DATE: November 8, 2016
SUBJECT:
Title
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL COUNSEL TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO AN AGREEMENT WITH JACKSON GILMOUR & DOBBS, PC FOR LEGAL SERVICES RELATED TO CERTAIN ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS INCREASING THE NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT FROM $175,000 TO $375,000
Body
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This agenda seeks Board authorization for the General Counsel to execute Amendment No. 2 to an outside counsel agreement with the law firm of Jackson Gilmour & Dobbs, PC. The amendment increases the not-to-exceed amount from $175,000 to $375,000. This firm represents the District in various matters relating to the cleanup of environmental contamination. Details regarding the specific matters for which this amendment is proposed are protected by the attorney/client and work product privileges and are discussed in a separate confidential attorney-client privileged memoranda to the Board.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation
Resolution authorizing the General Counsel to execute Amendment No. 2 to an agreement with Jackson Gilmour & Dobbs, PC for legal services related to certain environmental matters increasing the not-to-exceed amount from $175,000 to $375,000.
Body
FISCAL IMPACT:
The proposed amendment authorizes the expenditure of additional funds not-to-exceed $200,000. Funds for this amendment are available in the current FY2016-17 budget for the Office of the General Counsel.
Compass Strategic Goals:
This agenda item supports the following Strategic Goal(s).
• A Port that the public understands and trusts.
• A thriving and modern maritime seaport.
• A vibrant waterfront destination where residents and visitors converge.
• A Port with a healthy and sustainable bay and its environment.
• A financially sustainable Port that drives job creation and regional economic vitality.
DISCUSSION:
The Office of the General Counsel is responsible for providing legal advice and representation to the Board of Port Commissioners, the CEO and executive team, as well as all departments of the District. This includes representing the District in litigation and administrative procedures, as well as advising the District on transactions, policies and other matters. In order to best advise and defend the District, in addition to the in-house attorneys, the Office of the General Counsel sometimes utilizes the services of outside law firms to provide legal services in specific areas of law and to supplement the services of the in-house resources.
This agenda seeks Board authorization for the General Counsel to execute Amendment No. 2 to an outside counsel agreement with the law firm of Jackson Gilmour & Dobbs, PC. The amendment increases the not-to-exceed amount from $175,000 to $375,000. This firm represents the District in various matters relating to the cleanup of environmental contamination. Details regarding the specific matters for which this amendment is proposed are protected by the attorney/client and work product privileges and are discussed in a separate confidential attorney-client privileged memoranda to the Board.
General Counsel’s Comments:
The Office of the General Counsel has prepared this agenda and approved it as to form and legality.
Environmental Review:
The proposed Board action to authorize an agreement amendment for legal services does not constitute a “project” under the definition set forth in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15378 because it will not have a potential to result in a direct or indirect physical change in the environment and is therefore not subject to CEQA. No further action under CEQA is required.
In addition, this component of the proposed Board action allows for the District to implement its obligations under the Port Act and/or other laws. The Port Act was enacted by the California Legislature and is consistent with the Public Trust Doctrine. Consequently, this component of the proposed Board action is consistent with the Public Trust Doctrine.
Finally, this component of the proposed Board action does not allow for “development,” as defined in Section 30106 of the California Coastal Act, or “new development,” pursuant to Section 1.a. of the District’s Coastal Development Permit (CDP) Regulations. Therefore, issuance of a CDP or exclusion is not required for this component of the proposed Board action. Depending on the work conducted under individual contracts, processing under the District’s CDP Regulations may be required before such contract’s execution.
Equal Opportunity Program:
Not applicable.
PREPARED BY:
John Carter
Deputy General Counsel