FYI

- Michael Hammond

As part of our 2008 work plan, each Trustee was asked to complete the Membership Satisfaction Survey, and we are pleased to announce we had 100% participation. This survey serves as MVRMA's report card and provides feedback to our Board, staff and service providers regarding service delivery.

Respondents were asked to evaluate MVRMA's services using a scale of 1-5, with 5 being "exceptional service with very positive results" and 1 being "service is unacceptable."

The results of this year's survey were discussed with MVRMA Trustees at the March 17 Quarterly Board meeting. A rating of 4 or higher with an upward rating trend is the goal in each category.

I am pleased to report the following summary results of the 2008 Membership Satisfaction Survey:

Claims Administration Services: The overall rating for this service was very high, 4.7, as compared to 4.5 in both 2004 and 2006. Increased satisfaction was noted in several areas including communication on status of claim, quality of claims investigation, soundness of recommendations to deny/settle a claim, promptness of claim payment and quality of claims activity reports. One member commented, "I have been extremely satisfied with the administration of claims." Another stated, "We depend on his advice and guidance." A final comment echoed, "Very responsive and effective."

Loss Control Services: The membership expressed a consistent level of satisfaction in this area with an overall rating of 4.2 for the three most recent surveys. Increased satisfaction were noted in the quality of training seminars, quality of site visits/loss control inspections and quality of video library. Members' comments included, "MVRMA's efforts in this area are much more diligent than ours!" "Great library of appropriate topics." "The online driver training courses are helpful." "Starr is always willing to go the extra mile when we ask for assistance. She has great ideas for increasing our safety awareness and has an excellent rapport with all levels of our employees."

Brokering Services: The overall evaluation was 4.5 compared to 4.3 and 4.1 in 2006 and 2004, respectively. Comments included, "We continue to get better and better in our broker relationships and the services they offer to the pool and the members." "Their ability to place our product in the market, and the rates we pay have been very satisfying."

Support Services: 4.7 was this year's overall evaluation, which compares favorably to the 4.5 and 4.6 ratings received in 2006 and 2004, respectively. Increased satisfaction was noted in all 11 areas rated! Members rated responsiveness to questions or concerns and quality of the annual report/CAFR very high at 4.9. Typical comments included, "MVRMA has historically provided exceptional service with very positive results." "Staff is always on top of things, immediately responds to all requests and is extremely helpful." "There is no better customer service anywhere."

Litigation Services: MVRMA uses three firms for general litigation services. Though some members have limited contact with our attorneys, the overall opinion of litigation services was one of satisfaction and confidence. Ratings were as follows: Dinsmore and Shohl - 4.6, Surdyk, Dowd & Turner - 4.4 and Subashi, Wildermuth & Dinkler - 4.7.

Governance Activities: The overall evaluation of management and governance activities was 4.5 compared to 4.4 and 4.3 in 2006 and 2004, respectively. Keeping members informed on key issues received the highest mark of 4.8. Members commented, "The Board and Committee system works." "This system works fine, keeps us current on all issues and gives us feedback on upcoming topics."

Workers' Compensation TPA Services: Members expressed some concern in several areas. The specific ratings declined in all but one category which indicates there is more work to be done. The overall evaluation was 3.9 compared to 4.2 in both 2004 and 2006. We have shared the results with the TPA who will follow up with members participating in this optional MVRMA program.

Miscellaneous: The final section reflected a continued high level of member satisfaction. One respondent's comments summarized the comments of others, "By any standard, membership and participation in MVRMA has proven to be a financial success and an operational one as well."

The MVRMA staff and service providers appreciate the confidence expressed by our members. We will do our best to fulfill that trust.

back to top

Counselors' Comments

 - Dinsmore & Shohl

On April 9, 2008, the Ohio Supreme Court declined to review the decision of the Twelfth District Court of Appeals in Landwehr v. Village of Batavia. The controlling issue in this case was whether fire hydrants are a component of fire services, a governmental function subject to a political subdivision's sovereign immunity, or part of the municipal water-supply system, a proprietary function, the negligent maintenance of which would not be protected by immunity.

On November 12, 2003, Leroy and Joan Landwehr's residence caught fire. In responding and attending to the fire, the Village of Batavia Fire Department attempted to connect to the fire hydrant closest to the residence. However, the hydrant did not function properly, and the fire units were required to connect to another hydrant to attend to the fire. Ultimately, the Landwehr's home was destroyed. As a result, the Landwehrs filed a negligence action in the Clermont County Common Pleas Court claiming the negligent maintenance of the hydrant caused a delay between the hydrant connections that allowed the flames to destroy their home.

In response, the Village of Batavia moved the Court for immediate judgment in its favor arguing that fire hydrants and their maintenance are governmental functions that fall within the protection of sovereign immunity. Thus, regardless if the evidence established the hydrant connection was negligently maintained, the Village would still be entitled to immunity. However, the trial court denied the Village of Batavia's request holding that the hydrant was part of the municipal water system and that maintaining a water system is a proprietary function which potentially creates an exception to immunity if the evidence establishes the hydrants were negligently maintained. Consequently, the Village of Batavia appealed the trial court's denial of immunity to the Twelfth District Court of Appeals.

In rendering its decision, the Twelfth District Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's ruling, thereby accepting the Village's immunity argument. In drafting the decision of the Court of Appeals, Judge William W. Young outlined the application of immunity to the matter at hand. Simply stated, a political subdivision is not liable for damages in a civil action for injury, death or loss to person or property allegedly cause by any act or omission by a political subdivision, or its employees, in connection with a governmental or proprietary function. Nevertheless, an exception to this basic rule does exist. In regards to proprietary functions, immunity is not afforded to a political subdivision, or its employees, for any negligent conduct in carrying out these functions.

In reversing the trial court's decision, Judge Young's analysis focused on the primary purpose for the existence of fire hydrants. Judge Young remarked in his decision that fire hydrants are primarily used for firefighting services. Fire services, by their very nature, are provided by the government to preserve the health, safety and welfare of the community. Conversely, the primary purpose of a municipal water system is to provide a water utility to a municipality and its inhabitants for use in residences, buildings and properties. Accordingly, Judge Young wrote that fire hydrants are installed, operated and maintained within communities solely for the use of fire services, a governmental function entitled to immunity. Thus, the Village of Batavia was rightfully entitled to immunity and no determination as to whether the hydrant connection was negligently maintained was necessary.

Ultimately, the Landwehrs appealed the ruling of Twelfth District Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court of Ohio. By refusing to accept this case for review, the Supreme Court has silently concurred with Twelfth District's application of immunity to the maintenance of fire hydrants as a governmental function, rather than proprietary. As a result, the Supreme Court of Ohio has reassured political subdivisions that their immunity will protect them in situations similar to Landwehr v. Village of Batavia.

back to top

The Claims File

- Craig Blair

New First Report of Loss Form

In response to a directive at the 2007 Strategic Planning Retreat, a more interactive First Report of Loss Form has been created. It provides drop down boxes for easy completion and can be emailed rather than faxed to our office. Please contact us if you need to download this form or need instructions for completing it.

Timely reporting of incidents and claims is essential. The First Report of Loss Form should be forwarded to us as soon as the member receives notification of a claim, even though the police report and other documentation are not immediately available. Once we receive the report, we can begin contacting the parties involved, interviewing witnesses and inspecting damages or the scene of the accident.

Communication is the key to controlling losses. Forward any police reports, bills for repairs, etc. as soon as they are received. Proper attention and follow-up can sometimes prevent a claim from becoming a lawsuit.

back to top

Loss Control Lowdown  

-Starr Markworth

Summer is the peak season for one of nature's deadliest phenomena - lightning.  A single stroke of lighting has 125,000,000 volts of electricity. That's enough power to light a 100-watt light bulb for more than three months, or enough to seriously hurt or kill someone.

In the United States, an average of 62 people are killed each year by lightning. In 2006, there were 47 confirmed deaths and 246 confirmed injuries. The reported number of injuries is likely far lower than the actual number because many people do not seek help, or doctors who treat these injuries do not record them as such.

Each year, thousands of homes and other properties are damaged or destroyed by lightning. It accounts for more than a quarter billion dollars in property damage annually in the United States.

From 2003-2005, MVRMA member cities experienced 12 separate incidents of lightning strikes, resulting in more than $100,000 worth of property damage.

A risk management approach to lightning must assume the facility will be struck by lightning. To mitigate the damage, the facility can be equipped with a lightning protection system. This system will furnish a means for controlling the strike, by providing a low resistance path for discharging the lightning energy. It will allow the energy to enter or leave the ground without passing through and damaging non-conducting parts of the facility, such as those made of wood, brick, tile and concrete.

Some properties have a higher risk of lightning damage. When considering installation of a lightning protection system, you may want to assess this risk. A risk assessment guide for determining lightning loss for all types of structures can be found in Appendix I of the National Fire Protection Association's Lightning Protection Code, NFPA 780.

Lightning is responsible for more deaths and property loss than tornadoes, hurricanes and floods combined. But, of these violent forces of nature, lightning is the only one we can economically afford to protect ourselves against.

For more information, please contact the MVRMA office at 937/438-8878.

back to top

Brokers Beat

MVRMA's Crime Policy

Employee Dishonesty, or Employee Theft, with limits of $1,000,000 per loss, is the major coverage provided by MVRMA's Crime Policy. However, this policy also includes a number of other coverages as follows:

Forgery or Alteration

Inside the Premises - Theft of Money

and Securities

Inside the Premises - Robbery or Safe

Burglary of Other Property

Outside Premises

Computer Fraud

Funds Transfer Fraud

Money Orders and Counterfeit

Money

The frequency of Employee Dishonesty claims is very low, but the severity tends to be high. Typically, these claims take place on a continuing basis over long periods of time and result in large losses of property or funds. We generally see these claims settle well into six figures, and the ingenuity of the dishonesty schemes never ceases to amaze us. Surprisingly, one of the most effective loss control measures in combating these losses is a requirement that each employee take a vacation of one to two weeks every year without exception. A remarkable number of these claims are discovered while employees are away from the office.

This article will focus on two provisions of the Employee Dishonesty coverage. Because MVRMA and its members are public entities, the pool is eligible for Faithful Performance coverage as an extension to the Employee Dishonesty coverage. This additional coverage broadens the employee dishonesty or theft coverage to include coverage for "loss or damage to money, securities and other property resulting directly from the failure of any employee to faithfully perform their duties as prescribed by law when such failure has as its direct and immediate result a loss of your covered property." While there are a number of exclusions that accompany this extra coverage, it is still a significant expansion and is not available to most insureds. It enhances the theft coverage to include acts, which while not dishonest, can include errors, omissions and mistakes on the part of the employee, that cause loss or damage to money, securities and other property.

The other provision we want to highlight under the Employee Dishonesty coverage of the Crime Policy is an exclusion that reads "Loss caused by an employee if this employee has also committed theft or any other dishonest act prior to the effective date of the policy." The ramification of this provision is that while your city may decide to forgive the dishonest acts of an employee, that kind of decision may result in the loss of crime coverage for the employee.

Hopefully, this article will make you more aware of the broad Crime coverage provided by MVRMA for the benefit of its members.

back to top

 From the Board Room... 

MVRMA Celebrates its 20th Year of Operation 

FleetSMART Driver Training at Centerville  

Centerville is one of 15 MVRMA members participating in the FleetSMART on-line three-year pilot program designed to promote safe driving. The following is an article written by Ginger Yonak, HR Manager, describing that city's experience.

After familiarizing ourselves with the program, it was launched to all personnel in our Police Department, where there is already a heightened awareness for safety, both on-the-job and in our community. Officers were assigned a unique login and password that allows them to access the online program from any computer with internet access. (Courses are automatically assigned to a user based on the driving needs of his/her job.) After course completion, which typically takes about 20-30 minutes, the user is prompted to take an online test. Upon satisfactory completion, an online certificate is generated that may be downloaded and printed for record-keeping purposes. A course evaluation is also completed by the user and is routed automatically to FleetSMART administrators, as well as the entity's training coordinator, for review and consideration.

Right away, we started to receive feedback that the courses were straight forward, easy to understand and the overall format was very user-friendly. However, our officers also commented that the training scenarios were more applicable to EMS and fire than law enforcement. We passed this feedback along to FleetSMART and provided suggestions for improvement. They not only listened; they took action to ensure that our training objectives were met. In February 2008, FleetSMART launched a new segment to the training curriculum called EVOSMART that is specifically designed for law enforcement personnel. This new program was immediately made available to our officers and is now the standard curriculum for law enforcement personnel.

Centerville Staff Sergeant Robert Owsley said of the experience, "Our pain is another police department's gain." He and other officers are glad to know, in some small way, they have assisted in the creation of a more effective training product. Sgt. Owsley further commented, "It's a good refresher for driver safety, and it reminds you of safe driving principles taken for granted every day. It keeps you alert to things that sometimes may slip to the back burner."

We plan to continue using FleetSMART to increase driver safety awareness throughout the City of Centerville. This driver training program will soon be phased into other departments to supplement our existing safety and risk management programs.

back to top