You're on. >> Okay, it is Monday, June 1st, 7:00 p.m. This is the City of Brainerd Personal Finance Committee meeting. Let's start with introductions. >> Kelly Marvin, Brainerd City Council, Ward 2. >> Nate Olson, Waite General Insurance. >> Connie Holm, Finance Director, Brainerd
comment comment HR Director. >> Alderman Large, Kevin Stunek. >> Kelly. >> Kelly Masche, Waite General Insurance. >> And Gabe Johnson, chair of the committee. We have three items, the first of which is our League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust premium renewal.
Start with Connie. >> I'm going to turn it over to Nate and to Kelly. We were under budget from what we had budgeted, but I'll let you guys take over. >> Sure. >> Well, as far as insurance renewals go, I'm sorry to say this is a more boring
year compared to years a handful of years past. >> I like it going down. >> From an insurance guy's standpoint, it's it's pretty boring. It's flat. It's the rates are stable. The exposures are similar. You know, unless you have questions on what was in the packet, there's probably
just a couple of things I want to highlight. One is for cities your size in comparison, it's it's standard to go with deductibles that are the same on autos and equipment. And when I say equipment, it's equipment attached to vehicles such as
police car technology, sirens, and other permanently attached portable equipment that's not part of the vehicle, including on the big trucks. Right now, it's you guys have got a $1,000 on a vehicle. So, if a vehicle's in an accident, then it's $5,000 on the equipment that goes with any vehicle.
The League would like to see you keep it the same, but I'm not advocating you raise the vehicle to 5,000 either. So, my suggestion would be to keep them both at 1,000. That way, if there is a claim, your total out of pocket on a vehicle or something would be $2,000 of
a deductible towards the damage rather than today's $6,000. We're raising the deductible to $10,000. We've looked at the premium savings, it's not worth it, and I don't like the exposure for you guys. So, that would be the only really kind of tweak to your current model is
keeping the deductibles consistent at $1,000. >> And how much >> currently both are. That's the price for the >> No, they're they're one and they're 5,000 on the portable equipment. So, it's a little bit more to go >> Does this renewal number include them both being at one? >> It does. >> Okay.
>> No, it No, it doesn't. >> It does not. >> Hey Kelly, you said the cost of taking the equipment to $1,000 is how much? >> It's um the actual additional premium would be $1,566. Excuse me, $1,556.
I need glasses and I'm boycotting getting them. >> [laughter] >> So, to me >> So, um And that would um change the inland marine deductible from 5,000 to 1,000 to match your auto deductible.
>> Okay. That That seems like fair. >> Yeah. Do we get one accident every 3 years? Pay for itself. >> The other thing the League would like to remind all our municipality clients are uh since the formation of their cyber program in 2012, there's been just over
160 claims filed. Last year it peaked at 30. So, really about 20% of the claims came in in just one year. So, you kind of gather where the trend is going. Of the 30 claims, 25 of them were from compromised emails. In other words, somebody clicking on something that was
a legitimate fish. >> You naughty people, you. >> Uh >> It wasn't us. It wasn't us. >> And And one came from social engineering, which was an invoice coming from a vendor that wasn't the real vendor. But anyway, the point is, you guys are doing the training. We've advocated for that the last couple
years. The uh wants to remind you of that to stay on it like you have been because otherwise going forward um this year there hasn't been any premium change, but going forward that training will be mandatory especially to get a little bit higher limits. We're not advocating higher limits today or lower limits. Just keep what you
have, stay with the training, you'll be fine. >> And our cyber cyber coverage is >> half a million dollars >> Fine for now. >> So basically no change. >> Yeah, actually most of those cyber fishing ransomware and things like that, they're not a lot of money. I mean they're not requesting a lot of money.
Uh so I don't I don't recommend you make any change to that. Really uh I mean if I go as deep as you want here. I hope that that change >> our premium change was 1.6%. >> So I guess I do have one question. You
know, our building out at the airport. That doesn't look like it's included in this. >> That's just paid for out of the airport fund out of their own budget. >> They have their own policy. >> Separate policy. >> But it is insured. But it is insured. >> Yeah. >> All right. Yeah. >> As far as their the for the airport, is that what I heard Gabe say for the
airport? >> Yeah. >> Yeah, so they have their um employment practices falling underneath the the city of Brainerd's policy and we charge them out a premium for their portion of it. >> So that's like if their board member
would do something wrong. >> Um no, that's your director and officers. This is more like if you have a disgruntled employee and he comes back and he or she comes back and sues the airport for um you know, unlawful termination or um sexual harassment or
something like that. >> So that's why their share is only like $500 or whatever because their >> Exactly. >> buildings and equipment are all in separate policies. >> And workers >> Exactly. >> Are there any other questions? >> a motion that we uh can move forward with the renewal with the Minnesota
League of Cities Insurance Trust. >> And to decrease our >> our equipment deductible from $5,000 to $1,000. >> Oh, okay. I agree with that. >> Second. >> Any discussion? All in favor say I. >> I.
>> The motion carries. >> That was boring. >> Thanks, Kelly. Thanks, Nate. >> Thanks, guys. >> I thought I was here. Sorry, guys. >> Yeah, we like boring. >> We're all boring. >> I like boring. I like the the levy funds. Insurance decrease. >> Yeah. >> The next item is the election judges and
wages, Connie. >> So, every year we or every election we need to appoint election judges and those will be on file in the administrator's office. We also need to fix the rate of pay for the judges. Um the county is paying $25 per hour for head judges and $20 per hour for regular
judge judges. Excuse me, Master's paying 22 and 18. Um we do provide meals. Um we don't provide mileage. They do get an extra hour when they come to pick up their um supplies.
Um so I guess the motion is to um discuss and adopt the attached resolution appointing and setting wages for election judges. So, I don't know if you want to match the city if you want or the county or do you want us to stay where we are last year? >> Well, the county doesn't provide slice and milk, does it?
>> We usually get I don't think we do slice and milk. I think we do um uh I don't know if it's Domino's or or um I can't remember who got it. >> Oh, but we don't provide slice and milk, do we? >> Yeah, I don't think we do, either. >> I I would be fine matching the county. That's who we're competing with for election
>> Consistency. It's consistency. We're paying the same just >> Well, we Well, we do provide the meals, which is a little bit different, but you're fine with that continuing on? >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> All right. Fine with it. Motion for 25 and 20. >> Your turn. >> Yes, so moved. >> Yes, second.
>> All in favor say I. >> I. >> The motion carries. And our final item is the hiring of a deputy public works director city engineer Jennifer Schuman. Brittany? >> Yes, thank you. The city received three applications for the deputy public works
director city engineer position. We interviewed two. We made an offer to Jennifer Schuman. Jennifer must have you negotiating items with Jennifer B which have to be approved by council. So, I'll go through those. The
recommended motion is Jennifer's hiring of Jennifer Schuman as a deputy public works director city engineer subject to the following. One, placement at step three of the deputy public works director city engineer wage grid being $61.46 per hour. Two, to accommodate a previously
scheduled vacation, Jennifer will be credited with 40 hours of vacation leave effective on her hire date. She will not accrue additional vacation leave until the point at which she would have normally earned that additional 40 hours. Three, an initial vacation accrual of
13.33 hours per month equivalent to 4 weeks per year. This accrual rate will be frozen for the first 6 years of her employment after which it will increase with the employee policy manual. And then four, completion of the pre-employment process.
Um and then if all of those motions are approved, I will come back to council with an actual start date on the exact calendar. >> I make a motion to approve the hiring. >> Second. >> Okay, I had received a phone call from a colleague today wondering about this
initial 40 hours, this front loaded 40 hours. And are we at risk of them coming on, taking their 40 hours of vacation, and then quitting, and then never having money to pay for us? Is there any way the city can protect itself from being taken
advantage of in this situation? In a situation like that nobody expects to happen, but >> Right. Um I mean, their accrual within 4 months technically she would just have to work four months and she would be at the 40 hours or a little bit over.
But, I mean, we could add I don't know if we want to. I mean, it might just be something that we eat if we end up if she ends up leaving within the first four months. >> Okay, so it's after four months, it's
>> Well, she gets >> Cuz it's 13.3 days, so after four months I Yeah, after four months. She would have worked three months actually. Yeah. She works three months, she's accrued 40 and then that's when she'll start banking and we're a little bit over. I don't see that as much of a risk at
all. >> Questions, couple. Where'd she come from? >> She's been with the city of Waizata since 2018 in the engineering department and her most recent role is the assistant assistant city engineer since 2019.
>> That's all I wanted. Starting date as well? >> We don't know. >> That'll be confirmed after she >> After If we agree to this, she agrees to it. She probably has to put in 30 days or something on there. >> Yeah, she had wanted that 30 days just because of construction season.
>> Okay, all in favor say aye. Aye. That motion carries. And with that, we're adjourned.