Committee adopts changes to extend governmental-immunity protections to outside municipal counsel; second substitute approved and favored to House

Representative Kristofferson presented House Bill 364, governmental immunity amendments, saying the bill defines "outside legal counsel" and grants those attorneys immunity comparable to in-house city attorneys while they are representing a municipality.

Sherilyn Egnor, a former city attorney who testified as a witness, described litigation where she and her firm were named personally while the city benefited from notice-of-claim protections and other defenses. "Had I been in-house counsel with American Fork at the time, I would have had that same governmental immunity," she said, describing the increased exposure and malpractice-insurance consequences her firm faced.

Egnor and Jared Tingey of the League of Cities and Towns both told the committee the change would help smaller municipalities obtain legal representation without pricing themselves out of the market by forcing counsel to carry extraordinary liability coverage. Committee members asked about alternatives such as hiring part-time employees or narrowing statutory duties; witnesses said hiring as part-time employees could burden municipalities with benefits costs and that other statutory fixes might be possible but the proposed approach was intended as a pragmatic option.

Representative Thompson moved to adopt the second substitute; the committee adopted the second substitute by voice vote. Later the committee voted by roll call to favorably recommend the second substitute to the House floor; roll call recorded the measure passing 9 to 1 with Chair Abbott recorded as the lone no vote.

Ending: Supporters said the bill aims to keep smaller municipalities affordable legal representation by reducing the liability barrier for contract counsel; opponents raised constitutional concerns about broadening governmental immunity and suggested alternate approaches could be examined.