hi welcome to the foxborough board of selectmen special meeting on june 27th tonight's meetings was asked for by the kraft group to try and work out some insurance situations between the town and them i'd like to welcome the attorneys in the kraft group to come up to the table in front of us please okay just for the record when we start we can get on the line for the record your names please thanks mark i'm dick gelerman town counsel cindy meyer town counsel john davis from pierce davis perritano jim cobery general counsel of the kraft group ian murphy the kraft group and dick would you like to start yeah thank you so when when we met with you just two nights ago just to reiterate the issue the issue is that the current insurer for the town for law enforcement the law enforcement policy has advised the town that as of july 1st the deductible for events that occur under the law enforcement policy is going to go to fifty thousand because of that increase which the board has told me they found unacceptable we're trying to find solutions to that problem and we've been working with the kraft organization on that what's happened since tuesday with regard to meyer is we spoke i spoke with them on yesterday on wednesday and asked them to a couple of things would they agree to postpone the increase in the deductible from seven thousand five hundred to fifty thousand would they agree to postpone that until we had the opportunity to resolve these insurance issues with the stadium they declined to do that i asked them if they i asked em if asked em if they would consider imposing the fifty thousand deductible only for concerts as opposed to soccer events on the theory that soccer is relatively benign in terms of crowd behavior they declined to do that and then with with john davis help we asked them whether they would consider a prorated premium change to effectively get them to the same place the proration thinking being that we get this resolved relatively quickly and therefore the cost the net cost to the town go down they declined to do that but the one bit of good news from meyer that came in a phone call copied by email today is that the fifty thousand deductible is applicable only to stadium events it's not applicable townwide so that's where we are today with mia attorney cobery and i have had more conversations with one another today and yesterday than either of us care for and i do want to say that he's worked very very very diligently to try to help the town resolve this issue he can tell you later but if i can steal the thunder they have been able to think they can get in place actually this new policy before the next event before july 6th and that's some kind of doing we've been told by both meyer and early in talking with jim that we were really looking at a thirty to sixty day timeline it looks like they've been able to manage that to go down to about ten days so here's where we are you don't have an event coming up until july 6th we're going to ask the board after all of the presentations to consider putting over your decision on conditions of the license until july 5th we're going to ask the board to approve to continue its approval of the licenses as long as you get in place by that date a law enforcement policy that provides the coverage to the town in the form acceptable to you with a deductible acceptable to you between now and then there's a lot more work to do and we've been working very hard on it cindy's been working both days drafting agreements drafting motions dealing with meyer as i have with jim cobery so we've all been doing a lot of work and we have made some progress we are not there yet we're we're further along but we're not there yet we have drafted and sent to jim sent a copy to the town manager also a possible agreement that we could work out that's going to depend the resolution of this is going to depend we first have to know what kind of a policy we can get what it's going to cost i do think i can represent that that cost we'll be able to work out the portion of the cost of the premium i'm not talking about the deductible now in a way that's reasonably reflective of what it would cost us on one side of the town and secondly what it would cost us because of the stadium i don't know the impacts of what the new deductible or what the deductible will be that jim's going to tell you about there are a lot of moving parts to it that he'll explain but i don't know the impact once we have in place a policy provided through the stadium's efforts i don't know the impact of what that would be on meyer except for certain that that fifty thousand deductible will go down to seventy five but we're not to think that the cost of the policy should also go down since they're no longer primary since they no longer would be providing primary coverage for the town for stadium events so the net effect costwise is hard to calculate at this point we will get there but we're just not there tonight so i guess i'll stop as that introduction at the end i will want to get back and talk to you about a motion that we've drafted and let me say i know we're all working hard but we're getting paid for it and here you are two nights out of three so thank you for that cindy you have anything to add no not at the moment no mark john no the only other thing that and this was i think dick alluded to this but when we realized that there was the issue of that letter that was accomplished the following morning and sent to mr cobery so that that could be accomplished and if they can play something within the next ten days that is a lot more that's a lot sooner than we were led to believe by other consultants we had spoken to in the past including meyer the other day when we spoke to joe callahan he thought thirty days was aggressive he thought it would take more like sixty days so if something can be placed in time for the first event of july the 6th that'd be great jim if you don't mind i'd like to set the context of what we're doing here and what is hopefully gonna happen over the next ten days the context very briefly is this all started with the weldnerdutton protective custody lawsuit with that lawsuit we realized that there were some gaps some areas that we could improve upon mutually improve upon our indemnification and the town's insurance program and we spent and when i say we dan john davis cindy dick and i started working on this back in december and spent a lot of time in december january february working out a new form of indemnification agreement which we were able to do and so by the end of february we came to an agreement about a new indemnification and i think that's a very reasonable document and i think it does protect all of us much better from situations like the weldnerdutton case when we finished that we turned our attention to the insurance protocol and what we could do to improve that and just so you know what we mean by improve that the current policy is a seven thousand five hundred per person deductible and with the weldnerdutton case what happens there is each person who is involved in that case in the event they prevail and i don't think they will prevail but in the event they prevail they're not likely to get more than seven thousand five hundred but there are a lot of them there are potentially thousands of plaintiffs in that case and so if it is certified as a class and you do get a thousand plus plaintiffs all establishing damages in the seven thousand five hundred range you have a very substantial liability there that's not covered by insurance that would be part of your existing deductible and think we all agree that there should be some room there to improve that coverage and so starting in early march we started really working pretty hard to figure out what we could do to improve that and the first step in the process was to find out if we could improve our insurance policy and so right now we provide you with additional insured coverage under our general liability policy and what that does plain and simple is if you are involved in any type of litigation or claim that is the result of our acts or omission or people that we control's acts or omission then you would presumably have coverage under our insurance policy what it doesn't do is cover you for acts and omissions that your employees or your agents people that we don't control would result in liability and so step number one was to find out if we could change our general liability insurance policy to extend the coverage to include your employees the police officers in this case and our insurance consultant a gentleman named mike norrick he went ahead and contacted our insurer and the insurer said no that they would not do it and so we reported that back and so and that obviously it was not acceptable so we started to check with other insurance companies and see if we could change insurers and get a better insurance policy and mike approached a number of insurance companies all of whom said basically the same thing they're not inclined to do that and the reason they're not inclined to do it is because they would be in a situation where they would be insuring some folks activities and we have no control over them and the lack of control was something that they really all of these insurance companies uniformly had difficulty with and so that information i came back to the group and we started talking about other ways of resolving this issue and so the next approach was for our insurance consultant to try to identify opportunities for a townpurchased law enforcement professional liability insurance policy or i'm sorry for us to purchase a law enforcement professional insurance liability covering the activities of the town police force and we're not able to do that same reason because we don't control them so we thought about could we get a separate policy that the town would purchase and we would pay for we're getting a little warmer with that one but quite frankly the insurance companies came back and said they'd prefer to have one policy covering the town as opposed to two policies if there are two policies one covering activities at gillette stadium and the other covering the rest of the town the insurers had a concern that there would be what's called the other insurance clause issue where the insurance companies effectively point at each other and each tries to suggest the other one should really be the primary insurer so long story but we eventually settled on the idea that we would try to find a better alternative to existing via insurance policy and then we would work out some arrangement to allocate the premium associated with that policy and our insurance consultant informally because we weren't authorized to do anything officially on your behalf but informally he went out and contacted insurance companies and he found three that are active in massachusetts who were willing to provide that coverage and they each had a slightly different variant you all are familiar with insurance and you know there's premiums and deductibles and selfinsurance and every flavor you can possibly imagine but we found three companies and they were willing to do something and it seemed like each of them offered something that could be interesting to us collectively so we spoke with dick gelerman and kevin pecos and the timeframe of this is roughly april timeframe and we basically said hey if you can give us a letter that authorizes our consultant mike norrick to review your loss data and also to talk officially with these insurance companies we will be able to get these informal discussions reduced to formal proposals which we can present to the town manager and whomever else and then collectively we can decide which insurance product we want to go forward with we did not receive that letter we asked for it a number of times including by email including in meetings you know we had a meeting at town hall in kevin pecos office in midmay where i emphasized to kevin that we were six weeks away from what i considered to be a deadline june 30th end of policy deadline and i really needed the letter to allow us to get the alternatives reduced to writing so we could resolve this issue i indicated to kevin at that time that six weeks was really a pretty short period of time for us to evaluate proposals first of all to obtain proposals then evaluate them and then buying the insurance policy so i was pretty emphatic that we really needed to get something pretty quickly and at that meeting kevin told me that he would that he understood the deadline understood how to get the authorization letter and i thought we were going to receive something very shortly thereafter we did not and i reminded him of that i reminded dick that i needed to get that letter i didn't get the letter until yesterday and i received the letter yesterday because dick and cindy and john really put a lot of effort into getting the letter for us and so yesterday was really the first time when we were able to have our insurance consultant go out there and touch the bases and really try to get what we had previously discussed sixty days ago into a more formal position he's working very very hard on it as all of us are working very hard on it originally this morning he told me that this was not even possible to do in less than thirty days told me i was being too demanding this was just completely nuts on my part to think that we could make it in time for the revolution game he worked very hard late today he sent me an email and i don't know all the details of it yet but he thinks that he will be able to get some proposals before the 4th of july and that we will be able to present them to you and hopefully get your approval so that we can have a policy bound before the revolution game but he i want to emphasize that it's unfortunate it came down to this last minute crisis it really is it's not because of the efforts of anyone sitting at this table that it came to this point i mean i think all of us were quite proactive and really mindful of the deadline and trying to make sure that it didn't become a crisis i think that all of us when it became a crisis really sprang into action and tried to deal with this as professionally as possible and to get this all resolved i wish this were not a crisis to be perfectly frank with all of you but i think that we are on the cusp of getting it resolved it's going to require a little bit of luck and a lot more hard work from this group and from mike norrick but i'm sincerely hopeful we can do that and that's really the background of what we're doing here ian you have anything to add nothing to add any questions from the board just so i can look at the schedule the revolution the event on the 6th is what that's the first revolution game yes that's the saturday 4th of july holiday it basically comes down to the 5th if we go in the direction of putting this off it's just a very very tight window just so you can start to think of that in discussing scenarios jenny anything at this time not right now lorraine just a couple of questions trying to understand the current insurance set up with the law enforcement policy that's currently part of our existing general liability coverage is that correct yeah it's out of our general town's miia policy yes it's a form to the mia contract yeah okay so we have a certain cost to that to the town right now correct including the law enforcement policy yes right so if we were to have that policy rewritten where that is no longer included i would assume there's some change in the overall cost to the town of that hump of yeah i think if it were removed entirely because you have substitute coverage i imagine there would be an adjustment in the premium or if it was kept intact but as sort of an excess law enforcement protection over and above alternative coverage i would again expect to be some sort of an adjustment to the preview okay so and i can't speak for mia that's just my right right so what i'm trying to figure out is a simple formula for calculating this because the impact certainly we've already made it clear that the fifty thousand deductible we can't do that so since we have to go this other route in terms of costs now for this new policy i'm thinking that the delta in our original policy without which covered us before we now have a new cost whatever the delta is subtract that from the new cost and i think that's one way of thinking about how to potentially address the cost impact lorraine if i could calculating the delta area is not as simple as taking fifty thousand and subtracting seven thousand five hundred no i'm talking about the policy cost not the deductibles okay but when you're trying to calc and i think you're absolutely right that's the question but how do you do the calculation you do need to look at the premium costs certainly you need to look at what's the new premium going to cost the town what's our portion of it what's the savings on the premium if meyer goes from primary to secondary primary to nothing those are relatively easy calculations to make the harder one for me at least and we've talked to the active town manager about trying to get some help on this is how do you calculate the costs to the town from going from a seven thousand five hundred per plaintiff per claim where we are now deductible to a fifty thousand per occurrence deductible they're different the potential impact is hugely different on the town how do you factor that in and that's one of the issues that we'll certainly have to look at between now and when we see you again on the 5th but that's an important distinction lorraine going from per claim to per occurrence is a big distinction for the town it does limit the overall cost whereas we don't have that kind of limit now i think though what i'm the point i'm trying to get at is that if there was not if there were not these stadium issues and you starting with the weldnerdutton case is really what brought all this to light that the town would never be faced with that fifty thousand deductible so no but we have been and we are faced with a seven thousand five hundred deductible per plaintiff right if it's determined to be a class action suit yeah well even if not in this case it's times four could easily without a class action get to be seven five seven thousand five hundred times a much bigger number than four which isn't the class and do the math you only have to it only has to be seven people and then we're ahead i think you understand where i'm coming from and just trying to keep the town whole in terms of we were assisting at a seven thousand five hundred deductible because of a certain policy that we had and now because of a changed situation yeah we're all aware now of the situation that existed for a long time unfortunately it never bothered us and yes which is why we're here and that's the solution that we're trying to solve it's a problem we're trying to solve in a way that keeps us whole absolutely if i may hold on one sec are you done just one other general comment i appreciate you laying out the timeline jim but i think i see how hard and hear how hard everyone is working right now and i think it's really not fair to throw kevin under the bus like this and not have him be present to explain why there was a delay i don't know the details of why there was a delay i do know that he has been absent for some time and so everyone at this table knew that he was absent for that time so i just would ask that we dismiss that if i may yes i started working on this issue with kevin in march well before anything happened with respect to kevin if at any point during that period of time he had simply delivered the authorization letter that i sought we would never have had this crisis i feel badly that kevin's not here i'm here this is actually my 15th anniversary my wife is furious that i'm here but i'm here and he's not and i'm here because i have respect for this process and i want to get this crisis resolved and it's undeniable that kevin could have issued this letter at an earlier point in time it's also undeniable that if he had we would have had this resolved a long time ago i just think it's unfortunate that no one on the board knew that if i may i'll get back to that good and you said multiple plaintiffs at seven thousand five hundred per deductible and it could be many more i think that's what i'm hearing out there if the town was at that kind of a liability risk and this just came about because of the duttonweldner case why would ever we want to proceed in the future even with that policy if there was going to be a chance that we could have a class action lawsuit down the road have a thousand people times seven thousand five hundred bucks to the point of seventy five million and the revenue stream that we receive per year at that at two years but when yeah i mean it would just and you know it's not smart business do you agree or disagree i think that's right one of the goals here ought to be to place a limit a cap on our exposure for any event that occurs up there which is our fault and maybe that's the good thing that'll come out of all this is that we'll have accomplished that but you don't have the exposure in every town you have it in so many towns that hold a big venue does mansfield have the same exposure with that venue they hold i mean do you have any well one of the differences mark is that we own the stadium and we own the police force now we don't we own the land under the stadium same as the fixture i guess so you know but that's the difference and you know jim i'll tell you an easy solution to the problem and i'm just repeating but you know don't own the police force have em do do their own policing of it i'm not suggesting that that's not a recommendation there's all kinds of ramifications from that but yeah but that is a solution but the followup though and i made the statement a long time ago i don't know if anybody remembers but the town is a liability because we own the land that's in the lease agreement why wouldn't we just change that and sell the land and get out from this whole situation i'm askin is there any reason why we wouldn't i would suggest that's an entirely different topic we've got a short window to get this thing resolved that question itself is i don't think we can begin to talk about that one more thing jim you kind of arranged that right you're throwing the town manager right now under the bus did you have any documentary any document to prove any of this or you just i mean i can't take it as hearsay i can't sit here and listen to hearsay if you've got something that can prove your point and if you're gonna make statements like that you need to prove em that's what i'm saying well i stand by my statements i will happily send you the emails that i have exchanged over the last three months i know that you were in a meeting with me when i spoke with kevin i know that selectman davelas was also in a meeting with me and i believe it was at that meeting where kevin told us that he would issue the letter that week and that he understood the deadline i mean we discussed what would happen in the crisis situation and what if anything we should be doing to protect the town from that crisis and it was six weeks ago which wasn't a lot of time and we talked about that but we did talk about it he did make commitments you were both there if i'm wrong please tell me because i'm not trying to throw him under the bus what i am trying to do though is let you know that this group has been working very very diligently this group has been very very focused on the potential crisis that could result if we miss a deadline i personally made kevin aware that we don't want to be in that situation we collectively don't want to be in a crisis situation we want to have this insurance issue resolved as early in the process as possible and we didn't we haven't we're sitting here today on the 27th of june in crisis mode and it didn't have to be that way but i will send dick gelerman the emails that i have and hopefully he'll provide them with you but i really do go back to that meeting we had in may that you were both at and we did talk about this issue and we did talk about what needed to be done and kevin did make commitments to all of us that he would do the authorization letter at a minimum if he had done it back then we would have had the proposals very very you know a week later ten days later we would have probably had this meeting in early june we would have decided upon a particular insurance course of action and we would never have the crisis that we have right now and that's not throwing someone under the bus but that is a statement of fact and it is about accountability tim you wanna yeah again caution the board and then i understand kevin's not here the meeting that we were at and please understand kevin is working from the time he's meeting with you on your issue he's also meeting with meyers he's meeting with the dealing with the weldnerdutton case and he's looking at the town as a whole so to jump out of that meeting and says that he's gonna do something without considering all the other facets that he's dealing with again if kevin's not here i just wish we get off this subject and focus on today is the 27th we've got an event on the 6th all this stuff i'm sure is gonna fall out one way or the other cause nobody wants to be in crisis mode but if we're gonna focus for the next hour on whose fault it was this is a little bit of uncharted territory we've got class action suit we've got a stadium with events coming up and if we don't start working together and stop pointing the fingers especially when a 3rd party is not here we're gonna be spinning a lot of wheels right now so if we want to get this thing resolved for an event next saturday let's talk about what our options are now we've spoken about you know individual claims versus claims in aggregate if there's different options out there and if we can get maybe the good news about that it's crisis mode is people work extra diligently because there's a deadline in a couple of days versus a couple months we've got to work together on this starting tonight and if we don't i mean basically we have one day it was the day after the 4th of july i don't even know who the heck's gonna be here that day so if we don't leave this room tonight with some type of a consensus i wouldn't be too comfortable about saturday on the 6th so sean yeah two questions one is you had mentioned that the insurance company mentioned that they would prefer to have one policy is that the way this is going or are we going to have an overlay policy on our existing policy it's going toward one law enforcement policy covering the town townwide as well as at the stadium and to go back to mark's statement you know if the stadium weren't here foxborough would just be a sleepy town in the boston suburbs with the stadium here we have these issues is there an instrument out there that the insurance companies may provide that could cap our liability to a reasonable level because as you mentioned even at the seven thousand five hundred there's still no limit and you take a look at it and if we were not to prevail in this class action suit we're still open to a substantial amount of payment which the town would have to bear so it's reinsurance okay maybe that's the term but if there's a reinsurance policy that could be an umbrella over the top that could potentially limit our liability i think we'd all feel more comfortable because even the seven thousand five hundred it's just people aren't forever depending on the number of plaintiffs that come forward if i may jim over the past six months i've actually had the opportunity to learn a lot more about this particular type of insurance than i ever had any interest in learning and what i've learned is basically the following every municipality with a police force buys this law enforcement professional liability insurance and there are a lot of different ways to buy the insurance the mia policy that you buy is one way and what i mean by one way your deductible is based upon a per claimant so every the weldnerdutton case is a wonderful example every person who was wrongly placed into protective custody has a potential claim for you and the first seven thousand five hundred of each one of those claims is for your account not for the insurer's account so that's one way to do this another way to do it and i actually have a copy of a policy here that's also in place in massachusetts and used by a lot of municipalities is to do it on a per wrongful event basis and if that were the case in if that policy were in place when the weldnerdutton claimants came into being what would happen is each one of those people would be part of the same wrongful event and they would all fall within the deductible and the deductibles on those policies are generally speaking and once again i'm a lawyer not an insurance consultant but what i've learned over the last six months is the deductibles on those per wrongful event policies are usually twenty five thousand to fifty thousand and obviously higher deductibles generally result in lower premiums and vice versa there are a lot of variants on those but those are in general the ways to do it and so municipalities that have a concern about overall exposure as you just expressed they like to go for the per wrongful event where you have a cap and then they decide how much of a premium tolerance they have and they decide whether to buy a twenty five thousand cap or a fifty thousand cap i understand further that mia has been evolving their law enforcement coverage to a higher deductible that you have had the good fortune of keeping the lower deductible for an extended period of time and you know that's part of what's going on here there a little bit of an anachronism going on with respect to your policy to your benefit but i think the alternatives that we will be able to get will show you that spectrum and you'll be able to choose where on the risk premium spectrum you want to be and i will also offer the gratuitous comment that when i first looked at your policy i thought that i would personally prefer to have the per wrongful event coverage because i like the catastrophic protection that you get in that circumstance you know when you have a fifty thousand wrongful event coverage you're not ever looking at millions of dollars of exposure you may be looking at more nuisances that you prefer not to deal with but you never get into a situation like weldnerdutton or where you suddenly have potentially a million dollars of exposure jim i'm all set thanks mark do you have anything to add if i may to try to address your issue mr gray the per person cap the per person deductible i'm not sure whether there is a mechanism but i have heard of insurers that have said there is a per person deductible but up to a maximum deductible so whether it's five persons or ten claimants i've heard of insurers that do that i don't know whether that is an option under the mia policy or under the policies of any of the other insurers that attorney cobery is speaking to wrongful events i'm aware that gl policies have per occurrence limits professional liabilities have wrongful events limits and i can appreciate that that can be for the catastrophic loss a better protection for someone or an insured like the town of foxborough i think we have to appreciate here that at least with respect to the weldnerdutton case the claimants there are four currently four plaintiffs counsel for the four plaintiffs has said that there may be in excess of two thousand seven hundred and they're talking about more than just one event so they're talking about the bruce springsteen concert the country fest events patriots games so i'm not quite sure how many when they say two thousand seven hundred i'm not quite sure how many events they're talking about the higher deductible i appreciate that the mia contract right now is at seven thousand five hundred my understanding was that the rationale for increasing it to fifty thousand was that the protection that both the town and mia thought was in place wasn't turned out not to be in place so that's why it's going up to fifty thousand and it was conditioned upon that it would stay at seven thousand five hundred if alternative insurance was in place and i don't know to get to what whether it makes more sense frankly to eliminate the mia law enforcement policy entirely or have it as excess law enforcement coverage over whatever the other alternative policy is i don't know trying to find out what the mechanics would be right right right so potentially you could structure it that if the town re kept that existing law enforcement policy in place that that could apply to all town related events and then this other policy could strictly cover stadiumrelated events i would think so i mean i'm not an insurance consultant as well but i always thought that there could be a way to define stadium event in such a way that the new policy covers the stadium events and the mia policy covers nonstadium events i think that sounds like the cleanest and they agree to a common definition so that nothing falls through the cracks right okay thank you anybody else on the board at this point bob anything to add i'm just sensitive to the timeframe as jim already mentioned we have very few days to try to apply for a policy understand that's the beginning of the process correct yes and you know tomorrow's friday you get the weekend and then you have 4th of july on thursday and you would need to plan another meeting on the 5th on the 5th so just i won't be in town on the 5th so those are the issues that you're dealing with you just have to be aware of the time limitations i can't there's no way i can be here on the 5th james too anybody else gone on the 5th something that the whole board needs to be together sean you i'm around the other issue is if you recall the events that we permitted are contingent upon an indemnification agreement being reached by june 30th so come july 1st it's a potential that those permits are null and void so we would have to have an extension tonight or up until i guess friday to extend it up until july 4th 5th 6th whenever we do that yeah i have in anticipation of that drafted a motion for you but the look was the two of you are gonna be away on the 5th yeah yeah well yeah two and a half hours away well let us look into a way of doing a i don't know that we can do this are you available by phone or by it's not allowed it's not allowed by our bylaws anyway so it's just they didn't adopt that provision no they voted not to have it so it's not permitted so i think you got til wednesday unfortunately wednesday what's the date well we've got five people on board we have a quorum of three yeah but it's just not right for the whole board not to be here i just think this is something that the whole board especially what you we all have to offer needs to be together as one and i just don't see that i wouldn't want that to happen i'm sorry can we go in the direction of having the two separate policies stadium definition town definition see if that works with mia and whoever the other i guess whatever the other potential insurers are and that way we know we're covered you know we wouldn't cancel the m you say not cancel the mia policy the problem being that right now we can't tell you if the mia policy is effective whether or not you're going to be exposed to the fifty thousand deductible but if we correct me if i'm wrong but if the mia policy will be in effect it will be however it'll be subject to a fifty thousand deductible for stadium events correct which isn't a problem until july 6th correct right so exactly i said this at the other meeting why can't in fact we cover that deductible until we get this straightened out it's the simplest way of getting this through because we're unwilling to do so it's not our responsibility if you think about it for a moment here we made application for an event and you rightfully said there are some conditions one of which is that we need to have police details for these events and that's fine we're happy to have police details we're happy to pay the detail rate for them you are the ones who obtain the law enforcement professional liability insurance we obtain the general liability insurance we cannot you know i said earlier that our consultant has gone out there and tried to find any way possible for us to buy law enforcement professional liability insurance on your police force and we cannot we just simply cannot do it it's just impossible for the exact same reason that an insurance company won't issue that policy we can't do the indemnity we don't have control over the individuals that we would be asked to indemnify and the delta between seven thousand five hundred and fifty thousand is a lot of money i mean you'd be talking about hundreds of millions of dollars of potential exposure over people that we don't have any control so what you're asking i understand that's something that we've all thought about if there were a way to do it we would certainly do it but it's just too much money with too little control it just won't work and that's exactly why we're here because we can't deal with that either well we're dealing with it right now because mark one suggestion i have in terms of trying to get us to the 5th is well the 5th is out as far as i'm concerned because i can't be here jim can't be here well i'm two and a half hours away i'll drive back but if i can address that for a second mark is the open meeting law does not prohibit you from talking to me and you talking to me and what your thoughts are i can't share that so it's sequential i can't say i can't tell the rest of the board this is what mark thinks this is what jim but i can listen if there were a meeting on the 5th at that meeting i can express on your behalf what you're both thinking hopefully there'll be some information to respond to as a way to resolve this so that there can be a meeting you have a quorum on the 5th i can present at that meeting an open meeting for the first time to your colleagues and what you're thinking on this issue it would be hard to tell you what i'm thinking when i don't know the conversation dick that's gonna come forward yep that's the limitation mark i think you know what i say go for the 3rd that's what i say you know what we'll try to work with you and randy'll be here and you need to do it by the 3rd i want to be here i think everybody here's a must this board works well together everybody has to you know good insight and good input to put in the conversation so randy would you like to say something i'm just curious about the procurement rules that would apply here is that another stumbling block for us here or not you know bid process and policy gonna be over twenty five thousand this is subject to a bid because it's the town bank policy yeah i think it has to go to open bid john correct yup all right so that makes it impossible right there is that what we're saying if the town is purchasing it yeah i mean is that what you were saying jim the town would have to purchase it we cannot purchase it so that right there we're done didn't we just get a new policy from mia yes it was one of the and the town manager followed the bid process so that public bid process was adhered to mmhmm this would be an addendum or an amendment to that is that it would be a separate policy correct the mia could a different insurance company yeah so mia would not be the insurance company on a standalone policy has anybody seen the bidding the rfp for that well it's the thirty day procurement right i don't know what it said randy help me out here it's what you do or you help do you know that's a minimum yeah i think that's a minimum of thirty days and is it over twenty five thousand oh it's absolutely gonna be over twenty five thousand policy it's on my my understanding is that it will be roughly between thirty and fifty thousand of premium that's that puts us out of the room right there well could we do a policy for six months and then do another six month policy just to get it under the procure no randy said no that's really stretched nice thought but i think that's against the law there is one piece of legislation how that came about yes there is one piece of legislation that's pending i'm not sure how it's doing could raise those limits to fifty thousand i could check on that no i don't think the legislature's meetin over the holidays are they this session would end this week i'm not sure if that's one of the goals we've run into another road block i'll check on them well thank you for your input randy you guys want to take a five minute break and think about this or do you want to sit here and muddle the thoughts muddling sounds good yeah you know i i look at the issue and i say the the mia policy as it's going to take effect on july 1st with the fifty thousand per person i understand your concern about that but that is the same concern that i have about this so i certainly share your concern on that one we are trying our best to make this happen and everyone is at this table it's not an effort on my part or dan's part it's a universal effort on this side of the table it may be that it's just going to take longer than next week to get this done to comply with all the laws rules etc i go back to what i said before when you approved the event license you were acting within your statutory power to impose conditions related to public health and safety and one of the conditions that you imposed was that a police detail take effect the problem that we have right now is that the insurance for your police detail is unacceptable in terms of the risks that are we really gonna go down this road jim which is what that you don't want us to have our police officers there that we privately secure the no i wouldn't suggest that we privately secure them but if and i throw this out and i don't offer any criticism whatsoever but if your risk profile is such that the first thirty days or so you can't do it i would be willing to go talk to lieutenant stewart and see if he could provide the police presence that you would very legitimately request under the event license for the 6th of july and until such time as we get this i'll have three hundred and fifty grievances on my desk on monday morning how are the state police insured if i might we have a town bylaw that does not allow for that yeah it states that the chief of police foxborough chief of police is in charge of public safety in town excluding you know a state highway yeah so it's not a good idea well you know what that's it's not a solution i don't mean to i mean at this point anything else to say dan the disagreement that we're having is fifty thousand per occurrence yeah but it's over a contingency it may or may not occur right it may or may not occur we disagree with the kraft organization as to who are to be responsible for that cost should we have that cost we may never have that cost that would be nice a thought is that we continue to disagree about that issue and hope it doesn't happen if it does happen so thought is you issue the licenses and you put in the provision that if there is a deductible imposed upon the town a cost to the town of fifty thousand for something that occurs that that is a forty two thousand five hundred of that or some number is payable by the kraft organization i've been asking and they've declined it let me finish they're gonna say no but they could say if we reached agreement they could say we don't agree with that condition we're going to accept it not file any litigation today over it but accept that with the understanding that in the event that that does occur they reserved their rights to challenge that provision that's a possible solution what we're doing is if i can interrupt you owning a business i have this thing called worker's compensation liability and unemployment taxation if i don't pay those they send a notice to everybody i do business with and they cancel it and i'm out of business til it's reinstated i can't operate without insurance it's against the law i'm not saying you don't i'm not saying you operate without insurance we go forward with insurance but we have the policy in effect policy says that if there's a claim arising out of a stadium event there's gonna be a fifty thousand deductible what i'm saying to you is there may not be such a thing i mean keep in mind that there hasn't been very many and even with weldnerdutton there's no clear evidence that there even is one today so we're talking about a potentiality that experience tells us doesn't happen very much we're not jim and i have i guess in the year that i've been working with him for the first time we're pretty loud with one another okay we're not my sense is we're just not gonna reach agreement on that what i'm saying is that you issue your licenses you impose the condition they don't agree with the condition but they accept the license they don't run into court this week and say unlawful condition they say we'll accept it but we're going to reserve our rights in the event that it ever comes to be that there is a fifty thousand deductible that we have to face at that time if it happens we litigate it it's a simple enough thing to litigate and we either win or we lose but it only is for so long as we can get ourselves the kind of policy that we should have gotten before tonight okay but dick is it responsible for us to expose the taxpayer to that sort of claim i don't think we could sleep at night well john john i'd say we they could call on monday morning oh hold on hold on you have been exposed you have been exposed to a claim we're trying to avoid being exposed any further dick i know i understand that but you have been exposed to much more money than that and whatever you do you're going to have some exposure for a deductible for an insurance policy you are you always have and you will again what that number is we're trying to limit but i don't think you're being irresponsible for doing that one might argue that it's more responsible to have a fifty thousand deductible than seven thousand five hundred if it's for a short period of time and we can go to an occurrence basis dick that would be fine if it was an occurrence basis but it's not now the exposure is multiple millions of dollars yeah and i you know we're a municipality we're not a for profit business i know so i just don't know how you could expect the board to accept that as a solution i don't think our stock holders would like it too much i see john raising the i have not spoken with mr norrick your consultant but if the krafts have civil rights coverage because they have civil rights exposure so i assume the kraft organization would have civil rights coverage is there no way that the town can be added as an additional insured to the kraft's policy that provides them civil rights coverage as the named insured i've asked that question several times and the answer has always been no because we don't have control over your officers we cannot extend the coverage in that circumstance if you'd like to give us control over your officers it would happen automatically but i don't think anyone wants that to happen i think with the bylaws we've gone over that that's against the law couple of other things that are against the law the procurement thing would be against the law but then what was contemplated when the krafts agreed to provide the town with civil rights coverage right well i think now you're trying to position me so i respectfully will decline to answer that okay okay well it's like well it's the only an anybody else got any so we never had civil rights coverage once again i think you're trying to position me i'm not no no i don't think you are well we licensed events at the stadium and we had the motion attached to it that if insurance coverage was not i mean if this insurance issue was not cleared by june 30th then the town foxborough has the right to take back that license and not not have you know not license that event the license is null and void so it was very clear it was very clear when we did vote that that that was a possibility if this insurance issue was not resolved if i may mmhmm the license conditions require us it's quid condition three require us to obtain an insurance certificate with certain details we have obtained that insurance certificate and we've provided it to the town and we have received no word back that the insurance certificate is acceptable or not acceptable so at this point in time i think that you're right that you did require us to obtain insurance and you set it forth in the terms and conditions that were attached to the license and we think that we've given you an insurance certificate that complies with what's in those terms and conditions we think that what's been going on here is that you're looking for additional coverage because of the change in deductible from the mia policy and we're happy to work with you we really are and we're really trying very very hard to deliver some alternatives to help you on that but that's really the nature of what we're doing here it's not so much us failing to obtain the coverage that we can reasonably obtain it's that the time for obtaining the coverage that gives you the right risk profile is just closing so rapidly that's no and i appreciate that but the thing is we cannot let the town be on the hook in case something happens so i mean we are responsible and i don't want to expose the town of foxborough to the fifty thousand deductible just in case something does happen it seems the only way out of this in the temporary space is and i think the board pretty much stands together on this is that the deductible will be covered if it needs to be by the kraft organization i think it's the only out i think we beat it up pretty good here i don't know if you want to take a couple of minutes like i said and take a recess and think about it we don't we don't have to we cannot accept that and you're asking us to do something you don't accept and i mark could i take a break and talk to jim for a minute or two yes take a break frank call us up for about ten minutes please be right back okay we're back thanks for waitin dick do you have anything to add i do what i guess we're going to ask you to do is to put this over until july 3rd when hopefully by that date we'll have more concrete information for you we will do this in a way that does not require a procurement by the town so we avoid any 30b issues or we'll do it in a way that is in compliance with chapter 30b depending on the numbers and do you realize that july 3rd is wednesday before july 4th well no it's a lot of did you say you're not here the 3rd well i'm not supposed to be but if i have to be i will be right i mean there's nothing they can do about the dates well i understand that but what time are you planning to have this meeting cause it's not gonna be a seven hundred or eight hundred meeting it's going to be more like a four hundred or five hundred or six hundred meeting because it's going to go two hours and mark is five hundred okay with the board is five hundred okay with the board that's fine jim are you here or are you gone i'm here now well you know let's set it for five hundred let's just but can you give us a maybe not a status quo if you're not gonna be prepared for the meeting we'll just i don't want to go and come in back on the 3rd without having an understanding of what direction we might be thinking of going i mean in order to avoid the exposure of fifty thousand per claim i got it i told him he can't here til five hundred and thirty six hundred who can't be the guy filming we don't even know where we're going to be we don't know if we have the room we don't know who's saying the fca wouldn't be able to be ready for us til six hundred and thirty right yeah and we don't even know where we could have it yet there's no way i can come in on wednesday right right so town hall's open randy yeah does it have to be recorded does it well i think that people deserve the right to see it i mean yeah but if there's not but if it's posted they can come yeah well you know what then we're gonna have people come and occupy the room cindy it'd be over seventy say seventy people and then you can't have the meeting anyways bob yeah six hundred before the 4th of july is going to be five people five people nobody's gonna be there but us but actually jenny you know i know i appreciate that but after some of the conversation we've had here tonight i think we might see thirty five police officers there yeah could we circle back to the let's yeah i mean one of the solutions that we discussed was not having the police other than what's been done all these years continue with that so that that's not what we're talking about we're the reason to go to july 3rd is we hope we'll hopefully we'll have more concrete information about the type of policy we will do it within the procurement law and by that i mean we're not gonna purchase the town will not be expending its funds for this policy and we will try to address i mean the whole goal is to try to address not having the town exposed to multiple fifty thousand deductibles randy would you like to speak how do we i thought i heard mr cobery say that they weren't allowed to purchase insurance for that on the town's behalf the acqu we are not going to purchase it's not going to use any public funds for this acquisition we get a gift we have to work those yeah but so if it is a gift doesn't it have to also be accepted by the board of selectmen look there's a lot of things that have to be figured out and ascertained and determined between now and july 3rd okay you can't do that sitting here tonight we have a procurement issue if we can't address it then we won't but give us the opportunity to do so you know right we've got a commitment that they'll pay for it we just have to figure out a way that they can do so legally so we're not looking to a procurement okay anybody have anything to add if that is a scenario that works so be it we'll go in that direction but just so i'm clear we have mia coverage up until june 30th under the seven thousand five hundred per claim we've already signed and sent in money i don't know about that we have the new coverage starting july 1st so we're covered throughout is there an opportunity for either the coverage that ends on june 30th to extend it another month and work out there where it's not a procurement issue it's less than ten of a change and you can extend it until july 30th on the existing or take the coverage that's gonna start on july 1st and change it for the first two months so if the premiums are going to come up the deductibles will come down and that one month or two months bring it through august would be something that we addressed on a cash value yeah i mean i asked that and i'll ask it again but i've already asked and been told not those questions you asked it to mia yes in the conference call that we had with joe callahan the other day that was addressed and he said no yeah at least the second part of that whether they would give us a thirty day policy i don't know yeah yeah but would they give us the seventy five but at a high premium for two months no he said they wouldn't do that thank you i have a question about the civil rights coverage after july 1st and the certificates that we have received that we have the conditions on that everything has to be acceptable to the town and there's language that's different on here from prior years certificates and i don't see the language that says civil rights coverage on here so i just wanted to ask where that comes in on this policy on this binder i'm asking jim i don't know what document you have in front of you this is the document that comes with the applications from the stadium for the license the certificate of liability it's the binder that you provided with your application right that was on there before this is part of this is pulled from the country fest application so the new one the new one was it updated before from the previous this was part of the application that we said we would license subject to if we have understood but i it's different from last year's was that on there before and then got taken away is that what you're saying i did see it there before jim is not acknowledging whether it existed or not so i want to know going forward that it does it exist now and then i'd also like to ask john if you could review the prior binders to this binder just if that's something that we've got on there yeah for these events that we're talking about right now does that make sense mmhmm okay thank you i will ask mike norrick if you don't mind to tell me where that's in this certificate there's a new certificate that we provided that i can certainly send over to you as well okay that's been sent over since since the application process yes we traditionally june 30th is the time when insurance policies roll over and ours does as well so we sent you a new certificate to show that we have insurance coverage effective july 1st just sent that in in the pasttuesday so i will tell you this i don't read these insurance tributes very often i apologize for that but we do have civil rights coverage where it shows up on that certificate i don't know and i will ask mike to point out to me where it is the issue that john was raising before is is it civil rights coverage that covers the kraft group and its employees etc or does that coverage extend to the town and it's a very nuanced answer that would probably bore you and i not really that's okay we need to know because it's just a black and white question jim could you also ask him say i looked at that certificate and unless the new one is different that covers x of the named insured which would be the kraft group so that to me would exclude actions of the police the foxborough police so that doesn't really cover what we're talking about here and that's different please allow me i'm not an insurance lawyer by any stretch of the imagination but what i understand from talking to mike norrick in particular but also some other people is basically the following we have fairly robust insurance coverage given the nature of our fairly diverse business portfolio and we have general liability insurance property insurance all those different things that you'd expect within the liability portion of our insurance coverage we have civil rights coverage we also have as part of our overall insurance regime standard endorsements that relate to among other things additional insurance coverage and our endorsement that deals with additional insured coverage says in essence please once again i'm well outside of my expertise here but what i understand it says is as an additional insured you are covered in the event that we or people who work for us or over whom we have control do something that generates liability or the threat of liability so a good example of this is when we are the tenant and the landlord who is purely passive doesn't do anything but leases us space when our employees do something that generates liability and the landlord gets sued as part of that even though the landlord has done nothing because they are our additional insured in that case our coverage is extended to them because it's an action or omission of our employee that gave rise to that coverage so we have that type of coverage and it's routinely extended to our additional insureds and you are one of the additional insureds so you have that level of coverage where the great minds of this table diverge is whether our coverage should extend to also include the acts or omissions of your employees and our policy does not as far as i know does not go that far and that's one of the lengthy discussions that john and i have had over the past six months yeah i got one too all right you all set paul what's the next event after the 6th bon jovi on the 12th on the 12th or the 20th the 20th the 20th i don't know if so it's not the 12th no it's the 20th i've heard bon jovi's the 20th swift's the 26th 27th i've heard over and over again that there's never any situation at any soccer games that they're very low key they are very well under twenty thousand people typically around fifteen it's a very uneventful event so why don't you use you should be in marketing mark does not go into marketing nobody wants to i'm trying to make a point here comes with us for sweep mark why don't you can we just work i just wanna say and come back on the 3rd of july no i really don't want to because you're interrupting everybody's family lives here and it's becoming troublesome and everybody here's got a family and they've got things they wanna do and to overdedicated yourself during that causes situations with your family and it's not fair to the spouse not fair to the kids who've been looking forward to things for a long time including your own insurer my solution here that i wanna see happen is you say you've all stated soccer events we should just have it don't worry about the license it's a soccer event there's never any issues at em free up to 4th for everybody pony up the deductible for that one event gives you another fourteen days to work through this if everybody says there's not ever any problem at it cover the deductible for that one event it gives you another four more than fourteen days to come through with a plan here that's all you gotta do unfortunately we can't do that well you can ask your boss yeah no believe me i hear from him quite a bit because you know what it's just i don't see it happening any other way it gives you more time your pressurin everybody here on the board i mean you really are you got jenny has plans jim's away for the week i'm gone on friday you know if my boss asked me to work i tell him no you know what i'm saying so i just think it's an unfair thing to do i understand the urgency in your aspect but to pony up the deductible for one soccer event to come through a debt and free up everybody give everybody ample time to get this straightened out it doesn't seem like a lot if ya ask me if i may i mean yeah we just can't do that is what it comes down to and i hope you can understand that i certainly understand the inconvenience and i don't want anyone here to be inconvenienced by any stretch of the imagination if i could figure out another way i certainly would but unfortunately we just as relatively calm as the soccer matches are we just are not in the insurance business is what it comes down to but we are insured so if all you do is cover the deductible in writing for that one event it gives everybody almost three weeks to get through this i don't think it's a lot to ask if you look at the history of the events have you ever had any problems cause i'm about to make a motion of that aspect to the board and i'm hoping they go with me on it because i really don't want this to go into next week i just don't think i think it's a lot to ask we've done it before on christmas we've had to have major meetings the two days after christmas it's not general policy for the board to just make special meetings for everybody this board has been ample to everybody that's ever asked for one and i'm now asking you just to go back to your boss and ask him a question that's all i don't think it's too much to ask it gives everybody more time it's one event the most undercosting event of them all right there's hardly any costs at em hardly any right it's the same group of people is not a concert kind of atmosphere where it's a mixed group of people that go there once a year or whatever it's a different entity of people so that's where i am what do you think john well you're asking them to selfinsure no i'm not asking them to selfinsure i'm asking them to pay the deductible you're looking for a solution if we wait until the 5th i'm not sure what's gonna come out of it it's unknown nothing i can guarantee right now nothing'll come out of it and we're talking about the 3rd not the 5th now we're talking about the 3rd oh man you know i wouldn't be certain that nothing'll come out of it i think something might i mean i understand the inconvenience to the board i wouldn't be suggesting we go to the 3rd if i thought it was a waste of time right but i can see the inconvenience to you it's not just the board it's a lot more people than just the board it's cable access it's the town i can tell me it's the finance department it's all the people that work for the town it's trickling down i just don't see that there's a big issue with that for that one event and i'm gonna be adamant about it and if you allowed me to be adamant those events are relatively relatively calm another way to address this issue is for you to lessen the police detail requirement at that event just help me please get that ball game now yeah you could say for that one event we are gonna allow the stadium to provide their own security and if something happens we call chief o'leary and get people to come down i mean that happens a lot i mean where you allow people other license holders like liquor license holders in town don't always have to have police details at their bars sometimes they do over three hundred and fifty people you need to have a police detail but other times they don't and so it's within your power to say recognizing that soccer games are relatively benign and recognizing that this is an extraordinary circumstance we're gonna allow you to go forward with your team ops force but it doesn't go on beyond that day number one and number two if something happens you have to call chief o'leary and now we're back to bylaws right right correct the bylaws prevented that i agree with you but it's really not even up to this board it's up to the chief of police and he has made it very clear his policy on security up at the stadium could we ask chief o'leary if he could grant some grace on this once again we'll have about thirty five grievances on our table on monday morning if not before that probably tomorrow morning i'm simply trying to help i mean well i am too yep and i think the board i can i just ask something go ahead cindy how many police officers are there usually at the stadium on a soccer event oh twenty five it's really pretty small it's a very small not like three hundred and fifty for a football game or more or a concert's sometimes more than three hundred and fifty right help me out you shouldn't have as them about numbers well no i'm just trying to figure out what type of numbers we're talking about i really don't think that's relevant because the chief is in charge of security and he is not gonna agree to this right no he won't he's just not going to lorraine how does the stadium insure the state police for these types of situations we don't they're off property right they're not on your property no they're on our property but we don't insure them they don't ask for insurance and we don't provide insurance to them and if part of what i've learned over the last six months is that's actually relatively common you know talked to the red sox we talked to the folks at td bank north garden they don't have an obligation to provide insurance for the police details or the municipality they probably provide an indemnity and the indemnity is very similar to the indemnity that we have now but there's no insurance requirement there and to be fair dick and i have a difference of opinion about why the red sox and the bruins and celtics operate one way and we are being asked and you know i truly like and respect dick so i don't want to suggest otherwise but they don't provide insurance and the reason for that is baked into the detail rate is an overhead component but i think that's also the case here in foxborough you know we're starting to get off the topic i'm not i don't mean to cut you off jim but that's really not a part of this discussion anybody on the board feel like my suggestion's good one about making them cover the cause i think that's an amicable solution to this at this point in time it's a low risk for you and what i mean a couple of fifty thousand let's stick to the seven thousand five hundred so you really only had forty two thousand five hundred okay and it's gotta be in writing and then you can have your event on the 6th it gives you to the mark it isn't forty two thousand five hundred because it's per it's forty two thousand five hundred per claimant right well that's the liability of this board is not gonna well i'm just explaining we've been through this over and over again we're not willing to take that risk you're not either so we're at a stalemate it's business okay and we represent seventeen thousand people that own the town so we're asking you since it's such a risk low risk thing that everybody portrayed to me over the last ten days i've heard oh soccer's no big deal it's a low risk you can let it go for the fifty thousand deductible for just those events well this buys you time frees up everybody for twenty one days basically and i think it's a good idea and i don't think it's that much to ask so how does the board feel about that does anybody feel like this is a good solution or do we want to sit here and bang heads all night can we do that yeah we can make that motion if they accept it they accept it is it enforceable no they're gonna take it as not acceptable right hmmi think they've said that they can't that they said for all i think their focus there lorraine is on concert events larger venues they're looking to get this fixed up this gives them more time i mean it's either that or nothing at this point right and i mean really what are we going to do here i think well i think one thing if we gave everybody until the 3rd the outcome is still potentially the same depending on what happens we will not compromise on the fifty thousand deductible and we will have so then we'll have a two hour meeting so then on the 3rd hopefully doing it on a 3rd potentially gives time to work it out so that we don't get to that point we're at that point today but we're trying to free up the board from all the inconveniences oh what about this mark it's and i believe me i know what you're talking about trying to give up the day before a holiday i don't know what you guys talked about in the ten minutes but if you're fairly confident that you can get from there to there to the 3rd expedite it a little bit work on a saturday sunday whatever you gotta do and we'll wrap this up on the 2nd if you're here on the 2nd we'll do it if you're not here on the second sorry there's five people we gotta go with four three this is a big enough issue that i think we need to hmmm yeah go a few days to give them an opportunity yeah but if on the 3rd it's still a stalemate then cancel we don't have it it's canceled i don't know what else to say right but i'm wondering if they can discuss this with their entire organization and come back they can go discuss this right now and take five minutes mark's suggestion among yourself it's just for one event if i could interject to answer your question i'll be comfortable well before the 3rd whether or not the procurement issue is solvable okay i'll let you know and if i find out there's no hope then there's no hope there's no sense of my coming in on the 3rd and telling you that i'll tell you that well before and you can cancel the 3rd but then we still can't make a decision we need to make a motion tonight to have them have an alternative in place because we're not going to reconvene for some other scheme no mark i understand that but if i could just continue settle down mark you gotta watch what you say and how you say it well everybody sitting at this table deb is trying to circumvent the bylaws the laws of the town and it's not working out and i understand that but if you go back to the original thing is if the letter was written eight weeks ago stop stop so mark let me get back to that if you were to schedule me for the 3rd if prior to the 3rd at least on the procurement issue the bylaw issues if it's clear to me we're not going to be able to meet to comply with those bylaws and with procurement statutes i'll tell you i'll tell you well before the 3rd well not well before the 3rd i'll probably tell you on monday and it's not the first meeting you've canceled in terms of the issue how are we gonna solve the problem which to me the problem is the fifty thousand it's not procurement it's not compliance with bylaws that's not up to me that's up to jim and he sees it's not gonna happen he'll tell me i'll tell you and you in other words i don't expect the board to convene on the 3rd without their having the expectation that we've solved the problem right but what i'm saying to you we can make the motion tonight to back up what i said fifteen times about now to allow them to proceed to have the event if they will take on the deductible if they don't want to accept that at that point in time because you're going to make the board reconvene one way or another no i think that's fine i think what you're suggesting is fine so we kick it over to the 3rd in the event that the board is unable to reach agreement on that date then in order to obtain a license go forward they're going to have to for that there's just one soccer event between now and the 20th then that's the condition of the board if that's how the board feels and i get you on that sure and all i have to do is draft that motion yeah i think there's two i think there's one the following weekend two soccer events and bon jovi's on the 20th when's the next one i don't have it in front sorry i think its like 6th and 12th i don't have the soccer schedule randy i thought the 12th rang a bell as well yeah i certainly appreciate your efforts i do want to let you know though that mike norrick is going out on a limb and saying he will have something for us before the 6th of july now we're talking about having it a couple of days earlier so i what i'd like to do if it's okay with you is i will call mike first thing tomorrow morning and run this new schedule by him and if he says it's hopeless i will send a note to dick and let him know that and then this whole thing is then you can't have an event i'm trying to give you an out from a motion tonight oh i'm sorry all i'm suggesting is as soon as i know that it's impossible i will let you know and hopefully that'll be at least helpful as far as schedules are concerned that's the best i can do do you want this board to make a motion where i'm getting repetitive that you can have your event as long as your ko group agrees in writing to cover the difference in the deductible the fifty thousand to have the soccer games giving us time to work through the rest of the situation because we're not gonna meet if you don't come together with some plan then there's nothing we're not coming back to the table to talk about it anymore then you can't have the event i think that's how we're going you're saying if you don't have nothing together by monday or tuesday you're not gonna ask us to reconvene if we can't reconvene before the 6th then there's nothing do you want something well i'm probably being too much of a lawyer and i apologize for that but i'm really looking at this and saying that we have our insurance and we've provided you with this certificate and i need to provide an answer for you i will do that this is insurance that we cannot get and we are facilitating in essence we are really trying hard to find insurance for your police detail so that you can have an acceptable level of risk for the events we hold at the stadium so with all of that in mind i don't think it would be helpful if that's what you're asking to have the motion that you're suggesting i think what would probably be most helpful if you wouldn't mind is for me to check in with mike norrick tomorrow and find out what he thinks about the schedule and then let dick know and then whatever you feel is appropriate you certainly should do but i don't want to cause you to come in when you don't have to if we don't have something in the way of a proposal then you know let's all enjoy the 4th instead why don't we post a meeting for monday and tuesday and wednesday and just have it there in case we need to just following this to the logical conclusion then the event doesn't happen and that's exactly what i said three times then you have nothing if you don't come to an agreement to be clear there'll be litigation we will be in so you all know what's going to happen here we're gonna be in court next week if we can't solve it then then what good was that then what good was during the application process that we had that motion what good was that if it's not binding if we can't pull the license because the condition hasn't jen you are gonna pull the license yeah but if they do litigation that means they'll have the event anyway i mean what good what good is doing anything if the event's going to happen anyway and what good is trying and putting the town at risk i am advise i would be shocked if you if a license was pulled that they would simply not hold the event without seeking court intervention and they probably'll win but you know what we did our jobs okay i'm just that's what it's all about here is protecting the town and for the voters that put us here jim us now this is gonna turn into a rodeo mr chairman yeah please i have neither one of us have threatened any litigation and i want to make that clear we're really trying to work together and we've been trying to do that for over six months and i'm gonna try again tomorrow to get mr norrick to move even faster than he's already moving and i'm sincerely hopeful that this could all have been cooperatively but please we're not threatening any litigation and we are sincerely hopeful that things work out here and i do really like your idea selectman and if you wouldn't mind having some contingent dates available to us we'll keep you informed every chance i get i'll i'll send a note to dick letting him know what's going well and what's not going well i can't make any guarantees i really can't but we will try our best bob can you post meetings for next monday tuesday wednesday let's not do that i didn't agree to any of that sorry if nothing else and i know they won't agree to it it is a fall back position that potentially will allow the event to take place right it's a fallback but i don't know if it's possible it's showing that you're trying to work through this you know i think that we should make that kind of a motion anybody disagree with that i think i do for the reason if i had the option they don't want that option so forcing them something to do that they said three times that they don't wanna do i think we stand back and say we gave them the application contingent upon an insurance agreement that was worked out we feel that it's not worked out so at the end of this exercise they don't get the permit the permit has not physically been issued to them at this point so if they see that is the case they're still saying obviously we live in a real world if i had a guess the event's going to go forward and then we'll deal with it in the court but to force somebody that said they don't want to do it to hold their own to put money up when they said no i mean i look at the boston marathon that was always a peaceful thing and things change overnight so to ask a business to take fifty thousand liability times one hundred two hundred three hundred people that's kind of unreal also to selfinsure that number so we'll do our best the 2nd the 3rd the 1st if it doesn't work then the event has to be canceled because we have not come up with an agreeable indemnification clause that the town has said that's okay so i think there's more liability to say we're going to put it on their shoulders they're going to say no and then we're both dealing with an issue after the fact because they've already said no so we're going to give them a permit after the fact that they said no well said jim jenny how do you feel no i agree with jim lorraine you also yeah i think i'll let you know when i'm gonna post the meeting i'll talk to bob cause i'm not postin nothin tonight just for a point of reference nothing could be held on monday night anyway cause it would have to have been posted by this afternoon okay unless it's under provisions of emergency yeah but this would not be an emergency situation that'd be a public emergency so it'd be tuesday the tuesday would be the first possible tuesday and wednesday the tuesday i'm not inclined to do that at this point in time so you guys get together no contact with any board members other than through town counsel or town manager okay nobody i don't want anybody having any conversations with anybody but bob cutler and the attorneys to their attorneys all right is that clear anything you wanna add to that jim i would certainly defer to your lawyers on this but i don't know if that's legal to be perfectly frank dan's town well no i'm talking about the business you can talk to them you know we've had this discussion before nobody can talk about this about what we talked about tonight with the board about this i certainly won't all right everybody can make all the little phone calls they want to bob cutler town counsel and they will inform me and i can inform the board and we'll have another meeting all right all right is that okay that way it just keeps it from being a round robin so we're hold on so it's clear to me what what is the action that the board is taking tonight none none i think we're advising you based on the ten minute discussion you've had if there's a way to work it out we'll do our job and post it for tuesday as of now you're not post you're going to post a meeting as of tuesday tuesday wednesday and wednesday it's not going to be friday yeah if you would just post it for the those days you don't have to hold it post it for tuesday wednesday and friday we're just posting a meeting for those days you do have the issue of that's all right but you've got a condition that expires on june thirty it expires and it's either you're gonna renew it or not it expires sunday night huh i'm sorry sunday night so the product's expired expired that's all there is to it so what happens if that happens can you then we they can always vote every issue don't we have to have a public hearing bob well you would have that's a whole process a public hearing okay but is it are you posting a hearing for a meeting the other thing we do we do have a vote continuing those things to july 3rd okay but i haven't included the condition that he wants it cause it sounds to me like the board is not behind it so we've drafted a motion that basically puts over continues the approval until i say not later than july 3rd but it may be later than july 3rd i could say july 5th okay knowing that you're going to meet on the 3rd it's not late the 3rd is not later than the 5th and i anticipated a meeting on the 5th no but you can still have a meeting on the 3rd no the 2nd or the 3rd i'm not agreeing to the 5th i think what he's saying is extend the conditions the permit expires the 3rd the 3rd so make the motion to extend it to 3rd midnight the 3rd that way we have monday tuesday i thought we said the 3rd through the 5th we did originally say that but that doesn't mean that you have to have a meeting on the 5th you can have the meeting on the 3rd but just in case by some folks say everything's all worked out but logistically you can't get some final detail you're okay with or any other person's okay with just to leave it in place so it's not expired doesn't mean the meeting has to happen on the 5th that does seem reasonable dick are you saying that the license expires on the 30th it's the 30th the conditions of approval have a dead you have a deadline because it didn't make sense so i'm extending those it expires and the event is on the 6th so yeah okay so we're extending those to not later than the 5th but my my associate's absolutely right it doesn't mean you have to meet on the 5th it gives us to that day yes there won't be a quorum on the 5th and this is not for a meeting on the 5th this is for the conditions extending the conditions right did you make them back 3rd at midnight right effectively it's the 3rd it's a placeholder dick what's the relevance of stating the kenny chesney taylor swift concerts and these dates beyond the 3rd i'm sorry what's the relevance of stating theseoh they just i'm just identifying cause they'll all expire on the 30th they all expire yeah okay i'll make a motion to modify the previous votes taken by the board of selectmen approving the applications for the following concerts at gillette stadium kenny chesney august 23rd and 24th two thousand and thirteen taylor swift july 26th and twenty seven two thousand and thirteen and bon jovi july 20th two thousand and thirteen and for soccer events by extending the second condition of such improvements regarding attaining liability insurance with such events insuring both the applicant and the town the applicant shall provide insurance not later than july 5th two thousand and thirteen in a form satisfactory to this board all remaining conditions of set application approvals remain in full force and effect motion's made is there a second second any more discussion alls in favor aye alls opposed motion to adjourn so moved all in favor okay