CC - Item 4B - Minutes of February 24, 2026MINUTES OF THE
CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 24, 2026
The regular meeting of the Rosemead City Council was called to order by Mayor Armenta
at 7:00 p.m., in the Rosemead City Council Chamber, located at 8838 East Valley Boulevard,
Rosemead, California.
PRESENT: Mayor Armenta, Mayor Pro Tern Low, and Council Member Council Member Clark,
Council Member Dang and Ly
ABSENT: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Council Member Council Member Dang
INVOCATION was led by Council Member Ly
1. PUBLIC COMMENT - None
2. PRESENTATIONS
A. Introduction of Newly Hired Planning and Economic Development Manager,
Richard Marshalian
B. Director of Community Development Valenzuela introduced the newly hired
Economic Development Manager, Richard Marshalian. She shared that Mr.
Marshalian has extensive planning experience and in the government sector.
Economic Development Manager, Marshalian thanked the City Council and City
staff for their warm welcome to Rosemead.
The City Council welcomed Mr. Marshalian to the Rosemead family and look
forward to working with him.
3. PUBLIC HEARING - None
5. MATTERS FROM CITY MANAGER & STAFF
Mayor Armenta announced Agenda Item 5A- Update on Speed Hump Traffic
Calming Applications, would be moved up for discussion.
A. Update on Speed Hump Traffic Calming Applications
On March 11, 2025, the City Council adopted the Comprehensive Traffic Calming
Policy establishing the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program. The Speed
Hump policy was outlined within the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program.
In response to reported speeding concerns, staff reviewed 13 street segments in
accordance with the Speed Hump Policy. Of these, five segments were identified as
Rosemead City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes of February 24, 2026
Page 1 of 12 - - AGENDA ITEM 4.13 - - -
potentially eligible for speed hump installation based on the initial screening criteria;
however, additional staff evaluation was required to ensure full compliance with the
policy.
Recommendation: That the City Council receive and file this report.
City Engineer Basilyous provided a brief update to the Mayor and City Council
regarding the Speed Hump Policy, which was approved several months prior. The
policy establishes 11 criteria for evaluating speed hump requests, including factors
such as street speed and roadway width. Prior to policy adoption, a total of 11 requests
were received. Following adoption, staff reviewed these requests in accordance with
the criteria established. Of the 11 requests, 7 were determined to be ineligible. The
remaining 4 requests met preliminary criteria but required neighborhood surveys to
proceed.
Surveys were distributed twice to residents along the four qualifying street segments,
including Pine Street (between Garvey Avenue and Graves Avenue), Avar Avenue,
and areas near Bartlette and Denton Avenue. Survey responses indicated low levels
of support, with approval rates of approximately 15%, 20%, 15%, and 23%,
respectively. A majority of residents did not respond, despite efforts to increase
accessibility through multilingual materials, QR codes, and online response options.
Since the policy's adoption, two additional requests have been received. One request
was determined to be ineligible upon initial review. The second request appears to
meet the criteria and is currently undergoing Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume
analysis to determine eligibility.
Mayor Armenta expressed concerns regarding the implementation of speed humps,
noting her longstanding advocacy for traffic calming measures since her election in
2009. She referenced her experience as a former teacher in the Garvey School District
and emphasized ongoing safety concerns due to excessive vehicle speeds,
particularly along the corridor between Garvey Avenue and Graves Avenue. She
stated that frequent turnover in the Public Works Director position has resulted in
delays and a perceived lack of continuity in addressing speed hump requests. She
inquired whether data from a previously conducted comprehensive survey,
completed under former Public Works Director Wang, is available, noting that some
residents reported they were unaware of any prior survey efforts.
While acknowledging improvements in the current Public Works team, Mayor
Armenta emphasized the importance of moving forward efficiently. She expressed
interest in reviewing existing data and exploring opportunities to expedite the
process, indicating her understanding that prior findings may have supported the
installation of speed humps.
City Manager Kim provided background information regarding the City's traffic
calming policy, which was presented to and approved by the City Council
approximately one year ago. He explained that the policy outlines multiple tiers of
traffic calming measures, ranging from lower -level interventions such as stop sign
installation and roadway striping to higher -level measures, including speed humps.
Rosemead City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes of February 24, 2026
Page 2 of 12
Mr. Kim noted that speed humps represent the highest level of traffic calming and
are only considered after other design measures have been evaluated and determined
to be ineffective. He stated that the Traffic Engineering Division conducts analyses
to assess whether alternative measures can adequately address traffic concerns prior
to recommending speed humps. He further clarified that the 11 locations referenced
by staff had undergone evaluation for lower -level traffic calming measures and
progressed to consideration of speed humps. Of these, four locations met the
established criteria for speed hump installation. One key criterion includes roadway
conditions, such as streets with speed limits of 25 miles per hour or less, to ensure
safety. He confirmed that resident surveys were conducted for the four qualifying
locations, and the results of those surveys were presented to the City Council.
Mayor Armenta reiterated that a criterion is that all streets must be residential with
speed limits of 25 mph or less.
City Engineer Basilyous explained that speed limit is only one of the 11 criteria used
to evaluate streets. Other factors include whether the street is part of transit or
emergency routes and whether it meets minimum length requirements. After
reviewing all criteria, only four locations qualified to move forward, which is why a
survey was sent out.
Mayor Armenta opened public comments.
Van Trac, on behalf of the Willard School community, raised long-standing concerns
about speeding on Willard Avenue during school drop-off and pickup times. After a
recent incident in which a student's foot was run over, the community organized a
petition with over 800 signatures. She requested the installation of speed bumps to
help slow traffic and improve safety.
Anthony Rem expresses urgent concern about speeding on the street near the school,
noting that cars often travel as fast as 50 to 60 mph. As a parent, he recalls a recent
incident where he had to honk to prevent a child from being hit, as well as damage to
his own car from speeding drivers. He questioned the need for surveys and urged the
city to act quickly in installing speed bumps to protect students.
Angel Lopez, student at Willard Elementary, advocated speed bumps and crosswalks
near the school. He cited a recent incident where a student was hit by a car and
emphasized that speeding drivers put students at risk. He urged safety measures to
help protect students and allow families to walk safely.
Jasmin Ho, a fifth -grade student at Willard Elementary, urged the City Council to
add speed bumps and a crosswalk near the school. She also reiterated to a recent
incident where a student was injured by a car and explained that these measures
would slow traffic, reduce the risk of harm, and provide a safer way for students and
families to cross the street.
Council Member Ly thanked the parents, residents, and students for speaking, noting
his own connection as a former Willard Elementary student. He explained that the
Rosemead City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes of February 24, 2026
Page 3 of 12
City previously established 11 criteria for installing speed humps to ensure safety and
practicality, such as allowing emergency vehicle access. From an initial 11 requested
street segments, only four met the criteria. He asks whether Willard Avenue was
included among the original submissions.
City Manager Kim stated he recalled the Traffic Commission reviewed Willard Street
near the elementary school and approved some traffic -calming measures, including a
street crossing.
City Engineer Basilyous stated they are unsure whether Willard was among the
original 11 streets but can verify. He added that even streets that didn't qualify for
speed humps were still eligible for other traffic safety measures.
Council Member Ly asked for clarification on whether Willard was officially part of
the submitted streets for review, noting that its consideration by the Traffic
Commission suggests it likely was included.
City Manager Kim stated that Willard was likely part of the review process, noting
its location near a new housing project. He also remembers that the school had
previously requested a crosswalk during that time.
Council Member Ly seeks clarification on whether Willard Avenue residents have
formally submitted a request for a speed hump since the policy was established,
distinguishing it from earlier requests such as for a crosswalk.
City Manager Kim explained that requests begin as traffic calming applications,
which can lead to different levels of measures being considered, with speed humps
being the final option if needed.
Bahman Janka, Transtech Engineer Consultant stated that the City previously
evaluated Willard Avenue for a potential crosswalk and related safety improvements,
including curb extensions to improve visibility and shorten crossing distance. He
believed funding may already have been allocated through the Capital Improvement
Program and suggested the project could be in the design or upcoming construction
phase, pending confirmation of its current status.
Council Member Ly inquired whether the resident survey used to evaluate support
for traffic calming measures is conducted in both paper and online formats.
City Engineer Basilyous replied that the survey was done in paper and mailed out to
homeowners and online.
Council Member Ly explained that crossing guards are typically the responsibility of
the school district, though cities sometimes help fund them for safety reasons. He
asked whether the Garvey School District has ever requested crossing guards for
Willard Elementary or asked the City to share costs. He also noted there are currently
no crossing guards present and seeks clarification on whether any such request has
ever been made.
Rosemead City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes of February 24, 2026
Page 4-of 12
City Manager Kim explained that both Garvey and Rosemead school districts have
previously requested additional crossing guard locations, though he does not
specifically recall Willard being one of them. He outlined the process: the Public
Works Department conducts a warrant study to determine if a crossing guard is
justified, similar to criteria used for speed humps. If approved, the Traffic
Commission may recommend it to the City Council. He recalls four requested
locations in total, with only one ultimately meeting the criteria. He adds that crossing
guards are managed through annual contracts, requiring coordination between the
school district, city, and staffing company, which is why implementation typically
aligns with the start of a school year.
Council Member Ly acknowledged residents' urgency for immediate safety
improvements but emphasizes that the City must follow established procedures. He
explained that the agenda item is primarily an update on the overall traffic calming
policy, while the Willard situation may require separate review. Council Member Ly
stated more information is needed such as whether a formal request was submitted
and whether the Traffic Commission has evaluated it. He suggested that the Willard
issue should either return to a future council meeting or be referred to the Traffic
Commission for further analysis.
Council Member Clark asked whether speed humps can be designed in a way that
still allows emergency vehicles to pass, so fire trucks and ambulances can maneuver
around them. She emphasized concern about ensuring emergency access near the
school.
City Manager Kim explained that during development of the traffic calming policy,
they considered emergency access and driver behavior. He noted that placing speed
humps only on one side would likely cause drivers to simply go around them,
reducing effectiveness. The design is intended so that emergency vehicles, like fire
trucks, can still pass over the humps while still slowing down regular traffic.
Council Member Clark responded that even if drivers go around the speed hump, it
will still slow them down somewhat. She reiterated her main concern about ensuring
emergency access while still finding a way to reduce vehicle speed near the school.
She stressed the importance of finding a solution to improve safety and prevent a
potential tragedy. She asked whether public notices are distributed in four languages
to ensure accessibility for all residents.
City Engineer Basilyous explained that notices were primarily sent in English, but
they included a note directing residents to an online link where the information is
available in other languages, such as Chinese.
Council Member Clark objected to the current notice method, arguing that many
residents whose first language is not English may discard the mail without
understanding its importance. She emphasized that safety -related surveys like speed
hump proposals should be clearly communicated in multiple languages on the letter
itself, so residents immediately recognize the purpose and are more likely to respond.
City Engineer Basilyous clarified that the city can provide full translations of the
Rosemead City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes of February 24, 2026
Page 5 of 12
letter, but the current practice is to send the main notice in English with directions
showing how to access the same information online in other languages, such as
Chinese.
Council Member Clark argued that simply including a link is not effective, especially
for non-English speakers or busy residents. Drawing on her experience, she stressed
that communications must clearly capture attention, so people understand the purpose
of the survey. She believed the current approach may lead to valid responses being
missed and urged city staff to take extra steps to ensure important safety -related
notices are clearly understood.
City Engineer Basilyous agreed to improve communication and stated the notice can
be sent again in all four languages to ensure clarity and broader understanding. He
noted the city has already gone beyond policy by sending the notice twice due to low
response rates but is open to sending it a third time in multiple languages to further
ensure outreach is effective.
Council Member Clark requested that the City Council review and help refine how
public notices are worded before they are sent to residents, to ensure clarity and
effectiveness. She emphasized that clear communication is essential because elected
officials and staff serve the public, whom she describes as "the bosses," and therefore
residents must fully understand important issues affecting their community.
Council Member Dang emphasized that staff should be trusted with leadership in
developing and managing surveys without excessive repeated revisions, warning that
constant changes could undermine the usefulness of the process. He noted this is
already the second survey and cautions against continuing to reissue them, as it may
not lead to better outcomes. He referenced earlier traffic calming measures already
implemented near a nearby housing development, suggesting these may address
concerns in the Willard area and should be shared with residents. Additionally, he
warns that adding speed humps in the same area could be redundant or
counterproductive. He discussed design considerations for speed humps, explaining
that emergency vehicles are built to safely pass over them, and reassures concerns
about emergency access while noting that such vehicles can even cross medians in
extreme situations to reach incidents.
Mayor Pro Tem Low expressed improving the survey process by providing it in
multiple languages, noting that relying only on English with a link may prevent non-
English -speaking residents from participating. She acknowledged it may cost more
but believes it would lead to better responses. Regarding Willard, she agreed the issue
of traffic safety near the school should be considered separately from the survey
process. While her initial reaction is to support installing a speed hump, she suggested
first conducting a proper study to determine what measures are needed, even if the
street does not meet existing criteria, due to the presence of students and speeding
concerns.
City Manager Kim explained that a City Council staff report for Willard was
reviewed on July 23, 2024, before the 2025 speed hump policy was adopted, so speed
humps were not evaluated at that time. He noted that Willard may not have been part
Rosemead City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes of February 24, 2026
Page 6 of 12
of the current list of 11 speed hump candidates and suggested staff verify its status.
He also stated that instead of speed humps, several traffic -calming measures were
already approved in 2024, including reduced speed limits, updated signage,
crosswalk improvements, and a mid -block crosswalk with crossing guard provisions.
City Manager Kim proposes returning specifically to Willard to review the status of
the implemented measures and then reassessing whether additional actions, such as
speed humps, are needed under the new policy.
Mayor Armenta explained that public comments are not a back -and -forth discussion
but that council members will respond during their remarks. She shared her long-
standing concern about speeding near schools, based on her experience as a teacher
at Garvey School District and frequent exposure to unsafe driving conditions at
Willard and other schools. She supports installing speed humps at Willard and
believes the street meets multiple criteria, including being residential, single -lane,
low speed limit, and experiencing high traffic volume and speeding. She argued that
signage alone is ineffective and that driver behavior has not improved over decades.
Mayor Armenta also expresses frustration with delays in implementing traffic safety
measures due to policy gaps and repeated turnover in public works leadership, while
acknowledging the importance of having a formal policy in place. She emphasized
that student safety should be the top priority and questioned how many proposed
traffic calming measures have actually been fully implemented, suggesting that some
improvements may not have materialized in practice.
Mr. Janka explained that as part of the previously recommended crosswalk
improvements at Willard, the City proposed adding curb extensions (also called
chokers). These would extend the sidewalk into the roadway to shorten the crossing
distance and improve visibility of pedestrians. He noted that these safety features
were recommended but have not yet been installed.
Mayor Armenta thanks the speaker and emphasizes urgency, noting that similar curb
extensions and safety designs have been used elsewhere but have not yet been
implemented at Willard. She criticized the slow pace of proposed traffic safety
improvements, arguing that continued studies and proposals are not enough and that
action is needed to protect children. Speaking from her experience as a teacher, she
stressed that speeding near schools is a serious and ongoing danger and urges the
council to prioritize implementation over additional delays. She distinguished
between speed humps and smaller "speed bumps," arguing that such measures are
widely used in other cities and should be feasible locally. Mayor Armenta concluded
by calling for immediate action, stating that student safety must come first and
expressing strong concern about the consequences of continued inaction.
Council Member Ly thanked the mayor for her passion and acknowledged strong
community concern about school safety near Willard. He reiterates that the current
agenda item is only a policy update and not a specific action item for Willard and
there is insufficient information about whether a formal speed hump request has been
submitted under the 2025 policy. He emphasized that the City should follow its
established 11-criteria process and rely on professional engineering review rather
than informal assumptions. Council Member Ly supports consistent survey practices,
recommending they be offered in four languages and in both paper and online formats
Rosemead City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes of February 24, 2026
Page 7 of 12
to ensure broad accessibility across the community. He requested that the Willard
issue return to a future council or commission meeting with clearer information on
whether a request exists and whether it meets criteria. He also asks for an update on
the 2024 approved traffic calming measures, including what has been implemented
and the status of crossing guards.
Mayor Armenta agreed with Council Member Ly's request to review what traffic
calming measures have been implemented versus what remains outstanding from
prior approvals. She suggested also clarifying whether a formal request for a speed
hump was ever submitted or denied. She noted it is likely no official request exists
under the current 2025 policy and encourages residents to submit an application so
the process can move forward properly. Mayor Armenta thanked the speakers for
bringing attention to Willard, stating that their input has brought the street into focus,
and expressed commitment to working together to improve safety.
Council Member Clark asked whether failing to meet one of the criteria automatically
disqualifies a street from consideration for traffic calming measures, or if there is
flexibility to still evaluate the case further.
City Manager Kim explained that all required criteria must be met in order for a street
to move forward to a speed hump study, with no exceptions. He added that traffic
engineers follow a standardized manual that provides official guidelines for
evaluating and implementing traffic control measures.
Mr. Janka explained that while traffic engineers rely on the Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices for general roadway standards, speed humps are not
governed by that manual. Instead, speed hump installation is based on a separate set
of criteria that were developed by staff and formally adopted by the City Council. He
noted that those criteria such as traffic volume and speed thresholds are not fixed
rules in the manual and can be adjusted by the council. He emphasized that the current
requirements reflect staff recommendations and practices used by other cities but
ultimately exist because the council chose to adopt them.
Council Member Clark argued that the criteria should not be applied rigidly, noting
from her experience on the Traffic and Planning Commissions that variances are
commonly allowed in other types of cases, such as housing. She suggested that
instead of strictly adhering to set numerical thresholds (like grade limits), the
reviewing body should have flexibility to evaluate and decide on exceptions when
appropriate.
Council Member Ly stated that the established criteria exist for a purpose and were
recently adopted by the council in March 2025. While he acknowledged that policies
can always be changed, he emphasized that the question is whether they should be
changed. He reiterated that revisiting or altering the criteria was not necessary for
discussion at the moment.
Mayor Armenta reiterated that there is room to reevaluate the policy criteria's.
City Engineer Basilyous explained that staff must follow the current adopted policy
Rosemead City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes of February 24, 2026
Page 8 of 12
as written. However, he noted that the council can revisit and modify the policy in
the future if it chooses to introduce changes or adjustments.
Mayor Armenta echoing Council Member Ly's comments, she emphasized that since
a decision has already been voted on, any changes or flexibility must go through the
proper process.
Mr. Janka explained that typically, when residents request something like a speed
hump, they're asked to gather neighborhood support themselves. In this case,
however, the streets were council -initiated, so no one led that outreach. He noted the
current policy focuses on property owners, which may limit participation since
owners don't always live there. He suggested including residents (like tenants) in the
process to improve engagement. If the council agrees, staff could send surveys to
residents instead, potentially increasing responses and helping determine whether the
required 67% approval is met.
Council Member Ly asked the council to confirm direction on Willard specifically,
to have staff report back on what's been implemented, whether a speed hump request
exists, and what the next steps are. He also stated that he's not ready to change the
current speed hump policy yet, since it's been in place for less than a year. He
believed the council should give it more time and only consider revisions if they
prove ineffective.
City Engineer Basilyous confirmed the plan to engage with residents, study the street,
and prepare a staff report for the council. They will also distribute a multilingual
survey to gather broader community input.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR
Council Member Clark requested to pull item 4C for discussion.
ACTION: Moved by Council Member Ly, seconded by Council Member Clark to
approve Consent Calendar Items A, B D, and E, with the exception of C. Motion was
carried out by the following votes: AYES: Armenta, Clark, Dang, Low, and Ly,
NOES: None, ABSENT: None
A. Claims and Demands
• Resolution No. 2026-10
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, ALLOWING CERTAIN
CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $1,807,653.46
CHECKS NUMBERED 121102 THROUGH NUMBER 121192,
DRAFTS NUMBERED 8816 THROUGH NUMBER 8833 AND
EFT NUMBERED 53887 THROUGH NUMBER 53901
INCLUSIVELY
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2026-10.
Rosemead City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes of February 24, 2026
_Page 9 of 12-
B. Minutes
Recommendation: That the City Council approve the regular meeting minutes
of February 28, 2023 and February 10, 2026.
C. Adoption of Resolution No. 2026-07 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute
Program Supplemental Agreements with Caltrans for the Citywide Traffic Signal
Improvement Project
In 2025, the City secured a $2,572,380 grant from the Caltrans Highway Safety
Improvement Program Cycle 12 for a citywide traffic safety improvement project.
In order to draw down the funds, the California Department of Transportation
(Caltrans) requires a Resolution from the City that designates the authorized
signatory to sign the said grant -related Program Supplement Agreements.
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2026-07 authorizing
the City Manager to execute the $2,572,3 80 Program Supplemental Agreements with
Caltrans for the Citywide Traffic Signal Improvement Project.
Council Member Clark asked whether the traffic signal improvement project includes
signal synchronization. She noted that poorly timed signals cause unnecessary delays,
increase pollution from idling, and frustrate drivers, and she wants to know if this
issue will be addressed.
City Manager Kim clarified that signal synchronization is not included in this project,
as the grant focuses specifically on safety -related design features. However, he noted
that the city is addressing signal synchronization through a separate project.
ACTION: Moved by Council Member Ly, seconded by Council Member Clark to
adopt Resolution No. 2026-07 authorizing the City Manager to execute the
$2,572,380 Program Supplemental Agreements with Caltrans for the Citywide
Traffic Signal Improvement Project. Motion was carried out by the following votes:
AYES: Armenta, Clark, Dang, Low, and Ly, NOES: None, ABSENT: None
D. Adoption of Resolution No. 2026-08 Approving a Three (3) Year Memorandum of
Understanding Between the City of Rosemead and the Rosemead Employee
Association Professional and Confidential Unit, AFSCME Local 321,
from July 1, 2025 Through June 30, 2028
The City Council will consider approval of a three-year Memorandum of
Understanding ("MOU") with the Rosemead Employee Association Professional and
Confidential Unit ("P&C"), Local 321 of the American Federation of State, County,
and Municipal Employees ("AFSCME") covering all Professional and Confidential
employees. The MOU details the terms and conditions of employment and salary
ranges effective July 1, 2025, through June 30, 2028. City representatives negotiated
the tentative agreement with the Union which has also been ratified by the Union.
AFSCME is the exclusive representative of employees in the City's Professional and
Confidential Unit.
Rosemead City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes of February 24, 2026
Page 10 of 12
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2026-08, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A THREE (3)
YEAR MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN
THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD AND THE ROSEMEAD
EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATION PROFESSIONAL AND
CONFIDENTIAL UNIT, AFSCME LOCAL 321 FROM
JULY 1, 2025 THROUGH DUNE 30, 2028
E. Adoption of Resolution No. 2026-05, Amending the City of Rosemead Consolidated
Salary Schedule for Fiscal Years 2025-26 Through 2027-28, Including Establishment
of a Salary Range for the City Manager and Updating the Professional and
Confidential Group Salary Schedule
California Code of Regulations Section 570.5 and amendments to Section 571(b)
require that a consolidated salary schedule, reflecting all City classifications and
corresponding salary ranges, be publicly available for purposes of determining
eligible compensation for retirement. Accordingly, the consolidated salary schedule
must be adopted by the City Council, including compensation changes approved
through a Memorandum of Understanding and/or employee salary and City Manager
Kim benefit resolutions. The proposed resolution adopts the City's consolidated
salary schedule for Fiscal Years 2025-26 through 2027-28, establishes a salary range
for the City Manager position for purposes of AB 642 compliance, and incorporates
approved cost -of -living adjustments for the Professional and Confidential group.
Adoption of the consolidated salary schedule ensures compliance with applicable
regulatory requirements and accurately reflects authorized compensation actions.
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2026-05, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE
CONSOLIDATED SALARY SCHEDULE IN COMPLIANCE
WITH CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS TITLE 2,
SECTIONS 570.5 AND 571 FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1, 2025
THROUGH JUNE 30, 2028
5. MATTERS FROM CITY MANAGER & STAFF
A. Update on Speed Hump Traffic Calming Applications
Item was moved to the beginning of the meeting for discussion.
6. MATTERS FROM MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
A. Discussion and Review of the Public Safety Connections Administrative
Policy No. 50-07
Rosemead City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes of February 24, 2026
Page]] of 12
On January 27, 2026, Council Member Ly requested that the Public Safety
Connections Administrative Policy, No. 50-07, be brought back to the City Council
for review. The program has been paused since 2020.
Recommendation: That the City Council review and discuss the Public Safety
Connections Administrative Policy No. 50-07 and provide direction.
Council Member Ly proposed eliminating Policy 50-07, noting it's no longer needed
now that the Public Safety Commission exists. He stated the policy served its purpose
and formally moved to remove it from the administrative policies.
ACTION: Moved by Council Member Ly, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Low to
eliminate Administrative Policy 50-07, officially dissolving the Public Safety
Connections Forum. Motion was carried out by the following votes: AYES: Armenta,
Clark, Dang, Low, and Ly, NOES: None, ABSENT: None
B. Council Comments
Council Member Dang asked City Engineer Basilyous about the newly installed
guardrails particularly along Rosemead Boulevard and noted they look unusual and
unattractive. He wondered if they're related to Caltrans, why they're only being
installed on that street, and asked for clarification on their purpose.
City Engineer Basilyous stated he had not seen the guardrails and needed to
investigate. He believed they're likely installed by Caltrans but did not have details
and will look into it.
Council Member Dang gave a shoutout to Jean Kwan for organizing a "Kids Park
Cleanup" event at Rosemead Park, where children and adults volunteer to clean.
Mayor Armenta announced the Beautification Commission was hosting their
quarterly clean up at the Garvey Community and Senior Center communal garden.
Encourage the public to attend to help beautify the area.
7. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Armenta adjourned the meeting at 8:30 p.m.
F.3-99:TSITAa11
Sandra Armenta, Mayor
Ericka Hernandez, City Clerk
Rosemead City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes of February 24, 2026
Page 12 of 12