOST CASES I CAN PUT AS MUCH AS I WANT TO PUT, BUT 3 TO 5% EMPLOYEE MATCHES. MY

[01:50:01]

SO WE'RE MAKING EVEN THEM EVEN POORER AT RETIREMENT THAN THEY WERE WHEN THEY WORK FOR THE CITY PARISH. AM I MISUNDERSTANDING THIS? NO. HOWEVER, SO THE DROP IS NOT TYPICALLY USED AS A COLA.

IT IS USED AS WHATEVER IT IS.

IT'S MONEY THAT THEY'VE NEVER GOTTEN BEFORE. IT'S A CHUNK OF MONEY SO THEY CAN RETIRE, PAY LITTLE DEBTS OFF SO THAT THEY CAN ACTUALLY NOT HAVE TO STRESS. RIGHT, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT.

YES. SO THE WAY SO CHANGING IT FROM A FIVE YEAR DROP TO A THREE YEAR DROP, THE THREE YEAR DROP THEN ALLOWS THEM TO WORK PAST THAT. SO YES, THEY LOSE OUT ON TWO YEARS OF DROP, BUT THEY CAN STILL CONTINUE TO WORK. AND THE REASON THAT THAT NOW SINCE THE PAY STUDY HAS OCCURRED AND NOW THE PAY SCALES HAVE CHANGED IS NOW YOU HAVE A LARGE PORTION OF PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT TOPPED OUT ANYMORE AND YOU COME TO THE MIC WHILE SHE'S TALKING SO YOU NOW HAVE PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT TOPPED OUT.

THEY MAY SAY, OH YOU KNOW WHAT, I CAN STILL HAVE STEP INCREASES IF I DO A THREE YEAR DROP INSTEAD OF A FIVE YEAR DROP AND HAVE TO TERMINATE.

OKAY, GREAT. THANKS. STAY THERE. ANGIE, COME TO THE MIC. AS YOU WEREN'T HERE AT THE TIME WAS A SPECIFIC ASK TO LOOK AT 401K, 401K HYBRID AND THEN PENSION ONLY.

YES, SIR.

OKAY.

DID THE CONSULTANT DO THAT? YES.

I DON'T.

DID Y' ALL DO THAT? JAY, COME TO THE MIC. COME ON. ARE Y' ALL, ALL. Y' ALL WON THE BOARD MEETING. EVERYBODY WAS THERE.

COME TO THE MIC. YEAH, BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE ONLY WAY TO GET RID OF THE DEBT LONG TERM IS TO CHANGE THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE OF THE PLAN, WHICH IS WHAT WAS REQUESTED TO BE ON A. TO TO GET THE ACT, THE NEW ACTUARY. WE SPENT MONEY ON AN ACTUARY TO DO A REPORT.

NOT TO DO IT YOUR WAY, BUT TO DO IT THE WAY THAT WE ASKED TO DO IT.

YEAH. AND WE LOOKED AT THAT, WE LOOKED AT A 401 PLAN OR SOME KIND OF DEFINED CONTRIBUTION PLAN.

THE PROBLEM IS THAT UNDER THE AGREEMENT THAT EXCLUDES PARTICIPANTS FROM SOCIAL SECURITY, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PENSION TO BE EXEMPT FROM SOCIAL SECURITY. SO THAT MEANS IF YOU COME INTO SOCIAL SECURITY, THEN IMMEDIATELY THE 6% THAT THE CITY PARISH IS CONTRIBUTING TO THE PENSION GETS REPLACED BY 6.2% SOCIAL SECURITY. SO YOU'RE ALREADY PUTTING MORE IN AND YOU HAVEN'T GIVEN ANY BENEFIT OTHER THAN SOCIAL SECURITY YET.

SO LET ME ASK YOU THIS. BUT AT THE 401K RATE, OUR EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION GOES DOWN BECAUSE WE CAN MATCH UP TO 3 TO 5% AND THEY CAN PUT WHATEVER THEY WANT IN THERE.

SO LONG TERM WE MAY STILL GAIN BECAUSE THE UAL GOES DOWN WHILE THE SOCIAL SECURITY GOES UP. AM I SAYING IT WRONG? CORRECT.

YEAH.

THE UAL. NOTHING WE DO HERE IS REALLY GOING TO CHANGE THAT UAL. IT'S OUR ALREADY THERE. AND YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY IT DOWN OVER TIME TO REDUCE.

I JUST MEAN OVER TIME.

RIGHT. GOING 401K WOULD PROBABLY HAPPEN FASTER THAN CONTINUING A PENSION PROGRAM.

YEAH. THE PROBLEM IS THOUGH, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME UP WITH NEW MONEY TO DO THAT BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO BE PUTTING IN MORE SOCIAL SECURITY THAN YOU'RE ALREADY DOING. AND IF YOU'RE DOING ANY KIND OF MATCH OR EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION, THAT'S ADDITIONAL MONEY THAT IS GOING TO REDUCE WHAT YOU HAVE AVAILABLE TO PAY DOWN. THE.

IS THERE, IS THERE AN AGREEMENT THAT CAN BE PUT IN PLACE THAT SAYS FOR NEW EMPLOYEES WE WILL DO SOCIAL SECURITY, OR IS IT ALL OR NONE? THAT MAY BE MORE OF A LEGAL QUESTION.

MY POINT IS THESE THINGS HAVE TO BE EXPLORED. THAT'S WHAT Y' ALL GET PAID FOR.

RIGHT. THE REASON WE KIND OF VIEWED DEFINED CONTRIBUTION PLANS AS A NON STARTER IS IT DOESN'T DO ANYTHING TO YOUR CURRENT UNFUNDED ACCRUED LIABILITY, AND IT INCREASES YOUR COST AND REDUCES THE BENEFITS THAT PARTICIPANTS ARE GOING TO HAVE.

SO ONE LAST QUESTION AFTER THIS. I'M GOING TO BE DONE WITH YOU, BUT BEFORE I VOTE ON ANYTHING, AND I HOPE MY COLLEAGUES, WE WANT TO LOOK AT FULL REFORM OPTIONS, NOT THE ONES YOU THINK ARE GOOD, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT WHAT WE ASKED FOR. AND I MEAN, SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE COME AFTER ME WITH THE SAME QUESTIONS.

YEAH. AND WE CAN, WE CAN PROVIDE MORE DETAIL AROUND WHY THE DEFINED CONTRIBUTION PLAN IS A NON STARTER, BUT GIVEN THE FACT THAT IT'S GOING TO INCREASE YOUR COST AND REDUCE BENEFITS JUST TO PROVIDE THE PROTECTION THAT SOCIAL SECURITY HAS. BUT THAT'S A LOWER PROTECTION THAN WHAT YOU'RE CURRENTLY GIVING, LOWER BENEFITS THAN WHAT YOU'RE CURRENTLY GIVING TO PARTICIPANTS.

SO.

BUT IT ALSO HELPS BALANCE TO WHERE THE CITY PARISH HAS LESS DEBT AND THE EMPLOYER STILL HAS A GOOD RETIREMENT.

YEAH.

WELL, I'M GONNA PAUSE YOU ON MY TIME. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

SHELLEY, COME TO THE MIC, PLEASE. AND. AND ASIA, MAN, I'M MESSING IT UP EVERY TIME.

AISHA, STAND THERE WITH HER.

SO WE HAD QUESTIONS ABOUT ST.

GEORGE, AND YOU TOLD ME TO WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE 27TH, I BELIEVE IT WAS, TILL THE REPORT CAME OUT, WHICH WAS ON A THURSDAY, AND

[01:55:01]

SO CAN WE TALK ABOUT THE UAL? BASED ON THE NUMBERS THAT WE PUT FROM ST. GEORGE'S INCORPORATION AND WHAT THEY WOULD OWE US, AND CAN YOU GIVE US THE STATUS OF THAT, PLEASE? SO THOSE NUMBERS HAVEN'T BEEN FINALIZED BECAUSE WE'RE WAITING ON THE AUDIT TO BE FINALIZED.

ONCE THE. THE AUDIT OF AND CITY OF BATON ROUGE IS FINAL, WHICH I UNDERSTAND WILL OCCUR AT THE END OF THE MONTH, THEN WE'RE GOING TO GET A PERCENTAGE FROM THE CITY PARISH FINANCE OFFICE THAT REPRESENTS WHAT PERCENTAGE OF TAX REVENUE HAS BEEN LOST BECAUSE OF THE CREATION OF CITY OF ST. GEORGE. SO IN A SENSE, WHAT'S THE PERCENTAGE OF CONTRIBUTION EFFORT? THAT'S KIND OF THE TERM THAT'S USED WHEN YOU'RE DIVIDING OUT A LIABILITY. WHAT WAS THEIR CONTRIBUTION EFFORT IF THEY HAD NOT PULLED OUT, VERSUS NOW THAT THEY PULLED OUT, WHAT ARE THEY NOT PAYING INTO THE SYSTEM? SO ONCE THAT PERCENTAGE IS DETERMINED, THEN WE'LL PROVIDE THAT PERCENTAGE TO THE CITY OF ST. GEORGE, AND ALSO THAT PERCENTAGE WILL BE APPLIED TO THE UAL. THE VALUATION THAT WAS JUST COMPLETED, PRESENTED TO THE BOARD AND ADOPTED, THAT WAS THE BASIS FOR THE CONTRIBUTION RATES THAT I GAVE YOU THAT, THAT WILL DETERMINE THE WITHDRAWAL LIABILITY FOR CITY OF ST. GEORGE AND THAT WILL BE PUT ON A 15 YEAR MONTHLY PAYMENT PLAN FOR THEM TO MAKE THE PAYMENTS INTO CFIRS.

BECAUSE THAT'S A LONG ANSWER. I GOT 48 SECONDS.

OKAY, SO.

ALL RIGHT, WE'LL KNOW AND WE'LL KNOW IN A LITTLE OVER A WEEK.

A WEEK.

THAT'S THE SHORTAGE.

ACTUALLY PUT ON THE AGENDA A REPORT SPECIFICALLY ON ST.

GEORGE AND RETIREMENT. THANK YOU. NO, NO, YOU'RE GOOD. AND THE OTHER PART I TALKED ABOUT 401K WISE WAS BECAUSE THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT REALLY BENEFIT FROM THEIR RETIREMENT AT THE LEVELS, AT A HIGH LEVEL CITY, PARISH IS PUBLIC SAFETY. AND I'M NOT MAD AT WHAT THEY DO. I WANT, I DON'T WANT THEM TO RETIRE POOR, BUT THEY WORK A MILLION HOURS THE LAST THREE YEARS, THEY RETIRE AND THEY DO WELL, 800 SOME THOUSAND DOLLARS A YEAR, BUT THE AVERAGE EMPLOYEE DOES NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THAT.

THAT.

SO IF THEY'RE MAKING $50,000 A YEAR AND THEY RETIRE AT 85%, THAT'S PENNIES ON A DOLLAR.

THAT'S JUST, THAT'S DIRT POOR. AND I'M ABOUT TO CLOSE IN A COUPLE, IN A COUPLE YEARS. WHICH IS WHY I WANTED TO EXPLORE THE 401K WHICH TYPICALLY GIVES YOU 10 TO 12 RETURN ON INVESTMENT OVER A 30 YEAR PERIOD. SO I, I KIND OF KNOW MY NUMBERS A LITTLE BIT AND I HOPE TO SEE THAT FROM Y'.

ALL.

THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN HUDSON.

I THINK, MS. JOHNSON, YOU'RE PROBABLY THE BEST ONE FOR MY QUESTIONS. I'M CURIOUS, IS THERE ANY TYPE OF PROJECTION ON GROWTH OF THE UAL OR DECLINE OF GROWTH IN THE UAL BASED ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT Y' ALL HAVE MADE? YES, SIR. SO ONE THING THAT WE HAVEN'T TALKED ABOUT YET, PENSION FUNDING IS VERY COMPLICATED. SO I TALKED ABOUT THE NORMAL COST. THERE'S ALSO THE PAYMENT ON THE UAL.

AND BEFORE THIS YEAR THE UAL WAS SET ON A PAYMENT PLAN WHERE THE PAYMENTS INCREASED. IT WAS DESIGNED FOR THE PAYMENTS TO INCREASE ANNUALLY AT A RATE OF TWO AND A HALF PERCENT. AND I COULD GO INTO THE REASONS FOR IT, THERE'S SOME SAMPLE REASONS FOR IT, BUT JUST IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, I'LL POINT OUT THAT WE BROUGHT A PROPOSAL TO THE BOARD TO CHANGE THE PAYMENT STRUCTURE SO THAT IT'S NOW LEVEL PAYMENTS AND WE'VE EXTENDED THE TERM SLIGHTLY TO 25 YEARS AND WE'VE CHANGED IT FROM AN OPEN AMORTIZATION TO A CLOSED AMORTIZATION. SO THE SHORT OF WHAT THAT MEANS IS ESSENTIALLY WE NO LONGER EXPECT THE PAYMENTS AUTOMATICALLY TO INCREASE EVERY YEAR.

BECAUSE OF THIS NEW PAYMENT THAT THEY PAYMENT PLAN THAT THEY'VE ADOPTED, IT WILL TAKE A LITTLE BIT LONGER TO PAY IT OFF.

IN A SENSE, BEFORE WE NEVER TRULY WOULD HAVE PAID IT OFF BECAUSE IT'S AN EVERY YEAR.

IT'S AN OPEN AMORTIZATION, WHICH MEANS EVERY YEAR YOU RE AMORTIZE IT AND SO YOU NEVER DO TRULY PAY IT OFF. WHAT WE RECOMMENDED AND THE BOARD ADOPTED IS A 25 YEAR, ULTIMATELY A CLOSED PLAN. SO THE UAL WILL HAVE LEVEL PAYMENTS AND WILL BE PAID OFF IN 25 YEARS. SO THAT RESULTS IN A SLIGHTLY HIGHER PAYMENT IN THE SHORT TERM.

BUT ULTIMATELY IT WILL PAY OFF THE UAL AND WE'LL NO LONGER HAVE THIS EVER INCREASING EXPECTATION FOR THE UAL TO INCREASE. IT CAN STILL CHANGE. LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN WE HAVE YEARS OF INVESTMENT LOSSES, SURE, THE UAL CAN STILL GO UP AND THE PAYMENT CAN STILL GO UP, BUT IT WON'T BE BY DESIGN AND LIKE BAKED INTO THE PLAN.

I GOT YOU. OKAY. HAS THERE BEEN ANY DISCUSSION ON GOING UP ON THE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION RATE? THERE HAS BEEN SOME DISCUSSION

[02:00:02]

I'M NOT SURE IF YOU'RE ASKING ONLY ABOUT NEW HIRES OR EXISTING MEMBERS.

BOTH, REALLY.

ONE THING THAT THE CALCULATION OF THIS SPLIT RATE SHOWED IS THAT THE EMPLOYEES ARE PRETTY NON. PUBLIC SAFETY MEMBERS ARE PRETTY MUCH PAYING FOR THE FULL COST OF THEIR BENEFITS. SO IF YOU GO BACK TO THE.

SO IT WOULDN'T MAKE SENSE TO GO UP ON THEIRS.

IT WOULDN'T MAKE SENSE TO GO UP ON THEIRS. YOU'D HAVE THEM PAYING MORE THAN THE COST OF THE BENEFIT THAT THEY'RE RECEIVING. OKAY, PUBLIC SAFETY, THERE WOULD BE SOME ROOM TO INCREASE THEIR CONTRIBUTION RATE. AND YOU KNOW, I CERTAINLY CAN'T SPEAK FOR THEM, BUT I KNOW THAT THEY WERE ADAMANT AT KEEPING THEIR BENEFITS AT THE LEVEL THAT THEY'RE AT, WITH SOME EXCEPTIONS, AS AISHA DESCRIBED, AND MAY BE WILLING TO CONSIDER A HIGHER CONTRIBUTION RATE IN ORDER TO KEEP THOSE BENEFITS.

BUT I NEED TO POINT OUT THAT THAT WOULD BE FOR NEW HIRES. TO DO IT FOR EXISTING MEMBERS WOULD BE.

THAT'S A LEGAL DISCUSSION.

GOTCHA. YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING TO THAT REGARD? WELL, I JUST. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE, BECAUSE IT IS A LEGAL QUESTION, THAT SHELLY KIND OF DIDN'T DIVE INTO AN AREA THAT I KNOW SHE'S NOT VERY COMFORTABLE IN. BUT I, AS AN ATTORNEY MYSELF, AND HAVING LAURA GAIL HERE, WE CAN ABSOLUTELY ANSWER SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS AND KIND OF FLUSH SOME OF THAT OUT IF YOU'D LIKE. OKAY, LAURA GAIL, I'LL HAVE YOU COME UP, PLEASE, IN SOME OF LAURA GAIL SULLIVAN. I'M OUTSIDE COUNSEL FOR CPIRS. AND I'VE WORKED WITH A NUMBER OF OTHER RETIREMENT SYSTEMS AND BEEN WORKING WITH PUBLIC RETIREMENT FOR OVER 20 YEARS HERE IN THE STATE. WE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH SOME OF Y'. ALL. I THINK THAT EVERYBODY WAS GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS AHEAD OF THIS. AND SOME FOLKS HAD ASKED ABOUT MAKING CHANGES FOR ACTIVES. AND WHAT WE TOLD YOU WAS, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T PROVIDE LEGAL ADVICE.

YOU'LL HAVE YOUR OWN LEGAL ADVISORS AND YOU SHOULD ASK THEIR LEGAL OPINION.

BUT I'LL READ TO YOU FROM THE PLAN OF GOVERNMENT.

THE PENSION RIGHTS AND BENEFITS OF EMPLOYEES ENROLLED AS MEMBERS OF THE RETIREMENT SYSTEM SHALL BE DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE PLAN OF GOVERNMENT TOGETHER WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE RETIREMENT ORDINANCES ENACTED UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THIS SECTION THAT ARE IN EFFECT ON THE DATE THAT SUCH EMPLOYEES ENROLLED AS MEMBERS.

THE COUNCIL SHALL NOT DIMINISH OR IMPAIR THOSE RIGHTS AND BENEFITS IN ANY WAY. SO Y' ALL CAN ASK YOUR LEGAL COUNSEL ABOUT MAKING CHANGES UNDER THE PLAN OF GOVERNMENT FOR ACTIVES. BUT THAT IS WHAT I WOULD POINT Y' ALL TO. YEAH, THAT ANSWER, COUSIN, POINT OF ORDER.

REAL QUICK.

ANYBODY THAT'S HAVING AN OUTSIDE CONVERSATION, CAN Y' ALL PLEASE STEP OUTSIDE? THIS IS DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND, UNDERSTAND AND TO CONCENTRATE ON. AND I AM NOT HEARING ANYTHING THAT THE SPEAKERS ARE SAYING. PLEASE.

THANK YOU.

OKAY, TALK TO ME ABOUT NEW HIRES GOING UP ON THE RATE FOR NEW HIRES.

THEN WHAT? WHAT IS YOUR THOUGHTS? YOU CAN MAKE CHANGES FOR NEW HIRES AS YOU DETERMINE BECAUSE THE PLAN OF GOVERNMENT DOES AUTHORIZE THE COUNCIL TO SET UP THIS SYSTEM AND DETERMINE THE BENEFITS, TO DETERMINE WHEN THE VESTING PROVISIONS AND WHAT THOSE ACCRUALS LOOK LIKE.

BUT AS YOU'VE ALREADY HEARD, WHEN THE BOARD ASKED THE ACTUARY TO DETERMINE A SPLIT RATE, WHAT WAS FOUND IS THAT FOR NON PUBLIC SAFETY, AND THIS IS LUMPING EVERYBODY BEFORE 2015 WHO HAS A LITTLE BIT BETTER BENEFIT NON PUBLIC SAFETY WITH THE NEW HIRES AFTER 2015 THAT HAVE A LITTLE LESS RICH BENEFIT.

YEAH, THEY'RE ALREADY BEING PAID FOR.

BOTH GROUPS OF EMPLOYEES PRE AND POST 2015 ARE CONTRIBUTING 9.5% OF PAY. THE AMOUNT THAT THE EMPLOYER PAYS THAT FUNDS.

THIS YEAR'S BENEFIT ACCRUAL FOR THOSE PEOPLE IS 0.8% OF PAY. THAT'S WHY YOU HEARD THE ACTUARY SAY THAT THE NON PUBLIC SAFETY FOLKS ARE JUST ABOUT FUNDING THEIR OWN BENEFIT. SO THE BULK OF THE COST IS THE UAL. THE UAL WAS THE PAYMENTS, THE SCHEDULE OF PAYMENTS, THE AMORTIZATION OF PAYMENTS. IT WAS GROWING BY DESIGN. IT WASN'T NECESSARILY GROWING BECAUSE ANY CHOICES WERE MADE EXCEPT THAT THE AMORTIZATION WAS GOING TO BE INCREASING, WAS GOING TO BE AN OPEN SCHEDULE. THOSE CHANGES. CHANGES TO MAKE IT CLOSED. TO TRY TO GET TO A DATE WHEN WE EXPECT THE UAL THAT EXISTS TODAY TO BE FULLY FUNDED. THE BOARD HAS PUT THOSE IN PLACE FOR THE VALUATION THAT THE PAYMENTS WILL START IN JANUARY. SO THOSE CHANGES ARE BEING MADE. THE

[02:05:01]

BUT MOST THE BENEFIT. THERE ARE SOME INTERESTING PROVISIONS I'VE SEEN IN THE CPRS THAT I HAVEN'T SEEN IN OTHER PLACES. AND SHELLY WOULD TELL YOU THE SAME THING.

BUT THE BENEFIT DOES NOT GET THAT MUCH DIFFERENT FROM THE OTHER STATE AND STATEWIDE SYSTEMS THAT WE'VE SEEN.

GOTCHA.

AS FAR AS THAT CONTRIBUTION RATE IS SIMILAR AS WELL.

THE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION RATE, THE RETIREMENT SYSTEMS THAT HAVE 9.5 OR HIGHER.

FIREFIGHTERS RETIREMENT SYSTEM, THE JUDGE'S PLAN WHERE THEY GET A 3.5% ACCRUAL RATE AND THEY VEST IMMEDIATELY. THE LASERS, HAZARDOUS DUTY SERVICE, THE STATEWIDE POLICE SYSTEM AND THE SHERIFF'S GOTCHA. AND THE STATE POLICE HAVE NINE AND A HALF.

SO THERE ARE SOME OF THE NON PUBLIC SAFETY SYSTEMS THAT HAVE. THE BOARD HAS A LITTLE BIT OF ABILITY, SOME FLEXIBILITY ON MAKING THAT CONTRIBUTION RATE FOR THE EMPLOYEES A LITTLE BIT HIGHER. Y' ALL HAVE SOMETHING IN YOUR STATUTE THAT PUSHES THE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION UP AS THE OVERALL CONTRIBUTION GOES UP ALREADY.

BUT MOST EMPLOYEES THAT ARE PAYING NINE AND A HALF ARE GETTING PUBLIC SAFETY BENEFITS IN OTHER SYSTEMS. GOTCHA.

THANK YOU.

I THINK THAT THAT ADEQUATELY ANSWERS MY QUESTION.

I APPRECIATE YOU.

ONE MORE QUESTION FOR MR. SULLIVAN. THIS IS MORE OF A CONCEPTUAL QUESTION, I GUESS. AS QUICKLY AS YOU CAN.

I HAVE A MINUTE AND 30 LEFT, BUT WALK ME AGAIN THROUGH THE JUSTIFICATION FOR NOT GOING FOR DEFINED CONTRIBUTION PLAN.

THE REASON WHY I'M ASKING IS BECAUSE AS I READ YOUR PROPOSAL, THE OVERALL THEME HERE IS TO MITIGATE FUTURE RISK. AND A DEFINED CONTRIBUTION PLAN SORT OF ULTIMATELY IS THE BEST WAY TO MITIGATE FUTURE RISK FOR A PLAN AS I SEE IT. SO WALK ME THROUGH WHY WE WOULD NOT DO THAT.

YEAH. AND FIRST I'D SAY IT MITIGATE RISKS FOR THE CITY PARISH. IT TRANSFERS MOST OF THAT RISK TO THE INDIVIDUAL PARTICIPANTS.

THE PRIMARY REASON DEFINED CONTRIBUTION IS PROBLEMATIC IS YOU CANNOT HAVE DEFINED CONTRIBUTION ALONE. YOU HAVE TO HAVE EITHER STILL A PENSION OR SOCIAL SECURITY. THAT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING OF HOW THE AGREEMENTS THAT ALLOW YOU TO BE EXEMPT FROM SOCIAL SECURITY WORK. NOW THAT MEANS THAT IF YOU DO SOCIAL SECURITY, THERE'S A NEW 12.4% THAT HAS TO COME FROM SOMEWHERE THAT HAS NOT BEEN THERE BEFORE.

THAT'S 6.2 FROM THE MEMBER, 6.2 FROM THE STATE, CITY, PARISH. SO THAT'S ALREADY MORE THAN WHAT YOU'RE PUTTING IN FOR YOUR ON AVERAGE, FOR YOUR PARTICIPANTS. SO YOU'VE ALREADY, YOU'VE ALREADY REPLACED THE PENSION WITH SOCIAL SECURITY AND YOU HAVEN'T GIVEN THEM A DEFERRED CONTRIBUTION AMOUNT YET.

IN THAT THERE WOULD BE NO REQUIREMENT FOR US TO PAY A UAL FOR THEM THOUGH, RIGHT? WELL, THERE WOULD BE NO NEW UAL CREATED, BUT THE OLD UAL IS STILL THERE, STILL GOING TO BE THERE UNTIL IT GETS PAID DOWN, EITHER THROUGH GREAT INVESTMENT RETURN OR HIGHER CONTRIBUTIONS.

ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.

I APPRECIATE YOU, COUNCILWOMAN.

RACCA. SO WHENEVER WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THESE CHANGES, THEY I JUST WANT TO BE ABSOLUTELY, ABUNDANTLY CLEAR. THEY'RE ONLY GOING TO IMPACT THE NEW EMPLOYEE.

CORRECT. ALL RIGHT. AND SO WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NEW EMPLOYEE, WE TALKED ABOUT WHAT THAT EMPLOYEE WOULD LOOK LIKE COMING IN. AND YOU DISCUSSED RETENTION AND RETAINING THESE EMPLOYEES, DID YOU, AS A CONSULTANT, AS YOUR FIRM LOOKS AT DIFFERENT TYPES OF RETIREMENT PLANS FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF MUNICIPALITIES, ARE YOU COMMONLY SEEING THAT A NEW EMPLOYEE GRADUATING FROM COLLEGE IS SPENDING 20 TO 30 YEARS IN A POSITION WITH THE CITY, PARISH OR A MUNICIPAL JOB? NO, WE DON'T SEE THAT.

THERE'S MUCH MORE MOBILITY. SO PEOPLE ARE CHANGING JOBS. YOUR CURRENT ASSUMPTIONS FOR YOUR NON PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP ASSUMES BASICALLY A 50% TURNOVER IN 10 YEARS SO THAT HALF THE PEOPLE YOU HIRE ARE GONE BEFORE THEY'RE EVER INVESTED.

THE PLAN THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT CURRENTLY, THE PERSON THAT IS CONTRIBUTING TO THIS PLAN AS A NEW GRAD, NEW EMPLOYEE, WHAT BENEFIT DO THEY HAVE? IF THEY LEAVE FIVE YEARS IN, THEY JUST GET THEIR EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTIONS BACK.

AND WHAT BENEFIT DO THEY HAVE? IF THEY LEAVE 10 YEARS IN, 10 YEARS IN, THEN THEY HAVE A VESTED BENEFIT IN THE PLAN AND THEY WAIT UNTIL THEIR NORMAL RETIREMENT AGE TO RECEIVE THAT BENEFIT.

AND WHAT IS THEIR VESTED BENEFIT? IT'S GOING TO DEPEND ON THEIR SERVICE, ACTUAL YEARS OF SERVICE AND COMPENSATION FOR THEIR FIVE YEAR AVERAGE LEADING UP TO WHEN THEY LEFT EMPLOYMENT.

BUT AT ANY RATE, FROM YEAR ZERO TO YEAR NINE, THE BENEFIT'S NOT PORTABLE, CORRECT? CORRECT. THE BENEFIT IS NOT PORTABLE.

ALL RIGHT, NEXT, WHENEVER WE'RE LOOKING AT, AND I THINK THAT WE SAID IN LINE WITH OUR PEERS SEVERAL TIMES AMONGST THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE HAD AND THE REPORT, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT

[02:10:01]

SO WOULD 48.8% BE HIGH OR LOW FOR A TOTAL CONTRIBUTION RATE? THAT'S COMPARED TO NATIONAL AVERAGES. THAT'S HIGH.

WHAT WOULD THE NATIONAL AVERAGE BE? I WOULD SAY IT'S CLOSER TO 20 TO 25% FOR THE EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION.

ARE WE TAKING THAT INTO ACCOUNT WITH THE NEW EMPLOYEES? YES. AND ANOTHER KEY THING TO FACTOR IN THERE. YOU'RE NOT PARTICIPATING IN SOCIAL SECURITY. MANY SYSTEMS THAT HAVE CONTRIBUTION RATES AROUND 20 TO 25% DO STILL PARTICIPATE IN SOCIAL SECURITY. SO THEY'RE CONTRIBUTING 6.2% IN ADDITION TO THOSE.

SO OTHER MUNICIPALITIES ARE CONTRIBUTING TO SOCIAL SECURITY.

MORE ARE THAN ARE NOT.

YES.

MORE ARE THAN ARE NOT.

OKAY. BUT WHEN THEY'RE DOING THAT, THEIR RATE IS STILL LESS THAN THE 48.8%.

SURE, ABSOLUTELY.

AND IT'S STILL LESS THAN THE 34.5%.

YES, YES.

THAT AVERAGE. RIGHT.

YES.

OKAY. AND WHENEVER WE'RE LOOKING AT THE POTENTIAL CHANGES THAT WE'RE MAKING TO THE PLAN AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE DROP PROGRAM, HOW IMPACTFUL IS A DROP PROGRAM AND CHANGES TO THAT PARTICULAR PROGRAM GOING TO BE FOR EMPLOYEES 20 TO 30 YEARS FROM NOW THAT DON'T. WHEN WE'RE SEEING GENERATIONALLY EMPLOYEES NOT STAYING IN POSITIONS THAT LONG AND MOVING TO OTHER JOBS.

RIGHT. I ACTUALLY MADE THIS COMMENT BEFORE I CAME OVER FOR THE MEETING. I DOUBT IF YOU'VE HIRED ANYONE IN THE LAST 10 YEARS WHO, WHEN THEY WERE HIRED AS A YOUNG 20, 25 YEAR OLD, SAID, I'M REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THE DROP. IT'S JUST NOT SOMETHING THAT'S ON THE RADAR. THEY'RE PROBABLY NOT EXCITED ABOUT THE PENSION EITHER.

BECAUSE WHEN I WAS 20 OR 25 YEARS OLD, I WASN'T VERY EXCITED ABOUT PENSIONS.

BUT I LIVE AND DIE BY PENSIONS NOW. THAT'S JUST REALITY. YOUR INTEREST AND ENTHUSIASM FOR PENSION BENEFITS DOES THIS.

AS YOU GET OLDER, IT INCREASES EXPONENTIALLY. SO WHILE THE DROP IS NOT VERY INTERESTING TO ANYONE UNDER THE AGE OF 35, PROBABLY EVERYONE OVER THE AGE OF 50 IS KEENLY INTERESTED IN THE DROP.

GOT IT. ALL RIGHT. JUST TO CLEAR UP SOME LANGUAGE, WHENEVER WE WERE LOOKING AT YOUR PRESENTATION AND WE'RE DOING SUMMARY OF OBSERVATIONS, OVER 60% OF THE CURRENT NEW BENEFIT IS PROVIDED BY MEMBER CONTRIBUTIONS.

THAT'S CORRECT.

THAT'S CORRECT. AND THAT IS THE AGGREGATE. SO THAT INCLUDES BOTH PUBLIC SAFETY AND NON PUBLIC SAFETY.

AND SO WHENEVER WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MEMBER.

WHENEVER WE'RE.

EXCUSE ME, GUYS, SORRY, I'M TRYING TO HEAR, WHENEVER WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MEMBER CONTRIBUTIONS, IS THERE A FLUCTUATION IN EMPLOYMENT, PRIVATIZATION OF EMPLOYEES, OR LOSING A MASS AMOUNT OF EMPLOYEES GOING TO ALSO IMPACT THAT CONTRIBUTION NUMBER, HOW DOES THAT CHANGE.

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HOW CHANGES IN EMPLOYMENT CHANGE THE MEMBER CONTRIBUTION.

YES. SO IF YOU HAVE LESS MEMBERS CONTRIBUTING, WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? YEAH, LESS MEMBERS CONTRIBUTING SHOULDN'T HURT YOU ON THE WAY WHAT WE CALL THE NORMAL COST COMPONENT, THE VALUE OF NEW BENEFITS BEING EARNED.

BUT IT DOES MAKE LESS COMPENSATION AVAILABLE TO FUND THAT UNFUNDED ACCRUED LIABILITY. IT'S STILL THE SAME AMOUNT AS A DOLLAR AMOUNT AND YOU'RE STILL FUNDING IT THE SAME AS A DOLLAR AMOUNT.

BUT AS A PERCENTAGE OF PAY, IT LOOKS LARGER AND LARGER IF YOU HAVE FEWER EMPLOYEES.

SO WHENEVER WE HAVE OUR UNFUNDED LIABILITY AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FUNDING THAT PART, OFTENTIMES WE'VE ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE, HOW CAN WE FUND OUR UNFUNDED LIABILITY, WHAT ARE THE NUMBERS AND THE RATIOS WITH REGARD TO HOW MANY EMPLOYEES WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO KEEP THAT BALANCE. AND OFTENTIMES THE RESPONSE IS OUR NUMBERS ARE ACTUARIALLY SOUND.

SO WE HAVE AN ACTUARIAL FORMULA TO DETERMINE THAT WE HAVE AN UNFUNDED LIABILITY THAT IS CURRENTLY BEING SUPPORTED THROUGH MEMBER CONTRIBUTIONS.

BUT WITH THAT BEING SAID, WHERE ARE THE TIPPING SCALES? WHAT ARE THE NUMBERS? WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE WHENEVER WE'RE LOOKING AT RATIOS AS FAR AS EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTIONS, EMPLOYEES IN OUR DEPARTMENTS, WHERE ARE THE SCALES WHERE WE GET INTO A HIGH RISK PLACE? CAN YOU TALK SPEAK TO THAT? YEAH. AND THIS WILL REALLY BE MY ACTUARIAL OPINION. AND I PROBABLY SMILE A LITTLE BIT WHEN YOU SAY ACTUARIALLY SOUND, BUT I VIEW THAT AS A LITTLE BIT LIKE SAYING PRETTY. IT'S IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER WHETHER SOMETHING IS OR IS NOT ACTUARIALLY SOUND. I THINK THE IDEAL PENSION PLAN IS OVER 80, 80 OR OVER 90% FUNDED. IF YOU'RE BELOW THAT, THERE IS SIGNIFICANT RISK IN YOUR SYSTEM. IF YOU'RE BELOW 60%, THERE IS CONSIDERABLE RISK IN YOUR SYSTEM. THE DANGER IS THAT YOU'RE 60% FUNDED AND THEN WE HAVE A 20% MARKET CORRECTION AND THEN SUDDENLY 60 GETS MUCH, MUCH WORSE. SO MORE IS BETTER.

CERTAINLY FROM A FUNDED RATIO, THE TIPPING POINT IS HARD TO SAY. IT'S GOING TO DEPEND ON A NUMBER OF CIRCUMSTANCES.

[02:15:01]

THERE'S MANY IN BETTER SHAPE.

ULTIMATELY IT COMES DOWN TO THE COMMITMENT TO MAKE THE MINIMUM RECOMMENDED CONTRIBUTION WHEN THEY'RE DUE EACH YEAR. AND AS YOU'VE SEEN, THAT RATE HAS GONE UP OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS.

WE WOULD HOPE WE'RE ENTERING A PERIOD MAYBE NOW WHERE THAT RATE STABILIZES OR BEGINS TO COME DOWN A LITTLE BIT.

YOU'VE GOT SOME ACTUARIAL OR SOME ASSET GAINS. FROM THE STANDPOINT THAT THE MARKET VALUE RIGHT NOW IS ABOVE THE ACTUARIAL VALUE BY ABOUT 30 TO 40 MILLION, WHICH MEANS OVER THE NEXT FEW YEARS YOU'LL RECOGNIZE SOME OF THAT. SO WE DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE TO HAVE A 7% RETURN TO GET A 7% ACTUARIAL RETURN.

SO MAYBE THERE'S SOME GOOD NEWS COMING DOWN THE PIKE. BUT THE DANGER IS ALWAYS BIG INVESTMENT OR ECONOMIC EVENTS THAT HURT THE ASSET STATUS OF THE PLAN OR AS WE'VE SEEN ALREADY, THESE LONG TERM TRENDS OF THINGS LIKE THE DROP OVER TIME THAT PUT PRESSURE ON THE SYSTEM.

ABSOLUTELY. AND SO WHEN YOU SPECIFICALLY SAID YOU HAVE TO MAKE THE COMMITMENT AND ABSOLUTELY, I BELIEVE EVERYBODY HERE WOULD ABSOLUTELY MAKE THE COMMITMENT AS LONG AS WE HAD THE ABILITY. I THINK THE ABILITY TO PAY IS PROBABLY A LITTLE BIT MORE VOLATILE THAN THE COMMITMENT TO PAY.

BUT THE REALITY OF LOOKING AT THE NUMBERS WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT PERCENTAGE WHERE YOU SAID, HEY, 60% IS HIGH RISK, 90%, 80%, WE'RE DOING GREAT.

WHERE ARE WE? WHERE'S OUR 65%? OH, OKAY, WE'RE AT 65% AND THAT'S INTERESTING. I DON'T THINK I HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS.

COUNCILMAN GAUDET, DIRECTOR MIRZA, IF I COULD ASK FOR YOU TO COME UP. AND THEN MY INITIAL QUESTIONS ARE MORE PROCESS RELATED AND SO I'M GOING TO ASK OUR COUNCIL ADMINISTRATOR AS WELL. SO THE CPIRS BOARD AND THE RETIREMENT ADMINISTRATOR HAVE MADE RECOMMENDATIONS NOW PROPOSED BENEFIT CHANGES TO THE COUNCIL BUT IT'S IN THE FORM OF A MEMORANDUM AND NOW A REPORT.

AND SO TONIGHT WE'RE NOT BEING ASKED TO TAKE ANY FORMAL ACTION ON ANYTHING. SO WHAT IS THE MECHANISM BY WHICH THIS COUNCIL EITHER TAKES ACTION OR SENDS WORD BACK TO THE SECRETS BOARD? SO YOU COULD HANDLE THIS ONE OF AT LEAST TWO WAYS. THE FIRST WOULD BE THAT ANY COUNCILMEMBER COULD TAKE THE INFORMATION RECEIVED TONIGHT AND PUT AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA TO PROPOSE CHANGES TO THE RETIREMENT ORDINANCE.

ANOTHER WAY WOULD BE FOR THE RETIREMENT BOARD TO VOTE AND AGREE TO PLACE AN ITEM ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA BECAUSE THEY CAN PLACE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA AND REQUEST CHANGES TO THE RETIREMENT ORDINANCE.

THANK YOU FOR THAT. HAS THE BOARD HAD DISCUSSIONS ABOUT TAKING ACTION TO PUT AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA? NOT SPECIFICALLY. IT WAS OUR INSTRUCTION TO COME UP WITH RECOMMENDATIONS FOR METRO COUNCIL SO THAT WAY YOU ALL COULD MAKE THE DECISION.

SO THEY DID DO THAT. OUR BOARD MEETING IS NOT UNTIL THE END OF JULY TO WHERE THEY WOULD.

WE WOULD COME UP WITH LANGUAGE AND THEN PROPOSE TO THEM TO THEN BRING TO YOU.

BUT IF ANY OF YOU WANTED TO MAKE ANY OF THE CHANGES, BY ALL MEANS MY OFFICE CAN BE AVAILABLE TO HELP ASSIST DRAFT WHEN PUTTING THAT TOGETHER.

MR. DANIELS, YOU'RE THE CHAIR OF THE BOARD, CORRECT? IF YOU'LL JOIN HER. SO I MEAN I GUESS BROADLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE CHANGES THAT YOU ALL HAVE PROPOSED. LET ME ASK WITH RESPECT TO THE ELIMINATION OF THE SPOUSAL DEATH BENEFIT, THE NON VESTED SPOUSAL DEATH BENEFIT, THE DROP MODIFICATIONS AND THE TWO FOR ONE, THE ELIMINATION OF THE TWO FOR ONE LEAVE CONVERSION, DID Y' ALL LOOK AT MAKING IT VOLUNTARY FOR ON THOSE THREE, SPECIFICALLY VOLUNTARY FOR CURRENT EMPLOYEES? IN OTHER WORDS, YOU KNOW, REDUCING THE DROP PERIOD FROM FIVE YEARS TO THREE YEARS, BUT MAKING THAT MODIFIED DROP TERMS AVAILABLE ON A VOLUNTARY BASIS TO CURRENT EMPLOYEES? JAY DANIELS, CHAIR NO, WE DIDN'T. NOT FOR THE CURRENT EMPLOYEES.

THIS WAS ALL SOMEWHAT PROSPECTIVE FOR ALL THE NEW EMPLOYEES GOING FORWARD, I'D ENCOURAGE YOU ALL TO LOOK AT I MEAN, I THINK THERE MAY BE SOME EMPLOYEES PARTICULARLY DROP PARTICULARLY ON THE TWO FOR ONE LEAVE CONVERSION, WHO ACTUALLY BENEFIT FROM IT.

AND AGAIN, NOT MANDATORY. BE VERY CLEAR. I UNDERSTAND WHAT'S BEEN SAID MANY TIMES TONIGHT, NOT MANDATORY, BUT A VOLUNTARY SO FOR NEW HIRES GOING FORWARD AND A VOLUNTARY OPTION ON THOSE FOR EXISTING COULD ASSIST IN THE ULTIMATE GOAL OF COST SAVINGS AND COULD BENEFIT SOME EMPLOYEES, EXISTING EMPLOYEES. SO TO ME, I THINK THE BOARD, WHAT I'D ASK

[02:20:01]

THAT'S IT.

ALL RIGHT.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. I THINK THAT'S IT. I MEAN, I STILL AM SORT OF, I DON'T HAVE MY FINGER ON THE PULSE OF WHAT'S NEXT BECAUSE I THINK YOU'VE HEARD SOME SENTIMENT TONIGHT ABOUT MAYBE THESE DON'T GO FAR ENOUGH. I'M NOW VOICING, WELL, MAYBE THERE'S SOME OTHER THINGS YOU COULD LOOK AT. AND SO I'M NOT SURE, YOU KNOW, HOW WE COME TOGETHER AND SAY, WELL, OKAY, NOW ONCE THE MEETING IS DONE, HERE'S WHAT YOU DO NEXT. SO ANYWAY, WE'LL KEEP TALKING AND I'M ONE OF 12 AND SO WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS.

WE ARE OPEN TO ANY ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTION OR IDEAS THAT YOU HAVE. AGAIN, OUR BOARD MEETS AT THE END OF JULY. SO IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT YOU'D LIKE US TO DO AND HAVE THE BOARD APPROVE, YOU HAVE FIVE WEEKS.

YOU MIGHT GET 12 SETS OF INSTRUCTIONS.

WELL, THEN WE'LL HAVE A LOT TO WORK TO DO IN JULY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

THANKS FOR ALL THE WORK Y' ALL DID ON THIS AS WELL.

TO ALL OF YOU. I THINK WE'VE MET TWICE AND THE MEMORANDUMS AND INFORMATION SUBMITTED IN ADVANCE IS VERY HELPFUL. SO THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH FOR ALL THE WORK THAT'S GOING INTO IT.

LIKE A BOAT.

WE'RE GOING TO FINISH THIS FIRST.

I KNOW.

LET ME DO THE EMERGENCY ITEMS FIRST.

ABSOLUTELY.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ITEMS ONE.

YEAH.

BABY STEPS TIMES 143.

DID WE RECEIVE THE REPORT? WE DID.

OKAY.

PRETTY POSITIVE WE RECEIVED IT.

WELL, I UNDERSTAND WE HEARD IT.

I DIDN'T KNOW IF ANY.

ACTION.

[140. 26-00751]

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

THE RECEPTION WAS RECORDED.

ITEMS 140 THROUGH 144 ARE EMERGENCY ITEMS. IN ACCORDANCE WITH ORDINANCE 16442. THESE ITEMS, WE DECLARED AN EMERGENCY BY TWO THIRDS. VOTED THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL. I NEED A MOTION TO DECLARE THEM AN EMERGENCY.

MOTION BY COUNCILWOMAN AMOROSO. SECOND BY COUNCILMAN HUDSON. ANY OPPOSITION TO ON THE MOTION TO DECLARE EMERGENCY? ALL RIGHT.

ITEM 140. AUTHORIZING APPROVING THE SELECTION OF THE ADVOCATE AS THE OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE PARISH VISA.

BATON ROUGE CITY OF BATON ROUGE FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 01, 2026 UNTIL JULY TILL JUNE 30, 2027, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LOUISIANA REVISED STATUTES 1 43, 141A BY COUNCIL ADMINISTRATIVE TREASURER.

REGION FOR THE EMERGENCY IS TO SELECT THE JOURNAL PRIOR TO JULY 1, 2026. ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SHOULD WE HEAR FROM THE JOURNAL? IT DID SAY SADVOCATE, RIGHT? IT SAID SAVAGE.

OKAY.

SEE NONE MORE. MOTION BY

[141. 26-00754]

RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE DUE DATE FOR LOCAL HOSPITAL ASSESSMENT PAYMENTS FOR THE EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH COUNCIL LOCAL HEALTHCARE PROVIDER PARTICIPATION PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025 BY COUNCIL ADMINISTRATOR TREASURER. REASON FOR EMERGENCY IS TO EXTEND THE DUE DATE BEYOND JUNE 30, 2026. ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, GO TO COUNCIL.

HAVE A MOTION. MOTION BY COUNCILWOMAN AMOROSO. SECOND

[142. 26-00753]

ITEM 142. AUTHORIZING MAYOR PRESIDENT TO ENTER INTO A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT TO COORDINATE SERVICE DELIVERY OF MANDATED PARTNERS AND PROVIDERS ON BEHALF OF THE LOCAL WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT BOARD. 21. WITH ECKERD CONNECTS DOING BUSINESS AS ECKERD YOUTH ALTERNATIVES, INC. BY WORKFORCE WORKFORCE INVESTMENT DIRECTOR. REASON FOR THE EMERGENCY IS THE CURRENT CONTRACT WITH ECKERD CONNECTS EXPIRES JUNE 30, 2026. ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS? IT'S SEE, NONE GO TO COUNCIL.

COUNCILMAN COLEMAN, IS THAT WORKFORCE INVESTMENT DIRECTOR HERE? AND COME AND HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS.

GOOD AFTERNOON. GIRLY ANDERSON, INTERIM WHEEL WITH CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR FOR EMPLOYMENT BILL. OH, I'M SORRY. OKAY, SO IT'S AN EMERGENCY ITEM BECAUSE WE WERE WAITING ON LOUISIANA WORKS TO GIVE US GUIDANCE ON WHETHER WE WERE GOING TO DO A SINGLE STATE ONE STOP OPERATOR OR IF THEY WERE GOING TO LET US CONTINUE WITH THE 15 INDIVIDUAL CONTRACTS WHILE THEY DECIDE HOW WE MOVE FORWARD WITH IMPLEMENTING SINGLE STATE.

[02:25:02]

AM.

AND WHEN DID THEY GIVE YOU ALL THAT? MAY 26TH.

OKAY.

MONTH LATER.

OKAY.

COUNCILMAN HURST.

SO IS THE PROCESS CHANGED? WHAT.

WHAT PROCESS? JUST THE. THE PROCESS FOR WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT. I KNOW WE KIND OF HAD A FREEZE ON GETTING NEW PEOPLE UNTIL THE DECISION WAS MADE.

SO NOW WE CAN START SENDING PEOPLE BACK TO YOU GET EMPLOYED. RIGHT.

SO NO, WE'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH SINGLE STATE. WE ARE SETTING UP JOB FAIRS FOR OUR TEMORARY WORK WORKERS THAT ARE CURRENTLY UNDEREMPLOYED VR.

WE'RE FIRST HITTING UP THE CITY. THE CITY'S GOING TO DO SOMETHING FOR US, FOR OUR PEOPLE, AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE OUR ONE STOP OPERATOR, MS. CIN, BRING IN SOME OTHER AREA PARTNERS TO CONNECT THOSE INDIVIDUALS TO EMPLOYMENT.

SO I'M KIND OF CONFUSED. SO I UNDERSTAND THE JOB FAIR BECAUSE I'VE SENT SOME FOLKS AWAY WHEN YOU'VE ASSISTED THEM OR AT LEAST DISCUSS ASSISTING PUTTING A JOB FAIR, EVEN FOR SMALL BUSINESSES. MY QUESTION IS, IF I HAVE SOMEBODY WHO IS UNEMPLOYED BUT WANTS TO BE GAINFULLY EMPLOYED, I CAN NO LONGER SEND THEM TO YOU. I HAVE TO SEND THEM TO A JOB FAIR. SO IS THE STATE GOING TO HAVE SOMEWHERE WHERE I CAN SEND THEM THAT YOU ALL REDIRECT SO THAT THEY CAN GO THROUGH SOME OF THE SAME EMPLOYMENT PROGRAMS OR ALL THOSE CHANGING AS WELL SO YOU CAN STILL SEND THEM TO EMPLOYEE VR? WE WOULD ASSIST WITH JOB SEARCHES. WE ARE NO LONGER OFFERING TEMORARY WORK EXPERIENCE PLACEMENTS BECAUSE WE. WE'RE THE ONLY LOCAL AREA THAT OFFERS THAT. AND SO I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE GOING TO SUPPORT IT MOVING FORWARD WHEN EVERYONE GOES TO SINGLE STATE. SO WE JUST DIDN'T WANT TO ADD ANYONE ELSE TO WORK. AND THEN WE HAVE TO.

AND THEN WE HAVE TO LET THEM GO.

HAVE YOU ASKED DIRECTLY IF THAT WAS A POSSIBILITY AND WHAT THE TIMEFRAME WOULD BE? BECAUSE THAT WAS A HUGE HELP IN THE MARKETPLACE GETTING PEOPLE EMPLOYED PRETTY FAST. YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY WITH A JOB IS MORE ATTRACTIVE THAN SOMEBODY WHO HASN'T. DOESN'T HAVE ONE.

RIGHT. PEOPLE QUESTION WHY? SO FINDING SMALL BUSINESSES OR EVEN SOMETIMES OUR OFFICES WHERE WE CAN EMPLOY PEOPLE, IT LOOKS GOOD WHEN YOU WORK FOR THE CITY OF BATON ROUGE ON A PIECE OF PAPER. RIGHT. SO WERE YOU MANDATED TO STOP OR DID YOU CHOOSE TO STOP? NO, WE CHOSE TO STOP BECAUSE WE DIDN'T WANT TO INCREASE.

INCREASE THE LAYOFF RATE.

HAVE YOU. BUT I MEAN, WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS NOW FOR SIX MONTHS. SO THAT COULD HAVE BEEN SIX MONTHS SOMEBODY WAS EMPLOYED LOOKING FOR ANOTHER JOB. SO MY QUESTION IS, IS CAN YOU REACH OUT TO THE STATE AND ASK WHAT THE TIME FRAME LOOKS LIKE. SO THAT YOU KNOW WHAT YOU CAN DO. SO THAT WE CAN SEND PEOPLE TO YOU. I DON'T CARE IF IT'S FOR 30 DAYS OR FOR 12 MONTHS, ESPECIALLY IF IT'S GOING TO TAKE THEM A WHILE TO CONSOLIDATE TO A STATE PROGRAM.

I WILL ABSOLUTELY ASK.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

YOU'RE WELCOME.

MOTION BY. I'M SORRY, COUNCILMAN HURST. SECOND BY

[143. 26-00791]

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

143. AUTHORIZING MAYOR PRESIDENT ON BEHALF OF THE LIBRARY BOARD OF CONTROL TO EXECUTE THE FIRST OPTIONAL ONE YEAR RENEWAL OF CONTRACT WITH OKAY JANITORIAL SERVICING IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $720,000 WITH ONE OPTIONAL ONE YEAR RENEWAL FOR TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1,440,000 BY THE LIBRARY DIRECTOR.

REASON FOR EMERGENCY IS TO REQUEST METRO COUNSEL FOR OKAY JANITORIAL PREFERRED PERFORM THE WORK AS SPECIFIED IN THE CONTRACT, BUT THEY CANNOT PAY THEM UNTIL THE RESOLUTION IS AMENDED TO INCLUDE THE TWO OPTIONAL RENEWALS OUTLINED IN THE ATTACHMENT. YOU ARE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK

[144. 26-00796]

144. RESCHEDULING THE JULY 15, 2026 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL'S ONLY MEETING TO JULY 22, 2026 AT BY COUNCIL ADMINISTRATOR TREASURER.

REASON FOR EMERGENCY IS IN ORDER TO MOVE THE MEETING.

ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK

[ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS (Part 2 of 2)]

MOTION. MOTION BY COUNCILWOMAN AMOROSO. SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN HARRIS. ANY OPPOSITION? MOTION CARRIES.

MOTION TO RECONSIDER ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS.

ALL RIGHT.

WE HAVE A. WE HAVE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTER BY COUNCILMAN HURST.

I'M GONNA OBJECT.

OH, I'M WALKING.

HOLD ON.

WAS THAT AN OBJECTION? NO.

I NEED A SECOND FOR A MOTION TO RECONSIDER. SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN COLEMAN. ANY OPPOSITION? MOTION TO RECONSIDER. ITEMS BEEN RECONSIDERED. I DON'T NEED

[02:30:03]

OKAY. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTER OF EMERGENCY. ITEM A.

AUTHORIZING MAYOR PRESIDENT TO EXECUTE AN AMENDED AND RESTATED SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH THE EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH HOUSING AUTHORITY AND RELATED PROJECT PARTIES, INCLUDING PARTNERS FOR PROGRESS INCORPORATED, DOING BUSINESS AS PARTNER SOUTHEAST AND CYPRESS AT ARDENDALE PHASE 1. LP FOR THE CYPRESS AT ARDENDALE PHASE 1 AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PROJECT FUNDED IN PART THROUGH AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT CORONAVIRUS STATE AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUNDS SO AS TO CLARIFY AND REALIGN THE EXISTING AGREEMENT WITH THE PROJECT'S LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT FINANCING STRUCTURE, DOWNSTREAM LOAN DISBURSEMENT FRAMEWORK, PAYMENT TERMS AND COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS WITH NO INCREASE TO EXISTING ALLOCATION AND NO CHANGE TO THE APPROVED PROJECT PURPOSE. MY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR.

REASON THIS ITEM IS BEING REQUESTED AS ADMINISTRATIVE MATTER IS TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNAL DEADLINES. I NEED A MOTION TO WAIVE THE RULES.

MOTION BY COUNCILWOMAN HARRIS, SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN AMOROSO. WE'RE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE MOTION TO WAIVE THE RULES. ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THE MOTION TO WAIVE THE RULES SAYING NO, WE'LL GO TO COUNCIL. IS THERE ANY OBJECTION ON THE MOTION TO WAIVE THE RULES? NO OBJECTION. ALL RIGHT, NOW WE'LL HAVE A. WE'LL HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING. IS ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM, PLEASE? WILLIAM, COUNCIL TRULY APPRECIATE YOU CONSIDERING THIS ITEM. WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO GET SOME PEOPLE PAID FOR A WHILE. WHEN THIS ITEM WAS ORIGINALLY DONE BACK IN 2223, IT WAS STRUCTURED AS A REIMBURSEMENT BASED AGREEMENT.

THE PROBLEM WAS, IS THAT THESE ARE A LOT MORE COMPLICATED THAN THAT. AND THE PROJECT ACTUALLY OPERATES AS A LAYERED AFFORDABLE HOUSING FINANCE TRANSACTION WITH MULTIPLE COMPANIES. SO A REIMBURSED BASED AGREEMENT WAS NOT POSSIBLE. WE'VE SIMPLY JUST ADDED THOSE OTHER COMPANIES TO THE CONTRACT SO THAT WE'LL BE IN COMPLIANCE. THE PROJECT HAS ACTUALLY BEEN BUILT AND OCCUPIED AND IT'S A GREAT PROJECT AND THIS IS JUST PART OF IT. BUT THERE'S BEEN SOME PEOPLE THAT HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO GET PAID BECAUSE OF THIS ISSUE. AND THIS CORRECTS THE ISSUE.

ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? NOW WE'LL GO TO COUNCIL.

COUNCILWOMAN RACCA.

MR. DANIEL, CAN YOU PLEASE COME BACK TO THE MICROPHONE? I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT YOU JUST MADE. WITH REGARD, YOU SAID THAT IT WAS 2022 STRUCTURED PAY AGREEMENT, BUT YOU SAID THAT WE NEEDED TO GET IN COMPLIANCE. ARE WE CURRENTLY NOT IN COMPLIANCE? WE'RE NOT IN COMPLIANCE TO BE ABLE TO MAKE A PAYMENT TO THE HOUSING AUTHORITY BECAUSE THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT WAS SET UP TO BE REIMBURSEMENT. WELL, BECAUSE OF THE WAY THESE AGREEMENTS ARE STRUCTURED, AND THIS IS TRUE NATIONALLY, THERE ARE SEVERAL LAYERS TO THE FUNDING. THEY ACTUALLY GO DOWN WITH SEVERAL OTHER COMPANIES WHO ARE ACTUALLY DOING THE WORK. SO WHEN WE ASK FOR A CHECK, I MEAN, WE ASKED FOR AN INVOICE FROM THE HOUSING AUTHORITY SHOWING THAT THEY PAID ALL THEIR INVOICES. THEY CAN'T GIVE US ONE. SO WE RESTRUCTURED THE AGREEMENT SO THAT IT WOULD REFLECT THE FACT THAT THOSE PAYMENTS HAD BEEN MADE AND WE COULD REIMBURSE THEM.

SO WHO HAVE THE PAYMENTS NOT BEEN MADE TO? NO, NO, THE PAYMENTS HAVE ALL BEEN MADE.

YOU SAID THAT THERE WERE PEOPLE THAT WERE NOT GETTING PAID.

OH, YES, THE CONTRACTOR, MILTON WOMACK CONTRACTORS AND HIS SUBSIDIARIES.

BUT YOU ALSO SAID THAT ALL THE WORK HAS BEEN DONE.

IT HAS BEEN.

SO WHY COULDN'T WE PAY MR. MILTON WOMACK AND HIS COMPANY? BECAUSE WE COULD NOT GIVE THEM THE FINAL $6 MILLION THAT WE OWED THEM BECAUSE THIS WAS A REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT AND THE HOUSING AUTHORITY HAD NO INVOICE TO SHOW US THAT IT WAS PAID.

IS IT A PROBLEM THAT THEY DON'T HAVE AN INVOICE? NO, BECAUSE THE MONEY WAS ACTUALLY SPENT BY A COMPANY THAT WAS LAYERED BELOW THEM. WE'LL LET YOU DO IT.

I HAVE CSRS AND EVERYBODY WALKING UP. COME ON, CSRS.

WERE YOU GUYS MONITORING WHAT WAS GOING ON AT THE TIME? SO CERTAINLY WE ARE IN CONSTANT COMMUNICATION WITH THE HOUSING AUTHORITY, THE ISSUE. AND JUST TO PIGGYBACK OFF WHAT MR. DANIEL HAS SAID IS TRADITIONALLY IN A REIMBURSEMENT BASED PROGRAM AND, AND I THINK MR. GAUDET WILL APPRECIATE THIS FROM HIS OCD DAYS, BUT A COST IS INCURRED, A CHECK IS CUT AND THEN A REIMBURSEMENT IS SOUGHT. WHAT THE STRUCTURE THAT THE FOLKS OVER AT THE HOUSING AUTHORITY PARTNER

[02:35:01]

OKAY, SO IT'S A SLIGHT NUANCE AND PHRASE RELATIVE TO HOW MONEY LEAVES CITY PARISH, RELATIVE TO HOW MONEY HAS LEFT OR BEEN INCURRED BY THE HOUSING AUTHORITY IN ITS DOWNSTREAM ENTITIES.

SO CURRENTLY WE'RE NOT IN COMPLIANCE BECAUSE WE WEREN'T DOING IT THAT WAY. CORRECT? WELL, ACTUALLY THE PRIORITY WORK THAT HAD BEEN DONE HAD BEEN DONE IN THAT FASHION, BUT IT WAS LIMITED TO SIMPLY THE, I BELIEVE THE DEMOLITION OF THE PROJECT AT FIRST AND IT WAS UNDER KIND OF A FIRST PHASE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT.

NOW THAT WE'RE IN THE SECOND PHASE, IT'S UNDER THIS MORE DISBURSEMENT BASED FRAMEWORK AND WE'RE THE LAST POOL OF FUNDS TO GET PICKED UP IN THAT DISBURSEMENT BASED FRAMEWORK AND PAY OUT THE CONTRACTOR. CORRECT ME IF I'M MISTAKING ANYTHING, MR. DANIELS, ARPA FUND.

YEAH, IT'S ARPA FUNDING.

JAY DANIELS, CEO OF THE HOUSE OF AUTHORITY. WANT TO, WANT TO THANK THE PARTNERSHIP OF THE METRO COUNCIL. THE $8 MILLION IS PART OF 70 MILLION DOLLAR BOND DEAL. AND SO ULTIMATELY WHEN WE RECEIVE IT AS THE ORIGINAL SUB GRANT RECIPIENT, WE THEN LOAN THOSE FUNDS INTO OUR TAX CREDIT DEAL. SO TYPICALLY WHAT YOU SEE, I THINK THE ORIGINAL FRAMEWORK OF ARPA DOLLARS ARE SOMEWHAT SERVICE ORIENTED IN LIKE A SERVICE AGREEMENT.

BUT THEN WHEN WE, WHEN WE RECEIVE IT FROM THE HOUSING AUTHORITY, IT GOES INTO A TAX CREDIT DEAL.

PARTNER SOUTHEAST IS OUR NON PROFIT DEVELOPMENT ARM. WE THEN LOAN THOSE FUNDS INTO THE TAX CREDIT PARTNERSHIP. THIS IS A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP TO WHERE HOME BANK IS THE CONSTRUCTION FINANCE, REGIONS BANK IS THE TAX CREDIT INVESTOR. HUD PUTS IN ANOTHER $12 MILLION, STATE PUTS IN ANOTHER $13 MILLION AND THEN $8 MILLION COMES IN FROM THE CITY SIDE. SO ULTIMATELY, WHAT DIDN'T APPEAR IN THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT WERE THOSE TWO RELATED ENTITIES, ONE BEING PARTNER SOUTHEAST AND THE TAX CREDIT ENTITY. SO REALLY IT'S A TECHNICAL ASPECT.

I THINK CSRS AND THE CITY WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY HAD NICE VOTE, YOU KNOW, TIE AROUND US AND MAKE SURE THAT BEING COMPLIANT WITH ALL THE RELATED ENTITIES THAT WERE SUPPOSED TO BE IN THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT, IT'S CODIFIED IN ALL THE OTHER CLOSING DOCUMENTS, BUT JUST NOT IN THIS PARTICULAR ARBOR.

OKAY, THANK YOU FOR THAT EXPLANATION AND A REP FROM CSRS. THANK YOU, SIR.

SO CURRENTLY AS IT STANDS.

YES, PLEASE. CURRENTLY AS IT STANDS, ARE WE AT RISK OF LOSING ANY FUNDING OR HAVING TO REPAY ANY FUNDING? WHAT, WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE MOVING FORWARD? SO ONCE THE PAYMENT IS ISSUED, ASSUMING YOU APPROVE THE AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT THAT IS HERE, US IN THE CITY, PARISH STILL HAVE A DOWNSTREAM MONITORING OBLIGATION TO THE PROJECT AND TO ALL THREE OF THESE ENTITIES AFFILIATED WITH IT. AND THAT'S GOING TO REQUIRE, YOU KNOW, CONTINUED COLLABORATION WITH THE HOUSING AUTHORITY TO REDUCE THAT RISK. IS THERE NO RISK IN THAT? THAT'S NOT THE APPROPRIATE ANSWER. IS THERE SOME. IS IT, IS IT MITIGATED BY EXTENSIVE COLLABORATION WITH THE HOUSING AUTHORITY AND ITS DOWNSTREAM ENTITIES? ABSOLUTELY.

IS IT ALSO MITIGATED BY MAKING THIS CHANGE TONIGHT? CORRECT.

OKAY. AND SO MOVING FORWARD, WHEN WILL WE KNOW IF IT'S BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE TREASURY OR WHOEVER IS INVOLVED WITH EVALUATING WHETHER OR NOT WE DID THE RIGHT THING OR THE WRONG THING.

SO I BELIEVE WE'VE GOT A FIVE YEAR OBLIGATION OR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD IN WHICH TREASURY HAS THE ABILITY TO COME BACK AND LOOK AT FILES FROM A RECORDS RETENTION STANDPOINT. SO AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE END OF 2026, WE'LL HAVE, I THINK IT'S A FIVE YEAR CLOCK WHERE TREASURY CAN ALWAYS COME BACK AND AUDIT THOSE FILES IN ANY WAY THEY SEE FIT. WE HAVE NOT, DON'T HAVE MUCH PRECEDENCE AS TO HOW TREASURY IS GOING TO ACT ON THOSE FILES GOING FORWARD.

BUT I THINK IN THIS CASE, WITH THE RESTATED AGREEMENT, WE HAVE A VERY DEFENSIBLE CASE FROM A RISK STANDPOINT MOVING FORWARD.

DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER MATTERS OUT THERE THAT ARE SIMILAR TO THIS WHERE WE SWUNG AND MISSED WITH ARPA DOLLARS? YOU HAVE SOME OTHER AREAS OF RISK THAT I THINK Y' ALL ARE WELL AWARE OF WITHIN THE OVERALL ARPA PORTFOLIO, THIS PROJECT. AND THEN THERE'S ANOTHER THAT IS RELATED TO THE SCOTLANDVILLE HOUSING PROJECT.

ARE WE.

IS CSRS HELPING US MITIGATE THAT RISK AND MOVING THOSE PROJECTS FORWARD IN THE SAME MANNER? ARE WE DOING EVERYTHING WE NEED TO DO? YOU HAVE AN ADMINISTRATION RIGHT NOW WHO IS VERY, VERY RESPONSIVE TO THE REALITIES OF RISK AND WANTING TO CROSS EVERY T AND DOT EVERY I POSSIBLE.

[02:40:01]

YOU DON'T FORESEE ANY ISSUES ONCE WE MAKE THESE CHANGES TONIGHT? YES. ASSUMING LIKE WE HAVE OVER THE PAST COUPLE MONTHS WITH MR. DANIELS, THAT WE'VE GOT FULL FAITH AND COOPERATION WITH THE EBR HOUSING AUTHORITY AND THE FINAL RECONCILIATION OF, YOU KNOW, HE'S GOT A LAYERED CAPITAL STACK HERE, AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT NO, NO PORTION OF THAT STACK IS DOUBLE PAYING FOR ANY PARTICULAR ITEM ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT.

THAT FINAL RECONCILIATION WON'T HAPPEN. AND IT TRAILS WITH THE TAX CREDITS THAT ARE ALLUDED TO IN THE PREAMBLE HERE.

BUT THAT WON'T HAPPEN FOR SOME TIME UNTIL THE PROJECT IS CLOSED OUT.

BUT AS LONG AS WE'RE WORKING WITH THE HOUSING AUTHORITY, I THINK YOU'VE GOT MINIMAL RISK.

YES.

AND THE VENDORS THAT DID WORK WILL BE PAID.

ULTIMATELY, THAT'S WITH THE HOUSING AUTHORITY AND ITS DOWNSTREAM ENTITIES, BUT IT WILL. THIS WILL ENABLE THE CITY PARISH TO PROCEED WITH ITS OBLIGATION TO THE PROJECT.

THANK YOU BOTH VERY, VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU.

COUNCILMAN HUDSON, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY REAL QUICK.

IT WAS STATED THAT YOU DON'T HAVE INVOICES. I THINK A BETTER WAY OF SAYING IT JUST FOR ME TO UNDERSTAND IT AND POSSIBLY ANY MEDIA, IS THAT YOU DO ACTUALLY HAVE INVOICES. YOU JUST DON'T HAVE PAID INVOICES TO BE ABLE TO REIMBURSE. CORRECT.

WE DON'T HAVE CANCELED CHECKS.

GOTCHA.

FROM THE HOUSING AUTHORITY.

IT'S. IT'S ALL IN THE NAME OF THE ACTUAL LP ITSELF.

BUT WE HAVE THE VOICES FOR THE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE.

YEAH, IT'S. IT'S ALL ON THE TAX CREDIT SIDE.

AND THIS IS.

THIS HAS MANY LAYERS OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE INVESTORS WITH THE, WITH THE, WITH THE CONSTRUCTION FINANCE AS WELL AS PERMANENT FINANCING.

WE'VE ALREADY HAD AN AUDIT FOR IT BECAUSE AS A TAX CREDIT DEVELOPMENT, YOU HAVE TO DO AUDITS EVERY SINGLE YEAR.

AND WE JUST COMPLETED OUR FIRST ONE. AND SO EVERY YEAR THAT'LL BE PART OF THE COMPLIANCE WITH TREASURY AS WELL AS FOR THE NEXT 15 YEARS, WE HAVE THOSE AUDIT FINANCIALS.

AWESOME.

THANK YOU.

COUNCILMAN HURST, DO WE HAVE A MOTION FROM YOU? ABSOLUTELY. MOTION BY COUNCILMAN HURST. SECOND BY COUNCILMAN KENNEY. IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION. MOTION CARRIES.

MEETINGS ADJOURNED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.