2002_0722_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

T0: Neal FROM: Joel RE: Draft revisions to City Indemnification Ordinance As requested, I have prepared an ordinance amendment regarding the defense and indemnification of elected officials in specified situations. I believe it fully includes all features specified by the Mayor. The proposed amendments, however, do not change the central feature of the existing indemnification ordinance that in section 105.02 specifies that the ordinance be "in accordance with state law." Combined with the exceptions in 105.07, the revised ordinance remains generally consistent with the state statutory provisions for defense and indemnification, reprinted below for your reference: 1) 466.07 Indemnification. Subdivision L Indemnification required. Subject to the limitations in section 466.04, a municipality or an instrumentality of a municipality sha11 defend and indemnify any of its officers and employees, whether elective or appointive, for dama�es, including punitive damages, claimed or levied against the officer or employee, provided that the officer or employee: (1) was acting in the performance of the duties of the position; and (2) was not guilty of malfeasance in office, willful neglect of duty, or bad faith. 2) 465.76 May pay for officer or employee's criminal defense. Subdivision 1. If lawfully doing duty. If reimbursement is requested by the officer or employee, the governing body of a home rule charter or statutory city, a town or a county may, after consultation with its legal counsel, reimburse the city, town or county officer or employee for any costs and reasonable attorney's fees incurred by the person to defend charges of a criminal nature brought against the person that arose out of the reasonable and lawful performance of duties for the city, town or county. Subd. 2. When judge must approve. If less than a quorum of the governing body is disinterested, the reimbursement under subdivision 1 sha11 be approved by a judge of the district court. 3