2016_0111_CCPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

the cost for that resident. Ms. Shiwarski noted other municipalities chose toput that revenue back into the public infrastructure program. Specific to marketing their warranty program, Ms. Shiwarski reported that they do not do any door-to-door solicitation, but plan three separate campaigns in the spring, fall and winter to market each of their three products separately to limit confusion for residents. Ms. Shiwarski advised that residents could choose all three warranty programs, or any combination of the three. Ms. Shiwarski further reported that their firm did not send out any mailing to residents in a community without prior city review and approval of the marketing letter itself and envelope in which it will be sent. Ms. Shiwarski advised that this procedure was followed for each and every campaign, even if previously mailings had been approved by the municipality, allowing the city to have input on the mailing itself and the exact mailing dates. Ms. Shiwarski advised that their firm worked with each municipality on tools to limit calls to the city for the initial campaign, and to customize press releases for the media of the city’s choice. Ms. Shiwarski advised that this typically involved a letter offering the city partnership and their firm’s contact information, a customized web banner for the city website featuring a live chat for residents to visit with a customer service agent at their preference. Once their firm partners with a municipality, Ms. Shiwarski reported that each city partner had access to their firm’s online partner portal for city access and up-to-dateresident enrollment for each product and a list of the number of claims and accruing royalty for the municipality. Ms. Shiwarski noted that each resident was surveyed to determine their satisfaction and to immediately address any problem areas. Of their290 municipal partners across the United States, Ms. Shiwarski noted there were seven in the State of MN as listed in the information provided to the PWETC tonight, including the City of St. Louis Park. At the request of Member Cihacek, Ms. Shiwarski reviewed standard pricing for water, sewer and in-home plumbing averaging $6.765, $7.75 and $6.99 respectively. Ms. Shiwarski noted that a resident could cancel at any time, and receive a refund of remaining premiums submitted. At the further request of Member Cihacek, Ms. Shiwarski addressed how their firm maintained premium rates based on infrastructure prices nationally moving forward by basing their standard pricing on cities under 50,000 households and transferring that risk across the United States. Ms. Shiwarski noted that one city or year may result in a lot of claims, and others not, but by transferring those risks they were able to maintain that standard pricing to-date. At the request of Member Cihacek, Ms. Shiwarski advised that their firm had not seen a significant price escalation over the last two years, and not typically with their current customer base. Ms. Shiwarski advised that their first client had been in West Virginia and their rates had been grandfathered in, with newer partners providing an opportunity to adjust rates accordingly to address risk.