►
From YouTube: Study Session : 08-28-18
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
D
Well,
thank
you
very
much
for
the
opportunity
to
be
here
this
evening.
My
name
is
Brian
Kammler
I'm,
a
partner
with
plant
Moran
with
me,
is
Martin
Olynyk.
We
all
know
and
Jonathan
tree
on
fee,
so
we're
here
to
talk
about
post
employment
benefits
rather
other
post
employment
benefits.
What
is
that
so
we
call
it
Oh
peb
or
it's
usually
just
retiree
health
care,
so
it's
any
retirement
benefit
other
than
pension
pension
gets
talked
about
number
one
retiree
health
care
gets
talked
about.
D
Number
two
could
also
include
other
benefits
that
are
earned
while
an
employee
is
active
and
then
receives
during
their
time
of
retirement
could
be.
You
know,
other
versions
of
health
care,
whether
it's
optical
or
dental,
or
it
could
be
life
insurance
that
they
get
after
they
have
left
the
employee
of
the
city.
So
why
are
we
talking
about
it?
Well,
it's
in
your
financial
statements,
first
and
foremost,
and
so
this
comes
directly
from
the
city
of
Dearborn,
Heights
2017,
audited
financial
statements.
D
Gatsby
45
for
the
first
time,
required
a
governmental
unit
to
put
this
health
care
information.
This
retiree
health
care
information
in
your
financial
statements
you
always
ever
since
you
promised
the
first
employee.
If
you
stay
here
long
enough,
we'll
give
you
health
care
and
retirement
is
long
ever
since
that
first
employee
was
promised
that
benefit
you've
had
this
liability,
but
it
hasn't
been
recognized
or
recorded
until
seven
or
eight
years
ago,
with
Gatsby
45.
D
Now
this
disclosure
here
says,
what's
recorded
on
your
balance
sheet
as
a
liability
and
that
number
at
the
very
bottom
of
the
page
there
63
million
dollars.
That's
what
the
accounting
rules
say
up
till
now
what
they
say
you
have
to
record,
but
that's
not
the
totality
of
the
liability.
It's
just
these
accounting
rules
that
we
have
to
follow,
what's
required
to
go
into
your
financial
statement,
but
on
the
next
page,
also
page
60
of
your
audited
financials.
D
This
is
the
actuarial
accrued
liability.
So
this
is
the
big
giant
scary
number.
This
is
according
to
actuary
math,
which
is
different
than
algebra
or
geometry.
I
can't
come
up
with
this
number
you'd
need
to
hire
someone
outside
of
the
city
and
outside
of
Plant
miranne,
being
an
actuary
to
figure
out
how
many
people
you
have
take
a
guess
how
long
they're
gonna
live,
take
a
guess
what
the
cost
of
the
benefits
going
to
be.
D
If
we
were
gonna
fully
fund,
this
liability
we
would
have
to
set
aside
this
dollar
amount
today
to
pay
out
every
retiree
until
every
retiree
goes
on
to
the
next
Kingdom,
but
we'd
have
to
put
aside
168
million
dollars
based
on
the
assumptions
based
on
the
benefits
today,
based
on
these
guesses
as
to
how
long
people
are
gonna
live,
how
much
the
cost
of
health
care
goes
up
now.
This
number
till
now
has
not
been
recorded
in
your
financial
statements.
It's
been
disclosed
in
this
note
of
your
financial
statements
for
the
past.
D
Seven
or
eight
years,
but
the
totality
of
the
liability
has
not
been
recorded
on
the
balance
until
now.
So
now
we
have
a
new
Gatsby
rule,
Gatsby
75.
That
says
we
no
longer
want
that
63
million
dollar
number.
That
was
on
the
previous
page.
Now
we
want
the
168
million
dollar
number.
Now
it's
a
slightly
different
calculation.
It's
not
exactly
the
same,
but
it's
going
to
be
in
the
ballpark
of
this.
D
D
So
what
has
happened
over
time
is
that
pension
for
the
most
part,
if
you
go
community
by
community
pension
for
the
most
part,
has
been
pre
funded
in
it,
because
it's
required
by
law
that
you
have
to
get
an
actuarial
done
for
your
pension
every
year
and
you
have
to
set
aside
money
in
a
trust,
but
health
care,
o
peb
has
not
had
that
same
requirement
still
does
not
have
that
same
requirement.
It's
not
by
law.
D
You're
allowed
to
pay
as
you
go,
which
is
what
Dearborn
Heights
has
done,
which
is
what
the
vast
majority
of
communities
that
have
promised
this
benefit
have
done.
It
means
that
you
get
your
blue
cross
bill.
You
pay
your
Blue
Cross
bill
and
retirees
get
their
health
care,
but
you're
not
doing
any
pre
funding
you're,
not
setting
any
money
aside,
so
that
we're
gonna
take
care
of
it
down
the
road.
So
that's
why
there's?
This
hundred
and
sixty
eight
million
dollar
lie
ability
with
no
assets
to
offset
it
because
you've
been
doing
perfectly
legal
perfectly.
D
E
Had
a
question
for
you,
so
I've
I
mean
needless
to
say,
you're
saying
this
is
fine
right
now,
but
it
would
be
a
problem
or
a
challenge
if
we
have
the
same
situation
as
we
had,
for
example,
in
2007
six,
when
the
market
totally
browned
and
the
revenues
coming
in
because
at
a
tax
base
was
much
less
and
therefore
our
general
fund
may
not
have
that
type
of
money
around
at
that
time.
What
what
would
we
do
as
a
city
if
there
were
to
come
up
again
well.
D
That's
why
this
exists.
That's
why
it's
called
protecting,
because
what
happens
when
a
community
is
not
doing
financially
well,
is
they
have
to
make
cuts
so
whether
or
not
they
have
the
ability
to
change
retiree
health
care
depends
on
a
lot
of
things.
It
depends
on
your
collective
bargaining
agreements.
It
depends
on
many
things
wouldn't,
but
if
you
can't
change
the
health
care,
then
you're
going
to
have
to
change
your
operating
expenses.
D
E
D
And
that's
that's
what
this
is
about.
This
is
really
the
crux
of
why
I'm
here
today,
so
public
act.
202
requires
you
to
do
certain
things,
because
the
state
of
Michigan
doesn't
want
you
to
have
to
get
into
this
situation.
Where
you
have
to
make
a
decision.
Are
we
gonna
have
to
hurt
the
retirees
or
are
we
gonna
have
to
hurt
our
current
residents
and
cut
service?
Are
we
good?
What
are
we
gonna
have
to
do
to
make
our
city
continue
going
forward?
Okay,.
F
One
thing
that
I've
been
advocating
for
is
the
establishment
of
a
115
trust
fund
for
police
and
fire,
the
health
care
oversight,
actual
report
numbers.
So
that
way,
when
we,
you
know
through
act,
345
we're
taxing
the
residents.
We
need
to
have
the
calculation
to
do
so
so
with
that
and
I'm
very
concerned
about
this
whole
piece,
because
we
see
what's
happened,
not
just
in
Wayne
County
but
throughout
the
state
where
we
have
municipal
governments
that
have
cut
and
taken
away
benefits
in
retirement
and
I.
F
Think
that
is
a
horrible
thing
for
people
when
they've
worked
their
entire
life
and
they're
promised
and
they've
earned
those
benefits
to
take
that
on
away
from
them
in
their
retirement
years.
I
think
is
a
horrible
thing
and
so
I
want
to
make
sure
we
do
whatever
we
can
to
protect
our
employees
and
their
retirements.
F
So
with
that,
my
question
is
and
I
spend
a
lot
of
time
reviewing
act,
345,
and
you
know
that
particular
pension,
because
you
know
I'm,
looking
at
the
retirement
system
that
healthcare
piece
for
at
3:45
that
we're
taxing
is
included
in
this
a
peb
figure.
I
would
imagine
health
care
because
we
don't
have
a
115
trust
fund
and
if
that
is
a
case,
that
168
million
plus
unfunded
liability
over
expansion
of
30
years,
whatever
that
may
be,
what
percentage
of
that
is
placed
in
fire,
because
I
would
make
sure
that
being
protected.
D
We
will
talk
about
345
in
a
few
slides,
but
that's
part
of
the
solution
or
a
part
of
the
the
city's
response
we
go
to
the
next
slide,
so
the
goal
of
the
state
when
they
pass
this
public
act
is
to
make
sure
that
you're,
putting
not
you,
municipalities
that
have
promised
this
benefit,
making
sure
that
municipalities
that
have
promised
this
benefit
do
set
money
aside
to
protect
the
retirees
but
at
the
same
time
also
be
fiscally
responsible
so
that
they
don't
have
to
gut
current
operations.
They
want
to
protect
the
current
residents
as
well.
D
They
wanted
the
cities
and
townships
to
still
be
able
to
provide
service
to
the
communities
they
don't
want
to
make
those
people
suffer
at
the
expense
of
making
sure
the
retirees
get
their
benefit
they're.
Looking
for
a
win-win,
whether
or
not
they've
achieved
that
that's
subject
to
debate,
but
that's
the
goal,
that's
what
they're
trying
to
get
to
so
now.
How
would
they
do
this?
So
I
apologize
to
the
audience?
If
you
can't
read
that
on
the
screen,
but
basically
what
PA
202
required
was.
D
There
was
a
form
that
had
to
be
filled
out
by
every
municipality
that
promises
both
pension
and
retiree
health
care,
because
it's
not
just
old
PAP.
This
law
is
about
retirement
benefits,
both
pension
and
health
care,
and
so
there
was
this
form,
and
you
pulled
a
few
numbers
out
of
the
financial
statements,
put
it
into
the
form
and
it
would
calculate
what
your
percentage
of
funding
was.
So
if
your
pension
system
has
80
million
dollars
and
the
liability
is
100
million,
you're
80%
funded,
the
same
calculation
goes
for
retiree
health
care.
D
If
you
have
assets
set
aside,
those
assets
divided
by
the
liability,
gives
you
your
percentage
funded.
In
addition
to
that,
there
is
also
a
metric
comparing
your
required
contribution
for
both
pension
and
old
PAB
against
your
general
fund
operating
budget,
because,
if
you're
spending
too
much
of
your
general
operating
budget
on
these
benefits,
then
the
alternative
you
have
to
cut
service.
You
just
don't
have
enough
to
maintain,
and
so,
if
you
fail
those
tests
for
pension,
they
want
you
to
be
at
least
60
percent
funded
for
Oh
peb.
D
D
These
are
issues
that
are
very
complicated
and
so
that
calculation
is
not
necessarily
adequate
to
tell
you
is
this
plan
well
funded?
Do
we
have
the
means
to
keep
funding
it?
And
so,
following
this
this
process,
where
you
send
in
the
information
the
state,
tells
you
whether
or
not
you
pass
or
fail,
and
if
you
failed
those
tests,
then
you
had
the
opportunity
to
submit
a
waiver
and
that
waiver
process
was
so
that
you
could
explain.
D
Hey
look
yeah
I
failed
the
test,
but
there
are
other
circumstances
that
you're
not
aware
of,
because
the
test
was
prescribed
by
law
and
the
state
has
to
follow
the
letter
of
the
law.
They're
not
allowed
to
make
judgment
calls,
but
this
waiver
process
allowed
them
to
use
some
judgment
to
say
yeah,
you
failed
it,
but
there's
other
circumstances.
Now
a
lot
of
communities
and
I
helped
write
a
lot
of
these
waiver
applications.
D
A
lot
of
communities
had
really
good
reasons
that
I
personally
believe
should
have
been
adequate
to
get
a
waiver
and
they
were
rejected.
The
state
was
very,
very
strict
when
doling
out
these
waivers
most
did
not
get
them.
So
if
you
didn't
get
a
waiver
now
you
have
to
file
a
an
improvement
plan,
a
corrective
action
plan
or
a
cap,
so
from
the
date
of
the
letter
that
they
say.
No
sorry,
you
failed
the
tests
and
your
request
for
waivers
denied.
D
Now
you
have
six
months
to
file
this
cap
with
us,
and
so
that's
the
position
that
you
are
in.
You
have
to
file
a
corrective
action
plan
with
the
state
now
you're
fine
on
pension
you're
engines
are
over
the
60%
threshold,
but
retiree
healthcare
is
not
because
you
did
pay-as-you-go,
which
again
perfectly
legal
perfectly.
Okay,
most
communities
do
that,
but
according
to
this
law
they
want
you
to
be
funded.
So
now
this
is
the
position
you
are
in.
You
have
to
file
a
corrective
action
plan
with
the
state
by
November
17th.
D
That
plan
will
then
go
under
review
by
a
three-person
advisory
board
that
has
been
appointed
by
the
governor.
That
advisory
board
is
going
to
determine
whether
or
not
your
corrective
action
plan
is
reasonable,
because
you
could
just
slap
something
together
and
send
it
off,
but
that
doesn't
mean
it
gets
you
to
40%
funded
and
they
give
you
30
years
to
do
that.
D
So
you
have
to
come
up
with
a
plan
that
is
unique
to
you
that
addresses
your
very
specific
situation.
The
assets
that
your
community
has
the
liabilities
your
community
has
not
every
community
is
the
same.
In
fact
they
are
all
different.
Some
have
a
345
millage,
but
most
don't
some
have
other
liabilities.
Others
don't
some
have
revenue
streams,
but
others
don't
so
the
plan
is
going
to
be
unique
to
you
now.
How
do
you
get
there?
So
so
what
goes
in,
and
so
this
slide
explains
the
triggers
again,
that
40%
or
the
12%.
D
So,
like
I
mentioned,
you
are
adequately
funded
according
to
the
law
for
pension,
your
general
employee
plan
is
75%
funded,
the
police
and
fire
is
approximately
87%
funded
and
the
the
passing
grade
was
60,
so
those
plans
are
well
funded.
Those
are
okay
in
the
state's
not
concerned
about
how
you
pay
your
retirees,
their
pension.
That's
fine
off
the
table
for
this
discussion.
F
I
just
a
question
because
it
might
begin
slow,
it's
really
a
directly
to
what
you
say
go
out
and
it's
more
for
the
administration,
because
the
annual
required
contribution,
which
is
the
12%,
comes
to
a
little
under
14
million
correct.
That's
what
this
is
from
the
Michigan
Department
of
Treasury's
website.
It.
G
H
The
terminology
isn't
correct,
so
the
OL
pepper
terminology
was
basically
carried
over
from
pension.
So
on
the
pension
side
it
is
an
annual
required
contribution.
So
your
that's.
Why
your
pre-funding,
the
liability,
because
it's
a
requirement
for
OPA,
it's
actually
a
recommended
contribution.
So
that
way,
your
pre-funding,
some
of
that
liability.
But
technically
it's
now
requirement.
H
So
the
city
as
Brian
mentioned
the
city
has
been
paying
you
go
because
you're
not
technically
required
bound
by
law
to
pre-fund
it
that
14
million
dollars
a
annual
required
quote-unquote
required
as
in
the
pension,
but
you're
technically
not
required
to
do
that
and
now
going
forward
in
the
actuarial
and
I
lecture
reports
that
terminologies
going
to
be
adjusted
and
I
believe
it's
gonna
say
actually
recommended
contribution
versus
required.
Okay,.
D
So
now,
what
does
the
state
want
you
to
do?
Well,
they
want
you
to
get
funded.
They
want
you
to
get
to
40%
funded
for
ol
PAP
over
the
course
of
30
years.
Now,
how
do
you
do
that?
Well,
it's
two
components
right!
It's
how
much
you
have
in
assets
divided
by
how
much
do
you
have
in
liabilities?
So
if
you
can
grow
the
assets
but
don't
touch
the
liabilities
you
can
get
to
40%
funded,
but
it
takes
more
assets.
D
D
So
what
does
your
corrective
action
plan
have
to
say?
Well,
it
has
to
show
that
you
get
to
this
forty
percent
funded
over
30
years,
and
you
just
can't
take.
They
won't
just
take
my
word
for
it
and
they
just
won't
take
your
word
for
it
either
the
state
wants
an
actuarial
calculation
and
they
want
council
to
approve
it.
So
finance
can't
just
put
it
together,
because
just
because
finance
puts
together
a
plan
doesn't
mean
the
city's
gonna,
do
it.
D
D
Now
the
reasonable
time
frame,
they're,
saying
30
years,
which
it's
a
lot
more
doable
than
it
hey
by
the
end
of
your
term,
get
this
fixed,
no
30
years,
50
years,
they're
saying
is
way
too
long,
but
30
years,
because
usually
most
actuarial
valuations
are
amortized
over
30
years,
so
I
think
that's
where
they
got
that
number
from
and
it's
got
to
be
both
legal
and
feasible.
So
if
you
did
not
have
a
345
millage,
but
you
said,
hey
we're
gonna
pass
a
345
millage.
D
If
I'm
the
the
board
at
the
state
I
would
go
well.
What
are
the
odds
of
you
doing
that?
Maybe
you
do
maybe
you
don't
or
say,
yeah
we're,
gonna,
we're
gonna,
leave
you
an
additional
mill
to
pay
for
it,
but
you
don't
have
millage
capacity.
Well,
that's
not
legal
either.
So
they
want
this
plan
to
be
legal
and
reasonable
and
and
achievable,
and
they
also
want
some
good
faith
effort
that
you're
not
just
passing
it
and
then
forgetting
it.
D
So
that's
in
a
nutshell:
if
you
need
to
save
some
money
and
if
you
so
desire
lower
the
cost
of
the
benefit,
it
doesn't
necessarily
mean
decreasing
the
benefit,
but
it
means
perhaps
changing
plan
design
in
a
way
that
gives
comparable
benefit,
but
at
a
cheaper
cost.
So
is
that
possible?
Yes,
is
it
going
to
be
the
easiest
thing
in
the
world?
No,
it's
going
to
going
to
be
a
little
challenging.
You'll
need
some
help
doing
that.
D
In
order
to
save
money
for
for
OPA,
it
needs
to
go
into
a
trust.
You
can't
just
say:
well,
we've
got
this
other
bank
account
here
and
we're
gonna
put
money
in
this.
Other
bank
account
and
trust
us.
It's
only
gonna
go
to
OPA
that
doesn't
work.
A
trust
is
an
irrevocable
place
to
put
this
money
by
putting
it
in
the
trust.
You
are
saying
it's
going
to
retiree
health
care
and
we
are
legally
unable
to
do
anything
else
with
it.
D
You
would
have
to
begin
funding.
You've
got
to
put
some
money
into
this
trust
to
demonstrate
to
the
state.
Yes,
we
mean
business.
We
are
committed
to
doing
this
and
if
you
choose
to
go
the
path
of
fixing,
both
the
asset
and
the
liability
number
two
lower
the
benefit
costs,
you're
gonna
have
to
start
making
some
changes
to
your
plan
design.
D
Now,
we've
already
had
conversations
with
Jonathan
and
he
has
some
very
good
ideas
of
ways
to
do
that
and
we'll
have
to
work
with
the
administration
to
make
that
happen
and
you're
gonna
have
to
be
okay
with
it
and
approve
it.
In
order
for
that
to
go
on,
and
then
you
will
have
to
demonstrate
with
an
actuarial
calculation
that
this
will
in
fact
get
you
to
40%
funded
over
30
years.
That's
kind
of
the
that's
the
seal
of
approval
that
someone
other
than
the
city.
D
Someone
outside
the
city
has
taken
a
look
at
your
plan,
the
assumptions
that
you're
putting
forth
and
saying
yes,
based
on
these
assumptions,
we
think
over
30
years
you
hit
that
magic
number
of
40
percent,
and
then
you
have
to
begin
executing
this.
So
this
is
just
a
very
basic
graph
of
what
I
just
said.
D
The
first
column
is
that
you
have
a
168
million
dollar
liability
in
your
financial
statements
with
0%
funding.
There's
no,
no
blue,
green
piece
to
it,
and
in
five
year
increments,
going
out
thirty
years,
you
would
continue
to
put
money
into
the
trust
that
trust,
because
it
is
a
trust,
you're
able
to
invest
it
in
equities
and
other
pension
like
investments
that
should,
over
time,
get
you
a
return
of
seven
or
eight
percent,
not
the
half,
a
percent
you're
getting
at
the
local
bank.
But
again
your
your
revocable.
E
B
D
J
F
J
D
G
But
bond
council
went
to
seminar
the
treasurer
father
of
our
by
council
had
a
presentation,
and
while
there
is
talk
and
legislature
to
allow
we're
a
strong,
a
but
struck,
you
have
to
be
a
double
a
and
so
the
other
thing
is
there's
some
stipulations
connected
with
the
bonding
that
may
be
trouble.
Matic,
so
I
mean
from
what
everything
I've
heard,
I
think
the
paint
the
plan,
if
I,
might
need
to
be
bifurcated
and
police
and
fire
and
general
government,
police
and
fire
would
be
funded.
G
Hopefully
through
act,
354,
345
and
and
the
other
piece
would
have
to
come
through
a
combination.
I
would
imagine
a
general
fund
in
those
employees
that
are
out
of
the
water
system,
but,
and
that
would
then
contribute
that's
my
assumption.
I,
don't
know
if
I'm
correct
in
that
or
not
but
I,
think
you're.
Also
doing
the
plan
for
Wesleyan
and
Wesleyan
is
like
us.
B
G
C
D
So
even
though
you
can't
use
345
money
to
pay
for
the
benefits
of
a
water
and
sewer
person
for
the
purposes
of
this
calculation,
all
the
dollars
spend
the
same.
So
even
if
345
was
100
percent
of
the
funding
to
get
you
to
40
percent
that
meets
this
purpose,
but
those
accumulated
assets
could
only
go
to
paying
the
of
public
safety.
You'd
still
be
doing
pay
as
you
go
through
the
general
fund
for
everybody
else.
That.
G
Thank
you
and
kind
of
following
up
on
that.
My
thought
was
to
build
if
it's
an
affordable
piece
in
the
current
budget
for
the
general
government,
and
then
we
have
two
million
in
fun.
Balanced
reserves.
I
would
leave
that
alone.
If
there
is
in
the
future
some
type
of
recession
that
gives
us
two
million
dollars
to
kind
of
utilize
in
protection.
That
would
not
be
necessarily
and
the
trust
right
away,
but
would
help
us
if
there's
a
two
or
three
year
recession
to
maybe
help
us
achieve
the
goals
of
our
plan.
G
So
I
I,
don't
think
this
is
direct
as
draconian
as
we
think
provided
we
can
bifurcate
it
and
use
the
345
the
fought
to
pre-fund
us
and
if
that's
can
be
done.
The
other
thing
is:
it's
gonna,
be
very
difficult.
In
my
opinion,
maybe
not
your
opinion,
but
I
think
all
the
contracts
have
already
been
negotiated
and
I'm
not
looking
to
reopen
those
right
at
the
moment
and
my
explanation
to
the
state
would
be.
G
We
have
commitments
to
these
unions
for
X
number
of
years,
so
we
try
to
do
this
and
make
our
commitments
I
really
don't
want
to
go
back
and
reopen
it
now.
The
council
has
never
approved
the
agreement
with
the
we'll
say
the
general
government
folks
and
one
of
my
contention
is
with
the
state
now
saying:
no,
you
got
to
go
back
in
Rio,
since
you
don't
have
a
contract
with
them,
at
least
from
the
council
standpoint.
I
think
we
do.
D
Think
that
the
state,
unless
you
were
under
emergency
management
I,
don't
think
they
can
make
you
do
anything
with
your
contracts.
I
think
it's
up
to
the
city
to
decide
how
to
bargain
with
your
employees,
but
the
one
small
aspect
of
what
you
said.
The
only
part
that
I
disagree
with
is
you
don't
have
to
wait
until
the
agreement
expires
to
make
a
change.
It
depends
on
the
wording
of
your
contract,
but
most
typically
again,
I'm,
not
an
attorney
so
I'm,
not
interpreting
contracts
here,
but
usually
there's
language.
That
says
something
about
comparable.
D
So
a
lot
of
times,
Blue
Cross
stops
offering
a
plan
that
is
part
of
what
you
offer,
and
so
you
find
another
plan
that
offers
the
same
thing
or
at
the
same
cost,
if
any
to
the
retirees
or
to
the
active.
So
that's
where,
where
my
friend
Jonathan
comes
in
is
he
can,
with
working
with
the
labor
attorneys
figure
out
what
is
possible
within
the
plans
that
we
provide?
D
Whether
that's
and
I'm,
just
talking
up
top
of
my
head,
whether
it's
changing
provider,
whether
it's
changing
contract
within
Blue,
Cross,
whether
it's
if
the
contract
doesn't
say
Blue
Cross,
can
we
go
to
Aetna
whatever
there's
there's
a
lot
of
different
things?
You
can
do
that
the
individual
receiving
benefit
doesn't
notice,
because
all
this
stuff
happens
in
the
background
and
they
don't
see
they
go
to
the
same
doctor.
They
get
the
same
bill
or
no
bill.
They
get
the
same
service
and
there's
no
difference
there
are.
There
are
possibilities
for
that.
D
K
So
I
know
some
of
it
was,
was
asked
okay,
so
based
on
plant
Moran's
knowledge
and
experience,
one
knowledge
of
our
financial
state
from
the
last
artist
that
you
guys
have
done
and
based
on
your
experience
with
the
state
or
other
municipalities
going
through
you
for
a
plan.
Okay,
how
confident
is
plant
Moran
that
we
don't
make
drastic
changes
in
our
city?
I,
don't
know
if
you
guys
have
I,
don't
know
if
Jonathan
has
looked
at
that.
K
I
know
that
you
guys
it
got
to
be
part
of
I
guess
that
corrective
action
plan
for
the
state,
but
how
confident
is
it
without
making
drastic
changes
to
their
contracts?
Currently
we
have
or
the
future
one
that
we
have
with
TP
on.
How
confident
are
you
guys
that
that
we
actually
have
something
or
without
making
direct,
drastic
changes?
K
D
A
good
question-
and
my
answer
is
I-
am
very
confident
that
something
can
change
within
the
benefits
that
you
provide.
That
saves
some
amount
of
money
for
the
city.
How
severe?
How
not
severe
I
I
have
no
idea,
because
it's
not
something
that
we've
been
been
told
to
really
dig
into
yet,
but
I'm
sure
Jonathan
can
offer
some
more
insight
on
that.
It's.
L
So,
there's
a
there's
a
couple
things
just
off
the
top
of
my
head:
they
may
be
smaller
items
but,
for
example,
the
city
right
now
offers
retiree
life.
Insurance
I
usually
refer
to
that
as
a
death
benefit,
because
if
you're
getting
life
insurance
and
retirement,
everybody
unfortunately
dies.
So
that's
just
a
it's
a
guaranteed
benefit.
There
are
insurance
carriers
out
there.
Now
that
understand
the
the
situation
or
position
that
municipalities
have
been
put
on.
So
there
are
buyout
programs.
L
These
insurance
companies
are
saying
we
will
assume
all
of
your
liability
for
cash
payments
over
some
mutually
agreed-upon
time
period,
so
we
might
set
up
a
five-year
or
seven-year
payment
plan,
but
at
the
point
in
time
that
that
buyout
is
initiated
all
of
that
retiree
life
liability
comes
off
of
the
old
PAP
okay,
so
what
you're
doing
is
you're
effectively?
We
all
talked
about
the
pays.
You
go
method
right
now,
you're
just
paying
your
life
insurance
premiums
for
retirees
as
you
go.
L
What
you're,
you're
exchanging
is
a
reduction
in
liability
for
an
increase
in
your
cash
costs
as
you
go,
because
in
order
for
the
insurance
company
to
assume
all
that
liability,
the
fact
that
they
know
those
people
are
going
to
pass
away
at
some
point,
you're
effectively
pre-funding
that
liability
over
a
set
period
of
time.
That's
just
again:
it's
a
it's.
A
cash
cost
versus
a
complete
elimination
of
that
portion
of
your
liability,
no
change
in
benefits,
everybody
still
gets
the
same.
Death
benefit
there.
L
They
were
guaranteed
and
the
and
the
insurance
contracts
as
they
exist
now.
So
just
that's
just
one
example,
but
there
are
other
things
like
that
out
there
that
we
could
look
at
and
then
you
have
to
weigh
do
we
have
the
do.
We
have
the
room
in
the
budget,
or
can
we
budget
in
the
future
and
put
that
in
our
corrective
action
plan
now,
with
the
understanding
that
we
will
deal
with
the
cash
costs
or
how
to
budget
for
it
in
the
next?
You
know
in
the
next
fiscal
year
that
or
two
fiscal
years
out.
H
You
if
I
can
add
on
to
that
too
so
in
Jonathan's
example,
that
red
bar
would
decrease
as
a
result,
so
you're
required
annual
contribution
at
that
point
would
decrease
as
well.
So
you
are
pre
funding
that
liability,
but
your
other
payments
decrease.
So
it's
not
gonna,
be
the
offset
dollar-for-dollar,
but
there's
different
things.
You
can
do
so
that
what
you
minimize
the
impact.
B
A
G
L
H
One
important
thing
to
mention
too,
and
they
know-
and
Brian
mentioned
this
before,
but
now
looking
at
this
168
million
dollar
number,
which
that's
a
2017
number
so
2018
s,
sure
it's
going
to
adjust
a
little
bit,
but
you
don't
have
to
fund
168
million
dollars
immediately.
I,
don't
again
Brian
mentioned
that,
but
it
is
over
time.
H
So
if
it
comes
out
to
that
million
and
a
half
or
something
like
that
and
depending
on
how
much
police
and
fire
is
it's
not
this
daunting,
you
know
ten
million
dollars
a
year
or
something
like
that
you
have
to
put
aside.
It
is
still
looking
for
gold
number
I'm
sure,
because
you
have
to
look
at
your
operating
budget.
Make
sure
you
make
adjustments,
but
it's
not
that
you
have
to
fund
the
full
amount
right
away.
Come.
B
J
D
J
D
One
could
make
an
argument
that
you've
been
under
charging
citizens
for
years
that,
according
to
the
actuarial
calculation,
you're
supposed
to
put
away
twenty
million
dollars
a
year
for
retiree
health
care
and
you're
paying
tenant
premiums.
So
an
argument
could
be
made
that
the
city
could
have
charged
an
extra
ten
million
a
year
and
instead
you're
now
saying
well
going
forward.
We
have
to
do
a
million
or
two
or
whatever.
The
number
is,
but.
D
J
D
J
G
I
It's
complicated
few
questions,
so
I'm
a
Jonathan
suggested
something
in
terms
of
accounting
afford
this
by
pre-funding
is
just
because
it's
going
to
end
up
being
pre,
funded
by
virtue
of
say,
getting
rid
of
that
benefit
by
pre,
pre
funding
it
and
then
painted
over
the
course
of
time.
Is
that
mechanism
in
and
of
itself
coin,
to
cause
that
to
be
considered
to
be
no
longer
computed
in
this
calculation?
Is
that
what
you're
saying
or
are
you
just
saying
that
that's
a
way
to
end
up
having
someone
else
assume
those
liabilities
for
us.
L
I
I
D
D
However,
it's
a
law,
so
if
the
federal
law
changes,
if
something
is
something
happens,
that
there
is
no
more
worry
about
pre-funding,
this
liability,
then
I'm
sure
other
laws
would
be
changed
or
passed
to
address
it,
and
just
because
it
goes
into
this
irrevocable
trust.
There
are
situations
where
the
federal
government
has
allowed
say:
pension
money
that
was
put
aside
in
an
irrevocable
pension,
trust
to
be
used
to
pay
retiree
health
care
benefits.
D
One
of
my
clients
in
Oakland
County
that
community
was
over
funded
in
pension
under
completely
unfunded
in
Opa,
and
they
went
through
the
emergency
management
process
and
they
were
allowed
to
take
that
pension
money
that
is
supposed
to
be
ironclad
locked
down
in
a
trust
for
pension,
but
they
had
too
much.
They
were
allowed
to
use
it
to
pay
health.
I
D
G
Got
a
general
questions.
You
got
this
plan
that
it's
got
to
be
submitted.
I
thought
I,
hadn't,
sign
off
on
the
plan.
The
council
head
site,
open
I,
think
both
of
us
have
sign
off
on,
but
what's
the
steps?
What
do
we
need
to
have
you
do
so?
We
have
plenty
of
time
to
talk
about
the
cat,
so
plenty
of
time
to
talk
about
what
we're
gonna
put
in
the
plan
and
yeah
I.
Guess,
one
starting
point
and
I
think
it's
already
been
approved.
Is
we
have
an
actuarial
report
going
on
or
being
created?
G
D
D
My
guess
is
within
two
and
a
half
months,
you're
not
going
to
be
100%
done
with
your
plan,
I
think
it's
going
to
be
a
work
in
process
and
you're
going
to
overtime
change.
What
you're
doing
new
facts
and
circumstances
are
going
to
come
out,
but
the
things
that
you
can
nail
down
in
that
time
you
need
to
nail
those
down.
There
is
the
the
there's
a
form
to
fill
out
for
this
plan,
and
so
we
can
help
the
administration
complete.
The
form
gather
the
documentation.
D
F
K
G
K
C
D
G
D
Way
is
fine,
MERS
is
a
fine
product,
but
the
concept
of
the
trust
could
be
at
any
bank
or
financial
institution.
It's
just
a
matter
of
saying
and
taking
action
to
make
it
a
152
trust
that
this
is
only
for
retiree
health
care.
So,
whether
you
manage
the
money
yourself,
you
hire
an
investment
manager
outside
of
MERS,
you
use
MERS.
Any
of
them
are
viable
options
and
my.
G
Assumption
is
that
by
the
due
date
for
this
plan,
we
don't
actually
have
to
institute
all
these
deposits
by
that
date.
But
we
have
to
present
a
plan.
Then,
within
that
plan,
would
be
a
date
that
we
would
agree
that
we're
gonna
set
up
the
trust,
we're
gonna,
make
the
contribution
and
that
in
my
correct
and
then
correct,.
D
The
trust
can
be
established
very
quickly,
but
if
you're
going
to
use
public
act,
345
money,
you
don't
have
a
tax
levy
between
now
and
November
17.
So
it
would
be
physically
impossible
to
do
that.
But
it's
part
of
the
plan,
the
council
can
pass
a
resolution
that
says
we
will
use
that
in
the
next
tax
levy
or
the
next
available
tax
levy.