Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Risk Management Insurance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
MCIT updates Pine County commissioners on claims trends, reinsurance costs and cyber risk reductions
Summary
A Minnesota Counties Intergovernmental Trust (MCIT) representative told Pine County commissioners that rising property values and reinsurance costs are pressuring member rates, while cyber incidents appear to have trended down following member mitigation steps; MCIT urged continued investment in safety programs and contract review.
A risk management consultant from the Minnesota Counties Intergovernmental Trust briefed Pine County commissioners on MCIT’s financial position, reinsurance pressures and recent trends in cyber and workers’ compensation claims.
Joe Siminski, risk management consultant, summarized MCIT’s position as a joint powers entity that seeks cost‑effective coverage tailored to governmental operations and said the trust has faced rising reinsurance costs driven largely by increasing total insured values and higher construction and replacement costs. Siminski noted MCIT adjusted its reinsurance retentions — for example, increasing a casualty retention and the workers’ compensation retention — to blunt large premium spikes and to stabilize member contribution increases.
On cyber risk, Siminski said total cyber claims rose in prior years but that ransomware claims spiked and have since declined as members improved protections: “The ransomware claims have really fallen off in that year,” he said, and credited member investments in email filtering, staff training and other defenses for improved results. The consultant also highlighted MCIT’s member services including loss‑control consultations, employee assistance program access, benchmark analytics for law enforcement and safety seminars.
Siminski urged counties to continue common risk‑management practices: review contract language and coverages before finalizing agreements, maintain safety committees and return‑to‑work programs, and support ongoing cybersecurity training for employees. He also noted MCIT issues dividends when actuarial conditions permit; in recent distributions, workers’ compensation performance helped support returns to members.
Commissioners asked about specific areas such as equipment breakdown coverage and the costs of property reinsurance; Siminski said MCIT had added some equipment‑breakdown enhancements and that members should inventory and review valuations to help control future cost pressures.
MCIT recommended continued engagement with loss‑control specialists and took questions on county performance metrics and training offerings; commissioners thanked MCIT staff for the briefing.
