RFI: Legal Services for Port of San Francisco Matters – Seeking Outside Counsel Assistance

Please click on this link to open a Request for Information (RFI) issued by the San Francisco City Attorney’s Office (Office), for special counsel services to the Port of San Francisco.  It is also available on our website at the following link: https://sfcityattorney.org/aboutus/rfps/.

The Office is currently seeking outside counsel assistance in the following areas:

1)           US Army Corps of Engineers/Water Resources Development Act

2)           Maritime Law

3)           Public Trust Law

4)           Environmental Law

I. PURPOSE OF THE RFI
The City and County of San Francisco (San Francisco), through the Office of the City Attorney
(Office), is issuing this Request for Interest (RFI) to seek information and expressions of interest
from experienced attorneys or law firms (Candidates) to provide legal services for matters
relating to the Port of San Francisco (Services), as described in Section II, below. Work will
occur, and tasks will be assigned on an as-needed basis.
The purpose of this RFI is to generate a shortlist of Candidates interested and available to
provide the described Services. The Office anticipates it will invite shortlisted Candidates to
interview and enter into further discussions. The Office intends to select one or more
Candidates to enter into a contract for the Services.
The Office reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to select legal counsel through alternative
means or requests for qualifications. Prior to engagement, Candidates must execute a contract,
substantially in the form of the contract attached as Appendix B to this RFI. Additionally, before
any contract is awarded, Candidates must complete and file the forms listed in Appendix A to
this RFI.

II. SCOPE OF SERVICES
The scope of services described below is a general guide and not a complete list of all aspects of
the Services sought under this RFI or of all tasks necessary to complete the work. The Services
include, but are not limited to, legal services in the following legal practice areas:

1. City and County of San Francisco Resilience Program and Flood Study. Counsel shall
provide as-needed legal support, advice and assistance to the City Attorney on land use, real
estate, and environmental issues, including but not limited to drafting proposed local, state and
federal legislation, meeting and negotiating with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and
other stakeholders, and participating in strategy meetings/calls, in connection with federal
regulatory matters for the following projects:
• USACE Chief of Engineers Report for the S.F. Waterfront Coastal Flood Study.
• Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) Amendments
• Facilitate congressional authorization of water resources projects in WRDA.
• Real estate issues related to USACE water resources projects, including USACE
Lands, Easements, Rights-of-way, Relocations, and Disposal (LERRDs), and property
valuation for USACE feasibility studies, and how the public trust doctrine and the
Burton Act iimpactLERRDs. Specifically,
o acquisition, termination or amendments of leases, or portions of the leases;
o land acquisition, easements, or other real estate strategies in connection
with demolition or partial demolition of buildings;
o review of gross appraisal instructions and final draft appraisal reports; and
o understanding requirements for Federal flood control easements; and/or
land acquisition and impacts such easements could have on the lease and
use of Port or private property.
• Environmental issues related to USACE water resources projects and the impact the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) could have on
such projects.

2. Maritime Law: Provide legal support and advice on conventions and treaties that govern
maritime business and other nautical matters. Provide as needed advice or support related to
the Port’s waterfront operations, including:
• Interpretation and application of federal maritime statutes (e.g., Jones Act,
Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, and Limitation of Liability Act).
• U.S. Coast Guard and U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration
(MARAD) regulations.
• Marine insurance, vessel registration, and maritime lien issues.
• Maritime-related litigation in federal or state courts, in connection with disputes
related to or arising out of Jones Act, allisions, cargo damage or loss, oil spills, or
hazardous materials claims.
• Development, revision, and enforcement of port tariffs, including wharfage,
dockage, demurrage, and other fees and charges to ensure compliance with
applicable statutes and regulations.
• Port-related contracts, including terminal leases, operating agreements, and
stevedoring contracts.

3.Public Trust: Provide legal support and advice on the Burton Act and the public trust
doctrine.

4. Environmental Law: Provide legal support and advice on compliance with federal, state,
and local environmental laws and regulations, including but not limited to the Clean Water Act
(CWA), Clean Air Act (CAA), California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), McAteer-Petris Act, Coastal Zone Management Act,
Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, National Historic Preservation Act, Rivers and
Harbors Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act, Endangered Species Act, California Fish and Game
Code, and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). In addition, provide legal support, advice
and representation in connection with:
• Administrative hearings before regulatory agencies such as the U.S. EPA, California
Air Resources Board (CARB), Bay Area Air District (formerly known as BAAQMD), San
Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC), U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (USACE), California Department of Fish and Wildlife, US Fish and
Wildlife, NOAA Fisheries, Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), and
Regional Water Quality Control Board.
• Environmental civil or administrative enforcement actions.

III. PREPARING A RESPONSE
Please provide the following information in the manner specified, below:

1. Firm name, address, contact name, title, phone number, and email address of the person
authorized to represent the Candidate with respect to all notices, negotiations, discussions
and other communications relating to this RFI, and any selection process, and any
negotiations relating to a contract for the Services described in this RFI.

2. A short introduction or summary description of your experience in the industry, experience
with providing relevant services that are identical, or substantially similar to, the Services.
Note that Candidates may respond to one or more Services, if the Candidate determines
they have expertise to provide legal services in one or more areas.

3. A short introduction or summary description of the Candidate’s experience, including years
of experience, in the legal practice areas described in Section II above.

4. Name and experience, including representative matters, of the lead attorney(s) who would
provide the Services.

5. An organizational chart and brief description of each attorney or employee who may be
assigned to provide Services under a contract, including:
a. location of office;
b. if a firm – title and role within the Candidate’s firm;
c. if a firm – number of years with the Candidate’s firm;
d. expected role and responsibilities in providing the Services described in this RFI;
e. qualifications and any specialized expertise.
f. brief resume; and
g. if applicable, all currently active state bar licenses and federal court admissions.

6. Description of any actual or potential conflicts of interest with the City and County of San
Francisco, including its constituent boards, commissions, agencies, and departments.

7. Names of up to three clients for whom the Candidate has provided identical or
substantially similar Services, including for each: the client contact person, address, email
address, and telephone number. The Office will check references submitted by each
Candidate.

8. Description of required insurance coverage as described in the contract, including the
name of the insurance carrier(s). Please identify whether the coverage is on a per-client
basis, or is applied to the firm as a whole.

9. A proposed fee arrangement for the Services you are proposing, including an estimate of
the billing rates for up to five years. The fee proposal should include a breakdown of the
rates for each attorney and professional staff member (e.g., paralegal) who may be
assigned to provide Services. It is expected that the Candidate will offer their government
or comparable favorable rates. Please describe fees you propose to charge on any items
separate from attorney services, including, but not limited to computerized research,
photocopying or subpoena services. Include any other direct or indirect costs that may be
incurred by the Office, or any other additional information related to billing that the
Candidate believes will be relevant to the Office in considering the Candidate’s fees.

IV. EVALUATING RESPONSES
The Office will identify firms whose responses best meet San Francisco’s needs. The Office will
evaluate the responses to this RFI (each, a “Response”) generally in accordance with the
following criteria:

1. Experience and Qualifications
• Specific experience providing Services identical or substantially similar to the work
described.
• Relevant experience of lead attorney(s).
• Depth of the legal team identified in the Candidate’s Response to this RFI, in terms
of number and experience.
• Specifically as to Item 1 of Section II (Scope of Services):
o experience with USACE Chief of Engineers’ reports and authorizing projects
strongly preferred
o experience with WRDA amendment procedures and processes preferred
• Quality of recently completed Services for existing clients.
• Conflict-of-interest issues.
• Malpractice insurance and other insurance coverage.
• Ability to satisfy the requirements of Section II (Scope of Services).
• Fees and cost structure for Services described in this RFI.

2. Assigned Staff
• Professional experience of assigned staff.
• Staffing model (i.e., resources, skills, and processes to be applied) for Services
under this RFI.

3. Demonstrated Professionalism
• Communication skills, both oral and written.
• Quality of submitted response.

V. RESPONSE SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
All questions, requests for clarification, and requests for additional information regarding this
RFI must be submitted to Annette Mathai-Jackson, Annette.MathaiJackson@sfcityatty.org, by
March 10, 2026. All questions and requests must be submitted by e-mail. Responses to such
questions and requests shall be at San Francisco’s sole discretion, and nothing in this RFI shall
create an obligation by San Francisco to provide any response to a Candidate. Responses may,
at San Francisco’s sole discretion, be posted as addenda to this RFI.

Responses must be received by 4:30 pm PT on the Response Due Date. Responses, including
any attachments, should be submitted by email to Annette.MathaiJackson@sfcityatty.org.
Completeness, clarity and brevity will be looked upon favorably.

VI. TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS RFI
1. Responses to this RFI become the exclusive property of San Francisco. Materials provided
to the San Francisco can be requested by the public in accordance with the California
Public Records Act and San Francisco Administrative Code Section 67.24(e).

2. San Francisco accepts no financial responsibility for any costs incurred by Candidates in
responding to this RFI document (“Respondents”). Respondents shall absorb all expenses
they incur resulting from their response and any participation in any associated
discussions. Participation in this process is voluntary and non-compensable, and no
contract of any kind will be awarded as a result of this process.

3. San Francisco may, in its sole discretion, ask shortlisted Respondents to present their
material in person or remotely to San Francisco’s representatives at San Francisco’s offices,
and the costs of such presentations shall be solely the responsibility of the Respondent.

4. A Respondent that is recommended for a contract with the Office must conduct and clear a
conflict of interest check or obtain approved waivers before the Office will enter a
contract.

5. San Francisco, at its sole discretion, will determine if a request for proposals or other
competitive solicitation may be issued at a later date. Submission of a Response does not
guarantee any future business with San Francisco. The issuance of this RFI does not
constitute agreement by San Francisco that any contract will actually be entered into by
San Francisco. San Francisco expressly reserves the rights to:
a. Waive or correct any defect or informality in any proposal, response or response
procedure;
b. Reject any or all responses and re-issue a new RFI, RFQ or RFP;
c. Prior to the submission deadline for responses, modify all or any portion of the
schedule for receiving responses;
d. Procure any materials, equipment, products or services specified in this RFI by any
other means; or
e. Determine that no contract or services will be pursued.

Please refer to the Q&A’s below for more information:

Question 1 As there are several different elements of the scope, does the City Attorney’s
Office envision selecting one firm or potentially multiple firms in response to the RFI?
Response 1: Subject to the responses, the City Attorney’s Office could select one or
multiple firms.

Question 2 If multiple may be selected, is it possible that a firm could apply for all
elements, but be selected for less than all (in other words, is a response “all or nothing” or
could you pursue all scopes but be selected for Scope elements 1, 3 and 4)?
Response 2: One firm could be selected for one scope of work, multiple scopes of work, or
all scopes of work.

Question 3 Given that the scope elements and are broad and different, is it acceptable to
supply up to 3 client references for each scope element proposed vs. 3 in total.
Response 3 It is acceptable to provide up to 3 client references for each scope of work
proposed.