The Hartford cancels Audubon policy citing environmental advocacy, reverses decision

By Doug Bailey

Negative reaction to The Hartford’s decision to abruptly issue a non-renewal notice for an organization’s P&C policy, allegedly due to its environmental advocacy, brought a swift reversal but may not have quieted the concerns.

The brouhaha started when The Southern Adirondack Audubon Society, in Saratoga Springs, N.Y., received a notice from the Hartford saying it would not renew its policy when it expires in July after it learned that the birdwatching group serves as an “environmental protection organization.”

'Not acceptable exposure'

“This is not an acceptable exposure under The Hartford’s Small Commercial business segment guidelines,” said the letter, signed by the insurer’s vice president for P&C compliance, Susan L. Castaneda.

Executives at the Audubon chapter were caught off guard by the notice and were at a loss to understand it. Rob Snell, the organization’s president, wondered if the action was related to conservative ideology influenced by the Trump administration’s dim view of environmental activism, which the Hartford denied.

Snell told a local environmental news outlet that he was “appalled and offended” by The Hartford’s letter and insisted the Audubon chapter did no advocacy work or lobbying, beyond taking people out birdwatching and offering educational and informational programs.

The chapter signed up for the policy with The Hartford when it installed an antenna on the roof of a local college that tracks bird migrations.

Protecting environment cited as reason

He also said that after complaining to his insurance broker, he got another written explanation that said The Hartford is “not a market for associations who look to protect, analyze, or monitor the environment against misuse or degradation from human forces.”

But the news, first reported by the Adirondack Explorer, set off a firestorm of social media postings and letters of protest from allied groups.

The Connecticut Citizen Action Group called on The Hartford’s CEO, Christopher J. Swift, for a broader explanation.

“We must say that this is very problematic on a number of fronts,” wrote CCAG executive director Tom Swan “Is The Hartford basing underwriting on the content of speech, or the mission of customers? If so, when was this policy adopted, and what does it entail? This also appears to represent a significant shift in The Hartford’s approach to environmental issues.”

Swan copied the letter to Connecticut’s governor, attorney general, and insurance commissioner.

Decision based solely on risk, says The Hartford

Matthew Sturdevant, the head of media and public relations at The Hartford said in a statement that the insurer’s underwriting decisions are based solely on risk assessment and not informed by political and social viewpoints.

“Our Small Business unit is designed to offer property and general liability insurance to small-business owners,” he said. “Environmental-protection organizations and other advocacy groups are generally ineligible for coverage, principally because of an increased risk profile that falls outside of our Small Business unit’s risk appetite, although there are certain exceptions for organizations that have a lower risk profile.”

Insurers generally avoid liability coverage to organizations that actively engage in political advocacy or activism because they are themselves often subject to litigation for such things as libel, property damage, and other offenses.

The Audubon chapter in Saratoga Springs, however, is not one of those and Snell says he has received an offer from The Hartford to continue coverage and withdraw the non-renewal letter, which was apparently issued in error. The Hartford based its non-renewal notice on public information about the chapter and after a closer review reversed its decision. Snell has not decided whether to continue to do business with The Hartford, Connecticut-based company, which insures at least eight other Audubon chapters as well as several wildlife conservation organizations.

The incident is reminiscent of another one last year when a Washington, D.C.- based community development organization, the Community Opportunity Alliance, got a non-renewal letter from its insurer, Travelers, that was worded nearly exactly as The Hartford’s non-renewal letter.

“Community development operations are ineligible and are outside of our risk appetite,” the Travelers letter said. “Therefore, we are non-renewing your policy.”

Travelers, too, later said issuance of the non-renewal letter was a mistake.