HomeMy WebLinkAboutH.B. Municipal Employees Association - MEA - 1988-01-0411 will
Page a Council/Agency Minutes - 1/4!88
�.M_`SESSION
Mayor Erskine called a closed Session of Council pursuant to Governmen Code
Section 54956.9(a) to confer with its attorney regarding pending litigation
which has been initiated formally and to which the c+':y is a party. The title
of the litigation is Simons vs. County of Marin, et al. United States Dis-
trict Court #CBF 5234 MHP. Mayor Erskine called a Closed Session of Council
pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) to confer with its attorney
-eg:irding pending litigation which has heen initiated formally and to which
the city As a party. The title of the litigation is Huntington Beach Munici-
pal Employees Association vs. Thompson, et al Orange County Superior Court
.,Case No. 44-18-25,
UCESS REr„tiE
The Mayor called a recess of Council at 9 p.m. The meeting was reconvened a
9,,35 p.m.
Mayor Erskine announced t.ouncil action from the C'.osed Session as follows.,
S�ttlemeni �Ioved_-Simons v Qa1jv of Harin. et al '_itiaation
1. "th?:fi the s'rn Gf $15,000 be authorized paid In settlement of Simons vs.
County of Marin, et al., toward c total settlement c $225,000.
That the settlement agreement oetween the Municipal Employees Association
and the City be approved and that tt.s Mayor City Clerk and City
,Acminl;;trator be authoirzed "o execute said agreement on behalf of the
it
C v.
:-,2-. To appropriate, not to ex.ceei $13,000 out of the unappropriated general
a- fonds of the City to pray any outstanding balance clue the law firm of
,, Adams, Duque & Hazeltine for
Nrenarat' on or the def c�ndant's appal brief
°? to the California Supreme Court.
a
89 ?� OWN_ I IREDEVFLQI?lQh T ENy
;-:,The Mayo r/Cha I rman adjourned tha
regular meeting of the City Council and the
regular meeting of the Redevelopment Agency -if the City of Huntington Beach to
; Aanuary 11, 1988 at fi p.rn, in Room
B-8 in the Civic Center. ;
' _ a M• entt;orth
Clerk of t,e Redevelopment Agency
?
and City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk
�*
of the City Council of the City of
Huntl ton ;each, California
BY
'
4AtTEST,
Der,ut� Ci Cl er /Dee ty ark
r•'
�'A Alicia M. Wentworth
lam` "'
'. CiL•, lerk/Clerk
Mayor/Chairman
x
�-.
Ueputy City Ci erkldeputy C! ee
�..
ri
SETTLEMENT AGREEIMENT °HUNTINGTON BEACH MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES
ASSOCIATION AND MEMBERS OF THE HU14TINGTON BEACH' MUNICIPAL
EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, AND CITY OF HUNTINuTON BEACH AND RELATED
PARTIES.
WHEREAS, the Huntington Beach Municipal Employees Associa-
tion, a California non-profit mutual benefit corporatioxt, and the
Members of the Huntinaton Beach Municipal Employees Association,
filed suit in the Superior Court of the State of California in
and for the County of Orange on October 19, 1984 for causes of
action in mandamus and monetary damages; and
WHEREAS, the Fourth district Court o appeal, Division
Three, rulers on March 27 and April 27, 1987 that said action in
mandamus was meritorious and that the legal effect of said ruling
was to render City of Huntington Beach Resolution Number 5455
unlawful and having been unlawfully adopted; and
WHEREAS, on June 25, 1017, the Ca?ifc:rnia Supreme Court
u,>held the ruling of the Cc;urt of Appeal in this case; aad
WHEREAS, petitioners have filed a 'lotion for Peremptory Writ
of Mandate, which motion is to be heard by the Orange County
Superior Court, Department 25, on January 27, 1988; and
WHEREAS, petitioners and plaintiffs have filed a Memorandum
of Casts detailin4 their costs and attorneylfs fees for Orange
County Superior Court Casa Number 44-18-15, and for Court of
Appeal Case Dumber 4CIV GO02811; and
WHEREAS, respondents have filed a Motion to Tax said Costs
to be heard by the court on January 27, 1988; and
WHEREAS, the City of Huntington Beach and all parties,
respondent and defendant in 'these actions, desire to reach an
amicable resolution of these disputes through settlement and
compromise without admission of further liability herein; and
WHEREAS, petitioners and plaintiffs Huntington Beach Munici-
pal Employees Association and the Members thereof, desire to
resolve this dispute in its entirety without the need for further
litigation;
NOW THEREFORE the parties hereby agree to the following
provisions of this settlement agreement:
I
STATUS OF THE PARTIES
A. Petitioner and plaintiff, Huntington Beach municipal
Employees Association is a California non-profit mutual benefit
corporation in good standing recognized as the exclusive
representative of all employees within the non --:safety,
non -management bargaining unit of respondent and defendant City
�-2-
of Huntington Beach.
Petitioners and plaintiffs, Members of the Huntington
Beach Municipal Employees Association are those Members, past and
present, who have held membership in the Huntington Beach Munk%-
pal Employees Association during the period beginning duly 1,
1984 and conrinuing through January 4, 1988.
Petitioners and plaint.ffs Huntington Beach Municipal
Employees Associationand i'—be:r-s of the Huntington Beach munici-
pal Employees Association shall hereinafter collectively be
referred to as „petitioner MEA", "pet,-tion_w and plaintiff MEA",
"plaintiff MEA", and/or "MEA"
B. Respondent and defendant City of iiunti..gton Beach is a
chartered California city.
Respondent and defendant City Council of the City of
Huntington Beach is the duly elected City Council of the 7ity of
2untington Beach, the composition of which is different from its
composition on the cor=encement of this lawsuit, and from its
composi_tiei October 15, 1984, the date of adoption of City of
Huntington Beach Resolution Number 5455.
Respondents and defendants Charles W. Thompson, Robert
Franz, Jack belly, John A. Thomas, Ruth S. Bailey, Rutn E.
Finley, Don iliac Allister, Robert P. Mandic, Ron Pattinson, Gail
Hutton, , Alicia Wentworth, Warren G. Hall, dim Pali.n, P,aymond
,3-
7 Picard, Max Bowman, Earl Robitaille,-William G.. Reed, and Paul
Coop are all individual counsel persons, er;loyees, city offi-
cials, representatives, and/or agents of respondent and defendant
City of Hun:ington Beach, either presently or at some time since
the commencement of this lawsuit.
II
'PURPOSE OF THIS AGREEMENT
A. The purpose of thissettlement agreement is to settle
I
and compromise all differences between the parties relating to
i the subject Lawsuit. It is the intention of all parties to fully
i
and completely resolve th;s lawsuit and all claims brought
L
j' hereunder, including claims for equitable relief and claims for
monetary damages. It is the further intent of this agreement to
resolve the claim filed by petitioners and plaintiffs he_ein,
which claim was duly filed with the City Clerk of the City o
Huntington Beach on October 19, 1984, given claim number 84-61,
and rejected cn October 30, 1984.
B. The instant lawsuit is the result of a dispute between
the parties 'which arose during the course of their 1984 meeting
and conferring pursuant to the provisions of the Meyers-Milias-
Brown Act (Government Code Section 35OG et seq.). All parties
agree that this dispute has been an impediment to improved
employer -employee relations between the City of Hunt.ngton Beach
and the MEA..
4-
I
C The further purpose of this settlement agreement is to
improve employer -employee relations between the various parties
by removing this impediment to constructive and positive employee
relations. In consideration of the fact, recognized by all
parties, that a litigated ---elution of this dispute including
both the equitable portion of this dispute which would be heard
by the court alone, and the monetary, damages portion of this
dispute which would be heard by a jury, could result in an
adverse result for either part}; this negotiated settlement
agreement is deemed to be a preferable resolution for all
parties.
IT
SUBSTANTIVE PROVISIONS O THIS AGREEMENT
A. Respondents and defendants agree to implement a
salary increase (a one Range increase on the Cizy of Huntinqton
Beach Universal Salary Schedale) for all. Classifications in the
Bargaining Unit represented by MEA and all incumbents therein,,
effective aanuary 4, 1988.
B. The respondents shall pay a total settlement of
$174,500,00 in exchange for a total dismissal of this case with
prejudice. Said amount shall be paid as follows:_
I. The City of Huntington Beach shall pay $154,000.O0
to the Huntington Beacb Municipal Employees Associetior and the
fi
M '
Client Trust Account of James G. Harker., Said funds shall be
administered and disbursed by the Law Offices of James G. Harker,
a Professional Corporation, in accordance with the directions of
the Board of Directors of the Huntington Beach Municipal
Employees Association. It is recognized by all -oarties that all
or any portion of said funds may be distributed to the Members of
MEA, past and present, who have asserted personal injury claims
against the defendants f Fire lfrc� �sre:s Amy a� Rc u i~LAI-%n FOIL
was 7'3 rlC-ast IA)
2. TYt:s City of Huntington beach shall pay James G.
Harker, a Professional Corporation, $20,000.00 as and for
attorneys fees in complete settlement of any claim for attorneys,
fees against respondents ana defendants.
D. The total monetary settlement of $174,500.00 shall, be
made by wad of a City of Huntington Beach check in the amount of
$174,500.00 made payable to the Huntington Beach Municippl
Employees Association and James G. Harper, Client Trust Account.
Said funds shall be deposited in r.ie trust accont of James G.
Harker, A Professional Corporation a:rd distributed as identified
above. All other salary increases, Eunds, and salary adjustments
shall be distributed though the City payroll sys:,err.
E. The parties shall execute all documents, writings,
court filings, releases, and dismissals, which are .required by
the other parties,, their Insurers and their agents, to effectuate
all. ':terms and conditions of this settlement agreement.
F. This settlement agreement shall resolve all collective
bargaining disp"tes from the 1984 meet and confer process.
Respondent City of Huntington Beach shall not be required to
re -open or further negotiate with petitioner MLA, in any respect,
with regard to the 1984 bargaining process.
G. The parties shall, upon execution of this agreement,
and court proceedings other than proceedings to effectuate a
settlement of this case.
H. By this settlement agreement the petitioners and
plaintiffs hereby settle, compromis--, and withdraw the pending
lawsuit, their claim against the Cite of Huntington Beach, any
further right to appeal or proceed Ln any form w-th respect. to
this lawsuit, and any claims as 4o damages to them relating to
the events of October, 1984 and the 1984 bargaining process.
Fetiti_oz,ers and plaintiffs acknowledge that all matters arising
out of th;.s ?awsuit and its underlying claim are: finally com-
promised settled, and that this settlement agreement may be
k
pled as a de'ense and held as a bar to any action or proceeding
that may be brought, instituted, or taken by either party for any
damages arising out of or relating to the underlying dispute
L..rein.
7-
•
V
CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE; 91542 WAIVER
The petitioners and plaintiffs hereby waive and release any
and all claims against the City of Huntington Beach and all other,
respondents and defendants, their officers, employees, or agents,
and covenant not to sue upon any claim ;wising out of their
contention that said respondents and defendants have damaged
petitioners and plaintiffs is a result of the 1984 meet and
ccnfer process. Said waiver and releas- is made notwithstanding
California Civil Code Section 1542 which provides as follows:
"A general release noes not extend to claims which
the creditor does not know or expect to exist in
his favor at the time of executing the release,
which if known by him must have materially affected
his settlement with the debtor."
VI
ENTIRE IGREEMENT
The parties hereby declare and represent that they huve made
and/or received no promises, inducements, ox agreements other
than those expressed herein, and that this settlement agreement
contains the entire agreement between the parties hereto. The
terms of this compromise and settlement shall bind and ,inure to
the benefit of the parties and their heirs, successors, execu-
tors, and: assigns.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this
settlement agreer.ient on , 1988, and thereafter, at
Huntington .Beach, California.
Petitioner and Plaintiff Defendant and Respondent
Huntington. Beach Municipal City of Huntington Beach
Employees Association
y�
ROBERT T. HASTY, P.esident PAUL COOK, City Administrator
Approved as to Form Defendant and Respondent
and Content: City Council of the City of
Huntington Beach
LAW OFFICES OF JAMES G. HARKERBy
I
d AtiiES G. HARKER, Attorney for
Petitioners 4
CHARLE THOI+, SON j ROBERT
JOHN A. THOMAS
Rt1T$ S. BAILEY UTH E FINLEY
1�iA `,, L2S ER ROBERT P. MAND3 t:
,
-.-ROY ,PATTINSON GA HrJ CT N
YLt, AM G. 'REFD PAUL COOK
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT
GAIL HITTON, City Attorney
City (Attorney
it
I
l
i
s
-10-
\,
IF
ALICIA WENTWORTH WARREN G. BALL
JIM PALIN �� RAYI'OND PICARD
4z
MAX BOWMAN -AFL : ROBITAILLF
WILLIAM 0. REED PAUL COOK
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT
GAIL HUTTON, City Attorney
di
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties
hereto hwe executedthis
settlement agreement an
1988, and thereafter, at
Huntington Beach, California.
Petitioner and Plaintiff
Def-eandant and Respondent
Huntington Reach Municipal
City (if Huntington Beach
Employees Association
}
By--,
y
OBERx T. HASTY, President
PAUL C GK, City Administrator
Approved as to Form
Defendant and Respondent
and Content;
City Council of the City of
fiuntingLon Beach
LAW OFFICES OF DAMES G. HARKER
r
By
itv
--"vIAMES G. RXRKER, Attorney
for
fPetitionerr,
CHARLES W. THOMPSON
ROBERT _'RANI
JACK KELLX
,7CiHN A. THOMAS
R °H $. BAILEY
RUTH E. FINLEY
DON MAC ALLISTFR
ROBERT P. MANDIC
RON- PATTINSON
+SAIL HUTTON