Lifeguards Lose to Lime Margaritas in Ludington

[XLFD]

On Monday (2-26-2024) the Ludington City Council easily passed a motion to "allow concessionaires to sell alcoholic beverages at the beach and grant permission to apply for the [state liquor] license."  It wasn't immediately clear why three subsections (2,3, and 7) of Section 38-75 of the city code were left out of the discussion.  The first subsection indicated selling alcohol was event-based, the last indicated selling alcohol needed to happen in a fenced in area, both of those present existential problems with this effort. 

But let's look at the least significant one, subsection 3, and show why it is important.   It indicates that the concessionaire "shall provide general liability insurance in an amount of not less than $1,000,000.00, naming the city as an additional insured."  At meetings, the two concessionaires indicated they would have standard liability insurance without mentioning anything about covering the city and nobody batted an eye, however, this is a minor detail that can be corrected without a lot of effort of money.  We will see that adding the city to their own liability insurance would cost at most a couple hundred dollars.

The combination of the two-word phrases "liability insurance" and "Stearns Beach" brings up some bad memories for many of us long term residents of Ludington.  Back in 2001, John Henderson beat an incumbent mayor in no little part by letting us know that he would bring back the lifeguards to Stearns Beach, and he did in short order, not only giving an extra incentive for our school to churn out great swimmers, but more importantly, offer locals and tourist alike a safeguard that did not exist at the beaches of other West Michigan communities.  

By the end of 2009, however, Henderson would throw no life-ring to the program despite still having political capital and despite acknowledging the saving of three people earlier that year for the newspaper: 

 “This is why we have lifeguards at the beach, to provide life-rescuing service,” Henderson added. “I think it is one of the most important programs we have, with six blocks of Lake Michigan beach, it needs to be protected by lifeguards.”

We were told then that having lifeguards was an additional liability to the city that it couldn't afford, but then the universe did something that should have let us know better.  Ironically, the three people saved in 2009 at Stearns Beach turned into three deaths in three separate fatal drowning incidents in 2010.  Two may have been avoided if lifeguards were present.

City leaders, among them Henderson who would be among those fishing the bodies out of the water, chattered among themselves and did nothing other than offer some life-rings and beach park rangers in response.  These 'beach police' would do little more than enforce park rules, drive around parking lots, and cost even more to sustain than having three lifeguards on duty did.  Life-saving experience was not needed, because that would be a potential liability to the city.  

Henderson has since graduated to become the fire chief, but the beach patrol continues existing because to make a unique and safe beach experience with lifeguards instead would expose us to so much liability that our leaders and city attorneys can't even explain to us when repeatedly asked why it would drain us to buy liability insurance.  

Fortunately, I found someone offering lifeguard insurance, primarily for those lifeguards who cover swimming pools.  One cannot imagine how a natural beach shoreline with a swimming area defined by buoys would have more liability issues since you don't have all the slippery tiles, tripping hazards, etc.  But here was the quote for a year's worth of lifeguard general liability insurance coverage of 2 million dollars:

Four months of liability insurance for lifeguards then is in the neighborhood of a couple hundred dollars.  Recall, that was the same amount we originally said it cost our concessionaires to add the city onto their liability insurance for allowing drinking at the beach.  General liability insurance with the same company would expect to have a cost of around $40 a month for 5 months a year or $200/year for the same coverage.  

Priorities.  Should the city wind up paying the city's portion of liability insurance for selling drinks on the beach, they will be about $200 poorer every year but be covered.  Yet, Gentle Reader, doesn't it bother you that the city is willing to spend this money on liability insurance for selling booze this year, creating extra hazards, while balking at spending the same amount or less per year for liability insurance to cover a lifeguard program over the last 15 years in order to rescue community members and their guests from drowning?! 

Am I missing something?

[Willy]

You are not missing anything. On the contrary you are one of the few people who sees and understands that Ludington's elites are a bunch of slippery characters who are continually trying to manipulate the system for their own and their cronies personal gains. As long as dishonest people are in control, I'm afraid this will never end. It's one thing after another and the sad part is they use the taxpayers money to pay for legal help in order to defend their corrupt schemes. 

I'm not a fan of serving alcohol at any City Park unless it's for the occasional festival and such. This idea to have permanent dispensaries of alcohol is a bad idea and it stands to reason that this is another one of those back room deals.

[XLFD]

It's good to see you have the ability to post a picture in the comments, and thanks for the affirmation of my sanity (at least on this topic and a few others).  It just strikes me as odd that 15 years after the council decided that liability insurance costs were just so prohibitive to keeping the lifeguard program around (a program that to my knowledge had never been sued in the past for liability or otherwise) and have kept firm on that stance since, to so eagerly and without reservation decide to introduce city-created hazards and potentially litigable actions by issuing this approval.  This is madness.