HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 03151988 - 1.49 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA..COUNTY, CALIFORNIA'
March 15, 1988 by the following vote:
Adopted this Order on
AYES: Supervisors Powers , Fanden, McPeak , Torlakson.
NOES: None .
ABSENT: Supervisor Schroder
ABSTAIN: None .
SUBJECT: Railroad 4-R tax cases, further)
payments to. litigation fund ) Resolution No. 88/ 119
authorized ) (Govt. Code § 25203 )
The* Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County RESOLVES that: ,
Pursuant to Government Code Section 25203, the Auditor is
authorized and directed to draw and forward a warrant in the
amount of $3, 075 payable to County Supervisors Association of
California and charged to the same fund as previous contributions .
This amount is a further: contribution to the litigation fund
established for the subject cases , . in cooperation with other
counties .
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of
an action taken and entered on thF Minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: MAR 1,� 1988
DGC/jh PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk of the Board
of Supervisors and County Administrator
Deputy
By � P Y
j
i
Orig. Dept.:
CC: County Administrator
County Counsel
Auditor-Controller
Pn
. 1 , � 9
To- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: Victor J. Westman, County Counsel C ltra
By: Dennis C. Graves, Deputy County Couns coos
DATE: March 8, 1988 CO^
SUBJECT: "4-R" Litigation (Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe v. State
Board of Equalization, et al. and related cases)
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
By previous memoranda, we informed the Board of this
litigation in which the San Francisco law firm of Howard, Rice;
Nemerovsky, Canady, Robertson & Falk has been representing all of
the counties in California, except Los Angeles and Santa Clara
which refused to join the other counties . Your Board previously
authorized advances totalling approximately $30,0000 toward this
County' s obligation for the attorney' s fees and costs of the
litigation.
At this point in the litigation, we hope that one more
assessment will be sufficient to complete the case. This County' s
share of that assessment is $3, 075, which is 4.1% of the total
assessment. (Each county' s percentage share is the same as the
county' s percentage of all railroad unitary property in the
State. )
The resources of a large firm are virtually essential in this
type of complex litigation. We think the counties ' investment in
attorneys ' fees in this case has been worthwhile .
We strongly recommend the Board authorize the additional
.. $3, 075, and we enclose a Board Order to that effect.
DCG/jh
encl .
cc: Auditor
Administrator
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE; .
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR - RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE _. OTHER
SIGNATURE S :
ACTION OF BOARD ON I_- ._.._. r..IPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES; NOES:_ AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
CC'. ATTESTED __ MAR �+r 7O""
Q
PHIL BATCHELOR. CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
BY
M382/7-83 _,DEPUTY