Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Administration topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

At a glance: July 15 Commission votes — minutes, counsel contracts and other items

Commission on Community Investment and Infrastructure · July 1, 2014
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At its July 15 meeting the commission approved meeting minutes for May and June, hired bond and disclosure counsel for planned refunding work (Jones Hall, up to $122,500; Curls Bartling, up to $60,000), and completed several administrative items. Votes on these items were recorded as 4–1 for minutes (two abstentions) and unanimous 5–0 for the professional services contracts.

The Commission on Community Investment and Infrastructure recorded several procedural and administrative votes July 15, 2014.

Minutes: The commission approved the minutes for the May 20, 2014 and June 3, 2014 regular meetings. Both votes passed with four ayes and one abstention (one commissioner stated they were absent for the June 3 meeting).

Professional services contracts (Items 5E and 5F): Staff presented results of an RFP and recommended hiring bond counsel Jones Hall and disclosure counsel Curls Bartling (PC). The commission authorized a personal services contract with Jones Hall for bond counsel services with a maximum payment amount not to exceed $122,500. The commission also authorized a personal services contract with Curls Bartling for disclosure counsel services in an amount not to exceed $60,000. Both contracts were approved by roll call vote (5 ayes).

Context: staff said the contracts support a planned refunding of tax allocation/refunding revenue bonds (City & County of San Francisco Redevelopment Financing Authority series 2014 B and 2014 C); the final scope and transaction sizing will adjust with market conditions. Staff also noted a competitive RFP process and priority considerations for SBEs in disclosure counsel selection.