Municipal pension funds require regular actuarial assessments to evaluate their financial sustainability, which involves calculating the present value of all future pension obligations (liabilities) and comparing them against current assets to determine if the system has a deficit or surplus. When pension funds face deficits, it typically results from historical underfunding where municipalities failed to contribute adequate amounts to build sufficient reserves over decades, creating a situation where future generations must bear the financial burden of past decisions. Effective pension reform requires balancing the interests of current public servants (who want to maintain their retirement benefits) with the municipality's need to maintain fiscal health and invest in public infrastructure.
26/05/2026 | Reunião da Comissão Especial do Fundo de Aposentadoria e Pensões (FAP)Added:
Let me know, Maria Lúcia, when you're all set.
Okay. Therefore, I declare open the second extraordinary meeting of the Special Committee of the Retirement and Pension Fund, the FAP, here of the second legislative session of the 16th legislature of the City Council on May 26th at 7:27 PM.
I greet my fellow council members here, especially the council members of the committee, the committee members, councilman Lucas, councilman Marcelo, the alternate council members, councilman Lucas and councilman José who is online, councilman Otávio who is present here, councilman Cloves, councilman Carlos, our president as well. Greetings to the civil servants who are here representing their class, to SIMEV and its representatives, to the FAP Council, which also sent its representatives, Renan, representing the Secretariat of Management, Governance and Finance, Dr. Joel, who came to give an explanation, Jacob, then chief of staff of the mayor, representing the executive branch, Dr. Alonso, representing the municipal attorney's office, right? Gabriel and Fauston, Gabriel Miller and Fauston Saraiva representing ACI, and Fábio Lid, then representing CDL.
I believe they greeted everyone. Okay, please come up here and take your seat. The locations are named there. Yes, representing the Yes party, President Rosane.
A, you can have Luciano present, representing the FAP council, Secretary Renan, Dr. Joel, Mr. Jacó, there's a place for him there, OK.
Oh there. Renan goes up, Jacob, so he stays in the... But if Jacob wants to go up, he has a reserved seat. Gabriel and Fauston, make yourselves comfortable over here, and Fábio, feel free to stay over here as well. So, Alonso, your seat is here, but if you don't want to go up, that's fine. Beauty. I think it really fits right here down here. It's even cool to reach the microphone. Folks, good night to everyone then. Well, so here we are starting today the first, actually, it's the first extraordinary meeting, right? And let it be clear that we will always hold extraordinary meetings, outside of business hours, at a time when everyone can contribute. This committee, it already has a closing date, okay? The first date is December 31st. In closing, let's wrap up the discussions, let's end this one early, okay? Our committee has the sole purpose of discussing and shedding light on the retirement and pension fund, right? No topic unrelated to this will be discussed here. Well, we understand that this is a thorny issue, and there is indeed little information available today about our FAP (Fund for Agricultural Production), right, from the municipality. When we make requests for information, we realize that even the city hall isn't 100% up to speed on this issue, right? Especially those who respond to us. So, our intention is to bring transparency to this topic, okay? We have determined here that the meetings will have a maximum duration of 90 minutes. So when I get there I'll ask Eli to put the 80-minute timer there. And elide, okay?
Leave it there for 80 minutes. When we reach 80 minutes, we'll open it up for final considerations so it doesn't go on for too long, okay? And after finishing the meeting, we'll schedule the next one, always in the evening, which is a time when people can contribute, okay? What's going on, guys?
The Chamber here is the place for debate.
The Chamber is the house of the people. And here we have the oversight committee. Today, Councilor Carlito is presiding, Councilor Lucas is also part of it, and Councilor Marcelo is too, right? And it's always a place for debate, but this topic here deserves special attention, it deserves a different space to talk only about it. We see today, representatives, that this issue is being discussed by the executive branch, and there is indeed a need for a bridge between the city hall, the current administration, and the municipal employees. And unfortunately, that debate isn't happening today, is it? And I believe the whole community is the one that suffers in all of this, right? The municipality contributes to the FAP (Fund for the Prevention of Agricultural Activity), the municipality pays part of it, which means taxpayer money, money from the citizen who pays taxes. I believe that the fact that we invited the CDL and the ACI to be here means that the population will be represented here, right? The union and the FAP council are present here. The employee represented here is the one who, every month, makes their contribution on their payslip; this contribution is not voluntary, it is mandatory. So every public servant contributes to FAP, right? And we also have representatives from the city government here, precisely so that we can carry out this construction.
Our intention here is not to deceive anyone. So, nobody should think that anything will be decided here. We are here to discuss, to discuss, to leave here with a report and shortly present it to the executive branch. We know that the city government is giving importance to this commission. I am very grateful to Jacob, the chief of staff, who is here today with Dr. Alonso, and also with Renan, who is the secretary for management and governance. They are here precisely because they know that this topic is important and needs to be discussed. I appreciate the staff who came in after hours. This is a topic that concerns everyone, and if you're here, it's because you value this discussion, and that's important. Regarding the Chamber here, this administration, I am very grateful to President Carlos who immediately accepted my suggestion to create the commission, precisely because this is where this debate needs to take place, since it is often lacking elsewhere, okay? So, uh, as I said before, we also don't have access to much information. I hope the actuary can give us a presentation and shed some light on the matter.
Why? Well, when I participated in the last one, I think it was the last council meeting at headquarters, it was held at the Municipal Guard, in the Guard's auditorium, and what we saw, and I asked, and the people even answered me, right? The FAP board, it has a management board, right? An investment advice guide. This is a council, a board, an investment committee. And then we realize that we have people in the city, even affiliated with the CDL (Chamber of Shopkeepers), affiliated with the ACI (Commercial and Industrial Association), who work with investment funds, right? Funds, I do n't know about other municipalities, but private ones, right? That could contribute to our FAP (Fund for the Support of Public Administration), that could volunteer to show us investments that are interesting, that are safe, and that bring an interesting return, because everything that goes into the FAP, everything that moves through it, is profit, it's extra money, because our forecasts today are precarious, right?
Interest rates are high, so it's generating returns, but inflation is also extremely high, and sometimes what generates returns is already being eaten up by inflation. That's precisely why we're inviting organizations to participate, so they can contribute and, in the near future, improve this experience. So, I believe that this discussion, this open topic, in this way, of calling on the private sector and inviting the community to participate, has never happened before. Well, so we're giving this opportunity today so that we can, with intelligent people, with people who are willing, really, Jacob, build something in this debate, because we understand the union's position, we understand the position of the employees, we understand the position of the city hall. What we know is that FAP (Factor of Adjustment for Prevention) started badly, it started badly. It was founded incorrectly, wasn't it?
No fat was created when it started.
So, uh, not everything that starts out wrong, ends up wrong. We, as the municipality, will have to do our part to straighten things out, okay? Because if we look at it, we've been around for almost 30 years with FAP, okay? We are a young fund, our municipality is young, there are funds in Brazil that are over 100 years old and just as beneficial. There's no way we can be 30 years old today and say, "Let's just shut this down and that's it," right? Well, from here it goes to the INSS (Brazilian Social Security Institute). I do n't think that's the way to go. No, no, I don't know if a fund that young is beyond repair. So, that's why we're opening this debate, okay? I'm going to leave it for a minute and a half. I'll order in a minute and a half, okay? Oh, sorry, I've already got 2 minutes left, okay? So that they can make their presentation, so that the community here can get to know them, and see their representation. You can make yourselves at home. I'm going to ask to start with Gabriel here. That could be, Gabriel. So, after your presentation, and then the council members here, please take the floor. We 'll each have two minutes, okay? It's being broadcast, and those at home will also be able to watch.
Well, good evening everyone. Hi, I'm Gabriel, representing the C, the Commercial, Industrial and Service Association here in Estância Velha. I am currently serving as president of the local council in the municipality of Estância. And when you extended the invitation, Antônio, as we discussed, I think the main point of us being here is to listen, right? From my side, at least, it's about listening to what you have to say, what you have to present. Well, if it's possible to contribute as well, but listen much more than speak, because it 's really an issue that we first need to get involved in to understand what's happening in the municipality.
Well, good evening everyone. My name is Fauston Saraiva, I am the CEO of CI, and I am accompanying Gabriel here. I appreciate the invitation and emphasize the importance of our organization being here to listen and contribute as much as possible. It's a controversial topic, and I dare say it will never please everyone. It's an issue that, regardless of the actions taken, will cause pain, it will be a serious matter, but it's always important to strike a balance so that the municipality can have its capacity to invest in infrastructure restored, and also guarantee the minimum rights of the employees who work and have worked so hard. to achieve their retirement and security, which is very important. So, it 's a pleasure for us to be here participating in the debate, and we're available to contribute in the best way possible.
Well, good night. My name is Fábio Litk, and I am a member of the board of directors of CDL. I want to thank you for the invitation and say that the subject is important and relevant. One of the pillars of our Chamber of Commerce there, we always highly value the economic development of our region of operation, and this issue directly impacts the economy, from the structure of public services to education; we need to have all employees working satisfactorily, right? Oh, and we also need to keep the public accounts balanced, right?
So, we are living through a challenging economic scenario, with tax reform coming up.
Cost equalization, budget equalization, is very important.
So, yes, I congratulate the people who brought this issue up, because it's an old issue that we've been hearing about for a long time, but I confess that we don't have the correct information, as the councilman said a moment ago, we need to understand what's going on. Ideally, we could have a timeline here showing the behavior of this fund over the years so that we can understand if we are at the bottom, if we are accelerating downwards, or if the situation is already less bad than it was, so that we can have a horizon, because whether we like it or not, it's a mathematical problem. We need to understand the numbers in order to understand the actions, what we can do to solve the problem. So, thank you all, count on the CDL to do whatever is within our reach to help solve this problem. Yeah, we're in this together.
Thanks.
Good evening everyone. My name is Rosane, and I am the president of the municipal unions here in the municipality.
Well, my compliments to the president, Antônio, to the rest of the committee, and especially to my fellow staff members present here.
Well, I appreciate your interest in coming here to learn more about this topic, which is something that concerns us all. It's an issue that concerns us, it concerns the city when, well, if I retire, if I receive my full salary, the municipality's economy also responds.
Well, if the public servant, you know, has their salary, the economy will also be, you know, inflated as well, right? Well, the FAP issue, the retirement issues that we've contributed to since the beginning, since our first month at the city hall, concern us. It's a problem that we, you know, want to see solved, the FAP problem, but it's important to take into account that we never stopped, we never stopped contributing. So, it's that story, Luciano, okay, if it's going to bleed, but there can't be a single drop of blood, right? Well, not ours, not in our flesh, right? Because when we, you know, as we go along, we'll delve deeper into these issues. So I am here as a defender of our interests, our dignity, and our future. And that's what we've been saying, we don't want to receive less, nor work more, nor receive less.
Well, and I think, just to conclude, I think it was Gabriel or I don't know which one who spoke about the public issue, the public service as well, you know, it's our agenda, it's an agenda that we have. Quality healthcare, quality education, public services, and security for the people of Estância Velha.
Good evening everyone. I would like to thank the council members, and thank Antônio for the opportunity and for bringing this discussion to this house. This is not the first time that pensions have been on the agenda in this municipality, but perhaps it is the first time that the pension system has been discussed, allowed, and that public employees have been invited to discuss it in greater depth in this house.
I am representing the Deliberative Council of FAP. I have been a public servant in the municipality for over 20 years.
I am a dental surgeon here and I am also a consultant.
I am a defender of the dignity of public service, of public servants, and therefore of public service itself, and thus of the service provided to the population as a whole.
Well, Fábio mentioned knowing the history of our FAP, the history of our council, the history of our RPPS, since its founding back in '94. I think that's extremely important. It is not enough to know and understand the current state of our FAP. The important thing is to know how we got to this point and what stage we are at now.
Because if we don't know our past, we will repeat the same mistakes that are happening now. We've had several opportunities throughout these more than 30 years of the council to correct mistakes, but the administrations, the governments, the mayors did n't want to.
And I emphasize that we are having this discussion right now because, after Constitutional Amendment 103, they want to make the deficit pay for the civil servants, a deficit that the civil servants did not create, but was a result of underfunding over 30- odd years. An intentional financing that would have provided opportunities over those more than 30 years could have been remedied or amortized. It would n't be possible because we've arrived at this point.
Thanks.
Good evening everyone. Well, my name is Renan, I'm currently the secretary of the department, for those who don't know, and I'm here representing the executive branch, at the invitation of my colleagues from the legislative branch, right?
I am available to answer questions and exchange ideas, as are our two colleagues who are also there: the city attorney and the chief of staff.
Goodnight. Well, first of all, I'd like to express my sincere gratitude for the opportunity to be here, right? I've been here on other occasions. My name is Joel Fraga, I am an actuary by training, and I am also a securities consultant.
So, uh, I've been on this path for 28 years, serving only RPPS (Brazilian public pension systems).
Well, I already have several similar situations on my resume, which I'm very proud of, but I'd really like to emphasize one initial point here : in 28 years, I can't count on one hand the number of public hearings I've participated in.
So that's not the reason. years in 28 years. Well, it's not just because I'm here with you all, but this is very important, it's very important that everyone is involved.
Right now, I'm leading 22 reforms in 22 different municipalities, okay? The difficulties are the same, the arguments are the same, the desires are the same, and not all of them involve the community.
And this isn't about bringing the community in to exert pressure, nor about filling this house with civil servants to exert pressure, nor about manipulating council members to exert pressure.
My goal here is to provide information.
I work with numbers. I handle the actuarial side of things.
Well, from what I know, there will be another actuary participating here as well. Our goal is simple: to calculate and show you the costs, the past costs of your community's mistakes and successes, the current costs, and the future costs of those mistakes and successes. So I want to state upfront that this experience I bring comes from all my journey so that we can reach a common ground that is satisfactory for all stakeholders, not just one, but for the legislative branch, the executive branch, the community, and public servants. It's a difficult equation. Yes, it's possible. AND.
Dr. J, do you provide any services to the municipality today, or to FA itself?
No, in theory I will apply in the future, if the hiring is approved, to then do the study of the reform, together with my colleague, also preparing the draft laws that will come here.
I understood. Sir, have you ever provided any service to the municipality?
Yes, in the past.
Until what year, more or less?
Ah, that was in the 2000s. No, have you been following our FAP recently?
I'm following along because everything is public, right, councilman, right? I have the statement open here for the year, right? Well, if any of you are curious, there's been a record on the Ministry of Social Security's website since at least the year 2000, right?
So, it's possible to show, for example, an evolution or, you know, to demonstrate what has happened from then until now, right? So all of this is very readily available, widely published, publicized; it's all at everyone's disposal.
Thanks. I'm going to ask... I know Thiago is online. Well, I'm going to ask, I'm not going to ask if he's listening to me. If you're listening to me, give me a sign, Thago. Okay. I don't think so. Oh, sorry. Good, good, good evening everyone. I'm Adilson, I'm an actuary, that is, I'm responsible for the calculations.
Thaago [clearing his throat] was participating here with us, but he had to leave.
Perfect.
So, regarding anything related to the calculations and the report that was prepared for the closing of 2025, I am at your disposal.
Perfect. Uh, what would I like to do? A request. Does any city council member want to comment?
No, I'm going to make a request, Adilson, uh, I think to everyone here. What do you think about us scheduling a thorough presentation of our action calculus here? It's possible, Adilson, for us to do a presentation even remotely, right? I recently participated in one here at the house, right? To give a presentation so that our guests have access to our current situation, right? We can prepare some questions here and send them to you so that you can ask them during the specific meeting. Is it possible?
Yes, absolutely. We're hired by the Social Security Institute, right? So, all the institute has to do is send us the questions, whatever is needed, and we are always available to clarify and provide answers to any doubts you may have, right?
Perfect. Nice. I, Dr. Joel, may I ask you to give a presentation, a brief explanation?
So, make yourself at home.
Well, giving a brief explanation is a very big challenge, isn't it? The subject is quite complex, isn't it?
Sir, make yourself at home, okay? We have time. It 's OK. Thanks. Ah, our work, mine, Adilson's, and that of so many other actuaries across Brazil, right?
Yes, it's very clear and objective. We do a job called current assessment.
This actuarial assessment has one objective: to measure the size of the account, the size of the obligation that the municipality has towards all its employees, whether they are active, retired, or dependents in the form of pensions. So, we use a methodology that is used worldwide, based on current mathematics.
Based on statistics, based on probabilities, based on mathematical formulas, we need to answer a question that seems simple, but has underlying complexity: how would it be, and what conditions would we have if we had to pay everyone's pensions?
On December 31, 2025, which is the last work done by our colleague Adilson, which is, as I said, published in the Ministry of Social Security.
Well, that's just an assumption, right? We run a simulation as if we were going to pay all the money needed to cover a lifetime of retirement expenses.
In a single day, we measure the size of the liabilities, present it to the municipality, and compare it with the net worth, that is, with the assets.
If there is a correspondence, that is, if we have liabilities of several million reais and assets in the same proportion, we conclude that we have the financial and actuarial balance stipulated in the Brazilian Constitution.
When we have assets that exceed our liabilities or accounts payable, we have a surplus. And when we have the opposite, assets that are less than the measured liabilities, we have a deficit.
As a general rule, we have around 2100 municipal RPSs in Brazil. Not all municipalities created their own pension systems at the time, not all of them here in the state. We have, if my memory serves me right, 331 municipalities with their own pension systems here in the state. The others chose to remain in the general regime.
When the municipality, then called Distância Velha, decided to create its own pension system back in 1994, the municipality assumed this obligation. What obligation? To retire all civil servants and protect their families through survivor's pensions in case of death.
Our role, as I said, is to measure this, to give it value. So, we take a database, we simulate the retirement of those employees who are still working using the data that is in the registry. After we simulate the retirement of those who are working, we simulate life expectancy, that is, the average time these people will live after retirement.
It's an average. We don't know how long each person will live. Nobody here is God, but we use statistics and probability to measure this time, to estimate this benefit payment period based especially on life expectancy.
Using the data available today, on average, a woman who retires at age 55, which is the normal retirement age, will receive benefits for 30 years. A man who retires today at age 60 will receive his benefits for an average of another 20 years. Men's blood sugar levels average 80, and women's average 85, right? So this is the calculation that is made for a man who retires. 20 years of benefit payments. 20 x 13 times that man's salary. We will have the projected size of the expenditure for the future, which we call the expenditure flow. For a woman, 30 years, 13 times that woman's salary, we'll get the size of that woman's expenses.
Remember that this is in the future for some, and it's already in the present for others, those who are receiving benefits, right? Well, for those who are receiving benefits, we project from January 2026, for example, until the end of this life expectancy that we use today, especially the one from IBGE, which is given by a mortality table.
So, when we do this calculation and project it into the future, this expense has a portion in the year 2026 and the other portion in the year 2027 onwards, until the end of each of your lives, until the end of the lives of your dependents, based on, I repeat, life expectancy. Well, uh, this projection [clearing throat] that we make over the years, it's brought to present value.
It is all brought to the December 31st of each fiscal year.
What we call financial and actuarial balance, breaking down that expression, financial balance means having enough money to pay the bills until 2026, actuarial balance means having enough money to pay the bills for 2027, 3037, 5057, perhaps 87, 2087.
How does that work? No. And when we project life expectancy, we might have a dependent minor who is, for example, disabled, who will have a long life dependent on a particular family and, consequently, dependent on the specific pension scheme for their livelihood.
So, in this projection, since the system is capitalized, an interest rate is also considered.
This interest rate is used for capitalization because the system is capitalized. A capitalized system, unlike the general system, has at least four sources of funding. Employee contribution, employer contribution with offset, offsets with different pension schemes, and interest. Capitalization.
Capitalization has tremendous power.
Capitalization, understand that it means calling on the financial market to help pay the bills. All the money that comes from the income that you referred to at some point, right? All the money that goes towards generating income is money less that the employee has to contribute, it's money less that the municipal administration has to put into the RPPS (Regime Próprio de Previdência Social - Own Social Security Regime).
So, first of all, the system is healthy, it's healthier because it's capitalized.
And today the regime doesn't have all the money it should have, that is, when we compare, you have a deficit of around R$20 million, considering that the liabilities, the total liabilities are around R$780, uh, sorry, R $500,962 million. We are already dealing with a billion reais in liabilities, that is, everything that has been brought to present value, considering an interest rate that also works to capitalize and discount, in other words, all the future flow of revenues and expenses is brought to December 31, 2025.
When this was compared with the assets that existed on that same date, in the amount of R$83 million, considering a part of that net, 200-something million, the other part of a credit that the municipality linked in 2023, which is the income tax credit, which was passed here, possibly a law was approved, linking this resource to the PPPS. So, if it's a credit, you also calculate the present value and say that this money is earmarked and that it's an asset guaranteeing the retirement of civil servants as well.
So, even so, the municipality carries a deficit of R$79 million on December 31, 2025.
This means that if everyone had come here today to take home their retirement money, whether it's those who are already retired, pensioners receiving pension benefits, or even those employees who are still working, the RPPS (Regime Próprio de Previdência Social - Own Social Security Regime) wouldn't have all the money to give to these people. I usually joke that this is just a simulation, it 's not the truth. If that were true, people would go home somewhat frustrated. But this is the mechanism, created many, many years ago worldwide, that we actually use to conduct an examination for social security purposes, right? And I also often compare this exam to a person who has a certain disease, goes to the doctor, and the doctor orders tests to make a diagnosis.
To make a diagnosis of the pension system, we perform actuarial calculations.
So, actuarial calculation is the examination of this pension system. We will be able to measure, through this work, the extent of health or the extent of illness, depending on the perspective from which we look at it.
Well, as is well known, and possibly the city councilors know as well, this year the Court of Auditors has chosen to be the year to examine the public pension systems.
Six regional meetings with the mayors have already been scheduled.
You will either go to Porto Alegre or Caxias, I don't know which is best for you, the purpose of the meeting is precisely to bring the council members more up to speed on what will be discussed, what should be discussed in the reforms. I think you're getting ahead of yourself. That's very important, isn't it?
Because you're not going to arrive there without knowing what will be discussed. You've already made significant progress through these meetings you're organizing.
The Court of Auditors is practically knocking on the doors of municipal executives to resolve the pension issue.
And that's happening all over Brazil, right?
We have to look back and remember that, especially since 1998, roughly every 5 years, we go through a reform, and all these reforms are aimed at trying to balance the system, right?
If we look at this history, in 1998, there was the first major change in the lives of civil servants. In 1998, the requirement for a minimum retirement age was introduced for the first time with Constitutional Amendment number 20.
1998 also saw the biggest change to the public pension system in terms of financing. What is financing? How to pay into social security in order to receive social security benefits.
Until 1998, the system was non- contributory.
Public employees did not need to contribute to their retirement pension. The entire system became contributory starting on December 16, 1998.
Until then, right? And you guys here are a living example of that. The system was created in '94 with a contribution that did not reflect the size of the commitment that was made for the future. All the municipalities did the same thing.
If we want to call this a mistake, we can say that all municipalities made the same mistake. I'll give a classic example. I arrived in 2001 in the municipality of Bento Gonçalves, which had created its system in 1991, and from 1991 to 2001, it did not charge, not a single cent from the employees, nor did it contribute to their pension system.
It's the same as having lunch, breakfast, and dinner for free at any restaurant. Come in, eat, get up, leave, no need to pay. That happened, right? What happened in other municipalities here and in so many others. The contribution, even if it is said, and this is commendable and true, even if it is said that the employee paid throughout their life, it is true, but it is also true that they did not pay what was necessary to retire.
Similarly, the employer, which is the municipality, also failed to pay what was necessary to build what we call the mathematical reserve.
What is a mathematical reserve?
We have to make it fit over 25 years for female teachers, 30 years for male teachers, 30 years for non- teaching women, and 35 years of contributions for non-teaching men. We need to fit within this period the formation of a mathematical reserve that will sustain the benefit from the moment it is granted.
So that's what we're hired for, to do that calculation, to determine the scale of that. Back in the 90s, that didn't exist. It was all done empirically, without any technical basis whatsoever.
Each municipality established its own system with its own funding plan, without looking to the future.
I repeat, this was the sin committed by practically 99% of the public pension systems that exist in Brazil. No, sorry, irony isn't a privilege exclusive to the old, distant municipality, is it? That's ironic. Please forgive the irony. So, we have to understand that we're all basically facing the same problem, some a little more, others a little less.
It's also true that we have a very important opportunity.
What is the opportunity? I'm going to look at her from both sides. I'm going to look at it from the perspective of management, which involves the executive, legislative, and community branches, and I'm going to look at it from the perspective of public servants, from the perspective of administration, from the perspective of the community, and from the perspective of the legislative branch.
Something has to be done.
Something has to be done.
Yes, unfortunately it fell to you, because I need to remind you that in 2019, with the last reform that we know of, amendment 103, the states and municipalities were left out.
The lawmakers there left the states and municipalities out of it. That reform only applied to federal government employees.
From there, right? Some people think they've been waiting until now for something to come from above and impose the same rule that was imposed on federal government employees on municipal employees.
Some people saw that this wasn't going to happen, and in fact I believe it won't happen because it's unconstitutional, since this is a matter that the municipality has to legislate on. Others have already done it, municipalities have already done it, the state of Rio Grande do Sul has already done it and imposed a rather painful reform for its civil servants, right?
And [clearing his throat] something has to be done by the community, the executive branch, and the legislative branch.
On the other hand, this is no idle talk. Civil servants have a great opportunity to implement a reform tailored to their needs, because they don't need, and if the numbers are favorable, they don't need women to suddenly have to retire at age 62 and men at age 65. Okay? If the numbers favor that condition.
For example, today before coming here, I had a meeting with the municipality of Santa Rosa, an online meeting, where we started to outline scenarios. What are scenarios? Look, if we raise the retirement age by one year, what happens then?
If we tax retirees based on a minimum wage, or two, or three, or four, what happens then?
If we change the pension amount, as was done for federal employees, where the pension for federal employees is currently 50% plus 10% for each dependent, how will that work?
So, with that, we put together scenarios, and these scenarios are presented for everyone's consideration.
When my colleague Dr. Rosana and I conduct this work, we always suggest forming a pluralistic working group with diverse representation so that we can have a qualified discussion of this and arrive at a consensus, which is extremely difficult.
The challenge here is quite significant, because in theory, we have to reconcile two opposing desires.
What are your wishes? What are these conflicting desires? The server doesn't want anyone interfering with his life. The employee doesn't want to work anymore. The employee no longer wants to contribute.
The administration has another wish; it wants to spend less on its pension system so that there is more left over for the community, right? So, apparently, this is an antagonistic desire.
We have to find a way to reconcile these two desires, right?
The representatives here said that the community expects infrastructure improvements, but to improve infrastructure you need money, right? To have money, certain things have to be done. Among them, the pension reform rests on your shoulders. Those of us in the private sector have n't had the opportunity to discuss social security. She was simply forced down our throats. I'm going to retire when I'm 65. My wife will retire at age 62.
How could you not?
No, in that case I'll only contribute what I'm going to earn. I'm not going to earn above the salary cap either. I'm not going to earn above the salary cap either. And public servants are largely guaranteed to receive above the salary cap as well. There is a limitation, which is the municipal salary cap that is usually linked to the mayor's salary. But today, if a professional here earns R$ 20,000 and is entitled to the full amount, they will receive R$ 20,000.
As a business owner, if I want to earn more than 8,000, I'll have to start a retirement plan.
If I want to earn, for example, 20 as well. Yeah, that's it. So, since 2019, we have also had supplementary pension plans established in the municipality, because Constitutional Amendment 103 also imposed this same limitation for civil servants. In other words, the new civil servants who joined from 2019 onwards already have a salary cap under the same system as the general system, right? So, my presence here is to collaborate with everyone.
You won't hear me say here that I'm going to favor one side or the other. I am a technician. If I came here to bring information, I hope you don't kill the messenger for the message he brings, because that's usually what happens.
It's met with boos, criticism, and often irony, because we come to provide information.
If you are going to be able to reach that point, which I personally hope you will, which is to arrive at a reform that is as painless as possible for the civil servant and as beneficial as possible for the municipality, the challenge is yours.
I'm simply here, and if I get hired and continue working for the municipality, I'll be here to support that. For every proposal that is made, I will calculate and show you here: this proposal costs this much, another proposal costs that much. And then, from there, you will all be able to find the best path, because we will have to build that path. It's very important that you understand this. Everyone will have to build this path. It is not a solitary walk, it is a walk together.
If we deviate from this, or if there's no reform, then the civil servants will expect it to happen at some point, and it will happen, sooner or later a top-down reform will occur, because this is, let's say, almost inevitable. Either we have the time and opportunity to do what I call a tailor-made renovation.
In other words, imagine that today we have the ability to leave here, go to the seamstress or tailor, and order a custom-made outfit for ourselves. This is the opportunity. This is the opportunity we all have, to make a reform tailored to the conditions of each side.
Thanks.
Doctor, thank you for your participation.
I would like to say yes, we are indeed anticipating a debate.
Well, we had some bills filed here in the Chamber not long ago, concerning the Retirement and Pension Fund, and the debate here was limited to politics, right? Well, we don't have any council members here today with a background in accounting or who are experts in the field. It does not have. I'm not ashamed to say that I'm not an expert on the subject of accounting. I'm not an actuary either, am I? I doubt that any council member here today has the confidence to discuss this topic on equal terms. So, what did we do? That was precisely our intention, to start this debate and invite everyone to speak, right? even before the city government sends any other projects here. Yes, we are anticipating this, including to see if there is anything that can be done beforehand to mitigate the impacts. Yes, and I can tell you all with certainty, I didn't break the FAP, right? I didn't contribute, I didn't help either, but I'm a resident of this place who tomorrow won't be a city councilor anymore because everyone here is just passing through. Those who will remain are the civil servants. The mayor will also be passing by. The secretary is here today, he 's here, but he won't be here tomorrow. So everyone gets through. The only ones who won't make it are you guys, right? From the day you enter until the day you die, right? Let it take a while, right? But you'll be connected there, linked to Fáb. This topic will affect you. So, our expectation here is to be able to contribute, to be able to help, right? So, I'm going to ask the executive branch to prepare a presentation, Renan, so that you can come here, we'll schedule the next meeting shortly, and you can give the presentation today from the management's point of view, on how the FAP is doing today, on how the contribution is going, right? What is your timeline for change? What do you think needs to be improved? And I'm going to ask Thiago, and Adilson, to also have Adilson present the actuary's information at the next meeting, because, like Dr. Joel, they are people who don't take sides.
Despite the importance of actuaries, who are the actuaries employed by today? The actuary is contracted by FAP, so he's not going to come here to defend the mayor or the mayor's office or to defend a councilman or to defend a civil servant. He's going to come here to give the real story. So he's going to come here and show us how the FAP is doing today, Adilson, what the FAP forecast is for the next 5 years, how much we have in cash, where that money is being invested, where the committee invests it, right? Which fund does the committee invest in today? What is our return over the next 12 months? Is n't there something that could give us a longer life? Isn't there a fund that could give us a better return in the near future? I believe these are the best questions Adilson can answer for us during his presentation, Adilson. So, I believe that we, along with everyone present, will have plenty of peace of mind, so that in a third phase, we can begin to contribute. I do n't know if everyone agrees.
Make yourself at home, Luciano.
Thanks.
Some thoughts, a bit of a speech. Well, Joels rightly pointed out that several municipalities lacked a technical basis when creating their own pension systems. We've always had, we've always been monitored, and we've always had audit evaluations.
So, we had a technical study from the very beginning, right, from the creation, you say?
Yes, there have always been audits in the municipality. All these authoritative assessments indicated the need to increase and raise the rates, right?
So, unlike other municipalities, we started with a certain technical foundation, right? We, the private sector, the business owners, those who have an employee, pay around 20% to INSS (Brazilian Social Security Institute), right? Another 8% for the guarantee fund and some other charges, right?
Until 1994, the municipality here had a 20% NSS charge.
Immediately in 1994, it started paying 8%. For a few years they were paying 8%, then 11%, and now 14%.
So, at that lunch that Joel mentioned, the ones who ate and feasted on the money weren't the civil servants, it was the administration, it was the city hall. So, some of the public equipment in this city was paid for, it was financed with money that should have been in the FAP (Fund for Participation in Public Works), being capitalized, okay? So, it's very unfair to say that the employee indulged in that lunch.
Those who enjoyed and paid for this lunch were the public servants who clock in in the morning, afternoon, for lunch, and then again when they leave work. It was the management. If we were to calculate how many millions the municipality saved in those 30-odd years by not paying the 20 points, the 20% that Daniva pays to INSS.
At the time, during its creation in 1994, the administration fought to establish the RPPS (Regime Próprio de Previdência Social - Own Social Security Regime). It wasn't an initiative of the civil servants, it didn't come from the population of employees, it was the management and soon after, before the year 2000, it was already in debt, and not a small amount, it was a lot. It's already an installment plan. Is installment payment healthy for the fund, Joel?
It depends.
Yes, uh, no, I... then please explain "it depends," doctor. I think we're here to have a conversation, not to ask the Doctor, "Please, what does it depend on?" I think it's interesting, sir, let's go. Today, and always, ever since the legislation came into effect, when there are delays in contributions, whether from the employer's side, and there were even times when there was what we could call a deduction by the municipality, because it took the employee's assigned portion. Some municipalities did this, they were forced to sign installment agreements. These installment payment terms, as a rule, came with 12% annual interest plus inflation adjustment, right?
This is for correction, this is for correcting the past. From then on, at a minimum, at the very least, 6% per year plus inflation adjustment. Today, this current assessment was made with a projected interest rate of 5.52%. So, that's why it depends.
I am not aware of any installment plan that has not adhered to what we call the actuarial minimum. What is the minimum actor? At a minimum, 6% real interest per year, plus inflation, IPCA, INPC and GPM.
Is it bad for the RPPS (Regime Próprio de Previdência Social - Public Sector Pension Scheme) not to have this It depends, because if, for example, the Selic interest rate is low, it guarantees a high interest rate. When the market interest rate is high, he has one, he may even have a lower interest rate than the one being practiced by the market.
Well, I've already done some studies for other municipalities. I can mention the neighboring municipality of Portão, where I did a study covering the period from the beginning of the RPPS (Regime Próprio de Previdência Social - Own Social Security Regime) until last year.
The profitability they achieved was practically the same as required.
Years up, years down, but on average over 30 years it was the same.
So, it depends on the situation.
Sometimes, when interest rates are high, it may seem like having an installment plan is a bad idea. When the interest rate is low, that's guaranteed, right? That's why I said it depends. Perfect.
Yes, but well put, Joel. But beyond the issue of the interest rate, there's the issue of transferring that liability to future administrations, right? You're transferring liabilities to other administrations, right?
The current manager benefits, and in one way or another, it puts the assets of the RPPS (Regime Próprio de Previdência Social - Public Pension System) at risk, because the future manager may not be able to honor the payments, as is the case with Novo Hamburgo, which has not honored its payments for a long time and has been delaying, delaying, delaying installments. But one thing we also saw now, there was a debate in Congress, the tax reform, right? Whether or not there will be a tax increase, right? Increase, decrease taxation.
Social security contributions are taxes. It is well established in Brazilian law that social security contributions are taxes.
So, when we implement the pension reform, we penalize people twice.
The person, the human being in their dignity, in the matter of payment in money, in cash, and in the matter of more life, of time that they cease to have, of leisure, of being with their family, of living life to the fullest. So, she is penalized twice. Beyond the issue of increased taxation, which is considered a tax, there is also the issue of legal uncertainty, which is frequently discussed in the private sector.
Well, the public servant and the private sector worker enjoy legal security. He feels threatened all the time, he always has to be changing things, right? The game, we contract the game, we start the game in the first half, we change the rules of the game. Before the end of the game, the rules change again. These rules will be changed permanently. We will live in this insecurity, in this instability.
This is the society we want.
This is a society that I don't want for myself, I don't want for my colleagues, and I do n't want for those who come after me.
So, these are two things that we bring from the private sector that are frequently discussed: legal uncertainty and increased taxes. These are two things that public servants suffer from today: legal uncertainty, not knowing what's going to happen, right? And the tax increase, right?
Until 2019, the only entity responsible for paying pensions was the pension fund.
Look what 2019 does. She changes. If the government can't pay, it's the public servant who will pay with reforms, reforms, and more reforms. It can even include extraordinary liquidation for public servants.
This creates legal uncertainty. The legislation has changed completely.
It's quite different from the 1998 reform that they implemented from then on, but the entity was always the one responsible. The big innovation of 2019 is that it penalizes the public servant much more than the entity, and that's where the Court of Auditors came in. It's quite funny, the Court of Auditors, in all these years, didn't talk about pension reform as much as it does now.
It's hitting the pension reform technique much harder, because now it doesn't just depend on the entity paying; it penalizes public servants more than the entity.
The municipalities knew that this bill would arrive more than the public servant, because the public servant ignores it; they are out there on the front lines doing what they were hired for, what they were appointed for, through the competitive exam they took, which is to provide health, education, and security.
He's over there doing that. He doesn't have time to think about pension policy.
He's reassuring the head of the executive branch that his future is secure, right? Managers always had access to the audit evaluations, unlike the employees who never had access to the audit evaluation, they didn't know the risk they were taking, that was being built.
So what did the managers do?
They let this deficit grow over the decades, the fault of the states, the fault of the federal government, and now they went and pressured the National Congress to change the law, when the National Congress could have said otherwise: "No, we are going to help the municipalities pay this deficit, because we helped create this deficit, it wasn't the civil servants who created this deficit."
Thank you, Luciano. I'm asking Rosane. Rosane, at the last meeting you said that you had requests for information that had never been answered. Have you already arranged for the house?
No, you know.
Tap on it to see if it's there now. Yes yes. Well, the staff, Luciano says, and it's true, we're at work, you have your patient there to attend to, the students, and so on, we're in the day-to-day work. But also since 2019, when we took over management, and even before when Luciano went to FAP, we started to focus on understanding and trying to understand our role in this issue. And that's all we have to do, because when it's a cold number, right, the exact number doesn't exist, right? You can also make uh 1 billion, 3 billion, you can send it wherever you want. So, yeah, it's just money, it's just numbers. Well, and several times we asked for information from, you know, management. Well, actually, all of our... not just regarding FAP, everything we send to management, including things we spoke to personally, they said: "No, we will respond to you," and we didn't receive the responses.
Oh, and you forwarded it directly here. We forwarded it, no, we forwarded it directly to management, and we didn't get a response.
That's one issue we can address now, perhaps through a committee, you know. We have it, Rafael prepared it.
Bring them this week, bring them to the next meeting, or submit them here to the committee so we can forward them to the executive branch.
Whatever is relevant to the facts, we will request that they respond with priority. It's not what we did; it's related to the issues of... So bring them, you can even bring them to the next meeting, or file them so we can try to get them to provide the answer at the meeting. Excellent. Rosane, you 'll ask Dr. Alonso, who's representing the executive Jacó as well, to prioritize responding to this request, and we're asking them to bring the requests as soon as possible, okay? Well, before opening it up for consideration, I'll wait for any council member who wants to speak.
Okay, so I'll open it up for considerations. Okay, so I'll ask, can we get a presentation from the executive branch for the next meeting? I'm asking you, what do you think about us scheduling it for 15 days from now? You can schedule your next meeting for two Tuesdays here. Then, at that meeting, the executive brings his presentation, and we open it up for Adilson and the people from accounting to give their general presentations, and then from that meeting we begin the discussion. Rest assured, everyone can rest easy. Let me take a look here. Today is the 26th.
Let me see. It's going to be on the 2nd, three weeks from now, okay? So, in these three weeks, I believe they'll even bring you the answers from your countries soon enough.
You need to bring it this week by Friday and formally register it here at the house.
We're asking the secretary, I'm going to ask the secretary of this department, Marcelo, to give this priority and follow up on the PIs.
Three weeks, so at the request it could be the 16th, so then I won't go anymore, then I'll have already turned 16, they're in June, flying older. Maybe, maybe.
No, but I'll have already passed by then, so I won't have any commitments.
The executive presents his scenario for calculations.
The municipality is making its presentation, the executive branch is presenting it to us, right? And Adilson, too, within that hour and a half, we have both of those presentations. Could it be? Okay then. Rosane, do you all have all the questions prepared yet? Do you already have them in hand? No. Then hand them over to us.
You can bring her here. Bring it to Marcelo here, and Marcelo will forward it later.
Okay, if not now, it can be after the meeting. So, we'll schedule it for the 16th. Yes, it's possible for you to attend on the 16th. Is it possible for you as well? Jacob, is it possible, doctor?
Is it possible, Renan? It's possible.
Luciano, it's possible on the 16th, Rosane. It's possible.
As for the city councilors, we're already here on Tuesday, so it's all agreed. Then I'll let the president of the house know that we're going to schedule it, and the staff too, right? So let them be present. So, we're going to have these two presentations next week, and I think that from these presentations onwards, we'll start having discussions and asking for contributions as well. Even the organizations, I think, will have an overview of what we are experiencing today.
It's OK?
Uh, Mr. President, uh, June, yes, it will happen before then, uh, but we are also uh, going to have a series of debates and seminars to think about social security, public social security, social security as a right. So, June 29th is a Monday, right?
E29, right? Yeah, here in this house. So, we're going to have a seminar with Judge Marcelo D'Abroso and Lúcia, Dr. Lúcia Garcia, economist for the Judge. So, I also think it's important, you know, the presence of the community, of the business sector. I think it's a debate that could be expanded upon. I think we're starting something very interesting.
Forward the invitations. Send out the invitations. Send out the invitations. This applies to the Chamber, the committee, the president of the house, and the entities.
Perfect.
Soon it will be sent to all the councilors, sent to the mayor's office, sent to... I think it's important, right? Then we can have that meeting in a little while, which is becoming a milestone, right? So that we can begin with the invitations. So we can leave the time as 7:30 PM. Did it work out well for everyone? Is it now accessible? So we'll schedule that presentation for the 16th.
Perfect. So 19:15 is perfect. And if it's delayed at most, it will go until 9 PM. I'll ask here, then I'll open it up for final considerations.
So, each of you is welcome to share your thoughts, and we'll set the date here for June 16, 2026. That's a Tuesday, from 7 PM to 7:15 PM, so that's a convenient time for everyone to arrive, okay? Hey, councilman, if you want to make a statement, if you want to express your gratitude, feel free. Then we talk, people say goodbye, and then we end the meeting.
Well, I want to say goodnight to everyone who hasn't said goodnight yet, and thank you all for being here. If anyone wants to speak afterwards, we thank everyone for their presence.
To the business representatives here, to Mr. Joel, Dr. Joel, right? Ah, to the executive representatives, to everyone here on the FAP board, right, from SIME here, right? Yes, right? Well, I believe this is a project we're going to build, right? We, the city councilors, are taking the lead on this issue here. Yes, and even councilman Antônio took the lead. We all agree here. The other council members who are not present also agreed, because it's important to hear from the civil servants, to hear from the responsible personnel who truly understand the FAP (Fund for the Improvement of Public Administration), you know, how to calculate it. They're actually bills, right? So, the accounts aren't easy to make, given our reality at the city hall, and what was paid has already been paid.
And truly, the employees deserve to receive all the attention and dignity in a retirement they worked so hard for, and we really want to partner with everyone here to build together what they deserve. So, that's it from my side. Thank you so much to everyone for being here at the house.
Well, Mr. President, just so I don't have to go in, how does one go in mute and leave silent, right? But I think it's more important for us to point out here, president of this commission, and especially the employees, the union, the people here, the CDL, C, Joel, the people from Jacó, Alonso, the executive staff, Renan and Luciano, Rosane, which was very important. I think we've started taking the first step towards moving forward. I know this is long, exhausting, and stressful, and you don't want to know what we, as council members, end up discussing because nobody here wants to dip into the pockets of any of the employees, right? Even we, who know how difficult it is, sometimes feel like we're just R$100 short of defaulting on our bills, but we have a problem, we need to be clear-headed so that together we can find an alternative, right? It was created by that government. I believe that everyone involved has some degree of guilt involved. No, of course not the employees, but if it 's not a management that's just started now, we know about the investments, everything that's happened throughout history, that's led to where it is now, and that no foresight was taken in the future. And we have to do this now, while we're here together at this moment, trying to find an alternative. So the best step is dialogue, respecting everyone's opinion, each defending their side, their point of view, but that in the end we arrive at a common denominator that is good and praiseworthy for everyone, so that we don't penalize too many employees, but also so that we don't completely undermine future administrations.
Yes, as they say, we here as councilors are just temporary, but those who remain are the employees, those who contributed, those who retire, those who will retire, the dependents, in short, those who are there. We are all just passing through here. We might be able to in four years, no, in two years and a bit there won't be any, none of us here, but in the meantime the employees stay there, the population stays there, the investments stay there, the businessmen are there who invest everything. And we need to have a city that evolves and grows, but we also ca n't penalize those who are also consumers, who will also make this happen. The more money in the hands of the worker, and the community in general, the more our local economy will circulate. And that's what we need. How are we going to find that middle ground? So I think I don't believe the president is hopeful, if the nomination was from the president of this house, I readily agreed, and I think we are moving forward with hope that we will get closer to the end of the year, because this will still take a long time, but the commission will be ready by the end of the year. But I hope that perhaps before that we will already have a common denominator where we can each guide each of you within what we clarify regarding this whole FAP issue with all the technical explanations so that each of us has an exact understanding of how we can position ourselves here and decide our vote. I'm very grateful to everyone here, I appreciate the respect because lately, when we have these debates, we sometimes have a lot of disagreements, and that's part of it. It's normal to disagree. No, there's nothing wrong with disagreeing with each other. Now, the point is that we have to maintain respect and ensure that our debate progresses and is good for everyone. That was it. Thank you very much.
I confess that I mentioned here in a previous statement that this is a committee space, right?
Committee, everyone has the right to speak, right? It 's not like the session. So, uh, Virginia asked to speak, go ahead, you can speak. Well, Virginia, I appreciate the committee for actually listening to the employees, because it's very easy to talk on social media and say that dialogue can happen at any time, but if you don't provide it, it's not happening.
I want to state that, as a public employee of this municipality for 23 years, I am a teacher. I took a competitive exam that was organized by the executive branch at the time. It was offered, I accepted, I took the exam, and I passed.
What did he have, you mean? Laws that must be obeyed. I have been fulfilling all of them for 23 years. And I believe in excellence, because I love what I do.
Based on that, they changed our career plan because they needed to. What did I keep doing? An excellent teacher. I was the only one who needed to keep the word I gave in the competition.
The executive didn't need to. They can change the law as they please, harming me by reducing my working hours and negatively impacting my retirement, even though I'm currently 1 year and 7 months away from retirement. Do you know how much is deducted from my paycheck each month? Of course, at 23 years old, it's increasing by R$1290 every single month.
Calculate how much I've already contributed to FAP. I find it strange that nobody brings this up in this house for our information, and I'm not here, I want you to understand me very well, speaking about a single administration, which I'll mention because I have a little more knowledge of what happened, okay? I believe they all failed, in not making it clear to the employee, because it's very easy to say you have the autonomy to adjust the FAP (Factor of Adjustment for Accidents at Work), then you can, but when things get tough, I'm the one who has to work harder to make up for it. I don't understand this calculation.
I don't understand the concept of respecting the employee. I'm going to ask you something. When will we, the employees, have the right to know if this management did this with the FAP money, if it yielded a return, if it was positive, or if it was a loss? Because it got lost, they didn't ask for my permission to touch my retirement money. You have to take the risk of replacing it. I'm wrong, guys. I'm wrong. I'm speaking from my heart. I have 1 year and 7 months left until retirement.
And I know the work I do as a public employee. I'm here because I earned it through my competitive exam, and now you're coming with this talk about maybe getting a raise, I don't know by how much.
Why? Because they tampered with the background without my permission. It's my money. They can say whatever they want because I understand very little about law. I know about autonomy, but it's strange. When things get tough and there's not enough money, I'm the one who has to work harder. I do n't know the year, but Mayor Valdir Dilkin took 6 million from FAP to make an investment in an attempt to have a... how do you say it? No, it's an investment, a higher profit. He made an application, excuse me, the word just came to me.
Where's the money, people?
6 million from FAP. They stole my money. I can say that because my contribution is there.
Where is that money? Ah, nobody knows.
Now there is a deficit. I'll give you the floor.
I'm the one who has to work harder for that.
I want you all to think about this. They're putting the blame on the wrong people.
They are taking from those who don't deserve to pay twice. And if I'm wrong, I apologize, but this is a summary of what I'm able to understand about what's happening to us.
So bring the light, bring the light of our knowledge, it's our money.
Which mayor? What did he do? It worked, did n't it? I can only say I'm sorry, it's the executive branch that has to replace them. We did not receive any benefit from our monthly discount.
I refuse to come here and say, "Oh, because of tutorials," or "Because the index is falling." Guys, what I'm bringing up is simple: taking it from those who have already paid, because they used it improperly, I have to pay twice.
Excuse me for getting upset, but it's shameful to arrive at a school. I 'm a coordinator at a school today, and I hear things like: "Wow, go ahead, encourage the teachers, they don't want to teach anymore." Look at me, how am I supposed to encourage them?
Virginia, to wrap things up, okay? It'll be 3 minutes.
Thank you very much. I appreciate you listening to the colleague Gladis asked first, okay? So, from the bottom of my heart, thank you for forming this committee, and I would like to ask, as an employee, if you can get this data: what each administration did, where it applied the funds, what it did, whether it made a profit or if we lost money.
Thank you very much.
Good evening, I'm Gladis, a teacher.
Virginia says that in 23 years, it was 1200 and something. Then you multiply that by 34, because that's how long I worked.
I'm from a time when there were few teachers in the old school system. I was 17 years old, I had finished my studies, I had to work, the city hall paid me under the table because there wasn't a way to hire teachers until I turned 18. I celebrated my 18th birthday. I've spent years in school.
So I really don't think it's fair. I'm turning 57 now.
I have a very serious autoimmune disease. I shouldn't even be talking about this; it affects my mobility. I'm debating whether to cancel my health insurance because I don't think it's fair that I have to pay a bill.
For those 34 years, I was there teaching my classes. I never worried about what they were doing with the money that was deducted from my pay because I trusted them. What my father taught me was to be serious, honest, and fair.
And he never taught me to pay a bill that wasn't mine either. Because he was never stupid. This man who taught me that took the name of our city abroad. He was an emancipator.
And recently, when I went to defend my rights and those of my colleagues, I was assaulted in this house, I left with bruised arms, and nothing happened.
So I think it's a bit of a shame what's happening.
I think they need to investigate where this money went, what happened, and who took it, because I don't want to pay. I I need to continue with my health plan because I was blessed to become a grandmother, and I want to see my grandchild grow up because I saw things in this life that I didn't want to see, and I had to see them. What came to me is mine, I take responsibility for it. Now, what isn't mine, I won't take responsibility for. So, there's another person who brought several people into the world, including, I think, even city councilors, a nurse who brought the councilors into the world also told me that she'll have to cancel her plan due to a serious illness, because of medical malpractice, and she'll also cancel the plan. That's fair. At 7:30, I was always there, never late.
I carry this glory with me, which I inherited from my father. I have a neuroscientist who's always on time, I'll finish now, okay? I was at my school, I never missed or was late, and I worked, and when there was half a chicken, I always slept at school.
It's not Virginia, we dedicated ourselves. I went through a time when there weren't things to work on at the school. There was a shortage of cleaning staff, we took them on. "Hose, I never refused. Now, for me to pay a bill that isn't mine, I think it's at least a dirty trick, a shameless act, a disgrace to the municipality. Whoever took it should pay.
Thank you. Next over there. Okay.
So, good night everyone. Just to let you know, okay? It's already 80, it's 83 minutes, okay? We have 7 more minutes.
No, perfect, perfect, perfect. CL, but great, okay? But look, we have a deadline and we're going to meet the deadline, okay? So, if you want to speak, speak quickly. 2 minutes each, okay? Speak for two, he speaks for two, and then we'll go to the next meeting, because otherwise we won't meet our deadline and then there's no reason for us to continue with the meeting, okay? We're going to be punctual here because everyone here has a schedule. Thank you.
No, right. So I'm just going to clarify a few things here.
Ma'am, I can't hear you.
No, no, you know? She's speaking softly.
So, look,..." To clarify, we talked about investments, right?
There's the investment committee, which is responsible for managing the invested money.
All the revenue is deposited into the FAP account, and the council and the committee manage these investments. There were some investments in previous years that weren't good, right? But, to clarify for my colleague, the one in Ouro Preto, which was around 3 million at the time, which later generated returns, that amount went back to the municipality because there was a lawsuit. When they found that the investment was incorrect, they filed a claim, the municipality won, and the money returned.
You're from the fund, you're from the committee, uh, what's your name? Caroline.
Okay, I'll write that down so we can talk about it at the next meeting. Okay, it's interesting to talk about this topic.
Uh-huh.
No, very important. We'll talk about it at the next meeting. But continue, you can end this, but I 'll mention it at the next meeting.
There's an investment that's problematic, which was actually 4 million. And little at the time. Uh, I think it was around 2014, 2015 that the fund was liquidated. We received shares of other investments they had made, but these are problem funds that are dwindling, okay?
So that's our problem. At the time, I think it was a little over 3 million.
Uh, it's 3 million 600 at the time.
That's it. But then, uh, it's becoming less and less profitable, there's no way out, it's a fund in liquidation and it's being lost. So now we're stopping to close it down, okay, Carolina?
Okay. So, the current value we have in the fund is R$12,473,706.99.
Back in 2017, I looked up an old report, even before I was on the committee. It was R$111,616.91.
So in 9 years we've already had an increase of 100 points. So, since I've been on the committee, my colleague Rogério, who is also part of it, has... Ana, we have stock options, we have CPA1 TTON certification. So, since 2009, we've always sought the best investments, right? And to reach our goals, we can only invest in public banks, right? Since this problem occurred, an internal regulation was created in 2016 that limited us. We no longer invest in private banks or cooperatives, to avoid any kind of pressure from banks. And the cases that happened here at the time involved private banks, okay? So, just to clarify this issue. Thank you for your participation. Next up is Luís.
Oh, good evening everyone. Uh, let me make a brief explanation. No, explanation, just a quick note. I'm not one of those anymore. I'm the oldest active employee still. I joined in 1990.
I contributed for 4 years to the general system.
I was there for several years, including a time when I was vice-president of FAP representing the employees. And I remember, at the time, I was involved with FAP for, I believe, more than 7 years. We had meetings on the second Monday of each month. At a certain point, I remember, a team from outside came in wanting to seize the money. They said that our FAP, at the time, was one of the healthiest in the country. I remember during Valdir Tilkin's administration, the secretary was dismissed, and all the employees were fired, including me. And at the time, the money was seized—I can't give exact figures—and applied to funds, if I'm not mistaken, Banco Santos, and that money that's missing today, if I'm not mistaken, is 6 million. It's been explained now, and I guarantee you that at the next meeting we'll discuss this topic exhaustively.
Yes. Yes.
But I'll just invite Carol here—she's leaving, right, Caroline?—but I'll call her at the next meeting, and then she... Representing the committee, she can go from there with... Oh, perfect. Rogério will be able to explain it to us in a little while. It was up until then, that would be it, right? Because, because at the time, our FAP (Fund for Retirement and Pensions) was working well, at that time the mayor contributed, but then things started to fail or it was removed, we were removed, there were around three or four employees, then we, Valdir Ta, were all dismissed, and then things started to go downhill. That's all I have to say. Thank you for your contribution, Mr. Júlio.
Next time you'll have to talk a lot too, Mr. Júlio.
Not Alexandre.
Well, I think Aluío brought up something interesting, okay? Good evening everyone, okay? I'll be brief. Aluío brought up something interesting, our FAP was working well, the meetings were happening and from one moment to the next we were removed, okay? This is something that repeats itself, it has repeated itself recently, okay? FAP, Fund for Retirement and Pensions of... Employees, okay?
For the council members here, I think it's not right that the law allows the free appointment of whomever one pleases, okay? To manage the employees' money. These investments that occurred, okay, which I was part of the action that sought to recover, okay? They occurred at a time when the investments were all indicated by non-civil service employees, okay? They were people who had no responsibility whatsoever for the money, for their own administration, for the colleagues they represented. So, this free appointment and dismissal of the board, of the investment fund, of the workers' money, is not correct. Understood, council members?
That's noted, Antônio. Okay? I think that's one of the loopholes we have, okay?
Another interesting point, since our current, welcome, okay?
I brought a comparison with the private sector, okay?
My mother managed to pay off her apartment, okay? When she was working, when she retired, with a little money called the severance pay fund. It reminds me of... Friends here in the business group and the city councilors, public servants don't have this fund during their professional lives. What we receive at the end of our lives is professional retirement, which is retirement the following month.
Okay? One of the interesting issues to raise in the FAP (Fund for the Prevention of Public Sector Failures), in the discussion, okay? Is the issue of hiring and new public service exams, okay? One of the ways to increase the profitability of the FAP, the inflow of contributions, is with new public service exams, with new civil servants entering through competitive exams. With that, we gain quality in public service, okay? We gain well-prepared public servants, instead of a mere selection from an interview, okay, from a temporary contract.
Thank you. To conclude the contribution there, okay? Which ends up making the service more expensive and harmful. So, those who seek quality public service for the population, okay? should be thinking about how this worker is hired, how they are selected, and what their employment relationship and career prospects are. I've worked at the city hall for 18 years, okay? For 18 years, since I came to... City hall, I was offered a work plan where I dedicated my whole life and still dedicate it, okay? I ask the businessmen here, the mayor of municipality X offers incentives, you go there and set up the company, the administration changes, this incentive is withdrawn. What happens to the investment that was made?
OK.
Thank you, you know?
Thank you very much. Good night, Rogério. That concludes my participation, okay? Thank you.
Uh, good night. My name is Paulo Rogério.
I am part of the Investment Committee of the Retirement Fund and I asked for the floor, I didn't want to speak, okay? But since Virgínia spoke and named names here, I felt I had the right to speak, because I am part of the investment committee, okay, Virgínia? And I am a very honest person, very honest.
I don't touch anyone's money or anyone's assets. So, I think the accusation you made is very serious. Be careful.
No, just a little bit. Let me, let me just finish now. What? Let me just To conclude. Well, since you mentioned names, right?
I want to say here that I'm part of the committee. I studied for this. I've been here for almost 28 years, and I'm also nearing retirement. And I think it's unfair to say that Mayor A or B contributed to the FAP and is in this situation. I think, as Luciano said, where was our State Court of Auditors when the retirement funds were created?
Why didn't they point it out? No, mayor, you can't contribute only eight, you have to contribute more. Why didn't they point that out back then? Now yes. Now we have to correct the error of 30 years and one year. No, that's not how it's going to work. It can't work that way. So, folks, I want to say here, Mr. President, that I can contribute a lot to this committee. I'm sure of it. Mr. Júlio, for example, I also think we studied for this.
I'm on the investment committee fighting for more funds because I also want to retire, I also want to take care of things. From my family, and I value the retirement fund very much. And I think the mayor who's there today is also concerned about the deficit. Valdir was also very concerned, Toco was very concerned, okay? So I think this is a process that needs to be built. And it's the people who invested poorly, I don't know if it was intentional or not, uh, as my colleague said, that the employees who weren't hired through competitive exams, were hired through competitive exams, okay? Who made the investments. Today we have Progestão 1, 2, 3 and 4. Joel, correct me if I'm wrong. We can't invest in just anything. We are limited. So, in order to invest in something, we have to change Progestão. So there are several things that need to be addressed in this committee. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Thank you very much, Rogério, and everyone for your participation. I ask that you come back and that everyone there can contribute at the right time, okay? Uh, I reiterate here that we will also address this topic next week. I I think it's interesting to talk about this, right? The 16th, sorry, next week, no, next meeting, okay? June 16th, here, formally, right? 2016, we'll address this topic. So, regarding investments. It's important to bring it to light, right? And in a little while, this is the last time we talk about it, for example, in the committee here, but let's talk about it, right? Let it be clear, because it's a wound that everyone has, okay? Certainly, nobody would like to be talking about this, but if it happened, it needs to be brought to light so that, in a little while, talking about it is the remedy that was needed, okay? Uh, I'll open it up. Would anyone like to say goodbye? Would you like to make any contribution, Jacob? No, from the executive branch. Would anyone like to speak?
So, everyone, I really appreciate everyone's presence, okay? I want to thank everyone for their immediate response, from the entities, from the executive branch itself, regarding their presence here, okay?
I want to leave it on record here, and I think The staff should know this, everyone. Just so you all start discussing this, we're still talking and we end up hearing your comments and it gets in the way, okay? But it's alright. I want to make it clear to the staff that the government's base here, the government councilors, the president of the Chamber himself, they are crucial to this moment of debate. I, as an independent councilor, even in the opposition here, it's very easy to say, 'Look, we're doing a job, etc.' No, if the executive branch weren't here, if the cabinet weren't here, if the secretary weren't here, if the legal department weren't here, this would practically be a pointless meeting, because we wouldn't have mutual collaboration. If the government councilors here, who are the majority, didn't insist on this meeting, we wouldn't have approved this commission and we wouldn't have formed it.
So, I want to make it clear that the Chamber is only open today at this time and this meeting is happening because of mutual collaboration within the house. In fact, if there wasn't collaboration from the government, I wouldn't even be holding this meeting, because we will... We gathered, chatted, talked, talked, and when I got to the end, everyone would hug each other, and then we'd leave, because not everyone participated. So, I thank you once again for the presence of the entities, the executive branch, the union, Fábio's council, and the councilors, okay? So that we can be here again on the 16th for the presentations, everyone.
Thank you. Good night.
Related Videos
Truckers Finally Seeing Higher Rates… But Carriers Are STILL Going Bankrupt
LetsTruckTribe
480 views•2026-05-28
IS THIS THE REAL REASON FOR DATA CENTERS?
PrepperDawg
7K views•2026-05-31
JPMorgan CEO JUST NUKED Mamdani... as NYC's Middle Class COLLAPSES
Englishman-In-NewYork
7K views•2026-05-30
The Dark Age Of Blue Collar Has Begun
derekpolasekofficial
4K views•2026-05-28
Why People Pay More For Someone They Trust
financian_
66K views•2026-05-28
What has a broader economic impact, corporate downsizing or ecological collapse?
theratracejournal
1K views•2026-05-29
China Is Quietly Buying Gold, the Iran Deal Is Frozen, and Silver Is Heating Up
RichardHolloway0
694 views•2026-05-31
Why Canadians can no longer afford to survive #canada #inflation #shorts
TrueNorthInvestor-v4j
131 views•2026-06-01
