Tequesta reviews insurance renewal; council directs staff to vet asset removals and a higher storm deductible

The Village of Tequesta held a workshop on Aug. 3, 2026, to review property/casualty and workers' compensation renewal options presented by the Gehring Group. Gehring's consultant said the renewal package returned at "just under a 7% increase," driven mainly by a jump in the village's workers' compensation experience modification tied to two large open claims (about $490,000 and $218,000).

The consultant outlined three approaches to reduce premium: removing eight relatively low‑exposure assets from the insured schedule (reducing total insured value by roughly $3.1 million and trimming premium by about $48,000); adding a workers'‑compensation stop‑loss retention that would cap the village's deductible at $10,000 per policy period (estimated ~$36,000 premium reduction); and increasing the named‑storm windstorm deductible from 5% to 10%, which produces additional premium savings but increases the village's potential retention on a probable maximum loss modeled at about $7.4 million.

"You will see that the overall package came in at just under a 7% increase," the consultant said. She explained the workers'‑compensation increase was driven by the two large open claims. She also noted the option to remove eight assets (tennis courts, two water storage tanks, pumps and small well houses) that she said "are listed in that attachment" and could be reinstated later by endorsement if needed.

Council members probed the tradeoffs. One member asked how a 10% named‑storm deductible could affect finances; staff pointed to the village's hurricane reserve, which they said is $1 million total (about $500,000 from the general fund and $500,000 from the water utility). The consultant cautioned that while the premium savings are fixed, the exposure under a higher deductible is volatile: "When we look at your probable maximum loss in a 1 in 250 year storm, that's close to 7,400,000," she said, noting the $7.4 million included surge and was a ground‑up number not net of potential FEMA assistance.

After discussion, council signaled support for pursuing Alternative 2 — the combination of removing select assets and increasing the named‑storm deductible — but directed staff to review the proposed asset list and return any recommended adjustments to council before final approval. Staff were asked to prepare the item for a vote at an upcoming meeting, with the understanding that assets can be endorsed back onto the schedule mid‑year if needed.