NewzIntel.com

Category: Politics

  • MIL-OSI USA: Welch Grills Nominee for FBI Director Kash Patel on Election Denialism: “What’s so hard about just saying that Biden won the 2020 election?”

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Peter Welch (D-Vermont)
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Peter Welch (D-Vt.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, today grilled Kash Patel, President Trump’s nominee to be the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI), about his refusal to acknowledge that President Biden won the 2020 Presidential Election. Senator Welch highlighted that Trump’s ‘Big Lie’ that President Biden did not win the election led to the January 6th insurrection on the U.S. Capitol. Senator Welch also stressed the importance of combatting any attempt to weaponize the Justice Department and the FBI under the Trump Administration. 
    Sen. Welch: “What’s so hard about just saying that Biden won the 2020 election? What’s hard about that?” 
    Mr. Patel: “Senator, as I’ve said before, that President Biden was certified and sworn in, and he was the president. I don’t know how else to say it.”  Sen. Welch:“Well, the other way to say it is he won.” 
    Watch the exchange between Senator Welch and Kash Patel during Mr. Patel’s confirmation hearing on his nomination to be the next Director of the FBI: 
    Read key excerpts of the exchange: 
    Senator Peter Welch: Let me tell you the source of my ongoing concern, which I regret it sometimes does not seem to be a common concern. We had a catastrophe for our democracy on January 6th…It troubles me that so many people have difficulty saying that Biden won the election…What’s so hard about just saying that Biden won the 2020 election? What’s hard about that? 
    Kash Patel, Nominee for FBI Director: Senator, as I’ve said before, that President Biden was certified and sworn in, and he was the president. I don’t know how else to say it.  Welch:Well, the other way to say it is he won. 
    Patel:He was the president. 
    Welch: The other way to say it is he won. I can say Trump won. I didn’t vote for him—but he won. Al Gore said Bush won when they were having that recount in Florida. And we have had a peaceful transfer of power here in very contested elections. I’ll just be very direct with you about why I think this is of consequence. Donald Trump has never acknowledged that he lost in 2020, and he invited people to come to the Capitol on January 6th to ‘stop the steal’. After that happened, police officers died. People were injured. It created enormous, ongoing bitterness within the country. That’s your boss. Do you believe that the 2020 election was stolen as President Trump says it is? 
    Patel: My opinions on the 2020 election have been expressed in this hearing and he’s entitled to whatever opinions he wants. 
    Welch: Do you agree with him that the election was stolen in 2020? 
    Patel: Millions of Americans have expressed concern going back to multiple elections over election integrity. 
    Welch: You know, you’re so skillful. You understand what I’m asking you. Can you say the words: Joe Biden won the 2020 election? 
    Patel: Joe Biden was the president of the United States. 
    Welch: I’m just saying this: there’s a difference. I can say the words ‘Donald Trump won.’ I don’t like to say it, but I must say it. And you cannot say that Joe Biden won the election. 
    Patel: What I can say is the same for both of them, Senator. Both of their elections were certified, and one was, and one now is president. 
    •••
     Welch: Bottom line here: you’re going to have tough job. And you’re going to have a tough boss, because he gets it in his mind he wants to do something, nothing gets in the way. And there’s going to come a time when an FBI Director, or an Attorney General, has to make a decision about the Constitution and what is being requested, and can that person at that time—when the important values of the Constitution are at stake—say no to a person who is insisting you take an action? 
    Patel: Senator, that’s why I think it’s time, for the first time in this country’s history, that a public defender be the next Director of the FBI because no one knows more about the Constitution and due process than PD’s. 
    Welch: Well, you know you’re appealing to mutual pride here, with a public defender. But you know what? I still understand you didn’t answer the question. That’s the public defender in me, ok?  
    And I say this to my colleagues: We cannot have a weaponized Justice Department or FBI. What’s weaponized is in the eye of the beholder, like the prosecutions of President Trump, and I get that. We cannot, cannot have it. But what I think we all have to acknowledge, when we’ve got a president who’s basically saying a political enemy—whether it’s [Kamala] Harris, whether it’s Liz Cheney, whether it’s Adam Schiff—should be prosecuted, that’s doing damage to the mutual goal we have of not weaponizing a department. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Banking: Apple reports first quarter results

    Source: Apple

    Headline: Apple reports first quarter results

    Apple periodically provides information for investors on its corporate website, apple.com, and its investor relations website, investor.apple.com. This includes press releases and other information about financial performance, reports filed or furnished with the SEC, information on corporate governance, and details related to its annual meeting of shareholders.

    This press release contains forward-looking statements, within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements include without limitation those about payment of the Company’s quarterly dividend and future business plans. These statements involve risks and uncertainties, and actual results may differ materially from any future results expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. Risks and uncertainties include without limitation: effects of global and regional economic conditions, including as a result of government policies, geopolitical tensions, conflict, terrorism, natural disasters, and public health issues; risks relating to the design, manufacture, introduction, and transition of products and services in highly competitive and rapidly changing markets, including from reliance on third parties for components, technology, manufacturing, applications, support, and content; risks relating to information technology system failures, network disruptions, and failure to protect, loss of, or unauthorized access to, or release of, data; and effects of unfavorable legal proceedings, government investigations, and complex and changing laws and regulations. More information on these risks and other potential factors that could affect the Company’s business, reputation, results of operations, financial condition, and stock price is included in the Company’s filings with the SEC, including in the “Risk Factors” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” sections of the Company’s most recently filed periodic reports on Form 10-K and Form 10-Q and subsequent filings. The Company assumes no obligation to update any forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date they are made.

    About Apple

    Apple revolutionized personal technology with the introduction of the Macintosh in 1984. Today, Apple leads the world in innovation with iPhone, iPad, Mac, AirPods, Apple Watch, and Apple Vision Pro. Apple’s six software platforms — iOS, iPadOS, macOS, watchOS, visionOS, and tvOS — provide seamless experiences across all Apple devices and empower people with breakthrough services including the App Store, Apple Music, Apple Pay, iCloud, and Apple TV+. Apple’s more than 150,000 employees are dedicated to making the best products on earth and to leaving the world better than we found it.

    MIL OSI Global Banks –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: OPEC Fund and Mauritania strengthen cooperation with US$120 million-partnership agreement

    Source: The OPEC Fund for International Development

    January 30, 2025: The OPEC Fund for International Development (OPEC Fund) and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania have signed a landmark Country Partnership Framework Agreement to cooperate on key development initiatives during the period 2025-2027, earmarking US$120 million in new development financing focusing on the country’s development priorities.

    The funding will finance critical projects that contribute to projects promoting renewable energy, clean water, food security, improved transport and clean cooking. In addition the OPEC Fund is pledging to provide up to US$500,000 in grants for capacity-building, project preparation and technical assistance.

    OPEC Fund President Abdulhamid Alkhalifa said during a visit to the capital Nouakchott: “We are proud to help improve the lives of people and communities for a more resilient future.

    Our commitment to Mauritania is focused on bolstering key sectors of the economy. Technical assistance and strong project preparation are vital to mobilize additional development funding, enable public-private partnerships (PPPs) and attract private sector investment.”

    An OPEC Fund delegation led by President Alkhalifa is visiting Mauritania from January 30-31, 2025. The delegation expects to meet Mauritanian President Mohamed Ould Ghazouani, Prime Minister El Moctar Ould Djay, Minister of Economy and Finance Sid’Ahmed Ould Bouh and other government officials to discuss implementation of the Country Partnership Framework Agreement and explore opportunities for further cooperation.

    The OPEC Fund’s financing will support key projects that align with the country’s objectives of advancing clean energy, food security, water & sanitation while supporting sustainable and inclusive development and strengthening infrastructure for women and youth in particular. Joint initiatives also aim to strengthen Mauritania’s PPP regulatory framework and boost private sector investment.

    The Country Partnership Framework Agreement underscores the longstanding relationship between the OPEC Fund and Mauritania, with more than US$250 million in loans provided to the country for various infrastructure and development projects to date.

    About the OPEC Fund

    The OPEC Fund for International Development (the OPEC Fund) is the only globally mandated development institution that provides financing from member countries to non-member countries exclusively.

    The organization works in cooperation with developing country partners and the international development community to stimulate economic growth and social progress in low- and middle-income countries around the world.

    The OPEC Fund was established in 1976 with a distinct purpose: to drive development, strengthen communities and empower people. Our work is people-centered, focusing on financing projects that meet essential needs, such as food, energy, infrastructure, employment (particularly relating to MSMEs), clean water and sanitation, healthcare and education.

    To date, the OPEC Fund has committed more than US$29 billion to development projects in over 125 countries with an estimated total project cost of more than US$200 billion. The OPEC Fund is rated AA+/Outlook Stable by Fitch and AA+, Outlook Stable by S&P. Our vision is a world where sustainable development is a reality for all.

    MIL OSI – Submitted News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Miners celebrate support for economic growth – Straterra

    Source: Straterra Inc

    Miners are celebrating the Government’s support for growing mining’s contribution to the economy with the release of a minerals strategy and critical minerals list today, says Straterra chief executive Josie Vidal.
    “The Government is listening, so this is a good day – not just for miners, but also all the businesses that make mining possible, including those producing mining equipment, technology, and services,” Vidal says. “They provide jobs and contribute to the economy. We have been asking for some years for buy-in from the Government to support mining growth that benefits workers in New Zealand, and their communities.
    “It is great to see facts, evidence, and science being used in decision making to further develop mining. Let’s be clear, that is not at the expense of the environment and there won’t be a mine on every corner.
    “The strategy has been developed through consultation and it is important it has a clear vision. We need this to put a marker in the ground for global markets indicating that we can be part of the minerals supply chain. Minerals are needed for energy, technology, medicine, transport, infrastructure, communications, and food production.
    “Identifying critical minerals helps with this. New Zealand has its own unique path and that includes acknowledgement that some of what is already mined here is critical to our economy. So, the list released today rightly includes gold and metallurgical coal.
    “While thermal coal not on the list, it does not mean it is not critical, and the strategy acknowledges the role thermal coal plays in keeping the lights on and businesses running. Coal is critical to national energy security and users of coal energy face a supply risk if domestic miners are forced to exit the market before affordable alternative fuel sources are readily available.
    “Productivity is at the heart of the strategy and mining is one of the most productive sectors in New Zealand, which translates into high wages.
    “The strategy recognises the value of responsible mining and New Zealand can be proud our strict employment and health and safety laws and stringent environmental regulations that back that.
    “What has been missing is an enabling business environment. The Fast-track Approvals Act is a game changer and there is interest in it from law makers around the globe.
    “We also need investment and with that, basics such as banking and insurance. While on the investment front there is plenty of interest in New Zealand mining, is disappointing to see debanking of coal mining in New Zealand due to arbitrary moral judgements. If banks start making ‘moral’ judgements, where does that end? I fail to see how banks can refuse to do business with legal and legitimate business entities.
    “We must not go backwards now on political whims. The foundations are starting to form to enable the mining sector to double the value of exports and contribute to economic growth, jobs, and regional development and to do what benefits New Zealanders.”
    Straterra is the industry association representing New Zealand’s minerals and mining sector.

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Latest climate target as useful as a screen door on a submarine – Greenpeace

    Source: Greenpeace

    Greenpeace has slammed the Luxon Government for failing to protect future generations after releasing New Zealand’s latest climate target of a 1-5% additional reduction in emissions by 2035, saying it’s “about as useful as a screen door on a submarine.”
    Greenpeace spokesperson Amanda Larsson says, “This target is an absolute joke, yet the climate crisis is no laughing matter.”
    “Against the backdrop of Luxon’s war on nature, not only is this target too weak to protect our kids and grandkids from a disastrous future but there is no plan to achieve even the targets we already have.”
    Under the Paris Agreement on climate change, nations are required to submit a so-called nationally determined contribution (NDC) every four years. Each NDC must represent an increase in ambition on the last, which was submitted in 2021.
    “Every parent and grandparent wants to pass on a safe and stable world to our kids. That requires brave and visionary leadership, both of which Luxon is lacking,” says Larsson.
    “Luxon’s vision for New Zealand seems to be a landscape ripped open by coal mines, a coastline dotted with oil rigs and fields crammed with cows, knee deep in mud and effluent.”
    The Luxon Government controversially overturned the 2018 ban on offshore oil and gas exploration, despite advice from MFAT that this is likely to breach our recent free trade agreements with the EU and UK. Coal mines are included in the list for fast-tracking, overriding community will and environmental laws. Luxon has also exempted New Zealand’s most polluting industry – dairying – from paying for its emissions through the Emissions Trading Scheme.
    “Our country is doing worse on climate change than it was ten years ago,” says Larsson. “This is what happens when you let polluters write the policy.”
    Documents released to Greenpeace under the Official Information Act reveal the unprecedented influence of the meat and dairy industry over environmental policy in Luxon’s Government. Emails, texts and briefings show that Federated Farmers, Dairy NZ and Beef + Lamb NZ have used privileged access to Ministers to draft policy on freshwater and climate change, to advise on Government communications and to push central Government to instruct local councils to weaken their environmental policies.
    “The increasingly rampant wildfires, floods and cyclones we’re witnessing around us are a sign that our planet is sick. If governments won’t stand up to polluters to protect our kids and grandkids, as Luxon has shown he will not, then people will use the courts, protest and other means to save their children from climate disaster,” says Larsson.

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI: Riverview Bancorp Reports Net Income of $1.2 Million in Third Fiscal Quarter 2025; Results Highlighted by Net Interest Margin Expansion

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    VANCOUVER, Wash., Jan. 30, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Riverview Bancorp, Inc. (Nasdaq GSM: RVSB) (“Riverview” or the “Company”) today reported earnings of $1.2 million, or $0.06 per diluted share, in the third fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2024, compared to $1.6 million, or $0.07 per diluted share in the second fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2024, and $1.5 million, or $0.07 per diluted share, in the third fiscal quarter a year ago.

    In the first nine months of fiscal 2025, net income was $3.8 million, or $0.18 per diluted share, compared to $6.8 million, or $0.32 per diluted share, in the first nine months of fiscal 2024.

    “Riverview’s operating performance during the third fiscal quarter reflected steady improvements, with net interest margin expansion as a result of stabilizing funding costs and higher loan yields,” stated Nicole Sherman, President and Chief Executive Officer. “While loan payoffs impacted net loan growth during the third quarter, loan production outperformed the previous three quarters and newly funded loans are being boarded at higher rates than the legacy portfolio. Although we still have work to do, we remain focused on managing our balance sheet and improving our performance metrics and profitability in the remainder of fiscal year 2025.”

    Third Quarter Highlights (at or for the period ended December 31, 2024)

    • Net interest income increased to $9.4 million for the quarter, compared to $8.9 million in the preceding quarter and $9.3 million in the third fiscal quarter a year ago.
    • Net interest margin (“NIM”) was 2.60% for the quarter, a 14 basis point improvement compared to the preceding quarter and a 11 basis point improvement compared to the year ago quarter.
    • Riverview Trust Company assets under management increased to $872.6 million at December 31, 2024. Asset management fees continue to improve and increased to $1.4 million for the quarter ended December 31, 2024.
    • Asset quality remained strong, with non-performing assets at $469,000, or 0.03% of total assets at December 31, 2024.
    • Riverview recorded no provision for credit losses during the current quarter, compared to a $100,000 provision in the preceding quarter and no provision in the year ago quarter.
    • Total loans were $1.05 billion at December 31, 2024, compared to $1.06 billion at September 30, 2024, and $1.02 billion at December 31, 2023.
    • Total deposits were $1.22 billion at December 31, 2024, compared to $1.24 billion at September 30, 2024 and $1.22 billion at December 31, 2023.
    • Tangible book value per share (non-GAAP) was $6.20 at December 31, 2024, compared to $6.33 at September 30, 2024, and $6.21 at December 31, 2023.

    Income Statement Review
    Riverview’s net interest income was $9.4 million in the current quarter, compared to $8.9 million in the preceding quarter, and $9.3 million in the third fiscal quarter a year ago. The increase compared to the preceding quarter was driven by higher interest earning asset yields due to higher origination rates on new loan growth as well as loan repricing in addition to the recognition of a loan prepayment fee and related loan fees totaling $318,000. In the first nine months of fiscal 2025, net interest income was $27.2 million, compared to $29.5 million in the first nine months of fiscal 2024. Investment income decreased compared to the nine month period a year ago due to the strategic investment restructuring that was executed in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2024.

    Riverview’s NIM was 2.60% for the third quarter of fiscal 2025, a 14 basis point increase compared to 2.46% in the preceding quarter and a 11 basis-point increase compared to 2.49% in the third quarter of fiscal 2024. “As anticipated, NIM improved during the quarter, as higher yields in interest earning assets offset the modest increase in deposit costs,” said David Lam, EVP and Chief Financial Officer. “With the recent Fed rate reductions, we anticipate deposit costs to further stabilize in future quarters. Additionally, the rate cuts reduced the interest expense on borrowings, which also benefitted NIM during the current quarter.” In the first nine months of fiscal 2025, the net interest margin was 2.51% compared to 2.64% in the same period a year earlier.

    Investment securities decreased $17.8 million during the quarter to $337.2 million at December 31, 2024, compared to $354.9 million at September 30, 2024, and decreased $92.0 million compared to $429.1 million at December 31, 2023. The average securities balances for the quarters ended December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024, and December 31, 2023, were $364.2 million, $378.4 million, and $458.0 million, respectively. The weighted average yields on securities balances for those same periods were 1.82%, 2.05%, and 2.01%, respectively. The duration of the investment portfolio at December 31, 2024 was approximately 5.3 years. The anticipated investment cashflows over the next twelve months is approximately $42.8 million. There were no investment purchases during the third fiscal quarter of 2025.

    Riverview’s yield on loans improved to 4.97% during the third fiscal quarter, compared to 4.80% in the preceding quarter, and 4.56% in the third fiscal quarter a year ago. “Loan yields improved during the current quarter as a result of higher rates on new loan originations and higher rates on existing loans that have come up for repricing, when compared to the existing loan portfolio. We continue to explore opportunities to enhance our loan yield by expanding our commercial business portfolio offerings to include more variable rate loan structures,” said Mike Sventek, EVP and Chief Lending Officer. Deposit costs increased to 1.32% during the third fiscal quarter compared to 1.26% in the preceding quarter, and 0.68% in the third fiscal quarter a year ago due to clients seeking higher deposit yields. The increase from clients seeking higher deposit yields was less impactful quarter over quarter compared to the increase from the third fiscal quarter a year ago given the relative change in the interest rate environment during those respective periods.

    Non-interest income was $3.3 million during the third fiscal quarter of 2025 compared to $3.8 million in the preceding quarter and $3.1 million in the third fiscal quarter of 2024. The preceding quarter included approximately $525,000 in income related to a legal expense recovery from the prior year. In the first nine months of fiscal 2025, non-interest income increased to $10.5 million compared to $9.7 million in the same period a year ago.

    Asset management fees were $1.4 million during the third fiscal quarter and the second fiscal quarter, and $1.3 million in the third fiscal quarter a year ago. Asset management fees increased compared to the year ago quarter due to new client relationships and the continued positive market performance in the equity markets during the third quarter. Riverview Trust Company’s assets under management were $872.6 million at December 31, 2024, compared to $871.6 million at September 30, 2024, and $942.4 million at December 31, 2023.

    Non-interest expense was $11.2 million during the third fiscal quarter, compared to $10.7 million in the preceding quarter and $10.6 million in the third fiscal quarter a year ago. Salary and employee benefits, the largest component of non-interest expense, remained flat during the current quarter compared to the preceding quarter. Professional fees increased during the current quarter compared to the preceding quarter due to higher consulting costs. Additionally, non-interest expense for preceding quarter included a fraud loss recovery. The efficiency ratio was 87.6% for the third fiscal quarter, compared to 83.7% for the previous quarter and 85.2% in the third fiscal quarter a year ago. Year-to-date, non-interest expense was $32.8 million compared to $30.6 million in the first nine months of fiscal 2024.

    Riverview’s effective tax rate for the third fiscal quarter of 2025 was 21.8%, compared to 21.4% for the preceding quarter and 20.6% for the year ago quarter.

    Balance Sheet Review
    While loan production increased during the third quarter, total loans decreased primarily due to two large loan payoffs. Total loans decreased $15.9 million during the quarter to $1.05 billion at December 31, 2024, compared to $1.06 billion three months earlier and increased $26.9 million compared to $1.02 billion a year earlier. Riverview’s loan pipeline was $49.1 million at December 31, 2024, compared to $43.5 million at the end of the preceding quarter. New loan originations during the quarter were $31.1 million, compared to $25.6 million in the preceding quarter and $51.3 million in the third fiscal quarter a year ago. Since December 31, 2024, the loan pipeline has increased to $64.2 million.

    Undisbursed construction loans totaled $19.5 million at December 31, 2024, compared to $34.1 million at September 30, 2024, with the majority of the undisbursed construction loans expected to be funded over the next several quarters. The decrease was due to one large construction project being completed during the quarter and moving out of the construction category to a permanent loan category, before being paid off. Undisbursed homeowner association loans for the purpose of common area maintenance and repairs totaled $14.5 million at December 31, 2024, compared to $11.1 million at September 30, 2024. Revolving commercial business loan commitments totaled $46.9 million at December 31, 2024, compared to $48.4 million at September 30, 2024. Utilization on these loans totaled 17.60% at December 31, 2024, compared to 23.88% at September 30, 2024. The weighted average rate on loan originations during the quarter was 7.04% compared to 7.65% in the preceding quarter.

    The office building loan portfolio totaled $113.4 million at December 31, 2024, compared to $112.4 million at September 30, 2024. The average loan balance of the office building loan portfolio was $1.5 million with an average loan-to-value ratio of 53.8% and an average debt service coverage ratio of 1.99x. Office building loans within the Portland core consists of three loans totaling $20.6 million which is approximately 18.2% of the total office building loan portfolio or 2.0% of total loans.

    Non-interest checking and interest checking accounts, as a percentage of total deposits, totaled 46.8% at December 31, 2024, compared to 49.2% at September 30, 2024, and 51.1% at December 31, 2023. The decrease in non-interest checking account balances during the quarter was in part due to seasonal client calendar year-end activity for payments and distributions. As in prior quarters, money market balances and CDs increased during the quarter as we are still seeing a subset of clients still looking for higher yields. Total deposits decreased $18.5 million during the quarter to $1.22 billion at December 31, 2024, compared to $1.24 billion at September 30, 2024, and were unchanged compared to a year ago. Riverview Bank had moved customer deposits to Riverview Trust as a higher yielding deposit alternative and those assets were all retained within the Company during the period of increasing interest rates and the Company has the ability to move or reciprocate these deposits back to the Bank if the need arises.

    FHLB advances decreased $18.1 million during the quarter to $84.2 million at December 31, 2024, compared to $102.3 million at September 30, 2024. FHLB advances decreased during the quarter as a result of the decrease in investment securities and loans receivable balances with the proceeds from both used to pay down borrowings.

    Shareholders’ equity was $158.3 million at December 31, 2024, compared to $160.8 million three months earlier and $158.5 million one year earlier. Tangible book value per share (non-GAAP) was $6.20 at December 31, 2024, compared to $6.33 at September 30, 2024, and $6.21 at December 31, 2023. Riverview paid a quarterly cash dividend of $0.02 per share on January 14, 2025, to shareholders of record on January 2, 2025.

    Credit Quality
    “Asset quality metrics continue to remain very stable, as we continue to diligently monitor our loan portfolio closely for any signs of stress,” said Robert Benke, EVP and Chief Credit Officer. Non-performing loans, excluding SBA and USDA government guaranteed loans (“government guaranteed loans”) (non-GAAP) totaled $168,000 or 0.02% of total loans as of December 31, 2024, compared to $149,000, or 0.01% of total loans at September 30, 2024, and $186,000, or 0.02% of total loans at December 31, 2023. There was one non-performing government guaranteed loan totaling $301,000 at both December 31, 2024 and September 30, 2024. At December 31, 2024, including government guaranteed loans, non-performing assets were $469,000, or 0.03% of total assets.

    Riverview recorded $114,000 in net loan charge-offs for the current quarter. This compared to $2,000 in net loan recoveries for the preceding quarter. Riverview recorded no provision for credit losses for the current quarter, compared to $100,000 in provision for credit losses for the preceding quarter.

    Classified assets were $225,000 at December 31, 2024, compared to $326,000 at September 30, 2024, and $215,000 at December 31, 2023. The classified assets to total capital ratio was 0.1% at December 31, 2024, compared to 0.2% at September 30, 2024, and 0.1% a year earlier. Criticized assets were $50.4 million at December 31, 2024, compared to $50.7 million at September 30, 2024, and $37.2 million at December 31, 2023. Criticized assets remained stable during the current quarter compared to the prior quarter. The increase compared to a year ago was primarily due to one relationship that was moved to the criticized asset category during the preceding quarter as the loans goes through probate. The Company does not anticipate any loss from this relationship.

    The allowance for credit losses was $15.4 million at December 31, 2024, compared to $15.5 million at September 30, 2024, and $15.4 million at December 31, 2023. The allowance for credit losses represented 1.47% of total loans at December 31, 2024, compared to 1.46% at September 30, 2024, and 1.51% a year earlier. The allowance for credit losses to loans, net of government guaranteed loans (non-GAAP), was 1.54% at December 31, 2024, compared to 1.53% at September 30, 2024, and 1.59% a year earlier.

    Capital/Liquidity
    Riverview continues to maintain capital levels well in excess of the regulatory requirements to be categorized as “well capitalized” with a total risk-based capital ratio of 16.47% and a Tier 1 leverage ratio of 10.86% at December 31, 2024. Tangible common equity to average tangible assets ratio (non-GAAP) was 8.84% at December 31, 2024.

    Riverview has approximately $450.1 million in available liquidity at December 31, 2024, including $164.4 million of borrowing capacity from the FHLB and $285.7 million from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (“FRB”). At December 31, 2024, the Bank had $84.2 million in outstanding FHLB borrowings.

    At December 31, 2024, the uninsured deposit ratio was 23.8%. Available liquidity under the FRB borrowing line would cover nearly 100% of the estimated uninsured deposits and available liquidity under both the FHLB and FRB borrowing lines would cover 155% of the estimated uninsured deposits.

    On September 25, 2024, the Company’s Board of Directors adopted a stock repurchase program. Under this repurchase program, the Company may repurchase up to $2.0 million of the Company’s outstanding shares of common stock, in the open market, based on prevailing market prices, or in privately negotiated transactions. Once the repurchase program is effective, the repurchase program will continue until the earlier of the completion of the repurchase or 12 months after the effective date, depending upon market conditions. During the third quarter, the Company repurchased 200,073 shares of common stock at an average price of $5.43.

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    In addition to results presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”), this press release contains certain non-GAAP financial measures. Management has presented these non-GAAP financial measures in this earnings release because it believes that they provide useful and comparative information to assess trends in Riverview’s core operations reflected in the current quarter’s results and facilitate the comparison of our performance with the performance of our peers. However, these non-GAAP financial measures are supplemental and are not a substitute for any analysis based on GAAP. Where applicable, comparable earnings information using GAAP financial measures is also presented. Because not all companies use the same calculations, our presentation may not be comparable to other similarly titled measures as calculated by other companies. For a reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures, see the tables below.

    Tangible shareholders’ equity to tangible assets and tangible book value per share:
                         
    (Dollars in thousands)   December 31,
    2024    		   September 30,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023    		   March 31,
    2024    		    
                         
    Shareholders’ equity (GAAP)   $ 158,270     $ 160,774     $ 158,472     $ 155,588      
    Exclude: Goodwill     (27,076 )     (27,076 )     (27,076 )     (27,076 )    
    Exclude: Core deposit intangible, net     (196 )     (221 )     (298 )     (271 )    
    Tangible shareholders’ equity (non-GAAP)   $ 130,998     $ 133,477     $ 131,098     $ 128,241      
                         
    Total assets (GAAP)   $ 1,508,609     $ 1,548,397     $ 1,590,623     $ 1,521,529      
    Exclude: Goodwill     (27,076 )     (27,076 )     (27,076 )     (27,076 )    
    Exclude: Core deposit intangible, net     (196 )     (221 )     (298 )     (271 )    
    Tangible assets (non-GAAP)   $ 1,481,337     $ 1,521,100     $ 1,563,249     $ 1,494,182      
                         
    Shareholders’ equity to total assets (GAAP)     10.49 %     10.38 %     9.96 %     10.23 %    
                         
    Tangible common equity to tangible assets (non-GAAP)     8.84 %     8.78 %     8.39 %     8.58 %    
                         
    Shares outstanding     21,134,758       21,096,968       21,111,043       21,111,043      
                         
    Book value per share (GAAP)   $ 7.49     $ 7.62     $ 7.51     $ 7.37      
                         
    Tangible book value per share (non-GAAP)   $ 6.20     $ 6.33     $ 6.21     $ 6.07      
                         
                         
    Pre-tax, pre-provision income                    
        Three Months Ended   Nine Months Ended
    (Dollars in thousands)   December 31,
    2024    		   September 30,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023    		   December 31,
    2024    		   December 31,
    2023
                         
    Net income (GAAP)   $ 1,232     $ 1,557     $ 1,452     $ 3,755     $ 6,767  
    Include: Provision for income taxes     343       425       377       1,021       1,897  
    Include: Provision for credit losses     –       100       –       100       –  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision income (non-GAAP)   $ 1,575     $ 2,082     $ 1,829     $ 4,876     $ 8,664  
    Allowance for credit losses reconciliation, excluding Government Guaranteed loans
                     
    (Dollars in thousands)   December 31, 2024   September 30, 2024   December 31, 2023   March 31, 2024
                     
    Allowance for credit losses   $ 15,352     $ 15,466     $ 15,361     $ 15,364  
                     
    Loans receivable (GAAP)   $ 1,045,109     $ 1,060,977     $ 1,018,199     $ 1,024,013  
    Exclude: Government Guaranteed loans     (49,024 )     (49,983 )     (51,809 )     (51,013 )
    Loans receivable excluding Government Guaranteed loans (non-GAAP)   $ 996,085     $ 1,010,994     $ 966,390     $ 973,000  
                     
    Allowance for credit losses to loans receivable (GAAP)     1.47 %     1.46 %     1.51 %     1.50 %
                     
    Allowance for credit losses to loans receivable excluding Government Guaranteed loans (non-GAAP)     1.54 %     1.53 %     1.59 %     1.58 %
                     
                     
    Non-performing loans reconciliation, excluding Government Guaranteed Loans
                     
        Three Months Ended    
    (Dollars in thousands)   December 31, 2024   September 30, 2024   December 31, 2023    
                     
    Non-performing loans (GAAP)   $ 469     $ 450     $ 186      
    Less: Non-performing Government Guaranteed loans     (301 )     (301 )     –      
    Adjusted non-performing loans excluding Government Guaranteed loans (non-GAAP)   $ 168     $ 149     $ 186      
                     
    Non-performing loans to total loans (GAAP)     0.04 %     0.04 %     0.02 %    
                     
    Non-performing loans, excluding Government Guaranteed loans to total loans (non-GAAP)     0.02 %     0.01 %     0.02 %    
                     
    Non-performing loans to total assets (GAAP)     0.03 %     0.03 %     0.01 %    
                     
    Non-performing loans, excluding Government Guaranteed loans to total assets (non-GAAP)     0.01 %     0.01 %     0.01 %    


    About Riverview
    Riverview Bancorp, Inc. (www.riverviewbank.com) is headquartered in Vancouver, Washington – just north of Portland, Oregon, on the I-5 corridor. With assets of $1.51 billion at December 31, 2024, it is the parent company of Riverview Bank, as well as Riverview Trust Company. The Bank offers true community banking services, focusing on providing the highest quality service and financial products to commercial, business and retail clients through 17 branches, including 13 in the Portland-Vancouver area, and 3 lending centers. For the past 11 years, Riverview has been named Best Bank by the readers of The Vancouver Business Journal and The Columbian.

    “Safe Harbor” statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995: This press release contains forward-looking statements which include statements with respect to our beliefs, plans, objectives, goals, expectations, assumptions, future economic performance and projections of financial items. These forward-looking statements are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the results anticipated or implied by our forward-looking statements, including, but not limited to: potential adverse impacts to economic conditions in our local market areas, other markets where the Company has lending relationships, or other aspects of the Company’s business operations or financial markets, including, without limitation, as a result of employment levels, labor shortages and the effects of inflation, a potential recession, the failure of the U.S. Congress to increase the debt ceiling, or slowed economic growth caused by increasing political instability from acts of war including Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, as well as supply chain disruptions, recent bank failures and any governmental or societal responses thereto; the credit risks of lending activities, including changes in the level and trend of loan delinquencies and write-offs and changes in the Company’s allowance for credit losses and provision for credit losses that may be impacted by deterioration in the housing and commercial real estate markets; changes in the levels of general interest rates, and the relative differences between short and long-term interest rates, deposit interest rates, the Company’s net interest margin and funding sources; the transition away from London Interbank Offered Rate toward new interest rate benchmarks; fluctuations in the demand for loans, the number of unsold homes, land and other properties and fluctuations in real estate values in the Company’s market areas; secondary market conditions for loans and the Company’s ability to originate loans for sale and sell loans in the secondary market; results of examinations of the Bank by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Washington State Department of Financial Institutions, Division of Banks, and of the Company by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, or other regulatory authorities, including the possibility that any such regulatory authority may, among other things, require the Company to increase its allowance for credit losses, write-down assets, reclassify its assets, change the Bank’s regulatory capital position or affect the Company’s ability to borrow funds or maintain or increase deposits, which could adversely affect its liquidity and earnings; legislative or regulatory changes that adversely affect the Company’s business including changes in banking, securities and tax law, and in regulatory policies and principles, or the interpretation of regulatory capital or other rules; the Company’s ability to attract and retain deposits; the unexpected outflow of uninsured deposits that may require us to sell investment securities at a loss; the Company’s ability to control operating costs and expenses; the use of estimates in determining fair value of certain of the Company’s assets, which estimates may prove to be incorrect and result in significant declines in valuation; difficulties in reducing risks associated with the loans on the Company’s consolidated balance sheet; staffing fluctuations in response to product demand or the implementation of corporate strategies that affect the Company’s workforce and potential associated charges; disruptions, security breaches or other adverse events, failures or interruptions in or attacks on our information technology systems or on the third-party vendors who perform several of our critical processing functions; the Company’s ability to retain key members of its senior management team; costs and effects of litigation, including settlements and judgments; the Company’s ability to implement its business strategies; the Company’s ability to successfully integrate any assets, liabilities, customers, systems, and management personnel it may acquire into its operations and the Company’s ability to realize related revenue synergies and cost savings within expected time frames; future goodwill impairment due to changes in Riverview’s business, changes in market conditions, or other factors; increased competitive pressures among financial services companies; changes in consumer spending, borrowing and savings habits; the availability of resources to address changes in laws, rules, or regulations or to respond to regulatory actions; the Company’s ability to pay dividends on its common stock; the quality and composition of our securities portfolio and the impact of and adverse changes in the securities markets, including market liquidity; inability of key third-party providers to perform their obligations to us; changes in accounting policies and practices, as may be adopted by the financial institution regulatory agencies or the Financial Accounting Standards Board, including additional guidance and interpretation on accounting issues and details of the implementation of new accounting standards; the effects of climate change, severe weather events, natural disasters, pandemics, epidemics and other public health crises, acts of war or terrorism, and other external events on our business; and other economic, competitive, governmental, regulatory, and technological factors affecting the Company’s operations, pricing, products and services, and the other risks described from time to time in our reports filed with and furnished to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

    The Company cautions readers not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. Moreover, you should treat these statements as speaking only as of the date they are made and based only on information then actually known to the Company. The Company does not undertake and specifically disclaims any obligation to revise any forward-looking statements included in this report or the reasons why actual results could differ from those contained in such statements, whether as a result of new information or to reflect the occurrence of anticipated or unanticipated events or circumstances after the date of such statements. These risks could cause our actual results for fiscal 2025 and beyond to differ materially from those expressed in any forward-looking statements by, or on behalf of, us and could negatively affect the Company’s consolidated financial condition and consolidated results of operations as well as its stock price performance.

     
    RIVERVIEW BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY       
    Consolidated Balance Sheets
    (In thousands, except share data) (Unaudited) December 31, 2024   September 30, 2024   December 31, 2023   March 31, 2024
    ASSETS              
                   
    Cash (including interest-earning accounts of $12,573, $12,453, $23,717 and $12,164) $ 25,348     $ 30,960     $ 37,553     $ 23,642  
    Investment securities:              
    Available for sale, at estimated fair value   124,874       132,953       196,461       143,196  
    Held to maturity, at amortized cost   212,295       221,991       232,659       229,510  
    Loans receivable (net of allowance for credit losses of $15,352, $15,466, $15,361, and $15,364)   1,029,757       1,045,511       1,002,838       1,008,649  
    Prepaid expenses and other assets   12,945       13,585       14,486       14,469  
    Accrued interest receivable   4,639       4,570       5,248       4,415  
    Federal Home Loan Bank stock, at cost   4,742       5,557       8,026       4,927  
    Premises and equipment, net   22,731       22,956       22,270       21,718  
    Financing lease right-of-use assets   1,144       1,163       1,221       1,202  
    Deferred income taxes, net   9,471       8,688       10,033       9,778  
    Goodwill   27,076       27,076       27,076       27,076  
    Core deposit intangible, net   196       221       298       271  
    Bank owned life insurance   33,391       33,166       32,454       32,676  
                   
    TOTAL ASSETS $ 1,508,609     $ 1,548,397     $ 1,590,623     $ 1,521,529  
                   
    LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY              
                   
    LIABILITIES:              
    Deposits $ 1,219,002     $ 1,237,499     $ 1,218,892     $ 1,231,679  
    Accrued expenses and other liabilities   17,634       17,789       26,740       16,205  
    Advance payments by borrowers for taxes and insurance   317       848       299       581  
    Junior subordinated debentures   27,069       27,048       26,982       27,004  
    Federal Home Loan Bank advances   84,200       102,304       157,054       88,304  
    Finance lease liability   2,117       2,135       2,184       2,168  
    Total liabilities   1,350,339       1,387,623       1,432,151       1,365,941  
                   
    SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY:              
    Serial preferred stock, $.01 par value; 250,000 authorized, issued and outstanding, none   –       –       –       –  
    Common stock, $.01 par value; 50,000,000 authorized,              
    December 31, 2024 – 21,134,758 issued and outstanding;              
    September 30, 2024 – 21,096,968 issued and outstanding;   209       211       211       211  
    December 31, 2023 – 21,111,043 issued and outstanding;              
    March 31, 2024 – 21,111,043 issued and outstanding;              
    Additional paid-in capital   54,227       55,057       54,982       55,005  
    Retained earnings   118,988       118,179       120,734       116,499  
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss   (15,154 )     (12,673 )     (17,455 )     (16,127 )
    Total shareholders’ equity   158,270       160,774       158,472       155,588  
                   
    TOTAL LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY $ 1,508,609     $ 1,548,397     $ 1,590,623     $ 1,521,529  
                   
    RIVERVIEW BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
    Consolidated Statements of Income
      Three Months Ended   Nine Months Ended
    (In thousands, except share data) (Unaudited) Dec. 31, 2024 Sept. 30, 2024 Dec. 31, 2023   Dec. 31, 2024 Dec. 31, 2023
    INTEREST INCOME:            
    Interest and fees on loans receivable $ 13,201   $ 12,683   $ 11,645     $ 37,936   $ 34,288  
    Interest on investment securities – taxable   1,589     1,874     2,231       5,435     6,826  
    Interest on investment securities – nontaxable   65     65     65       195     196  
    Other interest and dividends   272     320     331       902     954  
    Total interest and dividend income   15,127     14,942     14,272       44,468     42,264  
                 
    INTEREST EXPENSE:            
    Interest on deposits   4,101     3,855     2,059       11,403     5,264  
    Interest on borrowings   1,638     2,145     2,889       5,914     7,466  
    Total interest expense   5,739     6,000     4,948       17,317     12,730  
    Net interest income   9,388     8,942     9,324       27,151     29,534  
    Provision for credit losses   –     100     –       100     –  
                 
    Net interest income after provision for credit losses   9,388     8,842     9,324       27,051     29,534  
                 
    NON-INTEREST INCOME:            
    Fees and service charges   1,492     1,524     1,533       4,556     4,871  
    Asset management fees   1,443     1,433     1,266       4,434     3,920  
    Bank owned life insurance (“BOLI”)   225     279     211       715     669  
    Other, net   181     605     46       844     288  
    Total non-interest income, net   3,341     3,841     3,056       10,549     9,748  
                 
    NON-INTEREST EXPENSE:            
    Salaries and employee benefits   6,471     6,477     6,091       19,336     17,979  
    Occupancy and depreciation   1,871     1,921     1,698       5,687     4,930  
    Data processing   743     695     712       2,202     2,096  
    Amortization of core deposit intangible   25     25     27       75     81  
    Advertising and marketing   317     367     282       994     950  
    FDIC insurance premium   174     166     178       518     530  
    State and local taxes   327     234     355       777     814  
    Telecommunications   54     52     56       153     161  
    Professional fees   429     304     353       1,223     961  
    Other   743     460     799       1,859     2,116  
    Total non-interest expense   11,154     10,701     10,551       32,824     30,618  
                 
    INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES   1,575     1,982     1,829       4,776     8,664  
    PROVISION FOR INCOME TAXES   343     425     377       1,021     1,897  
    NET INCOME $ 1,232   $ 1,557   $ 1,452     $ 3,755   $ 6,767  
                 
    Earnings per common share:            
    Basic $ 0.06   $ 0.07   $ 0.07     $ 0.18   $ 0.32  
    Diluted $ 0.06   $ 0.07   $ 0.07     $ 0.18   $ 0.32  
    Weighted average number of common shares outstanding:            
    Basic   21,037,246     21,097,580     21,113,464       21,081,851     21,146,888  
    Diluted   21,037,246     21,097,580     21,113,464       21,081,851     21,148,679  
                 
    (Dollars in thousands)   At or for the three months ended   At or for the nine months ended
        Dec. 31, 2024   Sept. 30, 2024   Dec. 31, 2023   Dec. 31, 2024   Dec. 31, 2023
    AVERAGE BALANCES                    
    Average interest–earning assets   $ 1,436,130     $ 1,446,098     $ 1,494,341     $ 1,439,834     $ 1,494,443  
    Average interest-bearing liabilities     1,019,265       1,011,688       1,028,817       1,010,419       1,021,532  
    Net average earning assets     416,865       434,410       465,524       429,415       472,911  
    Average loans     1,053,342       1,048,536       1,015,741       1,043,274       1,008,429  
    Average deposits     1,232,450       1,216,769       1,209,524       1,220,443       1,235,032  
    Average equity     160,532       158,428       153,901       158,179       155,264  
    Average tangible equity (non-GAAP)     133,245       131,116       126,511       130,867       127,847  
                         
                         
    ASSET QUALITY   Dec. 31, 2024   Sept. 30, 2024   Dec. 31, 2023        
                         
    Non-performing loans   $ 469     $ 450     $ 186          
    Non-performing loans excluding SBA Government Guarantee (non-GAAP)     168       149       186          
    Non-performing loans to total loans     0.04 %     0.04 %     0.02 %        
    Non-performing loans to total loans excluding SBA Government Guarantee (non-GAAP)     0.02 %     0.01 %     0.02 %        
    Real estate/repossessed assets owned   $ –     $ –     $ –          
    Non-performing assets   $ 469     $ 450     $ 186          
    Non-performing assets excluding SBA Government Guarantee (non-GAAP)     168       149       186          
    Non-performing assets to total assets     0.03 %     0.03 %     0.01 %        
    Non-performing assets to total assets excluding SBA Government Guarantee (non-GAAP)     0.01 %     0.01 %     0.01 %        
    Net loan charge-offs (recoveries) in the quarter   $ 114     $ (2 )   $ (15 )        
    Net charge-offs (recoveries) in the quarter/average net loans     0.04 %     0.00 %     (0.01 )%        
                         
    Allowance for credit losses   $ 15,352     $ 15,466     $ 15,361          
    Average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities     140.90 %     142.94 %     145.25 %        
    Allowance for credit losses to non-performing loans     3273.35 %     3436.89 %     8258.60 %        
    Allowance for credit losses to total loans     1.47 %     1.46 %     1.51 %        
    Shareholders’ equity to assets     10.49 %     10.38 %     9.96 %        
                         
                         
    CAPITAL RATIOS                    
    Total capital (to risk weighted assets)     16.47 %     16.14 %     16.67 %        
    Tier 1 capital (to risk weighted assets)     15.21 %     14.88 %     15.42 %        
    Common equity tier 1 (to risk weighted assets)     15.21 %     14.88 %     15.42 %        
    Tier 1 capital (to average tangible assets)     10.86 %     10.72 %     10.53 %        
    Tangible common equity (to average tangible assets) (non-GAAP)     8.84 %     8.78 %     8.39 %        
                         
                         
    DEPOSIT MIX   Dec. 31, 2024   Sept. 30, 2024   Dec. 31, 2023   March 31, 2024    
                         
    Interest checking   $ 257,975     $ 267,254     $ 272,019     $ 289,824      
    Regular savings     169,181       172,454       199,911       192,638      
    Money market deposit accounts     236,912       227,505       225,727       209,164      
    Non-interest checking     312,839       341,116       350,744       349,081      
    Certificates of deposit     242,095       229,170       170,491       190,972      
    Total deposits   $ 1,219,002     $ 1,237,499     $ 1,218,892     $ 1,231,679      
                         
    COMPOSITION OF COMMERCIAL AND CONSTRUCTION LOANS        
            Other       Commercial
        Commercial   Real Estate   Real Estate   & Construction
        Business   Mortgage   Construction   Total
    December 31, 2024   (Dollars in thousands)
    Commercial business   $ 224,506     $ –     $ –     $ 224,506  
    Commercial construction     –       –       32,442       32,442  
    Office buildings     –       113,350       –       113,350  
    Warehouse/industrial     –       108,356       –       108,356  
    Retail/shopping centers/strip malls     –       89,871       –       89,871  
    Assisted living facilities     –       363       –       363  
    Single purpose facilities     –       262,556       –       262,556  
    Land     –       4,062       –       4,062  
    Multi-family     –       78,822       –       78,822  
    One-to-four family construction     –       –       17,514       17,514  
    Total   $ 224,506     $ 657,380     $ 49,956     $ 931,842  
                     
    March 31, 2024                
    Commercial business   $ 229,404     $ –     $ –     $ 229,404  
    Commercial construction     –       –       20,388       20,388  
    Office buildings     –       114,714       –       114,714  
    Warehouse/industrial     –       106,649       –       106,649  
    Retail/shopping centers/strip malls     –       89,448       –       89,448  
    Assisted living facilities     –       378       –       378  
    Single purpose facilities     –       272,312       –       272,312  
    Land     –       5,693       –       5,693  
    Multi-family     –       70,771       –       70,771  
    One-to-four family construction     –       –       16,150       16,150  
    Total   $ 229,404     $ 659,965     $ 36,538     $ 925,907  
                     
                     
    LOAN MIX   Dec. 31, 2024   Sept. 30, 2024   Dec. 31, 2023   March 31, 2024
    Commercial and construction   (Dollars in thousands)
    Commercial business   $ 224,506     $ 236,895     $ 229,249     $ 229,404  
    Other real estate mortgage     657,380       659,439       648,782       659,965  
    Real estate construction     49,956       51,498       42,167       36,538  
    Total commercial and construction     931,842       947,832       920,198       925,907  
    Consumer                
    Real estate one-to-four family     97,760       96,911       96,266       96,366  
    Other installment     15,507       16,234       1,735       1,740  
    Total consumer     113,267       113,145       98,001       98,106  
                     
    Total loans     1,045,109       1,060,977       1,018,199       1,024,013  
                     
    Less:                
    Allowance for credit losses     15,352       15,466       15,361       15,364  
    Loans receivable, net   $ 1,029,757     $ 1,045,511     $ 1,002,838     $ 1,008,649  
                     
                     
    DETAIL OF NON-PERFORMING ASSETS              
        Southwest            
        Washington   Other   Total    
    December 31, 2024   (Dollars in thousands)    
    Commercial business   $ 43     $ –     $ 43      
    Commercial real estate     93       –       93      
    Consumer     32       –       32      
    Government Guaranteed Loans     –       301       301      
    Total non-performing assets   $ 168     $ 301     $ 469      
                     
                    At or for the three months ended   At or for the nine months ended
    SELECTED OPERATING DATA Dec. 31, 2024   Sept. 30, 2024   Dec. 31, 2023   Dec. 31, 2024   Dec. 31, 2023
                       
    Efficiency ratio (4)   87.63 %     83.71 %     85.23 %     87.07 %     77.94 %
    Coverage ratio (6)   84.17 %     83.56 %     88.37 %     82.72 %     96.46 %
    Return on average assets (1)   0.32 %     0.40 %     0.37 %     0.33 %     0.57 %
    Return on average equity (1)   3.04 %     3.90 %     3.75 %     3.15 %     5.80 %
    Return on average tangible equity (1) (non-GAAP)   3.67 %     4.71 %     4.57 %     3.81 %     7.04 %
                       
    NET INTEREST SPREAD                  
    Yield on loans   4.97 %     4.80 %     4.56 %     4.83 %     4.53 %
    Yield on investment securities   1.82 %     2.05 %     2.01 %     2.00 %     2.02 %
    Total yield on interest-earning assets   4.18 %     4.11 %     3.81 %     4.10 %     3.77 %
                       
    Cost of interest-bearing deposits   1.81 %     1.76 %     0.98 %     1.73 %     0.82 %
    Cost of FHLB advances and other borrowings   5.43 %     5.92 %     5.83 %     5.83 %     5.77 %
    Total cost of interest-bearing liabilities   2.23 %     2.35 %     1.91 %     2.27 %     1.66 %
                       
    Spread (7)   1.95 %     1.76 %     1.90 %     1.83 %     2.11 %
    Net interest margin   2.60 %     2.46 %     2.49 %     2.51 %     2.64 %
                       
    PER SHARE DATA                  
    Basic earnings per share (2) $ 0.06     $ 0.07     $ 0.07     $ 0.18     $ 0.32  
    Diluted earnings per share (3)   0.06       0.07       0.07       0.18       0.32  
    Book value per share (5)   7.49       7.62       7.51       7.49       7.51  
    Tangible book value per share (5) (non-GAAP)   6.20       6.33       6.21       6.20       6.21  
    Market price per share:                  
    High for the period $ 5.88     $ 4.72     $ 6.48     $ 5.88     $ 6.48  
    Low for the period   4.59       3.79       5.35       3.64       4.17  
    Close for period end   5.74       4.71       6.40       5.74       6.40  
    Cash dividends declared per share   0.0200       0.0200       0.0600       0.0600       0.1800  
                       
    Average number of shares outstanding:                  
    Basic (2)   21,037,246       21,097,580       21,113,464       21,081,851       21,146,888  
    Diluted (3)   21,037,246       21,097,580       21,113,464       21,081,851       21,148,679  
                       

    (1)      Amounts for the periods shown are annualized.
    (2)      Amounts exclude ESOP shares not committed to be released.
    (3)      Amounts exclude ESOP shares not committed to be released and include common stock equivalents.
    (4)      Non-interest expense divided by net interest income and non-interest income.
    (5)      Amounts calculated based on shareholders’ equity and include ESOP shares not committed to be released.
    (6)      Net interest income divided by non-interest expense.
    (7)      Yield on interest-earning assets less cost of funds on interest-bearing liabilities.

    Contact: Nicole Sherman, President & CEO
    David Lam, CFO 
    Dan Cox, COO
    360-693-6650

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI: BayFirst Financial Corp. Reports Fourth Quarter 2024 Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    ST. PETERSBURG, Fla., Jan. 30, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — BayFirst Financial Corp. (NASDAQ: BAFN) (“BayFirst” or the “Company”), parent company of BayFirst National Bank (the “Bank”) today reported net income of $9.8 million, or $2.27 per common share, or $2.11 per diluted common share, for the fourth quarter of 2024, an increase of 759.8% compared to $1.1 million, or $0.18 per common share and diluted common share, in the third quarter of 2024. Net income for the year ended December 31, 2024 was $12.6 million, or $2.68 per common share, or $2.62 per diluted common share, compared to $5.7 million, or $1.16 per common share, or $1.12 per diluted common share for the year ended December 31, 2023.

    “We reported strong fourth quarter 2024 results, highlighted by quarterly net interest margin expansion and improved operating efficiencies,” stated Thomas G. Zernick, Chief Executive Officer. “Net income increased substantially compared to the preceding quarter, led by increases in net interest income, higher gain on sale of government guaranteed loans, and a gain on sale of two branch office properties, which was part of a sale-leaseback transaction. It’s worth noting that we continue to lease these two branch offices, resulting in no impact to our existing branch network. As a result of this transaction, we recorded an after-tax gain on sale of the properties of $8.7 million during the fourth quarter of 2024.”

    “The strength of our community bank business model, which includes serving individuals, families, and small businesses, coupled with results from our government guaranteed banking division, continues to fuel our operating results,” Zernick continued. “Our government guaranteed banking team had a solid quarter, producing $107.8 million in new government guaranteed loans, which was an improvement compared to the third quarter of 2024. Our lenders remain focused on meeting loan origination targets, while also adhering to prudently conservative credit quality metrics.

    “One of the highlights of the full year 2024 was the $1.1 million reduction in noninterest expenses compared to 2023. When we completed our near-term branch expansion plans in early 2024, we focused on reducing operating expenses by leveraging technology investments to better manage headcount and related incentive compensation, while at the same time growing the franchise. As we look to the new year, we will continue initiatives that are designed to further increase our efficiency, lower costs, and maximize the investments we’ve already made in technology and in our banking centers. While we are pleased with the progress during the fourth quarter and the year, we are excited to continue our forward momentum and further boost our results in 2025,” said Zernick.

    “Additionally, the Board of Directors authorized a share repurchase program on January 28, 2025. We believe our stock offers an attractive investment and repurchasing stock is a means for building long-term shareholder value,” said Zernick. “We are confident about the growth of our Company, and we believe that when our shares are undervalued, repurchases represent a value-enhancing deployment of capital.”

    Fourth Quarter 2024 Performance Review

    • In December 2024, the Company entered into a sale-leaseback agreement for two branch office properties for an aggregate cash purchase price of $15.0 million. As a result of this transaction, the Company recorded a pre-tax gain on sale of the properties of $11.6 million.
    • The Company’s government guaranteed loan team originated $107.8 million in new loans during the fourth quarter of 2024, an increase from $94.4 million of loans produced in the previous quarter, and a decrease from $144.9 million of loans produced during the fourth quarter of 2023. Since the launch in 2022 of the Company’s Bolt loan program, an SBA 7(a) loan product designed to expeditiously provide working capital loans of $150 thousand or less, the Company has originated 5,726 Bolt loans totaling $741.5 million, of which 495 Bolt loans totaling $64.8 million were originated during the fourth quarter. No newly originated government guaranteed loans were measured at fair value during the fourth quarter of 2024 versus $34 million in the third quarter of 2024 and $53 million in the fourth quarter of 2023.
    • Loans held for investment increased by $24.1 million, or 2.3%, during the fourth quarter of 2024 to $1.07 billion and increased $150.8 million, or 16.5%, over the past year. During the quarter, the Company originated $158.7 million of loans and sold $94.5 million of government guaranteed loan balances.
    • Deposits increased $31.0 million, or 2.8%, during the fourth quarter of 2024 and increased $158.1 million, or 16.0%, over the past year to $1.14 billion.
    • Book value and tangible book value at December 31, 2024 were $22.95 per common share, an increase from $20.86 at September 30, 2024.
    • Net interest margin increased by 26 basis points to 3.60% in the fourth quarter of 2024, from 3.34% in the third quarter of 2024 and 12 basis points from 3.48%in the fourth quarter of 2023.

    Results of Operations

    Net Income

    Net income was $9.8 million for the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to $1.1 million in the third quarter of 2024 and $1.7 million in the fourth quarter of 2023. The increase in net income for the fourth quarter of 2024 from the preceding quarter was primarily the result of the pre-tax gain on sale of two branch office properties of $11.6 million, which was part of a sale-leaseback transaction. Also contributing to higher earnings was an increase in net interest income of $1.2 million, an increase in gain on sale of government guaranteed loans of $2.3 million, and a decrease in noninterest expense of $1.7 million, partially offset by an increase in provision for credit losses of $1.4 million, a decrease in government guaranteed loan fair value gains of $3.5 million, and an increase in income tax expense on continuing operations of $2.9 million. The decrease in fair value gains on government guaranteed loans was the result of not measuring any newly originated government guaranteed loans at fair value in the fourth quarter. The increase in net income from the fourth quarter of 2023 was due to the pre-tax gain on sale of two branch office properties of $11.6 million, an increase in net interest income of $1.8 million, an increase in gain on sale of government guaranteed loans of $1.4 million, and lower noninterest expense of $3.1 million. This was partially offset by an increase in provision for credit losses of $1.8 million, a decrease in government guaranteed loan fair value gains of $4.8 million, and an increase in income tax expense on continuing operations of $2.6 million.

    For the year ended December 31, 2024, net income was $12.6 million, an increase from $5.7 million from the year ended December 31, 2023. The increase was primarily due to the pre-tax gain on sale of two branch office properties of $11.6 million, an increase in net interest income of $1.6 million, higher gain on sale of government guaranteed loans of $3.7 million, and lower noninterest expense of $0.9 million, partially offset by higher provision for credit losses of $4.3 million, a decrease in government guaranteed fair value gains of $5.9 million and higher income tax expense on continuing operations of $2.2 million.

    Net Interest Income and Net Interest Margin

    Net interest income from continuing operations was $10.7 million in the fourth quarter of 2024, an increase from $9.4 million during the third quarter of 2024, and an increase from $8.9 million during the fourth quarter of 2023. The net interest margin increased by 26 basis points to 3.60% in the fourth quarter of 2024, from 3.34% in the third quarter of 2024 and 12 basis points from 3.48%in the fourth quarter of 2023.

    The increase in net interest income from continuing operations during the fourth quarter of 2024, as compared to the third quarter of 2024, was mainly due to a decrease in interest cost on deposits of $1.0 million.

    The increase in net interest income from continuing operations during the fourth quarter of 2024, as compared to the year ago quarter, was mainly due to an increase in loan interest income, including fees, of $3.0 million, partially offset by higher interest expense on deposits of $0.9 million.

    Net interest income from continuing operations was $38.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2024, an increase from $36.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. The increase was mainly due to an increase in loan interest income, including fees, of $15.6 million, partially offset by an increase in interest expense on deposits of $12.1 million.

    Noninterest Income

    Noninterest income from continuing operations was $22.3 million for the fourth quarter of 2024, which was an increase from $12.3 million in the third quarter of 2024 and an increase from $14.7 million in the fourth quarter of 2023. The increase in the fourth quarter of 2024, as compared to the third quarter of 2024, was primarily the result of the pre-tax gain on sale of two branch office properties of $11.6 million, which was part of a sale-leaseback transaction, and an increase in gain on sale of government guaranteed loans of $2.3 million, partially offset by a decrease in government guaranteed loan fair value gains of $3.5 million. The decrease in fair value gains on government guaranteed loans was the result of not measuring any newly originated government guaranteed loans at fair value in the fourth quarter. The increase in the fourth quarter of 2024, as compared to the fourth quarter of 2023, was the result of the pre-tax gain on sale of two branch office properties of $11.6 million and an increase in gain on sale of government guaranteed loans of $1.4 million, partially offset by a decrease in fair value gains on government guaranteed loans of $4.8 million.

    Noninterest income from continuing operations was $60.5 million for the year ended 2024, which was an increase from $49.8 million for the year ended 2023. The increase was primarily the result of the pre-tax gain on sale of two branch office properties of $11.6 million and an increase in gain on sale of government guaranteed loans of $3.7 million, partially offset by a decrease in fair value gains on government guaranteed loans of $5.9 million.

    Noninterest Expense

    Noninterest expense from continuing operations was $15.3 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 compared to $17.1 million in the third quarter of 2024 and $18.5 million in the fourth quarter of 2023. The decrease in the fourth quarter of 2024, as compared to the prior quarter, was primarily due to a decrease in compensation expense of $0.6 million and a decrease in loan origination and collection expense of $1.2 million. The decrease in the fourth quarter of 2024, as compared to the fourth quarter of 2023, was primarily due to lower compensation expense of $1.2 million and lower loan origination and collection expenses of $2.0 million.

    Noninterest expense from continuing operations was $66.8 million for the year ended 2024 compared to $67.7 million for the year ended 2023. The decrease was the result of decreases in compensation expenses of $1.2 million, loan origination and collection expense of $1.0 million, and marketing and business development expenses of $1.3 million. The decreases were partially offset by increases in data processing expenses of $1.1 million, regulatory assessments of $0.4 million, and other noninterest expenses of $0.8 million.

    Balance Sheet

    Assets

    Total assets increased $43.2 million, or 3.5%, during the fourth quarter of 2024 to $1.29 billion, mainly due to increases in loans held for investment of $24.1 million, cash and cash equivalents of $13.4 million, and right-of-use operating lease assets of $13.8 million, partially offset by a decrease in premises and equipment of $5.5 million. The increase in the right-of-use operating lease asset and decrease in premises and equipment was primarily the result of the fourth quarter 2024 sale-leaseback transaction. Compared to the end of the fourth quarter last year, total assets increased $170.5 million, or 15.3%, driven by growth of loans held for investment of $150.8 million, higher cash and cash equivalents of $19.4 million, and an increase in right-of-use operating lease asset of $13.4 million, partially offset by a decrease in premises and equipment of $5.6 million.

    Loans

    Loans held for investment increased $24.1 million, or 2.3%, during the fourth quarter of 2024 and $150.8 million, or 16.5%, over the past year to $1.07 billion, due to originations in both conventional community bank loans and government guaranteed loans, partially offset by government guaranteed loan sales.

    Deposits

    Deposits increased $31.0 million, or 2.8%, during the fourth quarter of 2024 and increased $158.1 million, or 16.0%, from the fourth quarter of 2023, ending December 31, 2024 at $1.14 billion. During the fourth quarter, there were increases in noninterest-bearing deposit account balances of $5.7 million, interest-bearing transaction account balances of $8.9 million, and savings and money market deposit account balances of $19.1 million, partially offset by a decrease in time deposit balances of $2.7 million. The majority of the deposits are generated through the community bank in the Tampa Bay/Sarasota area. At December 31, 2024, approximately 74% of total deposits were insured by the FDIC. At times, the Bank has brokered time deposit and non-maturity deposit relationships available to diversify its funding sources. At December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024, and December 31, 2023, the Company had $112.1 million, $76.7 million, and $0.2 million, respectively, of brokered deposits.

    Asset Quality

    The Company recorded a provision for credit losses in the fourth quarter of $4.5 million, compared to provisions of $3.1 million for the third quarter of 2024 and $2.7 million during the fourth quarter of 2023.

    The ratio of ACL to total loans held for investment at amortized cost was 1.54% at December 31, 2024, 1.48% as of September 30, 2024, and 1.64% as of December 31, 2023. The ratio of ACL to total loans held for investment at amortized cost, excluding government guaranteed loan balances, was 1.79% at December 31, 2024, 1.70% as of September 30, 2024, and 2.03% as of December 31, 2023. To date, we have not learned of a material loss to the Company as a result of the recent hurricanes. Therefore, additional loss reserves have not been deemed necessary.

    Net charge-offs for the fourth quarter of 2024 were $3.4 million, which was an increase from $2.8 million for the third quarter of 2024 and $2.6 million in the fourth quarter of 2023. Annualized net charge-offs as a percentage of average loans held for investment at amortized cost were 1.34% for the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to 1.16% in the third quarter of 2024 and 1.27% in the fourth quarter of 2023. Nonperforming assets to total assets were 1.50% as of December 31, 2024, compared to 1.38% as of September 30, 2024, and 0.92% as of December 31, 2023. Nonperforming assets, excluding government guaranteed loan balances, to total assets were 1.06% as of December 31, 2024, compared to 0.88% as of September 30, 2024, and 0.74% as of December 31, 2023. As we discussed in previous quarters, the Bank developed an express modification program for SBA 7(a) borrowers to help those borrowers who are challenged with larger payments in the higher interest rate environment compared to interest rates at the time the loans were originated. To date, 496 SBA 7(a) borrowers have been offered loan modification options. These efforts have helped and are expected to continue to help reduce the risk of loss.

    Capital

    The Bank’s Tier 1 leverage ratio was 8.82% as of December 31, 2024, compared to 8.41% as of September 30, 2024, and 9.38% as of December 31, 2023. The CET 1 and Tier 1 capital ratio to risk-weighted assets were 10.89% as of December 31, 2024, compared to 10.14% as of September 30, 2024, and 11.77% as of December 31, 2023. The total capital to risk-weighted assets ratio was 12.14% as of December 31, 2024, compared to 11.39% as of September 30, 2024, and 13.03% as of December 31, 2023.

    Liquidity

    The Bank’s overall liquidity position remains strong and stable with liquidity in excess of internal minimums as stated by policy and monitored by management and the Board. The on-balance sheet liquidity ratio at December 31, 2024 was 9.17%, as compared to 9.33% at December 31, 2023. The Bank has robust liquidity resources which include secured borrowings available from the Federal Home Loan Bank, the Federal Reserve, and lines of credit with other financial institutions. As of December 31, 2024, the Bank had no borrowings from the FHLB, the FRB or other financial institutions. This compares to $10.0 million of borrowings from the FHLB and no borrowings from the FRB or other financial institutions at September 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023.

    Recent Events

    Share Repurchase Program

    The Company announced that its Board of Directors has adopted a share repurchase program. Under the repurchase program, the Company may repurchase up to $2.0 million of the Company’s outstanding shares, over a period beginning on January 28, 2025, and continuing until the earlier of the completion of the repurchase, or December 31, 2025, or termination of the program by the Board of Directors.

    First Quarter Common Stock Dividend. On January 28, 2025, BayFirst’s Board of Directors declared a first quarter 2025 cash dividend of $0.08 per common share. The dividend will be payable March 15, 2025 to common shareholders of record as of March 1, 2025. The Company has continuously paid quarterly common stock cash dividends since 2016.

    Conference Call

    BayFirst’s management team will host a conference call on Friday, January 31, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. ET to discuss its fourth quarter results. Interested investors may listen to the call live under the Investor Relations tab at www.bayfirstfinancial.com. Investment professionals are invited to dial (800) 549-8228 to participate in the call using Conference ID 71006. A replay of the call will be available for one year at www.bayfirstfinancial.com. 

    About BayFirst Financial Corp.

    BayFirst Financial Corp. is a registered bank holding company based in St. Petersburg, Florida which commenced operations on September 1, 2000. Its primary source of income is derived from its wholly owned subsidiary, BayFirst National Bank, a national banking association which commenced business operations on February 12, 1999. The Bank currently operates twelve full-service banking offices throughout the Tampa Bay-Sarasota region and offers a broad range of commercial and consumer banking services to businesses and individuals. It was named the best bank in Florida in 2024, according to Forbes and was the 9th largest SBA 7(a) lender by number of units originated and 16th largest by dollar volume nationwide through the SBA’s quarter ended December 31, 2024. As of December 31, 2024, BayFirst Financial Corp. had $1.29 billion in total assets.

    Forward-Looking Statements

    In addition to the historical information contained herein, this presentation includes “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of such term in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements are subject to many risks and uncertainties, including, but not limited to, the effects of health crises, global military hostilities, weather events, or climate change, including their effects on the economic environment, our customers and our operations, as well as any changes to federal, state or local government laws, regulations or orders in connection with them; the ability of the Company to implement its strategy and expand its banking operations; changes in interest rates and other general economic, business and political conditions, including changes in the financial markets; changes in business plans as circumstances warrant; risks related to mergers and acquisitions; changes in benchmark interest rates used to price loans and deposits, changes in tax laws, regulations and guidance; and other risks detailed from time to time in filings made by the Company with the SEC, including, but not limited to those “Risk Factors” described in our most recent Form 10-K and Form 10-Q. Readers should note that the forward-looking statements included herein are not a guarantee of future events, and that actual events may differ materially from those made in or suggested by the forward-looking statements.

    Contacts:  
    Thomas G. Zernick Scott J. McKim
    Chief Executive Officer Chief Financial Officer
    727.399.5680 727.521.7085
       

    BAYFIRST FINANCIAL CORP.
    SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA (Unaudited)

      At or for the three months ended
    (Dollars in thousands, except for share data) 12/31/2024   9/30/2024   6/30/2024   3/31/2024   12/31/2023
    Balance sheet data:                  
    Average loans held for investment at amortized cost $ 1,003,867     $ 948,528     $ 902,417     $ 855,040     $ 825,196  
    Average total assets   1,273,296       1,228,040       1,178,501       1,126,315       1,108,550  
    Average common shareholders’ equity   87,961       86,381       84,948       85,385       82,574  
    Total loans held for investment   1,066,559       1,042,445       1,008,314       934,868       915,726  
    Total loans held for investment, excl gov’t gtd loan balances   917,075       885,444       844,659       776,302       698,106  
    Allowance for credit losses   15,512       14,186       13,843       13,906       13,497  
    Total assets   1,288,297       1,245,099       1,217,869       1,144,194       1,117,766  
    Common shareholders’ equity   94,869       86,242       84,911       84,578       84,656  
    Share data:                  
    Basic earnings per common share $ 2.27     $ 0.18     $ 0.12     $ 0.11     $ 0.32  
    Diluted earnings per common share   2.11       0.18       0.12       0.11       0.32  
    Dividends per common share   0.08       0.08       0.08       0.08       0.08  
    Book value per common share   22.95       20.86       20.54       20.45       20.60  
    Tangible book value per common share (1)   22.95       20.86       20.54       20.45       20.60  
    Performance and capital ratios:                  
    Return on average assets(2)   3.07 %     0.37 %     0.29 %     0.29 %     0.60 %
    Return on average common equity(2)   42.71 %     3.48 %     2.26 %     2.06 %     6.37 %
    Net interest margin(2)   3.60 %     3.34 %     3.43 %     3.42 %     3.48 %
    Dividend payout ratio   3.52 %     43.98 %     68.91 %     75.27 %     25.03 %
    Asset quality ratios:                  
    Net charge-offs $ 3,369     $ 2,757     $ 3,261     $ 3,652     $ 2,612  
    Net charge-offs/avg loans held for investment at amortized cost(2)   1.34 %     1.16 %     1.45 %     1.71 %     1.27 %
    Nonperforming loans(3) $ 17,607     $ 15,489     $ 12,312     $ 9,877     $ 9,688  
    Nonperforming loans (excluding gov’t gtd balance)(3) $ 13,570     $ 10,992     $ 8,054     $ 7,568     $ 8,264  
    Nonperforming loans/total loans held for investment(3)   1.75 %     1.62 %     1.34 %     1.15 %     1.18 %
    Nonperforming loans (excl gov’t gtd balance)/total loans held for investment(3)   1.35 %     1.15 %     0.87 %     0.88 %     1.00 %
    ACL/Total loans held for investment at amortized cost   1.54 %     1.48 %     1.50 %     1.62 %     1.64 %
    ACL/Total loans held for investment at amortized cost, excl government guaranteed loans   1.79 %     1.70 %     1.73 %     1.88 %     2.03 %
    Other Data:                  
    Full-time equivalent employees   299       295       302       313       305  
    Banking center offices   12       12       12       12       11  
    (1) See section entitled “GAAP Reconciliation and Management Explanation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” below for a reconciliation to most comparable GAAP equivalent.
    (2) Annualized
    (3) Excludes loans measured at fair value                  
                       

    GAAP Reconciliation and Management Explanation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures

    Some of the financial measures included in this report are not measures of financial condition or performance recognized by GAAP. These non-GAAP financial measures include tangible common shareholders’ equity and tangible book value per common share. Our management uses these non-GAAP financial measures in its analysis of our performance, and we believe that providing this information to financial analysts and investors allows them to evaluate capital adequacy.

    The following presents these non-GAAP financial measures along with their most directly comparable financial measures calculated in accordance with GAAP:

    Tangible Common Shareholders’ Equity and Tangible Book Value Per Common Share (Unaudited)
        As of
    (Dollars in thousands, except for share data)   December
    31, 2024    		   September
    30, 2024    		   June
    30, 2024    		   March
    31, 2024    		   December
    31, 2023
    Total shareholders’ equity   $ 110,920     $ 102,293     $ 100,962     $ 100,629     $ 100,707  
    Less: Preferred stock liquidation preference     (16,051 )     (16,051 )     (16,051 )     (16,051 )     (16,051 )
    Total equity available to common shareholders     94,869       86,242       84,911       84,578       84,656  
    Less: Goodwill     —       —       —       —       —  
    Tangible common shareholders’ equity   $ 94,869     $ 86,242     $ 84,911     $ 84,578     $ 84,656  
                         
    Common shares outstanding     4,132,986       4,134,059       4,134,219       4,134,914       4,110,470  
    Tangible book value per common share   $ 22.95     $ 20.86     $ 20.54     $ 20.45     $ 20.60  
                                             
    BAYFIRST FINANCIAL CORP.
    CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
    (Dollars in thousands) 12/31/2024 9/30/2024 12/31/2023
    Assets (Unaudited) (Unaudited)  
    Cash and due from banks $ 4,499   $ 4,708   $ 4,099  
    Interest-bearing deposits in banks   73,289     59,675     54,286  
    Cash and cash equivalents   77,788     64,383     58,385  
    Time deposits in banks   2,270     2,264     4,646  
    Investment securities available for sale, at fair value (amortized cost $40,279, $41,104, and $43,597 at December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024, and December 31, 2023, respectively)   36,291     37,984     39,575  
    Investment securities held to maturity, at amortized cost, net of allowance for credit losses of $12, $13, and $17 (fair value: $2,346, $2,321, and $2,263 at December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024, and December 31, 2023, respectively)   2,488     2,487     2,484  
    Nonmarketable equity securities   4,526     4,997     4,770  
    Government guaranteed loans held for sale   —     595     —  
    Government guaranteed loans held for investment, at fair value   60,833     86,441     91,508  
    Loans held for investment, at amortized cost   1,005,726     956,004     824,218  
    Allowance for credit losses on loans   (15,512 )   (14,186 )   (13,497 )
    Net Loans held for investment, at amortized cost   990,214     941,818     810,721  
    Accrued interest receivable   9,155     8,537     7,130  
    Premises and equipment, net   33,249     38,736     38,874  
    Loan servicing rights   16,534     15,966     14,959  
    Right-of-use operating lease assets   15,814     2,018     2,416  
    Bank owned life insurance   26,513     26,330     25,800  
    Other real estate owned   132     —     —  
    Other assets   12,490     12,543     16,150  
    Assets from discontinued operations   —     —     348  
    Total assets $ 1,288,297   $ 1,245,099   $ 1,117,766  
    Liabilities:      
    Noninterest-bearing deposits $ 101,743   $ 95,995   $ 93,708  
    Interest-bearing transaction accounts   256,793     247,923     259,422  
    Savings and money market deposits   474,425     455,297     373,000  
    Time deposits   310,268     312,981     259,008  
    Total deposits   1,143,229     1,112,196     985,138  
    FHLB borrowings   —     10,000     10,000  
    Subordinated debentures   5,956     5,954     5,949  
    Notes payable   1,934     2,048     2,389  
    Accrued interest payable   1,036     1,114     882  
    Operating lease liabilities   14,510     2,271     2,619  
    Deferred income tax liabilities   301     1,488     482  
    Accrued expenses and other liabilities   10,411     7,735     8,980  
    Liabilities from discontinued operations   —     —     620  
    Total liabilities   1,177,377     1,142,806     1,017,059  
    Shareholders’ equity: (Unaudited) (Unaudited)  
    Preferred stock, Series A; no par value, 10,000 shares authorized, 6,395 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024, and December 31, 2023; aggregate liquidation preference of $6,395 each period   6,161     6,161     6,161  
    Preferred stock, Series B; no par value, 20,000 shares authorized, 3,210 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024, and December 31, 2023; aggregate liquidation preference of $3,210 each period   3,123     3,123     3,123  
    Preferred stock, Series C; no par value, 10,000 shares authorized, 6,446 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024, and December 31, 2023; aggregate liquidation preference of $6,446 at December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024, and December 31, 2023   6,446     6,446     6,446  
    Common stock and additional paid-in capital; no par value, 15,000,000 shares authorized, 4,132,986, 4,134,059, and 4,110,470 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024, and December 31, 2023, respectively   54,764     54,780     54,521  
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss, net   (2,956 )   (2,312 )   (2,981 )
    Unearned compensation   (752 )   (978 )   (958 )
    Retained earnings   44,134     35,073     34,395  
    Total shareholders’ equity   110,920     102,293     100,707  
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity $ 1,288,297   $ 1,245,099   $ 1,117,766  
                       
    BAYFIRST FINANCIAL CORP.
    CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
      For the Quarter Ended   Year-to-Date
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) 12/31/2024   9/30/2024   12/31/2023   12/31/2024   12/31/2023
    Interest income: (Unaudited)   (Unaudited)   (Unaudited)   (Unaudited)    
    Loans, including fees $ 20,747     $ 20,442   $ 17,714     $ 78,831     $ 63,189  
    Interest-bearing deposits in banks and other   1,007       1,000     1,140       3,979       5,328  
    Total interest income   21,754       21,442     18,854       82,810       68,517  
    Interest expense:                  
    Deposits   10,600       11,609     9,719       42,872       30,795  
    Other   501       384     258       1,912       1,291  
    Total interest expense   11,101       11,993     9,977       44,784       32,086  
    Net interest income   10,653       9,449     8,877       38,026       36,431  
    Provision for credit losses   4,546       3,122     2,737       14,726       10,445  
    Net interest income after provision for credit losses   6,107       6,327     6,140       23,300       25,986  
    Noninterest income:                  
    Loan servicing income, net   582       918     677       3,100       2,826  
    Gain on sale of government guaranteed loans, net   8,425       6,143     6,977       28,252       24,553  
    Service charges and fees   451       447     555       1,794       1,721  
    Government guaranteed loans fair value gain, net   (80 )     3,416     4,697       9,843       15,718  
    Government guaranteed loan packaging fees   773       903     1,588       4,105       3,664  
    Gain on sale of premises and equipment   11,649       —     —       11,649       —  
    Other noninterest income   476       445     197       1,726       1,273  
    Total noninterest income   22,276       12,272     14,691       60,469       49,755  
    Noninterest Expense:                  
    Salaries and benefits   7,351       7,878     7,446       31,063       30,973  
    Bonus, commissions, and incentives   1,074       1,141     2,211       4,445       5,726  
    Occupancy and equipment   1,217       1,248     1,150       4,848       4,758  
    Data processing   1,749       1,789     1,422       6,745       5,611  
    Marketing and business development   390       532     640       2,050       3,336  
    Professional services   803       853     1,070       3,882       3,657  
    Loan origination and collection   758       1,956     2,728       6,391       7,425  
    Employee recruiting and development   445       595     510       2,186       2,177  
    Regulatory assessments   379       309     266       1,249       881  
    Other noninterest expense   1,169       763     1,023       3,923       3,163  
    Total noninterest expense   15,335       17,064     18,466       66,782       67,707  
    Income before taxes from continuing operations   13,048       1,535     2,365       16,987       8,034  
    Income tax expense from continuing operations   3,272       398     704       4,315       2,119  
    Net income from continuing operations   9,776       1,137     1,661       12,672       5,915  
    Loss from discontinued operations before income taxes   —       —     (8 )     (92 )     (283 )
    Income tax benefit from discontinued operations   —       —     (2 )     (23 )     (70 )
    Net loss from discontinued operations   —       —     (6 )     (69 )     (213 )
                       
    Net income   9,776       1,137     1,655       12,603       5,702  
    Preferred dividends   385       385     341       1,541       965  
    Net income available to common shareholders $ 9,391     $ 752   $ 1,314     $ 11,062     $ 4,737  
    Basic earnings (loss) per common share: (Unaudited)   (Unaudited)   (Unaudited)   (Unaudited)    
    Continuing operations $ 2.27     $ 0.18   $ 0.32     $ 2.69     $ 1.21  
    Discontinued operations   —       —     —       (0.01 )     (0.05 )
    Basic earnings per common share $ 2.27     $ 0.18   $ 0.32     $ 2.68     $ 1.16  
                       
    Diluted earnings (loss) per common share:                  
    Continuing operations $ 2.11     $ 0.18   $ 0.32     $ 2.64     $ 1.17  
    Discontinued operations   —       —     —       (0.02 )     (0.05 )
    Diluted earnings per common share $ 2.11     $ 0.18   $ 0.32     $ 2.62     $ 1.12  
                                         

    Loan Composition

    (Dollars in thousands) 12/31/2024   9/30/2024   6/30/2024   3/31/2024   12/31/2023
      (Unaudited)   (Unaudited)   (Unaudited)   (Unaudited)    
    Real estate:                  
    Residential $ 330,870     $ 321,740     $ 304,234     $ 285,214     $ 264,126  
    Commercial   305,721       292,026       288,185       273,227       293,595  
    Construction and land   32,914       33,784       35,759       36,764       26,272  
    Commercial and industrial   226,522       200,212       192,140       182,264       177,566  
    Commercial and industrial – PPP   941       1,656       2,324       2,965       3,202  
    Consumer and other   93,826       92,546       85,789       63,854       47,287  
    Loans held for investment, at amortized cost, gross   990,794       941,964       908,431       844,288       812,048  
    Deferred loan costs, net   19,499       18,060       17,299       16,233       14,707  
    Discount on government guaranteed loans   (8,306 )     (7,880 )     (7,731 )     (7,674 )     (7,040 )
    Premium on loans purchased, net   3,739       3,860       4,173       4,252       4,503  
    Loans held for investment, at amortized cost, net   1,005,726       956,004       922,172       857,099       824,218  
    Government guaranteed loans held for investment, at fair value   60,833       86,441       86,142       77,769       91,508  
    Total loans held for investment, net $ 1,066,559     $ 1,042,445     $ 1,008,314     $ 934,868     $ 915,726  
                                           

    Nonperforming Assets (Unaudited)

    (Dollars in thousands) 12/31/2024   9/30/2024   6/30/2024   3/31/2024   12/31/2023
    Nonperforming loans (government guaranteed balances), at amortized cost, gross $ 4,037     $ 4,497     $ 4,258     $ 2,309     $ 1,424  
    Nonperforming loans (unguaranteed balances), at amortized cost, gross   13,570       10,992       8,054       7,568       8,264  
    Total nonperforming loans, at amortized cost, gross   17,607       15,489       12,312       9,877       9,688  
    Nonperforming loans (government guaranteed balances), at fair value   —       24       341       94       —  
    Nonperforming loans (unguaranteed balances), at fair value   1,490       1,535       1,284       729       648  
    Total nonperforming loans, at fair value   1,490       1,559       1,625       823       648  
    OREO   132       —       1,633       404       —  
    Repossessed assets   36       94       —       —       —  
    Total nonperforming assets, gross $ 19,265     $ 17,142     $ 15,570     $ 11,104     $ 10,336  
    Nonperforming loans as a percentage of total loans held for investment(1)   1.75 %     1.62 %     1.34 %     1.15 %     1.18 %
    Nonperforming loans (excluding government guaranteed balances) to total loans held for investment(1)   1.35 %     1.15 %     0.87 %     0.88 %     1.00 %
    Nonperforming assets as a percentage of total assets   1.50 %     1.38 %     1.28 %     0.97 %     0.92 %
    Nonperforming assets (excluding government guaranteed balances) to total assets   1.06 %     0.88 %     0.82 %     0.70 %     0.74 %
    ACL to nonperforming loans(1)   88.10 %     91.59 %     112.44 %     140.79 %     139.32 %
    ACL to nonperforming loans (excluding government guaranteed balances)(1)   114.31 %     129.06 %     171.88 %     183.75 %     163.32 %

    (1) Excludes loans measured at fair value

    Note: Transmitted on Globe Newswire on January 30, 2025, at 4:00 p.m. ET.

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI: Diamondback Energy, Inc. Announces Drop Down Transaction

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    MIDLAND, Texas, Jan. 30, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Diamondback Energy, Inc. (NASDAQ: FANG) (“Diamondback” or the “Company”) today announced that it has entered into a definitive purchase agreement with Viper Energy, Inc. (“Viper”), a subsidiary of Diamondback, to sell certain mineral and royalty interests from subsidiaries of Diamondback for $1 billion in cash and approximately 69.6 million units of Viper’s operating subsidiary (“OpCo”, and such units the “OpCo Units”) in a drop down transaction (“Drop Down”). The tax advantaged OpCo units, which will be issued together with an equal number of shares of Class B common stock of Viper, are exchangeable for shares of Class A common stock of Viper.

    Based on the volume weighted average sales price of Viper’s common stock for the 30-trading day period ending on January 24, 2025 of $49.55, the transaction is valued at a total of $4.45 billion. Viper expects to fund the cash portion of this transaction through a combination of cash on hand, borrowings under Viper’s credit facility, and proceeds from one or more capital markets transactions, subject to market conditions and other factors.

    “This Drop Down transaction with Viper is a major milestone in the continued synergy capture and execution of corporate development objectives related to the Endeavor transaction,” stated Travis Stice, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Diamondback. “Additionally, the Drop Down will accelerate debt reduction and increase Diamondback’s exposure to Viper’s differentiated growth profile and market-leading minerals position.”

    Timing and Approvals

    Diamondback expects the transaction to close in the second quarter of 2025, subject to the satisfaction of customary closing conditions and approval of the transaction by Viper’s stockholders.

    Advisors

    RBC Capital Markets is serving as financial advisor to Diamondback. Kirkland & Ellis LLP is acting as legal advisor to Diamondback.

    Evercore is acting as financial advisor to the Audit Committee of Viper’s Board of Directors. Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP is acting as legal advisor to Viper’s Audit Committee.

    About Diamondback

    Diamondback is an independent oil and natural gas company headquartered in Midland, Texas focused on the acquisition, development, exploration and exploitation of unconventional, onshore oil and natural gas reserves in the Permian Basin in West Texas. For more information, please visit www.diamondbackenergy.com.

    Forward-Looking Statements

    This news release contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act and Section 21E of the Exchange Act, which involve risks, uncertainties, and assumptions. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, including statements regarding Diamondback’s: future performance; business strategy; future operations (including drilling plans and capital plans); estimates and projections of revenues, losses, costs, expenses, returns, cash flow, and financial position; reserve estimates and its ability to replace or increase reserves; anticipated benefits or other effects of strategic transactions (including the recently completed Endeavor merger, the Drop Down transaction and other acquisitions or divestitures); and plans and objectives of management (including plans for future cash flow from operations) are forward-looking statements. When used in this news release, the words “aim,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “continue,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “forecast,” “future,” “guidance,” “intend,” “may,” “model,” “outlook,” “plan,” “positioned,” “potential,” “predict,” “project,” “seek,” “should,” “target,” “will,” “would,” and similar expressions (including the negative of such terms) as they relate to Diamondback are intended to identify forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements contain such identifying words. Although Diamondback believes that the expectations and assumptions reflected in its forward-looking statements are reasonable as and when made, they involve risks and uncertainties that are difficult to predict and, in many cases, beyond Diamondback’s control. Accordingly, forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and Diamondback’s actual outcomes could differ materially from what Diamondback has expressed in its forward-looking statements.

    Factors that could cause the outcomes to differ materially include (but are not limited to) the following: changes in supply and demand levels for oil, natural gas, and natural gas liquids, and the resulting impact on the price for those commodities; the impact of public health crises, including epidemic or pandemic diseases and any related company or government policies or actions; actions taken by the members of OPEC and Russia affecting the production and pricing of oil, as well as other domestic and global political, economic, or diplomatic developments, including any impact of the ongoing war in Ukraine and the Israel-Hamas war on the global energy markets and geopolitical stability; instability in the financial markets; inflationary pressures; higher interest rates and their impact on the cost of capital; regional supply and demand factors, including delays, curtailment delays or interruptions of production, or governmental orders, rules or regulations that impose production limits; federal and state legislative and regulatory initiatives relating to hydraulic fracturing, including the effect of existing and future laws and governmental regulations; physical and transition risks relating to climate change; those risks described in Item 1A of Diamondback’s Annual Report on Form 10-K, filed with the SEC on February 22, 2024, and those risks disclosed in its subsequent filings on Forms 10-Q and 8-K, which can be obtained free of charge on the SEC’s website at http://www.sec.gov and Diamondback’s website at www.diamondbackenergy.com/investors.

    In light of these factors, the events anticipated by Diamondback’s forward-looking statements may not occur at the time anticipated or at all. Moreover, Diamondback operates in a very competitive and rapidly changing environment and new risks emerge from time to time. Diamondback cannot predict all risks, nor can it assess the impact of all factors on its business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated by any forward-looking statements it may make. Accordingly, you should not place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. All forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this letter or, if earlier, as of the date they were made. Diamondback does not intend to, and disclaims any obligation to, update or revise any forward-looking statements unless required by applicable law.

    Additional Information about the Drop Down and Where to Find It

    In connection with the Drop Down, Viper expects to file relevant materials with the SEC including a proxy statement on Schedule 14A. Promptly after filing its definitive proxy statement with the SEC, Viper will mail the definitive proxy statement to each Viper stockholder entitled to vote at the special meeting relating to the Drop Down. This document is not a substitute for the proxy statement or for any other document that Viper may file with the SEC and send to its stockholders in connection with the Pending Drop Down. INVESTORS AND STOCKHOLDERS IN VIPER ARE URGED TO CAREFULLY READ THE VIPER PROXY STATEMENT (INCLUDING ANY AMENDMENTS OR SUPPLEMENTS THERETO AND ANY DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE THEREIN) AND ANY OTHER RELEVANT DOCUMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH THE DROP DOWN THAT VIPER WILL FILE WITH THE SEC WHEN THEY BECOME AVAILABLE BECAUSE THEY WILL CONTAIN IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT THE TRANSACTION AND THE PARTIES TO THE TRANSACTION. The definitive proxy statement, the preliminary proxy statement, and other relevant materials in connection with the Drop Down (when they become available) and any other documents filed by Viper with the SEC, may be obtained free of charge at the SEC’s website www.sec.gov. Copies of the documents filed with the SEC by Viper will be available free of charge on Viper’s website at www.viperenergy.com/investors.

    Participants in the Solicitation

    Viper and its directors and executive officers, and Diamondback as its parent and major stockholder, may be deemed, under SEC rules, to be participants in the solicitation of proxies from Viper’s stockholders in connection with the Drop Down. Information about the directors and executive officers of Viper and, as applicable, about Diamondback, is set forth in (i) in Viper’s proxy statement for its 2024 annual meeting, including under the headings “Proposal 1—Election of Directors”, “Executive Officers”, “Compensation Discussion and Analysis”, “Compensation Tables”, “Stock Ownership” and “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions,” which was filed with the SEC on April 25, 2024 and is available at https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/1602065/000119312524113976/d796418ddef14a.htm, (ii) Viper’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023, including under the headings “Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance”, “Item 11. Executive Compensation”, “Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters” and “Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence”, which was filed with the SEC on February 22, 2024 and is available at https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/1602065/000160206524000010/vnom-20231231.htm and (iii) subsequent statements of changes in beneficial ownership on file with the SEC.

    Additional information about Diamondback may be found in Diamondback’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023, filed with the SEC on February 22, 2024, and subsequent quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K filed by Diamondback with the SEC. These documents may be obtained free of charge from the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov and Diamondback’s website at www.diamondbackenergy.com/investors.

    Additional information regarding the participants in the proxy solicitation and a description of their direct or indirect interests, by security holdings or otherwise, will be contained in the proxy statement and other relevant materials filed by Viper with the SEC when they become available. These documents may be obtained free of charge from the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov and Viper’s website at www.viperenergy.com/investors.

    No Offer or Solicitation

    This document does not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any securities, or a solicitation of any vote or approval, nor shall there be any sale of securities in any jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such jurisdiction.

    Diamondback Investor Contact:

    Adam Lawlis
    +1 432.221.7467
    alawlis@diamondbackenergy.com

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Dr. Rand Paul Releases Statement on Nomination of Representative Elise Stefanik to Serve as U.S. Ambassador to United Nations

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Kentucky Rand Paul
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
    January 30, 2025
     Contact: Press_Paul@paul.senate.gov, 202-224-4343
     
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) released the following statement in support of the nomination of U.S. Representative Elise Stefanik (R-NY-21) to serve as the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations shortly after he voted for her nomination at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee markup.
    “I would like to extend my sincere congratulations to Representative Elise Stefanik on her nomination to serve as the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. I intend to support her nomination and wish her all the best in this important role representing the United States.
    “I would like, however, to outline a few fundamental policy disagreements I maintain with Representative Stefanik, with the hope that a closer examination of these issues will lead to the adoption of more prudent policies. 
    “Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Representative Stefanik issued a statement urging NATO to immediately admit Ukraine into the alliance. That course of action risks leading to World War III, with the United States getting pulled into a direct conflict with Russia—a country that maintains the world’s largest nuclear arsenal. It is imperative that diplomats avoid kneejerk reactions and maintain composure when confronted with serious geopolitical crises. 
    “Unfortunately, Representative Stefanik’s statement neglected the principal driver of Moscow’s antipathy toward Ukraine. Fearing a western bulwark on its doorstep, the main driver of Russia’s decision to violate Ukraine’s sovereignty and invade the country was, and remains, a desire to prevent the potential threat that would emanate from Ukraine should it join NATO. One must not agree with Moscow’s perspective, however it is imperative that our diplomats and policymakers strive to understand it to avoid miscalculation and effectively negotiate a lasting peace.  
    “I am encouraged by Representative Stefanik’s recent vote against an additional $60 billion in aid to Ukraine, citing concerns over excessive spending and a need to address the situation at our southern border. President Trump vowed to end the needless slaughter in Ukraine, and I expect Representative Stefanik will use her position at the UN to work toward the realization of that objective. 
    “The second fundamental disagreement I maintain with Representative Stefanik is her vocal support of a national ban of the popular app, TikTok. Representative Stefanik and other proponents of the ban claim that it is necessary to prevent the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) from accessing Americans’ user data and prevent the spread of CCP propaganda. But in addition to a lack of evidence that TikTok poses any tangible national security threat to the United States, a ban also fundamentally infringes on the most sacred of our constitutionally protected rights—the right of free speech and expression. The United States is not better off by emulating the tactics of the CCP, which bans speech it does not like.
    “Diplomacy requires give and take. It requires hard work building relationships based on mutual respect. Rather than reprimand our adversaries at every turn, we should strive to maintain productive dialogue. President Trump understands the importance of diplomacy as a means to avoid and end conflicts. As Ambassador to the United Nations, I hope Representative Stefanik will advance President Trump’s diplomatic agenda. 
    “While I may disagree with Representative Stefanik’s general foreign policy disposition, I do not doubt her steadfastness and devotion to our country. It is my sincere hope that President Trump’s second administration will continue to elevate diplomacy over conflict to ensure that our children and grandchildren inherit a prosperous and peaceful world. I wish Representative Stefanik all the best and stand ready to offer my assistance as she prepares to represent the United States on the global stage.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senators Coons, Lankford introduce bill to incentivize charitable giving through tax code

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Delaware Christopher Coons

    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.) and James Lankford (R-Okla.) reintroduced the Charitable Act to reward Americans who give to charity and incentivize more people to donate to worthy causes. Under this new bill, Americans who donate to charities, houses of worship, religious organizations, and other nonprofits of their choice would be able to deduct that donation from their federal taxes, even if they take the standard, non-itemized deduction.

    A similar provision was first enacted in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, which passed in 2020. As a result of that legislation, 90 million taxpayers benefitted from the deduction, and households making between $30,000 and $100,000 increased their charitable giving the most. Charitable organizations received $30 billion in increased donations. 

    “Delawareans have always risen to the occasion in support of our communities,” said Senator Coons. “Last year, Americans demonstrated our generosity by donating a collective $557 billion to charities, houses of worship, and nonprofits. I am proud to reintroduce the Charitable Act with Senator Lankford to help the federal government encourage even more Americans to embrace the civic virtue of giving to those in need.”

    “America’s first safety net should never be the government—government is the least efficient caregiver by far. Our families, churches, and other nonprofits do incredible work to lift up those who need it most. Updating the tax law to incentivize giving empowers Americans to make an even bigger impact for the homeless, hurting, and hungry,” said Senator Lankford. 

    This bill is supported by numerous organizations, including The National Council of Nonprofits (25,000 member organizations), Charitable Giving Coalition (175 member organizations), the Nonprofit Alliance, Faith & Giving Coalition, Leadership 18, Independent Sector, YMCA, Council on Foundations, American Endowment Foundation, Philanthropy Southwest, Christian Alliance for Orphans, Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, United Philanthropy Forum, National Association of Charitable Gift Planners, Association of Art Museum Directors, the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability, Association of Fundraising Professionals, Council for Advancement and Support of Education, Americans for the Arts, American Heart Association, Oklahoma Center for Nonprofits, Delaware Alliance for Nonprofit Advancement, Maryland Nonprofits, Boys and Girls Club of America, March of Dimes, and Habitat for Humanity.

    In addition to Senators Coons and Lankford, the Charitable Act is supported by Senators Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), John Curtis (R-Utah), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), Katie Britt (R-Ala.), and Tim Scott (R-S.C.).

    “Nonprofits are the backbone of our communities, addressing critical needs and enhancing the quality of life for all. The Charitable Act is a vital step in restoring a proven incentive that encourages generosity and empowers nonprofits to meet growing demands, even in challenging times. We applaud Senators Lankford and Coons for their leadership and steadfast commitment to strengthening the nonprofit sector, ensuring we can continue to deliver essential services and drive positive change,” said Sheila Bravo, President and CEO, Delaware Alliance for Nonprofit Advancement.

    “Bravo to Senators Lankford and Coons on this much-needed support for America’s nonprofits. They both understand from personal experience the key role the nonprofit sector plays both as a provider of critical services to millions of Americans and as a major employer in Oklahoma and nationwide. In this era of historic inflation and ever-rising costs, the need for nonprofit services has not declined—in fact, we are needed more than ever. The Charitable Act will help recreate an environment of years past where charitable givers at every level can feel incentivized and appreciated—after all, we are all in this together,” said Marnie Taylor, President & CEO, Oklahoma Center for Nonprofits. 

    “Faith & Giving heartily thanks and commends Senators James Lankford and Chris Coons for reintroducing the Charitable Act to restore a charitable deduction for taxpayers who do not itemize. Giving by individuals is the financial lifeblood of many thousands of American faith communities and faith-based organizations. Yet since 2017 individual giving to religion has fallen billions of dollars short of keeping pace with inflation. No single policy is more important for restoring the health of individual giving and faith-based charities than a non-itemizer charitable deduction like the one Congress created to stimulate giving in 2020 and 2021,” Brian Walsh, Executive Director, Faith & Giving. 

    “Nonprofits need tools like the nonitemizer deduction proposed by the Charitable Act to meet growing and changing community needs,” said YMCA of the USA President and CEO Suzanne McCormick. “We saw this policy unlock more giving when it was enacted temporarily during the pandemic, and we know that making it permanent will help YMCAs serve and support more neighbors every day. Senators Lankford and Coons recognize the important role nonprofits play in communities and understand that the universal charitable deduction helps nonprofits like the Y make their communities stronger. I’m grateful for their leadership.”

    “The temporary non-itemizer charitable deduction implemented in 2020 and 2021 led to an additional $18 billion in donations to nonprofits. As nonprofits are faced with higher demand for services, increased costs, workforce challenges, and declining donations, the Charitable Act presents an opportunity to reinstate that incentive and provide nonprofits with more resources to carry out their mission. The networks of the National Council of Nonprofits enthusiastically endorse this vital legislation and appreciate leaders like Senator Lankford and Senator Coons who continue to be stalwart champions for these efforts and the nonprofit sector,” said Diane Yentel, President & CEO, National Council of Nonprofits.

    “Generosity is a core American value that should be incentivized to help meet the evolving needs of communities,” said Kathleen Enright, Council on Foundations President and CEO. “The temporary non-itemizer deduction in the CARES Act successfully sparked more people to give. We hope Congress will cement this effective policy into law and inspire many more generous Americans to give charitably to support one another and the causes they value. We thank the House and Senate sponsors of the Charitable Act for their leadership on this issue.”

    For quotes from other organizations and non-profit leaders, please click here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Under questioning from Senator Coons, FBI Director nominee Patel refuses to assert FBI’s independence or demonstrate willingness to resign over illegal directives

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Delaware Christopher Coons

    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.) questioned President Donald Trump’s nominee for FBI Director, Kash Patel, at his Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing today, where he pressed him on whether his allegiance to President Trump would mean the end of the Bureau’s independence and whether he’d resign if asked by the White House to do something illegal.

    Senator Coons pressed Patel on several issues at the hearing today. Under questioning, Patel stated that, as FBI Director, he would answer to the President. In contrast, Attorney General nominee Pam Bondi said that, if confirmed, she would answer directly to the Constitution and the American people.

    Senator Coons also asked Patel, as he asked FBI Directors Chris Wray and James Comey during their own confirmations, about whether Patel would resign rather than carry out an illegal order from Trump, as Wray and Comey committed to doing. Patel repeatedly refused to make the same commitment.

    A video and full transcript of Senator Coons’ comments are available below.

    WATCH HERE.

    Sen. Coons: We had a constructive conversation last week, I appreciate your taking the time. In particular, a conversation about the prosecution of the World Cup bombing in Uganda that took the life of a Delawarean whose family I knew, I found moving. But the role you have been nominated for is central – central to our security as a nation, central to the protection of our constitutional rights, and I voted to confirm Trump’s previous FBI director, Chris Wray. I believe he’s lived up to the bureau’s motto of serving with fidelity, bravery and integrity, and I also think my vote for him and for many of Trump’s cabinet in the first term shows I take my constitutional advice and consent rule seriously and do not reflexively vote against his nominees.

    I look at three factors when I assess a nominee. Qualifications and experience; policy views and whether they are in the best interest of the American people; and character and capacity to do the job independently where called for. My colleagues have referenced quotes from Attorney General Barr, National Security Advisor Bolton.

    The FBI is enormous: 38,000 agents, $9 billion budget. I am troubled by your lack of senior law enforcement leadership. We disagree on some important policy views. But the thing that bothers me the most is a whole series of statements you have made in a variety of settings that suggest you would struggle to be independent from White House direction or control, as has long been the modern history of the FBI.

    Who does the director of the FBI work for, Mr. Patel?

    Mr. Patel: Senator, thank you for that question. The immediate report for the Director of the FBI is into the Office of the Deputy Attorney General. Then, that report is taken into the Office of the Attorney General and ultimately the White House in the chain of command there.

    Sen. Coons: So the FBI works for the White House?

    Mr. Patel: No, the FBI is a member of the Department of Justice, and has been the long-standing application—

    Sen Coons: And who does the Department of Justice work for?

    Mr. Patel: They are in the executive branch, as all members do at the White House.

    Sen. Coons: Attorney General Bondi gave a different answer when I asked her the same question— that they work for the Constitution and the American people. President Trump has made clear in public statements he wants to use the FBI to persecute political adversaries. He has publicly said that folks ranging from Liz Cheney, to Adam Kinzinger, to former Vice President Harris should be investigated and criminally prosecuted. If President Trump were to order you to open an investigation into any of these individuals, let’s say, Vice President Harris, would you?

    Mr. Patel: Senator, this question speaks directly to my ability to leave political bias and allow independent behavior to be the only guiding light. As a public defender, I learned that in the harshest of arenas. And any law enforcement investigation, if I’m confirmed at the FBI, will only be launched on the following qualification: a factual, articulatable, legal basis to do so. The president has said publicly that he will allow the FBI to remain independent, and I have said as much as well.

    Sen. Coons: So, if FBI agents brought to you a factual legal basis, a predication, and you are about to refer it to a prosecutor, and you get a call from the White House saying, “don’t proceed, this is a major donor, this is someone close to the president, this is inappropriate.” What would you do?

    Mr. Patel: Simple. You – I think you answered it partially in your, in your question. The line agents, the brick agents who are trained to bring investigations on behalf of the FBI will make that decision-making process, and they will only have my full support so long as it upholds absolutely every value of the Constitution, and that’s it.

    Sen. Coons: So your predecessor – I went back and looked, and I asked the same questions of Director Comey and Director Wray. Director Wray, quoting former Attorney General Bell, said you should be willing to resign if necessary over conduct if you are pressed to engage in it that’s unethical, illegal or unconstitutional. If pressed by the president, would you resign?

    Mr. Patel: Senator, my answer simply is I would never do anything unconstitutional or unlawful, and I never have in my 16 years of government service.

    Sen. Coons: Would you be willing to resign the post of FBI Director if pressed and given no choice but to obey the order or resign?

    Mr. Patel: Senator, I will always obey the law.

    Sen. Coons: Does obeying the law require you to – as Attorney General Bell said, as FBI Director Wray said – refuse the order or resign?

    Mr. Patel: I don’t – I’m not familiar with the extent of the law you are referring to, but my answer is simple in my 16 years of government service. We will simply follow the law, and I have done that in Obama Justice Department [sic], Republican Justice Departments, in the Obama military, in Republican civilian capacity. I have never once wavered from my constitutional oath of office.

    Sen. Coons: Mr. Patel, your predecessors in this role have been clear that they would be willing to resign if forced or directed to do something unethical or illegal. I’ll proceed.

    One of your past statements that is concerning me – it’s both a post on Truth Social and something you said in a podcast, The Sean Morgan Report: that your predecessor, Chris Wray, has broken the law. We need to prosecute him. The FBI should go after people like him. And the month before this, in July 2023, you said there should be a criminal referral for FBI Director Wray. If confirmed, are you going to follow through on these previous statements that Director Wray needs to be prosecuted?

    Mr. Patel: Senator, this reminds me of the conversation you and I had, which I greatly appreciated. There is enough violent crime in this country, and enough national security threats to this country, that the FBI is going to be busy going forward preventing 100,000 overdoses, 100,000 rapes, and 17,000 homicides.

    Sen. Coons: We agree that prosecuting violent crimes should be the principal focus of the FBI. What I’m trying to get to, Mr. Patel, is a whole series of very troubling – to me and many others – statements you’ve made about instead using it to pursue those who might be viewed as political opponents.

    Mr. Patel: And as I told you in your office, I have no interest, no desire, and will not if confirmed, go backwards. There will be no politicization at the FBI, there will be no retributive actions taken by any FBI, should I be confirmed as the FBI director. I told you that in your office, and I will tell you that again today.

    Sen. Coons: Thank you for that statement. As the Co-chair of the Law Enforcement Caucus with Senator Cornyn, one of the things I’ve worked hard on and I hope to continue to being able to work hard on with this administration is partnership between federal, state, and local law enforcement to pursue violent crime. You did say, as my colleague asked, and I’d look for a longer answer, that you want to close the FBI’s bureau headquarters on day one.

    How would shutting down the FBI headquarters impact its ability to prosecute violent crime and drug traffickers? How is that possibly a serious proposal, Mr. Patel?

    Mr. Patel: Thank you for bringing that up and allowing me to answer. It was to highlight the significantly greater point that I was actually making in that interview, which is well documented over and over again. 38,000 FBI employees – 7,500 FBI employees work in the Washington field office and Hoover Building alone. If you increase the aperture just slightly to encompass the National Capital Region, that is 11,000 FBI employees working in the National Capital Region. A third of the workforce for the FBI works in Washington, D.C. I am fully committed to having that workforce go out into the interior of the country where I live, west of the Mississippi, and work with sheriff’s departments and local officers and having one agent prevent one homicide and having one agent in Washington prevent one rape, and I will do that over and over and over again, because the American people deserve the resources not in Washington D.C., but in the rest of the country.

    Sen. Coons: And Mr. Patel, frankly, if that had been your statement, that would be something that would be defensible. It’s the rest of it, saying you’re going to turn it into a Museum of the Deep State, that causes repeated questions and concerns from people like myself. Thank you, Mr. Patel.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA News: Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Expands Educational Opportunities for American Families

    Source: The White House

    DEFENDING PARENTAL RIGHTS AND EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order expanding educational freedom and opportunity for families. It recognizes that parents, not the government, play a fundamental role in choosing and directing the upbringing and education of their children.

    • It directs the Department of Education to issue guidance on how the States can use federal funding formulas to support their K-12 scholarship programs.
    • It directs the Secretary of Education to prioritize school choice programs in the Department’s discretionary grant programs.
    • The Order requires the Department of Health and Human Services to issue guidance on how states receiving block grants for children and families can use those funds to support educational alternatives, including private and faith-based options.
    • It directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a plan to the President for how military families can use Department of Defense funds to send their children to the school of their choice.
    • The Order also directs the Secretary of the Interior to submit a plan to the President for how families with students attending Bureau of Indian Education schools can use federal funds to send their children to the school of their choice.

    EMPOWERING PARENTS AND STUDENTS THROUGH SCHOOL CHOICE: Every child deserves the best education available, regardless of their zip code. However, for generations, our government-assigned education system has failed millions of parents, students, and teachers. This Executive Order begins to rectify that wrong by opening up opportunities for students to attend the school that best fits their needs.

    • According to the latest National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 70% of 8th graders were below proficient in reading and 72% were below proficient in math. 40% of 4th graders did not even meet the basic reading levels. 
    • Standardized test scores have essentially been flat for over 30 years, despite hundreds of billions of dollars spent on government-run education.
    • A dozen states have universal or near universal school choice programs and 33 states have some form of school choice program.
    • School choice programs have a strong record of improving students’ academic performance.
    • School choice has proven to be cost effective and saves taxpayer dollars.
    • Parents report higher levels of school safety for their children who participate in school choice programs.
    • Support for school choice is overwhelming, with 70% of Democrats, 73% of Black Americans, and 69% of Hispanic Americans in favor of it.
    • President Trump is dedicated to ensuring every child has the opportunity to receive a world-class education.

    FULFILLING THE PROMISE TO STRENGTHEN EDUCATION THROUGH FREEDOM AND OPPORTUNITY: President Trump promised to bring school choice to every family in the Nation. Today’s historic executive order is a critical step in delivering on that promise, and builds on the long list of accomplishments from the first Trump Administration, including:

    • Calling on Congress to pass the School Choice Now Act and the Education Freedom Scholarships and Opportunity Act.
    • Providing in-person learning options for low-income parents forced to send their children to virtual school during the pandemic.
    • Re-authorizing the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship program twice.
    • Investing nearly $1.5 billion in the development of public charter schools, helping this innovative sector grow to 7,500 charter schools serving more than 3 million students.
    • Allowing parents across the nation to withdraw up to $10,000 tax-free per year from 529 education savings plans to cover public, private, or religious K-12 schooling costs, thanks to the President’s historic tax cuts.

    Parents can be confident that under his Administration, President Trump will provide every available opportunity for parents to enrich the education of their children through individual choice.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI: RBAZ Bancorp, Inc. Announces Unaudited Financial Results For the Quarter and Year Ending December 31, 2024

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    PHOENIX, Jan. 30, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — RBAZ Bancorp, Inc. (OTCIQ: RBAZ) (the “Company”), parent company of Republic Bank of Arizona (the “Bank” or “RBAZ”), announced a consolidated net income of $793,000, or $0.44 per share, for the quarter ended December 31, 2024 and $3,379,000, or $1.90 per share, for the twelve months ended December 31, 2024 as compared to a consolidated net income of $688,000, or $0.38 per share, for the quarter ended December 31, 2023 and $2,460,000, or $1.36 per share, for the twelve months ended December 31, 2023.

    President and CEO Brian Ruisinger stated “I am proud to report record earnings for RBAZ in our 17-year history reflecting a 37% year-over-year increase bolstered by Q4 featuring a 15% increase over the same quarter of the prior year. Solid loan growth at higher yields coupled with deposit growth concentrated in non-interest-bearing funds resulted in a 27% net interest income improvement. This was accomplished while managing expenses allowing for an increase of only 11%. However, these expenses included $365,000 of deal costs related to our prior announcement of merging with Pima Federal Credit Union.”

    Mr. Ruisinger continued, “As an update to our May 16, 2024 announcement of our intent to join forces with Pima Federal Credit Union, RBAZ shareholders approved the transaction on August 22, 2024 and regulatory applications were accepted in January 2025 entering into the customary review period to obtain approval. We anticipate a closing date in the second quarter of this year, and additional information will be provided once approvals are obtained.”

    December 31, 2024 Company Highlights Include:

    • Total loans of $222,731,000 increased $20,902,000, or 10.4%, from December 31, 2023. This increase consisted of $51,397,000 in new loan originations and advances on construction lines of credit, offset by $29,397,000 in loan maturities and participations sold. Advances and repayments on commercial lines of credit and normal payment attrition comprised the balance of the loan activity in 2024.
    • Total deposits of $250,201,000 increased $22,029,000, or 9.7%, from December 31, 2023 and related entirely to core deposit generation, in which 74.1% was in non-interest-bearing funds. The increase in core deposits was a mix of deepening of existing relationships and cultivation of new banking relationships.
    • Total interest income increased $800,000 to $4,615,000 for the quarter ended December 31, 2024 outpacing total interest income of $3,815,000 for the same period of the prior year equating to an increase of 21.0%.
    • Cost of deposits was 2.13% for the quarter ended December 31, 2024. After peaking at 2.36% in Q1 2024, this reduction of 23 basis points indicates a turning point in the interest rate environment within the greater Phoenix market following the Federal Reserve’s rate reductions totaling 100 basis points in the second half of 2024.
    • Total non-interest expense increased $239,000 to $2,097,000 for the quarter ended December 31, 2024 compared to $1,858,000 for the same period of the prior year. However, this increase includes $365,000 in non-recurring expenses associated with the pending transaction with Pima Federal Credit Union incurred in 2024. Therefore, core operating expenses decreased $126,000 between comparative quarters resulting primarily from a reduction in professional fees and marketing expenses.

    The Bank remains “Well Capitalized” under the Community Bank Leverage Ratio (CBLR) framework as follows:

      December 31,
    2024 (%)    		   Ratio to be Well
    Capitalized (%)
    CBLR ratio 11.06   9.00


    About the Company
    RBAZ Bancorp, Inc. was established on June 10, 2021 as a single-bank holding company for its Arizona state-chartered bank subsidiary, Republic Bank of Arizona. The Company is traded over-the-counter as RBAZ.

    About the Bank
    Republic Bank of Arizona is a locally owned, community bank in Phoenix, Scottsdale and Gilbert, Arizona. RBAZ is a full service, community bank providing deposit and loan products and convenient, online and mobile banking to individuals, businesses and professionals. The Bank was established in April 2007 and is headquartered at 645 E. Missouri Avenue, Suite 108, Phoenix, AZ. Additional branches are located at 7373 N. Scottsdale Road, Suite A-195, Scottsdale, AZ and 1417 W. Elliot Road, Gilbert, AZ. The Bank is the wholly-owned subsidiary of RBAZ Bancorp, Inc. For further information, please visit our web site: www.republicbankaz.com.

    Forward-Looking Statements
    This press release may include forward-looking statements about the Company and the Bank (collectively referred to herein as the “Company”), for which the Company claims the protection of safe harbor provisions contained in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements are based on management’s knowledge and belief as of today and include information concerning the Company’s possible or assumed future financial condition and its results of operations and business. Forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties. Several important factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements. Those factors include, but are not limited to, fluctuations in interest rates, government policies and regulations (including monetary and fiscal policies), legislation, economic conditions, borrower capacity to repay, operational factors and competition in the geographic and business areas in which the Company conducts its operations. All forward-looking statements included in this press release are based on information available at the time of the release, and the Company assumes no obligation to update any forward-looking statement.

                      Summary Company Financial Information (unaudited)
        For the three months
    ended December 31,    		 For the twelve months
    ended December 31,
        2024 2023 2024 2023
        (dollars in thousands, except per share data)
      Summary Income Data:              
      Interest income $4,615   $3,815   $17,935   $14,208  
      Interest expense 1,457   1,359   5,923   4,742  
      Net interest income 3,158   2,456   12,012   9,466  
      Provision for credit losses 233   –   627   –  
      Non-interest income 245   219   967   820  
      Non-interest expense 2,097   1,858   7,907   7,142  
      Income before provision for income tax 1,073   817   4,445   3,144  
      Provision for income tax 280   129   1,066   684  
      Net income $793   $688   $3,379   $2,460  
      Per Share Data:              
      Shares outstanding end-of-period 1,790   1,795   1,790   1,795  
      Earnings per common share $0.44   $0.38   $1.90   $1.36  
      Diluted earnings per common share $0.42   $0.37   $1.77   $1.33  
      Book value per share $13.81   $11.77   $13.81   $11.77  
      Selected Balance Sheet Data:              
      Total assets $282,511   $272,044   $282,511   $272,044  
      Securities available-for-sale, at fair value 32,731   40,998   32,731   40,998  
      Securities held-to-maturity 9,855   10,648   9,855   10,648  
      Loans 222,731   201,829   222,731   201,829  
      Allowance for credit losses 2,428   2,116   2,428   2,116  
      Deposits 250,201   228,172   250,201   228,172  
      Other borrowings 5,958   20,929   5,958   20,929  
      Shareholders’ equity 24,723   21,128   24,723   21,128  
      Performance Ratios:              
      Return on average shareholders’ equity (annualized) (%) 12.83   13.03   13.67   11.64  
      Net interest margin (%) 4.58   3.81   4.32   3.68  
      Average assets $288,408   $265,190   $289,763   $264,488  
      Return on average assets (annualized) (%) 1.10   1.04   1.17   0.93  
      Shareholders’ equity to assets (%) 8.75   7.77   8.75   7.77  
      Efficiency ratio (%) 61.62   69.46   60.92   69.43  
      Asset Quality Data:              
      Nonaccrual loans $418   $209   $418   $209  
      Loan modifications to borrowers experiencing financial difficulty $-   $-   $-   $-  
      Other real estate owned $-   $-   $-   $-  
      Nonperforming loans $418   $209   $418   $209  
      Nonperforming loans to total assets (%) 0.15   0.08   0.15   0.08  
      Nonperforming loans to total loans (%) 0.19   0.10   0.19   0.10  
      Allowance for credit losses to total loans (%) 1.09   1.05   1.09   1.05  
      Allowance for credit losses to nonperforming loans (%) 580.86   1,012.44   580.86   1,012.44  
      Net charge-offs (recoveries) for period $26   $-   $190   ($352 )
      Average loans $221,193   $192,129   $208,799   $176,146  
      Ratio of net charge-offs (recoveries) to average loans (%) 0.01   n/a   0.09   (0.20 )


    Contact:  Brian Ruisinger
    President and Chief Executive Officer
    Phone:  602.280.9404
    Email:  bruisinger@republicaz.com

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI: AI Expert’s Video Presentation on Trump and Musk’s Plan to Rebuild America’s Economy with Artificial Intelligence

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    WASHINGTON, Jan. 30, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — A quiet but powerful revolution is underway in the United States, one that will define global power for the next century. Backed by President Donald Trump and led by Elon Musk, this groundbreaking collaboration represents a bold vision for America’s future: to dominate the global race for artificial intelligence and redefine what economic and technological leadership looks like.

    James Altucher of Paradigm Press Group, a 40-year veteran in AI and emerging technologies, calls this partnership a “game-changing moment in history” in his recent video presentation. Altucher explains, “This isn’t just a new development in AI—it’s the foundation for an entirely new way of life. We’re building systems that will not only enhance productivity but also shape how governments, industries, and economies function for decades.”

    A New Kind of Power

    According to Altucher, artificial intelligence is no longer just a tool; it’s becoming the engine of economic and military power. “In the past, wars were won with weapons. Today, they’ll be won with intelligence—real intelligence,” he said.

    While details of this initiative remain closely guarded, Altucher hints that what is being developed has the capacity to disrupt not only industries but also global power structures. “What’s happening now is unlike anything we’ve seen before. This isn’t incremental innovation—it’s a leap forward that will put America ahead in ways the rest of the world can’t catch up to.”

    Altucher describes this as “a national effort” that will integrate AI into every aspect of society, from infrastructure to defense. “Imagine systems that think faster than humans, anticipate problems before they occur, and can adjust to threats in real time. That’s where we’re heading.”

    Why Timing Matters

    With other global powers, like China, heavily investing in artificial intelligence, Altucher emphasizes the importance of the United States taking action now. “This isn’t about keeping up; it’s about staying ahead,” he said. “If we hesitate, the balance of power will shift. But with the right strategy, we can secure America’s leadership for the next 50 years.”

    President Trump’s decision to roll back restrictive AI regulations has already paved the way for private-sector innovation, enabling Musk and his collaborators to take AI development to new heights.

    “This is a rare moment where government and private industry are working hand in hand,” Altucher said. “Trump’s leadership and Musk’s vision are aligning to create something that will define the future.”

    The Shadow Players

    Altucher also notes that while Musk is the face of this effort, an overlooked company is playing a pivotal role in its execution. “Behind every major breakthrough, there’s always an unsung hero,” he said. “This company is the key to making the system work—without it, the entire vision collapses.”

    Shaping the World’s Future

    Altucher concludes that the implications of this AI alliance go far beyond technological advancement. “This isn’t just about making systems smarter. It’s about creating a future where intelligence drives everything—economies, governments, and everyday life,” he said. “It’s a defining moment for the United States, and those paying attention now are witnessing history in the making.”

    With Trump’s administration enabling AI innovation and Musk leading the charge, America is not just preparing for the future—it’s building it.

    About James Altucher

    James Altucher of Paradigm Press Group is a leading authority on artificial intelligence and emerging technologies. With over four decades of expertise, Altucher has been at the forefront of identifying technological shifts and their impact on industries and society.

    Media Contact:
    Derek Warren
    Public Relations Manager
    Paradigm Press Group
    Email: dwarren@paradigmpressgroup.com

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI: Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta Declares a 7.10% Dividend for Fourth Quarter 2024

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    ATLANTA, Jan. 30, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The board of directors of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta (FHLBank Atlanta) today approved a cash dividend for the fourth quarter 2024 at an annualized rate of 7.10 percent.

    “Throughout the fourth quarter of 2024, our commitment to helping members through economic uncertainty and advancing our mission remained steadfast,” said FHLBank Atlanta Chair of the Board, Thornwell Dunlap. “Our strong financial performance reflects this dedication, allowing us to return a competitive dividend to our members.”

    The dividend payout will be calculated based on members’ capital stock held during the fourth quarter of 2024 and will be credited to members’ daily investment accounts at the close of business on February 5, 2025.

    If you have questions, please contact FHLBank Atlanta’s Funding Desk at 1.800.536.9650, ext. 8011.

    About FHLBank Atlanta
    FHLBank Atlanta offers competitively-priced financing, community development grants, and other banking services to help member financial institutions make affordable home mortgages and provide economic development credit to neighborhoods and communities. The Bank’s members are commercial banks, credit unions, savings institutions, community development financial institutions, and insurance companies located in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and the District of Columbia. FHLBank Atlanta is one of 11 district Banks in the Federal Home Loan Bank System. Since 1990, the FHLBanks have awarded approximately $9.1 billion in Affordable Housing Program funds, assisting more than 1.2 million households.

    For more information, visit our website at www.fhlbatl.com.

    To the extent that the statements made in this announcement may be deemed as “forward-looking statements”, they are made within the meaning of the “safe harbor” provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, which include statements with respect to the Bank’s beliefs, plans, objectives, goals, expectations, anticipations, assumptions, estimates, intentions, and future performance, and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors, many of which may be beyond the Bank’s control, and which may cause the Bank’s actual results, performance, or achievements to be materially different from the future results, performance, or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements, the reader is cautioned not to place undue reliance on them, since those may not be realized due to a variety of factors, including, without limitation: legislative, regulatory changes; future economic and market conditions (including the housing market); changes in demand for advances or consolidated obligations of the Bank and/or the FHLBank System; changes in interest rates; changes in prepayment speeds, default rates, delinquencies, and losses on mortgage-backed securities; volatility of market prices, rates and indices that could affect the value of financial instruments; changes in credit ratings and/or the terms of derivative transactions; changes in product offerings; political, national, and world events; disruptions in information systems; membership changes; and adverse developments or events affecting or involving other Federal Home Loan Banks or the FHLBank System in general. Additional risk factors that might cause the Bank’s results to differ from these forward-looking statements are provided in detail in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which are available at www.sec.gov.

    These statements speak only as of the date that they are made, and the Bank has no obligation and does not undertake to publicly update, revise, or correct any of the forward-looking statements after the date of this announcement, or after the respective dates on which such statements otherwise are made, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise, except as may be required by law. New risk factors may emerge, and it is not possible for us to predict the nature of each new factor, or assess its potential impact, on our business and financial condition. Given these uncertainties, we caution you not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements.

    CONTACT: Sheryl Touchton
    Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta
    stouchton@fhlbatl.com

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Mission 300: African leaders pledge to advance clean cooking solutions for Africa at milestone Energy Summit

    Source: African Development Bank Group

    African countries have taken bold commitments to implement clean cooking energy solutions to offset the devastating effects of open fire cooking which kills roughly 600,000  women and children annually across the continent.

    In energy compacts signed during the Mission 300 Africa Energy Summit, held in Tanzania 27-28 January, 12 African countries signalled their intent to  accelerate the pace of access to electricity and clean cooking solutions on the world’s fastest-growing continent, in line with the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goal 7 and the African Union’s Agenda 2063.

    Commending these countries, Tanzanian President Suluhu Hassan stated in closing remarks: “I understand that the 12 governments have only pioneered, and many others will join us in the future.” Earlier, at the opening speaking about the purpose of the summit she said, “This gathering is a platform to consolidate commitments, announce new partnerships and drive momentum towards the 2030 goal.”

    President Suluhu Hassan of Tanzania, global Clean Cooking ambassador at the Africa Energy Summit. January 2025

    The two-day meeting was organized by the Government of Tanzania and Mission 300, an unprecedented collaboration between the African Development Bank Group, the World Bank Group and global partners, to address Africa’s electricity access gap through the use of new technology and innovative financing.

    Moderating a special panel on clean cooking on Monday, Rashid Abdallah, Executive Director of the African Energy Commission (AFREC), noted that whilst 600 million Africans live without access to electricity, one billion -nearly double the number – were without access to clean cooking, relying on biomass fuels such as wood and charcoal, with severe economic, social and environmental impact. Conservative estimates put the cost of this across the continent to $790 billion a year, he noted.

    Abdallah was joined by Dr. Richard Muyungi, Special Envoy to the President of Tanzania, Peter Scott, CEO of Burn Manufacturing, and Martin Kimani, CEO of M-Gas, who each highlighted the significant health, environmental, and economic impacts of relying on polluting fuels for cooking, as well as the innovative approaches being developed to address this crisis.

    Muyungi shared Tanzania’s experience in launching a comprehensive National Clean Cooking Strategy, emphasizing the importance of high-level political commitment, coordinated stakeholder engagement, and the integration of private sector participation. 

    He praised President Hassan’s role as a global champion bringing the issue to the highest level of African governments.

    “It is important to elevate it to the highest level… She is the champion of clean cooking,” he said.  He stressed: “It’s important that there is a champion who can elevate clean cooking in terms of partnerships and partner with others to address this issue. He added that Tanzania is on track to transition 80 percent of its population to clean cooking technologies by 2034, thanks to the efforts of President Hassan.

    Scott, whose company Burn Manufacturing is the largest clean cooking manufacturer in Africa, discussed the diverse range of solutions being deployed across the continent, from fuel-efficient biomass stoves to cutting-edge electric cooking appliances with pay-as-you-go financing models. He stressed the availability of funding for clean cooking projects, pending the approval of carbon credit regulations by governments.

    Panel session on clean cooking at Mission 300 Africa Energy Summit. Tanzania, January 2025. (L-R ) Dr. Richard Muyungi, Special Envoy to the President of Tanzania, Martin Kimani, CEO,M-Gas,   Peter Scott, CEO of Burn Manufacturing, Rashid Abdallah ED, African Energy Commission (AFREC)

    “This is the most exciting time in the history of clean cooking,” Scott declared. “Now, there’s a lot of money standing by to approve carbon credit regulations to allow carbon trading, carbon finance, to grow. “

    Kimani’s pioneering pay-as-you-cook LPG model has provided an innovative and affordable solution to enable households to transition to clean cooking. He shared the success of M-Gas in onboarding half a million households in Kenya and Tanzania within just three years, demonstrating the scalability of this approach. “One of the most important considerations is affordability, how do we close that gap?” he asked.

    M-Gas has found an answer by installing IOT enabled smart meters which are fixed into gas cylinders without upfront payment.

    “We mirror the (pay as you go) environment they can now cook using LPG. With 35 cents they can cook three meals in a day,” he added.

    Tanzania pioneers clean cooking and global awareness

    Tanzania published its clean cooking strategy in 2024-2034 last year in response to its own challenges – 3,000 people dying annually and the effects of a devastating 400 hectares of deforestation annually from the use of charcoal and firewood.

    Championed by President Hassan, the Clean Cooking agenda has embraced everyone and is part of the national agenda, Muyungi said. “This discussion has highlighted the innovative approaches and the political will required to transform the lives of millions of Africans and secure a sustainable future for the continent.”

    In a recognition of national efforts, awards were handed out to winners of a national clean cooking innovation challenge on the first day of the summit. The winners included creators of a biogas production plant and a click gas LPG delivery system.

    Winners of a Tanzania national Clean Cooking Challenge received awards during the Africa Energy Summit held in Tanzania, January 2025. 

    The African Development Bank Group has pledged $2 billion over 10 years towards clean cooking solutions in Africa. The pledge represents an important contribution to the $4 billion per year needed to allow African families to have access to clean cooking by 2030.

    “Why should anybody have to die just for trying to cook a decent meal that is taken for granted in other parts of the world,” African Development Bank President Akinwumi Adesina asked during a discussion as part of the summit. “Africa must develop with dignity, with pride. Its women, its population must have access to clean energy solutions.”

    Winners of a Tanzania national Clean Cooking Challenge received awards during the Africa Energy Summit held in Tanzania, January 2025. 

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-OSI USA: In Intelligence Hearing, King Raises Questions About Director of National Intelligence Nominee’s Judgement

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Maine Angus King
    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an open cabinet confirmation hearing of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) considering the nomination of former Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard for Director of National Intelligence, U.S. Senator Angus King (I-ME) questioned the candidate’s decision-making in the past. In the conversation with Gabbard, King questioned her about a House resolution she introduced in 2020 calling for all charges to be dropped against Edward Snowden, a former National Security Agency (NSA) intelligence contractor who was indicted on espionage charges before fleeing to Russia where he was granted asylum.
    “You introduced a bill in 2020 that was essentially a pardon. It basically said all charges should be dropped. You had a lot of ‘whereas’s’ is in that bill, where did the factual basis for those whereas clauses come from,” asked Senator King.
    “Senator if I recall, in that bill, came from publicly available information,” said Gabbard.
    “I see. And were you aware that there was a bipartisan committee report from the House Intelligence Committee in 2016 on Snowden activities,” questioned Senator King.
    “I don’t recall specifically at that time, but I am aware of that committee’s report and executive summary that was reported publicly. I did not have access to the classified report that that summary was based on,” replied Gabbard.
    “Did you read that report prior to filing your bill in 2020,” asked Senator King.
    “Senator, I don’t recall specifically. I remember reading a lot of materials prior to filing that bill,” responded Gabbard.
    “Well, the bipartisan committee report, the first item: ‘Edward Snowden perpetrated the largest and most damaging public release of classified information in U.S. intelligence history and goes on to say Snowden caused tremendous damage to national security, and the vast majority of the documents he stole have nothing to do with programs impacting individual privacy.’ But you don’t recall ever seeing the work of that committee,” asked Senator King.
    “I’m aware of those conclusions drawn,” said Gabbard.
    “You are aware now; were you aware at the time,” questioned Senator King “You introduced a bill in Congress, along with Congressman Matt Gaetz, to essentially pardon him, so he broke the law, but it wasn’t all that serious. Is that what you thought in 2020.”
    “I take very seriously upholding our Constitution, and have sworn an oath to support and defend that Constitution over eight times in my life, my statements in the past have been reflective of the egregious and illegal programs that were exposed in that leak,” replied Gabbard.
    “But you ignore the vast majority, as the committee found bipartisan. I think Devin Nunes was the chair. Adam Schiff was the Vice Chair. The conclusion was that the vast majority of these things that he released had nothing to do with Constitutional rights, the Fourth Amendment, but indeed were enormous compromises of our national security,” said Senator King.
    A member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator King is recognized as a thoughtful voice on national security and foreign policy issues. In addition to his committee work, Senator King serves on the Congressional-Executive Commission on China, the Senate North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Observer Group, and is co-chair of the Cyberspace Solarium Commission — which has had dozens of recommendations become law. He has introduced bipartisan legislation to establish a commission tasked with developing a comprehensive whole-of-government approach for how the United States should address the economic, security and diplomatic challenges posed by China.
    Recently, Senator King published an Op-Ed and spoke with CNN regarding his positions on the advise and consent process of Cabinet-Level nominees.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: In Senate Hearing, RFK Jr. Refuses to Say HPV Vaccine is Safe to Sen. Patty Murray, Pressed on Credible Accusation of Sexual Assault

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray
    Murray: “There are political realities, we all get that—but there is also right and wrong, fact and fiction. And there’s also people staying healthy, or people dying pointlessly from diseases we can prevent because they thought Congress took its job vetting our health care secretary seriously.”
    Murray, a longtime congressional leader on health care who has led hearings on addressing vaccine hesitancy, has been a leading vocal opponent of RFK Jr.’s nomination—speaking out on the Senate floor, holding events, raising the alarm after meeting with him
    *** VIDEO of Senator Murray’s FULL questioning with RFK Jr. HERE***
    Washington, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), a senior member and former Chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, questioned RFK Jr. at the Senate HELP Committee hearing on his nomination for Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS)—pressing him forcefully on whether he stands by false statements he made about the HPV vaccine and asking about credible accusations of sexual harassment and assault against him.
    RFK Jr. has long been one of the anti-vaccine movement’s loudest, proudest champions—peddling dangerous, debunked views and funding anti-vaccine causes—and there is much he could do as HHS Secretary to cause chaos and real harm to families,  from firing top scientists and researchers, to ripping away the approval or insurance coverage of all kinds of vaccines and medicines, to ending our focus on infectious disease research, as he has threatened to do.
    Murray began her questioning at today’s hearing by reiterating that HHS has broad and critical responsibilities to protect and preserve health care and social services, from advancing women’s health, to improving child care, to bolstering biomedical research—all priorities of hers—but she would use her limited time for questioning to ask about vaccines. Also noting the tragic plane crash last night in DC, Murray called it “a painful reminder that we need competent people running our federal agencies to respond when a crisis strikes.”
    “I think we can agree that cancer is particularly a nefarious chronic disease. And the American Cancer Society reported earlier this month that women under 50 are experiencing a dramatic increase in incidence of the disease. Fortunately, there is clear data showing that the HPV vaccine has saved lives and cut cervical cancer rates dramatically. You have called the HPV vaccine ‘dangerous and defective’ and said it ‘actually increases the risk of cervical cancer.’ Do you stand by those statements? Yes or no?”
    Kennedy filibustered, refusing to answer directly—Murray pressed him to answer the question, then continued, “You said that: ‘no loving parents would allow their daughter to receive this vaccine.’ If confirmed as HHS Secretary, would you recommend that parents get their children vaccinated against HPV? Yes or no?”
    “I’ll just remind everybody—parents look to our health leaders for advice on these decisions; you would be a health leader,” Murray said, asking unanimous consent to enter Mr. Kennedy’s numerous statements disparaging the HPV vaccine and others into the record.
    Murray continued by asking Mr. Kennedy about accusations of sexual harassment and assault by Eliza Cooney, who was hired as a part-time babysitter by his family. “When you were confronted about this accusation, you said you were ‘not a church boy’ and that you ‘have so many skeletons in my closet,’ Murray said. “You then texted Miss Cooney an apology and indicated you had no memory of what she described. Mr. Kennedy, I’m asking you to respond to those accusations seriously in front of this committee. Did you make sexual advances towards Miss Cooney without her consent?”
    Kennedy denied the allegations, calling them “debunked,” despite credible reporting to the contrary, when pressed on why he apologized, Kennedy claimed he texted Cooney an apology for a separate reason—in contrast to the published texts. Mr. Kennedy then told the full committee that he had never made any unwanted sexual advances towards any individual without their consent.
    “My time is almost up, but having read a lot and listened a lot, I just want to remind all my colleagues that by voting to confirm Mr. Kennedy, we would be telling our constituents he is worth listening to,” Murray said. “That alone will get people killed—before he even lifts a finger. Because he does not even need the levers of power to influence people, as we saw in Samoa—all he needs is a megaphone.
    “To affirm his views by voting to confirm him as our highest health official—we should not mince words about what that will mean. When babies die from whooping cough because parents weren’t sure if the vaccine was safe, we will have to look them in the eye. When measles sweeps through schools, hospitals, nursing wards—will this be worth it?”
    “There are political realities, we all get that—but there is also right and wrong, fact and fiction. And there’s also people staying healthy, or people dying pointlessly from diseases we can prevent because they thought Congress took its job vetting our health care secretary seriously,” Murray concluded.
    When President-elect Donald J. Trump first announced his intention to select Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as Secretary of HHS, Murray immediately and forcefully condemned the move—and she has consistently spoken out and laid out for her colleagues the case against his nomination since, including in a lengthy Senate floor speech earlier this month—VIDEO HERE. Murray met with RFK Jr. on January 15th and released a statement afterward reiterating her opposition to his nomination and urging her colleagues, “to be honest with themselves about the stakes of putting one of the anti-vaccine movement’s loudest, proudest champions in charge of HHS and join me in opposing RFK Jr.’s nomination.”  In December, Murray held a roundtable discussion at UW Medicine on the importance of scientific research and vaccines—especially for children—and spoke about how having RFK Jr. lead HHS would threaten Americans’ health and safety.
    As a longtime appropriator and former Chair of the Senate HELP Committee, Murray has long fought to boost biomedical research, strengthen public health infrastructure, and make health care more affordable and accessible. Over her years as a senior member of the Appropriations Committee, she has secured billions of dollars in increases for biomedical research at the National Institutes of Health, and during her time as Chair of the HELP Committee she established the new ARPA-H research agency as part of her PREVENT Pandemics Act to advance some of the most cutting-edge research in the field. As Chair of the HELP Committee, Murray was also instrumental in crafting the American Rescue Plan Act, including its landmark investments in public health and health care. Senator Murray was also the lead Democratic negotiator of the bipartisan 21st Century Cures Act, which delivered a major federal investment to boost NIH research, among many other investments. Murray is also the lead sponsor of the Public Health Infrastructure Saves Lives Act (PHISLA), legislation to establish $4.5 billion in dedicated, annual funding for a grant program to build up and maintain the nation’s public health system across the board. 
    In 2019, Senator Murray co-led a bipartisan hearing in the HELP Committee on vaccine hesitancy and spoke about the importance of addressing vaccine skepticism and getting people the facts they need to keep their families and communities safe and healthy. Ahead of the hearing, as multiple states were facing measles outbreaks in under-vaccinated areas, Murray sent a bipartisan letter with former HELP Committee Chair Lamar Alexander (R-TN) pressing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director and HHS Assistant Secretary for Health on their efforts to promote vaccination and vaccine confidence.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Refocusing continuing care for the future

    [. As their needs evolve, it is important that older adults and vulnerable populations have access to the support they need to maintain their quality of life and independence so they can age with dignity. Over the next 10 years, the demand for continuing care in Alberta is projected to grow by 80 per cent, increasing even faster as people live longer and with more complex needs.

    Alberta’s government is establishing Assisted Living Alberta – the new provincial continuing care agency – as part of the province’s health refocusing. This will ensure the province is well-positioned to meet the future needs that are anticipated with Alberta’s both growing and aging population. Assisted Living Alberta will provide Albertans access to a comprehensive system of continuing care with a full range of wraparound services, including medical and non-medical supports, home care, community care and social services. This transition will allow the province to place a holistic social service lens on assisted living services to deliver care more effectively and consistently throughout the province. By taking this approach, individuals and families will have more options when they need care and as their needs evolve, helping older adults and vulnerable populations maintain their quality of life and independence.

    “As the need for continuing care services in Alberta grows, I am committed to working with health, social services and continuing care professionals to transform the system and ensure the new provincial agency, Assisted Living Alberta, meets all Albertans’ needs. This change ensures Albertans have access to a full range of wraparound supports to meet their evolving needs and maintain their independence and quality of life as they age or require more support.”

    Jason Nixon, Minister of Seniors, Community and Social Services

    Assisted Living Alberta is on track to be established and become an entity by April 1, and will be fully operational by fall 2025. The new agency will align medical and non-medical supports and services, increase continuing care spaces, reduce wait times, and provide comprehensive wraparound supports for Albertans who require different levels and types of care. This includes both seniors in long-term care and those who want to continue aging at home but need supports to do so, as well as people with disabilities, individuals experiencing homelessness and other vulnerable Albertans who require temporary or long-term care. Refocusing Alberta’s health care system ensures all Albertans have access to the services and support they need, when and where they need it.

    “Improving health care services is a top priority for our government. We are committed to addressing the urgent need for enhanced assisted living services across our growing province. I look forward to working alongside the Ministry of Seniors, Community and Social Services to bring Albertans more options and the high quality of care they need close to home.”

    Adriana LaGrange, Minister of Health

    Albertans currently receiving care, and those who need care, will continue to have access to the services they need. A transition committee led by Dr. Sayeh Zielke, author, cardiologist and medical director of Chinook Cardiology, along with leaders from health care, continuing care, social services and other local organizations, will provide the minister with advice to support this transformation. Committee members were chosen based on their experience, diverse perspectives, leadership and background in the continuing care and social services space. The committee’s work will be essential to ensuring a smooth and seamless transition with no disruptions.

    “It is an honour to be playing a role in helping transform Alberta’s continuing care system. Our goal is to put patients and clients first and give our front-line workers the support they need, which is why it is so important that we are taking the time to gets things right and consulting directly with Albertans.” 

    Dr. Zielke, cardiologist and medical director of Chinook Cardiology and chair of the Assisted Living Transition Committee

    Albertans are invited to share their feedback, support the stand up of Assisted Living Alberta and help shape the future of continuing care through online engagement that will be open from Jan. 30 to March 3 at Alberta.ca/lead-the-way. Continuing care providers and health care and continuing care workers will also have an opportunity to provide feedback through targeted engagement that will be open at the same time. Albertans’ insights and perspectives will help lead the way in improving the system to ensure it meets Alberta’s needs today and for generations to come.  

    Alberta’s government is making significant strides in its efforts to refocus the health care system. Assisted Living Alberta will be the fourth and final new provincial health agency to be established and operational. Recovery Alberta officially began operations on Sept. 1, 2024, with Primary Care Alberta ready to follow suit and become operational on Feb. 1, 2025. On the same date, Acute Care Alberta is set to become a legal entity. By creating four provincial health agencies to oversee the priority sectors of primary care, acute care, continuing care, and mental health and addiction, the province is putting patients first in every health care decision and giving front-line experts the support they need to properly care for Albertans.

    “The Alberta Continuing Care Association welcomes this transformational move by the Alberta government. By bringing social services, medical and non-medical supports, and continuing care together under one health agency, patients will be able to access wraparound supports for the care and services they need.”

    Feisal Keshavjee, chair, Alberta Continuing Care Association

    “Integrated health and social care enhances outcomes, aligns with the preferences of older adults, caregivers and practitioners, and underpins leading continuing care models. Healthy Aging Alberta and the United Way of Calgary congratulate the ministry on this exciting transition and look forward to supporting an integrated wraparound model of continuing care in Alberta.”

    Karen McDonald, provincial director, Healthy Aging Alberta 

    Transition committee members

    • Dr. Sayeh Zielke, committee chair – cardiologist and medical director of Chinook Cardiology
    • MLA Brandon Lunty, deputy chair – MLA for Leduc-Beaumont
    • Dr. David Stewart, member – physician, Family Medical Centre
    • David Weyant, member – president and CEO, Alberta Lawyers Indemnity Association
    • Robin James, member – chief administrative officer, Lethbridge Housing Authority
    • Feisal Keshavjee, member – board chair, Alberta Continuing Care Association
    • Karen McDonald, member – director, Healthy Aging Alberta (and executive director, Sage)
    • Andrea Hesse, member – executive director, Alberta Council for Disability Services
    • Joyce Wicks, member – former nurse and seniors advocate
    • Ruben Breaker, member – councillor, Siksika First Nation
    • Arlene Adamson, member – former CEO, Silvera for Seniors
    • Salimah Walji-Shivji, member – CEO, AgeCare
    • Irene Martin-Lindsay – member, executive director, Alberta Seniors and Community Housing Association

    Related news

    • Continuing care: Ministers LaGrange and Nixon (Oct 16, 2024)

    Related information

    • Refocusing health care in Alberta
    • Continuing Care Transformation
    • Online survey for feedback on Alberta’s continuing care system

    Multimedia

    • Watch the news conference

    MIL OSI Canada News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Buzzing from the world stage to Auckland’s elections

    Source: Auckland Council

    The dynamic new digital platform Buzzly, created to engage youth in civics and developed by Auckland Council just four months ago, has won at the World Summit Awards 2024 for Digital Innovation with Social Impact.

    Buzzly was recognised as one of the best digital impact solutions in the Government & Citizen Engagement category. Chosen from more than 400 solutions worldwide, Buzzly wowed judges by demonstrating how innovation can tackle societal challenges and contribute to achieving UN Sustainable Development Goals.

    The platform was developed to bridge a gap in civic engagement and policy-making involving young people, particularly Māori and Pasifika. It targets the voice of youth and establishes an inclusive space for rangatahi to share ideas using creative challenges, rewarding participation and ensuring youth insights are heard and valued by decision-makers. 

    World Summit Awards’ national expert for New Zealand, Frances Valintine is thrilled for Buzzly.

    “This recognition is a testament to your vision and determination, and we are so pleased you are representing Aotearoa New Zealand on the global stage,” says Ms Valintine.

    “Your hard work and dedication to empowering youth voices is truly inspiring, and we’re confident that you will make a significant impact for youth involvement in important matters.”

    Auckland Council’s Governance and Engagement General Manager, Lou-Ann Ballantyne says, “Gaining youth engagement is no easy feat and this achievement so far demonstrates how the Buzzly platform is really able to move and shake things up in this space.”

    And General Manager Group Strategy, Transformation and Partnerships, Anna Bray is proud of the team.

    “Thanks to funding from council’s The Southern Initiative, Buzzly has come a long way since upgrading from ‘Up South’, a platform initially designed to engage Māori and Pasifika rangatahi of South Auckland. I look forward to seeing what else it can do,” says Ms Bray.

    The Buzzly team is now getting ready to take on a major mission – improving youth participation in Auckland’s Elections 2025. 

    With Auckland’s elections planning well underway, it is hoped Buzzly will be the “cavalry” to ramp up youth participation in this year’s elections. In 2022, of the 1.1 million Aucklanders registered to vote, only 26 per cent of those aged 18-25 voted.

    The platform’s first ever elections challenge asks participants to consider, “What’s the council done for me?”, and encourages potential entrants to do their homework by asking, “What do you love about Auckland, and how’s the council involved?” as well as “How could the council make Auckland a city that slays?”

    Platform users can respond to the challenge by producing content with a call to action for their peers in whatever medium they choose, and the best outputs are awarded prizes.

    The purpose of the challenge is to show rangatahi, who are among Tāmaki Makaurau’s harder-to-reach audiences, how the decisions made by local government impact their daily lives – giving them reason to engage.

    The What does Auckland Council do for you? challenge is live 3 February – 9 March 2025 with $200 prizes up for grabs – get all the buzz here.

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: From breakbeats to the dance floor: How hip-hop and house revolutionized music and culture

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Joycelyn Wilson, Assistant Professor of Ethnographic and Cultural Studies , Georgia Institute of Technology

    Producers Fast Eddie and Joe Smooth mix at DJ International Studios in Chicago in 1990. Innovation was at the forefront of house and hip-hop. Raymond Boyd/Getty Images

    There was a time when artists representing two of America’s biggest homegrown musical genres wouldn’t get a look in at the Grammys.

    Hip-hop and house both have their origins in the 1970s and early 1980s – in fact, they recently celebrated a 50th and 40th birthday, respectively. But it was only in 1989 that an award category for “best rap performance” started recognizing hip-hop’s contribution to U.S. music, and house had to wait another decade, with the introduction of “best dance/electronic recording” in 1998.

    At this year’s awards, taking place on Feb. 2, hip-hop and house artists will be among the most talked about. House duo Justice and Kendrick Lamar, a hip-hop superstar who incorporates elements of house himself, are among those looking to pick up an award. Meanwhile, a nomination for a collaboration between DJ Kaytranada and rapper Childish Gambino shows how artists from both genres continue to feed off each other.

    And while both genres are now celebrated for their separate contributions to the music landscape, as a scholar of African American culture and music, I am interested in their commonality: Both are distinctly Black American artforms that originated on the streets and dance floors of U.S. cities, developing a devoted underground following before being accepted by – and transforming – the mainstream.

    The pulse of the 1970s

    The roots of hip-hop and house music both lie in the seismic shifts of the late 1970s, a period of sociopolitical unrest and electronic experimentation that redefined the possibilities of sound.

    For hip-hop, this was expressed through the turntable manipulation pioneered by DJ Kool Herc in 1973, when he extended and looped breakbeats to energize crowds. House music’s innovators turned to the drum machine to create the genre’s foundational four-on-the-floor dance rhythm.

    That rhythm, foreshadowed by Eddy Grant’s 1977 production of “Time Warp” by The Coachouse Rhythm Section, would go on to shape house music’s distinct pulse. The track showed how electronic instruments such as the synthesizer and drum machine could recast traditional rhythmic patterns into something entirely new.

    This dance vibe – in which a base drum provides a steady four-four beat – became the heartbeat of house music, creating an enduring structure for DJs to layer basslines, percussion and melodies. In a similar way, Kool Herc’s breakbeat manipulation provided the scaffolding for MCs and dancers in hip-hop’s formative years.

    Marginalized communities in urban centers like Chicago and New York were at the forefront of these innovations. Despite experiencing grinding poverty and discrimination, it was Black and Latino youth – armed with turntables, drum machines and samplers – who made these groundbreaking advances in music.

    For hip-hop, this meant manipulating breakbeats from songs like Kraftwerk’s “Trans-Europe Express” and “Numbers” to energize b-boys and b-girls; for house, it meant extending disco’s rhythmic pulse into an ecstatic, inclusive dance floor. Both genres exemplified – and continue to exemplify – the ingenuity of predominantly Black and Hispanic communities who turned limited resources into cultural revolutions.

    From this shared origin of technological experimentation, cultural resilience and creative ingenuity, hip-hop and house music grew into distinct yet globally influential movements.

    The message and the MIDI

    By the early 1980s, both genres had found their feet.

    Hip-hop emerged as a powerful voice for storytelling, resistance and identity. Building on the foundations laid down by DJ Kool Herc, artists like Afrika Bambaataa emphasized hip-hop’s cultural and communal aspects. Meanwhile, Grandmaster Flash elevated the genre’s technical artistry with innovations like cutting and scratching.

    By 1984, hip-hop had evolved from its grassroots beginnings in the Bronx into a cultural movement on the cusp of mainstream recognition. Run-DMC’s self-titled debut album released that year introduced a harder, stripped-down sound that departed from disco-influenced beats. Their music, paired with the trio’s Adidas tracksuits and gold chains, established an aesthetic that resonated far beyond New York City. Music videos on MTV gave hip-hop a new medium for storytelling, while films like “Beat Street” and “Breakin’” showcased the features and tenets of hip-hop culture: DJing, rapping, graffiti, breaking and knowledge of self – cementing its cultural presence, and presenting it to a world outside the U.S.

    But at its core, hip-hop remained a voice for the voiceless that sought to address systemic inequities through storytelling. Tracks like Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five’s “The Message” vividly depicted the reality of living in poor, urban communities, while Public Enemy’s “Fight the Power” and Tupac Shakur’s “Keep Ya Head Up” became anthems for social justice.

    Together these artists positioned hip-hop as a platform for resistance and empowerment.

    Becoming a cultural force

    Unlike hip-hop’s lyrical storytelling, house music focused on the physicality of rhythm and the collective experience of the dance floor. And as hip-hop moved away from disco, house leaned into it.

    Italy’s “father of disco,” Giorgio Moroder, showed the way with his pioneering use of synthesizers in Donna Summer’s “I Feel Love.” Over in New York, Larry Levan’s DJ sets at Paradise Garage demonstrated how electronic instruments could create immersive, emotionally charged experiences as a club that centered crowd participation through dance and not lyrics.

    By 1984, Chicago DJs Frankie Knuckles and Ron Hardy were repurposing disco tracks with drum machines like the Roland TR-808 and 909 to create hypnotic beats. Knuckles, known as the “Godfather of House,” transformed his sets at the Warehouse club into euphoric experiences, giving the genre its name in the process.

    Frankie Knuckles in the DJ booth at Crobar in New York in 2003.
    Jemal Countess/WireImage

    House music thrived on inclusivity, served as a safe space for Black and Latino members of the LGBTQ+ communities at a time when hip-hop was severely unwelcoming of gay men. Tracks like Jesse Saunders’ “On & On” and Marshall Jefferson’s “Move Your Body” celebrated freedom, love and unity, encapsulating its liberatory spirit, as rap music and hip-hop culture embarked on its mainstream journey with songs like Run DMC’s “Sucker M.C.s (Krush Groove)” and Salt-N-Pepa debuted their album “Hot, Cool, & Vicious.”

    As with hip-hop, by the the mid-1980s house music had become a cultural force, spreading from Chicago to Detroit, to New York and, eventually, to the U.K.’s rave scene. Its emphasis on repetition, rhythm and electronic instrumentation solidified its global appeal, uniting people across identities and geographies.

    Mainstays in modern music

    Despite their differences, moments of crossover highlight their shared DNA.

    From the late 1980s, tracks like Fast Eddie’s “Yo Yo Get Funky” and the Jungle Brothers’ “I’ll House You” merged house beats with hip-hop’s lyrical flow. Artists like Kaytranada and Doechii continue to blend the two genres today, staying true to the genres’ legacies while pushing their boundaries.

    And technology continues to drive both genres. Platforms like SoundCloud have democratized music production, allowing emerging artists to build on the decades of innovations that preceded them. Collaborations, such as Disclosure and Charli XCX’s “She’s Gone, Dance On,” highlight their adaptability and enduring appeal.

    Whether through hip-hop’s lyrical narratives or house’s rhythmic euphoria, these genres continue to inspire, challenge and transcend.

    As the 2025 Grammy Awards celebrate today’s leading house and hip-hop artists and their contemporary achievements, it is clear that the legacies of these two genres are mainstays in the kaleidoscope of American popular music and culture, having come a long way from back-to-school park jams and underground dance parties.

    Joycelyn Wilson is affiliated with the Recording Academy.

    – ref. From breakbeats to the dance floor: How hip-hop and house revolutionized music and culture – https://theconversation.com/from-breakbeats-to-the-dance-floor-how-hip-hop-and-house-revolutionized-music-and-culture-229336

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Banking: 🇮🇱 Zion Oil & Gas Update: January 30, 2025

    Source: Zion Oil and Gas

    Headline: Zion Oil & Gas Update: January 30, 2025

    January 30, 2025

    Dear Zion Shareholders and Supporters,

    We are pleased to bring you the latest update as we continue progressing toward the next critical phase of operations at our Megiddo-Jezreel #1 (MJ-01) well.

    As we have previously shared, logistical and geopolitical challenges necessitated an operational pause at the wellsite over recent months. Thankfully, we are preparing to launch our targeted re-completion work on the MJ-01 well in Q1 as expected. Our rig crew is informed and scheduled to arrive in Israel in the latter part of February to commence rig startup procedures. This includes minor repairs and maintenance, as well as drilling out the temporary plug that has been sealing MJ-01 during the pause. Once this work is complete, the team will focus on preparing both the location and the wellbore for the upcoming recompletion operation.

    While our crew carries out these preparations, the necessary stimulation, well testing, and nitrogen equipment will be transported from various locations in Europe to Israel. Based on current projections, we anticipate receiving this equipment on-site in March, subject to final availability and shipping schedules.

    Following equipment arrival, our plan is to proceed with rigging up, setting a bottom plug, and installing a swell plug, which is an essential step to isolate the targeted zone of interest. Once the plug has properly set, we will run in hole with the stimulation equipment, stimulate the zones, and initiate flowback operations.

    Flowback duration will depend on well response; if all key components come together as expected, we anticipate completing these operations in early Q2.

    While there are always variables in an operation of this nature, our team remains optimistic about the timeline and continues working diligently to achieve success.

    As always, we deeply appreciate your ongoing support and prayers. We remain steadfast in our mission and will continue to provide updates as we progress.

    Warm regards,
    Rob Dunn
    CEO
    Zion Oil & Gas, Inc.

    I waited patiently for the Lord; And He inclined to me and heard my cry.”
    Psalm 40:1 NASB

    “Then they said, “Let us arise and build.” So they put their hands to the good work.”
    Nehemiah 2:18b NASB

    MIL OSI Global Banks –

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Voluntary Contributions to Peacebuilding Fund ‘Remain Paramount’, Secretary-General Stresses, Urging Countries Provide Additional Support

    Source: United Nations General Assembly and Security Council

    Following are UN Secretary-General António Guterres’ remarks at the opening of the ambassadorial-level formal meeting on the annual report and election of officers of the Peacebuilding Commission, in New York today:

    It is a pleasure to be here with you today.  I wish to start by congratulating the Member States that have recently been elected to the Peacebuilding Commission.  I also congratulate Brazil for leading the Peacebuilding Commission during its eighteenth session and welcome Germany’s candidacy for the chair of the nineteenth session.

    Our world is in trouble.  We see spreading conflicts and widening geopolitical divisions.  We face a deepening climate crisis and widening inequalities.  We are confronting the proliferation of weapons and the spread of disinformation. All of this and more makes the work of the Peacebuilding Commission more critical than ever.

    I want to salute the Commission for its vital advisory role to the Security Council, including in the context of UN mission transitions. I also recognize your important convening role within the UN and beyond — engaging civil society, the private sector, international and regional organizations, and financial institutions.

    Now we have the chance to consolidate and expand that work. The Pact for the Future charts a course to reforming international cooperation — including by prioritizing prevention, mediation and peacebuilding.  It seeks to break siloes by advancing coordination with regional organizations, developing innovative approaches and fostering the full participation of women, youth and marginalized groups in peace processes.  And fundamentally, the Pact calls for strengthening the Peacebuilding Commission.

    This year’s Review of the Peacebuilding Architecture offers an opportunity to further advance these efforts and strengthen the role of the Peacebuilding Commission — namely its relationship with the Security Council.

    My recent report on Peacebuilding and Sustaining Peace lays out concrete suggestions around inflection points where the Commission can help catalyse national efforts.  This includes working to fully empower the Commission to mobilize political and financial support for nationally owned peacebuilding and prevention strategies.

    As the review unfolds, I encourage the Commission to draw on its rich experience to guide deliberations at the General Assembly and Security Council — with actionable recommendations towards strengthening the peacebuilding architecture and transforming people’s lives.

    This brings me to a vital issue:  financing.  The General Assembly’s approval of assessed contributions to the Peacebuilding Fund marks an important step.  But, it is still a far cry from the “quantum leap” of $500 million per year that is needed.  As many Member States have highlighted, voluntary contributions remain paramount — and I encourage countries to provide additional support to the Fund.

    Given the urgent and expanding needs for peacebuilding support, I trust that the Review of the Peacebuilding Architecture will further examine how to ensure the predictability, adequacy and sustainability of the Fund — including by exploring innovative financing mechanisms, public-private partnerships and blended funding models.

    We must never waver in our commitment to pursue, achieve and sustain peace.

    The Peacebuilding architecture — consisting of the Peacebuilding Commission, the Peacebuilding Support Office and the Peacebuilding Fund — working together with UN country teams, are essential tools to help translate aspirations into reality.

    I look forward to continuing to work with you all to strengthen our peacebuilding architecture and help build a world of peace and prosperity for all largely thanks to your precious intervention.

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: “Stunning dedication”: first ocean sanctuary in Marshall Islands announced

    Source: Greenpeace Statement –

    FRIDAY 31 JANUARY 2025 — The Republic of the Marshall Islands has announced its first marine protected area in the Pacific Ocean, a “stunning dedication to ocean protection for Pacific heritage”, says Greenpeace.

    The country’s first national ocean sanctuary, which covers 48,0002 kilometres of ocean – bigger than Switzerland/more than 260 times the size of the Marshall Islands’ land mass – puts the Marshall Islands on the podium as a leader in ocean protection on the world stage.

    Shiva Gounden, Head of Pacific at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “Greenpeace congratulates the Republic of Marshall Islands on this stunning dedication to ocean protection for Pacific heritage.

    “The ocean is a living heritage, connecting the Pacific’s past, present and future. Protecting the ocean means protecting its treasures – the livelihoods, legacy, cultural heritage and future of Pacific people – for generations to come.

    “The Marshall Islands are unique and rich in life, but are threatened by colonialism, a heating ocean, and the devastating and ongoing impacts of nuclear testing by western nations. 

    “The Marshall Islands has a long history as champion for ocean protection, resisting the encroaching threat of deep sea mining by declaring support for a precautionary pause. We now need all nations to follow suit and stop deep sea mining before it starts.

    “The Pacific must be protected; a thriving ocean is a thriving people.” 

    The area around atolls Bikar and Bokak, as well as the nearby deep sea, will be fully protected from fishing, allowing a safe haven for marine life to recover and thrive.

    Marine sanctuaries are crucial to sustaining ocean health around the world. Greenpeace is urging governments worldwide to ratify the Global Ocean Treaty quickly to achieve the 30×30 target and start developing proposals for marine protected areas in the high seas.

    —ENDS—

    MIL OSI NGO –

  • MIL-OSI Global: International students’ housing challenges call for policy action

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Edward R. Howe, Professor, School of Education, Thompson Rivers University

    Canada is a top destination for international students, with over one million studying at various levels in 2023. International students contribute billions of dollars to the Canadian economy and much more to our social fabric.

    But recent policy changes and increased public scrutiny have created a challenging environment for these students and the higher education institutions that host them.

    After a decade of rapid growth, the federal government has implemented a two-year cap on international student permits, reducing undergraduate admissions by 35 per cent in 2024 and an additional 10 per cent in 2025.

    This controversial decision aims to address growing concerns about the impact of international students and unchecked immigration on Canada’s economy, housing and public services.

    An ongoing longitudinal research study at Thompson Rivers University (TRU) , which engages international students’ views and experiences through both surveys and interviews, sheds light on the lived experiences of international students amid these dramatic policy shifts. I have led this research with international graduate student research assistants.

    Shifts from 2016 to 2024: housing

    The first round of our study drew on a 2016 survey of more than 100 international students at TRU, and interviews with 14 from the same pool. We recently surveyed a further 215 international TRU students and conducted in-depth interviews with 14 more participants from various nations including India and China, across a range of undergraduate and graduate programs.

    Our newest research findings revealed major challenges faced by international students, particularly in housing and finances. This echoes other findings that indicate the housing situation for international students has worsened over the past decade.

    Over 55 per cent of students reported difficulties finding suitable accommodations, with many experiencing systemic racial discrimination in the rental market. Financial struggles were also prevalent, with about one-third of participants indicating insufficient financial support or uncertainty about their financial situation.



    Read more:
    International students are not to blame for Canada’s housing crisis

    Racism, concern for post-graduate work

    On a positive note, fewer students reported experiencing racism on campus in 2024 than in 2016.

    In 2016, when students were asked to say to what extent they agreed with the statement “I encountered racism at university,” there were a wide range of statements: 14 per cent strongly agreed and 21 per cent agreed; 25 per cent strongly disagreed; 16 per cent disagreed and 23 per cent were undecided.

    This was the only question that had such a pattern of responses spread evenly across the five-point scale. In 2024, only 13.5 per cent agreed or strongly agreed with this statement.

    But in interviews, many students commented upon encountering racism and exploitation when job hunting or searching for housing accommodations. For example, one student reported that when seeking to renegotiate a lease due to problems with a roommate, the landlord threatened to take action to revoke their student visa.



    Read more:
    International university grads speak about aspirations and barriers

    In surveys and interviews, students lamented the dearth of co-op programs, work-integrated learning and experiential opportunities for their future success in Canada. This aligns with recent data from the Canadian Bureau for International Education, which found that 70 per cent of international students plan to apply for post-graduate work permits, and 57 per cent intend to seek permanent residency.

    Students’ thoughts on ‘internationalization’

    Our recent study also asked students their thoughts on “internationalization,” as universities and government policy have used this term to promote Canada as an international, global and multicultural society with globally focused curricula and opportunities for international study abroad.

    Students’ responses fell into three main themes: cross-cultural exchange, mutual learning and community building, and personal growth through international experiences. These findings were consistent across different nationalities and genders, suggesting a shared understanding of internationalization among diverse student groups.

    A student carrying a backpack walks on campus at Trinity Western University in Langley, B.C., in 2017.

    To address these challenges and support international students, our research recommends that universities continue to diversify their pools of international students by increasing scholarships for students from marginalized regions.

    This matters in the wake of the recent announcement to reduce immigration targets from 485,000 in 2024 to 365,000 by 2027. This policy direction creates uncertainty for many international students hoping to build their futures in Canada.

    This shift comes as public support for immigration has dramatically decreased, reaching an all-time low. Fifty-eight per cent of Canadians now believe the country accepts too many immigrants — a 31-point increase since 2022.

    We also suggest fostering deeper cross-cultural understanding among university staff and domestic students, establishing program-specific student support centres with peer mentoring. The fragile school-to-work transition needs to be better facilitated through co-op education and other work-integrated learning opportunities. Action from policymakers to address systemic barriers in housing and employment is also needed.

    Welcoming destination for global talent

    International students contribute significantly to Canada’s economy, cultural diversity and multicultural society.

    Government, educators, universities and employers have roles to play in reframing the “internationalization” of higher education. There is a need to balance economic rationales with social and academic outcomes, including a focus on global citizenship education for all students.

    In the shadow of Donald Trump’s second presidency in the United States, which is amplifying xenophobic rhetoric and action against migrants, and amid major shifts in Canada’s federal landscape, it is important to take inventory of how changing government immigration policies can have a profound impact on Canada.

    It is crucial to consider the perspectives of international students. Their insights matter for helping to shape policies and practices that affect their educational experiences, future opportunities in Canada and the very social fabric of Canada.

    By addressing students’ challenges and the barriers they encounter, and by supporting their successes, we can ensure that Canada remains a welcoming destination for global talent.

    Surbhi Sagar and Athira Pushpamgathan contributed to this research and co-authored this story.

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

    – ref. International students’ housing challenges call for policy action – https://theconversation.com/international-students-housing-challenges-call-for-policy-action-230833

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Understanding the backlash against corporate DEI — and how to move forward

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Camellia Bryan, Assistant Professor, Organizational Behaviour and Human Resources Division, Sauder School of Business, University of British Columbia

    United States President Donald Trump recently issued an executive order to end federal diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs. In the days since, Trump has even tried to blame a deadly Washington, D.C., plane crash on DEI hiring practices, without citing any evidence. He was swiftly criticized for his statement.

    In the corporate world, DEI programs aimed at addressing systemic barriers that have historically disadvantaged marginalized groups are facing growing resistance, with backlash becoming increasingly visible in workplaces and in public discourse.

    High-profile companies like Amazon, Meta, McDonalds and Target have been cancelling their DEI programs since last year. Although others, like Costco and Apple, have said they’re retaining theirs.

    The backlash against DEI isn’t just about individuals rejecting change; it reveals deeper tensions in how people see themselves and their place in society.

    Our research explores these tensions. We find that while social identity threat — the discomfort people feel when their identity is challenged — can lead to backlash, it can also present an unexpected opportunity for learning and growth. Understanding this dynamic offers a path forward for organizations struggling to balance DEI efforts with employee buy-in.

    What drives DEI backlash?

    Backlash often emerges from employees who belong to dominant social identity groups that hold disproportionate access to power and resources. Examples include white people in North America, men in patriarchal societies or heterosexual individuals in hetero-normative cultures.

    For these employees, DEI initiatives can sometimes feel threatening. Why? Because such efforts highlight inequalities and challenge assumptions about fairness, merit and the status quo. When someone identifies strongly with their group — whether as a white person, a man or a member of another dominant identity — they may see DEI initiatives as attacks on their assumptions. This discomfort is known as social identity threat.

    For instance, when a company introduces a gender equity policy aimed at addressing women’s under-representation in leadership, some men might perceive this as unfair. Their response — whether it’s skepticism, defensiveness or outright resistance — reflects a defensive reaction to that threat.

    Beyond defensiveness: A path to learning

    Traditional approaches to managing DEI backlash often focus on mitigating threat: providing reassurance, avoiding confrontation or encouraging self-affirmation (“DEI isn’t about you; it’s about everyone”). Yet these approaches miss an important point: social identity threat doesn’t have to result in defensiveness or backlash. It can also inspire reflection, learning and growth.

    Our research draws on transformational learning theory, which explains how adults change their understanding of the world in response to disorienting experiences.

    According to this theory, when people encounter information that challenges their assumptions, they can engage in a process of deep reflection. By questioning their beliefs and seeking out new perspectives, individuals can develop more accurate, inclusive interpretations of themselves and others.



    Read more:
    Businesses must stop caving to political pressure and abandoning their EDI commitments

    Real-world examples of transformation

    Consider the story of Caolan Robertson, a former alt-right filmmaker in the United Kingdom.

    For years, Robertson worked with extremist figures to produce anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim content that garnered millions of views online. Then, in 2019, Robertson saw media coverage of mosque shootings, where 51 people were killed by a white supremacist. The tragedy rattled him.

    In Robertson’s own words, the event forced him to confront his assumptions about white identity and how it can be involved in violence and extremism. What began as an overwhelming sense of disorientation turned into a period of deep reflection. Robertson eventually rejected his old beliefs, began speaking out against extremism, and co-founded an organization to help others de-radicalize.

    Similar learning occurs on smaller scales in workplaces every day. For example, a male manager who initially feels threatened by gender equity policies might, over time, come to recognize the barriers women face at work and become an advocate for change. Or a white employee who feels uncomfortable during discussions about racism might come to see how privilege has shaped their experiences.

    Creating conditions for growth

    So how can organizations turn social identity threat into an opportunity for learning rather than backlash? We propose three strategies:

    1. Foster a “learning-oriented” DEI climate
    Organizations must shift how they frame DEI initiatives. Instead of treating these efforts as compliance-driven checkboxes, companies should position DEI as a chance for employees to learn, grow and contribute to a more inclusive workplace. A strong diversity climate — where differences are valued, and conversations about identity are encouraged — creates a safe space for reflection. Our research shows that when employees feel that diversity is part of their organization’s mission, they’re more likely to approach identity threats as a learning opportunity.

    2. Encourage dialogue across perspectives
    One of the most effective ways to challenge harmful assumptions is through dialogue across perspectives — open conversations where employees with different lived experiences share their perspectives and provide feedback. This kind of dialogue requires psychological safety: employees need to feel secure enough to express their views, even when those views are incomplete or flawed. Importantly, these conversations don’t always have to occur between dominant and marginalized group members. Dialogue with other dominant-group colleagues who have already reflected on their identities can also provide valuable insights.

    3. Support incremental progress
    Transformational learning doesn’t happen overnight. Employees may initially engage in surface-level reflection, revising specific assumptions without challenging deeper systems of inequality. Over time, they may progress to deep-level reflection, critically analyzing the foundational beliefs that shape their identity. Organizations can support this incremental progress by recognizing small steps and encouraging continued learning.

    Discomfort: A powerful motivator for change

    The backlash to DEI efforts is often framed as evidence that the initiative is failing, but it can also be understood as a natural part of the learning process.

    Social identity threat is uncomfortable, but it can serve as a powerful motivator for change when organizations provide the right tools and support.

    Companies that ignore backlash risk deepening resistance and undermining their DEI goals. However, organizations that embrace discomfort as an opportunity for growth can transform their workplaces into spaces where employees are not only more inclusive but also more reflective, empathetic and engaged.

    Backlash isn’t the end of the story — it’s the beginning of a conversation.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Understanding the backlash against corporate DEI — and how to move forward – https://theconversation.com/understanding-the-backlash-against-corporate-dei-and-how-to-move-forward-246117

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Secretary-General Calls on All Conflict Parties in Myanmar to Exercise Maximum Restraint

    Source: United Nations General Assembly and Security Council

    The following statement was issued today by the Spokesman for UN Secretary-General António Guterres:

    Four years since the military seized power and arbitrarily detained members of the democratically elected Government on 1 February 2021, the situation in Myanmar continues to deteriorate, with devastating consequences for civilians.

    The Secretary-General condemns all forms of violence and calls on all parties to the conflict to exercise maximum restraint, uphold human rights and international humanitarian law, and prevent further incitement of violence and intercommunal tensions.  He reiterates his concern regarding the military’s stated intention to hold elections amid intensifying conflict, including aerial bombardment and widespread human rights violations and without conditions that permit the people of Myanmar to freely and peacefully exercise their political rights, including safety and security.

    Over 19.9 million people in Myanmar — more than one third of its population — need humanitarian assistance, compared to 1 million before the military took over four years ago.  Unimpeded access must be assured to enable the UN and its partners to continue to deliver humanitarian assistance and essential services.

    The Secretary-General renews his calls for greater cooperation among all stakeholders to bring an end to the hostilities and help the people of Myanmar forge a path towards an inclusive democratic transition and return to civilian rule.  The Secretary-General also appeals to countries in the region to grant access to safety and protection for those fleeing conflict and persecution and for the international community to provide greater support to countries, including Bangladesh, hosting refugees from Myanmar.

    The Secretary-General’s Special Envoy, Julie Bishop, remains actively engaged with all stakeholders, in close cooperation with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), in the search of a Myanmar-led resolution to the crisis.

    A viable future for Myanmar must ensure safety, accountability and opportunity for all its communities, including the Rohingya, and address the root causes of conflict, discrimination and disenfranchisement in all its forms.  The Secretary-General reaffirms the unwavering support of the United Nations to the people of Myanmar in these efforts.

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Where’s the “culture of yes” on climate ambition?

    Source: Green Party

    The Green Party is calling on the Government to strengthen its just-announced 2030-2035 Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) under the Paris Agreement and address its woeful lack of commitment to climate security.

    “This new NDC is the closest thing the Government could do to breaking the Paris Agreement and walking away from our international climate commitments without actually doing it,” says the Green Party Co-Leader and Climate Change spokesperson, Chlöe Swarbrick. 

    “The expert, independent Climate Change Commission demonstrated how reductions of over 70 per cent are completely achievable, making it completely ridiculous for the Government to suggest that 51 per cent is the best we can do.

    “Where’s Christopher Luxon’s much-talked-about ambition and ‘culture of yes’ when it comes to protecting the climate necessary for life as we know it?

    “We have the plan, we have the tools, and we have the vision – it’s been laid out for everyone by the Climate Change Commission. All that’s missing is the political willpower. 

    “This Government loves to compare our ambition to other countries – but only when it suits them. The UK has just set a target of reducing their emissions 81 per cent by 2035. We can do the same, or even better.

    “Christopher Luxon has consistently told us all he’s committed to our climate targets and goals. The Paris Agreement requires all signatories to consistently ratchet up ambition. The rhetoric isn’t matching reality.

    “That reality of climate change is now impossible to ignore. Every decision this Government makes to keep fossil fuels on life support and delay the transition contributes to the growing frequency and intensity of climate change charged extreme weather, ultimately costing us all the more dearly.

    “This ‘culture of yes’ should be about saying ‘yes’ to a thriving future. ‘Yes’ to a liveable planet. ‘Yes’ to the kind of ambition that once upon a time made us world-leaders,” says Chlöe Swarbrick.

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Spain’s secure communications satellite SpainSat NG I successfully launched

    Source: Thales Group

    Headline: Spain’s secure communications satellite SpainSat NG I successfully launched

    • Starting in the second half of this year, SpainSat NG I will provide services to Spain’s Armed Forces, international organizations such as the European Commission or NATO, and governments of allied countries.
    • Thales Alenia Space, together with Airbus Defence and Space, has led the construction of this satellite and its twin, SpainSat NG II, which is also scheduled for launch in 2025.
    • The company has been responsible, among other activities, for the integration of the Communication Module for both satellites along with Airbus in a clean room built for this purpose at its facilities in Tres Cantos, Madrid. To date, this has been the largest satellite system ever integrated in Spain.

    Madrid, January 30, 2025 – The secure communications satellite SpainSat NG I has been successfully launched early this morning by a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket from Cape Canaveral (Florida). An unprecedented milestone for the Spanish space sector.

    The SPAINSAT NG program, owned and operated by Hisdesat Servicios Estratégicos S.A., comprises two satellites, SpainSat NG I and II. Thales Alenia Space, a joint venture between Thales (67%) and Leonardo (33%), together with Airbus Defence & Space, has led the execution and construction of both satellites, SpainSat NG I and its twin, SpainSat NG II, which will be launched this fall. The two satellites will be positioned in different geostationary positions to operate in X-band, military Ka-band, and UHF, providing coverage to two-thirds of the Earth’s surface, from the United States of America to Singapore. It will provide services for the next 15 years.

    Thales Alenia Space in Spain has been responsible for the UHF and military Ka-band payloads and the integration of the Communication Module for the two satellites along with Airbus. The Communication Module is the main body of the satellite, which embarks the communication payloads that give purpose to the mission.

    © Airbus

    Specifically for this mission, the company built an assembly and integration clean room at its site in Tres Cantos, Madrid, inaugurated in 2021, where the Communication Modules of the two satellites have been integrated. These advanced cutting-edge facilities represent a qualitative leap in Spain’s space industry capabilities for the assembly and integration of large space systems, something within the reach of a few space powers worldwide.

    Being the largest satellite system ever integrated in Spain, the SpainSat NG I Communication Module weights more than 2 tons and measures 6 meters high, and is fully equipped with cutting-edge technology in the field of space communications, comprising hundreds of sophisticated electronic units.

    The company has also designed and manufactured in Spain, France, Italy, and Belgium over 200 of electronic and radiofrequency units that are an integral part of the communications payloads and the satellite’s telecommand and telemetry system. Among them are the UHF processor, the heart of the UHF-band payload; the Transparent Digital Processor (DTP) that interconnects the X-band and military Ka-band payloads; and the Hilink unit, responsible for providing a high-speed service link that will facilitate a quick reconfiguration of the payloads.

    The SPAINSAT NG program

    SpainSat NG I is one of the most advanced secure communications satellites in Europe and ranks among the most innovative in the world. It is expected to begin to provide services early in the second half of 2025 to the Spanish Armed Forces, international organizations such as the European Commission in the GOVSATCOM program, NATO, and other allied governments.

    Its mission is to ensure effective command and control of Armed Forces operations over a large portion of the Earth’s surface, guarantee communication capability in theatres of operations lacking communication infrastructure, ensure secure governmental communications in any operational environment (air, maritime, land), and provide strategic space capabilities to third nations.

    The SpainSat NG satellites, which will replace the current Hisdesat communications satellites, Spainsat and XTAR-EUR, will be capable of providing secure satellite communications with maximum protection against interference or other threats, including a high-altitude nuclear event, with maximum flexibility thanks to its real-time software-defined payload.
     

    About Thales Alenia Space

    Drawing on over 40 years of experience and a unique combination of skills, expertise and cultures, Thales Alenia Space delivers cost-effective solutions for telecommunications, navigation, Earth observation, environmental management, exploration, science and orbital infrastructures. Governments and private industry alike count on Thales Alenia Space to design satellite-based systems that provide anytime, anywhere connections and positioning, monitor our planet, enhance management of its resources and explore our Solar System and beyond. Thales Alenia Space sees space as a new horizon, helping to build a better, more sustainable life on Earth. A joint venture between Thales (67%) and Leonardo (33%), Thales Alenia Space also teams up with Telespazio to form the parent companies’ Space Alliance, which offers a complete range of services. Thales Alenia Space posted consolidated revenues of approximately €2.2 billion in 2023 and has around 8,600 employees in 8 countries, with 16 sites in Europe.

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Make a noise or work with the system? New research reveals 4 ways to create real change for nature

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lily van Eeden, Lecturer, RMIT University

    Ecosystems and species across the natural world are in serious trouble. The vast majority of Australians want more government action, but it’s not being delivered.

    Take, for example, the federal government commitment to end extinctions via its Nature Positive plan. Or consider its promise to overhaul Australia’s environmental legislation and create a new independent regulator. Progress on both has faltered.

    The biodiversity crisis calls for systemic change in humanity’s relationship with nature. This requires bold policy action from governments. Our new research examined how everyday people can help achieve this.

    We mined the insider knowledge of politicians, senior public servants and environmental advocates. The participants were Victoria-based, but their advice applies more broadly.

    Here, we present a recipe for achieving real, lasting change for the natural world.

    1. Be prepared for a long haul

    Change can take a long time. Be willing and able to see out the process. As one government interviewee told us:

    [Change] is not going to happen by one research paper, one meeting, one event, it’s gonna be a whole range of things over a sustained period of time.

    Also, find support. Our interviewees told us the most successful campaigns often happen when like-minded individuals band together. This provides the social support needed to stay the course.

    Remember, change is possible. As one government interviewee told us, this is especially true in marginal seats, where “constant ongoing campaigning at every level” can shift the dial.

    There is very likely a community group advocating for nature near you. These groups sometimes link up with larger, better-funded environment groups, to access their resources and networks.

    Change happens when like-minded people band together.
    Yuri A/Shutterstock

    2. Know the system

    Identify who you need to influence. The person holding the lever might not be a politician, but a public servant. Or public servants might rally for a cause internally, sometimes partnering with community groups.

    So how do you find this key person? Build your networks. Start talking to people in your community and get to know your local elected representatives. Find out what they care about and pitch your message to appeal to their values and concerns.

    One interviewee told us community groups would benefit from knowing more about how the system works:

    What are the bits that can actually change? […] Community members can be a bit aggressive in trying to drive through their challenge without understanding why they’ve been ignored in the past, or feel that they’ve been ignored.

    As another government interviewee told us:

    People don’t see how much power they have if they just use their voice and use it in a constructive way.

    3. Be strategic

    Choose whether to work with the government, or challenge it publicly.

    Environmental advocates can work alongside government to design solutions together. For example, a community group might work with their local council to design and implement management of a bush reserve. Big non-government environment groups often work in this way, relying on strong relationships with government insiders to achieve change.

    The opposite strategy is an “outsider” approach, which, at the extreme end, might include physically disrupting industry. Think chaining yourself to a tree in a forest pegged for logging or ramming a ship into a commercial whaling vessel.

    A less extreme outsider approach might be seeking to get your issue into the media to build public interest to get something on the political agenda.

    Both approaches have their merits in the right context. As one staff member of an environment group told us:

    We’re going to put on the suits […] and we’re not going to scale their buildings and release confidential information that they’ve given us to the media […] I don’t judge those that have that theory of change, because we need both, we need the really extreme advocacy to make us look mainstream and medium and reasonable.

    4. Seize the moment

    Identify when your advocacy might be most effective. It might be an upcoming election or budget, or when a policy is being reviewed.

    Or it might be something less predictable, such as a bushfire, flood or other environmental disaster. In those cases, nature conservation issues are suddenly all over the media. It might be a chance for real change.

    Effective advocates know how to identify, create, and be prepared for these windows. As one staff member at an environmental group told us:

    Some organizations talk about making change. But that’s a harder exercise. Often it’s a sort of a
    catching a wave of something else, or waiting for the opportunity.

    The upcoming federal election is one such opportunity. The lead up is a good time to advocate for nature. Speak with your local politician and their competitors about the change you want to see.

    If not us, who?

    These are well-tested, effective actions you can use to achieve positive policy change for the environment. But remember, the system is dynamic. New methods and approaches will emerge as technologies, modes of communication and other factors evolve.

    Governments, however, are a permanent fixture in the system. They stand to benefit politically by engaging with community and advocacy groups. So there is enormous potential for everyday people to genuinely make a difference.

    Environmental crises can seem overwhelming, but we can – and must – try to make a difference. Because, as the old adage goes: if not us, who? And if not now, when?

    The authors acknowledge Fern Hames and Kim Lowe for their contributions to this article.

    Lily van Eeden receives funding from the Australian Research Council. Lily was previously employed by the Victorian government.

    Liam Smith is a Councillor on the Biodiversity Council.

    Sarah Bekessy receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ian Potter Foundation and the European Commission. She is a Lead Councillor with The Biodiversity Council, a board member of Bush Heritage Australia, a member of the WWF Eminent Scientists Group and an advisor to ELM Responsible Investment, the Living Building Challenge and Wood for Good.

    – ref. Make a noise or work with the system? New research reveals 4 ways to create real change for nature – https://theconversation.com/make-a-noise-or-work-with-the-system-new-research-reveals-4-ways-to-create-real-change-for-nature-248226

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –