Columbia Funds Series Trust I - Annual N-SAR report for the period
ending 4/30/11

Columbia Core Bond Fund
(the "Fund")


Item 77C - Matters submitted to a vote of security holders:

Columbia Core Bond Fund

At a Joint Special Meeting of Shareholders held on February 15, 2011,
shareholders of the Fund considered a proposal to approve an Agreement
and Plan of Reorganization pursuant to which the Fund will transfer its
assets to Columbia Bond Fund (the "Buying Fund") in exchange for shares of
the Buying Fund and the assumption by the Buying Fund of all of the
liabilities of the Fund (the "Reorganization").  The proposal was
approved as follows:

Votes For       Votes Against   Abstentions   Broker Non-Votes
1,613,983,635   1,607,333       1,553,852      0

The Reorganization was effective on March 11, 2011.


Item 77E - Legal Proceedings:


Information Regarding Pending and
Settled Legal Proceedings


In June 2004, an action captioned John E. Gallus et al. v. American
Express Financial Corp. and American Express Financial Advisors
Inc. was filed in the United States District Court for the District of
Arizona. The plaintiffs allege that they are investors in several
American Express Company mutual funds (branded as Columbia or
RiverSource) and they purport to bring the action derivatively on
behalf of those funds under the Investment Company Act of 1940. The
plaintiffs allege that fees allegedly paid to the defendants by the funds
for investment advisory and administrative services are excessive. The
plaintiffs seek remedies including restitution and rescission of
investment advisory and distribution agreements. The plaintiffs
voluntarily agreed to transfer this case to the United States District
Court for the District of Minnesota (the District Court). In response to
defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint, the District Court
dismissed one of plaintiffs' four claims and granted plaintiffs limited
discovery. Defendants moved for summary judgment in April 2007.
Summary judgment was granted in the defendants' favor on July 9, 2007.
The plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal with the Eighth Circuit Court of
Appeals (the Eighth Circuit) on August 8, 2007. On April 8, 2009, the
Eighth Circuit reversed summary judgment and remanded to the District
Court for further proceedings. On August 6, 2009, defendants filed a
writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court (the Supreme Court),
asking the Supreme Court to stay the District Court proceedings
while the Supreme Court considers and rules in a case captioned
Jones v. Harris Associates, which involves issues of law similar to those
presented in the Gallus case. On March 30, 2010, the Supreme Court
issued its ruling in Jones v. Harris Associates, and on April 5, 2010, the
Supreme Court vacated the Eighth Circuit's decision in the Gallus case
and remanded the case to the Eighth Circuit for further consideration in
light of the Supreme Court's decision in Jones v. Harris Associates. On
June 4, 2010, the Eighth Circuit remanded the Gallus case to the
District Court for further consideration in light of the Supreme Court's
decision in Jones v. Harris Associates. On December 9, 2010, the
District Court reinstated its July 9, 2007 summary judgment order in
favor of the defendants. On January 10, 2011 plaintiffs filed a notice
of appeal with the Eighth Circuit. In response to the plaintiffs'
opening appellate brief filed on March 18, 2011, the defendants filed
a response brief on May 4, 2011 with the Eighth Circuit.

In December 2005, without admitting or denying the allegations,
American Express Financial Corporation (AEFC, which is now
known as Ameriprise Financial, Inc. (Ameriprise Financial)), entered
into settlement agreements with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC) and Minnesota Department of Commerce
(MDOC) related to market timing activities. As a result, AEFC was
censured and ordered to cease and desist from committing or causing
any violations of certain provisions of the Investment Advisers Act
of 1940, the Investment Company Act of 1940, and various
Minnesota laws. AEFC agreed to pay disgorgement of $10 million
and civil money penalties of $7 million. AEFC also agreed to retain
an independent distribution consultant to assist in developing a plan
for distribution of all disgorgement and civil penalties ordered by the
SEC in accordance with various undertakings detailed at
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/ia-2451.pdf. Ameriprise
Financial and its affiliates have cooperated with the SEC and the
MDOC in these legal proceedings, and have made regular reports to
the RiverSource, Seligman and Threadneedle funds' Boards of
Directors/Trustees.

Ameriprise Financial and certain of its affiliates have historically
been involved in a number of legal, arbitration and regulatory
proceedings, including routine litigation, class actions, and
governmental actions, concerning matters arising in connection with
the conduct of their business activities. Ameriprise Financial believes
that the Funds are not currently the subject of, and that neither
Ameriprise Financial nor any of its affiliates are the subject of, any
pending legal, arbitration or regulatory proceedings that are likely to
have a material adverse effect on the Funds or the ability of
Ameriprise Financial or its affiliates to perform under their contracts
with the Funds. Ameriprise Financial is required to make 10-Q, 10-K
and, as necessary, 8-K filings with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on legal and regulatory matters that relate to Ameriprise
Financial and its affiliates. Copies of these filings may be obtained
by accessing the SEC website at www.sec.gov.

There can be no assurance that these matters, or the adverse publicity
associated with them, will not result in increased fund redemptions,
reduced sale of fund shares or other adverse consequences to the
Funds. Further, although we believe proceedings are not likely to
have a material adverse effect on the Funds or the ability of
Ameriprise Financial or its affiliates to perform under their contracts
with the Funds, these proceedings are subject to uncertainties and, as
such, we are unable to estimate the possible loss or range of loss that
may result. An adverse outcome in one or more of these proceedings
could result in adverse judgments, settlements, fines, penalties or
other relief that could have a material adverse effect on the
consolidated financial condition or results of operations of
Ameriprise Financial.