HomeMy Public PortalAboutRES-CC-1989-14Peso(Aoki 4--Sxi
l-Aird Class City]
1l�
A
Moab, Utah
, 1989
The City Council of the City of Moab, Grand County,
Utah (the "City"), met in c9peN public session at the
regular meeting place of the City Council at the City Hall, 150
East Center Street, in the City at 8:00 p.m. on 15
1989.
The meeting was duly called to order by the Mayor with
the following members of the City Council being present,
constituting a quorum of the City Council:
Tom Stocks Mayor
William D. McDougald Councilmember
fr- Terry Warner Councilmember
David Sakrison Councilmember
Dave Biersheid Councilmember
Christine Robbins Councilmember
Absent: 0404 5 Ke150N
C#R�SiiNC' l7.og iNs
There was also present:
Ray Pene City Recorder
After the minutes of the preceding meeting were read
and approved, the City Recorder presented to the City Council
an affidavit evidencing the giving of not less than twenty-four
(24) hours public notice of the agenda, date, time and place of
the 15/41us- , 1989, meeting of the City Council in
compliance with the requirements of Section 52-4-6(2), Utah
Code Annotated 1953, as amended, by (1) posting written notice
of the meeting at the principal office of the City Council at
the City Ha11, 150 East Center Street, in the City, and
(2) providing notice to at least one newspaper of general
circulation within the geographic jurisdiction of the City, or
to a local media correspondent. The affidavit was ordered
recorded in the minutes of the meeting and is as follows:
STATE OF UTAH
COUNTY OF GRAND
)
)
)
I, the undersigned, the duly qualified and acting City
Recorder of the City of Moab, Grand County, Utah (the "City"),
do hereby certify, according to the records of the City in my
official possession, and upon my own knowledge and belief, that
in accordance with the requirements of Section 52-4-6(2), Utah
Code Annotated 1953, as amended, I gave not less than
twenty-four (24) hours public notice of the agenda, date, time
and place of the _ , 1989, public meeting held by the
City Council of the City, by:
(a) causing a Notice of Public Meeting to be posted
at the principal office of the City Council at the City Hall,
150 East Center Street, in the City, on 14 A its , 1989, at
least twenty-four (24) hours before the convening of the
meeting, in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A; said Notice
of Public Meeting having continuously remained so posted and
available for public inspection during the regular office hours
of the City until the convening of the meeting; and
(b) causing a copy of the Notice of Public Meeting in
the formattached hereto as Exhibit A to be provided on
101U5T_ , 1989, at least twenty-four (24) hours before the
convening of the meeting, to the Times Independent, a newspaper
of general circulation within the geographic jurisdiction of
the City, and to each local media correspondent, newspaper,
radio station or television station which has requested
notification of meetings of the City Council.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my
official signature and impressed hereon the official seal of
the City, this /6. day of
[AFFIX SEAL HERE]
8:00 p.m.
1
7:00 p.m.
7:05 p.m.
C_ty of Moab - Regular. Council Meeting
Grand County Courthouse: 125 E. Center
Tuesday, August 15th 1969, at S:00 p.m.
Pre -Council Workshop - Mayor, Council &
For Council Review:
1. Bills against the City
Staff Reports:
Street
Staff
1. Police Department
2. Utilities/Streets/Parks
3. City Engineer
4. Building Inspector/Zone Administration
5. Treasurer
b. Planning Commission
7. Legal Counsel
**;}*****************************::** *************************** *****
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA
Fledge to Flag; Invocation
Call to Order;
I. Approval of !Minutes:
City of Moab
150 EAST CENTER STREET
MOAB, UTAH 84532
(801)259-5121
II. Reading of Correspondence:
III. Council & Mayor Reports:
IV. Old
1.
Dusiress:
Sb ano Ping requests permission to hold a concert
at the Old City nark on Sept. 4th, tabled from
Aug. 1st.
V. New Business:
I. Planning Commissions recommendations to Council on:
a. Conditional Use for Southeastern Utah Title Co.,
professional business in an R-2 2one at 148 E.
100 North.
b. Condit:io„al Use Rome Occupation for a ;re -School
to be operated in a R-2 Zone by Pam Lopez at
345 McGill.
c, Conditional Use Home Occupation Bed and Break-
fast for Ulli Eolzer at 147 N. 2nd East.
2. Shane Eing request.: permission to have a liquor
concession during t.,e. Concert at the Old City Park
on Sept. 4th. p
3. Tina Lopez - Miss Mom - Requests permission to
have a live band at their 2nd Annual National
Singles Conference to be held at the Old City Park
on October 7th & 8th 1989. -
4. Moab Film. Commission - Requests permission to have
live entertainment at theirl40th Anniversary Cele-
bration to be held at the Old City Park on Septem-
1st 1989.
5. Dorothy Markle - b;asicle Insurance Agency -
Requests an Agent of Record Letter from Moab City
to Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Utah.
6. Request to advertise for a public hearing on Ordin-
ance 89-07 - Regulating the Transport and Keeping
of Animals in Motor Vehicles.
Paul Siletti - Requests letter of support from
Moab City to build a Retirement Housing Complex
near the hospital.
Request to advertise for a public hearing on the
request that a parcel of land cn East 200 South be
donated by the City for a handicap home to be
built by the state for Southeastern Utah residents.
Request to advertise to go to bid for a:
a. Police Vehicle
b. Golf Cart Paths
c. Back-up irrigation pump for the Golf Course
10. Discussion on expanding existing three member board
to a five member board for the Grand County Roads
Special Service District No. 1.
11. Sear -Brown of Park City, Utah requests permission
to use the Moab Golf Course Master Plan in their
advertising.
12. Re -adoption of Western Area Power Administration
("NAPA") agreement.
VI. Pay the bills against the City of Moab.
VII.� Any other citizens request to be heard.
VIII. Adjournment.
Exhibit A
[Attach Notice of Public Meeting Here]
Thereupon, after the conduct of other business not
pertinent to the following, the following resolution was
introduced in written form by 6-iy Rimy gite 5rUC¢
was read in full and pursuant to motion duly made by
OAVe. +'eescits d and seconded by
Ter; Wil-knrea_ , was adopted by the
following vote:
AYE: p
`T ky Wit-2Ne2
1St( i Dour,ALa
NAY:
The resolution was then signed by the Mayor in open
meeting, was countersigned and attested by the City Recorder
and was recorded in the official records of the City by the
City Recorder. The resolution is as follows:
Resolution No. ILI'09
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT
OF LEGAL ACTION AGAINST
THE WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION, AMONG OTHERS
WHEREAS, on or about October 30, 1986, Utah Power &
Light Company ("UP&L") and 156 cities, counties, and towns in
Utah and Wyoming filed an action (the "Lawsuit") in federal
district court against the Western Area Power Administration
("WAPA"), among others, challenging the lawfulness of WAPA's
allocation of inexpensive federal hydroelectric power
exclusively to municipalities which own their own distribution
system pursuant to "preference" laws and otherwise claiming
that WAPA's federal power purchasing and marketing activities
are beyond WAPA's legal authority and are contrary to federal
environmental laws; and
WHEREAS, on April 14, 1988, Judge Greene entered
judgment in favor of WAPA, ruling that WAPA's power allocations
under "preference" laws and other power purchasing and
marketing activities are lawful, but that the environmental
claims should be resolved at trial; and
WHEREAS, UP&L, WAPA and the Colorado River Energy
Distributor's Association, an intervenor in the Lawsuit
("CREDA"), have reached a tentative settlement agreement
("Settlement Agreement"), a copy of which is
Appendix "A"; and
WHEREAS, the City is a party to the settlement by
of its participation as a plaintiff in the Lawsuit or
authorized UP&L, among other things, to act on its
in connection with an application for Colorado River
virtue
having
behalf
attached as
by
Storage Project power; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Settlement
Agreement and authorized its approval in substantially the form
attached as Appendix "B", and as contemplated by the Settlement
Agreement, authorizes Utah Power & Light Company to execute the
Settlement Agreement on behalf of the City; and
WHEREAS, the City Council understands that the
settlement constitutes a compromise of claims in the Lawsuit
which may result in a
irrigation electrical
WHEREAS, the
financial benefit to the residential and
residents of the City; and
City Council understands that under
certain conditions the financial benefits under the Settlement
Agreement may be reduced or terminated; and
-2-
WHEREAS, the City Council understands that the
Settlement Agreement imposes certain restrictions upon the
City, including, but not limited to a prohibition against
raising the same or similar issues in the Lawsuit in any other
legal action in the future, and from characterizing any
financial benefits from the Settlement Agreement as a benefit
under "preference" law or as an allocation of power from the
Colorado River Storage Project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council deems the Settlement
Agreement to be in the best interest of its citizens;
NOW, THEREFORE, Be It Resolved by the City Council of
the City of Moab, Grand County, Utah (the "City"), as follows:
Section 1. The City Council hereby authorizes and
directs the Mayor and City Recorder to execute the Approval
attached as Appendix B (which may be attached to the Settlement
Agreement), and, as contemplated by the Settlement Agreement,
authorizes an officer of Utah Power & Light Company to execute
the Settlement Agreement on behalf of the City, to terminate
the Settlement Agreement, if Utah Power & Light Company deems
it appropriate pursuant to paragraph 3 of the Settlement
Agreement, and to make minor, non -substantive changes (or
substantive changes if beneficial to the City and the Mayor and
City Recorder approve) to the Settlement Agreement.
-3-
Section 2. The Mayor and City Recorder and such other
officers, agents and employees of the City are hereby
authorized and directed to do all such acts and things and to
execute all such documents as may be necessary to carry out and
comply with the provisions of the Settlement Agreement.
Section 3. Immediately after its adoption, this
resolution shall be signed by the Mayor and City Recorder,
shall be recorded in a book kept for that purpose and shall
take immediate effect.
[The remainder of this page has been intentionally
left blank.]
day of
APPENDIX "A"
,SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
This Settlement Agreement is entered into this J
0-=
, 1989, by Utah Power & Light Company, a
division of PacifiCorp, an Oregon corporation, hereinafter
referred to as "UP&L"; all of the cities and counties listed on
the signature page hereof, hereinafter referred to as the
"Municipalities"; the Western Area Power Administration, the
United States of America, hereinafter referred to as "Western";
and the Colorado River Energy Distributors Association,
hereinafter referred to as "CREDA".
In consideration of the mutual agreements,
acknowledgements, covenants, and representations contained
herein, the parties agree as follows:
1. For purposes of this Settlement Agreement the
following terms are defined:
(i) "Appeal" means the proceeding entitled Salt
Lake City, et al, vs Western Area Power
Administration, et al., No. 88-1976 docketed on or
about June 27, 1988, with the United States Court of
Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
(ii) "CRSP" means Colorado River Storage Project.
(iii) "EIS" means an Environmental Impact
Statement prepared pursuant to Section 102(C) of the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C.
§§ 4321 et seq.
(iv) "Environmental Studies" means collectively
the current Glen Canyon Environmental Studies ("GCES")
and the current Recovery Implementation Program for
Endangered Fish Species in the Upper Colorado River
Basin ("RIP").
(v) "Final Criteria" means Final Post-1989
General Power Marketing and Allocation Criteria for
the Salt Lake City Area -Integrated Projects (published
at 51 Fed. Rev. 4,844 (February 7, 1986));
(vi) "Firm Contracts" means the firm electric
service contracts previously negotiated among Western
and its customers pursuant to the Final Criteria, and
previously executed by Western's customers;
(vii) "Interior" means the United States
Department of Interior.
(viii) "SLC Lawsuit" means the proceeding entitled
Balt Lake city, et a1.. v, western Area Power
Administration, et al., Civ. No. C-86-1000C, D. Utah,
filed on October 31, 1986, or any appeal from any
order entered in said proceeding other than the Appeal
defined in Paragraph 1(i).
-2-
(ix) "NEPA" means the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321 et seq.
(x) ASWF Lawsuit" means the proceeding entitled
Pational Wildlife Federation, et al, v. Western Area
Power Administration et al., Civil No. 88-C-1175J, D.
Utah, filed on December 20, 1988, or any appeal from
any order entered in said proceeding.
2. This Settlement Agreement is conditional upon
execution by Western and delivery to CREDA members of Firm
Contracts. This Settlement Agreement is also conditional upon
the absence on October 1, 1989 of any court order in the
Appeal, the SLC Lawsuit, or the NWF Lawsuit which prevents the
Firm Contracts from taking effect on October 1, 1989 as set
forth in the Firm Contracts. The parties agree to seek an
order of the District Court allowing Western to execute the
Firm Contracts. Such order may authorize Western to execute
the Firm Contracts with the understanding that Western may
modify the amount of the allocations under said Firm Contracts
based on (i) any final decisions made by Western in light of
any final EIS that may be ordered by the Court or done by
Western in connection with the NWF Lawsuit, or (ii) any final
administrative decision requiring changes in CRSP operations by
the Secretary of the Interior resulting from a final EIS
arising out of the Environmental Studies. If such order
-3-
conditions the Firm Contracts or Western's authority to execute
the same in any other way, or, if on October 1, 1989, any court
order in the Appeal, the SLC Lawsuit or the NWF Lawsuit
prevents the Firm Contracts from going into effect in
accordance with their terms on October 1, 1989 as set forth in
those Firm Contracts, any party shall have the option to
terminate this Settlement Agreement, in which case the
contracts contained in Exhibits "D", "E" and "F" shall be null
and void.
3. UP&L and the Municipalities agree to apply to the
District Court for dismissal with prejudice of the SLC
Lawsuit. Such dismissal shall be accomplished in two stages.
UP&L and the Municipalities shall apply to the District Court
for dismissal of all environmental claims with prejudice within
five (5) business days after the Firm Contracts have been
executed and delivered or this Settlement Agreement has been
fully executed, whichever comes later, in accordance with the
Stipulation and Proposed Order attached hereto as Exhibit "A".
The only remaining claims in the SLC Lawsuit, which comprise
the Rocky Mountain Generation Co-operative claims held in
abeyance pending the Appeal, shall be dismissed with prejudice
as provided in Paragraph 4.
4. UP&L and the Municipalities agree to apply to the
Tenth Circuit for the dismissal with prejudice of the Appeal in
accordance with the Stipulation and proposed Order attached
-4-
hereto as Exhibit "B" and to the District Court for the
dismissal of all remaining claims in the SLC Lawsuit in
accordance with the Stipulation and proposed Order attached
hereto as Exhibit "C" on or before October 5, 1989, if this
Settlement Agreement is valid and binding on October 1, 1989,
pursuant to paragraph 2. In the event the Appeal is scheduled
for oral argument before October 1, 1989, and the Tenth Circuit
denies the parties' application for an extension of time until
after October 1, 1989, then UP&L and the Municipalities, at
their option, may either terminate the Settlement Agreement and
proceed with the Appeal and the Rocky Mountain Generation
Co-operative claims of the SLC Lawsuit (if UP&L and the
Municipalities prevail on the Appeal), or apply to the Tenth
Circuit for the dismissal of the Appeal and to the District
Court for the dismissal of the remaining claims of the SLC
Lawsuit. Such dismissals shall be dismissals with prejudice of
all of the claims and issues involved in the Appeal, and any
claims which could have arisen in the Appeal in connection with
the SLC Lawsuit or otherwise, and all claims in the SLC
Lawsuit, leaving the Summary Judgment as a final, enforceable
judgment as to all parties and all matters affected thereby,
subject to the terms of this Settlement Agreement.
5. This Settlement Agreement is conditional upon
execution by the District Court and the Tenth Circuit of the
-5-
Orders dismissing the SLC Lawsuit and the Appeal with prejudice
as contemplated in Paragraphs 3 and 4.
�. The parties hereto acknowledge that it is within
the discretion of the Secretary of the Interior to establish
open .ing criteria for CRSP dams and reservoirs, within the
constraints of and discretion afforded by applicable laws,
including the "Law of the River."
7. The parties acknowledge that the CRSP is a
multiple purpose water resource project and that many entities
claim competing interests in the CRSP. In performing its
responsibilities, Western must attempt to reach an appropriate
accommodation of various competing interests, including but not
limited to environmental interests, within the constraints of
and discretion afforded by applicable laws.
8. The
to develop better
parties hereto acknowledge the worth and
understanding and communications among
need
themselves, other federal agencies, public and investor -owned
utilities, the environmental community, their regular customers
and the public at large, and agree to exercise their best
efforts to facilitate an open and productive exchange of
information and dialogue with respect to their interrelated
operations and common concerns.
9. The parties recognize that GCES and the RIP are
on -going studies and programs involving federal, state, and
-6-
private party participants, which attempt to address the
downstream environmental effects of CRSP operations.
10. "Nl,tarn agrees to cooperate and increase its
involvement in the ongoing GCES and RIP by offering, among
other things:::o provide additional technical and staff
assistance to the various study groups, including providing
requested data and reports, making available technical,
computer, and operational expertise, and otherwise making
Western's resources available to facilitate the prompt,
thorough, and accurate completion of the studies.
11. Western agrees that should the Environmental
Studies lead to a decision by the Secretary of Interior to
prepare an EIS with respect to CRSP operations, Western will
participate in the EIS as a cooperating agency.
12. Upon completion of any necessary NEPA process,
Western agrees to comply promptly with any final administrative
decision for change in CRSP dam operations as a result of the
Environmental Studies, unless precluded from doing so by order
of a court of competent jurisdiction.
13. In light of existing and anticipated reserve
margins and flexibility, Western does not at this time
anticipate that increased power purchases will be necessary to
perform its obligations under the Firm Contracts.
14. This Settlement Agreement shall be conditional
upon the execution by UP&L and Western of the Contract between
-7-
UP&L and Western for Annual Purchases of Energy, a copy of
which is attached hereto as Exhibit "D."
15. This Settl _imt;nt Agreement shall be conditional
upon the execution by Bait River and Western of an agreement
entitled "Contract bey aen Salt River Project Agricultural
Improvement and Power District and United States Department of
Energy Western Area Power Administration Salt Lake City Area
Integrated Projects for Interchange of Energy" (the
"SRP/Western Interchange Agreement"), a copy of which is
attached hereto as Exhibit "E".
16. The parties recognize and acknowledge that part
of the consideration for this Settlement Agreement is a
separate contract entitled "Capacity and Energy Exchange
Agreement between Utah Power & Light Company and Salt River
Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District" (the
"UP&L/SRP Exchange Agreement"), a copy of which is attached as
Exhibit "F". This Settlement Agreement is conditional upon the
execution by UP&L and Salt River of said agreement. As
provided in the UP&L/SRP Exchange Agreement, SRP shall have the
option, exercisable in its sole and unfettered discretion, to
terminate the UP&L/SRP Exchange Agreement if (i) Western takes
any action it is otherwise not authorized to take, or fails or
refuses to perform any obligations it is otherwise obligated to
perform under the SRP/Western Interchange Agreement; (ii)
-8-
Western precludes SRP from exercising any rights SRP would
otherwise have under the SRP/Western Interchange Agreement;
(iii) Western changes or alters 1,1y way any terms, covenants
or conditions of the SRP/Western 211terchange Agreement in a way
that affects the amounts or tiro or rates of delivery of
energy interchange; or (iv) Western refuses to accept an SRP
schedule for, or delivery or receipt of, energy interchanges
pursuant to the terms, covenants, or conditions of the
SRP/Western Interchange Agreement, unless the grounds for
termination do not result from, arise out of or relate to the
NWF Lawsuit, the SLC Lawsuit, the Appeal, any resolution of
either such lawsuit, any EIS prepared in connection with or as
a result of either such lawsuit, or any final administrative
decision requiring changes in CRSP operations by the Secretary
of the Interior resulting from a final EIS arising out of the
Environmental Studies. If the UP&L/SRP Exchange Agreement is
terminated by SRP as provided herein, the entire Settlement
Agreement and the ancillary agreements attached hereto as
Exhibits "D", "E" and "F" also terminate.
17. The parties recognize that under the NEPA claims
of the NWF Lawsuit, Western could be ordered to prepare an EIS,
or may decide on its own, after careful consideration, to
prepare an EIS. The parties further recognize that under other
claims of the NWF Lawsuit, Western could be involuntarily
-9-
ordered to modify its operations. The parties also recognize
that there may be a final administrative decision requiring
changes in CRSP operations by the Secretary of the Interior
resulting from a final EIS arising out of the Environmental
Studies. As a result of the foregoing, 'Aestern may modify its
operations in a way that could impact the SRP/western
Interchange Agreement. Western agrees that it will not take
any action as a result of the NWF Lawsuit, the SLC Lawsuit, the
Appeal, or in connection with the Environmental Studies that
could impact the SRP/western Interchange Agreement or the
allocations in the Firm Contracts except under an involuntary
order of the court or as a result of an EIS prepared as a
result of the foregoing, and only upon a reasonable and good
faith determination that it has no reasonable option. No
agreement of WAPA in this paragraph (or elsewhere in this
Agreement) is intended to limit, nor shall any such agreement
limit, WAPA's obligation to fully comply with the requirements
of NEPA. Western will meet with Salt River and UP&L to discuss
and explain the action that could affect the SRP/Western
Interchange Agreement before formally notifying Salt River
thereof.
18. If Western reduces the amount of either CRSP
capacity or CRSP energy which it is otherwise obligated to
deliver to its customers under the terms of the Firm Contracts
-10-
pursuant to an adjustment clause contained in a court order as
provided in paragraph 2, or otherwise as a result of the NWF
Lawsuit, the SLC Lawsuit, any resolution of either %kch
lawsuit, any EIS prepared in connection with or as 1 result of
either such lawsuit, or any final administrative_.19cision
requiring changes in CRSP operations by the Secretary of the
Interior resulting from a final EIS arising out of the
Environmental Studies, SRP's obligation to provide peaking
capacity and associated energy to UP&L pursuant to the UP&L/SRP
Exchange Agreement shall be reduced in amounts equal to any
reduction to SRP, on a KW per KW basis for every KW of capacity
by which SRP's allocation is reduced, and on a KWH per KWH
basis for every KWH of total energy by which SRP's allocation
is reduced.
19. This Settlement Agreement is being entered into
by the parties in order to avoid further costs, risks and
expenses of litigation. Any benefits to UP&L and the
Municipalities that may result from this Settlement Agreement
or any of the transactions relating hereto will not in any
manner be considered, construed or interpreted as benefits
relating to or arising from any federal laws or policies. Each
party specifically agrees that: (i) no arguments, concepts or
precedents relating in any way to federal preference laws,
policies or practices are created or intended to be created
-11-
by this Settlement Agreement or the transactions relating
hereto; (ii) no federal law, policy or principle of any kind is
intended to have any application, relevancy or bearing of E:7
kind on any benefits flowing to UP&L and the Municipalities
from this Settlement Agreement, the method by which UP&L 1
the Municipalities use or share said benefits, or the
agreements referenced herein, including Exhibits "D", "E" and
"F" hereto; and (iii) it will not in any context or forum take
the pcsition or argue that federal preference laws, policies or
practices or any other similar federal laws or policies
dictate, justify, or have any relevance to the method UP&L and
the Municipalities may use to share the benefits of this
Settlement Agreement.
20. If for any reason this Settlement Agreement does
not receive final approval from all parties and entities that
must approve it, or otherwise does not become fully enforceable
and final, this Settlement Agreement and the negotiations,
memoranda, notes or drafts resulting in this Settlement
Agreement and any other documents prepared in connection with
this Settlement Agreement shall not be used by the parties or
any entity bound hereby as evidence for any claim or claims or
for any other reason.
21. The parties hereto agree to support in any
proceeding the legality and enforceability of this Settlement
-12-
Agreement and the ancillary agreements attached hereto as
Exhibits D, E and F. In addition, UP&L will fully support the
propriety and reasonableness of the settlement reflected herein
of the environmental issues in the SLC Lawsuit. Upon
reasonable request by Western, UP&L shall evidence such support
by joining in or filing legal briefs and in court appearances
and arguments in the NWF Lawsuit, in a fashion deemed
appropriate by UP&L's counsel.
22. This Settlement Agreement is a compromise of
disputed claims and neither this Settlement Agreement nor any
documents or consideration referenced herein or relating hereto
shall be construed as an admission of any violation of law or
liability of any kind by any party, and each party expressly
denies that it has violated any law or has any liability in
connection with the matters raised in the SLC Lawsuit or Appeal
or compromised in this Settlement Agreement. Except as
specifically agreed hereunder, this Settlement Agreement shall
not constitute a waiver of any fights of any party.
23. UP&L and the Municipalities agree that they will
not, and they will not take any affirmative action to authorize
any of their officers, agents, employees, officials or
attorneys (specifically including current or future members of
the law firm of Jones, Waldo, Holbrook & McDonough), to
institute, cause to be instituted, or assist or
-13-
participate in any way in pursuing any legal actions, claims or
lawsuits against Western or the Department of Energy relating
to issues involved in the SLC Lawsuit or Appeal, including:
(i) the legality, constitutionality or enforceability of
federal preference laws, as written or as interpreted and
applied by Western; (ii) the legality or propriety of Western's
marketing programs and practices challenged in the SLC Lawsuit,
including the utility responsibility requirement for
eligibility to preference power, purchases of non-federal
power, hydro -thermal integration activities, oil conservation,
fuel replacement and similar programs, and conservation and
renewable energy programs; or (iii) Western's compliance with
NEPA or any other environmental laws in connection with
Western's Final Criteria, the Firm Contracts, or any of
Western's marketing programs and practices, including those
listed above.
24. All parties hereto expressly acknowledge and
agree that neither this Settlement Agreement nor any documents,
agreements, understandings or actions of any of the parties
relating to or in connection with this Settlement Agreement
will in any way change, impair, affect or diminish in any way
the finality, enforceability, or legal, preclusive and binding
effect of the Summary Judgment or the dismissal with prejudice
of the SLC Lawsuit and Appeal as to the parties and their
-19-
successors in interest. Each party agrees that it will not in
any judicial, legislative or public forum of any kind, take a
position or assert or represent anything to the contrary with
respect to the binding effect of the Summary Judgment.
25. This Settlement Agreement may be pleaded by any
party as a full and complete defense to, and may be used as the
basis for an injunction against, any conduct or any proceeding,
suit, or action which may be instituted, prosecuted, or
attempted, in breach of any of the terms of this Settlement
Agreement.
26. The parties intend to issue a joint press release
announcing the general provisions of this Settlement Agreement
in a form satisfactory to and approved by designated
representatives of each of the parties hereto.
27. This Settlement Agreement shall inure to the
benefit of and be binding upon each of the parties hereto and
their respective members, predecessors, successors, assignees,
transferees, and any subsidiaries, and each of them, as though
they were parties hereto.
28. Each of the parties to this Settlement Agreement
hereby affirms and acknowledges that it has read this
Settlement Agreement, has had it explained by its counsel, and
fully understands it, and that this is a full and final
compromise and settlement of all claims, demands, actions, or
causes of action raised in the SLC Lawsuit and Appeal.
-15-
Approved and accepted:
Jones, Waldo, Holbrook & McDonough
By:
By:
By:
Duaa1d B. Holbrook
William B. Bohling
Elizabeth M. Haslam
Attorneys for Utah Power & Light
Company and Municipalities other
than Salt Lake City, Riverdale
and Weber County
Utah Power & Light Company
By:
Sidney G. Baucom
Attorney for Utah Power & Light Company
Salt Lake City Corporation
By:
Bruce R. Baird
Attorneys for Salt Lake City Corporation
Weber County and City of Riverdale
By:
Frank Warner
Attorney for Weber County and the City of
Riverdale
By:
Sunnyside, Sunset, Syracuse, Tooele,
Toquerville, Tremonton, Trenton,
Uintah, Vernal, Virgin, Wales,
Wallsburg, Washington Terrace,
Wellington, Wellsville, West Jordan,
West Point, West Valley City, Willard,
Woods Cross; the following Utah
counties: Beaver County, Box Elder
County, Davis County, Emery County,
Grand County, Millard County, Morgan
County, Rich County, Salt Lake County,
San Juan County, Sevier County, Summit
County, Tooele County; the following
Wyoming cities and towns: Big Piney,
Cokeville, Diamondville, Evanston,
Kemmerer, Labarge, Marbleton, Opal,
Pinedale; the following Wyoming
counties: Lincoln County, Sublette
County
For: Salt Lake City
By:
For: Weber County
By:
For: Riverdale
"CREDA":
By:
Joe Falbo, President
For: Colorado River Energy Distributors
Association, Inc.
"UP&L":
By:
Frank N. Davis, President
For: Utah Power & Light Company, a division
of PacifiCorp
"Municipalities":
By:
For:
-0 ���
e following Utah cities a t wns:
Alta, Amalga, American For , Annabella,
Aurora, Bear River, Brian Head, Castle
Dale, Cedar City, Cedar Fort,
Centerfield, Centerville, Circleville,
Clarkston, Clawson, Clearfield,
Cleveland, Clinton, Coalville, Corinne,
Cornish, Delta, Deweyville, Draper,
Elmo, Elsinore, Elwood, Emery, Enoch,
Eureka, Farmington, Farr West, Fayette,
Ferron, Fielding, Fountain Green,
Francis, Fruit Heights, Garden City,
Garland, Genola, Glenwood, Goshen,
Grantsville, Green River, Gunnison,
Harrisville, Henefer, Highland,
Hinckley, Honeyville, Howell,
Huntington, Huntsville, Hyde Park,
Joseph, Junction, Kamas, Kanarraville,
Kingston, Laketown, Layton, Leamington,
Lewiston, Lynndyl, Mantua, Mapleton,
Marysvale, Mayfield, Mendon, Midvale,
Milford, Millville, Minersville, Moab,
Mona, Moroni, Naples, New Harmony,
Newton, Nibley, North Logan, North
Ogden, North Salt Lake, Oakley, Ogden,
Ophir, Orangeville, Orem, Panguitch,
Paradise, Park City, Perry, Plain City,
Pleasant Grove, Plymouth, Portage,
Providence, Redmond, Richfield,
Richmond, River Heights, Riverton, Roy,
Rush Valley, Salina, Sandy, Santaquin,
Scipio, Sigurd, Smithfield, Snowville,
South Jordan, South Ogden, South Salt
Lake, South Weber, Sterling, Stockton,
-17-
29. This Settlement Agreement is without prejudice to
the rights of the parties in any other litigation that may be
outstanding or to any claims other than the claims compromised
and settled in this Settlement Agreement.
30. Each of the signatories hereto represents and
warrants that he/she has full power and authority on behalf of
each of the parties indicated to execute this Settlement
Agreement and to bind each such party to all of the terms and
provisions hereof. Prior to the execution of this Settlement
Agreement, CREDA and UP&L will provide each other with copies
of the corporate resolutions from their respective Boards of
Directors authorizing their representatives to execute this
Settlement Agreement and the agreements
31. Each party shall bear its
associated herewith.
own costs
of the
lawsuits mentioned herein and of this settlement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused
this Settlement Agreement to be duly executed the day and year
first written above.
"Western":
By:
William H. Clagett, Administrator
For: Western Area Power Administration.
United States of America
By:
C. Max Vassa.lelli
Attorneys foc Western Area
Power Admiristration and
Other Def�nlants
Kimball, Parr, Crockett & Waddoups
By:
Gary A. Dodge
Attorneys for Colorado River Energy
Distributors Association, Inc.
Exhibits "A" through "F" are not attached but will be
made available upon request:
Exhibit "A" is a Stipulation and Proposed Order
dismissing environmental claims.
Exhibit "B" is a Stipulation and proposed Order
dismissing the appeal.
Exhibit "C" is a Stipulation and proposed Order
dismissing the remaining claims in the Salt Lake City
Lawsuit.
Exhibit "D" is a Contract between Utah Power & Light
and Western Area Power Administration for Annual
Purchases of Energy
Exhibit "E" is a Contract between Salt River Project
Agricultural Improvement and Power District and
Western Area Power Administration for Interchange of
Energy.
Exhibit "F" is a Contract between Salt River Project
Agricultural Improvement and Power District and Utah
Power & Light for Energy Exchange.
APPENDIX "B"
APPROVAL OF THE CITY OF MOAB
TO SETTLEMENT OF
SLC v. WAPA LAWSUIT
Pursuant to the duly enacted resolution, the City of
Moab, Grand County, Utah, hereby approves the Settlement
Agreement pertaining to Salt Lake City, et al. v. Western Area
Power Administration, et al., Civil No. 86C-1000G (D.Utah 1986)
and authorizes Utah Power & Light Company to execute the
Settlement Agreement on its behalf.
Mayor
[AFFIX SEAL HERE]
Passed and approved this
n and Attest:
bt,le
ty Recorder
[AFFIX SEAL HERE]
After the conduct of other business not pertinent to
the foregoing, it was moved and carried that the City Council
adjourn.
Mayor
[AFFIX SEAL HERE]
STATE OF UTAH
COUNTY OF GRAND
I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that I am the
duly qualified and acting City Recorder of the City of Moab,
Grand County, Utah (the "City").
I further certify that the above and foregoing
constitutes
�J m
a true and correct copy of the minutes of a
public meeting of the City Council of the
City, including a resolution adopted at said meeting, held
on
, 1989, as said minutes and resolution are
officially of record in my possession.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my
official signature
day of
[AFFIX SEAL HERE]
and affixed the seal of the City, this 1 -.=
, 1989.
Utah State Retirr -Int Office
540 East 200 South
Salt Lake City, Utah u4102
(801) 355-3884
RESOLUTION 13-89
UNIT TR/`'ISFER APPLICATION
fo the Public Safety
Noncontributory Retirement System
UNIT INFORMATION
Official Name of Unit
MOAB CITY CORPORATION
Effective Date of Coverage
7/31/89
Street Address
150 E. CENTER STREET
Unit Number
415
City State
MOAB, UTAH 84532 zip
Phone
259-5121
RESOLUTION TO PARTICIPATE IN THE UTAH PUBLIC SAFETY RETIREMENT SYSTEM
WHEREAS according to Section 49-4a-205, Utah Code Annotated 1953, the Utah Public Safety Retirement Act permits any
political subdivision, department, or educational institution currently participating in the Utah Public Safety Retirement
System, to transfer its enrollment to the Utah Public Safety Noncontributory Retirement System, upon approval of the Utah
State Retirement Board; and
WHEREAS the above -named unit, hereafter called the "applicant organization," desires to allow its eligible employees to
transfer to the Utah Public Safety Noncontributory Retirement System;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the governing body of the aforesaid applicant organization that it apply for
coverage under the Utah Public Safety Noncontributory Retirement System; and
BE IT RESOLVED that this document shall and hereby does constitute a formal application for transfer of coverage of the
applicant organization and all its eligible public safety employees to the Utah Public Safety Noncontributory Retirement
System under such terms and conditions as required by law; and
BE IT ALSO RESOLVED that eligible employees of the applicant unit, currently covered by the Utah Public Safety
Retirement System, on the effective date of unit transfer, shall have six months from the effective date of transfer to elect
participation in the Utah Public Safety Noncontributory Retirement System; and
BE IT ALSO RESOLVED that enrollment in the Public Safety Noncontributory Retirement System by the applicant
organization is permanent and said organization will remain in the Public Safety Noncontributory System as required by law
as long as eligibility criteria are met.
oFfiON TO PARTICIPATE IN A DEFiliwo colignigunott!I'L/l
Local government employers who are members
participate in the 401(k) Deferred Compensation
qualified employees. Indicate here if the employer
[7 Yes, the applicant organization elects to participate
Retirement Board.
Initially, the applicant organization will contribute
employee as of the effective date of this enrollment.
employer. Each employee will also be eligible
(R No, the applicant organization elects not to
of the Public Safety Noncontributory Retirement System
Plan of the Utah State Retirement Board and make
elects to participate at this time:
in the 401(k) Deferred Compensation Plan
an amount equal to % of the compensation
are eligible to
contributions for all
.
offered by the Utah State
of each eligible
-to -time by the
by payroll deduction.
at this time.
The percentage may be changed from time
to make tax deferred contributions to this program
participate in the 401(k) Deferred Compensation program
Attested: (Date) ��k - er-Coat'e -
v-/ye-,p/
By: (C toner, Chairman or ay THOMAS A. STOCKS q
� f — MAYOR �.���'�/
II ri., 4,. �- -�/te _7
�
_ .:.: _
RETIREMENT raft! USE ONLY -
Approved by Retirement Board (Date)
Unit Notrficabon Date
RETURN ALL COPIES TO THE RETIREMENT OFFICE
Distribution.
White - Retirement Office
Yellow - Will be returned to
Unit upon approval
MEMS-9 Rev 4139