Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Insurance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners clarify insurance paperwork with Mako; choose agent vs. employee appointment
Summary
Prairie County staff consulted Mako PCT about two contract forms (agent appointment vs. employee appointment). Mako explained counties may designate an internal employee instead of paying an external agent; commissioners said they have traditionally used their agent (Delight/Watson Insurance) and will confirm the approach.
County staff and commissioners reviewed two near-identical contracts from Mako PCT: one labeled an "employee appointment and agreement" and another labeled an "agent appointment and agreement" for property and casualty coverage. The difference, Mako explained on a phone call, is administrative: counties may either pay an external agent to perform underwriting/billing/claims coordination or designate an internal employee to carry those responsibilities and save the agent fee.
Commissioners said they have historically used their agent (referred to in the transcript as "Delight" and a county representative confirmed prior emails from Bonnie Kemp at Mako). Mako staff clarified that either option is acceptable and that the county must sign the correct form for how they intend to proceed; the county committed to determine whether to remain with their current external agent and to confirm the agent-percentage fee for the record. Staff noted that the agent appointment form should be returned by the end of the month to meet the renewal schedule.
