Agenda — Hidden Hills City Council, April 10, 2023

1. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
NOTE: The Hidden Hills City Council and City staf will be participating in this meeting inperson in the Council Chambers, at the teleconference locations noted above and via remote video conferencing (Zoom). Members of the public also have the opportunity to participate inperson in the Council Chambers (attendees will be required to follow the current State and County public health guidelines) or electronically via Zoom. Refer to “Public Participation” below. If you are an individual with a disability and need a reasonable modification or accommodation pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) please contact Deana Gonzalez at 818-888-9281 or staf @hiddenhillscity.org. If you are hearing impaired and would like to watch the meeting on ZOOM, once in the meeting room select the button “live transcript” and then select “show subtitles”. Members of the public will have the opportunity to address the City Council on agenda and non-agenda items in person, via Zoom or by email as indicated below.

Virtual Webinar Via ZOOM Platform: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/85301490310 To Join by Phone: 669.900.6833 or 408.638.0968 and Enter Webinar ID: 853 0149 0310

PLEASE NOTE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL MAY ACT ON ANY ITEM LISTED ON

THE AGENDA

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
(IN-PERSON AND VIDEO CONFERENCE)
6165 Spring Valley Road

TELECONFERENCE LOCATIONS
Monday, April 10, 2023
5:30 PM
AGENDA

2. Council:

Mayor Steve Freedland
Mayor Pro Tem Eniko Gold
Council Member Joe Loggia
Council Member Laura McCorkindale
Council Member Larry G. Weber
Staff:

City Manager Kerry Kallman
City Attorney Roxanne Diaz
City Engineer Dirk Lovett
City Clerk Deana Gonzalez
Administrative Analyst Chantelle Limon

ROLL CALL

3. AUDIENCE
Members of the audience are invited to address the Council at this time on items that are not on the printed agenda. Please observe the time limit of three minutes.

Per California Government Code Section 54954.2, the City Council is prohibited from discussing or taking immediate action on any item not on the agenda unless it can be demonstrated that the item is of an emergency nature, or the need to take action arose subsequent to the posting of the agenda.

Public Participation:

Public participation on agenda and non-agenda items is allowed in the following ways: in person in the City Council Chambers, at the teleconference locations, by email or if attending the meeting virtually, live public comments may be received by Zoom. Public comment on agenda and nonagenda items will be accepted by email to [email protected] prior to the meeting and the email should identify the agenda item number in the subject line of the email or indicate that it pertains to a non-agenda item. Such emails must be received by the City Clerk no later than 3:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting. Any emails received shall be read into the record.

Alternatively, members of the public may join the meeting via the Zoom platform and the Mayor will call on you for public comment. To ask a question or comment during a meeting, click on the icon labeled "Participants" at the bottom center of your PC or Mac screen. At the bottom of the window on the right side of the screen, click the button labeled "Raise Hand." Your digital hand is now raised. To “Raise Hand” on an audio only call, press*6 to unmute and *9 to “Raise Hand”.

4. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS

5. STAFF COMMENTS

6. PUBLIC HEARING

6.A Consideration of Resolution No.1008 to Approve an Application for a Minor Accommodation for an Alteration and Remodel to an Existing Nonconforming Building at 5650 Jed Smith Road and Find that the Minor Accommodation is Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15305(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS

SITTING AS THE PLANNING AGENCY, APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A MINOR

ACCOMMODATION TO ALTER AN EXISTING NONCONFORMING RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 5650 JED SMITH ROAD AND FINDING THAT THE PROJECT IS

EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
PURSUANT TO 15305(A) OF THE STATE CEQA GUIDELINES
6 - 4-10-23.pdf
6 - elevations.jpg
6 - site plan.jpg

7. CONSENT CALENDAR

7.A City Council Minutes – March 13, 2023 Regular Meeting 7A - 4-10-23.pdf

7.B Demand List
7B - 4-10-23.pdf

7.C Disbursement List – February
7C - 4-10-23.pdf

7.D Financial/Treasurer's Report - February
7D - 4-10-23.pdf

7.E Investment Statement – February
7E - 4-10-23.pdf

7.F Consideration of a Letter of Support for California Assembly Bill 1708 7F - 4-10-23.pdf

7.G Letter of Opposition to Sheriff Civilian Oversight Commission’s Recommendation to Involuntary Rotate Deputies Every Five Years
7G - 4-10-23.pdf

7.H Consideration of Approval of Resolution No. 1009 to Allow the City of Hidden Hills the Blanket Authority to File Applications for Grant Funds from the Los Angeles County Regional Park and Open Space District For Measure A Funding for Projects and Programs 7H - 4-10-23.pdf

8. OLD BUSINESS

8.A
Discussion Regarding the Food Truck Agreements for the 2023 Fiesta and Direction and Approval for an Agreement with In-N-Out Burger or Tommy’s Hamburgers and Authorization for a Deposit and Payment
8 - 4-10-23.pdf

9. ADJOURNMENT
Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at City Hall located at 6165 Spring Valley Road, Hidden Hills and on the City’s website at www.hiddenhillscity.org.

Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, any qualified individuals with a disability who plan to attend or otherwise participate in the City Council meeting and who may require accommodations or auxiliary aids should contact the City Clerk at 818/888-9281 at least 48 hours before the meeting.

This agenda was posted on Friday, April 7, 2023.
___________________________________
Deana L. Gonzalez, CMC, City Clerk

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
(IN-PERSON AND VIDEO CONFERENCE)
6165 Spring Valley Road
Monday, March 13, 2023 at 5:30 p.m.

NOTE: The Hidden Hills City Council and City staff will be participating in this meeting inperson in the Council Chambers, at the teleconference locations noted above and via remote video conferencing (Zoom). Members of the public also have the opportunity to participate inperson in the Council Chambers (attendees will be required to follow the current State and County public health guidelines) or electronically via Zoom. Refer to “Public Participation” below. If you are an individual with a disability and need a reasonable modification or accommodation pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) please contact Deana Gonzalez at 818-888-9281 or [email protected]. If you are hearing impaired and would like to watch the meeting on ZOOM, once in the meeting room select the button “live transcript” and then select “show subtitles”. Members of the public will have the opportunity to address the City Council on agenda and non-agenda items in person, via Zoom or by email as indicated below.

MINUTES

CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hidden Hills was duly held via teleconference and in person on Monday, March 13, 2023 at the hour of 5:30 p.m. Mayor Steve Freedland called the meeting to order and presided thereover.

ROLL CALL
Council: Mayor Steve Freedland
Mayor Pro Tem Eniko Gold
Council Member Joe Loggia
Council Member Laura McCorkindale
Council Member Larry G. Weber
Staff: City Manager Kerry Kallman
City Attorney Roxanne Diaz
City Engineer Dirk Lovett
Administrative Analyst Chantelle Limón
Accounting Specialist Theresa Hernandez
City Clerk Deana L. Gonzalez
City Council Minutes
March 13, 2023

Page 2 ends

AUDIENCE
There were no comments.

CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS
Happy Birthday to Council Member McCorkindale on March 19 and to Accounting Specialist Theresa Hernandez on March 20.

Mayor Pro Tem Gold wished former Council Member Stuart Siegel happy birthday on March 25.

She also stated that she attended the 38th annual women of the year awards which honors those women who do a lot for the community. She also requested that Council Member Loggia serve with her on the Salary Survey and Compensation Ad Hoc Committee with her, for which he accepted.

Councilmember McCorkindale stated that she’d like Council Member Loggia to join her on the Ad Hoc Burglary Committee, for which he accepted.

STAFF COMMENTS
There were no comments.

CONSENT CALENDAR
A. City Council Minutes – February 15, 2023 Special Meeting B. City Council Minutes – February 27, 2023 Regular Meeting C. Demand List
D. Ordinance No. 384 Amending the Hidden Hills Municipal Code Regarding Senate Bill 9 Subdivisions and Development Projects and Finding the Ordinance is Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act Regulations Section 15061(b)(3) Upon MOTION of Council Member Weber, seconded by Councilmember Loggia, and carried unanimously on roll call vote, it was resolved to approve items A, B, C, and D of the consent calendar as submitted.

City Council Minutes
March 13, 2023

Page 3 ends

OLD BUSINESS
Review and Consideration of An Underground Utility Assessment Program and Direction from City Council on Proceeding with the Program
City Manager Kallman provided a brief report regarding the subject item and introduced Jeff Cooper from NV5 to present his comprehensive review of the program:
the scope of work has been completed; all the overhead utilities have been mapped (information provided by the City and SCE), and all files will be transferred to the city, so that the City has documentation on where all the existing overhead utilities are located and a master plan can be created; then, based on all those maps a cost estimate to underground all the City’s overhead utilities is approximately $81 million, which is based on the cost of linear foot, current construction costs, and a 20% contingency for unexpected issues that occur; the other part of the scope was to look at financial options for the city to pay for undergrounding all overhead utilities; what is recommended is to put in place a program to allow property owners to do an assessment district; a boilerplate petition package has been created to give property honors an option to speed up the process, while the City continues with its undergrounding processes; if the City Council wants to have a program available for property owners, the rules or codes are already established by the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913, and a proposition called Proposition 218, which provides property owners an explanation of the program and allow them, if they're interested, to start the process.

Mayor Pro Tem Gold thanked Mr. Cooper for his presentation. She asked if residents decide to form an assessment district and go ahead with the project, do they have to pay prevailing wages, as the City does pay prevailing wages?
Mr. Cooper responded that prevailing wages will have to be paid when the project is built and those costs will be built into the construction costs already.

Mayor Pro Tem Gold also asked when forming an assessment district, can only those residents who have a pole on their property participate or can anybody who will benefit be able to participate?
Mr. Cooper replied that residents are not required to have a pole on their property to participate and that if it is beneficial for a property owner, they can certainly participate.

Mayor Freedland asked if residents could be compelled to participate? City Attorney Diaz stated that once the Assessment District is formed, those who are within that district will have to participate.

City Council Minutes
March 13, 2023

Page 4 ends

Mayor Freedland asked how is the money extracted from the people that do not want to participate? Mr. Cooper explained that once the district is formed per code, a cash collection letter will be sent and residents are given time to either write a check out and pay off the assessment, or they can let it go to Bond, and then it’s included on their property taxes, usually over a 20-year period.

Council Member Loggia wanted to confirm a couple items from the report, including that there are only 155 homes connected to the overhead transmission lines, so that means the majority of Hidden Hills would need to underground? Also, his other questions are regarding the funding mechanisms, which are the enhanced infrastructure financing district, utility users, tax, mello-roos, and utility surcharge. Is there a percentage statewide preference of other cities? Mr. Cooper replied that the most common is assessment districts.

Council Member Loggia inquired that if cities have made the decision to spend the amount of money to underground the whole city and assess every resident in the city? Mr. Cooper responded that the keyword assessment requires that people have a benefit and it requires a vote. A City can't just levy an assessment without going through this process. However, as an example, the City of San Diego put a franchise fee on their power bills and raise fees on their power bills to underground overhead utilities in the City of San Diego. This method is pretty controversial, and he is certainly not recommending this way of doing it.

Council Member Loggia asked if there examples of cities that have implemented the assessment district option and have given the City the option to participate in some percentage up to a number per year. For example, if the City wanted to encourage residents to actually do this assessment district people and the City to subsidize however many projects up to a 1 million dollars per year on a first come first, serve basis. Is that done anywhere? Is that something the City could do? Mr. Cooper responded that the hasn’t seen that done before, however, the City of Newport Beach has done many, many successful assessment districts. and the way they encourage it is they will upfront the soft cost, like doing the petition and doing the engineers report. They basically sponsor it until the district is approved. They have the option of just donating those funds to the project. or they can be paid by back by the assessment district. So, one option, if the City wants to encourage these projects, is to have funds available to do the upfront work, which is the petition, the engineers report and the ballot. and then, once you have an approved ballot and you have a real project, then the city could have the choice of getting paid back or just incentivize it to the property owners.

City Manager Kallman commented to Council Member Loggia’s point, the Council can make a policy to spend up to a 1 million dollars per year, and to simplify it, it would be if it was a 20 million dollar project the city and it gets under way. The city will pay off the first 1 million to get it down to 19 million dollars, and that's what the residents would be paying back.

City Council Minutes
March 13, 2023

Page 5 ends

Council Member Loggia stated that 81 million dollars is a big pill for us to swallow as a city. So how can we translate for every 1 million dollars we put in? If we could make that 10 million dollars that somebody else is putting in, they benefit because they get it cheaper. If that's what they want to do, we benefit because we're getting more undergrounding in the city. That is the kind of a program, I think, we should explore.

Mayor Freedland thinks it’s a great idea as my concern is that it's going to be difficult to get people to vote to tax themselves, and form these districts, so anything we can do to incentivize them I think is a win-win.

Mr. Cooper added that he has helped the City of Santa Monica with street lighting projects, and they've had a policy in those districts that if the district is approved and successful, and they move ahead with the project, the City will pay for half the cost.

Council Member Weber is still concerned about those residents who vote against an assessment district because they can't afford it. There's still a lot of people in Hidden Hills that have lived here for 50 and 60 years, and I can't see them being driven into an assessment district when they can't afford to do that, because the assessment on top of their property tax will probably be more than double with their property taxes right now. Low property taxes are probably what keeps them here.

City Attorney Diaz clarified that forming assessment districts is a two-step process. First there's a petition process, and once there is 60 percent of interest to move forward with the petition, then there's a Proposition 218 process, and that's a majority protest process. So, there's one more opportunity for residents to say n, even if the petition process goes underway, and the amount of the assessment depend on: how big that district is, how small that the district is, what's already underground and what's not. It's hard to say whether it's going to be just as expensive as a regular property tax assessment, for example based on value of property. Here it's talking about the cost of the underground work the value of it, and how your property receives a benefit more than the property next door. So, it's hard to quantify what that number will be, and whether it will be extraordinary or not. It will be an expense, though. It will come back to the City Council for a vote and if it’s a really close vote the City Council could decide on a majority vote not to proceed.

Mayor Freedland stated that the City has an ordinance that requires people to re-roof their house if they have a wood shake roof that needs repair, and it's over a certain square footage. But there's also an appeal process that if it's a financial hardship, they can appeal that and Council can take that into consideration. So there is a little bit of consideration that's available to Council to not force the issue on somebody. We clearly don't want to run anybody out of town and to Council Member Weber’s point, and it is a very valid question and a concern we should have.

Mayor Pro Tem Gold asked Mr. Cooper what the smallest assessment district he has seen? Mr.

Cooper responded that the smallest district he’s ever contemplated is about 20 parcels. The largest City Council Minutes
March 13, 2023

Page 6 ends

one he’s ever done is 965 Parcels in Newport Beach. Most of your districts are around 50 to 100 parcels. There is a better economy scale the more parcels are in the district.

Mayor Pro Tem Gold then asked staff what the smallest pole removal pole project was? City Manager Kallman commented that the last project was 9 polls, and that was that was really based on the on the run that we could get. A total of 35 poles have been removed in the City. When staff looks at projects, it is always an area that has a lot of poles in a row. Mr. Cooper, can we do an assessment district for 10 poles?
City Attorney Diaz commented that looking at the 1913 act, or maybe it was the 1911 act, there's a provision that gets incorporated that the petition can't be signed by not less than 5 owners of accessible land, so there's a minimum threshold.

Mr. Cooper added that it isn't really economically feasible to do a district with only 5 parcels, because it's quite a process, so his rule of thumb would be 10.

Resident Mathy Wasserman inquired if interest is spread out over the 20-year property tax bill? Mr. Cooper responded that those who pay cash will not pay any of the finance charges or any interest. Those that want to pay over time will not get the cash discount and will pay a little bit bigger amount plus interest over time and typically the interest rates are fixed.

Mayor Freedland asked if the assessment district has to be contiguous.

Mr. Cooper responded that it pretty much does, but we can stop and start it. For example, if there is a whole block that was very interested in it, we want to focus on that block, but if there was an area next to it that just didn't want to be in it we want to respect that. Instead of trying to get more people in you try to keep the boundaries where people benefit, and as many people as you can that would be interested in doing this that way. We avoid bringing people in that don't want to do this.

He really hasn't met anyone that doesn't want their overhead utilities undergrounded.

Council Member Loggia asked if there are 12 residents on a street and 7 want to be part of the assessment district and 5 do not, can the 7 residents split cost of the assessment district, including those 5 parcels that can’t afford to be in it?
City Attorney Diaz stated that it could not be done that way as it changes the benefit analysis and makes it vulnerable to challenge.

City Manager Kallman is asking for a consensus that the Council would like to move forward with this project. If that is the consensus then several steps will be taken. Staff look into some of the questions that have been voiced tonight and bring those answers back to the Council. Staff would like some direction on incentivizing. Is the consensus of the Council to research incentives? Some City Council Minutes
March 13, 2023

Page 7 ends

money should be set aside for the first round of deposits all the way up to Council Member Loggia’s idea. Staff will take a look at some municipal code updates to make sure that our code is aligned with doing this, and then finally, staff would recommend that we enter into a longer term agreement with NV5, who will continue to work side by side with City staff on this project as it involves very complicated time and consuming things with an enormous benefit. Staff would love to hear feedback from the Council Members.

Mayor Freedland appreciates the consultant’s comment that this is not to replace what the City is currently doing. If we were to see a tremendous interest in people doing this, then I could see, utilizing whatever money we had set aside to do undergrounding projects and using it to incentivize, because the larger the project the better benefit for everybody. Personally, I'm leaning towards what Council Member Loggia suggested as far as putting up some real incentives that actually puts a dent in the project for the people who are interested in assessing themselves.

Mayor Pro Tem Gold echoed Council Member Weber's concerns, and she is glad to hear that there is one more step, for the Council, is the last vote on this issue, because I think we really have to be cognizant of people's limited finances. Some people are elderly on fixed income, so we can't forget about that. But I'm all for moving forward with this and just being very considerate of our constituents in the process.

Council Member Weber agrees with moving forward and as far as incentives, they should be on a case-by-case basis.

Councilmember McCorkindale agrees with moving forward on assessment district; however, in terms of incentives, she thinks the Council has to look at in conjunction with the upcoming meeting where we're going to discuss the old way of doing it, and the assessments would have to balance out with the people who are getting the full benefit of the city money. So, she doesn’t think Council can answer that, until they have the second part of this conversation.

Council Member Loggia is in favor of moving forward and in favor of staff, moving forward and flushing out more of the details to see how something like this would work

NEW BUSINESS
A. Consideration of (1) Approval of an Agreement with Tommy’s Hamburgers and Payment of a $7,582.50 Deposit for Two Trucks to Serve Lunch at the 2023 Fiesta and (2) Approval of an Agreement with Southland Shows and Payment of a $39,250 Deposit to Provide Amusement Rides, Carnival Games, and Prizes for the 2023 Fiesta Administrative Analyst Limón presented the following report:

City Council Minutes
March 13, 2023

Page 8 ends

the annual two-day Hidden Hills Fiesta celebration returns this year, scheduled for September 30 and October 1, 2023; burgers for lunch in front of the Community Center on Saturday afternoon is a Fiesta tradition; in recent years, In-N-Out burger has provided lunch service, bringing two of their food trucks; unfortunately this year, In-N-Out is not available on September 30, staff requested to be placed on a waiting list; instead, staff inquired with Tommy’s Hamburgers about providing a similar lunch service as In-N-Out and they are available, providing two food trucks with a menu of double chili cheeseburgers, hamburgers, or cheeseburgers, along with fries, and a drink; should In-NOut become available, Tommy’s offers a cancelation policy and will honor a full refund if the order is canceled 14 days prior to the event; the proposed estimate for catering provided by Tommy’s Hamburgers is $10,110 with a deposit of $7,582.50 due now; the Saturday night carnival is the focal point of Fiesta with attractions for all ages. In 2021, the City contracted with Southland Shows for the first time, and then returned in 2022; staff has had an excellent experience working with the vendor and resident feedback supports bringing them back to Fiesta 2023; the proposed total cost to Southland Shows is $78,500 with a deposit of $39,250 due now.

Council Member Loggia has concerns with the terms and conditions of the contract with Tommy’s Hamburgers. He states that in the agreement that the City is to indemnify and hold harmless Tommy’s Burgers for anything that happens at the Fiesta lunch. In his experience, these things are mutual to hold harmless and mutual indemnification. He has requested that the City Attorney review this contract further.

City Attorney Diaz did point out that there is an exception in Tommy’s Hamburgers contract with respect to the indemnity, if it's the gross negligence of Tommy's, and its products and it's vehicle.

So, certainly, if there was a food poisoning, that would probably come under gross negligence, but she does understand Council Member Loggia's concern, and certainly she is happy to as part of the recommendation moving forward that the City Council would indicate that the contract is approved in the form negotiated and approved by the City Manager and the City Attorney with respect to insurance and indemnity. If it is non-negotiable by Tommy’s Hamburgers, then staff will bring it back to the Council to make that business decision.

As there was no further discussion, upon MOTION of Council Member Weber, seconded by Council Member Loggia, and unanimously carried on a roll call vote, it was resolved approve: (1) City Council Minutes
March 13, 2023

Page 9 ends

a deposit in the amount of $7,582.50 to Tommy’s Hamburgers and (2) a deposit in the amount of $39,250 to Southland Shows; and (3) authorize staff to prepare an Agreement with each vendor and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the agreements on behalf of the City.

B. Consideration of Approval of a Construction Contract with Martin Construction, Inc. for Phase 1A Fiber Conduit Construction in the Area of Ashley Ridge and Jim Bridger Roads
City Manager Kallman presented the following report:
at its meeting of in September of 2022, the City Council approved a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with fiber consultant Onward to design the City’s Fiber to the Home Project, who is currently working on the design, which will be done in five phases, including trenching, conduit, and junction boxes to place fiber in the communities roads and trails; it came to staffs attention last year that the Hidden Hills Community Association (HHCA) scheduled the reconstruction of Jim Bridger and the other roads in the Ashley Ridge subdivision for this April, which will include full street removal and replacement on some portions of the roads, and asphalt overlay on others; to avoid asphalt disruption and additional costs associated with fiber trenching after the roads are reconstructed, staff requested Onward to prepare a Phase 1A plan that would complete a portion of the trenching work impacting Jim Bridger Road, Ashley Ridge Road, Walker Road, and Butterfield Road, prior to April; at the HHCA’s Board meeting in August 2022, the Board authorized the City of Hidden Hills to trench and install the Phase 1A fiber conduit prior to the scheduled resurfacing of roads within the Jim Bridger/Ashley Ridge area and an encroachment permit (no fee) for the City was issued; bids received are listed below and Martin Construction, Inc. has the lowest bid of $359,390; since the original bids were received, a redesign and scheduling alternatives resulted in significant cost savings of $162,523, updating the quote to $196,867; all work should be completed by mid-May/early June, with a commitment to work on Saturdays should that be necessary; the City Fiber to the Home Ad-hoc Committee’s recommendation that the City Council award a contract to Martin Construction to proceed with the Phase 1A fiber conduit work at this time.

Onward Consultant Nick Keeler presented a PowerPoint reiterating many factors in the staff report presented by City Manager Kallman.

Council Member Loggia asked staff if the ask for approval amount, including the 10% contingency, includes additional funds for any unforeseen delays. City Engineer responded that City Council Minutes
March 13, 2023

Page 10 ends

that was a great question and confirmed that it did not. City Engineer Lovett suggested that authorizing the City Manager to spend up to an additional $25,000 would help not delaying the project, bringing the total cost for this project to approximately $241,000.

Mayor Pro Tem Gold stated that the commitment from the City Council to their constituents to bring Fiber to the Home is most important and hopes that this vote will go forward tonight.

Council Member Weber agreed with Mayor Pro Tem Gold and also confirmed with staff that a majority of the funding of this project will be coming from the American Rescue Plan funds and the balance will come from the general fund reserves.

Council Member McCorkindale thanked the consultant for bringing this project in at a lower cost and also the HHCA for their willingness to delay the project so that it will benefit all those involved.

Upon MOTION of Council Member Weber, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Gold and unanimously carried on roll call vote it was resolved to approve the construction contract with Martin Construction Phase 1 conduit construction in the form approved by the City Attorney in the amount of $216,553.70 including a 10% contingency, and authorize the City Manager to spend up to an additional $25,000 for any unforeseen costs.

C. Review of Fiscal Year 2022/23 Mid-Year Budget Report City Manager Kallman presented the following report:
staff anticipates about $4.4 million dollars in General Fund revenue this year, which is approximately 60% more than anticipated; the General Fund revenue property taxes expect to come at about $1.4 million about 5% more than originally anticipated; Building and Safety revenue is strong, and we are at our budgeted amount; expenses are doing fine; there were some changes to the budgeted expenses this year, mainly in the capital projects; staff was hoping that the undergrounding little hollow project would be underway at this point, however, looking at the calendar it's not mathematically possible to get this under way before the end of this fiscal year, so staff is recommending to remove those funds from the budget; the Council did authorize a budget adjustment over the summer, and that was for City Council Minutes
March 13, 2023

Page 11 ends

the additional costs related to recycling water; the City did receive a total of $452,000 from the American Rescue plan, which has been spent first on design engineering.

Mayor Freedland thanked staff for the report. He also suggested that since Mayor Pro Tem Gold was on the 2022-2023 budget committee, that she remain on it and be accompanied this year by Council Member Loggia. Mayor Pro Tem Gold and Council Member Loggia and the rest of the council agreed.

ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned. _____________________________
Steve Freedland, Mayor
ATTEST:

Deana L. Gonzalez, CMC, City Clerk

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
Cash Disbursements
February, 2023
Date Check Payee Description Amount Fund
02/07/2023 5117 LA County - Dept of Public Works RM/Mureau Rd - TS Maintenance 112.88 Gas Tax-HUTA 02/02/2023 ONLINE APPS merchant account fees 298.62
02/02/2023 ONLINE APPS merchant account fees 190.01
02/07/2023 13729 Delta Dental dental insurance - Feb 2023 345.83 02/07/2023 13730 VSP vision insurance - Feb 2023 189.94 02/07/2023 13731 William Frankel Plumbing kitchen sink repair 185.00 02/07/2023 13732 Safetech Communications, Inc. phone service 205.00 02/07/2023 13733 All American Generator Services generator service 495.00 02/07/2023 13736 Eniko Gold reimbursement - Conference parking 48.00 02/07/2023 13734 Cragoe Pest Services, Inc. RM/Mureau Rd - pest control service 90.00 02/07/2023 13735 Conejo Awards name badges 85.71
02/07/2023 13737 Joseph Loggia reimbursement - Conference parking 53.60 02/07/2023 ONLINE LVMWD utilities 39.55
02/07/2023 ONLINE SoCal Gas utilities 443.61
02/07/2023 ONLINE SoCal Edison Acct 2081 utilities 388.61 02/07/2023 ONLINE SoCal Edison Acct 3967 car charging & bicycle repair station 155.36 02/07/2023 13738 Thyssenkrupp elevator service 200.58
02/08/2023 ONLINE Spectrum/ Charter cable/internet - Feb 2023 343.05 02/14/2023 13752 Suite Renovation carpet cleaning 600.00 02/14/2023 13755 Inner-I Security City Hall security cameras - service calls 322.00 02/14/2023 13756 AT&T/ CalNet3 elevator phone 26.65
02/14/2023 13757 Xerox lease & usage 303.16
02/14/2023 13758 Chase Avenue Production newsletter - Feb 2023 397.44 02/15/2023 13761 LA County - Assessor mapbook pages 270.00 02/23/2023 ONLINE Chase Cardmember supplies, refreshments & dues, misc 1,223.60 02/23/2023 ONLINE Chase Cardmember Conference registrations/meetings 703.60 TOTAL 7,716.80

Page 1 ends

Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Table of Contents Page
Your Independent Investment Manager and/or Advisor

BEACON POINTE ADVISORS LLC
24 CORPORATE PLAZA STE 150
NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660-7017
1 (949) 718-1600
Need help reading this statement?
Visit www.schwab.com/StatementGuide for more information.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023
CITY OF HIDDEN HILLSMGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTSATTN KERRY KELLMAN6165 SPRING VALLEY RDHIDDEN HILLS CA 91302-1246 The custodian of your brokerage account is: Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.

Managed Account Marketplace
Belle Haven Investments, L.P.

Belle Haven Taxable Ladder PLUS

Page 1 of 41 ends

02/28-00000-TTCL0921-145700 *
Your Independent Investment Advisor is not affiliated with or an agent of Schwab and Schwab does not supervise or endorse your Advisor.

Terms and Conditions...................................................................................................2 Change in Account Value..............................................................................................3 Asset Composition........................................................................................................3 Gain or (Loss) Summary...............................................................................................4 Income Summary.........................................................................................................4 Cash Transactions Summary........................................................................................5 Realized Gain or (Loss)..............................................................................................36 Transaction Detail.......................................................................................................37 Bank Sweep Activity...................................................................................................40 Trades Pending Settlement.........................................................................................40 Endnotes For Your Account........................................................................................41 Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Terms and Conditions
Account Number
6201-0150
GENERAL INFORMATION AND KEY TERMS:

This Account statement is furnished solely by Charles Schwab & your Schwab statement, products or services, please write to the Client Advocacy Team at Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., Attention: Client Advocacy Team, 211 Main St., San Francisco, CA 94105, USA, of address or phone number, you may not receive important notifications about your Account, and trading or other restrictions might be placed on adjusted cost basis information (if applicable), certain payments to you and credits to your Account during the calendar year.

Retain this statement for income tax purposes. A financial statement for your inspection is available at Schwab's offices or a copy will be mailed to you upon written request. Any third party trademarks appearing herein are the property of their respective owners.

Schwab and Charles Schwab Bank are affiliates of each other and subsidiaries of the Charles Schwab Corporation.
© 2016 Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. ("Schwab"). All rights reserved.

Member SIPC.
(0221-117W)
IN CASE OF ERRORS OR DISCREPANCIES: If you find an
error or discrepancy relating to your brokerage activity (other than an electronic fund transfer) you must notify us promptly, but no later than 10 days after this statement is sent or made available to you. If this statement shows that we have mailed or delivered security certificate(s) that you have not received, notify Schwab immediately.

You may call us at 800-435-4000. (Outside the U.S., call +1-415-667-8400.) If you're a client of an independent investment advisor, call us at 800-515-2157. Any oral communications should be re-confirmed in writing to further protect your rights, including rights under the Securities Investor Protection Act (SIPA). If you do not so notify us, you agree that the statement activity and Account balance are correct for all purposes with interest and/or accrued dividends on positions held in your Account, but the interest and/or dividends have not been received into your account. Schwab makes no representation that the amounts shown (or any other amount) will be received. Accrued amounts are not covered by SIPC account protection until actually received and held in the Account. provide tax advice and encourages you to consult with your tax professional. Please view the Cost Basis Disclosure Statement for additional information on how gain (or loss) is calculated and how Schwab reports adjusted cost basis information to the IRS.

Co., Inc. ("Schwab") for your Account at Schwab ("Account"). Unless otherwise defined herein, capitalized terms have the same meanings as in your Account Agreement. If you receive any other communication from any source other than Schwab which purports to represent your holdings at Schwab (including balances held at a Depository Institution) you should verify its content with this statement.

AIP (Automatic Investment Plan) Customers: Schwab receives remuneration in connection with certain transactions effected through Schwab. If you participate in a systematic investment program through Schwab, the additional information normally detailed on a trade confirmation will be provided upon request.

Average Daily Balance: Average daily composite of all cash balances that earn interest and all loans from Schwab that are charged interest. as your agent and custodian in establishing and maintaining your Deposit Account(s) as a feature of your brokerage account(s). Deposit accounts held through bank sweep features constitute direct obligations of one of more FDIC insured banks ("Affiliated Banks") that are affiliated with Schwab and are not obligations of Schwab. Funds swept to Affiliated Banks are eligible for deposit insurance from the FDIC up to the applicable limits for each bank for funds held in the same insurable capacity. The balance in the Deposit Accounts can be withdrawn on your order and the proceeds returned to your brokerage account or remitted to you as provided in your Account Agreement. For information on FDIC insurance and its limits, as well as other important disclosures about the bank sweep feature(s) in your account, please refer to the Cash Features Disclosure Statement available online or from a Schwab representative. demand which, although accounted for on our books of record, is not segregated and may be used in the conduct of this firm's business. transactions were effected by Schwab acting as a principal for its own account, except for the reinvestment of Schwab dividends, for which an independent broker-dealer acted as the buying agent. Further information on these transactions will be furnished upon written request.

Benefit Plans features, interest is paid for a period that may differ from the Statement Period. Balances include interest paid as indicated on your statement by Schwab or one or more of its Affiliated Banks. These balances do not include interest that may have accrued during the Statement Period after interest is paid. The interest paid may include interest that accrued in the prior Statement Period. For the Schwab One Interest feature, interest accrues daily from the second-to-last business day of the prior month and is posted on the second-to-last business day of the current month. For the bank sweep feature(s), interest accrues daily from the 16th day of the prior month and is credited/posted on the first business day after the 15th of the current month.

If, on any given day, the interest that Schwab calculates for the Free Credit Balances in the Schwab One Interest feature in your brokerage account is less than $.005, you will not accrue any interest on that day. For balances held at banks affiliated with Schwab in the Bank Sweep and Bank Sweep for Benefit Plans features, interest will margin account and special memorandum account maintained for you under Section 220.5 of Regulation T issued by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. The permanent record of the separate account as required by Regulation T is available for your inspection.

Securities purchased on margin are Schwab's collateral for the loan to you. It is important that you fully understand the risks involved in trading securities on margin. These risks include:
your account(s) to maintain the required account equity without you entitled to an extension of time on a margin call.
requirements and the maintenance margin requirements for your Account at any time without advance written notice to you. on the last business day of the report period, normally the last trade price or bid as of market close. Unpriced securities denote that no market evaluation update is currently available. Price evaluations are obtained from outside parties. Schwab shall have no responsibility for the accuracy or timeliness of any such valuations. Pricing of assets not held at Schwab is for informational purposes only. Some securities, especially thinly traded equities in the OTC market or foreign markets, may not report the most current price and are indicated as Stale Priced.

For Limited Partnerships and Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) securities, you may see that the value reflected on your monthly account statement for this security is unpriced. NASD rules require that certain Limited Partnerships (direct participation programs) and Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) securities, that have not been priced within 18 months, must show as unpriced on customer statements.

Note that these securities are generally illiquid, the value of the securities will be different than its purchase price, and, if applicable, that accurate valuation information may not be available. the Market Price by the Quantity of Shares. This is the dollar value of your present holdings in your specified Schwab Account or a summary other than certain direct investments which may be held by a third party, are held in your Account. Values of certain Non-Publicly Traded Securities may be furnished by a third party as provided by Schwab's Account Agreement. Schwab shall have no responsibility for the accuracy or timeliness of such valuations. The Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC) does not cover many limited funds into which Free Credit Balances may be automatically invested pursuant to your Account Agreement. Schwab or an affiliate acts and receives compensation as the Investment Advisor, Transfer Agent, Shareholder Service Agent and Distributor for the Schwab Sweep Money Funds. The amount of such compensation is disclosed in the prospectus. The yield information for Schwab Sweep Money Funds is the current 7-day yield as of the statement period. Yields vary.

If on any given day, the accrued daily dividend for your selected sweep money fund as calculated for your account is less than ½ of 1 cent ($0.005), your account will not earn a dividend for that day.

In addition, if you do not accrue at least 1 daily dividend of $0.01 during a pay period, you will not receive a money market dividend for that period. Schwab and the Schwab Sweep Money Funds investment advisor may be voluntarily reducing a portion of a Schwab Sweep Money Fund's expenses. Without these reductions, yields are offered by Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., Member SIPC. Securities products and services, including unswept intraday funds and net credit balances held in brokerage accounts are not deposits or other obligations of, or guaranteed by, any bank, are not FDIC insured, and are subject to investment risk and may lose value. SIPC does not cover balances held at banks affiliated with Schwab in the Bank Sweep and Bank Sweep for Benefit Plans features. Please see your Cash Feature Disclosure Statement for more information on insurance coverage. (Loss) sections ("Gain/Loss Section(s)") contain a gain or a loss summary of your Account. This information has been provided on this statement at the request of your Advisor, if applicable. This information is not a Bank Sweep and Bank Sweep for Benefit Plans Features: Schwab acts Cash: Any Free Credit Balance owed by us to you payable upon Dividend Reinvestment Customers: Dividend reinvestment
Interest: For the Schwab One Interest, Bank Sweep, and Bank Sweep for accrue even if the amount is less than $.005.

Margin Account Customers: This is a combined statement of your • You can lose more funds than you deposit in the margin account. • Schwab can force the sale of securities or other assets in any of contacting you.
• You are not entitled to choose which assets are liquidated nor are • Schwab can increase both its "house" maintenance margin Market Price: The most recent price evaluation available to Schwab Market Value: The Market Value is computed by multiplying of the Market Value summed over multiple accounts.

Non-Publicly Traded Securities: All assets shown on this statement, partnership interests.

Schwab Sweep Money Funds: Includes the primary money market would have been lower.

Securities Products and Services: Securities products and services Yield to Maturity: This is the actual average annual return on a note if held to maturity.

Gain (or Loss): Unrealized Gain or (Loss) and Realized Gain or solicitation or a recommendation to buy or sell. Schwab does not Accrued Income: Accrued Income is the sum of the total accrued respect to those brokerage transactions.

IN CASE OF COMPLAINTS: If you have a complaint regarding or call Schwab Signature Alliance at 800-515-2157.

Address Changes: If you fail to notify Schwab in writing of any change your Account.

Additional Information:

We are required by law to report to the Internal Revenue Service Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 2 of 41 ends

Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Change in Account Value This Period Year to Date
Starting Value $ 9,573,614.72 $ 9,513,518.88
Credits 35,649.17 43,088.67
Debits 0.00 (11,975.98)
Transfer of Securities (In/Out) 0.00 0.00
Income Reinvested 0.00 0.00
Change in Value of Investments (69,603.08) (4,970.76)
Ending Value on 02/28/2023 $ 9,539,660.81 $ 9,539,660.81 Accrued Incomed94,513.44
Ending Value with Accrued Incomed
$ 9,634,174.25
Total Change in Account Value $ (33,953.91) $ 26,141.93 Total Change with Accrued Income
d $ 60,559.53
Asset Composition Market Value % of Account Assets
Cash and Bank SweepX,Z $ 13,251.15 <1%
Fixed Income 9,526,409.66 100%
Total Assets Long $ 9,539,660.81
Total Account Value $ 9,539,660.81 100%
Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 3 of 41 ends

Your Independent Investment Advisor is not affiliated with or an agent of Schwab and Schwab does not supervise or endorse your Advisor.

Account Value as of 02/28/2023:$ 9,539,660.81
Account Value [in Thousands]
5/22 8/22 11/22 2/23
0 2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 4 of 41 ends

Realized Gain or (Loss) This Period Unrealized Gain or (Loss) Gain or (Loss) Summary Short Term Long Term
All Investments $212.52b
$0.00b$(340,373.30) b
Values may not reflect all of your gains/losses; Schwab has provided accurate gain and loss information wherever possible for most investments. Cost basis may be incomplete or unavailable for some of your holdings and may change or be adjusted in certain cases. Statement information should not be used for tax preparation, instead refer to official tax documents. For additional information refer to Terms and Conditions.

This Period Year to Date
Income Summary Federally Tax-Exempt1 Federally Taxable Federally Tax-Exempt1 Federally Taxable Bank Sweep Interest 0.00 9.65 0.00 15.56
Corporate Bond and Other Interest 0.00 14,066.50 0.00 16,463.78 Municipal Bond Interest 625.00 20,248.02 625.00 25,222.11 Agency Security Interest 0.00 700.00 0.00 900.00
Total Income 625.00 35,024.17 625.00 42,601.45
Accrued Interest Paid 40.00 (535.27) 0.00 (535.27)
1Certain income in this category may qualify for state tax exemption; consult your tax advisor. 4Certain accrued interest paid on taxable bonds may be deductible; consult your tax advisor.

Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 5 of 41 ends

Cash Transactions Summary This Period Year to Date
Starting Cash* $ 6,409.53 $ 725.13
Deposits and other Cash Credits 0.00 0.00
Investments Sold 20,000.00 30,220.88
Dividends and Interest 35,649.17 43,088.67
Withdrawals and other Debits 0.00 0.00
Investments Purchased (48,807.55) (48,807.55)
Fees and Charges 0.00 (11,975.98)
Total Cash Transaction Detail 6,841.62 12,526.02
Ending Cash* $ 13,251.15 $ 13,251.15
*Cash (includes any cash debit balance) held in your account plus the value of any cash invested in a sweep money fund.

Investment Detail - Cash and Bank Sweep
Cash Starting Balance Ending Balance
% of Account
Assets
Cash 0.00 350.00 <1%
Total Cash 0.00 350.00 <1%
Bank Sweep Starting Balance Ending Balance
% of Account
Assets
Bank Sweep X,Z 6,409.53 12,901.15 <1%
Total Bank Sweep 6,409.53 12,901.15 <1%
Total Cash and Bank Sweep 13,251.15 <1%
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 6 of 41 ends

Investment Detail - Fixed Income
Par Market Price Market Value
Adjusted
Cost Basis
% of
Account
Assets
Unrealized
Gain or (Loss)
Estimated
Annual Income
Agency Securities Cost Basis Yield to Maturity

FEDERAL NTNL MO

2.875%23
20,000.0000 98.82750 19,765.50 19,732.40 <1% 33.10 575.00 DUE 09/12/23 19,732.40 4.38%
CUSIP: 3135G0U43
MOODY'S: Aaa S&P: AA+ Accrued Interest: 269.93
FHLB 3.875%23 170,000.0000 99.33340 168,866.78 169,742.90 2% (876.12) 6,587.50 DUE 09/15/23 169,742.90 4.03%
CUSIP: 3130ATDJ3
MOODY'S: Aaa S&P: NR Accrued Interest: 3,037.57
FHLB 4.3%23 250,000.0000 99.53030 248,825.75 250,010.31 3% (1,184.56) 10,750.00 DUE 09/26/23 250,010.31 4.29%
CUSIP: 3130ATGM3
MOODY'S: Aaa S&P: NR Accrued Interest: 4,628.47
FHLB 3.8%23 65,000.0000 99.15720 64,452.18 64,855.63 <1% (403.45) 2,470.00 DUE 09/29/23 64,855.63 4.02%
CALLABLE 03/29/23 AT
100.00000
CUSIP: 3130ATCV7
MOODY'S: Aaa S&P: NR Accrued Interest: 1,042.89
FHLB 4.02%23 400,000.0000 99.26940 397,077.60 399,819.41 4% (2,741.81) 16,080.00 DUE 09/29/23 399,819.41 4.06%
CALLABLE 03/29/23 AT
100.00000
CUSIP: 3130ATDT1
MOODY'S: Aaa S&P: NR Accrued Interest: 6,789.33
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 7 of 41 ends

Investment Detail - Fixed Income (continued)
Par Market Price Market Value
Adjusted
Cost Basis
% of
Account
Assets
Unrealized
Gain or (Loss)
Estimated
Annual Income
Agency Securities
(continued)
Cost Basis Yield to Maturity
FHLB 3.5%23 40,000.0000 98.74470 39,497.88 39,464.80 <1% 33.08 1,400.00 DUE 11/28/23 39,464.80 4.72%
CALLABLE 05/28/23 AT
100.00000
CUSIP: 3130ASY37
MOODY'S: Aaa S&P: AA+ Accrued Interest: 11.67
FHLB 3.875%23 295,000.0000 98.99890 292,046.76 293,684.36 3% (1,637.60) 11,431.25 DUE 12/08/23 293,684.36 4.26%
CUSIP: 3130ATDK0
MOODY'S: Aaa S&P: AA+ Accrued Interest: 2,635.54
FHLB 4%24 225,000.0000 98.77310 222,239.48 224,363.00 2% (2,123.52) 9,000.00 DUE 03/08/24 224,363.00 4.20%
CUSIP: 3130ATF28
MOODY'S: Aaa S&P: AA+ Accrued Interest: 4,050.00
FHLB 3.625%24 405,000.0000 98.40550 398,542.28 401,259.95 4% (2,717.67) 14,681.25 DUE 03/08/24 401,259.95 4.28%
CUSIP: 3130ATBM8
MOODY'S: Aaa S&P: AA+ Accrued Interest: 7,055.16
FHLB 4%24 295,000.0000 98.42280 290,347.26 294,279.13 3% (3,931.87) 11,800.00 DUE 06/20/24 294,279.13 4.14%
CUSIP: 3130ATAR8
MOODY'S: Aaa S&P: AA+ Accrued Interest: 5,277.22
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 8 of 41 ends

FEDERAL HOME LN MTG
4%24
10,000.0000 98.36300 9,836.30 9,839.50 <1% (3.20) 400.00 DUE 07/12/24 9,839.50 5.06%
CALLABLE 04/12/23 AT
100.00000
CUSIP: 3134GXZZ0
MOODY'S: Aaa S&P: AA+ Accrued Interest: 54.44
FHLB 4.125%24 295,000.0000 98.16020 289,572.59 293,987.50 3% (4,414.91) 12,168.75 DUE 12/19/24 293,987.50 4.29%
CALLABLE 03/19/23 AT
100.00000
CUSIP: 3130ATCL9
MOODY'S: Aaa S&P: AA+ Accrued Interest: 2,433.75

FEDERAL HOME LN MTG
4%25
20,000.0000 98.35510 19,671.02 19,849.60 <1% (178.58) 800.00 DUE 08/25/25 19,849.60 4.80%

MULTI STEP CPN
CALLABLE 05/25/23 AT
100.00000
CUSIP: 3134GXS62
MOODY'S: Aaa S&P: AA+ Accrued Interest: 13.33
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 9 of 41 ends

FEDERAL HOME LN

3.15%26
185,000.0000 95.85570 177,333.05 184,975.76 2% (7,642.71) 5,827.50 DUE 06/15/26 184,975.76 3.57%

MULTI STEP CPN
CALLABLE 03/15/23 AT
100.00000
CUSIP: 3134GXUY8
MOODY'S: Aaa S&P: AA+ Accrued Interest: 1,230.25
Total Agency Securities 2,675,000.0000 2,638,074.43 2,665,864.25 28% (27,789.82) 103,971.25 Total Cost Basis: 2,665,864.25
Total Accrued Interest for Agency Securities: 38,529.55 Par Market Price Market Value
Adjusted
Cost Basis
% of
Account
Assets
Unrealized
Gain or (Loss)
Estimated
Annual Income
Corporate Bonds Cost Basis Yield to Maturity
PROVIDENCE ST.

4.379%23
90,000.0000 99.43480 89,491.32 90,435.36 <1% (944.04) b3,941.10 DUE 10/01/23 90,512.43 3.88%
CUSIP: 743755AJ9
MOODY'S: A1 S&P: A+ Accrued Interest: 1,642.13
21ST CENTURY FOX AM
4%23
10,000.0000 99.01960 9,901.96 10,052.32 <1% (150.36) b400.00 DUE 10/01/23 10,078.20 3.46%
CUSIP: 90131HAA3
MOODY'S: WR S&P:

BBB+
Accrued Interest: 166.67
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 10 of 41 ends

Investment Detail - Fixed Income (continued)
Par Market Price Market Value
Adjusted
Cost Basis
% of
Account
Assets
Unrealized
Gain or (Loss)
Estimated
Annual Income
Corporate Bonds
(continued)
Cost Basis Yield to Maturity

STANFORD UNIVER

6.875%24
200,000.0000 101.28210 202,564.20 206,609.07 2% (4,044.87) b13,750.00 DUE 02/01/24 210,160.00 3.48%
CUSIP: 525555AB4
MOODY'S: Aaa S&P: AAA Accrued Interest: 1,145.83

TIME WARNER COS

7.57%24
190,000.0000 100.62640 191,190.16 201,462.51 2% (10,272.35) b14,383.00 DUE 02/01/24 222,656.47 1.47%
CUSIP: 887315BH1
MOODY'S: WR S&P:

BBBAccrued Interest: 1,198.58

HOWARD UNIVERSI

1.991%25
250,000.0000 90.83140 227,078.50 250,009.10 2% (22,930.60) b4,977.50 DUE 10/01/25 250,018.47 1.98%
CUSIP: 442851AP6
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 2,073.96

SAN DIEGO GAS & ELE
6%26
15,000.0000 102.62100 15,393.15 17,420.49 <1% (2,027.34) b900.00 DUE 06/01/26 18,408.75 1.27%
CUSIP: 797440BH6
MOODY'S: A1 S&P: A Accrued Interest: 225.00

BOSTON MEDICAL

4.519%26
100,000.0000 96.04550 96,045.50 108,039.81 1% (11,994.31) b4,519.00 DUE 07/01/26 110,659.45 2.12%
CUSIP: 10103DAA4
MOODY'S: Baa2 S&P: BBB Accrued Interest: 753.17
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 11 of 41 ends

HOWARD UNIVERSI

2.291%26
25,000.0000 89.63420 22,408.55 25,060.00 <1% (2,651.45) b572.75 DUE 10/01/26 25,084.75 2.22%
CUSIP: 442851AQ4
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 238.65

HOWARD UNIVERSI

2.657%26
10,000.0000 90.47550 9,047.55 10,170.24 <1% (1,122.69) b265.70 DUE 10/01/26 10,220.60 2.20%
CUSIP: 442851AH4
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 110.71

AMERICAN WATER CAPI
3%26
15,000.0000 92.61950 13,892.93 15,562.44 <1% (1,669.51) b450.00 DUE 12/01/26 15,674.90 2.01%
CALLABLE 09/01/26 AT
100.00000
CUSIP: 03040WAN5
MOODY'S: Baa1 S&P: A Accrued Interest: 112.50
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 12 of 41 ends

SOUTHERN CALIF G

2.95%27
260,000.0000 92.15350 239,599.10 258,779.41 3% (19,180.31) 7,670.00 DUE 04/15/27 258,779.41 3.04%
CALLABLE 03/15/27 AT
100.00000
CUSIP: 842434CW0
MOODY'S: A2 S&P: A Accrued Interest: 2,897.56
Total Corporate Bonds 1,165,000.0000 1,116,612.92 1,193,600.75 12% (76,987.83) b51,829.05 Total Cost Basis: 1,222,253.43
Total Accrued Interest for Corporate Bonds: 10,564.76
Par Market Price Market Value
Adjusted
Cost Basis
% of
Account
Assets
Unrealized
Gain or (Loss)
Estimated
Annual Income
Municipal Bonds Cost Basis Yield to Maturity

OH ST DPT ADMIN

0.371%23
90,000.0000 100.00000 90,000.00 88,529.60 <1% 1,470.40 333.90 BLDG COPS DUE 03/01/23 88,529.60 4.00%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 67755NJY2
MOODY'S: Aa2 S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 166.95

FRESNO CALIFORNI

3.18%23
25,000.0000 99.83700 24,959.25 25,036.54 <1% (77.29) b795.00 LEAS BLDG DUE 04/01/23 25,377.25 2.88%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 358184QG7
MOODY'S: A1 S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 331.25
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 13 of 41 ends

FULLERTON CA JUDGMT
6%33
20,000.0000 100.07300 20,014.60 20,161.25 <1% (146.65) b1,200.00 **CALLED** 20,163.80 5.89%
@100 EFF: 04/01/2023
PRE-REFUNDED 04/01/23
AT 100.00000
CUSIP: 359806AM8
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 500.00

POMONA CA PFA L

2.831%23
10,000.0000 99.78500 9,978.50 9,894.20 <1% 84.30 283.10 LEAS BLDG DUE 04/01/23 9,894.20 4.97%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 73208MCZ9
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 117.96

UNIVERSITY CALI

0.628%23
20,000.0000 99.12300 19,824.60 19,788.40 <1% 36.20 125.60 PUB EDUC DUE 05/15/23 19,788.40 1.47%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 91412HFK4
MOODY'S: Aa2 S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 36.98

BARSTOW CALIF P

3.109%23
55,000.0000 99.36000 54,648.00 55,009.88 <1% (361.88) b1,709.95 GP DUE 06/01/23 55,020.00 3.07%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 069042AA7
MOODY'S: NR S&P: A+ Accrued Interest: 427.49
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 14 of 41 ends

Investment Detail - Fixed Income (continued)
Par Market Price Market Value
Adjusted
Cost Basis
% of
Account
Assets
Unrealized
Gain or (Loss)
Estimated
Annual Income
Municipal Bonds
(continued)
Cost Basis Yield to Maturity
IL ST SLS TAX 3.49%23 265,000.0000 99.45300 263,550.45 262,057.30 3% 1,493.15 9,248.50 EXCISE TAX DUE 06/15/23 262,057.30 5.12%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 452227JM4
MOODY'S: NR S&P: A Accrued Interest: 1,952.46

CONNECTICUT ST
2%23
125,000.0000 98.99600 123,745.00 122,848.75 1% 896.25 2,500.00 GO UTX DUE 07/01/23 122,848.75 4.26%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 20772KJV2
MOODY'S: Aa3 S&P: AA- Accrued Interest: 416.67
BELL CA 3.5%23 10,000.0000 99.24500 9,924.50 9,864.00 <1% 60.50 350.00 GO UTX DUE 08/01/23 9,864.00 3.93%

OID TAXBL
CUSIP: 07786BCN8
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 29.17

SACRAMENTO CA PE

6.42%23
40,000.0000 100.43100 40,172.40 40,606.25 <1% (433.85) b2,568.00 REV LTX DUE 08/01/23 45,154.40 3.33%

XTRO TAXBL ASSURED
GUARA
CUSIP: 786056BB6
MOODY'S: A1 S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 214.00
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 15 of 41 ends

SOUTH EL MONTE CA

3.5%23
10,000.0000 99.28600 9,928.60 9,864.20 <1% 64.40 350.00 ALLC TAX DUE 08/01/23 9,864.20 5.37%

OID TAXBL ASSURED
GUARAN
CUSIP: 837680BE6
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 29.17

SACRAMENTO CN CA

5.73%23
100,000.0000 100.09600 29,201.24 32,954.26 <1% (3,753.02) b5,730.00 REV LTX DUE 08/15/23 39,483.23 3.13%

TAXBL ASSURED

GUARANTY M
CUSIP: 786091AE8
MOODY'S: A1 S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 254.67
FACTOR= .291732300

SACRAMENTO CN CA

5.73%23
10,000.0000 100.09600 2,920.12 2,937.32 <1% (17.20) 573.00 REV LTX DUE 08/15/23 2,937.32 223.27%

TAXBL NATIONAL PUBLIC
FI
CUSIP: 786091AD0
MOODY'S: A1 S&P: AA- Accrued Interest: 25.47
FACTOR= .291732253
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 16 of 41 ends

ALAMEDA CALIF C

3.619%23
25,000.0000 99.23500 24,808.75 24,695.00 <1% 113.75 904.75 ALLC TAX DUE 09/01/23 24,695.00 4.98%

TAXBL BUILD AMERICA
MUTU
CUSIP: 010775AT1
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 452.38

DANA POINT CA C

1.228%23
250,000.0000 97.80200 244,505.00 246,932.50 3% (2,427.50) 3,070.00 SPL TAX DUE 09/01/23 246,932.50 2.03%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 235839DQ7
MOODY'S: NR S&P: BBB Accrued Interest: 1,535.00

INLAND VY DA CA

4.432%23
200,000.0000 99.58000 199,160.00 205,902.39 2% (6,742.39) b8,864.00 ALLC TAX DUE 09/01/23 209,255.84 1.44%

XTRO TAXBL ASSURED
GUARA
CUSIP: 45750TAP8
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 4,432.00

MONTEREY CA REG F

2.4%23
190,000.0000 98.49100 187,132.90 190,001.38 2% (2,868.48) b4,560.00 IMPT FIRE DUE 09/01/23 190,014.25 2.39%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 612496AV1
MOODY'S: A2 S&P: AA- Accrued Interest: 2,280.00
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 17 of 41 ends

RIALTO CALIFORNIA R
4%23
165,000.0000 99.39500 164,001.75 166,992.67 2% (2,990.92) b6,600.00 ALLC TAX DUE 09/01/23 173,052.71 2.76%

OID TAXBL
CUSIP: 76246PBT4
MOODY'S: NR S&P: A+ Accrued Interest: 3,300.00

STOCKTON CALIFORN

2.5%23
125,000.0000 98.62100 123,276.25 123,918.32 1% (642.07) b3,125.00 ALLC TAX DUE 09/01/23 122,773.75 2.94%

OID TAXBL
CUSIP: 861403AU7
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 1,562.50

CUDAHY CALIFORN

3.474%23
100,000.0000 98.94000 98,940.00 100,003.40 1% (1,063.40) b3,474.00 ALLC TAX DUE 10/01/23 100,015.41 3.47%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 22973PAE1
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 1,447.50

EAST VY WTR DIST

0.65%23
20,000.0000 97.43700 19,487.40 19,211.00 <1% 276.40 130.00 WRSR UTIL DUE 10/01/23 19,211.00 4.64%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 275725AY5
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA- Accrued Interest: 54.17
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 18 of 41 ends

RI HSG & MTG FIN

3.35%23
25,000.0000 98.59500 24,648.75 24,290.75 <1% 358.00 837.50 SING HSG DUE 10/01/23 24,290.75 4.22%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 76221RZD8
MOODY'S: Aa1 S&P: AA+ Accrued Interest: 348.96

CALIFORNIA ST U

3.204%23
25,000.0000 98.75300 24,688.25 24,664.75 <1% 23.50 801.00 PUB EDUC DUE 11/01/23 24,664.75 4.47%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 13077DFE7
MOODY'S: Aa2 S&P: AA- Accrued Interest: 267.00

LOS ANGELES CALI

0.65%23
20,000.0000 97.06900 19,413.80 19,372.80 <1% 41.00 130.00 LEAS EQPT DUE 11/01/23 19,372.80 5.44%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 544587Y36
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA- Accrued Interest: 43.33

OR ST HSG/COMM M

2.87%24
15,000.0000 97.80600 14,670.90 15,006.81 <1% (335.91) b430.50 REV UTX DUE 01/01/24 15,011.67 2.82%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 686087T64
MOODY'S: Aa2 S&P: NR Accrued Interest: 71.75
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 19 of 41 ends

Investment Detail - Fixed Income (continued)
Par Market Price Market Value
Adjusted
Cost Basis
% of
Account
Assets
Unrealized
Gain or (Loss)
Estimated
Annual Income
Municipal Bonds
(continued)
Cost Basis Yield to Maturity
ILLINOIS ST 5%24 25,000.0000 100.98600 25,246.50 25,500.02 <1% (253.52) b1,250.00 GO UTX DUE 02/01/24 25,888.50 2.95%
CUSIP: 452152G54
MOODY'S: Baa1 S&P: A- Accrued Interest: 104.17

NJ ECON DEV AUTH PE
0%24
15,000.0000 94.87600 14,231.40 14,450.54 <1% (219.14) b0.00 GP DUE 02/15/24 14,147.00 3.90%

OID TAXBL ASSURED
GUARAN
CUSIP: 645913BC7
MOODY'S: A1 S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 0.00

MONROVIA CA RDA S

3.3%24
15,000.0000 97.83700 14,675.55 14,613.05 <1% 62.50 495.00 ALLC TAX DUE 05/01/24 14,613.05 5.00%

OID TAXBL
CUSIP: 611583CU7
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 165.00

REDONDO BEACH CALIF
3%24
195,000.0000 97.66700 190,450.65 193,634.79 2% (3,184.14) 5,850.00 ROAD TRAN DUE 05/01/24 193,634.79 3.14%

OID XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 757696AE9
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 1,950.00
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 20 of 41 ends

ONTARIO CALIFOR

2.798%24
10,000.0000 97.02300 9,702.30 9,628.70 <1% 73.60 279.80 AIR TRAN DUE 05/15/24 9,628.70 5.59%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 683042AH8
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 82.39
UNIV CA 2.9%24 15,000.0000 97.58900 14,638.35 14,566.10 <1% 72.25 435.00 PUB EDUC DUE 05/15/24 14,566.10 4.76%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 91412GQF5
MOODY'S: Aa2 S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 128.08

MONTCLAIR CALIF

0.926%24
15,000.0000 94.80800 14,221.20 14,036.15 <1% 185.05 138.90 GP DUE 06/01/24 14,036.15 5.01%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 612193AB8
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA- Accrued Interest: 34.73

OXNARD CA FA LS

2.284%24
255,000.0000 96.48000 246,024.00 255,006.66 3% (8,982.66) b5,824.20 LEAS EQPT DUE 06/01/24 255,020.00 2.28%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 691875DB1
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 1,456.05
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 21 of 41 ends

WHITTIER CALIFO

0.519%24
50,000.0000 94.33500 47,167.50 46,895.00 <1% 272.50 259.50 REV UTX DUE 06/01/24 46,895.00 3.67%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 966770AC3
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 64.88

ANAHEIM CA PFA L

1.38%24
20,000.0000 94.87200 18,974.40 18,801.20 <1% 173.20 276.00 LEAS BLDG DUE 07/01/24 18,801.20 N/Ay

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 03255LJY6
MOODY'S: A1 S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 46.00

COACHELLA CALIF

1.384%24
100,000.0000 95.06100 95,061.00 94,002.00 <1% 1,059.00 1,384.00 GP DUE 07/01/24 94,002.00 4.98%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 18978DAD3
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA- Accrued Interest: 230.67

EUGENE OR ELEC UTIL
0%24
40,000.0000 92.91300 37,165.20 39,491.68 <1% (2,326.48) b0.00 ELEC UTIL DUE 08/01/24 39,046.67 0.86%

OID TAXBL ASSURED
GUARAN

ESCROWED TO MATURITY
CUSIP: 298191TG2
MOODY'S: Aa2 S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 0.00
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 22 of 41 ends

LAKESIDE CALIFOR

1.62%24
25,000.0000 95.08800 23,772.00 25,009.43 <1% (1,237.43) b405.00 REV UTX DUE 08/01/24 25,015.56 1.59%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 512111AC9
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA- Accrued Interest: 33.75

SACRAMENTO CN C

6.625%24
10,000.0000 101.54500 10,154.50 10,192.88 <1% (38.38) b662.50 REV LTX DUE 08/01/24 10,205.50 5.27%

XTRO TAXBL ASSURED
GUARA
CUSIP: 786091AF5
MOODY'S: A1 S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 55.21
ST CTR CA CCD 0.8%24 15,000.0000 94.32200 14,148.30 13,993.85 <1% 154.45 120.00 COLL EDUC DUE 08/01/24 13,993.85 4.71%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 856597HU6
MOODY'S: Aa1 S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 10.00

KERN CNTY CA PEN OB
0%24
95,000.0000 92.20200 87,591.90 93,732.56 <1% (6,140.66) b0.00 GP DUE 08/15/24 92,554.85 0.89%

OID TAXBL NATIONAL
PUBLI
CUSIP: 492279CQ5
MOODY'S: Baa2 S&P: AA- Accrued Interest: 0.00
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 23 of 41 ends

PERRIS CA UHSD

0.632%24
20,000.0000 93.89100 18,778.20 18,450.40 <1% 327.80 126.40 IMPT SCH DUE 09/01/24 18,450.40 4.89%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 714398LG7
MOODY'S: Aa3 S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 63.20

BRENTWOOD CA IN

3.328%24
20,000.0000 96.89400 19,378.80 20,886.26 <1% (1,507.46) b665.60 SPAS DUE 09/02/24 21,684.20 1.08%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 10727XVF2
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 330.95

CA INFRA & E DE

0.645%24
75,000.0000 93.58300 70,187.25 68,910.50 <1% 1,276.75 483.75 FINL AUTH DUE 10/01/24 68,910.50 4.93%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 13034AL57
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AAA Accrued Interest: 201.56

CA INFRA & E DE

2.916%24
20,000.0000 95.89900 19,179.80 20,005.36 <1% (825.56) b583.20 EDUC EDR DUE 10/01/24 20,012.86 2.90%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 13034AD72
MOODY'S: NR S&P:

BBB+
Accrued Interest: 243.00
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 24 of 41 ends

RI HSG & MTG FIN

1.34%24
15,000.0000 94.29400 14,144.10 15,008.38 <1% (864.28) b201.00 SING HSG DUE 10/01/24 15,010.91 1.31%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 76221RW33
MOODY'S: Aa1 S&P: AA+ Accrued Interest: 83.75

STOCKTON CA PFA

2.374%24
10,000.0000 95.96900 9,596.90 9,816.80 <1% (219.90) 237.40 WTR UTIL DUE 10/01/24 9,816.80 3.14%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 861398CH6
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 98.92

CALIFORNIA ST U

0.563%24
85,000.0000 93.09700 79,132.45 78,082.30 <1% 1,050.15 478.55 PUB EDUC DUE 11/01/24 78,082.30 4.68%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 13077DQC9
MOODY'S: Aa2 S&P: AA- Accrued Interest: 159.52

CONNECTICUT ST H

0.98%24
15,000.0000 93.05100 13,957.65 13,824.20 <1% 133.45 147.00 MULT HSG DUE 11/15/24 13,824.20 4.92%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 20775HPC1
MOODY'S: Aaa S&P: AAA Accrued Interest: 43.28
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 25 of 41 ends

CONNECTICUT ST H

3.25%24
160,000.0000 96.28900 154,062.40 160,001.64 2% (5,939.24) b5,200.00 MULT HSG DUE 11/15/24 160,009.37 3.24%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 20775CS96
MOODY'S: Aaa S&P: AAA Accrued Interest: 1,531.11

FRESNO CALIFORNI

3.48%25
10,000.0000 96.75400 9,675.40 9,595.20 <1% 80.20 348.00 LEAS BLDG DUE 04/01/25 9,595.20 5.53%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 358184QJ1
MOODY'S: A1 S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 145.00
UNIV CA 3.738%25 25,000.0000 97.35600 24,339.00 24,976.00 <1% (637.00) 934.50 PUB EDUC DUE 05/15/25 24,976.00 3.77%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 91412GVD4
MOODY'S: Aa2 S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 275.16

FAIRFIELD CALIF

3.648%25
10,000.0000 97.34400 9,734.40 9,632.50 <1% 101.90 364.80 VP DUE 06/01/25 9,632.50 5.21%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 30421TAG9
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 91.20
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 26 of 41 ends

MONTEBELLO CALI

2.503%25
35,000.0000 94.22800 32,979.80 36,007.90 <1% (3,028.10) b876.05 REV LTX DUE 06/01/25 36,623.95 N/Ay
TAXBL
CUSIP: 612285AE6
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 219.01

ANAHEIM CA PFA

0.936%25
75,000.0000 91.15700 68,367.75 75,009.64 <1% (6,641.89) b702.00 REV UTX DUE 07/01/25 75,015.36 0.93%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 03255LJB6
MOODY'S: A1 S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 117.00

CALEXICO CALIF

2.483%25
335,000.0000 93.81700 314,286.95 335,009.88 3% (20,722.93) b8,318.05 ALLC TAX DUE 08/01/25 335,019.71 2.48%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 12953CAX3
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 693.17

CARSON CA RDA T

1.288%25
100,000.0000 91.35300 91,353.00 100,009.71 <1% (8,656.71) b1,288.00 REV UTX DUE 08/01/25 100,019.09 1.28%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 14575TDZ2
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 107.33
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 27 of 41 ends

Investment Detail - Fixed Income (continued)
Par Market Price Market Value
Adjusted
Cost Basis
% of
Account
Assets
Unrealized
Gain or (Loss)
Estimated
Annual Income
Municipal Bonds
(continued)
Cost Basis Yield to Maturity
CHICO CA USD 0.95%25 10,000.0000 91.01900 9,101.90 8,943.70 <1% 158.20 95.00 IMPT SCH DUE 08/01/25 8,943.70 5.01%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 168520QD9
MOODY'S: Aa3 S&P: NR Accrued Interest: 7.92

GUADALUPE CALIFORNI
3%25
15,000.0000 95.19100 14,278.65 14,145.35 <1% 133.30 450.00 ALLC TAX DUE 08/01/25 14,145.35 5.19%

OID TAXBL
CUSIP: 400559AH3
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 37.50

POMONA CA PEN OBG
4%25
65,000.0000 97.10300 63,116.95 68,810.43 <1% (5,693.48) b2,600.00 GP DUE 08/01/25 72,352.62 1.59%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 73208PBF7
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA- Accrued Interest: 216.67

SAN FRAN CA CY/

1.561%25
15,000.0000 90.96200 13,644.30 13,586.75 <1% 57.55 234.15 REV UTX DUE 08/01/25 13,586.75 5.19%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 79770GJB3
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 19.51
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 28 of 41 ends

VERNON CA ELEC S

4.65%25
145,000.0000 98.41600 142,703.20 145,000.00 1% (2,296.80) b6,742.50 ELEC UTIL DUE 08/01/25 162,252.27 2.34%

OID XTRO TAXBL

ASSURED G
CUSIP: 924397DE9
MOODY'S: A1 S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 561.88

FRESNO CA PEN OBG
0%25
55,000.0000 87.45900 48,102.45 48,288.79 <1% (186.34) b0.00 GP DUE 08/15/25 47,438.75 N/Ay

OID TAXBL NATIONAL
PUBLI
CUSIP: 358266CC6
MOODY'S: Baa2 S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 0.00

BANNING CALIFOR

2.805%25
10,000.0000 94.38100 9,438.10 9,634.50 <1% (196.40) 280.50 ALLC TAX DUE 09/01/25 9,634.50 3.98%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 066616AJ2
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 140.25

DANA POINT CA C

1.418%25
200,000.0000 91.07800 182,156.00 200,012.30 2% (17,856.30) b2,836.00 SPL TAX DUE 09/01/25 200,020.00 1.41%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 235839DS3
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 1,418.00
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 29 of 41 ends

MD ST CDA HSG

3.353%25
20,000.0000 95.37100 19,074.20 19,978.40 <1% (904.20) 670.60 SING HSG DUE 09/01/25 19,978.40 3.38%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 57419RK87
MOODY'S: Aa1 S&P: NR Accrued Interest: 335.30

MONTEREY CA REG

2.65%25
20,000.0000 94.13400 18,826.80 19,274.00 <1% (447.20) 530.00 IMPT FIRE DUE 09/01/25 19,274.00 3.81%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 612496AX7
MOODY'S: A2 S&P: AA- Accrued Interest: 265.00

RIALTO CALIFORN

4.524%25
15,000.0000 98.58500 14,787.75 14,750.45 <1% 37.30 678.60 ALLC TAX DUE 09/01/25 14,750.45 5.14%

TAXBL BUILD AMERICA
MUTU
CUSIP: 76246PBV9
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 339.30

SAN MARCOS CALI

4.016%25
20,000.0000 97.34300 19,468.60 19,334.00 <1% 134.60 803.20 ALLC TAX DUE 10/01/25 19,334.00 5.40%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 79876CBE7
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA- Accrued Interest: 334.67
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 30 of 41 ends

SWEETWATER CALIF

2.89%25
20,000.0000 94.62300 18,924.60 18,839.40 <1% 85.20 578.00 LEAS SCH DUE 10/01/25 18,839.40 5.15%

XTRO TAXBL

ESCROWED TO MATURITY
CUSIP: 87047SAJ9
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 240.83

NEW YORK ST HSG

1.125%25
100,000.0000 90.02600 90,026.00 100,009.97 <1% (9,983.97) b1,125.00 MULT HSG DUE 11/01/25 100,014.65 1.12%

XTRO TAXBL
CALLABLE 07/01/23 AT
100.00000
CUSIP: 64987JLN9
MOODY'S: Aa2 S&P: NR Accrued Interest: 375.00

SAN BERNARDNO C

8.253%26
15,000.0000 106.75100 16,012.65 16,702.17 <1% (689.52) b1,237.95 SCH COPS DUE 02/01/26 17,096.92 4.18%

OID XTRO TAXBL

ASSURED G
CUSIP: 796714DH3
MOODY'S: A1 S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 103.16
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 31 of 41 ends

RIVERSIDE CN CA

2.863%26
420,000.0000 93.82800 394,077.60 429,604.42 4% (35,526.82) b12,024.60 REV UTX DUE 02/15/26 432,833.53 2.07%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 76913CBA6
MOODY'S: Aa2 S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 534.43

LAKE ELSINORE CA

1.55%26
275,000.0000 90.14800 247,907.00 275,012.35 3% (27,105.35) b4,262.50 ALLC TAX DUE 03/01/26 275,020.00 1.54%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 86459ADN9
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 2,131.25

KS ST DEV FA RE

5.371%26
210,000.0000 100.57800 211,213.80 211,912.77 2% (698.97) b11,279.10 GP DUE 05/01/26 211,949.00 5.08%

XTRO TAXBL ASSURED
GUARA
CUSIP: 485428ZX7
MOODY'S: Aa3 S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 3,759.70

REDONDO BEACH CA

3.25%26
20,000.0000 95.12900 19,025.80 20,720.22 <1% (1,694.42) b650.00 ROAD TRAN DUE 05/01/26 20,866.60 2.17%

OID XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 757696AG4
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 216.67
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 32 of 41 ends

MONTEBELLO CALIF

2.83%26
10,000.0000 93.06600 9,306.60 10,430.31 <1% (1,123.71) b283.00 REV LTX DUE 06/01/26 10,639.60 1.56%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 612285AF3
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 70.75

ANAHEIM CA PFA

1.893%26
90,000.0000 89.80000 80,820.00 89,632.08 <1% (8,812.08) 1,703.70 LEAS BLDG DUE 07/01/26 89,632.08 1.98%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 03255LKA6
MOODY'S: A1 S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 283.95

CLOVIS CA USD

1.365%26
20,000.0000 89.10200 17,820.40 19,109.60 <1% (1,289.20) 273.00 FINL SCH DUE 08/01/26 19,109.60 2.42%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 189342L89
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 22.75

POMONA CA PEN O

2.474%26
15,000.0000 91.52000 13,728.00 15,152.98 <1% (1,424.98) b371.10 GP DUE 08/01/26 15,199.10 2.16%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 73208PBG5
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA- Accrued Interest: 30.93
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 33 of 41 ends

SAN LUIS UNITWE

1.828%26
30,000.0000 89.70200 26,910.60 30,263.14 <1% (3,352.54) b548.40 WTR UTIL DUE 09/01/26 30,316.70 1.60%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 798736AB0
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 274.20

WEST HOLLYWOOD

1.245%26
20,000.0000 87.90200 17,580.40 20,013.25 <1% (2,432.85) b249.00 ALLC TAX DUE 09/01/26 20,016.67 1.22%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 953321AE6
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA- Accrued Interest: 124.50

CALIFORNIA ST

2.375%26
25,000.0000 92.53800 23,134.50 26,158.99 <1% (3,024.49) b593.75 GO UTX DUE 10/01/26 26,506.00 1.18%
TAXBL
CUSIP: 13063DRD2
MOODY'S: Aa2 S&P: AA- Accrued Interest: 247.40

COLORADO HSG FI

1.609%26
20,000.0000 89.45800 17,891.60 19,454.80 <1% (1,563.20) 321.80 MULT HSG DUE 10/01/26 19,454.80 2.22%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 196480KT3
MOODY'S: Aaa S&P: AAA Accrued Interest: 134.08
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 34 of 41 ends

RIVERSIDE COUNT

1.474%26
60,000.0000 88.00500 52,803.00 60,012.46 <1% (7,209.46) b884.40 LEAS BLDG DUE 11/01/26 60,015.45 1.46%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 76913DFX0
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA- Accrued Interest: 294.80
ND ST HSG FA 3.913%27 40,000.0000 95.56200 38,224.80 40,015.50 <1% (1,790.70) b1,565.20 SING HSG DUE 01/01/27 40,016.67 0.00%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 658909N51
MOODY'S: Aa1 S&P: NR Accrued Interest: 260.87

COLORADO HSG FIN

3.62%27
115,000.0000 94.77800 108,994.70 115,016.43 1% (6,021.73) b4,163.00 SING HSG DUE 05/01/27 115,020.00 3.61%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 196480B89
MOODY'S: Aaa S&P: AAA Accrued Interest: 1,387.67

ONTARIO CALIFOR

1.875%27
20,000.0000 87.62500 17,525.00 19,501.20 <1% (1,976.20) 375.00 AIR TRAN DUE 05/15/27 19,501.20 2.37%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 683042BD6
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 110.42
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 35 of 41 ends

MAINE HEALTH &

1.659%27
10,000.0000 86.25500 8,625.50 9,720.50 <1% (1,095.00) 165.90 ACUT HLTH DUE 07/01/27 9,720.50 2.21%

XTRO TAXBL
CUSIP: 56042RJ60
MOODY'S: A1 S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 27.65

SEQUOIA CA UHSD

1.951%27
55,000.0000 89.14200 49,028.10 53,938.05 <1% (4,909.95) 1,073.05 FINL SCH DUE 07/01/27 53,938.05 N/Ay
TAXBL
CUSIP: 817409N50
MOODY'S: Aa1 S&P: NR Accrued Interest: 178.84

LEMON GROVE CAL

3.965%27
85,000.0000 95.83900 81,463.15 85,013.70 <1% (3,550.55) 3,370.25 SCH COPS DUE 10/01/27 85,013.70 3.96%

XTRO TAXBL
CALLABLE 04/01/23 AT
100.50000
CUSIP: 525654BZ1
MOODY'S: NR S&P: AA Accrued Interest: 1,872.36
Total Municipal Bonds 6,115,000.0000 5,771,722.31 6,007,317.96 61% (235,595.65) b160,046.25 Total Cost Basis: 6,051,436.16
Total Accrued Interest for Municipal Bonds: 45,419.13
Total Fixed Income 9,955,000.0000 9,526,409.66 9,866,782.96 100% (340,373.30) b315,846.55 Total Cost Basis: 9,939,553.84
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 36 of 41 ends

Investment Detail - Fixed Income (continued)
Accrued Interest represents the interest that would be received if the fixed income investment was sold prior to the coupon payment.

Yield to Maturity is the actual average annual return on a note if held to maturity.

Estimated Annual Income ("EAI") and Estimated Yield ("EY") calculations are for informational purposes only and are derived from information provided by outside parties. Schwab cannot guarantee the accuracy of such information. Since the interest and dividends are subject to change at any time, they should not be relied upon exclusively for making investment decisions. The actual income and yield might be lower or higher than the estimated amounts. EY is based upon EAI and the current price of the security and will fluctuate. For certain types of securities, the calculations could include a return of principal or capital gains in which case EAI and EY would be overstated. EY and EAI are not promptly updated to reflect when an issuer has missed a regular payment or announced changes to future payments, in which case EAI and EY will continue to display at a prior rate.

Total Investment Detail 9,539,660.81
Total Account Value 9,539,660.81
Total Cost Basis 9,939,553.84
Realized Gain or (Loss)
Acquired/ Sold/ Cost Basis
Realized
Gain or (Loss)
Short Term Quantity/Par Opened Closed Total Proceeds Adjusted Adjusted UNIV CA 3.789%24**CALLED**
@100 EFF: 02: 91412GTF2
10,000.0000 11/03/22 02/22/23 10,000.00 9,737.90 262.10 9,787.48 212.52 b
Total Short Term 10,000.00 9,737.90 262.10
9,787.48 212.52 b
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 37 of 41 ends

Realized Gain or (Loss) (continued)
Acquired/ Sold/ Cost Basis
Realized
Gain or (Loss)
Long Term Quantity/Par Opened Closed Total Proceeds Adjusted Adjusted POMONA CALIFORN 3.632XXX**MATURED**
TAXBL: 73209MAE7
10,000.0000 03/19/20 02/01/23 10,000.00 9,659.60 340.40 10,000.00 0.00 b
Total Long Term 10,000.00 9,659.60 340.40
10,000.00 0.00 b
Total Realized Gain or (Loss) 20,000.00 19,397.50 602.50 19,787.48 212.52 b
Schwab has provided accurate realized gain and loss information wherever possible for most investments. Cost basis data may be incomplete or unavailable for some of your holdings. If all data for a given investment is not available, the investment will not be listed here.

Option Customers: Realized gain/loss of underlying securities is adjusted to reflect the premiums of assigned or exercised options. Please consult IRS publication 550, Investment Income and Expenses, for additional information on Options.

Transaction Detail - Purchases & Sales
...

Fixed Income Activity
Settle Date Trade Dat Transaction Description Par Unit Price Charges and
Interest Total Amount
02/01/23 02/01/23 Full Redemption POMONA CALIFORN 3.632XXX (10,000.0000) 0.00 **MATURED**: 73209MAE7
02/01/23 02/01/23 Full Redemption POMONA CALIFORN 3.632XXX 0.00 10,000.00 **MATURED**: 73209MAE7
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 38 of 41 ends

Transaction Detail - Purchases & Sales (continued)
Fixed Income Activity (continued)
Settle Date Trade Dat Transaction Description Par Unit Price Charges and
Interest Total Amount
02/21/23 02/16/23 Bought Prime FRESNO CALIFORNI 3.48%25 10,000.0000 95.7520 155.33 (9,730.53) LEAS BLDG DUE 04/01/25: 358184QJ1
Executed by Belle Haven Investments, LP as Agent
With accrued interest of $135.33 and includes Schwab Prime Broker Fee $10.00, Executing Broker Commission $10.00 02/22/23 02/22/23 Redemption UNIV CA 3.789%24 (10,000.0000) 0.00 **CALLED**: 91412GTF2
02/22/23 02/22/23 Redemption UNIV CA 3.789%24 0.00 10,000.00 **CALLED**: 91412GTF2
02/28/23 02/24/23 Bought Prime SAN MARCOS CALI 4.016%25 20,000.0000 96.5700 347.97 (19,661.97) ALLC TAX DUE 10/01/25: 79876CBE7
Executed by Belle Haven Investments, LP as Agent
With accrued interest of $327.97 and includes Schwab Prime Broker Fee $10.00, Executing Broker Commission $10.00 02/28/23 02/27/23 Bought Prime LOS ANGELES CALI 0.65%23 20,000.0000 96.7640 62.25 (19,415.05) LEAS EQPT DUE 11/01/23: 544587Y36
Executed by Belle Haven Investments, LP as Agent
With accrued interest of $42.25 and includes Schwab Prime Broker Fee $10.00, Executing Broker Commission $10.00 Total Fixed Income Activity (28,807.55)
Total Purchases & Sales (28,807.55)
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 39 of 41 ends

Transaction Detail - Dividends & Interest (including Money Market Fund dividends reinvested) Transaction
Date
Process
Date Activity Description Credit/(Debit)
02/01/23 02/01/23 Bond Interest BELL CA 3.5%23: 07786BCN8 175.00 02/01/23 02/01/23 Bond Interest CALEXICO CALIF 2.483%25: 12953CAX3 4,159.03 02/01/23 02/01/23 Bond Interest CARSON CA RDA T 1.288%25: 14575TDZ2 644.00 02/01/23 02/01/23 Bond Interest CHICO CA USD 0.95%25: 168520QD9 47.50 02/01/23 02/01/23 Bond Interest CLOVIS CA USD 1.365%26: 189342L89 136.50 02/01/23 02/01/23 Bond Interest GUADALUPE CALIFORNI 3%25: 400559AH3 225.00 02/01/23 02/01/23 Bond Interest ILLINOIS ST 5%24: 452152G54 625.00 02/01/23 02/01/23 Bond Interest LAKESIDE CALIFOR 1.62%24: 512111AC9 202.50 02/01/23 02/01/23 Bond Interest POMONA CA PEN O 2.474%26: 73208PBG5 185.55 02/01/23 02/01/23 Bond Interest POMONA CA PEN OBG 4%25: 73208PBF7 1,300.00 02/01/23 02/01/23 Bond Interest POMONA CALIFORN 3.632XXX: 73209MAE7 181.60 02/01/23 02/01/23 Bond Interest SACRAMENTO CA PE 6.42%23: 786056BB6 1,284.00 02/01/23 02/01/23 Bond Interest SACRAMENTO CN C 6.625%24: 786091AF5 331.25 02/01/23 02/01/23 Bond Interest SAN BERNARDNO C 8.253%26: 796714DH3 618.98 02/01/23 02/01/23 Bond Interest SAN FRAN CA CY/ 1.561%25: 79770GJB3 117.08 02/01/23 02/01/23 Bond Interest SOUTH EL MONTE CA 3.5%23: 837680BE6 175.00 02/01/23 02/01/23 Bond Interest ST CTR CA CCD 0.8%24: 856597HU6 60.00 02/01/23 02/01/23 Bond Interest STANFORD UNIVER 6.875%24: 525555AB4 6,875.00 02/01/23 02/01/23 Bond Interest TIME WARNER COS 7.57%24: 887315BH1 7,191.50 02/01/23 02/01/23 Bond Interest VERNON CA ELEC S 4.65%25: 924397DE9 3,371.25 02/15/23 02/15/23 Bond Interest RIVERSIDE CN CA 2.863%26: 76913CBA6 6,012.30 02/15/23 02/15/23 Bond Interest SACRAMENTO CN CA 5.73%23: 786091AE8 835.81 02/15/23 02/15/23 Bond Interest SACRAMENTO CN CA 5.73%23: 786091AD0 83.58 02/15/23 02/16/23 Bank InterestX,Z BANK INT 011623-021523 9.65 02/22/23 02/22/23 Bond Interest UNIV CA 3.789%24: 91412GTF2 102.09 02/25/23 02/27/23 Bond Interest FEDERAL HOME LN MTG 4%25: 3134GXS62 350.00 02/28/23 02/28/23 Bond Interest FHLB 3.5%23: 3130ASY37 350.00 Total Dividends & Interest 35,649.17
Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 40 of 41 ends

Total Transaction Detail 6,841.62
Bank Sweep Activity
Transaction
Date Transaction Description Withdrawal Deposit Balance X,Z Opening Balance X,Z 6,409.53
02/02/23 Auto Transfer BANK CREDIT FROM BROKERAGE X 37,905.74 44,315.27 02/15/23 Interest PaidX,Z BANK INTEREST 9.65 44,324.92
02/16/23 Auto Transfer BANK CREDIT FROM BROKERAGE X 6,931.69 51,256.61 02/21/23 Auto Transfer BANK TRANSFER TO BROKERAGE 9,730.53 41,526.08 02/23/23 Auto Transfer BANK CREDIT FROM BROKERAGE X 10,102.09 51,628.17 02/28/23 Auto Transfer BANK TRANSFER TO BROKERAGE 38,727.02 12,901.15 Total Activity 48,457.55 54,949.17
Ending Balance X,Z 12,901.15
Bank Sweep: Interest Rate as of 02/28/23 was 0.45%. Your interest period was 01/16/23 - 02/15/23.

Z
Trades Pending Settlement
Transaction Quantity Trade Date Settle Date Unit Price Purchase/Debit Sale/Credit HERCULES CALIFO 3.566%25: 427078AF7 Bought Prime 10,000.0000 02/27/23 03/01/23 95.4580 9,595.52 Total Trades Pending Settlement 9,595.52
Pending transactions are not included in account value.

Schwab One® Account of

CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
MGR: BELLE HAVEN INVESTMENTS
Please see "Endnotes for Your Account" section for an explanation of the endnote codes and symbols on this statement.

Account Number
6201-0150
Statement Period
February 1-28, 2023

Page 41 of 41 ends

Endnotes For Your Account
Symbol Endnote Legend
b When available, Adjusted Cost Basis values are used in Gain or (Loss) calculations. d Accrued Income is the sum of the total accrued interest and/or accrued dividends on positions held in your brokerage account, but the income and/or dividends have not been received into your account and Schwab makes no representation that they will. Accrued amounts are not covered by SIPC account protection until actually received and held in the account.
y Yield to Maturity cannot be calculated because there are multiple lots for this position.

X Bank Sweep deposits are held at FDIC-insured bank(s) ("Banks") that are affiliated with Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.

Z For Bank Sweep and Bank Sweep for Benefit Plans features, interest is paid for a period that differs from the Statement Period. Balances include interest paid as indicated on your statement by Schwab or one or more of its affiliated banks. These balances do not include interest that may have accrued during the Statement Period after interest is paid. The interest paid may include interest that accrued in the prior Statement Period.

Schwab Institutional is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., and provides back office brokerage and related services to independent investment advisors and retirement plan providers. Schwab is a registered broker-dealer and is not affiliated with your Investment Advisor whose name appears on this statement ("Advisors") except in the case of Charles Schwab Investment Advisory, Inc. ("CSIA"), Schwab Private Client Investment Advisory, Inc. ("SPCIA"), or an affiliated company that may act as the investment advisor on a fund. Schwab neither endorses nor recommends any particular Advisor or its investment strategy and has no responsibility to monitor trading by any Advisor in your Account. Schwab has not verified any statement accompanying any Advisor's logo appearing on this statement. Not all of these products and services may benefit your Account, and Schwab may provide them to Advisors on the Advisor's commitment to place a certain amount of its clients' assets in brokerage accounts at Schwab within a certain period of time. This commitment could influence an Advisor's recommendation or requirement that its clients establish brokerage accounts at Schwab. For questions about this statement, or if there is a change in your financial situation, investment objectives, or risk profile, please contact your Independent Investment Manager and/or Advisor.

City of Hidden Hills
6165 Spring Valley Road * Hidden Hills, California 91302 (818) 888-9281 * Fax (818) 719-0083

MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Chantelle Limón, Administrative Analyst
DATE: April 10, 2023
SUBJECT: Consideration of a Letter of Support for California Assembly Bill 1708 Background
The League of California Cities has issued an “Action Alert” requesting that its member agencies support California Assembly Bill 1708 (AB 1708), which would amend Proposition 47 to increase accountability for repeat theft offenders and offer pathways for pre-plea diversion programming.

In 2014, California voters approved Proposition 47 which reduced the penalties for most theft crimes from felonies to misdemeanors. It also provided that past convictions for such charges could be reduced to a misdemeanor by a court.

Discussion
AB 1708 would require a person convicted of petty theft or shoplifting, with two or more prior convictions for specified theft-related offenses, to be punished by imprisonment in county jail for up to one year. Additionally, it would authorize a city, county prosecuting authority, or county probation department to create a diversion program for persons who commit repeat theft offenses.

Finally, any provisions that amend Proposition 47 would become effective only upon approval by the voters at the next statewide general election. The Ad-Hoc Legislative Committee has requested that the City submit a formal letter of support for AB 1708.

Fiscal Impact
There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.

Recommendation
It is recommended the City Council consider support of AB 1708.

Attachments

1. Draft Letter of Support for AB 1708

2. AB 1708 Fact Sheet
April 10, 2023
The Honorable Reginald Jones-Sawyer
Chair, Assembly Public Safety Committee
Legislative Office Building
1020 N Street, Room 111
Sacramento, California 95814
RE: AB 1708 (Muratsuchi) Theft.

Notice of SUPPORT (As Amended 3/9/23)
Dear Assembly Member Jones-Sawyer,
The City of Hidden Hills is pleased to support AB 1708 (Muratsuchi). This measure would increase accountability for repeat theft offenders and offer pathways for pre-plea diversion programming.

If passed, the bill would send the issue to the voters for approval at the next statewide general election.

This strategy is one of many supported by cities to address crime and its underlying causes. We remain committed to improving California’s carceral systems, interrupting and ending cycles of recidivism, and building a community-based system of care that appropriately meets the needs of all community members.

Proposition 47 of 2014 made promises of safe neighborhoods, but the unintended consequences that followed have provided anything but. According to a February 2023 study conducted by the Public Policy Institute of California, a strong majority of Californians worry they or a family member will be a victim of a crime (21% very, 44% somewhat). This is the sentiment being felt by residents of cities throughout the state.

The City of Hidden Hills has taken extraordinary measures to protect residents from falling victim to crime. Despite the continual presence of a proactive Sheriff’s Department, Hidden Hills remains a target for residential burglaries and other types of theft including grand theft, petty theft, vehicle theft, and identity theft. Moreover, as Hidden Hills is an exclusively residential community, residents travel to neighboring cities to dine, shop, and recreate, and are exposed to potential City of Hidden Hills
6165 Spring Valley Road * Hidden Hills, California 91302 (818) 888-9281 * Fax (818) 719-0083
“smash-and-grab” and “follow-home” crimes in their daily activities. Our communities deserve better, and cities are more than ready to find solutions that fix Proposition 47.

The City of Hidden Hills is keenly interested in exploring additional strategies to address the impacts of crime in our communities. This includes resources to improve community safety through prevention and early intervention programming, as well as improved re-entry service provision for our formerly incarcerated community members. While these provisions have historically been the responsibility of state and county departments, cities are interested in increased collaboration to meet these urgent needs.

For these reasons, the City of Hidden Hills requests your support on AB 1708.

Sincerely,
Steve Freedland
Mayor
cc: The Honorable Al Muratsuchi ([email protected]) Assemblymember Jacqui Irwin ([email protected]) Senator Ben Allen ([email protected])
Jeffrey Kiernan ([email protected])
League of California Cities ([email protected]) Last Updated: 3/28/2022

A S S E M B L Y M E M B E R A L MU R A T S U C H I
66 TH A S S E M B L Y D I S T R I C T
1 0 2 1 O S TREET , S UITE 5 6 1 0  S ACRAMENTO , CA 9 5 8 1 4 3 4 2 4 W. C ARSON S T R E E T , SUITE 4 5 0  T ORRANCE , CA 9 0 5 0 5 WWW . A 66. ASMDC . ORG
AB 1708 (Muratsuchi) – Retail Theft
SUMMARY______________________________
A report by the National Retail Foundation highlighted
that retail theft accounts for nearly $30 billion in
economic loss per year. Most of these incidents can be
traced back to a few repeat offenders who have learned
how to game the system. AB 1708 hopes to hold these
repeat offenders more accountable and also allows lower level offenders to enter diversion programs to stop their cycle of retail theft.

BACKGROUND__________________________
In 2014, the voters approved Proposition 47, which
reduced the penalties for most theft crimes, and greatly limited the ability to prosecute serial offenders and
professional thieves. Under Proposition 47, petty theft and a new crime of shoplifting are punishable as a
misdemeanor if the property taken does not exceed $950.

If the property taken exceeds $950 it is considered grand theft and can be punishable by misdemeanor or felony.

Proposition 47 also severely limited Penal Code § 666,
which allowed repeat offenders with multiple prior theftrelated convictions to be prosecuted for petty theft that is punishable as a misdemeanor or felony. Currently, no
matter how often an individual is arrested for committing petty theft, each subsequent offense is still only a
misdemeanor.

ISSUE___________________________________
There has been a recent spike in theft crimes where repeat offenders and professional thieves target business big and small with little to no consequences.

According to the San Francisco Police Department
(SFPD), a few repeat offenders seem to be driving the
city’s retail crime. SFPD data identified 116 repeat
offenders in 2020 and 33% of them were rearrested by the department. In Orange County, 45% of individuals
prosecuted for theft-related crimes were repeat offenders, and 23% had three or more prior convictions.

Although this is occurring nationwide, California is
recognized as a hot spot for these activities.

The National Retail Foundation notes that three of the top 10 cities for retail crime are in California. Los Angeles ranks number one, with San Francisco and Sacramento
ranking numbers five and ten on the list.

Since Proposition 47 eliminated the use of felony options for most serial theft cases, law enforcement generally only use a misdemeanor citation, which usually results in the suspect being immediately released. Despite the fact that District Attorneys are prosecuting these crimes and filing criminal charges in 85% of cases on average, the lack of real consequences for serial offenders creates an
impression that retail theft is a low-risk/high-reward
crime. According to a recent survey by the National
Association for Shoplifting Prevention (NASP), just 62% of California participants in their theft education courses believed they would be arrested if caught stealing again.

The likelihood of a light sentence also reduces the
incentive of those arrested to accept drug or mental health treatment or other diversion options. NASP further
reports that since Proposition 47 was enacted, they have seen a 50% drop in court participation in their education programs.

A majority of California voters expressed a desire to see changes made to Proposition 47 to better address theft
crimes, according to a 2022 survey by UC Berkeley.

SOLUTION_______________________________
AB 1708 holds repeat offenders accountable and also
provides a pretrial diversion option. If a person has two or more prior convictions related to theft, they could be
charged with a misdemeanor or felony on their next
offense. The bill also establishes a pretrial diversion program for persons charged with theft-related offenses and offers them appropriate mental health and substance abuse treatment in an effort to help prevent future theft and more serious crimes. This bill would only become
effective with voter approval.

STAFF CONTACT_________________________
Elissa Ouchida, Legislative Director
[email protected]
Last Updated: 3/28/2022
SUPPORT________________________________
California District Attorneys Association (Sponsor)
California Police Chiefs Association (Sponsor)
California Retailers Association (Sponsor)
League of California Cities (Sponsor)
City of Atwater
City of Brentwood
City of Ceres Council District 2
City of Fontana
City of Garden Grove
City of Hesperia
City of Indian Wells
City of Kerman
City of Lakewood
City of Menifee
City of Mission Viejo
City of Norco
City of Placentia
City of Red Bluff
City of Whittier
Town of Apply Valley
City of Hidden Hills
6165 Spring Valley Road * Hidden Hills, California 91302 (818) 888-9281 * Fax (818) 719-0083

MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Kerry Kallman, City Manager
DATE: April 10, 2023
SUBJECT: Letter of Opposition to Sheriff Civilian Oversight Commission’s Recommendation to Involuntary Rotate Deputies Every Five Years
Background
In November 2021, the Sheriff Civilian Oversight Commission directed the Chair of the Commission to engage pro bono Special Counsel to assist the Commission to investigate the existence and activities of problematic deputy groups, often referred to as “deputy gangs” or “cliques,” within the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department. In February, the Commission released their report, which is attached to this staff report.

Discussion
The comprehensive report provides a series of recommendations for the Sheriff’s Department to consider. One recommendation, “Re-Deployment and Rotations”, suggests that the Sheriff’s Department involuntarily rotate patrol deputies every five years, as a tactic to avoid the formation of deputy cliques or gangs.

The attached letter details the City’s opposition to this recommendation for a variety of reasons. Of most concern, is the unique geography of the jurisdiction under the Malibu/Lost Hills Station, which includes Hidden Hills. The letter discusses the specialized training deputies receive in regard to wildfire response. It goes on to reflect on the 2018 Woolsey Fire, and the dangers associated with out of area deputies responding to the fire and not being familiar with the canyon roads, and the confusion associated with safely evacuating residents and providing assistance.

Other concerns include, creation of undo hardships to deputies who have chosen to serve the communities where they live. Finally, the City of Hidden Hills spends considerable time creating relationships with personnel at the Malibu/Lost Hills station in an effort to provide excellent community-based policing service.

It should be noted that the City of Hidden Hills is not taking a position on the rest of the Civilian Oversight Commission’s recommendations.

City Council
Sheriff Civilian Oversight Committee
April 10, 2023

Page 2 ends

Fiscal Impact
There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.

Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council authorize the Mayor to sign the attached letter to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors.

Attachment (1) Letter of Opposition
(2) Sheriff Civilian Oversight Commission Report and Recommendations Regarding Deputy Gangs and Cliques
April 10, 2023
Lindsey P. Horvath, Supervisor
Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, 3rd District
821 Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration
500 West Temple Street
Los Angeles, California 90012
Dear Supervisor Horvath:

On behalf of the City Council of the City of Hidden Hills I am writing to express our opposition the Sheriff Civilian Oversight Commission’s recommendation to involuntary rotate deputies every five years to a different patrol station.

We recognize and commend the Sheriff Civilian Oversight Commission’s efforts to prevent the formation of deputy cliques with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department; however, involuntarily moving deputies every five years may have a negative effect on our communities.

All patrol station and communities they serve have unique challenges and cultures. For example, the Malibu/Lost Hills Station sits in the Santa Monica Mountains Region and consequently is vulnerable to wildfires. Our patrol deputies receive specialized training on responding to this natural disaster. One only needs to look at the 2018 Woolsey Fire to see the challenges associated with wildfire response and evacuations in this mountainous region. There are countless examples of deputies from other stations who responded to the Woolsey Fire only to not be familiar with the region and the complicated canyon roads.

Hidden Hills and the other four cities (Agoura Hills, Calabasas, Malibu, and Westlake Village) that are served by the Malibu/Lost Hills Station spend considerable time developing relationships with station personnel and constant turn over of our law enforcement partners will prove to negatively serve our communities. Many of our deputies live and work in our collective communities and deputies who are ordered to work within an assigned geographical area may not have the same level of commitment or enthusiasm as the deputies who volunteer to work within a chosen community.

Sincerely,
Steve Freedland
Mayor
City of Hidden Hills
6165 Spring Valley Road * Hidden Hills, California 91302 (818) 888-9281 * Fax (818) 719-0083

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL

TO SHERIFF CIVILIAN OVERSIGHT COMMISSION REGARDING

DEPUTY GANGS AND DEPUTY CLIQUES IN THE LOS ANGELES
COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT
February 2023
Sheriff Civilian Oversight Commission

COMMISSIONERS
Sean Kennedy, Chair Jamon R. Hicks, Vice
Chair
Irma Hagans Cooper
James P. Harris Hans Johnson
Luis S. Garcia Patricia Giggans
Robert C. Bonner Lael Rubin
Brian K. Williams, Executive Director

SPECIAL COUNSEL TO THE COMMISSION
Lead Special Counsel: Bert Deixler of Kendall Brill & Kelly Other Special Counsel included
Bart Williams and Susan L. Gutierrez of Proskauer
Ashley Bowman and Ariel Neuman of Bird Marella
Carolyn Kubota and Ellen Choi of Covington
William Forman of Winston & Strawn (on behalf of Loyola Law School Center for Juvenile Law and Policy)
L. Ashley Aull and Robyn Bacon of Munger Tolles & Olson (on behalf of Loyola Law School Center for Juvenile Law and Policy)
Naeun Rim and Sarah Moses of Manatt
Clark Brown, former General Counsel L.A. County Bar
Richard Drooyan, Consultant
Adam Dawson, lead investigator
i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
PREFACE .........................................................................................................................1

THE EXISTENCE OF DEPUTY GANGS AND DEPUTY CLIQUES IN THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT.........................................................................3 I. INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................3 II. INVESTIGATION.....................................................................................................5 III. FACTUAL FINDINGS...............................................................................................7 A. History of Deputy Gangs and Cliques..........................................................7 B. Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques Currently in the Department ..............10 C. Obstacles to Eliminating Deputy Cliques in the Department.....................35 D. The Elimination of Deputy Cliques is Constitutionally Permissible............41 IV. FACTUAL FINDINGS SUMMARY...........................................................................43 V. RECOMMENDATIONS TO ELIMINATE DEPUTY GANGS AND CLIQUES..................44 A. LEADERSHIP AND SUPERVISION................................................................45 B. POLICY AND TRAINING..............................................................................49 C. RE-DEPLOYMENTS AND ROTATIONS.........................................................53 D. ACCOUNTABILITY......................................................................................55 VI. CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................61 1 PREFACE
In November 2021, the Sheriff Civilian Oversight Commission (“COC”) directed the Chair of the COC to engage pro bono Special Counsel to assist the COC to investigate the existence and activities of problematic deputy groups, often referred to as “deputy gangs” or “cliques,” within the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (“Department”). Although prior commissions have documented the existence of deputy gangs and cliques over several decades, the COC wished to determine whether such groups continued to exist and to understand their impacts on the Department, its employees, and members of the public it serves.

By March 2022, a pro bono team of Special Counsel were engaged by the County and the Loyola Law School Center for Juvenile Law and Policy, and the COC launched the investigation of deputy gangs and cliques. The investigation included interviews of numerous members and former members of the Department, and review of numerous documents, court filings, deposition transcripts, public statements by Department representatives, published reports relating to prior investigations, and numerous relevant media reports. To date, the COC has conducted seven public hearings devoted to the investigation, most of which involved the taking of witness testimony under oath pursuant to the COC’s subpoena authority.

This Report and Recommendations is a result of the Special Counsel’s investigation on behalf of the COC. It is in two parts: Factual Findings, entitled The Existence of Deputy Gangs and Cliques in the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, and Recommendations to Rid the Department of Deputy Gangs and Cliques that fall under four headings: Leadership/Supervision, Policy/Training, Assignments/Rotations, and Accountability.
2 A word about nomenclature used in this Report. Special Counsel has chosen to use the term “Deputy Gangs” when referring to deputy groups engaged in egregious conduct such as violations of law, the excessive use of force, threats to the public or Department members and to use the term “Deputy Cliques” in discussing the broader concerns that the exclusionary subgroups pose to the mission of the Department, the careers and morale of other Department members, and the public, even when their activities do not violate specific laws. The term “Deputy Cliques” has historically been understood to include Deputy Gangs and exclusionary subgroups and their problematic behavior however configured. By using this term in this report, we do not intend to minimize the harm done by these groups to the Department, to other Department personnel, and to the public. The Findings confirm such harms.

The origins of Deputy Gangs and Cliques within the Department dates back decades. They may have started with benign intentions, but history has proved that Deputy Cliques have often evolved into Deputy Gangs whose members not only use gang-like symbols but engage in gang-type and criminal behavior directed against the public and other Department members. These groups, both historically and currently, also exalt the use of excessive force against civilians, harass other deputies, and undermine the chain of command within the Department. However denominated, the existence of these groups and their impact adversely affects the mission of the Department and undermines public trust in the Department.

The Deputy Cliques addressed in this Report and several prior reports have been variously referred to as deputy “gangs,” “cliques,” “subcultures” and “secretive subgroups. ”Deputy Cliques” are Sheriff’s deputies assigned to a particular Department patrol station, bureau, unit, or location in a jail who self- associate, and identify and act as a subgroup that excludes other deputies assigned to the same station, bureau, unit, 3 or jail location. They identify themselves by names such as the Banditos, Executioners, Regulators, Spartans, Reapers, Rattlesnakes, Cowboys, Vikings, Wayside Whities, 3000 Boys, and 4000 Boys. Members often have matching and sometimes sequentially numbered tattoos and use language and gestures associated with street gangs. By their actions Deputy Cliques invariably evolve into Deputy Gangs.

The Factual Findings section of this Report documents the overwhelming evidence demonstrating that Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques, still exist and engage in harmful activities in several of the Department’s patrol stations and bureaus. They victimize the Department, its members, and the public.

The Recommendations section identifies the reforms needed to eliminate Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques and to extinguish the culture of the Department that has permitted their existence and harmful influence within the Department for the past 50 years. The Recommendations provide an immediate call to action to the Sheriff, the Department leadership and every member of the Department. There can be no more delays!

THE EXISTENCE OF DEPUTY GANGS AND DEPUTY CLIQUES IN THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT
I. INTRODUCTION
The Department currently contains several active groups that have been, and still are, engaged in harmful, dangerous, and often illegal, behavior. Some of these groups have engaged in acts of violence, threatened acts of violence, placed fellow Deputies at risk of physical harm, engaged in acts celebrating officer involved shootings, and created a climate of physical fear and professional retribution to those who would speak publicly about the misconduct of such groups. Publicly released deputy body camera video illustrates such misconduct directed to a member of the public. For that reason, going back 30 years to the Commission led by Judge James J. 4 Kolts, these groups have been fairly referred to as “Deputy Gangs.” Deputy Cliques that evolve into Deputy Gangs meet the definition of “law enforcement gang” in California Penal Code Section 13670.1 The problems they cause
in the Department, however, go beyond their “gang-like” behavior. Deputy Cliques are rooted in secrecy and exclusivity. They undermine the Department’s leadership and supervision, foster insubordination, and are detrimental to the morale of other deputies and staff by exercising power and decision making that is fundamentally inconsistent with the para-military, chain of command structure of law enforcement agencies such as the Department. By exercising influence ordinarily reserved for supervisors and management, such as controlling assignments, schedules, and promotions, their existence within stations, bureaus and units of the Department violates fundamental principles of professional policing. But Deputy Cliques, whether they meet the definition of “law enforcement gangs” must be eradicated as they are the seeds from which Deputy Gangs develop.

While the prior Sheriff publicly asserted that he had acted to eliminate Deputy Gangs, in fact he facilitated their continued presence by, among other things, 1 Penal Code 13670 provides, in pertinent part: (2) “Law enforcement gang” means a group of peace officers within a law enforcement agency who may identify themselves by name and may be associated with an identifying symbol, including but not limited to, matching tattoos, and who engage in a pattern of on-duty behavior that intentionally violates the law or fundamental principles of professional policing, including but not limited to, excluding, harassing or discriminating against any individual based on a protected category under federal or state antidiscrimination laws, engaging in or promoting conduct that violates the rights of other employees or members of the public, violating agency policy, the persistent practice of unlawful detention or use of excessive force in circumstances where it is known to be unjustified, falsifying police reports, fabricating or destroying evidence, targeting persons for enforcement based solely on protected characteristics of those persons… and retaliation against officers who threaten or interfere with the activities of the group. Further, these groups often discriminate on the basis of gender, race and ethnicity in deciding who can become a member of the Deputy Cliques. Such workplace discrimination violates the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) and federal anti- discrimination law. 5 appointing known tattooed members of Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques to leadership positions in the Department, permitting the revival of emblems signifying membership in such groups and repeatedly relying upon an erroneous statement of law to avoid promulgating and enforcing a policy prohibiting Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques in the Department. The claim that Deputy Gangs no longer exist in the Department is flatly and inarguably false. Moreover, Deputy Cliques continue to exist.

The COC Policy recommendation prohibiting Joining and Participation in Deputy Cliques is constitutionally permissible, and it is factually supported by the investigation and multiple interviews conducted by the COC’s Special Counsel as well as the testimony given in the COC’s public hearings. The COC urges Sheriff Luna to adopt a policy that prohibits deputies from being members of Deputy Cliques and thereby ending Deputy Gangs.

II. INVESTIGATION
As part of the COC’s investigation, Special Counsel interviewed approximately eighty witnesses. The witnesses were current and former Deputies, Sergeants, Lieutenants, Captains, Commanders, Assistant Sheriffs, and Undersheriffs; a former Sheriff; and former law enforcement officials from other law enforcement agencies.

The witnesses also included attorneys representing current and former litigants against the Department and the County and certain of the litigants themselves. Many witnesses were interviewed multiple times.

Special Counsel coordinated with, interviewed and received information from the Los Angeles County Office of Inspector General, the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office, Loyola Law School and the Los Angeles County Public Defender’s Office.

Special Counsel received and reviewed dozens of depositions and sworn 6 statements, and associated exhibits generated in connection with past and pending litigation involving the Department; multiple media reports; body camera footage; and extensive reports prepared by the Kolts Commission, the United States Commission on Civil Rights, the Loyola Law School Center for Juvenile Law & Policy (‘Loyola Law School Report”), the Rand Corporation, the National Association of Blacks in Criminal Justice, and the Citizen’s Commission on Jail Violence.

Special Counsel attended virtual briefings by the former Sheriff Alex Villanueva, and repeatedly sought to meet with the former Sheriff and his Undersheriff, Timothy Murakami. They declined to meet or to be interviewed. Each was also invited to voluntarily appear and testify publicly before the COC. The former Sheriff declined to do so unless provided in advance with the questions and any documents that would be presented. The Undersheriff declined, asserting that his physical condition precluded his testimony, but not his other duties as Undersheriff. As a result, the COC subpoenaed both the Sheriff and Undersheriff to testify. Each refused, and both are now subject to legal proceedings to enforce the subpoenas and/or to hold each in contempt.

The COC held seven public hearings in which approximately fifteen witnesses publicly testified and numerous members of the public spoke. The overwhelming majority of witnesses who testified did so pursuant to subpoena. Several witnesses would only testify anonymously, and some did so remotely, using a voice distortion device out of fear of physical or professional retaliation. Several witnesses who had agreed to testify withdrew, often the night before the proposed testimony, out of similar fears.

In addition to witnesses who testified publicly, approximately sixty other witnesses were interviewed by the Special Counsel’s team. Many witnesses spoke only 7 after receiving assurances that they would not be identified publicly or even confidentially identified to the COC. The witnesses expressed concerns for their physical safety and the physical safety of family members, many of whom are Department employees. In addition, many witnesses insisted upon anonymity in interviews for fear of professional retribution often described as “career suicide.” Some of the factual findings recited in this Report are the product of these witness interviews.

III. FACTUAL FINDINGS
A. History of Deputy Gangs and Cliques
Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques have existed in the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department since at least 1973. That year, an internal Department memo dated December 5, 1973, documented the existence of a group known as the “Little Devils,” and identified 38 members who bore sequentially numbered tattoos of a devil.

In 1992, the Kolts Commission’s report confirmed the existence of Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques, including a Deputy Gang called the Vikings, in the Department.

After holding evidentiary hearings in Los Angeles in 1993 and 1996, the United States Commission on Civil Rights in 1999 issued a report focusing on the violence and trauma that Deputy Gangs had inflicted on communities of color and people struggling with mental illness, and urged the LASD to take decisive action to eradicate Deputy Gangs from its ranks.

In 2012, the Citizens’ Commission on Jail Violence (“CCJV”) found that Deputy Cliques existed in patrol and on certain floors of Men’s Central Jail (”MCJ” ) and that they contributed to the use of excessive force in the jail. The CCJV’s report contains five pages of recommendations to address the problem.

The Loyola Law School Report documented the Department’s long history of 8 Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques in 2021; and the Rand Corporation also confirmed their existence in its report titled Understanding Subgroups Within the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department in 2021.

The Los Angeles County Inspector General, Max Huntsman, testified before the COC about his office’s report entitled Analysis of the Criminal Investigation of Alleged Assault by Banditos that confirmed the involvement of the Banditos in the severe beating of non-Banditos deputies in an incident at Kennedy Hall in 2018.

As part of its investigation, the COC received and reviewed a September 13, 2004, memorandum from the then Undersheriff William T. Stonich to Sheriff Leroy Baca about efforts to address “inappropriate and potentially damaging behavior” at the Department’s Century Station. Among other conclusions the memorandum reported on rumored unethical activity engaged in by Century station personnel as follows:
“Mexican Mafia”, rumored to be a small select group of deputies of Hispanic decent (sic). They have been accused of holding positions of influence within the station (i.e.: detective, scheduling, watch deputy and field training officer positions) and are alleged to control much of the negative behind the scenes activity such as fund raising through means of unit level extortion for non -sanctioned events, unfair or biased granting of time off requests, controlling patrol and interior work assignments, etc.”
The COC also reviewed an October 1, 2007, memorandum from then Commander Willie Miller to Sheriff Baca reporting on an investigation of a group of deputies named the “Regulators” at Century Station. Among other things, the memorandum concluded that:
“The Regulators philosophy is that if a sergeant, lieutenant, or captain was weak at Century Station they would run over them, essentially speaking, they would run the station as a subculture fraction (sic). 9 They would not respect rank. They openly displayed the Regulators logo of the ‘skull and flames’ symbol on their motorcycles as well as body tattoos.”
The COC also reviewed hundreds of Department documents regarding the 2012 discovery in a patrol car of a written creed for a Deputy Gang named “The Jump Out Boys.” Members of the Jump Out Boys shared a common numbered tattoo that depicts a red-eyed skull wearing a bandana with the letters “O.S.S.” and holding a revolver next to an ace of spades and an 8 of spades, the so called “dead man’s hand” in poker.

Their creed recited that members understand “when the line need (sic) to be crossed, and crossed back” and that they “sometimes need to do things they don’t want to in order to get where they want to be.” It also directed members to keep a “black book” that records the date of every deputy involved shooting that authorized each shooter to embellish his common tattoo with smoke coming out of the gun. Seven Jump Out Boys members were fired, but because there was no clear policy against joining a Deputy Gang at the time, the Civil Service Commission reinstated four of them.

It is indisputable that for nearly 50 years, Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques have existed within the Department and their existence and negative impacts were known to the leadership of the Department. Yet there was no sustained effort during this period to eradicate Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques from the Department. All prior efforts were inadequate, lost continuity and failed to eliminate Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques. Owing to this failure, Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques are embedded in the culture of the Department, either tolerated or ignored. Indeed, during the tenure of Sheriff Baca, the Undersheriff, Paul Tanaka, was a tattooed member of the Vikings. According to numerous witness interviews, former Sheriff Villanueva’s Undersheriff, Tim Murakami, has a Caveman tattoo.

While law enforcement cliques are not unknown in other law enforcement 10 agencies, no other large law enforcement agency in the nation has allowed such cliques to exist and flourish as they have in the Department.

B. Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques Currently in the Department There is at least a half dozen, and possibly more, Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques currently in the Department, primarily at patrol stations. They include the Executioners, the Banditos, the Regulators, the Spartans, the Gladiators, the Cowboys and the Reapers. There are reports that new Deputy Cliques are forming as members of existing Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques retire or otherwise leave the Department.

There is some evidence indicating that Deputy Cliques are re-emerging in the Los Angeles County jails as the 4000 Boys.

Merely transferring members of Deputy Gangs or Deputy Cliques has not proved particularly effective. After the CCJV’s 2012 findings confirmed the existence of the 2000 and 3000 Boys on the second and third floor of MCJ, many of these deputies were transferred out of the jail to patrol. Many of the 3000 Boys sought assignments to Compton Station and became Executioners; many 2000 Boys sought assignment to Century Station and became Spartans. As discussed below, transfers or rotation of deputies must be much more intentional to avoid aggregating in a new location deputies involved in, or susceptible to influence by, Deputy Gangs or Deputy Cliques.

All the Deputy Cliques share harmful characteristics. While not all Deputy Cliques engage in identical unprofessional conduct, most share at least some of the following characteristics, and they have done and continue to do certain acts of unprofessional and dangerous policing. Deputy Cliques run the stations or units where they exist, as opposed to the sergeants, lieutenants and the captain who are charged with the duty to run the station; exercise influence over and often decide assignments and shifts, training, and overtime; exclude deputies from the Deputy Cliques, often based on race, 11 ethnicity or gender; intimidate deputies that are not part of the Deputy Cliques; give orders not to provide backup to disfavoreddeputies who are not members of the Deputy Cliques; order work slowdowns if management of a station attempts to rein them in; encourage a “we-they” attitude, not just between them and the public, but with other deputies within the station; operate in secrecy; lie in reports to protect each other; and threaten the public with use of excessive force without justification and belittle deputies unwilling to engage in such acts. Most troubling, they create rituals that valorize violence, such as recording all deputy involved shootings in an official book, celebrating with “shooting parties,” and authorizing deputies who have shot a community member to add embellishments to their common gang tattoos.

Typically, to be invited to become a member of a Deputy Gang or Deputy Clique, a deputy must demonstrate “toughness” that is frequently associated with use of excessive force or other forms of unconstitutional policing. Often the euphemistic term “peer leader” is used to describe the members.

Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques also have used and continue to use assaultive behavior against fellow deputies who do not belong to their groups as a show of power and influence. Certain of these altercations have led to public exposure in the media.

The COC investigation uncovered other incidents including threatened use of weapons by deputies upon other deputies.

The pernicious effects of these groups go well beyond assaulting other deputies.

Recent publicly released body camera footage of a deputy threatening to shoot a man in a parked car without any evidence of wrongdoing illustrated in real time gang behavior characteristic of Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques interacting with the public served.

Not all members of Deputy Cliques engage in acts of misconduct. Even those 12 members who do not engage in misconduct, however, contribute to the unprofessional influence of Deputy Cliques and their negative impact on the Department and on other deputies. Deputy Cliques have and continue to do great damage to the reputation of the Department, and the public hearings demonstrated that they have unquestionably destroyed trust between the Department and the public it serves.

Membership in a Deputy Gang or Deputy Clique is a liability for the County. One of the essential job qualifications of a deputy sheriff is the ability to testify credibly in a court of law. Deputies who belong to Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques that value loyalty to their members over their commitment to the Department and the public are likely to be disbelieved when their conduct is at issue. As Lieutenant Eric Strong, a 22- year member of the Department, put it, “If you are a member of a law enforcement gang, you cannot be trusted, you cannot be relied upon, your credibility is lacking.” Under the principles set forth by the United States Supreme Court in Brady v.

Maryland, such information that bears on the credibility of prosecution witnesses must be disclosed by the prosecution to the defense in criminal cases and is likely discoverable in civil lawsuits.

Deputies sued in civil lawsuits arising from the alleged use of excessive force cost the taxpayers of Los Angeles County tens of millions of dollars in judgments and settlements. It has been estimated that the additional cost to the County in these cases is upwards of $55 million. That number can only rise based upon pending and newly filed lawsuits and administrative claims. In addition to judgments and settlements, the County incurs seven-figure legal bills from outside litigation counsel hired by and paid for by the County to defend the misconduct of Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques.

Set forth below is some of the evidence developed by Special Counsel during the 13 COC’s investigation of Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques.

1. Compton Station
Lieutenant Larry Waldie testified before the COC that he was a tattooed member of a deputy group known as the “Gladiators.” He obtained the tattoo during his initial tour of duty at Compton Station and that another group known as the “Executioners” subsequently ran aspects of that station. Waldie said that Compton was a “fast station,” and it was considered a desirable post for deputies wanting exposure to incidents of crime requiring active law enforcement.

Waldie testified that many of the Executioners had served on the 3000 floor at MCJ. The CCJV noted the existence of the “3000 Boys” at MCJ and recommended that the it be disbanded. It appears, however, that many of the “3000 boys” transferred to Compton Station and formed or joined the Executioners. A witness who worked at MCJ and who insisted on anonymity for fear of reprisal, reported that a new version of the “3000 Boys” operating on the 4000 floor and calling itself the “4000 Boys” currently operates at MCJ.

Another witness currently assigned to the Compton Station disclosed that deputies who had worked on the 3000 floor at MCJ received preferential treatment at Compton. The witness reported being ridiculed based upon gender and race by the scheduling deputy, Jaime Juarez, an Executioner, and that Executioner members regularly discriminated against and ridiculed women.

Waldie testified that Deputy Juarez was the “shot caller” during Waldie’s tenure at Compton Station. The Commission received evidence that Juarez participated in four officer involved shootings. Juarez was subsequently removed from patrol, and interacting with the public during Sheriff McDonnell’s tenure, but was returned to patrol after Sheriff Villanueva took office. Waldie identified Deputies Ruiz, 14 Cuevas, Barajas, Ingersoll, Raisa and Ruben as Executioners. Waldie stated that based upon his observations Executioner membership apparently excluded females and African Americans.

The Commission received a photograph of Deputy Juarez’ truck which depicted an Executioner emblem on a flag. In a deposition in civil litigation brought by Waldie, Deputy Juarez admitted that he had attended approximately seven “inking parties.” He confirmed that Deputies Barajas, Ingersoll, Bray, Jimenez, and Reese attended Executioner inking parties as well. According to Juarez, Ingersoll was the last Executioner to receive an Executioner tattoo.

The Commission also received a photograph of a tattoo of a skeleton holding an automatic rifle on the calf of Deputy Aldama, a self-acknowledged Executioner. Other evidence indicates that, much like the Mafia, there are “made” members of Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques who are entitled to wear the tattoo associated with the group. The tattoos typically exalt the use of excessive force and are entirely unprofessional.

Deputy Aldama, and his partner, Mizrain Orrego, were named as defendants in two separate shootings of community members, Sheldon Lockett and Donta Taylor. In each instance the deputies claimed that the victims had guns. In neither case was a gun located and much evidence suggested that in fact neither had guns. The County settled both cases with the families of the deceased for a total amount just short of ten million dollars. Since outside counsel was engaged in each case substantial legal fees were incurred on top of the settlement amounts.

Waldie testified that the Executioners held positions of authority during his time at Compton Station. Those positions included scheduling deputy, training officer, detective, and gang task force membership. Waldie explained that the position of 15 scheduling deputy was powerful because it afforded the scheduler the ability to assign deputies to shifts, vacations and days off, desirable assignments on patrol or less desirable assignments in preferred or less desirable locations.

During 2019, when Waldie served as Acting Captain of Compton Station, Deputy Juarez was scheduled to be removed as scheduling Deputy and transferred from the station. Juarez told Waldie that his successor as scheduling Deputy should be another Executioner, but Waldie declined the request. In response, Juarez led the Executioners in a work slowdown in March 2019, and pressured non-Executioners to adhere to it.

The COC received an internal LASD document demonstrating that during the work slowdown, crime rose significantly compared to the preceding year and compared to the months before and after the slowdown. During the slowdown, arrests dropped precipitously, citizen calls were responded to slowly, and pro-active policing initiatives did not occur.

In addition to the statistical evidence documenting the work slowdown, the COC received the content of a text between Waldie and a deputy confirming the work slowdown directed by Deputy Juarez. The deputy supplying the information insisted upon anonymity: “But please between you and I. This could ruin my career. I don’t want my name mentioned at all please. I can’t have that.” Waldie testified that the culture of the Department created a justified fear among honest deputies that if it were believed that they had reported on the misconduct of fellow deputies, especially those belonging to a Deputy Clique, it would lead to harassment, ostracism, threats, or interference with career advancement.

A deputy who requested anonymity was suspected of cooperating with the COC and has been continuously subject to harassment and ostracism at the deputy’s current station. Another witness who testified anonymously has reported that another 16 deputy, who was wrongly suspected of having provided the anonymous testimony, has been repeatedly harassed at that deputy’s current station.

Waldie testified that after an officer involved shooting the deputies involved participated in a celebratory “debrief” at a bar in Fullerton. Waldie identified the pair of deputies, Ingersol and Barajas, as Executioners. Other evidence suggested that they were not yet tattooed Executioners, but were “chasing ink.” That is, they engaged in “aggressive” activities in the hope of becoming members.

Copies of texts reviewed by the COC revealed that Waldie brought the celebration to the attention of the captain heading Compton Station. Waldie testified that despite the seriousness of the circumstances, the captain did not take any action.

After Sheriff Villanueva took office, the captain was promoted to commander and retired from that position. He declined to be interviewed by Special Counsel’s team.

The evidence demonstrates that community needs in Compton were ignored or responded to slowly to pressure a station leader to act in accordance with the Executioners’ demands, and celebrations of officer involved shootings were neither stopped nor criticized. Waldie agreed that the conduct of the Executioners violated “fundamental principles of professional policing.” During her testimony before the COC, then-Chief, now Acting Undersheriff, April Tardy reviewed this evidence and acknowledged that the Executioners were a “law enforcement gang” within the meaning of California Penal Code section 13670.

2. East L.A. Station
Much public testimony before the COC focused upon the East L.A. Station and particularly on an incident at Kennedy Hall involving a brutal beating inflicted upon junior deputies by senior deputies who were members of the “Banditos.” The behavior can only be fairly described as that of a gang. This episode resulted in widely publicized 17 civil litigation brought by the victim deputies against the Bandito Deputies. Even though the defendants assaulted other members of the Department and did so in an after- hours offsite location, County Counsel approved the County paying outside counsel to defend them.

Former Sheriff Villanueva trained at the East L.A. Station and was widely believed to have shown favoritism toward the station and its deputies. He was roundly criticized for the reservation of front row seats for East L.A. deputies at his inauguration when the Kennedy Hall incident had received much negative publicity and was still an open investigation. He also restored the “Fort Apache, kick in the pants” logo at the entrance of the East L.A. Station. The COC also heard much testimony that refuted his repeated assertion that he had replaced a weak captain with a strong one and had transferred many deputies to address discipline problems. In fact, no deputy was involuntarily transferred out of the East LA Station, and many of the transferred deputies were not Banditos.

Finally, there has been substantial evidence that the administrative and potential criminal investigation into the Kennedy Hall incident was obstructed at the direction of the former Sheriff’s then Chief of Staff, Larry Del Mese, an acknowledged tattooed member of the “Grim Reapers.” Matthew Burson, who retired from the Department as a Chief, testified that when he was the Captain at the Internal Affairs Criminal Bureau he was instructed by Del Mese not to have the investigator of the Kennedy Hall incident ask about “sub-cultures” at the station. Burson understood that Del Mese was conveying an order from the former Sheriff, and he passed the instruction on to Sergeant Jeffrey Chow, who was investigating the incident. It is reasonable to infer that Sheriff Villanueva, despite its obvious relevance, ordered that no questions were to be asked about the Banditos or their role in the Kennedy Hall 18 “beat- down”.

Sergeant Chow testified that he believed the conduct of the assaulting deputies was criminal, but that he was directed not to ask questions about “sub- culture” activity at the station. He understood this to mean that no questions were to be asked about the Banditos/Deputy Cliques and its/their role in the gang style assault on other deputies, and he followed the orders because he worked in a “para-military organization.” After Chow testified, the COC learned of attempts to intimidate him and his wife, Vanessa, a Deputy Sheriff. The intimidation included an unmarked sheriff’s car following Chow home after his testimony before the COC and an undercover car parked conspicuously near the residence. (Captain Angela Walton reported a similar intimidation effort involving the parking of an undercover car directly in front of her home after her public testimony.)
Retired Chief Joseph Gooden described the early portion of his career at the East L.A. station and the presence of members of the “Cavemen” at the station. Despite having a degree from U.S.C. when fewer than 10% of the deputies had four-year college degrees, a Caveman told Gooden that there was “no way” he could become a training officer. Gooden observed that under 2% of the deputies at the East L.A. station wereAfrican American.

Years later, when Gooden was a Chief, he oversaw the Kennedy Hall investigation. Chief Gooden testified that he directed that the investigation be conducted as a criminal investigation, and that determining the motive of the involved deputies was an important part of the investigation. The instruction to Sergeant Chow not to ask questions about “sub-culture” activity in the East L.A. Station was directly contrary to Chief Gooden’s expectation and direction. It was also contrary to investigating the motive for the assault and the standard expected of a professional 19 police force.

The investigative report of the Department’s Internal Criminal Investigation Bureau regarding the Kennedy Hall incident was transmitted to the District Attorney’s Office to consider potential criminal charges. The report failed to mention that the investigating sergeant had been instructed not to ask questions about the Banditos or their role in the assault, even though the evidence related directly to a criminal motive for the attack.

An anonymous witness currently stationed at the East L.A. Station testified using a voice distorter because of a fear of physical and professional retribution. The witness identified current “shot callers” at East L.A. as Deputies Ortiz and Valle. The witness testified that Rene Munoz, one of the defendants in civil litigation relating to the Kennedy Hall beating, was the shot-caller prior to his departure from the East L.A.

Station. The witness testified that all three were tattooed Banditos.

The anonymous witness also identified the broad authority of the scheduling deputy, a Bandito, at the East L.A. Station, who gave assignments, schedules, days off and vacations, assigned areas for patrol and directed selection of training officers and assignment of trainees to them. The witness testified that the power of the Banditos was such that they were able to thwart the promotion of a disfavored deputy to training officer even though the deputy was ranked number one in the County for that promotion.

The witness also testified to various means of intimidation and ostracism inflicted by Banditos upon non-Banditos. This included a locker room argument in which a Bandito pointed his gun at the head of another deputy; the turning of backs when a disfavored deputy entered the hallway or room; and the refusal to answer back up calls when summoned by a disfavored deputy. The witness explained how 20 disfavored deputies received “jackets” i.e., reputational slanders intended to thwart their careers.

Another witness testified that the Banditos assaulted “disfavored” deputies, who would be challenged to a fight. The disfavored deputies would be told that they did not belong in East L.A. and that they were a “zero” as a provocation to a fight. The Banditos would surround the disfavored deputies in groups thus employing physical intimidation. This conduct is characteristic of gang activity. Like other Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques, the Banditos exert control by forcing disfavored, non-Bandito deputies to transfer to other stations.

Another witness who insisted upon anonymity described how a training officer humiliated trainees, especially women, at the East L.A. Station. Those efforts included name calling and tossing the trainees’ written work product to the ground with the goal of embarrassing and ostracizing the trainee before peers. According to this witness, the training officer who engaged in such unprofessional, intimidating conduct was a Bandito. The witness was certain that the Bandito’s control of the station was widely known. He stated that Deputy Valdez was the shot caller at East L.A. at the time and that he arranged the deputies’ schedules. As noted, Deputy Valdez was widely known to be a Bandito.

The witness also described a practice of ostracism at the East L.A. Station. When the witness walked into the station the deputies would turn their backs as the witness walked down the hall. The witness explained that Banditos “stepped on the radio” i.e., interfered with the ability to communicate from the patrol car by speaking over the deputy while the witness spoke. The Banditos persistently criticized the witness for a “culture violation.”
The witness reported a refusal to provide requested back up. A specific incident 21 involved a report of a person with a gun in a dangerous part of Boyle Heights. Because of the danger of a night call in that area the witness requested back up, but it was not forthcoming, and the witness abandoned the call. The proffered excuse that the deputies all were “busy” was proved false by review of time records.

A training officer at the East L.A. Station required that trainees keep the car fully stocked with snacks and demanded “good imagination on reports.” That the witness understood meant to lie to justify the acts of the deputies. The witness was informed that the training officer was a tattooed Bandito. The stocking of the car was a form of the “tax” imposed by the Banditos. The trainee had to pay for all meals, drinks and anything else the training officer required.

The witness observed that the Department enabled the Banditos control of the station and that known Banditos received promotions under Sheriff Villanueva. The witness claimed that the Banditos brought gifts to the wife of Sheriff Villanueva to procure promotions or to retain power positions. It was widely believed, and confirmed in testimony by Eli Vera, that the Sheriff consulted his wife on promotions even though she held no official position in the LASD. The witness also claimed that the Homicide Bureau is filled with Banditos.

The witness learned that Banditos had to be Mexican American and that Central Americans could not become Banditos. Another witness confirmed that, with one exception, all Banditos were Hispanic males, and none were women.

Another witness who insisted upon anonymity observed that the Banditos also directed work slowdowns that resulted in increased response times to calls and for arrests to cease. The most recent slowdown occurred because the Banditos believed that the Department’s Internal Affairs Bureau had pursued too many disciplinary investigations of deputies.
22 The witness testified that there were between 12 to 15 Banditos currently in the East L.A. Station, and that they held positions as “acting” detectives and training officers. The witness testified that there were also “associate” deputies who wished to be initiated and were “chasing ink.” One incident that the witness regarded as “chasing ink” involved the transportation of a shooting victim to a hospital. The witness stated that the deputies went off route and assaulted the victim. Such conduct can only be viewed as the act of a gang member and its indisputable harm to the community.

In an interview, retired Chief Gooden recounted that during his year and a half at the East L.A. Station the dominant group was the “Cavemen.” He believes that the Banditos grew out of the Cavemen.

Chief Gooden was one of several witnesses who disputed former Sheriff Villanueva’s claim that he had transferred 36 members from East L.A. for misconduct at the station. The anonymous witness claimed that there were no involuntary transfers of Banditos. No transferees were “overnighted,” i.e., subject to immediate involuntary transfer. Rather the transfers reflected voluntary departures related to deputy requests, promotions, or retirements.

Retired Chief Eli Vera also refuted the former Sheriff’s claim. He agreed with the testimony of Captain Ernie Chavez in a civil deposition that the deputies were transferred from the East L.A. Station for non- disciplinary reasons. One witness said in an interview, however, that a number of the transferees were “whistle blowers” who had objected to the Banditos’ control of the station. The witness described them as “the resistance.”
Another witness who required anonymity described the witness’ tenure at East L.A. Station as one in which deputies who “speak like gangsters” surrounded the witness. The witness described the unprofessional language used on radios, including 23 the use of nicknames and derogatory statements. Further, the witness reported that because the Banditos mistrusted the witness, they would not allow the witness to enter a house when they conducted a search. The witness said that contrary to Department policy, the fact and results of such searches were often undocumented.

The witness also experienced that calls for back up by disfavored deputies were not heeded. Such failures to provide requested back up imperiled the safety of these deputies. The civil case brought by the victims of the Banditos beating at Kennedy Hall included the deposition testimony of Deputy Concepcion Garcia, who witnessed calls for back up ignored by Banditos.

The anonymous witness had justifiable safety concerns. On one occasion, when the witness drove a personal vehicle from the East L.A. station, the witness observed that the lug nuts from the car wheels had been loosened. The witness said that to be part of the East L.A. anti-gang unit it was necessary to be an “inked” member of the Banditos.

The witness also confirmed the practice of a “tax” being levied by senior Banditos upon trainees to pay for food, “fund raising” and other financial demands of the Bandito training officers. The trainees who participated did so because of a fear that they would not get off training.

The witness also was supervised by, or worked with, “Cavemen” and “Regulators” They were Caucasian males in positions of authority. The witness stated that supervisors were well aware of the existence of these groups but did not act to interfere.

Another witness who spent nearly a decade in East L.A. and who also required anonymity for fear of physical retaliation, also described the Cavemen and the Banditos. The witness, said that the Banditos insisted that others “do what they want 24 you to do.” The witness also described the Banditos as “gangs behind the badge.” The witness says that everybody in the Department knows of the Banditos; their actions are not a “secret.”
This witness also confirmed that the Banditos imposed “taxes” on new deputies.

The witness was told by a Bandito training officer to “bring your credit card.” The witness was aware of the tattooed members of the Banditos and believed that there were as many as 80 Banditos during the witnesses’ tenure at East L.A. The witness said the Banditos would use force to discipline non-Banditos they did not like. This too is the behavior of a gang.

The Banditos exploited the junior deputies by, for example, requiring that they write reports for the Banditos and stay on uncompensated overtime if necessary to get the report done. The witness said that the Banditos recruited deputies to “chase ink”, i.e., to do what was necessary to be noticed and “stand apart.” That included writing reports to make problematic arrests appear legal. (Another anonymous witness described this practice as “working backwards.”)
An aspect of “chasing ink” was a desire to get into shootings. These deputies would follow a suspect believed to have a gun so that a shooting would be justified.

The witness said that there was pressure to “get numbers up” from time to time, meaning arrests. The witness was instructed by Banditos that they could always get somebody arrested as “under the influence” and “refused to take a test.” The goal was to raise arrest numbers.

Another witness, now retired after 24 years in the Department, was a training officer in East L.A. The witness ran afoul of the scheduling sergeant, Patty Estrada. The witness described Estrada as a female associate of the Banditos who did their bidding and conveyed favors and punishments on their behalf. The witness had a trainee 25 “pulled” by Estrada and observed that the trainee was assigned to a Bandito training officer.

Another witness testified anonymously about working at the East L.A. station.

Although warned that East L.A. was a difficult place to work due to harassment and hazing, the witness chose to work there anyway and was subjected to this conduct.

Like others, the witness affirmed that the Banditos were an open and notorious gang within the East LA Station. The witness believed that it was appropriate to refer to the Banditos as a “gang” that manifested its power by recruiting desired deputies and isolating others. Having become disfavored, the witness experienced, as did others, dispatch sending the witness a high volume of calls throughout the patrol area.

Additionally, when the witness called for backup, it would not arrive. The witness believed that the inability to receive back up when performing services increased considerably the risks of the work.

The witness was aware of “cigar night.” Those were evenings when female deputies would act to raise funds at Bandito “events” by circulating among deputies who were drinking and playing cards and selling cigars to those in attendance for support of other Bandito “sponsored” events. The witness described these cigar selling efforts as done upon the demand of the Banditos. The witness acknowledged that deputies were pressured to give money upon a Bandito solicitation. That trainees were “taxed” was well known in the station and in the Department more generally.

Gooden stated that when Sheriff McDonnell assumed office, he barred the East L.A. Station “Fort Apache kick in the pants logo.” Gooden regarded the logo as unprofessional and insulting to the East L.A. community. Gooden observed that the logo was reintroduced when Sheriff Villanueva assumed office. 26 3. Lennox Station (Now South L.A. Station)
Recently released shocking body camera footage shows South L.A. Station deputy Justin Sabatine repeatedly threatening to shoot an African American civilian sitting in his car in a parking lot. Several witnesses, including two current Department captains, have asserted that Sabatine was a member of a Deputy Clique. One captain believed that Sabatine was a Reaper. A public report based upon an anonymous source also claimed Sabatine is a Reaper. A second captain believed that Sabatine may not be a Reaper, but rather a member of a newly formed Deputy Clique in the South L.A.

Station. A captain reported learning that Sabatine threatened that there would be a work slow-down in South L.A. if the body camera footage was released.

As proof of the consequences to the Department and the County of gang like activities, the County has already been sued based upon Sabatine’s conduct. The Complaint demands $10,000,000. The County likely will engage outside counsel to represent the County and Sabatine.

The type of conduct revealed in the Sabatine body camera footage is consistent with a lengthy history of gang behavior at South L.A. Station. A current deputy who has served in the Department for more than 25 years insisted on anonymity for fear of physical retaliation. The witness described the activities of the group of deputies known as the Reapers at Lennox Station (now the South L.A. Station.) The witness saw the tattoos of the members, all of whom were Caucasian males. The witness observed that the Reapers now consist primarily of Hispanic deputies.

The witness stated that Reapers were involved in multiple shootings. The witness recounted a conversation in which the witness was criticized after the witness confronted two African Americans, a male and female, one of whom had a gun. The witness apprehended the suspects without firing a weapon. Later a Reaper criticized 27 the witness, and asked “why did you not shoot her?” The Reaper described it as a “freebie.”
According to the witness, another Reaper encouraged the witness to seek a warrant when there was no basis to do so. The witness declined and believes that this was a source of the mistrust of the witness among certain deputies.

A former deputy who served in the South L.A. Station described Carl Mandoyan as the shot caller at the station at the time. The witness claimed that it was widely known in the Department that Mandoyan was a Reaper. As in other stations, the witness noted that unpopular directives were “pushed back” against by work slowdowns. Some of the friction was with a captain who was acting in accordance with a directive from Sheriff McDonnell to “crackdown” on deputy misconduct.

The witness reported that to get into the Reapers one needed to have a “force incident” and look for an opportunity to shoot people. The other condition was that you “not be a rat.”
The witness’s experiences as a non-Reaper included being “slammed on calls.” The dispatcher repeatedly instructed the witness to answer calls for which other deputies refused to provide back up the witness requested. The witness described one incident in which the witness made a traffic stop and asked for a unit to back up. None came and the suspect ran away.

Another deputy who required anonymity described an incident at the beginning of the witness’s career in patrol. The witness pulled over a suspect who was apparently intoxicated and “out of it”. The witness said that the suspect appeared unaware that there was a gun on the passenger side front seat, did not reach for the gun, and did not resist arrest. When reporting the incident and booking the gun a Reaper ridiculed the witness for not shooting the suspect and claiming that he had “reached” for the 28 weapon.

Captain Angela Walton testified that in her 27 years of service there have always been Deputy Cliques in the Department and that they continue to exist to this day.

Walton described her experience at Lennox Station at the beginning of her career when the Reapers were a well-recognized presence in the station. She identified Larry Del Mese, who later became Sheriff Villanueva’s first Chief of Staff, as the “shot caller” at Lennox.

Walton observed that the Reapers were running the Lennox Station, particularly the early morning shift. After Walton obtained a position as a training officer on an interim basis, she was driven to a golf course and told by a deputy Reaper “we don’t like you.”
Walton testified that the Reapers set out to make her fail as a training officer.

She recalled, for example, a trainee who was a father. Walton allowed the trainee to call his children to say good night. The Reapers roundly criticized her for that accommodation and for allowing her trainee to eat lunch.

Walton described an attempt to intimidate her by posting her business card on a bulletin board at the station with a large “X” drawn through it. Further attempts at intimidation were frequent service calls from a Reaper in charge of dispatch. Walton said that the volume of calls alone adversely affected her ability to perform her job.

Walton experienced the scope of the Reapers influence when she delivered a prisoner to the Compton Station. While in Compton, Walton encountered a former colleague, and engaged in social “catch up” conversation. Walton’s brief delay from work for this social purpose was relayed by a Reaper who worked at Compton to a Reaper who worked at Lennox. According to Walton, her conversation with a former colleague demonstrated that the Reaper influence was not confined to a single station, 29 and it was used as a basis for criticism of her by the Reapers as part of their attempt to drive her from the station. When Walton sought a position at the Lancaster Station, she realized that she had a “jacket;” i.e., a negative reputation spread by the Reapers which included this supposed transgression.

4. Century Station
Retired Chief Gooden, who had more than 25 years of service in the Department, described how Century Station essentially operated on its own, apart from the Department’s command structure. He heard from deputies that if there were “problems” that the deputies would “handle that” and there was to be no involvement of the operations leadership of the station.

Chief Gooden recounted that during his tenure at MCJ the “2000 boys and 3000 boys” staged gladiator fights between jail inmates. Another witness stated that the 2000 boys were “heavy-handed white guys” who encouraged the use of force in large numbers at MCJ and eventually transferred to Century Station.

Chief Gooden also testified about the Department employees’ fear of retaliation should they speak out. He recounted female custody assistants explaining their concern to him in connection with deputy misconduct in MCJ.

When Gooden became a captain at Century Station he was concerned about the history of problems associated with the station. He learned that deputies were involved in personnel decisions, including determining who would receive the coveted position of training officer.

There were two problematic groups of deputies at Century Station at the time.

One was the Regulators. The other was the Spartans. Gooden described the competition for control of the station between them and recounted how there was even a dispute over one group taking and refusing to allow the other group to use a 30 station canopy for an event.

A witness requiring anonymity who worked at Century Station for approximately a decade said that the Regulators and Spartans were actively engaged in misconduct.

The witness said that the Regulators’ shot caller was the scheduling deputy. The witness claimed that Commander Kerry Carter and then Chief April Tardy knew of the presence and activities of the Regulators at the station. According to retired Assistant Sheriff Robert Olmstead, the entire Department leadership knew about the Regulators because the Regulators installed a large monument honoring themselves on the premises of the Century Station that remained in place for several years.

The anonymous witness described a Regulator sponsored fundraising poker game to support the Baker to Vegas run. The Regulators used female deputies as “cocktail waitresses” at the event. The female deputies received personal and administrative days off so they could work at the poker game. The witness reported that the Spartans were angered by the event and sought an equal amount of time off.

A Spartan left a threatening note under the door of the captain who denied the request.

The COC reviewed the content of a March 16, 2015, anonymous letter to Sheriff McDonnell that claimed the Spartans’ tattoo “represents ‘putting in work,’ such as unjustified beatings, falsifying reports of beatings, gladiator fighting, and intimidating other employees or inmates who interfered.”
Another witness who insisted on anonymity for fear that the witness’ career would “be over” if the cooperation were revealed, stated that there was a “book” that the witness had reviewed that identified the name and the date each Regulator received a tattoo. The witness said that there were twenty-five identified members.

The book also recited the creed that reflected a commitment to “proactive policing.” 31 The witness described the creed as “propaganda.”
The witness also described the “tax” the witness was required to pay. For example, in connection with the Baker to Vegas run the witness was required by a training officer to pay more than $100 for a photograph of the 1960s “Rat Pack” celebrities.

The training officer mirrored the language of former Undersheriff Paul Tanaka by instructing the witness to “work the gray” and “work backwards,” which the witness was taught meant “fudging” probable cause. The witness used as an example the “teaching” that all searches in high crime areas are to be defined as with “consent.” The witness said that nobody in high crime areas ever consents. The witness said that the goal was to get arrest statistics. When the witness protested “working backwards,” the witness was described by the training officer as “a rat.” That reputation was spread through the station.

The witness said that with the passage of time the Department is filled with “gang” members, including members of the command staff. The witnesssaid that at least 15 of the 25 Regulators have been promoted. The witness asserted that many of the promotions resulted from Undersheriff Tanaka’s efforts to promote favored deputies.

The witness said that the influence of the Regulators affected the goals of young deputies. Because of the perception that the Regulators were in control, young deputies wished to “make their bones” to gain acceptance. The witness said that goal encouraged deputies to get into shootings to establish their “bona fides.” Special Counsel also received confidential information corroborating the assertion of multiple interviewed witnesses that tattooed Deputy Clique members currently hold important positions within the Department. Special Counsel was 32 informed that one specific area of influence is in the Civil Rights and Public Corruption section of the Department. Sheriff Luna has eliminated that section. It was that section which led a search of former Board of Supervisor’s member Sheila Kuehl and current COC member Patricia Giggans.

Chief Gooden recounted that Interim Sheriff John Scott ordered that the Deputy Clique logos be abandoned. Shortly thereafter, however, Gooden learned that there was offsite sale of clothing with the prohibited logos.

5. Lancaster and Palmdale Stations
Angela Walton described her experience with Lancaster Station over several years. She testified that when her Vice Squad participated in an undercover operation, they would not reveal to the Lancaster deputies or supervisors the operation for fear that the suspects would be tipped off. While not specifically tied to Deputy Clique activity, the testimony illustrated inter- Departmental mistrust related to the absence of chain-of-command organizational supervision and the perception that sub-groups had conflicted loyalties.

Walton applied to be the Captain at Lancaster. She was the only “full Captain” applying. Since Lancaster is a contract city, city officials interviewed her for the position. She met with the Vice-Mayor who told her that he had received negative information about her. Walton understood that there was a Reaper at Lancaster Station and that the “jacket” she had obtained almost two decades before prevented her from becoming Captain of Lancaster Station.

Two non-Caucasian witnesses claimed to have been subjected to serial harassment by training officers at Lancaster Station. All training officers are Caucasian.

One of the witnesses asserted that there were “bad stops” that led to searches, most often of people of color. The witness said that young deputies were pressured to write 33 reports of searches in “a certain way” to make the stops legally justifiable even though the reports contained false information. The witness said that the training officers insisted that certain reports be constructed either to conceal actions taken or to reflect things which did not occur. The witness has reported that these assertions are now the subject of an investigation by the Internal Affairs Bureau.

The witness’ statement was consistent with a report issued by the U.S.

Department of Justice in a June 28, 2013, finding that deputies in Lancaster and Palmdale “engaged in a pattern or practice of discriminatory and otherwise unlawful searches and seizures, including the use of unreasonable force, in violation of the Fourth Amendment, the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VI.” The Department of Justice went on to note that “Some Antelope Valley Deputies wear tattoos or share paraphernalia with an intimidating skull and snake symbol as a mark of affiliation with the Antelope Valley stations.”
In a deposition in a wrongful death case, Oleg Polissky, a Palmdale Station deputy, testified that he received a Cowboys tattoo and attended a celebration with at least twenty similarly tattooed deputies. A similar tattoo appeared on the leg of a former deputy who was shot by another deputy while on a camping trip. A photo of the victim’s leg was displayed at a Special Hearing of the COC. A witness who required anonymity was told that the shooting was in retaliation for an act objected to by the Cowboys. The retaliatory shooting of out of favor compatriots is classic criminal gang activity prosecuted regularly. Another witness with direct knowledge of the circumstances, and who was the source of the first witness’ knowledge of the shooting, declined to be interviewed.

6. Aero Bureau
Aero Bureau is responsible for the Department’s helicopters. It has a small 34 number of assigned deputies who have the necessary pilot skills and wear a helmet that has as its logo a chicken being choked. The group is widely referred to as the “Ghetto Birds.”
A witness interviewed by COC’s staff described systematic harassment by the three senior Caucasian deputies in the Aero Bureau. The witness described them as a “clique” and the three as “shot callers.” The witness said that there were no African Americans assigned to the Aero Bureau and that as far as the witness knew there had been only one African American ever assigned to the Bureau.

Another witness, a current deputy with 20 years of service who insisted upon anonymity for fear of retribution, confirmed that the Aero Bureau takes pride in the “Ghetto Bird” logo. The witness said that a leader of the Aero Bureau openly stated that he was a Viking and was a founder of the Regulators. Another leader is a tattooed member of the Spartans. The witness described the process of coordinated “humiliation” efforts directed by the shot callers to disfavored deputies. The shot callers encouraged the others at Aero Bureau to ignore disfavored deputies.

The witness described systematic and routine harassment that caused many new deputies to leave the Bureau. The witness observed the shot callers mocking the accent of a Hispanic deputy and said that disfavored deputies had their pictures placed and defaced on bathroom walls.

The action of a small, self-selected racially harmonious sub-group is consistent with evidence regarding how Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques acted in numerous stations throughout the Department. The use of racially charged and disparaging logos is also consistent with their problematic conduct. Such conduct is inconsistent with fundamental principles of professional policing.
35 C. Obstacles to Eliminating Deputy Cliques in the Department Among those who must participate in the solution to longstanding and widespread problem of Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques in the Department are the Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs (“ALADS”) and County Counsel. Neither ALADS nor County Counsel have been helpful in the past.

1. ALADS
Most deputies who are members of ALADS are not tattooed members of a Deputy Gang or Deputy Clique. According to the Rand Report as many as 15 to 20% of deputies belong to Deputy Cliques. ALADS should, accordingly, recognize that the elimination of Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques is in the best interests of the vast majority of its members.

The Special Counsel’s investigation has revealed, however, numerous instances in which ALADS has protected Deputy Gang and Deputy Clique members. This has included protecting deputies who engaged in gang activities involving serious misconduct against other deputies who presumably are ALADS members. There is no dispute that pursuant to the Myers-Milias-Brown Act and the National Labor Relations Act, ALADS owes a duty of fair representation to all its members. Special Counsel believes, however, that ALADS can meet its obligations without condoning the existence of Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques, the harm they cause to the Department, or the attendant unprofessional conduct in which members of those groups engage.

ALADS has opposed efforts by the Department to require the disclosure of tattoos affiliated with Deputy Cliques. In one example, ALADS procured a legal opinion that the First Amendment prohibits the Department from barring deputies from having tattoos associated with these groups. That opinion, which is it at odds with the 36 applicable law discussed below, was provided to Sheriff Villanueva, who relied upon it to assert that he was constitutionally unable to restrain the use of tattoos by Deputy Cliques even if they constituted “police gangs” as defined by California Penal Code section 13670.

In a very recent example ALADS contacted a current captain who sent an email advising deputies at his station not to get Deputy Gang/Deputy Clique tattoos because it could hurt their careers. ALADS protested that advice and told the captain to cease and desist from advising deputies about tattoos. Such communication serves both to undermine the command structure of the Department and to normalize open display of Deputy Gang and Deputy Clique membership.

Steve Biagini, a retired 37-year veteran of the Department who served as Captain in the East L.A. station, observed that because of actions by ALADS and PPOA (Professional Peace Officers Association), the supervisor’s union, he could not question an incoming transferee’s “fitness” to serve at the East L.A. station. Rather, if the deputy was on an incoming transfer list, he had no discretion to refuse the transfer.

Similarly, he lacked the ability to transfer problematic deputies from the station.

Biagini blamed ALADS for this limitation on supervisorial discretion and the consequential harm to the Department of requiring unfit deputies to remain in stations where their problems arose.

Michael Gennaco, who was the head of the Office of Independent Review, described the institutional problems attributable to ALADS. He expects that ALADS will oppose more detailed and explicit training of deputies about the dangers of Deputy Clique affiliation, will oppose changes in the transfer and rotation system to reduce the influence of Deputy Cliques at stations and jails, and will not acknowledge the existence of problems associated with Deputy Cliques, notwithstanding the evidence 37 set forth above.

Gennaco used as an example ALADS’ involvement in the Quiet Canon episode, another fight among deputies, some of whom were ultimately terminated. Gennaco said that ALADS ostracized the whistle blowers but backed “to the hilt” the accused.

ALADS’s reaction to the Internal Affairs investigation of the Kennedy Hall incident involved a similar defense of the accused even though the victims were also deputies (and presumably ALADS members).

ALADS also created obstacles to Special Counsel’s investigation. Those include making a baseless contention that the COC has no subpoena power because the grant of that power by Measure R violates the deputies’ collective bargaining agreement with the County. Further ALADS has contacted witnesses subpoenaed by the COC and urged them to seek specific lawyers to assist the witnesses in avoiding testimony. A subpoenaed witness reported a specific direction to call a designated lawyer who would arrange for the witness not to testify.

It is imperative that ALADS supports the elimination of the Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques for the benefit of its members. The repeated gang style behavior of certain Deputy Cliques has led to enormous litigation costs borne, in part by ALADS, to the detriment of ALADS’ members, and significant harm to the Department’s reputation with the public. Each special hearing of the COC included multiple public witnesses calling out gang behavior by deputies and expressing a community fear and hatred of deputies simply because they were members of the Department. The level of anger and mistrust publicly expressed is the tip of a sizable iceberg in the community. Elimination of Deputy Gangs and Cliques is in the best interest of all Department members. The public enmity alone increases the risk of harm to deputies.

If only for reasons of their members safety, ALADS’ should be a leader in eliminating 38 Deputy Cliques and the Deputy Gangs that grow out of them.

2. County Counsel
County Counsel bears some responsibility for enabling Deputy Cliques. After the Kolts Commission issued the first report to publicly acknowledge the existence of Deputy Cliques in the Department in 1992, Judge Kolts recommended that the County establish a civilian oversight board to ensure the Sheriff implemented reforms aimed at reducing uses of force and eradicating Deputy Gangs. The County Counsel, however, issued an opinion advising that a civilian oversight board without the Sheriff’s agreement would violate state law. The Department leadership used this opinion to successfully oppose civilian oversight for many years. During this period without civilian oversight deputy gangs flourished.

The County Counsel has approved the use of County resources to pay by the hour litigation counsel to defend Deputy Gang and Deputy Clique members who have engaged in misconduct far outside the scope of their duties as deputies. Deputies who engaged in an after-hours beat downs of co-workers as an exercise of their power over other co- workers were not acting within the course and scope of their duty and yet they are supported in litigation by the County.

In connection with Lockett v. County of Los Angeles, 18-CV-5838-PJW in a December 2022 “Summary of Corrective Action” an Assistant County Counsel addressing the beating and tasering by Deputies Aldama and Orrego of Sheldon Lockett alleged to have been motivated by the deputies involvement in the Executioners Deputy Gang wrote “to date, there is no information or evidence obtained through any Sheriff’s Department investigation to substantiate this claim[that the use of force by the deputies was motivated by their membership in the Executioners.]” In fact, as was revealed at the hearing, Aldama displayed his 39 Executioner tattoo at a deposition. The Court denied the County’s lawyer’s attempt to keep from the jury evidence of the tattoos of the deputies. The question of the relationship between the use of force, a claim ultimately settled by the County for more than two million dollars, and action in furtherance of gang membership surely was a reasonable inference to be drawn from the history of the Executioners and the disturbing facts that led to the multi-million dollar settlement.

It appears that County Counsel refused to accept the inference in light of the facts publicly known. For example, in the case of the shooting of Donta Taylor by the same deputies, Aldama admitted not only that he had an Executioner tattoo but that up to twenty other deputies had the same tattoo. The Taylor case settled for seven million dollars. It appears that notwithstanding almost ten million dollars in County paid settlements that the County Counsel refused to accept the inference widely drawn by the media and the community.

As Michael Gennaco has made clear, County Counsel has not supported meaningful risk management and other efforts to address the problem of Deputy Cliques on the front end; that is, working to root out the problems before they result in litigation as opposed to paying after-the-fact litigation costs, settlements, and adverse judgments. He recalled a handwritten document describing a Regulator tattoo, which stated that “if you kill add smoke” to the tattoo. Gennaco stated that County Counsel urged no action because of concern that the Department would be sued if it took action in response to the tattoo.

The COC believes that County Counsel is aware that former Sheriff Villanueva relied upon a withdrawn and legally erroneous 2014 opinion to claim that he could not end the tattooed Deputy Cliques. Despite the COC’s request, the COC has been informed that County Counsel has advised the Board of Supervisors not to release an 40 opinion that fully sustains the COC’s recommended policy change. By this simple act County Counsel gave cover to a regime that at minimum tolerated, if not rewarded Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques.

The conduct of County Counsel creates a reasonable inference that, whatever its intentions, by its actions and inactions it has not provided meaningful assistance to eliminating Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques.

3. Los Angeles District Attorney’s Office
The District Attorney’s Office has in many instances ignored deputies who participate in Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques and who engage in gang-related misconduct. The Justice System Integrity Division (JSID) of the Los Angeles District Attorney’s Office investigates alleged criminal misconduct by deputies, as well as all deputy involved shootings to determine whether criminal charges should be filed. In conducting its analyses, the JSID repeatedly refrains from pursuing evidence that a sheriff’s deputy accused of potential criminal activity or unconstitutional is affiliated with a Deputy Gang or Deputy Clique. For example, JSID declined to file criminal charges against four alleged Banditos who severely beat other deputies at an offtraining party at Kennedy Hall. Despite substantial evidence that incident was, in effect, a “gang beat down,” the JSID discounted a gang-related motive, writing:
“Although there was some mention of a subculture of “Bandtios” existing at the ELA station, the Banditos was not a focus of this investigation nor were suspects identified as being part of this subculture.… At no point in this investigation did any witnesses indicate that the Banditos were equivalent to a gang or any type of criminal enterprise.”
The JSID memo is factually wrong—several witnesses interviewed in Special Counsel’s investigation have characterized the Banditos as a “gang”—and betrays a 41 reluctance to pursue any evidence of gang affiliation or a gang-related motive for alleged misconduct. As the Inspector General concluded in his October 2020 report, “Having received what appears to be a purposefully perfunctory investigation by ICIB (which did not gather evidence of the motive behind the alleged assault at Kennedy Hall) the LADA office did not request statements be taken from the uncooperative witnesses or compel a grand jury to compel statements.” The District Attorney’s Office also has failed to require the Department to disclose the identity of known Deputy Gang and Deputy Clique members who are to testify as prosecution witnesses in criminal trials. The District Attorney’s Office does not require Deputy District Attorneys to ask prosecution witnesses whether they belong to a Deputy Gang. The failure to obtain and to disclose potentially exonerating or impeaching testimony favorable to the defense raises significant constitutional issues under Brady v. Maryland (1963) 373 U.S.83.

D. The Elimination of Deputy Cliques is Constitutionally Permissible Applicable law permits disciplinary actions, including termination, based upon a deputy’s joining or participating in an internal Deputy Clique. The overwhelming evidence presented at the public hearing, and developed in extensive interviews, demonstrates that Deputy Cliques encourage excessive force, undermine supervision, destroy public trust, are discriminatory, disruptive, and act contrary to fundamental principles of professional policing. With these elements Deputy Cliques are properly defined as gangs within the definition of Penal Code Section 13670. These characteristics make the elimination of the Deputy Cliques constitutionally permissible.

Indeed, they make the elimination of these Deputy Cliques and Deputy Gangs a constitutional imperative.

The activities of and dangers created by Deputy Cliques meet the balancing test 42 required to ban or limit membership in these groups. Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563 (1968) established the required “balancing” test. The Ninth Circuit applied the test in Hudson v. Craven, 403 F.3d 691, 696 (9th Cir. 2005). The balance to be weighed is: “(1) [W]hether the speech that led to the adverse employment action [i.e., prohibiting Deputy Cliques] relates to a matter of ‘public concern’; and (2) whether, under a balancing test, the public employer can demonstrate that its legitimate interests outweigh the employee’s First Amendment rights.” Based upon the “public comment” at COC’s special hearings and COC regular meetings and the multiple public reports going back to the Kolts Commission in 1992, the existence and conduct of Deputy Cliques are plainly matters of “public concern.” The COC has heard moving statements by friends and family members of deceased or injured individuals impacted by the activities of Deputy Cliques. The treatment and gang activities of Deputy Clique members toward their brothers and sisters in uniform is a chilling statement of the paramount interest of the Department and the County in protecting its own employees and not tolerating persistent violations of law and fundamental principles of professional policing. The public is well advised to be “concerned” and to view the evidence of such misconduct directed toward fellow deputies and assume that they, as outsiders of the organization, can only expect worse treatment.

In Piscottano v. Murphy, 511 F. 3d. 247, 274-277 (2nd Cir. 2007), the court concluded that correctional officers’ membership in the Outlaws Motorcycle Club, an organization that had engaged in criminal activity, presented an issue of “public concern.” Here, both extensive law enforcement testimony and evidence and the public comments demonstrate that Deputy Clique membership is a matter of public concern. Accord, Godwin v. Rogue Valley Youth Corr. Facility 656 App’x 874, 875 (9th 43 Cir. 2016).

In the balancing of competing interests prong of the test, the employer needs to show that “the employee’s activity is disruptive to the internal operations of the governmental unit in question” and the disruption is significant enough so that it “impairs discipline by superiors or harmony among co-workers, has a detrimental impact on close working relationships…or impedes the performance of the speaker’s duties or interferes with the regular operation of the enterprise.” Melzer v. Bd. of Educ of City Sch. Dist. of City of New York, 336 F.3d 185, 197 (2nd Cir. 2003).

Courts have consistently found that a “law enforcement agency has a heightened need for order, loyalty, morale and harmony which affords a police department more latitude in responding to the speech of its officers than other government employers.” See e.g., Doggrell v. City of Anniston, Alabama, 277 F. Supp. 3d 1239, 1258 (N.D. Ala. 2017); Turner v. United States Capital Police, 34 F. Supp. 3d 124, 143 (D.D.C. 2014); McMullen v. Carson, 754 F.2d 936 (11th Cir. 1985) (Ku Klux Klan membership sufficient to terminate a Sheriff’s deputy.). Further, the efficiency, security, and integrity of the Department law enforcement function easily outweighs the “associational rights” of a Deputy Clique member.

In short, the applicable law establishes that, based upon the facts found by Special Counsel, and the evidence offered in public hearings conducted by the COC that the elimination of Deputy Cliques is well within the constitutional bounds of the Department. Not only is it permissible, but it is also a necessity.

IV. FACTUAL FINDINGS SUMMARY
Special Counsel’s investigation of Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques in the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department demonstrates that it is time to eradicate this 50-year plague upon the County of Los Angeles, its residents and the Department’s employees 44 who do not belong to, or wish to be associated with, the Deputy Gangs or Deputy Cliques. The fine distinction, if any, between “Deputy Gangs” and “Deputy Cliques” is not important. The evidence has shown that Deputy Cliques regularly devolve into discriminatory, exclusionary, and dangerous associations that challenge the core goals of law enforcement.

Accordingly, Special Counsel sets forth below recommendations to the COC to urge Sheriff Robert Luna to accomplish this goal. The COC should work with the Sheriff and the Department in facilitating enactment of the recommendations and monitoring the results.

V. RECOMMENDATIONS TO ELIMINATE DEPUTY GANGS AND CLIQUES On February 14, 2020, the COC passed a resolution recommending that the Department enact a policy “prohibiting joining and participation in deputy cliques.” A copy of the resolution and preamble is attached as Exhibit A.

The COC defined Deputy Cliques “as groups of Sheriff’s deputies within a particular patrol station, bureau or unit who self- associate as a subgroup to the exclusion of others in their station or unit.“ The term “Deputy Cliques” when used within the Department was intended to minimize the problem created by such groups.

The harmful effects of groups of deputies who self-associated and acted to exclude other deputies by identifying with symbols and names designed to separate themselves from the Department had a principal focus upon the harm caused to the Department and to excluded members. Special Counsel urges the COC to reiterate its request that the Sheriff enact a policy prohibiting deputies from joining, participating in or soliciting others to join a Deputy Clique.

However, Special Counsel urges the COC to go further. As expressed above, as defined in the COC proposal, the term “Deputy Cliques” encompasses subgroups that 45 engage in misconduct directed against the community such as excessive force and violations of constitutional rights. The factual investigation has revealed widespread, deliberate misconduct that at minimum violates fundamental principles of professional policing and in many cases appears to violate the law. The time has now come for a policy that expressly prohibits not just the internally harmful effects of Deputy Cliques, but the external, community harmful acts of Deputy Gangs. Such harmful acts include falsified police reports, unlawful searches and seizures, misuse and excessive use of force and discriminatory enforcement of law. Proof that the community, particularly the communities of color, are suffering because of gang behavior is epitomized in the recently released body-camera footage of Deputy Sabatine as he exercised his authority by pointing a gun at an African American man sitting in his parked car without any evidence of a crime.

Now is the time to eliminate all these problematic groups, Deputy Cliques and Deputy Gangs. The factual findings compel the COC to urge the Sheriff to adopt the following recommendations:

A. LEADERSHIP AND SUPERVISION

1. The Sheriff must clearly, promptly and unequivocally articulate his vision, policies, and objectives in addressing the problem of Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques.

Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques, and their adverse effects on the community and the Department need to be eliminated. This is easier said than done, but it will never be done unless the Sheriff promptly announces that Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques will no longer be tolerated. He should make clear that this is a top priority, and he should state his intention to make this happen immediately. He must also promptly adopt policies calculated to achieve this goal and see that these policies are enforced. 46 2. Adopt a policy that clearly prohibits deputies from participating in Deputy Gangs, as defined in Penal Code Section 13670.

Special Counsel’s investigation has revealed that, despite 50 years of known Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques within the Department, these problematic groups continue to operate at several of the Department’s patrol stations, engage in gang like activities and no Sheriff has adopted a policy banning participation in such groups.

Moreover, the State legislature has mandated that every law enforcement agency in the State of California “shall maintain a policy that prohibits participation in law enforcement gangs and make violation of that policy grounds for termination.” PC Section 13670(b). Moreover, the legislature has defined the term “law enforcement gang.” The current Sheriff’s predecessor failed to implement a policy banning law enforcement gangs within the Department. Such a policy should be adopted without further delay.

3. Adopt a policy that prohibits deputies from joining, participating in and soliciting others to join Deputy Cliques.

Given the Department’s long history of exclusionary deputy subgroups, it will not be enough merely to prohibit participation in deputy or law enforcement “gangs.” Ending this problem requires a prohibition against joining and participating in Deputy Cliques. In April 2021, the COC proposed that the Department adopt a policy that prohibits deputies from joining, participating in, or soliciting others to join a Deputy Clique. The COC’s proposed policy was accompanied by a preamble that explained the need for such a policy and provided definition to the term Deputy Clique.

As noted above, Special Counsel urges that the Sheriff adopt the COC’s proposed policy. Violators of the policy would be subject to discipline, up to and including termination. The indispensable element to ending this 50-year harm to the 47 Department and the public is adopting the recommended policy to send a strong message that belonging to a Deputy Clique is no longer going to be tolerated, that gang behaviors are a thing of the past and this Sheriff is fully committed to rid the Department of these groups.

All Deputy Gangs have sprung from Deputy Cliques, and the clique-culture is deeply embedded in the Department. This cancer in the Department must be excised.

4. The Sheriff should develop a departmentwide initiative to end Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques.

As noted above in the Factual Findings, Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques are secretive, exclusive, and often employ intimidating, unprofessional, or controversial graphics, including body tattoos. They diminish the public’s trust in the Department, undermine supervision and the chain of command, are detrimental to the morale of other Department members, and negatively impact the Department’s effectiveness and professionalism in executing its mission. The elimination of these groups requires buy-in at all levels of the Department. The Sheriff should announce a department-wide initiative banning Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques. All executives, managers, and supervisors must be openly and unequivocally committed to conveying the Sheriff’s policy, and objectives to Department personnel. As the Rand study stated, “Culture eats policy.” The Sheriff’s leadership teammust change the culture of stations, jails, and other bureaus or units where these groups exist.

5. The Sheriff should seek the support of ALADS and PPOA, for his vision, policies and objectives regarding Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques.

ALADS and PPOA need to be part of the solution and recognize that the elimination of Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques is in the overall best interests 48 of their members.

6. Any captain who is unable or unwilling to support the Sheriff’s policy without reservations should be subject to appropriate discipline ranging from transfer to a less critical position with little or no presence of Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques to
termination for insubordination in the Sheriff’s considered judgment and pursuant to required due process.

7. The Department should consider assigning a senior captain and a newly promoted captain to larger, high activity stations to ensure maximum supervision and mentoring of lieutenants and sergeants while retaining full accountability within the paramilitary structure of the Department.

Although a single captain heads Sheriff’s patrol stations, there is a precedent for having two captains oversee a facility in the Custody Division. MCJ, Twin Towers Correctional Facility, and North County Correctional Facility all have two captain organizations—one for operations and one for administrative functions. Assigning two captains to larger, busier patrol stations, particularly those with a history of entrenched Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques, will enhance the ability of captains to address the continuing problem of these groups and help ensure that such groups will not be formed in the future. If the Sheriff does not believe a two-captain approach is well advised, he should report his reasons to the COC.
49 B. POLICY AND TRAINING

1. As set forth in recommendations A (2) and A (3) above, the Sheriff should adopt and promptly implement a clear policy to address the need to eliminate Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques and prohibit tattoos that depict violence which must be supported, and explained by the Sheriff’s leadership team.

As defined earlier in this Report, a Deputy Clique is an association of deputies within a station or unit that is secretive and invidiously exclusionary and often adopts images, including matching tattoos depicting violence or the use of deadly force. These sub-groups have been fairly and frequently defined as Deputy Gangs. As stated in Recommendations No. A (2) and A (3) above, the Sheriff should immediately bar all deputies from joining, participating in, or soliciting others to join Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques. In addition to adopting this policy, the Sheriff should promulgate additional polices to help eradicate Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques, including a policy that prohibits new deputies hired after the date of the issuance of Recommendations A (2) and A (3) from having tattoos that depict violence, the use of deadly force or any iconography that might reasonably be found offensive to the public. Current Department members should also be prohibited from acquiring such tattoos after the date of the issuance of the policy. Any current Department member who acquired a Deputy Gang or Deputy Clique tattoo prior to the adopting of the policy should be required to ensure that it is not visible while the member is on-duty, on Department or County property, or is representing the Department away from the workplace.

A review of stations and jails should be conducted to determine which facilities have unprofessional station/jail/bureau logos. Unit commanders should be 50 accountable for the removal of decals, flags, bumper stickers, decorations, or other depictions of unprofessional symbols inappropriate for representing Department units.

All managers and supervisors must be responsive to the existence of graphics or other symbols representing prohibited Deputy Gangs or Deputy Cliques or offensive station/jail/bureau logos such as “Ghetto Birds” or “Ft. Apache.” They should be removed, and misconduct investigations should be initiated to determine which personnel are responsible for such graphics or symbols if they reappear in the future.

2. The Department should investigate violations of the policy banning joining or participating in Deputy Gang and Deputy Cliques and refer violations for discipline.

A primary consequence of any violation of the Sheriff’s policies regarding Deputy Gangs or Deputy Cliques should be a misconduct investigation followed by appropriate discipline which should range from suspension through demotion to discharge consistent with due process. Department personnel should also be advised that the Department will enforce Penal Code Section 13670.

3. The Department’s leadership team should consistently and recurrently emphasize the adverse career consequences of creating or joining a Deputy Gang or Deputy Clique.

Although this task belongs to personnel of every rank, the time commitment must increase with each successively lower rank. Notwithstanding the importance of a captain-level manager to set the tone for deputies, lieutenants and sergeants, lieutenants and sergeants spend the most time with deputies. They therefore must be most accountable for communicating to deputies under their supervision the adverse consequences of becoming involved with Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques. Captains ultimately are responsible for and must be held accountable for the performance of 51 lieutenants and sergeants.

4. The Department must implement a procedure for notifying the District Attorney’s Office if a deputy testifying as a witness participates in a prohibited Deputy Gang or Deputy Clique.

Compliance with Federal and State law, including compliance with Brady v.

Maryland (1963) 373 U.S. 83, requires the District Attorney’s Office to disclose if a deputy testifying as a prosecution witness participates in a prohibited Deputy Gang or Deputy Clique that might bear upon the witnesses’ credibility. The confidentiality of law enforcement personnel files does not relieve the prosecution of its constitutional obligation to disclose impeaching information for any deputy testifying as a prosecution witness. Sheriff Luna and his designees should consult with the District Attorney’s Office to devise an appropriate procedure for the Department to notify the District Attorney’s Office that a deputy is participating in a prohibited Deputy Gang or Deputy Clique so that prosecutors can make the required disclosures, if any, to the defense.

5. The Department should actively investigate violation of the policy prohibiting joining, participating in or soliciting deputies to join Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques
Sheriff Luna should remedy the Department’s longstanding failure to investigate Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques. After Recommendation No. 2, above is adopted, the Department should make reasonable efforts to learn whether deputies continue to participate in such groups, as the Department did in 1973 with the Little Red Devils and in 2013 with the Jump Out Boys.
52 6. The Department should train supervisors how to mentor deputies about the adverse consequences of involvement in Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques.

In 2016 the Department initiated a departmentwide mentoring program for deputy personnel named the “Sergeants’ Mentoring Initiative.” The objective of the program was to equip and inspire the sergeants to provide to their deputies meaningful, practical, recurrent mentoring about decision-making and conduct in law enforcement and custodial services. The program was designed to (1) emphasize the high aspirations associated with public safety services, (2) stress the importance and difficulty of the decisions required of peace officers, (3) acknowledge the temptations and pressures prevalent in law enforcement, and (4) enhance deputies’ capacity to apply foresight, perspective and wisdom to their decision- making and conduct.

7. The Department should implement a series of community meetings involving patrol station captains, commanders, and chiefs to ascertain the impact of Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques on community relations.

The Department should implement at every station a Community Advisory Committee (“CAC”). The committees should consist of community members who have been vocal in their criticisms of law enforcement in addition to station “boosters” who volunteer formembership.

The periodic meetings should be attended by committee members, other members of the community, and station personnel, including the captain, dedicated lieutenant, sergeants, and special assignment and other deputies as necessary. These meetings constitute excellent forums for Department personnel to learn about community concerns. The topic of Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques must be an 53 agenda item of these meetings.

C. RE-DEPLOYMENTS AND ROTATIONS
Special Counsel recognizes the complexity of the Department, as well as the difficulty of managing the second largest local law enforcement agency in the country, with its large geographical area, responsibilities for operating the largest county jail system and the largest local court system in America and its duty to police over four million residents.

Special Counsel also recognizes that re-deploying or transferring deputies who belong to a Deputy Gang or Deputy Clique from one unit or patrol station to another has in certain circumstances resulted in moving but not necessarily solving the problem. The clearest illustration of this was the transfer of substantial numbers of deputies who were members of the 2000 and 3000 Boys to the same patrol stations they selected as their preferences, i.e., Compton and South L.A. Stations, respectively.

Nonetheless, the use of the Sheriff’s authority to re-deploy, transfer and rotate assignments is a valuable tool that can help eliminate Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques within the Department and, importantly, preventing their formation and reemergence.

In interviewing non-Department law enforcement managers, as well as former Department leaders, Special Counsel recognizes that other law enforcement agencies use re-deployment and assignment rotation to minimize the risk of problematic officer or deputy groups forming in those agencies. It is an available and appealing strategy here. While not a panacea, it would provide an additional remedy and the mere announcement of the policy could serve a prophylactic effect.

Moreover, the evidence adduced demonstrates that the Department’s decentralized station-based structure has played a significant role in fostering Deputy 54 Gangs and Deputy Cliques. Deputies’ loyalties extend to the station rather than to the Department as a whole. Indeed, tattoos often are associated with the first or “home” station of the deputy.

At a minimum, the Sheriff should provide a report to the COC on his perception of the viability and likelihood of success of the rotational plan set forth below.

Special Counsel urges that the Sheriff implement the following recommendation for re-deployment and periodic rotations of deputies within patrol and custody:

1. The Sheriff should use his authority to re-deploy and rotate deputies based upon the needs of the Department for the Department to eliminate the formation and re-emergence of Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques.

The Sheriff should consider making such re-deployments or transfers within a geographic patrol or custody division, where possible, to avoid undue hardships. The Sheriff should also consider rotating all patrol deputies (after completion of field training) no later than the end of their first year in patrol to another patrol station within the Division. The Sheriff should also consider rotating all patrol deputies in periodic rotations, no longer than every five years, or sooner, to another station. The CCJV recommended and the Department implemented frequent rotations of deputies within the facilities of the County Jails. The rotational policy played a role in breaking up of the 2000 and 3000 Boys and reducing excessive force in MCJ. The rotation of deputies serving in Custody divisions should continue.

To effectively use the Sheriff’s authority to re-deploy, Unit Commanders should take necessary actions to address the problem of Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques under their commands, including recommending to their Chiefs transfers of problematic deputies. Captains must be focused upon the rotation options and actively 55 participate in informing Commanders and Chiefs of the utility and results of such transfers.

2. The Department should re-assess the dual career track for Custody/Court Services and provide a written report to the COC explaining what factors impede implementation.

Having more deputies in Custody or Court Services who want careers in those Divisions may allow other deputies to go directly to patrol from the academy or shorten the time that other deputies spend in Custody after the academy.

3. The Department should assess the feasibility of first assignments to patrol rather than jail facilities and provide a written report to the COC explaining what factors exist, if any, impede
implementation.

D. ACCOUNTABILITY

1. The Sheriff should ensure that senior executives and unit leaders, notably captains and commanders are implementing the Sheriff’s policy, vision and objectives regarding Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques.

A segment of the weekly Executive Planning Council meeting (Sheriff, Undersheriff, Assistant Sheriff, Division Chiefs and various staff members) should be devoted to discussion of the progress of the initiative to end Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques. Identified obstacles should be remedied quickly.

2. The Office of Inspector General should monitor implementation of the policy banning, joining or participating in Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques.

Because of the imperative of implementing policies to eliminate Deputy Gangs 56 and Deputy Cliques, Special Counsel recommends that the COC request the Office of Inspector General to deploy its resources as additional “eyes and ears” to ensure the policy recommendations A (2) and A (3) are implemented fully and with alacrity.

3. Promotional considerations should include an evaluation of evidence that a member under consideration for a promotion is currently involved in a Deputy Gang or Deputy Clique, including the nature and extent of the member’s involvement and whether it was before or after the date of the policy issued by the Sheriff.

Past administrations have promoted tattooed Deputy Gang members to the highest levels of leadership in the Department. Most notably, Sheriff Baca promoted Paul Tanaka, a tattooed Viking, to Undersheriff. More recently, Sheriff Villanueva promoted Timothy Murakami, a tattooed Caveman, to Undersheriff and Lawrence Del Mese, a tattooed Grim Reaper, to Chief of Staff.

Promoting Deputy Gang members into leadership positions reinforces the power of Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques and undermines the ability of officials to implement reforms aimed at eliminating them within the Department. For example, former Undersheriff Tanaka’s recommendation encouraging investigative tactics “close to the line”and “in the gray area” became part of the Jump Out Boys creed.

Current or former Deputy Gang and Deputy Clique members in leadership positions will have difficulty enforcing new prohibitions against other deputies joining a Deputy Gang or Deputy Clique because their own tattoos and past participation renders them vulnerable to accusations of, at minimum, hypocrisy. Former Chief of Staff Del Mese testified that he had his Reapers tattoos removed at about the same time as the former Sheriff appointed him Chief of Staff because he understood that the tattoo had come to be a “liability” and “a bad look.”
57 Consequently, the Department should inquire if a deputy under consideration for a promotion is or was Deputy Gang or Deputy Clique affiliated and must carefully evaluate the Department wide implications of promoting those who actively participated in such groups.

4. The Department should include a standard set of questions regarding a deputy’s current affiliations with Deputy Gangs or Deputy Cliques in the use of force review process and in administrative and internal criminal investigations.

This recommendation does not assume a per se causal connection between membership in a Deputy Gang or Deputy Clique, or the fact that a deputy has a tattoo reflecting involvement in such a group, and unlawful use of force or misconduct. It is, however, important to recognize that the community widely assumes such a causal connection.

Members of communities policed by Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques widely infer a connection between such groups and excessive uses of force. The U.S.

Commission on Civil Rights report, the Loyola Report and the report of the National Association of Blacks in Criminal Justice noted that stations with active Deputy Gangs have significantly more deputy involved shootings than stations without Deputy Gangs, even when the overall crime rates in the station-districts are comparable.

The questions must enable an assessment of the possibility or likelihood of a connection, without any presumption. If there is evidence indicating even a possible connection between a deputy’s membership in a Deputy Gang or Deputy Clique and a use of force incident or misconduct, investigative steps should be taken to determine the nature and extent of the connection. In any such cases, the Office of the Inspector General should be notified and asked to monitor the progress of the investigation. 58 5. The Department should ensure that captains are notified of deputies involved in force incidents or personnel misconduct investigations who have affiliations with Deputy Gangs or Deputy Cliques, including tattoos associated with such groups.

The Department should codify this recommendation as a rule in the Department Manual of Policy and Procedures. The responsibility for making this notification will normally fall to an investigator at the captain’s own unit of assignment, or to an Internal Affairs Bureau or to Internal Criminal Investigations Bureau investigator.

However, anyone who obtains such knowledge must promptly notify the concerned captain, either directly or through the chain of command.

6. The Department should ensure that the CompStat process for risk management indicators regarding the existence of Deputy Gangs or Deputy Cliques within a patrol station or other Department unit is implemented and is effective in assessing the risk mitigation efforts of unit commanders.

The Department previously instituted a CompStat process, also referred to as the Sheriff’s Critical Issues Forum (SCIF). The Department initially used it primarily in patrol divisions, but later extended to every division involved with large scale risk management issues. LAPD has successfully employed a CompStat process that allows measurable results. Such statistics driven analyses can assess unit commanders’ efforts to successfully manage their responsibilities. SCIF or other statistics driven analyses will assist in the responsible operating of the Department and provide another forum for evaluating progress on efforts to end Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques. The Department should track force incidents by shifts or deputy partners, checking for, and assessing, patterns that may indicate the need for re-assignments, transfers or, 59 discipline.

The Department should implement a “performance mentoring” process, overseen by Risk Management Bureau (“RMB”). The object of the program should be to identify “at-risk” employees by means of the automated “early identification and intervention system”.

Active management will determine the cause and the means of rectifying patterns of problematic conduct. Where leadership perceives the behavior as curable and non-recurrent, a mentoring program specifically designed to help the employee avoid future misconduct should be enacted.

7. The Department must ensure that captains hold sergeants and lieutenants accountable for deputies under their supervision involved in Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques.

It is essential that captains and lieutenants back up sergeants who face insubordination from members of Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques. Fulfilling this recommendation is a fundamental duty of captain- and lieutenant-level managers.

They must assess lower ranking managers and supervisors as to their commitment to convey, support and enforce the Sheriff’s vision and intentions about Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques. Failure on the part of a captain to meet this obligation should be grounds for transfer or other appropriate employment action.

8. The Department must ensure that sergeants actively and recurrently mentor deputy personnel and enforcement of the policy prohibiting Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques.

For sergeants to succeed in conducting the policy prohibiting Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques they must be supported by the chain of command. The persistence of these groups is due in part to sergeants perceiving that higher ranking officers will not 60 support them. With that perception, much of the incentive for a sergeant to actively seek to eliminate such groups is removed. Creation and systematic use of a data base tracking the date, time, setting, duration, topics covered, personnel in attendance, and identity of mentor will allow assurance that the policy of the Sheriff is reenforced by those closest to the deputies who might consider participation in a Deputy Gang or Deputy Clique.

9. The Sheriff should flatten the chain of command by eliminating at least one layer of supervision between him and the captains running patrol stations.

As noted earlier in this Report, the Department’s decentralized station- based structure has played a significant role in fostering Deputy Gangs and Deputy Clique.

Deputies’ loyalties are extended to the station rather than to the institution of the Department as a whole.

Despite some Sheriffs’ prior efforts to eradicate Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques some patrol station captains where these groups have flourished have found it easier to do nothing than take them on. The COC interviewed several captains of stations with widely known, active Deputy Gangs or Deputy Cliques who professed to know nothing about them despite extensive media coverage of scandals and widespread awareness of deputies of their presence. Because of the relative ease of the “do nothing” choice, information has not consistently flowed up to Commanders, Chiefs, and Assistant Sheriffs. That must change. Shortening the chain of command will assist the Sheriff in seeing that his policies will be enforced.

Currently, there are six layers of reporting from a Captain of a Patrol Station to the Sheriff (Captain to a Commander to a Chief to an Assistant Sheriff to the Undersheriff to the Sheriff). This top-heavy structure has led to a level of autonomy at 61 certain patrol stations that has contributed to the continuation of these groups. Some have equated patrol stations to functioning more like fiefdoms than integral parts of a command structure where policy is implemented throughout the Department.

This level of autonomy would be ameliorated by a shorter chain of command which the Sheriff could accomplish in a number of ways. At a minimum, the Assistant Sheriff for Patrol Operations should be a direct report to the Sheriff.

10. The prohibition against joining or participating in Deputy Gangs or Cliques should be a condition of employment.

Once the Sheriff adopts Recommendation No. 2, above, non-participation in Deputy Gangs or Deputy Cliques should be an express condition of employment. Such a condition will make clear from inception what will not be tolerated by the Department.

VI. CONCLUSION
Special Counsel respectfully urges the COC to consider the factual findings and recommendations in this report and to deliver the report to Sheriff Luna for his consideration.

There can be no doubt that Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques have been, and still are, responsible for undermining discipline, morale, and safety of the public and Department personnel. Deputy Gangs and Deputy Cliques, as the seed from which Deputy Gangs grow, must be eliminated. Sheriff Luna has an opportunity to set the Department on the right path in the best interests of the Department and the community. Special Counsel recommends that the COC adopt the Report and Recommendations and deliver it to the Sheriff.

EXHIBIT A

MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Chantelle Limón, Administrative Analyst
Date: April 10, 2023
Subject: Consideration of Approval of Resolution No. 1009 to Allow the City of Hidden Hills the Blanket Authority to File Applications for Grant Funds from the Los Angeles County Regional Park and Open Space District For Measure A Funding for Projects and Programs
Background
The Los Angeles County Regional Park and Open Space District (RPOSD) is responsible for implementing and administering the Los Angeles County Safe, Clean Neighborhood Parks and Beaches Measure of 2016 (Measure A). Seventy-five percent of Los Angeles County voters approved Measure A in November of 2016, which authorizes dedicated local funding for park, recreation, and open space projects and their maintenance through an annual special tax on all taxable real property in the County. Measure A makes funding available to eligible recipients for projects that repair and upgrade parks and recreational facilities; create new parks; preserve and protect open spaces and beaches; and support recreational programming. The existing Demonstration Garden and park-like space at City Hall were funded by RPOSD (Proposition A) in 1996.

Discussion
The City of Hidden Hills receives an annual allocation from Measure A and has the option to expend, accrue, bond, and share/transfer its funds every year. The allocation is distributed using a set formula and is approximately $10,000 per year. For the past several years, the City has been accruing its annual allocations, resulting in a current fund balance of $52,176.85. Measure A program guidelines limit the number of accrual years to five years; however, this timeline has not been historically enforced. The City is encouraged to plan to expend funds to guarantee it remains in Good Standing status with the program.

The proposed resolution provides staff the ability to file applications for Measure A grant funds now and in the future, without seeking City Council approval to apply each time.

City of Hidden Hills
6165 Spring Valley Road * Hidden Hills, California 91302 (818) 888-9281 * Fax (818) 719-0083
City Council
Measure A Resolution No. 1009
April 10, 2023

Page 2 ends

In 2022, the City was awarded a grant from the State (Per Capita Program) in the amount of $179,052 for a project to enhance the outdoor park-like space surrounding City Hall. This project is currently in design. The Per Capita grant requires a 20% match in the amount of $44,763 from the City; eligible match sources include local funds, such as Measure A. Staff anticipates using the Measure A funds discussed tonight as the City match, thus eliminating the need to use General Funds for the match.

Fiscal Impact
There is no fiscal impact of adopting this proposed resolution.

Recommendation
It is staff’s recommendation that the City Council approve the attached Resolution authorizing the City to apply for Measure A funds, as outlined above.

Attachment

1. Proposed Resolution No. 1009
RESOLUTION NO. 1009

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS

APPROVING THE BLANKET AUTHORITY TO FILE APPLICATIONS FOR GRANT

FUNDS FROM THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY REGIONAL PARK AND OPEN SPACE

DISTRICT FOR MEASURE A FUNDING FOR PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS WHEREAS, the voters of the County of Los Angeles on November 8, 2016, approved the Safe, Clean Neighborhood Parks, Open Space Beaches, Rivers Protection, and Water Conservation Measure (Measure A); and
WHEREAS, Measure A also designated the Los Angeles County Regional Park and Open Space District (the District) to administer said funds; and WHEREAS, the District has set forth the necessary policies and procedures governing the application for grant funds under Measure A; and
WHEREAS, the District’s policies and procedures require the governing body of the City of Hidden Hills to approve of the filing of an application before submission of said application to the District; and
WHEREAS, said application contains assurances that the City of Hidden Hills must comply with; and
WHEREAS, the City of Hidden Hills will enter into Agreement(s) with the District to provide funds for acquisition projects, development projects, and/or programs.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS HEREBY:

1. Approves the blanket authority to file applications with the Los Angeles County Regional Park and Open Space District for Measure A Funds for projects or programs; and

2. Certifies that the City of Hidden Hills understands the assurances and will comply with the assurances in the application form; and

3. Appoints the City Manager or designee, to conduct all negotiations, and to execute and submit all documents including, but not limited to, applications, agreements, amendments, payment requests and so forth, which may be necessary for the completion of projects or programs.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED on the 10th day of April, 2023. ____________________________________
Steve Freedland, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Deana L. Gonzalez, CMC, City Clerk

MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Roxanne Diaz, City Attorney
Date: April 10, 2023
Subject: Discussion Regarding the Food Truck Agreements for the 2023 Fiesta and Direction and Approval for an Agreement with In-N-Out Burger or Tommy’s Hamburgers and Authorization for a Deposit and Payment.

Background
It has been a Fiesta tradition to have burgers in front of the Community Center on Saturday afternoon. Accordingly, at the March 13, 2023 City Council meeting staff brought forward an agreement with Tommy’s Hamburgers (“Tommy’s”) for the Saturday afternoon lunch at the Community Center during the 2023 Fiesta. In the past, In-N-Out provided lunch service, but they were not available. Staff requested to be placed on a waiting list.

During the discussion of the agreement with Tommy’s, a question was raised regarding Tommy’s catering truck agreement which required the City to indemnify Tommy’s. A concern was raised that the City would be required to indemnify Tommy’s if, for example, their food made someone ill at the Fiesta. Direction was given to Staff to request revisions to the indemnification and insurance provisions and if Tommy’s refused, to bring this item back to the City Council for further discussion.

Discussion
As directed by the City Council, the City Attorney engaged with the representative from Tommy’s to discuss the indemnity provision. The Tommy’s agreement requires the City to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Tommy’s from any and all claims arising out of or related to the Fiesta except to the extent that the claim arises out of the “gross negligence of Tommy’s, the products, vehicles, employees, owners, officers, directors, representatives and agents.” We explained to Tommy’s that they are in the business position to indemnify the City for their negligence and errors and omissions as they are providing the services and requested that Tommy’s indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City. The Tommy’s Agreement also included a liquidated damages provision that limited recovery, including if there was an issue with the food and any related illness.

Another provision required the City to name Tommy’s as an additional insured.

City of Hidden Hills
6165 Spring Valley Road * Hidden Hills, California 91302 (818) 888-9281 * Fax (818) 719-0083
City Council
2023 Fiesta Food Truck Agreements
April 10, 2023

Page 2 ends

Tommy’s responded and indicated that the certificate of insurance did not apply to everyone and is requested only if necessary. As for the requested revisions, Tommy’s stated they are not able to remove or change any verbiage from the contract.

Subsequent to the March City Council meeting, City Staff (myself, Deana Gonzalez, the City Clerk and Chantelle Limón, the City’s Administrative Analyst) had a conference call with Penny DewittHoldren with Alliant Insurance Services regarding the City’s “Special Event Liability Insurance.” Many years ago, the City’s former City Manager discussed with the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (“CJPIA”) the issue of insurance since many small vendors at the Fiesta did not carry insurance (i.e “Kitty’s booth”). CJPIA recommended the City obtain a “Special Event Liability Policy” that would cover all the vendors the City lists on that policy. In speaking with Ms. Dewitt-Holdren regarding this policy and its coverage, she explained that the City can add any vendor to the policy as an additional insured. Should someone become ill from the food served at the event, this additional policy will provide the City and vendor coverage. She also explained that the benefits of the Special Event policy is that there is no deductible so it pays out immediately.

Also, should there be a claim, because we have this policy there is no impact on the City’s regular liability policy with the CJPIA. She stated that if we list the food-truck vendor on the policy, the City will be insured from claims arising out of that vendor’s operations and products.

Recently, In-N-Out informed Staff that they would be available to provide their trucks for the lunch at the Fiesta. The In-N-Out agreement is somewhat similar to the Tommy’s agreement in that the City is required to indemnify, defend and hold harmless In-N-Out but the City is not required to provide this indemnity for claims that arise out of the gross negligence or intentional misconduct of In-N-Out and its employees. What is different from the Tommy’s agreement is the addition of “intentional misconduct” as an exclusion to the City’s duty to indemnify. With respect to insurance, the City must only warrant that it has adequate insurance in place “for the property where the Event is to be held.” The City would add In-N-Out (or any food-truck vendor) to its Special Event policy and would satisfy this provision.

The In-N-Out agreement also has a clause that In-N-Out will not assume any liability for any damages or losses arising from or relating to the City’s event. Another clause limits In-N-Out’s liability to the fees actually paid by the City, except to the extent such claim, liability or defense has been “judicially determined to have resulted primarily from the gross negligence or intentional misconduct of In-N-Out Burger.”
We followed up with the In-N-Out representative and they were willing to review our requested revisions to the Agreement. Accordingly, we requested a mutual indemnify, defend and hold harmless clause and revised the claims to include those that arise from intentional, reckless, negligent or otherwise wrongful acts, error or omissions. We also included language that the limitation on liability would not be applicable to any action related to In-N-Out’s obligation to City Council
2023 Fiesta Food Truck Agreements
April 10, 2023

Page 3 ends

indemnify the City. The revisions were sent to In-N-Out prior to this meeting so we do not know if our requested revisions will be accepted.

At this juncture, the decision before the City Council is whether it would like to move forward with either agreement in their current form. Staff’s preference is In-N-Out and there is a possibility that In-N-Out may accept the City’s revisions to the indemnity and liability provisions. Staff estimates that the City has had the In-N-Out truck at the Fiesta at least 14 times over the years and the Tommy’s truck at least three times at the Fiesta. There have been no incidents regarding either food-truck.

Fiscal Impact
The proposed estimate for catering provided by Tommy’s is $10,110. The proposed estimate for catering provided by In-N-Out Burgers is $6,942.20.

Recommendation
Staff is seeking direction from the City Council regarding entering in to an agreement for catering services with either In-N-Out Burgers or Tommy’s Burgers.

Attachment

1. Tommy’s Mobile Catering Unit Agreement

2. In-N-Out Burger Cookout Agreement
In-N-Out Burger
Cookout Agreement
Event ID#: E63703
13502 Hamburger Lane
Baldwin Park, CA 91706
(626) 813-8295
This Cookout Agreement (this “Agreement”) is made and entered into as of 4/6/2023 (the “Effective Date”), by and between In-N-Out Burger and City of Hidden Hills (the “Customer”), located at 6165 Spring Valley Hidden Hills, CA 91302.

Event Information: Estimated Event Total:

Event ID#: E63703
Event Date: Sat, 9/30/2023 $6,942.30
Client: City of Hidden Hills
Serve Time: 11:00 am - 2:00 pm
Duration: 3 Hours
Planned # of Meals: 600
Order:

Number of Trucks: 2
Description:600 - Hamburgers, Cheeseburgers, Chips and Drinks Event Address:

Hidden Hills Community Association
24549 Long Valley Road
Calabasas, CA 91302
Event Name: City of Hidden Hills, herein after
the "Event"
Site Contact Information:

Deana Gonzalez
Phone: (818) 888-9281
Mobile: (805) 750-5305
Email: [email protected]
Customer/Billing Details:

City of Hidden Hills
6165 Spring Valley, Hidden Hills, CA 91302
Deana Gonzalez
Phone: (818) 888-9281
Mobile: (805) 750-5305
Key Dates:

Signed Contract Due: 4/13/2023
Deposit Due: 4/13/2023
Full Payment due: 9/30/2023
Final Date for Refund: 9/16/2023
I have read the above Event Information, and agree to the "Terms and Conditions" and any attachment or addendum and agree to all provisions therein.

Date Signature
Company/Organization Printed Name

Page 1 of 4 ends

TERMS AND CONDITIONS

1. COSTS: 1. PRICES, SALES TAX & MARK-UP: The total cost of Customer’s Event with The In-N-Out Burger Truck will be determined by the amount of food Customer orders prior to the Event, plus sales tax. The estimated total is based on:
-Estimated Food Subtotal: $5,340.00
- Trip Charge: $1,000.00
- Over-time: $0.00
- Out-of-Area Surcharge: $0.00
- Estimated Sales Tax: $602.30

2. Prices, terms and conditions quoted herein are subject to change. Should any such change occur, Customer will be notified no less than 60 days prior to the date of the Event.

3. TRIP CHARGE - There is a $500 trip-charge, per-truck which will be in addition to the food minimum.

4. FOOD MINIMUM CHARGE AND GUARANTEE: The “food minimum charge” or “guarantee” is calculated in the following manner: (a) $1,500 food minimum plus $100 for every half hour of service time used beyond one and a half (1.5 hours) or 75% of your estimated order (based on the average meal, which is the cheeseburger price). Please note that product cannot be substituted for unused meals to satisfy the minimum. The food minimum for this event, based on the above event details, is $4,000.00. 5. INCIDENTAL CHARGES: If unusual circumstances exist, In-N-Out Burger may assess an incidental charge. All such charges shall be noted in the Incidental Charges section prior to executing this Agreement.

6. COLLECTION OF MONEY: In-N-Out Burger will NOT collect any money from individuals attending the Event.

Rather, Customer is responsible for selling and collecting all funds.

7. DEPOSIT: A $500 deposit, per truck, is required to hold the date. Deposits are non-refundable if the Event is cancelled less than 14 days from the scheduled Event date. The receipt of Customer’s deposit by In-N-Out Burger will confirm the reservation of the Event. The full amount of the deposit will be credited against the total charges for the In-N-Out Burger Truck service. MasterCard, Visa, Discover and American Express are accepted. Checks will be accepted, but must clear no less than 10 days prior to the Event date.

8. BALANCE DUE: Final payment must be made at the end of the Event, by check, VISA, MasterCard, Discover or American Express. Cash will not be accepted unless prior arrangements have been made.

9. CANCELLATION: If Customer chooses to cancel their Event or reschedule to a different date, this must be done 14 days prior to the Event date to receive any type of refund. Deposits are non-refundable after this time.

2. SITE SELECTION: In-N-Out Burger reserves the right to pre-approve the location of any event at which In-N-Out Burger Truck may appear and shall have the right, upon request, to inspect the site in advance. The In-N-Out Burger Truck requires a solid and level surface and sufficient space for parking both the truck and our employee support vehicle to accompany the truck for the duration of your event. In-N-Out Burger reserves the right to relocate the In-N-Out Burger Truck if it deems the parking area or any portion thereof, to be unacceptable. If the desired parking area requires property parking permits, In-N-Out Burger is not responsible for obtaining them. Cookout Trucks require 85 feet of parking space, with 14 feet overhead clearance and a width of at least 11 feet. In-N-Out Burger cannot park in any residential drive-ways. Please be aware that some areas may be inaccessible due to narrow or steep roads and low overhanging trees.

Truck Information •
Length: 65' - We will need about 85' for parking or 9-10 parking spaces • Width: 14''. Our entire set-up (EZ-up and table) will need 25' of space. • Height: 13' (Safe clearance height of 14' needed) •
Bottom rail clearance height: 10", Rear tractor axle - front trailer axle spacing: 25' • Weight: 50,000 Lbs.

Initial

Page 2 of 4 ends

3. PROMOTIONAL MATERIALS: The In-N-Out Burger name, logo, trademark and graphics (“Names and Marks”) may only be used on printed materials relating to Customer’s Event and may not be included in any form of electronic advertising, including, without limitation, radio, television, etc. All printed materials (including, without limitation, posters, tickets or other promotional materials) using the In-N-Out Burger’s Names and Marks must be approved by the In-N-Out Burger Marketing Department in advance of production of such materials. Please e-mail any design to [email protected] for review (typically 24-hour turn-around and approvals). In-N-Out Burger reserves all rights, title and interest in and to its Names and Marks; Customer hereby acknowledges and agrees that by this Agreement InN-Out Burger is not granting to Customer any license of any kind to use In-N-Out Burger’s Names and Marks.

4. FOOD HANDLING AND SERVICE: Customer expressly understands and agrees that only In-N-Out Burger associates shall cook the burgers at the Event. In addition, Customer expressly agrees that no personnel, other than In-N-Out Burger associates, shall serve burgers to guests at the Event.

5. CHANGES IN TERMS OF AGREEMENT: In-N-Out Burger Cookout Trucks do not carry extra product. In-N-Out Burger will only come prepared to serve what is ordered on page (1) of this Agreement (see “Order”) and must all be served within the scheduled time. If Customer desires to change the time, location or menu of their Event as originally agreed to in this Agreement, Customer must inform In-N-Out Burger of such a change no later than seven (7) days prior to the scheduled date of the Event and is subject to availability. Please note that In-N-Out Burger may be unable to make any change in the Event if this advance notice is not provided.

6. INSURANCE AND INDEMNIFICATION REQUIREMENTS: Customer acknowledges and warrants that it has adequate liability insurance in place for the property where the Event is to be held. Upon In-N-Out Burger’s request, Customer shall provide In-N-Out Burger with a Certificate of Insurance, or a copy of the homeowners' insurance policy, indicating that adequate liability insurance is in place for the property where the cookout is to be held.

A. Except to the extent any action or claim arises out of the gross negligence or intentional misconduct of In-NOut Burger or any of its employees, owners, officers, directors and agents, Customer hereby agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless In-N-Out Burger and its affiliates, related business entities, successors, assigns, employees, owners, officers, directors and agents, and each of them, from and against any and all actions or claims that Customer or Customer’s guests, invitees and representatives may have, and against any and all other actions or claims, which in any way relate to or arise out of Customer’s Event.

B. Except for any liability arising out of its gross negligence or intentional misconduct, In-N-Out Burger does not, and shall not be required to, assume any liability for any damages or losses arising from or relating to Customer’s Event.

C. Customer hereby acknowledges and agrees that In-N-Out Burger and its employees, owners, officers, directors and agents shall not have any liability to Customer for any claims, liabilities or expenses arising out of or relating to the Event in excess of the fees actually paid by Customer to In-N-Out Burger pursuant to this Agreement, except to the extent any such claim, liability or defense has been finally judicially determined to have resulted primarily from the gross negligence or intentional misconduct of In-N-Out Burger.

7. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY: In no event shall In-N-Out Burger or any of its owners, officers, directors, employees, contractors or suppliers be liable to Customer for any punitive, special, exemplary, incidental, consequential or other indirect loss or damage (including, but not limited to, loss of profits, loss of revenue, loss of opportunity and loss of use) that may arise out of or in connection with this Agreement, including, but not limited to, damages or costs resulting from In-N-Out Burger's failure to provide the service regardless of whether such damages could have been foreseen, prevented or had been advised of. Under no circumstance will the collective liability of In-N-Out Burger and its owners, officers, directors, employees, contractors or suppliers, for any damages incurred, ever exceed the amount paid or payable by Customer to In-N-Out Burger under this Agreement regardless of the form of action, whether based on contract, tort, negligence,strict liability, products liability or otherwise.

Initial

Page 3 of 4 ends

8. RIGHT TO RESCIND: In-N-Out Burger reserves the right, at any time, to unilaterally rescind this Agreement and/or to deny service to Customer, even after the Event has commenced, if Customer’s Event is not conducted (or any person related to the Event does not conduct themselves) in a manner consistent with applicable law and the policies, practices or image of In-N-Out Burger. In particular, In-N-Out Burger is committed to providing and supporting a drugfree environment for its customers and Associates. In-N-Out Burger may, on its own discretion, unilaterally rescind this Agreement and/or deny service to Customer should Customer's Event in any way involve or support illegal or legal drug use, including marijuana, or drug paraphernalia, which shall include equipment, products, and materials of any kind whose primary design function is for use in growing, harvesting, manufacturing, producing, processing, preparing, packaging, storing, injecting, ingesting, inhaling or otherwise introducing such drugs into the human body.

9. GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE: The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement. If a dispute arises in connection with or relating to this Agreement, it shall be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction and venue of the state and federal courts located in Orange County, California, and the parties consent to the personal and exclusive jurisdiction and venue of these courts.

10. FORCE MAJEURE: The parties to this Agreement will be excused from the performance of this Agreement in whole or in part if the performance by In-N-Out Burger or Customer of any of its material obligations under this Agreement is prevented by operation of law or any cause beyond the reasonable control of such party, including without limitation fire, flood, disruption of transportation (but not the failure of a party to reasonably anticipate possible transportation delays), earthquake, public disaster, strike, labor dispute or unrest, accident, breakdown of electrical or other equipment, riot, war, insurrection, civil unrest, Act of God, any act of any legal or governmental authority (all of which causes are referred to as “events of force majeure”). If the Event is cancelled or curtailed because of the occurrence of any of the foregoing events of force majeure, In-N-Out Burger shall remit the full portion of the deposit, less any out-ofpocket costs incurred by In-N-Out Burger, in connection with the cancelled or curtailed Event.

11. MISCELLANEOUS: This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and supersedes any and all prior offers, negotiations and agreements. Only a written agreement executed by the parties shall modify or amend this Agreement. If any provision of this Agreement is declared invalid, the remaining provisions shall remain in full force and effect. The section and paragraph headings contained in this Agreement are for reference purposes only and shall not affect in any way the meaning or interpretation of this Agreement.

12. PRODUCT PRICES: The total cost of Customer’s cookout Event will be determined by the amount of food used, at the current prices below and other charges described on page one or the “Minimum Charge” of $1,500.00, whichever is higher. Prices, terms and conditions quoted are subject to change; should this occur, Customer will be notified no less than 60 days prior to the cookout date.

Individual Items: Cost Meals Including Chip & Drink: Cost Hamburgers $4.80 + tax Hamburger Meal $8.40 + tax
Cheeseburgers $5.30 + tax Cheeseburger Meal $8.90 + tax Double-Doubles® $6.90 + tax Double-Double® Meal $10.50 + tax Grilled Cheese $4.70 + tax Grilled Cheese Meal $8.30 + tax 20 oz. Fountain Drinks $2.35 + tax
Chips $1.25 + tax

13. FUNDRAISING POLICY: If Customer chooses to sell tickets as a fundraiser for an organization, In-N-Out Burger maintains a strict policy on maximum fund raiser prices that may be charged for our products. The maximum markup on each item is 25% on top of the cost, before sales tax. If at any time these price maximums are exceeded, Customer’s cookout event will terminated.

Initial

Page 4 of 4 ends

Event Date/Time: 11AM - 2PM
Location:
(a) 3
(b) 300 Chiliburgers, Fries and Drinks combinations.
(Plus tax), whichever is higher. Please note that the
60 $375.00

2. Terms of Payment
A. A deposit of $3,791.25

3. Promotional Materials
D. A mileage charge will be assessed, based upon location on the Event. Mileage over 60 miles will be charged at the rate of $2.75 per mile to Mileage for your Event will be: miles, for a total mileage charge of $0.00 Please initial that you accept the foregoing:

We reserve the right to assess incidental charges, depending on circumstances. Your incidental charges are as follows:
$5,055.00
The cost may be higher, depending on the number of combinations used.

C. If you do not reach the estimate total, you will be responsible for (i) the cost of the number of combinations ordered at the Event, or (ii) the Minimum Charge, plus applicable overtime (if any), for a minimum of : $4,166.25 products cannot be substituted for unused combinations in order to satisfy your minimum.

B. The Minimum Charge is (i) the sum of $1,900.00, plus $150.00 for every half hour of service used beyond one and one half hours, or (ii) seventyfive percent (75%) of the cost of the estimated number of items ordered, whichever is higher. If additional serving time is required, you will be charged at the rate of $300.00 per hour. Mileage and incidental items will be charged at one hundred percent (100%).

We accept MasterCard, VISA , & American Express.

You have selected the following for your Event:

Hours of Service Time
Based upon the foregoing, the estimated food cost of your Event is:

Saturday Septemeber 30th, 2023
[email protected]

TOMMY'S MOBILE CATERING UNIT AGREEMENT
Tommy's Mobile Catering Unit is a self-contained restaurant on wheels, that permits us to prepare our famous chiliburgers on request. We can also provide drinks and chips. On special order, we can also prepare French fries. Tomdan Enterprises, Inc. ("Tommy's") reserves the right to pre-approve the cookout event ("Event") which will include a physical inspection of the location. Our Mobile unit will require a firm level parking pad, and we reserve the Hidden Hills Fiesta Truck 1
24549 Long Valley Rd
Hidden Hills, CA 91302
Deana Gonzalez - 818.888.9281
right to change its location, if the designated location is not acceptable. Customer must secure any local approvals.

1. Costs
A. The total cost of your Event will be determined by the amount of food used, based upon (i) our current price list, together with other charges, or -1-
(ii) the Minimum Charge (hereafter defined), whichever is higher. Please see Schedule A for our current price list. We reserve the right to change our prices on sixty (60) days' notice. We maintain a strict policy on maximum prices that may be charged for our food products. These prices are also reflected on and marks and nothing herein shall constitute a license for use of same.

Schedule A. Please note that the Event will be terminated, if the prices charged exceed our maximums.

Our crew will only accept tickets or other scrip in exchange for food products. It is your responsibility to sell tickets before the Event or to have someone at the Event to handle money.
is required upon signing of this Agreement. Deposits are non-refundable, if the Event is cancelled less than fourteen (14) days before the Event date. We must receive the signed contract, your deposit, and a certificate of insurance, as indicated below, at least at least twenty-one (21) days prior to the Event date, in order to confirm your reservation. Your deposit will be credited against total charges for our service.

The use of "Tommy's" name will be limited to use on printed materials in writing, which is approved by us in advance of the Event, and may not be included in any form of electronic advertising, radio, television, or other media, without our written approval. We reserve all rights in our name, logo B. Final payment, by Visa or MasterCard or American Express or checks, must be made at the completion of your Event. Cash will not be accepted, unless prior arrangements have been made. Our Event staff will issue a final itemized invoice, indicating the amount of food sold and your total charges for services, less any deposits or previous payments. If the total sales is less than the Minimum Charge, you will be billed for the Minimum Charge.

C. You will be liable for any and all costs of collections with regards to delinquent account fees. A $25.00 fee will be charged for any returned items. We also reserve the right to charge a $250.00 last minute booking fee to events that get booked with less then 10 days' notice. and from the Event.

E. Events scheduled between the hours of 10pm-6am will be subjected to an additional charge of:

4. Change in Terms

5. Insurance and Indemnification Requirements
A. You shall be required to provide a certificate of insurance, naming Tomdan Enterprises, Inc. as an additional insured on your public liability

6. Right to Rescind

7. General Provisions

8. Liquidated Damages

9. Taxes
Tommy's Hamburgers
831 East Huntington Drive Suite 202
-2-
Monrovia, CA 91016
Phone (626) 357-9201
Fax (626) 359-5216
B. You agree that we shall not be liable for any indirect, incidental, special, consequential, or exemplary damages, arising out of or in any way shareholders, employees, representatives, successors and assigns, and each of them, from and against any and all actions, damages, claims, or liabilities ("Claims") of you, your guests, invitees, and representatives arising out of or in any way relating to the Event, except to the extent that such Claims arise If you desire to change the date, time, place or menu for the Event, you must inform us no later than ten (10) days prior to the Event date, and pay any additional deposit that may be required. Events with changes/postponements made within the ten (10) period will be subjected to a $350.00 fee. is in for the property where the Event is scheduled to be held. You shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless Tommy's, it affiliates, officers, directors, insurance or homeowner's insurance, together with a copy of homeowner's or public liability insurance policy indicating that liability insurance is in place Please initial that you accept the foregoing:
entitled to recover it's costs and reasonable attorney's fees. The headings in this Agreement are inserted for convenience only and are in no way intended to has completed the Event section of this Agreement and agrees to the terms and conditions thereof. masculine, feminine or neuter gender and the singular or plural number shall be deemed to include the other whenever the context so indicates. Each individual executing this Agreement on behalf of a corporation represents and warrants that he is duly authorized to execute and deliver this Agreement on behalf of said corporation. This Agreement may be signed in more than one counterpart, in which case each counterpart shall constitute an original of this Agreement. This Agreement shall apply to, be binding upon, and insure to the benefit or burden, as may be the case, of respective heirs, administrators, describe, define or limit the scope, intent or interpretation of this Agreement. Every provision of this Agreement is intended to be severable. If any term or binding upon Tommy's, unless made in writing by an officer of Tommy's.

We reserve the right, at any time, to rescind this Agreement and/or to refuse service, whether before or after the Event commences, if the Event is not consistent, or any personnel related to the Event does not conduct themselves, in a manner consistent with the law abiding and wholesome family image of Tommy's, which Tommy's will decide in its sole discretion.

Agreement. Therefore, in the event of a breach by Tommy's any and all damages shall be limited to the amount of the deposit paid and Customer waives forever any claim in excess of the return of this deposit.

It is understood that Tommy's will collect and Customer will pay all applicable sales taxes in addition to all other charges.

The undersigned has read the above and any attachment or addendum and agrees to the terms and conditions thereof. Furthermore, the undersigned provision hereof is illegal or invalid for any reason whatsoever, such illegality or invalidity shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Agreement.

This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, relating to agreements executed and to be performed within the state. This agreement supersedes any and all other agreements, either oral or in writing, between the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement, and contains the entire understanding of the parties relating to such subject matter. As used in this Agreement, the personal representatives, successors and assigns of the parties hereto.

The parties agree that it is difficult or impossible to estimate, define or predict damages which might flow from a breach by Tommy's of this _________________________________________________
Accepted by Tommy's Hamburgers
_________________________________________________
Date
_______________________________________________
(Person or Name of Corporation)
_______________________________________________
Date
_______________________________________________
(Signature)
Event Date/Time: 11AM - 2PM
Location:
(a) 3
(b) 300 Chiliburgers, Fries and Drinks combinations.
(Plus tax), whichever is higher. Please note that the
60 $375.00

2. Terms of Payment
A. A deposit of $3,791.25

3. Promotional Materials
and from the Event.

E. Events scheduled between the hours of 10pm-6am will be subjected to an additional charge of:

B. Final payment, by Visa or MasterCard or American Express or checks, must be made at the completion of your Event. Cash will not be accepted, unless prior arrangements have been made. Our Event staff will issue a final itemized invoice, indicating the amount of food sold and your total charges for services, less any deposits or previous payments. If the total sales is less than the Minimum Charge, you will be billed for the Minimum Charge.

Schedule A. Please note that the Event will be terminated, if the prices charged exceed our maximums.

Saturday Septemeber 30th, 2023
[email protected]

TOMMY'S MOBILE CATERING UNIT AGREEMENT
Tommy's Mobile Catering Unit is a self-contained restaurant on wheels, that permits us to prepare our famous chiliburgers on request. We can also provide drinks and chips. On special order, we can also prepare French fries. Tomdan Enterprises, Inc. ("Tommy's") reserves the right to pre-approve the cookout event ("Event") which will include a physical inspection of the location. Our Mobile unit will require a firm level parking pad, and we reserve the Hidden Hills Fiesta Truck 2
24549 Long Valley Rd
Hidden Hills, CA 91302
B. The Minimum Charge is (i) the sum of $1,900.00, plus $150.00 for every half hour of service used beyond one and one half hours, or (ii) seventyfive percent (75%) of the cost of the estimated number of items ordered, whichever is higher. If additional serving time is required, you will be charged at the rate of $300.00 per hour. Mileage and incidental items will be charged at one hundred percent (100%).

We accept MasterCard, VISA , & American Express.

You have selected the following for your Event:

Hours of Service Time
Based upon the foregoing, the estimated food cost of your Event is: $5,055.00 The cost may be higher, depending on the number of combinations used.

Please initial that you accept the foregoing:

We reserve the right to assess incidental charges, depending on circumstances. Your incidental charges are as follows:

D. A mileage charge will be assessed, based upon location on the Event. Mileage over 60 miles will be charged at the rate of $2.75 per mile to Mileage for your Event will be: miles, for a total mileage charge of $0.00

4. Change in Terms

5. Insurance and Indemnification Requirements
A. You shall be required to provide a certificate of insurance, naming Tomdan Enterprises, Inc. as an additional insured on your public liability

6. Right to Rescind

7. General Provisions

8. Liquidated Damages

9. Taxes
Tommy's Hamburgers
831 East Huntington Drive Suite 202
Agreement. Therefore, in the event of a breach by Tommy's any and all damages shall be limited to the amount of the deposit paid and Customer waives forever any claim in excess of the return of this deposit.

It is understood that Tommy's will collect and Customer will pay all applicable sales taxes in addition to all other charges.

The parties agree that it is difficult or impossible to estimate, define or predict damages which might flow from a breach by Tommy's of this describe, define or limit the scope, intent or interpretation of this Agreement. Every provision of this Agreement is intended to be severable. If any term or binding upon Tommy's, unless made in writing by an officer of Tommy's.

In the event of any action of law or in equity between the parties hereto to enforce and/or interpret any provision hereof, the prevailing party shall be relating to the Event. No employee of Tommy's has the ability to vary or increase the liability of Tommy's and statements made by an employee shall not be out of the gross negligence of Tommy's, the products, vehicles, employees, owners, officers, directors, representatives, and agents. has completed the Event section of this Agreement and agrees to the terms and conditions thereof. masculine, feminine or neuter gender and the singular or plural number shall be deemed to include the other whenever the context so indicates. Each individual executing this Agreement on behalf of a corporation represents and warrants that he is duly authorized to execute and deliver this Agreement on behalf of said corporation. This Agreement may be signed in more than one counterpart, in which case each counterpart shall constitute an original of this Agreement. This Agreement shall apply to, be binding upon, and insure to the benefit or burden, as may be the case, of respective heirs, administrators, Please initial that you accept the foregoing:
entitled to recover it's costs and reasonable attorney's fees. The headings in this Agreement are inserted for convenience only and are in no way intended to insurance or homeowner's insurance, together with a copy of homeowner's or public liability insurance policy indicating that liability insurance is in place If you desire to change the date, time, place or menu for the Event, you must inform us no later than ten (10) days prior to the Event date, and pay any additional deposit that may be required. Events with changes/postponements made within the ten (10) period will be subjected to a $350.00 fee. is in for the property where the Event is scheduled to be held. You shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless Tommy's, it affiliates, officers, directors, shareholders, employees, representatives, successors and assigns, and each of them, from and against any and all actions, damages, claims, or liabilities ("Claims") of you, your guests, invitees, and representatives arising out of or in any way relating to the Event, except to the extent that such Claims arise B. You agree that we shall not be liable for any indirect, incidental, special, consequential, or exemplary damages, arising out of or in any way -2-
Monrovia, CA 91016
Phone (626) 357-9201
Fax (626) 359-5216
_________________________________________________
Accepted by Tommy's Hamburgers
_________________________________________________
Date
_______________________________________________
(Person or Name of Corporation)
_______________________________________________
Date
_______________________________________________
(Signature)

Hidden Hills City CouncilApril 10, 2023

Hidden Hills City Council
April 10, 2023