LA Council Watch

← All files

Randy Rangel v. City of Los Angeles

Council File 26-1303

Pending — the city is defending a whistleblower retaliation lawsuit that's now in appeals court, and the Budget Committee is reviewing the City Attorney's recommendation for next steps, likely involving settlement authority or a Claims Board action.

Introduced
2026-09-09
Last changed
2026-09-15
CFMS file status
File open See note on file status
Expires
2028-09-11
Committee
Budget and Finance Committee
Initiated by
City Attorney
References
City Attorney Report: R26-0496Los Angeles Superior Court Case: 22STCV34806Court of Appeal Case: B348923Claim: C23-03125

This is the City Clerk's status for the council file itself, not the outcome of the measure. A file often stays open after the Council has already adopted an item. The summary above reflects the latest recorded action.

Brief

The City Attorney submitted a report on the Randy Rangel v. City of Los Angeles case (Superior Court Case 22STCV34806, currently on appeal) for budget authorization. The file was referred to Budget and Finance Committee on September 10, 2026, and the committee approved the item in Open Session on September 15, 2026. The specific settlement terms or amount are not detailed in the activity log, but the matter now requires City Council ratification.

Full summary

This council file addresses a pending lawsuit brought by Randy Rangel against the City of Los Angeles, alleging whistleblower retaliation under California Labor Code Section 1102.5 and violations of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. The case originated in Los Angeles Superior Court (Case No. 22STCV34806) and is currently before the Court of Appeal (Case No. B348923), indicating that at least one party has challenged a lower court ruling. The City Attorney's office, under City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto, submitted a report dated August 27, 2026, requesting that the City Council hold a closed session to receive legal advice regarding a potential Claims Board action in connection with this litigation. The closed session is authorized under California Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), which permits public bodies to meet privately with legal counsel concerning pending litigation. The involvement of numerous LAPD personnel — including officers from the Risk Management and Legal Affairs Division and the Board of Police Commissioners — in the report's distribution list strongly suggests that Rangel's claims arise from his employment with or treatment by the Los Angeles Police Department. The City Attorney referred the matter to the Budget and Finance Committee on September 10, 2026, which typically signals that the report concerns settlement authority, financial exposure, or a recommendation for Claims Board action. The committee scheduled the item for its September 15, 2026 meeting. As of the most recent activity on September 11, 2026, the file remains pending in committee. No vote or formal council action has yet been recorded. The file expires on September 11, 2028, unless acted upon sooner.

Activity (4)

  • 2026-09-15 Budget and Finance Committee approved the item in Open Session.
  • 2026-09-11 Budget and Finance Committee scheduled item for committee meeting on September 15, 2026.
  • 2026-09-10 City Attorney document(s) referred to Budget and Finance Committee.
  • 2026-09-09 Document submitted by City Attorney, dated August 27, 2026.

Documents (1)

View on CFMS →