Pleasantville Board of Education hears five insurance-broker proposals; no broker selected

Pleasantville Board of Education members heard presentations from five insurance firms April 18 as part of an RFP process to serve as the district’s insurance and employee-benefits broker, but the board did not name a winner.

The board received formal pitches from Brown and Brown; Alamo Insurance Group (employee-benefits and risk-management teams); a collaborative proposal led by Douglas Forrester/Clear Benefit Strategies with Curtis Lackland (absent); Atlantic Associates Insurance Agency; and Treadstone Risk Management. Each firm described services for property/casualty risk management and employee benefits, and several warned that next year’s medical and prescription costs are likely to rise sharply under the State Health Benefits Plan.

Why it matters: the employee-benefits line is one of the district’s largest budget items. Several presenters said state actuarial forecasts point to double-digit increases for the 2026 renewal, and the board said it will notify firms after completing its internal review. That decision could affect next year’s budget and employee premiums.

Brown and Brown said it works across the public sector and offered brokerage, data analytics, vendor management and open‑enrollment communications. “We have over $34,000,000,000 placed insurance premium amongst different insurance carriers,” Jacob Krakauer of Brown and Brown told the board, citing the firm’s national purchasing power and local offices in New Jersey.

Alamo Insurance Group, which has served Pleasantville since 02/2021, emphasized monthly claims reporting, preferred‑counsel negotiations and prior rate results for ancillary plans. Raquel Kagley, Alamo’s senior vice president for employee benefits, told the board that the state actuary and broker Aon’s mid‑year review forecasts “double digit” increases and that the district’s prescription plan could see a nearly 20% jump. She said Alamo is monitoring state reporting and preparing alternative market options for the board to consider.

The collaborative proposal from Douglas Forrester and Curtis Lackland framed its approach around care delivery and a flat, disclosed consulting fee rather than incumbent broker commissions. Forrester told the board the team does not accept commissions from health‑plan vendors and that its fee in the proposal is “inclusive of everything” for the life of the contract.

Atlantic Associates stressed local presence and long experience with New Jersey public entities and described its safety‑committee work and principal safety talks as part of loss‑control efforts. Treadstone Risk Management emphasized situational awareness and institutional memory, describing work to locate legacy policies and manage long‑tail exposures such as abuse/molestation claims.

Board action on the broker selection was not taken at the meeting. The board’s remarks at the end of the presentations said firms will be informed of a selection decision later; the transcript records the board noting it might choose tonight or at a later date.

Votes at a glance - Monthly fire drill and safety report (agenda item 1.8): motion carried (mover: Miss Alberto; second: Miss Akins). Roll call: Miss Alberto, Mister Gibson, Miss Akins, Miss Mello, Miss Silver, Miss Waters, Miss King, Miss Rowell — all recorded as yes. (Motion carries.) - Minutes (agenda 2.1 & 2.2): approved (mover: Mister Gibson; second: Miss Akins). - Finance block (agenda 3.1–3.15): approved (mover: Miss Waters; second: Miss Silver). - Human resources block (agenda 6.1–6.8): approved (mover: Miss Silver; second: Mister Gibson). Board member Miss Rowell recorded “yes to everything, but abstain from page 17, number 11.” - Policy block (agenda 7.1–7.3): approved (mover: Miss Alberto; second: Miss Silver). - Executive session: motion to enter and to exit executive session carried (enter mover: Miss Alberto; second: Miss Akins; exit mover: Miss Alberto; second: Miss Akins). - Curriculum and instruction (agenda 8.1–8.4): approved with agenda item 24 tabled (mover: Mister Gibson; second: Miss Silver). - Transportation (agenda 4.1–4.4): approved with item 4.5 tabled (mover: Miss Waters; second: Miss Silver). - HIP report: approved (mover: Mister Gibson; second: Miss Waters). - Resolution authorizing settlement in the matter styled T.O. v. Pleasantville Board of Education (OAL docket EDS‑14439‑24): approved (mover: Miss King; second: Miss Silver). - Motion to adjourn: carried.

Discussion highlights and clarifications - State Health Benefits Plan exposure: multiple presenters referred to the SEHBP and Aon’s mid‑year review as forecasting double‑digit increases for the district’s July 2026 renewal (presenters cited roughly 10% on medical and close to 20% on prescription in the mid‑year forecast). Presenters said that obtaining the state’s claims experience reporting is necessary to produce viable market alternatives. - Broker compensation and conflicts of interest: the Forrester/Lackland proposal emphasized a single, flat fee and stated the team does not accept commissions or other revenue from health‑plan vendors. Atlantic Associates and other firms said commissions for property/casualty lines are socialized through the joint insurance fund and disclosed in proposals. - Ancillary plan performance: firms reported concrete past renewals on dental and vision (examples: negotiated rate decreases or rate passes for prior years were cited by Alamo and Brown and Brown).

What the board asked for and next steps Board members asked about firms’ local offices, number of public‑sector clients, and how firms ensure best pricing when brokers receive commissions. Presenters replied with firm counts of clients and office locations and explained carrier‑agnostic procurement and disclosure practices. The board did not vote on a broker award; it said firms will be notified after the board’s selection process is complete.

Ending note The board took routine clustered votes on finance, HR, policy, curriculum and transportation items during the meeting and moved into and out of executive session on personnel and legal matters. The RFP presentation for broker services is expected to continue to the board’s procurement review; firms will be informed of the outcome once the board completes that process.