AGO 1990-025.

• Case Date: June 28, 1990
• Court: Connecticut

Connecticut Attorney General Opinions 1990. AGO 1990-025. June 28, 1990 Opinion No. 1990-025James B. Holmes Chairman State Insurance Purchasing Board 55 Elm Street Hartford, CT 06106Dear Mr. Holmes: This letter is in response to your request for advice concerning the State Insurance Purchasing Board's authority to obtain surety bonds for members of the board of directors of the Connecticut Convention Center Authority. The Connecticut Convention Center Authority ("Authority") was created by 1989 Conn. Pub. Acts 89-381. Section 4(a) of the Act states: There is created a body politic and corporate to be known as the "Connecticut Convention Center Authority." Said authority shall be a public instrumentality and political subdivision of this state and the exercise by the authority of the powers conferred by this act shall be deemed and held to be the performance of an essential public and governmental function. The Connecticut Convention Center Authority shall not be construed to be a department, institution or agency of the state. Under Section 4(d) of the Act, each member of the board of directors of the Authority and the executive director of the Authority are required to execute surety bonds or "in lieu thereof, the chairperson of the board shall execute a blanket position bond covering each member, the executive director and the employees of the authority ...." The statutory duties of the Insurance Purchasing Board ("Board") are set forth at Conn. Gen. Stat. § 4a-20. Section 4a-20 provides in part: "Said board shall determine the method by which the state shall insure itself against losses by the purchase of insurance governed by the provisions of chapters 678 and 682a and sections 38-176 to 38-182 [relating to surety bonds], inclusive, to obtain the broadest coverage at the most reasonable cost." (Emphasis added). Since the text of 1989 Conn. Pub. Acts 89-381 § 4(a) states that the Authority is not a department, institution or agency of the State, but is a "public instrumentality and political subdivision" of the state the question is whether that is the equivalent of "the state" for purposes of the Board's authority to obtain surety bonds. In State ex rel. Maisano v. Mitchell, 155 Conn. 256 (1967), the Connecticut Supreme Court discussed the meaning of the term "political subdivision": "'The term "political subdivision"...