Loading...
Resolution No. 7531• a 1 2'i 3' 41I1 5 6 7', 81' 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 7531 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VERNON APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A LETTER AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF VERNON AND THE LAW FIRM OF RUTAN & TUCKER, LLP TO CONTEST THE ACTIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Vernon by adoption of Resolution No. 7498 on February 15, 2000, authorized the filing of a petition or joinder in a petition before the State Water Resources Control Board contesting the January 26, 2000 action taken by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region, and its Executive Officer in connection with LARWQCB Order No. 96-054, Waste Discharge Requirements for Municipal Storm Water and Urban Run - Off Discharges within the County of Los Angeles; and WHEREAS, on February 24, 2000, a joint Petition for Review was filed by the law firm of Rutan & Tucker before the State Water Resources Control Board on behalf of numerous cities in the County of Los Angeles, the Building Industry Legal Defense Foundation and the Building Association of Southern California following the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board's approval of the Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plans; and WHEREAS, it is in the City of Vernon's best interests to join in the petition filed by the various cities and the building associations; and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WHEREAS, pursuant to the City's request, the law firm of Rutan 1&,Tucker included the City as a named petitioner in the joint petition; land WHEREAS, in order to continue with its participation in the Petition, the City of Vernon is being asked to enter into a letter lagreement with the law firm of Rutan & Tucker, the attorneys chosen to represent the various cities in the action entitled Cities of Bellflower Burbank Cerritos et al v California Regional Water WHEREAS, the law firm of Rutan & Tucker is requesting that leach City Petitioner be responsible for two-thirds (2/3rds) of the fees land costs incurred from February 28, 2000 forward, on a per capita lbasis, based on the number of cities identified as Petitioners at the time of the invoice and that each City Petitioner pay a Two Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($2,000.00) retainer amount to be used and drawn upon as fees and costs are expended; and WHEREAS, the City of Vernon believes that such a fee larrangement is reasonable. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY IOF VERNON AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The City Council of the City of Vernon hereby Ifinds and determines that the recitals contained hereinabove are true land correct. - 2 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 it 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 SECTION 2: The City Council of the City of Vernon hereby approves the Letter Agreement, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit "A." SECTION 3: The City Council of the City of Vernon hereby authorizes the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute said Letter Agreement for, and on behalf of, the City of Vernon. SECTION 4: The City Council of the City of Vernon hereby directs the City Administrator to send a copy of this resolution, one fully executed Agreement, and a $2,000.00 retainer to: Rutan & Tucker, LLP Attn: Richard Montevideo P.O. Box 1950 Costa Mesa, CA 92628-1950 SECTION 5: The City Clerk of the City of Vernon shall certify to the passage of this resolution, and thereupon and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of May, 2000. ATTEST: — x;e__ 41('�"-X'�Irt' ��� BRUCE V. MALKENHORST, City Clerk LEONIS C. MkLBURG, ayor - 3 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) )ss COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) I, BRUCE V. MALKENHORST, City Clerk of the City of Vernon, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution, being Resolution No. 7531, was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Vernon at a regular meeting of the City Council duly held on Tuesday, May 2, 2000, and thereafter was duly signed by the Mayor of the City of Vernon. BRUCE V. MALKENHORST, City Clerk (SEAL) - 4 - EXHIBIT A TAN CKER-i A T T 0 R N E Y S AT L A W A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS 611 ANTON BOULEVARD, FOURTEENTH FLOOR COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA 92626.1998 MELT ALL MAIL TO. POST OFFICE BOX 1950 COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA 92628-1950 TEL W#0NE 714-641.5100 FACSIMILE 714-S46-9035 INTERNET ADDRESS www.rutan.com DiMet Dial: (714) 662-4642 E-mail: rmontevid+eo@rutan.com Mr. Art Cervantes City of Vernon 4305 Santa Fe Avenue Vernon, CA 90058 A.W. RLITAN O IS&Ig nt TAMES t. Tucak SR. (i SSi.tiSq TAMES R. MOOT" ►AUK F'IODERiC MAR% W"mm 1. cArUN MICHAEL T. HORNAK MATTHEW K ROSS L Gr01/ 5 A• ORj. 4 RICNARO A. CURNUTT LEONARD A. HA"PR "IILM O KOHN ROSW' 0. Owem O.OWEN nNG A.lf NDERDENA TRIG A.. U NOEq O. DANIEL L L G�DHlT ESIXT 00-W L HUIRLWT, IR. TOR 0. KU►ERSERG S7FVEN A. NI HMS ADAM AOAEE A. GOLDF KARA S. CARLSON ARLS ARM NAN L A L P ►RM MKKAR W. IMMELL MgiORO T THOMAS G. NIOCKINGTON F. KEVI B AZIDFARe E. KEV W BRAZIL ERIC IRIC L ALA N FTfEO GAIANTEWILLIAM - RICHARD RIC/IARp O. ARM 0. 7NE000Rf L W M.• EVRIDIKI W. WYNOER IINLTOI OALULS UYNI N. MRZIR CRESSY LOMOM PARKER MARK K MALOVOS tow NOUYOF GIUERT N. KRIIGER LM40ALL K SAttUSH L SKI HARRISON K 7RAYNUM IIFFREY T. MRtlRHG MATTFNW L MRSOl1. IOSEPH 0. CARRUTN RICHARD P. StMS MARY K GREEN LARRY A. CEMM SON P. FARNU MARLINE POSE RRGEHELN WE C. RISHER FAMES S. OWE&L MKNAIL E. SITZER THOMAS CRANE 1 -ARM CAROL 0. CARTY ARK LEE WALTER IENNI ER S. ANDERSON IOHN T. BRADLEY ROIKRT C. tRAUN THOMAS S. SALINGER• ERAWE O: MCCALLA RN71ARp K./WWELL KAREN EUZAKTH WALTER NATALIE S4tµO DWMAS ALIfON L ROSSMAN .AVID.ORD SEW PENELO PFNEIOPE fARMEi K KATHERON NNSON EMVIO N. HOCNNER SILL N. LNRRE KL7SOH LEMO1NE4tiN E. MICHAEL 0. RUMN DUKE E. WAHLQUIST A. PATRICK MUEiOZ pHN WLTON, LOAN A. RAIMRFZ RARFN L MARTNIEZ IRA G RWIW RICHARD G. MONTEVIDEO LLB SCR SMITH S. RSOTTIf UL S IYNN LOScHIN 0M a CHEN ' T. LAN NGUYEN NFFUT K OODCNAN• STAN WOLCOTT, ERNEST W. IR ►AUl 1. SIEVIRS 1. SEVERE K75E►H L MAGA, 4 ►E LIP I. SLANCHARO TEMNCE L GALLAGHER USA V. NICIIOLAS IIOtERT S. SOMIIR L MAR. Hm 0. T II L PSON E]IAO. T/IOAViON ICRAIG C. RRGER ROSIRT L KING CEO AGALLEGOS DAVID L ALISNIRE ,�� A. POD DAVI S. COS RA[ER OANS S. DAN $ ATER STEEL OFSL K HIARN4ILMY p �E OP CARD 0.I: MESM& IL! wxtMM K MARTICORFNA LN;TMVE NANS VAN IN:TEN RNT K MYTON MARK WJDENSNK ISE L. R OAYg1 GMpfALOt 4 FAMES L MORRIS STEPHEN A. ELLH STEVEN J. GOON W. ANOREW MOORI .A PROFESSIONALPROFESSIONALTIONAL MESON L. TSAO CORPOMTKNJ April 10, 2000 RECEIVED (APR 112400 Community Services Re: Cities of Bellflower Burbank Cerritos et _al. v. California Reizional Water Quality Control Board Dear Mr. Cervantes: As you know, the law firm of Rutan & Tucker, along with some 23 cities in the County of Los Angeles, the Building Industry Legal Defense Foundation and the Building Association of Southern California (hereafter collectively BILD ), proceeded to file a Petition or an Amended Petition on behalf of the City of Vernon ("City") challenging the action of the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board on January 26, 2000 and actions and failures to act of its Executive Officer, Mr. Dennis Dickerson.' The purpose of this letter is to confirm the City's retention of Rutan & Tucker in connection with these matters. This retainer letter therefore sets forth the terms upon which the City has retained Rutan & Tucker and also provides the consent and appropriate conflict waivers The Cities who have joined in as Petitioners are as follows: Artesia, Bellflower, Burbank, Cerritos, Commerce, Diamond Bar, Downey, Irwindale, La Canada-Flintridge, La Mirada, La Verne, Lakewood, Lawndale, Monrovia, Palos Verdes Estates, Pico Rivera, Pomona, Rancho Palos Verdes, Santa Fe Springs, Signal Hill, South Gate, Vernon, Walnut, and Whittier. These Cities are hereafter collectively referred to as the "City Petitioners." The Cities of Bell Gardens, Compton, Hawaiian Gardens, Huntington Park, City of industry, Montebello, Paramount, San Gabriel, and Rosemead have asked to be added as Petitioners through an amendment and are therefore also to be included as "City Petitioners" herein. The Cities of Artesia has asked to withdraw as a Petitioner and is, therefore, not a City Petitioner for purposes of this Retainer Agreement. Additional Cities may be added as Petitioners in the future. 227/065121-0067 A — 1 58911.01 804/09/00 ,FUTAN TUCKER2 ATTOONEYS AT LAW Mr. Art Cervantes April 10, 2000 Page 2 for any potential conflicts that may be created by Rutan & Tucker's joint representation of the Cities and BILD. Our fees are generally based on the hourly design rates set by the firm, subject to periodic review and change, for the various attorneys involved in handling the matter. The rates vary depending upon the level of seniority, expertise and experience of the individuals involved. At present, my hourly design rate is $250 an hour, however, because we are in part representing existing public entity clients, our hourly rate for purposes of this matter will be a composite rate of $195 per hour for all attorney time. Further, whenever possible, legal interns, law clerks, legal assistants and other professionals with a lower billing rate will be utilized, consistent with the proper representation of the interests of our clients in connection with this matter and without sacrificing proficiency. In addition to fees, our clients are also billed for all necessary costs incurred in connection with the representation, such as document copying costs, messenger service fees, telecopying fees, long distance telephone costs, mileage, computer assisted research, filing fees, reporter fees, administrative record fees, and other related litigation and petition costs and out-of-pocket expenses. We render our statements on a monthly basis and they are payable within 30 days from the date of the invoice. The invoices will describe the work performed during the billing period and the identity of the individuals providing services, as well asa break down of billed costs. it is customary in matters of this nature that we receive a retainer as an advance against fees and costs prior to commencing work on the matter. For purposes of our representation, BILD has agreed to forward a payment of $5,000 as an initial retainer to be utilized towards fees and costs already incurred in connection with the preparation of the above -referenced Petition. Thereafter, from February 28th on, BILD has agreed to pay one-third (1/3) of the fees and costs necessary to represent all Petitioners' interests in connection with this matter, including the fees and costs necessary to put forth an alternative Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan before the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board. The remaining City Petitioners, including your City, have agreed to be responsible. for the remaining two-thirds (2/3rds) of the fees and costs incurred from February 28th on, until conclusion, with each City Petitioner agreeing to make an initial payment of $2,000 to be used towards the payment of such amounts. The City Petitioners will remain responsible for two-thirds of all such fees and costs incurred in this matter from February 28, 2000 forward, and the $2,000 retainer amount from each City will be used and drawn upon as fees and costs are expended. Each City shall be responsible for its pro rats portion of the fees and costs per capita, i.e., each City is responsible for paying invoices for two-thirds of the total billings, on a per capita basis, based on the number of Cities identified as Petitioners at the time of the invoice. If the City determines to drop -out of the Petition, the City shall be responsible for the costs and fees incurred up to the time it withdraws from the proceedings, including the costs and fees to effectuate the withdrawal. Monthly invoices showing the costs and fees incurred will be sent and any portion of the retainer 227/065121-0067 58911.01 a0410 M A - 2 ' ;Q.JTA�NCR ATTORNEYS AT L A W Mr. Art Cervantes April 10, 2000 Page 3 amount remaining, upon the conclusion of this matter, if any, will be returned, to the City within 30 days thereafter. In accordance with the requirements of California Business and Professions Code section 6148, I wanted. to advise you that Rutan & Tucker maintains errors and omissions insurance coverage applicable to the services to be rendered as contemplated by this agreement. As you know, Rutan & Tucker is currently acting as legal counsel to a number of other cities and school districts in Orange, Los Angeles and Riverside counties, as well as a large number of other private clients. Rutan & Tucker's representation of such public and private entities in such other matters is unrelated to its representation of the City in this matter. Rutan & Tucker therefore reserves the right to continue to represent such parties in these unrelated matters and any other parties in the future which may be adverse to the City, but which are unrelated to our representation of City in connection with the subject proceeding. Your signature below will confirm this understanding and your waiver on behalf of the City of any such conflicts. As referenced above, Rutan & Tucker is also representing BILD and some 23 other cities in connection with this matter, and anticipates representing additional cities in connection with an amendment to the subject Petition to account for additional action taken by the Executive Officer basal on the Regional Board's action of January 26, 2000. Some of these cities are cities which Rutan & Tucker presently represents and/or has represented in the past on other matters. In representing the City petitioners and in representing BILD's interests in the course of this proceeding, it is our belief that the interests of all Petitioners, both financially and legally, will be consistent and that we are able to proceed with a common strategy. Yet, there is always a potential for a conflict of interest to arise after additional facts involving the proceedings become known and/or as a result of a divergence in interest in the future because of positions that have or may be taken by the Respondents. One of the purposes of this retainer agreement is to provide full disclosure of the scope of our representation and to minimize any such potential conflicts. California Rule of Professional Conduct section 3-310 provides in part that: Rule 3-310. Avoiding The Representation Of Adverse Interests. (C) A member shall not, without the informed written consent of each client: (1) Accept representation of more than one client in a matter in which the interests of the clients potentially conflict; or 227/065121-0067 A — 3 5011.o1 ao4M/00 RUTAN &, E 11 A 7 T 0 R N!• S At L A W Mr. Art Cervantes April 10, 2000 Page 4 (2) Accept or continue representation of more than one client in a matter in which the interests of the clients actually conflict; or (3) Represent a client in a matter and at the same time in a separate matter accept as a client a person or entity whose interest in the first matter is adverse to the client in the first matter. (D) A member who represents two or more clients shall not enter into an aggregate settlement of the claims of or against the clients without the informed written consent of each client. In accordance with Rule 3-310, please be advised that there is a potential for the interests of the Petitioners to become adverse in the future. As an example, a potential conflict could arise if one or more of the City Petitioners determines to proceed with a Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan that is inconsistent with a plan that BiLD or another City would seek to be implemented. Although at this time there is no indication that such a conflict exists, and the interests of the Petitioners are not in anyway presently adverse, such a potential for adverse interests exists, and could cause a different settlement or prosecution strategy in pursing the Petition. If a conflict does occur between the City and BILD, the City agrees that Rutan & Tucker may continue with its representation of the City Petitioners and may withdraw from its representation of GILD, with BILD then being permitted to substitute in new counsel, if it so desires. Further, if a conflict arises in the future between and among the City Petitioners, Rutan & Tucker is permitted to proceed with the representation of those cities it presently represents as City Attorney, i.e., the Cities of Irwindale, Lawndale, and Signal Hill, and all other cities whose interests do not conflict with the interests of Irwindale, Lawndale, and Signal Hill in connection with these matters. Finally, your signature below :will constitute a waiver of any existing conflicts that may be created by Rutan & Tucker's representation of other parties presently adverse to your City in unrelated matters, and in its representation of future clients adverse to the City in unrelated matters. Your signature and acceptance of this retainer agreement below will constitute the City's approval of this provision on conflicts of interest and will also permit Rutan & Tucker to continue to represent other private and public clients who are or may be adverse to the City in the future, both in litigation and in non -litigation matters but unrelated to the instant proceedings, as well as to continue to represent the other City Petitioners in connection with this matter. Of course, in the event a conflict occurs, any amounts remaining in the retainer that are owed to the City in accordance with the above -referenced formula, would be returned to the City, along with A - 4 227/065121 0067 59911.01 a04/09/00 IRIJTAN &`IJCKER1 A T TO R N 4 Y$ A T L A W Mr. Art Cervantes April 10, 2000 Page 5 copies of all research and other legal analysis prepared in the course of our, representation of your interests in connection with this Petition. In addition, to the extent any consultants and/or expert witnesses will be necessary to pursue these matters, at this time, we believe that a coordinated strategy among experts and consultants will be cost effective. BILD has, moreover, offered to provide in-house and certain independent expert and technical services to assist in prosecuting the Petition, without cost to the other Petitioners in the proceeding. Should a conflict arise in the future with respect to the interests of BILD and the other Petitioners, and Rutan & Tucker is not able to proceed with its representation of BILD, the experts and consultants provided by BILD may continue to represent the interests of BILD in this or any subsequent proceeding. Other experts/consultants may continue to provide assistance and expertise to the remaining Petitioners represented by Rutan & Tucker. Please recognize that although there is a potential for adverse interests in the future, we believe at this time that collective' action on the part of each of the respective Petitioners is to their mutual advantage. It is our belief that there is a strong common interest among each of the Petitioners involved in the subject Petition, which permits and allows for a coordinated strategy in prosecuting the Petition and in pursuing a Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan on behalf of all of the Petitioners. We appreciate the opportunity to serve as your attorneys and anticipate a productive and harmonious relationship. If, however, you become concerned for any reason with the services we have or are performing, or the fees that have been assessed to the City, we encourage you to bring this matter to our attention immediately. If we perceive a problem with the representation, we will similarly bring it to your attention. If you wish Rutan & Tucker to represent the City in connection with this matter, we are requesting that you provide informed written consent by signing and returning this letter to us as soon as possible. We encourage you to seek independent counsel if you so desire regarding the importance of this consent, and we emphasize that you remain completely free to speak to independent counsel at any time, even if you decide to sign this Retainer Agreement and provide the consent requested herein. I would appreciate it if you would execute and return the enclosed copy of this letter, indicating the City's agreement with the above and authorizing us to act accordingly. A - 5 227/065121-0067 58911.01 ao4/o9/00 - T L-'CP3 A T T e" T S AT L A W Mr. Art Cervantes April 10, 2000 Page 6 If you have any questions or comments with respect to any of the matters set forth in this letter, please do not hesitate to call me. I look forward to working with you and the City and to a successful representation of your interests. Thank you again for considering Rutan & Tucker. Sincerely, RUTAN & TUCKER, LLP RM:hd Richard Montevideo I have read and understood the contents of this letter and consent to Rutan & Tucker representing the City on the items set forth above. City of Vernon Dated: April , 2000 By: Signature of City Representative 227/M121-0067 58911.01 a04/09/00 A - 6