09 November 2007

Franconia resident Jeffery Jesseman shares his RSA 91-A request on Primex Insurance's refusal to underwrite KingCast v. Ayotte et al.

This is a follow up to yesterday's post in which you can read that Primex coverage should extend to an RSA 91-A lawsuit. When I met Mr. Jesseman and most of the folks in Franconia several months ago they had no idea how to hold government accountable, and they will freely tell you that. So we've won already, but there's a lot more work to do. Stay tuned because we're going to do it. The RSA request is in the comments.

2 comments:

Christopher King said...

In the email forwards:

It strikes me very odd that the Insurance Company doesn't cover the cost yet their employee can be hired and paid directly by Franconia. Can anyone say Conflict of Interest ???

KingCast response: Something's fishy in Denmark, as usual. The Town is supposed to be covered by the clear unambiguous language on the Primex website.

Christopher King said...

November 8, 2007


Carl Belz
Chairman of the Select Board
Town of Franconia
PO Box 900
Franconia, NH 03580

Dear Carl and Select Board Members:

The November 7, 2007 edition of the Littleton Courier ran an article under the heading “Town Lawsuit”. This article summarized recent business done by the Select Board on behalf of the Town of Franconia and its citizens. Pursuant to RSA-91A, I am requesting more detailed information as outlined below:

1. Regarding the over budget items in the police budget, it was mentioned that they were due to unforeseen expenses. I am requesting the following:

a. Line item detail as to what these 2007 “unforeseen” expenses are (up through the 3rd quarter), why they were necessary, and when they occurred.
b. Summary breakdown of actual versus budgeted expenses for all police departmental expenditures through 3rd quarter 2007.

2. Regarding Primex’s decision to not cover legal expenses associated with KingCast.net versus The Town of Franconia, I would like a detailed explanation as to why Primex made this decision. Specifically I would like:

a. A copy of any and all correspondence between the Town and Primex that details the decision made and reasons therefore.
b. Minutes and notes of all Board meetings where discussions of liability coverage for this litigation were discussed; before and after Primex’s decision. This is an ongoing request.

Since these items were just reviewed as part of recent business and reported publicly, I expect a timely and accurate response as required by law.

Sincerely,


Jeffery Jesseman
Taxpayer