csrma - open claims (12-02-13) · pdf filemodel claims reporting flow charts i p. 54 6. ......

CSRMA California Sanitation Risk Management Authority

c/o ALLIANT INSURANCE SERVICES 100 Pine Street, 11th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94111 Tel: 415.403.1400

OFFICERS:Russ Baggerly, President Robert Reid805.646.5548 2006-2010Paul Bushee, Vice President Kevin Hardy760.753.0155 2003-2006

15776 Main Street, Suite 3, Hesperia, CA 92345 1072 Tico Road, Ojai, CA 93023One William Moffett Place, Goleta, CA 93117

Date/Time: Monday, December 9, 2013 LOCATION: Alliant Offices10:00 AM 100 Pine Street, 11th Floor

San Francisco, CA 94111A. CALL TO ORDER I: INFORMATION

S: SEPARATEB. PUBLIC & BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS V: VERBAL

H: HANDOUTC. CONSENT CALENDAR

1. Meeting Minutes - October 11, 2013 A p. 62. Demands as of October 17 and November 11 & 26, 2013 A p. 133. Reporting and Ratification of Claims Settlements A/V4. Long Range Action Plan Update I p. 16

D. CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING CLAIMSAction may be taken per Government Code Section 54956.95. A

See Reverse for Full Listing of Claims to be Discussed

E. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION1. 2012-13 Fiscal Year Audit A/S p. 292. Financial Audit Contract A p. 353. CAJPA Accreditation Report A p. 444. Alternatives to Presenting Annual Budget to the Board of Directors A p. 535. Model Claims Reporting Flow Charts I p. 546. Emerging Risks Work Plan I p. 597. CSRMA Investment Performance Review I/S p. 688. Trustees E & O Renewal A p. 699. Budget to Date Report at September 30, 2013 I p. 70

F. OFFICER/PROGRAM DIRECTOR/COMMITTEE REPORTS1. Long Range Planning Session Arrangements A/H p. 782. Long Range Planning Session Topics I p. 793. 2014 Proposed Meeting Calendar A p. 81

G. POOLED LIABILITY PROGRAM1 Retrospective Rating Calculation at 12/31/13 I p. 832. Program Year 28 (2013/14) Renewal A p. 853. Dividend Calculation as of 12/31/13 A p. 884. Carl Warren Staffing Plan I p. 90

H. PROPERTY PROGRAM None.

I. WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAM1. WC Payroll Audit PY 23 (2012-2013) I p. 912. PY 23 Workers' Compensation Program Awards for Excellence I/H p. 933. Annual Workers' Compensation Loss Analysis Reports I/H p. 94

J. PRIMARY INSURANCE PROGRAM1. Program Renewal A p. 95

Insurance License No.: 0C36861Fax: 415.402.0773

PAST PRESIDENTS:

EXECUTIVE BOARD MEETING AGENDA

Meeting Via Teleconference at the Following Locations:

2013 agendas.xls 1 12/2/2013

K. LOSS CONTROL1. Winter/Spring 2013/14 Area Training Update A p. 100

L. INFORMATION ITEMS 1. Poem of the Day I p. 1022. Article - Plan Now To Minimize Liability For Holiday Party Misconduct I p. 1033. Article - Sorry I Wasn't Listening - How Active Listening Skills Can Improve Your Workplace I p. 1054. Article - 8 Things You Should Never Say in a Termination Meeting I p. 1075. Article - Web of Lies - Using Social Media to Investigate Workers' Compensation Fraud I p. 1096. CSRMA Organizational Chart I p. 1117. CSRMA Service Team I p. 112

M. ADJOURNMENTThe next meeting will be held on January 15, 2014 during the CASA Conference

Per Government Code section 54954.2, persons requesting disability-related modifications or accommodations, including auxiliary aids or services in order to participatein the meeting, are requested to contact Alliant at (415) 403-1400 twenty-four hours in advance of the meeting. Entrance to the meeting location requires routineprovision of identification to building security. However, CSRMA does not require any member of the public to register his or her name, or to provide other information,

as a condition to attendance at any public meeting and will not inquire of building security concerning information so provided. See Government Code section 54953.3.

2013 agendas.xls 2 12/2/2013

CSRMA - OPEN / ACTIVE REPORTAS OF 12-02-13

MEMBER DISTRICT CLAIM# CLAIMANT CLAIM DESCRIPTION DATE OF LOSSDATE

REPORTED

CARPINTERIA SANITARY DISTRICT 1767988 GILBERT, MARK Bodility Injury 4/25/2012 10/25/2012

CITY OF HALFMOON BAY 1766994 CHAPMAN, DIANE Property Damage 7/27/2012 10/15/2012

CITY OF HALFMOON BAY 1862393 CHAPMAN, DIANE Property Damage 12/31/2012 7/31/2013

DELTA DIABLO SANITATION DIST. 1863385 SANCHEZ, HENRY Property Damage 8/14/2013 8/14/2013

DELTA DIABLO SANITATION DIST. 1870036 HUNT, & SONS Subrogation 11/13/2013 11/13/2013

GRANADA SANITARY DISTRICT 1866192 NGUYEN, YEM Bodility Injury 4/2/2013 9/18/2013

HOMESTEAD VALLEY SANITARY DISTRICT 1815496 SIEGEL, DAN AND JENNY Property Damage 12/22/2012 12/22/2012

LAKE ARROWHEAD COMMUNITY SERVICES DIST. 1864391 MURPHEY, MATT Property Damage 7/23/2013 8/23/2013

LAKE ARROWHEAD COMMUNITY SERVICES DIST. 1865862 JACOBSON, PAMELA Property Damage 8/15/2013 9/13/2013

LAKE ARROWHEAD CSD (SBU) 1844653 DOAN, KELLY Property Damage 12/31/2012 12/31/2012

LAS GALLINAS VALLEY SANITARY DISTRICT 1870329 VILLOLHUS, PEDRO Incident 11/18/2013 11/18/2013

MONTARA WATER AND SANITARY DISTRICT 1851509 HIX, KELLY Property Damage 3/15/2013 3/15/2013

MT. VIEW SANITARY DISTRICT 1866882 CAMPWAY/TOM GROSS, . Property Damage 9/25/2013 9/27/2013

NORTH OF RIVER SANITARY DIST. 1865023 Employment 7/6/2012 9/3/2013

NOVATO SANITARY DISTRICT 1548646 MADIAS, MICHAEL & LAURIE Property Damage 2/15/2011 3/15/2011

NOVATO SANITARY DISTRICT 1848999 SANDOVAL, PASQUAL Incident 1/31/2013 2/13/2013

NOVATO SANITARY DISTRICT 1854699 HEIN, MARK Property Damage 4/25/2013 4/26/2013

NOVATO SANITARY DISTRICT 1857423 CAL STAR GYMNASTICS, . Property Damage 5/28/2013 5/28/2013

NOVATO SANITARY DISTRICT 1865711 MOLLOY, TERRENCE Property Damage 6/18/2013 9/12/2013

SANITARY DISTRICT NO. 1 OF MARIN COUNTY 1568014 Employment 6/15/2011 7/14/2011

SANITARY DISTRICT NO. 1 OF MARIN COUNTY. 1857033 COOTE, ANNE Property Damage 4/4/2013 5/28/2013

SANITARY DISTRICT NO. 1 OF MARIN COUNTY. 1857964 CIMINO, JOSEPH Employment 1/27/2012 6/7/2013

SANITARY DISTRICT NO. 1 OF MARIN COUNTY. 1859002 PG&E, . Incident 6/18/2013 6/19/2013

SANITARY DISTRICT NO. 1 OF MARIN COUNTY. 1862037 POLSKY, KIRSTEN Property Damage 7/26/2013 7/26/2013

SANITARY DISTRICT NO. 1 OF MARIN COUNTY. 1868090 BARANCO, DAVE Property Damage 10/15/2013 10/16/2013

SANITARY DISTRICT NO. 1 OF MARIN COUNTY. 1868983 UNKNOWN, UNKNOWN Incident 10/28/2013 10/28/2013

SANITARY DISTRICT NO. 1 OF MARIN COUNTY. 1869423 RICE, PHILIP Property Damage 9/30/2013 11/4/2013

SANITARY DISTRICT NO. 1 OF MARIN COUNTY. 1869618 MARSH, PAMELA Property Damage 11/6/2013 11/6/2013

SANITARY DISTRICT NO. 1 OF MARIN COUNTY. 1869964 VAHL, GABRIELLE Property Damage 11/11/2013 11/12/2013

SANITARY DISTRICT NO. 1 OF MARIN COUNTY. 1870241 KIRK, HEIDI AND BLAIR Property Damage 11/15/2013 11/15/2013

SANITARY DISTRICT NO.5 OF MARIN COUNTY 1867670 Employment 7/25/2013 10/9/2013

SANTA MARGARITA WATER DISTRICT 1564019 LENNAR HOMES OF CA., . Property Damage 5/17/2011 5/18/2011

SANTA MARGARITA WATER DISTRICT 1856363 CARRIER, NATHALIE Property Damage 5/2/2013 5/17/2013

SANTA MARGARITA WATER DISTRICT 1860199 VARA, VANESSA Property Damage 7/2/2013 7/2/2013

SANTA MARGARITA WATER DISTRICT 1861432 DEFFENBAUGH, LAURI Property Damage 7/18/2013 7/19/2013

SANTA MARGARITA WATER DISTRICT 1867559 THOMAS, TOM & ROCHELLE Property Damage 10/6/2013 10/8/2013

SELMA-KINGSBURG-FOWLER COUNTY 1813935 ALVAREZ, MARIA Property Damage 12/3/2012 12/3/2012

SELMA-KINGSBURG-FOWLER COUNTY 1854770 AFNI - AMERPRISE ASO, NGOWAN Property Damage 11/20/2012 4/29/2013

SELMA-KINGSBURG-FOWLER COUNTY 1861092 FIENEN, BRIAN & AMY Property Damage 7/14/2013 7/15/2013

SELMA-KINGSBURG-FOWLER COUNTY 1870021 SANCHEZ, ANNA Incident 11/6/2013 11/12/2013

CARL WARREN & CO.

CONFIDENTIAL Open Claims 1 of 23

MEMBER DISTRICT CLAIM# CLAIMANT CLAIM DESCRIPTION DATE OF LOSSDATE

REPORTED

SEWER AUTHORITY MID-COASTSIDE 1859243 WESTERFIELD, GEOFFREY Property Damage 6/20/2013 6/21/2013

SOUTH TAHOE PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT 1764045 GRCLT CONDOMINIUM, AKA MARRIOTT ET AL Property Damage 3/13/2012 9/12/2012

SOUTH TAHOE PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT 1851347 KLECKER, DAVID Property Damage 3/13/2013 3/14/2013

SOUTH TAHOE PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT 1867293 COOPER, MARTHA Property Damage 9/28/2013 10/3/2013

SOUTH TAHOE PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT 1869211 MITCHELL, TODD & TRACY Incident 8/5/2013 10/31/2013

SOUTH TAHOE PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT 1870084 CZARNECKI, DAVID Property Damage 12/31/2000 11/13/2013

STEGE SANITARY DISTRICT (SBU) 1543173 PETERSON, DWIGHT Property Damage 1/2/2011 1/3/2011

STEGE SANITARY DISTRICT (SBU) 1769142 KESSNER, GAWAIN Property Damage 11/10/2012 11/12/2012

UNION SANITARY DISTRICT 1436724 COFFMAN, JESSE & DIANE Property Damage 4/11/2006 9/13/2006

UNION SANITARY DISTRICT 1865156 BECKUM, VICTOR Property Damage 9/3/2013 9/5/2013

UNION SANITARY DISTRICT 1866745 SALAZAR, SAMUEL Property Damage 9/20/2013 9/26/2013

UNION SANITARY DISTRICT 1867808 MESIAS, ROLAND Property Damage 10/9/2013 10/10/2013

UNION SANITARY DISTRICT 1869789 Zuniga, Rick Property Damage 11/6/2013 11/8/2013

VALLEJO SANITATION AND FLOOD CONTROL 1549034 COLLINS, DANE Employment 12/1/2009 3/21/2011

VALLEJO SANITATION AND FLOOD CONTROL 1767682 BRYAN, RICHARD Property Damage 10/22/2012 10/22/2012

VALLEJO SANITATION AND FLOOD CONTROL 1768515 JACKSON, JAYESHA (MINOR) Bodility Injury 2/19/2012 11/2/2012

VALLEJO SANITATION AND FLOOD CONTROL 1813961 JONES, JOAN & MATTHEW Property Damage 12/2/2012 12/4/2012

VALLEJO SANITATION AND FLOOD CONTROL 1867065 Employment 9/27/2013 10/1/2013

VALLEJO SANITATION AND FLOOD CONTROL 1870326 GUTIERREZ, ALBERTO Property Damage 11/17/2013 11/18/2013

VICTOR VALLEY WASTE WATER REC. AUTH 1565664 HAMM, THOMAS/VALERIE Property Damage 12/21/2010 6/10/2011

WEST BAY SANITARY DISTRICT 1508062 DOUGLAS, MICHAEL ETAL Property Damage 8/14/2009 11/9/2009

WEST COUNTY WASTEWATER DISTRICT 1600754 ACCESS PROP MGMT/, PEGGY BARTON Property Damage 9/8/2011 11/1/2011

WEST COUNTY WASTEWATER DISTRICT 1851845 STOVALL, PAUL Incident 2/7/2013 3/20/2013

WEST COUNTY WASTEWATER DISTRICT 1862430 DOUGLAS, CLOUDELL Property Damage 11/17/2008 8/1/2013

WEST COUNTY WASTEWATER DISTRICT 1865914 GARDENIA, LILITH Property Damage 9/14/2013 9/16/2013

WEST COUNTY WASTEWATER DISTRICT 1866357 CRUZ, GUSTAVO Property Damage 9/19/2013 9/20/2013

WEST VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT 1846367 LAMBERT, DAVID Property Damage 1/21/2013 1/21/2013

WEST VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT 1859803 HENSLEY, MICHAEL Property Damage 6/26/2013 6/27/2013

WEST VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT 1862168 GOTTLIEB, GLENN Property Damage 7/22/2013 7/30/2013

WEST VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT 1863558 LAU, DARYN Property Damage 8/16/2013 8/16/2013

WEST VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT 1864612 BRISTOW, KENNETH Property Damage 5/23/2013 8/27/2013

WEST COUNTY WASTEWATER DISTRICT 1866357 CRUZ, GUSTAVO Property Damage 9/19/2013 9/20/2013

WEST VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT 1633657 CA ODD FELLOWS, FOUNDATION INC. Property Damage 3/16/2012 3/26/2012

WEST VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT 1764300 WANG, GEORGE & MAUREEN Property Damage 9/14/2012 9/14/2012WEST VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT 1846367 LAMBERT, DAVID Property Damage 1/21/2013 1/21/2013WEST VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT 1859803 HENSLEY, MICHAEL Property Damage 6/26/2013 6/27/2013WEST VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT 1862168 GOTTLIEB, GLENN Property Damage 7/22/2013 7/30/2013WEST VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT 1863558 LAU, DARYN Property Damage 8/16/2013 8/16/2013WEST VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT 1864612 BRISTOW, KENNETH Property Damage 5/23/2013 8/27/2013

CONFIDENTIAL Open Claims 2 of 24

Claims Excess Page: 1

As Of: 11/30/2013 12/2/2013

Loss Dates: 01/01/1900 -11/30/2013 3:43:09 PM

C.S.R.M.A. W/C - 3507 Incurred Limits >= $100000

Claimant Name Employer Date of Injury

INDEMNITYAlmond, Dennis Central Contra Costa Sanitary 4/1/2009

Anderson, Greg Napa Sanitation District 9/23/2013

Bitle, Shawn Central Contra Costa Sanitary 9/15/2006

Brown, Keith West Bay Sanitary District 11/10/2011

Canepa, Charles Vallejo Sanitation & Flood Con 3/15/2012

Carrillo, Refugio Carpinteria Sanitary District 1/13/2012

Denton, Gregory West County Wastewater Distric 5/8/2013

Eckert, John Ventura Regional Sanitation Di 1/26/2011

Godinez, Ignacio Ventura Regional Sanitation Di 9/6/2010

Jones, Lorine South Bayside System Authority 10/5/2005

Kruger, Don Dublin San Ramon Services Dist 7/20/2011

Lloyd, Raymel Ventura Regional Sanitation Di 11/29/2012

McAbee, Curtis Novato Sanitary District 12/28/2007

Mccoy, Michael Ironhouse SD - Susan Walde P&C 6/6/2011

Perez, Alvaro Montecito Sanitary District 8/3/2010

Tracy, Jeannette Sewer Authority Mid-Coastside 3/9/2011

Vasut, Victor Union Sanitary District 10/6/2011

FUTURE MEDICALAlsbury, Jay South Tahoe Public Utility Dis 5/5/2008

Armstrong, Albert West Valley Sanitation Distric 11/10/1998

Ayers, James Vallejo Sanitation & Flood Con 9/11/2002

Baker, Jacob Lake Arrowhead Community Servi 1/6/2005

Bastian, Irma Regina Union Sanitary District 1/21/2011

Binder, Penny Central Contra Costa Sanitary 9/17/2007

Bouyett, Timothy Ventura Regional Sanitation Di 3/11/2010

Comito, Anthony Montecito Sanitary District 11/16/1995

Diaz, Juan Union Sanitary District 4/17/2007

Dugan, Jodey Santa Margarita Water District 3/28/2007

Dvorak, Josef South Tahoe Public Utility Dis 10/11/2006

Gianulias, James Vallejo Sanitation & Flood Con 9/21/2010

Grabowski, Mat Union Sanitary District 7/31/2008

Gregory, Leonard Union Sanitary District 2/12/1996

Grubka, Steven Central Contra Costa Sanitary 9/18/2007

Herlihy, Thomas Union Sanitary District 12/14/2010

Hernandez, Ralph Delta Diablo Sanitation Distri 4/17/1997

Hesse, Richard Lake Arrowhead Community Servi 5/5/2009

Jenkins, David South East Regional Reclamatio 1/29/2001

Marin, James Union Sanitary District 11/1/1990

Mendoza, Joey Carpinteria Sanitary District 4/20/2010

Mooney, Stephen Oro Loma Sanitary District 12/14/1998

Moraida, Christopher South Tahoe Public Utility Dis 4/4/2005

Rigdon, Bud Union Sanitary District 8/3/1998

Roletto, Jeffrey Union Sanitary District 8/24/2011

Rondoni, Michael South Tahoe Public Utility Dis 4/21/2004

Strickland, David South Tahoe Public Utility Dis 8/25/1998

Synsteby, Eric Monterey Regional Water Pollut 9/21/2000

Szabo, John Sewer Authority Mid-Coastside 4/16/2007

Thompson, Franklin Union Sanitary District 10/14/2000

Trapp, Gordon Pete Central Contra Costa Sanitary 11/19/2004

Wilhite, Randy Oro Loma Sanitary District 9/16/2002

Wood, Ron Lake Arrowhead Community Servi 5/13/1998

Youry, Timothy West County Wastewater Distric 5/21/2001

5

G:\Share\CLIENT\jpa\CSRMA\Agenda\_Executive Board\2013\12.09.13\C.1 - Minutes of the EB October 11 2013 - FINAL.doc

CALIFORNIA SANITATION RISK MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY EXECUTIVE BOARD MEETING TELECONFERENCE

SAN FRANCISCO, CA OCTOBER 11, 2013

MEMBERS & OFFICERS PRESENT Mr. Russ Baggerly, President, Ojai Valley Sanitary District, Ojai, CA Mr. Paul Bushee, Vice President, Leucadia Wastewater District, Carlsbad, CA Mr. George Emerson, Secretary, Goleta Sanitary District, Goleta, CA Mr. Craig Murray, Carpinteria Sanitary District, Carpinteria, CA Mr. Jason Warner, Oro Loma Sanitary District, San Lorenzo, CA Mr. Greg Baatrup, Fairfield/Suisun Sewer District, Fairfield, CA Mr. Logan Olds, Victor Valley Wastewater Reclamation Authority, Victorville, CA Mr. Bert Michalczyk, Dublin San Ramon Services District, Dublin, CA MEMBERS & OFFICERS ABSENT Mr. Kenneth Spray, Treasurer, Vallejo Sanitation & Flood Control District, Vallejo, CA GUESTS & CONSULTANTS Mr. Dennis Mulqueeney, Alliant Insurance Services, Inc., San Francisco, CA Mr. Myron Leavell, Alliant Insurance Services, Inc., San Francisco, CA Mr. P. J. Skarlanic, Alliant Insurance Services, Inc., San Francisco, CA Ms. Shadi Jalali, Alliant Insurance Services, Inc., San Francisco, CA Mr. David Patzer, Risk Management Solutions, Vallejo, CA Mr. Byrne Conley, Gibbons & Conley, Walnut Creek, CA A. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by President Russ Baggerly at 10:04 a.m. B. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. C. BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS There were no Board member comments. D. CONSENT CALENDAR D.1. Meeting Minutes – August 21, 2013

6

mleavell

Typewritten Text

C.1


The minutes of the meeting on August 21, 2013 were reviewed. A motion was made to accept the minutes as presented. MOTION: Bert Michalczyk SECOND: Paul Bushee MOTION CARRIED

AYES: Mr. Russ Baggerly Mr. Paul Bushee Mr. Craig Murray Mr. Jason Warner Mr. Gregory Baatrup Mr. Logan Olds Mr. Bert Michalczyk

NAYS: None

C.2. Reporting and Ratification of Claims Settlements - None C.3. Demands as of August 12, 26 & 28 and September 9 & 30, 2013 The Executive Board reviewed the demands as of August 12, 26 & 28 and September 9 & 30, 2013. A motion was made to approve the demands as presented. MOTION: Bert Michalczyk SECOND: Paul Bushee MOTION CARRIED


NAYS: None

C.4. Long Range Action Plan 2013/14 Update The Executive Board reviewed the Long Range Action Plan. At present, all items are on target. There was discussion on LRP Item II and how to most effectively handle the issue of passing the annual budget without the CSRMA Board of Directors’ meeting normally held at the Spring CASA Conference. Dennis Mulqueeney reviewed the available options which included holding a properly noticed Board of Directors Meeting via a Webinar, moving the fiscal year to line up better with CASA meeting dates, gaining authority for a budget extension each year in January to carry the expiring budget until the August meeting, or creating a Board of Directors meeting only

7


in the Spring, once every two years. The Program Administrators were directed to consult with counsel and the auditor before making any final recommendations. Further discussion on this Agenda item centered on a desire by the Executive Board to have the “Background” and/or “Updates” section of each be written with more detail about what the particular updated status is on each item. The Program Administrators agreed to do this. A motion was made to accept the Long Range Action Plan updates as presented. MOTION: Craig Murray SECOND: Logan Olds MOTION CARRIED


NAYS: None

D. CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING CLAIMS The Board entered Closed Session at 10:24 a.m. pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.95. The Board left Closed Session at 10:39 a.m., at which time it was announced that legal counsel was provided direction concerning the disposition of certain claims, however no final settlements were approved, nor was any action taken. E. OFFICER/PROGRAM DIRECTOR/COMMITTEE REPORTS None. F. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION F.1. Executive Board Elections – Nominating Committee Formation Dennis Mulqueeney reviewed the table depicting the current Executive Board membership and the eligibility of members whose terms are expiring. Logan Olds and Bert Michalczyk agreed to continue to serve for the upcoming term. There was discussion on the open Alternate seat and possible interested candidates. The Program Administrators were directed to prepare the Executive Board Elections letters for distribution to the membership. A motion was made to form a Nominating Committee consisting of Russ Baggerly and Paul Bushee.

8


MOTION: Greg Baatrup SECOND: Jason Warner MOTION CARRIED


NAYS: None

F.3. Long Range Planning Session 2014 Dennis Mulqueeney reviewed the item with Executive Board. There was discussion on holding the meeting this year in a Northern California venue, with the Santa Cruz or surrounding area of particular interest. Due to time and travel constraints, the Program Administrators were directed to locate venues situated relatively close to major airports. The Executive Board discussed and consensus was that the current LRP meeting schedule of Sunday through Tuesday is preferred. The Executive Board directed the Program Administrators to investigate locations in the Northern California area and report back with options at the December meeting. Further, the Program Administrators were directed to contact Michelle Murphy regarding her availability to facilitate the Long Range Planning session. F.4. CSRMA 2014 Preliminary Calendar Review Dennis Mulqueeney reviewed the 2014 Preliminary Calendar with the Executive Board. There was discussion on the date of the June meeting as several members have conflicts that would make it difficult for them to attend. It was recommended that the date be changed to June 2, 2014. This item was tabled until the December Executive Board meeting to allow the members to check their calendars; and to advise the Program Administrators of any conflicts. G. POOLED LIABILITY PROGRAM G.1. PY 28 (2013-14) Renewal Update Dennis Mulqueeney reported that the Pooled Liability Program is due to renew on December 31, 2013. Initial indications from the actuary are that losses are trending favorably. A flat to slight increase in reinsurance costs for the renewal is anticipated. Discussions with the reinsurance and excess markets on the renewal are progressing without issue. G.2. Annual Liability Loss Analysis Report David Patzer reviewed the item with the Executive Board. Last year; the Pooled Liability Committee requested that David Patzer prepare charts similar to those produced for the Workers

9


Compensation Program. David reviewed the loss analysis report with the Executive Board. Losses were analyzed by Frequency, Total Incurred and Average Incurred; and sorted by claim type for the years 2009-12. The most common type of claim experienced by our members continues to be sewer backups. G.3. Pooled Liability Program Claims Audit P.J. Skarlanic reviewed the item with the Executive Board. Bickmore Risk Services performed a claims audit of Carl Warren & Company in the Spring of 2013, with the results presented to the Pooled Liability Committee at their last meeting. Carl Warren and Company received an overall score of 90 in this audit, which is acceptable. The audit report contained several recommendations to which Carl Warren formally responded to. A copy of Carl Warren’s response to the audit was included in the agenda packet. The Executive Board, Board Counsel and the Program Administrators discussed the need to be continually vigilant about ensuring excellent member service. H. WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAM None. I. PROPERTY PROGRAM

None. J. PRIMARY INSURANCE PROGRAM

J.1. Program Renewal Update Dennis Mulqueeney reported that the Primary Insurance Program will be renewing on December 31, 2013. The incumbent carrier is proposing an across-the-board 10-15% premium increase which seems rather harsh in the current market environment. It was noted that the marketplace for primary liability coverage for wastewater utilities is very narrow, however, the Programs’ loss history and the general flexibility found in the market does not seem to warrant such an increase. Accordingly, the Program Administrators will be obtaining alternative quotes for consideration. An update will be provided at the December 9th Executive Board Meeting. K. LOSS CONTROL

K.1 Fall/Winter 2013 Area Training Update David Patzer reviewed the area training schedule with the Executive Board. David reported that topics slated to be presented are: Reducing Liability that Job Descriptions Can Cause; State Water Resource Control Board's New Monitoring and Reporting Program Requirements: What Do you Have To Do To Comply?; Sanitary Sewer Overflow Volume Estimation: Limiting Liability Through Defensible Calculations; Pump Station Failures, Class

10


Action Lawsuits and Regulatory Fines: Pump Station Contingency Plans - Is Your SSMP Missing This?; SSMPs and Employee Core Competencies; SSO Response, Defensible Volume Calculations, Private Property Damage and Angry Customers: Risk Reduction Measures and Gordon Graham: Supervisory and Disciplinary Skills 101. At the January 2014 CASA, the training will focus on: 1) Employment Law Annual Update; 2) Generational Differences in the Workplace; 3) How Your Agency Will Most Likely Experience Claims…And Prevention Strategies and 4) Sewer Overflow or Backup? Yep, There’s an App For That! K.2 Mobile SSO/Backup Smartphone Application Dennis Mulqueeney reviewed the item with the Executive Board. At the last Executive Board meeting, the Executive Board considered two concepts for the development of a Smartphone Application for SSO/Backup Sewer Response. It was noted that some potential users, were loosely backing the development of a product through the firm VDA Pro, and that DKF Risk Solutions (DKF) (David Patzer) is also independently in development of an application. At that time, the Executive Board directed staff to investigate the VDA Pro product to determine if a competitive bid situation should be pursued in addition to that offered by DKF. VDA Pro provided a proposal, which was reviewed by the Program Administrators and summarized in the agenda packet. After review, the Board decided not to pursue the VDA Pro option due to significantly higher development costs relative to the DKF option, and the longer timeline needed to complete the implementation. Further, it was believed that DKF's familiarity with CSRMA claims handling practices will aid in a smoother integration of the product with CSRMA member claim reporting requirements. A motion was made to decline the VDA proposal and to work up a draft contract with DKF with the contemplated scope of work, and delegating approval of a contract final form to the Officers’ Committee and General Counsel. MOTION: Logan Olds SECOND: Greg Baatrup MOTION CARRIED


NAYS: None

L. INFORMATION ITEMS L.1. Poem of the Day The Executive Board reviewed the Poem of the Day.

11


L.2. WCIRB Submits January 1, 2014 Filing - Article The Executive Board reviewed the article. L.3. "Obesity Classification as a disease could impact employment law, workers’

compensation" – Article The Executive Board reviewed the article. L.4. "Flu Shots and Changing HIPAA Regulations – Is Your Organization Up For the New

Confidentiality Challenges?" – Article The Executive Board reviewed the article. L.5. CAJPA Legislative Update The Executive Board reviewed the CAJPA Legislative Update. L.6. CSRMA 2013 Meeting Calendar The Executive Board reviewed the 2013 Meeting Calendar. L.7. CSRMA Organizational Chart The Executive Board reviewed the CSRMA Organizational Chart. L.8. CSRMA Service Team The Executive Board reviewed the CSRMA Service Team Chart. M. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 12:07 p.m. The next meeting is scheduled for December 9, 2013.

12

CHECK CHECK INVOICE INVOICE CHECK # DATE VENDOR NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT DESCRIPTION

10/17/2013 ALLIANT INSURANCE SERVICES 164301 7,103.25 7,103.25 Renew Crime 10/13/2013 - 2014

10/17/2013 AWARDS BY THE BAY reissue 441.58 441.58 Award Plaques (check reissue)

10/17/2013 CAJPA Statement 250.00 250.00 CAJPA Additional Exhibitor

10/17/2013 CARPINTERIA SANITARY DISTRICT. Sep-13 386.46 386.46 5/13 Liability Mtg

10/17/2013 DAVID PATZER DBA RISK MANAGEMENT SOLU31443 1,203.67 1,203.67 Go To Webinar; hotel deposit; shipping

10/17/2013 GRAHAM RESEARCH CONSULTANTS 6/26/2013 lettter 4,500.00 4,500.00 12/4/2013 - Professional Training

10/17/2013 HEATHER TRURO 05333 2,671.45 2,671.45 FEE Consulting 8/21 - 9/20, 2013

10/17/2013 JAMES MARTA & CO. 7024 3,000.00 3,000.00 FEE/Audit

10/17/2013 OAKLAND MARRIOTT CITY CENTER 12/4/2013 event 1,000.00 1,000.00 12/4/2013 event deposit

10/17/2013 ONLINE RISK SOLUTIONS 11117 1,000.00 1,000.00 Online Ctr. 9/2013

10/17/2013 PROFESSIONAL DYNAMICS, INC. 168508 1,200.00 1,200.00 MPN Admin 9/2013

10/17/2013 TUBE DESIGN 96610 96608 800.00 800.00 Website Maint 8 & 9/2013:

10/17/2013 WELLNESS COUNCILS OF AMERICA 110817 308.52 308.52 Well Workplace Newsletter 10/2013

10/17/2013 YORK INSURANCE SERVICES GROUP 500009651 18,000.00 18,000.00 Claims Administration 10/2013

TOTALS 41,864.93$ 41,864.93$

I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE ABOVE LISTED CHECKS ARE FOR CORRECT AND JUST SERVICES OR MATERIALS RECEIVEDTHAT PAYMENT HAS NOT BEEN PREVIOUSLY MADE, AND THAT FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE TO COVER THESE PAYMENTS.

Kenneth Spray

(Please print name)

George Emerson

(Please print name)

CALIFORNIA SANITATION RISK MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY CHECK REGISTER GENERAL ACCOUNT NO. 7020015599

DEMANDS AS OF October 17, 2013

page 1 of 3 Demands.xls13

mleavell

Ken & George

mleavell

Typewritten Text

C.2


11/11/2013 BRENDA KROUT reimburse 547.54 547.54 11/4/13 Finance Committee

11/11/2013 CALIFORNIA ASSOC. OF SANITATION AGENCIECASA 2014 910.00 910.00 CASA Membership 2014

11/11/2013 CARL WARREN & CO. Sept 2013 claims 21,095.06 21,095.06 FEES/Monthly Claims Admin & Billings - 9/2013

11/11/2013 CARPINTERIA SANITARY DISTRICT. Safety Reimburse 846.00 846.00 Safety & Risk Control Reimbursement Program

11/11/2013 DAVID PATZER DBA RISK MANAGEMENT SOLU31444 500.80 500.80 SHELL award applications/Training costs

11/11/2013 DKF SOLUTIONS, INC. 11346 8,000.00 8,000.00 update training modules

11/11/2013 GIBBONS & CONLEY 13-SEP2412 6,122.33 6,122.33 General CSRMA Matters: Program/Gen Fees & Exp

11/11/2013 HEATHER TRURO 05337 2,200.00 2,200.00 FEE Consulting 9/21 - 10/20, 2013

11/11/2013 JAMES MARTA & CO. 7100 7115 6,450.00 6,450.00 FEE/Audit

11/11/2013 KBF COLLABORATIVE SERVICES CSR-118 400.00 400.00 York Claims Connect Webinar Video Editing

11/11/2013 KENNETH SPRAY Exp Reimb 43.65 43.65 11/4/2013 Finance Committee

11/11/2013 KRISTIN GRIFFITH Reimburse 720.91 720.91 11/4/2013 Finance Committee

11/11/2013 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 171313 117.50 117.50 FEES /Legal Hotline through 9/2013

11/11/2013 MYRON D. LEAVELL 4250310 23.95 23.95 Newtek FEE/Web site hosting

11/11/2013 OCCUMETRIC 7103 4,708.23 4,708.23 Webinar - Injury/Liab Reduction

11/11/2013 ONLINE RISK SOLUTIONS 16,632.5011121 1,000.00 Online Ctr. 10/201311122 15,632.50 CJPRMA subscription - RCO

11/11/2013 PROFESSIONAL DYNAMICS, INC. 172512 1,050.00 1,050.00 Admin 10/2013

11/11/2013 SELMA-KINGSBURG-FOWLER C.S.D. Safety Reimbursm 2,000.00 2,000.00 Safety & Risk Control Reimbursement Program

11/11/2013 TUBE DESIGN 96611 400.00 400.00 Website Maint 10/2013:

11/11/2013 VENTURA REGIONAL SANITATION DISTRICT Safety Reimbursm 1,974.00 1,974.00 Safety & Risk Control Reimbursement Program

11/11/2013 WELLNESS COUNCILS OF AMERICA 111537 308.52 308.52 Well Workplace Newsletter 11/2013

TOTALS 75,050.99$ 75,050.99$


Kenneth Spray

(Please print name)

George Emerson

(Please print name)


DEMANDS AS OF November 11, 2013


mleavell

Ken & George


9004 11/26/2013 Oakland Marriott City Center 12/4/13 event 3,022.10 3,022.10 12/4/13 training event

TOTALS 3,022.10$ 3,022.10$


Kenneth Spray

(Please print name)

George Emerson

(Please print name)


DEMANDS AS OF November 26, 2013


mleavell

Ken & George

California Sanitation Risk Management Authority

Long-Range Action Plan

2013/14

Alliant Insurance Services, Inc. 100 Pine Street, 11th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111

(415) 403-1400

As of:

December 2, 2013

16

mleavell

Typewritten Text

C.4

G:\Share\CLIENT\jpa\CSRMA\Agenda\_Executive Board\2013\12.09.13\C.4 - CSRMA Long_Range Action Plan 2013_2014 FINAL.doc

Table of Contents

I. Emerging Risks Work Plan.....................................................................................................1

II. Alternatives to Presenting Annual Budget to Board of Directors .......................................3

III. Model Claims Reporting Flow Charts ...................................................................................4

IV. Program Administration, Brokerage and Risk Control Contract Considerations ...........6

V. Retrospective Rating Plan for Old Years ..............................................................................7

VI. Mobile Applications .................................................................................................................9

VII. Workers’ Compensation Claims Training ..........................................................................11

17

G:\Share\CLIENT\jpa\CSRMA\Agenda\_Executive Board\2013\12.09.13\C.4 - CSRMA Long_Range Action Plan 2013_2014 FINAL.doc - 1 -

I. Emerging Risks Work Plan Description: The Executive Board directed the Program Administrators to develop an Emerging Risks Work Plan. Objective: To develop a work plan that best addresses Emerging Risks that may impact CSRMA members. Action(s):

1. Identify and Analyze Emerging Risks 2. Present to the Pooled Liability Committee and review for recommendation 3. Present to the Workers’ Compensation Committee and review for

recommendation 4. Present to the Executive Board and review for recommendation 5. Implement work plan

Responsibility: 1. Alliant Insurance Services 2. Alliant Insurance Services and Pooled Liability Committee 3. Alliant Insurance Services and Workers’ Compensation Committee 4. Alliant Insurance Services and Executive Board 5. Alliant Insurance

Deadlines: 1. July and August 2013 2. September 2013 3. October 2013 4. December 2013 5. January 2014

Fiscal Impact: Unknown at this time. Background: Lloyd’s of London defines an Emerging Risk as “An issue that is perceived to be potentially significant but which may not be fully understood or allowed for an insurance terms and conditions, pricing, reserving or capital setting.” There are a number of Emerging Risks that could potentially impact CSRMA members, and ultimately the pool. For each of these identified risks CSRMA should first prioritize the risks then determine if there is an insurance solution, a risk management solution, or if there is even a solution at all. Status: As of May 31, 2013, this project is on target. As of August 13, 2013, this project is on target. As of October 3, 2013, this project is on target. A list of emerging risks that could

potentially impact CSRMA members has been presented to Pooled Liability Committee and subsequently prioritized by the Committee. The prioritized list of emerging risks will

ON TARGET

18


be presented to the Workers’ Compensation Committee at their October 24, 2013 meeting for review and comment.

As of December 2, 2013, this project is on target. The Workers’ Compensation

Committee reviewed the list of emerging risks at their last meeting. The Pooled Liability and Workers’ Compensation Committees have identified several risks that they believe may impact the CSRMA members and the pool and have prioritized them, ranking their top priorities 1-5. The list of emerging risk is being presented to the Executive Board at their December 9, 2013 meeting for review and next steps.

19


II. Alternatives to Presenting Annual Budget to the Board of Directors Description: With CASA eliminating its’ Spring (April) conference beginning in 2014, CSRMA will need to evaluate alternatives to present the Annual Budget to the Board of Directors for approval. Objective: Determine the best alternative to present the Annual Budget to the Board of Directors for approval. Action(s):

1. Identify Alternatives 2. Review and discuss options with Finance Committee 3. Present to the Executive Board and gain approval 4. Review and discuss with Board of Directors and gain approval 5. Presentation of Annual Budget

Responsibility: 1. Alliant Insurance Services 2. Alliant Insurance Services and Finance Committee 3. Alliant Insurance Services and Executive Board 4. Alliant Insurance Services and Board of Directors 5. Alliant Insurance Services

Deadlines: 1. September 2013 2. November 2013 3. December 2013 4. January 2014 5. April 2014

Fiscal Impact: Unknown at this time. Background: CSRMA currently holds Executive Board and Board of Directors meetings in conjunction with the CASA Spring, Summer and Winter Conferences. In 2014, CASA will be eliminating its' Spring Conference, usually held in late April. CSRMA has historically presented the Annual Budget to the Board of Directors for approval at its’ Spring (April) meeting. Status: As of May 31, 2013, this project is on target. As of August 13, 2013, this project is on target. As of October 3, 2013, this project is on target.

As of December 2, 2013, this project is on target. The Finance Committee reviewed viable alternatives for presenting the Annual Budget to the Board of Directors for approval. This item is agendized for discussion at the December 9, 2013 Executive Board meeting.

ON TARGET

20


III. Model Claims Reporting Flow Charts Description: The Executive Board has directed the Program Administrators to develop Model Claims Reporting Flow Charts for the various CSRMA coverage programs. Objective: To develop Model Claims Reporting Flow Charts for the various coverage programs as a resource to member agencies on how to properly report a claim. Action(s):

1. Develop draft model claims reporting flow charts 2. Present the liability claims reporting flow chart to the Pooled Liability

Committee to review and comment 3. Present the workers’ compensation claims reporting flow chart to the

Workers’ Compensation Committee to review and comment 4. Present claims reporting flow charts for the various coverage programs to the

Executive Board for review and approval 5. Distribute model claims reporting flow charts to members

Responsibility: 1. Alliant Insurance Services 2. Alliant Insurance Services and Pooled Liability Committee 3. Alliant Insurance Services and Workers’ Compensation Committee 4. Alliant Insurance Services and Executive Board 5. Alliant Insurance Services

Deadlines:

1. August 2013 2. September 2013 3. October 2013 4. December 2013 5. January 2014

Fiscal Impact: Unknown at this time. Background: A CSRMA member agency experienced a claim and was unclear on the proper claims reporting protocol, which resulted in the claim being reported late to the insurance carrier. The claim was denied initially. Ultimately the claim was paid, only after legal action was taken against the insurance carrier. Had the claim been reported in a timely manner, a more favorable outcome would have been achieved from the outset. The member agency requested that CSRMA assist them in developing Claims Reporting Flow Charts for the various coverage programs outlining the proper steps required in order to avoid a similar situation in the future. Status: As of May 31, 2013, this project is on target. As of August 13, 2013, this project is on target.

ON TARGET

21


As of October 3, 2013, this project is on target. Draft Model Claims Reporting Flow Charts have been presented to the Pooled Liability Committee. The Committees comments have been incorporated and will be presented to the Workers’ Compensation Committee at their October 24, 2103 meeting for review and comment.

As of December 2, 2013, this project is on target. The draft Model Claims Reporting Flow Charts were presented to the Workers’ Compensation Committee at their last meeting. The Committee’s comments have been incorporated and will be presented to the Executive Board at the October 24, 2103 meeting for review and approval.

22


IV. Program Administration, Brokerage and Risk Control Contract

Considerations Description: The Executive Board has asked the Program Administrators to present a three year contract proposal with an option for a two year extension. Objective: To execute a contract for up to a five-year period with pre-agreed compensation features in order to ease the annual administration of this topic. Action(s):

1. Develop a proposal as requested 2. Present to the Officers Committee for review and recommendation to the

Executive Board 3. Present to the Executive Board for review and approval 4. Execute the contract

Responsibility: 1. Alliant Insurance Services 2. Alliant Insurance Services and Officers Committee 3. Alliant Insurance Services, Officers Committee and Executive Board 4. Alliant Insurance Services

Deadlines: 1. May 2013 2. May 2013 3. June 2013 4. June 2013 Fiscal Impact: Unknown at this time. Background: The Alliant contract for JPA Administration, Insurance Brokerage and Risk Control Services renews on July 1, 2013 commencing an expected new three year period. Historically the contract has been on a three-year basis with compensation for each year negotiated on an annual basis within the term. The Officers Committee wishes to review the possibility of executing an agreement for up to a five-year period with pre-agreed compensation features in order to ease the annual administration of this topic. Status: As of May 31, 2013, this project is on target. The Program Administrators presented a 5-

year contract renewal to the Officers Committee. The Officers Committee will be making a recommendation to the Executive Board at the June 10, 2013 meeting.

As of August 13, 2013, this project is complete. The Executive Board approved a 5-year

contract with Alliant.

COMPLETED

23


V. Retrospective Rating Plan for Old Years Description: The Executive Board directed the Program Administrators to research the potential outcomes of closing out and or combining any number of older years in the retrospective rating formulas in the pooled programs. Objective: To determine the feasibility and potential benefits of closing out and or combining older program years in the retrospective rating plan. Action(s):

1. Research and analyze data 2. Present findings to the Workers’ Compensation Committee for review 3. Present findings to the Pooled Liability Committee for review 4. Present to the Executive Board for review and determination of Phase 2

Implementation Responsibility:

1. Alliant Insurance Services 2. Alliant Insurance Services and Workers’ Compensation Committee 3. Alliant Insurance Services and Pooled Liability Committee 4. Alliant Insurance Services and Executive Board

Deadlines:

1. September 2013 2. October 2013 3. November 2012 4. January 2014

Fiscal Impact: Unknown at this time. Background: The Retrospective Rating Plan calculations for the Pooled Programs, adopted by the Board of Directors, include all prior years to determine each member’s return or assessments based on their individual experience and the experience of the group as a whole. The Retro plan was adopted to spread losses amongst members. Each program year is evaluated beginning 18 months after the inception and annually thereafter. Major components of the retrospective rating plan include: • Losses • Administrative Costs • Investment Income • Incurred but not reported (IBNR) loss levels • Claims Reserves Status: As of May 31, 2013, this project is on target. As of August 13, 2013, this project is on target. As of October 3, 2013, this project is on target.

DELAYED

24


As of December 2, 2013, this project is delayed. The Program Administrators are in the process of converting the Retrospective Rating databases for both Programs to a web based platform using current technology. This conversion is behind schedule and has delayed progress on this LRP Action Plan item. The Program Administrators expect to have the conversion done in early 2014.

25


VI. Mobile SSO/Backup Response White Paper Description: The Executive Board directed CSRMA Loss Control to research the possibility of CSRMA developing or co-developing a mobile application designed to increase efficiency and accuracy when responding and reporting SSO’s and backups. Objective: To utilize mobile computer technology to increase efficiency when responding and reporting SSO’s and backups. Action(s):

1. Draft Mobile SSO/Backup Application White Paper 2. Present White Paper to the Pooled Liability Committee to review and

comment 2. Present White Paper to the Executive Board for direction

3. Take action, as necessary

Responsibility:

1. CSRMA Loss Control and Alliant Insurance Services 2. Alliant Insurance Services and Pooled Liability Committee 3. Alliant Insurance Services and Executive Board 4. Alliant Insurance Services

Deadlines: 1. January 2014 2. February 2014 2. March 2014 3. March 2014 Fiscal Impact: $5,000 is budgeted in Fiscal Year 2013-14. Background: Mobile computer technology has been aggressively making its way into the wastewater industry, serving a variety of needs. Whether it's putting electronic and interactive procedures into the hands of workers when working in the field or providing a platform to gather, process and distribute information, mobile technology is expected to continue to find new ways of increasing safety, productivity and efficiency of wastewater workers. Status: As of May 31, 2013, this project is on target.

As of August 13, 2013, this project is ahead of schedule. The FY 13/14 Risk Control Work Plan budgeted $5,000 to develop a white paper discussing the various risk management features, benefits and likely ultimate cost of a mobile sewer overflow and backup response application (app) for the CSRMA membership. A white paper on this topic may no longer be of any value to CSRMA as two important developments have occurred since the Long Range Planning Session. This topic has been agendized for discussion by the Executive Board at their August 21, 2013 meeting.

ON TARGET

26


As of October 3, 2013, this project is ahead of schedule. The Executive Board directed the Program Administrators to obtain an alternative proposal from VDAPro for the development of a Mobile SSO/Backup smartphone application. The Program Administrators received a proposal from VDAPro and have prepared a comparison to the DKF proposal for the Executive Board’s review. This topic has been agendized for discussion by the Executive Board at their October 11, 2013 meeting. As of December 2, 2013, this project is ahead of schedule. At its last meeting, the Executive Board opted to move forward with a product under development by DKF Solutions. The Program Administrators are in the process of finalizing the License Agreement for the Mobile Application with DKF Solutions, and expect the Mobile Application to be rolled out in March 2014.

27


VII. Workers’ Compensation Claims Training Description: The Executive Board has directed the Program Administrators to develop a workers’ compensation claims training program. Objective: To assist CSRMA members in navigating workers’ compensation claims. Action(s):

1. Develop a training plan 2. Review and discuss with the Workers’ Compensation Committee

3. Review and discuss with Executive Board 4. Implement training

Responsibility:

1. CSRMA’s Return to Work Consultant, CSRMA Loss Control and Alliant Insurance Services

2. Alliant Insurance Services and Workers’ Compensation Committee 3. Alliant Insurance Services and Executive Board 4. Alliant Insurance Services

Deadlines: 1. December 2013 and January 2014 2. February 2014 3. March 2014

4. March 2014 Fiscal Impact: Unknown at this time. Background: Workers’ Compensation claims can be very complex and each claim presents its own unique set of circumstances. The CSRMA membership has expressed a need for a training program that educates and better prepares members when workers’ compensation claims occur. Status: As of May 31, 2013, this project is on target.

As of August 13, 2014, this project is on target. As of October 3, 2013, this project is on target. As of December 2, 2013, this project is on target. An additional training was provided, via webinar, on “York Claims Expert” (YCE). YCE is the claims management system used by the Third Party Administrator and available for the members use as well.

ON TARGET

28

G:\Share\CLIENT\jpa\CSRMA\Agenda\_Executive Board\2013\12.09.13\E.1 - 2012-13 Financial Audit.doc

Agenda Item No. E.1 Executive Board Meeting

Meeting Date: December 9, 2013

2012-2013 Fiscal Year Audit Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR)

ISSUE: Annually, CSRMA engages an independent auditor to audit the accounting records of CSRMA. The Audit of fiscal year 2012/13 is complete. David Becker of James Marta & Company presented the draft Audit findings at the Finance Committee meeting and is scheduled to present the Audit to the Board of Directors at their January 16, 2014 meeting. A copy of Mr. Becker’s presentation to the Finance Committee is attached to this item for the Executive Board’s review. The Audit is included in the agenda packet. RECOMMENDATION: Review the report. The Finance Committee recommends that the Executive Board submit the Audit to the Board of Directors at their January meeting for review and acceptance. FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost of the Audit is expected to be $17,600. BACKGROUND: David Becker of James Marta & Company performed the financial audit for the year ended June 30, 2012. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Audit Presentation

2. 2012/13 Comprehensive Financial Audit Report (Separate)

29

1

1


June 30, 2013

Presented by David Becker

Partner

James Marta & CompanyCertified Public Accountants

Accounting, Auditing, Consulting, and Tax

2

Audit Highlights

n Audit opinion is unqualified (Pages 1-3)n Management’s Discussion & Analysis

(Pages 4-11)n Internal control letter (Pages 32-33)

James Marta & Company LLPCertified Public Accountants

3

Financial Resultsn Overall revenues up $773 (9%)n Retrospective contributions given $1.2M n Total expenses decreased $2.5M, prior year increased

$4.8M¨ Claims decreased $2.7M, prior year increase of $4M

n Decrease in prior year estimates of $1.1M¨ Member dividends of $2.2M (PY $2.3M)

n Net Position decreased $298Kn Total assets decreased $1.7Mn Total liabilities decreased $1.4M, prior year increased

$2.2M


30

2




31

3



Claims Reconciliation2013 2012 2011

Unpaid claims and claim adjustmentexpenses at beginning of year 14,891,860$ 12,900,180$ 14,191,433$

Incurred claims and claim adjustment expenses:

Provision for insured events of the current year 3,558,954 4,279,256 3,789,787

Increase/(decrease) in provision of insured events of prior years (1,108,698) 831,320 (2,735,975)

Total incurred claims and claimadjustment expenses 2,450,256 5,110,576 1,053,812

Payments:

Claim and claim adjustment expenses attributable to insured events of the current year 427,426 614,005 442,734

Claim and claim adjustment expenses attributable to insured events of the prior years 3,253,655 2,504,891 1,902,331

Total Payments 3,681,081 3,118,896 2,345,065

Total unpaid claims and claimsadjustment expenses 13,661,035$ 14,891,860$ 12,900,180$

32

4

Claims Incurred

Claims Incurred

Lettern Communication to those Charged with GovernanceØ Significant accounting estimates: claim liabilities and

discount rateØ No disagreements with managementØ Audit conducted as plannedØ Adjustments due to timing of audit and actuaryØ No material weaknesses identified


33

5

13

Key Pointsn CSRMA has paid dividends of over $17

million to members over the last 10 years.n Retrospective contribution returns of $11.6

million.n Increase in net position of $4.1 million over

that time.n CSRMA’s financial position is excellent

with$12 million of equity.


14

Summary

n Good financial reporting structure.n Knowledgeable management team.n Strong financial position


34

G:\Share\CLIENT\jpa\CSRMA\Agenda\_Executive Board\2013\12.09.13\E.2 - Financial Audit Contract 2013.doc



Financial Audit Contract ISSUE: The contract for annual financial audit services with James Marta & Company LLP will expire with completion of the audited financials as of June 30, 2013. The contract covered the term 2011-2013. James Marta & Company LLP has expressed a desire to continue as CSRMA auditors and has proposed a contract extension. The Finance Committee is recommending an extension of the current audit contract for the years ending June 30, 2014 and 2015. RECOMMENDATION: The Finance Committee recommends that the Executive Board extend the current audit contract for the years ending June 30, 2014 and 2015. FISCAL IMPACT: James Marta & Company LLP is proposing a fee of $18,100 for the first year of the contract extension and $18,600 for the second year. BACKGROUND: David Becker, with James Marta & Company LLP is the current auditor for CSRMA and has performed the last three audits. California enacted a law in 2012 that requires local agencies to rotate audit partners every six consecutive fiscal years. The California Society of CPAs worked with the bill’s sponsor to remove language prescribing firm rotation from the legislation. ATTACHMENTS: James Marta & Company LLP proposed contract extension for audit services for the years ending June 30, 2014 and 2015.

35

James Marta & Company LLP Certified Public Accountants

Accounting, Auditing, Consulting, and Tax

701 Howe Avenue, Suite E3, Sacramento, California 95825 Phone: (916) 993-9494 Fax: (916) 993-9489 e-mail: [email protected] www.jpmcpa.com

September 13, 2013 California Sanitation Risk Management Authority 100 Pine Street, 11th Floor San Francisco, California 94111-5101 We are pleased to propose an extension of our audit services for California Sanitation Risk Management Authority for the years ending June 30, 2014 and 2015. I. SCOPE OF WORK We will perform an audit of California Sanitation Risk Management Authority’s statements of net position and statements of activities and cash flows for the years ending June 30, 2014 and 2015. The purpose of audit is to express an opinion as to whether your financial statements are fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, and is limited to the period covered by our audit. We will also assist you in reviewing your Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for compliance with the Government Finance Officers Association requirements. You have requested that we audit the financial statements of California Sanitation Risk Management Authority, as of June 30, 2014 and 2015 and for the years then ended and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise California Sanitation Risk Management Authority’s basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents. We are pleased to confirm our acceptance and our understanding of this audit engagement by means of this letter. Our audit will be conducted with the objective of our expressing an opinion on each opinion unit. Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that Management Discussion and Analysis, Reconciliation of Claims Liabilities by Type of Contract, and the Claims Development Information be presented to supplement the basic financial statements. Such information, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board, who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historical context. As part of our engagement, we will apply certain limited procedures to the required supplementary information (RSI) in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. These limited procedures will consist primarily of inquiries of management regarding their methods of measurement and presentation, and comparing the information for consistency with management’s responses to our inquiries. We will not express an opinion or provide any form of assurance on the RSI.

36

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.jpmcpa.com

James Marta & Company LLP Page 2 of 8

If supplementary information other than RSI will accompany California Sanitation Risk Management Authority’s basic financial statements, we will subject the following supplementary information to the auditing procedures applied in our audit of the basic financial statements and certain additional procedures, including comparing and reconciling the supplementary information to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the financial statements or to the financial statements themselves, and additional procedures in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. We will conduct our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America (U.S. GAAS) and in accordance with Government Auditing Standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the basic financial statements are free from material misstatement. An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The procedures selected depend on the auditor’s judgment, including the assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error, fraudulent financial reporting, misappropriation of assets, or violations of laws, governmental regulations, grant agreements, or contractual agreements. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. Because of the inherent limitations of an audit, together with the inherent limitations of internal control, an unavoidable risk that some material misstatements may not be detected exists, even though the audit is properly planned and performed in accordance with U.S. GAAS and in accordance with Government Auditing Standards. In making our risk assessments, we consider internal control relevant to the entity’s preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity’s internal control. However, we will communicate to you in writing concerning any significant deficiencies or material weaknesses in internal control relevant to the audit of the financial statements that we have identified during the audit. II. MANAGEMENT’S RESPONSIBILITIES At the outset, it is imperative that we state the scope of your responsibilities in connection with this engagement:

a. The financial statements are the responsibility of California Sanitation Risk Management Authority management.

b. Encompassed in that responsibility is the establishment and maintenance of effective internal control over financial reporting, the establishment and maintenance of proper accounting records, and the selection of appropriate accounting principles.

c. Management is responsible for the design and implementation of programs and controls to prevent or detect fraud, and for informing us about all known or suspected fraud affecting the organization involving (a) management, (b) individuals who have significant roles in internal control, and (c) others where the fraud could have a material effect on the financial statements.

37


d. Management is also responsible for informing us of its knowledge of any allegations of fraud or suspected fraud affecting the organization received in communications from members, regulators, or others. In addition, management is responsible for identifying and ensuring that the entity complies with applicable laws and regulations.

e. Management is responsible: i. for the identification of the applicable reporting framework. ii. for the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements in accordance with

accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. iii. for the design, implementation, and maintenance of internal controls relevant to the

preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.

f. Management is responsible to provide us with: i. access to all information of which management is aware that is relevant to the preparation

and fair presentation of the financial statements such as records, documentation, and other matters;

ii. additional information that we may request from management for the purpose of the audit; and

iii. unrestricted access to persons within the entity from whom we determine it necessary to obtain audit evidence.

As part of our audit process, we will request from management and, when appropriate, those charged with governance, written confirmation concerning representations made to us in connection with the audit. We will assist in the preparation of your financial statements, but the responsibility for the financial statements remains with you. You are responsible for adjusting the financial statements to correct material misstatements and for confirming to us in the management representation letter that the effects of any uncorrected misstatements aggregated by us during the current engagement and pertaining to the latest period presented are immaterial, both individually and in the aggregate, to the financial statements taken as a whole. As part of our engagement we may propose standard, adjusting, or correcting journal entries to your financial statements. You are responsible for reviewing the entries and understanding the nature of any proposed entries and the impact they have on your financial statements. Further, you are responsible for designating a qualified management-level individual to be responsible and accountable for overseeing these services. III. OUR RESPONSIBILITY Our responsibility is to express an opinion as to whether your financial statements are fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, and is limited to the period covered by our audit. Facts and circumstances may require us to qualify that opinion, or to disclaim it, or to express an adverse opinion. Other facts and circumstances may require us to provide additional information on our report. We will keep you informed if and when we begin to reach conclusions that our report may need to be modified because of such facts and circumstances.

38


IV. CHARACTER AND LIMITATIONS OF AN AUDIT Our audit will be conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. Those standards require that we initially assess the risk that errors, fraud, irregularities, and illegal acts may cause the financial statements to contain a material misstatement. This is necessary because we do not audit all the transactions and balances in the financial statements, only a selected portion of them, in some cases a very small portion. The costs for us to examine a large portion of them, or all of them of a certain category, or all of them in all categories, would be prohibitive. Consequently, there are risks. In making this initial assessment, we are required to obtain an understanding of the entity and its environment, including its internal control, sufficient to assess the risks of material misstatement of financial statements and to design appropriate audit procedures. Those considerations mandate your complete cooperation and honesty about your knowledge and understanding of the possibility of the existence of errors, fraud, irregularities and illegal acts. By signing this letter, you agree that you will provide this cooperation and that you will be totally honest with us. Based on that assessment, the standards require us to design the audit to obtain reasonable, rather than absolute, assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether caused by errors, fraud, irregularities and illegal acts. Accordingly, a material misstatement may remain undetected. While we are required to exercise due care and professional skepticism, since our opinion is based on the concept of reasonable assurance, we are not an insurer and our report does not constitute a guarantee. We will inform you of all matters of fraud that come to our attention. We will also inform you of illegal acts that come to our attention, unless they are clearly inconsequential. We will inform you of any need to extend our procedures because of them and our estimate of their additional cost. The discovery, subsequent to the date of the auditor’s report, that one or more errors, frauds, irregularities, or illegal acts causing the financial statements to contain one or more material misstatements, have occurred does not necessarily mean that our audit was not conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. An audit includes obtaining an understanding of internal control sufficient to plan the audit, but is not designed to provide assurance on internal control or to identify significant deficiencies conditions. However, during the audit, if we become aware of such reportable conditions or ways that we believe management practices can be improved, we will communicate them to you in a separate letter. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our procedures will include tests of documentary evidence supporting the transactions recorded in the accounts, and may include direct confirmation of certain assets, revenues and expenses by correspondence with selected individuals, legal counsel, creditors, and financial institutions. Management is responsible for making all financial records and related information available for purposes of the audit. In the event that the financial information provided is incomplete or inaccurate, then we will either complete the work at our standard rate, or delay the audit until this information is complete and accurate.

39


At the conclusion of our audit, we will require you to furnish us a management representation letter confirming, among others, your responsibility for your financial statements and for the design and implementation of program and controls to prevent and detect fraud. This letter is a required audit procedure prior to issuing our report. By signing this engagement letter and furnishing a management representation letter, you agree to indemnify us and hold us harmless for any liability and costs arising from knowing misrepresentations by management. In accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, we will also issue a written report describing the scope of our testing over internal control over financial reporting, including the results of that testing. However, providing an opinion on internal control and compliance will not be an objective of the audit and, therefore, no such opinion will be expressed. We have attached a copy of our latest external peer review report of our firm for your consideration and files. V. OTHER STIPULATIONS Fees Our proposed fees for the audits will be $18,100 and $18,600 for the years ending June 30, 2014 and 2015, respectively. The Authority has the option of renewing this contract for either a one or two-year period. We will bill you on a monthly basis for our services and invoices are payable upon presentation. Unpaid fee balances 30 days overdue will bear interest at 18 percent per annum. This fee is based upon the assumption that the closing journal entries will be made and accounting will be finalized and closed before the year end audit fieldwork. Additional time and billing charges will incur if accounting service is provided for closing accounting records. Attendance at special meetings will be billed at our hourly rates. Whenever possible, we will attempt to use your organization’s personnel to assist in the preparation of schedules and analyses of accounts. We understand that your employees will prepare all cash or other confirmations we request and will locate any invoices selected by us for testing. This effort could substantially reduce our time requirements, facilitate the timely conclusion of the audit, and help you hold down audit fees. Our initial fee estimate assumes we will receive the aforementioned assistance from your personnel and unexpected circumstances will not be encountered. In the event that the GASB, FASB, AICPA, GAO, OMB, or the State of California issues additional standards or audit procedures that require additional work during the audit period, we will discuss these requirements with you before proceeding further. If to complete our work or in conjunction with our audit we are asked or are required to perform account reconciliation or other work not otherwise in the scope of an audit, our fee for addressing the additional requirements will be at our standard hourly rates for each person involved in the additional work. In the event we are required to respond to discovery requests, subpoenas, and outside inquiries, we will first obtain your permission unless otherwise required to comply under the law. Our time and expense to comply with such requests will be charged at our standard hour rates in addition to the stated contract.

40


Reports We will issue a report on the audit of the California Sanitation Risk Management Authority’s statements of net position and the related statements of revenues, expenses and change in net position and cash flows for the years ending June 30, 2014 and 2015. The purpose of an audit is to express an opinion as to whether your financial statements are fairly presented, in all material respects in conformity with United States generally accepted accounting principles, and is limited to the period covered by our audit. We will issue a written report upon the completion of our audit to the California Sanitation Risk Management Authority. Our report will be addressed to the board of directors of California Sanitation Risk Management Authority. We cannot provide assurance that an unmodified opinion will be expressed. Circumstances may arise in which it is necessary to modify our opinion, add an emphasis-of-matter or other-matter paragraph(s), or withdraw from the engagement. In the event we must withdraw from the engagement, our fees will be limited to the fees incurred up to the point of withdrawal. We will also issue a written report on internal control, a report to those charged with governance and a management comment letter (if needed). At the conclusion of our audit engagement, we will communicate to those charged with governance the following significant findings from the audit:

• Our view about the qualitative aspects of the entity’s significant accounting practices; • Significant difficulties, if any, encountered during the audit; • Uncorrected misstatements, other than those we believe are trivial, if any; • Disagreements with management, if any; • Other findings or issues, if any, arising from the audit that are, in our professional judgment,

significant and relevant to those charged with governance regarding their oversight of the financial reporting process;

• Material, corrected misstatements that were brought to the attention of management as a result of our audit procedures;

• Representations we requested from management; • Management’s consultations with other accountants, if any; and • Significant issues, if any, arising from the audit that were discussed, or the subject of

correspondence, with management. We will provide you with 15 copies of the report. If you intend to publish or otherwise reproduce the financial statements and make reference to our firm, you agree to provide us with printers’ proofs or masters for our review and approval before printing. You also agree to provide us with a copy of the final reproduced material for our approval before it is distributed. The intended users of the report are the board of directors of the California Sanitation Risk Management Authority. You agree to be responsible to distribute the reports to those charged with governance and to the appropriate officials of the responsible party.

41


Working Papers The working papers for this engagement are the property of James Marta & Company LLP and constitute confidential information. However, we may be requested to make certain working papers available or provide copies of them to certain regulators pursuant to authority given to it by law or regulation or peer reviewers. If requested, access to such working papers will be provided under the supervision of James Marta & Company LLP. The regulator’s may intend, or decide, to distribute the copies of information contained therein to others, including other governmental agencies. We agree to retain our work papers related to this audit for a period of at least seven (7) years from the date of our report. Mediation Provision Disputes arising under this agreement (including scope, nature, and quality of services to be performed by us, our fees and other terms of the engagement) shall be submitted to mediation. A competent and impartial third party, acceptable to both parties shall be appointed to mediate, and each disputing party shall pay an equal percentage of the mediator’s fees and expenses. No suit or arbitration proceedings shall be commenced under this agreement until at least 60 days after the mediator’s first meeting with the involved parties. If the dispute requires litigation, the court shall be authorized to impose all costs against any non-prevailing party found not to have participated in the mediation process in good faith. Several technical accounting and auditing words and phrases have been used herein. We presume you to understand their meaning or that you will notify us otherwise so that we can furnish appropriate explanations. If the foregoing is in accordance with your understanding, please indicate your agreement by signing a copy of this letter and returning it to us. We appreciate the opportunity to serve you and look forward to working with you and your staff. Sincerely,

James Marta & Company LLP Certified Public Accountants RESPONSE: This letter correctly sets forth our understanding. Acknowledged and agreed on behalf of California Sanitation Risk Management Authority

Approved by:

Title: Date:

42


43

G:\Share\CLIENT\jpa\CSRMA\Agenda\_Executive Board\2013\12.09.13\E.3. - CAJPA Accreditation Report 2013-16.doc



CAJPA Accreditation 2013-16

ISSUE: As discussed at the October Executive Board meeting, CSRMA has been accredited by the California Association of Joint Powers Authorities (CAJPA) effective May 15, 2013 for another three years. Conditional Accreditation was received pending satisfaction of three requirements, which are listed below with a status update for each:

No. Requirements for Accreditation Status 1. The York contract needs a provision requiring

York to disclose any conflict of interest.

COMPLETED

2. CSRMA needs to conform to the Brown Act’s requirement to post its agendas of its legislative body in a public place for a period of at least 72 consecutive hours.

COMPLETED

3. The contract with PFM only requires that PFM provide a copy of the ADV at inception of the contract. CSRMA needs to have in the contract a requirement in the contract that PFM has a duty to disclose any conflicts of interest as they may arise.

COMPLETED

To achieve Accreditation with Excellence, the following requirements must be satisfied:

No. Requirements for Accreditation w/ Excellence Status 1. Although CSRMA does obtain an actuarial study

every year on all its major retention programs, CSRMA needs a written policy requiring actuarial reports to be developed periodically on all major JPA retention programs.

See the attached draft amendment, as recommended by the CAJPA Accreditation Committee, for the PLP and WC Program Manuals.

2. Although CSRMA does obtain claims audits, it needs a written policy requiring such claims audit to be obtained on all major JPA retention programs.

See the attached draft amendment, as recommended by the CAJPA Accreditation Committee, for the PLP and WC Program Manuals.

44

G:\Share\CLIENT\jpa\CSRMA\Agenda\_Executive Board\2013\12.09.13\E.3. - CAJPA Accreditation Report 2013-16.doc

3. CSRMA needs to have the Board of Directors, not the just the Executive Board, review the Accreditation Report.

The BOD will review the report at their January 2014 meeting.

CSRMA has six months from the date of the Accreditation Committee approval to satisfy these requirements. A copy of the Accreditation Report will be made available at the meeting for the Executive Board to reference. RECOMMENDATION: None. Information only. FISCAL IMPACT: None. Information only. BACKGROUND: The California Association of Joint Powers Authorities (CAJPA) Accreditation Program reviews the organizational structure and activities of a joint powers authority (JPA), comparing the JPA with standards adopted by the Association believed to be advantageous to the preservation and performance of the individual JPA and JPAs in California as a whole. ATTACHMENTS: 1. CAJPA Accreditation Report of CSRMA (Handout) 2. PLP Program Manual with Suggested amendments

3. WC Program Manual with Suggested amendments

45

Liability Program Operation A. Program Participation Requirements

Member agencies obtain coverage upon the payment of an application fee, meeting underwriting criteria, and the signing of a Participation Agreement.

B. Program Committee The Pooled Liability Program Committee advises the Executive Board and the Board of

Directors on all operational aspects of the Program. The Committee is responsible for making recommendations on underwriting, coverage issues, claims administration and loss control.

The committee is composed of six members, appointed by the President, one of who is an

Executive Board member who serves as Committee Chair. C. Claims Administration Claims administration is provided by an Independent Third Party Claims Administrator.

Working with each agency, the Claims Administrator is responsible for advising as to the merit of each claim and the appropriate action to be taken. The Administrator is responsible for providing all necessary investigation of claims, as well as overseeing legal defense. The Administrator provides monthly claims reports containing the status of claims including paid and reserve values.

1. Claims Handling The Board of Directors has established an optional settlement policy whereby

small property damage claims valued at less than $5,000 per occurrence may be settled at the agency level. Should the agency wish to exercise this option they remain obligated to report such claims to the claims administrator for recording purposes.

2. Claims Filing Procedures The Claims Administrator provides procedures, and other pertinent information

concerning administration, to be followed in reporting liability claims. 3. Claims Settlement Authority

46

Various levels of settlement authority have been established as CSRMA policy. These levels are as follows:

$0-$25,000 - Claims Administrator The Claims Administrator has authority to settle claims up to, and including,

$25,000 in indemnity payment per claim. When at all possible, the Claims Administrator shall advise the member agency of the proposed recommended settlement prior to settlement.

Each agency may, at their option, settle property damage claims up to $5,000 per

occurrence and as outlined in Policy and Procedure Memorandum #1

.

$25,001-$125,000 – Pooled Liability Program Committee The Program Committee has the authority to authorize settlement of claims up to

and including $125,000 (per occurrence). $125,001-$SIR – Executive Board The Executive Board has authority to authorize claims settlement up to the

retained limit. 4. Claims Audit A biennial claim audit shall be conducted on the Third-Party Administrator in

order to ensure that CSRMA members benefit from above average claims handling services, and to allow the JPA to gauge the effectiveness of their work. A report of the audit will be presented to the Pooled Liability Committee and Executive Board for review.

D. Loss Control CSRMA has hired a full-time Risk Control Advisor to provide loss control services to

assist members in establishing a loss control program. The Program Committee develops and recommends loss control standards which if adopted, members are expected to meet. Specific Standards for individual members are contained in the Risk Control Advisor's member audit reports.

E. Policy and Procedure Policy and Procedures have been developed to assist in operation of the Program. As

policy is established notification to members is made by way of a Policy and Procedure Memorandum.

Formatted: Font: Bold, Italic

47

Liability Program Structure

A. Risk Sharing The Pooled Liability Program is currently structured with a $500,000 self-funded risk-

sharing first layer. Individual members choose between deductibles of $2,500 to $500,000 per occurrence based upon the size and financial strength of the agency. Each year, the level of the risk sharing layer is evaluated and may be adjusted upward or downward.

B. Coverage

The CSRMA risk sharing layer provides coverages for General and Automobile Liability as a result of Bodily Injury, Property Damage, Personal Injury, Employment Practices Liability and Public Entity Errors & Omissions Liability as stated in the Memorandum of Coverage. Coverage is on an occurrence basis.

Reinsurance is purchased above the $500,000 self insured layer to $25.5 Million in limits. In some instances the reinsurance coverage may be either narrower or broader in scope than the underlying memorandum of coverage.

C. Program Financing The cost to each member agency for program participation is determined by the

Executive Board upon the basis of a cost allocation plan and rating formula. The premium for each participating agency includes the agency's share of expected losses, program insurance costs, and program administrative costs for the year, plus the agency's share of Authority general expense allocated to the program by the Board.

The rating structure for General Liability uses the following factors to determine an

equitable charge for each individual member agency: 1. Existence 2. Treatment 3. Miles of sewage collection line excluding lateral. The Automobile Liability rating portion is based on per vehicle charges using the

following categories: 1. Heavy vehicles (Gross Vehicle Weight of 10,000 lbs. or more) 2. Light vehicles (Gross Vehicle Weight under 10,000 lbs.) D. Actuarial Report

An actuarial report shall be obtained annually to determine estimated outstanding losses for each open program year and funding rates for future program years based on the experience of the Pooled Liability Program.

Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5"

48

D.

E. Retrospective Rating

A retrospective rating plan is utilized to determine that sufficient funds are maintained in the Pool to cover all losses penetrating the Pool.

Formatted: Strikethrough

49

SECTION 1

INTRODUCTION

50

The Program Administrators have prepared this manual to serve as a reference for members of the Workers’ Compensation Program. We recommend that it be maintained by the person at your agency who is responsible for insurance matters. CSRMA has created a manual for each of its programs and one additional manual, which contains the Authority’s general documents. Together, these manuals are a valuable resource to your agency’s insurance program. Any questions about the Authority or its programs should be directed to the Program Administrators at:

CSRMA Program Administrators c/o Alliant Insurance Services, Inc.

100 Pine Street, 11th

San Francisco, CA 94111 Floor

Telephone: (415) 403-1400 Facsimile: (415) 402-0773

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION The Workers' Compensation Program was developed by CSRMA to provide state-mandated benefits to employees of Member Agencies in a cost effective, efficient manner. Special emphasis has been placed on providing responsive claims handling and safety services. PROGRAM STRUCTURE Coverage The program consists of a $750,000 SIR (Self-Insured Retention) pooled layer with Statutory per occurrence excess Workers’ Compensation coverage above the SIR, and $1,000,000 Employers Liability excess of the SIR. Deposit Premium Each Member Agency pays a deposit premium each year based on Workers' Compensation manual premium rates for each classification of worker. Actuarial Report An actuarial report shall be obtained annually to determine estimated outstanding losses for each open program year and funding rates for future program years based on the experience of the Workers’ Compensation Program.

51

Claims Administration Claims administration is provided through a third-party administrator. More information concerning this aspect of the program can be found in Section 2 of this manual. Claims Audit A biennial claim audit shall be conducted on the Third-Party Administrator in order to ensure that CSRMA members benefit from above average claims handling services, and to allow the JPA to gauge the effectiveness of their work. A report of the audit will be presented to the Workers’ Compensation Program Committee and Executive Board for review. Safety Services The CSRMA Risk Control Advisor provides safety services. Additional information on safety services can be found in Section 6 of this manual. Workers' Compensation Program Committee The Workers' Compensation Program Committee advises the Executive Board and the Board of Directors of all operational aspects of the program. The Committee is responsible for making recommendations on underwriting, coverage issues, claims administration, and loss control. The Committee is composed of six members appointed by the president, one of which is an Executive Board member who serves as Committee Chair. The members and the responsibilities of the Committee can be found in Section 4 of this manual.

Formatted: Font: Not Bold

52

G:\Share\CLIENT\jpa\CSRMA\Agenda\_Executive Board\2013\12.09.13\E.4 - Alternatives to Presenting Annual Budget to BOD.doc



Alternatives to Presenting Annual Budget to the Board of Directors ISSUE: With CASA eliminating its’ Spring (April) conference beginning in 2014, CSRMA will need to determine an alternative to present the Annual Budget to the Board of Directors for approval going forward. The Executive Board directed the Program Administrators to work with the Finance Committee to determine the best alternative to present the Annual Budget to the Board of Directors for approval absent a Board of Directors meeting at the Spring CASA conference. The Finance Committee considered several viable options. It was determined that the best alternative would be to establish a protocol by which the Board of Directors extends the Annual Budget in January each year to their August meeting date to approve a new Annual Budget. It was important to the Committee that the discussion, interaction and adoption of the budget continue to take place in person. RECOMMENDATION: The Finance Committee recommends to the Executive Board that they recommend to the Board of Directors to establish a protocol by which the Board of Directors extends the Annual Budget in January each year to their August meeting date to approve a new Annual Budget. FISCAL IMPACT: Unknown at this time. BACKGROUND: CSRMA currently holds Executive Board and Board of Directors meetings in conjunction with the CASA Spring, Summer and Winter Conferences. In 2014, CASA will be eliminating its' Spring Conference, usually held in late April. CSRMA has historically presented the Annual Budget to the Board of Directors for approval at its’ Spring (April) meeting. The Fiscal Year 2014-2015 Budget will be approved using the selected alternative. Alternatives considered including conducting a Board of Directors budget meeting through electronic means (webinar), adopting a two year budget, and changing the fiscal period of the JPA. Considering the drawbacks of these alternative approaches, none of these were more desirable to the Finance Committee over a process of developing a short budget extension. ATTACHMENTS: None.

53

Agenda Item No. E.5

Executive Board Meeting Meeting Date: December 9, 2013

Model Claims Reporting Flowcharts

ISSUE: As part of the 2013-14 Long Range Action Plan, the Executive Board directed the Program Administrators to develop Model Claims Reporting Flow Charts for the various CSRMA coverage programs as a resource to member agencies on how to properly report a claim. Both the Pooled Liability and Workers’ Compensation Committees have reviewed the flow charts. Their suggestions have been incorporated into the attached model claims reporting flow charts drafted by the Program Administrators. RECOMMENDATION: Review and provide direction. FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: A CSRMA member agency experienced a claim and was unclear on the proper claims reporting protocol, which resulted in the claim being reported late to the insurance carrier. The claim was denied initially. Ultimately the claim was paid, only after legal action was taken against the insurance carrier. Had the claim been reported in a timely manner, a more favorable outcome would have been achieved from the outset. The member agency requested that CSRMA assist them in developing Claims Reporting Flow Charts for the various coverage programs outlining the proper steps required in order to avoid a similar situation in the future. After review and approval from the Executive Board, the flowcharts will be placed on the CSRMA website, and will include interactive features such as links to supporting documents. ATTACHMENTS: Draft Model Claims Reporting Flowcharts

54

POOLED LIABILITY PROGRAMClaims Reporting Flowchart

The CSRMA Pooled Liability Program provides coverage for General and Automobile Liability as a result of Bodily Injury, Property Damage, Personal Injury, Employment Practices Liability and Public Entity Errors & Omissions Liability.

Incident Occurs(Report as soon as

practicable)

If Sewer Overflow

Refer to Sewer Overflow Policy & Procedure in the Pooled Liability Program

ManualContact

Carl Warren & Co.Mauri McGuire707‐732‐6728

[email protected]

If Severe (i.e. fatality, serious bodily injury or explosion)

Refer to “Severe Incident Response and

Notification” chart

First Notice of All Claims

When in doubt contact the CSRMA Program Administrators, Alliant Insurance Services.415‐403‐1400. Seth Cole, P.J. Skarlanic, Myron Leavell or Dennis Mulqueeney

55

Workers’ Compensation ProgramClaims Reporting Flowchart

The CSRMA Workers’ Compensation Program provides state‐mandated benefits to employees of Member Agencies for bodily injury caused by accident or disease when in the course and scope of work.



practicable)

Contact York Insurance Services

Tamara Kneff916.960.0939

[email protected]

If Severe Injury or Fatality




Refer to:Workers’ Compensation Management Programhttp://www.sipeonlinetraining.com/Main/rco_csrma_w

orkers_comp.cfm

56

Property Insurance ProgramClaims Reporting Flowchart

The CSRMA Property Program provides "All Risk" Property, Boiler & Machinery, Cyber Liability and Pollution Liability coverage.


practicable)

Contact Alliant Insurance Services ‐ Claims

Bob Frey415‐403‐1445

[email protected]





If Severe (i.e. explosion, building collapse or wildfire)

For Cyber Liability Losses also Report to:

For Pollution Liability Losses also Report to:

Contact Beazley GroupBeth Diamond

646‐943‐5900 / [email protected]

Contact ACE Claims USA800‐951‐4119

[email protected]

57

PRIMARY INSURANCE PROGRAMClaims Reporting Flowchart

The CSRMA "PIP" program provides coverage for General and Automobile Liability as a result of Bodily Injury, Property Damage, Personal Injury, Employment Practices Liability, Public Entity Errors and Omissions Liability and Auto Physical Damage. NOTE: Not all members purchase all of the above mentioned coverages.


practicable)

If Sewer Overflow

If Severe (i.e. fatality, bodily injury or explosion)



All Other Claims


Contact Alliant Insurance Services ‐

ClaimsBob Frey

415‐403‐[email protected]

Contact Alteris Claims Reporting

866‐577‐[email protected]

58

Agenda Item No. E.6


Emerging Risks Work Plan

ISSUE: As part of the 2013-14 Long Range Action Plan, the Executive Board directed the Program Administrators to work with the Pooled Liability and Workers’ Compensation Committees to develop an Emerging Risks Work Plan that best addresses Emerging Risks that may impact CSRMA members and the pool. The Pooled Liability and Workers’ Compensation Committees have identified several risks that they believe may impact the CSRMA members and the pool and have prioritized them on the attached, ranking their top priorities 1-5. The attached is being presented to the Executive Board for review and next steps. Also attached to this item are reference materials pertinent to the discussion. RECOMMENDATION: Review and provide direction. FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: Lloyd’s of London defines an Emerging Risk as “An issue that is perceived to be potentially significant but which may not be fully understood or allowed for an insurance terms and conditions, pricing, reserving or capital setting.” There are a number of Emerging Risks that could potentially impact CSRMA members, and ultimately the pool. For each of these identified risks CSRMA should first prioritize the risks then determine if there is an insurance solution, a risk management solution, or if there is even a solution at all. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Emerging Risks Work Plan – Draft 2. Federal Court Holds That E-Mail Received… 3. Public Entities at Risk for Privacy and Network Security Breaches 4. Emerging Risks Presentation (separate)

59

CSRMA Emerging Risks Work Plan 2013-14 - Draft

Emerging Risk Insurance SolutionRisk Management

Solution Comments1. Pharma-Water / Flushables Y Y Pollution Insurance for pharma-water; Education campaign; CASA2. Privacy and Network Security Y Y Public Risk Magazine May/June 2013 - Article; Stressed related WC issues. a. Electronic Media - Email N Y http://www.blankrome.com/index.cfm?contentID=37&itemID=30713. Weather Related Risks (Flood) Y Y Flood insurance; Parametrics; Emergency response plans; Contingency plans4. Clean Water Act Citizens Suits N Y Pooled Liabilty MOC defense coverage sublimit; CASA5. Aging Workforce N Y Change in retirement formula. Functional capacity testing.Rising Sea Level N Y Coastal areasTalent Gap N Y Succession Planning; RecruitingObesity Epidemic N Y Wellness ProgramPower Generation Y Y Wind, solar, hydro, fuel cells, co-gen

60

Federal Court Holds That E-Mail Received By Employee From Lawyer on His Work E-Mail System Is Not Privileged June 2013 (No. 2) For The Defense

In a recent decision, Judge Roslynn Mauskopf, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of New York, denied defendant Christopher Finazzo’s motion in limine to preclude the government from introducing an allegedly privileged e-mail that Finazzo’s personal attorney sent to Finazzo’s work e-mail account at the clothing retailer Aéropostale, Inc. (“Aéropostale”), his former employer.1 In the e-mail, Finazzo’s attorney attached a list of Finazzo’s assets that the attorney prepared for the purpose of creating a will.2 Finazzo was asked to review the values listed in the attachment, and the lawyer would draft a revised will based upon information received from Finazzo.3 The government sought to use the e-mail in support of its case against Finazzo for, among other things, mail fraud, wire fraud, and conspiracy.4 It contended that the e-mail was not privileged, because (i) Aéropostale’s policies regarding use of its e-mail accounts provided that (a) the e-mail system should generally be used for Company business only; (b) employees have no expectation of privacy in the use of the Company’s e-mail system; and (c) Aéropostale reserves the right to monitor or review employee e-mails, and (ii) Finazzo was aware of Aéropostale’s policy.5

Finazzo argued that the e-mail was privileged, that Aéropostale’s policy regarding its corporate e-mail accounts did not defeat Finazzo’s reasonable expectation of privacy, and that Finazzo did not ask his attorney to send the privileged e-mail to his Aéropostale account.6 The Court disagreed, finding that Finazzo had no reasonable expectation of privacy or confidentiality in any communication made through his Aéropostale e-mail account because of the way in which Aéropostale drafted and implemented its computer, e-mail, and Internet usage policy, which was explained in Aéropostale’s Employee Handbook that Finazzo acknowledged reading.7

We have written previously about whether the attorney-client privilege protects an employee’s personal documents and e-mails stored on a company computer or sent through a company’s network.8 Courts generally have found that documents or e-mails created on or sent through a company computer may be confidential and/or privileged if the employee possesses a subjective expectation of confidentiality in those documents that a court finds objectively reasonable.9 A four-factor test (or some derivative thereof) is used to make this determination:

Is there a company policy banning personal use of company e-mail?1.Does the company monitor the use of its e-mail?2.Does the company have access to all e-mails? and3.Did the company notify the employee about these policies?104.

This is the test that the Finazzo court used as well.11

So, in light of a fair number of decisions on this subject, what makes this decision important is the fact that Finazzo’s attorney, not Finazzo himself—who was not bound by Aéropostale’s e-mail policy—sent the e-mail that the Court deemed non-privileged.

SERVICESWhite Collar Defense & Investigations

PROFESSIONALSJoseph G. Poluka

Michelle Gitlitz Courtney

Page 1 of 3BLANK ROME LLP

9/16/2013http://www.blankrome.com/printFriendly.cfm?contentID=37&itemID=3071

61

Although many Courts have examined whether an employee who has sent and exchanged privileged e-mails with his or her lawyer may rely upon an expectation of privacy in light of an employer policy that restricts the personal use of the company’s e-mail system,12 we are unaware of any Court which has previously held that the attorney-client privilege is waived by an employee’s mere receipt of a privileged e-mail from his or her lawyer.

Generally, an attorney cannot unilaterally waive the privilege for his or her client.13 However, here, the Court found that Finazzo’s having admitted he previously corresponded with his attorney via his Aéropostale e-mail account and having never told his attorney not to send privileged information to his Aéropostale e-mail account were important considerations in determining that Finazzo did not ensure and preserve the confidentiality of communications with his attorney14 as required to prevent a waiver.15 This was despite the fact that Finazzo asserted that he never asked or authorized his attorney to send any confidential, sensitive, or privileged materials to his Aéropostale e-mail account.16 Finazzo also asserted that, immediately upon receiving the e-mail, he forwarded it to his personal e-mail account, deleted the e-mail from his inbox, and instructed his attorney only to send confidential information to his personal e-mail address.17 The court was unpersuaded by these arguments as well because, by forwarding the e-mail to his personal account, he sent it back through Aéropostale’s e-mail servers, providing Aéropostale another opportunity to see the e-mail.18

Although not mentioned in the opinion, the decision is consistent with the American Bar Association’s Formal Opinion 11-459 (the “ABA Opinion”), which states that lawyers have a duty to warn their clients not to use a workplace computer, network, or device to communicate with their personal lawyer. The ABA makes clear that, whenever a lawyer communicates with a client via e-mail, he/she must consider the risks associated with a third party gaining access to those communications, caution the client about this risk, and instruct the client on how to minimize the risk. The attorney in the Finazzo case clearly did not comply with the ABA Opinion. You can obtain more information on the ABA Opinion in our article entitled Ethical Electronics: New Guidance on Protecting the Confidentiality of Attorney-Client E-mails.19

It is clear from the Finazzo opinion that whether an e-mail is sent by an employee or his/her lawyer to the employee’s work e-mail account, there is a risk that such an e-mail will be considered non-privileged and discoverable in a subsequent litigation.

United States v. Finazzo, No. 10-cr-457, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22479 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 19, 2013).1.Id. at *3.2.Id. at *3-4.3.Finazzo was convicted of 14 counts of mail fraud and one count each of conspiracy and wire fraud on April 25, 2013.

4.

Id. at *10-14.5.Id., at *21-22.6.Id. at *33-34.7.J. Poluka and M. Gitlitz Courtney, Whose E-mail Is It Anyway, For the Defense (June 2007), reprinted in Privacy & Data Security Law Journal, vol. 2, no. 9, at 775 (Aug. 2007); J. Poluka and M. Gitlitz Courtney, Whose E-mail Is It Anyway...It Depends, For the Defense (February 2010), reprinted in Mondaq (March 2010).

8.

In re the Reserve Fund Secs. & Deriv. Litig., 275 F.R.D. 154, 160 (S.D.N.Y. 2011) (employee did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in e-mails he sent or received over the company’s system, because the company banned personal use of its e-mail system, the company reserved its right to access employee e-mail, the company warned employees that e-mail sent over the company’s system might be subject to disclosure to regulators and the courts, and the employee was aware of the e-mail policy); see also Stengart v. Loving Care Agency, Inc., 201 N.J. 300 (2010) (Stengart, who communicated with her lawyer via a personal password-protected Yahoo! e-mail account utilizing a company laptop, did not waive the attorney-client privilege, notwithstanding the company’s policy on electronic communications which provided that e-mails, Internet communications, and computer files are “the Company’s business records” and that the company could review and access “all matters on the Company’s media systems at any time.”); Alamar Ranch, LLC v. County of Boise, No. CV-09-004, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101866 at *11 (D. Idaho Nov. 2, 2009) (“It is unreasonable for any employee in this technological age...to believe that her e-mails, sent directly from her company’s e-mail address over its computers, would not be stored by the company and made available for retrieval.”); Sims v. Lakeside Sch., No. C06-1412RSM, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69568 at *2-3 (W.D. Wash. Sept. 20, 2007) (where the defendant advised all employees that they did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their company laptops, plaintiff’s e-mails sent on the employer’s e-mail account were not privileged; however, web-based e-mails sent by plaintiff to his counsel from the same laptop were protected by the attorney-client privilege); Kaufman v. SunGard Inv. System, No. 05-cv-1236, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28149 (D.N.J. May 10, 2006) (holding that employee had waived the attorney-client privilege by communicating with her attorney over a work e-mail system, where the company policy clearly notified employees that e-mails were “subject to monitoring, search or interception at any time....”); In re Asia Global Crossing, Ltd., 322 B.R. 247, 257 (S.D.N.Y. 2005)

9.



62

(use of a company’s e-mail system by an employee to send personal e-mails to the employee’s counsel did not waive the attorney-client privilege).Id.10.United States v. Finazzo, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22479, at *22.11.See e.g., Goldstein v. Colborne Acquisition Co., 873 F. Supp. 2d 932 (N.D. Ill. 2012); In re the Reserve Fund Secs. & Deriv. Litig., 275 F.R.D. 154; Aventa Learning, Inc. v. K12, Inc., 830 F. Supp. 2d 1083 (W.D. Wash 2011); Hanson v. First National Bank, No. 5:10-0906, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125935 (S.D.W.V. Oct. 31, 2011); Kaufman, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28149; Long v. Marubeni Am. Corp., No. 05-cv-639, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76594 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 19, 2006); In re Asia Global Crossing, Ltd., 322 B.R. 247.

12.

Republic Gear Co. v. Borg-Warner Corp., 381 F.2d 551, 556 (2d Cir. 1967); Schnall v. Schnall, 550 F. Supp. 650, 653 (S.D.N.Y. 1982).

13.

United States v. Finazzo, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22479, at *35.14.Id. at *17, *21 (citing U.S. v. Mejia, 655 F.3d 126, 134 (2d Cir. 2011) (party asserting the attorney-client privilege must demonstrate that the communication “was intended to be, and in fact was kept confidential” by making a showing that they took “some affirmative action to preserve confidentiality.”); U.S. v. DeFonte, 441 F.3d 92, 94-95 (2d Cir. 2006) (it was appropriate for district court to consider whether otherwise privileged communications were treated in “such a careless manner as to negate [any] intent to keep them confidential”); In re Horowitz, 482 F. 2d 72, 81 (2d Cir. 1973); Diversified Group, Inc. v. Daugerdas, 304 F. Supp. 2d 507, 515 (S.D.N.Y. 2003) (“It is axiomatic that voluntary disclosure of confidential communications constitutes a waiver of the attorney-client privilege.”) (internal citations omitted)).

15.

Id. at *4.16.Id.17.Id. at *39.18.J. Poluka and M. Gitlitz Courtney, Ethical Electronics: New Guidance on Protecting the Confidentiality of Attorney-Client E-mails, For the Defense (November 2011)

19.

Notice: The purpose of this newsletter is to identify select developments that may be of interest to readers. The information contained herein is abridged and summarized from various sources, the accuracy and completeness of which cannot be assured. The Advisory should not be construed as legal advice or opinion, and is not a substitute for the advice of counsel.

www.BlankRome.com



63

G:\Share\CLIENT\jpa\CSRMA\Agenda\_Executive Board\2013\12.09.13\E.7 - CSRMA Investment Performance Review_3rd Qtr 2013.doc



CSRMA Investment Performance Review

ISSUE: Ms. Paulina Woo of PFM presented a review of CSRMA’s current investments and provided a market outlook to the Finance Committee at their November 4, 2013 meeting. PFM’s presentation is included in the agenda packet for the Executive Board’s review. CSRMA’s current investments are summarized on page 8 of the presentation. The portfolio’s performance is highlighted on page 5. RECOMMENDATION: None at this time. FISCAL IMPACT: Unknown. BACKGROUND: None. ATTACHMENTS: Investment Performance Review, Third Quarter 2013 (Separate)

68

G:\Share\CLIENT\jpa\CSRMA\Agenda\_Executive Board\2013\12.09.13\E.8 - Trustees E&O Renewal.doc



Trustees E&O Renewal

ISSUE: CSRMA’s Trustees Errors & Omissions coverage is due to renew on December 31, 2013. The current limit of liability is $5,000,000 per claim and in the aggregate. The incumbent carrier is Lloyd’s of London. The expiring annual premium is $23,370 plus an additional $234 for terrorism coverage. Taxes and fees are in addition to the premium. RECOMMENDATION: The Program Administrators recommend that the Executive Board elect to renew the Trustees E&O coverage at the expiring limit and deductible option, as shown under “Option 2B” in the table below. FISCAL IMPACT: $25,000 is budgeted in FY 13/14 for Trustees E&O insurance. The table below depicts the quoted renewal options.

Limit Deductible Premium Optional

TRIA Premium

Option 1A $3,000,000 per claim $3,000,000 aggregate

$5,000 per claim $20,000 aggregate

$20,130 plus taxes and fees

$201

Option 1B $3,000,000 per claim $3,000,000 aggregate



$188

Option 2A $5,000,000 per claim $5,000,000 aggregate



$250

Option 2B Expiring Option

$5,000,000 per claim $5,000,000 aggregate



$234

BACKGROUND: Trustees E&O insurance provides professional liability coverage for the trustees of self-insurance funds for claims made against the trustees following any actual or alleged act, error or omission committed in the scope of managing the funds. The rating basis for this policy is total member contributions. Estimated total member contributions (pool deposit, insurance premium, JPA charge, etc.) are about the same as were estimated for the expiring policy term. ATTACHMENTS: None.

69

G:\Share\CLIENT\jpa\CSRMA\Agenda\_Executive Board\2013\12.09.13\E.9 - Budget To Date Report @ 09.30.13_Item.doc



Budget to Date Report as of September 30, 2013 ISSUE: Attached is the budget to date report as of September 30, 2013 and corresponding balance sheet. A variance report highlighting notable variances in the actual year to date figures versus what was budgeted is included. There are no major concerns about CSRMA’s finances at this writing. RECOMMENDATION: None at this time. FISCAL IMPACT: As depicted in the attached document. BACKGROUND: None. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Profit & Loss Budget to Actual 2. Variance Report

3. Balance Sheet

70

California Sanitation Risk Management AuthorityIncome StatementJuly 1 - September 30, 2013 - Unaudited

Ordinary Income/Expense

Income

4000 · Non-Member Revenue

4100 · JPA Charge

4110 · Program Directors' Fee

4220 · Pooled Deposit

4391 · Retro Adjustment

4400 · Insurance Premium (Net)

4602 · 'Deductible Recoveries

4620 · Interest Income

Total Income

Expense

5201 · Claims Expense

5205 · Loss Adjustment Exp

5300 · Risk Control Online

6330 · Program Directors' Fee Exp.

6432 · Net Insurance Premium

6464 · User/Fraud Fund Assessment

6506 · Actuarial

6512 · Claims Admin. Annual Fee

6516 · Coverage Counsel

6522 · Safety Other

6523 · Outside Safety Consultant

6650 · Program Legal

6652 · Program Committee

6658 · Program Contingency

6660 · Program Consulting

6667 · CSRMA Provided Seminars

7804 · Accounting Consulting

7808 · Financial Audit

7822 · Board Counsel

8944 · Printing/Promotion

8945 · Computer Software/Programming

8946 · Memberships/Other

8948 · Banking Service Charges

8954 · Executive/Officers Committee

8956 · Board of Directors

8960 · JPA Insurance

8990 · General Contingency

9120 · Dividends

Total Expense

Net Ordinary Income

Net Income

TOTAL

Jul - Sep 13 Budget $ Over Budget % of Budget

2,400.00 42,500.00 (40,100.00) 5.65%

169,631.45 703,652.00 (534,020.55) 24.11%

315,416.45 1,289,842.00 (974,425.55) 24.45%

1,323,711.85 5,689,579.00 (4,365,867.15) 23.27%

469,237.00 (500,000.00) 969,237.00 (93.85%)

910,638.81 3,602,357.00 (2,691,718.19) 25.28%

2,025.79 50,000.00 (47,974.21) 4.05%

3,486.78 273,953.00 (270,466.22) 1.27%

3,196,548.13 11,151,883.00 (7,955,334.87) 28.66%

755,030.22 3,735,892.00 (2,980,861.78) 20.21%

111,782.49 0.00 111,782.49 100.0%

940.50 27,625.00 (26,684.50) 3.41%

327,293.33 1,289,842.00 (962,548.67) 25.38%

899,915.88 3,602,357.00 (2,702,441.12) 24.98%

0.00 58,213.00 (58,213.00) 0.0%

10,800.00 50,754.00 (39,954.00) 21.28%

32,650.00 45,400.00 (12,750.00) 71.92%

0.00 5,000.00 (5,000.00) 0.0%

1,234.08 10,500.00 (9,265.92) 11.75%

74,474.48 249,500.00 (175,025.52) 29.85%

2,589.75 27,500.00 (24,910.25) 9.42%

0.00 5,000.00 (5,000.00) 0.0%

0.00 4,000.00 (4,000.00) 0.0%

2,061.95 13,500.00 (11,438.05) 15.27%

19,518.39 80,000.00 (60,481.61) 24.4%

650.00 2,140.00 (1,490.00) 30.37%

3,800.00 17,600.00 (13,800.00) 21.59%

3,261.79 15,000.00 (11,738.21) 21.75%

2,726.87 13,000.00 (10,273.13) 20.98%

447.90 14,500.00 (14,052.10) 3.09%

0.00 2,000.00 (2,000.00) 0.0%

2,008.76 6,250.00 (4,241.24) 32.14%

1,782.13 24,500.00 (22,717.87) 7.27%

3,444.80 5,000.00 (1,555.20) 68.9%

15,821.67 32,295.00 (16,473.33) 48.99%

4,000.00 22,000.00 (18,000.00) 18.18%

1,199,376.00 1,650,000.00 (450,624.00) 72.69%

3,475,610.99 11,009,368.00 (7,533,757.01) 31.57%

(279,062.86) 142,515.00 (421,577.86) (195.81%)

(279,062.86) 142,515.00 (421,577.86) (195.81%)

71


.021 - PIP



Income

4000 · Non-Member Revenue 120.00 2,125.00 (2,005.00) 5.65%

4100 · JPA Charge 7,450.45 37,110.00 (29,659.55) 20.08%

4110 · Program Directors' Fee 32,134.45 122,358.00 (90,223.55) 26.26%

4220 · Pooled Deposit 0.00

4391 · Retro Adjustment 0.00

4400 · Insurance Premium (Net) 93,073.73 392,818.00 (299,744.27) 23.69%

4602 · 'Deductible Recoveries 0.00

4620 · Interest Income 9.76 1,558.00 (1,548.24) 0.63%

Total Income 132,788.39 555,969.00 (423,180.61) 23.88%

Expense

5201 · Claims Expense 0.00

5205 · Loss Adjustment Exp 0.00

5300 · Risk Control Online 77.55 1,381.00 (1,303.45) 5.62%

6330 · Program Directors' Fee Exp. 32,369.75 122,358.00 (89,988.25) 26.46%

6432 · Net Insurance Premium 93,992.25 392,818.00 (298,825.75) 23.93%

6464 · User/Fraud Fund Assessment 0.00

6506 · Actuarial 0.00

6512 · Claims Admin. Annual Fee 0.00

6516 · Coverage Counsel 0.00

6522 · Safety Other 0.00 400.00 (400.00) 0.0%

6523 · Outside Safety Consultant 3,802.01 14,900.00 (11,097.99) 25.52%

6650 · Program Legal 0.00

6652 · Program Committee 0.00

6658 · Program Contingency 0.00

6660 · Program Consulting 0.00 500.00 (500.00) 0.0%

6667 · CSRMA Provided Seminars 1,951.84 8,000.00 (6,048.16) 24.4%

7804 · Accounting Consulting 65.00 250.00 (185.00) 26.0%

7808 · Financial Audit 380.00 1,760.00 (1,380.00) 21.59%

7822 · Board Counsel 326.18 1,500.00 (1,173.82) 21.75%

8944 · Printing/Promotion 53.26 1,000.00 (946.74) 5.33%

8945 · Computer Software/Programming 44.80 1,000.00 (955.20) 4.48%

8946 · Memberships/Other 0.00 200.00 (200.00) 0.0%

8948 · Banking Service Charges 200.88 600.00 (399.12) 33.48%

8954 · Executive/Officers Committee 139.57 2,500.00 (2,360.43) 5.58%

8956 · Board of Directors 344.48 500.00 (155.52) 68.9%

8960 · JPA Insurance 1,582.17 3,000.00 (1,417.83) 52.74%

8990 · General Contingency 45.00 1,000.00 (955.00) 4.5%

9120 · Dividends 0.00

Total Expense 135,374.74 553,667.00 (418,292.26) 24.45%

Net Ordinary Income (2,586.35) 2,302.00 (4,888.35) (112.35%)

Net Income (2,586.35) 2,302.00 (4,888.35) (112.35%)

72



Income


4100 · JPA Charge







Total Income

Expense







6506 · Actuarial





















9120 · Dividends

Total Expense

Net Ordinary Income

Net Income

.023 - Property


120.00 2,125.00 (2,005.00) 5.65%

8,652.50 34,610.00 (25,957.50) 25.0%

42,327.50 170,938.00 (128,610.50) 24.76%

0.00

0.00

384,680.18 1,441,328.00 (1,056,647.82) 26.69%

0.00

12.90 1,274.00 (1,261.10) 1.01%

435,793.08 1,650,275.00 (1,214,481.92) 26.41%

0.00

0.00

77.55 1,381.00 (1,303.45) 5.62%

42,327.50 170,938.00 (128,610.50) 24.76%

384,680.18 1,441,328.00 (1,056,647.82) 26.69%

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00 400.00 (400.00) 0.0%

3,802.01 12,400.00 (8,597.99) 30.66%

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00 500.00 (500.00) 0.0%

1,951.84 8,000.00 (6,048.16) 24.4%

65.00 250.00 (185.00) 26.0%

380.00 1,760.00 (1,380.00) 21.59%

326.18 1,500.00 (1,173.82) 21.75%

53.26 1,000.00 (946.74) 5.33%

44.80 1,000.00 (955.20) 4.48%

0.00 200.00 (200.00) 0.0%

200.88 600.00 (399.12) 33.48%

139.57 2,500.00 (2,360.43) 5.58%

344.48 500.00 (155.52) 68.9%

1,582.17 3,000.00 (1,417.83) 52.74%

45.00 1,000.00 (955.00) 4.5%

0.00

436,020.42 1,648,257.00 (1,212,236.58) 26.45%

(227.34) 2,018.00 (2,245.34) (11.27%)

(227.34) 2,018.00 (2,245.34) (11.27%)

73



Income


4100 · JPA Charge







Total Income

Expense







6506 · Actuarial





















9120 · Dividends

Total Expense

Net Ordinary Income

Net Income

.024 - Liability


960.00 17,000.00 (16,040.00) 5.65%

67,519.50 287,896.00 (220,376.50) 23.45%

145,249.50 610,045.00 (464,795.50) 23.81%

574,002.25 2,497,211.00 (1,923,208.75) 22.99%

0.00 (250,000.00) 250,000.00 0.0%

317,396.00 1,322,128.00 (1,004,732.00) 24.01%

2,025.79 50,000.00 (47,974.21) 4.05%

1,480.14 144,470.00 (142,989.86) 1.03%

1,108,633.18 4,678,750.00 (3,570,116.82) 23.7%

215,735.05 1,300,000.00 (1,084,264.95) 16.6%

57,782.49

406.72 11,050.00 (10,643.28) 3.68%

145,342.19 610,045.00 (464,702.81) 23.83%

317,303.44 1,322,128.00 (1,004,824.56) 24.0%

0.00

0.00 18,000.00 (18,000.00) 0.0%

2,550.00 15,300.00 (12,750.00) 16.67%

0.00 5,000.00 (5,000.00) 0.0%

0.00 3,700.00 (3,700.00) 0.0%

29,447.21 104,800.00 (75,352.79) 28.1%

2,177.25 26,000.00 (23,822.75) 8.37%

0.00 2,500.00 (2,500.00) 0.0%

0.00 2,000.00 (2,000.00) 0.0%

2,061.95 10,000.00 (7,938.05) 20.62%

8,783.26 36,000.00 (27,216.74) 24.4%

292.50 800.00 (507.50) 36.56%

1,710.00 7,920.00 (6,210.00) 21.59%

1,467.80 6,750.00 (5,282.20) 21.75%

1,336.79 5,000.00 (3,663.21) 26.74%

201.54 7,500.00 (7,298.46) 2.69%

0.00 900.00 (900.00) 0.0%

903.93 2,685.00 (1,781.07) 33.67%

1,014.51 11,000.00 (9,985.49) 9.22%

1,550.15 2,250.00 (699.85) 68.9%

7,119.75 14,791.00 (7,671.25) 48.14%

202.50 5,000.00 (4,797.50) 4.05%

0.00 700,000.00 (700,000.00) 0.0%

797,389.03 4,231,119.00 (3,433,729.97) 18.85%

311,244.15 447,631.00 (136,386.85) 69.53%

311,244.15 447,631.00 (136,386.85) 69.53%

74



Income


4100 · JPA Charge







Total Income

Expense







6506 · Actuarial





















9120 · Dividends

Total Expense

Net Ordinary Income

Net Income

.025 - WC


1,200.00 21,250.00 (20,050.00) 5.65%

86,009.00 344,036.00 (258,027.00) 25.0%

95,705.00 386,501.00 (290,796.00) 24.76%

749,709.60 3,192,368.00 (2,442,658.40) 23.48%

469,237.00 (250,000.00) 719,237.00 (187.7%)

115,488.90 446,083.00 (330,594.10) 25.89%

0.00

1,983.98 126,651.00 (124,667.02) 1.57%

1,519,333.48 4,266,889.00 (2,747,555.52) 35.61%

539,295.17 2,435,892.00 (1,896,596.83) 22.14%

54,000.00

378.68 13,813.00 (13,434.32) 2.74%

107,253.89 386,501.00 (279,247.11) 27.75%

103,940.01 446,083.00 (342,142.99) 23.3%

0.00 58,213.00 (58,213.00) 0.0%

10,800.00 32,754.00 (21,954.00) 32.97%

30,100.00 30,100.00 0.00 100.0%

0.00

1,234.08 6,000.00 (4,765.92) 20.57%

37,423.25 117,400.00 (79,976.75) 31.88%

412.50 1,500.00 (1,087.50) 27.5%

0.00 2,500.00 (2,500.00) 0.0%

0.00 2,000.00 (2,000.00) 0.0%

0.00 2,500.00 (2,500.00) 0.0%

6,831.45 28,000.00 (21,168.55) 24.4%

227.50 840.00 (612.50) 27.08%

1,330.00 6,160.00 (4,830.00) 21.59%

1,141.63 5,250.00 (4,108.37) 21.75%

1,283.56 6,000.00 (4,716.44) 21.39%

156.76 5,000.00 (4,843.24) 3.14%

0.00 700.00 (700.00) 0.0%

703.07 2,365.00 (1,661.93) 29.73%

488.48 8,500.00 (8,011.52) 5.75%

1,205.69 1,750.00 (544.31) 68.9%

5,537.58 11,504.00 (5,966.42) 48.14%

3,707.50 15,000.00 (11,292.50) 24.72%

1,199,376.00 950,000.00 249,376.00 126.25%

2,106,826.80 4,576,325.00 (2,469,498.20) 46.04%

(587,493.32) (309,436.00) (278,057.32) 189.86%

(587,493.32) (309,436.00) (278,057.32) 189.86%

75


TOTAL



Income

4000 · Non-Member Revenue 2,400.00 42,500.00 (40,100.00) 5.65% Finalizing non-member subscriptions to RCO4100 · JPA Charge 169,631.45 703,652.00 (534,020.55) 24.11% One quarter4110 · Program Directors' Fee 315,416.45 1,289,842.00 (974,425.55) 24.45% One quarter4220 · Pooled Deposit 1,323,711.85 5,689,579.00 (4,365,867.15) 23.27% One quarter4391 · Retro Adjustment 469,237.00 (500,000.00) 969,237.00 (93.85%)

4400 · Insurance Premium (Net) 910,638.81 3,602,357.00 (2,691,718.19) 25.28% One quarter4602 · 'Deductible Recoveries 2,025.79 50,000.00 (47,974.21) 4.05%

4620 · Interest Income 3,486.78 273,953.00 (270,466.22) 1.27% 1st quarter investment income not available.Total Income 3,196,548.13 11,151,883.00 (7,955,334.87) 28.66%

Expense

5201 · Claims Expense 866,812.71 3,735,892.00 (2,869,079.29) 23.2%

5300 · Risk Control Online 940.50 27,625.00 (26,684.50) 3.41% Finalizing non-member subscriptions to RCO6330 · Program Directors' Fee Exp. 327,293.33 1,289,842.00 (962,548.67) 25.38% One quarter6432 · Net Insurance Premium 899,915.88 3,602,357.00 (2,702,441.12) 24.98% One quarter6464 · User/Fraud Fund Assessment 0.00 58,213.00 (58,213.00) 0.0% Paid in December6506 · Actuarial 10,800.00 50,754.00 (39,954.00) 21.28%

6512 · Claims Admin. Annual Fee 32,650.00 45,400.00 (12,750.00) 71.92% Full year fee - York; 2 months Carl Warren6516 · Coverage Counsel 0.00 5,000.00 (5,000.00) 0.0%

6522 · Safety Other 1,234.08 10,500.00 (9,265.92) 11.75%

6523 · Outside Safety Consultant 74,474.48 249,500.00 (175,025.52) 29.85%

6650 · Program Legal 2,589.75 27,500.00 (24,910.25) 9.42%

6652 · Program Committee 0.00 5,000.00 (5,000.00) 0.0%

6658 · Program Contingency 0.00 4,000.00 (4,000.00) 0.0%

6660 · Program Consulting 2,061.95 13,500.00 (11,438.05) 15.27%

6667 · CSRMA Provided Seminars 19,518.39 80,000.00 (60,481.61) 24.4%

7804 · Accounting Consulting 650.00 2,140.00 (1,490.00) 30.37%

7808 · Financial Audit 3,800.00 17,600.00 (13,800.00) 21.59%

7822 · Board Counsel 3,261.79 15,000.00 (11,738.21) 21.75%

8944 · Printing/Promotion 2,726.87 13,000.00 (10,273.13) 20.98%

8945 · Computer Software/Programming 447.90 14,500.00 (14,052.10) 3.09%

8946 · Memberships/Other 0.00 2,000.00 (2,000.00) 0.0%

8948 · Banking Service Charges 2,008.76 6,250.00 (4,241.24) 32.14%

8954 · Executive/Officers Committee 1,782.13 24,500.00 (22,717.87) 7.27%

8956 · Board of Directors 3,444.80 5,000.00 (1,555.20) 68.9%

8960 · JPA Insurance 15,821.67 32,295.00 (16,473.33) 48.99%

8990 · General Contingency 4,000.00 22,000.00 (18,000.00) 18.18%

9120 · Dividends 1,199,376.00 1,650,000.00 (450,624.00) 72.69% PLP DividendsTotal Expense 3,475,610.99 11,009,368.00 (7,533,757.01) 31.57%

Net Ordinary Income (279,062.86) 142,515.00 (421,577.86) (195.81%)

Net Income (279,062.86) 142,515.00 (421,577.86) (195.81%)

76

California Sanitation Risk Management Authority Balance Sheet As of September 30, 2013 - Unaudited

Sep 30, 13

ASSETS

Current Assets

Checking/Savings

1002 · LAIF 7,111,287.36

1005 · General Checking - UB 304,507.84

1006 · WC Trust - UB 150,161.25

1007 · Liability Trust - UB 100,000.00

1008 · PFM/CA Asset Mgmt Program 16,831,088.47

1009 · PFM-CAMP Cash Reserve 4,016,707.38

Total Checking/Savings 28,513,752.30

Accounts Receivable

1100 · Accounts Receivable 32,717.48

Total Accounts Receivable 32,717.48

Other Current Assets

1200 · Interest Receivable 66,273.58

1540 · Prepaid Insurance Premium 1,877,607.24

1550 · Prepaid Program Directors' Fee 626,456.10

Total Other Current Assets 2,570,336.92

Total Current Assets 31,116,806.70

TOTAL ASSETS 31,116,806.70

LIABILITIES & EQUITY

Liabilities

Current Liabilities

Accounts Payable

2000 · Accounts Payable 9,508.01

Total Accounts Payable 9,508.01

Other Current Liabilities

2200 · Deferred JPA Charge 358,954.42

2210 · Deferred Program Directors' Fee 591,481.46

2220 · Deferred Pooled Deposits 2,823,131.05

2240 · Deferred Insurance Premium 1,911,427.94

Total Other Current Liabilities 5,684,994.87

Total Current Liabilities 5,694,502.88

Long Term Liabilities

2300 · Claims Reserves 6,051,891.00

2500 · Claims IBNR 6,453,911.00

2600 · Claims ULAE 1,155,233.00

Total Long Term Liabilities 13,661,035.00

Total Liabilities 19,355,537.88

Equity

3900 · Retained Earnings 12,040,331.68

Net Income (279,062.86)

Total Equity 11,761,268.82

TOTAL LIABILITIES & EQUITY 31,116,806.70

77

G:\Share\CLIENT\jpa\CSRMA\Agenda\_Executive Board\2013\12.09.13\F.1 - LRP Arrangements - 2014.doc

Agenda Item No. F.1 Executive Board Meeting


Long Range Planning Session Arrangements ISSUE: Every year the Program Administrators arrange an off-site Long-Range Planning Session as directed by the Executive Board. These sessions allow the Executive Board to review last year’s accomplishments as well as project future goals and concepts for the JPA and its members. RECOMMENDATION: The Program Administrators recommend that the Executive Board discuss the hotel options presented and decide on a venue for the 2014 Long Range Planning Session. FISCAL IMPACT: The CSRMA Executive/OC expense budget for the 2013/2014 LRP Session is $10,000. Last year, the cost of the hotel accommodations was $9,916. The proposed cost estimates for the 2014 LRP Session will be handed out at the meeting. BACKGROUND: Last year, the Long - Range Planning Session was held in Newport Beach at the Newport Beach Marriott Hotel & Spa. This year, a venue has not yet been selected. The Program Directors canvassed the Northern California area, and requested proposals from the following hotels:

Chaminade Hilton Santa Cruz/Scotts Valley Seascape

All of the hotels are available at this time. The proposed cost estimates for the above three hotels will provided at the meeting after clarification on catering costs. In the past, the Executive Board has utilized the services of a facilitator during the Long-Range Planning Sessions. Michelle Murphy has provided these services for the past ten years. At the Executive Board’s direction, we have contacted Michelle Murphy who is available. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Hotel Proposed Cost Estimates (Handout) 2) Hotel brochures (Handout)

78

G:\Share\CLIENT\jpa\CSRMA\Agenda\_Executive Board\2013\12.09.13\F.2 - LRP Discussion Topics 2014_Item.doc



2014 Long Range Planning Session Discussion Topics

ISSUE: Every year the Program Administrators gather possible topics of discussion for the Long Range Planning (LRP) Session, present them to the Executive Board, and then develop a LRP agenda based on the discussion surrounding those topics. The topics listed on the attached document were chosen through review of past agendas and discussions between team members and the Officers' Committee. These topics are being suggested as a starting point for discussion, and are being presented in this agenda item so that the Executive Board members have a chance to consider them and others prior to the meeting date. RECOMMENDATION: The Program Administrators recommend that the Executive Board review the list of potential discussion topics and provide direction. FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: Every year the Executive Board meets in an off-site LRP Session. These sessions allow the Executive Board to review last year’s accomplishments as well as project future goals and concepts for the JPA and its members. ATTACHMENTS: Possible Long Range Planning Session Discussion Topics.

79

Possible 2014 Long-Range Planning Session Topics

General Member Satisfaction Survey Rent-a-Risk Manager Long Range Planning or Board Retreat Emerging Risks Part II – Follow-up to Emerging Risks Work Plan Ancillary Coverages – i.e. Commercial Crime – Are our members protected? Risk Control Best Practices Audit Results Pooled Liability Reading a Liability Memorandum of Coverage Review of the Liability Memorandum of Coverage for Possible Changes Memorandum of Coverage: Reinsurance Failure Provision Coverage for Flood Control Activities Sub-Pool: Primary Insurance Program

Property Property Pool

80

mleavell

Typewritten Text

G:\Share\CLIENT\jpa\CSRMA\Agenda\_Executive Board\2013\12.09.13\F.3 - Proposed 2013 Meeting Calendar.doc



Proposed 2014 Meeting Calendar ISSUE: Every year the Executive Board adopts a meeting calendar. The Executive Board Meetings are included in that calendar. The Executive Board should review the proposed meeting dates and approve their calendar dates for the upcoming year. RECOMMENDATION: The Program Administrator recommends that the Executive Board approve their dates on the 2014 meeting calendar. FISCAL IMPACT: None.

BACKGROUND: None.

ATTACHMENTS: Proposed 2014 Meeting Calendar.

81

CSRMA MEETING CALENDAR 2014JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL

CSRMA OC - THUR - 12/19/2013 CSRMA WC - THUR - 6 CSRMA LRP - SUN - TUE - 16, 17 & 18 CSRMA OC - THUR - 3CSRMA EB - WED - 15 CSRMA EB - THUR - 25CSRMA BD - THUR - 16 CSRMA FIN - MON - 29CSRMA LIAB (TC) - THUR - 30

CASA January 15-17 Indian Wells

MAY JUNE JULY AUGUSTCSRMA LIAB - THUR - 8 CSRMA EB - MON - 2 CSRMA OC - TUES - 15 CSRMA EB - WED - 20CSRMA OC - TUES - 20 CSRMA BD - THUR - 21CSRMA WC - THUR - 29

CASA August 20-23 Monterey

SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBERCSRMA OC - FRI - 19 CSRMA EB - FRI - 10 CSRMA FIN - MON - 3 CSRMA EB - MON - 8CSRMA LIAB - THUR - 25 CSRMA WC - THUR - 23 CSRMA LIAB - THUR - 6

CSRMA OC - FRI - 14

CAJPA September 17-20South Lake Tahoe

G:\Share\CLIENT\jpa\CSRMA\Agenda\Admin\Calendars\Meeting Calendar2014 - V2.xls82

G:\Share\CLIENT\jpa\CSRMA\Agenda\_Executive Board\2013\12.09.13\G.1 - PLP Retrospective Rating Calculation @ 12.31.13.doc

Agenda Item No. G.1 Executive Board Meeting


Pooled Liability Program Retrospective Rating Calculation at 12/31/13

ISSUE: Each year the Program Administrators perform the Retrospective Rating Calculation for prior program years based on the formula adopted by the Board of Directors. The calculation grants either returns or assessments to members based on their individual experience and the experience of the group as a whole. Retro adjustments will appear as a debit or credit on member’s December 31, 2013 renewal invoices. RECOMMENDATION: The Pooled Liability Committee recommends to the Executive Board that a total of $889,336 be returned to the membership based on the attached schedule. FISCAL IMPACT: If the recommendation is accepted, the Pool's retained funds will be decreased by $889,336. As of June 30, 2013, the retained funds in the program were $8,783,768. BACKGROUND: The Retro plan was adopted to spread losses amongst members. Each program year is evaluated beginning 18 months after the inception and annually thereafter. Since the Pooled Liability program year begins on December 31, the retro calculation is performed based on financial data as of June 30. Major components of the retrospective rating plan include: Losses Administrative Costs Investment Income Incurred but not reported (IBNR) loss levels Claims Reserves ATTACHMENTS: December 31, 2013 Retrospective Rating Adjustment Schedule

83


Pooled Liability Program Retrospective Rating Adjustment Schedule - DRAFT

Calculated effective December 31, 2013MemberName 1986-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 TOTALS

Aliso Water Management Agency 0 (9) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (9)Bolinas Comm. P.U.D. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Capistrano Beach S.D. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Carmel S.D. 0 (5) 0 0 0 (521) 0 0 0 0 0 (2,092) (9,079) (11,697)Carpinteria S.D. 0 (4) 0 0 0 (366) 0 0 0 0 0 (1,531) 9,119 7,218Central Marin S.A. 0 (7) 0 0 0 (641) 0 0 0 0 0 (2,141) (10,402) (13,191)Dana Point S.D. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Delta Diablo S.D. 0 (8) 0 0 0 (814) 0 0 0 0 0 (3,788) (13,440) (18,050)Dublin San Ramon Services Dist 0 (15) 0 0 0 (1,030) (6,171) 0 0 0 0 (5,736) (26,753) (39,705)East Bay Discharges Authority 0 (4) 0 0 0 (355) 0 0 0 0 0 (982) (4,680) (6,021)East Palo Alto S.D. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Encina Admin. Agency 0 (15) 0 0 0 (1,475) 0 0 0 0 0 (10,860) (25,238) (37,588)Fairfield/Suisun S.D. 0 (7) 0 0 0 (574) 0 0 0 0 0 (6,342) (19,456) (26,379)Fallbrook S.D. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Goleta S.D. 0 (8) 0 0 0 (830) 0 0 0 0 0 (2,891) (14,068) (17,797)Ironhouse S.D. 0 (5) 0 0 0 (739) 0 0 0 0 0 (3,115) (14,649) (18,508)Lake Arrowhead C.S.D. 0 0 (52) 0 0 0 0 (2,132) 0 (56,126) 0 (5,223) (21,026) (84,559)Las Gallinas Valley S.D. 0 0 0 0 0 (619) 0 0 0 0 (3,916) (2,398) (10,444) (17,377)Leucadia County W.D. 0 (6) 0 0 0 (537) 0 0 0 0 0 (2,587) (12,428) (15,558)Montecito S.D. 0 (4) 0 0 0 (384) 0 0 0 0 0 (1,501) (6,978) (8,867)Monterey Regional W.P.C.A. 0 (10) 0 0 0 (1,257) 0 0 0 0 0 (5,608) (25,894) (32,769)Mt. View Sanitary District 0 0 0 (1,618) (7,546) (9,164)North of River S.D. 0 (7) 0 0 0 (658) 0 0 0 0 0 (2,718) (15,794) (19,177)Novato S.D. 0 (6) 0 0 0 (597) 0 0 0 0 0 40,478 9,740 49,615Ojai Valley S.D. 0 (6) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (2,270) (10,326) (12,602)Oro Loma S.D. 0 (8) 0 0 0 (705) 0 0 0 0 0 (2,828) (12,827) (16,368)S.A.S.M. 0 (6) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (1,585) 14,376 12,785S.E.R.R.A. 0 (8) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (8)San Elijo JPA 0 0 (1,096) (4,967) (6,063)Sanitary Dist. No. 1 of Marin 0 0 0 0 (94) 0 0 0 (1,817) 0 (51,311) (4,315) (11,881) (69,418)Sanitary Dist. No. 5 of Marin 0 (4) 0 0 0 (290) 0 0 0 0 0 (953) (1,100) (2,347)Santa Margarita WD 0 0 (3,488) (20,973) 0 0 0 0 (176,373) (57,164) (257,998)Sausalito Marin City S.D. 0 (4) 0 0 0 (295) 0 0 0 0 0 (973) (4,308) (5,580)Selma-Kingsburg-Fowler S.D. 0 (6) 0 0 0 (715) 0 0 0 0 0 (3,224) (14,863) (18,808)Sewer Authority of Mid-Coastside 0 (6) 0 0 (80) 0 0 0 0 0 0 (16,299) 22,847 6,462South Bayside S.A. 0 (13) 0 0 0 (1,172) 0 0 0 0 0 (5,158) (19,429) (25,772)South Orange County Wastewater Auth 0 0 0 0 0 (1,260) 0 0 0 0 0 (5,428) (25,370) (32,058)South Tahoe Public Utility District 0 (23) 0 0 0 (2,326) 0 0 0 0 0 (9,672) (36,833) (48,854)Stege S.D. (2) (7) 0 0 (75) (619) 0 0 0 (2,552) (580) 0 (7,216) (11,051)Tahoe-Truckee S.A. 0 (4) 0 0 0 (496) 0 0 0 0 0 (1,995) (9,535) (12,030)Truinfo County S.D. 0 (5) 0 0 0 (339) 0 0 0 0 0 (2,006) (11,628) (13,978)Union Sanitary Distirct 0 (9) 0 0 0 (726) 0 0 0 0 0 (1,839) (8,214) (10,788)Vallejo Sanitation & Flood 0 (5) 0 0 0 (452) 0 0 0 16,572 0 0 (6,093) 10,022Ventura Regional S.D. 0 (13) 0 0 0 (1,055) 0 0 0 0 0 (2,185) (8,817) (12,070)Victor Valley W.R.A. (4) (8) 0 0 0 (890) 0 0 0 0 (21,912) (4,354) (22,645) (49,813)West Bay S.D. 0 (8) 0 0 0 (646) 0 (1,037) (1,470) 0 0 (2,489) (11,824) (17,474)West Contra Costa S.D. 0 0 0 0 0 (727) 0 0 0 0 0 (3,027) (14,539) (18,293)West Valley S.D. 0 (14) 0 0 0 (1,002) 0 0 0 0 0 0 43,367 42,351Windsor W.D. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0TOTALS (6) (277) (52) 0 (249) (28,600) (27,144) (3,169) (3,287) (42,106) (77,719) (268,722) (438,005) (889,336)

84

G:\Share\CLIENT\jpa\CSRMA\Agenda\_Executive Board\2013\12.09.13\G.2 - PY 28 Renewal_EB.doc



Pooled Liability Program Program Year 28 (2013-14) Renewal

ISSUE: The Pooled Liability Program will be renewing December 31, 2013. Issues to consider include:

An appropriate total cost structure to members given the Program's expected expense items.

Comparison of total costs at both $500,000 and $750,000 SIR levels. Consideration of Stop Loss Aggregate coverage.

RECOMMENDATION: The Pooled Liability Committee recommends to the Executive Board that rates be set at a $500,000 SIR level such that the total expected renewal cost will not exceed $4,365,056 before consideration of retrospective rating adjustments. FISCAL IMPACT: The following chart depicts the Program Administrators’ expectation of the Program's renewal costs based on actuarial projections using a 70% confidence level, estimated reinsurance / excess costs, and budgeted expense items.

PY 27 PY 28 2012/13 2013/14

Expense Item $25.5 million

limit $25.5 million

limit Change

Pool Deposits 2,295,908 2,142,000 -153,908 -6.70%Est. Reinsurance/Excess Costs (Net) 1,269,588 1,330,967 61,380 4.83%

Est. Fixed Expense (JPA Charge) 270,078 287,896 17,818 6.60%

Pool Deposit Fees 580,995 604,193 23,198 3.99%

Total Expected Costs 4,416,569 4,365,056 -51,512 -1.17%

Retro Adjustment -601,315 -885,047 -283,732 -47.19%

Net Renewal Invoices 3,815,254 3,480,009 -335,244 -8.79% BACKGROUND: A description of each line item in the above chart follows, as well as a discussion of other issues: 1. Pool Deposits: This is the actuary's suggested “Ultimate Net Loss” at a

70% confidence level, discounted at 2.5%.

85


2. Reinsurance / Excess Cost: This is an estimate of the reinsurance / excess cost net of

commission. 3. Fixed Expenses: Estimated expenses to operate the program which include

an allocation of overall JPA expenses. 4. Pool Deposit Fees: Fees paid to the program administrator per its contract and

CSRMA's budget. Alliant is also paid a commission on the reinsurance/excess insurance placement, which offsets the pool deposit fee.

5. Retro Adjustment: The Retro plan was adopted to spread losses amongst

members. The calculation grants either returns or assessments to members based on their individual experience and the experience of the group as a whole.

6. Net Renewal Invoice: Total amount to be invoiced to Members. There are three components of this year’s renewal that merit further discussion. They are Pool Deposits, Reinsurance / Excess Insurance Costs, and Fixed Expense (JPA Charge). Pool Deposits for the 2013/14 PY renewal are based on the “ultimate net loss” projection from the Towers Watson Actuarial Study. Towers Watson has projected a 6.7% decrease in the overall funding requirements primarily due to better than expected loss experience. The reinsurance /excess expense increased 4.83% primarily due to an increase in exposure (i.e. payroll and number of autos) and favorable changes to the aggregate structure (discussed below). The reinsurance carrier currently providing coverage in excess of the pooled layer is the Munich Reinsurance America (AM Best Rating A XV). The reinsurance limits are $15,000,000 excess of the $500,000 (i.e. pooled layer). Ironshore Specialty Insurance Co. (Non-admitted, AM Best Rating A – XIV) provides an additional $10,0000,000 in limits bringing the total limits excess of the pooled layer to $25,000,0000. The reinsurance limits are $15,000,000 per occurrence and $25,000,000 in the aggregate. The aggregate limit is the most the reinsurer will pay in any given program year. In the event that the aggregate limit is exhausted in a single Program Year, the pool assets would be exposed for cumulative losses in excess of $25,000,000. For the renewal Munich has proposed per member aggregates of $15,000,000 for Employment Practices, Public Officials and General Liability. This would give the pool more cover and be in lieu of the $25,000,000 pool aggregate. The Fixed Expense (JPA Charge) the JPA Charge is expected to increase by about 6%, due to an increase in budgeted expenses, most notably outside safety consultant.

86


Other Factors to Consider Alternative SIR Levels The Pooled Liability Committee recommends remaining at the $500,000 SIR, as there is no cost savings associated with the assumption of a larger degree of risk, given the reinsurance carrier's pricing and actuarial projections. To move to a higher SIR ($750,000) the Program would need to charge $521,000 more in deposits. The reinsurer will not drop their premiums by this amount to have a higher attachment point on the Program. The downside to this approach is the inability to return "excess" funds paid to the insurer, plus investment income to members at a later date and assuming no losses occur. Moving to a higher SIR would allow CSRMA to invest the increased deposits rather than transfer these funds to the reinsurance carrier, which in turn protects the lower SIR. Stop Loss Aggregate Each year, Stop Loss Aggregate coverage is considered. Munich Re has provided a quote for an aggregate stop loss attaching at $3,815,000 (i.e. capping the pooled layer losses at $3,815,000 in PY 28). The limit offered is $1,000,000 excess of $3,815,000 for a premium of $175,000. The Program Administrators do not recommend a stop loss aggregate based on historical loss experience in the pooled layer. This coverage is designed to protect pool assets against a series of catastrophic events in the pooled layer in a single Program Year. ATTACHMENTS: None.

87

G:\Share\CLIENT\jpa\CSRMA\Agenda\_Executive Board\2013\12.09.13\G.3 - PLP Dividend Calculation @ 12.31.13.doc



Pooled Liability Program Dividend Calculation as of 12/31/13

ISSUE: The Pooled Liability Program Policy & Procedure No. 5-L allows for dividends to be declared from completed program years if the following requirements are met:

The program, on an aggregate basis, is funded to a 70% confidence level with retained funds in excess of the pooled layer per occurrence limit currently in force.

Dividends cannot be declared sooner than five years after expiration of a program year. No more than 25% of any years' retained earnings will be declared as dividends.

Program Years 1986/87, 1988/89, 1989/90, 1990/91, 1991/92, 1992/93, 1993/94, 1994/95, 1995/96, 1996/97, 1997/98, 1998/99, 1999/00, 2002/03, 2003/04, 2005/06, 2006/07 and 2007/08 are eligible for dividend declaration. RECOMMENDATION: The Pooled Liability Committee recommends that the Executive Board recommend to the Board of Directors a declaration of a dividend in the amount of $1,171,298. FISCAL IMPACT: Declaration of the recommended dividend would reduce the program’s re-tained funds by $1,171,298. As of June 30, 2013, the retained funds in the program were $8,783,768. BACKGROUND: The Authority has two mechanisms with which to return retained earnings to members. The retrospective rating plan does not generally return all retained funds to members. Therefore, the authority adopted Policy & Procedure No. 5-L in order to distribute the balance of retained funds to members. Unlike the retro plan, all members are eligible to receive dividends even if a member has had a poor loss experience in the program year for which a dividend is be-ing declared. The 1987/88, 2000/01, 2001/02 and 2004/05 years are not eligible for a dividend declaration due to negative retained earnings for these years. The dividend is calculated using the liability program matrix as of June 30, 2013, and the retro-spective rating plan calculation as of December 31, 2013. If a dividend were declared, dividend checks would be distributed to each of the members. The attached documents show the members allocations at a total distribution of $1,171,298. ATTACHMENTS: Summary of Dividends for All Program Years.

88


Pooled Liability Program Summary of Dividends for All Program Years

Calculated Effective December 31, 2013

Program Program Program Program Program Program Program Program Program Program Program Program Total

Year 1-11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15 Year 16 Year 17 Year 18 Year 19 Year 20 Year 21 Year 22 Amount of

Member Agency 86/87-96/97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 Dividends

Aliso Water Management Agency -2,045 -436 -655 -991 0 0 NA NA NA NA NA NA -4,127

Bolinas C.P.U.D. 0 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0Capistrano Beach S.D. -406 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA -406Carmel Area Wastewater Dist. -1,477 -220 -343 -587 0 0 -1,400 -1,188 0 -2,178 -4,052 -5,670 -17,115

Carpinteria S. D. -948 -198 -342 -506 0 0 -963 -904 0 -1,680 -3,214 -4,076 -12,831

Central Marin S.A. -2,014 -407 -628 -901 0 0 -1,789 -1,489 0 -3,018 -5,183 -6,187 -21,616

Dana Point S.D. -746 -207 -299 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA -1,252

Delta Diablo S.D. -1,864 -424 -493 -755 0 0 -2,071 -2,115 0 -3,500 -7,162 -8,925 -27,309

Dublin San Ramon Services District -3,957 -777 -988 -1,629 0 0 -4,479 -4,041 0 -5,803 -11,246 -14,598 -47,518

East Bay Dischargers Authority -531 -236 -369 -501 0 0 -1,183 -906 0 -1,552 -2,546 -2,895 -10,719

East Palo Alto S.D. -894 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA -894

Encina Wastewater Authority -3,854 -1,045 -1,268 -1,831 0 0 -4,358 -3,627 0 -7,552 -13,858 -16,068 -53,461

Fairfield/Suisun Sewer Dist. -1,565 -448 -564 -722 0 0 -1,719 -1,486 0 -2,704 -5,035 -5,925 -20,168

Fallbrook S.D. -1,199 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA -1,199

Goleta S.D. -2,357 -675 -800 -1,122 0 0 -2,455 -2,113 0 -4,013 -7,770 -9,439 -30,744

Ironhouse S.D. -1,113 -373 -473 -638 0 0 -1,977 -1,795 0 -3,538 -6,787 -8,515 -25,209

Lake Arrowhead C.S.D. -1,413 -1,548 -1,914 -2,743 0 0 -6,004 -3,253 0 -6,388 -11,770 -14,147 -49,180

Las Gallinas Valley S.D. -1,349 -441 -534 -827 0 0 -1,833 -1,601 0 -2,731 -5,313 -6,550 -21,179

Leucadia C.S.D. -2,099 -343 -379 -556 0 0 -1,479 -1,226 0 -2,455 -4,182 -6,667 -19,386

Montecito S.D. -942 -309 -362 -490 0 0 -1,039 -986 0 -1,899 -3,161 -3,958 -13,146

Monterey Regional W.P.C.A. -3,450 -903 -1,004 -1,412 0 0 -4,350 -3,602 0 -7,054 -11,748 -15,414 -48,937

North of River S.D. -1,565 -398 -492 -706 0 0 -1,947 -1,696 0 -3,223 -6,742 -8,234 -25,003

Novato Sanitary District -1,776 -460 -525 -758 0 0 -1,635 -1,399 0 -2,634 -5,051 -6,441 -20,679

Ojai Valley S.D. -1,717 -477 -536 -730 0 0 -1,586 -1,384 0 -2,426 -5,016 -6,133 -20,005

Oro Loma S.D. -2,252 -603 -687 -1,077 0 0 -2,404 -1,817 0 -3,364 -6,110 -7,481 -25,795

Sanitary District #1 -1,870 -695 -828 -1,096 0 0 -2,565 -1,875 0 -3,509 -6,693 -8,603 -27,734

Sanitary District #5 -613 -192 -289 -392 0 0 -941 -723 0 -1,213 -2,071 -2,477 -8,911

Santa Margarita WD 0 NA NA NA NA NA NA -12,139 0 -19,724 -34,174 -34,477 -100,514

Sausalito Marin City S.D. -743 -211 -297 -402 0 0 -973 -746 0 -1,237 -2,197 -2,462 -9,268

Selma-Kingsburg-Fowler C.S.D. -1,855 -557 -580 -846 0 0 -1,879 -1,696 0 -3,453 -7,111 -8,760 -26,737

Sewer Authority of Mid-Coastside -1,359 -402 -580 -780 0 0 -1,382 -1,607 0 -2,831 -6,515 -7,291 -22,747

Sewerage Agency of Southern Marin -1,792 -529 -680 -973 0 0 -1,613 -1,347 0 -2,940 -4,493 -5,488 -19,855

South Bayside System Authority -2,954 -731 -1,154 -1,631 0 0 -3,889 -3,274 0 -6,242 -11,073 -12,398 -43,346

South East Regional R.A. -2,245 -472 -576 -813 0 0 NA NA NA NA NA NA -4,106

South Orange County Wastewater Authority 0 NA NA NA NA NA -4,008 -3,519 0 -6,841 -11,525 -14,059 -39,952

South Tahoe PUD. -5,313 -2,012 -2,219 -3,177 0 0 -7,153 -6,575 0 -12,702 -22,499 -26,746 -88,396

Stege S.D. -1,678 -490 -686 -929 0 0 -1,807 -1,573 0 -3,021 -5,269 -6,566 -22,019

Tahoe-Truckee S.A. -1,392 -355 -389 -507 0 0 -1,185 -1,146 0 -2,558 -4,865 -5,527 -17,924

Triunfo S.D. -972 -234 -344 -471 0 0 -1,149 -891 0 -1,470 -2,509 -2,907 -10,947

Union S.D. -3,952 -852 -952 -1,225 0 0 -2,345 -1,885 0 -3,443 -5,858 -6,761 -27,273

Vallejo Sanitation & Flood Control -1,728 -408 -449 -565 0 0 -1,349 -1,048 0 -1,760 -2,988 -3,669 -13,964

Ventura Regional S.D. -5,664 -1,512 -1,635 -1,658 0 0 -3,806 -2,848 0 -5,282 -9,906 -12,189 -44,500

Victor Valley W.R.A. -1,961 -603 -755 -1,070 0 0 -2,516 -2,314 0 -4,918 -9,602 -11,716 -35,455

West Bay S.D. -2,070 -520 -698 -1,057 0 0 -1,892 -1,608 0 -3,051 -5,715 -7,034 -23,645West County W.D. -3,826 -972 -1,079 -1,049 0 0 -2,138 -1,816 0 -3,486 -6,848 -7,774 -28,988West Valley -679 -589 -706 -983 0 0 -3,031 -2,677 0 -5,005 -10,425 -12,671 -36,766Windsor W.D. -373 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA -373

Total -84,572 -23,264 -28,551 -39,106 0 0 -90,292 -87,935 0 -162,398 -298,282 -356,898 -1,171,298

89

AN EMPLOYEE-OWNED COMPANY

P. O. Box 3975 ı Walnut Creek, CA 94598

www.carlwarren.com ı Tel: 925-674-4660 ı 800-998-4763 ı Fax: 800-956-3999 CA License No. 2607296

October 28, 2013 Mr. Dennis Mulqueeney Program Administrator California Sanitation Risk Management Authority 100 Pine Street, 11th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 Change in Adjustor Personnel for CSRMA Dear Dennis: We are writing to inform you that Janice Yardley is no longer with Carl Warren & Company. Until further notice, all claims matters should be sent to the CSRMA account supervisor, Mauri McGuire, who has been supervising Janice for the past four years, and is already familiar with the claim files and CSRMA operations. In addition to the currently published on-call phone number, (707) 732-6728, Mauri can be contacted in any of the following ways:

Email: [email protected] Office: 805-650-7020 ext. 1003 Cell: 805-509-1426

Shortly, we will be publishing an 800 number for member use as well. Carl Warren & Company has been proud to represent CSRMA for many years, and rest assured we are committed to continuing to provide the highest quality claim service you’ve come to expect from our company. Thank you, and let us know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Brandon Schlenker Assistant Vice President

mailto:[email protected]�

mleavell

Typewritten Text

G.4

G:\Share\CLIENT\jpa\CSRMA\Agenda\_Executive Board\2013\12.09.13\I.1 - WC Payroll Audit - PY 23.doc

Agenda Item No. I.1 Executive Board Meeting


Workers’ Compensation Program Payroll Audit

Program Year 23 (2012-2013)

ISSUE: The Workers’ Compensation Program deposit is based on estimated payroll at inception of the coverage period. In order to determine final program costs, each member of the Program provides the Program Administrator with actual payroll for the same period. RECOMMENDATION: Information only. Based on the audit results, members will either receive a return check or invoice for any additional deposit due. FISCAL IMPACT: Based on the audit results, $13,624 in additional deposit is due from the membership. Last year, $13,879 was due from the membership. BACKGROUND: The Program Administrators request from each member of the Program updated (or actual) payroll for the past program year. The actual payroll is compared to the estimated payroll originally submitted at the inception of the program year. The actual deposit for that program year is calculated using the updated payroll information. This results in either a return or additional premium due to the membership. ATTACHMENTS: PY23 (2012-2013) Audit Worksheet

91


Program Year 23 - Payroll Audit

July 1, 2012 - July 1, 2013

WCIRB Payroll Classification

Member Agency

No. ofElected Official

Sanitation7580

Clerical8810

Swr. Cnstr.6307

Swr. Cnstr.6308

Sales8742

Irrig0251

Water7520

Landfill9424

Engineers8601

TotalPayroll

E.O.Premium Ex-Mod

Total Manual

PremiumDeposit

PremiumTotal Audit Premium

Difference (+/-)

0.043279710 0.003594417 0.082818292 0.042912932 0.004034549 0.042619511 0.035210611 0.059858039 0.003741127 50 0Carmel Area Wastewater District 5 1,573,142 186,999 122,153 118,250 2,000,544 250 78% 69,943 57,969 54,556 (3,413)

Carpinteria Sanitary District 5 773,326 191,135 256,520 1,220,981 250 116% 35,441 48,127 41,112 (7,015)

Castro Valley Sanitary District 5 772,328 413,967 435,603 1,621,898 250 76% 36,922 25,432 28,061 2,629

Central Contra Costa Sanitary District 5 14,931,131 5,675,879 495,319 6,033,692 27,136,021 250 74% 691,438 526,161 511,664 (14,497)

Central Marin Sanitation Agency 6 3,171,757 391,703 201,799 249,492 4,014,751 300 62% 140,728 82,289 87,251 4,962

Delta Diablo Sanitation District 3 4,691,735 2,024,352 110,290 1,134,339 7,960,716 150 65% 215,172 142,221 139,862 (2,359)

Dublin San Ramon S.D. 5 4,280,848 4,494,592 753,776 1,307,628 667,549 11,504,393 250 66% 253,260 164,686 167,152 2,466

Encina Wastewater Authority 0 4,801,525 658,910 208,000 131,073 5,799,508 0 63% 211,507 130,619 133,249 2,630

Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District 8 3,017,982 774,062 1,148,787 4,940,831 400 64% 138,097 86,773 89,034 2,261

Goleta Sanitary District 5 1,988,538 194,546 137,023 2,320,107 250 81% 87,565 62,589 70,928 8,339

Goleta West Sanitary District 5 340,039 164,098 60,200 564,337 250 117% 15,800 16,255 18,486 2,231

Ironhouse Sanitary District 5 1,368,376 264,285 189,219 614,759 145,244 2,581,883 250 96% 87,930 81,020 84,413 3,393

Lake Arrowhead CSD 5 1,047,188 842,841 251,926 1,176,667 273,428 3,592,050 250 98% 92,072 83,179 90,231 7,052

Las Gallinas Valley S.D. 5 1,041,258 580,331 151,731 1,773,320 250 82% 48,224 38,790 39,544 754

Leucadia Wastewater District 5 736,124 582,825 151,359 1,470,308 250 94% 34,815 30,777 32,726 1,949

Montecito Sanitary District 5 570,579 230,405 409,029 38,519 1,248,532 250 142% 27,567 44,030 39,145 (4,885)

Monterey Regional W.P.C.A. 0 4,413,293 1,015,825 1,193,075 621,334 7,243,527 0 76% 201,795 140,820 153,364 12,544

Mt. View Sanitary District 5 742,344 203,613 208,000 1,153,957 250 84% 33,949 27,928 28,517 589

Napa Sanitary District 5 3,057,734 492,686 208,000 556,613 4,315,033 250 66% 137,280 84,941 90,605 5,664

Novato Sanitary District 5 788,806 512,070 402,285 1,703,161 250 195% 37,853 80,348 73,813 (6,535)

Ojai Valley Sanitary District 7 869,787 398,040 219,488 1,487,315 350 89% 40,310 36,999 35,876 (1,123)

Oro Loma Sanitary District 5 2,821,769 207,601 477,951 442,585 3,949,906 250 65% 126,706 80,881 82,359 1,478

San Elijo JPA 4 1,189,015 348,949 104,000 140,641 1,782,605 200 72% 53,860 39,565 38,779 (786)

Sanitary District No. 1 of Marin County 5 2,397,744 583,748 427,497 3,408,989 250 92% 107,721 98,170 99,103 933

Sanitary District No. 5 of Marin County 5 571,938 111,293 104,000 787,231 250 80% 25,823 20,012 20,658 646

Santa Margarita Water District 5 2,159,050 2,531,783 1,060,049 79,333 3,789,036 116,015 9,735,266 250 76% 244,300 180,346 185,668 5,322

Sausalito-Marin City S.D. 5 616,917 152,449 208,000 110,758 1,088,123 250 117% 28,751 44,214 33,639 (10,575)

Selma-Kingsburg-Fowler County S.D. 5 1,354,116 291,188 152,836 257,826 2,055,966 250 70% 61,484 41,927 43,039 1,112

Sewer Authority Mid-Coastside 6 786,476 418,925 1,205,401 300 87% 35,844 34,087 31,184 (2,903)

South Bayside System Authority 4 7,273,428 658,233 293,881 357,122 8,582,664 200 61% 319,880 195,736 195,127 (609)

South Orange County Wastewater Aut. 7 4,687,130 882,655 104,000 403,873 6,077,658 350 64% 208,311 122,495 133,319 10,824

South Tahoe Public Utility District 5 3,722,025 2,495,104 104,000 1,268,972 1,071,719 8,661,820 250 81% 219,417 181,920 177,728 (4,192)

Stege Sanitary Distict 5 368,062 156,536 104,000 181,080 809,678 250 79% 17,839 15,000 15,000 0

Tahoe-Truckee Sanitation Agency 5 3,439,377 534,330 199,504 260,597 4,433,808 250 61% 152,806 98,614 93,212 (5,402)

Truckee Sanitary District 5 1,920,093 333,479 503,403 359,334 3,116,309 250 72% 87,925 64,271 63,306 (965)

Union Sanitary District 1 7,125,466 3,371,103 1,855,727 1,368,375 13,720,671 50 85% 333,162 261,581 283,188 21,607

Vallejo Sanitation & Flood C.D. 9 5,435,964 1,729,034 424,448 7,589,446 450 81% 243,520 200,663 197,251 (3,412)

Valley Sanitary District 5 1,390,269 286,824 57,350 1,734,443 250 71% 61,666 52,936 43,708 (9,228)

Ventura Regional S.D. 9 1,995,923 1,135,182 104,000 1,068,874 99,665 4,403,644 450 130% 155,686 204,430 202,392 (2,038)

Victor Valley W.R.A. 4 2,319,235 761,920 181,691 95,408 3,358,254 200 99% 104,404 95,955 103,360 7,405

West Bay Sanitary District 5 1,609,477 424,156 104,000 167,908 2,305,541 250 84% 72,480 58,176 60,883 2,707

West County Wastewater District 5 2,776,342 692,120 186,752 547,472 4,202,686 250 64% 125,699 90,942 80,447 (10,495)

West Valley Sanitation District 5 1,043,767 489,357 118,550 917,019 2,568,693 250 81% 51,092 47,029 41,588 (5,441)

Totals: 213 111,981,423 38,308,801 - - 12,559,739 694,092 7,542,303 1,068,874 19,076,743 191,231,975 10,650 85% 5,476,044 4,220,903 4,234,527 13,624

92

Agenda Item: I.2


Workers’ Compensation Program PY23 Workers' Compensation Awards for Excellence

ISSUE: The 2012/13 CSRMA Workers’ Compensation Excellence Award program recognizes those members with the lowest frequency and severity rates, with an emphasis on severity, for the Program year ending June 30, 2013. The winners will be recognized at the January 2014 Board of Directors meeting. RECOMMENDATION: None – informational item only. FISCAL IMPACT: The cost for the engraved plaques, certificates and lobby banners is estimated to be less than $12,000. BACKGROUND: CSRMA wishes to recognize those members of the Workers’ Compensation Program who achieve the best loss record for the policy year (July 1 through June 30) in the following three measurement categories. 1. Incidence Rate (a measure of frequency per 100 full-time employees) 2. Average Medical Cost per Claim (a measure of the severity of the injuries that occur) 3. Average Indemnity per Claim (a measure of how aggressive a member is in returning injured

employees to work) The following awards will be presented to the top 10% of the membership reflecting the best performance in the three categories listed above in three different agency size categories: 1. Small: 1-30 employees 2. Medium: 31-60 employees 3. Large: More than 60 employees The winning agencies will receive: 1. Engraved plaque announcing the Member as a CSRMA Safety Superstar for the policy year

evaluated 2. Announcement of the award winners to the CSRMA Board of Director’s meeting 3. CSRMA Bulletin announcing the award winners 4. Banner suitable for lobby display announcing the Member as a CSRMA Workers’

Compensation Excellence Award winner for the policy year evaluated ATTACHMENTS: None HANDOUT: Handout - CSRMA Workers’ Compensation Program Year 23 (2012/13 Policy Year) Workers’ Compensation Award for Excellence Summary

93

Agenda Item: I.3


Workers’ Compensation Program Annual Workers' Compensation Loss Analysis Reports

ISSUE: Each year the Risk Control Advisor provides the Workers’ Compensation Committee and the Executive Board with an analysis of the prior years’ workers’ compensation claims in order to determine trends and to better focus risk control efforts in areas where the members have the greatest need. RECOMMENDATION: Review the results and discuss. FISCAL IMPACT: None BACKGROUND: By monitoring trends within CSRMA’s workers’ compensation claims, CSRMA has been able to respond with risk control programs that target areas of greatest loss. This type of analysis has resulted in the following CSRMA Risk Control Programs: 1. Workers’ Compensation Claims Management and Return to Work Program 2. CSRMA’s Return to Work Advocate 3. Well Workplace monthly newsletter 4. Ergonomics for the Wastewater Worker video training toolkit 5. In person and online ergonomics training 6. CSRMA Health Promotion Program ATTACHMENTS: None HANDOUT: Handout - CSRMA Workers’ Compensation Claims Analysis for Program Year 23

94

G:\Share\CLIENT\jpa\CSRMA\Agenda\_Executive Board\2013\12.09.13\J.1 - PIP Renewal 2013.doc

Agenda Item No. J.1 Executive Board Meeting


Primary Insurance Program Program Renewal

ISSUE: The Primary Insurance Program (PIP) will be renewing December 31, 2013. The incumbent carrier, American Alternative Insurance Corporation (Glatfelter), quoted a 10% increase in premium for the Program and will not be offering a renewal to San Rafael Sanitation District, a member of the Program. Overall the Program has been profitable for Glatfelter, but this has not been a profitable class of business for Glatfelter and their underwriting appetite has changed to the detriment of CSRMA. Given this, the Program Administrators approached Alteris WaterPlus, a primary package insurance program for water and wastewater utilities for an alternative proposal. The carrier for the Alteris WaterPlus Program is Allied World Assurance Company (AM Best Rated A XV (Excellent)). Alteris provided a proposal for all members of the Program representing a 1.18% premium increase over expiring. Terms and conditions are same as expiring, with the exception of the deductibles. The deductible under the Glatfelter Program was nil. Alteris quoted deductibles of $1,000 for Management Liability and $2,500 for Employment Practices Liability. General Liability deductibles ranged from nil to $10,000, based on individual member loss history and exposures. The rationale for the deductibles is to provide long term premium stability. RECOMMENDATION: The Program Administrators recommend that the Executive Board approve renewal of the Primary Insurance Program with Alteris at an annual cost not to exceed $539,247, which represents an 0.62% overall increase for all members participating in the Program. FISCAL IMPACT: The table below provides a cost comparison to the 2012/13 Program Year.

% Change

2012/13 2013/14

Est. Insurance Premium (Net) *

379,748 384,296 1.18%

Program Directors Fee 129,479 121,192 -6.84%

JPA Charge 30,020 37,110 19.11%

Total Cost 539,247 542,598 0.62%

95

G:\Share\CLIENT\jpa\CSRMA\Agenda\_Executive Board\2013\12.09.13\J.1 - PIP Renewal 2013.doc

The percentage change in total cost for individual members varied based on changes in exposure and loss history. The Program Directors Fee and JPA Charge come from the Board approved budget. BACKGROUND: The PIP provides general liability, auto liability, errors and omissions liability, auto physical damage, and excess liability insurance coverages. The primary insurance market for public entities, including wastewater agencies is limited. The Program Administrators discussed the Program with AmTrust Insurance Company, but they do not have an underwriting appetite for wastewater agencies. Philadelphia Insurance Company and Travelers Insurance Company will only offer Management Liability and Employment Practices Liability coverage on a claims-made basis and historically have not been competitive on this class of business in California. Alteris provides coverage on an occurrence basis. ATTACHMENTS: WaterPlus Insurance Program Product Guide.

96

Product Guide

INSURANCE PROGRAMWATER

plus

97

PROPERTY◘ Proprietary Policy Form

▸ Property, Equipment Breakdown & Mobile Equipment ▸ No Coinsurance Penalty ▸ Limited Exclusions ▸ Numerous Coverage Extensions

◘ Blanket Policy Limit ▸ Real Property ▸ Business Personal Property

◘ Blanket Coverage Extension Limit A separate limit applies to: ▸ Business Income ▸ Extended Business Income ▸ Civil Authority ▸ Commandeered Property ▸ Extra Expense ▸ Tenant Leasehold Interest ▸ Electronic Data ▸ Preservation of Property

◘ Coverages Specific to Water- Related Entities ▸ Property in Transit ▸ Mobile Equipment ▸ Pollution Remediation Expenses ▸ Fungus, Wet Rot or Dry Rot ▸ SCADA Upgrades ▸ Contamination

◘ Additional Coverages ▸ Accounts Receivable ▸ Arson Reward ▸ Backup/Overflow of Water from Sewer, Drain, Sump ▸ Business Personal Property at New Locations ▸ Collapse ▸ Contract Penalties ▸ Cost of Inventory or Adjustment ▸ Debris Removal ▸ Dependent Business Premises ▸ Fine Arts ▸ Fire Department Service charge ▸ Fire Protection Devices

▸ Indoor/Outdoor Signs (unscheduled) ▸ New Locations or Newly Constructed Property ▸ Non-owned Detached Trailers ▸ Ordinance or Law Provision ▸ Outdoor Property (unscheduled) ▸ Patterns, Dies, Molds, Forms ▸ Personal Effects & Property of Others ▸ Tools & Equipment Owned by your Employees ▸ Trees, Shrubs & Plants ▸ Unintentional Errors & Omissions ▸ Utility Services – Business Income & Extra Expense ▸ Utility Services – Direct Damage ▸ Valuable Papers & Records

◘ Real Property Definition: The buildings, items or structures described in the Declarations including: ▸ Aboveground Piping ▸ Aboveground & Belowground Penstock ▸ Additions under Construction ▸ All Appurtenant Buildings or Structures ▸ Alterations & Repairs to Buildings or Structures ▸ Buildings ▸ Completed Additions ▸ Exterior Signs ▸ Fixtures, incl. Outdoor Fixtures ▸ Glass which is part of a Building ▸ Light Standards ▸ Materials, Equipment, Supplies & Temporary Structures used for making Additions, Alterations or Repairs to Buildings/Structures ▸ Paved Surfaces ▸ Permanently Installed Machinery & Equipment

▸ Permanent Storage Tanks ▸ Business Personal Property used for Maintenance & Service of Buildings or Structures ▸ Solar Panels ▸ Submersible Pumps, Pump Motors & Engines ▸ Underground Piping located on or within 1000 feet of Described Premises ▸ Underground Vaults & Machinery ▸ Restrooms ▸ Business Personal Property used tomaintain or service the Real Property

◘ Business Personal Property Definition: The property you

own that is used in your business including:

▸ Furniture & Fixtures ▸ Machinery & Equipment ▸ Computer Equipment ▸ Communication Equipment ▸ Stock

◘ Outdoor Property Definition: Permanent structures and items that are outside covered real property including: ▸ Historical Markers & Flagpoles ▸ Sirens, Antennas, Towers, Satellite Dishes, & Similar Structures ▸ Exterior Signs (not located at Premises) ▸ Fences & Retaining Walls ▸ Storage Sheds, Garages, Pavilions & Permanent Recycling Bins ▸ Hydrants ▸ Electric Utility Power Transmission & Distribution Lines, Poles & Related Equipment

CRIME◘ Proprietary Policy Form

▸ Faithful Performance ▸ Employee Benefit Plans ▸ Available Coverage for Designated Agents

◘ Coverages ▸ Employee Theft ▸ Forgery or Alteration ▸ Inside the Premise – Theft of Money & Securities ▸ Inside the Premise Robbery or Safe Burglary ▸ Outside the Premise ▸ Computer Fraud ▸ Funds Transfer of Fraud ▸ Money Orders & Counterfeit Paper Currency

COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY◘ Proprietary Policy Form

▸ Occurrence ▸ Duty to Defend ▸ Defense Outside the Limit ▸ Nonauditable ▸ Broad Definition of Insured ▸ Blanket Additional Insured ▸ Limited Exclusions

◘ Coverage Extensions ▸ Failure to Supply Water (no sublimit) ▸ Water & Wastewater Testing E & O ▸ Medical Payments ▸ Sewage from Backups & Breaks (no sublimit) ▸ Fire Damage Legal Liability ▸ Pollution Liability from: • Heat, smoke, or fumes from a hostile fire • Smoke drift from prescribed fires

• Escape of fuels or lubricants from mobile equipment • Application of pesticides or herbicides • Potable water provided to others • Chemicals used in your water or wastewater treatment • Natural gas or propane gas used in treatment process • Sudden & accidental events ▸ Contractual Liability – Railroads ▸ Dam, Levee & Dike Structural Failure & Existence Hazard ▸ Lead from Potable Water ▸ Waterborne Asbestos from Potable Water ▸ Watercraft ▸ Nonowned Aircraft

PUBLIC OFFICIALS & MANAGEMENT LIABILITY◘ Proprietary Policy Form

▸ Occurrence & Claims Made Options ▸ Duty to Defend ▸ Defense Options (Outside & Inside) ▸ Nonauditable ▸ Broad Definition of Insured

▸ Limited Exclusions◘ Coverages

▸ Wrongful Acts ▸ Employment Practices ▸ Employee Benefit Plans ▸ Injunctive Relief

◘ Coverage Extensions ▸ Inverse Condemnation ▸ Outside Directorship ▸ Third Party Discrimination

BUSINESS AUTO◘ Coverages

▸ Combined Single Limit ▸ Uninsured Motorists ▸ Hired Auto Liability ▸ Non Owned Auto Liability ▸ Medical Payments and Personal Injury Protection ▸ Hired Physical Damage ▸ Comprehensive & Collision ▸ Fleet Automatic

PRIVACY 101◘ Coverages

▸ Privacy & Network Security ▸ Notification and Credit Monitoring Costs ▸ Data Forensic ▸ Crisis Management

EXCESS LIABILITY◘ Proprietary Policy Form

▸ Following Form ▸ Duty to Defend ▸ Defense Outside the Limit ▸ Nonauditable ▸ $10,000,000 Capacity

◘ Underlying Coverages: ▸ Commercial General Liability including: • Water & Wastewater Testing • Pollution Liability • Failure to Supply ▸ Public Officials & Management Liability including: • Wrongful Acts • Employment Practices • Employee Benefit Plans • Inverse Condemnation • Outside Directorship ▸ Business Automobile ▸ Employers’ Liability

W a t e r P l u s c o v e r a g e s u m m a r y

Disclaimer: Coverages listed in this summary may or may not apply. Please review the actual quotation for a clear understanding of the coverages being offered. In addition, please request and carefully review the actual policy for a clear understanding of our terms, conditions, limitations, and exclusions. The policy itself will be the sole criterion to determine whether coverage applies to any claim or tender request. The policy summary and any quotation will not supersede the terms contained in the policy. 7/2012

98

PROGR A M M A N AGER

Alteris is a full service Managing General

Agency providing strategic risk solutions

to brokers and cl ients throughout the

Un i t e d S t a t e s . C ap ab i l i t i e s i n c l u d e

p r o d u c t p l a c e m e n t , u n d e r w r i t i n g

adminis trat ion, capi t a l management ,

s y s t e m s o l u t i o n s , c l a i m s s e r v i c e s ,

r i s k c o n s u l t a t i o n , a n d r e i n s u r a n c e

coordinat ion. Key disciplines comprise

special distr icts, alternative r isk, and

select commercial subsets.

Wa t erP lus i s under w r i t t en t hr ough

a n A M B e s t “A X V ” r a t e d c a r r i e r

and d is tr ibuted through independent

insurance brokers. For more information,

please contact your broker or visit us at

w w w.al ter isus.com.

Al ter is Insurance Ser v ices Inc.

250 Summer Street, Third Floor

Boston, Massachuset t s 02210

T 888 – 919 – 0001

F 888 – 310 – 3533

Agency License No. 3537131

99

Agenda Item: K.1 Executive Board Meeting


Loss Control Winter/Spring 2013/14 Area Training Update

ISSUE: As part of CSRMA’s ongoing risk control efforts, training is provided on topics of interest to the CSRMA membership at multiple locations throughout the year. The topics and locations scheduled for Fall 2013/Winter/Spring 2014 are listed below:

Topic Tentative Dates

Tentative Locations

Reducing Liability that Job Descriptions Can Cause

9/17, 9/18, 10/1, 10/2/13

Emeryville, WVSD, Ontario, Santa Barbara

State Water Resource Control Board's New Monitoring and Reporting Program Requirements: What Do you Have To Do To Comply?

9/24/13 Webinar

Sanitary Sewer Overflow Volume Estimation: Limiting Liability Through Defensible Calculations

10/8/13 Webinar

Pump Station Failures, Class Action Lawsuits and Regulatory Fines: Pump Station Contingency Plans - Is Your SSMP Missing This?

10/22/13 Webinar

SSMPs and Employee Core Competencies 11/5/13 Webinar

SSO Response, Defensible Volume Calculations, Private Property Damage and Angry Customers: Risk Reduction Measures

11/19/13 Webinar

Gordon Graham: Supervisory and Disciplinary Skills 101

12/4/13 Oakland

CASA: Employment Law Annual Update Generational Differences in the Workplace How Your Agency Will Most Likely Experience Claims…And Prevention Strategies Job Description Accuracy and Liability

January 2014 Indian Wells

CalOSHA’s Transite Pipe Requirements February 2014 Webinar Administrative Best Management Practices for Reducing Liability

March 2014 Webinar

100

New Risk Control Online Design, Navigation and Tools

March 2014 Webinar

Sewer Overflow and Backup Response App for CSRMA

March 2014 Webinar

Force Main Failures: Prevention Strategies April 2014 Oakland and Ontario Gordon Graham: Supervisory and Disciplinary Skills 101

May and June 2014

Santa Barbara Ontario Truckee

RECOMMENDATION: None – information only. FISCAL IMPACT: Approximately $35,000. These training programs are part of the 13/14 Risk Control training budget. BACKGROUND: As part of CSRMA’s ongoing risk control efforts, training is provided on topics of interest to the CSRMA membership at multiple locations throughout the year. Each training topic is selected based on timeliness and member need. Further, each training event has two goals:

To provide information and training that is timely, useful, understandable and practical for the purpose s of loss control and regulatory compliance;

To reach the largest number of people for which the training was designed in the most cost-effective manner possible.

ATTACHMENTS: None

101

The Promise BY JANE HIRSHFIELD

Stay, I said

to the cut flowers.

They bowed

their heads lower.

Stay, I said to the spider,

who fled.

Stay, leaf.

It reddened,

embarrassed for me and itself.

Stay, I said to my body.

It sat as a dog does,

obedient for a moment,

soon starting to tremble.

Stay, to the earth

of riverine valley meadows,

of fossiled escarpments,

of limestone and sandstone.

It looked back

with a changing expression, in silence.

Stay, I said to my loves.

Each answered,

Always.

Jane Hirshfield, "The Promise " from Come, Thief. Copyright © 2011 by Jane

Hirshfield. Used by permission of Alfred A. Knopf, an imprint of the Knopf

Doubleday Publishing Group, a division of Random House LLC. All Rights

Reserved.

Source: Come, Thief (Alfred A. Knopf, 2011)

102

mleavell

Typewritten Text

L.1

http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/274160/employee+rights+labour+relations/Plan+Now+To+Minimize+Liability+For+HolidayParty+Misconduct

Page 1 of 2 Nov 12, 2013 11:07:52AM MST

Fisher & Phillips LLP

Plan Now To Minimize Liability For Holiday-Party Misconduct -Employment and HR - United States mondaq.com

: Plan Now To Minimize Liability ForHoliday-Party Misconduct

Last Updated: November 11 2013Article by Albert D. BrannenFisher & Phillips LLP

36% of employers report employee misconductat holiday parties. The misconduct ranges from excessive drinking to sexual advances, off-color jokes,vulgar language, arguments, or even fistfights. This article summarizes risks to employers and listsprecautions you can take to minimize your liability. These precautions are categorized as: 1) pre-partycompliance efforts, and 2) specific actions for the night of the party.

Legal Risks

Employers may be liable for the acts of their supervisors and employees under several legal theories. Forexample, employers may be civilly liable for negligent or intentional acts occurring within the "scope ofemployment." Employers may also be liable for harassment, discrimination, or retaliation in violation ofTitle VII. Liability can be substantial. Take these risks seriously and consider the following precautions.

Pre-Party Necessities

Prior to the party, you should:

review your policies prohibiting drug and alcohol abuse, harassment, dating, fighting, weapons,and other misconduct;

educate supervisors and employees about the No-Harassment, No-Retaliation and EEO policiesand the procedures for reporting and responding to harassment, discrimination or retaliation claims;

make sure you have consistently disciplined violators of policies;foster a work environment free of harassment, discrimination, or retaliation; andconsider whether a private binding arbitration program for resolving employee claims is right for

your organization.

Party Planning

Most holiday party misconduct is related to over-consumption of alcohol. If you choose to serve alcohol ata party, consider these tips:

remind employees that normal rules of conduct apply to parties, and to drink responsibly;arrange for designated drivers, reduced cab fares or hotel room rates or even offer to pay or

reimburse alcohol-impaired employees for cab fare or hotel expenses;tell employees attendance is not required; 103


http://www.mondaq.com/content/author.asp?article_id=274160&author_id=769566

http://www.mondaq.com/content/company.asp?article_id=274160&company_id=12489

mleavell

Typewritten Text

L.2


Page 2 of 2 Nov 12, 2013 11:07:52AM MST

provide employees with a limited number of drink tickets;limit the length of the party and close the bar one hour before the end of the party;serve non-alcoholic beverages;do not serve punch or other concoctions that mask alcoholic content;provide food and entertainment to prevent drinking from being the focus of the party;serve foods that slow the assimilation of alcohol (i.e., those high in protein or starch) and not

greasy or salty foods that encourage more consumption of liquids;have the party off-site at a professionally managed facility with bartenders who are trained to limit

harm or liability;don't allow employees to tend bar or provide alcohol;designate a responsible person to "monitor" the party and work with the event staff;schedule the party on a week night when employees are less likely to over-indulge;hire an off-duty policeman or security specialist to be present during and after the party;don't hang mistletoe;make sure underage employees or guests are not served alcohol;review your insurance polices for alcohol-related exclusions.

While you can't completely eliminate the risk of liability arising from parties, by planning appropriately youcan reduce liability – and continue to celebrate!

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist adviceshould be sought about your specific circumstances.

104


http://www.rmplusonline.com/article.htm?id=5137

Page 1 of 2 Nov 26, 2013 01:50:51PM MST

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Sorry, I Wasn't Listening - How Active Listening Skills Can ImproveYour Workplace rmplusonline.com

Sorry, I Wasn't Listening - How Active Listening Skills Can Improve Your Workplace

Active listening is necessary for successful relationships in the workplace.

Active listening is more than "just paying attention." It includes paying attention to, and giving, verbal andnonverbal cues that indicate engagement in another person's story. Cues include eye contact, bodylanguage, appropriate pacing of the conversation, and attentive silence.

When communicating, it is important to give the other person time to think, participate, and collaborate.To allow the other person space to add to the conversation, try pausing occasionally. Active listening canalso help calm the other person, if he or she is angry or has complaints.

Active listening has five main components:

Focus. Ignore external and internal distractions, and keep your attention on the other person.Make eye contact and watch the other person's body language.

Do not interrupt. Let the other person finish his or her thought before responding, especially ifyou are disagreeing.

Use body language. Nod, smile, and keep your body posture open. Also, offer verbalencouragement, like "Yes" and "I understand."

Check Your Understanding. Speak a summary of the other person's comments occasionally toconfirm to him or her that you understand what is being said. Ask questions if there is somethingyou do not understand.

Respond Respectfully. Be honest, but always speak with the level of respect you would like toreceive.

Consider recording your conversations, with the other person's permission, to see how well you followthe rules of active listening and where you could improve. Andrew Roark, "Active Listening: How toRespond Respectfully," (Nov. 2013).veterinaryteambrief.com

Commentary

Active listening is important for managers speaking to their employees. Active listening improvescommunication among members of the organization, which in turn leads to more innovation, increasedproductivity, and improved overall work environment.

Active listening skills are especially important when carrying out evaluations. Managers should useactive listening when conducting evaluations of employees, so they can increase employee feedback.Managers should encourage employees to make certain they fully understand what the other party issaying as part of their job performance.

105


http://www.rmplusonline.com/article.htm?id=5137&format=print

mleavell

Typewritten Text

L.3


Page 2 of 2 Nov 26, 2013 01:50:51PM MST

Periodically remind employees at all levels of the organization to use active listening techniques toimprove intra-office communication. Encourage employees to speak to a manager if they are not able toeffectively communicate with a coworker. Managers should meet with employees or other managers whodo not listen well to review active listening skills and remind them that paying attention to what otheremployees have to say will improve everyone’s experience at work and the ultimate work product.

This informational piece was published on November 19, 2013.

©2006-2013 Travelers, Inc., All Rights Reserved. ©2006-2013 The McCalmon Group, Inc., All RightsReserved. Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners. Use of this website constitutes acceptance of The McCalmon Group's and . User Agreement Privacy Policy Legal Notices

106


http://www.rmplusonline.com/terms.htm

http://www.rmplusonline.com/privacy.htm

http://www.rmplusonline.com/content.htm?page=legal.htm

8 Things You Should Never Say in a Termination Meeting |California Employment Law foxrothschild.com

By Jeffrey

D. Polsky

on August

18, 2013

1. This is

hard for

me, too.

– While

usually

true, it’s

important

to

recognize that the person doing the firing has it better than the person getting fired. In

litigation, the statement will be used to make you sound self-centered and insensitive.

2. This is a decision by the company that I don’t necessarily agree with. – If you

disagree with the termination decision, you do what you can to persuade the decision

maker that it’s a mistake. Once the decision is made though, it’s your job to represent your

employer.

3. We’ll send you your final pay in a few days. – Not in California you won’t. Labor

Code § 201: “If an employer discharges an employee, the wages earned and unpaid at the

time of discharge are due and payable immediately.” So you will have a final paycheck,

including unused vacation, ready to hand the person on the day you terminate.

4. I should have probably pointed this out sooner . . . . – If someone is terminated for

poor performance, they should have been clearly informed (including in writing –

hopefully in a written performance review) of how they were deficient and needed

to improve. Regardless of the legal theory at issue, juries, judges, and arbitrators arelooking for fairness. This means the person was told what was wrong and given a

reasonable chance to correct the issue.5. Your complaint to [insert government agency] forces us to question your loyalty

to the company. – You might as well just list “retaliation” as the reason for termination.

6. You violated our company policies when you told your co-workers what you

were making. – This may be a problem anywhere according to the NLRB. But in addition,

Labor Code § 232 specifically prohibits employers from taking any action against an

employee who discloses his or her wages.

7. We’re getting rid of the deadwood./We need some new blood./We’re looking for

someone with a fresh perspective./There’s too much gray hair around here./We’re

trying to update our image. - I suppose these statements are slightly better than: “You’re

too old.” But only slightly.

8. I don’t have to give you a reason. - Technically, that’s true. But as I explained here,

you don’t want the person using his or her imagination to figure out the reason. Just make

107

http://foxrothschild.com/attorneys/jeffrey-polsky.html

http://californiaemploymentlaw.foxrothschild.com/2012/06/articles/employment-litigation/why-employment-defense-lawyers-hate-performance-reviews/

http://californiaemploymentlaw.foxrothschild.com/2013/06/articles/employment-litigation/nlrb-going-rogue/

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=lab&group=00001-01000&file=200-243

http://californiaemploymentlaw.foxrothschild.com/2013/04/articles/employment-litigation/when-you-fire-employees-tell-them-the-reason/

mleavell

Typewritten Text

L.4

sure the reason you give is accurate and supportable.

Update – August 23, 2013: Our partner Christina Stoneburner at the Employment Discrimination

Report added a ninth item to the list. You can read it here. Some people are so competitive!

108

http://www.foxrothschild.com/attorneys/bioDisplay.aspx?id=4060

http://employmentdiscrimination.foxrothschild.com/

http://employmentdiscrimination.foxrothschild.com/2013/08/articles/employee-termination/9-things-not-to-say-in-a-termination-meeting/

October/2013

Contact us to learn more about York Public Entity Jody Gray President [email protected] Jon Lord Managing Vice President [email protected]

Web of Lies -- Using Social Media to Investigate Workers' Compensation Fraud We’ve all heard the stories:

The City hall janitor who claimed his back injury prevented him from working but who boasted on Facebook that he had bowled a perfect game.

The judo instructor who claimed total and permanent injury but posted dates on which he was available to offer instruction.

The bronco-riding champ who filed a claim for work-related injuries then invited online friends to attend his next rodeo competition.

The postal worker who claimed a work-related shoulder injury that prevented her from lifting mail trays appearing on “The Price is Right” and putting all her shoulder strength into a spin.

109

mleavell

Typewritten Text

L.5

(She also posted photos on her Facebook page showing her using a zipline.)

While the dollar values for workers’ compensation claimant fraud remain relatively low – on average below $3,000 per claim – these costs can add up, especially with the increasing rate of fraud in workers’ compensation. According to the National Insurance Crime Bureau, which collects stats on insurance fraud and allows anonymous reporting of fraud, questionable referrals for workers’ compensation claims increased 20% in the first half of 2012 over the same period in 2011. And as a category, claimant fraud is approximately 300% higher than other types of questionable referrals to NICB. Fortunately, using social media as a tool is making it much easier – and more cost effective -- to investigate red flags and suspected workers’ compensation fraud. No longer do expensive investigators need to follow a person around, videotaping their every move and hoping to capture them doing something that contradicts the statements in their claim. Today, as part of their arsenal of tools, they can just check Facebook pages, Twitter feeds, and Flickr photos to see if the claimant has posted comments, photos or videos that can be used as leads to help determine the veracity of the claim. York’s Electronic Data Sciences practice has perfected the art of online fraud investigation, incorporating available social media information, such as the Check-In feature on Facebook, FourSquare, or Yobongo, to narrow the focus of the investigation, use investigative dollars effectively, and provide footage of a claimant. We are also pioneering several cutting-edge investigative tools. To read more about how York’s cutting edge approach to using social media to fight workers’ compensation fraud can save you money, click here. To speak to someone about how York can manage your workers’ compensation claims to reduce your cost of risk – and the cost of fraudulent claims – contact Angela Hatley, Vice President of Client Services ([email protected] or 909.942.3038) or Jody Gray, President, York Public Entity ([email protected] or 714.620.1336).

110

CSRMA Board of Directors

60 Members

Executive Board Russ Baggerly, Ojai Valley Sanitary District (President)

Paul Bushee, Leucadia Wastewater District (Vice President)

Craig Murray, Carpinteria SD

Jason Warner, Oro Loma SD

Greg Baatrup, Fairfield-Suisun SD

Logan Olds, Victor Valley WRA

Bert Michalczyk, Dublin San Ramon SD

Open (Alternate)

Officers Committee

Russ Baggerly

Paul Bushee

Secretary

George Emerson

Finance Committee

Kenneth Spray, Chair

Kristin Griffith

Brenda Krout

E.J. Shalaby

Treasurer

Kenneth Spray

Program Management Alliant Insurance Services, Inc.

JPA Administration & Insurance

Dennis Mulqueeney

Seth Cole

Myron Leavell

Marilyn Schley

P.J. Skarlanic

Thary Ou

Tevea Him

Loss Control Services

David Patzer, Risk Management Solutions CSRMA Risk Control Advisor

Heather Truro, HT Consulting

Return to Work Consultant

Accounting

Tami Giovanni

Legal Counsel

Byrne Conley, Esq. Gibbons & Conley

Coverage Counsel

David J. Garthe, Esq. Boornazian, Jensen &

Garthe

Claims

Mauri McGuire Carl Warren & Co.

Financial Auditor

David Becker James Marta & Company

Claims

Tamara Kneff York Insurance Services, Inc.

Pooled Liability Program Committee

Bert Michalczyk,

Dublin San Ramon SD, Chair

Ed Oyama, West Valley SD

Jeff Moorhouse, Carpinteria SD

Richard Currie, Union SD

Tom Williams, Ironhouse SD

Mark Williams, Las Gallinas Valley SD

Workers’ Compensation Program Committee

Greg Baatrup,

Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District, Chair

Jason Dow, Central Marin SA

Shari Deutsch, Central Contra Costa SD

Rex Delizo, Stege SD

Dan Child, SBSA

Roland Williams, Castro Valley SD

Financial Advisor

Carlos Oblites PFM Asset Management

LLC

111

mleavell

Typewritten Text

L.6

CSRMA California Sanitation Risk Management Authority

Service Team

Dennis Mulqueeney Senior Vice President

JPA Manager (415) 403-1421

[email protected]

Seth Cole First Vice President

Assistant JPA Manager (415) 403-1419

[email protected]

Tami Giovanni Accounting

(925) 963-0951 [email protected]

Thary Ou Account Administrator

Account Support Services (415) 403-1433

[email protected]

Myron Leavell Unit Manager

JPA / Insurance Administration (415) 403-1404

[email protected]

Marilyn Schley Account Manager

Insurance Administration (415) 403-1432

[email protected]

David Patzer Risk Control Advisor

Risk Control Consulting Services

(707) 373-9709 [email protected]

Tevea Him Administrative Support

Services (415) 403-1416

[email protected]

P.J. Skarlanic Account Manager

JPA / Insurance Administration (415) 403-1455

[email protected]

112

mleavell

Typewritten Text

L.7

csrma - open claims (12-02-13) · pdf filemodel claims reporting flow charts i p. 54 6. ......

Documents