I think we'll get started. Heather's on, NY's on. So, uh, thank you. I just want to thank everybody for taking some time out of your day and nice and early at 8:00 meeting to to jump on here. Um, I I appreciate that. And I think today's really a mix of of informational as well
as some recommendations um aimed at really keeping our health plan strong, uh, sustainable, and affordable for all of our employees in the district. Um, as you probably already know, healthcare costs continue to rise nationwide, but you know, we really want to stay ahead
of that and and avoid sort of what we were in before that we're we've been trying to get ourselves out of, right, where we um we kind of delayed any increases for a while and we found ourselves needing a really much larger ones. Um, you know, but we're trying to
stay ahead of that now. I know we have uh for for most employees a plan that carries us through, you know, this year and two more with SEIU. We still do need to return to the table to talk about plan year 206. And uh but here we have some
recommendations here that we're going to go through. So there we go. So last year, just a recap for for most employees, and this, you know, this is everybody except SEIU, we did agree to these three years of uh
three plan year increases. Um, as well as a, you know, the district putting $30 million of one-time funds to to bolster the the reserve and and share up the plan. And uh so we will be returning
with SEIU to talk about our plan year 26 with with you and uh but at the same time we felt it was necessary for you to be part of the decisions that we're looking at in and adjustments to the plan and things that we're already doing but also things that we're planning on
uh we recommend doing. Some of those things came out from our conversations with the coalition last year recommendations that you that that the coalition had. So, with that, I think I'll turn it over to Nancy and Heather to to lead us through some of these
things. >> Okay. So, next slide. So, I'm not sure who's controlling them. >> I got it. >> Oh, you do. Okay. >> All right. So, as Mr. Kubri mentioned, um, you know, we already have a three-year agreement with increases in
health premiums. And when we agreed to that, I did we were we've been very transparent about the status of the plan. We knew even with the increases in premiums, it wasn't going to be enough. When you get to plan year 27, you can see the premium increases are not enough
to cover what the expect expected increase in uh plan expenses is supposed to be. And so we said, you know, even though we've agreed to premium increases, we're not we're still going to continue to meet because we need to continue to meet on cost containment efforts and keep everybody updated as to
where we stand so that like Mr. Kubri mentioned by the time we get to plan year 28, we're not looking at um in substantial increases in health premiums. We'll just be able to continue those nominal increases in health premiums going forward.
Okay, next next slide. So what we're already doing for cost containment, uh we have uh implemented this glucose monitoring program uh which is uh completely voluntary. That's estimated to save $1.8 8 million. Uh we're implementing uh and
partnering with uh People One Health Centers uh which we did a presentation with uh the coalition group and that's estimated to save $1.8 million. Uh people one though has an additional cost per member and so the those that are
going to be eligible are those that have agreed to that the three-year uh premium increase. Uh so that will be this people one option will be available as of right now for CTA PBA and non-bargaining members. Uh we're making some uh slight
changes within the uh prescription drug plans related to the GLPS which is a small estimated savings of 300,000 uh but that every little bit helps. So we're looking at everything we can in order to contain cost so that by the time we get to plan year 27
we are at a break even. And then we're adding a fourth plan option. And that fourth plan option is going to be priced the same as uh the current low option plan. And that option is uh projected to save $2.2 million. Um and Miss Bolton is
going to walk through, you know, what the what that plan is. So we're not removing just adding an additional option. >> So Miss Bolton. >> Okay. So the shest plan uh is it's an
innovative technical um consumerdriven you know sort of the next generation of the consumer-driven plan. Um so as Heather mentioned it would be offered as the fourth plan completely voluntary. Um you know not in place of any of our three plans but in addition to it
beginning in plan year 26. It's co-ayment driven. If you look at this little illustration here it almost looks like an Uber app to me. But it is um not an Uber app. It is a very uh technological app that that is
um fortified by the existing United Choice Network. So members shop their health care services according to local providers um and prices that show on the app. The choice network has no no disruption from current network and it's
designed toward lower cost co-pays for the higher value services. So, our HMOs have lower co-pays for primary and specialist care for our tier one, so-called tier one providers that drive more value in care um based on just
their services and the underwriters uh determination of how they treat patients. Uh so, it's based on that model. So, if I had to go if I needed to go to a primary care physician for a sore throat, for example, I would type
that into the app. The app would pull up, as shown in this little uh illustration, and it would tell me where my primary care uh doctors are, and I would choose whatever I wanted. You know, if I wanted to go with the cost,
there's a $20 um PCP out there that I would choose. Tim, next slide. So, here's kind of how it looks. Uh, it is new again. Uh, so there's no deductible, no co- insurance, just these
clearly identified co-pays. So, as I mentioned, the lower co-pays have the higher value providers. uh and they're evaluated by um you know uh cost efficiency, effectiveness, patient reviews, all of
that certifications. Co-pays include the services delivered in that visit and so there are no follow-up balance bills or unexpected bills. Members can search ahead of time and know what they're going to pay. So it it's very
transparent. It's very innovative. Um, United acquired Shurist from a company called Bind, I think it was, in 2022. Um, it's, um, you know, we think that it's it's a product that might appeal to
our younger uh, newer employees or, uh, those those technical leaning folks. Uh, and it's just taking off. Uh there are now over a million lives covered under this plan and lots of private sector sector companies are
adopting it and so we're excited about the opportunity to offer it as a voluntary fourth option. Next slide please. So here's just kind of a plan design comparison. Um this is a busy slide but here are our
plans just some of our benefits summarized side by side. So you can see that the co-pays vary under shurist uh but there are no deductibles uh no co- insurance. There is an out-of- pocket
max so you're not going to spend more than $6,500 in any given year. Um but you're going to know what you're going to spend when you seek care. Next slide.
And then additional options. Heather, do you want me to continue or? >> Yes. Yeah. So, with the um so now we have three additional options. Um the first option is is was something that was recommended by the coalition bargaining group last year. Um it was
brought forward and uh we researched and and we are recommending that we we do proceed with that. It would be replacing the low op low option HMO with the neighborhood health plan. That is estimated to save $1.9 million. Um they
United is working hard to make sure that all doctors that are on the current plan would remain on the um uh the neighborhood health plan. It's over 98% of the doctors are on the same plans. Uh and it's not a gatekeeper model. So it's
not much different um from the low option plan. um employees would be required to uh select a primary care physician, but you don't need to go through that primary care physician in order to seek other care through other specialists. So, you would still be able
to go directly to a specialist. Um and you say, well, that how is that different and how would that save money? The way that it saves money is the primary care physician is the one who's coordin coordinating the care. So, if you go to one doctor, they ask for an X-ray. you go to another doctor, they
ask for an X-ray. All of that is forwarded to your primary through your primary care physician. And so your primary care physician would tell the second doctor, "Oh, they already had an X-ray. Here it is." And send them the X-ray instead of you going out and getting another second X-ray. Um so we
recommend that um replacing the low option plan with the neighborhood health plan. Um the second option is a premium change. We are recommending that we do not increase uh the high deductible uh
premium by the $18 per ch pay paycheck that we agreed to uh with the bargaining groups and that we for the employeeonly option plan. So it would remain at the current premium amount which Miss Bolton is $106.
>> Um $116. Let me just let me just grab that. And that would be an additional cost because it would be lost revenue uh to the plan. Uh but we're re recommending
uh that we keep that premium the same without doing that $18 increase. And then the last is plan design changes related to deductibles. And as we were working through with the plan actuary, uh he mentioned that we have not made
changes to our deductibles in several years. And so as the cost has increased and the claims have uh increased, the cost of claims has increased with medical inflation, uh he did recommend that we uh increase our deductibles.
That's just normal uh housekeeping of any self-insured plan. uh because everything else staying steady. Um if we were not to increase those deductibles, the plan would then end up being um structurally imbalanced. And so we're
recommending to increase the annual deductible one by $100 on both the low option and high option plans, which would save 1.8 million. And for the specialist co-pay, it would increase by $20 per visit on both the low and high option plans.
And if I may just just confirm that rate for the um consumer the CDHP is 116 per month currently. >> Okay. And so it would stay at 116 instead of increasing uh by that. That's per month. So instead of increasing by
$36. All right. Heather and Nancy, do we want to talk a little bit anything about how being on the high deductible would possibly be save them money or what what the difference would be? Well, the high deductible plan um does
have a consumerism sort of impact, you know, aspect to it in that it does have a high deductible, but the district provides a a health savings account option. If employees want to opt into it, we really want them to opt into it,
the district seeds those funds. And so over time, the HSA is a savings mechanism that will pay some of those costs incurred under the high deductible. But employees are motivated
to um to really think about if I have a sore throat, maybe I'll go to my PCP and pay $25 or $30 instead of, you know, the ER that's going to cost me and the plan more. You know, they want to save that that money. And the HSAs are neat
because when employees retire, they can actually take that money with them and use it to to spend on um health related costs in their retirement, >> right? It does it rolls over each year whatever balance is remaining. It's not
um it does it's not a use it or lose it like the FSA. So the HSA has a huge benefit to employees that they that it it is their money. All right. So next slide. And I think I walked through the neighborhood health plan, but is there anything um Miss
Bolton that I left out that you wanted to highlight? >> Um did you mention that we pursued this after uh you all brought it to us um in one of our bargaining sessions last year and so we did look into this um at your recommendation.
Uh so you know it's just a smaller uh it's kind of a it's just a more coste effective network but it would be relatively seamless to our employees. Uh they would have to choose a primary care
physician but again it's not a gatekeeper. don't have to use. They can still self-report to specialists, but that's why the actuary and the the I know that that increases in deductibles and co-pays are, you know, those are
those are difficult conversations to have, but the actuary specifically recommended those two um components because of our self uh referrals to specialists. there's not a lot of
daylight between the primary care physician and the specialist. And sometimes a primary care physician can resolve an issue um conservatively. And so he really thought the actuary thought that this difference, you know, this
kind of spread between co-pays would sort of serve to drive people to their primaries before self-reporting to an actu or to a specialist. Still be able to do it if they want to. Um, but the network health plan is really intended
to um keep you with your primary kind of that old medical home um theory. And so it should drive some costs down. Not a, you know, 2% but because our costs are
so high that matters. And so the plan um would be expected to ultimately save the HMO some money while being relatively seamless to our employees. Okay, next slide.
Uh so like we saw on the first chart, this actually is the numbers behind uh the chart to show that if we don't make any changes um if if we didn't make any changes to the plan, we would be looking at a $13 million short shortfall by plan
year 27. Um so with uh those cost containment measures that we're putting in place uh by plan year uh 27 we would be at a break even in the plan which means we'd be able to keep those nominal increases in premiums of where the
district is paying $11 and employees only $6 per pay period. You know so that's our goal. We want to get from digging ourselves out of a hole come plan year 27. We want to be proactive um and continue with whatever uh cost
containment and saving measures that we can put in place uh so that our plan is is structurally balanced and uh we can just have nominal increases going forward. Next slide. So now you can see the
difference from the first chart to the last chart. uh the yellow bar, the the premiums are now sufficient in order to cover uh the plan expenses and our ending fund balance is in compliance with state regulatory requirements if we
were to implement those changes. All right. Um so just a recap of the proposed changes to the plan is replacing the low option HMO with the neighborhood health plan that was recommended by the coalition last year. Um, so we after researching, you know,
with our actuary, uh, we were able to prove out that that that will save an estimated 1.9 million per year. And it's really should be seamless to the employee other than having to select a primary care physician. Um, other than that, you don't they don't have to
actually go through that primary care physician. They can, you know, direct report like Miss Bolton said, directly to any special specialist they want like they do now. recommend the premium change in the high deductible plan, keeping that the same with no increase
of the $18 that we had recommended last year. And then the plan design changes, which really come down to housekeeping um increasing that uh annual deductible by $100 um and increasing the specialist co-pay by $20. And both of those will
save, you know, nearly uh $3 million per year. So I guess uh at this time if I don't know we welcome your input if you got any ideas or suggestions um we'll turn it over to you now. >> Yeah. So I've got a few questions before
I get into what our position is with regard to these negotiations. But tell me about the people one health centers that are opening January 1. What exactly what services will be provided? How do employees access it? What cost will that be? Etc.
>> For those employees that elect to participate in people one and it's going to be open to the eligible employees that have, you know, already um agreed. So, CTA, PBA, and non-bargaining. Um it is a it's completely free option for the employee. So, that would be their
primary care. Although they could still elect to see other doctors, it doesn't um take that away from them. And there's no co-pays. Uh there's no um uh co-pays even on specific drugs. Uh there's also no co-pays if they are to if people want
primary care refers them for an MRI. There's no co-pays on the MRI, uh sleep machine, sleep apnea, whatever, you know, different services that are referred to them. It's all no cost to the employee. So, the plan pays a fixed amount each year for each employee of
$1,900. Am is that correct, Miss Bolton? >> Yeah. >> And then the employee has and so the plan is paying that and then there's no additional cost the employee pays when they actually go and visit >> and then the shest plan that you're
rolling out. Um, so I saw, yeah, I'm familiar with the plan a little bit, but when I hear innovative and consumer-driven, all that tells me is they're trying to get employees to they're trying to avoid claims, which means they're trying to get employees to avoid service. Uh, you know, when when
you look at that and you say, "Oh, look, it looks like an Uber app." Are you are you really just saying we're trying to get you to go to the cheapest provider? No, I would point >> I would say just to to get to your what
you said that it's to drive them to a lowerc cost care. It's really truly an innovative option that we expect younger employees to elect into. Um it's not because we're not replace we're not recommending to replace any of our plans. You know, I would say if we were
replacing one of our plans, you know, I I would agree with you on that. you know, potentially people might think that because it's a, you know, why are we replacing it other than to drive people to it? This truly is giving them a fourth option for those people that want to know what they're paying and
they're good with technology and they don't really want to talk to people on the phone. They want to just go on their app, see where they are, and it's it's it's very easy easy access. So it it's really truly just another option um for employees.
>> And when we talk about the high deductible plan, so you said that you're going to hold that premium at 116 as far as what the employees would pay. I have outdated numbers, so I don't have current enrollment numbers. Do you know by chance what percentage of our
bargaining unit employees are in that high deductible plan? of your particular bargaining unit. I don't think that we Yeah, I don't think we would be able to get that number. It is our the smallest enrolled plan. We can tell you that >> and it's because a lot of people don't
know and understand the high deductible plan. Um, it is and and for some people it's a little scary, you know, but I know that our our our previous um uh risk and benefits director, she's like, if I was young and I was just starting
the district, I would 100% go in that high deductible plan because that HSA just continues to grow and it stays with the employee. It's a huge benefit, but some people really just like to know that they have the health insurance and and don't want to have to worry about that. So, um, so it really is a personal
preference. Um, but the high deductible plan was priced higher than all of our other plans. And the reason why it was previously priced higher was because we wanted employees to to really research before they went into it. Um, but we do feel it is truly a good benefit employee
for employees and a lot of employees have not been electing to to participate in it. So that's why we thought it was better to keep the premium the same. So it will now be the the lowest employeeonly option. Um and and so that's why we're recommending it. Even
though it is a it is a loss revenue and will be some additional cost to the plan, we do ultimately think it is a good benefit for employees and we want them to really consider it as an option. >> Okay. Under the PBA and CTA agreements, those premiums were scheduled to go from
116 to 152. Have you amended those agreements? Well, that's part of this that's part of this discussion. Yeah. >> Well, see, I don't that's so that was a few bullet points down my list, but I
don't understand why the district's calling this coalition bargaining. You you struck three-year deals with the PVA and CTA, and you imposed on us what becomes under law a one-year deal. Why is this coalition bargaining if the PBA
and CTA are under contract? Well, it's it's really this this meeting wasn't necessarily even bargaining. It was as much I mean it obviously it's more like impact bargaining, I guess you would say. Um to try to come back and and talk a little bit we're about what
we're doing now, some of the things that we're already doing, just plan design changes that normally aren't bargained. Um but then also some options because really you know during negotiations over the last two years there were a lot of things floated and ideas and last year
we talked about the neighborhood health plan. So we know to do that that does need to be bargained right that you know changing swapping out a low option plan for the neighborhood health plan does require us to bargain it. Um, and it's
not some it's not something that anybody has to agree to, but our goal here really is just to make sure that at the end of this, we're not in another a situation where we're falling behind again. So, we we're not, you know, just because we have a a multi-year deal
doesn't mean that we're going to sit back and just wait until 2027 to start looking at, well, what what's the status of our plan? We want to stay ahead of this and and make sure that we can, you know, take in make any changes that are necessary now and and avoid any sort of, you know, larger increases later. And
we're also trying to, you know, make, you know, I'm not sure where you when, you know, how far along we were with with people one when before you, you know, joined the bargaining sessions, but that is something that we've really tried to, you know, we know that the
costs of the, you likes a premium increase, but that was really designed as an option where if you're using a a doctor and and you're going and you're you're you're you know paying co-pays and paying drug prescription drug prices and stuff like
that. That is something that would just be a tremendous benefit. So we're we we went out there and and and brought them into us to try to give another option for our employees to yeah while their premium might go up a little bit, we think that their their savings that
they're going to see from using people one would would be greater than than what the premium increases would be. Um, I know for a fact I guar I as soon as it's available, I'm signing up for people one. No question about it. It it's, you know, no no uh co-ay when you
go to the doctor. If I need prescription drugs, a lot of the are covered and MRIs, X-rays, all that stuff. I mean, that's going to add up. So, we're trying to just put forth some effort to make sure that our employees do have options that that, you know, maybe can scale
back some of the costs of the premium increases. >> Yeah. And listen, I mean there there's no argument that this sort of clinic-based care is, you know, the at least trend currently. I don't know that it's the way of the future. I I don't know if you need any more proof than
Amazon's opening its own clinics, right? I mean, they they just opened up three clinics between Broward and Dade County, and you know, if they opened one in Palm Beach, we'd probably all be on board uh because they appear to be doing a good job of it. Um, and we've had several
other clients that have been able to even in our self-insured funds open their own clinics and it does result in significant savings, you know, in reducing those claims. So, I'm all for that. I think what I was really driving at is if you have these, you've got two
more years, 26 and 27 under your collective bargaining agreements with the PBA and CTA. I don't see them present in this meeting. So, have they indicated that they're willing to come to the table and amend those agreements or are you just trying to convince them
that, hey, this might be a good idea? >> That's that's really it. We're trying to convince them no. PBA did say that they're not um interested in in returning the table right now. So, um that's something we'll have to work on uh with them and try to we're we're just
trying to share information here. I mean it it it you know it takes we it is a coalition right and and um so we're trying to share all this information we can uh and and you know we we you know there are a lot of questions over the
past few years about well why why are there the premiums you know why are we falling behind why are we asking for big increases now and I think it's because some of this kind of stuff wasn't considered there I mean Heather and Nancy have put down a lot more options
uh you know over last year and in in in in the future that we're recommending here that just weren't happening maybe you know for many many of those you know 10 years that that we saw no premium increases and it put us in a a tremendous hole that we had to dig
ourselves out of. So rather than uh you know keep going further in in the wrong direction, we're just trying to change things up and put these options out there. And if we could collectively agree that yeah, this makes a lot of sense for us, then let's do it. Um that way when when we get to 2028, we're
like, yeah, no problem. We, you know, we're we're we're the plan's in good shape. >> Yeah. I mean, look, I can tell you from our perspective, we're all in favor of the people one. we're in favor of replacing the low HMO with the NHP. I I I think that that's a a fantastic idea.
Uh but from our perspective, it really comes down to dollars and cents, right? You know, what are the employees required to pay? And I think we made our position pretty clear in the last negotiations over this that we're not on board with this coalition. You know, it's not coalition bargaining anymore as
far as we're concerned. Uh we think that if you look at the salary disparities between the CTA, PVA and the SEIU, you know, we have to have options that our lower wage earners can afford. And
so making improvements like that clinic or making improvements like replacing the low HMO with the NHP are good for us, but it still comes down to what are the employees going to pay? And that's why we pulled out of the coalition last year. And we're going to stay out of the coalition because, you know, in the the
exchanges that I saw that took place about this what was deemed at that time coalition bargaining, you know, I think they've made pretty clear that no, we have collective bargaining agreements. They're going to stand by them and which leaves us out on our own, which is where
we put ourselves last year. I'm not I'm not saying that they put us in this position. We chose this position last year and we stand by that choice, you know. So for us, we have negotiations coming up next month for a new collective bargaining agreement and we
think that healthc care should be part of those negotiations, the broad negotiations for an entire successor bargaining agreement and no longer separate negotiations that are not part of that pie. uh you know because you can't when we talk about what we're
going to take out of employees paychecks in order to afford healthare and you know we can debate should we operate that way should it be employer based healthcare you know those are separate and apart from collective bargaining but the fact of the matter is that under our
current system health care system in the United States it's employer based we rely upon you to provide us access to health care and the cost that we have to pay for that should be part of the negotiations for the wages that we earn
for the services that we provide and the jobs that we perform. So, you know, to us this shouldn't be a separate discussion from those negotiations. >> Understood. We'll have to look into that on our side and just exactly, you know, we'll reconnect with you about that
then. >> Yeah, I understand. I mean, and I'm not and I'm not saying that uh, you know, our position is that the district should provide different benefits to each of its bargaining units. I I you know, we understand that there are efficiencies
and economies of scale, right? We understand that. But what the district the costs that the district chooses to pass along to its employees, those don't have to be the same. And you know as the same as the position that we took last
year, we think the district should adopt a position that you know we are going to pass along these costs based on income and based on ability to pay. The district, we think, should be looking to each of its employees and saying, "We
need to provide you access to health care." And when we see rate increases like those that are contained in the PVA and CTA contracts, while they may be comfortable with those increases, we are not, you know, because we can't afford
them. You know, $36 a month to some employees may not sound like much of an increase, but to others that's significant and it makes a difference in they're having to choose between, you know, do I buy food, how do I pay for my
child care, how do I pay for fuel and cars, you know, so to us, we think the district needs to adopt an approach of we're going to scale this based on ability to pay, based on the wages that you earn and you know that's the
position that we took last year. Obviously it wasn't successful but we still maintain that position. >> On a separate note, Tim, I have a question. So when we were resolving the impass, the school district took a
position that it had me too clauses with the PVA and CTA that said if we charge the SEIU employees less, then we would have to match those rates for PBA and CTA. I've looked through the collective bargaining agreements. I've watched the
negotiation sessions. I've put in public records requests. I cannot find that me too clause. Can you tell me where that comes from? I I believe it was done through it was an email with parts of the coalition who when signing the agreement said that you
know I if if um other group is is able to secure a better rate that they would be entitled to it. So it was it was in writing I believe it was um with you know with CTA
uh really as you know asking that question or or you know asking it for us to agree to that um which you know we did. >> Yeah I did see those emails with Justin Catsman but so effectively that's a handshake deal not a collective
bargaining agreement not a ratified agreement. Sure. >> Uh it's not even you know a contract in writing. I mean, that's just, you know, hey, if uh we see that SEIU pulled out of this coalition, if they end up doing something better, we're going to get that, too, right? Oh, yeah. Yeah, sure.
I, you know, so it's not an enforceable agreement. >> We we would consider it would be. Yeah. We wouldn't we we um you know, if if we were to say, you know, yeah, we agreed to that, you know, even an email or a discussion, a handshake, whatever you want to call it, that means something to
us. um we wouldn't turn around and and do something different say, "Oh, yeah, we're we're just kidding." You know, we wouldn't do that. So, to us, it's enforcable. That's how we would approach that. Absolutely. >> All right.
And I, you know, you could expect the same. That's how we're going to deal with our our unions. You know, we're we're not that that would be the end of any kind of relationship. I think you could you'd have >> Yeah, I look I appreciate that. I you know I appreciate that and you know if I
you know have a handshake deal with somebody you know I expect that the deal you know absolutely but I just wanted you know it it it's been bothering me for six months now that
>> at that hearing it was said that no our contracts require it and I'm going this is not in the contracts. I do not see this. Right. >> Yep. All right. >> Heather, you added something. >> Yes. I I just wanted to make sure to put something on on the record that our plan
uh was not in a the need for the increased premiums because we were not being innovative and and trying to make changes within the plan. So over the past 10 years, the reason why we didn't have to have premium increases is because we were constantly making changes uh to the plan. um and also the
the the premiums were covering what those plan costs were. It truly wasn't until COVID that we did see that uh increase um due to medical inflation uh that we then had to make um further adjustments. And so we did wait. I don't
want to rehash everything because we heard it all last year, but I don't I don't want it to don't want it to seem like we are we're holding off on making changes. Uh previously uh we really weren't. It was looking to see how it settled after COVID. Um, after we knew with that increase in premiums that we
agreed to last year, we were going to continue to make changes and cost containment. That's what you have to do with a self- insurance plan in order to properly manage it. So, I just wanted to make sure that was on the record. That That's all. >> Yeah. I And I wasn't Heather, when I when I was talking about innovative and
consumer-driven, I was I was specifically talking about the shest plan and that fourth option. That wasn't uh in regard to anything else. >> Mr. Peg. >> Yeah. A comment then a question. First of all, the comment is that uh the
option to have clinics is is a great idea because we have more and more physicians and plans are going to concierge care and it makes it difficult for our our members to be able to get quality care. So, I appreciate that effort. But
the question I have, as I always do, I this really is the same thing I've discussed before. We're now giving a lot of different options and a lot of thought that the uh employees have to think about as they as they uh make decisions in regard to their their healthcare. Uh what's our educational?
What are we going to do to teach them about this and how are we going to communicate it? because there's a lot here to really uh you know it used to be if you have hair the color of mine you either question you either checked yes I want health care or no I'll get my own now we're looking at quite a few different choices and I think it's going
to be important for us to have a plan put together to communicate the changes and the options that are going to be available especially when we talk about the health savings account I agree with that 100% this is something I don't think enough employees take a uh take a an opportunity to use because it will it
is benefit icial to them both for their healthcare and for their tax purposes. So I I wish that we could do a better job of informing of that. So what's our plan? >> Um I can speak to that a little bit. We are working with people one uh representatives and our communications
team on a robust uh communication plan and uh also uh the shurist plan. We will work on a robust you know education plan. A lot of this will coincide with and around open enrollment because
that's a time of year when everybody's thinking about their health plan, but also um will extend beyond that. And you know, our communication materials, our customer service outreach um you know, all of those components will encompass
communications that help employees to better understand their benefits. And Nancy with that uh speaking for the staff association only. Whatever you can get to me or Eric as early as possible, we'll do our best to emphasize the
communication within our group if we can get that information uh as as early as possible so we can help get that out to them because I I just want people to be able to make the right decision for them personally rather than just checking yes or no. And I think it's important that we get that we get that information and
education out to them. >> Absolutely. We appreciate that assistance. >> All right. Any other questions? >> All right. Uh Mr. Foy, we're going to talk about it uh some things on our our side, but I I'll probably reach out to
you in the very near future to discuss just where we're going how we're going forward with everything. All right. >> Yeah, that'd be great. Look forward to it. >> Sounds good. All right. Thanks everybody. I appreciate your time today. >> Thanks for the information. We appreciate it.