WEIRTON — Weirton officials are recommending the city stay with its current provider for liability and property insurance, with a vote scheduled by city council tonight.

The proposal to stay with Travelers Insurance, provided through Assure America, was recommended during Friday’s meeting of the Weirton Finance Committee, following a discussion led by City Manager Mike Adams.

According to information provided by Adams, the city received initial bids from Travelers Property Casualty of $572,681 to provide property and liability insurance coverage for the next year, while the only other bidder, the risk pool from West Virginia Corp., submitted through Assured Partners of WV, offered a bid of $525,783.

Those quotes, in both cases, were based on a property value of $180,772,552, as well as the city owning just over 130 vehicles.

“They’re both using the same numbers,” Adams said.

While Travelers offered the higher bid, Adams said he was taking into account Assure America’s operating in Weirton, which allows a 5% bid preference reduction, as well as the various taxes and fees it pays to the city.

Beyond that, he expressed concern about the type of coverage the risk pool could provide, explaining the funds primarily are provided by other governmental entities in the state, as opposed to a traditional insurance program.

“Everyone is kicking in to cover your losses,” he said, noting the board has 11 members, with six county commissioners and two mayors among them. “This is a board that is going to be making a lot of decisions.”

Doug Velegol, representing Assure America, noted their quote had come down from last year’s bid, which cost the city $604,000, explaining there is protection built into the plan, so, in the event something would happen to the company, the city will still have coverage for a while.

“Travelers is an excellent, A plus plus rated company,” Velegol said. “They have been in the state forever.”

Matt Provenzano, representing Assured Partners, was in attendance Friday, but opted not to make any comments during the discussion.

Adams agreed there is a cost difference, but said he feels the decision will be best for the city.

“It will cost a little bit more, but I think it’s worth it,” Adams said.

Adams said the suggestion had support from the mayor, finance director and city attorney.