Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Insurance Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Waunakee delays insurer switch after detailed League and CIVMIC presentations; staff asked to return with tighter comparison
Summary
After hearing presentations from both the League of Wisconsin Municipalities Mutual Insurance and CIVMIC, the Village Board deferred any carrier change and asked staff to return with a more precise, apples-to-apples comparison of coverage, costs and optional endorsements.
The Village heard hour-long presentations from two municipal-insurance providers as staff and trustees weighed whether to change liability, property, workers' compensation and other coverage from the League of Wisconsin Municipalities Mutual Insurance to CIVMIC.
Todd (Village Administrator) summarized staff analysis: the League's program is longstanding and provides several features including optional no-fault sewer-backup coverage and first-dollar claim handling; CIVMIC's proposal uses a self-insured-retention structure (a $25,000 retention per claim up to a $100,000 annual cap) and includes enhanced member services, notably HR advisory and training, cyber coverage options and potential cost savings if the village chooses to self-fund some claim exposure.
Representatives from both providers presented and answered detailed trustee questions. League agent Ryan Burns emphasized first-dollar sewer-backup coverage and long-term relationship and asked trustees to consider coverage differences beyond premium. CIVMIC CEO Steve Stansig and manager Ben Rank described a staffed member-services model (HR advisers, safety and risk teams, training) that the village's staff said could help with HR and training gaps. CIVMIC representatives said their program could deliver expanded HR-adviser support and training credits available to members.
Trustees focused on a handful of technical and practical topics: whether sewer-backup (no-fault) coverage is included or optional; claims-retention levels and the potential annual exposure under an SIR model; whether cyber coverage included in each proposal was comparable; whether the proposals were submitted on truly identical terms; and how utilities (which historically paid for sewer-backup coverage) should be engaged. Staff said the utility director would be consulted to weigh utility fund impacts, and staff agreed to return with a clearer, apples-to-apples comparison (including optional coverages and SIR scenarios) before a final decision.
No final selection was made at the meeting. Trustees asked staff to collect additional documentation, involve the utility director and return to the board with a side-by-side comparison before making a carrier change.
