Citizen Portal
Sign In

Committee moves Newfield covered bridge insurance question to facilities committee after learning bridge is uninsured

Tompkins County Legislature Government Operations Committee · March 10, 2026

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
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

Staff told the committee the historic Newfield Covered Bridge lost commercial coverage and the only market quote would have cost about $53,000 a year; the committee agreed to refer the matter to Facilities & Infrastructure for inspection and further review rather than commit to permanent self-insurance.

County staff told the Government Operations Committee the historic Newfield Covered Bridge has been uninsured since its policy was canceled at year-end and that market quotes for replacement coverage were unaffordable.

"We cannot find a carrier that offers coverage except for one carrier which would cost us an annual premium of approximately $53,000, versus what we were paying about $3,000 in annual premiums," project staff Jesse told the committee.

Staff proposed adding the bridge to the county's self-insured assets. Several legislators said they were uneasy continuing without an inspection and wanted more detail on the condition and on what other county property is or is not insured. Committee members noted past state inspections and repairs — including a prior state-funded improvement that added sprinkler protection after a fire — and asked the county's facilities and highway teams to evaluate replacement costs and maintenance responsibilities.

The committee reached consensus to send the resolution and materials to the Facilities & Infrastructure Committee (FNI) for review at its March 19 meeting and did not adopt a permanent self-insurance decision at today's meeting. Staff said the bridge is effectively uninsured at present and that the referral would allow FNI members, facilities staff and risk managers to gather inspection results and insurance comparisons before a final legislative action.

Committee members emphasized preservation and public access concerns but said they wanted a fuller asset and risk analysis before committing county insurance resources.