Laserfiche WebLink
<br />2.Specific Comments <br /> <br />a.7.2 Termination, subdivision. 1 <br /> <br />i.This subdivision allows the joint powers entity (the FPC) to dissolve itself. Only <br /> <br />the member Cities who authorize a joint powers entity can dissolve a joint <br />powers entity. Certainly, the FPC can recommend to the member Cities that the <br />entity should be dissolved. Alternatively, the joint powers agreement can set <br />specific standards that trigger termination. <br /> <br />For example, termination could occur if 50% of Cities drop out. Accounting <br />principles could be used to trigger termination. For example, if net expenses <br />exceed net revenue without budgetary supplementation for the member Cities, <br />then termination is triggered. <br /> <br />This subdivision could be revised to clarify intent. I suggest stating that the FPC <br />should recommend termination to the member Cities when it determines that <br />continued operation of the FPC becomes impractical or uneconomical to <br />continue. <br /> <br />b.8.2 Insurance <br /> <br />i.Please change the first sentence as follows: “The FPC may is required to <br /> <br />purchase and maintain such insurance as will protect FPC …”. Coverage is a <br />fundamental requirement for a joint powers entity. Whether that insurance <br />coverage comes from a policy purchased by the FPC, or coverage comes from <br />the County or the Joint Law Enforcement Council’s policy, does not need to be <br />determine by this agreement. <br /> <br />c.10.4 Independent Contractor <br /> <br />i.I have questions regarding both the intent and the need for this paragraph. This <br /> <br />paragraph classifies “the parties” as independent contractors and not as <br />employees. Since a City cannot be an employee, I presume this phrase is meant <br />to say that the employees of the member Cities are reclassified as independent <br />contractors?? One of the great benefits of a joint powers agreement and entity <br />is to concentrate potential legal liability in the joint powers entity while <br />shielding the member Cities from liability. Here are three concepts to consider <br />before deciding to either redraft this paragraph or simply delete this paragraph: <br /> <br />1.So long as an employee working under the joint powers entity is acting <br /> <br />within the scope of the joint powers agreement, the member Cities <br />should enjoy a shield from liability regardless if that person is an <br />employee or independent contractor; <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br /> <br />