BOARD MEETING DATE: November 5, 2010
|
|
PROPOSAL:
SYNOPSIS:
COMMITTEE:
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:
Barry R. Wallerstein, D.Env. Background The FY 2010-11 Budget for Legal included $260,000 for litigation expenses in environmental law cases and specialized legal counsel. Several firms, principally Woodruff Spradlin & Smart and Shute Mihaly & Weinberger, have been assisting District Counsel with environmental litigation and special litigation matters. The monies for these matters have been and will be expended on lawsuits, including those involving the Architectural Coatings Rules, the recently adopted rule for consumer paint thinners – Rule 1143, the lawsuit seeking to overturn Rule 433 – Natural Gas Quality, the appeal of the federal lawsuit challenging the District’s internal offset accounts, and Communities for a Better Environment’s request for attorneys’ fees in the challenge to a ConocoPhillips permit. Although District Counsel has put cost-containment measures in place, it is expected that expenses in these matters, and the other matters handled by specialized legal counsel, will require an additional amount up to $425,000. Accordingly, District Counsel is requesting the appropriation of additional funds in the amount of $425,000, for a total expected expenditure of $685,000 this fiscal year. Proposal In order to defend ongoing and threatened litigation, it is necessary to appropriate additional funds for expenditure by outside counsel. It is expected that ongoing lawsuits, and new litigation that is possible, as well as matters requiring specialized legal counsel will require an additional $425,000 to be appropriated to prequalified counsel approved by the Board, as well as specialized legal counsel, as the need arises. Resource Impacts Sufficient funds will be available in Legal’s FY 2010-11 Budget following the transfer of funds from the Designation for Litigation and Enforcement. |