Los Angeles — 2026-02-11

(1)\n25-0160-S98\nCD 8\nCONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF HEARING PROTEST, APPEALS\nOR OBJECTIONS to the Department of Building and Safety report and\nconfirmation of lien for nuisance abatement costs and/or non-\ncompliance of code violations/Annual Inspection costs, pursuant to the\nLos Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC) and/or Los Angeles\nAdministrative Code (LAAC), for the property located at 4915 South\n11th Avenue.\nRecommendation for Council action:\nHEAR PROTEST, APPEALS OR OBJECTIONS relative to a\nproposed lien for nuisance abatement costs and/or non-compliance\nof code violations/Annual Inspection costs, pursuant to the LAMC\nand/or LAAC, and CONFIRM said lien for the property located at\n4915 South 11th Avenue. (Lien: $1,276.56)\n(Continued from Council meeting of August 13, 2025)

(10)\n25-1489\nBUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT relative to an update\non affirmative litigation actions of the federal government.\nRecommendations for Council action:\n1. NOTE and FILE the City Attorney report dated December 11,\n2025, attached to the Council file, relative to affirmative litigation\nchallenging actions of the federal government.\n2. REQUEST the City Attorney to update the Council on the status\nof the cases discussed in said City Attorney report.\n[The City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to pending litigation in the cases entitled King\nCounty et al. v. Turner et al. (No. 2:25-cv-814-BJR, W.D. Wash.);\nCounty of Santa Clara, et al. v. Noem, et al. (No. 3:25-cv-08330-\nWHO, N.D. Cal.); City and County of San Francisco, et al. v.\nTrump, et al. (No. 3:25-cv-1350-WHO, N.D. Cal.); and, Pedro\nVasquez Perdomo et al. v. Noem et al. (No. 2:25-cv-05605-MEMF,\nC.D. Cal.)].\nFiscal Impact Statement: Not applicable

(11)\n25-1391\nBUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE and PUBLIC SAFETY\nCOMMITTEE REPORTS relative to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-26\nSelective Traffic Enforcement Program (STEP) grant award from the\nState of California, Office of Traffic Safety (OTS).\nA. BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT\nRecommendations for Council action, SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL\nOF THE MAYOR:\n1. AUTHORIZE the Chief of Police, Los Angeles Police\nDepartment (LAPD), or designee, to:\na. Retroactively apply for and accept the grant award for the\nFY 2025-26 STEP from the State of California, OTS in the\namount of $6,405,000 for the period of October 1, 2025,\nthrough September 30, 2026.\nb. Execute the 2025-26 STEP Grant Agreement on behalf of\nthe City and submit the necessary agreements and\ndocuments relative to the grant award, subject to the\napproval of the City Attorney as to form.\nc. Execute a Professional Services Agreement with one\nselected vendor, for a term of 12 months within the\napplicable grant performance period, for a sum not to\nexceed $70,000, for the provision of phlebotomist\nservices, subject to the approval of the City Attorney as to\nform.\n2. AUTHORIZE the LAPD to:\na. Spend up to the grant amount of $6,405,000 in\naccordance with the grant award agreement.\nb. Submit grant reimbursement requests to the grantor and\ndeposit grant receipts in the LAPD Grant Trust Fund No.\n339/70.\nc. Prepare Controller instructions for any technical\nadjustments as necessary to implement Mayor and\nCouncil intentions, subject to the approval of the City\nAdministrative Officer (CAO); and, authorize the Controller\nto implement the instructions.\n3. AUTHORIZE the Controller to:\na. Establish a grant receivable and appropriate $6,405,000\nto appropriation account, account number to be\ndetermined, within Fund No. 339/70, for the disbursement\nof the FY 2025-26 STEP grant funds.\nb. Increase appropriations and transfer, as necessary, the FY\n2025-26 STEP grant funds from Fund No. 339/70, account\nnumber to be determined, to Fund No. 100/70, account\nnumbers and amounts as follows:\ni. Account No. 001092, Overtime Sworn; Amount:\n$3,628,773.28\nii. Account No. 001090, Overtime General; Amount:\n$224,791.27\niii. Account No. To Be Determined, Related Costs;\nAmount: $346,435.45\n4. AUTHORIZE the City Clerk to place the following actions\nrelative to the FY 2025-26 STEP Grant on the City Council\nAgenda on July 1, 2026, or on the first meeting day\nthereafter:\n​\nAuthorize the Controller to increase appropriations and\ntransfer, as necessary, the FY 2025-26 STEP grant funds\nfrom Fund No. 339/70, account number to be determined, to\nFund No. 100/70, account numbers and amounts as\nfollows:\na. Account No. 001092, Overtime Sworn; Amount:\n$1,746,703.37\nb. Account No. 001090, Overtime General; Amount:\n$111,936.87\nc. Account No. To Be Determined, Related Costs;\nAmount: $167,091.76\nB. PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE REPORT\nSUBMITS WITHOUT RECOMMENDATION the Recommendations of\nthe City Administrative Officer Report, dated December 18, 2025,\nattached to the Council File, as stated above.\nFiscal Impact Statement: The CAO reports that approval of the\nrecommendations within the report will allow for the expenditure of the\nFY 2025-26 STEP grant award totaling $6,405,000 from the State of\nCalifornia OTS. There is no impact to the General Fund as a result of\nthese recommendations. No matching funds are required for this\ngrant.\nFinancial Policies Statement: The CAO reports that the\nrecommendations provided in the report are in compliance with the\nCity’s Financial Policies in that one-time grant funding will be utilized\nfor one-time program expenditures.

(12)\n25-1536\nARTS, PARKS, LIBRARIES, AND COMMUNITY ENRICHMENT and\nBUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEES’ REPORT and RESOLUTION\nrelative to the submission of a Continued and Expansion Funding\nApplication (CEFA) to the California Department of Social Services\n(CDSS) General Child Care and Development Program (CCTR) for\nsubsidized preschool services.\nRecommendations for Council action:\n1. APPROVE the submission of a CEFA by the Department of\nRecreation and Parks (RAP) to the CDSS for subsidized\npreschool services at RAP's licensed preschools, through the\nCCTR Program for Fiscal Year (FY) 2026- 27.\n2. AUTHORIZE the General Manager, RAP, or designee, to\nexecute and submit the CEFA online.\n3. ADOPT the accompanying RESOLUTION, included as\nAttachment 2 of the Board of Recreation and Park\nCommissioners (Board) report dated December 18, 2025,\nattached to the Council file; and, DIRECT the Board Secretary\nto sign the web-based CEFA certifying that the Resolution was\nadopted.\nFiscal Impact Statement: The Board reports that the submission of the\nCEFA for the CCTR grant from CDSS does not impact the RAP’s\nGeneral Fund. If awarded and accepted, this grant would provide\nfunding to continue subsidized licensed preschool programs for two-\nyear old to three-year old children at any of the RAP’s licensed\npreschools.

(13)\n25-1488\nARTS, PARKS, LIBRARIES, AND COMMUNITY ENRICHMENT and\nBUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEES’ REPORT relative to\nMeasure A 2025 Competitive Program grant applications and funding\nfor six Department of Recreation and Parks (RAP) planning and design\nand capital improvement projects.\nRecommendations for Council action, SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL\nOF THE MAYOR:\n1. AUTHORIZE the Department of Recreation and Parks (RAP),\nretroactively, to submit six grant applications to the County of\nLos Angeles Regional Park and Open Space District (RPOSD)\nunder the Measure A 2025 Competitive Program for the\nfollowing projects:\na. Griffith Park (Tregnan Road)\nb. Hansen Dam Recreation Area\nc. Cabrillo Beach Lifeguard Tower\nd. Point Fermin Park (Sunken City)\ne. Wilders Addition Park Stairs\nf. Oakridge Estate\n2. AUTHORIZE the General Manager, RAP, to accept the funds, if\nawarded, for the amount, scope, and the performance period\noutlined in the Proposition K – L.A. For Kids Steering\nCommittee (LAFKSC) report dated December 11, 2025,\nattached to the Council file.\n3. DESIGNATE the General Manager, RAP, or designee, as the\nagent to conduct all negotiations, execute and submit all grant\ndocuments, including, but not limited to applications,\nagreements, amendments, and payment requests, which may\nbe necessary for the acceptance and use of Measure A funding\nfor said projects.\n4. AUTHORIZE the RAP to make necessary technical adjustments\nto carry out the intent of said LAFKSC report.\nFiscal Impact Statement: The LAFKSC reports that there is no\nanticipated General Fund impact as Measure A funding does not\nrequire matching funds.

(14)\n12-1670-S10\nARTS, PARKS, LIBRARIES, AND COMMUNITY ENRICHMENT and\nBUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEES’ REPORT relative to\nauthorizing an earmark of Proposition K program interest funds for\nthree specified projects, and the transfer of maintenance funds to the\nProposition K Capital Fund.\nRecommendations for Council action, SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL\nOF THE MAYOR:\n1. AUTHORIZE the earmark of up to $6.0 million in Proposition K\nprogram interest funds to reduce the shortfall for the design and\nconstruction activities for three future specified projects\nidentified in Attachment No. 8 of the Proposition K – L.A. For\nKids Steering Committee (LAFKSC) report dated September\n26, 2025, attached to the Council file.\n2. AUTHORIZE LAFKSC staff to identify and transfer funds\npreviously allocated for capital projects within the Proposition K\nmaintenance account (Fund No. 43L) to the Proposition K\ncapital account, as well as any accrued and future interest\nearnings from both the maintenance account and the\nProposition K administrative account (Fund No 43M).\n3. AUTHORIZE the Controller to adjust balances within the\nProposition K Funds (Fund Nos. 43K, 43L, and 43M) to\neffectuate the funding adjustments associated with\nRecommendation Nos. 1 and 2 above, in accordance with\ninstructions to be provided by the City Administrative Officer\n(CAO).\n4. AUTHORIZE the CAO to prepare technical adjustments, as\nneeded to carry out the intent of the Council action; and,\nAUTHORIZE the Controller to implement those technical\nadjustments.\nFiscal Impact Statement: The LAFKSC reports that there is an\nanticipated impact of $58.4 million on the General Fund to the extent\nthat Proposition K funds are insufficient to fully fund the remaining\nspecified projects. Insofar as the Proposition K funding capacity\ndiscussed in said LAFKSC report can be utilized to fund the cost of\nthe remaining specified projects, the level of cost offsets incurred by\nthe General Fund for project delivery could decrease. Program staff\nare completing closeout activities and expect to identify residual funds\nfor completed projects that could be used to offset shortfalls for Ballot-\nmandated specified projects. An earmark of $6.0 million in Proposition\nK interest funds is recommended to address funding shortfalls for\nthree out of the 31 specified projects remaining in the Proposition K\nprogram, as detailed in Attachment 8 of said LAFKSC report, which\nhave the largest shortfalls. Specific cost estimates for operating and\nmaintaining the projects addressed through the funding\nrecommendations of said LAFKSC report have not yet been\ndeveloped, but will be addressed through the City budget as projects\nare completed.\nFinancial Policies Statement: The LAFKSC reports that approval of\nthe recommendations in the report are in compliance with the City’s\nFinancial Policies in that current operations will be funded by current\nrevenues.

(15)\n17-0964-S1\nBUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT relative to the First\nRestated and Amended Master Placement Agreement No. C-143732\nwith FUSE Corps to provide a framework for City departments that\nparticipate in the FUSE Executive Fellowship Program.\nRecommendations for Council action:\n1. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the City Administrative Officer\n(CAO) to execute the proposed First Amended and Restated\nMaster Placement Agreement No. C-143732 with FUSE Corps,\na California Nonprofit Corporation, for a six-year term effective\nJune 1, 2023 through May 31, 2029, subject to the review and\napproval of the City Attorney.\n2. AUTHORIZE the General Managers of participating City\ndepartments to execute Individual Placement Agreements (IPA)\nwith FUSE Corps in accordance with the terms of the First\nAmended and Restated Master Placement Agreement, subject\nto the approval of the City Administrative Officer relative to the\navailability of budgeted funding and the City Attorney as to form.\nFiscal Impact Statement: The CAO reports that funding will be\nprovided with a program fee of $180,000 on a per-project basis by the\nparticipating City departments that choose to use the Agreement.\nFunds must be identified by the participating City department prior to\nthe execution of an IPA to place a FUSE Fellow. There will be no\nadditional fiscal impact.\nFinancial Policies Statement: The CAO reports that approval of the\nrecommended actions is in compliance with the City’s Financial\nPolicies as budgeted funds must be identified to support the proposed\nAgreement expenditures before an IPA is executed under the Master\nPlacement Agreement.

(16)\n26-0014\nBUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT relative to the\nremoval of delinquent accounts receivables submitted by the Los\nAngeles Housing Department (LAHD) for the quarter ending\nSeptember 30, 2025.\nRecommendation for Council action:\nAPPROVE the Collections Board of Review’s (CBR) recommendation\nand findings for the LAHD to remove from its active accounts\nreceivable 11 uncollectible invoices totaling $125,238.48, each\naccount owing $5,000 or more, as detailed in the CBR report dated\nDecember 17, 2025, attached to the Council file.\nFiscal Impact Statement: The CBR reports that the proposed action\nwill decrease the City’s receivable base by $125,238.48.

(17)\n25-1433-S1\nCD 4\nBUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT relative to an\nongoing funding source for daily security services at Runyon Canyon\nPark in Council District Four.\nRecommendation for Council action, pursuant to Motion (Raman –\nSoto-Martinez):\nINSTRUCT the City Administrative Officer (CAO), with the assistance\nof the Department of Recreation and Parks, to report to Council on an\nongoing funding source for daily security services at Runyon Canyon\nPark from 7:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m.\nFiscal Impact Statement: Neither the CAO nor the Chief Legislative\nAnalyst has completed a financial analysis of this report.

(18)\n25-0600-S77\nBUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT relative to the\nfeasibility of establishing a fee-for-service program to support\nAmericans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements for reimbursement\nof physical improvements, mobile accessibility and electronic services\nby City departments.\nRecommendation for Council action:\nDIRECT the City Administrative Officer, in consultation with the Chief\nLegislative Analyst, to to report to Council within 60 days on the\nfeasibility of implementing Options 1A, 2A, or 2B in the Department of\nDisability (DOD) report dated November 6, 2025, attached to the\nCouncil file. The assessment that should include an analysis of\nanticipated costs and fiscal impacts, as well as an evaluation of the\noperational and legislative requirements necessary to implement a\nworkable fee-for-service program for the DOD in time for the start of\nFiscal Year 2026-27.\nFiscal Impact Statement: The DOD reports that adopting and\nimplementing the recommended options would improve the City’s\nGeneral Fund by shifting a large portion of costs for accessibility\nservices to special funds and proprietary-controlled funds. In addition,\nthis overall shift in approach would decrease the DOD’s administrative\nburden, thus allowing staff to focus more of their time on compliance\nefforts. This in turn would minimize risk associated with non-\ncompliance by helping the City better meet its state and federally\nmandated disability access obligations; prioritizing these critical\nservices and integrating them into each department’s planning\nprocess and day-to-day work.

(19)\n23-0525\nCD 7\nBUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT relative to the\npayment of fees and costs associated with a Writ of Mandate in the\ncase entitled Janet Jha, v. City of Los Angeles, et al., Los Angeles\nSuperior Court Case No. 23STCP03499, for a 40-unit project located\nat 13916 West Polk Street.\nRecommendations for Council action, SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL\nOF THE MAYOR:\n1. AUTHORIZE payment of the fees and costs in the total amount\nof $134,591.61, plus applicable interest, from the Liability\nClaims Fund No. 100/59, Account No. 009798, Miscellaneous\nLiability Payouts, for the case entitled Janet Jha, v. City of Los\nAngeles, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No.\n23STCP03499.\n2. AUTHORIZE the City Attorney to draw a demand from the\nLiability Claims Fund No. 100/59, Account No. 009798,\nMiscellaneous Liability Payouts, which shall be paid as follows:\na. $134,591.61, plus applicable interest, to Patterson &\nO’Neill, PC, Tax Identification No. 92-3699950.\n3. AUTHORIZE the City Attorney, or designee, to make necessary\ntechnical adjustments, subject to the approval of the City\nAdministrative Officer; and, AUTHORIZE the Controller to\nimplement the instructions.\n[The City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nCalifornia Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer\nwith its legal counsel relative to the above-entitled case. (This\nmatter concerns litigation that resulted in a Writ of Mandate\nregarding the City’s land use application processing for a 40-unit\nhousing development at 13916 West Polk Street under the\nHousing Accountability Act.)]\nFiscal Impact Statement: None submitted by the City Attorney. Neither\nthe City Administrative Officer nor the Chief Legislative Analyst has\ncompleted a financial analysis of this report.

(2)\n25-0160-S85\nCD 9\nCONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF HEARING PROTEST, APPEALS\nOR OBJECTIONS to the Department of Building and Safety report and\nconfirmation of lien for nuisance abatement costs and/or non-\ncompliance of code violations/Annual Inspection costs, pursuant to the\nLos Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC) and/or Los Angeles\nAdministrative Code (LAAC), for the property located at 857 East 92nd\nStreet.\nRecommendation for Council action:\nHEAR PROTEST, APPEALS OR OBJECTIONS relative to a\nproposed lien for nuisance abatement costs and/or non-compliance\nof code violations/Annual Inspection costs, pursuant to the LAMC\nand/or LAAC, and CONFIRM said lien for the property located at 857\nEast 92nd Street. (Lien: $3,847.53)\n(Continued from Council meeting of August 13, 2025)

(20)\n25-0885\nCIVIL RIGHTS, EQUITY, IMMIGRATION AGING AND DISABILITY and\nBUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEES’ REPORT relative to a report\non all City projects, programs, and services that could be impacted by\nH.R. 1 (One Big Beautiful Bill Act); and related matters.\nRecommendations for Council action:\n1. DIRECT THE City Administrative Officer (CAO) to release a\nfollow-up report within 60 days that includes updates on its\nfindings on H.R.1’s impact on City projects, programs, and\nservices in light of funding reductions, Medi-Cal/CalFresh\neligibility changes, funding that was cut for LGBTQ+ services,\nand other changes that have taken effect.\n2. REQUEST the Department of Water and Power and the Port of\nLos Angeles to report to the Energy and Environment\ncommittee within 60 days regarding contingency planning and\nalternative funding sources to mitigate the impact to programs\nas a result of the loss of funds due to H.R. 1.\nFiscal Impact Statement: The CAO reports that the report is\ninformational, and the recommendation to note and file the report will\nnot result in a fiscal impact.\nFinancial Policies Statement: The CAO reports that the report\ncomplies with the City’s Financial Policies inasmuch as the report is\ninformational relative to the potential impacts to City programs and\nservices and reduced funding opportunities due to the elimination of\ngrants or rescission of unobligated funds.

(21)\n26-0005-S6\nCD 11\nCOMMUNICATION FROM THE LOS ANGELES HOUSING\nDEPARTMENT (LAHD) and RESOLUTION relative to removing the\nproperty at 11939 West Mayfield Avenue (Case No. 855954), Assessor\nI.D. No. 4265-009-060, from the Rent Escrow Account Program\n(REAP).\nRecommendation for Council action:\nAPPROVE the LAHD report recommendation dated February 3,\n2026, attached to the Council file, and ADOPT the accompanying\nRESOLUTION removing the property at 11939 West Mayfield Avenue\n(Case No. 855954), Assessor I.D. No. 4265-009-060, from the REAP.\nFiscal Impact Statement: None submitted by the LAHD. Neither the\nCity Administrative Officer nor the Chief Legislative Analyst has\ncompleted a financial analysis of this report.

(22)\n26-0005-S4\nCD 10\nCOMMUNICATION FROM THE LOS ANGELES HOUSING\nDEPARTMENT (LAHD) and RESOLUTION relative to removing the\nproperty at 4016 West Palmwood Drive (Case No. 874456), Assessor\nI.D. No. 5032-009-004, from the Rent Escrow Account Program\n(REAP).\nRecommendation for Council action:\nAPPROVE the LAHD report recommendation dated February 3,\n2026, attached to the Council file, and ADOPT the accompanying\nRESOLUTION removing the property at 4016 West Palmwood Drive\n(Case No. 874456), Assessor I.D. No. 5032-009-004, from the REAP.\nFiscal Impact Statement: None submitted by the LAHD. Neither the\nCity Administrative Officer nor the Chief Legislative Analyst has\ncompleted a financial analysis of this report.

(23)\n26-0005-S5\nCD 5\nCOMMUNICATION FROM THE LOS ANGELES HOUSING\nDEPARTMENT (LAHD) and RESOLUTION relative to removing the\nproperty at 10945 West National Boulevard (Case No. 844875),\nAssessor I.D. No. 4251-007-027, from the Rent Escrow Account\nProgram (REAP).\nRecommendation for Council action:\nAPPROVE the LAHD report recommendation dated February 3,\n2026, attached to the Council file, and ADOPT the accompanying\nRESOLUTION removing the property at 10945 West National\nBoulevard (Case No. 844875), Assessor I.D. No. 4251-007-027, from\nthe REAP.\nFiscal Impact Statement: None submitted by the LAHD. Neither the\nCity Administrative Officer nor the Chief Legislative Analyst has\ncompleted a financial analysis of this report.

(24)\n25-0006-S1\nCOMMUNICATION FROM THE CHIEF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST\n(CLA) relative to contracting with Critical Preparedness and Response\nSolutions (CPARS) for an After-Action Report (AAR) on the City’s\npreparation for and response to the windstorm and fires of January\n2025.\nRecommendations for Council action:\n1. AUTHORIZE the CLA, or designee, to negotiate and execute a\ncontract with CPARS to prepare and present an AAR on the\nCity’s preparation for and response to the windstorm and fires of\nJanuary 2025, for a term of two years and an amount of\n$580,000, with a scope that is substantially as described in the\nCLA report dated December 5, 2025, attached to Council file\nNo. 25-0006-S1.\n2. REQUEST the Mayor to include funding in the amount of\n$430,000 in the 2026-27 proposed City budget for this contract.\nFiscal Impact Statement: None submitted by the CLA. The City\nAdministrative Officer has not completed a financial analysis of this\nreport.

(25)\n19-0279\nMOTION (LEE - McOSKER) relative to reactivating Council file No.\n(CF) 19-0279 regarding Topanga Canyon Place / Plummer Street /\nHanna Avenue / Halsted Street / Illegal Dumping / Temporary Closure.\nRecommendation for Council action:\nREACTIVATE CF 19-0279 relative to Topanga Canyon Place /\nPlummer Street / Hanna Avenue / Halsted Street / Illegal Dumping /\nTemporary Closure and RESTORE the file to its most recent\nlegislative status as of the date of the File’s expiration.

(26)\n26-0147\nCD 13\nMOTION (SOTO-MARTINEZ - JURADO) relative to funding to\nsupplement the medical care and social services for patients\nexperiencing homelessness in Council District 13.\nRecommendations for Council action, SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL\nOF THE MAYOR:\n1. UTILIZE $568,834 from the AB1290 Fund No. 53P, Account No.\n281213 (CD 13 Redevelopment Projects - Services)\nand $568,834 from the General City Purposes Fund No.\n100/56, Account No. 000627 (Additional Homeless Services -\nCD 13) [TOTAL: $1,137,668] to supplement the medical care\nand social services for patients experiencing homelessness in\nCouncil District 13, currently being provided by Healthcare in\nAction under City Contract C-200712, for an extended period\nfrom August 6, 2025 to November 30, 2026.\n2. INSTRUCT and AUTHORIZE the City Clerk to prepare, process\nand execute the necessary documents with and/or payments to\nHealthcare in Action, or any other agency or organization, as\nappropriate, utilizing the above amount, for the above purpose,\nsubject to the approval of the City Attorney as to form.

(27)\n19-0742\nMOTION (McOSKER - HERNANDEZ – HARRIS-DAWSON) relative to\nreactivating Council file No. (CF) 19-0742 regarding amending Los\nAngeles Municipal Code (LAMC) Section 12.03 and adding Section\n11.5.15 to define and prohibit the uses of Private Detention Center and\nCommunity Detention Facility for Unaccompanied Minors citywide.\nRecommendation for Council action:\nREACTIVATE CF 19-0742 relative to amending LAMC Section 12.03\nand adding Section 11.5.15 to define and prohibit the uses of Private\nDetention Center and Community Detention Facility for\nUnaccompanied Minors citywide and RESTORE the file to its most\nrecent legislative status as of the date of the File’s expiration.

(28)\n26-0104\nThe City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled Krystal Shin, et al. v. City of Los\nAngeles, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 22STCV23442.\n(This matter arises from an incident involving defective playground\nequipment on February 12, 2022, at a City park located at 11075\nFoothill Boulevard, in Lake View Terrace.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Open Session on February 3, 2026.)

(29)\n26-0081\nThe City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled Patty Namkoong, et al. v. City of\nLos Angeles, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No.\n22SMCV02165. (This matter arises out of an accident involving a\nvehicle to vehicle traffic collision occurring March 26, 2021, at the\nintersection of Glencoe Avenue and Maxella Avenue.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Open Session on February 3, 2026.)

(3)\n26-0110\nCD 1\nCATEGORICAL EXEMPTION and COMMUNICATION FROM THE\nCITY ENGINEER relative to an offer to dedicate an easement for\nstreet purposes on 1457 North Main Street - Right of Way No. 36000-\n10317.\nRecommendations for Council action:\n1. FIND that the dedication of an easement for street purposes on\n1457 North Main Street (Dedication) is categorically exempt\nfrom the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 pursuant\nto Article III, Class 5(19) of the City's Environmental Guidelines.\n2. ACCEPT the petitioner's offer for the Dedication, substantially\nas shown on the Exhibit Map of the January 20, 2026 City\nEngineer report, attached to the Council file.\n3. AUTHORIZE the Board of Public Works to acquire the\nDedication.\n4. INSTRUCT the City Clerk to forward a copy of the Council\naction on this project to the Bureau of Engineering, Survey\nDivision for processing.\nFiscal Impact Statement: The City Engineer reports that a $3,193 fee\nfor processing this report was paid pursuant to Sections 7.3 and\n7.41.1 of the Los Angeles Administrative Code. No additional City\nfunds are needed.

(30)\n25-0472\nThe City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section No. 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled D’Jeon Rieux v. Los Angeles Fire\nDepartment, Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 22STCV26690.\n(This matter arises from a complaint of Labor Code Section 432.7 and\nGovernment Code Section 12952 violations against the City.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Closed Session on February 3, 2026.)

(31)\n26-0108\nThe City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled Dina Demas v. City of Los\nAngeles, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 22STCV13231.\n(This matter arises from a trip and fall incident on June 29, 2021, on\nthe sidewalk located at 17509 Ventura Boulevard, in the City of Los\nAngeles.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Open Session on February 3, 2026.)

(32)\n26-0107\nThe City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled Nasser Pouladian v. City of Los\nAngeles, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 22SMCV02554.\n(This matter arises from a December 8, 2021, sidewalk trip and fall\nincident near the intersection of Ashton Avenue and Westwood\nBoulevard, in Los Angeles.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Open Session on February 3, 2026.)

(33)\n26-0112\nThe City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled Jorge Eduardo Ramirez Delgado v.\nCity of Los Angeles, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No.\n24VECV02713. (This matter arises from a trip and fall incident on June\n16, 2023, on the sidewalk in front of 6822 Van Nuys Boulevard, in Van\nNuys.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Open Session on February 3, 2026.)

(34)\n26-0082\nThe City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled Antonio De Souza Filho v. City of\nLos Angeles, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No.\n23STCV26611. (This matter arises from a November 17, 2021, vehicle\nversus pedestrian incident at the intersection of La Brea Avenue and\nDe Longpre Avenue, in Los Angeles.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Open Session on February 3, 2026.)

(35)\n26-0114\nThe City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled Hector Gamez v. City of Los\nAngeles, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 22STCV25768.\n(This matter arises from a fall incident on November 29, 2021, on the\nroadway near 2722 West Avenue 31, in Los Angeles.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Open Session on February 3, 2026.)

(36)\n26-0083\nThe Committee may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled Sandra Gale Truitt v. City of Los\nAngeles, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 23STCV31845.\n(This matter involves a trip and fall incident on March 13, 2023, near\n4267 Degnan Boulevard in Los Angeles, California.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Open Session on February 3, 2026.)

(37)\n26-0115\nThe City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled Joerg Maeckle v. City of Los\nAngeles, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 22STCV14327.\n(This matter arises from a trip and fall incident on July 23, 2022, in the\ncrosswalk at the intersection of Acama Street and Lankershim\nBoulevard, in the City of Los Angeles.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Open Session on February 3, 2026.)

(38)\n26-0089\nThe City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled Martha Hermosillo v. City of Los\nAngeles, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 24STCV01961.\n(This matter arises from a February 10, 2023, trip and fall incident near\nthe intersection of South Wilton Place and 15th Street, in Los Angeles.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Open Session on February 3, 2026.)

(39)\n26-0092\nThe City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled Arianne Ortiz v. City of Los\nAngeles, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 22STCV34295.\n(This matter arises from a trip and fall on April 24, 2022, on Selma\nAvenue near the intersection of Schrader Boulevard, in the City ofLos\nAngeles.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Open Session on February 3, 2026.)

(4)\n26-0109\nCD 3\nCATEGORICAL EXEMPTION and COMMUNICATION FROM THE\nCITY ENGINEER relative to an offer to dedicate an easement for traffic\nsignal purposes on 5500 North Canoga Avenue - Right of Way No.\n36000-10365.\nRecommendations for Council action:\n1. FIND that the dedication of an easement for traffic signal\npurposes on 5500 North Canoga Avenue (Dedication) is\ncategorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality\nAct of 1970 pursuant to Article III, Class 5(4) of the City's\nEnvironmental Guidelines.\n2. ACCEPT the petitioner's offer for the Dedication, substantially\nas shown on the Exhibit Map of the January 23, 2026 City\nEngineer report, attached to the Council file.\n3. AUTHORIZE the Board of Public Works to acquire the\nDedication.\n4. INSTRUCT the City Clerk to forward a copy of the Council\naction on this project to the Bureau of Engineering, Survey\nDivision for processing.\nFiscal Impact Statement: The City Engineer reports that a $3,416.51\nfee for processing this report was paid pursuant to Sections 7.3 and\n7.41.1 of the Los Angeles Administrative Code. No additional City\nfunds are needed.

(40)\n26-0099\nThe City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled Marcia McAdoo v. City of Los\nAngeles, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 21STCV46555.\n(This matter arises from a trip and fall incident on January 4, 2020, on\nan uneven portion of the sidewalk in front of 1246 South Hope Street,\nin Los Angeles, California.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Open Session on February 3, 2026.)

(41)\n26-0117\nThe City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled Alice Kaczor, et al. v. City of Los\nAngeles, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 23VEVC05337.\n(This matter arises from a trip and fall incident on January 1, 2023, on\nthe roadway near 15124 Dickens Street, Sherman Oaks, California.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Open Session on February 3, 2026.)

(42)\n26-0100\nThe City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled Jose Gonzalez v. City of Los\nAngeles, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 22STCV31564.\n(This matter arises from a September 7, 2021, trip-and-fall that\noccurred at 830 South Hill Street, in Los Angeles.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Open Session on February 3, 2026.)

(43)\n26-0119\nThe City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled Victor Estuardo Jovel v. City of Los\nAngeles, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 22STCV32605.\n(This matter arises from an August 5, 2021, trip and fall incident\noccurring on the sidewalk near 13360 Sherman Way and Varna\nAvenue, in Van Nuys, California.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Open Session on February 3, 2026.)

(44)\n26-0103\nThe City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled Cathy Fiendel v. City of Los\nAngeles, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 22BBCV01270.\n(This matter arises from a trip and fall incident on July 28, 2022, on the\nsidewalk abutting 11942 Saticoy Street, in North Hollywood.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Open Session on February 3, 2026.)

(45)\n26-0118\nThe Committee may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled George Stephen Simonian v. City\nof Los Angeles, Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 22STCV25260.\n(This matter arises from a trip and fall incident on August 26, 2020, on\nan uplifted sidewalk located at 351 East 2nd Street, in Los Angeles.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Open Session on February 3, 2026.)

(46)\n26-0097\nThe City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled Jose Verdin v. City of Los Angeles,\net al., United States District Court Case No. 2:24-cv-08892. (This\nmatter arises from alleged failure to include the education incentive\npaid to Los Angeles Police Department rank-and-file in the regular\nhourly rate when making payment of Fair Labor Standards Act\novertime hours during the period from October 15, 2021 to present.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Open Session on February 3, 2026.)

(47)\n26-0095\nThe City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled Jacqueline Rivera v. City of Los\nAngeles, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 22STCV16892.\n(This matter arises from a May 5, 2021 incident where Plaintiff\nJacqueline Rivera contends that she was unlawfully terminated from\nCity of Los Angeles employment.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Open Session on February 3, 2026.)

(48)\n26-0096\nThe City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled Cecilia Cazarez Hernandez, et al.\nv. City of Los Angeles, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No.\n23STCV30989. (This matter arises from a vehicle versus vehicle traffic\nincident on May 18, 2023, that occurred on Glendale Boulevard at its\nintersection with Hyperion Avenue.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Open Session on February 3, 2026.)

(49)\n26-0094\nThe City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled Luis Zambrano, et al. v. City of Los\nAngeles, Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 23STCV12892. (This\nmatter arises from a June 30, 2021, incident involving the Los Angeles\nPolice Department Bomb Squad.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Open Session on February 3, 2026.)

(5)\n25-1441\nCD 12\n2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT\nREPORT (EIR), STATE CLEARINGHOUSE (SCH), ADDENDUMS,\nMITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, AND RELATED\nENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS; PLANNING AND LAND USE\nMANAGEMENT (PLUM) COMMITTEE REPORT and ORDINANCE\nFIRST CONSIDERATION relative to a Zone Change for the property\nlocated at 10777 North Winnetka Avenue.\nRecommendations for Council action, SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL\nOF THE MAYOR:\n1. DETERMINE based on the whole of the administrative record\nand the independent judgment of the decisionmaker the\nProposed Project is within the scope of the program approved\nwith the 2021-2029 Housing Element for which the 2021-2029\nHousing Element EIR No. ENV-2020-6762-EIR; SCH No.\n2021010130 (EIR), certified on November 24, 2021, and\nAddendum Nos. ENV-2020-6762-EIR-ADD1 adopted on June\n14, 2022 and ENV-2020-6762-EIR-ADD2 adopted on January\n13, 2025 (Addendum), pursuant to California Environmental\nQuality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15168, the project is\nwithin the scope of the program approved earlier with the\nHousing Element EIR and the EIR adequately describes the\nactivity for the purposes of CEQA, and the impacts of the\nProposed Project are within the scope of the EIR and the\nAddendum; and ADOPT the Mitigation Monitoring Program for\nthe Proposed Project.\n2. ADOPT the FINDINGS of the Los Angeles City Planning\nCommission (LACPC) as the Findings of Council.\n3. PRESENT and ADOPT the accompanying ORDINANCE\n(Revised Map), dated September 11, 2025, to effectuate a Zone\nChange from the existing A1-1 Zone to (T)A2-1 across the\nentire property; for the subdivision of one 11.38-acre parcel into\nfive lots ranging in size from 2.0 to 3.25 acres each, the Project\nretains the existing home and all existing accessory structures\non proposed Parcel 2, the Project also includes a Zoning\nAdministrator’s Adjustment to allow an existing accessory\nstructure to remain in place, 42.8 feet from the new front lot line\nof proposed Parcel 2 in lieu of 55 feet from the front lot line [Los\nAngeles Municipal Code 12.21 C.5(b)], no new construction is\nproposed; for the property located at 10777 North Winnetka\nAvenue, subject to Conditions of Approval, including T\nConditions.\nApplicant: Chuck Stevens and Stephanie Vitacco\nRepresentative: Chris Nassiri, Iacobbellis & Associates, Inc.\nCase No. CPC-2023-1263-ZC-ZAA-HCA\nEnvironmental No. ENV-2023-1264-HES\nRelated Case: TT-83950-HCA\nFiscal Impact Statement: The LACPC reports that there is no General\nFund impact as administrative costs are recovered through fees.

(50)\n26-0093\nThe City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled Joseph LaRocca v. City of Los\nAngeles, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 24STCV07744.\n(This matter arises from a June 18, 2022, police incident wherein\nPlaintiff was unintentionally struck by a 40 mm less-lethal round at the\n6th Street Viaduct at Clarence Street in the Los Angeles Police\nDepartment Hollenbeck Division.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Closed Session on February 3, 2026.)

(51)\n25-1540\nThe City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled Lillian Carranza v. City of Los\nAngeles, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 19STCV02594.\n(This matter arises from an employment litigation case against the City\nof Los Angeles.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Open Session on February 3, 2026.)

(52)\n25-1114\nThe Committee may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section No. 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the payment of attorney costs in the case\nentitled Los Angeles Times Communications LLC v. City of Los\nAngeles, Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 22STCP01267. (This\ncase arises out of a California Public Records Act request where\nattorneys’ fees were awarded to the Los Angeles Times.)\n(The Budget and Finance Committee considered the above matter\nin Open Session on February 3, 2026.)

(53)\n25-1263\nThe City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section No. 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal\ncounsel relative to the case entitled Black Lives Matter - Los Angeles,\net al. v. City of Los Angeles, et al., United States District Court Case\nNo. 2:20-cv-05027-CBM-AS. (This matter arises out of protests that\noccurred in the summer of 2020.)\nAdjourning Motions\nCouncil Adjournment\nEXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES - If you challenge a City action in court, you may be limited to raising only those\nissues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City\nClerk at or prior to, the public hearing. Any written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk before the City Council's final action on\na matter will become a part of the administrative record.\nCODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SECTION 1094.5 - If a Council action is subject to judicial challenge pursuant to Code of Civil\nProcedure Section 1094.5, be advised that the time to file a lawsuit challenging a final action by the City Council is limited by Code\nof Civil Procedure Section 1094.6 which provides that the lawsuit must be filed no later than the 90th day following the date on which\nthe Council's action becomes final.\nMaterials relative to items on this agenda can be obtained from the Office of the City Clerk's Council File Management System,\nat lacouncilfile.com by entering the Council File number listed immediately following the item number (e.g., 00-0000).

(6)\n21-1207\nCD 13\nHOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS COMMITTEE REPORT and\nRESOLUTION relative to adopting the Tax Equity and Fiscal\nResponsibility Act of 1982 (TEFRA) Resolution and Minutes; and\nissuing a supplemental tax-exempt multifamily mortgage revenue bond\nin an amount up to $1,900,000; and executing related financing\ndocuments for the Voltaire Villas Supportive Housing Project located at\n316 North Juanita Avenue in Council District 13 (CD 13).\nRecommendations for Council action, SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL\nOF THE MAYOR:\n1. NOTE and FILE the Los Angeles Housing Department (LAHD)\nreport dated December 11, 2025, attached to Council file No.\n21-1207, relative to the issuance of supplemental tax-exempt\nmultifamily mortgage revenue bond for the Voltaire Villas\nSupportive Housing Project located at 316 North Juanita\nAvenue in CD 13.\n2. ADOPT the October 30, 2025 TEFRA minutes for the Project\ncontained in the City Administrative Officer (CAO) report dated\nJanuary 28, 2026, attached to Council file No. 21-1207.\n3. ADOPT the accompanying RESOLUTION attached to the CAO\nreport dated January 28, 2026, attached to the Council file,\nauthorizing the issuance of up to $1,900,000 in supplemental\ntax-exempt multifamily mortgage revenue bonds for the Project.\n4. AUTHORIZE the General Manager, LAHD, or designee, to\nnegotiate and execute the relevant financing documents for the\nProject, subject to the approval of the City Attorney as to form.\nFiscal Impact Statement: The CAO reports that there is no General\nFund impact as a result of the issuance of supplemental tax-exempt\nmultifamily mortgage revenue bond (Bonds) for the Project. The City\nis a conduit issuer and does not incur liability for the repayment of the\nBonds, which are a limited obligation payable solely from the\nrevenues of the Project, and the City is not, under any circumstances,\nobligated to make payments on the Bonds.\nFinancial Policies Statement: The CAO reports that the\nrecommendations in this report comply with the City’s Financial\nPolicies in that the Bonds are a limited obligation payable solely from\nthe revenues of the Project and the City is not, under any\ncircumstances, obligated to make payments on the Bonds.\nDebt Impact Statement: The CAO reports that there is no debt impact\nas the Bonds are a conduit issuance debt and not a debt of the City.

(7)\n20-0508-S2\nADMINISRTATIVE EXEMPTION and COMMUNICATION FROM THE\nBOARD OF AIRPORT COMMISSIONERS relative to the proposed\nSecond Amendment to Contract DA-5446 with SITA Information\nNetworking Computing USA Inc., to increase the contract authority,\nupdating the information security requirements, operations and\nmaintenance of LAX, and ratification of the May 2025 letter exercising\nthe one-year option to extend.\n(Trade, Travel, and Tourism Committee report to be submitted in\nCouncil. If public hearing is not held in Committee, an\nopportunity for public comment will be provided.)\n(Please visit www.lacouncilfile.com for background documents.)

(8)\n22-1236-S1\nCOMMUNICATIONS FROM THE CITY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER\n(CAO) relative to the Second Amendment to a contract with NBS\nGovernment Finance Group Incorporated, to continue services related\nto the proposed increase of property tax assessments for street\nlighting.\nRecommendation for Council action:\nAUTHORIZE the President, Board of Public Works (BPW), or two\nmembers, to execute the Second Amendment to Contract No. C-\n138383 with NBS Government Finance Group Incorporated, to\nincrease the total compensation of the contract by $312,018, from\n$1,539,000 to $1,851,018, and continue services related to the\nproposed increase of property tax assessments for street lighting\nthrough December 15, 2027, subject to the approval of the City\nAttorney as to form.\nFiscal Impact Statement: The City Administrative Officer (CAO)\nreports that there is no direct General Fund impact. Funding for the\nproposed amendment will be provided by the Street Lighting\nMaintenance Assessment Fund. Funding for subsequent years of the\nagreement is subject to Mayor and Council approval, the availability of\nfunds, and will be appropriated through the City annual budget\ndevelopment process. The City’s financial obligation is limited to the\nextent of appropriations approved by the Council and Mayor.\nFinancial Policies Statement: The CAO reports that the above\nrecommendation complies with the City’s Financial Policies as the\nliability of the City is limited to the extent appropriations are approved\nby the Mayor and Council.

(9)\n26-0040\nPERSONNEL AND HIRING and BUDGET AND FINANCE\nCOMMITTEES’ REPORTS relative to a comprehensive staffing plan\nfor the Office of the City Attorney with detailed current and projected\nstaffing needs that is designed to significantly reduce the City’s\nreliance on outside counsel costs.\nA. PERSONNEL AND HIRING COMMITTEE REPORT\nRecommendations for Council action, pursuant to Motion\n(McOsker, Yaroslavsky – Jurado):\n1. REQUEST the City Attorney, with assistance from the City\nAdministrative Officer (CAO), Personnel Department, the\nCity Attorneys Association, and other relevant bargaining\ngroups, to report to the Budget and Finance Committee\nand the Personnel and Hiring Committee with the\nfollowing:\na. A comprehensive staffing plan for the Office of the\nCity Attorney that details current and projected\nstaffing needs and is designed to significantly reduce\nthe City’s reliance on outside counsel costs. The\nplan should include:\ni. The number of new positions required across\nlitigation, advisory, and specialized units, and\nthe respective recommended class codes and\njob classifications.\nii. The proposed salary ranges and\ncompensation adjustments needed to remain\ncompetitive for the positions and class\ncodes/classifications.\niii. Recruitment timelines, hiring strategies, and\nany Civil Service or Council action required, as\nwell as budgetary steps required to achieve\nthe staffing plan.\niv. The projected fiscal impacts and long-term\nsavings associated with shifting work from\noutside counsel to in-house legal teams.\nb. General hiring barriers affecting the recruitment and\nretention of qualified attorneys.\nc. Workload impacts on litigation, advisory, and\nmunicipal law functions.\nd. Budgetary, structural, or policy changes needed to\nensure the Office of the City Attorney is adequately\nstaffed to meet the legal needs of the City of Los\nAngeles.\n2. REQUEST the City Attorney, CAO, and the Personnel\nDepartment to report on and provide relevant data and\nrecommendations to include and build upon issues raised\nin prior Council actions (specifically Council File No. 25-\n1023) concerning City Attorney staffing, workload, reliance\non outside counsel, and hiring capacity.\nB. BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT\nRecommendations for Council action, as initiated by Motion\n(McOsker, Yaroslavsky – Jurado):\n1. REQUEST the City Attorney, with assistance from the City\nAdministrative Officer (CAO), Personnel Department, the\nCity Attorneys Association, and other relevant bargaining\ngroups, to report to the Budget and Finance Committee\nand the Personnel and Hiring Committee with the\nfollowing:\na. A comprehensive staffing plan for the Office of the\nCity Attorney that details current and projected\nstaffing needs and is designed to significantly reduce\nthe City’s reliance on outside counsel costs. The\nplan should include:\n​\ni. The number of new positions required across\nlitigation, advisory, and specialized units, and\nthe respective recommended class codes and\njob classifications.\nii. The\nproposed\nsalary\nranges\nand\ncompensation adjustments needed to remain\ncompetitive for the positions and class\ncodes/classifications.\niii. Recruitment timelines, hiring strategies, and\nany Civil Service or Council action required, as\nwell as budgetary steps required to achieve\nthe staffing plan.\niv. The projected fiscal impacts and long-term\nsavings associated with shifting work from\noutside counsel to in-house legal teams.\nb. General hiring barriers affecting the recruitment and\nretention of qualified attorneys.\nc. Workload impacts on litigation, advisory, and\nmunicipal law functions.\nd. Budgetary, structural, or policy changes needed to\nensure the Office of the City Attorney is adequately\nstaffed to meet the legal needs of the City of Los\nAngeles.\n2. REQUEST the City Attorney to include in its subsequent\nreport an assessment of adequate staffing needs to\nensure an expedited process of review for judgments that\naccrue interest, to ensure they are before the Claims\nBoard and then the Budget and Finance Committee within\n30 days.\n3. REQUEST the Chief Legislative Analyst (CLA) to advise\non any required changes, including legislative action\nthrough the Los Angeles Municipal Code or Los Angeles\nAdministrative Code, or by way of codification in the City’s\nFinancial Policies, to ensure the enforcement of the 30-\nday timeline for judgments that accrue interest.\nFiscal Impact Statement: Neither the CAO nor the CLA has completed\na financial analysis of this report.

(1)\n26-0145\nMotion (Hernandez – Jurado) relative to restoring the utilitarian\nstreetlight program.

(10)\n25-1497\nMotion (Rodriguez – Hernandez) relative to an exception to the street\ncut moratorium on San Fernando Road to allow for the installation of a\nwater supply line and accompanying meters at 12534 San Fernando\nRoad in Sylmar.

(11)\n25-0437\nCity Attorney report and Ordinance relative to use the progressive\ndesign-build project delivery method and the competitive sealed\nproposal selection process for the Hyperion Water Reclamation Plant\nPhase 1A Recycled Water Foundational Infrastructure Project. (This\nitem is referred to the Energy and Environment Committee and\nPublic Works Committee. On January 20, 2026, the Energy and\nEnvironment Committee approved this item.)\nFiscal Impact Statement: No

(12)\n26-0123\nMotion (Padilla – Blumenfield) relative to designating the intersection\nof Victory Boulevard and Balboa Boulevard Square as “Wheelchair\nBasketball Square."

(2)\n26-0146\nMotion (Hernandez – Jurado) relative to the current graffiti abatement\nresources, contractor performance, repeatedly targeted locations, the\ndevelopment of a prioritization matrix, and related matters.

(3)\n26-0140\nMotion (Hernandez – Jurado) relative to designating the intersection of\nWest 8th Street and Valencia Street in Westlake as “Francisco\nMorazan Central American Community Square."

(4)\n25-1510\nMotion (Rodriguez – Hernandez, Jurado, et al.) relative to the Bureau\nof Street Lighting’s response to outages, repair performance, funding,\nand utilitarian light program.

(5)\n26-0064\nMotion (Price – Hernandez) relative to a pothole inventory, pothole\nrepair response times, pothole funding, and related matters.

(6)\n25-1478\nCD 7\nMotion (Rodriguez – Hernandez) relative to designating the\nintersection at Van Nuys Boulevard and Herrick Avenue as " Dr.\nYvonne Chan Square."

(7)\n25-1479\nCD 7\nMotion (Rodriguez - Hutt) relative to designating the intersection at\nHerrick Avenue and Paxton Street as “Anita Zepeda Square."

(8)\n26-0021\nMotion (Raman – Soto-Martínez) relative to initiating proceedings to\nestablish a pedestrian mall on the 5600-5900 blocks of Mulholland\nHighway for public access to Griffith Park, and related matters.

(9)\n06-2467-S1\nCD 8\nCity Engineer report and Ordinance relative to the dedicated public\nstreet westerly of Main Street between 89th Street and 90th Street\nbeing established as Tupachi Place.\nFiscal Impact Statement: Yes