ITEM: |
ACTION ITEM |
||||
|
|||||
8. |
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF ADDITIONAL
BUDGET FOR LEGAL SERVICES FROM SHUTE MIHALY &
WEINBERGER |
||||
|
|||||
Meeting Date: |
March 17, 2025 |
Budgeted: |
No |
||
|
|
|
|||
From: |
David J. Stoldt, |
Program/ |
N/A |
||
|
General Manager |
Line Item: |
|
||
|
|
|
|
||
Prepared By: |
David J. Stoldt |
Cost Estimate: |
$100,000 |
||
|
|||||
General Counsel Review: N/A |
|||||
Committee
Recommendation: N/A |
|||||
CEQA Compliance: This action does not constitute a project as
defined by the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378. |
|||||
SUMMARY: On December 23, 2020
in connection with California American Water (Cal-Am) Company’s challenge to
the environmental review of the potential acquisition of the Monterey Water
System, Monterey County Superior Court Case No. 20CV003201 the District hired
Shute Mihaly & Weinberger for representation with a budget up to $25,000.
That environmental review was in support of the District’s Local Agency
Formation Commission (LAFCO) application.
On January 5, 2022, the District signed an engagement letter with the
firm for services related to litigation over LAFCO’s decision rejecting the
activation of latent powers of the District to sell
water retail. The budget was set at $125,000. That engagement resulted in a
lawsuit: MPWMD v. Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) & Cal-Am,
22CV000925. The District brought this lawsuit to
challenge LAFCO’s conduct and administrative decisions regarding exercise of
District powers to acquire Cal-Am water system facilities in accord with the
voter mandate in Measure J. On December 7, 2023, Judge Thomas Wills ruled in
favor of the District, and against LAFCO. The matter
is now on appeal before the Sixth District Court of Appeal (H051849.)
The budget for Shute Mihaly & Weinberger has been exhausted. However,
the District believes that the firm continues to add value in both the appeal
of the LAFCO decision, as well as “latent power” issues in the eminent domain
proceeding, as co-counsel.
Estimating the level of legal activity is difficult, but the District is entering a complex and very active part of the
bench trial – also referred to as the “Right to Take” trial. It is recommended
that an additional authorization of $100,000 for the remainder of the fiscal
year be approved. Such an amount will be reflected in the pending budget.
RECOMMENDATION: The General Manager recommends the Board
approve an additional budget for Shute Mihaly & Weinberger of $100,000.
EXHIBITS
None
U:\staff\Boardpacket\2025\031725\Action
Items\08\Item-8.docx