Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Employee Benefits topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Finance committee to seek additional quotes as benefits consultant follow-up lags

2346908 · February 19, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Committee members reviewed employee health-benefit options and consultants. Staff reported mixed experiences with Miller Wade Group and another broker, and agreed to gather requested documents and pursue a PEHP (Public Employee Health Plan) quote before open enrollment deadlines.

Woodland Hills finance committee discussed options for the city’s employee benefits plan and asked staff to gather documents requested by a state-run insurer for a price quote.

Aaron (committee member) and other members described a meeting with the Miller Wade Group; one committee member said the presenter “was informative, but in my opinion, not very helpful.” Another committee member reported receiving a quote and materials from Adrian, an independent broker, and said those materials would be forwarded to staff.

Tim (meeting participant) said he contacted PEHP (Public Employee Health Plan) and that the insurer requires a current plan document, the most recent invoice, and a member-level census (names, dates of birth, gender and ZIP code) to provide an underwriting quote. Tim said PEHP would not provide an estimate without those documents. Committee members agreed staff could gather and forward the requested documents; Chris and Tim were asked to coordinate and send PEHP the materials to meet the open-enrollment timeline.

Participants discussed carrier networks and employer costs. Committee members said SelectHealth, UnitedHealthcare and others had been considered; one member said, “SelectHealth is not gonna be playing favorites with 1 broker versus another,” and that carriers price on plan design rather than broker. The meeting noted public-employee retirement cost pressures — state retirement employer contributions were described in the discussion as roughly 19–21% for older tiers with lower rates for newer tiers — as context for total compensation budgeting.

No binding decision to change carriers was made. The committee set a follow-up meeting for March 5 to finalize benefit selections ahead of the April/May open-enrollment timeline described in the discussion.