Good afternoon and thank you for joining us.

I am Ladina Bolton, your Super District 7 Commissioner and Chair of Employee Relations and Public Safety.

Also serving on this ERPS committee with me are Commissioners Nicole Masaya of District 3 and Commissioner Marita Davis Johnson of District 5.

Commissioner Nicole Masaya is joining us virtually, so you may not see her up here, but you will hear her voice later in the meeting.

Also joining us is Super District 6, Commissioner Tid Terry.

So at this time we're gonna go ahead and jump into our meeting.

We do have a presentation that we'll get into later.

Yep, with the uh momentum firm.

So starting with the minutes, item 2026 0420, which are the February 17th minutes.

Had committee members had an opportunity to review those?

Yes.

Do we have a motion?

I make a motion that the minutes of February the 17th, 0420 be approved.

Do we have a second?

Second.

Wonderful.

Thank you, Commissioner.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Motion carries.

Item 2026 0483.

These are the minutes for the March 3rd ERPS meeting.

Had commissioners had an opportunity to review those minutes.

Yes, I make a motion to approve.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Thank you.

We're gonna come back to the health care benefits item.

So turn with me to page two, item 2026 0281.

All commission districts.

This is a cooperative agreement.

Source well contract number 10424-BKN.

Firefighting PPE and related equipment cleaning for use by the Department of Fire Rescue.

This request seeks to ratify purchase order number 505768 for the purchase of 65 Tri-certified Viking Shield Gear to be used by firefighters throughout the county.

Awarded to Viking Life Saving Equipment America Inc.

Care of Central Alabama Training Solutions or Cats amount not to exceed 110,000 dollars, one hundred and ten thousand one hundred and seventy-five dollars.

Do we have anyone to speak to this item?

Anyone from fire?

Hey Chief.

Good afternoon.

So uh this um this ratification is for turnout gear.

Well, it's not turnout gear.

This is more lightweight gear.

It's used for when we're in extreme heat on where we don't need typical structural firefighting gear.

Um it does help a lot with the uh heat, heat exhaustion and things of that nature, but it still gives us protection from things such as bloodborne pathogens.

Uh the reason for the ratification is because there was a price increase on the gear.

Thank you for that, sir.

Any questions or comments from committee members?

Commissioner Davis Johnson.

You have a question.

Why is it listed as a cooperative agreement?

And then, but it's really a ratification.

Yes.

Hi, Commissioners.

I can answer that.

Um initially the agenda item was drafted as a cooperative.

We were asking to make the purchase for the first time.

In between all of that is when we learned that the pricing was going to go up, and the vendor was willing to allow us to use the lower pricing if we committed.

So we put in the PO so that the user department could actually get the lower pricing.

It's a statewide contract.

So we wanted to keep the savings after December 31.

It was going up by probably about 10,000, a little over 10,000 dollars.

December 31 this year.

Of 2025.

2025, yes.

So it's a cooperative and a ratification.

Yes.

The initial submission, it was just supposed to be a cooperative, but we we wanted to make sure we had the cost savings.

Okay, I'm good.

Commissioner Masaya, did you have anything?

No, madam chair, thank you.

Okay.

Commissioner Terry.

No.

All right.

Seeing no other questions or comments from Commissioners.

Do we have a motion?

I make a motion that we approve uh 260281.

Second.

All in favor?

I motion carries.

Congratulations, sir.

Thank you.

We are going to move to item 2026 0555.

Commission districts five and seven.

This is an intergovernmental agreement between the city of Stonecrest, Georgia, and DeCab County for land exchange.

Okay, and what is that land exchange?

So this is for the uh construction of fire station 14.

Uh this area that we've picked, it gives us a very good strategic location just for response in that area.

Okay, and considering that it does say exchange, we're giving them um uh a parcel.

Are we giving them a parcel in exchange for that land or is the fire station a part of that agreement?

The fire station is a part of that agreement.

Okay.

Any other questions or comments from you have something for us, County Attorney?

I just want to support our chief.

He did a fine job explaining what this is for.

If you guys have any questions, I'm just here to support it.

Thank you, sir.

Any other questions or comments from committee members?

Yes, just briefly, um, madam chair, if I may.

I'm just you know, excited about this taking place.

Um I know we've heard from um some compute community folks that um may have been misinformed about what we actually have, when and how, but I'm always thankful when we you know pour additional resources and invest even further in being able to provide you know safety measures for our constituents for our community, you know, particularly this being in uh my committee members, other committee members um districts.

I'm glad to see it and so support it wholeheartedly thank you, Commissioner, and I believe Commissioner Davis Johnson has something as well.

And and thank you, uh Commissioner Massine for making that point because I didn't make that point.

I just want to make sure that everyone in the fifth district and in Stone Crest understand what uh Chief tell them once more what we what we getting.

Uh so this is fire station 14, it'll be a newly rented uh newly uh built station.

Newly built station in Stone Crest in District 5.

And when is that expected to be completed?

I don't have a completion date, ma'am.

Maybe from the time that we break ground, a year and a half to two years.

Okay, well, I see.

Uh Chris coming up.

I I I just have to emphasize this because there's so many people in the Stone Crest District 5 area saying we do not have a fire station, and we don't have one on the books, but this is the first of two that is in district five, isn't that correct?

We have uh yes, we have 14s, which will be a new building then fire station 27, which is a splash project.

Okay, now everybody here hear that.

So we can dispute it when they come in and say we don't have a fire station.

Chris, when are we I was just gonna add so uh director fulham said station 27, the bids are under evaluation.

We'll have a an announcement on that very shortly.

That's just north of Stonecrest Lightholny area.

14 is Chief said is we're replacing the old one on the park property about a mile away.

We'll start the design.

So it's probably three years out the opening.

Okay.

And is that uh Pleasant Dale?

Is that gonna is that one replacing Pleasant Dale?

Pleasantale wants a brand new one that'll help relieve some of the intergovernments.

And that's gonna be on the corner of Westley Chapel.

No, the fire station 16 is at Wesley Chapel and I 20 area.

Okay.

That's also good.

We got the bids for that too.

Okay, but all joking aside, I'm very happy uh about that.

I'm sure that the constituents of uh district five and stone crest or excited about it as well.

So thank you.

Thank you all.

Um and before you step away, because the address isn't noted in the um agenda item.

It does say two uh two acres, and it gives the parcel number, but for those who are watching or may review later, can you reiterate where it will be located?

I understand this fire station is gonna go at the intersection of Covington Highway and Hillville.

That's correct.

Okay.

Any other questions or comments from commissioners?

Commissioner Terry.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Yes, it looks like um we're swapping 6589 Covington Highways.

That's land that we own.

Correct.

Yeah and uh internet's going kind of slow, so I can't exactly back in the day you the nature of that.

You only use 79 plus or minus.

The city of Stonecrus is created.

They took over the park.

This one acre plus or minus is a rendant.

So we're just swapping some property.

Okay, so they'll probably add that to the park.

Exactly.

Gotcha.

Okay.

I didn't hear your question, Commissioner.

Oh, just the what what is what we were swapping?

Okay.

And it sounds like it's just the remnants of a park.

Um what's the name of the park?

Usually called Southeast Soccer Softball, I think just called Southeast Complex.

Southeast Okay.

Okay, gotcha.

Um and I believe at one point, Chief Fulham, when you were chief, Director Fulham, Chief Carter, there was a map of sort of all of the SPLOSS one and I think SPOS 2 fire station sort of expansions.

Is that something you could like kind of re up to us just because I think that was an important point is like you know, this is SPLOSS One, there's more and spot like the money's there, it just I remember at one point you said like as we get the land, like that's sort of the prioritization.

So obviously this isn't very important because without the land you can't expand it.

I think just having that visual of here's where all parts of the county will be sort of seeing expansion of new fire stations.

Yes, sir.

And way back when I was fire chief, uh there was that map.

Uh-huh.

Create some distance.

Uh but uh I believe on the SPLOS site, we still have the map uh that that shows those station locations, and as you mentioned, Commissioner, it did outlay the uh the possibilities if we were to reach those 35 stations that we have talked about.

Yes, sir.

And then it also included moving, in this case, this is moving a uh existing fire station, moving it west, and we showed that as well on that map.

All right, if there are no other questions or comments from commissioners, do we have a motion for this item?

I am proud to move to make a motion.

That item two cents zero two be approved.

And I am happy to second.

Wait, wait a minute.

I'm sorry.

That was the wrong one.

Let me put my glasses on.

I'm proud to make a motion that two six zero five five five be approved.

Congratulations and happy to second.

All right, all in favor.

Aye.

Aye.

All right, congratulations to the fire department and the community.

We are getting us a new fire station.

Thank you all.

All right, so we're gonna move to item 2026 0218.

This item comes out of districts five and seven, but it impacts all commission districts.

This is a resolution to establish or this is to establish regulatory oversight of blasting operations into CAP County through the adoption of a control blasting and safety ordinance to promote public safety, environmental protection, and community stability and for other purposes.

And I understand that some of the recommendations that you guys made have been updated.

Um, but I did want to ask the law department for some support.

This was originally drafted to be a separate blasting ordinance, but to our understanding, there is a section in the uh charter that already includes a little bit of information that this could be attached to.

So if you can provide some guidance, county attorney on whether or how we can attach this to Article 1, Section 12-2, or oh no, amending section 12-8, excuse me.

Or if it should read separately, we we will review that, Commissioner, and make sure that it properly reflects the appropriate placement within the code.

Um we've we've just received this and we'll we'll go over it for you.

But I hope that wouldn't delay the uh committee's consideration of it.

The substance should not change.

That's just about placement in the code.

Okay.

And since the recommendations that you guys made and and the updates that we subsequently, through the support of Mr.

Allen have made, had you guys had an opportunity to see those adjustments and determine whether the language is satisfactory.

So the only thing that um I would say that we would need to um have further look at would be the fees.

Okay.

We talked about the fees and looking at the fee study.

We did have two line items as far as uh what the fees would be, but again, that's going through the fee, the fee studies that we're doing.

So those haven't been formally adopted, so that would be the one the one portion of from our recommendations that I would say uh would still need more time and consideration and approval.

Okay.

And how much time do you think you guys would need to work through that?

So we've made our recommendations for the fees um already, so it's just a matter now of those being formally accepted and adopted, if so.

Okay.

Yes.

Um if you like those, I mean um on average on the annual, we've done uh 700 uh blastings per year, uh with the fees being uh 200, the recommendation I should say was 293.70 cents for the permit and $53.49 for the on-site permit.

Uh that's an annual average annual cost of 207,000, 646 dollars.

Okay, I was trying to write it.

Can you start over and slow down?

All I have is 293 and a decimal.

I didn't even get the cents.

70 cents, that would be for the for the permit.

Okay.

And then another on-site uh cost of $53 and 49 cents.

Okay.

And oh, on site, on site versus permitting.

Okay.

And then you said an annual total and something else.

So the annual, the average annual cost for that would be 207,000, 640 six.

207,000 646.

646.

And that's estimating the 700 average blastings or last year, I forget what you said.

Absolutely.

Yeah, that's the average of 707 blastings per year.

Okay.

And that's at all different levels, whether it's I'm gonna describe them as major or minor projects, depending on the size that incorporates all of them.

Absolutely.

All blast and all blasting permits, yes, ma'am.

Oh, for that state.

And these the numbers, the 293 dollars and 70 cents for that permitting, is that currently what that is?

Uh that's not what the current rate is right now.

Right now, we don't we don't have a there isn't any fees, we don't charge any fees at all.

So it's zero.

Yeah, we don't charge for blasting permits.

Is this stant the numbers that you guys have?

Was this standard for other jurisdictions, or how did we come up with these?

Absolutely.

Looking at surrounding jurisdictions and other fees that are associated with similar projects.

Okay.

The permitting comes directly through you guys, or is that through planning?

Through planning.

Okay.

So would ideally, and and I'm not sure if you thought through some of this already.

Um, so would planning collect the fees for you and then get them to the department?

Yes.

Yes, I mean we haven't if we implemented that way, yes.

Both the permitting and the on-site, or have you considered collecting those separately?

They will go hand in hand.

Okay.

Um, so they would you can't have one without the other.

We would need both.

Were these fees also something you were considering to give?

I know with the ordinance altogether, I think you gave it to maybe the marshals at the state level to review.

So the fees, were you planning on sharing that with them as well and then coming back to us?

So the fees we didn't, the fees were something that were more of an internal that we did internally, and we looked at the state more so for just the substance of the auditors of the ordinance, I'm sorry, itself.

Gotcha.

Do committee members have any questions or comments, Commissioner Davis Johnson?

So we've gone from zero to two hundred and seven thousand six forty six.

And so who paid all of that money?

Right.

Who well it just it wasn't a it wasn't a fee associated with the blasting permit.

So there was there wasn't a fee.

There was nothing to pay.

So we so this money is for what?

The permitting fee?

Mm-hmm.

As far as we have investigators that I'm sorry, um inspectors that go out on site, and then it's just for the permitting the processing of the permit, just like with the permits that are applied for as well.

So were we eating this cost for the inspections and all of that?

We were eating the costs.

Yes, ma'am.

Oh, okay.

nothing too pay so we so this money is for what the permitting fee is for us we have investigators I'm sorry um inspectors that go out on site and then it's just for the permitting the processing of the permit just like with the permits that are applied for as well so were we eating this cost for inspections and all of that we were eating the yes ma'am oh okay and so yeah so this is a good thing then um so pretty much that was my question and I think that you talked about how much time and if you said it was in house the fees is this ready to be passed or not the fee so the fee study isn't complete yet we're working with the company so that hasn't that process hasn't completed yet we've just submitted our recommendations to them so how much time do you think will be needed I'm not certain ma'am exactly how much before if 30 days if I may commissioner um two items one the fee uh study that uh chief uh Carter speaking to is a county uh initiative and so that's part of uh the study was what fees may uh be out there that are not being collected oh and to your point about uh what was being done uh I believe part of this uh ordinance change would require additional on-site um inspections and so currently we do that uh the fire department is uh on site for many of the in uh blasting uh but that is taking that inspector away from other uh inspections so I could see possibly in the future that's gonna require additional uh staffing oh okay and so uh and so would you say 30 days with a good referral uh well with it um I would hate to say a time frame because I'm just not sure how fast that fee study be done on the county level I'm not sure what other departments and and and what phase they are with theirs we've we've submitted ours but I'm just not certain but and if we can get input from either COO Williams or the county attorney um the what the discussion is about now is there are some recommended fees coming out of the fire department yes ma'am but there's also a fee study happening are there any reservations or concerns about adopting the recommendations in the interim of waiting on that study to complete since we're not sure how long that's gonna take no I I don't have any real concerns but my instinct tells me that in the next 30 days we're going to have enough from MGT to so that these two would kind of catch up to each other you know okay and that's what you were just saying in the 30 days we could do another review I think so okay did it change commission I'm sorry were you finished I didn't mean that you oh were you doing no go ahead okay I just wanted to speak to the fee issue um commissioners if you set the fee based on the recommendation from the fire department and then decide that the MGT study warrants another change then you could just change it again if you elected to oh okay okay so um yeah I just wanted to say thank you for all of your hard work that uh you have done uh with this ordinance because you've put a lot of hard work in it and she pulled me in to do hard work on it but uh we had a good place and so uh so what I think what um interim county attorney was saying that we could pass it with the recommendation change it later if if necessary or we could wait so I'm gonna leave that to you what is your preference okay well uh commissioner masayah did you want to weigh in as well thank you so much madam chair I'm comfortable with moving forward um based on the recommendations uh from the fire department and as Chief Carter has laid out so to the extent that um that is fine with the rest of the committee I'm comfortable with moving forward if that's um the will of everyone else okay and um attorney philips with that being said how much time do you think uh you guys will need in order to determine how and where this should fit we're we're already looking at that commissioner we we can have that ready for you for next Tuesday we can get it to you this week quite quite frankly I have some numbers in mind uh Mr.

Welch was looking as he always does he's there working while I'm speaking so we we have some ideas we're gonna double check it with the team and then we'll we'll have those numbers for you well in advance of next week again fixing that number should not hold this up at all.

Okay.

Commissioner Terry, did you have any questions or comments?

All right.

So if you guys could I'm not sure if you've done it already, but the numbers that you were just describing that you came up with, if you could share that information with us so we could put it into the document so we can have something kind of codified to share with the committee.

I'm hope I'm with the board next week based on what we vote in just a minute.

Um that would be extremely helpful, so we can go ahead and work that in.

But outside of that, if there are no other questions or comments from commissioners, do we have a motion for this item?

Yeah, I have a motion that this item be passed uh contingent upon receiving the information that we have requested, and then I have a comment.

Second.

All in favor.

Aye.

Wonderful, wonderful, wonderful.

I'm excited.

Go ahead.

Yeah.

And um, you know, I know that a lot of constituents out there.

Also uh gratified that we have this ordinance in place because they've been concerned and they've been patient.

Uh while we work through this.

So I'd say once more, thank you, uh, Commissioner Bowden for your uh hard work, and I'm glad that it's passed, and we can move forward on our blasting now.

All right, wonderful.

That motion carries absolutely.

It was certainly a pleasure working on this uh with the community and some developers requested it as well because they're used to it in other jurisdictions, which is always a plus.

All right, so moving forward.

We will jump to back to page one item 2026 0513.

This is finance and risk management.

All commission districts 2026-27 health care benefits.

Good afternoon, commissioners.

Uh, we're going to go fairly quickly through a fairly long presentation.

But before we start, I just wanted to mention that we're going into our 13th year of partnership with Buck Consulting, now Gallagher Consulting.

And Gallagher has uh been a tremendous partner in helping us to navigate the complexities, which is the health care market.

And today we're going to uh only have two asks of the uh committee.

One is to approve the upcoming rates that employees will pay for the health care benefits, and two to approve uh three new contract vendors for three new benefits that we're offering to our employees.

Uh, one is pet insurance.

I wish Commissioner Patrick was here because that was his ask.

But uh I want to turn it over to uh one of our senior uh principal consultants at uh Gallagher, and that's uh Brett Hayward, and he'll be followed by uh Nolan, who is our uh actuary.

We cannot make sense of these numbers without an actuary, so I'll turn it over to Brett.

Okay.

Commissioners, how are you today?

Fine, thank you.

Good.

Good to see you again.

Um I'm assuming this is our clicker.

Yep.

All right, so we're we are not gonna go through everything, but we wanted to make sure we had all the information for you.

Should you look for some light uh nighttime reading?

So we're gonna hit an executive summary real quick.

No one will go through the numbers for you.

I'll give you a highlight on the voluntary benefits, and we threw a couple things in the appendix for you as well, which um again you can take a look at at your leisure.

So uh executive summary, um, a lot of really really good news.

So medical pharmacy 2025 cost um actually came in well below trends uh of eight percent medical and ten percent pharmacy.

Um you actually came in around three to four percent um as a plan year, so the July 1 to June plan year, um, and actually a little bit negative on the medical when we look at it on a calendar year basis of about minus one and a half percent.

Pharmacy was up a little more last year.

Um that was due to some changes, uh, some additions that were made um to the pharmacy program um back in 2024.

So really good news there.

Um the Kaiser plans and self-funded plans administered by Anthem um for this upcoming plan year.

When we say PYE, we mean plan year ending, which is the upcoming plan year, so July of 26 through June of 27.

Um, what we're saying here is Kaiser is coming in with a renewal of a minus one percent to your rates with no plan changes to those plans at all.

Um, and while that is a minus on the our negative on the rates, we would continue to recommend we hold contributions flat, right?

So the overall is actually gonna be a slight decrease in premiums paid by the county.

Employees would experience no change at all.

We're projecting an 8% increase on the self-funded plans through Anthem.

And then we talk about the numbers here.

So medical pharmacy budget would be around 120 million.

It's an increase of nearly 5 million.

The county projected net cost is around 108.

And we'll get into the numbers here in just a minute.

The grand total for uh health and welfare for all planned year ending 27, so upcoming, um, which is everything the county pays for, medical pharmacy, dental life is around 132 million, which is an increase of almost 4%.

Um our recommendation again is to continue with the many many years of no contribution changes for employees, which is fantastic.

Which also includes no changes to contributions for early retirees.

Umrollment has gone up a little bit across all plans.

Um dental rates are increasing around three and a half percent.

All this is baked into the numbers above.

Um again, no changes to contributions there.

Um we do have some benchmarking in the back in the appendix for you to show how the CAP kind of looks in comparison to some of your other peer groups around town, right?

So Gwyneth's in there, state um the state plan of Georgia.

I believe we have Cobb in there and Fulton as well.

Um that's probably really about it.

The bottom bullet is talking about the voluntary benefits, um, which we will get into in just a moment.

And that's about it.

So if no questions here, I'm gonna let Nolan take you through a couple of the numbers so you can have a little bit better of an idea of actually what's going on within the program.

Thank you.

All right, so um on this page we're showing the self-insured uh projections.

Uh is on its own page because on the self-insured side, which is administered by Anthem, this is where the act uh the county actually pays the claim.

So when an employee goes uh to see the doctor, the claim is processed to Anthem and the county actually pays the claim.

Uh we see that for this year, due to favorable experience, uh we have a decrease of 4.6%.

So the county is gonna spend a little less than what was projected uh this plan year, and for next year, we're projecting an increase of eight percent, uh, which represent a five million increase from uh current budget.

On the next slide, we're showing I'm gonna clarify that that eight percent increase is from what was previously projected or from the actual from the actual what what we have currently the topic.

Yeah, yeah, the top line, you can see the top line, which is uh DCAP shows a total of 64.1 million, and uh from that 64.1 million, we're going to 69.3 million.

So that do represent the eight percent.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Uh the next line is showing everything included.

So we just talked about just the self-insured.

We also have a fully insured plan on the medical and pharmacy side that is administered by Kaiser.

Uh we also have the life and ADD uh that the county is paying for, and uh also we have dental.

Uh so that all included we uh having a uh one point uh 133 million, 0.6 million, and that's an increase of 3.8% for current.

So that's everything included.

On the next slide, so part of that 131 million is paid by the employees, and the employees paying about 23.8 million contributed to that 133 that we saw earlier.

And uh that's a decrease of 0.6%.

Uh you will notice that 6% decrease, 0.6% decrease because we this start in July, we're having the firefighters having the same benefit as the police officers.

Uh so they will have less contribution.

The county will receive less contribution started July 1st.

This is why you see that small decrease in employer contribution over there.

I want you to say that one more time.

Slow down and make it clear for the people, you're doing what for the fire department.

The firefighters are having the same benefit as the police officers.

So last year, the police officers were having zero contribution on the HGHP plans.

So starting July 1st, the firefighters will have the same benefit.

Thank you for that, sir.

Okay.

And uh so the first leaving at the last one, um, the employees will contribute 24 million, like we just saw, and uh that that would be left for the county one uh 107 million, uh which is a 4.8% for current.

And so we're not asking to vote on this budget since it was already voted on.

Uh we're just giving you the detail of what was voting on and what's included in the budget.

No question of the numbers.

Uh we go back to Brett, what is voluntary benefit?

Well, at this time we can see because it seems that we're nearly halfway through the presentation already.

Do committee members have questions so far in what was discussed?

I don't presently.

Okay.

Commissioner Terry, did you have anything?

Yes, thank you, Madam Chair.

Just a quick question.

Uh can you go back to the total number slide where you had the change from 2025?

Uh for the county's contribution, I think.

Yeah, that there it is.

Oh, okay.

And that this includes the this is the total grand total employee and county.

Yes.

Okay.

So 2025, 115 million, and then 2027.

So we're talking about 2027.

Right.

Right, yeah.

The the second column from the right would be the cost projection for the July 26th to June 27th plan.

Okay.

And since y'all are in the business, because you work for other municipal and I guess corporate clients, um, this is in fact the largest cost driver in your clients' budgets, generally speaking.

Yeah, and it goes up every year, right?

Yep.

Um, could you, and you don't have to answer this now, but could you just help us understand from a macro perspective, why healthcare costs go up every single year?

Um that's just like a good like global sort of understanding of demographics and the market for us to understand why there's things that are beyond our control in the market.

Absolutely.

Um, but then two, just any research or data you have, and maybe from other clients that you've worked for, in terms of how they've innovated, in terms of like you've talked about the near side clinic.

Um, I think director Jacobs has been looking at other sort of pharmacy kind of programs that might be for sort of higher cost medications that might have some sort of um discount.

Um, and then you know, like investment in like wellness programs, for instance.

So, like for an example, you know, 131 million dollars total is spent on health care benefits, dental, all that stuff, and then how much do we spend on wellness, you know, comparatively in large organizations.

So just any data you could provide of like here's other jurisdictions and how they've been able to maybe bend the cost curve down.

And you just probably have data on that.

And the only one example I'll share is years ago when I was at the University of Florida, I did a little internship in my nutrition program at Gainesville, City of Gainesville government, and they kind of touted at the time, this is like 2003, I think.

They touted having a gym and a registered dietitian and kind of like kind of having like on-site sort of wellness within the government for all employees, and basically just argue that that small investment helped them sort of save costs in these other factors when it comes to actually you know um treating um illness, uh, whether they're acute or chronic.

Right.

So just helping us understand those numbers and if there's any strategies you could recommend that we might consider that could help us, you know, see that.

I know it's gonna keep going up.

That's kind of hard based on the macro trends, but anything you see that might help us see that cost be a little bit lower than it otherwise might be.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Yeah, I'll I'll try not to be too lengthy.

Um, because I can we can go down a lot of rabbit holes here.

Uh well, you can come back to us and you could do some research and maybe share just you know with the commission.

You don't have to go into it now.

Okay.

Okay, very good.

Thank you.

We'll do that.

Uh, what I will say overall is your 3.8% is actually significantly better than a lot of my other groups.

Um, so you're you guys are in single digits, 3.8%.

Um that is a really strong, that's lower than trend, right?

While we're projecting the medical plans with Anthem to go up by 8%, which is a combined trend, nine, eight, eight, and ten percent on medical pharmacy, your overall spend is still well below that trend, right?

When you start pulling all of it together.

So this is a very strong renewal, which is why we're recommending no change to contributions for employees and retirees.

So thank you.

Okay, and we can continue with the presentation.

Okay, these will be quick.

Um this slide here, this is just recapping what you already have in place.

So the blue um text uh at the top highlights of current products with enhancements.

So this is already in place today.

These products, there are some new enhancements being added to them, which is further um bringing these these benefits um uh making them greater, making them, you know, I guess I'd say more enhanced for all the employees that incurly enrolled as anybody as well as anyone who may decide to enroll in the future.

So more money being paid out to your employees, uh putting more in their pockets uh to help offset their out of pocket cost uh depending on the product that they the benefit they may enroll in.

Um so then that this one is legal.

So you've got all four of those already in place.

What's new and what we are asking for is um we wanted to or we're looking to add uh a new hospital indemnity product.

We're looking, which would also be continued uh or added with all um uh AFLAC, which you already have.

So this would just be adding a new offering through an existing uh vendor partner.

Um Identity identity theft, which is obviously growing at rapid pace um these days, and so this would be a new benefit with a new uh vendor partner in all state, which is all state identity protection, and then the pet insurance, which is a recommendation to add as a new benefit through a company called Pet Partners.

So this would be two new vendor partners being added, all state and pet partners, but three overall new benefits added to the lineup uh for all uh employees.

And again, this is employees, these are not offered to retirees, even early retirees, and that's just uh that's just how they're filed as being insurance products.

Um you cannot be uh a retiree.

So any questions on any of those?

I mean, I can tell you what they are.

I put it here, I tried to give me as quick and simple as I could about what they do.

But any questions?

Is there a cost to the county to offer the good point?

Thank you.

Um I should have mentioned that there is zero cost to the county to add these, these are all employee paid.

Okay.

It is just an employer sponsored in the sense that you're bringing these to the employees to enroll in, but it is full employee paid.

And did these come out of uh requests that you've heard from employees or um folks making inquiries?

Um the pet insurance has come up from Commissioner Patrick, and then just you know, we've heard just randomly people might have mentioned something to uh Mr.

Jacobs over time, but the others are more you know, ID theft uh is is a big problem in the world.

Uh and so this is a product to help um provide that financial uh coverage for people and and uh recovery for those who might have had their identity stolen.

So it's something that is very common, uh offered uh in the marketplace.

So it was an idea that we said, hey, maybe we should consider this.

Um hospital indemnity, the reason that one was chosen was more because there are a lot of hospital confinements within your population within your utilization, so this seemed to be a very kind of no-brainer, really, to say, hey, if you are confined in the hospital, admitted to the hospital, and you were enrolled in this benefit, um, even for um for women who have you know childbearing ages, right?

They go in the hospital, they have a child, maternity is covered, they get paid out from the benefit if they enroll, right?

So that's the key is you have to enroll on this during the annual enrollment or as a new hire, or even as a qualified life event.

You get married, anything happens and you have an opportunity to re-enroll and you pick up these plans.

And the reason that I ask that is just when you have an abundance of offerings, sometimes it can be overwhelming and folks just skip over it because it's too much, especially because we don't get a whole lot of one-on-ones or trainings or conversations about who and when any individual may need or want some of these things.

And I I don't want to overwhelm anyone.

And if it takes more effort for you guys to manage all of this, but we don't have a whole lot of participation participation in it, it may not be worth the effort.

Yeah, what I will say is on the current existing um products that you have here, the accident critical illness, short-term disability, and the legal plans.

Participation is actually pretty high.

Okay.

Um, and so we've we've we as part of the benefits guide as part of the online um microsite that you guys have, the the your decay benefits.com site.

We there's a lot of education out there around what they are, what they do, how they can help.

So we try to provide that education, albeit you do have you know you've got to go out and read about it, but it's out there and it's available.

Um, but yes, I completely understand where you're going with that.

Okay.

Um, and I'd like to share with the community that Commissioner Patrick has joined us, probably just because his meeting is about to start, but thank you for coming to Earth Committee.

Um, so can you since he's here now, can you just share what you were saying about the additional benefits?

Just the one he might care about the most.

Oh, we have pet insurance, Commissioner Patrick.

I I heard my heard my name and I heard pet insurance.

I was like, wow, what a what a great thing.

Um but being seriously, I think Commissioner Terry, you and I back in 21 or 22 went to the NACO meeting and they were talking about benefits that would uh sort of encourage employees to stay with your organization and pet insurance was one of them.

So uh I'm grateful to Mr.

Jacobs for for um listening and hearing and looking up for that.

That's uh uh that is a great idea.

Uh one question I do have, um, and this is uh I have heard there are newer technologies or medicines that are coming out that help people with their teeth for cavities or rebuilding their teeth, and then there's something for diabetes type two by diabetes.

How do you guys look at newer medical procedures or technologies and ultimately have that available for our for our employees?

A lot of that is contingent upon the vendors and what is being you know, uh, I guess I'd say added within their um what's covered, what's not they have as individual insurance companies have their own medical directors that are looking at that stuff and evaluating the market, evaluating what's new, what's emerging, all of that, and they will determine whether they cover it or do not cover it.

Gotcha.

Sometimes they will allow the decision to be made at the employer level to say do you want to opt in or out of something?

Uh and then that's when we pull in, you know, Mr.

Jacobs, and we kind of look at it, we look at your data and we make a decision on do we think this is going to be you know a positive or a negative um for the employees.

Um sometimes they make the decision themselves and just this is not covered, or this is covered, and we're adding it to your policy.

Right.

So it does tend to start there on some of the other um like uh let's say like GLP ones for on the pharmacy program, right?

That is is always an employer decision.

Do you want to cover it?

Do you not?

If you do, at what level, and do you put any restrictions around it or whatever?

So there's a lot of conversation that goes into that.

We would pull in our pharmacist, the PBM, the pharmacy benefit manager, in this case CVS, would pull in their clinicians and we would have some discussions.

Larry would be involved in all of that, and we make decisions at that point.

So there's a lot of there are a lot of conversations that are occurring.

But there is still the avenue for as new technologies come along with it.

Absolutely, and gene therapies is a huge one, it's a big big topic, big dollars.

So yeah, there's we're we are never bored.

Okay, right.

Great to hear that.

Thank you very much.

Madam Chair, uh, I didn't come just back for that reason.

So we if you have extra time you need uh PWI is relatively short, so we have some flexibility.

Thank you, sir.

I appreciate that.

Commissioner Davis Johnson.

With your um pet insurance, I see that it is um you pay up front, then submit claims for reimbursement.

And I wanted to know is that how the average pet insurance work because you know my dog I was diagnosed with cancer, and he had to have uh she had to have chemo treatments, and that came to about 10,000 dollars.

Wow, and then so you're you're you're saying if your dog is has chemo, a major illness where you would have to pay out substantial amounts of money.

You would have to wait, you would have to pay that out, and then would have to get reimbursed.

That it that is how it works, yeah.

Yes.

Well, my dog is in dog heaven probably won't get enough one.

But uh, you know, that can be problematic with some people.

Yes.

Um it'd be like uh health care flexible spending account or dependent care account or something where you you you you pay out of pocket and then you submit for a claim and then they pay back type of thing.

But yeah, that is how it works.

Okay.

Any other questions or comments from commissioners?

Okay.

And if we could just quickly go through next steps.

Yes, so for today it was again, we're not asking for budget uh approvals that you guys took care of that already in uh county budget.

So no increase to employees or early retiree contributions for the upcoming plan, approving Kaiser rates, which is on minus 1% and approving the new voluntary benefits recommendations for the upcoming plan year, which I realize I put on there twice.

So apologies.

Alrighty.

So with that, do we have a recommendation for item 2026 0513?

Second.

All in favor.

Aye.

Thank you so much.

Motion carries.

And thank you for keeping all of those expensive expenses, excuse me, level for our employees.

Absolutely.

No increase.

Good to see you guys again.

Thank you very much.

You're welcome.

And if I may borrow like seven minutes, I think that was a yes.

We will have our presentation, the operational assessment update for the ERPS departments.

I think we should because I'll be as quick as possible.

Hello again.

We're going to get the hard copies of the ERPS committee report sent out on the flow of this presentation is consistent with ops.

I'll go through the um committee specific insights for the departments associated with this committee, which is uh E911, DEMA, Human Resources, and Merit Systems, Fire Rescue, the Medical Examiner's Office and Police.

For those following along that weren't in the ops committee today, um, I'm lookitish to say I'm managing principal of the momentum firm back in September.

We were hired uh to be the change management and strategic consultants uh to support the implementation of the uh operations and performance assessment that was conducted by Malden and Jenkins.

Uh we made a promise at the start of the project to keep the board engaged um early and consistently on a quarterly basis.

And this is the second time we are reporting um to this committee back in December.

We published a written report, but I didn't have a chance to come and speak.

Uh so thank you uh for your time today.

Right?

You sure it was September?

It seems like you've been hanging around longer than that.

September, yes, yeah.

But time time is flying.

We're having a lot of fun.

Um so uh the agenda move this closer.

I'm so tall.

These feels um operational goals.

Um I'll go over the um implementation management process that we've designed and are currently implementing.

Uh I'll give a status update on the uh implementation of the recommendations inside of the departments associated with this committee, and then again I'll talk about the committee specific progress and how that is different or similar to the trends that we're seeing overall.

Okay.

So just a reminder that uh there is a strategy associated with implementing all these recommendations, and what you see on the slide are the transformation goals in which we are attempting to make progress within uh through implementing um this series, this series of recommendations.

Um of the key results that we hope to realize throughout this process are are things from you know getting a year-over-year reduction in internal audit findings and open issues across departments, increasing customer satisfaction scores for uh service delivery, um finding uh cost savings opportunities where um some operational improvements yield those, uh modernizing technology and enabling data-driven government, which will result this year in over will which will result in a hundred percent of departments reporting KPIs this year, which is a new thing.

Um this matrix uh just reminds um reminds everyone that there's a process that we have in place to actually lay uh these initiatives on a timeline.

We take into consideration the impact that we're attempting to achieve as well as the level of effort required, and we are focused on the top quadrant, uh the quick wins and the major projects.

Right.

Uh this is the implementation management process that we designed and tailored for DeCab County.

Uh, we're assessing um implementation progress on an ongoing basis.

We're convening departments one-on-one and in groups uh to support them with implementation.

We're identifying new transformation initiatives actually that address the root causes of some of these common challenges.

We're managing the implementation through change management and then reporting quarterly to the board here and the CEO.

At the bottom, you'll notice some of the things that we are tracking.

Not all of these insights are in this report, but you can expect every time we come for us to be able to articulate this story a little bit better from recommendation statuses to the reasons why things are blocked to potential cost savings.

Can't wait to come back with that one.

This is an overall dashboard view of where the county is, the 18 departments that were included, the assessment, 266 recommendations exist, 59 are currently met across the board.

11 are blocked, and oftentimes when they're listed or categorized as blocked, it's because they require some additional type of resource to implement it.

And you'll see here that over 123 recommendations require some sort of additional resource.

Sometimes that's management consulting support where we're able to go in and help uh the departments with some of these roadblocks.

All right.

So now I'll move into the committee specific updates for the departments again associated uh with ERPs that were assessed.

So across the board, we have 106 total recommendations for this committee.

27 are met currently.

That is an um increase from December, so that's good.

Steady progress is being made.

Eight recommendations are recorded as blocked, and 51 are listed as requiring additional resources.

Governance issues, org structure challenges, and communication problems are some of the most common challenges that these departments are working on currently.

Uniquely, or it's interesting here, this is a slide that shows the projected implementation timeline of the department's recommendations.

And I noticed similar to what uh the trend was earlier in ops, that many departments are noting that it will take time to implement their recommendations, so 2027 or beyond.

But where we want to lean in after this meeting with departments one-on-one is that uh that last column there, the unsure or blank where departments are saying they're not quite sure when um this should be targeted for completion.

So we recognize that some of those answers might be nuanced, so we'll take our time to to try to identify that and have a better synthesis of though that information the next time we see you.

Um we wanted to capture the type of resources that departments are asking for assistance in beyond just funding.

So you'll see here that training, uh cross-departmental support, um, in addition to funding are you know, representing a lion's share of what departments are saying uh is required for uh successful implementation.

Okay, and then just some quick summary insights um about the departments in this committee specifically.

Um this is a good thing.

Um the ERPS committee department show slightly stronger early progress than the county overall.

Um so you know, the ERPS committee has a higher proportion of recommendations met compared to the others, so 25% compared to 22% countywide average.

Um implementation progress within these departments uh remain in progress uh for the most part, and um blocked or rejected recommendations remain relatively low comparably, so that's also a good thing.

Um number four of interest um compared, you know, speaking and pointing to the budget, so 16 of the 24 recommendations, and actually I want to say that we made this quick update.

So the page that you're looking at that's printed, it has a slightly different version.

Um, Dr.

Bolton, like number three, for example, on your written page, we 86 because that was a typo is incorrect.

So we've updated this slide, and I'll make sure you all have the right copy.

But that last point says that half over half of the recommendations that require funding, similar to the ops committee were not approved in the FY26 budget.

Um we also noticed something interesting uh in the way that departments reported for this committee is that half of the 16 recommendations that they actually required further investigation to assess cost.

So we're gonna try to understand if perhaps they were not funded because the departments are still trying to understand the requirements for implementation and have not sized the cost requirement or the costs associated with implementing it.

That could be one of the barriers.

Uh I wanted to try to see if we can look through the data to find any additional insights because there was a lot of concentrated conversation on budget limits.

So that was something we found that was interesting to this committee.

And that miss uh CSA.

I I went to high school with somebody that but I I think also the conversation that we had in the previous committee um could speak to number four a bit staffing, not in totality.

Well, regarding as a board, we didn't know that there were 16 of 24 items within the budget that specifically addressed the recommendations that you had.

So we had no idea that those items were recommended and we did not approve them.

Understood.

Because there was nothing indicating to us that we were working toward those initiatives.

So that may have helped if we could have better understood why the requests were being made.

Yes, absolutely.

We actually had a follow-up conversation uh after ops with um the director um budget TJ, and we are working together right now to try to you know make sure that the alignment is clear on the requested items um in the you know this most recent budget and what was and not approved, so we should be able to produce that hopefully soon.

Yes, go ahead, Commissioner Davis Johnson.

To follow up with what you were saying, following up what Commissioner Bolton was saying, I would assume that the recommendations that requires funding is what you all determined in your report to the county, but then understanding, and let me know if I'm wrong, but understanding and listen to what Zach stated earlier, I understand that you all made the recommendation for funding, but we wanted to see if there were other areas that we could explore that would not necessarily require require the funding.

Yes.

So I think it would have been a little premature for us to move on that without the administration first analyzing what your report is saying, and to see if there's options.

Alternatives, yeah.

Uh alternatives to the funding, because the bottom line that the administration, you all are recommending, is cost savings and efficiency.

Is that correct?

What one of the key results we're attempting to drive certainly is efficiencies and cost savings.

I just wanted to clarify that um neither myself, my company, the momentum firm, or Malden and Jenkins who developed the assessment, made recommendations that said sp explicitly that these would require funding.

It's through this implementation process that we asked department heads to evaluate these recommendations that Malden and Jenkins developed and and let us know if they they believe it requires funding.

But yes, that intermediary process that you're mentioning is something that we can't implement now that you've made budget determinations and there's this delta.

So did you want to if I could just add in one one thing, madam chair?

So something else we'll we'll be evaluating over the next uh between now and next time we meet is whether or not there were specific requests to the budget office for funding.

Because there may be many instances where they've determined we need funding or we need a position or something, but that was not translated in the um in the budget request.

So we'll be evaluating all of that and come to determinations if the if a department has said we need this resource, um, then we'll determine well, is that through funding?

Is that through reassigning of personnel?

Is that through um, you know, you may have vacant positions that can be reclassified?

That's the the effort we'll be going through.

Um and with that said, then can you clarify whether the so it says half were not approved, and it could have been they weren't requested at all.

Were these specifically in number four requested and not approved?

Um that is the way the departments reported it, that they requested it in the FY26 budgeted, but it was not approved, and they provided some context and their responses about that as well.

But I understand y'all's point about missing the context and the mapping associated with the request you saw and what was associated with the assessment.

So we'll we'll take that into account for future reporting.

Yeah, this is really good for us to understand what the requests are, if there are any alternatives and holistically what it could look like in order to move in the direction of making the improvements, whether it's specific to the recommendation or again an alternative as such.

Um before we continue, was there any other question or comment from uh committee members or commissioners?

Commissioner Masaya, did you have anything?

No, um no, Madam Chair.

I mean, I think it's important that as it relates to the suggestions that were made and um requested um budget that as far as I can recall with the passing of the budget that we approved the the budget as um acts and requested by the administration.

So to the extent that uh particular suggestions based on uh M and J's insights uh were uh a part of the budget um inclusive of those costs to make any necessary changes, then they would have been approved uh from a financial standpoint as a part of the process that we uh we went um into as a board of commissioners.

So I just wanted to make sure that it is clear that it it wasn't that um the board failed to you know um provide uh you know a budget or to support any requests, it was apparently that it wasn't something that was suggested uh suggested uh by the administration at that particular time, but as the process moves forward, I'm sure that will continue um to confer with the administration, and they'll advise us of any uh budget amendments that may need to be made as you know we have that process as well.

And so um, you know, that's it in terms of comments, no particular questions, and just glad that we are moving along as a government authority and um including the help of M and J to get this done.

So with that, I yield back to you, uh chair.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Did you get that additional variable?

Specifically we'll talk about it later.

Okay, go ahead.

I am tracking the importance though of this alignment, and you know, we want to you know be fair in the process.

I know that there are a lot of things in progress, and there have been many things that the board did support approval on.

Um, and so we're gonna continue to report that progress, but we will tighten up on the alignment for sure.

Um, the last uh thing to mention is just the March 2026 progress overall.

We are um gathering feedback from department heads every other month on the status of this implementation, and in the in-between months, we're engaging them either individually or through groups.

Um just some noteworthy things here across the board.

Um initial implementation timeline, costs, resources are required across the board.

Um, many departments, not just you know, associated with this committee, but many departments across the county were unsure of some of these areas, like the cost requirements.

We mentioned that.

Um of recommendations across the board depend on additional funding.

And that note just says that there will be a more definitive list of recommendations that can be accomplished within this year's budget versus recommendations that need to be implemented in 2027 and beyond.

When I look at the data, there's a ton of um initiatives then that said that budgets were requested for them and their capital projects.

So we understand the the nuances there, but the beauty of this process is to be able to actually consolidate some of these initiatives, right?

Where you see requests coming from different areas, and perhaps there's a way to you know kind of bring this all up under one portfolio for funding in some instances since we're addressing many of the same problems.

So we'll try to find those, you know, efficiencies over time.

And then uh lastly, on what comes next.

Uh, the top three challenge areas across the board have been governance issues, org structure challenges, and technology limitations.

And so, as we are, of course, working with each department uh individually, we're responsible for overseeing the entire program, and it's those three areas that we're gonna be spending most of our time um creating initiatives and implementing things over the next quarter.

So I'll pause there to see um if there's any questions.

A little over seven minutes.

Sorry.

Okay.

So any questions or comments from committee members.

I know we asked a few during the presentation.

Okay.

Commissioners, uh, Patrick or Terry, did you have anything?

Uh nothing additional right now, Madam Chair.

Thank you.

Okay.

I did have one on the slide where it says combined survey insights from E91, E911, DEMA, and all of the other departments.

It's one of the earlier slides.

The total recommendations was 106, but the breakdown equals 86.

So recommendations met 27, recommendations blocked, eight, and recommendations requiring resources is 51.

So the other 20, where do those fall?

That's a good question.

Um I need to go back and do some research and then I'll be able to answer that effectively.

Um we have a management, one of our management consultants here with some back end ability.

Um we'll present in PWI.

I'm I may be able to get that answer today.

If not, I'll certainly follow up, but thanks for that call out.

We'll we'll go back and double check those numbers.

Okay, and I think that was it for me.

Let me make sure.

Okay.

Yes, that was it for me.

So if there are no other questions or comments from commissioners, thank you, Miss CSA, for your presentation.

Look forward to the next update, and we appreciate you consistently bringing us information and allowing us opportunity to share from our position what we think would help for us to make better decisions with support in the county.

So with that, do we have a motion to adjourn?

So move.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

And thank you for uh Commissioner Patrick for your extra time.