2018_03-27_PWETCpacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

and harmless from any and all liability on account of injury to persons or damage to property occasioned by the issuance of permits or by the construction, maintenance, repair, inspection, or operation of registrant's or permittee's facilities located in the right of way. The City shall not be indemnified for losses or claims occasioned through its own negligence except for losses or claims arising out of or alleging the local government unit's negligence as to the issuance of permits or inspections to ensure permit compliance. The City shall not be indemnified if the injury or damage results from the performance in a proper manner of acts that the registrant or permittee reasonably believes will cause injury or damage, and the performance is nevertheless ordered or directed by the City after receiving notice of the registrant's or permittee's determination. C. Defense: If a suit brought against the City under circumstances where the registrant or permittee is required to indemnify, the registrant or permittee, at its sole cost and expense, shall defend the City in the suit if written notice of the suit is promptly given to the registrant or permittee within a period in which the registrant or permittee is not prejudiced by the lack or delay of notice. If the registrant or permittee is required to indemnify and defend, it shall thereafter have control of the litigation, but the registrant or permittee may not settle the litigation without the consent of the City. Consent will not be unreasonably withheld. This part is not, as to third parties, a waiver of any defense, immunity, or damage limitation otherwise available to the City. In defending an action on behalf of the City, the registrant or permittee is entitled to assert in an action every defense, immunity, or damage limitation that the City could assert in its own behalf. (Ord. 1209, 8-24-1998) 707.29: APPEAL: A. A right-of-way user that: 1) has been denied registration; 2) has been denied apermit; 3) has had permit revoked; or 4) believes that the fees imposed are not in conformity with Minn. Stat. 237.163, Subd. 6; or 5) disputes a determination of the Director regarding Section 707.23 Subd. 2 of this Ordinance, may have the denial, revocation, or fee imposition reviewed, upon written request, by the City Council. The City Council shall act on a timely written request at its next regularly scheduled meeting. A decision by the City Council affirming the denial, revocation, or fee imposition will be in writing and supported by written findings establishing the reasonableness of the decision. (Ord. 1333,3-13-2006) B. Upon affirmation by the City Council of the denial, revocation, or fee imposition, the right-of-way user shall have the right to have the matter resolved by binding arbitration. Binding arbitration must be before an arbitrator agreed to by both the City Council and right-of-way user. If the parties cannot agree on an arbitrator, the matter must be resolved by a three (3) person arbitration panel made up of one arbitrator selected by the City, one arbitrator selected by the right-of-way user and one selected by the othertwo (2) arbitrators. The costs and fees of the single arbitrator shall be borne equally by the City and right-of-way user. In the event there is a third arbitrator, each party shall bear the expense of its own arbitrator and shall jointly and equally bear with the other party the expense of the third arbitrator and of the arbitration. (Ord. 1209, 8-24-1998) 707.30: ABANDONED AND UNUSABLE FACILITIES: A. Discontinued Operations: A registrant who has determined to discontinue its operations in the City must either: 1. Provide information satisfactory to the Director that the registrant's obligations for its facilities in the right of way under this Chapter have been lawfully assumed by another registrant; or