Agenda packet, first session — Bellflower City Council, February 9, 2026 (part 2 of 2)

residents or consumers are likely to mistakenly assume that goods/services offered by both businesses come from a common source. In making that determination, the City Manager may consider, without limitation, how and where the parties' goods or services are advertised, marketed, and sold; the purchasing conditions; the range of prospective purchasers of the goods or services; and whether there is any evidence of actual confusion.

2. As to an ownership change, whether the permittee will substantially retain its ownership structure as compared with the Origination Date; whether the proposed ownership change meets the requirements of the Cannabis Regulations; and whether the ownership change is sufficiently routine to justify a Modified CBP.

C. For CBP Renewal applications, the City Manager must consider whether the permittee maintained its ownership as required by BMC § 14.08.070 between the time of filing an initial applicable for a CBP and filing a renewal application in any subsequent year. To do so, a CBP Renewal application must provide evidence that a permittee did not change its name; corporate structure; or any other part of its ownership to the City Manager's satisfaction absent good cause shown as determined in the City Manager's sole discretion.

SECTION 12: Recommendations.

A. Upon receiving a timely filed Application, the City Manager, or designee, will determine the completeness of the Application in accordance with the Cannabis Regulations and this Resolution.

B. Following the City Manager's consideration of the applications, the City Manager will provide a recommendation to the City Council regarding whether an application should be approved.

SECTION 13: Consideration; Conditions. The City Council may determine whether to grant a Modified CBP during a special or regular meeting. If granted, a Modified CBP will:

A. Expire at the same time as the existing CBP. A Modified CBP cannot extend the term of an existing CBP;
B. Except for CBP Renewal applications and Conversion Applications, the City Council will conduct a public hearing in accordance with the Cannabis Regulations. For CBP Renewal applications the City Manager (in accordance with the BMC) or City Council may determine whether a CBP Renewal should be issued.

C. Be subject to the same terms and conditions of the existing CBP. -24-

City of Bellflower
Resolution No. 23-18

Page 10 of 11 ends

D. Becomes effective upon the permittee executing an acknowledgement of all conditions of approval.

E. If desirable, the City Council may determine the order for considering Applications during the public hearing to be based upon a random drawing conducted by the City Clerk. Applications will be considered by the City Council using a "forced ranking" system to determine which, if any, person will receive a CBP or CBP Renewal, if desirable.

F. The applicant will comply with all requirements of the Cannabis Regulations.

SECTION 14: Application Forms; Standard Conditions of Approval. All application forms and standard conditions of approval previously approved by the Cannabis Regulations may continue to be utilized by the City Manager, or designee. The City Manager is authorized to make changes to such forms and conditions as desirable and in a form approved by the City Attorney. No additional City Council approval is required for such changes. Applicant(s) will be required to provide signed acknowledgement of acceptance of the conditions of approval before City Council consideration if an application is recommended for approval.

SECTION 15: Taxes. In addition to any other applicable taxes, CBP permittees must also pay a business license tax and cannabis tax in accordance with the BMC. Such taxes are separate and apart from the Application Fee. For a CBP to become effective, a permittee must:

A. Pay the business license tax and obtain a business license in accordance with the BMC (see, BMC §§ 5.08.020 and 5.08.030); and
B. Ensure, to the satisfaction of the City Manager, or designee, that the permittee will pay all cannabis taxes in accordance with the requirements of BMC Chapter 3.37 including, without limitation, acknowledging the forms required to remit the tax.

SECTION 16: Delegation of Authority; Ratification of Previous Actions. The City Manager, or designee, is authorized to promulgate administrative policies and procedures ("AP&P") that implement BMC Title 14 and, specifically, such additional qualifications for CBP Renewal or Reconsideration Application that may be desirable for administrative purposes. Nothing in such AP&P can substantively alter this Resolution; the AP&P must be reconciled with the intent of BMC Title 14 and this Resolution.

All previous actions exercised by the City Manager, or designee, to implement the Cannabis Regulations as set forth in this Resolution are ratified by the City Council.

SECTION 17: Preservation; Cannabis Regulations. Anything in this Resolution that supersedes previous actions undertaken to implement BMC § 14.08.050 does not affect any penalty, forfeiture, or liability incurred before, or preclude prosecution and imposition of penalties for any violation occurring before this Resolution's effective date.

Any such amended or superseded part will remain in full force and effect for sustaining action or prosecuting violations occurring before the effective date of this Resolution. -25-

City of Bellflower
Resolution No. 23-18

Page 11 of 11 ends

Unless amended or superseded by this Resolution, all parts of the uncodified regulations implementing Cannabis Regulations within the BMC remain in full force and effect. Any conflict between this Resolution and the uncodified Cannabis Regulations will be resolved in favor of this Resolution.

SECTION 18: Supplemental Requirements. The policies and procedures established by this Resolution are in addition to, and supplement, all other requirements of the BMC including, without limitation, those set forth in BMC § 14.08.060.

SECTION 19: Severability. If any part of this Resolution or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the City Council intends that such invalidity will not affect the effectiveness of the remaining provision or application and, to this end, the provisions of this Resolution are severable.

SECTION 20: Electronic Signatures. This Resolution may be executed with electronic signatures in accordance with Government Code §16.5. Such electronic signatures will be treated in all respects as having the same effect as an original signature.

SECTION 21: The Mayor, or presiding officer, is authorized to sign this Resolution signifying its adoption by the City Council of the City of Bellflower and the City Clerk, or her duly appointed deputy, may attest thereto.

SECTION 22: This Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption and will remain effective unless repealed or superseded.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELLFLOWER ON THIS 12T" DAY OF JUNE 2023.
v
Sonny R. Santa Ines, Mayor
ATTEST:

Mayr Oc '{ui, City Clerk
AP RO D O RM:

G
Karl H. Berger, Ci Attorney
-26-

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )SS

CITY OF BELLFLOWER
I, Mayra Ochiqui, City Clerk of the City of Bellflower, California, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing Resolution No. 23-18 was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Bellflower at the Regular Meeting of the City Council on June 12, 2023, by the following vote to wit:

AYES: Council Members — Dunton, Koops, Sanchez and
Mayor Santa Ines
ABSENT: Council Member — Mayor Pro Tem Hamada
Dated: June 13, 2023
J
ayr Oc qui, Ci C r
City(of B Ilflower, California
SEAL)
-27-

15-A

TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council

ATTENTION: Ryan Smoot, City Manager

FROM: Anna Garan, Director of Finance

SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to receive and file Warrant Register No. 26-081, dated February 9, 2026.

DATE: February 9, 2026

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

BMC § 2.12.030.B stipulates that the Director of Finance is responsible for the preparation of warrant registers for the City Manager and City Council. In addition, Section X.B of the Budget, Financial and Administrative Policies stipulates the City’s process in executing warrants for the payment of goods and services, as well as the requirement to make each warrant register a matter of public record by placing it on the City Council Agenda as a Consent Calendar item.

RECOMMENDATION

1) Receive and file Warrant Register No. 26-081; or

2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

FISCAL IMPACT

$3,032,479.62 in expenditures and $279,350.50 in interaccount transfers.

ATTACHMENT

Warrant Register No. 26-081 .......................................................................................... 2

Fund No.CITY OF BELLFLOWER:
010 General Fund 1,632,444.48$
011 General Fund Projects 8,076.00
015 TDA Article 3 Fund - Pedestrian/Bikeway 69,000.00
024 Park Facilities Fund 1,451.70
050 Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (State) 46,730.91 090 Agency Fund/Refundable Deposits - Private Projects 2,679.60 100 Proposition A Fund - Transportation 334.20
115 Measure M Fund - Transportation / Streets 291,309.55 125 Measure R Fund - Transportation / Streets 1,052.43
135 Proposition C Fund - Transportation / Streets 50,947.96 320 Measure W Fund - Water 90.00
510 Economic Development Fund 1,438.14
530 IT/Equipment Replacement Fund 149.08
540 GIS Update Fund 1,875.00
730 Debt Service Fund - 2021 Pension Obligation Bonds 149,500.98 900 Community Development Block Grant Fund 20,068.00
910 HOME Fund 2,932.50
944 Parking District No. 1 Fund 1,231.65
974 Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund 15,022.86 Total Accounts Payable 2,296,335.04
Payroll Check/ACH Payments (Pay Period Ending 01/23/2026 and 01/29/2026) 320,816.58 Total Expenditures - City 2,617,151.62$
Fund No.SUCCESSOR AGENCY:
970 Redevelopment Obligation Retirement Fund 415,328.00$ Total Expenditures - Successor Agency 415,328.00$
Inter Account Transfers (Non-Expenditures) 279,375.50$
COMBINED TOTAL - CITY AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY 3,311,855.12$

WARRANT REGISTER FUND SUMMARY

CITY OF BELLFLOWER
(Warrant Register No. 26-081 Dated February 9, 2026)
https://bellflowergcc.sharepoint.com/sites/fin/Shared Documents/Warrant Registers/Warrant Register Cover Page Template

REPORT.: 02/03/26 City of Bellflower PAGE: 001 RUN....: 02/03/26 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: 20434 (20434 SOUTH SANTA FE AVENUE, LLC)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: ALA05 (ALAN'S LAWN AND GARDEN CENTER, INC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: ALL12 (ALL CITY MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: AVA01 (ADVANCED AVANT-GARDE INC.)

REPORT.: 02/03/26 City of Bellflower PAGE: 002 RUN....: 02/03/26 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: AVA01 (ADVANCED AVANT-GARDE INC.) ..Continue..

67.50 910 42054 4210 12/25 CONSULTANT/HOME ADMIN 1111.25 900 42054 4150 12/25 CONSULTANT/CDBG ADMIN 12597 XXXXXX 01/26/26 6222.50 900 42054 4152 12/25 CONSULTANT/CODE ENFORCEMENT CDBG ------------
Vendor's Total = 9576.25
------------

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: BEL03 (BELLFLOWER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: BLU01 (BLUE DIAMOND MATERIALS)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: BNY01 (THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON)

REPORT.: 02/03/26 City of Bellflower PAGE: 003 RUN....: 02/03/26 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: BNY01 (THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON) ..Continue..

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: BRU04 (KATHRYN BRUN)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: BSN01 (VARSITY BRANDS HOLDING CO., INC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: BUM01 (MORRIS BUMPERS)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: BUR01 (BURKE,WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP)

REPORT.: 02/03/26 City of Bellflower PAGE: 004 RUN....: 02/03/26 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: BUR01 (BURKE,WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP) ..Continue..

---- WARRANT ----- --------------------------------------- DISTRIBUTION --------------------------------------- Invoice No Number Date Amount Paid G/L Account No Ctr Description ---------- ------ -------- ------------ -------------- --- -------------------------------------------------- 357239 XXXXXX 01/26/26 21197.00 010 42032 1400 11/25 LEGAL SERVICES/RETAINER 357240 XXXXXX 01/26/26 579.20 010 42032 1400 11/25 LEGAL SERVICES/GENERAL/NOTE ASSUMPTION 121.80 010 42032 1400 11/25 LEGAL SERVICES/GENERAL/16411 BLFR/EDGEWAY 1221.80 010 42098 1400 11/25 LEGAL SERVICES/GENERAL LITIGATION 1663.20 010 42032 1400 11/25 LEGAL SERVICES/MCJ PETRO TANKLINES LLC 899.50 010 42032 1400 11/25 LEGAL SERVICES/GENERAL TRANSACTIONAL 1850.40 010 42032 1350 11/25 LEGAL SERVICES/HR/LABOR & EMPLOYMENT 1346.40 010 42032 4105 11/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CE GENERAL/MEETINGS,FILINGS 1821.60 010 42032 4105 11/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CRIMINAL PROSECUTION BMC

26.40 900 42032 4152 11/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CE CDBG/BF V.SILYAN

26.40 900 42032 4152 11/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CE CDBG/9070 ARTESIA 871.20 900 42032 4152 11/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CE CDBG/9080 ARTESIA

52.80 900 42032 4152 11/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CE CDBG/15345 WOODRUFF

52.80 900 42032 4152 11/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CE CDBG/17046 BELLFLOWER BLVD

52.80 900 42032 4152 11/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CE CDBG/17207 CLARK 237.60 900 42032 4152 11/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CE CDBG/9875 ALONDRA BLVD

52.80 900 42032 4152 11/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CE CDBG/10015 ALONDRA 3458.40 900 42032 4152 11/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CE CDBG/9103 ARTESIA 1461.60 090 20502 11/25 LEGAL SERVICES/DEV.REIM/9903 FLOWER 1218.00 090 20522 TGH 11/25 LEGAL SERVICES/DEV.REIM/8825 ARTESIA 6374.20 010 42032 1400 11/25 LEGAL SERVICES/GENERAL LEGAL/CBP ADMIN. ------------
Vendor's Total = 51409.60
------------

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: BUR06 (BURHENN & GEST LLP)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: BUT03 (BUTLER CHEMICALS, INC.)

REPORT.: 02/03/26 City of Bellflower PAGE: 005 RUN....: 02/03/26 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: CHA27 (CHARLES SCHWAB TRUST BANK)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: CJC01 (CJ CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION, INC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: CLE11 (CLEARPAY PROCESSING LLC)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: COR15 (CORODATA MEDIA STORAGE INC.)

REPORT.: 02/03/26 City of Bellflower PAGE: 006 RUN....: 02/03/26 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: COR16 (CORODATA RECORDS MANAGEMENT INC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: COS00 (COSTAR REALTY INFORMATION, INC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: DEP16 (DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: DIG04 (DIGITAL DOLPHIN SUPPLIES)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: ECK01 (ECKERSALL, LLC)

REPORT.: 02/03/26 City of Bellflower PAGE: 007 RUN....: 02/03/26 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: EME03 (CAROLYN HARSHMAN)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: EMP05 (EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: FAI01 (FAIR HOUSING FOUNDATION)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: FER05 (FERGUSON ENTERPRISES, LLC)

REPORT.: 02/03/26 City of Bellflower PAGE: 008 RUN....: 02/03/26 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: FIR10 (COSCO FIRE PROTECTION, INC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: FRO07 (FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: GAN00 (GANAHL LUMBER COMPANY)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: GAT02 (GATEWAY CITIES COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS)

REPORT.: 02/03/26 City of Bellflower PAGE: 009 RUN....: 02/03/26 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: GLA01 (GLASBY MAINTENANCE SUPPLY)

53.00 010 46020 3900 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES
357289A XXXXXX 01/23/26 732.98 010 46000 3900 CLEANING SUPPLIES 732.98 010 46000 8000 CLEANING SUPPLIES
732.99 010 46000 2000 CLEANING SUPPLIES
357344B XXXXXX 01/23/26 43.37 010 46011 3900 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES ------------
Vendor's Total = 4875.61
------------

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: GOD01 (DANIEL GODINEZ)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: GRA06 (GRAINGER, INC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: GRE04 (GREATLAND CORPORATION)

REPORT.: 02/03/26 City of Bellflower PAGE: 010 RUN....: 02/03/26 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: GRE04 (GREATLAND CORPORATION) ..Continue..

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: GRE21 (GREENFIELDS OUTDOOR FITNESS, INC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: H&H02 (H & H NURSERY, INC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: HAS03 (HASA INC)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: HDL03 (HDL SOFTWARE LLC)

REPORT.: 02/03/26 City of Bellflower PAGE: 011 RUN....: 02/03/26 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: HOM01 (HOME DEPOT)

---- WARRANT ----- --------------------------------------- DISTRIBUTION --------------------------------------- Invoice No Number Date Amount Paid G/L Account No Ctr Description ---------- ------ -------- ------------ -------------- --- -------------------------------------------------- B260109H XXXXXX 01/09/26 346.64 010 41311 1012 12/25 PUBLIC WORKS SUPPLIES/HOME DEPOT 218.40 010 43100 3000 12/25 PUBLIC WORKS SUPPLIES/HOME DEPOT 409.55 010 46000 3900 12/25 PUBLIC WORKS SUPPLIES/HOME DEPOT 232.87 010 46000 8000 12/25 PUBLIC WORKS SUPPLIES/HOME DEPOT 642.89 010 46010 3900 12/25 PUBLIC WORKS SUPPLIES/HOME DEPOT 321.22 010 46011 3900 12/25 PUBLIC WORKS SUPPLIES/HOME DEPOT 185.46 010 46012 3900 12/25 PUBLIC WORKS SUPPLIES/HOME DEPOT 604.71 010 46022 3900 12/25 PUBLIC WORKS SUPPLIES/HOME DEPOT 100.19 010 46025 3900 12/25 PUBLIC WORKS SUPPLIES/HOME DEPOT 1244.08 010 46029 3900 12/25 PUBLIC WORKS SUPPLIES/HOME DEPOT 897.63 010 46300 3100 12/25 PUBLIC WORKS SUPPLIES/HOME DEPOT 149.08 530 18400 12/25 P&R SUPPLIES/HOLIDAY DECOR/D.1012 124.20 100 46000 3560 12/25 PUBLIC WORKS SUPPLIES/HOME DEPOT 140.17 944 46000 3410 12/25 PUBLIC WORKS SUPPLIES/HOME DEPOT -7.57 010 43100 3900 12/25 PW SUPPLIES/HOME DEPOT/EARLY PAY DISCOUNT

32.83 010 46000 3100 12/25 PUBLIC WORKS SUPPLIES/HOME DEPOT ------------
Vendor's Total = 5642.35
------------

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: HUM03 (COOPERATIVE PERSONNEL SERVICES)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: INK01 (INK HEAD PRINTS, LLC)

REPORT.: 02/03/26 City of Bellflower PAGE: 012 RUN....: 02/03/26 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: INK01 (INK HEAD PRINTS, LLC) ..Continue..

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: INT15 (MIKE CABRERA CORPORATION)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: INT24 (INTEGRATED DEMOLITION AND)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: IRS02 (INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE)

REPORT.: 02/03/26 City of Bellflower PAGE: 013 RUN....: 02/03/26 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: IRS02 (INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE) ..Continue..

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: JHM01 (JHM SUPPLY, INC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: KIN07 (KINGDOM CAUSES)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: KTU01 (KTU+A )

REPORT.: 02/03/26 City of Bellflower PAGE: 014 RUN....: 02/03/26 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: LEA11 (LEAD TECH ENVIRONMENTAL)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: LOS01 (LOS ANGELES COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT)

---- WARRANT ----- --------------------------------------- DISTRIBUTION --------------------------------------- Invoice No Number Date Amount Paid G/L Account No Ctr Description ---------- ------ -------- ------------ -------------- --- -------------------------------------------------- 261198TZ XXXXXX 01/29/26 116681.68 010 42130 2200 11/25 SPECIAL ASSIGNMENT OFFICERS (X4) 96262.26 010 42153 2200 11/25 GENERAL LAW CARS (40-HOUR) (X3) 32087.42 010 42155 2200 11/25 TRAFFIC LAW CAR (40-HOUR) (X1) 476626.88 010 42152 2200 11/25 GENERAL LAW CARS (56-HOUR)X10.61 134767.26 010 42154 2200 11/25 TRAFFIC LAW CARS (56-HOUR) (X3) 44922.42 135 42117 3600 11/25 TRANSIT OFFICER (56-HR) TRAFFIC (X1) 26490.00 010 42150 2200 11/25 SPECIAL ASSIGNMENT SERGEANT (X1)* 40304.66 050 42165 2150 11/25 NO RELIEF GRANT CARS (40-HR) (X2) 1186.64 050 47300 2150 11/25 MDC DATA & MAINTENANCE ONLY (X8) 261443TZ XXXXXX 01/29/26 20943.28 010 42164 2200 11/4-28/25 OT LAW ENFORCEMENT/CRIME SUPPRESSION 261444TZ XXXXXX 01/29/26 868.48 010 42164 2200 11/18/25 OT LAW ENFORCEMENT/SAFETY TEAM ENFORCE. 261445TZ XXXXXX 01/29/26 9036.71 010 42161 2200 11/4-28/25 OT LAW ENFORCEMENT/TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT ------------
Vendor's Total = 1000177.69
------------

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: LOS29 (LOS ANGELES COUNTY SAFER ESCROW ACCOUNT)

---- WARRANT ----- --------------------------------------- DISTRIBUTION --------------------------------------- Invoice No Number Date Amount Paid G/L Account No Ctr Description ---------- ------ -------- ------------ -------------- --- -------------------------------------------------- 261198TZ XXXXXX 01/29/26 15168.62 010 42130 2200 11/25 LIAB.INS/SPECIAL ASSIGNMENT OFFICERS (X4) 12514.09 010 42153 2200 11/25 LIAB.INS/GENERAL LAW CARS (40-HR) (X3) 4171.36 010 42155 2200 11/25 LIAB.INS/TRAFFIC LAW CAR (40-HR) (X1) 61961.49 010 42152 2200 11/25 LIAB.INS/GENERAL LAW CARS (56-HOUR)X10.61 17519.74 010 42154 2200 11/25 LIAB.INS/TRAFFIC LAW CARS (56-HOUR) (X3) 5839.93 135 42117 3600 11/25 LIAB.INS/TRANSIT OFFICER (56-HR) TRAFFIC(X1) 5239.61 050 42165 2150 11/25 LIAB.INS/NO RELIEF GRANT CARS (40-HR) (X2) 261443TZ XXXXXX 01/29/26 2722.63 010 42164 2200 11/4-28/25 LIAB.INS/OT LAW ENF/CRIME SUPPRESSION

REPORT.: 02/03/26 City of Bellflower PAGE: 015 RUN....: 02/03/26 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: LOS29 (LOS ANGELES COUNTY SAFER ESCROW ACCOUNT) ..Continue..

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: LOS50 (LOS CERRITOS COMMUNITY NEWS)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: ONG01 (OSCAR NERI)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: PAC23 (PACIFIC PRODUCTION SERVICES, LLC.)

REPORT.: 02/03/26 City of Bellflower PAGE: 016 RUN....: 02/03/26 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: PERS0 (PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM)

0.04 010 43524 3900 ROUNDING ADJ
------------
Vendor's Total = 68908.29
------------

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: PML01 (P.M. LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES, LLC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: QUA08 (QUADIENT LEASING USA, INC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: RAY01 (RAYVERN LIGHTING SUPPLY COMPANY, INC)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: RJM01 (RJM DESIGN GROUP, INC.)

REPORT.: 02/03/26 City of Bellflower PAGE: 017 RUN....: 02/03/26 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: ROA01 (ROADLINE PRODUCTS INC USA)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: SAF13 (SAFETY DYNAMICS GROUP, INC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: SAN41 (DK SANDLER BROTHERS, INC)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: SCS02 (S.C. SIGNS & SUPPLIES LLC)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: SEA06 (MEISTER SEALCOAT & SUPPLIES LLC)

REPORT.: 02/03/26 City of Bellflower PAGE: 018 RUN....: 02/03/26 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: SIM06 (J R SIMPLOT COMPANY)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: SMA03 (SMART & FINAL)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: SOU01 (SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: SOU06 (SOUTH COAST AQMD)

REPORT.: 02/03/26 City of Bellflower PAGE: 019 RUN....: 02/03/26 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: SOU14 (SOUNDTHINKING, INC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: TAY01 (TAYLOR SECURITY SYSTEMS,INC.)

90.00 320 46000 6022 01/26-03/26 ALARM/CELLULAR MONITOR'G SVS/AFN 303.1 757.80 010 46000 2000 01/26-03/26 ALARM/CELLULAR MONITOR'G SVS/AFN 303.1 291.00 010 46000 3100 01/26-03/26 ALARM/CELLULAR MONITOR'G SVS/AFN 303.1 144.00 010 46013 3900 01/26-03/26 ALARM/CELLULAR MONITOR'G SVS/AFN 303.1 105.00 010 46020 3900 01/26-03/26 ALARM/CELLULAR MONITOR'G SVS/AFN 303.1 120.00 010 46023 3900 01/26-03/26 ALARM/CELLULAR MONITOR'G SVS/AFN 303.1

90.00 010 46029 3900 01/26-03/26 ALARM/CELLULAR MONITOR'G SVS/AFN 303.1 345.00 010 46030 3900 ECF 01/26-03/26 ALARM/CELLULAR MONITOR'G SVS/AFN 303.1 210.00 100 46000 3560 01/26-03/26 ALARM/CELLULAR MONITOR'G SVS/AFN 303.1 180.00 010 46000 8010 TSS 01/26-03/26 ALARM/CELLULAR MONITOR'G SVS/AFN 303.1 ------------
Vendor's Total = 5707.05
------------

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: TAY06 (TAYLOR'S LOCK & KEY)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: TEC05 (TECHNICOLOR PRINTING)

REPORT.: 02/03/26 City of Bellflower PAGE: 020 RUN....: 02/03/26 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: TRI08 (TRIPEPI, SMITH & ASSOCIATES)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: VOY02 (VOYA RETIREMENT INS & ANNUITY CO - 457)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: VOY03 (VOYA RETIREMENT INS & ANNUITY CO - 401a)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: VOY04 (VOYA RETIREMENT INS & ANNUITY - 457 ROTH)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: WHI03 (WHITTIER FERTILIZER)

REPORT.: 02/03/26 City of Bellflower PAGE: 021 RUN....: 02/03/26 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: WIL01 (WILLDAN ENGINEERING)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: WIL26 (WILSON GLASS & SCREEN)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: WOO04 (JEFFREY T. WOOD)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: \BOI1 (DONNA BOISE)

REPORT.: 02/03/26 City of Bellflower PAGE: 022 RUN....: 02/03/26 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: \BR03 (BRAVO SIGN AND DESIGN,INC)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: \MOR0 (JAMES MORTLEY)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: \ST46 (ST. THOMAS MALANKARA ORTHODOX)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: \THU2 (THURMOND MUSIC LLC)

Report's Grand Total = 3139013.16
============

15-B
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council

ATTENTION: Ryan Smoot, City Manager

FROM: Mayra Ochiqui, City Clerk

SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to approve the Minutes of the January 26, 2026, Regular Meeting of the City Council.

DATE: February 9, 2026

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

None

RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL

1) Approve the January 26, 2026, Regular Meeting Minutes; or

2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

FISCAL IMPACT

None

ATTACHMENT

Minutes of the January 26, 2026, Regular Meeting of the City Council ……………..…… 2

{Y4 O F BELLF 110%
Q
r» ‘ I s 012 9- o 69 w ING TO GET “
1 MINUTES

CITY OF BELLFLOWER

REGULAR MEETING OF THE BELLFLOWER CITY COUNCIL

MONDAY, JANUARY 26, 2026

BELLFLOWER CITY HALL
5:00 P.M. OUTGOING MAYOR’S CEREMONY – GREEN ROOM
7:00 P.M. OPEN & CLOSED SESSIONS – COUNCIL CHAMBERS

5:00 P.M. – OUTGOING MAYOR’S CEREMONY

1 CALL TO ORDER

Mayor Santa Ines called the Regular Meeting to order at 5:08 p.m. in the Green Room at Bellflower City Hall, 16600 Civic Center Drive, Bellflower.

2 ROLL CALL

For the record, the following Members of the City Council were present:

Mayor Sonny R. Santa Ines
Mayor Pro Tem Victor A. Sanchez
Council Member Ray Dunton
Council Member Dan Koops
Council Member Wendi Morse

3 INVOCATION

Parks & Recreation Commissioner Mitch Haack offered the Invocation.

4 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Planning Commissioner Guy Bremer led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.

5 PRESENTATIONS TO OUTGOING MAYOR RAY DUNTON

Mayor Santa Ines detailed the many accomplishments during Ray Dunton’s term as Mayor and introduced a video in tribute to him from the City Council Members, professional colleagues, friends, and family.

Page 1 of 12 ends

OF BELLFL CS“ 0%
I.» (I 0 $- ROMNO Mme
2 Bellflower City Council Minutes Item No. 5
January 26, 2026 Page 2 of 12

5 PRESENTATIONS TO OUTGOING MAYOR RAY DUNTON – Continued

For the record, in lieu of presentations or gifts, donations were made to the Kiwanis Foundation of Bellflower in Ray Dunton’s name to maintain the U.S. Flag located in the City of Bellflower at the 91 Freeway and Bellflower Boulevard.

Lauren Yokomizo, Field Representative for Janice Hahn, County Supervisor, Fourth District and The Rotary Club of Bellflower, 1) congratulated Ray Dunton on all of the accomplishments under his fifth term as Mayor and for providing key services to those in need with the New Hope Shelter; and 2) presented him with a $50.00 check from The Rotary Club of Bellflower as a donation to the Kiwanis Foundation.

Dorothy Pemberton, Council Member, City of Downey, thanked Ray Dunton for his service and presented him with a certificate of recognition.

Anastacia Nwosu, Field Representative for Assemblymember Jose Luis Solache, Jr., 62nd District, 1) congratulated Ray Dunton for his fifth year as Mayor and completing another successful term; and 2) noted that they would be mailing a donation to the Kiwanis Foundation on behalf of the Office of Assemblymember Jose Luis Solache, Jr.

Jennifer Perez, Mayor, City of Norwalk, thanked Ray Dunton for his service and presented him with a certificate of recognition.

Larry Wehage, Public Safety Commissioner, Bellflower Noon Lions, Bellflower Chamber of Commerce, and Southeast Los Angeles County Workforce Development Board, presented Ray Dunton with a $100.00 check as a donation to the Kiwanis Foundation on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce and presented his wife, Dawn Dunton, with flowers.

David Arellano, Council Member, City of Lakewood and Bellflower Business Owner, expressed his appreciation for Ray Dunton and all he has accomplished.

James Cody Birkey, Cerritos College Board of Trustees, Area 4, thanked Ray Dunton for his service and presented him with a certificate of appreciation.

Khoi Dao, Assistant Fire Chief, Los Angeles County Fire Department, 1) thanked and congratulated Ray Dunton for his leadership and guidance; and 2) noted that he would personally donate $100.00 to the Kiwanis Foundation.

Robin Snow, Snow Funeral Services, presented a $50.00 check as a donation to the Kiwanis Foundation in honor of her late husband Bob Snow who was a Kiwanis Club member.

Karla Caceres, District Representative for Senator Bob Archuleta, 30th District, thanked Ray Dunton for his accomplishments in Bellflower over the last year and presented him with a certificate of recognition. 3 Bellflower City Council Minutes Item No. 5
January 26, 2026 Page 3 of 12

5 PRESENTATIONS TO OUTGOING MAYOR RAY DUNTON – Continued

Jenna Enkhorn, The Woman’s Club & Friends of the Library , stated that the Friends of the Library had mailed their donation check to the Kiwanis Foundation and expressed gratitude for Ray Dinton’s leadership and efforts to involve citizens in community matters.

For the record, Council Member Dunton stated that 1) Former Mayor Randy Bomgaars’s wife dropped off a check for $50.00 as a donation to the Kiwanis Foundation; 2) Former Mayor John Pratt sent a donation to the Kiwanis Foundation; and 3) Carol Waite and Fred Harris made a $1,000.00 contribution to the Kiwanis Foundation.

Bea Proo, accompanied by Carol Gamez of the Bellflower Civic Chorus, presented Ray Dunton with a donation to the Kiwanis Foundation and thanked him for the achievements he accomplished during his term.

In recognition of Ray Dunton’s commitment and contributions to the City of Bellflower during his term as the 68th Mayor, 1) Mayor Santa Ines presented him with a personalized Gavel Plaque that includes the gavel with which he presided over meetings during his year as Mayor; 2) Mayor Pro Tem Sanchez presented him with an autographed Petty Die Cast car signed by Kyle Petty, who was the 2025 BRAVO awards Keynote Speaker; 3) Council Member Koops presented him with a Challenge Coin display which included the coin designed to commemorate his year as Mayor; and 4) Council Member Morse presented him with a scrapbook of photos highlighting the City’s progress and developments during his year as Mayor.

Council Member Mayor Dunton 1) stated that he loved serving in the position of Mayor and had a great year, emphasizing that the accomplishments were not about him but about the residents; 2) thanked his City Council colleagues and his wife, for guiding and supporting him ; 3) expressed appreciation to everyone who attended the ceremony; and 4)noted that he was elected in March 2007 during the City’s 50th anniversary and reflected on the hardships of the recession, during which he learned the importance of ma king do with limited resources, remarking on how far the City has come financially since that time.

Recess: Without objection, Mayor Santa Ines recessed the meeting at 6:14 p.m., noting that the meeting would reconvene at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers to conduct the business portion of the meeting.

7:00 P.M. – OPEN SESSION & CLOSED SESSION

6 RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION

Mayor Santa Ines reconvened the meeting at 7:02 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Bellflower City Hall, 16600 Civic Center Drive, Bellflower. 4 Bellflower City Council Minutes Item No. 6
January 26, 2026 Page 4 of 12

6 RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION - Continued

The following Members of the City Council responded present to roll call:

Mayor Sonny R. Santa Ines
Mayor Pro Tem Victor A. Sanchez
Council Member Ray Dunton
Council Member Dan Koops
Council Member Wendi Morse

Staff Participants:

Ryan Smoot, City Manager
Karl H. Berger, City Attorney
Mayra Ochiqui, City Clerk
Assistant City Attorney Timothy E. Campen
Len Gorecki, Assistant City Manager/Director of Public Works Jim DellaLonga, Director of Economic Development
Wangsu Lee, Assistant to the City Manager
Jennifer Russell, Management Assistant

7 REQUEST TO APPEAR REMOTELY

None

8-A CITY COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS

Mayor Santa Ines provided details relative to new waste carts that will be provided to residents from February 9, 2026 through May 9, 2026, as a Citywide effort to comply with Senate Bill 1383, noting that the City’s waste hauler (CR&R) will empty carts and replace them with new ones on a scheduled collection day.

Mayor Pro Tem Sanchez provided details relative to the recently launched “My Bellflower” mobile app, noting that the free app is now available for download on major app stores, allowing residents to submit service requests, check the City calendar, view upcoming events, access business licensing information, review public records, and receive updates on City programs and resources.

Council Member Morse provided details relative to the return of the Entrepreneurial Academy in February 2026, noting that the free eight -week program, offered in partnership with Heart Centered Leadership, will guide participants through starting and growing a business, with sessions held on Wednesdays b eginning February 18 and concluding with a Graduation Ceremony on April 22, 2026.

5 Bellflower City Council Minutes Item No. 8-A
January 26, 2026 Page 5 of 12

8-A CITY COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS – Continued

Council Member Dunton provided details relative to upcoming February programs at the Clifton M. Brakensiek Library, noting that the activities will offer educational and recreational opportunities for children, teens, and adults.

Council Member Koops provided details relative to the CR&R Compost Drive-Thru Giveaway to be held on February 21, 2026, noting that Bellflower residents can pick up free compost at the Public Works Yard, as part of the City’s ongoing efforts to promote sustainability and waste reduction.

8-B PRESENTATION: SERVICE CLUB – ROTARY CLUB OF BELLFLOWER

Lauren Yokomizo, President of The Rotary Club of Bellflower, gave a PowerPoint presentation providing an overview of the club’s activities and responded to Council Members’ questions.

8-C PRESENTATION: BEVERAGE CONTAINER CALENDAR

Michelle Nicholls of CalRecycle presented a PowerPoint presentation recognizing the Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Prevention Artwork Contest Winners selected from among elementary school fifth graders enrolled in the Bellflower Unified School District.

9 PUBLIC COMMENTS

Laura Milne, resident, 1) praised the new City Life magazine, but expressed concerns related to the proposed Willows Project, including public safety, traffic, parking, economic impacts, project density, and displacement of existing businesses; and 2) urged the City Council to consider an alternate location for the project and stated her opposition.

For the record, Mayor Santa Ines 1) clarified that the proposed Willows Project is not a homeless shelter, but a state-approved apartment complex; 2) explained that the City cannot block the project per state law, but noted that the developer is exceeding requirements by providing six parking spaces , and implementing enhanced security and programming; and 3) referenced a site visit to another similar development in San Diego, highlighting the developer’s use of modern security measures and the well-managed, clean facilities, expressing confidence that the development would be a positive addition to Bellflower.

Mayor Pro Tem Sanchez 1) added that he also visited the development sites with Mayor Santa Ines and staff, noting that the sites were well-maintained, secure, and included programming for residents; 2) highlighted the City’s advocacy efforts in Sacramento against “by-right” development bills, explaining that while Bellflower opposes these mandates, state law limits the City’s ability to stop certain projects; and 3) emphasized ongoing efforts to provide housing responsibly and acknowledged residents’ concerns about the development. 6 Bellflower City Council Minutes Item No. 9
January 26, 2026 Page 6 of 12

9 PUBLIC COMMENTS - Continued

At the request of Mayor Santa Ines, Director of Economic Development DellaLonga explained that 1) the development is a high-quality subsidized apartment complex, offering wraparound services for residents of varying income levels; and 2) the 50-unit complex includes one on-site manager unit and provides secure access, job training and assistance, transportation support, a computer lab with training, and community activities for residents.

Sandra Roubos, lead contact for the Rendelia Adversary Action Team, 1) provided written materials for the City Council Members; 2) stated that she opposed the proposed Willows Project on Lakewood Boulevard, citing concerns with safety, traffic, infrastructure, and neighborhood compatibility ; and 3) requested the City pursue an alternative site.

Jennifer Gonzalez, resident, 1) noted her attendance at the Outgoing Mayor’s Ceremony and her experience attending City Council meetings over the past several years; and 2) encouraged residents to participate in Council meetings, which are held on the second and fourth Mondays of each month, emphasizing the importance of community involvement in City matters.

Peter Enkhorn, resident, 1) expressed support for the proposed housing project, noting the need for assistance for people experiencing homelessness , citing positive experiences with local shelters, and stated that he believes the project could be beneficial to the community; and 2) inquired whether the project would include a circular driveway or similar design to prevent congestion, emphasizing that proper on-site management and traffic planning could mitigate any neighborhood impact.

Dee Marie Spence, resident, 1) shared her personal experience with homelessness in Bellflower, highlighting the lack of programs and shelters at that time and credited organizations like Little House Women’s Rehab and Calvary Bellflower for helping her transition off the streets ; 2) emphasized the ongoing need for supportive housing and services, noting that current funding and resources are limited; and 3) encouraged the community to approach the proposed Willows Project with an open mind, recognizing its potential to help individuals in need.

Archie Dragovich, resident, noting that he was a lifelong Bellflower resident, expressed concerns about crime and public safety in relation to his neighborhood and the Willows Project.

Andrew San Nicolas, Executive Director of Kingdom Cause of Bellflower, 1) highlighted the ongoing homelessness crisis, noting rising numbers of families and elderly residents in need; and 2) emphasized that affordable housing helps prevent homelessness and reduces long-term costs to the City, expressed support for the proposed Willows Project, and offered assistance from his organization to help implement housing solutions.
7 Bellflower City Council Minutes Item No. 10-A
January 26, 2026 Page 7 of 12

10 PUBLIC HEARINGS

A Consideration and possible action to conduct a public hearing to authorize the recording of a Notice of Special Assessment for Nuisance Abatement Against the Owner of 9103-9121 Artesia Boulevard.

City Manager Smoot introduced the item , noting that the City received a request from the property owner to continue the hearing to the next City Council Meeting on February 9, 2026.

It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Sanchez, seconded by Council Member Koops, and carried without objection, to open the public hearing.

For the record, Council Member Dunton noted that there was no one in attendance who wanted to speak on the matter, including the property owner.

There being no one in attendance wishing to provide public testimony, it was moved by Council Member Morse, seconded by Council Member Koops, and unanimously carried by the following roll call vote, to continue to the public hearing to the February 9, 2026, City Council Meeting:

AYES: Council Members – Morse, Sanchez, Dunton, Koops and Mayor Santa Ines

B Consideration and possible action to conduct a public hearing to authorize the recording of a Notice of Special Assessment for Nuisance Abatement against the owner of 9070 Artesia Boulevard; and adopt Resolution No. 26-03 – A Resolution to Record a Notice of Special Assessment for Nuisance Abatement of 9070 Artesia Boulevard (APN 7162-011-011).

City Manager Smoot and City Attorney Berger introduced the item.

Assistant City Attorney Campen 1) provided a PowerPoint presentation of the Staff Report; and 2) responded to Council Members’ questions along with City Attorney Berger.

For the record, Assistant City Attorney Campen noted that there was a typographical error in Section 4 of the Resolution and requested the total amount reflect the correct amount of $198,568.78.

Following discussion, it was moved by Council Member Dunton, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Sanchez, and carried without objection, to open the public hearing.

Peter Enkhorn, resident, requested and received Assistant City Attorney Campen’s name and title.

Following brief discussion, it was moved by Council Member Dunton, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Sanchez, and carried without objection, to close the public hearing.

8 Bellflower City Council Minutes Item No. 10-B
January 26, 2026 Page 8 of 12

10 PUBLIC HEARINGS - Continued

For the record, City Attorney Berger stated that the correction noted by Assistant City Attorney Campen was captured in the supplemental material provided to the City Council and made available to the public prior to the start of the meeting.

It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Sanchez, seconded by Council Member Koops, and unanimously carried by the following roll call vote, to adopt Resolution No. 26-03, as amended, to record a notice of special assessment for nuisance abatement on the owner of 9070 Artesia Boulevard (approved via Resolution No. 26-03, adopted January 26, 2026):

AYES: Council Members – Morse, Sanchez, Dunton, Koops and Mayor Santa Ines

11 ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION

None

12 CONSIDERATION ITEMS

A Consideration and possible action to select and approve a design concept for pedestrian improvements on Coke Avenue between Artesia Boulevard and the south City Limit.

City Manager Smoot introduced the item.

For the record, Council Member Koops 1) announced that he would recuse on this item due to a conflict of interest, as he owns property within 500 feet of the subject property; and 2) left the dais and Council Chambers at 8:3 8 p.m.

Assistant City Manager/Director of Public Works Gorecki 1) provided a PowerPoint presentation of the Staff Report; and 2) responded to Council Members’ questions along with City Manager Smoot.

Mayor Pro Tem Sanchez 1) expressed his excitement for the project, noting that there may be an Option 3, which would be explained best by Council Member Dunton; and 2) shared his perspective on why Option 2 was his preference of the options detailed by staff, should Council Member Dunton’s Option 3 not be available.
9 Bellflower City Council Minutes Item No. 12-A
January 26, 2026 Page 9 of 12

12 CONSIDERATION ITEMS – Continued

A Consideration and possible action to select and approve a design concept for pedestrian improvements on Coke Avenue between Artesia Boulevard and the south City Limit. – Continued

Council Member Dunton, 1) expressed the opinion that Option 1 initially appeared to be the better plan; however, he expressed concern about narrowing the street by three feet, noting that it could lead to parking restrictions as seen on other streets throughout the City; 2) suggested Option 3 which included exploring the possibility of working with the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power to either purchase or obtain dedication of a three -foot strip of land; 3) noted that based on his experience it has been easier to work with the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power than with Southern California Edison , recommended staff engage with the utility company to pursue that option which would allow the curb to remain in its current location and avoid the cost of reconstructing the street, while still adding a sidewalk on the opposite side; and 4) added that there were no power poles in that section and observed that existing fences were in poor condition, suggesting there may be an opportunity to install decorative fencing consistent with City ordinances.

Mayor Santa Ines stated that, if feasible, there could be room for bulb -outs and there may be a possibility to incorporate them into the new Option 3.

Council Member Morse stated that she was familiar with the neighborhood, expressing the opinion that the area clearly needed a sidewalk.

Following discussion, it was the consensus of the City Council (Koops recused) to direct staff to contact the Department of Water and Power to explore additional options with regard to design concepts for pedestrian improvements on Coke Avenue between Artesia Boulevard and the south City Limit and bring the matter back to the City Council for further consideration.

For the record, there was no formal action taken on this item.

Eddie Cruz, Board of Education, Paramount Unified School District, 1) stated that in 2022 he brought the matter to the attention of Mayo r Pro Tem Sanchez after noticing that Collins Elementary students and Bellflower residents were required to walk in the street due to the absence of a sidewalk, which posed a major safety concern; and 2) thanked the City Council for taking action on the issue and expressed appreciation on behalf of the students and families of Collins Elementary.

For the record, Council Member Koops returned to the Council Chambers and dais at 9:01 p.m.

10 Bellflower City Council Minutes Item No. 13
January 26, 2026 Page 10 of 12

13 CONSENT CALENDAR

It was moved by Council Member Dunton, seconded by Council Member Koops, and unanimously carried by the following roll call vote, to approve the actions stipulated on the Consent Calendar:

AYES: Council Members - Morse, Sanchez, Dunton, Koops and Mayor Santa Ines

A Consideration and possible action to receive and file City Council Warrant Register No. 26-072, dated January 26, 2026.

Action: Received and filed Warrant Register No. 26- 072.

B Consideration and possible action to receive and file the Investments Report for the Month of December. _________
Action: Received and filed the Investments Report.

C Consideration and possible action to ratify Council Member Ray Dunton’s appointment of John Gardner to the Public Safety Commission for the term ending December 2026.

Action: Ratified Council Member Ray Dunton’s appointment of John Gardner to fill the unexpired term on the Public Safety Commission ending December 2026.

D Consideration and possible action to receive and file Official Travel Report – California Contract Cities Association Legislative Orientation Tour, January 5–7, 2026 (Pursuant to AB 1234).

Action: Received and filed Official Travel Report for the California Contract Cities Association, 2026 Sacramento Legislative Tour.

E Consideration and possible action to waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1452 – An Ordinance adding § 2.04.080 to Bellflower Municipal Code to implement the Bellflower City Charter by establishing voting requirements for ordinances, resolutions, and other City Council actions.

CEQA: The Ordinance is exempt from additional review under the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., “CEQA”) and the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq., the “CEQA Guidelines”) because, under CEQA Guidelines §§ 15061(b)(3) and 15378(b)(5), the Ordinance establishes internal governmental procedures that have no potential to cause a significant effect on the environment.

Action: Waived further reading and adopted Ordinance No. 1452.

F Consideration and possible action to adopt Resolution No. 26-02 – A Resolution approving the 2026 City of Bellflower Transit Services Title VI Program.

Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-02.

11 Bellflower City Council Minutes Item No. 13
January 26, 2026 Page 11 of 12

13 CONSENT CALENDAR – Continued

G Consideration and possible action to adopt a Legislative Platform authorizing the City Manager to issue position letters on State and Federal legislation impacting local government services in the City of Bellflower.

Action: Adopted the proposed Legislative Platform and authorize d the City Manager to issue position letters on State and Federal legislation impacting local government services in Bellflower.

H Consideration and possible action to approve the Minutes of the January 12, 2026, Regular Meeting of the City Council and Bellflower Financing Authority.

Action: Approved the January 12, 2026, Regular Meeting Minutes.

14 COUNCIL REPORTS

Mayor Pro Tem Sanchez, Council Member Dunton, Council Member Koops and Mayor Santa Ines made various comments and reports.

15 RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION

For the record, 1) City Manager Smoot introduced the titles of the Closed Session items and requested that Item 15-B not be considered, noting that it would be brought back at a future date; 2) Council Member Morse and Council Member Dunton recused on Item 15-A, as they have property conflicts within 500 feet of the subject properties; and 3) Council Member Morse and Council Member Dunton left the Council Chambers and dais at 9:05 p.m. and did not return to the meeting.

There being no one from the public wishing to speak on Closed Session items, without objection, Mayor Santa Ines recessed the Meeting at 9:05 p.m. to a Closed Session regarding:

A CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR
(Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8) [CITY]

Property: APN 7161-008-906 (9818 Artesia Boulevard) and 7161-008-905
Agency Negotiator: Ryan Smoot, City Manager
Negotiating Party: Jeff Hopkins, Hopkins Real Estate Group Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment

B [Item Not Considered]

CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - POTENTIAL LITIGATION
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(2):

One Matter. FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: Letters Dated December 19, 2025 and December 18, 2025 (see attached).

For the record, Closed Session adjourned at 9:28 p.m.
12 Bellflower City Council Minutes Item No. 16
January 26, 2026 Page 12 of 12

16 RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION

Mayor Santa Ines reconvened the Meeting at 9:29 p.m., with Council Member Dunton and Council Member Morse absent, and announced that no reportable action was taken during Closed Session.

17 ADJOURNMENT

Without objection, Mayor Santa Ines adjourned the meeting at 9:29 p.m. to the next Regular Meeting of the Bellflower City Council at 5:30 p.m. on Monday, February 9, 2026.

Sonny R. Santa Ines, Mayor
City of Bellflower

Attest:

Mayra Ochiqui, City Clerk
Approved: February 9, 2026

13 To whom it may concern,
My name is Jorge Macias, and I am a police officer for the Los Angeles Police Department. I have been a law enforcement officer for approximately nine years and currently serve as a field training officer. As you are aware, the city of Los Angeles has been struggling with nomelessness for years.

In response to this issue, the Los Angeles Housing Department (LAHD) established a program similar to the one being implemented in our city of Bellflower. This program aims to provide housing for the homeless population. However, based on my extensive experience, I believe that this program has had detrimental effects to the city of Los Angeles.

Firstly, it has resulted in a significant increase in radio calls and property crimes in the surrounding area. Secondly, the program has placed a strain on the community due to the heightened safety concerns related to drug abuse, property crime, and the increased workload for law enforcement officers.

Given these concerns, I strongly recommend that the city of Bellflower refrain from approving the construction of this property in our city. I have personally responded to numerous radio calls involving said drug abuse and violent crimes, and I am deeply concerned about the potential impact of this program on our community's safety and well- being,
Best,
1)
Jorge Macias
S62 - Z87 - q 6/ V

Drive for Success
Youth Academy
Presents

INAUGURAL ANNUAL
GOLF

AWARENESS
aDa*

SATURDAY
MAY 2, 2026
--11 AM — 4 PM
r-_
HELD AT:

Drive for Success Youth Academy
9836 Flower Street "Rear"
Bellflower, CA 90706
VatialM

EVENT HIGHLIGHTS
• Economic Impact
• Youth & Diversity
• Health Benefits
• Networking Reception
Itit EMPOWERING YOUTH THROUGH GOLF
ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND MENTORSHIP __

DRIVE FOR SUCCESS
YOUTH ACADEMY, INC.

CONTACT INFO
M. Joseph Moore
CEO / Founder / Instructor
• 646-267-7145
Q 562-515-6311
Register at
9836 Flower Street 'Rear" ( Bellflower, CA 90706

BOOKS, CHESS & TOYS

BOOK DONATION DRIVE
Drop off Any New or Used Books
9836 Flower Street, Bellflower CA 90706
Book drive goes from
January - December
Call for large book pick ups
310-714-1707
Ask about Golf and Chess Lessons
501 (c) 3 nonprofit start ups
& Entrepreneurial Training
Mission
Connecting people to knowledge, to ideas, and to one another.

We are 501 (c) 3 Nonprofit — 100% Tax deductible
We also accept donations of cars, trucks, vans or Real Estate

National Association for Black Veterans, Inc. 6
Ili lig

4. 4
"Creating a positive lifestyle for veterans"
Veterans & Spouses
Appreciation Day
Monday May 25, 2026
11 A.M.-3P.M.

Held at
Books Toys & More (In Rear)
9836 Flower Street, Bellflower, CA 90706
Sponsored by: National Association for Black Veterans (NABVETS), Drive For Success Youth Academy & American Legions
Local Support from Businesses
AGHAPY Mart, Nacho's Mexican Food, Hala Hair,
Soul Mate Coffee and Navaeh Japanese Retail Store
All veterans and their families are invited
Vendor Space Available
Contact: Commander Anthony Williams 909-921-2456
Benjamin Walker/ Speaker/ Vice Commander 626-205-0549
or Jacquelyn Deloatch 310-714-1707
(Plenty of FREE Parking, Fun & Food
„ yp
4\Y 4 +s
SJ'trEs01. `

V)
C4
W
z
o
c.)
z
a.

U
z
o
O01
N
O CO
M
5o
No
oa
NQz
WWo
5 J LL
gmo
w
CCw
= J
N W
Jo
3Q
oo
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
ARIA GUILANI (Bar No. 337834)
[email protected]
ANDERSON, McPHARLIN & CONNERS LLP
707 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 4000
Los Angeles, California 90017-3623
TELEPHONE: (213) 688-0080 ♦ FACSIMILE: (213) 622-7594
Attorneys for
EITAN SHARAF and

ARTESIA ENTERPRISES, LLC

BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF BELLFLOWER
In the matter of:
9103-9121 Artesia Boulevard,
Assessor's Parcel Numbers
7162-16-044, 7162-16-045, and
7162-16-046

RESPONSE TO CITY OF

BELLFLOWER'S REQUEST FOR

ABATEMENT COSTS
Place: City Council of the City of Bellflower
16600 Civic Center Drive
Bellflower, California 90706
3543509.2 06363-001
1 RESPONSE TO CITY OF BELLFLOWER'S REQUEST FOR ABATEMENT COSTS

▪ oth
• artD
Z 5o
O co 09
U o<
• CC Z <a
a w W 0
LL
• m• v
U w
CCw
J
• =w
O CD
• <
w N rn
o 0
CO
CO
fV
N
tD
N
LL
O
CO
o
o
co
co
CD
lw
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
I. INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF FACTS
Artesia Enterprises, LLC ("Artesia") purchased 9103-9121 Artesia Boulevard, Bellflower, California (collectively, the "Lots") on or around March 2013. The Lots are arranged as follows:
2 office
A
portable U
office
B
c
garage
D
concrete driveway
31 1 1
pstabe office
asphalt parkir•g
sicewalk
F
canopy
shed
J
canopy
canopy
5 72ArLfY'
912
house
utyU.1 c7E.tyl
91191
Artesia Blvd
fenco
huddng
TN
shed
cpen
concrete
garage
9124
house
°actity Plot Plan 0 40 it
mar) 2a 1 inch .40feet
9103-9129 112 Artesia Elva , Bellfovrer, CA 90706
Over the course of several years, the City of Bellflower ("City") and Artesia, via its manager, Mr. Eitan Sharaf, worked to abate the alleged nuisances existing on the Lots. When purchased, and throughout the relevant time period for this matter, the Lots contained numerous tenants, some of whom pre -dated Artesia's purchase of the Lots. As is relevant to the current issue before this Council, beginning on or around July 2022, the City's attorneys (now Burke, Williams, and Sorensen, LLP ("BWS")) began informing the tenants residing upon the Lots of Bellflower Municipal Code ("BMC") violations on their respective lots. Between that period of time and the present, BWS, on behalf of the City, issued further notices to Artesia regarding numerous purported BMC violations on the Lots.
3543509.2 06363-001-0
2 RESPONSE TO CITY OF BELLFLOWER'S REQUEST FOR ABATEMENT COSTS

1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
..1 O (N
cn
z wo� 12
✓ NOM
• Q Q
z QQ�'d
WwO1-
5o< o
a. moo
Woo
z NWco
o ��'—
z
z Sacs,
w r•cn• OO
N .J
F-
11 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 Artesia complied with the demanded actions to abate the alleged violations on the Lots.

Indeed, between December 2023 and April 2024, Artesia effectuated the removal of all tenants from the Lots. Between March 2024 and September 2024, Artesia: (1) removed all signs, fences, wind screens, and tenant -abandoned vehicles, boats, and hazardous waste; (2) moved three mobile offices and a camper on the Lots; (3) removed the doors on a canopy on the Lots, removed all wood shades, demolished the unpermitted bathroom, and removed the canopy existing over a mobile office; (4) painted all buildings and light poles; (5) obtained the asbestos report to demolish one of the structures existing on the Lots, as mandated by the City; (6) obtained the required engineering report for all buildings; (7) obtained engineering plans for the fences and gates that were the subject of the notices of violations and submitted said plans to the City; (8) completed the required asphalt slurry seal upon the Lots; (9) installed all required fencing, landscaping, and gates on the Lots; (10) per Council's September 9, 2024 order, completed demolition of all buildings by October 1, 2024 and removed the final mobile office; and, (11) installed a new roof upon 9121 Artesia Boulevard, Bellflower, California at BWS's request.

BWS, following the completion of all requested abatement, stated that all required abatement was completed by the due date — at the end of 2024. BWS did not contact Mr. Sharaf or Artesia further after December 2024 regarding abatement.

Almost a year later, Mr. Sharaf received a letter from BWS dated November 17, 2025 demanding payment of the abatement costs for the Lots between January 27, 2022 and September 30, 2025 for the sum of $82,740.82. This letter contained an "accounting" that failed to provide any description, unit, or names as to the work done by BWS, or any description as to the Code Enforcement actions taken by the City's officers. By way of example, all of the City officials' "entries" appear in the following format:'
A copy of the Demand for Costs is attached hereto as Exhibit 1 for Council's ease of reference. 3543509.2 06363-001-0
3 RESPONSE TO CITY OF BELLFLOWER'S REQUEST FOR ABATEMENT COSTS

2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 a.
-1 o0N� 11
el oM'
Li.)
I-0( 12
V0
o<N 13
z NQQ4
1LjOLL 14
Z LL •
z goa o 15
a. moo
mNo
mu., ao
J c0
o J(9 ( 16
z
`4 QN
w 17
O nV)
NOW
H
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 Date
Employee Name
Classification
Hourly
Units
Total Cost
10/24/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

0.5 $73.16
10/29/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

0.75 $109.74
`
$8,816.25
All of BWS' fees appear in the following fashion:

Bellflower City Attorney's Office
Date
Billed Amount
08/04/2022
$70.50
8119/2022
8/31/2022
9/07/2022
9/13/2022
9/22/2022
$117.50
$70.50
$70.50
$94.00
$70.50
$49.40
$24.70
$24.70
11/15/2023
12/9/2023
12/23/2023
3/29/2024
$49.40
4/19/2024
$74.10
6/25/2024
$24.70
8/23/2024
8/29/2024
8/30/2024
$25.50
$229.50
$127.50
$153.00
9/4/2024
9/6/2024
9/9/2024
$76.50
$76.50
9/10/2024
9/10/2024
9/11/2024
$229.50
$25.50
S25.50
Seeking to contest the reasonableness of these charges, Mr. Sharaf and Artesia, through his agent and counsel of record, requested records to itemize and describe these claimed costs. The City attorneys, Solange Fortenbach and Tim Campen, refused to provide them. In so doing, both claimed that no such itemization or descriptors were needed —but that's wrong.

Now, with an impending Council meeting scheduled for February 9, 2026, and faced with a complete inability to contest the reasonableness of the costs requested, Artesia and Mr. Sharaf seek (1) a continuance of the February 9, 2026 hearing to the March or April session and (2) an order by the Council requiring the City attorney's office to substantiate the costs incurred by their office(s) and the City in connection with the abatement of the Lots. (See Charter of the City of Bellflower, Art. III(A)-(C) [enunciating City Council's authority]; id., Art. VIII(C) [City 3543509.206363-001-0
4 RESPONSE TO CITY OF BELLFLOWER'S REQUEST FOR ABATEMENT COSTS

a
_1 o N W
O ,
Lu
Z b"
D
v° Ng�
d Qcc 2
Nx_
z Q Q
J WW W o u_
. O<C
a. moo
CC
z NW-
o OM
z
3aN
W ncn
o oo-
d
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
Council's grant of authority in line with the Government Code]; see also BMC, § 17.112.060 [City council's authority to hear appeals]; Montgomery v. Superior Court (1975) 46 Cal.App.3d 657, 668 [City Council may direct City attorney to undertake certain actions].)2 The entry of such orders would allow Mr. Sharaf and Artesia a meaningful opportunity to respond to the abatement costs sought. As it currently stands, they are not being given the opportunity to meaningfully respond to the demand, in violation of their procedural due process rights.

II. LEGAL ANALYSIS
A. Artesia and Mr. Sharaf s due process rights will be violated if such costs are granted without a reasonable itemization and description of abatement fees and costs.

The BMC mandates that the City must keep an accounting of its abatement costs. (BMC, § 8.36.180(A).) In keeping this accounting, the City may seek fees and costs associated with abatement. (Id., § 8.36.190.) To do so, it must serve a statement of abatement costs on the responsible persons within 20 calendar days of the City's completion of nuisance abatement actions. (Id. § 8.36.180(B).) A responsible party thereafter may contest the abatement costs sought by providing the following:
a. Name, address, telephone number, and signature of each responsible party who is contesting the statement of
abatement costs;
b. Address and description of real property upon which the City abated a public nuisance;
c. Date of the statement of abatement costs being appealed; and 2 This does not account for the fact that BWS did not serve a statement of abatement costs on the responsible persons within 20 calendar days of the City's completion of nuisance abatement actions. (BMC, § 8.36.180(B).) Based on BWS' communications with Mr. Sharaf, abatement was to be completed and was completed at the end of 2024. It appears the election to recover fees is thus untimely — as the statement of costs was served 331 calendar days after abatement was completed. (See Schneider v. County of San Diego (9th Cir.1994) 28 F.3d 89, 93 [when a property aligns to the municipal code where it once was not in alignment, nuisance abatement is "complete."].)
3543509.2 06363-001-0
5 RESPONSE TO CITY OF BELLFLOWER'S REQUEST FOR ABATEMENT COSTS

W o N
W w^ry
z 5o`N°
V Nam
pQN
cCj
Z yQc
a w o
Q
W n In
NJ
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
d. Description of the specific abatement cost being contested, and a statement of the grounds for contest in sufficient detail to enable the City Council to understand the nature of the controversy.
(Id., § 8.36.180(D)(1).)
Such requirements purport to provide the process afforded to a responsible person to contest the reasonableness of any fees or costs provided. Preliminarily, as alleged "responsible persons," Artesia and Mr. Sharaf hold due process rights under the California and Federal Constitutions. (See First Nat. Bank of Boston v. Bellotti (1978) 435 U.S. 765, 778-779 [corporations have Fourteenth Amendment procedural due process protections]; accord Palm Medical Group, Inc. v. State Comp. Ins. Fund (2008) 161 Ca1.App.4th 206, 217 [procedural due process protections under the California constitution].)

1. The refusal to provide substantive and itemized descriptions for the abatement costs sought violates the procedural due process clause of the California Constitution.

Procedural due process under the California Constitution is "much more inclusive" and protects a broader range of interests than under the federal Constitution. (San Jose Police Officers Assn. v. City of San Jose (1988) 199 Cal.App.3d 1471, 1478.) Under the California Constitution, the application
must be determined in the context of the individual's due process liberty interest in freedom from arbitrary adjudicative procedures.

Thus, when a person is deprived of a statutorily conferred benefit, due process analysis must start not with a judicial attempt to decide whether the statute has created an `entitlement' that can be defined as `liberty' or `property,' but with an assessment of what procedural protections are constitutionally required in light of the governmental and private interests at stake.
(See People v. Ramirez (1979) 25 Ca1.3d 260, 264 (Ramirez).) In so doing, the court instructed reviewing bodies to " `evaluate the extent to which procedural protections can be tailored to promote more accurate and reliable administrative decisions in light of the governmental and private interests at stake....' " (See id. at p. 267, bolded and italicized emphases added and quotations omitted.)
3543509.2 06363-001-0
6 RESPONSE TO CITY OF BELLFLOWER'S REQUEST FOR ABATEMENT COSTS

1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
This approach presumes that, when an individual is subjected to deprivatory governmental action, they always have a due process liberty interest both in fair and unprejudicial decision - making and in being treated with respect and dignity. (Id. at p. 268.) In essence, a party is entitled to (1) notice, and (2) a meaningful opportunity to be heard on the validity, fairness, and amount of the costs. (Cal. Const. Art. 1, § 7(a); Thain v. City of Palo Alto (1962) 207 Ca1.App.2d 173, 191; see also Chicago, M. St. P. & Pac. R. Co. v. Risty (1928) 276 U.S. 567, 574 [landowner must be apprised of what is proposed and afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard].) The determination of the dictates of due process generally requires consideration of four factors: (1) the private interest that will be affected by the individual action; (2) the risk of an erroneous deprivation of this interest through the procedures used and the probable value, if any, of additional or substitute safeguards; (3) the dignitary interest of informing individuals of the nature, grounds and consequences of the action and of enabling them to present their side of the story before a responsible governmental official; and (4) the government interest, including the function involved and the fiscal and administrative burdens that the additional or substitute procedural requirements would entail. (Oberholzer v. Commission on Judicial Performance (1999) 20 Ca1.4th 371, 390-391, citations and quotations omitted.) The primary purpose of procedural due process is to provide affected parties with the right to be heard at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner. (Ryan v. California Interscholastic Federation -San Diego Section (2001) 94 Ca1.App.4th 1048, 1072.) That isn't happening here, as elucidated below, infra II(A)(3).

2. The refusal to itemize and describe its abatement costs violates the Fourteenth and Fifth Amendments of the United States Constitution. "Procedural due process imposes constraints on governmental decisions which deprive individuals of `liberty' or `property' interests within the meaning of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth or Fourteenth Amendment." (Mathews v. Eldridge (1976) 424 U.S. 319, 332 (Matthews); see U.S. Const. Amend. 14.) To satisfy the requirements of Federal procedural due process, the government must provide notice reasonably calculated, under all the circumstances, to apprise interested parties of the pendency of the action and afford them an opportunity to present their 3543509.2 06363-001
7 RESPONSE TO CITY OF BELLFLOWER'S REQUEST FOR ABATEMENT COSTS

a
.l ONa)
u M
N
Z 5 8c
8 NmF)
.3 d
a N
Z �Qc
a WW2LL
r LL
ZI
= j0aCOO
a. MOO
L) W 6 O
Cr CO
Z N WC0
(0
o J0m
z -
c4 §QN
n oo-J
J
NJ F-
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
objections. (Jones v. Flowers (2006) 547 U.S. 220, 225-226, citation omitted.) While a procedure for challenging a city's decision is adequate prior to deprivation, such a hearing must also include a meaningful opportunity to present objections. (Matthews, supra, 424 U.S. at pp. 334-335; Brock v. Roadway Express, Inc. (1987) 481 U.S. 252, 261 [Due process requires notice and an "opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner."], internal quotation marks original and cleaned up.)
Similar to the California Supreme Court's guidance, an administrative body must first, evaluate the private interest that will be affected by the official action; second, evaluate the risk of an erroneous deprivation of such interest through the procedures used, and the probable value, if any, of additional or substitute procedural safeguards; and finally, evaluate the Government's interest, including the function involved and the fiscal and administrative burdens that the additional or substitute procedural requirement would entail.
(Ibid., cleaned up.) This evaluation is flexible and must take into account the procedural protections that a particular situation demands. (Wilkinson v. Austin (2005) 545 U.S. 209, 224- 225.)

3. The refusal to itemize and describe the abatement costs means that Artesia and Mr. Sharaf cannot meaningfully challenge the abatement costs sought, in contravention of the United States and California Constitutions.

The protections of procedural due process apply to administrative proceedings. (See Thain v. City of Palo Alto, supra, 207 Ca1.App.2d at p. 189.) Indeed, a responsible person under the BMC is entitled to challenge the reasonableness of any costs claimed, provided there is (1) a description of the specific abatement cost being contested and (2) a statement of the grounds for the contest in sufficient detail to enable the City Council to understand the nature of the controversy. (See Houser Holdings CA, LLC v. Tokio Marine Specialty Insurance Company (N.D. Cal. 2024) 738 F.Supp.3d 1226, 1234.) In evaluating the overlapping Ramirez and Matthews factors, the City attorney's (BWS) current position of refusing to itemize and describe the costs sought violates Artesia and Mr. Sharaf's procedural due process rights. 3543509.2 06363-001-0
8 RESPONSE TO CITY OF BELLFLOWER'S REQUEST FOR ABATEMENT COSTS

1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 The payment or loss of money is a protected property interest that triggers procedural due process protections. (See Board of Regents v. Roth (1972) 408 U.S. 564, 571-572.) Absent the ability to meaningfully evaluate and respond to each claimed cost, it is likely that Artesia and Mr. Sharaf will possibly overpay for costs that are not reasonable to the abatement action. To wit, with the current iterations of the "accounting,"
Date
Employee Name
Classification
HourI v
Units
Total Cost
10/24/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

0.5 $73.16
10/29/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

0.75 $109.74
$8,816.25
Belli ower
City Attorney's C
Date
Billed Amount
08/04/2022
$70.50
8/19/2022
$117.50
8/31/2022
$70.50
9/07/2022
$70.50
9/13/2022
$94.00
9/22/2022
$70.50
11/15/2023
$49.40
12/9/2023
$24.70
12/23/2023
$24.70
3/29/2024
$49.40
4/19/2024
$74.10
6/25/2024
$24.70
8/23/2024
$25.50
8/29/2024
$729.50
8/30/2024
$127.50
9/4/2024
$153.00
9/6/2024
$76.50
9/9/2024
$76.50
9/10/2024
$229.50
9/10/2024
$25.50
9/11,2024
$25.50
ffice
it is impossible to ascertain what costs are being claimed and for what purpose. (See cf. Connally v. General Const. Co. (1926) 269 U.S. 385, 391 [laws that do not allow a person of common intelligence to know what is prohibited or allowed are void as a matter of law].) There would be little to no burden upon the City or BWS in providing the complete information requested and necessary here. By way of example, if this were a civil enforcement 3543509.2 06363-001-0
9 RESPONSE TO CITY OF BELLFLOWER'S REQUEST FOR ABATEMENT COSTS

a
O N in
W
Z 5oCNC
V Norco
OQN
z CC
WWoLL
LL •
¢'C OQaoo
a. moo
w
cc co
Wco
o -I0
z�
LLB QN
W N U)
W
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
action, the City's and BWS' request for attorney's fees must include itemized descriptions of the work done. (See Maria P v. Riles (1987) 43 Ca1.3d 1281, 1295.) To provide a date and amount billed, as is the case here, would not suffice. As such, there is no added burden to BWS or the City in providing this required information. (Matthews, supra, 424 U.S. at pp. 334-335.) Council is acting as a quasi-judicial body in determining whether to award abatement costs. (See, e.g., Clary v. City of Crescent City (2017) 11 Cal.App.5th 273, 284; see also BMC, § 8.36.180(H).) This Council should not grant its imprimatur to a lesser standard than that which is uniformly required for any party claiming fees — i.e., a rubber stamp in violation of the California and United States Constitutions. (See, e.g., R. H. Macy & Co. v. Robinson (1960) 183 Ca1.App.2d 182, 191-192; see also Beames v. City of Visalia (2019) 43 Cal.App.5th 741, 767- 787 [due process violation existed where a city failed to provide a property owner a meaningful opportunity to challenge nuisance abatement action and abatement cost recovery].) Requiring BWS to substantiate their claimed fees with itemized descriptions, as would be required in any judicial setting, is necessary. To allow otherwise would infringe upon Artesia and Mr. Sharafs procedural due process rights. (Matthews, supra, 424 U.S. at pp. 334-335.) As such, Artesia and Mr. Sharaf seek (1) a continuance of the February 9, 2026 hearing to the March or April session, and (2) an order by the Council requiring the City attorney's office to substantiate the costs incurred by their office(s) and the City in connection with the abatement of the Lots.

III. CONCLUSION
Procedural due process requires a meaningful opportunity to respond to a governmental entity's attempt to deprive a property owner of a protected interest. Regarding abatement costs, procedural due process requires that a contesting party from whom costs are sought know the basis for a cost. That is absent here. BWS, the City's attorney, has steadfastly refused to do that which it would be required to do in a judicial setting — i.e., itemize and describe the fees associated with abatement.

Council, in determining whether to assess such costs against all responsible persons, is acting in its quasi-judicial setting. To allow the recovery of costs with this dearth of information is a violation of Artesia's and Mr. Sharafs procedural due process rights, as they cannot provide 3543509.2 06363-001-0
10 RESPONSE TO CITY OF BELLFLOWER'S REQUEST FOR ABATEMENT COSTS

1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
the detail required by the BMC to contest the costs. As such, Artesia and Mr. Sharaf seek (1) a continuance of the February 9, 2026 hearing to the March or April session, and (2) an order by the Council requiring the City attorney's office to substantiate the costs incurred by their office(s) and the City in connection with the abatement of the Lots.

DATED: February 3, 2026 ANDERSON, McPHARLIN & CONNERS LLP By:
ii)/(Jav-u---A
Aria Guilani
Attorneys for
EITAN SHARAF an ARTESIA ENTERPRISES,
LLC
3543509.2 06363-001-0
11 RESPONSE TO CITY OF BELLFLOWER'S REQUEST FOR ABATEMENT COSTS

EXHIBIT 1
EXHIBIT 1

mranza
DUect No 949 265 3416
sfortenbach(8lbwslaw. corn
November 17, 2025

VIA E-MAIL AND FIRST-CLASS MAIL
Eitan Sharaf
Property Owner
Artesia Enterprises LLC
7624 Firestone Blvd.

Downey. CA 90241
[email protected]
Simon Sharaf
Counsel for Property Owner
[email protected]
Re: City's Notice of Demand for Payment
Dear Mr. Sharaf:

As you are aware, this law firm serves as the City Attorney's Office for the City of Bellflower ("City"), and I serve as its Deputy City Attorney. We last reached out to you around November 2024 in our email titled "9103 Artesia — Unpermitted Vehicle Storage and Pending Impound," regarding the property located at 9103-9121 Artesia Boulevard, Bellflower, CA, 90706 ("Property"). Therein, Assistant City Attorney Timothy Campen reiterated the existing violations on the Property which had continued to exist for years and for which an administrative hearing had already been conducted.

Our office advised that the City was pursuing an abatement warrant to tow and impound any and all unpermitted vehicles remaining on the Property by October 31, 2024, without opportunity for extension. You abated the nuisances existing on the Property by the due date and, as such, avoided incurring further costs. Today's letter serves as a demand for payment of the City's abatement -related costs incurred in anticipation of City's abatement.

CITY'S DEMAND FOR PAYMENT
On or about October 10, 2024, the City obtained a public nuisance abatement warrant issued by the Honorable Deborah Sanchez, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge. After being fully advised of the City's intention to abate with personnel, at the eleventh hour just prior to the City executing the warrant, you voluntarily complied.

While the City did not have to engage in abating your Property pursuant to the abatement warrant, it is indisputable that the City obtaining the warrant and being on the 013 EXHIBIT 1

Eitan Sharaf
November 17, 2025

Page 2 ends

cusp of executing said warrant was the direct catalyst for your compliance. Therefore, this demand letter comprises of costs accumulated to gain your compliance. These costs total $82,740.82. An accounting of these costs is attached hereto as Exhibit A.

Please be advised that all advisals from the City's prior demand letters and notices regarding violations of the BMC at your Property still hold true and are incorporated herein by reference.

Please be advised that pursuant to BMC Chapter 8.36.' the City is entitled to recover its abatement -related costs from you.

The City has determined abatement costs up to the present total of $82,740.82. This amount is subject to increase until final payment is made as further legal fees accumulate to collect these outstanding costs. Per BMC section 8 36.180(D), you have a right to contest the statement of abatement costs within 10 calendar days of service.

Please be further advised that you are hereby being informed of the manner of contesting this demand pursuant to BMC § 8.36 180(D) as follows:

D. A responsible person has the right to contest a statement of abatement costs by filing a written request for contest with the City Clerk's office (located at 16600 Civic Center Drive, Bellflower, California) within 10 calendar days of service of the statement of abatement costs.

1. A written request for contest will contain the following information. a. Name, address. telephone number, and signature of each responsible party who is contesting the statement of abatement costs;
b. Address and description of real property upon which the City abated a public nuisance;
c. Date of the statement of abatement costs being appealed; and d. Description of the specific abatement cost being contested, and a statement of the grounds for contest in sufficient detail to The Bellflower Municipal Code may be accessed at https://ecode360.com/BE4904 . 014

mranwen
Eitan Sharaf
November 17, 2025

Page 3 ends

enable the City Council to understand the nature of the controversy.

Please be further advised that you have thirty calendar days from the date of service of this Demand Letter to remit to the City the total sum of $82,740.82 by cashier's check only to avoid the City seeking and imposing a special assessment lien on the Property. Payment should be made out to "City of Bellflower," should reference "Reimbursement for abatement -related expenses for 9103-9121 Artesia Boulevard," and should be submitted in person or mailed.

Please be further advised that if no payment is made or no request to contest is timely submitted to the City as required by the BMC, the City Attorney's Office will seek a resolution before the Bellflower City Council at the next available regularly scheduled council meeting to authorize a special assessment for the collection of all abatement costs pursuant to BMC § 8.36.190.

Please feel free to contact me directly at sfortenbach(o�bwslaw com or 949.265.3416 with questions or information concerning the contents of this letter.

Sincerely,

BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP
Solange Fortenbach
SF:SF
cc: Karl H. Berger, City Attorney
Timothy Campen, Assistant City Attorney
015

Exhibit A
Accounting for Abatement -Related Costs
9103-9123 Artesia Blvd
Code Enforcement Insuector Costs — Brian McNerne
Date
Employee Name
Classification
Hourly
Units
Total Cost
11/16/2023
Brian McNerney
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$136.61
1 $136.61
11/21/2023
Brian McNerney

Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$136.61
3 $409.83
$546.44
Code Enforcement Insuector Costs — David Fawcett
Date
Employee Name
Classification
Hourly
Units
Total Cost
1/27/2022

David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

0.75 $109.74
1/28/2022
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

1.5 $219.49
2/8/2022
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

0.75 $109.74
9/9/2022
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

0.75 $109.74
9/11/2022
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33
1 $146.33
9/12/2022
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33
2 $292.66
11/7/2022
David Favtcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

3.5 $512.15
5/1/2023
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

0.75 $109.74
7/6/2023
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33
1 $146.33
016

Date
Employee Name
Classification
Hourly
Units
Total Cost
7/10/2023
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

0.25 $36.58
11/16/2023
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33
1 $146.33
11/20/2023
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

0.5 $73.16
11/21/2023
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33
3 $438.99
11/29/2023
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33
I
$146.33
1/18/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33
3 $438.99
1/31/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33
2 $292.66
2/5/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33
1 $146.33
2/8/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33
4 $585.32
2/13/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

0.5 $73.16
4/5/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33
1 $146.33
4/8/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

0.75 $109.74
4/16/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

0.75 $109.74
5/17/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

1.5 $219.49
5/21/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

2.5 $365.82
017

Date
Employee Name
Classification
Hourly
Units
Total Cost
5/22/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33
1 $146.33
6/3/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33
2 $292.66
6/10/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33
2 $292.66
6/19/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

3.5 $512.15
9/24/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33
1 $146.33
9/25/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

0.5 $73.16
9/26/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

1.5 $219.49
9/30/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33
1 $146.33
10/3/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33
3 $438.99
10/8/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33
2 $292.66
10/9/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

1.5 $219.49
10/10/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

3.5 $512.15
10/15/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

0.75 $109.74
10/18/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

0.5 $73.16
10/22/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

0.5 $73.16
018

Date
Employee Name
Classification
Hourly
Units
Total Cost
10/24/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

0.5 $73.16
10/29/2024
David Fawcett
Code
Enforcement
Supervisor
$146.33

0.75 $109.74
$8,816.25
Code Enforcement Inspector Costs — Esmeralda Erdelyan
Date
Employee Name
Classification
Hourly
Units
Total Cost
4/19/2023
Esmeralda
Erdelyan
Code Enforcement
Supervisor
$91.03

0.5 $45.51
5/24/2023
Esmeralda
Erdelyan
Code Enforcement
Supervisor
$91.03

0.5 $45.51
9/25/2024
Esmeralda
Erdelyan
Code Enforcement
Supervisor
$91.03

0.5 $45.51
$136.53
Bellflower City Attorney's Office
Date
Billed Amount
08/04/2022
$70.50
8/19/2022
$117.50
8/31/2022
$70.50
9/07/2022
$70.50
9/13/2022
$94.00
9/22/2022
$70.50
11/15/2023
12/9/2023
12/23/2023
3/29/2024
$49.40
$24.70
$24.70
$49.40
4/19/2024
$74.10
6/25/2024
$24.70
8/23/2024
$25.50
8/29/2024
$229.50
8/30/2024
$127.50
9/4/2024
$153.00
9/6/2024
$76.50
9/9/2024
$76.50
9/10/2024
$229.50
9/10/2024
$25.50
9/11/2024
$25.50
019

Date
Billed Amount
10/8/2024
$51.00
10/10/2024
$51.00
12/23/2024
$25.50
4/25/2025
$25.50
7/11/2025
$25.50
$1,888.00
Bellflower City Attorney's Office
Date
Billed Amount
1/10/2022
$264.00
1/11/2022
$594.00
1/12/2022
$176.00
1/27/2022
$572.00
2/25/2022
$47.00
4/29/2022
$286.00
5/02/2022
$132.00
6/07/2022
$44.00
6/20/2022
$484.00
6/21/2022
$154.00
6/23/2022
$88.00
7/13/2022
$132.00
7/21/2022
$748.00
7/27/2022
$198.00
7/28/2022
$682.00
7/29/2022
$66.00
7/29/2022
$88.00
8/03/2022
$70.50
8/04/2022
$23.50
8/04/2022
$94.00
8/05/2022
$493.50
8/07/2022
$94.00
8/08/2022
$23.50
8/09/2022
$70.50
8/10/2022
$70.50
8/11/2022
$23.50
8/16/2022
$94.00
8/17/2022
$305.50
8/18/2022
$799.00
8/19/2022
$399.50
08/22/22
$23.50
08/23/22
$70.50
08/24/22
$258.50
08/25/22
$70.50
020

Date
Billed Amount
08/26/22
$70.50
08/29/22
$141.00
08/30/22
$376.00
08/31/22
$141.00
09/01/22
$23.50
09/02/22
$23.50
09/05/22
$70.50
09/05/22
$164.50
09/06/22
$47.00
09/07/22
$376.00
09/08/22
$47.00
09/08/22
$23.50
09/08/22
$70.50
09/09/22
$963.50
09/10/22
$282.00
09/11/22
$987.00
09/12/22
$728.50
09/13/22
$305.50
09/14/22
$141.00
09/15/22
$141.00
09/20/22
$258.50
09/21/22
$94.00
09/21/22
$846.00
09/22/22
$305.50
09/23/22
$376.00
09/25/22
$47.00
09/26/22
$775.50
09/27/22
$188.00 '
09/27/22
$23.50
09/28/22
$611.00
09/28/22
$23.50
09/29/22
$352.50
09/30/22
$681.50
10/03/22
$329.00
10/11/22
$634.50
10/17/22
$70.50
10/18/22
$258.50
10/19/22
$94.00
10/20/22
$164.50
10/27/22
$141.00
10/28/22
$399.50
11/02/2022
$540.50
11/03/2022
$564.00
11/04/2022
$235.00
021

Date
Billed Amount
11/04/2022
$211.50
11/07/2022
$1,574.50
11/07/2022
$1,010.50
11/08/2022
$141.00
11/09/2022
$305.50
11/16/2022
$70.50
11/17/2022
$329.00
11/18/2022
$282.00
11/25/2022
$23.50
11/28/2022
$47.00
11/28/2022
$47.00
1/10/2023
$70.50
1/11/2023
$752.00
1/12/2023
$1,363.00
1/13/2023
$117.50
1/24/2023
$70.50
2/7/2023
$47.00
4/12/2023
$70.50
6/8/2023
$23.50
6/12/2023
$47.00
8/23/2023
$49.40
10/16/2023
$98.80
10/17/2023
$49.40
11/15/2023
$296.40
11/16/2023
$148.20
11/20/2023
$543.40
11/29/2023
$74.10
11/30/2023
$98.80
12/4/2023
$345.80
12/5/2023
$222.30
12/7/2023
$222.30
12/11/2023
$24.70
12/12/2023
$24.70
12/13/2023
$271.70
1/2/2024
$98.80
1/3/2024
$172.90
1/8/2024
$148.20
1/10/2024
$74.10
1/16/2024
$74.10
1/17/2024
$345.80
1/18/2024
$24.70
1/31/2024
$419.90
2/5/2024
$222.30
2/6/2024
$839.80
022

Date
Billed Amount
2/6/2024
$691.60
2/8/2024
$864.50
2/12/2024
$148.20
2/15/2024
$222.30
3/4/2024
$98.80
3/5/2024
$444.60
3/6/2024
$123.50
3/7/2024
$963.30
3/11/2024
$197.60
3/12/2024
$123.50
3/13/2024
$74.10
3/18/2024
$172.90
3/19/2024
$296.40
3/20/2024
$321.10
3/22/2024
$222.30
3/22/2024
$98.80
3/25/2024
$321.10
3/25/2024
$74.10
3/26/2024
$148.20
3/26/2024
$98.80
3/27/2024
$74.10
3/28/2024
$296.40
3/28/2024
$123.50
3/28/2024
$123.50
3/29/2024
$49.40
3/29/2024
$98.80
4/1/2024
$49.40
4/3/2024
$148.20
4/4/2024
$172.90
4/8/2024
$222.30
4/9/2024
$98.80
4/16/2024
$296.40
4/16/2024
$123.50
4/17/2024
$172.90
4/19/2024
$148.20
4/22/2024
$172.90
4/23/2024
$24.70
4/24/2024
$74.10
4/25/2024
$98.80
4/30/2024
$74.10
5/6/2024
$172.90
5/7/2024
$148.20
5/7/2024
$98.80
5/13/2024
$568.10
023

Date
Billed Amount
5/15/2024
$49.40
5/20/2024
$49.40
5/28/2024
$444.60
5/29/2024
$716.30
5/30/2024
$98.80
5/31/2024
$123.50
6/3/2024
$345.80
6/6/2024
$98.80
6/6/2024
$419.90
6/11/2024
$74.10
6/13/2024
$49.40
6/19/2024
$963.30
6/20/2024
$24.70
6/24/2024
$271.70
6/25/2024
$24.70
7/1/2024
$25.50
7/2/2024
$51.00
7/4/2024
$51.00
7/17/2024
$51.00
7/25/2024
$76.50
7/29/2024
$51.00
7/31/2024
$127.50
8/1/2024
S408.00
8/2/2024
$969.00
8/5/2024
$25.50
8/5/2024
$331.50
8/7/2024
$76.50
8/7/2024
$102.00
8/9/2024
$586.50
8/9/2024
$535.50
8/12/2024
$357.00
8/12/2024
$331.50
8/12/2024
$331.50
8/13/2024
$433.50
8/14/2024
$102.00
8/14/2024
$178.50
8/14/2024
$51.00
8/14/2024
$306.00
8/15/2024
$102.00
8/16/2024
$51.00
8/19/2024
$25.50
8/19/2024
$25.50
8/22/2024
$535.50
8/23/2024
$25.50
024

Date
Billed Amount
8/23/2024
$76.50
8/26/2024
$102.00
8/26/2024
$102.00
8/27/2024
$153.00
8/27/2024
$25.50
8/28/2024
$331.50
8/28/2024
$255.00
8/29/2024
$178.50
8/29/2024
$102.00
8/30/2024
$433.50
9/2/2024
$102.00
9/3/2024
$76.50
9/4/2024
$204.00
9/5/2024
$51.00
9/5/2024
$76.50
9/6/2024
$76.50
9/9/2024
$433.50
9/10/2024
$102.00
9/12/2024
$102.00
9/12/2024
$76.50
9/13/2024
S229.50
9/16/2024
$280.50
9/16/2024
$76.50
9/17/2024
$102.00
9/20/2024
$25.50
9/23/2024
$51.00
9/25/2024
$76.50
9/26/2024
$204.00
9/30/2024
$51.00
10/1/2024
$229.50
10/2/2024
$790.50
10/3/2024
$688.50
10/4/2024
$637.50
10/7/2024
$51.00
10/8/2024
$153.00
10/9/2024
$102.00
10/10/2024
$331.50
10/29/2024
$153.00
11/18/2024
$102.00
12/23/2024
$76.50
12/23/2024
$25.50
$59,282.10
025

Bellflower City Attorney's Office
Date
Billed Amount
3/19/2024
$98.80
6/1/2024
$24.70
6/6/2024
$49.40
6/7/2024
$49.40
6/20/2024
$24.70
6/24/2024
$74.10
7/1/2024
$51.00
9/15/2024
$76.50
9/4/2024
$25.50
9/5/2024
$255.00
9/15/2024
$76.50
8/1/2024
$25.50
8/1/2024
$25.50
8/2/2024
$76.50
8/4/2024
$25.50
8/9/2024
$127.50
8/9/2024
$25.50
8/12/2024
$25.50
8/13/2024
$484.50
8/21/2024
$102.00
8/23/2024
$153.00
8/23/2024
$25.50
8/26/2024
$204.00
8/27/2024
$25.50
8/28/2024
$76.50
8/29/2024
$76.50
9/4/2024
$969.00
9/5/2024
$25.50
9/8/2024
$178.50
9/9/2024
$2,830.50
9/10/2024
$153.00
9/12/2024
$76.50
9/13/2024
$25.50
9/23/2024
$204.00
9/24/2024
$25.50
9/30/2024
$102.00
10/2/2024
$25.50
10/3/2024
$1,173.00
10/4/2024
$51.00
10/7/2024
$25.50
10/8/2024
$25.50
10/9/2024
$25.50
026

Date
Billed Amount
10/10/2024
$102.00
10/22/2024
$25.50
10/23/2024
$76.50
10/29/2024
$51.00
11/5/2024
$25.50
11/7/2024
$25.50
11/18/2024
$51.00
11/19/2024
$51.00
12/18/2024
$51.00
12/23/2024
$25.50
2/28/2025
$25.50
4/25/2025
$25.50
7/11/2025
$25.50
9/30/2025
$26.40
$8,788.00
Bellflower City Attorney's Office
Date
Billed Amount
8/23/2024
$25.50
12/23/2024
$25.50
3/29/2024
$49.40
6/25/2024
$24.70
12/23/2024
$25.50
12/23/2024
$102.00
1/6/2025
$178.50
1/10/2025
$1,147.50
11/07/2022
$1,010.50
9/21/2022
$94.00
10/31/2022
$117.50
3/29/2024
$49.40
8/2/2024
$306.00
8/23/2024
$25.50
12/23/2024
$25.50
2/28/2025
$25.50
4/25/2025
$25.50
7/11/2025
$25.50
$3,283.50
Abatement Cost Total: $82,740.82
027

1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28

PROOF OF SERVICE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
At the time of service, I was over 18 years of age and not a party to this action. I am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. My business address is 707 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 4000, Los Angeles, California 90017-3623.

On February 3, 2026, I served true copies of the document described as RESPONSE TO CITY OF BELLFLOWER'S REQUEST FOR ABATEMENT COSTS on the interested parties in this action as follows:

City of Bellflower City Clerk
E -Mail: [email protected]
Timothy E. Campen, Esq.

Burke, Williams & Sorenson LLP
501 West Broadway, Suite 1600
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 814-5800
Facsimile: (619) 814-6799
E -Mail: [email protected]
Solange Z. Fortenbach, Esq.

Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP
18300 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 650
Irvine, CA 92612-1032
Telephone: (949) 265-3416
E -Mail: [email protected]
Attorneys for City of Bellflower
Attorneys for City of Bellflower
BY E-MAIL OR ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION: I caused a copy of the document(s) to be sent from e-mail address [email protected] to the persons at the e-mail addresses listed in the Service List. I did not receive, within a reasonable time after the transmission, any electronic message or other indication that the transmission was unsuccessful.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on February 3, 2026, at Los Angeles, California.

LISA GREENE
3543509.2 06363-001-0
28 RESPONSE TO CITY OF BELLFLOWER'S REQUEST FOR ABATEMENT COSTS

THE WILLOWS
Project Background
Wakeland Housing Development Corporation

February 9, 2026

Thank you, Mr. Smoot. Good evening Honorable Mayor and members of the City Council. This evening, you will be provided a presentation regarding The Willows project. This is before you tonight by the offer of Wakeland who is providing the bulk of the presentation. There is no decision point for City Council tonight. I’ll provide a brief background and then I’ll turn it over to Rebecca Louie, CEO of Wakeland Housing Development Corporation for additional details regarding the project and information on the project timeline going forward. 1 Background
2017/18 - City started exploring how to address the homeless issues facing Bellflower

2020 – New Hope Shelter opened

Housing Continuum Bottleneck shortly thereafter.

City setting aside and exploring the use of federal CHDO funding for permanent supportive housing

Back in 2017/18 the City, in response to a growing concern in the community, began exploring ways to address the homelessness issues facing Bellflower.

After significant work on this issue and despite the pandemic at the time, the City opened the New Hope shelter in May 2020, partnering with Mercy House to successfully operate the shelter.

It wasn’t soon after that it became obvious there was a bottleneck in the progression of resources and housing available for people exiting the shelter. There were few places for folks to go and take the next step in housing after the shelter. A log-jam ensued and long-term occupants of the shelter increased.

With the bottle-neck, the shelter was operating at capacity with few to no open beds available, hindering the city’s homelessness efforts. As these issues were discussed, Mercy House, recommended and introduced the City to Wakeland Housing Development Corporation to see if Wakeland would be a fit for Bellflower and if they could help by developing a potential permanent supportive housing project and providing that next phase of housing for qualified people.

Taking a couple of steps back and while all this was occurring, and since the completion of the Habitat for Humanity project on Ramona Street in 2018, the City on its end began setting aside and exploring the use of their federal HOME Partnership - Community Housing Development Corporation funds, what we call the City’s CHDO funds for a potential permanent supportive housing project.

2 Background
Established in 1988. Constructed and operate more than 9,000 units.

Multi-layered project funding

Tour of two Wakeland projects in San Diego

Pursuant to state law, the project was approved ministerially in January 2026

It was during those initial conversations and research into Wakeland as a developer of this unique type of housing that the City realized Wakeland had the experience and wherewithal to develop and operate a high-quality, permanent supportive housing project in Bellflower. Real briefly, Wakeland has been doing affordable housing in southern California for almost 40 years, since 1988. Over that time Wakeland has constructed and manages over 9,000 units.

It was this experience, expertise, and willingness to work with the City which led to the partnership with the City, in which the City contributed its restricted federal CHDO funds to a project as a pass-through funding source, along with funds from the County of Los Angeles, a State of California grant, as well as tax credit funding.

In the autumn of last year, City staff and two City Council Members toured two of Wakeland’s projects in San Diego and, without stealing any of Rebecca’s thunder, both staff and the City Council members were impressed with the construction quality, security, services, and upkeep that were provided at Wakeland’s projects.

Although The Willows project was approved ministerially pursuant to state law in January, and no decisions are to be made tonight, the partnership with the City is such that Wakeland is willing to provide this presentation. Again, this is an informational presentation and there is no decision point for City Council tonight regarding this project.

With that, I’ll turn the presentation over to Rebecca Louie, CEO of Wakeland Housing Development Corporation. 3 THE WILLOWS
Bringing high quality affordable housing to the City of Bellflower

4 Our Team

5 6

ABOUT WAKELAND
Wakeland has built:
9,000

AFFORDABLE HOMES THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA
Overall, our efforts have led to the creation of:
67 AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMUNITIES
Wakeland has provided affordable housing and resident services for more than:
50,000
PEOPLE SINCE 1998
Our mission is to transform lives and communities with high-quality affordable and supportive housing paired with impactful resident services.

6 7

PROJECT OVERVIEW

PROJECT TYPE
Supportive Housing

UNIT MIX
50 one-bedroom units
1 two-bedroom manager unit

ONSITE AMENITIES
Comprehensive case management services

05.14.2025
8 8

Design Option 1: Refined white building

We previously showed you two renderings – one was a simple white building, and the other was a more “modern” blue building. We’ve been working through some refinements based on the original designs. We still have some work to do and we aren’t fully satisfied yet, so we welcome your input.

High-quality architecture and landscaping.

Controlled access and secure building design.

Cameras, lighting, and CPTED principles.

Designed to blend into the surrounding neighborhood.
9 Design Option 2: Refined blue building

10 11

What Is Supportive Housing?

Affordable apartments paired with ongoing services

Not a shelter, treatment facility, or drop-in center

Residents are part of a long-term housing community

12 Case management and individualized service plans.

Behavioral health connections and wellness support.

Life skills, employment, budgeting, and stability programs.

Residents are supported to maintain long-term housing.
13 Controlled building entry and monitored access.

Cameras in appropriate areas and well-lit surroundings.

Good Neighbor Policies keep the property quiet and safe.

Coordination with police and fire when needed.
14 15

Questions?
Check out our website: https://www.wakelandhdc.com/the-willows.html E-mail us: [email protected]

16 Communications Assessment Findings & Implementation Update February 9, 2026

Good evening, Mayor and Council. And thank you to Ryan and Mike for the introductions. My name is Sara Madsen and I oversee Tripepi Smith’s communications work with the City of Bellflower.

Tonight, I’ll cover two things: first, a brief report-out on the Express Communications Assessment as a completed project, and second, an update on communications improvements that have happened in parallel and the early results we’re seeing.

Agenda
Part 1: Communications Assessment Report Findings
Part 2: Parallel Communications Improvements & Early Results

The presentation is split into two parts. Part one is the assessment’s findings. Part two is what staff has already been doing alongside that work to advance Bellflower communications in the mean time.

PART 1:

Communications Assessment Report Findings

I’ll start with the assessment itself.

Assessment Overview

The Express Communications Assessment was designed to give staff a clearer, more comprehensive understanding of how communications are currently functioning across the City, and where there may be opportunities to better align and support that work.

Why the Assessment Was Conducted
Support Strategic Plan Goal #2: Increase Public Outreach, Education & Connection Evaluate existing communications systems
Identify opportunities to strengthen consistency, clarity, and readiness

This effort directly supports Strategic Plan Goal #2, increasing public outreach, education, and connection. The intent was not to reinvent communications, but to evaluate existing systems and ensure they’re set up to support the City as activity continues to grow.

Assessment Scope
The assessment reviewed:

Internal communications
External communications
Policies and processes
Branding and visual identity
Digital, print, and outreach tools

The scope was intentionally broad. It looked at internal and external communications, policies and processes, branding and visual identity, and the full range of tools the City uses, including digital, print, and outreach.

Assessment Timeline & Process
July – December 2025

The assessment took place between July and December of 2025 and included discovery, platform review, data analysis, and development of observations and recommendations.

Staff Engagement
Six interviews with staff across departments
Focus on real-world workflows and perceptions
Feedback directly informed recommendations

Staff input was a key part of this process. Six interviews were conducted across departments to understand real-world workflows, day-to-day practices and perceived experience, which helped ground the findings in how work actually happens.

Assessment Observations

Based on that review, several overarching observations emerged. These observations reflect patterns across systems, not isolated issues or individual departments. Importantly, these observations highlight opportunities to strengthen and support existing efforts. And I want to reiterate that this assessment began back in July of last year. The second portion of the presentation details how some of these observations have already been addressed. Just keep that in mind as we run through this section.

Key Observations: Overview
Communications functions are active but structurally decentralized Bellflower’s brand is recognizable but inconsistently applied Digital engagement is strong, but systems operate in silos Crisis and media communications rely on institutional knowledge and lack procedural documentation

The assessment confirmed that Bellflower is already doing a lot of things well. The opportunity is not necessarily more activity, it’s strategy and structure. These observations point to areas where clearer frameworks and coordination would amplify the work that’s already happening.

Communications responsibilities are distributed across departments, resulting in uneven workflows, inconsistent approvals, and varying use of tools.

The City’s logo and visual identity are strong anchors, but the absence of a formal style guide leads to variation across platforms, departments, and materials.

The City maintains an active presence across social media, email, web, and print, yet these tools are not always strategically coordinated to reinforce one another.

Protocols for media response and crisis communications are largely informal and dependent on individual experience rather than documented procedures.

Key Observations: In Practice
Communications Workflows
Requests are routed through a mix of forms, emails, and informal processes depending on department, which can slow timelines and create inconsistencies.

Branding and Accessibility
Templates, fonts, colors, and ADA practices vary across platforms, and accessibility measures like alt text and captions are applied inconsistently.

Platform Coordination
Social media, email, print and the website are all effective individually, but are not consistently planned or deployed as part of a single, integrated comms strategy.

Emergency and Media Readiness
There is no standardized chain of command, documented messaging templates, or routine testing process for emergency communications.

In practice, this shows up through a mix of communications workflows across departments, variation in branding and accessibility practices, tools that work well individually but aren’t always planned together, and reliance on staff experience for emergency and media communications.

These observations helped staff better understand where coordination and clarity could support the work already underway.

Summarized Recommendations
Optimize Communications Workflow & Strategic Approach

Strengthen and Solidify Bellflower’s Brand and Identity

Expand, Optimize and Diversify the Existing Communications Toolset

Improve Media Relations and Outreach

Increase Partnership with Local Organizations and Community Groups

Based on those observations, the assessment outlined several high-level recommendation areas. I want to emphasize that tonight’s presentation is informational. Staff will likely return to Council at a later date with more detailed implementation items as appropriate.

Broadly, the recommendations focus on standardizing communications practices, strengthening the City’s brand and visual identity, better leveraging existing tools, and increasing coordination with media and community partners.

PART 2:

Parallel Communications Improvements & Early Results

That concludes the assessment portion of my presentation tonight. I’ll now shift to the work that’s been happening in parallel and share some of the early results of that work.

Why Work Began in Parallel
Improvements did not wait for final report, and in some cases, began before the report even started Focused on actions within staff’s control
Informed by early assessment insights
Tripepi Smith was a force multiplier to staff’s existing capacity to begin making improvements

While the assessment was underway, staff did not pause communications efforts. In some cases, improvements began even before the report formally started. This allowed the City to maintain momentum and focus on actions within staff’s control. Tripepi Smith supported this work by expanding staff capacity during a period of increased activity, and continues to do so now.

Focus Area: Structure
Structural changes to communication roles, responsibilities and oversight Communications moved under Parks & Recreation
Formalized Communications and Marketing Manager role
Tripepi Smith supports Communications and Marketing Manager with strategy coordination and content development and implementation

One early focus area was strengthening communications leadership and coordination. Communications were formally moved under Parks and Recreation, the Communications and Marketing Manager role was formalized, and additional support in Tripepi Smith was added for strategy coordination and content development.

Focus Area: Processes & Strategy
Overhaul to communications processes and strategy
Created a work plan to begin optimizing City communications foundation Audited, optimized and documented City’s technical social media set up Prioritized reimagining and rebranding of City newsletters Began quarterly communication strategy meetings to bring more intentionality and vision to City communications

Another early focus area was strengthening both communications processes and overall strategy.

On the process side, staff began refining workflows to support more consistent planning and execution, including auditing and optimizing the City’s social media technical setup and reimagining the City’s newsletters to better align with communication goals.

From a strategy perspective, staff also began holding quarterly communications strategy meetings to bring more intentionality, coordination, and long-term vision to how City communications are planned and delivered.

Early Results of Preliminary Improvements

The following early results reflect preliminary improvements that were implemented while the assessment was still underway. They are not intended to be comprehensive or final, but rather to demonstrate how changes to structure, processes, and strategy are already beginning to show results across City communications.

Social Media Performance Improvements
Unification of voice and coordination between City and Parks & Recreation social media accounts Increased use of short-form video and reels tied to events and alerts Strategic boosting of key events and classes to increase attendance and registration respectively Measurable impact on reach and participation

On social media, early improvements included better coordination between City and Parks and Recreation social media accounts, increased use of short-form video for events and alerts, and selective boosting of key promotions. These changes helped increase reach and engagement tied to City programs.

Current Social Media Platforms
City + P&R
City
City
City
City
P&R

This slide provides a snapshot of the City’s current social media presence across both City and Parks and Recreation accounts.

Platform Audience Metrics
*As of July 31, 2025
*As of Feb. 3, 2026

692

This slide shows how the City’s social media audiences have grown across platforms over time, reflecting both City and Parks and Recreation accounts. On the left is a snapshot from July 31, 2025. The right snapshot reflects progress as of February 3, 2026.

Top Performing Social Media
Oct. 2025

Glow-A-Ween Family Dance Party

Boosted for $400

Dec. 2025

Christmas Tree Lighting Ceremony

Organic post

This slide highlights a couple of recent examples that illustrate how communications supported City programs and events.

In October, the Glow-A-Ween Family Dance Party was selectively boosted to help drive awareness and attendance. In December, the Christmas Tree Lighting Ceremony performed strongly as an organic post.

These examples show how different approaches, both boosted and organic, are being used intentionally depending on the goal of the communication.

City Life Magazine
Expanded from Parks & Recreation-focused brochure to full coverage City magazine Mailed directly to 26,489 residents
Strengthens non-digital outreach and reach to individuals who are not present online

Bellflower City Life debuted with the Spring 2026 edition of the City’s quarterly print publication, transitioning from a Parks and Recreation brochure into a full City magazine mailed directly to residents.

Bellflower City Life Now
Strong subscriber growth
E-Citizen in July 2025: 692
Bellflower City Life Now in Feb 2026: 10,392
Open rates exceeding expectations
Feb. 2026: 49.4%
Industry Average: 32.5%
Email remains a trusted channel

The former e-Citizen was reimagined as Bellflower City Life Now beginning in February 2026.

You’ll notice a significant difference between subscriber counts from 2025 and where they are today, so I want to briefly explain that context.

In 2025, the City went through a required reconfirmation process that significantly reduced the active subscriber list. That number reflects only subscribers who reconfirmed at that time, not total contacts.

Since then, staff resolved deliverability issues, consolidated email platforms, and migrated Parks and Recreation newsletter subscribers into a single system. As a result, the City now has a significantly larger and more stable subscriber base receiving Bellflower City Life Now emails.

Today’s open rates and subscriber counts reflect that stabilized, consolidated system.

My Bellflower App
Launched Dec. 15, 2025
Real-time updates
Centralized service access
Growing adoption
Currently at 1,222 downloads

The My Bellflower App launched in December 2025 and provides real-time updates and centralized access to services. Adoption continues to grow. This tool complements City Life and social media, providing timely updates and easy access to services.

Integrated Communications Ecosystem

Bellflower Communications

Together, these tools form a coordinated communications ecosystem that allows the City to reach residents across multiple channels and reinforce messaging.

What’s Next?

Looking ahead, staff will continue building on the communications foundation that’s now in place.

Potential Future Communication Projects
Website Content Audit and Redesign (in progress)
City Brand Evaluation and Formalization
Crisis Communications Plan
Formalize Media Relations Plan
Audit and Modernize Social Media Policy
Expand Stock Photo and Video Library

Looking ahead, staff will continue building on the communications foundation that’s now in place.

The items listed here represent a menu of potential next-phase projects that support continued improvement in City communications. These are not listed in priority order, and they are not intended to suggest that all work will happen at once.

Some of these efforts are already in progress, while others will be evaluated as staff continues to assess current capacity, timing, and budget. The intent is that all of these areas are important over time, and staff is actively determining which items can be advanced now and which should be revisited at a later date.

Staff will continue to keep Council informed as this work evolves and will return with more specific recommendations as priorities, timing, and resources are clarified.

Thank You!
Questions?

That concludes my update. Thank you for the opportunity to share where this work stands and the direction it’s heading.

We look forward to continuing to support staff as they work to strengthen City communications and carry out Council’s intent under Strategic Plan Goal #2 to increase public outreach, education, and connection.

We’re happy to answer any questions.

Attorney-Client Privilege
Re “Automax” property

1 The California Supreme Court Has Ruled Attorney Billing Records are Privileged Communications

“When a legal matter remains pending and active, the privilege encompasses everything in an invoice, including the amount of aggregate fees." (Los Angeles Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors, supra, 2 Cal. 5th 282 at 295 (emphasis added))

2 Resolution No. 26-04
9111-9119 Artesia Boulevard
(the Automax” Property)

1 Property Ownership
Los Angeles County Recorder’s records indicate the registered owner of the Property is Artesia Enterprises LLC. (“Owner”).

2 History of Enforcement
January 2022 Inspection Warrant

3 4

5 6

History of Enforcement
May 19, 2022 – Notice of Violation (BMC 17.52.030)
July 21, 2022 – Notice of Nonconformity Abatement
Single auto repair business (not enclosed)
Auto part storage (not stored indoors)
Missing CUPs: auto repair center, auto sales, auto storage, trucking yard and storage July 27, 2022 – Final Notice of Public Nuisance and Intent to Abate with City Personnel “Use of the property for habitation, a night club, auto storage, auto repair (beyond one business), auto sales, and similar uses are in violation of the M-1 zoning restrictions for your Property.” Pg. 2.

July 29, 2022 – Notice of Public Nuisance Hearing of Appeal of Nonconformity Administrative Hearing Appeal on Notice of Public Nuisance and Appeal to Planning Commission

7 History of Enforcement
November 7, 2022 – Planning Commission
Public hearing to consider Property Owner’s appeal on the Notice of Nonconformity Planning Commission adopts Resolution No. PC 22-16 denying appeal January 12, 2023 – City Council adopts Resolution No. 23-02 Denying Property Owner’s appeal of the Planning Commission’s denial of a Notice of Nonconformity Abatement appeal for automobile sales and automobile repair center

8 History of Enforcement
November 21, 2023 – Final Notice of Public Nuisance and Intent to Abate with City Personnel 19 different violations listed
February 8, 2024 – Hearing
February 14, 2024 – Order re Abatement

9 History of Enforcement
Providing Clarification to Property Owner
March 8, 2024 – Notice of Public Nuisance and Intent to Abate with City Personnel Correspondence providing further clarification
March 11, 2024
March 29, 2024
April 30, 2024
May 31, 2024 – Amended Order

10 Final Notice of Compliance
August 2, 2024 – Final Notice of Compliance
Final notice of compliance to comply with Hearing Officer’s May 31, 2024 amended order October 2, 2024 deadline
“Failure to pay the City’s abatement costs in full will result in the City placing a lien and special tax assessment on [the] Property to recoup these costs.”

11 Final Notice of Compliance

12 13

Preparing for City Abatement
September 9, 2024 – City Council passes Resolution No. 24-54 Authorizing contracting without need for bidding
October 3, 2024
Property Owner notified of City’s intent to obtain warrant Assistant Timothy Campen and Property Owner appear before Judge Sanchez October 10, 2024
Judge Sanchez ordered Code Enforcement Officer David Fawcett to return to her Department on Oct. 10 and report on the status of your Property

Abatement actions: removal or completion of any unfinished fencing; completion of required landscaping; resurfacing of lot surfaces; repair or demolition of blighted structures; removal of any unpermitted trailers, storage containers inoperable vehicles, trash, junk or debris

14 Property Owner Abatement Update
October 3, 2024

15 Property Owner Abatement Update
October 7, 2024

16 Ownership Backsliding
October 29, 2024
Assistant City Attorney Timothy Campen sends Property Owner e-mail (“9103 Artesia – Unpermitted Vehicle Storage and Pending Impound”) Deadline: October 31, 2024 to remove each and every unpermitted vehicle

17 October 31, 2024 – Abatement Update

18 Demand Letter
Total Costs: $82,740.82

19 The Property Today

20 Any questions?

21 Consideration and possible action to adopt Resolution No. 26-05 – A Resolution implementing Title 14 of the Bellflower Municipal Code by establishing policies and procedures for obtaining, modifying and maintaining Cannabis Business Permits; and superseding Resolution No. 23-18

Prepared by: City Manager’s Office
February 9, 2026

1 Agenda

Proposed Updates Under Resolution 26-05
Current Permitting Process vs. Proposed Permitting Process Staff Recommendations to City Council

2 Proposed Updates (Resolution 26-05)
Concurrent CUP & CBP Review & Consideration
Redefined “adequate period of performance & financing”
Notice Requirement of Property Sale
First-Come-First-Serve Approach & Closed-bidding for Dispensary/Retail

3 CURRENT CANNABIS PERMIT ROADMAP (Resolution 23-18)

Existing CUP?
Submit
CBP
Submit CUP with Planning Dept.

Approved (Public Hearing #1)
City Manager deems eligible
City Manager denies application
Approved/Denied

Yes
No

Denied

City Manager to City Council for approval/denial
(Public Hearing #2)
First-come, first-served; force-ranked

Evaluation randomized; force-ranked

4 PROPOSED CANNABIS PERMIT ROADMAP (Resolution 26-05- Supersedes 23-18)

CUP/CBP Application
Meets Requirements?
Cannabis Regulations
Approved/Denied

Does Not Meet Requirements
Cannabis Regulations

City Manager to City Council for Consideration – Public Hearing First-come, first-served

Dispensary Consider Sealed-Bids

5 Drug Rehabilitation Program/Homeless Prevention Program $5,000 annual contribution set in 2017. Still $5,000.

6 Staff Recommendations to City Council
Adopt Resolution 26-05; and
Authorize the City Manager to accept and process applications for cannabis-related CUPs and CBPs; or Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

Bellflower City CouncilFebruary 9, 2026

Bellflower City Council
February 9, 2026