FYI:

Michael Hammond, Executive Director

back to top

Counselors' Comments

 - Surdyk, Dowd & Turner

Newest Battle in Concealed-Carry Legislation and its Impact on Political Subdivisions

The questions surrounding the recently effective Ohio Revised Code Chapter 2923, allowing Ohioans to carry concealed weapons, seem never-ending to many political subdivisions throughout Ohio. These questions range from simple concerns regarding where to post signs to complex questions regarding whether political subdivisions may legislate tougher standards for carrying concealed weapons. As the law evolves, it becomes even more important for MVRMA members to stay informed.

One recent question surrounds the right of political subdivisions to post signs prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons around open, outdoor public property. These locations may include such places as public swimming pools, public golf courses, biking trails, tennis courts, public parks, public camping grounds and even public parking lots. Statutory language does provide the answer.

Ohio Revised Code Section 2923.125(C)(2)(b) specifically grants political subdivisions immunity from civil liability for injury, death or loss to person or property resulting from a licensee bringing a concealed weapon onto the political subdivision's property. Private employers are granted the same immunity. See R.C. Section 2923.126(C)(2)(a). However, there is a legislative twist to this statute. Private employers, within R.C. Section 2923.126(C)(1), are allowed to establish a rule, policy or practice regulating where concealed weapons are prohibited on their property. There is no such provision for political subdivisions. The only conclusion to draw from this intentional legislative wording is that political subdivisions do not have the right to prohibit the carrying of concealed weapons on all public property, only the buildings and other places specifically named within the statute. Therefore, open, outdoor public property cannot have signs posted prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons.

Some members of the Ohio Legislature want to expand the rights of political subdivisions to control where concealed weapons may be carried. Recently, Rep. Tyrone Yates submitted House Bill 496 that would amend R.C. Section 2923.126 to allow local governments to ban the carrying of concealed weapons in public spaces, specifically public parks, swimming pools, golf courses, cemeteries and parking lots. The bill would allow political subdivisions to enact ordinances or resolutions to prohibit concealed weapons in more places than buildings where public offices are located. House Bill 496 has been assigned to the Criminal Justice Committee, and Rep. Yates hopes the bill will get through committee in the fall. Until then, it is contrary to state law for political subdivisions to post signs prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons on open, outdoor public property.

back to top

The Claims File

- Craig Blair

Recently, one of our trustees requested a summary of how a claim is handled in order to present this information at an upcoming employee safety meeting. In response to his request, I suggested the following scenario which could be tracked from start to finish.

A city vehicle rearends a third party, and the city employee as well as the other driver are injured.

At the scene, the employee should first check to see if anyone has been injured and then call the police and if needed, the EMS unit. After this has been done, an exchange of information should occur. All members should have "Auto ID Cards," provided by MVRMA, in their city vehicles. These cards were developed to assist the employee in what is usually an "emotional" situation. This card has information about who insures the vehicle (MVRMA) and who to contact at the city. The card also states that no employee is authorized to "make any representation, statement, promise or assurance as to the validity or payment of any claim which may be asserted against the City." Once the employee has given his statement to the police, it will be MVRMA's responsibility to handle the claim going forward.

The claim should be reported to MVRMA within 24 hours even if no police report is available. MVRMA will then contact both parties. Early contact is important for representing the city as well as initiating the claims process with the third party.

After getting the report, MVRMA will inspect the scene and both vehicles. In an accident with injuries, it is important to determine how the accident occurred and to get a "feel" for how severe the impact may have been. This determination helps later when settling the injury claim. The early reporting also helps if weather or road conditions were a factor. MVRMA needs to inspect the scene before those conditions change.

The city may then proceed with repairs to the vehicle and forward the final bill to MVRMA. MVRMA will pay the repair shop directly.

The employee's injury claim will be filed through Workers' Compensation and be handled by the city. MVRMA will not be involved with this aspect of the claim.

In this particular case, our member is clearly liable. MVRMA will contact the other party to explain how, under Ohio law, municipalities are allowed the "offsets" of available coverage. This means the other party's insurance will provide the coverage for repairing his vehicle. Because these offsets are provided under Ohio law, the other party's insurance can not surcharge or raise his rates. His insurance company is required to accept the burden of the claim.

The other party will incur no out of pocket expenses. MVRMA will pay the deductible and provide a rental car if his insurance doesn't cover this expense.

Medical bills for the third party would be covered first by his automobile medical payment coverage and then his own health insurance carrier. To settle this claim, MVRMA would owe any medical bills not covered, lost wages and the pain and suffering and inconvenience involved. No payments are made until the other party is ready to settle all claims.

Hopefully, this scenario explains how MVRMA is involved in settling a claim. We want our members to know we are here to represent them in a prompt, professional manner. The interests of the pool and its members are our number one priority.

back to top

Congratulations!

At the June 21st Board Meeting there was plenty to celebrate.

The 2004 Safety Performance Evaluation Checklist (SPEC) results revealed three cities with perfect scores! Indian Hill, Miamisburg and Montgomery received Pinnacle Awards to mark this achievement. The Ascension Award, which is given to the city with the most improved compliance was presented to the City of Piqua which scored 97.33%, a 37% improvement over last year.

Safety Awards for 2003 were also announced at this meeting. The Overall Award, presented to the city with the lowest dollar losses per full-time employee, is the City of Montgomery. The runner up is the City of Wilmington.

Department winners are also determined by the lowest dollar losses per employee. This year all winners in the five participating departments had zero losses. The winners are as follows:

Police: Montgomery and Wilmington

Fire & EMS: Springdale

Water & Wastewater: Sidney

Parks & Recreation: Mason

Streets & Refuse: Tipp City

These departments will receive plaques noting their achievement and will be eligible for a breakfast or other celebration. Individual certificates will be issued for each employee. In addition, all zero-loss departments in the five categories mentioned above are entitled to individual certificates as well as a breakfast or other celebration.

Safety Performance Award plaques are given to departments with three or more consecutive zero-loss years. Cities receiving the plaques this year are the following:

Madeira: Parks & Recreation (1995-2003)

Montgomery: Parks & Recreation (2001-2003)

Springdale: Parks & Recreation (2000-2003)

Tipp City: Fire Department (2001-2003) and Street Department (2001-2003)

Vandalia: Service Department (1994-2003)

West Carrollton: Water/Wastewater Division (1999-2003)

Wilmington: Police Department (2000-2003)

Standard of Excellence Awards are given to cities with losses of $100 or less per employee for the year. The following cities should be recognized for 2003:

Montgomery: $12.30/employee

Wilmington: $14.91/employee

West Carrollton: $15.42/employee

Beavercreek: $26.04/employee

Piqua: $35.46/employee

Vandalia: $61.21/employee

Kettering: $71.40/employee

Congratulations to all our winners! We appreciate your efforts in the areas of safety and loss control.

back to top

Brokers' Beat

- Marsh USA Inc.

Fleet Safety: An Interview with Mr. Dennis Loy, Marsh Senior Vice President

Dennis Loy is a senior vice president with Marsh’s Risk Consulting Practice. Mr. Loy is located in Marsh’s Appleton, Wisconsin office. He works with a wide variety of fleets. His most common endeavors focus on using drivers to help management solve problems through accident-review boards, safety committees and development of certified training teams.

Question: Can an established safety program help with insurance renewals?

Dennis Loy (DL): No doubt about it. Absolutely. A good fleet is going to have an established and active safety program. It doesn’t languish on the shelf and collect dust. It has to be in place and lived – 365 days a year, 7 days a week, 24 hours a day – in order to make safety improvements along the way.

Question: Are we talking just about the big trucking operations? Or are we talking about any operations – for example, operations that have salespeople and service people on the road all the time?

DL: In my definition, a fleet is a fleet is a fleet – anything with rubber tires. It could be 18-wheelers delivering whole loads of cargo. It could be minivans delivering flowers for the Valentine’s Day weekend. And it could even be the sedans salespeople commonly use.

Too often, we think of safety as a job-site situation such as construction. We close our eyes, and we can picture employees with hardhats, steel-toed shoes and hearing protection. We fail to realize that out on the highway, we have another very dangerous environment for those employees, whether they’re in 18-wheelers or minivans delivering flowers. I read just a few days ago that 1,400 people in the United States lost their lives in work-related motor-vehicle accidents in 2003. That’s quite a large number.

Question: And probably the last time people really got careful about driving was when they took a driving test when they were 15, 16, or 17.

DL: You’re correct. I think many of us got our licenses at age 16 or whatever age the state allowed, and we went on our merry way. Unfortunately, many fleets still use that driver’s license as the only threshold for drivers. They’re a little bit lax on their screening and, especially, on training the people they’re bringing into their operations.

A good training program is a key element, along with a pool of trainers who will work with these new employees and share driving tips, basic defensive driving, the ability to manage road rage and so on. Often, involving company drivers in the development and execution of the training can be very helpful. Involving your own drivers can add some credibility in the eyes of the employees you’re training. Fellow drivers can also provide "real world" examples that can enhance the program. An emphasis on fleet safety should be a part of the everyday operation, no doubt about it.

Question; What do you recommend that a risk manager or fleet manager do to be more proactive in mitigating risk?

DL: I think another important step is developing a good safety manual. Too often, I’ll find a fleet that has a driver’s manual, but not a safety manual. By "safety manual," I mean safety documents written for every department manager and every supervisor. The company’s policies and procedures – in terms of hiring, firing, discipline and counseling – should all be in one binder. There may be some defensive – driving tips in it or just the company standards to help managers and supervisors support the safety program by effectively managing their teams.

Question: Are there any other best practices for fleet safety you want to share with us?

DL: I think another key element is the motor-vehicle records or abstracts – whatever your state may call them. We often see companies obtain these at the time of hire, but fail to recheck them on a periodic basis. Once you get the person on board, it’s very wise to take another look at the abstract, maybe after three months, and equally important to look again on an annual basis thereafter. Keep looking at the record. Is there a pattern developing? Is there something you need to do, some type of action that you can initiate before that driver gets into a greater degree of difficulty

back to top

From the Board Room...

At the June 21st Quarterly Board Meeting, the following actions were taken:

- Authorized a settlement amount in Hatcher vs. Vandalia

- Authorized the Executive Director to approve the final 2004 Memorandum of Coverage Document for $5M x $2M

- Approved the adjustment in coverage for tees and greens to $500,000 per each nine holes effective with the PCF calculation and property coverage for 2005

- Approved Endorsement No. 7-04 which lists the CICs to be covered by MVRMA's 2004 Liability Coverage Document

- Approved the change in contents reporting for the second half of 2004 to allow contents to be scheduled at actual value or remain at 30% of building value for each appraised location

- Approved Amended Appendix H of the SPEC, which is Sample Indemnification Language for Mutual Aid Agreements

- Approved this year's Awards Program: see Page 3

- Approved membership in MVRMA for Centerville pending the city's acceptance of MVRMA's proposal

- Approved the Executive Director's salary increase

back to top