Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Cronin indicated the northwest area should be excluded from the Memorandum of <br />Understanding. She said the County informed her that they had no input with regard to setting <br />boundaries and have not seen the map which is exhibit A to the agreement. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver refuted that and indicated Alameda County had representatives at the table <br />when the boundaries were discussed. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico indicated he was in favor of Option 3 regarding attorneys' fees because he did <br />not want to pay for outside counsel for the County. With regard to damages, he felt there <br />should be language establishing how the split would be divided. He was also comfortable with <br />allowing a court to decide. Mr. Pico was not in favor of the Campbell termination clause. <br /> <br /> Ms. Scribner said that in looking at a map, Pleasanton and Hayward have a much smaller <br />acreage than Alameda County. However in order to get Alameda County to cooperate in <br />keeping the open space, she believed we had to give them something. She agreed to handling <br />legal fees in house, but did not want to pay for outside counsel. If a judgment were against an <br />individual jurisdiction, each party should pay its own share. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver did not think it made sense for the County to pick the defense attorney if we <br />are holding the County harmless. The Ridge is Pleasanton's back yard, whether 2% or more, <br />and he believed we should have a say. If Pleasanton is a principal party to benefit, then <br />Pleasanton should be willing to pay for it. He did not support the termination clause. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Ms. Scribner, seconded by Ms. Mohr, that Hayward and Pleasanton <br />would provide defense for the County if a third party challenges the agreement and that defense <br />would be provided by in-house legal staff and Hayward and Pleasanton would not pay attorneys <br />fees awarded against the County, and would not pay for damages awarded against the County; <br />that two out of three jurisdictions are required to terminate the agreement. <br />The roll Call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmembers Mohr and Scribner <br />NOES: Councilmembers Dennis, Pico, and Mayor Tarver <br />ABSENT: None <br />ABSTAIN: None <br /> <br /> The motion failed. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Mr. Pico, seconded by Ms. Dennis, to approve Option 3 regarding <br />attorneys' fees; damages to be shared equally; and not to include the termination section. <br />The roll call vote was aS follows: <br />AYES: Councilmembers Dennis, Pico, and Mayor Tarver <br />NOES: Councilmembers Mohr and Scribner <br />ABSENT: None <br />ABSTAIN: None <br /> <br />10/1/93 <br /> 4 <br /> <br /> <br />