Insurance agent says pool renewal will mean higher property rates for Madison County amid rising appraisals

An insurance representative told Madison County commissioners that the county's membership in the pooled insurance program will carry a sizeable renewal shift driven largely by higher property appraisals.

The agent said the county faces a 21.53% change in overall premium this year, attributing about 99% of that movement to updated appraisal values that raised the county's insured building-and-contents total by $28,269,250. "Last year we paid just under a million. This year we're paying just over a million. However, the next best option was closer to $3 million," the agent said, arguing the pool remains a cost-stable alternative to the open market.

The presentation, delivered after the chair called the meeting back to order, reviewed options that could reduce near-term costs, including a stated-value approach that lets owners insure a structure at a chosen percentage of its appraised value rather than full replacement cost. The agent used an example of a historic schoolhouse appraised at more than $1 million that the county presently insures at a stated value of $89,000 to cover cleanup rather than full reconstruction.

Coverage changes and line-item renewals were also spelled out. The agent said zoning, ethics and flood-plane protections were added this year into the base coverage rather than sold as optional endorsements; the change did not increase premiums because of actuary adjustments. On rate lines, the board's recent vote produced a 4% reduction to the property base, vehicles stayed at $110 per $100 of value and equipment remained 44 cents per $100. The agent reported a 7.5% increase to the liability base rate and a 3.5% average increase across the pool. Fidelity and crime coverage rose from just under $19 per employee to $23.86 per employee under a three-year contract.

Claims and reserves were addressed in the renewal briefing. The presenter noted two open claims: a wrongful-termination matter with expenses totaling $69,762 and a general-liability matter listed at $4,993. She explained some claims figures on the circulated reports are redacted where reserve accounting is ongoing but said closed claims and paid amounts are up-to-date.

The agent also reviewed capital adequacy, saying the pool has been growing its capital cushion since 2016 and is aiming to reach a stronger "green" position that would provide more options in the reinsurance market and help moderate future rate volatility.

Staff resources tied to law-enforcement risk and county operations were introduced during the presentation. The agent identified Dan Ali as the public-safety risk manager and Brandon Harris as the peer-review coordinator, and said those staff can assist counties with wellness programming and liability mitigation even where only a holding cell exists. She described Nancy Everson as a governmental finance director resource and Karly King as the IT manager who has produced substantial cost savings on camera and telecom purchases.

The presenter highlighted two legal/coverage points of particular operational significance. First, the county litigation group's internal defense handling leads to lower measured costs, which the agent said reduces the county's loss ratios compared with private defense. Second, on sexual-abuse coverage the agent advised that while a claim may be reported up to three years after an incident, policy reporting rules also require an insured to notify the carrier within 180 consecutive days after initial discovery of an alleged sexual-abuse event to preserve consideration: "You have three years to report a claim. However, you only have 180 consecutive days after initial discovery," she said.

The briefing included a discussion of detention-related exposure and space constraints. Commissioners noted regional bed shortages and the difficulty of placing detainees when nearby jurisdictions are full, with the agent warning that inadequate detention capacity can increase county liability and complicate required custody rules. The agent recommended a jail review even where only a holding cell exists and described successful in-custody programs that produced revenue and improved behavior in other counties.

The presentation concluded with contact details and an opportunity for follow-up questions. A motion to adjourn was made (mover recorded as Mr. Knight) and seconded; the transcript records the chair calling for a vote but does not include the vote result.

Next steps: county staff and the agent indicated they will finalize stated-value selections, confirm builder's-risk and historical-appraisal treatments for specific structures, and follow up on claim-detail questions with the claims team.