Executive Committee Agenda July 16, 2014 Page 1

CALIFORNIA JOINT POWERS RISK MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING

July 16, 2014 - 10:00 A.M.

Palms Grill

100 S. McDowell Blvd Petaluma, CA 94954

(707) 763-3333

AGENDA

I. CALL TO ORDER: 10:00 A.M.

II. ROLL CALL

III. PRESENTATIONS

Certificate of Insurance Tracking - Pins Advantage

IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of the Executive Committee meeting held on April 24, 2014 Minutes of the Special Executive Committee meeting held on June 4, 2014

V. COMMUNICATIONS

A. Executive Committee Members

B. General Manager/Secretary

C. Next Scheduled Meetings: Board of Directors (10/23/2014) CJPRMA Office

Executive Committee (09/19/2014) Lake Tahoe

VI. CONSENT CALENDAR

None

VII. THIS TIME IS RESERVED FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ON MATTERS OF EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE BUSINESS

VIII. ACTION CALENDAR

1. Business Calendar 2014

2. Review of General Manager’s Goals and Objectives 2013-2015

3. Review of 2014-2015 Liability Billing Program Member Contributions

4. Proposed Modifications to the Property Memorandum of Coverage

Page 1

Executive Committee Agenda July 16, 2014 Page 2

5. CJPRMA Model Contract Language

6. Risk Management Issues

IX. CLOSED SESSION

1. Government Code Section 54956.9 (a)

Conference with Legal Counsel - Pending Litigation

Name of Case: Sami Sabbah et. al. v Richmond Court: N/A Case No.: 2012-2013-0167-01

2. Government Code Section 54956.9 (a)

Conference with Legal Counsel - Pending Litigation

Name of Case: Tuthill Family Partnership v Redding Court: N/A Case No.: 2013-2014-0114-01

X. ACTION ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS

XI. ADJOURNMENT

Page 2

III.

ExecutivApril 24Page 1

I.

II.

789

APPROV

A moof theHami

ve Committee Mee4, 2014

CALIFOR

CALL TO

President

ROLL C

1) Janet Ha2) Ron Blan3) Steve Sc

) Byrne Co) Lola Deem) Craig Sch

VAL OF M

otion by Diree Executive ilton, Blanqu

eting Minutes

RNIA JOIN

EXEC

O ORDER:

Giles called

ALL

milton, Livenquie, Petaluhwarz, Frem

O

onley, Gibbom, CJPRMAhweikhard, C

MINUTES

ector SchwarCommittee muie, Ferguso

NT POWERS

CUTIVE CO

April 24,

Hilton Ga5050 B

Reddi

(53

M

:

d the meeting

PRESE

ermore uma

mont

ABSEN

OTHERS PR

ons & ConleyA CJPRMA

rz, secondedmeeting heldn and Margo

S RISK MA

OMMITTEE

, 2014 9:00 A

arden Inn ReBechelli Laning, CA 960

0) 226-5111

MINUTES

g to order at

ENT

4) 5) 6) 7)

NT

RESENT

y

d by Directord on Februarolies voted f

ANAGEMEN

E MEETING

A.M.

edding ne 002

9:00 a.m.

Lynn Marg Mark Fergu Anthony Gi Chris Carm

10) Dav 11) Muj

r Margolies,ry 20, 2014, for the appro

Bac

NT AUTHO

G

goles, Santa Ruson, REMIFiles, Sunnyv

mona, Reddin

vid Clovis, Cjtaba Datoo,

, to approve Directors G

oval of the m

ck to Agend

RITY

Rosa F ale

ng

CJPRMA AON (telep

the minutesGiles, Carmominutes. Mot

da

phonic)

na, Schwarztion passes.

z,

Page 3

Back to Agenda

Executive Committee Meeting Minutes April 24, 2014 Page 2

IV. COMMUNICATIONS

A. Executive Committee Members B. General Manager/Secretary C. Next Scheduled Meetings: Board of Directors (05/13/2014-05/14/2014) City of Lodi

Executive Committee (07/17/2014) City of Petaluma

V. CONSENT CALENDAR

None

VI. THIS TIME IS RESERVED FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ON MATTERS OF EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE BUSINESS

VII. ACTION CALENDAR

1. Business Calendar for 2014 The business calendar was provided to the Executive Committee as a standing agenda item. The calendar provides the committee with key business items and the required dates for completion. No action was required on this item.

2. Approval of General Manager’s Goals and Objectives 2013-2015 The general manager provided the committee with General Manager Goals and Objectives for FY 2013-2015. After a lengthy discussion at the March meeting, the Board of Directors returned this item to the Executive Committee for approval. The Executive Committee agrees that this is an important document for their evaluation of the performance of the General Manager. A motion was made by Director Ferguson and seconded by Director Carmona to recommend the approval of the General Manager Goals and Objectives 2013-2015. Directors Giles, Schwarz, Carmona, Hamilton, Blanquie, Ferguson and Margolies voted for the approval of agenda bill # 2. Motion passes.

3. Application for Membership from Association of Bay Area Governments’ Pooled Liability

Association Network (PLAN)

The Board of Directors reviewed the preliminary information provided at the March meeting. At that time there was insufficient data available to make a determination on accepting PLAN as a new member of CJPRMA. The Board of Directors and staff recommended that additional studies be performed and the data be submitted to the Executive Committee for further review. The Board of Directors expects to receive a recommendation from the Executive Committee regarding accepting PLAN for membership to our organization.

Page 4

Back to Agenda

Executive Committee Meeting Minutes April 24, 2014 Page 3

The Executive Committee reviewed the application of ABAG PLAN and reviewed the actuary recommendations provided by Mujtaba Datoo, AON. Mr. Datoo provided the Executive Committee with a complete overview of his findings and provided the committee with a recommendation for the methodology for capturing contributions.

Claims Administrator Schweikhard shared his findings of his claims audit performed at the ABAG PLAN office. Mr. Schweikhard advised the committee that he noted the PLAN uses a very conservative reserving policy and believes that based upon his review their exposures were very similar to that of existing CJPRMA Members. In addition, Schweikhard noted that the PLAN uses best practices on the administration of their claims.

General Manager Clovis also provided additional information regarding his review of the ABAG program and how they would fit as a new member of CJPRMA.

The committee members provided feedback to the General Manager and recommended he bring back the issue to the full board at the May Meeting. Several members of the committee were prepared to recommend the approval of the PLAN for membership. The group requested a review of PLAN and specifically how the PLAN compares to the four other JPA’s that are currently in the program.

No formal action was taken on this item at the meeting.

4. Approval of Reimbursement of General Liability Training Expenses Policy

At the March meeting, the Board of Directors reviewed the Reimbursement of General Liability Training Expenses Policy and referred the item to the Executive Committee for further review and study. Staff provided the Executive Committee with an updated policy on the reimbursement of general liability training expenses. The committee reviewed the proposed updated language and recommended that the Executive Committee approve the modified policy and forward to the Board of Directors for approval at the May meeting. A motion by Director Schwarz and seconded by Director Carmona to recommend the approval of the Reimbursement of General Liability Training Expenses Policy and forward the policy for adoption by the Board of Directors. Directors Giles, Schwarz, Carmona, Hamilton, Blanquie, Ferguson and Margolies voted for the approval of agenda bill # 4. Motion passes.

5. Approval of Administrative Assistant Job Description The general manager provided the Executive Committee with an update job description for the administrative assistant. He advised that the recruitment process to fill the vacancy in the CJPRMA Office had begun. DPS HR consulting firm from Sacramento is assisting staff in the recruitment. DPS reviewed the current office assistant job description and recommended modifying the current title to administrative assistant. Also, there were updates made to the requirements of the position. There were no recommendations to reclassify the position to a different salary schedule.

Page 5

Back to Agenda

Executive Committee Meeting Minutes April 24, 2014 Page 4

A motion by Director Margolies and seconded by Director Blanquie to approve the administrative assistant job description. Directors Giles, Schwarz, Carmona, Hamilton, Blanquie, Ferguson and Margolies voted for the approval of agenda bill # 5. Motion passes.

5. Risk Management Issues

Director Blanquie, General Manager Clovis and Claims Administrator Schweikhard advised the committee of the results of the 2014 CAJPA Capitol Caucus Day that was held in March. The committee received information on the benefits of the program and it was recommended that directors attempt to schedule participation in the program in 2015. Director Giles advised the committee of a training program that was recently presented at the City of Sunnyvale, which provided a detailed overview of current issues related to FEMA recovery. Director Giles stated that the presenter may be available to provide the same training to other CJPRMA members.

VIII. CLOSED SESSION

1. Government Code Section 54956.9 (a) Conference with Legal Counsel - Pending Litigation

Name of Case: Hall, et, al. v. City of Fairfield, et, al. Court: United States District Court, Eastern District of California Case No.: 10-CV-00508-GEB-DAD

2. Government Code Section 54956.9 (a)

Conference with Legal Counsel - Pending Litigation

Name of Case: Storey v. City of Roseville, et, al. Court: Superior Court of California, County of Placer Case No.: SCV0032572

IX. ACTION ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS

The general manager received direction from the Executive Committee regarding closed session item number one and number two.

X. ADJOURNMENT

The meeting was adjourned at 3:05 p.m.

Page 6

Special June 04Page 1

8.

I.

II.

5)6)

Executive Commi4, 2014

CALIFOR

SPE

1. 2.

3. City of4.

6. City o7. City o

Gibbons &

CALL TO

President

ROLL CA

1) Janet 2) Chris

) Byrne Conl) Craig, Schw

ittee Meeting Minu

RNIA JOIN

ECIAL MEE

City of FremCity of Live

of Petaluma, City of Red

5. REMIFof Santa Rosaof SunnyvaleConley, 2185

O ORDER:

Giles called

ALL

t Hamilton, LCarmona, R

ley, Gibbonsweikhard, CJ

utes

NT POWERS

ETING OF TJune 04,

(Teleph

CJPR3201 Doola

Liverm

Dial in Participa

mont, 3300 Crmore, 1052 1304 Southpdding, 777 CyF, 414 West Na, 100 Santa e,505 West O5 North Calif

M

the meeting t

PR

Livermore Redding

AB

Fremont, Pe

OTHER

s & Conley JPRMA

S RISK MA

THE EXEC2014 – 4:00 honic Meetin

RMA OFFICan Road, Su

more, CA 945

# 866-866-2nt Code: 109

Capitol AvenSouth Liverm

point Blvd., SuCypress AvenuNapa Street, Rosa Ave., Rlive Ave., Suifornia Blvd.,

MINUTES

to order at 4:

RESENT

3) M4) A

BSENT

etaluma, San

RS PRESEN

7) Dav

ANAGEMEN

CUTIVE COP.M. ng)

CE uite 285 551

2244 98199

nue, Fremont,more Avenue

Suite 270., Peue, Redding, Sonoma, CA

Room 9, Santite 200., SunSuite 285, W

:00 p.m.

Mark FergusAnthony Gil

nta Rosa

NT

vid Clovis, C

NT AUTHO

OMMITTEE

t, CA 94538 e, CA 94551 etaluma, CA 9

CA 96001 A 95476 ta Rosa, CA 9nyvale, CA 9

Walnut Creek

son, REMIFles, Sunnyva

CJPRMA

RITY

94954

95404 94086 k, CA 94596

F le

Page 7

Special Executive Committee Meeting Minutes June 04, 2014 Page 2

III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

None

IV. PRESENTATIONS

None

V. CONSENT CALENDAR

None

VI. THIS TIME IS RESERVED FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ON MATTERS OF EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE BUSINESS

VII. ACTION CALENDAR

None

VIII. CLOSED SESSION

1. Government Code Section 54956.9 (a)

Conference with Legal Counsel - Pending Litigation Name of Case: Gliksman v. City of Davis (YCPARMIA) Court: Superior Court of the State of California- County of Yolo Case No.: PM12-1372

IX. ACTION ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS

The general manager received direction from the Executive Committee regarding closed session item number one.

X. ADJOURNMENT

A motion by Director Hamilton and seconded by Director Ferguson to adjourn the

meeting at 4.18 p.m., passed unanimously.

Page 8

ITE

ME

GE

Rec

Item

Fisc

Exh

TEM: 1

EETING: 07

ENERAL MA

commended

None: T

m Explanati

The CJPRboard meitems and

cal Impact: None.

hibits:

1. CJPR

/16/2014

ANAGER:

Actions:

his item is b

ion:

RMA 2014 Beetings. Thid the require

RMA 2014 B

CALRISK M

TI

being provide

Business Cais calendar p

ed dates for c

Business Cal

LIFORNIAMANAGE

AGE

TITLE: BUS

ed for inform

alendar will bprovides boacompletion.

endar.

A JOINT EMENT A

ENDA BIL

SINESS CA

mation only.

be provided ard members

POWERSAUTHORI

LL

ALENDAR F

as a standins and staff w

S ITY

FOR 2014

ng agenda itewith a listing

Back to Ag

em for all futof key busin

genda

ture ness

Page 9

Janu

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

CALIFOR

uary Distribut Executive Member ruary FPPC For PARMA C Deadline Redistrib Distribut Distribut Distribut Return Arch Distribut Board of Annual Mil FPPC For Distribut Executive Distribut Requests Deadline Distribut Member y Distribut Board of

o Co Po Co A

Return C Deadline

RNIA JOIN

2

ion of Execue CommitteeQuarterly Pa

m 700 FilingConference ( for Member

bution of Equion of Summion of Summion of Summ

APD, Property

ion of BoardDirectors M

Meeting Room

m 700 Filingion of Execue Committeeion of Certif

s for Nomina for Membere nominatioQuarterly Pa

ion of BoardDirectors A

Commercial Iroposed Bud

Claims Audit AB 1234 Ethicertificate of for Member

NT POWE

2014 BUS

utive Commie Meeting – 0ayroll Report

g Requests S02/09/2014rs to submituity Checksmary of Propmary of APD mary of Boiley and Boiler

d of Directoreeting – 03/m Requests

g Deadline Autive Commie Meeting – 0ficate of Covations for Prers to submit

on for Presidayroll Report

d of Directornnual Meetinnsurance Re

dget for 201Presentationcs Training (Coverage Rrs to submit

ERS RISK

SINESS CA

ittee Agenda01/16/2014ts – 01/31/2

Sent Out 4 - 02/12/2t Agenda item

perty Values Values

er & Machine& Machinery

rs Meeting A/20/2014

April 1, 2014ittee Meeting04/24/2014verage Renewesident/Vicet Agenda itement and Vicets – 04/30/2

rs Annual Meng – 05/13/enewals 4-2015 n (even numbeenewals Listt Agenda item

MANAGE

ALENDAR

a – 1/09/204 2014

014) ms for Marc

ery Values y Renewals L

Agenda – 03/

4 g Agenda – 04 wals Lists e President (ms for Annue President (2014

eeting Agend2014 – 05/1

ered years)ts to Staff ms for June

EMENT AU

R

14

h Meeting –

Lists to Staff

/13/2014

04/17/2014

(Bi-annually)ual Meeting –(even numbe

da– 05/06/215/2014

Meeting – 0

UTHORIT

02/25/201

f

4

) – 04/23/201ered years)

2014

5/22/2014

TY

4

14

Page 10

Revised 7/1/2014

June

Distribution of Board of Directors Meeting Agenda – 06/12/2014 Board of Directors Meeting – 06/19/2014

o Bi-annual election of President and Vice President (even numbered years) o Election of Executive Committee Members o Bi-annual Review of Conflict of Interest Code (odd numbered years) o Bi-annual Appointment of Treasurer (even numbered years)

Certificates of Coverage Renewals mailed to certificate holders (6/30/2014) Risk Management Plan Revisions Requests for reimbursement of liability training expenses due by August 31,2014

July

Distribution of Executive Committee Meeting Agenda – 07/10/2014 Executive Committee Meeting – 07/16/2014 General Liability Premiums Billed Auto Physical Damage Program Premiums Billed Property Program Premiums Billed Boiler & Machinery Premiums Billed Member Quarterly Payroll Reports -07/31/2014

August

Financial Audit in process Actuarial Study in process

September

Distribution of Executive Committee Agenda – 09/12/2014 Executive Committee Meeting – 09/19/2014 CAJPA Conference 09/16/2014 - 09/19/2014 Deadline for Members to submit Agenda items for October Meeting – 09/24/2014

October

Distribution of Board of Directors Meeting Agenda – 10/16/2014 Board of Directors Meeting – 10/23/14

o Financial Audit Presented o Approval of Annual Meeting and Holiday Calendars

Member Quarterly Payroll Reports – 10/31/2014

Page 11

Revised 7/1/2014

November

Distribution of Executive Committee Meeting Agenda – 11/13/2014 Executive Committee Meeting – 11/20/2014 Deadline for Members to submit Agenda items for December Meeting –

11/27/2014 December

Distribution of Board of Directors Meeting Agenda – 12/11/2014 Board of Directors Meeting – 12/18/2014

o Annual Report Presented o Actuarial Study Presented o Annual Review of Investment Policy

Deadline for change to SIR or withdrawal from any CJPRMA program - 12/31/2014

Page 12

ITE

ME

GE

Rec

Item

Fisc

Exh

TEM: 2

EETING: 07

ENERAL MA

commended

None: T

m Explanati

The Execat their Afor staff iprovidedaccompli The goalCommittdocumenthe Execugeneral mgeneral m The new Discussiorecreate tallow the The gene

cal Impact: None.

hibits:

1. Gene2. FY 2

/16/2014

ANAGER:

Actions:

his item is b

ion:

cutive CommApril Meetingin meeting th

d a copy of thishments yea

s and objecttee for the punt has also beutive Comm

manager. Thmanager’s ac

goals and obons by the Ethe goals ande organizatio

eral manager

eral Manager013-2016 St

CALRISK M

TIO

being provide

mittee approvg. These gohe objectivehe goals and ar to date hav

tives documeurpose of evaeen used as a

mittee informhe Board of Dccomplishme

bjectives adoExecutive Cod objectives

on to continu

r will be ava

r’s Goals andtrategic Plan

LIFORNIAMANAGE

AGE

TITLE: REVIOBJECTIVES

ed for inform

ved the Genoals and objes of the adopobjectives f

ve been add

ent has been aluating the a communic

med of the accDirectors haents and acti

opted at the ommittee ind

on an annuaue with a lon

ailable to disc

d Objectivesn.

A JOINT EMENT A

ENDA BIL

IEW OF GENS 2013-2015

mation only.

neral Manageectives were pted strategifor review byed to the for

the key docperformancation tool tocomplishme

as referred thivities to the

April meetindicated that ial basis. Theng-range app

cuss the statu

s 2013-2015

POWERSAUTHORI

LL

NERAL MA

er Goals andcreated to id

ic plan. They the commirmat for revi

cument utilize of the gene

o keep both tents of the CJhe responsibi Executive C

ng were desiit was difficue two-year d

proach to the

us of the goa

S ITY

ANAGER’S G

d Objectives dentify the a General Maittee. Curreniew.

zed by the Exeral managethe Board ofJPRMA teamility of moniCommittee.

igned for a tult and time duration on the operation o

als & object

Back to Ag

GOALS AND

FY 2013-20areas of prioranager has nt

xecutive er. This f Directors anm and the itoring the

two-year perconsuming the goals wil

of CJPRMA.

tives.

genda

D

015 rity

nd

riod. to ll

Page 13

1U

G

Finan an

Develop services

1 | P a g e Updated 07/09/201

GOALS

ncial Strength nd Solvency

15%

core products an with innovation.

15%

14

The generalprograms anthe investedcurrent costexcess/reinsmake recomneeded.

d .

The generalmonitor themembers. Tinsure finanCJPRMA wservices thafor our mem The primarygoal will in

1. Ris2. Cov3. Cla

GENERAL

OUTC

l manager will mnd services for thd assets of CJPRMts to members andsurance coverage

mmendation to the

l manager will coe core products anThese products anncial strength andwill also attempt tat meet the needs mbers.

y areas of focus fclude the followi

sk Management Inverage aims Managemen

L MANAGER G

OMES

onitor the develohe organization thMA, maintain or rd provide enhanc

e to member expoe Board of Direct

ontinue to evaluatnd services providnd services will b

d solvency to CJPto broaden coverafor cost effective

for the achievemeing:

nformation Servic

t

GOALS & OBJ

CA

pment of hat maintain reduce the

ced osures. Will tors as

te and ded to be driven to RMA.

age and e services

ent of this

ces

G

JECTIVES FO

COMMITTEEASSIGNMENT

Executive Committee

General Manager

OR 2013- 2015

T

G.M.to col2015 balan

Manatenan

Provimeetiincom

Develpolluand ewith

WorkdevelABA

Providevelrecomoffset

Creatviewi

DelivConsperfoLiverRockinclu

TASKS COMP

. presented an alllecting contribuby reducing EL

nce loss of investaged the incoment DaVita to offsided feedback toing to advise on

me.

loped new coverution program, cyexpanded limits new reinsurer.ked with actuarylop new SIR for G Plan. ided risk transfeloped state of themmended clauset impact of new Ited an updated fing annual reporvered ongoing suole to members

ormed live demormore, Fairfield,klin. Continued tde mapping of e

PLETED

lternative approutions for PY 201LF contributions tment income. e received from set cost of admino B.O.D. at each status of investm

rage options withyber risk prografor EPL coverag

y and broker to prospective mem

er training and e industry

es for contracts tISO forms. flip book methodrt in digital form

upport of Risk using system. As for Roseville, , Lodi, Vallejo ato update systemexposures and lo

ach 14-to

n fees.

ment

h a am ge

mber

o

d of mat.

Also

nd m to

sses.

Page 14

2 | P a g e Updated 07/09/2014

GOALS OUTCOMES COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENT

TASKS COMPLETED

Develop and deliver targeted training programs to members

based upon CJPRMA and member loss history.

10%

Collect the necessary data for the purpose of identifying the primary loss exposures for CJPRMA and our members. Utilize the data for the purpose of developing state of the art, effective training sessions for members. The primary areas of focus for completing this objective include the following:

1. Targeted training-Aligned to loss history and actual trends.

2. Member Education – Develop a training program for member management and operations.

3. Director Education and Training – Enhance skills of Directors through education and training.

General Manager

Delivered group risk transfer training to over 100 attendees. Delivered specific training to Livermore and Galt.

Provided ARM-P training for several Board Members and delivered testing at the same time.

Scheduling a new ARM series beginning in the fall.

Provided a Board Member Orientation.

Create an approach to marketing the value of

CJPRMA to its members and identify market opportunities

for control growth of the organization.

10%

Develop a member outreach program that provides members with key information identifying the value of CJPRMA to its members. In addition, evaluate the opportunities for development of a targeted marketing effort to organizations that meet and or exceed current member standards. The primary initiatives for the delivery of an effective outreach program will include:

1. Marketing communication brochure 2. Exclusions and alternative coverage 3. Market definition and outreach

Actively pursued ABAG Plan for membership for PY 14-15. ABAG deferred a determination for changing their program to later in the year. Developed a $2.5 million SIR to meet their needs.

Creating an educational video for our members on CJPRMA. The history and coverage options available will also be a tool for outreach for new prospects.

Page 15

3 | P a g e Updated 07/09/2014

GOALS OUTCOMES COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENT

TASKS COMPLETED

Implement and monitor an information technology upgrade to all CJPRMA

systems.

5%

CJPRMA is implementing a new RMIS System. The system will be utilized as the primary workflow product for the organization and will provide membership with the opportunity to utilize multiple modules within the system for a significantly discounted pricing. In addition CJPRMA will evaluate all of its technology solutions and will expressly evaluate for following key areas:

1. Claims Management Technology 2. Member information upgrade 3. Exposure Data 4. Webinars

General Manager

Implemented Risk Console to full functionality – continue to provide training on the use of the program. Also provided demos on Risk Console modules to expose members to options.

Provide consultation to board members and individual

member agencies by resolving questions and issues

concerning agency risk management practices and

procedures.

10%

The general manager is available to assist board members and their agencies by reviewing contracts, performing audits, reviewing policies and by making practices for best practice risk management. General manager will work with ad-hoc committee to develop CJPRMA standards for risk transfer and will populate the new Risk Console System with standardized contract requirements.

Worked with members on contracts and coverage issues as they arise. Fielding as many as 5 to 15 requests per week to review contracts and advise on coverage. Working with Galt on SWAT agreement with Elk Grove.

Actively working with Livermore on contract issues with LPFD.

Page 16

4 | P a g e Updated 07/09/2014

GOALS OUTCOMES COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENT

TASKS COMPLETED

Provide updated information to members on CJPRMA programs, services and

provide ongoing updates on legislative changes including results of litigation affecting

our industry. 10%

CJPRMA staff will provide ongoing updates to members on programs and services and shall provide training on an annual basis that will include:

1. New board member orientation 2. Update on all memorandum of coverage

documents 3. Claims update 4. Case law updates

General Manager and Staff

Provided Board with updates by claims administrator on pertinent legislation in Sacramento.

Working with CAJPA and Legislative Committee on new issues.

Working with Redding on a letter of support on inverse condemnation published decision.

Actively supporting Vallejo on case law regarding bankruptcy.

Working on appeal with City of Fairfield on private property trespass issue.

Enhance the CJPRMA claims processing, litigation

management program and the delivery of litigation/claim information to the board of

directors. 10%

The general manager will work with staff to continue to improve the delivery of claims management to members. Staff will review options for a preferred provider network of legal counsel, develop improved reporting to the board of directors on all claims and continue to provide semi-annual updates on the overall claims management process and organization experience

General Manager

and Staff

Working actively with Claims

Administrator in communication with members on claims process and litigation.

Developing reports out of Risk Console based on new data entered into system. Prepare detailed reports based on losses.

Performing claims audits and primary claims audits to identify areas requiring improvement.

Actively managing all litigated files in CJPRMA layer. Participate actively in mediations and including members in settlement decision making process.

Page 17

5 | P a g e Updated 07/09/2014

GOALS OUTCOMES COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENT

TASKS COMPLETED

Manage all aspects of the operation of CJPRMA

including staff, operations and outside vendors.

10%

The general manager has the overall responsibility to oversee the performance of staff and to work with staff to develop capabilities within CJPRMA. General manager must also oversee all outside vendors to insure the highest quality and most efficient use of resources for the delivery of service to the organization and its members.

General Manager

Managed all aspects of office and conducted ongoing meetings with staff. Evaluating their performance based on the Board Adopted Strategic Plan.

Managed transition of staff member that resigned. Conduct recruitment process including testing and interview panel.

Managed and process all aspects of office function.

Manage the CJPRMA facility and coordinate all aspects of

building maintenance and maintain relationship with

tenant. 5%

General Manager will be responsible for maintaining all operations of the new facility and provide oversight and coordination of tenant relationship and coordination of other condo owners at facility.

General Manager

Managing the operation of the office. Work with tenant and owner of other suites to preserve CJPRMA asset.

Evaluating option for implementing video conferencing.

Continue ongoing management of all IT systems, security systems and all other building related infrastructure.

Page 18

WHEN WHO ACTION STEP COMMENTS

ON

TARGET

FY 2013-2016 GM & Staff

Monitor investment income and provide program contributions based upon rolling six year average.

Monitor contribution to ELF to achieve member contribution stabilization.

FY 2013-2016 GM & Board

Review investment portfolio results and continue to monitor program for achieving long term investment yield.

Provide Board of Directors with actual investment returns and identify impact on contributions.

6/30/2014 GM & Staff

Implement the electronic resource for the tracking of Certificates of Insurance by members

12/31/2014 GM & StaffCreate a Best Practices Risk Management Tool Kit

To be based upon recommended standards

FY 2014-2016 GM & Staff Model Policies and Procedures

FY 2014-2015 GM & Board

Develop risk management advisory standards and audit members for compliance

To be based upon recommended standards

Initiative 1.3 Coverages

Ongoing GM & StaffReview all CJPRMA coverage programs and evaluate market alternatives

Initiative 1.1 Financial Strength and Solvency - new addition

Initiative 1.2 Risk Management Information Services

California Joint Powers Risk Management AuthorityStrategic Goals FY 2013 - 2016

Critical Success Factor – Financial Strength and Solvency

STRATEGIC GOAL 1: CORE PRODUCTS AND SERVICES INNOVATION

REVISEDDONE

STATUS

Page 1 Page 19

STRATEGIC GOAL 1: CORE PRODUCTS AND SERVICES INNOVATION

WHEN WHO ACTION STEP STATUS COMMENTS

DONEON

TARGETREVISED

Ongoing GM & BoardDefine optimum coverage attachements

To be completed annually at renewal

Ongoing GM & StaffReview availability of optional programs

Ongoing GM & StaffIdentify market coverage programs based upon member needs

Re-evaluate the Excess Worker's Compensation option during the 2015

FY 2014-2015 GM & Staff

Develop best claims management practices and procedures

In process - as yet to be defined

FY 2014-2015 GM & StaffLitigation Management (rate survey, panel list) To be completed yearly

Ongoing GM & StaffExpanded Claims Audit to include primary exposures

6/30/2014 GM & StaffInput historical claims data information into risk console

Ongoing GM & StaffBi annual statistical review of claims

Initiative 1.4 Claims Management

Page 2 Page 20

WHEN WHO ACTION STEP COMMENTS

ON

TARGET

FY 2014-2015 GM & Staff

Identify loss history by type of loss and survey members for suggestions

To be based upon collected data

FY 2014-2015 GM & StaffDevelop a training portfolio for members

FY 2014-2015 GM & StaffEvaluate a risk management academy program

FY 2014-2015 GM & Staff Claims management training

FY 2014-2015 GM & StaffCreate targeted training program focusing on loss history

To be based upon collected data

FY 2014-2015 GM & StaffPrepare a set of core competency training programs

STRATEGIC GOAL 2: MEMBER EDUCATION AND TRAINING INITIATIVE

Initiative 2.1 Targeted Training and Member Education - Aligned to loss history and actual trends/Develop a training program for member management and operations

REVISED

STATUS

DONE

Page 3 Page 21

STRATEGIC GOAL 2: MEMBER EDUCATION AND TRAINING INITIATIVE

WHEN WHO ACTION STEP STATUS COMMENTS

DONEON

TARGETREVISED

12/31/2014 GM & StaffProvide annual property & liability MOC training/updates

12/31/2014 GM & Staff New member orientation Ongoing GM & Staff ARM series presentations2014 GM & Staff Governance training

2014 GM & Staff

Use technology to record trainings and make available online

Initiative 2.3 Director Education and Training - Enhance skills of Directors through education and training

Page 4 Page 22

12/31/2014 GM & Staff

Create an overview of exclusions and alternative coverages for those exclusions

FY 2014-2015 Board & GMEvaluate coverage options and extensions within MOC

FY 2014-2015 GM & StaffDefine target market and potential members

FY 2014-2015 GM & Staff

Evaluate outreach options and develop appropriate materials for targeted audience

FY 2014-2015 GM & Staff

Explore expansion of super pool concept evaluating alternative attachments and excess

2014 Board & GM

Deliver CJPRMA overview to member Council & Executive Staff

2014 Board & GM

Form a Marketing Task Force to explore ideas and provide direction for marketing outreach

Explore engaging a professional consultant or firm to assist

Initiative 3.1 Exclusions and Alternative Coverages

Initiative 3.2 Market Definition and Outreach

STRATEGIC GOAL 3: MARKETING AND COMMUNICATION OUTREACH

Page 5 Page 23

WHEN WHO ACTION STEP COMMENTS

ON

TARGET

6/30/2014 GM & Staff Implementation of Risk Console

Ongoing GM & StaffProvide member support for utilization of RMIS

12/31/2014 GM & StaffCreate uniform coding for membership

Ongoing GM & StaffSupport member transition and utilization of Risk Console

FY 2014-2015 Gm & StaffPromote data collection and include primary exposures

FY 2014-2015 GM & Staff Website enhancementFY 2014-2015 GM & Staff Evaluate member portal options

12/31/2014 GM & StaffCreate reports identifying claims exposure data for members

Ongoing Board & GMCollect member expsoures for marketing of programs

Initiative 4.1 Claims Management Technology

Initiative 4.3 Exposure Data

REVISED

Initiative 4.2 Member Information Upgrade

DONE

STATUS

STRATEGIC GOAL 4: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY UPGRADE

Page 6 Page 24

STRATEGIC GOAL 4: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY UPGRADE

WHEN WHO ACTION STEP STATUS COMMENTS

DONE ON TARGET REVISED

12/31/2014 GM & StaffCreate short subject activity specific webinars

FY 2014-2015 GM & StaffIdentify resources for creation of webinars/online meetings

12/31/2014 GM & StaffUtilize technololgy to enhance member participation

FY 2015-2016 GM & Staff

Provide desktop tools for members to evaluate claims and exposures

Initiative 4.5 Enhanced Financial Reporting

Initiative 4.4 Webinars

Page 7 Page 25

ITE

ME

GE

Rec

Item

Prem

Inve

ELFTotaCon

TEM: 3

EETING: 07

ENERAL MA

commended

None. T

m Explanati At the Occontributprogram investmethe previcontribut During thDirectorsbe a reduMembersreduction In 2008 tThe intenminimizeinvestmeagainst thprepared

mium

est Income

F al ntribution

/16/2014

ANAGER:

Actions:

his item is fo

ion:

ctober 2013 tions with thyear 2012-2

ent portfolio ous fiscal yetion for 2013

he 2013-201s meetings anuction in inves throughoutn in investme

the Board ofnt of the newe fluctuationent income whe premium.by staff iden

2008-2009

10,079,947

2,834,932

2,250,000

9,495,015

CALRISK M

TIC

for informatio

Board Meethe Board of D2013 by 17.1for fiscal ye

ear. This re3-2014.

4 program ynd presentedestment incot the year onent earnings

f Directors adw rate contribns of premiumwas to fund th. This methontifies a hist

2009-2010

11,768,1

3,760,4

2,250,0

10,257,6

LIFORNIAMANAGE

AGE

TITLE: REVIONTRIBUT

on only.

ting staff disDirectors. T%. This inc

ear 2011-201eduction in in

year, Chandld status updaome. Staff han the status o that would

dopted a newbution calculms over a lohe Excess L

odology has mtorical review

0 2010-2

135 11,77

470 5,40

000 2,25

665 8,61

A JOINT EMENT A

ENDA BIL

IEW OF 201TIONS

scussed the 2The contributcrease was b12. There hnvestment in

ler Asset Maates on our inas made a cof the investmimpact futur

w mechanismlation was tong period ofoss Fund wimet its intenw of annual

2011 2011

70,677 11,4

05,634 4,8

50,000 2,2

5,043 8,8

POWERSAUTHORI

LL

14-2015 LIAB

2013-2014 lition amounts

based solely ohad been a 25ncome create

anagement atnvestment poncerted effoment incomere premium c

m for establio develop a mf time. Also,ith the remainded purposecontribution

1-2012 20

445,319 11,

883,396 5,9

250,000 2,2

811,923 7,4

S ITY

BILITY PRO

iability progrs had increason the perfo5% reductioned the overal

ttended multportfolio. Thort to educate and any antcontribution

ishing annuamethodology, the intent oinder to be ae. The followns since 2008

12-2013 2

,132,683

943,685

250,000

438,998

Back to Ag

OGRAM ME

ram sed from

ormance of on on returns ll increase in

tiple Board ohere continuete Board ticipated

ns.

al contributioy that would

of utilizing thapplied as a cwing chart 8.

2013-2014

10,949,289

4,483,826

2,250,000

8,715,463

genda

EMBER

our over

n the

of es to

ons. d he credit

2014-2015

11,427,830

4,345,416

1,550,000

8,632,414

Page 26

Back to Agenda

The chart reveals that member premiums have remained relatively steady since 2008-2009. This also shows that investment income has fluctuated from a low of $2.8 million to a high of $5.9 million. The total contribution for PY 2013-2014 was approximately 17% higher than the previous year as a result of the investment income fluctuation. The average total contribution for the six years that the new rate methodology has been used is $8,889,018. The total contribution for 2013-2014 was approximately $174,000 less than the six year average. The Board of Directors adopted and approved the funding amounts for PY 14/15 at the December 2013 board meeting. Based on these funding amounts and a reduction in investment income the PY 2014-2015 liability premium would be $9,332,414; an increase of approximately $617,000 from PY 2013-2014. In order to maintain a stable premium, staff is utilizing the ELF to offset the contribution increase. The ELF contribution will be reduced by $700,000 reducing the total liability premium to $8,632,414. The finance analyst and general manager will be present to discuss this item.

Fiscal Impact:

None. Exhibits:

1. Preliminary liability contributions for program year 2014-2015

Page 27

PY 2014-2015

Preliminary Liability Premium Calculation

Losses 8,161,295 Pool B 1,643,686 0.1207 0.121

Reinsurance 1,846,331 Pool C 6,517,609 0.4451 0.445

Overhead 1,425,000 Pool D 3,271,331 0.2234 0.223

11,432,626 11,432,626 0.7893 0.789

(a) (b) (c) (d) (g)

Member

PY 14/15

Payroll

PY 14/15

Pure Liab

Premium

Less:

12/13

Investment

Income

Add:

Exess Loss

Fund

PY 14/15

Liability

Premium

PY 13/14

Prem

Increase/

(decrease)

Alameda 51,749,091 408,300 183,994 54,783 279,089 269,445 9,644

Chico 29,393,215 231,912 100,068 31,116 162,961 194,338 (31,377)

Fairfield 46,270,180 365,072 150,361 48,983 263,693 269,833 (6,140)

Fremont 93,226,572 735,558 292,940 98,692 541,309 533,498 7,811

Livermore 38,234,613 301,671 124,177 40,476 217,970 227,162 (9,192)

LPFD 8,162,590 64,403 8,641 73,044 74,734 (1,690)

Lodi 29,514,205 232,867 99,232 31,244 164,879 155,535 9,344

NCCSIF 137,857,036 1,087,692 425,313 145,938 808,317 877,868 (69,551)

Petaluma 27,200,165 214,609 86,651 28,795 156,753 157,785 (1,032)

Redding 60,486,090 477,235 180,865 64,032 360,402 346,780 13,622

REMIF 100,271,200 791,140 310,185 106,149 587,104 590,632 (3,528)

Richmond 87,400,348 689,589 108,052 92,524 674,061 675,246 (1,185)

Roseville 96,161,015 758,710 255,383 101,798 605,125 596,428 8,697

San Leandro 29,614,720 233,660 81,137 31,351 183,874 191,485 (7,611)

San Rafael 34,507,343 272,263 112,935 36,530 195,858 189,864 5,994

Santa Rosa 98,722,669 778,922 296,250 104,510 587,182 591,633 (4,451)

SCORE 19,565,967 154,375 73,305 20,713 101,783 98,888 2,895

Stockton 102,864,619 687,136 297,980 108,895 498,050 513,979 (15,929)

Sunnyvale 89,126,809 703,211 277,351 94,351 520,211 511,984 8,227

Vacaville 51,221,696 404,139 161,501 54,224 296,863 299,929 (3,066)

Vallejo 48,907,887 385,883 161,762 51,775 275,896 275,936 (40)

YCPARMIA 183,711,326 1,449,482 565,974 194,481 1,077,989 1,072,481 5,508

1,464,169,356 11,427,830 4,345,416 1,550,000 8,632,414 8,715,463 (83,049)

$1M SIR

70% - Undiscounted

Page 28

ITE

ME

GE

Rec

Item

TEM: 4

EETING: 07

ENERAL MA

commended

None at t

m Explanati

The Cityproperty purchasedevelopmcurrently

Munich Rhad beenthe currerelated topreliminabuildingsMunich Rthe struct

Munich Rsurvey toabandonestructureimpact onMunich Rstandard

Vacancy restrictiv

/16/2014

ANAGER:

Actions:

this time. Th

ion:

of Stocktonwas valued d by the city

ment. The sty underway.

Re, our propn vacant for mnt time, the

o the homeleary estimate s, is approximRe, City of Sture.

Re has requeo all current ped or vacant. Munich Rn an abandoRe provided Property Me

clause wordve:

CALRISK M

TIM

his item is b

n sustained ain excess of

y for approxitructure was

perty reinsuremany years aactual cause

ess occupantto demolish

mately $1.5 Stockton and

ested additioproperty pro, and to iden

Re proposes cned/vacant sthe followin

emorandum

ding is wide

LIFORNIAMANAGE

AGE

TITLE: PROMEMORAN

eing provide

a major fire lf $8,834,000imately $350destroyed b

er has expreand had beene of the fire is that may h

h the structurmillion. Th

d CJPRMA f

onal informatogram membntify the intenconsideratiostructure andng examplesof Coverage

ranging and

A JOINT EMENT A

ENDA BIL

OPOSED MNDUM OF C

ed for inform

oss at a struc. The struct0,000 with th

by the fire an

ssed a concen occupied bis still underwhave inadvertre, which sitshere will be dfor the actua

tion from CJbers to identint by the me

on for new lad the significs of languagees:

d below are s

POWERSAUTHORI

LL

MODIFICATCOVERAG

mation purpo

cture within ture was an ehe intent of p

nd the demol

ern over thisby a number way. The antently starteds between twdiscussion anal settlement

JPRMA Memify any strucembers on thanguage for tcant risk pose that are cur

some examp

S ITY

TIONS TO E

oses only.

the city in Jearly 1910’sperforming lition of the

type of lossr of homelessnticipated cad the blaze. wo other nonnd negotiatioamount for

mbers. Stafctures that arhe proposed the MOC to

sed by these rrently found

ples from len

THE PROP

June 2014. T hotel that wdowntown structure is

s. The builds individualsause of the fi The

n-city ownedons betweenreplacement

ff forwarded re currently use of the offset the structures. d in many ot

nient to more

PERTY

The was

ing s. At

fire is

d n t of

a

ther

e

Page 29

· With a stipulated vacancy period (# of days) the settlement is strictly ACV vs. RC for a violation.

· ISO wording has a stipulated vacancy period then settlement on ACV minus 15% for a violation.

· Agreed amount on identified vacant properties.

· With a stipulated vacancy period only the demo costs will be paid for a violation.

The worst case is CJPRMA and Munich Re taking no immediate action. As it stands, Stockton (or any other member) has absolutely no incentive to do anything different with the remaining vacant properties that are attractive targets for vagrants, vandals, etc. Eventually all other members could be subsidizing loss activity from one or two members that is avoidable. Billy Deeb, AON and the general manager are in discussions with Munich Re regarding this issue. Once the survey of property program members is completed, we will be in a much stronger position as we discuss the options with Munich Re. One option for CJPRMA is to do absolutely nothing, however this option exposes Munich Re to additional catastrophic losses as well as exposing other members of the property program with significant increases for 2015. Robert Lowe, AON will be at the meeting and will be available to discuss this issue. This item requires no formal action at this time, once a tentative approach is identified, a Board Meeting with property program participants will be required.

Fiscal Impact:

1. Unknown at this time. Exhibits:

None.

Page 30

ITE

ME

GE

Rec

Item

Fisc

Exh

TEM: 5

EETING: 07

ENERAL MA

commended

None at t

m Explanati CJPRMARobert Moccurred create newhen exeagreemen Director recommeintends tothe Execudirection A copy o Staff will

cal Impact: None

hibits:

1. CJPR2. Petalu3. Petalu4. Petalu5. Petalu

/16/2014

ANAGER:

Actions:

this time. Th

ion:

A presented fMarshburn an

effective wiew language ecuting theirnts has been

Blanquie, Peended clauseo create a mutive Comm

n to Staff for

of the Petalum

l be present

RMA Recomuma Professuma Insuranuma Insuranuma Constru

CALRISK M

TI

his item is p

four trainingnd David Cloith the 04/13for agreeme

r agreementsattached wi

etaluma has es provided bodel templat

mittee to reviethe develop

ma Agreeme

to discuss th

mmended Lansional Servicnce Requiremnce Requiremuction Agree

LIFORNIAMANAGE

AGE

TITLE: CJP

rovided for i

g sessions onovis. The se3 editions. Sents that wills. A copy ofith this agend

created a nuby CJPRMAte for use byew the langument of a m

ent has been

he options fo

nguage for Aces ments B1 ments B2 ement

A JOINT EMENT A

ENDA BIL

PRMA MOD

information

n Contractuaessions focusStaff workedl provide addf the CJPRMda bill.

umber of docA. Based on y our membeuage provide

model agreem

n attached to

or creating th

Agreements

POWERSAUTHORI

LL

DEL CONT

only.

al Risk Transsed on the ne

d with consulditional prot

MA recomme

cuments thatdiscussions

ers. This ageed by Directo

ment.

this agenda

his model ag

S ITY

TRACT LAN

sfer that werew ISO formltant Robert tection to CJended langua

t include mawith Board

enda bill proor Blanquie

bill.

greement.

NGUAGE

re conductedm changes th

Marshburn JPRMA memage for

any of the Members, s

ovides time fand to provi

d by hat to

mbers

taff for ide

Page 31

The CalifCertifiedto all newdevelopeagreemenhas arisenyou atten“Revise y As statedprovisionencourag Please nomaterials NOTE: Istandard Throughoand insurmost currRisk Manbe provid These doCJPRMAreceive aDavid Cl It is not orecommeand to he

CJPRM

fornian Jointd Risk Managw agreemented to eliminants/contractsn from the n

nded one of tyour contrac

d in the progrns to your agged to cut an

ote the follows provided at

In this worksd policy prov

out this inforrance specifrent informanagement Deded to CJPR

ocuments andA and shoulda request for lovis, Genera

our intent to ending languelp plug the g

MA RECOM

t Powers Risgers.Com to ts. The new ate gaps in cos. This new new ISO 201the four traincts or risk los

ram, you shogreements. Td paste as ne

wing disclaimt the training

shop we discvisions to obt

rmation youfications for ation availabepartment. T

RMA Member

d recommendd only be use

a copy of thal Manager

rewrite youruage due to cgaps in the p

MMENDED

sk Managemdevelop CJPindemnity/h

overage that language wa3 forms. Y

ning sessionsing coverag

ould consultThis documeecessary to u

mer statemeg.

cuss what netain maximu

will note thagreements.

ble today andThe informars electronic

ded languaged after conshe recommen

of CJPRMA

r contract lanchanges needproblem area

1

LANGUAG

ment AuthoriPRMA recomhold harmles

often occur as also devel

You have bees that were p

ge”.

t with your Cent has been upgrade your

nt that was i

eds to be doum protection

at CJPRMA. The recomd should be

ation and lancally and are

ge should nosulting with lnded languagA.

nguage and ded as a resuas we have o

GE FOR AG

ity worked wmmended lass/insurance r for liabilityloped to min

en provided aprovided by

Counsel prioprepared in r agreement

included at t

one to effectin for the Pub

is providingmmended lang

reviewed bynguage contae recommend

t be providelegal counsege, please as

requirementult of the newobserved in m

GREEMEN

with Robert Manguage thatlanguage ha

y that arises onimize loss oa copy of thiCJPRMA an

or to adding ta word form.

the beginnin

ively transferblic Entity.

g recommenguage is bas

y both your Cained in this ded for your

ed to non-meel. In the evesk the other p

ts. Rather, ww insurance many contra

NTS!

Marshburn ot should be aas been out of of coverage tis documentnd were title

the followinmat and you

g of the

r risk and sa

ded indemnised upon theCity Attorney workshop w

r use.

embers of ent that you party to con

we are coverage focts.

of added

that t as ed

g are

atisfy

ity e y and will

ntact

rms

Page 32

2

If you have any questions on the language or require assistance with identifying the location within your agreements to add the described language, please contact David Clovis, General Manager at 925-290-1316 or via email: david@cjprma.org CJPRMA Recommended Language for Agreements CJPRMA Recommended language (to overcome coverage & limits restrictions): It shall be a requirement under this agreement that any available insurance proceeds broader than or in excess of the specified minimum Insurance coverage requirements and/or limits shall be available to the Additional Insured. Furthermore, the requirements for coverage and limits shall be (1) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this Agreement; or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any Insurance policy or proceeds available to the named Insured; whichever is greater. CJPRMA Recommended language (to insure that all subcontractors also include the “City” as an additional insured): Contractor agrees to include with all subcontractors in their subcontract the same requirements and provisions of this agreement including the indemnity and Insurance requirements to the extent they apply to the scope of the Subcontractor’s work. Subcontractors hired by Contractor agree to be bound to Contractor and Public Entity in the same manner and to the same extent as Contractor is bound to Public Entity under the Contract Documents. Subcontractor further agrees to include these same provisions with any Sub-subcontractor. A copy of the Owner Contract Document Indemnity and Insurance provisions will be furnished to the Subcontractor upon request. The General Contractor shall require all sub-contractors to provide a valid certificate of insurance and the required endorsements included in the agreement prior to commencement of any work and contractor will provide proof of compliance to the city.

CJPRMA Recommended language to be added to Additional Insured requirements language The Additional Insured coverage under the Contractor’s policy shall be “primary and non-contributory” and will not seek contribution from the Public Entity’s insurance or self insurance and shall be at least as broad as CG 20 01 04 13. CJPRMA Recommended language to be added to additional insured language in Contract document The limits of Insurance required in this agreement may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess Insurance. Any umbrella or excess Insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and non contributory basis for the benefit of Public Entity (if agreed to in a written contract or agreement) before the Public Entity’s own Insurance or self insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured.

Page 33

3

CJPRMA Recommended language to be added at the end of the indemnity section of the Agreement:

Contractor/Subcontractor's responsibility for such defense and indemnity obligations shall survive the termination or completion of this agreement for the full period of time allowed by law.

CJPRMA Recommended language to be added to indemnification clause in the Agreement:

The defense and indemnification obligations of this agreement are undertaken in addition to, and shall not in any way be limited by, the insurance obligations contained in this agreement.

CJPRMA Recommended language to be added to the general insurance requirements section within an Agreement:

1. All self-insured retentions (SIR) must be disclosed to Risk Management for approval and shall not reduce the limits of liability.

2. Policies containing any self-insured retention (SIR) provision shall provide or be endorsed to provide that the SIR may be satisfied by either the named Insured or the Public Entity.

3. Public Entity reserves the right to obtain a full certified copy of any Insurance policy and endorsements. Failure to exercise this right shall not constitute a waiver of right to exercise later.

CJPRMA Recommended language to be added to all Agreements that may include the use of subcontractor(s):

Subcontractor agrees to be bound to GC and Public Entity in the same manner and to the same extent as GC is bound to Public Entity under the Contract Documents. Subcontractor further agrees to include the same requirements and provisions of this agreement, including the indemnity and Insurance requirements, with any Sub-subcontractor to the extent they apply to the scope of the Sub-subcontractor’s work. A copy of the Public Entity Contract Document Indemnity and Insurance provisions will be furnished to the Subcontractor upon request.

CJPRMA Recommended language that should be included in the Indemnity and Insurance requirements section of a Purchase Order:

1. I have read, understand, and agree to comply with the Indemnity and Insurance requirements supplied with this Purchase Order.

CJPRMA Recommended language that should be included in the Indemnity and Insurance requirements section when issuing a RFP or RFQ:

For RFPs: It is strongly recommended when distributing an RFP (proposal) or RFQ (qualification), include a document titled “Summary of Indemnity and Insurance Requirements” which includes “Please provide a copy of these indemnity and insurance requirements to your insurance broker or insurer to confirm compliance” followed by the full text of both your indemnity and insurance requirements. Then, at the bottom of the form have them sign and

Page 34

4

return as above “I have read, understand, and agree to comply with the Indemnity and Insurance requirements supplied with this proposal.”

CJPRMA Recommended language to include at the beginning of an Indemnity clause:

1. To the fullest extent allowed by law, Contractor shall... AND/OR— 2. With the exception that this section shall in no event be construed to require indemnification

by Contractor to a greater extent than permitted under the public policy of the State of California, Contractor shall...

CJPRMA Recommended language that should be included in the insurance section of construction agreements regarding completed operations: Contractor shall maintain insurance as required by this contract to the fullest amount allowed by law and shall maintain insurance for a minimum of five years following the completion of this project. In the event contractor fails to obtain or maintain completed operations coverage as required by this agreement, the city at its sole discretion may purchase the coverage required and the cost will be paid by contractor.

Page 35

 

1                                             P.S.A. R.M. Draft, 3‐28‐14  

Professional Services Agreement Indemnification Clause 

  To the fullest extent allowed by law, Consultant shall, at its own expense, indemnify, defend with counsel acceptable to the City, (which acceptance will not be unreasonably withheld), and hold harmless City and its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers (“Indemnitees”) from and against any and all alleged liability, loss, damage, claims, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, regulatory proceedings, civil penalties and fines, expenses and costs (including, without limitation, claims expenses, attorney’s fees and costs and fees of litigation) (collectively, “Liability”) of every nature, whether actual, alleged or threatened, arising out of or in connection with the Services or Consultant’s failure to comply with any of the terms of this Agreement, regardless of any fault or alleged fault of the Indemnitees.     The Consultant’s obligation to indemnify, defend and hold harmless under this provision shall not be excused because of the Consultant’s inability to evaluate Liability, or because the Consultant evaluates Liability and determines that the Consultant is not or may not be liable.  The Consultant must respond within 30 calendar days to any tender for defense and indemnity by the City, unless the time for responding has been extended by an authorized representative of the City in writing.  If the Consultant fails to accept tender of defense and indemnity within 30 calendar days, in addition to any other remedies authorized by law, so much of the money due or that may become due the Consultant under this Agreement as shall reasonably be considered necessary by the City, may be retained by the City until disposition has been made of the matter subject to tender, or until the Consultant accepts tender, whichever occurs first.  In the event that the City must file responsive documents in a matter tendered to Consultant prior to Consultant’s acceptance of tender, Consultant agrees to fully reimburse all costs, including but not limited to attorney fees, claim, and costs and fees of litigation, incurred by the City in filing such responsive documents.  The Consultant waives any and all rights to express or implied indemnity against the Indemnitees concerning any Liability of the Consultant arising out of or in connection with the Services or Consultant’s failure to comply with any of the terms of this Agreement.  The Consultant’s responsibility for such defense and indemnity obligations shall survive the termination or completion of this Agreement for the full period of time allowed by law.  The defense and indemnification obligations of this Agreement are undertaken in addition to, and shall not in any way be limited by, the insurance obligations contained in this Agreement.     Notwithstanding the foregoing, to the extent this Agreement is a “construction contract” as defined by California Civil Code Section 2783, as may by amended from time to time, Consultant’s duty to indemnify under this provision shall not apply when to do so would be prohibited by California Civil Code Section 2782, as may be amended from time to time.  

Page 36

 

2                                             P.S.A. R.M. Draft, 3‐28‐14  

Notwithstanding the foregoing, to the extent that the Services include design professional services subject to California Civil Code Section 2782.8, as may be amended from time to time, Consultant’s duty to indemnify shall only be to the maximum extent permitted by California Civil Code Section 2782.8. 

Page 37

 

                                                                                              1                    March 24, 2014 B‐1 Ins. Req. Contractor  

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS EXHIBIT B‐1 

 Contractor’s performance of the services under this agreement shall not commence until Contractor shall have obtained all insurance required under this Exhibit and such insurance shall have been reviewed by the City Attorney and approved by the Risk Manager.  All requirements herein provided shall appear either in the body of the insurance policies or as endorsements and shall specifically bind the insurance carrier.  Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract all necessary insurance against claims now and in the future for alleged injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the services by the Contractor, the Contractor’s agents, representatives, employees and subcontractors.    

Insurance Coverage and Limits Restrictions 1. It shall be a requirement under this agreement that any available insurance proceeds 

broader than or in excess of the specified minimum insurance coverage requirements and/or limits shall be available to the additional insured.  Furthermore, the requirements for coverage and limits shall be (1) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this agreement; or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy or proceeds available to the named insured; whichever is greater.  

2. The limits of insurance required in this agreement may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance.  Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and non‐contributory basis for the benefit of the City of Petaluma before the City of Petaluma’s own insurance or self‐insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured. 

 

A. Minimum Scope of Insurance  Coverage shall be at least as broad as: 1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage: 

a. Blanket contractual liability b. Broad form property coverage c. Personal injury 

2. Insurance Services Office from covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto).   3. Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and 

Employer’s Liability insurance. 4. Such other insurance coverages and limits as may be required by the City of 

Petaluma.    

B. Minimum Limits of Insurance Contractor shall maintain limits no less than: 

Page 38

 

                                                                                              2                    March 24, 2014 B‐1 Ins. Req. Contractor  

1. General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and  property damage and a $2 million aggregate.  If Commercial General Liability insurance or other form with a general aggregate liability is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this agreement or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. 

2. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3. Employer’s Liability: Bodily Injury by Accident ‐ $1,000,000 each accident. 

    Bodily Injury by Disease ‐ $1,000,000 policy limit.     Bodily Injury by Disease ‐ $1,000,000 each employee.  

4. Such other insurance coverages and limits as may be required by the City of Petaluma.   

 

C. Deductibles and Self‐Insured Retentions 1. Any deductibles or self‐insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the 

City of Petaluma.  At the option of the City of Petaluma, either:  the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self‐insured retentions as respects the City of Petaluma, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers; or the Contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claims administration and defense expenses.    

2. Policies containing any self‐insured retention (SIR) provision shall provide or be endorsed to provide that the SIR may be satisfied by either the named insured or the City of Petaluma.   

3. The City of Petaluma reserves the right to obtain a full certified copy of any insurance policy and endorsement.  Failure to exercise this right shall not constitute a waiver of right to exercise later.   

 

Other Insurance Provision Requirements  Additional Insured Requirements: 

1. The required general liability and automobile policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain the following provisions: 

a. The City of Petaluma, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds as respects alleged: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor.  The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City of Petaluma, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers.  

b. Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City of Petaluma, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers. 

Page 39

 

                                                                                              3                    March 24, 2014 B‐1 Ins. Req. Contractor  

c. The Contractor’s insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought except, with respect to the limits of the insurer’s liability. 

d. Contractor shall furnish properly executed Certificates of Insurance from insurance companies acceptable to the City of Petaluma and signed copies of the specified endorsements for each policy prior to commencement of work under this agreement.  Such documentation shall clearly evidence all coverages required above including specific evidence of separate endorsements naming the City of Petaluma and shall provide that such insurance shall not be materially changed, terminated or allowed to expire except after 30 days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been filed with the City Clerk.  Such insurance shall be maintained from the time work first commences until completion of the work under this agreement.  Contractor shall replace such certificates for policies expiring prior to completion of work under this agreement.   

 

Acceptability of Insurers Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A: VII. 

Completed Operations Contractor shall maintain insurance as required by this contract to the fullest amount allowed by law and shall maintain insurance for a minimum of five years following the completion of this project.  In the event the Contractor fails to obtain or maintain completed operations coverage as required by this agreement, the City of Petaluma at its sole discretion may purchase the coverage required and the cost will be paid by the Contractor.  

Cross‐Liability The Liability policy shall include a cross‐liability or severability of interest endorsement.    

Failure to Maintain Insurance Coverage If Contractor, for any reason, fails to maintain insurance coverage, which is required pursuant to this agreement, the same shall be deemed a material breach of contract.  The City of Petaluma, at its sole option, may terminate this agreement and obtain damages from the Contractor resulting from said breach.  Alternatively, the City of Petaluma may purchase such required insurance coverage, and without further notice to Contractor, the City of Petaluma may deduct from sums due to Contractor any premium costs advanced by the City of Petaluma for such insurance.   

 Primary and Non‐Contributory  For any claims related to this project, the Contractor’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City of Petaluma, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers.  Any insurance or self‐insurance maintained by the City of Petaluma, its officers, 

Page 40

 

                                                                                              4                    March 24, 2014 B‐1 Ins. Req. Contractor  

officials, employees, agents or volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor’s insurance and shall not contribute with it. The additional insured coverage under the Contractor’s policy shall be “primary and non‐contributory” and will not seek contribution from the City of Petaluma’s insurance or self‐insurance and shall be at least as broad as CG 20 01 04 13.  

Subcontractors  Subcontractor agrees to be bound to the Contractor and the City of Petaluma in the same manner and to the same extent as Contractor is bound to the public entity under the contract documents.  Subcontractor further agrees to include the same requirements and provisions of the agreement, including the indemnity and insurance requirements, with any sub‐subcontractor to the extent they apply to the scope of the sub‐subcontractor’s work.  A copy of the City of Petaluma’s Contract Document Indemnity and Insurance Provisions will be furnished to the subcontractor upon request. Contractor further agrees to include with all subcontractors in their subcontract the same requirements and provisions of this agreement including the indemnity and insurance requirements to the extent they apply to the scope of the subcontractors work.  Subcontractors hired by Contractor agree to be bound to Contractor and the City of Petaluma in the same manner and to the same extent as Contractor is bound to the City of Petaluma under the contract documents.  Subcontractor further agrees to include these same provisions with any sub‐subcontractor.  A copy of the Owners Contract Document Indemnity and Insurance Provisions will be furnished to the subcontractor upon request.  The Contractor shall require all subcontractors to provide a valid certificate of insurance and the required endorsements included in this agreement prior to the commencement of any work and Contractor will provide proof of such compliance to the City of Petaluma if requested.  

Subrogation Waiver Contractor agrees to waive subrogation rights against City of Petaluma regardless of the applicability of any insurance proceeds, and to require all Contractors, subcontractors or others involved in any way with the services to do likewise.  

Verification of Coverage Contractor shall furnish the City of Petaluma with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause.  The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf.  All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City of Petaluma before the services commence.   

Page 41

 

                                                                                              1                              March 24, 2014 B‐2 Ins. Req. P.L.  

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS EXHIBIT B‐2 

 Consultant’s performance of the services under this agreement shall not commence until Consultant shall have obtained all insurance required under this Exhibit and such insurance shall have been reviewed by the City Attorney and approved by the Risk Manager.  All requirements herein provided shall appear either in the body of the insurance policies or as endorsements and shall specifically bind the insurance carrier.  Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract all necessary insurance against claims now and in the future for alleged injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the services by the Consultant, the Consultant’s agents, representatives, employees and subcontractors.  Required professional liability insurance shall be maintained at the level specified herein for the duration of this agreement and any extension thereof and for twelve additional months following the agreement termination or expiration.      

Insurance Coverage and Limits Restrictions 1. It shall be a requirement under this agreement that any available insurance proceeds 

broader than or in excess of the specified minimum insurance coverage requirements and/or limits shall be available to the additional insured.  Furthermore, the requirements for coverage and limits shall be (1) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this agreement; or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy or proceeds available to the named insured; whichever is greater.  

2. The limits of insurance required in this agreement may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance.  Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and non‐contributory basis for the benefit of the City of Petaluma before the City of Petaluma’s own insurance or self‐insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured. 

 

A. Minimum Scope of Insurance  Coverage shall be at least as broad as: 1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage: 

a. Blanket contractual liability b. Broad form property coverage c. Personal injury 

2. Insurance Services Office from covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto).   3. Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and 

Employer’s Liability insurance. 4. Professional Liability insurance 

Page 42

 

                                                                                              2                              March 24, 2014 B‐2 Ins. Req. P.L.  

5. Such other insurance coverages and limits as may be required by the City of Petaluma.    

B. Minimum Limits of Insurance Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: 1. General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and  

property damage and a $2 million aggregate.  If Commercial General Liability insurance or other form with a general aggregate liability is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this agreement or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. 

2. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3. Employer’s Liability: Bodily Injury by Accident ‐ $1,000,000 each accident. 

    Bodily Injury by Disease ‐ $1,000,000 policy limit.     Bodily Injury by Disease ‐ $1,000,000 each employee.  

4. Professional Liability insurance: $1,000,000. 5. Such other insurance coverages and limits as may be required by the City of 

Petaluma.    

C. Deductibles and Self‐Insured Retentions 1. Any deductibles or self‐insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the 

City of Petaluma.  At the option of the City of Petaluma, either:  the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self‐insured retentions as respects the City of Petaluma, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claims administration and defense expenses.    

2. Policies containing any self‐insured retention (SIR) provision shall provide or be endorsed to provide that the SIR may be satisfied by either the named insured or the City of Petaluma.   

3. The City of Petaluma reserves the right to obtain a full certified copy of any insurance policy and endorsement.  Failure to exercise this right shall not constitute a waiver of right to exercise later.   

 

Other Insurance Provision Requirements  Additional Insured Requirements: 

1. The required general liability and automobile policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain the following provisions: 

a. The City of Petaluma, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds as respects alleged: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant.  The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of 

Page 43

 

                                                                                              3                              March 24, 2014 B‐2 Ins. Req. P.L.  

protection afforded to the City of Petaluma, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers.  

b. Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City of Petaluma, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers. 

c. The Consultant’s insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought except, with respect to the limits of the insurer’s liability. 

d. Consultant shall furnish properly executed Certificates of Insurance from insurance companies acceptable to the City of Petaluma and signed copies of the specified endorsements for each policy prior to commencement of work under this agreement.  Such documentation shall clearly evidence all coverages required above including specific evidence of separate endorsements naming the City of Petaluma and shall provide that such insurance shall not be materially changed, terminated or allowed to expire except after 30 days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been filed with the City Clerk.  Such insurance shall be maintained from the time work first commences until completion of the work under this agreement.  Consultant shall replace such certificates for policies expiring prior to completion of work under this agreement.   

 

Acceptability of Insurers Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A: VII. 

Completed Operations Consultant shall maintain insurance as required by this contract to the fullest amount allowed by law and shall maintain insurance for a minimum of five years following the completion of this project.  In the event the Consultant fails to obtain or maintain completed operations coverage as required by this agreement, the City of Petaluma at its sole discretion may purchase the coverage required and the cost will be paid by the Consultant.  

Cross‐Liability The Liability policy shall include a cross‐liability or severability of interest endorsement.    

Failure to Maintain Insurance Coverage If Consultant, for any reason, fails to maintain insurance coverage, which is required pursuant to this agreement, the same shall be deemed a material breach of contract.  The City of Petaluma, at its sole option, may terminate this agreement and obtain damages from the Consultant resulting from said breach.  Alternatively, the City of Petaluma may purchase such required insurance coverage, and without further notice to Consultant, the City of Petaluma may deduct from sums due to Consultant any premium costs advanced by the City of Petaluma for such insurance.   

Page 44

 

                                                                                              4                              March 24, 2014 B‐2 Ins. Req. P.L.  

 Primary and Non‐Contributory  For any claims related to this project, the Consultant’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City of Petaluma, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers.  Any insurance or self‐insurance maintained by the City of Petaluma, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant’s insurance and shall not contribute with it. The additional insured coverage under the Consultant’s policy shall be “primary and non‐contributory” and will not seek contribution from the City of Petaluma’s insurance or self‐insurance and shall be at least as broad as CG 20 01 04 13.  

Subcontractors  Subcontractor agrees to be bound to the Consultant and the City of Petaluma in the same manner and to the same extent as Consultant is bound to the public entity under the contract documents.  Subcontractor further agrees to include the same requirements and provisions of the agreement, including the indemnity and insurance requirements, with any sub‐ subcontractor to the extent they apply to the scope of the sub‐subcontractor’s work.  A copy of the City of Petaluma’s Contract Document Indemnity and Insurance Provisions will be furnished to the subcontractor upon request. Consultant further agrees to include with all subcontractors in their subcontract the same requirements and provisions of this agreement including the indemnity and insurance requirements to the extent they apply to the scope of the subcontractors work.  Subcontractors hired by Consultant agree to be bound to Consultant and the City of Petaluma in the same manner and to the same extent as Consultant is bound to the City of Petaluma under the contract documents.  Subcontractor further agrees to include these same provisions with any sub‐subcontractor.  A copy of the Owners Contract Document Indemnity and Insurance Provisions will be furnished to the subcontractor upon request.  The Consultant shall require all subcontractors to provide a valid certificate of insurance and the required endorsements included in this agreement prior to the commencement of any work and Consultant will provide proof of such compliance to the City of Petaluma if requested.  

Subrogation Waiver Consultant agrees to waive subrogation rights against City of Petaluma regardless of the applicability of any insurance proceeds, and to require all Consultants, subcontractors or others involved in any way with the services to do likewise.  

Verification of Coverage Consultant shall furnish the City of Petaluma with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause.  The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf.  All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City of Petaluma before the services commence.   

Page 45

 

   1                                        Const: R.M. Draft, 3‐28‐14  

Construction Agreement Indemnification Clause 

  To the fullest extent allowed by law, Contractor shall indemnify, defend with counsel acceptable to City, and hold harmless to the full extent permitted by law, City and its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers from and against any and all alleged liability, loss, damage, claims, expenses and costs (including, without limitation, attorney fees and costs and fees of litigation) (collectively, “Liability”) of every nature arising out of or in connection with Contractor’s performance of the Work or its failure to comply with any of its obligations contained in this Agreement, except such Liability caused by the active negligence, sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City.  Pursuant to California Public Contract Code Section 9201, City shall timely notify Contractor of receipt of any third‐party claim relating to this Agreement.    The Contractor’s responsibility for such defense and indemnity obligations shall survive the termination or completion of this Agreement for the full period of time allowed by law.  The defense and indemnification obligations of this Agreement are undertaken in addition to, and shall not in any way be limited by, the insurance obligations contained in this Agreement.     

Page 46

ITE

ME

GE

Rec

Item

Fisc

Exh

TEM: 6

EETING: 07

ENERAL MA

commended

None. T

m Explanati

This itemmembers Issues tha

1. W2. T

cal Impact:

None.

hibits: 1. Youn2. Seven

7/16/2014

ANAGER:

Actions:

his item is b

ion:

m is reserveds and for the

at have been

Workers ComTips for polic

ng vs. Countn Pointers to

CALRISK M

TI

being provide

d for the discprovision of

n requested t

mpensation, Yce officer dep

ty of Butte o Help You A

LIFORNIAMANAGE

AGE

TITLE: RIS

ed for inform

cussion of risf status upda

to be listed fo

Young vs. Cpositions in

Ace a Civil L

A JOINT EMENT A

ENDA BIL

SK MANAG

mation only.

sk managemates on the ri

for discussion

County of Bucivil lawsuit

Lawsuit Dep

POWERSAUTHORI

LL

GEMENT I

ment issues thisk managem

n are set fort

utte – (Tony ts – (Tony G

position

S ITY

SSUES

hat are of conment program

th below:

Giles, SunnyGiles, Sunnyv

Back to Ag

ncern to the m.

yvale) vale)

genda

Page 47

1

Filed 6/25/14

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Butte)

----

DANIEL YOUNG,

Petitioner,

v.

WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS

BOARD AND COUNTY OF BUTTE,

Respondents.

C075047

(WCAB No. ADJ8321113)

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING; petition for writ of review from a decision of the

Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board. Decision annulled and matter remanded.

Mastagni, Holstedt, Amick, Miller & Johnsen and Craig E. Johnsen for Petitioner.

No appearance for Respondent Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board.

Cuneo, Black, Ward & Missler, Richard A. Weyuker and Lauren E. Sible for

Respondent County of Butte.

Page 48

2

Labor Code section 3600, subdivision (a)(9) (hereafter section 3600(a)(9))1

forecloses workers’ compensation coverage for an injury that arises out of “voluntary

participation in any off-duty recreational, social, or athletic activity not constituting part

of the employee’s work-related duties, except where these activities are a reasonable

expectancy of, or are expressly or impliedly required by, the employment.”

We conclude that a county jail correctional sergeant’s off-duty injury, sustained

when he was performing jumping jacks at home as part of his regular warm-up exercise

regimen, arose in the course of his employment under section 3600(a)(9)’s exception for

coverage, where a departmental order required correctional officers to “maintain

themselves in good physical condition so that they can handle the strenuous physical

contacts often required of a law enforcement officer,” and where the Butte County

Sheriff’s Department (the Department) required its correctional officers to undergo

periodic training exercises, many of which involved physical activity. Consequently, we

annul the decision from the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB), which

concluded otherwise, and remand for further proceedings.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Sergeant Daniel Young, the petitioner here, was initially hired in 1994 as a jail

booking officer by the Department. Young accepted a position as a correctional officer

within the same department in May 1995 after passing a required physical fitness test.2

In 1999 Young was promoted to correctional sergeant, the same position he held when he

sustained his injury.

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Labor Code.

2 Sergeant Young has not taken any other physical fitness tests since the initial test in

1995; however, Young did partake in a physical fitness test in 1999 to help establish a

baseline for a redesigned physical fitness test. Neither of these two tests involved

jumping jacks.

Page 49

3

Pursuant to Departmental Order No. 3004 (Departmental Order 3004), issued in

February 2004, correctional officers, including correctional sergeants, are required to

“maintain themselves in good physical condition so that they can handle the strenuous

physical contacts often required of a law enforcement officer.” The Department’s class

specification bulletin for correctional sergeants, which describes the job duties of that

position, requires correctional sergeants to be able to perform the same duties as

correctional officers. And this same bulletin indicates, “Work occasionally involves

personal danger, and exposure to hazardous, uncontrollable and life-threatening situations

. . . . This position may require walking, running, lifting and climbing during efforts to

catch or subdue hostile individuals. [¶] . . . [¶] Required to physically restrain persons.”

Correctional sergeants are also required to complete periodic training exercises

each year, many of which involve physical activity. Sergeant Young testified the training

exercises begin with “a warm-up period because of the physical requirements the class

. . . place[s] on a[n] individual later.” Young further testified many of the training

sessions involve “pairing off with a partner, taking turns being the aggressor versus the

officer . . . and practicing control holds, . . . physical control techniques, take-down

techniques, [and] both self-defense and offensive methods.” Young also testified that

during baton training sessions, sergeants “are required to go . . . against an inanimate

object full out for a long period of time,” which Young described as being “extremely

strenuous.”

Despite requirements to maintain good physical condition, the Department does

not provide officers with an opportunity to exercise or participate in a fitness regimen

during work hours; nor does the Department provide guidance as to the types of exercises

or activities considered appropriate for maintaining the requisite level of fitness. As

such, Sergeant Young maintains his physical fitness through his own fitness regimen at

home when off duty. Young’s fitness regimen involves doing warm-up calisthenics,

Page 50

4

including jumping jacks, before engaging in more rigorous exercises on his elliptical

machine or on his multistation weight machine.3

On January 9, 2012, Sergeant Young was doing his usual warm-up calisthenics,

specifically jumping jacks, in anticipation of more demanding exercises with his elliptical

and weight machines. During one of the jumping jacks, Young came down and felt

“extreme stabbing pain in [his] left knee.” Young reported this injury as work-related

“because the injury took place specifically because [he] was exercising in order to

maintain [him]self in a physical condition required by [the] [D]epartment.”

Sergeant Young testified he believes jumping jacks have helped him manage his

weight since reaching middle age and have helped improve his cardiovascular health.

Young testified he has “serious questions as to whether or not [he] would have been

healthy enough” to perform his duties without his exercise regimen. Young also testified

he believed the Department expected him to maintain good physical condition and he

believed he could be terminated if he was not capable of performing his job duties.

Young further testified he has reminded the correctional officers he supervises “they need

to remain in [good] physical condition in order to do their job.”

The workers’ compensation judge (WCJ) concluded that Sergeant Young’s injury

was compensable under section 3600(a)(9), finding, under the applicable legal test, that

Young had a subjective belief the Department expected him to engage in a physical

fitness regimen, and that such a belief was objectively reasonable. The WCAB disagreed

that such a belief was objectively reasonable under a mere “general requirement” to

maintain fitness, and annulled the WCJ’s decision. We issued a writ of review to review

the WCAB’s decision.

3 Sergeant Young added that he and his wife, who is a correctional deputy, “love to walk

when [they] can and consider that . . . part of [their] workout.”

Page 51

5

DISCUSSION

Sergeant Young’s Injury Is Compensable Under Section 3600(a)(9)

A. Issue on Writ Review

Section 3600 “provides generally that an injury is covered by workers’

compensation benefits when, at the time of the injury, ‘the employee is performing

service growing out of and incidental to his or her employment and is acting within the

course of his or her employment’ and ‘the injury is proximately caused by the

employment . . . .’ ” (City of Stockton v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2006)

135 Cal.App.4th 1513, 1519 (City of Stockton).) Section 3600(a)(9) specifically explains

that an injury that arises out of “ ‘voluntary participation in any off-duty recreational,

social, or athletic activity not constituting part of the employee’s work-related duties’ ” is

not compensable, “ ‘except where these activities are a reasonable expectancy of, or are

expressly or impliedly required by, the employment.’ ” (City of Stockton, at p. 1520.)

In Ezzy v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (1983) 146 Cal.App.3d 252 (Ezzy), the

Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Division Two, concluded that what is now

section 3600(a)(9) was added to the workers’ compensation statutory scheme “ ‘to draw a

brighter line delimiting compensability by replacing the [previous] general foreseeability

test with one of “reasonable expectancy” of employment’ [citation], a test that is met

when [(1)] the employee subjectively believes his or her participation in the [injury-

producing] activity is expected by the employer, and [(2)] the belief is objectively

reasonable.” (City of Stockton, supra, 135 Cal.App.4th at p. 1520, [delineating the Ezzy

test].)

Under this two-pronged Ezzy test, the issue of subjective belief is a question of

fact, which we review under the substantial evidence rule; and the issue of objective

reasonableness is a question of law, which we determine independently. (City of

Stockton, supra, 135 Cal.App.4th at p. 1524.)

Page 52

6

The issue in this writ review proceeding is whether the second prong of the Ezzy

test—i.e., whether the employee’s belief is objectively reasonable—is met here.4

B. Section 3600(a)(9) as Applied to Law Enforcement Officers

There have been a number of cases applying section 3600(a)(9) (or its

predecessor), which have found injuries—sustained by law enforcement officers while

engaging in athletic activities—to be compensable under workers’ compensation; they

include the following three cases:

(1) Wilson, supra, 196 Cal.App.3d 902, where the Court of Appeal, Fifth

Appellate District, found compensable an ankle injury sustained by a police officer while

running off duty at a school track. (Id. at pp. 904, 909.) As a member of the police

department’s special emergency response team (SERT), the officer had to pass physical

tests four times a year to remain on the team. (Id. at p. 904.) The tests included a

requirement that officers over the age of 35, as was the officer in Wilson, must be able to

run two miles in 17 minutes. (Ibid.) SERT officers were told by supervisors that they

would have to exercise off duty to pass the tests. (Id. at p. 906.) The Wilson court found

the injury compensable because “[i]t would be completely unrealistic to conclude that

off-duty running was not expected of [a] [SERT] member over 35 years of age who

4 Both parties’ briefs mention the first prong of the Ezzy test—subjective belief—only in

passing; these briefs focus on the Ezzy test’s second prong of objective reasonableness.

The WCJ found that Sergeant Young met the first prong through his testimony; and the

WCAB did not address this prong directly, merely noting that the first prong has been

labeled a “lax standard” (quoting Wilson v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (1987)

196 Cal.App.3d 902, 906 (Wilson)) and that most cases are decided on the second prong

of the Ezzy test. To the extent the first prong is raised as an issue, Sergeant Young’s

testimony, detailed in the Factual and Procedural Background of this opinion, is more

than sufficient to satisfy that prong. (See Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Workers’

Comp. Appeals Bd. (1986) 187 Cal.App.3d 922, 932 [an employee satisfies the subjective

prong of Ezzy by testifying he or she felt that participation in the activity was mandated

by the employment relationship].)

Page 53

7

wanted to pass the [department’s] test of running [two] miles in 17 minutes or less.” (Id.

at p. 908.)

(2) Kidwell v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1130

(Kidwell), where the Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Division Five, found

compensable an injury sustained by a California Highway Patrol (CHP) officer while she

was practicing a standing long jump at home. (Id. at p. 1139.) The standing long jump

was part of the CHP’s annual, mandatory fitness test. (Id. at p. 1132.) In previous years,

the CHP officer in Kidwell had passed the fitness tests except for the standing long jump.

(Id. at pp. 1132-1133.) This deficiency resulted in the loss of $130 per month in salary,

loss of eligibility for certain assignments and overtime, issuance of a “fitness plan,” and

an entry in her performance evaluation. (Id. at p. 1133.) Under the circumstances, the

Kidwell court concluded that it would be “patently unreasonable” to find the CHP did not

expect the officer to practice for the standing long jump test at her home. (Id. at p. 1139.)

And (3) Tomlin v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2008) 162 Cal.App.4th 1423

(Tomlin), in which the officer, who sustained an injury while running on vacation, was a

member of the police department’s SWAT (special weapons and tactics) unit. (Id. at

pp. 1425-1426.) As a SWAT member, the officer was required to pass a fitness test to

qualify for the unit initially, and was required to pass supplemental fitness tests each year.

(Id. at pp. 1425, 1430.) The Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Five,

found the injury compensable under section 3600(a)(9), because the SWAT officer was

injured while training for “an imminent, mandatory, physical fitness test to be

administered by his employer.” (Tomlin, at p. 1430.) As such, the court found that the

training activities were a reasonable expectancy of employment even though the officer

was on vacation. (Id. at p. 1431.)

Page 54

8

There have also been cases applying section 3600(a)(9) (or its predecessor), which

have found injuries—sustained by law enforcement officers while engaging in athletic

activities—not to be compensable under workers’ compensation; they include:

(1) Taylor v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (1988) 199 Cal.App.3d 211 (Taylor),

where a police officer was injured at a city-owned gymnasium while playing in a pickup

game of basketball during his lunch break. (Id. at p. 213.) The police department

expected officers to keep in good physical condition; however, the department provided

no formal fitness training sessions or guidelines, and there were no formal physical

fitness tests. (Id. at pp. 213-214.) The police department also issued a general order,

which included a provision that workers’ compensation benefits would not be awarded

for athletic injuries unless approval for an athletic event or exercise had been obtained in

advance. (Id. at p. 214.) The Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Division Two,

found the injury not compensable, as participation in the pickup game was voluntary and

it was not reasonably expected or required by the officer’s employment. (Id. at p. 215.)

The court added that it is reasonable to permit an employer to limit its liability for athletic

injuries, as had the department, because “[t]o hold otherwise would in effect render the

employer potentially liable for any injury sustained in any recreational or athletic activity

if the activity contributed to the employee’s physical fitness. Such broad potential

liability would be contrary to the legislative intent of section 3600, subdivision (a)(9).”

(Id. at p. 216.)

And (2) City of Stockton, supra, 135 Cal.App.4th 1513, where this court found an

officer’s injury, sustained while playing in an off-duty pickup basketball game, was not

compensable. Although the officer’s employment application stated an officer must be

fit, and he believed officers should be in shape, the officer knew he was not subject to

any kind of fitness testing and he was not aware of any officer being disciplined for not

being fit. (Id. at p. 1525.) Additionally, the officer did not incorporate pickup games of

Page 55

9

basketball into a training regimen and he testified he would have been in shape regardless

of the occasional pickup game of basketball. (Id. at pp. 1525-1526.) When considering

the objective reasonableness prong of the Ezzy test, we noted the pickup game of

basketball had no connection whatsoever to the employer and the employer did not

subject its officers to any form of physical fitness testing, nor any type of testing

requiring the type of skills used in playing basketball. (Id. at p. 1526.)

C. Section 3600(a)(9) as Applied to this Case

Turning to the facts of this case, we find the second prong of the Ezzy test is

satisfied because Sergeant Young’s belief—that the Department expected him to engage

in warm-up calisthenics as part of an off-duty exercise regimen—was objectively

reasonable as a matter of law.

The legal standards that must be met to find a belief objectively reasonable are as

follows. The focus is “on the specific activity in which the employee was involved when

the injury occurred.” (City of Stockton, supra, 135 Cal.App.4th at p. 1524.) There must

be a “substantial nexus between an employer’s expectations or requirements and the

specific off-duty activity in which the employee was engaged[; otherwise] the scope of

coverage becomes virtually limitless and contrary to the legislative intent of [section

3600](a)(9).” (Id. at p. 1524, italics added.) The decisions that have found workers’

compensation coverage under section 3600(a)(9) have generally found “the employer

expected the employee to participate in the specific activity in which the employee was

engaged at the time of injury” and have found “specific conduct by the employer with

respect to the activity at issue.” (City of Stockton, at pp. 1524-1525.)

The Department principally argues that Sergeant Young’s “subjective belief that

engaging in jumping jacks as part of his home exercise program was required by [the

Department] is not objectively reasonable because it was based [merely] on a general

obligation to maintain good physical fitness.” (Italics added.) We disagree.

Page 56

10

We start with Departmental Order 3004, which states, “Physical fitness for duty:

Members shall maintain themselves in good physical condition so that they can handle

the strenuous physical contacts often required of a law enforcement officer.” And we

couple that order with the class specification bulletin for correctional sergeants, which

reiterates, “Work occasionally involves personal danger, and exposure to hazardous,

uncontrollable and life-threatening situations . . . . This position may require walking,

running, lifting and climbing during efforts to catch or subdue hostile individuals.

[¶] . . . [¶] Required to physically restrain persons.” As noted, both of these directives

apply to correctional sergeants.

Although these departmental directives required correctional sergeants to maintain

good physical condition and a certain physical ability, the Department does not provide

correctional sergeants with an opportunity to exercise or maintain a fitness regimen

during work hours; nor does the Department provide guidance as to the types of exercises

or activities considered appropriate for maintaining the requisite level of fitness.

Accordingly, it is objectively reasonable for Sergeant Young to believe that the

Department expected him to engage in an off-duty exercise regimen to maintain his

physical fitness.

Furthermore, given Departmental Order 3004’s requirement that correctional

sergeants maintain good physical condition, it is also objectively reasonable to believe

the Department would have expected the specific activity of warm-up calisthenics as part

of a sergeant’s exercise regimen, particularly for a 64-year-old officer such as Sergeant

Young. And jumping jacks are one of the most common such calisthenics. Young

testified he believes jumping jacks helped improve his cardiovascular health and he had

“serious questions as to whether or not [he] would have been healthy enough” to perform

his duties without his exercise regimen. If the fitness requirement in Departmental Order

3004 means anything, it surely must encompass the specific activity at issue here: a

Page 57

11

traditional, low-risk, widely performed warm-up calisthenic. Consequently, there is a

substantial nexus between the Department’s requirement that its correctional sergeants

maintain good physical condition and Sergeant Young’s specific off-duty activity of

warm-up calisthenics, which included jumping jacks.

In Wilson, the Court of Appeal, Fifth Appellate District, found it “completely

unrealistic” to conclude that off-duty running was not expected of SERT officers over 35

years of age who wanted to meet the SERT-membership requirement of a 17-minute two-

mile run. (Wilson, supra, 196 Cal.App.3d at p. 908.) Similarly, here, it would be

“completely unrealistic” to conclude that warm-up calisthenics, of which jumping jacks

are one of the most common, were not expected of middle-aged correctional sergeants

who were required to maintain good physical condition so they could handle strenuous

physical contact.

Although this case does not involve preparation for an employer-required specific

fitness test (see Kidwell, supra, 33 Cal.App.4th at p. 1139) or an employer-required

specific level of fitness for special units (see Wilson, supra, 196 Cal.App.3d at pp. 907-

908; Tomlin, supra, 162 Cal.App.4th at p. 1429), the Department does require

correctional sergeants to undergo periodic training exercises, which often involve

physical activity that can be “extremely strenuous.” Sergeant Young testified these

training exercises begin with “a warm-up period because of the physical requirements the

class . . . place[s] on an individual later.” For example, during the baton training

exercise, correctional sergeants are required to go “full out for a long period of time”

against an inanimate object. And, interestingly, the periodic training exercises begin with

a warm-up period, further supporting a conclusion that the Department expected warm-up

exercises as part of an exercise regimen. The whole purpose of doing warm-up

calisthenics is to prevent injury when more rigorous exercises are undertaken.

Page 58

12

Finally, unlike the officer in Kidwell, who was training specifically for the

standing long jump (33 Cal.App.4th at p. 1139), it would be impracticable for

correctional sergeants to tailor an exercise regimen for the purpose of passing the

periodic training exercises given the wide variety of those exercises. Indeed, Sergeant

Young has completed required training exercises involving physical activity, such as:

Taser update, cell extraction, restraint chair, baton use, arrest and control techniques,

grappling, control holds, and joint locks. Accordingly, it would be reasonable for

correctional sergeants to believe the Department expected them at least to maintain

sufficient cardiovascular health to pass the training exercises.

To allay any concerns law enforcement departments may have about potentially

increased liability as a result of this decision, we note that departments have the ability to

limit the scope of potential liability by designating and/or preapproving athletic activities

or fitness regimens as the police department did in Taylor. (See Taylor, supra,

199 Cal.App.3d at p. 216.)

DISPOSITION

Sergeant Young’s injury is compensable under section 3600(a)(9)’s exception for

coverage. Accordingly, the WCAB’s decision is annulled and the matter is remanded to

the WCAB for proceedings consistent with this opinion. Sergeant Young is awarded his

costs in the proceeding before this court. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.936.)

(CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION)

BUTZ , J.

We concur:

NICHOLSON , Acting P. J.

HULL , J.

Page 59

 

Force Scie

Chuck Editor

www.forc

nce&reg Ne

Remsbergr-in-Chief

cescience.or

ews

rg

J

July 7, 2014

Page 60

For information on our two-day Force Science Training class and for pricing to bring the program directly to your agency, please e-mail training@forcescience.org

In this issue:

I. 7 pointers to help you ace a civil lawsuit deposition II. Our readers write: Views differ on high-risk vehicle stops

I. 7 pointers to help you ace a civil lawsuit deposition

The two biggest mistakes officers make in approaching depositions in civil lawsuits are:

1. Equating the experience with the familiar process of testifying as a prosecution witness in a criminal case, and

2. Deciding to "wing it" instead of taking the time and effort to understand and prepare for the "unfamiliar and decidedly hostile" arcane world of pre-trial testimony as a defendant accused of wrongdoing.

In his latest book, Preparing for Your Civil Deposition: A Guide for the Law Enforcement Professional, veteran trainer and legal consultant George T. Williams offers a practical, point-by-point template for avoiding these pitfalls and prevailing against "litigators who are experts in the business of winning police misconduct cases and separating agencies from their budgets."

Williams' trenchant advice, tightly packed into scarcely more than 100 utilitarian but easy-to-read pages, is drawn from his two decades of defending cops as an expert witness, from his scrutiny of hundreds of officers' real-life depositions, and from input from "the best civil defense attorneys in the business."

Too often, Williams believes, officers mistakenly focus on the testimony they'll give at trial in a civil suit and underestimate or ignore the importance of what they say at a pre-trial deposition, which likely is their first chance under oath to relate in detail their version of what happened in the encounter at issue.

"Without exception," Williams writes, officers who comprehend and master the pivotal deposition environment "tend to do well" facing even the wiliest adversaries--and may even prevent a case from advancing to trial. But those who fail to ready themselves properly may "literally lose what was a winnable case for themselves and their agencies by giving terrible deposition testimony."

Here are 7 keys to winning deposition warfare, distilled from Williams' insightful book. The elaboration he gives on these and much more in the text itself will help you meet the challenge of providing an accurate, comprehensive, and persuasive account of your actions when you do the right thing on the street--and are rewarded by being sued.

Page 61

1. Understand your adversary's motives. By winning a suit in federal court, plaintiffs' lawyers stand to gain "reasonable attorney fees" that may "range up to six figures," exceeding even the damages awarded to their clients. This may represent "three to six months of pay for them," Williams explains.

With that at stake, "the amount of time and the intensity of [their] preparation will be unlike anything you have experienced in your previous criminal testimony.... [They] will typically have a mastery of every detail...and challenge you on every action and decision for its legal and tactical validity.... They are hungry," and at deposition they are sizing you up as prey.

2. Know the plaintiff's theories. Absorb all the details of the Complaint for Damages that lays out the plaintiff's version of what happened and the allegations against you. This "fact pattern" will likely differ greatly from your memory and the facts included in your initial report, Williams points out. But this is the story the plaintiff's attorney intends to sell to a judge and jury, and your deposition will help him lock in his courtroom strategy.

"Pay attention to the themes" of the plaintiff's case, Williams advises. A primary goal "is to make you appear incompetent and ill-trained." But if you "know how your attacker will engage you,...it is [easier] to build a defense against that assault."

3. Refresh your "core job knowledge." No matter how many years you've been on the street, you need to thoroughly "review and relearn the basics" of your job before your deposition, Williams says. Be able to articulate with "conversational familiarity" the essence of all policies pertinent to your incident, the key case law that's relevant, and how your actions comported with them. Document your training and be prepared to describe the workings of enforcement tools you may have used, including the TASER, for example. (Williams lists a dozen technical/tactical questions about CEWs that plaintiff's lawyers often ask--and that cops being deposed often "flunk.")

In the eyes of civilians who will ultimately judge you, Williams warns, "failure to confidently articulate [the] fundamental core knowledge of your profession" in words they can understand "will taint their opinion of your actions and decision-making...and may fundamentally affect their verdict."

4. Keep context in the foreground. Every question the plaintiff's attorney asks you is intended to help him confirm his theory of your alleged misconduct, Williams says. Your job is to "keep the context [of your actions] in the foreground of your answers." That is, use his questions as opportunities to fully explain "all of the factors you relied upon in making your decisions and responding to the threat or resistance of the suspect."

Those who will ultimately judge your behavior are required to consider the circumstances in which you were acting. You need to put them "into your shoes at the time you were involved in the event" so they can comprehend the reasonableness of your perceptions and responses. Without that context, Williams says, "they will arrive at someone else's

Page 62

version of the facts and that will not be good for your case."

5. Beware attorney traps. Mind games by the plaintiff's attorney to get you rattled, off-balance, emotionally unsettled, or impulsively angry are notorious in depositions. However friendly the lawyer may seem initially, it's a guise to lull you into complacency. Stay alert, Williams cautions. "He is not your friend."

Williams describes a laundry list of common ploys, including incomplete hypothetical scenarios, vague or confusing questions, misstated quotations, intimidating threats or innuendoes, false sympathy, deliberate rudeness, non-sequential questioning, frequent interruptions or "corrections"--all designed to weaken your testimony to his advantage.

Recognizing red flags will help you keep the integrity of your testimony intact. One countermeasure Williams recommends: frequent breaks, to disrupt your adversary's momentum and maintain your professional composure.

6. Monitor other depositions. As a defendant, you have the right to sit in on any of proceedings of your case. If the depositions of other officers, witnesses, or plaintiffs in the case are scheduled ahead of yours, take advantage of this valuable intelligence opportunity and be there, Williams advises.

"Hearing many of the questions that you will likely be asked is a great advantage," he writes. "You will be able to identify what subjects you may need to research" more thoroughly, "you'll be able to mentally rehearse your answers to provide the clearest testimony possible," and you'll get an in-action preview of the plaintiff's attorney's style, so that any attempted ambush by him when you're in the hot seat is less likely to catch you off-guard.

10. Believe you can win. Prepare, prepare, prepare is Williams' mantra for winning in the deposition arena. Properly prepping with your attorney before a deposition may itself take 30-50 hours, he says, plus the groundwork you do on your own. But if you put in the "sweat equity" to become an articulate student of the case, "you will almost assuredly limit the time and number of questions you will be subjected to," Williams predicts, because adversary attorneys quickly move off topics that don't reveal weaknesses they can capitalize on.

"The truth is," he writes, "lawsuits have been won in deposition because a squared away, competent, and prepared officer was able to convince opposing counsel that there was no money in the case."

Although plaintiffs' attorneys "are often built up in the minds of officers as dreaded, all-powerful creatures," Williams notes, the truth is that they "are not god-like." Provided that you acted reasonably toward the plaintiff, that you can clearly articulate your perceptions of the event in question, and that you are prepared to maneuver defensively through the unique world of civil litigation, "[e]ach and every one of them is beatable."

Page 63

Among the numerous other building-blocks for success that Williams explores in Preparing for Your Civil Deposition is this recommendation: Make sure your attorney is "up to date on the science of human factors and performance limitations." That includes understanding how your ability to "perceive, interpret, and react to threats" is affected in "dynamic, time-compressed, highly adrenalized" circumstances.

As a human being inside a uniform, "what you realistically can, and more importantly, cannot do" when under a life threat can be "a major factor in the reasonableness of your actions" and in your ability to remember important details afterward. He cites the Force Science Institute as currently "the best source of information about police-specific human factors."

George Williams, Director of Training for Cutting Edge Training LLC in Bellingham, WA, can be reached at: gtwilliams@cuttingedgetraining.org. Preparing for Your Civil Deposition: A Guide for the Law Enforcement Professional is available through Amazon.com.

Our thanks to Atty. Jeff Martin, a retired sergeant with San Jose (CA) PD and a graduate of the certification course in Force Science Analysis, for bringing this book to our attention.

II. Our readers write: Views differ on high-risk vehicle stops

Force Science News #257 [6/6/14] included an exchange about preferred tactics for a high-risk vehicle stop, considering how reaction time is affected by whether suspects are commanded to walk forward or backward toward the point of arrest. The discussion sparked strong reactions from some readers. See below for representative responses, edited in some cases for clarity and brevity:

Lifting the shirt cuts risk Do you not have all suspects lift their shirt and spin around to show a weapon or lack of one? Once the waistband area (what we call the 90%) is clear, the chances of a gun coming from there are slim. If you are simply having them walk back without any type of check, I would reconsider your high-risk-stop training.

Sgt. Rich Monteton 13-year high-risk vehicle stop instructor Tempe (AZ) PD

Facing forward best in low light During low-light engagements, having the suspect face toward the officers, with hands held high and away from the body and with all available lights shining into the suspect's eyes, creates a greater advantage than having the suspect face away. All he sees is an intense white light surrounded by a dark abyss.

If the suspect faces away, he can still see potential cover, escape routes, weapons,

Page 64

flanking officers' positions, and other tangibles that may allow him to formulate "last resort" strategies.

Sgt. Daniel Danaher Instructor, Tactical Encounters, Inc. Livonia, Michigan

Advantages of walking forward There are advantages to having the suspect walk back facing the officers. An officer will be watching the suspect's face and eyes (as well as hands) as part of the overall picture. The eyes will often give away any action the suspect intends to make, such as looking for escape routes or scanning equipment, etc.

Also there is the psychological effect of having the suspect(s) see exactly what they are facing, knowing that any aggressive movement toward a weapon will be met with a measured response from the officers.

Sgt. Todd Leatherdale RCMP, Operational Readiness Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

Walking backward only complicates a stressful situation I contend that having the occupants face the officers is overall a better method.

In my experience, a suspect who emerges on command, then follows whatever specific directions to reveal the waistband, has effectively indicated a psychological surrender. In 24+ years, I have had exactly zero persons who demonstrated compliance to all commands later manifest dangerous resistance. Those who are going to fight, come out fighting. Those who are going to flee, come out running. Those who accept that their day is done, come out and do as they are told.

What I have seen with the walking-backward approach is a protracted exchange of directions including multiple "two steps to your left" and "back to the right" and "back up, a little more, a little more." Compliance has to be viewed as a fleeting moment that can be withdrawn at the suspect's will. Directional confusion delays the arrest process and affords the suspect a chance to re-evaluate a decision to comply and scan the area for flight paths. It just amplifies an already stressful situation.

Assuming the "face away" method, the suspect is typically ordered into a position of disadvantage for handcuffing. If that position is prone, as it is typically trained, when they bend and reach for the ground it is impossible to tell from behind if they are actually reaching for the ground--or for their waist. They could index and draw a weapon while their hands are concealed by their own body and your first indication of their intent will likely be their first shot.

To the contrary, a suspect with hands high and a handheld light shining on their face can

Page 65

walk forward normally and efficiently to a specific point. I advocate picking a spot on the ground or creating one with a flashlight, then directing the suspect to walk slowly to it and put his belly button on it. The suspect will be in position on the ground in likely half the time compared to walking them backward. That means a lot when there are more suspects in the car making their own decisions about compliance.

Lt. James Fairfield Tallahassee (FL) PD

Walking forward brings faster response to threat I have yet to see a bad guy role-player successfully draw and fire before they are thoroughly dealt with while walking forward toward the officers.

When a suspect walks backward, I believe most officers will not fire until the offender has fully faced them, causing a tremendous amount of lag time. If officers in training will not fire a marking cartridge until they can clearly see a gun in the hand of a turning attacker, what makes anyone think they will fire a live round?

Sgt. Matt Wasko Training Academy Hays County (TX) SO

NOTE: If you'd like to forward this message to a friend, please click here

Page 66

Visit www.forcescience.org for more information

(c) 2014: Force Science Institute, www.forcescience.org. Reprints allowed by request. For reprint clearance, please e-mail: editor@forcescience.org.

To unsubscribe from these mailings, please send your request to editor@forcescience.organd you will be removed promptly.

 

Page 67