[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6657693,"mediaKeyId","5067439-6eef5b34b327d77f099b586282f50afe","parentId",5067439,"title","Resident complains of unexpected $872 water bill; asks Pico Rivera to improve billing notifications","audioSeconds",236,"startMs",4911000,"endMs",5147000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5067439-6eef5b34b327d77f099b586282f50afe&start=4911&end=5147","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5067439-6eef5b34b327d77f099b586282f50afe/thumbnail_4911000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6657693/Pico-Rivera/Los-Angeles-County/California/Resident-complains-of-unexpected-872-water-bill-asks-Pico-Rivera-to-improve-billing-notifications","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6657693-6362b720717a8ca2660e043b8b9e53f3/orig.mp4?Expires=1775223920&Signature=hfx7FFXYxmGd4o~jAbAp7yTDmyZ5qKtuvbsGOWDBCfcDX4m3DQ390-olMjc7norBS965Ki-MZtNooHAnC458arRRNnD445AXysaJCWZbXrrENgrtkBGNkkNw6vVXtoyUXwRP5jm~MFFJ9-LdVdN1LK5SXTwBS4J82DkNUatPURXNP8rQT0uN3nCCUjp43sDGk~uV0AfsFvV2Ff~XtrFk5E8rHpw~BiODj~BiNyzTCBhtxhDG~HYZR4AkuZbS~o5rs7FTMrGjhPnWtxDk5Irv2unIzE78kCF84DyFcqlMYbYQSJ1WWhk1gOCIhrW9Jgrphpa~i~-S6gF~wCD-4hUYCg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Pico Rivera, CA","date","2025-06-25T15:16:54Z","article","During public comment at the June 24 council meeting, Yolanda Martinez, a longtime Pico Rivera resident and recently retired county employee, said she unexpectedly received an $872 water bill after a prior bill of about $375. Martinez said a city employee told her a notice had been left on her door but she said she did not receive it. Martinez said she is on direct payment and asked the city to develop more reliable notification methods, such as mail or an app alert, because she is a senior and was not able to respond promptly to the alleged notice.

Mayor Garcia asked staff to follow up and City Manager Steve Carmona said staff would work directly with Martinez to review the bill and notification history. No council action was taken at the meeting; staff were asked to remedy the resident’s situation offline.

Clarifying details

- Resident reported an $872 water bill following a previous bill of about $375; she said she had not received any door notice she was told had been left.
- Resident said she is on direct payment but could not afford the unexpected balance and requested a different notification method.
- City Manager agreed to work with the resident outside the meeting to investigate and resolve the matter.

Ending

City staff committed to follow up with the resident to review the billing record and notification history; the council did not take formal action on municipal billing policy at the June 24 meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Meeting of the City Council 6/24/25","oneSentenceSummary","A longtime resident told the council she received an $872 water bill she said she did not see prior door notices about and asked the city to improve how customers are notified of billing and urgent meter issues; city staff agreed to follow up offline.","taxTitle","Pico Rivera, Los Angeles County, California","taxId",3842,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6657696,"Resident asks Pico Rivera to investigate front‑yard ADU at 8335 Passons Boulevard; city staff to follow up",175,4714000,4889000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5067439-6eef5b34b327d77f099b586282f50afe&start=4714&end=4889","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5067439-6eef5b34b327d77f099b586282f50afe/thumbnail_4714000.jpg","/articles/6657696/Pico-Rivera/Los-Angeles-County/California/Resident-asks-Pico-Rivera-to-investigate-frontyard-ADU-at-8335-Passons-Boulevard-city-staff-to-follow-up","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6657696-6e6a944ba70c47408add64a8aae3f3d6/orig.mp4?Expires=1775223920&Signature=hGrTEXf7QURf3A3NI8k5-MK8xcxuuBen1x1m4Js~-f9brRhOkMWeCbHHrOY-nWSobHFogm-imEjiqSkVdgrJGNBJjYVZW6G68cPg6q5E-CkjB7~sjiFi56MfFP2yBXvvZrdctsLTwYRmu7DIfY7JJggoDDEia62yJkU4FTiWHsvKGjtYM~rT-OrfIn7xeYODaDNHnYfoA3ES3UpVe2f65HhIpSAU3BNiUyZ0ESjbDscDbVahsaAxOfXRS73cx-AzTMZ-Ekm1T9F2nEF44o2oN36Zx-Ca5zSnszozYRXkRo1NSy6n~NnpOgSutngBLWMRivREXOyW1kbPetxNxDjOWA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","During public comment on June 24, resident Renee Rothrock Singleton told the Pico Rivera City Council that an accessory dwelling unit at 8335 Passons Boulevard appears to be sited in the front yard, is less than the 20‑foot setback on the street and is larger than the primary residence. Singleton asked the council to investigate and clarify application of municipal and state ADU rules and to notify nearby property owners of the findings.

Singleton said the structure “is an eyesore,” that neighbors had not approved the siting and that she believed the city planning and building department had misinterpreted municipal code. She told the council the ADU should have been built in the backyard and that state guidance (she cited state housing-department standards) envisioned ADUs as subordinate to the primary dwelling.

City Manager Steve Carmona acknowledged the public comment and the mayor asked staff to follow up with Singleton. The planning department had earlier told Singleton the project was legal, according to her statement; Singleton said she had emailed the city manager and the planning department and was asking for a more formal response and clarification.

No formal appeal or enforcement action was recorded on the meeting record. The council did not take a vote on the matter; staff were asked to investigate and to notify Singleton of the results.

Clarifying details

- Address cited by commenter: 8335 Passons Boulevard.
- Complaint: ADU sited in front yard, alleged setback less than 20 feet, and ADU larger than primary house (commenter’s assertion).
- City planning response (as reported by commenter): planning staff told the commenter the ADU was legal.

Ending

The council directed staff to follow up with the resident and clarify municipal code application and any next steps. If the resident pursues a formal complaint or appeal, the matter could return to a future council or planning commission proceeding.","A longtime resident told the council that an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) at 8335 Passons Boulevard was built in the front yard, may violate setback rules and appears larger than the primary residence; she asked the council to investigate and seek clarity on municipal code interpretation.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6657700,"Votes at a glance: Pico Rivera council approves consent calendar, five‑year housing allocation amendment and operating budget",59,4205000,4264000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5067439-6eef5b34b327d77f099b586282f50afe&start=4205&end=4264","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5067439-6eef5b34b327d77f099b586282f50afe/thumbnail_4205000.jpg","/articles/6657700/Pico-Rivera/Los-Angeles-County/California/Votes-at-a-glance-Pico-Rivera-council-approves-consent-calendar-fiveyear-housing-allocation-amendment-and-operating-budget","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6657700-dd3c3f9a409f079002c8e32943c4a7ef/orig.mp4?Expires=1775223920&Signature=SErwXzD5tiSf6EQ~6mvcv1NOP-1QMSLtt8EzvKvwVDgz~qJ8mFc5gEb0JMbPpkj5Xp279bU-2cuiFXFZU5xxJUIsjux6dYj8YSMQnLoc~1OECKtunLmMUtkIq5hEFiZOMemZuNI3T0kF9uk37QnusgirXsDqZ5DrJ4vxqrpr1ULFWbWn9bLlguTa3IP9cyrxI6NKXqLwbW6CyzAWDht6yUwukad58mKGphuW0dOvsW8OHDmgmvLPWjhMwkcbN-8~WOCbCaOOHcbncjsvvv6ISP5f8VTPCDJkVQ~6PNY8tzGNVvYWaSl2IePItg2EpVvGBOaQ9TDBJIuUjy20QFmboQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Pico Rivera City Council approved multiple agenda items on June 24. The council approved items 2 through 18 on the consent calendar, adopted the city’s operating budget and approved an amendment to the five‑year local housing allocation plan. All votes were unanimous (5-0).

Consent calendar: items 2–18

The council approved items 2–18 on the consent calendar in a single motion. The motion was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Camacho and seconded by Council member Laura and passed 5-0.

Five‑year local housing allocation plan (public hearing)

The council opened a public hearing on an amendment to the five‑year local housing allocation plan. City staff reported no written or oral communications on the item. Council member Laura moved to approve the amendment; Mayor Pro Tem Camacho seconded. The motion passed 5-0.

Operating budget (agenda item 19)

The council adopted the city’s operating budget after the staff presentation. The motion to adopt was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Camacho and seconded by Council member Dr. Sanchez and passed 5-0.

What passed (at a glance)

- Consent calendar: items 2–18 — approved 5-0.
- Amendment to five‑year local housing allocation plan — approved 5-0.
- Operating budget (agenda item 19) — adopted 5-0.

No items on the consent calendar or the budget vote were recorded as receiving dissent or abstentions in the meeting minutes. Departments responsible for implementing each approved item were directed to proceed, and staff indicated the operating budget materials would be posted publicly.","On June 24 the Pico Rivera City Council approved the consent calendar (items 2–18), adopted the operating budget and approved an amendment to its five‑year local housing allocation plan; all votes were unanimous.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6657705,"Pico Rivera council unanimously authorizes joining Los Angeles lawsuit over federal immigration enforcement; discusses local legal defense fund",1537,3921000,5458000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5067439-6eef5b34b327d77f099b586282f50afe&start=3921&end=5458","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5067439-6eef5b34b327d77f099b586282f50afe/thumbnail_3921000.jpg","/articles/6657705/Pico-Rivera/Los-Angeles-County/California/Pico-Rivera-council-unanimously-authorizes-joining-Los-Angeles-lawsuit-over-federal-immigration-enforcement-discusses-local-legal-defense-fund","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6657705-06c53c0abaf28e681d77f1f6110d846c/orig.mp4?Expires=1775223920&Signature=oYN6ji79yW~f9s~VEaaRZlqjUkFX2ai98~sugdu~RK8dtwK3VlLtHfHYUh0Fc5VO11sJGSXDwGlrYE~4e3jVr21gi-7XCbPqFDqfB4Z9OfjwismDe2rmMN58XLsyzEn9ASG~0nEBFnmpLMK8v7d3532QSbAkTQqErsLgO6JHXkhmpOKkFWpY~qH0TJP3O8K8Uxtg2xRe7JwpN81y1BWpTMU7duE0eytT~3RsSOoXrOOXtYO1E0Y0gJoVikUQpuuNQf5qfEQxn12RvwW5DBHz2iUrbcJ6cpjwguxq8MiqCifjV~vnRw0MvXSiyg-zVcClr4Kr2ApjgAwdCBjPHtDKgg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Pico Rivera City Council voted unanimously June 24 to authorize the city attorney’s office to join a lawsuit that the City of Los Angeles intends to file challenging federal immigration enforcement tactics, including operations by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Mayor Garcia made the motion asking the city attorney to “take all the necessary steps to join in this litigation,” and the measure passed on a 5-0 roll call. Council members who voted yes were Council member Lara, Council member Lutz, Council member Dr. Sanchez, Mayor Pro Tem Camacho and Mayor Garcia.

The vote followed a detailed presentation and public comment about recent enforcement activity in Pico Rivera and the wider Los Angeles region. City Manager Steve Carmona told the council that ICE agents had been active in the city in recent days and that a small number of residents were detained, including a resident, Adrian Martinez, who Carmona said is a U.S. citizen; Carmona said Martinez was released and now has legal representation. Carmona reported two subsequent community protests that he described as peaceful and said the city had posted multilingual resources and set up a secure video upload portal for residents to share footage.

Immigration attorney Juliana Garcia (identified in the meeting as Juliana Garcia) gave a 40‑minute presentation to the council on how federal agencies operate, what enforcement tactics attorneys are seeing in Southern California and practical steps residents and small businesses can take if enforcement appears. Garcia described the use of unmarked vehicles, officers who do not display identification, and workplace and public-space arrests that, she said, often hinge on “reasonable suspicion.” She described several legal tools and remedies—forms such as the I-213 and motions to suppress evidence in court—and urged residents to prepare caregiver affidavits, retain attorney contact information and, when possible, avoid interfering physically with enforcement activity while documenting it.

Edgar Ortiz, economic justice policy manager at the California Immigrant Policy Center, urged the council to proceed with the proposed legal assistance fund but to revisit proposed carve‑outs so the city’s program aligns with Long Beach, Los Angeles and Los Angeles County programs. Ortiz said detention of a household member can cause large drops in household earnings and asked council members to treat the fund as “a start, not the end” of city action.

Council members debated additional local measures the city might pursue. Several members asked staff to work with the Chamber of Commerce and local businesses on signage and private‑property notices advising that ICE administrative documents (for example, I‑200/I‑205 forms) do not constitute judicial warrants. Council member Laura urged distribution of “know‑your‑rights” cards at city events. Mayor Pro Tem Camacho and others discussed limits to local authority over federal agents and asked staff, the city attorney and the sheriff’s office to outline enforcement options and next steps. City Attorney Rick (last name not specified in the meeting) was reported to have begun outreach to partner cities and the chamber.

No council member opposed joining the litigation. The council did not adopt a final ordinance or resolution on the legal defense fund at the June 24 meeting; speakers asked staff to return with details, eligibility rules and legal review. City staff and several council members said they would return with draft language, outreach plans for small businesses, and coordination steps with community legal providers and nonprofit bond funds.

The council’s action was taken openly after a closed‑session briefing; the clerk reported that closed session included a public‑employee evaluation and conference with legal counsel regarding anticipated litigation under California Government Code sections 54957(b)(1) and 54956.9(d)(4).

What the council approved

- Authorization for the city attorney to join litigation being filed by the City of Los Angeles against the federal government and related parties to challenge enforcement tactics used by ICE and related agencies. The motion passed unanimously (5-0).

Follow-up the council requested

- Legal staff to draft proposed language and eligibility criteria for a local legal assistance fund and return to council for review.
- Coordination with the Police/Sheriff’s Department and Chamber of Commerce on business guidance and signage explaining private‑property rights and the difference between administrative immigration forms and judicial warrants.
- Continued dissemination of multilingual “know‑your‑rights” materials and online resources for residents to locate detained family members and to submit footage securely.

Ending note

Council members and presenters repeatedly emphasized that joining the litigation was intended to seek greater accountability and oversight of federal enforcement tactics; the council’s vote does not itself change federal practice but authorizes the city attorney to pursue litigation coordination and related legal avenues.","The Pico Rivera City Council voted unanimously June 24 to authorize the city attorney to join litigation to challenge federal immigration-enforcement tactics. Council members and outside speakers described aggressive, sometimes unmarked enforcement activity and discussed a proposed local legal defense fund and other community protections.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Resident complains of unexpected $872 water bill; asks Pico Rivera to improve billing notifications

Resident asks Pico Rivera to investigate front‑yard ADU at 8335 Passons Boulevard; city staff to follow up

Votes at a glance: Pico Rivera council approves consent calendar, five‑year housing allocation amendment and operating budget

Pico Rivera council unanimously authorizes joining Los Angeles lawsuit over federal immigration enforcement; discusses local legal defense fund