The Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, today issued the following statement on the National Day of Remembrance of the Quebec City Mosque Attack and Action against Islamophobia:
“On January 29, 2017, a gunman opened fire at the Centre culturel islamique de Québec in Sainte-Foy. Six Canadians died and 19 others were wounded. Today, we remember the victims of this senseless act of hate.
“Ibrahima Barry, Mamadou Tanou Barry, Khaled Belkacemi, Abdelkrim Hassane, Azzeddine Soufiane, and Aboubaker Thabti were proud Muslims, Quebeckers, and Canadians. They were murdered because of their faith. Our thoughts are with the communities of Quebec City, as well as the brave first responders who risked their lives to help others in the wake of this tragedy. We stand in solidarity with Muslim communities in Canada and around the world to fight the hate that led to this attack. We are also not immune to its resurgence, especially as we see the rise in Islamophobia and hate across our communities.
“We’re taking action. We appointed Canada’s first Special Representative on Combatting Islamophobia, Amira Elghawaby, to support our efforts to combat Islamophobia. We have renewed Canada’s Anti-Racism Strategy to ensure diverse voices shape federal policies, programs, and services. We invested in the Canada Community Security Program to increase security at places of worship and community centres.
“To protect communities, we passed the toughest gun control measures in over 40 years. With the measures announced last month, we’ve now banned more than 2,400 makes and models of assault-style firearms and their variants. We expanded background checks and prohibited the sale, purchase, and transfer of handguns in Canada. We also introduced ‘red flag’ laws, which are already in force, allowing anyone to apply to the court to remove firearms from individuals who may pose a risk to themselves or others.
“Today, we remember those whose lives were tragically taken at the Centre culturel islamique de Québec and we reaffirm our commitment to standing with Muslim communities in Canada in the face of racism, hate, and discrimination. Together, we will continue to build a safe, welcoming, and prosperous country for everyone.”
NASHUA, N.H., Jan. 29, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Accounting firm leaders, staff and SMB finance professionals will gather en masse in Nashville, TN for RightNOW 2025. The annual event, hosted by Rightworks, the only intelligent cloud services provider purpose-built for accounting firms and professionals, will bring together some of the brightest minds in accounting on May 19, 2025. The two-day conference will feature top-tier influencer keynotes, engaging breakout sessions on security, generative AI integration and building a modern firm, and offer a networking forum for attendees to tackle the profession’s persisting challenges head-on.
“The accounting profession is at a critical turning point where modernization is not optional. Firms need to uplevel their businesses with the technical innovations and strategies that enhance client service and drive greater efficiency in their everyday business,” said Joel Hughes, CEO of Rightworks. “We are excited to gather professionals at all stages of growth so they can walk away with a strategic action plan that will make an immediate impact on their business in the second half of the year and beyond.”
Renowned entrepreneurs and CEOs Gary Vaynerchuk and Josh Linkner to deliver opening keynotes
RightNOW 2025 will kick off each day with keynotes from major industry trailblazers exploring harnessing the power of generative AI, creating powerful brands and strengthening the workplace. Day one features a fireside chat with Gary Vaynerchuk, CEO, author, serial entrepreneur and chairman of VaynerX. Day two begins with Josh Linkner, serial entrepreneur, New York Times bestselling author and venture capital investor.
Following the keynotes is an exceptional lineup of breakout sessions, including:
The future of the accounting profession: Navigating emerging challenges and opportunities for firms
Buying & selling accounting firms: Insider tips from a broker, banker and lawyer
The nuts and bolts of AI: A workshop for practical application
Think like a hacker: How to protect yourself, your family and your firm from being breached
Late night lounge: Evening on AI
Cultivating credibility: The path to becoming a trusted advisor
Key tactics for successfully leading through change
Roundtable: Top trends and tactics you need to know about
Unpacking NPAG’s accounting talent strategy report: A plan to overcome the talent shortage
Why culture matters and how to build one that empowers
Great job! Building a great place to work
Purposely invest in yourself through lifelong learning
Getting strategic with AI
Staying compliant and secure in the cloud
Innovation station
Early Bird registration ends soon
RightNOW 2025 will take place May 19-21, 2025, at Gaylord Opryland Resort & Convention Center in Nashville, Tennessee. Early access pricing is available through January 31. Attendees are eligible to receive up to 14 Continuing Professional Education (CPE) credits. Visit the RightNOW page for more information.
About Rightworks Rightworks enables accounting firms and businesses to significantly simplify operations and expand their value to clients via our award-winning intelligent cloud and learning resources. This is possible with Rightworks OneSpace, the only secure cloud environment purpose-built for the accounting and tax profession, and Rightworks Academy, the premier community for firm optimization, growth and professional development. The Academy offers access to thought leadership, events, peer communities and extensive learning resources. Founded in 2002, we’ve grown to serve over 10,000 accounting firms in the US—from single practitioners to Top 10 firms. For more information, please visit rightworks.com or follow us on LinkedIn, Facebook and Instagram.
Image asset:
A photo accompanying this announcement is available at
The Aurora, Ill.,, Fire Department had help from the IAM this year, delivering toys to deserving children around Aurora, Il. As part of its annual toy drive, firefighters collect toys around the holidays and deliver them to homes, surprising many deserving children.
Every year, firefighters receive donated toys from several individuals and organizations, including the Aurora-based IAM Local 1202 and IAM District 8. In the days before Christmas, Santa makes his deliveries with firefighters in a firetruck.
“This is what the holiday season is all about,” said IAM Midwest Territory General Vice President SamCicinelli. “The true spirit of the holidays is in giving back, and it’s incredible to see so many people come together to make a difference for local families.”
“We’re proud to partner with Local 1202 in Aurora for our annual toy drive,” said IAM District 8 Directing Business Representative Ryan Kelly. “This year, we gathered thousands of dollars worth of toys from 17 of our District 8-affiliated locals across the state, bringing joy to many local families. My sincere thanks go out to all the volunteers, as well as District 8 staff for their help in making this the huge success it was.”
“I’m extremely proud of the efforts of our membership,” said IAM Local 1202 President Dave Dady. “I’m also proud of the efforts of our brothers and sisters from across the IAM Locals in District 8 whose efforts ensured our success.”
This year, IAM Local 1202 was also featured on thefront pageof Labor News for their efforts.
Asylum seekers wait at Catholic Charities in McAllen, Texas, for humanitarian aid on Jan. 18, 2025. Associated Press/Eric Gay
“Animals,” “aliens” and “people with bad genes” – President Donald Trump and his supporters often use this kind of dehumanizing language to describe immigrants.
In the 2024 presidential debate between Trump and Democratic candidate Kamala Harris, Trump falsely referred to Haitian refugees in Springfield, Ohio, as “eating the pets of the people that live there.” And in his Jan. 20, 2025, inaugural address, Trump spoke of “dangerous criminals, many from prisons and mental institutions,” who have illegally entered the U.S. “from all over the world.”
Using hateful, polarizing language to gain a political advantage or make an argument against a group of people, like immigrants, is not unique to the U.S.
The use of this language is associated with populist shifts in many parts of the world.
In the first few days of the new Trump administration, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers began raids to detain immigrants living in the U.S. illegally and increased their number of arrests and deportations of immigrants, including those without violent criminal records.
Tom Homan, the U.S. border czar, has said that the government’s mass immigration deportation plans – which he said could include raids on schools, churches and other places previously considered havens – is “all for the good of this nation.”
My hate speech research shows that, as the world has seen to its horror again and again, words that slander and strip people of their voices and humanity are often a first step toward discriminatory and violent policies. At its most extreme, speaking of people as dirty and polluting and saying they lack humanity makes it easier to kill them.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents handcuff a detained immigrant in Maryland on Jan. 25, 2025. Associated Press/Alex Brandon
Echoes from the fascist past
There is nothing new about the hateful political rhetoric that has become common today.
In the lead-up to and during World War II, fascist leaders in Europe targeted Jews, Roma, gay people and other groups as sources of “social pollution,” as beyond being human, while describing themselves as noble and decent, embodying a pure, uncorrupted nation.
In 1920, well before the German Nazi Party came to power in 1933, its platform declared that “Only someone of German blood, regardless of faith, can be a citizen.”
Viktor Klemperer, a literary scholar who was a close observer of Nazism, wrote in a diary published posthumously in 1995 that the Third Reich’s demonizing language against Jews and other marginalized groups helped create its culture and justify its mass killings. Nazis consequently assumed the mantle of liberators as they killed those whom they saw as corrupting the “pure race,” in accordance with ideas of “racial hygiene.”
The Nazis’ hateful language was not limited to Europe. Fritz Kuhn, a German Nazi activist, served in the late 1930s and early 1940s as leader of the German American Bund, an organization of ethnic Germans and Nazi sympathizers living in the U.S. He addressed a Nazi rally at Madison Square Garden in New York City in 1939.
Kuhn said during his speech that American citizens with American ideals are “determined to protect ourselves, our homes, our wives and children against the slimy conspirators who would change this glorious republic into the inferno of a Bolshevik paradise.”
The U.S. government stripped Kuhn of his U.S. citizenship in 1943 and deported him to Germany in 1945 because of his pro-Nazi allegiance.
In 2018, Matteo Salvini, then the deputy prime minister who now holds the same position, denounced the Roma people, an ethnic minority. He called for their removal through a “mass cleansing street by street, piazza by piazza, neighborhood by neighborhood.”
Salvini has directed his most virulent language, however, toward the tens of thousands of migrants and asylum seekers, mostly from Africa, who attempt to reach Italy via the Mediterranean Sea.
Salvini, perhaps more than any other populist leader in the world, has turned his hateful language and use of misinformation into action. Italian authorities under Salvini’s direction have detained ships working to help rescue migrants who are in danger at sea, preventing them from carrying out those rescues.
In September 2024, an Italian prosecutor requested a six-year jail term for Salvini, accusing him of kidnapping 147 migrants by preventing them from landing at a port in Italy for several weeks.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt speaks during a press briefing on Jan. 28, 2025, alongside an image of an alleged criminal detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
What to expect
We can’t be certain at this point what Trump’s and his supporters’ hateful language against immigrants, minorities and political opponents will yield.
Judging by Italy’s example and other instances, it’s possible that laws will be broken in implementing Trump’s immigration and asylum policies.
A federal judge temporarily halted Trump’s Jan. 20 executive order that told federal agencies to not process identification documents for babies born to parents who are living in the country illegally, among other scenarios.
It’s not clear how these policies will continue to unfold. What is clear is that words of hate have been used in many times and places as a justification for illegal arrests and, in some cases, as a prelude to state-sanctioned mass violence.
Ronald Niezen does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Assistant professor Frank Cackowski, left, and researcher Steven Zielske at Wayne State University in Detroit became suspicious of a paper on cancer research that was eventually retracted.Amy Sacka, CC BY-ND
Over the past decade, furtive commercial entities around the world have industrialized the production, sale and dissemination of bogus scholarly research, undermining the literature that everyone from doctors to engineers rely on to make decisions about human lives.
It is exceedingly difficult to get a handle on exactly how big the problem is. Around 55,000 scholarly papers have been retracted to date, for a variety of reasons, but scientists and companies who screen the scientific literature for telltale signs of fraud estimate that there are many more fake papers circulating – possibly as many as several hundred thousand. This fake research can confound legitimate researchers who must wade through dense equations, evidence, images and methodologies only to find that they were made up.
Even when the bogus papers are spotted – usually by amateur sleuths on their own time – academic journals are often slow to retract the papers, allowing the articles to taint what many consider sacrosanct: the vast global library of scholarly work that introduces new ideas, reviews other research and discusses findings.
These fake papers are slowing down research that has helped millions of people with lifesaving medicine and therapies from cancer to COVID-19. Analysts’ data shows that fields related to cancer and medicine are particularly hard hit, while areas like philosophy and art are less affected. Some scientists have abandoned their life’s work because they cannot keep pace given the number of fake papers they must bat down.
The problem reflects a worldwide commodification of science. Universities, and their research funders, have long used regular publication in academic journals as requirements for promotions and job security, spawning the mantra “publish or perish.”
But now, fraudsters have infiltrated the academic publishing industry to prioritize profits over scholarship. Equipped with technological prowess, agility and vast networks of corrupt researchers, they are churning out papers on everything from obscure genes to artificial intelligence in medicine.
These papers are absorbed into the worldwide library of research faster than they can be weeded out. About 119,000 scholarly journal articles and conference papers are published globally every week, or more than 6 million a year. Publishers estimate that, at most journals, about 2% of the papers submitted – but not necessarily published – are likely fake, although this number can be much higher at some publications.
While no country is immune to this practice, it is particularly pronounced in emerging economies where resources to do bona fide science are limited – and where governments, eager to compete on a global scale, push particularly strong “publish or perish” incentives.
As a result, there is a bustling online underground economy for all things scholarly publishing. Authorship, citations, even academic journal editors, are up for sale. This fraud is so prevalent that it has its own name: paper mills, a phrase that harks back to “term-paper mills”, where students cheat by getting someone else to write a class paper for them.
The impact on publishers is profound. In high-profile cases, fake articles can hurt a journal’s bottom line. Important scientific indexes – databases of academic publications that many researchers rely on to do their work – may delist journals that publish too many compromised papers. There is growing criticism that legitimate publishers could do more to track and blacklist journals and authors who regularly publish fake papers that are sometimes little more than artificial intelligence-generated phrases strung together.
To better understand the scope, ramifications and potential solutions of this metastasizing assault on science, we – a contributing editor at Retraction Watch, a website that reports on retractions of scientific papers and related topics, and two computer scientists at France’s Université Toulouse III–Paul Sabatier and Université Grenoble Alpes who specialize in detecting bogus publications – spent six months investigating paper mills.
This included, by some of us at different times, trawling websites and social media posts, interviewing publishers, editors, research-integrity experts, scientists, doctors, sociologists and scientific sleuths engaged in the Sisyphean task of cleaning up the literature. It also involved, by some of us, screening scientific articles looking for signs of fakery.
What emerged is a deep-rooted crisis that has many researchers and policymakers calling for a new way for universities and many governments to evaluate and reward academics and health professionals across the globe.
Just as highly biased websites dressed up to look like objective reporting are gnawing away at evidence-based journalism and threatening elections, fake science is grinding down the knowledge base on which modern society rests.
As part of our work detecting these bogus publications, co-author Guillaume Cabanac developed the Problematic Paper Screener, which filters 130 million new and old scholarly papers every week looking for nine types of clues that a paper might be fake or contain errors. A key clue is a tortured phrase – an awkward wording generated by software that replaces common scientific terms with synonyms to avoid direct plagiarism from a legitimate paper.
Frank Cackowski at Detroit’s Wayne State University was confused.
The oncologist was studying a sequence of chemical reactions in cells to see if they could be a target for drugs against prostate cancer. A paper from 2018 from 2018 in the American Journal of Cancer Research piqued his interest when he read that a little-known molecule called SNHG1 might interact with the chemical reactions he was exploring. He and fellow Wayne State researcher Steven Zielske began a series of experiments to learn more about the link. Surprisingly, they found there wasn’t a link.
Meanwhile, Zielske had grown suspicious of the paper. Two graphs showing results for different cell lines were identical, he noticed, which “would be like pouring water into two glasses with your eyes closed and the levels coming out exactly the same.” Another graph and a table in the article also inexplicably contained identical data.
Zielske described his misgivings in an anonymous post in 2020 at PubPeer, an online forum where many scientists report potential research misconduct, and also contacted the journal’s editor. Shortly thereafter, the journal pulled the paper, citing “falsified materials and/or data.”
“Science is hard enough as it is if people are actually being genuine and trying to do real work,” says Cackowski, who also works at the Karmanos Cancer Institute in Michigan. “And it’s just really frustrating to waste your time based on somebody’s fraudulent publications.”
Wayne State scientists Frank Cackowski and Steven Zielske carried out experiments based on a paper they later found to contain false data. Amy Sacka, CC BY-ND
He worries that the bogus publications are slowing down “legitimate research that down the road is going to impact patient care and drug development.”
The two researchers eventually found that SNHG1 did appear to play a part in prostate cancer, though not in the way the suspect paper suggested. But it was a tough topic to study. Zielske combed through all the studies on SNHG1 and cancer – some 150 papers, nearly all from Chinese hospitals – and concluded that “a majority” of them looked fake. Some reported using experimental reagents known as primers that were “just gibberish,” for instance, or targeted a different gene than what the study said, according to Zielske. He contacted several of the journals, he said, but received little response. “I just stopped following up.”
The many questionable articles also made it harder to get funding, Zielske said. The first time he submitted a grant application to study SNHG1, it was rejected, with one reviewer saying “the field was crowded,” Zielske recalled. The following year, he explained in his application how most of the literature likely came from paper mills. He got the grant.
Today, Zielske said, he approaches new research differently than he used to: “You can’t just read an abstract and have any faith in it. I kind of assume everything’s wrong.”
Legitimate academic journals evaluate papers before they are published by having other researchers in the field carefully read them over. This peer review process is designed to stop flawed research from being disseminated, but is far from perfect.
Reviewers volunteer their time, typically assume research is real and so don’t look for signs of fraud. And some publishers may try to pick reviewers they deem more likely to accept papers, because rejecting a manuscript can mean losing out on thousands of dollars in publication fees.
“Even good, honest reviewers have become apathetic” because of “the volume of poor research coming through the system,” said Adam Day, who directs Clear Skies, a company in London that develops data-based methods to help spot falsified papers and academic journals. “Any editor can recount seeing reports where it’s obvious the reviewer hasn’t read the paper.”
With AI, they don’t have to: New research shows that many reviews are now written by ChatGPT and similar tools.
María de los Ángeles Oviedo-García, a professor of marketing at the University of Seville in Spain, spends her spare time hunting for suspect peer reviews from all areas of science, hundreds of which she has flagged on PubPeer. Some of these reviews are the length of a tweet, others ask authors to cite the reviewer’s work even if it has nothing to do with the science at hand, and many closely resemble other peer reviews for very different studies – evidence, in her eyes, of what she calls “review mills.”
PubPeer comment from María de los Ángeles Oviedo-García pointing out that a peer review report is very similar to two other reports. She also points out that authors and citations for all three are either anonymous or the same person – both hallmarks of fake papers. Screen capture by The Conversation, CC BY-ND
“One of the demanding fights for me is to keep faith in science,” says Oviedo-García, who tells her students to look up papers on PubPeer before relying on them too heavily. Her research has been slowed down, she adds, because she now feels compelled to look for peer review reports for studies she uses in her work. Often there aren’t any, because “very few journals publish those review reports,” Oviedo-García says.
An ‘absolutely huge’ problem
It is unclear when paper mills began to operate at scale. The earliest article retracted due to suspected involvement of such agencies was published in 2004, according to the Retraction Watch Database, which contains details about tens of thousands of retractions. (The database is operated by The Center for Scientific Integrity, the parent nonprofit of Retraction Watch.) Nor is it clear exactly how many low-quality, plagiarized or made-up articles paper mills have spawned.
But the number is likely to be significant and growing, experts say. One Russia-linked paper mill in Latvia, for instance, claims on its website to have published “more than 12,650 articles” since 2012.
An analysis of 53,000 papers submitted to six publishers – but not necessarily published – found the proportion of suspect papers ranged from 2% to 46% across journals. And the American publisher Wiley, which has retracted more than 11,300 compromised articles and closed 19 heavily affected journals in its erstwhile Hindawi division, recently said its new paper-mill detection tool flags up to 1 in 7 submissions.
Day, of Clear Skies, estimates that as many as 2% of the several million scientific works published in 2022 were milled. Some fields are more problematic than others. The number is closer to 3% in biology and medicine, and in some subfields, like cancer, it may be much larger, according to Day. Despite increased awareness today, “I do not see any significant change in the trend,” he said. With improved methods of detection, “any estimate I put out now will be higher.”
The paper-mill problem is “absolutely huge,” said Sabina Alam, director of Publishing Ethics and Integrity at Taylor & Francis, a major academic publisher. In 2019, none of the 175 ethics cases that editors escalated to her team was about paper mills, Alam said. Ethics cases include submissions and already published papers. In 2023, “we had almost 4,000 cases,” she said. “And half of those were paper mills.”
Jennifer Byrne, an Australian scientist who now heads up a research group to improve the reliability of medical research, submitted testimony for a hearing of the U.S. House of Representatives’ Committee on Science, Space, and Technology in July 2022. She noted that 700, or nearly 6%, of 12,000 cancer research papers screened had errors that could signal paper mill involvement. Byrne shuttered her cancer research lab in 2017 because the genes she had spent two decades researching and writing about became the target of an enormous number of fake papers. A rogue scientist fudging data is one thing, she said, but a paper mill could churn out dozens of fake studies in the time it took her team to publish a single legitimate one.
“The threat of paper mills to scientific publishing and integrity has no parallel over my 30-year scientific career …. In the field of human gene science alone, the number of potentially fraudulent articles could exceed 100,000 original papers,” she wrote to lawmakers, adding, “This estimate may seem shocking but is likely to be conservative.”
In one area of genetics research – the study of noncoding RNA in different types of cancer – “We’re talking about more than 50% of papers published are from mills,” Byrne said. “It’s like swimming in garbage.”
When retractions do happen, it is often thanks to the efforts of a small international community of amateur sleuths like Oviedo-García and those who post on PubPeer.
Jillian Goldfarb, an associate professor of chemical and biomolecular engineering at Cornell University and a former editor of the Elsevier journal Fuel, laments the publisher’s handling of the threat from paper mills.
“I was assessing upwards of 50 papers every day,” she said in an email interview. While she had technology to detect plagiarism, duplicate submissions and suspicious author changes, it was not enough. “It’s unreasonable to think that an editor – for whom this is not usually their full-time job – can catch these things reading 50 papers at a time. The time crunch, plus pressure from publishers to increase submission rates and citations and decrease review time, puts editors in an impossible situation.”
In October 2023, Goldfarb resigned from her position as editor of Fuel. In a LinkedIn post about her decision, she cited the company’s failure to move on dozens of potential paper-mill articles she had flagged; its hiring of a principal editor who reportedly “engaged in paper and citation milling”; and its proposal of candidates for editorial positions “with longer PubPeer profiles and more retractions than most people have articles on their CVs, and whose names appear as authors on papers-for-sale websites.”
“This tells me, our community, and the public, that they value article quantity and profit over science,” Goldfarb wrote.
In response to questions about Goldfarb’s resignation, an Elsevier spokesperson told The Conversation that it “takes all claims about research misconduct in our journals very seriously” and is investigating Goldfarb’s claims. The spokesperson added that Fuel’s editorial team has “been working to make other changes to the journal to benefit authors and readers.”
That’s not how it works, buddy
Business proposals had been piling up for years in the inbox of João de Deus Barreto Segundo, managing editor of six journals published by the Bahia School of Medicine and Public Health in Salvador, Brazil. Several came from suspect publishers on the prowl for new journals to add to their portfolios. Others came from academics suggesting fishy deals or offering bribes to publish their paper.
In one email from February 2024, an assistant professor of economics in Poland explained that he ran a company that worked with European universities. “Would you be interested in collaboration on the publication of scientific articles by scientists who collaborate with me?” Artur Borcuch inquired. “We will then discuss possible details and financial conditions.”
A university administrator in Iraq was more candid: “As an incentive, I am prepared to offer a grant of $500 for each accepted paper submitted to your esteemed journal,” wrote Ahmed Alkhayyat, head of the Islamic University Centre for Scientific Research, in Najaf, and manager of the school’s “world ranking.”
“That’s not how it works, buddy,” Barreto Segundo shot back.
In email to The Conversation, Borcuch denied any improper intent. “My role is to mediate in the technical and procedural aspects of publishing an article,” Borcuch said, adding that, when working with multiple scientists, he would “request a discount from the editorial office on their behalf.” Informed that the Brazilian publisher had no publication fees, Borcuch said a “mistake” had occurred because an “employee” sent the email for him “to different journals.”
Academic journals have different payment models. Many are subscription-based and don’t charge authors for publishing, but have hefty fees for reading articles. Libraries and universities also pay large sums for access.
A fast-growing open-access model – where anyone can read the paper – includes expensive publication fees levied on authors to make up for the loss of revenue in selling the articles. These payments are not meant to influence whether or not a manuscript is accepted.
The Bahia School of Medicine and Public Health, among others, doesn’t charge authors or readers, but Barreto Segundo’s employer is a small player in the scholarly publishing business, which brings in close to $30 billion a year on profit margins as high as 40%. Academic publishers make money largely from subscription fees from institutions like libraries and universities, individual payments to access paywalled articles, and open-access fees paid by authors to ensure their articles are free for anyone to read.
The industry is lucrative enough that it has attracted unscrupulous actors eager to find a way to siphon off some of that revenue.
Ahmed Torad, a lecturer at Kafr El Sheikh University in Egypt and editor-in-chief of the Egyptian Journal of Physiotherapy, asked for a 30% kickback for every article he passed along to the Brazilian publisher. “This commission will be calculated based on the publication fees generated by the manuscripts I submit,” Torad wrote, noting that he specialized “in connecting researchers and authors with suitable journals for publication.”
Apparently, he failed to notice that Bahia School of Medicine and Public Health doesn’t charge author fees.
Like Borcuch, Alkhayyat denied any improper intent. He said there had been a “misunderstanding” on the editor’s part, explaining that the payment he offered was meant to cover presumed article-processing charges. “Some journals ask for money. So this is normal,” Alkhayyat said.
Torad explained that he had sent his offer to source papers in exchange for a commission to some 280 journals, but had not forced anyone to accept the manuscripts. Some had balked at his proposition, he said, despite regularly charging authors thousands of dollars to publish. He suggested that the scientific community wasn’t comfortable admitting that scholarly publishing has become a business like any other, even if it’s “obvious to many scientists.”
The unwelcome advances all targeted one of the journals Barreto Segundo managed, The Journal of Physiotherapy Research, soon after it was indexed in Scopus, a database of abstracts and citations owned by the publisher Elsevier.
Along with Clarivate’s Web of Science, Scopus has become an important quality stamp for scholarly publications globally. Articles in indexed journals are money in the bank for their authors: They help secure jobs, promotions, funding and, in some countries, even trigger cash rewards. For academics or physicians in poorer countries, they can be a ticket to the global north.
Consider Egypt, a country plaguedbydubiousclinical trials. Universities there commonly pay employees large sums for international publications, with the amount depending on the journal’s impact factor. A similar incentive structure is hardwired into national regulations: To earn the rank of full professor, for example, candidates must have at least five publications in two years, according to Egypt’s Supreme Council of Universities. Studies in journals indexed in Scopus or Web of Science not only receive extra points, but they also are exempt from further scrutiny when applicants are evaluated. The higher a publication’s impact factor, the more points the studies get.
With such a focus on metrics, it has become common for Egyptian researchers to cut corners, according to a physician in Cairo who requested anonymity for fear of retaliation. Authorship is frequently gifted to colleagues who then return the favor later, or studies may be created out of whole cloth. Sometimes an existing legitimate paper is chosen from the literature, and key details such as the type of disease or surgery are then changed and the numbers slightly modified, the source explained.
It affects clinical guidelines and medical care, “so it’s a shame,” the physician said.
Ivermectin, a drug used to treat parasites in animals and humans, is a case in point. When some studies showed that it was effective against COVID-19, ivermectin was hailed as a “miracle drug” early in the pandemic. Prescriptions surged, and along with them calls to U.S. poison centers; one man spent nine days in the hospital after downing an injectable formulation of the drug that was meant for cattle, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. As it turned out, nearly all of the research that showed a positive effect on COVID-19 had indications of fakery, the BBC and others reported – including a now-withdrawn Egyptian study. With no apparent benefit, patients were left with just side effects.
“There’s a huge academic incentive and profit motive,” says Lisa Bero, a professor of medicine and public health at the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus and the senior research-integrity editor at the Cochrane Collaboration, an international nonprofit organization that produces evidence reviews about medical treatments. “I see it at every institution I’ve worked at.”
But in the global south, the publish-or-perish edict runs up against underdeveloped research infrastructures and education systems, leaving scientists in a bind. For a Ph.D., the Cairo physician who requested anonymity conducted an entire clinical trial single-handedly – from purchasing study medication to randomizing patients, collecting and analyzing data and paying article-processing fees. In wealthier nations, entire teams work on such studies, with the tab easily running into the hundreds of thousands of dollars.
“Research is quite challenging here,” the physician said. That’s why scientists “try to manipulate and find easier ways so they get the job done.”
Institutions, too, have gamed the system with an eye to international rankings. In 2011, the journal Science described how prolific researchers in the United States and Europe were offered hefty payments for listing Saudi universities as secondary affiliations on papers. And in 2023, the magazine, in collaboration with Retraction Watch, uncovered a massive self-citation ploy by a top-ranked dental school in India that forced undergraduate students to publish papers referencing faculty work.
The root – and solutions
Such unsavory schemes can be traced back to the introduction of performance-based metrics in academia, a development driven by the New Public Management movement that swept across the Western world in the 1980s, according to Canadian sociologist of science Yves Gingras of the Université du Québec à Montréal. When universities and public institutions adopted corporate management, scientific papers became “accounting units” used to evaluate and reward scientific productivity rather than “knowledge units” advancing our insight into the world around us, Gingras wrote.
This transformation led many researchers to compete on numbers instead of content, which made publication metrics poor measures of academic prowess. As Gingras has shown, the controversial French microbiologist Didier Raoult, who now has more than a dozen retractions to his name, has an h-index – a measure combining publication and citation numbers – that is twice as high as that of Albert Einstein – “proof that the index is absurd,” Gingras said.
Worse, a sort of scientific inflation, or “scientometric bubble,” has ensued, with each new publication representing an increasingly small increment in knowledge. “We publish more and more superficial papers, we publish papers that have to be corrected, and we push people to do fraud,” said Gingras.
In 2024, Landon Halloran, a geoscientist at the University of Neuchâtel, in Switzerland, received an unusual job application for an opening in his lab. A researcher with a Ph.D. from China had sent him his CV. At 31, the applicant had amassed 160 publications in Scopus-indexed journals, 62 of them in 2022 alone, the same year he obtained his doctorate. Although the applicant was not the only one “with a suspiciously high output,” according to Halloran, he stuck out. “My colleagues and I have never come across anything quite like it in the geosciences,” he said.
According to industry insiders and publishers, there is more awareness now of threats from paper mills and other bad actors. Some journals routinely check for image fraud. A bad AI-generated image showing up in a paper can either be a sign of a scientist taking an ill-advised shortcut, or a paper mill.
The Cochrane Collaboration has a policy excluding suspect studies from its analyses of medical evidence. The organization also has been developing a tool to help its reviewers spot problematic medical trials, just as publishers have begun to screen submissions and share data and technologies among themselves to combat fraud.
This image, generated by AI, is a visual gobbledygook of concepts around transporting and delivering drugs in the body. For instance, the upper left figure is a nonsensical mix of a syringe, an inhaler and pills. And the pH-sensitive carrier molecule on the lower left is huge, rivaling the size of the lungs. After scientist sleuths pointed out that the published image made no sense, the journal issued a correction. Screen capture by The Conversation, CC BY-ND This graphic is the corrected image that replaced the AI image above. In this case, according to the correction, the journal determined that the paper was legitimate but the scientists had used AI to generate the image describing it. Screen capture by The Conversation, CC BY-ND
“People are realizing like, wow, this is happening in my field, it’s happening in your field,” said the Cochrane Collaboration’s Bero”. “So we really need to get coordinated and, you know, develop a method and a plan overall for stamping these things out.”
What jolted Taylor & Francis into paying attention, according to Alam, the director of Publishing Ethics and Integrity, was a 2020 investigation of a Chinese paper mill by sleuth Elisabeth Bik and three of her peers who go by the pseudonyms Smut Clyde, Morty and Tiger BB8. With 76 compromised papers, the U.K.-based company’s Artificial Cells, Nanomedicine, and Biotechnology was the most affected journal identified in the probe.
“It opened up a minefield,” says Alam, who also co-chairs United2Act, a project launched in 2023 that brings together publishers, researchers and sleuths in the fight against paper mills. “It was the first time we realized that stock images essentially were being used to represent experiments.”
Taylor & Francis decided to audit the hundreds of articles in its portfolio that contained similar types of images. It doubled Alam’s team, which now has 14.5 positions dedicated to doing investigations, and also began monitoring submission rates. Paper mills, it seemed, weren’t picky customers.
“What they’re trying to do is find a gate, and if they get in, then they just start kind of slamming in the submissions,” Alam said. Seventy-six fake papers suddenly seemed like a drop in the ocean. At one Taylor & Francis journal, for instance, Alam’s team identified nearly 1,000 manuscripts that bore all the marks of coming from a mill, she said.
And in 2023, it rejected about 300 dodgy proposals for special issues. “We’ve blocked a hell of a lot from coming through,” Alam said.
Fraud checkers
A small industry of technology startups has sprung up to help publishers, researchers and institutions spot potential fraud. The website Argos, launched in September 2024 by Scitility, an alert service based in Sparks, Nevada, allows authors to check if new collaborators are trailed by retractions or misconduct concerns. It has flagged tens of thousands of “high-risk” papers, according to the journal Nature.
Fraud-checker tools sift through papers to point to those that should be manually checked and possibly rejected. solidcolours/iStock via Getty Images
The fraudsters have not been idle, either. In 2022, when Clear Skies released the Papermill Alarm, the first academic to inquire about the new tool was a paper miller, according to Day. The person wanted access so he could check his papers before firing them off to publishers, Day said. “Paper mills have proven to be adaptive and also quite quick off the mark.”
Given the ongoing arms race, Alam acknowledges that the fight against paper mills won’t be won as long as the booming demand for their products remains.
According to a Nature analysis, the retraction rate tripled from 2012 to 2022 to close to .02%, or around 1 in 5,000 papers. It then nearly doubled in 2023, in large part because of Wiley’s Hindawi debacle. Today’s commercial publishing is part of the problem, Byrne said. For one, cleaning up the literature is a vast and expensive undertaking with no direct financial upside. “Journals and publishers will never, at the moment, be able to correct the literature at the scale and in the timeliness that’s required to solve the paper-mill problem,” Byrne said. “Either we have to monetize corrections such that publishers are paid for their work, or forget the publishers and do it ourselves.”
But that still wouldn’t fix the fundamental bias built into for-profit publishing: Journals don’t get paid for rejecting papers. “We pay them for accepting papers,” said Bodo Stern, a former editor of the journal Cell and chief of Strategic Initiatives at Howard Hughes Medical Institute, a nonprofit research organization and major funder in Chevy Chase, Maryland. “I mean, what do you think journals are going to do? They’re going to accept papers.”
With more than 50,000 journals on the market, even if some are trying hard to get it right, bad papers that are shopped around long enough eventually find a home, Stern added. “That system cannot function as a quality-control mechanism,” he said. “We have so many journals that everything can get published.”
In Stern’s view, the way to go is to stop paying journals for accepting papers and begin looking at them as public utilities that serve a greater good. “We should pay for transparent and rigorous quality-control mechanisms,” he said.
Peer review, meanwhile, “should be recognized as a true scholarly product, just like the original article, because the authors of the article and the peer reviewers are using the same skills,” Stern said. By the same token, journals should make all peer-review reports publicly available, even for manuscripts they turn down. “When they do quality control, they can’t just reject the paper and then let it be published somewhere else,” Stern said. “That’s not a good service.”
Better measures
Stern isn’t the first scientist to bemoan the excessive focus on bibliometrics. “We need less research, better research, and research done for the right reasons,” wrote the late statistician Douglas G. Altman in a much-cited editorial from 1994. “Abandoning using the number of publications as a measure of ability would be a start.”
Despite the declaration, metrics remain in wide use today, and scientists say there is a new sense of urgency.
“We’re getting to the point where people really do feel they have to do something” because of the vast number of fake papers, said Richard Sever, assistant director of Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, in New York, and co-founder of the preprint servers bioRxiv and medRxiv.
Stern and his colleagues have tried to make improvements at their institution. Researchers who wish to renew their seven-year contract have long been required to write a short paragraph describing the importance of their major results. Since the end of 2023, they also have been asked to remove journal names from their applications.
That way, “you can never do what all reviewers do – I’ve done it – look at the bibliography and in just one second decide, ‘Oh, this person has been productive because they have published many papers and they’re published in the right journals,’” says Stern. “What matters is, did it really make a difference?”
Shifting the focus away from convenient performance metrics seems possible not just for wealthy private institutions like Howard Hughes Medical Institute, but also for large government funders. In Australia, for example, the National Health and Medical Research Council in 2022 launched the “top 10 in 10” policy, aiming, in part, to “value research quality rather than quantity of publications.”
Rather than providing their entire bibliography, the agency, which assesses thousands of grant applications every year, asked researchers to list no more than 10 publications from the past decade and explain the contribution each had made to science. According to an evaluation report from April, 2024 close to three-quarters of grant reviewers said the new policy allowed them to concentrate more on research quality than quantity. And more than half said it reduced the time they spent on each application.
Gingras, the Canadian sociologist, advocates giving scientists the time they need to produce work that matters, rather than a gushing stream of publications. He is a signatory to the Slow Science Manifesto: “Once you get slow science, I can predict that the number of corrigenda, the number of retractions, will go down,” he says.
At one point, Gingras was involved in evaluating a research organization whose mission was to improve workplace security. An employee presented his work. “He had a sentence I will never forget,” Gingras recalls. The employee began by saying, “‘You know, I’m proud of one thing: My h-index is zero.’ And it was brilliant.” The scientist had developed a technology that prevented fatal falls among construction workers. “He said, ‘That’s useful, and that’s my job.’ I said, ‘Bravo!’”
Labbé receives funding from the European Research Council.
He has also received funding from the French National Research Agency (ANR), and the U.S. Office of Research Integrity.
Labbé has been in touch with most of the major publishers and their integrity officers, offering pro-bono consulting regarding detection tools to various actors in the field including STM-Hub and Morressier.
Cabanac receives funding from the European Research Council (ERC) and the Institut Universitaire de France (IUF). He is the administrator of the Problematic Paper Screener, a public platform that uses metadata from Digital Science and PubPeer via no-cost agreements. Cabanac has been in touch with most of the major publishers and their integrity officers, offering pro bono consulting regarding detection tools to various actors in the field including ClearSkies, Morressier, River Valley, Signals, and STM.
Frederik Joelving does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Natural gas-fired electric power generation has increased in Pennsylvania since 2013 as the state has shifted toward natural gas as its main fuel source for electric power generation. In October 2024, natural gas-fired generation accounted for 57% of the electricity generated in Pennsylvania, more than twice the share in October 2013 (26%). Over the past decade, natural gas has become the primary fuel source for electricity generation in the state, surpassing coal-fired generation in 2016 on an annual basis and nuclear-powered generation in 2019. Natural gas-fired generation reached an all-time monthly peak in Pennsylvania of 15.3 million megawatthours (MWh) in July 2024, as hourly electricity demand peaked across multiple regions of the Lower 48 states due to widespread heatwaves.
From 2013 to 2023, fuel consumption for electricity generation in Pennsylvania shifted from mostly coal to natural gas. Pennsylvania sits on top of the Marcellus shale play within the Appalachian Basin where dry natural gas production has more than doubled in the past decade. Dry natural gas production in Pennsylvania increased from 8.9 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) in 2013 to 20.8 Bcf/d in 2023, as the cost of natural gas fell compared with other energy sources. In addition, power generators in the state made investments in new technologies that increased the efficiency of natural gas as a source of power generation such as combined-cycle gas turbines, which use heat from natural gas turbines to run steam turbines to generate power from both.
More power is now generated in Pennsylvania than is consumed, prompting generators to send surplus electricity to other states. In 2023, power companies in Pennsylvania sent more electricity outside state borders than companies in any other state in the country, moving 83.4 million MWh to neighboring states.
Rising natural gas consumption in the electric power sector was the primary driver of increased use in Pennsylvania over the past decade. In 2013, natural gas consumption for power generation averaged 1.0 Bcf/d. Natural gas use in the electric power sector more than doubled since then, reaching 2.6 Bcf/d in 2023, while use in the residential, commercial, and industrial sectors remained relatively stable. Total natural gas delivered to all consumers in Pennsylvania averaged 4.8 Bcf/d in 2024 through October, up from 2.6 Bcf/d during all of 2013.
Data source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Natural Gas Monthly Note: PA=Pennsylvania, FL=Florida, TX=Texas, LA=Louisiana, CA=California
Between 2013 and 2023, natural gas consumption in Pennsylvania increased by 64% (1.7 Bcf/d), the largest percentage increase among the top five natural gas consuming states in the United States in 2023. In 2013, Pennsylvania ranked as the seventh-largest consuming state of natural gas in the United States, behind Illinois, Florida, New York, Louisiana, California, and Texas; in 2019, Pennsylvania ranked as the fifth-largest consuming state and has remained at that rank since then. From 2013 to 2023, natural gas consumption increased in all of the top five consuming states except California, where natural gas as a share of power generation has decreased by 15% since 2013 as the state has increased its share of renewables in its electricity generation mix.
Principal contributors: Grace Wheaton, Andrew Iraola
N’DJAMENA –The World Meteorological Organization’s Systemic Observations Financing Facility (SOFF) and the United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) have launched a five-year project aiming to modernise Chad’s meteorological network, improve weather forecasts, and anticipate the consequences of climate events in Chad.
The US$ 6.98 million project, led by WFP in collaboration with Chad’s National Meteorological Agency (ANAM) with technical support from GeoSphere Austria, involves installing six new surface stations and four upper-air stations, while renovating 27 existing stations across the country. The project prioritizes national capacity-building to enhance synergies between development programmes and maximize the SOFF project’s impact.
“Strengthening ANAM’s capacities through the SOFF project aligns perfectly with the government’s vision and policies, providing users with high-quality forecasts to anticipate climate extremes and mitigate disaster risks affecting populations and natural resources” said Fatima Goukouni Weddeye, Minister of Transport, Civil Aviation, and National Meteorology.
Upgraded meteorological infrastructure will improve the anticipation and management of climate extremes like droughts and floods, while strengthening national capacities through sustainable data management.
“Collaborating along the meteorological value chain is key to leveraging weather and climate data” said Markus Repnik, Director of the SOFF Secretariat. “Closing Chad’s data gap significantly improves weather and climate forecasts for Chad, Africa, and the world, as forecasts beyond three days require global data, including from Chad. SOFF’s investments support Chad’s objectives of increasing climate resilience, protecting communities, and the agricultural sector”
Sarah Gordon-Gibson, WFP’s Country Director and Representative in Chad, noted, “The people of Chad are among the hardest hit by the current climate crisis and face some of the highest levels of food insecurity globally. Reliable meteorological data is essential to anticipate, alert, and respond to crises and their impact on people’s food security”.
The latest Cadre Harmonisé food security analysis indicates that over 2.4 million people in Chad will face food insecurity by 2025, potentially rising to 3.7 million during the June-August lean season. Food insecurity in Chad is primarily driven by conflicts and a decline in agricultural production, particularly due to recent floods in the south, the country’s breadbasket.
# # #
The United Nations World Food Programme is the world’s largest humanitarian organization saving lives in emergencies and using food assistance to build a pathway to peace, stability and prosperity for people recovering from conflict, disasters and the impact of climate change.
Follow us on X (formerly Twitter): @wfp_media @wfp_wafrica @wfp_chad
　　Let me now say a few words in English to welcome our friends from different parts of the world. Hello, Hong Kong! Hello, friends from different parts of the world! 　　 　　Welcome to the annual Hong Kong International Chinese New Year Night Parade, on this, the first fabulous day of the Chinese New Year – the Year of the Snake. 　　 　　There’s no better way, anywhere on earth, to welcome in the New Year than by following – and revelling in – Hong Kong’s magnificent Chinese New Year Night Parade. 　　 　　This year’s celebration is led by 55 performing groups and floats from 14 countries and regions. Here in the world city of Hong Kong, to dance, sing and perform, skip, juggle, cheerlead and otherwise amaze and delight you, on this most auspicious of days. 　　 　　And the Night Parade is just the start of our New Year’s festivities. Tomorrow night, a 23-minute fireworks display will light up our world-renowned Victoria Harbour. Our sky will be filled with auspicious symbols, as well as adorable pandas – showcasing Hong Kong’s giant panda family, now counting six and readying for their first full public appearance at the same time in mid-February. 　　 　　And, alongside the horses at Chinese New Year Raceday, in Sha Tin on January 31, you’ll want to catch the lions – and lion dancers – on show, part of a fun-filled day at the track. 　　 　　The Night Parade floats you see tonight, together with some of our performers, will find their way to Lam Tsuen, from tomorrow night, for the Hong Kong Well-wishing Festival. This year, the floats are on display there until February 13. 　　 　　Only in Hong Kong, the world’s East-meets-West centre for cultural exchange – and day-and-night entertainment. All around town, you’ll be greeted by the magnificent spectacle of our festivities, and the warm hospitality of the people of Hong Kong, as we share the joy of the New Year with all of you. 　　 　　I wish you all a happy, healthy and eventful Year of the Snake. Kung Hei Fat Choi! Thank you and enjoy the evening. 　　 (Cantonese/Putonghua)
San Diego, Calif., Jan. 29, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — California BanCorp (“us,” “we,” “our,” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: BCAL), the holding company for California Bank of Commerce, N.A. (the “Bank”) announces its consolidated financial results for the fourth quarter and full year of 2024.
The Company reported net income of $16.8 million, or $0.51 per diluted share, for the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to a net loss of $16.5 million, or $0.59 per diluted share for the third quarter of 2024, and net income of $4.4 million, or $0.24 per diluted share for the fourth quarter of 2023. The Company reported net income of $5.4 million, or $0.22 per diluted share, for the full year of 2024, compared to net income of $25.9 million, or $1.39 per diluted share for the full year of 2023.
“I’m pleased to report our strong fourth quarter earnings of $16.8 million, the result of a full quarter of combined operations after our July 31, 2024, merger close,” said David Rainer, Executive Chairman of the Company and Bank. “We continue to derisk our consolidated balance sheet and are making significant headway in reducing our exposure in the Sponsor Finance portfolio. Additionally, we are rapidly reducing our reliance on brokered deposits, which despite the reduction of the high-yielding Sponsor Finance product, has allowed us to maintain a consistent, strong net interest margin. We are focused on building tangible book value, which increased to $11.71 in the fourth quarter, up $0.43 from the prior quarter, and up $0.79 in the five months since the merger close. While we are pleased to report these strong financial results, we, along with all our fellow Southern California residents, have been through a very difficult period due to the recent wildfires and we are working with all our constituents to assist them in any way we can.”
“On behalf of the Company and the Bank, I want to express our condolences to all our neighbors, clients and employees that have been affected by the recent Southern California wildfires,” said Steven Shelton, CEO of the Company and the Bank. “You are in our thoughts and prayers and will remain so as we work to rebuild and recover going forward. Except for the one-day closure of one branch as a precautionary measure for the safety of our employees, I’m pleased to report there were no other disruptions to our operations and all other offices remained open. We are fortunate to report that the fires are expected to have a minimal impact on our loan portfolio, and we continue to focus on providing outstanding service to our combined client base throughout California, and on building shareholder value.”
Fourth Quarter 2024 Highlights
Net income of $16.8 million or $0.51 diluted earnings per share for the fourth quarter; adjusted net income (non-GAAP1) was $17.2 million or $0.53 per share for the fourth quarter.
Net interest margin of 4.61%, compared with 4.43% in the prior quarter; average total loan yield of 6.84% compared with 6.79% in the prior quarter.
Reversal of provision for credit losses of $3.8 million for the fourth quarter, compared with a provision for credit losses of $23.0 million for the prior quarter, of which $21.3 million was due to the day one provision for credit losses on non-purchased credit deteriorated (“non-PCD”) loans and unfunded loan commitments related to the merger with California BanCorp (the “Merger”).
Return on average assets of 1.60%, compared with (1.82)% in the prior quarter.
Return on average common equity of 13.21%, compared with (15.28)% in the prior quarter.
Efficiency ratio (non-GAAP1) of 57.4% compared with 98.9% in the prior quarter; excluding Merger related expenses the efficiency ratio was 55.9%, compared with 60.5% in the prior quarter.
Tangible book value per common share (“TBV”) (non-GAAP1) of $11.71 at December 31, 2024, up $0.43 from $11.28 at September 30, 2024.
Total assets of $4.03 billion at December 31, 2024, compared with $4.36 billion at September 30, 2024.
Total loans, including loans held for sale of $3.16 billion at December 31, 2024, compared with $3.23 billion at September 30, 2024.
Nonperforming assets to total assetsratio of 0.76% at December 31, 2024, compared with 0.68% at September 30, 2024.
Allowance for credit losses (“ACL”) was 1.71% of total loans held for investment at December 31, 2024; allowance for loan losses (“ALL”) was 1.61% of total loans held for investment at December 31, 2024.
Total deposits of $3.40 billion at December 31, 2024, decreased $342.2 million or 9.1% compared with $3.74 billion at September 30, 2024.
Noninterest-bearing demand deposits of $1.26 billion at December 31, 2024, a decrease of $111.3 million or 8.1% from September 30, 2024; noninterest bearing deposits represented 37.0% of total deposits, compared with $1.37 billion, or 36.6% of total deposits at September 30, 2024.
Total brokered deposits of $121.1 million, a decrease of $101.5 million from September 30, 2024.
Cost of deposits was 1.87%, compared with 2.09% in the prior quarter.
Cost of funds was 1.99%, compared with 2.19% in the prior quarter.
The Company’s preliminary capital exceeds minimums required to be “well-capitalized,” the highest regulatory capital category.
Full Year 2024 Highlights
Merger closed on July 31, 2024, whereby predecessor California BanCorp (“CALB”) merged with and into the Company and California Bank of Commerce merged with and into the Bank. CALB had total loans of $1.43 billion, total assets of $1.91 billion, and total deposits of $1.64 billion. The Merger created a bank holding company with approximately $4.25 billion in assets and 14 branches across California, with approximately 300 employees serving our communities. Total aggregate consideration paid for the Merger was approximately $216.6 million and resulted in approximately $74.7 million of preliminary goodwill, subject to adjustment in accordance with ASC 805.
Net income of $5.4 million, down $20.5 million, or 79.0% from the prior year largely due to the after-tax one-time day one provision for credit losses related to non-PCD loans and unfunded loan commitments of $15.0 million and merger related expenses of $12.0 million; adjusted net income (non-GAAP1) was $32.4 million or $1.32 per share for the year.
Diluted earnings per share of $0.22, down $1.17, or 84.2% from the prior year.
Total loan interest income increased to $160.0 million, up $46.0 million or 40.4% from the prior year largely due to the Merger.
Net interest margin of 4.28% for 2024, compared with 4.33% in the prior year; average loan yield was 6.55%, up from 5.94% in the prior year.
Efficiency ratio (non-GAAP1) of 76.6%, compared to 61.3% in the prior year; excluding merger related expenses the efficiency ratio was 63.8%, compared with 61.3% in the prior year.
Provision for credit losses of $21.7 million, of which $21.3 million was due to the day one provision for credit losses on non-PCD loans and unfunded loan commitments in connection with the Merger, compared to $915 thousand for the year ended December 31, 2023.
Total assets of $4.03 billion, up $1.7 billion or 70.8% from December 31, 2023, largely due to the Merger.
Total loans, including loans held for sale, increased to $3.16 billion, up $1.2 billion from December 31, 2023, largely due to the Merger, with the fair value of the acquired loans totaling $1.36 billion.
Total deposits of $3.40 billion, up $1.46 billion from December 31, 2023, largely due to the $1.64 billion of deposits acquired in the Merger.
Noninterest-bearing demand deposits were $1.26 billion, representing 37.0% of total deposits, compared to $675.1 million, or 34.7% of total deposits at December 31, 2023.
Cost of deposits was 2.01%, up from 1.37% in the prior year.
Tangible book value per common share (“TBV”) (non-GAAP1) of $11.71 at December 31, 2024, down $1.85 from December 31, 2023.
Fourth Quarter Operating Results
Net Income
Net income for the fourth quarter of 2024 was $16.8 million, or $0.51 per diluted share, compared with a net loss of $16.5 million, or a loss of $0.59 per diluted share in the third quarter of 2024. Our third quarter results were negatively impacted by a day one $15.0 million after-tax current expected credit losses (“CECL”)-related provision for credit losses on non-PCD loans and unfunded loan commitments related to the merger, or $0.54 loss per diluted share, and $10.6 million of after-tax merger expenses, or $0.38 loss per diluted share. Pre-tax, pre-provision income (non-GAAP1) for the fourth quarter was $19.4 million, an increase of $19.0 million from the prior quarter. Excluding the merger and related expenses, the adjusted pre-tax, pre-provision income (non-GAAP1) for the fourth quarter was $20.1 million, an increase of $5.0 million from the prior quarter. The net income and diluted earnings per share increases for all of the periods presented were largely driven by the Merger and the operating results since the closing date of the Merger.
Net Interest Income and Net Interest Margin
Net interest income for the fourth quarter of 2024 was $44.5 million, compared with $36.9 million in the prior quarter. The increase in net interest income was primarily due to an $8.4 million increase in total interest and dividend income, partially offset by an $832 thousand increase in total interest expense in the fourth quarter of 2024, as compared to the prior quarter. During the fourth quarter of 2024, loan interest income increased $7.3 million, of which $6.1 million was related to accretion income from the net purchase accounting discounts on acquired loans, total debt securities income increased $10 thousand, and interest and dividend income from other financial institutions increased $1.2 million. The increase in interest income was mainly due to reporting a full quarter of combined operations for the fourth quarter of 2024 and primarily driven by the mix of interest-earning assets added by the Merger and the impact of the accretion and amortization of fair value interest rate marks. Average total interest-earning assets increased $526.5 million in the fourth quarter of 2024, the result of a $401.3 million increase in average total loans, a $260.4 million increase in average deposits in other financial institutions and a $5.8 million increase in average restricted stock investments and other bank stock, partially offset by a $1.3 million decrease in average total debt securities and a $139.8 million decrease in average Fed funds sold/resale agreements. The increase in interest expense for the fourth quarter of 2024 was primarily due to a $466 thousand increase in interest expense on interest-bearing deposits, the result of a $217.9 million increase in average interest-bearing deposits, coupled with a $17.2 million increase in average subordinated debt, partially offset by a 22 basis point decrease in average interest-bearing deposit costs, and a $9 thousand decrease in interest expense on Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) borrowings, the result of a $611 thousand decrease in average FHLB borrowings in the fourth quarter of 2024.
Net interest margin for the fourth quarter of 2024 was 4.61%, compared with 4.43% in the prior quarter. The increase was primarily related to a 20 basis point decrease in the cost of funds, partially offset by a one basis point decrease in the total interest-earning assets yield. The yield on total average interest-earning assets in the fourth quarter of 2024 was 6.48%, compared with 6.49% in the prior quarter. The yield on average total loans in the fourth quarter of 2024 was 6.84%, an increase of five basis points from 6.79% in the prior quarter. Accretion income from the net purchase accounting discounts on acquired loans was $6.1 million, increasing the yield on average total loans by 76 basis points; the net amortization expense from the purchase accounting discounts on acquired subordinated debt and acquired time deposits premium increased the interest expense by $467 thousand, the combination of which increased the net interest margin by 58 basis points in the fourth quarter of 2024.
Cost of funds for the fourth quarter of 2024 was 1.99%, a decrease of 20 basis points from 2.19% in the prior quarter. The decrease was primarily driven by a 22 basis point decrease in the cost of average interest-bearing deposits, and an increase in average noninterest-bearing deposits, partially offset by an increase of 26 basis points in the cost of total borrowings, which was driven primarily by the amortization expense of $559 thousand from the purchase accounting discounts on acquired subordinated debt which increased the cost on total borrowing by 320 basis points. Average noninterest-bearing demand deposits increased $251.7 million to $1.28 billion and represented 36.3% of total average deposits for the fourth quarter of 2024, compared with $1.03 billion and 33.6%, respectively, in the prior quarter; average interest-bearing deposits increased $217.9 million to $2.26 billion during the fourth quarter of 2024. The total cost of deposits in the fourth quarter of 2024 was 1.87%, a decrease of 22 basis points from 2.09% in the prior quarter. The cost of total interest-bearing deposits decreased primarily due to the Company’s deposit repricing strategy and the ongoing pay off of high cost brokered deposits and California State certificates of deposit in the fourth quarter of 2024.
Average total borrowings increased $16.6 million to $69.4 million in the fourth quarter of 2024, primarily due to an increase of $17.2 million in average subordinated debt acquired in the Merger, partially offset by a decrease of $611 thousand in average FHLB borrowings during the fourth quarter of 2024. The average cost of total borrowings was 7.97% for the fourth quarter of 2024, up from 7.71% in the prior quarter.
(Reversal of) Provision for Credit Losses
The Company recorded a reversal of provision for credit losses of $3.8 million in the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to a provision for credit losses of $23.0 million in the prior quarter. The decrease was largely related to the third quarter provision for credit losses including the effects of the Merger, and the resulting one-time initial provision for credit losses on acquired non-PCD loans of $18.5 million and unfunded loan commitments of $2.7 million. Total net charge-offs were $154.0 thousand in the fourth quarter of 2024, which included $103 thousand from an acquired consumer solar loan portfolio and $51 thousand from a commercial real-estate loan. The provision for credit losses in the fourth quarter of 2024 included a $1.0 million reversal of provision for unfunded loan commitments related to the decrease in unfunded loan commitments during the fourth quarter of 2024, coupled with lower loss rates, offset by higher average funding rates used to estimate the allowance for credit losses on unfunded commitments. Total unfunded loan commitments decreased $108.6 million to $925.3 million at December 31, 2024, compared to $1.03 billion in unfunded loan commitments at September 30, 2024.
The reversal of provision for credit losses for loans held for investment in the fourth quarter of 2024 was $2.9 million, a decrease of $22.6 million for the fourth quarter of 2024 from a provision for credit losses of $19.7 million in the prior quarter. The decrease was driven primarily by the third quarter amount including the one-time initial provision for credit losses on acquired non-PCD loans and decreases in legacy special mention loans and loans held for investment. Additionally, qualitative factors, coupled with changes in the portfolio mix and in the reasonable and supportable forecast, primarily related to the economic outlook for California, which were partially offset by an increase in legacy substandard accruing loans, were factors related to the decrease in the provision for credit losses. The Company’s management continues to monitor macroeconomic variables related to increasing interest rates, inflation and the concerns of an economic downturn, and believes it has appropriately provisioned for the current environment.
Noninterest Income
The Company recorded noninterest income of $1.0 million in the fourth quarter of 2024, a decrease of $170 thousand compared to $1.2 million in the third quarter of 2024. The Company reported a loss on sale of loans of $1.1 million, related to the sale of certain Sponsor Finance loans, in the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to a gain on sale of loans of $8 thousand in the prior quarter. There was no gain on SBA 7A loan sales in the third and fourth quarters of 2024. Bank owned life insurance income of $823 thousand in the fourth quarter of 2024 increased $425 thousand from the prior quarter. Service charges and fees on deposit accounts of $911 thousand in the fourth quarter of 2024 decreased $225 thousand from the prior quarter, related to the one-time waiver of analysis charges for certain deposit accounts in light of the core system conversion. Other charges and fees income increased to $208 thousand in the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to a loss of $450 thousand in the prior quarter, primarily related to a $614 thousand valuation allowance on other real estate owned (“OREO”) due to a decline in the fair value of the underlying property in the third quarter of 2024. No comparable valuation allowance on OREO was recorded in the fourth quarter of 2024.
Noninterest Expense
Total noninterest expense for the fourth quarter of 2024 was $26.1 million, a decrease of $11.6 million from total noninterest expense of $37.7 million in the prior quarter, which was largely due to the decrease in merger related expenses.
Salaries and employee benefits increased $689 thousand during the quarter to $16.1 million. The increase in salaries and employee benefits was primarily related to the growth in headcount due to the Merger, partially offset by the third quarter amount including the one-time costs associated with non-continuing directors, executives and employees of $1.4 million. Merger and related expenses in connection with the Merger decreased $14.0 million during the quarter to $643 thousand. Data processing and communications of $2.0 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 increased by $424 thousand, due primarily to increases in transaction volume from both organic growth and the Merger. Intangible assets amortization of $1.1 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 increased by $373 thousand, due primarily to a full quarter of amortization of the core deposit intangible asset acquired in the Merger, compared with only two months of amortization of the asset in the prior quarter. Other expenses of $2.1 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 increased by $443 thousand, due primarily to higher loan related expenses, customer service related expenses, travel expenses and insurance expenses.
Efficiency ratio (non-GAAP1) for the fourth quarter of 2024 was 57.4%, compared to 98.9% in the prior quarter. Excluding the merger and related expenses of $643 thousand and $14.6 million, the efficiency ratio (non-GAAP1) for the fourth and third quarters of 2024 would have been 55.9% and 60.5%, respectively.
Income Tax
In the fourth quarter of 2024, the Company’s income tax expense was $6.5 million, compared with a $6.1 million income tax benefit in the third quarter of 2024. The effective rate was 27.9% for the fourth quarter of 2024 and 26.9% for the third quarter of 2024. The increase in the effective tax rate for the fourth quarter of 2024 was primarily attributable to the impact of the non-tax deductible portion of the merger expenses and the vesting and exercise of equity awards combined with changes in the Company’s stock price over time, partially offset by the impact of the tax on the excess executive compensation.
Balance Sheet
Assets
Total assets at December 31, 2024 were $4.03 billion, a decrease of $331.1 million or 7.6% from September 30, 2024. The decrease in total assets from the prior quarter was primarily related to a decrease in cash and cash equivalents of $226.3 million and a decrease in loans, including loans held for sale, of $77.1 million as compared to the prior quarter. These decreases primarily relate to the decreases in wholesale funding sources and the Sponsor Finance portfolio from loan sales and payoffs.
Loans
Total loans held for investment were $3.14 billion at December 31, 2024, a decrease of $60.5 million, compared to September 30, 2024, primarily the result of Sponsor Finance loans sales and loan payoffs in the amount of $90.8 million. During the fourth quarter of 2024, there were new originations of $128.5 million and net advances of $25.6 million, offset by loan sales and payoffs of $214.5 million, and the partial charge-off of loans in the amount of $154 thousand. Total loans secured by real estate decreased by $5.1 million, construction and land development loans decreased by $20.6 million, commercial real estate and other loans increased by $11.8 million, 1-4 family residential loans increased by $11.9 million and multifamily loans decreased by $8.1 million. Commercial and industrial loans decreased by $54.5 million, and consumer loans decreased by $1.0 million. The Company had $17.2 million in loans held for sale at December 31, 2024, compared to $33.7 million at September 30, 2024.
Deposits
Total deposits at December 31, 2024 were $3.40 billion, a decrease of $342.2 million from September 30, 2024. The decrease primarily consisted of $111.3 million noninterest-bearing demand deposits, $73.9 million interest-bearing non-maturity deposits, and $157.0 million time deposits. Noninterest-bearing demand deposits at December 31, 2024, were $1.26 billion, or 37.0% of total deposits, compared with $1.37 billion, or 36.6% of total deposits at September 30, 2024. At December 31, 2024, total interest-bearing deposits were $2.14 billion, compared to $2.37 billion at September 30, 2024. At December 31, 2024, total brokered time deposits were $121.1 million, compared to $222.6 million at September 30, 2024. The Company offers the Insured Cash Sweep (ICS) product, Certificate of Deposit Account Registry Service (CDARS), and Reich & Tang Deposit Solutions (R&T) network, all of which provide reciprocal deposit placement services to fully qualified large customer deposits for FDIC insurance among other participating banks. At December 31, 2024, total reciprocal deposits were $754.4 million, or 22.2% of total deposits at December 31, 2024, compared to $839.7 million , or 22.4% of total deposits at September 30, 2024.
Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) and Liquidity
At December 31, 2024 and September 30, 2024, the Company had no overnight FHLB borrowings. There were no outstanding Federal Reserve Discount Window borrowings at December 31, 2024 or September 30, 2024.
At December 31, 2024, the Company had available borrowing capacity from an FHLB secured line of credit of approximately $753.9 million and available borrowing capacity from the Federal Reserve Discount Window of approximately $318.5 million. The Company also had available borrowing capacity from four unsecured credit lines from correspondent banks of approximately $90.5 million at December 31, 2024, with no outstanding borrowings. Total available borrowing capacity was $1.16 billion at December 31, 2024. Additionally, the Company had unpledged liquid securities at fair value of approximately $129.4 million and cash and cash equivalents of $388.2 million at December 31, 2024.
AssetQuality
Total non-performing assets increased slightly to $30.6 million, or 0.76% of total assets at December 31, 2024, compared with $29.8 million, or 0.68% of total assets at September 30, 2024.
There were no loans downgraded to nonaccrual during the fourth quarter of 2024. Non-performing assets in the fourth quarter of 2024 included OREO, net of valuation allowance, of $4.1 million related to a multifamily building, the same balance as the prior quarter.
Total non-performing loans increased slightly to $26.5 million, or 0.85% of total loans held for investment at December 31, 2024, compared with $25.7 million, or 0.80% of total loans held for investment at September 30, 2024.
Special mention loans decreased by $24.1 million during the fourth quarter of 2024 to $69.3 million, including $25.5 million of non-PCD loans and $10.1 million of purchase credit deteriorated (“PCD”) loans, at December 31, 2024. The decrease in the special mention loans was due mostly to a $9.0 million payoff, $24.5 million in downgrades to substandard accruing loans and $8.4 million in upgrades to Pass loans, partially offset by $18.1 million in downgrades from Pass loans. Substandard loans increased by $13.6 million during the fourth quarter of 2024 to $117.9 million, including $11.0 million of non-PCD loans, $55.9 million PCD loans and $14.1 million nonaccrual PCD loans, at December 31, 2024. The increase in the substandard loans was due primarily to $29.8 million in downgrades and $2.9 million in net advances, partially offset by a $17.3 million in payoffs, $1.7 million in upgrades to Pass and $103 thousand in charge-offs.
The Company had $150 thousand in consumer solar loans that were over 90 days past due and still accruing interest at December 31, 2024, compared to $37 thousand in such delinquencies at September 30, 2024.
There were $12.2 million in loan delinquencies (30-89 days past due, excluding nonaccrual loans) at December 31, 2024, compared to $19.1 million in such loan delinquencies at September 30, 2024.
The allowance for credit losses, which is comprised of the allowance for loan losses (“ALL”) and reserve for unfunded loan commitments, totaled $53.6 million at December 31, 2024, compared to $57.6 million at September 30, 2024. The $4.0 million decrease in the allowance for credit losses included a $2.9 million and $968 thousand reversal of provision for credit losses for the loan portfolio and reserve for unfunded loan commitments, respectively, partially offset by total net charge-offs of $145 thousand for the quarter ended December 31, 2024.
The ALL was $50.5 million, or 1.61% of total loans held for investment at December 31, 2024, compared with $53.6 million, or 1.67% at September 30, 2024.
Capital
Tangible book value (non-GAAP1) per common share at December 31, 2024, was $11.71, compared with $11.28 at September 30, 2024. In the fourth quarter of 2024, tangible book value was primarily impacted by net income of $16.8 million for the fourth quarter, stock-based compensation expense, and an increase in net of tax unrealized losses on available-for-sale debt securities. Other comprehensive losses related to unrealized losses, net of taxes, on available-for-sale debt securities increased by $3.8 million to $6.6 million at December 31, 2024, from $2.9 million at September 30, 2024. The increase in the unrealized losses, net of taxes, on available-for-sale debt securities was attributable to non-credit related factors , including an increase in bond prices at the long end of the yield curve, even as the Federal Reserve decreased the Fed funds rate by 25 basis points in December 2024. Tangible common equity (non-GAAP1) as a percentage of total tangible assets (non-GAAP1) at December 31, 2024, increased to 9.69% from 8.58% in the prior quarter, and unrealized losses, net of taxes, on available-for-sale debt securities as a percentage of tangible common equity (non-GAAP1) at December 31, 2024 increased to 1.8% from 0.8% in the prior quarter.
The Company’s preliminary capital exceeds minimums required to be “well-capitalized” at December 31, 2024.
ABOUT CALIFORNIA BANCORP
California BanCorp (NASDAQ: BCAL) is a registered bank holding company headquartered in San Diego, California. California Bank of Commerce, N.A., a national banking association chartered under the laws of the United States (the “Bank”) and regulated by the Office of Comptroller of the Currency, is a wholly owned subsidiary of California BanCorp. Established in 2001 and headquartered in San Diego, California, the Bank offers a range of financial products and services to individuals, professionals, and small to medium-sized businesses through its 14 branch offices and four loan production offices serving Northern and Southern California. The Bank’s solutions-driven, relationship-based approach to banking provides accessibility to decision makers and enhances value through strong partnerships with its clients. Additional information is available at www.bankcbc.com.
In addition to historical information, this release includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements relate to expectations, beliefs, projections, future plans and strategies, anticipated events or trends and other matters that are not historical facts. Examples of forward-looking statements include, among others, statements regarding expectations, plans or objectives for future operations, products or services, loan recoveries, projections, expectations regarding the adequacy of reserves for credit losses and statements about the benefits of the Merger, as well as forecasts relating to financial and operating results or other measures of economic performance. Forward-looking statements reflect management’s current view about future events and involve risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ from those expressed in the forward-looking statement or historical results. Forward-looking statements can be identified by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts and often include the words or phrases such as “aim,” “can,” “may,” “could,” “predict,” “should,” “will,” “would,” “believe,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “expect,” “hope,” “intend,” “plan,” “potential,” “project,” “will likely result,” “continue,” “seek,” “shall,” “possible,” “projection,” “optimistic,” and “outlook,” and variations of these words and similar expressions.
Factors that could cause or contribute to results differing from those in or implied in the forward-looking statements include but are not limited to risk related to the Merger, including the risks that costs may be greater than anticipated, cost savings may be less than anticipated, and difficulties in retaining senior management, employees or customers, the impact of bank failures or other adverse developments at other banks on general investor sentiment regarding the stability and liquidity of banks, changes in real estate markets and valuations; the impact on financial markets from geopolitical conflicts; inflation, interest rate, market and monetary fluctuations and general economic conditions, either nationally or locally in the areas in which the Company conducts business; increases in competitive pressures among financial institutions and businesses offering similar products and services; general credit risks related to lending, including changes in the value of real estate or other collateral, the financial condition of borrowers, the effectiveness of our underwriting practices and the risk of fraud; higher than anticipated defaults in the Company’s loan portfolio; changes in management’s estimate of the adequacy of the allowance for credit losses or the factors the Company uses to determine the allowance for credit losses; changes in demand for loans and other products and services offered by the Company; the costs and outcomes of litigation; legislative or regulatory changes or changes in accounting principles, policies or guidelines and other risk factors discussed in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and other documents the Company may file with the SEC from time to time.
Additional information regarding these and other risks and uncertainties to which our business and future financial performance are subject is contained in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023, and other documents the Company files with the SEC from time to time.
Any forward-looking statement made in this release is based only on information currently available to management and speaks only as of the date on which it is made. The Company does not undertake, and specifically disclaims any obligation, to update any forward-looking statements to reflect occurrences or unanticipated events or circumstances after the date of such statements or to conform such forward-looking statements to actual results or to changes in its opinions or expectations, except as required by law.
California BanCorp and Subsidiary Financial Highlights (Unaudited)
At or for the Three Months Ended
At or for the Year Ended
December 31, 2024
September 30, 2024
December 31, 2023
December 31, 2024
December 31, 2023
($ in thousands except share and per share data)
EARNINGS
Net interest income
$
44,541
$
36,942
$
22,559
$
122,984
$
94,138
(Reversal of) provision for credit losses
$
(3,835
)
$
22,963
$
824
$
21,690
$
915
Noninterest income (expense)
$
1,004
$
1,174
$
(102
)
$
4,760
$
3,379
Noninterest expense
$
26,125
$
37,680
$
15,339
$
97,791
$
59,746
Income tax expense (benefit)
$
6,483
$
(6,063
)
$
1,882
$
2,830
$
10,946
Net income (loss)
$
16,772
$
(16,464
)
$
4,412
$
5,433
$
25,910
Pre-tax pre-provision income (1)
$
19,420
$
436
$
7,118
$
29,953
$
37,771
Adjusted pre-tax pre-provision income (1)
$
20,063
$
15,041
$
7,118
$
46,241
$
37,771
Diluted earnings (loss) per share
$
0.51
$
(0.59
)
$
0.24
$
0.22
$
1.39
Shares outstanding at period end
32,265,935
32,142,427
18,369,115
32,265,935
18,369,115
PERFORMANCE RATIOS
Return on average assets
1.60
%
(1.82
)%
0.75
%
0.18
%
1.12
%
Adjusted return on average assets (1)
1.64
%
1.01
%
0.75
%
1.05
%
1.12
%
Return on average common equity
13.21
%
(15.28
)%
6.21
%
1.43
%
9.48
%
Adjusted return on average common equity (1)
13.57
%
8.44
%
6.21
%
8.53
%
9.48
%
Yield on total loans
6.84
%
6.79
%
6.08
%
6.55
%
5.94
%
Yield on interest earning assets
6.48
%
6.49
%
5.85
%
6.26
%
5.69
%
Cost of deposits
1.87
%
2.09
%
1.81
%
2.01
%
1.37
%
Cost of funds
1.99
%
2.19
%
1.95
%
2.12
%
1.46
%
Net interest margin
4.61
%
4.43
%
4.05
%
4.28
%
4.33
%
Efficiency ratio (1)
57.36
%
98.86
%
68.30
%
76.55
%
61.27
%
Adjusted efficiency ratio (1)
55.95
%
60.54
%
68.30
%
63.80
%
61.27
%
As of
December 31, 2024
September 30, 2024
December 31, 2023
($ in thousands except share and per share data)
CAPITAL
Tangible equity to tangible assets (1)
9.69
%
8.58
%
10.73
%
Book value (BV) per common share
$
15.86
$
15.50
$
15.69
Tangible BV per common share (1)
$
11.71
$
11.28
$
13.56
ASSET QUALITY
Allowance for loan losses (ALL)
$
50,540
$
53,552
$
22,569
Reserve for unfunded loan commitments
$
3,103
$
4,071
$
933
Allowance for credit losses (ACL)
$
53,643
$
57,623
$
23,502
Allowance for loan losses to nonperforming loans
1.90
x
2.08
x
1.74
x
ALL to total loans held for investment
1.61
%
1.67
%
1.15
%
ACL to total loans held for investment
1.71
%
1.80
%
1.20
%
30-89 days past due, excluding nonaccrual loans
$
12,232
$
19,110
$
19
Over 90 days past due, excluding nonaccrual loans
$
150
$
37
$
—
Special mention loans
$
69,339
$
93,448
$
2,996
Special mention loans to total loans held for investment
2.21
%
2.92
%
0.15
%
Substandard loans
$
117,926
$
104,298
$
19,502
Substandard loans to total loans held for investment
3.76
%
3.26
%
1.00
%
Nonperforming loans
$
26,536
$
25,698
$
13,004
Nonperforming loans to total loans held for investment
0.85
%
0.80
%
0.66
%
Other real estate owned, net
$
4,083
$
4,083
$
—
Nonperforming assets
$
30,619
$
29,781
$
13,004
Nonperforming assets to total assets
0.76
%
0.68
%
0.55
%
END OF PERIOD BALANCES
Total loans, including loans held for sale
$
3,156,345
$
3,233,418
$
1,964,791
Total assets
$
4,031,654
$
4,362,767
$
2,360,252
Deposits
$
3,398,760
$
3,740,915
$
1,943,556
Loans to deposits
92.9
%
86.4
%
101.1
%
Shareholders’ equity
$
511,836
$
498,064
$
288,152
(1
)
Non-GAAP measure. See – GAAP to Non-GAAP reconciliation.
California BanCorp and Subsidiary Financial Highlights (Unaudited)
At or for the Three Months Ended
At or for the Year Ended
ALLOWANCE for CREDIT LOSSES
December 31, 2024
September 30, 2024
December 31, 2023
December 31, 2024
December 31, 2023
($ in thousands)
Allowance for loan losses
Balance at beginning of period
$
53,552
$
23,788
$
22,705
$
22,569
$
17,099
Adoption of ASU 2016-13 (1)
—
—
—
—
5,027
Initial Allowance for PCD loans
—
11,216
—
11,216
—
(Reversal of) provision for credit losses (2)
(2,867
)
19,711
1,131
19,520
1,731
Charge-offs
(154
)
(1,163
)
(1,267
)
(2,774
)
(1,303
)
Recoveries
9
—
—
9
15
Net charge-offs
(145
)
(1,163
)
(1,267
)
(2,765
)
(1,288
)
Balance, end of period
$
50,540
$
53,552
$
22,569
$
50,540
$
22,569
Reserve for unfunded loan commitments(3)
Balance, beginning of period
$
4,071
$
819
$
1,240
$
933
$
1,310
Adoption of ASU 2016-13 (1)
—
—
—
—
439
(Reversal of) provision for credit losses (4)
(968
)
3,252
(307
)
2,170
(816
)
Balance, end of period
3,103
4,071
933
3,103
933
Allowance for credit losses
$
53,643
$
57,623
$
23,502
$
53,643
$
23,502
ALL to total loans held for investment
1.61
%
1.67
%
1.15
%
1.61
%
1.15
%
ACL to total loans held for investment
1.71
%
1.80
%
1.20
%
1.71
%
1.20
%
Net charge-offs to average total loans
(0.02
)%
(0.17
)%
(0.26
)%
(0.11
)%
(0.07
)%
(1
)
Represents the impact of adopting ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments – Credit Losses on January 1, 2023. As a result of adopting ASU 2016-13, our methodology to compute our allowance for credit losses is based on a current expected credit loss methodology, rather than the previously applied incurred loss methodology.
(2
)
Includes $18.5 million for the three months ended September 30, 2024 and year ended December 31, 2024 related to the initial provision for credit losses for non-PCD loans acquired in the Merger.
(3
)
Included in “Accrued interest and other liabilities” on the consolidated balance sheet.
(4
)
Includes $2.7 million for the three months ended September 30, 2024 and year ended December 31, 2024 related to the initial provision for credit losses on unfunded commitments acquired in the Merger.
California BanCorp and Subsidiary Balance Sheets (Unaudited)
December 31, 2024
September 30, 2024
December 31, 2023
($ in thousands)
ASSETS
Cash and due from banks
$
60,471
$
115,165
$
33,008
Federal funds sold & interest-bearing balances
327,691
499,258
53,785
Total cash and cash equivalents
388,162
614,423
86,793
Debt securities available-for-sale, at fair value (amortized cost of $151,429, $163,384 and $136,366 at December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023)
142,001
159,330
130,035
Debt securities held-to-maturity, at cost (fair value of $47,823, $49,487 and $50,432 at December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023)
53,280
53,364
53,616
Loans held for sale
17,180
33,704
7,349
Loans held for investment:
Construction & land development
227,325
247,934
243,521
1-4 family residential
164,401
152,540
143,903
Multifamily
243,993
252,134
221,247
Other commercial real estate
1,767,727
1,755,908
1,024,243
Commercial & industrial
710,970
765,472
320,142
Other consumer
24,749
25,726
4,386
Total loans held for investment
3,139,165
3,199,714
1,957,442
Allowance for credit losses – loans
(50,540
)
(53,552
)
(22,569
)
Total loans held for investment, net
3,088,625
3,146,162
1,934,873
Restricted stock at cost
30,829
27,394
16,055
Premises and equipment
13,595
13,996
13,270
Right of use asset
14,350
15,310
9,291
Other real estate owned, net
4,083
4,083
—
Goodwill
111,787
112,515
37,803
Intangible assets
22,271
23,031
1,195
Bank owned life insurance
66,636
66,180
38,918
Deferred taxes, net
43,127
45,644
11,137
Accrued interest and other assets
35,728
47,631
19,917
Total assets
$
4,031,654
$
4,362,767
$
2,360,252
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Deposits:
Noninterest-bearing demand
$
1,257,007
$
1,368,303
$
675,098
Interest-bearing NOW accounts
673,589
781,125
381,943
Money market and savings accounts
1,182,927
1,149,268
636,685
Time deposits
285,237
442,219
249,830
Total deposits
3,398,760
3,740,915
1,943,556
Borrowings
69,725
69,142
102,865
Operating lease liability
18,310
19,211
12,117
Accrued interest and other liabilities
33,023
35,435
13,562
Total liabilities
3,519,818
3,864,703
2,072,100
Shareholders’ Equity:
Common stock – 50,000,000 shares authorized, no par value; issued and outstanding 32,265,935, 32,142,427 and 18,369,115 at December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023)
442,469
441,684
222,036
Retained earnings
76,008
59,236
70,575
Accumulated other comprehensive loss – net of taxes
(6,641
)
(2,856
)
(4,459
)
Total shareholders’ equity
511,836
498,064
288,152
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity
$
4,031,654
$
4,362,767
$
2,360,252
California BanCorp and Subsidiary Income Statements – Quarterly and Year-to-Date (Unaudited)
Three Months Ended
Year Ended
December 31, 2024
September 30, 2024
December 31, 2023
December 31, 2024
December 31, 2023
($ in thousands except share and per share data)
INTEREST AND DIVIDEND INCOME
Interest and fees on loans
$
54,791
$
47,528
$
29,968
$
159,960
$
113,951
Interest on debt securities
1,698
1,687
991
5,827
3,497
Interest on tax-exempted debt securities
305
306
353
1,223
1,655
Interest and dividends from other institutions
5,764
4,606
1,257
12,788
4,419
Total interest and dividend income
62,558
54,127
32,569
179,798
123,522
INTEREST EXPENSE
Interest on NOW, savings, and money market accounts
12,447
11,073
6,606
37,329
20,161
Interest on time deposits
4,179
5,087
2,331
15,432
6,704
Interest on borrowings
1,391
1,025
1,073
4,053
2,519
Total interest expense
18,017
17,185
10,010
56,814
29,384
Net interest income
44,541
36,942
22,559
122,984
94,138
(Reversal of) provisions for credit losses (1)
(3,835
)
22,963
824
21,690
915
Net interest income after (reversal of) provision for credit losses
48,376
13,979
21,735
101,294
93,223
NONINTEREST INCOME
Service charges and fees on deposit accounts
911
1,136
507
3,140
1,946
(Loss) gain on sale of loans
(1,095
)
8
—
(672
)
831
Bank owned life insurance income
823
398
253
1,748
946
Servicing and related income on loans
157
82
17
307
240
Loss on sale of debt securities
—
—
(1,008
)
—
(974
)
Loss on sale of building and related fixed assets
—
—
—
(19
)
—
Other charges and fees
208
(450
)
129
256
390
Total noninterest income (expense)
1,004
1,174
(102
)
4,760
3,379
NONINTEREST EXPENSE
Salaries and employee benefits
16,074
15,385
9,598
49,845
39,249
Occupancy and equipment expenses
2,314
2,031
1,678
7,242
6,231
Data processing
1,960
1,536
1,158
5,832
4,534
Legal, audit and professional
817
669
1,161
2,559
3,211
Regulatory assessments
436
544
320
1,714
1,508
Director and shareholder expenses
458
520
207
1,410
849
Merger and related expenses
643
14,605
—
16,288
—
Intangible assets amortization
1,060
687
80
1,877
389
Other real estate owned expense
220
3
—
5,246
—
Other expense
2,143
1,700
1,137
5,778
3,775
Total noninterest expense
26,125
37,680
15,339
97,791
59,746
Income (loss) before income taxes
23,255
(22,527
)
6,294
8,263
36,856
Income tax expense (benefit)
6,483
(6,063
)
1,882
2,830
10,946
Net income (loss)
$
16,772
$
(16,464
)
$
4,412
$
5,433
$
25,910
Net income (loss) per share – basic
$
0.52
$
(0.59
)
$
0.24
$
0.22
$
1.42
Net income (loss) per share – diluted
$
0.51
$
(0.59
)
$
0.24
$
0.22
$
1.39
Weighted average common shares-diluted
32,698,714
27,705,844
18,727,519
24,623,397
18,656,742
Pre-tax, pre-provision income (2)
$
19,420
$
436
$
7,118
$
29,953
$
37,771
(1
)
Included (reversal of) provision for unfunded loan commitments of $(1.0) million, $3.3 million and $(307) thousand for the three months ended December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively, and $2.2 million and $(816) thousand for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively
(2
)
Non-GAAP measure. See – GAAP to Non-GAAP reconciliation.
California BanCorp and Subsidiary Average Balance Sheets and Yield Analysis (Unaudited)
Three Months Ended
December 31, 2024
September 30, 2024
December 31, 2023
Average Balance
Income/ Expense
Yield/ Cost
Average Balance
Income/ Expense
Yield/ Cost
Average Balance
Income/ Expense
Yield/ Cost
($ in thousands)
Assets
Interest-earning assets:
Total loans
$
3,184,918
$
54,791
6.84
%
$
2,783,581
$
47,528
6.79
%
$
1,954,396
$
29,968
6.08
%
Taxable debt securities
147,895
1,698
4.57
%
149,080
1,687
4.50
%
113,375
991
3.47
%
Tax-exempt debt securities (1)
53,607
305
2.87
%
53,682
306
2.87
%
58,644
353
3.02
%
Deposits in other financial institutions
422,032
5,123
4.83
%
161,616
2,215
5.45
%
56,313
759
5.35
%
Fed funds sold/resale agreements
3,353
38
4.51
%
143,140
1,886
5.24
%
9,008
125
5.51
%
Restricted stock investments and other bank stock
30,341
603
7.91
%
24,587
505
8.17
%
16,394
373
9.03
%
Total interest-earning assets
3,842,146
62,558
6.48
%
3,315,686
54,127
6.49
%
2,208,130
32,569
5.85
%
Total noninterest-earning assets
326,601
277,471
137,193
Total assets
$
4,168,747
$
3,593,157
$
2,345,323
Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity
Interest-bearing liabilities:
Interest-bearing NOW accounts
$
704,017
$
3,784
2.14
%
$
617,373
$
2,681
1.73
%
$
362,579
$
1,860
2.04
%
Money market and savings accounts
1,192,692
8,663
2.89
%
999,322
8,392
3.34
%
669,391
4,746
2.81
%
Time deposits
359,111
4,179
4.63
%
421,241
5,087
4.80
%
208,700
2,331
4.43
%
Total interest-bearing deposits
2,255,820
16,626
2.93
%
2,037,936
16,160
3.15
%
1,240,670
8,937
2.86
%
Borrowings:
FHLB advances
—
—
—
%
611
9
5.86
%
56,380
802
5.64
%
Subordinated debt
69,420
1,391
7.97
%
52,246
1,016
7.74
%
17,854
271
6.02
%
Total borrowings
69,420
1,391
7.97
%
52,857
1,025
7.71
%
74,234
1,073
5.73
%
Total interest-bearing liabilities
2,325,240
18,017
3.08
%
2,090,793
17,185
3.27
%
1,314,904
10,010
3.02
%
Noninterest-bearing liabilities:
Noninterest-bearing deposits (2)
1,283,591
1,031,844
721,169
Other liabilities
55,007
41,962
27,178
Shareholders’ equity
504,909
428,558
282,072
Total Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity
$
4,168,747
$
3,593,157
$
2,345,323
Net interest spread
3.40
%
3.22
%
2.83
%
Net interest income and margin
$
44,541
4.61
%
$
36,942
4.43
%
$
22,559
4.05
%
Cost of deposits
$
3,539,411
$
16,626
1.87
%
$
3,069,780
$
16,160
2.09
%
$
1,961,839
$
8,937
1.81
%
Cost of funds
$
3,608,831
$
18,017
1.99
%
$
3,122,637
$
17,185
2.19
%
$
2,036,073
$
10,010
1.95
%
(1
)
Tax-exempt debt securities yields are presented on a tax equivalent basis using a 21% tax rate.
(2
)
Average noninterest-bearing deposits represent 36.27%, 33.61% and 36.76% of average total deposits for the three months ended December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively.
California BanCorp and Subsidiary Average Balance Sheets and Yield Analysis (Unaudited)
Year Ended
December 31, 2024
December 31, 2023
Average Balance
Income/ Expense
Yield/ Cost
Average Balance
Income/ Expense
Yield/ Cost
($ in thousands)
Assets
Interest-earning assets:
Total loans
$
2,443,127
$
159,960
6.55
%
$
1,918,443
$
113,951
5.94
%
Taxable debt securities
136,984
5,827
4.25
%
107,021
3,497
3.27
%
Tax-exempt debt securities (1)
53,721
1,223
2.88
%
65,674
1,655
3.19
%
Deposits in other financial institutions
171,939
8,692
5.06
%
46,826
2,434
5.20
%
Fed funds sold/resale agreements
43,990
2,319
5.27
%
18,114
923
5.10
%
Restricted stock investments and other bank stock
22,137
1,777
8.03
%
15,930
1,062
6.67
%
Total interest-earning assets
2,871,898
179,798
6.26
%
2,172,008
123,522
5.69
%
Total noninterest-earning assets
224,018
134,225
Total assets
$
3,095,916
$
2,306,233
Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity
Interest-bearing liabilities:
Interest-bearing NOW accounts
$
511,425
$
10,644
2.08
%
$
308,537
$
5,161
1.67
%
Money market and savings accounts
911,684
26,685
2.93
%
673,176
15,000
2.23
%
Time deposits
324,249
15,432
4.76
%
180,219
6,704
3.72
%
Total interest-bearing deposits
1,747,358
52,761
3.02
%
1,161,932
26,865
2.31
%
Borrowings:
FHLB advances
19,543
1,103
5.64
%
26,390
1,434
5.43
%
Subordinated debt
39,479
2,950
7.47
%
17,818
1,085
6.09
%
Total borrowings
59,022
4,053
6.87
%
44,208
2,519
5.70
%
Total interest-bearing liabilities
1,806,380
56,814
3.15
%
1,206,140
29,384
2.44
%
Noninterest-bearing liabilities:
Noninterest-bearing deposits (2)
873,043
801,882
Other liabilities
36,677
24,865
Shareholders’ equity
379,816
273,346
Total Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity
$
3,095,916
$
2,306,233
Net interest spread
3.11
%
3.25
%
Net interest income and margin
$
122,984
4.28
%
$
94,138
4.33
%
Cost of deposits
$
2,620,401
$
52,761
2.01
%
$
1,963,814
$
26,865
1.37
%
Cost of funds
$
2,679,423
$
56,814
2.12
%
$
2,008,022
$
29,384
1.46
%
(1
)
Tax-exempt debt securities yields are presented on a tax equivalent basis using a 21% tax rate.
(2
)
Average noninterest-bearing deposits represent 33.32%, and 40.83% of average total deposits for the year ended December 31, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively.
California BanCorp and Subsidiary GAAP to Non-GAAP Reconciliation (Unaudited)
The following tables present a reconciliation of non-GAAP financial measures to GAAP measures for: (1) adjusted net income (loss), (2) efficiency ratio, (3) adjusted efficiency ratio, (4) pre-tax pre-provision income, (5) adjusted pre-tax pre-provision income, (6) average tangible common equity, (7) adjusted return on average assets, (8) adjusted return on average equity, (9) return on average tangible common equity, (10) adjusted return on average tangible common equity, (11) tangible common equity, (12) tangible assets, (13) tangible common equity to tangible asset ratio, and (14) tangible book value per share. We believe the presentation of certain non-GAAP financial measures provides useful information to assess our consolidated financial condition and consolidated results of operations and to assist investors in evaluating our financial results relative to our peers. These non-GAAP financial measures complement our GAAP reporting and are presented below to provide investors and others with information that we use to manage the business each period. Because not all companies use identical calculations, the presentation of these non-GAAP financial measures may not be comparable to other similarly titled measures used by other companies. These non-GAAP measures should be taken together with the corresponding GAAP measures and should not be considered a substitute of the GAAP measures.
Three Months Ended
Year Ended
December 31, 2024
September 30, 2024
December 31, 2023
December 31, 2024
December 31, 2023
($ in thousands)
Adjusted net income
Net income (loss)
$
16,772
$
(16,464
)
$
4,412
$
5,433
$
25,910
Add: After-tax Day1 provision for non PCD loans and unfunded loan commitments (1)
—
14,978
—
14,978
—
Add: After-tax merger and related expenses (1)
453
10,576
—
11,988
—
Adjusted net income (non-GAAP)
$
17,225
$
9,090
$
4,412
$
32,399
$
25,910
Efficiency Ratio
Noninterest expense
$
26,125
$
37,680
$
15,339
$
97,791
$
59,746
Deduct: Merger and related expenses
643
14,605
—
16,288
—
Adjusted noninterest expense
25,482
23,075
15,339
81,503
59,746
Net interest income
44,541
36,942
22,559
122,984
94,138
Noninterest income (expense)
1,004
1,174
(102
)
4,760
3,379
Total net interest income and noninterest income
$
45,545
$
38,116
$
22,457
$
127,744
$
97,517
Efficiency ratio (non-GAAP)
57.4
%
98.9
%
68.3
%
76.6
%
61.3
%
Adjusted efficiency ratio (non-GAAP)
55.9
%
60.5
%
68.3
%
63.8
%
61.3
%
Pre-tax pre-provision income
Net interest income
$
44,541
$
36,942
$
22,559
$
122,984
$
94,138
Noninterest income (expense)
1,004
1,174
(102
)
4,760
3,379
Total net interest income and noninterest income
45,545
38,116
22,457
127,744
97,517
Less: Noninterest expense
26,125
37,680
15,339
97,791
59,746
Pre-tax pre-provision income (non-GAAP)
19,420
436
7,118
29,953
37,771
Add: Merger and related expenses
643
14,605
—
16,288
—
Adjusted pre-tax pre-provision income (non-GAAP)
$
20,063
$
15,041
$
7,118
$
46,241
$
37,771
(1
)
After-tax Day 1 provision for non-PCD loans and unfunded commitments and merger and related expenses are presented using a 29.56% tax rate.
Three Months Ended
Year Ended
December 31, 2024
September 30, 2024
December 31, 2023
December 31, 2024
December 31, 2023
($ in thousands)
Return on Average Assets, Equity, and Tangible Equity
Net income (loss)
$
16,772
$
(16,464
)
$
4,412
$
5,433
$
25,910
Adjusted net income (non-GAAP)
$
17,225
$
9,090
$
4,412
$
32,399
$
25,910
Average assets
$
4,168,747
$
3,593,157
$
2,345,323
$
3,095,916
$
2,306,233
Average shareholders’ equity
504,909
428,558
282,072
379,816
273,346
Less: Average intangible assets
135,073
104,409
39,035
79,366
39,195
Average tangible common equity (non-GAAP)
$
369,836
$
324,149
$
243,037
$
300,450
$
234,151
Return on average assets
1.60
%
(1.82
%)
0.75
%
0.18
%
1.12
%
Adjusted return on average assets (non-GAAP)
1.64
%
1.01
%
0.75
%
1.05
%
1.12
%
Return on average equity
13.21
%
(15.28
%)
6.21
%
1.43
%
9.48
%
Adjusted return on average equity (non-GAAP)
13.57
%
8.44
%
6.21
%
8.53
%
9.48
%
Return on average tangible common equity (non-GAAP)
18.04
%
(20.21
%)
7.20
%
1.81
%
11.07
%
Adjusted return on average tangible common equity (non-GAAP)
18.53
%
11.16
%
7.20
%
10.78
%
11.07
%
December 31, 2024
December 31, 2023
($ in thousands except share and per share data)
Tangible Common Equity Ratio/Tangible Book Value Per Share
Shareholders’ equity
$
511,836
$
288,152
Less: Intangible assets
134,058
38,998
Tangible common equity (non-GAAP)
$
377,778
$
249,154
Total assets
$
4,031,654
$
2,360,252
Less: Intangible assets
134,058
38,998
Tangible assets (non-GAAP)
$
3,897,596
$
2,321,254
Equity to asset ratio
12.70
%
12.21
%
Tangible common equity to tangible asset ratio (non-GAAP)
9.69
%
10.73
%
Book value per share
$
15.86
$
15.69
Tangible book value per share (non-GAAP)
$
11.71
$
13.56
Shares outstanding
32,265,935
18,369,115
INVESTOR RELATIONS CONTACT Kevin Mc Cabe California Bank of Commerce, N.A. kmccabe@bankcbc.com 818.637.7065
1 Reconciliations of non–U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) measures are set forth at the end of this press release.
SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom today announced the following appointments:
Deborah Hoffman, of Sacramento, has been appointed Chief Deputy Director at the Office of Tax Appeals. Hoffman has been Special Advisor at the California Department of Veterans Affairs since 2020, where she was previously Senior Advisor for Communications from 2019 to 2020. She was Undersecretary of the California Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency from 2017 to 2019. Hoffman was Deputy Press Secretary in the Office of Governor Brown from 2015 to 2017. She was Assistant Secretary of Public and Employee Communications at the California Department of Corrections from 2012 to 2015. Hoffman was Deputy Secretary of Communications and External Affairs at the California Environmental Protection Agency from 2011 to 2012. She was Communications Director and Policy Consultant in the Office of Senator Fran Pavley from 2009 to 2011. Hoffman was a Reporter at KXTV ABC10 News Sacramento from 1995 to 2009. She earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in Journalism from California State University, Northridge. This position does not require Senate confirmation, and the compensation is $187,104. Hoffman is registered without party preference.
Krista Dunzweiler, of Sacramento, has been appointed Chief Deputy General Counsel in the Office of Legal Affairs at the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, where she has been Chief Deputy General Counsel since 2019. Dunzweiler held several positions at the California Department of Justice from 2014 to 2019 including Deputy Attorney General IV and Deputy Attorney General III. She was an Associate at Locke Lord LLP from 2011 to 2014, Bullivant Houser Bailey from 2008 to 2011, Diepenbrock Harrison from 2006 to 2008, and at Weinstraub Genshlea Chediak from 2004 to 2006. Dunzweiler earned a Juris Doctor degree from the University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law, and a Master of Arts degree in Communications and a Bachelor of Arts degree in History and Psychology from the University of the Pacific. This position does not require Senate confirmation, and the compensation is $229,236. Dunzweiler is a Democrat.
Todd Gloria, of San Diego, has been appointed to the California Air Resources Board. Gloria has been the Mayor of the City of San Diego since 2020. He was an Assemblymember with the California State Assembly from 2016 to 2020. Gloria was a Councilmember, District 3 in the City of San Diego from 2008 to 2016. He was a District Director in the Office of Congresswoman Susan A. Davis from 2001 to 2008. Gloria was a San Diego Housing Commissioner on the San Diego Housing Commission from 2005 to 2008. He was Board Chair at San Diego LGBT Community Center from 2002 to 2007. Gloria earned his Bachelor of the Arts degree in Political Science and History from the University of San Diego. This position requires Senate confirmation, and the compensation is $100 per diem. Gloria is a Democrat.
Roxanne Messina Captor, of Redondo Beach, has been reappointed to the California Arts Council, where she has been serving since 2022. Captor has been Associate Faculty at Santa Monica College since 1986, an Emmy-nominated Filmmaker at Messina Captor Films Inc. since 1994, and a teacher at the New York Film Academy since 2022. She was a Faculty Member at Emerson College LA and CalArts from 2000 to 2019. Captor was Executive Director for the San Francisco International Film Festival and Society from 2001 to 2006. She is a member of the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences, Who’s Who of America, Greenlight Women, and the National Association of Television Program Executives. Captor earned a Master of Fine Arts degree in Directing for Cinema from Columbia College of Chicago and a Bachelor of Fine Arts degree in Theatre Arts from Julliard School of Music. This position requires Senate confirmation, and the compensation is $100 per diem. Captor is a Democrat.
Press Releases, Recent News
Recent news
Jan 28, 2025
News What you need to know: Governor Newsom met today with leaders of the Pacific Palisades synagogue Kehillat Israel, which still stands after the fire. Los Angeles, California – Today, Governor Gavin Newsom met with clergy, staff, and board members of Kehillat…
Jan 28, 2025
News Dodgers Chairman Mark Walter, Mark Walter Family Foundation, and Los Angeles Dodgers Foundation will provide an initial commitment of up to $100 million LA Rises will support city and county efforts to help accelerate recovery LOS ANGELES — In the wake of one…
Jan 27, 2025
News LOS ANGELES — Scientists, water managers, state leaders, and experts throughout the state are calling out the federal administration’s ongoing misinformation campaign on water management in California. Here is a snapshot of what water leaders and media are saying…
What you need to know: Governor Newsom met today with leaders of the Pacific Palisades synagogue Kehillat Israel, which still stands after the fire.
Los Angeles, California – Today, Governor Gavin Newsom met with clergy, staff, and board members of Kehillat Israel, the largest synagogue in Pacific Palisades, which still stands after the Palisades Fire wiped out the neighborhood. Kehillat Israel is home to almost one thousand Jewish families, a third of whom lost their homes in the fires.
“It was an honor to see the resilience of the Kehillat Israel community. To know their place of worship still standing is nothing short of a miracle, and watching the clergy and congregants coming together to pray, learn, and support each other is inspiring. Pacific Palisades will build back stronger than ever, and KI will continue to be a leader in that recovery.”
Governor Gavin Newsom
Founded in Pacific Palisades in 1950, Kehillat Israel has been in its current building since October 26, 1997. It is a center of the community for Jews of all faiths across West Los Angeles, and includes a parenting center, Early Childhood Center (pre-school and TK), and K-12 and senior programming.
Today’s convening took place at Beth Shir Shalom, a synagogue in Santa Monica where some of Kehillat Israel’s programming is currently being held.
Support for the Palisades
Governor Newsom was on the ground in Pacific Palisades 50 minutes after the Palisades Fire first broke out in the Palisades Highlands. He has since toured the Palisades Village with first responders several times, visited the destroyed homes of Palisadians, and volunteered with Project Angel Food to assist survivors. He continues to meet with survivors, leaders, and local officials to ensure that the Palisades has all it needs to recover and rebuild.
Get help today
Californians can go to CA.gov/LAfires – a hub for information and resources from state, local and federal government.
Individuals and business owners who sustained losses from wildfires in Los Angeles County can apply for disaster assistance:
If you use a relay service, such as video relay service (VRS), captioned telephone service or others, give FEMA the number for that service.
Press Releases, Recent News
Recent news
Jan 28, 2025
News Dodgers Chairman Mark Walter, Mark Walter Family Foundation, and Los Angeles Dodgers Foundation will provide an initial commitment of up to $100 million LA Rises will support city and county efforts to help accelerate recovery LOS ANGELES — In the wake of one…
Jan 27, 2025
News LOS ANGELES — Scientists, water managers, state leaders, and experts throughout the state are calling out the federal administration’s ongoing misinformation campaign on water management in California. Here is a snapshot of what water leaders and media are saying…
Jan 25, 2025
News SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom today announced the following appointments:Bret Ladine, of Sacramento, has been appointed Director of the Financial Information System for California (FI$Cal). Ladine has been General Counsel at the California State…
Jan 28, 2025
What you need to know: The passage of Proposition 1 by California voters adds rocket fuel to Governor Gavin Newsom’s transformational overhaul of the state’s behavioral health system. These reforms refocus existing funds to prioritize Californians with the most serious mental health and substance use issues, who are too often experiencing homelessness. They also fund more than 11,150 new behavioral health beds and supportive housing units and 26,700 outpatient treatment slots.
Los Angeles, California – California took a major step forward in correcting the damage from 50 years of neglect to the state’s mental health system with the passage of Proposition 1. This historic measure — a signature priority of Governor Gavin Newsom — adds rocket fuel to California’s overhaul of the state’s behavioral health systems. It provides a full range of mental health and substance abuse care, with new accountability metrics to ensure local governments deliver for their communities.
This is the biggest reform of the California mental health system in decades and will finally equip partners to deliver the results all Californians need and deserve. Treatment centers will prioritize mental health and substance use support in the community like never before. Now, it’s time to roll up our sleeves and begin implementing this critical reform – working closely with city and county leaders to ensure we see results.
Governor Gavin Newsom
newsom-news-template
IMG_3682-min
contact-governor-landing
workers-FxAJ5fkakAAtVI3
priorities-and-progress-image
economy-F-isBKpbsAAxdab
gun-violence-San Diego Guns Package 2.18.22_2
What they’re saying:
Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg, original author of the Mental Health Services Act: “Twenty years ago, I never could have dreamed that we would have the strong leadership we have today, committing billions and making courageous policy changes that question the conventional wisdom on mental health. Now, with the passage of Proposition 1. California is delivering on decades old promises to help people living with brain-based illnesses, to live better lives, to live independently and to live with dignity in our communities. This is a historic moment and the hard work is ahead of us.“
Senator Susan Eggman (D-Stockton), author of Senate Bill 326: “Today marks a day of hope for thousands of Californians who are struggling with mental illness – many of whom are living unhoused. I am tremendously grateful to my fellow Californian’s for passing this important measure. And I am very appreciative of this Governor’s leadership to transform our behavioral health care system!”
Assemblymember Jacqui Irwin (D-Thousand Oaks), author of Assembly Bill 531: “This started as an audacious proposal to address the root cause of homelessness and today, Californians can be proud to know that they did the right thing by passing Proposition 1. Now, it’s time for all of us to get to work, and make sure these reforms are implemented and that we see results.”
Bigger picture: Transforming the Mental Health Services Act into the Behavioral Health Services Act and building more community mental health treatment sites and supportive housing is the last main pillar of Governor Newsom’s Mental Health Movement – pulling together significant recent reforms like 988 crisis line, CalHOPE, CARE Court, conservatorship reform, CalAIM behavioral health expansion (including mobile crisis care and telehealth), Medi-Cal expansion to all low-income Californians, Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative (including expanding services in schools and on-line), Older Adult Behavioral Health Initiative, Veterans Mental Health Initiative, Behavioral Health Community Infrastructure Program, Behavioral Health Bridge Housing, Health Care Workforce for All and more.
More details on next step here
Press Releases, Recent News
Recent news
Jan 28, 2025
News Dodgers Chairman Mark Walter, Mark Walter Family Foundation, and Los Angeles Dodgers Foundation will provide an initial commitment of up to $100 million LA Rises will support city and county efforts to help accelerate recovery LOS ANGELES — In the wake of one…
Jan 27, 2025
News LOS ANGELES — Scientists, water managers, state leaders, and experts throughout the state are calling out the federal administration’s ongoing misinformation campaign on water management in California. Here is a snapshot of what water leaders and media are saying…
Jan 25, 2025
News SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom today announced the following appointments:Bret Ladine, of Sacramento, has been appointed Director of the Financial Information System for California (FI$Cal). Ladine has been General Counsel at the California State…
2025-09 STATE OF HAWAIʻI JOINS 21 STATES AND DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA TO STOP TRUMP ADMINISTRATION FROM WITHHOLDING ESSENTIAL FEDERAL FUNDING
Posted on Jan 28, 2025 in Latest Department News, Newsroom
STATE OF HAWAIʻI
KA MOKU ʻĀINA O HAWAIʻI
DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
KA ʻOIHANA O KA LOIO KUHINA
JOSH GREEN, M.D. GOVERNOR
KE KIAʻĀINA
ANNE LOPEZ
ATTORNEY GENERAL
LOIO KUHINA
STATE OF HAWAIʻI JOINS 21 STATES AND DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA TO STOP TRUMP ADMINISTRATION FROM WITHHOLDING ESSENTIAL FEDERAL FUNDING
New Trump Administration Policy Would Block Trillions in Funding for Health, Education, Law Enforcement, Disaster Relief, and Other Essential State Programs
News Release 2025-09
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
January 28, 2025
HONOLULU –Attorney General Anne Lopez today joined a coalition of 22 attorneys generalsuingto stop the implementation of a new Trump administration policy that orders the withholding of trillions of dollars in funding that every state in the country relies on to provide essential services to millions of Americans.
Thenew policy, issued by the President’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB), puts an indefinite pause on the majority of federal assistance to states. The policy would immediately jeopardize state programs that provide critical health and childcare services to families in need, deliver support to public schools, combat hate crimes and violence against women, provide life saving disaster relief to states, and more.
Attorney General Lopez and the coalition of attorneys general are seeking a court order to immediately stop the enforcement of the OMB policy and preserve essential funding.
“We are aware of U.S. District Court Judge Loren L. AliKhan’s ruling which blocks the federal grant and loan freeze until Monday,” said Attorney General Lopez. “It is imperative that we continue with our court filing to make sure that the enforcement of the OMB policy is halted.”
Attorney General Lopez continued: “The people of Hawaiʻi pay the federal government millions upon millions of dollars in taxes every year, and the people of this state are entitled to receive a broad array of federal funds to pay for law enforcement and other crucial programs in accordance with federal law. And the impacts of this policy withholding federal funds have already been realized in our state. Neither the President of the United States nor an acting federal budget official can unilaterally upend federal law and cause such mass uncertainty in the Hawaiʻi and our sister states by withholding federal funds authorized by law. The Department of the Attorney General will stand up for the rule of law in this nation.”
The OMB policy, issued late on January 27, directs all federal agencies to indefinitely pause the majority of federal assistance funding and loans to states and other entities beginning at 5:00 pm today, January 28. As Attorney General Lopez and the coalition note in their lawsuit, OMB’s policy has caused immediate chaos and uncertainty for millions of Americans who rely on state programs that receive these federal funds. Essential community health centers, addiction and mental health treatment programs, services for people with disabilities, and other critical health services are jeopardized by OMB’s policy.
Attorney General Lopez and the coalition also argue that jeopardizing state funds will put Americans in danger by depriving law enforcement of much-needed resources. OMB’s policy would pause support for U.S. Department of Justice initiatives to combat hate crimes and violence against women, stop drug interdiction, support community policing, and provide services to victims of crimes. In addition, Attorney General Lopez and the coalition of attorneys general note that the OMB policy would halt essential disaster relief funds to places like California and North Carolina, where tens of thousands of residents are relying on FEMA grants to rebuild their lives after devastating wildfires and floods.
While the administration has attempted to clarify the scope and meaning of the OMB policy, states have already reported that funds have been frozen. As part of their lawsuit, Attorney General Lopez and the coalition of attorneys general argue that OMB’s policy violates the Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act by imposing a government-wide stop to spending without any regard for the laws and regulations that govern each source of federal funding. The attorneys general argue that the president cannot decide to unilaterally override laws governing federal spending, and that OMB’s policy unconstitutionally overrides Congress’ power to decide how federal funds are spent.
Joining Attorney General Lopez in the lawsuit are the attorneys general of Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia.
The Complaint can be foundhere.
# # #
Media contacts:
Dave Day
Special Assistant to the Attorney General
Office: 808-586-1284
Email:[email protected]
Web:http://ag.hawaii.gov
Toni Schwartz Public Information Officer Hawai‘i Department of the Attorney General Office: 808-586-1252 Cell: 808-379-9249 Email:[email protected]
Office of the Governor — News Release — Governor Green Applauds Federal Judge for Halting Funding Freeze
Posted on Jan 28, 2025 in Latest Department News, Newsroom, Office of the Governor Press Releases
STATE OF HAWAIʻI KA MOKU ʻĀINA O HAWAIʻI JOSH GREEN, M.D. GOVERNOR KE KIAʻĀINA
GOVERNOR GREEN APPLAUDS FEDERAL JUDGE FOR HALTING FUNDING FREEZE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE January 28, 2025
HONOLULU — Governor Josh Green, M.D., applauds the ruling by a federal court judge today, blocking the order by President Trump to freeze federal funding for crucial programs serving Americans. The Governor stands in strong opposition to President Trump’s executive order pausing federal disbursements, which has caused a great deal of chaos, confusion and uncertainty.
“The presidential order seeks to prevent the people of Hawai‘i from receiving crucial services funded by the millions of dollars they pay to the federal government each year. This cannot stand,” said Governor Green. “My administration is currently assessing the impact of this pause on essential state programs and services, including education, health care, social services, and wildfire recovery. For those programs that are found to be impacted, the state of Hawai‘i will work to develop alternate plans to ensure that key services for local residents are continued. The state Attorney General has joined other states in initiating legal action to challenge the federal administration’s actions, as Hawai‘i has already encountered impacts of this threatened funding freeze.”
The U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued a memorandum on January 27, 2025, which requires federal agencies to complete a comprehensive analysis of all of their federal financial assistance programs to identify programs, projects and activities that may be impacted by any of the president’s executive orders. During this review period, the obligation and disbursement of federal funds were to be paused effective January 28, 2025 at 5:00 p.m.
“The OMB has since issued clarification guidance indicating that any program that provides direct benefits to individuals is not subject to the pause, such as Medicaid, SNAP or Social Security benefits, among others,” said state Department of Budget and Finance Director Luis Salaveria.
“The Department of Accounting and General Services (DAGS) has several divisions or attached agencies that would be affected,” said state Comptroller Keith Regan. “The main impact would be to our public arts initiatives in the State Foundation of Culture and the Arts. Indirectly, it is possible the Archives may need to halt projects funded by its federal grants and our State Procurement Office’s Surplus Property Program may be affected by the pause in funding.”
The Hawai‘i Department of Transportation is working with the Trump Administration on clarifications to the OMB memo, including its impacts on obligated formula projects and discretionary funds.
The state Department of Law Enforcement welcomed the OMB’s clarification memo, but is still seeking final determination of impacts from federal partners.
“The Hawaiʻi Department of Labor and Industrial Relations (DLIR) is deeply concerned about the temporary pause on federal financial assistance and its potential impacts on our ability to deliver essential services,” said DLIR Director Jade T. Butay. “A significant portion of our operations, including workforce development, unemployment insurance, job training and workplace safety through our Occupational Safety and Health division, is supported by federal funds. Any disruption to these critical programs could affect workers, employers and communities statewide. We are actively monitoring the situation and are awaiting further guidance from the U.S. Department of Labor to understand the full scope of the impacts and next steps. We remain committed to serving the people of Hawaiʻi and ensuring the continuity of essential programs.”
The State of Hawaiʻi Department of Defense (HIDOD) (comprising the Hawaiʻi National Guard, Hawaiʻi Emergency Management Agency, Office of Veterans’ Services and Civilian Military Programs) evaluated potential impacts to its core mission to enable a safe, secure, and thriving state of Hawaiʻi. HIDOD relies on approximately $88M in federal funding for its annual operating budget; about $350M to administer its Hazardous Mitigation Program Grant; close to $25M for its Emergency Management Program Grant, and anticipates approximately $56M in FEMA reimbursement for the recent Maui Wildfires disaster response and recovery. It also receives federal grant funding for the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA) program to synergize its counter-narcotics efforts with federal, state and county law enforcement agencies.
“While these federal programs are being reviewed by OMB, there’s no immediate impact to operate, retain qualified personnel, and continue to protect the citizens of the state of Hawaiʻi,”, said Maj. Gen. Stephen Logan, State Adjutant General.
The Hawaiʻi State Public Library System (HSPLS) receives about $1.5M in Library Services and Technology Act funding that ensures that all local residents have access to library materials, technology in the library to connect to the Internet, and online databases that provide equal access to information and learning opportunities no matter where they live. The suspension of this funding will cause our communities to face limited access to information that supports their health, business, education and ability to connect to the world. Specifically, students will not have free access to test preparation and families will not have easy access to legal forms to support their needs.
HSPLS also is a recipient and partner for two digital equity projects. One provides basic digital literacy classes in all of our communities through May of this year. The second is part of the Federal Broadband Equity Access Deployment (BEAD) funding received by the University of Hawaiʻi. The funding supports Digital Literacy Navigators in all public libraries to ensure our patrons have access to learning the digital literacy skills they need to be successful.
Governor Green and his administration will continue to work to support the people of Hawai‘i, prioritizing affordability, housing, reducing homelessness, increasing food security and more, to allow the residents of the islands to live and thrive in the place they love and call home.
# # #
Media Contacts: Erika Engle Press Secretary Office of the Governor, State of Hawai‘i Phone: 808-586-0120 Email: [email protected]
Makana McClellan Director of Communications Office of the Governor, State of Hawaiʻi Cell: 808-265-0083 Email: [email protected]
Imphal (Agenzia Fides) – “There is less violence in Manipur today than a year ago, thanks to the massive presence of the Indian armed forces: more than 70,000 soldiers are deployed in all the buffer zones that separate the two conflicting communities. But the situation remains tense and very polarized. An official ceasefire and concrete mediation measures for pacification are needed. We need peacemakers”, explains to Fides Archbishop Linus Neli of Imphal, capital of the Indian state of Manipur, describing the situation in this state in northeastern India, where an inter-ethnic conflict broke out between the Meitei and Kuki-zo communities in May 2023. To avoid clashes, the temporary solution found by the local government was to separate the belligerents into isolated territories. Constructive steps towards peace are lacking today. Manipur Finance Minister N. Biren Singh said on Sunday that “the government is working for the development of the state” and that it intends to work “for a new Manipur, where peace and love for the past will reign.”Bishop Neli says he is encouraged by this prospect, which, he stresses, must necessarily start from listening to the two conflicting communities: “The two communities,” he notes, “cannot cross into each other’s territory because of the 24-hour surveillance by armed men. In the Meitei community, Christians present report a climate of repression. The Kuki Zo, for their part, are fighting fiercely for a separate administration, which goes against the wishes of the Meitei majority. The Meitei are for the territorial integrity of Manipur and are demanding the status of “recognized tribe,” which has been the cause of intercommunal violence. Today, he says, in this situation, “there is no spontaneous political solution in sight until the state government and the central government work on it.”At the social level, worrying phenomena are manifesting themselves: “The increase in drug trafficking, armed militancy by people who procure weapons, increasing cases of extortion: in other words, crime thrives on the difficulties of the state and the central government in ensuring security,” says the bishop, who notes that “society is highly polarized.” “Only members of neutral communities or other ethnic groups such as the Nagas are allowed to cross the border between the strictly closed areas of the Meitei and the Kuki,” reports Bishop Neli. “The local Church,” he says, “with its religious priests and lay people, continues to provide humanitarian assistance: we are engaged in building houses, providing livelihoods, education, psychosocial support. In addition, he reports, Christians are active and involved in an interfaith forum that is constantly trying to bring the parties to dialogue and peace. We are now calling for a formal truce and a pact, so that civilians can move safely on national roads and have free access to the airport and medical facilities,” he hopes.The Catholic faithful of Manipur, who are part of both the Kuki and the Meitei, are facing the same difficulties and are unable to move, which is impacting the celebrations and activities of the Church: “On the occasion of the Jubilee,” he says, “we celebrated the solemn opening Eucharist in the cathedral, which is in Meitei territory. The Archbishop Emeritus opened another holy door in another church for the Kuki Zo who cannot come here, in the city cathedral. We therefore allow everyone to pray and benefit from the plenary indulgence. We have set the theme of hope for 2025 and a nine-year programme that will lead us to the Jubilee of 2033. We really hope that it will be a journey marked by peace and reconciliation.” (PA) (Agenzia Fides, 29/1/2025)
Share:
TORONTO, Jan. 29, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Carbon Streaming Corporation (Cboe CA: NETZ) (OTCQB: OFSTF) (FSE: M2Q) (“Carbon Streaming” or the “Company”) today provided a project update with respect to the Purchase and Sale Agreement dated as of May 9, 2023, as amended pursuant to that First Amending Agreement, dated as of February 7, 2024 (the “Sheep Creek Stream”), among Carbon Streaming, Mast Reforestation SPV I, LLC (“Mast”) and its parent company DroneSeed Co., d/b/a Mast Reforestation (“Mast Parent Co”).
Carbon Streaming has received a Notice of Adverse Impact from Mast and Mast Parent Co under the Sheep Creek Stream Agreement pursuant to which, among other things, Mast advised Carbon Streaming that the Sheep Creek project has experienced significantly higher than expected mortality rates and that the surviving seedlings had exhibited slower than expected growth rates. As a result, Mast indicated to Carbon Streaming that it no longer expects to deliver the agreed-upon 286,229 forecast mitigation units to Carbon Streaming under the Sheep Creek Stream, as Mast no longer considers the existing Sheep Creek project plan and budget to be viable. Carbon Streaming has formally responded to the Notice of Adverse Impact and requested that Mast respond to Carbon Streaming’s significant concerns regarding, among other things, the timing of the delivery of the Notice of Adverse Impact, and the characterization of the cause of the adverse impact. The Company is continuing to evaluate all legal avenues available under the Sheep Creek Agreement.
The Company had entered into a project pipeline streaming agreement (the “Pipeline Agreement”) for up to US$15 million with Mast and Mast Parent Co, to advance its pipeline of post-wildfire reforestation projects in the Western USA. Carbon Streaming also invested US$2 million into Mast Parent Co through a convertible note (the “Convertible Note”). In October 2023, the Convertible Note was converted into preferred shares of Mast Parent Co upon the execution of a qualifying financing event, resulting in 1.3 million preferred shares of Mast Parent Co (the “Preferred Shares”) being issued to the Company at a fair value of $2.6 million. The Company expects that the facts described above will materially decrease the fair value of the Sheep Creek Stream and the Preferred Shares on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
About Carbon Streaming
The Company’s focus is on projects that generate high-quality carbon credits and have a positive impact on the environment, local communities, and biodiversity, in addition to their carbon reduction or removal potential. This approach aligns our strategic interests with those of project partners to create long-term relationships built on a shared commitment to sustainability and accountability and positions us as a trusted source for buyers seeking high-quality carbon credits.
Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Information
This news release contains certain forward-looking statements and forward-looking information (collectively, “forward-looking information”) within the meaning of applicable securities laws. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, that address activities, events or developments that the Company believes, expects or anticipates will or may occur in the future, are forward-looking information, including, without limitation: statements regarding the feasibility of the project under the Sheep Creek Stream and the implications to the Company’s financial statements; statements regarding the fair value of the Sheep Creek Streaming and the Preferred Shares; and statements regarding the Company’s evaluation of legal avenues under the Sheep Creek Stream.
When used in this news release, words such as “estimates”, “expects”, “plans”, “anticipates”, “will”, “believes”, “intends” “should”, “could”, “may” and other similar terminology are intended to identify such forward-looking statements. This forward-looking information is based on the current expectations or beliefs of the Company based on information currently available to the Company. Forward-looking information is subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that may cause the actual results of the Company to differ materially from those discussed in the forward-looking information, and even if such actual results are realized or substantially realized, there can be no assurance that they will have the expected consequences to, or effects on, the Company. They should not be read as a guarantee of future performance or results, and will not necessarily be an accurate indication of whether or not such results will be achieved. Factors that could cause actual results or events to differ materially from current expectations include, among other things: future engagement with Mast after the date hereof in respect of the Sheep Creek Stream and matters related thereto and arising therefrom; general economic, market and business conditions and global financial conditions, including fluctuations in interest rates, foreign exchange rates and stock market volatility; volatility in prices of carbon credits and demand for carbon credits; change in social or political views towards climate change, carbon credits and ESG initiatives and subsequent changes in corporate or government policies or regulations and associated changes in demand for carbon credits; limited operating history for the Company’s current strategy; risks arising from competition and future acquisition activities; concentration risk; inaccurate estimates of growth strategy; dependence upon key management; impact of corporate restructurings; reputational risk; failure or timing delays for projects to be registered, validated and ultimately developed and for emission reductions or removals to be verified and carbon credits issued (and other risks associated with carbon credits standards and registries); foreign operations and political risks including actions by governmental authorities, including changes in or to government regulation, taxation and carbon pricing initiatives; uncertainties and ongoing market developments surrounding the validation and verification requirements of the voluntary and/or compliance markets; due diligence risks, including failure of third parties’ reviews, reports and projections to be accurate; dependence on project partners, operators and owners, including failure by such counterparties to make payments or perform their operational or other obligations to the Company in compliance with the terms of contractual arrangements between the Company and such counterparties; failure of projects to generate carbon credits, or natural disasters such as flood or fire which could have a material adverse effect on the ability of any project to generate carbon credits; volatility in the market price of the Company’s common shares or warrants; the effect that the issuance of additional securities by the Company could have on the market price of the Company’s common shares or warrants; global health crises, such as pandemics and epidemics; and the other risks disclosed under the heading “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in the Company’s Annual Information Form dated as of March 27, 2024 filed on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca.
Any forward-looking information speaks only as of the date of this news release. Although the Company believes that the assumptions inherent in the forward-looking information are reasonable, forward-looking information is not a guarantee of future performance and accordingly undue reliance should not be put on such statements due to the inherent uncertainty therein. Except as may be required by applicable securities laws, the Company disclaims any intent or obligation to update any forward-looking information, whether as a result of new information, future events or results or otherwise.
Source: Moscow Government – Government of Moscow –
The Great Patriotic War veteran Boris Kravtsov was awarded the title of honorary citizen of the city of Moscow. This in his blog Sergei Sobyanin said.
On the eve of the 80th anniversary of the victory in the Great Patriotic War, Russian President Vladimir Putin put forward an initiative to award the titles of honorary citizens of regions, cities and municipalities to front-line soldiers who participated in the Great Patriotic War.
“In response to this initiative of the head of state, I submitted to the Moscow City Duma a proposal to award the title of honorary citizen of the city of Moscow to war participant Boris Vasilyevich Kravtsov. Today, the deputies supported my proposals,” the Mayor of Moscow noted.
He specified that in the coming days he would send proposals to municipal councils of deputies to award the title of “Honorary Resident of the Municipality” to all Muscovites who participated in the Great Patriotic War.
Boris Kravtsov was born on December 28, 1922 in Moscow. In June 1941, he was mobilized into the Workers’ and Peasants’ Red Army. As a lieutenant, he fought on the Southwestern, Stalingrad and Don fronts. He participated in the Battle of Kharkov, the Battle of Stalingrad, then fought for Donbass, liberated the cities of Pavlograd and Zaporozhye.
On October 24, 1943, Guards Senior Lieutenant Boris Kravtsov and a reconnaissance group crossed the Dnieper River to Khortitsa Island near Zaporozhye. From there, he transmitted targeting information to the artillery via radio, ensuring the suppression of enemy firing points. When enemy soldiers surrounded the scouts’ dugout, Boris Kravtsov called in Soviet artillery fire on his position, which allowed it to be cleared of the enemy. The Red Army soldiers themselves survived the shelling. On December 31, 1943, he received a severe shrapnel wound to the thigh.
By the Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR of March 19, 1944, for the heroic feat demonstrated in the performance of combat missions of the command on the front of the fight against the German invaders, Boris Kravtsov was awarded the title Hero of the Soviet Union. In June 1944, after a long treatment, with the rank of captain, he was discharged from the army due to injury.
After the war, Boris Vasilyevich graduated from the Law Institute, and then worked his entire life in the justice and prosecutor’s offices, rising from a judge to the Minister of Justice of the USSR.
After retirement, Boris Kravtsov became an active participant in the veterans’ movement. In 2022, Vladimir Putin awarded him the Order of Merit for the Fatherland, 1st degree.
“Boris Vasilyevich recently turned 102 years old. He is the only living Hero of the Soviet Union in the country, awarded this title for his exploits during the Great Patriotic War,” added Sergei Sobyanin.
On behalf of the residents of the capital, he congratulated Boris Kravtsov on being awarded the title of “Honorary Citizen of the City of Moscow” and thanked him for his heroic deeds and selfless service to the Motherland and the city.
Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.
Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect
Headline: W&T Offshore Announces Closing of $350 Million Senior Second Lien Notes Offering And Additional Strengthening of Balance Sheet
HOUSTON, Jan. 29, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — W&T Offshore, Inc. (NYSE: WTI) (“W&T Offshore” or the “Company”) today announced the closing, on January 28, 2025, of its previously announced offering of $350 million in aggregate principal amount of 10.750% Senior Second Lien Notes due 2029 (the “Notes”) at par in a private offering that is exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and receipt of proceeds from a previously-announced insurance settlement. In conjunction with the issuance of the Notes, the Company entered into a credit agreement with certain lenders and other parties which provides the Company a revolving credit facility of $50 million.
Closed $350 million of Notes;
Lowered the interest rate from the previous 11.750% Senior Second Lien Notes due 2026 (the “2026 Senior Second Lien Notes”) by one hundred basis points;
Repaid $114.2 million outstanding under the term loan provided by Munich Re Risk Financing, Inc., as lender (the “MRE Term Loan”);
Entered into a new credit agreement for a $50 million revolving credit facility through July 2028 that is undrawn and replaces the previous credit facility provided by Calculus Lending, LLC; and
Received in cash $58.2 million of the previously announced $58.5 million insurance settlement related to the Mobile Bay 78-1 well, with the remainder expected shortly, which further bolsters W&T’s balance sheet.
Tracy W. Krohn, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, commented, “We have begun 2025 with several positive events that improve W&T’s financial position. Over the past month, we have strengthened the balance sheet by closing the new senior second lien notes offering, entering into a new revolving credit facility and collecting our insurance settlement. I would like to thank our banks for running such a smooth process. The new senior second lien notes, which received improved credit ratings from S&P and Moody’s, had a broad distribution. This included international investors and was significantly oversubscribed, further demonstrating the investment community’s confidence in W&T’s underlying asset base. We are likewise pleased to now have access to the bank revolver market again. With pathways in place to bring additional fields back online and our successful actions to enhance our balance sheet, we are well-positioned for success moving forward.”
The Company has used a portion of the proceeds from the Notes offering, along with cash on hand to, (i) purchase for cash pursuant to a tender offer, such of the Company’s outstanding 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes that were validly tendered pursuant to the terms thereof (the “Tender Offer”), (ii) repay outstanding amounts under the MRE Term Loan, (iii) fund the full redemption amount for an August 1, 2025 redemption of the remaining 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes not validly tendered and accepted for purchase in the Tender Offer and (iv) pay premiums, fees and expenses related to the offering of Notes, the Tender Offer, the redemption of the remaining 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes, the satisfaction and discharge of the indenture governing the 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes and the repayment of the MRE Term Loan. On the closing date of the offering of the Notes, the Company completed all actions necessary to satisfy and discharge the indenture governing the 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes.
On January 28, 2025, in conjunction with the issuance of the Notes, the Company entered into a credit agreement (the “Credit Agreement”), by and among the Company, as borrower, Texas Capital Bank, as Administrative Agent, lender and L/C Issuer, TCBI Securities, Inc., doing business as Texas Capital Securities, as Lead Arranger and Bookrunner, the other lenders named therein and other parties thereto which provides the Company a revolving credit and letter of credit facility (the “Credit Facility”), with initial lending commitments of $50 million with a letter of credit sublimit of $10 million. The Credit Facility matures on July 28, 2028.
The Credit Facility is guaranteed by each of the Company’s wholly owned direct and indirect subsidiaries (the “Guarantors”) and is secured by a first-priority lien on substantially all of the natural gas and oil properties and personal property assets of the Company and the Guarantors, other than the Company’s membership interest in its Unrestricted Subsidiaries (as defined in the Credit Agreement) and minority ownership in certain joint venture entities. Certain future-formed or acquired majority-owned domestic subsidiaries of the Company may also be required to guarantee the Credit Facility and grant a security interest in substantially all of their natural gas and oil properties and personal property assets to secure the obligations under the Credit Facility.
This press release is being issued for informational purposes only and does not constitute an offer to purchase or a solicitation of an offer to sell the 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes, and it does not constitute a notice of redemption of the 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes.
The Notes and the related guarantees have not been and will not be registered under the Securities Act or any other securities laws, and the Notes and the related guarantees may not be offered or sold except pursuant to an exemption from, or in a transaction not subject to, the registration requirements of the Securities Act and any other applicable securities laws. The Notes and the related guarantees are being offered only to persons reasonably believed to be qualified institutional buyers in the United States under Rule 144A and to non-U.S. investors outside the United States pursuant to Regulation S.
This press release is being issued for informational purposes only and does not constitute an offer to sell, a solicitation of an offer to buy, or a sale of the Notes, the related guarantees, or any other securities, nor does it constitute an offer to sell, a solicitation of an offer to buy or a sale in any jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale is unlawful.
ABOUT W&T OFFSHORE
W&T Offshore, Inc. is an independent oil and natural gas producer with operations offshore in the Gulf of Mexico and has grown through acquisitions, exploration and development. As of September 30, 2024, the Company had working interests in 53 fields in federal and state waters (which include 46 fields in federal waters and 7 in state waters). The Company has under lease approximately 673,100 gross acres (515,400 net acres) spanning across the outer continental shelf off the coasts of Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi and Alabama, with approximately 514,000 gross acres on the conventional shelf, approximately 153,500 gross acres in the deepwater and 5,600 gross acres in Alabama state waters. A majority of the Company’s daily production is derived from wells it operates.
FORWARD-LOOKING AND CAUTIONARY STATEMENTS
This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All statements other than statements of historical facts included in this release regarding the Company’s financial position, operating and financial performance, and potential to return fields back to production are forward-looking statements. When used in this release, forward-looking statements are generally accompanied by terms or phrases such as “estimate,” “project,” “predict,” “believe,” “expect,” “continue,” “anticipate,” “target,” “could,” “plan,” “intend,” “seek,” “goal,” “will,” “should,” “may” or other words and similar expressions that convey the uncertainty of future events or outcomes, although not all forward-looking statements contain such identifying words. Items contemplating or making assumptions about actual or potential future production and sales, prices, market size, and trends or operating results also constitute such forward-looking statements.
These forward-looking statements are based on the Company’s current expectations and assumptions about future events and speak only as of the date of this release. While management considers these expectations and assumptions to be reasonable, they are inherently subject to significant business, economic, competitive, regulatory and other risks, contingencies and uncertainties, most of which are difficult to predict and many of which are beyond the Company’s control. Accordingly, you are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, as results actually achieved may differ materially from expected results described in these statements. The Company does not undertake, and specifically disclaims, any obligation to update any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances occurring after the date of such statements, unless required by law.
Forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially including, among other things, the regulatory environment, including availability or timing of, and conditions imposed on, obtaining and/or maintaining permits and approvals, including those necessary for drilling and/or development projects; the impact of current, pending and/or future laws and regulations, and of legislative and regulatory changes and other government activities, including those related to permitting, drilling, completion, well stimulation, operation, maintenance or abandonment of wells or facilities, managing energy, water, land, greenhouse gases or other emissions, protection of health, safety and the environment, or transportation, marketing and sale of the Company’s products; inflation levels; global economic trends, geopolitical risks and general economic and industry conditions, such as the global supply chain disruptions and the government interventions into the financial markets and economy in response to inflation levels and world health events; volatility of oil, NGL and natural gas prices; the global energy future, including the factors and trends that are expected to shape it, such as concerns about climate change and other air quality issues, the transition to a low-emission economy and the expected role of different energy sources; supply of and demand for oil, natural gas and NGLs, including due to the actions of foreign producers, importantly including OPEC and other major oil producing companies (“OPEC+”) and change in OPEC+’s production levels; disruptions to, capacity constraints in, or other limitations on the pipeline systems that deliver the Company’s oil and natural gas and other processing and transportation considerations; inability to generate sufficient cash flow from operations or to obtain adequate financing to fund capital expenditures, meet the Company’s working capital requirements or fund planned investments; price fluctuations and availability of natural gas and electricity; the Company’s ability to use derivative instruments to manage commodity price risk; the Company’s ability to meet the Company’s planned drilling schedule, including due to the Company’s ability to obtain permits on a timely basis or at all, and to successfully drill wells that produce oil and natural gas in commercially viable quantities; uncertainties associated with estimating proved reserves and related future cash flows; the Company’s ability to replace the Company’s reserves through exploration and development activities; drilling and production results, lower–than–expected production, reserves or resources from development projects or higher–than–expected decline rates; the Company’s ability to obtain timely and available drilling and completion equipment and crew availability and access to necessary resources for drilling, completing and operating wells; changes in tax laws; effects of competition; uncertainties and liabilities associated with acquired and divested assets; the Company’s ability to make acquisitions and successfully integrate any acquired businesses; asset impairments from commodity price declines; large or multiple customer defaults on contractual obligations, including defaults resulting from actual or potential insolvencies; geographical concentration of the Company’s operations; the creditworthiness and performance of the Company’s counterparties with respect to its hedges; impact of derivatives legislation affecting the Company’s ability to hedge; failure of risk management and ineffectiveness of internal controls; catastrophic events, including tropical storms, hurricanes, earthquakes, pandemics and other world health events; environmental risks and liabilities under U.S. federal, state, tribal and local laws and regulations (including remedial actions); potential liability resulting from pending or future litigation; the Company’s ability to recruit and/or retain key members of the Company’s senior management and key technical employees; information technology failures or cyberattacks; and governmental actions and political conditions, as well as the actions by other third parties that are beyond the Company’s control, and other factors discussed in W&T Offshore’s most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q found at www.sec.gov or at the Company’s website at www.wtoffshore.com under the Investor Relations section.
YAOUNDE – The United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) welcomes a Japanese Yen 200 million (approx. US$ 1.27 million) contribution from the Government of Japan to provide lifesaving food assistance to crisis-affected people across six regions in Cameroon
In collaboration with the government, WFP will provide general food distributions to 17,000 most vulnerable refugees, internally displaced people, vulnerable host populations, including primary school-aged children in the Far North, North, East, Adamawa, North-West and South-West regions of Cameroon.
The funding will also enable WFP to reach 8,200 primary school children with nutritious meals sourced from Japan. Additionally, WFP will extend its integrated food and nutrition assistance to 8,800 refugees, IDPs, and vulnerable host communities located in the Far North, and Eastern regions (East, North, and Adamawa).
“Japan’s support is more than just a lifeline—it is an investment in resilience and hope. By addressing urgent food and nutrition needs, we are creating pathways toward sustainable change for the most vulnerable populations in Cameroon,” said Gianluca Ferrera, WFP’s Country Director in Cameroon. “We are profoundly thankful for Japan’s unwavering dedication to the fight against hunger.”
The humanitarian situation remains critical in Cameroon with 1.1 million people internally displaced as of December 2024, due to the protracted crisis in the lake Chad, North-West and South-West regions, and the adverse effects of climate change such as frequent droughts and floods. The country also hosts 281,488 refugees from the Central African Republic in the Adamawa, East, and North regions. According to the November 2024 Cadre Harmonisé food security analysis over 2.7 million people are projected to experience acute hunger between June and August 2025.
“Through this partnership, the Government of Japan aims to address food security of communities and build their resilience,” said H.E. Mr. Kentaro Minami, Japanese Ambassador to Cameroon. “Our contribution reflects a balanced approach, addressing essential food and nutrition needs while laying the foundation for long-lasting solutions to improve livelihoods of vulnerable populations.”
Overall, in Cameroon, WFP focuses on addressing food insecurity and malnutrition through emergency relief and recovery programmes. This includes the provision of cash and food assistance to crisis-affected people, school meals to primary school children, nutrition support and services to children under 5, pregnant women, and breastfeeding mothers, and food assistance for asset creation. The main objective is to improve school attendance and learning, enhance local agricultural productivity, improve access to nutrition, and strengthen community resilience to climate shocks. WFP is dedicated to supporting vulnerable populations and fostering sustainable development throughout the country.
# # #
The United Nations World Food Programme is the world’s largest humanitarian organization saving lives in emergencies and using food assistance to build a pathway to peace, stability and prosperity for people recovering from conflict, disasters, and the impact of climate change.
Follow us on X, formerly Twitter, via @wfp_media @WFP_Cameroon
The European Commission, through Cohesion Policy funds[1] is already contributing to disaster risk management with EUR 14 billion across EU regions, focusing on the most vulnerable and exposed territories.
For Greece, some EUR 1.4 billion is allocated to prevent and manage climate-related risks[2] in the programming period 2021-2027.
Under the shared management and subsidiarity principles governing the Cohesion Policy Funds, the use of the available resources (project selection and implementation of operations) falls under the responsibility of the Member State.
Member States affected by natural disasters may also benefit from the flexibilities provided by the Regional Emergency Support to Reconstruction — RESTORE Regulation which entered into force on 24 December 2024[3].
This will enable Member States to reprogramme part of their Cohesion Policy funds allocations for actions and projects in response to natural disasters, including reconstruction and repair measures to alleviate the negative socioeconomic consequences of natural disasters.
Union support could cover up to 95% of the expenditure and include an additional pre-financing of 25%. This will ease the budgetary pressure on affected Member States and regions.
Finally, the EU Solidarity Fund, upon request, is available to support Member States targeting costs for emergency and recovery operations[4] caused by major natural disasters.
[1] European Regional Development Fund, Cohesion Fund, Just Transition Fund and Interreg programmes
[2] Out of the EUR 1.4 billion, some EUR 726 million in public funding is allocated to prevent and manage climate-related flood risks.
[3] Regulation (EU) 2024/3236 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 2024 amending Regulations (EU) 2021/1057 and (EU) 2021/1058 as regards Regional Emergency Support to Reconstruction (RESTORE), available at the following link : http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/3236/oj
[4] The EU Solidarity Fund (EUSF) can only be activated at the request of the Member State which has a deadline of 12 weeks as from when the first damage occurred, demonstrating that the total direct damage exceeds the thresholds specified in Article 2 Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002. The EUSF may cover a part of the costs for emergency and recovery operations incurred by public authorities. This means, for example, the recovery of essential infrastructure, provision of temporary accommodation to the population, cleaning-up operations, and protection of the cultural heritage. Private damage is not eligible.
ST. LOUIS, Jan. 29, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Stifel Financial Corp. (NYSE: SF) today reported net revenues of $1.36 billion for the three months ended December 31, 2024, compared with $1.15 billion a year ago. Net income available to common shareholders of $234.7 million, or $2.09 per diluted common share, compared with $153.2 million, or $1.38 per diluted common share for the fourth quarter of 2023. Non-GAAP net income available to common shareholders of $249.7 million, or $2.23 per diluted common share for the fourth quarter of 2024.
Net revenues of $4.97 billion for the year ended December 31, 2024 compared to $4.35 billion a year ago. Net income available to common shareholders of $694.1 million, or $6.25 per diluted common share, compared with $485.3 million, or $4.28 per diluted common share in 2023. Non-GAAP net income available to common shareholders of $755.9 million, or $6.81 per diluted common share in 2024.
Ronald J. Kruszewski, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, said “Stifel generated record net revenue and the second highest earnings per share in our history in 2024. The fact that we accomplished this level of performance in a year when our Institutional segment was rebounding from a very difficult operating environment in 2023 is a testament to the strength and diversity of our business model. Given our long history of profitable growth, Stifel is well positioned to capitalize on improving market conditions in 2025 and to achieve our short and long term targets.”
Full Year Highlights
The Company reported record net revenues of $4.97 billion driven by higher investment banking revenues, asset management revenues, and transactional revenues, partially offset by lower net interest income.
Non-GAAP net income available to common shareholders of $6.81.
Record asset management revenues, up 18% over 2023.
Record client assets of $501.4 billion, up 13% over 2023.
Recruited 100 financial advisors during the year, including 34 experienced employee advisors and 12 experienced independent advisors.
Non-GAAP pre-tax margin of 20%.
Return on average tangible common equity (ROTCE) (5) of 23%.
Tangible book value per common share (7) of $34.99, up 12% from prior year.
Fourth Quarter Highlights
Quarterly record net revenues of $1.36 billion.
Non-GAAP net income available to common shareholders of $2.23.
Investment banking revenue increased 48% over the year-ago quarter, driven by higher advisory and capital raising revenues.
Capital raising revenues increased 50% over the year-ago quarter.
Advisory revenues increased 47% over the year-ago quarter.
Non-GAAP pre-tax margin of 21%.
Annualized ROTCE (5) of 28%.
Other Highlights
Board of Directors authorized a 10% increase in common stock dividend starting in the first quarter of 2025.
Announced the acquisition of Bryan, Garnier, & Co.
Financial Summary (Unaudited)
(000s)
4Q 2024
4Q 2023
FY 2024
FY 2023
GAAP Financial Highlights:
Net revenues
$1,364,682
$1,146,379
$4,970,320
$4,348,944
Net income (1)
$234,685
$153,164
$694,098
$485,255
Diluted EPS (1)
$2.09
$1.38
$6.25
$4.28
Comp. ratio
58.3%
58.8%
58.7%
58.7%
Non-comp. ratio
22.2%
23.2%
22.6%
25.1%
Pre-tax margin
19.5%
18.0%
18.7%
16.2%
Non-GAAP Financial Highlights:
Net revenues
$1,364,721
$1,146,419
$4,971,051
$4,348,958
Net income (1)(2)
$249,710
$166,587
$755,896
$531,524
Diluted EPS (1) (2)
$2.23
$1.50
$6.81
$4.68
Comp. ratio (2)
58.0%
58.0%
58.0%
58.0%
Non-comp. ratio (2)
21.3%
22.6%
21.9%
24.3%
Pre-tax margin (3)
20.7%
19.4%
20.1%
17.7%
ROCE (4)
20.1%
14.6%
15.9%
11.5%
ROTCE (5)
28.3%
21.3%
22.7%
16.6%
Global Wealth Management (assets and loans in millions)
Net revenues
$865,209
$766,028
$3,283,960
$3,049,962
Pre-tax net income
$316,318
$301,360
$1,207,942
$1,215,822
Total client assets
$501,402
$444,318
Fee-based client assets
$192,705
$165,301
Bank loans, net (6)
$21,311
$19,730
Institutional Group
Net revenues
$478,335
$359,292
$1,592,833
$1,226,317
Equity
$280,159
$200,915
$926,729
$709,286
Fixed Income
$198,176
$158,377
$666,104
$517,031
Pre-tax net income
$95,681
$7,771
$223,400
$2,100
Global Wealth Management
Fourth Quarter Results
Global Wealth Management reported record net revenues of $865.2 million for the three months ended December 31, 2024 compared with $766.0 million during the fourth quarter of 2023. Pre-tax net income was $316.3 million compared with $301.4 million in the fourth quarter of 2023.
Highlights
Client assets of $501.4 billion, up 13% over the year-ago quarter.
Fee-based client assets of $192.7 billion, up 17% over the year-ago quarter.
Recruited 8 financial advisors during the quarter, including 4 experienced employee advisors with total trailing 12 month production of $8 million.
Net revenues increased 13% from a year ago:
Transactional revenues increased 18% over the year-ago quarter reflecting an increase in client activity.
Asset management revenues increased 23% over the year-ago quarter reflecting higher asset values as a result of improved market conditions and net cash inflows.
Net interest income decreased 1% from the year-ago quarter primarily as a result of lower rates, partially offset by balance sheet growth.
Total Expenses:
Compensation expense as percent of net revenues increased to 48.5% primarily as a result of higher compensable revenues.
Provision for credit losses was primarily impacted by loan growth and a deterioration in certain loans, partially offset by a slightly better macroeconomic forecast.
Non-compensation operating expenses as a percent of net revenues increased to 14.9% primarily as a result of higher litigation-related expenses and an increase in the provision for credit losses, partially offset by revenue growth.
Summary Results of Operations
(000s)
4Q 2024
4Q 2023
Net revenues
$865,209
$766,028
Transactional revenues
200,564
169,471
Asset management
405,800
330,498
Net interest income
254,337
257,920
Investment banking
5,198
4,562
Other income
(690)
3,577
Total expenses
$548,891
$464,668
Compensation expense
419,466
359,376
Provision for credit losses
11,893
(37)
Non-comp. opex
117,532
105,329
Pre-tax net income
$316,318
$301,360
Compensation ratio
48.5%
46.9%
Non-compensation ratio
14.9%
13.8%
Pre-tax margin
36.6%
39.3%
Institutional Group
Fourth Quarter Results
Institutional Group reported net revenues of $478.3 million for the three months ended December 31, 2024 compared with $359.3 million during the fourth quarter of 2023. Pre-tax net income was $95.7 million compared with $7.8 million in the fourth quarter of 2023.
Highlights
Investment banking revenues increased 49% from a year ago:
Advisory revenues of $189.9 million increased 47% from the year-ago quarter driven by higher levels of completed advisory transactions.
Fixed income capital raising revenues increased 53% over the year-ago quarter primarily driven by higher bond issuances.
Equity capital raising revenues increased 52% over the year-ago quarter driven by higher volumes.
Fixed income transactional revenues increased 16% from a year ago:
Fixed income transactional revenues increased from the year-ago quarter driven by improved client engagement and realized trading gains.
Equity transactional revenues increased 5% from a year ago:
Equity transactional revenues increased from the year-ago quarter primarily driven by an increase in equities trading commissions.
Total Expenses:
Compensation expense as a percent of net revenues decreased to 58.6% primarily as a result of higher revenues.
Non-compensation operating expenses as a percent of net revenues decreased to 21.4% primarily as a result of revenue growth.
Summary Results of Operations
(000s)
4Q 2024
4Q 2023
Net revenues
$478,335
$359,292
Investment banking
299,221
201,102
Advisory
189,912
129,378
Fixed income capital raising
61,424
40,214
Equity capital raising
47,885
31,510
Fixed income transactional
118,700
102,019
Equity transactional
59,409
56,501
Other
1,005
(330)
Total expenses
$382,654
$351,521
Compensation expense
280,261
248,970
Non-comp. opex.
102,393
102,551
Pre-tax net income
$95,681
$7,771
Compensation ratio
58.6%
69.3%
Non-compensation ratio
21.4%
28.5%
Pre-tax margin
20.0%
2.2%
Global Wealth Management
Full Year Results
Global Wealth Management reported record net revenues of $3.3 billion for the year ended December 31, 2024 compared with $3.0 billion in 2023. Pre-tax net income of $1.2 billion decreased 1% from 2023.
Highlights
Recruited 100 financial advisors during the year, including 34 experienced employee advisors and 12 experienced independent advisors with total trailing 12 month production of $37 million.
Net revenues increased 8% from prior year:
Transactional revenues increased 15% from prior year reflecting an increase in client activity.
Asset management revenues increased 18% from prior year reflecting higher asset values as a result of improved market conditions and net cash inflows.
Net interest income decreased 11% from prior year primarily driven by changes in the deposit mix, partially offset by lending growth and higher rates.
Total Expenses:
Compensation expense as a percent of net revenues increased to 48.9% primarily as a result of higher compensable revenues.
Provision for credit losses was primarily impacted by loan growth and a deterioration in certain loans, partially offset by a slightly better macroeconomic forecast.
Non-compensation operating expenses as a percent of net revenues increased to 14.3% primarily as a result of higher litigation-related expenses and an increase in the provision for credit losses, partially offset by revenue growth.
Summary Results of Operations
(000s)
FY 2024
FY 2023
Net revenues
$3,283,960
$3,049,962
Transactional revenues
752,352
654,231
Asset management
1,536,296
1,299,361
Net interest income
967,712
1,086,628
Investment banking
21,475
16,680
Other income
6,125
(6,938)
Total expenses
$2,076,018
$1,834,140
Compensation expense
1,605,148
1,415,210
Provision for credit losses
25,102
22,699
Non-comp. opex
445,768
396,231
Pre-tax net income
$1,207,942
$1,215,822
Compensation ratio
48.9%
46.4%
Non-compensation ratio
14.3%
13.7%
Pre-tax margin
36.8%
39.9%
Institutional Group
Full Year Results
Institutional Group reported net revenues of $1.6 billion for the year ended December 31, 2024 compared with $1.2 billion in 2023. Pre-tax net income was $223.4 million compared with $2.1 million in 2023.
Highlights
Investment banking revenues increased 36% from prior year:
Advisory revenues of $577.4 million increased 24% from prior year driven by higher levels of completed advisory transactions.
Fixed income capital raising revenues increased 48% from prior year driven by an increase in our corporate debt issuance business.
Equity capital raising revenues increased 74% from prior year driven by higher volumes.
Fixed income transactional revenues increased 27% from prior year:
Fixed income transactional revenues increased from prior year driven by improved client engagement, market volatility, and realized trading gains.
Equity transactional revenues increased 7% from prior year:
Equity transactional revenues increased from prior year driven by an increase in equities trading commissions.
Total Expenses:
Compensation expense as a percent of net revenues decreased to 60.2% primarily as a result of higher revenues.
Non-compensation operating expenses as a percent of net revenues decreased to 25.8% as a result of revenue growth and expense discipline.
Summary Results of Operations
(000s)
FY 2024
FY 2023
Net revenues
$1,592,833
$1,226,317
Investment banking
973,356
714,575
Advisory
577,432
465,588
Fixed income capital raising
209,047
141,647
Equity capital raising
186,877
107,340
Fixed income transactional
393,013
308,393
Equity transactional
215,223
201,413
Other
11,241
1,936
Total expenses
$1,369,433
$1,224,217
Compensation expense
959,602
841,671
Non-comp. opex.
409,831
382,546
Pre-tax net income
$223,400
$2,100
Compensation ratio
60.2%
68.6%
Non-compensation ratio
25.8%
31.2%
Pre-tax margin
14.0%
0.2%
Other Matters
Highlights
Total assets increased $2.1 billion, or 6%, over the year-ago quarter.
The Board of Directors approved a 10% increase in the quarterly dividend to $0.46 per common share starting in the first quarter of 2025.
The Company repurchased $45.5 million of its outstanding common stock during the fourth quarter. During 2024, the Company repurchased $242.6 million of its outstanding common stock.
Weighted average diluted shares outstanding increased from the year-ago quarter as a result of the increase in share price and a decrease in share repurchases over the comparable period.
The effective tax rate was primarily impacted by the benefit related to the tax impact on stock-based compensation.
The Board of Directors declared a $0.42 quarterly dividend per share payable on December 16, 2024 to common shareholders of record on December 2, 2024.
The Board of Directors declared a quarterly dividend on the outstanding shares of the Company’s preferred stock payable on December 16, 2024 to shareholders of record on December 2, 2024.
4Q 2024
4Q 2023
FY 2024
FY 2023
Common stock repurchases
Repurchases (000s)
$45,461
$141,138
$242,628
$518,296
Number of shares (000s)
408
2,345
3,140
8,475
Average price
$111.30
$60.18
$77.28
$61.16
Period end shares (000s)
102,171
101,062
102,171
101,062
Weighted average diluted shares outstanding (000s)
112,089
111,330
110,975
113,453
Effective tax rate
8.3%
21.1%
21.2%
26.1%
Stifel Financial Corp.(8)
Tier 1 common capital ratio
15.4%
14.2%
Tier 1 risk based capital ratio
18.2%
17.2%
Tier 1 leverage capital ratio
11.4%
10.5%
Tier 1 capital (MM)
$4,331
$3,916
Risk weighted assets (MM)
$23,742
$22,748
Average assets (MM)
$38,073
$37,451
Quarter end assets (MM)
$39,896
$37,727
Agency
Rating
Outlook
Fitch Ratings
BBB+
Stable
S&P Global Ratings
BBB
Stable
Conference Call Information
Stifel Financial Corp. will host its fourth quarter and full year 2024 financial results conference call on Wednesday, January 29, 2025, at 9:30 a.m. Eastern Time. The conference call may include forward-looking statements.
All interested parties are invited to listen to Stifel’s Chairman and CEO, Ronald J. Kruszewski, by dialing (866) 409-1555 and referencing conference ID 7408307. A live audio webcast of the call, as well as a presentation highlighting the Company’s results, will be available through the Company’s web site, www.stifel.com. For those who cannot listen to the live broadcast, a replay of the broadcast will be available through the above-referenced web site beginning approximately one hour following the completion of the call.
Company Information
Stifel Financial Corp. (NYSE: SF) is a financial services holding company headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri, that conducts its banking, securities, and financial services business through several wholly owned subsidiaries. Stifel’s broker-dealer clients are served in the United States through Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Incorporated, including its Eaton Partners and Miller Buckfire business divisions; Keefe, Bruyette & Woods, Inc.; and Stifel Independent Advisors, LLC; in Canada through Stifel Nicolaus Canada Inc.; and in the United Kingdom and Europe through Stifel Nicolaus Europe Limited. The Company’s broker-dealer affiliates provide securities brokerage, investment banking, trading, investment advisory, and related financial services to individual investors, professional money managers, businesses, and municipalities. Stifel Bank and Stifel Bank & Trust offer a full range of consumer and commercial lending solutions. Stifel Trust Company, N.A. and Stifel Trust Company Delaware, N.A. offer trust and related services. To learn more about Stifel, please visit the Company’s website at www.stifel.com. For global disclosures, please visit www.stifel.com/investor-relations/press-releases.
A financial summary follows. Financial, statistical and business-related information, as well as information regarding business and segment trends, is included in the financial supplement. Both the earnings release and the financial supplement are available online in the Investor Relations section at www.stifel.com/investor-relations.
The information provided herein and in the financial supplement, including information provided on the Company’s earnings conference calls, may include certain non-GAAP financial measures. The definition of such measures or reconciliation of such measures to the comparable U.S. GAAP figures are included in this earnings release and the financial supplement, both of which are available online in the Investor Relations section at www.stifel.com/investor-relations.
This earnings release contains certain statements that may be deemed to be “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. All statements in this earnings release not dealing with historical results are forward-looking and are based on various assumptions. The forward-looking statements in this earnings release are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in or implied by the statements. Factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from those contemplated by such forward-looking statements include, among other things, the following possibilities: the ability to successfully integrate acquired companies or the branch offices and financial advisors; a material adverse change in financial condition; the risk of borrower, depositor, and other customer attrition; a change in general business and economic conditions; changes in the interest rate environment, deposit flows, loan demand, real estate values, and competition; changes in accounting principles, policies, or guidelines; changes in legislation and regulation; other economic, competitive, governmental, regulatory, geopolitical, and technological factors affecting the companies’ operations, pricing, and services; and other risk factors referred to from time to time in filings made by Stifel Financial Corp. with the Securities and Exchange Commission. For information about the risks and important factors that could affect the Company’s future results, financial condition and liquidity, see “Risk Factors” in Part I, Item 1A of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023. Forward-looking statements speak only as to the date they are made. The Company disclaims any intent or obligation to update forward-looking statements to reflect circumstances or events that occur after the date the forward-looking statements are made.
Summary Results of Operations (Unaudited)
Three Months Ended
Year Ended
(000s, except per share amounts)
12/31/2024
12/31/2023
% Change
9/30/2024
% Change
12/31/2024
12/31/2023
% Change
Revenues:
Commissions
$
203,786
$
173,614
17.4
$
183,445
11.1
$
756,024
$
673,597
12.2
Principal transactions
174,887
154,377
13.3
137,089
27.6
604,564
490,440
23.3
Investment banking
304,419
205,664
48.0
243,182
25.2
994,831
731,255
36.0
Asset management
405,825
330,536
22.8
382,616
6.1
1,536,674
1,299,496
18.3
Other income
3,294
9,687
(66.0
)
18,705
(82.4
)
43,129
8,747
393.1
Operating revenues
1,092,211
873,878
25.0
965,037
13.2
3,935,222
3,203,535
22.8
Interest revenue
500,661
516,213
(3.0
)
510,823
(2.0
)
2,016,464
1,955,745
3.1
Total revenues
1,592,872
1,390,091
14.6
1,475,860
7.9
5,951,686
5,159,280
15.4
Interest expense
228,190
243,712
(6.4
)
251,192
(9.2
)
981,366
810,336
21.1
Net revenues
1,364,682
1,146,379
19.0
1,224,668
11.4
4,970,320
4,348,944
14.3
Non-interest expenses:
Compensation and benefits
795,750
674,437
18.0
718,065
10.8
2,916,229
2,554,581
14.2
Non-compensation operating expenses
302,731
265,947
13.8
289,945
4.4
1,125,647
1,087,671
3.5
Total non-interest expenses
1,098,481
940,384
16.8
1,008,010
9.0
4,041,876
3,642,252
11.0
Income before income taxes
266,201
205,995
29.2
216,658
22.9
928,444
706,692
31.4
Provision for income taxes
22,196
43,511
(49.0
)
58,153
(61.8
)
197,065
184,156
7.0
Net income
244,005
162,484
50.2
158,505
53.9
731,379
522,536
40.0
Preferred dividends
9,320
9,320
0.0
9,320
0.0
37,281
37,281
0.0
Net income available to common shareholders
$
234,685
$
153,164
53.2
$
149,185
57.3
$
694,098
$
485,255
43.0
Earnings per common share:
Basic
$
2.26
$
1.47
53.7
$
1.43
58.0
$
6.67
$
4.55
46.6
Diluted
$
2.09
$
1.38
51.4
$
1.34
56.0
$
6.25
$
4.28
46.0
Cash dividends declared per common share
$
0.42
$
0.36
16.7
$
0.42
0.0
$
1.68
$
1.44
16.7
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding:
Basic
103,856
103,934
(0.1
)
103,966
(0.1
)
104,066
106,661
(2.4
)
Diluted
112,089
111,330
0.7
110,994
1.0
110,975
113,453
(2.2
)
Non-GAAP Financial Measures(9)
Three Months Ended
Year Ended
(000s, except per share amounts)
12/31/2024
12/31/2023
12/31/2024
12/31/2023
GAAP net income
$244,005
$162,484
$731,379
$522,536
Preferred dividend
9,320
9,320
37,281
37,281
Net income available to common shareholders
234,685
153,164
694,098
485,255
Non-GAAP adjustments:
Merger-related (10)
16,820
16,921
60,745
63,222
Restructuring and severance (11)
(430)
—
10,792
—
Provision for income taxes (12)
(1,365)
(3,498)
(9,739)
(16,953)
Total non-GAAP adjustments
15,025
13,423
61,798
46,269
Non-GAAP net income available to common shareholders
$249,710
$166,587
$755,896
$531,524
Weighted average diluted shares outstanding
112,089
111,330
110,975
113,453
GAAP earnings per diluted common share
$2.18
$1.46
$6.59
$4.61
Non-GAAP adjustments
0.14
0.12
0.56
0.40
Non-GAAP earnings per diluted common share
$2.32
$1.58
$7.15
$5.01
GAAP earnings per diluted common share available to common shareholders
$2.09
$1.38
$6.25
$4.28
Non-GAAP adjustments
0.14
0.12
0.56
0.40
Non-GAAP earnings per diluted common share available to common shareholders
$2.23
$1.50
$6.81
$4.68
GAAP to Non-GAAP Reconciliation(9)
Three Months Ended
Year Ended
(000s)
12/31/2024
12/31/2023
12/31/2024
12/31/2023
GAAP compensation and benefits
$795,750
$674,437
$2,916,229
$2,554,581
As a percentage of net revenues
58.3%
58.8%
58.7%
58.7%
Non-GAAP adjustments:
Merger-related (10)
(4,641)
(9,203)
(22,039)
(32,150)
Restructuring and severance (11)
430
—
(10,792)
—
Total non-GAAP adjustments
(4,211)
(9,203)
(32,831)
(32,150)
Non-GAAP compensation and benefits
$791,539
$665,234
$2,883,398
$2,522,431
As a percentage of non-GAAP net revenues
58.0%
58.0%
58.0%
58.0%
GAAP non-compensation expenses
$302,731
$265,947
$1,125,647
$1,087,671
As a percentage of net revenues
22.2%
23.2%
22.6%
25.1%
Non-GAAP adjustments:
Merger-related (10)
(12,140)
(7,678)
(37,975)
(31,058)
Non-GAAP non-compensation expenses
$290,591
$258,269
$1,087,672
$1,056,613
As a percentage of non-GAAP net revenues
21.3%
22.6%
21.9%
24.3%
Total adjustments
$16,390
$16,921
$71,537
$63,222
Footnotes
(1) Represents available to common shareholders.
(2) Reconciliations of the Company’s GAAP results to these non-GAAP measures are discussed within and under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” and “GAAP to Non-GAAP Reconciliation.”
(3) Non-GAAP pre-tax margin is calculated by adding total non-GAAP adjustments and dividing it by non-GAAP net revenues. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” and “GAAP to Non-GAAP Reconciliation.”
(4) Return on average common equity (“ROCE”) is calculated by dividing annualized net income applicable to common shareholders by average common shareholders’ equity or, in the case of non-GAAP ROCE, calculated by dividing non-GAAP net income applicable to commons shareholders by average common shareholders’ equity.
(5) Return on average tangible common equity (“ROTCE”) is calculated by dividing annualized net income applicable to common shareholders by average tangible shareholders’ equity or, in the case of non-GAAP ROTCE, calculated by dividing non-GAAP net income applicable to common shareholders by average tangible common equity. Tangible common equity, also a non-GAAP financial measure, equals total common shareholders’ equity less goodwill and identifiable intangible assets and the deferred taxes on goodwill and intangible assets. Average deferred taxes on goodwill and intangible assets was $80.3 million and $71.1 million as of December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
(6) Includes loans held for sale.
(7) Tangible book value per common share represents shareholders’ equity (excluding preferred stock) divided by period end common shares outstanding. Tangible common shareholders’ equity equals total common shareholders’ equity less goodwill and identifiable intangible assets and the deferred taxes on goodwill and intangible assets.
(8) Capital ratios are estimates at time of the Company’s earnings release, January 29, 2025.
(9) The Company prepares its Consolidated Financial Statements using accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (U.S. GAAP). The Company may disclose certain “non-GAAP financial measures” in the course of its earnings releases, earnings conference calls, financial presentations and otherwise. The Securities and Exchange Commission defines a “non-GAAP financial measure” as a numerical measure of historical or future financial performance, financial position, or cash flows that is subject to adjustments that effectively exclude, or include, amounts from the most directly comparable measure calculated and presented in accordance with U.S. GAAP. Non-GAAP financial measures disclosed by the Company are provided as additional information to analysts, investors and other stakeholders in order to provide them with greater transparency about, or an alternative method for assessing the Company’s financial condition or operating results. These measures are not in accordance with, or a substitute for U.S. GAAP, and may be different from or inconsistent with non-GAAP financial measures used by other companies. Whenever the Company refers to a non-GAAP financial measure, it will also define it or present the most directly comparable financial measure calculated and presented in accordance with U.S. GAAP, along with a reconciliation of the differences between the non-GAAP financial measure it references and such comparable U.S. GAAP financial measure.
(10) Primarily related to charges attributable to integration-related activities, signing bonuses, amortization of restricted stock awards, debentures, and promissory notes issued as retention, additional earn-out expense, and amortization of intangible assets acquired. These costs were directly related to acquisitions of certain businesses and are not representative of the costs of running the Company’s on-going business.
(11) The Company recorded severance costs associated with workforce reductions in certain of its foreign subsidiaries.
(12) Primarily represents the Company’s effective tax rate for the period applied to the non-GAAP adjustments.
Headline: W&T Offshore Announces Initial Results of Cash Tender Offer and Consent Solicitation
HOUSTON, Jan. 29, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — W&T Offshore, Inc. (NYSE: WTI) (“W&T” or the “Company”) announced today the initial results of its previously announced cash tender offer (the “Tender Offer”) relating to any and all of its outstanding 11.750% senior second lien notes due 2026 (the “2026 Senior Second Lien Notes”) pursuant to its Offer to Purchase and Consent Solicitation dated January 13, 2025 (the “Offer to Purchase”). In conjunction with the Tender Offer, the Company also solicited consents (the “Consent Solicitation”) from the holders of the 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes for the adoption of proposed amendments (the “Proposed Amendments”), which, among other things, eliminated substantially all of the restrictive covenants, as well as various events of default and related provisions contained in the indenture governing the 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes (the “Indenture”).
As of 5:00 p.m. (New York City time) on January 27, 2025, the Company had received the requisite tenders and consents to the Proposed Amendments. The Proposed Amendments became effective on January 27, 2025 upon execution of a supplemental indenture to the indenture governing the 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes.
On January 28, 2025 (the “Early Settlement Date”), the Company accepted and purchased $269,741,000 aggregate principal amount of the outstanding 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes (or approximately 98.09% of the outstanding principal amount of 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes) for a purchase price equal to $1,036.25, plus accrued and unpaid interest, for each $1,000 principal amount of the 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes purchased. After giving effect to the purchase of 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes on the Early Settlement Date, an aggregate $5,259,000 principal amount of the 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes will remain outstanding.
W&T’s tender offer for the 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes will expire at 5:00 p.m. (New York City time) on February 11, 2025, unless the Tender Offer is extended by the Company in its sole discretion (the “Expiration Time”). Holders of the 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes who validly tender their 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes on or prior to the Expiration Time, and whose 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes are accepted for purchase, will receive consideration of $1,006.25 per $1,000 principal amount of the 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes tendered. In addition, the Company will pay accrued and unpaid interest on the principal amount of 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes accepted for purchase from the most recent interest payment date on the 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes to, but not including, February 13, 2025, the final settlement date.
Also on January 28, 2025, the Company mailed a notice of redemption to each remaining holder of 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes. The notice of redemption calls for the redemption of any 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes that remain outstanding on August 1, 2025. Such redemption is being made in accordance with the “optional redemption” provision of the Indenture, at a redemption price equal to 100.000% of the aggregate principal amount of the 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes, plus accrued and unpaid interest up to, but excluding, the date of redemption.
Because the withdrawal deadline of 5:00 p.m. (New York City time) on January 27, 2025 has passed, previously tendered 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes may no longer be withdrawn, and holders who tender 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes after the withdrawal deadline will not have withdrawal rights.
W&T engaged Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC to act as dealer manager for the Tender Offer and as solicitation agent for the Consent Solicitation and can be contacted at (212) 761-1057 (collect) or (800) 624-1808 (toll-free) with questions regarding the Tender Offer and Consent Solicitation.
Copies of the Offer to Purchase are available to holders of 2026 Second Senior Lien Notes from D.F. King & Co., Inc., the information agent and tender agent for the Tender Offer and the Consent Solicitation. Requests for copies of the Offer to Purchase should be directed to D.F. King at (866) 620-2535 (toll free), (212) 269-5550 (banks and brokers) or wtoffshore@dfking.com
Neither the Offer to Purchase nor any related documents have been filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), nor have any such documents been filed with or reviewed by any federal or state securities commission or regulatory authority of any country. No authority has passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of the Offer to Purchase or any related documents, and it is unlawful and may be a criminal offense to make any representation to the contrary.
The Tender Offer and the Consent Solicitation were made solely on the terms and conditions set forth in the Offer to Purchase. Under no circumstances shall this press release constitute an offer to buy or the solicitation of an offer to sell the 2026 Second Senior Lien Notes or any other securities of the Company or any of its subsidiaries. The Tender Offer and the Consent Solicitation are not being made to, nor will the Company accept tenders of 2026 Second Senior Lien Notes or deliveries of consents from, holders in any jurisdiction in which the Tender Offer and the Consent Solicitation or the acceptance thereof would not be in compliance with the securities of blue sky laws of such jurisdiction. This press release also is not a solicitation of consents to the Proposed Amendments to the indenture governing the 2026 Second Senior Lien Notes. No recommendation is made as to whether holders should tender their 2026 Second Senior Lien Notes or deliver their consents with respect to the 2026 Second Senior Lien Notes. Holders should carefully read the Offer to Purchase because it contains important information, including the terms and conditions of the Tender Offer and the Consent Solicitation.
About W&T Offshore
W&T Offshore, Inc. is an independent oil and natural gas producer, active in the exploration, development and acquisition of oil and natural gas properties in the Gulf of Mexico. As of September 30, 2024, the Company had working interests in 53 producing offshore fields in federal and state waters (which include 46 fields in federal waters and seven in state waters). The Company has under lease approximately 673,100 gross acres (515,400 net acres) spanning across the outer continental shelf off the coasts of Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi and Alabama, with approximately 514,000 gross acres on the conventional shelf, approximately 153,500 gross acres in the deepwater and 5,600 gross acres in Alabama state waters. A majority of the Company’s daily production is derived from wells it operates. For more information on W&T, please visit the Company’s website at www.wtoffshore.com.
Forward-Looking and Cautionary Statements
This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All statements other than statements of historical facts included in this release regarding the Company’s financial position, operating and financial performance, timing and completion of the Tender Offer and Consent Solicitation are forward-looking statements. When used in this release, forward-looking statements are generally accompanied by terms or phrases such as “estimate,” “project,” “predict,” “believe,” “expect,” “continue,” “anticipate,” “target,” “could,” “plan,” “intend,” “seek,” “goal,” “will,” “should,” “may” or other words and similar expressions that convey the uncertainty of future events or outcomes, although not all forward-looking statements contain such identifying words. Items contemplating or making assumptions about actual or potential future production and sales, prices, market size, and trends or operating results also constitute such forward-looking statements.
These forward-looking statements are based on the Company’s current expectations and assumptions about future events and speak only as of the date of this release. While management considers these expectations and assumptions to be reasonable, they are inherently subject to significant business, economic, competitive, regulatory and other risks, contingencies and uncertainties, most of which are difficult to predict and many of which are beyond the Company’s control. Accordingly, you are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, as results actually achieved may differ materially from expected results described in these statements. The Company does not undertake, and specifically disclaims, any obligation to update any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances occurring after the date of such statements, unless required by law.
Forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially including, among other things, the regulatory environment, including availability or timing of, and conditions imposed on, obtaining and/or maintaining permits and approvals, including those necessary for drilling and/or development projects; the impact of current, pending and/or future laws and regulations, and of legislative and regulatory changes and other government activities, including those related to permitting, drilling, completion, well stimulation, operation, maintenance or abandonment of wells or facilities, managing energy, water, land, greenhouse gases or other emissions, protection of health, safety and the environment, or transportation, marketing and sale of the Company’s products; inflation levels; global economic trends, geopolitical risks and general economic and industry conditions, such as the global supply chain disruptions and the government interventions into the financial markets and economy in response to inflation levels and world health events; volatility of oil, NGL and natural gas prices; the global energy future, including the factors and trends that are expected to shape it, such as concerns about climate change and other air quality issues, the transition to a low-emission economy and the expected role of different energy sources; supply of and demand for oil, natural gas and NGLs, including due to the actions of foreign producers, importantly including OPEC and other major oil producing companies (“OPEC+”) and change in OPEC+’s production levels; disruptions to, capacity constraints in, or other limitations on the pipeline systems that deliver the Company’s oil and natural gas and other processing and transportation considerations; inability to generate sufficient cash flow from operations or to obtain adequate financing to fund capital expenditures, meet the Company’s working capital requirements or fund planned investments; price fluctuations and availability of natural gas and electricity; the Company’s ability to use derivative instruments to manage commodity price risk; the Company’s ability to meet the Company’s planned drilling schedule, including due to the Company’s ability to obtain permits on a timely basis or at all, and to successfully drill wells that produce oil and natural gas in commercially viable quantities; uncertainties associated with estimating proved reserves and related future cash flows; the Company’s ability to replace the Company’s reserves through exploration and development activities; drilling and production results, lower–than–expected production, reserves or resources from development projects or higher–than–expected decline rates; the Company’s ability to obtain timely and available drilling and completion equipment and crew availability and access to necessary resources for drilling, completing and operating wells; changes in tax laws; effects of competition; uncertainties and liabilities associated with acquired and divested assets; the Company’s ability to make acquisitions and successfully integrate any acquired businesses; asset impairments from commodity price declines; large or multiple customer defaults on contractual obligations, including defaults resulting from actual or potential insolvencies; geographical concentration of the Company’s operations; the creditworthiness and performance of the Company’s counterparties with respect to its hedges; impact of derivatives legislation affecting the Company’s ability to hedge; failure of risk management and ineffectiveness of internal controls; catastrophic events, including tropical storms, hurricanes, earthquakes, pandemics and other world health events; environmental risks and liabilities under U.S. federal, state, tribal and local laws and regulations (including remedial actions); potential liability resulting from pending or future litigation; the Company’s ability to recruit and/or retain key members of the Company’s senior management and key technical employees; information technology failures or cyberattacks; and governmental actions and political conditions, as well as the actions by other third parties that are beyond the Company’s control, and other factors discussed in W&T Offshore’s most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q found at www.sec.gov or at the Company’s website at www.wtoffshore.com under the Investor Relations section.
Disclaimer
This press release must be read in conjunction with the Offer to Purchase. This announcement and the Offer to Purchase contain important information which must be read carefully before any decision is made with respect to the Tender Offer and the Consent Solicitation. If any holder of 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes is in any doubt as to the actions it should take, it is recommended to seek its own legal, tax, accounting and financial advice, including as to any tax consequences, immediately from its stockbroker, bank manager, attorney, accountant or other independent financial or legal adviser. Any individual or company whose 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes are held on its behalf by a broker, dealer, bank, custodian, trust company or other nominee or intermediary must contact such entity if it wishes to participate in the Offer to Purchase. None of the Company, the dealer manager and solicitation agent, the information agent and tender agent and any person who controls, or is a director, officer, employee or agent of such persons, or any affiliate of such persons, makes any recommendation as to whether holders of 2026 Senior Second Lien Notes should participate in the Tender Offer.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
The Government has published new independent research into the safety of e-bike and e-scooter lithium-ion batteries, chargers and e-bike conversion kits.
A lithium-ion battery with a battery management system.
The Government has published new independent research into the safety of e-bike and e-scooter lithium-ion batteries, chargers and e-bike conversion kits.
The Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS) commissioned Warwick Manufacturing Group (WMG) to produce the research to improve Government’s evidence base on the risks associated with unsafe e-bike and e-scooter batteries and chargers, following a rise in the number of fires in the UK related to these products, some of which have sadly led to fatalities.
The research gives new insight into:
how battery failures occur during real-world use and environments, including scenarios of foreseeable misuse or modification
the types of processes and materials used in product manufacture that achieve safer design and safer use of lithium-ion batteries
potential shortcomings in technical requirements in product standards that have not kept pace with technological innovation
The research brings together evidence and data from the UK and overseas with input from stakeholders and businesses across the supply chain. This evidence gathering has been supported by detailed technical product inspections and product testing in laboratory settings.
OPSS is carefully assessing the evidence to inform our future activity and is working to support wider Government and interested stakeholders on future actions that could be taken to improve the safety of these products.
A WMG spokesperson said: “We are delighted to have had the opportunity to assist OPSS to achieve a deeper understanding of the root causes of these battery fires.”
OPSS is already undertaking a programme of enforcement and market surveillance activity. In December 2024, the Government published new statutory guidelines for businesses producing and distributing lithium-ion batteries for e-bikes. The guidelines set out that such batteries must contain mechanisms capable of preventing thermal runaway to be considered safe products.
OPSS is also assessing products and conducting checks on businesses selling e-bikes, e-scooters and kits used to convert standard bikes to e-bikes, both online and on the High Street. Since 2022, there have been 21 product recalls, and 29 Product Safety Reports published for unsafe or non-compliant e-bikes or e-scooters subject to corrective action.
This activity follows the launch of Government’s Buy Safe, Be Safe consumer information campaign which launched in October 2024 to raise awareness of these risks, and provided safety advice for consumers purchasing e-bikes, e-scooters and lithium-ion batteries.
There is information about public services affected by Storm Éowyn and drop-in centres for those without water or power. Also, advice on food safety, the dangers of carbon monoxide and damaged electricity equipment or power lines. Keep a close eye on neighbours and support them in whatever way you can.
Emergency numbers
You should note the following numbers in case of emergency:
You can information about electricity supply, including an updated list of areas affected by power cuts, on the NIE Networks website.
Local councils information and community assistance or drop-in centres
There is information about community assistance or drop-in centres at this link – NIE Networks representatives will be at a number of these venues:
You can find your local council area information, including about community drop-in centres, at these links:
Water supply
If there are difficulties with water supply and sewerage, you will get the most up-to-date information on areas experiencing disruption and what is being done on the NI Water website. This includes a full postcode search facility.
You can also phone Waterline 24 hours a day/ 365 days a year on:
03457 440088
Older people, people with a serious medical condition, or people who need extra help for any other reason can join the NI Water customer care register to get a range of free extra services.
Carbon monoxide dangers
If you’re without electricity, using equipment such as kerosene heaters, charcoal grills (BBQs) and portable generators indoors can cause carbon monoxide levels high enough to result in carbon monoxide poisoning.
Only equipment designed to be used indoors should be brought inside the home.
For any fuel-burning equipment indoors:
there must be good ventilation
it must be used with a carbon monoxide alarm
Always follow the manufacturer’s guidance.
There is further advice at this link:
Symptoms of carbon monoxide poisoning include headaches, nausea, breathlessness, dizziness, collapse, and loss of consciousness.
If affected, you should:
open doors and windows for ventilation and go outside into the fresh air
go to your GP or nearest Emergency Department
if it’s urgent, call 999
call the relevant emergency advice line
Gas Emergency Service (24 hours) 0800 002 001
Oil (OFTEC) 0845 65 85 080
Food safety advice
If a power cut has affected your home and you have no electricity supply, it’s important you continue to store and prepare food safely.
You can find advice at this link:
If your water supply is cut off, it is recommended using alcohol-based hand sanitiser for cleaning your hands before touching food.
Report a fallen tree or blocked road
You can report a fallen tree or blocked road at the following link:
Roads information
Work is ongoing to remove obstructions. Road users are advised to use caution, as there is debris on some roads and roadsides.
You can get the latest updates about roads at this link:
Where roads are closed, follow road signs and any diversions in place.
Public transport
For the latest information on bus and train services, go to the Translink website.
School closures
You can find information about schools affected by the bad weather at this link:
MOT and driving tests
Driver and Vehicle Agency (DVA) testing services resumed as scheduled on Saturday 25 January.
There is some disruption for vehicle tests anticipated at Armagh and Omagh, and driving tests at Altnagelvin.
DVA will contact affected customers.
Unless you receive a notification from DVA, you should arrive for your appointment as scheduled.
Public libraries
All public libraries are open, with free Wi-Fi, power outlets, and seating.
Find out more about the services available at:
Jobs and Benefits offices and Department for Communities offices
All Jobs and Benefits offices and Department for Communities offices are open, except for the Foyle Jobs and Benefit Office due to some storm damage.
Temporary closure of Foyle Jobs and Benefits office
Information for benefits customers:
Foyle Jobs and Benefits office is currently closed due to storm damage
staff working remotely are providing a normal service
while the office is closed, benefit payments due will still be paid by the date due
Universal Credit customers can use the online service and journal as usual
telephone calls will be handled by staff working remotely
Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA) signing at Foyle Jobs and Benefits offices is excused
staff will contact affected customers for telephone or alternative in-person appointments
customers in need of urgent in-person support can contact another Jobs and Benefits office
Forests, country parks, nature reserves and angling
Safe public access at all sites by the storm will be reinstated as soon as possible.
Birdkeepers
Birdkeepers are reminded to be extra vigilant during the clean-up following the storm.
Headline: Threat predictions for industrial enterprises 2025
Key global cyberthreat landscape development drivers
Hunt for innovations
Innovations are changing our lives. Today, the world is on the threshold of another technical revolution. Access to new technologies is a ticket to the future, a guarantee of economic prosperity and political sovereignty. Therefore, many countries are looking for their way into the new technological order, investing in promising research and development in a variety of areas: AI and machine learning, quantum computing, optical electronics, new materials, energy sources and types of engines, satellites and telecommunications, genetics, biotechnology and medicine.
In terms of cybersecurity, growing interest in innovation means APTs are focusing on institutions and enterprises involved in new tech research and development. As the demand for the technical know-how grows, elite cybercriminal groups – such as top ransomware gangs and hacktivists – are also joining the game, hunting for the leading innovative enterprises’ trade secrets.
Industrial enterprises should keep in mind that this information might be even easier to access and exfiltrate from the shop floor than from within research lab and office network perimeters. The supply chain and network of trusted partners are also very logical potential targets.
Intentionally created barriers and sanction wars
Increasing geopolitical turbulence, sanction wars, and the artificial restriction of access to efficient technology is boosting the drive to violate the intellectual property rights of leading enterprises. This may lead to the following security risks.
OT technology developers and suppliers are facing the problem that existing mechanisms built into their products may no longer be effectively safeguarding their intellectual property.
Сracks, third-party patches, and various other ways to bypass license restrictions, come at the price of increased cybersecurity risks right inside OT perimeter.
In addition to stealing documentation related to cutting-edge technological developments, attackers will continue to hunt for technical know-how – for example, collecting 3D/physical models and CAD/CAM designs as we saw in the attacks by Librarian Ghouls.
PLC programs, SCADA projects, and other sources of technological process information stored in OT assets may also become another target for malicious actors.
New technologies mean new cyber risks
When trying something completely new, one should always expect some unexpected consequences in addition to the promised benefits. Today, many industrial enterprises are keeping up with organizations in other sectors (for example, financial or retail) in the implementation of IT innovations, such as augmented reality and quantum computing. As in many other fields, the biggest boost in efficiency is expected from the widespread use of machine learning and AI systems, including their direct application in production – when tweaking and adjusting technological process control. Already today, the use of such systems at certain facilities, such as non-ferrous metallurgy, can increase final product output by an estimated billion dollars per year. Once an enterprise experiences such an increase in efficiency, there’s no going back – such a system will become an essential production asset. This may affect the industrial threat landscape in several ways:
The improper use of AI technologies in the IT and operational processes of industrial enterprises may lead to the unintended disclosure of confidential information (for example, by being entered into a model training dataset) and to new security threats. The seriousness and likelihood of some of these threats is currently hard to assess.
Both the AI systems and the unique enterprise data they use (either in its raw form – historical telemetry data – used as a training dataset, or as neural network weights incorporated into the AI model), if they become crucial assets, may now be new cyberattack targets. For example, if the systems or data get locked by the bad guys, they may be impossible to restore. Additionally, attacking these systems may not pose risks to the safety of the victim facility, unlike for traditional OT systems, meaning malicious actors may be more inclined to go for the attack.
Attackers also do not ignore technical progress; their use of AI at various stages of the killchain (for malicious tools development and social engineering, such as text generation for phishing emails) reduces costs, thereby accelerating the development of cyberthreats. This tendency will certainly evolve in 2025.
Time-tested technologies mean new cyber risks
Just because a system has not been attacked, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it is well protected. It could be that attackers have simply not reached it yet – perhaps because they already had simpler, more reliable and automated ways to perform attacks, or maybe you’ve just been lucky.
The expression “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” takes on a special meaning in OT infrastructures. Sometimes systems have been running for years or even decades without any modifications, even without installing critical security patches or changing insecure configurations, such as unnecessary network services, debug interfaces and weak passwords. Sometimes systems are still running in the exact same state as when they were put into operation.
Things get even more complicated when you take into account the poor quality of information about OT product vulnerabilities available from the developers or public sources. Fortunately, malicious actors still very rarely attack industrial assets and industrial automation systems.
Moreover, in addition to unprotected industrial automation systems such as PLCs and SCADA servers, which are in fact very difficult to keep cybersecure, there are many other types of devices and even entire infrastructures that are somehow connected to the technological network. The security of these systems is often unjustifiably overlooked:
Telecom equipment. Its security is usually considered either the responsibility of the telecom operator or thought to be unnecessary for some reason. For example, mobile base stations and technological networks of mobile operators are believed to be already sufficiently protected from cyberattacks, which is why “no one attacks them”. For some reason, this problem is largely ignored by security researchers as well: while the security of endpoints and their key components, such as modems, is thoroughly studied, there are extremely few in-depth publications on the security of base stations or core network equipment. However, the equipment can obviously be compromised, at least from the operator’s side, for example, during maintenance. After all, telecom operators themselves are far from being immune to cyberattacks, as the story of the Blackwood attacks using the NSPX30 implant shows us. Thus, the following must be kept in mind:
At the very least, the threat model of industrial enterprises must include “man-in-the-middle” attacks on telecom equipment and the infrastructure of telecom operators.
Given how rapidly all kinds of smart remote monitoring and control systems are being implemented – primarily in mining and logistics, but also in other sectors and types of facilities – the priority of securing telecom-related infrastructures will only increase correspondingly. For example, to guarantee the safety of robotized infrastructures and the use of automated transport at facilities, we’re seeing the introduction of wireless communication. Industrial enterprises should clearly invest in telecom security in order to avoid cyberincidents, perhaps as early as this year.
The security of smart sensors, meters, measuring and control devices, and other devices in the Industrial Internet of Things is typically neglected by both the enterprises using them and, correspondingly, the developers themselves. However, as the history of FrostyGoop shows, these devices may also become attack targets.
The connection points of small remote industrial infrastructure facilities typically use inexpensive network equipment, sometimes not even designed for industrial use (for example, SOHO devices). Their cybersecurity can be extremely difficult to keep in good condition, both due to architectural limitations and the complexity of centralized maintenance. At the same time, such devices can be manipulated not only to distribute general-purpose malware or host botnet agents (as in the case of Flax Typhoon/Raptor Train), but also as an entry point into the IT or OT network.
The Windows OS family has been the most popular platform for workstations and automation system servers for decades. However, in recent years, many industrial enterprises have been increasingly installing Linux-based systems in their OT circuits, for various reasons. One of the decisive arguments in favor of choosing Linux is often the belief that such systems are more resistant to cyberattacks. On the one hand, there is indeed less malware that can run on this OS, and the probability of accidental infection is lower than for Windows OS. On the other hand, protecting Linux systems against a targeted attack is just as difficult, and in some cases even more so. The fact is that:
Developers of security solutions for Linux have to catch up with solutions protecting Windows infrastructure. For a long time, many functions were not in demand by customers and, therefore, were not implemented. At the same time, implementing new functionality is more expensive because it is necessary to support multiple OS strains developing in parallel, and the integration of security solutions is not a priority for kernel developers. There are two downstream consequences of this: first, a lack of effective standard integration mechanisms, and second, updating the kernel can easily “break” compatibility – and a simple module rebuild may not be enough.
On the industrial enterprise side, there are clearly not enough information security specialists who are also Linux experts, so both secure device configuration and monitoring and incident detection may not be that effective.
Both Linux OT solutions themselves and their developers often demonstrate insufficient information security maturity and can be an easy target for attackers, as was revealed, for example, during the investigation of a series of Sandworm attacks on Ukrainian critical infrastructure facilities.
Wrong vendor choice means big trouble
Insufficient investment of product developers or technology providers in their own information security guarantees that their customers will experience incidents. This problem is especially relevant for providers of niche products and services. An illustrative case is the attack on CDK Global, which led to direct losses of its customers exceeding a total of one billion dollars.
The situation for industrial enterprises is complicated by a number of factors. Key among these are:
Extremely long technology supply chains. Equipment, including automation systems for key production assets, is very complex. An enterprise’s industrial equipment fleet may include both all the main components typical of IT systems and many components created as a result of cooperation between multiple manufacturers of industry-specific technologies. Many of these may be relatively small developers of niche solutions without the necessary resources to satisfactorily ensure their own security and that of their products. Moreover, the installation, initial setup, and regular maintenance of equipment requires the involvement of various third-party specialists, further expanding the attack surface of the supply chain and trusted partners.
Almost every large industrial organization is its own vendor. The specifics of the particular industry and enterprise require significant modification of ready-made solutions, as well as the development of new automation solutions tailored for the organization. Often, these developments are carried out either within the organization itself or by subsidiaries or related companies. All of this multiplies almost all of the risk factors described above: such developments are rarely carried out with a high level of security maturity, resulting in solutions full of basic vulnerabilities that even mediocre attackers can exploit. Obviously, these security issues are already being used in cyberattacks and will continue to be.
Security by obscurity doesn’t work anymore for OT infrastructures
The availability of so many tools for working with industrial equipment (just count the number of libraries and utilities implementing industrial network protocols posted on GitHub) makes developing and implementing an attack on an industrial enterprise’s main production assets significantly easier than just a few years ago. In addition, industrial enterprises themselves continue to evolve – over the past few years, we’ve seen big efforts to not only automate production, but also to inventory and document systems and processes. Now, to impact an industrial facility on the cyber-physical level, attackers no longer need to carefully study textbooks on the particular type of protective systems (such as SIS or circuit/relay protection) basics and to involve external experts in the particular industry. All the necessary information is now available in convenient digital form in the organization’s administrative and technological network. We have seen cases of attackers telling journalists that after they entered the victims’ network perimeter they studied internal facility’s safety-related documentation for a long time before choosing which OT systems to attack, in order to avoid putting employee’s lives at risk or polluting the environment as a result of the attack.
The government’s social housing regulator has issued a decision on Portsmouth City Council following the council’s self-referral last year.
The Regulator of Social Housing (the regulator) has said that the service is ‘in need of significant improvement’.
The grading is not unexpected, and the council has had a work plan in place for some time to address areas that have been identified as in need of change.
In April 2024, the regulator introduced new consumer standards for social housing landlords, which confirmed government expectations and introduced new regular inspections for local authorities.
This means landlords need to be able to show data and evidence that proves they are compliant with the new standards and that they are delivering good services to tenants.
The council chose to fulfil its legal duty to self-refer to the regulator in September 2024 and informed tenants and reported to the council’s September Housing decision meeting. Landlords need to inform the social housing regulator of areas where there are gaps that mean they may not meet the standards. This is called a self-referral and is seen as a positive step, with the regulator encouraging landlords to do so. The regulator noted the council had “engaged constructively” and “acted transparently” by making a detailed self-referral.
The regulator says that the council has failed to meet the safety and quality standard – one of the four of its standards – in the following areas:
Stock condition surveys, which did not include all required information
Electrical safety, relating to the recency of information
Outstanding fire remedial actions
Emergency repairs clarity and oversight
These are all areas the council is aware of. The council has a plan to tackle these which includes: increased officer visits to tenants’ homes to make sure information is up to standard and up to date, increasing the frequency of electrical testing, improving the way information is recorded and stored including around repairs, and responding to outstanding fire actions in priority order, with plans to invest significantly in this area. An update report will be going to the council’s housing decision meeting in February.
The regulator has acknowledged that the council, which is landlord to around 17,000 homes across the south, is “taking steps to address the serious failings identified and make significant improvements”.
Cllr Darren Sanders, Cabinet Member for Housing and Tackling Homelessness, said: “We knew there was room for improvement to meet the new regulator standards. That’s why we referred ourselves and have publicised this to our tenants and other stakeholders. We welcome and accept the findings of the regulator and will work constructively and proactively with them and our tenants on those areas they have identified.
“I am confident we are already addressing the issues raised. Tenants are at the heart of everything we do, and tenant feedback reassures us that they have confidence in us as a landlord. We want to be open and transparent with our tenants, leaseholders and shared-owners, and to embrace the on-going work plan. This is the start of our journey with the regulator, and we will continue to work closely with them.”
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
Portsmouth City Council issued with a C3 grading by the Regulator of Social Housing
The Regulator of Social Housing has issued a C3 grading to Portsmouth City Council, after an investigation found they had failed to meet the outcomes of the consumer standards, in particular those relating to the Safety and Quality Standard.
RSH’s responsive engagement with Portsmouth CC began in August 2024, after information in the council’s Fire Safety Remediation Survey return indicated potentially material issues.
Although RSH’s initial engagement focused on fire safety, Portsmouth CC was then asked to provide further information on wider aspects of landlord health and safety and, following a self-assessment, the council made a self-referral to RSH in September 2024.
An investigation into the landlord found:
Over 1,000 outstanding fire remedial actions.
Over 85% of its homes have not had an electrical condition test for over five years, a number of which are located in high-risk communal blocks.
Less than 40% of its homes had been surveyed within the last five years, more than a third had been surveyed more than ten years ago, and nearly 10% had no record at all. Additionally, stock condition surveys undertaken prior to 2024 did not include an assessment of hazards
A lack of clarity for tenants as to what they can expect in terms of the repairs service.
Kate Dodsworth, Chief of Regulatory Engagement at RSH, said:
“The health and safety of tenants is non-negotiable.
“Providing safe, decent homes for tenants starts with accurate, up-to-date data. Without this, it is impossible to deliver the right services to residents.
“Portsmouth City Council has engaged constructively with us and we welcome their transparency in making a self-referral. This is the first step towards addressing the serious failings identified and making significant improvements.”
RSH also published regulatory judgements from proactive inspections for two landlords.
Aspire Housing received a C1 for its first consumer grading, as well as being upgraded to a G1 governance grading and retaining its V2 viability grading.
Sanctuary Housing Association received a C2 grading, and retained its G1 and V2 gradings.
RSH published a further 12 regulatory judgements through its stability check programme, with Incommunities Limited and Magenta Living both regraded from V1 to V2. The remaining 10 landlords retained their viability and governance ratings.
Stability checks are a yearly exercise where we look at the financial information landlords have submitted to us (including their most recent business plan and annual accounts) and consider whether their current viability grade is consistent with this
On 1 April 2024 RSH introduced new consumer standards for social housing landlords, designed to drive long-term improvements in the sector. It also began a programme of inspections for all large social landlords (those with over 1,000 homes) over a four-year cycle. The changes are a result of the Social Housing Regulation Act 2023 and include stronger powers to hold landlords to account. More information about RSH’s approach is available in its document Reshaping Consumer Regulation.
RSH carries out stability checks on all housing associations, and other private registered providers, who own 1,000 homes or more. The stability checks are a yearly exercise. We look at the financial information landlords have submitted to us (including their most recent business plan and annual accounts) and consider if there are any risks which might result in a change to their financial viability or governance gradings. The checks do not include local authorities because our governance and financial viability standard does not apply to them.
RSH promotes a viable, efficient and well-governed social housing sector able to deliver more and better social homes. It does this by setting standards and carrying out robust regulation focusing on driving improvement in social landlords, including local authorities, and ensuring that housing associations are well-governed, financially viable and offer value for money. It takes appropriate action if the outcomes of the standards are not being delivered.
Source: United States Department of Justice (National Center for Disaster Fraud)
Defendant defrauded Americans for a decade with trove of over 14,000 stolen identities
Tacoma – The second of two Nigerian men residing in Canada who defrauded pandemic aid programs of millions was sentenced today in U.S. District Court in Tacoma to 54 months in prison for wire fraud and aggravated identity theft announced U.S. Attorney Tessa M. Gorman. Fatiu Ismaila Lawal, 46, was extradited from Canada last July, and pleaded guilty in September 2024. At today’s sentencing hearing U.S. District Judge Tiffany M. Cartwright said, the crime required substantial planning. “This took advantage of programs designed to help people who were really struggling in an international emergency,” Judge Cartwright said.
“This defendant made it his full-time job to defraud the U.S. for years before the pandemic, but he kicked it into high gear once critical aid to Americans workers was flowing,” said U.S. Attorney Gorman. “His fraud included using stolen identities of Washington residents to file dozens of unemployment claims in the first few weeks of the pandemic, contributing to the flood of fraudulent claims that caused the state to pause all unemployment payments. In this way his fraud harmed all Washingtonians who desperately needed assistance at the onset of the pandemic.”
According to records filed in the case, Lawal, and codefendant Sakiru Olanrewaju Ambali, 46, used the stolen identities of thousands of workers to submit over 1,700 claims for pandemic unemployment benefits to over 25 different states, including Washington State. In total, the claims sought approximately $25 million, but the conspirators obtained approximately $2.7 million, primarily from pandemic unemployment benefits. Lawal admits that he personally submitted claims for $1,345,472.
Lawal personally submitted at least 790 unemployment claims using the stolen identities of 790 workers. He submitted claims for pandemic unemployment benefits to New York, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, California, Washington and some 19 other states. Lawal also established four internet domain names that were subsequently used for fraud – creating some 800 different email addresses that were used in this scheme.
Additionally, between 2018 and November 2022, Lawal used stolen personal information to submit 3,000 income tax returns for $7.5 million in refunds. The IRS detected the fraud and paid just $30,000.
“While Mr. Lawal may not have secured the $7.5 million he sought from fraudulent tax refunds, each of the 3,000 returns he filed represents a life he disrupted,” said Adam Jobes, Special Agent in Charge of IRS Criminal Investigation’s Seattle Field Office.
Lawal and co-defendant Ambali also attempted to use the stolen American identities for Economic Injury Disaster Loans (EIDL) to defraud the Small Business Administration (SBA). The pair submitted some 38 applications, but SBA caught most of the fraud and paid only $2,500.
Lawal and Ambali had the proceeds of their fraud sent to cash cards or to “money mules” who transferred the funds according to instructions given by the co-conspirators. They also allegedly used stolen identities to open bank accounts and have the money deposited directly into those accounts for their use.
Evidence gathered in the case shows that Lawal personally received a substantial portion of the criminal proceeds. Lawal was ordered to pay restitution of $1,345,472.
In asking for a 65-month prison sentence, the government argued, “During major disasters and nationwide emergencies, it is particularly importantfor the government to be able to disburse aid quickly to real victims to mitigate the impact of the crisis. The actual monetary loss to the government comes secondary to the fact that a real person or business behind each stolen identity had difficulty accessing assistance because a fraudulent claim was already paid in their identity. These difficulties were further compounded by the onslaught of fraudulent claims that clogged the infrastructure in place to distribute the aid. The estimated loss from these fraudulent pandemic unemployment claims is over $100 billion.”
The National Unemployment Fraud Task Force provided a lead on this case to the investigative team in Western Washington. The case was investigated by the FBI with assistance from U.S. Postal Inspection Service (USPIS) and the Department of Labor Office of Inspector General (DOL-OIG). Also contributing to the investigation were Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI), Washington State Employment Security Division (ESD), and the Small Business Administration (SBA).
The case was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Cindy Chang of the Western District of Washington. DOJ’s Office of International Affairs assisted with extradition on this matter.
The COVID-19 Fraud Enforcement Task Force was established to marshal the resources of the Department of Justice in partnership with agencies across government to enhance efforts to combat and prevent pandemic-related fraud. The Task Force bolsters efforts to investigate and prosecute the most culpable domestic and international criminal actors and assists agencies tasked with administering relief programs to prevent fraud by augmenting and incorporating existing coordination mechanisms, identifying resources and techniques to uncover fraudulent actors and their schemes, and sharing and harnessing information and insights gained from prior enforcement efforts. For more information on the department’s response to the pandemic, please visit https://www.justice.gov/coronavirus.
Anyone with information about allegations of attempted fraud related to COVID-19 can report it by calling the Department of Justice’s National Center for Disaster Fraud (NCDF) Hotline via the NCDF Web Complaint Form at https://www.justice.gov/disaster-fraud/ncdf-disaster-complaint-form.
Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray
Murray: “In a brazen and illegal move, the Trump administration is working to freeze huge chunks of federal funding passed into law—by Republicans and Democrats alike. Now, not even 24 hours later, they are issuing new guidance trying to clean up the massive mess they have made, saying: ‘Wait, we don’t actually know what we are doing….’ but still leaving needless uncertainty about what actually is happening—and they are still—let me make that clear: still—withholding approved funding all across government.”
***VIDEO HERE***
Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, joined Senate Democrats’ weekly press conference and discussed the Trump administration’s unprecedented and illegal directives to withhold vast chunks of federal funding that were signed into law by Republicans and Democrats alike. She also touched on the recent update the Trump administration sent on its orders, as well as Senate Democrats’ resolution condemning President Trump’s pardons for violent insurrectionists.
Earlier today, Senator Murray joined colleagues in raising the alarm on the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) memo issued by the Trump administration last night directing agencies to withhold federal funding and creating mass chaos and confusion in the process.
Last night, Senator Murray and House Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Rosa DeLauro sent a letter to Acting OMB Director Matthew J. Vaeth raising the alarm on President Trump’s unlawful executive orders and the new memoranda issued by OMB on Monday directing agencies to withhold vast swaths of approved federal funding.
A fact sheet on the issue of the impoundment is available HERE.
Senator Murray’s remarks, as delivered, are below:
“Every one of us in this building owes a huge debt to our Capitol Police. Considering all they sacrifice to keep us safe, we should be able to say—with one voice—that if you violently assault a Capitol Police officer, you should not get a pardon. You should not get off scot free. I will have more to say later on the floor—but from Trump pardoning violent insurrectionists to issuing blatantly unconstitutional executive orders to lawlessly blocking bipartisan funding, we have a lot more ground to cover. And today I want to talk about the OMB guidance the Trump administration issued in the dead of night.
“In a brazen and illegal move, the Trump administration is working to freeze huge chunks of federal funding passed into law—by Republicans and Democrats alike.
“Now, not even 24 hours later, they are issuing new guidance trying to clean up the massive mess they have made, saying: ‘Wait, we don’t actually know what we are doing….’ But still leaving needless uncertainty about what actually is happening—and they are still—let me make that clear: still—withholding approved funding all across government.
“Meanwhile, this chaos is already hurting people, causing confusion, and causing devastating delays. I mean where do we start here? There are a lot of urgent questions but precious few answers—and the answers keep changing.
“What about grants for public safety? Grants for firefighters and for police departments, or that prevent violence against women—those aren’t direct to individuals—are they still halted?
“Or health care? What about community health centers that millions rely on—including in rural areas?
“Or money fighting the opioid crisis—grants that go to states, communities, and non-profits? Are they stopping funding for addiction treatment and prevention?
“Or clinical studies. Scientists at the University of Washington and Washington State University are deeply alarmed—this is not theoretical; research projects will collapse and staff will be furloughed or laid off.
“Tribes in my state are deeply alarmed that they will see severe cuts across health care, education, law enforcement, housing—practically every aspect of daily life on Indian land.
“And of course, what about disaster relief that could be derailed? In Eastern Washington, in my home state, $44 million to help Spokane County rebuild after wildfires—money that was announced weeks ago—is that still on pause? Last week Trump visited communities in North Carolina and California still reeling from disaster; now he is throwing the aid those communities need into chaos.
“Schools that need Title I payments are worried they may not get the funds that Congress has allocated and voted on.
“Suddenly, we don’t know: How will Meals on Wheels feed seniors who depend on them? Or what this means for homeless veterans we are working to get housed?
“Entire budgets and payrolls across the country are carefully hinging on these resources—we’re talking about small towns, cities, rural America, school districts, universities, and much more.
“And look—saying, ‘just kidding’ not even 24 hours later—is not a solution.
“You can’t pretend you had no idea it would cause chaos despite all the warnings. That is not believable, and even if it was true, it’s not a good reason for the damage caused.
“Even despite what we’ve heard from the administration in the last hour or so, they are still illegally withholding funding owed to all of our states—that basic truth has not changed.
“So I am urging my fellow Republicans to open your eyes to just how bad this is and will be for your states and your communities and speak out. I know reports say the White House is trying to silence members who have done that—but stand up. We are talking about your constituents.
“And specifically, I am urging my Republican colleagues on the Senate Budget Committee to vote against Russ Vought’s nomination. Republicans should not advance this nomination out of committee until the Trump administration follows the law.
“And I am warning the Trump Administration—the law is the law. You need toreverse course, follow the requirements of the law, ensure the nation’s spending laws are implemented as Congress intended, and avoid this pointless, damaging chaos.”
Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray
ICYMI: Schumer, Murphy, Kim Lead 47 Senators in Introducing Resolution Condemning Pardons of Individuals Found Guilty of Assaulting Capitol Police Officers
Murray: “Trump is showing every day, with nearly every action—that he has zero regard for the laws of our country. From pardoning, en masse, violent insurrectionists, to illegally firing government watchdogs charged with holding him accountable, to issuing blatantly unconstitutional executive orders, to asking OMB to halt funding Congress passed—something that is causing serious chaos and harm to red states and blue states alike.”
***VIDEO HERE of Senator Murray’s floor speech***
Washington, D.C. — Today, Republicans senselessly blocked a one-line resolution offered by U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) and her Democratic colleagues that simply condemns the pardons of individuals found guilty of assaulting Capitol Police Officers. After Republican John Barrasso (R-WY) blocked the resolution, Murray and Senate Democrats took to the Senate floor to speak out against Trump’s move to grant full, complete, and unconditional pardons to violent criminals who assaulted U.S. Capitol Police officers and call out Republicans for refusing to stand up for the Capitol Police who put their lives on the line—and suffered severe injuries—protecting senators’ lives on January 6th.
All 47 Members of the Senate Democratic Caucus are cosponsors of the resolution, which simply states: “Resolved, That the Senate disapproves of any pardons for individuals who were found guilty of assaulting Capitol Police officers.” A PDF of the resolution is HERE.
On the Senate floor today, Senator Murray made clear that the throughline of the first week of the Trump administration has been lawlessness—with Trump, “showing every day, with nearly every action, that he has zero regard for the laws of our country. From pardoning, en masse, violent insurrectionists, to illegally firing government watchdogs charged with holding him accountable, to issuing blatantly unconstitutional executive orders, to asking OMB to HALT funding Congress passed— something that is now causing serious chaos and harm to red states and blue states.”
“I will not sit back and allow President Trump to rewrite the history of the January 6th insurrection,” Murray continued. “Officers here sacrificed tremendously to keep senators safe, Republicans and Democrats alike—and we have the footage, photos, and police reports that clearly show the crimes and the violence committed… President Trump’s decision to pardon, en masse, 1,500 people charged in the insurrection is a truly unthinkable attempt to erase the facts of that day, and undermine our democracy. But it is especially heinous that he chose to pardon individuals who violently attacked our Capitol Police officers… It is a betrayal of the law enforcement that protected us all that day and a dangerous endorsement of political violence—telling criminals that you can beat cops within an inch of their lives as long as it’s in service to Donald Trump.”
According to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, approximately 1,572 defendants have been federally charged with crimes associated with the attack of the U.S. Capitol on January 6th. This includes approximately 598 charged with assaulting, resisting, or impeding law enforcement agents or officers or obstructing those officers during a civil disorder, including approximately 171 defendants charged with using a deadly or dangerous weapon or causing serious bodily injury to an officer. As proven in Court, the weapons used and carried on Capitol grounds during the January 6th attack include firearms; OC spray; tasers; edged weapons, including a sword, axes, hatchets, and knives; and makeshift weapons, such as destroyed office furniture, fencing, bike racks, stolen riot shields, baseball bats, hockey sticks, flagpoles, PVC piping, and reinforced knuckle gloves. During the siege of the Capitol on January 6th, 2021, over 80 U.S. Capitol Police Officers were assaulted.
Senator Murray’s full remarks, as delivered, are below and video is HERE:
“Mr. President, we are a week into the Trump Administration, and it can be summed up in one word: lawlessness. Trump is showing every day, with nearly every action, that he has zero regard for the laws of this country.
“From pardoning, en masse, violent insurrectionists, to illegally firing government watchdogs charged with holding him accountable, to issuing blatantly unconstitutional executive orders, to asking OMB to halt funding Congress passed—something that is now causing serious chaos and harm to red states and blue states.
“We are not going to let his strategy of overwhelming chaos win the day. We are fighting each of the actions, and will not stop asserting our power as an equal branch of the government.
“But right now, today, we are going to focus on one issue in particular—one that is not just alarming, but actually personal to all of us here in the Senate, because it concerns the Capitol Police each of us walk by every single day.
“I have made it clear, I will not sit back and allow President Trump to rewrite the history of the January 6th insurrection. Already, his Justice Department has taken down the public database that laid out the thousands of investigations—he is literally trying to erase the evidence from public memory!
“But no President can rewrite history—not unless we stand by and let him. And that is absolutely not going to happen. We will not forget what really happened here on January 6th, 2021.
“As we all remember, as the American people witnessed in real time, armed insurrectionists—egged on by the sitting president—broke into the U.S. Capitol and violently assaulted Capitol Police officers in their attempt to overturn a free and fair election.
“You do not have to take my word for it—though, like many of my colleagues, I have a first-person account of that day. The reality is well documented in videos, in photos, in case documents from thousands of people charged with felonies after that day—including assault.
“We know, as a matter of fact, some insurrectionists brought knives, tasers, axes, hatchets, pepper spray, zip ties and more.
“We know, as a matter of fact, some assaulted officers with flagpoles, stun guns, fire extinguishers, and bear spray.
“We know as a matter of fact, that Capitol Police officers suffered severe injuries as a result—including cracked ribs, smashed spinal disks, brain injuries, and even the loss of an eye.
“Officers here sacrificed tremendously to keep senators safe, Republicans and Democrats alike—and we have the footage, photos, police reports that clearly show the crimes and the violence that was committed.
“So Mr. President, President Trump’s decision to pardon—en masse—1,500 people charged in the insurrection is truly an unthinkable attempt to erase the facts of that day, and undermine our democracy.
“But it is especially heinous that he chose to pardon individuals who violently attacked our Capitol Police officers. Not to mention commuting the sentences of 14 others: people found guilty of seditious conspiracy, people like Enrique Tarrio, leader of the Proud Boys, and Stewart Rhodes, leader of the Oath Keepers.
“It is a betrayal of the law enforcement that protected all of that day, and a dangerous endorsement of political violence—telling criminals that you can beat cops within an inch of their lives as long as it’s in service to Donald Trump.
“Every one of us here owes a tremendous debt of gratitude to our Capitol Police. They protected our lives, and they protected our democracy. That is why we are here today to pass a resolution today, that makes clear the U.S. Senate stands with our Capitol Police officers—by disapproving the pardon of those who violently attacked the officers who keep us safe.
“It is a very simple, modest resolution—its reads, in its entirety: ‘Resolved: that the Senate disapproves of any pardons for individuals who were found guilty of assaulting Capitol Police officers.’
“It is that simple. We aren’t relitigating every case—this is only about people guilty of assaulting Capitol Police.
“I made sure this was short and clear—something we can pass unanimously. Because a message like this really should be unanimous.
“In fact, Mr. President, just to underscore how straightforward this is—I want to read it in its entirety once again: ‘Resolved: that the Senate disapproves of any pardons for individuals who were found guilty of assaulting Capitol Police officers.’
“That’s it. The entire thing. I don’t really think there is anything here for anyone to disagree with.
Senator Murray’s remarks, as delivered, after Republicans blocked the resolution:
“Mr. President, I am deeply frustrated that is the response we got today. We cannot agree on something as simple as standing by the officers who keep this building safe?! Officers every one of us walk by every day?
“There are officers standing just outside the floor right now keeping watch as we are forced to debate whether it was not was okay to pardon the people that violently attacked them.
“I don’t know how my colleagues who oppose this simple resolution can look them in the eye!
“It is insulting enough that Speaker Johnson—someone who has a dedicated, 24/7 detail—has refused to put up the plaque honoring the brave officers who kept us safe four years ago.
“But the fact we can’t pass a resolution as simple as the one I presented today—the fact we can’t all agree that we should side with the people who keep us safe, over the people who are attacking us, is disgraceful.
“It is unworthy of this body, and unworthy of the sacrifice our Capitol Police have demonstrated time and again. We owe them better.
“I will not going to stop pushing to make sure we show them we understand that.
“The President may be able to grant pardons, commute sentences, release criminals, delete databases… but I will tell you here, he can take no action he takes can erase the past, unless we let him.
“And as long as I can stand, as long as I can speak, as long as I am here—I will not let him, or anyone, rewrite the history of the January 6th insurrection or erase the important lessons that we must learn from it.”
Source: United States Senator for New Jersey Cory Booker
NEWARK, NJ –– This afternoon, Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Andy Kim (D-NJ) joined New Jersey non-profit service providers to warn of the immediate and tangible negative effects the Trump-Vance administration’s January 27 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) memorandum will have on communities across the Garden State.
Requiring all executive departments and agencies “to identify and review all Federal financial assistance,” OMB’s memorandum pauses all grant, loan, and other congressionally apportioned financial assistance programs to municipalities and critical service providers across the country, including funding for veterans’ assistance groups, police, firefighters, and local first responders, early childhood education centers, older adult service providers, and domestic violence survivor organizations.
Condemning these pauses, Senator Cory Booker, Senator Andy Kim, and local and state-wide service providers warned:
“Once again, President Trump has made clear his willingness to inflict pain upon communities across the country, including at home in New Jersey. OMB’s latest guidance has produced immense uncertainty across our state’s municipalities and critical service providers. My office has heard from veterans’ assistance groups, local first responders, and domestic violence survivor organizations, and they’re all telling us the same thing. Their operational integrity and the wellbeing of those they serve are in jeopardy. These are the actions of a callous president––one wholly unconcerned by the day-to-day realities of the majority of Americans and New Jerseyans. While President Trump continues to ignore families who want to see actions that lower costs and make their lives better, I’ll continue to work to guarantee New Jerseyans––from Sussex County to Cumberland County and everywhere in between––have the resources they need to get ahead,” said Senator Cory Booker.
“President Trump and his administration continue to serve their own power first, not caring that local communities are the collateral damage to their incompetence. OMB’s decision disregards the basic functions of our federal government and how it meets critical needs in communities across our country. We want Donald Trump to know exactly what these decisions and loss of funding could mean for New Jersey: it places independent living centers on the brink, risks vital Meals on Wheels for our seniors, and threatens crucial Head Start services for our families. These are just a couple examples from the calls and messages coming into my office today. At a moment of such distrust between people and their government, this isn’t simply a disregard for our Constitution, this is a cruel attack hurting families all across this nation. We will look at all possible actions to force the Trump administration to honor Congress’ power of the purse and ensure these funds reach our communities,” said Senator Kim.
“The new executive order pausing the release of federal grant funding impacts sexual violence services, putting individuals who have been assaulted and their loved ones at greater risk. With reduced funding, service providers face the challenge of maintaining critical support systems, including the availability of advocates to answer hotlines, provide accompaniments to forensic exams, navigate the court system, and offer counseling and other critical services. Often, there is no duplication of services supporting survivors, and our data show that there are already existing waitlists for them. Interruptions in funding will only exacerbate an already strained system and delay access to care. This increase in wait times will not only heighten the immediate danger of further harm but also prolong the impact on survivors’ healing,” said Robert Baran and Denise Rodriguez, Co-Directors, New Jersey Coalition Against Sexual Assault.
“We have worked with Senator Booker countless times to be sure we have secured these much needed dollars to Fire Departments across New Jersey. These dollars have offset costs for manpower, training, and equipment. All of which have provided a safer workplace for our members while we protect the residents and visitors of our great State. We urge the President to release these funds Congress has appropriated for AFG and SAFER grants,” said Eddie Donnelly, President, New Jersey State Firefighters’ Mutual Benevolent Association (FMBA).
“A pause in federal funding of any length will impact our ability to serve our homeless veteran population. This is not just the case for our program but for similar programs throughout the nation. The effects of this pause will be immediate and grave. For example, they will imperil the support families enrolled in the VA’s Support Services for Veterans Families (SSVF) programs receive, including rental assistance. And, as rents come due in a matter of days, this raises the specter of evictions and increased veteran homelessness. Additionally, a pause in the federal funding we receive will immediately affect our ability to purchase and prepare food for our 100+ housed veterans, prevent us from taking in, and providing services, for additional homeless veterans in New Jersey, halts our ability to pay leases on vehicles used for support services, and jeopardizes the jobs of nearly 200 employees dedicated to serving our nation’s veterans, many of whom are veterans or were once unhoused veterans themselves. While we will continue to provide those who rely on us with the dignity and care they deserve, OMB’s memorandum seriously endangers the wellbeing of an already vulnerable population,” said Bruce Buckley, Chief Executive Officer, Soldier On.
“The recent pause in funds has produced considerable concern across the Rutgers University community, which prides itself on the federally supported research and service it carries out to promote the common good and serve the national interest. The federal government is a critical partner to Rutgers, with federal funding for student aid, research, and public service initiatives accounting for about $1 billion of the university’s $5.6 billion budget. As we work across the university to understand the impact of the federal pauses and to provide guidance to our community during these uncertain times, Rutgers remains profoundly committed to our public mission of research, teaching, and service, and to our students’ success,” said Jonathan Holloway, President, Rutgers University.
“A freeze to the release of federal funds will impact all victims and survivors of domestic violence. The vast majority of our 33 domestic violence providers in NJ rely on federal funding to ensure that every county has a domestic violence shelter, legal advocacy, counseling and other critical services that survivors need. A freeze in funding will increase barriers for survivors seeking safety, and will cause many to stay in abusive situations, increasing the danger and harm they will experience. The federal government must act accordingly, and not hastily, to ensure victims and survivors have the services they need in their community when they need them” said Adrienne Gantz and Nicole Morella, Co-Executive Directors, New Jersey Coalition to End Domestic Violence.
“Just a few days into their term, the Trump-Vance Administration has imposed an unprecedented freeze on federally funded programs, including programs that benefit more than 578,000 New Jerseyans, who rely on community health centers for vital, cost-efficient and life-saving care. For a majority of our state’s community health centers, this freeze in federal funding will cause them to shutter, leaving hundreds of thousands of New Jerseyans without access to healthcare. These freezes come asemerging public health risks––like bird flu and other infectious diseases––continue to pose dangers to our communities. Our health centers are already struggling financially, and many are facing the likelihood of not making payroll in the next few weeks, dealing a death blow to centers that are already having difficulty in retaining an adequate workforce for the services they provide,” said Selina Haq, Ph.D., President/Chief Executive Officer, New Jersey Primary Care Association.
“Boys & Girls Club of Newark has six funding sources that may be impacted by the federal spending freeze. These funds represent more than 10% of our annual budget of $5M and could affect funding for 35-50 team members in direct service with youth. The kinds of programs that could be affected are meal service at our after-school programs, food distribution to families, mentorship for at-risk youth, and critical funding related to safety at our facility. We believe these services are of vital importance to the work we do in our community. Our hope is to see funding restored to ensure our constituents can receive these services that they rely on for their well-being,” said Ameer Washington, Chief Executive Officer, Boys & Girls Club Newark.
“The freeze in federal funding, which has been imposed, will undoubtedly have a devastating impact on Centers for Independent Living throughout the country. These centers provide crucial support and assistance to individuals with disabilities, allowing them to live independently and fully participate in their communities. With this ban in place, these centers may be forced to put vital services on hold, leaving many individuals without the necessary resources and support they rely on. Furthermore, the ban may also result in significant financial strain for these centers, potentially leading to payrolls being put on hold and difficulty paying rent. This could ultimately jeopardize the ability of these centers to continue operating and providing essential services to those in need. The impact of this ban will not only be felt by the centers themselves, but also by the individuals they serve, creating a ripple effect throughout the disability community. It is essential that this ban be reconsidered and alternative solutions be explored to ensure that Centers for Independent Living can continue their important work without interruption,” said Carole Tonks, Executive Director, Alliance Center for Independence – Edison, NJ.
“This order to halt federal funding will have devastating consequences for millions of New Jerseyans, including many that New Jersey Citizen Action directly serves. Federal grants enable many organizations like ours to help New Jerseyans to save themselves from foreclosures, afford first-time homebuyer loans, protect themselves from housing discrimination, file their taxes for free, navigate essential social safety-net programs, and achieve financial stability. These key investments have allowed New Jersey to build stronger communities and healthier, thriving families. The order would also affect the entire New Jersey nonprofit sector dedicated to serving our state’s most vulnerable populations. These include organizations that provide services for seniors, people with disabilities, children, women, victims of domestic violence, and organizations in the field of mental health. It’s unconscionable that the Trump administration should halt these investments—which have already been approved by Congress—for American taxpayers while considering further tax cuts for billionaires and corporations,” said Dena Mottola, Executive Director, New Jersey Citizen Action.
“The work that we do along with other nonprofit public health agencies is vital to the health of our communities. We know that maternal child health is critical to the health of our nation and limiting or cutting funding that states, agencies and programs like ours receive will have negative long-term consequences on the women, children and families that we serve,” said Robyn D’Oria MA, RNC, APN, Chief Executive Officer, Central Jersey Family Health Consortium.
Additional programs and initiatives adversely impacted by OMB’s memorandum include but are not limited to:
Head Start
Click here for a state-by-state table of FY 2024 funding for Head Start, which funds comprehensive early childhood education, or here for state-by-state fact sheets that use the same funding data.
VAWA Grants
Click here for state level totals of FY 2024 grant funding from the Office of Violence Against Women.
Community Health Center
Click here for a 2023 table of state-by-state Section 330 grant funding for community health centers, which provide affordable care for millions of Americans.
IDEA and Other Department of Education Grant Programs
Click here for a state-by-state table of IDEA Grants (which help children with disabilities) from FY 2023, and data on other grant programs through the Department of Education that could be impacted by the freeze.
COPS Grants
The Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program is a Department of Justice grant program for law enforcement. More info here, and many of the links include state-by-state fact sheets. This link here includes FY 2024 grant amounts for the COPS Hiring Program (CHP). These are divided up by state but you may have to calculate your state’s total separately.
State Opioid Response Grants
Click here for total state awards from FY 2024 for the State Opioid Response Grantsprogram, which funds addiction prevention, treatment, and recovery services.
SBA Loans to Small Business
Click here for a dashboard of approved SBA loans by state for recent fiscal years including FY 2024. State totals for both the 7(a) program and 504 program are available. Copying values from the dashboard does not always work, but the Download Data option is a good other way to access the numbers.
