Agenda packet, regular meeting — Huntington Park City Council, September 22, 2026 (part 2 of 3)

organizational depth, access to specialized legal resources, prior experience representing Huntington Park, and familiarity with municipalities and public agencies throughout the Southeast Los Angeles region. These factors are expected to reduce transition requirements and facilitate continuity of legal services.

On September 8, 2026, the City Council considered staff's recommendation to select OMLO as the preferred firm and authorize the City Manager to negotiate an agreement.

With Vice Mayor Jonathan Sanabria absent, the motion received two affirmative votes, one negative vote, and one abstention, and failed for lack of the required number of affirmative votes. No action was taken to select a preferred firm or authorize an agreement.

The matter is returning to the City Council to consider awarding legal services to the City Attorney. Under the proposed engagement, Rick R. Olivarez would serve as the designated City Attorney, supported by a qualified Deputy/Assistant City Attorney mutually acceptable to the City and OMLO and the firm's broader municipal law practice.

To provide the City Council with greater clarity regarding the anticipated cost and structure of the proposed engagement, staff has included proposed principal business terms as Attachment D. The terms address designated personnel, compensation, rate adjustments, and budget controls. Staff recommends awarding City Attorney legal services to OMLO and authorizing the City Manager to finalize and execute the Professional Services Agreement, subject to approval as to form.

FISCAL IMPACT/FINANCING
Funding for City Attorney legal services is included within the City's adopted budget.

Actual expenditures will depend upon the volume and complexity of legal services required. The final Professional Services Agreement will establish the applicable compensation structure and budget controls.

CONCLUSION
Upon Council approval, staff will proceed with the recommended actions.

Respectfully submitted,

RICARDO REYES
City Manager

ATTACHMENT(S)
A. City Attorney Services RFP Evaluation Summary
B. September 8, 2026 City Council Staff Report

CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF AWARD OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

AGREEMENT FOR CITY ATTORNEY LEGAL SERVICES
September 22, 2026

Page 3 of 3 ends

C. OMLO Proposal and Supplemental Response
D. Proposed Principal Business Terms
E. Professional Services Agreement

ATTACHMENT A
City of Huntington Park
City Attorney Services RFP
Evaluation Summary
I. Proposers
Six firms submitted proposals and participated in the evaluation process:
• Aleshire & Wynder, LLP
• Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP
• Law Office of Arturo N. Fierro
• Olivarez Madruga Law Organization, LLP (OMLO)
• Ross & Schwarz
• Sarega Law, APC
II. Evaluation Panel
The five-member evaluation panel consisted of:
• City Manager
• Assistant City Manager
• Chief of Police
• Director of Human Resources
• City Prosecutor
III. Evaluation
The evaluation included review of written proposals, structured interviews, supplemental information, proposed staffing and service-delivery models, and financial terms.

Primary evaluation considerations included:
• Municipal law qualifications and experience
• Legal judgment and risk management
• Responsiveness and availability
• Labor, employment, and personnel experience
• Proposed City Attorney and supporting legal team
• Organizational depth and specialized expertise
• Continuity and backup coverage
• Transition approach
• Service delivery and assignment management
• Financial terms and budget predictability
• Overall ability to meet the City's legal-service needs City Attorney Services RFP
Evaluation Summary

Page 2 of 3 ends

IV. Leading Firms
Following the evaluation, three firms emerged as the leading candidates:

Rank Firm Aggregate Panel Evaluation
1 Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 87.5%
2 Olivarez Madruga Law Organization, LLP 79.6%
3 Aleshire & Wynder, LLP 75.4%
Firm Principal Strengths Considerations
Burke, Williams
& Sorensen,
LLP
Extensive municipal law experience;
substantial organizational depth; strong
proposed lead counsel; broad specialty
practice; significant continuity and
backup resources.

Proposed financial
structure provided less
immediate budget
predictability and remained
subject to further
negotiation.

Olivarez
Madruga Law
Organization,
LLP
Full-service municipal practice;
substantial organizational resources;
prior Huntington Park experience;
familiarity with neighboring SELA
jurisdictions and regional matters;
specialized municipal expertise;
reduced transition requirements.

Final designated staffing,
service expectations, and
financial terms require
negotiation and
confirmation.

Aleshire &
Wynder, LLP
Extensive municipal and public-agency
experience; substantial organizational
resources; strong responsiveness and
continuity; broad municipal practice.

Overall evaluation placed
the firm behind Burke and
OMLO.

V. Overall Evaluation
Burke received the highest aggregate panel evaluation, followed by OMLO and Aleshire & Wynder.

Following review of the complete evaluation record, OMLO was identified as the preferred firm based on the overall combination of municipal experience, organizational capacity, institutional and regional familiarity, continuity, transition capability, and potential value to the City.

City Attorney Services RFP
Evaluation Summary

Page 3 of 3 ends

The proposed engagement is based upon Rick R. Olivarez serving as designated City Attorney and OMLO identifying a qualified Deputy/Assistant City Attorney acceptable to the City.

Final staffing, scope of services, service expectations, compensation, budget controls, and other contractual terms remain subject to negotiation and subsequent City Council approval.

r
41- • i.-- 44.
-‘1 :ern.
,
c
r
Ci

ATTORNEYS AT LAW
OMLO
Olinall•MMUGMAIwO4Sreill.

OLIVAREZ MADRUGA LAW ORGANIZATION, LLP

COST PROPOSAL

IN RESPONSE TO

THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON PARK

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR

CITY ATTORNEY LEGAL SERVICES

A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
WWW.OMLOLAW.COM
500 SOUTH GRAND AVENUE ∎ 12TH FLOOR ∎ LOS ANGELES, CA 90071 PHONE 213.744.0099 ∎ FAX 213.744.0093

2. 3.

4. 1

9. COST PROPOSAL
a. Hourly Rate
Should Olivarez Madruga Law Organization, LLP be selected to provide City Attorney Services to the City of Huntington Park, we propose the following hourly rates for General and Special Matters.

Attorney Title Rate
Partners $ 350 per hour
Of Counsel $ 350 per hour
Senior Associates $ 335 per hour
Associates $ 325 per hour
Paralegals $ 175 per hour
Specialty Work $ 375 per hour
b. Monthly Retainer
If the Firm is selected to provide City Attorney services to the City of Huntington Park, we would recommend a retainer amount after that award, based on discussions with the City Manager, Mayor and City personnel regarding the needs and budgetary restrictions of the City. c. General / Retainer Legal Services and Special Legal Services General / Retainer Legal Services
The Firm is dedicated to providing quality legal services at rates below our competitor law firms.

Among our public law attorney peers, our rates are the most competitive.

Recognizing the fiscal challenges and limitations that still confront many municipalities during this period of ongoing economic challenges, the Firm works cooperatively with our city clients to negotiate a competitive and cost sensitive compensation arrangement for General / Retainer Legal Services that would include:

Provide routine legal assistance, advice and consultation to the City Council and to City staff relating to general municipal and public law issues, potential tort liability and risk management;
Prepare and review legal opinions, ordinances, resolutions, agreements and related documents;
Except as otherwise provided below, the legal analysis and review of requests for public records under the California Public Records Act (Gov. Code section 6250 et seq.);
Monitor pending state and federal legislation and regulations, and new case law, as appropriate;

5. 6.

7. 8.

9. 2
Draft, review and administer contracts that the City may have with other legal counsel. Such administration shall include oversight services such as a review of attorney invoices, coordination of special legal counsel’s activities, direction to special legal counsel with regard to strategies and communication of City Council and City staff direction to special legal counsel;
Attend to City staff’s legal needs on-site or during office hours as may be needed; Attend two regular meetings of the City Council per month; Prepare for and participate in labor negotiations up to 8 hours per month; and Perform all duties of the office of City Attorney except to the extent such duties are included within the definition of “Special Legal Services” below.

The Firm is capable of providing in-service training on a broad range of subjects. The cost of providing such in-service training would be billed at the Firm’s contracted hourly rate.

Special Legal Services
During the course of the Firm’s representation of the City, the Firm may be asked to provide special services outside the scope of the General / Retainer Legal Services. These extraordinary services would include:

1. Drafting of legal documents and provision of legal analysis in anticipation of litigation under those circumstances where the City has received at least one (1) oral or written communication that a party tends to initiate or is ready to initiate litigation or an administrative or regulatory enforcement action against the City;

2. The prosecution or defense of civil actions and/or administrative actions brought by or against the City including discovery, drafting of pleadings, and other legal documents and correspondence in connection with litigation and/or administrative hearings or proceedings and conducting legal analysis in connection with the same;

3. The defense and/or representation of the City in handling specific workers’ compensation claim matters;

4. The defense and/or representation of the City in the handling or prosecution of conduct of employee layoffs, reassignment and/or disciplinary matters beyond routine legal questions. Special services include drafting of notices for intent to discipline, attending hearings and preparation and representation at all appeal proceedings;

5. Preparation for and participation in labor negotiations in excess of 96 hours per calendar year. Hours which exceed 96 for the year will thereafter be billed on an hourly basis as a special matter;

6. All other matters other than those covered under the definition for General / Retainer Services; and
3 7. Attend or chair special meetings of the City Council and/or specialized closed session presentations.

The Firm is also open to negotiating a fee schedule for Special Legal Services.

The Firm charges the same hourly rate for all of its legal services, including litigation, hearings and investigations.
d. Billing Increments, Minimum Charges, Travel-Time Policies, Research Charges, Document Charges, Administrative Charges, Reimbursable-Costs The Firm uses electronic billing software. Attorneys bill at .10 (one-tenth) hour increments. We are familiar with various e-billing systems, and the attorneys are comfortable with billing codes used by these programs. The Firm generates a statement for fees, costs, and expenses incurred on a monthly basis. The statements indicate the basis of the fees, including the date and hours worked, the hourly rate, and a brief description of the work performed. Statements can be sent by email transmission. Separate billing categories can be established to track costs associated with the City funding categories or to track project costs, or for such other bases as the City may direct.

Reimbursement of Expenses
In addition to the hourly fees, in the course of the Firm’s representation of the City, we may incur certain out-of-pocket expenses such as, but not limited to, long-distance telephone calls (other than calls between the City and the Firm), court filing fees (including filing fees for administrative proceedings), deposition fees, witness fees, costs for investigation services, service of process fees, courier costs, and other related courts costs, authorized air travel and costs of travel accommodations for litigation matters handled on behalf of the City, parking fees, copy fees, facsimile costs and other related travel costs. All such costs shall be submitted to the City for approval as part of the monthly billing statement. No individual cost in excess of $500 shall be incurred without the approval of the designated City representative. Out-of-pocket expenses shall be charged in accordance with the following schedule:

Facsimiles …………………….$0.50 per page
Copies …………………….$0.10 per page
Air Travel ……………………..At cost
Postage, long distance
telephone and other Out-ofPocket Expenses
……………………..At cost
Mileage ……………………..IRS standard rate
Documents, Research
The Firm does not charge for word processing or computer usage, with the exception of internetbased legal research (e.g., Lexis, Westlaw). 4 Travel Time
The Firm will generally not charge for mileage or travel time between our office and the City facilities, nor for local telephone calls or calls made to the City. e. Annual Rate Escalation - Cost-of-Living Adjustment
Our hourly rates for attorneys and paraprofessionals may be adjusted periodically, generally at the beginning of the fiscal year, upon the mutual agreement of the parties.

This rate reflects the increase, if any, in the cost of living during the previous 12 months by adding to the hourly rates an amount computed by multiplying the hourly rates by the percentage by which the level of the Consumer Price Index for the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area, as reported on January 1st of the new year by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the United States Department of Labor has increased over its level as of January 1st of the prior year. f. Cost Control and Reporting
Recognizing the fiscal challenges and limitations that still confront many municipalities during this period of ongoing economic instability, the Firm works cooperatively with our clients to negotiate a competitive and cost sensitive compensation arrangement. The Firm is dedicated to providing quality legal services at rates which are competitive to or below those of other law firms.

Among our public law attorney peers, our rates are competitive and provide a high value of legal service for a very reasonable cost.

The Firm applies the same rate for all tasks performed, including telephone conferences, attendance at Board meetings, court attendance, etc. Timesheets and invoices are promptly prepared and provide detailed explanations as to the services and tasks performed. So that our public agency clients can track costs for individual projects, we break down our invoices into the individual matters/projects for that client rather than a comprehensive invoice. The Firm is also accustomed to providing added levels of detail as may be required by the client.

The Firm routinely provides budgets for litigation matters that it handles as well as for investigations and research projects. The specific areas in the budgets include case development and administration, pretrial pleadings, discovery, and trial preparation costs. The Firm is more than willing to provide budgets for other projects to allow the City to manage and control costs.

The cost of preparing these budgets is billed at the Firm’s contracted hourly rate.

"'• 0- 1—m.a.

ATTORNEYS Al LAW
OMLO

OLIVAREZ MADRUGA LAW ORGANIZATION, LLP

RESPONSE TO

THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON PARK

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR

CITY ATTORNEY LEGAL SERVICES

A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
WWW.OMLOLAW.COM
500 SOUTH GRAND AVENUE ∎ 12TH FLOOR ∎ LOS ANGELES, CA 90071 PHONE 213.744.0099 ∎ FAX 213.744.0093
OlIVARF7 MAIIRIICZA I AW ORC.ANI7ATIAN I I P

ATTORNEYS AT LAW
500 S GRANO AVE, 12TH FLOOR. LOS ANGELES, CA 90071 I TEL: 213.744.0099 I FAX: 213.744.0093 L WWW.OMLOLAW.COM 1 1. COVER LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
June 18, 2026

BY ELECTONIC DELIVERY BY PLANET BIDS
Stephany Santin, Assistant City Manager
Eduardo Sarmiento, City Clerk
City of Huntington Park
6550 Miles Avenue
Huntington Park, CA 90255
Re: Response to Request for Proposals for City Attorney Legal Services Due Date: June 18, 2026 at 5:00 p.m.

Dear City of Huntington Park, Ms. Santin and Mr. Sarmiento:

It is with great pleasure that Olivarez Madruga Law Organization, LLP (the “Firm” or “OMLO”) submits the attached response (“Response”) to the City of Huntington Park (the “City”) Request for Proposals for City Attorney Legal Services. - Proposer: Olivarez Madruga Law Organization, LLP
Limited Liability Partnership
Main Office: 500 South Grand Avenue – 12th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 744-0099
Contact and Email: Rick R. Olivarez, Managing Partner
[email protected]
and
Athena Francisco, Office Administrator
[email protected]
- Olivarez Madruga has reviewed the following Proposal, is familiar with the required services, and is capable of performing the services described. - If chosen to represent the City of Huntington Park, the Firm proposes Stephanie Vasquez as the City Attorney and Richard E. Padilla and Rick R. Olivarez as the Deputy City Attorneys.
- We acknowledge Addenda 1and 2 regarding the Cost Proposal and Submission Date. - By submission of the attached proposal, our Firm commits to providing the services contemplated at the rates set forth therein. This proposal and the proposed pricing shall remain valid for 120 days from the response deadline of June 18, 2026. 2 Olivarez Madruga Law Organization is a minority owned law firm, founded in 2010, and is composed of over 40 attorneys. The Firm combines quality large-firm experience with flexible and responsive small-firm attention. The Firm attorneys bring a broad range of legal expertise well-suited to addressing most any area required by the City.

The attorneys in the Firm’s Municipal and Litigation Groups are very familiar with the legal challenges faced by municipalities. The Firm’s experience with public agencies allows us to address the many unique and often unexpected challenges that confront local governments, particularly during very challenging economic times, when agencies have been forced to do more with less.

Our attorneys have served as City Attorney, General Counsel and Special Counsel and, in that capacity, have attended hundreds of city council meetings and other public meetings. Whether negotiating intricate contractual terms, assisting with litigation prevention, and/or ramping up complex litigation, we have the expertise to consistently achieve positive results and bring a fresh energy and dynamism to the City’s legal matters.

We thank you for allowing us to be considered as part of this very important selection process. Please know that it would be our great honor to serve the City of Huntington Park and we welcome the opportunity to discuss the Firm, our proposal and the value we will bring to the City. If you have any questions or need any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. For additional information on the Firm and its areas of expertise, please refer to our website.

Very truly yours,
Rick R. Olivarez - Managing Partner
Olivarez Madruga Law Organization, LLP
500 South Grand Avenue – 12th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Tel: (213) 744-0099
[email protected]
Athena Francisco – Office Administrator
[email protected]
Website:omlolaw.com
3 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. COVER LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL ............................................................................ 1

2. PROPOSAL SUMMARY .................................................................................................. 6 a. Key Features, Distinguishing Strengths, and Principal Advantages of Proposal ......... 6 b. Understanding of the City Attorney Role ....................................................................... 6 c. Qualified to Serve as City Attorney for the City of Huntington Park ........................... 7

3. FIRM PROFILE AND RESOURCES ................................................................................ 7 a. Name, Address, Entity Type, Ownership Structure, Year Established ........................ 7 b. Firm's History, Size, Financial Stability, Municipal Client Base, Office Locations ........................................................................................................................... 8 c. Office Managing the City's Work ................................................................................... 9 d. Attorney, Paralegal, Clerical, Technology, Records-Management, and Administrative Support Available to the City ................................................................ 9 e. Subcontractors, Affiliated Firms Proposed ..................................................................... 9

4. QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE ...................................................................... 10 a. Experience Representing California Cities and Public Agencies ............................... 10 b. Experience Advising City Councils, Planning Commissions, City Managers, Department Heads, and Municipal Staff ....................................................................... 10 c. Experience with Brown Act, Public Records Act, Political Reform Act, Government Code Section 1090, Public Contracting, Land Use, CEQA, Labor and Employment, Public Safety, Police Records, Risk Management, Claims, Litigation, and Municipal Code Updates ...................................................................... 11 • Brown Act .......................................................................................................... 11 • Public Records Act ............................................................................................ 11 • Political Reform Act.......................................................................................... 11 • Government Code Section 1090 ...................................................................... 12 • Public Contracting ............................................................................................. 12 • Land Use and Planning ..................................................................................... 12 • CEQA ............................................................................................................... 13 • Employment ....................................................................................................... 13 • Public Safety ...................................................................................................... 14 • Police Records ................................................................................................... 14 • Risk Management .............................................................................................. 14 • Claims .............................................................................................................. 15 • Litigation ............................................................................................................ 15 4 • Municipal Code Updates .................................................................................. 16 d. Experience Preparing Ordinances, Resolutions, Contracts, Staff Report Legal Analyses, Legal Memoranda, Closed-Session Materials, and Training Materials .......................................................................................................................... 16 e. Identify Recognized Municipal Law, Land Use, Labor and Employment, Public Safety, Public Works, Or Litigation Expertise ............................................................. 17

5. PROPOSED LEGAL TEAM AND STAFFING PLAN .................................................. 20 a. Proposed City Attorney .................................................................................................. 20 b. Proposed Deputy City Attorney and Team ................................................................... 20 c. Organizational Chart ...................................................................................................... 22 d. Availability for Meetings, City Hall Office Hours, Urgent Matters, Evening Meetings, and After-Hours Contact .............................................................................. 23 e. Conflicts, Workload Spikes, Absences, Vacations, Emergencies, and Handling of Specialized Issues ..................................................................................... 24

6. WORK PLAN AND APPROACH TO LEGAL SERVICES........................................... 24 a. Approach to Providing Day-to-Day Municipal Legal Services .................................. 24 b. Process for Agenda Review, Legal Intake, Assignment Tracking, Response Times, Written Advice, Status Reporting, and Communication with City Officials and Staff ........................................................................................................... 25 c. Advising the City About New Laws, Litigation Trends, Regulatory Developments, and Operational Risks .......................................................................... 26 d. Evaluation of Litigation Risk, Settlement Options, Budget Impacts, and Cost-Benefit Considerations .......................................................................................... 26 e. Cost-Control Strategies, Use of Templates, Preventive Advice, Matter Budgets, and Reporting.................................................................................................................. 27 f. Legal Services Not Provided ......................................................................................... 28

7. CLIENT REFERENCES, RELATED EXPERIENCE, AND WORK SAMPLES .......... 28

8. CONFLICTS, DISCLOSURES, AND PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY .............. 28 a. Public Agency Clients .................................................................................................... 28 b. Potential Conflict of Interest .......................................................................................... 29 c. Method for Resolving Any Conflict ............................................................................. 30 d. Representation of Party Adverse to a Public Entity ..................................................... 30 e. Malpractice Claim, Lawsuit, Fee Dispute, Disciplinary Matters ................................ 30 f. Terminated Public Agency Contracts ........................................................................... 30 g. Relationship with Huntington Park Elected Officials .................................................. 30 h. Violation of Law, Regulation, Or Ethical Standard ..................................................... 30 i. Appendix B ..................................................................................................................... 30 5 9. COST PROPOSAL ........................................................................................................... 31

10. EXCEPTIONS TO RFP, AGREEMENT, OR INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS .......... 31 APPENDIX 32
Appendix A
Appendix B
Sample Ordinance
Sample Staff Report
Sample Legal Analysis Memorandum
Attorney Resumes
Acknowledgement Addendum 1
Acknowledgement Addendum 2
6 2. PROPOSAL SUMMARY
a. Key Features, Distinguishing Strengths, and Principal Advantages of Proposal
The firm of Olivarez Madruga Law Organization, LLP (the “Firm” or “OMLO”) understands the legal services to be provided to the City of Huntington Park and the expected role of City Attorney.

The Firm has a proven record of providing a complete range of services to our municipal clients.

The Firm’s philosophy is to be a cooperative team player in order to efficiently solve problems and reach the goals and objectives set by the City.

Formed in 2010, Olivarez Madruga Law Organization, LLP is a certified minority-owned law firm whose attorneys are leaders in their fields and bring a wealth of experience, talent, and skill to the clients they serve and the cases they handle.

The Firm provides regular representation and counsel to cities, counties, school districts, universities, community colleges, redevelopment agencies, insurance companies, small businesses, contractors, manufacturers and the retail industry in both the public and private sectors covering a wide scope of legal issues.

Our attorneys frequently advise clients on issues regarding general municipal law, government law; labor and employment law, including wage and hour; litigation, including general liability and product liability; corporate law; education law; real estate law, including CEQA, construction, redevelopment, and environmental and water law. Given our broad range of specialties, the Firm can provide a unique level of depth and expertise for almost any legal matter facing our clients. b. Understanding of the City Attorney Role
Our representation is guided by the principle that the City is the client. Our role is to protect the interests of the City as an organization, defend the policies adopted by the City and advise the City and its officers and employees on the law. We are not retained to provide legal service to individual council members. To avoid awkwardness, we make this distinction clear upon undertaking representation and we often need to reinforce the concept.

Competent representation means more than knowing the law. We endeavor to provide legal services with three goals in mind. First, we strive to be fair and impartial. Our legal advice is the same regardless of who seeks it and notwithstanding the majority wishes of the city council. We find that this trait earns confidence in our responses. Second, we try to balance candor with diplomacy. We are aware that we are a “public-facing” representative of the City and must often deliver unwanted advice in a public forum. We endeavor to always provide information clearly and in a manner that will not cause additional issues with the City. Finally, we always try to work with our clients to find creative solutions to legal problems. When saying “no,” we always attempt to provide the advice in a way that, if possible, also offers legally supportable alternative courses of action.

As City Attorneys, we work for the City Council, but also work collaboratively with the City Manager and other City staff to accomplish City-wide objectives. We believe it is important to establish a close working relationship with the Mayor, City Council, City Manager and other City personnel. This would include attending meetings and direct daily communication electronically 7 and telephonically during and after business hours. The Firm attorneys have attended hundreds of council and board meetings and have expertise in offering opinions and advice to both City personnel and the public in clear and uncomplicated terms. c. Qualified to Serve as City Attorney for the City of Huntington Park The Firm understands the legal services to be provided to the City and the expected role of the City Attorney. The philosophy of the Firm is to serve the client most effectively by becoming an integral part of the City team. Our attorneys will be available to attend staff meetings, team building conferences and other essential policy development sessions.

Our Attorney Team is keenly aware that, when it comes to representing public agency clients, time is always of the essence. The Firm has a comprehensive case management system that ensures that queries and assignments are addressed and completed in a timely manner. The Firm’s background and experience in public law, education law and governance provides additional insight into addressing important issues with a cutting-edge approach.

Though all assignments are important, we recognize some will need to be prioritized. OMLO will provide immediate assistance to the Mayor, City Council, City Manager, and City staff providing direct dial cell phone numbers of our attorneys to ensure immediate access when the need arises.

The Firm attorneys and support staff will conduct routine team meetings to review assignments and evaluate staffing needs for various engagements. Time and expenses are monitored closely as each project progresses, and significant events are reported promptly to the client.

The Firm currently serves as the City Attorney to the City of El Monte, the City of Cudahy, the City of San Fernando, the City of Bell Gardens, as well as General and Special Legal Counsel to various management, community college and school districts including the City of Inglewood, City of Ojai, City of Commerce, City of San Buenaventura, City of La Puente, City of South Gate, City of National City, City of Barstow, City of Irwindale, City of Bell Gardens, City of Santa Fe Springs, City of South El Monte, City of Maywood, El Monte Union High School District, the Hacienda La Puente Unified School District, the Lynwood Unified School District, the San Bernardino City Unified School District, the Los Angeles Unified School District, the Los Angeles Community College District, the Rio Hondo Community College District, the Compton Unified School District, the Bassett Unified School District, the Lennox School District, the Rosemead School District, the Adelanto Elementary School District, the Coachella Valley Unified School District, the Fairfax Elementary School District, and the Baldwin Park Unified School District.

3. FIRM PROFILE AND RESOURCES
a. Name, Address, Entity Type, Ownership Structure, Year Established Official Name of the Firm: Olivarez Madruga Law Organization, LLP Adress: 500 South Grand Avenue – 12th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Entity Type: Limited Liability Partnership
8 Principals Rick R. Olivarez, Managing Partner
Thomas M. Madruga, Senior Partner
Year Established: 2010
b. Firm's History, Size, Financial Stability, Municipal Client Base, Office Locations
Olivarez Madruga Law Organization, LLP is a certified minority-owned law firm whose 43 attorneys are leaders in their fields and bring a wealth of experience, talent, and skill to the cases they handle and clients they serve. Formed in 2010, the Firm is managed by Rick R. Olivarez who heads the Municipal Group and Thomas M. Madruga who heads the Litigation, Labor and Employment and Education Groups. The Firm attorneys represent and counsel a wide range of clients in both the private and public sectors.

The Firm is financially stable and able to provide exceptional services as described herein. The Firm has complied with all licensing and reporting required for a limited liability partnership and a business operating in the City of Los Angeles. In addition, the Firm has complied with the requirements for obtaining and maintaining its MBE certification.

The Firm’s public agency clients include the following:
• City of El Monte
• City of Cudahy
• City of San Fernando
• City of Ojai
• City of Inglewood
• City of Commerce
• City of San Buenaventura
• City of La Puente
• City of South Gate
• City of National City
• City of Barstow
• City of Irwindale
• City of Bell Gardens
• City of Santa Fe Springs
• City of South El Monte
• City of Maywood
• El Monte Union High School District
• Hacienda La Puente Unified School
District
• Lynwood Unified School District
• Los Angeles Community College District
• Los Angeles Unified School District
• Rio Hondo Community College District
• Riverside County Office of Education
• Compton Unified School District
• Centinela Valley Union High School District
• Bassett Unified School District
• Lennox School District
• Rosemead School District
• Colton Joint Unified School District
• Alhambra Unified School District
• Oxnard Union High School District
• Coachella Valley Unified School District
• Adelanto Elementary School District
• Little Lake City School District
9 • Ventura County Office of Education
• Fairfax Elementary School District
• Banning Unified School District
• Covina Valley Unified School District
• Grossmont Union High School District
• Whittier Union High School District
• Bellflower Unified School District
• San Gabriel Discovery Center Authority
• Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority
• California Cities for Self-Reliance Joint
Powers Authority
c. Office Managing the City's Work
The main office of the Firm is located in Downtown Los Angeles and will serve as the main office to manage the City’s work. The Firm does not charge for office-to-City travel time or mileage for General Legal Services.
d. Attorney, Paralegal, Clerical, Technology, Records-Management, and Administrative Support Available to the City
The Firm maintains a very professional and highly resourceful home office support staff including paralegals, legal assistants, administrators and finance staff, totaling over 70 employees. The office hours for the Firm are 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

The Firm’s designated City Attorney will assign the work, based on experience and case load, to associate attorneys and paralegal staff whenever possible to control costs. As a smaller firm, we are keenly aware of the strengths of our attorney team and make assignments accordingly, always with the supervision of the partners.

The Firm’s support staff maintains electronic matter logs to keep attorneys and support staff apprised of critical deadlines and pending assignments. The logs also aid in providing clients with the current status on pending matters and cases. The Firm attorneys and support staff conduct routine team meetings to evaluate staffing needs for each client and to review assignments.

The Firm files are networked allowing all attorneys and staff access to the complete client files, whether in the office, in court or at the client’s office, preventing duplication or inconsistencies. e. Subcontractors, Affiliated Firms Proposed
Despite years of experience and expertise, the Firm acknowledges that certain practice areas are beyond the core competencies of the Firm. In such cases, the Firm will recommend special counsel for those subject areas beyond the expertise of the Firm. Over the years, the Firm has partnered with numerous firms with varied expertise. Depending on the area of expertise required, the Firm will provide a list of potential counsel for review by the City. Once outside counsel is hired, the Firm, if requested by the City, will supervise the work and review submitted invoices to ensure that they are consistent with the agreement with the City, and submit these invoices to the City for payment.
10 4. QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE
a. Experience Representing California Cities and Public Agencies The attorneys of Olivarez Madruga Law Organization have a unique specialty in the field of municipal law, having served as contract city attorneys for numerous municipalities in Los Angeles County and Southern Californa. In this capacity, the Firm provides services for the entire range of a city’s needs, including counseling for commissions and city councils, law enforcement and public safety advocacy, public works and public contracting, environmental compliance, risk management and defense of claims, and a wide variety of regulatory and constitutional issues, like voting requirements, which impact the efficient functioning of any California city.

The majority of the Firm’s work is providing legal services to public agencies in Southern California. Our attorneys have attended hundreds of city council, redevelopment and planning commission, and school board meetings and have gained substantial experience representing and working with staff to implement the specific visions and goals for each public entity. b. Experience Advising City Councils, Planning Commissions, City Managers, Department Heads, and Municipal Staff
We believe that the ability to serve our clients depends largely upon our ability to effectively communicate with our clients and offer clear, concise and easy to understand explanations and solutions to complex problems.

Though all assignments are important, we recognize some will need to be prioritized. Our goal is to provide immediate assistance to the Mayor, City Council, City Manager, and City staff. Direct dial cell phone numbers of our attorneys will be given to the Mayor, City Council, City Manager and staff personnel to ensure immediate access when the need arises. The Firm attorneys and support staff also conduct routine team meetings to review assignments and evaluate staffing needs for various engagements. Time and expenses are monitored closely as each project progresses and significant events are reported promptly to the client.

Firm attorneys are experienced in preparing customary status updates and routinely prepare such reports as part of their representation for other Firm clients. The Firm delivers periodic status reports in electronic format in lieu of, or in addition to, traditional mail delivery. Firm attorneys and support staff also conduct routine team meetings to review case assignments and evaluate staffing needs for various engagements. Time and expenses are monitored closely as each case progresses and significant events are reported promptly to the client.

We typically provide a bi-weekly report to the City Council and City Manager on the status of legal matters we are working on. The reports generally detail the most high profile and politically sensitive matters we are working on and any matters which could expose the municipality to substantive or significant exposure.
11 c. Experience with Brown Act, Public Records Act, Political Reform Act, Government Code Section 1090, Public Contracting, Land Use, CEQA, Labor and Employment, Public Safety, Police Records, Risk Management, Claims, Litigation, and Municipal Code Updates
• Brown Act
Our attorneys are experts in the Brown Act and its legal and practical application to public meetings. The Firm’s lawyers have presided over hundreds of public meetings and are frequently asked questions concerning the Brown Act from city council members and city personnel. The Firm is proud of its ability to explain in straightforward terms what is and is not permissible under this often confusing and misunderstood body of law. Our attorneys frequently speak at and attend seminars and conferences on the Brown Act to ensure we are up to date on any new developments in the law. Upon request, the Firm can provide information on the Brown Act to Board Members. • Public Records Act
For years, the Firm’s attorneys have overseen, managed and prepared responses to Public Records Act requests. Our attorneys work closely with city staff to determine whether information requested is subject to disclosure or falls within one of the designated exceptions. Our attorneys have considerable experience advising public agency clients on the management of records, including advice on the interplay between sunshine laws, like the California Public Records Act, and laws designed to safeguard the confidentiality of public agency employees, students and other persons who provide personal information to public agencies. Firm attorneys also have experience advising public agency clients on matters concerning compliance with the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). We have also had considerable experience assisting clients in the development of internal policies, including policies relating to the retention, destruction and release of records. • Political Reform Act
OMLO attorneys have vast experience advising public agency clients on compliance with incompatible offices laws, including the Political Reform Act, Government Code sections 1090 and 1099, revolving door restrictions, economic interest reporting and SB 1439 (Gov. Code § 84308) campaign contribution limitations. OMLO was sought out by the City Attorneys Association of Los Angeles County (“CAALAC”) to provide a presentation to fellow City Attorneys regarding the impact and implications of SB 1439. Firm attorneys frequently advise government bodies and public officials on compliance with State transparency and public integrity laws, including the Political Reform Act, Government Code section 1090 and other similar legislation and statutes. We have advised and instructed public agency officials on the preparation of Form 700 Statements of Economic Interest and campaign contribution disclosure laws. We advise public agency clients on public hearing recusal protocols in situations where a public official has an actual or potential conflict of interest. We have also facilitated communication between public agencies and representatives of the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office Public Integrity Division. Attorneys with the Firm have also coordinated with other law enforcement entities, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation in investigations involving potential public corruption. In addition, OMLO has successfully contested alleged FPPC violations against our public agency clients.
12 • Government Code Section 1090
The Firm has extensive experience advising public agency clients on compliance with the conflict of interest and incompatible offices laws, including the Political Reform Act, Government Code sections 1090 and 1099, revolving door restrictions and economic interest reporting.

Our attorneys have considerable experience advising public agency clients on the management of records, including advice on the interplay between sunshine laws, like the California Public Records Act, and laws designed to safeguard the confidentiality of public agency employees, students and other persons who provide personal information to public agencies. Firm attorneys also have experience advising public agency clients on matters concerning compliance with the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). We are versed in the Shine the Light laws embedded within the Consumer Records Act, as well as more recent legislation impacting the management of data, including requirements imposed under AB1584 concerning enhanced contract requirements for third-party contractors, and AB 1442 concerning the collection of student information from social media. We have also had considerable experience assisting clients in the development of internal policies, including policies relating to the retention, destruction and release of records. The Firm also has considerable experience with the review and drafting of third-party vendor agreements and the handling of sensitive information, which such entities may acquire or be provided in the course of their performance. Our Firm also has extensive experience working with local and federal law enforcement authorities, particularly relating to the safeguarding of sensitive information critical to their investigations.
• Public Contracting
The Firm’s attorneys have drafted and reviewed thousands of public contracts, as well as crafted security documents, deeds of trust, leases, and contracts for public works projects, large and small.

Additionally, our attorneys have drafted escrow documents and overseen the escrow closing process for a variety of real estate transactions. The Firm has also negotiated franchise and license agreements for solid waste hauling services and wireless telecommunications facilities.

The Firm’s public agency responsibilities include, among other things, drafting ordinances, resolutions, staff reports, presentations, legal opinions, procurement and professional services contracts, bidding documents, real estate instruments and development documents, franchise agreements, and waivers and releases.
• Land Use and Planning
The Firm has substantial experience in all facets of land use and environmental law, serving as general legal counsel to numerous planning commissions, historic preservation commissions, and planning departments, while also serving as litigation counsel in lawsuits challenging land use regulations and environmental issues. The Firm’s expertise includes: zoning and planning law, Subdivision Map Act compliance, review and adjudication of entitlements, revocation of land use permits, and related land use matters. Our attorneys participate in the entitlement process involving the consideration of conditional use permits, zoning variances, specific plans, General Plan updates, and tentative tract maps.
13 The Firm’s unique combination of transactional expertise and litigation experience enables the Firm to provide not only general legal advice to agencies on planning and land use issues, but also litigation advocacy on nearly any aspect of land use or environmental law.

The Firm’s attorneys have successfully defended redevelopment agencies in challenges to the adoption and amendment of redevelopment plans, the awarding of OPAs and DDAs to rival developers, compliance with environmental requirements (such as compliance with CEQA), and compliance with the terms of contracts and redevelopment agreements.

Our lawyers have performed complex environmental studies and impact analysis of development projects, construction, re-construction and modernization and have served as the liaison between civil engineers, traffic engineers, geologists, soil engineers, CEQA consultants, community consultants, and architects and in preparing defensible Mitigated Negative Declarations.

Our attorneys have also successfully negotiated with numerous municipalities including the City of Los Angeles and the Planning Department with regard to the use, application and revocation of Conditional Use Permits for all types of construction projects and developments. • CEQA
OMLO has experience in all aspects of environmental law, from CEQA compliance to toxic cleanup and hazardous materials litigation under CERCLA, RCRA, the Polanco Act, and other statutes; to general environmental compliance under the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, and other regulatory statutes. Each of our client cities adopted as a part of the city’s General Plan an Environmental Justice Element pursuant to SB 1000, to ensure that proposed projects protect the city’s residents.

Serving as a city’s special outside counsel, we analyzed a developer’s lawsuit challenging the city’s denial of a development project where the denial was based in part on heightened public attention to the effects of pollution on nearby vulnerable communities. We concluded the city’s action was lawful and within its power.

As city attorney, we advise city staff and the city council on ongoing investigation and remediation of contaminants from soil, soil vapor, and groundwater in multiple locations throughout the city.

We advise on the city’s legal obligations under a Settlement Agreement with the EPA and Order of Consent for Removal Action, which involves cooperating with private landowner parties to the agreement.

In planning and zoning approvals by cities, we have helped draft conditions of project approvals that involve requirements to accomplish cleanup actions under the direction of the State Water Board and DTSC.
• Employment
The Firm has provided advice and representation in personnel and employment law, management rights, labor negotiations, working conditions, layoffs, reduction in force disputes, administrative and disciplinary matters, terminations, and work-related injuries, including advice and consult regarding compliance with federal and state employment laws. 14 The Firm has represented its clients in hundreds of disciplinary and termination proceedings and handles sensitive negotiations with recognized employee bargaining groups (unions). The Firm also provides advice, counseling and representation on proper employment practices, including harassment, hostile work environment, discrimination, wrongful termination and wage and hour law.

The Firm has handled nearly every type of employment litigation matter including wrongful termination, racial discrimination, gender discrimination, age discrimination, sexual harassment, hostile work environment, unfair employment practices, civil rights violations, First Amendment violations, claims related to violations of the Family Leave Act, HIPAA, the Americans With Disabilities Act, and violations of both the federal and state wage and hour claims.

Our attorneys have appeared before all types of public agencies in defense of employment claims, including the Department of Labor, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Department of Fair Employment and Housing and related tribunals and administrative hearing boards.
• Public Safety
The Firm provides services for the entire range of a city’s needs, including counseling for law enforcement and public safety advocacy, The Firm attorneys have represented police officers in all aspects of internal affairs investigations and Skelly hearings before the city managers, city and county counsel, including the handling of all administrative appeals. The Firm has experience representing both employers and miscellaneous employees in all aspects of internal affairs investigations and Skelly hearings, including the handling of all administrative appeals and appeals to the Superior Court.
• Police Records
We have extensive experience advising cities on various police matters, including defending Pitchess motions and subpoenas for records, compliance with military equipment reporting, conceal weapons permits, as well as advising on police disciplinary matters and on collective bargaining negotiations.
• Risk Management
Risk mitigation may be the most important role of the City Attorney. The first step starts with education. Our Firm is active with the California League of Cities and other similar organizations that provide constant information about changes to the law and potential sources of risk. Using information learned from these sources we provide periodic advice to department heads about changes to the law or new best practices.

When claims are filed, we work closely with a public agency’s risk management officers and carrier so that staff understands the legal issues and the potential for liability. We monitor ongoing litigation and provide periodic reports to the city council. Once a claim is resolved, we help to determine whether changes need to be made in order to protect the city in the future. Our municipal practice group communicates these lessons so that your City can benefit from the experience of our other clients.
15 In addition, the Firm uses the latest technology to maintain information security, for scheduling and calendaring, and for the oversight of attorney assignments. State of the art management software ensures that we meet all deadlines and efficiently undertake crucial conflict checks. The Firm’s legal support staff maintains separate electronic matter logs to keep attorneys and support staff further apprised of critical deadlines and pending tasks. The logs also aid in providing clients with the current status on cases.
• Claims
The Firm’s attorneys have built a reputation in defense of all types of liability matters including claims ranging from simple slip and fall cases to catastrophic dangerous conditions of property resulting in loss of limb and life, simple and complex tort matters, product liability matters, commercial matters, contract disputes, franchise agreements, business torts, violations of the Business and Professions Code, First Amendment law, regulation of adult businesses and restrictions of commercial speech, and premises liability cases. • Litigation
The Firm’s Litigation Practice Group represents its clients in prosecuting, defending, mediating, and arbitrating lawsuits, petitions, and claims. The Litigation Practice Group specializes in the following areas:

1. General liability and tort matters

2. Personal injury law (negligence, premises liability, product liability and excessive force)

3. Employment litigation (including ADA litigation, wrongful termination, discrimination, sexual harassment and hostile work environment claims, wage and hour claims, and labor compliance)

4. Product liability law (including toxic torts, asbestos litigation, aviation and complex design and manufacturing claims)

5. Professional liability (legal malpractice, medical malpractice and defense of design

6. Business tort liability (compliance with Business and Professions Code, breach of contract claims, and commercial disputes)
The Firm’s litigators have unparalleled experience providing legal advice and services during all phases of litigation. In contract-related matters, the Firm’s attorneys have filed thousands of pleadings and have managed both large and small-scale discovery plans. The Firm employs its years of experience adjudicating successful dispositive motions, and zealously advocates for its public agency clients at arbitrations, mediations and in trial. The Firm’s clients are apprised of litigation progress through close participation with client representatives and are updated regularly regarding case status and liability exposure.

The Firm’s litigators have considerable experience in premises liability and construction litigation, including construction defect claims, competitive bidding and bid protest disputes, breach of 16 contract claims, construction delay claims, stop notice litigation, contractor licensing, and litigation of performance and payment bond claims.
• Municipal Code Updates
The Firm understands that, from time to time, a city’s codes and general plans require updating.

Accomplishing this task would include review of existing code, providing comments regarding possible updates; preparation of analysis regarding recommendations and development of implementation plan; drafting of the code and amendments; meetings and calls with City staff for feedback and recommendations; assistance with city council meetings addressing new code; and assistance with implementation.

As City prosecutor, our attorneys are regularly called upon to handle all aspects of the prosecution of Municipal Code violations. Initially, after gathering all the evidence regarding the violation, the attorneys conduct office hearings with the Municipal Code violators. In circumstances where the offender fails to comply or rectify the violation, we have drafted complaints and attended court hearings with the City Code Enforcement Officer. We have been successful with obtaining a guilty or no contest plea in all of these matters.
d. Experience Preparing Ordinances, Resolutions, Contracts, Staff Report Legal Analyses, Legal Memoranda, Closed-Session Materials, and Training Materials
Our municipal team frequently prepares, reviews and approves ordinances, resolutions, staff reports, presentations, legal opinions, construction and professional services contracts, competitive bidding documents, real estate instruments and development documents, franchise agreements, and waivers and releases for consideration and adoption by the legislative body. Our attorneys draft and review hundreds of public contracts each year, crafting security documents, deeds of trust, leases, and contracts for public works projects, large and small. Additionally, our attorneys have drafted escrow documents and overseen the escrow closing process for a variety of real estate transactions. The Firm has also negotiated franchise and license agreements for solid waste hauling services and wireless telecommunications facilities.

Recently, our Firm has been involved in the drafting of ordinances establishing water and sewer rates, updating contracting policies, and updating solid waste franchise ordinances. We have drafted ballot measure ordinances relating to the imposition of new taxes (e.g., a local option sales tax ordinance) as well as ordinances relating to the implementation of various Proposition 218 property-related fees (including budget-based water rates). We have also assisted our clients to establish local Rules of Order and Ethics provisions to help streamline their public meetings.

The Firm attorneys are experienced in the law of statutory utility franchises authorizing the use of the public right of way by utility providers. They have been involved in the drafting of ordinances establishing heightened wireless facilities siting and design standards, updating contracting policies, updating solid waste franchise ordinances, and establishing marijuana dispensary moratoria. They have experience in drafting ballot measure ordinances relating to the imposition of new taxes (e.g., a half-cent sales tax ordinance, an updated utility users tax ordinance and a parcel tax ordinance for fire services) as well as ordinances relating to the implementation of Proposition 218 property-related fees.
17 e. Identify Recognized Municipal Law, Land Use, Labor and Employment, Public Safety, Public Works, Or Litigation Expertise
Municipal Law Expertise
The Firm recently advised a municipal client concerning a series of complex conflict of interest issues relating to a qui tam (“whistleblower”) action brought by an elected official concerning questions of conflict of interest, improper contracting, legislative body member recusal, and public meeting participation concerns under the Ralph M. Brown Act.

The Firm coordinated the investigation and subsequent litigation recovering hundreds of thousands of dollars embezzled by a former District Business Manager and Chief Financial Officer. The Firm utilized forensic accounting to piece together the fraudulent scheme employed over a fiveyear period to recover damages based on theories of misuse of public resources, conversion, fraud, unjust enrichment and the California False Claims Act
Additionally, Firm attorneys assisted a client city in matters related to Department of Cannabis Control (DCC) Local Jurisdiction Grant Awards during audits performed by the California State Auditor. In the process, legal advice on compliance requirements for financial transparency, labor contract adjustments, and cost controls were instrumental in arriving at a favorable outcome for the client.

OMLO has advised a separate client city in matters related to adjustments to fees and service charges, special parcel tax issuance, zero-based budgeting, and internal control strengthening for improvements in financial solvency. The Firm worked closely with general counsel of the private accounting firm CliftonLarsonAllen (CLA) on a financial audit of a separate client city.

Land Use
The Firm has substantial experience in all facets of land use and environmental law, serving as general legal counsel to numerous planning commissions, historic preservation commissions, and planning departments, while also serving as litigation counsel in lawsuits challenging land use regulations and environmental issues. The Firm’s expertise includes: zoning and planning law, Subdivision Map Act compliance, review and adjudication of entitlements, revocation of land use permits, and related land use matters. Our attorneys participate in the entitlement process involving the consideration of conditional use permits, zoning variances, specific plans, General Plan updates, and tentative tract maps.

Labor and Employment
The Firm has litigated all types of labor and employment disputes from inception through trial and appeal. Today’s employers are faced with many challenges including compliance with a complicated web of federal and state statutory and common law requirements that often result in litigation. The Firm has handled numerous employment litigation matters including claims related to violations of the Family Leave Act, HIPAA, NLRA, the Americans With Disabilities Act, and violations of both federal and state wage and hour claims.

Our attorneys have appeared before all types of public agencies in defense of labor and employment claims, including the Department of Labor, the Equal Employment Opportunity 18 Commission, the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, the National Labor Relations Board, and related tribunals and administrative hearings. The Firm attorneys have represented police officers in all aspects of internal affairs investigations and Skelly hearings before the city managers, city and county counsel, including the handling of all administrative appeals.

The Firm has experience representing both employers and miscellaneous employees in all aspects of internal affairs investigations and Skelly hearings, including the handling of all administrative appeals and appeals to the Superior Court.

Public Safety
The Firm has also been intimately involved in the development and updating of wireless facilities regulation, including regulation of wireless facilities mounted in the public right-of-way (e.g., light poles and streetlights) to balance state and federal mandates with community concerns over safety, right-of-way accessibility and aesthetics. We have also worked with the cities of El Monte and San Fernando in drafting of accessory dwelling unit (i.e., second unit) ordinances that comply with new state regulations restricting the ability of cities to deny second unit requests but which also implement legislatively authorized standards that give cities some ability to make sure the state’s relaxed standards to not create undue burdens on neighborhoods in terms of parking and community character.

We have extensive experience advising cities on various police matters, including defending Pitchess motions and subpoenas, compliance with military equipment reporting, conceal weapons permits, as well as advising on police disciplinary matters and on collective bargaining negotiations.

Public Works
The Firm’s attorneys have drafted and reviewed thousands of public contracts, as well as crafted security documents, deeds of trust, leases, and contracts for public works projects, large and small.

Additionally, our attorneys have drafted escrow documents and overseen the escrow closing process for a variety of real estate transactions.

The Firm has also negotiated franchise and license agreements for solid waste hauling services and wireless telecommunications facilities. The Firm attorneys are experienced in the law of statutory utility franchises authorizing the use of the public right of way by utility providers. They have been involved in the drafting of ordinances establishing heightened wireless facilities siting and design standards, updating contracting policies, updating solid waste franchise ordinances, and establishing marijuana dispensary moratoria. They have experience in drafting ballot measure ordinances relating to the imposition of new taxes (e.g., a half-cent sales tax ordinance, an updated utility users tax ordinance and a parcel tax ordinance for fire services) as well as ordinances relating to the implementation of Proposition 218 property-related fees.

Our attorneys consult regularly with city staff during all phases of construction to ensure proper performance by contractors, consultants, and owners. We advise the staff in our clients’ public works and facilities departments, and third-party construction management firms, regarding construction management issues during design, bid, and construction phases throughout the course of projects. This work includes contract payment processing, preliminary notices, mechanic’s liens and stop notices, RFI processing, inspection and design consultation, participating in jobsite 19 meetings, Division of State Architect compliance and coordination, plan submittal, review, project close out and commissioning, change order negotiations, critical path methodology progress schedule analysis and adjustment, contract termination, and surety calls, negotiations and takeovers.

Litigation
The Firm’s Litigation Practice Group represents its clients in prosecuting, defending, mediating, and arbitrating lawsuits, petitions, and claims. The Firm’s attorneys have built a reputation in defense of all types of liability matters including simple and complex tort matters, product liability matters, commercial matters, contract disputes, franchise agreements, business torts, violations of the Business and Professions Code, First Amendment law, regulation of adult businesses and restrictions of commercial speech, premises liability cases, including claims ranging from simple slip and fall cases to catastrophic dangerous conditions of property resulting in loss of limb and life.

The Firm’s litigators have unparalleled experience providing legal advice and services during all phases of litigation. In contract-related matters, the Firm’s attorneys have filed thousands of pleadings and have managed both large and small-scale discovery plans. The Firm employs its years of experience adjudicating successful dispositive motions, and zealously advocates for its public agency clients at arbitrations, mediations and in trial. The Firm’s clients are apprised of litigation progress through close participation with client representatives and are updated regularly regarding case status and liability exposure.

The Firm’s litigators have considerable experience in premises liability and construction litigation, including construction defect claims, competitive bidding and bid protest disputes, breach of contract claims, construction delay claims, stop notice litigation, contractor licensing, and litigation of performance and payment bond claims.

Recent litigation matters for our municipal clients include:
• Ventura29 LLC v. City of San Buenaventura (2023) 304 Cal.Rptr.3d 122. Represented the City of Ventura against a land developer’s claims of inverse condemnation, nuisance, trespass and negligence. Plaintiff claimed the City was responsible for wrongfully burying the debris on the vacant private land decades ago. The City denied such conduct, but argued the case should be dismissed on demurrer because it was long past the statutory time in which to file a lawsuit, and that the developer had failed to pursue an administrative appeal to the public works director. The trial court agreed and the Court of Appeal affirmed. • Compton Unified School District v. UC Regents. Counsel for Compton Unified School District, involving a challenge to the use of the SAT / ACT within the California public school system.
• Lead counsel for City of San Buenaventura in the Thomas Fire Consolidated Cases.

Defended the City of San Buenaventura in the largest California wildfire costing more than $2.2 billion in damages caused by the fire.
• Lopez v. City of Inglewood. Defended City and four police officers in a wrongful death/civil rights (42 U.S.C. § 1983) / battery action in the death of a suspect under the influence of 20 Methamphetamine involving allegations of restraint and positional asphyxiation. The case settled after seven days of a jury trial.
• Lynch v. Los Angeles Community College District. Defense verdict on behalf of the District in an age discrimination, failure to prevent age discrimination matter, and allegation of retaliation in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act matter involving an 89- year-old adjunct professor. The case was tried to a defense verdict. • Burnside v. Compton Unified School District. Represented the District and obtained favorable summary judgment in a matter where former Superintendent alleged breach of employment contract, and claims of race, age, gender, and sexual orientation discrimination, retaliation, sexual harassment, and creation of hostile work environment. • LACCD v. HOK / SDI, et al. Defended, and obtained a favorable result, on behalf of the Los Angeles Community College District in a $44 million construction project/dispute involving architectural design issues and delay damages. • Belser v. City of Inglewood. Obtained summary judgment for the City in this action where Plaintiff’s finger was amputated. Plaintiff, a minor, alleged that a swing-set at the City’s park constituted a dangerous condition in violation of Gov. Code § 835 when her finger was caught in the link and was amputated when she dismounted.

5. PROPOSED LEGAL TEAM AND STAFFING PLAN
a. Proposed City Attorney
If chosen to represent the City of Huntington Park, Stephanie Vasquez, Partner, will serve as City Attorney.

Stephanie Vasquez is a Partner with Olivarez Madruga Law Organization, LLP, serving as part of the firm’s Municipal Law practice group. Ms. Vasquez serves as the City Attorney for the City of Bell Gardens and as Deputy City Attorney for several other clients. Ms. Vasquez’s practice areas include a wide range of Municipal Law issues including public contracting, public works, First Amendment, election law, campaign finance and ethics and disclosure laws. Ms. Vasquez was named one of the “Women of Influence: Attorneys” by the Los Angeles Business Journal (2025), and “Ones to Watch” by the Best Lawyers in America – Municipal Law (2026).

Prior to joining Olivarez Madruga Law Organization, LLP, Ms. Vasquez was a litigation attorney where she focused on insurance defense matters.

Ms. Vasquez was admitted to the California State Bar in 2017. She has been practicing municipal law for the past 8 years.
b. Proposed Deputy City Attorney and Team
Richard E. Padilla and Rick R. Olivarez will serve as Deputy City Attorneys. Mr. Padilla is a partner of the Firm and Mr. Olivarez is the Managing Partner of the Firm. Their team would include all of the attorneys of the Firm, both Municipal and Litigation practices, drawing on their individual specialties, according to the task or project. 21 Richard E. Padilla
Richard Padilla is a Partner with Olivarez Madruga Law Organization. As the Deputy City Attorney for the City of El Monte, Mr. Padilla has researched and prepared written analysis on a variety of legal issues for the City Council, City commissions and City departments. He has provided advice and analysis for ordinances, resolutions, contracts, real property transaction documents and other similar documentation, and has conducted ethics training for officials of the City. He has assisted commissions and department staff in the development of policies and procedures (e.g., purchasing policies and bidding procedures), prepared and reviewed bid documents for public works projects and assisted with coordination of the bid process.

Mr. Padilla serves as legal counsel for the City of San Fernando and the San Gabriel Basin Water Quality Authority and as Assistant City Attorney for the City of El Monte. He has frequently advised City officials on Brown Act and conflict of interest matters and reviewed California Public Records Act requests. In addition, he has advised the City Clerk on election law matters, drafted City-initiated ballot measures and drafted impartial City Attorney analyses for various Citysponsored measures. Mr. Padilla has provided legal advice for, and assisted in the coordination of, Proposition 218 majority protest proceedings for the establishment and increase of property related fees and charges.

Mr. Padilla’s work has also included the preparation of development agreements, leases, deeds, loan agreements and other transactional documents. He has appeared at administrative proceedings on behalf of public agency and private party clients and researched a variety of public law matters.

Mr. Padilla also served as a research attorney for the California 5th District Court of Appeal in Fresno.

Mr. Padilla was admitted to the California State Bar in 1999, and the entirety of his 27-year career has been in service to public entities.

Rick R. Olivarez
Rick R. Olivarez is the founding and Managing Partner of Olivarez Madruga Law Organization, LLP. In this capacity, he oversees the day-to-day operations of the firm. Under his leadership, OMLO has grown into the premier minority-owned law firm in Southern California.

In addition, Mr. Olivarez manages the Firm’s municipal and school district practice group.

As city attorney, Mr. Olivarez advises on all aspects of municipal law including, but not limited to, the Public Records Act, public contracts, Brown Act, litigation, economic development, construction law, and ethics. Additionally, Mr. Olivarez has drafted hundreds of resolutions, ordinances, and contracts on behalf of his municipal clients.

Mr. Olivarez also serves as general counsel to a number of school districts and community colleges. In this role, Mr. Olivarez advises the governing bodies on various legal matters involving workplace harassment, construction, employment, and conflict of interest. 22 Mr. Olivarez was admitted to the California State Bar in 1997, and the majority of his nearly 30 - year career has been in service of public agencies.

Full Resumes of Ms. Vasquez, Mr. Padilla and Mr. Olivarez can be found in the Appendix.

Municipal Team
The Firm maintains a very professional and highly resourceful home office support staff including paralegals, legal assistants, administrators and finance staff, totaling over 70 employees. The office hours for the Firm are 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. The Firm attorneys and support staff conduct routine team meetings to review case assignments, determine status and budgets, and evaluate staffing needs for various engagements.
c. Organizational Chart
If the Firm is chosen to represent the City of Huntington Park, all assignments from the City Manager will go through Stephanie Vasquez, Richard Padilla or Rick Olivarez. The Firm’s partners supervise all assignments and assign tasks to associate attorneys and paralegal staff whenever possible to control costs. The lead attorneys will assign the work based on experience and case load.

Below is an Organizational Chart showing the workflow of assignments from the City to the Firm. 23 Before the Firm can determine the time commitment for specific City projects, we would propose a transition schedule covering onboarding, relationship-building, file transfer, priority assessment and establishment of key workflows to ensure a seamless handover and continuous legal service delivery.
d. Availability for Meetings, City Hall Office Hours, Urgent Matters, Evening Meetings, and After-Hours Contact
Our attorneys are always available and accessible to our clients as well as responding quickly to client queries, during business hours and after hours. Accordingly, we strive to provide opinions Stephanie Vasquez
Partner
Review assignment and
assign to team member(s)
considering time commitment
and expertise
Monitor and review team
work; report to City
Richard Padilla, Partner
Rick R. Olivarez, Partner
Review assignment and
assign to team member(s)
considering time commitment
and expertise
Monitor and review team
work; report to City
Litigation Team
Thomas M. Madruga – Senior Partner
Terence Gallagher – Partner
Leslie Burnet – Partner
Daniel Lee – Senior Associate
Tania Ochoa – Senior Associate
Colin Barr – Of Counsel
Deborah Lee-Germain – Of Counsel
Carol Velazquez - Associate

Paralegals / Staff
Municipal Law Team
Ken Trumkul - Associate
Dulce Rodas - Associate
Joanna Burstedt- Associate
Rick R. Olivarez – Partner
Richard Padilla - Partner
Jesse Jauregui – Partner
Paloma Perez-McEvoy – Partner
Stephanie Vasquez – Partner
Susie Altamirano - Partner
Alejandra Cortez - Associate
Chelsey Ballot - Associate
Christine Flier – Of Counsel
Manny Cruz Jr. - Associate
Shelley Preisler - Associate
Stephanie Arechiga – Associate
Paralegals / Staff

CITY OF HUNTINGTON
PARK

CITY MANAGER
24 and advice free of unnecessary “legalese” so that our clients can develop a firm understanding of the challenges and responsibilities that confront them.

Our Attorney Team is keenly aware that, when it comes to representing public agency clients, time is always of the essence. The Firm’s background and experience in public law, education law and governance provides additional insight into addressing important issues with a cutting-edge approach.

The Firm understands that queries from the City and staff must be addressed immediately, and in no event later than the close of the business day, unless the request requires extensive research or the responsible attorney is engaged in a trial. In such event, the Firm will strive to provide a response no later than the next City business day. Direct dial cell phone numbers of the assigned attorneys will be given to the City Manager and staff to ensure immediate access when a matter requires urgent attention or an emergency arises.
e. Conflicts, Workload Spikes, Absences, Vacations, Emergencies, and Handling of Specialized Issues
The majority of the Firm’s clients are public entities, and our litigation team handles dozens of matters in defense of those public agencies each year. The Firm has not been in a situation of being adverse to any other public entity in the last 10 years, either in litigation or in administrative matters. Should there be a situation of one of our clients being adverse to another client on a particular assignment, we would immediately notify the City so that waivers could be obtained, or another outside firm could be engaged.

Our Firm is composed of 43 attorneys with legal expertise well-suited to addressing most any area required by the City. Our attorneys have served as City Attorney, General Counsel and Special Counsel and provide exemplary service. If any attorney is unavailable for any reason, another team member will be available to the City. All attorneys are available by email and cell phone on a 24/7 basis. We anticipate no interruption of service to the City at any time.

6. WORK PLAN AND APPROACH TO LEGAL SERVICES
a. Approach to Providing Day-to-Day Municipal Legal Services We believe that the ability to serve our clients depends largely upon our ability to effectively communicate with our clients and offer clear, concise and easy to understand explanations and solutions to complex problems.

Our approach to effective negotiation and resolution is driven by several key factors which include (1) Preparedness, (2) Listening, (3) Professionalism, (4) Communication, (5) Efficiency, (6) Avoiding Emotion, (7) Flexibility, (8) Creativity and (9) Knowledge and Understanding of the Issue.

Our attorneys are always available and accessible to our clients as well as always responding quickly to client queries. Accordingly, we strive to provide opinions and advice in a clear and concise manner so that our clients can develop a firm understanding of the challenges and responsibilities that confront them.
25 Though all assignments are important, we recognize some will need to be prioritized. Our goal is to provide immediate assistance to the Mayor, City Council, City Manager, and City staff. Direct dial cell phone numbers of our attorneys will be given to the Mayor, City Council, City Manager and staff personnel to ensure immediate access when the need arises. The Firm attorneys and support staff also conduct routine team meetings to review assignments and evaluate staffing needs for various engagements. Time and expenses are monitored closely as each project progresses and significant events are reported promptly to the client. b. Process for Agenda Review, Legal Intake, Assignment Tracking, Response Times, Written Advice, Status Reporting, and Communication with City Officials and Staff
The Firm attorneys have attended hundreds of council and board meetings and have expertise in offering opinions and advice to both city personnel and the public in clear and uncomplicated terms. Our municipal team has extensive experience drafting ordinances, resolutions, staff reports, presentations, legal opinions, construction and professional services contracts, competitive bidding documents, real estate instruments and development documents, franchise agreements, and waivers and releases. They regularly advise city staff regarding agenda and meeting requirements and FAQs to reinforce best practices.

The Firm understands that queries from the City and City staff must be addressed immediately, and in no event later than the close of the business day, unless the request requires extensive research or the responsible attorney is engaged in a trial. In such event, the Firm will strive to provide a response no later than the next City business day.

Recognizing that serving the public often demands the ability to respond quickly to unexpected and rapidly evolving developments, our office stresses the importance of being available to City staff and responding promptly to staff queries. To meet this objective, we have equipped our attorney team with some of the most up-to-date communications equipment so that attorneys can be easily reached either by telephone, e-mail or text during the work day or night. We also maintain a very professional and highly resourceful home office support staff that is also available during regular business hours to troubleshoot a broad range of administrative and/or logistical challenges.

In our experience representing cities, we have found the most efficient working relationship is to have all assignments start with the City Attorney. The City Attorney can then either handle the assignment or delegate it to one of the senior members of the Municipal Law team. Assignments 26 are always made with regard to the expertise needed to complete the assignment and are supervised by the City Attorney or a senior partner. In those cases where work is assigned or where Staff contacts lower-level attorneys directly, the Firm will make sure that the projects are tracked internally and that senior partners are notified of the assignment of work. The Firm typically communicates via email.
c. Advising the City About New Laws, Litigation Trends, Regulatory Developments, and Operational Risks
We provide legislative updates and developments to our clients on the Firm’s website. In addition, we have the ability and technology in-house to track specific legislation requested by our clients on a particular matter. We do not charge our clients for this service. Our attorneys frequently author memoranda relating to new legislation, offering insight into how the legislation affects the communities we serve while offering clear suggestions on how to implement and manage the legislation. Some recent topics include disability and LGBTQ discrimination, medical marijuana legislation, and California Public Records Act and SB 272. We subscribe to daily and monthly law journals to keep us apprised of regulatory changes and court decisions and our attorneys attend seminars and conferences throughout the year on topics germane to our public agency clients.

Risk mitigation may be the most important role of the City Attorney. The first step starts with education. Our Firm is active with the California League of Cities and other similar organizations that provide constant information about changes to the law and potential sources of risk. Using information learned from these sources we provide periodic advice to department heads about changes to the law or new best practices.

When claims are filed, we work closely with a public agency’s risk management officers and carrier so that staff understands the legal issues and the potential for liability. We monitor ongoing litigation and provide periodic reports to the City Council. Once a claim is resolved, we help to determine whether changes need to be made in order to protect the City in the future. Our municipal practice group communicates these lessons so that your City can benefit from the experience of our other clients.
d. Evaluation of Litigation Risk, Settlement Options, Budget Impacts, and Cost-Benefit Considerations
The approach, preparation, and execution of litigation plans for public agency clients are unique to each case’s facts and circumstances. Before undertaking representation of the client, we will present a detailed budget and strategy for approval by the City Council in closed session. Based on the needs of the case, we will designate inflection points where additional direction from the City Council is anticipated. We will also designate inflection points where the budget is likely to be adjusted based on developments within the litigation. From that point, we will arrange to periodically brief the City Council regarding the matter based on the specific needs and circumstances of the litigation. In some cases, we routinely include the litigation item for closed session at every meeting because of the importance or complexity of the litigation.

The Firm’s attorneys possess the organization and information systems infrastructure needed to effectively manage multiple complex cases. We have defended lawsuits involving literally thousands of plaintiffs and have defended cases that have spanned decades. State-of-the-art matter 27 management software ensures that we meet all deadlines and efficiently undertake crucial conflict checks. The Firm’s legal support staff maintains separate electronic matter logs to keep attorneys and support staff further apprised of critical deadlines and pending tasks. The logs also aid in providing clients with the current status on cases.

Trial attorneys in the Firm have considerable experience with public agencies and have taken over litigation matters on the eve of trial, on short notice, or when conflicts have arisen requiring replacement counsel.

Litigation strategy must always consider the economics of the matter. During each step of the litigation, we must consider the following factors: (1) the amount in controversy; (2) the likelihood of success; (3) alternatives to achieving the same goal; (4) the costs of the procedure considered; and (5) the impact of the procedure on the case if successful.

Guided by these principles, at the start of the case we prepare a detailed litigation and discovery plan and budget, and receive direction from the client regarding our strategies. Further, during the litigation we routinely return to the budget for reevaluation and direction from the client. e. Cost-Control Strategies, Use of Templates, Preventive Advice, Matter Budgets, and Reporting
Our attorneys understand the challenges and needs of public agencies and the economic and budgetary restrictions they operate under. To control costs, Ms. Vasquez, Mr. Padilla and Mr. Olivarez will assign work from the City to associate attorneys and paralegal staff whenever possible, based on experience and case load. As a smaller firm, we are keenly aware of the strengths of our attorney team and make assignments accordingly, always with the supervision of the partners. Monthly invoices are reviewed to monitor for excessive time spent on tasks, so that the client is not overcharged.

Over the years the Firm has developed dozens of templates for documents used by our municipal clients, including professional services agreements, contract agreements, city-specific documents, and PRAR responses. The templates save time and costs for the client and make updates to current documents easier and less costly. The use of these templates provides a cost-savings to the City where staff can initiate the agreements with preliminary information. All agreements will require review and approval as to form by the City Manager and the City Attorney’s office to ensure that the final form is complete.

The Firm attorneys strive to balance candor with diplomacy. We are aware that we are a “publicfacing” representative of the City and must often deliver unwanted advice in a public forum. We endeavor to always provide information clearly and in a manner that will not cause additional issues with the City. We always try to work with our clients to find creative solutions to legal problems. When saying “no,” we always attempt to provide the advice in a way that, if possible, also offers legally supportable alternative courses of action. We understand that as City Attorneys, we work for the City Council, but also work collaboratively with the City Manager and other City staff to accomplish City-wide objectives.

As referenced in Section a. above, the Firm attorneys regularly provide status reports and budget updates to our clients for on-going projects and investigations. 28 f. Legal Services Not Provided
In the course of our representation, in order to properly and effectively protect the best interests of the City, the Firm may assign legal matters to special counsel (law firms or attorneys), subject to the City Manager’s approval, in the following areas of expertise:
 Tax law
 Public Finance
 Information Technology
 Intellectual Property
 Workers’ Compensation

7. CLIENT REFERENCES, RELATED EXPERIENCE, AND WORK SAMPLES Michael B. O’Kelly Rene Bobadilla
City Manager City Manager
City of Bell Gardens City of Santa Fe Springs
Tel: (562) 806-7702 Tel: (562) 868-0511, ext. 7510
Email: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] Brian Saeki
City Administrator
City of Vernon
Tel: (323) 583-8811 ext. 228
The above references have been clients of the Firm for many years. We have represented the City of Bell Gardens and worked closely with Mr. O’Kelly since 2019. Mr. Saeki was formerly with the City of San Fernando, which we have represented since 2013. Mr. Bobadilla was formerly the City Manager of the City of El Monte where we have been City Attorney since the Firm was established in 2010. We currently represent the City of Santa Fe Springs where Mr. Bobadilla is the City Manager.

Examples of an Ordinance, Staff Report and Legal Analysis Memorandum are attached in the Appendix at the end of this proposal.

8. CONFLICTS, DISCLOSURES, AND PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY a. Public Agency Clients
The following is a list of the Firm’s public agency clients:
• City of El Monte
• City of Cudahy
• City of San Fernando
• City of Huntington Park
• City of Bell Gardens
• City of Yorba Linda
• City of West Covina
• City of Inglewood
29 • City of Los Angeles
• City of Maywood
• City of Norwalk
• City of Commerce
• City of San Buenaventura
• City of La Puente
• City of Lynwood
• City of South Gate
• City of National City
• City of California City
• City of Barstow
• City of Dana Point
• City of Irwindale
• City of Santa Fe Springs
• City of Vernon
• El Monte Union High School
District
• Hacienda La Puente Unified School
District
• Lynwood Unified School District
• Los Angeles Community College
District
• Los Angeles Unified School District
• Rio Hondo Community College
District
• Compton Unified School District
• Centinela Valley Union High School
District
• Baldwin Park Unified School
District
• Bassett Unified School District
• Bellflower Unified School District
• Lennox School District
• Montebello Unified School District
• Rosemead School District
• Colton Joint Unified School District
• Alhambra Unified School District
• Oxnard Union High School District
• Coachella Valley Unified School
District
• Little Lake School District
• Adelanto Elementary School District
• Little Lake City School District
• Ventura County Office of Education
• San Diego County Office of
Education
• Santa Clara County Office of
Education
• Fairfax Elementary School District
• Housing Authority of the City of Los
Angeles
• Watershed Conservation Authority
• San Gabriel Discovery Center
Authority
• Alameda Corridor Transportation
Authority
b. Potential Conflict of Interest
The Firm provides regular representation and counsel to cities, counties, school districts, water districts, universities, community colleges, redevelopment agencies, insurance companies, small businesses, contractors, manufacturers and the retail industry in both the public and private sector covering a wide scope of legal issues.

Currently, no client of the Firm is adverse to the City of Huntington Park and we do not anticipate any conflicts of interest. Should an actual conflict arise between the City of Huntington Park and one of our clients on a particular assignment, we would immediately notify the City so that waivers could be obtained, or another outside firm could be engaged. 30 c. Method for Resolving Any Conflict
Should a conflict arise between the City of Huntington Park and one of our we would immediately notify the City to obtain waivers. Should a waiver situation be undertaken and waivers obtained, then the Firm would proceed with establishing an ethical wall. All Firm personnel (lawyers, paralegals, secretaries, and staff) would be directed to: (i) avoid any discussion of any of the subject matters with or in the presence of the attorneys or staff handling the mater that is adverse to the City, (ii) avoid the dissemination of any information about the matter with those attorneys and staff, and (iii) maintain the Firm’s physical and computer files for the matters so that they are not available to those attorneys or staff.

If the City prefers that outside counsel be hired, the Firm, if requested by the City, will supervise the work and review submitted invoices to ensure that they are consistent with the agreement with the City and submit these invoices to the City for payment. d. Representation of Party Adverse to a Public Entity
The Firm has not been in a situation of being adverse to any other public entity in the last 10 years, either in litigation or in administrative matters. Should there be a situation of one of our clients being adverse to another client, we would turn the matter over to outside counsel to handle to alleviate any conflict of interest in representing our clients. e. Malpractice Claim, Lawsuit, Fee Dispute, Disciplinary Matters The Firm and its attorneys have had no malpractice claims, lawsuits, fee disputes, complaints, disciplinary actions, State Bar proceedings, Fair Political Practices Commission enforcement matters, grievances or violations of the California Rules of Professional Conduct filed against them or had any client sue them for malpractice in our 16 year history. f. Terminated Public Agency Contracts
The Firm’s services have never been terminated by any client. g. Relationship with Huntington Park Elected Officials
No attorney of the Firm has any past or current business, financial, campaign, personal, or family relationship with any current Huntington Park elected official, appointed official, employee, consultant, or family member of such person.
h. Violation of Law, Regulation, Or Ethical Standard
The Firm and its attorneys have had no legal actions filed against them. The Firm’s services have never been terminated by any client. The Firm has never been sued or been the subject of any legal malpractice claims. The Firm certifies that no attorney or the Firm has been debarred, suspended or otherwise declared ineligible to contract by any federal, state or local public agency. i. Appendix B
The completed Appendix B is located at the end of this proposal in the Appendix. 31 9. COST PROPOSAL
The Firm’s Cost Proposal has been uploaded separately to Planet Bids.

10. EXCEPTIONS TO RFP, AGREEMENT, OR INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS The Firm requires no exceptions to this RFP, the anticipated professional services agreement, insurance requirements, indemnity provisions, confidentiality requirements, or any other City requirement.
32 APPENDIX
Contains Writing Samples
15 APPENDIX A

CERTIFICATION STATEMENT AND SIGNATURE SHEET
All proposals must include this certification statement, signed by a duly authorized representative legally authorized to bind Proposer to its proposal and cost schedule. (1) Proposer has read and understands the RFP and all addenda identified below. (2) Proposer did not, directly or indirectly, collude, conspire, or agree with any person, firm, corporation, or other Proposer regarding the amount, terms, or conditions of its proposal.
(3) Proposer did not directly or indirectly induce or solicit any other Proposer to submit a false or sham proposal or to refrain from submitting a proposal. (4) Proposer did not receive unauthorized information from any City official, employee, consultant, or representative during the RFP process except as provided in the RFP or by formal addendum.
(5) All information submitted with the proposal is true, correct, and complete to the best of Proposer's knowledge.
(6) Proposer has identified all exceptions, deviations, conflicts, and required disclosures in its proposal.
(7) Proposer does not discriminate in employment or provision of services on any basis prohibited by federal, state, or local law.
(8) Proposer can obtain and maintain the insurance required by the City as a condition of contract execution and performance.

Name of Firm / Proposer
Entity Type
Address
Federal Tax ID No.

Primary Contact / Title
Telephone
Email
Addendum Nos.

Acknowledged
Olivarez Madruga Law Organization, LLP
Limited Liability Partnership
47-1973650
Rick R. Olivarez / Managing Partner
(213) 744-0099
500 South Grand Avenue - 12th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90071 [email protected] / [email protected]
No addenda
16 Authorized Signatory Name
Authorized Signature
Title
Date

APPENDIX B

POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION, PAC PARTICIPATION, AND CALIFORNIA LEVINE

ACT DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
California Government Code section 84308, commonly referred to as the “Levine Act,” regulates certain campaign contributions made to officers of local agencies by parties, participants, and agents in proceedings involving contracts and other covered matters.

Proposers are responsible for reviewing and complying with the current law.

In addition to any disclosure required by law, the City requires the following disclosures to evaluate potential conflicts, appearance issues, and compliance obligations relating to this RFP and any resulting contract.

For purposes of this Appendix, “Proposer” includes the proposing firm or attorney, any principal, partner, shareholder, member, officer, director, attorney proposed for City work, employee acting on behalf of the Proposer, agent, consultant, subcontractor, affiliated entity, or other person acting on behalf of the Proposer in connection with this RFP.

1. Prior Political Contributions
Within the twelve (12) months preceding submission of this proposal, has the Proposer made any political contribution of more than $500, individually or in the aggregate, to any City of Huntington Park City Council Member, candidate for City office, City-controlled committee, or other City official who may participate in or influence any City action concerning this RFP or any resulting contract?
YES ___ NO ___
If yes, identify the contributor, recipient, amount, date, and whether the contribution was made directly or through any intermediary.

Rick R. Olivarez
Managing Partner
6/17/26
X
X
17 3. PAC Participation or Support/Opposition Activity
Within the twenty-four (24) months preceding submission of this proposal, has the Proposer formed, funded, controlled, managed, sponsored, advised, represented, served as an officer or treasurer of, raised funds for, solicited funds for, made payments to, or otherwise participated in any political action committee, independent expenditure committee, candidate committee, ballot measure committee, or other political committee that supported or opposed any City of Huntington Park City Council Member, candidate for City office, City ballot measure, or City-controlled committee?
YES ___ NO ___
If yes, identify the committee, the Proposer’s role, the City official, candidate, measure, or committee supported or opposed, whether the activity was in support or opposition, the dates of participation, and the amount contributed, paid, raised, solicited, or bundled, if any.

4. Anticipated Future PAC Participation or Support/Opposition Activity Does the Proposer anticipate, plan, intend, or reasonably expect to form, fund, control, manage, sponsor, advise, represent, serve as an officer or treasurer of, raise funds for, solicit funds for, make payments to, or otherwise participate in any political action committee, independent expenditure committee, candidate committee, ballot measure committee, or other political committee that may support or oppose any City of Huntington Park City Council Member, candidate for City office, City ballot measure, or City-controlled committee within twelve (12) months after any City action related to this proposal or any resulting contract? YES ___ NO ___
If yes, identify the anticipated committee if known, the anticipated role, the City official, candidate, measure, or committee expected to be supported or opposed, whether the activity is expected to be in support or opposition, and the anticipated amount to be contributed, paid, raised, solicited, or bundled, if known.

5. Fundraising, Bundling, Behested Payments, or Intermediary Activity Within the twenty-four (24) months preceding submission of this proposal, has the Proposer hosted, sponsored, organized, solicited, bundled, transmitted, reimbursed, directed, arranged, or facilitated any contribution, payment, behested payment, sponsorship, event payment, or other campaign-related payment of more than $500 for the benefit of any City of Huntington Park City Council Member, candidate for City office, City ballot measure, Citycontrolled committee, or other covered City official? YES ___ NO ___
If yes, identify the person or entity involved, the recipient or beneficiary, the amount, the date, the nature of the activity, and any intermediary used.

X
X
X
18 6. Continuing Duty to Update
The Proposer must promptly update this disclosure in writing if, before contract award or within twelve (12) months after any City action related to this RFP or any resulting contract, the Proposer becomes aware of new or changed information responsive to this Appendix.

Acknowledged: YES ___ NO ___

7. Certification
The undersigned certifies that he or she is authorized to sign this disclosure on behalf of the Proposer; that the Proposer has made a reasonable inquiry regarding the matters disclosed above; and that the information provided is true, correct, and complete to the best of the Proposer’s knowledge.

The undersigned further acknowledges that a disclosure does not automatically disqualify the Proposer, but that false, misleading, incomplete, or materially inaccurate disclosures may result in rejection of the proposal, disqualification, termination of negotiations, termination of any resulting contract, or any other remedy available to the City.

Company / Proposer Name
Authorized Signatory
Title
Signature
Date

APPENDIX C

X
Olivarez Madruga Law Organization, LLP
Rick R. Olivarez
Managing Partner
June 17, 2026
Olivarez Madruga Law Organization carries all of the required insurance and will include the City as a named insured on these policies in the event of the award of the proposed contract.
1 ORDINANCE NO. 934
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF __ AMENDING TITLE 5
(BUSINESS LICENSES, REGULATIONS AND TAXES) OF
THE __ MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADD LICENSING AND

PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR CANNABIS RETAIL
BUSINESS, AND AMENDING TITLE 9 (ZONING AND

PLANNING REGULATIONS) TO CONDITIONALLY

PERMIT A CANNABIS RETAIL USE IN COMMERCIAL
ZONES
WHEREAS, the City of __ (“City”) is a general law city, incorporated under the laws of the State of California;
WHEREAS, pursuant to its police power, the City may enact and enforce laws within its boundaries which promote the public health, morals, safety, or general welfare of the community, and are not in conflict with general laws; WHEREAS, the City’s General Plan (“General Plan”) articulates the community’s vision and is underscored by an effective Zoning Code in compliance with state law that protects the public health, safety and welfare, enacts regulatory and enforcement controls to defend safe neighborhood character and minimize potential for negative impacts on people, the community, and the environment;
WHEREAS, Chapter 9.21 (Prohibited Uses) of Title 9 (Zoning and Planning Regulations) of the __ Municipal Code (“__MC”) expressly prohibits all commercial cannabis activities within City limits;
WHEREAS, the City finds it necessary to amend the __MC to remove certain prohibitions and add language to enact provisions that authorize appropriate use standards for commercial cannabis activities, specifically, cannabis retail activities through proposed Ordinance No. 934 (“Ordinance”);
WHEREAS, the proposed Ordinance establishes land use and zoning regulations for Cannabis Retail, as specified, that are legal within the state, subject to strict compliance with state and local laws and regulations;
WHEREAS, the proposed Ordinance would streamline review and processing of entitlement requests and promote accessibility and a convenient, safe, and sustainable way to connect customers to a desired commodified product and ensure community compatibility;
WHEREAS, the purpose of the Ordinance is to ensure the incorporation of regulations and development standards of such businesses in certain zones within the City through the use of the public hearing process for both conditional use permits and negotiated development agreements;
2 WHEREAS, the proposed Ordinance would be consistent with the General Plan; WHEREAS, Policy No. 1 of the General Plan’s Land Use Element emphasizes the City’s commitment to open communication and seeking public input; WHEREAS, the deliberation of the Ordinance has been subject to a public hearing process that has been duly noticed for the purpose of seeking public input and participation and community members will continue to provide public input for individual projects resulting from ordinance implementation and is therefore consistent with Policy No. 1;
WHEREAS, Policy No. 3 of the General Plan’s Land Use Element promotes compatible commercial development to emphasize commercial identity and to enhance the appearance, potential economic vitality, and revitalization of commercial areas in the City;
WHEREAS, a cannabis retail use will be limited to commercial and industrial zones only and subject to certain development standards and other siting requirements to enhance the economic viability of the surrounding commercial areas and is therefore consistent with Policy No. 3;
WHEREAS, Policy No. 4 of the General Plan’s Land Use Element asserts that the City shall encourage private investment in the City’s industrial economic base while ensuring compliance with necessary environmental requirements; WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 934 encourages investment by permitting a cannabis retail use that would be subject to a discretionary approval process and would be required to comply with all applicable state and local environmental requirements and is therefore consistent with Policy No. 4;
WHEREAS, Policy No. 5 of the General Plan’s Land Use Element emphasizes the provision of an environment to stimulate local employment, property values, community stability, and the economic vitality of existing local businesses; WHEREAS, the introduction of a new use will promote an economic diversity of the City’s commercial and industrial zones and provide local employment opportunities while still regulating the use in order to ensure community stability and economic vitality of existing businesses and is therefore consistent with Policy No. 5; WHEREAS, pursuant to California Government Code Section 65854, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on this matter on May 30, 2023, wherein the Planning Commission considered all public comments received both before and during the public hearing, the presentation by City staff, the relevant staff report, and all other pertinent documents regarding the proposed Ordinance No. 934; WHEREAS, at the close of the public hearing, the Planning Commission voted to recommend denial of the proposed ordinance by a 4-1-0 vote due to the desire to conduct 3 more public hearings and for further input on the properties that may potentially be zoned to conditionally permit a Cannabis Retail use;
WHEREAS, the City Council may approve, modify, or disapprove the Planning Commission’s recommendation pursuant to Government Code Section 65857; WHEREAS, on June 12, 2023, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the proposed Ordinance, considered all public comments received before and during the public hearing, the presentation by City Staff, the relevant staff report inclusive of the Planning Commission’s recommendation, and all other pertinent documents regarding the proposed ordinance;
WHEREAS, the proposed Ordinance would preserve the ability for the input and participation for any proposed Cannabis Retail use through the conditional use permit process and, if applicable, through the development agreement process; and WHEREAS, cannabis retail operations often take place in existing commercial or industrial buildings, and operate similarly to other retail operations, and would be subject to the same development standards as other commercial operations, including but not limited to height, setbacks, and parking; but subject to more restrictive siting requirements and thus, it can be seen with certainty that the regulation of cannabis retail sales will not cause a direct or indirect impact on the environment pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) (Pub. Res. Code § 21000 et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., Title 14, § 15000 et seq.).

NOW THEREFORE, the people of the City of __ do ordain as follows (unless otherwise noted, changes are shown in bold or strikethrough text):

SECTION 1. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference in full herein.

SECTION 2. Chapter 9.21 (Prohibited Uses) of Title 9 (Zoning and Planning) of the __ Municipal Code is repealed in its entirety.

SECTION 3. The alphabetical list of definitions provided in Chapter 9.04 (Definitions) of Title 9 (Zoning and Planning Regulations) of the __MC, is amended to add the following definitions:

Section 9.04.030 “C” definitions.
“Cannabis” shall mean all parts of the plant Cannabis Sativa Linnaeus, Cannabis Indica, or Cannabis Ruderalis, whether growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin, whether crude or purified, extracted from any part of the plant; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the plant, its seeds, or resin. “Cannabis” also means the separated resin, whether crude or purified, obtained from cannabis. “Cannabis” does not include the mature stalks of the plant, fiber produced from the stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds of the plant, any other compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the mature stalks (except the 4 resin extracted therefrom), fiber, oil or cake, or the sterilized seed of the plant which is incapable of germination. For the purpose of this division, “cannabis” does not mean “industrial hemp” as defined by Section 11018.5 of the Health and Safety Code. “Cannabis Cultivation” shall have the same meaning as Section 26001(m) of the Business and Professions Code, and includes any commercial activity involving the planting, growing, harvesting, drying, curing, grading, or trimming of cannabis.

Cannabis Cultivation, as defined herein, does not include the personal cultivation at a private residence of up to six (6) plants as authorized by state law for personal use. “Cannabis Manufacturing” shall have the same meaning as Section 26001(aj) of the Business and Professions Code, and includes activities that compound, blend, extract, infuse, package, label or otherwise make or prepare a cannabis product. “Cannabis Products” shall have the same meaning as in Section 11018.1 of the Health and Safety Code, and includes such products that are intended for use on, or consumption by, an animal. Cannabis products are not considered food, as defined by Section 109935 of the Health and Safety Code, a drug, as defined by Section 109925 of the Health and Safety Code, or a cosmetic, as defined by Section 109900 of the Health and Safety Code.
“Cannabis Retail” shall have the same meaning as Section 26001(av) of the Business and Professions Code, and includes a person who is engaged in the retail sale and delivery of cannabis or cannabis products to customers. Delivery of Cannabis and Cannabis Products shall also include the use of a technology platform by a Cannabis Retailer to conduct the commercial transfer of Cannabis and Cannabis Products. “Cannabis State Licensee” shall have the same meaning as Section 26001(ac) of the Business and Professions Code, and includes a person holding a license pursuant to the Medical and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (“MAUCRSA”) whether the holder of an A-license or M-license, as defined in Section 26001 of the Business and Professions Code.
“Cannabis Testing Laboratory” shall have the same meaning as Section 26001(ax) of the Business and Professions Code, and includes a laboratory, facility, or entity in the state that offers or performs tests of cannabis or cannabis products and that is: (a) accredited by an accrediting body that is independent from all other persons involved in commercial cannabis activity in the state; and (b) licensed by the California Department of Cannabis Control, or statewide body charged with regulating commercial cannabis activities.

Section 9.04.250 “Y” definitions.
“Youth center” shall have the same meaning as Section 11353.1(e)(2) of the Health and Safety Code, and includes any public or private facility that is primarily used to host recreation or social activities for minors, including but not limited to, private youth 5 membership organizations or clubs, social service teenage club facilities, video arcades, or similar amusement park facilities.

SECTION 4. The alphabetical list of land uses in Table 9.12A of Section 9.12.030 (Permitted land uses) of Chapter 9.12 (Commercial Zones) of Title 9 (Zoning and Planning Regulations) of the __MC is amended to add the following new land use categories to the alphabetical list to read as follows:

Table 9.12A: Commercial Land Use Matrix
Uses M-U
Zone
C-S
Zone
C-3
Zone
C-4
Zone
C-M
Zone
Special Requirements
Cannabis
Cultivation1
Cannabis
Manufacturing
Cannabis Retail2 C C C C C Refer to __MC, Chapter

9.20 for additional
development
standards for
Cannabis Retail.

Refer to __MC, Chapter

5.12 for business
regulatory permit and
operating standards
for Cannabis Retail.

Cannabis Testing
Laboratory
SECTION 5. The alphabetical list of land uses in Table 9.14A of Section 9.14.030 (Permitted land uses) of Chapter 9.14 (Industrial Zones) of Title 9 (Zoning and Planning Regulations) of the __MC is amended to add the following new land use categories of the alphabetical list to read as follows:

Table 9.14A: Industrial Land Use Matrix
Uses M-1 Special Requirements
1 This use excludes the cultivation of up to six (6) cannabis plants, as permitted by state law, for personal use.
2 A Cannabis Retail use is prohibited within the Civic Center Overlay District (“CCOD”) as indicated on the City’s Zoning Map, irrespective of the underlying zoning. 6 Cannabis Cultivation1
Cannabis Manufacturing
Cannabis Retail2 C Refer to __MC, Chapter 9.20
for additional development
standards for Cannabis
Retail.

Refer to __MC, Chapter 5.12
for business regulatory
permit and operating
standards for Cannabis
Retail.

Cannabis Testing Laboratory
SECTION 6. Section 9.20.160 of Chapter 9.20 (Special Uses and Applicable Standards) of Title 9 (Zoning and Planning Regulations) of the __MC, is added to read:

Chapter 9.20 Special Uses and Appliable Standards

9.20.160 Cannabis Retail – Conditional use.

In addition to compliance with all other state and local statutes, ordinances and regulations, the following regulations shall apply to Cannabis Retailers where they are permitted by conditional use permit:

A. Location. The following locational requirements shall apply to all Cannabis Retailers:

1. Use Prohibited in the Civic Center Overlay District. A Cannabis Retail use shall not be permitted within the Civic Center Overlay District (“CCOD”), as indicated on the City’s Zoning Map, irrespective of the underlying zoning.

2. Proximity to Sensitive Uses. A Cannabis Retail use shall not be located within a 600-foot radius of a day care center, youth center, school, or parks as defined in Chapter 9.04 of the __MC, that is existing at the time an application for a conditional use permit is submitted.

3. Proximity to Cannabis Retailers. A Cannabis Retailer shall not be located within a 250-foot radius of another Cannabis Retailer that is existing at the time an application for a conditional use permit is submitted.
1 This use excludes the cultivation of up to six cannabis plants, as permitted by state law, for personal use. 2 A Cannabis Retail use is prohibited within the Civic Center Overlay District (“CCOD”) as indicated on the City’s Zoning Map, irrespective of the underlying zoning.
7 B. Additional Development and Design Standards for Cannabis Retailers. The following development and design standards shall apply to all Cannabis Retailers unless more restrictive conditions are imposed as a condition of approval:

1. Parking. A Cannabis Retail use shall be subject to the “Business general” parking requirements, as set forth in Section 9.38.050(C)(2) of the __MC.

2. Signage. All signage shall comply with the requirements set forth in Chapter

9.40 of the __MC.

3. Windows. Windows facing the street frontage shall be clear untinted glass.

Mirrored, reflective, or tinted glass shall only be permitted as an architectural or decorative accent and shall not comprise more than twenty percent (20%) of the window.

4. Decorative Railings and Grilles. Decorative railings and grilles that are placed in front of or behind windows shall be at least seventy-five percent (75%) open to perpendicular view and no more than six (6) feet in height. Security gates and grilles shall be prohibited on the exterior of any structure.

C. Additional Application Requirements. Applications for a conditional use permit to permit a Cannabis Retail use shall also provide the following documentation, in addition to the requirements set forth in Section 9.50.030 of the __MC:

1. A copy of the state Cannabis Retail license (Type 9 or Type 10, as defined in the California Code of Regulations) issued by the Department of Cannabis Control (“DCC”).

2. A signed affidavit stating that upon a conditional approval of the Cannabis Retail use, that applicant will apply for and obtain a business regulatory permit for Cannabis Retailer, pursuant to Chapter 5.12 of the __MC, prior to commencing operations of the Cannabis Retail use.

3. A radius map indicating the location of all Cannabis Retailers, day care centers, youth centers, and schools existing within a one thousand five hundred (1,500) foot radius of the subject site at the time of application submittal. Radius maps must be generated within thirty (30) days of submittal to the City.

D. Duration. The life of a conditional use permit shall not exceed eighteen (18) months from the date of issuance of the first building permit. For the purposes of this section, a “building permit” shall mean a permit issued by the Building and Safety Division for the development of a property or structure, inclusive of demolition; grading; building; electrical, plumbing, or mechanical upgrades; or change of occupancy. An applicant who wishes to obtain an approval for a Cannabis Retail use in exceedance of eighteen (18) months may request a development agreement.

E. Upon consideration of the conditional use permit, the planning commission may also impose additional conditions of approval.
8 SECTION 7. The alphabetical list of definitions provided in Section 5.12.015 (Permit – Designation of business requiring) of Chapter 5.12 (Permits – Issuance and Revocation) of Title 5 (Business Licenses, Regulations and Taxes) of the __MC, is amended to add the following definitions:

G. Cannabis Retail. As defined in Section 9.04.030 of the __ Zoning Code; H. Cannabis Products. As defined in Section 9.04.030 of the __ Zoning Code; K. Head shop. A business is deemed to be a head shop if it sells or displays for the purpose of sale any device, contrivance, instrument or paraphernalia for smoking or injecting, or consuming cannabis, hashish, PCP or any controlled substance, as defined in the Business and Professions Code or the Health and Safety Code of the state of California, other than prescription drugs and devices to ingest or inject prescription drugs, as well as roach clips, and cigarette papers and rollers designed for the smoking of the foregoing;
SECTION 8. Section 5.14.010 (Application) of Chapter 5.14 (Business Regulations Generally) of the __MC is amended to read:

The following regulations in Chapters 5.22 through 5.60 and 5.64 of the __MC, in addition to any other regulations imposed by this code or by state law, shall apply to all business licenses and trades licensed under the provisions of the business license law.

SECTION 9. Chapter 5.64 (Retail Cannabis Business Permit) is added to Title 5 (Business Licenses, Regulations and Taxes) of the __MC to read:

5.64.010 Purpose and intent.

It is the purpose and intent of this Chapter to regulate the operations of Cannabis Retail businesses, which may pose public safety risk and quality of life concerns if not properly regulated. It is the City’s goal to address concerns related to the business aspect of commercial cannabis activities through the City’s police powers. Therefore, the City imposes the following objective standards for applications, approvals, denials, and permit revocations, as well as terms for security, odor, inspection, and grounds for revocation of a Cannabis Retail business regulatory permit.

5.64.020 Retail Cannabis Permit Required.

A. All Cannabis Retail businesses are subject to the business regulatory permit requirements of this Chapter and Chapter 5.12 of the __MC, as well as all other applicable ordinances of the City and laws of the state of California.

B. It shall be unlawful for any person to establish, operate, engage in, conduct, or carry on any Cannabis Retail within the City unless the person first obtains, and continues to maintain in full force and effect, a Cannabis Retail business regulatory permit, as required herein.
9 5.64.030 Permit Application Contents.

In addition to the application requirements in Section 5.12.020, an application for a Cannabis Retailer permit shall submit:

A. A planning commission Resolution and associated conditions of approval, and development agreement (if applicable), for a Cannabis Retailer use at the location proposed for the Cannabis Retailer business regulatory permit.

B. A site plan and floor plan for the associated approved conditional use permit.

C. A valid license (Type 9 or Type 10, as defined in the California Code of Regulations, Title 4, Division 19) issued by the Department of Cannabis Control (“DCC”), accompanied by a statement signed under penalty of perjury, affirming that the license is valid and is in good standing with the DCC, and is not subject to pending or active enforcement action, including but not limited to including unpaid fines, outstanding citations, license suspension, or license revocation.

D. A security plan indicating the Cannabis Retailer shall provide adequate security and lighting on-site to ensure the safety of persons and protect the premises from theft at all times in conformance with the security plan.

E. A permit application shall not be processed until all of the foregoing documentation and application requirements set forth in __MC Section 5.12.020 and this Section

5.64.030 have been satisfied.

5.64.040 Operating Standards.

All Cannabis Retail businesses in the City shall operate in conformance with the following operating requirements (“Operating Standards”):

A. No Cannabis Retailer may commence operations without obtaining a business regulatory permit required by this Chapter; a conditional use permit for a Cannabis Retailer use pursuant to Chapter 9.50 of the __MC; the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, finalized Building Job Card, or equivalent document signed by the Building Official; the appropriate state licenses issued by the DCC; and any other applicable governmental agency approvals. In the event that a Cannabis Retailer does not request a building permit, the Cannabis Retailer shall not commence operations until the Planning Department has inspected the site to confirm that all applicable conditions of approval and/or applicable terms within an executed development agreement have been satisfied.

B. Cannabis Retail businesses shall provide adequate security and lighting on site to ensure the safety of persons and protect the premises from theft at all times in conformance with the security plan submitted with the business license application.

C. All security guards employed by a Cannabis Retail business shall be licensed and possess a valid Department of Consumer Affairs “Security Guard Card” at all times. 10 D. Cannabis Retailer shall strictly comply with the state requirements, including but not limited to the Medical and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (“MAUCRSA”) and related regulations as enacted by the DCC and amended from time to time.

E. An odor absorbing ventilation and exhaust system shall be installed so that odor generated inside the business is not detected inside the business.

F. Cannabis Retailers shall not engage in Cannabis Cultivation, Cannabis Manufacturing, Cannabis Laboratory Testing, as defined in Chapter 9.04 of the __MC.

All such business uses are strictly prohibited within City limits and are subject to enforcement action pursuant to Section 5.64.060 of the __MC.

G. On-site consumption of Cannabis and Cannabis Products shall be prohibited.

H. Cannabis Retail businesses shall post a notice in a conspicuous location, readily visible to persons entering the premises notifying patrons that entry onto the premises by persons under the age of twenty-one (21) is prohibited.

I. Cannabis Retail businesses shall comply with all conditions of approval stated in the conditional use permit permitting the Cannabis Retail use issued pursuant to Chapter

9.50 of the __MC.

J. City Code Compliance Officers, the __ Police Department, Los Angeles County Fire Department staff, or other agents and employees of the City shall be granted access to the site for the purpose of determining compliance with the Operating Standards contained herein.

K. A Cannabis Retail business shall commence operations within one year of issuance of a business regulatory permit.

5.64.050 Suspension or Revocation – Grounds.

A. In addition to the grounds in Chapter 5.12 of the __MC, a permit may be suspended or revoked if any of the following conditions exist:

1. Failure to comply with the Operating Standards contained in Section 5.64.040 of the __MC.

2. Failure to pay all applicable taxes and fees to the City for a consecutive threemonth period.

3. The assignment or attempt to assign or transfer any business regulatory permit issued pursuant to this Chapter.

4. Failure to obtain and/or maintain all of the required state permits for a Cannabis Retail business, including but not limited to licenses from the Department of Cannabis Control and a seller’s permit from the State Department of Tax and Fee Administration.
11 5. Failure to maintain and post all state- and locally-issued licenses and permits in a conspicuous place.

B. The hearing and appeal procedures for a suspension or revocation of a permit shall be in accordance with the procedures pursuant to Chapter 5.12 of the __MC.

5.64.060 Unauthorized Cannabis Operations – Enforcement.

A. Any person or entity engaged in a Cannabis Retailer operation, as defined in Chapter 9.04 of the __MC, without a regulatory business permit, shall be considered a nuisance per se and shall be subject to enforcement action, including but not limited to prosecution of a misdemeanor.

B. Any person or entity, including a licensed Cannabis Retailer, engaged in Cannabis Cultivation, Cannabis Manufacturing, or Cannabis Laboratory Testing, as defined in Chapter 9.04 of the __MC, shall be considered a nuisance per se and shall be subject to enforcement action, including but not limited to prosecution of a misdemeanor.

5.64.070 Violations.

A. Each and every violation of the provisions of this Title 5 of the __MC is hereby deemed unlawful and a public nuisance and may be prosecuted as a misdemeanor.

Each day a violation is committed or permitted to continue shall constitute a separate offense.

B. The remedies provided herein are not to be construed as exclusive remedies. The remedies set forth in Title 5 of the __MC shall be in addition to any other remedies for violations of the Municipal Code, including but not limited to Title 6 and Title 9 of the __MC.

5.64.080 City Fees.

The City Council may adopt fees related to the review, issuance, and enforcement of Cannabis Retail business regulatory permits.

SECTION 10. In accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), it can be seen with certainty that the adoption of Ordinance No. 934 would not result in a significant environmental impact and is therefore exempt from CEQA.

SECTION 11. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance, and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions might subsequently be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
12 SECTION 12. The City Clerk shall certify the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause this Ordinance to be published and/or posted as required by law, which shall take full force and effect thirty days from its adoption. [Signatures on the following page]
13 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2024.

THE CITY OF __
________________________________
__, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
________________________________ ________________________________ __ ____________
City Attorney City Clerk

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: City Manager
BY: Community Development Director
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE NEXUS STUDY AND INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 928, AMENDING
TITLE 3 OF THE __ MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH
CHAPTER 3.27, “DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES”
DATE:

RECOMMENDATION:

It is staff’s recommendation that the City Council:

1. Approve a resolution adopting the Development Impact Fee (DIF) study, which finds that the activity to consider development impact fees is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section nos. 15378(b)(4), 15060(c)(3), and 15060(c)(2), based on the findings and conclusions in the staff report; and

2. Introduce first reading, by title only, and waive further reading of Ordinance No. 928, amending Title 3 of the __ Municipal Code (__MC) to add Chapter 3.27, titled “Development Impact Fees.”
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

With the passage of the 1987 Mitigation Fee Act (Act) [Government Code Section 66000 and following], the State of California recognized both the rising costs associated with the infrastructure to serve the built environment communities need and the impact of population increase on local jurisdictions. The Mitigation Fee Act secured a system for identifying and collecting certain fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions that local jurisdictions could regularly impose when properties are developed. A Development Impact Fee (DIF) is a monetary exaction charged by local government to a developer in connection with implementation of approved projects. Impact fees vary widely across localities. While the City of __ (City) has understood the impacts of development on its infrastructure, it has yet to adopt DIF legislation, lest it appear unfriendly to businesses.

With greater understanding that property developers budget for such fees and expect them as part of a growing city, the City Council directed staff to proceed with a Request for Proposals to conduct a DIF study.

On DATE, City staff released a Request for Proposals (RFP) for a development impact fee nexus study and recommended a development impact fee schedule for new development. The purpose of the requested Study was to ensure the City utilized overhead rates that accurately accounted for the cost of dilapidating infrastructure and General Plan updates and to ensure appropriate fees would be assessed for necessary future improvements and updates.

The RFP requested a scope of services proposal to address the following:

1. Provide data, findings, and recommendations to implement Development Impact Fees.

2. Review City documents.

3. Attend staff and public meetings.

4. Prepare a final report submitted to the City containing background information, methodology, findings, and recommendations.

Staff made a recommendation for consultant selection based on staff’s evaluation of the proposals/qualifications in consideration of the consultant team’s qualifications, comparable experience and cost, as well as consultant’s availability to undertake the project, complete tasks in a timely manner and deliver a high-quality work product. Staff was confident in recommending __ Financial Services based on their command of the subject matter. On DATE, the City Council adopted a resolution approving the professional services agreement with __ Financial Services for a commissioned DIF study and to recommend a DIF schedule for new development.

DISCUSSION:

Like most jurisdictions, the City is organized into departments that provide a full range of municipal services, including police, public works, recreation and community services, community and economic development, and administration. These services are supported by the General Fund. The adopted fiscal year (FY) 20__-__ budget is approximately $__ million, up from the previous two years. DIFs are fees assessed on new development to help pay their fair share of the cost for the expansion of City infrastructure and services impacted by the new development. This proportional exaction, as discussed in the attached draft Study, would be considered a reasonable relationship between the fee’s use and the type of development project on which the fee is charged.

Study Objectives
The City initiated a review of the current supportive practices for required infrastructure improvements for the City’s General Plan growth projections and the City’s 10-Year Capital Improvement Plan. The Study was intended to consider operational services that could be included in the fee program to ensure the costs of supporting the new required infrastructure would be paid by endeavors associated with new development. The Study summarizes an analysis of development impact fees needed to support future development in the City through 2040 and shared approaches in keeping with the State’s Act commonly used to accommodate growth.

Cost Approaches
The Study identifies three approaches commonly used to collect public facilities fees under that authority granted by the Act. The three approaches explained are the existing inventory approach, the planned facilities approach, and the system plan approach.

The existing inventory approach assumes no net loss of levels of service to new development when there is no long-range plan for new facilities available.

The planned facilities approach allocates costs based on the ratio of new development use or increase in demand for services when a share of a service can be identified and tied to a new use.

The system plan approach considers situations where existing and new facilities and services are used by existing and new development and allocates a share of the responsibility to new development. Existing development must also fund a share of the planned facilities with any funding source other than impact fees.

Use of Fees and Program Maintenance
The Study goes on to say that impact fee revenue must be spent on new facilities or expansion of current facilities to serve new development. The Study also identifies maximum justified fees to fund the anticipated amount required to fund $__ million for planned future facilities and expanded services on page 4. Should less than the maximum be adopted, reliance on other sources of revenue would be needed to fund infrastructure, facilities and expanded services for new development, including existing or new taxes, special assessments, bond proceeds and/or grants.

Summary of Study
The Study’s purpose is to provide findings and recommendations to implement a DIF program with the knowledge that growth projections will dictate adding supportive infrastructure and other operational services. The Study methodology includes six (6) steps for calculating fees required to fund the mitigations associated with accommodating growth. The six steps involve 1.) estimating future growth, 2.) identifying existing facility standards, 3.) determining future required facilities, 4.) determining associated costs to serve new development, 5.) allocating a cost per unit of new development with the appropriate portion of future facilities, and 6.) identifying alternative funding requirements.

It was noted that through this process, approved projects would fund only facilities that would be required by the new development.

To ensure appropriate funding, the Study states that the three separate standards that determine components for facility standards are demand, design, and cost. Demand standards focus on the quantity of facilities that would be used to accommodate growth.

Design standards focus on how a facility would be planned for function. Cost standards help quantify portions of facilities that would be used by new development. The Study indicated the types of facilities would be planned in the way best determined by the type of use anticipated for the new development.

The Study reports that there are three common methods for determining new development’s fair share of planned facilities. The existing inventory, planned facilities, and system plan methods allocate costs formulaic ratios of existing, planned facilities and new development use growth forecasts and projections that would demand transportation facilities, parks and recreation facilities, general government facilities, law enforcement facilities, and General Plan updates.

The Study recommends the following fee levels for different residential and nonresidential categories.

Table 1 summarizes the development impact fees that meet the City’s identified needs and comply with the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act.

Page 39 ends

include adopting the Study, approving and adopting the new ordinance language to implement the process for the collection and use of fees. Once the ordinance is in effect the City would then follow the required noticing and public hearing requirements to bring forth a resolution to adopt the fees.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the adoption of development impact fees is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act in that pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, section 15378(b)(4), which states the creation of government funding mechanisms that do not involve any commitment to any specific project that may cause a significant effect on the environment, is not defined as a “project” under CEQA. The adoption of the Study and consideration of the proposed ordinance also constitutes activities not considered a project according to section 15060(c)(3) since there is no anticipation of a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment pursuant to section 15060(c)(2).

Table 1: Maximum Justified Impact Fee Summary
Land Use
Transportation
Facilities
Parks and
Recreation
Facilities -
Subdivisions1
Parks and
Recreation
Facilities -
Infill1
General
Government
Facilities
Law
Enforcement
Facilities
General
Plan
Update
Total -
Subdivisions
Total -
Infill
Residential - per Sq. Ft. $ 1.43 $ 14.99 $ 10.57 $ 0.64 $ 1.09 $ 0.10 $ 18.26 $ 13.84 Nonresidential - per Sq. Ft.

Commercial $ 3.79 $ - $ 0.18 $ 0.30 $ 0.03 $ 4.30
Office 3.97 - 0.27 0.46 0.04 4.74
Industrial 2.30 - 0.10 0.16 0.02 2.58
1 A residential development project either plays the subdivision fee or the infill fee for parks and recreation facilities, not both.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Adoption of the ordinance and the associated DIFs will result in additional funds being recovered to offset the infrastructure impacts from new development. Maintaining a DIF program and keeping the fees current to reflect contemporary development patterns and infrastructure needs can have a positive fiscal impact to the City. DIFs provide a stream of funding to support capital improvements required by new development. When implemented carefully, the City’s competitiveness to development remains steady relative to its neighboring cities as other neighboring cities have also implemented similar programs; they ensure other goals, like housing production, can also be met; and they provide the opportunity to still gain community benefits through the Planned Development/Development Agreement process. The cost to the City to maintain a DIF program is the staff time required to apply the fees upon building permit issuance, monitor the program to ensure appropriate collection and use, and manage the construction of capital projects once funds are collected. These costs can simultaneously be paid for by the DIF funds through the administrative charge and by charging staff time for project development as a project cost.

CONCLUSION:

DIFs mitigate the impacts of new development and fund needed public facilities and infrastructure to maintain quality of life. However, DIFs are only one piece of the larger puzzle that the City can use to build neighborhoods while also ensuring that new development of all types pays its fair share of infrastructure costs. Other tools such as Planned Developments allow the City to request new infrastructure be built or funded by new development. Infrastructure required as part of Planned Developments can often be built sooner than infrastructure funded through DIFs.

The establishment of a DIF program outlined in the proposed ordinance would ensure that new development pays its fair share of the new facilities and infrastructure necessary to accommodate impacts resulting from that new development in real time. With the adoption of the Study and the proposed Ordinance, the City Council will be setting the appropriate level of DIFs that strike the balance between generating important revenue for needed infrastructure while at the same time supporting other City goals required to build and protect neighborhoods.

Based on all the analysis provided in this report, City Council leadership, and the City management’s prior input and guidance, staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution adopting the Development Impact Fee Study, introduce the attached ordinance for a first reading and direct staff to follow the noticing requirements to bring back a DIF fee resolution for the City Council’s consideration.

ATTACHMENTS:

Exhibit A - Resolution
Exhibit B - Draft Development Impact Fee Study
Exhibit C - Ordinance No. XXX
Exhibit D - Public Hearing Notice
Exhibit E - Public Comment

ATTORNEYS AT LAW
OMLO

CONFIDENTIAL

A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
WWW.OMLOLAW.COM
500 SOUTH GRAND AVENUE ∎ 12TH FLOOR ∎ LOS ANGELES, CA 90071 PHONE 213.744.0099 ∎ FAX 213.744.0093

MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
From: City Attorney’s Office
Date:

Subject: City of – People v. – Role of Special Counsel
What is ’ Role in the People v. Matter?
The former City Attorney brought in the law firm of for special counsel matters. On 2017, the City adopted Resolution No. approving the service agreement with (“Agreement”). (Resolution No. , Exhibit 1.) It appears that (“Mr. is the primary billing attorney from s. At the time the Agreement was executed, Mr. was a partner with On or about , Mr. started his own firm – &
Associates – and started serving in an of counsel capacity with .

Is a Quo Warranto Lawsuit Contemplated by the Scope of Services in the Agreement?
The nature of legal services to be provided by can be defined through a review of (1) the recitals set forth in Resolution No. and (2) Section 2 of the Agreement.

As to the former, the recitals in Resolution No. provide:

WHEREAS, the City on occasion requires special legal services to address public employment and workers’ compensation legal matters that fall outside the purview of the City Attorney or when the City Attorney’s Office may be conflicted on a particular matter;

OLIVAREZ MADRUGA LAW ORGANIZATION, LLP

CONFIDENTIAL

Page 2 ends

WHEREAS, there is a need to add qualified law firms to the City’s special counsel panel of personnel and workers’ compensation attorneys; and
WHEREAS, the City desired to enter into an agreement with the law firm of to provide special legal services
relating to personnel and workers’ compensation matters. (Agreement, Recitals.)
As to the latter, the Agreement describes the nature of legal services to be provided as follows:
“Public personnel and workers’ compensation legal defense, litigation, and advisement as requested by Client. Said legal services and representation are assigned to Law Firm.” (Agreement, § 2 (emphasis added).)
The pursuit of a quo warranto action appears to be outside the scope of intended representation, but there is an argument to be made that this matter would fall into the “other” bucket, especially with approval from the former City Council.

How Was the People v. Lawsuit Initiated?
This lawsuit started with conversations among staff and culminated in the former City Attorney’s Office applying for and receiving leave to sue in quo warranto from the Attorney General’s Office on . (Exhibit 2.) The former City Attorney’s Office worked with Mr. and filed the complaint in quo warranto on . (Exhibit 3.) Initially, Mr. denied any involvement in the filing phase of the lawsuit, but when confronted with contrary evidence (specifically, that his name appears on the complaint), he admitted that he did review and help with the filing of the complaint. After the filing, Mr. took over the case.

Contrary to the Terms of the Agreement, Mr. Has Not Provided Updates to the City Regarding the People v. Lawsuit.

According to Mr. he worked more closely with the former City’s Attorney’s Office in the beginning stages, and as the lawsuit progressed, Mr. took direction from and provided updates to (“Ms. of the Opinions Unit from the Attorney General’s Office.

In , Mr. reached out to our office to provide an overview of the litigation.

Given that the lawsuit was already initiated and based on research regarding quo warranto matters, our office determined that we could not object to or direct Mr. to stand down or take any other action.

Since Mr. conversations with our office in , we have not received any updates regarding the matter. Our understanding is that Mr. has also failed to provide updates to anybody else at the City.

As mentioned above, Mr. claims to have been working closely with Ms. and may use this as an excuse for not providing the City with updates, but our office found G

CONFIDENTIAL

Page 3 ends

correspondence from Mr. to Ms. dated that provides “I am working on revising the Trial Brief but [am] waiting for some information from the former City Attorney.” It is unclear whether Mr. has been receiving direction from the former City Attorney’s Office regarding this matter.

What is clear, is that Mr. has not been receiving direction from or providing updates to our office or others currently at the City.

Pursuant to Section 3 of the Agreement, Mr. has an obligation to provide updates to the City:

RESPONSIBILITIES OF ATTORNEY AND CLIENT. Law Firm
will perform the legal services called for under this Agreement, keep Client informed of progress and developments, and respond promptly to Client’s inquiries and communications. Client will be truthful and cooperative with Law Firm and keep Law Firm reasonably informed of developments; as well as make timely payments under this Agreement.
(Agreement, § 3.)
The City has not received a meaningful update on this matter since and Mr. has moved this matter through the discovery process and trial without providing a single update to the City. This is a strange practice, as attorneys generally provide updates to clients regarding important developments (e.g., scheduling of depositions, filings of briefs, or preparing for trial, etc.).

It is anticipated that Mr. will argue that he was updating Ms. and that these updates were sufficient. However, Ms. role is the matter is that of co-counsel; she is not the “client” as that term is defined in the Agreement.

Contrary to the Terms of the Agreement, Mr. Has Failed to Provide Regular Billing Statements to the City for the People v. Lawsuit.

Mr. failed to send invoices to the City in regular thirty-day intervals. Section 6 of the Agreement dictates the timeline for billing:

BILLING STATEMENTS. The legal services rendered and the costs advanced by Law Firm on Client’s behalf and will be billed on a 30-day cycle. Services rendered and costs advanced will be itemized on each bill. Statements for services rendered will describe the nature of service performed and identify the costs advanced. Billing disputes are subject to Arbitration.
(Agreement, § 6.)

CONFIDENTIAL

Page 4 ends

While there is language stating that the billing is to occur in thirty-day cycles, Mr. may raise a technical objection and argue that there is no language dictating when bills are to be sent from the firm to the City. However, this argument is unlikely to succeed.

On September 18, 2019, Mr. assistant (“Ms. emailed the City and provided invoices for activity occurring between throug May 2019.

It is worth noting the Mr. has changed his story on the transmission of his bills no less than three times. Mr. first asserted that there was no delay in the transmission of his invoices to the City, that he sent invoices regularly and on a monthly basis, and that the email was nearly a reminder to the City that the previously-provided invoices had not been paid.

Staff denied this version of events, and Mr. then said that his invoices might have been provided quarterly. Mr. latest position is that he mailed invoices to the City “within two weeks of the invoice date.” Staff also denies this and is currently looking into past billing practices from Mr. firm and whether he has mailed invoices in the past. Our office has requested that Mr. provide proof that his bills were submitted in a timely manner and we are still awaiting a response.

To date, Mr. has not sent invoices for activity occurring between June and September It is likely that these invoices will include more costs as the level of activity has increased (e.g., trial preparation and trial attendance, etc.). At this time, it is unclear how much Mr. has billed for his prosecution of People v.

The untimely transmission of Mr. invoices is related to the lack of updates received.

That is, even if Mr. failed to provide updates to the City, the evidence of billing would be a way for the City to ascertain that Mr. was undertaking some work related to this matter.

The City May Decide to Dispute the Invoices Submitted by Mr.

There are a few separate grounds for the City to dispute the invoices submitted by Mr. (1) it is unclear that the former City Council provided explicit direction to Mr. to pursue the People v. matter; (2) the Agreement imposes a limit of ten thousand dollars per fiscal year; and (3) the Code of Civil Procedure provides Mr. with other means for recovering his costs.

First, based on staff’s review of City records, People v. was likely authorized in On , the former City Council met in closed session to discuss potential litigation pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9, subdivision (d)(4), which creates an exception to the Brown Act where “[b]ased on existing facts and circumstances, the legislative body of the local agency has decided to initiate or is deciding to initiate litigation.” While the Brown Act allows the City Council to meet in closed session, any final action taken in closed session must be reported out, including any approval for legal counsel to initiate litigation. (Gov. Code, section 54957.1, subd. (a)(2) [“[i]n the case of approval given to initiate or intervene in an action . . . . [the report] shall specify that the direction to initiate or intervene in an action has been given and that the action, the defendants, and the other particulars shall, once formally commenced, be disclosed to any person upon inquiry”].)
\.

CONFIDENTIAL

Page 5 ends

The Closed Session Report read for this meeting as follows: “Assistant City Attorney stated that four Council Members were present in the Closed Session and Council Member was absent. He stated that the City Council provided direction and no final action was taken.”
If this was the meeting where the former City Council authorized action in the lawsuit, the action of initiating litigation should have been read out as part of the closed session report. There is a narrow exception to allow some delay in reporting where final approval rests with another party or the court. This narrow exception provides that the report may be announced when the initiation become final and upon inquiry of any person. It could be argued that final authority rested with the Attorney General’s Office. However, once leave to sue in quo warranto was provided – on , it should have been reported out.

Second, the Agreement includes a limit of ten thousand dollars per fiscal year. Pursuant to Section 5 of the Agreement: “COSTS. [ ] Payments for this agreement shall not exceed tenthousand dollars ($10,000) per fiscal year without consent of the City Council.”1 The relevant fiscal years are: Fiscal Year spanning through ) and Fiscal Year (spanning through ).

To date, the City has paid a total of $ towards to Mr. for his efforts related to People v. split between Fiscal Year and Fiscal Year For Fiscal Year the City paid $ . This exceeded the $ cut off. For Fiscal Year the City paid $ . Based on the $ cut off, $ is remaining for Fiscal Year For the period between through Mr. is requesting the payment in the amount of $ . As previously mentioned, Mr. is also requesting payment for the period between and , but has not provided his invoices for this timeframe. Regardless of the amount requested, Mr. work already exceeds the threshold in the Agreement for Fiscal Year This may be a basis for disputing the invoiced amount.

With that said, it is anticipated that Mr. will argue that he may exceed the $ threshold because his work was authorized by the former City Council and also because he conversed with our office in
Third, based on the nature of quo warranto matters, Mr. can look elsewhere to be made whole for his efforts. The relevant portions of the Code of Civil Procedure envision that if a party prosecuting a quo warranto matter is successful, the “defendant, against whom such action has been brought . . . [is responsible for] the costs of the action.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 809.) Moreover, the Code of Civil Procedure provides that the Attorney General may require a party prosecuting a quo warranto matter to “pay any judgment for costs or damages recovered against the plaintiff, and all the costs and expenses incurred in the prosecution of the action.” (Code Civ.

Proc., § 810.)
1 The placement of this clause in the “costs” section make create a contract interpretation issue.

Costs are generally defined as incidental out-of-pocket expenses incurred and can be contrasted with fees paid to attorneys for legal services rendered. Nonetheless, the City has a strong argument that this section applies more broadly to any payments made under the Agreement. gr!"--
33 STEPHANIE VASQUEZ
Partner
State Bar No. 316710
[email protected]

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Stephanie Vasquez is a Partner with Olivarez Madruga Law Organization LLP, serving as part of the firm’s Municipal Law practice group. Ms. Vasquez serves as the City Attorney for the City of Bell Gardens and as Deputy City Attorney for several other clients. Ms. Vasquez’s practice areas include a wide range of Municipal Law issues including public contracting, public works, First Amendment, election law, campaign finance and ethics and disclosure laws.

Prior to joining Olivarez Madruga Law Organization LLP, Ms. Vasquez was a litigation attorney where she focused on insurance defense matters.

During her free time, Ms. Vasquez enjoys traveling and exploring new restaurants.

EDUCATION
• Loyola Law School Los Angeles, Civil Litigation Concentration, Honors, J.D. o Dean’s Honors List, First Honors First Honors Award, Civil Litigation Concentration Honors, Civil Litigation Skills Practicum, Poehls/Hobbs District Attorney Practicum • University of California Los Angeles, B.A., Honors, Vice Provost Recognition Award

ADMISSION TO BAR, MEMBERSHIPS AND AWARDS
• State Bar of California
• Member, Southeast District Bar Association
• Member, Kiwanis Club of Downey
34 RICHARD E. PADILLA
Partner
State Bar No. 201342
[email protected]

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Richard Padilla is a Partner with Olivarez Madruga Law Organization. As the Deputy City Attorney for the City of El Monte, Mr. Padilla has researched and prepared written analysis on a variety of legal issues for the City Council, City commissions and City departments. He has provided advice and analysis for ordinances, resolutions, contracts, real property transaction documents and other similar documentation, and has conducted ethics training for officials of the City. He has assisted commissions and department staff in the development of policies and procedures (e.g., purchasing policies and bidding procedures), prepared and reviewed bid documents for public works projects and assisted with coordination of the bid process.

Padilla has provided legal advice for, and assisted in the coordination of, Proposition 218 majority protest proceedings for the establishment and increase of property related fees and charges.

Mr. Padilla also served as a research attorney for the California 5th District Court of Appeal in Fresno.

EDUCATION
• University of California, Davis School of Law, J.D., 1998 • University of California, Berkeley, B.S., Economics and Political Science, 1992

ADMISSION TO BAR, MEMBERSHIPS AND AWARDS
• State Bar of California
35 RICK R. OLIVAREZ
Partner
State Bar No. 195770
[email protected]

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Mr. Olivarez is the founding and Managing Partner of Olivarez Madruga Law Organization LLP (“OMLO”). In this capacity, he oversees the day-to-day operations of the firm. Under his leadership, OMLO has grown into the premier minority-owned law firm in Southern California.

In addition, Mr. Olivarez manages the firm’s municipal and school district practice group.

Mr. Olivarez also serves as general counsel to a number of school districts and community colleges.

In this role, Mr. Olivarez advises the governing bodies on various legal matters involving workplace harassment, construction, employment, and conflict of interest.

Mr. Olivarez has developed a particular expertise in managing complex internal and external investigations concerning allegations of sexual harassment, conflict of interest, fraud, and misappropriation of public funds. Working with outside state and federal agencies, Mr. Olivarez has worked in partnership with his clients to successfully expose, prosecute, and obtain financial judgements against these bad actors.

Mr. Olivarez has also served as legal counsel to the Surplus Property aka “7-11” committee of his school district clients. In this capacity, Mr. Olivarez advised the committee on the disposition, sale, lease, and transfer of surplus property. Mr. Olivarez also helped to craft the committee’s final report to the governing board on its recommendations.

Mr. Olivarez is a frequent speaker on legal topics concerning ethics and good governance. Most recently, he was a featured speaker at NALEO’s annual conference held in Washington, D.C. for newly elected public officials. Mr. Olivarez delivered a presentation to the attendees entitled “The Top 10 Things to Do to Avoid Getting Indicted.” He gave the same presentation to the Latino Center for Leadership Development in San Antonio, Texas.

In addition to his legal practice, Mr. Olivarez sits on the White Memorial Medical Center Foundation 36 Board, Homeboy Industries Board of Directors, White Memorial Medical Center Governing Board, and the NALEO Educational Fund Board. Mr. Olivarez is particularly honored to serve on the NALEO Board founded by his grandfather, the late Congressman Edward R. Roybal.

Mr. Olivarez also frequently supports a number of local non-profit organizations including the Mexican American Opportunity Foundation, Mexican-American Bar Association, and Hispanas Organized for Political Equality, to name a few. Olivarez is also involved politically on the local, state, and national level, and often holds meet-and-greets and other events with decision and policy makers in the firm’s downtown Los Angeles office.

EDUCATION
• American University, Washington College of Law, J.D., 1997 o Member, Clinical Law Program – selected to participate as a certified law student and member of the #2 ranked Clinical Legal Education program as recognized by U.S.

News and World Report.
o Represented Victims of Domestic Violence and their children to obtain temporary and permanent restraining orders.
o Worked in the Washington DC office of the US Attorney under former Obama appointee Eric Holder.
• University of California, Los Angeles, B.A., Political Science, 1992 o Member, Lambda Chi Alpha Fraternity

ADMISSION TO BAR, MEMBERSHIPS AND AWARDS
• State Bar of California
• President, White Memorial Medical Center Charitable Foundation, 2014 • Board of Directors, NALEO Educational Fund, 2014 – present • Speaker, NALEO Institute for Newly Elected Officials, November 2014, Washington, D.C., “Ethics – Top 10 Things to Do to Avoid Getting Indicted” • Board of Directors, Los Angeles Latino Chamber of Commerce, 2018 • Speaker, Latino Center for Leadership Development, March 2017, San Antonio, TX, “Law & Ethics: Understanding the Rules of the Game
• “Best Lawyers in America” (2024-Present)
• “LA500: Most Influential People in Los Angeles ” – Los Angeles Business Journal • “Top 100 Lawyers” – Los Angeles Business Journal
• “Leaders of Influence: Minority Attorneys” – Los Angeles Business Journal • “Southern California Super Lawyers” – Thomson Reuters • “Man of the Year” – White Memorial Medical Center Foundation 1 | P a g e
June 15, 2026

CITY OF HUNTINGTON PARK
ADDENDUM NO. 1 NOTICE INVITING PROPOSALS FOR

CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES
The following changes have been made to the submission requirements of proposal submission.

Question - Is there a Worksheet that we need to complete and include in our proposal?
Answer- No, there is no worksheet needed if the following are included in the proposal. Please disregard last bullet in 9. Cost proposal.

9. Cost Proposal
The cost proposal must be submitted separately from the service proposal. The cost proposal must include all proposed compensation, billing, and reimbursement terms, including:
• Hourly rates for all attorneys, paralegals, law clerks, and other personnel who may work on City matters.
• Any proposed monthly retainer, flat fee, blended rate, or alternative fee arrangement.
• A clear list of services included in any monthly retainer and services excluded from the retainer.
• Rates for litigation, special matters, hearings, investigations, training, and attendance at meetings.
• Billing increments, minimum charges, travel-time policies, research charges, document charges, administrative charges, and all reimbursable-cost policies. • Proposed annual rate escalation, if any, and any proposed limits on increases. • Cost-control strategies and proposed reporting for monthly legal spending. • A completed Cost Proposal Worksheet in substantially the form attached as ‘Appendix C’.

Notice Inviting Proposals End of Addendum No. 1
By order of the City of Huntington Park, Administrative team.

Stephany Santin, Assistant City Manager
2 | P a g e
Date: 06/15/26
All notifications or Addendums must be acknowledged via signature by the Bidder and made part of and incorporated as part of the bid proposal.

Statement of Bidder Acknowledgment
Please sign the acknowledgment below and include it as part of your Bid Proposal.

Contractor Name Signature
Date Title
Olivarez Madruga Law Organization, LLP
Rick R. Olivarez
June 18, 2026 Managing Partner
1 | P a g e
June 15, 2026

CITY OF HUNTINGTON PARK
ADDENDUM NO. 2

NOTICE INVITING PROPOSALS FOR

CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES
The following changes have been made to the submission requirements of proposal submission. The information under section titled SUBMISSION DEADLINE inaccurately stated the submission date as June 17, 2026 instead of June 18, 2026.

Please submit your RFP response at the time and date indicated below:

6. SUBMISSION DEADLINE
To be considered, proposals must be submitted electronically via the City’s Planet Bids portal no later than 5:00 p.m. on June 18, 2026. Late proposals will not be considered unless the City determines, in its sole discretion, that acceptance is in the City's best interest and permitted by law.

Notice Inviting Proposals End of Addendum No. 2
By order of the City of Huntington Park, Administrative team.

Statement of Bidder Acknowledgment
Please sign the acknowledgment below and include it as part of your Bid Proposal.

Contractor Name Signature
Date Title
Rick R. Olivarez
Olivarez Madruga Law Organization, LLP
June 18, 2026 Managing Partner
August 11, 2026

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
Rick R. Olivarez
Olivarez Madruga Law Organization LLP
500 S. Grand Ave, 12th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
RE: Huntington Park Supplemental Responses
Dear City Manager Reyes:

Thank you again for the opportunity to be considered as the city attorney for the City of Huntington Park. As requested, below are our responses to the supplemental questions you asked us to provide.

1. PROPOSED CITY ATTORNEY AND BACKUP

Paloma Perez - McEvoy – Proposed City Attorney – We propose Ms. Perez-McEvoy to serve as the City Attorney for the City of Huntington Park (“HP”). She brings more than 20 years of public policy, planning, and land use, and government relations experience to the Firm. Based on our research and understanding of the legal issues facing HP, we believe Ms. Perez-McEvoy’s is the best person to serve in this role. As the Co-Chair of OMLO’s municipal law group, Ms. PerezMcEvoy is well versed in general municipal law matters and is an expert on planning and zoning laws, CEQA compliance, and has represented public agencies in complex real estate transactions. She also regularly drafts ordinances, specific plans, and development agreements for OMLO’s municipal clients. Ms. Perez-McEvoy regularly attends city council meetings, planning commission meetings and shares the city attorney role with Mr. Olivarez for several cities located in the San Gabriel Valley.

Adrian De Leon – Assistant City Attorney – Mr. De Leon will serve as the Assistant City Attorney for HP. He is an expert in complex real estate transactions and is a licensed real estate broker. Mr.

De Leon has drafted hundreds of resolutions, ordinances, commercial contracts, leases, loan documents, and labor agreements. Currently, Mr. De Leon serves as the Assistant City Attorney for the City of La Puente and South El Monte, and is also involved in real estate transactions, personnel and land use matters, for several of OMLO’s other clients. Mr. De Leon would also act as a liaison between HP and OMLO and would be available to provide support and back up when Ms. Perez-McEvoy is unavailable.

Joanna Burstedt – Junior Assistant City Attorney – Mr. Burstedt is an Associate in OMLO’s municipal practice group. She has quickly established herself as the “go-to” person for contract drafting and review, legal research and labor and employment matters. Ms. Burstedt provides day-to-day legal support on these and other matters for OMLO’s municipal clients and has also provided training to City staff on the public records act, sexual harassment and ethics.

The proposed team referenced above differs from our proposal because OMLO has experienced exponential growth since our RFP submission. As a result, the firm has had to reassign the initial team proposed in order to service the immediate needs of OMLO’s existing clientele. If selected as HP’s city attorney, the team proposed will immediately transition its current workload to others within the firm so that each member can provide HP with the time and attention it needs and deserves.

2. AVAILABILITY AND MEETING COVERAGE

Paloma Perez-McEvoy – Ms. Perez-McEvoy shares the City Attorney role with Mr. Olivarez for the City of El Monte. As such, she regularly attends City Council meetings when Mr. Olivarez is unavailable. Ms. Perez-McEvoy also serves as primary counsel to the City of Santa Fe Springs on real estate matters, the Surplus Land Act and employment matters. She also helps the firm’s other public agency clients from time to time with these types of issues.

Ms. McEvoy does not have any recurring meeting obligations that conflict with Huntington Park’s City Council or Planning Commission meetings. If a conflict arises, however, priority would be given to HP.

We are uncertain how many hours per week of legal support HP needs. However, OMLO and Ms.

Perez-McEvoy are committed to offering as many hours as HP desires to expeditiously complete outstanding projects and legal matters.

OMLO agrees to serve as many office hours as HP needs on a weekly basis.

As mentioned herein above, the proposed HP team will reduce and/or transfer pending legal matters to other OMLO staff and dedicate all of its time and resources to servicing HP’s needs.

Paloma Perez-McEvoy will attend City Council meetings. If she is unavailable, Adrian De Leon will sit in the chair. If both Perez-McEvoy and De Leon are unavailable, Mr. Olivarez is available to step in. OMLO also has 42 other lawyers available to help, if needed.

Adrian De Leon will serve as legal counsel to the Planning Commission. If Mr. De Leon is unavailable, Mr. Lloyd Pilchen will substitute in. Mr. Pilchen currently represents several Planning Commissions, is a licensed surveyor with expertise in subdivisions, boundaries, easements, title issues and land use matters.

3. STAFFING AND DIVISION OF RESPONSIBILITIES
General Municipal Advice – Paloma Perez-McEvoy
Labor and Employment – Joana Burstedt
Police and Public-Safety Matters – Tom Madruga
Public Records Act and Pitchess Matters – Stephanie Arechiga, Joana Burstedt / Aiden Armstrong Land Use, Housing, and CEQA – Paloma Perez-McEvoy
Risk Management and Claims Coordination – Tom Madruga
Outside Services: OMLO’s outsources bond counsel services. We would also outsource matters in which OMLO has a conflict of interest. While not common, this does occasionally happen.

*** Please note that there are other attorneys with expertise in these areas and can be utilized by HP if necessary. If selected, we recommend scheduling a meet and greet with City staff at OMLO’s downtown LA office so that you can meet the proposed team members in person. You can also tour our offices, and personally meet all of our attorneys, paralegals, legal assistants and administrative staff.

We acknowledge that HP outsources certain work, such as code enforcement, to other firms. We agree to work collaboratively with these firms and with HP to ensure continuity of services. We agree to coordinate with HP’s existing legal counsel and avoid duplication of work and to adhere to the City’s billing mandate. We also acknowledge and agree that the City may prohibit specified OMLO personnel from participating in City matters or receiving City information.

4. RESPONSIVENESS AND ASSIGNMENT MANAGEMENT
Recognizing that serving the public often demands the ability to respond quickly to unexpected and rapidly evolving developments, our office stresses the importance of being available to City staff and responding promptly to staff queries. To meet this objective, we have equipped our attorney team with some of the most up-to-date communications equipment so that attorneys can be easily reached either by telephone, e-mail or text during the work day or night. We also maintain a very professional and highly resourceful home office support staff that is also available during regular business hours to troubleshoot a broad range of administrative and/or logistical challenges.

Additionally, the Firm maintains business software systems as well as customary internet legal research systems: Lexis and Westlaw. The Firm’s attorneys are all equipped with laptops and smart phones allowing them to communicate with clients and colleagues from virtually any location.

Any work requests should be transmitted to the City Attorney so that she can handle the assignment in a timely fashion. Once a case is assigned, the attorneys possess the organization and information systems infrastructure needed to effectively manage multiple complex cases. State of the art management software ensures that we meet all deadlines. The Firm’s legal support staff maintains a separate electronic matter logs to keep attorneys and support staff further apprised of critical deadlines and pending tasks. The Firm attorneys and support staff also conduct routine team meetings to review assignments and evaluate staffing needs for various engagements. Time and expenses are monitored closely as each project progresses, and significant developments are shared with the client.

In addition to the foregoing, we would recommend a weekly meeting with the City Manager and City Department Heads to discuss different legal matters and upcoming projects that the Firm will be working on. This will allow us to create timelines to complete the projects and tasks. That said, we are amenable to whatever arrangement the City Manager would like us to follow so that the work is performed properly and completed on time.

5. INITIAL TRANSITION
We propose a three-step approach for OMLO’s transition into the role of city attorney. The first step would be for OMLO and city staff to compile an inventory of active litigation, claims, labor and employment matters, contracts under review, development and land-use projects, public records act requests and pending ordinances and resolution. For those cases the City would like us to handle, we would formally substitute OMLO in as counsel of record. During this initial phase, it would also be helpful for us to understand the City’s goals and priorities, annual budget, departmental strategic plans, if any, and any hot button issue needing immediate attention.

Second, we propose leadership meetings with the City Manager and his department heads so we can meet the team and learn about each department and its priorities, goals, and needs. At these meetings, we would establish protocol procedures for legal opinion and assignment requests, city management and city council communication, emergency legal responses, and litigation reporting. During this phase, we will begin to familiarize ourselves with HP’s municipal code, personnel policies, risk management procedures, collective bargaining agreements and ethics and conflict of ethics policies. We would also request individual meetings with the City Manager and Council Members to introduce ourselves and the Firm’s capabilities.

The third step is for OMLO to integrate itself into the culture of the City and to identify systems for delivery legal advice in a timely, cost-effective manner. To achieve this goal, within the first 90 days we would offer training to City staff on public records act, employment, good governance practices, and ethics. The purpose of the training would be to educate City staff on common topics and legal issues, which can be addressed without legal intervention thereby reducing legal fees. We would also request an annual performance evaluation of our firm so that City staff and the City Council can provide us with goals and objectives and areas for improvement.

OMLO will not charge the City for time spent reviewing the City’s municipal code, governance manuals, collective bargaining agreements, employee handbook, or any other city policies or manual. The Firm also will not charge HP for the initial introductory meetings with City staff or for any social gatherings.

6. BEST AND FINAL OFFER
OMLO’s services shall consist of both General Services and Special Matters.

General Services shall be billed to, and compensated by, the City (i) at a composite hourly rate for all attorneys of $300 per hour for up to 90 hours in each calendar month, and (ii) at a composite hourly rate for all attorneys of $340 per hour for any hours in excess of 90 hours in each calendar month. General Services shall include:

1. Attendance at City Council/Planning Commission meetings, and any other meeting directed by the City Manager;

2. Attendance at staff meetings when directed by the City Manager;

3. Legal research and legal advice to the City Council, Planning Commission, other City commissions, various committees and subcommittees, the City Manager and City staff ;

4. Preparation and review of ordinances, resolutions, and agreements as requested;

5. Oversight of legal matters handled by outside counsel;

6. Legal services for entities created by the City Council; and

7. Such other legal services as may be directed by the City Council or City Manager from time to time.

Thus, if OMLO bills 90 hours’ worth of time to General Services in any given month, the amount to be paid to OMLO by the City equals $27,000. This amount represents OMLO’s proposed monthly retainer amount.

Special Matters is defined as all advisory (non-litigation) services for labor and employment, environmental matters, specialized real estate, and water. Special services shall be commenced only after OMLO has received authorization from the City Manager or City Council to undertake that work. Special Matters include only advisory work and shall not include legal services provided in connection with litigation. Special Matters will be billed to, and compensated by, the City at a composite hourly rate of $350 for Partners and Of Counsel, $335 for Senior Associates, and $325 for Associates.

Litigation services will be billed to, and compensated by, the City at a composite hourly rate for all attorneys of $350 per hour.

7. POLITICAL ACTIVITY AND RELATIONSHIPS

1. To the best of the Firm’s recollection: None

2. To the best of the Firm’s recollection: None

3. To the best of the Firm’s recollection, OMLO was hired to serve as the interim city attorney for the City of Bell Gardens in or about January 2019, which was several months after the 2018 November election. In or around mid-year 2019, OMLO was appointed to be the permanent city attorney. To the best of the Firm’s recollection, no campaign contributions were made prior to appointment as interim or permanent city attorney.

4. On December 16, 2024, following the November 2024 election, OMLO was approved by the City Council under the City Manager’s signing authority to serve as the interim City Attorney for the City of South El Monte. On January 14, 2025, the City Council approved OMLO to continue serving as the interim City Attorney pending completion of an RFP process. After the RFP process was completed, the City Council unanimously approved OMLO on June 3, 2025 to serve at City Attorney.

The Firm does not have a formal policy governing political contributions. OMLO does, however, donate to political campaigns, including to council members of cities we currently represent. We also regularly donate to candidates for local, state, and federal campaigns. All donations made by the Firm are properly reported in accordance with existing local, state, and federal law. The firm does NOT bundle, use third party consultants, or engage in illegal activity concerning campaign donations. We believe in full transparency and do not try to hide the donations we make. If selected, OMLO agrees NOT to make campaign contributions to any current city council members or to any candidates running for city council.

8. CONFLICTS AND PROFESSIONAL HISTORY

1. None

2. None

3. None

4. None

9. REFERENCES, CONTRACT TERMS, AND CERTIFICATION

Louis Atwell, City Manager, City of Inglewood – (424) 225 - 0399 Alma Martinez, City Manager, City of El Monte – (818) 400 - 4995

OMLO hereby certifies that it can satisfy the RFP’s insurance requirements. OMLO further certifies that the supplemental responses contained herein are complete and accurate, that the identified attorneys are available and have agreed to perform the slated roles, and that the personnel, availability, and scope and financial commitments may be incorporated into the final agreement.

Sincerely,
_______________________
Rick R. Olivarez
Managing Partner

COST PROPOSAL WORKSHEET FOR THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON PARK

PROPOSER INFORMATION
Law Firm:

Primary Contact:

Title:

Email:

Telephone:

Date Submitted:

MONTHLY RETAINER OR ALTERNATIVE FEE STRUCTURE
Monthly Retainer: $______________ Annual Cost: $__________________ Billing Structure: ☐ Hourly Only ☐ Monthly Retainer ☐ Flat Fee ☐ Blended Rate ☐ Other
Service / Task Provided
by Firm?
(Y/N)
Included in
Monthly
Retainer?
(Y/N)
Comments
Regular and special City Council
meetings
Planning Commission meetings
Closed sessions and closedsession reporting
Agenda review and staff report
legal review
Weekly City Hall office hours
Executive Team, department
head, and similar meetings
General advice to City Council,
City Manager, departments,
commissions, and staff
Brown Act advice and training
Public Records Act advice and
complex request review
Political Reform Act,
Government Code section 1090,
Olivarez Madruga Law Organization, LLP.

Rick Olivarez
Managing Partner
[email protected]
(213)744-0099
8/11/2026
27,000
Y Y
Y Y
$300 per hour for the first 90 hours in the calendar month at a composite hourly rate for all attorneys of $340 per hour for any hours in excess of 90 hours in the calendar month.

General Services
Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
N Y
Y Y
For Public Records Request that fall
under 5 hours will be billed under Retainer.

Anything over 5 hours and more complex
will be billed at a Special Matter rate.

The first 5 hours will be billed under
the Retainer. For more complex and
voluminous work will be billed at a Special
Matter rate.

Y
and ethics advice
Standard ordinances and
resolutions
Non-routine ordinances,
municipal code updates, and
specialized legislation
Standard contract review and
approval as to form
Complex contract negotiation
and drafting
Public works, procurement,
prevailing wage, and bidding
advice
Real property transactions,
leases, licenses, easements,
and acquisitions
Land use, zoning, planning, and
development review
CEQA advice and document
review
Subdivision Map Act and
development agreement advice
Housing, economic
development, and grant-related
legal advice
Labor and employment advice
Personnel investigations,
discipline, grievances, and
administrative proceedings
Labor negotiations and collective
bargaining support
Police and public safety legal
issues
Pitchess-related matters,
subpoenas, and sensitive
records
Claims, risk management, and
third-party administrator
coordination
Litigation management and
coordination with outside
counsel
Direct litigation representation,
writs, appeals, or administrative
proceedings
Training for elected officials,
Y Y
Y Y The first 5 hours will be
billed under the Retainer. For
more complex and voluminous
work will be billed at a Special
Matter rate.

Y Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Special Matter Litigation
The first 5 hours will be billed
biunder the Retainer. For more complex
and voluminous work will be billed at a
Special Matter rate.

Y
Standard agreements will be billed under
Retainer. For more complex matters will
be billed at a Special Matter rate.

Standard agreements and basic tasks
will be billed under Retainer.

For more complex matters will
be billed at a Special Matter rate.

Standard agreements and basic tasks
will be billed under Retainer. For more
complex matters will be billed at a
Special Matter rate.

Standard tasks will be billed under the
retainer. For more complex and
voluminous work will be billed at a
Special Matter rate.

Standard tasks will be billed under
the retainer. For more complex and
voluminous work will be billed at a
Special Matter rate.

Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y Y
Y
commissioners, and staff
Elections advice
Public financing, bonds,
assessments, taxes, and fees
Franchising, utilities,
telecommunications, and
intergovernmental agreements
Other Services Included:
________________________________________
Other Services Excluded:
________________________________________

HOURLY BILLING RATES
Position Hourly Rate
City Attorney $________
Senior Partner $________
Partner $________
Senior Associate $________
Associate $________
Junior Associate $________
Paralegal $________
Law Clerk $________
Investigator $________
Other $________

SPECIAL MATTER RATES
Service Rate / Included
Litigation
Employment Investigations
Administrative Hearings
Code Enforcement
Labor Negotiations
Arbitration
Mediation
Training
Special Projects
Other
Y Y
Y Y
N
Y Standard tasks will be billed under the
retainer. For more complex and
voluminous work will be billed at a
Special Matter rate.

Y
Bond Counsel
Please refer to supplemental response that includes our rates.

MEETING ATTENDANCE
Meeting Type Included? Hourly/Flat Rate
City Council ☐ Yes ☐ No $______
Special Council ☐ Yes ☐ No $______
Closed Session ☐ Yes ☐ No $______
Planning Commission ☐ Yes ☐ No $______
Commission ☐ Yes ☐ No $______
Department ☐ Yes ☐ No $______
Emergency ☐ Yes ☐ No $______

BILLING POLICIES
Item Response
Billing Increment
Minimum Billing
Charge
Minimum Meeting
Charge
Travel Time
Mileage
Parking
Copies
Printing
Electronic Research
Administrative
Charges
Other Reimbursable
Costs

ANNUAL RATE ADJUSTMENTS
Annual Rate Increase Proposed? ☐ Yes ☐ No
Item Response
Frequency
Maximum Increase
Method (CPI / Fixed %)

COST CONTROL PRACTICES
Describe cost-control strategies:

Annual CPI percentage increase based on LA County percentage or not to exceed 5%.

Cost are driven by the amount of assignments. OMLO will work with City staff to determine budget for each project. Any project in which OMLO anticipates an increase, OMLO will propose a budget and confer with the client before performing additional services. OMLO will track hours and tasks to monitor assignments and produce efficient representation.
________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________

MONTHLY REPORTING
☐ Detailed Invoices
☐ Matter Summaries
☐ Litigation Status Reports
☐ Budget-to-Actual Reports
☐ Annual Legal Spending Summary
☐ Open Matter Report
☐ Other: __________________

ADDITIONAL FEES
Identify any additional fees:
____________________________________________________

CERTIFICATION
Authorized
Representative:

Title:

Signature:

Date:

Rick Olivarez
Managing Partner
8/11/26

ATTACHMENT D

PROPOSED CITY ATTORNEY PRICING
Olivarez Madruga Law Organization, LLP (OMLO)
Service Proposed Rate
General City Attorney Services - First 100 hours/month $300/hour General City Attorney Services - Over 100 hours/month $325/hour Special Matters - Partners / Of Counsel $325/hour
Special Matters - Senior Associates $310/hour
Special Matters - Associates $300/hour
Special Matters - Attorneys with 15+ years of experience* $350/hour Litigation $325/hour
Thomas P. Madruga - Litigation* $350/hour
Rate Adjustments: No rate increases during the first 24 months. Thereafter, annual CPI adjustments are capped at 3%.

Budget Controls: Annual not-to-exceed amount, with advance notice and City authorization required for material budget overruns.

Designated City Attorney: Rick R. Olivarez.
* Higher rate applies when assignment of the attorney is appropriate to the matter.

!"#$%&'""!%()*"'$+!,'")-$''.'(/0)12334356789:4;<3;5<356323< =>?@?A=BCCCCC@DCCCCCEFG
H/I32395;J632K6I30'JJ3L69M3N;6378KOP;5<O36Q3356I3
,!R%& S(!(-%(#)$TK;4U59L9V;WLX2VX2;69X5/0,!R78YZ[ \

]^_Z_`/I32395;J632K0,%("S*)(78a&X26I3VU2VX:3:XJ6I9:)12334356E ,!R;5<,%("S*)(4;PO323J3223<6XLXWW3L69M3WPOP6I3L;V96;W9b3<63240#;2693:a7 I3L;V96;W9b3<63240#;26P74;P23J326X,!RX2,%("S*)(95632LI;513;OWPa

_A=BZ[_=Bcdefd>ef>?fgfe=>?@h=?AgfBifj??@?AfD@kk@h=>lDdj?Bm

noZE@>Y
Z_`E?Af_pj@>jkqefe=?BfrqfB?D@gg@i@Bdkig@jfBBD@g
Y__^
\\`sd>e

noZE@>Y
Z_`E?Afg@DfBB=@>dkfgt=jfBZlgffcf>?hdBdBB=l>fe?@?Af

]^_Z_sd>e

noZE
]^_Z_gfigfBf>?B?Ad?=?=BDqkkurqdk=D=fe?@ifgD@gcBqjA
ig@DfBB=@>dkBfgt=jfBvut=g?qf@D=?Bfwifg=f>jfd>e?Af?gd=>=>lEfeqjd?=@>d>efwifg?=Bf @D=?Big=>j=idkBd>efcik@uffBsd>e

noZE
]^_Z_Dqg?AfggfigfBf>?B?Ad?=?=Bh=kk=>l?@djjfi?
gfBi@>B=v=k=?uD@gifgD@gc=>lBqjABfgt=jfB=>djj@ged>jfh=?A?Af?fgcBd>ej@>e=?=@>B Bf?D@g?A=>?A=BZlgffcf>?sd>e

noZE?Affwfjq?=@>@D?A=BZlgffcf>?hdBdiig@tfevu?Afoq>?=>l?@>dgx =?u@q>j=kd?=?Bflqkdg[ff?=>l@DY
Z_`y

nE_o\
ED@gd>e=>j@>B=efgd?=@>@D?Afcq?qdkj@tf>d>?Bd>e
j@>e=?=@>BAfgf=>j@>?d=>feEZlf>jud>e
]^_Z_dlgffdBD@kk@hBm

!"#$%

$%&
&
$""
'

&$
&"
() !$
#$%#**+&&
"#

#
%#$%&$

,
#
%

-./01(.1
#) "

, '
!
" 2&
"#$%
#"3""
'

&$4567879:;<= &$#'

' %

#"
:>?@AB@C>BDE7?BF<G
./01(.1'
#) "

' $&"

1H#***#
-!#
&#*"-

*"-",,*&"-I&,!$
-" 2&
"-
#"3"#$%
&$
&%$
#*#$%
"

!# JK
3$
""# J

!,
$
*J, '
!#$%
&!*J

!,*

" 2&
"#$%
#"3""
'

,
' 2&
"

, ,
""
'
&"() !$

#'
!$
&
$%" 2&
"#$%
#"3""
'

,
' 2&
""#** &$#'
' %

)$ #**JJ

#,&
#*&L%
! MNOPQRS

T1U1&"() !$
"#**

!!$

$VW(1X#$%
!&$#

$VW(1X
1

!
'
() !$
!#J+
$%%J#, &
%
',

VY11../UZX
=[GJ# ="G,
$K &

&

'
&
JU#$#)

K &

&
"#**
,
2&%%$
*""
#$
&
J=\]G%#J", &

!&$#
&
$
'
&"() !$

^O_`abcab_`adefg_aObd`hiiOjfPh_f_OjPO`aka_OPO_`fPladfPfd_Pag__`fmnopqd #&*&
J

!&$#

&"() !$
#
#$J
&!'

$2$&$

'

\U.(1.

(
./01(.1"#**, '
!
2# &
"" 2&
"#$%
#"3""
'

&$

>?@AB@C>BDE7?BF4567879:;<r

&
$

\=(G$

K&
"
#$%&$)-./01(.1qe_O_hi

!,$"#
&
$
% &$)
1 !
'
&"() !$

#$J+
$"&
$
!"#**$

+
%

%)
%#)) )#
"!
'VY11.(U/.1X=[G, J#
s`fPfabht_fPu_`fM^O_v

vwxgffyez{S|uzbifdddzg`hyyfyfxjfbya_zPfad
'& "
#,,
2%J
1H#

&$)&$

$"*
#
&
$K&

&
JU#$#) #$%

'&$#$

$
2$
./01(.1q"
# )"# ,

+
%
.

v+
%!, &

+,& #
&
$
'
1 !
#$J
"&$)*+
$"&
$
!-1H!#J"",$%./01(.1q", '
!#$

,$%&$)1H#,,
2#*
'#$J#$
&
&,#
%+,$%&
"&$+
""
'
.

v+
%!
#$J

1Hv#,,
2%#!$%!$

!,$"#
&
$
!"
'
&"() !$

}(HU.1U.(1.$
'& "

'#
!
$
-./01(.1"#**
dzk{a__Omnophba_f{a~fyabOagftOP_`h_{Ob_`qdhdfff=M ^oS,
!
$
G#$%&$%&
#
&$)
#%%&
&
$#*" 2&
"#$%
#"3", '
!%% &$)

$
*J

$
*%%
#*$%# !
$
-&$
*%&$)" 2&
"#$%
#"3", '
!%#$%

&! "#*

v
'v,

3
+,$""&$
%
'
#!
$

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

J9KG>>BEC@?CLMN>BMODP>BCDEF@GC@1$-((.-!"#-!"'*.0(%#%-",-''+&-#% &%'*&,17!#$&%10%'##*-((.-##%&1'*8%&%,+",%&#$!1G4&%%.%"#3*&-0%&!*,*3 #$&%%:;=)%-&1-3#%&#$%%H0!&-#!*"*&#%&.!"-#!*"*3#$!1G4&%%.%"#9>?@A1$-(( $-8%#$%&%-1*"-2(%&!4$##*-''%11-",%H-.!"%1+'$&%'*&,1/7!#$*+#'$-&4%9 >?@A1$-((*7"-",3+&#$%&$-8%#$%&!4$##*-+,!#1+'$&%'*&,1/#*.-6%#&-"1'&!0#1 #$%&%3&*.-",#*!"10%'#-((0&*4&-.,-#-/,*'+.%"#1/0&*'%%,!"41/-",-'#!8!#!%19

J9QGRGCOBCSNC@RA>BCDEF@GC@P?"#$%%8%"#>BCDEF@GC@'%-1%1#* 0%&3*&.#$%5*&6-4&%%,#*+",%&#$!1G4&%%.%"#*&*#$%&7!1%-2-",*"1#$% +",%&#-6!"4'*"#%.0(-#%,$%&%!"0&!*&#*#$%%H0!&-#!*"*3#$!1G4&%%.%"#*&0&!*& #*'*.0(%#!*"*3-")*&-((#-1611%#3*&#$!"#$%D'*0%*3D%&8!'%1/>BCDEF@GC@ 1$-((,%(!8%&#*>?@A!..%,!-#%()-",7!#$*+#,%(-)/-((7&!##%".-#%&!-(1/!"'(+,!"4 -")%(%'#&*"!''*..+"!'-#!*"1/&%'*&,1-",*#$%&7*&60&*,+'#0&%0-&%,*& *2#-!"%,2)>BCDEF@GC@!"#$%0%&3*&.-"'%*3#$!1G4&%%.%"#9T+&#$%&.*&%/ >BCDEF@GC@1$-((*"()2%'*.0%"1-#%,3*&#$%&%-1*"-2(%8-(+%*3#$% 1%&8!'%1/#-161-",*#$%&7*&60%&3*&.%,+0#*#$%#!.%*3'%11-#!*"*& -2-",*".%"#/(%11-,%,+'#!*"3*&-"),-.-4%1/'*1#1*&-,,!#!*"-(%H0%"1%1 7$!'$>[email protected])!"'+&-1-&%1+(#*3>BCDEF@G

UUVWXYZ[Y\]^_X[Z]`YXX\X^a

b9Jcd
efgeff chfP@$%>?@A$%&%2),%1!4"-#%1#$%>!#)S-"-4%&-", O!&%'#*&*3i+2(!'5*&61jkcde

lm

&%0&%1%"#-#!8%13*&#$%0%&3*&.-"'%*3#$!1G4&%%.%"#9@$%>!#)S-"-4%&1$-((2% #$%'$!%3>?@AM%0&%1%"#-#!8%9@$%>?@AM%0&%1%"#-#!8%1*&#$%!&,%1!4"%%1$-(( -'#*"2%$-(3*3#$%>?@A3*&-((0+&0*1%1+",%&#$!1G4&%%.%"#9>BCDEF@GC@ 1$-(("*#-''%0#,!&%'#!*"1*&*&,%&13&*.-")0%&1*"*#$%&#$-"#$%>?@A M%0&%1%"#-#!8%1*&#$%!&,%1!4"%%9

b9b>BCDEF@GC@MNiMNDNC@G@?nNGCO>BC@G>@?CTBMSG@?BCP

!"#$%
! &'()*+

"
$&,'

($# &
-. /

)
$&#&(0
123

5 6

7
89

844
9
44

4
445
95

9

:
9
:

7
8

5 6

44

6 59
;

<=9
<=

6 >6?@< <ABC<BDAE B7<FBG<BEBH

;
84
4;
<=

7
8

5
44

4
4 <=

4 5
6 44;
8

I

4
<=

>6J @ @A BDKBAE BABEK=BBH

98;4

44;H

6
44

5447
8844
4495

4

LM
!
))(!$N

O6
44

5447
85

<=D

6
4454;
444
4

49
444;

494

5

QRSR

K44

5 TP

5

UQRRRVWXVY6ZD

7
8

5 ;
4444

5
D

B6 44
L
54

8449
8;4

9

[

5 D

A6 44
L
54

T4
45

\
4TZZ
444

9

9:4

!"#$%
"

!"#$%
"
&

'

!"#$%
"
&

(

)*

!"#$%
"

)+*

./012345062789:;<0=>029=2>3004/[email protected]&62770B42970:C29D;:38 B03C:3E0=FD?GHIJK.LH.:3:9?GHIJK.LH.&6F0/2<C6/2<<9:47:96454M402

!"#$%
"

277:3=2970;54/2BB<572F<059=M643D6429=23=6:C?GHIJK.LH.&6B3:C0665:9O

PQ##
R"ST"
U

'

!"#$%
"

230E240352<4:[email protected]&6;5<<59>90664:09403594:4/56L>300E094OL77:3=59><[email protected]

!"#$%
"

?GHIJK.LH.&6=M4506:3:F<5>245:96M9=034/56L>300E094;54/:M44/0B35:3

'
)WX*

!"#$%
"
!"#$%
"

4:7:EB<D;54/4/0403E6:C4/56L>300E094O@94/02F60970:[email protected]&6B35:3;354409

!"
#$%
& '(

!"
#$%

!"
#$%
)*+,-./,+012-3.+.456!"
#$%
7

'(89

! : !"
#$%

!"
#$%

7(

7!"
#$%
)

;

<=>?)+/[email protected],.BC4-1-41-.2,B-D.5@4-EB,.456F5DBAA.,[email protected] '(

!"
#$%

! :

!"
#$%
)H

!"
#$%

H#
#

I

(!"
#$%

&# #
H
H7

.5+0-B5/2JA.+BK.C.,D.5+0-B5/2JL4-M2-+)/4E125+B,.45.5+0-B5/2B5A,N2(

OP
I"Q%"R
I%":

#"PS

#&
!"
#$%
)

T UV

! :

(
!"
#$%

!"
#$%
)

T
UV

'(

! :

T UV

!"
#$%

'(

W!"I%
!
' X%'#&!"
#$%
(

7H 7
7

'(!"
#$%
)

7
7

! Y"#X9
H

CBL-2+0C,.5B5.5/-2B+2.5<Z[*\]>F[>)+/4+,4@12-@4-EB5/2J,N2^B-,.2++NBCC

8
#

7_`

U
,.E212-.4Aa4@<Z[*\]>F[>)+54,./2,4<=>?4@.,+.5/-2B+2A/4+,4@

E.5B,2,N.+FG-22E25,0145bABD+)L-.,,25

""#

$"$
%"
%&
%"
"
"$&%
"#"

'
"

'%"

"

$
$

""
#

&
"
$#
"#

() *+**

!

+

,-"#
%#
#
#

!#""

#"$#&$

!#
""""

-""$
##

!#

"

"$
#

%&#
.

/

!
""&
""$

&"
"

"$

%"1
2#
%&

%"1
2

!#""

#"$#&$

!
"".%
$'

"
#&
#
/
$

%$&"

#&"
&
"
$$,
#&"

/-&$

!-

%%
$

"$#

!%#

"$#&$
/
-

33343567895:;

<( /+

*+
&

#
%
%#%
=,

!-
""%#

"

%>%

#

"

!
""%#

""-

%
.

-'

"?"!
&
"
$
%

!
""%#
@ABCDABCEF@@GHIBAJKGCGHAJLBAMBJBDNOCPQHACIGRSEKLEFTGHAUGVW

&#

%
.

"?"!
&
"
$.

1%X
?)))(2

>%
."
%
?!
.

""
.

%"

"

""
""
1Y))))))))2
%#X%

""
""
1YZ))))))))2
"

&#
"$
[%$
"
[%$$#

#%
#
"#

#%""
&
"
$

\ %&
"!
&
"
$
%

!
""%#

%&
"!
&
"
$
%
&#

%
.

X %&
)))(.

%&
"!
&
"
$
#(1$%2
%
%&
"!
&
"
$
%
"".

%"

"

!"#$"%&'!()$*%+,-!*.*%/"+*0$12()3!4$"&%5-+6-3-,4.*%/"+*0$78 !9:!"#$"%&0!()$*%+,-!*-*%/"+*0$-*%/0;+(!/*,+%:-339/3340!()34:-,; <
=
<>

=<<
<

<@>ABC8@C
DCE

=
F

@>ABC8@C<

<G
F

<

HI 8 DCD@8BD@>AJK JKLADJKK@C>7C<MB?

<
8
B
D

<DCE

'.NO&

HH JKLADJK 8JJDKJJ8CD@M78?

P

<

8

<

<
Q

<
=

?
=<

<
8

P

-*%/"$"%:;!S+00!"T-*U,!,;$3+,$%,$T-,-!*!9,;$V$%,&%.*%/"+*0$W/-T$S;+X$ +*YZ[ZV$%,&%"+,-*U!9*!3$%%,;+*Y\]..Z'.NO(+4+3%!+00$),)!3-0-$%)"!0/"$T 64-*%/"+*0$0+""-$"%:-,;+^,+*T+"T_`!!"&%

<
aaa
+00!"T-*U,!,;$3+,$%,)/63-%;$T$T-,-!*,;$^,+*T+"T_`!!"&%"+,-*UU/-T$ZY%,! !"#$"%&'!()$*%+,-!*.*%/"+*0$12()3!4$"&%5-+6-3-,4.*%/"+*0$S,;$'.NO J

?

<
Q

<
Q=

<
<

<
<
>

Hb cJD8Ed@>ABC8@C&^.e^fgYe'278

?
@>ABC8@C%;+336$)"-(+"4,!+*40!X$"+U$+X+-3+63$,!'.NO!"'.NO&

h-*%/"+*0$(+-*,+-*$T64'.NO!"'.NO&

<
R

@>ABC8@C&

<

=<

Hi G8DjKJd>AaJM8CD@78

8

<

<@>ABC8@C

=
?
<

<

@>ABC8@C<
=
?

DCE

Hk jKJDdD8CD@djKJ8MK7@>ABC8@C
F=

!""#!"""

$%&'%$%

$(
$&)$&$
$&)
*+%$

""
,-"."#/"#/
,-".

#"

01234
5#"./06789:2572,"/
""#.

"

0123,
."

" ""#"#!"#"".

.; # "#
5"
!
0123""#
#"4<=>?>@ABCB?DA>EFCBGEH@DG?>DGI>GIF@E>J>GAECF@>D?= BGEH@DG?>KFLB?ME=DLLN>EBOG>INMDK>@EFGDHA=F@BP>INMA=DABGEH@>@AF NBGI?FQ>@DO>FGBAEN>=DLCDGIE=DLLN>FGCF@JEK@FQBI>INMA=>RS<TBC @>UH>EA>I45

" ""#"#!"
#"#

#0123"#"
#"06789:2572!!"!"
*+VW*X*V*+

Y*XZ[\*

,"; /06789:2572

#0123,

#

; #" "
"#
"#!"4

S]^S_`ab_ScSRd<Se_

f4g
h
$

#"#

/
i\)*V
j*)%
k
$+

i$
mn
*%)

o"
!#,/
#
!/"p /#!./!/
)W%$
&*
q\

*V+ )$
$
$*&*
**

&*
$$*%

/
""./ ".
!
".."//!"/,

!"#
06789:2572!
/."/ -" "rs/"

!"

5.!"4

2 "#!"""##"
#"#" #
#
0123
1"#!",

"
!#,,
; ".
06789:2572"#!"
0123
!".
!

"..",
!"#

01234

06789:2572t",#.
0123, #"""
5.!""

"
06789:2572!!!""#!"
/#
"#/"#
#

!0123

f4u 2

o"
!#,/06789:2572
"#!"
/
#

!"##
"#
01231"#!"
!"#."//
i q\ &*
k$&)%$W$

*%
)$i$

$**v)

*V+
o

"#
"#

."s
" ".

"""",
06789:2572

!"
,t
"#

!
,
"
."""#"
5.!"4

!

!

!
"

!
"

#$

%

!#$
&

'(()*+',)-./01-02"+/3(-42'5*/4)'.26

7%
8

!
&
&

9

8

9

9
9

9

9:
;

9 ;

!

!
&

9
9

(0/<*2*/42/='4>./01-02"+/3(-42'5*/4'+5/02*3*)'0'+56

!

%
&

&

?@AB"

8 8
8

!

9
%
&

988&
9

!

!

!

9

9

D
8

!

5/,-=E))>0-2(/42*,)-'4F*4F-34*=>GH/)FH'03)-22'4FF-=-4F?@AB'4F?@AB"

8 8
8

8 %

:

:

8I
8
8
& &

!
8 9;

# $

988&
9

!

!

%

*4+)EF-0-'2/4',)-'55/04->2"=--2
*4+E00-F,>+/E42-)/=?@AB"

J 8

!
9

98
&
8

D

!

9

9

8
8

8

9
8
8 %

$%&'()*+,&*-+

./ 012!3 !435!647 7809 !"

4387: 3

/;<=>?@AB>CB>DEFGCHICJCHKK@AAIKH=@ILMNOPE

4387: 3

Q

4387: 3

4387: 3

.R

!

!"
#

4387: 3

S

S

8

T/

Q

4387: 3

5
Q 4387: 3

#

S

S

/.

B>DFILMNOPE

#
3

IKU@CJHF@C@FKCH=KMNOPE

.R 0V0384WS0W 7:XY10 64W Z1002039

!

[

\U@C@HA>LK@C]^_`@AKILa@L>b?Kc<FU>??I==bCdeIC>??
0
S

[

0
S

AIKH=@KIKU@B@L>b?KHAfg>CKD\U@C@HA>LK@CC@L@CC@BKI>F>^a@L>b?KhIKH=@c<

0
S

#

0
S

X

0

S

.RY.R

0
S

[

0
S

"

#$%&'()*+((,-.(/012345

7/7)8+9.:;/<),+1234/;12345

6

6
=
>

?

@
:;/<),+7/1234/;12345

6

5(;+-(/*-&9+A/*7;/9

6
@
B

C

@6@

D
E

F
>

F #GHI 6
>

@6
D
EJ

D 6

6
6>@>

?

#

6
6
6

6>@>

?I>

@

!#I

5

6

?

K
#I

5

@

>

@
K#I

5 -*,L/;)7(+8:9/.++(5,)(;+M-;,/;

6 >
>>> K#
I

6@?6>

6>

>
N>

6
6K#
I

5

@

6
> >@

K
-*,L/;O<))%12345

6

6@6

D
E

6#PQI 6

@6@

PQC 6
R
F
PQC 6 >D
E
6

@
B

D
E

!"

#

#
$%&'()*&

'
+,

$-.
/01

#

$%&'()*&"

&

$-.

$-.

#
##

$%&'()*&"

#
*
#

$%&'()*&"

$%&'()*&
23455677854968:
!"

$%&'()*&"

#
;<63647=:563>=?@ABC67B487D85496EF

$-.#
'

&

H##

(

$%&'()*&
#

#
J

K
#

*
#

$-.
8C63=5658C38<4L458385<6324B636B53495
!"

*
#

*
#

#
M

M

#

N

#

*
#

#

#

#
#

-

#
$-.

*
#

*
#
$-.

#

#

(

$%&'()*&
$-.###

!
!

"
#!

$

!
%
"
!

$

$"
!#

""!
!
#

&'(&)*&*+,-+./012)345*4(6)-75&-3,68+,2*9:5&&;&)+652)+,&./01%

!

#

<
$

" !

"
#

!

=
$
!
#
#

!#

#

!
$

>

?@ ABCD

EBFG
$!
!#" #

#
$!
!#"
!

$

#
H#

$"!$

$$#

$! "
A

$ A

#

"

?I FE
E
<
F
BB

JAFE

G !

#
#
$
!

"
!

$

$

#$$
!

KLM NLOPQRRSTQUVOWXUKLOLUTO

YZ J[B\J

B
<C
BB
AFABF
G

J#
J
"
!

#

# #

"

C#

!

9:5&&;&)+]+,&+&5;^_634;&)+*-)`_-+-a;&-)*-)`2)3b4`&*-bb5&(65+*]

!

#

#

#

!

!

#
$

!

!"

'
()*

)
#
$

!

!

+", -#!.
#

#
$/

) )

#
$"#
$

% "
%

#
$

012334567089:;<=

>*

?

)

) )

#
$"

+"@ -

#A

/

)

)

)

B

-

@C"""

@DEF
%"

-

C,+HI
%"

+"J
#./

)

K

)

/

LMNOPQRSNRT LURVT
W
A.X Y

K*
W
!!Z.X+HHIA

W
!!Z.XY

K*

FI,HH

/W
A.X

/Z Z

A

.
/W.A
#
X .
/
["
K
/WKY.X K
/'@,@(HE,&+C+C

"!# $%% &'()*%+,-').&'($)/)

(

"!" 1$%+)'($)*+2/$%+3)(+)

40
5

(

$*)6!

(

"!8 9:;<=>?:@A;;BCDEFB<B;AC?$%+3)(+)/$*)6

$%+3)(+)

7

0

$%+3)(+)!

"!
'%.*1*)&G*+)&'&)/$%+3)(+)

HIJK
LMNO

$%+3)(+)

(

!-
$%+3)(+)

HIJKLMNO

$%+3)(+)

0
(

$*)6

(

!-

(

$*)6

(

"!P )*Q&*%-).&&&+$&/)

(

"!RS 2%T&'+*+23(4(+GT&+&/)
(

3
(

$

$

$

!"#$
%

&

&

&
'
(
&

&
) % *
%&
+,
-+#

%& *

!,

#

/000'1!23004564789:;<=>?@:;A?=BCDA?@:;EF>GHI;:A?H

'
J2KK45647()

J

J

+

L

+

&J
%

& *

%

%

%

+

&

%
*

&

%

+

&

/ M!
#
# # NO$P !

&%

%

Q&& *R

%&
NO&

%

:@<STUDVWXTWBC@?;CI?AY:?HGI:IZG<[W\8

K ,P"#]-#!"#$+=;I^BC_G;@:;E=AHG:@=A^:`>?a=I?:AbAcG;IZ?CXa;GGEGAI

+

%
&
%

J ,]
d%

%
J

%
&

e%
%&&

%

& %

&

J
%

%
&
AHGZG;GbAcG;8fg:;HG
h=iGb;GjZG;G?A&

J *

% *
%&
$'
(

L'(

e%
R

%

L'(*

J

'*

*

(

J%
L'(J &
*

P !

&&

& L'(

&

R

& L
'(

J &

%

J
P !

& &

& L
'(

&

k XWWSlTF\UBgFFU$

+
&&

&

J
*

% *

&

J
+

%

J

J&

+

;G=C:A=`>G=II:;AG^CB@GGC=Ac=>>:IZG;H:CIC:@

1 !#P"

!"

#$#""%&

"$$#"
"%
"
#&%'!$%"($

"

) *+
,* -
."#&"$$!"%

( /#"/

%"$$!"%
"
"

"#&#%#
!"" #
0
(!
"
!(
"

1 +2
3

"#&"
!$
($
/$$#$/
0"% !$
!% !&
4%"
!/&#

("""$$!% %$$ !
!

5 .
.+&
&/&
!"%

$& "#&
"$$($

#%$""'!%
0#
"#

"/
"%4!*

($6%& 0&
&"/&
!"
"%

$&"!0(

&

0("$$(

78 *
+!
" (%"!$"/"!"

#
"
!(!
" !$
/

/$&"/%#&/

"!"!
/!/ "#&

7 *+ +* +
*3 *+ (
! $!!""!

0
("" "#&

'"!
/

("" "#&"$$!$

77
-
."#&!$%
#$$!
'""
/!&
$/ $
'!$%"('
""
"0"
!
&"

""

"%
"
"$$#&"
%
"
#"/0$0/
0*

*+,3
'!% "#&"&"/

""#&"/0$0/&

0!&

"$$($

#&
&/
&
!"%

$&"#&"$$($

#%$""
0#

%$
'!%

"
%"%+!5/(

79 *,

+"#&"$$'!%
:9;#$
!%
"! 0!"$$ 6%$ !
!
0

0&
&/&
!"%

$&
!%
:";
"$$($

#%$""&
$$!%
"! &
0

!"
!
#$

%!&

'( )%
* %
*
*"
+,
-.
###
#
"#

!"
!

#

%!&
#

%!&,
#

/%0
"!1*
2 ,%

0."0*3

!
""

$%&'()*+,&%,-&(,./01 2,/34()$(,5+6&/,&7

8 9
:
;
8 9<;=
<>=

?
9 ?
9

/..0(@4A/5&()(03B

8 9
C
:

/&&45&B

:
:DE

?
9

6550 Miles Avenue  Huntington Park, CA 90255  (www.hpca.gov  (323) 584-6230 Office of the City Clerk

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
The City of Huntington Park requires that applicants must submit to the Office of the City Clerk proof of Liability Insurance in the following amounts.

Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
 General Liability – Minimum Limits of: (Pending Event)  $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 general aggregate;  $2,000,000 per occurrence and $4,000,000 general aggregate; or  Other: _____________________________________________
for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage, including operations, products and completed operations
 Automobile Liability – if vendor has no owned autos, Code 8 (hired) and Code 9 (non-owned), with limits of no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. (Note – required only if auto is used in performance of work)  Workers Compensation – required by the State of California, with statutory limits, and employer’s liability insurance with limit of no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. (Note – required only if vendor has employees) *Special Events serving/selling alcohol must also include Liquor Liability (limits will vary depending on event type)
The General Liability policy is to contain, or to be endorsed to contain the following:
 The City of Huntington Park, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds.

Special Event Holder or Permittee shall hold harmless, defend and indemnify Entity and its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all liability, loss, damage, expense, costs (including without limitation costs and fees of litigation) of every nature arising out of or in connection with Contractor’s performance of work hereunder or its failure to comply with any of its obligations contained in the agreement, except such loss or damage which was caused by the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the Entity.
6550 Miles Avenue  Huntington Park, CA 90255  (www.hpca.gov  (323) 584-6230 Certificate Holder:
 City of Huntington Park, 6550 Miles Avenue, Huntington Park, CA 90255 Acceptability of Insurers:
 Insurance is to be placed with insurers authorized to conduct business in the state with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A: VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the Entity.

A typed legible name of the Authorized representative must accompany the signature on the certificate of insurance and/or the true and certified copy of the policy

THE ENDORSEMENT PAGE MUST ACCOMPANY THE ACORD FORM
CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY.
6550 Miles Avenue  Huntington Park, CA 90255  (www.hpca.gov  (323) 584-6230

SUBJECT TO CHANGE ACCORDING TO EVENT
Subject to change according to event.

SUBJECT TO CHANGE ACCORDING TO EVENT
Insurance
Company
Name(s)
Insured Name & Address
Policy Number
Policy Number
Current
Policy Period
Current Policy
Period
Policy Number Current Policy
Period
DATE
Agent or Broker
Name & Address
Must
mark
either a
“Y” or
“X”
Must have
a Contact
Name &
Phone
number or
email
address
General Liab.

Each Occurrence:
$2,000,000
Damage to Rented
Premises:
$1,000,000
Med Exp: $5,000
Personal & Adv
Injury: $1,000,000
General Aggregate:
$4,000,000
Products:
$1,000,000
Combined
Single
Limit:
$1,000,000
Each
Accident:
$1,000,000
“The City of Huntington Park, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds.”
City of Huntington Park
6550 Miles Avenue
Huntington Park, CA 90255 SIGNATURE
Must be in ACCORD 25 (2016/03) or ACCORD 25 (2014/01) any other form will NOT be acceptable 6550 Miles Avenue  Huntington Park, CA 90255  (www.hpca.gov  (323) 584-6230 “The City of Huntington Park, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds.”
1 Request for Proposal P age | 1
For Network Cabling Installation
City of Huntington Park Request for Proposal for Electronic Document Management System

CITY OF HUNTINGTON PARK

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR
City Attorney Legal Services
PROPOSAL DUE DATE: June 18, 2026, AT 5:00 P.M.
6550 Miles Ave
Huntington Park, CA 90255
Contact: Stephany Santin
323.584.6132
[email protected]
2 Request for Proposal
Professional Services for City Attorney
Table of Contents

1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND INTRODUCTION .................................................................. 3

2. OVERVIEW...................................................................................................................................... 4

3. PROPOSAL PROCESS................................................................................................................. 7

4. SELECTION CRITERIA.............................................................................................................. 11

5. SELECTION PROCESS............................................................................................................. 11

6. SUBMISSION DEADLINE.......................................................................................................... 12

7. INQUIRIES AND NO CONTACT POLICY............................................................................... 12

8. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND RFP TERMS................................................................. 12

9. AWARD OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT ……………………………………...…...15 APPENDIX A ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..15 • Certification Statement and Signature Sheet
APPENDIX B ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..16 • California Levine Act Statement
APPENDIX C ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..18 • Insurance Requirements
APPENDIX D………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…….19 • Form of Professional Services Agreement
3 Request for Proposal
Professional Services for City Attorney

1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND INTRODUCTION
A. General Description
The City Council of the City of Huntington Park ("City") invites qualified law firms and attorneys ("Proposers") to submit written proposals to provide City Attorney legal services.

The selected Proposer will serve as City Attorney and provide full-service municipal legal counsel to the City, as directed by the City Council and the City Manager, and in coordination with City departments, boards, commissions, officials, and staff.

This Request for Proposals ("RFP") contains the information necessary to prepare and submit a responsive proposal. By submitting a proposal, each Proposer represents that it has carefully reviewed this RFP, understands the work required, can perform the services described, and agrees to comply with the requirements and conditions stated herein, except for any exceptions expressly identified in the proposal.

The City reserves the right to reject any or all proposals, to waive immaterial irregularities, to request clarifications or additional information, to negotiate with one or more Proposers, to retain separate special counsel for any matter, and to cancel this RFP at any time if the City determines that doing so is in the City's best interest.

B. City Profile
The City of Huntington Park is a California municipal corporation located in southeast Los Angeles County. The City provides municipal services through elected and appointed officials, departments, boards, commissions, and staff. Additional information regarding the City is available at www.hpca.gov.

The City seeks practical, responsive, and solution-oriented legal counsel with substantial experience representing California cities, advising elected and appointed officials, managing municipal risk, and supporting lawful, efficient, and transparent public agency operations.

C. Anticipated Contract Term
The City anticipates entering into a professional services agreement for an initial three (3) year term, with up to two (2) one-year extension options upon mutual written agreement, unless otherwise determined by the City Council. The City reserves the right to negotiate a different term with the selected Proposer.

D. City Contact
All communication concerning this RFP must be directed to the Assistant City Manager identified below. No other City official, employee, consultant, or representative is authorized to provide binding interpretations or clarifications regarding this RFP.

Stephany Santin, Assistant City Manager
City of Huntington Park
6550 Miles Avenue
Huntington Park, CA 90255
Email: [email protected]
4 2. OVERVIEW
The selected City Attorney will provide general municipal legal services for the City.

The services described below are intended to identify the principal categories of work expected, but they are not exhaustive. The City may assign additional legal matters consistent with the role of City Attorney and may also retain separate special counsel when the City determines that doing so is appropriate.

A. General Counsel and Governance Services
(1) Advise the City Council, City Manager, City departments, commissions, committees, officials, and staff on legal matters pertaining to City affairs. (2) Provide practical legal advice that identifies risk, explains available options, and supports lawful implementation of City policy decisions. (3) Attend closed sessions, prepare or review closed-session materials, and advise on confidentiality, report-out obligations, and related governance issues. (4) Advise on municipal authority, state and federal preemption, constitutional issues, statutory interpretation, local regulatory authority, conflicts of interest, due process, and risk management.
(5) Assist the City in developing legally defensible procedures, policies, forms, templates, and internal review processes.

B. Meetings, Agenda Review, and Availability
(1) Attend regular City Council meetings and Planning Commission meetings as requested by the City. The City currently anticipates attendance at two (2) City Council meetings per month and one (1) Planning Commission meeting per month. (2) Regular City Council meetings are currently held on the second and fourth Tuesday of each month at 6:00 p.m. Planning Commission meetings are currently held on the third Wednesday of each month at 6:30 p.m. Meeting schedules may change. (3) Review agendas, staff reports, resolutions, ordinances, contracts, and other materials before meetings, and provide timely comments to City staff. (4) Attend executive team, department head, community, intergovernmental, or other meetings as requested.
(5) Provide regular office hours at City Hall, anticipated to be several hours each week, unless the City and selected Proposer agree to another availability model. (6) Provide timely responses to routine inquiries and urgent matters, including after-hours availability when necessary for time-sensitive City business.

C. Ordinances, Resolutions, Municipal Code, and Legislative Support (1) Draft, review, and revise ordinances, resolutions, staff report legal analyses, policies, regulations, and other legislative materials requested by the City Council or City Manager
(2) Review and update provisions of the Huntington Park Municipal Code to maintain consistency with current law and City policy direction. (3) Advise on legal authority, enforcement mechanisms, administrative procedures, penalty structures, findings, due process, and implementation issues for proposed municipal legislation.
5 (4) Monitor and advise the City regarding federal and state legislation, regulations, and judicial decisions affecting municipal operations.

D. Contracts, Procurement, Public Works, and Real Property (1) Draft, review, negotiate, and approve as to form contracts, amendments, memoranda of understanding, leases, licenses, easements, purchase and sale agreements, encroachment agreements, development-related agreements, and other legal instruments involving the City.
(2) Advise on public contracting, competitive bidding, procurement, conflicts in contracting, public works requirements, prevailing wage issues, insurance, indemnity, and contract administration.
(3) Assist with negotiation and legal review of real estate, infrastructure, economic development, franchise, utility, telecommunications, and intergovernmental agreements.
(4) Provide legal advice regarding grant agreements, funding restrictions, cost recovery, fees, charges, and compliance obligations.

E. Land Use, Planning, Housing, and Environmental Matters (1) Advise the City Council, Planning Commission, City Manager, Community Development staff, and other City staff on planning, zoning, subdivision, development, housing, environmental, and land-use matters.
(2) Provide legal advice regarding Planning and Zoning Law, the Subdivision Map Act, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), housing laws, development agreements, conditional use permits, variances, appeals, nonconforming uses, and related local land-use procedures.
(3) Review land-use conditions, findings, notices, administrative records, development approvals, denials, appeals, and settlement documents.
(4) Assist with legal strategy for major City initiatives, intergovernmental matters, housing programs, and community development projects.

F. Labor, Employment, and Personnel Matters
(1) Provide legal advice concerning public-sector labor and employment matters, including personnel rules, discipline, investigations, grievances, meet-and-confer obligations, labor negotiations, employee leave issues, workplace policies, wage and hour issues, disability accommodation, and related matters.
(2) Draft and review employment agreements, separation agreements, personnel policies, disciplinary notices, investigation protocols, grievance responses, and labor-related correspondence.
(3) Represent or assist the City in administrative proceedings, mediations, arbitrations, and litigation related to personnel and labor matters when requested.

G. Police, Public Safety, and Sensitive Records
(1) Provide legal advice regarding public safety operations, police department issues, peace officer-related employment and disciplinary matters, investigations, subpoenas, 6 Pitchess-related matters, public safety records, and other sensitive law enforcement issues.
(2) Advise on records disclosure, privacy, confidentiality, privileges, retention, subpoenas, administrative investigations, and interagency coordination. (3) Coordinate with the City Manager, Police Department leadership or contracted law enforcement representatives, risk management staff, and outside counsel as needed.

H. Public Records Act, Brown Act, Ethics, and Conflicts (1) Advise on the Ralph M. Brown Act, California Public Records Act, Political Reform Act, Government Code section 1090, common law conflicts of interest, due process, incompatible offices, gift rules, campaign-related restrictions, and other public ethics laws.
(2) Review Public Records Act responses and exemptions, assist with complex or sensitive record requests, and advise on litigation risks arising from disclosure disputes. (3) Provide training to elected officials, commissioners, officers, employees, and staff on governance, ethics, conflicts, open meetings, records, and other topics as requested.

I. Litigation, Claims, Risk Management, and Outside Counsel Coordination (1) Advise the City on claims, subpoenas, threatened litigation, settlement strategy, litigation risk, preservation obligations, and dispute resolution. (2) Coordinate with the City's risk management personnel, third-party administrator, insurers, joint powers authorities, and outside counsel. (3) Assist the City Manager and City Council in assigning, monitoring, and evaluating litigation matters handled by outside counsel or special counsel. (4) Represent the City in litigation, administrative proceedings, writ proceedings, appeals, or other disputes when requested and when the matter is within the selected Proposer's expertise and capacity.
(5) Provide monthly status reports, or other reports requested by the City, describing active legal matters, deadlines, significant developments, budget impacts, and recommended next steps.

J. Special Legal Services
The selected Proposer may be asked to provide special legal services on an as-needed basis, subject to City authorization. Special services may include litigation, appellate matters, public financing, land-use litigation, CEQA matters, labor arbitration, complex public works disputes, bond or assessment matters, housing matters, telecommunications, franchising, election matters, tax and fee matters, and other specialized assignments. The City retains the right to retain separate counsel for any special service or matter.

K. Services Not Included Unless Expressly Assigned
This RFP is for City Attorney legal services. Routine code enforcement prosecution, criminal prosecution, and other specialized prosecutorial services are not included unless expressly assigned by the City in writing. The City may continue to contract separately for code enforcement, prosecution, or other special counsel services. 7 L. Minimum Required Qualifications
(1) Active membership in good standing with the State Bar of California for all attorneys proposed to provide legal services.
(2) Substantial experience representing California cities or other California public agencies. (3) Demonstrated knowledge of municipal law, general law city governance, public meetings, public records, conflicts of interest, public contracting, land use, public employment, public safety issues, litigation management, and risk management. (4) Demonstrated reputation for integrity, reliability, responsiveness, sound judgment, and professional competence.
(5) Ability to maintain all required insurance coverage and comply with the City's conflict, confidentiality, public records, and contracting requirements.

3. PROPOSAL PROCESS
A. Submittal Timeline
Milestone Date / Time
RFP Issued May 19, 2026
Deadline for Questions May 26, 2026, 5:00 p.m.

Responses to Questions / Addendum
Issued
May 28, 2026
Proposal Submission Deadline June 18, 2026, 5:00 p.m.

Staff Review of Proposals June 18, 2026
Interviews / Presentations, if requested Week of June 22nd City Council Consideration / Award July 14, 2026
Anticipated Start of Services August 1, 2026
The City reserves the right to modify any date in the submittal timeline by addendum or other written notice.

B. Submission Requirements
Proposer is responsible for preparing a clear, complete, well-organized, and concise proposal. The proposal must respond to all requirements of this RFP and must be submitted in the required format.
- Proposals must be received by June 18, 2026 at 5:00pm - Submissions shall be delivered electronically via the City’s Planet Bids Portal:
https://vendors.planetbids.com/portal/72415/portal-home - Late submissions may not be considered
- A completed Certification Statement and Signature Sheet (Appendix A). - A completed California Levine Act Statement (Appendix B). - Any exceptions to the City's agreement or insurance requirements, clearly identified in the proposal.

C. Proposal Format Guidelines
Proposals shall be typed, page-numbered, and organized in the sequence below. The 8 proposal should be straightforward and concise. Technical terms should be explained in plain language where necessary. The narrative portion of the proposal shall not exceed thirty-five (35) pages, excluding table of contents, resumes, required forms, cost proposal, and sample work product.

1. Cover Letter of Transmittal
- Identify the Proposer with legal name, entity type, principal address, local office address, telephone number, email address, and primary contact person. - State that the Proposer has reviewed the RFP, is familiar with the required services, and is capable of performing the services described.
- Identify the proposed City Attorney and proposed Deputy City Attorney or alternate attorney(s).
- Acknowledge receipt of all addenda, if any.
- State that the proposal and proposed pricing will remain valid for at least one hundred twenty (120) days after the proposal submission deadline. - Be signed by an authorized representative with authority to bind the Proposer.

2. Proposal Summary
- Summarize the key features, distinguishing strengths, and principal advantages of the proposal.
- Explain why the Proposer is qualified to serve as City Attorney for the City of Huntington Park.
- Describe the Proposer's understanding of the City Attorney role and the City's need for responsive, practical municipal legal services.

3. Firm Profile and Resources
- Provide the official name, address, entity type, ownership structure, and year established.
- Describe the firm's history, size, financial stability, municipal client base, office locations, and resources.
- Identify the office that would manage the City's work and the office located nearest to Huntington Park.
- Describe attorney, paralegal, clerical, technology, records-management, and administrative support available to serve the City.
- Identify all subcontractors, of counsel attorneys, contract attorneys, or affiliated firms proposed for use, and describe the services they would provide.

4. Qualifications and Experience
- Describe the Proposer's experience representing California cities and other public agencies.
- Describe experience advising city councils, planning commissions, city managers, department heads, and municipal staff.
- Describe experience with Brown Act, Public Records Act, Political Reform Act, Government Code section 1090, public contracting, land use, CEQA, labor and employment, public safety, police records, risk management, claims, litigation, and municipal code updates.
- Describe experience preparing ordinances, resolutions, contracts, staff report legal analyses, legal memoranda, closed-session materials, and training materials. 9 - Identify any recognized municipal law, land use, labor and employment, public safety, public works, or litigation expertise.

5. Proposed Legal Team and Staffing Plan
- Identify the attorney proposed to serve as City Attorney, including resume, bar admission date, years of practice, years of municipal practice, current public agency clients, and role on those matters.
- Identify each proposed Deputy City Attorney, alternate attorney, specialist attorney, paralegal, or staff member expected to work on City matters. - Provide an organizational chart showing responsibilities, reporting structure, and primary points of contact.
- Describe availability for meetings, City Hall office hours, urgent matters, evening meetings, and after-hours contact.
- Describe how conflicts, workload spikes, absences, vacations, emergencies, and specialized issues will be handled.

6. Work Plan and Approach to Legal Services
- Describe the Proposer's approach to providing day-to-day municipal legal services. - Describe the process for agenda review, legal intake, assignment tracking, response times, written advice, status reporting, and communication with City officials and staff. - Describe how the Proposer will proactively advise the City about new laws, litigation trends, regulatory developments, and operational risks. - Describe how the Proposer evaluates litigation risk, settlement options, budget impacts, and cost-benefit considerations.
- Describe cost-control strategies, including staffing by appropriate billing level, use of templates, preventive advice, matter budgets, and reporting. - List any legal services the Proposer does not provide.

7. Client References, Related Experience, and Work Samples - Provide at least three (3) recent municipal or public agency client references for services performed by the designated City Attorney or proposed team within the last five (5) years. Include agency name, contact person, title, telephone number, email address, services provided, dates of service, and the team member(s) involved - Proposers are responsible for notifying references that the City may contact them and for providing any waiver or authorization the reference requires. - Provide up to three (3) representative examples of substantially similar work, such as a redacted legal memorandum, ordinance, resolution, staff report legal analysis, training outline, litigation status report, or governance advisory. Proposers must redact privileged, confidential, or client-identifying information as necessary.

8. Conflicts, Disclosures, and Professional Responsibility - List all public agency clients currently represented by the Proposer and by the proposed City Attorney.
- Identify any actual, potential, or foreseeable conflict of interest, including conflicts under the Political Reform Act, Government Code section 1090, common law conflict principles, the California Rules of Professional Conduct, or any contractual obligations. - Identify the proposed method for resolving any conflict, including whether informed written consent would be required and whether the Proposer believes the conflict is waivable.
10 - Identify all situations within the last ten (10) years in which the Proposer or proposed legal team represented a party adverse to a public entity in litigation, administrative proceedings, negotiations, or other material disputes.
- Identify any pending or concluded malpractice claim, lawsuit, fee dispute, disciplinary matter, State Bar proceeding, or Fair Political Practices Commission enforcement matter involving the firm or any proposed team member within the last ten (10) years, and explain the outcome.
- Identify any City Attorney, general counsel, or public agency contract terminated within the last five (5) years before its scheduled expiration and explain the circumstances. - Disclose any past or current business, financial, campaign, personal, or family relationship with any current Huntington Park elected official, appointed official, employee, consultant, or family member of such person.
- Identify whether the Proposer, any officer, partner, shareholder, member, or employee with a proprietary interest has ever been disqualified, removed, debarred, or otherwise prevented from bidding on or completing a federal, state, or local government contract because of a violation of law, regulation, or ethical standard. - Complete and submit the Political Contribution, PAC Participation, and Levine Act Disclosure Statement attached as Appendix B. The disclosure must identify political contributions, PAC participation, independent expenditures, fundraising activity, bundled contributions, behest payments, sponsorships, or other campaign-related activity involving the Proposer, its principals, officers, attorneys proposed for City work, employees acting on behalf of the Proposer, agents, consultants, subcontractors, or affiliated entities, to the extent such activity relates to any City of Huntington Park elected official, candidate for City office, City-controlled committee, City ballot measure, or other City official who may participate in or influence any City action concerning this RFP or any resulting contract.

9. Cost Proposal
The cost proposal must be submitted separately from the service proposal. The cost proposal must include all proposed compensation, billing, and reimbursement terms, including:
- Hourly rates for all attorneys, paralegals, law clerks, and other personnel who may work on City matters.
- Any proposed monthly retainer, flat fee, blended rate, or alternative fee arrangement. - A clear list of services included in any monthly retainer and services excluded from the retainer.
- Rates for litigation, special matters, hearings, investigations, training, and attendance at meetings.
- Billing increments, minimum charges, travel-time policies, research charges, document charges, administrative charges, and all reimbursable-cost policies. - Proposed annual rate escalation, if any, and any proposed limits on increases. - Cost-control strategies and proposed reporting for monthly legal spending. - A completed Cost Proposal Worksheet in substantially the form attached as ‘Appendix C’.

10. Exceptions to RFP, Agreement, or Insurance Requirements Proposer must clearly identify any exception to this RFP, the anticipated professional services agreement, insurance requirements, indemnity provisions, confidentiality 11 requirements, or any other City requirement. Failure to identify an exception may be deemed acceptance of the requirement. The City may reject any proposal that contains exceptions the City determines are material or unacceptable.

4. SELECTION CRITERIA
Proposals will be evaluated based on the factors below. The City reserves the right to consider any other factor it determines which is relevant to the City's best interest.

Criteria Approximate
Weight
Experience and Qualifications: demonstrated municipal law expertise; experience representing California cities; qualifications of proposed City Attorney, deputies, and specialists; experience with governance, land use, public contracting, employment, public safety, litigation, and risk management.
30%
Approach to Legal Services and Responsiveness: understanding of City needs; proposed work plan; communication practices; agenda review; preventive legal advice; workload capacity; availability for meetings, urgent matters, and City Hall office hours.
30%
Cost Proposal and Cost Control: reasonableness, clarity, and completeness of rates and fee structure; retainer value; reimbursable costs; budget controls; ability to provide high-quality services efficiently.
20%
References, Past Performance, and Reputation: municipal references; record of meeting deadlines and budgets; judgment, integrity, reliability, quality of written work, and client satisfaction. 10%
Conflicts, Disclosures, Local Presence, and Transition: absence or manageability of conflicts; proximity and availability; transition plan; ability to integrate with City operations.
10%

5. SELECTION PROCESS
- City staff will review proposals for responsiveness and may evaluate proposals using the criteria in this RFP.
- The City may request clarification, supplemental information, best and final offers, interviews, presentations, or additional materials from one or more Proposers. - The City may interview all Proposers, only the highest-ranked Proposers, or no Proposers. Interviews would be scheduled for the week of June 22nd. - City staff may conduct reference checks, background checks, public-records searches, State Bar status checks, litigation searches, and other due diligence deemed appropriate by the City.
- The City Council will make the final selection and may award a contract, reject all proposals, negotiate further, retain the existing City Attorney, or take any other action the City Council determines is in the City's best interest. - Selection under this RFP does not guarantee a contract until the professional services agreement is approved and executed by all required parties. 12 6. SUBMISSION DEADLINE
To be considered, proposals must be submitted electronically via the City’s Planet Bids portal no later than 5:00 p.m. on June 17, 2026. Late proposals will not be considered unless the City determines, in its sole discretion, that acceptance is in the City's best interest and permitted by law.
• Proposals shall be submitted electronically via the City’s Planet Bids Portal:
https://vendors.planetbids.com/portal/72415/portal-home • Late submissions may not be considered
Eduardo Sarmiento, City Clerk
City of Huntington Park
6550 Miles Avenue
Huntington Park, CA 90255

7. INQUIRIES AND NO CONTACT POLICY
Questions regarding this RFP must be submitted in writing by email to Stephany Santin, Assistant City Manager, at [email protected] no later than 5:00 p.m. on May 25, 2026. The City may publish responses by written addendum via Planet Bids portal. Oral statements, explanations, or interpretations are not binding on the City.

From issuance of this RFP until the City announces a selection or cancels the RFP, Proposers shall not communicate regarding this RFP with any City Council member, commissioner, officer, employee, consultant, or representative other than the City Contact identified in this RFP, unless expressly authorized in writing by the City. Violation of this nocontact policy may result in disqualification.

It is each Proposer's responsibility to check the City's website, bid portal, or other location designated by the City for addenda, clarifications, answers to questions, or changes to this RFP.
8 . ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND RFP TERMS
A. Addenda and Clarifications
The City may modify, clarify, or interpret this RFP by written addendum. Any addendum issued by the City will become part of this RFP. Proposers must acknowledge receipt of all addenda in their proposals. The City is not responsible for any explanation or interpretation not issued by written addendum.

B. Completion of Proposal
Proposals must be complete in all respects. A proposal may be rejected if it is conditional, incomplete, materially nonresponsive, misleading, or contains unauthorized conditions, limitations, or irregularities. A proposal must address each requirement of this RFP, even if the response is "not applicable" or "no exception." C. Proposal Costs
All costs incurred in preparing, submitting, presenting, or revising a proposal are the sole responsibility of the Proposer. The City shall not be liable for any such costs, including 13 costs associated with interviews, travel, protests, clarification requests, or contract negotiations.

D. Public Records
Proposals and other materials submitted in response to this RFP become the property of the City and may be subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act (Government Code section 7920.000 et seq.) and other applicable law. Proposers should not submit materials they do not want disclosed unless they are prepared to defend any claimed exemption.

Any portion of a proposal that the Proposer believes is exempt from disclosure must be clearly marked "CONFIDENTIAL," "PROPRIETARY," or "TRADE SECRET," and must include a specific explanation of the legal basis for the claimed exemption. Blanket designations of an entire proposal as confidential or proprietary may be disregarded and may render a proposal nonresponsive.

If the City is required to defend or respond to any Public Records Act request, subpoena, or legal action seeking disclosure of materials the Proposer marked as confidential, proprietary, or trade secret, the Proposer agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officials, officers, employees, and agents from all costs, expenses, attorney fees, and liability arising from the claimed exemption or opposition to disclosure, to the extent permitted by law.

E. Errors, Omissions, and Ambiguities
If a Proposer discovers any ambiguity, conflict, discrepancy, omission, or error in this RFP, the Proposer must notify the City in writing before the question deadline and request clarification. If a Proposer fails to notify the City of an error known or reasonably discoverable before proposals are due, the Proposer submits its proposal at its own risk and shall not be entitled to additional compensation or relief based on the error or its later correction.

F. Withdrawal or Modification of Proposal
A proposal may be withdrawn or modified before the proposal submission deadline by written request signed by an authorized representative of the Proposer and delivered to the City Contact. Withdrawn proposals may be resubmitted before the deadline if they fully comply with this RFP. Proposals may not be withdrawn, modified, or canceled after the submission deadline except as permitted by the City in writing.

G. Duration of Proposal
Proposal prices, terms, and conditions shall remain firm for at least one hundred twenty (120) days after the proposal submission deadline, unless the City agrees otherwise in writing.

The City may request extensions or best and final offers before award.

H. Rejection of Proposals
The City may reject any or all proposals, any portion of any proposal, or any proposal that the City determines is not in the City's best interest. Grounds for rejection may include, but are not limited to:
- Failure to comply with this RFP.
- Failure to submit a proposal by the deadline or in the required format. - False, misleading, incomplete, or materially inaccurate information. 14 - Material exceptions to City requirements.
- Failure to demonstrate required qualifications or capacity. - Unacceptable conflicts of interest.
- Unauthorized communications or violation of the no-contact policy. - Active litigation or material adversity against the City, if the City determines that the adversity affects the Proposer's ability to serve the City. - Failure to complete, sign, or update the Political Contribution, PAC Participation, and Levine Act Disclosure Statement, or submission of false, misleading, incomplete, or materially inaccurate information concerning political contributions, PAC participation, independent expenditures, fundraising, bundled contributions, behest payments, sponsorships, or other campaign-related activity.

I. Compliance with Laws and Nondiscrimination
The selected Proposer shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulations, ordinances, and orders. The selected Proposer shall not discriminate in employment or in the provision of services on any basis prohibited by law.

J. Independent Contractor
The selected Proposer will serve as an independent contractor. No partner, shareholder, member, attorney, employee, agent, or subcontractor of the selected Proposer shall be deemed an employee of the City by virtue of the professional services agreement.

K. Conflicts of Interest
The selected Proposer must warrant that it has no interest, and will not acquire any interest, that would conflict with performance of City Attorney services. The selected Proposer must comply with applicable conflict-of-interest laws and professional responsibility rules, including Government Code section 1090, the Political Reform Act, common law conflict rules, and the California Rules of Professional Conduct. The City may require additional disclosures or waivers before contract execution or during the term of the agreement.

L. Contract Documents and Order of Precedence
If a contract is awarded, the contract documents shall include the professional services agreement, this RFP and addenda (if any), and the selected Proposer's proposal. In the event of a conflict, the following order of precedence shall apply unless the City and selected Proposer agree otherwise in writing:
(1) Professional Services Agreement.
(2) City addenda, if any.
(3) This RFP.
(4) Selected Proposer's proposal and cost proposal.
15 9. AWARD OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
The successful Proposer will be expected to enter into a professional services agreement with the City. The City may use the form attached as ‘Appendix E’, the City's standard professional services agreement, or another form approved by the City. The final agreement will require approval by the City Council or other City authority as required.

Within ten (10) business days after notice of intent to award, the selected Proposer must provide all documents requested by the City, including insurance certificates and endorsements, W-9, conflict disclosures, and any other documents required for contract approval. Failure to timely provide required documents or execute the agreement may be cause for the City to terminate negotiations and proceed with another Proposer.

No agreement shall be binding on the City until it has been approved and executed by the City and the selected Proposer. The City may terminate negotiations if the City and selected Proposer cannot reach agreement on compensation, scope, insurance, indemnity, conflicts, or other material terms
The successful Proposer, and any subconsultant(s). shall obtain a valid City of Huntington Park Business License on or before their commencement of work.

APPENDIX A

Name of Firm / Proposer
Entity Type
Address
Federal Tax ID No.

Primary Contact / Title
Telephone
Email
Addendum Nos.

Acknowledged
16 Authorized Signatory Name
Authorized Signature
Title
Date

APPENDIX B

POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION, PAC PARTICIPATION, AND CALIFORNIA LEVINE

Proposers are responsible for reviewing and complying with the current law.

2. Anticipated Future Political Contributions
Does the Proposer anticipate, plan, intend, or reasonably expect to make any political contribution of more than $500, individually or in the aggregate, to any City of Huntington Park City Council Member, candidate for City office, City-controlled committee, or other covered City official within twelve (12) months after any City action related to this proposal or any resulting contract?
YES ___ NO ___
If yes, identify the anticipated contributor, recipient, anticipated amount, anticipated date if known, and whether the contribution is expected to be made directly or through any intermediary.
17 3. PAC Participation or Support/Opposition Activity
Within the twenty-four (24) months preceding submission of this proposal, has the Proposer formed, funded, controlled, managed, sponsored, advised, represented, served as an officer or treasurer of, raised funds for, solicited funds for, made payments to, or otherwise participated in any political action committee, independent expenditure committee, candidate committee, ballot measure committee, or other political committee that supported or opposed any City of Huntington Park City Council Member, candidate for City office, City ballot measure, or City-controlled committee?
YES ___ NO ___
If yes, identify the committee, the Proposer’s role, the City official, candidate, measure, or committee supported or opposed, whether the activity was in support or opposition, the dates of participation, and the amount contributed, paid, raised, solicited, or bundled, if any.

Acknowledged: YES ___ NO ___

Company / Proposer Name
Authorized Signatory
Title
Signature
Date

APPENDIX C

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
The selected Proposer shall not commence work until it has provided evidence satisfactory to the City that it has secured all required insurance. The City may modify these requirements before contract execution. Insurance requirements shall not limit the selected Proposer's indemnity, defense, or professional obligations. Please refer to the insurance packet provided as a supplemental attachment to the RFP. (PLEASE NOTE: The sample insurance requirements packet can be found in the documents section of the Planet Bids portal)
Additional Requirements
- Commercial General Liability and Commercial Automobile Liability policies shall name the City of Huntington Park, its elected and appointed officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers as additional insureds for liability arising out of the selected Proposer's services.
- Insurance shall be primary and non-contributory as to the City for covered claims where additional insured status is required.
- Required policies shall include waiver of subrogation in favor of the City where available and applicable, including Workers' Compensation. 19 - Insurers shall be authorized to transact insurance in California and have an A.M. Best rating of A-VII or better, unless otherwise approved by the City. - Certificates of insurance and required endorsements must be provided before commencement of services and upon renewal. The City may request copies of policies or endorsements for review.
- Deductibles and self-insured retentions must be disclosed and are subject to City approval.
- Failure to maintain required insurance may result in suspension of services, withholding of payment, or termination of the agreement.

APPENDIX D

FORM OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
A sample of the professional service agreement has been included as a supplemental attachment and is provided for proposal purposes. The City reserves the right to use this form, the City's standard agreement, or a revised agreement approved by the City.

Proposers must identify any requested exceptions in their proposals. (PLEASE NOTE: The sample professional service agreement can be found in the documents section of the Planet Bids portal)

IMPORTANT DATES
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL RELEASED May 19, 2026
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION DEADLINE: 5:00 PM May 26, 2026
RELEASE OF INFORMATION REQUESTED May 28, 2026
PROPOSAL DUE DATE/SUBMISSION DEADLINE: 5:00 PM June 18, 2026 PROPOSERS INTERVIEWS Week of June 22nd
TENTATIVE AWARD DATE July 14, 2026
APPROXIMATE CONTRACTUAL START DATE August 1, 2026

CITY OF HUNTINGTON PARK
Community Development Department
City Council Agenda Report
September 22, 2026
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
City of Huntington Park
6550 Miles Avenue
Huntington Park, CA 90255
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council:

CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH CARE SOLACE, INC. TO PROVIDE CITYWIDE MENTAL HEALTH CARE COORDINATION THROUGH CALIFORNIA’S OPIOID SETTLEMENT

FUND (OSF)
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL:

1. Approve the professional services agreement with Care Solace, Inc to provide mental health care coordination funded through California’s Opioid Settlement Fund (OSF).

BACKGROUND
California has joined multiple national lawsuits against manufacturers, distributors, and other entities responsible for aiding the opioid epidemic. As a result, the City of Huntington Park has received $278,192.35 from national Opioid Settlement Agreements (OSA). Each state’s share of the funding has been determined by agreement among the states using a formula that considers the impact of the opioid crisis on the state - the number of overdose deaths, the number of residents with Substance Use Disorder (SUD), and the number of opioids prescribed - along with the population of the state.

California jurisdictions receiving OSA allocations must utilize funds for substance use prevention, intervention, harm reduction, treatment, and recovery services in communities.

The settlement strictly prohibits the use of these funds for general government operations, unrelated law enforcement activities, equipment not tied to opioid response, capital projects without a direct connection to opioid remediation, or supplanting existing City funding obligations. The intent of the settlement is to ensure that all funds are directed toward evidence-based strategies that meaningfully address the impacts of the opioid epidemic and support community health and safety.

CARE SOLACE INC- OPIOID SETTLEMENT FUND
August 25, 2026

Page 2 of 3 ends

Huntington Park City CouncilSeptember 22, 2026

Huntington Park City Council
September 22, 2026