Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Claims topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Adams County board denies $16,996.97 insurance subrogation claim over airport hangar damage
Summary
The board voted to deny a subrogation claim from State Farm seeking reimbursement for $16,996.97 paid to a hangar renter who alleged county equipment caused damage; county insurance found the claim not covered and supervisors said record information was insufficient.
Get email alerts on the Legal Claims topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Adams County supervisors voted to deny a $16,996.97 subrogation claim from State Farm after receiving briefings from corporation counsel and other supervisors.
Corp Counsel told the board that a hangar renter’s insurer, State Farm, had paid the renter $16,996.97 and is seeking reimbursement from the county, but counsel said he did not know how the insurer concluded that county equipment caused the damage. “I don’t know how they determined that it was our mower that hit the hanger,” Corp Counsel said.
Supervisor Jerry questioned the estimate for repairs, noting recent steel prices and arguing the replacement cost appeared excessive. “I can tell you what steel is selling for is $3.70 a lineal foot… So if those are 12 foot sheets, you’re looking at less than $50 a sheet,” Supervisor Jerry said, adding he did not understand where the dollar figure came from.
Corp Counsel said the county’s insurer had reviewed the submission and concluded the damage would not be covered by the county policy; he added the insurer commonly pursues subrogation when it believes another party is liable. After discussion, a motion to deny the claim was made and seconded by Supervisor Poehler. The board approved the motion by voice vote; the transcript records the motion passing but does not list a roll-call tally.
Why it matters: Denying the subrogation request closes this specific reimbursement demand but could lead to further action by the claimant or insurer. Supervisors expressed concern about the factual basis for the claim and its asserted cost.
Corp Counsel offered to obtain additional information if the board wanted further investigation; the board proceeded with denial at this meeting.

