06-28-2012 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

important that the legislature periodically review and adjust the limits to assure that they continue to be reasonable. What does the 2006 legislation mean for cities who are involved in or are considering joint powers agreements? The 2006 legislation eliminates one disincentive to intergovernmental cooperation: the increased tort exposure that had automatically come with cooperative activities since the Reimer decision. But while the risk of excess liability is now no greater for cooperative activities than for individual activities, it's important to keep in mind that that risk still exists because some types of claims aren't covered by the statutory liability limits. With any governmental service, there is always a risk of liability greater than the statutory limits, whether that service is provided cooperatively or individually. And it's still very important to think about liability risks in joint powers activities, and to structure joint powers agreements to minimize conflicts among the parties and to address those liability risks as effectively and efficiently as possible. In short, the 2006 law helps a great deal but it doesn't mean we don't have to think about risk and liability in joint powers situations. When cities are thinking about joint powers activities, the basic advice is still the same: • Use a written agreement, not just a handshake. • Make sure the agreement is as clear and unambiguous as possible as to who is responsible for what; • Use appropriate defense, indemnification, and waiver provisions to minimize conflicts so the parties can provide a unified defense. • Make sure liability coverage is in place and appropriately structured. • Spell out in advance how any excess or uninsured liability would be covered so you don't have to fight about it at the time. • Make sure you address how the agreement would be terminated, and how any remaining assets or liabilities would be allocated. PST — 6/2006 -14-