Pico Rivera hears update on local hazard mitigation plan; public review set for April 16

Aaron Fenensteel, a consultant with Atlas Planning, presented an update on Pico Rivera’s draft Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) at the April 9 council meeting, outlining prioritized hazards, outreach to date and the next steps in the review and approval process.

The presentation explained that the LHMP is intended as a five‑year strategic document designed to reduce future risk and to unlock federal and state mitigation funding. “For every dollar you invest today, you save $4 in the future,” Fenensteel said, citing the rationale used in federal mitigation planning.

The plan identifies adverse weather (extreme heat, drought, severe wind, severe winter storm and tornado), seismic hazards, epidemic and flood-related hazards including dam failure, and a set of human-caused hazards — urban fire, infrastructure failure, hazardous materials release, power outage, transportation incidents and terrorism. Fenensteel said the team worked with city departments, Los Angeles County Fire and Los Angeles County Sheriff to inventory and prioritize those hazards.

Fenensteel told the council the draft would be released for public review on April 16, after which the city will submit the document to the California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) and then to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). He said FEMA approval is required for the city to become eligible for certain federal mitigation grants and that final adoption by the council would start the plan’s five‑year period of eligibility for funding.

Council members pressed on specific hazards and preparedness measures. Dr. Monica Sanchez asked whether the plan “is also including preventative measure, correct?” Fenensteel replied that mitigation can include preventative projects — for example, seismic retrofits to reduce the chance of bridge collapse — and that elements of preparedness overlap with mitigation.

Councilmember Andrew Lara raised concerns about flooding, publicizing evacuation plans and large-scale power outages that could prevent pumping at city wells. Lara referenced county work on a database of residents who are bed-bound or need medical assistance to evacuate; he asked the city manager to coordinate with the county once that database is developed.

Councilmember Lutz asked whether the plan covered terrorism and cyber hacking. Fenensteel said cyber threat is commonly discussed under human‑caused hazards and that he would verify whether the city specifically identified cyber threats; he noted that FEMA funding tied to the federal Stafford Act is focused on natural hazards. Fenensteel added that the emergency operations plan (EOP), a companion document to the LHMP that the city will update later this year, is the appropriate place for detailed annexes on power failures and cyber incidents.

City Manager Steve said the city already maintains an “aggressive” cyber‑security program and that emergency generators are installed at multiple sites, including water facilities. The manager and Fenensteel agreed the EOP will be used to detail operational responses (for example, animal evacuations and power‑failure procedures) with explicit links back to mitigation priorities in the LHMP.

Fenensteel summarized outreach to date: an online survey with 33 responses, two stakeholder meetings involving roughly 30 participants, and an in‑person meeting at the senior center attended by about 70–80 residents. He said the LHMP update is intended to support future grant applications and local projects identified in the plan.

No formal ordinance or binding action was recorded at the meeting; the presentation was received for information and scheduled for public review beginning April 16, after which it will proceed to Cal OES and FEMA for review prior to final council adoption.