HomeMy Public PortalAboutORD10182 BILL NO. g,3 —�34
SPONSORED BY COUNCILMAN
® ORDINANCE NO. L� D
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF JEFFERSON, MISSOURI, AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH WILLIAM M.
BARVICK FOR THE PROVISION OF LEGAL SERVICES, AND AUTHORIZING A
BUDGET ADJUSTMENT.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JEFFERSON,
MISSOURI, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized and
directed to execute a contract with William M. Barvick for the
provision of legal services for the sum of $30, 000.
Section 2. The contract shall be substantially the same in
form and content as that contract attached hereto as Exhibit A.
Section 3. There is hereby appropriated out of the
Unappropriated General Fund Balance $60, 000 for the purpose of
increasing the appropriations of UE Rate Case, Account Number 10-
15-336A.
Section 4. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect
from and after the date of its passage and approval.
® Passed 1q-1 7 - g Approved el -2n _�'cf
Preq,4fding Off ice Mayor
ATTEST:
Of O
City Clerk
LEGAL SERVICES CONTRACT
This contract is made and entered into this -�-- day of
® , 1984 , by and between the City of Jefferson, Missouri,
a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City" , and
William M. Barvick, hereinafter referred to as "Attorney" .
The parties agree as follows :
1. Attorney will represent the City in the Union Electric
Company rate increase request case currently pending before the
Missouri Public Service Commission (PSC Case No. ER-84-168) . Such
representation shall include reviewing all testimony in the case,
consultation with the City regarding the position that it wishes
to take in the case, the selection of, and consultation with,
expert witnesses to present testimony in support of that
position, consultation with the Commission's Staff and the Public
Counsel regarding their positions in the case, briefing and
arguing the case before the Commission, and such other similar
matters as may be necessary to fully prepare and conclude the
case before the Commission.
2. The City will pay for the services rendered by Attorney
at $60/hour. The City will also pay any out-of-pocket expenses
incurred by Attorney in connection with those services, including
travel, long distance telephone calls, copies , and postage for
mailing packages.
3. Attorney will submit to the City a detailed bill each
month itemizing the cost of the services rendered. The City will
pay Attorney on a monthly basis . The total cost of the services
under this contract shall not exceed $30, 000 without the prior
written approval of the City, even if other cities join with the
City for joint representation.
4 . If the City decides to join with other cities in the
presentation of a common position, Attorney will undertake the
additional representation insofar as it does not conflict with
representation of the City. The charge for this joint
representation would be at the same rate of $60/hour. The City
will pay Attorney for the entire cost of the joint
representation. Contribution to the payment of those costs by the
participating cities is a matter to be worked out between
Jefferson City and the other cities .
5. City will hire the expert witnesses to be used in the
case. Attorney shall consult with the City concerning the
selection of the expert witnesses .
6. Attorney's letter to the City Counselor, dated March 29,
1984 , is hereby incorporated by reference into this contract .
• 7. City may terminate this contract by giving notice in
writing to the Attorney. Upon termination of this contract, City
will pay Attorney for any unpaid services he has already
'performed and for any unpaid out-of-pocket expenses already
incurred.
CITY OF JEFFERSON
By
MAYOR
ATTEST:
c
CITY CLERK
WILLIAM M. BARVICK
Attorney at Law
WILLIAM M. BARVICK
ATTORNEY AT LAW
® 124 EAST HIGH STREET
JEFFERSON CITY, MISSOURI GS101
314-834-4737
March 29, 1984
Mr. Lyndel Porterfield
City Counselor
320 East McCarty
Jefferson City, MO 65101
Re: Union Electric request to increase rates charged for
electric service, P.S.C. Case No. 84-168
Dear Mr. Porterfield:
It is my understanding that Jefferson City will be faced
with a substantial increase in the rates that it pays for
electricity if the Union Electric Company's pending rate request
is approved, and that, as a result, it is interested in obtain-
ing the assistance of outside counsel to represent it in that
® proceeding.
I have had extensive experience before the Missouri Public
Service Commission, and, as you know, I recently represented
Jefferson City and a coalition of similarly situated cities
in an intervention in the Union Electric merger case in which
the company was also proposing a major increase for municipal
customers. As a result, I would like to submit the following
proposal to provide legal services to the City and to any other
city that joins with Jefferson City to protect a similar interest
in the above proceedings.
I will provide legal advice to the City and to any other
city with a similar interest that has joined with the City in
a common pursuit of their mutual interests in this proceeding.
I will also provide representation before the Missouri Public
Service Commission to protect and to promote the*City' s interests
in the Union Electric rate case to insure that any action taken
by the Commission on the Company's request to increase its rates
does not result in any unwarranted and unreasonable increase in
the rates currently paid by the City for electric service.
The pending rate case is an extremely complicated case in
which one can anticipate extensive hearings on a variety of
issues in addition to those that one ordinarily encounters in
a rate case. To lessen the cost to the City of an effective
Mr. Lyndel Porterfield -2- March 29, 1984
intervention, my work would include a review and analysis of
the Company's pre-filed testimony to identify and to distin-
guish between those issues that directly impact upon the City
and those whose impact would be indirect. It would also include
an assessment of issues where the City's interests can be
anticipated to be congruent with the interests of other parties,
for example, the staff of the Commission and the Public Counsel.
The employment of expert consultant assistance would be limited
to those issues and areas where the City would have direct
interests that are not likely to be protected or advocated by
any other participant in the proceeding.
My work will also include the review and analysis of
proposals to provide consultant assistance and the selection
and recommendation to the City of a suitable consultant. I will
review and analyse the testimony of the Commission's staff, the
Public Counsel and any other intervenor in this matter. I will
work with the selected consultant and with city officials, where
appropriate, in the preparation of pre-filed testimony. I will
attend all hearings involving issues or matters where the City's
interests are at stake. I will brief and argue the City's
position before the Commission. In the conduct of my work, I
will coordinate my efforts with the City Counselor and provide
timely reports to the City on the status of the case throughout
the proceedings.
My charges for the above services are sixty dollars ($60.00)
an hour for my time, plus the actual cost of such expenses as
travel, long distance telephone calls, copies and postage for
mailing packages or reports (e.g., the cost of mailing copies of
testimony, briefs or other large documents to various parties
in the proceeding) . Fees for services would be billed monthly.
I would anticipate that the work associated with the pre-
paration for and attendance at the hearings in Jefferson City,
together with attendance at two or three local hearings in the
Company' s service area would not require more than five hundred
(500) hours. On that assumption, I would propose to do the work
associated with this case at a maximum cost to the City of
Thirty Thousand Dollars ($30, 000) , unless otherwise authorized.
In addition to the cost of my services, the City should
anticipate hiring expert witnesses. I would anticipate that
the sum of Thirty Thousand Dollars ($30, 000) should be suffic-
ient to pay for the cost of expert testimony in this case.
In the event that other cities should join with .Jefferson
City in the presentation of -a common position, I would be
® willing to undertake the additional responsibility insofar as
t
Mr. Lyndel Porterfield -3- March 29, 1984
it would not conflict with my duties to Jefferson City. The
charge for my services would be the same. While I would look
to Jefferson City for payment of my fees and expenses, con-
tribution to the payment of those costs by participating cities
would be a matter to be worked out between Jefferson City and
the other cities.
As you know, the deadline for intervening in this case
is April 6, 1984. Intervening parties also have until April 19,
1984 to respond to a motion filed by the Company. In its
motion the Company has asked the Commission to establish a
procedure for an emergency rate increase which would take
effect this year in the event that the Callaway plant became
commercially operable ahead of schedule. It has also asked the
Commission to adopt a procedure to deal with the eventuality
that the plant comes on line later than anticipated. Under the
Company's proposed procedure, it would be relieved of the
obligation of filing a new rate case to bring the plant into
rate base at the later date. I believe that a timely response
to this motion is adviseable.
If you have any questions about my qualifications and
experience or about this proposal, please let me know.
Very truly yours, A
William M. Barvick
WMB:mb