| Date | County | City | Meeting Type | Item Type | Item | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20260211 | LA County | Los Angeles | City Council | Item | (14) 12-1670-S10 ARTS, PARKS, LIBRARIES, AND COMMUNITY ENRICHMENT and BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEES’ REPORT relative to authorizing an earmark of Proposition K program interest funds for three specified projects, and the transfer of maintenance funds to the Proposition K Capital Fund. Recommendations for Council action, SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE MAYOR: 1. AUTHORIZE the earmark of up to $6.0 million in Proposition K program interest funds to reduce the shortfall for the design and construction activities for three future specified projects identified in Attachment No. 8 of the Proposition K – L.A. For Kids Steering Committee (LAFKSC) report dated September 26, 2025, attached to the Council file. 2. AUTHORIZE LAFKSC staff to identify and transfer funds previously allocated for capital projects within the Proposition K maintenance account (Fund No. 43L) to the Proposition K capital account, as well as any accrued and future interest earnings from both the maintenance account and the Proposition K administrative account (Fund No 43M). 3. AUTHORIZE the Controller to adjust balances within the Proposition K Funds (Fund Nos. 43K, 43L, and 43M) to effectuate the funding adjustments associated with Recommendation Nos. 1 and 2 above, in accordance with instructions to be provided by the City Administrative Officer (CAO). 4. AUTHORIZE the CAO to prepare technical adjustments, as needed to carry out the intent of the Council action; and, AUTHORIZE the Controller to implement those technical adjustments. Fiscal Impact Statement: The LAFKSC reports that there is an anticipated impact of $58.4 million on the General Fund to the extent that Proposition K funds are insufficient to fully fund the remaining specified projects. Insofar as the Proposition K funding capacity discussed in said LAFKSC report can be utilized to fund the cost of the remaining specified projects, the level of cost offsets incurred by the General Fund for project delivery could decrease. Program staff are completing closeout activities and expect to identify residual funds for completed projects that could be used to offset shortfalls for Ballot- mandated specified projects. An earmark of $6.0 million in Proposition K interest funds is recommended to address funding shortfalls for three out of the 31 specified projects remaining in the Proposition K program, as detailed in Attachment 8 of said LAFKSC report, which have the largest shortfalls. Specific cost estimates for operating and maintaining the projects addressed through the funding recommendations of said LAFKSC report have not yet been developed, but will be addressed through the City budget as projects are completed. Financial Policies Statement: The LAFKSC reports that approval of the recommendations in the report are in compliance with the City’s Financial Policies in that current operations will be funded by current revenues. | February 11, 2026 LA County Los Angeles City Council Item #14 |
| 20260211 | LA County | Los Angeles | City Council | Item | (10) 25-1489 BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT relative to an update on affirmative litigation actions of the federal government. Recommendations for Council action: 1. NOTE and FILE the City Attorney report dated December 11, 2025, attached to the Council file, relative to affirmative litigation challenging actions of the federal government. 2. REQUEST the City Attorney to update the Council on the status of the cases discussed in said City Attorney report. [The City Council may recess to Closed Session, pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), to confer with its legal counsel relative to pending litigation in the cases entitled King County et al. v. Turner et al. (No. 2:25-cv-814-BJR, W.D. Wash.); County of Santa Clara, et al. v. Noem, et al. (No. 3:25-cv-08330- WHO, N.D. Cal.); City and County of San Francisco, et al. v. Trump, et al. (No. 3:25-cv-1350-WHO, N.D. Cal.); and, Pedro Vasquez Perdomo et al. v. Noem et al. (No. 2:25-cv-05605-MEMF, C.D. Cal.)]. Fiscal Impact Statement: Not applicable | February 11, 2026 LA County Los Angeles City Council Item #10 |