Meeting Information
Special Meeting
Friday, April 12, 2002, 9:00 a.m.
City Hall, Board of Supervisors Chambers, Room
250
Chair: Commissioner Gonzalez; Vice-Chair:
Commissioner McGoldrick
Members: Commissioners Ammiano, Hall, and Schmeltzer
Alternates: Commissioners Peskin and Fellman
SPECIAL AGENDA
(There will be public comment on each item)
1. Call to Order and Roll Call
The meeting was called to order by Vice-Chair McGoldrick at 9:18 a.m.
Members Present: Vice-Chair McGoldrick; Commissioners Ammiano, Hall, and Schmeltzer. Commissioner Fellman was noted present at 9:20 a.m.
Member Absent: Chair Gonzalez
2. Approval of Minutes of the Commission Meeting and Public Power Hearing of February 22, 2002 and Commission Meeting of March 1, 2002. Action Item.
Commissioner Ammiano moved to approve the February 22, 2002 Commission meeting and public power hearing minutes and March 1, 2002 Commission meeting minutes; Commissioner Hall seconded. No public comment, no discussion and no objection.
3. Public Hearing: Discussion and adoption of the proposed SF LAFCo 2002-2003 Fiscal Year Budget (Government Code Section 56381).
Gloria L. Young, Executive Officer stated that the Commission has received a staff annual budget report for adoption as required by the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act. The budget before the Commission is identical to that approved by the Commission last year in the amount of $458,750. The funds for San Francisco LAFCo were originally setup as a project fund in an initial amount of $754,250. The Commission had continued to expend funds out of that original amount of $754,250 and currently has $364,444 on reserve. Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act requires that the Commission adopt, at a minimum, the same budget amount that it adopted last year, which was $458,750. Specific findings must be made in order to reduce the budget, and the budget may be increased if necessary. It is the Executive Officer’s determination that it is not necessary to increase the budget and recommends approval. She requests that the Commission (1) not affect the budget after its final adoption, which will need a second hearing after a 21-day notice; (2) continue to use the monies in reserve; and (3) request an increase from the Board only if the Commission finds it necessary .
The existing budget amount that can be expended at this time totals $60,000. We have almost expended the funds associated with outside counsel and have a total of $20,000 until the end of the fiscal year. She is recommending that when the Commissioners look at proposals from energy consultants at the April 19 meeting, that the Commission determine whether we need to go to the Board to request a release of reserves to enact the energy consultant contract and request a release of $25,000 to continue the use of legal counsel.
Commissioner Ammiano brought up the issue of hiring outside counsel versus inside counsel at the April 9, 2002 Budget Committee hearing and recommended that the LAFCo discuss this issue. Gloria Young advised the Commission that inside or outside counsel would have to be paid, as discussed by City Attorney, Dennis Herrera at the Budget Committee meeting. The City Attorney’s Office does charge back other agencies for their services.
Commissioner McGoldrick asked the Executive Officer the best way to make a comparison of costs by inside versus outside counsel.
Gloria L. Young, Executive Officer stated that it is difficult to make a comparison with the billings from the City Attorney because they provided services from July 1, 2000 to June 30, 2001. They had a number of attorneys that supported the LAFCo effort. The total amount paid to the City Attorney’s Office in August of last year was $153,699. When the Commission hired outside legal counsel in the Fall of last year, a contract amount of $100,000 was set. The LAFCo would need an amount of $25,000 to carry it through the remainder of the fiscal year. It could be compared as $153,699 versus $125,000.
Commissioner Schmeltzer asked the Executive Officer if she could give the Commissioners who weren’t on the Commission in the past a sense of what the outside counsel’s legal tasks in the last year were.
Gloria L. Young stated that the LAFCo had a number of major issues that they consulted with outside legal counsel about as follows; (1) the initiation of the contract with E. J. Simpson and relevant issues; (2) PG&E’s concern with the contract being awarded to E. J. Simpson; (3) the pursuit and guidance of other energy options that the City could provide; (4) the public hearings that we are currently involved in; (5) strategizing for a plan for the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for an energy consultant; and (6) ongoing litigation.
Commissioner McGoldrick asked whether the Commission had to initiate a direction today.
Gloria L. Young stated that she would like to go to the Finance Committee when the Commission has an amount that they would be interested in pursuing in hiring an energy consultant. She would also like direction for a release of reserves in the amount she has identified for legal counsel. With respect to the budget process, the Commission will have another hearing where they will adopt a budget in about a month because it has to occur after a 21-day notice.
Donald L. Maynor, Esquire stated that he would be providing an Executive Summary of what the energy consultant report should look like and a timeline of the events for the rest of the year. It is his sense that his role would go away unless the Commission would want to have more public hearings. He might be of assistance in doing a review of the report, but he does not see a need for him to attend LAFCo meetings after the public hearing process.
Gloria L. Young stated that the firm that Nancy Miller, Esquire, represents has provided LAFCo assistance with respect to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg law and Don Maynor, Esquire, has been involved with energy-related issues.
Commissioner Schmeltzer asked about the third law firm.
Gloria L. Young stated that Donald Maynor, Esquire partnered with Fred Yanney and his services were used briefly in the beginning. The main support has been from the two attorneys here.
Public Comment
No Public Comment
4. Future Agenda Items
Gloria L. Young stated that the Commission would be receiving evaluation criteria used in interviewing the energy consultants in their April 19th meeting packet. In addition, they would be receiving additional information to assist them in their interviews next Friday. The attorneys will make comments at the April 19th meeting. Gloria L. Young stated that she would not be present at the meeting.
5. Public Comment on Items not on the Agenda
No Public Comment
Public Comment Closed
6. Adjournment
The meeting of the San Francisco Local Agency Formation Commission adjourned at 9:32 a.m.
p>