My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
ADMINISTRATIVE FEE DISPUTE
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
LONG TERM AGREEMENT
>
A
>
ALAMEDA COUNTY
>
ADMINISTRATIVE FEE DISPUTE
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2013 2:57:11 PM
Creation date
6/14/2013 2:55:25 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
LONG TERM AGREEMENTS
LONG TERM AGREEMENTS - DOCUMENT DATE
5/31/2013
LONG TERM AGREEMENTS - NAME
COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
LONG TERM AGREEMENTS - TYPE
MISC AGMT
LONG TERM AGREEMENTS - RECORD SERIES
704-06 (Long Term Agreements)
LONG TERM AGREEMENTS - DESTRUCTION DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE <br /> This Settlement Agreement and Release (the"Settlement Agreement") is made and entered into <br /> by and between the City of Pleasanton, a municipal corporation ("City") and the County of <br /> Alameda, a political subdivision of the State of California ("County") and is effective as of the <br /> date of full execution by the parties as indicated below ("Effective Date"). <br /> RECITALS <br /> A. The County charges cities within the County a property tax administration fee for <br /> assessing, collecting. and allocating property tax revenues. <br /> B. A dispute has arisen between the City' and the County regarding the amount of <br /> property tax administration fees charged to the City beginning in fiscal year 2006-2007 and <br /> continuing through fiscal year 2011-2012 (the"Administrative Fee Dispute"). <br /> C. A dispute involving issues similar to those germane to the Administrative Fee <br /> Dispute was the subject of ongoing litigation recently decided by the Supreme Court of <br /> California in City of Alhambra v County of Los Angeles, Supreme Court of Cali forth, Case No. <br /> S 135457, in which the Supreme Court determined that there were errors in he methodology <br /> utilized by counties to calculate property tax administration fees (the "Administrative Fee <br /> Litigation"). <br /> D. In light of the Supreme Court's ruling in the Administrative Fee Litigation, the <br /> parties desire to enter into this Settlement Agreement in order to resolve the Administrative Few. <br /> Dispute and provide reimbursement to City for certain property tax administration fees in <br /> exchange for a complete release of any and all claims as hereinafter described. <br /> AGREEMENT <br /> NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants set forth below, <br /> City and County agree as follows: <br /> 1.0 Compromise and Settlement. <br /> the Parties to this Agreement, in consideration of the promises and concessions made by each <br /> Party, agree that the foregoing recitals are true and correct, and agree to mutually compromise <br /> and settle the Administrative Fee Dispute upon all of the terms and conditions in this Agreement. <br /> 2.0 Release and Discharge <br /> 2.1 In consideration of the payment set forth in Section 3.0. City, for itself, its <br /> elected and appointed officers, employees, agents, administrators, successors and <br /> assigns, does hereby release, acquit and tbrever discharge the County, its elected <br /> and appointed officials, officers, employees, agents, administrators, successors <br /> and assigns, from and against any and all past, present or future claims, demands, <br /> SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE Panics approve this met �$ <br /> Ct unty City <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.