TO: AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM: Aimee L. Steele, General Counsel/Chief Legal Officer
SUBJECT: Contract Award
ACTION ITEM
AGENDA PLANNING REQUEST: ☐
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Title
Consider authorizing the General Manager/Chief Executive Officer to enter into a contract with Redwood Public Law Group not to exceed $250,000.
Staff Contact:
Aimee L. Steele, General Counsel/Chief Legal Officer
Body
STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE:
Goal - High-Performing Workforce
Ensuring the General Counsel’s Office has sufficient external law firms to consult with ensures a high performing workforce that is capable of responding to the needs of the District.
BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
The cost of the requested contract (not to exceed $250,000) is accounted for in the General Counsel/Chief Legal Officer’s outside legal budget.
CONTRACT AWARD SUMMARY:
|
Vendor Outreach Summary: |
|
|
No. DBE/SBEs: |
N/A |
|
No. Registered Vendors: |
3 |
|
|
|
|
Contract Summary: |
|
|
# Proposals/Bids Received: |
3 |
|
Award Type: |
Low Apparent Bid |
|
Independent Cost Estimate Range (hourly): |
Senior Partner: $550 Partner: $545 Of Counsel: $490 Senior Associate: $400 Mid-level Associate: $370 Junior Associate: $345 Law Clerk: $295 Paralegal: $250 |
|
Recommended for Award: |
Redwood Public Law Group |
|
Small Business Type: |
Not Applicable* |
|
DBE/SBE Utilization %:** |
N/A |
* Neither SBE, nor DBE
** The District sets Small Business Enterprise (SBE) goals on contracting opportunities. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) may authorize a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) goal; however, SBE goals may result in DBE awards and utilization.
Levine Act Disclosure
California Government Code § 84308, commonly referred to as the “Levine Act,” precludes an Officer of a local government agency from participating in the award of a contract if he or she receives any political contributions totaling more than $500 in the 12 months preceding the pendency of the contract award, and for three months following the final decision, from the person or company awarded the contract. This prohibition applies to contributions to the Officer, or received by the Officer on behalf of any other Officer, or on behalf of any candidate for office or on behalf of any committee. The Levine Act also requires disclosure of such contributions by a party to be awarded a specified contract. Disclosure is not required for contracts that are competitively bid, contracts under $50,000; contracts between two or more government agencies; contracts where no party receives financial compensation; and periodic review or renewal of development agreements or competitively bid contracts with non-material modifications.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
The General Counsel’s department maintains a panel of law firms from which the General Counsel’s department may consult when the department lacks the expertise of District-employed staff to handle legal issues that arise within the District. These services were last solicited in the Fall of 2025. Prior to the solicitation in 2025, these services were last solicited in Fall of 2020. Between contract awards in 2020 and the most recent solicitation in 2025, the external panel of firms available to the General Counsel’s office decreased significantly. Some firms were no longer in operation. Some firms no longer offered the specialty that the District once used them for. Several partners and associates the District had worked with regularly no longer worked for the firms on the panel.
Unfortunately, there were significant delays in the 2025 solicitation and delays in executing contracts once the Board issued awards. The solicitation was also not well advertised, which led to lack of participation by several firms who were on the existing panel or who had expressed interest in submitting bids. Furthermore, one of the firms who submitted a bid and to which the Board awarded a contract decided not to move forward on a contract with the District due to the difficulties in navigating the District’s requests after the contract was awarded.
Due to the depletion of the 2020 panel and the significant delays in issuing the solicitation and awarding contracts, the General Counsel’s office is in need of expertise outside of those firms on the 2025 panel. The General Counsel/Chief Legal Officer has consulted with Redwood Public Law Group for both Board training - attendance at the 2025 Board retreats to advise on Rosenberg’s Rules of Order and Campaign Finance. The General Counsel has also consulted with Redwood Public Law Group on Board Policy 101 as well as confidential Board matters. To date the current amount bill by Redwood totals $8,500.
Redwood Public Law Group was established in 2024 and is comprised of attorneys who regularly serve as General Counsel or attorneys for government entities including cities, counties and special districts.
Redwood Public Law Group’s rates for partners, associates, and staff are similar to those charged by other firms on the District’s outside legal panel.
Board Policy 465 - Procurement Policy requires Board approval of contracts for Legal services, regardless of the cost.
The General Counsel anticipates the continued need to consult with Redwood.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
The advantage to authorize a contract with Redwood Public Law Group is that it will allow the General Counsel the discretion to seek sound advice from a qualified firm when needed. There are no identified disadvantages.
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
No alternatives were considered.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTION/POLICIES:
Staff Report 25-516 - Consider Approving Award of Contracts for Outside Legal Services
ATTACHMENTS:
None.
Prepared by:
Aimee L. Steele, General Counsel/Chief Legal Officer
Approved/Reviewed by:
Michael Silk, Director of Procurement & Materials Management
Aimee L. Steele, General Counsel/Chief Legal Officer
Richard Oslund, Director of Management and Budget