Compton City Council
June 23, 2026

Members of the public may address the City Council on any item shown on the agenda or matter of the Council’s authority after completion of “Request to Address the Council Form” available in the lobby of the Council Chambers or in the City Clerk’s office. This form must be completed 15 minutes prior to the scheduled meeting time. Pursuant to Section 54957.5 of the California Government Code, Any writings (Except for those writings which are exempt from disclosure) which are distributed to all or a majority of the members of the City Council are available for public inspection in the lobby of the City Council Chambers and in the office of the City Clerk during regular business hours.

COMPTON CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
06/23/2026
4:30 PM – CLOSED SESSION
5:30 PM - PUBLIC MEETING
205 S. WILLOWBROOK AVE
COMPTON, CA 90220

OPENING

ROLL CALL

MOMENT OF SILENCE

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION

CLOSED SESSION

1. PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957(b)(1)
Title: City Controller

2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION
City of Compton v TimeLa Case No. 22CMCV00339
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c) and (d)(1)

3. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION -2- City Council Agenda
6/23/2026 5:30 PM
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(e)(1) or (d)(2) and (e)(1) because the significant exposure to litigation in two cases

REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION

PUBLIC COMMENTS ON AGENDA ITEMS AND NON-AGENDA MATTERS

CONSENT AGENDA
Consent items are routine and expected to be non-controversial. They will be acted upon by the Council at one time without discussion unless a Council Member requests an item be removed or discussed.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

4. JULY 1, 2025

HUMAN RESOURCES

5. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COMPTON

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ESTABLISH A PURCHASE ORDER IN THE AMOUNT OF $126,637.06 WITH NEOGOV FOR THE PROVISION OF

ADMINISTRATIVE AND TECHNICAL SOFTWARE SERVICES FOR THE

SECOND YEAR OF SERVICE, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE THIRD

YEAR OF SERVICE

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

6. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COMPTON

APPROVING A TAX TRANSFER RESOLUTION FOR LAFCO REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 (COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT)

REGULAR AGENDA

REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES AND

CITY COUNCIL

7. REMOVAL OF OFFICERS, COUNCIL MEMBERS, BOARDS/COMMISSIONS AND

COMMITTEES
RECEIVE AND FILE: RESIGNATION LETTER - ADRIANA OROZCO

CITY MANAGER'S REPORT

8. A REQUEST TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING: CHARGES RELATED TO

SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLABLE MATERIALS HANDLING SERVICES,

DELINQUENCIES TO BE COLLECTED ON THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY TAX ROLL FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-2027; AND DELINQUENT ACCOUNTS

SUBMITTED BY REPUBLIC SERVICES TO BE COLLECTED ON THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY TAX ROLL FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026 FOR
-3- City Council Agenda
6/23/2026 5:30 PM
OUTSTANDING BALANCES FOR TAX ROLL BILLING FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026- 2027 on Tuesday, July 7, 2026 @ 5:45 PM

9. CONSIDERATION OF THE CITY OF COMPTON’S MEMBERSHIP IN THE

CALIFORNIA CITIES FOR SELF-RELIANCE JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY (JPA)

NEW BUSINESS

10. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COMPTON

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A PROFESSIONAL

SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH AND ESTABLISH A PURCHASE ORDER FOR

EMPOWERING REACH FOUNDATION FOR SUPPORTIVE SERVICES USING

HOME-AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN (HOME-ARP) FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF ($870,446.12)

11. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COMPTON

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A PURCHASING AGREEMENT WITH ZOLL MEDICAL CORPORATION TO PURCHASE TWO (2)

CARDIAC MONITORS/DEFIBRILLATORS FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ($148,422.99)

12. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COMPTON ADOPTING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-2027

13. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COMPTON AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 26,135 TO EXERCISE THE FIRST OF TWO ONE-

YEAR OPTIONS TO EXTEND CERTAIN LEGAL SERVICES RETAINER
AGREEMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-2027 WITH THE OPTION OF ONE REMAINING ONE (1) YEAR EXTENSION; APPROVE AMENDED

COMPENSATION TERMS FOR CERTAIN FIRMS

14. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COMPTON AMENDING THE 2025-2026 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET TO TRANSFER FUNDS

AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A PURCHASE

AGREEMENT WITH PROFESSIONAL SALES & SERVICE AND ISSUE A PURCHASE ORDER TO PURCHASE FOUR (4) TYPE I AMBULANCES AND ONE (1) PARAMEDIC SQUAD FOR THE CITY OF COMPTON FIRE DEPARTMENT ($2,034,683.83)

15. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COMPTON

ESTABLISHING AN EXPEDITED PERMITTING PROCESS FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLE (EV) CHARGING STATIONS; APPROVING AN EV CHARGING STATION PERMIT CHECKLIST; AND DETERMINING CEQA EXEMPTION (SECOND READING)

16. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COMPTON

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A PROFESSIONAL

SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH AND ESTABLISH A PURCHASE ORDER FOR

HOMELESS OUTREACH PROGRAM INTEGRATED CARE SYSTEM (HOPICS)

FOR SUPPORTIVE SERVICES USING HOME-AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN -4- City Council Agenda
6/23/2026 5:30 PM
(HOME-ARP) FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF ($600,000)

COUNCIL COMMENTS

ADJOURNMENT
NEXT REGULAR MEETING: 7/7/2026 5:30PM
Visit our website at http://www.comptoncity.org
Visit our Youtube at https://www.youtube.com/@comptoncityhall 1 July 1, 2025
The Compton City Council meeting was called to order at 5:40pm by Mayor Emma Sharif in the Council Chambers of City Hall. The Moment of Silence and Pledge of Allegiance Ceremonies were also led by Mayor Emma Sharif.

ROLL CALL
Council Members Present: D. Duhart, A Spicer, J. Bowers, Mayor E. Sharif Council Members Absent: L. Darden
Other Officials Present: E. Perrodin, S. Zurita, W. T. Binns

PUBLIC COMMENTS ON AGENDA ITEMS AND NON-AGENDA MATTERS
Abril stated she has gone to over fifty-seven businesses and they have a need for Know Your Rights cards in Tagalog, Korean, Vietnamese, Cambodian, and Thai. Even though they have gotten some cards from outside Compton she hopes they will provide the business owners and the community with the information they need to deal with ICE situations. She also visited the parks, three out of the four of them have programing, great staff, however she asked if they had any immigration procedures in place, but she was informed that there was nothing. They need procedures when it comes to ICE.

Tanya Lewis first district who needed to ask the Treasurer to look into the 5.6 million dollars, however he wasn’t there. Rite Aid is closing and she as well as other residents would like to know why they do not have a descent restaurant. She is not an IHOP woman. Someone needs to look into the space where Rite Aid is and replace it with a sit-down restaurant. Every year 4 th of July comes and the empty lots are still not cleaned up. They need to hold the owners of the lots accountable for not keeping them maintained. On 134th next to Kipp School she was told they were going to build apartments, and she doesn’t see how because that area is not for apartments. The citizens in the neighborhood need to know before they start building on said property.

Maria Villareal representing the Compton Latino Chamber of Commerce stated it’s difficult for businesses. They need sit down restaurants and better businesses. They need to convince the businesses that they are clean, friendly, and safe. Those three components are very strong but it’s not happening, therefore they have a lot to work on. The Compton Latino Chamber of Commerce has started a program called LaCasa for immigrants. LaCasa means that in the moment they are working with the community immigrants that are afraid to come out and got to the grocery store.

They are urging the community to give them a call and let them know what they need and they will do it for them. They need to stand together and do what needs to be done because everybody suffers.

Lynn Boone thanked Mayor Sharif for calling her to speak a little later she appreciated that. She spoke about the fireworks indicating that the Council failed the residents once again. Instead of placing it on the ballot for the people to vote for no fireworks they didn’t do that. They had the City Manager suspend selling to nonprofits. There are no Safe and Sane Fireworks in Compton therefore people are going outside of the city purchasing fireworks. She doesn’t know any officer in their right mind that’s going to go out and determine what’s legal and what isn’t. As for the $15,000 that was so called given to the Council, there is an administration fee that is given out to the Council from the Grants Department and Council members get some of that therefore taking the $15,000 is illegal. In regard to item #2 there is no resolution for the removal of Councilmember Galvan. There is no resolution appointing Mr. Spicer in the seat. To make the person Mayor Pro Tem when he is not even supposed to be there as a Councilmember is ridiculous.

Missy noted that she doesn’t see on the telethon that there will be a fine, it just states no illegal fireworks. It needs to state there’s a fine. She wants to speak on the resolution to herself on item number two. She addressed Councilmember Spicer indicating “I could never see you as Mayor Pro Tem and the reason is remember when you slapped your mama and you called me a loser when I brought it to your attention”. “If you slap your mother, you will slap any female that come your way. You are not ready for it. Seeing you all over social media speaking negative about the City Clerk at one time when she was going through her rehab with breast cancer slinging her name on social media”. “Seeing you on social media smoking drugs high as a kite, do you think we want a person like you representing us as Mayor”. “Then you run Dollarhide like it’s your building. All

4. 2
your friends are on your campaign committee, and they are nonprofit therefore they benefit from us as taxpayers”. Dollarhide is a revenue building stop using the taxpayers.” Just like the $10,000 that Michelle Chambers gave you to open up your water company that Janna left behind when Michelle was in office”. Vote no for him, he doesn’t deserve to be Mayor Pro Tem.

Fidel Marquez district one stated with the grants being granted last week, today in Riverside County Civil Grand Jury Investigation found the City of Palm Springs lacks adequate policies and procedures to safeguard taxpayer funds from fraudulent use by nonprofits resulting in a loss of over $700,000. Do they have any such policy and procedures when it comes to their grants because it seems the same people receive funding. They want to avoid that happening in the City of Compton because they know a lot of people and commissioners are friends of friends of nonprofits.

The City of Key West, a Republican state and their local police assist ICE with their procedures.

The City of Palm Springs just voted not to have their local Police Department assist ICE. If a Republic state is fighting back, he expects to see a whole lot more from Compton City Council.

They need to show leadership. The District Attorney is doing Compton a disservice. The taxpayers of Compton deserve answers.

Vanessa Cain stated she totally agreed with Missy and Pro Tem. She thinks character is important when they talk about representing cities. They already know how people view Compton. To keep having trash piled on top of what they have to deal with already makes no sense. They know he’s not supposed to be in the seat. He’s a woman beater, they have a Treasurer that pass Viagra, lace it and give it to other men for sex. They have to stop this it’s ridiculous no other city would put up with that type of behavior. The Treasurer should definitely be gone. The citizens asked for a special election they didn’t get it. For everyone that was in the seat that was not elected, Councilmember Bowers was the only elected official that they had. They should have granted the city their wishes.

The citizens should have had a special election for one, two and four but they didn’t get it. They are constantly violating the Charter and the Brown Act, and the citizens are supposed to agree with it. The only reason they haven’t torn into them is because they know them all personally with the exception of Mayor Sharif. Delores Zurita is her friend, she was a steward with The Meals on Wheels Program, and she needs to come back. Mayor Sharif needs to get some guts and run the meetings the way they should be run.

Claudia from Compton Latino Chamber of Commerce indicated Maria spoke on the program LaCasa where they deliver groceries to immigrants to keep them safe at home however they have another program which is their Food Pantry. They are distributing food for the whole community every Saturday at 11am at the Chambers. If anyone needs groceries, please come out. They are also seeking volunteers.

CONSENT AGENDA
City Clerk Zurita read Item No. 1, including the resolution and the amendments that had been incorporated into the staff report prior to Council consideration and vote.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COMPTON APPROVING IN- KIND CONTRIBUTIONS IN SUPPORT OF 22ND ANNUAL COMPTON STAND DOWN FOR VETERANS SEPTEMBER 19-21, 2025.

The Stand Down concept was used during the Vietnam War to provide a safe retreat for units returning from combat operations.

Council District 1 – Overtime Expense Account: 1001-400-C01-4171 ($813.04) Council District 4 – Overtime Expense Account: 1001-400-C04-4171 ($813.04) Mayor – Overtime Expense Account: 1001-400-C05-4171 ($813.04) Both of these documents have been updated with the attached corrections.

CITY MANAGER

1. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COMPTON APPROVING IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS IN SUPPORT OF 22 ND ANNUAL COMPTON STAND DOWN FOR VETERANS SEPTEMBER 19-21, 2025
(Approved Resolution #26,276 with amendments to the Staff Report) 3 Councilmember Bowers noted the Council denied the kids’ use of the space. He’s not against Veterans but it directly affects the kids in Compton. It seems they are picking and choosing again with respect to the nonprofits. They have the gentleman at Dollarhide, Barack Bomani why is he there if he received the money from Los Angeles County and was there a background check performed. Nembo Thought Youth Counseling Consulting received a grant from the city and now there’s radio silence. If they do in kind donations for this, why can’t they do in kind donations for United Hands or Restoration Diversion Services. In kind donations can be event space, volunteer time, charitable contributions, services or property. Compton kids are just asking to use the space temporarily. These kids need this; they are being trained world class. They are supposed to be concerned about the youth, and they are kicking them in the butt.

Councilmember Duhart informed Councilmember Bowers that she did get the question today about Kids Club being able to continue to practice over there and her answer was yes.

On Motion by Bowers, seconded by Duhart to approve the Consent Agenda by the following vote on roll call:

AYES: Councilmembers - Duhart, Spicer, Mayor E. Sharif
NOES: Councilmembers – None
ABSENT: Councilmembers – Darden
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers – Bowers

REGULAR AGENDA

REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES AND CITY

COUNCIL

2. APPOINTMENT(S) OF OFFICERS, COUNCIL MEMBERS

BOARDS/COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES
Mayor Sharif read a statement from Attorney Green who gave her the legal opinion regarding Councilmember Spicer’s Appointment.

Attorney Perrodin asked if the Council designated legal counsel.

Mayor Sharif responded, Attorney Green.

Attorney Perrodin advised that currently he was the only attorney in his office. He asked Mayor Sharif where did she get the opinion from.

Mayor Sharif stated she shared with him where she received the information.

Attorney Perrodin announced that he was the only duly elected City Attorney in the City of Compton therefore any opinion would have to come through his office.” Is that not correct Ma’am?”
Mayor Sharif replied yes, they are supposed to come through your office.

Attorney Perrodin noted that Mr. Green is not in his office therefore any opinion he rendered would not be sufficient.

Mayor Sharif replied you’re saying this opinion we have is not….

Attorney Perrodin stated he didn’t say that. She said that the Council had a legal opinion, his question was how you could have a legal opinion and it didn’t come through the City Attorney’s Office.

Mayor Sharif stated maybe Attorney Green could come and explain.

Attorney Perrodin advised that Mr. Green didn’t have to come up he is the duly elected City 4 Attorney.

Mayor Sharif stated, “what I was saying to Mr. City Attorney”.

Attorney Perrodin stated thanks for referring to him as Mr. City Attorney because in the last six months she hasn’t given him the respect of being City Attorney.

Mayor Sharif advised him that he was not there most of the time how could she. She can’t refer anything to him if he’s not sitting in the seat
Attorney Perrodin stated he didn’t say she had to refer anything to him. She doesn’t have to respect him, but she needs to respect the office.

Mayor Sharif replied not if you’re not sitting there.

Attorney Perrodin stated I’m sitting here now and you asked for the legal opinion of someone else when was the one elected by the people.

Mayor Sharif stated she could not ask him any questions if he was not there to answer them.

Attorney Perrodin asked “Mayor when is the last time you referred anything to me? Since you want to be so honest you were calling me every week asking for opinions”.

Mayor Sharif stated until you stopped answering my calls.

Attorney Perrodin Replied “Exactly because you weren’t following the advice. The next thing you would do is call Darryl Sweeney and listen to whatever he had to say”.

Councilmember Spicer interceded, asking if they could have order and get back to the item at hand.

Mayor Sharif informed them that she was the only Mayor up there and what they are discussing has nothing to do with Darryl Sweeney.

Mayor Perrodin stated “you made an opinion, you said something and I’m telling you what you do you can hit the gavel all you want”.

Mayor Sharif asked Attorney Perrodin if he had something he wanted to say in regard to the matter at hand.

Attorney Perrodin stated he would if she gave him the opportunity he would.

Mayor Sharif informed him she was allowing him to speak.

Attorney Perrodin addressed Councilmember Bowers indicating that last week at the Council meeting he did not attend because he had to go to a court hearing in Downtown L.A. because the Council is suing him. He saw what Councilmember Bowers had asked. The first thing he asked was could a Councilperson second a nomination, no they can’t. Councilmember Spicer seconded his own nomination and that was improper. He read the Municipal Code pertaining to the Mayor Pro Tem appointment.

Mayor Sharif thanked the City Attorney Perrodin and noted that was the same information on the opinion she received. She asked Mr. Green to come up to the podium.

Attorney Perrodin informed Mayor Sharif that he would not allow her to disrespect him by having Attorney Green come up and speak.

Mayor Sharif stated she just wanted to ask him a question.

Attorney Perrodin was adamant about Mr. Green speaking, indicating she could ask him.

Mayor Sharif asked Attorney Perrodin if there was a vote that needed to be taken on the matter. 5 Attorney Perrodin replied no it isn’t.

Mayor Sharif stated that since there is no vote to be taken the appointment is done.

Attorney Perrodin asked Mayor Sharif why did she disrespected him and had Mr. Green come up.

Mayor Sharif felt that Attorney Perrodin disrespected her as well.

Attorney Perrodin explained that the court ruled that Galvan got four false votes and she took those away, that’s in the minute order, however the City of Compton never did what Ms. Boone indicated. They should have done a resolution indicating Mr. Spicer was Councilperson of district two. It’s a formality but it should have been done.

Councilmember Bowers noted if they had gone along with the California Government Code which he read indicating the majority of the people were appointed except two. They should have gone to a special election, and they wouldn’t be in this mess.

APPOINTMENT OF MAYOR PRO TEM – COUNCILMAN ANDRE SPICER

A COUNCILMEMBER CANNOT SECOND THEIR OWN NOMINATION, YET NO VOTING

IS REQURED WHEN APPOINTING MAYOR PRO TEM

COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Duhart offered the following communications/announcements:
She was advised that Rite Aid was closing and CVS would be occupying the space. She doesn’t know if it’s true or not but she will find out because she referred to a restaurant and she knows they couldn’t give private property to someone to build a restaurant. On 134 th Street next to Kipp she indicated they were building some apartments she was not aware of that either. She asked the Assistant City Manager to find out and report on that next week.
As a reminder the Compton City Council has voted that all fireworks are illegal to manufacture, possess or discharge within the City of Compton. To report the illegal sale or use of fireworks please call 310-605-6500. Let’s work together to keep our neighborhood safe, clean and peaceful during this holiday season.
Water Aerobics is back at Gonzalez Park, classes take place every Tuesday, Thursday and Friday from 6:15pm -7:15pm. No registration is required just bring your towel and positive energy.
Always remember to eat, shop and buy Compton, a safe, clean and friendly city.

Councilmember Spicer offered the following communications/announcements:
On July 16, 2026, Power Legacy and LePlug Workshop Series for nonprofits from 5-8pm at Dollarhide Community Center. Workshops will cover fundraising, framework, planning, donor cultivation, strategies and more. Completely free to non-profits that wish to attend. The Mindful Walk and Talk is held every first Saturday of the month from 9am-10am hosted by the Compton Wellness Collective. This is a walk to slow you down and reconnect. The next walk will be on July 5, 2025, at Magic Johnson Park in the recreation area.
On July 11, 2025 from 6-9pm Summer Nights at the Museum, a Paint & Sip with live music will be held at the Compton Museum. For more information visit comptonmuseum.org.
6 Creative Calm is a free eight-week healing arts and mindful program that will be given at Roy Campanella Park located at 14812 S. Stanford Ave., Compton, CA. It will take place on Wednesdays from July 16 - September 3, 2025, from 6pm to 7:30pm. All ages are welcome.
The Rebuild is a Men’s Process Group, a space for men to confront, process and rise from trauma. The meetings will take place on Thursdays, July 10, 17 and 24, 2025, from 6pm to 8pm. If interested, please visit comptonwellnesscollective.com. Save the date for July 27, 2025, they are putting together a Celebrity Basketball Game and Backpack Giveaway for residents returning back to school in the fall. On July 31, 2025, they will host their next Senior Outing. Usually, they take the seniors out to a movie and treat them to popcorn and a drink, however this time they will allow the seniors to decide the outing. If there are any suggestions, please email his liaison Tenay Spears at [email protected].
He put the City Manager on notice that there is still a lot of trash at the railroad tracks. It has been that way for the past two months. They have put calls in however it has not been cleaned up.
He would like his colleagues to join him with an ordinance preventing ICE from wearing masks and not identifying themselves with the proper identification. Thank you, have a wonderful evening.

Councilmember Bowers offered the following communications/announcements:
Acknowledged concerns they continue to hear from residents concerning illegal fireworks.

While the City Council unanimously voted that no fireworks legal or illegal are permitted anywhere in the City of Compton legal enforcement remains a challenge. He will be discussing this matter further with his fellow Councilmembers and will be working with local law enforcement to ensure they have the support needed to support the policy. The residents deserve peace and safety in their neighborhoods, and they are committed to making it happen.
He extended a special thank you to Window Muhammad, The Bridge Compton and all the partners and volunteers who hosted last Friday’s Community Food Giveaway and Resource event at Burrell MacDonald Park. It was a great success with strong turnout so much so they ran out of food early and that speaks volume about the need of community engagement.
He highlighted the incredible work being done by Adrian Ferray and the Compton Tool Library. This is a free resource for residents where residents could borrow tools and learn how to repair and maintain household items. Throughout July the Tool Library will offer free community workshops including intro to sewing, open woodshop, tiling, learning to print and more. Flyers are available on the table at the back of Council Chambers, and the full schedule could be found online at themakershub.org. Through community unity they will build a stronger, more resilient Compton that is united, prepared and forward moving. Thank you.

Mayor Sharif offered the following communications/announcements:
On June 26, 2025, she attended the Ribbon Cutting Ceremony for Concord Court, a new Townhome Community on Compton Blvd. and Dwight.
On June 27, 2025, she stopped by the Unearthed and Empowerment Community’s Art Camp at the City Church of Compton. It was wonderful to see the youth engaging in creativity and growth over the summer.
7 On June 28, 2025, she attended the EECI Summer of Soul Concert in Cerritos. The proceeds went to the EECI’s free Entrepreneurial and Job Readiness Program for residents of Compton and neighboring cities. Special thanks to EECI for continuing to uplift and empower Compton residents.
On June 29, 2025, she had the honor of being recognized by the Graces of Awareness Achievement Awards for community outreach efforts. It was a privilege to stand alongside leaders working to improve the community. Special thanks to the Graces of Awareness for the meaningful honor and the incredible work they continue to do in Compton. Her office is partnering with the L.A. County Public Defender’s Office and hosting an Expungement Fair on July 11, 2025, at Dollarhide from 10am to 2pm. The event is designed to help individuals reclaim their freedom of access to new opportunities. Contact the Public Defender’s Office to make an appointment at 310-603-7271. On July 25, 2025, in collaboration with Councilmember Lillie Darden, they will be hosting their first Sunset Talks with Assemblymember Mike Gibson. The evening is designed for them to sip and connect with local leaders under the sunset while discussing community concerns and recent issues impacting Compton. They invite the community to submit discussion topics when they sign up by using the QR code on the flyer or by calling 310- 605-5662. The event will take place on the outside patio of the Dollarhide Community Center from 6pm to 7:30pm.
In regard to the ribbon cutting that was done on July 25, 2024, regarding the Gateway City’s Broadband. This is a transformative moment for the city and the entire Gateway city regions. The one hundred twenty-five-mile project will bring high speed fiber optic connections to twenty-four City Halls including eighty-three miles of new underground and area fiber within the Compton area. She emphasized it was not an overnight achievement. For years the city has been overlooked when it comes to digital infrastructure, but she has personally advocated ensuring Compton would be prioritized, and they would be the first city to receive broadband connection as part of the project. By December 26, 2025, they would like to see the improvements come to life for the community. Special thanks to all the partners that helped to bring the project forward and she’s proud Compton is leading the way to a more connected, equitable and empowering future for the residents. She thanked everyone for being there this evening and they look forward to seeing them next week.

ADJOURNMENT
On motion by Duhart, seconded by Bowers, the meeting was adjourned at 6:41pm by the following vote on roll call:

AYES: Council Members – Duhart, Spicer, Bowers, Sharif
NOES: Council Members – None
ABSENT: Council Members – Darden
_____________________________________ ____________________________________ SATRA D. ZURITA EMMA SHARIF

CITY CLERK CITY OF COMPTON MAYOR CITY OF COMPTON
JUNE 23, 2026
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: JEROME GROOMES

ACTING CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COMPTON

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ESTABLISH A PURCHASE
ORDER IN THE AMOUNT OF $126,637.06 WITH NEOGOV FOR THE

PROVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE AND TECHNICAL SOFTWARE

SERVICES FOR THE SECOND YEAR OF SERVICE, AND

APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE THIRD YEAR OF SERVICE

SUMMARY
This resolution authorizes a Purchase Order of $126,637.06 for NEOGOV for the second year of its three-year professional services agreement with the City, to pay for Human Resources software services for the period of May 1, 2026 through April 30, 2027. This resolution also appropriates funding for the third year of services ($168,124.64) to be budgeted in the fiscal year 2026-2027 Human Resources budget.

BACKGROUND
NEOGOV is a Human Resources Information System (HRIS) providing public sector- focused recruitment and human resources management software utilized by the City’s Human Resources Department. The department relies on NEOGOV’s software platform to administer vital human resources activities.

On April 22, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution 26,238, which authorized the City Manager to enter into a three-year professional services agreement with NEOGOV for recruitment and human resources management software services for a total cost of $499,552.66. The fully executed services agreement with NEOGOV provides that the second year of service (May 1, 2026 through April 30, 2027) be invoiced at $126,637.06, and the third year of service (May 1, 2027 through April 30, 2028) to be invoiced at $168,214.64, covering annual subscription services for: Benefits, Core HR, eForms, Learn, Onboard, Payroll, Perform, Single Sign-On, and Time & Attendance.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
During the current fiscal year, expenditures for NEOGOV have exceeded the purchasing authority threshold of $50,000.00 established by Resolution 26,100 and evident by Resolution 26,238, thereby requiring City Council authorization for the issuance of an additional Purchase Order.

FISCAL IMPACT

5.5.5. STAFF REPORT – PURCHASE ORDER FOR GOVERNMENTJOBS.COM, INC., DOING BUSINESS AS “NEOGOV”
MAY 23, 2026
PAGE 2
A Purchase Order of $126,637.06 will be established to NEOGOV to pay for the second year of software services for the Human Resources Department during the current 2025- 2026 year.

Funding for the second year of services ($126,637.06) is available and to be paid in the current fiscal year’s budget of the Human Resources department, and will be available in Account #1001-560-000-4266 (Human Resources – Contract Services). Funding for the third year of services ($168,214.64) will be included as an anticipated expenditure in the fiscal year 2026-2027 budget for the Human Resources Department, to be paid from the same account upon budget adoption.

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution authorizing a Purchase Order for NEOGOV for the second year of services in the amount of $126,637.06, and appropriating funds for the third year of services ($168,214.64) in the fiscal year 2026-2027 budget.

TAQUAN JONES

HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
APPROVED FOR FORWARDING:

JEROME GROOMES

ACTING CITY MANAGER
RESOLUTION NO. _____________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COMPTON

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ESTABLISH A PURCHASE ORDER IN THE AMOUNT OF $126,637.06 WITH NEOGOV FOR THE PROVISION OF

ADMINISTRATIVE AND TECHNICAL SOFTWARE SERVICES FOR THE SECOND

YEAR OF SERVICE, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE THIRD YEAR OF

SERVICE
WHEREAS, NEOGOV is a “Human Resources Information System” (HRIS) utilized in public-sector focused recruitment and human resources management software utilized by the City’s Human Resources Department; and
WHEREAS, the City entered into a three-year professional services agreement with NEOGOV pursuant to Resolution 26,238, adopted on April 22, 2025, authorizing services for Human Resources and Payroll software for the City for a total cost of $499,552.66; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 26,238, a Purchase Order of $204,700.96 was authorized to NEOGOV for the first year of software services for Human Resources processes that are vital in recruitment, payroll, and time-tracking, opened from Account # 1001-560-000-4266 (Human Resources – Contract Services); and WHEREAS, the fully executed services agreement with NEOGOV provides that the second year (May 1, 2026 through April 30, 2027) of services are to be invoiced at $126,637.06, and the third year (May 1, 2027 through April 30, 2028) of services are to be invoiced at $168,214.64, covering annual subscription services of: Benefits, Core HR, eForms, Learn, Onboard, Payroll, Perform, Single Sign-On, and Time & Attendance; and WHEREAS, during the current fiscal year, expenditures for NEOGOV have exceeded the purchasing authority threshold of $50,000.00 established by Resolution 26,100 and evident by Resolution 26,238, thereby requiring City Council authorization for the issuance of an additional Purchase Order; and
WHEREAS, a Purchase Order of $126,637.06 will be established to pay the second year of recruitment and human resources management software services, to be paid during fiscal year 2025-2026 from Account #1001-560-000-4266 (Human Resources – Contract Services); and the third year of service charges in the amount of $168,214.64 will be budgeted and appropriated in the fiscal year 2026-2027 budget for the Human Resources Department upon adoption of that budget; and
WHEREAS, and funding for the third year of service’s invoice ($168,215.64) will be included as an anticipated expenditure and be made available in the budget of the Human Resources Department for the fiscal year 2026-2027 and to be paid from Account #1001-560-000-4266 (Human Resources – Contract Services).

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COMPTON DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1.That the City Manager is hereby authorized to establish a Purchase Order of $126,637.06 from Account #1001-560-000-4266 (Human Resources – Contract Services) to NEOGOV for second year of software services (May 1, 2026 through April 30, 2027) used by the Human Resources department. The third year of service charges in the amount of $168,214.64 (May 1, 2027 through April 30, 2028) shall be paid and appropriated in the fiscal year 2026-2027 budget for the Human Resources Department.

RESOLUTION NO. _____________
PAGE 2
SECTION 2.That a duly certified copy of this Resolution shall be delivered to the offices of the City Manager, City Clerk, City Controller, Legal Division, and Human Resources Department.

SECTION 3.That the Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the adoption of this Resolution.

ADOPTED this _______ day of ___________, 2026.

_______________________________

EMMA SHARIF

MAYOR OF THE CITY OF COMPTON
ATTEST:
___________________________________
SATRA D. ZURITA

CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF COMPTON

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF COMPTON:SS
I, Satra D. Zurita, City Clerk of the City of Compton, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Compton, signed by the Mayor, and attested by the City Clerk at a regular meeting thereof held on the _______ day of _________________, 2026.

That said resolution was adopted by the following vote, to wit:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS-
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS-
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS-
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS-
___________________________________
SATRA D. ZURITA

CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF COMPTON

01478.0005 2157847.2
June 23, 2026
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COMPTON

APPROVING A TAX TRANSFER RESOLUTION FOR LAFCO
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 (COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT)

SUMMARY
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the attached Tax Transfer Resolution (“TTR”) associated with the annexation of territory to the Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District (“CCMAD”) and the detachment of the same territory from the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District (“GLACVCD”), in order to allow the Local Agency Formation Commission (“LAFCO”) to proceed with Reorganization No. 2018-08.

BACKGROUND
The LAFCO has received an application for reorganization No. 2018-08 involving the CCMAD and the GLACVCD. The proposal includes:
 Annexation of approximately 1,246.794± acres (1.948 square miles) into CCMAD; and
 Detachment of sixteen (16) separate areas from GLACVCD;  Encompassing portions of the City of Compton and nearby unincorporated territory.

Upon completion, the entire City of Compton will be within the CCMAD service boundary.

The purpose of the reorganization is to:
 Eliminate fragmented service boundaries;
 Provide consistent mosquito and vector control services Citywide; and  Improve operational efficiency and public health coordination.

Both CCMAD and GLACVCD support the reorganization. The proposed action does not alter service levels to residents, but consolidates mosquito abatement services under a single district for improved consistency.

Tax Transfer Resolution (“TTR”)

6.6.6.6. Staff Report – Approval of a Tax Transfer Resolution for LAFCO Reorganization No. 2018-08 (Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District)
June 23, 2026, Page 2 of 3
01478.0005 2157847.2
Under California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 99, property tax exchange must be negotiated and approved by all affected agencies before LAFCO can consider the proposal. The TTR:
Establishes the allocation of property tax increment between affected agencies; Transfers a portion of tax increment to CCMAD for annexed territory; Correspondingly adjusts shares of GLACVCD and other agencies; and Applies beginning the fiscal year following boundary change filing and continuing annually thereafter.

The agreement involves multiple agencies, including:
County of Los Angeles
Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District
Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District
County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, and 8
Water Replenishment District of Southern California
City of Compton
The TTR also provides:
Adjustments overseen by the Los Angeles County Auditor-Controller; and A correction mechanism if calculation errors are later identified.

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE
The City Council must approve the Tax Transfer Resolution (“TTR”) pursuant to Revenue and Taxation Code Section 99 in order for LAFCO to proceed with consideration of Reorganization No. 2018-08.Revenue and Taxation Code section 99.2 provides that the version of Section 99 in effect at the time the reorganization was initiated governs the property tax exchange process, which in this case is 2018. Based on available information, subsequent amendments to Section 99 do not affect the proposed Tax Transfer Resolution.

The proposal has been processed under the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act and is subject to LAFCO approval. And environmental review for the project has been categorically exempted under CEQA (Sections 15320 and 15378(b)(5)).

Approval of the TTR will:
Enable LAFCO to proceed with the reorganization process, which is currently pending receipt of all TTR approvals;
Support consistent public health services Citywide, particularly vector control and mosquito abatement; and
Staff Report – Approval of a Tax Transfer Resolution for LAFCO Reorganization No. 2018-08 (Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District)
June 23, 2026, Page 3 of 3
01478.0005 2157847.2
Eliminate overlapping and inconsistent service boundaries that currently exist within Compton.

Failure to approve the TTR will:
Delay or prevent LAFCO from hearing the application; and Maintain fragmented service jurisdiction within the City.

Approval of the TTR is time-sensitive, as LAFCO cannot schedule the proposal for Commission consideration until all affected agencies have submitted executed resolutions.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt the attached Joint Tax Transfer Resolution approving the negotiated exchange of property tax revenue resulting from:
Annexation of territory to the Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District (CCMAD); and
Detachment of the same territory from the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District (GLACVCD).

2. Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute and return two (2) executed original signature pages (wet-signed) to the County of Los Angeles Chief Executive Office.

JACK H. GONG, PE., SE, PMP

CITY ENGINEER
APPROVED FOR FORWARDING:

JERRY GROOMES

ACTING CITY MANAGER
01478.0005 2157851.2
RESOLUTION NO. ___________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COMPTON

APPROVING A TAX TRANSFER RESOLUTION FOR LAFCO
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 (COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT)
WHEREAS,the Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District (“CCMAD”) has filed an application with the Local Agency Formation Commission (“LAFCO”) for Reorganization No. 2018-08, including the annexation of territory to CCMAD and detachment from the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District (“GLACVCD”); and
WHEREAS,the territory proposed for annexation consists of approximately 1,246.79± acres of inhabited territory within and adjacent to the City of Compton; and WHEREAS,pursuant to Section 99 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code, affected agencies are required to negotiate the exchange of property tax revenues resulting from jurisdictional changes; and
WHEREAS,the County of Los Angeles, affected special districts, and the City of Compton have negotiated the distribution of property tax increment resulting from the reorganization; and
WHEREAS,approval of the Tax Transfer Resolution is required in order for the County of Los Angeles to place the proposal before the Board of Supervisors and for LAFCO to consider the reorganization.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COMPTON DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1.The City Council hereby approves and accepts the negotiated exchange of property tax revenue resulting from LAFCO Reorganization No. 2018-08, as set forth in the attached Joint Resolution.

SECTION 2.The City Council acknowledges that: (1) Property tax increment attributable to the annexed territory shall be allocated to the Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District in accordance with the Tax Rate Area formulas; and (2) Corresponding contributions shall be detached from the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District, as specified in the agreement.

SECTION 3.The City Council authorizes the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Joint Resolution and transmit two (2) original signed copies to:

County of Los Angeles
Chief Executive Office
Budget and Operations Management Branch
500 West Temple Street, CEO Mailroom
Los Angeles, CA 90012
SECTION 4.If any calculation used in the property tax transfer is later determined to be incorrect, the transfer shall be corrected in accordance with the provisions of the Joint Resolution.

SECTION 5.A copy of this Resolution shall be filed in the offices of the City Manager, City Controller, City Attorney, City Clerk, and Public Works Engineering Department.

SECTION 6.The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the adoption of this Resolution.

RESOLUTION NO.___________
PAGE 2
01478.0005 2157851.2
ADOPTED this ____ day of ______________, 2026.
_______________________________

EMMA SHARIF

MAYOR OF THE CITY OF COMPTON
ATTEST:
___________________________________
SATRA D. ZURITA

CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF COMPTON

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF COMPTON: ss
I, Satra D. Zurita, City Clerk of the City of Compton, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the City Council, signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk at a regular meeting thereof held on the _____ day of ___________, 2026.

That said Resolution was adopted by the following vote to wit:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS-
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS-
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS-
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS-
___________________________________
SATRA D. ZURITA

CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF COMPTON
01478.0005 2157857.2

JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, AS THE GOVERNING

BODY OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, THE CONSOLIDATED FIRE

PROTECTION DISTRICT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, AND THE LOS ANGELES

COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT

AND THE

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT, THE GREATER LOS ANGELES COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT, THE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 1 OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, THE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 2 OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, THE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 8 OF LOS

ANGELES COUNTY, THE WATER REPLENISHMENT DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN

CALIFORNIA, AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COMPTON, APPROVING

AND ACCEPTING THE NEGOTIATED EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY TAX REVENUE

RESULTING FROM THE ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY KNOWN AS
REORGANIZATION 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO ABATEMENT

DISTRICT, DETACHMENT FROM THE GREATER LOS ANGELES COUNTY

VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT
WHEREAS, Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District initiated proceedings with the Local Agency Formation Commission for Los Angeles County (LAFCO) for the annexation of territory identified as Reorganization 2018-08 to the District; WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 99 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code, for specified jurisdictional changes, the governing bodies of affected agencies shall negotiate and determine the amount of property tax revenue to be exchanged between the affected agencies;
WHEREAS, the area proposed for annexation is identified as Reorganization 2018-08 and consists of approximately 1,246.79± acres of inhabited territory to the Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District; detachment from the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District; and affected territory is located west of the 710 Freeway and north of the 91 Freeway, located with portions of the City of Compton and portions of unincorporated territory.

WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles (County), as governing body of the County, the Consolidated Fire Protection District of Los Angeles County, the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, the County Lighting Maintenance District No. 1687, the Firestone Garbage Disposal District, and on behalf of Road District #2 and the LA County Library; the governing bodies of the Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District, the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District, the County Sanitation District No. 1 of Los Angeles County, the County Sanitation District No. 2 of Los Angeles County, the County Sanitation District No. 8 of Los Angeles County, and the Water Replenishment District of Southern California; and the City Council of the City of Compton; have determined the amount of property tax revenue to be exchanged between their respective agencies as a result of the annexation of the territory identified as Reorganization 2018-08, annexation to the Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District, detachment from the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District, is as set forth below.

Joint Resolution
Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District Reorganization 2018-08

01478.0005 2157857.2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:

1. The negotiated exchange of property tax revenue between the County of Los Angeles, Consolidated Fire Protection District, Flood Control District, County Lighting Maintenance District No. 1687, Firestone Garbage Disposal District, Road District #2, the County Library, Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District, the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District, the County Sanitation District No. 1 of Los Angeles County, the County Sanitation District No. 2 of Los Angeles County, the County Sanitation District No. 8 of Los Angeles County, Water Replenishment District of Southern California, and the City of Compton, resulting from Reorganization 2018-08 is approved and accepted.

2. For the fiscal year commencing after the filing of the statement of boundary change for Reorganization 2018-08 with the Board of Equalization pursuant to Government Code sections 54902 and 57204, and every fiscal year thereafter, the following ratios of annual property tax increment attributable to each respective Tax Rate Area in the Reorganization 2018-08 territory shall be transferred to Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District as shown below. The other affected taxing entities’ shares of property tax increment shall be adjusted as calculated by the Auditor- Controller of Los Angeles County.

Tax
Rate
Area
Annual Tax
Increment Ratio
Transfer to
CCMAD
Tax
Rate
Area
Annual Tax
Increment Ratio
Transfer to
CCMAD
Tax
Rate
Area
Annual Tax
Increment Ratio
Transfer to
CCMAD
202 0.000870444 2945 0.000948730 3769 0.000893877
2808 0.000857634 2951 0.000961420 3795 0.000880480
2809 0.000982649 2965 0.000913141 3820 0.000880087
2810 0.000893869 2973 0.000923422 3825 0.000950126
2813 0.000857186 2978 0.000880146 6059 0.000945552
2852 0.000881367 2979 0.000913264 11255 0.000893869
2855 0.000879913 2980 0.000913211 11265 0.000893877
2856 0.000881368 2981 0.000940286 11267 0.000907775
2863 0.000893651 2999 0.000948578 11268 0.000907874
2867 0.000858111 3750 0.000857704 11294 0.000880174
2868 0.000857548 3752 0.000931974 12934 0.000948730
2880 0.000857962 3764 0.000857143 13556 0.000948730
2913 0.000953882 3766 0.000857186 17012 0.000948730

3. For the fiscal year commencing after the filing of the statement of boundary change for Reorganization 2018-08 with the Board of Equalization pursuant to Government Code sections 54902 and 57204, and every fiscal year thereafter, the following ratios of annual property tax increment attributable to each respective Tax Rate Area in the Reorganization 2018-08 territory shall be detached from the Greater Joint Resolution
Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District Reorganization 2018-08

01478.0005 2157857.2
Los Angeles County Vector Control District as shown below. The other affected taxing entities’ shares of property tax increment shall be adjusted as calculated by the Auditor- Controller of Los Angeles County.

Tax
Rate
Area
Annual Tax
Increment Ratio
Detach from

GLACVCD
Tax
Rate
Area
Annual Tax
Increment Ratio
Detach from

GLACVCD
Tax
Rate
Area
Annual Tax
Increment Ratio
Detach from

GLACVCD
202 -0.000361951 2945 -0.000324835 3769 -0.000397816
2808 -0.000397816 2951 -0.000305020 3795 -0.000397816
2809 -0.000397816 2965 -0.000326154 3820 -0.000397816
2810 -0.000397816 2973 -0.000397816 3825 -0.000280095
2813 -0.000398660 2978 -0.000365324 6059 -0.000397816
2852 -0.000368526 2979 -0.000397816 11255 -0.000397816
2855 -0.000369924 2980 -0.000397816 11265 -0.000397816
2856 -0.000368579 2981 -0.000397816 11267 -0.000397816
2863 -0.000397816 2999 -0.000320620 11268 -0.000397816
2867 -0.000412163 3750 -0.000397816 11294 -0.000110265
2868 -0.000393910 3752 -0.000397816 12934 -0.000324835
2880 -0.000394064 3764 -0.000400375 13556 -0.000317052
2913 -0.000314677 3766 -0.000398664 17012 -0.000318179

4. If at any time after the effective date of this Joint Resolution, the calculations used herein to determine initial property tax transfers, or the data used to perform those calculations, are found to be incorrect, thus producing an improper or inaccurate property tax transfer, the property tax transfer shall be recalculated and the corrected transfer shall be implemented for the next fiscal year /
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
Joint Resolution
Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District Reorganization 2018-08

01478.0005 2157857.2
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of ,
202_ by the following vote:

AYES: ABSENT:

NOES: ABSTAIN:

Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District
Signature
Print Name and Title
ATTEST:

Secretary
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
(Signed in Counterpart)
Joint Resolution
Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District Reorganization 2018-08

01478.0005 2157857.2
The foregoing resolution was on the day of ,
202_, adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles and ex officio the governing body of all other special assessment and taxing districts, agencies and authorities for which said Board so acts.

EDWARD YEN, Executive Officer
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
of the County of Los Angeles
By
Deputy
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

DAWYN R. HARRISON
County Counsel
By
Deputy
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
(Signed in Counterpart)
Joint Resolution
Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District Reorganization 2018-08

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of ,
202_ by the following vote:

AYES: ABSENT:
01478.0005 2157857.2
NOES: ABSTAIN:

Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District
Signature
Print Name and Title
ATTEST:

Secretary
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
(Signed in Counterpart)
Joint Resolution
Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District Reorganization 2018-08

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of ,
202_ by the following vote:

AYES: ABSENT:
01478.0005 2157857.2
NOES: ABSTAIN:

County Sanitation District No. 1 of Los Angeles County
Signature
Print Name and Title
ATTEST:

Secretary
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
(Signed in Counterpart)
Joint Resolution
Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District Reorganization 2018-08

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of ,
202_ by the following vote:

AYES: ABSENT:
01478.0005 2157857.2
NOES: ABSTAIN:

County Sanitation District No. 2 of Los Angeles County
Signature
Print Name and Title
ATTEST:

Secretary
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
(Signed in Counterpart)
Joint Resolution
Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District Reorganization 2018-08

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of ,
202_ by the following vote:

AYES: ABSENT:
01478.0005 2157857.2
NOES: ABSTAIN:

County Sanitation District No. 8 of Los Angeles County
Signature
Print Name and Title
ATTEST:

Secretary
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
(Signed in Counterpart)
Joint Resolution
Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District Reorganization 2018-08

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of ,
202_ by the following vote:

AYES: ABSENT:
01478.0005 2157857.2
NOES: ABSTAIN:

Water Replenishment District of Southern California
Signature
Print Name and Title
ATTEST:

Secretary
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
(Signed in Counterpart)
Joint Resolution
Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District Reorganization 2018-08

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of ,
202_ by the following vote:

AYES: ABSENT:
01478.0005 2157857.2
NOES: ABSTAIN:

Mayor
City of Compton, California
ATTEST:

City Clerk
City of Compton
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

City Attorney
City of Compton
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
(Signed in Counterpart)
Joint Resolution
Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District Reorganization 2018-08

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of ,
202_ by the following vote:

AYES: ABSENT:
01478.0005 2157857.2
NOES: ABSTAIN:

Mayor
City of Compton, California
ATTEST:

City Clerk
City of Compton
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

City Attorney
City of Compton
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
(Signed in Counterpart)
LAFCO
Local Agency Formation Commission
for the County of Los Angeles
Voting Members
Donald Dear
Chair
Gerard Mccallum
1st Vice-Chair
Margaret Finlay
2nd Vice-Chair
John Lee
John Mirisch
Kathryn Barger
Lindsey Horvath
Robert Lewis
Vacant
(San Fernando Valley)
Alternate Members
Angie Reyes English
Anthony Bell
Hilda Solis
Imelda Padilla
Micah Ali
Wendy Celaya
LALAFCO Staff
Paul Novak
Executive Officer
Adriana Romo
Deputy Executive Officer
Adriana Flores
Alisha O'Brien
Amber De La Torre
Doug Dorado
Taylor Morris
80 South Lake Avenue
Suite 870
Pasadena, CA 91101
Phone: 626.204.6500
Fax: 626.204 .6507
wWw .lalafco.org

NOTICE OF FILING
Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District
Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District
City of Compton
Los Angeles County Supervisor Holly J. Mitchell
Los Angeles County Chief Executive Office
Consolidated Fire Protection District
County Sanitation District Nos. 1, 2 and 8 of Los Angeles County Firestone Garbage Disposal District
Central Basin Municipal Water District
West Basin Municipal Water District
Water Replenishment District of Southern California
Los Angeles County Office of Education
Compton Unified School District
Lynwood Unified School District
Paramount Unified School District
LAFCO File:

Reorganization No. 2018-08 for the Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District and the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District (Amendments to the Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District and the
Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District Spheres of Influence; Detachment from the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District; and Annexation to the Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District) Pursuant to Government Code Section 56658, notice is hereby given that an application for the proposed reorganization listed above has been received by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). The application proposes to reorganize approximately 1,246.794± acres (or 1.948 square miles) of inhabited territory to the Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District (Compton Creek MAD). The reason for this reorganization is to detach sixteen {16) separate areas (portions of the City of Compton and portions of unincorporated territory) from the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District and annex said areas to the Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District. After completion of this proposal, the entire City of Compton will be within the boundaries of the Compton Creek MAD.

The affected territory is generally located west of the 710 Freeway and north of the 91 Freeway, located with portions of the City of Compton and portions of unincorporated territory.

The proposal application, maps, and geographic descriptions are attached for your review.

Please submit comments, if any, to the LAFCO office by January 21, 2025.

If you have any questions about this proposal, please contact this office at ( 626)204-6500.

Date: December 19, 2024
Enc.

Alisha O'Brien
Government Analyst
LAFCO
Local Agency Formndon Comrnissk-m
for tho Cuonty of Lo~ Arigdc,
Local Agency Formation Commission for the County of Los Angeles 80 South Lake Avenue, Suite 870, Pasadena, CA 91101
Telephone: (626) 204-6500 Fax: (626) 204-6507

APPLICATION TO INITIATE PROCEEDING FOR CHANGE OF ORGANIZATION/REORGANIZATION (Pursuant to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000, Division 3, Title S, Commencing with Section 56000, of the Government Code)

1. LAFCO PROPOSAL DESIGNATION NO.: Reorganization No. 2018-08

2. PROPOSAL INITIATED BY:

Identify the party initiating this proposal {please check one).

Public Agency
Name of Public Agency: Compton Creek MAD
Name and title: John Franklin/General Manager
D Landowner/ Registered Voter Petition
Name of Chief Petitioner:

Name of Chief Petitioner:

Name of Chief Petitioner:

This party or parties shall be referred to herein as "the Applicant".

3. DESIGNATED CONTACT PERSON:

Resolution Date: 03/18/2024
Name: John Franklin Title: General Manager
Address: 1224 S. Santa Fe Ave.

City: Compton
Telephone: (424) 406-3220
State: CA Zip Code: 90221
E-Mail: [email protected]
The Applicant is requested to notify LAFCO immediately of any changes in the designated contact person.

4. RELATED JURISDICTIONAL CHANGES "Affected Local Agencies" {Cities and/or Special Districts):
a. Compton Creek Mosquito
b. Greater LA County Vector Control
Attach additional sheets if necessary.

Annexation l ✓ I Detachment D SOI amendment l ✓ I
Annexation D Detachment I ✓ ! SOI amendment l ✓ I

LAFCO
Loc.:tl Agency Fc>rmntion Comrnis:S.ion
for tht::! Count)" of Lo~ An~~clc":>
e. Is the affected territory (any territory for which a change of organization, reorganization, or Sphere of Influence change is proposed) within the Sphere of Influence (SOI) of the city or special district into which it is proposed to be annexed? D Yes l ✓ I No
Note: If the answer is "No," the Applicant must request an SOI amendment (4a-4d, above).

5. LANDOWNERS:
a. Number of landowners within the affected territory: 1,930 b. If less than 6 landowners, list:

Name: Assessor Parcel Number:

Name: Assessor Parcel Number:

Name: Assessor Parcel Number:

Name: Assessor Parcel Number:

Name: Assessor Parcel Number:
c. Do the boundaries of the proposal conform to existing lines of assessment? [lJ Yes D No
If "No," explain:
d. Does the proposal create any islands or corridors of unincorporated territory? D Yes
If "Yes," explain:
e. Total Assessed Land Value:
$ 100,781,695.00 Tax Roll Year: 2024 Date: 06/24/2024

6. REGISTERED VOTERS:

Number of registered voters: 11,000 As of: January 2024 Note: State Law defines a proposed change of organization or reorganization as either "Uninhabited," in which case there are fewer than 12 registered voters in the affected territory, or "Inhabited'" in which case there are 12 or more registered voters.

LAFCO
Loc,"11 Agency For-m:ttion Con1rnlssion
for tho Coumy of Lo'> Arii~dc>

7. GENERAL INFORMATION:
a. Location of affected territory:

The City of Compton and Unincorporated Territory known as West Rancho Dominguez and East Rancho Dominguez. b. Unified School District(s) name: Address:

Compton Unified School District 501 S. Santa Fe Ave.

Compton, CA 90021
c. Elementary School District(s) name: Address:

Compton Unified School District 501 S. Santa Fe Ave.

Compton, CA 90021
d. High School District(s) name: Address:
501 S. Santa Fe Ave.

Compton Unified School District Compton, CA 90021
e. Describe the location of the affected territory, including major thoroughfares (freeways, highways, streets, alleys) that border or traverse the territory, natural features (water bodies, mountain ranges, etc.), man-made features (existing development, utility corridors, flood/drain,age channels or basins, railroad lines, etc.), and any other characteristics that help identify the affected territory.

The majority of the affected territory is west of the 710 Freeway and north of the 91 Freeway, with a few exceptions.

1. Area 9c - the 91 Freeway bisects its area.

2. Area 9q - is located east of the 710 Freeway.
f. Size of affected territory: 1246.794 ± acres
g. Provide a detailed description of the affected territory and existing land-uses, including, but not limited to:
commercial, industrial, multi-family or single-family residential, institutional, active recreational, and/or passive open space.

Industrial, commercial, multi-family residential, single-family residential, and open-space.

LAFCO
Loc:.I Agency For·111:i.tion Conmlission
(or tht:? Coumy of Los Angde~
h. Provide a detailed description of the land uses surrounding the affected territory.

Residential, commerical.
i. Provide a detailed description of the topography (flat, sloping, mountainous, etc.) of the affected territory.

The topography is flat.
j. Provide a detailed description of any natural boundaries (rivers, lakes, stream beds, mountain ranges, etc.) within or adjacent to the affected territory.

The Los Angeles River runs through the majority of the eastern boundary of the Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District (CCMAD).
k. Provide a detailed description of any proposed change of use to the affected territory, including any planned development and/or on-going construction.

N/A
I. Provide a detailed description of any flood control facilities (dams, reservoirs, flood control channels, debris basins, catch basins, etc.) within or adjacent to the affected territory.

The Compton Creek runs through a small portion of Area 9c, which is located in the northeast corner of Area 9c and adjacent to Area 9c.
m. Explain why the proposal is necessary:

To incorporate the remaining portions of the City of Compton that have historically not been included in the territory covered by the Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District (CCMAD). After the completion of this proposal, the entire City of Compton will be within the boundaries of CCMAD.

LAFCO
Loc.\l Agency Fonn.1.tion CorT1rnis.sfoi1
for the Co:n111ty or Lo;. r\ngde~

8. POPULATION AND HOUSING:
a. Current Population: 1,439 Source: US Census
b. Proposed Population (if development is proposed): N/A c. Proximity to existing populated areas:

Date: 2020
d. Likelihood of significant growth in the affected territory within the next 10 years (please circle one):
l ✓ I no growth D modest growth D significant growth
e. Likelihood of significant growth in adjacent areas within the next 10 years (please circle one):

I ✓ I no growth D modest growth D significant growth

9. GOVERNMENT SERVICES:
"Government services" refers to governmental services, whether or not those services would be provided by the local agency or agencies subject to the proposal. It also includes public facilities necessary to provide those services.
a. Estimate the present cost and describe the adequacy of government services and controls in the area:

The assessment method for our Ad Valorem and Benefit Assessment Tax varies by land use, including 1) Residential, 2) Commercial, 3) Agricultural, and 4) No Use Code. All parcels have a base rate of $12.98. Residential parcels add $5.99 per acre, capped at $20.00, making it $18.97 for parcels of 1 acre or less. Commercial parcels add $5.99 per 20 acres, also capped at $20.00, resulting in $18.97 for parcels of 20 acres or less. Agricultural parcels add $5.99 per 5 acres, capped at $20.00, totaling $18.97 for parcels of 5 acres or less. The District receives a small portion of the 1% Ad Valorem tax, amounting to about $2.3 million in the 2023-24 fiscal year. b. Estimate the probable future need for government services (including public facilities) or controls in the area:

The demand for vector control services in Los Angeles County is expected to persist and possibly increase due to ongoing challenges with endemic vector-borne diseases like West Nile Virus. Additionally, the introduction of new invasive species and emerging vector-borne diseases could further escalate the need for comprehensive vector-control interventions and public health facilities in the area. c. If the proposal includes incorporation, formation, or annexation, what will be the effect of this proposal or exclusion and of alternative courses of action on the cost and adequacy of services and controls in the proposed area and adjacent areas?
Annexing these parts of the City of Compton and unincorporated areas into CCMAD will enable more efficient and equitable distribution of services and resources across the entire City of Compton. Adjacent parcels will continue to receive vector control services from GLACVCD, ensuring service continuity and minimizing confusion among residents. d. If, as a result of this proposal, increased service demand exceeds the existing capacity, describe what will be done by the service provider to increase capacity of services:

Vector control services are currently provided to the area by the specialist responsible for servicing the City of Compton and surrounding unincorporated territory. Should operational demands increase, additional revenue from Ad Valorem property taxes can be allocated for new equipment, seasonal personnel, and control agents to ensure continued and effective service delivery.

LAFCO
Local Agcnc:y Formntion Comrnis.slot,
for the County of Los Angeles
e. List any assessments, fees, or other charges to be levied as part of this proposal and/or that may be levied in the near future:

Vector control services are already being levied on this area of the City of Compton and unincorporated territory. Only a portion of the ad valorem property taxes would be redistributed to· the CC MAD.
f. List any Joint Powers Authorities (JPAs) or (equivalent) which may be providing services to the affected territory and/or surrounding territory:

N/A

10. EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION:
a. What will be the effect of the proposed action on adjacent areas? IT would eliminate existing inconsistencies in the boundaries between CCMAD and the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District, especially those that exist in the City of Compton. However, there initially may be confusion regarding service providers, which will have to be addressed through a comprehensive public education and outreach campaign. b. What will be the effect of the proposed action on mutual social and economic interests? Continuing vector control services throughout the area benefits both residential and industrial properties by reducing public health risks and enhancing the quality of life.
c. What will be the effect of the proposed action on the local governmental structure of the County of Los Angeles? There will be no impact to the local government structure of the County. d. What will be the effect of the alternative action on adjacent areas, on mutual social and economic interests, and the local governmental structure of the County of Los Angeles? Annexing these parts of the City of Compton and surrounding unincorporated areas into CCMAD will enable more efficient and equitable distribution of services and resources throughout Compton. Adjacent parcels will continue to receive vector control services from GLACVCD, ensuring continuity and minimizing confusion among residents.

LAFCO
Loc::-11 Agency Forrmttion Cor11rn1ssfon
for th!:! Coumy i:.,f Lo'., Ao;gdc.,_
e. What will be the effect or impact if the proposed action is denied by LAFCO? It would maintain the existing status quo of inconsistent and non-continuous borders between CCMAD and the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District. This would mean that the City of Compton would continue to be services by multiple vector control districts and may lead to confusion among residents as to who they should contact for vector control services.

11. OPEN SPACE LAND CONVERSION:
a. Will the proposal result in the conversion of any open-space lands to other uses? D Yes [l] No

12. AGRICULTURAL LANDS:
a. Will the proposal have any effect on maintaining the physical and economic integrity of agricultural lands? D Yes [l] No
b. Is there any Prime Agricultural Land within the affected territory? D Yes l ✓ I No
c. Is any of the land within the affected territory currently utilized for commercial agricultural purposes? D Yes [l] No
d. Was any of the land within the affected territory utilized for commercial agricultural purposes within the last ten years?
D Yes [l] No

13. GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING:
a. Existing General Plan land use designation(s):

City of Compton GP - Mixed Use, Open Space, Public/Quasi Public, Low Density Residential, and Industrial.

Unincorp. - Residential 9 (H9) and General Commercial (CG). b. Is the proposal consistent with the existing General Plan land use designation? [l] Yes D No
c. Existing Zoning designation(s):

City of Compton zoning - Low Density Residential (RL), Medium Density Residential (ML), and Heavy Manufacturing (MH). Unincorp. - Single-Family Residential (R-1 ), Light Industrial (A-1 ). d. Is the proposal consistent with the existing zoning designation? [l] Yes □ No

LAFCO
Loc.11 Agency Formation CornmJs!.lon
for the County of Lo::. .i-'\ngdc~
e. Is the proposal within a Specific Plan?
[ZI Yes D No
f. Existing Specific Plan Designation(s):

West Rancho Dominguez - Victoria and East Rancho Dominguez g. Is the proposal consistent with the existing Specific Plan designation? [ZI Yes D No
h. If annexation to a city is proposed, what is the City's General Plan designation of the affected territory? N/A
i. If annexation to a city is proposed, are the existing land-uses consistent with the City's General Plan designation(s)? DYes ONo
j. If annexation to a city is proposed, what is the City's Pre-Zoning designation of the affected territory? N/A
k. If annexation to a city is proposed, is the existing zoning consistent with the City's Pre-Zoning designation(s)? OYes ONo
I. Is the proposal consistent with the most recent Regional Transportation Plan adopted by Southern California Association of Governments?
[Z1 Yes D No

14. PLAN TO PROVIDE SERVICES:
a. Describe services to be extended to the affected territory:

We will provide comprehensive services, including ongoing vector control, disease surveillance, and community education. These will encompass non-control directed activities such as prevention and information dissemination, biorational methods like physical control, natural regulatory mechanisms such as the use of mosquito fish, and pesticide application b. Describe the level and range of those services to be provided:

The annexed areas will receive comprehensive vector control, disease surveillance, and community education services to ensure a high standard of public health and safety.
_fage 8 of 17
LAFCO
Local Agency Form.ttion Cornrnls!tlon
for the C-:~umy ,:.,f Lo;. ;\.n~~des.
c. Describe any improvements or upgrades of structures, roads, sewer, water facilities, or other public facilities associated with this change of organization/reorganization:

N/A
d. How will services be financed?
Through a portion of the ad valorem property taxes and Benefit Assessment property taxes received by CCMAD.

15. TIMELY AVAILABLILTY OF WATER SUPPLIES:
a. How will the proposal impact the timely availability of water supplies adequate for projected needs? N/A
b. For projects involving a proposed change in land use and/or new development - Please provide a recent will-serve letter, water supply analysis, or equivalent, from the water provider(s) (wholesaler, retailer, private water company, etc.) concerning the current adequacy of water supply for the project:

N/A

16. REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS (only for city proposals):
a. Identify how the proposal will affect a city or cities and the County of Los Angeles in achieving their respective fair shares ofthe regional housing needs, as determined by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG):

N/A
b. Date of most recent approval by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) of the City's Housing Element:

N/A

17. ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE:

Government Code Section 56668(p) defines environmental justice as "the fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, and incomes with respect to the location of public facilities and the provisions of public services."

LAFCO
Loc3t Agcm:y Formation Comrnis~lon
for the Coumy Qf Li:l~ 1\iigdc~
a. Identify how the proposal will promote environmental justice:

Continous moquito and vector control services provided to all the residential and industrial in the City of Compton and surrounding unincorporated territory.

18. DISADVANTAGED UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITIES {DUCs):
a.
b.

LAFCO maintains maps of all DUC's within Los Angeles County on the "Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities" section of LAFCO's website. Please consult these maps to determine if there are DU Cs within or adjacent to the affected territory that is the subject of your proposal.

Is the affected territory within a DUC?
□ NO [l] YES
Is the affected territory adjacent to a DUC?
□ NO [l] YES
Give general location of DUC:

Areas 9g. 9j, and 9p. Southwest of Area 9p, north and
east of Area 9j, and south of Area 9g.

Give general location of DUC:

Areas 9g. 9j, and 9p. Southwest of Area 9p, north and
east of Area 9j, and south of Area 9g.

19. BONDED INDEBTNESS:
a. Do the agencies whose boundaries are being changed have any existing bonded debt? [Z] YES □ NO'
b. Will the proposal area be liable for payment of its fair share of this existing debt? [Z] YES □ NO
c. In the case of detachment requests, does the detaching agency propose that the subject territory continue to be liable for existing bonded debt?
[ZJYES □ NO

LAFCO
Local Agency Form.uio11 Corrm1is.slon
for the Ccumy i~f l.t~n• An~;d~:-.

20. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) Compliance:
a. Check one:
[{]
□
□
□
Categorical Exemption/ Statutory Exemption
CEQA Guideline Section:15320 and 15378(b)(S)
Negative Declaration (ND}
Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND)
Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
b. Identify the Lead Agency which adopted a CEQA clearance for the proposal: Compton Creek MAD c. Date Lead Agency adopted the CEQA clearance for the proposal: 3/20/2024 d. Submit complete copies of CEQA compliance documents. e. Submit complete copies of any Notice of Exemption (NOE} or Notice of Determination (NOD).

21. CITY PLAN FOR MUNICIPAL SERVICES (only for city proposals):

Municipal Service
Animal Control
Fire & Emergency Medical
Flood Control
Library
Mosquito and Vector Control
Park and Recreation
Planning
Police
Road Maintenance
Solid Waste
Street Lighting
Water
Wastewater
Current Service Provider

Proposed Service Provider
LAFCO
Local Agency Formation Cor11rrHsslon
for the County of Lm. Angch:s.

Animal Control
Describe services to be extended to the affected territory:

Describe the level and range of those services to be provided:

Describe any improvements or upgrades or transfers of facilities:

How will services be financed?
Fire and Emergency Services
Describe services to be extended to the affected territory:

Describe the level and range of those services to be provided:

Describe any improvements or upgrades or transfers of facilities:

How will services be financed?
Flood Control
Describe services to be extended to the affected territory:

Describe the level and range of those services to be provided:

Describe any improvements or upgrades or transfers of facilities:

How will services be financed?

LAFCO
Loc:il Agency Fbrrniltion Commission
for the County of Lei., Angele~
Library
Describe services to be extended to the affected territory:

Describe the level and range of those services to be provided:

Describe any improvements or upgrades or transfers of facilities:

How will services be financed?
Mosquito & Vector Control
Describe services to be extended to the affected territory:

Describe the level and range of those services to be provided:

Describe any improvements or upgrades or transfers of facilities:

How will services be financed?
Parks and Recreation
Describe services to be extended to the affected territory:

Describe the level and range of those services to be provided:

Describe any improvements or upgrades or transfers of facilities:

How will services be financed?

LAFCO
Loc::11 Agcnc:y Formntion Comrnissloi,
for the Coumy r>f Lo::. Angele~
Planning
Describe services to be extended to the affected territory:

Describe the level and range of those services to be provided:

Describe any improvements or upgrades or transfers of facilities:

How will services be financed?
Police
Describe services to be extended to the affected territory:

Describe the level and range of those services to be provided:

Describe any improvements or upgrades or transfers of facilities:

How will services be financed?
Road Maintenance
Describe services to be extended to the affected territory:

Describe the level and range of those services to be provided:

Describe any improvements or upgrades or transfers of facilities:

How will services be financed?

LAFCO
Local Ag.ency FornHttion Cornrni~sfon
for the Cowu:y of Ll::t'\> Angdc~
Solid Waste Disposal
Describe services to be extended to the affected territory:

Describe the level and range of those services to be provided:

Describe any improvements or upgrades or transfers of facilities:

How will services be financed?
Street Lighting
Describe services to be extended to the affected territory:

Describe the level and range of those services to be provided:

Describe any improvements or upgrades or transfers of facilities:

How will services be financed?
Water
Describe services to be extended to the affected territory:

Describe the level and range of those services to be provided:

Describe any improvements or upgrades or transfers of facilities:

How will services be financed?

LAFCO
Local Agcm:y formation Comrnissfon
for the C<.)Unt>· of Lo~ Arigch:~
Wastewater
Describe services to be extended to the affected territory:

Describe the level and range of those services to be provided:

Describe any improvements or upgrades or transfers of facilities:

How will services be financed?

INDEMNIFICATION/ LEGAL DEFENSE
As a condition to the Local Agency Formation Commission for the County of Los Angeles' {LAFCO's) evaluation of the Applicant's proposal, the Applicant and, if different, the Real Party In Interest {i.e., the landowner) Compton Creek Mosquito Abatement District hereby warrant, represent, and agree to defend, indemnify, hold harmless LAFCO and its agents, officers, commissioners, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against LAFCO or its agents, officers, commissioners, and employees, relating to or arising out of LAFCO's evaluation or processing of the proposal, including, but not limited to, any action to attack, set aside, void, annul, enjoin, or compel LAFCO's approval, disapproval, evaluation, or processing of the proposal, which indemnification obligation includes, but is not limited to, Applicant/Real Party In Interest being required to pay for any costs and reasonable attorneys' fees incurred or anticipated to be incurred by LAFCO in connection with any such action. This indemnification obligation shall not include intentional or willful misconduct on the part of LAFCO, but shall include passive and/or concurrent active negligence by LAFCO.

Applicant/Real Party In Interest agree that LAFCO has the right to appoint its own counsel for its defense and conduct its own defense in the manner it deems in its best interest, and that such actions will not relieve or limit Applicant's/Real Party In Interest's obligations to indemnify and reimburse defense costs. At the discretion of the Executive Officer, a deposit or deposits of funds by the Applicant may be required in an amount or amounts sufficient to cover any anticipated or incurred litigation costs.

LAFCO
Lota! Agency Formation Cornrnis!,IOil
for tl,c c(. ... unty of Lot- Ar1~1clc'l.

PROPOSAL CERTIFICATION
By my signature below, I hereby certify my understanding that:
• I/We are authorized to make these certifications and file this Proposal with LAFCO on behalf our city, special district, corporation, landowner, and/or other party filing said Proposal, and I/we will provide written evidence of same to LAFCO upon request.
• It is the responsibility of the Applicant to substantiate this Proposal. • There is no guarantee, expressed or implied, that any Proposal will be approved by LAFCO. • Each matter must be carefully evaluated by LAFCO staff. • LAFCO staff's recommendation may change during the course of the review based on the information presented.
• A public hearing may be required, the proposal may be subject to a "protest" process, and the proposal may be subject to an election.
• The environmental review (pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act) associated with the submittal of this application is preliminary, and, after further evaluation, additional information, reports, studies, applications, and/or fees may be required.
• The required map and geographic description must conform to the "Instructions of Completing Maps and Geographic Descriptions," to the satisfaction of the Executive Officer. • If my proposal is denied, I am/We are not entitled to any refund of fees paid. • Submitting inaccurate or incomplete information may result in delays or denial of my Proposal. • The information I have provided in this Proposal, including all attachments and supplemental information provided, is accurate and correct to the best of my knowledge, subject to penalty of perjury. • This proposal will not be scheduled for consideration by the Commission (LAFCO) until all required documents are provided, to the satisfaction of the Executive Officer. • I/We have reviewed and agree to the Indemnification/Legal Defense terms, above.

I have read and understand the foregoing, and agree to the submittal of this Proposal.

APPLICANT
06/26/2024
Compton Creek MAD
Name of Applicant
John Franklin, GM
Name & Position of Person Signing
(if different from Applicant)

REAL PARTY IN INTEREST
Signature/Date
Name of Real Party In Interest
Name & Position of Person Signing
(if different from Real Party In Interest)

Q?roved by~
~ ;:-c
_-r~ 0
- GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
J::,YlorM •
o EORGANIZA TION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9C

EXHIBIT A
AREA 9C - COMPTON

A PORTION OF THE RANCHO SAN PEDRO IN THE CITY OF COMPTON, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE MAP FILED IN PATENT BOOK 1, PAGES 119 THROUGH 121, INCLUSIVE OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

COMMENCING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF CENTRAL AVENUE AND VICTORIA STREET AS SHOWN ON THE RECORD OF SURVEY IN BOOK 82, PAGES 31-32 FILED SEPTEMBER 16, 1965;
THENCE ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID CENTRAL AVENUE N 00°22'20" W 735.18

FEET TO THE INTERSECTION OF THE CENTERLINE OF CENTRAL AVENUE AND THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF CARSON PER PARCEL MAP NUMBER 11180 FILED IN BOOK 107, PAGES 24 THROUGH 26 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING;
L 1 THENCE N00°22'20" W 2188.76 FEET ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF CENTRAL

AVENUE TO THE INTERSECTION OF CENTRAL AVENUE AND WEST WALNUT STREET PER PARCEL MAP NUMBER 1022 FILED IN BOOK 17, PAGES 83 & 84 OF SAID COUNTY ;
L2 THENCE N87°59'42" E 20.01 FEET ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF WEST WALNUT STREET TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH A LINE PARALLEL TO AND 20 FEET EASTERLY OF THE CENTERLINE OF SAID CENTRAL AVENUE;
L3 THENCE N00°22'20" W 1294.82 FEET ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE PER ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 155 FILED WITH THE COUNTY RECORDER 07-07-67 OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY; TO A POINT APPROXIMATELY 480 FEET SOUTH OF

THE INTERSECTION OF CENTRAL AVENUE AND GREENLEAF BOULEVARD AND

AN ANGLE POINT IN THE CITY OF COMPTON BOUNDARY LINE PER SAID PARCEL MAP NO. 1022 FILED IN BOOK 17, PAGES 83 & 84 OF SAID COUNTY; L4 THENCE N89°37'40" E 280.00 FEET ALONG THE CITY OF COMPTON BOUNDARY LINE OF THE CITY OF COMPTON ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO 155; LS THENCE N00°22'20" W 518.09 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF 168TH STREET, NOW GREENLEAF BOULEVARD (60 FEET WIDE), PER SAID PARCEL MAP NO 1022;
L6 THENCE S87°54'35 " W 250.11 FEET ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY TO

THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF CENTRAL AVENUE (90 FEET WIDE) PER SAID PARCEL MAP NO 1022; llPAGE
L7 THENCE N00°22'20" W 508.24 FEET ALONG THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF CENTRAL AVENUE (90 FEET WIDE) TO THE SOUTHERLY TRACT LINE OF TRACT MAP NO 16757 FILED IN BOOK 501 PAGES 17-20 OF SAID COUNTY; LS THENCE S89°47'02" E 981.51 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY TRACT LINE TO AN ANGLE POINT IN SOUTHERLY TRACT LINE TRACT NO. 16757;
L9 THENCE S03°01 '56" E 498.58 FEET ALONG SAID TRACT LINE TO THE CENTERLINE OF 168TH STREET, NOW GREENLEAF BOULEVARD (60 FEET WIDE) PER SAID TRACT NO. 16757;
L 10 THENCE N87°54'35" E 1534.08 FEET ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF GREENLEAF

BOULEVARD TO THE NORTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF PARCELS 17 & 18 PER PARCEL MAP NO. 1022 FILED IN BOOK 17, PAGES 83 & 84 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES;
L 11 THENCE S03°12'07" E 1050.24 FEET ALONG SAID PROLONGATION LINE TO AN ANGLE POINT OF THE TRACT LINE PER SAID PARCEL MAP NO 1022; L 12 THENCE N87°54'55" E 1326.00 FEET ALONG SAID TRACT LINE AND THE EASTERLY PROLONGATION THEREOF TO A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND 204.22 FEET EASTERLY OF THE CENTERLINE OF WILMINGTON AVENUE; SAID PARALLEL LINE BEING THE EASTERLY LINE OF ANNEXATION DISTRICT 85 OF THE CITY OF COMPTON FILED JANUARY 23, 1952;
L 13 THENCE N03°12'17" W 1050.32 FEET ALONG SAID LINE PARALLEL TO AND 204.22 FEET EASTERLY OF THE CENTERLINE OF WILMINGTON AVENUE TO THE CENTERLINE OF GREENLEAF BOULEVARD (60 FEET WIDE) PER PARCEL MAP NO. 1604 FILED IN BOOK 26, PAGES 53 & 54 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY;
L 14 THENCE N87°54'42" E 3882.10 FEET ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF GREENLEAF BOULEVARD TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PARCEL 12 SHOWN ON THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON RIGHT OF WAY MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 2 OF OFFICIAL MAPS, PAGES 43 THROUGH 48 INCLUSIVE, ALSO BEING THE

NORTHEAST CORNER OF SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY RIGHT OF WAY (120 FEET WIDE) PER RECORD OF SURVEY FILED IN BOOK 114, PAGES 86 - 94 OF SAID COUNTY;
L 15 THENCE S03°15'14" E 1192.70 FEET ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID

SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY RIGHT OF WAY PER SAID

RECORD OF SURVEY TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE EASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 11399.19 FEET AND A RADIAL BEARING OF N86°42'27" E;
C16 THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00° 09'00" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 29.84 FEET TO A NON­ TANGENT COMPOUND CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 5669.60 FEET; 2IPAGE
C17 THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE 00°18'00" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 29.69 FEET TO A NON­ TANGENT COMPOUND CURVE, HAVING A RADIUS OF 3759.75 FEET; C18 THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00°27'00" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 29.53 FEET TO A NON­ TANGENT COMPOUND CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 2804.83 FEET; C19 THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00°36'00" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 29.37 FEET TO A NON­ TANGENT COMPOUND CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 2231.88 FEET; C20 THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00°44'59" AN ARC LENGTH OF 29.21 FEET TO A NON­ TANGENT COMPOUND CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 1849.91 FEET; C21 THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11 °20'31" AN ARC LENGTH OF 366.20 FEET TO A NON­ TANGENT COMPOUND CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 2231.80 FEET; C22 THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00°44'59" AN ARC LENGTH OF 29.21 FEET TO A NON­ TANGENT COMPOUND CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 2804.83 FEET; C23 THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00°36'00" AN ARC LENGTH OF 29.37 FEET TO A NON­ TANGENT COMPOUND CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 3759.75 FEET; C24 THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00°27'00" AN ARC LENGTH OF 29.53 FEET TO A NON­ TANGENT COMPOUND CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 5669.60 FEET; C25 THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THOUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00°18'00" AN ARC LENGTH OF 29.69 FEET TO A TANGENT COMPOUND CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 11399.19 FEET;
C26 THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THOUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00°09'00" AN ARC LENGTH OF 29.84 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE WITH A RADIAL BEARING OF N70°54'16" E;
L27 THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY RIGHT OF WAY (120 FEET WIDE) PER RECORD OF SURVEY FILED IN BOOK 114, PAGES 86 - 94 OF SAID COUNTY; S19°05'45' E 1343.29 FEET TO A LINE THAT IS PARALLEL WITH, AND 150 FEET SOUTHERLY, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES FROM THE NORTHERLY

LINE OF THE PEDRO DOMINGUEZ ALLOTMENT PER CITY OF COMPTON ANNEXATION NO. 94 FILED WITH THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDER ON JANUARY 22,1953, AND RECORD OF SURVEY BOOK 152 PAGES 52-64 SAID COUNTY;
3IPAGE
L28 THENCE ALONG SAID LINE PARALLEL WITH AND 150 FEET SOUTHERLY OF THE NORTHERLY DOMINGUEZ ALLOTMENT LINE N89°27'37" W 780.12 FEET TO

THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID HELLMAN TRACT PER CITY OF COMPTON ANNEXATION NO. 94 FILED WITH THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDER ON JANUARY 22, 1953 AND MAP OF THE HELLMAN TRACT FILED IN BOOK 02 MISCELLANEOUS MAPS PAGES 524-525 LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDS; L29 THENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE OF SAID HELLMAN TRACT S00°28'05" E 1583.59 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF APRA STREET (60 FEET WIDE) PER PARCEL MAP 5316 FILED IN BOOK 73 OF PARCEL MAPS, PAGES 28 & 29 OF SAID COUNTY;
L30 THENCE N87° 59'38" E 80.03 FEET ALONG THE EASTERLY PROLONGATION OF

SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF APRA STREET OF SAID PARCEL MAP 5316, SAID LINE ALSO BEING THE CITY OF COMPTON BOUNDARY LINE DESCRIBED IN ANNEXATION DISTRICT 172B TO THE CITY OF COMPTON FILED AS INSTRUMENT NUMBER 81-151848 LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDS;
L31 THENCE S00°28'07" E 63.02 FEET ALONG SAID CITY OF COMPTON LINE AS SHOWN IN SAID ANNEXATION DISTRICT 1728, SAID LINE ALSO BEING 20 FEET

EASTERLY, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES, TO THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF ACACIA AVENUE;
L32 THENCE S87°59'38" W 33.53 FEET ALONG SAID CITY LINE DESCRIBED IN SAID CITY ANNEXATION DISTRICT 172B TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 44.99 FEET AND A RADIAL BEARING OF N44°51'00"W;
C33 THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 42°50'14" AN ARC LENGTH OF 33.64 FEET TO THE END OF SAID

CURVE, ALSO BEING THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF APRA STREET PER SAID ANNEXATION DISTRICT 172B;
L34 THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF APRA STREET S87°59'38" W 676.21 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN THE CITY OF COMPTON BOUNDARY SAID PER ANNEXATION DISTRICT 172B AND THE EASTERLY TRACT LINE OF PARCEL MAP NO. 11315 RECORDED IN BOOK 112, PAGES 39- 43 LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDS;
L35 THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL MAP S07°59'01" W 220.44. FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL MAP NO. 11315;
L36 THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE S08°12'20"W 1573.19 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL MAP NO. 11315;
L37 THENCE S88°00'18"W 1214.41 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL MAP NO. 11315;
4IPAGE

THENCE THE FOLLOWING ALONG THE SOUTHERLY AND WESTERLY TRACT LINE OF SAID PARCEL MAP NO. 11315 AND THE SOUTHERLY AND WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF COMPTON THE FOLLOWING SEVEN (7) COURSES AND DISTANCES;
L38 THENCE N00°00'00"W 574.42 FEET
L39 THENCE S90°00'00" W 197.82 FEET
L40 THENCE N50°28'01" W 362.55 FEET
L41 THENCE N01°57'15" W 475.70 FEET
L42 THENCE S88°02'45" W 621.52 FEET
L43 THENCE N01°57'15" W 306.21 FEET
L44 THENCE S88°02'45" W 421.15 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF WILMINGTON AVENUE(83 FEET WIDE) PER PARCEL MAP NO. 11315 PAGES 39-43 LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDS;
L45 THENCE N04 °01 '09" W 203.16 FEET ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID

WILMINGTON AVENUE TO THE INTERSECTION OF WILMINGTON AVENUE AND VICTORIA STREET (84 FEET WIDE) PER PARCEL MAP NO. 11315 PAGES 39-43 LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDS;
L46 THENCE S87°59'38" W 2071.56 FEET ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF VICTORIA STREET SHOWN IN PARCEL MAP 11180 FILED IN BOOK 107, PAGES 24 THROUGH 26 LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDS TO THE SOUTHERLY
PROLONGATION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOT 7 OF SAID PARCEL MAP NO. 11180 AND THE BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF COMPTON;
L47 THENCE N02°01'16" W 734.74 FEET ALONG SAID EASTERLY TRACT LINE AND

THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF THE CITY OF COMPTON TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT? OF SAID PARCEL MAP NO. 11180 AND AN ANGLE POINT OF THE CITY OF COMPTON BOUNDARY;
L48 THENCE S87°59'53" W 1850. 75 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE

CITY OF COMPTON AND THE SOUTHERLY TRACT LINE OF SAID PARCEL MAP NO. 11180 TO POINT OF BEGINNING .

CONTAINING: 872.797 ACRES MORE OR LESS.

SUBJECT TO ALL COVENANTS, RIGHTS, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD.

ALL AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT ATTACHED HERETO AS "EXHIBIT B" AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.

SI PAGE

THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT.

PREPARED BY
NVS, INC.
/
/
J BRALEY, L.S. 8446
09-08-2023
DATE
6IPAGE
..... . .:.i
: EXHIBIT "B,,
I ,...

CITY OF

COMPTON
• • • • • I
: PARCEL: MAP : ·
• : • 06 t331 • : c~=======l
: :PM 334~096' : • : • : • :
. . . .

ARTESIA: s~vo :
- . ·sR· · ·g1· ·• · . . - . . . . . .
/
'--

ABBREVIATIONS & LEGEND

CITY OF
CARSON

POC POINT OF COMMENCEMENT

POB POINT OF BEGINNING

CCMAD COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT

GLACVCD GREATER LA COUNTY

VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT
i ···;,··- ._ • GLACVCD EXISTING BOUNDARY

CCMAD EXISTING BOUNDARY
-------- CITY OF COMPTON BOUNDARY
--- REORGANIZATION BOUNDARY
l
W. GREENLEAF-¼-_
-
'1"ayfor Morns
_,__ __ _,_ __ ..,............-----:-J N
AREA C CONTAINS 872.797 ACRES

MORE OR LESS
w· . > - •. • ' .
<(. . . . . . . . - . - . ' .
• · • · PARCEL MAP -1430 -
_j . : • : • :PM 023:.050: • : • <( ' . . . . . . .
a::: . • . • '
Le.. • •
~ . . .

Z , ..
. W . •.•.
, U .•.•.

I
o' 21 o· 420· 840'
- ----
SCALE 1"= 420'

THIS PLAT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER

MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE

PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT ON
SEPTEMBER 7, 2023 . :RADBARD
• : ST · •
- --=--:--i~~~ -== - . . - . . . .
. :MAHALO Pl . • . • . • . • /~ 09-07-2023
. . . .
• :PO:C·: ·
. . . ' . • I· •.•.•... . . . . .

NV 5
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
P: 858.385.0500 WWW.NV5.COM
J BRALEY L.S. 8446 DATE
: • : • : • : ·L46 : • :
. . . . . . . . . . .
• : • : • : W :VICJORIA -S. : • : . : •
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9C
PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 09-07-2023
: . l

SHEET NUMBER
1 OF 8 SHEETS

JOB NUMBER
227822-0001585.00
I TRACT 16757
I TR 0501-017
- ",_ wa L:B ,__...,.. ___ ..,;;;;. _____ .......,.
/EXHIBIT "B "/
I
• • I
. . . . . . . . . .
: • :- i ~ :::::::::::::::: < ~ TRACT 14170
TR 03Q7-013
TR0:

NV5
15092 AVENU£ OF SC/£NC£, SUIT£ 200
SAN D/£GO, CA 92128
P: 858.385.0500 WWW.NV5.COM
on
O' 210' 420' 840'
j
SCALE 1"=
N
I
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9C
420'

SHEET NUMBER
2 OF 8 SHEETS PREPARED FOR: CCMAO
JOB NUMBER DATE SUBMITTED: 09-07-2023 227622-0001565.00 (
w > <(
I (/)
a:: I
TRACT 13742 ~
/EXHIBIT
TRACT 1473
"B"I
~
w <
l > . <(
l I a:: w I- I TR 0290-006 ~ 1
~'--~=========i~~~....__,~-+-1~::~::;~~-;~_;;=_ ;_ ;_ ~-;_ i. ~-~:;;;;;:s~o~·:;c~A·=;L::.~E::.;D~~,;s~-~O~N~-~R/W~. ~-~::: =: ~:; :~w~~G~R~E;E~N~~~-EE~:A~.F~:aa~_L'L~VVED~-~ -~-~-~- 7: i:
~ • : • : : : ; : • : : : • : : f'ER_itM2-4:i: - _;__; ; : : : • : : : • : • : • : : : : :
z TR 0020-1548 w
L14 0
,,
I
I
--- - =:-1

GREENLEAF DR
CITY ANNEX NO. 85
~ . . . . . . . z
~ : • : • : • : • : • : PARCEL MAP 1.604 • : • : • : . : . : . : · : · : : · · · . · ~ ~ : : : : : : : : : : : : f:>M 02~-6~3: • : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : PARC 3 ~-. • • . . . • . .. .... : . . : ·p 3 • • . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . .
• L_12 I • • • • • • • : • . • . . . . • : . : .... ... .... : . : : : . : . : .

NV5
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200 SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
P: 858 . .385.0500 WWW.NV5.C0M
o' 210' 420'
J
SCALE 1"=
N
I
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9C
840'
420'

SHEET NUMBER
3 OF 8 SHEETS PREPARED FOR: CCMAD
JOB NUMBER DATE SUBMITTED: 09-07-2023 227622-0001565.00 w
>
<(

EXHIBIT
w >
~ I FARROWDALE :
,, B,,
w
>
<(
:::.::::
0 0
IY
en
':;::
0 _j
_j
L14
~ 1 TRACT ~
~ l TR 0014-1908 ~
TRACT 3789
TR 0041-028 ~ E GREENLEAF BLVD
. . . ~ . . . . .
:w ~RE;EN~EA(~L\/~ : : SO CAL ED ISON R/W, • : . . . _ _ _ : : : :pE:R: OM2-43 • : • ~ : · > :_. : · :-' : · : . . - . . • . • .... ..... • : • : • : • : • : • : • : • : • : • : • : ·PARCEL ·MAP 2773 : : : :
: : : : : : : • : • : • ~ • : • : • : • : · : · : PM "044-027 · : · : · : . . . . . . . . . . ' . . . . . .
: • PARCEL · MAP 22737 · : . . . . - .
• :Pfv'.1 247-QB?: - : - :
• . . . . . .
• :PARCEL :MAP ~82:2•
: • PM 094-054 · :
. .
. • . 'I.[)
,..-
_J
• • . - . . . . .
:A~TE_SLA: BLVP • : . • . : . : . • .
o' 210· 420· 840' . . . . . .
• ·SR.-· 91 • · • · ·
j
SCALE 1"= 420'
N
I
NV5
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
. . . ' . . . . .
• ' • • ♦ • • • •
: : SEE.· SHEET 5: :

I O o o • •
: • S'li LINE ·LOT· XIII· :
• : HELLMAN TRACT . 0 • LO .
. -
L28
CITY ANNEX. N0.94
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9C 4
OF 8 SHEETS P: 858.385.0500 WWW.NV5.COM PREPARED FOR: CCMAD JOB NUMBER DATE SUBMITTED: 09-07-2023 227622-0001565.00 : : : : : : : : : : S-EE: S:HEET 4 : EXHIBIT " " . • . . .

B . . : -s't.Y: LINE •LoT· x111- :
· • · • . • HELLMAN TRACT . • • .... .... 0
. I[) .

L28
: : : : : : :PARtEL :MAP: ~4:3~ : : : : : : : : : : : : :~EtO~D bi= : · . . CITY ANNEX. N0. 94 : : : : : : :p·rvi 029:.035: • : • : • : • : : : : : : : : : : : SURVEY : : : : : : : I:'- F>A~CEL MAP 13460 • · • · • · • : • · • : • : • : • : • : • : • : • : · : · : · : RS -241-056 · • · • · • g PM 149 / 13-1'4 : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : ~~ ~ : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : ~ ~ ...J P. DOMIN,GUttZ PARCEL MAP: 53:16 : · : · • · • · • · • · ~ :c
: PM: 73f 2s~29 • : : : • : • : • : • : • ~-+~===-::__uu_::u_,:i:__~_-_~,..... -~::::::_~ 'if?- : : • : • : • : : · : · ~- . _. ___ .- . . . : : : L3:, : :
~ : . : : : : : : ... _ . : : : : : : ~PR~ : ~TR~ET: : : : : : I{): : : : : ~~ 4 : : : : : : : : : LJ~ :
:\ r . : : : : : : : -: . : -: . : -: . : . : -. -: . : : : : : :j: : : : : : : : : : ~3~ . : : : . • . - - - . - . ' . • . • . • . . . . : • : . : . : • : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : ctTY. oF: COMPTON . ' •.•. . ( . • . • . • . • . • . • . • . • . • . • . • . . . • . • . • . ' • BOUNDARY • . • . • . • . • . • . • . . . . . . . . . . . .. - . . . . . . . . . . ............ . o' 21 o· 420· 840'
- ----
. . ex:) .. n .• 1-7- ' _J
. (f) .
. • :::.::: ' .
. · o ·. . . 3: . .
. :~ : :1
• . O::'. . •
. m .
. I
:-----_,_ ._ ...
. -' . : . : . :-. • :::--;----"- ----'-
(J) . . . . . .
:::L . : . : . : . : . :

I · •
. . --- •
. : 1 ~ :'.:.:::::::::::: : ::::::::::
::, · L37 · · · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " . . . . . - .

SCALE 1"=
I N
I
NV S
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9C
420'

SHEET NUMBER
5 OF 8 SHEETS 15092 AVE:NU£ OF SC/£NC£, SUIT£ 200
SAN D/£GOJ. CA 92128
P: 858.38::,.0500 WWW.NV5.COM PREPARED FOR: CCMAD JOB NUMBER DA TE SUBMITTED: 09-07-2023 227622-0001565.00
. . . . " " . • • . . . . . . .
o' 210' 420' 840'
- ----
SCALE 1"= 420'
l N
I
NV 5
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO. CA 92128
P: 858.JBS.0500 WWW.NVS.COM
: : 1\::::.: ••••• : ••• :: •• :: ~:: ••• : ••••
• · • · · • · • · • · • · • · • · • · • · • · ~o· · . · L39. · • ' . . . . . • . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . - . . . . ' . ' . .
• : PARCEL MAP: 1-3497 •
: • PM: 239~o26 : · . · : · :ro
•• I")
• " 1-- " _j
........... : · 0 ·.
: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :~f :
: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :~: :
• • • • • • • . . • . . <t: I : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :~::
• : • : • : - ~ - :1
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9C

SHEET NUMBER
6 OF 8 SHEETS
PREPARED FOR: CCMAD JOB NUMBER
DA TE SUBMITTED: 09-07-202 3 227622-0001565.00
AP
EXHIBIT "B"
NUMBERS IN AREA 9C
6141-031-045 7318-002-034
7306-010-806 7318-002-035
7306-010-807 7318-002-039
7306-010-902 7318-002-041
7318-001-062 7318-002-042
7318-001-083 7318-002-043
7318-001-085 7318-002-047
7318-001-086 7318-002-059
7318-001-087 7318-002-060
7318-001-088 7318-002-061
7318-001-089 7318-002-063
7318-001-092 7318-002-064
7318-001-093 7318-002-065
7318-001-094 7318-002-066
7318-001-095 7318-002-076
7318-001-096 7318-002-077
7318-001-097 7318-002-078
7318-001-101 7318-002-804
7318-001-102 7318-002-807
7318-001-105 7318-002-808
7318-001-106 7318-002-810
7318-001-109 7318-003-812
7318-001-110 7318-003-813
7318-001-112 7318-003-928
7318-001-113 7318-003-929
7318-001-114 7318-005-051
7318-001-115 7318-005-052
7318-001-116 7318-005-053
7318-001-117 7318-005-054
7318-001-118 7318-005-055
7318-001-800 7318-005-056
7318-001-801 7318-005-057
7318-001-809 7318-005-060
7318-001-810 7318-013-006
7318-001-811 7318-013-007
7318-001-812 7318-013-008
7318-001-818 7318-013-013
7318-001-819 7318-013-014
7318-001-820 7318-013-021
7318-001-821 7318-013-022
7318-002-015 7318-013-024
7318-002-023 7318-013-025
7318-002-024 7318-013-033
7318-002-027 7318-013-034
7318-002-030 7318-013-802
7318-002-031
7318-002-033
NV 5
7318-013-902 7319-003-034 7319-003-101 7319-029-017
7318-013-903 7319-003-036 7319-003-109 7319-029-027
7318-013-904 7319-003-037 7319-003-110 7319-029-028
7318-013-905 7319-003-038 7319-003-111 7319-029-032
7318-013-906 7319-003-039 7319-003-804 7319-029-033
7318-021-001 7319-003-040 7319-024-017 7319-029-034
7318-021-005 7319-003-041 7319-024-019 7319-029-035
7318-021-012 7319-003-046 7319-024-032 7319-029-041
7318-021-014 7319-003-047 7319-024-033 7319-029-044
7318-021-019 7319-003-048 7319-024-034 7319-029-045
7318-021-031 7319-003-051 7319-024-035 7319-029-046
7318-021-032 7319-003-052 7319-024-037 7319-029-047
7318-021-033 7319-003-053 7319-024-038 7319-029-048
7318-021-035 7319-003-054 7319-024-040 7319-029-049
7318-021-037 7319-003-055 7319-024-041 7319-029-050
7318-021-038 7319-003-056 7319-024-042 7319-029-051
7318-021-039 7319-003-057 7319-024-045 7319-029-801
7318-021-043 7319-003-062 7319-024-800 7319-029-901
7318-021-044 7319-003-063 7319-024-900 7319-034-002
7318-021-046 7319-003-065 7319-028-019 7319-034-003
7318-021-047 7319-003-066 7319-028-034 7319-034-005
7318-021-048 7319-003-067 7319-028-035 7319-034-006
7318-021-051 7319-003-068 7319-028-038 7319-034-011
7318-021-052 7319-003-069 7319-028-040 7319-034-012
7318-021-053 7319-003-070 7319-028-041 7319-034-014
7318-024-001 7319-003-071 7319-028-043 7319-034-015
7318-024-002 7319-003-072 7319-028-044 7319-034-016
7318-024-003 7319-003-073 7319-028-045 7319-034-017
7318-024-006 7319-003-074 7319-028-046 7319-034-018
7318-024-009 7319-003-076 7319-028-048 7319-034-019
7318-024-012 7319-003-077 7319-028-049 7319-034-020
7318-024-015 7319-003-078 7319-028-050 7319-034-021
7318-024-016 7319-003-079 7319-028-051 7319-034-022
7318-024-018 7319-003-080 7319-028-053 7319-034-023
7318-024-800 7319-003-081 7319-028-056 7319-034-024
7318-024-801 7319-003-082 7319-028-057 7319-034-025
7318-024-803 7319-003-083 7319-028-058 7319-034-026
7318-024-804 7319-003-084 7319-028-059 7319-034-027
7318-024-806 7319-003-085 7319-028-060 7319-034-028
7319-002-803 7319-003-086 7319-028-803 7319-034-029
7319-002-805 7319-003-087 7319-028-804 Portion:
7319-002-806 7319-003-088 7319-028-805 7318-002-062
7319-003-020 7319-003-089 7319-028-806
7319-003-022 7319-003-090 7319-028-903
7319-003-023 7319-003-092 7319-028-905
7319-003-024 7319-003-098 7319-029-009
7319-003-033 7319-003-100 7319-029-014
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9C

SHEET NUMBER
7 r£ 8 SHEETS 15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO CA 92128
P: 858.385.0500 WWW.NVS.COAI PREPARED FOR: CCMAD JOB NUMBER DATE SUBMITTED: 09-07-2023 227622-0001565.00

LINE TABLE
NO . BEARING
L1 N00°22'20"W
L2 N87°59'42"E
L3 Noo
0 22·2o"w
L4 N89°37'40"E
L5 Noo
0 22·2o"w
L6 S87° 54' 35 "W
L7 N00°22'20"W
LS S89°47'02"E
L9 S03° O 1 ' 56" E
L10 N87°54'35"E
L 11 S03°12'07"E
L12 N87° 54 '55"E
L13 N03° 12' 17"W
L14 N87° 54' 42"E
L15 S03° 15' 14"E
L27 S19°05'45"E
L28 N89°27'37"W
L29 S00°28'05"E
L30 N87° 59 '38"E
L31 S00°28'07"E
L32 S87° 59 '38"W
L34 S87° 59 '38"W
L35 S07°59 '01 "W
L36 S08°12'20"W
L37 S88 ° 00 ' 18" W
L38 N00°00'00"W
L39 S90°00'00"W
L40 N50°28'01"W
L41 NO 1 ° 5 7 ' 15" W
L42 S88°02'45"W
L43 NO 1 ° 5 7 ' 15 "W
L44 S88°02'45"W
L45 N04°01'09"W
L46 S87° 59 '38"W
L47 N02°01 '16"W
L48 S87° 59 '53"W
NVS
EXHIBIT "B"

LINE & CURVE TABLE

ARC TABLE
LENGTH NO . DELTA RADIUS LENGTH
2188.76' C16 6=00°09'00" 11399 • 19 I 29.84'

20.01' C17 6=00°18'00" 5669.60 ' 29.69'
1294.82' C18 6=00°27'00" 3759.75' 29.53'
280.00' C19 6=00°36'00" 2804.83' 29.37'
518.09' C20 6=00°44'59" 2231. 80 I 29. 21'
250. 11' C21 6= 11 ° 20, 31 '' 1849. 91 ' 366.20'
508.24' C22 6=00°44'59" 2231. 80' 29.21
981 . 51 ' C23 6=00°36'00 " 2804.83' 29.37'
498.58' C24 6=00°27'00" 3759.75' 29.53
1 1534.08' C25 6=00°18
1 00" 5669.60' 29.69'
1050.24' C26 6=00°09
1 00" 11399. 19' 29.84'
1326.00' C33 6=42° 50 I 14" 44.99' 33.64
1 1050.32'
3882. 10'
1192.70' INDEX MAP
1343.29'
780. 12'
1583.59'

80.03'

63.02'

33.53 '
676. 21'
220.44'
1573. 19'
1214.41'
574.42'
197.82'
362.55'
475.70'
621. 52'
306. 21'
421.15'
203. 16'
2071. 56'
734.74' VICTORIA
1850.75'

BLVD ---,
I -,
I
I r----
1 ~~= ,
I _____ J

SHEET NUMBER
8 15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9C OF 8 SHEETS
PREPARED FOR: CCMAD JOB NUMBER
DATE SUBMITTED: 09-07- 2023 227622-0001565.00 P: 858.385 .0500 WWW.NV5.COM EXHIBIT "A"

LEGAL DESCRIPTION
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9D
AREA 90 - COMPTON

A PORTION OF THE RANCHO SAN PEDRO IN THE CITY OF COMPTON, COUNTY

OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE MAP FILED IN PATENT BOOK 1, PAGES 119 THROUGH 121, INCLUSIVE OF MAPS IN THE

OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

BEGINNING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF CENTRAL AVENUE AND COMPTON BOULEVARD (FORMERLY MAIN STREET), AS SHOWN ON TRACT NO. 6627 FILED IN BOOK 71, PAGES 64 AND 65 OF MAPS, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID; THENCE,
T1 S 11° 11' 40" E 1867.77 FEET; THENCE,
T2 N 81 °57'18" E 20.03 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING (TPOB);

THENCE,
L 1 N 81°57'18" E 85.71 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN THE SOUTH LINE OF TRACT NO. 21983, AS SHOWN ON MAP FILED IN BOOK 588, PAGES 40 AND 41 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER; THENCE, L2 N 89°12'08" E 550.43 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE; THENCE, L3 S 0°47'52" E 0.81 FEET; THENCE,
L4 N 89°15'20" E 1.05 FEET; THENCE,
LS S 0°44'40" E 135.60 FEET; THENCE,
L6 S 89°12'08" W 613.34 FEET ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 2 OF TRACT NO. 1850, AS SHOWN ON MAP FILED IN BOOK 21, PAGES 194 AND 195 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER; THENCE,
L7 N 11°11'40" W 127.69 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.

CONSISTING OF 1.949 ACRES MORE OR LESS

LINE DATA

LINE BEARING DISTANCE
L1 N 81"57
1 18
11 E 85.71'
L2 N 89"12'08" E 550.43'
L3 s 00·47'52" E 0.81 I
L4 N 89"15'20" E 1.05'
LS S 00"44'40" E 135.60'
L6 S 89"12'08" W 613 .34'
L7 N 11"11'40" W 127.69'

LINE DATA

LINE BEARING DISTANCE
T2 N 81"57'18" E 20.03'
POB
Cl COMPTON BLVD.

AREA 9D

DETAIL A

RANCHO SAN PEDRO
PB 1-119-121
W. COMPTON BLVD

VICINITY
SCALE: 1 n= 100'
so' \__
~--------------- ----- ------- ----
15 'q"
-in
-~
TRACT NO. 2198.J MB 588-40-4.J DETAIL A
L2
APN 6142-014-902 (POR.)
APN 6142-014-90.J
SOUTH LINE OF LOT 2 l6
TR. NO. 1850 MB 21-194-195
AREA = 1.949 ACRES
EXHIBIT "B" BUCKEYE SURVEYING & ENGINEERING
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO COMPTON CREEK # -I/-, { / MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETATCHMENT FROM ::,s v=. ~ '}') . .- - ~ ')../~ 2 ~ GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD} AREA 9D Tel: (BOS} 208-0952 ~ - I SHEET 1 OF 1 ~~1~5!"~ .com DENNIS HUNTER PLS 8539 DATE
ST
,-
01 ~
~
1'-a.Yfor Morns

GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
• REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9E

EXHIBIT A
AREA 9E - COMPTON

A PORTION OF THE RANCHO SAN PEDRO IN THE CITY OF COMPTON, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE MAP FILED IN PATENT BOOK 1, PAGE 119 OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

COMMENCING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF COMPTON BOULEVARD (80' WIDE) AND CENTRAL AVENUE (VARIABLE WIDTH); THENCE SOUTH 11 °11'40" EAST ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF CENTRAL AVENUE 40.73 FEET TO THE WESTERLY

PROLONGATION OF THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF COMPTON BOULEVARD (FORMERLY MAIN STREET) PER TRACT 6627 PER MAP FILED IN BOOK 71 , PAGES 64-65 IN SAID OFFICE OF SAID COUNTY, SAID POINT BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING; L 1 FROM SAID POINT OF BEGINNING AND LEAVING SAID CENTERLINE OF CENTRAL AVENUE THENCE NORTH 89°39'00" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF COMPTON AVENUE A DISTANCE OF 2783.55 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 15, BLOCK A, PER TRACT NO. 7148 SHOWN ON THE MAP FILED IN BOOK 78, PAGE 77 AT THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY;
L2 THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 15 SOUTH 03°19'10" EAST A DISTANCE OF 130.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT PER SAID TRACT NO. 7148;
L3 THENCE NORTH 89°39'00" EAST A DISTANCE OF 210.03 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOTS 15 THRU 20 PER SAID TRACT NO. 7148 AND THE

EASTERLY PROLONGATION THEREOF TO THE CENTERLINE OF DWIGHT AVENUE, FORMERLY DWIGHT STREET (57' WIDE), SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF CITY OF COMPTON ANNEXTION DISTRICT NO. 158 FILED NOVEMBER 15, 1968, WITH THE COUNTY RECORDER OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY;
L4 THENCE ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF DWIGHT AVENUE SOUTH 03°19'10" EAST 510.40 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID CITY OF COMPTON ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 158, SAID LINE ALSO BEING THE EASTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 7148; LS THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF TRACT 7148 & SOUTHERLY LINE OF BLOCK M TRACT 6627 FILED IN BOOK 71 PAGES 64 THRU 65, LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDS , SOUTH 89°38'15 " WEST A DISTANCE OF 1327.05 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF BLOCK M PER TRACT NO. 6627, AND ITS' WESTERLY PROLONGATION TO THE CENTERLINE OF TAJAUTA AVENUE (30' HALF WIDTH) (FORMERLY JAMISON STREET) PER SAID TRACT NO. 6627; L6 THENCE ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF TAJAUTA AVENUE (FORMERLY COMPTON AVENUE) (30' HALF WIDTH) SOUTH 03°20'40" EAST A DISTANCE OF 962.18 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF COMPTON PER TRACT NO. 21983 PER MAP FILED IN BOOK 588, PAGES 40 THRU 43 INCLUSIVE AT THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY; L7 THENCE SOUTH 89°14'22" WEST A DISTANCE OF 474.99 FEET ALONG SAID NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF COMPTON PER SAID TRACT NO. 21983 TO THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF THE CITY OF COMPTON PER SAID TRACT NO. 21983 AND PER RECORD OF SURVEY FILED IN BOOK 320 PAGE 82 LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDS;

LB THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY CITY OF COMPTON BOUNDARY LINE PER SAID RECORD OF SURVEY NORTH 03°21'39" WEST A DISTANCE OF 187.95 FEET TO

AN ANGLE POINT THEREOF, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTHEASTERLY POINT OF CITY OF COMPTON ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 104 PER SAID RECORD OF SURVEY.;
L9 THENCE FOLLOWING SAID CITY OF COMPTON ANNEXATION DISTRICT BOUNDARY AND SAID RECORD OF SURVEY SOUTH 89°16'05" WEST 300.00 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT OF SAID ANNEXATION DISTRICT BOUNDARY; L 10 THENCE NORTH 03°21'39" WEST A DISTANCE OF 110.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF 155TH STREET (VARIOUS WIDTH), SAID RIGHT

OF WAY ALSO BEING THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 104, ALSO BEING THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 6627 SHOWN IN BOOK 71 OF MAPS, PAGE 64 THRU 65 INCLUSIVE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY;
L 11 THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF 155TH STREET AND THE WESTERLY PROLONGATION THEREOF SOUTH 89°16'05" WEST A DISTANCE OF 707.80 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF CENTRAL AVENUE (VARIABLE WIDTH),

SAID POINT BEING THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID CITY OF COMPTON ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 104;
L 12 THENCE ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID CENTRAL AVENUE NORTH 11°11'40" WEST A DISTANCE OF 1337.15 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND THE END OF THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION.

CONTAINING: 70.18 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.

SUBJECT TO ALL COVENANTS, RIGHTS, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD .

ALL AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT ATTACHED HERETO AS "EXHIBIT B" AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.

THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT.

PREPARED BY
NV5, INC.
//? ✓
/ '-0/;!-/
J BRALEY, L.S. 8446
01/11/2024
DATE
><-P=o=c=------,.______,,,----Ns-9· J-. g~'G@--:::"[~E ~ HI BIT -=------- - ~ - ---
,, B "~------- ~-------~
-~C~OMPTONBL~□~---
L1
• • o + • t ♦ O O • 0 0 o O • o • t O • 0 t O O o ♦ 0 < t O o o o • • • o O o • o • o • • • 0 • o • • o oo • o • o o • , ♦ 0 o o o • t O O ♦ t 00 0 00 I ♦ O o o O • • T • • • • • • •• • • • • •• • • • ••••• ••••--• •••• .......... ........ ... .................................... ' .... . ' .... ..... ' ................. .... ............ ......... . o • 0 o o o • • • • • • • 0 • • • • • • • • o o • • o o o, O o o o o o o o o O • 0 0 o ♦ 0 Io I ♦ 0 o Io o o o • • o + o o o • • • •• • • • • • 0 •• 0 IO O +o O O O +IO O O • o •• • ♦ o • •• • + •• o o oo o o o • 00 0 • • ·-:-:-:·-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-::so::-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: ..... ... ............. ' ....................... ' ............... .................................. ' ...... ... . • T • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • o o o o o o o o o • o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O O O O • 0 ♦ • • •• o • o • o - • o o o • • 0 o O • o O O O ♦ 0 • • • :-:-:-:-:-:-:-t r,:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-J :54TH:-$T::-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:.:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-S5:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:­ :-:-:-: :-.·.-.·.-:.·:.·:.-:·.·.-:-:-.-:-.-.-:-:-:-:-.-:-:-.-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: SEE SHEET 4 :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:

PARCEL INCLUDED FOR ANNEXATION

70.18 AC. MORE OR LESS

ABBREVIATIONS & LEGEND
POC
POB
ROW
CCMAD

POINT OF COMMENCEMENT

POINT OF BEGINNING

RIGHT OF WAY

COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT

GLACVCD GREATER LA COUNTY

VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT
GLACVCD EXISTING .................... .................... BOUNDARIES

CCMAD EXISTING

BOUNDARIES

CITY OF COMPTON

BOUNDARIES
NV 5
15092 AVE:NUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
P: 858.385.0500 WWW.NV5.COM
I N
I
o' 1 oo· 1 oo· 400·
- -- -
SCALE 1 "= 200'

THIS PLAT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER

MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE

PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT ON
JANUARY 11, 2023.
/~ 01/11/2024
J BRALEY LS. 8446 DATE
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9E

SHEET NUMBER
1 or 7 SHEETS
PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 01/11/2024 JOB NUMBER 227822-0001686.00
:EXHIBIT "B"
I"'-'- --,--- --=~ ---
l1
N89"39'00"E - - - _ _ COMPTONBL.V~□~--
:-:-:-. :-: :-::.:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-- -:-:-: N ·g:·3~Vo·o>·:{:-:-:~ds3:ss:-: ::: :-:-. - g.5; ' <:<:: :rnwH+: : t : H rntw@mzt t .- LJ g}
·~· : \•·· : >:•:• •:::: :-::: •~rnio :~ji]Eiri>ire,O> •iii :> •;1:;r~;t~NJ5:Ar;~r > : .::: ::::: : : : : •:• ;;:: fi)s{fT:•:/: :: : :: t::r :t\{:{i } ?; ;) ; ::::r: Ii:\ t::: .. • • • • • • <( • • • • • • • • • ······ · TRACT· 6627 • • • · · • • • • .. • • • • .. • • • • • • • • • • • • • .. ······- TRACT--7-1 48 -- .. • .. · -.. · • • • • • • -q- ::::::::::.::~: ::::::::/:::::::\/:/~if 7~/~fSf~:::::::/:::::::::\::::::::::·:::::::: ::::::::::/\::::::::::::::::>:::::t~i:t:t::\:::/:\:::/:/:\:::: .· ..J -:-:-:-:-:--.~ ::-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-::-:-:-:-::-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: :;·· :::::::::::_::~ :-_:-:-:::::·:::-:::::-: :-:::::::::::::::·:::_:::_:_:_~~::::::::_:::::_:_:_:_:_:_:_: _:_:_:_:_.:::::::::._:_:_:_:_:_:_: _: _:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_;~ :_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:_::,:. • • • • • • ,. • • • • • • • • • • , • • - • , • • • • • , • 0 • a • , • • • O t o ♦ • ♦ • • ♦ o o • • • o • • o • • o o • 0 • o o o • o • I o O I • • I o • 0 0 o I o O • > 0 0 ♦ 0 t o O o • • • • • • o • • o o • • 0 0 • o , ..... ' ........ ... . -- . - - - . .... ..... . ... -........................ ... . .. ..... ...... . ... .. ....... ... . . .... .. .. . . .. . ·.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.\:.-.1-??.~P.-?T·.-.-.-.-.-.· ·.- ·.-.- ·:!!) • • • • • • ·_· ·.-.- • • • • • • • ·.-.-.-.-.-.- • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ·lF> • • • • • • • • • • -.- • • • • • ·.- -.-.-. ::::::::::::_:i : ::::::~:{;;:ti~{i~8:ti/M:::t~A{:::::6~11-:::::::::::_·:~<x ::::::::\;our~~R:~/{i~{\~:~2/:f~~~::::::::::::::::: ::: t=-====::::
.... •• • • S89"38' 15''W 1327.05' L5 N LY LINE TRACT 511• . . . .. . . 12.44 ' . ... ... ... . . .. . --~
CCMAD
. . . . . . . . .

TRACT 14124
TR 285-21
I
I
:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:- 5 SEE SHEET 3 LAUREL ST.
0 ID

PARCEL INCLUDED FOR ANNEXATION

70.18 AC. MORE OR LESS

ABBREVIATIONS & LEGEND
POC
POB
ROW
CCMAD

POINT OF COMMENCEMENT

POINT OF BEGINNING

RIGHT OF WAY

COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT

GLACVCD GREATER LA COUNTY

VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT

GLACVCD EXISTING
·~·.-.-.-, .......... ,............... BOUNDARIES

CCMAD EXISTING

BOUNDARIES

CITY OF COMPTON

BOUNDARIES
NV 5
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
P: 858.JBS.0500 WWW.NV5.COM
I o' 1 oo· 1 oo· 400'
- -- -N
I
SCALE 7 "= 200'
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9E
PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 01/11/2024

SHEET NUMBER
2 OF 7 SHEETS

JOB NUMBER
227822·0001686.00
,, s "~u~~~~{~:_:~,~-~-:~~~;~_: _;;~~_:_:_:_:_ :_:_:_: __ :_ N LY LINE TRACT 14124 st'

12.44' \
RAN'OH9 SAN fflDIO I
I
CCMAD
LU
~ ~ g TRACT 21983 ~
0 TR W
S 588/ 40-43 O :-:-:-ciiY:-or-:-:-:-:- -:­
-:-:-c:oMP:roN-:-:-:-·-:
"-ANNEXATION: : ·. ~
:01stR1ct:-fJ0::-: :-: .,
-:.:-:-:-:-rse: :-:-:-:-:-:-. :-
:c w
~ 5 0 t)
z
541 54

PARCEL INCLUDED FOR ANNEXATION

70.18 AC. MORE OR LESS

ABBREVIATIONS & LEGEND
POC
POB
ROW
CCMAD

GLACVCD
....................
·:::::::::::::::::::.

POINT OF COMMENCEMENT

POINT OF BEGINNING

RIGHT OF WAY

COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT

GREATER LA COUNTY

VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT

GLACVCD EXISTING

BOUNDARIES

CCMAD EXISTING

BOUNDARIES

CITY OF COMPTON

BOUNDARIES
LAUREL ST.
54 156TH ST
~
(./)
~
("Tl
:::0 r -<
~ CJ
(./)
g
~
I
("Tl
:::0
0 (0
TRACT 14124
TR 285-21
I
,-=---,I
w
.~
1-:c
(.9
,....____ __ _, s
0 I r L.....-.=----------1
-< LINE
0 (0
TRACT 14124
I
SOUTHERLY LINE TRACT 21983
I o' 1 oo· 1 oo· 400 '
- -- -N
I
SCALE 1 "= 200'
NVS
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9E

SHEET NUMBER
3 OF 7 SHEETS
P: 858.J85.0500 WWW.NV5.COM PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 01/11/2024 JOB NUMBER 227622-0001565.00
• •••• • ·~:·:·:·:·:·:::::::.:::::::::j :ttrH :$r:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~2::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.5 ... .- .. : .-.- . . .- ..... . .- .. _. .. _· : - : -:·:.:. : · :-:-:·:. : · :· :·: ·:· :· :·:·:. : · :· :· : · :·: . :·:. :-:· :· : - . : . : ·:- . :· :·. ·:• :-> : •:.: •: - : -:•:• : · :•:·: ·: - : •: ·:-:-: •:•: •:· :•:-:-: •: ·:.:.: ·: •:•CJTY.•:•O.F:: ·:-:·: ·:-:-:. :·:.: ·:< ·> :· ·> t) )\\t!;}~;1k: ::::::r: : t:? \)) Itt) \) t)::ii~l!~~r: :):/ • • • • .• _. .• :. •. • . • _. .• _. _.. •. • .. .. _.. • :. • . • . ·: .• _.. •. •. ·:. • _. : . • _. _._._. .• : .- .•. •.• : - •.. •. •. ·: . • : : . • . • : .• : .•.• :.· .• : .•.• : : . • :. • :. · : .• : .• : _.. • :. ·: :.J.58 .:: . • : . • , • : .• _.. • . • . . . . . . . - ... .. . - . . . . . . - . - ... - . . . . . . . ·.·.·.·.-.·.·.-.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.L1·t ·.-.·.·.·.-.·.-.·.·.·_·.·.-.·.·.-.-.-.·.-.·.·.·.·.·.· ·.-.·.·.·.-.·.·.·.·.-... •.• ......... ·.·1.s-srH .-s ·T ·.·.·.·.·.·.·. • ........... •.•.•.•.•.

N89"16'05"£ 707.80 ..- : : : : : : : : : : : : '.:::::::::::::: . ::::::::::: : : : : : : : : : : :

RECORD OF SURVEY
320/82
CCMAD
T~ACT 21983
TR 588/40-43
... ............. .. ..... ' ........ '... .. . . . ..... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . ... . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . - .... . . . . .. . . . . . . .. ... .. . . . . .. .. . '............ . ........ . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . -. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . ........ .

L9

CITY OF COMPTON

ANNEXATION
DISTRICT NO. 104
156TH ST
fftY· LJNt· Clf-C -:·:-:· ....
oF·.·coMPT0N-·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.
• ·.- :-:tR:<ifssJ:-:·:·:·:·:-:·:·:-
L7 474.99'
S89" 14'22"W
SOUTHERLY LINE TRACT 21983

PARCEL INCLUDED FOR ANNEXATION

70.18 AC. MORE OR LESS
'

ABBREVIATIONS & LEGEND
POC
POB
ROW
CCMAD

GLACVCD

POINT OF COMMENCEMENT

POINT OF BEGINNING

RIGHT OF WAY

COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT

GREATER LA COUNTY

VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT

GLACVCD EXISTING

BOUNDARIES

CCMAD EXISTING

BOUNDARIES

CITY OF COMPTON

BOUNDARIES
o' 1 oo· 1 oo· 400'
N
I
SCALE 7 "= 200'
NV 5
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9E

SHEET NUMBER
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
P: 858 .J85.0500 WWW.NV5.COM PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 01/11/2024 4 OF 7 SHEETS

JOB NUMBER
227822-0001686.00

LINE TABLE
NO . BEARING
L1 N89°39'00"E
L2 S03 ° 1 9 ' 1 0" E
L3 N89°39'00"E
L4 S03 ° 1 9 ' 1 0 "E
L5 S89 ° 38 ' 15" W
L6 S03°20'40"E
L7 S89 ° 38 ' 15" W
LS N03°21 '39"w
L9 S89°16'05"W
L10 N03°21'39"W
L 11 S89°16'05"W
L12 N11°11'40"W
NV S
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
EXHIBIT "B"

COMPTON BLVD - - - --- ---,

CITY OF

COMPTON

ALONDRA BLVD

VICINITY MAP
N.T.S.
l I
LU
~ z
0 1-
(.9
z
~ ....J
~
~-----~ COMPTON BLVD
LENGTH
Q783.55'
130.00'
SHEET 1 SHEET 2
210.03'
510.40' SHEET 3
1327.05'
962. 18'
474.99'
187.95'
300.00' ALONDRA BLVD
110. 00'
707.80'
1337. 15'

VICINITY MAP
N.T.S.

REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9E
LU
~
z
0 I-
(.9
I
z
~
::!
s N
I

SHEET NUMBER
5 OF 7 SHEETS
P: 858.385.0500 WWW.NV5.COM PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 01/11/2024 JOB NUMBER 227822-0001686.00
6142-001-008
6142-001-009
6142-001-010
6142-001-011
6142-001-012
6142-001-013
6142-001-014
6142-001-015
6142-001-016
6142-001-017
6142-001-021
6142-001-023
6142-001-026
6142-001-027
6142-001-028
6142-001-029
6142-001-030
6142-001-031
6142-001-034
6142-001-035
6142-001-036
6142-001-037
6142-001-038
6142-001-042
6142-001-043
6142-001-044
6142-001-045
6142-001-046
6142-001-047
6142-001-050
6142-001-052
6142-001-054
6142-001-055
6142-001-056
6142-002-001
6142-002-004
6142-002-008
6142-002-009
6142-002-010
6142-002-013
6142-002-014
6142-002-015
6142-002-016
6142-002-017
6142-002-018
6142-002-019
6142-002-020
6142-002-021
6142-002-022
6142-002-023
6142-002-024
6142-002-025
6142-002-026
6142-002-027
6142-002-028
6142-002-029
6142-002-032
6142-002-033
6142-002-034
6142-002-035
6142-002-038
6142-002-039
6142-002-040
6142-002-041
6142-002-043
6142-002-044
6142-002-045
6142-002-046
6142-002-047
6142-002-048
6142-002-049
6142-003-001
6142-003-002
6142-003-003
6142-003-004
6142-003-005
6142-003-008
6142-003-009
6142-003-011
6142-003-012
6142-003-013
6142-003-014
6142-003-015
6142-003-016
6142-003-017
6142-003-018
6142-003-019
6142-003-020
6142-003-021
6142-003-022
6142-003-023
6142-003-024
6142-003-025
6142-003-026
6142-003-030
6142-003-031
6142-003-032
6142-003-033
6142-003-034
6142-003-035
6142-003-036
6142-003-037
6142-003-038
6142-003-041
NV 5
15092 AVE:NUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO,,_ CA 92128
P: 858.JB::,.0500 WWW.NV5.COM
EXHIBIT "B"

ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBERS
6142-003-042
6142-003-046
6142-003-047
6142-003-049
6142-003-050
6142-003-051
6142-003-052
6142-004-001
6142-004-002
6142-004-003
6142-004-004
6142-004-005
6142-004-008
6142-004-009
6142-004-010
6142-004-011
6142-004-012
6142-004-013
6142-004-014
6142-004-015
6142-004-016
6142-004-017
6142-004-021
6142-004-022
6142-004-023
6142-004-024
6142-004-025
6142-004-026
6142-004-029
6142-004-030
6142-004-031
6142-004-032
6142-004-033
6142-004-034
6142-004-035
6142-004-036
6142-004-037
6142-004-038
6142-004-039
6142-004-041
6142-004-042
6142-004-043
6142-004-044
6142-005-001
6142-005-002
6142-005-004
6142-005-006
6142-005-007
6142-005-008
6142-005-009
6142-005-010
6142-005-011
6142-005-012
6142-005-013
6142-005-014
6142-005-017
6142-005-018
6142-005-019
6142-005-020
6142-005-021
6142-005-022
6142-005-023
6142-005-024
6142-005-025
6142-005-026
6142-005-027
6142-005-028
6142-005-029
6142-005-030
6142-005-031
6142-005-032
6142-005-033
6142-005-034
6142-005-035
6142-005-036
6142-005-039
6142-005-040
6142-005-041
6142-006-003
6142-006-004
6142-006-005
6142-006-006
6142-006-015
6142-006-016
6142-006-017
6142-006-018
6142-006-019
6142-006-020
6142-006-021
6142-006-022
6142-006-023
6142-006-024
6142-006-031
6142-006-032
6142-006-033
6142-006-034
6142-006-037
6142-006-038
6142-006-039
6142-006-901
6142-006-902
6142-007-001
6142-007-002
6142-007-003
6142-007-008
6142-007-009
6142-007-010
6142-007-011
6142-007-012
6142-007-013
6142-007-014
6142-007-015
6142-007-018
6142-007-019
6142-007-020
6142-007-023
6142-007-027
6142-007-028
6142-007-029
6142-007-030
6142-007-031
6142-007-032
6142-007-035
6142-007-036
6142-007-038
6142-007-039
6142-007-041
6142-007-042
6142-007-043
6142-007-045
6142-007-046
6142-007-047
6142-007-048
6142-007-051
6142-007-052
6142-007-053
6142-007-054
6142-007-055
6142-008-001
6142-008-004
6142-008-005
6142-008-006
6142-008-011
6142-008-012
6142-008-013
6142-008-014
6142-008-015
6142-008-016
6142-008-021
6142-008-022
6142-008-023
6142-008-024
6142-008-025
6142-008-026
6142-008-027
6142-008-028
6142-008-034
6142-008-039
6142-008-040
6142-008-043
6142-008-044
6142-008-045
6142-008-047
6142-008-048
6142-008-049
6142-008-050
6142-008-051
6142-008-052
6142-008-053
6142-008-054
6142-008-055
6142-008-056
6142-009-001
6142-009-004
6142-009-005
6142-009-006
6142-009-007
6142-009-008
6142-009-009
6142-009-012
6142-009-013
6142-009-014
6142-009-015
6142-009-016
6142-009-017
6142-009-018
6142-009-019
6142-009-020
6142-009-021
6142-009-022
6142-009-023
6142-009-024
6142-009-025
6142-009-026
6142-009-027
6142-009-028
6142-009-029
6142-009-030
6142-009-031
6142-009-032
6142-009-033
6142-009-034
6142-009-035
6142-009-036
6142-009-037
6142-009-041
6142-009-042
6142-009-043
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9E

SHEET NUMBER
6 OF 7 SHEETS
PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 01/11/2024 JOB NUMBER 227822-0001686.00
EXHIBIT "B,,

ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBERS
6142-009-044 6142-012-007 6142-024-004 6142-025-029 6142-027-060 6142-009-045 6142-012-008 6142-024-005 6142-025-032 6142-027-061 6142-009-046 6142-012-009 6142-024-006 6142-025-033 6142-027-062 6142-009-047 6142-012-010 6142-024-007 6142-025-034 6142-027-063 6142-009-048 6142-012-011 6142-024-010 6142-025-035 6142-027-064 6142-009-054 6142-012-012 6142-024-011 6142-025-037 6142-027-065 6142-009-055 6142-012-013 6142-024-012 6142-025-038 6142-027-066 6142-010-001 6142-012-014 6142-024-013 6142-026-002 6142-027-067 6142-010-002 6142-012-015 6142-024-014 6142-026-005
6142-010-003 6142-012-017 6142-024-015 6142-026-011 PORTION OF:
6142-010-004 6142-012-031 6142-024-016 6142-026-012 6142-012-040 6142-010-005 6142-012-037 6142-024-019 6142-026-013 6142-012-041 6142-010-009 6142-012-038 6142-024-020 6142-026-014 6142-012-042 6142-010-010 6142-012-039 6142-024-021 6142-026-015 6142-012-043 6142-010-011 6142-012-901 6142-024-022 6142-026-016
6142-010-012 6142-022-002 6142-024-024 6142-026-017
6142-010-013 6142-022-003 6142-024-025 6142-026-018
6142-010-014 6142-022-004 6142-024-026 6142-026-019
6142-010-017 6142-022-005 6142-024-027 6142-026-020
6142-010-018 6142-022-006 6142-024-030 6142-026-021
6142-010-019 6142-022-007 6142-024-031 6142-026-022
6142-010-021 6142-022-008 6142-024-034 6142-026-023
6142-010-022 6142-022-009 6142-024-035 6142-026-024
6142-010-023 6142-022-010 6142-02 4-036 6142-026-025
6142-010-024 6142-022-012 6142-024-037 6142-026-026
6142-010-025 6142-022-013 6142-024-038 6142-027-015
6142-010-026 6142-022-014 6142-024-040 6142-027-016
6142-010-032 6142-022-028 6142-024-041 6142-027-017
6142-010-033 6142-022-034 6142-025-001 6142-027-018
6142-010-034 6142-022-035 6142-025-002 6142-027-021
6142-010-035 6142-023-001 6142-025-003 6142-027-022
6142-010-036 6142-023-002 6142-025-004 6142-027-023
6142-010-037 6142-023-003 6142-025-005 6142-027-024
6142-010-038 6142-023-004 6142-025-006 6142-027-025
6142-010-039 6142-023-005 6142-025-007 6142-027-026
6142-010-040 6142-023-006 6142-025-008 6142-027-027
6142-010-041 6142-023-007 6142-025-009 6142-027-028
6142-010-042 6142-023-008 6142-025-010 6142-027-029
6142-010-043 6142-023-009 6142-025-012 6142-027-030
6142-010-044 6142-023-010 6142-025-013 6142-027-031
6142-010-045 6142-023-011 6142-025-015 6142-027-034
6142-010-046 6142-023-014 6142-025-016 6142-027-035
6142-010-047 6142-023-015 6142-025-017 6142-027-043
6142-010-048 6142-023-016 6142-025-018 6142-027-054
6142-010-051 6142-023-018 6142-025-019 6142-027-055
6142-011-902 6142-024-001 6142-025-020 6142-027-056
6142-012-001 6142-024-002 6142-025-021 6142-027-058
6142-012-002 6142-024-003 6142-025-022
6142-012-003 6142-025-023
6142-012-004 6142-025-024
6142-012-005 6142-025-025
6142-012-006 6142-025-028
N V s
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

SHEET NUMBER
MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM 7
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200 GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9E OF 7 SHEETS SAN DIEGO, CA 92128 PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 01/11/2024 JOB NUMBER P: 858.JBS.0500 WWW.NVS.COM 227822·0001686.00

GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
1' ay/or Mort\S
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9F

EXHIBIT A
AREA 9F - COMPTON

A PORTION OF THE RANCHO SAN PEDRO IN THE CITY OF COMPTON, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE MAP FILED IN PATENT BOOK 1, PAGE 119 OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

COMMENCING AT THE CENTERLINE OF 149TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE (100 FEET WIDE) PER TRACT MAP 83433 FILED IN BOOK 1445 OF MAPS, PAGES 67 THRU 68 INCLUSIVE IN SAID OFFICE OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID CENTRAL AVENUE SOUTH 11°15'40" EAST A DISTANCE OF 27.16 FEET TO THE WESTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE NORTHERLY LINE OF LOT 1 PER SAID TRACT MAP 83433; THENCE LEAVING SAID CENTERLINE NORTH 89°33'00" EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY PROLONGATION 20.36 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 178 TO THE CITY OF COMPTON, EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 28, 1980, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING.

L 1 FROM THE POINT OF BEGINNING, THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF LOT 1 PER SAID TRACT MAP 83433 NORTH 89°33'00" EAST 861.35 FEET TO THE

NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, ALSO BEING THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 178;
L2 THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 AND SAID ANNEXATION DISTRICT SOUTH 03°31'19" EAST 132.31 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER THEREOF;
L3 THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 AND THE WESTERLY PROLONGATION OF SAID SOUTHERLY LINE SOUTH 89°33'00" WEST 843.21 FEET, ALSO BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID ANNEXATION DISTRICT 178; L4 THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID ANNEXATION DISTRICT, SAID LINE BEING 20 FEET DISTANT AND PARALLEL TO THE CENTERLINE OF CENTRAL AVENUE, NORTH 11 °15'40" WEST A DISTANCE OF 134.51 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND THE END OF THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION.

CONTAINING: 2.59 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.

SUBJECT TO ALL COVENANTS, RIGHTS, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD .

ALL AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT A TT ACHED HERETO AS "EXHIBIT B" AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.

THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT.

PREPARED BY
NVS, INC.
<-7/ ct ,/ 0<"-/
J BRALEY, L.S. 8446
12-16-2023
DATE

CITY OF COMPTON

E DETAIL ,,A,,
REON
"' \
: EXHIBIT "B"
PALMER AVE -------------- ~
TRACT NO. 16966
M.B. 395/19-20
CCMAD
~-~
OB \ L1

PARCEL INCLUDED FOR ANNEXATION

2.59 AC. MORE OR LESS

ABBREVIATIONS & LEGEND
POC
POB
ROW
CCMAD

GLACVCD

POINT OF COMMENCEMENT

POINT OF BEGINNING

RIGHT OF WAY

COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT

GREATER LA COUNTY

VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT

GLACVCD EXISTING

BOUNDARIES

CCMAD EXISTING

BOUNDARIES

CITY OF COMPTON

BOUNDARIES
NV 5
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
P: 858.385.0500 WWW.NV5.COM
CCMAD
\
1 I
I N
I
RANcR)
MN Plfio

LINE TABLE
NO. BEARING
L1 N89' 33'00"E
L2 S03'31'19"E
L3 S89'33'00"W
L4 N 11' 15' 40"W
o' 70' 140'
- -- -
-
LENGTH
861.35'
132.31'
843.21'
134.51'
280'
SCALE 1 "= 140'

THIS PLAT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER

MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE

PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT ON
DECEMBER 16, 2023.
7~ 12-16-2023
J BRALEY L.S. 8446 DATE
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9F

SHEET NUMBER
1 OF 2 SHEETS
PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 12-18-2023 JOB NUMBER 227622-0001565.00

ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBERS
6143-011-022
6143-011-025
EXHIBIT "B"

ROSECRANS AVE
AREA 9F

CITY OF

COMPTON
w
~ z
0 1-
c.9 z
~
....J
~
\ COMPTON AVE
L-..--------'
NV 5
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO). CA 92128
P: 858.JB:, .0500 WWW.NV5.COM

VICINITY MAP
N.T.S. l
I
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9F
PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 12-18-2023

SHEET NUMBER
2 OF 2 SHEETS

JOB NUMBER
227822-0001686.00
-
,a I rMo~ ORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO y~ BATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9G

EXHIBIT A

GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
AREA 9G - COMPTON
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF LOT 2, RANGE 2, IN THE SAN PEDRO RANCHO, PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 4, PAGE 348 OF MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS

OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED

AS FOLLOWS

COMMENCING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF COMPTON BOULEVARD AND STANFORD AVENUE AS SHOWN ON TRACT NO. 27388 RECORDED IN BOOK 698 PAGE 47 LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDS THENCE, N 88°56'55" E 96.07 FEET TO A POINT

ON THE CENTERLINE OF SAID COMPTON BOULEVARD AND THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE WESTERLY TRACT LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 27388, ALSO BEING A POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF A 100 FOOT LOS ANGELES WATER AND POWER (LADWP) EASEMENT (100' WIDE) RECORDED IN BOOK 6165 PAGE 389-390 O.R.

OF SAID COUNTY, AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION;
L 1 THENCE N 11 °02'05" W 40.61 ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT TO

THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID COMPTON AVENUE OF SAID TRACT NO. 27388;
L2 THENCE N 88°56'55" E 136.18 FEET ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 27388;
L3 THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT OF WAY S 11 °02'05" E 17 4.15' FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT OF THE BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF COMPTON PER TRACT NO. 27388; L4 THENCE S 89°27'53" W 136.40 FEET ALONG SAID CITY OF COMPTON BOUNDARY LINE TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LADWP EASEMENT (100' WIDE); L5 THENCE N 11 °02'05" W 132.29 FEET ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE OF SAID

LADWP EASEMENT TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND THE END OF THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION.

CONTAINING: 0.534 ACRES MORE OR LESS.

SUBJECT TO ALL COVENANTS, RIGHTS, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD.

ALL AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT ATTACHED HERETO AS "EXHIBIT B" AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.

THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT.

PREPARED BY
NV5, INC.

J BRALEY, LS. 8446
09-19-2023
DATE
EXHIBIT "B"
CCMAD
__..,.
---
o'
POC
50 ' 1 oo· 200'
SCALE 1 "= 1 00'

ABBREVIATIONS & LEGEND

POINT OF COMMENCMENT

POINT OF BEGINNING

THIS PLAT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER

MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE

PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT ON
SEPTEMBER 19, 2023.

J BRALEY L.S. 8446

PARCEL INCLUDED FOR

ANNEXATION

0.534 ACRES MORE OR LESS

NO ASSESSORS PARCEL

NUMBERS INCLUDED WITHIN
THE LIMITS OF AREA 9G
~
~
5 :z
CD
09- 19-2023
DATE
ROSECRANS AVE.

LN~1ID
/ff.A
COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT < 0
POB
CCMAD
GLACVCD GREATER LOS ANGELES VECTOR CONTROL DISTRl~ ed by LA/:".

AREA TO BE ANNEXED TO CCMAD r.</o Co COMPTON BLVD
CITY BOUNDARY LINE ~'< ___,.....-'1\1\
CENTERLINE ~ I , '
CCMAD AREA SHADING - -J~--- \ CITY OF COMPTON

GLACVCD AREA SHADING
NV 5
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
P: 858.385.0500 WWW.NV5.COM
I

VICINITY MAP
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD). AREA 9G
PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 09-19-2023

SHEET NUMBER
1 OF 1 SHEETS

JOB NUMBER
227822-0001585.00
ta.Yfor Mort\S

GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9H

EXHIBIT A
AREA 9H - COMPTON

BEING A PORTION OF NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 17, THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 16, ALL IN-TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE13 WEST SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, AND PORTIONS OF RANCHO TAJAUTA

AND RANCHO SAN PEDRO, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS BEGINNING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF ROSECRANS AVENUE (100' WIDE) AND CENTRAL AVENUE (100' WIDE) AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP 72903 RECORDED IN BOOK 386 PAGE 58 LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDS;
L 1 THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF CENTRAL AVENUE (100' WIDE) PER RECORD OF SURVEY FILED IN BOOK 187 PAGE 65 LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDS S 17°21'26" E 143.98 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE WESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1500.00 FEET, WITH A RADIAL BEARING OF S 72°38'18" W;
C2 THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THRU A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06°00'40, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 157.37 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; L3 THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID CENTRAL AVENUE (100' WIDE) ON A TANGENT LINES 11 °21 '02" E 114.44 TO THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF CENTRAL AVENUE (100' WIDE) AND 144 th STREET (60' WIDE) PER SAID RECORD OF SURVEY BOOK 187 PAGE 65;
L4 THENCE CONTINUING IN A SOUTHERLY DIRECTION ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF CENTRAL AVENUE (100' WIDE) PER TRACT NO 12933 FILED IN BOOK 252 PAGE 34 LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDS S 11 °21 '02" E 825.00 FEET; LS THENCE LEAVING SAID CENTERLINE S78°38'58" W 50.00 FEET TO THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF CENTRAL AVENUE (100' WIDE) PER SAID TRACT NO. 12933;
L6 ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY N11°21'02" W 777.58 FEET TO THE RIGHT OF WAY CUTBACK CORNER OF LOT 17 OF SAID TRACT MAP NO. 12933, L7 THENCE N20°25'38" W 95.08 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY CUTBACK CORNER OF PARCEL 16 OF SAID TRACT MAP NO. 12933; L8 THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE N11 °21'02" W 67.97 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY CUTBACK CORNER ON LOT 16 OF SAID TRACT MAP TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1435.00 FEET;
C9 THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THRU A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 01 °16'38 A DISTANCE OF 31.99 FEET TO THE END OF SAID NON-TANGENT CURVE; L 10 THENCE ALONG A NON-TANGENT LINEN 13°41'02" W 53.88 FEET TO THE

BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1435.00 FEET, WITH A RADIAL BEARING OF S74°50'12" W; C11 THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THRU A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02°05'02" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 52.19 FEET TO THE END OF SAID NON-TANGENT CURVE;
L 12 THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF CENTRAL

AVENUE (VARIABLE WIDTH) AND ITS NORTHERLY PROLONGATION TO THE CENTERLINE OF ROSECRANS AVENUE (100' WIDE) N16°51'55" W 172.50 FEET; L 13 THENCE ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID ROSECRANS AVENUE PER SAID PARCEL MAP 72903 S86°43'05" W 531.46;
L 14 THENCE N00°04'59" W 50.08 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 19287 FILED IN BOOK 221 PAGE 78 OFFICIAL RECORDS AND THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF ROSECRANS AVENUE (100' WIDE); L 15 THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY S86°43'05" W 643.36 FEET; L 16 THENCE N 00°04'59" W 1215.89 FEET TO ANGLE POINT OF PARCEL 1 OF SAID

PARCEL MAP, THENCE
L 17 THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID PARCEL 1 LOT LINE AND ITS EASTERLY PROLONGATION N 89°47'16" E 321.43 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE SE QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 17 T3S, R13W, SBM;
L 18 THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID QUARTER SECTION LINES 00°04'59" E 630.97 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT OF PARCEL 2 OF SAID PARCEL MAP NO. 19287; L 19 THENCE ALONG SAID LINE OF PARCEL 2 AND ITS EASTERLY PROLONGATION N 89°42'13" E 740.24 FEET TO A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF CENTRAL AVENUE (100' WIDE);
L20 THENCE ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF CENTRAL AVENUE (100' WIDE) S 17°21 '55" E 596.16 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF CENTRAL AVENUE (100' WIDE) AND ROSECRANS AVENUE (100' WIDE) AND THE END OF THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION.

CONTAINING: 21.46 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.

SUBJECT TO ALL COVENANTS, RIGHTS, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD .

ALL AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT ATTACHED HERETO AS "EXHIBIT B" AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.

THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT.

PREPARED BY
NVS, INC.
7 j
J BRALEY, L.S. 8446
06-08-2023
DATE
CCMAD
~ : ·>:.~· .. :)
1 r:r · ........... , PARCEL MAP NO 72903
BK 386 PG 57-59
EXHIBIT "B"
: :: POC
··:: POB

ABBREVIATIONS & LEGEND

POINT OF COMMENCMENT
POINT OF BEGINNING .el· .• ·::::?--·
1-:.~: ..... .. ·.:_:_::··:t:.··
Ft\:::: °:.:: ::. ::)i l-'!;_;_'2 _ _ _ __ -::=':i:~-::i:""""-" ·-: CCMAD
~.::: GlAVCD
·.: UT

COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT

GREATER LOS ANGELES VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT

UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY
0®€ . N0. 86-458852
O.R. ft!:I•I• H\5
1 :;!
{\:~··· :::/ ? ~: ···:··.
<O ·::.· . ' ·: .:. g ·'. ~- •:••·: .-.-: .

CCMAD LINE

CENTERLINE

EXISTING CCMAD BOUNDARIES

EXISTING GLACVCD BOUNDARIES

CITY LINES
HEAVY BORDER IS AREA 9H
:JI?} i t:r. ~ ~ \i:}}:/::;:\(:'.:°:':-::~~! c~{·~-·~~·No·1· ·> AREA = 21.460 AC. MORE OR LESS .: ~"' : ...... a. ,..:. ::. 0 , .. ::::::.: ... :: .. ·: ... : BK 189 PG 81-82 • ·.:: . . : : 0 a, :.::. ' - IQ ·1 ..--; .... :···· ... ::···· ... . · .... • •••• o .. . · -. • 0 ................... • • AP 6134 020-072 & • . . tt ~ i :I:\: i ~ ;\ ! ?:<:\\/{\ : t: :· ~~: ~~~1~~~~t \ .... :JI 1 ::-'.•· ..- : :·•··"' ~: ... a. ·:Af',fil3if,.OWOa'3 :-:•-- PARCEL MAP .,. ··::···::•::::•:•:•::--•::•:·:
;-:-:-: g; '. ... a. co . • ' _::_::.::·_:·_·_':: ::·:-:BK 2~·1· P~. ~~.-~~ ... ~ _._:_:·· ::•:•/:.:\:\:/: :
~::::::L.::}:: 28~tl MAP.NO.\~.::: ··=:·:~f~~:~~~; •• ~.:.:~~:if~:~:~~ET f ...... :.-·.. K 221 PG 78-79 • .. .. • . .-·: ....... :. • ... :··:: .. : .. :·-- · ,:t:·i::/·/::-: -:~t~/ ;.AE' 5134-020:os \?\:/;·;:tr ............... :
~s i':srn i,;:~77 , .... : .~~·
_..-."ciio sECRANSAVE. :·•:•:•:--:SW·;~~~t--lt~JiF..:: · ::. :·< ·EcORilO o'
I N
I
160' 320' 640'
- -Ifatjfal\::/b{'): :;;:i[;l!t;TI!C:i!IN\f BK W.l pG •• • --- ·····•:•.-.-.-•:·:.:\ .--:-_:::~ :!~ :~ ·:\~ik&i::: ~ . • ' ··::.-•.-·· .::::::'.:-.·:-:::::-:-: :-:-::::::-:·:::/· .. ::::· ; ••••• ·;;::.:,:::•::::·:·::.\:::: :::f ::ii.:< ~
••• ..... ·:•::~ \\"t\
7-c'iy/or Morris

THIS PLAT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION

IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE PROFESSIONAL LAND
SURVEYOR'S ACT ON JULY 18, 2023.
/~ 07-18-2023
J BRALEY L.S. 8446 DATE
:::.~ •.;:.:\
·::·:::~.~\;} :-:::: .: .. ··.·:::: .... a ... ·: ·; ·: .. :::: . . () _.:.;,:·, ·: .. :·:: .:-.-· ()
.; ..... ~ :-:-:. t
• ... ' a> '--1 ....... :\ 0
---: 7- ~?.\ .. :. ~
··.: ½9ij{t
~ ~~·
:, }I
·········--· ..
. . .... ~ . .. . ..... . . , ...... -·--·-
••· ··········· ·-·
SCALE 1 "= 320'
NV 5
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018--ffl TO TIIE COMPfON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GIACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD). ARFA 9H
1 OF 2 SHEETS 15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE. SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
P: 858.385 .0500 WWW.NV5.COM PREPARED FOR: CCMAD JOB NUMBER DATE SUBMITTED: 07-18-2D2 3 227622-0001565.00

EXHIBIT ,, B,,

LINE TABLE ABBREVIATIONS & LEGEND
NO. BEARING LENGTH POC POINT OF COMMENCMENT
L1 S17'21 '26"E 143.98' POB POINT OF BEGINNING
L3 S11'21 '02"E 114.44' CCMAD COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT GLAVCD GREATER LOS ANGELES VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT L4 s11·21 '02"E 825.00' UT UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY L5 S78"38'58"W 50.00' -~-- CCMAD LINE
L6 N11"21 '02"W 777.58' --- CENTERLINE
L7 N20"25'38"W 95.08' ----- CITY LINES
L8 N11'21 '02"W 67.97' EXISTING CCMAD BOUNDARIES
L10 N13"41 '02"W 53.88'
·::::::❖'.·:.·.;;;:;•:-:::;::::::-.: .. .-:: EXISTING CLACVCD BOUNDARIES L12 N16'51'55"W 172.50'
L13 S86' 43'05"W 531.46'
L14 N00"04'59"W 50.08'
L15 S86"43'05"W 643.36'
L 16 N00"04'59"W 1215.89'
L17 N89'47'16"E 321.43'
L18 soo·o4'59"E 630.97'
L19 N89'42'13"E 740.24'
L20 S17'21 '55"E 596.16'

ARC TABLE
NO. DELTA RADIUS LENGTH
C2 6=06"00 ' 40" 1500.00' 157.37'
C9 6=01"16'38" 1435.00' 31.99'
C11 6=02"05 '02" 1435.00' 52.1 g'
......- - ------- --- - ---,
I I

I EL SEGUNDO BLVD I
I
UT w w I-. r----- ~ ~ I _J L~
0 I <( z
I
a:: 0 ::j I f- CITY OF COMPTON f-
CD z (.'.)
135TH ST. I
w
C> z
I
z g I z ::::E
_J
~ I §:

I
<(
__ ...,
I z
I AREA 9H ----, I I
I UT
I
I
~ ---
I
--- ROSECRANS AVE.

UT
____ ____ I

VICINITY MAP
NTS
N V 5
REORGANilATION NO. 2018-0S 'IO TIIB COMPl'ON CREEK

SHEET NUMBER
MOSQUl'IO ABATEMENT DISllUCT (DETACHMENT FROM 2
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUIT£ 200 GIACVCD AND ANNEXATION 'IO CCMAD). AREA 9H OF 2 SHEETS SAN DIEGO, CA 92128 PREPARED FOR: CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 07-18-2023 JOB NUMBER P: 858.385.0500 WWW.NV5.COM 227622-0001565.00
1"ctytor Morns

GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 91

EXHIBIT A
AREA 91
BEING A PORTION OF THE RANCHO TAJAUTA MARKED "HEIRS OF ANDREA ALVARADO

54.43 ACRES AND W.P.FOWLER 100.17 ACRES AS SHOWN ON CLERK'S FILED MAP NO. 63 IN CASE NO. 1200 OF THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE 17TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS.

COMMENCING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF ROSECRANS AVENUE AND CENTRAL AVENUE PER TRACT NO. 17141 FILED IN BOOK 402 PAGE 10-14 LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF CENTRAL AVENUE (VARYING WIDTH) N 17°22'29" W 51.55' TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; L 1 THENCE, N 17°22'29" W 544.61 FEET, ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF CENTRAL AVENUE TO A POINT;
L2 THENCE N 89°41 '39" E 40.00 FEET;
L3 THENCE N 17°22'29" W 193.11 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1461.76 FEET;
C4 THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THRU A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 17°44'41"', AN ARC DISTANCE OF 452.71 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; LS THENCE ON A TANGENT BEARING N 00°22'12" E 18.75 FEET TO THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID TRACT NO. 17141;
L6 THENCE N 89°43'25" E 1152.47 FEET, ALONG SAID NORTHERLY TRACT LINE TO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID TRACT NO. 17141 SAID POINT ALSO BEING A POINT ON THE WESTERLY TRACT LINE OF TRACT NO. 18359 FILED IN BOOK 454 PAGES 25-27 O.R.;
L7 THENCE N 00°22'51" W 28.45 FEET, CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE OF TRACT NO. 18359 TO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID TRACT NO. 18359; L8 THENCE, N 88°53'00" E 1543.01 FEET, ALONG SAID NORTHERLY TRACT LINE TO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF TRACT NO. 18359;
L9 THENCE, S 01°35'25" W 1055.16, ALONG THE EASTERLY TRACT LINE OF TRACT NO. 18359 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF TRACT NO. 18359 AND THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF ROSECRANS AVENUE (100' WIDE); L 10 THENCE, S 71 °54'40" W 91.05 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SAID ROSECRANS AVENUE (100' WIDE);
L 11 THENCE S 83°28'45" W 228.31 FEET;
L 12 THENCE, S 85°05'35" W 111.41 FEET;
L 13 THENCE S 86°42'44" W 1997.76 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND THE END OF THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION.

CONTAINING: 67.093 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.

SUBJECT TO ALL COVENANTS, RIGHTS, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD.

ALL AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT ATTACHED HERETO AS "EXHIBIT B" AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.

THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT.

PREPARED BY
NV5. INC.
_;;: 7-1
,
J BRALEY, LS. 8446
06-08-2023
DATE
~loved by ~,.c:;
?-9 c0 EXHIBIT ,, B,,
GRAPHIC SCALE ~ -z ~ ~
--~----"----,,i--'=0'- '--'-1....:...7=5'_=3=5=0-' - -- ~ - m
SCALE 1"= 350' c3

LINE TABLE
NO. BEARING
L1 N17'22'29"W
L2 N89"41 '39»E
L3 N17'22'29"W
L5 Noo·22·12"E
L6 N89"43'25"E
L7 N00"22'51''W
LB Nss·53'oo"E
L9 S01"35'25"W
L10 S71"54'40"W
L 11 S83"28'45"W
L12 S85"05'35"W
L13 S86° 42' 44"W

ARC TABLE
LENGTH
544.61'

40.00'
193.11'

18.75'
1152.47'

28.45'
1543.01'
1055.16'

91.05'
228.31'
111.41'
1997.76'
z
Cf)
-I
NO. DELTA RADIUS LENGTH
C4 ti=17'44'41" 1461.76'

ABBREVIATIONS & LEGEND

POB POINT OF BEGINNING

CL CENTERLINE

CCMAD COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT

GLACVCD GREATER LA COUNTY

VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT
452.71'
o;::.:i EXISTING CCMAD BOUNDARIES
·••••• ................. ,. EXISTING GLACVCD BOUNDARIES - - - - CITY BOUNDARY

UT UNINCORPORATED

TERRITORY

PARCEL INCLUDED FOR

ANNEXATION

67.093 AC. MORE OR
LESS
ZmH.#.,tl:~~t,,t!7'rPrl'+,.~~~~8±!4;4.,,

THIS PLAT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR

UNDER MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE

WITH THE PROFESSIONAL LAND
SURVEYOR'S ACT ON MARCH 08, 2023.
/~~ 06-08-2023
\ @CMAD J BRALEY LS. 8446 DATE
NV 5
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
P: 858.JBS.0500 WWW.NV5.COM
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 91

SHEET NUMBER
1 OF 3 SHEETS
PREPARED FOR: CCMAD

JOB NUMBER
DAlE SUBMITTED: 06-08-2023 227622-0001565.00
l N
I
N.T.S.

EXHIBIT
w
UT - Cl1Y OF ~
§2 I COMPTON
a5 13STH1 S
z
§
z
g ~-' ~ AREA 91 ~
_J
~ <(
3::
___ __, z
UT
I ROSECRANS AVE.

I
VICIN11Y MAP

ABBREVIATIONS & LEGEND
POB
CL
CCMAD

POINT OF BEGINNING

CENTERLINE

COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT

GLACVCD GREATER LA COUNTY

VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT

EXISTING CCMAD BOUNDARIES
....................... ,. EXISTING GLACVCD BOUNDARIES
- - - - CITY BOUNDARY

UT UNINCORPORATED

TERRITORY
,, B,,
6144-001-001
6144-001-002
6144-001-003
6144-001-004
6144-001-005
6144-001-006
6144-001-007
61 44-001 -008
6144-001-009
6144-001-010
6144-001-011
6144-001-012
6144-001-013
6144-001-014
6144-001-015
6144-001-016
6144-001-017
6144-001-018
6144-002-024
6144-002-025
6144-002-026
6144-002-027
6144-002-028
6144-002-029
6144-002-030
6144-002-031
6144-002-032
6144-002-033
6144-002-034
6144-002-035
6144-002-036
6144-002-037
6144-002-038
6144-002-039
6144-002-040
6144-002-041
6144-002-042
6144-002-043
6144-002-044
6144-002-045
6144-002-046
6144-002-047
6144-003-001
6144-003-002
6144-003-003
6144-003-004
6144-003-005
6144-003-006
6144-003-007
6144-003-008
6144-003-009
6144-003-010
6144-003-011
6144-003-012
6144-003-013
6144-003-014
6144-003-015
6144-003-016
6144-003-017
6144-003-018
6144-003-019
6144-003-020
6144-003-021
6144-003-022
6144-003-023
6144-003-02 4
6144-003-025
6144-003-026
6144-003-027
6144-003-028
6144-003-029
6144-003-030
6144-003-031
6144-003-032
6144-003-033
6144-003-034
6144-003-035
6144-003-036
6144-003-037
6144-003-038
6144-003-039
6144-003-040
6144-003-041
6144-003-042
6144-003-043
6144-003-044
6144-003-045
6144-004-001
6144-004-002
6144-004-003
6144-004-004
6144-004-005
6144-004-006
6144-004-007
6144-004-008
6144-004-009
6144-004-010
6144-004-011
6144-004-012
6144-004-013
6144-004-014
6144-004-015
6144-004-016
6144-004-017
6144-004-018
6144-004-019
6144-004-020
6144-004-021
6144-004-022
6144-004-023
6144-004-024
6144-004-025
6144-004-026
6144-004-027
6144-004-028
6144-004-029
6144-004-030
6144-004-031
NV 5
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 91
6144-004-032
6144-005-001
6144-005-002
6144-005-003
6144-005-004
6144-005-005
6144-005-006
6144-005-007
6144-005-008
6144-005-009
6144-005-010
6144-005-011
6144-005-012
6144-005-013
6144-005-014
6144-005-015
6144-005-01 6
6144-005-017
6144-005-018
6144-005-019
6144-005-020
6144-005-021
6144-005-022
6144-005-023
6144-005-024
6144-005-025
6144-005-026
6144-005-027
6144-005-028
6144-005-029
6144-005-030
6144-005-031
6144-005-032
6144-006-001
6144-006-002
6144-006-003
6144-006-004
6144-006-005
6144-006-006
6144-006-007
6144-006-008
6144-006-009
6144-006 - 010
6144-006-011
6144-006-012
6144-006-013
6144-006-014
6144-006-015
6144-006-016
6144-006-017
6144-006-018
6144-006-019
6144-006-020
6144-006-021
6144-006-022
6144-006-023
6144-006-024
6144-006-025

SHEET NUMBER
2 OF 3 SHEETS 15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
P: 858.385.0500 WWW.NV5.COM PREPARED FOR: CCMAD JOB NUMBER DATE SUBMITTED: 06-08-2023 227622-0001565.00

EXHIBIT ,, B,,
6144-006-026 6144-008-019 6144-010-014 6144-012-011
6144-006-027 6144-008-020 6144-010-015 6144-012-012
6144-006-028 6144-008-021 6144-010-016 6144-012-013
6144-006-029 6144-008-022 6144-010-017 6144-012-014
6144-006-030 6144-008-023 6144-010-018 6144-012-015
6144-006-031 6144-008-024 6144-010-019 6144-012-016
6144-006-032 6144-008-025 6144-010-020 6144-012-017
6144-006-033 6144-008-027 6144-010-021 6144-012-018
6144-007-001 6144-008-028 6144-01 0-022 6144-012-019
6144-007-002 6144-008-029 6144-01 0-023 6144-012-020
6144-007-003 6144-008-030 6144-010-024 6144-012-021
6144-007-004 6144-008-031 6144-01 0-025 6144-012-022
6144-007-005 6144-008-032 6144-010-026 6144-012-023
6144-007-006 6144-008-033 6144-010-027 6144-012-024
6144-007-007 6144-009-001 6144-010-028 6144-012-025
6144-007-008 6144-009-002 6144-010-029 6144-012-026
6144-007-009 6144-009-003 6144-010-030 6144-012-027
6144-007-010 6144-009-004 6144-010-031 6144-012-028
6144-007-011 6144-009-005 6144-011-001 6144-012-029
6144-007-012 6144-009-006 6144-011-002 6144-012-030
6144-007-013 6144-009-007 6144-011-003 6144-013-001
6144-007-014 6144-009-008 6144-011-004 6144-013-002
6144-007-015 6144-009-009 6144-011-005 6144-013-003
6144-007-016 6144-009-010 6144-011-006 6144-013-004
6144-007-017 6144-009-011 6144-011-007 6144-013-005
6144-007-018 6144-009-012 6144-011-008 6144-013-006
6144-007-019 6144-009-013 6144-011-009 6144-013-007
6144-007-020 6144-009-014 6144-011-010 6144-013-008
6144-007-021 6144-009-015 6144-011-011 6144-013-009
6144-007-022 6144-009-016 6144-011-012 6144-013-010
6144-007-023 6144-009-017 6144-011-013 6144-013-011
6144-007-024 6144-009-018 6144-011-014 6144-013-012
6144-007-025 6144-009-019 6144-011-015 6144-013-013
6144-007-026 6144-009-020 6144-011-016 6144-013-014
6144-007-027 6144-009-021 6144-011-017 6144-013-015
6144-007-028 6144-009-022 6144-011-018 6144-013-016
6144-007-029 6144-009-023 6144-011-019 6144-013-017
6144-007-030 6144-009-024 6144-011-020 6144-013-018
6144-007-031 6144-009-025 6144-011-021 6144-013-019
6144-007-032 6144-009-026 6144-011-022 6144-013-020
6144-008-001 6144-009-027 6144-011-023 6144-013-021
6144-008-002 6144-009-028 6144-011-024 6144-013-022
6144-008-003 6144-009-029 6144-011-025 6144-013-023
6144-008-004 6144-009-030 6144-011-026 6144-013-024
6144-008-005 6144-009-031 6144-011-027 6144-013-025
6144-008-006 6144-009-032 6144-011-028 6144-013-026
6144-008-007 6144-010-001 6144-011-029 6144-013-027
6144-008-008 6144-010-002 6144-011-030 6144-013-028
6144-008-009 6144-010-003 6144-012-001
6144-008-010 6144-010-005 6144-012-002
6144-008-011 6144-010-006 6144-012-003
6144-008-012 6144-010-007 6144-012-004
6144-008-013 6144-010-008 6144-012-005
6144-008-014 6144-010-009 6144-012-006
6144-008-015 6144-010-010 6144-012-007
6144-008-016 6144-010-011 6144-012-008
6144-008-017 6144-010-012 6144-012-009
6144-008-018 6144-010-013 6144-012-010
5 REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

SHEET NUMBER
N V MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM 3
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200 GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 91 OF 3 SHEETS SAN DIEGO, CA 92128 PREPARED FOR: CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 06-08-2023 JOB NUMBER P: 858.385.0500 WWW.NV5.COM 227622-0001565.00
1"ayror Morns

GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9J

EXHIBIT A
AREA 9J - COMPTON
BEING A PORTION OF RANCHO TAJAUTA RECORDED IN BOOK 1 PAGE 250 OF

PATENTS, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS.

COMMENCING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF 137TH STREET AND GRAHAM AVENUE AS SHOWN ON TRACT NO. 15697 RECORDED IN BOOK480 PAGE 36 OF MAPS LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDS;
THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID 137TH STREET S 89°54'00" W 264.95 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF SAID 137TH STREET AND THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT;

THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID WESTERLY TRACT LINE S 00°03'05 E 150.99 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION;
L 1 THENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY TRACT LINE N 00°03'05" W 302.86 FEET TO THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID TRACT;
L2 THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 15697 N 89°52'55"E 1183.09 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF WILMINGTON AVENUE (60 FEET WIDE);
L3 THENCE ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF WILMINGTON AVENUE S00°02'20"E 249.34 FEET TO THE WESTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT NO. 9068 RECORDED IN BOOK 121 PAGE 55 OF MAPS LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDS; L4 THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT NO. 9068 N89°04'45"E 916.48 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF TRACT NO. 9068;

LS THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY TRACT LINE AND IT'S SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION S00°00'43"W 374.55 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF TRACT NO. 4431 RECORDED IN BOOK 112 PAGES 7-8 OF MAPS LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDER;
L6 THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF TRACT NO. 4431 S72°04'40"W 994.07

FEET TO THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF NORTH KEMP AVENUE, PREVIOUSLY NAMED WILMINGTON AVENUE (60' WIDE);
L7 THENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY N00°02'20"W 611.77 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF TRACT NO. 15697;
LB THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERL y LINE OF TRACT NO. 15697 S89°54'00"W 1153.02 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID TRACT NO. 15697, THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND THE END OF THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION.

CONTAINING: 19.486 ACRES. MORE OR LESS.

SUBJECT TO ALL COVENANTS, RIGHTS, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD.

ALL AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT ATTACHED HERETO AS "EXHIBIT B" AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.

THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT.

PREPARED BY
NV5, INC.
,,,-.1.;,_f
J BRALEY, L.S. 8446
06-08-2023
DATE
EXHIBIT "B"
CCMAD 7'"c1yfor Morris
·-::·::~:/l : :: ?7~t995:;~~~~:~~~!::?:>\://:/://.-. • TRACT NO 15697 ·:·:::·:·:·:·:~:;~;~_.; ·:·:·:·:·:·:°:·:·:·:·~·:·\ :-: ~~~ L4 CCMAD ~ s' .

NO.

L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
L6
L7
LS
~:~~:-:-:-:-:-.-.-:-:-:-:-:-.-:-:,:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:GLACVCO:-:-_. .. ___ .. ___ ............................. - .... _- · .. _. _._. _._. _._. _. _. _._. _. _._. _. _._. _. _. _.L-~ _._. _._. _. · ._._. .. _._. ._. _. _._._. _._._. _._._._. _. -· • _. • • ·--:::: ::::::: t:R~qr::_~<r :~~~:?::: :::::-:-:-:-:~: :: :: ::::: :: ::::: :

CCMAD ._._._._._._._._._._._._.1'::istf-.f-ST_._._._._._._._._._._.,z· _._._._._._._._.. : : : :-:-: :-:-:-:-:-:-: :-:-:-: :-:-:-: :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-- -g - -:-:-:-:-:-:-~ :
• . .. . • ' ••.•.••••• ' ••• ' •••••••••• ' ..:.l' ••••••.• ' ............................... :::, . ... . .

LINE TABLE w ,: :.:·:·TRACT:N0.-·4431·:-:-:-:-:-:-:: -:-:· · > ' ............................. - .. .

BEARING LENGTH
NOD°03'05"W 302.86
N89'52'55"E 1183.09'
soo·o2'2o"E 249.34'
N89'04' 45"E 916.48'
soo·oo· 43"w 374.55'
S72'04' 40"W 994.07'
Noo·o2·2o"w
ss9·54'oo"w 1153.02'
1-105
<( . .. . .............. .. ......... .
a.. r--- ·. • _._. _._. _. _. _. _._._._. _. _._._._._._. _. _._._.: _._. _. .. . ~ _J • • • • • • • 139-TH·ST· • • • • [IJ _. . _. ••. _. .• .- _. .- _. _. _. _. _. _. _. _. • ~ . . ............. . . . ......... . I . I- •
0::
0 z
~
IJfA ~
SAN
r$J?,.'€ • Pl!0RO
o· 140' 280' sso·
ABBREVIATIONS & LEGEND ISCALE 1 "=

POB POINT OF BEGINNING

POC POINT OF COMMENCEMENT

CCMAD COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO
ABATEMENT DISTRICT N ~=~
280'
LA I

UT UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY I

GLACVCD GREATER LOS ANGELES
COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL o AREA lgJ · ,- w
I ROSECRANS AVE. <:.C
z
0 UT 'G
z
~
_J
z SR 91

VICINITY MAP
NV 5
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
P: 858.385.0500 WWW.NV5.COM

DISTRICT
EXISTING GLACVCD ________________ .... BOUNDARIES

EXISTING CCMAD

BOUNDARIES
- - - - CITY OF COMPTON

BOUNDARIES

PARCEL INCLUDED FOR ANNEXATION

19.486 AC. MORE OR LESS

THIS PLAT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER

MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE

PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT ON
SEPTEMBER 18, 2023.

J BRALEY L.S. 8446
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9J
PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 09-18-2023
09-18-2023
DATE

SHEET NUMBER
1 OF 2 SHEETS

JOB NUMBER
227822-0001585.00
EXHIBIT "B,,

ASSESSORS PARCEL

NUMBERS INCLUDED IN
AREA 9J
6144-015-001 6144-016-013 6155-027-014
6144-015-002 6144-016-014 6155-027-015
6144-015-003 6144-016-015 6155-027-016
6144-015-004 6144-016-016 6155-027-031
6144-015-005 6144-016-017 6155-028-015
6144-015-006 6144-016-018 6155-028-016
6144-015-007 6144-016-019 6155-028-017
6144-015-008 6144-016-043 6155-028-018
6144-015-009 6144-016-044 6155-028-019
6144-015-010 6144-020-029 6155-028-020
6144-015-011 6153-001-013 6155-028-021
6144-015-012 6153-001-014 6155-028-022
6144-015-013 6153-001-015 6155-028-023
6144-015-014 6153-001-016 6155-028-024
6144-015-015 6153-001-017 6155-028-025
6144-015-016 6153-001-018 6155-028-026
6144-015-017 6153-001-019 6155-028-027
6144-015-018 6153-009-019 6155-028-029
6144-016-001 6153-009-020 6155-028-030
6144-016-003 6155-027-001 6155-028-031
6144-016-004 6155-027-002 6155-028-032
6144-016-005 6155-027-003 6155-028-033
6144-016-006 6155-027-004 6155-028-034
6144-016-007 6155-027-007 6155-028-036
6144-016-008 6155-027-008 6155-028-037
6144-016-009 6155-027-009 6155-028-038
6144-016-010 6155-027-010 6155-028-039
6144-016-011 6155-027-011 6155-028-040
6144-016-012 6155-027-012 6155-028-041
6155-027-013 6155-028-042
6155-028-043
6155-028-044
6155-029-001
6155-029-002
6155-029-003
N V 5

SHEET NUMBER
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK
MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM 2
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200 GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9J OF 2 SHEETS SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
P: 858 .385.0500 WWW.NV5.COM PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 09-18·2023 JOB NUMBER 227822-0001585.00
~ptovedby'-"1
~c
~/Vi 0
- IV \
----
~ GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
clJ1o, Morris
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9K

EXHIBIT A
AREA 9K - COMPTON

A PORTION OF THE RANCHO TAJAUTA IN THE CITY OF COMPTON, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE MAP FILED IN PATENT BOOK 1, PAGE 250 OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

COMMENCING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF NORTH OLEANDER AVENUE (FORMERLY OLEANDER STREET, 40' WIDE) AND EAST ORIS STREET (FORMERLY OAKS AVENUE, 40' WIDE) PER MAP OF TRACT 4265 IN BOOK OF MAPS 47, PAGES 9-10 INCLUSIVE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY; THENCE SOUTH 23°40'15" EAST ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF NORTH OLEANDER AVENUE 109.27 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT MAP, ALSO BEING THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF COMPTON PER ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 168 ADOPTED ON MARCH 12, 1973, AND ALSO BEING THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF RANCHO TAJAUTA SHOWN IN BOOK 1 OF PATENT MAPS, PAGE 250 OF SAID OFFICE OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE LEAVING SAID CENTERLINE SOUTH 72°01'30" WEST 20.10

FEET TO THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SAID NORTH OLEANDER AVENUE, ALSO BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 168, AND ALSO BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING.

L 1 THENCE ALONG THE SHARED SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOTS 1 THRU 4, BLOCK W OF SAID TRACT 4265 SOUTH 72°01'30" WEST A DISTANCE OF 99.16 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 4, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 168;
L2 THENCE NORTH 23°40'15" WEST ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 4 AND SAID ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 168 A DISTANCE OF 96.66 FEET TO THE

NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF, ALSO BEING A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF EAST ORIS STREET PER SAID TRACT 4265 IN BOOK 47 OF MAPS, PAGES 9 THRU 10 INCLUSIVE;
L3 THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY, ALSO BEING THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 168 NORTH 75°39'30" EAST 99.99 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CONER OF THEREOF, ALSO BEING A POINT ON SAID WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF NORTH OLEANDER AVENUE; L4 THENCE SOUTH 23°40'15" EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY, ALSO BEING THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 168 A DISTANCE OF 90.30 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING .

CONTAINING: .21 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.

SUBJECT TO ALL COVENANTS, RIGHTS, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD.

ALL AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT ATTACHED HERETO AS "EXHIBIT B" AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.

THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT.

PREPARED BY
NV5, INC.
/
,,, 1 / ci.
~ ~-/'
J BRALEY, L.S. 8446
01/10/2024
DATE

LINE TABLE
NO. BEARING LENGTH
L1 S72°01 '30"W 99.16'
L2 N23'40'15"W 96.66'
L3 N75'39'30"E 99.99'
L4 S23'40 '15't 90.30'

PARCEL INCLUDED FOR ANNEXATION
.21 ACRES MORE OR LESS

ABBREVIATIONS & LEGEND
POC
POB
ROW
CCMAD

GLACVCD
.................. ·

POINT OF COMMENCEMENT

POINT OF BEGINNING

RIGHT OF WAY

COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT

GREATER LA COUNTY

VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT

GLACVCD EXISTING

BOUNDARIES

CCMAD EXISTING

BOUNDARIES

CITY OF COMPTON

BOUNDARIES
NV 5
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
P: 858.385.0500 WWW.NVS.COM
· · · · · ·EXHIBIT "B" · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · - - - . . - . - -AANCClHICO - - - - - - • ' • • ' • ' ' ' • • • ' . • ' ' • • • • • '1T' A tr l\ 0 lr 1'11" A. • . • • .
........ ....... . ' ' ..... 11:~ri\.\JJ:ll.ri\.· . ' ..

TRACT 4368

BLOCK B
BK 47 MAPS, PG 76
W FIG ST ·
TRACT 4368

BLOCK A
CCMAD BK 4 7 MAPS, PG 76
I N
I
40'
o' 20' 40' 80'
- -- -
SCALE 1 "= 40'

THIS PLAT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER

MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE

PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT ON
DECEMBER 29, 2023.
12-29-2023
J BRALEY L.S. 8446 DATE
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9K

SHEET NUMBER
1 OF 2 SHEETS
PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 01/10/2024 JOB NUMBER 227622-0001565.00
NV 5
w
~
z
0 I­
C)
z
2 _J
s:
15092 AVfNUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
P: 858.J85.0500 WWW.NV5.COM
EXHIBIT "B"

EL SEGUNDO BLVD
I
L l
l ____ 7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
I
I
I
I
I

UNINCORPORATED

TERRITORY
--- --- \ I --- \ \ \
I • --- ___ \
1 ---
\ ------------------ AREA 9K
- ~CITY OF

COMPTON

ROSECRANS AVE

VICINITY MAP
N.T.S.

I N
I
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9K
PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 01/10/2024

SHEET NUMBER
2 OF 2 SHEETS

JOB NUMBER
227822·0001686.00

GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
1"eYfor Morns
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9L

EXHIBIT A
AREA 9L - COMPTON

A PORTION OF THE RANCHO TAJAUTA IN THE CITY OF COMPTON, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE MAP FILED IN PATENT BOOK 1, PAGE 250 OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

COMMENCING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF WILLOWBROOK AVE (40' WIDE) AND ORIS STREET (40' WIDE), FORMERLY OAKS AVENUE (40' WIDE) PER TRACT 4265 IN BOOK 47 OF MAPS, PAGES 9 THRU 10 INCLUSIVE, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY; THENCE ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF ORIS STREET SOUTH 75°39'30" WEST A DISTANCE OF 184.45 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF LOT 3 IN BLOCK 'M' OF SAID TRACT 4265 (POC1); THENCE LEAVING SAID CENTERLINE SOUTH 23°40'15" EAST ALONG SAID NORTHERLY PROLONGATION OF SAID EASTERLY LINE OF LOT 3 A DISTANCE OF 20.27 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 3, SAID CORNER ALSO BEING THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 113 (CPT0098) TO THE CITY OF COMPTON ON AUGUST 24, 1956, SAID CORNER ALSO BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING (POC2) .

L 1 FROM THE POINT OF BEGINNING, THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE OF LOT 3 SOUTH 23°40'15" EAST 44.56 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER THEREOF,

SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 113;
L2 THENCE ALONG THE SHARED SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOTS 3 AND 4 OF SAID BLOCK M SOUTH 72°01'30" WEST A DISTANCE OF 150.74 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 4, SAID SHARED LINE ALSO BEING THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 113;
L3 THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 4, ALSO BEING THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 113 NORTH 23°40'15 " WEST A DISTANCE OF 54.24 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF; L4 THENCE NORTH 75°39'30" EAST ALONG THE SHARED NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOTS 3 AND 4, ALSO BEING THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 113 A DISTANCE OF 152.01 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND THE END OF THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION.

CONTAINING: 0.17 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.

SUBJECT TO ALL COVENANTS, RIGHTS, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD.

ALL AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT ATTACHED HERETO AS "EXHIBIT B" AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.

THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT.

PREPARED BY
NV5, INC.
7 ~ ✓
rfi- ~-/'
J BRALEY, L.S. 8446
12-14-2023
DATE
:;::::::.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::\:::-::::::::::::::x·:::·~·· ._... • :::::::::::::::::::::E·x ·H I BIT "B •::::::::::::::.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::-:::::::.:::::::::.. ... ....... : : : :·:·:<·:·:·:?~?::i:????:::::??:::::::??<:? -••••••••••••••• -- ---••• --•••••• -••••••••••••• --•• -••• \If tt?tf /\.. • ?\ If itff ~??I LINE TABLE •.•.•.• .. • ·.·.·.·.·.·:.·.·.·.·.·:.·.·:.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·:.·.·.·:.:.·.·.·:.·.·.· .. ·.·.·:.·:.·.·.·.-.-. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.. ··:::::·:::::::::::::·:·::·?~:::::::::: NO. BEARING LENGTH •. . .. • ' ··········· ••··••··· ••···· ······· ··· ········· ·· · .... .... ...... ........ ... ......... .... ··········· ····· ········ : POC1 : POC2 ..•...... . ·················· ············ ········· ······· ·•·· ........ .. ········· ············· ······ ······ ·•······· · ..... L1 s75·39•3o•w
S23"40'15"E
S23"40'15"E
............... .. ......... . ............. ...... . ....................... .... . ....... ..... ........ . ........ ....... ......... ... . ................ .. ·················•·· •·••···· ...... ····· ... , ................... ...... .... . .......... ........ . ...... ..... ................ .. . ................. . 184.45' :: ...... ............ ... ..... .. . ........... ...... . ······•······················ ···•··············· ············· ·•·· ••········ .. . ......... ...... . ··· ······ ··········1· ·· ········ ................. . ....... .............. ....... ... . ............... . 20.27' ::

44.56' ·'. ::.:::::\:IAfjCit(f::::::::::::::::::::::.. •:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
·: .. · :.-.-.- ..... - ... - .-. ·::.•.-... . ·:::.- .. .-.-.-.- .. ::.-.· .. .-.-.-:.·: .. .-: .. : ::i".· ................ .

L2 S72"01 '30"W •::::::::::::?.AfAtrt.A:::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ·•::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 150.74' :. ···· ··· ····-··· ········ ······· · · ··-- •· • ·· ·-·- · ·············· ·· •··········· ···· ..•.•...•.•. ·············· ············· ····· · .......... . . ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••• ·· ·· ··· ·- -·· ·· ··· ·········- -· · · · · • ··•·•· - ··· L3 N23"40'15"W 54.24' :: •:•:•.-:•:•{ f):-:-:·:-::•. ·•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:-:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:-:•:•:-:•:•:•:•:•:
••••••••• ······ ························· ·······•······· L4 N75"39'30"E 152.01' ::
........ L . .. .... ........... ............................ . ·::.. .·.-:::. • ................ 1·::::: .. :::: : ::::::.-.·:::::::::: ... .. -.. .. ....... ... ... . .... ... -. . ... .... .. . ·::::::::::: .. •.• ·:: ... :::. . ' .-.-.... .-.-.. :::~·-- .. ·.-... .-.-.-..... ' :: .. '\• ... ........... . ........ ... . .. ·······- · --- · ·· ·· ·-··- ·:·:·:· :•: : ·: ·:•:•:·.- •:•:·:•:•:•:·:·.-.-: •:· .. . . . · .. .-.-.-:•: ·:· :•: 2·:· :·:·:•: •:· :·:·:·:·::: ::: ••• . . . . . . . . . . . . ........... ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' ... ~ . . . . . . - .... - -. . -. . . . . .......... . ............................. · ··••·· ···•··········· ......... . ........... , ...... ... ·········· ····· ....... ,. .... . ..... ...................... , .. ....... .. .... . . ................ ........... . ... , ...... ... . ............ ........... ··· ··-······ ·· ·-· . :: :::::::::. ·::.~::::::.-:::::: :: •••
~(::(\#.82:ft~ti:i:~(:{i? ::: •••
::::::·:•:·::::::... )~}~q:{{
·:·:•:::.: .. : .. : .. : .. :. ·: ··:~:( }}\ m~
... . BK-4:Z·:MA · ... ·· nt\tlr' '\ -:-::·.-.. •. : : . .. ·._. . ... •. • • .. • ,t'Z igi\;I ······ ·l"'>~s .9- . ~ ©v ...... r. . ...- .. .. :x, ,

PARCEL INCLUDED FOR ANNEXATION

0.17 AC. MORE OR LESS

ABBREVIATIONS & LEGEND
POC
POB
ROW
CCMAD

POINT OF COMMENCEMENT

POINT OF BEGINNING

RIGHT OF WAY

COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT

GLACVCD GREATER LA COUNTY

VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT

GLACVCD EXISTING
·.w.-.-.-.·.-.-.-.·.-,.-.,,·.-.-. BOUND AR I ES

CCMAD EXISTING

BOUNDARIES

CITY OF COMPTON

BOUNDARIES
~toved by l,.q;::
~~ Co
::Z:1L1
~
I N
I
o' 30' 50'
- -- -
RANOd)
SAN JFDU>
120'
SCALE 1
11 = 60'

THIS PLAT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER

MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE

PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT ON
DECEMBER 14, 2023.
7~ 12-14-2023
J BRALEY L.S. 8446 DATE
NV 5
15092 AVE:NUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9L

SHEET NUMBER
1 OF 2 SHEETS
P: 858.385.0500 WWW.NV5.COM PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DA TE SUBMITTED: 12-14-2023 JOB NUMBER 227822-0001686.00
EXHIBIT "B"

EL SEGUNDO BLVD
Ll
l _ _ _ _ 7
NV 5
w
~
z
0 I­
C)
z
2 _J
s:
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
P: 858.JB5.0500 WWW.NV5.COM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1 I

UNINCORPORATED

TERRITORY
\ _, --1 ', , _ _ __
1 _ _ _ AREA 9L
' ---
- ~CITY OF

COMPTON

ROSECRANS AVE

VICINITY MAP
N.T.S.

I N
I
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9L
PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 12-14-2023

SHEET NUMBER
2 OF 2 SHEETS

JOB NUMBER
227822-0001686.00
7"aytor Mort\S GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9M

EXHIBIT A
AREA 9M - COMPTON

A PORTION OF THE RANCHO SAN ANTONIO IN THE CITY OF COMPTON, COUNTY OF

LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE MAP FILED IN PATENT BOOK 1, PAGES 119 THROUGH 121, INCLUSIVE OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE

COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

COMMENCING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF ARLINGTON STREET (50' WIDE) AND LONG BEACH BOULEVARD (80' WIDE) AS SHOWN ON TRACT NO. 4827 RECORDED IN BOOK 54 PAGE 25-26 OF MAPS LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID ARLINGTON STREET (50' WIDE) N 74°42'15" W 267.05 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOT 23 OF SAID TRACT NO. 4827 AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION;
L 1 THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF ARLINGTON AVENUE (50' WIDE) N 74°42'15" W 1427.32 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID TRACT NO. 4827;
L2 THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 4827 N 06°32'15"E 941.80 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID TRACT; L3 THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 4827 S 67°05'30" E 1304.71 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF BLOCK D LOT 9 OF SAID TRACT; L4 THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK D, LOT 9 S 03°05'00" E 137.16 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTHEASTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK D, LOT 9 AND THE CENTERLINE OF STOCKTON STREET (50' WIDE) AS SHOWN ON SAID TRACT NO. 4827;
L5 THENCE ALONG SAID CENTERLINES 70°04'47"E 101.38 FEET TO THE

INTERSECTION OF THE NORTHEASTERLY PROD OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF BLOCK E, LOT 10 OF SAID TRACT NO. 4827;
L6 THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LOT LINES OF BLOCK E LOTS 10 AND LOT 20 OF SAID TRACT MAPS 19°55'13" W 318.50 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF PINE STREET (60' WIDE) OF SAID TRACT NO. 4827;
L7 THENCE ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF PINE STREET (60' WIDE) S 70°04'47" E 189.16 FEET TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE EAST LINE OF BLOCK F LOT 12 OF SAID MAP;
L8 THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK F, LOT 12, S 19°55'13" W 141.19 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 12;
L9 THENCE ALONG THE REAR LOT LINE OF SAID BLOCK F, LOT 12 & 23 OF SAID TRACT NO. 4827 N 73°00'00" W 18.28 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF BLOCK F, LOT 24 OF SAID TRACT;
L 10 THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF BLOCK F, LOT 23 AND IT'S SOUTHERLY PROLONGATIONS 15°17'45" W 146.74 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND THE END OF THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION.

CONTAINING: 26.556 ACRES. MORE OR LESS.

SUBJECT TO ALL COVENANTS, RIGHTS, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD.

ALL AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT ATTACHED HERETO AS "EXHIBIT B" AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.

THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT.

PREPARED BY
NV5, INC.
#-7
J BRALEY, L.S. 8446
09-15-2023
DATE
EXHIBIT "B"
NO. BEARING LENGTH
1---L 1-+----N-7-4'_4 _2.,....., 1-s""'"""w----1--1_4_2_7 _-3-----12' 0 ' 12 0' 2 40' ..._LL_32--t--N-0 _5_· 3- 2--,-' _1 5....,..."~E 1----9 4_1_. s_o---1' \ SCALE 1 ,, = , S67'05'30"E 1304 .71' L4 S03'05'00"E 137.16'
L5 S70'04'47"E 101.38' ~\
L6 S19'55'13"W 318.50' \~,
L7 S70'04'47"E 189.16'
LS S19'55'13"W 141.19'
240'
L9 N73'00'00"W 18.28'
L10 S15'17'45"W 146.74'

ABBREVIATIONS & LEGEND
POC PaNT OF COMMENCEMENT

POB POINT OF BEGINNING CCMAD EXISTING

CCMAD COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO BOUNDARIES
ABATEMENT DISTRICT .................... GLACVCD EXISTING GLACVCD GREATER LA COUNTY .................... BOUNDARIES VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT _ - - - CITY OF COMPTON

UT UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY BOUNDARIES
480' PARCEL INCLUDED FOR ANNEXATION

26.556 AC. MORE OR LESS

THIS PLAT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER

MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE

PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT ON
SEPTEMBER 15, 2023.
09-15-2023
J BRALEY L.S. 8446 DATE
NV S
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9M

SHEET NUMBER
1 OF 2 SHEETS
P: 858.385.0500 WWW.NV5.COM PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DA TE SUBMITTED: 09-15-2023 JOB NUMBER 227822-0001585.00
6176-008-002
6176-008-003
6176-008-004
6176-008-005
6176-008-006
6176-008-007
6176-008-008
6176-008-009
6176-008-010
6176-008-013
6176-008-014
6176-008-015
6176-008-016
6176-008-017
6176-008-018
6176-008-019
6176-008-020
6176-008-021
6176-008-022
6176-008-023
6176-008-024
6176-008-025
6176-008-026
6176-008-027
6176-008-028
6176-008-029
6176-008-030
6176-008-031
6176-008-032
6176-008-033
6176-008-034
6176-008-035
6176-008-036
6176-008-037
6176-008-039
6176-008-040
6176-008-041
6176-008-042
6176-008-043
6176-009-001
6176-009-002
6176-009-003
6176-009-004
6176-009-005
6176-009-006
6176-009-007
6176-009-008
6176-009-009
6176-009-012
6176-009-013
6176-009-014
6176-009-015
6176-009-016
6176-009-017
6176-009-018
6176-009-019
6176-009-020
6176-009-021
6176-009-022
6176-009-023
6176-009-024
6176-009-025
6176-009-026
6176-009-027
6176-009-028
6176-009-029
6176-009-030
6176-009-031
6176-009-032
6176-009-033
6176-009-034
6176-009-035
6176-009-036
6176-009-037
6176-009-038
6176-009-039
6176-010-021
6176-010-022
6176-010-023
6176-010-024
6176-010-025
6176-010-026
6176-010-027
6176-010-028
6176-010-029
6176-010-030
6176-010-031
6176-010-032
6176-010-033
6176-010-034
6176-010-035
6176-010-036
6176-010-037
6176-010-038
6176-010-039
6176-014-025
6176-014-026
6176-014-027
EXHIBIT "B"

ASSESSORS PARCEL

NUMBERS INCLUDED IN
AREA 9M
6176-014-028
6176-014-029
6176-014-030
6176-014-031
6176-014-032
6176-014-033
6176-015-001
6176-015-002
6176-015-003
6176-015-004
6176-015-005
6176-015-006
6176-015-007
6176-015-008
6176-015-009
6176-015-010
6176-015-011
6176-015-013
6176-015-014
6176-015-015
6176-015-016
6176-015-017
6176-015-018
6176-015-019
6176-015-020
6176-015-021
6176-016-001
6176-016-002
6176-016-003
6176-016-004
6176-016-005
6176-016-006
6176-016-007
6176-016-008
6176-016-009
6176-016-010
6176-016-011
6176-016-012
6176-016-013
6176-016-014
6176-016-015
6176-016-016
6176-016-017
6176-016-018
6176-016-019
6176-016-020
6176-016-021
6176-016-022
6176-016-023
6176-016-029
NV 5
15092 AVcNUE OF SCIENCE. SUfTf 200
SAN DIEGO CA 92128
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9M
P: 858.iS.osoo www.NV5.COM PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 08•Ui·2028

SHEET NUMBER
2 OF 2 SHEETS

JOB NUMBER
227822-0001&86.00
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9N ~~toved by l,4,t;-c
EXHIBIT A 'f ..-;-: 0
GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION ( ~
AREA 9N - COMPTON 'l"ayfor Morris

A PORTION OF THE RANCHO SAN ANTONIO IN THE CITY OF COMPTON, COUNTY OF

LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE MAP FILED IN PATENT BOOK 1, PAGES 119 THROUGH 121, INCLUSIVE OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE

COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

BEGINNING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF McMILLAN STREET (80.5' WIDE) AND GIBSON AVENUE (75' WIDE) AS SHOWN ON TRACT NO. 20946 RECORDED IN BOOK 610 PAGE 09 OF MAPS LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDS;
L 1 THENCE, N 83°43'45" W 175.02 FEET ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID McMILLAN STREET (80.5' WIDE) TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOT 44 TRACT NO. 7099 RECORDED IN BOOK 101 PAGES 06-07 OF MAPS, LOS ANGELES COUNTY STATE OF CALIFORNIA;
L2 THENCE, N 08°33'40" E 151.65 FEET ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 44 OF SAID TRACT NO. 7099 TO THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF THE PARCEL DESCRIBED IN GRANT DEED NUMBER 98-3666545 OFFICIAL RECORDS, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES STATE OF CALIFORNIA;
L3 THENCE, S 83°43'45" E 175.02 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID

PARCEL OF SAID GRANT DEED TO A POINT ON A LINE DEFINED AS THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF COMPTON ON SAID TRACT NO. 20946; L4 THENCE, N 08°33'40"E 439.33 FEET ALONG SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF THE

CITY OF COMPTON FEET TO THE WESTERLY PROJECTION OF THE NORTHERLY TRACT LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 20946;
LS THENCE, S 83°40'30" E 782.72 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 20946 TO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID TRACT NO. 20946 ALSO BEING THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF WRIGHT ROAD (60' WIDE) PER SAID TRACT NO. 20946;
L6 THENCE S 08°34'10" W 640.80 FEET ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY AND

ITS' SOUTHERLY PROJECTION TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF McMILLAN STREET (80.5' WIDE);
L7 THENCE N 83°43'40" W 771.99 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SAID TRACT NO. 20946 FEET TO A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF GIBSON AVENUE (60' WIDE) PER SAID TRACT NO. 20946;
L8 THENCE N 03°26'45" W 51.24 FEET ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF GIBSON

AVENUE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND THE END OF THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION.

CONTAINING: 12.114 ACRES. MORE OR LESS.

SUBJECT TO ALL COVENANTS, RIGHTS, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD.

ALL AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT ATTACHED HERETO AS "EXHIBIT B" AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.

THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT.

PREPARED BY
NV5, INC.

J BRALEY, LS. 8446
06-08-2023
DATE
EXHIBIT "B" db
• Gl:ACVCD · • • z.:,; · • ~ . • • • • • • • • • • • · .r:2 . · .::=:zJ. · · · · · · · · · · ·l· · · -............ _. _ .... .. -...... _ .. _-.. _ .... -_ .... ~--~<--.-$ ~r -----... -.. .. _ ...... -.. -.. ---< .. -...... -.. -_ .. _ .... ·.-_-.. _ -.. -.r.·.-_· r <<---·_· .. _· ... • .... -.. -..-:.-.·.-_._· .. _· .. _· .. J_· .. .-i .. -.... _-.. _-..... _ .. _ .. _ .... -.. ·.-:.-_·_._ .. _ ...... _ .. _ -_ • .. -.. _-.. _ .. . • .. _·. · .. ·. · ·. · ·_. ·_ ._·_._·.-:.·.·. · .. ·_ · ·. · ·.· ·_ · •. -.~ ·-~· ·_ · · .. · · •. ·2! ··:. ·.•· · .. · · ·. · ·_ · ·_ · ·_._·. __ ·_._-.·. ·_ .. · ·. · ·_ · •. ·.• .. _· .. _·.·_. ·. ·_ · ··11·:_. -t~~i. ~i~~;-1s;~·- ·_ :_ (_ ·_·. ·.-_. · . .-_.-_. ·_.·_._·.-_·.-_·.-_.-_ :_ .-_.-_: _·.-.··1'.°<: : ·_:_:_. :.:. iRLiN~TON /(VE ·:: I i .:••·•.·<.· ~ :•.•.·•· i>·•·· ~·· > .·•. i••···· <> • i<•••·• i ·\ •.••··•>··• •• :" \ .··•· !.· )) ·: :::cl:J: .. L'.( J _0F:LOJ ,4~ _-_- ~ .. z. ·: ::: ... _. j ::: :. ·:: 3·1:.·:. · ·: . ::::. -·:::: t'.LJ·I· · ·:::::::. ·::::: .. ·-1~ ·:::
:. ·: ·.0 ::: JR.~C:T:~Q: :"Z099:. :. ~ :.g. ·::::::. ~--·::::. ·. ~f :. :::. AREAN'.'. ·::. z ·:. · ·:::::::. ·:::: : : . · ·:::
•]t· It:~'6;t~1 .•••• 1} ii~ ..... /\ •••••.•••. •···· i.•• ·••·••1) •·•• ?.i i /.•• ti ii.••··•··•/ : \ . 0 'P □ .·•·••··· .·.·.·.·. ·~.;ii·.~· TRA
8 .TNO ]o•~ 5'[2> 50" .<· •···•······ .•. • ••.•• / ···•< <<·.··.·<· • /•·· .• ···••<··.·.· .. ·.· ..•. •.·.·•··.· .. ·:::. ·::: -0 ·:: . ·r.1 ::: : . ·-.-. ::::. : : ,.:,-20·..1 2•. · · ·::: ::::: ._. ,·.- ::. 250,~:4'.·:::. :. · ·::::. 212,qQ' ::. 9 .-, ·:::::::. - ._. · · ·• ';;.._-: . : . · •• •. : -:-:. · · •• •. · -~McMIL'L.ANST-: •• ·:. · · · .-:-. ·:.·· ·· . • -=- -.'ii,. · ••• ·: ::. ex;) • • • , U~ • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • , •• ' • .. •• • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • •. • • •

LINE TABLE
NO. BEARING
L1 N83'43'45"W
L2 NOB" 33' 40"E
L3 S83" 43' 45 "E
L4 N08"33'40"E
L5 S83'40'30 'E
L6 sos·34'1 o"w
L7 N83"43'40"W
LB N03'26'45'W
NV 5
~ ·:: : .~ -·. · ·.·:::::. · · ·: ::::. · · ·::: .L7.'- · • ·_·::::. · • • • • ·::. · · • ·.·:::. 5s . • ·::::. · · . . - dSO .. . ...... . . ·.-_.·.-.-.-.-.o·LACvi:fri:.-·_.-_.-_.-_.-_·.-:::_itAll~~-• • • • • • • • • • • • ·:: :::. _._-.-:::::. ' . '' • ••• -~ rr,v,...,..

I ~ • • •
LENGTH
175.02'
151.65'
175.02'
439.33'
782.72
640.80'
771 .99'

51.24'
75' 150' 300'
- ---- YNWOOD
POC
POB
CCMAD

GLACVCD
UT
.................... ······•·1 .. ,, .. ,, ...

J,,;;;_
"<I:"
UT

VICINITY MAP

POINT OF COMMENCEMENT

POINT OF BEGINNING

COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT

GREATER LA COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT THIS PLAT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANC~ WITH THE

GLACVCD EXISTING PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR S ACT ON
BOUNDARIES MARCH 15, 2023 •
CCMAD EXISTING c::::z:_~
BOUNDARIES /..c;--
CITY OF COMPTON 06-08-2023
BOUNDARIES J BRALEY L.S. 8446 DATE

SHEET NUMBER
1 15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9N OF 2 SHEETS
PREPARED FOR: CCMAD

JOB NUMBER
DATE SUBMITTED: 06-08-202 3 227622-0001565.00 P: 858.385.0500 WWW.NV5.COM 6186-026-016
6186-027-020
6186-044-013
6186-044-014
6186-044-015
6186-044-016
6186-044-017
6186-044-020
6186-044-023
6186-044-025
6186-044-026
6186-044-027
6186-044-028
6186-045-003
6186-045-004
6186-045-005
6186-045-006
6186-045-007
6186-045-008
6186-045-009
6186-045-010
6186-045-011
6186-045-012
6186-045-013
6186-045-014
6186-045-015
6186-045-016
6186-045-017
6186-045-018
6186-045-019
6186-045-020
6186-045-021
6186-045-022
6186-045-023
6186-045-024
6186-045-025
6186-045-026
6186-045-027
6186-045-028
6186-045-029
6186-045-030
6186-045-031
6186-045-033
6186-045-035
6186-045-037
6186-045-039
6186-045-041
6186-045-043
6186-045-044
6186-045-045
6186-045-046
6186-045-04 7
6188-027-021 (portion)
NV 5
15092 AVENU£ OF SCl£NC£, SUIT£ 200
SAN Dl£GO ~ 92128
P: 858.JBS.OSOO WWW.M'S.COAi
EXHIBIT "B"

ASSESSORS PARCEL

NUMBERS INCLUDED IN
AREA N
ANNEXATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON

CREEK MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT
APN PARCEL LIST AREA 9N
SHm NUMBER
2 OF 2 SHEETS
PREPARED FOR: CCMAD JOB NUMBER
DATE SUBMITTED: 06-08-2023 227622-0001565.00

GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
1'aYfor Mo\1'\S
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 90

EXHIBIT A
AREA 90 - COMPTON

A PORTION OF THE RANCHO SAN PEDRO IN THE CITY OF COMPTON, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE MAP FILED IN PATENT BOOK 1, PAGES 119 THROUGH 121, INCLUSIVE OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

COMMENCING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF E. McMILLAN STREET (80.5' WIDE) AND GIBSON AVENUE (60' WIDE) AS SHOWN ON TRACT NO. 11858 RECORDED IN BOOK 220 PAGE 43-44 MAPS LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE, S 03°25'06" E 51.23 FEET ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID GIBSON AVENUE (60' WIDE)

TO THE WESTERLY PROJECTION OF THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SAID McMILLAN AVENUE (80.5' WIDE); TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.

L 1 THENCE, S 83°42'13" E 927.21 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY

TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET;
C2 THENCE, SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE AN ARC DISTANCE OF 71.00 FEET THRU A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 81°21'50" TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 180.00 FEET
C3 THENCE, SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE AN ARC DISTANCE OF 188.80 FEET THRU A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 60°05'49" FEET CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY TO A POINT SHOWN ON THE CAL TRANS RIGHT OF WAY MAP NO. F1518-8;
L4 THENCE, S 62°19'23" W 109.52 FEET ALONG THE RIGHT OF WAY LINE SHOWN ON CAL TRANS RIGHT OF WAY MAP NO. F1518-8;
L5 THENCE, S 59°42'32" W 10.25 FEET ALONG THE RIGHT OF WAY LINE SHOWN ON CAL TRANS RIGHT OF WAY MAP NO. F1518-8;
L6 THENCE, S 46°50'32" W 40.80 FEET ALONG THE RIGHT OF WAY LINE SHOWN ON CAL TRANS RIGHT OF WAY MAP NO. F1518-8;
L7 THENCE, S 46°50'32" W 100.16 FEET ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE; L8 THENCE, S 24°41'47" W 128.55 FEET ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE; L9 THENCE, S 53°24'28" W 62.11 FEET TO THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF MANETTE PLACE (80' WIDE);
L 10 THENCE, S 78°23'18" W 138.07 FEET;
L 11 THENCE, S 00°31'12" E 68.56 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF ROSECRANS AVENUE (100' WIDE);
L 12 THENCE, S 89°29'09" W 38.66 FEET ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF ROSECRANS AVENUE;

THENCE, LEAVING SAID CENTERLINE OF ROSECRANS AVENUE THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) COURSES AND DISTANCES
L 13 S 00°21'31" E 54.46 FEET;
L 14 S 54°08'50" E 8.62 FEET;
L 15 S 05°21'47" W 6.44 FEET;
L 16 THENCE, N 81°57'41" W 107.42 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF ROSECRANS AVENUE (100' WIDE);
L 17 THENCE S 89°29'09" W 250.00 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF ROSECRANS AVENUE (100' WIDE);
L 18 THENCE, LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY N 00°21'31" W 100.00 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF ROSECRANS AVENUE (100' WIDE); L 19 THENCE S 89°29'09" W 187.50' FEET ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF ROSECRANS AVENUE (100' WIDE) TO THE CENTERLINE OF GIBSON AVE (60' WIDE); L20 THENCE N 03°25'06" W ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF GIBSON AVENUE 660.53

FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND THE END OF THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION.

CONTAINING: 13.082 ACRES. MORE OR LESS.

SUBJECT TO ALL COVENANTS, RIGHTS, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD.

ALL AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT ATTACHED HERETO AS "EXHIBIT B" AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.

THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT.

PREPARED BY
NV5, INC.
/
',l .,,9 ~
/ ~k-7
J BRALEY, L.S. 8446
09-15-2023
DATE
-

ABBREVIATIONS & LEGEND
POC
POB
ROW
(R)
CCMAD

GLACVCD
UT

POINT OF COMMENCEMENT

POINT OF BEGINNING

RIGHT OF WAY
RADIAL

COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT

GREATER LA COUNTY

VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT

UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY

GLACVCD EXISTING

BOUNDARIES

CCMAD EXISTING

BOUNDARIES

CITY OF COMPTON

BOUNDARIES
SCALE 1 "= 1 so'
. .. -.... . . . .
• • 4.
300

PARCEL INCLUDED FOR ANNEXATION

13.082 AC. MORE OR LESS

VICINITY MAP

THIS PLAT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER

MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE

PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT ON
SEPTEMBER 15, 2023.
09-15-2023
J BRALEY L.S. 8446 DATE
NV 5
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200·
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 90

SHEET NUMBER
1 OF 2 SHEETS
P: 858.385.0500 WWW.NV5.COM PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 09-15-2023 JOB NUMBER 227622-0001565.00
EXHIBIT "B"

ASSESSORS PARCEL

NUMBERS INCLUDED IN
AREA 0
YNWOOD
!sl CITY
"'{" - 'COMP I -L"'1
6185-014-001
6185-014-002
6185-014-003
6185-014-005
6185-014-006
6185-014-007
6185-014-008
6185-014-009
6185-014-010
6185-014-011
6185-014-012
6185-014-013
6185-014-014
6185-014-015
6185-014-016
6185-014-017
6185-014-018
6185-014-019
6185-014-022
6185-014-023
6185-014-024
6185-015-002
6185-015-003
6185-015-004
6185-015-006
6185-015-008
6185-015-009
6185-015-010
6185-015-011
6185-015-012
6185-015-015
6185-015-016
6185-015-017
6185-015-018
6185-015-019
6185-015-025
6185-015-031
6185-015-033
6185-015-034
6185-015-035
6185-015-039
6185-015-040
6185-015-041
6185-015-042
6185-015-043
6188-027-005
6188-027-006
6188-027-007
6188-027-009
6188-027-010
6188-027-011
6188-027-012
6188-027-018
6188-027-019
6188-027-020

ABBREVIATIONS & LEGEND J I
r-- ....

NV 5
POC
POB
ROW
(R)
CCMAD

GLACVCD
UT
l ••u••••·•• .. ·••H·j

POINT OF COMMENCEMENT

POINT OF BEGINNING

RIGHT OF WAY
RADIAL

COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT

GREATER LA COUNTY

VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT

UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY
E.McMILLAN ST
I
UT1
I

ROSECRANS AVE
I EA
GL.ACVCD EXISTING -------------

BOUNDARIES

CCMAD EXISTING

BOUNDARIES

CITY OF COMPTON

BOUNDARIES
NO.

L1
L4
LS
L6
L7
LB
L9
L10
L 11
L12
L13
L14
L15
L16
L17
L18
L19
L20

ARC TABLE
NO.

C2
C3

VICINITY MAP

UNE TABLE

BEARING LENGTH
S83"42'13"E 927.21'
S62" 19'23"W 109.52'
S59"42'32"W 10.25'
S46"50'32"W 40.80'
S46"50'32"W 100.16'
S24"41'47"W 128.55'
S53"24'28"W 62.11'
S78"23' 1 B'W 138.07'
S00"31 '12"E 68.56'
S89"29'09"W 38.66'
S00"21 '31 "E 54.46 '
S54"08'50"E 8.62'
S05"21'47"W 6.44'
N81"57'41"W 107.42'
S89"29'09"W 250.00'
N00"21 '31 "W 100.00'
S89"29'09"W 187.50'
N03"25'06"W 660.53'

DELTA RADIUS LENGTH
ti=81 "21'50" 50.00' 71.00'
ti=60"05 '49' 180.00 188.80'
l I
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 90

SHEET NUMBER
2 OF 2 SHEETS 15092 AVfNU£ OF SCIENCE, SUTT'£ 200
SAN DIEGO CA 92128
P: 858.JB~.0500 WWW.NV5.COM PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 08·16-2023 JOB NUMBER 227822-0001686.00

GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
.,.aytor Morns
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9P

EXHIBIT A
AREA 9P - COMPTON

A PORTION OF THE RANCHO SAN PEDRO IN THE CITY OF COMPTON, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE MAP FILED IN PATENT BOOK 1, PAGES 119 THROUGH 121, INCLUSIVE OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

BEGINNING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF COMPTON BOULEVARD (60' WIDE) AND GIBSON AVENUE (60' WIDE) AS SHOWN ON TRACT NO. 6251 RECORDED IN BOOK 067 PAGES 07 - 12 OF MAPS, LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDS;
L 1 THENCE, N 03°29'21" W 1,988.77 FEET ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID GIBSON AVENUE (60' WIDE) TO THE WESTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE NORTHERLY LINE OF LOT 106 BLOCK 5 OF SAID TRACT NO. 6251;
L2 THENCE, N 89°25'56" E 138.74 FEET ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE TO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 106;
L3 THENCE, S 00°13'26" E 41.01 FEET ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 106 TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 106 ALSO BEING THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT 110 BLOCK 5 OF SAID TRACT MAP NO. 6251; L4 THENCE, N 89°25'56" E 150.00 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOTS 110- 112 OF SAID TRACT NO. 6251 TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 112 OF SAID TRACT NO. 6251;
LS THENCE, N 00°13'25" W 148.04 FEET ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 112 TO THE CENTERLINE OF SAN CARLOS STREET (50' WIDE) AS SHOWN ON SAID TRACT NO. 6251;
L6 THENCE, S 89°25'56" W 150.00 FEET ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF SAN CARLOS STREET (50' WIDE) TO THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE REAR LINE OF LOT 62 BLOCK 1 TRACT NO. 6251;
L7 THENCE, N 00°13'25" W 107.04 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION LINE TO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 61 BLOCK 1 OF SAID MAP; LS THENCE, S 89°25'56" W 150.95 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 61 OF SAID MAP TO THE CENTERLINE OF GIBSON AVENUE (60' WIDE); L9 THENCE, N 03°29'20" W 214.33 FEET ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF GIBSON AVENUE (60' WIDE) TO THE WESTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SAN RAFAEL STREET (50' WIDE) PER SAID TRACT NO. 6251; llPage
L 10 THENCE, N 89°25'55" E 413.16 FEET ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SAN RAFAEL STREET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT 39, BLOCK 1, TRACT NO. 6251;
L 11 THENCE, N 00°13'26" W 125.18 FEET ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 39 TO THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 39;
L 12 THENCE, N 89°32'25" E 198.34 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY LOT LINES OF LOTS 39-42 OF SAID TRACT NO. 6251 TO A POINT DISTANT EASTERLY 48.34 FEET FROM THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 42;
L 13 THENCE, S 27° 17'45" E 113.51 FEET ALONG THE BOUNDARY LINE OF THE CITY OF PARAMOUNT AS SHOWN ON THE CITY OF PARAMOUNT ANNEXATION NO. 5, FILED JULY 28, 1970 WITH THE COUNTY RECORDER OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 43, SAID POINT DISTANT NORTHERLY 23.42 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT;
L 14 THENCE, S 27°14'18" E 82.16 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF LOT 73, BLOCK 3 OF TRACT NO. 6251, SAID POINT BEING EASTERLY 37.32 FEET FROM THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT; L 15 THENCE, S 27°17'52" E 137.72 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE TO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF LOT 96, BLOCK 3 OF TRACT NO. 6251; L 16 THENCE, S 00°13'26" E 228.08 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF LOT 121 BLOCK 5 OF SAID TRACT NO. 6251, SAID POINT BEING 55 FEET FROM THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 121; L 17 THENCE, S 14°19'14" W 70.40 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 121, SAID POINT BEING DISTANT EASTERLY 32.32 FEET FROM THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 121; L 18 THENCE, N 89°25'56" E 1.91 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE AND SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOT 121 TO A POINT DISTANT EASTERLY OF THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT 121, ALSO BEING THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT 138, BLOCK 5 OF TRACT NO. 6251;
L 19 THENCE, S 12°49'03" W 126.48 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE OF THE CITY OF PARAMOUNT TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 138, SAID POINT BEING DISTANT EASTERLY 5.69 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 138;
L20 THENCE, S 11 °38'58" W 61.39 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE NORTHERLY 10 FEET OF LOT 158, BLOCK 7 OF TRACT NO. 6251, SAID POINT BEING ALSO DISTANT 6.93 FEET FROM THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 158;
L21 THENCE, S 10°12'07" W 114.90 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 158, SAID POINT BEING DISTANT EASTERLY 22.28 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 158; 21Page
L22 THENCE, S 10°20'48" W 121.47 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE TO A POINT IN THE EASTERLY LINE OF LOT 172, BLOCK 7 OF TRACT NO. 6251, SAID POINT BEING DISTANT SOUTHERLY 119.27 FEET FROM THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 172;
L23 THENCE, S 00°13'21" E 3.93 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE AND SAID EASTERLY LINE OF LOT 172 TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT; L24 THENCE, S 09°19'16" W 60.90 FEET ALONG SAID BOUNDARY LINE OF THE CITY OF PARAMOUNT OF SAID ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 5 TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE NORTHERLY 10 FEET OF LOT 191, BLOCK 8 OF SAID TRACT MAP, SAID POINT BEING 30.90 FEET EASTERLY OF THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 191;
L25 THENCE, S 09°30'06" W 239.77 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOT 202, BLOCK 8 OF TRACT NO. 6251, SAID POINT BEING DISTANT WESTERLY 0.6 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 202;
L26 THENCE, S 05°38'19" W 60.35 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE NORTHERLY 10 FEET OF LOT 219, BLOCK 9 OF SAID TRACT MAP, SAID POINT BEING WESTERLY 6.76 FEET OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 219;
L27 THENCE, S 05°01'54" W 113.52 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 219, SAID POINT BEING DISTANT 32.85 FEET FROM THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT;
L28 THENCE, S 89°24'21" W 1.63 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE AND ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOT 219 TO A POINT EASTERLY 31.22 FEET FROM THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOT 229, BLOCK 9 OF TRACT NO. 6251; L29 THENCE, S 05°09'48" W 113.67 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF THE SOUTHERLY 10 FEET OF SAID LOT 229, SAID POINT BEING DISTANT EASTERLY 20.55 FEET FROM THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 229;
L30 THENCE, S 06°21'51" W 60.44 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF LOT 244, BLOCK 10 OF SAID TRACT MAP, SAID POINT BEING EASTERLY 13.62 FEET FROM THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 244; L31 THENCE, S 07°56'47" W 124.41 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOT 243 OF SAID BLOCK OF SAID TRACT MAP, SAID POINT DISTANT EASTERLY 45.94 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 243;
L32 THENCE, N 89°25'56" E 0.06 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE AND SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOT 243 TO A POINT DISTANT EASTERLY 46 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 243;
3IPage
L33 THENCE, S 07°54'52" W 185.06 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE NORTHERLY 10 FEET OF LOT 264, BLOCK 11 OF SAID TRACT MAP, SAID POINT BEING EASTERLY 19.80 FEET FROM THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 264;
L34 THENCE, S 09°52'28" W 301.07 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE NORTHERLY 10 FEET OF LOT 277, BLOCK 12 OF SAID TRACT MAP, SAID POINT BEING EASTERLY 17.02 FEET FROM THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 277;
L35 THENCE, S 07°47'28" W 114.25 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 277, SAID POINT BEING 11.69 FEET WESTERLY OF NORTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF LOT 288 OF SAID BLOCK OF SAID TRACT MAP;
L36 THENCE, N 89°25'56" E 11.69 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE AND SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOT 277 TO SAID NORTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF LOT 288;
L37 THENCE, S 14°08'40" W 143.73 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE AND SAID NORTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF LOT 288 TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 288;
L38 THENCE, S 14°49'38" E 30.96 FEET ALONG SAID CITY BOUNDARY LINE TO THE CENTERLINE OF COMPTON BOULEVARD (PREVIOUSLY LEMON STREET, 60' WIDE) ACCORDING TO TRACT NO. 6251;
L39 THENCE, S 89°29'35" W 310.34 FEET ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF COMPTON

BOULEVARD TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND THE END OF THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION.

CONTAINING: 29.81 ACRES. MORE OR LESS.

SUBJECT TO ALL COVENANTS, RIGHTS, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD.

ALL AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT ATTACHED HERETO AS "EXHIBIT B" AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.

THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT.

PREPARED BY
NV5, INC.

I
~/4. / ~ ... -7
J BRALEY, L.S. 8446
09-15-2023
DATE
41Page
EXHIBIT "B,, I
- l ROSECRANS AVE.
:;7;~;~ • > ••••• ?iii{]
BLOCK 1 • ....• _ .. •:: . ..

I
I
_I_
I

I CITY OF UJ
067 Mf>-PS ___..,_,,..:r.:,~ ::: ••••• ·•:: I COMPTON G 7-12
- SEE
~ I
NV 5
15092 AVENUE ·oF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
P: 858.385.0500 WWW.NV5.COM
.l
:'
... ]

DETAIL C
SHEET 2 l
I
I
I
I
I
COMPTON BLVD!
N
I
SOMERSET BLVD .
····:1
/)\ ~~o\18d by lAF-c
'r'y 0
I
I
I
1M
1aytor Mor(\S
B

VICINITY MAP

ABBREVIATIONS

POB POINT OF BEGINNING

CCMAD COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT

GLACVCD GREATER LA COUNTY
UT

VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT

UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY

GLACVCD EXISTING
-:-:-.:.-::::'::.::..;-,:,;..·. SEE DETAIL A
_-:: ";<.:·:::. : _:_._:_.·. SH EE T 2
............... ,, .... , .......... ,.,_ BOUNDARIES

CCMAD EXISTING

BOUNDARIES

CITY OF COMPTON
~ ---- - - BOUNDARIES
,
175' 350' 700'
- ----
SCALE 1 "= 350'
······ ······ --·j
AREA P CONTAINS 29.81 ACRES

MORE OR LESS

THIS PLAT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER

MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE

PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT ON
SEPTEMBER 15, 2023.
09-15-2023
J BRALEY L.S. 8446 DATE
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9P
PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 09-15-2023

SHEET NUMBER
1 OF 3 SHEETS

JOB NUMBER
227822-0001585.00
EXHIBIT "B"

AP NUMBERS IN AREA P

LINE TABLE
NO. BEARING
L1 N03'29'21 "W
L2 N89'25'56"E
L3 S00'13'26"E
L4 N89'25'56"E
L5 N00'13'25"W
L6 S89'25'56''W
L7 N00'13'25"W
LS S89'25'56''W
L9 N03'29'20''W
L10 N89'25'55"E
L 11 NOO' 13'26"W
L 12 N89'32'25"E
L13 S27'17'45"E
L14 S27'14
1 1 S"E
L15 S27'17'52"E
L 16 s00·13'26"E
L17 S14'19'14"W
L18 N89'25'56"E
L19 S12'49'03"W
L20 S11'38'58"W
L21 S10'12'07"W
L22 S10'20'48"W
L23 soo· 13•21 "E
L24 S09'19'16"W
L25 S09'30'06"W
L26 S05'38'19"W
L27 S05'01 '54"W
L28 S89'24'21 "W
L29 S05'09'48"W
L30 S06'21 '51 "W
L31 S07'56'47"W
L32 N89'25'56"E
L33 S07'54'52"W
L34 S09'52'28"W
L35 S07'47'28"W
L36 N89'25'56"E
L37 S 14'08' 40"W
L38 S14'49'38"E
L39 S89'29'35"W
NV 5
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
P: 858.385.0500 WWW.NV5.COM
LENGTH
1988.77 '
138.74'

41.01'
150.00'
148.04'
150.00'
107.04'
150.95'
214.33'
413.16'
125.18'
198.34'
113.51'

82.16'
137.72'
228.08'

70.40'

1.91'
126.48'

61.39'
114.90 '
121.47'

3.93'

60.90'
239.77'

60.35'
113.52'

1.53'
113.67'

60.44'
124.41'

0.06 '
185.06'
301.07'
114.25'

11.69'
143.73'

30.96'
310.34 '
... __J ' ....... .
:2~~-·-L-32
DETAIL · . I--,.. ~~.,........,.-~
, A .. . .
. 2 5.1 . . 2,5 2 . • . • . • . • .
. .. .
. . . . . . f'r) . ' .....
a' 40
1 80' 160'
SCALE 1 "= 80'
o· 40' 80' 160'
- ----
SCALE 1 "= 80'
... N .

DETAIL l 1 8
C
. · ~ · '
o· 40' 80'
- -
160'
---
SCALE 7 "= 80'
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9P

SHEET NUMBER
2 OF 3 SHEETS
PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DA TE SUBMITTED: 09-15-2023 JOB NUMBER 227822-0001686.00
6180-001 -011
6180-001-012
6180-001-013
6180-001-014
6180-001-015
6180-001-019
6180-001-023
6180-001-042
6185-001-029
6185-001-030
6185-001-031
6185-001-032
6185-001-033
6185-001-034
6185-001-035
6185-001-036
6185-001 -037
6185-001-040
6185-001 -041
6185-001-042
6185-001 -045
6185-001-047
6185-001 -048
6185-001-049
6185-001-050
6185-001-051
6185-001-052
6185-001 -056
6185-001 -057
6185-001-061
6185-001-064
6185-001 -065
6185-001-066
6185-001-067
6185-001-068
6185-001-069
6185-002-029
6185-002-030
6185-002-031
6185-002-032
6185-002-033
6185-002-034
6185-002-035
6185-002-036
6185-002-037
6185-002-038
6185-002-039
6185-002-044
6185-002-045
6185-002-04 7
6185-002-048
6185-002-049
6185-002-054
6185-002-055
6185-002-056
6185-002-057
NVS
EXHIBIT "B"

AP NUMBERS IN AREA P
6185-002-058
6185-002-059
6185-002-060
6185-002-061
6185-002-062
6185-002-063
6185-002-069
6185-002-070
6185-002-072
6185-002-073
6185-002-074
6185-002-075
6185-002-076
6185-002-077
6185-002-078
6185-002-079
6185-002-080
6185-016-024
6185-016-036
6185-016-037
6185-016-038
6185-01 6-039
6185-01 6-042
6185-016-043
6185-016-044
6185-016-045
6185-01 6-046
6185-016-047
6185-016-048
6185-016-049
6185-016-050
6185-016-051
6185-01 6-052
6185-01 6-053
6185-01 6-054
6185-016-055
6185-016-056
6185-016-057
6185-016-058
6185-016-059
6185-016-060
6185-016-061
6185-016-062
6185-016-063
6185-016-065
6185-016-070 (portion)
6185-016-071
6185-018-003
6185-018-004
6185-018-005
6185-018-006
6185-018-010
6185-018-011
6185-018-012
6185-018-013
6185-018-014
6185-018-015
6185-018-019
6185-018-020
6185-018-021
6185-018-022
6185-018-023
6185-018-024
6185-018-025
6185-018-026
6185-018-030
6185-018-032
6185-018-033
6185-018-034
6185-018-035
6185-018-036
6185-018-037
6185-018-038
6185-018-039
6185-018-040
6185-018-041
6185-018-046
6185-018-047
6185-018-048
6185-018-049
6185-018-050
6185-018-051
6185-018-052
6185-018-054
6185-018-055
6185-018-056
6185-018-059
6185-018-060
6185-018-061
6185-018-062
6185-018-063
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9P
15092 AVE:NU£ OF SC/£NC£, SUTT'E 200
SAN DIEGO CA 92128
P: 858.385.0500 WWW.NV5.COM PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 08-16-2023

SHEET NUMBER
3 OF 3 SHEETS

JOB NUMBER
227822-0001686.00

GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
'l"a.Yf or Morns
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9Q
EXHIBIT "A"
AREA 90 - COMPTON

A PORTION OF THE RANCHO SAN PEDRO IN THE CITY OF COMPTON, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE MAP FILED IN PATENT BOOK 1, PAGES 119 THROUGH 121 AND A PORTION OF THE RANCHO LOS CERRITOS ACCORDING TO THE MAP FILED IN PATENT BOOK 2, PAGES 202 THROUGH 205,

INCLUSIVE OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

COMMENCING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF SOMERSET BOULEVARD AND SAN JOSE AVENUE AS SHOWN ON TRACT NO. 7890 RECORDED IN BOOK 088 PAGE 44 OF MAPS LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDS;

THENCE ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID SOMERSET BOULEVARD
S 89°21'25" W 841.86 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 4 RANGE 10 OF THE TEMPLE AND GIBSON TRACT MAP FILED IN MAP BOOK 2, PAGES 540 & 541 IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE S 03°15'30" E 40.04

FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SAID SOMERSET BOULEVARD AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION; L 1 THENCE, N 89°21'25" E 666.96 FEET TO THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID TRACT NO. 7890;
L2 THENCE, S 03°10'00" E 714.30 FEET ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF TRACT NO. 7890 TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF MARK KEPPLE ST.; L3 THENCE, N 89°20'15" E 143.67 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY

CORNER OF MARK KEPPLE STREET AND SAN JOSE AVENUE AS SHOWN ON SAID TRACT NO. 7890;
L4 THENCE, S 03°10'00"E 576.24 FEET ALONG THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SAID SAN JOSE AVENUE TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF MYRRH STREET (25' WIDE) PER TRACT NO. 7890;
LS THENCE, N 89°15'20" E 467.59 FEET ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY TRACT LINE TRACT NO. 7890;
L6 THENCE, N 18°41'35" E 35.60 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT ON SAID EASTERLY TRACT LINE;
L7 THENCE, N 89°34'40" E 43.95 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF TRACT NO. 15549 FILED IN MAP BOOK 627 PAGES 84 & 86 IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY;
L8 THENCE, S 29°55'55" W 1469.00 FEET ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF TRACT NO. 15549 TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF ALONDRA BOULEVARD; L9 THENCE, S 89°38'25" W 528.58 FEET TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE

NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SAID ALONDRA BOULEVARD AND THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOT 4 RANGE 10 OF SAID TEMPLE AND GIBSON TRACT; L 10 THENCE, N 03°15'30" W 2519.75 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND THE END OF THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION.

CONTAINING: 47.618 ACRES. MORE OR LESS.

SUBJECT TO ALL COVENANTS, RIGHTS, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD.

ALL AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT ATTACHED HERETO AS "EXHIBIT B" AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.

THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT.

PREPARED BY
NV5, INC.
-z / ~-~✓ -7
J BRALEY, L.S. 8446
09-18-2023
DATE
EXHIBIT "B,,
·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.GtACVC.O·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.,.__ ___ ~~~.~. ~ .. - .. ~. ~ CCM~D
..... . ' ............ ., ' ............ - .
:I
NO.

L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
L6
L7
LB
L9
L10

LINE TABLE

BEARING LENGTH
N89'21 '25"E 666.96' •
S03' 10'00"E 714.30' •
N89'20' 15.E 143.67 ' .

S03' 1 O'OO"E 601.33 '.

N89' 15'20"E 467.59'
N18'41 '35"E 35.60 ' .

N89'3 4'40" E 43.95 ' .

S29'55' 55"W 1469 ,00' ·
S89.38'25''W 528.58' •
Nos 15•3o"w 2519.75" •
AREA Q CONTAINS 47.618 ACRES

MORE OR LESS
POC
POB
CCMAD

GLACVCD
UT
,, ........... .. ..... , ......... . .................

CITY OF

PARAMOUNT

POINT OF COMMENCEMENT

POINT OF BEGINNING

COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT

GREATER LA COUNTY

VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT

UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY

GLACVCD EXISTING

BOUNDARIES

CCMAD EXISTING

BOUNDARIES

CITY OF COMPTON

BOUNDARIES
175' 350'
SCALE 1 "= 350'
700'
09-18-2023
J BRALEY L.S. 8446 DATE
NV 5
REORGANIZATION NO.2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLA~VCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9Q

SHEET NUMBER
1 ·oF 1 SHEETS 15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
P: 858 . .385.0500 WWW.NV5.COM PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 09-18-2023 JOB NUMBER 227822-0001686.00

GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
'1"aylor Mott\S
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9R
EXHIBIT "A"
AREA 9R - COMPTON

A PORTION OF THE RANCHO SAN PEDRO IN THE CITY OF COMPTON, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE MAP FILED IN PATENT BOOK 1, PAGES 119 THROUGH 121 AND A PORTION OF THE RANCHO LOS CERRITOS ACCORDING TO THE MAP FILED IN PATENT BOOK 2, PAGES 202 THROUGH 205,

INCLUSIVE OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

COMMENCING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF ATLANTIC PLACE AND 70TH STREET PER RECORD OF SURVEY FILED IN BOOK 244, PAGE 15 IN SAID OFFICE OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE S01°32'24" W ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF ATLANTIC PLACE 135.29 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 7 RANGE 8 OF THE TEMPLE & GIBSON TRACT FILED IN BOOK 2 OF MAPS, PAGES 540-541 INCLUSIVE IN SAID OFFICE OF SAID COUNTY.

THENCE, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE OF THE TEMPLE & GIBSON TRACT, SAID LINE ALSO BEING THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF COMPTON S89°31'28" W 1247.06

FEET, TO THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SPORTSMAN DRIVE AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION;
L 1 THENCE, N07°17'10" E 1109.38 FEET ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF

SPORTSMAN DRIVE AND THE NORTHERLY PROLONGATION THEREOF TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF LOT A TRACT NO.561 RECORDED IN BOOK 15 PAGE 49 LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDS, SAID LINE ALSO BEING THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOT 13 BLOCK 23 OF THE CALIFORNIA COOPERATIVE COLONY TRACT RECORDED IN BOOK 21 PAGE 15 OF MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY; L2 THENCE, N36°40'00" W 199.21 FEET ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 561 TO AN ANGLE POINT IN EASTERLY LINE LOT A OF SAID TRACT NO. 561; L3 THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT A TRACT NO. 561 N21 °51 '06'' W 83.09 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT NO 561 ALSO BEING THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOT 6 RANGE 8 TEMPLE & GIBSON TRACT FILED IN BOOK 2 PAGES 540 TO 541 OF MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; L4 THENCE, N89°51 '05" E 89.10 FEET ALONG SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 6 RANGE 8 TEMPLE & GIBSON TRACT , TO A POINT AS SHOWN ON CAL TRANS RIGHT OF WAY MAP NO. F1517-5: THENCE THE FOLLOWING FOUR (4) COURSES AND DISTANCES

LS N24°47'32" E 66.02 FEET;
L6 S78°44'26" E 37.09 FEET;
L7 N15°24'37" W 52.19 FEET;
L8 N27°45'58" E 179.68 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT ON THE WESTERLY LA COUNTY

FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT RIGHT OF WAY AS SHOWN ON SAID CAL TRANS RIGHT OF WAY MAP F1571-5;
L9 THENCE, N12°10'35" E 1063.56 FEET ALONG THE WESTERLY LOS ANGELES

COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL RIGHT OF WAY PER SAID DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS MAP F1517-5;
L 10 THENCE, N12°11'23" E 51.30 FEET ALONG SAID WESTERLY FLOOD CONTROL RIGHT OF WAY TO THE CENTERLINE OF ALONDRA BOULEVARD (80' WIDE), FORMERLY OLIVE STREET PER SAID DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS MAP F1517-5; L 11 THENCE, N89°15'09" E 28.81 FEET ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF ALONDRA BOULEVARD TO THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF GIBSON AVENUE (33' WIDE) PER SAID DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS MAP F1517-5;
L 12 THENCE, LEAVING SAID CENTERLINE OF ALONDRA BOULEVARD N03°17'08" W 1789.67 FEET TO THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF GIBSON STREET (33' WIDE) PER SAID DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS MAP F1517-5;
L 13 THENCE, N13°59'57" E 340.41 FEET ALONG SAID WESTERLY LOS ANGELES

FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT RIGHT OF WAY LINE TO THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF COMPTON AS SHOWN IN ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 34 RECORDED SEPTEMBER 26;
L 14 THENCE, ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF COMPTON N89°13'06" E 837.19 FEET TO THE EASTERLY LOS ANGELES FLOOD CONTROL

DISTRICT RIGHT OF WAY PER LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT MAP 19-RW 47.2, SAID RIGHT OF WAY BEING A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY WITH A RADIUS OF 5000 FEET AND A RADIAL BEARING OF S79°49'24" E;
C15 THENCE, SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE AN ARC DISTANCE OF 776.33 FEET THRU A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 08°53'46" TO THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF COMPTON PER ANNEXATION NO. 9 TO THE CITY OF PARAMOUNT RECORDED OCTOBER 14, 1986;
L 16 THENCE, ALONG SAID CITY OF COMPTON BOUNDARY LINE S89°13'19" W 276.80 FEET TO A POINT DISTANT 540 EASTERLY OF THE NW CORNER OF LOT 5, RANGE 9 OF THE TEMPLE GIBSON TRACT PER SAID ANNEXATION NO. 9 TO THE CITY OF PARAMOUNT;
Page I 2
L 17 THENCE, S07°36'59" W 2605.85 FEET ALONG THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF COMPTON TO A POINT DISTANT 263.00 FEET S04°24'24" W OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF PARCEL 84 IN FIELD MAP 20335-3 PER SAID ANNEXATION NO. 9 TO THE CITY OF PARAMOUNT;
L 18 THENCE, N89°36'35" E 263.00 FEET ALONG SAID BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF COMPTON, SAID LINE ALSO BEING THE NORTHERLY LINE LOT 13, BLOCK 23 OF SAID CALIFORNIA COOPERATIVE TRACT RECORDED IN BOOK 21, PAGE 15 OF MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY AS SHOWN IN SAID ANNEXATION NO. 9 TO THE CITY OF PARAMOUNT;
L 19 THENCE, S06°54'48" W 617.49 FEET ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF COMPTON PER ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 187 TO THE CITY OF COMPTON RECORDED OCTOBER 15, 1986;

THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF COMPTON PER SAID ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 187 THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) COURSES AND DISTANCES:

L20 S03°40'46" W 286.00 FEET
L21 S12°33'13" W 175.35 FEET
L22 S17°25'16" W 134.54 FEET
L23 THENCE, CONTINUING S07°23'37" W 260.46 FEET ALONG SAID CITY OF COMPTON BOUNDARY LINE, ALSO BEING THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 7, RANGE 8 OF THE TEMPLE & GIBSON TRACT RECORDED IN BOOK 2 PAGES 540 TO 541 OF

MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, SAID LINE ALSO BEING THE EASTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE CENTERLINE OF GREENLEAF BOULEVARD; L24 THENCE, S89°31'28" W 653.22 FEET ALONG SAID BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF COMPTON PER ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 187 TO THE CITY OF COMPTON TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND THE END OF THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION.

CONTAINING: 61.145 ACRES. MORE OR LESS.

SUBJECT TO ALL COVENANTS, RIGHTS, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD.

ALL AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT ATTACHED HERETO AS "EXHIBIT B" AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.

Page I 3

THIS GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT.

PREPARED BY
NV5, INC.

J BRALEY, L.S. 8446
09-26-2023
DATE
Page I 4
EXHIBIT "B"

CITY OF

PARAMOUNT
.·.·.·coMPT- N .BLVo. ·. ·. ·_·_ ·_·_·_·_·_·_ ·_·_ ·_·_·_· ,-...__
..!.. SOMERSET BLVD.
- -- 7- --- y· ••• ••••••• ·_· ·.·.·.·.· _·_-._.,·~-
I L
CITY OF~

COMPTON I
I
~ I
ti()
.::,~~ ,._<,,,'<o \
I
\
I
-~-- .,
OSE "

LINSLEY
.......... -a .... . .... ..... ·· ·O · . .. .
.·.:-: :-:-:-:-:·:-:-:~r -:-:-:-:-:
. . . . . . . --'- . . . . .
\TY ·OF· • • • • • • • • • •
• 0 0 0 0 I o O • 0 • 0 0 0
AMOUNT · • • • • • • • .......... . ... .....
o I • 0 J • • I o O O O O O ~ 0 • • • • o o 0
:-: ~1-:-: :-· :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:- ·-·.·.·.
o'
-,
I
I
I t5N
-~<-=;-.,.___ -~I I
-,-...__
I
~ o;

COMPTON

0..
u
OF

PARAMOUNT
~ CITY OF
~ LONG BEACH
<(

VICINITY MAP
NTS

ABBREVIATIONS & LEGEND

POC POINT OF COMMENCEMENT

POB POINT OF BEGINNING

CCMAD COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT

GLACVCD GREATER LA COUNTY

VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT
••••••••••••••••••••••••• GLACVCD EXISTING BOUNDARY

CCMAD EXISTING BOUNDARY
- - - - CITY OF COMPTON BOUNDARY
125' 250' 500'
- ----
SCALE 1"= 250'
••••••••••••• ••.• .•.•.•.•. -~ ·_:·~ · µ:\-_.J,- 11 IS PLAT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1; • • t~i.Sa PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT ON . . . -s EE .. s H E.E .... 2 .......... ... ~~l~r. ~
0 SEPTEMBER 26, 2023.

AREA 9R CONTAINS 61.145 ACRES

MORE OR LESS
J BRALEY L.S. 8446
09-26-2023
DATE
NV 5
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9R

SHEET NUMBER
1 15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
P: 858.385.0500 WWW.NV5.COM PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 09-26-2023 OF 4 SHEETS

JOB NUMBER
227622-0001565.00
SEE SHEET 1 EXHIBIT "B"
. . . . .. . z -,_:..
.. . ....... <( . _ .
~ ............ u

ABBREVIATIONS & LEGEND
I ......................... .

LINSLEY •• \ : : : : :- ~ • : •
., .·.· .·. ·.··.·.·.·.· 2 ·. <"" .·.·.·. ·.·.· .. •.•.•

POC POINT OF COMMENCEMENT

POB POINT OF BEGINNING

CCMAD COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT

GLACVCD GREATER LA COUNTY
w \ .......... Q . . ::_j . ...... ' .. .
> .......... ~ Q ......... .
<( ......... Q_ . ·~ · ....... .. '
I •• • •• • • • • ·-2· · <(·. • ....... .
z \ · · · · · · · · o .c:i::: ··· • • • • ••• 0 .......... .. . <( .......... . (j) I ••• .•.• • ••••. ~ .q_: ... • ......... .. ..•... co I . . . . . . . Li._. . . . . . . . . . . . .
- 1\ . . .. . ... 0 .LL,.. . . . .... . . . .

C) I . . . Q .... - . .... .

C) \ .·.·.·.·. · .·. · . · .~ ·.~ .· .·.·.·. ·.· .· .· .·. · . l'-o. I • •••••• ·u c:·
";' \ .•.•.•.•.•.•.•.... .. c;> .•...•.•...•.•.•.•.•.•
~ .. ....... . ~ ... . .. ... ... .

I _, . . . . ..
---=: ~,, • ~ ~ • T •- . _• • - • • • , - • •- • -. • , ... .' ~ •-: _• . - • .- • • ..:. • • • • • • < I I • • • o I • > • 0 I I ~ I • I I I o
I
: • :\ •• : • : • : • : • : • : • : •.• : ':.:.:.:.: •. • : • : • : • : • : • : • ' · · · · · · · · · · · · RAN·CHO ·
.···:···&'0~ ·· :-··:·:·:Bo"lJN°o:ARY·
.·~~~·.·.······.·. · . ·.·.· .·.·.·. ·. ·
. · . ·.'<;,,.,,__~ ·.· .. • . • .. • .•. •. ••.•.•.•.•.•. •. • .• ... . -o/ ' .. ' -.... - ... : -~' - - .
••.... -· .... ' •...... ..... ·~1:,...0'. -~ • .. .
.·.·.· . · .· ~ · -z .· . . ·. ~·. ·_· c6V_.· . ·. •.·.· _·_· Oj ••••• ·Q) . o· . . . . .. .... .
' . ... . ~ - ~ .. '. -t"~ ....... '
· ···· ,-..:. ·Q ··· ·.· ~~··· · ·
.·.·.·.·.·.· 0 .· ~ .• .. ·V" ········· ·· ·· · ········ ······ Q ·O -·- ··············· ·. ·O · . . ...... .. . ' ... . . ·:;;::·r;·. ' •.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.• ' ...... .::::( .- .. . . .. ........ .. . . .

VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT
.;;.:;;;_·~.,;;;;;:;;;::::::: GLACVCD EXISTING BOUNDARY

CCMAD EXISTING BOUNDARY
- - - - CITY OF COMPTON BOUNDARY

LINE TABLE
NO. BEARING LENGTH
L1 NOT17'10nE 1109.38'
L2 N36. 40'00"W 199.21'
L3 N21·51 '06''W 83.09'
L4 N89.51 'd'5"E 89.1 o·
L5 N24·47'32"E 66.02'
L6 S78. 44'26"E 37.09'
L7 N15·24'37"W 52.19'
L8 N2T45'58"E 179.68'
L9 N12"10'35"E 1063.56'
L10 N12"11'23"E 51.30'
L 11 N89.15'09"E 28.81'
L12 N03'17'08"W 1789.67'
L13 N13'59'57"E 340.41'
L14 N89"13'06"E 237.19'
L16 S89"13'19''W 276.80'
L17 SOT36'59"W 2605.85'
L18 N89"36'35"E 263.00'
L19 s05·54'48"W 617.49'
L20 S03'40'46 "W 286.00'
L21 S12"33' 13"W 175.35'
L22 S1T25' 16"W 134.54'
L23 SOT23'37"W 260.46'
L24 S89"31 '28"W 653.22'
: : : : : -:@: t:s: . : . • : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . :- : . :. l L_L__L...~·~· ·~· 0-!_. :__:L· _c.........:.· ·~ · ---N ~----- ---,

ARC TABLE
LENGTH
SEE SHEET 3
0_'~_1_2~5•~-25~0~·~~~~5~00' I NO. DELTA RADIUS
= c18 08·53'45" 5000.00·
SCALE 1 "= 250'
776.33'
NV 5
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
P: 858.385.0500 WWW.NV5.COM
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9R
PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 09-26-2023

SHEET NUMBER
2 OF 4 SHtETS

JOB NUMBER
227622-0001565.00
SEE SHEET 2 EXHIBIT "B"
........ (.) ...

I N
I
o· 125' 250' 500·

ABBREVIATIONS & LEGEND

POC POINT OF COMMENCEMENT

POB POINT OF BEGINNING

CCMAD COMPTON CREEK MOSQUITO

ABATEMENT DISTRICT

GLACVCD GREATER LA COUNTY
NV S
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 92128
P: 858 . .385.0500 WWW.NV5.COM
SCALE 1 "= 250'

GLACVCD EXISTING BOUNDARY

CCMAD EXISTING BOUNDARY

CITY OF COMPTON BOUNDARY
REORGANIZATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON CREEK

MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (DETACHMENT FROM
GLACVCD AND ANNEXATION TO CCMAD) AREA 9R
PREPARED FOR:CCMAD DATE SUBMITTED: 09-26-2023

SHEET NUMBER
3 OF 4 SHEETS

JOB NUMBER
227822-0001685.00
EXHIBIT "B"
AP NUMBERS IN AREA 9R
6180-024-015
6239-001-011
6239-001-905
6239-001-906
6239-001-907
6239-002-011
7101-013-020
7101-013-021
7101-013-023
7101-013-024
7101-013-902
7101-013-904
7101-015-002
7101-015-004
7101-015-005
7101-015-902
7101-017-008
7101-017-012
7101-017-013
7101-017-016
7101-017-019
7101-017-021
7101-017-022 (portion)
7101-017-023
NVS
15092 AVENUE OF SCIENCE. SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO C4 9212B
P: 858.°JM.0500 WWW.NVS.COAI
ANNEXATION NO. 2018-08 TO THE COMPTON

CREEK MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT
ARi,;A AR

SHEET NUMBER
4 OF 4 SHEETS
PREPARED FOR: CCMAD DATE Bl&ITTED: OI-H-2028 227~00
JUNE 23, 2026
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: MUNICIPAL WATER DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: REQUEST TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR SOLID WASTE

AND RECYCLABLE MATERIALS HANDLING SERVICES TO BE

COLLECTED ON LOS ANGELES COUNTY TAX ROLL FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2026-2027; AND DELINQUENT ACCOUNTS SUBMITTED BY

REPUBLIC SERVICES TO BE COLLECTED ON THE LOS ANGELES
COUNTY TAX ROLL FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026 FOR OUTSTANDING BALANCES FOR TAX ROLL BILLING FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-2027 Effective, July 1, 2023, the City of Compton began billing all single-family and multi-family (without bin service) parcels within the City on the County of Los Angeles Property Tax Roll.

The City's franchise hauler, Republic Services, Inc., bills the Charges for multi-family accounts (with bin service) and commercial accounts, by invoice, and may turn over delinquent accounts to the City for collection on the Tax Roll.

The City has prepared a written report that describes (i) a list of all single-family and multi- family (with one to three units and without bin service) parcels for Tax Roll Billing for 2026- 2027 (ii) the Outstanding Balances for Tax Roll Billing for 2025-2026 (iii) the parcels with delinquent multi-family accounts and commercial accounts (delinquencies of over 90 days) that Republic has turned over to the City to be collected on the 2026-2027 Tax Roll. The Report is on file in the office of the City Clerk and in the City's Water Department.

Any owners of parcels identified in the Report may protest the collection on the 2025- 2026 and 2026-2027 Tax Roll of the Charges or the delinquent amounts, as applicable.

Staff recommends that City Council schedule a public hearing on this matter for Tuesday, July 7, 2026 at 5:30 p.m.

DAVID BENNETT

WATER DEPARTMENT MANAGER
APPROVED FOR FORWARDING:

JERRY GROOMES

ACTING CITY MANAGER

8. JUNE 23, 2026
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: JEROME GROOMES

ACTING CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF THE CITY OF COMPTON’S MEMBERSHIP IN THE

CALIFORNIA CITIES FOR SELF-RELIANCE JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY (JPA)

SUMMARY
This staff report provides an update on recent regulatory, and judicial developments affecting gaming revenues of California cardroom cities such as the City of Compton.

Due to the absence of any advocacy in the pending litigation, staff recommends that the City Council consider withdrawing from the California Cities for Self-Reliance Joint Powers Authority (JPA).

BACKGROUND
The City of Compton is a member of the California Cities for Self-Reliance (CCSR) Joint Powers Authority (JPA), formed to coordinate municipal interests regarding gaming-related issues. Member cities include Bell Gardens, Hawaiian Gardens, and City of Commerce.

Bureau of Gambling Control Regulations of Card Games:

On April 1, 2026, the Regulations of the Bureau of Gambling Control (Bureau) pertaining to card games became effective. The Blackjack Regulations revoke all existing Blackjack styled games and require all card rooms to submit new rules for the play of one defined Blackjack game. The Player-Dealer Regulations revoke all existing games featuring a Player-Dealer position and require all card rooms to submit new rules that compel the players to rotate the Player-Dealer position according to very specific rules or terminate the play of the game.

The Bureau economic impact report acknowledges that Regulations will cause card rooms to loss one half of their revenues, but many commentators and opponents believe the revenue losses will be much greater and lead to the close of some card rooms.

9.9.9.9.9.9.9.9. STAFF REPORT - CALIFORNIA CITIES FOR SELF-RELIANCE JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY JUNE 23, 2026
PAGE 2
California Gaming Association v. Rob Bonta, Bureau of Gambling Control In response and on March 6, 2026, the California Gaming Association, several card rooms and third-party proposition players, represented by the law firm of Munger Tolles& Olson, filed two Verified Petitions for Writ of Mandamus and Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief challenging the validity of the Bureau’s Regulations.

On March 30, 2026, the law firm filed two Motions seeking injunctions to stop the implementation and enforcement of the Regulations for hearing on May 21, 2026.

The California Cities Gaming Authority (CCGA), a joint powers authority consisting of the Cities of Gardena, Inglewood and Colma, took the following actions to protect the gaming revenues of its member cities:
On April 21, 2026, the CCGA filed a Motion for Leave to File an Amicus Brief In Support of the Petitioners Motion for Preliminary Injunction together with an Amicus Brief In Support of the Petitioners Motion for Preliminary Injunction. On May 1, 2026, the Court held a hearing on a Motion by the Indian Tribes to Intervene in the lawsuit and on the CCGA Motion. The Court denied the Tribes’ Motion but granted the CCGA Motion.

The California Cities for Self-Reliance (CCSR), joint powers authority, did not file a Motion for Leave to File an Amicus Brief in Support of the Preliminary Injunctions and did not appear at the May 1 hearing.

Hearing on Motions for Preliminary Injunctions on March 6, 2026 On May 21, 2026, the Court held a hearing on the Motions. The CGA was represented by Munger Tolles and Olson. The Bureau was represented by the Attorney General.

The CCGA was represented by its General Counsel Jimmy Gutierrez.

The Court granted the Preliminary Injunctions.

The attorneys for the parties requested to proceed by Motions for Judgment on the Pleadings. The Court set the Motions for hearing on June 30, 2026, and directed the parties to file their Motions by June 5, 2026 and Oppositions by June 22, 2026.

The Court also granted leave to file Amicus Briefs to the CCGA, the Tribes and the CCSR on the same dates.

On June 5, 2026, the following Motions and Briefs were filed:
The CGA filed its Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. The CCGA filed its Amicus Brief In Support of the CGA’s Motion.

STAFF REPORT - CALIFORNIA CITIES FOR SELF-RELIANCE JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY JUNE 23, 2026
PAGE 3
The Bureau filed its Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. The Tribes filed its Amicus Brief In Support of the Bureau’s Motion. The CCRS did not file an Amicus Brief.

ANALYSIS
The devastating effect of the Bureau’s Regulations on the City of Compton’s tax revenues from its card room requires strong and effective advocacy in the Petition filed by the CGA against Bonta and the Bureau. Unfortunately, the CCSR has taken no action to protect the City of Compton from the devastating effect of the Bureau’s Regulations.

Withdrawing from the JPA at this time would:
• Pause the City’s financial and administrative commitments to the JPA Payee Name Check Date Check Amount
CA Cities for Self-Alliance 16-Apr-15 $25,000

STAFF REPORT - CALIFORNIA CITIES FOR SELF-RELIANCE JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY JUNE 23, 2026
PAGE 4
CA Cities for Self-Alliance 22-Feb-16 $25,000
CA Cities for Self-Alliance 24-Jan-17 $30,000
CA Cities for Self-Alliance 13-Sep-17 $30,000
CA Cities for Self-Alliance 8-Jan-19 $30,000
CA Cities for Self-Alliance 4-Jun-19 $33,000
CA Cities for Self-Alliance 17-Dec-19 $30,000
CA Cities for Self-Alliance 20-Oct-20 $30,000
CA Cities for Self-Alliance 1-Mar-22 $30,000
CA Cities for Self-Alliance 2-Mar-22 $30,000
CA Cities for Self-Alliance 18-Jul-23 $30,000
CA Cities for Self-Alliance 12-Sep-23 $35,000
CA Cities for Self-Alliance 9-Oct-24 $35,000
CA Cities for Self-Alliance 13-Jan-26 $37,500
TOTAL 2015 - 2026 $430,500
•Allow City Council to reconsider participation after the court rules on the Motion. • Preserve the City’s flexibility to join the CCGA in the future if participation becomes advantageous
Given the convergence of legal and regulatory challenges, withdrawal provides the most prudent course of action while preserving future options.

FISCAL IMPACT
Withdrawal from the JPA may result in the reduction or elimination of membership dues or related expenditures. Current annual membership is $37,500 for GL Account 1001- 510-000-4219. Expenditures 2015 to 2026 total $430,500 to the California Cities for Self Reliance JPA.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council:

Adopt a resolution directing the City Manager to initiate the City of Compton’s withdrawal from the California Cities for Self-Reliance Joint Powers Authority, effective immediately, pending the outcome of the ongoing state judicial and regulatory proceedings.

JEROME GROOMES

ACTING CITY MANAGER

STAFF REPORT - CALIFORNIA CITIES FOR SELF-RELIANCE JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY JUNE 23, 2026
PAGE 5

ATTACHMENTS

1.California Cities Gaming Authority (CCGA) Amicus Brief June 5, 2026

2.California Gaming Authority (CGA) Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings June 5, 2026

3.Attorney General Bonta's Motion for Judgement on the Pleadings June 5, 2026

4.Tribes Amicus Brief June 5, 2026

5.2026 Resolution Withdrawing from California Cities for Self-Reliance (CCSR)

6.Draft Withdrawal Notice to CCSR

7.Resolution 26,118

1 BRIEF OF AMICUS CALIFORNIA CITIES GAMING AUTHORITY IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
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

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISO

CALIFORNIA GAMING ASSOCIATION;
et al.,

Petitioners and Plaintiffs,

vs.

ROB BONTA, et al.,

Respondents and Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. CPF-26-519606
Case No. CPF-26-519609

BRIEF OF AMICUS CALIFORNIA

CITIES GAMING AUTHORITY IN
SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS’

MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE

PLEADINGS

Date: June 30, 2026
Time: 9:00 a.m.

Dept.: 303
Judge: Hon. Richard C. Darwin

INTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE
Amicus curiae California Cities Gaming Authority (“CCGA”) submits this brief to support Petitioners’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (“Motion”) in both captioned cases.

Amicus has a direct interest in preserving and effectuating the powers of municipalities to license and tax card rooms from which municipalities derive substantial tax revenues upon which they rely to sustain essential governmental services to their residents. Amicus seeks to prevent the Bureau from enforcing its regulations and revoking existing game approvals through legislative and judicial functions, not grant ed to it, which effectively eliminate municipal taxes on card room revenues in violation of the Grove/Pines doctrine.

Jimmy L. Gutierrez (SBN 59448) FEE EXEMPT PER GOV. CODE § 6103 JIMMY L. GUTIERREZ LAW CORPORATION
13963 Laredo Lane
Chino Hills, California 91709
Telephone: (909) 717-1100
[email protected]

Attorney for Amicus Curiae California Cities Gaming Authority, a Joint Powers Authority

2 BRIEF OF AMICUS CALIFORNIA CITIES GAMING AUTHORITY IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
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

Each CCGA Member city licenses and taxes cardrooms within its jurisdiction under powers that are constitutionally grounded, historically well -established, and separate from the Bureau’s game-approval responsibility. Such municipal powers derive from sections 5 and 7 of Article XI of the California Constitution and Government Code sections 37100 and 37101 , which protect municipal affairs powers - the taxation power - against state agency regulations.

Such municipal affairs powers predate the Gambling Control Act (“Act”) by over a century that were expressly preserved by the Legislature when it enacted the Act in 1998, through section 19803(b) of the Business and Professions Code.

The CCGA’s interest is entirely governmental. Its three member cities (Colma, Gardena and Inglewood) face immediate, severe, and permanent fiscal harm if the Bureau’s Player - Dealer Regulation and on Blackjack Regulation are not invalidated. The combined projected annual revenue losses of the three member cities exceed twelve million dollars. The specific consequences include the threatened elimination of one-third of Colma’s Public Safety Department, a formal fiscal emergency in Gardena, and the defunding of public safety, senior services, and infrastructure in Inglewood.

INTRODUCTION
These two companion cases arise from a single unlawful regulatory assault on card rooms and their host cities. The Bureau of Gambling Control (the “Bureau”) adopted two sets of regulations - on Games with a Player-Dealer Position (“Player-Dealer Regulation”) and o n Blackjack-Style Games (“Blackjack Regulation”) - that collectively target the card games that are most frequently played at California’s cardrooms and that generate the greatest portion of cardroom revenues upon which host municipalities derive tax revenues to sustain their services.

The parties have recognized that the following dispositive legal issues common to both cases may be resolved by way of the Motion: (1) whether the Bureau had authority to adopt the Regulations and (2) whether the Bureau had authority to revoke its prior approvals of existing games. Amicus now writes separately to address these legal issues from its municipal perspective and to explain why both questions must be answered in favor of Petitioners.

3 BRIEF OF AMICUS CALIFORNIA CITIES GAMING AUTHORITY IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
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

ARGUMENT
I. THE REGULATIONS VIOLATE THE MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS POWER TO TAX The Bureau lacks authority to adopt the Regulations, because the Regulations restrict games on a statewide basis. When the Legislature enacted the Gambling Control Act (“Act”), it recognized that gaming had traditionally been regulated at the local level and that many municipalities relied heavily on tax revenues from authorized gaming activity to fund their local governments. For that reason, the Act not only explicitly preserves municipalities’ right to tax gaming but also requires that any statewide restrictions on games be adopted only by the Commission (a neutral five-member body with policymaking authority and expertise) and only where those restrictions meet certain procedural requirements. The Bureau has ignored that framework by adopting Regulations that effectively prohibit entire categories of games, and thereby nullify taxes that CCGA’s Member Cities have relied upon for decades.

A. State Regulations Cannot Eliminate Municipal Taxation The Bureau’s Blackjack Regulations do not regulate card room blackjack-style games.

They eliminate them. Section 2073 of the Blackjack Regulations prohibits “any game of blackjack” statewide. Section 2075 of the Blackjack Regulations summarily revokes every existing approval. And t he Player-Dealer Regulation’s render the games it nominally permits commercially non-viable.

Thus, the Regulations do not regulate the games that Colma, Gardena, and Inglewood tax. No! The Regulations destroy them - and with them - the revenue these Cities have relied upon for decades to fund public safety, infrastructure, senior services, and core governmental operations. Respondents themselves admit in both Answers that the Regulations will affect municipal revenues and that certain municipalities will be impacted. Those are binding judicial admissions on the face of the pleadings.

But the Gambling Control Act does not contain any legislative direction that would destroy local gaming revenues through any means including the adoption of Regulations that effectively eliminate the play of games in card rooms. On the contrary, the Act preserves local

4 BRIEF OF AMICUS CALIFORNIA CITIES GAMING AUTHORITY IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
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

gaming revenues. Business and Professions Code section 19803(b) expressly declares that the Act does not preclude any city, county, or city and county from imposing any local tax or license fee.

Furthermore, a state power to regulate an activity can not eliminate a municipal tax. In re Groves (1960) 54 Cal.2d 154, 156–157 (“Whether or not state law has occupied the field of regulation, cities may tax businesses carried on within their boundaries and enforce such taxes by requiring business licenses for revenue and by criminal penalties.”) The municipal power of taxation may not be overcome except upon a direct and immediate conflict with a state statute. The Pines v. City of Santa Monica (1981) 29 Cal.3d 656, 661 (“The taxation power is vital and granted to charter cities by the Constitution. Their ability to impose revenue taxes can be curtailed only by the charter itself or when ’in direct and immediate conflict with a state statute or statutory sch eme.’ That the state has preempted a field of statewide concern for the purposes of regulation does not itself prevent local taxation of the persons or activities regulated.”) And where a conflicting state statute fails to demonstrate a statewide concern, the local tax measure prevails. California Federal Savings & Loan Assn. v. City of Los Angeles (1991) 54 Cal.3d 1, 9 (“If the subject of the statute fails to qualify as one of statewide concern, then the conflicting charter city measure is a ‘municipal affair’ and ‘beyond the reach of legislative enactment.”)
If a state regulatory scheme that merely restricts an activity cannot preempt the local tax on that activity, then an agency regulation that eliminates the activity entirely cannot be valid where the Legislature has simultaneously and expressly preserved t he municipal authority to tax it. The Regulations accomplish through elimination what the Legislature has declared may not be accomplished through preemption.

B. No Statutory Direction to Eliminate Local Taxation of Gaming Revenue The California Supreme Court has recognized only one exception to the Groves/Pines doctrine. In California Federal Savings & Loan Assn. v. City of Los Angeles (1991) 54 Cal.3d 1, the Court found preemption of local taxation only because the Legislature had enacted an

5 BRIEF OF AMICUS CALIFORNIA CITIES GAMING AUTHORITY IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
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

express “in lieu” tax scheme that specifically declared it displaced all other local taxes on financial corporations. The Court emphasized that municipal taxation is ordinarily a protected municipal affair and that displacing it requires both a genuine statewide concern and a statute specifically designed to supersede local taxes.

None of those conditions is present here. The Gambling Control Act contains no “in lieu” provision. It contains the opposite - section 19803(b) expressly preserves local taxing authority. The Legislature has never enacted a statute authorizing the Bureau to destroy municipal gaming tax bases. An administrative agency cannot accomplish through regulation what the Legislature has not authorized through statute. California Federal makes clear that even the Legislature must act expressly to displace the constitutionally grounded municipal taxing power. A subordinate agency has no power to do implicitly what the Legislature itself cannot do without explicit action.

II. THE BUREAU LACKED AUTHORITY TO ADOPT THE REGULATIONS.

The California Gambling Control Commission (the “Commission”) is the Legislature’s chosen governmental body for quasi-legislative gaming policy. Both Regulations - which impose statewide categorical rules prohibiting entire classes of games - are quintessentially quasi-legislative acts.

A. The Bureau Lacked Authority to Prohibit Any Game Statewide

The Gambling Control Act creates a deliberate division of authority and responsibilities between two separate state agencies. The Commission is authorized to: establish minimum standards for gaming (Bus. & Prof. Code § 19824), adopt regulations for the administration and enforcement of the Act (§ 19840), restrict and regulate any activity related to controlled gambling (§ 19841(o)), define and limit the method of operation of games (§ 19841(p)), and - after a full evidentiary proceeding before its five-member panel and upon a specific finding that a game violates existing law - prohibit any game on a statewide basis (§ 19842(a)).

6 BRIEF OF AMICUS CALIFORNIA CITIES GAMING AUTHORITY IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
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 Bureau’s responsibilities are far narrower. Section 19826 assigns the Bureau defined investigative, enforcement, and approval responsibilities. It may approve the play of individual controlled games, including restrictions and limitations on individual approvals (§ 19826(g)). It may adopt regulations reasonably related to its enumerated functions and duties (§ 19826(f)). It may recommend game limitations to the Commission (§ 19841(p)) - a role that would be superfluous if the Bureau could promulgate statewide restrictions. Nowhere in section 19826 - or anywhere else in the Act - is the Bureau granted authority to issue statewide game prohibitions. That authority is reposed in the Commission exclusively.

But the Bureau’s Regulations are not limited to restricting individual game approvals under section 19826(g). Rather, the Bureau’s Regulations prohibit entire categories of games.

And the Commission has not found any approved game – to be replaced by the Regulations – to be unlawful.

B. The Regulations Are Void, Because They Are Not Authorized The Regulations are not authorized by the Act. They are void.

California administrative agencies possess no inherent powers; they possess only those powers that have been granted to them by the state Constitution or by statute. And the fact an agency has been granted some authority to act within a given area does not mean that the agency enjoys plenary authority to act in that area. Consequently, if an agency takes action that is inconsistent with, or that simply is not authorized by the statute, then its action is void. (Security Nat. Guaranty, Inc. v. Cal. Coastal Com. (2008) 159 Cal.App.4th 402, 419.

In Security, a developer challenged the Coastal Commission’s assertion of authority over a project. The Court of Appeal invalidated the Commission’s action because the agency could not identify an affirmative statutory grant for the power it claimed, stating the governing principle that agency action beyond that legislation is void.

The Regulations must face the same outcome. They are not authorized. They are void. ///
///

7 BRIEF OF AMICUS CALIFORNIA CITIES GAMING AUTHORITY IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
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

III. THE BUREAU LACKED AUTHORITY TO REVOKE GAME APPROVALS The Bureau had no authority to revoke the game approvals it had previously approved.

A. The Act Reposes Game Revocation Authority in the Commission Exclusively The Gambling Control Act is explicit. If the Bureau believes an “approval should be suspended or revoked,” it must “file an accusation with the commission.” (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 19930(b)) The Commission then adjudicates the accusation and must find that the game violates a law before any game may be revoked. (Id. § 19842(a)) The Commission’s own regulations list the Bureau’s enforcement tools - warning notices, notices to cure, advisory letters, filing of accusations with the Commission recommending revocation of a game approval - but conspicuously omit revocation of game approvals. (Cal. Code Regs., Tit. 4, §§ 12550(f), 12552(c), 12554(a)). The Act does not empower the Bureau to take unilateral game revocation actions.

But both the Player -Dealer Regulation and the Blackjack Regulation circumvent this process. Each Regulation creates a compliance window after which any non-conforming game’s approval is automatically “deemed non-compliant” and withdrawn - without any accusation, any Commission hearing, any evidence or any finding of unlawfulness. In essence, the Regulations imposes an unauthorized summary game revocation process.

B. Due Process Prohibits the Bureau’s Summary Game Revocation Process The summary game revocation process in both Regulations violates the due process clauses of the United States and California Constitutions. But a perm it to engage in a lawful business cannot be revoked without notice, a hearing, and evidence before a neutral decision- maker. Bauer v. City of San Diego (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 1281, 1294; Barry v. Barchi (1979) 443 U.S. 55, 66–67. In Irvine v. State Board of Equalization (1940) 40 Cal.App.2d 280, 284 – 285, the Court of Appeal reinstated a license to sell liquor that was summarily revoked stating that a person should not be deprived even of a permit to engage in a legitimate business without due process “whether the license is granted as a privilege or recognized as a vested right.” Thus, the provision of the Act that "game approvals are a revocable privilege, and cardrooms

8 BRIEF OF AMICUS CALIFORNIA CITIES GAMING AUTHORITY IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
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

do not acquire vested rights in such approvals" (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 19801(k)) does not support a denial of due process.

The Regulations provide for an objection to the Bureau Director acting in her sole discretion. Neither Answer pleads any facts showing how the objection processes satisfy due process. Respondents also admit in both Answers that the Bureau approved targeted games as recently as 2024 and 2025. (Player-Dealer Answer ¶¶ 132–135; Blackjack Answer ¶¶ 85, 87.) Thus, the imposition of the Regulations’ objection process, in place of the accusation process under the Act, violates due process rights of card room owners and municipalities.

Consequently, the Bureau’s summary revocation of existing games means that the play of card games at card rooms will cease immediately, as will the tax revenues of the municipalities that tax the play of card games at its licensed card rooms.

CONCLUSION
The court may dispose of this case by granting the Petitioners’ Motion for Judgement on the Pleadings, because it presents a clear, undisputed factual scenario, as well as the harm that would ensue to the cardroom industry and to the municipalities that host card rooms.

Amicus curiae respectfully urges this Court to grant Petitioners’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings without leave to amend, and direct Respondents to rescind both Regulations.

Respectfully submitted,

By: _____________________ DATED: June 5, 2026

Jimmy L. Gutierrez
Attorney for Amicus Curiae California Cities Gaming Authority

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

-1- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

BENJAMIN J. HORWICH, SBN 249090
[email protected]
MEGAN L. McCREADIE, SBN 330704
[email protected]

MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP
560 Mission Street, Twenty-Seventh Floor
San Francisco, California 94105-2907
Telephone: (415) 512-4000
Facsimile: (415) 512-4077

JEREMY S. KREISBERG (pro hac vice)
[email protected]

MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP
601 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Suite 500E
Washington, D.C. 20001
Telephone: (202) 220-1100

OLIVER BROWN, SBN 335952
[email protected]
LAUREN E. KUHN, SBN 343855
[email protected]

MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP
350 South Grand Avenue, Fiftieth Floor
Los Angeles, California 90071-3426
Telephone: (213) 683-9100

Attorneys for California Gaming Association
see additional counsel on next page

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
CALIFORNIA GAMING ASSOCIATION;

CAL-PAC RANCHO CORDOVA, LLC
(d/b/a PARKWEST CASINO CORDOVA);
CASINO 580, LLC (d/b/a PARKWEST
CASINO 580); LODI CARDROOM, INC.
(d/b/a PARKWEST CASINO LODI);
PARKWEST BICYCLE CASINO, LLC (d/b/a
PARKWEST BICYCLE CASINO);

PARKWEST CASINO MANTECA, LLC
(d/b/a PARKWEST CASINO MANTECA);
THE SILVER F, INC. (d/b/a PARKWEST
CASINO LOTUS); ACME PLAYER
SERVICES, LLC; BLACKSTONE GAMING,
LLC; CALPROP SERVICES, LLC; FAROS
UNLIMITED, INC.; FORTUNE PLAYERS
GROUP, INC.; GLOBAL PLAYER
SERVICES, INC.; KB VENTURES; KBCH
CONSULTANTS, INC.; KNIGHTED
VENTURES, LLC; L.E. GAMING, INC.;
PACIFIC GAMING SERVICES, LLC;
PLAYERS EDGE SERVICES;
PROGRESSIVE GAMING, LLC;
Case No. CPF-26-519606;
Case No. CPF-26-519609

Petitioners’ Motion for Judgment on the
Pleadings

Date: June 30, 2026
Time: 9:00 a.m.

Dept.: 303
Judge: Hon. Richard C. Darwin

Action Filed: March 6, 2026

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

-2- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

QUALIFIED PLAYER SERVICES, LLC;
THE INDEPENDENT; AND WAHBA,

Petitioners and Plaintiffs,

vs.

ROB BONTA, in his official capacity as
Attorney General of the State of California;
YOLANDA MORROW, in her official
capacity as Director of the Bureau of
Gambling Control; CALIFORNIA

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, BUREAU OF
GAMBLING CONTROL, a state agency,

Respondents and Defendants.

SCOTT B. GARNER, SBN 156728
[email protected]
MOLLY J. MAGNUSON, SBN 229444
[email protected]

UMBERG ZIPSER LLP
1920 Main Street, Suite 750
Irvine, California 92614
Telephone: (949) 679-0052

Attorneys for Cal-Pac Rancho Cordova, LLC (d/b/a Parkwest Casino Cordova); Casino 580, LLC (d/b/a Parkwest Casino 580); Lodi Cardroom, Inc. (d/b/a Parkwest Casino Lodi); Parkwest Bicycle Casino, LLC (d/b/a Parkwest Bicycle Casino); Parkwest Casino Manteca, LLC (d/b/a Parkwest Casino Manteca); and The Silver F, Inc. (d/b/a Parkwest Casino Lotus)

ELIZABETH A. DOOLEY, SBN 292358
[email protected]
SUSANNA G. SCHUEMANN, SBN 332956
[email protected]

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
One Embarcadero Center, Suite 2600
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: (415) 393-8200

DEBRA WONG YANG, SBN 123289
[email protected]

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
333 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, California 90071
Telephone: (213) 229-7000

Attorneys for Acme Player Services, LLC; Blackstone Gaming, LLC; CalProp Services, LLC; Faros Unlimited, Inc.; Fortune Players Group, Inc.; Global Player Services, Inc.; KB Ventures; KBCH Consultants, Inc.; Knighted Ventures, LLC; L.E. Gaming, Inc.; Pacific Gaming Services, LLC; Players Edge Services; Progressive Gaming, LLC; Qualified Player Services, LLC; The Independent; and Wahba
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

-3- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on June 30, 2026, at 9:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard, in Department 303, located at Civic Center Courthouse, 400 McAllister Street, San Francisco, CA 94102, Petitioners and Plaintiffs California Gaming Association; Cal- Pac Rancho Cordova, LLC (d/b/a Parkwest Casino Cordova); Casino 580, LLC (d/b/a Parkwest Casino 580); Lodi Cardroom, Inc. (d/b/a Parkwest Casino Lodi); Parkwest Bicycle Casino, LLC (d/b/a Parkwest Bicycle Casino); Parkwest Casino Manteca, LLC (d/b/a Parkwest Casino Manteca); The Silver F, Inc. (d/b/a Parkwest Casino Lotus); Acme Player Services, LLC; Blackstone Gaming, LLC; CalProp Services, LLC; Faros Unlimited, Inc.; Fortune Players Group, Inc.; Global Player Services, Inc.; KB Ventures; KBCH Consultants, Inc.; Knighted Ventures, LLC; L.E. Gaming, Inc.; Pacific Gaming Services, LLC; Players Edge Services; Progressive Gaming, LLC; Qualified Player Services, LLC; The Independent; and Wahba (collectively, “Petitioners”) will and hereby do move the Court to grant relief in their favor on Causes of Action 1–4 and 7–8 in their Verified Petitions for Writ of Mandamus and Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief in Case Nos. CPF-26-519606 and CPF-26-519609. Pursuant to instruction from the Court, Petitioners are filing a single Motion in both cases. Petitioners ask the Court to entertain this Motion, as justice may require, as a motion for judgment on the pleadings under Code Civ. Proc., § 438, subd. (c)(1)(A), as a common law motion for judgment on the pleadings, or as a motion for summary adjudication on the claims referenced herein under Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (f).

The parties have met and conferred regarding the grounds for this motion and did not reach an agreement resolving the claims raised in this Motion. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 439, subd. (a); Declaration of Megan McCreadie in Support of Petitioners’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (“McCreadie Decl.”), filed concurrently.)
Petitioners’ motion is based on this Notice and Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, the Memorandum of Points and Authorities in support thereof, the accompanying Request for Judicial Notice and Declaration of Megan McCreadie, the Verified Petitions for Writ of Mandamus and Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief in Case Nos. CPF-26-519606 and CPF-26- 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

-4- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

519609, Petitioners’ forthcoming response brief, all other filings in Case Nos. CPF-26-519606 and CPF-26-519609, and such other materials or arguments of counsel that the Court may receive at or before the hearing on this Motion.

DATED: June 5, 2026 MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP

By: /s/ Benjamin J. Horwich
BENJAMIN J. HORWICH
JEREMY S. KREISBERG
MEGAN L. McCREADIE

OLIVER BROWN
LAUREN E. KUHN

Attorneys for California Gaming Association

DATED: June 5, 2026 UMBERG ZIPSER LLP

By: /s/ Scott B. Garner
SCOTT B. GARNER
MOLLY J. MAGNUSON

Attorneys for Cal-Pac Rancho Cordova, LLC
(d/b/a Parkwest Casino Cordova); Casino 580,
LLC (d/b/a Parkwest Casino 580); Lodi
Cardroom, Inc. (d/b/a Parkwest Casino Lodi);
Parkwest Bicycle Casino, LLC (d/b/a Parkwest
Bicycle Casino); Parkwest Casino Manteca, LLC
(d/b/a Parkwest Casino Manteca); and The
Silver F, Inc. (d/b/a Parkwest Casino Lotus)

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

-5- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

DATED: June 5, 2026 GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP

By: /s/ Elizabeth A. Dooley
ELIZABETH A. DOOLEY
SUSANNA G. SCHUEMANN

DEBRA WONG YANG

Attorneys for Acme Player Services, LLC;
Blackstone Gaming, LLC; CalProp Services, LLC;
Faros Unlimited, Inc.; Fortune Players Group,
Inc.; Global Player Services, Inc.; KB Ventures;
KBCH Consultants, Inc.; Knighted Ventures, LLC;
L.E. Gaming, Inc.; Pacific Gaming Services, LLC;
Players Edge Services; Progressive Gaming, LLC;
Qualified Player Services, LLC; The Independent;
and Wahba

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

-6- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................10 II. Background ..........................................................................................................................10 A. The Gambling Control Act Deliberately Divides Authority Between the Bureau of Gambling Control and the California Gambling Control Commission ..............................................................................................................10 B. The Bureau Has Issued Regulations to Outlaw Cardrooms’ Most Popular Games .......................................................................................................................13 C. Procedural Background ............................................................................................14 III. Legal Standard ......................................................................................................................15 IV. Argument ..............................................................................................................................15 A. The Bureau Lacks Authority to Issue the Regulations .............................................15 B. The Bureau Lacks Authority to Revoke Previously Granted Game Approvals .................................................................................................................19

1. The Act Requires the Commission to Adjudicate Approval Revocations ..................................................................................................20

2. The Regulations’ Revocation Procedures Violate Due Process Protections ....................................................................................................23 V. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................24

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

-7- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Page(s)

STATE CASES
Anaheim Mobile Estates, LLC v. State
(2025) 113 Cal.App.5th 602 .......................................................................................................15 Bauer v. City of San Diego
(1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 1281 .......................................................................................................23 BMW of North America, Inc. v. New Motor Vehicle Bd.
(1984) 162 Cal.App.3d 980 ........................................................................................................15 Burnett v. Chimney Sweep
(2004) 123 Cal.App.4th 1057 .....................................................................................................15 Cal. DUI Laws. Assn. v. Dept. of Motor Vehicles
(2022) 77 Cal.App.5th 517 .........................................................................................................23 Carmel Valley Fire Prot. Dist. v. State
(2001) 25 Cal.4th 287 .................................................................................................................17 Environmental Protection Information Center v. Dept. of Forestry & Fire Protection (1996) 43 Cal.App.4th 1011 .....................................................................................21 Irvine v. State Bd. of Equalization
(1940) 40 Cal.App.2d 280 ..........................................................................................................24 Lovelace v. Superior Court
(2025) 108 Cal.App.5th 1081 .....................................................................................................19 Mann v. Dept. of Motor Vehicles
(1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 312 .........................................................................................................24 Morris v. Williams
(1967) 67 Cal.2d 733 ..................................................................................................................22 Nightlife Partners v. City of Beverly Hills
(2003) 108 Cal.App.4th 81 .........................................................................................................22 People v. Martin
(1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 699 ........................................................................................................19 People v. Soto
(2011) 51 Cal.4th 229 .................................................................................................................17 Podiatric Medical Bd. v. Superior Court
(2021) 62 Cal.App.5th 657 .........................................................................................................21 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

-8- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

Sabatasso v. Superior Court
(2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 791 .......................................................................................................24 Security Nat. Guaranty, Inc. v. Cal. Coastal Com.
(2008) 159 Cal.App.4th 402 .......................................................................................................15 Shoemaker v. Myers
(1990) 52 Cal.3d 1 ......................................................................................................................19 Stewart v. San Mateo County
(1966) 246 Cal.App.2d 273 ........................................................................................................24

FEDERAL CASES
Barry v. Barchi
(1979) 443 U.S. 55 .....................................................................................................................23 Bell v. Burson
(1971) 402 U.S. 535 ...................................................................................................................24

CONSTITUTION AND STATUTES
Cal. Const., article XX, § 22 ............................................................................................................22 Bus. & Prof. Code
§ 6046 .........................................................................................................................................22 § 6078 .........................................................................................................................................22 § 6079.1 ......................................................................................................................................22 § 19801, subd. (h) .......................................................................................................................10 § 19801, subd. (k) .......................................................................................................................24 § 19810 .......................................................................................................................................11 § 19811 .......................................................................................................................................10 § 19811, subd. (b) .......................................................................................................................16 § 19812, subd. (b) .......................................................................................................................11 § 19812, subd. (c) .......................................................................................................................11 § 19812, subd. (d) .......................................................................................................................11 § 19813, subd. (c) .......................................................................................................................11 § 19814, subd. (a) .......................................................................................................................11 § 19824 .......................................................................................................................................16 § 19824, subd. (b) .................................................................................................................13, 20 § 19826, subd. (a) .................................................................................................................12, 17 § 19826, subd. (b) .......................................................................................................................17 § 19826, subd. (c) .................................................................................................................13, 17 § 19826, subd. (e) ...........................................................................................................13, 17, 20 § 19826, subd. (f) .......................................................................................................................12 § 19826, subd. (g) .....................................................................................................12, 13, 17, 18 § 19830 (former) ........................................................................................................................11 § 19830A (former) .....................................................................................................................11 § 19834 (former) ........................................................................................................................11 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

-9- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

§ 19834.5 (former) .....................................................................................................................17 § 19834A (former) .....................................................................................................................11 § 19834.5A (former) ..................................................................................................................17 § 19836 (former) ........................................................................................................................11 § 19840 .................................................................................................................................12, 16 § 19841 .......................................................................................................................................16 § 19841, subd. (o) .......................................................................................................................16 § 19842 .....................................................................................................................16, 17, 18, 19 § 19842, subd. (a) .......................................................................................................................16 § 19842, subd. (c) .......................................................................................................................16 § 19930 .....................................................................................................................20, 21, 22, 23 § 19930, subd. (a)(1) ..................................................................................................................20 § 19930, subd. (b) .................................................................................................................13, 20 § 19930, subd. (c) .................................................................................................................13, 20 § 19932, subd. (a) .......................................................................................................................21 Code Civ. Proc.
§ 437c, subd. (f) ..........................................................................................................................15 § 438, subd. (c)(1)(A) .................................................................................................................15 § 438, subd. (d) ...........................................................................................................................15 Gov. Code
§ 11425.10, subd. (a)(4) .............................................................................................................22 § 11425.30, subd. (a) ..................................................................................................................22 § 11502 .......................................................................................................................................22 § 11503 .......................................................................................................................................22 Pen. Code
§ 330 ...........................................................................................................................................19 § 337j, subd. (e)(1) .....................................................................................................................13

OTHER AUTHORITIES
Executive Order D-29-01 .................................................................................................................11 Legis. Counsel’s Dig., SB 952 (2001–2002), subd. (7) ...................................................................12

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

-10- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

I. Introduction
Petitioners have challenged two Regulations issued by the Bureau of Gambling Control (“Bureau”) that would outlaw the most popular games played in California cardrooms and revoke longstanding approvals for those games. As Respondents have agreed, Petitioners’ challenges include two sets of claims that raise pure questions of law appropriate for resolution in this Motion. First, the Regulations exceed the Bureau’s authority because they would prohibit cardroom games across the entire industry. Under the framework of separated powers adopted by the Gambling Control Act (“Act”), the authority to promulgate such a prohibition rests solely with the California Gambling Control Commission (“Commission”), an independent agency that is vested with broad rulemaking powers under the Act. Second, the Regulations are contrary to law because they would allow the Bureau to revoke previously issued game approvals unilaterally.

That assertion of power conflicts with the Act, which requires that the Commission adjudicate any attempted revocation of a game approval, following an explicit, step-by-step process set forth in the law. It also conflicts with the Due Process Clause, which guarantees cardrooms a hearing before a neutral decisionmaker before their valuable game approvals are revoked. This Court should resolve these threshold issues in Petitioners’ favor and grant writs accordingly.

II. Background
A. The Gambling Control Act Deliberately Divides Authority Between the Bureau of Gambling Control and the California Gambling Control Commission The Gambling Control Act establishes a “comprehensive” regulatory framework for the gaming industry with responsibilities divided between two regulatory bodies: the California Gambling Control Commission and the Bureau of Gambling Control. (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 19801, subd. (h)
1; see PD Pet.2 ¶¶ 74–82; Bl. Pet. ¶¶ 66–74.) The Commission is a five-member body whose members are appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate. (§ 19811.) The members are insulated from external pressure by protection from removal except for

1 Unless otherwise noted, all statutory citations are to the Business and Professions Code. 2 Citations to the petition challenging the Regulation on Games with a Player-Dealer Position (CPF-26-519606) are abbreviated “PD Pet.”, and citations to the petition challenging the Regulation on Blackjack-Style Games (CPF-26-519609) are abbreviated “Bl. Pet.” 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

-11- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

“incompetence, neglect of duty, or corruption.” (§ 19813, subd. (c).) Commission membership is finely tuned to the body’s unique role: It is limited to individuals who do not “hold[] any elective office,” do not serve as an official of a “political party,” do not have outside employment, and have not been employed by or received “substantial income” from any “gambling establishment” in the two years prior to appointment. (§ 19812, subds. (b) & (d); § 19814, subd. (a).) It is partisan-balanced (§ 19812, subd. (c)) and subject to competency-balancing, with one member having “experience in banking or finance”; one member who is an attorney having “regulatory law experience”; one member having a “background in law enforcement and criminal investigation”; one member having a “background in business”; and one member of the public (id., subd. (e)).

None of those requirements applies to the Bureau, which is housed in the Department of Justice under the control of the elected Attorney General. (See § 19810 [Attorney General may exercise “[a]ny power or authority of the [Bureau]”].)
When the Legislature passed the initial version of the Act, it gave the Bureau and the Commission concurrent regulatory authority during an interim period when the Commission was being established. In that period, both the Bureau and the Commission had a general rulemaking authority to “adopt regulations for the administration and enforcement of [the Act].” (See McCreadie Decl. Ex. 2 at pp. 47, 90 [providing such authority to the Bureau (then the “division”) in § 19830 and to the Commission in § 19830A].) And both were vested with a wide set of specific regulatory responsibilities, including to “[r]estrict, limit, or otherwise regulate” the “conduct of controlled gambling.” (See id. at pp. 50, 93 [providing such authority to the Bureau in § 19834 and to the Commission in § 19834A].)
Following the issuance of Executive Order D-29-01, which declared that the Commission was “prepared to assume the responsibilities and exercise the powers conferred” on the Bureau (McCreadie Decl. Ex. 3), the broad regulatory powers that had once been granted to the Bureau were withdrawn (see id. Ex. 2 at p. 52 [§ 19836]), leaving only the Commission with the general regulatory power to regulate gaming in our State. The Legislature then passed conforming legislation and explained that it was “repeal[ing] provisions of existing law giving the [Bureau] the authority to issue regulations for the administration and enforcement of the [A]ct,” consistent 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

-12- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

with the “framework” envisioned in the original law whereby the Commission would ultimately take sole responsibility for “the state regulation of gambling in California.” (Id. Ex. 4 [Legis.

Counsel’s Dig., SB 952 (2001-2002), subd. (7)]; see also id. Ex. 5 [legislative history].) The Act that remained—and the one that governs today—adopts what the Bureau has called a “dual-agency structure” that is “designed to ensure” a “clear separation of powers as necessary for proper checks and balances.” (McCreadie Decl. Ex. 6 at p. 145 [Bureau testimony from 2012].) As the Bureau has explained, that structure “clearly delineate[s] [the] roles and responsibilities” of each agency to “separate prosecutorial and adjudicatory functions.” (Ibid.) The prosecutorial functions are vested in the Bureau, which serves as the “law enforcement agency that monitors industry participants, investigates gambling violations, enforces the State’s gambling laws through use of the criminal laws and administrative processes created by the Act, and investigates the qualifications of applicants seeking licensure.” (Id. at p. 146.) The Commission, on the other hand, “function[s] as a policy-making and administrative agency with respect to all matters related to controlled gaming, and act[s] in an adjudicative capacity with respect to license issuance and discipline.” (Ibid.; see id. at p. 145 [Bureau testimony that the Commission is “the policy maker that sets minimum standards for gaming operations”]; PD Pet. ¶ 82 [reproducing graphic from the Commission explaining that the Commission “[d]evelops regulations and sets policy,” while the Bureau is charged with “[i]nvestigations and enforcement”]; Bl. Pet. ¶ 74 [same].)
That separation of powers—with the Bureau acting as investigator and prosecutor, and the Commission acting as policymaker and adjudicator—runs throughout the Act. With respect to rulemaking, the Act grants the Commission broad authority to “adopt regulations for the administration and enforcement of [the Act]” (§ 19840), but grants the Bureau only the limited authority to “adopt regulations reasonably related to its functions and duties as specified in [the Act]” (§ 19826, subd. (f)). With respect to licensure, the Act tasks the Bureau with “receiv[ing] and process[ing] applications for any license, permit, or other approval,” and it allows the Bureau to “[a]pprove the play of any controlled game.” (Id., subd. (g).) But the Bureau may only “recommend” the denial of an application (id., subd. (a)), and the Commission has final say over 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

-13- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

whether ultimately to “deny any application for a license, permit, or approval” (§ 19824, subd. (b)). And with respect to discipline, the Bureau may “investigate suspected violations of … laws of this state relating to gambling,” “initiate” disciplinary actions, and “seek restriction, limitation, suspension, or revocation of any license or approval.” (§ 19826, subds. (c) & (e).) But to impose such disciplinary measures the Bureau “shall file an accusation with the [C]ommission,” which adjudicates the matter “in accordance with … the Government Code” and metes out punishment, including by “requir[ing] the payment of fines or penalties.” (§ 19930, subds. (b) & (c).) Consistent with this careful division of responsibilities, for nearly the first three decades of the Bureau’s existence, the Bureau never issued regulations that outlawed particular games statewide or revoked previously issued approvals without any adjudication by the Commission.

The Bureau instead discharged its responsibility to “[a]pprove the play of any controlled game” (§ 19826, subd. (g); see also Pen. Code, § 337j, subd. (e)(1)), by reviewing each individual game application that came before it and assessing the application’s compliance with existing law.

B. The Bureau Has Issued Regulations to Outlaw Cardrooms’ Most Popular Games In 2026, the Bureau issued two unprecedented Regulations. The Regulation on Games with a Player-Dealer Position makes unlawful player-dealer games long approved by the Bureau and played throughout the State, and it mandates that any replacements for those games include a novel set of rules that the Bureau invented. (See Reg. § 2076; PD Pet. ¶¶ 155–158.) The Regulation on Blackjack-Style Games outlaws blackjack-style games long approved by the Bureau and played today in California cardrooms, and it further forbids a vast range of potential variations of those games. (See Reg. §§ 2073–2074; Bl. Pet. ¶¶ 105–106, 222–223, 265.) Under each Regulation, the Bureau has set forth a process to summarily “withdraw[]” previously issued “approval[s]” for any games that do not “comply” with the Bureau’s new game requirements, subject only to review by the Director of the Bureau, who may deny any objection at her “discretion.” (Reg. § 2077, subd. (g); see id. § 2075, subd. (e).) The Commission did not promulgate the Regulations and has no role in implementing them.

During the comment period on each Regulation, Petitioners and other stakeholders explained that the Bureau lacks authority (1) to issue regulations that categorically outlaw certain 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

-14- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

cardroom games or (2) to revoke existing game approvals without going to the Commission. (See PD Pet. ¶¶ 167, 177; Bl. Pet. ¶¶ 118, 129.) The Bureau made no substantive changes in response to those comments. (See PD Pet. ¶¶ 151, 154; Bl. Pet. ¶ 100.) Instead, the Bureau claimed that it had authority to issue the Regulations due to its responsibility to “approve the play of any controlled game.” (PD Pet. ¶ 168; Bl. Pet. ¶ 119.) In contrast to the Bureau’s prior testimony that the Commission is “the policy maker that sets minimum standards for gaming operations” (p. 12, supra), the final regulations asserted that the Bureau has authority to “fill in details” of the “statutory scheme” based on its “expertise” (PD Pet., Ex. 2, p. 180 [RF-PD-1782]; see also BJ Pet., Ex. 2, p. 166 [RF-BJ-1940]). And in contrast to the Bureau’s prior acknowledgment that the Commission acts as “adjudicat[or]” under the Act (p. 12, supra), the final regulations asserted that the Bureau has an “implie[d]” “authority to revoke” previously approved games due to its “plenary authority to approve a game” (PD Pet. ¶ 178; Bl. Pet. ¶ 130).

C. Procedural Background
On March 6, 2026, Petitioners filed suits to invalidate the Regulations. Petitioners brought claims challenging the Bureau’s novel assertions of power, alleging that the Bureau lacks authority to prohibit games categorically (PD Pet. ¶¶ 359–366, 376–380 [Counts 1 & 3]; Bl. Pet. ¶¶ 278– 285, 295–299 [Counts 1 & 3]) or to revoke existing game approvals unilaterally (PD Pet. ¶¶ 367– 375, 381–386 [Counts 2 & 4]; Bl. Pet. ¶¶ 286–294, 300–305 [Counts 2 & 4]). Petitioners also alleged that the Regulations’ revocation procedures violated due process. (PD Pet. ¶¶ 402–416 [Counts 7–8]; Bl. Pet. ¶¶ 321–335 [Counts 7–8].) Respondents answered that Petitioners’ allegations about the Bureau’s lack of authority to issue the regulations and to revoke existing game approvals “consist of legal conclusions or argument as to which no response is required” and that “the Gambling Control Act exists and speaks for itself.” (PD Answer ¶¶ 160–178; Bl.

Answer ¶¶ 105–123.) Respondents agree that those issues are purely legal and can be resolved on a motion for judgment on the pleadings. (See Resps.’ Case Management Statement (May 6, 2026) Attach. 15; McCreadie Decl. Ex. 1 at p. 34:14–25.)
On May 21, this Court entered preliminary injunctions in both cases upon determining that there is “clear and convincing evidence that [in] adopting these regulations, the Bureau exceeded 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

-15- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

… its jurisdiction.” (McCreadie Decl. Ex. 1 at p. 30:6–10.) The injunctions prohibit the Bureau from implementing or enforcing the Regulations through July 5, 2026.

III. Legal Standard
Petitioners’ motion for judgment on the pleadings must be granted if “the complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause or causes of action against the defendant and [Respondents’] answer does not state facts sufficient to constitute a defense to the complaint.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 438, subd. (c)(1)(A); see also, e.g., Anaheim Mobile Estates, LLC v. State (2025) 113 Cal.App.5th 602, 609–610.) Pure questions of law are especially amenable to resolution via a motion for judgment on the pleadings. (See Burnett v. Chimney Sweep (2004) 123 Cal.App.4th 1057, 1065 [motion for judgment on the pleadings “raises only questions of law”].) In ruling on such a motion, the Court may consider materials subject to judicial notice (Code Civ. Proc., § 438, subd. (d)), including the administrative record. In the alternative, Petitioners seek summary adjudication on the claims referenced herein, on a record limited to materials that are properly considered on a motion for judgment on the pleadings. (Id. § 437c, subd. (f).) IV. Argument
A. The Bureau Lacks Authority to Issue the Regulations
The Regulations exceed the Bureau’s authority under the Gambling Control Act. The Bureau, “like all administrative agencies, has no inherent powers; it possesses only those powers that have been granted to it by the Constitution or by statute.” (Security Nat. Guaranty, Inc. v.

Cal. Coastal Com. (2008) 159 Cal.App.4th 402, 419.) If the Bureau “takes action that is … not authorized by [statute], then its action is void.” (Ibid.; accord BMW of North America, Inc. v. New Motor Vehicle Bd. (1984) 162 Cal.App.3d 980, 995.) Under that rule, the Regulations are void because neither the Act nor any other law authorizes the Bureau to adopt a categorical prohibition on cardroom games. That highly consequential authority is instead reserved for the Commission.

1. Consistent with the Commission’s role as (in the Bureau’s own words) “the policy maker that sets minimum standards for gaming operations” (p. 12, supra), the Act grants the Commission a wide range of powers that embrace the subject of the Regulations. Both “jurisdiction” and “supervision over gambling establishments in this state and over all persons or 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

-16- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

things having to do with the operations of gambling establishments” are “vested in the [C]ommission.” (§ 19811, subd. (b).) The Commission thus has “all powers necessary and proper to enable it fully and effectually to carry out the policies and purposes” of the Act. (§ 19824.) Those powers include all manner of rulemaking. Article 3 of the Act, titled “Regulations,” sets forth a range of rulemaking powers—granting all to the Commission and none to the Bureau.

Section 19840 provides the Commission a general rulemaking authority to “adopt regulations for the administration and enforcement of” the Act. And section 19841 provides a non-exclusive list of specific regulatory responsibilities that the Commission “shall” have, including the authority to “[r]estrict, limit, or otherwise regulate any activity that is related to the conduct of controlled gambling” (§ 19841, subd. (o))—which describes precisely what the Regulations would do.

The Act’s very next section puts an important limitation on the Commission’s exercise of its broad powers: Under section 19842, if the Commission wants to “prohibit, on a statewide basis, the play of any game or restrict the manner in which any game is played,” the Commission must conduct a regulatory proceeding in which it “finds that the game, or the manner in which the game is played, violates a law of the United States, a law of this state, or a local ordinance.” (§ 19842, subd. (a).) The Act thus imposes specific procedural and substantive safeguards on the most consequential regulations of cardroom gaming. (See McCreadie Decl. Ex. 1 at p. 10:8–12 [court’s observation regarding the “logic[]” of the “broad restriction” in section 19842, considering that “the power to ban or change a game carries so much consequence”].) Those safeguards ensure that categorical prohibitions on cardroom games—such as those that the Regulations seek to achieve—are issued not by a prosecutorial agency under the Attorney General’s control, but instead by an independent and neutral panel with expertise in regulatory law, business, and law enforcement (see p. 11, supra), after conducting a full proceeding in which it may receive legal arguments, evidence, and testimony from affected parties and the public, and in which it must make specific legal findings required by law (see § 19842, subds. (a) & (c)).

2. At the same time that the Act grants the Commission the authority to prohibit games on a statewide basis if it follows the proper procedure, the Act withholds that authority from the Bureau. Consistent with the Bureau’s role as a prosecution and enforcement body, the 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

-17- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

Bureau’s powers are limited to vetting applicants for gaming licenses (§ 19826, subd. (a)), monitoring licensees (id., subd. (b)), investigating suspected illegal gaming activity (id., subds. (c) & (d)), initiating disciplinary actions before the Commission (id., subd. (e)), and approving individual applications for the play of controlled games (id., subd. (g)). None of those authorities permits the Bureau to take over the Commission’s policymaking or adjudicatory role and prohibit whole categories of games. The Bureau’s limited regulatory authority also provides no such permission: Unlike the Commission, the Bureau lacks a general power to adopt regulations for the administration and enforcement of the Act; the Bureau instead may adopt only regulations that are “reasonably related to its functions and duties.” (Id., subd. (f).) The statutory history of the Act confirms the absence of authority for the Bureau to issue the type of statewide gaming prohibitions that the Commission may adopt, and that the Regulation would achieve. The original version of the Act gave both the Bureau and the Commission the general authority to “adopt regulations for the administration of” the Act, along with the specific power to “restrict, limit, or otherwise regulate” the “conduct of controlled gambling.” (See p. 11, supra.) And the original Act placed limits—the same ones found today in section 19842—on both the Bureau and the Commission before either used its rulemaking powers to “prohibit, on a statewide basis, the play of any game.” (McCreadie Decl. Ex. 2 at pp. 50–51, 93 [placing limits on the Bureau in § 19834.5 and on the Commission in § 19834.5A].) But the Bureau’s rulemaking powers and the limits that went with them were repealed once the Commission was prepared to assume its responsibilities. (See pp. 11–12, supra.) The Regulations thus assert a Bureau authority that not only is absent from the Act but was removed from it. This Court “cannot interpret [a law] to reinsert what the Legislature intentionally removed.” (People v. Soto (2011) 51 Cal.4th 229, 245; Carmel Valley Fire Prot. Dist. v. State (2001) 25 Cal.4th 287, 301 [similar].)

3. The Bureau nevertheless has insisted that it has the power to issue the Regulations.

The Bureau has not denied that the Regulations are statewide prohibitions on cardroom games.

After all, the Regulations themselves make that explicit. (See, e.g., Reg. § 2073 [“Any game of blackjack shall not be approved for play.”]; id. § 2076, subds. (a) & (b) [stating rules that every player-dealer game “shall” and “shall not” include]; id. §§ 2075, subd. (e), 2077, subd. (g) 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

-18- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

[providing that approvals for games that do “not comply” with the Regulations “shall be withdrawn”].) The Bureau has instead urged that it may adopt such prohibitions because section 19826, subdivision (g), charges the Bureau with “[a]pprov[ing] the play of any controlled game, including placing restrictions and limitations on how a controlled game may be played.” (See PD Pet. ¶ 168 [Bureau’s position in rulemaking]; Bl. Pet. ¶ 119 [same]; PI Opp. at p. 16.) But that authority cannot carry the weight the Bureau places on it. Subdivision (g) is expressly an approval authority for individual games; it is not an authority to prohibit whole categories of games. That is confirmed by the last sentence of subdivision (g), which states that “[a]ctual costs incurred by the [Bureau] to review and approve game rules shall be reimbursed to the [Bureau] by the licensee making the request.” That reimbursement requirement makes sense where an individual cardroom submits an individual game application; it would not make sense if subdivision (g) applied to categorical game prohibitions. The Bureau’s job of “placing restrictions and limitations on how a controlled game may be played” (ibid.) during the individual game- approval process does not change the analysis. Tasking the Bureau with “placing” restrictions when it approves individual games is a far cry from empowering the Bureau to establish or promulgate novel restrictions for the entire industry. More broadly, the Bureau’s game-approval authority cannot allow it to end-run section 19842’s limits on statewide gaming prohibitions—yet that is the glaring implication of the Bureau’s position.

The Bureau’s view is also inconsistent with the overall structure of the Act. As the Bureau has previously explained, the Act situates the Commission as “policy maker” (p. 12, supra), but no policymaking task under the Act is more consequential than determining what categories of games are impermissible. That leaves the Bureau without authority, either concurrent or exclusive, in this field. The Bureau does not have concurrent authority to issue statewide gaming prohibitions because the Act adopts (in the Bureau’s words) a “clear separation of powers” (p. 12, supra), so that cardrooms are not forced to follow potentially conflicting regulations on the same topic from two different agencies. Any assertion of concurrent authority would also be inconsistent with the legislative history of the Act, which shows that the Legislature deliberately removed the Bureau’s once-concurrent regulatory authorities that mirrored those of the Commission. (See pp. 11–12, 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

-19- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

supra.) And the Bureau certainly does not have an exclusive authority to issue statewide gaming prohibitions because the Act grants the Commission a broad and general power over controlled gaming (pp. 15–16, supra) and imposes specific limits on the Commission’s ability to adopt statewide gaming prohibitions—all of which would be negated or made superfluous if the Bureau alone could adopt such prohibitions. (See Shoemaker v. Myers (1990) 52 Cal.3d 1, 22 [“[W]e do not … construe statutory provisions so as to render them superfluous.”].) The Bureau’s argument also ignores that all of this comes in the context of applying broad criminal laws to key business licenses. (See Pen. Code, § 330.) If any agency is to take that delicate responsibility, it must be the Commission, not the Bureau. The Legislature would have to speak with far more clarity if it wished to give a prosecuting agency like the Bureau a permanent power to implement criminal laws. (Compare Lovelace v. Superior Court (2025) 108 Cal.App.5th 1081, 1098–1099, 1104–1105 [holding that a rule violated the nondelegation doctrine by giving too much discretion to prosecutors to decide the meaning of criminal laws, without “meaningful implementation guidance”], with People v. Martin (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 699, 710 [upholding a law that defined “hazardous waste” and then directed a state agency to adopt a regulation listing wastes that met the definition, because the law gave the agency a narrow directive and clear guidance, rather tasking the agency with making “fundamental policy decisions”].) Ultimately, the Act is clear both as to who may adopt a statewide gaming prohibition—the Commission—and as to how it must be done—by following the specific procedures laid out in section 19842. The Bureau’s contrary view is inconsistent with the text and structure of the Act.

Because the Regulations are premised on an authority that the Bureau lacks, they are void.

B. The Bureau Lacks Authority to Revoke Previously Granted Game Approvals The Bureau also lacks authority to revoke previously issued game approvals unilaterally, as both Regulations would do. The Act instead requires that the Bureau proceed before the Commission, which acts as neutral adjudicator before any game approval is revoked—consistent with the requirement of the California Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) that prosecutorial and adjudicatory functions be divided. Any doubt is resolved by the law of due process, which requires a hearing in front of a neutral adjudicator before the Bureau may revoke the valuable 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

-20- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

game approvals on which Petitioners have built their businesses.3

1. The Act Requires the Commission to Adjudicate Approval Revocations a. Section 19930 lays out a comprehensive procedure for revoking existing game approvals—with revocation authority vested in the Commission, not the Bureau. That procedure begins with the Bureau “mak[ing] appropriate investigations” to “[d]etermine whether there has been any violation” of the Act “or any regulations adopted thereunder.” (§ 19930, subd. (a)(1).) If the Bureau “is satisfied that … [an] approval should be … revoked,” the Bureau “shall file an accusation with the [C]ommission.” (Id., subd. (b), italics added.) Then, after following the Government Code’s procedures for formal hearings (ibid.), the Commission—not the Bureau—is authorized to “limit, condition, or restrict any … approval” (§ 19824, subd. (b); see also § 19930, subd. (c) [the Commission may “require the payment of fines or penalties” in “addition to any [other] action that the [C]ommission may take against a[n] … approval”]). Section 19930 is therefore explicit that the Bureau’s role in the revocation process is to investigate violations of the law and to prosecute them before the Commission, while the Commission has the ultimate power to adjudicate the Bureau’s charges and mete out punishment. Wholly absent from—and incompatible with—this process is any power for the Bureau to revoke game approvals on its own.

The balance of the Act confirms that only the Commission, and not the Bureau, has the ultimate power to decide whether revocation is warranted. Where the Act lists the respective powers of the Bureau and the Commission, it provides that the Bureau may “initiate” disciplinary actions and “seek” the revocation of any approval (§ 19826, subd. (e)), while the Commission has the power to “restrict” such approval (§ 19824, subd. (b)). The Act also provides a specific

3 If the Court concludes that the Bureau lacks authority to issue statewide gaming prohibitions, it may be unnecessary to decide the lawfulness of the Bureau’s assertion of authority to unilaterally revoke game approvals. Still, three considerations counsel in favor of addressing the Bureau’s revocation authority. First, because each Regulation has both a statewide prohibition and a procedure for implementing it as to existing games, resolving both issues would avoid any doubt that the correct disposition of the petitions would be to issue writs directing that the Regulations be rescinded in full. Second, because the revocation-authority question is a pure question of law that (like the statewide-prohibition issue) implicates the division of authorities between the Bureau and the Commission, resolving it would require relatively minimal additional judicial resources.

Third, in the event of an appeal, an opinion and judgment on both issues from this Court would give the Court of Appeal flexibility to simultaneously address either or both issues, avoiding the potential for piecemeal appeals on two closely related issues. 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

-21- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

process for aggrieved persons to obtain judicial review of a Commission decision to “revoke[] any previously granted … approval.” (§ 19932, subd. (a).) By contrast, the Act provides no appeals process to review a (hypothetical) Bureau decision to revoke a previously granted approval— because the Act does not contemplate the Bureau taking such action. The overall structure of the Act thus reflects the Legislature’s intention that the only available mechanism for achieving a revocation is the balanced, stepwise process in section 19930—where the Bureau files accusations and the Commission decides whether to uphold them.

The Regulations, however, would skip that process entirely and revoke Petitioners’ longstanding game approvals unilaterally, with no involvement by the Commission or any other neutral adjudicator. Each Regulation provides that, at the end of the timeline for implementing the Regulation, any game that “does not comply” with the Regulation’s prohibitions “shall be deemed non-compliant … and approval for the game shall be withdrawn.” (Reg. § 2075, subd. (e); id. § 2077, subd. (g).) A cardroom’s sole administrative recourse is to file an “objection” with the Director of the Bureau, who “may then grant or deny the objection” in her “discretion.” (Id. § 2077, subd. (g); see id. § 2075, subd. (e) [citing id. § 2071, subds. (d) & (e)].) The Regulations would thus summarily revoke previously issued game approvals without any accusation before the Commission and without any administrative adjudication of the Bureau’s charges. b. The Bureau’s explanation for adopting this procedure, rather than following the one set forth in the Act, is that (in the Bureau’s view) its asserted “authority to withdraw approval of previously approved games is implied by [its] plenary authority to approve a game.” (PD Pet. ¶ 178; Bl. Pet. ¶ 130; see also PI Opp. at pp. 18–19.) But “[i]mplied powers” of the type the Bureau claims “are recognized only when there is no precise statute covering the point.” (Podiatric Medical Bd. v. Superior Court (2021) 62 Cal.App.5th 657, 673.) Where the Legislature has “directly and in … detail dealt with the subject” at issue—as it has in section 19930—even a “broad” grant of authority does not permit an agency to bypass the scheme selected by the Legislature. (Environmental Protection Information Center v. Dept. of Forestry & Fire Protection (1996) 43 Cal.App.4th 1011, 1023.) That rule applies with particular force here, because section 19930 speaks in mandatory terms, stating that the Bureau “shall” file an accusation with 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

-22- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

the Commission if it wants to revoke an approval. That requirement leaves no room for the Bureau to imply an alternative revocation option. (See Morris v. Williams (1967) 67 Cal.2d 733, 737 [agencies may not “ignore[] or violate[]” a “mandate of the Legislature”].) Regardless, Respondents’ basis for implying authority fails on its own terms. Contrary to the Bureau’s argument, the authority to approve does not imply an authority to revoke; the words are antonyms. And licensure schemes commonly provide that an agency with authority to grant a license must proceed before a neutral adjudicator before it may revoke that license—just as section 19930 demands. (See, e.g., Cal. Const., art. XX, § 22 [Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control issues alcohol licenses, while an independent board presides over license revocation appeals]; Bus. & Prof. Code, §§ 6046, 6078, 6079.1 [attorney licensure handled by Committee of Bar Examiners, disbarment handled by State Bar Court]; see also Gov. Code, §§ 11502–11503 [providing for accusations seeking license revocation to be heard by a judge in the Office of Administrative Hearings].) The Gambling Control Act adopts that framework as part of the Legislature’s decision to “separate prosecutorial and adjudicatory functions,” with the Bureau responsible for the former and the Commission responsible for the latter. (See p. 12, supra.) The Bureau’s asserted power to revoke game approvals on its own would erase that deliberate distinction—making the Bureau the judge of its own prosecutions. c. The revocation feature of the Regulations also contravenes the California APA. “One of the basic tenets of the California APA” is that “the prosecutory and, to a lesser extent, investigatory, aspects of administrative matters must be adequately separated from the adjudicatory function.” (Nightlife Partners v. City of Beverly Hills (2003) 108 Cal.App.4th 81, 91, italics in original; see also Gov. Code, § 11425.10, subd. (a)(4) [“The adjudicative function shall be separated from the investigative, prosecutorial, and advocacy functions….”].) Indeed, an “employee engaged in prosecuting functions for an agency in a case may not, in the same or a factually related case, participate or advise in either the decision, or the agency review’s [sic] of that decision.” (Nightlife Partners, supra, 108 Cal.App.4th at p. 92, italics in original; Gov. Code, § 11425.30, subd. (a) [prohibiting a person from serving as “presiding officer in an adjudicative proceeding” if that person served as “prosecutor … in the proceeding”].) The Regulations stand in 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

-23- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

stark contrast to those requirements, as they permit the same Bureau Director who promulgated the Regulations to issue summary revocation orders of the games that the Regulations target and then adjudicate any objections to those orders.

The Act does not countenance that violation of the California APA. It instead requires that the independent Commission adjudicate any effort by the Bureau to revoke a game approval.

2. The Regulations’ Revocation Procedures Violate Due Process Protections The Bureau’s decision to sidestep the statutory framework for adjudicating revocations not only is wrong as a statutory matter but also violates cardrooms’ due process rights. a. The procedure outlined in section 19930, under which the Bureau’s effort to revoke any game approval proceeds to a neutral hearing before the Commission, is not an optional statutory path—it is “the constitutional floor.” (Cal. DUI Laws. Assn. v. Dept. of Motor Vehicles (2022) 77 Cal.App.5th 517, 530, quotation marks omitted.) Due process prohibits the government from depriving a person of a government-issued right or privilege without affording that person an opportunity to be heard in “a fair hearing before a neutral or unbiased decision-maker.” (Ibid.) Accordingly, under the state and federal Constitutions, a business permit—such as a game approval—cannot be revoked except “upon notice to the permittee, upon a hearing, and upon evidence substantially supporting a finding of revocation.” (Bauer v. City of San Diego (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 1281, 1294 [California Constitution], citation omitted; see Barry v. Barchi (1979) 443 U.S. 55, 66–67 [Fourteenth Amendment].)
The Regulations fail that fundamental requirement. In contrast to the Act, the Regulations do not provide cardrooms with a hearing before a neutral decisionmaker; revocations are instead issued by the Bureau unilaterally, based on the Bureau’s asserted power to “deem[]” a game “non- compliant.” (Reg. § 2075, subd. (e); id. § 2077, subd. (g).) And the Regulations do not call for a decision reflecting substantial evidence supporting the revocation; they instead provide the Bureau’s Director with complete “discretion” to deny any objections. (Id. § 2077, subd. (g); see id. § 2075, subd. (e).) That scheme not only is inconsistent with the Act’s routing of game- approval revocations to a Commission-run administrative hearing under the Government Code, but also fails to provide the most basic protection that due process requires: an adjudication free 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

-24- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

from bias. Cardrooms are instead left with the impossible task of convincing the Bureau not to proceed with a revocation that the Bureau’s “own rule” compels. (Sabatasso v. Superior Court (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 791, 795.)
b. To date, the Bureau’s primary response has been to note that, under the Act, game approvals are “a revocable privilege” and a cardroom does not “acquire[] any vested right[s]” therein. (§ 19801, subd. (k); see PD Pet. ¶ 183; Bl. Pet. ¶ 135; PD PI Opp. at pp. 19–20.) But that does not erase the due process problem with the Regulations. Under established precedent, due process protections apply “whether the license is granted as a privilege or recognized as a vested right,” because “it is the policy of our law that a person should not be deprived even of a ‘permit’ to engage in a legitimate business without a fair and impartial hearing.” (Irvine v. State Bd. of Equalization (1940) 40 Cal.App.2d 280, 284–285 [analyzing an analogous licensing scheme under the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act]; see Bell v. Burson (1971) 402 U.S. 535, 539 [“[C]onstitutional restraints limit state power to terminate an entitlement whether the entitlement is denominated a ‘right’ or a ‘privilege.’”].) The Bureau’s argument would also have troubling consequences: It would mean that cardrooms are wholly unprotected by the requirements of due process when their most valuable business licenses are threatened. (See § 19801, subd. (k) [characterizing as a “revocable privilege” not only game approvals, but “[a]ny license or permit issued” under the Act].) That is not the law. (See Mann v. Dept. of Motor Vehicles (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 312, 321 [due process protects license “crucial to plaintiff’s economic viability”].) c. At a minimum, these due process concerns are further reason to interpret the Act to require an adjudication by the independent Commission before the Bureau may revoke a game approval. It is a “well-settled principle in California that because of reasons of justice and policy a statute, unless it expressly provides to the contrary, will be interpreted to require a hearing in license revocation proceedings.” (Stewart v. San Mateo County (1966) 246 Cal.App.2d 273, 283.) There is certainly no express provision in the Act that permits the Bureau’s approach.

V. Conclusion
The Court should grant Petitioners’ motion and issue writs directing Respondents to rescind the Regulations and take other appropriate actions. 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

-25- CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

DATED: June 5, 2026 MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP

By: /s/ Benjamin J. Horwich
BENJAMIN J. HORWICH
JEREMY S. KREISBERG
MEGAN L. McCREADIE

OLIVER BROWN
LAUREN E. KUHN

Attorneys for California Gaming Association

DATED: June 5, 2026 UMBERG ZIPSER LLP

By: /s/ Scott B. Garner
SCOTT B. GARNER
MOLLY J. MAGNUSON

Attorneys for Cal-Pac Rancho Cordova, LLC
(d/b/a Parkwest Casino Cordova); Casino 580,
LLC (d/b/a Parkwest Casino 580); Lodi
Cardroom, Inc. (d/b/a Parkwest Casino Lodi);
Parkwest Bicycle Casino, LLC (d/b/a Parkwest
Bicycle Casino); Parkwest Casino Manteca, LLC
(d/b/a Parkwest Casino Manteca); and The
Silver F, Inc. (d/b/a Parkwest Casino Lotus)

DATED: June 5, 2026 GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP

By: /s/ Elizabeth A. Dooley
ELIZABETH A. DOOLEY
SUSANNA G. SCHUEMANN

DEBRA WONG YANG

Attorneys for Acme Player Services, LLC;
Blackstone Gaming, LLC; CalProp Services, LLC;
Faros Unlimited, Inc.; Fortune Players Group,
Inc.; Global Player Services, Inc.; KB Ventures;
KBCH Consultants, Inc.; Knighted Ventures, LLC;
L.E. Gaming, Inc.; Pacific Gaming Services, LLC;
Players Edge Services; Progressive Gaming, LLC;
Qualified Player Services, LLC; The Independent;
and Wahba

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

1 Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Supporting Memo. (CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609)

ROB BONTA
Attorney General of California

PAUL STEIN
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
ANDREW E. KUSHNER (State Bar No. 316035)
CARTER M. JANSEN (State Bar No. 347116)
SHARON L. O’GRADY (State Bar No. 102356)
Deputy Attorneys General
455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 11000
San Francisco, CA 94102-7004
Telephone: (415) 510-3834
Fax: (415) 703-1234
E-mail: [email protected]
Attorneys for Respondents and Defendants Rob
Bonta, Attorney General of the State of California;
the California Department of Justice; Yolanda
Morrow, Director of the Bureau of Gambling
Control; and the Bureau of Gambling Control

Exempt from Filing Fees
(Gov. Code, § 6103)

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

CALIFORNIA GAMING ASSOCIATION
et al.,
Petitioners and Plaintiffs,
v.

ROB BONTA, in his official capacity as
Attorney General of the State of California
et al.,
Respondents and Defendants.

Case Nos. CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609

RESPONDENTS’ NOTICE OF MOTION

AND MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON
THE PLEADINGS; SUPPORTING

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND

AUTHORITIES
Date: June 30, 2026
Time: 9:00 a.m.

Dept: 303
Judge: Honorable Richard C. Darwin
Trial Date: None Set
Action Filed: March 6, 2026

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

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

2 Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Supporting Memo. (CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609)

Notice of Motion and Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings ........................................................ 7 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 8 Background ..................................................................................................................................... 8 I. Regulatory Responsibilities of the Bureau of Gambling Control and the Gambling Control Commission .............................................................................. 8 II. The Challenged Regulations ................................................................................... 9 III. Petitioners’ Allegations ......................................................................................... 10 Legal Standard .............................................................................................................................. 10 Argument ...................................................................................................................................... 11 I. Respondents Are Entitled to Judgment on Causes of Action 1 and 3 Because the Regulations Are Within the Scope of the Bureau’s Authority ......... 11 A. The Bureau Has Express Statutory Authority to Determine Which Games May Be Played in California Cardrooms and to Issue Regulations Relating to That Function. .................................................... 11 B. The Gambling Control Act Does Not Strip the Bureau of Its Authority to Decide What Constitutes a Permissible Controlled Game. ........................................................................................................ 13 II. Respondents Are Entitled to Judgment on the Pleadings on Causes of Action 2 and 4 Because the Bureau Has Authority to Issue Regulations Revoking Prior Game Rule Approvals ................................................................. 16 A. The Bureau Has Authority to Revoke Previously Issued Game Approvals. ................................................................................................. 16 B. The Bureau Is Not Required to Follow the Commission’s Quasi- Judicial Procedures to Revoke Previously Issued Game Approvals. ........ 18 III. Respondents Are Entitled to Judgment on the Pleadings on Petitioners’ Due Process Claims (Causes of Action 7 and 8)................................................... 20 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 22

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

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Page

3 Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Supporting Memo. (CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609)

CASES
Alborzi v. Univ. of So. Cal.
(2020) 55 Cal.App.5th 155 ..................................................................................................... 19 Board of Regents v. Roth
(1972) 408 U.S. 564 ................................................................................................................ 21 California School Boards Association v. State Board of Education (2015) 240 Cal.App.4th 838 ................................................................................................... 19 Calvert v. County of Yuba
(2006) 145 Cal.App.4th 613 ................................................................................................... 20 Citicorp NA v. Franchise Tax Board
(2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 1403 ............................................................................................. 12, 13 Hobbs v. City of Pacific Grove
(2022) 85 Cal. App. 5th 311 ............................................................................................. 20, 21 Hotel Employees & Restaurant Employees Intern. Union v. Davis (1999) 21 Cal.4th 585 ............................................................................................................. 15 Lavin v. California Horse Racing Bd.
(1997) 57 Cal.App.4th 263 ..................................................................................................... 17 Mack v. State Bar of California
(2001) 92 Cal.App.4th 957 ..................................................................................................... 10 Marine Forest Society v. Cal. Coastal Comm.
(2005) 36 Cal.4th 1 ................................................................................................................. 19 Nichols v. County of Santa Clara
(1990) 223 Cal.App.3d 1236 ............................................................................................. 17, 21 O’Connor v. Superior Ct.
(1979) 90 Cal. App. 3d 107 ..................................................................................................... 21 PaintCare v. Mortensen
(2015) 233 Cal.App.4th 1292 ................................................................................................. 17 Richtek USA, Inc. v. uPI Semiconductor Corp.
(2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 651 ................................................................................................... 10 Sierra Lake Reserve v. City of Rocklin
(1991) 938 F.2d 951 ................................................................................................................ 20 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

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
(continued)
Page

4 Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Supporting Memo. (CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609)

Stewart v. San Mateo County
(1966) 246 Cal.App.2d 273 ..................................................................................................... 17 Vincent Petroleum Corp. v. Culver City
(1941) 43 Cal.App.2d 511 ....................................................................................................... 17

STATUTES
California Business & Professions Code
§ 19801, subd. (k) ............................................................................................................. 18, 21 § 19805, subd. (c) .......................................................................................................... 9, 11, 13 § 19805, subd. (g) ................................................................................................................... 13 §§ 19805, subds. (k)-(m) ..................................................................................................... 9, 11 § 19805, subd. (o) ............................................................................................................... 9, 11 § 19805, subd.(ag) ............................................................................................................... 9, 11 §§ 19824, subds. (a)-(f) ........................................................................................... 9, 14, 18, 19 § 19826, subd. (c) .................................................................................................................... 13 § 19826, subd. (e) ................................................................................................................ 9, 14 § 19826, subd. (f) .......................................................................................................... 9, 11, 12 § 19826, subd. (g) ................................................................................................... 9, 11, 13, 17 § 19827, subd. (a) .................................................................................................... 9, 11, 12, 17 § 19840 ................................................................................................................................ 9, 13 § 19841 .................................................................................................................................... 13 § 19841, subd. (b) ............................................................................................................ passim § 19841, subd. (o) ............................................................................................................... 9, 14 § 19841, subd. (p) ................................................................................................................... 14 § 19842, subd. (a) .................................................................................................................... 14 § 19924, subd. (b) ................................................................................................................... 18 § 19924, subd. (c) .................................................................................................................... 18 § 19924, subd. (f) .................................................................................................................... 18 § 19930 .................................................................................................................................... 18 § 19930, subd. (b) ................................................................................................... 9, 14, 18, 19 § 19943.5 ........................................................................................................................... 11, 17 California Code of Civil Procedure
§ 438 .......................................................................................................................................... 7 § 438, subd. (c)(1)(B) .............................................................................................................. 10 § 438, subd. (c)(2)(A).............................................................................................................. 10 California Goverment Code
§ 11340, et seq. ....................................................................................................................... 20 § 11342.600 ............................................................................................................................. 12 § 15001.1 ................................................................................................................................. 17 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

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
(continued)
Page

5 Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Supporting Memo. (CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609)

California Penal Code
§ 330 ................................................................................................................................. passim § 330.11 ................................................................................................................. 11, 12, 13, 15 § 337j ................................................................................................................................. 11, 13 § 337j, subd. (a) ................................................................................................................... 8, 11 § 337j, subd. (e) ....................................................................................................................... 16 § 337j, subd. (e)(1) .............................................................................................................. 8, 11 Administrative Procedure Act (APA) ........................................................................................... 19 Gambling Control Act ............................................................................................................... 8, 13 Senate Bill 952 (Stats 2001) Chapter 945 ..................................................................................... 13 Senate Bill 1664 (2007-2008 Reg. Sess.)...................................................................................... 15

REGULATIONS
Cal. Code Regs., Title 4
§ 12097, subd. (e)(5) ............................................................................................................... 17 § 12290, subd. (a) .................................................................................................................... 13 § 12362 .................................................................................................................................... 14 § 12369 .................................................................................................................................... 14 § 12370 .................................................................................................................................... 14 § 12372 .................................................................................................................................... 14 § 12373 .................................................................................................................................... 14 § 12380 .................................................................................................................................... 14 § 12381 .................................................................................................................................... 14 §§ 12384-12387 ...................................................................................................................... 14 § 12388 .................................................................................................................................... 14 § 12391 .................................................................................................................................... 14 § 12392 .................................................................................................................................... 14 § 12395 .................................................................................................................................... 14 § 12396 .................................................................................................................................... 14 § 12461 .................................................................................................................................... 14 § 12472 .................................................................................................................................... 14 § 12473 .................................................................................................................................... 14 § 12560, subd. (a) .................................................................................................................... 13 § 12560, subd. (d)(16) ............................................................................................................. 13 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

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
(continued)
Page

6 Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Supporting Memo. (CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609)

Cal. Code Regs., Title 11
§ 2010, subd. (f) ...................................................................................................................... 18 §§ 2010, subds. (g)-(j) ............................................................................................................. 10 § 2071, subd. (d) ..................................................................................................................... 18 §§ 2073-2074 .......................................................................................................................... 10 §§ 2076, subds. (a)-(b) ............................................................................................................ 10

OTHER AUTHORITIES
Cal. Gambling Ctrl. Comm., Initial Statement of Reasons, CGCC-GCA-2025-02-R ................. 17 35 Cal. Jur. 3d Gaming, Prize Contests, and Lotteries § 91 ......................................................... 19 S.B. 1664 Bill Analysis, Assemb. Comm. on Appropriations (July 16, 2008)............................. 15

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

7 Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Supporting Memo. (CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609)

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on June 30, 2026, at 9:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in Department 303 of the San Francisco County Superior Court, located at Civic Center Courthouse, 400 McAllister Street, San Francisco, CA 94102, Respondents Rob Bonta, in his official capacity as California Attorney General; Yolanda Morrow, in her official capacity as Director of the Bureau of Gambling Control; and the California Department of Justice, Bureau of Gambling Control (“Respondents”), will and hereby do move for judgment on the pleadings on the First through Fourth and the Seventh and Eighth causes of action in the Verified Petition for Writ of Mandamus and Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief (Petition), pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 438, on the grounds that the Petition does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against Respondents.

Respondents’ Motion for Judgment is based on this Notice and Motion for Judgment, the Memorandum of Points and Authorities in support thereof, the request for judicial notice filed herewith, and such other matters as may be brought before the Court.

Dated: June 5, 2026.

Respectfully submitted,

ROB BONTA
Attorney General of California

PAUL STEIN
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
ANDREW E. KUSHNER
CARTER M. JANSEN
Deputy Attorneys General
/s/ Sharon L. O’Grady
SHARON L. O’GRADY
Deputy Attorney General
Attorneys for Respondents and Defendants
Rob Bonta, Attorney General of the State of
California; the California Department of
Justice; Yolanda Morrow, Director of the
Bureau of Gambling Control; and the
Bureau of Gambling Control

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

8 Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Supporting Memo. (CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609)

INTRODUCTION
The Court has preliminarily enjoined the Bureau of Gambling Control’s new regulations relating to rotation of the player-dealer position (“Player-Dealer Regulations”) (Case No. CPF- 26-5190606) and blackjack-style games (“Blackjack Regulations”) (Case No. CPF-26-5190609), finding that the Bureau likely lacks authority to establish statewide standards for controlled games in California. As expressly set forth in the Gambling Control Act and related criminal statutes, however, California cardrooms can only offer controlled games, and a permissible “controlled game” is one approved by the Bureau. The Bureau is specifically charged with regulating “game rules” to “ensure fairness to the public and compliance with state laws.” (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 19841, subd. (b)1.) The Bureau also has express authority to adopt regulations relating to its functions and duties under the Act.

Petitioners ask the Court to find instead that only the Gambling Control Commission has authority to set statewide standards for permissible controlled games, and that the Bureau must file formal accusation proceedings before the Commission, on a case-by-case basis, to bring previously approved games into compliance with the state’s gambling laws. But Petitioners do not, and cannot, point to any statutory restriction on the Bureau’s authority to regulate game rules or to revoke previously issued game approvals. The Commission’s authority, while broad, is not exclusive, and nothing in the Act suggests that it somehow displaces the Bureau’s specific, detailed grants of authority to approve and regulate controlled games. Petitioners’ claims fail as a matter of law, and the Court should therefore grant this motion for judgment on the pleadings.

BACKGROUND
I. REGULATORY RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE BUREAU OF GAMBLING CONTROL AND

THE GAMBLING CONTROL COMMISSION
The Bureau has express statutory authority to determine the rules governing “controlled games” that can be offered by cardrooms. The Gambling Control Act (the Act) makes it unlawful to play any “controlled game” without permission, and defines a “controlled game” as one “approved by the Department of Justice,” i.e., the Bureau. (Pen. Code, § 337j, subds. (a), (e)(1)

1 Unless otherwise indicated, statutory citations in this brief are to the Business and Professions Code.
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

9 Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Supporting Memo. (CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609)

(emphasis added). See also § 19805, subds.(c), (k)-(m), (o), (ag).) And under section 19826, subdivision (g), the Bureau is responsible for “[a]pproving the play of any controlled game, including placing restrictions and limitations on how a controlled game may be played.” The Gambling Control Commission (Commission) has authority to issue regulations “for the administration and enforcement” of the Act (§ 19840), including authority to regulate activity “related to the conduct of controlled gambling.” (§ 19841, subd. (o).) The Commission is expressly charged with regulating the operations of cardrooms—e.g., approving or denying cardroom license applications and disciplining licensees, ensuring that no ineligible or unsuitable persons are associated with controlled gambling activities, that gambling activities take place only in suitable locations, and the like. (§ 19824, subds. (a)-(f).) In addition, the Commission is the decision-maker in adjudicative proceedings the Bureau might bring, seeking “restriction, limitation, suspension, or revocation” of a “license, permit, finding of suitability, or approval” issued by the Commission, or the “imposition of any fine upon any person licensed or approved” by the Commission (§§ 19826, subd. (e), 19930, subd. (b).) Under the Act, the Commission’s authority to regulate the operations of cardrooms complements, rather than displaces, the Bureau’s authority to determine what constitutes an approved controlled game. The Act specifically requires that the Commission’s regulations “[p]rovide for the approval of game rules … by the [Bureau] to ensure fairness to the public and compliance with state laws.” (§ 19841, subd. (b) (emphasis added).) II. THE CHALLENGED REGULATIONS
The Act vests the Bureau with broad, discretionary authority to “adopt regulations reasonably related to its functions and duties as specified” in the Act (§ 19826, subd. (f)), as well as “all powers necessary and proper to enable it to carry out fully and effectually the duties and responsibilities of [the Bureau].” (§ 19827, subd. (a).) The Blackjack and Player-Dealer Regulations challenged here set uniform standards to ensure that all cardroom games comply with Penal Code section 330, which makes it a crime to play any “banked” games or the game of twenty-one (also known as blackjack.) The regulations, inter alia, provide that blackjack and player-dealer games offered at cardrooms must include certain rules, and must not include certain 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

10 Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Supporting Memo. (CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609)

other rules, to avoid the criminal prohibitions in state law. (Code of Regs., tit. 11, §§ 2076, subds. (a)-(b) [player-dealer]; id., §§ 2010, subds. (g)-(j), 2073-2074 [blackjack].) III. PETITIONERS’ ALLEGATIONS
In the First and Third causes of action in each case, Petitioners allege that the Bureau lacks authority to issue regulations setting statewide standards for blackjack and player-dealer games, and that only the Commission has that power. (Player-Dealer Petition ¶¶ 359-360, 376-380; Blackjack Petition ¶¶ 278-285, 295-300.) In their Second and Fourth causes of action, Petitioners allege that the Bureau lacks authority to revoke previously issued game approvals under the challenged regulations, and must instead bring formal accusation proceedings before the Commission for each and every game it contends is unlawful. (Player-Dealer Petition ¶¶ 367- 382, 381-375; Blackjack Petition ¶¶ 286-294, 301-304.) In their Seventh and Eighth causes of action, Petitioners allege that the approval revocation process under the challenged regulations violates their right to due process under the federal and state constitutions. (Player-Dealer Petition ¶¶ 402-416; Blackjack Petition ¶¶ 321-335.) This motion seeks judgment on the pleadings as to each of these causes of action, on the grounds that they fail to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. These claims present legal questions and fail as a matter of law.

Petitioners’ remaining causes of action are not at issue in this motion.

LEGAL STANDARD
Under Code of Civil Procedure section 438, subdivisions (c)(1)(B) and (c)(2)(A), a defendant may move for judgment on the pleadings on the grounds that the complaint, or any cause of action in the complaint, “does not state facts sufficient to state a cause of action against the defendant.” A motion for judgment on the pleadings is decided on the same standard that applies to a demurrer. All properly pleaded material facts are deemed true, but not contentions, deductions, or conclusions of fact or law. (Mack v. State Bar of California (2001) 92 Cal.App.4th 957, 961.) Additionally, the court may consider matters that may be judicially noticed. (Richtek USA, Inc. v. uPI Semiconductor Corp. (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 651 (2015). 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

11 Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Supporting Memo. (CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609)

ARGUMENT
I. RESPONDENTS ARE ENTITLED TO JUDGMENT ON CAUSES OF ACTION 1 AND 3 BECAUSE THE REGULATIONS ARE WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE BUREAU’S AUTHORITY.

Under the Act, the Bureau has express statutory authority to determine whether cardroom game rules are legal or not, and to promulgate regulations relating to that function. The Commission’s authority to administer and enforce the Act, while broad, is complementary to and does not displace the Bureau’s authority in that regard.

A. The Bureau Has Express Statutory Authority to Determine Which Games May Be Played in California Cardrooms and to Issue Regulations Relating to That Function.

The Bureau’s authority to issue the challenged regulations is rooted in Penal Code section 337j, which makes it unlawful to play any “controlled game” without permission, and defines a “controlled game” as one “approved by the Department of Justice,” i.e., the Bureau. (Id., subds. (a), (e)(1) (emphasis added).) The Act, in turn, provides that cardrooms are only permitted to offer “controlled games” as defined by Penal Code section 337j. (§ 19805, subd. (o); see also id., subds. (c), (k)-(m), (ag).) This express delegation of authority to the Bureau to decide whether a game may legally be played or not is reflected in and reenforced by numerous other statutory provisions. Most importantly here, under section 19826, subdivision (g), the Bureau is responsible for “[a]pproving the play of any controlled game, including placing restrictions and limitations on how a controlled game may be played.” (Emphasis added.) Similarly, Section 19841, subdivision (b), provides for “approval of game rules … by [the Bureau].”2 Moreover, the Act vests the Bureau with broad, discretionary authority to “adopt regulations reasonably related to its functions and duties as specified” in the Act (§ 19826, subd. (f)), as well as “all powers necessary and proper to enable it to carry out fully and effectually the duties and responsibilities of [the Bureau].” (§ 19827, subd. (a).) The regulations challenged here do precisely that: they govern whether blackjack and player-dealer games are entitled to

2 See also § 19943.5 (providing a defense to cardrooms in an action arising from “play of a controlled game,” provided “the game was played in the manner approved” and “during the time for which it was approved by the [Bureau]”) (emphasis added); § 19805, subd. (c) & Pen.

Code, § 330.11 (delegating authority to the Bureau to determine whether a controlled game can be played without violating the prohibition on “banked games” in Pen. Code, § 330). 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

12 Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Supporting Memo. (CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609)

approval by the Bureau as legally permissible controlled games and, as such, they are indisputably “reasonably related” to the Bureau’s “functions and duties.” (§ 19826, subd. (f).) The Court has preliminarily found that the Bureau only has authority to approve “specific games for specific licensees” (Hearing Tr. at 11:22-23), but that is, respectfully, not correct. The Act does not specify how the Bureau must go about approving any particular game or games, and the fact that a licensee requesting approval for a particular game must reimburse the Bureau’s actual costs of processing the request (see id. at 11:25-12: 11) does not negate the Bureau’s express authority to issue regulations. More fundamentally, even assuming the Bureau can only approve “specific games for specific licensees,” the regulations are still reasonably related to that function and duty. (§ 19826, subd. (f).) The regulations define permissible blackjack and player- dealer games, and as such will be used by the Bureau to decide whether “specific games for specific licensees” may be approved, and whether approvals previously granted for “specific games” must be revoked.

A regulation is broadly defined to include “every standard of general application” used to “implement, interpret, or make specific the law enforced or administered by” an agency. (Gov.

Code, § 11342.600.) Here, the challenged regulations are designed to implement, interpret, and make more specific Penal Code sections 330 and 330.11, precisely so those statutes can be consistently applied in the context of individual game approvals. The challenged regulations set a generally applicable, objective standard, rather than limiting the Bureau to approving games one- by-one, in an ad hoc fashion. As such, they are reasonably related to the Bureau’s game-approval function (§ 19826, subd. (f)), and are “necessary and proper to enable [the Bureau] to carry out fully and effectually the duties and responsibilities . . . . specified in [the Act.].” (§ 19827, subd. (a).)
Accordingly, Respondents are entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the First and Third causes of action challenging the Bureau’s authority to adopt the challenged regulations.3

3 The fact that the challenged regulations have been a long time coming does not suggest that they are not an appropriate exercise of the Bureau’s authority. In Citicorp NA v. Franchise Tax Board (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 1403, 1408-1409, the Court upheld as valid a rule that changed an interpretation of a statute that had been in effect for 22 years, explaining: “an administrative (continued…)
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

13 Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Supporting Memo. (CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609)

B. The Gambling Control Act Does Not Strip the Bureau of Its Authority to Decide What Constitutes a Permissible Controlled Game.

While section 19840 broadly authorizes the Commission to issue regulations for the “administration and enforcement” of the Act, that does not mean its powers are unlimited. (Contra Hearing Tr. at 9:7-8.) As mentioned, the Bureau, not the Commission, is specifically tasked with approving permissible controlled games and placing restrictions and limitations on how they may be played. (Pen. Code, § 337j, subd. (e)(1), 330, & 330.11; §§ 19805, subds. (c), (g), 19826, subds. (c), (g).) And section 19841, which directs the Commission to issue regulations on a variety of subjects, unequivocally confirms that the Bureau has at least primary, if not exclusive, authority in that area, providing that the Commission’s own regulations shall “[p]rovide for the approval of game rules … by the [Bureau] to ensure fairness to the public and compliance with state laws.” (Id., subd. (b) (emphasis added).)4 Accordingly, the Commission’s own regulations expressly acknowledge that the Bureau has responsibility to ensure that game rules comply with the law. (See, e.g., Code of Regs., tit. 4, § 12290, subd. (a) [“A TPPPS licensee must comply with game rules approved by the Bureau, including but not limited to the rules regarding player-dealer rotation and table wagering.”]; § 12560, subds. (a), (d)(16)

agency may change its interpretation of a statute, rejecting an old construction and adopting a new. . . . As long as the change is constitutionally and legislatively permissible, an agency would be remiss in not adapting its interpretation of the rules to fit the practicalities and present economic conditions dictating a change.” (Id. at p. 1420.) 4 The Court’s preliminary finding that the Legislature “took away those big broad powers” from the Bureau and gave them to the Commission is, respectfully, incorrect. (Hearing Tr. at 10:24-11:5) In the transitional period between the time the Commission was created and its members were first seated, the Bureau had the power to issue regulations for the “administration and enforcement” of the Act—powers that now belong to the Commission in section 19840. (See Stats. 1997 § 19830; Request for Judicial Notice (“RJN”) Ex. 18.) The 1997 Act inadvertently failed to sunset the Bureau’s authority in that regard, however, necessitating a cleanup bill. A 2001 bill, sponsored by the Attorney General, repealed those provisions “relating to the [Bureau’s] authority to adopt regulations [‘for administration and enforcement of the Act’] that were intended to be replaced by provisions which address the Commission’s authority to adopt regulations, once appointed.” (S.B. 952 Bill Analysis, Senate Committee on Government Organization (April 3, 2002); RJN, Ex. 1; see S.B. 952 Bill Analysis, Assembly Committee on Appropriations (July 18, 2001); RJN Ex. 2; Senate Bill 952 (Stats 2001) ch. 945; RJN, Ex. 3.) Thus, the 2001 bill was not a “complete scrambling and redistribution of whose doing what between the Commission and the Bureau.” (Contra Hearing Tr. at 10:24-25.) It simply cleaned up an inadvertent drafting error in the 1997 Act. (RJN Exs. 1, 2.) But more importantly, the Legislature did not take away the Bureau’s express authority to define a “controlled game” that may be played in California, regulate game rules, place limitations and restrictions on the play of controlled games, and issue regulations reasonably related to those functions and duties. 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

14 Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Supporting Memo. (CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609)

[imposing monetary penalties and other sanctions if a “TPPPS employee type licensee made a wager that was not specifically authorized by the game rules as approved by the Bureau”].) Section 19841, subdivision (o), upon which Petitioners heavily rely, only permits the Commission to regulate activity that is “related to the conduct of controlled gambling ….” For example, the Commission is charged with approving or denying cardroom license applications and disciplining licensees, ensuring that no ineligible or unsuitable persons are associated with controlled gambling activities, that gambling activities take place only in suitable locations, and the like. (§ 19824, subds. (a)-(f).) The Commission’s regulations are consistent.5 And, the Commission’s status as decision-maker in disciplinary proceedings the Bureau brings to address specific instances of wrongdoing (§§ 19826, subd. (e), 19930, subd. (b)) does not displace the Bureau’s authority to approve cardroom games to ensure compliance with state laws. (§ 19841, subd. (b).)6
Although the Act allows the Commission to engage in a rulemaking proceeding in which it could find that a game that has been approved by the Bureau “violates a law of the United States, a law of this state, or a local ordinance” (§ 19842, subd. (a))—authority that the Commission has apparently never exercised—this provision does not restrict, let alone negate, the Bureau’s express authority to decide what constitutes a permissible controlled game and to issue regulations reasonably relating to that function.7

5 See Code of Regs., tit. 4, §§ 12362 (statewide list of persons to be excluded from cardrooms); 12364 (relocation of cardrooms); 12369 (exclusion of unauthorized Third Party Proposition Player Services (“TPPPSs”) personnel); 12370 (cardroom evacuation and safety plans); 12372, 12395, 12396 (cardroom security and surveillance); 12373 (approval for cardrooms to have additional tables for special events); 12472 and 12473 (approval of additional or fewer permanent tables); 12380 (minimum internal cardroom controls); 12381 (cardroom policies and procedures); 12384-12387 (to collection, counting and security of fees); 12388 (cardroom extensions of credit and check cashing); 12391 (standards for gambling floor operations); 12392 (requirements for house rules); 12461 (cardroom referrals relating to problem gambling).
6 Section 19841, subdivision (p), authorizes the Commission to act where local regulation may be insufficient to protect “health, safety, or welfare of residents” in specific geographic areas. However, this does not include authority to determine what is or is not a controlled game that may legally be played in California cardrooms.
7 Unable to identify any statutory restriction on the Bureau’s authority to decide what constitutes a permissible controlled game, Petitioners argue that the Commission is better suited to that task than the Bureau because its members are appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate, serve staggered terms, and are “politically balanced.” (Player-Dealer Petition ¶ 75; (continued…)
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

15 Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Supporting Memo. (CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609)

Finally, Petitioners allege the Bureau has never previously restricted games statewide (Player-Dealer Petition ¶¶ 125-135), but that mischaracterizes the history of the Bureau’s actions before it commenced formal rulemaking for the challenged regulations. In December 2007, then- Bureau Chief Robert Lytle sent cardrooms a letter, at their request, stating the Bureau’s purported view that Penal Code section 330.11’s requirement that the player-dealer position “must be continuously and systematically rotated among each of the participants” could be satisfied so long as the player-dealer position was “consistently and systematically offered to all seated players.” (Lytle Letter, p. 1; RJN, Ex. 4 (emphasis added).) Days after sending the letter, Lytle retired from the Bureau and immediately began consulting for cardrooms. (Accusation judgment; RJN, Ex. 5.) Lytle was subsequently prosecuted for disclosing confidential Bureau information to cardrooms and banned for life from having any involvement in cardrooms. (Ibid.)8 Cardrooms embraced the Lytle Letter as approving their current practices, and the Petitioners do so here. (Player-Dealer Petition ¶ 126.) The year after the Lytle Letter was issued, a proposed bill that would have codified it died in the Appropriations Committee (Senate Bill 1664 (2007-2008 Reg. Sess.); RJN Ex. 6), based in part on concerns that the measure violated the California Constitution under the Supreme Court’s decision in Hotel Employees & Restaurant Employees Intern. Union v. Davis (1999) 21 Cal.4th 585. (S.B. 1664 Bill Analysis, Assemb.

Comm. on Appropriations (July 16, 2008); RJN, Ex. 7.)
In 2016, under Attorney General Harris, the Bureau issued a notice suspending the Lytle Letter pending review. (Notification from then-Bureau Chief Wayne Quint to All Gambling Establishments (Feb. 19, 2016); RJN, Ex. 8.) Then, after receiving public input, the Bureau issued a notification on June 30, 2016 rescinding the Lytle Letter and announcing that the Bureau would deny approval of game rules that did not require systematic offering of the player-dealer position and provide for actual rotation of the deal every 60 minutes. (Notification from Wayne

see Hearing Tr. at 28:20-28.) That is a policy argument—insufficient to support a cause of action—and in any event it is flatly inconsistent with the Act itself, which states the Bureau must approve controlled games to “ensure fairness to the public and compliance with state laws.” (§ 19841, subd. (b).)
8 See https://capitolweekly.net/the-story-of-bob-lytle-the-most-infamous-figure-in- california-gaming-youve-never-heard-of/.
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

16 Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Supporting Memo. (CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609)

Quint to All Gambling Establishments (June 30, 2016); RJN, Ex. 9.) The Notification also required modification of existing approved games to comply with the new requirements. (Ibid.) This time, cardrooms objected and petitioned the Office of Administrative Law (“OAL”) for a determination that the Notification was an impermissible underground regulation, and OAL granted this petition. (RJN, Exs. 10, 11.)
After Attorney General Harris was succeeded by Attorney General Becerra, the Bureau started informal pre-rulemaking activities seeking public input on concept regulations beginning in 2019 (for potential player-dealer regulations) and in 2021 (for potential blackjack-style game regulations). (RJN, Exs. 12-13.) However, Attorney General Becerra left office in March 2021, before formal rulemaking could commence.

Thus, the Bureau has been issuing, or attempting to issue, statewide, generally applicable regulatory guidance on permissible controlled games since 2016. In sharp contrast, Petitioners do not, and could not, allege that the Commission has ever taken such action, notwithstanding their (incorrect) contention that only the Commission has that authority. The Commission has not sought to regulate game rules, nor has it objected to the Bureau’s efforts to do so. (RJN, Section I, Items 1-6; RJN, Exs. 12-15.)
In sum, the Court should squarely reject Petitioners’ invitation to sharply restrict the Attorney General’s authority to enforce the state’s gambling laws, and grant judgment on the pleadings against Petitioners on their First and Third causes of action.

II. RESPONDENTS ARE ENTITLED TO JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS ON CAUSES OF ACTION 2 AND 4 BECAUSE THE BUREAU HAS AUTHORITY TO ISSUE REGULATIONS

REVOKING PRIOR GAME RULE APPROVALS
A. The Bureau Has Authority to Revoke Previously Issued Game Approvals.

Petitioners allege that, because the Act does not explicitly state that the Bureau may revoke game approvals, its failure to proceed via accusation on a case-by-case basis is beyond its authority. (Player-Dealer Petition ¶¶ 369-370, 383-384; Blackjack Petition ¶¶ 288-289, 302-303.) This argument, too, fails as a matter of law.

The Bureau’s authority to revoke previously issued game approvals is a necessary incident to its express authority to approve controlled games in the first place (Pen. Code, § 337j, subd. 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

17 Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Supporting Memo. (CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609)

(e); § 19826, subd. (g)) and enforce the state’s gambling laws, including Penal Code section 330. (Gov. Code, § 15001.1.) The Bureau has “all powers necessary and proper to enable it to carry out fully and effectually” its “duties and responsibilities.” (§ 19827, subd. (a).)9 If the Bureau could not revoke a previously issued game approval, however, the Bureau would be severely hamstrung in its ability to enforce the law and protect the public. This is particularly true given that cardrooms have an “absolute defense” to any liability arising from play of a previously approved game, provided “the game was played in the manner approved” by the [Bureau] … during the time for which it was approved by the [Bureau].” (§ 19943.5 (emphasis added).) This provision would make no sense if the Bureau lacked authority to revoke a previously issued game approval.10
In other contexts, courts have had no difficulty finding that, in the absence of statutory restrictions, the “power to license … implies the power to revoke.” (Nichols v. County of Santa Clara (1990) 223 Cal.App.3d 1236, 1244 [permit to carry concealed weapon].) The “power to license includes the power of revocation, and it is immaterial that the licensing ordinance contains no express provision permitting revocation.” (Stewart v. San Mateo County (1966) 246 Cal.App.2d 273, 284; Vincent Petroleum Corp. v. Culver City (1941) 43 Cal.App.2d 511, 517 [holding that the “rule that a license or permit granted under the police power … is always subject to revocation is well settled”].) Here, nothing in the Act restricts the Bureau’s authority to revoke

9 Moreover, “an administrative agency is not limited to the exact provisions of a statute in adopting regulations to enforce its mandate,” and the “absence of any specific statutory provisions regarding the regulation of an issue does not mean that such a regulation exceeds statutory authority,” because the agency is “authorized to ‘fill up the details’ of the statutory scheme.” (PaintCare v. Mortensen (2015) 233 Cal.App.4th 1292, 1298-99, 1307-08; see also Lavin v. California Horse Racing Bd. (1997) 57 Cal.App.4th 263, 268 [holding it is a “well- settled principle of administrative law that in the absence of an express statutory directive to the contrary, an administrative agency may exercise its discretion in selecting the methodology by which it will implement the authority granted to it”].) 10 A proposed rule issued by the Commission prohibits as deceptive any cardroom advertising relating to a “game, group of games, or gaming activity that is not currently approved by the Bureau.” (Cal. Gambling Ctrl. Comm., [Proposed] Code Regs., tit. 4, § 12097, subd. (e)(5) (emphasis added); RJN, Ex. 16.) The Commission has explained that the proposed rule is “necessary to prevent a potential loophole in the requirements that could allow [a cardroom] to advertise the name of a game, group of games, or gaming activity that is no longer Bureau- approved.” (Cal. Gambling Ctrl. Comm., Initial Statement of Reasons, CGCC-GCA-2025-02-R, p. 16 (emphasis added); RJN, Ex. 17 (emphasis added).) This, too, assumes that the Bureau has the power to revoke previously granted game approvals.
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

18 Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Supporting Memo. (CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609)

previously issued game approvals. To the contrary, the Act expressly provides that game approvals are a “revocable privilege.” (§ 19801, subd. (k); see Section II infra.) Moreover, the Bureau already has a regulation providing for revocation of previously granted approvals when it finds that “a gaming activity is prohibited or made unlawful by state, local ordinance, regulation, or final judgment.” (Code Regs., tit. 11, § 2071, subd. (d)), see id. § 2010, subd. (f) [defining “gaming activity” as “any activity or event . . . that is appended to, or relies upon any controlled game”].) Neither Petitioners, nor anyone else, has ever challenged that regulation as ultra vires.

B. The Bureau Is Not Required to Follow the Commission’s Quasi-Judicial Procedures to Revoke Previously Issued Game Approvals.

Petitioners try, but fail, to locate a restriction on the Bureau’s game-approval revocation authority in section 19930, subdivision (b), which provides in relevant part that if, “after investigation, the Bureau is satisfied that a license, permit, finding of suitability, or approval should be suspended or revoked, it shall file an accusation with the commission ….” (See Player- Dealer Petition ¶ 174; Blackjack Petition ¶ 72.) Section 19930 directs the Bureau to bring proceedings before the Commission to revoke approvals issued by the Commission, not by the Bureau itself. The Commission issues a wide range of licenses, permits, and “approvals.” (E.g., § 19924, subd. (b) [security controls over gambling premises “are subject to the approval of the commission”]; id., subd. (c) [Commission may “[a]pprove or disapprove transactions, events, and processes as provided in this chapter]; id., subd. (f) [Commission may grant temporary licenses or approvals on appropriate terms]; see also footnote 6, supra.) It also has general authority to “[r]equire any person to apply for a license, permit, registration, or approval as specified in this chapter,” and to deny such requests “[f]or any cause deemed reasonable by the commission ….” (Id., § 19824, subds. (a)-(b).) But, as discussed above, the Commission plays no role in the issuance of game approvals by the Bureau; to the contrary, the Act expressly directs the Commission to adopt regulations providing for “the approval of game rules … by the [Bureau].” (§ 19841, subd. (b) (emphasis added).)
Indeed, it makes no sense to require the Bureau to institute formal accusation proceedings against every cardroom in the state to bring all of them into conformance with the requirements of 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

19 Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Supporting Memo. (CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609)

Penal Code section 330 for blackjack and player-dealer games, nor would such piecemeal litigation be fair. Enactment of regulations is the appropriate procedure to ensure uniformity:
“Quasi-legislative acts involve the adoption of rules of general application on the basis of broad public policy, while quasi-judicial acts involve the determination and application of facts peculiar to an individual case.” (Alborzi v. Univ. of So. Cal. (2020) 55 Cal.App.5th 155, 169, citation omitted; see Marine Forest Society v. Cal. Coastal Comm. (2005) 36 Cal.4th 1, 23.) Issuing regulations applicable to all cardrooms, rather than proceeding via piecemeal accusation proceedings, ensures that all cardrooms receive equal treatment and are in compliance with state laws.11 The fact that the Bureau follows certain requirements for the quasi-adjudicatory process triggered by an accusation directed against an individual cardroom that is in violation of the law or a regulation (§ 19930, subd. (b)) does not somehow negate its authority to revoke previously issued game approvals pursuant to the challenged regulations.

California School Boards Association v. State Board of Education (2015) 240 Cal.App.4th 838, is instructive. In that case, petitioners challenged the Board’s approval of a statewide charter for a charter school. Petitioners argued that the Board was required, but failed, to follow standards for adjudicatory proceedings undertaken by a governmental agency, including a written accusation, evidentiary hearing, and written decision. Notwithstanding statutory language clearly indicating that was the case, the Court of Appeal disagreed, holding that approval or denial of a charter school application is a “quasi-legislative function,” and therefore “fundamentally at odds with” the Administrative Procedure Act (APA)’s adjudicatory procedures. (Id. at p. 843.) It explained, the “hallmark of quasi-legislative decision” is that it is “informed by the public interest” and “involves consideration of factors beyond the mere application of existing rules to existing facts.” (Id. at 847.) Here, Petitioners correctly concede that the Bureau acted in a quasi-

11 Accusation proceedings are disciplinary proceedings to address wrongdoing. (See § 19824, subd. (e); 35 Cal. Jur. 3d Gaming, Prize Contests, and Lotteries § 91 [the Bureau “is required to appropriately investigate whether there has been any violation of the statutory provisions governing the control of gambling or any regulations adopted under such provisions,” and “[i]f, after any investigation, the division is satisfied that a license, permit, finding of suitability, or approval should be suspended or revoked, it must file an accusation with the (Commission).”].) It is the appropriate procedure for taking action against individual cardrooms based on issues specific to that cardroom, not a mechanism for implementing regulations. 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

20 Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Supporting Memo. (CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609)

legislative capacity in issuing the regulations (Player-Dealer Petition ¶¶ 366, 375, 395, 410, 431; Blackjack Petition ¶¶ 285, 294, 314, 329, 347). Its use of the APA’s rulemaking procedures, rather than filing multiple accusations before the Commission, was proper.

In short, nothing in the Act prohibits the Bureau from issuing regulations that require cardrooms to change the rules of previously approved games to comply with the regulations.

Respondents are entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the Second and Fourth causes of action in each case.

III. RESPONDENTS ARE ENTITLED TO JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS ON PETITIONERS’ DUE PROCESS CLAIMS (CAUSES OF ACTION 7 AND 8).

Petitioners further allege that, because the Act does not explicitly state that the Bureau may revoke game approvals, its failure to proceed via accusation on a case-by-case basis also violates due process. (Player-Dealer Petition ¶¶ 403-406, 412-415; Blackjack Petition ¶¶ 322-325, 331- 333.) These arguments, too, fail as a matter of law.

First, only governmental decisions that are adjudicative in nature are subject to procedural due process notice and hearing requirements. Accordingly, a conclusion that the challenged regulations are within the Act’s delegation of regulatory authority to the Bureau (see Section I supra) disposes of this claim. (See Sierra Lake Reserve v. City of Rocklin (1991) 938 F.2d 951, 957 [“When the action complained of is legislative in nature, due process is satisfied when the legislative body performs its responsibilities in the normal matter prescribed by law.”].) As discussed above, an agency appropriately proceeds by regulation when adopting a rule of general application, and compliance with the APA’s rulemaking process (Gov. Code § 11340, et seq.) also satisfies due process requirements. “Legislative action generally is not governed by these procedural due process requirements because it is not practical that everyone should have a direct voice in legislative decisions; elections provide the check there.” (Calvert v. County of Yuba (2006) 145 Cal.App.4th 613, 622. See Sierra Lake Reserve v. City of Rocklin, supra, 938 F.2d at p. 957.)
That is true even when the result is revocation of previously issued approvals and the requirement that cardrooms modify their game rules. The decision in Hobbs v. City of Pacific 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

21 Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Supporting Memo. (CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609)

Grove (2022) 85 Cal. App. 5th 311, 320 is instructive. There, owners of property licensed for use as short term rentals made improvements in the expectation that they could continue that use, and they sued when their licenses were not renewed after an ordinance restricting short term rentals took effect. Plaintiffs claimed they were entitled to a hearing, and therefore the adoption of the ordinance violated their due process rights. The Court disagreed. While an adjudicative governmental action often “requires the procedural due process standards of reasonable notice and opportunity to be heard, ... [l]egislative action generally is not governed by these procedural due process requirements because it is not practical that everyone should have a direct voice in legislative decisions ....” (Ibid.) And, in response to plaintiffs’ argument that the application of the ordinance “was necessarily adjudicatory because it applied to” their specific property, the court held that, even if the city’s action could be considered adjudicatory, plaintiffs still were not entitled to a hearing before losing their license because “actions involving only the non- discretionary application of objective standards do not entitle the affected person to a due process hearing.” (Id. at 321.) That is precisely what the challenged regulations are intended to do: apply objective standards to all cardrooms, so that all affected cardrooms are treated the same.

Further, a person only has a “protectible property interest” under due process if he has “a legitimate claim of entitlement under the applicable law.” (Nichols v. Cnty. of Santa Clara, supra, 223 Cal.App.3d at p. 1242 (citing Board of Regents v. Roth (1972) 408 U.S. 564, 577).) Here, the Act expressly states: “Any license or permit issued, or other approval granted pursuant to this chapter, is declared to be a revocable privilege, and no holder acquires any vested right therein or thereunder.” (§ 19801, subd. (k).) Under the statute’s plain text, then, Petitioners do not have a “protectible property interest” in their approvals to offer blackjack or banked games. (See Hobbs v. City of Pacific Grove, supra, 85 Cal.App.5th at pp. 320, 325 [holding that vested rights, if any, are “limited to the express terms and conditions of the license”]; O’Connor v.

Superior Ct. (1979) 90 Cal. App. 3d 107, 113-114 [finding that “[p]etitioners [did] not possess a vested right to the free transferability of their permits” when the governing ordinance “did not provide for continuation of that practice”].)
As a matter of law, Petitioner’s due process claims fail. 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

22 Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Supporting Memo. (CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609)

CONCLUSION
The cardrooms seek a ruling that would gravely compromise the Bureau’s power to combat illegal gambling. In 2016, when the Bureau first attempted to bring cardrooms into compliance with Penal Code section 330, they successfully challenged the effort as an underground regulation, while at the same time embracing the notorious Lytle letter as a regulatory safe harbor.

Now that the Bureau has engaged in formal rulemaking, they are pushing for a ruling that the Bureau lacks authority to adopt regulations at all. Similarly, they contend the Bureau cannot revoke game approvals it previously issued, arguing the Bureau must proceed by formal accusation before the Commission on a game-by-game basis—a recipe for regulatory paralysis as cases drag through the formal adjudicatory process, followed by inevitable writ actions challenging whatever determinations the Commission might make. Meanwhile, even in these cases, the cardrooms continue to look for ways to defer judicial review of fundamental questions regarding the legality of their player-dealer and blackjack games. The Court should grant Respondents’ motion for judgment on the pleadings and proceed to consider the remaining issues, in particular the overridingly important question of whether the Bureau’s regulations are consistent with California’s statutory and constitutional prohibitions on gambling.

Dated: June 5, 2026.

Respectfully submitted,

ROB BONTA
Attorney General of California

PAUL STEIN
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
ANDREW E. KUSHNER
CARTER M. JANSEN
Deputy Attorneys General
/s/ Sharon L. O’Grady
SHARON L. O’GRADY
Deputy Attorney General
Attorneys for Respondents and Defendants
Rob Bonta, Attorney General of the State of
California; the California Department of
Justice; Yolanda Morrow, Director of the
Bureau of Gambling Control; and the
Bureau of Gambling Control

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

AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS Case Nos. CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609 6225028
KEKER, VAN NEST & PETERS LLP ELLIOT R. PETERS - # 158708 [email protected] R. ADAM LAURIDSEN - # 243780 [email protected] FRANCO MUZZIO - # 310618 [email protected] MAYA JAMES - # 318554 [email protected] 633 Battery Street San Francisco, CA 94111-1809 Telephone: 415 391 5400 Facsimile: 415 397 7188 Attorneys for Amici Tribes Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, Pechanga Band of Indians, United Auburn Indian Community, Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians, Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation, and Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
CALIFORNIA GAMING ASSOCIATION, et al.,
Petitioners and Plaintiffs,
v.

ROB BONTA, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the State of California, et al., Respondents and Defendants.

Case Nos. CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609 AMICI TRIBES’ AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS Date: June 30, 2026 Time: 9:00 a.m. Dept.: 303 Judge: Hon. Richard C. Darwin Date Filed: March 6, 2026

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

1 AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS Case Nos. CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609 6225028
I. INTRODUCTION
Petitioners took no issue with the regulatory authority of the Bureau of Gambling Control (the “Bureau”) when it protected their illegal gaming and benefitted their bottom-line. Now, after the Bureau determined that Petitioners’ player-dealer and blackjack games violate the California Penal Code, Petitioners contend that the Bureau has zero authority to promulgate regulations regarding the legality of certain controlled games that the Bureau directly oversees. Petitioners’ position is inconsistent with the Gambling Control Act (the “Act”) and the longstanding practices of both the Bureau and the California Gambling Control Commission (the “Commission”).

Respondents are correct that the Bureau possesses the necessary authority to promulgate the Player-Dealer and Blackjack Regulations (the “Regulations”), and the Court should grant their Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings.

The Amici Tribes, whose governments and people have suffered from cardroom casinos’ illegal gaming for years, submit this brief to highlight the cynical inconsistency of Petitioners’ position. Under applicable authority such as Oliver v. County of Los Angeles (1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 1397, the cardrooms’ player-dealer games plainly violate the Penal Code. It was a broad pronouncement from the Bureau’s acting chief Robert Lytle in 2007 (the “Lytle Letter”) that originally provided a fig-leaf of cover for the illegal practices the Regulations now target.

The cardrooms take no issue with the Bureau’s purported authority to find that their conduct does not violate the law, going so far as to cite the Lytle Letter in their complaint, but conveniently take a different view of Bureau authority when its determinations are against them. The cardrooms challenged the Bureau’s 2016 withdrawal of the Lytle Letter as an underground regulation—an argument conceding the Bureau’s regulatory authority over these issues—and thereby triggered the recent round of rulemaking as a result. But now that the Bureau has engaged in the full rulemaking process the cardrooms had argued was needed, Petitioners argue that these issues are entirely beyond the Bureau’s authority. No matter what mechanism is poised to rein in cardrooms’ law-breaking, cardrooms inevitably argue that authority rests elsewhere.

The Amici Tribes also detail the real-world disruptive consequences of finding that the Bureau lacks power to promulgate the Regulations. The significance of the Court’s decision on 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

2 AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS Case Nos. CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609 6225028
this matter should not be lost in Petitioners’ hyper-technical distortions of California statutes. The California Attorney General, like his immediate predecessors, determined that Petitioners’ games violate the Penal Code in a variety of ways. The agency to which the Attorney General has delegated his prosecutorial powers in the gaming space, the Bureau, went through months of public processes to address those violations in an orderly and transparent manner, giving cardrooms ample opportunity to participate and offer comment, and then time to cease their lawbreaking. Petitioners now accuse the Bureau of engaging in too much process through those regulatory efforts, arguing that the Bureau should have simply instituted individual enforcement actions against each cardroom offering illegal games to stay within its undisputed legal authority.

Of course, had the Bureau followed that process, Petitioners no doubt would have complained about lack of sufficient notice and transparency, or opportunity to engage with the Bureau.

Petitioners are not above the law. California has empowered the Bureau to determine that cardrooms are offering illegal games and to take action to stop them. The Regulations are a rightful exercise of that authority.

II. ARGUMENT
A. Petitioners have repeatedly attempted to avoid any form of regulation of their illegal gaming.

Petitioners have a decades-long history of evading any attempt by California authorities to regulate them. Following the decision in Oliver, casinos understood that compliance with Penal Code § 330 required them to ensure that the player-dealer position is actually rotated among players at a table, so that no single player—such as cardroom-contracted third-party proposition players (“TPPPs”)—can bank the game. Petitioners expressly acknowledge Oliver’s clear mandate in some of their game rules: “[t]here must be an intervening Player/Dealer so one person 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

3 AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS Case Nos. CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609 6225028
cannot continually occupy the position and the ‘bank’ hand within the meaning of Oliver.”1 Although Oliver is settled law, cardrooms have sought to evade its clear restrictions by pointing to a December 2007 letter from then-Bureau chief Robert Lytle. The Lytle Letter proffered a self-serving and erroneous interpretation of Penal Code § 330, which advised that merely offering the player-dealer position to others at the table was sufficient to comply with § 330. (See, e.g., RF-PD-0570–0571 (Vol. 4).) Cardroom industry groups solicited the letter weeks before Lytle left the Bureau to become a cardroom consultant (a career-change that ended with Lytle accepting a lifetime ban from the gaming industry as punishment for a laundry list of misdeeds focused on helping cardrooms evade law enforcement). The letter contains precisely the type of broad pronouncements regarding the legality of games that Petitioners now claim are beyond the Bureau’s authority: it “mandated that all game rules” contain certain provisions to “fulfill [California’s] legislative intent” and described “[g]enerally” what “acceptable rules require.” (RF-PD-0570 (Vol. 4).) Cardrooms, including some Petitioners, had no qualms with the Bureau’s authority to interpret Penal Code § 330 in this manner when it served them. For example, Petitioners cite the Lytle Letter in paragraph 126 of their complaint challenging the player-dealer regulations as supposed evidence of their games’ legality. (P-D Compl. at ¶ 126.) However, when the Bureau rightfully sought to correct the Lytle Letter’s erroneous conclusions, the cardrooms adopted a different view of Bureau authority. In 2016, under Attorney General Kamala Harris, the Bureau “suspended” the Lytle Letter.2 Later that year, the Bureau stated that, contrary to the Lytle Letter, “offer-only” rules are not legally sufficient and, therefore, games required actual rotation of the player-dealer position. (Id. at pp. 8–9.) Cardrooms challenged the Bureau’s suspension of the Lytle Letter as an “underground regulation” and 1 (See https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/media/parkwest-bicycle-casino.pdf, at p. 54 [Petitioner Parkwest Bicycle Casino game rules for No Bust – 21st Century Blackjack]; see also, e.g., https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/media/parkwest-casino-cordova.pdf, at p. 15 [Petitioner Parkwest Casino Cordova game rules for Pai Gow Poker citing Oliver]; https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/media/parkwest-casino-580.pdf, at p. 24 [Petitioner Parkwest Casino 580 games rules for Commission Free Baccarat citing Oliver]; https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/media/pc-lotus.pdf, at p. 14 [Petitioner Parkwest Lotus game rules for EZ Baccarat citing Oliver].) 2 See https://oal.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/166/2017/08/2017-OAL-Determination-No.-2.pdf, at p. 8. 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

4 AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS Case Nos. CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609 6225028
prevailed on procedural grounds (id. at pp. 1–6)—even though the Lytle Letter, itself, was arguably an “underground regulation” to begin with. (See Sandhu v. Bd. of Admin. (2025) 108 Cal.App.5th 1048, 1079 [an “underground regulation” is a proposed regulation where “the agency must intend it to apply generally rather than in a specific case” and “the agency must adopt it to implement, interpret, or make specific the law enforced by the agency”].)3 Given the cardrooms’ claim that simply withdrawing Lytle’s flawed analysis would constitute an underground regulation, the Bureau initiated formal rulemaking on player-dealer games shortly after the 2017 decision. Through a series of workshops in 2018 and 2019 and notice-and-comment periods on draft regulations under Attorney General Xavier Becerra, the State sought to provide cardrooms with the transparent and formal process they claimed was required—a process in which many of the cardrooms participated. In 2025, that process came to a head under Attorney General Rob Bonta, with the State ultimately adopting the Regulations to limit some of Petitioners’ illegal games. (See Cal. Code Regs., tit. 11, §§ 2073, 2076.) The Regulations are the culmination of a decade-long effort by multiple Attorneys General to bring cardrooms closer to compliance with California law. Notably, at no point throughout this process did the Commission lodge any objection to the Bureau’s regulatory power or efforts or suggest in any way that the authority for such regulation rested with the Commission rather than the Bureau.

The Commission had years to raise any concerns with the Bureau’s actions, but as reflected in the Regulations’ administrative record, it chose to do nothing.

Petitioners fully concede (as they must) that the Bureau is authorized “[t]o adopt regulations reasonably related to its functions and duties.” (See, e.g., P-D PI Mot. at 15, quoting Bus. & Prof. Code § 19826, subd. (f).) This authority necessarily includes adopting regulations related to “placing restrictions and limitations on how a controlled game may be played.” (Bus. & Prof. Code § 19826, subd. (g).) That is precisely what the Regulations attempt to do. Moreover, the Regulations are directly related to and facilitate the Bureau’s ability to know in real time on the cardroom floor when the game rules it approves on paper effectively “render the maintenance 3 Unless otherwise indicated, internal punctuation, footnotes, emphases, and citations were omitted from, and any emphases were added to, quotations. 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

5 AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS Case Nos. CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609 6225028
of or operation of a bank impossible by other means,” as is the Bureau’s function and duties mandated by Penal Code 330.11 and Business and Professions Code § 19826, subdivision (g).

They serve as a uniform standard for game play with measurable time limits that the Bureau can effectively monitor and enforce. (See Bus. & Prof. Code § 19827.) Petitioners ignore these facts and offer a misreading of the Act that obfuscates the Bureau’s statutory authority. Their interpretation of the Act must be rejected. (See Gattuso v. Harte-Hanks Shoppers, Inc. (2007) 42 Cal.4th 554, 567 [courts “must give [a statutory] provision a reasonable and commonsense interpretation consistent with the apparent purpose and intention of the lawmakers, practical rather than technical in nature, which upon application will result in wise policy rather than mischief or absurdity”].)
Petitioners’ continued evasion of the State’s attempts to stop them from breaking the law is not without consequence either. Each day that passes without regulation of Petitioners’ illegal gaming, the Amici Tribes and many others continue to be harmed. As discussed in prior amici briefing, the California Constitution prohibits Petitioners’ illegal gaming, granting the Amici Tribes an exclusive right to offer the games at issue. (See Cal. Const., art IV, § 19, subd. (f).) The Constitution likewise vests the California Attorney General with authority to see that this and all other “laws of the State are uniformly and adequately enforced.” (Cal. Const., art. V, § 13.) Constitutionally mandated enforcement of Tribal gaming exclusivity through the Bureau under the Attorney General’s supervision is “vital to California tribal governments, providing the means to deliver essential services such as housing, education, healthcare, environmental protections, cultural preservation, elder care, fire services, and more.” (RF-PD-0747 (Vol. 5); see California v.

Cabazon Band of Mission Indians (1987) 480 U.S. 202, 221 fn. 25 [tribal gaming “promot[es] the health, education, and general welfare of tribal” citizens].) Petitioners’ continuing violation of the law, and obstruction of the Bureau’s constitutional authority to uniformly enforce the law, threatens Tribal sovereignty and the welfare of Tribal citizens. The fact that such law-breaking makes money for the cardrooms or others is no defense.

Ultimately, no matter what form required regulation takes, Petitioners always proclaim that it is the wrong form. While they now point to the Commission as the supposed regulating 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

6 AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS Case Nos. CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609 6225028
body that will check them, they proffer no evidence that the Commission would be inclined to undertake this specific type of regulation of cardrooms. When placed in full context, Petitioners are effectively arguing that they are beyond regulation. That is not the law, and Petitioners should not be permitted to evade properly implemented regulations any longer. Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings should be granted.

B. If the Bureau lacks the authority to implement the Regulations, greater regulatory disorder will result.

Petitioners’ position that the Bureau lacks the authority to implement the Regulations will inevitably lead to inefficiency and disorder that the Act did not intend to create or foster.

Petitioners contend that the Bureau is required to initiate individual, cardroom-by- cardroom enforcement proceedings to effectuate the change it otherwise seeks in the Regulations. (See, e.g., P-D Compl. at ¶ 80; P-D PI Mot. at pp. 16–17.) They are wrong. There is nothing in the Act requiring the Bureau to engage in such piecemeal enforcement when it could pursue a comprehensive and consistent means to enforce the law. There is no evidence that the Legislature intended to make it more difficult for the Bureau to exercise its authority and achieve cardrooms’ conformity with the law only through individualized enforcement action. (See Niedermeier v.

FCA US LLC (2024) 15 Cal.5th 792, 804 [statutory interpretation requires “avoid[ing] a construction that would lead to unreasonable, impractical, or arbitrary results”].) Indeed, Petitioners’ position, if adopted, would frustrate the Act’s clear directive that the Bureau may adopt regulations reasonably related to its duties to enforce the law. (See Bus. & Prof. Code § 19826, subd. (f); see also So. Cal. Edison Co. v. P.U.C. (2000) 85 Cal.App.4th 1086, 1104 [statutory interpretation must “leav[e] no part useless or devoid of meaning”].) The Legislature intended to make it easier and more efficient for the Bureau to carry out the Attorney General’s duty to uniformly stop illegal gaming; Petitioners’ interpretation of the Act would achieve the opposite.

Piecemeal enforcement actions against every cardroom offering illegal games, with no notice or cardroom involvement, would be more burdensome for everyone involved and delay uniform enforcement of the law. The Act does not support such an absurd position—it does the 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
7 AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS Case Nos. CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
6225028
opposite; it enables the Bureau to exercise its authority to efficiently and reasonably undertake its duties. Petitioners’ contention to the contrary should be rejected.

III. CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Respondents’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings should be granted.

Dated: June 5, 2026
By:

KEKER, VAN NEST & PETERS LLP
ELLIOT R. PETERS
R. ADAM LAURIDSEN

FRANCO MUZZIO

MAYA JAMES
Attorneys for Amici Tribes Agua Caliente
Band of Cahuilla Indians, Federated
Indians of Graton Rancheria, Pechanga
Band of Indians, United Auburn Indian
Community, Viejas Band of Kumeyaay
Indians, Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation, and
Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation

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

1 PROOF OF SERVICE Case Nos. CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609 6225028

PROOF OF SERVICE

I am employed in the City and County of San Francisco, State of California in the office of a member of the bar of this court at whose direction the following service was made. I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within action. My business address is Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, 633 Battery Street, San Francisco, CA 94111-1809.

On June 5, 2026, I served the following document(s):

AMICI TRIBES’ AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS By ELECTRONICALLY SERVING the document via File & ServeXpress as described above on the recipients designated on the Transaction Receipt located on the File & ServeXpress website.

BENJAMIN J. HORWICH
MEGAN L. McCREADIE

MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP
560 Mission Street, Twenty-Seventh Floor
San Francisco, California 94105-2907
[email protected]
[email protected]

JEREMY S. KREISBERG

MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP
601 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Suite 500E
Washington, D.C. 20001
[email protected]

OLIVER BROWN

MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP
350 South Grand Avenue, Fiftieth Floor
Los Angeles, California 90071-3426
[email protected]

Attorneys for California Gaming Association
SCOTT B. GARNER
MOLLY J. MAGNUSON

UMBERG ZIPSER LLP
1920 Main Street, Suite 750
Irvine, California 92614
[email protected]
[email protected]
Attorneys for Cal-Pac Rancho Cordova, LLC
(d/b/a Parkwest Casino Cordova); Casino 580,
LLC (d/b/a Parkwest Casino 580); Lodi
Cardroom, Inc. (d/b/a Parkwest Casino Lodi);
Parkwest Bicycle Casino, LLC (d/b/a Parkwest
Bicycle Casino); Parkwest Casino Manteca,
LLC (d/b/a Parkwest Casino Manteca); The
Silver F, Inc. (d/b/a Parkwest Casino Lotus)

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
2 PROOF OF SERVICE
Case Nos. CPF-26-519606; CPF-26-519609
6225028
SUSANNA G. SCHUEMANN

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
One Embarcadero Center, Suite 2600
San Francisco, California 94111

DEBRA WONG YANG

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
333 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, California 90071
[email protected]
[email protected]
Attorneys for Acme Player Services, LLC;
Blackstone Gaming, LLC;
CalProp Services, LLC; Faros Unlimited, Inc.;
Fortune Players Group,
Inc.; Global Player Services, Inc.; KB
Ventures; KBCH Consultants, Inc.; Knighted
Ventures, LLC; L.E. Gaming, Inc.; Pacific
Gaming Services, LLC; Players Edge Services;
Progressive Gaming, LLC; Qualified Player
Services, LLC; The Independent; and Wahba

ROB BONTA
Attorney General of California

PAUL STEIN
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
SHARON L. O’GRADY
Deputy Attorney General

ANDREW EDWARD KUSHNER
Deputy Attorney General

CARTER MARLEY JANSEN
Deputy Attorney General
455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 11000
San Francisco, CA 94102-7004
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected] (legal secretary)
Attorneys for Respondents and Defendants
Rob Bonta, Attorney General of the State of
California; the California Department of
Justice; Yolanda Morrow, Director of the
Bureau of Gambling Control; and the Bureau
of Gambling Control
Executed on June 5, 2026, at San Francisco, California.

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

Kelly F. Love

RESOLUTION NO. ______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COMPTON DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO INITIATE THE CITY OF COMPTON’S WITHDRAWAL FROM

THE CALIFORNIA CITIES FOR SELF-RELIANCE JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY

PENDING THE OUTCOME OF STATE JUDICIAL, REGULATORY, AND LEGISLATIVE

PROCEEDINGS
WHEREAS, the City of Compton is currently a member of the California Cities for Self-Reliance Joint Powers Authority (JPA); and
WHEREAS, recent statewide judicial and regulatory actions, including the May 21 preliminary injunction decision, subsequent regulatory updates issued by the Attorney General, the June 5 amicus filing, and the scheduled June 30 court hearing, have created uncertainty regarding the governance and enforcement of gaming-related activities; and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 549 (SB 549), adopted in 2023, grants federally recognized tribes standing to pursue declaratory and injunctive relief in state court concerning alleged violations of constitutional limitations on non-tribal gaming; and WHEREAS, while SB 549 does not itself determine the legality of specific gaming practices, its implementation increases the potential for litigation involving cardrooms and municipalities, contributing to a fluid legal environment; and WHEREAS, the combined effect of the ongoing litigation, evolving regulatory guidance, and the implementation of SB 549 creates uncertainty for jurisdictions participating in gaming-related joint powers authorities; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to ensure that the City’s involvement in any joint powers’ authority remains aligned with the City’s best interests and is based on clear and stable legal direction; and
WHEREAS, temporarily withdrawing from the JPA will allow the City to pause its participation and reassess future involvement once the legal and regulatory framework is more clearly defined; and
WHEREAS, withdrawal at this time does not preclude the City from rejoining the JPA in the future should the City Council determine such participation is beneficial.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COMPTON DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The City Manager is hereby directed to initiate all necessary actions and provide any required notices to formally withdraw the City of Compton from the California Cities for Self-Reliance Joint Powers Authority.

Section 2. Withdrawal shall become effective in accordance with the procedures set forth in the JPA Agreement.

Section 3. City staff shall continue monitoring state judicial, regulatory, and legislative developments, including the implementation of SB 549, and return to the City Council with updates or recommendations as appropriate.

Resolution No. ____________