NewzIntel.com

Category: housing

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Royal Darwin Show – Operation Home Safe

    Source: Northern Territory Police and Fire Services

    The Northern Territory Police Force, in partnership with the Department of Housing, Larrakia Nation and the City of Darwin, will launch a coordinated operation, Operation Home Safe, to assist visitors returning home following the Royal Darwin Show.

    The show is a major event that brings families together from many vast and remote locations from across the Northern Territory. We encourage people to enjoy the show and all it has to offer, but to also plan for a safe return home.

    Superintendent Kirsten Engels said, “Everyone enjoys the Royal Darwin Show as it’s a fantastic celebration for families and more. Returning safely home to family and friends is also important.

    “Every year, extended stays in Darwin following the event can result in people sleeping rough or living in overcrowded housing. This multi-agency operation will involve patrols and engagement teams supporting and assisting showgoers where we can, to help people return home.”

    The operation’s focus includes:

    • Supporting children to return to school in their home communities
    • Encouraging people to return home to access medical appointments and support services
    • Promoting stability, safety, and wellbeing for families

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-OSI China: Half a century on, China-EU ties require collaboration rather than division

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    Flight MU845 headed for Paris is set to depart Nanjing Lukou International Airport in Nanjing, east China’s Jiangsu Province, late July 8, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]

    This year marks the 50th anniversary of diplomatic ties between China and the European Union (EU), a milestone in a relationship that has matured through dialogue, cooperation and mutual benefit.

    As the international landscape grows increasingly fraught, the anniversary offers a timely reminder: China is a critical partner to Europe, not a systemic rival.

    That distinction matters. Despite occasional disagreements, the relationship between China and Europe is underpinned by a wide range of shared interests, including trade, climate, and global governance. These areas of common ground should not be eclipsed by isolated points of friction.

    From just 2.4 billion U.S. dollars in trade in 1975 to nearly 785 billion dollars in 2024, China-EU economic ties have become one of the most vibrant engines of global growth. Tens of thousands of freight trains have linked Chinese cities with over two dozen European countries. Investment flows have steadily expanded. Tourism, education, and people-to-people exchanges are flourishing. Such a relationship is not adversarial but essential.

    Admittedly, like all major economic players, China and the EU do not agree on everything. But disagreement does not equal confrontation. In fact, it is through dialogue that differences can be managed, and mutual interests enhanced.

    Some in Europe express concerns over so-called trade imbalances and follow Washington’s talk of “de-risking” and “de-coupling from China.” But such concerns often miss the broader picture.

    The EU has long benefited from its trade with China, not only through exports of goods but through the access its businesses enjoy in a vast and evolving market. From luxury brands and automobiles to pharmaceuticals and engineering, European firms have built a strong presence in China.

    Moreover, trade is not merely about goods. Services such as education, travel and tourism, where Europe enjoys clear advantages, have formed a growing and vital part of bilateral exchanges. Chinese tourists, students, and business travelers have made meaningful contributions to Europe’s economy and cultural life.

    China and Europe also share common principles. Both advocate for multilateralism, a UN-centered international system, and a multilateral trade regime with the World Trade Organization (WTO) at its core. Both support multipolarity and globalization. Both are committed to tackling climate change and development deficits — real challenges that demand cooperation, not confrontation.

    China, which does not seek dominance in global affairs, has never imposed its choices on Europe, nor has it blamed the EU for its domestic challenges. On the contrary, China has consistently supported a strong, united and strategically autonomous Europe. China firmly believes that Europe is a critical pole in a multipolar world and a key partner in promoting a more inclusive and just global order.

    China’s pursuit of high-quality development aligns naturally with Europe’s goals of a green transition and renewed competitiveness. Despite differences on certain issues, China’s door to Europe remains open. It will continue to expand cooperation in areas ranging from green development to digital innovation, and from AI governance to upholding a free and open world economy.

    The significance of China-EU ties extends far beyond bilateral interests. Whether in green supply chains, creating joint technological standards, or climate governance, each area of cooperation sends a signal of hope and stability to a world in flux.

    As global climate change think tank E3G rightly pointed out, China and the EU are clean-tech powerhouses and agenda-setters in global climate policy. Allowing geopolitical tensions or trade frictions to derail this cooperation would be a serious strategic mistake.

    The relationship needs more trust, not suspicion; more bridges, not barriers. This requires a return to the original spirit of China-EU engagement based on mutual respect, mutual benefit and shared progress.

    As former EU official Gerhard Stahl noted, framing China as a “systemic rival” has done more to fuel misunderstanding than to foster constructive engagement. China, one of Europe’s most important partners, offers long-term predictability and enormous opportunity. The prospects for China-EU relations are brighter than ever. 

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Booker Reintroduces Scale-Up Manufacturing Investment Company Act

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Jersey Cory Booker
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) reintroduced the Scale-Up Manufacturing Investment Company Act, legislation to nurture innovation in our entrepreneurs and help bring manufacturing jobs back home by increasing access to capital for small manufacturers seeking to scale up their operations.
    Lack of access to capital pushes emerging entrepreneurs to produce their advanced manufacturing technologies abroad in other nations that provide financing opportunities for scaling manufacturers. Not only does this migration drain the United States of innovative manufacturing capabilities, it also causes us to lose out on high-paying, high-skilled manufacturing jobs that accompany the commercialization of new ideas. We must do more to keep these jobs and opportunities for innovation here at home.
    “Decades of bad trade deals and offshoring have hollowed out domestic manufacturing, and we must start giving American businesses the tools they need to build, create jobs, scale, and stay competitive—at home,” said Senator Booker. “If we continue to fall short in this space, our competitors will fill the vacuum and America will lose out on these engines for innovation and job growth. This legislation will help our manufacturing sector thrive and bring good-paying jobs home by providing resources for manufacturers, entrepreneurs and small businesses to innovate on a larger scale.”
    Nearly half of the American workforce is employed by small businesses. As of 2024, small businesses employ 45.9% of the U.S. workforce, approximately 59 million people, and have long served as engines of job creation and innovation. To survive in today’s increasingly competitive economy, entrepreneurs often must expand quickly, growing on their own or in collaboration with larger firms to help scale-up their innovations into commercialized products which often require highly complex, advanced manufacturing capabilities that demand more time and capital to scale than nonproduction firms. However, our nation’s financing mechanisms have not kept up with this changing landscape and make it difficult for these companies to find the capital needed to demonstrate viability of their technology at a commercial scale.
    The Scale-Up Manufacturing Investment Company Act would:
    Establish a new federal investment program under the SBA to provide matching capital (leverage) to private investment funds supporting U.S.-based manufacturing scale-up projects.
    Create a licensing and selection process for “participating investment funds” with rigorous criteria including track record, capital raised, and experience in manufacturing.
    Authorize up to $1 billion per year in SBA leverage, capped at $500 million per fund, with a required minimum of $250 million in private capital per participating fund.
    Funds must invest in “qualifying manufacturing projects” that build first commercial production facilities or scale novel manufacturing technologies, with limitations on investment concentration and leverage use.
    Implement strong oversight through regular audits, reporting, independent valuations, and provisions for fund discipline and SBA enforcement.
    To read the full text of the bill, click here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Variety Op-Ed: “Elizabeth Warren on Colbert ‘Late Show’ Cancellation: Is the Paramount Trump Payoff a Bribe?”

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts – Elizabeth Warren
    July 23, 2025
    “The Paramount payoff is part of a corrupt pattern of Trump exploiting the power of the presidency both to profit personally and to punish his perceived enemies.”
    “The moment we turn a blind eye to these deals is the moment we start to lose our democracy.”
    Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) published an op-ed in Variety making the case that the Late Show with Stephen Colbert’s cancellation may be another one of Donald Trump’s attempts to get big corporations to buy his favor and bow down before him.
    Senator Warren has been leading the charge to determine if Paramount is bribing President Trump in exchange for approval of its multi-billion-dollar megamerger with Skydance, and has fought relentlessly across the board against President Trump’s corruption.
    Read the full op-ed here and below:
    Variety – Elizabeth Warren on Colbert’s ‘Late Show’ Cancellation: Is the Paramount Trump Payoff a Bribe?July 23, 2025
    President Donald Trump and CBS parent company Paramount want you to think that The Late Show with Stephen Colbert was canceled for “purely financial” reasons. Really?
    During the 2024 election, Donald Trump sued CBS, making claims CBS called “meritless.” Legal experts could see from a mile away that Trump’s claims were bogus. Paramount seemed ready to fight the allegations, and it looked like they’d win that fight handily. Then Trump took office in January 2025.
    From the first moments of his presidency, Trump quickly made it clear that he was happy to use his executive power to enrich himself. He was eager to hand out favors — for the right price — and threaten punishment for those who pushed back. There’s a reason that billionaire CEOs paid millions of dollars to get front-row access to his inauguration.
    This is where questions about a Paramount payout to Trump come in. Right now, Paramount is trying to merge with Skydance, another huge media company. This deal is worth $8 billion – and, by the way, it could raise prices for millions of viewers. But here’s the kicker: this merger can only go through if it’s approved by the Trump administration.
    Instead of fighting Trump on his “meritless” lawsuit, Paramount settled, handing $16 million to Trump’s presidential library. This looks like bribery in plain sight, and that’s exactly what Stephen Colbert said on his show: “This kind of complicated financial settlement with a sitting government official has a technical name in legal circles: it’s ‘big, fat bribe.’” Three days later, Paramount-owned CBS canceled Colbert’s show. And Trump didn’t waste a moment before celebrating the news.
    Was it a coincidence that CBS canceled Colbert just three days after he spoke out? Are we sure that this wasn’t part of a wink-wink deal between the president and a giant corporation that needed something from his administration? If CBS made this decision for “purely financial” reasons, why the timing? And why did Trump say “I hope I played a major part in” getting Colbert fired? These are fair questions, and ones that I have asked Paramount and Skydance.
    The Paramount payoff is part of a corrupt pattern of Trump exploiting the power of the presidency both to profit personally and to punish his perceived enemies.
    ABC News handed over $15 million to Trump’s presidential library in a settlement for another questionable defamation lawsuit. Trump was even more direct with Mark Zuckerberg, reportedly telling him that the price for being “brought in the tent” of the new Trump administration was to settle another doubtful lawsuit. Zuckerberg immediately bowed down, ending Meta’s fact-checking program and dumping $22 million into the Trump library. And Trump is running the same play again: immediately after Paramount folded, Trump sued the Wall Street Journal over an article that exposed details about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein.
    As Trump works to dampen any criticism in the media, he has also launched attacks on other independent institutions. In his first few months in office, Trump has aggressively threatened both universities and law firms in an effort to force them to bend to his will. The pattern is the same: Trump threatens to bring down the weight of the federal government on a single institution, and, too often, the targets feel they have no option but to bow down to an all-powerful Trump.
    And for everyone in the free press, the academic world and the legal system, Trump has delivered his message with ruthless bluntness: If you criticize him, you could be forced to pay dearly.
    The wealthy and well-connected have long had outsized influence in Washington, but Donald Trump is the most corrupt president in American history. He is using that corruption to gain control over independent organizations and people who might hold him to account. Every threat, use of intimidation, and potential bribe undermines our democracy as it moves Trump closer to absolute control.
    I recently introduced my Presidential Library Anti-Corruption Act to close at least one bribery loophole. This bill would block anyone from dumping tens of millions of dollars into a president’s library slush fund while that president still sits in the Oval Office. It would mean Paramount couldn’t funnel nearly $16 million to Trump’s library while it seeks favors from his administration. It would mean Qatar couldn’t “gift” Trump a $400 million private jet destined for some future library. This is a basic, common-sense reform that would help ensure that the government works for the American public, not just for people willing to pay for presidential favors. But that’s just Step One.
    Trump and his billionaire friends may think they can turn the power of the federal government into a tool they can deploy to make themselves richer while the rest of us stand quietly by. But we understand that the moment we turn a blind eye to these deals is the moment we start to lose our democracy.
    In the coming weeks, months, and years, all of us must show Trump that we see his march toward authoritarianism and we will not be silenced. Democrats need to embrace the fight against corruption as a top priority. Republicans need to grow a spine and get behind common-sense anti-corruption measures. All Americans need to speak up. Because yes, it’s a shame that CBS canceled The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, but it is a threat to all of us that the top late-night show in the country may have been canceled in order to curry favor with a wannabe king.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: VIDEO: In Foreign Relations Subcommittee Hearing, Ranking Member Rosen Highlights Urgent Need to Strengthen Middle East Partnerships and Combat Iran

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Jacky Rosen (D-NV)

    Watch the full opening statement HERE.
    WASHINGTON, DC – During the first hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, & Counterterrorism, Ranking Member Jacky Rosen (D-NV) stressed the urgent need for a coherent U.S. strategy in the Middle East that strengthens regional integration, restores stability, and counters a nuclear Iran. Senator Rosen called on the Trump Administration to work closely with Congress, particularly following recent U.S. strikes on Iran’s nuclear program, and criticized cuts to our diplomatic workforce and foreign assistance, warning they undermine national security. Emphasizing the importance of diplomacy and development, she advocated for expanding the Abraham Accords, supporting Israel’s qualitative military edge, increasing humanitarian aid into Gaza, and preventing terrorist resurgence throughout the region. 
    Below is Senator Rosen’s opening statement:
    Thank you, Chair McCormick, for holding today’s important hearing – like you said, this is the subcommittee’s first since you and I were named Chair and Ranking Member, respectively. I am incredibly excited about the work we will be able to do together to support U.S. interests across a broad swath of the globe – from the Middle East and North Africa to Central and South Asia.
    And I want to thank you as well to our witnesses for taking the time to offer your insights today. 
    I’d like to build upon your remarks, Senator McCormick, because as you illustrated the Middle East is at a critical juncture, full of risks, as well as opportunities. How we engage in the region in the coming weeks and months has the potential to alter its trajectory for decades to come. 
    In just the last few weeks, we have seen hostilities between Israel and Iran, we’ve seen increased Houthi attacks on maritime commerce in the Red Sea, skirmishes between Israel and Syria, and a lack of progress in ending the war in Gaza, bringing ALL of the hostages held by Hamas home, and addressing the humanitarian crisis.
    But since the beginning of the year, we have also seen the decline of Iran’s nuclear and ballistic capabilities, Assad’s regime crumble in Syria, Hezbollah be diminished to a shell of its former self in Lebanon, and the significant weakening of Hamas.
    To help set the Middle East on a path towards peace and prosperity, we not only have to deter our adversaries from engaging in harmful actions, we must also work to advance our interests by implementing a coherent strategy and assistance plan for the region. 
    So let me be clear – Iran can never be allowed to acquire or develop a nuclear weapon. I am hopeful our targeted strikes on Iran’s nuclear program earlier this summer will pave the way to a negotiated agreement that makes this a reality. It is critical the Administration works hand in glove with Congress on what comes next.
    We must also ensure that terror groups, especially Iranian proxies, cannot operate freely and threaten stability in the Middle East. And so on that end, I have led bipartisan efforts to freeze Iranian assets, tighten and renew sanctions, and integrate air and missile defenses throughout the region. But we must do more to bolster regional stability to deny extremist groups the instability on which they thrive.
    An integrated Middle East of like-minded partners and allies is essential to advancing our interests, which is why we must widen and deepen the Abraham Accords, including through economic integration and other people-to-people bonds that provide tangible benefits to the region. 
    In Gaza, Hamas remains an impediment to peace and poses a threat to both Israelis and Palestinians. We must continue to support Israel as it works to free the hostages, defeat Hamas, and protect itself against future threats. And we also must allow for more humanitarian aid for civilians in Gaza and do everything possible to prevent the loss of innocent lives and to support a negotiated end to the war.
    In Syria and Iraq, we cannot cede ground where the U.S.-led coalition has made significant progress in eliminating the ISIS threat. To consolidate our military gains, we need to ensure that terrorists are held accountable for their horrific crimes. But we also must make sure that there is a thoughtful plan for reintegration and rehabilitation of individuals from Al Hol and Al Roj camps. If we fail to reintegrate these populations, it will be at our peril.
    This leads me to my last point. Former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis once said “if you don’t fully fund the State Department, then I will need to buy more ammunition.” Diplomacy and foreign assistance is vital to the future of this region. 
    When people don’t have access to food or jobs, terror groups recruit them. When children don’t have access to education, they are more easily radicalized. 
    As this Administration slashes our diplomatic corps, expert civil servants, and foreign assistance programs, we are undeniably less safe and less prosperous. 
    To set the region on the right path, we can’t be afraid to leverage our military strength. But we certainly must also leverage our diplomatic and foreign assistance tools.
    I thank you for being here and I look forward to discussing this with you all further today.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: King to Witness: Electric Bills in Maine are Rising, Storage and Transmission Solutions Should Be Pursued

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Maine Angus King

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, in a hearing of the Energy and Natural Resources (ENR) Committee, Senator Angus King (I-ME) spoke about the rising costs of electric bills in Maine and the path forward to address these rising costs via transmission upgrades and battery storage for renewable energy sources. In his exchange with Rob Gramlich, the President of Grid Strategies LLC, King highlighted that while battery storage capabilities exist today, the demand is only growing greater. King also shared that by simply upgrading existing transmission lines, the United States can lower the cost of home energy in places like Maine.

    Senator King began, “The word transmission has come up numerous times a day and how important it is and what an important part it is of this discussion. Unfortunately, this morning, the Department of Energy terminated a loan program for a major interregional transmission system in the Midwest. So, here we are talking about how important transmission is, and here is the Department of Energy – and it was not a grant, it was a loan guarantee program. I just think the timing is somewhat ironic.

    “We all know that solar and wind are intermittent. We understand that [and] everybody knows that. I was in the hydro business, that is also intermittent. It doesn’t always rain. As well as wind, biomass and large-scale conservation. What is really happening is really dramatic in terms of energy storage,” Senator King continued. “If you have adequate energy storage, solar and wind are baseload, because you have something to make up the difference. I used AI … to check on where we are on batteries. As of five minutes ago, the U.S. added a record 10.4 gigawatts of utility scale battery storage in 2024, marking a 66% increase from the prior year. In 2025, the EIA anticipates a record-setting year with another 18 gigawatts of utility scale battery storage on the grid. Looking ahead, the EIA forecast the U.S. battery storage will nearly double, reaching 65 gigawatts by the end of 2026.

    Senator King continued, “In other words, the battery industry is no longer a fantasy or a distant dream. It is happening right now in a very substantial scale. As you point out come Mr. Gramlich, it saved the day in Texas and California, and is already working, the idea of integrating batteries with solar and wind. Let me talk for a minute though about transformation. Mr. Gramlich, this is what worries me, it used to be an electric bill in Maine was 25% transmission and distribution and 75 source of energy. It is now about 50/50 and transmission is getting more and more expensive. Everybody knows we have to rebuild the grid. My concern it’s going to be done in an expensive way that will add dramatically to ratepayers’ cost. Mr. Gramlich, you are nodding. I take it you agree. The record doesn’t show nodding.

    Gramlich responded, “Absolutely. We are doing transmission in sometimes the most expensive way possible now and we can change that.”

    As a member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Senator King has repeatedly emphasized the importance of permitting reform to deliver carefully considered, timely approvals of sorely-needed clean energy projects. Senator King has also been one of the Senate’s most vocal advocates for improving energy storage technologies and development and worked to include significant storage investments in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and Inflation Reduction Act. Most recently, Senator King reiterated the importance of an “all of the above” energy policy strategy during an ENR hearing considering the nominations of Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Economics – Tariffs and uncertainty likely to dampen medium-term inflation pressures – Reserve Bank of NZ

    Source: Reserve Bank of New Zealand

    24 July 2025 – Global tariffs and economic uncertainty are likely to mean less inflation pressures in New Zealand and a pullback in business investment and household spending, RBNZ Chief Economist Paul Conway says.

    However, the economy is currently supported by high export prices and lower interest rates, he says.  

    In a speech delivered to Business New Zealand in Wellington today, Mr Conway says that as a small, open economy, we are heavily influenced by global developments.

    “Being tied in with the global economy helps us prosper. It also means that when something big happens offshore, such as the imposition of tariffs, its ripple effects impact the New Zealand economy,” he says.

    The US has made a decisive shift towards a more trade protectionist stance, which is a major change in the global trading environment with significant implications for the global economy, Mr Conway says.

    Tariffs may make global supply chains less efficient and could nudge up the cost of imports. This is why tariffs are expected to add to inflation pressures in the US.

    But for New Zealand, the main impact is likely to be weaker global growth, which could reduce demand for our exports and lower import prices. Import prices could fall further as other countries redirect their exports away from the US. This is expected to reduce inflation pressures here.

    At the same time, uncertainty is elevated, making it harder for households and businesses to plan.

    “When businesses aren’t sure what’s coming, they hold off hiring and delay big investments. Households tend to respond to increased uncertainty by putting off big sp

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cramer Chairs EPW Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee Hearing, Discusses Regulatory Reforms, Safe Routes to School

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Kevin Cramer (R-ND)

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Kevin Cramer (R-ND), Chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure, held a hearing on the development of the Surface Transportation Reauthorization Bill. The hearing focused specifically on three bipartisan bills Cramer led with colleagues on the EPW committee:

    • S.1733, the Highway Funding Transferability Improvement Act, which increases the percentage of funds a state Department of Transportation (DOT) can transfer between formula categories from 50% to 75% percent. This change gives state DOTs more flexibility to direct funds to high-priority infrastructure projects allowing them to make investments better reflecting local needs.
    • S.1167, the Transportation Asset Management Simplification Act, which cuts red tape for State DOTs by streamlining asset management reporting requirements. Specifically, it eliminates annual asset management compliance reports allowing state DOTs to spend more time maintaining and improving roads and bridges instead of filing redundant paperwork.
    • S.1828, the Safe Routes Improvement Act, which requires each state DOT to designate a Safe Routes to School Program coordinator. The intent is to enhance program accessibility for communities in North Dakota and nationwide.

    [embedded content]

    ***Click here for audio. Click here for video.***

    In his opening statement, Cramer said: “As we look toward reauthorization, I’m focused on advancing practical, bipartisan policies to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the Federal Aid-highway program.

    “As I like to say, without well-maintained routes like Interstate 94, which is made possible because of formula funding, durum wheat from North Dakota would never become pasta in New York or Los Angeles. North Dakota is low population state, but the number one producer of many commodities. Our roads can’t be relegated to gravel and expect interstate commerce to thrive. The formula system works and this committee has demonstrated a strong commitment to it over the years.

    “Greater flexibility for states is precisely the goal of the Highway Funding Transferability Improvement Act, which I was happy to partner with Ranking Member Alsobrooks on. It’s a great idea and I’m glad we’re working on it. Her forward-thinking approach on this issue is refreshing. The concept with our legislation is remarkably simple, a lot of good things are, but very important. States know their needs better than any bureaucrat in Washington.

    “I look forward to working with my colleagues to get this bill done and to ensure the highway program is more responsive to the needs of our constituents.”

    Cramer introduced Chad Orn, who serves as the Deputy Director for Planning at the North Dakota Department of Transportation, saying “Chad knows firsthand how critical transportation infrastructure is to everyday life in North Dakota. He literally works every day to ensure our roads and bridges meet the needs of communities across the state. I couldn’t ask for a better voice to bring a boots on the ground perspective to this hearing.”

    He also introduced Marisa Jones, the Managing Director for the Safe Routes Partnership. In the last highway bill, Cramer and U.S. Senator Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV) expanded the Safe Routes to School Program to include high school students. Earlier this year, Cramer introduced the Safe Routes Improvement Act to further enhance the Safe Routes to School Program. In her introductory remarks, Ms. Jones highlighted specific examples of how several North Dakota communities have utilized the Safe Routes to School program to advance projects. “Let’s look at North Dakota to see examples of how Safe Routes to School works in small towns and rural states. Gwinner, with population 924, built sidewalks to connect the Southside neighborhood to the school. Even Medora with just 155 residents completed a Safe Routes to School project connecting the high school to Main Street. And Minot, which I concede is a big city for North Dakota, but it’s been working on Safe Routes for 15 years, guided by a district-wide plan and building sidewalks to schools annually, funded through the transportation alternatives program.”

    [embedded content]

    ***Click here for audio. Click here for video.***

    Cramer first asked Orn and Samantha Biddle, the Maryland Deputy Secretary of Transportation, about specific suggestions for accelerating the delivery of infrastructure projects. Both witnesses highlighted a need to allow more projects to qualify for an expedited environmental review process. This goal aligns with the intent of the One Federal Decision which was included in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and championed by Cramer.

    “We need to raise the rates on that for value engineering, and then the definition of a major project,” said Orn. “That’s another thing. Even here in North Dakota, we’re right up against, the definition of a major project, which, when I first started at DOT, I and I never, ever thought we would be anywhere near what cost a major project but just sheer cost of projects we’re right there.”

    “Just being, you know, realistic about kind of how far we are able to stretch these dollars and then how that does also apply to the permitting landscape, I think, is a needed adjustment in thinking through those sorts of things,” responded Biddle. 

    Cramer then discussed the Safe Routes to School Program. He asked Jones to explain how communities, especially in rural areas, can learn more about the program and ultimately access funds to move forward with safety projects.

    “There’s more funding available, but it means that in a small rural community where they might not have full time staff at all, and maybe the mayor is also the grocery clerk,” responded Jones. “They don’t have the capacity or awareness, sometimes to pursue [this] funding. And so this is exactly why we need statewide routes to school coordinators to help communities, first of all, raise their awareness that this is an opportunity, and then help them navigate federal funding, apply for grants, and build projects that save lives. And we see the return on that investment in rural states in states all across the country […]These are projects that children and families love, local elected officials, love these projects. These help build economic development, improve safety, get kids physically active, and help get kids to school and time and ready to learn.”

    Cramer concluded the hearing by asking witnesses about solutions to address work zone safety challenges. “As big a hurry as we are to get a highway maintained or built or fixed, we’re also often in too big a hurry to get to wherever our destination is and don’t pay it close enough attention to the hazard of workers right on the very highway we’re driving on,” said Cramer. “Maybe you could if you have any thoughts or suggestions legislatively that we should be looking at for improvement of worker safety?”

    Biddle explained how in Maryland, “We implemented legislation, through the state of Maryland, that introduced a tiered fine structure and also allows us to expand our implementation of work zone cameras. I always say that I hope we don’t earn a single dollar through these programs, because it’s not about generating revenue. It’s about protecting our workers and saving lives.”

    Orn outlined the agency’s commitment to safety and the importance of working closely with local partners. “We have a real good relationship with our AGC, our American General Contractors, so we do work with them, and [a] work zone is important, but we don’t want to see a bunch of restrictions on them,” replied Orn. “We still want flexibility to be able to work with our contractors and our partners on the work zone safety. And if we hear any feedback, we make corrections. We fix it. We listen to them because we know it’s critical with that. A few examples of stuff that we did in North Dakota as Samantha led to, we also just raised our fines within work zones, almost doubled them in the state, and that’s going to go an effect on August 1, the state legislature does that. And another thing we do, and we’ve been doing for years and years and years, is we provide overtime dollars to our highway patrol, so then that they can patrol the work zone.”

    Below is the opening statement of Chair Cramer, as delivered.

    “This is a good hearing and a good day to discuss the road ahead for us. We’re going to discuss proposals to improve America’s transportation infrastructure. It’s an important conversation, on the EPW Committee, we’ve already begun to work to craft surface transportation reauthorization legislation for next year.

    “Senator Alsobrooks and I were just visiting about how the last one passed out of the committee unanimously. Beginning work early, working together, having good witnesses helps us get to a similar goal next year.

    “I commend Chairman Capito for her leadership in getting the reauthorization process started early and look forward to working with her, Ranking Member Whitehouse, Ranking Member Alsobrooks, and of course my fellow committee members to get a comprehensive, bipartisan bill across the finish line next year. 

    “I also want to thank our witnesses today for being here. We appreciate your time and the insight that you bring to this conversation.

    “As we look toward reauthorization, I’m focused on advancing practical, bipartisan policies to improve the efficiency and the effectiveness of the Federal Aid-highway program. Just last week, as I said, the full committee held an excellent hearing with state and local leaders, including Governor Kelly Armstrong where we talked about lessons learned in past bills and what improvements we can make. Some programs like the Bridge Formula program are a high priority for all states. Governor Armstrong spoke in strong support of it and it’s no surprise that his Department of Transportation is echoing the same strong support in your testimony today.

    “But there are areas where we can improve. In recent months, I’ve introduced three bills, which I believe are all central to this effort. Each reflects direct input from states and is about getting better outcomes, without increasing the cost to the taxpayers.

    “From the start, however, I need to emphasize the importance of preserving and strengthening formula funding. As I like to say, without well-maintained routes like Interstate 94, which is made possible because of formula funding, durum wheat from North Dakota would never become pasta in New York or Los Angeles, and wouldn’t that be too bad. North Dakota is low population state, but the number one producer of many agricultural commodities. Our roads can’t be relegated to gravel and expect interstate commerce to thrive. The formula system works and this committee has demonstrated a strong commitment to it over the years.

    “In terms of reforms, I think we need to take a serious look at reducing the regulatory burden on states and cutting red tape within the highway program. My bill with Senator Kelly, the Transportation Asset Management Simplification Act, does just that. It’s a small fix but it supports a much bigger goal of cutting through the bureaucracy so that every dollar goes further.

    “Another key principle is providing more flexibility for states to make investment decisions that better reflect local needs. Greater flexibilities for states is precisely the goal of the Highway Funding Transferability Improvement Act, which I was happy to partner with Ranking Member Alsobrooks on. It’s a great idea and I’m glad we’re working on it. Her forward-thinking approach on this issue is refreshing. The concept with our legislation is remarkably simple, a lot of good things are, but very important. States know their needs better than any bureaucrat in Washington. North Dakota and Maryland’s constituents have very different transportation needs. It turns out, when Washington gets out of the way, states know exactly what to do and deliver real results. Both Ranking Member Alsobrooks and I served in state and local government, and I think both of us would agree, the best partnerships with the federal government were those where we could be the most nimble to meet a constituent’s needs. I always tell federal witnesses and nominees: please, do not impose federal mediocrity on our state’s excellence. This bill embodies that basic principle and I look forward to hearing from both our state witnesses on this point.

    “Safety, however, must also be at the forefront of everything we do. Specifically, making it safer and easier for kids to walk and bike to school. I introduced the Safe Routes to School Improvement Act with Senator Markey to do just that. This builds on bipartisan work that we did with Senator Cortez Masto in the last highway bill that expanded the Safe Routes to School program to include high schools. This bill would enhance access to the program for communities in North Dakota and nationwide by requiring states to have a specific point of contact to help local communities navigate the program and understand what exactly they are eligible to apply for. This will improve infrastructure like sidewalks and street crossings so that children who walk or bike to school are safer in that process.

    “Lastly, this committee must do more to accelerate project delivery. There is a lot to be said on this, but I’d just note the One Federal Decision (OFD) framework was a strong concept under the last bipartisan infrastructure bill, but it hasn’t delivered the results we hoped for. As part of reauthorization, at minimum, we should revisit the OFD and make real improvements.

    “I look forward to working with my colleagues to get this bill done and to ensure the highway program is more responsive to the needs of our constituents.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: New investment to drive AI and biotech innovation

    Source: New Zealand Government

    The Government is investing $24 million in smart, practical science that will help New Zealanders live healthier lives and support the development of sustainable food industries.

    Science, Innovation and Technology Minister Dr Shane Reti today announced two major research programmes in partnership with Singapore, focusing on artificial intelligence (AI) tools for healthy ageing and biotechnology for future food production.

    “Science and innovation are critical to building a high-growth, high-value economy. That’s why we’re investing in research with a clear line of sight to commercial outcomes and real public benefit,” Dr Reti says.

    “This Government is focused on backing the technologies that will deliver real-world results for New Zealanders – not just in the lab, but in our hospitals, homes, and businesses.

    “Whether it’s supporting older Kiwis to live well for longer or developing smarter food production systems, these projects are about practical applications of advanced science to solve problems and grow our economy.”

    Funded through the Catalyst Fund, designed to facilitate international collaboration, the investment will support seven joint research projects over the next three years, deepening New Zealand’s research ties with Singapore and building capability in AI and biotechnology.

    The AI programme, delivered alongside AI Singapore, directly supports the Government’s Artificial Intelligence Strategy – a plan to use AI to safely and effectively boost productivity and deliver better public services.

    “Our AI Strategy is about encouraging the uptake of AI to improve productivity and realise its potential to deliver faster, smarter, and more personalised services, including in healthcare,” says Dr Reti.  

    “These projects will help develop tools that support clinicians and improve care for our ageing population. Our collaboration with Singapore, a country well advanced in their use and development of AI, will help grow Kiwi capability to explore future practical uses of AI.”

    The biotechnology programme will focus on turning scientific research into scalable food solutions, including alternative proteins and new food ingredients, in partnership with Singapore’s A*STAR.

    “These partnerships are about future-proofing our economy and our communities — tackling global challenges with New Zealand science at the forefront,” Dr Reti says.

    Notes to the Editor:

    The Leveraging AI for Health Ageing programme will partner with AI Singapore (AISG) and will fund three projects which apply AI to improve health outcomes for older adults, particularly in cognitive health and personalised care:

    • AI-Assisted interRAI Assessment – University of Otago will enhance aged care assessments by integrating AI to improve efficiency and personalisation.
    • AI-Driven Risk Score for Dementia – University of Auckland will build an AI tool to help clinicians identify individuals at high risk of progressing to dementia.
    • AI-Augmented Cognitive Health Monitoring – Victoria University of Wellington will develop a remote monitoring platform using speech analysis, cognitive games, and caregiver input.

    The Biotech in Future Food Research Programme will partner with Singapore’s Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR) and fund four groundbreaking projects:

    • Algae-Based Future Foods – Cawthron Institute will develop processing methods for two algae species suited to commercial development in both countries.
    • Hybrid Meat Production – University of Canterbury will design a novel, scalable approach to producing affordable hybrid meat.
    • Bio-Fermented Functional Foods – University of Auckland will create next-generation food ingredients from bacterial cellulose and mushroom mycelium.
    • Black Soldier Fly Bioproducts – Scion will explore the use of insect larvae to develop bioactive compounds and protein sources for human and animal nutrition.

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Modernising heart failure treatment in Hawke’s Bay

    Source: New Zealand Government

    A new digital model of care is transforming how heart failure is managed in Hawke’s Bay, delivering faster treatment, fewer hospital visits, and better outcomes for patients, Health Minister Simeon Brown says.

    “This Government is focused on practical, patient-centred improvements to healthcare,” Mr Brown says.

    “Instead of long waits, repeated hospital visits, and lengthy travel for more remote patients, people are now receiving tailored, home-based care that’s faster, safer, and more effective.”

    The remote patient monitoring pathway supports people with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction – a condition where the heart does not pump blood as it should. A key part of treatment is titration – the process of slowly adjusting medication doses to the safest and most effective level, based on how a patient responds. 

    “Traditionally, this requires frequent in-person appointments and can take many months. This new approach means patients can be safely monitored and have their medications adjusted from home.”

    The service uses hospital-supplied smart kits, including a tablet, scales, blood pressure cuff, and pulse oximeter, so patients can check their vital signs daily and connect with clinicians via regular video consults. 

    “This is about delivering more care, closer to home. Instead of travelling in for every check-up or medication change, patients can be supported where they’re most comfortable, while more frequent monitoring is enabling health professionals to step in more quickly if anything changes.”

    Results show clear improvements:
     

    Hospital readmissions within 30 days have dropped to zero, from a previous rate of 25 per cent
    Appointment attendance has improved, with no missed appointments compared to a previous 15.3 per cent no-show rate
    Medication titration now takes 6 – 8 weeks, a substantial reduction from the previous 6 – 8 months
    Increased capacity for clinical teams, enabling more patients to receive timely care

    “Under the old pathway, it could take up to nine months for patients to reach the right combination of medications. The new pathway is accelerating access to care, reducing hospitalisations, and making it possible for more patients to be seen and receive the care they need.

    “This is a smart, patient-focused solution that’s delivering real results for patients with heart failure in Hawke’s Bay,” Mr Brown says.

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Tuberville Speaks to USDA Undersecretary of Agriculture Nominee

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Alabama Tommy Tuberville

    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) participated in a Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry hearing today to consider Mr. Richard Fordyce to be Under Secretary of Agriculture for Farm Production and Conservation. During the hearing, Sen. Tuberville and Mr. Fordyce discussed the Farm Board Act and Mid-South Oilseed Double Cropping Study Act—two pieces of legislation Sen. Tuberville introduced today to help Alabama farmers and livestock producers. Sen. Tuberville and Mr. Fordyce also discussed the need to increase guaranteed loan limits to ease the burden on our poultry producers and problems Alabama continues to face with feral swine.

    Excerpts from the interview can be found below and the full interview can be viewed on YouTube or Rumble.

    ON ADDING A PRODUCER FOR LIVESTOCK AND CROPS TO FCIC:

    TUBERVILLE: “Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Fordyce for being here. I grew up close to a town called Fordyce in Arkansas, home of a famous football coach years ago, Mr. Bear Bryant. 

    Thanks for wanting to do this again in another fashion. Thanks for your service because it is awfully hard. […] First of all, I wanna know if you’ll help me support these bills. I just put two new bills, Ag bills, on the floor today. […] The first addresses the Federal Crop Insurance Board of Directors. There are four seats for producers, and we want one of those seats to be for a producer of both livestock and crops to provide a different perspective for various new livestock crops insurance products RMA (Risk Management Agency) is implementing. That’s my first one. Does that sound pretty good?”

    FORDYCE: “Yes, Senator. It actually does. It sounds like it makes some sense. […]”

    TUBERVILLE: “Now we’re from Alabama, and we can make some sense now. OK?”

    […]

    FORDYCE: “So, I’m not backpedaling, Senator, but I think what I would need to do is understand exactly what the makeup is of the Federal Crop Insurance Board, but it sounds like a good idea to me.”

    ON CONDUCTING AN RMA STUDY FOR OILSEED:

    TUBERVILLE: “Thank you. Thank you. The second bill would authorize a study for double and rotational cropping of winter canola in the Mid-South region. This would gather data as farmers in North Alabama and Tennessee are starting to grow winter canola for synthetic aviation fuel and diesel fuel. All these bills get complex. […]”

    FORDYCE: “I’m sure that is complex, but I am aware of the winter canola effort. And I would say that I would applaud the RMA for being responsive and having the ability to, you know, to evolve as things change. So, I would think that they would take a look at what kind of options might be available.”

    TUBERVILLE: “Thank you. And as we all know, our farmers are in bad trouble. I have a lot of friends that are huge farmers, and they don’t know whether they’re gonna make it through the year, much less through this crop. […]”

    ON RAISING GUARANTEED LOAN LIMITS:

    TUBERVILLE: “So, access to credit is becoming harder and harder. This year was really tough. We had to come up with some subsidies for some of the farmers to get them through this past winter to get another crop. Poultry producers are facing huge challenges, steep cost of poultry houses. $3.5 million for four houses. Can you discuss the importance of increasing our guaranteed loan limits to $3.5 million because of that?”

    FORDYCE: “Well, I was serving as the Administrator for the Farm Service Agency the last time the loan limits were raised. And I think it was welcomed certainly by the agency, and it was welcomed by the producers that the farm loan programs serve. And if that were the intent of Congress to raise those loan limits, I think that would be appropriate given the cost of things and the entry level costs of things.”

    ON FERAL SWINE ERADICATION PROGRAM:

    TUBERVILLE: “It’s going to sky high. It’s not getting any cheaper. One quick question: feral swine. We got huge problems in our state, and I know in other states. In the Big Beautiful Bill, we had $105 million for the feral swine eradication program. What’s your stance on the eradication program? You think we’re making progress?”

    FORDYCE: “That would be tough for me to say. We do have those in Missouri as well.”

    TUBERVILLE: “Y’all have hogs?!”

    FORDYCE: “We have, yeah. We have feral swine. We have wild hogs in Missouri. […] Well, in Missouri, they’ve stopped the ability for folks to hunt them because the idea was that if they’re hunting them, then there has to continue to be a supply of them, and somehow, they just keep showing up. So, I don’t know, I guess, it was, maybe, is one way of looking at it.”

    TUBERVILLE: “Well, just let them know that us and Alabama will send you some if you need them. Because we got a way over abundance. And we’re gonna send them to Senator Grassley in Iowa. He loves hogs. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.”

    Senator Tommy Tuberville represents Alabama in the United States Senate and is a member of the Senate Armed Services, Agriculture, Veterans’ Affairs, HELP and Aging Committees.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Property Market – Rental market softens tipping in favour of tenants – Cotality

    Source: Cotality.

    New Zealand’s rental market has started to swing in favour of tenants, as easing migration and rising supply take the heat out of rents, according to Cotality’s July Housing Chart Pack. (ref. http://www.cotality.com/nz/resources/industry-insights/monthly-housing-chart-pack )

    Data from the Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment (MBIE) shows that the national median rent in the three months to May edged down by -0.3% from last year, not a big fall but still the first since late 2009.

    After significant increases over 2021-23, rental growth has generally petered out in recent months, or turned negative in some key centres.

    There has been a rare shift in markets such as Auckland where the median weekly rent has dropped -2.0% over the past year to $650. Wellington City has also seen a decline of -0.8%, down to $602. Tauranga and Christchurch are other main centres with soft rents at present.
     
    Median weekly rents in three months to May, % change from a year ago

    Sources: MBIE, Cotality (formerly CoreLogic)

    Cotality Chief Property Economist Kelvin Davidson said this shift is being driven by a range of interrelated factors.

    “There was a sharp rise in rents post-COVID as borders reopened and net migration spiked. Many new migrants tend to rent, especially given the foreign buyer ban, and that demand placed pressure on key centres such as Auckland.”

    “At the same time, rental supply was tighter. Investor activity had dipped due to rising mortgage rates and tax rule changes, which arguably meant fewer rental properties were added to the available pool than otherwise might have been the case.”
    Mr Davidson noted that these dynamics pushed rents up to high levels, both in dollar terms and relative to household incomes, placing strain on tenant affordability.

    “This affordability ceiling is now acting as a natural brake on further rent increases.”

    “And while it’s still expensive to be a tenant, the balance of power has shifted slightly. It’s not suddenly easy to rent, but it is nevertheless a friendlier market for tenants than it has been in recent years,” he said.
    Recent falls in net migration have reduced marginal rental demand growth, while the supply of available listings rises.

    “Supply has risen as investors are starting to return to the market, and at the same time we’re seeing the completion of many new-build properties.

    “Overall, this has contributed to a softening in the rental market, with conditions gradually shifting in favour of tenants,” Mr Davidson concluded.
    Highlights from the July 2025 Housing Chart Pack include:

    New Zealand’s residential real estate market is worth a combined $1.65 trillion.
    The Cotality Home Value Index shows property values across New Zealand ticked up by +0.2% in June. Over the three months to June, however, there was a -0.1% dip in median property values across NZ.

    The total sales count over the 12 months to June is 85,951.
    Total listings on the market were 27,006 in June. The total number of properties listed on the market remains elevated, although the seasonal fall for new listings flows means that agreed sales have just started to eat into stock levels.
    The pace of rental growth remains subdued, with net migration having fallen a long way from its peak, and the stock of available rental listings on the market still elevated.
    Buyer Classification data shows first home buyers made up 26% of purchases from April to June, while smaller investors (‘Mums and Dads’) are having a comeback, targeting cheaper, existing dwellings.
    Gross rental yields now stand at 3.8%, which is the highest level since mid-16.
    Inflation is back in the 1–3% target range. The Reserve Bank looks set to cut the official cash rate again to 3.0%, potentially as soon as August.
    The Chart of the Month for July highlights MBIE data showing the annual % change in median weekly rents over the three months to May. After years of sharp increases, rents are now softening in some main centres, with Auckland down -2.0% to $650, alongside modest declines in Wellington City (-0.8%) and Tauranga (-0.2%).

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Wyden Blasts Republicans Over Manufactured Energy Crisis

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore)

    July 23, 2025

    Washington, D.C. – Senator Ron Wyden, D-Ore., today blasted congressional Republicans during a committee hearing for ending clean energy tax credits in their disastrous budget bill, triggering a significant decrease in energy supply when demand is skyrocketing.

    “The Republicans have been doing favors for their Big Oil buddies at the consumers’ expense, and that’s a major reason why energy bills are going through the roof,” Wyden said at a Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing. “Fossil fuels cannot meet our demand today. If we’re going to meet demand we need solar and wind, we need these alternatives.”

    In 2022, Wyden authored the clean energy tax credits in the Inflation Reduction Act that encourage innovation and choice in energy markets by boosting technology-neutral tax credits. The Inflation Reduction Act also included substantial tax credits for domestic manufacturing of solar, wind, and battery components, and the processing of critical minerals. In the wake of passage of the Inflation Reduction Act into law, the United States saw an unprecedented clean energy and manufacturing boom.

    Forecasts showed the clean energy tax credits would have taken meaningful long-term steps to securing U.S. energy independence by reducing oil consumption by up to 24 percent by 2030, increasing potential natural gas exports by more than 20 percent, reducing oil demand (and thus prices) and providing alternative sources of energy to Europe. Clean energy supply also helps keep energy costs down for households and creates good-paying jobs.

    The cancellation of these credits by Republicans under their budget bill, comes when energy demand is soaring. By 2030, electricity demand may grow substantially; one estimate suggests demand will grow by as much as 25 percent relative to 2023 due to increased use of data centers for advanced computing that requires significant energy. Wyden sounded the alarm that doing away with these sources of energy will leave the energy grid unable to meet skyrocketing demand, plunge the country into an energy crisis, and raise utility costs for families nationwide.

    Video is here

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Schatz, Young Introduce Bill to Cut Regulations, Increase Housing Options

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Hawaii Brian Schatz

    WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senators Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) and Todd Young (R-Ind.) introduced the Identifying Regulatory Barriers to Housing Supply Act, legislation that would encourage local communities to cut burdensome regulations, encourage more housing options, and bring a new level of transparency to the community development process.

    Currently, many communities across the U.S. are building paper walls of regulations that negatively affect and, at times, discriminate against low- and middle-income Americans seeking to live, work, and flourish in a city or town. The Identifying Regulatory Barriers to Housing Supply Act would better ensure localities do their part to increase housing supply and make it more affordable for all Americans.

    “In order to reverse anti-housing policies, we need to know where they are in place and how they hurt communities. Our bill will provide HUD and the public with more transparency on policies that are stopping much-needed housing from being built,” said Senator Schatz.

    “Burdensome local zoning and land use policies can drive up housing costs in our communities and stifle the ability of Americans to move to areas of opportunity. Our bill will encourage transparency from cities, towns, and rural areas to cut harmful regulations and increase housing affordability across our nation,” said Senator Young.

    The legislation would require recipients of federal Community Development Block Grants to report on whether they have already adopted less burdensome land use policies and/or to submit a plan for implementing said policies and how adopting them would benefit the jurisdiction. Some of the policies encouraged by the bill include enacting high-density single-family and multifamily zoning, allowing manufactured homes in areas zoned primarily for single-family residential homes, reducing minimum lot size, and allowing single-room occupancy development wherever multifamily housing is allowed.

    The bill avoids encroaching on the rights of states and localities to set zoning policies. Instead, it conditions federal funds based on transparency regarding the rationale for choosing not to remove or reform harmful land use regulations.

    In addition to Senators Schatz and Young, U.S. Senators Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), and Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.) are original co-sponsors.

    Full text of the Identifying Regulatory Barriers to Housing Supply Act can be found here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Prescribed burning threatens survival of skinks and other wildlife

    Source:

    24 July 2025

    Prescribed burning is threatening the survival of skinks, ecologists say.

    As Australia and the world grapple with global warming and increased bushfire risks, University of South Australia ecologists are turning their attention to the impact of prescribed burning on native animals.

    In a new study published in The International Journal of Wildland Fire, researchers investigated the maximum temperatures that lizards could experience during prescribed (controlled) fires in the Mount Lofty Ranges and compared them to their maximum survivable temperatures.

    Widespread prescribed burning is undertaken in spring and autumn each year in the Mount Lofty Ranges, a biodiversity hotspot and fire-prone region. Researchers measured surface and shelter temperatures during four prescribed fires and analysed their results alongside the lab-collected ‘critical thermal limits’ of three different species of skinks.

    The findings demonstrated that the average temperatures under common shelters like logs and rocks during these fires were 108°C and 53°C respectively, which exceeded the survivable temperature range (37.5°C – 43.0°C) of each type of skink.

    While only reptiles were studied, lead researcher and UniSA PhD candidate Shawn Scott says that these temperatures would also threaten the survival of other native animals and that the results can therefore be applied more broadly.

    “These conditions dramatically exceed the 60°C threshold for most terrestrial vertebrates,” Scott says.

    “Logs and rocks were the most effective shelters for buffering extreme temperatures during prescribed fire in our study.

    “However, the maximum temperatures and duration of these conditions may still prove lethal for small vertebrates if prescribed burning is undertaken during conditions that exacerbate fire severity.”

    Researchers also discovered that when ambient temperatures on days of prescribed burnings were higher, maximum temperatures beneath the shelters – and the duration at which they stayed lethally hot – also increased.

    “Our analysis showed that the temperatures of the fires increased by up to 700°C as ambient temperatures increased from 17°C to 22°C,” Scott says.

    “The hotter the fire, the hotter it’s going to be inside or beneath the shelters sought out by small animals during prescribed burnings, making it more difficult for them to survive, especially over an extended period.”

    “In terms of shelter quality, rocks and logs maintained the coolest temperatures, showing that they are critical to small animals,” says co-researcher and UniSA wildlife ecologist Associate Professor Sophie (Topa) Petit.

    “However, many of those sites still reached temperatures far above what reptiles can withstand. Not all rocks and logs are good enough.”

    As climate change increases the risk of bushfires, prescribed burnings are also expected to increase, especially in fire-prone, Mediterranean climates like the Mount Lofty Ranges, other parts of Australia, and also Greece, Italy, Spain and California.

    Scott says that animal survival and biodiversity conservation should be prioritised in burning processes, and that his team’s research can help inform relevant strategies not only on the home front but also abroad.   

    ”If lower intensity fires are to be achieved during prescribed burns, they should be undertaken on mild days when ambient temperatures are below 17°C,” he says.

    “In Australia, burning does occur on days that are considered mild – between 17°C to 22°C – but our research demonstrates that even in these conditions the maximum temperatures and their duration are high enough to threaten small animals relying on shelters like rocks and logs for protection.

    “Second, pre-fire surveys should be conducted to establish the availability and density of shelter sites that may increase the likelihood of animal survival during fire.”

    The researchers suggest that larger shelters and below-surface shelters like soil, hollows, and burrows should be examined next, as well as animal movement and mortality during and after fires.

    The study, titled ‘Between a rock and a hot place: do surface shelters facilitate survivable conditions for small vertebrates during prescribed fire?’ is available online. DOI:10.1071/WF24184

     

    …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

    Contact for interview: Shawn Scott E: Shawn.Scott@unisa.edu.au
    Media contacts: Candy Gibson M: +61 434 605 142 E: Candy.Gibson@unisa.edu.au; Josh Owen-Thomas E: Josh.Owen-Thomas@unisa.edu.au

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: $36 Million for Law Enforcement to Fight Gun Violence

    Source: US State of New York

    [embedded content]

    [embedded content]

    New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services Commissioner Rossana Rosado said, “Thanks to Governor Hochul’s unwavering commitment to public safety, New York continues to see record reductions in gun violence. This funding ensures that our local law enforcement agencies and community organizations can build on the strategies that are working, saving lives, strengthening communities, and restoring trust. I am so proud of my DCJS team members who provide our partners across the state with the tools, training, and resources that allow them to sustain this progress.”

    New York State Police Superintendent Steven G. James said, “The GIVE initiative continues to produce results that matter. Thanks to Governor Hochul’s ongoing commitment and the leadership of the Division of Criminal Justice Services, law enforcement agencies across the state are better equipped to target and reduce gun violence. This funding supports the critical work being done on the ground, providing local agencies with the tools, training, and resources they need to keep their communities safe. The New York State Police is proud to support our partners in this effort and remains committed to doing everything we can to protect the people of New York.”

    Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins said, “This funding is a vital investment in the safety and well-being of New Yorkers. By directing this funding to local law enforcement and public safety partners through the GIVE initiative, we are reinforcing evidence-based strategies that are driving down gun violence and saving lives. Our communities throughout the state have made tremendous progress, and this continued investment ensures that momentum continues. I was proud to work with Governor Hochul, Speaker Heastie, and my Senate Majority colleagues to deliver $347 million in this year’s budget to support GIVE and other gun violence prevention efforts across the state.”

    State Senator Monica Martinez said, “When it comes to protecting our streets from gun violence, we must ‘GIVE’ law enforcement agencies the funding they need to succeed. These grants help make Suffolk County and other recipient communities safer, as proven by the double-digit declines in shooting-related incidents with injury and shooting deaths. I thank Governor Hochul and the Division of Criminal Justice Services for prioritizing this investment in safer neighborhoods across New York.”

    State Senator Siela Bynoe said, “Gun violence is a public health crisis in New York State, and I am grateful to Governor Hochul for taking action to reduce the number of individuals injured or killed in this epidemic. Community-based solutions like the GIVE initiative, which supports Nassau’s law enforcement in their mission to combat gun violence in our neighborhoods, are critical to maintaining statewide progress in reducing shooting incidents. While Nassau County has an extraordinary safety record, there is more work to be done, and this initiative proves to be an invaluable resource.”

    Assembly Deputy Speaker Phil Ramos said, “New York continues to lead the nation with bold, innovative strategies that combine precision policing with community-driven public safety. This record-level investment of $36 million underscores our state’s unwavering commitment to real solutions to reduce gun violence. This investment builds on the progress New York has made in saving lives, curbing illegal firearms, and empowering the communities we serve. As a former Detective and Police Officer, I’ve seen firsthand how funds like these provide the necessary resources, focused training, modern technology, and data-driven strategies that produce tangible, measurable results. The numbers speak for themselves: fewer shootings, fewer victims, and safer communities. I commend Governor Hochul for her continued partnership and leadership in ensuring that Long Island and New York State continue to be a safe and prosperous places to live, work, and visit.”

    Assemblymember Charles Lavine said, “Since being sworn-in, Governor Hochul has remained laser-focused on fighting crime through all means at her disposal. This includes providing financial support for local law enforcement to ensure it has the necessary resources to do its job and enacting legislation, like my ghost guns bill, designed to keep dangerous firearms off the streets. I am proud of the great progress made so far and look forward to continuing to work with her to prevent senseless violence from occurring and keeping our communities as safe as possible.”

    Public safety is my top priority, and since taking office, my administration has been laser focused on working with local law enforcement to drive down gun violence across New York.”

    Governor Hochul

    Assemblymember Judy Griffin said, “Reducing gun violence is directly linked to public safety. I am proud to live in a state where our constituents know this and demand that we continue to take action. This vital funding will ensure that our local police departments have the equipment and technical assistance needed to continue their fight. Public safety is a top priority for my constituents, and I thank the Governor for designating a portion of this funding to police agencies that serve Nassau County residents.”

    Assemblymember Rebecca Kassay said, “Thank you to Governor Hochul for these funds that will provide essential support to our local law enforcement as they work to reduce gun violence, and strengthen safety in our neighborhood. State investments like the GIVE initiative help ensure officers have the training and tools they need to stay safe, protect the public, and build trust within the community.”

    Assemblymember Tommy John Schiavoni said, “I would like to thank Governor Hochul for her leadership and steadfast commitment to keeping our communities safe. Governor Hochul’s continued investment in the GIVE initiative is saving lives and making our communities safer. This targeted support for law enforcement and evidence-based violence prevention strategies has produced real, measurable results. I am especially grateful for the funding directed to Long Island, where local agencies are working tirelessly to reduce gun violence and improve public safety for all residents.”

    Assemblymember Kwani O’Pharrow said, “Together, we invest in safer streets and stronger communities as we tackle gun violence head on with unwavering support and commitment from our Governor.”

    Suffolk County Executive Ed Romaine said, “Thank you to Governor Hochul for providing Suffolk County with vital resources to address gun violence and domestic abuse in our communities. These grants help ensure that our law enforcement officers have the tools they need to protect our families, support survivors, and build safer neighborhoods for everyone who calls Suffolk home.”

    Suffolk County Police Department Commissioner Kevin Catalina said, “The grant money builds upon our success in fighting gun violence, providing funds to focus on enforcement and community outreach efforts. The SCPD extends our gratitude to Governor Hochul for the GIVE grant funding which enhances our public safety efforts in Suffolk County.”

    Embedded Flickr Album

    Suffolk County Sheriff Errol D. Toulon, Jr. said, “The GIVE grant has been a critical tool in our efforts to reduce gun violence by funding key personnel and supporting programs that reach at-risk youth before trouble does. This is what real collaboration looks like, and we’re proud to continue this vital work together. I want to thank Governor Hochul for her investment in this initiative to help keep Suffolk County and our communities safe.”

    Suffolk County Legislator Rebecca Sanin said, “It is devastating and unacceptable that gun violence is still the leading cause of death for children in the United States. I deeply commend the Governor for taking action—investing in law enforcement and delivering the tools our county needs to safeguard our children. Today marks a significant step forward in our fight to keep our kids safer in Suffolk County, ensuring that their future is not defined by the fear of violence but rather the promise of hope and possibility.”

    Scott J. Beigel Memorial Fund Founder Linda Beigel Schulman said, “I thank Governor Hochul for her visit to Suffolk County and her steadfast support to prevent gun violence. I worked closely with her to make red flag laws in New York a reality. Her commitment to better funding for community policing is crucial to deterring crime. We must always do more, and I know the governor is committed to progress.”

    GIVE data for each of the 28 police departments and an interactive dashboard featuring current year and annual historical data are available on the Statistics page of the state Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) website.

    View the breakdown of funding awarded to GIVE police departments, and district attorneys’ offices, probation departments, and sheriffs’ offices in 21 counties outside of New York City for the contract period July 1, 2025, through June 30, 2026: Albany, Broome, Cayuga, Chautauqua, Chemung, Dutchess, Erie, Jefferson, Monroe, Nassau, Niagara, Oneida, Onondaga, Orange, Rensselaer, Rockland, Schenectady, Suffolk, Tompkins, Ulster, and Westchester. DCJS administers GIVE grants and provides training and technical assistance to partner agencies through the program, which requires agencies to use evidence-based strategies to reduce shootings, save lives and combat violent crime.

    The FY26 Enacted Budget sustained unprecedented funding secured by Governor Hochul, including $347 million for GIVE and other gun violence prevention programs, as well as additional initiatives to improve public safety, expand support for victims and survivors of crime, and strengthen communities.

    The Division of Criminal Justice Services provides critical support to all facets of the state’s criminal justice system, including, but not limited to: training law enforcement and other criminal justice professionals; overseeing a law enforcement accreditation program; ensuring Breathalyzer and speed enforcement equipment used by local law enforcement operate correctly; managing criminal justice grant funding; analyzing statewide crime and program data; providing research support; overseeing county probation departments and alternatives to incarceration programs; and coordinating youth justice policy. Follow DCJS on Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn and X (formerly Twitter).

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: More Than $5 Million Grant to Boost Digital Skills Statewide

    Source: US State of New York

    overnor Kathy Hochul today announced the re-release of the ConnectALL Digital Equity Program Capacity Grant Request for Applications (RFA), committing over $5 million in State funding to continue New York’s digital equity grantmaking after federal funding was terminated by the Trump administration in May 2025. The ConnectALL Digital Equity Program will award grants across the state to support digital equity and inclusion projects that provide New Yorkers with devices, skills, and awareness needed to make use of affordable, reliable broadband service. Applications are due August 25, 2025 at 11:59 p.m. ET and must be submitted through the New York State Consolidated Funding Application Portal at https://apps.cio.ny.gov/apps/cfa.

    “Digital access is essential for success in today’s world — whether it’s applying for a job, completing schoolwork, accessing health care, or staying connected to loved ones. In New York, we believe that access to affordable, reliable internet is a basic right, not a luxury,” Governor Hochul said. “That’s why we are taking action to ensure every New Yorker has the tools, skills, and support they need to thrive in the digital age. No matter the challenges, we will continue forging ahead — investing in communities, strengthening partnerships, and delivering on our promise of a more connected and equitable future.”

    Empire State Development President, CEO and Commissioner Hope Knight said, “Digital equity is essential to economic mobility, educational access, and full participation in modern life. New York State remains unwavering in our commitment to ensuring that every community — urban, rural, and everything in between—can connect to the resources and opportunities the digital world offers. Through continued investment, strong partnerships, and innovative strategies, we are moving forward to close the digital divide and build a more inclusive future for all New Yorkers.”

    Governor Hochul also announced a campaign to educate New Yorkers on the low-cost internet service options available under New York State’s Affordable Broadband Act (ABA) — the nation’s first legally mandated low-cost broadband option. Under the ABA, internet service providers are required to offer internet connections for $20/month or less and to promote and provide enrollment guidance to consumers.

    By re-releasing the Digital Equity Program RFA, ConnectALL reaffirms the Governor’s commitment to address barriers to internet adoption and access and enhance the opportunities and security for New Yorkers using the internet by:

    • Increasing access to affordable broadband subscriptions
    • Providing access to internet devices
    • Expanding digital literacy programs
    • Protecting the privacy and safety of residents, and
    • Ensuring the accessibility of government services

    ConnectALL will work with state and local partners to promote enrollment in low-cost internet options secured for eligible consumers through the Affordable Broadband Act.

    This groundbreaking legislation has earned national recognition, with ConnectALL winning the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors (NATOA) Community Broadband and Digital Equity Award for 2025 Broadband Visionary/Legislative Achievement of the Year.

    ConnectALL will partner with New York City and State agencies to engage with eligible households, make them aware of low-cost internet plans, and support their enrollment. This partnership will implement a multi-channel outreach strategy that includes multilingual flyers, text campaigns to households receiving public benefits, summer street and back-to-school outreach, information via NYC 3-1-1, and a plain language self-enrollment guide, among other actions. In addition, the State is investing $500,000 in 2-1-1 NY, a subsidiary of the United Way New York, to launch ABA support for 2-1-1 callers with screenings and targeted enrollment guidance for up to 10,000 low-income households seeking reduced-cost internet services outside of New York City.

    Expanding New York’s Digital Infrastructure

    Governor Hochul has made expanding broadband access a cornerstone of her administration’s efforts to create a more equitable New York. Through the ConnectALL initiative, New York State is investing over $1 billion to transform the state’s digital infrastructure, enhance competition among providers, and ensure that every New Yorker has access to reliable, affordable high-speed internet. To date, ConnectALL has overseen the successful launch and implementation of several programs to advance broadband access, including:

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: ARENA backs Calix with $44.9M to fire up green steel future

    Source: Ministers for the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science

    Overview

    • Category

      News

    • Date

      24 July 2025

    • Classification

      Renewables for industry

    The Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA) has committed $44.9 million to Calix to build a novel demonstration plant using its Zero Emissions Steel Technology (ZESTY).

    Powered by renewable electricity and hydrogen, the plant will aim to produce up to 30,000 tonnes of low-carbon hydrogen direct reduced iron (HDRI) and hot briquetted iron (HBI) each year in a strong step toward cleaner steelmaking.

    ZESTY leverages Calix’s proprietary Flash Calciner technology which aims to reduce the cost of green iron production. The new funding builds on the successful outcomes of ARENA funded engineering studies for the demonstration plant. The funding also supports early-stage engineering studies for a much larger commercial scale ZESTY plant, helping build local capability in low emissions metals—a strategic priority for ARENA and a critical future industry for Australia.

    The project will also showcase a flexible green iron process that can ramp production up or down to match renewable energy supply—supporting a smarter, cleaner industrial future.

    ARENA CEO Darren Miller stressed that finding a low or zero emissions pathway for steelmaking is crucial, given its significant contribution to global emissions.

    “As the world’s largest producer and exporter of iron ore, Australia has a critical role in reducing emissions across the steel value chain,” he said.

    “ZESTY is a strong step toward building a low-emissions steel industry at home.”

    “What makes ZESTY so compelling is its potential to dramatically lower the amount of hydrogen required to convert iron ore into pure iron. ZESTY, in combination with use of renewable electricity from Australia’s world-class solar and wind resources, has the potential to create a new green iron industry targeting both domestic and export markets as the world transitions away from fossil fuels.”

    Calix CEO Phil Hodgson welcomed the funding, saying, “green iron can tackle one of the world’s hardest to abate emissions sources while adding value to Australia’s biggest export. ZESTY is designed to do this cost effectively – minimising hydrogen use, avoiding pelletisation, and operating flexibly on low-cost electricity.”

    Founded in 2005, Calix is an Australian innovator in sustainable high-temperature mineral processing, with applications across steel, cement, alumina, lithium and critical minerals.

    ARENA media contact:

    media@arena.gov.au

    Download this media release (PDF 151KB)

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-Evening Report: UN’s highest court finds countries can be held legally responsible for emissions

    By Jamie Tahana in The Hague for RNZ Pacific

    The United Nations’ highest court has found that countries can be held legally responsible for their greenhouse gas emissions, in a ruling highly anticipated by Pacific countries long frustrated with the pace of global action to address climate change.

    In a landmark opinion delivered yesterday in The Hague, the president of the International Court of Justice, Yuji Iwasawa, said climate change was an “urgent and existential threat” that was “unequivocally” caused by human activity with consequences and effects that crossed borders.

    The court’s opinion was the culmination of six years of advocacy and diplomatic manoeuvring which started with a group of Pacific university students in 2019.

    They were frustrated at what they saw was a lack of action to address the climate crisis, and saw current mechanisms to address it as woefully inadequate.

    Their idea was backed by the government of Vanuatu, which convinced the UN General Assembly to seek the court’s advisory opinion on what countries’ obligations are under international law.

    The court’s 15 judges were asked to provide an opinion on two questions: What are countries obliged to do under existing international law to protect the climate and environment, and, second, what are the legal consequences for governments when their acts — or lack of action — have significantly harmed the climate and environment?

    The International Court of Justice in The Hague yesterday . . . landmark non-binding rulings on the climate crisis. Image: X/@CIJ_ICJ

    Overnight, reading a summary that took nearly two hours to deliver, Iwasawa said states had clear obligations under international law, and that countries — and, by extension, individuals and companies within those countries — were required to curb emissions.

    Iwasawa said the environment and human rights obligations set out in international law did indeed apply to climate change.

    ‘Precondition for human rights’
    “The protection of the environment is a precondition for the enjoyment of human rights,” he said, adding that sea-level rise, desertification, drought and natural disasters “may significantly impair certain human rights, including the right to life”.

    To reach its conclusion, judges waded through tens of thousands of pages of written submissions and heard two weeks of oral arguments in what the court said was the ICJ’s largest-ever case, with more than 100 countries and international organisations providing testimony.

    They also examined the entire corpus of international law — including human rights conventions, the law of the sea, the Paris climate agreement and many others — to determine whether countries have a human rights obligation to address climate change.

    The president of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), Yuji Iwasawa, delivering the landmark rulings on climate change. Image: X/@CIJ_ICJ

    Major powers and emitters, like the United States and China, had argued in their testimonies that existing UN agreements, such as the Paris climate accord, were sufficient to address climate change.

    But the court found that states’ obligations extended beyond climate treaties, instead to many other areas of international law, such as human rights law, environmental law, and laws around restricting cross-border harm.

    Significantly for many Pacific countries, the court also provided an opinion on what would happen if sea levels rose to such a level that some states were lost altogether.

    “Once a state is established, the disappearance of one of its constituent elements would not necessarily entail the loss of its statehood.”

    Significant legal weight
    The ICJ’s opinion is legally non-binding. But even so, advocates say it carries significant legal and political weight that cannot be ignored, potentially opening the floodgates for climate litigation and claims for compensation or reparations for climate-related loss and damage.

    Individuals and groups could bring lawsuits against their own countries for failing to comply with the court’s opinion, and states could also return to the International Court of Justice to hold each other to account.

    The opinion would also be a powerful precedent for legislators and judges to call on as they tackle questions related to the climate crisis, and give small countries greater weight in negotiations over future COP agreements and other climate mechanisms.

    Outside the court, several dozen climate activists, from both the Netherlands and abroad, had gathered on a square as cyclists and trams rumbled by on the summer afternoon. Among them was Siaosi Vaikune, a Tongan who was among those original students to hatch the idea for the challenge.

    “Everyone has been waiting for this moment,” he said. “It’s been six years of campaigning.

    “Frontline communities have demanded justice again and again,” Vaikune said. “And this is another step towards that justice.”

    Vanuatu’s Climate Change Minister Ralph Regenvanu (cenbtre) speaks to the media after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) rulings on climate change in The Hague yesterday. Image: X/CIJ_ICJ

    ‘It gives hope’
     Vanuatu’s Climate Minister Ralph Regenvanu said the ruling was better than he expected and he was emotional about the result.

    “The most pleasing aspect is [the ruling] was so strong in the current context where climate action and policy seems to be going backwards,” Regenvanu told RNZ Pacific.

    “It gives such hope to the youth, because they were the ones who pushed this.

    “I think it will regenerate an entire new generation of youth activists to push their governments for a better future for themselves.”

    Regenvanu said the result showed the power of multilateralism.

    “There was a point in time where everyone could compromise to agree to have this case heard here, and then here again, we see the court with the judges from all different countries of the world all unanimously agreeing on such a strong opinion, it gives you hope for multilateralism.”

    He said the Pacific now has more leverage in climate negotiations.

    “Communities on the ground, who are suffering from sea level rise, losing territory and so on, they know what they want, and we have to provide that,” Regenvanu said.

    “Now we know that we can rely on international cooperation because of the obligations that have been declared here to assist them.”

    The director of climate change at the Pacific Community (SPC), Coral Pasisi, also said the decision was a strong outcome for Pacific Island nations.

    “The acknowledgement that the science is very clear, there is a direct clause between greenhouse gas emissions, global warming and the harm that is causing, particularly the most vulnerable countries.”

    She said the health of the environment is closely linked to the health of people, which was acknowledged by the court.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Sweet spot for daily steps is lower than often thought, new study finds

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jack McNamara, Senior Lecturer in Clinical Exercise Physiology, University of East London

    Focus and blur.

    Your fitness tracker might be lying to you. That 10,000-step target flashing on your wrist? It didn’t come from decades of careful research. It came from a Japanese walking club and a marketing campaign in the 1960s.

    A major new study has found that 7,000 steps a day dramatically cuts your risk of death and disease. And more steps bring even greater benefits.

    People hitting 7,000 daily steps had a 47% lower risk of dying prematurely than those managing just 2,000 steps, plus extra protection against heart disease, cancer and dementia.

    The findings come from the biggest review of step counts and health ever done. Researchers gathered data from 57 separate studies tracking more than 160,000 people for up to two decades, then combined all the results to spot patterns that individual studies might miss. This approach, called a systematic review, gives scientists much more confidence in their conclusions than any single study could.

    So where did that magic 10,000 number come from? A pedometer company called Yamasa wanted to cash in on 1964 Tokyo Olympics fever. It launched a device called Manpo-kei – literally “10,000 steps meter”. The Japanese character for 10,000 resembles a walking person, while 10,000 itself is a memorable round number. It was a clever marketing choice that stuck.

    At that time, there was no robust evidence for whether a target of 10,000 steps made sense. Early research suggested that jumping from a typical 3,000 to 5,000 daily steps to 10,000 would burn roughly 300 to 400 extra calories a day. So the target wasn’t completely random – just accidentally reasonable.

    This latest research paper looked across a broad spectrum – not just whether people died, but heart disease, cancer, diabetes, dementia, depression and even falls. The results tell a fascinating story. Even tiny increases matter. Jump from 2,000 to 4,000 steps daily and your death risk drops by 36%. That’s a substantial improvement.

    But here’s where it gets interesting. The biggest health benefits happen between zero and 7,000 steps. Beyond that, benefits keep coming, but they level off considerably. Studies have found meaningful benefits starting at just 2,517 steps per day. For some people, that could be as little as a 20-minute stroll around the block.

    Age changes everything, too. If you’re over 60, you hit maximum benefits at 6,000 to 8,000 daily steps. Under 60? You need 8,000 to 10,000 steps for the same protection. Your 70-year-old neighbour gets 77% lower heart disease risk at just 4,500 steps daily.

    The real secret of why fitness targets often fail? People give up on them.

    Research comparing different step goals found a clear pattern. Eighty-five per cent of people stuck with 10,000 daily steps. Bump it to 12,500 steps and only 77% kept going. Push for 15,000 steps and you lose nearly a third of people.

    One major study followed middle-aged adults for 11 years. Those hitting 7,000 to 9,999 steps daily had 50-70% lower death risk. But getting beyond 10,000 steps? No extra benefit. All that extra effort for nothing. Other researchers watching people over a full year saw the same thing. Step programmes worked brilliantly at first, then people slowly drifted back to old habits as targets felt unrealistic.

    Steps easily accumulate from everyday activities.
    Marius Comanescu/Shutterstock.com

    Most steps happen without you realising it

    Here’s something that might surprise you. Most of your daily steps don’t come from structured walks or gym sessions. Eighty per cent happen during everyday activities – tidying up, walking to the car, general movement around the house.

    People naturally build steps through five main routes: work (walking between meetings), commuting (those train station treks), household chores, evening strolls and tiny incidental movements. People using public transport clock up 19 minutes of walking daily just getting around.

    Research has also found something else interesting. Frequent short bursts of activity work as well as longer walks. Your body doesn’t care if you get steps from one epic hike or dozens of trips up the stairs. This matters because it means you don’t need to become a completely different person. You just need to move a bit more within your existing routine.

    So, what does this mean for you? Even 2,500 daily steps brings real health benefits. Push up to 4,000 and you’re in serious protection territory. Hit 7,000 and you’ve captured most of the available benefits.

    For older people, those with health conditions, or anyone starting from a sedentary baseline, 7,000 steps is brilliant. It’s achievable and delivers massive health returns. But if you’re healthy and can manage more, keep going. The benefits climb all the way up to 12,000 steps daily, cutting death risk by up to 55%.

    The 10,000-step target isn’t wrong exactly. It’s just not the magic threshold everyone thinks it is.

    What started as a Japanese company’s clever marketing trick has accidentally become one of our most useful health tools. Decades of research have refined that original guess into something much more sophisticated: personalised targets based on your age, health and what you can actually stick to.

    The real revelation? You don’t need to hit some arbitrary target to transform your health. You just need to move more than you do now. Every single step counts.

    Jack McNamara does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Sweet spot for daily steps is lower than often thought, new study finds – https://theconversation.com/sweet-spot-for-daily-steps-is-lower-than-often-thought-new-study-finds-261605

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI China: Inter-Civilizational Dialogue Among SCO Countries 2025 held in Tianjin

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    Inter-Civilizational Dialogue Among SCO Countries 2025 held in Tianjin

    Updated: July 24, 2025 07:07 Xinhua
    This photo taken on July 23, 2025 shows a scene during the Inter-Civilizational Dialogue Among Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) Countries 2025 in north China’s Tianjin. The event attracted some 300 participants from home and abroad. Sideline events including a calligraphy exhibition, a sculpture exhibition, and an intangible heritage exhibition were also held during the dialogue. [Photo/Xinhua]

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI China: 3rd round of Russia-Ukraine talks agrees on prisoner exchange, differs on ceasefire

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    Russian and Ukrainian delegations held a third round of peace talks on Wednesday evening at the Ciragan Palace, during which the two sides agreed on another prisoner exchange but clashed on ceasefire terms and a potential presidential meeting.

    Russian presidential aide Vladimir Medinsky and Secretary of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council Rustem Umerov led the Russian and Ukrainian delegations, respectively. The closed-door talks were chaired by Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan.

    Following the talks, which lasted for less than one hour, Umerov said at a press conference that Ukraine continues to insist on a full and unconditional ceasefire as the essential foundation for effective diplomacy.

    “We are ready for a ceasefire now and to start substantive peace negotiations, and it is up to the other side to accept this basic step towards peace,” Umerov said.

    “We emphasize that the ceasefire must be genuine. It must include a complete cessation of strikes on civilian and critical infrastructure,” he said.

    Prior to the talks, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Tuesday that Moscow and Kiev are “diametrically opposed” in their positions on how to end the conflict, noting that “much work” still needs to be done.

    The Ukrainian side has proposed to Russia to hold a meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky “by the end of August,” where the participation of U.S. President Donald Trump and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan will be “especially valuable,” he said.

    During a separate press conference after the talks, Medinsky said Russia and Ukraine agreed to exchange 1,200 prisoners of war each, including a proposal from Moscow to swap about 30 civilians held by Ukraine in the Kursk region.

    Russia has returned the bodies of 7,000 fallen Ukrainian soldiers and is ready to return 3,000 more, he said, requesting the return of any number of deceased Russian soldiers from Ukraine.

    He also said that the Russian side proposed establishing three online working groups with Ukraine to address political, humanitarian, and military issues, and asked Ukraine to consider declaring short ceasefires of 24-48 hours along the contact line to evacuate the wounded soldiers and recover the bodies of fallen troops.

    As to the Putin-Zelensky meeting Ukraine proposed, Medinsky said such a meeting is not being considered until certain processes are completed.

    Meanwhile, Zelensky wrote on social media platform X after the talks that the ninth stage of prisoner exchange took place “today,” which involved more than 1,000 people from the Ukrainian side, including those “seriously ill and severely wounded.”

    “It is important that the exchanges are ongoing,” he wrote.

    In his opening remarks to the talks, Fidan urged the two delegations to engage in result-oriented negotiations aimed at achieving a ceasefire and ultimately ending the war.

    “Our goal is to end this bloody war, which has come at a heavy cost, as soon as possible,” Fidan said.

    While the previous two rounds of talks in Istanbul — held on May 16 and June 2 — led to the exchange of thousands of war prisoners and the bodies of fallen soldiers, they produced little progress toward a ceasefire.

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI China: Yin headlines star-studded field for 2025 Buick LPGA Shanghai

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    The Buick LPGA Shanghai will return to the Shanghai Qizhong Garden Golf Club from October 9-12, organizers announced on Wednesday.

    As the first event of the 2025 LPGA Fall Asia Swing, it will bring together the world’s top female golfers for a thrilling showdown, delivering an elite competition and reigniting golf’s momentum.

    Yin Ruoning of China competes during the women’s individual stroke play round 1 of golf at the Paris 2024 Olympic Games in Paris, France, Aug. 7, 2024. (Xinhua/Du Yu)

    Jointly sanctioned by the LPGA (Ladies Professional Golf Association) and the China LPGA (CLPGA), the Buick LPGA Shanghai has established itself as a global stage for champions.

    Featuring 81 top players competing for a 2.2 million U.S. dollars purse under a no-cut format, the Buick LPGA Shanghai will see defending champion Yin Ruoning headline the world-class lineup. The Chinese star, a former world No. 1 and major winner, aims for back-to-back victories on home soil.

    In the autumn of 2024, Yin Ruoning delivered a career-defining performance at the Buick LPGA Shanghai, carding eight birdies in a blistering final round to shoot 8-under par and finish at a record-breaking 25-under par, claiming the title and etching her name into the tournament lore.

    “The Buick LPGA Shanghai holds a special place in my heart,” said Yin. “It has witnessed my growth and opened the door for countless young Chinese players to pursue their dreams. I am deeply grateful to the Buick brand for its lasting support of me, junior golf, and the overall development of the sport in China.”

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI USA News: Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Promotes the Export of American AI Technologies

    Source: US Whitehouse

    PROMOTING THE EXPORT OF AMERICAN AI: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order to support the American AI industry by promoting the export of full-stack American AI technology packages to allies and partners worldwide.

    • The Order directs the Secretary of Commerce to establish and implement the American AI Exports Program to support the development and deployment of U.S. full-stack AI export packages.
      • These full-stack, end-to-end packages include hardware, data systems, AI models, cybersecurity measures, applications for sectors like healthcare, education, agriculture, and transportation, and more.
      • The packages must comply with export controls and other relevant requirements.
    • The Order directs the Secretary of Commerce to review and select proposals that will receive export support from the Economic Diplomacy Action Group, such as loans, guarantees, and technical assistance.

    SUPPORTING THE U.S. AI INDUSTRY: President Trump is advancing American leadership in AI to secure economic growth, national security, and global competitiveness.

    • AI is a foundational technology that will shape the future of innovation, defense, and prosperity for decades to come.
    • The United States must lead in developing and deploying AI technologies, standards, and governance models to reduce global reliance on systems from adversarial nations.
    • By exporting American AI, the U.S. will strengthen ties with allies, promote U.S. standards and governance models, and maintain technological dominance.
    • This initiative supports U.S. businesses, including small businesses, by facilitating investment in AI development and infrastructure, ensuring America remains the global leader in AI innovation.

    MAKING AMERICA THE GLOBAL LEADER IN AI: President Trump has made American leadership in AI a national priority.

    • President Trump signed the first-ever Executive Order on AI in 2019 recognizing the paramount importance of American AI leadership to the economic and national security of the United States.
      • In historic actions, the Trump Administration established the first-ever national AI research institutes, strengthened American leadership in AI technical standards, and issued the world’s first AI regulatory guidance to govern AI development in the private sector.
    • President Trump also took executive action in 2020 to establish the first-ever guidance for Federal agency adoption of AI to more effectively deliver services to the American people and foster public trust in this critical technology.
    • In January 2025, President Trump signed an Executive Order to reverse harmful Biden Administration AI policies and enhance America’s global AI dominance.
    • In April 2025, President Trump signed an Executive Order to advance AI education for America’s youth.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA News: Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Accelerates Federal Permitting of Data Center Infrastructure

    Source: US Whitehouse

    ACCELERATING DATA CENTER INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order to facilitate the rapid and efficient buildout of data center infrastructure.

    • The Order directs the Secretary of Commerce to launch an initiative to provide financial support, such as loans, grants, and tax incentives, for Qualifying Projects.
      • These Qualifying Projects include data centers that require greater than 100 megawatts of new load, infrastructure projects related to data center energy needs, semiconductor facilities, networking equipment, or other data center or related infrastructure projects selected by the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of the Interior, Secretary of Commerce, or Secretary of Energy.
    • The Order revokes a Biden-era Executive Order that would have saddled AI data center development on Federal lands with pages of DEI and climate requirements.
    • The Order instructs agencies to streamline environmental reviews and permitting for data centers and related infrastructure by leveraging existing exemptions and creating new ones to expedite the construction of Qualifying Projects.
    • The Order enhances transparency and efficiency by designating Qualified Projects for expedited permitting under the FAST-41 framework.
    • The Order promotes the use of Brownfield and Superfund sites for data center development, repurposing these lands for productive use.
    • The Order directs the Department of the Interior, the Department of Energy and the Department of Defense to authorize data center construction on appropriate Federal lands.

    STRENGTHENING AMERICA’S AI AND MANUFACTURING LEADERSHIP: President Trump is promoting the rapid buildout of AI data centers and critical infrastructure to secure economic prosperity, national security, and scientific leadership.

    • AI data centers and supporting infrastructure, such as energy systems and semiconductors, are essential for powering America’s technological and industrial future.
    • Lengthy and complex Federal regulations can delay critical projects, hindering America’s ability to lead in AI and manufacturing.
    • By streamlining permitting and providing financial support, the U.S. will accelerate the development of data centers and enable our global dominance in AI, which will in turn create jobs and enhance national security.
    • This initiative ensures American leadership in AI and critical technologies, positioning the U.S. to outpace global competitors and drive innovation for decades to come.

    USHERING IN A GOLDEN AGE FOR AMERICAN TECHNOLOGICAL DOMINANCE: President Trump has made American leadership in AI a national priority.

    • President Trump signed the first-ever Executive Order on AI in 2019 recognizing the paramount importance of American AI leadership to the economic and national security of the United States.
      • In historic actions, the Trump Administration established the first-ever national AI research institutes, strengthened American leadership in AI technical standards, and issued the world’s first AI regulatory guidance to govern AI development in the private sector.
    • President Trump also took executive action in 2020 to establish the first-ever guidance for Federal agency adoption of AI to more effectively deliver services to the American people and foster public trust in this critical technology.
    • In January 2025, President Trump signed an Executive Order to reverse harmful Biden Administration AI policies and enhance America’s global AI dominance.
    • In April 2025, President Trump signed an Executive Order to advance AI education for America’s youth.
    • The Administration is capitalizing on other permitting successes that will also enable data center development, such as dramatically reducing NEPA’s impact on critical infrastructure projects, developing emergency NEPA procedures that can permit major mining projects in under 28 days at the Department of the Interior, revising NOAA’s deep sea mining regulations, and more.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA News: Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Prevents Woke AI in the Federal Government

    Source: US Whitehouse

    PREVENTING WOKE AI IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order to ensure that artificial intelligence (AI) models procured by the Federal government prioritize truthfulness and ideological neutrality.

    • President Trump is protecting Americans from biased AI outputs driven by ideologies like diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) at the cost of accuracy.
    • The Order directs agency heads to procure only large language models (LLMs) that adhere to “Unbiased AI Principles” defined in the Order: truth-seeking and ideological neutrality.
      • Truth-seeking means that LLMS shall be truthful and prioritize historical accuracy, scientific inquiry, and objectivity, and acknowledge uncertainty where reliable information is incomplete or contradictory.
      • Ideological neutrality means that LLMs shall be neutral, nonpartisan tools that do not manipulate responses in favor of ideological dogmas like DEI, and that developers will not intentionally encode partisan or ideological judgments into an LLM’s outputs unless those judgments are prompted by or readily accessible to the end user.
    • The Order instructs the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, in consultation with other Federal leaders, to issue guidance for agencies to implement these principles in AI procurement.
    • The Order mandates that Federal contracts for LLMs include terms ensuring compliance with the Unbiased AI Principles, including terms holding vendors accountable for certain costs if contracts are terminated due to noncompliance.

    SAFEGUARDING TRUST IN FEDERAL AI USE: President Trump is advancing trustworthy AI in the Federal government to protect the integrity of information and services provided to the American people.

    • AI is a critical technology that will shape how Americans learn, access information, and navigate their daily lives.
    • Ideological biases, such as those driven by DEI, can distort AI outputs, undermine historical and scientific accuracy, and erode public trust in AI systems.
      • For example, one major AI model changed the race or sex of historical figures—including the Pope, the founding Fathers, and Vikings—when prompted for images because it was trained to prioritize DEI requirements.
      • In another case, an AI model asserted that a user should not “misgender” another person even if necessary to stop a nuclear apocalypse.
    • By requiring truth-seeking and ideologically neutral AI models, the Federal government ensures reliable, objective information for Americans and prevents the spread of biased or misleading outputs.

    SERVING AMERICA, NOT IDEOLOGICAL AGENDAS: President Trump is terminating DEI across the Federal government and advancing American leadership in AI to ensure technology and policies serve the public, not ideological agendas.

    • President Trump is harnessing AI to strengthen national security, economic prosperity, and technological leadership.
      • In January 2025, President Trump signed an Executive Order to reverse harmful Biden Administration AI policies and enhance America’s global AI dominance.
      • In April 2025, President Trump signed an Executive Order to advance AI education for America’s youth.
      • Today, President Trump also signed Executive Orders on facilitating the rapid and efficient buildout of data infrastructure and promoting the export of American AI technologies.
    • President Trump is restoring fairness and merit by dismantling radical DEI programs
      • In January, President Trump signed executive actions to end radical and wasteful DEI programs and preferencing, terminate radical DEI preferencing in Federal contracting and spending, eliminate DEI and restore excellence and safety within the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and abolish DEI bureaucracy within the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security.
      • In March, President Trump signed a Memorandum removing DEI from the Foreign Service.
      • In April, President Trump signed an Executive Order to ensure school discipline policies are based on objective behavior, not DEI.
      • President Trump: “We will terminate every diversity, equity, and inclusion program across the entire Federal government.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA News: Accelerating Federal Permitting of Data Center Infrastructure

    Source: US Whitehouse

    By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

    Section  1.  Policy and Purpose.  My Administration has inaugurated a golden age for American manufacturing and technological dominance.  We will pursue bold, large-scale industrial plans to vault the United States further into the lead on critical manufacturing processes and technologies that are essential to national security, economic prosperity, and scientific leadership.  These plans include artificial intelligence (AI) data centers and infrastructure that powers them, including high‑voltage transmission lines and other equipment.  It will be a priority of my Administration to facilitate the rapid and efficient buildout of this infrastructure by easing Federal regulatory burdens. 

    In addition, my Administration will utilize federally owned land and resources for the expeditious and orderly development of data centers.  This usage will be done in a manner consistent with the land’s intended purpose — to be used in service of the prosperity and security of the American people.

    Sec. 2.  Definitions.  For purposes of this order:

    (a)  “Data Center Project” means a facility that requires greater than 100 megawatts (MW) of new load dedicated to AI inference, training, simulation, or synthetic data generation.

    (b)  “Covered Components” means materials, products, and infrastructure that are required to build Data Center Projects or otherwise upon which Data Center Projects depend, including:

    (i)    energy infrastructure, such as transmission lines, natural gas pipelines or laterals, substations, switchyards, transformers, switchgear, and system protective facilities;

    (ii)   natural gas turbines, coal power equipment, nuclear power equipment, geothermal power equipment, and any other dispatchable baseload energy sources, including electrical infrastructure (including backup power supply) constructed or otherwise used principally to serve a Data Center Project;

    (iii)  semiconductors and semiconductor materials, such as wafers, dies, and packaged integrated circuits;

    (iv)   networking equipment, such as switches and routers; and

    (v)    data storage, such as hardware storage systems, software for data management and protection, and integrated services that work with public cloud providers.

    (c)  “Covered Component Project” means infrastructure comprising Covered Components, or a facility with the primary purposes of manufacturing or otherwise producing Covered Components.

    (d)  “Qualifying Project” means:

    (i)    a Data Center Project or Covered Component Project for which the Project Sponsor has committed at least $500 million in capital expenditures as determined by the Secretary of Commerce;

    (ii)   a Data Center Project or Covered Component Project involving an incremental electric load addition of greater than 100 MW;

    (iii)  a Data Center Project or Covered Component Project that protects national security; or

    (iv)   a Data Center Project or Covered Component Project that has otherwise been designated by the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Commerce, or the Secretary of Energy as a “Qualifying Project”.

    (e)  “Project Sponsor” means the lead sponsor providing financial and other support for a Data Center Project or Covered Component Project, as determined by the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Commerce, or the Secretary of Energy, as appropriate.

    (f)  “Superfund Site” means any site where action is being taken pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 9604, 9606, or 9620.

    (g)  “Brownfield Site” means a site as defined in 42 U.S.C. 9601(39).

    Sec.  3.  Encouraging Qualifying Projects.  The Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and other relevant executive departments and agencies (agencies), shall launch an initiative to provide financial support for Qualifying Projects, which could include loans and loan guarantees, grants, tax incentives, and offtake agreements.  All relevant agencies shall identify and submit to the Director of OSTP any such relevant existing financial support that can be used to assist Qualifying Projects, consistent with the protection of national security.

    Sec. 4.  Revocation of Executive Order 14141.  Executive Order 14141 of January 14, 2025 (Advancing United States Leadership in Artificial Intelligence Infrastructure), is hereby revoked.

    Sec.  5.  Efficient Environmental Reviews.  (a)  Within 10 days of the date of this order, each relevant agency shall identify to the Council on Environmental Quality any categorical exclusions already established or adopted by such agency pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), reliance on and adoption of which by agencies (pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4336 and 4336c) could facilitate the construction of Qualifying Projects.

    (b)  The Council on Environmental Quality shall coordinate with relevant agencies on the establishment of new categorical exclusions to cover actions related to Qualifying Projects that normally do not have a significant effect on the human environment.  Agencies shall, for purposes of establishing these categorical exclusions, rely on any sufficient basis to do so as each such agency determines.

    (c)  Consistent with 42 U.S.C. 4336e(10)(B)(iii), loans, loan guarantees, grants, tax incentives, or other forms of Federal financial assistance for which an agency lacks substantial project-specific control and responsibility over the subsequent use of such financial assistance shall not be considered a “major Federal action” under NEPA.  For purposes of this order, Federal financial assistance representing less than 50 percent of total project costs shall be presumed not to constitute substantial Federal control and responsibility.

    Sec.  6.  Efficiency and Transparency Through FAST‑41.  (a)  The Executive Director (Executive Director) of the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council (FPISC) may, within 30  days of the date that a project is identified to FPISC by a relevant agency, designate a Qualifying Project as a transparency project pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4370m-2(b)(2)(A)(iii) and section 41003 of the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (Public Law 114-94, 129 Stat. 1312, 1747) (FAST-41).  Within 30 days of receiving such agency notification, the Executive Director may publish Qualifying Projects on the Permitting Dashboard established under section 41003(b) of FAST-41, including schedules for expedited review. 

    (b)  In consultation with Project Sponsors, the Executive Director shall expedite the transition of eligible Qualifying Projects from transparency projects to FAST-41 “covered projects” as defined by 42 U.S.C. 4370m(6)(A).  To the extent that a Qualifying Project does not meet the criteria set forth in 42 U.S.C. 4370m(6)(A)(i) or (iii), FPISC may consider all other available options to designate the project a covered project under 42 U.S.C. 4370m(6)(A)(iv).

    Sec. 7.  Streamlining of Permitting Review.  (a)  The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency shall assist in expediting permitting on Federal and non-Federal lands by developing or modifying regulations promulgated under the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.); the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.); the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.); the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.); and other relevant applicable laws, in each case, that impact the development of Qualifying Projects.

    (b)  The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency shall, consistent with the Environmental Protection Agency’s statutory authorities, expeditiously identify Brownfield Sites and Superfund Sites for use by Qualifying Projects.  As part of this effort, within 180 days of the date of this order, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency shall develop guidance to help expedite environmental reviews for qualified reuse and assist State governments and private parties to return such Brownfield Sites and Superfund Sites to productive use as expeditiously as possible.

    Sec.  8.  Biological and Water Permitting Efficiencies.  (a)  Upon identification of sites by the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Energy as described in section 9 of this order, the action agency, as identified through the process described in the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544) (ESA), shall initiate consultation under section 7 of the ESA with the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Commerce, or both with respect to common construction activities for Qualifying Projects that will occur over the next 10 years at a programmatic level.  The Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce shall utilize programmatic consultation to ensure timely and efficient completion of such consultation.

    (b)  Within 180 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, shall review the nationwide permits issued under section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1344) and section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403) to determine whether an activity-specific nationwide permit is needed to facilitate the efficient permitting of activities related to Qualifying Projects.

    Sec. 9.  Federal Lands Availability.  (a)  The Department of the Interior and the Department of Energy shall, after consultation with industry and further in consultation with the Department of Commerce as to the Project Sponsors to which relevant authorizations shall be granted, offer appropriate authorizations for sites identified by the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Energy, as applicable and appropriate for the relevant uses, consistent with 42 U.S.C. 2201, 42 U.S.C. 7256, 43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq., and all other applicable law.

    (b)  The Secretary of Defense shall, pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 2667 or other applicable law and as and when the Secretary of Defense deems it necessary or desirable, identify suitable sites on military installations for Covered Component infrastructure uses and competitively lease available lands for Qualifying Projects to support the Department of Defense’s energy, workforce, and mission needs, subject to security and force protection considerations.

    Sec. 10.  General Provisions.  (a)   Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

    (i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

    (ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

    (b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

    (c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

    (d)  The costs for publication of this order shall be borne by the Department of Energy.

                                  DONALD J. TRUMP

    THE WHITE HOUSE,

        July 23, 2025.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA News: Promoting The Export of the American AI Technology Stack

    Source: US Whitehouse

    By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 301 of title 3, United States Code, it is hereby ordered:

    Section 1.  Purpose.  Artificial intelligence (AI) is a foundational technology that will define the future of economic growth, national security, and global competitiveness for decades to come.  The United States must not only lead in developing general-purpose and frontier AI capabilities, but also ensure that American AI technologies, standards, and governance models are adopted worldwide to strengthen relationships with our allies and secure our continued technological dominance.  This order establishes a coordinated national effort to support the American AI industry by promoting the export of full-stack American AI technology packages.

    Sec. 2.  Policy.  It is the policy of the United States to preserve and extend American leadership in AI and decrease international dependence on AI technologies developed by our adversaries by supporting the global deployment of United States-origin AI technologies.

    Sec. 3.  Establishment of the American AI Exports Program.  (a)  Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Commerce shall, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), establish and implement the American AI Exports Program (Program) to support the development and deployment of United States full-stack AI export packages.

    (b)  The Secretary of Commerce shall issue a public call for proposals from industry-led consortia for inclusion in the Program.  The public call shall require that each proposal must:

    (i)    include a full-stack AI technology package, which encompasses:

    (A)  AI-optimized computer hardware (e.g., chips, servers, and accelerators), data center storage, cloud services, and networking, as well as a description of whether and to what extent such items are manufactured in the United States;

    (B)  data pipelines and labeling systems;

    (C)  AI models and systems;

    (D)  measures to ensure the security and cybersecurity of AI models and systems; and

    (E)  AI applications for specific use cases (e.g., software engineering, education, healthcare, agriculture, or transportation);

    (ii)   identify specific target countries or regional blocs for export engagement;

    (iii)  describe a business and operational model to explain, at a high level, which entities will build, own, and operate data centers and associated infrastructure;

    (iv)   detail requested Federal incentives and support mechanisms; and

    (v)    comply with all relevant United States export control regimes, outbound investment regulations, and end-user policies, including chapter 58 of title 50, United States Code, and relevant guidance from the Bureau of Industry and Security within the Department of Commerce.

    (c)  The Department of Commerce shall require proposals to be submitted no later than 90 days after the public call for proposals is issued, and shall consider proposals on a rolling basis for inclusion in the Program.

    (d)  The Secretary of Commerce shall, in consultation with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Energy, and the Director of OSTP, evaluate submitted proposals for inclusion under the Program.  Proposals selected by the Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Energy, and the Director of OSTP, will be designated as priority AI export packages and will be supported through priority access to the tools identified in section 4 of this order, as consistent with applicable law.

    Sec. 4.  Mobilization of Federal Financing Tools.  (a)  The Economic Diplomacy Action Group (EDAG), established in the Presidential Memorandum of June 21, 2024, chaired by the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce and the United States Trade Representative, and as described in section 708 of the Championing American Business Through Diplomacy Act of 2019 (Title VII of Division J of Public Law 116-94) (CABDA), shall coordinate mobilization of Federal financing tools in support of priority AI export packages.  

    (b)  I delegate to the Administrator of the Small Business Administration and the Director of OSTP the authority under section 708(c)(3) of CABDA to appoint senior officials from their respective executive departments and agencies to serve as members of the EDAG. 

    (c)  The Secretary of State, in consultation with the EDAG, shall be responsible for:

    (i)    developing and executing a unified Federal Government strategy to promote the export of American AI technologies and standards;

    (ii)   aligning technical, financial, and diplomatic resources to accelerate deployment of priority AI export packages under the Program;

    (iii)  coordinating United States participation in multilateral initiatives and country-specific partnerships for AI deployment and export promotion;

    (iv)   supporting partner countries in fostering pro‑innovation regulatory, data, and infrastructure environments conducive to the deployment of American AI systems;

    (v)    analyzing market access, including technical barriers to trade and regulatory measures that may impede the competitiveness of United States offerings; and

    (vi)   coordinating with the Small Business Administration’s Office of Investment and Innovation to facilitate, to the extent permitted under applicable law, investment in United States small businesses to the development of American AI technologies and the manufacture of AI infrastructure, hardware, and systems.

    (d)  Members of the EDAG shall deploy, to the maximum extent permitted by law, available Federal tools to support the priority export packages selected for participation in the Program, including direct loans and loan guarantees (12  U.S.C. 635); equity investments, co-financing, political risk insurance, and credit guarantees (22  U.S.C. 9621); and technical assistance and feasibility studies (22 U.S.C. 2421(b)).

    Sec. 5.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

    (i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

    (ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

    (b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

    (c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

    (d)  The costs for publication of this order shall be borne by the Department of Commerce.

                                  DONALD J. TRUMP

    THE WHITE HOUSE,

        July 23, 2025.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA News: Preventing Woke AI in the Federal Government

    Source: US Whitehouse

    By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

    Section 1.  Purpose.  Artificial intelligence (AI) will play a critical role in how Americans of all ages learn new skills, consume information, and navigate their daily lives.  Americans will require reliable outputs from AI, but when ideological biases or social agendas are built into AI models, they can distort the quality and accuracy of the output. 

    One of the most pervasive and destructive of these ideologies is so-called “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI).  In the AI context, DEI includes the suppression or distortion of factual information about race or sex; manipulation of racial or sexual representation in model outputs; incorporation of concepts like critical race theory, transgenderism, unconscious bias, intersectionality, and systemic racism; and discrimination on the basis of race or sex.  DEI displaces the commitment to truth in favor of preferred outcomes and, as recent history illustrates, poses an existential threat to reliable AI.

    For example, one major AI model changed the race or sex of historical figures — including the Pope, the Founding Fathers, and Vikings — when prompted for images because it was trained to prioritize DEI requirements at the cost of accuracy.  Another AI model refused to produce images celebrating the achievements of white people, even while complying with the same request for people of other races.  In yet another case, an AI model asserted that a user should not “misgender” another person even if necessary to stop a nuclear apocalypse. 

    While the Federal Government should be hesitant to regulate the functionality of AI models in the private marketplace, in the context of Federal procurement, it has the obligation not to procure models that sacrifice truthfulness and accuracy to ideological agendas.  Building on Executive Order 13960 of December 3, 2020 (Promoting the Use of Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence in the Federal Government), this order helps fulfill that obligation in the context of large language models.

    Sec. 2.  Definitions.  For purposes of this order:

    (a)  The term “agency” means an executive department, a military department, or any independent establishment within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 101, 102, and 104(1), respectively, and any wholly owned Government corporation within the meaning of 31 U.S.C. 9101.

    (b)  The term “agency head” means the highest-ranking

    official or officials of an agency, such as the Secretary, Administrator, Chairman, Director, Commissioners, or Board of Directors.

    (c)  The term “LLM” means a large language model, which is a generative AI model trained on vast, diverse datasets that enable the model to generate natural-language responses to user prompts.

    (d)  The term “national security system” has the same meaning as in 44 U.S.C. 3552(b)(6).

    Sec. 3.  Unbiased AI Principles.  It is the policy of the United States to promote the innovation and use of trustworthy AI.  To advance that policy, agency heads shall, consistent with applicable law and in consideration of guidance issued pursuant to section 4 of this order, procure only those LLMs developed in accordance with the following two principles (Unbiased AI Principles): 

    (a)  Truth-seeking.  LLMs shall be truthful in responding to user prompts seeking factual information or analysis.  LLMs shall prioritize historical accuracy, scientific inquiry, and objectivity, and shall acknowledge uncertainty where reliable information is incomplete or contradictory. 

    (b)  Ideological Neutrality.  LLMs shall be neutral, nonpartisan tools that do not manipulate responses in favor of ideological dogmas such as DEI.  Developers shall not intentionally encode partisan or ideological judgments into an LLM’s outputs unless those judgments are prompted by or otherwise readily accessible to the end user. 

    Sec. 4.  Implementation.  (a)  Within 120 days of the date of this order, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), in consultation with the Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy, the Administrator of General Services, and the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, shall issue guidance to agencies to implement section 3 of this order.  That guidance shall:

    (i)    account for technical limitations in complying with this order;

    (ii)   permit vendors to comply with the requirement in the second Unbiased AI Principle to be transparent about ideological judgments through disclosure of the LLM’s system prompt, specifications, evaluations, or other relevant documentation, and avoid requiring disclosure of specific model weights or other sensitive technical data where practicable;

    (iii)  avoid over-prescription and afford latitude for vendors to comply with the Unbiased AI Principles and take different approaches to innovation;

    (iv)   specify factors for agency heads to consider in determining whether to apply the Unbiased AI Principles to LLMs developed by the agencies and to AI models other than LLMs; and

    (v)    make exceptions as appropriate for the use of LLMs in national security systems.

    (b)  Each agency head shall, to the maximum extent consistent with applicable law:

    (i)    include in each Federal contract for an LLM entered into following the date of the OMB guidance issued under subsection (a) of this section terms requiring that the procured LLM comply with the Unbiased AI Principles and providing that decommissioning costs shall be charged to the vendor in the event of termination by the agency for the vendor’s noncompliance with the contract following a reasonable period to cure;

    (ii)   to the extent practicable and consistent with contract terms, revise existing contracts for LLMs to include the terms specified in subsection (b)(i) of this section; and

    (iii)  within 90 days of the OMB guidance issued under subsection (a) of this section, adopt procedures to ensure that LLMs procured by the agency comply with the Unbiased AI Principles.

    Sec. 5.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

    (i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

    (ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

    (b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

    (c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

    (d)  The costs for publication of this order shall be borne by the General Services Administration.

                                  DONALD J. TRUMP

    THE WHITE HOUSE,

        July 23, 2025.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI: Northfield Bancorp, Inc. Announces Second Quarter 2025 Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    NOTABLE ITEMS FOR THE QUARTER INCLUDE:

    • DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE WERE $0.24 FOR THE CURRENT QUARTER COMPARED TO $0.19 FOR THE TRAILING QUARTER, AND $0.14 FOR THE SECOND QUARTER OF 2024.
    • NET INTEREST MARGIN INCREASED BY 19 BASIS POINTS TO 2.57% FOR THE CURRENT QUARTER COMPARED TO 2.38% FOR THE TRAILING QUARTER, AND BY 48 BASIS POINTS COMPARED TO 2.09% FOR THE SECOND QUARTER OF 2024, DRIVEN BY LOWER FUNDING COSTS AND HIGHER YIELDS ON INTEREST-EARNING ASSETS.
    • COST OF DEPOSITS, EXCLUDING BROKERED DEPOSITS, AT JUNE 30, 2025 WAS 1.88% AS COMPARED TO 1.94% AT MARCH 31, 2025.
    • ASSET QUALITY IMPROVED WITH NON-PERFORMING LOANS TO TOTAL LOANS AT 0.36% AT JUNE 30, 2025 COMPARED TO 0.48% AT MARCH 31, 2025.
    • THE COMPANY MAINTAINED STRONG LIQUIDITY WITH OVER $800 MILLION IN UNPLEDGED AVAILABLE-FOR-SALE SECURITIES AND LOANS READILY AVAILABLE-FOR-PLEDGE OF APPROXIMATELY $1 BILLION.
    • A $10.0 MILLION REPURCHASE PLAN APPROVED ON APRIL 23, 2025 WAS COMPLETED DURING THE CURRENT QUARTER AS THE COMPANY REPURCHASED 862,469 SHARES.
    • CASH DIVIDEND DECLARED OF $0.13 PER SHARE OF COMMON STOCK, PAYABLE ON AUGUST 20, 2025, TO STOCKHOLDERS OF RECORD AS OF AUGUST 6, 2025.

    WOODBRIDGE, N.J., July 23, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — NORTHFIELD BANCORP, INC. (Nasdaq:NFBK) (the “Company”), the holding company for Northfield Bank, reported net income of $9.6 million, or $0.24 per diluted share, for the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to $7.9 million, or $0.19 per diluted share, for the three months ended March 31, 2025, and $6.0 million, or $0.14 per diluted share, for the three months ended June 30, 2024. For the six months ended June 30, 2025, net income totaled $17.4 million, or $0.43 per diluted share, compared to $12.2 million, or $0.29 per diluted share, for the six months ended June 30, 2024. For the three and six months ended June 30, 2025, net income included $580,000 of additional tax expense related to options that expired in May 2025. For the three and six months ended June 30, 2024, net income included $795,000 of additional tax expense related to options that expired in June 2024, and $683,000 of severance expense. The increase in net income for the current quarter and the six months ended June 30, 2025, as compared to the comparable prior year periods was primarily due to an increase in net interest income, attributable to lower funding costs and higher yields on loans and securities, partially offset by an increase in the provision for credit losses on loans.

    Commenting on the quarter, Steven M. Klein, the Company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, noted, “Our strong financial results reflect the continued execution of our strategic initiatives, focused on prudent and disciplined lending and deposit gathering, net interest margin expansion, and expense discipline.” Mr. Klein further noted, “I’m pleased to report that we continue to deploy our substantial capital base, including through stock repurchases of $15.0 million for the year and the declaration of a quarterly cash dividend of $0.13 per common share, payable August 20, 2025, to stockholders of record on August 6, 2025.”

    Results of Operations

    Comparison of Operating Results for the Six Months Ended June 30, 2025 and 2024

    Net income was $17.4 million and $12.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2025 and June 30, 2024, respectively. Significant variances from the comparable prior year period are as follows: a $9.6 million increase in net interest income, a $4.9 million increase in the provision for credit losses on loans, a $1.3 million increase in non-interest income, a $920,000 decrease in non-interest expense, and a $1.7 million increase in income tax expense.

    Net interest income for the six months ended June 30, 2025, increased $9.6 million, or 17.0%, to $66.2 million, from $56.6 million for the six months ended June 30, 2024 due to a $6.0 million decrease in interest expense and a $3.6 million increase in interest income. The decrease in interest expense was primarily due to a decrease in the average balance of interest-bearing liabilities of $141.5 million, or 3.3%, as well as a decrease in the cost of interest-bearing liabilities, which decreased by 18 basis points to 2.74% for the six months ended June 30, 2025, from 2.92% for the six months ended June 30, 2024. The average balance of interest-bearing liabilities decreased primarily due to a $378.9 million, or 35.2%, decrease in the average balance of borrowed funds, partially offset by a $237.2 million, or 7.5%, increase in the average balance of interest-bearing deposits, primarily certificates of deposit. The decrease in the cost of interest-bearing liabilities was driven primarily by an eight basis point decrease in the cost of interest-bearing deposits to 2.47% from 2.55% and a four basis point decrease in the cost of borrowings to 3.83% from 3.87%. The increase in interest income was primarily due to a 25 basis point increase in the yield on interest-earning assets, due to higher yields on mortgage-backed securities and loans, partially offset by a $128.0 million, or 2.3%, decrease in the average balance of interest-earning assets. The decrease was primarily due to decreases in the average balance of loans of $175.5 million, the average balance of other securities of $275.8 million, and the average balance of interest-earning deposits in financial institutions of $128.1 million, partially offset by an increase in the average balance of mortgage-backed securities of $453.4 million. The changes reflect the purchase of higher-yielding mortgage-related securities with excess cash and proceeds from the maturities of other securities.

    Net interest margin increased by 42 basis points to 2.48% for the six months ended June 30, 2025, from 2.06% for the six months ended June 30, 2024. The increase in net interest margin was primarily due to higher yields on loans and mortgage-backed securities, coupled with a decrease in the cost of interest-bearing liabilities. Net interest income for the six months ended June 30, 2025, included $609,000 of interest income related to the settlement of a non-accrual loan in May 2025. The Company accreted interest income related to purchased credit-deteriorated (“PCD”) loans of $469,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2025, as compared to $747,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2024. Net interest income for the six months ended June 30, 2025, also included loan prepayment income of $767,000 as compared to $561,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2024.

    The provision for credit losses on loans increased by $4.9 million to $4.7 million for the six months ended June 30, 2025, compared to a benefit of $203,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2024, primarily due to an increase in general reserves related to a worsening macroeconomic forecast in the current quarter within our Current Expected Credit Loss (“CECL”) model, an increase in specific reserves of $1.2 million, changes in model assumptions including a reduction in prepayment speeds, and higher net charge-offs. Partially offsetting the increase in reserves was a decline in loan balances. Net charge-offs were $3.7 million for the six months ended June 30, 2025, primarily due to $3.2 million in net charge-offs on small business unsecured commercial and industrial loans, as compared to net charge-offs of $2.6 million for the six months ended June 30, 2024. Management continues to closely monitor the small business unsecured commercial and industrial loan portfolio, which totaled $24.0 million at June 30, 2025.

    Non-interest income increased by $1.3 million, or 21.0%, to $7.5 million for the six months ended June 30, 2025, compared to $6.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2024. The increase was primarily due to an increase in income on bank-owned life insurance of $1.4 million, primarily related to the exchange of certain policies in the fourth quarter of 2024 which have higher yields, partially offset by a $178,000 decrease in gains on trading securities. Gains on trading securities in the six months ended June 30, 2025, were $709,000, as compared to gains of $887,000 in the six months ended June 30, 2024. The trading portfolio is utilized to fund the Company’s deferred compensation obligation to certain employees and directors of the plan. The participants of this plan, at their election, defer a portion of their compensation. Gains and losses on trading securities have no effect on net income since participants benefit from, and bear the full risk of changes in the trading securities market values. Therefore, the Company records an equal and offsetting amount in compensation expense, reflecting the change in the Company’s obligations under the plan.

    Non-interest expense decreased by $920,000, or 2.0%, to $44.4 million for the six months ended June 30, 2025, compared to $45.3 million for the six months ended June 30, 2024. The decrease was primarily due to a $650,000 decrease in employee compensation and benefits, primarily due to severance expense of $683,000 which was recorded during the six months ended June 30, 2024, and a $178,000 decrease in deferred compensation expense, which is described above, and had no effect on net income. Partially offsetting the decreases were higher salary expense related to annual merit increases and higher stock compensation expense as the prior year included a credit of $461,000 related to performance stock awards not expected to vest. Additionally, there was a $456,000 decrease in advertising expense attributable to a change in marketing strategy and the timing of specific deposit and lending campaigns, and a $311,000 decrease in other expense. Partially offsetting the decreases was a $485,000 increase in professional fees related to outsourced audit services and recruitment fees.

    The Company recorded income tax expense of $7.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2025, compared to $5.5 million for the six months ended June 30, 2024. The effective tax rate for the six months ended June 30, 2025, was 29.3% compared to 31.2% for the six months ended June 30, 2024. In May 2025, options granted in 2015 expired and resulted in additional tax expense of $580,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2025, as compared to options granted in 2014 that expired in June 2024 and resulted in additional tax expense of $795,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2024.

    Comparison of Operating Results for the Three Months Ended June 30, 2025 and 2024

    Net income was $9.6 million and $6.0 million for the quarters ended June 30, 2025 and June 30, 2024, respectively. Significant variances from the comparable prior year quarter are as follows: a $5.7 million increase in net interest income, a $2.7 increase in the provision for credit losses on loans, a $1.7 million increase in non-interest income, and a $1.1 million increase in income tax expense.

    Net interest income for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, increased $5.7 million, or 19.9%, to $34.4 million, from $28.7 million for the quarter ended June 30, 2024, due to a $3.5 million decrease in interest expense and a $2.2 million increase in interest income. The decrease in interest expense was primarily due to a decrease in the average balance of interest-bearing liabilities of $177.0 million, or 4.1%, as well as a decrease in the cost of interest-bearing liabilities which decreased by 22 basis points to 2.73% for the three months ended June 30, 2025, from 2.95% for the three months ended June 30, 2024. The average balance of interest-bearing liabilities decreased primarily due to a $344.2 million, or 33.1% decrease in the average balance of borrowed funds, partially offset by a $167.0 million, or 5.2%, increase in the average of interest-bearing deposits. The decrease in the cost of interest-bearing liabilities was driven by an 18 basis point decrease in the cost of interest-bearing deposits to 2.42% from 2.60%, partially offset by a 10 basis point increase in the cost of borrowed funds to 3.98% from 3.88%. The increase in interest income was primarily due to a 28 basis point increase in the yield on interest-earning assets due to higher yields on mortgage-backed securities and loans, partially offset by a $151.7 million, or 2.8%, decrease in the average balance of interest-earning assets. The decrease was primarily due to decreases in the average balance of other securities of $277.3 million, the average balance of loans of $183.3 million and the average balance of interest-earning deposits in financial institutions of $112.0 million, partially offset by an increase in the average balance of mortgage-backed securities of $422.3 million. The changes reflect the purchase of higher-yielding mortgage-related securities with excess cash and proceeds from the maturities of other securities.

    Net interest margin increased by 48 basis points to 2.57% for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, from 2.09% for the quarter ended June 30, 2024. The increase in net interest margin was primarily due to higher yields on loans and mortgage-backed securities, coupled with a decrease in the cost of interest-bearing liabilities. Net interest income for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, included $609,000 of interest income related to the settlement of a non-accrual loan in May 2025. The Company accreted interest income related to PCD loans of $247,000 for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, as compared to $321,000 for the quarter ended June 30, 2024. Net interest income for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, included loan prepayment income of $522,000, as compared to $210,000 for the quarter ended June 30, 2024.

    The provision for credit losses on loans increased by $2.7 million to $2.1 million for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, from a benefit of $618,000 for the quarter ended June 30, 2024, primarily due to an increase in general reserves related to a worsening macroeconomic forecast in the current quarter within our CECL model, an increase in specific reserves of $1.2 million, and changes in model assumptions, including a reduction in prepayment speeds. Partially offsetting the increase in reserves was a decline in loan balances and lower net charge-offs. Net charge-offs were $887,000 for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, primarily due to $879,000 in net charge-offs on small business unsecured commercial and industrial loans, as compared to net charge-offs of $1.6 million for the quarter ended June 30, 2024.

    Non-interest income increased by $1.7 million, or 58.3%, to $4.5 million for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, from $2.9 million for the quarter ended June 30, 2024. The increase was primarily due to increases of $820,000 in gains on trading securities and $760,000 in income on bank-owned life insurance, primarily related to the exchange of certain policies in the fourth quarter of 2024 which have higher yields. Gains on trading securities in the three months ended June 30, 2025, were $1.0 million as compared to gains of $188,000 in the quarter ended June 30, 2024.

    Non-interest expense remained stable at $23.0 million for both quarters ended June 30, 2025 and June 30, 2024.

    The Company recorded income tax expense of $4.3 million for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, compared to $3.2 million for the quarter ended June 30, 2024. The effective tax rate for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, was 31.0% compared to 35.0% for the quarter ended June 30, 2024. In May 2025, options granted in 2015 expired and resulted in additional tax expense of $580,000 for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, as compared to options granted in 2014 that expired in June 2024 and resulted in additional tax expense of $795,000 for the quarter ended June 30, 2024.

    Comparison of Operating Results for the Three Months Ended June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025

    Net income was $9.6 million and $7.9 million for the quarters ended June 30, 2025, and March 31, 2025, respectively. Significant variances from the prior quarter are as follows: a $2.6 million increase in net interest income, a $496,000 decrease in the provision for credit losses on loans, a $1.5 million increase in non-interest income, a $1.5 million increase in non-interest expense, and a $1.4 million increase in income tax expense.

    Net interest income for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, increased by $2.6 million, or 8.2%, to $34.4 million, from $31.8 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, due to a $2.3 million increase in interest income and a $272,000 decrease in interest expense. The increase in interest income was primarily due to a 17 basis point increase in the yield on interest-earning assets, partially offset by a $49.1 million decrease in the average balance of interest-earning assets, primarily due to decreases in the average balance of loans of $62.4 million, the average balance of other securities of $61.5 million, and the average balance of interest-earning deposits in financial institutions of $39.5 million, which were partially offset by an increase in the average balance of mortgage-backed securities of $114.1 million. The changes reflect the purchase of higher-yielding mortgage-related securities with excess cash and proceeds from the maturities of other securities. The decrease in interest expense was primarily due to a $66.1 million, or 1.6%, decrease in the average balance of interest-bearing liabilities largely attributable to a $67.8 million decrease in the average balance of interest-bearing deposits.

    Net interest margin increased by 19 basis points to 2.57% for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, from 2.38% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, primarily due to higher yields on loans and mortgage-backed securities. Net interest income for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, included $609,000 of interest income related to the settlement of a non-accrual loan in May 2025. Net interest income for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, included loan prepayment income of $522,000 as compared to $245,000 for the quarter ended March 31, 2025. The Company accreted interest income related to PCD loans of $247,000 for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, as compared to $223,000 for the quarter ended March 31, 2025.

    The provision for credit losses on loans decreased by $496,000 to $2.1 million for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, from $2.6 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025. The decrease in the provision for the current quarter was primarily due to lower net charge-offs and a decline in loan balances, partially offset by an increase in specific reserves of $569,000 and an increase in general reserves due to a worsening macroeconomic forecast in the current quarter within our CECL model. Net charge-offs were $887,000 for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, as compared to net charge-offs of $2.8 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025.

    Non-interest income increased by $1.5 million, or 49.8%, to $4.5 million for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, from $3.0 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025. The increase was primarily due to a $1.3 million increase in gains on trading securities, net. For the quarter ended June 30, 2025, gains on trading securities, net, were $1.0 million, compared to losses of $299,000 for the quarter ended March 31, 2025.

    Non-interest expense increased by $1.5 million, or 7.2%, to $23.0 million for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, from $21.4 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025. The increase was primarily due to a $2.0 million increase in compensation and employee benefits, of which $1.3 million was attributable to an increase in deferred compensation expense and has no effect on net income due to offsetting gains on trading securities. The remaining increase in compensation and employee benefits was primarily due to higher salary expense related to an increase in headcount during the current quarter as well as recognizing a full quarter of merit-related increases as compared to one month in the prior quarter. Additionally, there was a $280,000 increase in data processing costs attributable to an increase in core system expenses. Partially offsetting the increases were decreases of $205,000 in occupancy expense, $169,000 in professional fees, $210,000 in other expense, and $156,000 in credit loss expense/(benefit) for off-balance sheet exposure. The decrease in credit loss expense/(benefit) for off-balance sheet exposure was due to a benefit of $53,000 recorded during the quarter ended June 30, 2025, as compared to a provision of $103,000 recorded during the quarter ended March 31, 2025.

    The Company recorded income tax expense of $4.3 million for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, compared to $2.9 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025. The effective tax rate for the quarter ended June 30, 2025 was 31.0%, compared to 27.0% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025. During the quarter ended June 30, 2025, options granted in 2015 expired and resulted in additional tax expense of $580,000, contributing to the higher effective tax rate for the quarter ended June 30, 2025 compared to the quarter ended March 31, 2025.

    Financial Condition

    Total assets increased by $12.9 million, or 0.2%, to $5.68 billion at June 30, 2025, from $5.67 billion at December 31, 2024. The increase was primarily due to an increase in available-for-sale debt securities of $200.2 million, or 18.2%, partially offset by decreases in loans receivable of $106.5 million, or 2.6%, cash and cash equivalents of $70.2 million, or 41.8% and other assets of $9.6 million, or 20.4%.

    Cash and cash equivalents decreased by $70.1 million, or 41.8%, to $97.6 million at June 30, 2025, from $167.7 million at December 31, 2024, as excess liquidity was deployed into purchasing higher-yielding mortgage-backed securities. Balances fluctuate based on the timing of receipt of security and loan repayments and the redeployment of cash into higher-yielding assets such as loans and securities, or the funding of deposit outflows or borrowing maturities.

    Loans held-for-investment, net, decreased by $101.6 million, or 2.5%, to $3.92 billion at June 30, 2025 from $4.02 billion at December 31, 2024, primarily due to a decrease in multifamily real estate loans, partially offset by increases in one-to-four family residential mortgage and home equity and lines of credit loans. The decrease in loan balances reflects the Company’s continued strategic focus on managing concentration risk within its commercial and multifamily real estate loan portfolios, while maintaining disciplined loan pricing. Multifamily loans decreased $114.4 million, or 4.4%, to $2.48 billion at June 30, 2025 from $2.60 billion at December 31, 2024, commercial and industrial loans decreased $4.9 million, or 3.0%, to $158.5 million at June 30, 2025 from $163.4 million at December 31, 2024, commercial real estate loans decreased $3.7 million, or 0.4%, to $886.1 million at June 30, 2025 from $889.8 million at December 31, 2024, and construction and land loans decreased $3.6 million, or 10.0%, to $32.3 million at June 30, 2025 from $35.9 million at December 31, 2024. Partially offsetting these decreases were increases in home equity and lines of credit of $12.8 million, or 7.3%, to $186.8 million at June 30, 2025 from $174.1 million at December 31, 2024, and one-to-four family residential loans of $12.5 million, or 8.3%, to $162.8 million at June 30, 2025 from $150.2 million at December 31, 2024.

    As of June 30, 2025, non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans (as defined by regulatory guidance) to total risk-based capital was estimated at approximately 416%. Management believes that Northfield Bank (the “Bank”) maintains appropriate risk management practices including risk assessments, board-approved underwriting policies and related procedures, which includes monitoring Bank portfolio performance, performing market analysis (economic and real estate), and stressing of the Bank’s commercial real estate portfolio under severe, adverse economic conditions. Although management believes the Bank has implemented appropriate policies and procedures to manage its commercial real estate concentration risk, the Bank’s regulators could require it to implement additional policies and procedures or could require it to maintain higher levels of regulatory capital, which might adversely affect its loan originations, the Company’s ability to pay dividends, and overall profitability.

    Our real estate portfolio includes credit risk exposure to loans collateralized by office buildings and multifamily properties in New York subject to some form of rent regulation limiting rent increases for rent stabilized multifamily properties. At June 30, 2025, office-related loans represented $178.8 million, or 4.6% of our total loan portfolio, with an average balance of $1.8 million (although we have originated these type of loans in amounts substantially greater than this average) and a weighted average loan-to-value ratio of 58%. Approximately 39% were owner-occupied. The geographic locations of the properties collateralizing our office-related loans are: 49.9% in New York, 48.6% in New Jersey and 1.5% in Pennsylvania. At June 30, 2025, our largest office-related loan had a principal balance of $90.0 million (with a net active principal balance for the Bank of $29.3 million as we have a 33.3% participation interest), was secured by an office facility located in Staten Island, New York, and was performing in accordance with its original contractual terms. At June 30, 2025, multifamily loans that have some form of rent stabilization or rent control totaled $434.1 million, or 11% of our total loan portfolio, with an average balance of $1.7 million (although we have originated these type of loans in amounts substantially greater than this average) and a weighted average loan-to-value ratio of 50%. At June 30, 2025, our largest rent-regulated loan had a principal balance of $16.6 million, was secured by an apartment building located in Staten Island, New York, and was performing in accordance with its original contractual terms. Management continues to closely monitor its office and rent-regulated portfolios. For further details on our rent-regulated multifamily portfolio see “Asset Quality”.

    PCD loans totaled $9.0 million and $9.2 million at June 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively. The majority of the remaining PCD loan balance consists of loans acquired as part of a Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation-assisted transaction. The Company accreted interest income of $247,000 and $469,000 attributable to PCD loans for the three and six months ended June 30, 2025, respectively, compared to $321,000 and $747,000 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2024, respectively. PCD loans had an allowance for credit losses of approximately $2.7 million at June 30, 2025.

    Loan balances are summarized as follows (dollars in thousands):

      June 30, 2025   March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024
    Real estate loans:          
    Multifamily $ 2,483,078   $ 2,567,913   $ 2,597,484
    Commercial mortgage   886,135     882,600     889,801
    One-to-four family residential mortgage   162,750     146,791     150,217
    Home equity and lines of credit   186,848     181,354     174,062
    Construction and land   32,300     40,284     35,897
    Total real estate loans   3,751,111     3,818,942     3,847,461
    Commercial and industrial loans   158,539     162,133     163,425
    Other loans   2,008     1,411     2,165
    Total commercial and industrial and other loans   160,547     163,544     165,590
    Loans held-for-investment, net (excluding PCD)   3,911,658     3,982,486     4,013,051
    PCD loans   8,955     9,043     9,173
    Total loans held-for-investment, net $ 3,920,613   $ 3,991,529   $ 4,022,224
                     

    Other assets decreased by $9.6 million, or 20.4%, to $37.4 million at June 30, 2025, from $46.9 million at December 31, 2024. The decrease was primarily attributable to a decrease in deferred tax assets primarily due to a decrease in unrealized losses on the securities available-for-sale portfolio.

    The Company’s available-for-sale debt securities portfolio increased by $200.2 million, or 18.2%, to $1.30 billion at June 30, 2025, from $1.10 billion at December 31, 2024. The increase was primarily attributable to purchases of securities, partially offset by paydowns and maturities. At June 30, 2025, $1.27 billion of the portfolio consisted of residential mortgage-backed securities issued or guaranteed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, or Ginnie Mae. In addition, the Company held $29.7 million in corporate bonds, substantially all of which were investment grade, $684,000 in municipal bonds and $613,000 in U.S. Government agency securities at June 30, 2025. Unrealized losses, net of tax, on available-for-sale debt securities and held-to-maturity securities approximated $14.6 million and $276,000, respectively, at June 30, 2025, and $21.8 million and $400,000, respectively, at December 31, 2024.

    Equity securities were $6.3 million at June 30, 2025 and $14.3 million at December 31, 2024. Equity securities are primarily comprised of an investment in a Small Business Administration (“SBA”) Loan Fund. This investment is utilized by the Bank as part of its Community Reinvestment Act program. The decrease in equity securities was primarily due to a redemption, at par, of $5.0 million of our investment in the SBA Loan Fund during the quarter ended June 30, 2025.

    Total liabilities increased $7.3 million, or 0.1%, to $4.97 billion at June 30, 2025, from $4.96 billion at December 31, 2024. The increase was primarily attributable to an increase in borrowings of $165.5 million, partially offset by a decrease in deposits of $152.3 million. The Company routinely utilizes brokered deposits and borrowed funds to manage interest rate risk, the cost of interest-bearing liabilities, and funding needs related to loan originations and deposit activity.

    Deposits decreased $152.3 million, or 3.7%, to $3.99 billion at June 30, 2025 as compared to $4.14 billion at December 31, 2024. Brokered deposits decreased by $188.4 million, or 71.5%, as the Company placed less reliance on brokered deposits, which were used as a lower-cost alternative to borrowings in the quarter ended December 31, 2024. Deposits, excluding brokered deposits, increased $36.0 million, or 0.9%. The increase in deposits, excluding brokered deposits, was primarily attributable to increases of $73.7 million in transaction accounts and $9.6 million in time deposits, partially offset by decreases of $29.2 million in savings accounts, and $18.0 million in money market accounts. Growth in transaction accounts and time deposits was primarily due to new municipal relationships and new commercial customer relationships.

    Estimated gross uninsured deposits at June 30, 2025 were $1.87 billion. This total includes fully collateralized uninsured governmental deposits and intercompany deposits of $940.6 million, leaving estimated uninsured deposits of approximately $929.2 million, or 23.1%, of total deposits. At December 31, 2024, estimated uninsured deposits, excluding fully collateralized uninsured governmental deposits and intercompany deposits, totaled $896.5 million, or 21.7% of total deposits.

    Deposit account balances are summarized as follows (dollars in thousands):

      June 30, 2025   March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024
    Transaction:          
    Non-interest bearing checking $ 735,811   $ 722,994   $ 706,976
    Negotiable orders of withdrawal and interest-bearing checking   1,331,060     1,367,219     1,286,154
    Total transaction   2,066,871     2,090,213     1,993,130
    Savings and money market:          
    Savings   874,927     899,674     904,163
    Money market   254,154     271,566     272,145
    Total savings   1,129,081     1,171,240     1,176,308
    Certificates of deposit:          
    $250,000 and under   573,612     602,959     580,940
    Over $250,000   141,623     144,255     124,681
    Brokered deposits   75,000     123,289     263,418
    Total certificates of deposit   790,235     870,503     969,039
    Total deposits $ 3,986,187   $ 4,131,956   $ 4,138,477
                     

    Included in the table above are business and municipal deposit account balances as follows (dollars in thousands):

      June 30, 2025   March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024
               
    Business customers $ 907,464   $ 891,545   $ 885,769
    Municipal (governmental) customers $ 892,652   $ 929,611   $ 859,319
                     

    Borrowed funds increased to $893.5 million at June 30, 2025, from $727.8 million at December 31, 2024. The increase in borrowings for the period was primarily due to a $55.0 million increase in borrowings under an overnight line of credit, and a $110.5 million increase in other borrowings. Management utilizes borrowings to mitigate interest rate risk, for short-term liquidity, and to a lesser extent from time to time, as part of leverage strategies.

    The following table sets forth borrowing maturities (excluding overnight borrowings and subordinated debt) and the weighted average rate by year at June 30, 2025 (dollars in thousands):

    Year   Amount   Weighted Average Rate
    2025   $295,684   4.44%
    2026   148,000   4.36%
    2027   173,000   3.19%
    2028   154,288   3.96%
        $770,972   4.05%
             

    Total stockholders’ equity increased by $5.6 million to $710.3 million at June 30, 2025, from $704.7 million at December 31, 2024. The increase was attributable to net income of $17.4 million for the six months ended June 30, 2025, an $11.9 million increase in accumulated other comprehensive income associated with an increase in the estimated fair value of our debt securities available-for-sale portfolio, and a $2.0 million increase in equity award activity, partially offset by $15.0 million in stock repurchases and $10.7 million in dividend payments. On February 26, 2025, the Board of Directors of the Company approved a $5.0 million stock repurchase program, and on April 23, 2025, the Board of Directors approved a $10.0 million stock repurchase program. During the six months ended June 30, 2025, the Company repurchased 1.3 million shares of its common stock outstanding at an average price of $11.52 for a total of $15.0 million pursuant to the approved stock repurchase plans. As of June 30, 2025, the Company has no outstanding repurchase program.

    The Company’s most liquid assets are cash and cash equivalents, corporate bonds, and unpledged mortgage-related securities issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Government, Fannie Mae, or Freddie Mac, that we can either borrow against or sell. We also have the ability to surrender bank-owned life insurance contracts. The surrender of these contracts would subject the Company to income taxes and penalties for increases in the cash surrender values over the original premium payments. We also have the ability to obtain additional funding from the Federal Home Loan Bank and Federal Reserve Bank of New York utilizing unencumbered and unpledged securities and multifamily loans. The Company expects to have sufficient funds available to meet current commitments in the normal course of business. The Company’s on-hand liquidity ratio as of June 30, 2025 was 18.3%.

    The Company had the following primary sources of liquidity at June 30, 2025 (dollars in thousands):

    Cash and cash equivalents(1)   $ 85,652
    Corporate bonds(2)   $ 15,525
    Multifamily loans(2)   $ 1,074,872
    Mortgage-backed securities (issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Government, Fannie Mae, or Freddie Mac)(2)   $ 791,369
         
    (1) Excludes $12.0 million of cash at Northfield Bank.
    (2) Represents estimated remaining borrowing potential.
     

    The Company and the Bank utilize the Community Bank Leverage Ratio (“CBLR”) framework. At June 30, 2025, the Company’s and the Bank’s estimated CBLR ratios were 12.09% and 12.56%, respectively, which exceeded the minimum requirement to be considered well-capitalized of 9%.

    Asset Quality

    The following table details total non-accrual loans (excluding PCD), non-performing assets, loans over 90 days delinquent on which interest is accruing, and accruing loans 30 to 89 days delinquent at June 30, 2025, March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024 (dollars in thousands):

      June 30, 2025   March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024
    Non-accrual loans:          
    Held-for-investment          
    Real estate loans:          
    Multifamily $ 2,521     $ 2,565     $ 2,609  
    Commercial mortgage   4,555       4,565       4,578  
    Home equity and lines of credit   1,264       1,267       1,270  
    Commercial and industrial   4,517       4,972       5,807  
    Total non-accrual loans   12,857       13,369       14,264  
    Loans delinquent 90 days or more and still accruing:          
    Held-for-investment          
    Real estate loans:          
    Multifamily   —       —       164  
    Commercial mortgage   74       —       —  
    One-to-four family residential   871       878       882  
    Home equity and lines of credit   177       140       140  
    Commercial and industrial   121       —       —  
    Total loans held-for-investment delinquent 90 days or more and still accruing   1,243       1,018       1,186  
    Non-performing loans held-for-sale:          
    Commercial mortgage   —       4,397       4,397  
    Commercial and industrial   —       500       500  
    Total non-performing loans held-for-sale   —       4,897       4,897  
    Total non-performing loans   14,100       19,284       20,347  
    Total non-performing assets $ 14,100     $ 19,284     $ 20,347  
    Non-performing loans to total loans   0.36 %     0.48 %     0.51 %
    Non-performing assets to total assets   0.25 %     0.34 %     0.36 %
    Accruing loans 30 to 89 days delinquent $ 4,076     $ 6,845     $ 9,336  
                           

    The decrease in non-performing loans held-for-sale from March 31, 2025, and December 31, 2024, was due to repayment of the loans in full from a settlement agreement in bankruptcy.

    Accruing Loans 30 to 89 Days Delinquent

    Loans 30 to 89 days delinquent and on accrual status totaled $4.1 million, $6.8 million and $9.3 million at June 30, 2025, March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively. The following table sets forth delinquencies for accruing loans by type and by amount at June 30, 2025, March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024 (dollars in thousands):

      June 30, 2025   March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024
    Held-for-investment          
    Real estate loans:          
    Multifamily $ 1,230   $ 1,296   $ 2,831
    Commercial mortgage   14     147     78
    One-to-four family residential   741     2,584     2,407
    Home equity and lines of credit   1,398     1,141     1,472
    Commercial and industrial loans   693     1,674     2,545
    Other loans   —     3     3
    Total delinquent accruing loans held-for-investment $ 4,076   $ 6,845   $ 9,336
                     

    PCD Loans (Held-for-Investment)

    The Company accounts for PCD loans at estimated fair value using discounted expected future cash flows deemed to be collectible on the date acquired. Based on its detailed review of PCD loans and experience in loan workouts, management believes it has a reasonable expectation about the amount and timing of future cash flows and accordingly has classified PCD loans ($9.0 million at June 30, 2025 and $9.2 million at December 31, 2024, respectively) as accruing, even though they may be contractually past due. At June 30, 2025, 2.3% of PCD loans were past due 30 to 89 days, and 25.5% were past due 90 days or more, as compared to 2.1% and 24.9%, respectively, at December 31, 2024.

    Our multifamily loan portfolio at June 30, 2025 totaled $2.48 billion, or 63% of our total loan portfolio, of which $434.1 million, or 11%, of our total loan portfolio included loans collateralized by properties in New York with units subject to some percentage of rent regulation. The table below sets forth details about our multifamily loan portfolio in New York (dollars in thousands).

    % Rent
    Regulated    		   Balance   % Portfolio
    Total NY
    Multifamily
    Portfolio    		   Average
    Balance    		   Largest Loan   LTV*   Debt Service
    Coverage Ratio
    (DSCR)*    		   30-89 Days
    Delinquent    		   Non-Accrual   Special
    Mention    		   Substandard
    0   $ 294,926   40.5 %   $ 1,229   $ 16,361   50.6 %   1.50x   $ 155   $ 481   $ —   $ 1,015
    >0-10     4,673   0.6       1,558     2,097   50.6     1.33     —     —     —     —
    >10-20     18,258   2.5       1,404     2,818   48.4     1.59     —     —     —     —
    >20-30     19,159   2.6       2,129     5,417   48.1     1.55     —     —     —     —
    >30-40     15,884   2.2       1,324     3,012   43.2     1.74     —     —     —     —
    >40-50     21,438   2.9       1,261     2,701   46.7     1.68     —     —     —     —
    >50-60     9,222   1.3       1,537     2,299   39.1     1.80     —     —     —     —
    >60-70     21,815   3.0       2,727     11,102   53.2     1.50     —     —     —     —
    >70-80     22,038   3.0       2,449     4,855   47.3     1.55     —     —     —     —
    >80-90     19,547   2.7       1,150     3,113   45.9     1.66     —     —     1,118     —
    >90-100     282,037   38.7       1,730     16,594   51.3     1.54     —     2,040     3,608     4,342
    Total   $ 728,997   100.0 %   $ 1,467   $ 16,594   50.2 %   1.54x   $ 155   $ 2,521   $ 4,726   $ 5,357
                                                               

    The table below sets forth our New York rent-regulated loans by county (dollars in thousands).

    County   Balance   LTV*   DSCR*
    Bronx   $ 116,252   50.9%   1.51x
    Kings     184,424   49.4%   1.58
    Nassau     2,145   35.7%   2.13
    New York     48,532   46.0%   1.62
    Queens     37,359   44.1%   1.69
    Richmond     32,031   59.8%   1.41
    Westchester     13,327   58.4%   1.44
    Total   $ 434,070   49.9%   1.56x
                 
    *  Weighted Average
     

    None of the loans that are rent-regulated in New York are interest only. During the remainder of 2025, 13 loans with an aggregate principal balance of $23.6 million will re-price.

    About Northfield Bank

    Northfield Bank, founded in 1887, operates 37 full-service banking offices in Staten Island and Brooklyn, New York, and Hunterdon, Middlesex, Mercer, and Union counties, New Jersey. For more information about Northfield Bank, please visit www.eNorthfield.com.

    Forward-Looking Statements: This release may contain certain “forward looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, and may be identified by the use of such words as “may,” “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “should,” “plan,” “estimate,” “predict,” “continue,” and “potential” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. Examples of forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, estimates with respect to the financial condition, results of operations and business of Northfield Bancorp, Inc. Any or all of the forward-looking statements in this release and in any other public statements made by Northfield Bancorp, Inc. may turn out to be wrong. They can be affected by inaccurate assumptions Northfield Bancorp, Inc. might make or by known or unknown risks and uncertainties as described in our SEC filings, including, but not limited to, those related to general economic conditions, particularly in the market areas in which the Company operates, competition and demand for financial services in our market area, competition among depository and other financial institutions, including with respect to fees and interest rates, fluctuations in residential and commercial real estate values and market conditions, changes in liquidity, the size and composition of our deposit portfolio and the percentage of uninsured deposits in the portfolio, our ability to access cost-effective funding, changes in laws or government regulations or policies affecting financial institutions, including changes in the monetary policies of the U.S. Treasury and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the imposition of tariffs or other domestic or international governmental policies and retaliatory responses, changes in the quality and/or composition of our loan and securities portfolios, prepayment speeds, charge-offs and/or credit loss provisions, changes in the value of our goodwill or other intangible assets, changes in regulatory fees, assessments and capital requirements, inflation and changes in the interest rate environment that reduce our margins, reduce the fair value of financial instruments or reduce our ability to originate loans, the failure to maintain current technologies and to successfully implement future information technology enhancements, cyber security and fraud risks against our information technology and those of our third-party providers, the ability of third-party providers to perform their obligations to us, the effects of war, conflict, and acts of terrorism, our ability to successfully integrate acquired entities, and adverse changes in the securities markets. Consequently, no forward-looking statement can be guaranteed. Northfield Bancorp, Inc. does not intend to update any of the forward-looking statements after the date of this release, or conform these statements to actual events.

     
    (Tables follow)
    NORTHFIELD BANCORP, INC.
    SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL AND OTHER DATA
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts) (unaudited)
     
                   
      At or For the Three Months Ended   At or For the Six Months Ended
      June 30,   March 31,   June 30,
      2025   2024   2025   2025   2024
    Selected Financial Ratios:                  
    Performance Ratios (1)                  
    Return on assets (ratio of net income to average total assets) 0.68 %   0.41 %   0.56 %   0.62 %   0.42 %
    Return on equity (ratio of net income to average equity) 5.41     3.45     4.52     4.97     3.52  
    Average equity to average total assets 12.56     12.00     12.43     12.50     12.02  
    Interest rate spread 1.94     1.44     1.76     1.84     1.41  
    Net interest margin 2.57     2.09     2.38     2.48     2.06  
    Efficiency ratio (2) 59.02     72.89     61.57     60.22     72.16  
    Non-interest expense to average total assets 1.63     1.60     1.53     1.58     1.58  
    Non-interest expense to average total interest-earning assets 1.72     1.68     1.61     1.66     1.65  
    Average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities 130.31     128.47     129.42     129.87     128.57  
    Asset Quality Ratios:                  
    Non-performing assets to total assets 0.25     0.30     0.34     0.25     0.30  
    Non-performing loans (3) to total loans (4) 0.36     0.42     0.48     0.36     0.42  
    Allowance for credit losses to non-performing loans (5) 256.15     200.96     242.73     256.15     200.96  
    Allowance for credit losses to total loans held-for-investment, net (6) 0.92     0.85     0.87     0.92     0.85  
                                 

    (1)  Annualized where appropriate.
    (2)  The efficiency ratio represents non-interest expense divided by the sum of net interest income and non-interest income.
    (3)  Non-performing loans consist of non-accruing loans and loans 90 days or more past due and still accruing (excluding PCD loans), and are included in total loans held-for-investment, net.
    (4)  Includes originated loans held-for-investment, PCD loans, acquired loans and loans held-for-sale.
    (5)  Excludes loans held-for-sale.
    (6)  Includes originated loans held-for-investment, PCD loans, and acquired loans.

     
    NORTHFIELD BANCORP, INC.
    CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
    (Dollars in thousands, except share and per share amounts) (unaudited)
     
      June 30, 2025   March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024
    ASSETS:          
    Cash and due from banks $ 11,985     $ 12,523     $ 13,043  
    Interest-bearing deposits in other financial institutions   85,652       89,139       154,701  
    Total cash and cash equivalents   97,637       101,662       167,744  
    Trading securities   14,052       13,003       13,884  
    Debt securities available-for-sale, at estimated fair value   1,300,975       1,246,473       1,100,817  
    Debt securities held-to-maturity, at amortized cost   8,454       8,883       9,303  
    Equity securities   6,278       10,855       14,261  
    Loans held-for-sale   —       4,897       4,897  
    Loans held-for-investment, net   3,920,613       3,991,529       4,022,224  
    Allowance for credit losses   (36,120 )     (34,921 )     (35,183 )
    Net loans held-for-investment   3,884,493       3,956,608       3,987,041  
    Accrued interest receivable   19,241       19,648       19,078  
    Bank-owned life insurance   179,134       177,398       175,759  
    Federal Home Loan Bank of New York stock, at cost   43,664       38,350       35,894  
    Operating lease right-of-use assets   26,157       27,345       27,771  
    Premises and equipment, net   20,842       21,431       21,985  
    Goodwill   41,012       41,012       41,012  
    Other assets   37,352       42,435       46,932  
    Total assets $ 5,679,291     $ 5,710,000     $ 5,666,378  
               
    LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY:          
    LIABILITIES:          
    Deposits $ 3,986,187     $ 4,131,956     $ 4,138,477  
    Federal Home Loan Bank advances and other borrowings   831,920       709,159       666,402  
    Subordinated debentures, net of issuance costs   61,554       61,498       61,442  
    Lease liabilities   30,286       31,630       32,209  
    Advance payments by borrowers for taxes and insurance   25,287       29,270       24,057  
    Accrued expenses and other liabilities   33,783       35,338       39,095  
    Total liabilities   4,969,017       4,998,851       4,961,682  
               
    STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY:          
    Total stockholders’ equity   710,274       711,149       704,696  
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity $ 5,679,291     $ 5,710,000     $ 5,666,378  
               
    Total shares outstanding   41,819,988       42,676,274       42,903,598  
    Tangible book value per share(1) $ 16.00     $ 15.70     $ 15.46  
                           

    (1)  Tangible book value per share is calculated based on total stockholders’ equity, excluding intangible assets (goodwill and core deposit intangibles), divided by total shares outstanding as of the balance sheet date. Core deposit intangibles were $45, $57 and $69 at June 30, 2025, March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively, and are included in other assets.

     
    NORTHFIELD BANCORP, INC.
    CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
    (Dollars in thousands, except share and per share amounts) (unaudited)
     
      For the Three Months Ended   For the Six Months Ended
      June 30,   March 31,   June 30,
        2025       2024       2025       2025     2024  
    Interest income:                  
    Loans $ 46,661     $ 45,967     $ 45,283     $ 91,944   $ 92,014  
    Mortgage-backed securities   13,888       7,355       12,009       25,897     11,753  
    Other securities   442       3,506       797       1,239     7,347  
    Federal Home Loan Bank of New York dividends   728       935       862       1,590     1,905  
    Deposits in other financial institutions   706       2,457       1,141       1,847     5,849  
    Total interest income   62,425       60,220       60,092       122,517     118,868  
    Interest expense:                  
    Deposits   20,285       20,664       21,191       41,476     39,937  
    Borrowings   6,916       10,041       6,291       13,207     20,704  
    Subordinated debt   828       828       819       1,647     1,656  
    Total interest expense   28,029       31,533       28,301       56,330     62,297  
    Net interest income   34,396       28,687       31,791       66,187     56,571  
    Provision/(benefit) for credit losses   2,086       (618 )     2,582       4,668     (203 )
    Net interest income after provision/(benefit) for credit losses   32,310       29,305       29,209       61,519     56,774  
    Non-interest income:                  
    Fees and service charges for customer services   1,685       1,570       1,620       3,305     3,185  
    Income on bank-owned life insurance   1,736       976       1,639       3,375     1,940  
    Gains on available-for-sale debt securities, net   —       1       —       —     1  
    Gains/(losses) on trading securities, net   1,008       188       (299 )     709     887  
    Gain on sale of loans   —       51       —       —     51  
    Other   97       73       62       159     176  
    Total non-interest income   4,526       2,859       3,022       7,548     6,240  
    Non-interest expense:                  
    Compensation and employee benefits   13,728       13,388       11,775       25,503     26,153  
    Occupancy   3,328       3,222       3,533       6,861     6,775  
    Furniture and equipment   411       477       414       825     961  
    Data processing   2,402       2,177       2,122       4,524     4,324  
    Professional fees   903       681       1,072       1,975     1,490  
    Advertising   294       482       250       544     1,000  
    Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insurance   618       649       617       1,235     1,237  
    Credit (benefit) loss expense for off-balance sheet exposures   (53 )     103       103       50     186  
    Other   1,339       1,814       1,549       2,888     3,199  
    Total non-interest expense   22,970       22,993       21,435       44,405     45,325  
    Income before income tax expense   13,866       9,171       10,796       24,662     17,689  
    Income tax expense   4,295       3,214       2,920       7,215     5,518  
    Net income $ 9,571     $ 5,957     $ 7,876     $ 17,447   $ 12,171  
    Net income per common share:                  
    Basic $ 0.24     $ 0.14     $ 0.19       0.43     0.29  
    Diluted $ 0.24     $ 0.14     $ 0.19       0.43     0.29  
    Basic average shares outstanding   40,183,613       41,999,541       40,864,529       40,522,193     42,181,306  
    Diluted average shares outstanding   40,204,833       42,002,650       40,922,829       40,561,953     42,203,715  
     
    NORTHFIELD BANCORP, INC.
    ANALYSIS OF NET INTEREST INCOME
    (Dollars in thousands) (unaudited)
     
      For the Three Months Ended
      June 30, 2025   March 31, 2025   June 30, 2024
      Average
    Outstanding
    Balance    		   Interest   Average
    Yield/
    Rate (1)    		   Average
    Outstanding
    Balance    		   Interest   Average
    Yield/
    Rate (1)    		   Average
    Outstanding
    Balance    		   Interest   Average
    Yield/
    Rate (1)
    Interest-earning assets:                                  
    Loans (2) $ 3,944,822   $ 46,661   4.74 %   $ 4,007,266   $ 45,283   4.58 %   $ 4,128,105   $ 45,967   4.48 %
    Mortgage-backed securities (3)   1,246,843     13,888   4.47       1,132,715     12,009   4.30       824,498     7,355   3.59  
    Other securities (3)   56,559     442   3.13       118,082     797   2.74       333,855     3,506   4.22  
    Federal Home Loan Bank of New York stock   37,225     728   7.84       36,929     862   9.47       38,707     935   9.72  
    Interest-earning deposits in financial institutions   79,463     706   3.56       118,983     1,141   3.89       191,470     2,457   5.16  
    Total interest-earning assets   5,364,912     62,425   4.67       5,413,975     60,092   4.50       5,516,635     60,220   4.39  
    Non-interest-earning assets   280,107             277,586             265,702        
    Total assets $ 5,645,019           $ 5,691,561           $ 5,782,337        
                                       
    Interest-bearing liabilities:                                  
    Savings, NOW, and money market accounts $ 2,491,340   $ 12,227   1.97 %   $ 2,502,664   $ 12,148   1.97 %   $ 2,490,372   $ 13,183   2.13 %
    Certificates of deposit   867,268     8,058   3.73       923,713     9,043   3.97       701,272     7,481   4.29  
    Total interest-bearing deposits   3,358,608     20,285   2.42       3,426,377     21,191   2.51       3,191,644     20,664   2.60  
    Borrowed funds   696,874     6,916   3.98       695,281     6,291   3.67       1,041,035     10,041   3.88  
    Subordinated debt   61,517     828   5.40       61,461     819   5.40       61,294     828   5.43  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities   4,116,999     28,029   2.73       4,183,119     28,301   2.74       4,293,973     31,533   2.95  
    Non-interest bearing deposits   723,693             706,217             691,384        
    Accrued expenses and other liabilities   95,047             94,819             103,082        
    Total liabilities   4,935,739             4,984,155             5,088,439        
    Stockholders’ equity   709,280             707,406             693,898        
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity $ 5,645,019           $ 5,691,561           $ 5,782,337        
                                       
    Net interest income     $ 34,396           $ 31,791           $ 28,687    
    Net interest rate spread (4)         1.94 %           1.76 %           1.44 %
    Net interest-earning assets (5) $ 1,247,913           $ 1,230,856           $ 1,222,662        
    Net interest margin (6)         2.57 %           2.38 %           2.09 %
    Average interest-earning assets to interest-bearing liabilities         130.31 %           129.42 %           128.47 %

    (1)  Average yields and rates are annualized.
    (2)  Includes non-accruing loans.
    (3)  Securities available-for-sale and other securities are reported at amortized cost.
    (4)  Net interest rate spread represents the difference between the weighted average yield on interest-earning assets and the weighted average cost of interest-bearing liabilities.
    (5)  Net interest-earning assets represent total interest-earning assets less total interest-bearing liabilities.
    (6)  Net interest margin represents net interest income divided by average total interest-earning assets.

       
      For the Six Months Ended
      June 30, 2025   June 30, 2024
      Average
    Outstanding
    Balance    		   Interest   Average
    Yield/
    Rate (1)    		   Average
    Outstanding
    Balance    		   Interest   Average
    Yield/
    Rate (1)
    Interest-earning assets:                      
    Loans (2) $ 3,975,872   $ 91,944   4.66 %   $ 4,151,387   $ 92,014   4.46 %
    Mortgage-backed securities (3)   1,190,095     25,897   4.39       736,654     11,753   3.21  
    Other securities (3)   87,150     1,239   2.87       362,917     7,347   4.07  
    Federal Home Loan Bank of New York stock   37,078     1,590   8.65       39,153     1,905   9.78  
    Interest-earning deposits in financial institutions   99,114     1,847   3.76       227,177     5,849   5.18  
    Total interest-earning assets   5,389,309     122,517   4.58       5,517,288     118,868   4.33  
    Non-interest-earning assets   278,852             266,065        
    Total assets $ 5,668,161           $ 5,783,353        
                           
    Interest-bearing liabilities:                      
    Savings, NOW, and money market accounts $ 2,496,970   $ 24,375   1.97 %   $ 2,477,334   $ 25,514   2.07 %
    Certificates of deposit   895,335     17,101   3.85       677,800     14,423   4.28  
    Total interest-bearing deposits   3,392,305     41,476   2.47       3,155,134     39,937   2.55  
    Borrowed funds   696,082     13,207   3.83       1,074,957     20,704   3.87  
    Subordinated debt   61,489     1,647   5.40       61,266     1,656   5.44  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities $ 4,149,876     56,330   2.74     $ 4,291,357     62,297   2.92  
    Non-interest bearing deposits   715,003             695,512        
    Accrued expenses and other liabilities   94,934             101,339        
    Total liabilities   4,959,813             5,088,208        
    Stockholders’ equity   708,348             695,145        
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity $ 5,668,161           $ 5,783,353        
                           
    Net interest income     $ 66,187           $ 56,571    
    Net interest rate spread (4)         1.84 %           1.41 %
    Net interest-earning assets (5) $ 1,239,433           $ 1,225,931        
    Net interest margin (6)         2.48 %           2.06 %
    Average interest-earning assets to interest-bearing liabilities         129.87 %           128.57 %
                           

    (1)  Average yields and rates are annualized.
    (2)  Includes non-accruing loans.
    (3)  Securities available-for-sale and other securities are reported at amortized cost.
    (4)  Net interest rate spread represents the difference between the weighted average yield on interest-earning assets and the weighted average cost of interest-bearing liabilities.
    (5)  Net interest-earning assets represent total interest-earning assets less total interest-bearing liabilities.
    (6)  Net interest margin represents net interest income divided by average total interest-earning assets.

    Company Contact:
    William R. Jacobs
    Chief Financial Officer
    Tel: (732) 499-7200 ext. 2519

    The MIL Network –