Laserfiche WebLink
SD-21. Civil Liability of Local <br />Governments <br />Issue: One of the barriers to the delivery of <br />governmental services and programs is the <br />exposure of local governments and their <br />officials to civil damage claims. The state <br />has acted to protect itself and its local <br />governments by enacting exceptions and <br />limitations to liability suits, and authorizing <br />self-insurance and other mechanisms to deal <br />with claims allowed by law. <br />Response: The League of Minnesota <br />Cities supports: <br />a) Creating an exception to municipal <br />tort indemnification law, Minn. Stat. § <br />466.07, where an employee is defended <br />and indemnified for claims under a <br />contract of insurance carried by the <br />employee. <br />b) Extending the protection of the state <br />and municipal Tort Claims Act to <br />quasi -governmental entities when <br />performing public services such as <br />firefighting or licensed third -party <br />ambulance providers that contract <br />with a municipality to provide <br />ambulance services. <br />c) Existing constitutional safeguards for <br />protecting public and private property <br />interests without any statutory <br />expansion of property rights. <br />d) Clarifying and maintaining the <br />applicability of municipal immunity in <br />various areas, including, but not <br />limited to, vicarious official immunity <br />and park and recreational immunity, <br />including the extension to entities <br />providing a public service that have <br />not traditionally been included within <br />the immunity (e.g., state trails over <br />municipal utility easements). <br />e) Preserving changes to Minnesota's <br />joint and several liability laws that <br />f) <br />g) <br />require a municipality to be at least 50 <br />percent at fault to be held responsible <br />for 100 percent of a damage award. <br />Reasonable limits on the amount and <br />circumstances in which statutory <br />attorney fees may be awarded in order <br />to encourage settlement by all parties <br />and decrease the likelihood of <br />litigation. <br />Preserving the essential structure of <br />the local government tort liability caps <br />in Minn. Stat. § 466.04. <br />SD-22. Private Property Rights and <br />Takings <br />Issue: In the wake of the U.S. Supreme <br />Court's 2005 decision Kelo v. City of New <br />London, which upheld the ability of local <br />governments to use eminent domain for <br />economic development purposes, the <br />Legislature enacted significant restrictions <br />on cities' use of eminent domain for <br />economic development and redevelopment, <br />and imposed new compensation and <br />procedural requirements that apply to all <br />condemnation actions, including those for <br />traditional public uses such as roads, parks, <br />and schools. Legislation to control cities' <br />abilities to perform regulatory acts —such as <br />road rights -of -way condemnation, shooting <br />range zoning, and amortization —has also <br />received strong support from legislators. In <br />addition, some legislators would like to <br />authorize businesses to seek inverse <br />condemnation when a governmental entity <br />enters the business market and provides <br />competing goods or services or limits the <br />number of businesses that can operate <br />privately or receive public contracts. <br />Such legislative initiatives threaten a wide <br />array of planning, environmental, historic <br />preservation, and land conservation <br />measures and undermine the fundamental <br />responsibility of cities to protect the public <br />health, safety, and welfare of its citizens. <br />League of Minnesota Cities <br />2015 City Policies Page 13 <br />