Loading...
CC Resolution No. 8946 ., RESOLUTION NO. 8946 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF FIRST AMENDMENT TO COST SHARING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITIES OF CAMPBELL, CUPERTINO, LOS ALTOS, MILPIT AS, MONTE SERENO, MOUNTAIN VIEW, PALO ALTO, SANTA CLARA, SARATOGA AND SUNNYVALE AND THE TOWNS OF LOS ALTOS HILLS AND LOS GATOS TO RETAIN LEGAL COUNSEL WHEREAS, on August 20, 1992, the cities of Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos, Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Mountain View, Palo Alto, Santa Clara, Saratoga, and Sunnyvale and the towns of Los Altos Hills and Los Gatos entered into an agreement to retain counsel to represent their interests in contesting the validity of the city of San lose's disposal facility ordinance and share in the costs of representation, Shute, Mihaly and Weinberger were retained as counsel, and a budget of $50,000 was established; and WHEREAS, the original budget has been exceeded and the parties wish to increase the budget to $130,000; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that said agreement is hereby amended as shown in First Amendment to Agreement attached hereto. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 17th day of AUi/;ust ,1993, by the following vote: VOTE MEMBERS QE. THE CITY COUNCIL AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Dean, Goldman, Koppel, Sorensen, Szabo None None None ATIEST: APPROVED: /s/ Kim M. Smith City Clerk / s / Nick Szabo Mayor, City of Cupertino FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT This First Amendment to Agreement, dated, for convenience, , 1993, is made and entered into by and between the cities of Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos, Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Mountain View, Palo Alto, Santa Clara, Saratoga, and Sunnyvale and the towns of Los Altos Hills and Los Gatos ("parties"). RECITALS 1. On August 20, 1992, the parties entered into an agreement to retain counsel to represent their interests in contesting the validity of the city of San Jose's disposal facility ordinance ("Ordinance") and share in the costs of representation. Shute, Mihaly and Weinberger were retained as counsel, and a budget of $50,000 was established. 2. An action in the Superior Court of the State of California entitled Citv of CUDertino. et al. vs. Citv of San Jose. et al. was filed. A request for issuance of a writ of mandate based on alleged CEQA violations was denied, and an allegation that San Jose did not act in accordance with the regional welfare was rejected. Although the trial court overruled the defendants' demurrer to an allegation that the Ordinance was preempted by state law, the parties have elected to drop this claim in light of the recent decision in City of Dublin et al. v. County of Alameda et aI., pending the outcome of the City of Dublin's petition for review before the California Supreme Court. The parties wish to appeal the decision of the trial court. 3. The original budget has been exceeded, and the parties wish to ratify the additional costs incurred to date. In anticipation of the additional costs to be incurred to resolve the equal protection claim and to file an appeal, the parties wish to increase the budget to $130,000. In consideration of the following covenants, terms and conditions, the parties agree: SECTION 1. Section 2.1 of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: "2.1 The' parties agree that the total costs of Counsel's services will be the actual costs to be shared by the parties less any costs which are incurred by parties at their own expense. This amount shall not exceed $130,000, unless the costs in excess of $130,000 are authorized as set forth in this Agreement. Such costs shall include the costs of services performed by Counsel's attorneys at established hourly billing rates, fees and costs of expert witnesses, and such other administrative costs as set forth in the retainer agreement, but shall exclude any costs attributable to 1 930802 sy" 0070355 communications with Counsel initiated by a party. Costs in excess of $130,000 shall not be authorized until a vote of a majority of the parties has been obtained. All costs which have been incurred in excess of $50,000 are hereby ratified by the parties. The City Attorney shall promptly call a meeting of the parties' city attorneys when the City Attorney has determined or is advised that Counsel has incurred approximately $100,000 in costs and charges and when the City Attorney has determined or is advised by Counsel that the costs of litigation are likely to exceed $130,000. At such time, the City Attorney shall inquire of Counsel whether it is reasonably foreseeable that Counsel's costs and charges will exceed $130,000." SECTION 2. Section 2.2 of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: "2.2 The parties agree to share the costs of litigation, including the costs of trial and appeal, in proportion to their respective share of the total tonnage of solid waste delivered by the parties' franchised haulers to San Jose landfill sites during calendar year 1991. The percentage share of the costs of each party shall be established, as follows: Name of Partv Percentaqe Share City of Campbell 7.13 %- City of Cupertino 6.62 %- City of Los Altos 5.07 %- Town of Los Altos Hills 0.61 %- Town of Los Gatos 6.44 %- City of Milpitas 9.07 %- City of Monte Sereno 0.51 %- City of Mountain View 12.59 %- City of Palo Alto 15.92 %- City of Santa Clara 9.82 %- City of Saratoga 4.76 %- City of Sunnyvale 21. 46 %- TOTAL: 100.00 %- Except as provided in Section 2.8, each party shall bear its proportionate share of Counsel's fees and expenses incurred under Section 2.1 up to $130,000, whether or not a party withdraws from participation in this Agreement prior to the expenditure of $130,000 in costs." SECTION 3. Section 2.3 of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: "2.3 The parties further agree to share in the costs of any other expenditures reasonably and necessarily 930802 ay" 0070355 2 incurred by any party to this Agreement in anticipation of litigation in proportion to their percentage share as set forth in Section 2.2, whether or not a party withdraws from participation in this Agreement prior to the expenditure of $130,000 in costs incurred under Section 2.1. For the purposes of this Section 2.3, the parties understand and agree that no party other than the City of Palo Alto shall be reimbursed for additional costs and expenses as provided herein: a. City of Palo Alto not to exceed $1,086.55 [for court reporter transcripts of San Jose Planning Commission ($741.60) and San Jose City Council ($294.95) hearings on negative declaration and tax ordinance, respectively] plus an amount not to exceed $50.00 for photocopying costs associated with the production of documents by the City of San Jose in response to a California Public Records Act request submitted by the City of Palo Alto. The obligation to pay any unpaid reimbursements shall survive the termination of this Agreement." SECTION 4. Section 2.7 of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: "2.7 In the event a party withdraws from participation in this Agreement after $130,000 in costs have been incurred, that party shall be obligated to pay for its proportionate share of the costs in excess of $130,000 incurred to the date of withdrawal and give to the City Attorney not less than three (3) days' notice of that party's intent to withdraw from participation in any action initiated by Counsel. The effective date of a party's withdrawal shall occur on the date a court approves of such party's withdrawal as a party to any legal or equitable action initiated by Counsel in behalf of the parties. Costs in excess of $130,000 shall be shared by the remaining parties in accordance with each remaining party's respective share of the total tonnage of solid waste delivered by the remaining parties to San Jose landfill sites during calendar year 1991. By way .of illustration of the foregoing paragraph's provisions on the calculation of costs, assume Counsel's final costs are in excess of $130,000, and the final cost is $150,000, the parties are A, B, C and D and their franchise hauled tonnage for calendar year 1991 are 10, 20, 30 and 40 tons, respectively, and party A withdraws after Counsel incurs $135,000 in legal costs and party B withdraws after Counsel incurs $140,000 in costs. Counsel's costs in excess of $130,000 will be shared by the parties A, B, C and D as follows: 930802 'YO 0070355 3 A - 10/100 x ($135,000 - $130,000) = $500. B - 20/100 X ($135,000 - $130,000) + 20/90 x ($140,000 _ $135,000) = $2,111.11. C - 30/100 x ($135,000 - $130,000) + 30/90 x ($140,000 _ $135,000) + 30/70 x ($150,000 - $140,000) = $7,452.38. D - 40/100 x ($135,000 - $130,000) + 40/90 X ($140,000 _ $135,000) + 40/70 X ($150,000 - $140,000) = $9,936.51." SECTION 5. Section 2.8 of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: "2.8 Notwithstanding any other provision contained in this Agreement, in no event shall the total amount required to be paid by the City of Monte Sereno for its share of costs, including interest, exceed the amount of one thousand dollars ($1,000), and the total amount required to be paid by the City of Saratoga under this Agreement for its share of costs, including interest, shall not exceed four thousand seven hundred sixty dollars ($4,760). In the event that the amount of a party's share of the total costs established under Section 2.2 would exceed that party's share of costs subject to limitation under Section 2.8, e~ch of the parties other than the party whose costs are subject to limitation agrees to pay a proportionate share of that party's share of costs, including interest, in excess of the amount of the limitation on costs as follows: The excess amount of costs of a party whose share of costs, including interest, is subject to limitation shall be multiplied by a fraction, the numerator of which is any other party's percentage share established under Section 2.2 and the denominator of which is the difference between one hundred percent and the percentage share established under Section 2.2 of the party whose share of costs, including interest, is subject to limitation. By way of illustration of the foregoing paragraph's provisions, assuming that the total costs of litigation is $130,000 and the excess amount of costs to be shared by all parties other than Saratoga is $1,428 ($6,188 or 4.75% of $130,000 less $4,760), Palo Alto's share of $1,428 will be $238.70 ($1,428 x 15.92/100 _ 4.76) . SECTION 6. Section 5.4 of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: "5.4 This Agreement is intended to cover the payment of costs of legal representation of the parties in a determination of whether the adoption of the 930802 'y" 0070355 4 ordinance was in compliance with applicable law through the completion of trial, if any, or other final resolution of such determination and a final deter- mination on appeal. Executed by the parties on the date first above stated. CITY OF CAMPBELL APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: ATTEST: By: By: 930802 BY. 0070355 5 CITY OF CUPERTINO By: ATTEST: APPROVED ~;ro F~. -;/' (0 ¿;¿:~- 6Id /U By: . ..-/ é'Cf-1-" 'é~/ By: 930802 .yo 0070355 6 CITY OF LOS ALTOS By: ATTEST: By: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: 930802 'Yo 0070355 7 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS By: ATTEST: By: 930802 'Y. 0070355 APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: 8 TOWN OF LOS GATOS By: ATTEST: By: 930802 'y" 0070355 APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: 9 APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: CITY OF MILPITAS By: ATTEST: By: 930802 'yn 0070355 10 APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: CITY OF MONTE SERENO By: ATTEST: By: 930802 'yn 0070355 11 CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW By: ATTEST: By: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: ,? APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW By: ATTEST: By: 930802 'Yo 0070355 12 APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: CITY OF PALO ALTO By: ATTEST: By: 930802 'Y' 0070355 13 CITY OF SANTA CLARA By: ATTEST: By: 930802 .yo 0070355 APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: 14 , CITY OF SARATOGA By: ATTEST: By: 930802 .yn 0070355 15 APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: