CCAgenda_03Jan22 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Waiver of Tort Liability Limit January 22, 2003 Background: at our January 8 meeting, we reviewed a proposal to waive the tort liability limit; the review and action were required in order to comply with LMCIT requirements for insurance purposes. The staff proposed we not waive the limit and this proposal was backed by an opinion from our city attorney recommending the "no waiver" position. Neither the proposal nor the recommendation contained an in-depth pro-con analysis nor did they include costs of either position. We, the council, acted on the proposal with the proviso that we would further analyze the issue and its attendant costs by the January 22d meeting to ensure our decision to not waive the limit was the right thing to do. Subsequent to our January 8 meeting, we received the cost data and a very well written, thoughtful analysis issued by the LMCIT. Essentially, the question raised is how much protection do we wish to provide the citizens of Falcon Heights and others in the unlikely event that an action by the city results in legally liable injuries, damage or death to one or more persons. The question is whether we feel one million dollars is sufficient protection for our citizens or whether we should raise the protection limit to two million dollars. The cost to raise the protective limit would be $1198 or approximately 22 cents per resident. • To put this in some context, in our personal lives, most of us carry at least $300,000 in automobile liability protection and many of us carry a million or more dollars in personal liability protection. This seems adequate for each of us as individual homeowners, but is it sufficient for the city to protect its citizens? Hospital costs continue to skyrocket; a stay in an intensive care unit costs thousands if not tens of thousands per day. If our actions were judged to be legally liable for the injuries to multiple parties at the same time, is our "no waiver" limit sufficient to protect our citizens and provide for the injured? As part of our day-to-day responsibilities, we engage in activities that are inherently dangerous. We plow streets, maintain and rebuild roads, trim trees, provide fire and police services, host large-scale social events and provide recreational programs and facilities. If a city truck were to plow into a Falcon Heights school bus and we were held legally liable for multiple injuries, do we feel one million dollars is sufficient to provide for the injured or would we feel more comfortable at two million dollars of protection? If a city owned or maintained structure were to collapse injuring many, and we were judged liable, do we feel one million dollars is sufficient to provide for the injured or would we feel more comfortable at two million dollars of protection? ~a