Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Indemnification Rewrite topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council pulls proposed overhaul of city defense and indemnification law after widespread public concerns
Summary
The City Council pulled an ordinance that would rewrite Chapter 9’s indemnification and defense rules after residents and board members said the draft was unclear and provided insufficient notice.
The Saratoga Springs City Council on Tuesday withdrew consideration of a proposed amendment to Chapter 9 of the city code — a rewrite of the city’s defense and indemnification provisions — after multiple public commenters and some commissioners raised concerns about notice, scope and council discretion.
The ordinance would have expanded the city’s authority to provide defense and indemnification for officers, employees and certain volunteers. City Attorney Tony Izzo explained the proposal is intended to “provide the widest possible scope of defense and indemnification for our city's officers and employees acting within the scope of their public employment.” He also said land-use board members have historically been treated as employees for the purpose of coverage and that insurance normally covers these matters.
Public commenters urged the council to delay any vote. Gordon Boyd of 99 State Street said the public and affected volunteers had received “very short and lack of notice” — the draft, he said, was posted only days earlier — and warned that the ordinance, as written, would make indemnification discretionary and subject to council review. “The proposal undermines collective bargaining,” Boyd said, adding the public cannot tell from the posted version what text would be inserted or removed because redline language was not shown.
A volunteer member of a land-use board, Otis Maxwell, said he objected to a requirement that council approval be necessary before a member could obtain representation, arguing that council politics could unfairly limit access to counsel and prompt resignations.
Several commissioners and the city attorney described the proposed law as consistent with earlier city practice and with parts of New York state indemnification practice, but acknowledged the draft needed clarification. Mayor Safford announced he would pull the proposal from Tuesday’s agenda so the city can solicit additional input and revise the language.
No formal vote on the ordinance was taken Tuesday; the mayor said the item will be revised and returned after additional stakeholder comment.
