Cowlitz County weighs exit as risk pool plans steep premium hikes

Cowlitz County officials on Monday were warned that the county's liability insurance premium through the joint risk pool could spike sharply in 2026, and staff said they are preparing options that include seeking alternate coverage.

Kathy Funk Baxter, the county's finance presenter, reported that risk-management services are budgeted at about $2.8 million and that the county has already paid nearly all of the current year premium. Shelley Pierce, the county's risk and safety manager, and Marissa Hutchison, risk and safety analyst, told commissioners they've begun cost comparisons and outreach to alternative providers after the pool announced a substantial increase at its recent member meeting.

"We're hearing rumors of 38%, which is $1,100,000," Pierce said, summarizing information shared at the pool conference and noting the pool's board had voted on the increase. County staff said the rumored jump would push the county's total premiums toward roughly $4 million depending on the county's specific experience ratio and other billing factors. The county has budgeted for a smaller increase but cannot finalize department allocations until it receives an exact invoice, expected in January.

Because the pool bills each member using a county-specific experience factor, county budget staff said the overall 38% increase does not directly translate to the county's share until the formal invoice is issued. "We need to know our exact number," Baxter said. She noted that the county had previously transferred $850,000 into risk-management accounts this year (about $300,000 to liability claims reserves and $550,000 returned to the general fund earlier in 2024 to help pre-fund premiums).

Commissioners and staff described active work to study alternatives. Marissa Hutchison said the county had attended an Alliant proposal workshop and begun discussions with a smaller Washington County risk group and its Third-Party Administrator as a possible partner. Hutchison and Pierce said they have been working on an extensive application and conducting one-on-one discussions with other counties to gauge cost, service and administrative differences.

Pierce described at least one procedural option: counties may notify the pool of intent to withdraw up to Dec. 31; that notice is treated as a one-year notice and gives the member county a six-month window to retract the notice if a workable solution emerges. "It gives us the time to do our due diligence," Hutchison said.

Several commissioners expressed frustration with the timing and governance of the pool. One commissioner said they had opposed the pool's increases at the member meeting and questioned whether counties should be asked to shore up pool solvency through large, recurring premium increases while county budgets are under pressure. Pierce and Hutchison said the county will continue the analysis and return with options for coverage and cost comparisons.

Next steps: staff will present detailed cost comparisons and recommended next steps after the pool issues its member invoices in January. Commissioners were not asked to vote on leaving the pool during Monday's meeting; staff emphasized the county must file formal notice by Dec. 31 if it intends to begin the withdrawal process.