Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Vendor Insurance Events topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council asks staff to return with options on insurance requirements for vendors at city events
Summary
After raising concerns that current insurance wording and requirements limit small vendors, council asked staff to propose a practical, lower‑cost approach — including event‑level blanket or low‑cost short‑term policies — and to return with revisions to the city’s rules and procedural options.
LAREDO — Councilors asked city staff on Monday to bring back an updated plan for insurance requirements for private vendors that use city property for events, after vendors and some council members said the current insurance rules can be a barrier to small businesses.
City risk and human resources staff described the city’s standard insurance requirements for private contractors and vendors: commercial general liability (staff suggested $1 million per occurrence / $2 million aggregate as typical), commercial auto liability when a motor vehicle is involved, and workers’ compensation where employers have employees. Risk manager Carla Robles and Human Resources Director Linda DeNietta told the council the city’s municipal insurer (TML) generally does not cover third‑party commercial exposures and that vendors’ own insurance is the usual control.
Council members said the city should make it easier for small, low‑risk vendors — a family‑run food stand or small artisan seller — to participate in events. Staff described a short‑term commercial policy product (sometimes called a single‑event or “TULIP”/GatherGuard policy) that vendors can buy for a one‑day event at a substantially lower price than a full annual commercial policy; staff said pricing varies by risk class and event size and could range from tens to several hundred dollars depending on the coverage class and event length.
Council direction and next steps: after discussion the council unanimously approved a motion directing staff to return with a recommendation that (a) clarifies the ordinance language about required insurance types and limits, (b) evaluates options for short‑term vendor coverage (single‑event policies) or an event‑level blanket policy where the city obtains one policy that covers all approved vendors for a specific city event, (c) identifies legal language for hold‑harmless and indemnity agreements, and (d) proposes a practical fee or subsidy structure to reduce barriers for small or startup vendors. Staff said they would consult TML and other municipal examples and return with an ordinance/update and costed options for council consideration.
What was not decided: the council did not change current insurance requirements at the meeting; instead it asked staff to produce alternatives and a recommended path forward. Staff and councilors noted the need to balance protecting city assets and taxpayers with supporting local small businesses.
