Newton County tables $353,930 property-insurance renewal, asks for carrier liquidity and equipment list

Newton County Commissioners Court on Tuesday tabled consideration of the countys proposed insurance renewal after commissioners said the packet lacked documentation they need to assess whether the proposed carriers have the financial capacity to cover a large loss.

The court was presented with proposals under RFP 2025-2026 for property, auto and liability coverage. Staff said the countys insurance proposal this year totaled $353,930, down from $442,467 the previous year. Auto-liability costs were discussed separately and were presented as roughly $110,000 this year compared with about $88,000 last year, an increase of about $22,001.

Why it matters: Commissioners said the county may be shifting property coverage to surplus-lines (nonadmitted) carriers not licensed in Texas. Several commissioners said the packet did not contain the "net disposition" or other documentation showing surplus or AM Best-type ratings that would let them judge whether a carrier could cover catastrophic, statewide losses.

An insurance representative told the court that the property coverage would be written as surplus-lines coverage under Texas insurance statutes and that the carriers in the program carry AM Best-style surplus ratings. The representative said multiple carriers share limits across a reported portfolio value of about $26,855,000, but commissioners said the packet did not make the carrierssurplus figures or approved filings with the Texas Department of Insurance clear.

One commissioner said he had asked a state representatives office to press TAC (the county purchasing pool referenced in the proposal) to extend an offer to Newton County, and asked staff to wait to act until they received any additional offer. Commissioners also asked the county attorney and administrative staff to confirm whether re-soliciting a bid would be permissible in the procurement timeframe.

The court also raised a separate, practical concern: commissioners could not find a scheduled-equipment listing in the packet. Multiple speakers asked staff to supply a complete equipment schedule (for example VINs or similar identifiers) so newly acquired county assets would be covered or removed promptly when sold. One commissioner asked that each commissioner receive a copy of the equipment schedule and that staff add instructions to notify the insurance office when equipment is bought or sold.

In a separate part of the renewal packet staff reviewed an optional crime-insurance line covering employee theft, forgery, money and securities, and money-in-transit; the added premium for that coverage was $1,696. Commissioners voiced general support for including the crime coverage.

Flood coverage was discussed for a handful of buildings that may be in higher-risk areas; staff said flood premiums are optional and vary by location and that most county buildings discussed appear to be outside the highest-risk flood zones.

Formal action: The court voted to table the property-insurance renewal to the next commissioners court meeting and directed staff to provide the requested carrier financial documentation and an updated scheduled-equipment list. The payment of final bills later on the agenda was approved by the court on a separate motion by Commissioner Richard White, seconded by Commissioner Benson.

The item will return for action after staff provides the requested materials and any additional offers are received.