74-49
Mission Statement
The mission of the City of Monterey Park is to provide excellent service, foster growth and opportunity, and create a joyous and collaborative environment.
Minutes
Monterey Park City Council
Financing Authority (MPFA)
Housing Authority (MPHA)
Geologic Hazard Abatement District (GHAD)
Successor Agency (SA)
Regular Meeting
February 4, 2026
The City Council, the Financing Authority (MPFA), the Housing Authority (MPHA), the Geologic Hazard Abatement District (GHAD), and the Successor Agency (SA) of the City of Monterey Park held a Regular Meeting of the Council in the Council Chamber, located at 320 West Newmark Avenue in the City of Monterey Park, Wednesday, February 4, 2026, at 6:30 PM.
1. Call to Order
Mayor Yang called the meeting to order at 6:37 p.m.
2. Flag Salute
The Monterey Park Fire Explorers led the Flag Salute. Pledge of Allegiance was presented by Civic Superstar Alex Zhou.
3. Roll Call
City Clerk Maychelle Yee called the roll:
Council Members Present: Henry Lo, Vinh Ngo, Jose Sanchez, Thomas Wong, Elizabeth Yang
Council Members Absent: None.
Also present:
City Treasurer Amy Lee
City Manager Inez Alvarez
City Attorney Karl Berger
Assistant City Manager Diana Garcia
Director of Finance Martha Garcia
Director of Human Resources and Risk Management Christine Tomikawa Director of Community Development Timothy Hou
Director of Recreation and Community Services Robert Aguirre City Librarian Kristin Olivarez
Director of Public Works Shawn Igoe
Police Chief Scott Wiese
Fire Chief Jason Hing
Police Captain Gus Jimenez
Finance Manager Laura Borjon
Fire Marshal Jessica Estrella
Code Enforcement Supervisor Rey Lozano
74-50
February 4, 2026
Principal Management Analyst Rebecca Bojorquez
Deputy City Clerk Cindy Trang
Virtually present: None.
4. Telecommunications Announcement, if requested
None.
5. Agenda Revisions and Additions
City Manager Alvarez requested to hear Agenda Item No. 8.A. before Public Communications and to hear Agenda Item No. 9.A. before Staff Communications.
6. Public Communications
Public Communications were heard after Agenda Item No. 8.A. • Paul Isozaki conveyed his disapproval of data centers, criticized the City Council's decision-making process as he believed public input is necessary before developing large-scale projects, provided his opinion on the City Attorney, emphasized the need to include the community and commented on the Barnes Park pool.
• Edlyn Takahashi, representing the San Gabriel Valley Power-Up Beacon (SGVPUB), advocated for the Barnes Park Pool. She shared her appreciation at the recent Barnes Park Pool Revitalization Community Meeting and provided recommendations for the proposed pool designs that cater to the diving community.
• Aaron, Chair of the Los Angeles Peace and Freedom Party, spoke about the recent United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activity in neighboring cities,
requested the City Council to enforce a ban on
ICE activity in Monterey Park and detailed the Police Department's need to serve and protect the community.
7. Staff Communications
Staff Communications were heard after Agenda Item No. 9.A.
7.A. City Manager's Office
Assistant City Manager Garcia announced the City's partnership with Chinatown Service Center (CSC) to strengthen the immigrant support services in the City. She emphasized their goal to increase accessible information/services, improve immigrant health/wellness and provide direct assistance to immigrant families and seniors.
74-51
February 4, 2026
7.B. Fire Department
Code Enforcement Supervisor Lozano shared a PowerPoint presentation describing the divisions newly found partnership with CSC to develop equitable pathways to voluntary compliance for specific residents that are experiencing language barriers and behavioral health barriers. He articulated their goals for public safety, access to services and community engagement.
7.C. Public Works
Public Works Director Shawn Igoe presented a PowerPoint presentation announcing the Community Transportation Survey, the dates for the Monthly Compost Giveaway and the WARE Disposal Customer Survey.
7.D. Library
City Librarian Olivarez showed a PowerPoint presentation detailing the previous events hosted by the library during the month of January and presented the upcoming events occurring in February which include: Happily Ever After, a romance author panel; Lunar New Year Craft Storytime; a Lunar New Year Plushie Workshop and the registration dates for the English as a second language classes for the spring semester. She announced the Library's celebration of Black History Month with the opportunity to stream Canopy and participate in program
ming such as the Take and Make Art Class
and the Soul Food Program.
7.E. Recreation and Community Services
Director of Recreation and Community Services Aguirre displayed a PowerPoint presentation highlighting the success of the 2026 Lunar New Year Festival and thanked the residents and City staff for their collaboration. He spoke about the recent resurfacing of the Barnes Park tennis and pickleball courts and their
plan to resurface the rest of the parks. He provided an update on the Barnes Park Pool Revitalization Survey and encouraged the community to provide input on the conceptual designs for the proposed pool and announced the Monterey Park Night at the Clippers Game Event where they will be celebrating Japanese Heritage Night.
74-52
February 4, 2026
Extension of Council Meeting
Action Taken: The City Council extended the Council Meeting to 1:00 a.m.
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Ngo and seconded by Council Member Wong, motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Council Members: Henry Lo, Vinh Ngo, Jose Sanchez, Thomas Wong, Elizabeth Yang
Noes: Council Members: None
Absent: Council Members: None
Abstain: Council Members: None
Recusal: Council Members: None
Recess and Reconvened
The City Council recessed at 12:30 a.m. and reconvened with all Council Members present at 12:37 a.m.
8. Presentation
8.A. Recognition of 2025 Congressional App Challenge Third Place Winners:
Drexel Ngo, Alina Ramos, Evan Lau and Athicha Chanpradub This Agenda Item was heard after Agenda Additions and Deletions.
The third-place winners of the 2025 Congressional App Challenge, Drexel Ngo, Alina Ramos, Evan Lau and Athicha Chanpradub, voiced their appreciation to the City Council, their teachers, and families for their long- time
support of their project. The City Council presented the team with certificates signifying their achievement and showcased a video about their app, EyeMax.
9. Old Business
9.A. Consideration and possible action to direct the City Manager and City Attorney to prepare a ballot proposition to prohibit data centers citywide and allow housing development within Saturn Park
This Agenda Item was heard after Public Communications.
On January 21, 2026, the City Council unanimously adopted a 45-day moratorium prohibiting the further processing or acceptance of data center applications. It is my (Council Member Ngo) understanding that a public hearing to consider extending the moratorium will be scheduled for March 4, 2026.
74-53
February 4, 2026
While our direction to the City Manager and City Attorney on January 21st was to draft new zoning regulations for City Council consideration which would implement the intent of the moratorium, i.e., a complete ban of data centers within the City, it seems that this is not enough. A voter- approved ban on data
centers seems like the only way to ensure that the City is protected from future data center developments.
Additionally, the Saturn Park Innovation/Technology Zone (“SPITZ”) already allows for mixed use and live/work land uses (Ordinance No. 2270, adopted September 17, 2025). When the City Council added these land uses to the SPITZ, we generally agreed that a r
esidential component is an important facet
of the Saturn Park area. After hearing public comment on January 21st, which heavily favored housing in this area, I think we need more residential options.
Accordingly, I ask that the City Council join me in directing the City Manager and City Attorney to draft a ballot proposition that would (1) ban all data centers within the City; and (2) expand the residential options within Saturn Park beyond mixed use and live/work. On March 4
th, we should consider all
residential oriented land uses that make sense in the Saturn Park area.
To give the City Manager and City Attorney additional time to draft a ballot proposition for consideration, I will be asking the City Council on March 4 th to
extend the moratorium until we can discuss whether City Council enacted zoning regulations or a ballot proposition approved by voters make the most sense to protect public health and safety. Since municipal elections are scheduled for November 2026, I will be asking the City Council in March to extend the moratorium adopted on January 21
st to at least January 2027.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that the City Council consider:
1. Directing the City Manager and City Attorney to draft a ballot proposition for City Council consideration at the March 4, 2026 City Council Meeting; and
2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.
Public Speakers:
Mayor Yang announced the speakers in groups of five.
• Vincent Chang expressed his neutralism towards the development of a data center, shared his disappointment with the division between the City and the residents, and wished to see a fair system between the developer and the residents.
74-54
February 4, 2026
• Dora Leung submitted a speaker card but did not speak.
• Amy Smith detailed the idea of setting standards for the future of Citywide development and requested not to let the opportunity go to waste.
• Marc Gonzalez, a resident, conveyed his concerns about the potential negative effects a data center could have on the health of his family.
• Amy, a resident, talked about her opposition to the idea of implementing a ballot measure regarding the prohibition of data centers and provided information on the potential negative effects data centers could bring to a residential area.
• Megan, a resident, elaborated on her disappointment and disapproval of a potential data center in Monterey Park.
• Carrie, a resident, commented on the number of Monterey Park residents who were uninformed about the proposed 1977 Saturn data center project. She recommended the topic be on a future agenda to allow further discussion and asked the City Council to consider the appeal of Ordinance 2253.
• Skywalker, a resident, expressed his frustrations regarding the division between the residents of Monterey Park and the union workers and explained the potential health risks of data centers.
• Skylar, a resident, alongside his two daughters, spoke about the potential increase in utility bills if a data center is developed. His daughters provided information on the risk of wildlife leaving their habitats due to the loud construction of a data center.
• Maria submitted a speaker card but did not speak as she was not present when her name was called.
• Jeremy submitted a speaker card but did not speak as he was not present when her name was called.
• May, a resident, voiced her opposition to a data center in Monterey Park, as she believed it was incompatible with the City and talked about the alleged lack of communication received between the City and the residents.
74-55
February 4, 2026
• Joy Rowe talked about her educational background in public health and the potential health risks data centers bring to a community and how it will affect their quality of life.
• Jesse Damon, a resident, shared his appreciation to the City Council for their willingness to listen to the residents’ concerns and recommended different avenues the City can take to protect the health and wellness of the community. He requested local town hall meetings to discuss the language of what the proposed ballot measure would look like, and commented on the Applicant's alleged lack of communication with the residents regarding the proposed data center project on 1977 Saturn St.
• Anne Kageyama expressed confusion about the topic of housing in the proposed ballot measure. She articulated her opinion on the temporary jobs the union workers would receive if a data center was built and provided business recommendations that could bring in revenue for the City.
• Jim Pugh, from the Sheppard Law Firm, representing the Applicant, articulated his disapproval of the proposed ballot measure and the ban on data centers in the City. He commented on the Applicant's efforts to address the resident's concerns and potential litigation risk with the City. He provided written correspondence.
• Lauren submitted a speaker card but was not present when her name was called.
• Mark Rudholm, a resident, provided his experience working in data centers, believed a ballot measure was premature and a missed opportunity for future revenue for the City.
• Cindy Alvarado, a resident, commented on her love for Monterey Park and expressed her opposition towards zone changes that do not benefit the quality of life of the residents.
• Jessica Jy, a resident representing an extended network of residents throughout the City, conveyed her disapproval of the development of a data center and would like to support small business in the City.
74-56
February 4, 2026
• Dave Jones, resident, thanked Mayor Yang, Council Member Sanchez and Council Member Ngo for their efforts to communicate to the public regarding the proposed data center project on 1977 Saturn Street. He expressed his opposition to data centers and to the concept of a ballot measure, as he believed it provides the opportunity for the applicant to sway the votes in their favor.
• Andres Abarca articulated his viewpoint on the potential harm data centers could bring to the community and requested to have the ballot measure represent the desires of the residents.
• Valerie Lizarraga submitted a speaker card but was not present when her name was called.
• Frida I, a resident, conveyed her experience and support of unions, but spoke in opposition to the concept of data centers in Monterey Park.
She claimed data centers are detrimental to the environment, and the potential project will only bring in temporary jobs.
• Christine Rodriguez, a resident, talked about her disapproval of a data center and the proposed ballot measure, as she believed it brings the developer the opportunity to sway the votes in their favor. She reminded the City Council of their actions reflecting the residents' viewpoint of them.
• Paul Lange, a resident and union member, opposed the idea of a data center, as he believed it would cause irreparable harm to the environment. He showed his respect to the union members and their attempts to obtain jobs but claimed there would be no long-term profits if the project was developed.
• Gordon Huang, a resident, spoke about his respect for the advancement of technology but on ethical grounds. He provided different options for revenue and growth in Monterey Park.
• Jazmin Gonzalez reiterated the residents' opposition towards the Applicant and his project and not the union workers.
• Juan De Lara provided his opinion on data centers and spoke of different alternatives that could improve the development of a data center in Monterey Park.
• Jeffrey Munoz conveyed his opposition to data centers.
74-57
February 4, 2026
• Tommy Favaee representing the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local 11, spoke in opposition to the ballot measure as he believed it would prevent the production of jobs for the community.
He commented on the opportunity to work and grow in the community of Monterey Park.
• Christina Johnyn submitted a speaker card but was not present when her name was called.
• Diana Limon, representing IBEW Local 11, opposed the proposed ballot measure and urged the City Council to conduct an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to determine the best decision for the City.
• Jorge Hernandez, representing IBEW Local 11, requested an EIR to provide facts about the project before the City Council decides on the future of the project.
• Emily Chu, a resident, thanked the City Council for hearing the community and commented on the City Council's initial action to approve the development of a data center until massive public input was received. She claimed it has caused a lack of trust between the residents and the City Council and requested the City Council to approach the data center ban with accountability and transparency.
• Charlie Ly, a resident, described the City Council as fighters and requested them to fight, listen and serve the people.
• Evelyn Moreno shared her opposition to the idea of data centers and opposed the added language of housing in the proposed ballot measure. She believed the subject of data centers should be a stand- alone option for the residents to vote on.
• Brenda Campos voiced her opinion against the moratorium. She claimed it would prevent union-based families the affordability to live.
• Madeline Ocampo asked the City Council to explore multiple options to ban data centers as they are potentially detrimental to public health and only benefit the corporations funding their development.
• Deb Simone, a resident, vocalized her hesitance towards a ballot measure and instead inquired about the repeal of Ordinance No. 2253.
She suggested developing projects that are beneficial to the community.
74-58
February 4, 2026
• Jackie Waltman, representing IBEW Local 11, commented on the strong opinions presented to the City Council and recommended an EIR before a final decision is made.
• Fabian Nuñez, representing the Applicant of the proposed 1977 Saturn St data center project, presented to the City Council flyers created to educate the public on their project. He articulated his respect for those in opposition to the project, voiced his opposition to the proposed ballot measure, and talked about the necessity of an EIR to allow debate and discussion.
• Tommy Zelinski, representing IBEW Local 11, opposed the proposed ballot measure and moratorium since the Applicant has agreed to conduct an EIR. He requested the Council to look at the facts before deciding the future of the project.
• Hrag Balian, a resident, commented on the petition that was launched a few weeks ago and provided an update on the number of signatures they have received since then. He spoke in support of the ballot, raised concerns regarding the language about housing, reiterated the idea of transparency within the City Council and recommended the appeal of Ordinance 2253.
• Yvonne Wong, a resident, shared her disappointment upon learning about the proposed data center project through a flyer in Montebello.
She believed there was alleged favoritism to the Applicant from the City Council and requested the City Council to think about the needs of the residents.
• Bosco Woo questioned whether the City Council trusted the Applicant more than the residents. He agreed there would be temporary jobs for the union, but it would lead to long-term effects on the community and requested a ban on data centers entirely.
• Nate Brotton submitted a speaker card but was not present when his name was called.
• Robert Castro, a resident, voiced his opposition to the development of a data center in the City as he is worried about the future children who will grow up in Monterey Park and reiterated the idea of developing projects in the City that would benefit the union workers.
74-59
February 4, 2026
• Rolan Gutierrez representing Sprinkler Fitters U.A. Local 709, spoke in support of the development of data centers, and understood the concerns residents have regarding the development of the project. He emphasized the professionalism his union workers bring to ensure craftsmanship and integrity are implemented
during the development of
a project.
• Eduardo Lemus, a resident, asked the City Council to consider the future of technology in the City and to take the necessary steps to ensure it is done efficiently.
• Claudia Vera explained the City’s need to move towards progress that would provide opportunities for the Hispanic community.
• David Hansen spoke about democracy and shared his appreciation for the debates shown at the meeting. He claimed the anger felt by the community is justified and reiterated the idea of educating the community to ensure accurate information is being presented about data centers.
• Chris Perry, Superintendent for Clune Construction Company, shared his experience working in data centers, showed his support towards an EIR in opposition to a ban and commented on the need to respect others when stating their opinion to the City Council.
• Eleanor Lee submitted a speaker card but was not present when her name was called.
• Christa Lee submitted a speaker card but was not present when her name was called.
• Randye Kaye, a resident, reiterated the community’s opposition to a data center in Monterey Park and stated the importance of having an independent engineering firm perform the EIR to prevent biased opinions on the proposed 1977 Saturn data center project. She spoke about her experience as an immigrant in Monterey Park and advocacy for the community.
• Jeremy, member of Amazon Teamsters, shared his opinion on the union workers’ support towards data centers and the suggested developing a project that has nothing to do with data centers.
• Anna Yeh reiterated her opinion of being pro-business but anti data center.
74-60
February 4, 2026
• Susan Halfbreed submitted a speaker card but was not present when her name was called.
• Rene Palacios, representing the Ironworkers Local 433 Union, detailed the benefits projects such as the data center provide to the local workforce as it provides opportunities for people and brings a civic and economic boost to the City.
• Tyler Byrd, representing Ironworkers 433 Union, elaborated on the idea of developing a good project with qualified standards to ensure its completion.
• Max Reid, a resident, articulated his opinion on the Applicant and their alleged goal to harm the City.
• Clotilde Jang submitted a speaker card but was not present when her name was called.
• Kevin Crow submitted a speaker card but was not present when his name was called.
• Joel Greenfield submitted a speaker card but was not present when her name was called.
• Alice Li submitted a speaker card but was not present when her name was called.
• Laziza Lambert, in association with Actum LLC and the Applicant, spoke about their outreaching efforts to the community and requested an EIR to allow concrete facts to be presented for the City Council’s decision.
• Xochitl Medrano, Political Coordinator of the District Council of Ironworkers, shared her youth experience in the San Gabriel Valley and detailed the importance of implementing safety regulations to ensure the successful development of a data center.
• Veto Basulto, representative of Anchor Church, claimed data centers are powerful tools for schools, jobs and worldwide communication.
• Kira Hum, a resident, asked the City Council to listen to the concerns of the residents for the City Council decisions will affect the families in the City.
74-61
February 4, 2026
• Nicole Garaldon submitted a speaker card but was not present when her name was called.
• Zach Strasters acknowledged the concerns presented by the residents and requested an EIR as it would provide concrete facts in the decision-making process for the City Council.
• Godfrey Wachira, representing Coalition for Responsible Equitable Economic Development Los Angeles (CREED LA), requested an EIR as he believed it is necessary for the City Council's consideration of the proposed 1977 Saturn data center project.
• Roxana Farahani, resident, articulated her opinion on the Applicant and Actum LLC, claiming they do not have the resident's best interests in mind and urged the community to remain strong and diligent in their advocacy against data centers.
• Harrison Kwok, a resident, spoke about the residents' advocacy during the City Council meetings and claimed the City Council lacked the leadership needed to ban data centers entirely.
• George Bocanegra, representing the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America union in Los Angeles County, talked about the passion the residents have exuded about data centers. He showed his support to develop a data center and his opposition to the proposed ballot measure as he believed banning potential development would hurt the construction industry and economic growth of the City.
• Bryan Mercke, a resident, voiced his approval of the proposed ballot measure, appraised the implementation of housing, allowing the City to be more aligned with the State’s regulations.
• Yun talked about Actum LLC's collaboration with the Applicant, and their alleged attempts to shape a narrative to minimize community resistance. He claimed the residents deserve transparency, and there must be a more resident-friendly solution to increase revenue for the City.
• Felicia Marquez thanked the City Council for staying late with the community to hear their concerns and commented on the burden the State has given to local governments in implementing regulations on data centers. She believed there is no need for an EIR as the evidence and findings of the community are sufficient and announced her advocation for her fellow residents.
74-62
February 4, 2026
• Teresa read an excerpt taken from January 21, 2026, City Council meeting video, conveyed her opinion about the City Council's lack of accountability, the potential consequences the City will have if a data center was developed and presented the idea of implementing housing for it will create long-lasting jobs and stability in the community.
• Bryant Phan, a resident, thanked Council Member Sanchez's stance on banning data centers. He believed there are plenty of projects the unions could work on that do not have to be a data center.
• Samuel articulated his experience of moving to Monterey Park as an immigrant and stated he would not have moved to Monterey Park had he known a potential data center would be built.
• Steven Kung voiced his opinion on the Applicant and Actum LLC and advocated for the residents’ desire to ban data centers.
• Richard Chou’s name was announced earlier in the meeting, but he spoke near the end. He provided his opinion on the residents' comments about the union workers and spoke about his own experience as a union worker and growing up as a Monterey Park resident.
• Casey Wong’s name was announced earlier in the meeting but spoke near the end. She provided her opinion about the speakers that were in favor of developing a data center in Monterey Park and commented on the City Council’s ability to repeal Ordinance No. 2253. • The City Clerk’s Office received and filed written communications regarding Agenda Item No. 9.A. from Betty Hang, Janice, Andrew Liu, Bill Torbey, Kelsey Ko, Shanna Chau, Christopher Bao, Liane Tiet, Maggie K. Lee, Betsy Storm, Ashley Sere, Alex Arinsberg, Jimmy Chao, Georgianna Chan, Kai Knight, Stephen Vicuna, Carol Clemente,
Samantha Vizcaino, Terrance Sy, Natalie Alvarado, Harold Tom, Karen T., Kysa Hayashi, Jacquelin Sun, Michelle Tom, Clotilde Jang, Carol Ono, Stella Dominguez, Malena Hoyos, Seleste Delgado, Isela Velazquez, Steven J. Kung, Alex Ventura, Michael Chan, Trinity Pike, Joni L Meyers, Joyce Vega, Yvette Morales, Phoi Tran Yan, Irene Ikeda, Meredith Alling, Cindy Teng, Deborah Bona, Katherine Yu, Maureen Krause, Grace Cavazos, Jenny Yang, Sharon Situ, Dorothy Wang, George and Jan Nishida, Victoria Mevs-Lee, Annie Chuong, Samantha Wong, Kevin Diep, Bosco Woo, Daniela Cruz, Bosco, Janice Yee, Kaitlin Neal, Anne Liu, Taige Hao, Mark Shinohara, Kevin Ma, Kevin, Sofia Ruiz, Bina Takeuchi, Yennefer, Lauren Shen, Jim H. Dao, Ben Wong and Phuong Troung, Alice, Morgan Soloski, Angie Cung, Queenie Y., Brenda Martin Del Campo, Christine Huynh, Paul Minh 74-63
February 4, 2026
Tran, Cheryl Tay, Gabbie Metheny, Joyce Truong, Jared Kuchinsky, Fernando and Leticia Flores, Caitlin Torres, Sarah Shultz, Ryan Cheung, Alexandria Alger, Roger Lin, Matthew Huang, Leslie Yick, Alex Lung, Felicity Hall, Debbie Carlos, Chadwick Arita, Victoria Wong, Christopher Lam and James Pugh.
Extension of Council Meeting
Action Taken: The City Council extended the Council Meeting to 12:00 a.m.
Motion: Moved by Council Member Ngo and seconded by Council Member Wong, the motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Council Members:
Henry Lo, Vinh Ngo, Jose Sanchez, Thomas Wong,
Elizabeth Yang
Noes: Council Members: None
Absent: Council Members: None
Abstain: Council Members: None
Recusal: Council Members: None
Public Speakers, continued:
• Vicente Ocampo, a resident, shared his opinion about the union allegedly becoming pawns for the Applicant and claimed the long-term consequences would affect the community greater than the benefits.
• Andrew Yip, organizer for the San Gabriel Valley Progressive Action, commented on the organization's goal to provide community defense and announced their plan to bring awareness to the residents about data centers.
• Margaret Leung talked about the passion she has seen from the youth who are advocating for a ban on data centers and voiced her frustrations with the City Council and the way business is conducted in the City.
• Aurora Mireles, a resident, conveyed her viewpoint on the amount of positivity shown by the community and organizers, and stated there is fear from the residents due to information allegedly provided by Actum LLC and the Applicant.
• Meredith Alling commented on the lack of respect between the residents and the union members speaking and advocated for the idea of more jobs for projects that will benefit the City.
74-64
February 4, 2026
Discussion: Council Member Ngo provided an overview of the proposed staff report addressing the recent discussion amongst community members about their concerns regarding data centers in the City.
The City Council ensued in a discussion about the consideration of drafting a ballot proposition regarding data centers and the opportunity to have staff research other options for consideration.
Extension of Council Meeting
Action Taken: The City Council extended the meeting to 12:30 a.m.
Motion: Moved by Council Member Wong and seconded by Council Member Sanchez, motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Council Members: Henry Lo, Vinh Ngo, Jose Sanchez, Thomas Wong, Elizabeth Yang
Noes: Council Members: None
Absent: Council Members: None
Abstain: Council Members: None
Recusal: Council Members: None
Action Taken: The City Council approved the recommendation and directed staff to explore different options to prohibit data centers citywide for the City Council's consideration and to collect input from community members.
Motion: Moved by Council Member Wong and seconded by Council Member Sanchez, motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Council Members:
Henry Lo, Vinh Ngo, Jose Sanchez, Thomas Wong,
Elizabeth Yang
Noes: Council Members: None
Absent: Council Members: None
Abstain: Council Members: None
Recusal: Council Members: None
74-65
February 4, 2026
10. Consent Calendar
This item was heard after Staff Communications.
All items under the Consent Calendar are considered by the City Council to be routine and will be enacted by one motion. Specific items may be removed from the Consent Calendar at the request of any member of the City Council for separate consideration.
Action Taken: The City Council approved Agenda Item No. 10.A., 10.B., 10.C.,
10.D., 10.E., 10.F., and 10.G. reading resolutions and ordinances by title only and waiving further reading thereof. Mayor Yang declared a potential Conflict of Interest on Agenda Item No. 10.F., recused herself and did not vote on the item.
Motion: Moved by Council Member Ngo and seconded by Council Member Wong, motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Council Members: Henry Lo, Vinh Ngo, Jose Sanchez, Thomas Wong, Elizabeth Yang
Noes: Council Members: None
Absent: Council Members: None
Abstain: Council Members: None
Recusal: Council Members: Elizabeth Yang for Agenda Item No. 10.F.
10.A. Minutes
The minutes are a record of the official actions taken at the City Council meeting.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that the City Council consider:
1. Approving the minutes from the special meeting of December 17, 2025 and the regular meeting of December 17, 2025; and
2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.
Action Taken: The City Council approved the recommendation, on Consent Calendar.
10.B. Monthly Investment Report
As of December 31, 2025, invested funds for the City of Monterey Park total $79,773,412.67.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that the City Council consider:
1. Receiving and filing the monthly investment report; and 74-66
February 4, 2026
2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.
Action Taken: The City Council received and filed the report, on Consent Calendar.
10.C. Approve locations for a future mural celebrating the United States Semiquincentennial at Barnes Park and a mural honoring the San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, Gabrieleno/Tongva, at Sierra Vista Park.
The City Council has expressed interest in increasing public art in the City of Monterey Park. In an effort to expand access to art throughout the City, the Director of Recreation & Community Services is proposing two sites for future murals:
• Barnes Park - In celebration of the United States of America’s 250 years of independence, the Director is proposing the commission of a mural on the exterior wall of the Barnes Park Gymnasium facing McPherrin Avenue. The Director will work with a local artist to develop a design that honors the nation and creates a destination for residents and visitors alike. The design will be reviewed by the Community Participation Commission, and the final design will be approved by the City Council.
• Sierra Vista Park – The Director is working with the City Engineer to develop a Tongva-themed playground with outdoor fitness equipment.
To enhance this project and beautify the park, a future mural designed by a local Tongva artist is being proposed for a wall facing the playground at the rear of the Sierra Vista Community Center. The City has received a letter of support from Chief Anthony Morales of the Gabrielino Tongva Tribal Council.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that the City Council consider:
1. Approving locations for future murals celebrating the United States Semiquincentennial at Barnes Park and a mural honoring the San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, Gabrielino/Tongva, at Sierra Vista Park; and
2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.
Action Taken: The City Council approved the recommendation, on Consent Calendar.
74-67
February 4, 2026
10.D. Consideration of Sending a Letter of Support on Behalf of Pacific Asian Consortium in Employment as a Sub-Applicant to the California Air Resources Board for their Application for the 2025 Planning and Capacity Building Grant
The Pacific Asian Consortium in Employment (“PACE”) reached out to the City and desires to partner with the City for the 2025 California Air Resources Board (“CARB”) Planning and Building Capacity Grant. This grant seeks to assist communities plan for clean and equitable transportation solutions. Per the grant requirement, because PACE is a community-based organization, they need a sub-applicant to be a local government or tribal government.
Similarly, the grant requires the following: the project budget for planning cannot exceed $500,000 and more than 50% of the Project Community must be in disadvantaged or low-income community census tracts. PACE has identified the City of Monterey Park as a desired partner due to the City’s diverse and large population. PACE has a long history of serving the City of Monterey Park residents and businesses through small business assistance and lending, residential weatherization, and energy savings and efficiency outreach programs.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that the City Council consider:
1. If desirable, sending a letter of support on behalf of the Pacific Asian Consortium in Employment’s grant application to the California Air Resources Board’s 2025 Planning and Capacity Building Grant; and
2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.
Action Taken: The City Council approved the recommendation, on Consent Calendar.
10.E. Waive further reading and adopt an Ordinance amending Monterey Park Municipal Code Chapters 1.10, 2.56, 4.20, and 4.30 to designate the Planning Commission as the Board of Appeals to consider appeals arising from application of the California Building Standards Code Title 16 to the Monterey Park Municipal Code (“MPMC”) codifies the California Building Standards Code (24 Cal. Code of Regs. § 1.1, et seq.) with local amendments (collectively, the “CBSC”). This Ordinance is proposed in response to Temple of 1001 Buddhas v. City of Fremont (2024) 100 Cal.App.5th 456 to make it plain that the Planning Commission is designated to be the board of appeals for matters arising from enforcement of the CBSC.
74-68
February 4, 2026
The Ordinance was introduced and received first reading at the January 21, 2026 City Council meeting (See Attachment 1 to the staff report). The staff report from January 21, 2026 is attached for reference. Second reading and adoption of this Ordinance is recommended. If adopted, the ordinance will take effect in 30 days.
CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act):
The Ordinance is exempt from additional review under the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., “CEQA”) and the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq., the “CEQA Guidelines”) because it consists only of minor revisions and clarifications to an existing code of construction- related regulations and specification of procedures related thereto and will not have the effect of deleting or substantially changing any regulatory standards or findings required therefor, and therefore does not have the potential to cause significant effects on the environment.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that the City Council consider:
1. Waiving the second reading, and adopting the proposed Ordinance amending Monterey Park Municipal Code Chapters 1.10, 2.56, 4.20, and 4.30 to designate the Planning Commission as the Board of Appeals to consider appeals arising from application of the California Building Standards Code; and
2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.
Action Taken: The City Council waived the second reading and approved and adopted Ordinance No. 2273, on Consent Calendar.
Ordinance No. 2273
An Ordinance amending Monterey Park Municipal Code Chapters 1.10, 2.56,
4.20, and 4.30 to designate the Planning Commission as the Board of Appeals to consider appeals arising from application of the California Building Standards Code
74-69
February 4, 2026
10.F. Annual Weed Abatement Declaration List
The County of Los Angeles Department of Agriculture Commissioner/Weights and Measures (Weed Abatement Division) has submitted the annual Weed Abatement Declaration List to the City. (The Weed Abatement Declaration List (“Declaration List”) is a list of parcels in Monterey Park which have been identified by inspection to contain, or have the potential to contain weeds, brush or other flammable materials sufficient to be considered a fire hazard.) The accompanying Resolution seeks City Council approval to declare the properties on the annual Weed Abatement Declaration List to be public nuisances which may be abated. The authority to remove properties from the Declaration List, upon request and after investigation, will be assigned to the City Manager or designee.
CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act):
The City reviewed the environmental impacts of the proposed Ordinance pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq. “CEQA”) and the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 Cal. Code of Regs. §§ 15000, et seq., the “CEQA Guidelines”). Adoption of this Resolution is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under CEQA Guidelines § 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Resolution may have a significant effect on the environment.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that the City Council consider:
1. Adopting the attached Resolution with the Declaration List; and/or
2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.
Action Taken: Mayor Yang announced a potential Conflict of Interest as her property is listed on the Weed Abatement Declaration List, recused herself and did not participate on the item. The City Council adopted Resolution No. 2026-R3, on Consent Calendar.
Resolution No. 2026-R3
A resolution adopted pursuant to Government Code § 39561 declaring that weeds, brush, rubbish, refuse and dirt upon and in front of certain public and private property in the city are a public nuisance, and declaring its intention to provide for abatement.
74-70
February 4, 2026
10.G. Black History Month Resolution
The attached resolution is being brought forth to the Council for consideration at the request of Council Member Sanchez.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that the City Council consider:
1. Approving the attached resolution; and
2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.
Action Taken: The City Council adopted Resolution No. 2026-R4 on Consent Calendar.
Resolution No. 2026-R4
A resolution of the City Council of the City of Monterey Park, California, declaring and recognizing the month of February 2026 as National Black History Month
11. Public Hearing
None.
12. New Business
None.
13. City Communications (City Council) / Future Agenda Items Council Member Ngo shared his appreciation to the community for their civic engagement during the previous City Council meetings and mentioned his attendance at the Lunar New Year Festival.
Council Member Wong reported his attendance at the Lunar New Year Festival and requested staff to research opportunities to increase the amount of immigration services in partnership with the Chinese Service Center, research language regarding U.S. Immigra
tion and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Free Zones
Ordinances and to provide an update on agenda management and speaker card operations during City Council meetings.
Mayor Pro Tem Lo mentioned his attendance at the Lunar New Year Festival.
Mayor Yang spoke in recognition to the Police Department and Fire Department for their efforts in keeping the community safe at the Lunar New Year Festival and at the City Council Meetings and announced upcoming holidays/celebrations which include: Superbowl Sunday, Lunar New Year and Valentine's Day.
74-71
February 4, 2026
14. Closed Session (if Required; City Attorney to Announce) None.
15. Adjournment
There being no further business for consideration, the meeting was adjourned at 12:42 a.m.
__________________
Maychelle Yee
City Clerk
Approved on April 1, 2026, at the regular City Council Meeting