14 - Laserfiche WebLink

Plan. The City will implement the Scope of Services incorporated into the professional services agreement entered into between the City and ESA on July 20, 2010; provided, however, that the City may, in its discretion, and after providing advance written notice to Intervener and Plaintiffs, modify the Scope of Services in a manner that does not prevent the City from fully addressing the allegations raised by the General Plan /CEQA litigation. The Climate Action Plan will address the allegations raised by the General Plan /CEQA litigation, as spelled out in the Scope of Services. The Attorney General's Office has interpreted CEOA and its Guidelines to require that the City analyze its GHG emissions and reduction strategies for the life of a project (through 2025 for the City's General Plan), and to require that the City measure GHG impacts against physical environmental conditions as they exist at the time a Notice of Preparation is published, not against a "business as usual" scenario. The City acknowledges, but is not bound by, these interpretations of the Attorney General's Office, and shall consider drafting the SEIR to be consistent with these interpretations. Nothing in the Settlement Agreement requires the City to undertake any obligation with respect to the Climate Action Plan, or the SEIR for the Climate Action Plan, in excess of the obligations generally imposed under CEQA or any other State law. • Article 9 (CEQA). As appropriate, and as agreed to in the Tentative Agreement, the City will conduct environmental analysis in accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines for the actions identified in the Settlement Agreement. Article 10 (No Additional Litigation; Plaintiffs' Waiver and Release). The parties agree to terminate all litigation. The City will not appeal or further contest the actions. The Plaintiffs and Intervener agree to dismiss with prejudice all outstanding causes of action and litigation. Dismissal with prejudice means they are agreeing not to sue the City again based upon any issue that was raised in the Urban Habitat litigation. But, they reserve the right to enforce the Settlement Agreement and challenge future implementation actions by the City, i.e. adoption of the Housing Element update and the Climate Action Plan. Enforcement of this agreement could entail reinstitution by the Court of cessation of the City's permitting authority. Article 11 (Permitting Authority). The City's permitting authority shall be fully and immediately restored upon approval of the Settlement Agreement. Article 12 (Judgment and Enforcement). The Settlement Agreement shall be made a part of a Judgment to be approved by the Court. The Court will retain jurisdiction over the case pending completion of all items agreed to by the parties. If one party believes the other has breached the terms of the agreement, there is a mechanism to notify the other party of the concern and an opportunity to meet and confer together before a party pursues judicial enforcement. It is acknowledged that Plaintiffs and Intervener may seek from the Court re- imposition of restriction of the City's permitting authority in the event of a breach of the Settlement Agreement by the City. Article 13 (Attorneys Fees and Litigation Costs). The City shall pay $1,990,000 to Public Advocates, Inc. in two equal payments, one within 30 days of the date of approval, and the second no later than July 31, 2011. The State Attorney General's Office does not seek recovery of fees. If Plaintiffs or Intervener make(s) a claim arising from some Page 6 of 7