►
From YouTube: Clearwater Benefits Committee Meeting - July 16, 2021
Description
Clearwater Benefits Committee Meeting - July 16, 2021
A
A
B
B
Comments
concerns
before
we
dive
in
like
looks
like
everybody's
good
to
start
so
we're
gonna
talk
about
kind
of
two
things
in
the
beginning:
we're
going
to
talk
about
the
claims,
experience
and
also,
if
you
all
remember
one
of
the
discussions
we
had
at
the
last
meeting
was
talking
about
kind
of
the
city's
reserves
on
the
self-funded
plan.
So
jay
was
able
general
probably
helped
me
with
some
of
that
jay
was
able
to
put
together
kind
of
a
histories.
B
B
B
It
to
kind
of
the
way
employees
that,
when
two
employees
both
work
here
and
at
the
family
coverage
the
way
those
were
being
calculated
for
so
our
claim
spreadsheet
that
you're
going
to
see
is
actually
adjusted
a
little
bit.
It's
going
to
look
a
little
bit
worse
because
some
of
those
employees
were
kind
of
being
captured
twice
in
the
funding.
B
That's
sort
of
the
the
downside
of
that,
but
the
good
news
is
overall
the
fun
that
was
only
a
couple
years
in
the
years
of
history.
So,
overall
the
fun
is
still
performing
well,
we'll
talk
about
some
of
that
and
discussions
that
we
had
with
that.
It's
actually
good
now
that
we've
kind
of
done
that
we
have
a
way
to
to
do
also
a
double
check
kind
of
at
the
end
of
the
year.
To
look
at
to
look
at
that,
so
we'll
talk
about
claims,
we'll
talk
about
some
of
that
reserve
history.
B
B
So
if
you
guys
want
to
flip
page
two
sorry
there's
no
page
numbers
but
to
the
claims
report,
so
this
will
look.
A
little
claims
will
look
a
little
bit
higher
in
terms
of
reserve
accumulation
or
it
looked
like
there's
a
little
bit
more
deficit
than
what
you
saw
last
month.
That's
because
some
of
those
dual
employees
were
being
counted
twice
in
our
system.
B
So
if
you
take
a
look-
and
I
think,
everybody's
pretty
familiar
with
the
report-
if
you
guys
want
to
go,
we
do
have
made
claims.
So
if
you
take
a
look
and
go
one,
two,
three
four
five
columns
over
actual
paid
claims
for
the
month
of
may
you'll
see
we're
down
a
little
bit
from
the
prior
month
and
the
two
months
before
that
coming
in
at
about
1.7
million
in
that
regard.
B
B
Historically,
when
you
look
at
that,
it's
not
that
big
of
an
increase-
it's
just
looking
at
last
year,
as
kind
of
a
speaker,
makes
that
look
a
little
bit
bigger
a
big
part
of
what
is
driving.
That,
though
kind
of
the
middle
box
is
you've
got
a
number
of
high
claimants
this
year,
so
catastrophic
some
cancers,
heart
conditions,
different
things,
that's
still
a
lot
of.
What's
driving
that
increase
overall
last
year?
B
B
B
Jay's
team,
jay
and
his
team
put
together
essentially
year
by
year
line
by
line
of
how
the
fund
is
performing,
and
one
thing
I
will
point
out.
So
this
is
part
of
how
we
figured
out
the
card
with
the
dual
spouses.
The
other
thing
is,
there
are
going
to
be
sometimes
timing,
issues
based
on
when
something
gets
credited.
A
B
Because
if
you're
going
to
go,
try
and
compare
one
to
another,
you
might
run
yourself
low
and
crazy,
but
if
you
go
to
the
bottom
right
to
the
annual
net
reserve,
so
the
city
overall,
since
going
self-funded,
there's
been
about
2.8
million
kind
of
been
surplus,
that's
been
generated
and
steve.
I
knew
you
had
kind
of
asked
a
follow-up
question
on
some
of
those
numbers.
You
know
what
was
that,
so
that's
ultimately,
based
on
the
city's
record,
keeping
all
the
expenses
revenue
pharmacy
rebates,
all
those
items,
there's
a
positive
balance
about
2.8
million.
B
B
Okay,
so
if
you
look
to
the
next
page,
you
all
remember
from
our
last
meeting,
we
were
looking
at
about
a
5.3
increase
and
let
me
just
because
I
did
identify
that
that
one
issue
with
the
dual
spouses,
so
a
logical
question,
would
be
well
if
you
know
the
funding
was
potentially
lower.
Does
that
impact
the
amount
of
increase
and
the
way
the
projection
works?
The
good
news.
B
D
B
B
C
D
B
D
D
B
C
C
B
D
B
D
C
D
D
B
Yeah,
okay,
okay,
so
let's
get
to
the
good
news,
as
you
said,
see,
let's
get
to
where
I
want
to
get
so.
Overall,
the
initial
projections
are
5.3
percent,
as
you
guys
can
see.
Obviously,
claims
are
up
quite
a
bit
this
year,
but
what
we
did
work-
and
you
know
with
the
team
and
look
at
that-
523
projected
increase,
as
well
as
that
three
million
dollars
in
surplus
knowing
also
being
cautious
where
the
year
is
trending.
B
D
B
B
If
claims
weren't
up
12
per
you
know
year
over
year,
it
might
be
a
situation
where
we
could
say,
let's
absorb
the
whole
increase,
but
with
the
way
the
plan
is
trended
this
year
we
don't
necessarily
know
if
we're
going
to
eat
into
that
2.8
million
dollars
how
much
we're
going
to
eat
into
that
before
the
end
of
the
year.
So,
looking
at
that,
you
know
wanting
to
take
a
conservative
route
and
if
this
year
turns
around
a
little
bit
numbers
get
better.
You
know
going
into
next
year.
B
B
You
know
increases
on
the
lower
end
because
that's
the
year
where
you
really
want
to
have
as
much
of
that
as
possible
to
help
the
employees
with
that.
But
I
think
this
is
you
know,
ultimately
what
we're
looking
at
two
and
a
half
percent
increase.
If
you
look
at
the
fact
that
last
year
was
a
zero,
you
know
that
means
we're
talking
about
over
over
two
years
about
a
1.3
percent
average,
which
is.
D
Pretty
good
when
it
comes
to
insurance,
so
I'll
kind
of
open
it
up
there.
Even
though
we've
been
having
dialogue
and
any
questions
comments
concerns
I
made
these
spreadsheets
well
it's
here
when
we
first
when
we
first
started
getting
stuff
from
strangers,
and
I
remember
jennifer,
I
know
you
weren't
here
jill
you
weren't
here
sean
was
here,
there's
a
bunch
of
people
that
weren't
here
at
the
time,
and
it
was
always
it
was
projected
sean.
D
You
had
talked
about
how
most
major
cities
and
west
venture
companies
went
to
the
self-insured
because
it
helps
to
save
money.
It
helps
to
save
life
and
we're
all
like
that,
and
then
2017.
We
actually
saw
some
good
savings.
We
actually
showed
this.
Some
good
rates
returned
such
and
we're
like
this
everything's
great.
That's
when
we
decided
to
try
to
figure
out
a
way
to
give
something
back
to
the
employees
which
we
which
were
done
and
eventually
done
in
the
form
of
decreasing
our
copays
down
to
2040
instead
of
46..
D
400
000.
every
other
year
we
actually
saw
surpluses
going
into
our
into
our
our
reserves,
so
you
threw
a
little
bit
of
a
lucky
wrench
into
this
one.
You
said
that
that
city
and
sean
have
a
completely
different
numbers
in
there.
I
would
really
like
to
see
the
corrected
numbers.
All
the
corrective
numbers
on
go
back
since
really
you've
got
that.
That's
what
we
went
over.
That's
when
that's
the
whole
numbers.
There
must
be
a
month
planes
and
such.
D
How
the
difference
is
because
it's
it's
difference
of
40
employees
funding
over
here,
but
we're
talking
four
million
dollars
difference
in
reserve
funds
over
the
48
police
budget
over
five
years.
That
seems
like
a
lot
of
difference,
reserve
funds,
so
I've
brought
some
machines
right
out.
Obviously
this
is
gonna
be
a
little
bit
changed
now
because
that's
different.
I
want
to
pass
them
out,
but
this
is
a
trend
month
to
month
on,
based
on
the
numbers
that
sean
gave
us
over
since
2015
how
the
reserve
has
increased
each
month
first
year
it
didn't.
D
We
didn't,
have
the
extra
reserve
funds
when
we
first
started
cell
phone,
so
that
was
showing
something
decreases
in
hamilton
county
since
then,
since
2015
every
year
we
showed
an
increase
in
funding.
The
spreadsheet
shows
some
calculations
there
as
to
how
much
overage
we
should
have
added
to
the
reserve
each
year
like
2015.
According
to
the
numbers
we
had,
there
should
be
547
000
extra
added
to
it,
2016
with
1
million,
almost
1.4
million
preservatives,
at
least
based
on
these
numbers.
We
get
the
plant
costs
versus
total
plant
funding
again.
D
Million
in
2017
2018
was
anomaly
and
correct
me.
If
I'm
wrong
was
that
the
year
that
we
had
the
the
all
the
neonates,
the
premature
purse,
that
we
had
a
lot
of
stop
loss,
extra,
logical
problems,
so
that
was
the
probably
the
reason
that
we
had
a
decrease
on
the
yearly
reserves
for
that
year,
city
paid
extra
on
that
year
in
2019,
not
last
year
2019,
we
had
almost
2
million
extra
in
reserves
over
here
2020
last
year
we
had
2.2
megahertz
reserves
this
year.
D
D
D
C
D
C
D
As
far
as
the
iff
union
goes,
we
have
big
number
differences
over
here.
I
understand
that,
there's
that
we're
now
finding
that
calculations
were
not
made
correctly
on
our
sheets
and
our
our
stuff.
We
say
things:
we
have
a
big
difference
in
this.
I
use
the
actual
number
that
we're
given
in
each
of
our
meetings
since
2015
on
to
do
monthly
projections
and
showing
increases
in
the
reserves
over
here.
D
I
have
a
big
difference:
I'm
not
willing
to
vote
for
an
increase
right
now,
but
we
have
differences
in
our
calculations
on
money
over
here
yeah.
I
know
we
talked
about
doing
a
going
from
5.3
down
to
2.6,
but
we're
still,
we
want
to
see
actual
numbers
over
here
before
we
go
for
increase
where
we're
saying
no
increase,
we're
we're
not
ready
to
vote
a
yes
on
the
increase
sure
based
on
the
numbers.
That's.
B
And-
and
I
understand
steve
and
I
understand
the
frustration-
I
think
it's
frustrating
for
all
of
us-
it's
frustrating
for
us
to
to
realize
that
there
was
a
difference.
When
we
look
at
the
history,
you
know
candidly,
we
tried
to
figure
out
what
changed
and
I
don't
know
that
we're
able
to
identify
that.
You
know
at
some
point
between
17
and
18.
So
up
to
that
the
numbers
matched
I
identified.
B
B
But
the
only
thing
I
would
say
is
you
know,
regardless
of
that
again
there's
a
discrepancy
in
it.
It
happened
regardless
of
that.
The
numbers
that
jay
has
that
we
put
on
that
spreadsheet
ultimately
are
not
going
to
change,
there's,
not
three
to
four
million
dollars
whatever.
That
number
is,
if
you
look
at
the
history
of
the
dual
employee
tier,
it's
actually
grown
in
the
last
couple
years.
You
know
a
couple
years
ago.
It
was
only
about
it's
somewhere
in
the
20.
B
You
know
person
range
low
20s.
So
more
people
have
been
involved
in
that.
So
it's
not
a
you
know.
Dollar
for
dollar
every
year
was
that
number
obviously
rates
have
gone
up.
Ultimately.
Looking
at
that,
though,
what
you
have
in
front
of
you
is
what
the
numbers
are.
There's
not
you
know
four
million
dollars
that
can
come
back
into
the
bank
because
of
that,
so
you
know
we
can
get
whatever
you
want
or
comfortable
with
from
a
from
a
timing
point
of
view,
the
only
thing
I
would
say
is:
there's
not
four
million
dollars.
B
That's
just
going
to
appear
in
that
fund
tomorrow,
so
either
way,
regardless
of
what
we
bring
you
back,
I
don't
believe
that
there's
gonna
be
a
change
to
the
2.6,
because
if
you
go
back
to
page
one
and
you
look
at
the
way
the
plan
here
is
running,
you
look
at
some
of
the
catastrophic
claims
that
are
on
there.
We
still
have
to
make
sure
the
fund
is
managed
responsibly,
which
it
has
been,
and
it
will
continue
to
be.
B
So
that's
where
we're
looking
at
that
2.6
increase
overall,
as
you
guys
know,
inflation
there's
some
reports
that
just
came
out.
You
know
inflation's
of
5
medical
inflation
is
close
to
double
that
you
know
so
we're
seeing
a
lot
of
groups
in
the
8
9,
10,
12,
15,
increase
range
2.6
of
the
city.
Paying
100
of
single
is
still
a
pretty
good
increase,
no
increase
last
year,
so
ultimately
we'll
bring
back
whatever
you're
comfortable
with,
but
I'm
giving
you
kind
of
the
cold
hard
facts
that
the
numbers
are
the
numbers
again.
B
I
think
everybody
wishes
there
wasn't
this
discrepancy,
we
don't
know
you
know
we
can't
identify
why
that
change
right
so
for
for
a
number
of
years
the
numbers
matched
straight
up
and
then
there
was
there
was
a
change.
We
don't
necessarily
know
what
made
that
or
who
made
that
it's
it's
been.
Neither
one
was
wrong.
It's
just
it
is
what
it
is
and
those
are
the
numbers
we're
looking
at.
B
B
B
B
The
fund
also
runs
on
a
fiscal
year
where
the
plan
runs
on
a
calendar
year,
so
there's
always
going
to
be
some
differences
there.
So
I
I'm
telling
you
that
because
we
will
bring
back
whatever
you
want.
You
know
work
with
the
team,
but
ultimately
you
know
those
numbers
are
the
numbers.
That
was
that's.
What
was
actually.
B
B
You
know,
subject
to
final
verification
at
the
end
of
the
year,
because
that's
you
know
when
you
have
two
separate
systems
where
we're
accounting
for
that
you
know.
There's
I
don't
think,
there's
anything
else
we
can
do
besides
get
that
disclaimer
and
make
any
adjustments
at
the
end
of
the
year.
We
might
identify
yeah.
C
D
D
A
lot
of
them
gone
through
a
lot
of
issues
with
code
itself
and
by
the
way
that
was
another
question
we
had
to
ask:
did
the
city
receive
any
federal
money
to
help
supplement
insurance
claim
costs
for
insurance
due
to
code
and
if
and
what?
And
if
so
was
any
of
it
applied
towards
our
insurance
record,
so
not
from
claims.
A
E
D
D
A
D
E
Other
plans
that
are
more
affordable
but
it
turns
out
today,
there's
gotta
be
some
more
plans
out
there.
So
that's
so,
and
I
think
to
look
at
that
too.
You
need
to
look
at
kind
of
a
list
on
those
people
and
see
if
they
age
out
or
did
they.
You
know,
that's
that's
possible,
but
that's
possible,
but
it's
interesting
that
over
the
years
you
can
actually
see
a
slide
in
the
retirees
that
are
actually.
E
So,
as
our
retirees
age
out,
unless
people
are
retiring
because
of
you
know,
the
average
working
age
is
getting
older
and
older,
I
would
expect
that
trend.
That's
a
general
trend,
so
our
retirees
that
are
there
are
aging
out.
We
don't
have
as
many
new
retirees
coming
in
because
less
people
are
retiring.
C
D
So
basically,
what
we
were
saying
before
when
we're
talking
about
a
5.3
increase,
because
that
was
to
cover
approximately
a
million
dollars
in
overage
and
by
the
way
I
I
know
that
you
based
it
on
a
lot
of
our
stuff
on
trends
and
such,
but
our
city
historically
has
run
well
underneath
these
trends
exceedingly
underneath
these
trends.
All
of
us
so
again
we're
we're.
Basing
the
next
year's
projections
on
trends
and
even
with
the,
even
with
the
increased,
with
increased
costs
based
on
the
trends
over
there
and
our
funding.
B
E
G
E
B
A
seven
percent
medical
inflationary
factor
accounted
for.
If
you
look
at
obviously
the
claims
report,
if
you
want
to
go
to
the
bottom,
the
top
box,
you
can
see
the
break
out
of
your
trend,
medical
and
pharmacy
right
so
you're
at
almost
14
on
medical,
which
is
the
bulk
right.
Those
don't
get
a
one-to-one
rating,
because
pharmacy
is
a
lot
lower
expense
so
down
in
the
bottom
box,
you
know
you're
a
12
percent
trend
right
now
and
that
formula
is
only
calling
for
about
seven
percent.
B
So
there's
there's
really.
If
you,
if
you
were
a
bridge
of
the
actuary
and
gonna,
look
at
it,
you
would
say
well,
we
need
to
assume
14
trend
in
there.
So
there's
really
a
five
percent
five
to
six
percent
advantage
that
we're
kind
of
giving
the
city
and
giving
the
employees
and
hoping
that
that
trend
is
an
anomaly.
B
B
D
B
A
B
F
B
D
B
B
So
that's
where
we're
looking
and
saying
look:
a
modest
increase,
2.6
trying
to
do
that.
Knowing
that
you
know
I
was
in
a
group
two
days
ago
in
front
of
their
board
and
they
they
had
good
years
the
last
two
years
and
they
did
zeros
and
they
just
you
know,
they're
in
a
24
increase,
and
the
comment
they
made
is
I
wish
we
had
done.
You
know
four
percent
a
year
for
the
last
two
years,
because
now
we'd
maybe
be
looking
at
an
eight
or
nine
right.
B
You
know
so
we're
trying
to
apply
in
some
regards,
even
though
not
something
rigid
saying
we'll
do
a
minimum
of
this
year.
It's
saying
look,
you
know
we
are
having
a
bad
year.
Hopefully
it's
an
anomaly,
but
we
also
need
to
account
for
the
fact
that
what
if
this
continues
in
the
next
year,
you
know
we
could
eat
that
surplus
up,
extremely
quick
so
that
a
nominal
2.6
increase.
I
know
any
increase
is
not
you
know
appreciated,
and
I
get
that
I
mean.
I
have
insurance
too
right
and
I
our
insurance
goes
up
as
well.
D
B
If
you
look
at
I'll
just
say
one
more
thing
like.
If
you
look
at
you
know
one
of
our
entities
the
other
day
around
here
you
know
the
bulk
of
entities
around
here
contribute
a
hundred
percent
of
single
and
zero
percent
independent.
As
you
guys
know,
the
city
contributes
68
towards
family
coverage.
So,
looking
at
that
data,
the
contribution
and
the
amount
that's
being
paid
is
kind
of
beyond
competitive
to
what
you
would
find
in
the
market.
I
know
it's
an.
D
D
Yes,
there
is
a
way
to
decrease
that
cost
for
you,
but
in
order
to
do
that,
the
employee
only
would
have
to
take
a
share
of
the
cost.
As
I
said,
there's
1100
to
1200
of
those
they're
not
going
to
approve
that.
I
can't
talk
to
you
know
the
majority
of
our
our
union
or
the
other
units
can't
do
the
same
thing
and
say:
hey:
can
you
take
up
the
cost?
D
It
ain't
going
to
happen
so
so
a
lot
of
this
extra
burden
on
that
portion
is
covered
by
the
employee
plus
one
employee
was
families
based
on
the
numbers
you
guys
before
in
these
numbers.
It
looks
like
we're
trying
to
cover
about
500
000
increase
right,
because
last
last
meeting
was
about
a
million
dollars.
D
Our
guys
still
do
not
want
an
increase
and
they've
gone
through
a
lot
over
this
last
year
as
well
for
a
lot
of
home
expenses,
family
expenses,
child
care
expenses,
even
though
they
get
something
back,
they
they've
had
to
do
a
lot
of
different
things.
I
know
all
the
other
employees
that
are
here
in
the
city
have
done
that,
especially
the
ones
that
that
had
to
work
from
home
and
had
to
do
other
things
their
children
were
at
home.
B
B
D
D
Other
conference
rooms
are
fairly
difficult,
all
discussing
some
increases
and
such
and
one
of
the
things
we
asked
is
if
the
city
was
it
was.
I
think
a
four
percent
increase
we're
looking
at
something
along
those
lines
and
we
asked
is
the
city
winning?
Will
the
city
be
willing
to
cover
that
extra
expenses
and
one
of
the
things
he
said?
Is
you
know
what
don't
do
it
right
now?
You
specifically
said
wait
until
it's
a
point
where
you
would
be
needed,
it
would
be
much
better
right.
D
I
think
we're
at
that
point
at
this
point
in
time.
It's
a
smaller
amount
that
we'd
be
asking
for
five
hundred
thousand
dollars
for
the
city
to
help
cover
to
keep
this
at
a
zero
percent
increase.
It
would
help
the
employees
out
across
the
city
for
any
additional
cost
that
they've
played
approved.
It's
not
that
big
of
an
increase,
we're
asking
them
to
cover,
and
I
think
that
would
also
allow
time
to
get
all
the
numbers
back
in
order
and
where
they
need
to
be.
E
So
and
you're
right,
I
did-
and
I
guess
my
response
to
that
is
it.
You
know
for
what's
and
obviously
we're
in
negotiations
with
please
fire,
okay,
but
we're
not
in
a
situation
where
we're
not
providing
increases.
You
know
we
are
providing
significant
increases.
We
also
have
the
minimum
wage.
That's
overhaul,
that's
coming
in
that's
a
12
million
dollar
price
tag
on
it
that
we're
getting
ready
to
implement.
So
in
terms
of
the
needing
it
I
feel
like
we're
more
than
offsetting
by
in
the
salary
stuff.
E
E
Five
percent
but
and
but
then
you
know,
when
I
take
a
step
back
and
look
at
you
know
what
we
have
in
funding.
Well,
you
know
what
you
do
need
to
that's,
why
we
do
self
insurance
so
that
we
can
have
these
things
is
now
the
time
to
buy
it
down,
and
so
I'm,
like
you
know
what
why
we
can.
So
why
don't
we
buy
it
down?
But
when
you
look.
E
C
Your
membership
in
this
decision,
because
if
we
raid
the
2.8
million
this
year
when
it's
minor,
when
it's
minor,
to
get
it
from
2.6
down
to
zero
and
next
year,
inflation
which
we're
all
reading
about
the
newspapers-
medical
inflation
next
year,
all
of
a
sudden
with
the
fact
that
we're
also
having
a
bad
year.
On
top
of
that
we
come
back
next
year
and
we
find
out,
we've
got
a
10,
15
20
increase
and
we
rated
the
2.8
million.
We
don't
have
that
available
to
help
subsidize
an
offset.
C
D
E
D
A
B
F
E
D
So
I
don't
end
up
being
thrown
off
the
memorial
call
by
bridge,
because
right
now,
our
memberships
and
is
looking
at
skewed
numbers,
because
our
numbers
that
we
were
presented
with
were
not
correct
and
our
membership
is
looking
at
numbers
that
are
way
off
what
they
actually
are.
So
we
need
to
take
that
back
to
our
memberships
to
explain
hey.
This
is
the
actual
numbers.
This
is
where
we
stand
right
now
and
the
reason
why
and
the
reason
why
the
reason
why
the
numbers
are
correct.
D
D
E
And
what
I
I
would
ask
that
you
also
bring
to
the
numbers
is
that
it's
going
to
sound
a
little
bit
harsh,
but
you
know
you
can't
just
want
the
reduction
when
we
have
all
these
programs.
That
would
help
on
the
bottom
line
and
then
you
don't
participate.
I
don't
mean
you,
I
mean
the
global
you
you
know.
A
E
Gonna
get
that's
the
only
way
that
this
is
gonna
get
better,
because
we're
going
to
continue
having
these
conversations
and
not
make
any
progress,
and
so
we're
doing
surveys
you
guys
have
not
completed
the
survey
we
you
know,
I
mean
so
like
we're
trying
to
give
you
what
you
want
so
that
we
can
impact
these
bottom
lines.
So
we
don't
have
to
have
this
conversation
because
the
only
way
we're
going
to
change
this
is
if
we
change
our
behavior,
but
yet
I'm
not
getting
that.
E
D
Been
we've
been,
we've
been
promoting
them,
we
actually
on
rn.
We
have
been
promoting
them.
We've
been
saying:
look,
you
can
get
this
money
back,
go
ahead
and
do
this
money
back
go
get
a
cancer
screen,
get
75
bucks
back.
You
know,
we've
been
promoting
this
as
well
and
the
other
in
the
other
programs
as
well.
It's
kind
of
like
trying
to
make
people
wear
masks.
E
D
The
health
clinic
all
this
stuff,
the
city
things
in
the
city-
have
done
going
stuff
in
church,
but
we
do
promote
this.
I
get
the
questions
all
the
time.
I'm
like
look,
that's
what
they're
doing
you
know
this
is
here.
This
is
helping.
This
is
helping.
You
know
this
is
the
problem
right
here:
you're,
not
gonna.
D
The
one
thing
that
would
reduce
the
cost
down
for
employees
is
if
they,
if
employee,
plus
one
paid
like
10
and
that
ain't
gonna
happen,
I
had
no
misconceptions
that
were
going
to
happen.
So
it's
just
the
way
this
is,
but
we
need
to
bring
it
back
to
them.
I
think
and
and
give
them
the
updated
numbers
and
give
them
corrections
on
this.
So
we
can
bring
you
guys
an
accurate.
A
A
four-week
open,
enrollment
period
during
when
we
to
renew
benefits
and
whatnot,
and
what
we
would
like
to
do
is
reduce
that
to
three
weeks
rather
than
four
the
normal.
If
you
will-
and
I
don't
like
to
use
that
term
but
a
typical
open
enrollment
lasts
two
weeks,
so
we
figure
if
we
can,
if
we
can
reduce
it
to
three
without
you
know
any
too
much
issue,
then.
D
A
E
Time
going
to
the
different
locations
and
people
don't
show
up,
and
so
it's
like,
rather
than
continue
to
stack
something
for
four
weeks
without
a
lot
of
attendance
oftentimes
without
any
attendance
at
all,
we're
going
to
do
it
in
three
weeks,
just
to
increase,
have
some
efficiencies.
It's
a
waste
of
our
time
that
doesn't
seem
like
the.
G
Just
a
question
that
do
you
think
some
of
that
comes
into
like
solid
waste.
You'd
have
a
capital
audience
back
when
we
had
our
monthly
meetings
because
they
all
have
to
be
there
and
everything.
But
I
remember
when
I
first
started
in
city
20.
Some
years
ago
I
was
in
survey.
We
had
mandatory
meetings,
yeah
and.
G
This
is
important
enough
because
I
think
sometimes
and
and
I'm
just
speaking,
for
some
of
what
goes
on
out
there
and
I'm
not
it's
not
a
blanket
statement
or
anything,
but
there
are
pockets
of
it
where
things
come
up
and
we
can
even
relate
this
down
to
votes
that
we've
had
and
all
kinds
of
things
where
some
supervisors
just
don't
want
to
be
bothered
with
it.
They
don't
want
to
change
their
schedule.
F
That
that
opportunity
isn't
being
pushed
aside
by
using
mandatory
slots
for
open
enrollment
yeah,
like
everybody,
has
to
go
to
at
least
one
well.
I
would
just
say
that
for
sure,
work
and
guys
work
at
midnight
come
back
and
have
to
have
mandatory
specifications
on
overtime
that
you
just
manage.
Someone.
E
The
mandatory
meetings
have
a
terrible
outcome
with
staff,
because
we
have
staff
that
are
sleeping.
We
try
to
keep
them
as
short
as
possible.
We
have
staff,
that's
disgruntled
like
I
don't
want
to
listen
to
you,
I'm
forced
to
be
here
if
I
can
talk
to
fire
police
for
when
they
want
to
be
there,
and
I
work
with.
E
So
we
have
we
put
out
an
open,
enrollment
video,
and
so
that
has
been
very
helpful
because
a
lot
of
people
have
their
questions
answered
during
those
videos.
We
also
have
an
open,
enrollment,
quick
fact
sheet
that
we
have
provided
to
employees,
and
so
we
have
not
gotten
a
lot
of
questions
and,
what's
helped
is
you
know,
major
dalton
or
chief
ellers
will
put
out
a
mandatory
feat
during
this
time,
because
if
you
come
back
after
and
say
you
didn't.
D
E
E
D
So
so
it
sounds
to
me,
like
you
all,
are
doing
an
excellent
job
on
the
the
online
information
going
for
an
open
enrollment,
an
open
enrollment
is
done
through
the
beta
checks,
whatever
we
call
it
now
now
now,
so
there's
not
really
that
much
of
a
need
for
extra
meetings
over
here.
So
why
can't
we
keep
open
enrollment
like
shantae,
is
going
for
for
four
weeks
to
reduce
meetings
down
to
maybe
only
one
or
two
I'm
not
going
forward.
E
A
Yeah
what
but
I
do
remember,
we
started
doing
more
meetings
every
day,
because
departments
were
saying
that
we
weren't
coming
to
meetings.
We
weren't
there
we
weren't
available.
So
then,
when
it's,
when
my
stuff
was
going
out
and
having
all
these
meetings,
then
nobody
was
showing
up.
So
we
responded
to
some
feedback
that
we
had
gotten
on.
The
previous.
You
know
benefit
enrollment
survey,
and
so
I
mean
you
know
in
my
personal
opinion.
Typically
in
other
places,
you
know
they
don't
even
have
meetings
right.
So
I'm
thinking
three
weeks
is
enough
time.
E
When
it
fell
off
from
1719
for
like
participation
during
open
enrollment,
so
from
the
mandatory
meetings
to
last
year,
I
would
say
we
actually
had
more
participation
last
year
than
we
have
years.
Prior
bentek
did
start
as
admin
assist,
which
was
super
beneficial.
If
anybody
did
open
enrollment
last
year,
I
could
log
in
and
I
could
go
on
to
an
employee's
account
and
they
could,
you
know,
walk.
I
don't
have
to
have
them
sign
in
and
do
their
passwords.
E
H
F
E
F
They
don't
want
to
do
something
for
work
after
they.
You
know
they're
ready
to
go
crash
at
home.
I
mean
that's
just
because
they
work
hard
out
there,
not
that
you
guys
don't
know,
but
you
know
what
I'm
saying:
there's
no
penalty,
if
you
don't
show
up,
if
there
was
a
penalty
for
it
as
if
you
would
lose
a
benefit,
people
would
show
up
for
it,
but
it
was
going
to
be
the
same
thing
I
had
last
year.
If
I'm
single,
I'm
single,
why
won't
I
show
up
because
nothing's
going
to
change.
D
And
there's
there's
less
of
a
need
for
people
to
we're
in
a
modern
age.
What's
the
people
coming
on
the
department
and
making,
especially
ones
that
are
just
starting
on
this
city
over
here
they've
got
10
times
more
computer
knowledge
and
stuff
than
I
do
so
they
know
how
to
look
this
stuff
up
online
and
figure
it
out,
and
that's
how
I
was
mistaken
just
for
my.
H
E
Put
in
the
surveys
again
we're
listening
surveys,
so
I
know
that
a
lot
of
fire
employees
have
come
to
me
saying.
Why
am
I
going
to
waste
my
time
when
we
had
the
light
scan
so
now
we
do
have
the
light
skin.
I
don't
know
sean
if
more,
if
you've
seen
an
increase
in
fire
and
police
doing
motivation,
I'd
have
to
get
a
custom
report
to
see
that.
F
E
E
G
B
Because
I
I
think
I
understand
in
some
ways
what
you're
asking
you
know.
The
first
thing
is
the
nice
thing
about
the
motivate
me
type
program.
Is
it
doesn't
really
cost
any?
So
if
nobody
does,
it
doesn't
really
cost
them.
So
so
we're
not
adding
a
cost
burden
in
having
that
program
and
the
benefit
of
it.
Obviously,
is
we
get
people
in
to
get
those
screenings?
B
You
know
we
hopefully
can
keep
you
off.
That
large
claim.
I
don't
know
if
you
guys
look,
but
there's
a
million
dollar
claim
right.
You
know
if
we
can,
if
we
can
stop
those
from
happening.
You
know
it
makes
a
big
impact
in
that
regard.
So
that's
really,
but
you
know
to
your
point:
if
no
one
does
it,
it
doesn't
really
cost
the
city
there's
not
a
burden
on
doing
that
program.
That's
that's
what
you're
trying
to
look
for,
and
just
because
it's
the
last
thing
on
the
agenda.
B
D
I
started
I
started
looking
at
compartments
going
through
the
list
of
people
just
to
get
a
jump
on
especially
two
areas
and
there's
a
fair
and-
and
I
didn't
I've
completed
yet,
but
there
are
a
fair
number
of
police
fire
that
have
participated
so
relative
to
percentage.
I
don't
know
what
that
is,
but
in
terms
of
from
what
I
think
more
because
last
year,
even
participation
was
pretty
reasonable
for
a
life
scan.
That's
50
bucks!
Well
what
yeah
lifestyle
so
so.
F
F
E
E
B
B
B
B
So
there's
really
no
such
thing
as
free
time.
Okay,
so
so
in
that
regards,
I,
I
won't
argue
with
the
doctors,
but
you
know
this
is
really
targeted
to
people
that
at
least
based
on
that
criteria.
I
think
the
numbers
chris
might
know.
I
think,
like
you
know,
if
your
blood
sugar's
100
to
110,
like
quota
the
pre-diabetic
and
then
110
and
over
is
so
basically,
if
you're
already
in
a
situation
where
you
are
taking
insulin
and
taking
a
a
medicine
to
reduce
your
blood
sugar,
it's
not
a
program
targeted
for
those
individuals.
B
It's
really
something.
That's
maybe
been
flagged
as
hey
you're
in
that
pre-rip,
but
you
don't
even
necessarily
have
to
have
the
blood
sugar
issue
right.
If
you
have
you
know
if
your
weight's
over
and
you
have
other
markers,
I
think
just
one
other
marker
and
there's
a
list
this
program,
it
uses
a
coaching
methodology,
so
they
send
you
a
digital
scale.
When
you
step
on
that
scale,
your
coach
sees
your
numbers.
B
H
I'm
not
fat,
you
know,
so
those
those
numbers
aren't
going
to
be
completely
accurate.
You
understand
what
I'm
saying,
because
I
live
a
healthy
lifestyle.
I
know
I
eat
clean.
I
work
out
regularly.
My
job
entails
pretty
much
a
glorified
distributor,
so
I'm
thinking
and
shoveling
all
day
just
about
normally
so
my
point
is
those
numbers
aren't
going
to
be
too
accurate.
B
B
Has
nothing
to
do
with
whether
or
not
somebody's
considered
obese
right,
there's
certain
markers
that
qualify,
someone
for
the
program
that
is
one
of
the
potential
markets
just
because
somebody
has
a
bmi
of
26,
doesn't
mean
they
have
anything
wrong
with
them
healthy
and
that's
not
what
this
is
trying
to
say
it's
not
saying,
because
you
have
a
bmi
of
26.
You
have
to
go
into
this
program
because
one,
it's
completely
voluntary
right,
we're
not
forcing
anybody
into
anything.
We're
not!
You
know.
This
is
a
voluntary
program.
B
If
you
are,
you
know
at
risk
and
you
want
help
and
you
want
to
engage
in
this
program
and
you
meet
the
criteria
you
can
engage
in
the
program.
Nobody
has
to
do
anything
in
that
regards
what
the
program
is
really
designed
around
is
trying
to
provide
somebody
an
opportunity
for
kind
of
in
person,
but
virtual
one-on-one
coaching
to
say:
look,
you
know
you.
Maybe
you
have
a
risk
right.
Your
blood
pressure
is
high.
Maybe
that's
diet
related,
that's
causing
it.
You
know,
so
you
work
with
that
coach.
B
If
you
don't
want
to
do
the
program,
you
don't
have
to
we're
not
saying,
because
somebody
has
a
bmi,
that's
one
point
or
two
points
over.
You
know
that
we
think
they're
unhealthy
or
anything
like
that.
It's
just
there's
a
list
of
this
qualifies
that
qualifies
someone
to
voluntarily
enroll
in
the
program
if
they
want.
So,
if
you
are
the
marathon
runner
that
has
nothing
wrong
with
you,
you
run
every
day.
You
know.
C
B
You
don't
have
high
blood
pressure,
high
triglycerides
or
anything.
You
don't
qualify
and
participate
in
that
program,
so
this
is
just
another
offering
that's
being
made
available.
So
we,
you
know
people
come
all
the
time
and
say
hey,
I'm
struggling
with
my
weight,
but
I
don't
know
who
to
go
to
so.
This
is
just
an
option
for
coaching.
What
we
really
like
about
the
program
overall
is
the
omada.
It
comes
through
as
a
preventative
claim
to
the
city
only
if
that
coach
helps
that
person
achieve
success.
B
So
let's
say
that
you
know
you're
overweight
and
you
have
all
these
high
markers.
You
go
on
this
coaching
program
and
you
get
worse.
The
city
doesn't
get
charged
a
dollar
right,
so
there's
no
cost
to
the
city.
So
it's
really
a
performance-based
comes
to
his
claims
completely
free
to
the
employee.
So
what
we're
trying
to
do?
Is
you
know
if
you
look
at
the
global
landscape
and
chris
can
kind
of
jump
in
here
right
10,
15
years
ago
we
had
these
kind
of
programs
where
we
said
hey.
B
If
you're
overweight
do
this
program,
you
know-
and
we
took
this
blanket
approach
right
kind
of
with
everybody.
So
what
like
an
omada
is
trying
to
do
is
trying
to
be
for
that
percentage
of
the
population
that
wants
that
help
just
another
tool
for
them
to
need.
It's
not
going
to
be
for
everybody,
but
it
could
be
for
somebody.
You
know
if
we
can
take
somebody,
that's
in
a
state
of
not
taking
a
medication
for
diabetes,
but
in
a
year
is
gonna,
be
there
and
we
can
keep
them
from
getting
there.
B
That's
gonna
save
the
plan,
probably
twenty
thousand
dollars
a
year
when
you
look
at
the
cost,
those
diabetes
beds,
and
it's
only
going
up.
So
that's
what
the
program's
designed
around
completely
voluntary.
You
know
the
the
vmi
discussion
is
just
one
of
about
chris.
I
think,
like
nine
or
ten
different
things
that
could
make
you
eligible
to
purchase
every
reason.
I
brought
that
up
because
I
went
to
the
city
clinic
and
I
get
a
physical
service
from
the
state
fund
because
it
was
it's
available.
B
F
G
B
And
how
I
use
this
as
an
example
right,
the
you
know,
we
do
a
wellness,
fair
and
the
guy
that
you
know
comes
in
with
his
track
shoes
on
and
it's
like
hey.
I
want
my
my
incentive.
The
reality
is
that's
great
because
we
wanna,
but
that's
not.
You
know
the
guy
that
goes
to
the
doctor
every
three
months
for
his
checkup
and
gets
his
life.
B
That's
not
really
what
we're
trying
to
target,
because
that
person,
even
if
they're
you
know,
on
meds
or
something
they're
they're,
maintaining
what
we're
really
worried
about
and
what
causes
the
big
claims
are
the
ones
that
get
caught
by
surprise
right,
the
person
that
hasn't
gone
to
the
doctor
for
10
years
and
has
no
idea
what
their
blood
sugar
is-
and
you
know
trust
me.
I
understand
going.
B
Like
I'm
in
better
shape
than
you,
you
know,
and
I
understand
and
and
that,
but
that's
not
you
know
we're
not
trying
to
we're
trying
to
get
that
person
that
doesn't
ever
go.
It
doesn't
get
that
cancer
screening,
so
you
can
scale
in
a
digital
coach
in
person
like
fellaini.
It's
it's
a
person.
It's
actually
live
like
if
you
you
can
text
them,
but
if
you
text
them
at
two
in
the
morning,
they're
asleep.
F
B
They
might
say,
hey,
you
know
sean
what'd,
you
what'd,
you
do
different.
Last
week,
you're,
like
oh
gosh,
you
know
I
was
on
the
night
shift
and
I
you
know
I
had
no
choice
but
to
eat
from
the
driveway
or
whatever
you
know.
The
point
is
to
get
you
to
help
understand
what
what
causes
that
right?
It's
not
you
know
and
then
that
coach
obviously
may
say
hey.
Have
you
ever
thought
of
trying
this
or
it
might
be?
You
know
hey,
you
know.
What
are
you
eating?
B
Are
you
eating
a
lot
more
processed
foods
than
that?
So
it's
designed
to
give
people
information
and
help
them
make
better
decisions.
That's
all
we're
we're
trying
to
do
people
that
have
done
the
program.
You
know
really
like
it
and
can't
believe
people
don't
like
it
probably
aren't
even
going
to
start
it.
So
it's
not.
You
know
the
nice
thing
is
it
doesn't
cost
the
city
anything
like
that
and
while
we're
looking
what
we're
looking
at,
we
just
have
to
hammer
a
couple
things
out
with
cigna
is.
B
B
B
B
Right
so
you
know,
if,
if
you
wanted
to
be
more
drastic
and
say,
we
really
want
to
give
people
and
that's
how
you
would
do
it
more
than
probably,
even
if
you
bump
motivate
me
up
to
500
bucks,
you're,
probably
still
not
going
to
see
that
much
of
an
incremental
increase.
What
you're
going
to
see
is
the
people
that
are
already
doing
it.
Earning
500
bucks
instead
of
200.
Let's.
G
G
A
A
C
B
A
E
H
B
If
there's
any
additional
information
that
you
need,
that's
not
in
the
packet,
you
just
make
sure
you.
Let
us
know
specifically
what
that
is,
so
that
we,
you
know.
If
you
need
documents
or
whatever,
then
we
can
put
that
together
so
and
if
you
guys
want
to
follow
up,
you
know
to
an
email
with
jail,
or
you
know
you
say
yeah,
it's
already
in
the
packet
or
whatever.
It
is
just
make
sure.
Let
us
know
so
that
we
can,
you
know,
get
back
together.
It's
all
ready
to
throw
axes
all
across
this.
F
D
So
it
could
have
been
30
couples,
but
it
was
showing
60
employees
and
really
it
would
only
be
30
claims
of
funding.
Let's
say
each
each
couple:
their
monthly
cost
was
five
hundred
dollars.
So
I
don't
know,
then
it
was
really
selling
that
the
city
was
taking
in
a
thousand
dollars
instead
of
five
hundred
dollars.
C
Was
right
in
the
gearing
groups
database,
our
payroll
information
being
fed
to
their
database
was
causing
their
database
to
be
incorrect.
So
therefore,
sean's
number
of
the
cumulative
savings
was
overstated
because
of
that
error
it
didn't
affect
any
of
the
city's
numbers.
City's
numbers
were
going
in
correctly
from
the
payroll
system
into
the
general
ledger,
and
that's
and
that's
what's
flushed
out
now
is
we've
got
this
cumulative
difference.
That's
occurred
because
of
that
80
000
a
month
that
was
being
overstated
in
their
numbers
and
jesse.
It
was
probably
driven
because
we
had
to.
We
had.