My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 06-24-2008
NewBrighton
>
Council
>
Packets
>
2008
>
CCP 06-24-2008
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/21/2018 11:20:29 PM
Creation date
6/20/2008 3:18:05 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
254
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
always exceed the liability limits of the Host Committee's insurance policy and <br />• the City's LMCIT policy. <br />I spoke with John Kelly, one of St. Paul's assistant city attorneys, who drafted the <br />Agreement about this issue. John informed me that the liability limit for the Host <br />Committee insurance policy does not include defense costs, which are covered <br />separately and there is no limit for these costs. John informed me that most of the <br />costs relating to events like the Convention are usually defense costs. John also <br />told me that the $10,000,000 liability limit amount was not arrived at arbitrarily. <br />St. Paul spent a lot of time researching the issue and deciding the amount. There <br />were many meetings with several cities' public risk managers and the insurance <br />broker. The amount was determined by studying the claims that arose from many <br />past high-profile events (such as other political conventions, the Olympics, etc.) <br />and doubling the amount of the total claims from the event that had the highest <br />amount. <br />• <br />2. Section 11.2. This Section is the League of Minnesota Cities' biggest concern <br />("[t]he [City] shall be responsible for injuries or death of its own [personnel]"). <br />The League is concerned about this Section because if the Host Committee's <br />insurance is not sufficient, this Section could cause the parties to blame each <br />other. The Agreement states that assisting officers are under the supervision, <br />command and control of the St. Paul Police Department yet the City is responsible <br />for its own acts and/or omissions and those of its officials, employees, <br />representatives and agents in carrying out the terms of the Agreement. This sets <br />up a potential conflict between the City and St. Paul in the event that they are both <br />named as defendants in a lawsuit. <br />According to John Kelly, contrary to what was previously believed, the assisting <br />officers will not be under the command and control of the St. Paul Police <br />Department. This statement was in previous versions of the Agreement, but has <br />been removed. Instead, a system will be used that is known in the law <br />enforcement community as "unified command." It is supposedly widely used by <br />law enforcement agencies. The assisting officers will work collaboratively, but <br />within their own departments. <br />3. The League of Minnesota Cities is also concerned that the Agreement does not <br />address claims that the City might have with a party other than St. Paul. If <br />officers from a number of jurisdictions are working together, there is no <br />agreement to address liability in these cases. It is the League's opinion that in <br />addition to liability issues, this could affect workers' compensation claims. <br />As discussed above, the assisting officers from the City will work collaboratively, <br />but within their own departments. This means that they will not be mixed with <br />assisting officers from other departments on an assignment. Therefore, the City <br />should not have any claims against any other departments, other than St. Paul. <br />335193vl SJS NE136-21 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.