Closed Session Agenda: WRCOG vs City Regular Session Agenda: Retention of $900 per Hour Law Firm Orrick Herrington and Stucliffe
Beaumont Special Session Wednesday july 13, 2016.
Closed Session 6:00 pm
Regular Session 8:00 pm
Closed Session Agenda: WRCOG vs City
Regular Session Agenda: Retention of Orrick Herrington and Stucliffe Law Firm to Represent the City in Connection with Financial and Restructuring Challenges Facing the City.
Background: “This condition is made exigent by the fact that a sizable judgment was rendered against the City in favor of WRCOG.”
A two year old Judgement is not ‘exigent’ and it’s too late. The Case has been in Appeals two years – the Appeals Court is about to rule – and we all know that the Ruling is going to be against the City because they stole the County’s money – by direction and with Council’s Approval.
Fiscal Impact: $895/hour with no Limit
At $895/hr It will cost $100,000 just to familiarize themselves with the Cases.
Although not mentioned in the Staff Report; the Law Firm also includes the $3 Million penalty for forging the Financial Statements imposed by the Department of Finance. This is also nonnegotiable as it is a debt owed to a government agency derived from the criminal activity.
Orrick’s document mentions legal advise of Bankruptcy, but neither the WRCOG or State Department debt can be included in a bankruptcy. The only other debts the City has is the personal injury lawsuits that could be argued arose from willful and malicious intent. – as a lawyer should be well aware.
The ‘good news’ is that the City of Beaumont doesn’t have any debt that can be dismissed with a bankruptcy.
The ‘bad news’ is that Beaumont City Council continues to waste the Taxpayers’ money on lawyers and constants instead of building Roads, Fire Stations, and a Recycled Water Facility.
From us court.gov: http://www.uscourts.gov/services-forms/bankruptcy/bankruptcy-basics/disc…
Generally speaking, the exceptions to discharge apply automatically if the language prescribed by section 523(a) applies. The most common types of nondischargeable debts are certain types of tax claims, debts not set forth by the debtor on the lists and schedules the debtor must file with the court, debts for spousal or child support or alimony, debts for willful and malicious injuries to person or property, debts to governmental units for fines and penalties, debts for most government funded or guaranteed educational loans or benefit overpayments, debts for personal injury caused by the debtor’s operation of a motor vehicle while intoxicated, debts owed to certain tax-advantaged retirement plans, and debts for certain condominium or cooperative housing fees.
The types of debts described in sections 523(a)(2), (4), and (6) (obligations affected by fraud or maliciousness) are not automatically excepted from discharge. Creditors must ask the court to determine that these debts are excepted from discharge. In the absence of an affirmative request by the creditor and the granting of the request by the court, the types of debts set out in sections 523(a)(2), (4), and (6) will be discharged.