Monterey Park City Council
March 4, 2026

City Council of Monterey Park
The City Council Acting on Behalf of the Successor Agency of the Former Redevelopment Agency, the Housing Authority, the Monterey Park Financing Authority and the Monterey Park Geologic Hazard Abatement District Agenda

Regular Meeting
Monterey Park City Hall Council Chambers
320 West Newmark Avenue, Monterey Park, CA 91754

Wednesday, March 4, 2026
6:30 PM
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.

Land Acknowledgment
We would like to acknowledge that the land we inhabit today was once known as Tovangaar, the home of the Gabrieleño-Tongva people. We show our respect to the Gabrieleño-Tongva people, as well as all Indigenous people, past, present, and future, and honor their labor as original caretakers of this land. We commit to uplifting the Gabrieleño-Tongva people, invite you to acknowledge the history, and join us in caring for this land.

General Information
Documents related to an Agenda item are available to the public in the City Clerk’s Office located at 320 West Newmark Avenue, Monterey Park, CA 91754, during normal business hours and at www.montereypark.ca.gov/agendas.

The public may watch the meeting live on the city’s cable channel MPKTV (AT&T U-verse, channel 99 or Charter Communications, channel 182) or by visiting the city’s website at http://www.montereypark.ca.gov/133/City-Council-Meeting-Videos. Per the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please email City Hall at [email protected] or call (626) 307-1359 for reasonable accommodation at least 48 hours before a meeting. Council Chambers are wheelchair accessible.

Public Comment for Matters Not on the Agenda
Pursuant to Rule 5 of Resolution No. 12226 (adopted February 17, 2021), speakers are limited to a total of five minutes for Public Comment and a total of five minutes on all other items on the Agenda.

Exception - See Public Hearing Procedures under Rule 7, Resolution No. 12226. If desirable, the Mayor and City Council may change the amount of time allowed for speakers.

While all comments are welcome, the Brown Act does not allow the City Council to take action on any item not on the agenda. The Council may briefly respond to comments after Public Communications is closed. Persons may speak to any matter that is not on the Agenda but within the City Council's

subject-matter jurisdiction at this time. Comments regarding an Agenda item, including the Consent Calendar, will be heard when that matter is called. Written Communication is accepted up to 24 hours before the meeting by completing an online form at www.montereypark.ca.gov/writtencomm. Written communications are provided to the City Council.

Live Translation:

Meetings will be translated (transcribed or audio) to the language you select. Instructions are provided below.

即時翻譯：
會議將被翻譯（筆譯或音譯）至您選擇的語言。操作說明如下

Traducción en vivo:

Las reuniones se traducirán (por escrito o por audio) al idioma que seleccione. Las instrucciones se encuentran a continuación.

1. Call to Order
Mayor

2. Flag Salute
The Monterey Park Fire Explorers

3. Roll Call
Henry Lo, Vinh Ngo, Jose Sanchez, Thomas Wong, Elizabeth Yang

4. Telecommunications Announcement, if requested

5. Agenda Revisions and Additions

6. Public Communications

7. Staff Communications

8. Presentation

8.A. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California - Garvey Reservoir Rehabilitation Project

9. Old Business

9.A. Solar, Electric Vehicle Charging Stations, and Electrical Improvements Project – Award of Contract to Johnson Controls and Authorization of Lease Financing

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Authorizing the City Manager to execute a public works contract, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with Johnson Controls in the amount of $17,571,525 for the construction and installation of solar panels, electric vehicle charging stations and various electrical improvements at various City facilities (the “Project”);

2. Authorizing the Public Works Director to approve change orders and contingency up to $570,000, for a total Project cost of $18,141,525;

3. Adopting a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into a Master Equipment/Lease Agreement with a bank of city choice, for financing up to $18,141,525 million, in a form approved by the City Attorney, for the construction and installation of solar panels, electric vehicle charging stations and various electrical improvements at various city facilities (the “Project”); and

4. Taking such additional, related action that may be desirable.

CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act):

The City reviewed the environmental impacts of the proposed action 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”). The proposed activity contemplates installation, maintenance, repair of solar panels, and electric vehicle (“EV”) charging stations at various facilities. The recommended action constitutes a “project” under CEQA. However, the Project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §§ 15301, 15303, and 15311.

10. Consent Calendar
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.

10.A. Monthly Investment Report

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Receiving and filing the monthly investment report; and

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

10.B. Consideration of Letter of Support for California Assembly Bill 1786

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. If desirable, sending a letter of support for California Assembly Bill 1786, the "Public Contracts: Best Value Construction Contracting for Counties, Cities, and Joint Power Authorities," on behalf of the City Council; and

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

10.C. Purchase of Conducted Energy Device for the Police Department from Axon Enterprises, Inc.

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Waiving bidding requirements pursuant to Monterey Park Municipal Code §

3.20.050(2), and authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with Axon Enterprises, Inc., in a form approved by the City Attorney, to purchase Axon Taser 10 Conducted Energy Devices for $602,033.02; and

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

10.D. Acceptance of Emergency Operations Training Cadre Project

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Receiving and filing report;

2. Authorizing the appropriation of $76,185 grant funds to the Fiscal Year 2025-26 budget in Account No. 3143201-5211; and

3. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

10.E. Award of Professional Services Agreement to BOA Architecture for the preparation of Plans, Specifications and Engineer’s estimates (“PS&E”) for Fire Station 61 Remodeling

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services agreement with Black, O’Dowd & Associates, dba BOA Architecture, for the preparation of Plans, Specifications and Engineer’s estimates (“PS&E”) for Fire Station 61 Remodeling in an amount not to exceed $106,700; plus $11,000 contingency for unexpected work; and

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

10.F. Authorize First Amendment to Professional Services Agreement with BOA Architecture

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Authorizing the City Manager to execute a first Amendment to Agreement No. 2497- A with Black, O’Dowd & Associates, dba BOA Architecture, in a form approved by the City Attorney, for an additional amount not to exceed $15,000; and

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

10.G. Community Transportation Updates and Amendment to Via Transportation Inc. for on-demand services

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Receiving and Filing this staff report summarizing the status of the City’s Community Transportation pilot and program updates;

2. Authorizing the City Manager to execute an Amendment with Nomad Transit, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Via Transportation Inc., in a form approved by the City Attorney, adding a six-month pilot for Dial-A-Ride support services in the amount of $230,670 for the term of the pilot and extending on-demand services on a month-to- month basis beginning March 2026 in amount not-to-exceed $62,606 per month;

3. Adopting a Resolution approving the Monterey Park Zero Emission Bus Rollout Plan in compliance with the California Air Resources Board (“CARB”) Innovative Clean Transit (“ICT”) Regulations; and

4. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

10.H. Sole Source Procurement of Replacement UV Lamps for the Carbon Granular Treatment System (CGTS) from Trojan Technologies Corp.

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Waiving bidding requirements pursuant to Monterey Park Municipal Code Section

3.20.050(2) and authorizing the City Manager to execute a two-year agreement with Trojan Technologies, in a form approved by the City Attorney, for the purchase of replacement ultraviolet (UV) lamps for the City’s Carbon Granular Treatment System (CGTS) in an amount not to exceed $555,000, covering replacement of all three UV treatment trains through June 30, 2027; and

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

10.I. Authorize First Amendment to Professional Services Agreement No. 2483-AA with SPEC Services, Inc. for Scada Programming Implementation and Support Services

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Authorizing the City Manager to execute the First Amendment to Agreement No. 2483-AA with SPEC Services, Inc., in a form approved by the City Attorney, for a revised total not-to-exceed amount of $170,700 for services through June 30, 2027; and

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

10.J. Women's History Month Resolution (As Requested by Council Member Sanchez)

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Approving the attached resolution; and,

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

10.K. Read Across America Resolution (As Requested by Council Member Sanchez)

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Approving the attached resolution; and,

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

10.L. American Red Cross Month Resolution (As Requested by Council Member Wong)

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Approving the attached resolution; and,

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

10.M. Employee Appreciation Month Resolution (As Requested by Council Member Ngo)

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Approving the attached resolution; and

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

11. Public Hearing

11.A. Annual Weed Abatement Protest Hearing

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Continuing the public hearing to the March 18, 2026, City Council meeting; and

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

11.B. Consideration and possible action to conduct a public hearing to extend and amend Urgency Ordinance No. 2272 to place a general moratorium on data centers within the City of Monterey Park for 10 months and 15 days

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Opening the public hearing; taking testimonial and documentary evidence;

2. After closing the public hearing and considering the evidence, read by title only, waive further reading, and adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 22XX to amend Urgency Ordinance No. 2272 by at least a four-fifths vote to extend the general moratorium on data centers within the City of Monterey Park for 10 months and 15 days; and

3. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act):

Adopting the draft Urgency Ordinance is exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., "CEQA") and CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq.) because it establishes temporary rules and procedures for minor alterations in land use. The Urgency Ordinance, therefore, is categorically exempt from further CEQA review under CEQA Guidelines § 15305. Further, the adoption and extension of the Urgency Ordinance is

also exempt from review under CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15061(b)(3) because the Ordinance is for general policies and procedure-making. This Ordinance does not authorize any new development entitlements. Any proposed project that will utilize the changes set forth in this Ordinance is subject to environmental review as part of the entitlement review of the project. The Ordinance will not adversely impact the environment and is therefore exempt from the provisions of CEQA.

12. New Business

12.A. Consideration and possible action to call for a special election on June 2, 2026 and adding a proposition to the ballot prohibiting data centers citywide

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Adopting Resolution Nos. 2026-R5 through 2026-R8 which, collectively, call for a special election on June 2, 2026, add a proposition to the ballot prohibiting data centers citywide, request an impartial analysis, and establish procedures for ballot arguments;

2. Determining whether the City Council should submit an argument in favor of the ballot proposition;

3. Approving a budget adjustment and appropriation of $210,000 to pay for the special election costs;

4. Approving a budget adjustment and appropriation of $100,000 to pay for anticipated litigation costs; and

5. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act):

The City Council is required to conduct environmental review of matters it places onto the ballot pursuant to Elections Code § 9222. Placing this matter onto the June 2, 2026 ballot is not subject to further review under the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq.) for the reasons stated in Section 4 of the draft Proposition. The City Manager, or designee, is directed to file a notice of determination.

12.B. Consideration of Letter of Support for California Assembly Bill 1577, California Senate Bills 886, 887 and 978

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. If desirable, sending letters of support for California Assembly Bill 1577, the “Data Center Energy and Water Transparency,” and California Senate Bills 886, the “California Technology Innovation and Ratepayer Protection Act,” 887, the “Data Centers and CEQA Clarity,” and 978, the “Large-Scale Energy Facilities and Electricity,” on behalf of the City Council; and

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

13. City Communications (City Council) / Future Agenda Items

14. Closed Session (if Required; City Attorney to Announce)

15. Adjournment

City Council Staff Report

Date: March 4, 2026
Agenda Item Number: 9.A.

To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Shawn Igoe, Public Works Director
Subject: Solar, Electric Vehicle Charging Stations, and Electrical Improvements Project – Award of Contract to Johnson Controls and Authorization of Lease Financing

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Authorizing the City Manager to execute a public works contract, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with Johnson Controls in the amount of $17,571,525 for the construction and installation of solar panels, electric vehicle charging stations and various electrical improvements at various City facilities (the “Project”);

2. Authorizing the Public Works Director to approve change orders and contingency up to $570,000, for a total Project cost of $18,141,525;

3. Adopting a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into a Master Equipment/Lease Agreement with a bank of city choice, for financing up to $18,141,525 million, in a form approved by the City Attorney, for the construction and installation of solar panels, electric vehicle charging stations and various electrical improvements at various city facilities (the “Project”); and

4. Taking such additional, related action that may be desirable.

CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act):

The City reviewed the environmental impacts of the proposed action 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”). The proposed activity contemplates installation, maintenance, repair of solar panels, and electric vehicle (“EV”) charging stations at various facilities. The recommended action constitutes a “project” under CEQA. However, the Project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §§ 15301, 15303, and 15311.

Executive Summary:

The City’s FY 2025-26 Capital Improvement Plan (“CIP”) includes Solar Panels, Battery Storage Systems and EV Charging Stations Project as Project No. 95052. On April 16, 2025, the City Council awarded Johnson Controls, Inc. (“JCI”) a Project Development Agreement (“PDA”) with the sole consultant who responded to the Request for Proposal (“RFP”) advertised by the Director of Public Works. JCI prepared plans for various facilities and

developed various pro forma cash flow models that were reviewed by the City’s third-party financial advisor. Following various reviews, it was determined that the original scope of work should be reduced in order to meet the City’s financial goals.

While the recommended agreement is structured as a Public Works contract, the Project originated through an energy services performance contracting evaluation process that guided scope refinement and financial feasibility analysis.

The final scope includes solar panels and electrical upgrades at City Hall, Delta Water Plant and George Elder Park. EV charging stations are proposed at City Hall, Langley Senior Center and Bruggemeyer Library. The plans prepared by JCI cover the original larger scope and will be available to the City for possible future construction work.

The project cost is $17,571,525 before a Federal Investment Tax Credit (“ITC”) direct pay of $3,316,139. The project is estimated to result in the reduction of 1,101 metric tons of CO2 annually for 30 years.

It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute a Public Works contract with JCI in the amount of $17,571,525 for the Project and authorize the Director to approve change orders not to exceed $570,000 over the total contract amount.

Background:

Following issuance of the City’s Notice to Proceed, JCI worked with staff to assess each facility identified and develop plans that cover solar panels installation, electrical upgrades or replacement of the electric distribution system, and the possibility of EV charging station installation at each location. Once the concept design was completed, JCI developed a pro forma cash flow. The City’s Finance Director reviewed the proposal and a third-party financial advisor reviewed the proposed pro forma cash flow. Revisions were proposed to reduce the scope of the project in order to meet the City’s financial goals.

The proposed Project at this time incorporates the following facilities and improvements:

The proposed solar panels will provide the following outputs:

JCI’s proposal is proposed as a design-build, turnkey delivery pursuant to a performance-based contract. Under this approach, Johnson Controls, Inc. (JCI) is responsible for providing final engineering, procurement, and construction of the project in accordance with the Monterey Park Facility Improvements Measures (“FIMs”) List, for a fixed, lump-sum contract price of $17,571,525.

JCI’s work is expected to be completed within 18 months from the City’s Notice to Proceed.

JCI is planning to start construction by June 30, 2026 to ensure the eligibility of the Elective Pay Federal ITC and finish by December 31, 2027 which is the deadline for the ITC.

The Project as presented is expected to result in Greenhouse Gas Reduction (GHG) as recommended in the City’s Sustainability Plan. The solar PV systems are expected to reduce 1,101 metric tons of CO2 annually for 30 years. The EV Charging Stations are estimated to result in 1,843 metric tons of CO2 annually in net GHG reduction.

It is recommended that the City Council award the Project to JCI for a total of $17,571,525 with a contingency not to exceed $570,000.

Strategic Plan Goal:

This Project meets the City’s goal to maintain, build and modernize infrastructure and facilities to support the current and future needs of our city and community as it aims to meet the City’s adopted Sustainability Plan, reduce energy demand and provide the community with the needed EV charging stations.

Fiscal Impact:

Financing Structure
The total contract amount for the Project is $17,571,525, exclusive of contingency. The Project is eligible for an ITC Direct Pay estimated at $3,316,139, subject to final qualification and receipt from the Internal Revenue Service.

The City anticipates financing the Project as follows:
• The Delta Water Plant solar infrastructure will be funded from previously issued bond proceeds and reserves within the Water Enterprise Fund. • Approximately $15 million will be financed through a 20-year lease revenue financing structure.

The remaining Project costs will be funded through available City funds and the anticipated federal ITC Direct Pay.

Indicative financing terms from Bank of America reflect an estimated all-in true interest cost of approximately 4.3% for a 20-year term.

The financing will be structured to:

1. Assume receipt of the ITC Direct Pay in Year 2;

2. Apply the full ITC amount as a mandatory principal reduction; and

3. Re-amortize the remaining principal beginning in Year 3.

The amortization schedule established at closing will incorporate this structure, such that annual debt service from Year 3 forward reflects the reduced principal balance. This ensures that federal incentive proceeds directly reduce long-term borrowing costs and moderate annual debt service obligations.

Failure to receive the ITC Direct Pay would not affect Project completion but would alter long- term financing assumptions.

Operating Impact and Revenue Assumptions
The Project includes approximately 1.4 MW (DC) of installed solar photovoltaic capacity across City facilities and the installation of public EV charging stations. Based on the Johnson Controls pro forma, annual operating benefit in the initial years following construction is projected to consist of:
• Energy cost avoidance from on-site solar generation; and • Net operating revenue from public EV charging stations.

Early operating years reflect combined projected energy savings and EV net revenue of approximately $375,000 to $400,000 annually, excluding the one-time ITC Direct Pay. These amounts are based on conservative EV utilization and utility rate assumptions consistent with municipal practice.

The solar installations are projected to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and reduce purchased electricity costs across participating facilities. EV charging revenue assumptions are based on conservative utilization estimates.

Net Fiscal Position
Under the ITC principal reduction and re-amortization structure:
• Years 1 and 2 reflect initial scheduled debt service. • Beginning in Year 3, annual debt service declines due to the reduced principal balance. • Based on current modeling, annual operating benefits are projected to largely offset debt service over the financing term.
• Upon retirement of the debt, the City will retain the full benefit of ongoing energy savings and EV charging revenues without associated debt service obligations.

The Delta Water Plant component being funded through the Water Enterprise Fund further reduces General Fund exposure and isolates enterprise-related infrastructure costs within the appropriate fund.

Coverage and Long-Term Benefit
Based on current modeling assumptions:
• Annual operating benefits are projected to offset a substantial portion of annual debt service following re-amortization.
• Long-term cumulative cash flow is projected to be approximately cost-neutral over the useful life of the improvements, exclusive of O&M and lifecycle costs. • After Year 20, the City benefits from continued energy cost avoidance and EV revenue without debt obligations.

For transparency and prudent fiscal management, staff has prepared a summary illustrating (see Attachment 1):

• Annual debt service before and after ITC principal reduction; • Annual projected energy savings and EV revenue;
• Debt service coverage ratios beginning in Year 3;
• A sensitivity scenario reflecting reduced EV utilization; • Additional Fiscal Sensitivities and Risk Considerations;

1. Timing and receipt of ITC Direct Pay;

2. Actual solar production levels;

3. Future electricity rate escalation;

4. EV charging utilization rates; and

5. Final interest rate at bond pricing.

Operations, Maintenance and Lifecycle Considerations
The financial analysis presented reflects projected energy cost avoidance and EV charging revenue and assumes application of the Federal ITC Direct Pay as a principal reduction with re-amortization beginning in Year 3. The base model does not embed a fixed annual allowance for operations and maintenance (“O&M”) or long-term equipment replacement reserves.

Staff anticipates that O&M services will be competitively procured following project completion in order to promote cost efficiency and pricing transparency. Over the useful life of the improvements, O&M costs and potential equipment replacement (e.g., inverter replacement) will reduce projected annual net savings.

Actual net fiscal performance will depend on future O&M procurement costs and long-term asset performance. It is staff’s assessment that inclusion of O&M and lifecycle replacement costs may reduce projected annual net fiscal benefit and could result in certain years that are approximately break-even relative to debt service during the financing term.

However, the structured application of ITC proceeds to principal reduction materially strengthens the financing structure beginning in Year 3 and mitigates long-term financial exposure.

Over the full useful life of the assets, the Project continues to provide:
• Long-term energy cost stabilization,
• Infrastructure modernization,
• Greenhouse gas reduction benefits, and
• Revenue-generating EV charging capacity.

Attachments:

1. Resolution

2. JCI Proposal

3. Proforma Cash Flow

4. Financial Transparency Project

Staff Report
March 4, 2026

ATTACHMENT 1
Resolution

RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO

A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH BANC OF AMERICA PUBLIC CAPITAL
CORP., IN A FORM APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY, FOR

FINANCING OF THE SOLAR, VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS, AND

ELECTRICAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Monterey Park as follows:

SECTION 1: The City Council finds as follows:

A. The City has a need for the acquisition and financing of certain property and improvements associated with the Solar, Electric Vehicle Charging Stations, and Electrical Improvements Project (collectively, the “Project”).

B. The City desires to participate in a lease-revenue program with Banc of America Public Capital Corp (or one of its affiliates) for the Project as it limits the use of the City’s financial reserves.

C. The City complied with all applicable procurement requirements.

D. This Resolution is adopted based upon the entirety of the administrative record including, without limitation, the staff report submitted by the Public Works Director (“Director”).

SECTION 2: Action. The City Council adopts this resolution authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to enter into a Lease Agreement with Banc of America Public Capital Corp. for financing not to exceed $ 15 million, in a form approved by the City Attorney, for the Project.

SECTION 3: Other Actions Authorized. The City Manager, and designees, are authorized to take all action necessary or reasonably required to carry out, give effect to this Resolution.

SECTION 4: Construction. This Resolution must be broadly construed in order to achieve the purposes stated in this Resolution. It is the City Council’s intent that the provisions of this Resolution be interpreted or implemented by the City and others in a manner that facilitates the purposes set forth in this Resolution.

SECTION 5: Reliance on Record. Every one of the findings and determinations in this Resolution are based on the competent and substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the project. The findings and determinations constitute the independent findings and determinations of the City Council in all respects and are fully and completely supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole.

Resolution No.

SECTION 6 : Limitations. The City Council’s analysis and evaluation of the project is based on the best information currently available. It is inevitable that in evaluating a project that absolute and perfect knowledge of all possible aspects of the project will not exist. One of the major limitations on analysis of the project is the City Council’s lack of knowledge of future events. In all instances, best efforts have been made to form accurate assumptions. Somewhat related to this are the limitations on the City's ability to solve what are in effect regional, state, and national problems and issues. The City must work within the political framework within which it exists and with the limitations inherent in that framework.

SECTION 7 : Summaries of Information . All summaries of information in the findings, which precede this section, are based on the substantial evidence in the record. The absence of any particular fact from any such summary is not an indication that a particular finding is not based in part on that fact.

SECTION 8: Severability. lf any part of this Resolution or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the City Council intends that such invalidity will not affect the effectiveness of the remaining provisions or applications and, to this end, the provisions of this Resolution are severable.

SECTION 9: Electronic Signatures . This Resolution may be executed with electronic signatures in accordance with Government Code §16.5. Such electronic signatures will be treated in all respects as having the same effect as an original signature.

SECTION 10 : Recordation. The Mayor, or presiding officer, is authorized to sign this Resolution signifying its adoption by the City Council of the City of Monterey Park and the City Clerk, or her duly appointed deputy, may attest thereto.

SECTION 11 : Effective Date. This Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption and will remain effective unless repealed or superseded.

SECTION 12: The City Clerk is directed to certify to the adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original Resolutions.

Resolution No.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of March, 2026.

Elizabeth Yang, Mayor

Attest:

Maychelle Yee, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:

Karl H. Berger, City Attorney

By:

Joaquin Vazquez, Assistant City Attorney

Staff Report
March 4, 2026
ATTACHMENT 2
JCI Proposal

Johnson Controls - CONFIDENTIAL - CONTAINS CUSTOMER INFORMATION

February 19, 2026

Shawn Igoe
Director of Public Works
City of Monterey Park
320 West Newmark Avenue
Monterey Park, CA 91754

Subject: Solar PV, EV Public Charging Stations and Electrical Switchgear upgrades

The Monterey Park project is proposed as a design-build, turnkey delivery pursuant to a performance-based contract. Under this approach, Johnson Controls, Inc. (JCI) is responsible for providing final engineering, procurement, and construction of the project in accordance with the Scope of Work set forth in the incorporated design documents, for a fixed, lump-sum contract price. The project cost is $17,571,525 before Federal ITC direct pay. The ITC amount of $3,316,139 is currently eligible. This gross cost includes all the scope noted in the FIM scope table.

Johnson Controls - CONFIDENTIAL - CONTAINS CUSTOMER INFORMATION This delivery method provides the City with cost certainty and a single point of accountability for project execution. The contract does not anticipate change orders for the defined scope of work.

Any modification to the approved scope, design, or specifications requested only by the City would require a formally executed change order and would be subject to an equitable adjustment in price and/or schedule in accordance with the terms of the agreement.

JCI is targeting a 18-month completion period from contract signing, however that could be subject to change once the final contract is negotiated and executed.

Lastly, JCI will ensure that we start construction by June 30 th, 2026, to ensure the eligibility of
the Elective Pay Federal ITC and finish by the December 31st 2027 deadline for the ITC.

Here is the breakdown of the Solar Pv system sizes by site as well as the number of EV charging stations by site.

Building Name Address
PV Solar
Size (kW
DC)
PV Solar
Size (kW
AC)
City Hall - Building 320 W. Newmark Ave., Monterey Park, CA 120.96 100.00
City Hall – Police 320 W. Newmark Ave., Monterey Park,
CA 337.92 280.00
Delta Water Plant 2657 Delta Ave., Rose Mead, CA 883.20 660.00 George Elder Park &
Pool
1950 Wilcox Ave., Monterey Park, CA 66.56 60.00
Total 1,408.64 1,100

Johnson Controls - CONFIDENTIAL - CONTAINS CUSTOMER INFORMATION

The project will provide electrical financial savings for energy costs by generating onsite and avoiding the higher cost of utility. The EV charging stations will provide a net revenue to the City from Public use. In addition, Green House Gas (GHG) Reduction will be achieved through onsite solar generation and the availability of EV charging stations.

Please see attached GHG reduction report for the Solar PV systems that will reduce 1,101 metric tons of CO2 annually for 30 years. For the EV Charing Stations the initial annual estimate is provided in table with assumptions.

These are standard, conservative CAP assumptions used by California cities:
• Average EV miles traveled: 10,000 miles/year
• Gasoline vehicle emission factor: 0.404 kg CO₂e/mile
• EV energy consumption: 0.30 kWh/mile
• California grid emission factor: 0.20 kg CO₂e/kWh
(All figures align with CARB / SCAG / typical CAAP practice.)

Lastly, with respect to the proforma Cash flows provided, one of the pro forma Cashflow’s shows the entire $17,571,525 as financed and the other Cashflow shows the Delta Plant electrical upgrade scope as non-financed from financing package since it’s an Enterprise fund and may be paid for via other means.

Robert Thomasian
Johnson Controls Inc.

Sr. Sustainable Infrastructure
Sustainable Infrastructure Division
7711 Center Avenue, Suite 650
Huntington Beach, CA 92647
323-203-5720

Staff Report
March 4, 2026
ATTACHMENT 3
Proforma Cash Flow

13,286,313$ Total Project Budget
3,316,139$ ITC Direct Payment
9,970,174$ Total
Const 2026 $0 $19,456 - $ $19,456 $ - $0 $19,456 $19,456 1 2027 $347,304 $27,803 - $ $375,107 $375,107 $16,029 $0 $391,136 ($16,029) $3,427 2 2028 $359,460 $28,081 3,316,139 $ - $ $3,703,680 $3,703,680 $8,501 $0 $3,712,181 ($8,501) ($5,074) 3 2029 $372,041 $28,362 - $ $400,403 $400,403 $8,501 $0 $408,904 ($8,501) ($13,575) 4 2030 $385,062 $28,645 - $ $413,708 $413,708 $0 $0 $413,708 $0 ($13,575) 5 2031 $398,539 $28,932 $427,471 $427,471 $0 $0 $427,471 $0 ($13,575) 6 2032 $412,488 $29,221 $441,709 $441,709 $0 $0 $441,709 $0 ($13,575) 7 2033 $426,925 $29,513 $456,439 $456,439 $0 $0 $456,439 $0 ($13,575) 8 2034 $441,868 $29,809 $471,676 $471,676 $0 $0 $471,676 $0 ($13,575) 9 2035 $457,333 $30,107 $487,440 $487,440 $0 $0 $487,440 $0 ($13,575) 10 2036 $473,340 $30,408 $503,747 $503,747 $0 $0 $503,747 $0 ($13,575) 11 2037 $489,907 $30,712 $520,618 $520,618 $0 $0 $520,618 $0 ($13,575) 12 2038 $507,053 $31,019 $538,072 $538,072 $0 $0 $538,072 $0 ($13,575) 13 2039 $524,800 $31,329 $556,129 $556,129 $0 $0 $556,129 $0 ($13,575) 14 2040 $543,168 $31,642 $574,811 $574,811 $0 $0 $574,811 $0 ($13,575) 15 2041 $562,179 $31,959 $594,138 $594,138 $0 $0 $594,138 $0 ($13,575) 16 2042 $581,855 $32,278 $614,134 $0 $0 $0 $0 $614,134 $600,559 17 2043 $602,220 $32,601 $634,821 $0 $0 $0 $0 $634,821 $1,235,380 18 2044 $623,298 $32,927 $656,225 $0 $0 $0 $0 $656,225 $1,891,605 19 2045 $645,113 $33,256 $678,370 $0 $0 $0 $0 $678,370 $2,569,975 20 2046 $667,692 $33,589 $701,281 $0 $0 $0 $0 $701,281 $3,271,257 21 2047 $691,062 $33,925 $724,987 $0 $0 $0 $0 $724,987 $3,996,243 22 2048 $715,249 $34,264 $749,513 $0 $0 $0 $749,513 $4,745,756 23 2049 $740,282 $34,607 $774,889 $0 $0 $0 $774,889 $5,520,646 24 2050 $766,192 $34,953 $801,145 $0 $0 $0 $801,145 $6,321,791 25 2051 $793,009 $35,302 $828,312 $0 $0 $0 $828,312 $7,150,103 26 2052 $820,764 $35,655 $856,420 $0 $0 $0 $856,420 $8,006,522 27 2053 $849,491 $36,012 $885,503 $0 $0 $0 $885,503 $8,892,026 28 2054 $879,223 $36,372 $915,596 $0 $0 $0 $915,596 $9,807,621 29 2055 $909,996 $36,736 $946,732 $0 $0 $0 $946,732 $10,754,353 30 2056 $941,846 $37,103 $978,949 $0 $0 $0 $978,949 $11,733,303 $17,928,762 $986,580 $3,316,139 $0 $22,231,482 $10,465,148 $33,031 $0 $10,498,179 $11,733,303 $11,733,303

CITY OF MONTEREY PARK, CALIFORNIA
City of Monterey Park, CA-PV/EV and Electrical Upgrades (Delta Electrical assumed not financed) 30 YEAR FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
YR # YR

INCOME AND COST REDUCTIONS EXPENSES
SYSTEM

PERFORMANCE

VERIFICATION
(M&V)

ANNUAL CASH
FLOW

CUMULATIVE
CASH FLOWENERGY SAVINGS/Avoided
Cost PV EV Charging Net Revenue PublicFederal ITC - Direct Pay
TOTAL
Savings/Net Rev
Finance Payment
Estimate

O&M PLANNED

SERVICE PV & EV
(2% escalation Year
3+)
TOTAL

EXPENSES
Totals:
2/19/26

Staff Report
March 4, 2026
ATTACHMENT 4
Financial Transparency Project

FINANCIAL TRANSPARENCY SUMMARY
Solar, EV Charging & Electrical Improvements Project

FINANCING ASSUMPTIONS
• Estimated Amount Financed: Approximately $13,000,000
• Term: 20 Years
• Estimated Interest Rate (TIC): Approximately 4.3%
• ITC Direct Pay (Year 2): $3,316,139
• ITC Applied as Mandatory Principal Reduction
• Re-Amortization Beginning Year 3 (Remaining 18 Years)

Final annual debt service will be determined at bond pricing and will reflect the required ITC principal reduction and re-amortization structure.

ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE STRUCTURE
Original Amortization (No ITC Reduction)

Estimated level annual debt service on approximately $13 million over 20 years at current indicative rates is approximately $985,000 per year.

Structured Amortization with ITC Principal Reduction

Under the proposed financing structure:
• Years 1–2 reflect full scheduled debt service.
• In Year 2, ITC proceeds are applied as a mandatory principal reduction. • Beginning in Year 3, the remaining principal balance will be re-amortized over the remaining term.
• Annual debt service from Year 3 forward will decline materially relative to the original schedule.

The final re-amortized payment amount will be established at closing.

PROJECTED ANNUAL SAVINGS & EV REVENUE
(Operating Year – Excluding ITC)

Based on the Johnson Controls pro forma, early operating years reflect approximately:
• Energy Cost Avoidance (Solar): ~$372,000 annually
• Net EV Charging Revenue: ~$28,000 annually
• Total Annual Operating Benefit: ~ $400,000 annually

These projections exclude the one-time ITC Direct Pay and reflect conservative EV utilization and utility rate assumptions.

DEBT SERVICE RELATIONSHIP

Annual operating benefits are projected to offset a substantial portion of annual debt service following re-amortization.

The Project is structured to:
• Leverage federal incentive funding to reduce borrowing costs; • Moderate long-term General Fund exposure;
• Improve the debt service profile beginning in Year 3; and • Provide cumulative long-term benefit over the useful life of the assets.

The Project is not structured as a profit-generating investment, but as a long-term cost stabilization and infrastructure modernization strategy.

SENSITIVITY CONSIDERATIONS
Given EV revenue represents a relatively small portion of total projected annual benefit, overall financial performance is more sensitive to:
• Solar production levels;
• Future electricity rate escalation;
• Final interest rate at bond pricing; and
• O&M and lifecycle cost assumptions.

LONG-TERM FISCAL POSITION
Years 1–2 reflect initial debt service prior to ITC principal reduction.

Beginning Year 3, debt service declines due to mandatory ITC principal reduction and re-amortization.

Over the financing term, annual operating benefits are projected to offset a meaningful portion of debt service.

After Year 20, the City retains full energy savings and EV revenue without debt service obligations.

Funding of the Delta Water Plant component through the Water Enterprise Fund further reduces General Fund exposure and aligns infrastructure costs with the benefiting fund.

OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE & LIFECYCLE CONSIDERATIONS
The financial projections presented reflect projected energy cost avoidance and EV charging revenue. The base analysis does not embed:
• Annual operations and maintenance (O&M) costs; or
• Long-term capital replacement reserves.

The City intends to competitively procure O&M services following project completion in order to promote cost efficiency and pricing transparency.

Inclusion of O&M and lifecycle replacement costs may reduce projected annual net benefit and could result in certain years that are approximately break-even relative to debt service during the financing term.

However, the structured application of ITC proceeds materially improves the financing profile beginning in Year 3 and mitigates long-term financial exposure.

City Council Staff Report

Date: March 4, 2026
Agenda Item Number: 10.A.

To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Amy Lee, City Treasurer
Subject: Monthly Investment Report

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Receiving and filing the monthly investment report; and

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

Executive Summary:

As of January 31, 2026, invested funds for the City of Monterey Park total $80,238,803.06.

Background:

In accordance with the City’s Investment Policy, a monthly investment report is presented to the City Council showing the types of investments, dates and maturities, amounts of deposits, rates of interest, and the current market values for securities with maturity more than 12 months. The attached monthly investment report includes a portfolio summary from Chandler Asset Management.

Strategic Plan Goal:

N/A

Fiscal Impact:

N/A

Attachments:

1. Monthly Investment Report

Staff Report
March 4, 2026

ATTACHMENT 1
Monthly Investment Report

INVESTMENTS PORTFOLIO PROFILE:

TOTAL BALANCE AT 1/31/2026 80,238,803.06 $

INVESTMENT COMPOSITION
(1)LA COUNTY POOLED INVESTMENT FUND ON DEMAND 3.24% 27,015,381.16$ (2)LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND ON DEMAND 3.931% 18,465,599.11$ (3)CHANDLER ASSET MANAGEMENT 4.45% 27,001,789.38$
Purchase Maturity Interest
(4)CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT Date Date Rate
1 RIZE FED CREDIT UNION 12/13/24 12/14/26 4.25% 245,000 2 FIRST SEACOAST BANK 01/27/25 01/27/27 4.15% 247,000
3 GOLDMAN SACHES BANK 01/28/25 01/28/27 4.15% 244,000
4 FIRST BUSINESS BANK 01/30/25 01/29/27 4.15% 244,000
5 FIRST KY BANK 01/30/25 02/01/27 4.15% 249,000
6 AUSTIN TELCO FED CREDIT UNION 01/31/25 02/01/27 4.25% 249,000 7 SOUND CREDIT UNION 01/31/25 02/01/27 4.20% 249,000
8 MORGAN STANLEY BANK 02/12/25 02/12/27 4.30% 244,000
9 MORGAN STANLEY PRIVATE BANK 02/12/25 02/12/27 4.30% 244,000 10 OREGON COMMUNITY CREDIT UNION 02/24/25 02/24/27 4.30% 249,000 11 MERRICK BANK 02/28/25 02/26/27 4.30% 249,000
12 FIRST WESTERN TRUST BANK 03/06/25 03/06/26 4.25% 249,000 13 SOUTHERN STATES BANK 03/21/25 03/22/27 4.15% 249,000 14 CORPORATE AMERICA FAMILY CREDIT UNION03/27/25 03/27/26 4.25% 249,000 15 PARKWAY BANK & TRUST 03/27/25 03/27/26 4.20% 239,000 16 TOYOTA FINANCIAL SAVINGS BANK 04/10/25 04/12/27 4.00% 245,000 17 UBS BANK 04/23/25 04/23/27 3.95% 249,000
18 AMERICAN EXPRESS NATIONAL BANK 04/30/25 04/30/27 4.05% 245,000 19 STATE BANK INDIA 05/05/25 05/05/27 4.10% 244,000
20 TRANSPORTATION ALLIANCE BANK 05/12/25 05/12/27 4.00% 249,000 21 FINWISE BANK 05/21/25 05/21/27 4.00% 249,000
22 CONNEXUS CREDIT UNION 07/23/25 07/23/27 4.10% 245,000 23 HARBORSTONE CREDIT UNION 08/06/25 08/06/26 4.25% 249,000 24 HOPE FEDERAL CREDIT UNION 08/21/25 08/21/26 4.10% 240,000 25 CIVIC FEDERAL CREDIT UNION 08/29/25 08/28/26 4.15% 249,000 26 PREFERRED BANK 09/03/25 09/03/26 3.93% 113,033
27 OPTUM BANK 09/15/25 09/15/27 3.70% 245,000
28 FIRST BANK 09/19/25 03/19/27 3.70% 245,000
29 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS CREDIT UNION 09/24/25 09/24/27 3.65% 249,000 30 DORT FINANCIAL CREDIT UNION 10/10/25 10/12/27 3.75% 247,000 31 ALLIANT CREDIT UNION 10/30/25 10/30/26 4.00% 249,000 32 DART BANK 01/30/26 02/01/28 3.65% 245,000 01/00/00
Total CDs (32) 4.076% 7,756,033.41$
OTHER INFORMATION:

BANK BALANCE: (1) $24,809,511.55
AVERAGE MATURITY DAYS 160
AVERAGE INTEREST RATE FOR THE MONTH 3.887%

THE CITY'S INVESTMENT HAS SUFFICIENT LIQUIDITY TO MEET THE CITY'S EXPENDITURE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE NEXT 180 DAYS. THE 180-DAY LIQUIDITY DISCLOSURE IS REQUIRED PER GOVERNMENT CODE 53646.

THERE HAVE BEEN NO VARIANCES TO THE INVESTMENT POLICY.
(1) Bank balance is maintained to cover outstanding warrants, payroll checks and on-going operating costs.

CITY OF MONTEREY PARK

INVESTMENT REPORT
JANUARY 31, 2026

City of Monterey Park | Account #11189 | As of January 31, 2026PORTFOLIO SUMMARYAccount SummaryCredit Quality*Total Rate of Return** 1M 3M YTD 1YR 2YRS 3YRS 5YRS 10YRS(03/12/24)City of Monterey Park 0.26%0.26%5.39%Benchmark Return 0.21% 0.99% 0.21% AA+2.03 End Values as of 12/31/2025End Values as of 01/31/2026Market ValueAccrued InterestTotal Market Value 27,431,902.43 27,499,815.900.00 0.00ParBook ValueCost ValueUnited StatesFarm Credit System 6.65%6.32%1.52%1.39%1.32%1.28%

City Council Staff Report

Date: March 4, 2026
Agenda Item Number: 10.B.

To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Diana Garcia, Assistant City Manager
Rebecca Bojorquez, Principal Management Analyst
Subject: Consideration of Letter of Support for California Assembly Bill 1786

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. If desirable, sending a letter of support for California Assembly Bill 1786, the "Public Contracts: Best Value Construction Contracting for Counties, Cities, and Joint Power Authorities," on behalf of the City Council; and

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

Executive Summary:

The San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments (“SGVCOG”) is a sponsor of Assemblymember John Harabedian’s AB 1786 and has reached out to its membership cities for letters of support. The SGVCOG supports this legislation, as it provides local governments with greater flexibility in managing complex infrastructure projects by allowing best-value construction contracting.

This bill was introduced in January 2026 and is currently pending before its respective policy committee in the Legislature; it has not been approved by both houses or signed into law. If the Council elects to send a letter of support at this time, staff will transmit the letters to the author and committee chairs prior to committee hearings and will monitor the bill’s progress through the legislative process.

Background:

AB 1786 (Harabedian) would expand an existing best value construction contracting program, which is currently limited to counties, to also include general law cities and eligible joint powers authorities. The best value construction contracting program currently allows counties to award contracts of more than $1,000,000 to contractors based on experience and capacity, rather than the lowest bidder. This bill would expand who can participate in the program and similarly also extend the program’s sunset date from January 1, 2030, to January 1, 2040. This bill would not replace low-bid procurement policies but rather authorize an additional project

delivery option for larger construction projects.

Strategic Plan Goal:

N/A

Fiscal Impact:

There is no direct fiscal impact associated with sending the letter of support.

Attachments:

1. Bill Text 1786

2. Letter of Support - AB 1786

Staff Report
March 4, 2026
ATTACHMENT 1
Bill Text - AB 1786

SHARE THIS:

Date Published: 02/10/2026 09:00 PM
ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 1786
AB-1786 Public contracts: best value construction contracting for counties, cities, and joint powers authorities. (2025-2026)

CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE— 2025–2026 REGULAR SESSION
Introduced by Assembly Member Harabedian
February 10, 2026
An act to amend Sections 20155, 20155.1, 20155.3, 20155.4, 20155.5, 20155.6, 20155.7, and 20155.9 of, and to amend the heading of Article 3.7 (commencing with Section 20155) of Chapter 1 of Part 3 of Division 2 of, the Public Contract Code, relating to public contracts.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 1786, as introduced, Harabedian. Public contracts: best value construction contracting for counties, cities, and joint powers authorities.

Existing law establishes a program to allow counties to select a bidder on the basis of best value, as defined, for construction projects in excess of $1,000,000. Existing law also authorizes counties to use a best value construction contracting method to award individual annual contracts, not to exceed $3,000,000, for repair, remodeling, or other repetitive work to be done according to unit prices, as specified. Existing law establishes procedures and criteria for the selection of a best value contractor and requires that bidders verify specified information under oath. Existing law requires the board of supervisors of a participating county to submit a report that contains specified information about the projects awarded using the best value procedures described above to the appropriate policy committees of the Legislature and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee before March 1, 2029. Existing law repeals the program provisions on January 1, 2030.

This bill would, instead, authorize a county, general law city, and eligible joint powers authority, as defined, to utilize this program, would make various conforming changes to the above-described provisions, and would extend the operation of those provisions until January 1, 2040. The bill would delete the provisions authorizing counties to use a best value construction contracting method to award individual annual contracts, not to exceed $3,000,000, for repair, remodeling, or other repetitive work to be done according to unit prices, as specified.

With regard to the above-specified reporting requirement, the bill would, instead, require the governing body of a participating county, city, or eligible joint powers authority to submit the report, as specified, to the appropriate policy committees of the Legislature and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee before March 1, 2031. The bill Home Bill Information California LawPublicationsOther ResourcesMy SubscriptionsMy Favorites 2/25/26, 2:12 PM Bill Text - AB-1786 Public contracts: best value construction contracting for counties, cities, and joint powers authorities. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1786 1/6

would expand the crime of perjury by extending the operation of the program and expanding the program to general law cities and eligible joint powers authorities, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Vote: majority Appropriation: no Fiscal Committee: yes Local Program: yes THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The heading of Article 3.7 (commencing with Section 20155) of Chapter 1 of Part 3 of Division 2 of the Public Contract Code is amended to read:

Article 3.7. Best Value Construction Contracting for Counties Counties, Cities, and Certain Joint Powers Authorities SEC. 2. Section 20155 of the Public Contract Code is amended to read:
20155. (a) This article provides optional authority for a best value procurement program for county construction projects in excess of one million dollars ($1,000,000). ($1,000,000) for participating counties, cities, and eligible joint powers authorities, as defined in Section 20155.1. (b) The board of supervisors of a county governing body of a participating county, city, or eligible joint powers authority shall let any contract for a construction project pursuant to this article to the bidder representing the best value or else reject all bids.
(c) The bidder may be selected on the basis of the best value to the county. In order to implement this method of selection, the board of supervisors governing body shall adopt and publish procedures and required criteria that ensure that all selections are conducted in a fair and impartial manner. These procedures shall conform to Sections 20155.3 to 20155.6, inclusive, and shall be mandatory for a county that chooses to participate in the pilot program. inclusive.
(d) If the board of supervisors of a county governing body deems it to be in the best interest of the county, the board of supervisors, participating county, city, or eligible joint powers authority, on the refusal or failure of the successful bidder for a project to execute a tendered contract, the governing body may award it to the bidder with the second lowest best value score, as determined in accordance with subdivision (c) of Section 20155.5. If the second bidder fails or refuses to execute the contract, the board of supervisors may likewise award it to the bidder with 20155.5 and thereafter to the third lowest best value score, as determined in accordance with subdivision (c) of Section 20155.5. if necessary.
(e)(1)A county may also use the best value construction contracting method set out in this article to award individual annual contracts, which shall not exceed three million dollars ($3,000,000), adjusted annually to reflect the percentage change in the California Consumer Price Index, for repair, remodeling, or other repetitive work to be done according to unit prices. The contracts shall be based on plans and specifications for typical work. No annual contracts may be awarded for any new construction. (2)For purposes of this subdivision, best value criteria shall be applied to the annual contract for construction services, rather than to an individual, specific project. Annual contracts may be extended or renewed for two subsequent annual terms and a maximum of six million dollars ($6,000,000) over the subsequent two terms of the contract. Contract values shall be adjusted annually to reflect the percentage change in the California Consumer Price Index.
(3)For purposes of this subdivision, “unit price” means the amount paid for a single unit of an item of work, and “typical work” means a work description applicable universally or applicable to a large number of individual projects, as distinguished from work specifically described with respect to an individual project. For purposes of this section, “repair, remodeling, or other repetitive work to be done according to unit prices” shall not include design or contract drawings.

SEC. 3. Section 20155.1 of the Public Contract Code is amended to read:
20155.1. As used in this article:
2/25/26, 2:12 PM Bill Text - AB-1786 Public contracts: best value construction contracting for counties, cities, and joint powers authorities. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1786 2/6

(a) “Best value” means a procurement process whereby the selected bidder may be selected on the basis of objective criteria for evaluating the qualifications of bidders with the resulting selection representing the best combination of price and qualifications.
(b) “Best value contract” means a competitively bid contract entered into pursuant to this article. (c) “Best value contractor” means a properly licensed person, firm, or corporation that submits a bid for, or is awarded, a best value contract.
(d) City means any general law city and does not include a charter city. (d)
(e) “County” means any chartered or general law county. “County” county and includes a city and county. (e)
(f) “Demonstrated management competency” means the experience, competency, capability, and capacity of the proposed management staffing to complete projects of similar size, scope, or complexity. (g) (1) “Eligible joint powers authority” means a joint powers authority formed pursuant to Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 6500) of Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code that is expressly authorized in its joint powers agreement to finance, develop, construct, or deliver public works, public infrastructure, affordable housing, or a combination thereof.
(2) An eligible joint powers authority shall not include a joint powers authority that exercises independent land use regulatory authority or general police powers.
(f)
(h) “Financial condition” means the financial resources needed to perform the contract. The criteria used to evaluate a bidder’s financial condition shall include, at a minimum, capacity to obtain all required payment bonds, performance bonds, and liability insurance.
(g)
(i) “Labor compliance” means the ability to comply with, and past performance with, contract and statutory requirements for the payment of wages and qualifications of the workforce. The criteria used to evaluate a bidder’s labor compliance shall include, as a minimum, the bidder’s ability to comply with the apprenticeship requirements of the California Apprenticeship Council and the Department of Industrial Relations, its past conformance with those requirements, and its past conformance with requirements to pay prevailing wages on public works projects.
(h)
(j) “Qualifications” means the financial condition, relevant experience, demonstrated management competency, labor compliance, and safety record of the bidder, and, if required by the bidding documents, some or all of the preceding qualifications as they pertain to subcontractors proposed to be used by the bidder for designated portions of the work. A county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority shall evaluate financial condition, relevant experience, demonstrated management competency, labor compliance, and safety record, using, to the extent possible, quantifiable measurements.
(i)
(k) “Relevant experience” means the experience, competency, capability, and capacity to complete projects of similar size, scope, or complexity.
(j)
(l) “Safety record” means the prior history concerning the safe performance of construction contracts. The criteria used to evaluate a bidder’s safety record shall include, at a minimum, its experience modification rate for the most recent three-year period, and its average total recordable injury or illness rate and average lost work rate for the most recent three-year period.

SEC. 4. Section 20155.3 of the Public Contract Code is amended to read:
2/25/26, 2:12 PM Bill Text - AB-1786 Public contracts: best value construction contracting for counties, cities, and joint powers authorities. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1786 3/6

20155.3. A county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority shall proceed in accordance with the following when awarding best value contracts under this article:
(a) The county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority shall not select a bidder on the basis of the best value to a county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority unless, after evaluating at a public meeting the alternative of awarding the contract on the basis of the lowest bid price, the county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority makes a written finding that awarding the contract on the basis of best value, for the specific project under consideration, will accomplish one or more of the following objectives: reducing project costs, expediting the completion of the project, or providing features not achievable through awarding the contract on the basis of the lowest bid price.
(b) The county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority shall prepare a solicitation for bids and give notice pursuant to Section 20125. A county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority may identify specific types of subcontractors that are required to be included in the bids. A county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority shall comply with Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 4100) of Part 1 with regard to construction subcontractors identified in the bid.
(c) The county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority shall establish a procedure to prequalify bidders pursuant to Section 20101. The information required pursuant to this section shall be verified under oath by the bidder in the manner in which civil pleadings in civil actions are verified. Information submitted by the bidder as part of the evaluation process shall not be open to public inspection to the extent that information is exempt from disclosure under the California Public Records Act (Division 10 (commencing with Section 7920.000) of Title 1 of the Government Code).
(d) Each solicitation for bids shall do all of the following:
(1) Invite prequalified bidders to submit sealed bids in the manner prescribed by this article. (2) Include a section identifying and describing the following:
(A) Criteria that the county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority will consider in evaluating bids. (B) The methodology and rating or weighting system that will be used by the county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority in evaluating bids.
(C) The relative importance or weight assigned to the criteria identified in the request for bids. (e) Final evaluation of the best value contractor shall be done in a manner that prevents cost or price information from being revealed to the committee evaluating the qualifications of the bidders prior to completion and announcement of that committee’s decision.

SEC. 5. Section 20155.4 of the Public Contract Code is amended to read:
20155.4. (a) A best value contractor shall not be prequalified or shortlisted unless the contractor provides an enforceable commitment to the county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority that the contractor and its subcontractors at every tier will use a skilled and trained workforce to perform all work on the project or contract that falls within an apprenticeable occupation in the building and construction trades, in accordance with Chapter

2.9 (commencing with Section 2600) of Part 1.
(b) This section shall not apply if any of the following requirements are met:
(1) The county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority has entered into a project labor agreement that will bind all contractors and subcontractors performing work on the project or contract to use a skilled and trained workforce, and the contractor agrees to be bound by that project labor agreement. (2) The project or contract is being performed under the extension or renewal of a project labor agreement that was entered into by the county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority prior to January 1, 2017. (3) The contractor has entered into a project labor agreement that will bind the contractor and all its subcontractors at every tier performing the project or contract to use a skilled and trained workforce. (c) For purposes of this section, “project labor agreement” has the same meaning as in paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 2500.

SEC. 6. Section 20155.5 of the Public Contract Code is amended to read:
2/25/26, 2:12 PM Bill Text - AB-1786 Public contracts: best value construction contracting for counties, cities, and joint powers authorities. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1786 4/6

20155.5. Selection of the best value contractor shall be made as follows:
(a) (1) An evaluation committee appointed by the county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority shall evaluate the qualifications of the bidders based solely upon the criteria set forth in the solicitation documents, and shall assign a qualifications score to each bid.
(2) A county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority shall establish written policies and procedures, consistent with applicable law, to ensure that members of an evaluation committee are free from conflicts of interest, if the county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority has not already established applicable written policies and procedures.
(b) A county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority shall not award a contract for a construction project pursuant to this article if a solicitation for bids for that construction project results in the submission of fewer than three responsive bids to the county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority for evaluation. (c) Except as provided in subdivision (d) of Section 20155, the award of the contract shall be made to the bidder whose bid is determined by a county, city, or eligible joint powers authority, in writing, to be the best value to the county. county, city, or eligible joint powers authority. To determine the best value contractor, the county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority shall divide each bidder’s price by its qualifications score. The lowest resulting cost per quality point will represent the best value bid. (d) A county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority shall issue a written decision of its contract award. (e) Upon issuance of a contract award, a county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority shall publicly announce its award identifying the best value contractor to which the award is made, the project, the project price, and the selected best value contractor’s score based on the evaluation criteria listed in the request for bids. The notice of award shall be made public and include the score of the selected best value contractor in relation to all other responsive bidders and their respective prices. The contract file shall include documentation sufficient to support the decision to award.

SEC. 7. Section 20155.6 of the Public Contract Code is amended to read:
20155.6. (a) If a county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority elects to award a project pursuant to this article, retention proceeds withheld by the county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority from the selected best value contractor shall not exceed 5 percent if a performance and payment bond, issued by an admitted surety insurer, is required in the solicitation of bids. (b) In a contract between the selected best value contractor and a subcontractor, and in a contract between a subcontractor and any subcontractor thereunder, the percentage of the retention proceeds withheld shall not exceed the percentage specified in the contract between the county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority and the selected best value contractor. If the selected best value contractor provides written notice to a subcontractor that, prior to or at the time the bid is requested, a bond may be required and the subcontractor subsequently is unable or refuses to furnish a bond to the selected best value contractor, then the selected best value contractor may withhold retention proceeds in excess of the percentage specified in the contract between the county county, city, or eligible joint powers authority and the selected best value contractor from any payment made by the selected best value contractor to the subcontractor.

SEC. 8. Section 20155.7 of the Public Contract Code is amended to read:
20155.7. (a) Before March 1, 2029, the board of supervisors of a participating county 2031, the governing body of a participating county, city, or eligible joint powers authority shall submit a report to the appropriate policy committees of the Legislature and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee. The (b) The report shall include, but is not limited to, all of the following information: following:
(1) A description of the projects awarded using the best value procedures. (2) The contract award amounts.
(3) The best value contractors awarded the projects.
(4) A description of any written protests concerning any aspect of the solicitation, bid, or award of the best value contracts, including contracts and the resolution of the those protests. (5) A description of the prequalification process.
2/25/26, 2:12 PM Bill Text - AB-1786 Public contracts: best value construction contracting for counties, cities, and joint powers authorities. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1786 5/6

(6) The criteria used to evaluate the bids, including the weighting of the criteria and an assessment of the effectiveness of the methodology. criteria.
(7) If a project awarded under this article has been completed, an If applicable, an assessment of the project performance, to include a summary of any including delays or cost increases. (b)
(c) A report submitted pursuant to subdivision (a) shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code.

SEC. 9. Section 20155.9 of the Public Contract Code is amended to read:
20155.9. This article shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2030, 2040, and as of that date is repealed.

SEC. 10. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution. 2/25/26, 2:12 PM Bill Text - AB-1786 Public contracts: best value construction contracting for counties, cities, and joint powers authorities. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1786 6/6

Staff Report
March 4, 2026
ATTACHMENT 1
Letter of Support

PRIDE IN THE PAST • FAITH IN THE FUTURE

320 West Newmark Ave. Monterey Park, CA 91754
www.montereypark.ca.gov

CITY CLERK

MAYCHELLE YEE

CITY TREASURER

AMY LEE

CITY COUNCIL

HENRY LO

VINH NGO

JOSE SANCHEZ

THOMAS WONG

ELIZABETH YANG

March 4, 2026

The Honorable John Harabedian
California State Assembly
1021 O Street, Suite 4350
Sacramento, CA 95814

RE: AB 1786 (Harabedian): Best Value Contracting
NOTICE OF SUPPORT – City of Monterey Park

Dear Assembly Member Harabedian:

On behalf of the City of Monterey Park, I write in strong support of your AB 1786, which extends existing best value construction contracting authority to cities and certain infrastructure focused joint powers authorities, creating parity with procurement tools already available to counties.

Cities across California are responsible for delivering increasingly complex capital projects, including transportation improvements, water and sewer infrastructure upgrades, public safety facilities, parks, stormwater systems, and affordable housing developments. These projects are often funded through layered financing structures that combine local revenue, state grants, federal appropriations, and bond proceeds. They are delivered in a construction environment marked by material cost volatility, skilled labor shortages, supply chain disruptions, and heightened schedule pressures tied to grant deadlines and performance requirements.

Under current law, general law cities are generally required to award construction contracts to the lowest responsible bidder. While that framework remains appropriate for many projects, it can constrain a city’s ability to account for important risk facto rs when delivering large scale or technically complex infrastructure. Lowest bid procurement may limit the ability to meaningfully evaluate contractor experience with similar projects, demonstrated capacity to manage complex staging or coordination requirements, safety performance history, and long-term value considerations.

PRIDE IN THE PAST • FAITH IN THE FUTURE

320 West Newmark Ave. Monterey Park, CA 91754
www.montereypark.ca.gov

AB 1786 provides cities with an optional procurement tool that allows objective qualifications to be evaluated alongside price through a transparent and competitive process. Best value contracting does not eliminate competition or bypass accountability. Instead, it establishes clear evaluation criteria, maintains public notice and bidding requirements, requires documentation of award decisions, and preserves reporting obligations and a sunset date. Cities would retain full discretion to continue using traditional lowest responsible bidder procurement where appropriate.

For projects involving complicated phasing, sensitive community impacts, coordination with utilities and outside agencies, or heightened safety concerns, best value contracting can reduce the risk of delays, litigation, change orders, and cost escalation. By selecting the contractor offering the strongest overall combination of price and qualifications, cities can better safeguard taxpayer resources, improve schedule reliability, and deliver higher quality outcomes for residents.

AB 1786 ensures parity between counties, cities, and qualified regional delivery entities while maintaining transparency and legislative oversight. We commend your leadership on this issue and are proud to support this legislation.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth Yang
Mayor

Henry Lo
Mayor Pro Tem

Jose Sanchez
Councilmember

Thomas Wong
Councilmember

Vinh T. Ngo
Councilmember

City Council Staff Report

Date: March 4, 2026
Agenda Item Number: 10.C.

To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Scott Wiese, Police Chief
Subject: Purchase of Conducted Energy Device for the Police Department from Axon Enterprises, Inc.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Waiving bidding requirements pursuant to Monterey Park Municipal Code § 3.20.050(2), and authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with Axon Enterprises, Inc., in a form approved by the City Attorney, to purchase Axon Taser 10 Conducted Energy Devices for $602,033.02; and

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

Executive Summary:

The Monterey Park Police Department (“Department”) recommends the acquisition of Axon Taser 10 conducted energy devices (“CED”) to replace the Department’s existing Axon X26P Tasers. Conducted energy devices are a critical less than lethal force option used to safely manage volatile encounters and reduce the risk of injury to officers, subjects, and the public.

The Department’s current conducted energy devices reached the end of their effective service life and are experiencing equipment failures that can no longer be resolved through manufacturer repair support. Transitioning to the Axon Taser 10 will allow the Department to modernize its less than lethal equipment, improve operational reliability, and ensure sworn personnel are equipped with current, industry-standard technology consistent with modern law enforcement practices and officer safety expectations.

Background:

The Department has utilized CEDs for more than 20 years as part of its use of force continuum to safely de-escalate volatile encounters while minimizing the risk of injury to officers, subjects, and the public. CEDs are frequently deployed during incidents involving individuals experiencing emotional distress, mental health crises, or substance induced impairment, where effective less than lethal options are critical to resolving situations without resorting to higher levels of force.

The X26P has served as the Department’s primary CED since 2018. TASER CED technology is proprietary and manufactured exclusively by Axon Enterprise, Inc., which is the sole source provider of TASER devices for law enforcement use. Axon maintains exclusive ownership and control over the TASER platform, including device hardware, cartridges, firmware, training protocols, warranties, accessories, and system compatibility. The TASER platform is the standardized, CED technology utilized by regional Southern California law enforcement agencies, and no alternative manufacturers are used by these agencies. Because this technology, regional standardization, and associated support and training infrastructure are unique to Axon, no other manufacturer can provide a compatible or equivalent conducted energy device.

The Axon Taser 10 represents the current generation of conducted energy device technology and provides substantial operational enhancements compared to the X26P. These enhancements include an extended engagement distance of up to 45 feet, providing officers with increased standoff distance and additional reaction time during volatile encounters. The Taser 10 also features ten independently fired probes, allowing officers to deploy additional probes without reloading and to correct missed deployments, thereby improving effectiveness and reducing the need to escalate to higher levels of force.

Additional advancements include improved deployment accuracy and reliability, which increase the likelihood of effective neuromuscular incapacitation while reducing ineffective deployments. Collectively, these capabilities reduce the need for close contact physical struggles, thereby lowering the risk of injury to both officers and subjects.

The X26P platform is now three generations behind current conducted energy device technology, and the Department has experienced equipment failures that can no longer be resolved through manufacturer repair support. Replacing X26P with the Axon Taser 10 allows the Department to modernize its less than lethal equipment, enhance operational reliability, and ensure sworn personnel are equipped with current, industry standard tools consistent with modern law enforcement practices and officer safety expectations.

Strategic Plan Goal:

The subscription purchase of the Axon Taser 10 CED aligns with the City of Monterey Park's Strategic Plan goal:

1. Ensure Public Safety with a Modernized and Community Oriented Approach

By purchasing the Axon Taser 10 less than lethal devices, the Department will strengthen community engagement by enhancing emergency preparedness by modernizing a lifesaving de-escalation tool to save lives.

Fiscal Impact:

The total project cost for 99 Axon Taser 10 CEDs is $602,033.02, based on a five-year subscription agreement. Funding has been budgeted in FY 25/26 under account number 1015002-5501-EPD01 to cover the first year subscription payment of $120,406.58.

Subscription payments for Years 2 through 4 are $120,406.58 per year, with a Year 5 payment

of $120,406.70, for a total five-year cost of $602,033.02.

Funding for the subscription payments beyond FY 25/26 will be subject to approval through the annual budget process. The Department will request the necessary appropriations in subsequent fiscal years to fund the remaining purchase obligations.

Attachments:

1. Axon Monterey Park Police Dept. TASER 10 Certification Pro (99) Quote

Staff Report
March 4, 2025

ATTACHMENT 1
Axon Taser 10 Quote

Q-801995-46050KP
Issued: 01/28/2026
Quote Expiration: 03/31/2026
Estimated Contract Start Date: 05/01/2026
Account Number: 112712
Payment Terms: N30
Mode of Delivery: UPS-GND
Credit/Debit Amount: $0.00

SHIP TO BILL TO SALES REPRESENTATIVE PRIMARY CONTACT
Monterey Park Police Dept. - CA
320 W Newmark Ave
Monterey Park,
CA
91754-2818
USA

Monterey Park Police Dept. - CA
320 W Newmark Ave
Monterey Park
CA
91754-2818
USA
Email:

Kyle Panasewicz
Phone: +1 4803294734
Email: [email protected]
Fax: (480) 905-2071
Bob Hung
Phone: (626) 307-1253
Email: [email protected]
Fax: (626) 307-1441
Quote Summary Discount Summary
Program Length 60 Months Average Savings Per Year $51,198.14 TOTAL COST $565,710.40
ESTIMATED TOTAL W/ TAX $602,033.02 TOTAL SAVINGS $255,990.70

Axon Enterprise, Inc.
17800 N 85th St
Scottsdale, Arizona 85255
United States
VAT: 86-0741227
Domestic:(800) 978-2737
International: +1.800.978.2737

Payment Summary
Date Subtotal Tax Total
Apr 2026 $113,142.08 $7,264.50 $120,406.58
Apr 2027 $113,142.08 $7,264.50 $120,406.58
Apr 2028 $113,142.08 $7,264.50 $120,406.58
Apr 2029 $113,142.08 $7,264.50 $120,406.58
Apr 2030 $113,142.08 $7,264.62 $120,406.70
Total $565,710.40 $36,322.62 $602,033.02

Quote Unbundled Price: $821,665.00
Quote List Price: $649,880.20
Quote Subtotal: $565,710.40
Pricing
All deliverables are detailed in Delivery Schedules section lower in proposal Item Description Qty Term Unbundled List Price Net Price Subtotal Tax Total Program
C00031 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 99 60 $137.25 $108.33 $94.16 $559,310.40 $36,322.62 $595,633.02 A la Carte Services
102597 TASER CEW + VR INSTRUCTOR CERT + VR
IMPLEMENTATION (2-DAY) 1 $6,400.00 $6,400.00 $6,400.00 $0.00 $6,400.00 Total $565,710.40 $36,322.62 $602,033.02
Delivery Schedule
Hardware
Bundle Item Description QTY Shipping Location Estimated Delivery Date TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100122 AXON VR - HEADSET - BATTERY 4 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100126 AXON VR - TACTICAL BAG 4 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100390 AXON TASER 10 - HANDLE - YELLOW CLASS 3R 99 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100390 AXON TASER 10 - HANDLE - YELLOW CLASS 3R 3 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100394 AXON TASER 10 - MAGAZINE - HALT TRAINING BLUE 4 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100396 AXON TASER 10 - MAGAZINE - INERT RED 30 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100399 AXON TASER 10 - CARTRIDGE - LIVE 1980 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100400 AXON TASER 10 - CARTRIDGE - HALT 990 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100401 AXON TASER 10 - CARTRIDGE - INERT 300 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100591 AXON TASER - CLEANING KIT 1 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100616 AXON TASER 10 - HOLSTER - BLACKHAWK - RH 99 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100623 ENHANCED HOOK-AND-LOOP TRAINING (HALT) SUIT (V2) 1 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100748 AXON VR - CONTROLLER - TASER 10 4 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100832 AXON VR - CONTROLLER - HANDGUN VR19H 4 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 101124 AXON VR - HOLSTER - T10 BLACKHAWK GRAY - RH 8 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 101294 AXON VR - TABLET 4 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 101300 AXON VR - TABLET CASE 4 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 101455 AXON TASER 10 - REPLACEMENT TOOL KIT - INTERPOSER BUCKET 1 1 04/01/2026
TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 101456 AXON TASER 10 - REPLACEMENT INTERPOSER BUCKET 9 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 101751 AXON VR - HEADSET - HTC FOCUS VISION 4 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 101755 AXON TASER 10 - MAGAZINE - LIVE DUTY BLACK V2 3 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 101755 AXON TASER 10 - MAGAZINE - LIVE DUTY BLACK V2 99 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 101757 AXON TASER 10 - MAGAZINE - LIVE TRAINING PURPLE V2 30 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 102389 AXON VR - MULTI-USER ROOM MARKER 2 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 20018 AXON TASER - BATTERY PACK - TACTICAL 10 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 20018 AXON TASER - BATTERY PACK - TACTICAL 3 1 04/01/2026

Hardware
Bundle Item Description QTY Shipping Location Estimated Delivery Date TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 20018 AXON TASER - BATTERY PACK - TACTICAL 99 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 70033 AXON - DOCK WALL MOUNT - BRACKET ASSY 2 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 71019 AXON BODY - DOCK POWERCORD - NORTH AMERICA 2 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 74200 AXON TASER - DOCK - SIX BAY PLUS CORE 2 1 04/01/2026 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 80087 AXON TASER - TARGET - CONDUCTIVE PROFESSIONAL RUGGEDIZED 2 1 04/01/2026
TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 80090 AXON TASER - TARGET FRAME - PROFESSIONAL 27.5 IN X 75 IN 2 1 04/01/2026
TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100400 AXON TASER 10 - CARTRIDGE - HALT 800 1 04/01/2027 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100400 AXON TASER 10 - CARTRIDGE - HALT 790 1 04/01/2028 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100210 AXON VR - TAP REFRESH 1 - TABLET 4 1 10/01/2028 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 101009 AXON VR - TAP REFRESH 1 - HANDGUN CONTROLLER 4 1 10/01/2028 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 101012 AXON VR - TAP REFRESH 1 - TASER CONTROLLER 4 1 10/01/2028 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 20373 AXON VR - TAP REFRESH 1 - HEADSET 4 1 10/01/2028 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100400 AXON TASER 10 - CARTRIDGE - HALT 790 1 04/01/2029 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100400 AXON TASER 10 - CARTRIDGE - HALT 790 1 04/01/2030 Software
Bundle Item Description QTY Estimated Start Date Estimated End Date TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 101180 AXON TASER - DATA SCIENCE PROGRAM 99 05/01/2026 04/30/2031 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 20248 AXON TASER - EVIDENCE.COM LICENSE 99 05/01/2026 04/30/2031 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 20248 AXON TASER - EVIDENCE.COM LICENSE 1 05/01/2026 04/30/2031 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 20370 AXON VR - USER ACCESS - FULL VR 99 05/01/2026 04/30/2031 Services
Bundle Item Description QTY
TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100751 AXON TASER 10 - REPLACEMENT ACCESS PROGRAM - DUTY CARTRIDGE 99 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 101193 AXON TASER - ON DEMAND CERTIFICATION 99 A la Carte 102597 TASER CEW + VR INSTRUCTOR CERT + VR IMPLEMENTATION (2-DAY) 1 Warranties
Bundle Item Description QTY Estimated Start Date Estimated End Date TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100197 AXON VR - EXT WARRANTY - HEADSET 4 04/01/2027 04/30/2031 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100213 AXON VR - EXT WARRANTY - TABLET 4 04/01/2027 04/30/2031 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100704 AXON TASER 10 - EXT WARRANTY - HANDLE 99 04/01/2027 04/30/2031 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 100704 AXON TASER 10 - EXT WARRANTY - HANDLE 3 04/01/2027 04/30/2031 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 101007 AXON VR - EXT WARRANTY - TASER CONTROLLER 4 04/01/2027 04/30/2031 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 101008 AXON VR - EXT WARRANTY - HANDGUN CONTROLLER 4 04/01/2027 04/30/2031 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 80374 AXON TASER - EXT WARRANTY - BATTERY PACK T7/T10 10 04/01/2027 04/30/2031 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 80374 AXON TASER - EXT WARRANTY - BATTERY PACK T7/T10 3 04/01/2027 04/30/2031 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 80374 AXON TASER - EXT WARRANTY - BATTERY PACK T7/T10 99 04/01/2027 04/30/2031 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 80396 AXON TASER - EXT WARRANTY - DOCK SIX BAY T7/T10 2 04/01/2027 04/30/2031

Shipping Locations
Location Number Street City State Zip Country
1 320 W Newmark Ave Monterey Park CA 91754-2818 USA
1 320 W Newmark Ave Monterey Park CA 91754-2818 USA
Payment Details
Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total
Year 1 102597 TASER CEW + VR INSTRUCTOR CERT + VR IMPLEMENTATION (2-DAY) 1 $1,280.00 $0.00 $1,280.00 Year 1 C00031 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 99 $111,862.08 $7,264.50 $119,126.58 Total $113,142.08 $7,264.50 $120,406.58
Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total
Invoice Upon Fulfillment C00031 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 99 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Total $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total
Year 2 102597 TASER CEW + VR INSTRUCTOR CERT + VR IMPLEMENTATION (2-DAY) 1 $1,280.00 $0.00 $1,280.00 Year 2 C00031 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 99 $111,862.08 $7,264.50 $119,126.58 Total $113,142.08 $7,264.50 $120,406.58
Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total
Year 3 102597 TASER CEW + VR INSTRUCTOR CERT + VR IMPLEMENTATION (2-DAY) 1 $1,280.00 $0.00 $1,280.00 Year 3 C00031 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 99 $111,862.08 $7,264.50 $119,126.58 Total $113,142.08 $7,264.50 $120,406.58
Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total
Year 4 102597 TASER CEW + VR INSTRUCTOR CERT + VR IMPLEMENTATION (2-DAY) 1 $1,280.00 $0.00 $1,280.00 Year 4 C00031 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 99 $111,862.08 $7,264.50 $119,126.58 Total $113,142.08 $7,264.50 $120,406.58
Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total
Year 5 102597 TASER CEW + VR INSTRUCTOR CERT + VR IMPLEMENTATION (2-DAY) 1 $1,280.00 $0.00 $1,280.00 Year 5 C00031 TASER 10 CERTIFICATION PRO PLAN 99 $111,862.08 $7,264.62 $119,126.70 Total $113,142.08 $7,264.62 $120,406.70

Tax is estimated based on rates applicable at date of quote and subject to change at time of invoicing. If a tax exemption certificate should be applied, please submit prior to invoicing.

Standard Terms and Conditions
Axon Enterprise Inc. Sales Terms and Conditions
Axon Master Services and Purchasing Agreement:

This Quote is limited to and conditional upon your acceptance of the provisions set forth herein and Axon’s Master Services and Purchasing Agreement (posted at https://www.axon.com/sales-terms-and-conditions), as well as the attached Statement of Work (SOW) for Axon Fleet and/or Axon Interview Room purchase, if applicable. In the event you and Axon have entered into a prior agreement to govern all future purchases, that agreement shall govern to the extent it includes the products and services being purchased and does not conflict with the Axon Customer Experience Improvement Program Appendix as described below.

ACEIP:

The Axon Customer Experience Improvement Program Appendix, which includes the sharing of de-identified segments of Agency Content with Axon to develop new products and improve your product experience (posted at www.axon.com/legal/sales-terms-and-conditions), is incorporated herein by reference. By signing below, you agree to the terms of the Axon Customer Experience Improvement Program.

Acceptance of Terms:

Any purchase order issued in response to this Quote is subject solely to the above referenced terms and conditions. By signing below, you represent that you are lawfully able to enter into contracts. If you are signing on behalf of an entity (including but not limited to the company, municipality, or government agency for whom you work), you represent to Axon that you have legal authority to bind that entity. If you do not have this authority, please do not sign this Quote.

Exceptions to Standard Terms and Conditions
Rewrite Estimates
Estimated Amounts and Contract Terminations. Any amounts stated as due under existing or terminated contracts — including contract transfer balances carried forward to new or pending contracts — are estimates based on payments received as of the calculation date. These estimates may be adjusted if new contracts are not executed on the anticipated dates or if expected payments are not made.

Refresh Shipment Timing
Technology Assurance Plan (TAP) Refresh Prior to Renewal. For Customers with expiring agreements that include TAP refresh rights, Axon may, in its discretion, ship refresh hardware under the existing contract while renewal or replacement agreements are in progress. Any such shipments will be deemed made under the terms of the existing contract until the new contract is fully executed, after which any applicable updates, fees, or adjustments will apply.

Shipment Timing
Shipment Variance. Estimated shipment dates are provided for planning purposes only and are not guarantees. Axon may ship hardware before or after the estimated shipment date, and failure to meet an estimated shipment date will not, by itself, constitute a breach, provided Axon uses commercially reasonable efforts to meet estimated shipment dates.
\s1\ \d1\
Signature Date Signed
1/28/2026

City Council Staff Report

Date: March 4, 2026
Agenda Item Number: 10.D.

To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Jason Hing, Fire Chief
Michelle Marquez, Principal Management Analyst
Subject: Acceptance of Emergency Operations Training Cadre Project

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Receiving and filing report;

2. Authorizing the appropriation of $76,185 grant funds to the Fiscal Year 2025-26 budget in Account No. 3143201-5211; and

3. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

Executive Summary:

The City of Monterey Park Fire Department acknowledges and accepted the subrecipient agreement for the EMG Emergency Management CADRE Training project under the 2022 ($76,185) and 2023 ($300,000) State Homeland Security Program (SHSP) grants. This initiative is designed to strengthen the City’s and the region’s emergency preparedness and response capabilities by providing specialized training to members of the Community Assistance and Disaster Response Effort (CADRE). In accordance with Resolution No. 11740, adopted by the City Council on May 6, 2015, staff is reporting to the City Council the source of funds received and the associated project details.

Background:

The EOC Academy is a regional training program designed to efficiently and effectively prepare non- emergency management city personnel to fulfill emergency operations center (EOC) roles during special events, major emergencies, and disasters. The Academy accomplishes this by delivering a streamlined and optimized version of the standardized EOC training provided by the California Office of Emergency Services and the California Specialized Training Institute. The EOC Academy’s condensed program is designed to be completed in approximately half the time of the standardized courses. The City of Monterey Park Fire Department has acted as host in the past and looks forward to the continued partnership with Los Angeles County Disaster Management Area Coordinators. By hosting the Emergency Management Cadre training and serving as fiduciary for the grant funding, the city will benefit by having the opportunity to send employees to participate in the training. Additionally, the City will be able to allocate funds to the City of Monterey Park Fire Department for emergency management related activities in accordance with SHSP projects details.

Strategic Plan Goal:

This initiative directly supports the City’s Strategic Plan Goal 1, Ensure Public Safety with a Modernized and Community-Oriented Approach, by enhancing emergency preparedness and response capabilities through specialized Cadre training. By equipping personnel to serve in Emergency Operations Center roles, the City ensures a flexible and mission-ready service model during major incidents and disasters. Additionally, the project advances Goal 2, Maintain Stability of the City’s Fiscal and Human Resources, by leveraging State Homeland Security Program grant funding, resulting in no fiscal impact to the City while providing professional development opportunities that strengthen workforce capacity and resilience.

Fiscal Impact:

The State Homeland Security Program (SHSP) grant program has been approved by Los Angeles County. Staff is requesting an appropriation of the awarded $76,185 in grants funds to the Fiscal Year 2025-2026 budget in Account No. 3143201-5211.

Attachments:

None

City Council Staff Report

Date: March 4, 2026
Agenda Item Number: 10.E.

To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Shawn Igoe, Public Works Director
Subject: Award of Professional Services Agreement to BOA Architecture for the preparation of Plans, Specifications and Engineer’s estimates (“PS&E”) for Fire Station 61 Remodeling

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services agreement with Black, O’Dowd & Associates, dba BOA Architecture, for the preparation of Plans, Specifications and Engineer’s estimates (“PS&E”) for Fire Station 61 Remodeling in an amount not to exceed $106,700; plus $11,000 contingency for unexpected work; and

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

Executive Summary:

Fire Station 61 was constructed in the early 1970s and is beginning to exceed its useful life.

The living quarters are reminiscent of the time in which they were constructed, with communal showers and dorms. The City of Monterey Park was notified in November 2023 that United States Senator Alex Padilla had secured $1.5 million in federal funding for upgrades at Fire Station 61, which will be used to upgrade the living quarters at Fire Station 61. The Director requested proposals from three architectural firms, and selected BOA Architecture to provide the necessary architectural services to complete the development of PS&E for the remodeling.

The Director requests City Council approval to enter into a professional services agreement with BOA Architecture in an amount not to exceed $106,700; plus $11,000 contingency for unexpected work, for the preparation of PS&E for Fire Station 61 remodeling (the “Contract”)

Background:

Fire Station 61 was constructed in the early 1970s and is over 50 years old. Due to its age, Station 61 is beginning to exceed its useful life. The living quarters are reminiscent of the time in which they were constructed, with communal showers and dorms.

The City of Monterey Park was notified in November 2023 that United States Senator Alex

Padilla had secured $1.5 million in federal funding for upgrades at Fire Station 61. The funding will be used to upgrade the living quarters at Fire Station 61.

On August 21, 2024, the City Council accepted the $1.5M in federal earmarked funds. As a condition of acceptance of the funds, the City was required to complete the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review prior to finalizing the process and providing the City with an agreement to be able to receive the funds. It was determined that the proposed improvements met the NEPA Categorical exemption. The recent federal government shutdown delayed the process as many other projects were in the queue. Finally, on February 3, 2026, the City received the signed agreement from HUD authorizing the City to proceed with the Project.

The Director requested proposals from three architectural firms: BOA Architecture, PBK and TYLin, and selected BOA Architecture to provide the necessary architectural services to complete the development of PS&E for the remodeling.

The Director received a proposal from BOA Architecture for $106,700 The Director is currently working with BOA Architecture for the redesign of the City Council Chambers and is satisfied with the provided services.

It is recommended that City Council authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with BOA Architecture in an amount not to exceed $106,700; plus $11,000 contingency for unexpected work, for the preparation of PS&E for Fire Station 61 remodeling

Strategic Plan Goal:

This Project meets the City’s goal to maintain, build and modernize infrastructure and facilities to support the current and future needs of our City and community as it aims to continue public facility improvements.

Fiscal Impact:

The proposed contract cost will not exceed $106,700; plus $11,000 contingency for unexpected work. Funds for this project are budgeted as part of Capital Improvement Project (“CIP”) 95048.

Attachments:

1. BOA Architectural Proposal

Staff Report

March 4, 2026
ATTACHMENT 1
BOA Architecture Proposal

1511 Cota Avenue
Long Beach, CA 90813
Telephone: 562-912-7900
Telephone: 310-832-2681
www.boaarchitecture.com
Ziad Mazboudi, PE, Project Manager March 17, 2025
City of Monterey Park
Re: Fee for Architectural-Engineering Services for: Monterey Park 2nd Floor Remodel for Fire Station 61 Based on our site meeting with you on 3-17-25 we are pleased to submit our Fee Proposal for PSE (plans, specs, estimate) for approval from the City Building-Safety Dept. and customary public bidding to general contractors. We will also provide bidding assistance and Construction Administration services for this phase of design work. We understand that we will completely renovate the entire 3400 sf 2nd floor which includes the renovation of the kitchen- dining-living areas and creating private dorms and gender-neutral bathrooms. Our scope for this project is outlined below, and our itemized fee spreadsheet is attached.

Scope for Interior Remodel

1. Provide Architectural-Engineering design services to renovate the entire 2 nd floor interior living area of this Fire Station #61. At minimum, provide 10 private dorms with fire-escape windows to the exterior for 10 firefighters. It is ideal for dorm lockers to be accessed from the hallway side and the dorm side to allow firefighters to sleep during the shift change. Provide 1 unisex ADA compliant bathroom, and 3 private non-ADA compliant regular bathrooms, for a total of 4 private bathrooms with shower. Remodel the kitchen and dining areas for efficient circulation. Add a guardrail at the 2nd BBQ deck for safety. Replace the roofing as it is worn and is near the end of its useful life. The existing HVAC equipment is relatively new and is in good working order and will not need to be replaced. The existing apparatus bays and offices on the 1 st floor will not be worked on at this time and are not in this Scope of Work. See the attached floor plan sketch showing the Area of Work.

2. Provide design for ADA compliance on the 2 nd floor as required by the City Building-Safety Dept.

3. Because of its high construction cost, work within the existing building envelope, avoid a building addition.

4. Verify site conditions w measurements, produce CADD as-built drawings for the building and site.

5. In the preliminary design phase, create 3 conceptual floor plans for the Client to select the desired one that will be refined into a final recommendation. Provide 3-dimensional color renderings showing especially the kitchen-dining areas.

6. Project management and meetings to expedite the project and communicate with Client.

7. Provide submittals at 30%, 60%, 90%, 100%.

8. Provide Construction Cost Estimate.

9. Provide formal specifications.

10. Provide façade improvement design for the 2 nd floor to integrate new dorm windows. The façade improvements shall be compatible and enhance the existing architecture of the Fire Station.

11. Provide structural engineering for new walls and reconfigure the 2nd floor plan layout.

12. Provide mechanical engineering for the new HVAC ducting for the new 2nd floor plan layout.

13. Provide electrical engineering for new electrical lighting and power.

14. Provide Construction Support for bidding assistance and Construction Administration services Items Not Included
a. Land Survey with underground utility lines (there drawings will be provided by the Client) b. Asbestos, Lead paint, Hazardous Materials Report
c. Design of ADA parking stalls, as the existing ADA parking stalls are assumed to be ADA compliant. d. Design of any part of the exterior sitework.
e. Landscape architecture and Civil Engineering
f. Furniture selection
g. Design of the 1 st first of this Fire Station.

BOA Architecture can begin work immediately upon your Notice to Proceed. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me personally at (310) 480-7730 cell.

BOA Architecture
Edward Lok Ng, Architect, LEED AP, President

FIXED FEE PROPOSAL
Architectural-Engineering Services for:

City of Monterey Park 2nd Floor Renovation of Fire Station 61 date: Nov. 25, 2025 Construction Cost Estimate: To Be Determined prepared by: BOA, Edward Lok Ng, Architect prepared for: City of Monterey Park, Ziad Mazboudi

PERSON HRS UNIT RATE COST TOTAL

PRE-DESIGN
kick-off meeting to verify scope of work,obtain as-built dwgs. PM-Arch 4 hrs 150 600 project management, confirm cost/work plan & prep field work PM-Arch 6 hrs 150 900 site assessment, as-built measurements & photos Sr.Tech 10 hrs 110 1,100 CADD-3D Sr.Tech 20 hrs 110 2,200
4,800

ARCHITECTURAL SCHEMATIC DESIGN
preliminary design; 3 floor plan options, refine 1 option PM-Arch 16 hrs 150 2,400 CADD-3D drawings Sr.Tech 70 hrs 110 7,700
3-D color renderings Sr.Tech 20 hrs 110 2,200
project management PM-Arch 8 hrs 150 1,200
construction cost estimate PM-Arch 6 hrs 150 900
meeting or coordination with Client PM-Arch 8 hrs 150 1,200 15,600
ENGINEERING and EXPENSES
structural engineering 9,000
mechanical, new HVAC equipment, provide new ducts 8,000 plumbing 7,000
electrical 11,000
civil engineering 0
expenses for blueprints, photocopies, mailing, misc. 200 35,200

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN DEVELOPMENT & CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS refine preliminary design PM-Arch 16 hrs 150 2,400
CADD-3D modeling of construction document drawings Sr.Tech 120 hrs 110 13,200 project management, design development,coord. w engineers PM-Arch 50 hrs 150 7,500 meeting or coordination with Client PM-Arch 20 hrs 150 3,000 specifications in CSI format PM-Arch 30 hrs 150 4,500
construction cost estimate PM-Arch 6 hrs 150 900
quality control PM-Arch 20 hrs 150 3,000
City bldg-safety dept. and client submittal&corrections Sr.Tech 40 hrs 110 4,400 38,900

CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT
pre-bid meeting PM-Arch 0 hrs 150 0
bidding RFI's PM-Arch 4 hrs 150 600
pre-construction meeting PM-Arch 0 hrs 150 0
project management, RFI & submittal response PM-Arch 50 hrs 150 7,500 CADD-3D modeling and record drawings Sr.Tech 10 hrs 110 1,100 construction site meetings, punchlist meeting PM-Arch 20 hrs 150 3,000 12,200
TOTAL $106,700

City Council Staff Report

Date: March 4, 2026
Agenda Item Number: 10.F.

To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Shawn Igoe, Public Works Director
Subject: Authorize First Amendment to Professional Services Agreement with BOA Architecture

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Authorizing the City Manager to execute a first Amendment to Agreement No. 2497-A with Black, O’Dowd & Associates, dba BOA Architecture, in a form approved by the City Attorney, for an additional amount not to exceed $15,000; and

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

Executive Summary:

The City Council, on July 16, 2025, awarded BOA Architecture a professional service agreement for the preparation of Plans, Specifications and Engineer’s estimates (“PS&E”) for City Hall Council Chamber and restroom remodeling.

The scope of the proposal by BOA Architecture was limited to the Council Chambers and did not include any design of the back conference room including ensuring ADA compliance of the back restroom, the relocation of the AV room and incorporation of safety measures.

BOA Architecture provided a proposal for the additional scope in the amount of $15,000. The amendment will increase the total contract amount to a total not to exceed contract amount of $154,300.

Background:

The City Hall and its Council Chambers were constructed almost 50 years ago. Over the years, some improvements were made to bring the audio-visual and technological needs to current standards at that time.

The City Council, on July 16, 2025, awarded BOA Architecture a professional service agreement for the preparation of Plans, Specifications and Engineer’s estimates (“PS&E”) for City Hall Council Chamber and restroom remodeling.

During design work, it was determined that additional scope is required to incorporate additional services that were not initially incorporated into the scope of work. BOA Architecture provided a proposal for the additional scope of work in the amount of $15,000.

The Director of Public Works recommends an amendment to Agreement 2497-A with BOA Architecture by an additional amount of $15,000.

Strategic Plan Goal:

This Project meets the City's goal to maintain, build and modernize infrastructure and facilities to support the current and future needs of our City and community as it aims to continue public facility improvements and provide multiple forms of usage of the Council Chambers.

Fiscal Impact:

The Contract cost will not exceed $154,300. The Contract funds are budgeted as part of Capital Improvement Project (“CIP”) 95065.

Attachments:

1. BOA Architecture Proposal

Staff Report
March 4, 2026

ATTACHMENT 1
BOA Architecture Extra Fee Proposal

1511 Cota Avenue
Long Beach, CA 90813
Telephone: 562-912-7900
Telephone: 310-832-2681
www.boaarchitecture.com
Mr. Ziad Mazboudi, PE January 3, 2026
City of Monterey Park
Re: Extra Fee for Architecture-Engineering Services for Remodel of Monterey Park City Council Conference Room Area Based on your request (as you have stated in recent meetings) to remodel the City Council conference room area, which includes the conference room, restroom, and kitchenette, and incorporated into our current Construction Documents, we are requesting an Extra Fee for this additional scope. Please note that this area of the City Council Chambers was not included in our original fee/scope proposal. See attached original fee/scope proposal. Our Scope of Work for this additional scope is outlined below, and our itemized Extra Fee spreadsheet is attached for your review.

Scope of Work

1. Provide the AV technology in the conference room as desired by the City.

2. Provide bulletproofing in the wall that separates this area from the main public Council Chambers.

3. Provide interior design to remodel the conference room, restroom, and kitchenette, as desired by the City. See the attached sketch showing the project area.

4. Provide ADA compliance for the area of work.

5. Provide sufficient Construction Documents (drawings and specs) to secure a building permit approval and public bidding to general contractors.

6. Attend meetings and provide overall project coordination with you, our sub-consultant engineers, the Client, to expedite the Scope of Work.

7. Respond to RFI’s from the Contractor during the construction phase of this project.

Per the attached fee spreadsheet, we are requesting an Extra Fee of $15,000 for this additional work.

When approved, BOA’s overall project design fee will now be $139,300 Original Fee + $15,000 Extra Fee = $154,300 total Overall Fee. Please review and let us know if this meets your approval. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (310) 480-7730 cell.

BOA Architecture
Edward Lok Ng, Architect, LEED AP, President

EXTRA FEE PROPOSAL
Architectural-Engineering Services for:

Monterey Park City Council Conference Room Remodel
date: Jan. 30, 2026 Construction Cost Estimate: To Be Determined prepared by: BOA, Edward Lok Ng, Architect prepared for: City of Monterey Park, Ziad Mazboudi

PERSON HRS UNIT RATE COST TOTAL

PRE-DESIGN
kick-off meeting to verify scope of work,obtain as-built dwgs. PM-Arch 0 hrs 150 0 project management, confirm cost/work plan & prep field work PM-Arch 0 hrs 150 0 site assessment, as-built measurements & photos Sr.Tech 2 hrs 110 220 CADD-3D Sr.Tech 3 hrs 110 330
550

ARCHITECTURAL SCHEMATIC DESIGN
preliminary design; 3 floor plan options, refine 1 option PM-Arch 6 hrs 150 900 CADD-3D drawings Sr.Tech 20 hrs 110 2,200
3-D color renderings Sr.Tech 0 hrs 110 0
project management PM-Arch 2 hrs 150 300
construction cost estimate PM-Arch 0 hrs 150 0
meeting or coordination with Client PM-Arch 3 hrs 150 450 3,850
ENGINEERING and EXPENSES
structural engineering 1,000
mechanical, new HVAC equipment, provide new ducts 1,000 plumbing 1,000
electrical 1,000
lighting designer 0
AV consultant 0
acoustical engineering 0
civil engineering 0
expenses for blueprints, photocopies, mailing, misc. 0
4,000

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN DEVELOPMENT & CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS refine preliminary design PM-Arch 2 hrs 150 300
CADD-3D modeling of construction document drawings Sr.Tech 30 hrs 110 3,300 project management, design development,coord. w engineers PM-Arch 4 hrs 150 600 meeting or coordination with Client PM-Arch 2 hrs 150 300 specifications in CSI format PM-Arch 0 hrs 150 0
construction cost estimate PM-Arch 0 hrs 150 0
quality control PM-Arch 4 hrs 150 600
City bldg-safety dept. and client submittal&corrections Sr.Tech 0 hrs 110 0 5,100

CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT
pre-bid meeting PM-Arch 0 hrs 150 0
bidding RFI's PM-Arch 2 hrs 150 300
pre-construction meeting PM-Arch 0 hrs 150 0
project management, RFI & submittal response PM-Arch 6 hrs 150 900 CADD-3D modeling and record drawings Sr.Tech 0 hrs 110 0 construction site meetings, punchlist meeting PM-Arch 2 hrs 150 300 1,500
TOTAL $15,000

City Council Staff Report

Date: March 4, 2026
Agenda Item Number: 10.G.

To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Shawn Igoe, Public Works Director
Robert Aguirre, Director of Recreation & Community Services Subject: Community Transportation Updates and Amendment to Via Transportation Inc. for on-demand services

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Receiving and Filing this staff report summarizing the status of the City’s Community Transportation pilot and program updates;

2. Authorizing the City Manager to execute an Amendment with Nomad Transit, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Via Transportation Inc., in a form approved by the City Attorney, adding a six-month pilot for Dial-A-Ride support services in the amount of $230,670 for the term of the pilot and extending on-demand services on a month-to- month basis beginning March 2026 in amount not-to-exceed $62,606 per month;

3. Adopting a Resolution approving the Monterey Park Zero Emission Bus Rollout Plan in compliance with the California Air Resources Board (“CARB”) Innovative Clean Transit (“ICT”) Regulations; and

4. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

Executive Summary:

In early 2024, the City implemented a pilot program for transportation services, which included restructured Spirit Bus routes and implementation of on-demand services, MPK Transit Express operated by Via Transportation Inc (“Via”). This report summarizes the status of the pilot program and also proposes the use of Via’s services to help augment the City’s current Dial-a-Ride services. The City currently operates Dia-a-Ride through its Recreation and Community Services department with limited availabilities due to staffing and program resources. Due to the success of MPK Transit Express’s on-demand service and Via’s staffing and technology resources, the Director of Recreation and Community Services recommends that City Council authorize a six-month term agreement with Via for Dial-a-Ride augmentation services.

Additionally, it is recommended that City Council adopt a Resolution approving the City of

Monterey Park’s Zero Emission Bus Roll Out Plan. In December 2018, the California Air Resources Board (“CARB”) adopted the Innovative Clean Transit (“ICT”) (Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 13 § 2023.1) regulation, which requires all public transit agencies to gradually transition to 100- percent zero-emission bus (“ZEB”) fleets by 2040. The regulation requires transit agencies to publish ZEB Rollout Plans and has purchase requirements for transit agencies of different sizes by year.

Background:

On November 6, 2024, City Council approved a restructuring of Spirit Bus routes and authorized a one-year pilot of MPK Transit Express, an on-demand rideshare program operated in partnership with Via Transportation, Inc. The changes came after an evaluation of the Spirit Bus system by Arcadis/IBI where it reviewed ridership data, cost trends, and community feedback to evaluate the efficiency of the system. Findings in the study included declining ridership, rising costs in operations, and service inefficiencies. Community feedback demonstrated a public interest in more direct routes, easier transfers, and flexible service like app-based, on-demand rides.

Pilot program

MPK Transit Express, powered by Via, was launched in April 2025. The on-demand service supplements the City’s fixed-route Spirit Bus system. The service helps bridge first- and last- mile gaps, provides transit access to areas no longer served by traditional routes, and offers expanded service hours and flexible pick-up/drop-off options. By working in tandem with the Spirit Bus, MPK Transit Express enhances mobility for residents, especially seniors, students, and those with limited transportation access.

Due to demand and mobility needs, on August 7, 2025 MPK Transit Express’s coverage area expanded to include high-priority areas, including California State University, Los Angeles, larger coverage surrounding Mark Keppel High School, key destinations along South Atlantic Boulevard such as the County library, courthouse, and regional transit connections, including the Metro E Line station at Atlantic/Pomona, and Wal-Mart in the City of Rosemead. Since the zone expansion, ridership to the City of Rosemead has been requested daily. Additionally, service hours were extended to provide weekday service starting at 6:30 a.m. through 7:30 p.m. Fares for MPK Transit Express also took effect on September 10, 2025. Fare is $2.00 per ride, or $1.00 per ride for riders over 55 years old and wheelchair accessible vehicle (“WAV”) riders. Riders can book additional seats for passengers for just $1. Payment options include credit or debit cards through the app or phone. Additionally, the City offers a voucher program that allows riders to use cash to purchase ride credit in increments of $2, $12, and $20.

Vouchers are available for purchase at the Langley Senior Center.

Spirit Bus service changes were implemented later in August 2025. This allowed for a transition period to allow for riders to learn and use MPK Transit Express before routes were changed or discontinued. The changes included route restructuring for Routes 1,2,3 and 5, and elimination of Route 4.

Evaluation

The City has continued its work with its consultants, now Flexlynqs, to evaluate the pilot program and service changes. Recent performance data shows that the City’s fixed-route and

micro-transit services continue to serve a significant role in local mobility and transportation. In 2024, the Spirit Bus system recorded 74,117 annual riders, averaging 6,167 riders per month, at a cost per trip of $29.31. In 2025, ridership varied by period. From January through March 2025, Spirit Bus carried 16,823 riders (5,607 average monthly) at $31.14 per trip. From April through July 2025, ridership increased to 23,172 (5,793 average monthly) with a slightly higher cost per trip of $32.02. However, from August through December 2025, ridership declined to 17,754 (3,550 average monthly), and the cost per trip rose to $46.04. On an annualized basis, 2025 Spirit Bus ridership is projected at approximately 57,749, with an average monthly ridership of 4,813 and a cost per trip of $34.67.

In further review of Spirit Bus, the Link service route has consistently demonstrated the lowest ridership productivity, averaging fewer than one passenger per service hour—resulting in high cost per ridership. Based on this data, it is recommended to discontinue the Link beginning July 2026. Riders in this area currently have access to transportation through MPK Transit Express and higher usage of the on-demand service in lieu of a fixed-route shuttle would be more efficient and cost effective.

MPK Transit Express, which launched in 2025 to supplement Spirit Bus, served 9,513 riders from April through November, averaging 1,189 riders per month at a cost per trip of $36.85. On an annual basis, MPK Transit Express is projected to serve approximately 14,772 riders, maintaining the same monthly average and cost per trip.

Overall, the Spirit Bus route changes and MPK Transit Express service appear to be an efficient model for transportation services in the City. The joint programs allow the City to provide reliable and cost-efficient public transit throughout the City for all types of riders. It also allows for regional connectivity and increased use of services. The City conducted a community survey from December 2025 through February 2026 to obtain community feedback on transportation services. The survey results showed that survey respondents rely on the primary use of a personal vehicle. Close to one-third of respondents did indicate that both Spirit Bus and MPK Transit Express services were used. Current riders reported generally positive satisfaction levels, with approximately 75% of Spirit Bus riders and nearly 50% of MPK Transit Express riders indicating they are “almost always” or “often” satisfied. The survey also identified work, education, and medical trips are primary use of MPK Transit Express. The most frequently cited reasons for not using Spirit Bus is that they use MPK instead, it doesn’t go close enough to where people need to travel, that service is infrequent, and that it doesn’t operate the hours or days of week needed.

The evaluation of the Spirit Bus fixed-route system and MPK Transit Express program demonstrates that Monterey Park is at an important transition point in the evolution of its local mobility services from a traditional fixed-route model toward a more flexible, performance- based mobility framework.

As the City prepares to release an RFP incorporating the evaluation’s findings and service recommendations for fixed-route and on-demand services, it is recommended that City Council authorize a month-to-month extension to the agreement with Via Transportation, Inc., for services after February 2026. This will allow for continuity of services until the RFP process is completed and a new contractor is selected. The City would also have the flexibility to terminate micro transit services within 30 days of termination with Via.

Dial-A-Ride

While Dial-A-Ride (“DAR”) was not part of the pilot launched in 2024, it is a City transportation service available to Monterey Park residents aged 55 years or older and/or those who have a signed form from a physician attesting to a disability. The service provides transportation within City limits, and to medical appointments in adjacent communities within five miles. DAR is overseen by the Recreation and Community Services department and operated with City employees Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., with appointments made in advance.

The program is free to qualifying residents.

The City has experienced service challenges with DAR due to limited resources such as drivers and technology. The City received a proposal from Via to help augment DAR service using its existing fleet and current MPK Transit technology for expanded coverage and availability. Neighboring cities such as Rosemead have transitioned their services from City operated programs to an on-demand contractor due to its efficient and cost effective model.

Similar to the current MPK Transit Express, Via would offer on-demand app-based appointment scheduling, as well as dispatch services for DAR. By having Via operate Dial-A- Ride services, it would supplement current services to support City staff, create efficiency in scheduling, book rides in real-time, and serve as staff augmentation. It is recommended that City Council authorize a six-month term with Via for DAR support.

Monterey Park Zero Emission Bus Plan

CARB adopted the ICT which requires all public transit agencies to gradually transition their bus fleet to zero-emission technologies. The City is subject to regulations for “small agencies (fewer than 100 buses) which requires 25% of all new bus purchases to be zero-emission beginning 2026, by 2029, 100% of all new fixed-route purchases by transit agencies must be zero emissions. CARB’s goal is for all transit operators to be fully transitioned by 2040.

The City currently owns eight transit buses as part of the Spirit Bus fixed-route service However, due to service changes and anticipated RFP, the new contractor would be responsible for owning and maintaining a fleet of 6 buses for services. The proposed ZEB Roll out plan, outlines how the City’s bus fleet will be phased into zero-emission including purchase and charging considerations by the City and future contractor.

It is recommended that the City adopts a resolution approving the plan and proceeding with the RFP process based on the results of the Pilot program and future service changes.

Strategic Plan Goal:

These implementations support the Strategic Plan Goal of Expanding Access to Community Resources and Services by providing an additional transportation option for seniors and individuals with disabilities.

Fiscal Impact:

The FY 2025-26 budget included $573,869 for on-demand micro-transit service. There are sufficient funds in the FY 2025–26 budget to cover the remaining on-demand micro-transit service provided by Via. Funds for the DAR support services are budgeted in the Recreation and Community Services Department’s annual budget. Both services are funded with Prop A/Prop C funds.

Attachments:

1. Spirit Bus & MPK Transit Express Evaluation

2. Via Cost Proposal

3. Resolution

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

Spirit Bus Fixed-Route & MPK Transit
Express
Service Evaluation

Prepared for the City of Monterey Park
by Flexlynqs
February 2026

SPIRIT BUS FIXED -ROUTE & MPK TRANSIT EXPRESS

SERVICE EVALUATION
Prepared for the City of Monterey Park
February 2026 2

Table of Contents

1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 3 2 Spirit Bus & MPK Transit Express - Evaluation ................................................... 5

2.1 Spirit Bus ...................................................................................................... 5

2.2 MPK Transit Express .................................................................................. 10

2.3 Spirit Bus and MPK Ridership & Cost Comparisons .................................. 13 3 Community Survey – What We Heard? ............................................................... 14 4 A Way Forward ...................................................................................................... 19

4.1 Strategic Direction for Local Transit Services ............................................. 19

4.2 Potential Deployment of LA Metro TAP Fare Payment .............................. 20

4.3 Financial and Policy Considerations ........................................................... 21

4.4 Implications for the Preparation of the RFP ................................................ 21

4.5 Conclusion.................................................................................................. 22

SPIRIT BUS FIXED -ROUTE & MPK TRANSIT EXPRESS

SERVICE EVALUATION
Prepared for the City of Monterey Park
February 2026 3
1 Introduction
The City of Monterey Park has retained consulting firm Flexlynqs to assist in the conduct of a Transit System Evaluation of its Spirit Bus and MPK Transit Express public transportation program.

This initiative of the City is both timely and provides for an opportunity to critically evaluate the City’s local transit system to present foundational data for the preparation of a Request for Proposal (RFP) document for the near term (effective July 1, 2026) contracting for the provision of service.

Current Public Transportation Services: Public transportation services that are available to the community of Monterey Park include a local fixed-route circulator, the Spirit Bus, rideshare app micro transit service, MPK Transit Express, and regional bus service that is provided by two operators: Los Angeles County Metro Bus and Montebello Bus Lines. Also available to the community is a local Dial-A-Ride service for seniors and disabled persons (operated by the City’s Recreation and Community Services).

Spirit Bus - Updates to Routes and Schedule – Effective August 1, 2025, changes to the Spirit Bus routes included:
• Routes 1 and 2 went from one-way loops to two-way routes • Route 3 no longer serves the area of Graves Ave to Garvey Ranch Park • Route 4 was discontinued, with MPK Transit Express covering this area • Route 5 connects to the Metro E Line Station at Atlantic and Pomona. Service east of Atlantic Blvd. and Riggin St. was eliminated, with MPK Transit Express covering Riggin St. and the Monterey Park Marketplace.
• LINK shuttle between Corporate Center Drive and the
CSULA Metrolink station.

Riders have access to real-time status of Spirit Bus routes through the Passio GO! app. Riders can view the buses' expected arrival times, plan trips and check out specific routes. The Spirit Bus fare remains at 25 cents.

MPK Transit Express – Introduced in April 2025, MPK Transit Express is an on-demand public rideshare service. Riders are able to book a trip using a smartphone application or by calling the program’s call center and also track their vehicle. Rides are available Monday - Friday, 6:30am - 7:30pm. As of September 10, 2025, a $2 fare was introduced.

Spirit Bus and MPK Transit Express routes and service area are presented in Figure 1.1.

Dial-A-Ride (DAR) is a free shared transportation service for Monterey Park senior residents ages 55 years or older and/or have a signed form from a physician attesting to a disability. The service provides transportation within city limits, and to medical appointments in adjacent communities within five miles (Alhambra, Montebello, San Gabriel, and other unincorporated LA County areas).

SPIRIT BUS FIXED -ROUTE & MPK TRANSIT EXPRESS

SERVICE EVALUATION
Prepared for the City of Monterey Park
February 2026 4
Figure 1.1: Spirit Bus Routes and MPK Transit Express Service Area

SPIRIT BUS FIXED -ROUTE & MPK TRANSIT EXPRESS

SERVICE EVALUATION
Prepared for the City of Monterey Park
February 2026 5
2 Spirit Bus & MPK Transit Express -
Evaluation
An evaluation of Spirit Bus and MPK Transit Express services is presented in this section.

2.1 Spirit Bus
The following presents operating and financial data for the Spirit Bus fixed route bus system.

For historical context, Figure 2.1 presents Spirit Bus 2024 (a) ridership and (b) revenue hours by route.

Figure 2.2 presents Spirit Bus 2025 ridership and revenue hours by route. 2025 ridership and revenue hour data by month and route are presented in Figure 2.3. Data is segregated to reflect: (1) pre-MPK Express deployment (Jan. to April ’25); (2) pre-route changes (May-July ’25); post route changes (Aug.-Dec. ’25) Financial performance is presented in Figures 2.4 (Cost per Month) and 2.5 (Cost per Trip).

Figure 2.1(a): Spirit Bus 2024 Ridership

SPIRIT BUS FIXED -ROUTE & MPK TRANSIT EXPRESS

SERVICE EVALUATION
Prepared for the City of Monterey Park
February 2026 6
Figure 2.1(b): Spirit Bus 2024 Revenue Hours by Route

Spirit Bus 2024 TRIPS PER HOUR
Route 1 Route 2 Route 3 Route 4 Route 5 Link
Ridership 14,423 16,248 17,557 16,040 7,832 2,017
Hours 3,347 3,371 3,447 3,332 3,340 2,603

TRIPS PER
HOUR 4.3 4.8 5.1 4.8 2.3 0.8

SPIRIT BUS FIXED -ROUTE & MPK TRANSIT EXPRESS

SERVICE EVALUATION
Prepared for the City of Monterey Park
February 2026 7
Figure 2.2: Spirit Bus 2025 Ridership and Revenue Hours by Route

Route 1 Route 2 Route 3 Route 4 Route 5 Link
Ridership 11,164 13,422 13,805 8,088 8,491 2,725
Hours 3,445 3,457 3,455 1,999 3,388 2,620
TRIPS PER HOUR 3.2 3.9 4.0 4.0 2.5 1.0

SPIRIT BUS FIXED -ROUTE & MPK TRANSIT EXPRESS

SERVICE EVALUATION
Prepared for the City of Monterey Park
February 2026 8
Figure 2.3: 2025 Spirit Bus Ridership & Revenue Hours by Month and Route

Spirit Bus 2025
Route 1 Route 2 Route 3 Route 4 Route 5 Link
January 1,048 1,065 1,312 1,104 643 115
February 649 1,174 1,352 1,193 757 133
March 1,124 1,197 1,678 1,287 818 174
2,821 3,436 4,342 3,584 2,218 422 16,823
April 1,262 1,247 1,690 1,290 803 191
May 1,240 1,095 1,770 1,280 736 182
June 1,118 1,054 1,291 988 595 212
July 921 1,283 901 946 836 241
4,541 4,679 5,652 4,504 2,970 826 23,172
August 678 958 850 0 728 290
September 904 1,181 869 0 770 349
October 885 1,217 770 0 790 353
November 718 951 506 0 546 271
December 671 1,000 816 0 469 214
3,856 5,307 3,811 0 3,303 1,477 17,754
Spirit Bus 2025
Route 1 Route 2 Route 3 Route 4 Route 5 Link
January 298.3 287.75 288.77 282.27 271.4 170.82
February 169.78 277.8 270.8 279.5 257.68 205.68
March 283.88 279.33 278.11 277.27 282.07 226.17
751.96 844.88 837.68 839.04 811.15 602.67 4,687.38
April 298.33 291.07 285.28 292.38 280.52 231.08
May 293.42 284.33 280.37 280.68 230.48 225.83
June 298.75 281.04 287.38 289.90 275.62 225.75
July 297.60 297.28 289.95 296.53 282.87 241.70
1,188.10 1,153.72 1,142.98 1,159.49 1,069.49 924.36 6,638.14 August 289.90 278.73 278.49 0.00 296.95 235.13
September 304.55 291.80 297.95 0.00 302.87 233.78
October 342.62 322.88 325.12 0.00 343.74 246.75
November 275.20 268.68 269.78 0.00 263.82 179.13
December 292.35 296.47 303.47 0.00 299.97 198.37
1,504.62 1,458.56 1,474.81 0.00 1,507.35 1,093.16 7,038.50 Spirit Bus 2025
Route 1 Route 2 Route 3 Route 4 Route 5 Link
Jan.-March 3.75 4.07 5.18 4.27 2.73 0.70
April-July 3.82 4.06 4.94 3.88 2.78 0.89
Aug.-Dec. 2.56 3.64 2.58 0.00 2.19 1.35

TRIPS PER
HOUR
Hours
Ridership

SPIRIT BUS FIXED -ROUTE & MPK TRANSIT EXPRESS

SERVICE EVALUATION
Prepared for the City of Monterey Park
February 2026 9
Figure 2.4 Cost per Month

Figure 2.5: Cost per Trip

Months Total Cost Cost/Month Cost/Hour Cost/Trip
January - March $523,908.46 $174,636.15 $111.77 $31.14
April - July $741,944.91 $185,486.23 $111.77 $32.02
August - December $817,451.39 $163,490.28 $116.14 $46.04 Total / Average $2,083,304.76 $36.08

SPIRIT BUS FIXED -ROUTE & MPK TRANSIT EXPRESS

SERVICE EVALUATION
Prepared for the City of Monterey Park
February 2026 10
Key Observations
The Spirit Bus system exhibits uneven productivity and efficiency, driven by misalignment between service deployment and passenger demand. Core routes perform satisfactorily, while select services operate with disproportionately low productivity.

Spirit Bus routes fall into three functional categories:

Tier 1 – Productive Core Routes - Routes 1- 3
→ Operationally viable, demand-aligned, defensible investments Tier 2 – Marginal Routes - Route 5
→ Candidate for restructuring, frequency reduction, or redesign Tier 3 – Structurally Inefficient Services - Link
→ Candidate for elimination

2.2 MPK Transit Express
The following presents operating and financial data for the MPK Transit Express service.

Figure 2.6 illustrates the number of completed trips from April 2025 to January 2026 (10- month period). Trips per revenue hour are presented in Figure 2.7. A summary of operational and financial performance is presented in Figure 2.8.

In addition to the aforementioned, qualitative performance indicators include:
➢ Average pick-up ETA’s are 11.9 minutes (response time) ➢ Average ride duration is 8.4 minutes (travel time)
➢ Average ride distance is 2.3 miles

Figure 2.6: Number of Completed Trips (April 2025 – January 2026)

SPIRIT BUS FIXED -ROUTE & MPK TRANSIT EXPRESS

SERVICE EVALUATION
Prepared for the City of Monterey Park
February 2026 11
The completed trips metric (Figure 2.6) reflects actual service utilization and market uptake across the 10-month period. This indicator is important because it measures real demand, not theoretical capacity.

Analytical interpretation:
• Growth or stability in completed trips indicates service-market fit • Flat or declining trip completion would have indicated misalignment between service levels and user demand
• Provides empirical justification for service investment.

Figure 2.7: Trips per Revenue Hour

Trips per revenue hour is a core efficiency metric that directly links operational input (service hours) to output (passenger trips). From a policy perspective, this metric is relevant for the following reasons:
• High values = efficient resource deployment
• Low values = oversupply, misallocation, or poor service design • Enables direct comparison between fixed-route services and MPK Express

SPIRIT BUS FIXED -ROUTE & MPK TRANSIT EXPRESS

SERVICE EVALUATION
Prepared for the City of Monterey Park
February 2026 12

Figure 2.8: Operational & Financial Summary (April 2025 – January 2026)

Month
(2025/26)
Completed
Trips
Vehicle
Hours
(invoice)
Revenue
Hours
Gross Cost (per
invoice)
Farebox
Revenue Net Cost Net Cost
per Trip
Trips per
Revenue Hour
April 271 450.87 194.3 $38,765.80 $0.00 $38,765.80 $143.05 1.39 May 675 447.67 308.9 $38,490.67 $0.00 $38,490.67 $57.02 2.19 June 963 495.48 399.6 $42,601.37 $0.00 $42,601.37 $44.24 2.41 July 1,416 538.72 482.4 $46,319.15 $0.00 $46,319.15 $32.71 2.94 Aug. 1,899 540.48 481.3 $46,470.47 $0.00 $46,470.47 $24.47 3.95 Sept. 1,516 549.95 465.8 $47,284.70 $1,071.72 $46,212.98 $30.48 3.25 Oct. 1,589 616.8 517.3 $53,032.46 $1,599.12 $51,433.34 $32.37 3.07 Nov. 1,184 488.54 415.2 $42,004.67 $1,747.57 $40,257.10 $34.00 2.85 Dec. 1,351 553.1 451.1 $47,555.54 $1,915.13 $45,640.41 $33.78 2.99 Jan.'26 1,447 627.9 523.1 $53,986.84 $1,931.68 $52,055.16 $35.97 2.77 TOTAL
(10 mths.) 12,311 5,309.51 4,239.00 $456,511.67 $8,265.22 $448,246.45 $36.41 2.90 Via - MPK Express
($85.98/hr.)

SPIRIT BUS FIXED -ROUTE & MPK TRANSIT EXPRESS

SERVICE EVALUATION
Prepared for the City of Monterey Park
February 2026 13

2.3 Spirit Bus and MPK Ridership & Cost Comparisons

Figure 2.9 presents a ridership and cost comparison of Spirit Bus and MPK services.

Figure 2.9: Spirit Bus and MPK Ridership & Cost Comparisons

Key Observations:
➢ Spirit Bus annual ridership declined 22.08% from 2024 to 2025 ➢ Spirit Bus cost per trip increased by 18.29% from 2024 ($29.31) to 2025 ($34.67) ➢ The cost per trip of MPK is 6.29% greater than the cost per trip for Spirit Bus ➢ Total ridership (Spirit Bus and MPK combined) of 72,521 is 2.15% less than Spirit Bus ridership of 74,117 in 2024

Total
Ridership
Avg. Monthly
Ridership
Cost per
Trip
2024 Annual 74,117 6,167 $29.31
Jan.- March 16,823 5,607 $31.14
April - July 23,172 5,793 $32.02
Aug. - Dec. 17,754 3,550 $46.04
Total 57,749 4,813 $34.67
2025/26 April '25 - Jan. '26 12,311 1,231 $36.85
Annualized 14,772 1,189 $36.85
72,521 6,043
Spirit Bus
MPK
Annualized Total (Spirit & MPK)
2025

SPIRIT BUS FIXED -ROUTE & MPK TRANSIT EXPRESS

SERVICE EVALUATION
Prepared for the City of Monterey Park
February 2026 14
3 Community Survey – What We Heard?
The goal of the Spirit Bus and MPK Transit Express of the Community Surveys was to gather information and gain a better understanding of how current Spirit Bus and/or MPK riders view the services, what barriers to using the services may exist for Monterey Park residents who do not currently use either of them, or how the services may be improved.

The surveys were available to the public from December 2025 to early February 2026, during which time 76 responses were gathered. The survey was promoted through the City of Monterey Park’s social media channels, and at in-person engagement events and presentations.

Responses to key questions are presented below.

In a typical week, what types of transportation do you use to get around?

SPIRIT BUS FIXED -ROUTE & MPK TRANSIT EXPRESS

SERVICE EVALUATION
Prepared for the City of Monterey Park
February 2026 15
The use of a personal vehicle was the primary mode used. Close to one-third of respondents did indicate that both Spirit Bus and MPK Transit Express services were used. A similar percentage indicated they used of Metro bus.

If you now use MPK Transit Express (On-Demand) Service, what do you think of the service?

Current MPK Transit Express riders are happy with many aspects of the service. Close to 50% responded that they are “almost always” or “often” satisfied with MPK service.

How often do you typically ride MPK Express service?

Close to 50% of
respondents use MPK
service either daily or
several times per week.

That rises to 62% when
‘Once a week’ is included.

SPIRIT BUS FIXED -ROUTE & MPK TRANSIT EXPRESS

SERVICE EVALUATION
Prepared for the City of Monterey Park
February 2026 16
For what trip purposes do you use the MPK Express service?

MPK Transit Express is used primarily for work, education, and medical trips (combine for representing 64% of trips).

If you do NOT use MPK Transit Express (On-Demand) Service, why not?

Primary reasons for not using MPK
Transit Express include ‘not feeling
safe’ and they ‘did not know about the
service’. Of a similar percentage was
‘doesn’t operate on the days of week
want to travel’.

SPIRIT BUS FIXED -ROUTE & MPK TRANSIT EXPRESS

SERVICE EVALUATION
Prepared for the City of Monterey Park
February 2026 17
If you now use SPIRIT Bus Service, what do think of the service?

Current Spirit Bus riders are happy with many aspects of the service. They find it to be affordable and safe, and about 75% responded that they are “almost always” or “often” satisfied with Spirit Bus service.

Respondents also identified a number of pain points with current service. Nearly 50% said the service “not very often” or “almost never” operates on schedule, and less than 25% said that travel times are “not very often” or “almost never” reasonable.

If you do NOT use SPIRIT Bus Service, why not?

SPIRIT BUS FIXED -ROUTE & MPK TRANSIT EXPRESS

SERVICE EVALUATION
Prepared for the City of Monterey Park
February 2026 18
The most frequently cited reasons for not using Spirit Bus is that they use MPK instead, it doesn’t go close enough to where people need to travel, that service is infrequent, and that it doesn’t operate the hours or days of week needed.

Other frequently cited reasons were that the bus takes too long to travel where people need to go, they would need to transfer between multiple lines, or they need more information about which bus to take.

SPIRIT BUS FIXED -ROUTE & MPK TRANSIT EXPRESS

SERVICE EVALUATION
Prepared for the City of Monterey Park
February 2026 19
4 A Way Forward
The evaluation of the Spirit Bus fixed-route system and MPK Transit Express program demonstrates that Monterey Park is at an important transition point in the evolution of its local mobility services. The data indicates that while core fixed routes remain defensible investments, select services are structurally inefficient, and on-demand service has demonstrated strong market acceptance and operational performance.

This section outlines a recommended policy direction and establishes the framework to inform preparation of the forthcoming Request for Proposals (RFP) for contracted transit operations effective July 1, 2026.

4.1 Strategic Direction for Local Transit Services

1. Preserve and Strengthen Core Fixed-Route Service
Routes 1 - 3 continue to demonstrate acceptable productivity and provide important network stability. These services should remain the backbone of the City’s transit program, with refinements focused on:
• Improved on-time performance
• Schedule optimization based on demand patterns
• Enhanced passenger information and stop amenities
• Integration with regional transit providers
These routes provide essential circulation within Monterey Park and critical connections to regional services, including Metro Bus and Montebello Bus Lines.

2. Restructure or Reduce Marginal Fixed-Route Service
Route 5 should be evaluated for service redesign, frequency adjustment, or potential consolidation with other services. Its productivity suggests that service levels may exceed the demand demonstrated in certain segments.

Any restructuring should prioritize:
• Maintaining connectivity to major trip generators
• Coordinating with MPK Transit Express coverage
• Avoiding duplication of higher-frequency regional routes

3. Discontinue the LINK Shuttle Service
The LINK shuttle service exhibits persistently low productivity and represents a structurally inefficient allocation of service hours. With trips per revenue hour significantly below system averages, continuation of this service cannot be justified from a cost-effective perspective.

SPIRIT BUS FIXED -ROUTE & MPK TRANSIT EXPRESS

SERVICE EVALUATION
Prepared for the City of Monterey Park
February 2026 20
Additionally:
• Regional transit connectivity to CSULA and surrounding areas is available through Metro and Montebello services.
• Both Route 5 and MPK Transit Express can serve localized demand within Monterey Park where appropriate.

It is therefore recommended that the LINK shuttle service be discontinued in the next service contract cycle, with any residual mobility needs addressed through more flexible or demand-responsive service models.

4. Continue and Optimize MPK Transit Express
MPK Transit Express has demonstrated:
• Strong and growing ridership
• High utilization rates (trips per revenue hour)
• Positive customer satisfaction
• Competitive cost per trip relative to fixed-route service The service effectively addresses first/last-mile needs, work and education trips, and medical travel. Continued operation is recommended, with a focus on:
• Ongoing service area calibration
• Monitoring cost per trip trends
• Addressing safety perception and public awareness gaps • Exploring fare integration options

4.2 Potential Deployment of LA Metro TAP Fare Payment
As part of the City’s modernization efforts, consideration should be given to implementing LA Metro’s TAP fare payment system across Spirit Bus and MPK Transit Express services.

Benefits of TAP integration include:
• Seamless fare payment across regional transit providers • Reduced cash handling and administrative burden
• Improved ridership data collection and reporting
• Enhanced customer convenience
• Potential eligibility for regional fare subsidy or integration programs TAP deployment would position Monterey Park’s transit services within the broader Los Angeles County mobility ecosystem and improve connectivity between local and regional services.

The RFP should therefore request:
• Proposer experience with TAP integration and farebox technology

SPIRIT BUS FIXED -ROUTE & MPK TRANSIT EXPRESS

SERVICE EVALUATION
Prepared for the City of Monterey Park
February 2026 21
• Hardware and software requirements for TAP validation on fixed-route and microtransit vehicles
• Implementation timeline and cost estimates
• Data reporting compatibility with Metro systems

4.3 Financial and Policy Considerations
The evaluation indicates:
• MPK Transit Express cost per trip is comparable to fixed-route service • Combined system ridership has marginally decreased relative to 2024 This suggests that a hybrid mobility model - combining productive fixed routes with demand-responsive service - is both financially defensible and aligned with community needs.

Future policy decisions should prioritize:
• Cost per passenger trip
• Trips per revenue hour
• Equity and geographic coverage
• Alignment with regional transportation investments

4.4 Implications for the Preparation of the RFP
The findings of this evaluation directly inform the scope and structure of the forthcoming RFP for transit operations beginning July 1, 2026.

The RFP should:

1. Define a Hybrid Service Model
• Fixed-route service (Routes 1 - 3, modified Route 5)
• On-demand microtransit (MPK Transit Express)
• Elimination of LINK shuttle

2. Establish Clear Performance Metrics
Proposers should be required to meet performance standards including:
• Minimum trips per revenue hour
• Maximum cost per trip thresholds
• On-time performance standards
• Maximum average response time (for on-demand service) • Customer satisfaction benchmarks

SPIRIT BUS FIXED -ROUTE & MPK TRANSIT EXPRESS

SERVICE EVALUATION
Prepared for the City of Monterey Park
February 2026 22

3. Require Technology Integration
• Real-time vehicle tracking
• Passenger information systems
• TAP fare compatibility (if adopted)
• Data reporting and dashboard capabilities

4. Provide Scalable Service Options
The RFP should request base and optional service scenarios, allowing the City flexibility to:
• Adjust service levels based on funding
• Expand or contract MPK service zones
• Pilot additional service innovations

5. Emphasize Data-Driven Management
Contract language should include:
• Monthly performance reporting
• Quarterly service review meetings
• Adjustment mechanisms tied to productivity thresholds

4.5 Conclusion
The Spirit Bus and MPK Transit Express evaluation confirms that Monterey Park’s transit system is transitioning from a traditional fixed-route model toward a more flexible, performance-based mobility framework.

Maintaining productive core routes, discontinuing structurally inefficient services such as the LINK shuttle, and continuing to refine MPK Transit Express will position the City to:
• Improve cost efficiency
• Enhance service responsiveness
• Strengthen regional connectivity
• Better align service deployment with demonstrated demand Incorporating potential LA Metro TAP fare integration and embedding clear performance standards into the upcoming RFP will ensure that the City secures a modern, accountable, and adaptable transit operating partner.

This evaluation provides the analytical foundation necessary to define the scope of work, service expectations, and performance framework for the City’s next generation transit services contract.

Staff Report
March 4, 2026
ATTACHMENT 2
Via Cost Proposal

MICROTRANSIT SERVICES:

DIAL-A-RIDE SERVICES:

Staff Report
March 4, 2026
ATTACHMENT 3
Resolution

RESOLUTION NO. ____

A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CITY OF MONTEREY PARK ZERO

EMISSION BUS ROLLOUT PLAN IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE

CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD INNOVATIVE CLEAN
TRANSIT REGULATION 13 CCR § 2023.1.

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Monterey Park as follows:

SECTION 1: The City Council finds as follows:

A. Pursuant to California Code of Regulations (“CCR”) Title 13 § 2023.1 , the Innovative Clean Transit ( “ICT”) requires each transit agency to submit a complete Zero Emission Bus ( “ZEB”) Rollout Plan, as approved by its governing body.

B. Each transit agency must approve and submit to the California Air Resources Board (“CARB”) a ZEB Rollout Plan describing how the agency will transition to a zero-emission fleet.

C. The City of Monterey Park prepared a ZEB Rollout Plan, which meets the following requirements:

a. A goal to transition its bus fleet to zero -emission by 2040 with careful planning that avoids early retirement of CNG and unleaded buses.
b. A goal to pursue all available and viable options to seek funding opportunities to accelerate the transition ahead of what is identified in the Plan.
c. Identifies types of ZEB technologies that the City of Monterey Park intends to continue to deploy through an operator, including battery electric and hydrogen fuel cell electric buses. d. Describe how the City plans to deploy ZEB’s in disadvantaged communities as listed in the latest version of “CalEnviroScreen.” e. Identify potential funding sources.

D. This Resolution is adopted based upon the evidence submitted during the March 4, 2026, City Council meeting including, without limitation, all documents presented to the City Council and public testimony.

SECTION 2: Adoption and Authorization. The City Council adopts the City of Monterey Park ZEB Rollout Plan attached as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference and authorizes the City Manager, or designee, to submit the plan to any government agencies as may be required by law.

Resolution No.

SECTION 3: Severability. If any part of this Resolution or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the City Council intends that such invalidity will not affect the effectiveness of the remaining provision or application and, to this end, the provisions of this Resolution are severable.

SECTION 4: Reliance On Record. Each and every one of the findings and determinations in this Resolution are based on the competent and substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the project. The findings and determinations constitute the independent findings and determinations of the City Council in all respects and are fully and completely supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole.

SECTION 5: Limitations. The City Council’s analysis and evaluation of the project is based on the best information currently available. It is inevitable that in evaluating a project that absolute and perfect knowledge of all possible aspects of the project will not exist. One of the major limitations on analysis of the project is the City Council’s lack of knowledge of future events. In all instances, best efforts were made to form accurate assumptions. Somewhat related to this are the limitations on the Ci ty’s ability to solve what are in effect regional, state, and national problems and issues. The City must work within the political framework within which it exists and with the limitations inherent in that framework.

SECTION 6: Summaries of Information. All summaries of information in the findings, which precede this section, are based on the substantial evidence in the record. The absence of any particular fact from any such summary is not an indication that a particular finding is not based in part on that fact.

SECTION 7: Construction. This Resolution must be broadly construed in order to achieve the purposes stated in this Resolution. It is the City Council’s intent that the provisions of this Resolution be interpreted or implemented by the City and others in a manner that facilitates the purposes set forth in this Resolution.

SECTION 8: Electronic Signatures . This Resolution may be executed with electronic signatures in accordance with Government Code §16.5. Such electronic signatures will be treated in all respects as having the same effect as an original signature.

SECTION 9: Recordation. The Mayor, or presiding officer, is authorized to sign this Resolution signifying its adoption by the City Council of the City of Monterey Park and the City Clerk, or her duly appointed deputy, may attest thereto.

SECTION 10: Effective Date. This Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption and will remain effective unless repealed or superseded.

Resolution No.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this ___ day of ______________, 2026.

________________________________
Elizabeth Yang, Mayor

Attest:

__________________________
Maychelle Yee, City Clerk

Approved as to Form:

__________________________
Karl H. Berger, City Attorney

Exhibit A - ZEB Rollout Plan

Pride in the Past • Faith in the Future

CITY OF MONTEREY PARK

320 West Newmark Avenue • Monterey Park • California 91754-2896 www.ci.monterey-park.ca.us
City Council
Henry Lo
Vinh Lo
Jose Sanchez
Thomas Wong
Elizabeth Wang
City Clerk
Maychelle Yee
City Treasurer
Amy Lee

CITY OF MONTEREY PARK
Innovative Clean Transit (ICT) Regulation
Zero-Emission Bus (ZEB) Small Transit Fleet
Rollout Plan (ROP)
March 4, 2026

EXHIBIT A

City of Monterey Park: ICT ZEB ROP 2026 Page 1 of 6
Table of Contents
Section A: Transit Agency Information ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 2 Addresses: ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 2 Background: ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 2 Contact: ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 2 Zero-Emission Bus Group ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 2 Section B: Transition Plan General Information ................................ ................................ ...................... 2 General Information ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 2 Adoption ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 3 Contact ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 3 Section C: Technology Portfolio ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 3 Vehicle Deployment ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 3 Infrastructure Deployment ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 3 Section D: Current & Future Bus Purchases ................................ ................................ ........................... 4 Current Fleet ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 4 Section E: Facilities & Infrastructure ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 5 Primary Charging Facility ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 5 Planned Secondary Charging Facility ................................ ................................ .............................. 5 Section F: Disadvantaged Communities ................................ ................................ ................................ . 5 SB 535 Disadvantaged Community ................................ ................................ ................................ . 5 Section G: Workforce Training ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 6 Workforce Training ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 6 Section H. Funding ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 6 Vehicles ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 6 Infrastructure ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 6 Section I: Start-Up & Scale Up Challenges ................................ ................................ .............................. 6 Appendix A: Resolution 2026-XX (City Council Adoption ................................ ................................ ........ 6

City of Monterey Park: ICT ZEB ROP 2026 Page 2 of 6
Section A: Transit Agency Information
Addresses:

City of Monterey Park
320 W. Newmark Ave.

Monterey Park, CA 91754
Background:

The City of Monterey Park (City) operates a fixed-route service - Spirit Bus - and a demand responsive service - Dial-A-Ride. In April 2025, the City launched a pilot program for new on -demand service, MPK Transit Express. All services operate generally within City limits. The City contracts with a private company to operate the Spirit Bus; the service is available to the general public for a cash fare of 25 cents for Routes 1 to 3 and 50 cents for Route 5 and the Metrolink feeder service. Dial -A-Ride is operated in-house and is restricted to senior residents who are 55 years and older and individuals with disabilities. Dial-A-Ride is a free service. The City’s pilot, MPK Transit Express, is also contractor - operated. Service area covers most of the City’s jurisdiction and is open to the general public for $2 per ride. Seniors and individuals with disabilities receive a discounted rate of $1.

Contact:

Primary Secondary
Judy Witrago Xochitl Tipan
Management Analyst Public Works Manager
320 W. Newmark Ave 320 W. Newmark Ave
Monterey Park, CA 91754 Monterey Park, CA 91754
626.307.1291 626.307.1383
[email protected] [email protected]

Zero-Emission Bus Group
The City of Monterey Park is not part of a Joint Zero-Emission Bus Group.

Section B: Transition Plan General Information
General Information
The City of Monterey Park’s rollout plan will transition the agency’s fixed-route bus fleet and demand response vehicle fleet to 100% zero -emission by 2040 per ICT regulation. The plan directs Monterey Park to procure heavy-duty battery electric buses in 2029 to replace heavy-duty compressed natural gas (CNG) buses that have met or exceeded their useful lives; the demand -response fleet will also

City of Monterey Park: ICT ZEB ROP 2026 Page 3 of 6
introduce battery electric vehicles as existing fleet have met or exceeded their useful lives and as technology improves. No vehicles are planned for early retirement to comply with the ICT regulation.

This plan is intended to be a living document that is subject to change as zero -emission vehicle technology and infrastructure technology matures.

Year Planned Procurement ZEB Count Notes
2026-2027 Replacement wave 1 Contractor-owned
2028-2029 All new ZEB
procurements
1 ICT requirement
2032-2040 Gradual replacement All ZEB As vehicles reach end of useful life

Adoption
The ROP was adopted by the City of Monterey Park City Council on March 4, 2026. The resolution is included in Appendix A.

Contact
For additional information regarding the ROP, please contact:

Judy Witrago
Management Analyst
320 W. Newmark Ave
Monterey Park, CA 91754

Section C: Technology Portfolio
Vehicle Deployment
The City of Monterey Park plans to deploy battery electric buses (BEBs) and battery electric vehicles (BEVs) as the fleet transitions to 100% zero-emission. The City will ensure compliance with ICT requirements through contractual obligations placed on its transit service provider.

Infrastructure Deployment
As the City transitions to a contracted fleet model, future service contracts will require the contractor to deploy zero-emission buses consistent with the City’s ICT Rollout Plan and CARB requirements. The City recognizes that its existing CNG fueling infrastructure will be phased down as zero -emission technologies are introduced.

City of Monterey Park: ICT ZEB ROP 2026 Page 4 of 6
Section D: Current & Future Bus Purchases
Current Fleet

The Spirit Bus fleet currently includes 9 vehicles: (3) 2018 Arboc Spirit of Mobility, (1) 2015 Arboc low floor cutaway, (3) 2013 El Dorado BRT mid-sized buses, (1) 2011 El Dorado AeroElite cutaway, and (1) contractor-owned cutaway spare. The City’s Dial-a-Ride and MPK Transit Express do not use buses as part of their fleet. The City recently completed a transportation study which resulted in route restructures and service changes reducing the fleet size needed for service. Base d on continued service of four fixed-routes, the City will maintain a fleet of 6 buses , which will be contractor -owned.

The current fleet listed in Table 1 will be phased out as part of a new contracted anticipated for 2026.

Table 1. Current Fleet
Asset
Class
Service Name Manufacturer Model Owner Agency
Fleet ID
Vehicle
Length
(in feet)
Seating
Capacity
Vin Number/Id. Number
CU-
Cutaway
bus
Monterey Park
Spirit Bus
El Dorado E-Z RIDER II

8.9 ISL G
City of
Monterey
Park
085 30 29 1N9MNALG4DC084183
CU-
Cutaway
bus
Monterey Park
Spirit Bus
El Dorado E-Z RIDER II

8.9 ISL G
City of
Monterey
Park
086 30 29 1N9MNALG2DC084182
CU-
Cutaway
bus
Monterey Park
Spirit Bus
El Dorado E-Z RIDER II

8.9 ISL G
City of
Monterey
Park
087 30 29 1N9MNALG0DC084181
CU-
Cutaway
bus
Monterey Park
Spirit Bus
Ford F550 6.8L
CNG
City of
Monterey
Park
103 33 26 1FDAF5GY1BEC48173
CU-
Cutaway
bus
Monterey Park
Spirit Bus
Chevrolet/Arboc 4500 6.0L
CNG
City of
Monterey
Park
106 26 26 1GB6G5BG1F1209624
CU-
Cutaway
bus
Monterey Park
Spirit Bus
Chevrolet/Arboc 4500 6.0L
CNG
City of
Monterey
Park
148 26 26 1HA6GUBB5JN007294
CU-
Cutaway
bus
Monterey Park
Spirit Bus
Chevrolet/Arboc 4500 6.0L
CNG
City of
Monterey
Park
149 26 26 1HA6GUBB7JN007314
CU-
Cutaway
bus
Monterey Park
Spirit Bus
Chevrolet/Arboc 4500 6.0L
CNG
City of
Monterey
Park
150 26 26 1HA6GUBBXJN007341
CU-
Cutaway
bus
Monterey Park
Spirit Bus
El Dorado Aerotech First Transit
(Contractor)
19 26 28 1FDGF5GY9BEC48822

Future Fleet
The City is currently working on an RFP for a new transportation contractor for fixed -route and on - demand services. The RFP requires that the bus fleet is owned and maintained by the new contractor. Based on a 6 bus fleet requirement, Table 2. Shows the proposed phase in for ZEB into the City’s Spirit Bus service.

City of Monterey Park: ICT ZEB ROP 2026 Page 5 of 6
Table 2. Future Fleet
Timeline Total
Number of
Buses to
Purchase
Number of
ZEB Purchase
Percentage of
Annual ZEB
purchase
ZEB Bus
Type
ZEB Fuel
Type(s)
Number of
Conv Bus
Purchased
Percent of
Annual
Conventional
Bus
Purchases
Types of
Conv.

Buses
Fuel
Type
2026-2027 4 1 25% Minibus Battery-
electric
3 75% Cutaway CNG
2027-2028 1 0 NA NA NA 1 100% Cutaway CNG
2028-2029 1 1 100% Minibus Battery-
electric
0 NA NA NA

Section E: Facilities & Infrastructure
Primary Charging Facility
The City currently contracts with First Transit for its fixed -route Service. Vehicles are stored and maintained at the contractor-operated facilit y. The City owns and operates a CNG fueling station used to subsidize fuel costs for the current fleet. This facility supports the existing CNG fleet but is not suitable for zero -emission bus charging without modification. As the City transitions toward zero - emission vehicles, future charging infrastructure is anticipated to be located at contractor -operated facilities or shared charging sites within the City. The exact locations and charging configurations will be determined in coordination with the future service provider and local utility. The City anticipates coordination with the local electric utility provider to evaluate grid capacity, service upgrades, and energization timelines necessary to support zero-emission bus charging.

Planned Secondary Charging Facility
The City recognizes the importance of charging redundancy and will require future contractors to provide backup charging solutions or operational contingencies to ensure service reliability.

Section F: Disadvantaged Communities
SB 535 Disadvantaged Community
According to the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), disadvantaged communities are defined as the top 25% in terms of scoring in the CalEnviroScreen.

CalEnviroScreen is a tool that identifies communities that are most vulnerable to pollution by using environmental, health, and socioeconomic data to produce a score for every census tract within the state of California. Based on the cities listed in the latest version of CalEnviroScreen, Spirit Bus currently services one disadvantaged community, Census Tract 6037530400, and will continue for the foreseeable future. Spirit Bus buses service all areas of Monterey Park, and as they are replaced, they will serve disadvantaged communities providing cleaner, quieter service to the local ridership.

ZEB deployment will prioritize routes serving disadvantaged communities where feasible.

City of Monterey Park: ICT ZEB ROP 2026 Page 6 of 6
Section G: Workforce Training
Workforce Training
The training of bus operators and maintenance and repair staff on zero-emission bus technologies is the responsibility of the City’s fixed-route service provider. The City will require its contractor to provide training consistent with manufacturer and industry standards. Training will be included as part of the OEM procurement.

Section H. Funding
Vehicles
The City uses Metro Local Return Funds, Prop A and Prop C to fund its fixed-route and dial-ride services and vehicles acquisition. Through its contractor-operator relationship, the City will rely on its contractor and local funds to reach its zero-emission goals.

Infrastructure
The City is currently working on a city-wide solar and EV charging project to install charging infrastructure within city limits. This project will help the availability of chargers within the service area for both fixed-route and on-demand service. Additionally, the City will rely on its contractors charging resources to supplement the City’s EV network.

Section I: Start-Up & Scale Up Challenges
The City anticipates challenges with availability of charging infrastructure in close proximity to the City’s service area. Although the City is working on citywide solar and EV charging infrastructure implementation, charging capacity for large Zero-emission buses may be limited.

Appendix A: Resolution 2026-XX (City Council Adoption)

City Council Staff Report

Date: March 4, 2026
Agenda Item Number: 10.H.

To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Shawn Igoe, Public Works Director
Subject: Sole Source Procurement of Replacement UV Lamps for the Carbon Granular Treatment System (CGTS) from Trojan Technologies Corp.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Waiving bidding requirements pursuant to Monterey Park Municipal Code Section

3.20.050(2) and authorizing the City Manager to execute a two-year agreement with Trojan Technologies, in a form approved by the City Attorney, for the purchase of replacement ultraviolet (UV) lamps for the City’s Carbon Granular Treatment System (CGTS) in an amount not to exceed $555,000, covering replacement of all three UV treatment trains through June 30, 2027; and

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

Executive Summary:

The City’s Carbon Granular Treatment System (CGTS) relies on proprietary ultraviolet (UV) disinfection equipment manufactured and supplied by Trojan Technologies Corp. (Trojan). The UV lamp trains are mission-critical components of the water treatment process and are required to maintain compliance with State Water Resources Control Board Division of Drinking Water regulations and ensure continuous delivery of safe drinking water.

UV lamps have a defined service life. As operating hours accumulate, UV output declines, reducing treatment efficiency and potentially impacting regulatory compliance if not replaced in a timely manner. Based on manufacturer specifications and system operating data, staff has determined that replacement of lamps for two (2) of the three UV treatment trains is required during Fiscal Year 2025–2026. The remaining treatment train will be replaced in Fiscal Year 2026–2027 to strategically phase expenditures while maintaining full operational reliability.

Because the existing UV system was designed and supplied by Trojan and utilizes proprietary lamps that are not manufactured or distributed by other vendors, this procurement qualifies as a sole source purchase pursuant to Monterey Park Municipal Code 3.20.050(2).

Background:

The City’s advanced oxidation ultraviolet treatment system was specifically designed to treat groundwater constituents, including volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and 1,4-dioxane.

Trojan engineered and supplied the UV reactors, controls, and proprietary lamp assemblies that form the core of this system. The performance of the UV system is directly dependent on lamp intensity and proper calibration with the manufacturer’s equipment specifications. Over time, lamp output degrades in accordance with predictable operational life cycles. Failure to replace lamps within recommended intervals may result in diminished UV dosage, reduced treatment effectiveness, and potential regulatory compliance concerns.

The proposed phased replacement is part of the City’s proactive asset management and preventive maintenance program. Replacing two treatment trains during the current fiscal year and the third train during the following fiscal year ensures uninterrupted treatment capability, reduces risk of unexpected system downtime, and distributes financial impacts responsibly across budget cycles.

Trojan Technologies is the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) of the City’s UV treatment system and the sole authorized supplier of compatible replacement lamps for this equipment.

The lamps are proprietary components specifically engineered to function within Trojan’s reactors and control systems. No other manufacturer produces lamps certified, with appropriate warranties, or approved for use in the City’s installed UV equipment.

Pursuant to Monterey Park Municipal Code Section 3.20.050(2), competitive bidding may be waived when goods are available from only one source. Staff has determined that this purchase qualifies as a sole source procurement due to the proprietary nature of the equipment and the absence of alternative suppliers.

Installation of the replacement lamps will be performed under the City’s existing maintenance agreement with Trojan, ensuring continuity of service and manufacturer oversight.

Strategic Plan Goal:

This action directly supports the City’s strategic goal of maintaining and protecting critical water infrastructure to ensure the continued delivery of safe, reliable, and regulatory-compliant drinking water.

Fiscal Impact:

Funding for the replacement UV lamps is budgeted in the Water Treatment Fund (402). The cost to replace the initial two treatment trains during Fiscal Year 2025–2026 will not exceed $370,000. The total cost to replace all three treatment trains over two fiscal years will not exceed $555,000.

Funds are budgeted and will be reimbursed for eligible expenses through the City’s existing agreement with the Water Quality Authority (WQA) and the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), minimizing financial impact to the Water Treatment Fund. There is no impact to the General Fund.

Attachments:

1. Trojan Sole Source Letter

Staff Report

March 4, 2026

ATTACHMENT 1
Trojan Technologies Corp.

Sole Source Letter

Trojan Technologies Corporation
839 State Route 13, Cortland, NY 13045-5630
Trojan Technologies Grand Rapids Distribution Center
4310 44th St Grand Rapids, MI 49512
www.trojantechnologies.com

Patricia Cruz
City of Monterey Park
320 W Newmark Ave
Monterey Park, CA 91754

RE: Trojan System Replacement Parts- Trojan UVPHOX PJ#112439

Dear Ms. Cruz:

In the Engineered Submittal Package for the Trojan UVPHOX, Trojan provided an equipment performance guarantee stating that those systems will meet the required level of disinfection provided that the systems are operated and maintained in accordance with recommendations made by Trojan Technologies.

For this equipment guarantee to be maintained, it is imperative that the appropriate components and replacement parts be used in those systems. There are key replacement parts and system components that directly influence the performance and reliability of each system. Among these critical replacement parts are the UV lamps, electronic ballasts, wiper components and printed circuitry. Without using these critical replacement parts that are approved and validated by Trojan Technologies, we cannot guarantee that those systems will provide the required germicidal output.

In order to keep the equipment performance guarantee intact, it is recommended that specialized system components be purchased directly from Trojan Technologies. Trojan purchases only validated system components (lamps, ballasts etc.) from our suppliers and only those components meeting our performance standards are passed on to the customer.

If you have any questions regarding this matter or require any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Best regards,

Heather Conine
Heather Conine- Regional Account Manager

TROJAN TECHNOLOGIES
(760) 648-3289 mobile
[email protected]
ATTACHMENT 1

City Council Staff Report

Date: March 4, 2026
Agenda Item Number: 10.I.

To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Shawn Igoe, Public Works Director
Subject: Authorize First Amendment to Professional Services Agreement No. 2483-AA with SPEC Services, Inc. for Scada Programming Implementation and Support Services

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Authorizing the City Manager to execute the First Amendment to Agreement No. 2483- AA with SPEC Services, Inc., in a form approved by the City Attorney, for a revised total not-to-exceed amount of $170,700 for services through June 30, 2027; and

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

Executive Summary:

On June 16, 2025, the City entered into Agreement No. 2483-AA (the “Agreement”) with SPEC Services Inc. (SPEC) in the amount of $45,700 to prepare a comprehensive SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) Master Plan (“Master Plan”) for the City’s water system.

The Master Plan’s intent is to identify aging equipment, cybersecurity vulnerabilities, and system weaknesses that could affect the reliability and security of the City’s water operations if left unaddressed. The Master Plan also prioritizes necessary upgrades to ensure continued delivery of safe, reliable drinking water.

During the plan’s development, the consultant identified several program updates that needed to be addressed to complete the Master Plan. In order to effectively and efficiently complete the Master Plan, it is recommended that the City approve an amendment to authorize SPEC to implement the priority improvements identified, including system programming updates, cybersecurity enhancements, system reconfiguration, and technical support. The Amendment increases the contract amount by $125,000, for a total not-to-exceed amount of $170,700, and extends the Agreement term through June 30, 2027, to allow for phased implementation and system stabilization.

Background:

The City’s SCADA system is the operational backbone of its water utility. It monitors and controls wells, pump stations, reservoirs, and treatment facilities that are essential to delivering safe and reliable drinking water.

Several system components are approaching end-of-life, certain software platforms and communications infrastructure are outdated, and cybersecurity risks require mitigation to protect critical infrastructure.

Under the original Agreement, SPEC was to perform a comprehensive system discovery and assessment that includes field site evaluations, software and network review, programmable logic controller and radio system analysis, cybersecurity vulnerability identification, and the development of a modernization and implementation roadmap. The proposed additional scope of work will address system updates that are considered priority improvements for the continued operation of the system. By completing these updates, SPEC will be able to deliver an up-to-date Master Plan and improvement recommendations.

As the City’s SCADA consultant, SPEC has a deep understanding of how the City’s control system is designed and how it operates — including its equipment, communications, programming, and known problem areas. Because SPEC is currently developing the plan, they are uniquely positioned to carry out the work efficiently and with minimal risk of delays or misunderstandings. The implementation phase requires hands-on knowledge of the system setup, programming, and technical analysis that were developed during the planning process.

Retaining SPEC ensures continuity with the development of the Master Plan, avoids duplication of effort, and eliminates the learning curve that a new consultant would require.

Bringing in a new firm at this stage would increase costs, delay implementation, and introduce avoidable risk to a critical public safety system. Continuing with SPEC is therefore in the City’s best operational and financial interest.

The amendment also extends the term of the Agreement by one year, from June 30, 2026, to June 30, 2027, to allow for phased implementation, programming support, and system stabilization.

Strategic Plan Goal:

This action supports the City’s strategic goal of maintaining and protecting critical water infrastructure to ensure continued delivery of safe, reliable, and regulatory-compliant drinking water.

Fiscal Impact:

The proposed First Amendment increases the Agreement by $125,000, resulting in a revised total not-to-exceed amount of $170,700. Sufficient funds are budgeted within the Water Fund to support this Amendment for services through June 30, 2026, and no additional appropriation is required. Funds for services through FY 2026-27 will be budgeted as part of the annual budget process.

Attachments:

None

City Council Staff Report

Date: March 4, 2026
Agenda Item Number: 10.J.

To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Diana Garcia, Assistant City Manager
Subject: Women's History Month Resolution (As Requested by Council Member Sanchez)

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Approving the attached resolution; and,

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

Executive Summary:

The attached resolution is being brought forth to the Council for consideration at the request of Council Member Sanchez.

Background:

N/A

Strategic Plan Goal:

N/A

Fiscal Impact:

There is no expected fiscal impact associated with adopting this resolution.

Attachments:

1. Women's History Month Resolution

Staff Report
March 4, 2026

ATTACHMENT 1
Draft Resolution

RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY

PARK, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING AND RECOGNIZING THE MONTH
OF MARCH 2026 AS WOMEN’S HISTORY MONTH, A NATIONAL

CELEBRATION THAT HIGHLIGHTS THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF

WOMEN TO EVENTS IN HISTORY AND CONTEMPORARY SOCIETY

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Monterey Park as follows:

SECTION 1: The City Council finds as follows:

A. In February 1980, President Jimmy Carter issued a presidential proclamation declaring the week of March 8 as National Women’s History Week. The proclamation stated, “From the first settlers who came to our shores, from the first American Indian families who befriended them, men and women have worked together to build this nation. Too often the women were unsung and sometimes their contributions went unnoticed. However, the achievements, leadership, courage, strength, and love of the women who built America were as vital as that of the men whose names we know so well.”

B. Women’s History Month originated as a national celebration in 1981 when Congress passed Public Law 97-28 which authorized the President to proclaim the week beginning March 7, 1982, as Women’s History Week. Throughout the next five years, Congress continued to pass joint resolutions designating a week in March as Women’s History Week.

C. In 1987, after being petitioned by the National Women’s History Project, Congress passed Public Law 100-9 which designed the month of March 1987 as Women’s History Month.

D. Between 1988 and 1994, Congress passed additional resolutions requesting and authorizing the President to proclaim March of each year as Women’s History Month. Since 1995, U.S. Presidents, regardless of political party, have issued a series of annual proclamations designating the month of March as Women’s History Month. These proclamations celebrate the contributions women have made and recognize the specific achievements women have made throughout American history in a variety of fields.

E. Women’s History Month corresponds with International Women’s Day which is celebrated on March 8 worldwide. It provides an opportunity to celebrate the achievements of women while calling for greater equality.

F. The National Women’s History Alliance designates a yearly theme for Women’s History Month. For 2026, the National Women’s History Alliance (NWHA) proudly presents the theme “Leading the Change: Women Shaping a Sustainable Future.” This theme celebrates women who are rebuilding systems for long-term

sustainability, covering environmental, economic, and social justice. It recognizes leaders driving holistic change, creating a more resilient future.

G. American women have played and continue to play a critical economic, cultural, and social role in every sphere of the life of the Nation by constituting a significant portion of the labor force working inside and outside of the home.

H. American women have been leaders, not only in securing their own rights of suffrage and equal opportunity, but also in the abolitionist movement, the emancipation movement, the industrial labor movement, the civil rights movement, and other movements, especially the peace movement, which create a more fair and just society for all.

I. According to the latest data from the U.S. Census Bureau, women constitute approximately 52% of Monterey Park's population, reflecting their significant presence in the community. Additionally, 54.7% of women aged 16 and over in Monterey Park are part of the civilian labor force, underscoring their vital contributions to the local economy.

J. Currently, Elizabeth Yang serves as Mayor, representing District 2. Maychelle Yee serves as the City Clerk and Amy Lee serves as the City Treasurer.

K. The City of Monterey Park has a rich history of female leadership. Notably, Lily Lee Chen became the first Chinese American woman to serve as mayor in the United States when she was elected in 1984. Congresswoman Judy Chu served on the City Council from 1988 to 1994. Louise Davis, Patricia Reichenberger, Betty Couch, Marie T. Purvis, Rita Valenzuela, Sharon Martinez, Betty Tom Chu and Teresa Real have served as Councilmembers. Marguerite Alstrom, Laura Lee McMillen, Theresa Amador and Pauline Lemire have served as City Clerks.

Florence Hirt and Louise Davis have served as City Treasurers.

L. The City Council of the City of Monterey Park declares the month of March 2026 as Women’s History Month and encourages all residents to celebrate with appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities.

SECTION 2: Electronic Signatures. This Resolution may be executed with electronic signatures in accordance with Government Code §16.5. Such electronic signatures will be treated in all respects as having the same effect as an original signature.

SECTION 3: Recordation. The Mayor, or presiding officer, is authorized to sign this Resolution, signifying its adoption by the City Council of the City of Monterey Park, and the City Clerk, or her duly appointed deputy, may attest thereto.

SECTION 4: Effective Date. This Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption and will remain effective unless repealed or superseded.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of March 2026.

________________________________
Elizabeth Yang, Mayor

Attest:

__________________________
Maychelle Yee, City Clerk

City Council Staff Report

Date: March 4, 2026
Agenda Item Number: 10.K.

To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Diana Garcia, Assistant City Manager
Subject: Read Across America Resolution (As Requested by Council Member Sanchez)

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Approving the attached resolution; and,

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

Executive Summary:

The attached resolution is being brought forth to the Council for consideration at the request of Council Member Sanchez.

Background:

N/A

Strategic Plan Goal:

N/A

Fiscal Impact:

There is no expected fiscal impact associated with adopting this resolution.

Attachments:

1. Read Across America Week Resolution

Staff Report
March 4, 2026

ATTACHMENT 1
Draft Resolution

RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY PARK, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING AND RECOGNIZING MARCH 2-6,
2026, AS READ ACROSS AMERICA WEEK

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Monterey Park as follows:

SECTION 1: The City Council finds as follows:

A. The act of reading has been around for thousands of years since the invention of the written word, and in the earliest years, reading was a skill that only the wealthy and educated segment of society possessed. As the years progressed, more individuals began to read and write, and reading came to be the common skill that it is today.

B. In 1998, the National Education Association (NEA) established the nation’s largest year-round celebration of reading known as NEA’s Read Across America which focuses on motivating children and teens to read through events, partnerships, and reading resources that are about everyone, for everyone.

C. NEA’s Read Across America Day is celebrated every March 2 and commences Read Across America Week which spans through March 6. Read Across America Week is a celebration of reading and promotes adult involvement in the education of students throughout the nation.

D. Across the nation, teachers, librarians, politicians, actors, athletes, parents, grandparents, and others develop Read Across America activities to bring reading excitement to children of all ages. Governors, mayors, and other elected officials recognize the role reading plays in their communities with proclamations and floor statements.

E. The annual theme for NEA’s Read Across America Day and Week is to Create & Celebrate a Nation of Diverse Readers. Monterey Park Residents are encouraged to read books with children and promote NEA’s message that there is always room in the community for all readers.

F. The City Council of the City of Monterey Park is committed to inspiring all residents, especially children and youth, to explore diverse perspectives and cultures through the eyes of others. Books provide lessons that improve the overall quality of life, encourage curiosity, promote knowledge, and support the countless possibilities available to every person.

G. The City Council of the City of Monterey Park encourages all residents to stand firmly committed to promoting reading as the catalyst for students’ future academic success, their preparation for jobs of the future, and their ability to compete in a global economy, and hereby proclaim March 2-6, 2026, as Read Across America Week.

SECTION 2: Electronic Signatures. This Resolution may be executed with electronic signatures in accordance with Government Code §16.5. Such electronic signatures will be treated in all respects as having the same effect as an original signature.

SECTION 3: Recordation. The Mayor, or presiding officer, is authorized to sign this Resolution, signifying its adoption by the City Council of the City of Monterey Park, and the City Clerk, or her duly appointed deputy, may attest thereto.

SECTION 4: Effective Date. This Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption and will remain effective unless repealed or superseded.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of March 2026.

________________________________
Elizabeth Yang, Mayor

Attest:

__________________________
Maychelle Yee, City Clerk

City Council Staff Report

Date: March 4, 2026
Agenda Item Number: 10.L.

To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Diana Garcia, Assistant City Manager
Subject: American Red Cross Month Resolution (As Requested by Council Member Wong)

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Approving the attached resolution; and,

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

Executive Summary:

The attached resolution is being brought forth to the Council for consideration at the request of Council Member Wong.

Background:

N/A

Strategic Plan Goal:

N/A

Fiscal Impact:

There is no expected fiscal impact associated with adopting this resolution.

Attachments:

1. American Red Cross Month Resolution

Staff Report
March 4, 2026

ATTACHMENT 1
Draft Resolution

RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY

PARK, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING AND RECOGNIZING THE MONTH
OF MARCH 2026 AS AMERICAN RED CROSS MONTH

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Monterey Park as follows:

SECTION 1: The City Council finds as follows:

A. Clarissa (Clara) Harlowe Barton is one of the most honored women in American history known for her astounding devotion and dedication to helping others. Barton is considered a visionary whose humanitarian spirit helped change the world, and on May 21, 1881, founded the American Red Cross.

B. After hearing of the Swiss-inspired global Red Cross network while visiting Europe following the Civil War, Barton and a few of her acquaintances campaigned for an American Red Cross and ratification of the Geneva Convention protecting the war- injured, which the United States ratified in 1882.

C. Barton led the American Red Cross for 23 years and conducted its very first domestic and overseas disaster relief efforts. The American Red Cross also aided the U.S. military during the Spanish-American War and successfully campaigned for the inclusion of peacetime relief work as part of the global Red Cross network.

D. The American Red Cross introduced its first aid, water safety, and public health nursing program prior to World War I, and by 1918, local chapters grew from 107 to 3,864 with more than 30 million adult and junior Red Cross members. Following the war, the Red Cross focused its service to veterans and enhanced its programs in safety training, accident prevention, in-home care, and nutrition education.

E. Extensive services provided by the American Red Cross were once again needed for the U.S. military in World War II. This request initiated a national blood program that collected 13.3 million pints of blood for use by the armed forces. Following World War II, the Red Cross introduced the first nationwide civilian blood program that now supplies more than 40% of the blood and blood products in the United States today.

F. The American Red Cross has since expanded its services to include civil defense, CPR/AED training, HIV/AIDS education, and the provision of emotional care and support in the wake of disasters and continues to assist government agencies and community organizations plan, coordinate and provide feeding, sheltering, and family reunification services for people affected by disasters.

G. Today, the American Red Cross provides compassionate care in five critical areas:
people affected by disasters in America; support for members of the military and their families; blood collection, processing, and distribution; health and safety education and training; and international relief and development.

H. Since 1943, every United States President regardless of political party has issued messages and proclamations recognizing the tremendous efforts made by the American Red Cross including providing aid during disasters, ensuring access to lifesaving blood, providing education and training, and alleviating human suffering in the face of emergencies by mobilizing the power of volunteers and the generosity of donors.

I. The Monterey Park City Council recognizes the compassion of people in the Monterey Park community and reaffirms their commitment to care for one another in times of crisis. Kindhearted individuals in Monterey Park exemplify Barton’s commitment as they step up through humanitarian efforts to provide a beacon of hope for those in need. Their voluntary and selfless contributions make a lifesaving difference and strengthen the Monterey Park community.

J. The Monterey Park City Council hereby proclaims March 2026 as American Red Cross Month and encourages all residents of Monterey Park to reach out and support its humanitarian mission whether it is volunteering, donating blood, giving financially, or saving a life with first aid and CPR skills.

SECTION 2: Electronic Signatures. This Resolution may be executed with electronic signatures in accordance with Government Code §16.5. Such electronic signatures will be treated in all respects as having the same effect as an original signature.

SECTION 3: Recordation. The Mayor, or presiding officer, is authorized to sign this Resolution, signifying its adoption by the City Council of the City of Monterey Park, and the City Clerk, or her duly appointed deputy, may attest thereto.

SECTION 4: Effective Date. This Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption and will remain effective unless repealed or superseded.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of March 2026.

________________________________
Elizabeth Yang, Mayor

Attest:

__________________________
Maychelle Yee, City Clerk

City Council Staff Report

Date: March 4, 2026
Agenda Item Number: 10.M.

To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Diana Garcia, Assistant City Manager
Subject: Employee Appreciation Month Resolution (As Requested by Council Member Ngo)

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Approving the attached resolution; and

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

Executive Summary:

The attached resolution is being brought forth to the Council for consideration at the request of Council Member Ngo.

Background:

N/A

Strategic Plan Goal:

N/A

Fiscal Impact:

There is no expected fiscal impact associated with adopting this resolution.

Attachments:

1. Employee Appreciation Month Resolution

Staff Report
March 4, 2026

ATTACHMENT 1
Draft Resolution

RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY PARK RECOGNIZING MARCH 2026 AS EMPLOYEE APPRECIATION MONTH

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Monterey Park as follows:

SECTION 1: The City Council finds as follows:

A. The City of Monterey Park is committed to providing high-quality services that enhance the safety, well-being, and quality of life for all residents and visitors.

B. The dedicated full-time and part-time employees of the City of Monterey Park work tirelessly to ensure the efficient operation of our City government and the delivery of essential services to the community.

C. Each department and division is an integral part of the City, ensuring that governance, safety, fiscal sustainability, infrastructure, community engagement, community enrichment programs, neighborhood and economic vitality, and customer service are supported through daily actions and work performed by staff.

D. The City Council acknowledges and appreciates all full-time and part-time City employees, for their hard work, knowledge, and dedication that contribute to the success of Monterey Park, making it a safe and welcoming community.

E. The Monterey Park City Council hereby declares March 2026 as Employee Appreciation Month.

SECTION 2: Electronic Signatures. This Resolution may be executed with electronic signatures in accordance with Government Code §16.5. Such electronic signatures will be treated in all respects as having the same effect as an original signature.

SECTION 3: Recordation. The Mayor, or presiding officer, is authorized to sign this Resolution, signifying its adoption by the City Council of the City of Monterey Park, and the City Clerk, or her duly appointed deputy, may attest thereto.

SECTION 4: Effective Date. This Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption and will remain effective unless repealed or superseded.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of March 2026.

________________________________
Elizabeth Yang, Mayor

Attest:

__________________________
Maychelle Yee, City Clerk

City Council Staff Report

Date: March 4, 2026
Agenda Item Number: 11.A.

To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Jason Hing, Fire Chief
Subject: Annual Weed Abatement Protest Hearing

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Continuing the public hearing to the March 18, 2026, City Council meeting; and

2. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

Executive Summary:

The Fire Chief recommends that this item be continued to the March 18, 2026, City Council meeting to allow for sufficient public hearing notice.

Background:

N/A

Strategic Plan Goal:

N/A

Fiscal Impact:

N/A

Attachments:

None

City Council Staff Report

Date: March 4, 2026
Agenda Item Number: 11.B.

To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Timothy Hou, Director of Community Development
Subject: Consideration and possible action to conduct a public hearing to extend and amend Urgency Ordinance No. 2272 to place a general moratorium on data centers within the City of Monterey Park for 10 months and 15 days

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Opening the public hearing; taking testimonial and documentary evidence;

2. After closing the public hearing and considering the evidence, read by title only, waive further reading, and adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 22XX to amend Urgency Ordinance No. 2272 by at least a four-fifths vote to extend the general moratorium on data centers within the City of Monterey Park for 10 months and 15 days; and

3. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act):

Adopting the draft Urgency Ordinance is exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., "CEQA") and CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq.) because it establishes temporary rules and procedures for minor alterations in land use. The Urgency Ordinance, therefore, is categorically exempt from further CEQA review under CEQA Guidelines § 15305. Further, the adoption and extension of the Urgency Ordinance is also exempt from review under CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15061(b)(3) because the Ordinance is for general policies and procedure-making. This Ordinance does not authorize any new development entitlements. Any proposed project that will utilize the changes set forth in this Ordinance is subject to environmental review as part of the entitlement review of the project. The Ordinance will not adversely impact the environment and is therefore exempt from the provisions of CEQA.

Executive Summary:

On January 21, 2026, the City Council adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 2272 establishing a 45-day moratorium that would prohibit processing land use applications for any data center within Saturn Park (Attachment 1). That ordinance will expire on March 7, 2026, if not extended.

While the original Urgency Ordinance established a moratorium on land use applications for any data center in Saturn Park and any construction or operation in the City, the proposed extension of the Urgency Ordinance would establish a moratorium on processing any data centers within the City of Monterey Park (Attachment 2).

Pursuant to Government Code Section 65858(b), cities can extend the moratorium for 22 months and 15 days (for a total of two years) by a four-fifths vote of the legislative body.

However, only a 10 and a half month time extension, with an expiration date of January 21, 2027, is proposed to allow City staff to analyze and conduct an adequate study within that time period (if not sooner) and formulate new regulations to address data center use in the City of Monterey Park.

A copy of the January 21, 2026, staff report is attached and incorporated by reference (Attachment 3).

Background:

Section 65858 Report

Government Code Section 65858(d) requires that 10 days before the expiration of the moratorium, the City Council must issue a written report describing the measure taken to alleviate the condition which led to the adoption of the ordinance.

At the City Council’s direction, since January 21, 2026, the Director implemented the following measures and actions to alleviate the conditions set forth in Ordinance No. 2272:
• Identifying which zones allow data centers within the City. • Discussed potential revisions to the zoning regulations within the MPMC. • Modified the urgency ordinance to include a citywide prohibition on data centers.

Lastly, at its February 4, 2026 meeting, the City Council directed the City Manager to return at the March 4, 2026 City Council meeting with additional options related to prohibiting data center uses and future land use planning possibilities. This direction included evaluating zoning regulations that may be adopted by the City Council and drafting a potential ballot proposition to prohibit data centers throughout the City and potentially expand residential options within Saturn Park.

Pursuant to Government Code Section 65858(b), the City may extend the moratorium for an additional 22 months and 15 days (for a total of two years) by a four-fifths vote of the legislative body.

Public Notice

The legal notice of this hearing was published in the Monterey Park Press and posted at City Hall, Monterey Park Bruggemeyer Library, and Langley Center on February 19, 2026, with affidavits of posting on file.

Strategic Plan Goal:

Fiscal Impact:

There are no identifiable fiscal impacts associated with adopting the draft urgency ordinance.

Attachments:

1. Ordinance No. 2272

2. Urgency Ordinance No. 22XX

3. Staff Report - January 21, 2026

ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. 2272

ORDINANCE NO. 2272

AN INTERIM ORDINANCE PROHIBITING PROCESSING OF

PENDING, AND ACCEPTANCE OF NEW, DATA CENTER LAND

USE APPLICATIONS WITHIN SATURN PARK TO CONSIDER

ADOPTING ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS FOR SUCH LAND
USES

The City Council for the City of Monterey Park does ordain as follows:

SECTION 1: This Ordinance is adopted pursuant to Government Code §§ 36937, 65858, and other applicable laws.

SECTION 2: Findings. The City Council finds, determines and declares as follows:

A. The City may adopt and enforce all laws and regulations not in conflict with the general laws and the City holds all rights and powers established by California law.

B. On November 6, 2024, the City Council adopted new regulations governing data centers in Saturn Park. As codified at Monterey Park Municipal Code (“MPMC”) § 21.14.220, data centers may only be permitted within Saturn Park pursuant to the terms of a development agreement approved by the City Council.

C. While the provisions of the development agreement law (Government Code §§ 65864–65869.5) make it plain that any decision regarding data centers within Saturn Park are completely discretionary for the City Council, additional regulations governing data center provide certainty to the public and private property owners regarding the City’s overall expectations for developing such land uses. Such regulations were first considered by the City Council on November 6, 2024 and should be reexamined to protect public health, safety, and welfare. The City requires additional time to study which regulations are in the public interest.

D. To prevent frustration of these studies and the implementation of new regulations, the public interest, health, safety, and welfare require enactment of this Ordinance. The absence of this Ordinance would impair the orderly and effective implementation of contemplated MPMC amendments, and any further authorization of data center land uses within Saturn Park during the period of the moratorium may conflict with or frustrate the contemplated updates and revisions of the MPMC.

Ordinance No. 2272

E. Based on the foregoing, the City finds that that this Ordinance is necessary in order to protect the City from the potential effects and impacts of data center land uses and the accompanying impacts from energy use, noise, air quality, aesthetic impacts to the City, and other similar or related effects on property values and the quality of life in the City’s neighborhoods.

F. The City Council further finds that this moratorium is a matter of local and City-wide importance and is not directed towards any business that currently seeks to utilize MPMC Chapter 21.14.

G. The City Council finds that this Ordinance is authorized by the City’s police powers. The City Council further finds that the length of the moratorium imposed by this Ordinance will not in any way deprive any person of rights granted by state or federal laws, because the moratorium is short in duration and essential to protect the public health, safety and welfare.

SECTION 3: Environmental Assessment. Adopting the draft Urgency Ordinance is exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., "CEQA") and CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq.) because it establishes temporary rules and procedures for minor alterations in land use.

The Urgency Ordinance, therefore, is categorically exempt from further CEQA review under CEQA Guidelines § 15305. Further, the adoption of the Urgency Ordinance is also exempt from review under CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15061(b)(3) because the Ordinance is for general policies and procedure-making. This Ordinance does not authorize any new development entitlements. Any proposed project that will utilize the changes set forth in this Ordinance is subject to environmental review as part of the entitlement review of the project. The Ordinance will not adversely impact the environment and is therefore exempt from the provisions of CEQA.

SECTION 4: Interim regulations. The following provisions are adopted as interim requirements for issuing permits pursuant to the MPMC for data center land uses within Saturn Park, and any construction or operation in the City in conflict with these provisions is expressly prohibited:

A. Restricted Activities. For a period of 45 days after adoption of this Ordinance, the City will not process any pending application for a data center land use within Saturn Park or accept new applications for data center land uses.

B. “Data center” is defined at MPMC § 21.14.210.

Ordinance No. 2272

C. Based upon a review of the City’s entire administrative record including, without limitation, from the City Council’s previous meetings in October and November 2024, along with a cursory review of information within the public domain, there is a plethora of substantial evidence demonstrating a reasonable argument exists that any proposed data center in California “may have a significant effect on the environment” necessitating a fair‑argument that any application for a data center requires preparation of an environmental impact report (EIR). Publicly available materials document that large data centers have high and continuous electricity demand, often supported by diesel or gas backup generation with associated air quality, greenhouse gas, and noise impacts; that they may place significant demands on local water supplies for cooling; and that they can drive related infrastructure and land use changes, all of which have been specifically identified as needing robust CEQA analysis. In light of CEQA’s requirement that an EIR be prepared whenever there is substantial evidence, in view of the whole record, that a project may cause a significant environmental effect, and the well‑established “low threshold” nature of the fair‑argument test, this body of evidence supports a finding that any data center proposal in California presents at least a reasonable argument of potentially significant environmental impacts such that an EIR is required.

D. The City Manager, or designee, must review any application for a data center land use entitlement to determine compliance with the provisions of this Ordinance. City employees, and City boards and commissions, are directed to refrain from accepting or processing any application for any land use entitlement, including, without limitation, use permits, variances, building permits, licenses and certificates of occupancy, necessary for constructing, placing, or operating data centers within the Saturn Park area, and to refrain from processing any land use entitlement for any pending applications already received. These prohibitions will remain effective for 45 days following adoption of this Ordinance.

E. The City Manager and City Attorney are directed to draft regulations that prohibit data centers within the City’s jurisdiction.

Noticing for a public hearing to consider adopting such proposed regulations should occur forthwith to ensure timely public input regarding such regulations and provide certainty to private property owners contemplating data center developments within Saturn Park regarding the City’s expectations and regulation of such land uses.

SECTION 5: Construction. This Ordinance must be broadly construed to achieve

Ordinance No. 2272

the purposes stated in this Ordinance. It is the City Council’s intent that the provisions of this Ordinance be interpreted or implemented by the City and others in a manner that facilitates the purposes set forth in this Ordinance.

SECTION 6: Enforceability. Repeal of any provision of the MPMC does not affect any penalty, forfeiture, or liability incurred before, or preclude prosecution and imposition of penalties for any violation occurring before this Ordinance’s effective date. Any such repealed part will remain in full force and effect for sustaining action or prosecuting violations occurring before the effective date of this Ordinance.

SECTION 7: Validity of Previous Code Sections. If this entire Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, any repeal or amendment of the MPMC or other city ordinance by this Ordinance will be rendered void and cause such previous MPMC provision or other the city ordinance to remain in full force and effect for all purposes.

SECTION 8: Severability. If any part of this Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the city council intends that such invalidity will not affect the effectiveness of the remaining provisions or applications and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable.

SECTION 9: Publication. The City Clerk is directed to certify the passage and adoption of this Ordinance; cause it to be entered into the City of Monterey Park’s book of original ordinances; make a note of the passage and adoption in the records of this meeting; and, within fifteen (15) days after the passage and adoption of this Ordinance, cause it to be published or posted in accordance with California law.

SECTION 10: Report. Pursuant to Government Code § 65858, the City Manager, or designee, must prepare a report for City Council consideration describing the measures taken to address the conditions which led to adoption of this Ordinance. This report must be provided to the City Council so that it may be considered and issued not later than 10 days before this Ordinance expires.

SECTION 11: Effective Date. This Ordinance will become effective immediately upon adoption pursuant to Government Code §§ 36937 and 65858 for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, safety, and welfare.

Pursuant to those statutes this Ordinance is adopted by a four-fifths vote.

SECTION 12: Expiration Date. After adoption, this Ordinance will be repealed by operation of law on March 7, 2026, unless a subsequent ordinance is adopted by the City Council that extends this date.

Ordinance No. 2272

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 21
st day of January, 2026.

____________________________
Elizabeth Yang, Mayor

ATTEST:

________________________________
Maychelle Yee, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

________________________________
Karl H. Berger, City Attorney

State of California )
County of Los Angeles ) §.

City Of Monterey Park )

I, Maychelle Yee, City Clerk of the City of Monterey Park, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Urgency Ordinance No. 22 72 was duly passed, approved and adopted at its special meeting held on 21
st day of January, 2026 by
the following vote:

Ayes: Council Members: Ngo, Wong, Sanchez, Lo, Yang
Noes: Council Members: None

Absent: Council Members: None
Abstain: Council Members: None
Recusal: Council Members: None

Dated this 21
st day of January, 2026.
_________________________
Maychelle Yee, City Clerk

ATTACHMENT 2
Urgency Ordinance No. 22XX

ORDINANCE NO. 22XX

AN URGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2272

TO EXTEND THE TEMPORARY MORATORIUM PROHIBITING

PROCESSING OF PENDING, AND ACCEPTANCE OF NEW,

DATA CENTER LAND USE APPLICATIONS WITHIN THE CITY

OF MONTEREY PARK

The City Council for the City of Monterey Park does ordain as follows:

SECTION 1: This Ordinance is adopted pursuant to Government Code §§ 36937, 65858, and other applicable laws and is an extension of a moratorium adopted pursuant to Ordinance No. 2272

SECTION 2: Findings. The City Council finds, determines and declares as follows:

A. The City may adopt and enforce all laws and regulations not in conflict with the general laws and the City holds all rights and powers established by California law.

B. Monterey Park Municipal Code (“MPMC”) § 21.14.220 provides that data centers within Saturn Park may only be approved in accordance with a development agreement approved by the City Council.

C. While the provisions of the development agreement law (Government Code §§ 65864–65869.5) make it plain that any decision regarding data centers within Saturn Park are completely discretionary for the City Council, additional regulations governing data centers proposed in other zones within the City provide certainty to the public and private property owners regarding the City’s overall expectations for developing such land uses.

D. To prevent frustration of these studies and the implementation of new regulations, the public interest, health, safety, and welfare require enactment of this Ordinance. The absence of this Ordinance would impair the orderly and effective implementation of contemplated MPMC amendments, and any further authorization of data center land uses within the City of Monterey Park during the period of the moratorium may conflict with or frustrate the contemplated updates and revisions of the MPMC.

E. Based on the foregoing, the City finds that that this Ordinance is necessary in order to protect the City from the potential effects and impacts of data center land uses and the accompanying impacts

from energy use, noise, air quality, aesthetic impacts to the City, and other similar or related effects on property values and the quality of life in the City’s neighborhoods.

F. The City Council further finds that this moratorium is a matter of local and City-wide importance and is not directed towards any business that currently seeks to utilize MPMC Chapter 21.14 or any other zoning within the City.

G. The City Council finds that this Ordinance is authorized by the City’s police powers. The City Council further finds that the length of the moratorium imposed by this Ordinance will not in any way deprive any person of rights granted by state or federal laws, because the moratorium is short in duration and essential to protect the public health, safety and welfare.

SECTION 3: Environmental Assessment. Adopting the draft Urgency Ordinance is exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., "CEQA") and CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq.) because it establishes temporary rules and procedures for minor alterations in land use.

The Urgency Ordinance, therefore, is categorically exempt from further CEQA review under CEQA Guidelines § 15305. Further, the adoption of the Urgency Ordinance is also exempt from review under CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15061(b)(3) because the Ordinance is for general policies and procedure-making. This Ordinance does not authorize any new development entitlements. Any proposed project that will utilize the changes set forth in this Ordinance is subject to environmental review as part of the entitlement review of the project. The Ordinance will not adversely impact the environment and is therefore exempt from the provisions of CEQA.

SECTION 4: Interim regulations. The following provisions are adopted as interim requirements for issuing permits pursuant to the MPMC for data center land uses within the City of Monterey Park, and any construction or operation in the City in conflict with these provisions is expressly prohibited:

A. Restricted Activities. For a period of 10 months and 15 days after adoption of this Ordinance, the City will not process any pending application for a data center land use within the City of Monterey Park or accept new applications for data center land uses.

B. “Data center” is defined at MPMC § 21.14.210 and within the Market Place Specific Plan as adopted by Ordinance No. 2231 on June 21, 2023.

C. Based upon a review of the City’s entire administrative record

including, without limitation, from the City Council’s previous meetings in October and November 2024, along with a cursory review of information within the public domain, there is a plethora of substantial evidence demonstrating a reasonable argument exists that any proposed data center in California “may have a significant effect on the environment” necessitating a fair‑argument that any application for a data center requires preparation of an environmental impact report (EIR). Publicly available materials document that large data centers have high and continuous electricity demand, often supported by diesel or gas backup generation with associated air quality, greenhouse gas, and noise impacts; that they may place significant demands on local water supplies for cooling; and that they can drive related infrastructure and land use changes, all of which have been specifically identified as needing robust CEQA analysis. In light of CEQA’s requirement that an EIR be prepared whenever there is substantial evidence, in view of the whole record, that a project may cause a significant environmental effect, and the well‑established “low threshold” nature of the fair‑argument test, this body of evidence supports a finding that any data center proposal in California presents at least a reasonable argument of potentially significant environmental impacts such that an EIR is required. Accordingly, the City Manager, or designee, is directed to require that any applicant with a pending data center application prepare an EIR in accordance with applicable law to fully inform decision-makers regarding potential significant impacts of such land uses.

D. The City Manager, or designee, must review any application for a data center land use entitlement to determine compliance with the provisions of this Ordinance. City employees, and City boards and commissions, are directed to refrain from accepting or processing any application for any land use entitlement including, without limitation, use permits, variances, building permits, licenses and certificates of occupancy, necessary for constructing, placing, or operating data centers within the City of Monterey Park, and to refrain from processing any land use entitlement for any pending applications already received. These prohibitions will remain effective for 10 months and 15 days following adoption of this Ordinance.

E. The City Manager and City Attorney are directed to draft regulations that are substantially similar to those previously considered on November 6, 2024 to govern data centers within Saturn Park. Noticing for a public hearing to consider adopting such proposed regulations should occur forthwith to ensure timely public input regarding such regulations and provide certainty to private

property owners contemplating data center developments within the City of Monterey Park regarding the City’s expectations and regulation of such land uses.

SECTION 5: Construction. This Ordinance must be broadly construed to achieve the purposes stated in this Ordinance. It is the City Council’s intent that the provisions of this Ordinance be interpreted or implemented by the City and others in a manner that facilitates the purposes set forth in this Ordinance.

SECTION 6: Enforceability. Repeal of any provision of the MPMC does not affect any penalty, forfeiture, or liability incurred before, or preclude prosecution and imposition of penalties for any violation occurring before this Ordinance’s effective date. Any such repealed part will remain in full force and effect for sustaining action or prosecuting violations occurring before the effective date of this Ordinance.

SECTION 7: Validity of Previous Code Sections. If this entire Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, any repeal or amendment of the MPMC or other city ordinance by this Ordinance will be rendered void and cause such previous MPMC provision or other the city ordinance to remain in full force and effect for all purposes.

SECTION 8: Severability. If any part of this Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the city council intends that such invalidity will not affect the effectiveness of the remaining provisions or applications and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable.

SECTION 9: Publication. The City Clerk is directed to certify the passage and adoption of this Ordinance; cause it to be entered into the City of Monterey Park’s book of original ordinances; make a note of the passage and adoption in the records of this meeting; and, within fifteen (15) days after the passage and adoption of this Ordinance, cause it to be published or posted in accordance with California law.

SECTION 10: Report. Pursuant to Government Code § 65858, the City Manager, or designee, must prepare a report for City Council consideration describing the measures taken to address the conditions which led to adoption of this Ordinance. This report must be provided to the City Council so that it may be considered and issued not later than 10 days before this Ordinance expires.

SECTION 11: Effective Date. This Ordinance will become effective immediately upon adoption pursuant to Government Code §§ 36937 and 65858 for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, safety, and welfare.

Pursuant to those statutes this Ordinance is adopted by a four-fifths vote.

SECTION 12: Expiration Date. After adoption, this Ordinance will be repealed by

operation of law on January 21, 2027, unless a subsequent ordinance is adopted by the City Council that extends this date.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of March, 2026.

____________________________
Elizabeth Yang, Mayor

ATTEST:

________________________________
Maychelle Yee, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

________________________________
Karl H. Berger, City Attorney

ATTACHMENT 3
Staff Report – January 21, 2026

City Council Staff Report

Date: January 21, 2026
Agenda Item Number: 5.A.

To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Council Member Vinh Ngo
Subject: Consideration and possible action to adopt an urgency ordinance implementing interim development regulations for data centers within Saturn Park upon a four- fifths vote

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Adopting an Urgency Ordinance upon 4/5 vote pursuant to Government Code § 65858 establishing a moratorium on new data centers within Saturn Park for 45 days; and

2. Taking such additional, related action that may be desirable.

CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act):

Adopting the draft Urgency Ordinance is exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., "CEQA") and CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq.) because it establishes temporary rules and procedures for minor alterations in land use. The Urgency Ordinance, therefore, is categorically exempt from further CEQA review under CEQA Guidelines § 15305. Further, the adoption of the Urgency Ordinance is also exempt from review under CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15061(b)(3) because the Ordinance is for general policies and procedure-making. This Ordinance does not authorize any new development entitlements. Any proposed project that will utilize the changes set forth in this Ordinance is subject to environmental review as part of the entitlement review of the project.

The Ordinance will not adversely impact the environment and is therefore exempt from the provisions of CEQA.

Executive Summary:

On November 6, 2024, the City Council adopted new zoning regulations for Saturn Park based upon recommendations from the Saturn Park Advisory Review Committee (SPARC). The draft ordinance proposed to the City Council at that time included regulations for design and studies governing data centers. Following City Council consideration of those draft regulations, however, the Council ultimately decided that requiring a development agreement for all data centers would ensure comprehensive City oversight of such projects.

Since then, it is apparent that the City Council may wish to reconsider regulations governing

data centers. While the City Council generally considered all issues identified by recent public communications in 2024, it is apparent that it is in the public interest to revisit those issues.

To give the City Manager and City Attorney additional time to craft refined regulations that the City Council may wish to reconsider, I request that the City Council adopt interim regulations and a moratorium on processing land use applications for any data center within Saturn Park.

If adopted, the draft urgency ordinance included with this report would prohibit the City from processing any pending applications for a data center and prevent acceptance of any new applications. Additionally, it would require the City Manager, or designee, to prepare a draft environmental impact report (DEIR) for any pending application once the City Council considers and, hopefully, adopts new land use regulations for data centers. This initial moratorium would last at least 45 days but may be extended up to a total of two years.

Background:
2024 City Council Actions and SPARC Recommendations
On October 2, 2024, the City Council considered the SPARC recommendations and directed the City Manager and City Attorney to draft amendments to MPMC Chapter 21.14 to include regulations governing data centers. The Council specifically requested that regulations address concerns related to energy, water, air quality, noise, and building design.

Originally Proposed Regulations (November 6, 2024)
On November 6, 2024, draft ordinances included with the staff report proposed regulations integrating sustainability requirements and comprehensive design standards:

Sustainability Requirements
• Requirement for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED®) certified building designs
• On-site electric vehicle charging stations
• Noise reduction for generators and mechanical equipment

Development Standards
• Data center definition
• Development standards for lots, yards, building height, floor area ratio, and off-street parking
• Required walls and landscaping
• Specific design standards for data centers addressing screening and aesthetics

Design Guidelines Resolution
The staff report also included a proposed resolution implementing design guidelines for data centers that would have governed:
• Architectural aesthetics to enhance the Saturn Park community • Integration with surroundings
• Design standards specific to data center operations

The City Council continued the design guidelines resolution to a future meeting without adoption.

City Council Modifications and Adopted Approach
The most significant change made by the City Council during its deliberation was the addition of a mandatory development agreement requirement for all data centers. The MPMC now includes the following language in MPMC § 21.14.220:

Section 21.14.220 Data Centers -- Development Agreement Requirements:
"Data centers are permitted only with a development agreement in accordance with Chapter

21.44 of this code."
This requirement fundamentally alters the historical regulatory approach to data processing facilities. Rather than allowing such uses with a conditional use permit or a permitted principal use, data centers – as now defined in the MPMC – may only be developed pursuant to a development agreement approved by the City Council and adopted by ordinance (which is subject to referendum).

Implications of Mandatory Development Agreement Requirement Approving a development agreement is a discretionary, legislative, decision that may be made by the City Council in its sole discretion. This means that data center projects cannot proceed solely under the "by-right" standards previously part of the MPMC’s zoning regulations.

Instead, each data center must negotiate a development agreement with the City, providing greater opportunity for:
• Community input and negotiation
• Project-specific conditions addressing environmental, traffic, and design concerns • Public benefits requirements specific to each project • Ongoing oversight and compliance mechanisms

Need for Further Refinement
Adopting a moratorium will provide the City Manager and City Attorney an opportunity to give the City Council an informed recommendation regarding new regulations governing data centers in Saturn Park. If adopted by a 4/5 vote of the City Council, the urgency ordinance would impose a temporary moratorium on processing pending applications for data center entitlements within Saturn Park and prohibit new applications from being accepted. The temporary moratorium would expire on March 7, 2026 unless extended before that time.

Strategic Plan Goal:

N/A

Fiscal Impact:

There are no identifiable fiscal impacts with adopting the draft urgency ordinance.

Attachments:

1. Draft Urgency Ordinance

2. November 6, 2024 Staff Report with attachments

ATTACHMENT 1
Draft Urgency Ordinance
Staff Report
January 21, 2026

O
RDINANCE NO. ________
AN

INTERIM ORDINANCE PROHIBITING PROCESSING OF

PENDING, AND ACCEPTANCE OF NEW, DATA CENTER LAND

USE APPLICATIONS WITHIN SATURN PARK TO CONSIDER

ADOPTING ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS FOR SUCH LAND
USES
T
he City Council for the City of Monterey Park does ordain as follows:

SECTION 1: This Ordinance is adopted pursuant to Government Code §§ 36937, 65858, and other applicable laws.

SECTION 2: Findings. The City Council finds, determines and declares as follows:

A. T
he City may adopt and enforce all laws and regulations not in conflict with the general laws and the City holds all rights and powers established by California law.

B. O
n November 6, 2024, the City Council adopted new regulations governing data centers in Saturn Park. As codified at Monterey Park Municipal Code (“MPMC”) § 21.14.220, data centers may only be permitted within Saturn Park pursuant to the terms of a development agreement approved by the City Council.

C. W
hile the provisions of the development agreement law
(Government Code §§ 65864–65869.5) make it plain that any decision regarding data centers within Saturn Park are completely discretionary for the City Council, additional regulations governing data center provide certainty to the public and private property owners regarding the City’s overall expectations for developing such land uses. Such regulations were first considered by the City Council on November 6, 2024 and should be reexamined to protect public health, safety, and welfare. The City requires additional time to study which regulations are in the public interest.

D. To pr
event frustration of these studies and the implementation of new regulations, the public interest, health, safety, and welfare require enactment of this Ordinance. The absence of this Ordinance would impair the orderly and effective implementation of contemplated MPMC amendments, and any further authorization of data center land uses within Saturn Park during the period of the moratorium may conflict with or frustrate the contemplated updates and revisions of the MPMC.

E. Based on the foregoing, the City finds that that this Ordinance is necessary in order to protect the City from the potential effects and impacts of data center land uses and the accompanying impacts from energy use, noise, air quality, aesthetic impacts to the City, and other similar or related effects on property values and the quality of life in the City’s neighborhoods.

F. The City Council further finds that this moratorium is a matter of local and City-wide importance and is not directed towards any business that currently seeks to utilize MPMC Chapter 21.14.

G. The City Council finds that this Ordinance is authorized by the City’s police powers. The City Council further finds that the length of the moratorium imposed by this Ordinance will not in any way deprive any person of rights granted by state or federal laws, because the moratorium is short in duration and essential to protect the public health, safety and welfare.

SECTION 3: Environmental Assessment. Adopting the draft Urgency Ordinance is exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., "CEQA") and CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq.) because it establishes temporary rules and procedures for minor alterations in land use.

The Urgency Ordinance, therefore, is categorically exempt from further CEQA review under CEQA Guidelines § 15305. Further, the adoption of the Urgency Ordinance is also exempt from review under CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15061(b)(3) because the Ordinance is for general policies and procedure-making. This Ordinance does not authorize any new development entitlements. Any proposed project that will utilize the changes set forth in this Ordinance is subject to environmental review as part of the entitlement review of the project. The Ordinance will not adversely impact the environment and is therefore exempt from the provisions of CEQA.

SECTION 4: Interim regulations. The following provisions are adopted as interim requirements for issuing permits pursuant to the MPMC for data center land uses within Saturn Park, and any construction or operation in the City in conflict with these provisions is expressly prohibited:

A. Restricted Activities. For a period of 45 days after adoption of this Ordinance, the City will not process any pending application for a data center land use within Saturn Park or accept new applications for data center land uses.

B. “Data center” is defined at MPMC § 21.14.210.

C. Based upon a review of the City’s entire administrative record including, without limitation, from the City Council’s previous meetings in October and November 2024, along with a cursory review of information within the public domain, there is a plethora of substantial evidence demonstrating a reasonable argument exists that any proposed data center in California “may have a significant effect on the environment” necessitating a fair‑argument that any application for a data center requires preparation of an environmental impact report (EIR). Publicly available materials document that large data centers have high and continuous electricity demand, often supported by diesel or gas backup generation with associated air quality, greenhouse gas, and noise impacts; that they may place significant demands on local water supplies for cooling; and that they can drive related infrastructure and land use changes, all of which have been specifically identified as needing robust CEQA analysis. In light of CEQA’s requirement that an EIR be prepared whenever there is substantial evidence, in view of the whole record, that a project may cause a significant environmental effect, and the well‑established “low threshold” nature of the fair‑argument test, this body of evidence supports a finding that any data center proposal in California presents at least a reasonable argument of potentially significant environmental impacts such that an EIR is required. Accordingly, the City Manager, or designee, is directed to require that any applicant with a pending data center application prepare an EIR in accordance with applicable law to fully inform decision-makers regarding potential significant impacts of such land uses.

D. The City Manager, or designee, must review any application for a data center land use entitlement to determine compliance with the provisions of this Ordinance. City employees, and City boards and commissions, are directed to refrain from accepting or processing any application for any land use entitlement, including, without limitation, use permits, variances, building permits, licenses and certificates of occupancy, necessary for constructing, placing, or operating data centers within the Saturn Park area, and to refrain from processing any land use entitlement for any pending applications already received. These prohibitions will remain effective for 45 days following adoption of this Ordinance.

E. The City Manager and City Attorney are directed to draft regulations that are substantially similar to those previously considered on November 6, 2024 to govern data centers within Saturn Park. Noticing for a public hearing to consider adopting such proposed regulations should occur forthwith to ensure timely public input regarding such regulations and provide certainty to private

property owners contemplating data center developments within Saturn Park regarding the City’s expectations and regulation of such land uses.

SECTION 5: Construction. This Ordinance must be broadly construed to achieve the purposes stated in this Ordinance. It is the City Council’s intent that the provisions of this Ordinance be interpreted or implemented by the City and others in a manner that facilitates the purposes set forth in this Ordinance.

SECTION 6: Enforceability. Repeal of any provision of the MPMC does not affect any penalty, forfeiture, or liability incurred before, or preclude prosecution and imposition of penalties for any violation occurring before this Ordinance’s effective date. Any such repealed part will remain in full force and effect for sustaining action or prosecuting violations occurring before the effective date of this Ordinance.

SECTION 7: Validity of Previous Code Sections. If this entire Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, any repeal or amendment of the MPMC or other city ordinance by this Ordinance will be rendered void and cause such previous MPMC provision or other the city ordinance to remain in full force and effect for all purposes.

SECTION 8: Severability. If any part of this Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the city council intends that such invalidity will not affect the effectiveness of the remaining provisions or applications and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable.

SECTION 9: Publication. The City Clerk is directed to certify the passage and adoption of this Ordinance; cause it to be entered into the City of Monterey Park’s book of original ordinances; make a note of the passage and adoption in the records of this meeting; and, within fifteen (15) days after the passage and adoption of this Ordinance, cause it to be published or posted in accordance with California law.

SECTION 10: Report. Pursuant to Government Code § 65858, the City Manager, or designee, must prepare a report for City Council consideration describing the measures taken to address the conditions which led to adoption of this Ordinance. This report must be provided to the City Council so that it may be considered and issued not later than 10 days before this Ordinance expires.

SECTION 11: Effective Date. This Ordinance will become effective immediately upon adoption pursuant to Government Code §§ 36937 and 65858 for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, safety, and welfare.

Pursuant to those statutes this Ordinance is adopted by a four-fifths vote.

SECTION 12: Expiration Date. After adoption, this Ordinance will be

repealed by operation of law on March 7, 2026, unless a subsequent ordinance is adopted by the City Council that extends this date.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 21
st day of January, 2026.

____________________________
Elizabeth Yang, Mayor

ATTEST:

________________________________
Maychelle Yee, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

________________________________
Karl H. Berger, City Attorney

ATTACHMENT 2
November 6, 2024 Staff Report with attachments
Staff Report
January 21, 2026

City Council Staff Report
DATE: November 6, 2024

AGENDA ITEM
NO: Public Hearing - 4A
TO: The H
onorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Director of Community Development
SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to adopt regulations governing data centers within Saturn Park in accordance with Section 3(A) of Ordinance No. 2198 (adopted by voters as Measure JJ on November 3, 2020).

RECOM
MENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Opening the public hearing and taking testimonial and documentary evidence;

2. After closing the public hearing and considering the evidence submitted during that public hearing:
a. Adopting an Urgency Ordinance (Attachment 1) upon 4/5 vote pursuant to Government Code § 65858 amending Monterey Park Municipal Code (“MPMC”) Chapter 21.14 to add regulations governing data centers in accordance with Section 3(A) of Ordinance No. 2198 (adopted by voters as Measure JJ on November 3, 2020);
b. Introducing and waiving first reading of Ordinance No. _____ (ZCA -24-02) (Attachment 2) amending Monterey Park Municipal Code (“MPMC”) Chapter 21.14 to add regulations governing data centers in accordance with Section 3(A) of Ordinance No. 2198 (adopted by voters as Measure JJ on November 3, 2020); and
c. Adopting Resolution No. _____ (Attachment 3) adopting design guidelines for data centers in accordance with MPMC Chapter 21.14; and

3. Taking such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

CEQA
(California Environmental Quality Act):

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”), the City reviewed the environmental impacts of the proposed regulations . No additional environmental review is required for these regulations pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15060(c)(2), § 15378(b)(5) § 15301 § 15303 and § 15061(b)(3). These regulations are exempt from additional CEQA review because the regulations would amend existing zoning to govern data centers within Saturn Park in accordance with the voter enacted Land Use Element. This will not have a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment and does not qualify as a “project” under CEQA because it will not make physical changes to the environment.

Additionally, the regulations are exempt from additional CEQA review under the 386 of 637

Staff Report

November 6, 2024

commonsense exemption that it will not affect the environment. Any future data center project applications will require separate environmental review as required by applicable law.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

On October 2, 2024, the City Council considered the Saturn Park Advisory Review Committee’s (“SPARC’s”) recommendation regarding potential future land uses as part of implementation of the Land Use and Urban Design Element (“LUE”) to the General Plan. The City Council directed staff to draft amendments to MPMC Chapter 21.14 affecting properties within Saturn Park , including conducting research and developing regulations governing data centers to address concerns related to energy, water, air quality, noise and building design.

ZCA-24-02 proposes regulations for data centers within Saturn Park which implement the LUE. As a separate document, design guidelines for data centers are included for City Council consideration.

BACKGROUND:

TYPE OF ACTION: LEGISLATIVE
Decision-Making Body: Pursuant to MPMC § 2.56.020(c), the City Council is the City’s Planning Agency for this matter. In considering the recommended actions, the City Council acts in its discretionary legislative capacity (formulating rules that apply to all future cases).

For the proposed Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment, the City Council must make the findings in MPMC § 21.38.050:

• That the proposed text amendment is consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan;

• That the proposed text amendment will not adversely affect surrounding properties; and

• That the proposed text amendment promotes public health, safety, and general welfare and serves the goals and purposes of the MPMC’s zoning regulations.

These findings are included in the draft o rdinances; the facts upon which these findings rely are also included with the draft documents.

EXISTING DATA CENTER REGULATIONS
The current regulations within MPMC Chapter 21.14 were enacted by the voters in 1998 and are generally identified as “Office Professional” or “O -P.” To avoid confusion with other zoning regulations that were adopted by the City Council in 2013, the regulat ions affecting Saturn Park were designated as “O-P (Voter Enacted).” 387 of 637

Staff Report

November 6, 2024

The City is currently processing an application for a “data center” at 1977 Saturn. One of the City Council’s topics of discussion – which was also discussed by the SPARC – is the public interest in regulating data centers within Saturn Park. While the proposed use at 1977 Saturn was classified as a “data processing facility,” voters in 1998 could not have contemplated a “data center” use.

CURRENT AND PROPOSED DEFINITIONS
The MPMC does not current define a data center; data processing facilities are defined as

“a building, dedicated space within a building, or group of buildings primarily used for the processing, storage, and management of electronic data on less than an acre of land. This type of facility typically involves activities such as data entry, storage, conversion, and analysis for onsite use.”

Should the proposed regulations be adopted, the MPMC would be amended to include the following definition of a “data center”:

“a building, dedicated space within a building, or group of structures located on one or more acres of land used to house a large group of networked computer systems used for data storage and processing for off -site users, to be used for the remote storage, processing, or distribution of large amounts of data. Such facilities may also include air handlers, power generators, water cooling and storage facilities, utility substations, back-up batteries, fire suppression systems, enhanced security features, and other associated utility infrastructure to support operations. This definition does not apply to smaller data processing facilities that are located on less than one acre of land and where such facilities are accessory or incidental to another primary use.”

This definition more accurately describes the data centers utilized nationwide for cloud storage; data transmissions; and other internet related activities. It also reflects the resource intense nature of such land uses.

PROPOSED REGULATIONS
The proposed regulations would help mitigate the impact of data centers on both surrounding land uses and on environmental resources. These efforts are reflected in:

• Aesthetics – the proposed design guidelines would craft data center buildings that are more than a box with wires. Such structures should help enhance the Saturn Park community and its surroundings with attractive architectural.

• Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (“LEED®”) certified building designs for sustainable construction – this will help alleviate the impact of data 388 of 637

Staff Report

November 6, 2024

centers on energy, water, and other resources. The intent is to encourage use of renewable resources and reduce electrical use.

• Public benefits – the regulations would require data centers to execute a development agreement with the City to ensure that the community benefits from the presence of these land uses. Because data centers do not “sell” anything, they are not generally a significant source of tax revenue (other than limited property taxes). A development agreement will help not only protect the investment of data center developers but also provide a vehicle by which benefits may flow to the City.

• Green technology – among other things, data center would be required to provide onsite electric vehicle charging stations. Additionally, such uses must ensure that noise emanating from generators, etc., are reduced to the extent practicable.

LEGAL NOTIFICATION:

The legal notice of this hearing was posted at City Hall, Monterey Park Bruggemeyer Library, and Langley Center and published in Monterey Park Press on October 24, 2024, with affidavits of posting on file.

2024-25 STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL:

The proposed code amendments meet the 2024- 25 Strategic Plan Goal to “ Strengthen our local economy and enhance housing opportunities” by providing a framework from which data centers will be allowed to be built in a sustainable way that will create benefits to the community.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There are no identifiable fiscal impacts associated with adopting the Ordinance itself (other than costs associated with codifying the Ordinance).

Respectfully submitted and prepared
by:

Jessica Serrano
Director of Community
Development

389 of 637

Staff Report

November 6, 2024

Approved by:

Reviewed by:

Inez Alvarez
City Manager
Karl H. Berger
City Attorney

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Urgency Ordinance No. ____ amending the Monterey Park Municipal Code

2. Regular Ordinance No. ____ amending the Monterey Park Municipal Code

3. Resolution No. ____ adopting design standards that apply to data center developments

4. Data Center Research:
a. County of Fairfax, Virginia – Data Centers Report and Recommendations, dated January 9, 2024
b. Article – As Data Centers Zap Power, Some Pols Ponder The Unthinkable: Pulling The Plug, dated October 9, 2024
c. Article – Recommendations for Proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Data Center Impacts in Fairfax County, dated May 20, 2024

5. Notice of Determination

390 of 637

Staff Report
November 6, 2024

ATTACHMENT 1
Urgency Ordinance No. ____ amending the
Monterey Park Municipal Code
391 of 637

ORDINANCE NO.

AN URGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING MONTEREY PARK
MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 21.14 (ZCA-24-02) TO AMEND

REGULATIONS GOVERNING DATA PROCESSING FACILITIES IN
ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 3(A) OF ORDINANCE NO. 2198
(ADOPTED BY VOTERS AS MEASURE JJ ON NOVEMBER 3, 2020).

The City Council of the City of Monterey Park does ordain as follows:

SECTION 1: The City Council finds and declares that:

A. This Ordinance is adopted pursuant to the voters’ directives in Ordinance No. 2198, as adopted November 3, 2020 via Measure JJ.

B. Based upon recommendations of the Saturn Park Advisory Review Commission (“SPARC”), the City Council will be considering expansion of uses within Saturn Park.

C. As a preliminary matter, however, the City Council finds that there is a current interest by developers to construct “data centers” within Saturn Park. A review of the Monterey Park Municipal Code (“MPMC”) confirms that the “data center” land use is not considered as part of the current zoning regulations. While a “data processing facility” is listed as an allowed land use within Saturn Park, that term is not defined. Additionally, since this term was added to the MPMC in 1998, it was well before the concept internet commerce emerged as the “new economy”; the term did not encompass the scope of uses contemplated by contemporary data center developers.

D. It is plain that data centers – as they have developed in the 25 years since the Saturn Park regulations were first added to the MPMC – are energy hungry land uses that are generally aesthetically displeasing and provide few public benefits. Current data show that, overall, buildings consume 74% of all electricity in the United States.

E. Goal 2 of the City’s Environmental Justice Element provides that “Community health and the reduction of exposure to environmental pollutants is a priority and part of all planning and policy practices.” Additionally, Goal 3.1 provides that the City should “[m]aximize the use of the City’s existing open space network and recreation facilities by enhancing those facilities and providing connections, particularly from disadvantaged neighborhoods.”

F. These Goals and Policies reflect the City Council’s overall intent to provide for a cleaner, greener, and more enjoyable community both for our current 392 of 637

Ordinance No.

residents and for future generations.

G. Requiring data centers to adhere with green building principles is a form of climate action that minimizes greenhouse gas emissions, relies on energy efficiency and renewable resources, conserves water, optimizes material use, provides healthy and biodiverse environments, and bolsters an equitable society.

H. Third party rating systems characterize the lifecycle considerations for green buildings. These programs can offer credibility, transparency, and consistency to project teams in pursuit of an elevated and well-defined performance standards for data centers.

I. It is in the public interest to update the MPMC as to data centers while also considering additional uses for Saturn Park as contemplated by Measure JJ, SPARC, and the City Council.

J. Without the enactment of this Ordinance, the voter’s vision for revitalizing Saturn Park via Measure JJ would be thwarted: anticipated applications for land uses currently allowed by MPMC Chapter 21.14, if approved, would lock in certain types of land uses for the foreseeable future.

K. The City Council determines that the MPMC requires updating to protect the public against health, safety, and welfare dangers that may result from allowing applicants for data centers to rely upon outdated land use regulations.

L. The City Council finds that that this Ordinance is necessary in order to protect the City from the potential effects and impacts of outdated land uses and the accompanying impacts from traffic and commerce on City streets, impacts on parking availability in the business areas of the City, the aesthetic impacts to the City, and other similar or related effects on property values and the quality of life in the City’s neighborhoods.

M. Based on the foregoing, and, in accordance with Government Code §§ 36934 and 36937(b) and the City’s police powers, the City Council finds that that this Ordinance should be adopted on an urgency basis to preserve public peace, health, safety and welfare.

SECTION 2: Pursuant to MPMC § 21.38.050, the City Council finds as follows:

A. Land Use and Urban Design Element: This Ordinance complies with Policy 4.2 (Sustainable Practices); Policy 4.3 (Environmental Burden); Policy 4.4 (Freeway Buffer Greening); Policy 4.5 (New Development); Policy 4.6 (Active Transportation); Policy 11.1 (Privacy); Policy 12.1 393 of 637

Ordinance No.

(Compatibility); Policy 12.2 (Comprehensive Design); and Policies 25.1,

25.2, and 25.3 (specific as to Saturn Park).

B. Environmental Justice Element: This Ordinance complies with Policy No.

2.1 (limiting environmental pollution); Policy 2.2 (promote enhanced health outcomes and improved quality of life); and Policy 3.2 (work with local business community to expand green space programs).

C. These regulations will not adversely affect surrounding properties. Such regulations will operate citywide and will not affect a change in the use or the intensity of use of property in any zone.

SECTION 3: Environmental Review. The City Council finds and determines that this ordinance is not subject to further review under the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq.; “CEQA”) for the following reasons: (1) it will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15060(c)(2); (2) there is no possibility that the ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15061(b)(3); and (3) the ordinance, by itself, does not constitute a “project” as defined in the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15378).

SECTION 4: Renaming of Zone; Amendment of Zoning Map; Amendment of MPMC §

21.02.210. All references to “O-P—OFFICE PROFESSIONAL ZONE (VOTER ENACTED)” within the MPMC are amended to read “S-P – SATURN PARK INNOVATION/TECHNOLOGY ZONE.” All references to the “O-P zone” within MPMC Chapter 21.14 are amended to read “S-P zone.” The reference to the “McCaslin Business Park (O-P Voter Enacted)” in the Zoning Map is amended to read “Saturn Park Innovation/Technology Zone.” MPMC § 21.02.210(B) is amended to add the “Saturn Park Innovation/Technology Zone” to the table of Zone Designations.

SECTION 4: MPMC Chapter 21.14 is amended to read as follows:

“Chapter 21.14

S-P – SATURN PARK INNOVATION/TECHNOLOGY ZONE

21.14.010. Purpose.

In order to provide for the development of innovation and technology uses that exhibit a diversity of business activity from both revenue and service quality standpoints, and which are compatible and responsive to abutting land uses, including residential developments, the following regulations apply to all properties classified in the S-P zone.

21.14.020. Definitions.
394 of 637

Ordinance No.

Unless the contrary is stated or clearly appears from the context, the following definitions govern the construction of the words and phrases used in this chapter:

“Data center” means a building, dedicated space within a building, or group of structures located on one or more acres of land used to house a large group of networked computer systems used for data storage and processing for off-site users, to be used for the remote storage, processing, or distribution of large amounts of data. Such facilities may also include air handlers, power generators, water cooling and storage facilities, utility substations, back-up batteries, fire suppression systems, enhanced security features, and other associated utility infrastructure to support operations. This definition does not apply to smaller data processing facilities that are located on less than one acre of land and where such facilities are accessory or incidental to another primary use.

“Data processing facility” means a building, dedicated space within a building, or group of buildings primarily used for the processing, storage, and management of electronic data on less than an acre of land. This type of facility typically involves activities such as data entry, storage, conversion, and analysis for onsite use.

“Director” means the City Manager or designee. Unless otherwise designated by the City Manager, the Community Development Director is the Director.

“Green Building Rating System” means an assessment tool, created and managed by LLED, a reputable organization in good standing and recognized by the building industry as meeting the standard of care, that includes the following general characteristics, at a minimum:

A. Holistic approach to program requirements, with established and comprehensive sustainability metrics for measuring performance in a range of impact areas, such as energy; environmental justice; human and environmental health; integrative process; materials; site and surrounds; and water;

B. Independent third-party verification;

C. Mechanism for consistent evaluation and communication of achievement or levels of achievement;

D. Standardized processes for project data tracking and project team support; and

E. Commitment to continuous improvement with clearly delineated and transparent methods for program updates.

395 of 637

Ordinance No.

“Green Business Certification Inc.” or “GBCI” is the global certification body for the LEED green building program and other sustainability rating systems, as well as the administrator of related professional credentials. (www.gcbi.org)

“Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design” or “LEED®” is an internationally recognized and third-party verified green building rating system developed by the U.S.

Green Building Council. (www.usgbc.org/leed)

21.14.030. Permitted Uses.

It is unlawful for any person to use, nor may any property owner permit the use of any lot classified in any S-P zone for any use, other than the following as set out in this chapter.

21.14.040. Prohibited Uses.

All uses not permitted in this chapter are prohibited.

21.14.050. Principal Uses.

The principal uses are permitted as follows:

Administrative and professional offices; beauty salon or barber shop; bookstore; Cellular phone, telephone and pager store; coffee shop; Computer store, sales and service; confectionary shop;
Data processing facility;
Delicatessen;
Employment agency;
Financial institutions’ corporate offices, no retail banking; General research facility, not involving testing, manufacturing, fabrication or processing or sale of products, nor the use of a hazardous material that has a degree of hazard rating in health, flammability or reactivity of Class 4 as ranked by U.F.C. Standard 79-3 or succeeding standard;
Gift shop;
Ice cream parlor;
Import and export offices;
Investment service offices, stock brokers; Jewelry store, sales and service; Legal offices;
Mailbox and service store;
396 of 637

Ordinance No.

Medical equipment and supplies, sales and service; notary public; Photocopying and blueprinting; public utility customer service office; Real estate offices and title companies; restaurant, tearoom and café; Service businesses;
Stationery;
Studio, art, dance, martial arts, photography; tax consulting; Tobacco store;
Travel agency;
Video sales and rentals.

21.14.060. Conditional uses.

Conditional uses are uses specifically enumerated in this chapter.

21.14.070. Standards of Development Generally.

All premises in the S-P zone must comply with the following standards of development as set out in this chapter and as may be adopted by city council resolution.

21.14.080. Lots.

A. Lot Area. The minimum lot building on the S-P zone area of each lot is 5,000 square feet.

B. Lot Width. The minimum width of each lot is 50 feet.

C. Lot Depth. The minimum depth of each lot is 100 feet.

21.14.090. Yards.

The following minimum yards are required on all lots:

A. Front Yard. No minimum front yard is required.

B. Side and Rear Yards. Every lot must have and maintain minimum side and rear yards as follows:

1. When the side yard is adjacent to a street, the yard must be at least 15 feet in depth.

2. When adjacent to an R-zone, the yard must be not less than 50 feet, plus five feet in depth for each story above one story of building or each 10 foot increment above 15 feet in height of 397 of 637

Ordinance No.

building on the S-P zoned lot. Where there is an opening, including, without limitation, windows, pedestrian doors and roll-up doors, in any facing a yard adjacent to an R-zone, the yard must be not less than 100 feet from any opening to minimum width of the R zoned lot. The yard may be used for parking, excepting a minimum 15 foot wide area abutting the R zone which must be landscaped and maintained in such a condition so as not to violate this code. The required landscaping must also conform to the standards set forth in Section 21.14.150.

3. When the S-P zoned lot is separated from an R zone by an alley, a rear yard setback of 40 feet must be provided, as measured from the centerline of the alley. A minimum three-foot wide landscaped planter must be installed and maintained along the alley, excepting at any vehicular access driveway.

4. When adjacent to a non-residential zone, commercially-zoned or M zoned lot, no yard is required.

21.14.100. Building Height.

No building or structure exceeding 40 feet or three stories may be located on any lot.

Buildings or structures exceeding the height limits may be permitted upon approval of a conditional use permit.

21.14.110. Floor Area Ratio (FAR).

The floor area ratio may not exceed 0.5 when the lot is less than 10,000 square feet in area. When the lot is between 10,000 and 20,000 square feet in area, the floor area ratio may not exceed 0.65. When the lot is more than 20,000 square feet in area, the floor area ratio may not exceed 0.8. The floor area ratio may be increased to a maximum of 1.0 for all lots, upon approval of a conditional use permit.

21.14.120. Off-Street Parking and Loading.

Each S-P zoned lot must have and maintain off-street parking and loading facilities as required by this title.

21.14.130. Required Walls.

Except as otherwise provided in this chapter the following standards apply:

A. Where any part of the front yard or street side yard of an S-P zoned lot is used for parking or loading, a masonry wall compatible in color with the commercial building and/or sight- obscuring hedge a minimum of three 398 of 637

Ordinance No.

feet in height must be erected and maintained within a landscaped area a minimum of three feet in width adjacent to the sidewalk at the front or side yard property line as required by this title.

B. When any S-P zoned lot has a common side or rear lot line with any R zoned property, a six-foot solid decorative masonry or concrete block wall compatible in color with the commercial building must be constructed and maintained along all such common side or rear lot lines. Where an easement exists, abutting the common property line, the decorative wall may be constructed along the boundary of the easement on the commercial lot. A minimum three-foot wide landscaped planter with automatic irrigation system must be placed adjacent to the wall, planted with trees, shrubs, ground cover and vines. Where a parking lot on the S- P zoned lot abuts a R zoned lot, the additional parking lot landscaping requirements of this chapter apply.

21.14.140. Trash Facilities.

Each S-P zoned lot must provide facilities for the storage and collection of trash as follows:

A. Any outdoor trash facility must be enclosed by a minimum five-foot high solid masonry, brick or concrete wall except for the access way which must be enclosed with solid decorative gates of the same height.

A. Location and size are subject to approval by the Director. When any S-P zoned lot has a common property line with a R zoned lot, no trash facility may be located within the required building setback.

B. Open vehicular and pedestrian access to and from such trash facility must be provided. No parking spaces may block such access to the trash facility.

C. Trash facilities must be maintained in a closed manner at all times to prohibit visibility from public rights-of-way or adjacent property.

21.14.150. Buffering and Maintenance of Landscaping and Easements.

A. For S-P zoned lots with side or rear yards that are adjacent to an R zoned lot, the following buffering provisions must be provided and maintained:

1. Landscaping, irrigation and maintenance plans are required and the plans are subject to approval of the planning agency. The plans must incorporate, without limitation, 15 gallon minimum trees at time of planting, interspersed shrubs, ground cover, raised earthen 399 of 637

Ordinance No.

berms and automatic sprinkler systems. The City may require the maintenance plan to include a bona fide service agreement with a City licensed landscaping service business. Maintaining an active service agreement on file with the Director is the responsibility of the owner of the subject property or authorized agent.

2. All landscaped areas and easements must be maintained in good condition, weed and disease free, and in compliance with this code.

21.14.160. Compressors, Air-Conditioning Units or Similar Mechanical Equipment.

Each S-P zoned lot which has compressors, air-conditioning units or similar mechanical equipment, located on the roof and outside of the exterior walls of any building or structure, must comply with the following:

A. All such equipment must be installed with permanent sound proofing measures, including, without limitation, enclosures, parapet and sound attenuating walls and screens. All such equipment must comply with noise standards set forth in this code. The location, type and scope of soundproofing measures for such equipment are subject to the approval of the Director.

B. All such equipment must be maintained in a clean and proper condition to prevent collection of litter and filth, emissions of dust or fumes, vibration or electrical disturbances.

21.14.170. Lighting.

All outdoor lighting must be located and shielded so as to prevent the direct spillage of light or glare onto adjacent lots and streets.

21.14.180. Site Development Plan Approval.

Site development plans must be approved by the Director in accordance with this code before the Building Official issues a building permit.

21.14.190. Limitations on Permitted Uses.

Every use permitted in the S-P zone must comply with the following:

A. All uses must be conducted totally within a completely enclosed building, except for those uses which are customarily conducted in the open. Those uses conducted in the open may not be closer than 100 feet to any R zoned lot, except for parking.
400 of 637

Ordinance No.

B. No outdoor storage is allowed unless the same is enclosed by a view- obscuring fence or wall, provided that no stored material is visible above the fence or wall, that the fence or wall is approved by the Director and that such storage is limited to the accessory storage of items sold or utilized in the conduct of a permitted use on the premises. Where the S-P zoned lot is adjacent to a R zoned lot, no outdoor storage is permitted within 100 feet of a R zoned lot.

C. No loading and unloading is permitted in any required side or rear yard.

D. Where the S-P zoned lot is adjacent to a R zoned lot, no deliveries of goods and commodities nor loading or unloading shall be conducted during the hours from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.

E. Overnight parking of vehicles is prohibited, except those vehicles used in conjunction with a permitted use.

F. Driveways cannot exceed 30 feet in width or 60% of the lot frontage.

G. No use is permitted which produces or causes or emits any dust, gas, smoke, glare, noise, fumes, odors, electromagnetic emanations or vibrations which are or may be detrimental to the health, safety, welfare and peace of the City and its residents and businesses.

H. No use is permitted which uses or stores a hazardous material that has a degree of hazard rating in health, flammability or reactivity of Class 4 as ranked by U.F.C. Standard 79-3 or succeeding standard. A business materials usage and operations form must be filed with the Public Works Director before the Building Official issues a certificate of occupancy.

I. No person may, at any location within the S-P zone, create nor allow the creation of noise which causes the noise level to exceed the applicable noise standards set forth in this code. Where the S-P zoned lot is adjacent to an R zoned lot, the noise level at the property line of the R zoned lot may not exceed the allowable noise level for residential properties.

21.14.200. Conditional Uses.

Auditorium, not within 300 feet of an R zone
Buildings exceeding height limit
Business college (office or medical, dental)
Child care center, not within 300 feet of an R zone
401 of 637