Cities Index.
Agenda packet

Oxnard City Council
September 20, 2022

Document
Agenda packet
Meeting
September 20, 2022
Body
Oxnard City Council
Pages
45
Original file
128.1 MB
Text extracted from the city's file for reading and search. Open the original on oxnardca.api.civicclerk.com. That file is the official record.

Written materials relating to an item on this agenda that are distributed to the legislative bodies within 72 hours before the item is to be considered at its regularly scheduled meeting will be made available for public inspection at the City Clerk’s Office, 300 West Third Street 4th Floor during customary business hours. Agenda reports are also on the City of Oxnard web site at www.oxnard.org.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you require special assistance to participate in a meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at 385-7803. Notice at least 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to reasonably arrange for your accessibility to the meeting.

Agenda Item time estimates: (Presentation / Council Discussion / Public Comment) AGENDA

OXNARD CITY COUNCIL

OXNARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SUCCESSOR AGENCY

OXNARD FINANCING AUTHORITY

OXNARD HOUSING AUTHORITY
Meeting Location: Council Chambers, 305 West Third Street September 20, 2022
Closed Session - 4:30 PM
Appointment Items - 5:00 PM
Regular Meeting - 6:00 PM
Zoom details to call-in for public comment during a meeting:

1. Dial Phone Number: (888) 475-4499

2. Enter Meeting ID: 859 3471 3154

3. Passcode: 408770
If you wish to speak remotely during public comments on a particular item on the agenda, please sign-on by following the zoom calling in steps listed above. Once the Mayor calls for public speakers, press *9 to raise your hand to inform the City Clerk you would like to speak during the public speaking section for that particular item on the agenda, while in the zoom waiting room.

The public may view the meeting from home on Spectrum channel 10, Frontier channel 35, or YouTube at Youtube.com/oxnardnews.

Video recordings of the meeting are typically available online following the meeting at the City’s website at www.oxnard.org/citymeetings. *Please see the link for the Measure M pre-recorded presentation video for each item listed on this agenda.

YOU MAY PARTICIPATE IN THE MEETING IN THE FOLLOWING WAYS:

1. ATTEND THE MEETING AT THE LOCATION LISTED ABOVE: Submit a speaker card to the City Clerk.

2. EMAIL COMMENTS OR SIGN UP TO SPEAK REMOTELY BEFORE THE MEETING a. Submit a request to speak by no later than 3 p.m. on the day of the meeting by using the form available at www.oxnard.org/citymeetings.
b. Submit an email to [email protected] no later than 3 p.m. on the day of the meeting (indicate the agenda item number in the subject line). All email correspondence will be forwarded to the City Council prior to the start of the meeting and made part of the legislative record. c. Contact the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 385-7803 to submit your request.

3. PROVIDING PUBLIC COMMENTS REMOTELY DURING THE MEETING a. To provide public comment during the meeting dial (888) 475-4499 and enter the Meeting ID and Passcode listed above as the Zoom details for this meeting. When the Mayor announces the particular item on the agenda you want 1 OXNARD CITY COUNCIL OXNARD FINANCING AUTHORITY HOUSING AUTHORITY

OXNARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SUCCESSOR AGENCY September 20, 2022 PAGE 2
to speak on, press *9 to raise your hand while in the zoom waiting room. Once called on, press *6 to unmute your phone.
b. Public comments on agenda items will be taken following the announcement of the item. After the item is announced, members of the public may register or otherwise be recognized for the purpose of providing public comment.

Detailed participation instructions can be found at www.oxnard.org/city-meetings. * The City has filed pre-election and post-election lawsuits regarding the validity of Measure M.

A. ROLL CALL, POSTING OF AGENDA
THE FOLLOWING LEGISLATIVE BODIES ARE MEETING: City Council B. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS
At this time, a person may address the legislative body only on matters appearing on the closed session agenda. The presiding officer shall limit public comments to three minutes.

C. CLOSED SESSION (4:30 PM)

1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—EXISTING LITIGATION (Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1))
Name of case: Starr v. City of Oxnard
Ventura County Superior Court, Case No. 56-2017-00494475-CU-WM-VTA Legislative Body: City Council

2. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Government Code section 54957.6) Agency designated representatives: Alex Nguyen, City Manager and Steve Naveau, Director of Human Resources
Employee organizations: International Association of Firefighters, AFL-CIO (IAFF), Local No. 1684; Oxnard Public Safety Managers Association (OPSMA) Legislative Body: City Council

3. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—EXISTING LITIGATION (Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1))
Name of case: Pedroso v. City of Oxnard
Ventura County Superior Court, Case No. 56-2020-00542336-CU-WT-VTA Legislative Body: City Council
D. APPOINTMENT ITEMS (5:00 PM)

1. City Manager Department
SUBJECT: Oxnard Convention & Visitors Bureau (OCVB) Annual Report. (15/10/5) RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive the OCVB FY 21-22 Annual Report. (Live presentation by Oxnard Convention & Visitors Bureau President & CEO, Julie Mino.) Legislative Body: City Council
Contact: Ashley Golden, (805) 385-7478

2. Public Works Department
SUBJECT: Presentation by City Staff on Drought Response Actions and Current Drought Conditions. (10/10/10)
2 OXNARD CITY COUNCIL OXNARD FINANCING AUTHORITY HOUSING AUTHORITY

OXNARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SUCCESSOR AGENCY September 20, 2022 PAGE 3
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive a verbal report by City staff on the Water Conservation Update Report.

Please click the following link to view the required Measure M pre-recorded presentation video: https://youtu.be/aax1a8IYZsI
Legislative Body: City Council
Contact: Michael Wolfe, (805) 385-8055
E. OPENING CEREMONIES (6:00 PM)
Pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States.

F. CEREMONIAL ITEMS

1. SUBJECT: Presentation of a Proclamation Designating September 15 through October 15, 2022 as "Hispanic Heritage Month."

2. SUBJECT: Presentation of a Proclamation Designating the Month of October 2022 as " Multicultural Month" in the City of Oxnard.

G. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
A person may address the legislative body only on matters not appearing on the agenda and within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body. Speaker requests shall be submitted as set forth on the first page of this agenda. Speakers are limited to three minutes. After 30 minutes, if all speakers have not had the opportunity to speak, the remaining speakers will be given an opportunity to speak prior to adjournment of the meeting. The legislative body cannot enter into a detailed discussion or take action on any items presented during public comments at this time. Such items may only be referred to the City Manager/Executive Director/Secretary for administrative action or scheduled on a subsequent agenda for discussion. Persons wishing to speak on public hearing items should do so at the time of the hearing.

H. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/SECRETARY
The City Manager/Executive Director/Secretary shall report on items of interest to the legislative body occurring since the last meeting. The legislative body cannot enter into detailed discussion or take action on any item presented during this report. Such items may only be referred to the City Manager/Executive Director/Secretary for administrative action or scheduled on a subsequent agenda for discussion.

1. Public Works Department
SUBJECT: Reconsideration of Local Emergency and Ratification of Director Orders Regarding the Water Shortage Emergency and Mandatory Water Conservation Measures.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:

1. Adopt a resolution confirming the need to continue the local emergency declared on May 17, 2022, due to drought conditions and lack of adequate water supply; and

2. Adopt a resolution ratifying DES Order No. 22-04 of the Director of Emergency Services modifying mandatory water conservation measures required during the local emergency.

Legislative Body: City Council
Contact: Michael Wolfe, (805) 385-8055
I. CITY COUNCIL/HOUSING AUTHORITY/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/FINANCING AUTHORITY 3 OXNARD CITY COUNCIL OXNARD FINANCING AUTHORITY HOUSING AUTHORITY

OXNARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SUCCESSOR AGENCY September 20, 2022 PAGE 4

BUSINESS/COMMITTEE REPORTS
At this time, a member of the legislative body may make a brief announcement, or make a brief report on his or her activities. Further, members of the legislative body may request to schedule consideration of whether to place an item on a future agenda. The legislative body cannot enter into detailed discussion or take action on any item presented during this report. The member's report shall not exceed three minutes, unless additional time is granted by the presiding officer.

J. REVIEW OF INFORMATION/CONSENT AGENDA
The members of the legislative body will consider whether to remove Information/Consent Agenda items for discussion later during the meeting.

K. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON INFORMATION/CONSENT AGENDA
At this time, a person may address the legislative body only on matters appearing on the information/consent agenda. The presiding officer shall limit public comments to three minutes.

L. INFORMATION/CONSENT AGENDA

1. City Clerk Department
SUBJECT: Approval of Minutes.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the minutes of the July 5, 2022 and July 19, 2022 regular meetings as presented.

Legislative Body: City Council
Contact: Rose Chaparro, (805) 385-7805

2. Public Works Department
SUBJECT: Amendment to Agreement No. 9315-21-PW with Econolite Systems Incorporated for Traffic Signal Preventive, Emergency and Non-Emergency Maintenance Services.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve and authorize the Mayor to execute a First Amendment to Agreement 9315-21-PW with Econolite Systems Incorporated to increase the not to exceed amount from $200,000 to $300,000 for traffic signal preventive, emergency and nonemergency maintenance services. (Public Works and Transportation Committee approved 3-0.) Legislative Body: City Council
Contact: Michael Wolfe, (805) 385-8055

3. Public Works Department
SUBJECT: Agreement A-8484 with Weck Laboratories, Inc. for Contract Laboratory Chemical Testing Services.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve and authorize the:

1. Mayor to execute Agreement A-8484 with Weck Laboratories, Inc. for a term of one year with the option to extend for two consecutive periods of one year each upon the written agreement of both parties for a maximum possible contract term of three years, and for a total contract not-toexceed amount over the entire possible contract term of $1,700,000 for laboratory chemical testing services; and

2. Purchasing Agent to execute amendments to extend the term of Agreement A-8484 up to a 4 OXNARD CITY COUNCIL OXNARD FINANCING AUTHORITY HOUSING AUTHORITY

OXNARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SUCCESSOR AGENCY September 20, 2022 PAGE 5
maximum term of three years.
(Public Works and Transportation Committee approved 3-0.) Legislative Body: City Council
Contact: Michael Wolfe, (805) 385-8055

4. Public Works Department
SUBJECT: City of Oxnard Water Division 2019-2021 Public Health Goals Report.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file the 2019-2021 Public Health Goals Report.
(Public Works and Transportation Committee approved 3-0.) Legislative Body: City Council
Contact: Michael Wolfe, (805) 385-8055

5. Fire Department
SUBJECT: Adoption of a Resolution Approving the 2022 Update of the Ventura County MultiJurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the attached Resolution approving the 2022 update of the Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan.

Legislative Body: City Council
Contact: Alexander Hamilton, (805) 385-7700

6. City Manager Department
SUBJECT: Activation of the Wagon Wheel Neighborhood Council.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council certifies that the Wagon Wheel Neighborhood has completed the action necessary to participate in the Neighborhood Council Program.

Legislative Body: City Council
Contact: Ashley Golden, (805) 385-7478
M. REPORTS

1. Community Development Department
SUBJECT: Proposed City-wide Residential Curb Cut Program to enhance the parking availability in residential areas by allowing curb cuts while minimizing impacts to existing on-street parking inventories. (0/15/15)
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a Resolution titled: “A Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of Oxnard Adopting A City-Wide Residential Curb Cut Program.” Please click the following link to view the required Measure M pre-recorded presentation video: https://youtu.be/p6kQs6BAftw
Legislative Body: City Council
Contact: Michael Wolfe, Jeff Pengilley, (805) 385-8055, (805) 385-8208

2. Public Works Department
SUBJECT: Agreement A-8492 with Toro Enterprises, Inc. for Lift Station Improvements Project (Stations 1, 2, and 30), Specification No. PW 21-89. (0/5/5) RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve and authorize the following for a total of 5 OXNARD CITY COUNCIL OXNARD FINANCING AUTHORITY HOUSING AUTHORITY

OXNARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SUCCESSOR AGENCY September 20, 2022 PAGE 6
$3,586,800 in Project funds for the Lift Station Improvements Project (Stations 1, 2, and 30), Specification No. PW 21-89 (Project No. 226601):

1. The Mayor to execute Agreement A-8492 with Toro Enterprises, Inc. in the amount of $2,989,000 for the Project;

2. A Project contingency amount of $298,900;

3. A Project allocation amount of $298,900 for engineering, inspection, survey and project management; and

4. Authorize the City Manager or designee to approve a budget appropriation in the amount of $2,686,800 from the available Wastewater Operations Fund Balance for the use of this Project. (This item did not originate in Committee as this is a capital improvement project specifically listed in the City's Capital Improvement Program budget, which was previously approved by the City Council.)
Please click the following link to view the required Measure M pre-recorded presentation video: https://youtu.be/CdBt9ufTILQ
Legislative Body: City Council
Contact: Michael Wolfe, (805) 385-8055
N. ADJOURNMENT
6 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
APPOINTMENT ITEMS (5:00 PM)
AGENDA ITEM NO. D.1
DATE: September 20, 2022
TO: City Council
FROM: Ashley Golden, Assistant City Manager, (805) 385-7478, [email protected] SUBJECT: Oxnard Convention & Visitors Bureau (OCVB) Annual Report. (15/10/5)

RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council receive the OCVB FY 21-22 Annual Report. (Live presentation by Oxnard Convention & Visitors Bureau President & CEO, Julie Mino.)

BACKGROUND
The Oxnard Convention and Visitors Bureau (“OCVB”) was initially formed in May 1974 as a nonprofit corporation for the purpose of generating economic benefits to the City of Oxnard (“City”) by promoting the area and attracting more visitors. The vision of the OCVB is to lead Oxnard’s travel and tourism industry in promoting and marketing Oxnard as a premier leisure and business travel destination, seeking to bring significant economic and social benefits to our community. As such, OCVB’s mission statement is to establish the Oxnard area as a recognized destination for tourism and business travel. To promote Oxnard in primary markets and the local community, OCVB produces print, online, and social media materials, working collaboratively with neighboring Convention and Visitors Bureaus, Ventura County Coast, Central Coast Tourism Council, and Visit California to promote tourism across our region. Of importance is staying up to date on current travel trends and markets, so that the proper marketing and outreach is undertaken to maximize OCVB’s efforts. Going forward, OCVB’s stated goals include continuing to provide connectivity between visitor sectors. Doing this will require City support in implementing their long-term strategic plan.

DISCUSSION
This report serves as the OCVB report for FY 21-22.

One of the OCVB’s key performance indicators, and the foremost method for tracking success, is through hotel statistics.

Unfortunately, Travel and Tourism was one of the hardest hit industries in the wake of the Covid 19 pandemic. In 2020 the City hotel statistics (Average Daily Rate and Occupancy) were down for the first time in 8 years. We are happy to report that these key performance indicators, Average Daily Rate and Occupancy are on the rise and we are back to prepandemic numbers.

Year-end numbers for 2021, which are based on a calendar year, are as follows:
 2021 Average Daily Rate is at $163.66, which is up 14.7% from the previous year.  2021 Average Occupancy is at 67%, up 13.2% from the previous year Oxnard continues to outperform neighboring cities on Average Daily Rate. All of our neighboring cities have similar Average Occupancy throughout the year. The Central Coast as a whole outperformed all of California’s statewide 7 numbers. With travel starting to return, Oxnard is experiencing rates and occupancies that exceed 2019 (pre-pandemic) numbers in most 2021 and 2022 months.

Other Stats (FY 21-22)

1. OCVB continues to have a strong social media presence with more than 59,900 combined followers across Facebook and Instagram, plus 3,223 followers and subscribers across Twitter, YouTube, Spotify, Pinterest, LinkedIn and TikTok.

Social media has been instrumental in driving community relationships, increasing destination awareness and improving perception.

2. OCVB participates in a Visit California Localhood program titled CA NOW Travel Stories, generating content that is distributed on the Visit California website and on Google’s search pages. Two OCVB stories were top trending in the network during the last fiscal year, with 30k total story views and a 53% interaction rate.

3. OCVB compounds its social media reach by working with influencers. This past year, Visit Oxnard has worked with travel and foodie influencers including Tastemade (7.2 million followers) and Tastemade Travel (362k followers), Black Foodie (132k followers), Our Travel Passport (69.1k followers), The Best Drink Ever (151k followers), Bad Birdy (191k followers), Andy Sola (236k followers) and Oxnard-based foodie influencer Trendi Eats (71.2k followers). OCVB has also worked with travel influencer websites, like LA Parent, LA Magazine, Travel Zoo, Weekend Sherpa and The Journal of Lost Time, creating informative articles that highlight Oxnard’s hospitality businesses and building backlinks to its owned channels.

4. OCVB’s robust public relations strategy has, since July 1, 2021, resulted in earned coverage with top outlets including Newsbreak, Fodor’s, LA Times, Fox News, NY Post, SFGATE, Yahoo, National Geographic, Wall Street Journal, AAA Westways, Meetings Today, Smart Meetings, Out Traveler, Malibu Coast Lifestyle Magazine, Conejo Valley Lifestyle Magazine, SoCal Life Magazine, LA Travel Magazine, Travel Awaits, Patch.com, VC Star, VC Reporter and broadcast and radio interviews/coverage on KTLA, KCBS, KEYT, KCLU, 95.9fm Mambo in the Morning Show and Spectrum News.

5. The OCVB general tourism e-newsletter has 9,244 e-subscribers with up to a 46% open rate (industry average is

20.4%). This e-newsletter is circulated at least bi-monthly to drive awareness to Oxnard’s latest hospitality news, seasonal articles and tourism business offerings.

6. Compared to FY 20/21, the metric for visitoxnard.com website users grew 125.6% to 388,611 users. Sessions were up 131.6% year-over-year at 491,640 sessions, and pageviews were up 74.1% at 846,222 pageviews. This means that OCVB is gaining web visibility, with more users relying upon the organization’s website for information about Oxnard and its tourism offerings. The top geographic referrals to visitoxnard.com outside Ventura County during FY 21/22 were Los Angeles, San Francisco, Dallas, San Diego and Las Vegas.

7. OCVB works with Torchlight Marketing on search engine optimization. Torchlight optimized 24 webpages on visitoxnard.com during FY21/22, which resulted in net 209 Google keyword rankings improvements.

8. OCVB engaged in paid media programming through marketing agency Madden Media, resulting in omni-channel media placements meeting or exceeding the following target metrics: Google SEM 66,667+ clicks, Google Video Distribution 233,000+ views, Google Responsive Display 7.5 million + impressions, Facebook Click-to-Site Display 40,476+ clicks, Facebook Remarketing Display 12,264+ clicks and Mobilefuse Precision Geofencing 2.35 million+ impressions. OCVB utilized Madden’s Voyage destination intelligence platform to generate target audience data, ensuring that these campaigns were optimized in line with visitation and demand metrics. This programming was partially funded by Council approved ARPA funds.

9. In addition to the digital marketing tactics noted above, OCVB participated in paid media placements, including dedicated e-marketing campaigns through Visit California, with a global reach to an active subscriber base of 200k+, sponsored content and showcase ads with AAA Westways (1.5 million+ subscribers), plus digital campaigns with LA Parent (900k annual page views) and LA Magazine (custom content package w/ 650k impressions) targeting Oxnard’s top market by visitor volume, Los Angeles. OCVB also targeted group business with a Meetings Today e-marketing spotlight to a highly segmented audience of 50k subscribers. 8 10. Utilizing Council approved ARPA funds, Visit Oxnard created its 2022-2023 Visitor Guide and absorbed all ad costs for prior advertisers (i.e., Oxnard hospitality businesses) as a business recovery measure to ensure partners were able to participate, despite any hardships caused by the pandemic. 33k copies were printed, with 26k of those copies distributed in 583 locations throughout California and the remainder distributed by individual request and in Oxnard hotels and locally.

11. OCVB ran a print advertisement in the Visit California Visitor Guide, with 250,000 copies sent directly to highly qualified in-state subscribers of Travel+Leisure, Better Homes & Gardens and Parents, with additional distribution to instate sales missions, consumer and travel trade shows, California Welcome Centers and more, plus promoted actively throughout the year on VisitCalifornia.com. OCVB also ran print ads in AAA Westways (4.65 million circulation), Central Coast California Visitors Map (225k circulation), Travel Guide to California (80k circulation), Edible Magazine (50k readers), VC Reporter (14k circulation) and Meetings Today (114k unique audience).

12. OCVB is greatly involved in industry relations to leverage opportunities for co-op programming. In addition to those already mentioned, co-op projects in partnership with Ventura County Lodging Association (VCLA) included emarketing with Visit California (200k+ subscribers); sponsored content, a mix of native and banner ads and e-marketing with LA Magazine (2.09 million monthly page views, 17k travel newsletter e-subscribers, 44k general newsletter subscribers); sponsored content with TravelZoo (1.5 million+ reach); programmatic advertising with Mosaic Media (688k+ impressions, generated 693 destination visits) and sponsored content and e-marketing with Weekend Sherpa (200k impressions, 130k+ e-subscribers). OCVB also worked with VCLA to create direct booking engine landing pages for visitoxnard.com, oxnard.org, thecollectionrp.com and several Oxnard events websites. These direct booking pages allow Oxnard hotels to generate revenue directly without paying third party fees. The visitoxnard.com direct booking page alone garnered 44,154 hotel listing views and 3,441 clicks to hotel websites in FY 21/22. This metric is separate and non-inclusive of visitoxnard.com hotel listing page conversions, which measured 23k+ clicks to Oxnard business listings,

1.9k+ hotel registration inquiries and 1.6k+ clicks to call Oxnard businesses.

13. OCVB’s Dallas Cowboys Training Camp landing page at visitoxnard.com/cowboys received 148,507 pageviews, or

17.3% of the pageview volume for the entire website for all of FY 21/22. Because the Cowboys are a global name and a huge draw for interest in tourism to Oxnard, OCVB invests in a robust marketing plan to grow its audience with this devoted fan base. In addition to promoting Training Camp on its owned channels and via earned placements, OCVB ran digital display ads with the USA Today network on articles tagged #Cowboys and #NFL (730k+ impressions); print ads in VC Reporter; Facebook and Instagram cost-per-click and remarketing ads; outdoor ads including a static billboard off Highway 101 and an LED billboard digital ad at The Collection; onsite activations and promotional giveaways plus the organization’s first-ever Oxnard Fan Night in partnership with The Collection.

14. OCVB ran a leveraged-media co-op campaign from November 2021 thru June 2022 in partnership with Visit California and Expedia, with 50% matching funds from Visit California and a 1:1 media match from Expedia. The campaign received 3.6 million impressions, 4,600 room nights booked and generated $1.1 million in gross hotel room bookings, with a 14.6:1 Return on Ad Spend.

15. Funded by Council approved ARPA funds, OCVB ran an additional leveraged-media co-op campaign from May 2022 thru June 2022 with Visit California and Expedia, with 50% matching funds from Visit California and a 1:1 media match from Expedia. The campaign received 3.3 million impressions, 1,800 room nights booked and generated $523.7k in gross hotel room bookings, with a 7:1 Return on Ad Spend.

16. Funded by Council approved ARPA funds, OCVB ran programmatic advertising with TripAdvisor, resulting in 2.5 million+ impressions, 2,993 clicks, with a click-through-rate measuring double the industry average at .12.

17. In addition to projects already noted, OCVB received Council approved ARPA funds to aid in tourism recovery for projects including a content creation and storytelling campaign with The Journal of Lost Time and HD live cam installation/streaming service. Since installation of OCVB’s HD live cam at Marine Emporium Landing, website traffic to the organization’s weather page, where the live cam feed is streaming, has increased 368% year-over-year. Looking forward, OCVB has ongoing and planned projects funded by Council approved ARPA funding including a wayfinding system, an OXNARD letters tourism attraction, City film department coordination efforts and tourism-inspired artwork at Oxnard Transit Center.
9 18. OCVB attended 3 group and leisure tradeshows (as we were still coming out of the pandemic) in FY 21/22, making connections with thousands of potential visitors and meeting planners.

19. The OCVB team members sit on 16 industry Board of Directors and Committees throughout our region, state and nation.

20. OCVB was also recognized for their efforts in FY 21/22 receiving the following awards from industry partners: Great Workplace Award by California Travel Association, MarCom Award for Digital Press, Public Relations Society of America Image Award for Visit Oxnard Media Kit and West Ventura County Business Alliance Community Influencer Award.

Oxnard Tourism Marketing District ("OTMD")
Lodging business owners decided to pursue formation of the OTMD in order to create a dedicated revenue source devoted to marketing Oxnard as a tourist, meeting, and event destination. On March 5, 2019, City Council approved OCVB to form the Oxnard Tourism Marketing District (“OTMD”), which includes an annual assessment rate of one and one-half of one percent (1.5%) of gross room rental revenue in addition to the existing Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT), and other guest charges and fees. The OTMD is expected to generate approximately $730,000 on an annual basis for promotion of travel and tourism specific to Oxnard, when not in a pandemic or emergency situation. The City is paid a fee equal to one percent (1%) of the amount of assessment collected to cover its costs of collection and administration from funds collected for the OTMD. The OTMD has a five (5) year term, beginning April 1, 2019 through March 31, 2024. The assessment was implemented beginning April 1, 2019.

This approach has been used successfully in other destination areas throughout the state to improve tourism and drive additional room nights to assessed lodging businesses. The OTMD includes all lodging businesses located within the boundaries of the City of Oxnard, except lodging businesses with fifty-four (54) rooms or less and RV parks.

OCVB Agreement
The City Council approved a five-year agreement with OCVB on May 21, 2019, of which we are in the fourth year of the five-year agreement. This contract will expire on June 30, 2024. The 2019 contract amount represented a $300,500 (47%) reduction from the previous agreement compensation of $641,124.

Given all the demands on City funds, OCVB has found that the formation of the OTMD was a vital method to achieve the goals of the organization, while at the same time reducing the City's financial assistance. Since the OTMD funding is limited to marketing the specific lodging business paying into the OTMD, it is vital that the City provide direct funding to OCVB to ensure that Oxnard as a whole is promoted as a premier leisure and business travel destination. As the data shows, the promotion leads to the continued growth and success of hotel performance, thus generating more TOT funds and additional tax revenue streams for the City of Oxnard.

OCVB has indicated they will request Council consideration of their contract renewal during the FY22/23 Annual Report, which is expected in September 2023. The goal would be to have the OCVB and OTMD be on the same timeline.

Looking Forward
OCVB is still looking forward to the addition of three new hotel properties coming on-line in the next two years, which is projected to bring a 34% increase in available hotel rooms. Exhibit B of the current Agreement (A-8142) defines performance measures. These include:

1. Serve as the City’s official tourism agency,

2. Develop a comprehensive marketing program, and

3. Participate in activities related to the branding of the City. 10 In alignment with these measurables, the Council approved, as part of the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding two overarching projects that OCVB in managing:

1. A City Wayfinding program,

2. Additional Marketing Initiatives. Including; Digital Advertising campaigns with proven strong ROI, Branding, Publications and Destination Management projects to directly assist the City of Oxnard in the amount of $436K.

STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
This agenda item supports Economic Development strategy. The purpose of Economic Development strategy is to focus on the retention and expansion of Oxnard businesses by increasing the skills and employability of our local workforce, invite new business investments, and target site-based redevelopment opportunities.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no impact associated with this report. $265,000 for subject contract was approved as part of the FY 22023 budget On May 21, 2019, the City Council approved an agreement with OCVB (Agreement No. A-8142) to receive the following financial contributions from the City's general fund:

1. FY 2019-20, $340,624 in year one,

2. FY 2020-21 $350,000 in year two,

3. FY 2021-22 $300,000 in year three,

4. FY 2022-23 $265,000 in year four, and

5. FY 2023-24 $270,000 in year five.

COMMITTEE OUTCOME
This item did not originate in Committee.

Prepared by: Ashley Golden, Assistant City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. FY 21/22 Visit Oxnard Annual Report Presentation
11 City Council Meeting 9/20/2022
1 FY 21/22

VISIT OXNARD

ANNUAL REPORT
12 City Council Meeting 9/20/2022
2 FY 22/23
VISIT
OXNARD
Board of Directors
Executive Committee
Steve Buenger, Chair
Marine Emporium Landing
Dolores Licon, Secretary
Homewood Suites
General Board
Jill Almonia
The Collection at RiverPark
Millicent Bennett
Residence Inn by Marriott
Gary Blum
Heritage Square/Downtown Oxnard
Tony Dybeku
Waterside Restaurant
Adam Gonzalez
805Keto.com
Hutton John
The Haven at Whitesails
David Neel, Treasurer
Murphy Auto Museum
Ashley Golden, City Manager’s Office
City of Oxnard
Nancy Lindholm
West Ventura County Business Alliance
Bryan MacDonald
Council Member, Oxnard
Marilyn Miller
Ventura County Harbor Department
Channel Islands Harbor
Stacy Miller
Stacy Miller Public Affairs
Mark Spellman
Lazer Media
Brian Tucker, Board Advisor
Ventura County Coast

WHAT WE DO
Values
Inclusivity, diversity and
representation in marketing.

Sensitivity to locals and residents.

Follow through with our brand
promise, ensuring that our brand is
truthful and accurate in its
messaging. Support to local retail
and hospitality businesses. Build,
maintain and grow a positive
working relationship with local
stakeholders and government
officials.

Mission
To promote and market Oxnard as a
premier leisure and business travel
destination, bringing significant
economic and social benefits to our
community.

Brand Promise
Oxnard is a destination that offers
value to those seeking experiences in
family, cultural, outdoor adventure
and group travel.

HOW WE
DO IT
Multifaceted Approach
13 City Council Meeting 9/20/2022
3 OVERVIEW OF MARKETING PLAN FY 21/22
Blank slides indicate video links
which will be shown live during City
Council on September 20, 2022
14 City Council Meeting 9/20/2022
4 WEBSITE WEBSITE
Blank slides indicate video links
which will be shown live during City
Council on September 20, 2022

WEBSITE
Blank slides indicate video links
which will be shown live during City
Council on September 20, 2022
15 City Council Meeting 9/20/2022
5 EMAIL

MARKETING
EMAIL

SOCIAL MEDIA

SOCIAL MEDIA
59,900

COMBINED

FOLLOWERS
ACROSS

FACEBOOK AND

INSTAGRAM
3,223

FOLLOWERS AND

SUBSCRIBERS

ACROSS TWITTER,

YOUTUBE,

SPOTIFY,

PINTEREST,

LINKEDIN AND
TIKTOK
16 City Council Meeting 9/20/2022
6 RESTAURANT PASS

OWNED MEDIA

TACO TRAIL

OWNED MEDIA
17 City Council Meeting 9/20/2022
7 INFLUENCER PARTNERSHIPS

EARNED MEDIA
18 City Council Meeting 9/20/2022
8 ONLINE COVERAGE

EARNED MEDIA

EARNED MEDIA

BROADCAST & RADIO

COVERAGE
19 City Council Meeting 9/20/2022
9 BRANDING CAMPAIGN
Blank slides indicate video links
which will be shown live during City
Council on September 20, 2022
20 City Council Meeting 9/20/2022
10 2022–2023 Visitor Guide
Digital Advertising
21 City Council Meeting 9/20/2022
11 Print Ads

OUTDOOR ADS
22 City Council Meeting 9/20/2022
12 EXPEDIA

CAMPAIGN
S
November 2021
thru June 2022

TRIPADVISO
R
CAMPAIGNS May 2022
thru June 2022
23 City Council Meeting 9/20/2022
13 INCLUSION IN THE

CALIFORNIA
TRAVEL

CONVERSATION

QUALIFIED LEADS

GENERATED FROM
CO-OPS

REDUCED RATES

ON AD BUYS AND

REMNANT SPACE

OPPORTUNITIES

INDUSTRY CO-OPS &

COLLABORATIONS

VISIT CALIFORNIA

E-NEWSLETTER

MARKETING

LA MAGAZINE

SPONSORED

CONTENT

TRAVELZOO

SPONSPORED

CONTENT

LEVERAGED MEDIA

INDUSTRY CO-OPS &

COLLABORATIONS
24 City Council Meeting 9/20/2022
14 Tradeshows Attended in
FY 21/22
Dallas Travel & Adventure Show – 5,380 Total Attendance Denver Travel & Adventure Show – 6,215 Total Attendance IPW – 4,800 Attendees with over 100 one on one appointments Destinations California Meetings
Show
August 2022
Connect California Meetings Show
November 2022
Destinations West Meetings Show
November 2022
Smart Meetings
November 2022
Upcoming Tradeshows in FY 22/23
CalSAE Seasonal Spectacular
December 2022
New York Travel & Adventure Show
January 2023
Denver Travel & Adventure Show
February 2023
Go West Meetings Show
February 2023
IPW
May 2023
25 City Council Meeting 9/20/2022
15 MEETINGS BROCHURE

MEETINGS & EVENTS
Blank slides indicate video links
which will be shown live during City
Council on September 20, 2022
26 City Council Meeting 9/20/2022
16 DALLAS COWBOYS

TRAINING CAMP

SIGNATURE EVENT

SIGNATURE EVENT
27 City Council Meeting 9/20/2022
17 • VIP Experience & Daily VIP Pass
Giveaways
• 148k visitoxnard.com/cowboys
pageviews (17.3% of total
pageview volume)
• 730k+ impressions on USA
Today Network digital display
ads
• Facebook & Instagram costper-click and remarketing ads • LED Billboard at The Collection
• Static Billboard off Highway 101
• Print ads in VC Reporter
• Onsite activations and promotional
giveaways
• First-ever Oxnard Fan Night in
partnership with The Collection
DALLAS

COWBOYS
TRAINING CAMP Marketing Initiatives

SIGNATURE EVENT
28 City Council Meeting 9/20/2022
18 Cal Travel Board Member
Cal Travel Communications
Committee
Cal Travel Homelessness
Advisory Committee
Central Coast Tourism
Council Board Member
Destinations International
Convention, Sales & Service
Committee
Destinations International
Global Leadership Committee
Oxnard Downtown District
Identity & Placemaking
Committee
Oxnard Chamber of
Commerce (WCVBA)
Business Advisory Committee
Oxnard Chamber of
Commerce (WCVBA)
Military Appreciation
Committee
Visit California Public
Relations Committee
Visit California DMO
Leadership Committee
Visit California Brand &
Content Committee
Ventura County Coast Board
Member
Ventura County Coast
Tradeshow Committee
West Coast DMO Alliance

BOARD & COMMITTEE

INVOLVEMENT

LOOKING FORWARD
29 City Council Meeting 9/20/2022
19 Blank slides indicate video links
which will be shown live during City
Council on September 20, 2022
30 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
APPOINTMENT ITEMS (5:00 PM)
AGENDA ITEM NO. D.2
DATE: September 20, 2022
TO: City Council
FROM: Michael Wolfe, Public Works Director, (805) 385-8055, [email protected] SUBJECT: Presentation by City Staff on Drought Response Actions and Current Drought Conditions. (10/10/10)

RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council receive a verbal report by City staff on the Water Conservation Update Report.

Please click the following link to view the required Measure M pre-recorded presentation video: https://youtu.be/aax1a8IYZsI

BACKGROUND
Drought Response Actions and Current Drought Conditions.

STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
This agenda item is a routine operational item or does not relate to the five strategic priorities adopted by City Council on March 16, 2021.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no financial impact.

COMMITTEE OUTCOME
This item did not originate in Committee.

Prepared by: Joseph Marcinko, Assistant Public Works Director

ATTACHMENTS

1. Presentation
31 Update on Drought Response Actions
and Current Drought Conditions
Joseph Marcinko
Assistant Public Works Director
Public Works and Transportation Committee
September 13, 2022
City Council
September 20, 2022
32 FOR PUBLIC WORKS AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE:

That the Public Works and Transportation Committee receive and file the Water Conservation Update Report.

O
RECOMMENDATION 2
33 FOR CITY COUNCIL:

That the City Council receive a verbal report by City staff on the Water Conservation Update Report.

O
RECOMMENDATION 3
34 ● State Water Project (SWP) supplies received by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) are severely affected by the Drought ● MWD placed water use restrictions and volumetric goals on SWP dependent users which include the Calleguas Municipal Water District (CMWD) ● Drought requirements are frequently changing by the State and Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD)
● City staff is:
• Is working diligently to make sure Oxnard remains in compliance with all mandated watering restrictions and volumetric goals
• Is constantly providing customers with informational and resources to help them use less water and achieve the water conservation goals • Has taken actions to reduce the water usage on areas such as parks, medians, and parkways and non functional turf
BACKGROUND 4
35 PURCHASED IMPORTED WATER 5
36 TOTAL WATER CONSUMPTION 6
37 ● Enhanced outreach and education since the water
shortage local emergency was declared by the Oxnard
City Council on May 17, 2022 by the items listed below:
○ Conservation Hotline - 139 calls as of 8/10/2022
○ Blue Box Campaign- Water savings devices
○ Electronic Message boards - Rotated > four weeks
○ Orange lawn signs with drought messaging
○ “Use Less Water - Learn How:” C Street Banner
○ Direct Mail Postcard - Mailed August 1st
○ Social Media Posts- Facebook, Twitter, Instagram
○ Commercial Outreach - West Ventura County
Business Alliance
○ Community events - Farmers Market, Insect Festival,
Neighborhood Meetings
OUTREACH AND EDUCATION 7
38 OUTREACH AND EDUCATION CONTINUED 8
39 OXNARDWATER.ORG 9
40 LANDSCAPE TRANSFORMATION REBATE 10
41 ENFORCEMENT 11
42 • Irrigation audits, provided free by MWD, were recently completed on eligible Oxnard parks
• Parks are watered once per week, with the exception of high activity areas and areas with trees which are allowed additional watering • City staff are working on prioritizing areas with trees and completing irrigation repairs
PARKS 12
43 • CMWD is extracting stored water supplies from their Las Posas Aquifer Storage and Recovery Wells
• CMWD’s goal is to reduce the volume of SWP water purchased from MWD to help meet their volumetric goals.
• Meeting the volumetric goals will help prevent MWD from implementing zero outdoor watering or further restrictions
• August 16, 2022 - MWD adopted a resolution for equitable access to water supplies and increase supply reliability in the future to all member agencies MWD is monitoring the volumetric goals monthly through November and will make future restrictions based on the achievement of those goals MWD/CMWD UPDATE 13
44 There is no direct financial impact in receiving this report.

FINANCIAL IMPACT 14
45 QUESTIONS
15 46

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

REPORT OF CITY MANAGER/EXECUTIVE

DIRECTOR/SECRETARY
AGENDA ITEM NO. H.1
DATE: September 20, 2022
TO: City Council
FROM: Michael Wolfe, Public Works Director, (805) 385-8055, [email protected] SUBJECT: Reconsideration of Local Emergency and Ratification of Director Orders Regarding the Water Shortage Emergency and Mandatory Water Conservation Measures.

RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council:

1. Adopt a resolution confirming the need to continue the local emergency declared on May 17, 2022, due to drought conditions and lack of adequate water supply; and

2. Adopt a resolution ratifying DES Order No. 22-04 of the Director of Emergency Services modifying mandatory water conservation measures required during the local emergency.

BACKGROUND
On May 17, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution 15,568 proclaiming a local emergency due to drought conditions and lack of adequate water supply, and adopted Resolution 15,569 establishing new mandatory conservation measures.

On June 30, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution 15,628 ratifying an order issued by the Director of Emergency Services pertaining to the local emergency, and confirming the need to continue the local emergency pursuant to Government Code Section 8630(c).

On July 28, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution 15,609 reconfirming the need to continue the local emergency pursuant to Government Code Section 8630(c).

By adopting the resolution attached to this staff report, the City Council would once again confirm the need to continue the local emergency. If Council adopts the resolution, staff will return to the Council within 60 days of adoption for reconsideration of the emergency.

By adopting the resolution attached to this staff report ratifying Director’s Order 22-04, which supersedes Director’s Order 22-03, the Council would ratify continued mandatory water conservation measures required during the local emergency and modifications to the measures regarding tree irrigation and updates to enforcement penalties.

STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
This agenda item supports the Infrastructure and Natural Resources strategy. The purpose of the Infrastructure and Natural Resources strategy is to preserve and improve our roads, utilities, parks, trees, water supply and natural resources through effective planning, prioritization, and an equitable and efficient use of available funding.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
47 There is no direct financial impact.

COMMITTEE OUTCOME
This item did not originate in Committee.

Prepared by: Michael Wolfe, Public Works Director

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution - Water Shortage Emergency Continuance

2. Resolution - Ratifying Director Order 22-04

3. Exhibit A - DES Order No. 22-04 - Water Conservation

4. Adopted Resolution 15,568 (dated 5-17-22)

5. Adopted Resolution 15,569 (dated 5-17-22)

6. Adopted Resolution 15,628 (dated 6-30-22)

7. Adopted Resolution 15,609 (dated 7-28-22)
48 CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OXNARD
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OXNARD

CONFIRMING THE NEED TO CONTINUE THE LOCAL EMERGENCY
PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 8630(C)
WHEREAS, Government Code section 8630 and Chapter 6 of the Oxnard City Code (“OCC”) empower the City Manager of the City of Oxnard (“City”), acting in the capacity of the Director of Emergency Services, to request the City Council to proclaim the existence of a local emergency when drought conditions threaten the safety of persons or property within the City; and
WHEREAS, on May 17, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution 15,568 which proclaimed the existence of a local emergency due to drought conditions and lack of adequate water supply; and
WHEREAS, also on May 17, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution 15,569 establishing new mandatory water conservation measures; and WHEREAS, on June 30, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution 15,628 which determined that there was a need to continue the local emergency due to continued drought conditions and lack of adequate water supply; and WHEREAS, on July 28, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution 15,609 which determined that there was a need to continue the local emergency due to continued drought conditions and lack of adequate water supply; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code section 8630(c), the City Council must review the need for continuing the local emergency at least once every 60 days until the governing body terminates the local emergency; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that there is a need to continue the local emergency because the conditions that brought on the May 17, 2022 local emergency persist; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code section 8634, and Chapter 6 of the City Code, the Director may promulgate orders and regulations necessary to provide for the protection of life and property and shall request the City Council to ratify such orders and regulations; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Oxnard resolves that the local emergency declared on May 17, 2022 due to drought conditions and lack of adequate water supply shall remain in effect.
49 PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS day of 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN
:

John C. Zaragoza, Mayor
ATTEST:

Rose Chaparro, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Stephen M. Fischer, City Attorney
50 CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OXNARD
RESOLUTION NO. ______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OXNARD

RATIFYING AN ORDER ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY

SERVICES IN RESPONSE TO THE PROCLAMATION OF A LOCAL
EMERGENCY PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 8630 AND
OXNARD CITY CODE CHAPTER 6
WHEREAS, Government Code section 8630 and Chapter 6 of the Oxnard City Code (“OCC”) empower the City Manager of the City of Oxnard (“City”), acting in the capacity of the Director of Emergency Services, to request the City Council to proclaim the existence of a local emergency when drought conditions threaten the safety of persons or property within the City; and
WHEREAS, on May 17, 2022, the City Council proclaimed the existence of a local emergency due to drought conditions and lack of adequate water supply; and WHEREAS, also on May 17, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution 15,569 establishing new mandatory water conservation measures; and WHEREAS, OCC Chapter 6, section 3 subparagraph (C)(1) empowers the City Manager, acting in the capacity of the Director of Emergency Services (“Director”), to promulgate orders and regulations during the existence of a local emergency when drought conditions threaten the safety of persons or property within the City; and WHEREAS, on September 6, 2022, the Director of Emergency Services, issued DES Order No. 22-04 promulgating water conservation measures in response to the Local Emergency; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to OCC Chapter 6, section 3 subparagraph (C)(1), the Director shall request the City Council to ratify such orders and regulations; and WHEREAS, the Director has issued DES Order No. 22-04, which supersedes DES Order No. 22-03 in response to the Local Emergency.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Oxnard resolves that:

1. The local emergency declared on May 17, 2022 due to drought conditions and lack of adequate water supply is still in effect.

2. Order 22-04 issued by the Director and attached as Exhibit A hereto is necessary to provide for the protection of life and property in response to the Local Emergency and is hereby ratified.

PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS ____ day of ___________ 2022, by the following vote:
51 AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

John C. Zaragoza, Mayor
ATTEST:

Rose Chaparro, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Stephen M. Fischer, City Attorney
52 EXHIBIT A
[Director of Emergency Services Order 22-04]
53 DES Order No. 22-04
September 7, 2022

CITY OF OXNARD
DIRECTOR ORDER NO. 22-04

ORDER OF THE DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY SERVICES OF THE CITY OF

OXNARD MODIFYING MANDATORY WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES
WHEREAS, Government Code section 8630 in conjunction with Chapter 6, section 3 subparagraph (C)(1) of the Oxnard City Code (“OCC”) empower the City Manager of the City of Oxnard (“City”), acting in the capacity of the Director of Emergency Services, to promulgate orders and regulations during the existence of a local emergency when drought conditions threaten the safety of persons or property within the City; and WHEREAS, on May 17, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution 15,568 proclaiming the existence of a local emergency due to drought conditions and lack of adequate water supply; and
WHEREAS, also on May 17, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution 15,569 establishing new mandatory water conservation measures; and WHEREAS, on June 22, 2022, the City Manager acting as the Director of Emergency Services promulgated Director’s Order No. 22-03 updating the City’s water conservation measures adopted by the City Council in Resolution 15,569; and WHEREAS, Stage 2 water shortage conditions exist within the City; and WHEREAS, a new Director’s Order is required to comply with ongoing water conservation mandates from the State of California, the State Water Resources Control Board, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, and Calleguas Municipal Water District; and
WHEREAS, the Director of Emergency Services pursuant to OCC section 6-3(C)(1), herein shall issue updated water conservation measures, superseding DES Order No. 22-03, and amending in part the conservation measures set forth in Resolution 15,569; and WHEREAS, this Director’s Order includes the amended mandatory water conservation measures applicable to City water users in bold; and
WHEREAS, on May 24, 2022, the State Water Resources Control Board voted unanimously to implement a statewide ban on the use of potable water for irrigating nonfunctional turf at commercial, industrial and institutional properties, including Home Owners Associations (“HOAs”); and
WHEREAS, the State Water Resources Control Board has defined non-functional turf, which in general is considered to be turf that is solely ornamental and not regularly used for human recreational purposes or for civic or community events; and 54 DES Order No. 22-04
September 7, 2022
WHEREAS, Non-functional turf is a ground cover surface of mowed grass that is ornamental and not otherwise used for human recreation purposes. Non-functional turf does not include school fields, sports fields, and areas regularly used for civic or community events; and WHEREAS OCC Sec. 22-136(B)(3) establishes limits on watering duration as follows:
“Watering or irrigating of lawns, landscape or other vegetated area with potable water using a landscape irrigation system or a watering device that is not continuously attended is limited to no more than 15 minutes per day per station;” and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California’s (“MWD”) Emergency Water Conservation Program Handbook, at Section 3.1.1., establishes eligible outdoor water restriction criteria as follows: “Metropolitan does not specify the day of the week or any method of even/odd house numbering for the watering restrictions. Metropolitan does, however, require that Member Agencies limit watering times to prevent substitution of water use from restricted days to permitted days. For this purpose, watering duration will be limited to no more than 10 minutes, effective July 1;” and
WHEREAS, the City’s watering duration limitations must be consistent with MWD’s limitations; and
WHEREAS, State Water Project suppliers, including MWD, have indicated their intent to penalize non-compliant purveyors (such as the City) with volumetric penalties of up to $2,000 per acre-foot that exceeds defined allocations established or do not comply with mandatory restriction criteria; and
WHEREAS, MWD’s Emergency Water Conservation Program Handbook, at Section

3.1.6., establishes exceptions to 1-day outdoor watering restrictions including: “locallydetermined exceptions which reflect modest community choice will be considered.”; and WHEREAS, the State Water Resources Control Board has provided information that signals their intent to prioritize the irrigation of trees to ensure the health of trees and urges the continuation of watering of trees during the drought; and WHEREAS, Trees provide clean air, reduce urban heat islands, capture stormwater, improve water quality, reduce flood risk, stabilize soil, and provide habitat to wildlife. ///
///
///
///
///

NOW, THEREFORE, THE DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY SERVICES OF THE CITY OF OXNARD DOES HEREBY ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
55 DES Order No. 22-04
September 7, 2022
SECTION 1. The recitals, facts, findings, and conclusions set forth above in the preamble of this Order are true and correct, and are incorporated by reference into this Order as though fully set forth herein.

SECTION 2. Resolution 15,569 is attached hereto and incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein, as Exhibit A.

SECTION 3. This Director Order supersedes DES Order No. 22-03 issued on June 22, 2022.

SECTION 4. In accordance with Resolution 15,569 the following water conservation measures are in effect during the continued declaration of a local emergency due to drought conditions and lack of adequate water supply:
a. Watering of lawns, functional turf, trees, shrubs, vegetation, landscape and other outside irrigation is prohibited except between 4 p.m. and 9 a.m. or 6 p.m. and 9 a.m. during daylight savings time, no more than once per week. b. The following watering schedule is established:
i. Odd numbered addresses (Ending in 1, 3, 5, 7, 9): Sundays ONLY. ii. Even numbered addresses (Ending in 0, 2, 4, 6, 8): Saturdays ONLY iii. No watering between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. (non-daylight savings time) iv. No watering between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. (daylight savings time) c. Exceptions to allow for irrigation outside of the designated periods include (1) the hand watering of trees, food plants, or other perennials with use of a container (e.g. bucket or watering can) or a hose fitted with a shut-off nozzle and (2) the use of drip irrigation or other high-efficiency irrigation systems to apply water at a weekly volume consistent with the one-day watering restriction imposed on less efficient irrigation systems.
d. Irrigation of park and school ground areas with potable water are only permitted during the once weekly designated irrigation periods noted in this Section. e. Sports activity fields may irrigate more frequently, but only as necessary, to maintain playing surface quality.
f. All vegetation within Wildland-Urban Interface and Defensible Space will be maintained as required under Public Resource Code 4291. g. The application of potable water to landscapes during and within 48 hours after measurable rainfall is prohibited.
56 DES Order No. 22-04
September 7, 2022
h. The irrigation of newly constructed homes and building exteriors with potable water is prohibited unless drip or microspray systems are used. i. The use of potable water in a fountain or other decorative water feature is prohibited, except where the water is part of recirculating system. j. The City must provide prompt notice to customers when information indicates a leak may exist within the end-user’s control.
k. Irrigation of non-functional turf on medians with potable water is prohibited. l. Potable water for irrigation of non-functional turf at commercial, industrial and institutional properties, including HOAs, is prohibited. m. Watering or irrigating of functional turf, landscape or other vegetated area with potable water using a landscape irrigation system or a watering device is limited to no more than 10 minutes per day per station.
n. Trees in public spaces may be irrigated more frequently, but only as necessary, to maintain tree well-being for human health and safety as determined by the Emergency Services Director.

SECTION 5. The Oxnard Water Division shall take the following actions when water waste is reported or observed:

First Violation Warning Letter
7 Day Post Letter
Follow Up Phone
Call
For a first violation, the City shall give written notice of the violation to the customer by personal service,
by delivery through regular United States mail
addressed to the customer's residence, or any other
means reasonably designed to notify the customer of
the violation. The notice shall contain a description of violation, educational notice listing all prohibited
water waste, and provide resources such as rebate
information.

Follow up to see if the customer has received the
educational letter. Discuss if the issue has been
addressed and offer additional information/resources
Second Violation Notice to Correct For a second violation, the City shall give a written notice to correct the violation to the customer by
personal service, by delivery through regular United
States mail addressed to the customer's residence, or
any other means reasonably designed to notify the
customer of the violation. The notice to correct shall
contain a description of the violation, request to
correct the violation, a statement of the possible
57 DES Order No. 22-04
September 7, 2022
penalties for violation, and a statement informing the
customer of his/her right to request an adjustment or
an appeal.

Third Violation Citation & Fine For a third violation, the City shall issue an administrative citation and fine in the amount of $100
to the customer by personal service, by delivery
through regular United States mail addressed to the
customer's residence, or any other means reasonably
designed to notify the customer of the violation. The
citation shall contain a description of the violation,
fine amount and a statement informing the customer
of his/her right to request an adjustment or an appeal.

Fourth Violation Citation & Fine For a fourth violation, the City shall issue an administrative citation and fine in the amount of $500
to the customer by personal service, by delivery
through regular United States mail addressed to the
customer's residence, or any other means reasonably
designed to notify the customer of the violation. The
citation shall contain a description of the violation,
fine amount and a statement informing the customer
of his/her right to request an adjustment or an appeal.

Fifth / Additional
Violations
Citation & Fine For a fifth violation, the City shall issue an administrative citation and fine in the amount of
$1000 to the customer by personal service, by
delivery through regular United States mail addressed
to the customer's residence, or any other means
reasonably designed to notify the customer of the
violation. The citation shall contain a description of
the violation, fine amount and a statement informing
the customer of his/her right to request an adjustment
or an appeal.

The City may impose such other penalty or fine as
deemed appropriate by the City Manager, and
consistent with Oxnard City Code, until such time
that the City Manager determines that further
violations are not likely to occur.
///
///
///
///
58 59
60 61
62 63
64 65
66 67
68 69
70 71
72 73
74 75
76 77
78 79

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

INFORMATION/CONSENT AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM NO. L.1
DATE: September 20, 2022
TO: City Council
FROM: Rose Chaparro, City Clerk, (805) 385-7805, [email protected] SUBJECT: Approval of Minutes.

RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council approve the minutes of the July 5, 2022 and July 19, 2022 regular meetings as presented.

BACKGROUND
Approval of Minutes.

STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
This agenda item is a routine operational item or does not relate to the five strategic priorities adopted by City Council on March 16, 2021.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no financial impact.

COMMITTEE OUTCOME
This item did not originate in Committee.

Prepared by: Rose Chaparro, City Clerk

ATTACHMENTS

1. MINUTES 07 05 2022 CC Regular Meeting

2. MINUTES 07 19 2022 CC Regular Meeting
80 MINUTES

OXNARD CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting
July 5, 2022
A. ROLL CALL, POSTING OF AGENDA
At 5:02 p.m., Mayor John C. Zaragoza called to order the regular meeting of the Oxnard City Council, in the City Hall Council Chambers at 305 W. Third Street, Oxnard, California. The City Clerk called the roll and announced the posting of the agenda Councilmembers Gabriela Basua, Vianey Lopez, Oscar Madrigal, Bert E. Perello, Gabriel (Gabe) Teran, Mayor Pro Tem Bryan A. MacDonald, and Mayor John C. Zaragoza were present.

Staff members present in person were Alexander Nguyen, City Manager; Ashley Golden, Assistant City Manager; Shiri Klima, Deputy City Manager; Stephen M. Fischer, City Attorney; Jason Benites, Police Chief; Christopher Williams, Assistant Chief of Police; Alexander Hamilton, Fire Chief; Michael Wolfe, Public Works Director; Joseph Marcinko, Assistant Public Works Director; Omar Castro, Water Division Manager; Emilio Ramirez, Housing Director; Renee Rakestraw, Community Services Manager; and Rose Chaparro, City Clerk.

Staff members Betsy George, Chief Financial Officer; Vyto Adomaitis, Community Development Director; and Brian Yanez, Assistant Public Works Director participated via videoconference.

THE FOLLOWING LEGISLATIVE BODIES ARE MEETING: City Council B. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS (None received.) C. CLOSED SESSION (5:00 PM)

1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Government Code section 54957.6) Agency designated representatives: Alex Nguyen, City Manager, Steve Naveau, Director of Human Resources; and Jennie Kelly, Assistant City Attorney.

Employee organization: Service Employees International Union CTW, CLC, Local 721 (SEIU Local 721); International Union of Operating Engineers AFL-CIO, Local No. 501 (IUOE Local 501); International Association of Firefighters, AFL-CIO (IAFF), Local No. 1684; Oxnard Public Safety Managers Association (OPSMA); Oxnard Peace Officers Association (OPOA); Oxnard MidManagers’ Association; (OMMA); and unrepresented employees: City Manager; City Attorney; Assistant City Manager; Chief Financial Officer; City Clerk; Assistant City Treasurer/Director of Revenue and Licensing; Deputy City Manager; Community Development Director; Fire Chief; Housing Director; Human Resources Director; I.T. Director; Cultural and Community Services Director; Police Chief; Public Works Director (Department Directors); Chief Assistant City Attorney; Assistant City Attorney; Deputy City Attorney.

Legislative Body: City Council

2. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE ANNUAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION (Government Code section 54957)
Title: City Attorney
Legislative Body: City Council

3. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE ANNUAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION (Government Code section 54957)
81 July 5, 2022 OXNARD CITY COUNCIL PAGE 2
Title: City Manager
Legislative Body: City Council

4. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Government Code section 54957.6) Agency designated representative: Bryan MacDonald, Mayor Pro Tem.

Unrepresented employees: City Attorney and City Manager.

Legislative Body: City Council
At 5:07 p.m., the City Council recessed to a closed session. At 6:23 p.m., the City Council reconvened in open session in the Council Chambers. The City Attorney announced that City Council will continue the Closed Session at the end of the Council meeting to review the remaining items (C.2 and C.3). At 1:35 a.m., the City Council recessed to continue the closed session to discuss the remaining two items. At 2:52 a.m., the City Council reconvened in open session in the Council Chambers. The City Attorney announced that there were no reportable actions out of closed session.

D. OPENING CEREMONIES (6:00 PM)
The flag salute was followed by a moment of silence.

E. CEREMONIAL ITEMS

1. SUBJECT: Presentation of Resolution #15,605 to Kevin Thompson for Twenty-Eight Years of Outstanding Service to the City of Oxnard.

Mayor Zaragoza read the resolution and presented it to Kevin D. Thompson, who retired after working in the Oxnard Police Department, as a Police Officer, for over 28 years. Police Chief Benites and other Police Department staff congratulated and thanked Kevin for his years of service to the City of Oxnard. Kevin also made a few remarks.

2. SUBJECT: Presentation of a Proclamation Designating the Month of July 2022 as "Parks and Recreation."
Mayor Zaragoza read the proclamation and presented it to Steve Howlett, Assistant Public Works Director and staff. The Parks and Recreation Department is also celebrating 75 years of service to the community.

Mayor Zaragoza acknowledged and thanked the Parks and Recreation Department staff for the services, hard work, and dedication provided to the community.

F. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Public comments were received from Lawrence Stein (Budget and Costs for the Aquatic Center, Water Costs, Fireworks, and Police Department spending), Ray Blattel (Data provided by Finance regarding the expenditures for 2020 River Ridge Golf Club), and Douglas Partello (Concerns about Fireworks and not issuing citations, only warnings; suggestion for Fire Department outreach).

G. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/SECRETARY
City Manager Nguyen announced that there are no items report for tonight’s meeting. 82 July 5, 2022 OXNARD CITY COUNCIL PAGE 3

1. Public Works Department
SUBJECT: Ratification of Director Orders regarding the water shortage emergency and mandatory water conservation measures.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution ratifying orders issued by the Director in response to the previously proclaimed water shortage emergency and mandatory water conservation measures.

There were no orders to ratify; no formal action was taken on this item.

H. CITY COUNCIL/HOUSING AUTHORITY/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/FINANCING AUTHORITY

BUSINESS/COMMITTEE REPORTS

1. City Attorney Department
SUBJECT: Resolution #15,606 Supporting Reproductive Rights.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt Resolution #15,606 declaring:

1. The City of Oxnard’s commitment to women’s rights and reproductive freedom;

2. The City of Oxnard as a Right-To-Choose sanctuary city; and

3. Support for the codification of the right to an abortion into Federal and California Constitutional law.

Stephen M. Fischer, City Attorney, presented and answered questions.

Public comments were received from Brenda K. Holmes, Douglas D. Partello, Representative from Congresswoman Julia Brown, Steven Nash, Elidet Bordon, Angela Landers, Daniel Mora, Molly McCoy, Spencer Richey, Richard Schneider, Deidre Frank, Linda Tofoya, Maria Navarro, Renee DiCarlo, Elyssa, Sandra E., Alex Masci, Alyssa Partida, Carmen, Marisol, Debra, Casey Rodriguez, Michelle Holmes, Veronica Barranda, Alejandra Mendoza, Cruzi Nieto, Vanessa Teran, Sal Gonzalez, Barbara Macri-Ortiz, Joel Allen, Joseph Domitauvech, Max Schmader, JD Stephans, Anthony Walker, Theresa Bell, Pastor Al Duff Jr., Mary Rose Short, Hannah Godinez, Clara Barany, Maura Hogan, Max Villians, Lisa Harris, Pat Brown, Darlene Miller Gonzalez, Diana Velvy, Josue Velasquez, Carolyn Guillot, Rev. Greg Runyon, Roberto Alfaro, Esteban Alcantar, Joe Teichert, Elisa Marinero, Shannon Gillespie McComb, Aaron Starr, Lisa Marie Ruiz, Robert Bagdazian, Megan Velzy, Alicia Percell, Sonya Webb, Adelique Magdaleno, Daniel Wilson, Leonore Schuetz, Cynthia Salas, Rafael Alamillo, Kyle Emmanuel De La Torre, Becky Olson, Mary Bagdazian, Cole Brocato, Sam Gallucci, Karen Sher, Julian Ruelas Jr., Angela Whitecomb, Sal Fuentes, Lance Ralston, Sean B. Buloe M.D., Maria Knotts, DeSandra Aldana, Lux Orozco, Bryan Rodriguez, Ellen Henderson, Vanessa Valdez, Lauraine Effress, Alejandra Perez, Pete Carrillo, Richard Snyder, Anna Murphy, Christian Alonso, Gail Weller Brown, Charles Teachant, Missy McQuattre, Erma Valdivia, Reyna Smith, Art Najera, Vicki Miller, Bob Lopez, Lucia A. Torres, Linda Tafoya, Jeff Thompson, Saul Arce, Michelle Honles, Marianne Parra, Debora Barber, Gloria Massey Chinea, Mary Kyser, KC Rodriguez, DeeDee Beanan, Sandy Diaz, Carlie Magallanes, Senator Monique Limon Representative Patty Quiroz, Carmen Ramirez, Veronica Miranda, Steven Auclair, Angel Garcia, Alejandra Cernas Mendoza, Rolando Chinea, Vanessa Serrato, Max Williams, and Cynthia Saenz. Written comments were also received.

Discussion ensued among the Council and staff.
83 July 5, 2022 OXNARD CITY COUNCIL PAGE 4
At 10:00 p.m., City Council voted to continue the meeting past 10:00 p.m., and take action on the remainder of the items on the agenda.

It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem MacDonald, seconded by Councilmember Perello, to approve the recommended action as presented. VOTE: Lopez, MacDonald, Madrigal, Perello, Teran, and Zaragoza voted in favor; motion passed 6-0. Councilmember Basua was absent.

A motion was made by Council to vote individually on each of the three recommendations, as follows:

It was moved by Councilmember Perello, seconded by Mayor Zaragoza, to approve the recommended action. VOTE: Lopez, Perello, Teran, and Zaragoza voted in favor; MacDonald and Madrigal voted against; motion passed 4-2. Councilmember Basua was absent.

1. The City of Oxnard’s commitment to women’s rights and reproductive freedom; It was moved by Councilmember Lopez, seconded by Councilmember Teran, to approve the recommended action as presented. VOTE: Lopez, Madrigal, Perello, Teran, and Zaragoza voted in favor; motion passed 5-0-1. Mayor Pro Tem MacDonald abstained. Councilmember Basua was absent.

2. The City of Oxnard as a Right-To-Choose sanctuary city; and It was moved by Councilmember Lopez, seconded by Councilmember Teran, to approve the recommended action as presented. VOTE: Lopez, , Perello, Teran, and Zaragoza voted in favor; MacDonald and Madrigal voted against; motion passed 4-2. Councilmember Basua was absent.

3. Support for the codification of the right to an abortion into Federal and California Constitutional law.

It was moved by Councilmember Lopez, seconded by Councilmember Perello, to approve the recommended action and incorporated the language provided by the City Attorney in the memorandum provided to Council on July 5, 2022 amending the language to the amended resolution supporting reproductive rights and staff report, as presented. VOTE: Lopez, Perello, Teran, and Zaragoza voted in favor; MacDonald and Madrigal voted against; motion passed 4-2. Councilmember Basua was absent.

I. REVIEW OF INFORMATION/CONSENT AGENDA
Items K-1 through K-4 were discussed among the Council and staff.

J. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON INFORMATION/CONSENT AGENDA
Public comments were received from Douglas Partello (K.4).

K. INFORMATION/CONSENT AGENDA

1. City Clerk Department
SUBJECT: Approval of Minutes.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the minutes of the June 7, 2022 regular meetings as presented.
84 July 5, 2022 OXNARD CITY COUNCIL PAGE 5

2. Public Works Department
SUBJECT: Agreement A-8468 with Parkhouse Tire, Inc. for Tire Retreading and Repair Services.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve and authorize the Mayor to execute Agreement A-8468 with Parkhouse Tire, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $600,000 for a three year term, with each year renewable in one year increments beginning September 4, 2022 and ending September 3, 2025 upon agreement by both parties for tire retreading and repair services. (Public Works and Transportation Committee approved 3-0.)

3. Cultural & Community Services Department
SUBJECT: First Amendment to Agreement with the Hueneme Elementary School District for the Operations of the After School Education and Safety Grant.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:

1. Approve and authorize the Mayor to execute a First Amendment to Agreement with the Hueneme Elementary School District (HESD) {A-8337} in the amount of $3,857,261 for a new not to exceed agreement amount of $7,017,157 for operations of the Hueneme After School Education and Safety (ASES) Grant;

2. Adopt Resolution #15,607 amending Resolution 15,593 pursuant to Chapter 4 of the City Personnel Rules and Regulations; and

3. Approve a budget appropriation recognizing $1,901,786 in grant funding for FY 2022-2023.

4. Housing Department
SUBJECT: Remittance to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development Department for Ineligible Costs Related to the Community Development Block Grant Program.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:

1. Authorize the City Manager to repay $369,083.20 to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development Department to comply with the 2021 Monitoring Review requirements; and

2. Authorize the City Manager or designee to appropriate up to $369,083.20 of General Funds, if needed, and authorize the Finance Department to conduct a cash transfer to the United States Treasury and the return of funds to the appropriate line of credit as directed by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development.
(This item did not originate in Committee.)
Consent Items K.1, 2, and K.4
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem MacDonald, seconded by Councilmember Perello, to approve the Information/Consent items as presented. VOTE: Lopez, MacDonald, Madrigal, Perello, Teran and Zaragoza voted in favor; motion passed 6-0. Councilmember Basua was absent. 85 July 5, 2022 OXNARD CITY COUNCIL PAGE 6
Consent Item K.3
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem MacDonald, seconded by Councilmember Perello, to approve the recommended action as presented. VOTE: Lopez, MacDonald, Madrigal, Perello, and Zaragoza voted in favor; motion passed 5-0-1. Councilmember Teran abstained due to his professional consulting work with school districts in the County.

L. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business on the agenda, and without objection, Mayor Zaragoza adjourned the meeting at 2:54 p.m.

ROSE CHAPARRO JOHN C. ZARAGOZA
City Clerk Mayor
86 MINUTES

OXNARD CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting
July 19, 2022
A. ROLL CALL, POSTING OF AGENDA
At 4:31 p.m., Mayor John C. Zaragoza called to order the regular meeting of the Oxnard City Council, in the City Hall Council Chambers at 305 W. Third Street, Oxnard, California. The City Clerk called the roll and announced the posting of the agenda Councilmembers Gabriela Basua, Vianey Lopez, Councilmember Oscar Madrigal, Bert E. Perello, Gabriel (Gabe) Teran, Mayor Pro Tem Bryan A.

MacDonald, and Mayor John C. Zaragoza were present.

Councilmember Oscar Madrigal joined the meeting at 6:37 p.m.

Staff members present in person were Alexander Nguyen, City Manager; Shiri Klima, Deputy City Manager; Stephen M. Fischer, City Attorney; Kenneth Rozell, Chief Assistant City Attorney; Jason Benites, Police Chief; Alexander Hamilton, Fire Chief; Michael Wolfe, Public Works Director; Steve Naveau, Human Resources Director; Vyto Adomaitis, Community Development Director; Omar Castro, Public Works Water Manager; and Rose Chaparro, City Clerk.

Staff member Nikolas Boas, Supervising Civil Engineer participated via videoconference.

Wendy Chan and Jose De Jesus with MIG and Nicole Thompson with M6 also participated via videoconference.

THE FOLLOWING LEGISLATIVE BODIES ARE MEETING: City Council B. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS (None received.) C. CLOSED SESSION (4:30 PM)

1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Government Code section 54957.6) Agency designated representatives: Alex Nguyen, City Manager, and Steve Naveau, Director of Human Resources.

Employee organization: Oxnard Peace Officers Association (OPOA); Oxnard Public Safety Managers Association (OPSMA); and International Association of Firefighters, AFL-CIO (IAFF), Local No. 1684.

Legislative Body: City Council

2. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Government Code section 54957.6) Agency designated representative: Bryan MacDonald, Mayor Pro Tem.

Unrepresented employees: City Attorney and City Manager.

Legislative Body: City Council
At 4:35 p.m., the City Council recessed to a closed session. The City Attorney announced that item C.1 was removed from tonight’s Council meeting agenda. No public comments were received. At 5:38 p.m., the City Council reconvened in open session in the Council Chambers. The City Attorney announced that there were no reportable actions out of closed session.
87 JULY 19, 2022 OXNARD CITY COUNCIL PAGE 2
D. APPOINTMENT ITEMS (5:30 PM)

1. SUBJECT: Presentation by Monica White, Food Share of Ventura County CEO on the organization's food distribution and the impact of COVID on their organization's mission.

Ms. Monica White, President and CEO of Food Share Ventura County, gave a presentation to Council about the challenges and accomplishments of distributing food during the COVID-19 pandemic crisis and how it has affected the operations of the organization. They also provided Council with the 2020-2021 annual report to Council.

E. OPENING CEREMONIES (6:00 PM)
The flag salute was followed by a moment of silence.

F. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Public comments were received from Lawrence Stein (public records requested for water, fireworks, sports park, and developer fees), Walter Hagedohla, Chair of the Oxnard Shores Neighborhood Council (Airport touch and go flights, safety and pollution concerns), Rita Wyngarden, Oxnard Shores Neighborhood Council (Airport safety concerns, touch and go flights, low altitudes and noise complaints), Joe Gosland, Oxnard Shores Neighborhood Council (Airport concerns of noise, safety, lead poisoning, and touch and go flights), Joni Conterno (Airport expressed safety concerns about touch and go flights and flight crashes), Bendi Benedetto (Airport safety and environmental issues), Joy MacKinnon (Resident of the Wilson Center/OPAC Board of Director, teaches tap dancing, invitation to annual recital), Deborah Baber (Oxnard largest recipient of Food Share donations, gun control, and Oxnard Sanctuary City), Reverend Greg Runyon (community healing, love one another), and Pat Brown (Decision on Women Rights Resolution), and Deirde Frank, Oxnard Shores (Oxnard Shores Neighborhood Council /Airport touch and go flights are excessive).

G. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/SECRETARY

1. City Manager Department
SUBJECT: Ratification of Director Orders regarding the water shortage emergency and mandatory water conservation measures.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution ratifying orders issued by the Director in response to the previously proclaimed water shortage emergency and mandatory water conservation measures.

Public comments were received from Lawrence Stein (water shortage/pipeline/wells).

There were no orders to ratify the Director Orders; no formal action was taken on this item.

H. CITY COUNCIL/HOUSING AUTHORITY/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/FINANCING AUTHORITY

BUSINESS/COMMITTEE REPORTS
Councilmember Teran announced he, the City Manager, Public Works staff, and Special Districts staff met with the Wagon Wheel Neighborhood Council at their request to address their concerns.

Neighborhood Council thanks to the parks staff. He thanked staff for their hard work to obtain new 88 JULY 19, 2022 OXNARD CITY COUNCIL PAGE 3
lids for the trash cans. He also mentioned that speed signs were installed due to input received from residents.

Councilmember Lopez commended the Parks and Recreation Department staff for organizing the Oxnard PAL Kids Fest community event. She also attended the Aquatic Center Community meetings in South Oxnard. She plans to attend the upcoming the Southwinds Neighborhood Council and the Redwood Neighborhood Council meetings.

Mayor Pro Tem MacDonald reported that a great amount of Amazon employees utilize the Gold Coast Transportation public transportation system. He is organizing some programs to fund some grants.

Councilmember Perello reported that he received comments that some residents would like to see that the Airport close. However, he reminded the resident that when the Airport receives federal funds which they recently accepted 14 million dollars for improvements for the airport. This extends the life of the airport. He attended the Ventura Council of Government (VCOG) meeting. He also attended the Dunes Neighborhood Council meeting.

Councilmember Basua also attended the Oxnard PAL Kids event and said that it was very well attended. There were a lot of families that participated. She congratulated Terrel Harrison and his team for a job well done in organizing this family event. Congratulated Walter Fuller for his 26 years as a beach steward. She also mentioned an incident that she experienced on Hueneme Road. She mentioned that one of the bicyclist hit her car and did not stop. She is concerned about this safety issue.

Councilmember Madrigal reported that he has been receiving calls and emails from residents that are concerned about the street repair delays. He also received emails from residents asking that their neighborhoods be considered for curb cuts. He thanked everyone for keeping everyone safe.

Reminded residents to stay safe and share the roads.

Mayor Zaragoza Blackstock Neighborhood Council meeting.

1. City Manager Department
SUBJECT: League of California Cities Annual Conference Voting Delegate 2022.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council designate a voting delegate and a voting alternate to attend the League of California Cities Annual Conference.

City Manager Nguyen presented and answered questions. No public comments were received.

A motion was made by Council to appoint Councilmember Lopez as the voting delegate and appointed Councilmember Basua as the voting alternate to attend the League of California Cities Annual Conference.

It was moved by Councilmember Perello, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem MacDonald, to approve the recommended action as presented. VOTE: Basua, Lopez, MacDonald, Madrigal, Perello, Teran, and Zaragoza voted in favor; motion passed 7-0.

2. City Attorney Department
SUBJECT: Resolution Denouncing Gun Violence and Supporting Gun Violence Reduction Efforts. 89 JULY 19, 2022 OXNARD CITY COUNCIL PAGE 4
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt Resolution #15,608 denouncing gun violence and supporting gun violence reduction efforts.

City Attorney Fischer read decorum advisory about the conduct during the City Council meetings. He reminded the members of the public that they may not disrupt the meeting and keep orderly conduct or they may be removed from the public meeting. The City Attorney presented and answered questions. Public comments were received from Barbara Macri-Ortiz, Deborah Baber, Pat Brown, and Reverend Greg Runyon. Discussion ensued among the Council and staff.

It was moved by Mayor Zaragoza, seconded by Councilmember Perello, to approve the recommended action as presented. VOTE: Basua, Lopez, MacDonald, Madrigal, Perello, Teran, and Zaragoza voted in favor; motion passed 7-0.

I. REVIEW OF INFORMATION/CONSENT AGENDA
Items K-1 through K-2 were discussed among the Council and staff.

J. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON INFORMATION/CONSENT AGENDA
Public comments were received from Pat Brown (K.1).

K. INFORMATION/CONSENT AGENDA

1. Public Works Department
SUBJECT: Purchase Order with Iteris Inc for Video Detection Equipment for Gonzales Road as part of Adaptive Traffic Signals Project.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve and authorize the Mayor to execute a Purchase Order with Iteris Inc., as a sole source purchase, in the amount of $437,953.00 for video detection equipment for 18 signalized intersections on Gonzales Road.

This item did not originate in Committee as this is a capital improvement project specifically listed in the Capital Improvement Program budget, which was previously approved by the City Council.

2. Public Works Department
SUBJECT: Agreement A-8485 with NoHo Constructors for Pleasant Valley Park Restroom Project, Specification No. PW 21-84.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve and authorize the following for a total of $261,000 in Project funds for the Pleasant Valley Park Restroom Project, Specification No. PW 21- 84 (Project No. 205708):

1. The Mayor to execute Agreement A-8485 with NoHo Constructors in the amount of $217,500 for the Project;

2. A Project contingency amount of $21,750 for the Project; and

3. A Project allocation amount of $21,750 for engineering, inspection, survey and project management for the Project.

This item did not originate in Committee as this is a capital improvement project specifically listed 90 JULY 19, 2022 OXNARD CITY COUNCIL PAGE 5
in the Capital Improvement Program budget, which was previously approved by the City Council.

It was moved by Councilmember Basua, seconded by Councilmember Teran, to approve the Information/Consent items as presented. VOTE: Basua, Lopez, MacDonald, Madrigal, Perello, Teran, and Zaragoza voted in favor; motion passed 7-0.

L. REPORTS

1. Public Works Department
SUBJECT: Campus Park Activation Project Update. (10/5/5) RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file a verbal update report for the Campus Park Activation Project design.
(This item did not originate in Committee as this is a capital improvement project specifically listed in the Capital Improvement Program budget, which was previously approved by the City Council.) (Presentation will be live upon consultant's request.)
Tatiana B. Arnaout, P.E., City Engineer presented and introduced Wendy Chan and Jose De Jesus with MIG and Nicole Thompson with M6, who were also available to answer questions. Public comments were received from Lawrence Stein, Barbara Macri-Ortiz, Miguel Fernandez, Roger Poirier, Angela Whitecomb, and Aurelio Ocampo. Discussion ensued among the Council and staff.

Mayor Pro Tem MacDonald recused from participating due to owning property near the location of this project.

Report was received and filed; no formal action was taken on this item.

2. Public Works Department
SUBJECT: Agreement with Taft Electric Company for the Oxnard Saviers Traffic Signal Improvements Project (5 Signals), Specification No. PW 19-97 (Project No. 173102) . (0/5/5) RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve and authorize the following for a total of $3,022,339 in Project funds for Project No. 173102:

1. The Mayor to execute Agreement A-8480 with Taft Electric Company in the amount of $2,518,615.46 for the Project;

2. A Project contingency amount of $251,861;

3. A Project allocation amount of $251,861 for engineering, inspection, survey and project management; and

4. A budget appropriation of $92,050 from Federal Transportation Grant Fund (275); and a budget reallocation of $1,000,000 within the Capital Outlay Fund (301) and a budget reallocation of $424,591 within the Circulation System Improvement Fees Fund (354) both from the Traffic Signal Modernization Project 203106.

Tatiana B. Arnaout, P.E., City Engineer presented and answered questions. Public comments were received 91 JULY 19, 2022 OXNARD CITY COUNCIL PAGE 6
from Pat Brown. Discussion ensued among the Council and staff.

It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem MacDonald, seconded by Councilmember Basua, to approve the recommended action as presented. VOTE: Basua, Lopez, MacDonald, Madrigal, Perello, Teran, and Zaragoza voted in favor; motion passed 7-0.

3. City Attorney Department
SUBJECT: Single-use Foodware Accessories and Standard Condiments Ordinance. (0/5/5) RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council introduce for first reading by title only and waive further reading of Ordinance #3017 titled:
“ORDINANCE #3017 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OXNARD ADDING ARTICLE XXIV TO CHAPTER 7 OF THE OXNARD CITY CODE IN COMPLIANCE WITH ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 1276, TO RESTRICT THE DISTRIBUTION OF SINGLE-USE FOODWARE ACCESSORIES AND STANDARD CONDIMENTS.”
City Attorney Fischer presented and answered questions. No public comments were received. Discussion ensued among the Council and staff.

It was moved by Councilmember Perello, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem MacDonald, to approve the recommended action as presented. VOTE: Basua, Lopez, MacDonald, Madrigal, Perello, Teran, and Zaragoza voted in favor; motion passed 7-0.

M. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business on the agenda, and without objection, Mayor Zaragoza adjourned the meeting at 9:24 p.m.

ROSE CHAPARRO JOHN C. ZARAGOZA
City Clerk Mayor
92 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

INFORMATION/CONSENT AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM NO. L.2
DATE: September 20, 2022
TO: City Council
FROM: Michael Wolfe, Public Works Director, (805) 385-8055, [email protected] SUBJECT: Amendment to Agreement No. 9315-21-PW with Econolite Systems Incorporated for Traffic Signal Preventive, Emergency and Non-Emergency Maintenance Services.

RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council approve and authorize the Mayor to execute a First Amendment to Agreement 9315-21-PW with Econolite Systems Incorporated to increase the not to exceed amount from $200,000 to $300,000 for traffic signal preventive, emergency and non-emergency maintenance services. (Public Works and Transportation Committee approved 3-0.)

BACKGROUND
The City is responsible for the maintenance and operation of traffic signals, flashing beacons, and driver speed feedback radar signs on City-maintained roads.

The City of Oxnard did not send out a Request for Proposal (RFP) but rather used a City of Thousand Oaks solicitation for signal maintenance services. In 2020, after a two-month RFP process, the City of Thousand Oaks received signal maintenance proposals on April 15, 2020 from three companies as follows:
• Siemens Systems
• Econolite Systems Incorporated (Econolite)
• Crosstown Electrical, Inc
After review of the submitted proposals and a follow-up interview, their evaluation team unanimously determined that Econolite submitted the best proposal, gave the best presentation and answers during the interview, and provided the lowest cost among the participating companies.

In July 2021, the City of Oxnard signed an agreement (9315-21-PW) with Econolite using a “piggy-back” option contained within the City of Thousand Oaks solicitation for signal maintenance services. The agreement was authorized by the City Manager for the initial amount of agreement not to exceed $200,000. To date, the City has spent approximately $130,000 on the existing agreement with Econolite and is expected to exceed $200,000 by December 2022. As such, we are requesting City Council approval to increase the contract amount to $300,000 total. The current agreement expiration date is June 30, 2023.

Please note that on June 14, 2022, this Committee approved and recommended Council approval of an agreement related to “repair” services for traffic signals that was awarded to another vendor. The agreement in this report relates to “maintenance” services of traffic signals.

DISCUSSION
93 Per the scope of the services, Econolite is required to provide all required tools, equipment, apparatus, facilities, and material to perform all work necessary to maintain the traffic signal equipment, flashing beacons, and driver speed feedback signs in compliance with current City/Caltrans standards and specifications. Econolite will perform routine maintenance services by qualified personnel at a preset rate per intersection and extraordinary/emergency maintenance services based upon agreed fee schedules.

The primary purpose of the contract is for Econolite to assist the City with carrying on a program of continuing comprehensive maintenance designed to eliminate or reduce the incidence of malfunctions, reduce complaints, and extend the useful life of the traffic signal equipment. The program includes preventive maintenance two times per year for all the signalized intersections.

Projects to be completed by Econolite are categorized as follows:

Scheduled Maintenance Work (primary purpose)
The scope of work and schedule shall be mutually agreed to between City staff and the Econolite before work begins.

Work under this category shall be planned and scheduled Monday through Friday between the hours of 8:00 am and 5:00 pm unless otherwise agreed to by the City.

Non-Scheduled Urgent Repair Work (as-needed)
Econolite must be on the site within two hours of the notification and begin work immediately to the following events:
 Any signal controller malfunction
 Burned out red or green ball or arrow display
 Burned out or malfunctioning Pedestrian Walk Signal Indications

STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
This agenda item supports the Infrastructure and Natural Resources strategy. The purpose of the Infrastructure and Natural Resources strategy is to preserve and improve our roads, utilities, parks, trees, water supply and natural resources through effective planning, prioritization, and an equitable and efficient use of available funding.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The total amount of this First Amendment to Agreement 9315-21-PW with Econolite Systems Incorporated shall not exceed $100,000 with a new not to exceed contract amount of $300,000 for traffic signal preventative, emergency, and non-emergency maintenance services.

The annual estimated spending plan is $150,000 per fiscal year. There is sufficient Fiscal Year 2022-23 budget available in the General Fund Traffic Signal Maintenance Division (101-3102-803-8209) for these maintenance services.

COMMITTEE OUTCOME
The Public Works and Transportation Committee approved 3-0 on July 26, 2022 to approve the staff recommendation and to forward the item for Council approval.

Prepared by: Tatiana Arnaout, City Engineer

ATTACHMENTS

1. Econolite First Amendment 9315-21-PW

2. Econolite Agreement 9315-21-PW
94 FIRST AMENDMENT TO TRADE SERVICES AGREEMENT (V-01-17-19)) Agreement No. 9315-21-PW

FIRST AMENDMENT TO TRADE SERVICES AGREEMENT
This First Amendment (“First Amendment”) to the Trade Services Agreement (“Agreement”) is made and entered into in the County of Ventura, State of California, this 20th day of September, 2022, by and between the City of Oxnard, a municipal corporation (“City”), and Econolite Systems Incorporated (“Vendor). This First Amendment amends the Agreement entered into on August 1, 2021, by City and Vendor.

City and Vendor agree as follows:

1. The City’s Project Manager in Section 7 of the Cover Page of the Agreement is hereby amended to “Kumar Neppalli.”

2. The Contact Email in Section 12 of the Cover Page of the Agreement is hereby amended to “[email protected].”

3. The City Address for Notice in Section 11 of the Cover Page of the Agreement is hereby amended to:
“City of Oxnard
Attn: Kumar Neppalli
305 W. Third St. 2nd Floor,
Oxnard, CA 93030”

4. The amount in Section 6 of the Cover Page of the Agreement is hereby amended to “$300,000.”

5. As so amended, the Agreement remains in full force and effect. [Signatures on next page]
95 Agreement No. 9315-21-PW
FIRST AMENDMENT TO TRADE SERVICES AGREEMENT (V-01-17-19)) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed the Amendment on the date first written above.

CITY OF OXNARD ECONOLITE SYSTEMS INCORPORATED

☒ John C. Zaragoza, Mayor1 Date Michael C Doyle, CEO2 Date ☐ Alexander Nguyen, City Manager
☐ Jennifer Yates, Purchasing Manager
☐ ___________, Buyer
John W. Tracey, CFO Date
ATTEST:

Rose Chaparro, City Clerk Date
(only if Mayor signs)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Stephen M. Fischer, City Date
Attorney (always required)

1The City Council must authorize and the Mayor must sign the amendment if the original contract and all amendments collectively total over $200,000 annually. The City Manager may authorize and sign the amendment if the original contract and all amendments collectively total over $100,000 but up to $200,000 annually. The Purchasing Manager may authorize and sign the amendment if the original contract and all amendments collectively total up to $100,000 annually. A Buyer may authorize and sign the amendment if the original contract and all amendments collectively total up to $25,000 annually. 2The City requires the following for any contract:
• For a corporation, the signatures of the Board President, CEO or Vice President and of the Board Secretary, Assistant Secretary, CFO or Assistant Treasurer;
• For an LLC, the signatures of at least two managers of the LLC (company directors, not lower-level managers); or • For a partnership, the signature of a partner. If the partnership is a limited partnership, the signer must be a general partner.

If the company has a different structure, or if the above-listed persons are not the appropriate signers, please submit to the City Attorney legally-binding documentation stating who can sign and bind your company. 96 97
98 99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

INFORMATION/CONSENT AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM NO. L.3
DATE: September 20, 2022
TO: City Council
FROM: Michael Wolfe, Public Works Director, (805) 385-8055, [email protected] SUBJECT: Agreement A-8484 with Weck Laboratories, Inc. for Contract Laboratory Chemical Testing Services.

RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council approve and authorize the:

1. Mayor to execute Agreement A-8484 with Weck Laboratories, Inc. for a term of one year with the option to extend for two consecutive periods of one year each upon the written agreement of both parties for a maximum possible contract term of three years, and for a total contract not-to-exceed amount over the entire possible contract term of $1,700,000 for laboratory chemical testing services; and

2. Purchasing Agent to execute amendments to extend the term of Agreement A-8484 up to a maximum term of three years.
(Public Works and Transportation Committee approved 3-0.)

BACKGROUND
The City of Oxnard water, wastewater, and recycled water treatment facilities are required by State and Federal permits to sample and analyze water, wastewater, and recycled water for water quality constituents and provide certified reporting. The Wastewater Division operates a small laboratory that has the ability to perform some of the basic analyses required for water, wastewater, and recycled water constituents. The majority of the regulatory required analyses are performed with expensive instrumentation and use complex, certified methods which make doing these analyses in-house cost prohibited. Therefore, a third party laboratory service is required to analyze samples that the wastewater laboratory cannot. The third party laboratory will provide as-needed analytical testing services as well as report preparation for regulatory authorities. This will ensure compliance with the wastewater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the State Water Resources Control Board, and State Division of Drinking Water (DDW) reporting requirements.

The Wastewater Treatment Plant NPDES permit requires testing for the following pollutants:
 11 organic compounds and pesticides
 11 metals
 21 carcinogens (cancer-causing)
 41 non-carcinogens
The Advanced Water Purification Facility (AWPF) NPDES permit requires testing for the following pollutants:
 5 organic compounds and pesticides
140
 18 metals
 6 radioactive pollutants
 27 volatile organic compounds
 33 non-volatile organic compounds
The Water Division DDW permit requires testing for the following pollutants:
 11 organic compounds and pesticides
 20 metals
 6 radioactive pollutants
 29 volatile organic compounds
 23 non-volatile organic compounds
 Bacteriological analysis
 Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) if necessary
 Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) if necessary
A copy of the full pollutant testing list is included in the contract lab services agreements.

DISCUSSION
On April 19, 2022, the City’s Purchasing Department, on behalf of the Public Works Department, released Request for Proposal (RFP) PW 22-108 to invite qualified contractors to conduct laboratory chemical testing and sampling for the Water and Wastewater Division. Bid submissions were due May 25, 2022.

The City received a total of three submissions from laboratory firms which included:

1. Weck Laboratories, Inc. (Weck),

2. Pace Analytical Services, LLC,

3. Eurofins Scientific.

An evaluating panel composed of the Wastewater Operations Manager, Wastewater Laboratory Services, and Water Regulatory Compliance Technician selected Weck as the most qualified responsive proposer.

Weck has previously been a reliable source for contract laboratory services.

STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
This agenda item supports the Infrastructure and Natural Resources strategy. The purpose of the Infrastructure and Natural Resources strategy is to preserve and improve our roads, utilities, parks, trees, water supply and natural resources through effective planning, prioritization, and an equitable and efficient use of available funding.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The total cost for Agreement A-8484 with Weck shall not exceed $1,700,000 over three years, if extended. The spending plan for FY 2022-23 is $305,000. There is sufficient funding available in the FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget in the accounts listed in the table below from the following sources: Wastewater Collection (Fund 611) and Treatment (Fund 621) Operating, Water Operating (Fund 601) and Water Security & Contam. Prev. (Fund 608) . Funds in subsequent fiscal years will be requested during the annual budget process. Funding of as-needed amounts will be verified prior to work commencing.

Spending Plan Account
FY 22-23
9 FY 23-24
12 months
FY 24-25
12 months
FY 25-26
3 TOTAL
141
months months
OWTP 611-6101-842.8239
&
621-6202-842.8239
$30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $15,000 $120,000
AWPF 601-6012-842.8239 $70,000 $150,000 $165,000 $45,000 $430,000 Water 608-6015-842.8239 $175,000 $340,000 $372,500 $97,500 $985,000 As-Needed Various $30,000 $56,000 $63,000 $16,000 $165,000 Total $305,000 $581,000 $640,500 $173,500 $1,700,000
An estimated inflation factor of 10% has been added to each subsequent fiscal year.

COMMITTEE OUTCOME
The Public Works and Transportation Committee approved 3-0 on July 26, 2022 to approve the staff recommendation and to forward the item for Council approval.

Prepared by: Joseph Marcinko, Assistant Public Works Director

ATTACHMENTS

1. Agreement A-8484
142
Agreement No. A-8484
AGREEMENT FOR TRADE SERVICES (V-05/23/22)

AGREEMENT FOR TRADE SERVICES

COVER PAGE
(1) Agreement Start Date: October 1, 2022
(2) Vendor: Weck Laboratories, Inc.
(3) Services: Laboratory Analysis Testing Services
(4) Schedule of Services: See Scope of Work Exhibit
(5) Agreement Ending Date: September 30, 2023, subject to renewal for up to two consecutive one-year terms upon the written agreement of both parties for a maximum total contract term of three years. (6) Total Agreement Amount: $1,700,000
(7) City’s Project Manager: Eric Ngo / Richard Maria
(8) Vendor’s Project Manager: Rahul Nair, Project Manager (9) Insurance Coverage: INS-A
(10) What wages are required for this Project?
☐ Living wage but not prevailing wages, in which case: Section 20(a) through (c) and the Living Wage Policy Exhibit are incorporated and are required; but Section 20(d) and the Prevailing Wage Exhibit are not incorporated and are not required.
☐ Prevailing wages but not living wage, in which case: Section 20(d) and the Prevailing Wages Exhibit are incorporated and are required; but Section 20(a) through (c) and the Living Wage Policy Exhibit are not incorporated and are not required.
☐ Both living wage and prevailing wages, in which case Section 20, the Living Wage Policy Exhibit, and the Prevailing Wages Exhibit are incorporated and required. ☐ Neither living wage nor prevailing wages, in which case Section 20, the Living Wage Policy Exhibit, and the Prevailing Wages Exhibit are not incorporated and are not required. (11) Addresses for Notice:

FOR VENDOR: FOR CITY:

Weck Laboratories, Inc. City of Oxnard
Attn: Rahul Nair, Project Manager Attn: Eric Ngo, Laboratory Supervisor 14859 Clark Avenue Attn: Richard Maria, Water Regulatory Compliance Coordinator City of Industry, CA 91745 305 West Third Street 3rd floor Oxnard, CA 93030
(12) Contact Emails:

VENDOR’S PROJECT MANAGER: CITY’S PROJECT MANAGER
[email protected] [email protected] / [email protected] The Agreement for Trade Services is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. The following exhibits are also attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference into the Agreement:
☐ Scope of Services Exhibit ☐ Living Wage Policy Exhibit ☐ Rates and Costs Exhibit ☐ Prevailing Wages Exhibit
☐ Schedule of Services Exhibit ☐ Iran Contracting Act Certification ☐ Insurance Exhibit (INS-A)

Page 1 of 45 ends

143
Agreement No. A-8484

AGREEMENT FOR TRADE SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT FOR TRADE SERVICES (“Agreement”) is entered into in Ventura County, California, on the date that is written as “(1) Agreement Start Date” on the Cover Page, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. This Agreement is entered by and between the City of Oxnard (“City”) and the person or entity listed as “(2) Vendor” on the Cover Page, subject to the following terms and conditions:

1. Scope of Services. Vendor shall provide to City the services listed as “(3) Services” on the Cover Page (the “Services”). Vendor shall provide the Services during the term of this Agreement, as set forth below, according to the schedule written as “(4) Schedule of Services” on the Cover Page, and as further explained in the Scope of Services Exhibit, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. In the event of any conflict between the terms of this Agreement and any incorporated document(s), the terms of this Agreement shall control.

2. Term. This Agreement shall begin on the date that is written as “(1) Agreement Start Date” on the Cover Page and shall end on the date that is written as “(5) Agreement Ending Date” on the Cover Page. Time is of the essence in this Agreement.

3. Compensation. For the Services performed during the term of this Agreement, City shall pay Vendor an amount not to exceed the amount that is listed as “(6) Total Agreement Amount” on the Cover Page, at the rates listed in the Rates and Costs Exhibit, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. The rates in the Rates and Costs Exhibit shall be in effect through the end of this Agreement unless otherwise stated therein.

4. Invoices. Vendor shall submit a payment request to City per services requested on each individual sets of Chain of Custody documents. Payment due within 30 days of invoice date. Invoices may be emailed to:
[email protected].

5. Acceptance of Payment. Vendor’s acceptance of final payment made pursuant to this Agreement shall constitute a release of City from all claims and liabilities for compensation to Vendor for anything completed, finished or relating to the Services. City’s payment shall not constitute nor be deemed a release of the responsibility and liability of Vendor for the accuracy and competency of the information provided and/or the Services performed hereunder, nor shall such payment be deemed to be an assumption of responsibility or liability by City for any defect or error in the Services performed by Vendor and its employees, agents and subcontractors. Vendor shall provide City with a completed Request for Taxpayer Identification Number and Certification, as issued by the Internal Revenue Service.

If any sales tax is due for the Services performed by Vendor or materials or products provided to City by Vendor, Vendor shall pay the sales tax. City shall not reimburse Vendor for sales taxes paid by Vendor.

6. Non-binding Terms. Any terms and conditions that are typed, printed, or otherwise included in any Vendor invoice rendered pursuant to this Agreement shall be deemed to be solely for the convenience of the parties.

No such term or condition shall be binding upon City, and no action by City (including, without limitation, the payment of any such invoice in whole or in part) shall be construed as binding City with respect to any such term or condition, unless the specific term or condition has been previously agreed to by Vendor and City in this Agreement or in a binding amendment thereto.

7. Non-Appropriation of Funds. Payments to be made to Vendor by City for the Services performed within the current fiscal year are within the current fiscal budget and within an available, unexhausted and unencumbered appropriation of City. In the event City does not appropriate sufficient funds for payment of the Services beyond the current fiscal year, this Agreement shall cover payment for the Services only up to the conclusion of the last fiscal year in which City appropriated sufficient funds and shall automatically terminate at that fiscal year’s conclusion.

8. Coordination of Services. The Services shall be coordinated with the person in the position listed in “(7) City’s Project Manager” on the Cover Page, subject to the direction of the City Manager or Department Director.

Vendor hereby designates the person in the position listed in “(8) Vendor’s Project Manager” on the Cover Page as the person responsible for the Services who shall coordinate with City’s Project Manager in making binding decisions in line with this Agreement on behalf of Vendor.

Page 2 of 45 ends

144
Agreement No. A-8484

9. Personnel. Vendor represents that it has or shall secure at its own expense all personnel required to perform the Services. Vendor shall make reasonable efforts to maintain the continuity of Vendor’s staff who are assigned to perform the Services. Vendor may associate with or employ associates or subcontractors in the performance of the Services, but at all times shall Vendor be responsible for its associates and subcontractors’ labor, advice or materials provided in furtherance of providing the Services. Should any of Vendor’s employees, assigns or subcontractors not conduct him- or herself appropriately, as determined by the City’s Project Manager, in the process of providing the Services or any portion thereof, the City’s Project Manager may notify the Vendor’s Project Manager, who shall immediately handle the problem, as determined appropriate by him or her, such that the problem does not persist.

10. Additional Work. City may request additional specified work under this Agreement. The City’s Project Manager must authorize all such work in writing before commencement. Vendor shall perform such work, and City shall pay for such additional work, in accordance with the Rates and Costs Exhibit. Should the work not fall under any such listed rate or cost, Vendor shall submit a quote for all additional work, which the City’s Project Manager must approve in writing by before any such work may commence. The City shall compensate Vendor for any work that does not fall under a rate or cost listed in the Rates and Costs Exhibit, and for which Vendor did not obtain the City’s Project Manager’s written approval before work commenced, as determined by the City’s Project Manager in his or her sole discretion.

11. Advertising and Publicity. Vendor shall not use the name of or refer to City directly or indirectly in any advertisement, news release, or professional or trade publication without prior written approval from the City Manager. This Section shall survive the termination of this Agreement.

12. Audit. City shall have the option of inspecting, auditing and/or reproducing all records and other written materials: used by Vendor in preparing its billings to City as a condition precedent to any payment to Vendor; or for other purposes relating to the Agreement. Vendor will promptly furnish all documents requested by City. Additionally, if this Agreement is in excess of $10,000, the State Auditor may examine and audit Vendor for a period of 3 years after final payment under the Agreement. Regardless of whether a State audit is permitted, Vendor shall maintain and preserve all such records for a period of at least 3 years after final payment under the Agreement or until an audit has been completed and accepted by City, whichever occurs later. Vendor shall maintain all such records in City or to promptly reimburse City for all reasonable costs incurred in conducting the audit at a location other than in City, including but not limited to expenses for personnel, salaries, private auditor, travel, lodging, meals and overhead.

Vendor shall include a copy of this Section in all contracts with its subcontractors, and Vendor shall be responsible for immediately obtaining those records or other written material from its subcontractors upon a request by the State Auditor and/or City.

13. Termination. City may terminate this Agreement at any time, with or without cause and without penalty, upon 15 calendar days’ prior written notice. Such termination shall be effective on the date specified in the notice, or if no date is specified, then 15 calendar days from the date of the notice. Vendor may terminate this Agreement at any time, with or without cause and without penalty, upon 30 calendar days’ prior written notice. Such termination shall be effective on the date specified in the notice, or if no date is specified, then 30 calendar days from the date of notice and only if all assignments accepted by Vendor have been completed before the date of termination. In the event of termination of this Agreement by either party due to no fault or failure of performance by Vendor, City shall pay Vendor compensation for all Services satisfactorily completed in accordance with all of the terms and provisions of this Agreement, as determined by the City, before the effective date of termination; provided, in no event shall the Vendor receive an amount exceeding that which would have been paid to Vendor for the full performance of the Services. If City pays for any materials, City shall be entitled to the title and possession of such.

14. Hold Harmless, Defense and Indemnity.

To the fullest extent permitted by law, Vendor shall immediately defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City, its legislative and advisory bodies, and the City’s officials, directors, officers, employees, and agents (the “Indemnitees”) from and against all liabilities regardless of nature, type, or cause, arising out of or resulting from or in connection with Vendor’s performance of this Agreement or Vendor’s failure to comply with any of its obligations contained in this Agreement. Liabilities subject to the duties to defend and indemnify include, without limitation, all claims, losses, damages, penalties, fines, and judgments; associated investigation and administrative expenses; defense costs,

Page 3 of 45 ends

145
Agreement No. A-8484
including but not limited to reasonable attorneys’ fees; court costs; and costs of alternative dispute resolution.

Vendor’s obligation to indemnify applies unless it is adjudicated that any of the liabilities covered by this Section 15 are the result of the sole active negligence or sole willful misconduct of any of the Indemnitees. a. The duty to defend is a separate and distinct obligation from Vendor’s duty to indemnify. Vendor shall be obligated to defend in all legal, equitable, administrative, or special proceedings with counsel approved by the City Attorney immediately upon tender to Vendor of the claim in any form or at any stage of an action or proceeding, whether or not liability is established. An allegation or determination of negligence or willful misconduct by any of the Indemnitees shall not relieve Vendor from its separate and distinct obligation to defend the Indemnitees.

The obligation to defend extends through final judgment, including exhaustion of any appeals. The defense obligation includes the obligation to provide independent defense counsel if Vendor asserts that liability is caused in whole or in part by the negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnitees. If it is finally adjudicated that liability was caused by the sole active negligence or sole willful misconduct of any of the Indemnitees, Vendor may submit a claim to City for reimbursement of reasonable attorneys’ fees and defense costs. b. The review, acceptance or approval of Vendor’s work or work product by any of the Indemnitees shall not affect, relieve or reduce Vendor’s indemnification or defense obligations. This Section 15 shall survive completion of the Services or termination of this Agreement. The provisions of this Section 15 shall not be restricted by and do not affect the provisions of this Agreement relating to insurance.

15. Insurance. Vendor shall obtain and maintain during the performance of any services under this Agreement the insurance coverages listed within the insurance document stated in “(9) Insurance Coverage” on the Cover Page and in the Insurance Exhibit, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, unless the Risk Manager waives, in writing, the requirement that Vendor obtain and maintain such insurance coverages. Such insurance must be issued by a company satisfactory to the Risk Manager. Vendor shall, before performance of any Services pursuant to this Agreement, file with the Risk Manager evidence of insurance coverage as specified in “(9) Insurance Coverage” on the Cover Page and in the Insurance Exhibit. Maintenance of insurance coverages by Vendor is a material element of this Agreement. Vendor’s failure to maintain or renew insurance coverages or to provide renewal evidence may be considered a material breach of this Agreement.

16. Documents and Materials.
a. All final computations, exhibits, files, plans, correspondence, reports, drawings, designs, data, photographs, specifications, information, images, video files, media, or other deliverables prepared, created, drawn, calculated, photographed or developed by Vendor pursuant to this Agreement (“Documents and Materials”) shall be the property without restriction or limitation upon its use, duplication or dissemination by the City. All Documents and Materials shall be considered “works made for hire,” and all Documents and Materials and any and all intellectual property rights arising from their creation, including, but not limited to, all copyrights and other proprietary rights, shall be and remain the property of the City without restriction or limitation upon their use, duplication or dissemination by the City. Vendor shall not obtain or attempt to obtain copyright protection as to any Documents and Materials. Vendor hereby assigns to the City all ownership and any and all intellectual property rights to the Documents and Materials that are not otherwise vested in the City pursuant to this Section 17. b. Vendor shall deliver all Documents and Materials to City’s Project Manager upon completion of the Services or termination of this Agreement without additional cost or expense to the City. Additionally, anytime at City’s request, City shall be entitled to possession of, and Vendor shall furnish to City’s Project Manager within 10 calendar days, any or all of the Documents and Materials without additional cost or expense to the City. In both situations, if Vendor prepares Documents and Materials on a computer, Vendor shall provide City with said Documents and Materials both in a printed format and in an electronic format that is acceptable to the City. Vendor may retain copies of these Documents and Materials but must request permission from the City before use, duplication or dissemination these Documents and Materials for any purpose other than for the Services provided to the City pursuant to this Agreement.
c. Any substantive modification of the Documents and Materials by City staff or any use of the completed Documents and Materials for other City projects, or any use of uncompleted Documents and Materials, without the written consent of Vendor, shall be at City’s sole risk and without liability or legal exposure to Vendor.

Page 4 of 45 ends

146
Agreement No. A-8484
d. Vendor warrants and represents that it has secured all necessary licenses, consents or approvals to use any instrumentality, thing or component as to which any intellectual property right exists, including computer software, used in the rendering of the Services and the production of all Documents and Materials, and that the City has full legal title to and the right to use, duplicate or disseminate the Documents and Materials. Vendor shall defend, indemnify and hold Indemnitees harmless from any loss, claim or liability in any way related to a claim that City’s use of any of the Documents and Materials is violating federal, state or local laws, any contractual provisions, or any laws relating to trade names, licenses, franchises, copyrights, patents or other means of protecting intellectual property rights and/or interests in products or inventions. Vendor shall bear all costs arising from the use of patented, copyrighted, trade secret or trademarked documents, materials, equipment, devices or processes in connection with its provision of the services and Documents and Materials. In the event the use of any of the Documents and Materials by the City is held to constitute an infringement and the use of any of the same is enjoined, Vendor, at its own expense, shall: secure for City the right to continue using the Documents and Materials by suspension of any injunction, or by procuring a license or licenses for City; or modify the Documents and Materials so that they become non-infringing while remaining in compliance with the requirements of this Agreement. e. This Section 17 shall survive the termination of this Agreement.

17. Confidentiality of Information.
a. For the purposes of this Agreement, “Confidential Information” means all information, in whatever form transmitted, relating to the past, present or future business affairs of the City, including without limitation, (i) technical information, including patent, copyright, trade secret, and other proprietary information, techniques, sketches, drawings, models, inventions, processes, apparatus, equipment, algorithms, software programs, software source documents, and formulas; or (ii) non-technical information, including without limitation finances, financial and accounting data and information, suppliers, customers, customer lists, purchasing data and any other information belonging to the City or to a third party whose information is in the City’s possession or control under obligations of confidentiality, and which is disclosed to Vendor or is developed by Vendor in whole or in part at the City’s expense. b. All Documents and Materials shall be considered Confidential Information and shall not be reproduced, transmitted, disclosed or used by the Vendor without the written consent of the City, except as may be necessary for Vendor to fulfill its obligations to the City.
c. Notwithstanding the above, these limitations shall not apply to information that (i) is already known to Vendor at the time of that information’s disclosure or becomes publicly known through no wrongful act or omission of Vendor, (ii) is communicated to a third party with the express written consent of City and is not subject to restrictions on further use or disclosure, (iii) is independently developed by Vendor and has no relation to this Agreement, or (iv) is required by law, court order, court-issued subpoena or other legal process to be disclosed; provided, however, that before making such disclosure, Vendor shall immediately provide City with written notice and a reasonable opportunity for City to object to the disclosure or to take action to maintain the confidentiality of the information, unless such prior disclosure is legally impermissible. d. Vendor shall use reasonable care to protect the Confidential Information. In the event of a breach or threatened breach of this Agreement, City shall be entitled to obtain an injunction prohibiting any such breach, the costs of which shall be paid by Vendor. Any relief granted shall be in addition to and not in lieu of any other legal or equitable relief, including money damages. The parties acknowledge that Confidential Information is valuable and unique and that disclosure of the Confidential Information in breach of this Agreement may result in irreparable injury to the City.
e. Other than an obligation upon the City to deal in good faith, the City makes no warranties and shall bear no liability or responsibility for errors or omissions in any Confidential Information disclosed under this Agreement or for any business decisions made by Vendor in reliance on any Confidential Information disclosed under this Agreement.
f. This Section 18 shall survive the termination of this Agreement.

Page 5 of 45 ends

147
Agreement No. A-8484

18. Independent Contractor. Vendor is and shall at all times remain, as to City, a wholly independent contractor. Neither City nor any of its employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Vendor or any of its employees, except as stated in this Agreement. Vendor has and shall retain the right to exercise full control over the employment, direction, means of performance, location, compensation and discharge of all persons assisting Vendor, and it is free to dispose of all portions of its time which it is not obligated to devote to City in such a manner and to such persons, firms, or corporations as Vendor wishes except as expressly provided in this Agreement. This Agreement shall not be interpreted to prevent or preclude Vendor from rendering any services for Vendor’s own account or to any other person or entity as Vendor in its sole discretion shall determine; provided, however, that performing such services shall not materially interfere with the Services Vendor shall perform for the City. Except as City’s Project Manager specifies in writing, Vendor and its employees and agents have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity, to incur any debt, obligation or liability on behalf of City, bind City in any manner, or otherwise act on behalf of City as an agent. Vendor and its employees are not employees of City. Vendor and its employees are not entitled to receive from City any of the benefits or rights afforded employees of City, including but not limited to reserve leave, sick leave, vacation leave, holiday leave, compensatory leave, Public Employees Retirement System benefits, and health, life, dental, long-term disability and workers’ compensation insurance benefits. Vendor shall not, at any time or in any manner, represent that it or any of its agents or employees are in any manner agents or employees of City. Vendor agrees to pay all required taxes on amounts paid to Vendor under this Agreement, and to indemnify and hold City harmless from any and all taxes, assessments, penalties, and interest asserted against City by reason of the independent contractor relationship created by this Agreement. Vendor shall be solely responsible for, and shall save City harmless from, all matters relating to the payment of Vendor’s subcontractors, material suppliers, directors, officers, employees, agents and representatives, including compliance with social security requirements, federal and State income tax withholding, and all other regulations governing employer-employee relations, as applicable. City shall have the right to offset against the amount of any compensation due to Vendor under this Agreement any amount due to City from Vendor as a result of its failure to promptly pay to City any reimbursement or indemnification arising under this Section.

19. Wages. If the first option is selected in response to (10) on the Cover Page and, thus, the payment of living wage is required, only this paragraph and subsections (a) through (c) of this Section 20 shall apply. If the second option is selected in response to (10) on the Cover Page and, thus, the payment of prevailing wages (and related Labor Code provisions) is required, only this paragraph and subsection (d) of this Section 20 shall apply. If the third option is selected in response to (10) on the Cover Page and, thus, both the payment of living wage and prevailing wages (and related Labor Code provisions) is required, this paragraph and subsections (a) through (d) shall apply, meaning Vendor shall compensate all of its employees providing services to City in accordance with both the City’s Living Wage Policy and State-required prevailing wages. In the event of a conflict between the City’s Living Wage Policy and State-required prevailing wages, the higher of the two shall prevail. If the fourth option is selected in response to (10) on the Cover Page and, thus, neither the payment of living wage nor prevailing wages (and related Labor Code provisions) is required, no part of this Section 20 shall apply.

If either the first or third option is selected in response to (10) on the Cover Page, Vendor shall compensate any employee of Vendor who provides Services to the City under this Agreement in accordance with the Living Wage Policy Exhibit, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. While this Agreement is in effect, Vendor shall pay such employee no less than $16.89 per hour for each hour that such employee provides services under this Agreement. This hourly rate shall be adjusted on July 1, 2022, and each July 1 thereafter, according to the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index, all items, prepared by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the Los Angeles area relating to all urban consumers (CPI-U), index base 1982-84=100, comparing May of the previous year to May of the current year. In addition, while this Agreement is in effect, Vendor shall provide to such employee no less than 96 hours of paid leave per calendar year.
a. Vendor agrees to post, at a location readily accessible to those employees providing services to the City, a copy of the Living Wage Policy adopted by the Oxnard City Council on July 9, 2002, and effective October 1, 2002.
b. If Vendor fails to compensate such employee pursuant to the Living Wage Policy, the City Manager or designee shall terminate this Agreement on written notice to Vendor, effective immediately.

Page 6 of 45 ends

148
Agreement No. A-8484
c. In addition, if Vendor fails to comply with the Living Wage Policy in any manner, Vendor shall pay to City a fine of $500 and shall pay to any employee providing services under this Agreement a penalty of three times the amount or value of the compensation owed to such employee under the Living Wage Policy. Vendor shall pay such fine and penalty within 15 days after the City Manager or designee provides written notice to Vendor of the amount owed.
d. If either the second or third option is selected in response to (10) on the Cover Page, in accordance with Labor Code Section 1770 et seq., the Project is a “public work.” The Vendor shall pay wages in accordance with the determination of the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”) regarding the prevailing rate of per diem wages. Copies of those rates are on file with the Public Works Director and are available to any interested party upon request. The Vendor shall post a copy of the DIR’s determination of the prevailing rate of per diem wages at the job site. The Vendor shall comply with all provisions of the Prevailing Wage Exhibit, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.

20. Nondiscriminatory Employment. Vendor shall not unlawfully discriminate against any individual based on race, color, religion or religious creed, national origin, ancestry, ethnic group identification, primary language, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sex, sexual orientation, age, immigration status, citizenship or military and veteran status. Vendor understands and agrees that it is bound by and will comply with all legal nondiscrimination mandates. For every subcontractor who will perform Services, Vendor shall be responsible for such subcontractor’s compliance with this Section.

21. Vendor’s Representations. Vendor represents, covenants and guarantees that: a) Vendor is licensed, qualified, and capable of furnishing the labor, materials, and expertise necessary to perform the Services in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement; b) there are no obligations, commitments, or impediments of any kind that will limit or prevent Vendor’s full performance under this Agreement; c) to the extent required by the standard of practice, Vendor has investigated and considered the scope of Services performed, has carefully considered how the Services should be performed, and understands the facilities, difficulties and restrictions attending performance of the Services under this Agreement.

22. Compliance with Laws. In performing the Services under this Agreement, Vendor shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances and regulations. Before performing the Services under this Agreement, Vendor shall obtain all required licenses and permits, including a City business tax certificate.

23. Conflict of Interest. If, in performing the Services set forth in this Agreement, Vendor makes, or participates in, a “governmental decision” as described in Title 2, Section 18704 of the California Code of Regulations, or performs the same or substantially all the same duties for City that would otherwise be performed by a City employee holding a position specified in City's conflict of interest code, Vendor shall be subject to City's conflict of interest code, the requirements of which include the filing of one or more statements of economic interests disclosing the relevant financial interests of Vendor’s personnel providing the Services set forth in this Agreement. Furthermore, Vendor shall not to accept any employment or representation during the term of this Agreement or within 12 months after completion of the Services which is or may likely make Vendor “financially interested,” as provided in California Government Code Sections 1090 and 87100, in any decisions made by City on any matter in connection with which Vendor has been retained pursuant to this Agreement.

24. Fictitious Name. If Vendor has a fictitious name, Vendor shall submit to City a new Fictitious Business Name Statement approved by any California county before Vendor’s prior Fictitious Business Name Statement expires if such expiration may occur during the term of this Agreement, including any term amendment.

25. Non-Assignability. Vendor shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement or any part thereof, whether by assignment or novation, without City’s prior written consent, which may be withheld for any reason or for no reason at all. Any purported assignment without written consent shall be null, void, and of no effect, and Vendor shall hold harmless, defend and indemnify Indemnitees regarding all Claims arising from or relating to any unauthorized assignment.

Page 7 of 45 ends

149
Agreement No. A-8484

26. Protection of Services. Vendor shall continuously maintain adequate protection of all of Vendor’s work from damage and shall protect the City’s property from any and all injury or loss arising in connection with this Agreement. Vendor shall take all necessary precaution for the safety of employees on the job and shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, State and municipal safety laws and building codes to prevent accidents or injury to persons on, about or adjacent to any premises where the Services are being performed.

27. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of Vendor.

28. Applicable Law; Venue. The validity, interpretation, and performance of this Agreement shall be controlled by and construed under the laws of the State of California, excluding California’s choice of law rules.

Venue for any such action relating to the Agreement shall be in the Ventura County Superior Court.

29. Titles. The titles used in this Agreement are for convenience only and shall in no way define, limit or describe the scope or intent of this Agreement or any part of it.

30. Force Majeure. Neither City nor Vendor shall be responsible for delays or failures in performance resulting from acts beyond the control of either party. Such acts shall include but are not be limited to acts of God, riots, acts of war, epidemics, fire, earthquakes, or other disasters.

31. Authority. Any person executing this Agreement on behalf of Vendor warrants and represents that s/he has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of Vendor and to bind it to the performance of these obligations.

32. Binding Agreement. The parties do not intend this Agreement to be binding upon them and shall not be held liable to its terms until it is fully executed by all required signers.

33. Cumulative Remedies. All rights and remedies of City herein shall be in addition to all other rights and remedies available at law or in equity, including, without limitation, specific performance for the enforcement of this Agreement, and temporary and permanent injunctive relief.

34. Integration; Amendment. This Agreement, including any other documents incorporated herein by specific reference, constitutes the entire and integrated agreement of City and Vendor regarding the subject matter described herein. This Agreement supersedes all prior oral or written communications, negotiations, representations, agreements and promises. This Agreement may not be modified or amended, nor any provision or breach waived, except in a writing, signed by both parties, that expressly refers to this Agreement.

35. Construction. In the event of any asserted ambiguity in or dispute regarding the interpretation of any matter herein, the interpretation of this Agreement shall not be resolved by any rules of construction providing for interpretation against the party who causes the uncertainty to exist or who drafted the Agreement in whole or in part.

36. No Waiver. Waiver by either party of any one or more of the conditions of performance under this Agreement shall not be a waiver of any other condition of performance under this Agreement. In no event shall the making by City of any payment to Vendor constitute or be construed as a waiver by City of any breach of covenant, or any default that may then exist on the part of Vendor, and the making of any such payment by City shall in no way impair or prejudice any right or remedy available to City with regard to such breach or default.

37. Attorneys’ Fees. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable costs, attorneys’ fees (including the reasonable value of the services rendered by the City Attorney’s Office) and expenses, including investigation fees and expert witness fees, in addition to any other relieve to which that party may be entitled, in any legal action or other proceeding, including an action for declaratory relief, for the enforcement of this Agreement or because of an alleged dispute, breach, default or misrepresentation in connection with this Agreement.

38. Notice. Except as otherwise required by law, a notice or communication authorized or required by this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed received—on (a) the day of delivery if delivered by hand or overnight courier service during City’s regular business hours or (b) on the third business day following deposit in the

Page 8 of 45 ends

150
Agreement No. A-8484
United States mail, postage prepaid—to the addresses listed as “(11) Addresses for Notice” on the Cover Page or to such other address as one party may notify the other in writing.

39. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original and all of which, when taken together, shall be deemed to be one and the same agreement.

A signed copy of this Agreement transmitted by email to either of City or Vendor’s Project Managers’ emails listed in “(12) Contact Emails” on the Cover Page or by other means of electronic transmission shall be deemed to have the same legal effect as delivery of an original executed copy of this Agreement for all purposes.

40. Severability. If any term or portion of this Agreement is held to be invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect.

41. Iran Contracting Act Certification. In accordance with Public Contract Code Section 2200 et seq., the City requires that any person that submits a bid or proposal or otherwise proposes to enter into or renew a contract with the City with respect to goods or services of one million dollars ($1,000,000) or more, must certify at the time an Agreement is signed or renewed, that the person is not identified on a list created pursuant to subdivision (b) of Public Contract Code Section 2203 as a person engaging in investment activities in Iran described in subdivision (a) of Public Contract Code Section 2202.5, or as a person described in subdivision (b) of Public Contract Code Section 2202.5, as applicable. The form of such Iran Contracting Certificate is included with this Agreement and must be signed and dated under penalty of perjury.
[Signatures on next page]

Page 9 of 45 ends

151
Agreement No. A-8484
AGREEMENT FOR TRADE SERVICES (V-05/23/22)
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed the Agreement on the date that is written as “(1) Agreement Start Date” on the Cover Page.

CITY OF OXNARD WECK LABORATORIES, INC.
☐ John C. Zaragoza, Mayor1 Date Alfredo Pierri, President 2 Date ☐ Alexander Nguyen, City Manager
☐ Jennifer Yates, Purchasing Manager
☐ [name], Buyer
Cecelia Pierri, Secretary Date
ATTEST:

Rose Chaparro, City Clerk Date
(only if Mayor signs)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Stephen M. Fischer, City Date
Attorney (always required)
1 The City Council must authorize and the Mayor must sign any agreement over $200,000 annually. The City Manager may authorize and sign any agreement over $100,000 but up to $200,000 annually. The Purchasing Manager may authorize and sign any agreement up to $100,000 annually. A Buyer may authorize and sign any agreement up to $25,000 annually.
2 The City requires the following for any contract:
● For a corporation, the signatures of the Board President, CEO or Vice President and of the Board Secretary, Assistant Secretary, CFO or Assistant Treasurer;
● For an LLC, the signatures of at least two managers of the LLC (company directors, not lower-level managers); or
● For a partnership, the signature of a partner. If the partnership is a limited partnership, the signer must be a general partner.

If the company has a different structure, or if the above-listed persons are not the appropriate signers, please submit to the City Attorney legally-binding documentation stating who can sign and bind your company.

Page 10 of 45 ends

152
Agreement No. A-8484

SCOPE OF SERVICES EXHIBIT
Laboratories shall hold State of California ELAP and National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (NELAP) certificate. Include a copy of current laboratory licensure with the proposal. Subcontract laboratories must also hold accreditations. Any analysis being sent to a subcontract laboratory shall be noted within the final proposal.

General Specifications
Laboratory shall have a web-based client access portal and data reporting system.

Laboratory shall provide a dedicated project manager (familiar with State of California drinking water regulations and/or Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and NPDES requirements) and key personnel.

Laboratory shall include a list/chart of all analysis methods with MDL, PQL and RDL.

Proposal shall include fees for data report rush turnaround and courier service, as well as courier availability (i.e. notification requirement for courier bottle delivery or sample pick up).

Laboratory shall maintain and preserve appropriate samples and sample extracts for at least thirty (30) calendar days after submission of the report of analysis, Metal analysis samples shall be held for 30 days after the submission of final report. Laboratory assumes full responsibility for the proper disposal of all test samples in accordance with State and Federal hazardous waste regulations.

Laboratory shall include its policy on reanalysis of samples for confirmation when necessary.

Laboratory shall provide the City with a copy of its quality assurance manual and that of any planned subcontract laboratories with the proposal and upon the event changes are made after award of the contract.

Final reports provided to the City shall include a copy of the Chain of Custody Laboratory shall include an example final report in the proposal for City review.

Laboratory shall notify the City of any permit exceedances within 24 hours of discovery.

Standard turnaround time for reporting shall be 15 working days (with some at 20 or longer). For any analysis where this may not be feasible, laboratory must note standard turnaround time for specified analysis.

The City has a duty to report data to the State and may impose financial penalties (10% penalty per analysis that is five work days past the stated standard turnaround time) for late delivery of reports or failure to meet notification requirements.
o Failure to immediately notify the City of permit limit exceedance within 24 hours of discovery. o Failure to immediately notify the City of QA/QC failures within 24 hours of discovery.

The City is required to meet compliance with all State and Federal requirements and limits must be met. Contract Laboratory must be able to update notification requirement limits when new limits are imposed on the City. It is anticipated that the City will be regulated under an updated Wastewater NPDES permit by Fall 2023. For reference, the City’s current Wastewater NPDES permit and the State’s current MCL and Secondary Standard limits are included in this package.

Page 11 of 45 ends

153
Agreement No. A-8484
Drinking Water Quality Testing Requirements
The laboratory contracted for drinking water analyses should meet the following requirements:
‒ Drinking water analyses must be performed in accordance with the current California Regulations Related to Drinking Water Title 22 Code of Regulations and methods listed in Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40 Part 141 (40 CFR 141). Reporting limits must be below the established detection limits for the purposes of reporting (DLRs). The laboratory is responsible for updating their records when water quality limits are added or revised.
‒ Laboratory proposal should include a cost for group analysis (i.e. general minerals, general physicals, inorganics) and individual analyses. Include a cost for analyses marked “as needed.” ‒ Laboratory should provide their policy on the re-analysis of samples. ‒ Ninety-five percent of the drinking water analyses listed in this RFP (excluding UCMR 4 and analyses designated “TBD”) should be routinely conducted in-house without subcontracting. ‒ Provide the City with the appropriate sample containers with preservatives, coolers, trip blanks, sampling/environmental blanks as needed.
‒ Web-based client access portal and data reporting system. ‒ Must be able to provide EDT to the State’s Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS). ‒ Electronic data format (PDF, EDF, CSV, or Excel) of results to the City Water Department. ‒ Immediate MCL exceedance notifications via phone call and email to the appropriate contacts. ‒ Immediate notification via phone call and email to appropriate City contacts of any quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) failures that impact City samples.
‒ Laboratory must be able to accommodate 3-day rush analyses of TTHMs. ‒ QA/QC report to be provided with analytical results.

Environmental Compliance Wastewater Testing Services
The laboratory contracted for environment compliance wastewater analyses should meet the following requirements:
‒ Analysis methods to be used by the laboratory. Analyses must be performed in accordance with methods listed in Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40 Part 136 (40 CFR 136). ‒ Provide sample containers with preservatives, coolers, trip blanks as needed. Contract Laboratory to provide sample transport services.
‒ Web-based client access portal and data reporting system. ‒ Electronic data format (PDF, EDF, and CSV, or Excel) of results to the City Water Department. ‒ Immediate notification (within 24 hours of discovery) via phone call and email to appropriate City contacts of any quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) failures that impact City samples. ‒ QA/QC report to be provided with analytical results.

Wastewater Treatment Process and Biosolids Testing Services The laboratory contracted for wastewater and biosolids analyses should meet the following requirements:
‒ Wastewater analysis must be performed in accordance with methods listed in Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40 Part 136 (40 CFR 136).
‒ Laboratories to provide a list with stated RDL capacity for each parameter. ‒ Provide sample containers with preservatives, coolers, trip blanks as needed free of charge. ‒ Contract Laboratory to provide sample transport services. ‒ Web-based client access portal and data reporting system ‒ Electronic data format (PDF, EDF, and CSV, or Excel) of results to the City Water Department. ‒ Immediate NPDES permit (NPDES NO. CA0054097) limit exceedance notifications via phone call and email to appropriate contacts

Page 12 of 45 ends

154
Agreement No. A-8484
‒ Ability to conform to updated requirements issued by the state when new NPDES permit is issued to the City of Oxnard (estimated Fall 2023)
‒ Immediate notification via phone call and email to appropriate City contacts of any quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) failures that impact City samples
‒ Laboratory must be able to accommodate rush analyses and reporting (As quickly as a total of 3 days for analysis and final report when practicable)
‒ QA/QC report to be provided with analytical results.

Recycled Water/Potable Reuse Testing Requirements
The laboratory contracted for Recycled Water/Potable Reuse water analyses should meet the following requirements:
‒ All laboratory analysis for recycled water contaminants having a primary or secondary MCL or notification level must be conducted using a drinking water method approved by DDW for the contaminant and conducted by a laboratory accredited by the State Water Board Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) for the analytical method used.
‒ All analyses shall be required to be conducted in accordance with the latest edition of “Guidelines Establishing Test Procedures for Analysis of Pollutants” (40 CFR § 136) promulgated by the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency. (CCR Title 23, Section 2230). The Quality Assurance-Quality Control Program must conform to the USEPA Guidelines "Laboratory Documentation Requirements for Data Validation", January 1990, USEPA Region 9) or procedures approved by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board.
‒ Samples shall be analyzed using analytical methods described in Section 141 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR § 141); or where no methods are specified for a given pollutant, by methods approved by DDW, the Regional Water Board and/or the State Water Board. Analytical methods that provide Minimum Reporting Levels (MRLs) lower than the limits prescribed in Waste Discharge Permit (Order R4-2020-0051, File No.08-070) or as low as possible that will provide reliable data. ‒ Specific analytes required as part of the 2018 Recycled Water Policy must be analyzed by laboratories that are approved by the DDW. Reporting limits must be below the established detection limits for the purposes of reporting (DLRs). The laboratory is responsible for updating their records when water quality limits are added or revised.
‒ Laboratory proposals should include a cost for group analysis (i.e. general minerals, general physicals, inorganics) and individual analyses. Include a cost for analyses marked “as needed.” ‒ Laboratory should provide their policy on the re-analysis of samples. ‒ Provide the City with the appropriate sample containers with preservatives, coolers, and trip blanks as needed. ‒ Web-based client access portal and data reporting system. ‒ Electronic data format (PDF, EDF, and CSV, or Excel) of results to the City Water Department. ‒ Immediate MCL exceedance (from Sample Point EFF-001 ) notifications via phone call and email to the appropriate contacts.
‒ Immediate notifications on exceedances set forth in the Waste Discharge Permit (Order R4-2020-0051, File No.08-070)
‒ Immediate notification via phone call and email to appropriate City contacts of any quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) failures that impact City samples.
‒ QA/QC report to be provided with analytical results. Samples shall be analyzed within allowable holding time limits as specified in 40 CFR § 141. All QA/QC analyses shall be conducted on the same dates the samples are analyzed.

Additional As Needed Testing
The City and awarded Laboratory/Laboratories shall cooperatively work together throughout the duration of the agreement. Any laboratory contracted with the City through this RFP process shall be able to accommodate any requested analysis/method/or notification change and imposed on the City through Permitting agencies.

Page 13 of 45 ends

155
Agreement No. A-8484

RATES AND COSTS EXHIBIT

WATER DIVISION
251 SOUTH HAYES AVENUE

SAMPLING

FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
MATRIX

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER SAMPLING

FREQUENCY

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER YEAR

ANALYSIS METHOD SUBCONTRACT

LABORATORY

STANDARD
TURN
AROUND
TIME
RUSH
TURN
AROUND
UNIT
PRICE
Weekly Drinking 1 52 Langelier Index
calculation only
Calculation 15 + $10.00
Weekly Drinking 1 52 Total Suspended
Solids (TSS)
SM 2540D 15 + $15.00
Weekly Drinking 3 156 Nirite EPA 353.2 15 + $15.00
Weekly Drinking 4 208 PH,
Conductivity
SM 4500
EPA 120.1
15 + $20.00
Weekly Drinking 4 208 Manganese EPA 200.7 15 + $10.00
Weekly Drinking 5 260 Fluoride EPA 300.0 15 + $15.00
Weekly Drinking 6 312 Hardness as
CaCO3
Calculation 15 + $20.00
Weekly Drinking 6 312 Sulfate EPA 300.0 15 + $15.00
Weekly Drinking 7 364 Calcium EPA 200.7 15 + $10.00
Weekly Drinking 7 364 Chloride EPA 300.0 15 + $15.00
Weekly Drinking 7 364 Iron EPA 200.7 15 + $10.00
Weekly Drinking 7 364 Magnesium EPA 200.7 15 + $10.00
Weekly Drinking 7 364 Nitrate EPA 353.2 15 + $15.00
Weekly Drinking 7 364 Sodium EPA 200.7 15 + $10.00
Weekly Drinking 7 364 Total Dissolved
Solids (TDS)
SM 2540 15 + $15.00
Weekly Drinking 43 2236 Coliforms P/A SM 9223 15 + $15.00 Monthly Drinking 7 84 Alkalinity SM 2320B 15 + $15.00
Monthly Drinking 7 84 Fluoride EPA 300.0 15 + $15.00
Monthly Drinking 7 84 Nirite EPA 353.2 15 + $15.00
Monthly Drinking 10 120 Methyl Tertiary
Butyl Ether
(MTBE)
EPA 524.2 15 + $50.00
Monthly Drinking 10 120 Nitrate EPA 300.0 15 + $15.00
Quarterly Drinking 3 12 Uranium EPA 200.8 15 + $20.00
Quarterly Drinking 8 32 Trihalomethanes EPA 524.2 15 + $50.00 Quarterly Drinking 8 32 Haloacetic
Acids
EPA 552.2 15 + $75.00
Quarterly Drinking 10 40 Calcium EPA 200.7 15 + $10.00
Quarterly Drinking 12 48 1, 2, 3
Trichloropropane
(1,2,3 TCP)
SRL 524M 15 + $65.00
Annual Drinking 1 1 Strontium 90 EPA 905.0 Pace-PA 20 not available
$135.00
Annual Drinking 1 1 Tritium EPA 906.0 Pace-PA 20 not
available
$70.00
Annual Drinking 7 7 Gross Alpha
Radioactivity
EPA 900.0 15 + $40.00
Annual Drinking 7 7 Gross Beta
Radioactivity
EPA 900.0 15 + $40.00

Page 14 of 45 ends

156
Agreement No. A-8484

SAMPLING

FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
MATRIX

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER SAMPLING

FREQUENCY

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER YEAR

ANALYSIS METHOD SUBCONTRACT

LABORATORY

STANDARD
TURN
AROUND
TIME
RUSH
TURN
AROUND
UNIT
PRICE
Annual Drinking 7 7 Radium 226 EPA 903.0 Pace-PA 20 not available
$110.00
Annual Drinking 7 7 Radium 228 EPA 904.0 Pace-PA 20 not available
$110.00
Annual Drinking 10 10 General Mineral Various 15 + $125.00 Annual Drinking 10 10 General Physical Various 15 + $30.00 Annual Drinking 10 10 Inorganics Various 15 + $125.00
Annual Drinking 10 10 Perchlorate EPA 314.1 15 + $40.00 Annual Drinking 10 10 Radiologicals Various Not defined in Oxnard IPR List
+
Annual Drinking 10 10 Synthetic
Organics
Compounds
EPA 500
Series 1613
15 + $880.00
Annual Drinking 10 10 Volatile
Organics
Compounds
EPA 524.2 15 + $80.00
Annual Drinking 11 11 Aggressive
Index
calculation only
Calculation 15 + $10.00
Annual Drinking 11 11 Asbestos EPA 600
R-94 / 134
EMSL-LAT 20 not
available
$170.00
If Needed Drinking 1 1 Acute Toxicity 96 Hours ABC Labs 20 not available
$400.00
If Needed Drinking 5 5 BOD 5 SM 5210B 15 + $45.00
If Needed Drinking 5 5 Settable Solids SM 2540 15 + $12.00 If Needed Drinking 5 5 Turbidity EPA 180.1 15 + $12.00
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
List 1
UCMR 3-7
VOC
EPA 524.3 n/a
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
List 1
UCMR
3-1 SOC
EPA 522 n/a
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
List 1
UCMR 3-6
Metals
EPA 200.8
REV 5.4
n/a
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
List 1
UCMR 3-1
Oxyhalide
Anion
EPA 300.1 n/a
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
List 1
UCMR 3-6
Perflourinated
Compounds
EPA 537
REV 1.1
n/a
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
List 2
UCMR 3-7
Horomones
EPA 539 n/a

Page 15 of 45 ends

157
Agreement No. A-8484

SAMPLING

FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
MATRIX

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER SAMPLING

FREQUENCY

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER YEAR

ANALYSIS METHOD SUBCONTRACT

LABORATORY

STANDARD
TURN
AROUND
TIME
RUSH
TURN
AROUND
UNIT
PRICE
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
List 1
UCMR 5
Per- and
Polyfluoroalkyl
Substances
EPA 533 20 + $300.00
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
11-
chloroeicosafdluor
o-3oxaundecane –
1 sulfonic acid
(11Cl-PF3OUdS
EPA 533 + incl EPA 533
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
9chlorohexadecaflu
oro-3-oxanonane1-sulfonic acid
(9Cl-PF3ONS)
EPA 533 + incl EPA 533
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
4,8-dioxa-3Hperfluorononanoic
acid (ADONA)
EPA 533 + incl EPA 533
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
hexafluoropropy
lene oxide dimer
acid (HFPO
DA)
EPA 533 + incl EPA 533
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
nonafluoro-3,6-
dioxaheptanoic
acid (NFDHA)
EPA 533 + incl EPA 533
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
perfluorobutanoi
c acid (PFBA)
EPA 533 + incl EPA 533
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
perfluorobutanes
ulfonic acid
(PFBS)
EPA 533 + incl EPA 533
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
1H,1H,2H,2Hperfluorodecane
sulfonic acid
( 8:2FTS)
EPA 533 + incl EPA 533
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
perfluorodecano
ic acid (PFDA)
EPA 533 + incl EPA 533
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
perfluorododeca
noic acid
(PFDoA)
EPA 533 + incl EPA 533
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
perfluoro(2-
ethoxyethane)
sulfonic acid
(PFEESA)
EPA 533 + incl EPA 533
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
perfluoroheptan
esulfonic acid
(PFHpA)
EPA 533 + incl EPA 533
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
1H,1H,2H,2Hperfluorohexane
sulfonic acid
(4:2FTS)
EPA 533 + incl EPA 533
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
perfluorohexane
sulfonic acid
(PFHxS)
EPA 533 + incl EPA 533

Page 16 of 45 ends

158
Agreement No. A-8484

SAMPLING

FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
MATRIX

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER SAMPLING

FREQUENCY

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER YEAR

ANALYSIS METHOD SUBCONTRACT

LABORATORY

STANDARD
TURN
AROUND
TIME
RUSH
TURN
AROUND
UNIT
PRICE
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
perfluoro-3-
methoxypropano
ic acid
(PFMPA)
EPA 533 + incl EPA 533
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
perfluoro-4-
methoxybutanoi
c acid
(PFMBA)
EPA 533 + incl EPA 533
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
perfluorononano
ic acid (PFNA)
EPA 533 + incl EPA 533
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
1H,1H,2H,2Hperfluorooctane
sulfonic acid
(6:2FTS)
EPA 533 + incl EPA 533
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
perfluorooctanes
ulfonic acid
(PFOS)
EPA 533 + incl EPA 533
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
perfluorooctanoi
c acid (PFOA)
EPA 533 + incl EPA 533
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
perfluoropentan
oic acid
(PFPeA)
EPA 533 + incl EPA 533
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
perfluoropentan
esulfonic acid
(PFPeS)
EPA 533 + incl EPA 533
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
perfluoroundeca
noic acid
(PFUnA)
EPA 533 + incl EPA 533
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
UCMR 5 EPA 537.1 20 + $250.00
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
N-ethyl
perflorooctanesu
lfonamidoacetic
acid
(NEtFOSAA)
EPA 537.1 + incl EPA 537.1
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
N-methyl
perfluorooctanesu
lfonamidoacetic
acid
(NMeFOSAA)
EPA 537.1 + incl EPA 537.1
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
perfluorotetrade
canoic acid
(PFTA)
EPA 537.1 + incl EPA 537.1
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
perfluorotrideca
noic acid
(PFTrDA)
EPA 537.1 + incl EPA 537.1
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
List 3
UCMR 5
Metals
EPA 200.7 n/a
If Needed Drinking 3 Entry Point
1 Maximum
Resident
UCMR5 Metals
- Lithium
EPA 200.7 20 + $30.00
UCMR5 Field Blanks billed as samples Excludes UCMR5 as number of samples is unknown

Page 17 of 45 ends

159
Agreement No. A-8484

SOURCE CONTROL
6001 PERKINS ROAD

SAMPLING

FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
MATRIX

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER SAMPLING

FREQUENCY

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER YEAR

ANALYSIS METHOD SUBCONTRACT

LABORATORY

STANDARD
TURN
AROUND
TIME
RUSH
TURN
AROUND
UNIT
PRICE
Monthly NonPotable2 24 Boron EPA 200.8 15 + $10.00
Bi-Monthly NonPotable1 6 PCBs EPA 608.3 15 + $90.00
Bi-Monthly NonPotable (1)1 6 Chlorinated
Pesticides-ByProducts+Mirex
EPA 608.3 15 + included
Bi-Monthly NonPotable1 6 Group Metals:

Cadmium,
Total
Chromium,
Copper, Lead,
Nickel, Silver,
and Zinc
EPA 6010B
+ EPA
7471A
15 + $70.00
Bi-Monthly NonPotable1 6 Dioxins-High
Resolution
Resolution-Full
List
EPA 1613B 20 not
available
$525.00
Bi-Monthly NonPotable (2)1 6 Volatiles
Organics-Full
List
EPA 624.1 15 + $100.00
Bi-Monthly NonPotable1 6 Semivolatiles
OrganicsFull List
EPA 625.1 15 + $160.00
Bi-Monthly NonPotable1 6 Total Cyanide EPA 335.4 15 + $35.00 Mark up on Rush Samples
Notes:
(1)Include 2,4-DDD, 2,4-DDE, 2,4-DDT, 4,4-DDD, 4,4-DDE, and 4,4-DDT (2)Sample for 624.1 is unpreserved. Include Acrolein, Acrylonitrile, and 2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether
%

Page 18 of 45 ends

160
Agreement No. A-8484

WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
6001 PERKINS ROAD

SAMPLING

FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
MATRIX

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER SAMPLING

FREQUENCY

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER YEAR

ANALYSIS METHOD SUBCONTRACT

LABORATORY

STANDARD
TURN
AROUND
TIME
RUSH
TURN
AROUND
UNIT
PRICE
Monthly NonPotable1 12 PCBs EPA 608.3 15 + $90.00
Monthly NonPotable
(2)
1 12 Chlorinated
PesticidesByProducts+Mi
rex
EPA 608.3 15 + included
Monthly NonPotable2 24 TKN (Total
Kjeldahl
Nitrogen)
EPA 351.2 15 + $35.00
Monthly NonPotable1 12 TOC (Total
Organic
Carbon)
SM-5310C 15 + $40.00
Monthly Sludge
(1)
1 12 Group
Metals:

Arsenic,
Cadmium,
Total
Chromium,
Copper,
Lead,
Mercury,
Molybdenu
m, Nickel,
Selenium,
and Zinc
EPA 6010B
+ EPA
7471A
15 + $105.00
Monthly Sludge
(1)
1 12 TKN (Total
Kjeldahl
Nitrogen)
EPA 351.2 15 + $40.00
Monthly Sludge
(1)
1 12 % Moisture Calculated 15 + $10.00
Quarterly NonPotable2 8 DioxinsHigh
Resolution
ResolutionFull List
EPA 1613B 20 not
available
$525.00
Quarterly NonPotable2 8 PCB
Congeners
GCMS-SIM 15 + $275.00
Quarterly NonPotable1 4 PCBs EPA 608.3 15 + $90.00
Quarterly NonPotable
(2)
1 4 Chlorinated
PesticidesByProducts+Mi
rex
EPA 608.3 15 + included
Quarterly NonPotable2 8 Gross Alpha
and
Beta
EPA 900.0 15 + $80.00

Page 19 of 45 ends

161
Agreement No. A-8484

SAMPLING

FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
MATRIX

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER SAMPLING

FREQUENCY

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER YEAR

ANALYSIS METHOD SUBCONTRACT

LABORATORY

STANDARD
TURN
AROUND
TIME
RUSH
TURN
AROUND
UNIT
PRICE
Semiannual Sludge
(1)
1 2 DioxinsHigh
Resolution
ResolutionFull List
EPA 8290A Pace-MN 20 not
available
$525.00
Semiannual Sludge
(1)
1 2 Group
Metals:

Antimony,
Arsenic,
Beryllium,
Cadmium,
Total
Chromium,
Copper,
Mercury,
Lead,
Molybdenu
m, Nickel,
Selenium,
Silver,
Thallium,
and Zinc
EPA 6010B
+ EPA
7471A
15 + $145.00
Semiannual Sludge
(1)
1 2 Total
Cyanide
EPA 9012 15 + $40.00
Semiannual Sludge
(1)
1 2 PCBs EPA 8082 15 + $90.00
Semiannual Sludge
(1,2)
1 2 Chlorinated
PesticidesByProducts+
Mirex
EPA 8081A 15 + included
Semiannual Sludge
(1)
1 2 Semivolatile
s OrganicsFull List
EPA 8270C 15 + $160.00
Semiannual Sludge
(1)
1 2 Volatiles
OrganicsFull List
EPA 8260B 15 + $100.00
Semiannual NonPotable
(4)
2 4 Volatiles
OrganicsFull List
EPA 624.1 15 + $100.00
Semiannual NonPotable2 4 Semivolatiles
Organics-Full
List
EPA 625.1 15 + $160.00
Semiannual NonPotable2 4 Hexavalent
Chromium
EPA 218.6 15 + $40.00
Semiannual NonPotable2 4 Tributyltin Krone, et
al, 1989
in Water
15 + $200.00
Semiannual NonPotable2 4 Total
Cyanide
EPA 335.4 15 + $35.00

Page 20 of 45 ends

162
Agreement No. A-8484

SAMPLING

FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
MATRIX

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER SAMPLING

FREQUENCY

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER YEAR

ANALYSIS METHOD SUBCONTRACT

LABORATORY

STANDARD
TURN
AROUND
TIME
RUSH
TURN
AROUND
UNIT
PRICE
Semiannual NonPotable2 4 Group
Metals:

Antimony,
Arsenic,
Beryllium,
Cadmium,
Total
Chromium,
Copper,
Mercury,
Lead,
Nickel,
Selenium,
Silver,
Thallium,
and Zinc
EPA 200.8 15 + $135.00
Annual NonPotable1 1 Group
Metals:

Cadmium,
Total
Chromium,
Copper,
Lead,
Nickel,
Silver, and
Zinc
EPA 200.8 15 + $70.00
Quarterly Sludge
(3)
1 4 DioxinsHigh
Resolution
ResolutionFull List
EPA 8290A Pace-MN 20 not
available
$525.00
Quarterly Sludge
(3)
1 4 PCBs EPA 8082 15 + $80.00
Quarterly Sludge
(2,3)
1 4 Chlorinated
PesticidesByProducts+Mi
rex
EPA 8081A 15 + included
Quarterly Sludge
(3)
1 4 Group
Metals:

Potassium,
Boron
EPA 6010B 15 + $20.00
Quarterly Sludge
(3)
1 4 CCR Metals EPA 6010B
+ EPA
7471A
15 + $175.00
Quarterly Sludge
(3)
1 4 17 STLC
(WET) CCR
Metals
EPA 6010B
+ EPA
7471A
15 + $275.00
Mark up on Rush Samples
Notes:
(1) Report in Dry Weight
(2)Include 2,4-DDD, 2,4-DDE, 2,4-DDT, 4,4-DDD, 4,4-DDE, and 4,4-DDT (3) Report in Wet Weight
(4)Sample for 624.1 is unpreserved. Include Acrolein, Acrylonitrile, and 2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether
%

Page 21 of 45 ends

163
Agreement No. A-8484

ADVANCED WATER PURIFICATION FACILITY
5700 PERKINS ROAD

SAMPLING

FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
MATRIX

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER SAMPLING

FREQUENCY

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER YEAR

ANALYSIS METHOD SUBCONTRACT

LABORATORY

STANDARD
TURN
AROUND
TIME
RUSH
TURN
AROUND
UNIT
PRICE
Daily NonPotable1 365 Settleable
Solids
SM 2540 F 15 + $10.00
Weekly NonPotable1 52 Total
Suspended
Solids
SM 2540 D 15 + $15.00
Weekly NonPotable1 52 5 day
Biochemical
Oxygen
Demand
(BOD₅)
SM 5210 B 15 + $45.00
Daily NonPotable1 365 Total
Coliforms
(P/A)
SM 9223B 15 + $10.00
Twice per
week
NonPotable1 104 Ammonia as N EPA 350.1
or SM 4500-
NH3 C
15 + $30.00
Twice per
week
NonPotable1 104 Nitrate as N EPA 353.2 15 + $15.00
Twice per
week
NonPotable1 104 Nitrite as N EPA 353.2 15 + $15.00
Monthly NonPotable1 12 Copper EPA 200.5
or 200.7 or
200.8 or
200.9 or SM
3111 B or
3113 B or
3120 B
15 + $10.00
Monthly NonPotable1 12 Lead EPA 200.5
or 200.8 or
200.9 or
SM3113 B
15 + $10.00
Monthly NonPotable1 12 Chromium VI EPA 218.6
or 218.7
15 + $40.00
Monthly NonPotable1 12 Inorganic
Chemicals per
Title 22,
§64431 Table
64431-A
includes
Asbestos &
Perchlorate
Multiple Valid
Methods, See
Spreadsheet
Attached
15 + $385.00
Monthly NonPotable1 12 Volatile
Organic
Chemicals per
Title 22,
§64444 Table
64444-A –
section a)
EPA 524.2 15 + $80.00

Page 22 of 45 ends

164
Agreement No. A-8484

SAMPLING

FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
MATRIX

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER SAMPLING

FREQUENCY

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER YEAR

ANALYSIS METHOD SUBCONTRACT

LABORATORY

STANDARD
TURN
AROUND
TIME
RUSH
TURN
AROUND
UNIT
PRICE
Monthly NonPotable1 12 Non-Volatile
Synthetic
Organic
Chemicals per
Title 22,
§64444 Table
64444-A –
section b)
Multiple
Valid
Methods,
See
Spreadsheet
Attached
15 + $880.00
Monthly NonPotable1 4 General
Minerals &
Inorganic
Chemicals (Ca,
K, Na, total
hardness)
See attached
spreadsheet
15 + $40.00
Monthly NonPotable1 12 Disinfection
By-Products
per Title 22
§64533 Table
64533-A
THM+HAA5
+Chlorite+
Bromate
Multiple
Valid
Methods,
See
Spreadsheet
Attached
15 + $220.00
Monthly NonPotable1 12 Gross Alpha
(only)
EPA 900.0 15 + $40.00
Monthly NonPotable1 12 Gross Beta -
EPA 900.0
EPA 900.0 15 + $40.00
Monthly NonPotable1 12 Strontium-90 EPA 900.0 20 not
available
$135.00
Monthly NonPotable1 12 Uranium
(pCi/L) - EPA
200.8
EPA 200.8 15 + $20.00
Monthly NonPotable1 12 Combined
Radium-226
and Radium
228
EPA
903.1+904.
0 20 not
available
$220.00
Monthly NonPotable1 12 Tritium
(pCi/L)
EPA 906 20 not
available
$70.00
Quarterly NonPotable1 4 Total
Dissolved
Solids
SM 2540 C 15 + $15.00
Quarterly NonPotable1 4 Sulfate EPA 300.1 15 + $15.00
Quarterly NonPotable1 4 Chloride EPA 300.1 15 + $15.00

Page 23 of 45 ends

165
Agreement No. A-8484

SAMPLING

FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
MATRIX

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER SAMPLING

FREQUENCY

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER YEAR

ANALYSIS METHOD SUBCONTRACT

LABORATORY

STANDARD
TURN
AROUND
TIME
RUSH
TURN
AROUND
UNIT
PRICE
Yearly NonPotable1 1 Secondary
MCLs per
§64449
Tables
64449A and
64449B (not
including
compounds
sampled
elsewhere)
Multiple
Valid
Methods,
See
Spreadsheet
Attached
15 + $105.00
Monthly NonPotable1 12 Notification
Levels (see
spreadsheet –
note NDMA
and 1,4
Dioxane are
reported
separately)
Multiple
Valid
Methods,
See
Spreadsheet
Attached
15 + $1,075.00
Quarterly NonPotable1 4 Priority Toxic
Pollutants(1)
Multiple Vali
Methods, See
Spreadsheet
Attached
15 + $405.00
Monthly NonPotable1 12 1,4 Dioxane(2) EPA 522 15 + $160.00 Monthly NonPotable3 36 NDMA(2) EPA 521 15 + $190.00
Quarterly NonPotable1 4 NMOR(2) EPA 521 15 + included
Monthly NonPotable3 36 Sucralose(2) EPA 1694 15 + $300.00 Monthly NonPotable3 36 Sulfamethoxa
zole(2)
EPA 1694 15 + $300.00
Monthly NonPotable1 12 PFOS and
PFOA(2)
EPA 537.1 15 + $225.00
Monthly NonPotable3 12 Electrical
Conductivity
(2)
SM 2510B 15 + $10.00
Weekly (&
Monthly)
NonPotable2 (1)(3) 116 Total Organic
Carbon (2)
SM 5310 B 15 + $40.00
Quarterly NonPotable1 4 Estrogen
receptor-α(2)
_(4) Trussell
Technologies
60 not
available
$2,000.00
Quarterly NonPotable1 4 Aryl
hydrocarbon
Receptor (2)
_(4) BioDetection
Systems BV
60 not
available
$3,500.00
Mark up on Rush Samples %
Notes:
(1) Methods with the lowest possible detection limit are requested due to very low levels allowable for priority toxic pollutants. (2) Laboratory must have a DDW method approval letter for analysis of compounds per the recycled water policy or be able to gain method approval prior to contract commencement. Methods stated are guidance only and even if used must be approved by CA DDW. Alternate methods can be used if granted DDW approval for use as part of the Recycled water policy - https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/recycled_water/policy.html (3) Additional sample point will be measured monthly, so 2 x 52 samples plus 12 samples per year. (4) There is no standard method for the bioanalytical screening tool assays. Laboratories should develop an SOP consistent with National Water Reuse Guidance and have this SOP and method approved by DDW.

Page 24 of 45 ends

166
Agreement No. A-8484

ADVANCED WATER PURIFICATION FACILITY-INJECTION WELLS
(MW-1D, MW-1M, MW-1S, MW-2, MW-3)

SAMPLING

FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
MATRIX

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER SAMPLING

FREQUENCY

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER YEAR

ANALYSIS METHOD SUBCONTRACT

LABORATORY

STANDARD
TURN
AROUND
TIME
RUSH
TURN
AROUND
UNIT
PRICE
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 General
Minerals
Varies 15 + $175.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 Inorganic
Chemicals
Varies 15 + $175.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 General
Physical
(Title 22)
Varies 15 + $30.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 1,4-Dioxane -
GCMS
EPA 827M 15 + $160.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 1,2,3-
Trichloroprop
ane (TCP) -

GCMS-SIM
SRL 524MTCP15 + $65.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 EPA 625 -
Semivolatile
Organic
Compounds
EPA 625 15 + $160.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 EPA 556 -
Formaldehyde
only
EPA 556 15 + $180.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 Bromate -
EPA 300.1
EPA 300.1 15 + $35.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 Chlorate -
EPA 300.1
EPA 300.1 15 + $35.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 Chlorite -
EPA 300.1
EPA 300.1 15 + $35.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 EPA 531.1 -
Carbamates
EPA 531.1 15 + $85.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 EPA 508 -
Organochlori
ne Pesticides
& PCBs
EPA 508 15 + $85.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 EPA 515.3 -
Chlorinated
Acid
Herbicides
EPA 515.3 15 + $85.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 Oil and
Grease - EPA
1664A
EPA 1664A 15 + $35.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 EPA 549.2 -
Diquat
EPA 549.2 15 + $85.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 EPA 548.1 -
Endothall
EPA 548.1 15 + $85.00

Page 25 of 45 ends

167
Agreement No. A-8484

SAMPLING

FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
MATRIX

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER SAMPLING

FREQUENCY

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER YEAR

ANALYSIS METHOD SUBCONTRACT

LABORATORY

STANDARD
TURN
AROUND
TIME
RUSH
TURN
AROUND
UNIT
PRICE
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 EPA 8330A -
Explosives
EPA
8330A
15 + $225.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 524.3 -
Fumigants
(EDB, DBCP)
EPA
524.3
15 + $50.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 EPA 547 -
Glyphosate
EPA 547 15 + $85.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 EPA 8015B -
Glycol
EPA 8015B 15 + $130.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 EPA 552.2 -
Haloacetic
Acids
(HAA5)
EPA 552.2 15 + $90.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 Boron - EPA
200.8
EPA 200.8 15 + $10.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 Vanadium -
EPA 200.8
EPA 200.8 15 + $10.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 Nitrosoamine
s low-level -
EPA 1625M
EPA
1625M
15 + $190.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 Perchlorate -
EPA 314.0
EPA 314.0 15 + $40.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 PFCs in water
by LC/MS
EPA 537M 15 + $275.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 Polybrominat
ed Diphenyl
Ethers
(PBDEs) -
EPA 1614M
GC/MS
SIM
15 + $250.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 PPCP - EPA
1694
List A
EPA
1694M
15 + $300.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 PPCP - EPA
1694 List B
EPA
1694M
15 + $300.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 PPCP - EPA
1694 List C
EPA
1694M
15 + $300.00

Page 26 of 45 ends

168
Agreement No. A-8484

SAMPLING

FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
MATRIX

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER SAMPLING

FREQUENCY

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER YEAR

ANALYSIS METHOD SUBCONTRACT

LABORATORY

STANDARD
TURN
AROUND
TIME
RUSH
TURN
AROUND
UNIT
PRICE
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 PPCP -
Hormones by
LCMSMSAPCI+
EPA
1694M
15 + included
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 Alkyl Phenols
by GCMS
D7065
ASTM
D7065
15 + $250.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 Pyrethroid
Pesticides by

GC/MS SIM
GC/MS

NCI-SIM
15 + $225.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 Gross Alpha -
EPA 900.0
EPA 900.0 15 + $40.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 Gross Beta -
EPA 900.0
EPA 900.0 15 + $40.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 Uranium
(pCi/L) - EPA
200.8
EPA 200.8 15 + $20.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 EPA 525.2 -
Semivolatile
Organics -
extended
EPA 525.2 15 + $200.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 EPA 525.2
Mod - OPP
low-level
EPA 525.2M 15 + $190.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 Dioxin
2378TCDD -
EPA 1613BATP
EPA 1613B 20 + $190.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 Asbestos,
water - TEM
EPA 100.2 15 + $170.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 Radium-226 EPA Ra-05 20 + $110.00 Quarterly NonPotable5 20 Radium-228 EPA Ra-05 20 + $110.00 Quarterly NonPotable5 20 Strontium-90 EPA 905.0 20 + $135.00 Quarterly NonPotable5 20 Tritium EPA 906.0 20 + $70.00 Quarterly NonPotable5 20 EPA 524.2 –
TBA
EPA 524.2 15 + $60.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 EPA 524.2 -
Volatile
Organic
Compounds
EPA 524.2 15 + $80.00
Quarterly NonPotable5 20 EPA 624 -
Volatile
Organic
Compounds
EPA 624 15 + $100.00
Mark up on Rush Samples %

Page 27 of 45 ends

169
Agreement No. A-8484

ADVANCED WATER PURIFICATION FACILTY

WETLANDS PROJECT IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION 5700 PERKINS ROAD

SAMPLING

FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
MATRIX

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF
SAMPLE

PER SAMPLING

FREQUENCY

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER YEAR

ANALYSIS METHOD SUBCONTRACT

LABORATORY

STANDARD
TURN
AROUND
TIME
RUSH
TURN
AROUND

UNIT PRICE
Monthly NonPotable12 12 Alkalinity * 15 + $15.00
Monthly NonPotable12 12 Aluminum * 15 + $10.00
Monthly NonPotable12 12 Arsenic * 15 + $10.00
Monthly NonPotable12 12 Barium * 15 + $10.00
Monthly NonPotable12 12 Beryllium * 15 + $10.00
Monthly NonPotable12 12 Boron * 15 + $10.00
Monthly NonPotable12 12 Bromide * 15 + $35.00
Monthly NonPotable12 12 Cadmium * 15 + $10.00
Monthly NonPotable12 12 Calcium * 15 + $10.00
Monthly NonPotable12 12 Chemical
Oxygen
Demand
(COD)
* 15 + $40.00
Monthly NonPotable12 12 Chromium * 15 + $10.00
Monthly NonPotable12 12 Chloride * 15 + $15.00
Monthly NonPotable12 12 Copper * 15 + $10.00
Monthly NonPotable12 12 Fluoride * 15 + $15.00
Monthly NonPotable12 12 Iron * 15 + $10.00
Monthly NonPotable12 12 Magnesium * 15 + $10.00
Monthly NonPotable12 12 Manganese * 15 + $10.00
Monthly NonPotable12 12 Oil and
Grease
* 15 + $35.00

Page 28 of 45 ends

170
Agreement No. A-8484

SAMPLING

FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
MATRIX

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER SAMPLING

FREQUENCY

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER YEAR

ANALYSIS METHOD SUBCONTRACT

LABORATORY

STANDARD
TURN
AROUND
TIME
RUSH
TURN
AROUND
UNIT
PRICE
Monthly NonPotable12 12 Potassium * 15 + $10.00
Monthly NonPotable12 12 Selenium * 15 + $10.00
Monthly NonPotable12 12 Strontium EPA 200.8 15 + $10.00 Monthly NonPotable12 12 Sulfate * 15 + $15.00
Monthly NonPotable12 12 Thallium * 15 + $10.00
Monthly NonPotable12 12 Zinc * 15 + $10.00
Mark up on Rush Samples %
Notes:
* The BOR has not provided specific method requirements for requested analysis Wetland Project testing anticipated to end by March 2024

Page 29 of 45 ends

171
Agreement No. A-8484
AQUIFER STORAGE and RECOVERY (ASR)

MONITORING WELLS

SAMPLING

FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
MATRIX

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER SAMPLING

FREQUENCY

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER YEAR

ANALYSIS METHOD SUBCONTRACT

LABORATORY

STANDARD
TURN
AROUND
TIME
RUSH
TURN
AROUND
UNIT
PRICE
Quarterly 5 20 General Mineral Varies 15 + $175.00
Quarterly 5 20 Inorganic
Chemicals
Varies 15 + $175.00
Quarterly 5 20 General Physical
(Title 22)
Varies 15 + $30.00
Quarterly 5 20 1,4 Dioxane -
GCMS
EPA 522 15 + $160.00
Quarterly 5 20 1,2,3
Trichloropropane
(TCP) GCMSSIM
SRL 524M
- TCP
15 + $65.00
Quarterly 5 20 Semivolatile
Organic
Compounds
EPA 625 15 + $160.00
Quarterly 5 20 Formaldehyde EPA 556 15 + $180.00
Quarterly 5 20 Bromate EPA 300.1 15 + $35.00
Quarterly 5 20 Chlorate EPA 300.1 15 + $35.00
Quarterly 5 20 Chlorite EPA 300.1 15 + $35.00
Quarterly 5 20 Carbamates EPA 531.1 15 + $85.00
Quarterly 5 20 Organochlorine
Pesticides &
PCB's
EPA 508 15 + $85.00
Quarterly 5 20 Chlorinated
Acid Herbicides
EPA 515.3 15 + $85.00
Quarterly 5 20 Oil and Grease EPA 1664A 15 + $35.00
Quarterly 5 20 Diquat EPA 549.2 15 + $85.00
Quarterly 5 20 Endothall EPA 548.1 15 + $85.00
Quarterly 5 20 Explosives EPA 8330A 15 + $225.00
Quarterly 5 20 Fumigants
(EDB, DBCP)
EPA 524.3 15 + $50.00
Quarterly 5 20 Glyphosate EPA 547 15 + $85.00
Quarterly 5 20 Glycol EPA 8015B 15 + $130.00
Quarterly 5 20 Haloacetic
Acids (HAA5)
EPA 552.2 15 + $75.00
Quarterly 5 20 Boron EPA 200.8 15 + $10.00
Quarterly 5 20 Vanadium EPA 200.8 15 + $10.00
Quarterly 5 20 Nitrosoamines
low-level
EPA 521 15 + $190.00
Quarterly 5 20 Perchlorate EPA 314.0 15 + $40.00
Quarterly 5 20 PFC's in Water
by LC/MS
EPA 537.1 15 + $275.00
Quarterly 5 20 Polybrominated
Diphenyl Ethers
(PBDE's)
EPA
1614M
15 + $250.00

Page 30 of 45 ends

172
Agreement No. A-8484

SAMPLING

FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
MATRIX

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER SAMPLING

FREQUENCY

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER YEAR

ANALYSIS METHOD SUBCONTRACT

LABORATORY

STANDARD
TURN
AROUND
TIME
RUSH
TURN
AROUND
UNIT
PRICE
Quarterly 5 20 PPCP - EPA
1694
List A
EPA 1694M 15 + $300.00
Quarterly 5 20 PPCP - EPA
1694 List B
EPA
1694M
15 + $300.00
Quarterly 5 20 PPCP - EPA
1694 List C
EPA
1694M
15 + $300.00
Quarterly 5 20 PPCP -
Hormones by
LCMSMSAPCI+
EPA
1694M
15 + included
Quarterly 5 20 Alkyl Phenols
by GCMS
ASTM
D7065
15 + $250.00
Quarterly 5 20 Pyrethroid
Pesticides by
GC/MS Sim
GC/MS

NCI-SIM
15 + $225.00
Quarterly 5 20 Gross Alpha EPA 900.0 15 + $40.00
Quarterly 5 20 Gross Beta EPA 900.0 15 + $40.00
Quarterly 5 20 Uranium (pCi/L) EPA 200.8 15 + $20.00
Quarterly 5 20 Semivolatile
Organics -
Extended
EPA 525.2 15 + $200.00
Quarterly 5 20 Mod-OPP lowlevelEPA 525.2M 15 + $190.00 Quarterly 5 20 Dioxin
2378TCDDEPA 1613B 20 + $190.00
Quarterly 5 20 Asbestos,
Water-TEM
EPA 100.2 15 + $170.00
Quarterly 5 20 Radium - 226 EPA 903.1 20 + $110.00
Quarterly 5 20 Radium - 228 EPA 904.0 20 + $110.00
Quarterly 5 20 Strontium - 90 EPA 905.0 20 + $135.00
Quarterly 5 20 Tritium EPA 906.0 20 + $70.00
Quarterly 5 20 EPA 524.2 -
TBA
EPA 524.2 15 + $60.00
Quarterly 5 20 Volatile Organic
Compounds
EPA 524.2 15 + $80.00
Quarterly 5 20 Bacteriological
Coliform and
E.Coli
SM 9223B 15 + $30.00
Quarterly 5 20 Hexavalent
Chromium
EPA 218.6 15 + $40.00
Quarterly 5 20 Dissolved
Oxygen
EPA 360.1 15 + $30.00
Quarterly 5 20 Oxidation
Reduction
Potential
ASTM
D1498
15 + $35.00

Page 31 of 45 ends

173
Agreement No. A-8484

SAMPLING

FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
MATRIX

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER SAMPLING

FREQUENCY

ESTIMATED

NUMBER OF

SAMPLES

PER YEAR

ANALYSIS METHOD SUBCONTRACT

LABORATORY

STANDARD
TURN
AROUND
TIME
RUSH
TURN
AROUND
UNIT
PRICE
Quarterly 5 20 Hydrogen
Sulfide
EPA 150.1 /
SM 4500SH/
CAL
15 + $30.00
Quarterly 5 20 Specific
Conductance
SM 2510B 15 + $10.00
Mark up on Rush Samples
* Sample frequency may change once State requirements for sampling become official. %
Courier on Tuesday/Wednesday No Charge
Courier on other than Tues./Weds. $200
+ RUSH SURCHARGES (available as capacity permits)
same workday 150%
1 workday 100%
2 to 3 workdays 75%
4 to 5 workdays 30%
all TATs listed are in working days
The period of performance anticipated for this agreement shall be for three years, renewable in one-year increments beginning October 1, 2022, or effective upon signature of an Agreement by both parties, unless terminated earlier.

This annual renewal shall be based on mutually acceptable services, cost adjustments, and the City requirements and there is no obligation by the City to purchase any specified amount of goods or services. Updated annual pricing must be submitted to the City in writing, no later than the July 1st preceding the renewal date. Increases shall not exceed the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPI-U) for Los Angeles from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics based on a 12-month CPI-U for May.

Page 32 of 45 ends

174
Agreement No. A-8484

IRAN CONTRACTING ACT CERTIFICATION
(TO BE EXECUTED AND SUBMITTED WITH THE

AGREEMENT)
Public Contract Code Sections 2202-2208
Pursuant toPublicContract Code 2204.(a) A public entity shallrequire a person that issubmits a bid or proposal to,or otherwise proposes to enter into or renew a contract with, a public entity with respect to a contract for goods or services of one million dollars ($1,000,000) or more to certify, at the time an Agreement is signed or renewed,that the person is not identified on a list created pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 2203 as a person engaging in investment activities in Iran described in subdivision (a) of Section 2202.5 or as a person described in subdivision 9b) of Section 2202.5, as applicable.

To comply with this requirement, please insert your company/entity and Federal ID number (if available) and complete one of the options below. Please note, California law established penalties for providing false certifications, including civil penalties equal to the greater of $250,000 or twice the amount of the contract for which the false certification was made, contract termination and three-year ineligibility to bid on contract in accordance with Public Contract Code section 2205.

OPTION No.1 – CERTIFICATION
I, the official named below, certify I am duly authorized to execute this certification on behalf of the company/entity identified below, and the company/entity identified below is not on the current list of persons engaged in investment activities in Iran created by DGS and is not a financial institution extending twenty milliondollars ($20,000,000) or more in credit to another person or entity, for 45 days or more, if that other person or company/entity will use the credit to provide goods or services in the energy sector in Iran and is identified on the current list of persons engaged in investment activities in Iran created by DGS in accordance with subdivision
(b) of Public Contract Code 2203.

Company Name/Financial Institution (printed): Federal ID Number (or n/a):

By (Authorized Signature):

Printed Name & Title of Person Signing: Date Executed
Executed in the County of in the State of
OPTION No.2 – EXEMPTION
Pursuant to Public Contract Code sections 2203(c) and (d), a public entity may permit a vendor/financial institution engaged in investment activities in Iran, on a case-by-case basis, to be eligible for, or to bid on, submit a proposal for, or enters into or renews, a contract for goods and services. If you have obtained an exemption from the certification requirement under the Iran Contracting Act, please fill out the information below and attach documentation demonstrating the exemption approval.

Company Name/Financial Institution (printed): Federal ID Number (or n/a):

By (Authorized Signature):

Printed Name & Title of Person Signing: Date Executed
Executed in the County of in the State of

Page 33 of 45 ends

175
Agreement No. A-8484

INSURANCE EXHIBIT
Exhibit INS-A

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSULTANTS
(WITH ERRORS AND OMISSIONS REQUIREMENT)

1. Consultant shall obtain and maintain during the performance of any services under this Agreement the following insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of services hereunder by Consultant, its agents, representatives, employees or subconsultants.
a. Commercial General Liability Insurance, including Contractual Liability, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage for each claimant for general liability with coverage equivalent to Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability Coverage (Occurrence Form CG 0001). If a general aggregate limit is used, that limit shall apply separately to the project or shall be twice the occurrence amount;
b. Business automobile liability insurance in an amount not less than $1,000,000 combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage for each claimant for automobile liability with coverage equivalent to Insurance Services Office automobile liability coverage (Occurrence Form CA0001) covering Code No. 1, “any auto;” c. Professional liability/errors and omissions insurance appropriate to Consultant’s profession to a minimum coverage of $1,000,000, with neither Consultant nor listed subconsultants having less than $500,000 individually. The professional liability/errors and omissions insurance must be project specific with at least a one year extended reporting period, or longer upon request. d. Workers’ compensation insurance in compliance with the laws of the State of California, and employer’s liability insurance in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per claimant. Additionally, the workers’ compensation policy shall include a waiver of all rights of subrogation which the insurer may have against the City.

2. Consultant shall, prior to performance of any services, file with the Risk Manager certificates of insurance with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this Exhibit INS-A. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The certificates and endorsements are to be on the attached forms or on other forms approved by the Risk Manager. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the Risk Manager before commencement of services.

City reserves the right to require complete certified copies of all required insurance policies at any time. The certificates of insurance and endorsements shall be sent via email (or fax if necessary) to the Risk Manager, addressed as follows (do not send hard copies):

City of Oxnard Insurance Compliance Reference No. P.O. Box 100085 – OX Duluth, GA 30096 Via Email: [email protected] Via Fax: 678-259-1007

3. Consultant agrees that all insurance coverages shall be provided by a California admitted insurance carrier with an A.M. Best rating of A:VII or better and shall be endorsed to state that coverage may not be suspended, voided, canceled, or reduced in coverage or limits without 30 days’ prior written notice to the Risk Manager. The Risk Manager shall not approve or accept any endorsement if the endorsement contains “best effort” modifiers or if the insurer is relieved from the responsibility to give such notice.

4. Consultant agrees that the commercial general liability and business automobile liability insurance policies shall be endorsed to name City, its City Council, officers, employees, agents and volunteers as additional insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of Consultant; products and completed operations of Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by Consultant; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to City, its City Council, officers, employees, agents and volunteers. The General Liability Special Endorsement Form and Automobile Liability Special Endorsement Form attached to this Exhibit INS-A or substitute forms containing the same information and acceptable to the Risk Manager shall be used to provide the endorsements (ISO form CG 2010 11/85 or if not available, CG 2010 with an edition date prior to 01/04 and CG 2037).

Page 34 of 45 ends

176
Agreement No. A-8484

5. The coverages provided to City shall be primary and not contributing to or in excess of any existing City insurance or self-insurance coverages (this must be endorsed). Additionally, the workers’ compensation policy shall include a waiver of all rights of subrogation which the insurer may have against the City. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to City, its City Council, officers, employees and volunteers. The insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability.

6. The insurer shall declare any deductibles or self-insured retentions to and be approved by the Risk Manager.

At the option of the Risk Manager, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects City, its City Council, officers, employees and volunteers, or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses.

7. All insurance standards applicable to Consultant shall also be applicable to Consultant's subconsultants.

Consultant agrees to maintain appropriate agreements with subconsultants and to provide proper evidence of coverage upon receipt of a written request from the Risk Manager. 6/22

Page 35 of 45 ends

177
Agreement No. A-8484

INSTRUCTION FOR SUBMITTING INSURANCE CERTIFICATES AND ENDORSEMENT FORMS Certificates of Insurance
The sample accord form on the following page is provided to facilitate your preparation and submission of certificates of insurance. You may use this or any industry form that shows coverage as broad as that shown on the attached sample. Please note the certificate holder address must be as shown on the attached sample accord form with the contract number and insurance exhibit identification information completed.

Improperly addressed certificates may delay the contract start-up date because the City’s practice is to return unidentifiable insurance certificates to the insured for clarification as to the contract number. Cancellation provisions must be endorsed to the policy. Modifying the certificate does not change coverage or obligate the carrier to provide notice of cancellation.

Endorsement Forms
Original endorsements are required for commercial general liability and business automobile liability insurance policies and must be attached to the applicable certificate of insurance. City preference is that the Consultant/insurer use the endorsement forms which are attached. Substitute forms will be accepted, however, as long as they include provisions comparable to the sample accord form.

INS-A.doc

Page 36 of 45 ends

178
Agreement No. A-8484

ACORD CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE ISSUE DATE (MM/DD/YY)

PRODUCER

THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW.

CODE SUB-CODE COMPANIES AFFORDING INSURANCE COVERAGE

INSURED COMPANY

LETTER A SPECIFY COMPANY NAMES IN THIS SPACE

COMPANY

LETTER B

COVERAGES

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY

PERIOD INDICATED, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO

WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS.

CO

LTR TYPE OF INSURANCE
POLICY
NUMBER
POLICY

EFFECTIVE
DATE
(MM/DD/YY)
POLICY

EXPIRATION
DATE
(MM/DD/YY) LIMITS

A GENERAL LIABILITY
[x] COMMERCIAL GENERAL
LIABILITY [ ] CLAIMS
MADE [x] OCCUR.
[x] OWNER'S &
CONTRACTOR'S PROT.

GENERAL AGGREGATE $1,000,000
PRODUCTS COMP/OP AGG . $1,000,000
PERSONAL & ADV. INJURY $1,000,000
EACH OCCURRENCE $1,000,000
FIRE DAMAGE (Any one fire) $
MED. EXPENSE (Any one person) $

A AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY
[x] ANY AUTO

ALL OWNED AUTOS SCHEDULED AUTOS HIRED AUTOS NON-OWNED AUTOS GARAGE LIABILITY COMBINED SINGLE $1,000,000
LIMIT
BODILY INJURY $
(Per person)
BODILY INJURY $
(Per accident)
PROPERTY DAMAGE $

A EXCESS LIABILITY

UMBRELLA FORM

OTHER THAN UMBRELLA
FORM
EACH OCCURRENCE $
AGGREGATE $

A WORKERS'

COMPENSATION
AND

EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY

STATUTORY LIMITS
EACH ACCIDENT $1,000,000
DISEASE-POLICY LIMIT $1,000,000
DISEASE-EACH EMPLOYEE $1,000,000

A OTHER
Errors and omissions insurance or malpractice insurance available for the insured's profession
Minimum coverage $1,000,000
Each consultant/ $500,000
& listed sub-consultant

DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS/LOCATIONS/VEHICLES/RESTRICTIONS/SPECIAL ITEMS

CERTIFICATE HOLDER

CITY OF OXNARD
Attn: Insurance Compliance
Reference No._______
P.O. Box 100085 – OX
Duluth, GA 30096
Via Email: [email protected]
Via Fax: 678-259-1007

CANCELLATION

SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILL ENDEAVOR TO MAIL 30

DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE LEFT, BUT

FAILURE TO MAIL SUCH NOTICE SHALL IMPOSE NO OBLIGATION OR LIABILITY OF ANY KIND UPON THE COMPANY, ITS AGENTS OR REPRESENTATIVES.

AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
Rev. 6/22 INS-A.doc

Page 37 of 45 ends

179
Agreement No. A-8484

GENERAL LIABILITY SPECIAL ENDORSEMENT
FOR THE CITY OF OXNARD (the “City”)

SUBMIT IN DUPLICATE
ENDORSEMENT NO. ISSUE DATE (MM/DD/YY)
PRODUCER POLICY INFORMATION:

Insurance Company:

Policy No.:

Policy Period: (from) (to)
LOSS ADJUSTMENT EXPENSE  Included in Limits
 In Addition to Limits
Telephone:  Deductible  Self-Insured Retention (check which) of $ with an Aggregate of $ applies to NAMED INSURED coverage.  Per Occurrence  Per Claim (which) APPLICABILITY. This insurance pertains to the operations, products and/or tenancy of the named insured under all written agreements and permits in force with the City unless checked here  in which case only the following specific agreements and permits with the City are covered

CITY AGREEMENTS/PERMITS

TYPE OF INSURANCE

GENERAL LIABILITY
 COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY
 COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL LIABILITY
 OWNERS & CONTRACTORS PROTECTIVE
 Claims Made
Retroactive Date
 Occurrence

OTHER PROVISIONS
COVERAGES LIABILITY LIMITS IN THOUSANDS $

EACH OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE
 GENERAL
 PRODUCTS/COMPLETED OPERATIONS
 PERSONAL & ADVERTISING INJURY
 FIRE DAMAGE


CLAIMS: Underwriter’s representative for claims pursuant to this insurance.

Name:

Address:

Telephone: ( )
In consideration of the premium charged and notwithstanding any inconsistent statement in the policy to which this endorsement is attached or any endorsement now or hereafter attached thereto, insurance company agrees as follows:

INSURED. The City, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers are included as insureds with regard to liability and defense of suits arising from the operations, products and activities performed by or on behalf of the named insured.

CONTRIBUTION NOT REQUIRED. As respects: (a) work performed by the named insured for or on behalf of the City; or (b) products sold by the named insured to the City; or (c) premises leased by the named insured from the City, the insurance afforded by this policy shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, agents, employees or volunteers; or stand in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of the named insured’s scheduled underlying primary coverage. In either event, any other insurance maintained by the City, its officers, agents, employees or volunteers shall be in excess of this insurance and shall not contribute with it.

SEVERABILITY OF INTEREST. This insurance applies separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought except with respect to the company’s limits of liability. The inclusion of any person or organization as an insured shall not affect any right which such person or organization would have as a claimant if not so included.

CANCELLATION NOTICE. With respect to the interests of the City, this insurance shall not be canceled, or materially reduced in coverage or limits except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by receipted delivery has been given to the City.

PROVISIONS REGARDING THE INSURED’S DUTIES. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policy or breaches or violations of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, agents, employees or volunteers.

SCOPE OF COVERAGE. This policy, if primary, affords coverage at least as broad as:

Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability Coverage, “occurrence” form CG0001; or If excess, affords coverage which is at least as broad as the primary insurance form CG0001.

Except as stated above nothing herein shall be held to waive, alter or extend any of the limits, conditions, agreements or exclusions of the policy to which this endorsement is attached.

ENDORSEMENT HOLDER

CITY OF OXNARD
Attn: Insurance Compliance
Reference No._______
P.O. Box 100085 – OX
Duluth, GA 30096
Via Email: [email protected]
Via Fax: 678-259-1007

AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
 Broker/Agent  Underwriter 
I (print/type name), warrant that I have authority to
bind the above-mentioned insurance company and by my signature hereon do so bind this company to this endorsement.

Signature
(original signature required)
Telephone: ( ) Date Signed:

Rev. 6/22 INS-A.doc

Page 38 of 45 ends

180
Agreement No. A-8484

AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY SPECIAL ENDORSEMENT
FOR THE CITY OF OXNARD (the “City”)

SUBMIT IN DUPLICATE
ENDORSEMENT NO. ISSUE DATE (MM/DD/YY)
PRODUCER POLICY INFORMATION:

Insurance Company:

Policy No.:

Policy Period: (from) (to)
LOSS ADJUSTMENT EXPENSE  Included in Limits
 In Addition to Limits
Telephone:  Deductible  Self-Insured Retention (check which) of $ with an Aggregate of $ applies to NAMED INSURED coverage. Per Occurrence  Per Claim (which) APPLICABILITY. This insurance pertains to the operations, products and/or tenancy of the named insured under all written agreements and permits in force with the City unless checked here  in which case only the following specific agreements and permits with the City are covered:

CITY AGREEMENTS/PERMITS

TYPE OF INSURANCE OTHER PROVISIONS
 COMMERCIAL AUTO POLICY
 BUSINESS AUTO POLICY
 OTHER

LIMIT OF LIABILITY
CLAIMS: Underwriter’s representative for claims pursuant to this insurance.

Name:

Address:

Telephone: ( )
$ per accident, for bodily injury and property damage.

In consideration of the premium charged and notwithstanding any inconsistent statement in the policy to which this endorsement is attached or any endorsement now or hereafter attached thereto, insurance company agrees as follows:

1. INSURED. The City, its officers, agents, volunteers and employees are included as insureds with regard to liability and defense of suits arising from the operations, products and activities performed by or on behalf of the named insured.

CONTRIBUTION NOT REQUIRED. As respects: (a) work performed by the named insured for or on behalf of the City; or (b) products sold by the named insured to the City; or (c) premises leased by the named insured from the City, the insurance afforded by this policy shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, agents, employees or volunteers; or stand in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of the named insured’s scheduled underlying primary coverage. In either event, any other insurance maintained by the City, its officers, agents, employees or volunteers shall be in excess of this insurance and shall not contribute with it.

SEVERABILITY OF INTEREST. This insurance applies separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought except with respect to the company’s limits of liability. The inclusion of any person or organization as an insured shall not affect any right which such person or organization would have as a claimant if not so included.

CANCELLATION NOTICE. With respect to the interests of the City, this insurance shall not be canceled, or materially reduced in coverage or limits except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by receipted delivery has been given to the City.

PROVISIONS REGARDING THE INSURED’S DUTIES. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policy or breaches or violations of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, agents, employees or volunteers.

SCOPE OF COVERAGE. This policy, if primary, affords coverage at least as broad as:

Insurance Services Office Automobile Liability Coverage, “occurrence” form CA0001, code ("any auto"); or If excess, affords coverage which is at least as broad as the primary insurance form referenced in the preceding section (1).

Except as stated above nothing herein shall be held to waive, alter or extend any of the limits, conditions, agreements or exclusions of the policy to which this endorsement is attached.

ENDORSEMENT HOLDER

CITY OF OXNARD
Attn: Insurance Compliance
Reference No._______
P.O. Box 100085 – OX
Duluth, GA 30096
Via Email: [email protected]
Via Fax: 678-259-1007

AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
 Broker/Agent  Underwriter 
I (print/type name), warrant that I have authority to
bind the above-mentioned insurance company and by my signature hereon do so bind this company to this endorsement.

Signature
(original signature required)
Telephone: ( ) Date Signed
Rev. 6/22

Page 39 of 45 ends

181
Agreement No. A-8484

LIVING WAGE POLICY EXHIBIT
The Living Wage Policy of the City of Oxnard is hereby adopted by the City Council on July 9, 2002 to be effective October 1, 2002.

1. Pursuant to this Living Wage Policy, Vendor shall pay those employees who provide services to the City under contract:
(a) Effective October 1, 2002, at least $9.00 an hour for the time during which the employee is providing services to the City;
(b) Effective July 1, 2003, at least $9.25 an hour for the time during which the employee is providing services to the City and 32 hours of paid leave per every calendar year in which an employee provides services to the City; (c) Effective July 1, 2004, at least $10.59 an hour for the time during which the employee is providing services to the City and 64 hours of paid leave per every calendar year in which an employee provides services to the City; and (d) Effective July 1, 2005, at least $12.22 an hour for the time during which the employee is providing services to the City and 96 hours of paid leave per every calendar year in which an employee provides services to the City.

2. The hourly rates established in Section 1 shall be adjusted July 1, 2006 and, each July 1 thereafter, according to the percentage change since July 1, 2005 in the Consumer Price Index prepared by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the Los Angeles area relating to all urban consumers.

3. A service contractor executing a service contract with the City for which the City will pay the contractor $25,000 or more during the contract term shall be subject to the Living Wage Policy.

4. A service contractor executing more than one service contract with the City, and the combined monetary total of the payments by the City pursuant to such contracts is $25,000 or more for the combined contract terms shall be subject to the Living Wage Policy.

5. This Living Wage Policy shall not govern the following types of contracts for: (a) the purchase, rental or lease of goods, products, equipment, supplies or other personal property; (b) public works projects as defined in State or local law; and (c) professional services.

6. This Living Wage Policy shall not govern the following service contractors: (a) nonprofit entities organized under IRS Code section 501(c)(3); (b) public entities such as cities, counties, special districts, states and the federal government; and (c) businesses employing fewer than five persons.

7. The City Attorney is directed to include in all standard trade services contracts and all contracts involving unique trade services, the language set forth in Exhibit 1 attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.

8. If Vendor fails to comply with this Living Wage Policy, the City Manager is directed to terminate the subject service contract immediately and to impose appropriate fines and penalties as set forth in the service contract.

9. The City Manager and the City Attorney are responsible for the administration and enforcement, respectively, of the Living Wage Policy. If an employee of a service contractor governed by the Living Wage Policy concludes that he/she has been retaliated against for the exercise of rights under the Living Wage Policy, the employee should contact the City Manager at 385-7430.

10. The City Manager shall reasonably cooperate with representatives of the Ventura County Living Wage Coalition to ensure the effective administration and enforcement of the Living Wage Policy.

11. This Living Wage Policy may be changed only by City Council and only after a duly noticed public hearing.

12. The City Manager is directed to ensure that the City Council will review the Living Wage Policy as part of the FY 2003-2004/05 budget process.

Page 40 of 45 ends

182
Agreement No. A-8484
Exhibit 1
Living Wage Policy
Pursuant to the Living Wage Policy adopted July 9, 2002 by the City Council and effective October 1, 2002, the City Manager and City Attorney are directed to include the following language in all standard trade services contracts and all unique trade services contracts governed by the Living Wage Policy.

A. Vendor shall compensate any employee of Vendor who provides services under this Agreement in accordance with the Living Wage Policy, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as the Living Wage Policy Exhibit. While this Agreement is in effect, Vendor shall pay such employee no less than $16.89 per hour for each hour that such employee provides services under this Agreement. In addition, while this Agreement is in effect, Vendor shall provide to such employee no less than 96 hours of paid leave per calendar year.

B. Vendor agrees to post, at a location readily accessible to those employees providing services to the City, a copy of the Living Wage Policy adopted by City Council on July 9, 2002 and effective October 1, 2002.

C. If Vendor fails to compensate such employee pursuant to the Living Wage Policy, the City Manager or designee shall terminate this Agreement on written notice to Vendor, effective immediately.

D. In addition, if Vendor fails to comply with the Living Wage Policy in any manner, Vendor shall pay to City a fine of $500 and shall pay to any employee providing services under this Agreement a penalty of three times the amount or value of the compensation owed to such employee under the Living Wage Policy. Vendor shall pay such fine and penalty within 15 days after the City Manager or designee provides written notice to Vendor of the amount owed.

Page 41 of 45 ends

183
Agreement No. A-8484

CITY OF OXNARD LIVING WAGE REQUIREMENTS
EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2021

42. Vendor shall compensate any employee of Vendor who provides services under this Agreement in accordance with the Living Wage Policy, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit 1. While this Agreement is in effect, Vendor shall pay such employee no less than $16.89 per hour for each hour that such employee provides services under this Agreement. This hourly rate shall be adjusted on July 1, 2022, and each July 1 thereafter, according to the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index, all items, prepared by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the Los Angeles area relating to all urban consumers (CPI-U), index base 1982-84=100, comparing May of the previous year to May of the current year. In addition, while this Agreement is in effect, Vendor shall provide to such employee no less than 96 hours of paid leave per calendar year.
a. Vendor agrees to post, at a location readily accessible to those employees providing services to the City, a copy of the Living Wage Policy adopted by the Oxnard City Council on July 9, 2002 and effective October 1, 2002. b. If Vendor fails to compensate such employee pursuant to the Living Wage Policy, the City Manager or designee shall terminate this Agreement on written notice to Vendor, effective immediately. c. In addition, if Vendor fails to comply with the Living Wage Policy in any manner, Vendor shall pay to City a fine of $500 and shall pay to any employee providing services under this Agreement a penalty of three times the amount or value of the compensation owed to such employee under the Living Wage Policy. Vendor shall pay such fine and penalty within 15 days after the City Manager or designee provides written notice to Vendor of the amount owed. d. The foregoing requirements are restated on page 5 of the Agreement for Trade Services.

Page 42 of 45 ends

184
Agreement No. A-8484

PREVAILING WAGES EXHIBIT

1. Vendor acknowledges that the Project defined in the Agreement between Vendor and City is a “public work” as defined in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1 of the California Labor Code (“Chapter 1”), and that this Agreement is subject to Chapter 1 and the rules and regulations established by the Director of Industrial Relations (“DIR”) implementing such statutes. Vendor shall perform the Project as a public work. Vendor shall comply with and be bound by all the terms, rules and regulations described in Chapter 1 and the DIR’s rules and regulations as though set forth in full herein.

2. Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1773.2, copies of the prevailing rate of per diem wages for each craft, classification, or type of worker needed to perform the Agreement are on file at City Hall and will be made available to any interested party on request. Vendor acknowledges receipt of a copy of the DIR determination of such prevailing rate of per diem wages, and Vendor shall post such rates at each job site covered by this Agreement.

3. Vendor is required to post job site notices, as prescribed by regulation. See Labor Code Section 1771.4(a)(2).

4. Vendor shall comply with and be bound by the provisions of Labor Code Sections 1774 and 1775 concerning the payment of prevailing rates of wages to workers and the penalties for failure to pay prevailing wages. Vendor shall, as a penalty to City, forfeit not more than $200 for each calendar day or portion thereof for each worker paid less than the DIR’s determined prevailing rates for the work or craft in which the worker is employed pursuant to this Agreement by Vendor or any subcontractor. The Labor Commissioner shall determine the amount of the penalty as described in Section 1775.

5. Vendor shall comply with Labor Code Section 1776, which requires Vendor and each subcontractor to (1) keep accurate payroll records and verify such records in writing under penalty of perjury, (2) certify and make such payroll records available for inspection, and (3) inform City of the location of the records.

6. Vendor shall comply with Labor Code Sections 1777.5, 1777.6 and 1777.7 and California Administrative Code Title 8, Section 200 et seq. concerning the employment of apprentices on public works projects for all apprenticeable occupations.

Before commencing work under this Agreement, Vendor shall provide City with a copy of the information submitted to any applicable apprenticeship program. Within 60 days after concluding the Project, Vendor and each of its subcontractors shall submit to City a verified statement of the journeyman and apprentice hours performed under this Agreement.

7. Vendor may not be debarred or suspended throughout the Agreement Term pursuant to Labor Code Section 1777.1 or 1777.7. If he, she or it becomes debarred or suspended in the Agreement Term, Vendor must immediately notify City.

8. Vendor is not qualified to bid on, be listed in a Bid proposal, or engage in the performance of any contract for public work, as defined in Labor Code Sections 1720 through 1861, unless currently registered and qualified to perform public work pursuant to Labor Code Section 1725.5. Vendor shall continue without interruption to stay registered and qualified to perform public work pursuant to Section 1725.5 for the duration of the term of this Agreement. This provision does not apply to construction, alteration, demolition, installation or repair work of $25,000 or less or to maintenance work of $15,000 or less.

9. Vendor acknowledges that 8 hours labor constitutes a legal day’s work. Vendor shall comply with and be bound by Labor Code Section 1810.

10. Vendor shall comply with and be bound by Labor Code Section 1813 concerning penalties for workers who work excess hours. Vendor shall, as a penalty to City, forfeit $25 for each worker employed in the performance of this Agreement by Vendor or by any subcontractor for each calendar day during which such worker is required or permitted to work more than 8 hours in any calendar day and 40 hours in any one calendar week in violation of the provisions of Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1815, work performed by Vendor’s employees in excess of 8 hours per day and 40 hours per week shall be permitted upon public work upon compensation for all hours worked in excess of 8 hours per day at not less than 1 ½ times the basic rate of pay.

11. The Project listed in the Agreement is subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the DIR.

12. Vendor shall be responsible for each and every one of its subcontractors’ compliance with Chapter 1, the DIR’s rules and regulations, and Labor Code Sections 1860 and 3700. Vendor shall include in the written contract between it and each subcontractor a copy of, and a requirement that each subcontractor shall comply with, those statutory provisions. Vendor shall be required to take all actions necessary to enforce such contractual provisions and ensure subcontractors’ compliance, including without limitation, conducting a periodic review of the certified payroll records of each subcontractor, and upon becoming aware of the failure of the subcontractor to pay its workers the specified prevailing rate of wages, Vendor shall diligently take corrective action to halt or rectify any failure.

13. To the maximum extent, Vendor shall hold harmless, defend (with counsel approved by the City Attorney) and indemnify City, its legislative bodies, and its officials, officers, employees and agents from any demand or claim for damages, compensation, fines, penalties or other amounts arising out of or incidental to any acts or omissions listed above by any person or entity (including Vendor, its subcontractors, and each of their officials, officers, employees and agents) in connection with any work undertaken or in connection with the Agreement, including without limitation the payment of all attorneys’ fees and other related costs. All duties of Vendor under this Section shall survive Agreement termination.

Page 43 of 45 ends

185
Agreement No. A-8484

SCHEDULE OF SERVICES EXHIBIT

LABORATORY ANALYSIS TESTING SCHEDULE

DIVISION LOCATION
Water Division 251 S Hayes Avenue, Oxnard. CA
Source Control 6001 Perkins Road, Oxnard, CA
OWTP/Oxnard Water Treatment Plant 6001 Perkins Road, Oxnard, CA AWPF/Advanced Water Purification Facility 5700 Perkins Road, Oxnard, CA ASR Monitoring Wells See attached location map
AWPF Wetlands 5700 Perkins Road, Oxnard, CA
ASR Well/Aquifer Storage and Recovery 937 West 5th Street, Oxnard, CA

Page 44 of 45 ends

186

WELL SITE LOCATION MAP
ASR Water Well No. 1 Campus Park Wellfield
City of Oxnard
Oxnard, California
3 2
NORTH
0 125 250
FEET
LEGEND
ASR WELL NO. 1

APPROXIMATE

MONITORING WELL

LOCATION AND NUMBER

SOUTH K STREET

SOUTH H STREET

SECOND STREET
WEST 5TH STREET
1 ASR WELL NO. 1
1

Page 45 of 45 ends

Agreement No. A-8484
187

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

INFORMATION/CONSENT AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM NO. L.4
DATE: September 20, 2022
TO: City Council
FROM: Michael Wolfe, Public Works Director, (805) 385-8055, [email protected] SUBJECT: City of Oxnard Water Division 2019-2021 Public Health Goals Report.

RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council receive and file the 2019-2021 Public Health Goals Report. (Public Works and Transportation Committee approved 3-0.)

BACKGROUND
The California Health and Safety Code Section 116470(b) requires large water utilities (more than 10,000 service connections) to prepare a brief written report if their water quality measurements have exceeded any Public Health Goal (PHG) in the three previous calendar years. The PHG report is triennial and completed by July 1 in the year it is due.

The PHG report must include the following: (1) any contaminant that has been detected above the PHG, (2) health risk information on the detected contaminants, (3) an estimated cost associated with installation of the Best Available Technology (BAT) to help reduce the level of a given contaminant, and what action, if any, will be taken to reduce the level of the contaminant and what was the basis for that decision.

The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)/ Division of Drinking Water (DDW), uses PHGs in the evaluation of health-related drinking water standards, known as Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs). MCLs are enforceable limits that water purveyors must meet to protect public health. DDW considers treatment costs, available treatment and analytical technology when setting new MCLs for unregulated chemicals.

PHGs are established by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). The OEHHA determines and publishes the “numerical public health risk” associated with both PHGs and MCLs. A PHG is a nonenforceable goal, used as a health risk assessment, not a proposed drinking water standard. It is the level of a contaminant in drinking water, which is considered not to pose a significant risk to health if consumed for a lifetime. This determination is made without regard to cost or treatability. The most recent health risk information published by OEHHA is used in this PHG report.

Contaminants that exceeded their PHG or MCLG in the years 2019 to 2021 are addressed in this report. For any contaminant that OEHHA has not set a PHG, the water suppliers are to use the Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) adopted by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). MCLGs are the federal equivalent to PHGs, but not identical.

Only contaminants which have a California primary drinking water standard and either a PHG or MCLG has been set are to be addressed in this report. There are some constituents that are routinely detected in water systems at levels usually well below the drinking water standards, for which no PHG nor MCLG have yet been adopted by OEHHA or USEPA.

These constituents are not required to be included in this report. 188
This report provides the following information required by the Health and Safety Code for each constituent detected in the City of Oxnard’s water supply between 2019-2021 that exceeded a PHG or Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG):
 Numerical public health risk associated with the MCL, PHG, or MCLG;  Category or type of risk to health that could be associated with each constituent;  Best Available Technology that could be used to reduce the constituent level; and  Estimate of the cost to install the Best Available Treatment Technology, if it is appropriate and feasible.

DISCUSSION
The PHGs are non-enforceable goals that are not required to be met by any public water system and are set by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). A PHG is the level below which OEHHA has determined that a drinking water contaminant poses no significant health risk. Additionally, PHGs are developed and published by OEHHA (Health and Safety Code Section 116365) using current risk assessment principles, practices and methods. PHGs are based solely on public health risk considerations. None of the risk management factors that are considered by the DDW or the USEPA in setting drinking water standards are considered in setting the PHGs.

These factors include analytical detection capabilities, treatment technology available, benefits, and cost. If a constituent does not have a PHG, then as required for this report, public water systems are to use Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLGs) developed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Like PHGs set by OEHHA, MCLGs are set by the USEPA in which they believe there are no known or expected risks to health, with a margin of safety.

Water quality data collected for the City of Oxnard’s Water Distribution System between 2019 - 2021 was reviewed and used for the purpose of determining compliance with state and federal drinking water standards. This information was summarized in the annual Drinking Water Consumer Confidence Reports made available to all City of Oxnard customers, residents, and businesses. The City’s most recent Drinking Water Consumer Confidence Report is available at www.oxnard.org/CCR.

Most of the constituents tested in water were reported as Non-Detect (ND) and not listed in the Drinking Water Consumer Confidence Report. When a constituent is reported as ND, it generally means that the laboratory did not detect the constituent, but it could also mean that it was detected at a level less than California’s Detection Level for Reporting (DLR) purposes.

From the review of the 2019-2021 Oxnard water quality data, there were 11 constituents detected that exceeded a PHG or MCLG. The 11 constituents were as follow: arsenic, cadmium, gross alpha particles activity, gross beta particle activity, radium 226 and radium 228, uranium, trihalomethanes (THMs), bromodichloromethane, bromoform, chloroform and dibromochloromethane.

The Best Available Technology selected to remove the 11 constituents was Reverse Osmosis (RO). Three RO facilities were determined to be necessary to achieve removal by treating 7.5 Million Gallons per Day (MGD) of water. These facilities are estimated to cost $90.9 Million dollars to construct, $27.1 Million dollars to operate and maintain and increase the average customers water bill by $508 per year.

CONCLUSION
While eleven constituents exceeded a PHG or MCLG, the levels detected are extremely low, not enforceable and much lower than the State of California enforceable drinking water Maximum Contaminant Levels.

Because the City is in compliance with the State of California and Federal Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels, staff does not recommend installing treatment processes to attempt to reduce the levels below Public Health Goal and Maximum Contaminant Level Goal levels.
189

STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
This agenda item supports the Infrastructure and Natural Resources strategy. The purpose of the Infrastructure and Natural Resources strategy is to preserve and improve our roads, utilities, parks, trees, water supply and natural resources through effective planning, prioritization, and an equitable and efficient use of available funding.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no financial impact in receiving this report.

COMMITTEE OUTCOME
The Public Works and Transportation Committee approved 3-0 on July 26, 2022 to approve the staff recommendation and to forward the item for Council to receive and file.

Prepared by: Omar Castro, Water Division Manager, Joseph Marcinko, Assistant Public Works Director

ATTACHMENTS

1. PHG_Triennial_Report_2019
190
PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS 2022

TRIENNIAL REPORT

CITY OF OXNARD

WATER DIVISION

191

CITY OF OXNARD
Page | 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
BACKGROUND …………………………………………………………………………………………. 2
WHAT ARE PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS? ……………………………………………………………… 3 WATER QUALITY DATA CONSIDERED ………………………………………………………….…. 3 CITY OF OXNARD WATER SOURCES ……………………………………………………………….. 3 BEST AVAILABLE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY AND COST ESTIMATE …………………….… 4 CONSTITUENTS DETECTED ………………………………………………………………………….. 4
METALS
ARSENIC …..……………………………………………………………………………………… 5
CADMIUM .………………………………………………………………………………………. . 5

RADIOLOGICALS
GROSS ALPHA PARTICLE ……………………………………………………………………… 6
GROSS BETA PARTICLE ………………………………………………………………………... 6
RADIUM 226/RADIUM 228 ……………………………………………………………………….7
URANIUM …………………………………………………………………………….…………… 7

ORGANICS
BROMODICHLOROMETHANE ………………………………………………………….……… 8
BROMOFORM …………………………………………………………………………….………. 9
CHLOROFORM ………………………………………………………………………….…………9
DIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE …………………………………………………….…………… 9
ESTIMATED COST TO ACHIEVE PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS ………………………………….…... 9 RECOMMENDATION ………………………………………………………………………………..... 10

192

CITY OF OXNARD
Page | 2

BACKGROUND
California Health and Safety Code Section 116470(b) requires large water utilities (more than 10,000 service connections), prepare a brief written report if their water quality measurements have exceeded any PHG in the three previous calendar years. This Public Health Goal Report must be completed by July 1 in the year it is due.

The Public Health Goal report must include the following (1) any contaminant that has been detected above the PHG, (2) health risk information on the detected contaminants, (3) an estimated cost associated with installation of the Best Available Technology (BAT) to help reduce the level of a given contaminant and what action, if any, will be taken to reduce the level of the contaminant and what was the basis for that decision.

The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)/ Division of Drinking Water (DDW), uses PHGs in the evaluation of health-related drinking water standards, known as Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs). MCLs are enforceable limits that water purveyors must meet to protect public health. DDW considers treatment costs, available treatment and analytical technology when setting new MCLs for unregulated chemicals.

Public Health Goals are established by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). The OEHHA determines and publishes the “numerical public health risk” associated with both PHGs and MCLs. A Public Health Goal is a non-enforceable goal, used as a health risk assessment, not a proposed drinking water standard. It is the level of a contaminant in drinking water, which is considered not to pose a significant risk to health if consumed for a lifetime. This determination is made without regard to cost or treatability. The most recent health risk information published by OEHHA is used in this PHG report.

Only contaminants that exceeded their PHG in the years 2019 to 2021 are addressed in this report. Any contaminant that the OEHHA has not set a PHG for a contaminant, the water suppliers are to use the Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) adopted by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). MCLGs are the federal equivalent to PHGs, but not identical. Only constituents which have a California primary drinking water standard and for which either a PHG or MCLG has been set are to be addressed in this report. There are some constituents that are routinely detected in water systems at levels usually well below the drinking water standards, for which no PHG nor MCLG have yet been adopted by OEHHA or USEPA. These constituents are not required to be included in this report.

This report provides the following information required by the Health and Safety Code for each constituent detected in the City of Oxnard’s water supply in 2019-2021 that exceeded a PHG or MCLG.  Numerical public health risk associated with the MCL, PHG, or MCLG.  Category or type of risk to health that could be associated with each constituent.  Best Available Technology that could be used to reduce the constituent level.  Estimate of the cost to install the Best Available Treatment Technology, if it is appropriate and feasible.
193

CITY OF OXNARD
Page | 3
WHAT ARE PUBLIC HEALTH GOALSs?
 PHGs are non-enforceable goals that are not required to be met by any public water system.  PHGs are set by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA).  A PHG is the level below which OEHHA has determined that a drinking water contaminant poses no significant health risk.
 PHGs are developed and published by OEHHA (Health and Safety Code Section 116365) using current risk assessment principles, practices and methods.  PHGs are based solely on public health risk considerations. None of the risk management factors that are considered by the DDW or the USEPA in setting drinking water standards are considered in setting the PHGs. These factors include analytical detection capabilities, treatment technology available, benefits and cost.
 If a constituent does not have a PHG, then as required for this report, public water systems are to use Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLGs) developed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).
 Like PHGs set by OEHHA, MCLGs are set by the USEPA in which they believe there are no known or expected risks to health, with a margin of safety.

WATER QUALITY DATA CONSIDERED
All water quality data collected for the City of Oxnard’s Water Distribution System from 2019 - 2021 is used for the purpose of determining water compliance with state drinking water standards. This information was summarized in tables included in the Drinking Water Consumer Confidence Reports made available to all City of Oxnard customers, residents, and businesses for those years. The City’s most recent Drinking Water Consumer Confidence Report is available at www.oxnard.org/CCR.

Most of the constituents tested in water were reported as Non-Detect (ND) and are not generally listed in the Drinking Water Consumer Confidence Report. When a constituent is reported as ND, it generally means that the laboratory did not detect the constituent, but it could also mean that it was detected at a level less than California’s Detection Level for Reporting (DLR) purposes.

CITY OF OXNARD WATER SOURCES
The City of Oxnard utilizes 3 sources for its water supply.  34% of Oxnard’s water supply is treated water purchased from Callegus Municipal Water District. The raw surface water is imported from Northern California via the State Water Project and treated by Metropolitan Water District (MWD).
 30% of Oxnard’s water supply is treated water purchased from United Water Conservation District (United). United supplies disinfected groundwater replenished by the Santa Clara River, Lake Piru, and the Freemen Diversion Facility.
194

CITY OF OXNARD
Page | 4
 36 % of Oxnard’s water supply is from groundwater wells owned and operated by the City. While all well water is treated, blended, and disinfected, a portion of this water is treated by reverse osmosis filtration (R.O.).

BEST AVAILABLE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY AND COST ESTIMATES
Both the USEPA and DDW have adopted what are known as Best Available Technologies (BATs), which are the best known methods of reducing contaminant levels. Capital construction along with operation and maintenance (O&M) costs can be estimated for such technologies. Since many PHGs and MCLGs are set much lower than the MCL, it is not always possible or feasible to determine what treatment is needed to further reduce a constituent down to or near the PHG or MCLG. For example, USEPA sets the MCLG for potential cancer-causing chemicals at zero. Estimating the costs to reduce a constituent is difficult, if not impossible, because it is not possible to verify by analytical means that the level has been lowered to zero. In some cases, installing treatment to try and further reduce very low levels of one constituent may have adverse effects on other aspects of water quality.

CONSTITUENTS DETECTED THAT EXCEED A PHG OR MCLG IN OXNARD

CONSTITUENT (UNITS)
SWRCB
MCL
OEHHA
PHG
USEPA
MCLG

MAXIMUM

LEVEL DETECTED
Arsenic (mg/L) 0.01 0.000004 0 0.0033
Cadmium (mg/L) 0.005 0.00004 0.005 0.00024
Gross Alpha Particles (pCi/L) 15 none 0 4
Gross Beta Particles (pCi/L) 50 none 0 4
Radium - 226 (pCi/L) none 0.05 none 0.238
Radium - 228 (pCi/L) none 0.019 none 0.759
Uranium (pCi/L) 20 0.43 0 6.1
Bromodichloromethane (mg/L) none 0.00006 0 0.0033
Bromoform (mg/L) none 0.0005 0 0.019
Chloroform (mg/L) none 0.0004 0.07 0.0016
Dibromochloromethane none 0.0001 0.06 0.11
mg/L = miligrams per liter
pCi/L = picocuries per liter
Each of the eleven constituents listed are described below, including current state and or federal water quality standards, level observed within the City system, potential source of constituent, numerical public health risk associated with the MCL and the PHG or MCLG, category or type of risk to health that could be associated with each constituent, and the Best Available Technology (BAT) for treatment.
195

CITY OF OXNARD
Page | 5
Arsenic
The MCL for arsenic in drinking water is 0.01 milligrams per liter (mg/L). The level of arsenic detected in Oxnard Water was below the MCL with a maximum level of 0.0033 mg/L. The City did not, however, meet the PHG for this constituent which was set at 0.000004 mg/L. The most probable source of the arsenic detected in the City’s water system was erosion of natural deposits.

Health Risk Category: Cancer. Some people who drink water containing arsenic in excess of the MCL over many years may experience skin damage, circulatory system problems, and may have an increased risk of getting cancer. Numeric Health Risk at PHG: Cancer risk. Theoretical 70-year lifetime excess risk is one cancer case per million people (expressed as 1x10-6). Numeric Health Risk at California MCL:

Cancer risk. Theoretical 70-year lifetime excess cancer risk is one excess cancer case per hundred people (expressed as 2.5x10-3).

The following technologies are identified as Best Available Technology (BAT) for reducing arsenic levels in drinking water, according to the CA State Division of Drinking Water (DDW).  Activated Alumina
 Coagulation / Filtration
 Electrodialysis
 Ion Exchange
 Lime Softening
 Oxidation / Filtration
 Reverse Osmosis
Currently the City Of Oxnard Water Division utilizes Reverse Osmosis (RO) treatment at wells 32, 33, and 34. RO treatment is one of the Best Available Treatment Technologies for lowering arsenic levels.

Cadmium
The MCL for cadmium in drinking water is 0.005 milligrams per liter (mg/L). The level of cadmium detected in Oxnard Water was well below the MCL with a maximum level of 0.00024 mg/L. The City did not meet the PHG for this constituent which was set at 0.00004 mg/L. The most probable source of the cadmium detected in the City’s water was erosion of natural deposits.

Health Risk Category: Nephrotoxicity (harms the kidney). Cadmium has the chronic potential to cause kidney, liver, bone and blood damage from long-term exposure at levels above the maximum contaminant level (MCL). Numeric Health Risk at PHG: Not Applicable (N/A). Numeric Health Risk at California MCL: N/A.

The Best Available Technologies (BAT) for reducing levels of cadmium are listed below.  Distillation
 Reverse Osmosis
196

CITY OF OXNARD
Page | 6
Reverse Osmosis (RO) treatment is currently used at wells 32, 33, and 34. This is one of the Best Available Technologies for lowering the levels of cadmium in drinking water.

Gross Alpha Particles Activity
Gross alpha particles activity has a state MCL of 15 picocuries per liter (pCi/L). Gross alpha particle activity has no PHG, but the federal MCLG is zero. Maximum level of gross alpha particles in City water was 4.0 pCi/L, which was below the MCL. The most probable source of gross alpha particle activity detected in the City water system was from erosion of naturally occurring minerals.

Health Risk Category: Alpha particle activity is considered to be a human carcinogen. Certain minerals are radioactive and may emit a form of radiation known as alpha radiation. Some people who drink water containing alpha emitters in excess of the MCL over many years may have an increased risk of getting cancer. Numeric Health Risk at MCLG: For an MCLG of zero, the excess cancer risk is zero. Numeric Health Risk at MCL: Approximately 1x10-3 for the most potent alpha emitter.

DDW has identified the following BATs for reducing the level of gross alpha particles.  Ion Exchange
 Reverse Osmosis
The City of Oxnard Water Division currently uses Reverse Osmosis (RO) at wells 32, 33 and 34. RO is one of the BAT for lowering the level of gross alpha particles in drinking water.

Gross Beta Particle Activity
Gross beta particle activity has a state MCL of 50 pCI/L (equivalent to 4 millirem per year). Gross beta particle activity has no PHG, but the MCLG is zero. Maximum level of gross beta particles in City water was 4.0 pCi/L. The most probable source of gross beta particles activity detected in the City water system was from naturally occurring minerals.

Health Risk Category: Beta particle activity is considered to be a human carcinogen. Certain minerals are radioactive and may emit forms of radiation known as photons and beta radiation. Some people who drink water containing photon and beta emitters in excess of the MCL over many years may have an increased risk of getting cancer. Numeric Health Risk at MCLG: For an MCLG of zero, the excess cancer risk is zero. Numeric Health Risk at MCL: Approximately 2x10-3 for the most potent beta emitter.

DDW has identified the following BATs for reducing the level of gross beta particles.  Ion Exchange
197

CITY OF OXNARD
Page | 7
 Reverse Osmosis
The City of Oxnard Water Division currently uses Reverse Osmosis (RO) at wells 32, 33 and 34. RO is one of the BAT for lowering the level of Gross beta Particles in drinking water.

Radium 226 and Radium 228
There is currently no state MCL for both Radium 226 and Radium 228. The level of Radium 226 detected in Oxnard Water was 0.238 picocuries per liter (pCi/L). The level of Radium 228 detected in Oxnard Water was 0.759 pCi/L. The City however, did not meet the PHG for these constituents, which were set at

0.05 picocuries per liter and 0.019 picocuries per liter, respectively. The most probable source of radium is the naturally occurring decay of uranium and thorium found in radioactive rock, soil and water. Radium can enter ground water by dissolution of aquifer materials, by desorption from rock or sediment surfaces, and by ejection form minerals during radioactive decay.

Health Risk Category: Carcinogenicity. Some people who consumed water that contained more than 5 picocuries per liter over 70 years may have an increased risk of getting cancer. Radium is primarily associated with bone and sinus cancers along with cell tissue damage. Numeric Health Risk at PHG:

Cancer risk. Theoretical 70-year lifetime excess risk is one cancer case per million people (expressed as 1x10-6). Numeric Health Risk at California MCL: Cancer risk. Theoretical 70-year lifetime excess cancer risk is one excess cancer case per ten thousand people (expressed 1x10-4).

The following technologies are identified as Best Available Technology (BAT) for reducing radium 226 and radium 228 levels in drinking water, according to the CA State Division of Drinking Water (DDW).  Ion Exchange
 Lime softening
 Reverse Osmosis
Reverse Osmosis (RO) treatment is currently used at wells 32, 33, and 34. This is one of the Best Available Technologies for lowering the levels of radium 226 and radium 228 in drinking water.

Uranium
The state MCL for uranium is 20 pCi/L. The PHG for uranium is 0.43 pCi/L. Maximum observed level of uranium was 6.1 pCi/L. The most probable source of uranium detected in the City water system was from erosion of naturally occurring minerals.

Health Risk Category: Carcinogenic/chronic toxicity. Some people who drink water containing uranium in excess of the MCL over many years may have kidney problems or an increased risk of getting cancer.

Numeric Health Risk at PHG: The theoretical 70-year lifetime cancer risk for drinking water with uranium above 0.43pCi/L is one excess cancer case per million people (1x10-6). For a MCLG of zero, the 198

CITY OF OXNARD
Page | 8
cancer risk is zero. Numerical Health Risk at MCL: The theoretical 70-year lifetime cancer risk for drinking water with uranium above 20 pCi/L is 5 excess cancer cases per 100,000 people (5x10-5).

DDW has identified the following BATs for reducing the level of gross beta particles.  Coagulation / Filtration
 Ion exchange
 Lime Softening
 Reverse Osmosis
The City of Oxnard Water Division currently uses Reverse Osmosis (RO) at wells 32, 33 and 34. RO is one of the BAT for lowering the level of uranium in drinking water.

Trihalomethanes (THMs)
There are 4 major regulated trihalomethanes found in drinking water. All 4 constituents are results of disinfection byproducts necessary to avoid infectious diseases within the general public from microbial contamination of drinking water supplies. None of these 4 constituents have an individual State MCL.

There is a total trihalomethanes MCL, which is the sum of these 4 constituents. The MCL is 0.08mg/L.

The Best Available Technologies (BAT) for reducing levels of Trihalomethanes are listed below.  Filters Containing Carbon or Charcoal
 Reverse Osmosis
The City of Oxnard Water Division currently uses Reverse Osmosis (RO) at wells 32, 33 and 34. RO is one of the BAT for lowering the levels of TTHMs in drinking water.

Bromodichloromethane
The PHG for bromodichloromethane is 0.00006 mg/L. The level that was detected in the City Water was

0.003 mg/L.

Health Risk Category: Carcinogenicity. Some people, who drink water containing bromodichloromethane in excess of the PHG over many years, may have an increased risk of getting cancer. Numeric Health Risk at PHG: The theoretical 70-year lifetime cancer risk for drinking water above the 0.00006 is one excess cancer cases per million (1x10-6). Numeric Health Risk at MCL: The theoretical 70-year lifetime cancer risk for drinking water above the 0.8 mg/L is 1.3 excess cancer cases per one thousand (1.3x10-3). 199

CITY OF OXNARD
Page | 9
Bromoform
The PHG level for bromoform is 0.0005 mg/L. The level of bromoform detected within the City water was 0.019 mg/L.

Health Risk Category: Carcinogenicity. Some people who drink water containing bromoform in excess of the PHG over many years may have an increased risk of getting cancer. Numeric Health Risk at PHG:

Theoretical 70-year lifetime cancer risk is one excess cancer case per million (1x10-6). Numeric Health Risk at MCL: Theoretical 70-year lifetime cancer risk for drinking water above the 0.08 mg/L is two excess cancer cases per ten thousand (2x10-4).

Chloroform
The PHG level for chloroform is 0.0004 mg/L. The level of chloroform detected within the City water was 0.0016 mg/L.

Health Risk Category: Carcinogenicity. Some people who drink water containing chloroform in excess of the PHG over many years may have an increased risk of getting cancer. Numeric Health Risk at PHG:

Theoretical 70-year lifetime cancer risk is one excess cancer case per million (1x10-6). Numeric Health Risk at MCL: Theoretical 70-year lifetime cancer risk for drinking water above the 0.08 mg/L is two excess cancer cases per ten thousand (2x10-4).

Dibromochloromethane
The PHG level for dibromochloromethane is 0.0001 mg/L. The level of dibromochloromethane detected within the City water was 0.011 mg/L.

Health Risk Category: Carcinogenicity. Some people who drink water containing dibromochloromethane in excess of the PHG over many years may have an increased risk of getting cancer. Numeric Health Risk at PHG: Theoretical 70-year lifetime cancer risk is one excess cancer case per million (1x10-6). Numeric Health Risk at MCL: Theoretical 70-year lifetime cancer risk for drinking water above the 0.08 mg/L is eight excess cancer cases per ten thousand (8x10-4).

ESTIMATED COSTS TO ACHIEVE PHG’s
The California Health and Safety code requires that this report includes an estimate of the aggregate cost and cost per customer for additional treatment to achieve the PHGs. Reverse osmosis (RO), ion exchange (IX), and corrosion control are potential BATs available for the constituents of concern.

It is estimated that additional RO treatment would have to be constructed at three City blending stations that do not currently have a desalter. RO treatment capacity needed at each station is estimated at 7.5 million gallons per day, totaling 22.5 million gallons per day for three stations. The cost estimates 200

CITY OF OXNARD
Page | 10
includes engineering, construction, operation, 30-year amortization at 5 percent for debt service, and 3 percent annual inflation. However, the cost estimates do not include land costs, conveyance, and permitting.

Estimated total cost for the City would be approximately $27,141,000 per year as shown in the chart below. Total additional cost per customer would be approximately $508 per year.

System Characteristics Treatment
RO # of units 3
RO Capacity/Station (MGD) 7.5
RO Engineering/Construction Cost per unit ($ million) (2013$) (1,2) 30.3 RO Total Annual Cost ($ million/year) (2030$) (3) 27.1
Total Additional Annual Cost per Customer ($ / connection / year)(2030$) (4,5) 508 Notes:

1. RO costs provided by City of Oxnard ($24 million/ desalter). (City, 2015). 3% per year added for inflation (from 2013 - 2030)

2. Costs for inflation and additional capital/operating are assumed to be balanced by the use of newer technology and efficiencies.

3. Current RO Total Annual Cost provided by City of Oxnard (based on $1268/AF). Desalters are to be constructed over a 15 year period. City will treat approximately 16,900 AFY of groundwater by year 2030.

4. Costs adjusted to 2030 dollars with inflation estimated at 3% per year. Total additional annual cost per customer service connection for additional RO treatment adjusted to 2030 dollars.

5. Current number of service connections is approximately 42,500 (City, 2015 UWMP). Projected 2030 service connections is 53,400 (based on mean increase from 1992-2010).

The above estimate is for the construction of three additional desalters. All 3 desalter facilities could not be built at the Water Campus due to groundwater allocation restrictions (set by Fox Canyon Groundwater Management Agency), total demand, and insufficient storage for permeate water. This scenario would only be obtainable by gaining more groundwater allocation and constructing separate R.O. facilities throughout the city. This would greatly reduce our dependency on purchased water, but not eliminate the need for purchased sources.
201

CITY OF OXNARD
Page | 11

RECOMMENDATION
The City of Oxnard routinely performs and reports compliance monitoring of its water supplies. Water delivered by the City complies with all drinking water standards set by the state and federal government.

On average, contaminants detected had concentrations far below MCLs. Only eleven contaminants had at least one sample that was detected at a higher level than the PHG or MCLG, which are non-enforceable goals. In addition, this report estimates significant treatment costs to potentially achieve PHGs and MCLGs. Because many PHGs and MCLGs are set at zero, it is not always feasible to determine what treatment is needed to reduce a constituent downward to or near zero. Furthermore, it is often not possible to verify by analytical means that the level has actually been lowered to zero.

For these reasons, City staff has determined that this financial investment is not warranted at this time given the low risks associated with the PHGs and MCLGs discussed in this report.

If you have any questions concerning this report, please contact Richard Maria, Water Regulatory Compliance Coordinator, at (805) 200-5374.
202

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

INFORMATION/CONSENT AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM NO. L.5
DATE: September 20, 2022
TO: City Council
FROM: Alexander Hamilton, Fire Chief, (805) 385-7700, [email protected] SUBJECT: Adoption of a Resolution Approving the 2022 Update of the Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan.

RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council adopt the attached Resolution approving the 2022 update of the Ventura County MultiJurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan.

BACKGROUND
Hazard Mitigation Planning for the Ventura County Planning Area:

In May 2021, a coalition of Ventura County planning partners embarked on a planning process to prepare for and lessen the impacts of specified natural hazards. Responding to federal mandates in the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-390), the partnership was formed to pool resources and create a uniform hazard mitigation strategy that can be consistently applied to the defined planning area and used to ensure eligibility for specified grant funding sources. The 25 member planning partnership that completed this plan update process includes:

1. Ventura County (Unincorporated Areas)

2. City of Camarillo

3. City of Fillmore

4. City of Moorpark

5. City of Ojai

6. City of Oxnard

7. City of Port Hueneme

8. City of Santa Paula

9. City of Simi Valley

10. City of Thousand Oaks

11. City of Ventura

12. California State University, Channel Islands

13. Calleguas Municipal Water District

14. Casitas Municipal Water District

15. Channel Islands Beach Community Services District

16. Conejo Recreation and Park District

17. Ojai Valley Sanitary District

18. Pleasant Valley Recreation and Park District

19. Saticoy Sanitary District

20. Triunfo Water and Sanitation District

21. United Water Conservation District

22. Ventura County Fire Protection District
203

23. Ventura County Office of Education

24. Ventura County Public Works Agency-Watershed Protection

25. Ventura Regional Sanitation District
The planning area for the hazard mitigation plan encompasses all of Ventura County. The result of the organizational efforts has been to produce a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) approved multi-agency multi-hazard mitigation plan.

Mitigation is defined in this context as any sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to life and property from a hazard event. Mitigation planning is the systematic process of learning about the hazards that can affect the community, setting clear goals, identifying appropriate actions, and following through with an effective mitigation strategy. Mitigation encourages long-term reduction of hazard vulnerability and can reduce the enormous cost of disasters to property owners and all levels of government. Mitigation can also protect critical community facilities, reduce exposure to liability, and minimize post-disaster community disruption.

The hazard identification and profiling in the hazard mitigation plan addresses the following natural hazards considered to be of significant importance within the Ventura County planning area:
 Dam Failure Inundation
 Drought
 Earthquake
 Flooding (includes Levee Failures)
 Landslide & Mass Movements
 Sea Level Rise/Coastal Erosion (SLR)
 Severe Storms
 Severe Weather Events (Heat/Freeze Events)
 Tsunami
 Wildfire
The Ventura County Office of Emergency Services secured funding for developing the hazard mitigation plan and was the lead coordinating agency for this multi-jurisdictional effort. All participating local jurisdictions have been responsible for assisting in the development of the hazard and vulnerability assessments and the mitigation action strategies for their respective jurisdictions and organizations. The plan presents the accumulated information in a unified framework to ensure a comprehensive and coordinated plan covering all planning partners within the Ventura County Planning Area.

Each jurisdiction has been responsible for the review and approval of their individual sections of the plan.

A team of City of Oxnard staff members representing Fire, Police, Public Works, HR, IT, Finance, Cultural and Community Services, the City Attorney’s Office, Community Development and the City Manager’s Office provided updates to Oxnard’s jurisdictional annex that is included within the plan.

The plan was prepared in accordance with the Cal OES Local Hazard Mitigation Plan and FEMA preparation guidelines.

The plan update process was overseen by a 17-member, stakeholder Steering Committee. The Steering Committee is composed of representative stakeholders from within the planning area and is an established committee that was leveraged for this planning process. In addition, residents were asked to contribute by sharing local knowledge of their individual area’s vulnerability to natural hazards based on past occurrences. Public involvement has been solicited via a multi-media campaign that included public meetings, web-based information, questionnaires, and progress updates via the news media.

NEXT STEPS
Why adopt this Plan?
Once the hazard mitigation plan has been approved by Cal OES and FEMA and adopted by all of the jurisdictional 204
partners, the partnership will collectively and individually become eligible to apply for hazard mitigation project funding from the suite of grant programs under FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) program. The Plan needs to be adopted as the final step in the process.

Where do we go from here?
Once Cal OES and FEMA have approved the Plan (APA – Approval Pending Adoption), each jurisdiction will need to adopt Volume 1 and its respective annex by governing body resolution to be eligible to apply for funding sources including grants.

Grant funds are made available to local governments and states and can be used to implement the various hazard mitigation measures specified in the respective annexes. The Hazard Mitigation Plan is considered a living document, such that as awareness of additional hazards develop and new strategies and projects are conceived to offset or prevent loss due to natural hazards, the Plan will be evaluated and revised on an annual basis during the 5 year plan timeframe.

As a living document, the hazard mitigation plan information can be integrated and used in conjunction with other emergency and related plans, such as Emergency Operation Plans (EOPs).

STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
This agenda item supports the Public Safety strategy. The purpose of the Public Safety strategy is to restore and modernize the delivery of public safety services to provide for the safety of our neighborhoods and health of our community.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact for the approval of the Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. However, the implementation of the plan will require time and resources.

COMMITTEE OUTCOME
This item was approved 3-0 on July 26, 2022 by the Community Servces, Public Safety, Housing & Development Committee.

Prepared by: Katie Casey, Communications Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Exhibit 1a_Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan_ Volume 1

2. Exhibit 1b_Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan_ Volume 2

3. VC HMP Resolution_Oxnard_Committee Review 7.26.22 (1)

4. Ventura County MJHMP Approval 8-16-2022
205
Multi-Jurisdictional Multi-Jurisdictional
Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Mitigation Plan
June 2022
Ventura County
Update 2022
Volume 1—Area-wide Information
206
207
Ventura County
Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan
Update 2022
June 2022

PREPARED FOR PREPARED BY
County of Ventura Tetra Tech
800 South Victoria Avenue
Ventura, CA 93009
1999 Harrison Street
Suite 500
Oakland, CA 94612
Phone: 510.302.6300
Fax: 510.433.0830
tetratech.com
Tetra Tech Project #103s7429
\\tts121fs1\Data\EMCR_Projects\California\VenturaCounty\HMP 2021_103s7429\Plan Development\Plan Documents\2022-06_Final\2022-06_VenturaHMP_Vol1_Final.docx 208
209
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Contents v

CONTENTS
Executive Summary............................................................................................................. xvii Part 1— BACKGROUND AND METHODS

1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................................1-1

1.1 Why Prepare This Plan? ......................................................................................................1-1

1.2 Who Will Benefit from This Plan?.........................................................................................1-2

1.3 Contents of the Plan.............................................................................................................1-3

2. Plan Update—What has Changed?.............................................................................................2-1

2.1 Previous Plans .....................................................................................................................2-1

2.2 Why Update? .......................................................................................................................2-2

2.3 The Updated Plan—What Is Different?................................................................................2-1

3. Plan Development Methodology ..................................................................................................3-1

3.1 Funding ................................................................................................................................3-1

3.2 Formation of the Core Planning Team.................................................................................3-1

3.3 Establishment of the Planning Partnership ..........................................................................3-1

3.4 Defining the Planning Area ..................................................................................................3-2

3.5 The Steering Committee ......................................................................................................3-3

3.6 Coordination with Stakeholders and Agencies.....................................................................3-4

3.7 Review of Existing Programs ...............................................................................................3-5

3.8 Public Participation...............................................................................................................3-6

3.9 Plan Development Chronology/Milestones ........................................................................3-12

4. Ventura County Profile.................................................................................................................4-1

4.1 Physical Setting....................................................................................................................4-1

4.2 Historical Overview ..............................................................................................................4-3

4.3 Population Centers, Transportation, and Government.........................................................4-4

4.4 Development........................................................................................................................4-4

4.5 Demographics Profile.........................................................................................................4-11

4.6 Economy ............................................................................................................................4-14

5. Hazards of Concern .....................................................................................................................5-1

5.1 Major Past Hazard Events ...................................................................................................5-1

5.2 Hazards Evaluated in 2015 Plan..........................................................................................5-2

5.3 Identified Hazards for the 2022 Update ...............................................................................5-3

6. Existing Regulations ....................................................................................................................6-1

6.1 Federal and State Agencies, Programs and Regulations ....................................................6-1

6.2 Local Plans, Reports and Codes..........................................................................................6-6

6.3 Local Capability Assessment ...............................................................................................6-7

6.4 Hazard Mitigation Capabilities for Future Development.......................................................6-9 Part 2— RISK ASSESSMENT

7. Risk Assessment Methodology....................................................................................................7-1

7.1 Risk Assessment Tools........................................................................................................7-1

7.2 Risk Assessment Approach .................................................................................................7-2

7.3 Sources of Data Used in Modeling and Exposure analyses ................................................7-3 210
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Contents vi

7.4 Limitations............................................................................................................................7-6

8. Dam Failure .................................................................................................................................8-1

8.1 General Background ............................................................................................................8-1

8.2 Hazard Profile ......................................................................................................................8-3

8.3 Exposure..............................................................................................................................8-9

8.4 Vulnerability........................................................................................................................8-11

8.5 Scenario.............................................................................................................................8-13

8.6 Issues.................................................................................................................................8-13

9. Drought ........................................................................................................................................9-1

9.1 General Background ............................................................................................................9-1

9.2 Hazard Profile ......................................................................................................................9-5

9.3 Exposure............................................................................................................................9-11

9.4 Vulnerability........................................................................................................................9-11

9.5 Scenario.............................................................................................................................9-12

9.6 Issues.................................................................................................................................9-13

10. Earthquake...............................................................................................................................10-1

10.1 General Background ........................................................................................................10-1

10.2 Hazard Profile ..................................................................................................................10-6

10.3 Exposure........................................................................................................................10-13

10.4 Vulnerability....................................................................................................................10-14

10.5 Scenario.........................................................................................................................10-27

10.6 Issues.............................................................................................................................10-28

11. Flood........................................................................................................................................11-1

11.1 General Background ........................................................................................................11-1

11.2 Hazard Profile ..................................................................................................................11-7

11.3 Exposure........................................................................................................................11-22

11.4 Vulnerability....................................................................................................................11-25

11.5 Scenario.........................................................................................................................11-28

11.6 Issues.............................................................................................................................11-29

12. Landslide..................................................................................................................................12-1

12.1 General Background ........................................................................................................12-1

12.2 Hazard Profile ..................................................................................................................12-2

12.3 Exposure..........................................................................................................................12-6

12.4 Vulnerability......................................................................................................................12-8

12.5 Scenario.........................................................................................................................12-10

12.6 Issues.............................................................................................................................12-10

13. Sea-Level Rise and Coastal Erosion .......................................................................................13-1

13.1 General Background ........................................................................................................13-1

13.2 Hazard Profile ..................................................................................................................13-2

13.3 Exposure..........................................................................................................................13-7

13.4 Vulnerability......................................................................................................................13-8

13.5 Scenario...........................................................................................................................13-9

13.6 Issues...............................................................................................................................13-9

14. Severe Storms .........................................................................................................................14-1

14.1 General Background ........................................................................................................14-1

14.2 Hazard Profile ..................................................................................................................14-2 211
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Contents vii

14.3 Exposure and Vulnerability ..............................................................................................14-5

14.4 Scenario...........................................................................................................................14-7

14.5 Issues...............................................................................................................................14-7

15. Severe Weather.......................................................................................................................15-1

15.1 General Background ........................................................................................................15-1

15.2 Hazard Profile ..................................................................................................................15-4

15.3 Exposure and Vulnerability ..............................................................................................15-8

15.4 Scenario...........................................................................................................................15-9

15.5 Issues...............................................................................................................................15-9

16. Tsunami ...................................................................................................................................16-1

16.1 General Background ........................................................................................................16-1

16.2 Hazard Profile ..................................................................................................................16-3

16.3 Exposure..........................................................................................................................16-6

16.4 Vulnerability......................................................................................................................16-9

16.5 Scenario.........................................................................................................................16-12

16.6 Issues.............................................................................................................................16-12

17. Wildfire.....................................................................................................................................17-1

17.1 General Background ........................................................................................................17-1

17.2 Hazard Profile ..................................................................................................................17-4

17.3 Exposure..........................................................................................................................17-7

17.4 Vulnerability......................................................................................................................17-9

17.5 Scenario.........................................................................................................................17-11

17.6 Issues.............................................................................................................................17-12

18. Climate Change .......................................................................................................................18-1

18.1 General Background ........................................................................................................18-1

18.2 Impact of Climate Change on Hazards of Concern..........................................................18-8

19. Other Hazards of Interest.........................................................................................................19-1

19.1 Agricultural and Biological................................................................................................19-1

19.2 Pandemic .........................................................................................................................19-3

20. Planning Area Risk Ranking ....................................................................................................20-1

20.1 Probability of Occurrence.................................................................................................20-1

20.2 Impact ..............................................................................................................................20-2

20.3 Risk Rating and Ranking..................................................................................................20-3 Part 3— MITIGATION PLAN

21. Vision Statement, Goals and Objectives..................................................................................21-1

21.1 Vision STatement.............................................................................................................21-1

21.2 Goals................................................................................................................................21-1

21.3 Objectives ........................................................................................................................21-2

22. Mitigation Best Practices..........................................................................................................22-1

22.1 Mitigation Best Practices..................................................................................................22-1

22.2 Adaptive Capacity ..........................................................................................................22-11

23. Recommended Planning-Area-Wide Actions...........................................................................23-1

23.1 Recommended Mitigation Actions for All Partners...........................................................23-1

23.2 Area-Wide Action Plan Prioritization ................................................................................23-1

23.3 Classification of Area-Wide Mitigation Actions.................................................................23-3 212
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Contents viii

24. Plan Adoption and Maintenance ..............................................................................................24-1

24.1 Plan Adoption...................................................................................................................24-1

24.2 Plan Maintenance Strategy ..............................................................................................24-1 References
Appendices
Appendix A. Public Involvement Materials
Appendix B. Federal and State Agencies, Programs and Regulations Appendix C. Mapping Methods & Data Sources
Appendix D. Detailed Risk Assessment Results
Appendix E. Summary of Peak Discharges for the Planning Area Appendix F. FEMA Approval and Partner Adoption Resolutions Tables
Table ES-1. Countywide Mitigation Initiatives.......................................................................................xxiii Table 2-1. Key Changes from Previous Hazard Mitigation Plan............................................................2-1 Table 3-1. Core Planning Team Makeup...............................................................................................3-1 Table 3-2. Hazard Mitigation Planning Partners ....................................................................................3-2 Table 3-3. Steering Committee Members..............................................................................................3-3 Table 3-4. Summary of Public Meetings..............................................................................................3-12 Table 3-5. Plan Development Milestones ............................................................................................3-13 Table 4-1. Normal Precipitation and Temperatures, 2000 – 2020.........................................................4-2 Table 4-2. Planning Area Building Counts by Occupancy Class ...........................................................4-7 Table 4-3. Estimated Replacement Value of Planning Area Buildings ..................................................4-7 Table 4-4. Critical Facilities by Jurisdiction and Category .....................................................................4-8 Table 4-5. Recent Population by Jurisdiction.......................................................................................4-12 Table 4-6. Comparative Statistics for Renter-Occupied and Owner-Occupied Housing Units ............4-15 Table 4-7. 2021 Principal Employers within Ventura County...............................................................4-15 Table 5-1. Federal Disaster Declarations for Hazard Events that Affected the Planning Area..............5-1 Table 5-2. Hazards Addressed in This Hazard Mitigation Plan .............................................................5-3 Table 6-1. Summary of Relevant Federal Agencies, Programs and Regulations..................................6-1 Table 6-2. Summary of Relevant State Agencies, Programs and Regulations .....................................6-3 Table 7-1. Hazus Model Property and Hazard Data Documentation.....................................................7-5 Table 7-2. Hazus Model Critical Facilities Data Documentation............................................................7-6 Table 8-1. Ventura County Dams with Potential to Endanger Lives and Property ................................8-4 213
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Contents ix
Table 8-2. Ventura County Dam Inspection Dates ................................................................................8-6 Table 8-3. State of California Downstream Hazard Potential Classification ..........................................8-8 Table 8-4. Exposed Property in Evaluated Dam Failure Inundation Area .............................................8-9 Table 8-5. Estimated Dam Failure Impacts on Population...................................................................8-11 Table 8-6. Estimated Impact of a Dam Failure in the Planning Area...................................................8-11 Table 9-1. State Drought Management Program...................................................................................9-5 Table 10-1. Mercalli Scale and Peak Ground Acceleration Comparison .............................................10-3 Table 10-2. NEHRP Soil Classification System...................................................................................10-6 Table 10-3. Recent Earthquakes Magnitude 5.0 or Larger Within 100-mile Radius of Planning Area 10-7 Table 10-4. Likely Maximum Magnitudes and Recurrence Intervals ...................................................10-9 Table 10-5. Earthquakes Modeled for Risk Assessment...................................................................10-15 Table 10-6. Estimated Earthquake Impact on Persons .....................................................................10-15 Table 10-7. Estimated Impact of Earthquake Scenario Events in the Planning Area ........................10-15 Table 10-8. Age of Housing Units in Planning Area...........................................................................10-21 Table 11-1. Flood Insurance Statistics.................................................................................................11-7 Table 11-2. CRS Status of Participating Jurisdictions .........................................................................11-8 Table 11-3. History of Flood Events...................................................................................................11-14 Table 11-4. Repetitive Loss Properties in Ventura County ................................................................11-17 Table 11-5. Summary of Peak Discharges in Large Ventura County Drainages...............................11-19 Table 11-6. Exposed Population in Evaluated Flood Hazard Zones .................................................11-22 Table 11-7. Exposed Property in Evaluated Flood Hazard Zones.....................................................11-23 Table 11-8. Estimated Flood Impacts on Persons and Households ..................................................11-26 Table 11-9. Estimated Impact of a Flood Event in the Planning Area ...............................................11-26 Table 12-1. Landslide Events in the Planning Area.............................................................................12-3 Table 12-2. Exposed Population in Mapped Landslide Hazard Zones ................................................12-6 Table 12-3. Exposed Property in Mapped Landslide Hazard Zones ...................................................12-7 Table 12-4. Loss Estimation for Landslide...........................................................................................12-9 Table 13-1. History of Coastal Erosion Events ....................................................................................13-3 Table 13-2. Estimated Population Exposure for Sea-Level Rise.........................................................13-7 Table 13-3. Estimated Property Exposure for Sea-Level Rise ............................................................13-7 Table 14-1. Recent Severe Storm Events in the Planning Area..........................................................14-2 Table 15-1. Beaufort Wind Chart .........................................................................................................15-1 Table 15-2. Operational Enhanced Fujita Scale ..................................................................................15-3 Table 15-3. Recent Severe Weather Events in the Planning Area......................................................15-4 Table 16-1. Tsunami Events in Ventura County ..................................................................................16-3 Table 16-2. Exposed Property in the Tsunami Inundation Zone..........................................................16-7 Table 16-3. Estimated Impact of a Tsunami Event in the Planning Area...........................................16-10 Table 17-1. Federally Declared Wildfire Events in Ventura County.....................................................17-4 Table 17-2. Exposed Population in Mapped Relative Fire Hazard Zones ...........................................17-7 Table 17-3. Exposed Property in Mapped Relative Fire Hazard Zones...............................................17-8 Table 17-4. Loss Estimates for Fire Hazard Severity Zones .............................................................17-10 Table 19-1. Agricultural and Biological Hazards That Threaten Ventura County ................................19-2 214
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Contents x
Table 19-2. Naturally Spread Diseases Seen in California..................................................................19-4 Table 22-1. Alternatives to Mitigate the Dam Failure Hazard ..............................................................22-2 Table 22-2. Alternatives to Mitigate the Drought Hazard.....................................................................22-3 Table 22-3. Alternatives to Mitigate the Earthquake Hazard ...............................................................22-4 Table 22-4. Alternatives to Mitigate the Flood Hazard.........................................................................22-5 Table 22-5. Alternatives to Mitigate the Landslide Hazard ..................................................................22-6 Table 22-6. Alternatives to Mitigate Sea-Level Rise and Coastal Erosion...........................................22-7 Table 22-7. Alternatives to Mitigate the Severe Storm and Severe Weather Hazards ........................22-8 Table 22-8. Alternatives to Mitigate the Tsunami Hazard....................................................................22-9 Table 22-9. Alternatives to Mitigate the Wildfire Hazard....................................................................22-10 Table-23-1. Action Plan—Countywide Mitigation Initiatives.................................................................23-1 Table 23-2. Mitigation Action Priority ...................................................................................................23-3 Table 23-3. Analysis of Mitigation Actions ...........................................................................................23-4 Table 24-1. Plan Maintenance Matrix ..................................................................................................24-2 Figures
Figure 3-1. Example Page of the Hazard Mitigation Plan Web Site ......................................................3-7 Figure 3-2. Sample Page from Survey Distributed to the Public............................................................3-8 Figure 3-3. Example Story Map Data Page ...........................................................................................3-9 Figure 3-4. Screenshot from September 16, 2021 Community Emergency Preparedness Workshop 3-10 Figure 4-1. Planning Area......................................................................................................................4-5 Figure 4-2. Land Use Classifications in the Planning Area....................................................................4-6 Figure 4-3. Critical Facilities (1 of 2) ......................................................................................................4-9 Figure 4-4. Critical Facilities (2 of 2) ....................................................................................................4-10 Figure 4-5. State of California and Ventura County Population Growth per Decade...........................4-12 Figure 4-6. Planning Area Age Distribution..........................................................................................4-13 Figure 4-7. Planning Area Race Distribution........................................................................................4-14 Figure 4-8. Employment in Ventura County by Industry Sector...........................................................4-16 Figure 4-9. 10-Year Unemployment Rates for California and Ventura County....................................4-17 Figure 4-10. Employment in the Planning Area by Type of Work ........................................................4-17 Figure 8-1. Locations of Dams in Ventura County .................................................................................8-5 Figure 8-2. Dam Failure Inundation Area Used for Risk Assessment ...................................................8-7 Figure 8-3. Building Count by Occupancy Class in the Dam Failure Inundation Zone........................8-10 Figure 8-4. Critical Facilities in Dam Failure Inundation Area..............................................................8-10 Figure 8-5. Critical Facilities Exposed to and Affected by Mapped Dam Failure Inundation Area.......8-12 Figure 8-6. Average % of Damage to Critical Facilities Caused by Modeled Dam Failure..................8-12 Figure 9-1. Example Drought Index Maps, Current as of November 18, 2021......................................9-3 Figure 9-2. Calleguas MWD’s Lake Bard Reservoir ..............................................................................9-6 Figure 9-3. Casitas MWSD’s Lake Casitas............................................................................................9-7 Figure 9-4. UWCD’s Freeman Diversion ...............................................................................................9-7 215
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Contents xi
Figure 9-5. Percent of Ventura County Affected by Each USDM Rating, 2000 – 2021 .........................9-9 Figure 10-1. Peak Acceleration (%g) with 2% Probability of Exceedance in 50 Years........................10-5 Figure 10-2. Local Fault Locations.......................................................................................................10-8 Figure 10-3. NEHRP Soil Class.........................................................................................................10-10 Figure 10-4. Liquefaction Zones ........................................................................................................10-11 Figure 10-5. Peak Ground Acceleration (%g) with 10% Probability of Exceedance in 50 Years.......10-12 Figure 10-6. Building Count by Occupancy Class on NEHRP D or E soils .......................................10-13 Figure 10-7. Critical Facilities on NEHRP D and E Soils ...................................................................10-14 Figure 10-8. Intensity Scale for 100-Year Probabilistic Earthquake Scenario ...................................10-16 Figure 10-9. Intensity Scale for Oak Ridge M7.16 Earthquake Scenario ..........................................10-17 Figure 10-10. Intensity Scale for San Cayetano M7.16 Earthquake Scenario...................................10-18 Figure 10-11. Intensity Scale for South San Andreas M8.03 Earthquake Scenario ..........................10-19 Figure 10-12. Intensity Scale for Ventura-Pitas Point M7.12 Earthquake Scenario ..........................10-20 Figure 10-13. Critical Facility Damage Potential, 100-Year Probabilistic Earthquake Scenario ........10-22 Figure 10-14. Critical Facility Damage Potential, Oak Ridge M7.16 Earthquake Scenario ...............10-23 Figure 10-15. Critical Facility Damage Potential, San Cayetano M7.16 Earthquake Scenario .........10-23 Figure 10-16. Critical Facility Damage Potential, S San Andreas M8.03 Earthquake Scenario ........10-24 Figure 10-17. Critical Facility Damage Potential, Ventura-Pitas Point M7.12 Earthquake Scenario .10-24 Figure 10-18. Critical Facility Functionality, 100-Year Probabilistic Earthquake Scenario ................10-25 Figure 10-19. Critical Facility Functionality, Oak Ridge M7.16 Earthquake Scenario........................10-25 Figure 10-20. Critical Facility Functionality, San Cayetano M7.16 Earthquake Scenario..................10-26 Figure 10-21. Critical Facility Functionality, S San Andreas M8.03 Earthquake Scenario ................10-26 Figure 10-22. Critical Facility Functionality, Ventura-Pitas Point M7.12 Earthquake Scenario..........10-27 Figure 11-1. Limit of Moderate Wave Action........................................................................................11-5 Figure 11-2. Floodplains Mapped in the Ventura River Levee Study ................................................11-16 Figure 11-3. Floodplains Mapped in the Santa Clara River Levee Study ..........................................11-17 Figure 11-4. FEMA Flood Hazard Areas............................................................................................11-18 Figure 11-5. Ventura County Flood Warning System Example .........................................................11-23 Figure 11-6. Building Occupancy Classes in the Mapped Flood Zones ............................................11-24 Figure 11-7. Critical Facilities in 1% Annual Chance Floodplain .......................................................11-24 Figure 11-8. Critical Facilities in 0.2% Annual Chance Floodplain ....................................................11-25 Figure 11-9. Facilities Exposed to and Affected by the 1% and 0.2% Annual Chance Floods..........11-27 Figure 11-10. Average Damage to Critical Facilities from 1% and 0.2% Annual Chance Floods......11-27 Figure 12-1. Susceptibility to Deep-Seated Landslides .......................................................................12-4 Figure 12-2. Building Occupancy Classes in the Mapped Landslide Hazard Zones ...........................12-7 Figure 12-3. Critical Facilities in High or Very High Landslide Risk Areas...........................................12-8 Figure 13-1. Estimated Inundation Area for 25-Centimeter Sea-Level Rise........................................13-4 Figure 13-2. Estimated Inundation Area for 100-Centimeter Sea-Level Rise......................................13-5 Figure 13-3. Building Occupancy Classes in 25-cm and 100-cm Sea-Level Rise Exposure Areas ....13-8 Figure 15-1. Santa Ana Winds.............................................................................................................15-2 Figure 15-2. Wind Zones in the United States .....................................................................................15-7 Figure 16-1. Common Sources of Tsunamis .......................................................................................16-1 Figure 16-2. Runup Distance and Height in Relation to the Datum and Shoreline..............................16-2 Figure 16-3. Tsunami Risk Areas for Ventura County .........................................................................16-4 216
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Contents xii
Figure 16-4. Potential Tsunami Travel Times in the Pacific Ocean, in Hours......................................16-7 Figure 16-5. Structures in the Tsunami Inundation Zone, by Building Occupancy Class ....................16-8 Figure 16-6. Critical Facilities in Tsunami Inundation Area..................................................................16-8 Figure 16-7. Critical Facilities Exposed to and Affected by Mapped Tsunami Inundation Area ........16-10 Figure 16-8. Average % of Damage to Critical Facilities Caused by Modeled Tsunami....................16-11 Figure 17-1. CAL FIRE Wildfire Activity Statistics for Ventura County 2011-2019 ..............................17-5 Figure 17-2. Fire Hazard Severity Zones in Ventura County ...............................................................17-6 Figure 17-3. Structures in the Moderate, High or Very High FHSZs, by Occupancy Class.................17-8 Figure 17-4. Critical Facilities in High or Very High Severity Zones ....................................................17-9 Figure 18-1. Global Carbon Dioxide Concentrations Over Time .........................................................18-2 Figure 18-2. Possible Future Sea Levels for Different Greenhouse Gas Pathways ............................18-6 Figure 18-3. Changes in Projected Maximum Temperatures in Ventura County ................................18-7 Figure 19-1. Ventura County COVID-19 Case Rate June – December 20, 2021................................19-5 Figure 20-1. Probability Factors for Hazards of Concern.....................................................................20-1 Figure 20-2. Impact Factors for Hazards of Concern...........................................................................20-3 Figure 20-3. Weighted Impact Factors for Hazards of Concern ..........................................................20-3 Figure 20-4. Total Risk Rating for Hazards of Concern.......................................................................20-4 Figure 20-5. Hazard Risk Ranking.......................................................................................................20-4 217
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Definition of Terms xiii

DEFINITION OF TERMS

0.2 percent-annual-chance flood—the flood that has a

0.2 percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any
given year; often referred to as the 500-year flood
1 percent-annual-chance flood—the flood that has a
1 percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any
given year; often referred to as the 100-year flood
AB—Assembly Bill
ADA—Americans with Disabilities Act
asset—any man-made or natural feature that has value,
including people; buildings; infrastructure, such as bridges, roads, sewers, and water systems; lifelines, such as
electricity and communication resources; and
environmental, cultural, or recreational features such as parks, wetlands, and landmarks.
base flood—the flood having a 1% chance of being
equaled or exceeded in any given year, also known as the “100-year” or “1 percent annual chance” flood. The base flood is a statistical concept used to ensure that all
properties subject to the National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP) are protected to the same degree against flooding.
basin—the area within which all surface water—whether
from rainfall, snowmelt, springs, or other sources—flows to a single water body or watercourse. The boundary of a
river basin is defined by natural topography, such as hills, mountains, and ridges. Basins are also referred to as
“watersheds.”
benefit/cost analysis—a systematic, quantitative method of comparing projected benefits to projected costs of a project or policy. It is used as a measure of cost
effectiveness.
benefit—a net project outcome and is usually defined in monetary terms. Benefits may include direct and indirect effects. For the purposes of benefit/cost analysis of
proposed mitigation measures, benefits are limited to
specific, measurable, risk reduction factors, including reduction in expected property losses (buildings, contents, and functions) and protection of human life.

BLM—Bureau of Land Management
CAL FIRE—California Department of Forestry and Fire
Protection
Cal OES—California Governor’s Office of Emergency
Services
capability assessment—an analysis of a community’s
capacity to address threats associated with hazards. The assessment includes two components: an inventory of an
agency’s mission, programs, and policies, and an analysis of its capacity to carry them out.

CCR—California Code of Regulations
CDBG-DR—Community Development Block Grant
Disaster Recovery grants
CEQA—California Environmental Quality Act
CFR—Code of Federal Regulations
climate action plan—a detailed and strategic framework
for measuring, planning, and reducing greenhouse gas
emissions and related climatic impacts. Climate action
plans, at a minimum, include an inventory of existing
emissions, reduction goals or targets, and analyzed and prioritized reduction actions.
climate change—a change in global or regional climate
patterns, in particular a change apparent from the mid to late 20th century onwards and attributed largely to the increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide produced by the use of fossil fuels.

Community Rating System (CRS)—a voluntary program
under the NFIP that rewards participating communities
(provides incentives) for exceeding the minimum
requirements of the NFIP and completing activities that reduce flood hazard risk by providing flood insurance
premium discounts.
critical facilities—facilities and infrastructure that are critical to the health and welfare of the population. These become especially important after any hazard event
occurs.

CWA—Clean Water Act
dam failure—an uncontrolled release of impounded water
due to a partial or complete breach in a dam (or levee) that impacts its integrity.
dam—any artificial barrier or controlling mechanism that can or does impound or divert water.

DART—Disaster Assistance Response Team
debris flow—dense mixtures of water-saturated debris
that move down-valley, looking and behaving much like
flowing concrete. They form when loose masses of
unconsolidated material are saturated, become unstable, and move down slope. The source of water varies but
includes rainfall, melting snow or ice, and glacial outburst floods.

DFIRM—Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map
Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA; Public Law 106-390)—
the latest federal legislation enacted to encourage and promote proactive, pre-disaster planning as a condition of receiving certain federal financial assistance.
drought—the cumulative impacts of long periods of dry
weather. These can include deficiencies in surface and
218
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Definition of Terms xiv
subsurface water supplies and general impacts on health, well-being, and quality of life.

DWR—Department of Water Resources
EAP—emergency action plan
earthquake—the shaking of the ground caused by an
abrupt shift of rock along a fracture in the earth or a contact zone between tectonic plates.
ecosystem services—an ecosystem service is any
positive benefit that wildlife or ecosystems provide to people. The benefits can be direct or indirect—small or large.
epidemic—the spread of an infectious disease beyond a
local population, reaching people in a wider geographical area. Several factors determine whether an outbreak will become an epidemic: the ease with which the disease
spreads from vectors, such as animals, to people, and the ease with which it spreads from person to person.
equity—the absence of avoidable or remediable
differences among groups of people, whether those
groups are defined socially, economically,
demographically, racially, or geographically.

ESA—Endangered Species Act
exposure—the number and dollar value of assets
considered to be at risk during the occurrence of a specific hazard.
extent—the size or location of an area affected by a
hazard. For hazards that do not have a clearly defined
extent, this definition expands to the strength or magnitude (severity) of the hazard. For hazards in this plan that do not have mapping, extent is addressed by the severity
discussion of the hazard profile.
extreme cold—temperatures from winter storms
associated with freezing rain, sleet, snow and strong
winds that may cause hypothermia or frostbite.
extreme heat—temperatures that hover 10 ºF or more
above the average high temperature for a region and last for several days.
federal disaster declaration—declarations for events
that cause more damage than state and local
governments and resources can handle without federal
government assistance. A federal disaster declaration puts into motion long-term federal recovery programs, some of which are matched by state programs, to help disaster
victims, businesses, and public entities.

FEMA—Federal Emergency Management Agency
FERC—Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
FHSZ—Fire Hazard Severity Zone
flash flood—a flood that occurs with little or no warning when water levels rise at an extremely fast rate
Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)—the official map on
which the Federal Emergency Management Agency
delineates the special flood hazard area.

Flood Insurance Study—a report published by the
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration for a
community in conjunction with the community’s Flood
Insurance rate Map. The study contains such background
data as the base flood discharges and water surface
elevations that were used to prepare the FIRM. In most
cases, a community FIRM with detailed mapping will have a corresponding flood insurance study.
floodplain—the land area along the sides of a river that becomes inundated with water during a flood.
flood—the inundation of normally dry land resulting from the rising and overflowing of a body of water.

FRA—federal responsibility area
freeboard—the margin of safety added to the base flood
elevation.
frequency—how often a hazard of specific magnitude,
duration, and/or extent is expected to occur on average.

Statistically, a hazard with a 100-year frequency is
expected to occur about once every 100 years on average and has a 1 percent chance of occurring any given year.

Frequency reliability varies depending on the type of
hazard considered.

Fujita tornado damage scale—scale for rating tornado
wind speeds, estimated on the basis of damage sustained.

The scale rates the intensity or severity of tornado events using numeric values from F0 to F5 based on tornado
wind speed and damage. An F0 tornado (wind speed less
than 73 miles per hour (mph)) indicates minimal damage
(such as broken tree limbs), and an F5 tornado (wind
speeds of 261 to 318 mph) indicates severe damage.
g—the acceleration associated with gravity (%g is an
acceleration calculated as a percentage of the
acceleration of gravity)
geographic information system (GIS)—a computer
software application that relates data regarding physical and other features on the earth to a database for mapping and analysis.
goal—a general guideline that explains what is to be
achieved. Goals are usually broad-based, long-term,
policy-type statements and represent global visions. Goals help define the benefits that a plan is trying to achieve.

The success of a hazard mitigation plan is measured by
the degree to which its goals have been met (that is, by the actual benefits in terms of actual hazard mitigation). greenhouse gases—methane, nitrous oxide and other
gases that trap heat and warm the Earth, as a greenhouse traps heat from the sun.
ground shaking—the result of rapid ground acceleration
caused by seismic waves passing beneath buildings,
roads, and other structures.
hazard—a source of potential danger or adverse condition that could harm people and/or cause property damage.
hazardous material—a substance or combination of
substances (biological, chemical, radiological, and/or
219
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan AbbreviationsDefinition of Terms xv
physical) that, because of its quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical or infectious characteristics, has the potential to cause harm to humans, animals, or the
environment, either by itself or through interaction with other factors.

Hazus (Hazards U.S.)—a nationally standardized, GISbased multi-hazard risk analysis tool developed and distributed by FEMA
high-hazard dam—a dam that can cause loss of human
life from the failure or improper operation of the dam
IBC—International Building Code
intensity—the measure of the effects of a hazard
inventory—the assets identified in a study region
comprise an inventory. Inventories include assets that
could be lost when a disaster occurs and community
resources are at risk. Assets include people, buildings, transportation, and other valued community resources.

IT—information technology
LiMWA—Limit of Moderate Wave Action
liquefaction—loosely packed, water-logged sediments
losing their strength in response to strong shaking,
causing major damage during earthquakes.
local government—any county, municipality, city, town,
township, public authority, school district, special district, intrastate district, council of governments (regardless of whether the council of governments is incorporated as a nonprofit corporation under State law), regional or
interstate government entity, or agency or instrumentality of a local government; any Indian tribe or authorized tribal organization, or Alaska Native village or organization; and any rural community, unincorporated town or village, or other public entity.

LRA—local responsibility area
magnitude—the measure of the strength of an
earthquake.
mitigation actions—specific actions to achieve goals and objectives that minimize the effects from a disaster and reduce the loss of life and property.
mitigation—a preventive action taken in advance of an
event to reduce or eliminate risk to life or property.
mph—miles per hour
Mw—Moment Magnitude Scale
N/A—not applicable
NASA—National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NCEI—National Centers for Environmental Information
NEHRP—National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program
NFIP—National Flood Insurance Program
NOAA—National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NWS—National Weather Service
OES—Office of Emergency Services (Ventura County
Sheriff’s)
pandemic—an epidemic of infectious disease that has
spread through human populations across a large region, multiple continents, or worldwide.
peak ground acceleration (PGA)—a measure of the
highest amplitude of ground shaking that accompanies an earthquake, based on a percentage of the force of gravity. ppm—parts per million
preparedness—actions that strengthen the capability of
government, people, and communities to respond to
disasters.
probability of occurrence—a statistical measure or
estimate of the likelihood that a hazard will occur. This probability is generally based on past hazard events in the area and a forecast of events that could occur in the
future. A probability factor based on yearly values of
occurrence is used to estimate probability of occurrence. recurrence interval—the inverse of the probability that a given event will be equaled or exceeded in any given year (sometimes called the return period)
repetitive loss property—any NFIP-insured property
that, since 1978 and regardless of any changes of
ownership during that period, has experienced—Four or
more paid flood losses in excess of $1000.00; or two paid flood losses in excess of $1000.00 within any 10-year
period since 1978; or three or more paid losses that equal or exceed the current value of the insured property.
risk assessment—the process of measuring potential
loss of life, personal injury, economic injury, and property damage resulting from hazards. This process assesses
the vulnerability of people, buildings, and infrastructure to hazards
risk ranking—process to score and rank hazards based
on the probability that they will occur and the impact they will have if they do.
risk—the estimated impact that a hazard would have on
people, services, facilities, and structures in a community.

Risk measures the likelihood of a hazard occurring and
resulting in an adverse condition that causes injury or damage. Risk is often expressed in relative terms such as a high, moderate, or low likelihood of sustaining damage above a particular threshold due to occurrence of a
specific type of hazard. Risk also can be expressed in
terms of potential monetary losses associated with the
intensity of the hazard.
riverine—of or produced by a river. Riverine floodplains have readily identifiable channels.

Robert T. Stafford Act (Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, Public Law 100-
107)—the statutory authority for most federal disaster
response activities, especially as they pertain to FEMA and its programs. Signed into law November 23, 1988;
amended by the Disaster Relief Act of 1974 (Public Law
93-288).

SEMS—Standardized Emergency Management System
220
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Definition of Terms xvi
SFHA—special flood hazard area
significant-hazard dam—a dam that can cause
economic loss, environmental damage or disruption of
lifeline facilities, or can impact other concerns, but not necessarily loss of life.
special flood hazard area—the base floodplain
delineated on a Flood Insurance Rate Map. The SFHA is
mapped as a Zone A in riverine situations and zone V in coastal situations. The SFHA may or may not encompass
all of a community’s flood problems
SRA—state responsibility area
stakeholder—business leaders, civic groups, academia,
non-profit organizations, major employers, managers of
critical facilities, farmers, developers, special purpose districts, and others whose actions could impact hazard mitigation.
subsidence—the caving in or sinking of an area of land. surface fault rupture—an offset of the ground surface
when fault rupture extends to the Earth’s surface.
thunderstorm—a storm with lightning and thunder
produced by cumulonimbus clouds. Thunderstorms
usually produce gusty winds, heavy rains, and sometimes hail. Thunderstorms are usually short in duration (seldom more than 2 hours).
tornado—a violently rotating column of air extending
between and in contact with a cloud and the surface of the earth. Tornadoes are often (but not always) visible as
funnel clouds.

USDA—U.S. Department of Agriculture
USDM—U.S. Drought Monitor
USGS—U.S. Geological Survey
vulnerability—an assessment of how susceptible an
asset is to damage, based on its construction, contents, and the economic value of its functions
watershed—an area that drains downgradient from areas
of higher land to areas of lower land to the lowest point.

Zone X—area determined to be outside the 1 percent and

0.2 percent annual chance floodplains.
zoning ordinance—ordinance that designates allowable
land use and intensities for a local jurisdiction.
221
xvii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Ventura County’s hazard mitigation plan update for 2022 defines measures to reduce risks from natural disasters in the Ventura County planning area, which includes unincorporated areas, incorporated cities, and special purpose districts. The plan updates the County’s previous plan, the 2015 Ventura County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan. It complies with federal and state hazard mitigation planning requirements to establish eligibility for funding under Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) grant programs for all jurisdictions that participated as planning partners:
• City of Camarillo
• City of Fillmore
• City of Moorpark
• City of Ojai
• City of Oxnard
• City of Port Hueneme
• City of San Buenaventura (Ventura)
• City of Santa Paula
• City of Simi Valley
• City of Thousand Oaks
• California State University, Channel
Islands
• Calleguas Municipal Water District
• Casitas Municipal Water District
• Channel Islands Beach Community
Services District
• Conejo Recreation & Park District
• Ojai Valley Sanitary District
• Pleasant Valley Recreation & Park District
• Saticoy Sanitary District
• Triunfo Water & Sanitation District
• United Water Conservation District
• Ventura County Fire Protection District
• Ventura County Office of Education
• Ventura County Public Works Agency—
Watershed Protection
• Ventura Regional Sanitation District

PLAN DEVELOPMENT APPROACH
Organization
A core planning team consisting of a contract consultant and Ventura County staff was assembled to facilitate this plan update. A planning partnership was formed by engaging eligible local governments and making sure they understood their expectations for compliance under the updated plan. A steering committee was assembled to oversee the plan update, consisting of both governmental and nongovernmental stakeholders within the planning area. Coordination with other local, state, and federal agencies involved in hazard mitigation occurred throughout the plan update process. Organization 222
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Definition of Terms xviii
efforts included a review of the County’s 2015 hazard mitigation plan, the California statewide hazard mitigation plan, and existing programs that may support hazard mitigation actions.

Public Outreach
The planning team implemented a multi-media public involvement strategy utilizing the outreach capabilities of the planning partnership that was approved by the Steering Committee. The strategy included virtual public meetings, a community hazard mitigation awareness survey, a project website, and multiple print, web-based, and social media releases. Additionally, the Steering Committee was made up of community-based organizations, non-profit organizations, and other agencies that helped amplify public outreach efforts to their networks.

Plan Document Development
The planning team and Steering Committee assembled a document that is designed to meet federal hazard mitigation planning requirements for all partners. The updated plan contains two volumes.

Volume 1 contains components that apply to all partners and the broader planning area. Volume 2 contains components that are jurisdiction-specific, including each planning partner’s dedicated annex.

Adoption
Once pre-adoption approval has been granted by the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services and FEMA, each planning partner will individually adopt the updated plan. Each partner has up to one year from FEMA approval to adopt the plan.

RISK ASSESSMENT
Risk assessment is the process of measuring the potential loss of life resulting from natural hazards, as well as personal injury, economic injury, and property damage, in order to determine the vulnerability of people, buildings, and infrastructure. For this update, the risk assessment included the following:
• Hazard identification and profiling
• Assessment of the impact of hazards on physical, social, and economic assets • Identification of particular areas of vulnerability
• Estimates of the cost of potential damage
Based on the risk assessment, each hazard of concern was ranked for the risk it poses to the overall planning area using risk ranking criteria provided by the core planning team. These rankings were reviewed and validated by each planning partner through the jurisdictional annex process. Figure ES-1 shows scores and ratings for the entire Ventura County planning area. All planning partners also rated the hazards for their impacts on their own individual planning areas. Figure ES-2 summarizes how the participating planning partners rated each hazard.
223
Executive SummaryDefinition of Terms
xix
Figure ES-1. Countywide Hazard Risk Rating
Figure ES-2. Summary of Risk Rating for Individual Planning Partners Dam Failure
34 Landslide
33 Flooding
18 Earthquake
32 Severe Storms
24 Severe Weather
24 Wildfire
24 Drought
9 Sea Level Rise / Erosion
12 Tsunami
12 0
2 4
6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Values shown are risk ratings. Larger circles indicate higher rating.

High Risk
Medium
Risk
Low Risk
8 4
10 5
12 0
4 4
0 10
11 1
15 18
10 3
21 21
0 9
6 20
0 2 2
9 0 0
12 5
0 0 0 0
1 13
0 0
13 1
0 5
10 15
20 25
Dam Failure Drought Earthquake Flooding Landslide Sea Level Rise /
Erosion
Severe
Storms
Severe
Weather
Tsunami Wildfire
Number of Planning Partners Assigning This Rating to This Hazard
Highest Risk Medium Risk Lowest Risk Not Ranked
224
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Definition of Terms xx
The Steering Committee considered the full range of natural hazards that could affect the planning area and then selected those that present the greatest concern for risk assessment in this plan. The process incorporated a review of state and local hazard planning documents as well as information on the frequency of, magnitude of, and costs associated with hazards that have struck the planning area or could do so. Anecdotal information regarding natural hazards and the perceived vulnerability of the planning area’s assets to them was also used. Based on the review, this plan includes risk assessments for the following hazards of concern:
• Dam failure
• Drought
• Earthquake
• Flood
• Landslide
• Sea-level rise and coastal erosion
• Severe storms
• Severe weather
• Tsunami
• Wildfire
In addition to the risk assessment of the hazards of concern, this plan provides a qualitative review of “hazards of interest.” The Steering Committee determined that these other hazards, though not required to be evaluated under federal guidelines for hazard mitigation plans, are important to recognize qualitatively in this plan. Hazard profiles, without quantitative risk assessments, are provided for the following hazards of interest:
• Agricultural and biological hazards
• Pandemic
Climate change is not assessed as an individual hazard, but a profile is provided describing how climate change could affect the hazards of concern assessed in this plan.

MITIGATION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The Steering Committee reviewed the 2015 Ventura County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan and noted that neither a vision statement nor a list of objectives was part of the previous plan. The following vision statement was selected to guide the Steering Committee and planning partners in selecting the actions contained in this plan update:

The Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan will establish and promote a comprehensive mitigation strategy and efforts to equitably reduce risk and increase the resiliency of the community and environment from natural hazards. 225
Executive SummaryDefinition of Terms
xxi
Goals
The Steering Committee and planning team established the following 10 goals for the plan update:
• Protect life, property, and the environment, and minimize displacement due to natural hazard events.
• Effectively communicate natural hazard risks and mitigation strategies to the whole community. • Pursue development and implementation of feasible, cost-effective, and environmentally sound hazard mitigation measures.
• Prioritize multi-objective hazard mitigation actions and those that reduce risk to vulnerable communities.
• Coordinate with other plans and programs that can support or enhance hazard mitigation. • Enhance the County’s capability and capacity to prepare for, respond to, and recover from the impacts of natural hazards.
• Proactively anticipate the risks of future impacts from hazards. • Increase the County’s adaptive capacity to reduce risk from hazard impacts. • Promote proactive, self-sufficient mitigation and response abilities. • Reduce risk to and increase the resilience of critical infrastructure and community lifelines.

The effectiveness of a mitigation strategy is assessed by determining how well these goals are achieved.

Objectives
Each of the selected plan objectives meets multiple goals, serving as a stand-alone measurement of the effectiveness of a mitigation action, rather than as a subset of a goal. The objectives were used to help establish priorities for each action identified in the plan. The plan objectives are as follows:
• Utilize the best available data, science, and technology to identify and communicate the risk exposure to hazards to state, regional, and local agencies, as well as the private sector and non-profit groups.
• Support efforts to improve the resilience of community lifelines in socially vulnerable communities.
• Enhance supply chain diversity and improved resilience by supporting local food and energy production and increased multi-modal transportation.
• Research, develop, promote, adopt, and enforce codes and standards to preserve life and property that are affordable and feasible to implement. • Promote and implement measures to mitigate the risk of wildfires, such as greenbelts and fire breaks around communities and along roadways.
• Support the protection of vital records, and strengthen or replace buildings, infrastructure, and lifelines to minimize post-disaster disruption and facilitate short-term and long-term recovery. • Improve and expand systems that provide warning and emergency communications to the whole community.
226
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Definition of Terms xxii
• Continue developing and strengthening inter-jurisdictional coordination and cooperation in the area of emergency services.
• Promote and implement the retrofit or replacement of at-risk structures and lifelines to increase community resilience.
• Incentivize mitigation measures for high-risk and repetitive loss areas to address repairs, major alterations, development plans, and practices to increase community resilience. • Reduce repetitive property losses due to hazard impacts through acquisition, retrofitting, design, and updated construction and land use regulations.
• Encourage and support leadership within the private sector, non-profit agencies, and community-based organizations to promote and implement local hazard mitigation activities. • Proactively manage and care for natural resources, including grasslands, forests, oak woodlands, riparian forests, stream channels, coastal wetlands, and beaches, to enhance their ability to withstand and recover from natural disasters and minimize public safety risks. • Support hazard mitigation measures that promote and enhance natural processes. • Support hazard mitigation measures, where feasible, that utilize nature-based practices and solutions (e.g., holistic watershed management and green belts) and support and enhance natural processes.
• Encourage the creation of financial and regulatory incentives to motivate stakeholders such as homeowners, private sector businesses, and non-profit community organizations to mitigate hazards and risks.
• Conduct public outreach activities that increase community awareness and understanding of hazard risk, mitigation options, and preparedness strategies. • Minimize impacts of hazard events on the economic drivers for the County. • Align the hazard mitigation plan with state mitigation plans; city and county general, community, capital improvement plans; special-purpose district plans; and climate action, resilience, and adaptation plans.

MITIGATION ACTION PLAN
The mitigation actions presented in this update are activities designed to reduce or eliminate losses resulting from natural hazards. The update process resulted in the identification of 300 mitigation actions for implementation by individual planning partners, as presented in Volume 2 of this plan. In addition, the Steering Committee and planning partners identified three countywide actions benefiting the whole partnership, as listed in Table ES-1.
227
Executive SummaryDefinition of Terms
xxiii
Table ES-1. Countywide Mitigation Initiatives
Action Number and Description
Priority for
Implementation
Priority for
Grant Pursuit
CW-1— Continue to maintain a website that will house the multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation plan and any amendments to it adopted during the next 5-year period to provide the planning partners and the public with ongoing access to the plan and its implementation.

High Low
CW-2— Continue to leverage/support/enhance ongoing, regional public education and awareness programs, such as VCAlert, CERT (Community Emergency Response Team), DART (Disaster Assistance Response Team), TsunamiReady, and StormReady, as methods to educate the public on risk, risk reduction, and community resilience.

High Low
CW-3— Continue to provide a virtual hub for sharing information on hazard mitigation resources on the readyventuracounty.org website that will support mitigation efforts and awareness of grant funding opportunities to the planning partnership.

High Low

IMPLEMENTATION
The Steering Committee developed a plan implementation and maintenance strategy that includes monitoring of the plan’s implementation, progress reporting, a strategy for continued public involvement, and plan integration with other relevant plans and programs.

Full implementation of the recommendations of this plan will require time and resources. The measure of the plan’s success will be its ability to adapt to changing conditions. Ventura County and its planning partners will assume responsibility for adopting the recommendations of this plan and committing resources toward implementation. The framework established by this plan will enable all planning partners to pursue Hazard Mitigation Assistance grant funding for feasible, eligible and cost-effective actions. The planning partnership developed this plan with extensive public input, and public support of the actions identified in this plan will help ensure the plan’s success. 228
229
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Part 1—BACKGROUND AND METHODS
230
231
1-1

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 WHY PREPARE THIS PLAN?
Hazard mitigation is defined as any action taken to reduce or alleviate the loss of life, personal injury, and property damage that can result from a disaster. Hazard mitigation activities include planning efforts, policy changes, programs, studies, improvement projects, and other steps to reduce the impacts of hazards. These actions may be long- or short-term in nature, and are implemented before, as well as during and after disasters.

1.1.1 Federal Eligibility
Disaster Mitigation Act
The federal Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA) emphasizes planning for disasters before they occur. The DMA requires state and local governments to develop hazard mitigation plans in order to be eligible for certain hazard-related federal grant programs. The grant eligibility requires that the hazard mitigation plan be approved by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), formally adopted by the local community, and regularly updated. Regulations developed to fulfill the DMA’s requirements are included in Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations (44 CFR).

The DMA encourages cooperation among state and local authorities in pre-disaster planning. The responsibility for hazard mitigation lies with not only with local, state, and federal governments, but also with private property owners and commercial and institutional interests. The enhanced planning network called for by the DMA helps local governments to articulate accurate needs for mitigation, resulting in faster allocation of funding and more cost-effective risk-reduction projects.

The DMA also promotes sustainability in hazard mitigation. To be sustainable, hazard mitigation needs to incorporate sound management of natural resources and address hazards and mitigation in the largest possible social and economic context.

Community Rating System
FEMA’s Community Rating System (CRS) is a voluntary incentive program that encourages community floodplain management activities that go beyond the minimum requirements of FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The CRS describes 18 activities that communities can take to reduce or eliminate exposure to floods. To implement these activities, FEMA published the 2013 NFIP CRS Coordinators Manual, which spells out the credit and credit criteria for CRS activities. Some of these activities can be implemented through the adoption of a qualifying hazard mitigation plan. 232
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-2

1.1.2 Purposes for Planning
Ventura County prepared a hazard mitigation plan in compliance with the DMA in 2005 and has updated the plan every five years since then, most recently in 2015. The Ventura County MultiJurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2022 update fulfills the ongoing update requirement.

This update identifies resources, information, and strategies for reducing risk from natural hazards.

Elements and strategies in the plan were selected because they meet a program requirement and because they best meet the needs of the County and communities within it. The focus of this plan is on better decision-making to avoid future risk and on activities that will eliminate or reduce current risks.

In preparing this update, the County partnered with local cities and special-purpose districts. Such multi-jurisdictional planning benefits from pooled resources and the elimination of redundant activities.

FEMA encourages multi-jurisdictional planning under its guidance for the DMA. The plan will help guide and coordinate mitigation activities throughout the planning area.

The planning effort identified risks posed by hazards and developed strategies to reduce the impact of hazard events on people and property in Ventura County. The plan was developed to meet the following objectives:
• Meet or exceed program requirements specified under the DMA. • Enable Ventura County to continue to qualify for federal grant funding to reduce risk through mitigation.
• Create a risk assessment that focuses on Ventura County’s hazards of concern. • Coordinate existing plans and programs so that high-priority mitigation activities are funded and implemented.
• Address the Activity 510 Floodplain Management Planning activities of the CRS for the three participating partners:
 Ventura County Public Works Agency—Watershed Protection (VCPWA-WP) on behalf of Unincorporated Ventura County, which joined the CRS in 2011 (currently rated at CRS Class 5)
 The City of Oxnard, which joined the CRS in 2013 (currently rated at CRS Class 7)  The City of Simi Valley, which joined the CRS in 1993 (currently rated at CRS Class 5).

1.2 WHO WILL BENEFIT FROM THIS PLAN?
All residents, visitors, and businesses in Ventura County are the ultimate beneficiaries of this hazard mitigation plan update. The plan identifies strategies and actions to reduce risk for those who live in, work in, and visit the planning area. It provides a viable planning framework for all foreseeable natural hazards. Participation by key stakeholders in developing the plan helped ensure that outcomes will benefit the broadest possible range of communities in the county. The plan’s goals and recommendations can lay the groundwork for development and implementation of local mitigation activities and partnerships.
233
Introduction
1-3

1.3 CONTENTS OF THE PLAN
This plan has been organized into two volumes so that elements that are specific to the individual planning partners can easily be distinguished from those that apply to the whole planning area:
• Volume 1—Volume 1 includes all federally required elements that apply to the entire planning area. This includes the description of the planning process, public involvement strategy, goals and objectives, countywide hazard risk assessment, countywide mitigation actions, and a plan maintenance strategy.
• Volume 2—Volume 2 includes all federally required jurisdiction-specific elements, in annexes for each participating jurisdiction. It includes a description of the participation requirements confirmed by the core planning team and Steering Committee, as well as instructions and templates that the partners used to complete their individual annexes.

Both volumes include elements required under federal guidelines. The CRS floodplain management planning activities for the participating planning partners are identified in their individual annexes.

Where sections of this plan address specific DMA requirements, the CFR section number in which the requirement is found is cited.

The following appendices provided at the end of Volume 1 include information or explanations to support the main content of the plan:
• Appendix A—Public involvement information used in preparation of this update • Appendix B—A summary of federal and state programs and regulations relevant to hazard mitigation
• Appendix C—A description of data sources and methods used for mapping hazard areas • Appendix D—Quantitative risk assessment modeling results by jurisdiction • Appendix E—Peak stream flow levels for waterways within Ventura County • Appendix F—Plan adoption resolutions from planning partners Each planning partner will adopt Volume 1 in its entirety and at least the following parts of Volume 2:
the introduction, the partner’s jurisdiction-specific annex, and the appendices. 234
235
2-1

2. PLAN UPDATE—WHAT HAS CHANGED?

2.1 PREVIOUS PLANS

2.1.1 2005 Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan
The 2005 hazard mitigation plan was prepared by Ventura County and other members of the Local Hazard Mitigation Group—consisting of members of the Inter-Agency Coordination Group, including fire chiefs/officials, emergency managers, safety coordinators, planners, and other officials and staff from 34 local participants including Ventura county, cities, and special districts). Technical support was provided by URS Corporation. The 2005 plan was developed between June 2004 to January 2005. It was adopted by the Ventura County Board of Supervisors on June 7, 2005.

2.1.2 2010 Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan
The 2010 Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan was a multi-jurisdictional plan covering Ventura County, the Cities of Camarillo, Moorpark, Ojai, Oxnard, Port Hueneme, Santa Paula, Thousand Oaks, and Ventura, eight special purpose districts, and the Ventura County Office of Education. The plan was adopted by the Ventura County Board of Supervisors in December 2010 and was approved by FEMA Region IX in February 2011. The planning process was overseen by a planning committee that was based on the standing Emergency Coordinators’ Council. The plan identified eight goals and identified and prioritized 102 actions to be implemented by the planning partners.

2.1.3 2015 Ventura County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
The 2015 update of the Ventura County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan was a multi-jurisdictional plan that covered Ventura County, the Cities of Camarillo, Moorpark, Ojai, Oxnard, Port Hueneme, Santa Paula, Thousand Oaks, and Ventura, eight special purpose districts, and the Ventura County Office of Education. Like the 2010 and 2005 plans before it, the 2015 plan focused on the hazards considered to be the greatest risk to the county based on historical disaster events, future probabilities and degree of vulnerability—including wildfire, earthquake, flood, dam and levee failures, landslide, winter storms, tsunamis, and agriculture/biological events.

The 2015 update process was expanded to address the implications that climate change and drought may have on hazard trends in Ventura County. Additionally, the 2015 process was enhanced to meet FEMA’s Community Rating System Activity 510 planning requirements.

Based on its assessment of the identified hazards, the 2015 Plan recommended 22 mitigation actions for all partners that addressed the following 12 hazards of concern:
236
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-2
• Agricultural/biological
• Climate change
• Dam failure/inundation
• Drought
• Earthquake
• Flood
• Landslide
• Levee failure inundation
• Post-fire debris flow
• Tsunami
• Wildfire
• Winter storm
The 18 planning partners identified and prioritized 95 actions to be implemented by individual partners.

The planning process was overseen by a planning committee that included staff from County departments and agencies, representatives for each participating city and special district, and other entities, including the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES). The committee met two times during the plan update process. The plan was adopted by the Ventura County Board of Supervisors in May 2016 and was approved by FEMA Region IX in August 2016.

2.2 WHY UPDATE?

2.2.1 Federal Eligibility
Under 44 CFR, hazard mitigation plans must present a schedule for monitoring, evaluating, and updating the plan. This provides an opportunity to reevaluate recommendations, monitor the impacts of actions that have been accomplished, and determine if there is a need to change the focus of mitigation strategies. A jurisdiction covered by a plan that has expired is not able to pursue elements of federal funding for which a current hazard mitigation plan is a prerequisite.

2.2.2 Changes in Development
Hazard mitigation plan updates need to reflect any changes in development in the planning area that may have increased or decreased the vulnerability of a jurisdiction to hazards since the last plan was approved (44 CFR Section 201.6(d)(3)). The intent of this requirement is to ensure that the mitigation strategy addresses the risk and vulnerability of existing and potential development, as well as taking into consideration possible future conditions that could affect vulnerability.

The following are significant development and demographic changes in Ventura County since the 2015 hazard mitigation plan update:
• As of January 1, 2021, the reported population for Ventura County was 835,459, representing a decrease of 1.7 percent from 2016 (California Department of Finance, 2021) • The valuation of the general building stock increased by 21.5 percent (County of Ventura Assessor, 2021)
• Based on development permit data provided by the municipal planning partners (see Volume 2), permits were issued for the construction of nearly 20,000 new structures over the past five years. This does not include accessory dwelling units, which are often classified as alterations 237
Plan Update—What has Changed?
2-1
to an existing property rather than new construction. More than 80 percent of this development occurred in the cities of Camarillo, Ojai and Thousand Oaks.

Although the population decreased slightly during the performance period of the 2015 plan, the county experienced an overall increase in general building stock (see Volume 2). This plan update assumes that some of this new development occurred in hazard-prone areas. Because all such new development would have been regulated pursuant to local programs and codes, it is assumed that vulnerability did not increase even if exposure did. Ventura County and its incorporated cities and towns have general plans that govern land-use decisions and policymaking, as well as building codes and flood-management regulations based on state and federal mandates. More detailed information on the types and location of new construction over the last five years is available in the city and County annexes located in Volume 2 of this plan.

2.3 THE UPDATED PLAN—WHAT IS DIFFERENT?
The updated plan differs from the 2015 plan in a variety of ways. Table 2-1 indicates the major changes between the two plans as they relate to 44 CFR requirements for hazard mitigation plans.

Table 2-1. Key Changes from Previous Hazard Mitigation Plan 44 CFR Requirement 2015 Plan Updated Plan
Requirement §201.6(b): In order to
develop a more comprehensive approach
to reducing the effects of natural disasters,
the planning process shall include:
• An opportunity for the public to
comment on the plan during the
drafting stage and prior to plan
approval;
• An opportunity for neighboring
communities, local and regional
agencies involved in hazard
mitigation activities, and agencies
that have the authority to regulate
development, as well as businesses,
academia and other private and nonprofit interests to be involved in the planning process; and
• Review and incorporation, if
appropriate, of existing plans,
studies, reports and technical
information.

The 2015 plan included all of these
components as summarized in Section
3 of the plan. This planning effort
included enhanced coordination with
floodplain management agencies to
meet CRS requirements. The process
was overseen by a designated
planning committee and facilitated
through an oversight hazard mitigation
planning committee. The process
included a public outreach and
stakeholder involvement strategy that
included:
• Multi-media releases
• Website
• Web portal
• Engagement with the Emergency
Planning Council
• Town hall
• Virtual town hall
• Brochure
This plan update utilized many of the same mitigation
planning best-management practices but enhanced
them on multiple fronts. The update process was
facilitated by a planning team consisting of key
County staff and a contract consultant, working with
a multidiscipline stakeholder steering committee that
met more frequently than the committee established
for the 2015 effort. The steering committee confirmed
a public engagement strategy that included:
• Plan website
• Story map
• Survey
• Public meetings
• Social media
• Media outreach
This plan update also included enhanced efforts to
coordinate with other agencies and community
stakeholders that could support or enhance the
outcomes of the update effort.
238
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-2
44 CFR Requirement 2015 Plan Updated Plan
§201.6(c)(2): The plan shall include a risk
assessment that provides the factual basis
for activities proposed in the strategy to
reduce losses from identified hazards.

Local risk assessments must provide
sufficient information to enable the
jurisdiction to identify and prioritize
appropriate mitigation actions to reduce
losses from identified hazards.

The 2015 plan included a risk
assessment of 12 hazards of concern:
• Agricultural/biological
• Climate change
• Dam failure inundation
• Drought
• Earthquake
• Flood
• Landslide
• Levee failure inundation
• Post-fire debris flow
• Tsunami
• Wildfire
• Winter storm
Each hazard was profiled with
discussions on nature, history,
location, extent, and probability of
future events. However, the 2015 plan
did not rank the hazards.

Volume 1 Part 2 presents a risk assessment of 10
hazards of concern and risk profiles for two “other
hazards of interest” (agricultural/biological and
pandemic). The identified hazards of concern are as
follows:
• Dam failure
• Drought
• Earthquake
• Flood
• Landslide
• Sea-level rise and coastal erosion
• Severe storms
• Severe weather
• Tsunami
• Wildfire
Hazard profiles are standardized for each hazard of
concern, so that there is uniformity in the discussion
of each hazard and the information provided can
support rating of risk for each jurisdiction. All profiled hazards of concern were ranked based on their
quantified impacts.

The “other hazards of interest” profile was added to
address agricultural/biological and pandemic
hazards. These hazards were not ranked, but were
qualitatively assessed to develop a more complete
picture of the hazards facing the planning area.

A climate change chapter was included that
qualitatively profiles the potential impacts of climate change on each hazard of concern.
§201.6(c)(2)(i): [The risk assessment shall
include a] description of the … location
and extent of all natural hazards that can
affect the jurisdiction. The plan shall
include information on previous
occurrences of hazard events and on the
probability of future hazard events.

Each hazard of concern was profiled
with discussions of nature, history,
location, extent and probability of
future events.

Each hazard of concern was profiled in the following
categories:
• General Background
• Hazard Profile
o Past events
o Location
o Frequency
o Severity
o Warning Time
o Secondary Hazards
• Exposure
• Vulnerability
• Future trends in development
• Scenario
• Issues
239
Plan Update—What has Changed?
2-3
44 CFR Requirement 2015 Plan Updated Plan
§201.6(c)(2)(ii): [The risk assessment shall
include a] description of the jurisdiction’s
vulnerability to the hazards described in
paragraph (c)(2)(i). This description shall
include an overall summary of each
hazard and its impact on the community
The vulnerability analysis in the 2015
plan is based solely on exposure and
does not estimate loss. The plan does
include an overall summary of each
hazard’s impact based on exposure
but does not determine the value of
that exposure.

For this plan update, this aspect of the plan was
significantly enhanced. Vulnerability was assessed
for all hazards of concern. FEMA’s Hazus risk
assessment platform was used for evaluating dam
failure, earthquake, flood, sea-level rise and tsunami
hazards. The analyses supplemented the data built
into the Hazus program with locally defined city and
county data (Hazus refers to this as a Level 2
analysis). Site-specific data on County-identified
critical facilities were entered into the Hazus model.

Hazus outputs were generated for other hazards by
applying an estimated damage function to an asset
inventory extracted from Hazus. The risk assessment
methodology used is described in Chapter 7 of this
volume.
§201.6(c)(2)(ii): [The risk assessment]
must also address National Flood
Insurance Program insured structures that
have been repetitively damaged floods
Section 5.5 of the plan was dedicated
to FEMA-identified repetitive loss
properties
Section 11.2.7 of Volume 1 of this plan includes a
comprehensive analysis of repetitive loss areas that
includes an inventory of the number and types of
structures in the repetitive loss area. Repetitive loss areas are delineated, causes of repetitive flooding
are cited, and these areas are reflected on maps.

This analysis includes all repetitive loss properties
within the county.
§201.6(c)(2)(ii)(A): The plan should
describe vulnerability in terms of the types
and numbers of existing and future
buildings, infrastructure and critical
facilities located in the identified hazard
area.

The focus of the vulnerability analysis
for the 2015 plan was exposure of
residential structures and identified
critical facilities and infrastructure. The
analysis includes no loss estimation.

The current update used Hazus to model impacts
from dam failure, earthquake, flood, sea-level rise,
and tsunami. A complete inventory of the numbers
and types of buildings exposed (both residential and
non-residential) was generated for each hazard of
concern. Critical facilities were defined for the
planning area, and these facilities were inventoried
by exposure. Each hazard chapter provides a
discussion on future development trends.
§201.6(c)(2)(ii)(B): [The plan should
describe vulnerability in terms of an]
estimate of the potential dollar losses to
vulnerable structures identified in
paragraph (c)(2)(i)(A) and a description of
the methodology used to prepare the
estimate.

The 2015 vulnerability analysis
includes no loss estimation.

Dollar loss estimates were generated for all hazards
of concern. These estimates were generated by
Hazus for dam failure, earthquake, flood, and
tsunami. For the other hazards, loss estimates were
generated by applying a regionally relevant damage
function to the exposed inventory. In all cases, a
damage function was applied to an asset inventory.

The asset inventory was the same for all hazards
and was generated in Hazus.
§201.6(c)(2)(ii)(C): [The plan should
describe vulnerability in terms of] providing
a general description of land uses and
development trends within the community
so that mitigation options can be
considered in future land use decisions.

The 2015 Plan does not describe
vulnerability in terms of land uses and
development trends within the
community so that mitigation options
can be considered in future land use
decisions.

There is a discussion of the overall land use within
the planning area, and a spatial analysis of land use
was performed for hazards with a clearly defined
extent and location. There is a discussion on future
development trends as they pertain to each hazard
of concern. This discussion looks predominantly at
the existing land use and the current regulatory
environment.
240
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-4
44 CFR Requirement 2015 Plan Updated Plan
§201.6(c)(3): The plan shall include a
mitigation strategy that provides the
jurisdiction’s blueprint for reducing the
potential losses identified in the risk
assessment, based on existing authorities,
policies, programs and resources, and its
ability to expand on and improve these
existing tools.

The 2015 plan includes two identified
goals, overarching potential mitigation
actions for all local participants, and
jurisdiction-specific actions for each
planning partner.

The plan contains a vision statement, goals,
objectives, and actions. The actions are jurisdictionspecific and strive to meet multiple objectives. The objectives are broad but measurable. All objectives
meet multiple goals and stand alone as components
of the plan. Each planning partner was asked to
complete a capability assessment that looks at its
regulatory, technical, and financial capabilities
§201.6(c)(3)(i): [The hazard mitigation
strategy shall include a] description of
mitigation goals to reduce or avoid longterm vulnerabilities to the identified hazards.

The 2015 plan identified two goals. A vision statement, 10 goals, and 19 objectives are described in Chapter 21 of this volume. Objectives
were identified that meet multiple goals and were
used to help establish priorities for the action items
identified in the plan. The objectives are the basis for identifying and prioritizing multi-objective actions.
§201.6(c)(3)(ii): [The mitigation strategy
shall include a] section that identifies and
analyzes a comprehensive range of
specific mitigation actions and projects
being considered to reduce the effects of
each hazard, with particular emphasis on
new and existing buildings and
infrastructure.

The 2015 plan prescribes a
methodology for identifying potential
actions from which each planning
partner would draw to prepare an
action plan. For each potential action,
the methodology identifies the hazard
addressed, the mitigation category,
and whether action applies to new or
existing construction.

Volume 1, Chapter 22 includes a catalog of
mitigation best management practices that was
developed through a facilitated process. This catalog
identifies actions that manipulate the hazard, reduce
exposure to the hazard, reduce vulnerability, or
increase mitigation capability. The catalog
segregates actions by scale of implementation. A
table in each planning partner’s action plan analyzes
each action by mitigation type to illustrate the range
of actions selected.
§201.6(c)(3)(ii): [The mitigation strategy]
must also address the jurisdiction’s
participation in the National Flood
Insurance Program, and continued
compliance with the program’s
requirements, as appropriate.

The 2015 Plan addresses the NFIP in
the context of the mapping available
within the planning area. The
addresses the NFIP as a financial
resource available to mitigate the
impacts of the flood hazard, and it
profiles the unincorporated County’s
participation in the NFIP.

The plan addresses the NFIP and the participation
status of all cities within the county. Each municipal
planning partner’s annex in volume 2 of the plan
profiles its NFIP status. All municipal planning
partners that participate in the NFIP identified an
action stating their commitment to maintain
compliance and good standing under the program.
§201.6(c)(3)(iii): [The mitigation strategy
shall describe] how the actions identified
in section (c)(3)(ii) will be prioritized,
implemented and administered by the
local jurisdiction. Prioritization shall include
a special emphasis on the extent to which
benefits are maximized according to a cost
benefit review of the proposed projects
and their associated costs.

The 2015 plan establishes priority
project criteria centered on meeting
FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Assistance
program requirements. All actions
identified in the 2015 plan are
considered to be “high priority” projects
based on these criteria.

Each recommended action was prioritized using a
qualitative methodology that looked at the objectives
the project will meet, the timeline for completion, how the project will be funded, the impact of the project,
the benefits of the project and the costs of the
project. This prioritization scheme is detailed in the
introduction to Volume 2 of this plan.
§201.6(c)(4)(i): [The plan maintenance
process shall include a] section describing
the method and schedule of monitoring,
evaluating, and updating the mitigation
plan within a five-year cycle.

Section 8 of the 2015 plan includes a
plan maintenance methodology that
meets this requirement
Volume 1, Chapter 24 details a strategy for
monitoring, evaluating, and updating the mitigation
plan within a five-year cycle.
241
Plan Update—What has Changed?
2-5
44 CFR Requirement 2015 Plan Updated Plan
§201.6(c)(4)(ii): [The plan shall include a]
process by which local governments
incorporate the requirements of the
mitigation plan into other planning
mechanisms such as comprehensive or
capital improvement plans, when
appropriate.

Section 8.3 of the 2015 plan includes a
plan maintenance methodology that
meets this requirement
Volume 1, Chapter 24 details recommendations for
incorporating the plan into other planning
mechanisms, such as:
• Comprehensive plan
• Emergency response plan
• Capital improvement programs
• Municipal code and standards
Specific current and future plan and program
integration activities are detailed in each participating jurisdiction’s annex in Volume 2.
§201.6(c)(4)(iii): [The plan maintenance
process shall include a] discussion on how
the community will continue public
participation in the plan maintenance
process.

Section 8.4 of the 2015 plan includes a
plan maintenance methodology that
meets this requirement.

Volume 1, Chapter 24 details a comprehensive
strategy for continuing public involvement.
§201.6(c)(5): [The local hazard mitigation
plan shall include] documentation that the
plan has been formally adopted by the
governing body of the jurisdiction
requesting approval of the plan (e.g., City
Council, County Commissioner, Tribal
Council).

Adoption documentation and the
FEMA approval letter are provided in
the plan as an appendix.

Volume 1, Appendix F includes all supporting
documentation for adoption of the plan by all
planning partners
242
243
3-1

3. PLAN DEVELOPMENT METHODOLOGY

3.1 FUNDING
Funding for this planning effort was supplemented by a FEMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance grant (DR-4344-341-P). Ventura County Sheriff’s Office of Emergency Services (OES) was the applicant agent for the grant. The grant covered 75 percent of the cost for development of this plan; the County covered the balance through in-kind match funding.

3.2 FORMATION OF THE CORE PLANNING TEAM
The County of Ventura contracted with Tetra Tech, Inc. to assist with development and implementation of the plan (the procurement process complied with 2 CFR A.II.200). The Tetra Tech project manager managed the overall plan development; Tetra Tech’s lead planner was tasked with interacting with the County of Ventura’s grant manager. A core planning team was formed to lead the planning effort, made up of the members shown in Table 3-1.

The core planning team met 14 times during the update process to track plan development milestones and identify meeting content for a steering committee established to help with development of the plan.

Table 3-1. Core Planning Team Makeup
Ventura County
Bonnie Luke, OES, Senior Program Administrator/Grant Manager Ruth Venus, IT Services, GIS Manager Kathy Gibson, OES, Program Administrator Eric Alger, IT Services, GIS Program Analyst Patrick Maynard, OES, Director Richard Paschal, IT Services, GIS Program Analyst Glenn Shephard, VCPWA-WP, Director Ashley Bautista, CEO, Public Information Officer Gerard Kapuscik, VCPWA-WP, Staff Services Manager Jackie Nuñez, CEO, Assistant Public Information Officer Tetra Tech
Rob Flaner, Project Manager Jeana Wiser-Gomez, Public Outreach Lead Cindy Rolli, Lead Project Planner Des Alexander, Planner Carol Baumann, Lead Risk Assessor Megan Brotherton, Planner

3.3 ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PLANNING PARTNERSHIP
In June 2021, a planning partnership was formed to leverage resources and to meet requirements of the federal Disaster Mitigation Act for as many eligible local governments as possible. Ventura County opened this planning effort to all eligible local government and special districts within the planning area. 244
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-2
The new partnership expanded the partnership that had been established for the 2010 and 2015 hazard mitigation plan updates.

Each jurisdiction wishing to join the planning partnership was asked to provide a letter of intent to participate that designated a point of contact for the jurisdiction and confirmed the jurisdiction’s commitment to the process and understanding of expectations. The planning partners covered under this plan are listed in Table 3-2.

Table 3-2. Hazard Mitigation Planning Partners
Jurisdiction Point of Contact Title
Cities/County
City of Camarillo Carmen Nichols Assistant City Manager City of Fillmore Keith Gurrola Fire Chief
City of Moorpark Mackenzie Douglass Program Manager
City of Ojai James Vega City Manager
City of Oxnard Scott Brewer Emergency Manger
City of Port Hueneme Scott Matalon Emergency Manager (Police) City of San Buenaventura (Ventura)a Daniel Wall Emergency Manager City of Santa Paula Scott Varner Emergency Manager
City of Simi Valleyb Eileen Connors Emergency Manager
City of Thousand Oaks Grahame Watts Emergency Manager
Ventura County Bonnie Luke Senior Program Administrator Special Purpose Districts
California State University, Channel Islandsb Maggie Tougas Emergency Manager Calleguas Municipal Water District Daniel Cohen Emergency Response Coordinator Casitas Municipal Water District Julia Aranda Engineering Manager Channel Islands Beach Community Services District Peter Martinez General Manager Conejo Recreation & Park Districtb Bill Palermo Park Operations Analyst Ojai Valley Sanitary District Jeff Palmer General Manager Pleasant Valley Recreation & Park Districtb Mary Otten General Manager Saticoy Sanitary Districtb Tim Doyle Engineering Analyst Triunfo Water & Sanitation Districtb Tim Doyle Engineering Program Manager United Water Conservation District Brian Collins Chief Operations Officer Ventura County Fire Protection District Mark Lorenzen Fire Chief Ventura County Office of Education Russ Olsen Director of Risk Management Ventura County Public Works Agency—Watershed Protection Glenn Shephard Director Ventura Regional Sanitation Districtb Tina Rivera Director of Finance a. San Buenaventura is the official name of the city commonly called the City of Ventura. b. New planning partner

3.4 DEFINING THE PLANNING AREA
The planning area was defined to consist of the unincorporated county areas, incorporated cities, and special purpose districts within the geographical boundary of Ventura County. All partners to this plan have jurisdictional authority within this planning area. A map showing the geographic boundary of the defined planning area for this plan update is provided in Chapter 4, along with a description of the planning area characteristics.
245
Plan Development Methodology
3-3

3.5 THE STEERING COMMITTEE
Hazard mitigation planning enhances collaboration among diverse parties who can be affected by hazard losses. A key element of the public engagement strategy for this plan update was the formation of a stakeholder steering committee to oversee all phases of the update. The members of this committee included Ventura County staff, planning partner representatives, and other stakeholders from within the planning area.

For this process, “stakeholder” was defined as any person or public or private entity that owns or operates facilities that would benefit from the mitigation actions of this plan, and/or has an authority or capability to support mitigation actions identified by this plan or be impacted by its recommendations.

Stakeholders were separated into two categories:
• Participatory Stakeholders—Stakeholders that actively participated in the planning process as planning partners or members of the Steering Committee. • Coordinating Stakeholders—Stakeholders that were not able to commit to actively participating in the process as a participatory stakeholder but were kept apprised of plan development milestones or were able to provide data that was used in the plan development.

The planning team assembled a list of steering committee candidates representing diverse interests within the planning area. Guidance on the committee’s composition was also obtained from reviewing FEMA’s 2017 recommendations on CRS credit for planning committees. The planning team confirmed a committee of 17 members at the May 19, 2021, kickoff meeting. Table 3-3 lists the Steering Committee members and designated alternates.

Table 3-3. Steering Committee Members
Point of Contact Organization Title Alternate
Ashley Bautista Ventura County Chief Executive Office Public Information Officer Jackie Nuñez Daniel Cohen Calleguas Municipal Water District Emergency Response Coordinator Doug Graham American Red Cross of Ventura County Volunteer Lead Scott O’Connell Louise Lampara Ventura County Coalition of Labor, Agriculture, & Business Executive Director Alyssa Mann The Nature Conservancy Project Director, Disaster Resilience Kat Selm Brian McCarthy City of Fillmore Senior Planner
Russ Olsen Ventura County Office of Education Director of Risk Management Michelle Kelly Chris Rosa Ventura County Emergency Medical Services Deputy Administrator Janelle Hahn Jeff Shea Ventura County Fire Protection District Division Chief Mark Lorenzen Glenn Shephard Ventura County Public Works Agency—Watershed Protection
Director Gerard Kapuscik
John Tolson Simi Valley Chamber of Commerce Director of Membership & Marketing Maggie Tougas California State University Channel Islands Emergency Manager Ventura County Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster Chair Julie TumamaitStenslieThe Barbareño/Ventureño Band of Mission Indians Tribal Chair Frank Arrendondo Lauren Utterback Independent Living Resource Center Emergency Preparedness Services Manager
Jamie
Zimmerman
Dave Ward Ventura County Planning Division Planning Director Aaron Engstrom Grahame Watts City of Thousand Oaks Public Works Emergency Manager Matt Wyatt Ventura County Building and Safety District Manager West County Office Dave Hansen 246
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-4
Leadership roles and ground rules were established during the Steering Committee’s initial meeting on May 19, 2021. The Steering Committee then met every one to two months as needed throughout the course of the plan’s development. The core planning team facilitated each Steering Committee meeting, which addressed a set of objectives based on an established work plan. The Steering Committee met six times from May 2021 through February 2022. Agendas were posted to the website prior to each scheduled Steering Committee meeting, and meeting summaries were posted to the hazard mitigation plan website following their approval by the Steering Committee.

3.6 COORDINATION WITH STAKEHOLDERS AND AGENCIES
Opportunities for involvement in the planning process must be provided to neighboring communities, local and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation, agencies with authority to regulate development, businesses, academia, and other private and nonprofit interests (44 CFR, Section 201.6(b)(2)). The planning team met this requirement as described below.

3.6.1 Notifications About Plan Development Milestones
The following agencies, organizations and entities were invited to participate in the plan development process, including all steering committee meetings, and were kept apprised of plan development milestones:
• Aera Energy
• American Red Cross of Ventura County
• Amgen
• Barbareño/Ventureño Band of Mission
Indians
• California State University Channel Islands
• Calleguas Municipal Water District
• Camrosa Water District
• Casitas Municipal Water District
• Channel Islands Beach Community
Services District
• City of Camarillo
• City of Fillmore
• City of Moorpark
• City of Ojai
• City of Oxnard
• City of Port Hueneme
• City of Santa Paula
• City of Simi Valley
• City of Thousand Oaks
• City of Ventura
• Conejo Recreation & Park District
• Independent Living Resource Center
• MICOP (Mixteco/Indigena Community
Organizing Project)
• Ojai Valley Sanitary District
• Oxnard Chamber of Commerce
• Pleasant Valley Recreation and Park
District
• Saticoy Sanitary District
• Simi Valley Chamber of Commerce
• Strickland Mutual Water Company
• The Nature Conservancy
• Triunfo Water & Sanitation District
• United Water Conservation District
• Ventura Chamber of Commerce
247
Plan Development Methodology
3-5
• Ventura County ACS/ARES
• Ventura County Building and Safety
• Ventura County Chief Executive Office
• Ventura County Coalition of Labor,
Agriculture, and Business
• Ventura County Emergency Medical
Services
• Ventura County Fire Protection District
• Ventura County Health Services Agency
• Ventura County Office of Education
• Ventura County Planning Division
• Ventura County Public Works Agency—
Watershed Protection
• Ventura County Sheriff’s OES
• Ventura County Voluntary Organizations
Active in Disaster
• Ventura Regional Fire Safe Council
• Ventura Regional Sanitation District
These entities received meeting announcements, meeting agendas, and meeting minutes by e-mail throughout the plan development process. Some of them supported the effort by attending meetings or providing feedback on issues.

3.6.2 Pre-Adoption Review
All the entities listed above were provided an opportunity to review and comment on this plan during the public comment period, primarily through the hazard mitigation plan website (see Section 3.8.1). All were sent an e-mail message informing them that draft portions of the plan were available for review.

Upon completion of a public comment period, the complete draft plan was sent to the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) and FEMA for a pre-adoption review to ensure program compliance.

3.7 REVIEW OF EXISTING PROGRAMS
Hazard mitigation planning must include review and incorporation, as appropriate, of existing plans, studies, reports and technical information (44 CFR, Section 201.6(b)(3)). Chapter 6 of this plan provides a review of laws and ordinances in effect within the planning area that can affect hazard mitigation actions. In addition, the following programs can affect mitigation within the planning area:
• California Fire Code
• 2019 California Building Code
• California State Hazard Mitigation Forum
• Local capital improvement programs
• Local emergency operations plans
• Local general plans
• Housing elements
• Safety elements
• Local zoning ordinances
• Local coastal program policies
248
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-6
Assessments of all planning partners’ regulatory, technical, and financial capabilities to implement hazard mitigation actions are presented in the individual jurisdiction-specific annexes in Volume 2.

Many of these relevant plans, studies and regulations are cited in the capability assessments.

3.8 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Broad public participation in the planning process helps ensure that diverse points of view about the planning area’s needs are considered and addressed. The public must have opportunities to comment on disaster mitigation plans during the drafting stages and prior to plan approval (44 CFR, Section 201.6(b)(1)). The Community Rating System (CRS) expands on these requirements by making CRS credits available for optional public involvement activities. The public outreach process for this plan update consisted of a combination of general outreach and information provided during partner meetings and events.

3.8.1 Strategy
As a result of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, in-person events were not able to be held during the course of this plan update. Therefore, the strategy for involving the public in this plan update emphasized the following elements:
• Identify and involve planning area stakeholders.
• Open Steering Committee meetings to members of the public for ongoing input. • Use a survey to evaluate the public’s perception of risk. • Invite public participation and engagement at virtual meetings, including a call-in option for community members to provide input by phone.
• Attempt to reach as many planning area residents as possible using multiple media sources, including print, website, and social media.
• Publish agendas and minutes for Steering Committee meetings on the website.

In order to engage the broadest segment of the population, all social media posts were posted in both English and Spanish. Additionally, translation into Spanish, Mixteco and American Sign Language was provided during all virtual meetings. Translation services were advertised in meeting announcements and at the beginning of each meeting. Non-English-speaking participants could take advantage of this service by joining a break-out room of the virtual meeting. Recordings of public meetings were posted on the hazard mitigation website.

Stakeholders and the Steering Committee
The inclusion of stakeholders on the Steering Committee (see Section 3.5) served as a significant component of public involvement activities. Stakeholders targeted for this process included the following:
• Ventura County and local jurisdiction departments relevant for hazard mitigation planning • Members of the academic community
• Community member representatives
249
Plan Development Methodology
3-7
• Representatives of humanitarian aid and access and functional needs (AFN) support services • Tribal representatives
• Local special-purpose districts
• Local businesses and business interests
• Local environmental organizations
Internet
At the beginning of the plan update process in May 2021, the County established a hazard mitigation website (https://www.readyventuracounty.org/local-multijurisdictional-hazards-mitigation-plan-update/) to provide information about the process (see Figure 3-1). The website was used to keep the public informed about milestones and public participation opportunities and to solicit input.

Figure 3-1. Example Page of the Hazard Mitigation Plan Web Site The site’s address was publicized in all press releases, mailings, surveys, and public meetings.

Information on the plan development process, the Steering Committee, the community awareness survey, and drafts of the plan were made available to the public on the site throughout the process. 250
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-8
Ventura County intends to keep a website active after the plan is complete to keep the public informed about successful mitigation projects and future plan updates.

Hazard Mitigation Survey
The planning team developed a 27-question community awareness survey with guidance from the Steering Committee (see Figure 3-2). The survey was used to gauge household and individual awareness of natural hazards and community members’ level of knowledge about tools and techniques to assist them in reducing risk and loss from natural hazards.

Figure 3-2. Sample Page from Survey Distributed to the Public The survey was made available on the hazard mitigation plan website in both Spanish and English and was advertised throughout the course of the planning process (June 2021 to September 2021).

Information on the survey was disseminated via an initial press release, the hazard mitigation plan website, social media (Facebook and Twitter), presentations during five publicly held Community Emergency Preparedness Workshops, and emails to emergency management stakeholders and interested parties. Interim results collected through September helped guide the Steering Committee and planning partners in affirming goals and objectives and in developing mitigation strategies. The survey remained active until the end of December 2021 for continued public input.

Story Map
An online “Story Map” was created (using Esri StoryMap software) to communicate the variety and severity of hazards facing Ventura County (see Figure 3-3). During the update process, the Story Map was released to the public and promoted through print and social media, the project website, and during public meetings. It includes risk assessment results for all relevant hazards, an interactive hazard mapping tool, and a report function to produce comprehensive hazard exposure summaries for any given property, block, or defined area. The Story Map expanded the ways in which members of the public could interact with hazard data as the hazard mitigation plan update was underway. 251
Plan Development Methodology
3-9
Figure 3-3. Example Story Map Data Page
After completion of the hazard mitigation plan update, the Ventura County Story Map will continue to support visual and data-based communication about the range of hazards relevant in Ventura County.

New and revised data can be loaded into the platform in the future to compare hazard risk with any other spatial data set.

Public Meetings
Five virtual public meetings—Community Emergency Preparedness Workshops on September 15, 16, 22, and 23 and October 11, 2021—described the hazard mitigation plan update process and provided information on the Story Map and community survey. Guest panelists from different cities were featured at each workshop to speak about local emergency preparedness efforts and current plan updates. The meetings described how participants could learn about hazard mitigation, follow the progress of the plan update, and participate in the plan update process. Each meeting featured a question-and-answer component and was presented in English, Spanish, Mixteco, and American Sign Language. Recordings of each meeting were posted on the website. Figure 3-4 shows an example screen shot from one of these meetings.

Additionally, the Emergency Planning Council meeting held on November 18, 2021 included an update on the status of the hazard mitigation plan update process.

Social Media
The Ventura County Sheriff’s OES social media accounts (Twitter, Facebook, Nixle, and Nextdoor) were used to share information about the hazard mitigation planning process, including the community awareness survey, Community Emergency Preparedness Workshops, and the public comment period. 252
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-10
Figure 3-4. Screenshot from September 16, 2021 Community Emergency Preparedness Workshop Print and Other Media Outreach
Press releases were distributed over the course of the plan’s development as key milestones were achieved and before each public meeting. Each press release was supplemented by meeting announcements on the project website. The planning effort received widespread press coverage, including the following:
• Announcements of hazard mitigation plan update process and requests for community input:
 June 24, 2021—Nixle
 June 24, 2021—Citizens Journal
 June 2021—City of Thousand Oaks Sustainability Blog
 July 1, 2021—City of Thousand Oaks City Scene
 July 6, 2021—Ojai Valley News
 July 7, 2021—VC Reporter
 July 14, 2021—Ojai Valley News
 July 19, 2021—The Fillmore Gazette
 July 21, 2021—Simi Valley Police Department
 July 21, 2021—VC Reporter
 July 21, 2021—Simi Valley News
 September 2, 2021—City of Moorpark
 July 21, 2021—Citizens Journal
• July 29, 2021—Simi Valley News announcement of the plan update and community survey 253
Plan Development Methodology
3-11
• Announcements of the five virtual Community Emergency Preparedness Workshops that included presentations on the plan update process:
 September 8, 2021—Nixle
 September 8, 2021—Citizens Journal
 September 8, 2021—VC Reporter
 September 15, 2021—VC Reporter
• HMP Update public service announcement (PSA) video release  September 2021—A public service announcement was created to support and inform the public about the hazard mitigation plan update and process. The video is posted on the County’s hazard mitigation website at Hazard Mitigation Plan – Ready Ventura County.

Public Comment
The public outreach process for this plan update consisted of a combination of general outreach and information provided during partner meetings and events. Five virtual public meetings—on September 15, 16, 22, and 23 and October 11, 2021—described the hazard mitigation plan update process and provided information on the Story Map and community survey. The draft plan was made available to the public for comment during a noticed, three-week period in March 2022. The public comment period gave the public an opportunity to comment on the draft plan update prior to its submittal to Cal OES and FEMA. The principle avenue for public comment on the draft plan was the website established for this plan update.

3.8.2 Public Participation Results
Survey Results
From June through December 2021, more than 800 surveys were completed, covering all geographic areas of the County. The survey and detailed results are included in Appendix A; a summary is as follows:
• 832 surveys were completed.
• Surveys were received from all 10 incorporated cities as well as the unincorporated areas of the County.
• Respondents ranked wildfire as the hazard of greatest concern, followed by drought, earthquake, severe weather (wind, heat, cold), agricultural/biological hazards, severe storms, sea-level rise and coastal erosion, flood, landslide, tsunami, and dam failure. • 84 percent of respondents have experienced or been affected by a wildfire. • Nearly half of the respondents felt that their household was not prepared or only somewhat prepared to deal with a hazard event.

Most respondents (nearly 76 percent) felt that personal experience with one or more natural hazards or disasters provided useful hazard and disaster preparedness to the public, followed by emergency preparedness information from government sources (federal, state, or local) (59 percent).
• The concept of incentives to promote hazard mitigation actions on a personal scale was strongly supported, with 67 percent of the respondents supporting a property tax break or incentive and 254
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-12
63 percent supporting an insurance premium discount to encourage them to spend money to retrofit their homes.

Survey results were provided to the Steering Committee for use in confirming goals, objectives and county-wide actions for this plan update. Additionally, the survey results were included in the toolkit provided to each planning partner through the jurisdictional annex process described in Volume 2. Each planning partner was able to use the survey results to:
• Gauge the public’s perception of risk and identify what citizens are concerned about. • Identify the best ways to communicate with the public. • Determine the level of public support for different mitigation strategies. • Understand the public’s willingness to invest in hazard mitigation.

Meeting Attendance and Participation
Table 3-4 summarizes the attendance at the public meetings. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, all meetings were held virtually.

Table 3-4. Summary of Public Meetings
Date Type of Meeting
Number in
Attendance
May 19, 2021 Steering Committee Meeting #1 29
June 9, 2021 Steering Committee Meeting #2 27
July 14, 2021 Steering Committee Meeting #3 24
September 8, 2021 Steering Committee Meeting #4 16
September 15, 2021 Community Emergency Preparedness Workshop 106 September 16, 2021 Community Emergency Preparedness Workshop 90 September 22, 2021 Community Emergency Preparedness Workshop 83 September 23, 2021 Community Emergency Preparedness Workshop 55 October 11, 2021 Community Emergency Preparedness Workshop 30 November 10, 2021 Steering Committee Meeting #5 22
November 18, 2021 Ventura County Emergency Planning Council January 27, 2022 Presentation at the Santa Clara River Watershed Committee’s community organization meeting Unknown February 9, 2022 Steering Committee Meeting #6 20
Total

3.9 PLAN DEVELOPMENT CHRONOLOGY/MILESTONES
Table 3-5 summarizes important milestones in the development of the plan update. 255
Plan Development Methodology
3-13
Table 3-5. Plan Development Milestones
Date Event Description Attendance
2021
1/21 Support Contractor Secured County selects Tetra Tech to facilitate plan update process N/A Feb/
March
COVID-19 COVID-19 pandemic caused delays in onboarding of project lead and initiation of update process
4/7 Organize Resources Core planning team formed N/A
4/8 Core Planning Team Meeting #1 • Core planning team kickoff • Planning process overview and schedule
• Steering Committee function defined
• Planning partner discussion
• Data acquisition
• Public outreach strategy
• Meeting coordination
11 4/13 Core Planning Team Meeting #2 • Review of 2015 hazards of concern • Steering Committee
• Schedule kickoff meeting
11 4/27 Core Planning Team Meeting #3 • Steering Committee • Hazards of concern
• Planning partner kickoff meeting
• Public outreach
11 5/5 Project Kickoff Meeting • Review work plan
• Discuss planning partner expectations
• Obtain input on Steering Committee
• Risk assessment data needs
• Discuss public involvement strategy
34 5/6 Jurisdictional Annex Process
Phase 1
• Planning partners begin the jurisdiction annex update process with the team, profile, trends, and previous plan status updates.

N/A
5/11 Core Planning Team Meeting #4 • Hazard scenarios
• Public outreach
• Steering Committee confirmation
• Planning partner kickoff meeting review
12 5/13 Public Outreach ReadyVentura County website adapted and expanded for information on 2022 plan update process
N/A
5/19 Steering Committee Meeting #1 • Project overview
• Role of the Steering Committee
• Discuss public outreach strategy
• Review of 2015 hazard mitigation plan
29 5/25 Core Planning Team Meeting #5 • Hazard scenarios confirmed • Draft mission, goals, and objectives
• Public outreach—community preparedness survey
14 6/02 Public Outreach Hazard mitigation community awareness survey deployed and kept open through December 31, 2021. https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/G7T7W5R (Survey closed after December 31, 2021)
N/A
6/08 Core Planning Team Meeting #6 • Public outreach
• Finalized hazards of concern and scenarios
• Mission and goals discussion
• Define FEMA community lifelines
14 256
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-14
Date Event Description Attendance
6/09 Steering Committee Meeting #2 • Finalize and confirm Steering Committee guidelines • Public outreach strategy
o Website
o Survey
• Volume 1 and 2 overview
• Vision and goal setting
• Hazards of concern accepted and hazard scenarios explained • Critical infrastructure / FEMA lifelines definition accepted 27 6/22 Core Planning Team Meeting #7 • Public outreach, bilingual survey • Mission goals and objectives discussion
13 7/06 Jurisdictional Annex Process
Phase 2
• Planning partners continue the jurisdictional annex update process with the capability assessment, integration review, and information sources updates.

N/A
7/14 Steering Committee Meeting #3 • Public outreach
o Website
o Survey update
• Vision, goals, and objectives accepted
• Planning partner update
• Story map overview
24 7/20 Core Planning Team Meeting #8 • Final mission, goals, and objectives • Public outreach
• Story map review
• Jurisdictional Annex Phase 3 Workshop discussion
9 8/03 Core Planning Team Meeting #9 • Public outreach, survey updates • Jurisdictional Annex Phase 3 Workshop overview
11 8/31 Core Planning Team Meeting #10 • Public outreach update • PSA video update
• Story map presentation
• Planning partner update
• Steering Committee meeting preparation
6 9/08 Steering Committee Meeting #4 • Public outreach
o Website
o Survey status
o Community meetings
• Story map
o PSA video
16 9/14 Core Planning Team Meeting #11 • Story map review • PSA video status
8 9/15 Public Outreach Community Emergency Preparedness Workshop—Featuring Unincorporated County Areas
106
9/16 Public Outreach Community Emergency Preparedness Workshop—Featuring the City of Oxnard
90 9/22 Jurisdictional annex Workshop -
Municipalities
Workshop for municipal planning partners to assist in completion of Phase 2 of the jurisdictional annex process. Remote technical support provided by Tetra Tech
30 9/22 Public Outreach Community Emergency Preparedness Workshop—Featuring the City of Camarillo
83 9/23 Jurisdictional annex Workshop –
Special Purpose Districts
Workshop for special district planning partners to assist in completion of Phase 2 of the jurisdictional annex process. Remote technical support provided by Tetra Tech
35 9/28 Phase 3 Annex Conference
Call #1
Remote technical support provided to planning partners by Tetra Tech in support of Phase 2 annex completion
257
Plan Development Methodology
3-15
Date Event Description Attendance
9/17 Public Outreach • Closure of hazard mitigation survey • Tabulation of results
9/23 Public Outreach Community Emergency Preparedness Workshop—Featuring the City of Simi Valley
55 Sept Public Outreach PSA video released in English and Spanish N/A 10/05 Phase 3 Annex Conference
Call #2
Remote technical support provided to planning partners by Tetra Tech in support of Phase 3 annex completion
10/11 Public Outreach Community Emergency Preparedness Workshop—Featuring the City of Santa Paula
30 10/12 Phase 3 Annex Conference
Call #3
Remote technical support provided to planning partners by Tetra Tech in support of Phase 3 annex completion
10/19 Phase 3 Annex Conference
Call #4
Remote technical support provided to planning partners by Tetra Tech in support of Phase 3 annex completion
10/26 Core Planning Team Meeting #12 • Planning partner Phase 3 annex status update • Countywide initiatives
• Plan maintenance strategy
• Public meeting to coordinate with the Emergency Planning Council • Public comment period discussion
• Plan development schedule update
11/10 Steering Committee Meeting #5 • Update on planning partner activities • Review of proposed county-wide initiatives
• Confirmation of plan maintenance strategy
22 11/16 Core Planning Team Meeting #13 • Discuss and determine plan maintenance strategy and grant monitoring 5 11/18 Public Outreach • Emergency Planning Council meeting • Status update on the hazard mitigation plan update
not available
2022
1/11 Core Planning Team Meeting #14 • Draft plan Volume 1 review • Planning partner update
• Plan development schedule
5 2/09 Steering Committee Meeting #6 • Discuss plan progress • Draft plan presentation
• Draft plan public comment method
• Public comment period
• Plan development, submittal and adoption discussion
20 2/08 Core Planning Team Meeting #15 • Draft plan Volume 1 internal review update • Steering Committee meeting preparation
• Public comment press release discussion
• Plan development schedule updates
5 3/03 Public Outreach Opening of the 3-week public comment period N/A 3/24 Public Outreach Closure of the 3-week public comment period N/A 4/1 Plan Submittal to Cal OES Submittal of draft plan to Cal OES for review and approval N/A 4/1 Plan Submittal to FEMA Submittal of draft plan to FEMA N/A TBD Approval Pending Adoption Approval Pending Adoption provided by FEMA N/A TBD Adoption Adoption window for planning partners opens N/A TBD Approval Proof of adoption documentation submitted to FEMA and Cal OES N/A TBD Approval Final approval of the plan by FEMA N/A
258
259
4-1

4. VENTURA COUNTY PROFILE

4.1 PHYSICAL SETTING

4.1.1 Geography and Topography
Ventura County covers 2,208 square miles along southern California’s Pacific coast (1,845 square miles of land and 363 square miles of water). It is bordered by Kern County to the north, Santa Barbara County to the northwest, the Pacific Ocean to the southwest, and Los Angeles County to the east and southeast. National forest makes up 53 percent of Ventura County’s total area. Of the remaining 47 percent (555,953 acres), 59 percent is agricultural and 17.5 percent is urban. Two of California’s eight Channel Islands are also part of the county: Anacapa Island, which is the most visited island in Channel Islands National Park, and San Nicolas Island, which is operated by the U.S. Navy.

The topography in the county is highly variable and includes mountainous areas, rolling hills, a fertile river valley and coastal plain, steep coastal bluffs, and sections of rocky coastline. The northern half of the county is mountainous and sparsely inhabited, and contains some of the most unspoiled, rugged and inaccessible wilderness remaining in southern California. Most of this land lies within the Los Padres National Forest, and includes the Chumash Wilderness in the northernmost portion, adjacent to Kern County, as well as the Sespe Wilderness and portions of the Dick Smith Wilderness and Matilija Wilderness (both of which straddle the line with Santa Barbara County) (California Department of Conservation 2021). This is an area of high topographic relief; eight mountains within this portion of the county exceed 6,000 feet in elevation, and the only major river valley is Lockwood Valley.

Conversely, the southwestern portion of the county consists of a large coastal plain known as the Oxnard Plain. The plain was formed by the deposition of sediments from the Santa Clara River and from the streams of the Calleguas-Conejo drainage system. It has a mean elevation of 50 feet, but the elevation is as much as 150 feet at points south of the Santa Clara River and as much as 300 feet at points north of the river. The part east of the Revolon Slough that centers on Camarillo is called Pleasant Valley. Most of the arable land in the county is found on the coastal plain, as well as the cities of Camarillo, Oxnard, Ventura, and Port Hueneme.

A series of smaller east-west trending hills and mountain ranges make up much of the remainder of the county. The Santa Ynez Mountains, the Topatopa Mountains, and the Piru Mountains constitute the northern boundary of the Oxnard Plain. The Santa Susana Mountains lie alongside the eastern boundary of the county, and the Simi Hills and the Santa Monica Mountains are along the southern border with Los Angeles County. These coastal mountains range in elevation from 50 feet along the coast south of the coastal plain to about 3,100 feet in the Santa Monica Mountains. Inland, the low, long South Mountain and Oak Ridge ranges separate Santa Clara Valley from the Las Posas Valley 260
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-2
and Simi Valley. The Camarillo Hills and the Las Posas Hills extend from Camarillo to Simi Valley and separate the Las Posas-Simi area from the Santa Rosa Valley and Tierra Rejada Valley (U.S.

Department of Agriculture 1970).

4.1.2 Watersheds and Surface Waters
Ventura County contains four main watershed zones. The Santa Clara River is by far the largest river, with a drainage area of 1,625 square miles at its mouth. The Ventura River is also a prominent river in the county, with a drainage area of 263 square miles at the Pacific Ocean. Chapter 11 discusses the watershed areas in greater detail. The county also has numerous lakes and reservoirs. The largest dam-created reservoir by volume is Lake Casitas, which holds 254,000 acre-feet of water. It is used primarily for drinking water, irrigation, flood control, and recreation. Lake Piru, another large damcreated reservoir in the county, has a slightly larger surface area than Lake Casitas but is shallower and only holds 83,244 acre-feet of water. Lake Piru is used for recreation, flood control, surface water conservation and groundwater conservation and replenishment.

4.1.3 Climate
Ventura County features a Mediterranean climate characterized by cool, dry summers near the coast and warm, dry summers inland. Winters are typically mild and wet, with the area receiving 95 percent of its annual rainfall from November through April.

Average precipitation is highly variable across the region and varies dramatically with elevation as well as distance from the coast. For example, average annual rainfall ranges from less than 8 inches in the Cuyama Valley in northwestern Ventura County to approximately 38 inches in the Ventura River watershed west of the City of Ojai. Prevailing weather patterns during winter and the orientation of the mountain ranges in the northern half of the county can also combine to produce extremely highintensity rainfall. Along the coast near Oxnard, Ventura, Simi Valley, and Thousand Oaks, the average rainfall is 14 inches.

Like most of southern California, Ventura County also observes high interannual precipitation variability, where an average rainfall year is the exception rather than the rule.

Table 4-1 summarizes normal climate date from 2000 through 2020 at the National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) weather station at the Oxnard Airport.

Table 4-1. Normal Precipitation and Temperatures, 2000 – 2020 Temperature (ºF)
Precipitation (inches) Minimum Average Maximum
Annual 17.6 46.5 58.6 71.3
Winter 10.99 37.7 48.9 60.2
Summer 0.09 55.5 69.3 83.1
Spring 4.29 42.6 54.9 67.1
Autumn 2.16 50.2 61.3 74.6
Weather Station: Oxnard Ventura County Airport
Source: (National Centers for Environmental Information 2021) 261
Ventura County Profile
4-3

4.2 HISTORICAL OVERVIEW
Ventura County was historically inhabited by the Chumash people, who also settled throughout much of Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties. The Chumash were originally hunters, gatherers, fisherman, and traders, and are known for their rock paintings and basketry.

Spanish explorers began arriving in the area in the mid-1500s, although active occupation did not effectively occur until more than 200 years later. The Spanish encouraged settlement of the area with large land grants called ranchos. The Catholic church established the Mission San Buenaventura in 1782 in what is now the City of San Buenaventura (commonly called the City of Ventura).

The County of Ventura was established on January 1, 1873, when it separated from Santa Barbara County, just 23 years after California’s statehood was attained. At this time, the area remained largely rural, consisting of a population of less than 5,000 individuals that engaged predominantly in ranching and the cultivation of grain crops.

During the early 1900s, increased demand from new markets in the burgeoning Los Angeles area led to a significant expansion and diversification of agriculture in Ventura. Together with the discovery of vast oil reserves in the area, this resulted in an influx of immigrants, wealth, and substantial improvements to transportation infrastructure in the region.

A second, intense population boom (>5% annually) occurred beginning in the 1940s with the construction of Port Hueneme and the establishment of a military base at Point Mugu, which brought numerous professionals and ancillary industries to the region. Ventura County, and the Oxnard area in particular, benefited from the hiring of more than 10,000 civilian workers and 21,000 military personnel, thus providing jobs for local residents and reviving the economy following the Depression of the 1930s.

By 1950, the population of the county had increased to over 114,000, more than double its population in 1930.

The East County saw a large growth in population starting in the mid-20th century with people moving from the San Fernando Valley in Los Angeles to the Conejo and Simi Valleys. Many working-class people migrated to these areas during the 1960s and 1970s out of East and Central Los Angeles.

Making the U.S. 101 a full freeway in the 1960s, and the expansions that followed, helped make commuting to Los Angeles easier and opened the way for development westward. The communities that saw the most substantial development were Calabasas, Hidden Hills, Agoura Hills, Westlake Village, Thousand Oaks, and Newbury Park. The East County area of Simi Valley saw its already considerable population of nearly 60,000 inhabitants in 1970 grow to over 100,000 over the following two decades.

Development moved farther out the U.S. 101 corridor and sent population rising in West County cities as well. The largest population growth there was in Camarillo, Oxnard, and Ventura. Development in the East County and along the U.S. 101 corridor is rare today, because most of these cities are masterplanned cities, such as Thousand Oaks and Simi Valley, and are approaching buildout. Although the area still has plenty of open space and land, almost all of it is mandated to never be developed as part of the master plan of each city.
262
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-4

4.3 POPULATION CENTERS, TRANSPORTATION, AND GOVERNMENT
The major population centers in Ventura County today are in the southern part of the county, within the incorporated cities of Camarillo, Fillmore, Moorpark, Ojai, Oxnard, Port Hueneme, Santa Paula, Simi Valley, Thousand Oaks, and San Buenaventura (Ventura). Unincorporated communities of note include La Conchita, Lake Sherwood, Meiners Oaks, Oak Park, Oak View, Santa Rosa Valley, El Rio, and Saticoy. The City of Ventura, located along the northwestern coast of the county, is the county seat.

The nearby City of Oxnard is the most populous city. Both these cities are located on the Oxnard Plain, a large alluvial fan formed by deposition from the Santa Clara River. The planning area is shown in Figure 4-1. The risk analysis for this hazard mitigation plan assessed risk both countywide and for each planning partner’s jurisdictional area.

U.S. Highway 101 is the main highway in the county, running east to west through the southern half of the county, and connecting the cities of Thousand Oaks, Camarillo, Oxnard, and Ventura. U.S.

Highway 126 runs east to west along the Santa Clara River Valley, through the cities of Fillmore, Santa Paula, and Ventura, before joining with U.S. Highway 101. Highway 1 follows the coastline along the county’s southern boundary. Other major roadways include State Highways 33, 34, 118, and 150.

Airports in the county include Camarillo Airport, Oxnard Airport, Santa Paula Airport, and Naval Base Ventura County. Both Camarillo and Oxnard airports are operated by the Ventura County Department of Airports. Santa Paula airport is a privately owned, public-use airport. Naval Base Ventura County is operated by the U.S. Navy. The National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) and Metrolink trains carry passengers on track extending from Simi Valley to Oxnard. Amtrak service continues to Ventura and along the coastline/Highway 101 to Santa Barbara County.

The Ventura County Board of Supervisors sits as the governing board of Ventura County and of various special jurisdictions such as the Sonoma County Water Agency, the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, the Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District, County Sanitation Districts, and the Community Development Commission. The Board is composed of five supervisors elected from supervisorial districts for four-year terms. The boundaries of these districts are included on Figure 4-1.

4.4 DEVELOPMENT

4.4.1 Land Use
The Ventura County 2040 General Plan and its land use maps govern the types of land uses and development that may occur in different areas of the unincorporated county. The focus of current land use policies is to preserve agricultural, rural, and open space lands while directing growth to cities and unincorporated communities. Figure 4-2 shows the distribution of current land uses in the unincorporated county.

4.4.2 Building Count, Occupancy Class and Estimated Replacement Value Table 4-2 presents planning area building counts by occupancy class; these are broad use classes assigned in the Hazus model. Table 4-3 summarizes estimated replacement value for building structures and contents combined, based on County assessor data. 263
Fillmore
Moorpark
Simi Valley
Santa Paula
Oxnard
Ojai
Port
Hueneme
Camarillo
San
Buenaventura
Thousand Oaks
Lake Piru
Lake
Casitas
¬«33 ¬«118
¬«34
¬« ¬«118 126
¬«150
¬«1
¬«1
¬«23
¬«126
¬«23
¬«33
¬«33
¬«34
¬«1
¬«150
¬«232
¬«33
¬«23
£¤101
Figure 4-1. Planning Area
Data Sources: Ventura Co.,
Esri
County Boundary
Cities
Major Roads
±
06 3
Miles
264
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-6
Figure 4-2. Land Use Classifications in the Planning Area Source: Ventura County 2020
265
Ventura County Profile
4-7
Table 4-2. Planning Area Building Counts by Occupancy Class Number of Buildings
Agricultural Commercial Education Government Industrial Religion Residential Total Camarillo 24 736 215 280 832 85 19,657 21,829
Fillmore 7 328 85 69 39 17 4,310 4,855
Moorpark 101 410 183 63 153 18 9,769 10,697
Ojai 23 345 56 48 54 87 2,918 3,531
Oxnard 92 3,117 654 429 961 150 40,471 45,874
Port Hueneme 0 299 57 430 26 18 5,583 6,413
San Buenaventura 72 2,933 381 250 788 192 30,694 35,310 Santa Paula 55 833 119 50 190 69 7,211 8,527
Simi Valley 56 1,210 434 53 301 108 35,640 37,802
Thousand Oaks 7 1,442 325 171 286 218 36,348 38,797
Unincorporated 11,027 3,172 494 745 523 493 32,568 49,022 Total 11,464 14,825 3,003 2,588 4,153 1,455 225,169 262,657 Table 4-3. Estimated Replacement Value of Planning Area Buildings Estimated Total Replacement Value
(Structure and Contents)
Estimated Total Replacement Value
(Structure and Contents)
Camarillo $17,707,287,595 San Buenaventura $23,838,143,638 Fillmore $2,467,839,895 Santa Paula $4,571,072,937
Moorpark $8,222,512,567 Simi Valley $24,328,139,279
Ojai $2,340,202,613 Thousand Oaks $30,560,756,798
Oxnard $32,903,823,044 Unincorporated $29,161,232,550
Port Hueneme $4,655,956,714 Total $180,756,967,629
Source: Ventura County tax parcel data

4.4.3 Critical Facilities
Critical facilities are those that are essential to the health and welfare of the population. These become especially important after a hazard event. Also included are facilities that hold significant amounts of hazardous materials with a potential to impact public welfare during a hazard event. The risk assessment for each hazard in this plan discusses potential impacts on critical facilities. This plan update uses the following definition of critical facilities:

A structure, facility, or other improvement that, because of its function, service area, or uniqueness, provides service that enables the continuous operation of critical business and government functions, and is critical to human health and safety, or economic security.

The planning team and Steering Committee recommended that this plan update include a definition of critical facilities that aligns with FEMA’s “community lifelines” concept. This will position the County for future funding under FEMA grant programs and initiatives. The FEMA-defined lifeline categories are as follows:
• Safety and Security—Law enforcement/security, search and rescue, fire services, government service, responder safety, and imminent hazard mitigation 266
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-8
• Food, Water and Shelter—Evacuations, schools, food/potable water, shelter, durable goods, water infrastructure and agriculture
• Health and Medical—Medical care (hospitals), patient movement, public health, fatality management, health care and supply chain
• Energy—Power (grid), temporary power and fuel
• Communications—Infrastructure, alerts, warnings, messages, 911 and dispatch, responder communications and financial services
• Transportation—Highway/roadway, mass transit, railway, aviation, maritime and pipeline • Hazardous Materials—Facilities, hazardous debris, pollutants, and contaminants Table 4-4 provides a summary of the critical facilities in the planning area by category and jurisdiction.

General locations of identified critical facilities are shown on Figure 4-3 and Figure 4-4. The County and its planning partners consider this information to be subject to change as new information about critical facilities becomes available during the performance period for this plan. Due to the sensitivity of this information, a detailed list of facilities is not provided; however, all critical facilities were analyzed in Hazus to help rank risk and identify mitigation actions. The risk assessment for each hazard discusses critical facilities with regard to that hazard.

Table 4-4. Critical Facilities by Jurisdiction and Category Number of Facilities Present
Communications Energy
Food, Water,
Shelter
Hazardous
Material
Health &
Medical
Safety &
Security Transportation Total
Camarillo 20 5 34 14 1 35 32 141
Fillmore 3 1 4 1 0 10 3 22
Moorpark 5 1 7 9 0 19 11 52
Ojai 6 1 14 0 1 13 2 37
Oxnard 24 33 11 23 2 59 36 188
Port Hueneme 7 2 1 2 0 7 8 27
San Buenaventura 34 10 6 6 3 54 63 176
Santa Paula 5 1 3 3 1 15 20 48
Simi Valley 19 4 4 13 1 51 71 163
Thousand Oaks 53 7 20 13 1 55 54 203
Unincorporated 74 46 106 9 0 73 223 531
Total 250 111 210 93 10 391 523 1,588

4.4.4 Development Trends
An understanding of population and development trends can assist in planning for future development and ensuring that appropriate mitigation, planning, and preparedness measures are in place to protect human health and community infrastructure. The Disaster Mitigation Act requires that communities consider land use trends, which can alter the need for, and priority of, mitigation options over time.

Land use and development trends significantly affect exposure and vulnerability to various hazards. For example, significant development in a hazard area increases the building stock and population exposed to that hazard.
267
!.
!.
!.!. !. !.
!.
!.
!.
!. !. !.!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!. !.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.!.
!.
!. !.
!.!.
!.
.! !. !.
!.
!. !.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!. !.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !. !. !.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !. !. !. !.!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!. !. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.!.
!. !. !. !. !.
!.
!.
!.!.!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!. !. !.!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!. !.!.
!. !.
!. !.
!.
!. !. !.
!.
!.
!.
!. !. !. !. !. !.
!. !.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!. !. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!. !. !.
!.
!. !.
!.!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.!.
!.
!.!.
!.!.!.
!.
!.!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.!. !.
!.!. !.!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.!. !.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!. !. !.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.

Fillmore
Moorpark
Simi Valley
Santa Paula
Oxnard
Ojai
Port
Hueneme
Camarillo
San
Buenaventura
Thousand Oaks
Lake Piru
Lake
Casitas
¬«33 ¬«118
¬«34
¬« ¬«118 126
¬«150
¬«1
¬«1
¬«23
¬«126
¬«23
¬«33
¬«33
¬«34
¬«1
¬«150
¬«232
¬«33
¬«23
£¤101
Figure 4-3. Critical Facilities (1 of 2)
Data Sources: Ventura Co., VCFD,
Casitas MWD, Calleguas MWD,
City of Camarillo, CA Energy
Commission, Cal Trans, EPA,
HIFLD, Esri
!. Health and Medical
!. Food, Water, Shelter
!. Safety and Security
County Boundary
Cities
Major Roads
±
06 3
Miles
268
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !. !.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!. !.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!. !.
!.!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!. !.
!.!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.!.
!. !.
!. !.!. !. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.!.
!. !.
!.!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!. !.
!.!.!.!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!. !.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !. !.
!.
!. !. !.!.!.
!.
!.!.
!.!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!. !. !. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!. !.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.!.!.!. !.
!. !. !.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.!.
!.!.
!.
!.!. !. !. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.!.
!.!.!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.!.
!.
!. !.
!.!. !.!. !.
!.!.
!.!.!.!.
!.
!.!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.!.!.
!.!.!.!.!.!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.!.!.!.
!.
!.
!.!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!. !.!.!. !.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.!. !.
!. !.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !. !.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.!.
!.
!.!.!.
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!. !.
!.
!.
!.

Fillmore
Moorpark
Simi Valley
Santa Paula
Oxnard
Ojai
Port
Hueneme
Camarillo
San
Buenaventura
Thousand Oaks
Lake Piru
Lake
Casitas
¬«33 ¬«118
¬«34
¬« ¬«118 126
¬«150
¬«1
¬«1
¬«23
¬«126
¬«23
¬«33
¬«33
¬«34
¬«1
¬«150
¬«232
¬«33
¬«23
£¤101
Figure 4-4. Critical Facilities (2 of 2)
Data Sources: Ventura Co., VCFD,
Casitas MWD, Calleguas MWD,
City of Camarillo, CA Energy
Commission, Cal Trans, EPA,
HIFLD, Esri
!. Communications
!. Energy
!. Hazardous Material
!. Transportation
County Boundary
Cities
Major Roads
±
06 3
Miles
269
Ventura County Profile
4-11
Projected Future Trends
The Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) is mandated by state law as part of the periodic process of updating local general plan housing elements. RHNA quantifies the need for housing within each jurisdiction during specified planning periods. The Southern California Association of Governments is in the process of developing its sixth cycle RHNA allocation plan, which will cover the planning period October 2021 through October 2029 (Southern California Association of Governments 2021a). Ventura County’s 2021-2029 allocation is 24,452 housing units (Southern California Association of Governments 2021b).

Planning Framework
Ventura County and all incorporated cities included in this hazard mitigation plan have general plans, adopted under state law, to ensure that their governing bodies take actions that the community has determined to be the most orderly, beneficial, and supportive of the community vision. All partners have committed to link their general plans to this hazard mitigation plan. This will create an opportunity for wise land use decisions as future growth impacts hazard areas.

The County of Ventura has land use regulatory authority over most unincorporated land in the county.

The County lacks land use authority within the city limits of incorporated cities and in unincorporated areas that are owned and managed by the state or federal government (e.g., state parks, national parks, Bureau of Land Management areas, and tribal lands), except for portions of state parks and other state land in the coastal zone. Under state law, the County has land use authority over land owned and managed by special districts in the unincorporated area (e.g., school districts, cemetery districts, water districts), subject to limited exceptions (Ventura County 2020).

All city and county planning partners have specific capabilities to manage growth in a way that limits increased risk associated with hazards. Details on these capabilities for each hazard assessed in this plan are provided in Section 6.4. Each of these planning partners reviewed their general plans under the capability assessments performed for this effort, as presented in Volume 2 of the hazard mitigation plan. Deficiencies identified by these reviews can be identified as mitigation actions to increase the capability to deal with future trends in development.

4.5 DEMOGRAPHICS PROFILE

4.5.1 Population Counts
Information about population is a critical part of planning because it directly relates to land needs such as housing, industry, stores, public facilities and services, and transportation. Population changes are useful socio-economic indicators. A growing population generally indicates a growing economy, while a decreasing population may signify economic decline. Due to delays associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, some 2020 census information was not yet available at the time of this plan update. The Census Bureau changed the 2020 American Community Survey release schedule. 270
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-12
Current and Historical Population
Table 4-5 shows the population of the County and its incorporated cities from 1990 to 2020. Oxnard and Thousand Oaks are the largest cities in Ventura County, together accounting for 39.4 percent of the planning area’s population in 2010 and 39.5 percent in 2020. Unincorporated areas accounted for

11.5 percent of the planning area’s population in 2010 and about 11.3 percent in 2020.

Table 4-5. Recent Population by Jurisdiction
Population
1990 2000 2010 2020
Camarillo 52,297 57,084 65,201 69,964
Fillmore 11,992 13,643 15,002 15,558
Moorpark 25,494 31,415 34,421 36,264
Ojai 7,613 7,862 7,461 7,450
Oxnard 142,560 170,358 197,899 205,950
Port Hueneme 20,322 21,845 21,723 23,707
Ventura 92,557 100,916 106,433 105,878
Santa Paula 25,062 28,598 29,321 30,386
Simi Valley 100,218 111,351 124,237 124,953
Thousand Oaks 104,381 117,005 126,683 126,384
Unincorporated 86,500 93,120 94,937 94,725
Total 669,016 753,197 823,318 841,219
Source: California Department of Finance, 2021
Overall decrease in population of the unincorporated areas was 0.2 percent from 2010 to 2020; the City of Oxnard grew 3.9 percent during the same timeframe, and the population of the City of Thousand Oaks decreased 0.2 percent. Figure 4-5 shows the planning area’s 10-year population growth rates from 1970 to 2020 compared to those of the state.

Figure 4-5. State of California and Ventura County Population Growth per Decade Source: California Department of Finance, 2021
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
1970 - 1980 1980 - 1990 1990 - 2000 2000 - 2010 2010 - 2020 % 10-Year Change in Population
California
Ventura County
271
Ventura County Profile
4-13
Projected Future Population
According to projections by the California Department of Finance, Ventura County’s population is expected to increase to 885,628 by 2040. This represents about a 5 percent increase from the 2020 population of 841,219.

4.5.2 Age Distribution
The overall age distribution for the County is shown in Figure 4-6. Based on U.S. Census 2019 data estimates, 15.9 percent of the planning area’s population is 65 or older, compared with the state average of 14.8 percent. It is also estimated that 18.4 percent of the population is 14 or younger, which varies slightly from the state’s average of 18.7 percent.

Figure 4-6. Planning Area Age Distribution
Source: U.S. Census—American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates 47,323
46,665
61,801
57,549
55,414
113,309
104,866
109,967
58,672
53,817
78,541
40,324
17,758
0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000
Under 5 years
5 to 9 years
10 to 14 years
15 to 19 years
20 to 24 years
25 to 34 years
35 to 44 years
45 to 54 years
55 to 59 years
60 to 64 years
65 to 74 years
75 to 84 years
85 years and over
Number of People
Age
272
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-14

4.5.3 Race, Ethnicity and Language
According to the U.S. Census, the racial composition of the planning area is predominantly white, at 56 percent. The largest minority populations are Asian at 7.5 percent, and some other race at 5.1 percent.

Figure 4-7 shows the racial distribution in the planning area. Based on the U.S. Census ethnicity definitions, Ventura County consists of 43.2 percent of individuals of Hispanic or Latino ethnicity (of any race). The planning area has a 21.6 percent foreign-born population. Other than English, the most spoken language in the planning area is Spanish. The Census estimates 53.6 percent of the residents speak English “less than very well.”
Figure 4-7. Planning Area Race Distribution

4.5.4 Persons with Disabilities or with Access and Functional Needs According to the 2018 Census estimates, persons with disabilities or with access and functional needs make up 10.8 percent of the total civilian non-institutionalized population of Ventura County. According to U.S. Census data, 32.1 percent of the over-65 population have disabilities of some kind.

4.6 ECONOMY

4.6.1 Income
Based on 2019 Census data, per capita income in the County of Ventura was $40,293 and the median household income was $92,236. The Department of Housing and Urban Development estimated a 2021 median family income for Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura of $94,340.

The Census estimates that 7.9 percent of all families in the planning area and 7.2 percent of the over65 population have incomes below the poverty level. Children under the age of 18 account for 11.3 percent of individuals who are below the poverty line.

White

80.3%
Black or African
American

1.8%
American Indian and
Alaska Native

0.7%
Asian

7.5%
Some Other Race

5.1%
Two or More Races

4.6%
273
Ventura County Profile
4-15

4.6.2 Homeownership and Renter-Occupied Housing
According to 2019 American Community Survey estimates, there are 268,524 occupied housing units in Ventura County. Table 4-6 compares general demographic statistics for renter-occupied and owneroccupied housing units.

Table 4-6. Comparative Statistics for Renter-Occupied and Owner-Occupied Housing Units Renter-Occupied Housing Units Owner-Occupied Housing Units Occupied Housing Units
Number 100,014 168,510
% of Total 37.2 62.8
Age of Residents
< 35 26,463 8,547
55 and older 30,084 105,535
Time Living at Current Residence
Moved in in 2017 or Later 41,142 21,887

4.6.3 Industry, Businesses, and Institutions
Table 4-7 identifies the principal employers in Ventura County in 2019 as provided by the American Community Survey. Figure 4-8 shows the breakdown of employment in the planning area by industry sector. The County’s economy is strongly based in the education/health services sector and the professional/scientific/management sector. Information and wholesale trade make up the smallest sectors of the local economy.

Table 4-7. 2021 Principal Employers within Ventura County Employer Employer Type
Adventist Health Simi Valley Hospitals
Amgen Inc Biological Specimens-Manufacturers
Baxter Healthcare Medical Manufacturers
Community Memorial Health System Health Care Management County of Ventura Government
Haas Automation Inc Machinery-Manufacturers
Harbor Freight Tools Tools-New & Used
Los Robles Hospital Hospitals
Moorpark College Education
Nancy Reagan Breast Center Diagnostic Imaging Centers
National Guard Government
Ojai Valley Inn Hotels & Hospitality
Oxnard College Education
Pentair Aquatic Systems Retail
Port Hueneme Military
Procter & Gamble Manufacturing
Rancho Simi Recreation Park District Public Administration 274
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-16
Employer Employer Type
Sheriff’s Department Government
City of Simi Valley Government
City of Simi Valley City Manager Government
St. John’s Regional Medical Center Hospitals
U.S. Department of the Navy Military
Ventura County Medical Center Hospital
Ventura County Office of Education School District
Figure 4-8. Employment in Ventura County by Industry Sector

4.6.4 Employment Trends and Commuting
Ventura County’s local employment base has remained nearly the same since 2010. In 2019, the estimated total number of employed Ventura County residents was 422,172, an increase of only 0.58 percent from 2010. Of the working-age population who make up the labor force, 52.1 percent are men and 47.9 percent are women.

Figure 4-9 compares unemployment rates for the State of California and Ventura County from 2010 through 2019. The 2019 Ventura County unemployment rate was the lowest in 10 years at 2.6 percent.

The rate peaked at 7.3 percent in 2011 and declined overall through 2019. In each year from 2010 through 2019, the County unemployment rate was lower than that of the state.

Figure 4-10 shows U.S. Census data for the most common occupations for the employed population of Ventura County. This includes wage and salary jobs, and jobs held by business owners and selfemployed persons. The total job count does not include unpaid volunteers or family workers, or private household workers.

Agriculture,
forestry, fishing
and hunting, and
mining
Construction

5.9%
Manufacturing

9.8%
Wholesale

2.9%
Retail

10.4%
Transportation

3.6%
Information

2.4%
Finance

7.3%
Professional

12.1%
Education

19.8%
Arts and
Entertainment

9.7%
Other Services

5.6%
Public
Administration

5.1%
275
Ventura County Profile
4-17
The 2019 U.S. Census Bureau data shows 78.4 percent of the County’s population work and live in Ventura County; 21.6 percent commute to other places. In 2019, 34.4 percent of Ventura County commuters spent more than 30 minutes to travel to work.

Figure 4-9. 10-Year Unemployment Rates for California and Ventura County Figure 4-10. Employment in the Planning Area by Type of Work 0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Unemployement Rate
State of California
Ventura County
Management,
Business, Science
and Arts
37%
Service
19%
Sales & Office
22%
Natural Resources,
Construction and
Maintenance
12%
Production,
Transportation, and
Material Moving
10%
276
277
5-1

5. HAZARDS OF CONCERN
Defining the hazards that present the greatest risk to the planning area is the first step in assessing overall risk to the community. The planning team and Steering Committee reviewed available information to determine what types of hazards may affect the planning area, how often they can occur, and their potential severity.

5.1 MAJOR PAST HAZARD EVENTS
Federal disaster declarations are typically issued for hazard events that cause more damage than state and local governments can handle without assistance from the federal government, although no specific dollar loss threshold has been established for these declarations. A federal disaster declaration puts federal recovery programs into motion to help disaster victims, businesses, and public entities.

Some of the programs are matched by state programs. Federal disaster, emergency, or fire management assistance declarations were issued for 46 events since 1954 in the planning area. These events are listed in Table 5-1.

Table 5-1. Federal Disaster Declarations for Hazard Events that Affected the Planning Area Type of Event
Disaster
Declaration # Date
Flooda DR-15 02/05/1954
Flooda DR-47 12/23/1955
Firea DR-65 12/29/1956
Flooda DR-82 4/4/1958
Flooda DR-122 3/6/1962
Severe Storma DR-138 10/24/1962
Flooda DR-145 2/25/1963
Heavy Rains, Flooding DR-211 December 7, 1965
Severe Storms, Flooding DR-253 January 26, 1969
Forest, Brush Fires DR-295 September 29, 1970
Severe Storms, High Tides, Flooding DR-364 February 8, 1973 Coastal Storms, Mudslides, Flooding DR-547 February 15, 1978 Severe Storms, Mudslides, Flooding DR-615 January 8, 1980 Coastal Storms, Floods, Slides, Tornadoes DR-677 January 21 – March 30, 1983 Grass, Wildlands, Forest Fires DR-739 June 26 – July 19, 1985 Severe Storms, High Tides, Flooding DR-812 January 17 – 22, 1988 Severe Freeze DR-894 December 19, 1990 – January 3, 1991 Snow Storm, Heavy Rain, High Winds, Flooding, Mudslide DR-935 February 10 – 19, 1992 278
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-2
Type of Event
Disaster
Declaration # Date
Severe Storm, Winter Storm, Mud & Landslides, Flooding DR-979 January 5 – March 20, 1993 Fires, Mud & Landslides, Soil Erosion, Flooding DR-1005 October 26 – April 22, 1994 Northridge Earthquake DR-1008 January 17 – November 30,1994 Severe Winter Storms, Flooding, Landslides, Mud Flows DR-1044 January 3 – February, 1995 Severe Winter Storms, Flooding, Landslides, Mud Flows DR-1046 February 13 – April 19, 1995 Severe Fires EM-3120 October 21 – 31, 1996
Severe Winter Storms and Flooding DR-1203 February 2 – April 30, 1998 Severe Storms, Tornadoes, High Winds and Flooding DR-1267 December 20 – 28, 1998 Wildfires, Flooding, Mudflow and Debris Flow DR-1498 October 21, 2003 – March 31, 2003 Severe Storms, Flooding, Debris Flows, and Mudslides DR-1577 December 27, 2004 – January 11, 2005 Severe Storms, Flooding, Landslides, and Mud and Debris Flows DR-1585 February 16 – 23, 2005 Hurricane Katrina Evacuation EM-3248 August 29 – October 1, 2005 Topanga Fire FM-2583 September 28 – October 10, 2005
School Fire FM-2586 November 18 – 23, 2005
Day Fire FM-2677 September 25 – 30, 2006
Shekell Fire FM-2681 December 3 – 6, 2006
Severe Freeze DR-1689 January 11 – 17, 2007
Wildfires, Flooding, Mudflows, and Debris Flows DR-1731 October 21 – March 31, 2008 Guiberson Fire FM-2839 September 22 – 29, 2009
Springs Fire FM-5024 May 2 – 11, 2013
Thomas Fire FM-5224 December 4, 2017
Wildfires, Flooding, Mudflows, and Debris Flows DR-4353 December 4, 2017- January 31, 2018 Wildfires DR-4407 November 8 – 25, 2018
Saddleridge Fire FM-5293 October 10, 2019
Getty Fire FM-5297 October 28, 2019
Easy Fire FM-5298 October 30, 2019
Maria Fire FM-5302 November 1, 2019
COVID-19 Pandemic DR-4482 January 20, 2020 and continuing a. FEMA did not begin distinguishing declarations by county until 1964. Declarations prior to then are statewide, not county-specific.

Source: FEMA 2021
Review of these events helps identify hazards of concern and targets for risk reduction activities.

However, many natural hazard events do not trigger federal disaster declaration protocol but have significant impacts on their communities (e.g. landslides that result in road closures). These events are also important to consider in identifying hazards of concern and establishing their recurrence intervals.

5.2 HAZARDS EVALUATED IN 2015 PLAN
The planning team also reviewed information on hazards from the previous plan update conducted in 2015. That plan addressed the following 12 hazards of concern:
• Agricultural / biological
• Climate change
• Dam failure/inundation
• Drought
• Earthquake
• Flood
279
Hazards of Concern
5-3
• Landslide
• Levee failure inundation
• Post-fire debris flows
• Tsunami
• Wildfire
• Winter storm

5.3 IDENTIFIED HAZARDS FOR THE 2022 UPDATE
The Steering Committee considered the full range of natural hazards that could affect the planning area and then selected those that present the greatest concern for risk assessment in this plan. The process incorporated a review of state and local hazard planning documents as well as information on the frequency of, magnitude of, and costs associated with hazards that have struck the planning area or could do so. Anecdotal information regarding natural hazards and the perceived vulnerability of the planning area’s assets to them was also used.

Based on the review, this plan includes risk assessments for the hazards of concern listed in Table 5-2.

Climate change is not assessed as an individual hazard, but a profile is provided describing how climate change could affect the hazards of concern assessed in this plan.

Table 5-2. Hazards Addressed in This Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazards of Concern Hazards of Interest
• Dam failure inundation
• Drought
• Earthquake
• Flooding (includes levee failures)
• Landslide & mass movements
• Sea-level rise and coastal erosion
• Severe storms
• Severe weather (heat/freeze events)
• Tsunami
• Wildfire
• Agricultural biological incidents
• Pandemic
Note: Hazards are listed in alphabetical order in this table and in the risk assessment portion of this plan; the order presented does not indicate the hazards’ relative severity or risk.

In addition to the risk assessment of the hazards of concern, this plan provides a qualitative review of the “hazards of interest” listed in Table 5-2. The Steering Committee determined that these other hazards, though not required to be evaluated under federal guidelines for hazard mitigation plans, are important to recognize qualitatively in this plan. Hazard profiles, without quantitative risk assessments, are provided for these hazards of interest.
280
281
6-1

6. EXISTING REGULATIONS
Existing regulations, agencies and programs at the federal, state, and local level can support or impact hazard mitigation actions identified in this plan. Hazard mitigation plans are required to include a review and incorporation, if appropriate, of existing plans, studies, reports, and technical information as part of the planning process (44 CFR, Section 201.6(b)(3)). Information presented in this section can be used to review local capabilities to implement the action plan this hazard mitigation plan presents. Individual review by each planning partner of existing local plans, studies, reports, and technical information is presented in the annexes in Volume 2.

6.1 FEDERAL AND STATE AGENCIES, PROGRAMS AND REGULATIONS State and federal regulations and programs that need to be considered in hazard mitigation are constantly evolving. For this plan, a review was performed to determined which regulations and programs are currently most relevant to hazard mitigation planning. The findings are summarized in Table 6-1 and Table 6-2. Short descriptions of each program are provided in Appendix B.

Table 6-1. Summary of Relevant Federal Agencies, Programs and Regulations Agency, Program or
Regulation
Hazard Mitigation
Area Affected Relevance
Americans with Disabilities Act Action Plan
Implementation
FEMA hazard mitigation project grant applications require full compliance with applicable federal acts.

Bureau of Land Management Wildfire Hazard The Bureau funds and coordinates wildfire management programs and structural fire management and prevention on BLM lands.

Civil Rights Act of 1964 Action Plan
Implementation
FEMA hazard mitigation project grant applications require full compliance with applicable federal acts.

Clean Water Act Action Plan
Implementation
FEMA hazard mitigation project grant applications require full compliance with applicable federal acts.

Community Development
Block Grant Disaster
Resilience Program
Action Plan Funding This is a potential alternative source of funding for actions identified in this plan.

Community Rating System Flood Hazard This voluntary program encourages floodplain management activities that exceed the minimum National Flood Insurance Program requirements.

Disaster Mitigation Act Hazard Mitigation
Planning
This is the current federal legislation addressing hazard mitigation planning.

Emergency Relief for Federally
Owned Roads Program
Action Plan Funding This is a possible funding source for actions identified in this plan. 282
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-2
Agency, Program or
Regulation
Hazard Mitigation
Area Affected Relevance
Emergency Watershed
Program
Action Plan Funding This is a possible funding source for actions identified in this plan.

Endangered Species Act Action Plan
Implementation
FEMA hazard mitigation project grant applications require full compliance with applicable federal acts.

Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission Dam Safety
Program
Dam Failure Hazard This program cooperates with a large number of federal and state agencies to ensure and promote dam safety.

Federal Wildfire Management
Policy and Healthy Forests
Restoration Act
Wildfire Hazard These documents mandate community-based collaboration to reduce risks from wildfire.

National Dam Safety Act Dam Failure Hazard This act requires a periodic engineering analysis of most dams in the country National Environmental Policy
Act
Action Plan
Implementation
FEMA hazard mitigation project grant applications require full compliance with applicable federal acts.

National Fire Plan Wildfire Hazard This plan calls for joint risk reduction planning and implementation by federal, state and local agencies.

National Flood Insurance
Program
Flood Hazard This program makes federally backed flood insurance available to homeowners, renters, and business owners in exchange for communities enacting floodplain regulations
National Incident Management
System
Action Plan
Development
Adoption of this system for government, nongovernmental organizations, and the private sector to work together to manage incidents involving hazards is a prerequisite for federal preparedness grants and awards National Landslide
Preparedness Act
Risk Assessment of
Landslide Hazard
This act authorized a national landslide hazards reduction program and a 3D elevation program, providing tools and data to assess the landside hazard.

Presidential Executive Order
11988 (Floodplain
Management)
Flood Hazard This order requires federal agencies to avoid long and short-term adverse impacts associated with modification of floodplains
Presidential Executive Order
11990 (Protection of Wetlands)
Action Plan
Implementation
FEMA hazard mitigation project grant applications require full compliance with applicable presidential executive orders.

Rural Development Program Action Plan
Implementation
The program provides project financing and technical assistance to help rural communities provide the infrastructure needed by rural businesses, community facilities, and households.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Dam Safety Program
Dam Failure Hazard This program is responsible for safety inspections of dams that meet size and storage limitations specified in the National Dam Safety Act.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Flood Hazard Management
Flood Hazard, Action
Plan Implementation,
Action Plan Funding
The Corps of Engineers offers multiple funding and technical assistance programs available for flood hazard mitigation actions
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
Safety Evaluation of Existing
Dams Program
Dam Failure Hazard The program emphasizes site evaluations to identify potential safety deficiencies on Interior Department dams and analyses to expedite corrective action decisions.

U.S. Fire Administration Wildfire Hazard This agency provides leadership, advocacy, coordination, and support for fire agencies and organizations.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Wildfire Hazard This service’s fire management strategy employs prescribed fire throughout the National Wildlife Refuge System to maintain ecological communities. 283
Existing Regulations
6-3
Table 6-2. Summary of Relevant State Agencies, Programs and Regulations Agency, Program or Regulation
Hazard
Mitigation
Area Affected Relevance
AB 9: Fire safety: Wildfires: Fire Adapted
Communities
Wildfire Hazard Establishes the Regional Forest and Fire Capacity Program to support regional leadership to build local and regional capacity and develop, prioritize, and implement strategies and projects that create fire adapted communities and landscapes by improving watershed health, forest health, community wildfire preparedness, and fire resilience.

AB 32: The California Global Warming
Solutions Act
Action Plan
Development
This act establishes a state goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020
AB 38: Fire safety: Low-Cost Retrofits:

Regional Capacity Review: Wildfire
Mitigation
Wildfire Hazard Directs the California Natural Resources Agency to review the regional capacity of each county that contains a very high fire hazard severity zone and establishes a comprehensive wildfire mitigation and assistance program.

AB 70: Flood Liability Flood Hazard A city or county may be required to partially compensate for property damage caused by a flood if it unreasonably approves new development in areas protected by a state flood control project
AB 162: Flood Planning Flood Hazard Cities and counties must address flood-related matters in the land use, conservation, and safety and housing elements of their general plans.

AB 267: California Environmental Quality
Act: Exemption: Prescribed Fire,
Thinning, and Fuel Reduction Projects.

Wildfire Hazard Extends to January 1, 2026, the exemption from requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act for prescribed fire, thinning, or fuel reduction projects on federal lands to reduce the risk of high-severity wildfire that had been reviewed under the National Environmental Policy Act.

AB 380: Forestry: Priority Fuel Reduction
Projects
Wildfire Hazard Requires the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection to identify priority fuel reduction projects annually and exempts the identified priority fuel reduction projects from certain legal requirements.

AB 431: Forestry: Timber Harvesting
Plans: Defensible Space: Exemptions
Wildfire Hazard Extends to January 1, 2026, the exemption from a requirement to complete a timber harvest plan for maintaining defensible space between 150 feet and 300 feet from a habitable structure.

AB 497: Forestry and Fire Protection:

Local Assistance Grant Program: Fire
Prevention Activities: Street and Road
Vegetation Management
Wildfire Hazard Appropriates funds for local assistance grants for fire prevention activities with priority for projects that that manage vegetation along streets and roads to prevent the ignition of wildfire.

AB 575: Civil Liability: Prescribed
Burning Activities: Gross Negligence
Wildfire Hazard Provides that a private entity engaging in a prescribed burning activity that is supervised by a person certified as burn boss is liable for damages to a third party only if the prescribed burning activity was carried out in a grossly negligent manner.

AB 642: Wildfires Wildfire Hazard This bill is an omnibus fire prevention bill that makes various changes to support cultural and prescribed fire, including the creation of a Cultural Burning Liaison at the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, and requires a proposal for creating a prescribed fire training center.

AB 747: General Plans—Safety Element Hazard
Mitigation
Planning
The safety elements of cities’ and counties’ general plans must address evacuation routes and include any new information on flood and fire hazards and climate adaptation and resiliency strategies.

AB 800: Wildfires: local general plans:
safety elements: fire hazard severity
zones.

Wildfire Hazard This Bill has provisions for wildfire hazard mapping and applications for that mapping in the Safety elements General plans within the state. 284
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-4
Agency, Program or Regulation
Hazard
Mitigation
Area Affected Relevance
AB 1255: Fire prevention: Department of
Forestry and Fire Protection: Grant
Programs
Wildfire Hazard Requires the Natural Resources Agency to develop a guidance document that describes goals, approaches, opportunities, and best practices in each region of the state for ecologically appropriate, habitat-specific fire risk reduction. Requires consultation with counties related to the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s local fire prevention grant program.

AB 1295: Residential development
Agreements: Very High-Risk Fire Areas
Wildfire Hazard Prohibits the legislative body of a city or county from entering into a residential development agreement for property in a very high fire risk area as designated by a local agency or a fire hazard severity zone classified by the director of CAL FIRE.

AB 1439: Property Insurance Discounts Wildfire Hazard Requires residential or commercial property insurance policies to include a discount if a local government where the insured property is located funds a local wildfire protection or mitigation program.

AB 1500: Safe Drinking Water, Wildfire
Prevention, Drought Preparation, Flood
Protection, Extreme Heat Mitigation, and
Workforce Development Bond Act of
2022.

Drought,
Flood, Extreme
Heat and
Wildfire
Hazards
If approved by the voters, would authorize the issuance of bonds to finance projects for safe drinking water, wildfire prevention, drought preparation, flood protection, extreme heat mitigation, and workforce development programs.

AB 2140: General Plans—Safety Element Hazard
Mitigation
Planning
This bill enables state and federal disaster assistance and mitigation funding to communities with compliant hazard mitigation plans.

AB 2800: Climate Change—Infrastructure
Planning
Action Plan
Development
This act requires state agencies to take into account the impacts of climate change when developing state infrastructure.

Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
Act
Earthquake
Hazard
This act restricts construction of buildings used for human occupancy on the surface trace of active faults.

Board of Forestry and Fire Protection
Fire Safe Regulations
Wildfire Hazard The Fire Safe Regulations set the floor for fire safety standards for perimeters and access to residential, commercial, and industrial building construction.

California Coastal Management Program Flood,
Landslide,
Tsunami and
Wildfire
Hazards
This program requires coastal communities to prepare coastal plans and requires that new development minimize risks to life and property in areas of high geologic, flood, and fire hazard.

California Department of Forestry and
Fire Protection (CAL FIRE)
Wildfire Hazard CAL FIRE has responsibility for wildfires in areas that are not under the jurisdiction of the Forest Service or a local fire organization.

California Department of Parks and
Recreation
Wildfire Hazard State Parks Resources Management Division has wildfire protection resources available to suppress fires on State Park lands.

California Department of Water
Resources
Flood Hazard This state department is the state coordinating agency for floodplain management.

California Division of Safety of Dams Dam Failure
Hazard
This division monitors the dam safety program at the state level and maintains a working list of dams in the state.

California Environmental Quality Act Action Plan
Implementation
This act establishes a protocol of analysis and public disclosure of the potential environmental impacts of development projects. Any project action identified in this plan will seek full California Environmental Quality Act compliance upon implementation.

California Fire Alliance Wildfire Hazard The alliance works with communities at risk from wildfires to facilitate the development of community fire loss mitigation plans.

California Fire Plan Wildfire Hazard This plan’s goal is to reduce costs and losses from wildfire through pre-fire management and through successful initial response.
285
Existing Regulations
6-5
Agency, Program or Regulation
Hazard
Mitigation
Area Affected Relevance
California Fire Safe Council Wildfire Hazard This council facilitates the distribution of National Fire Plan grants for wildfire risk reduction and education.

California Fire Service and Rescue
Emergency Mutual Aid Plan
Wildfire Hazard This plan provides guidance and procedures for agencies developing emergency operations plans, as well as training and technical support.

California General Planning Law Hazard
Mitigation
Planning
This law requires every county and city to adopt a comprehensive longrange plan for community development, and related laws call for integration of hazard mitigation plans with general plans.

California Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard
Mitigation
Planning
Local hazard mitigation plans must be consistent with their state’s hazard mitigation plan.

California Residential Mitigation Program Earthquake
Hazard
This program helps homeowners with seismic retrofits to lessen the potential for damage to their houses during an earthquake.

California State Building Code Action Plan
Implementation
Local communities must adopt and enforce building codes, which include measures to improve buildings’ ability to withstand hazard events.

Disadvantaged and Low-Income
Communities Investments
Action Plan
Funding
This is a potential source of funding for actions located in disadvantaged or low-income communities.

Division of the State Architect’s AB 300
List of Seismically At-Risk Schools
Earthquake
Hazard, Action
Plan
Development
The Division of the State Architect recommends that local school districts conduct detailed seismic evaluations of seismically at-risk schools identified in the inventory that was required by AB 300.

Governor’s Executive Order S-13-08
(Climate Impacts)
Action Plan
Implementation
This order includes guidance on planning for sea-level rise in designated coastal and floodplain areas for new projects.

Office of the State Fire Marshal Wildfire Hazard This office has a wide variety of fire safety and training responsibilities.

Senate Bill 12: Local government:
planning and zoning: wildfires.

Wildfire Hazard Requires the safety element to be reviewed and updated as necessary to include a comprehensive retrofit strategy to reduce the risk of property loss and damage during wildfires. Requires the planning agency to submit the adopted strategy to the Office of Planning and Research for inclusion into a central clearinghouse.

Senate Bill 92: Public Resources Portion
of Biennial Budget Bill
Dam Failure
Hazard
This bill requires dams (except for low-risk dams) to have emergency action plans that are updated every 10 years and inundation maps updated every 10 years, or sooner if specific circumstances change.

Senate Bill 97: Guidelines for
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Action Plan
Implementation
This bill establishes that greenhouse gas emissions and the effects of greenhouse gas emissions are appropriate subjects for California Environmental Quality Act analysis.

Senate Bill 99: General Plans: Safety
Element: Emergency Evacuation Routes
Action Plan
Implementation
This bill requires the safety element must include information to identify residential developments in hazard areas that do not have at least two emergency evacuation routes.

Senate Bill 182: Local Government:

Planning and Zoning: Wildfires
Wildfire Hazard This bill made a number of changes to state law regarding planning for and permitting development in areas designated as very high fire risk areas.

Senate Bill 379: General Plans: Safety
Element—Climate Adaptation
Action Plan
Implementation
This bill requires cities and counties to include climate adaptation and resiliency strategies in the safety element of their general plans.

Senate Bill 1000: General Plan
Amendments—Safety and Environmental
Justice Elements
Action Plan
Implementation
Under this bill, review and revision of general plan safety elements are required to address only flooding and fires (not climate adaptation and resilience), and environmental justice is required to be included in general plans.
286
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-6
Agency, Program or Regulation
Hazard
Mitigation
Area Affected Relevance
Senate Bill 1035: Fire, Flood, and
Adaptation Safety Element Updates
Action Plan
Implementation
Clarifies that revisions to the Safety Element to address fire hazards, flood hazards, and climate adaptation and resilience strategies all must occur upon each revision to a Housing Element or Local Hazard Mitigation Program.

Senate Bill 1241: General Plans: Safety
Element—Fire Hazard Impacts
Wildfire Hazard This bill requires cities and counties to make findings regarding available fire protection and suppression services before approving a tentative map or parcel map.

Standardized Emergency Management
System
Action Plan
Implementation
Local governments must use this system to be eligible for state funding of response-related personnel costs.

Western Governors Association TenYear Comprehensive StrategyWildfire Hazard This strategy implementation plan prepared by federal and Western state agencies outlines measures to restore fire-adapted ecosystems and reduce hazardous fuels.

6.2 LOCAL PLANS, REPORTS AND CODES
Plans, reports, and other technical information were identified and provided directly by participating jurisdictions and stakeholders or were identified through independent research by the planning consultant. These documents were reviewed to identify the following:
• Existing jurisdictional capabilities.
• Needs and opportunities to develop or enhance capabilities, which may be identified within the local mitigation strategies.
• Mitigation-related goals or objectives considered during the development of the overall goals and objectives.
• Proposed, in-progress, or potential mitigation projects, actions and initiatives to be incorporated into the updated jurisdictional mitigation strategies.

The following local regulations, codes, ordinances, and plans were reviewed in order to develop complementary and mutually supportive goals, objectives, and mitigation strategies that are consistent across local and regional planning and regulatory mechanisms:
• General plans (land use, housing, safety, and open space elements) • Building codes
• Zoning and subdivision ordinances
• NFIP flood damage prevention ordinances
• Stormwater management plans
• Emergency management and response plans
• Land use and open space plans
• Climate action plans
• Community wildfire protection plans
287
Existing Regulations
6-7

6.3 LOCAL CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT
All participating jurisdictions compiled an inventory and analysis of existing authorities and capabilities called a “capability assessment.” A capability assessment creates an inventory of a jurisdiction’s mission, programs, and policies, and evaluates its capacity to carry them out. This assessment identifies potential gaps in the jurisdiction’s capabilities.

The planning partnership views all core jurisdictional capabilities as fully adaptable to meet a jurisdiction’s needs. Every code can be amended, and every plan can be updated. Such adaptability is itself considered to be an overarching capability. If the capability assessment identified an opportunity to add a missing core capability or expand an existing one, then doing so has been selected as an action in the jurisdiction’s action plan, which is included in the individual annexes presented in Volume 2 of this plan.

Capability assessments for each planning partner are presented in the jurisdictional annexes in Volume

2. The sections below describe the specific capabilities evaluated under the assessment.

6.3.1 Planning and Regulatory Capabilities
Jurisdictions have the ability to develop policies and programs and to implement rules and regulations to protect and serve residents. Local policies are typically identified in a variety of community plans, implemented via a local ordinance, and enforced through a governmental body.

Jurisdictions regulate land use through the adoption and enforcement of zoning, subdivision, and land development ordinances, building codes, building permit ordinances, floodplain, and stormwater management ordinances. When effectively prepared and administered, these regulations can lead to hazard mitigation.

6.3.2 Fiscal Capabilities
Assessing a jurisdiction’s fiscal capability provides an understanding of the ability to fulfill the financial needs associated with hazard mitigation projects. This assessment identifies both outside resources, such as grant-funding eligibility, and local jurisdictional authority to generate internal financial capability, such as through impact fees.

6.3.3 Administrative and Technical Capabilities
Planning, regulatory, and fiscal capabilities provide the backbone for successfully developing a mitigation strategy; however, without appropriate personnel, the strategy may not be implemented.

Administrative and technical capabilities focus on the availability of personnel resources responsible for implementing all the facets of hazard mitigation. These resources include technical experts, such as engineers and scientists, as well as personnel with capabilities that may be found in multiple departments, such as grant writers.
288
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-8

6.3.4 NFIP Compliance
Flooding is the costliest natural hazard in the United States and, with the promulgation of recent federal regulation, homeowners throughout the country are experiencing increasingly high flood insurance premiums. Community participation in the NFIP opens up opportunity for additional grant funding associated specifically with flooding issues. Assessment of the jurisdiction’s current NFIP status and compliance provides planners with a greater understanding of the local flood management program, opportunities for improvement, and available grant funding opportunities.

6.3.5 Public Outreach Capability
Regular engagement with the public on issues regarding hazard mitigation provides an opportunity to directly interface with community members. Assessing this outreach and education capability illustrates the connection between the government and community members, which opens a two-way dialogue that can result in a more resilient community based on education and public engagement.

6.3.6 Community Classifications
Other programs, such as the Community Rating System, Storm/Tsunami Ready, and Firewise USA, can enhance a jurisdiction’s ability to mitigate, prepare for, and respond to natural hazards. These programs indicate a jurisdiction’s desire to go beyond minimum requirements set forth by local, state, and federal regulations in order to create a more resilient community. These programs complement each other by focusing on communication, mitigation, and community preparedness to save lives and minimize the impact of natural hazards on a community.

6.3.7 Development and Permitting Capability
Identifying previous and future development trends is achieved through a comprehensive review of permitting since completion of the previous plan and in anticipation of future development. Tracking previous and future growth in potential hazard areas provides an overview of increased exposure to a hazard within a community.

6.3.8 Adaptive Capacity
An adaptive capacity assessment evaluates a jurisdiction’s ability to anticipate impacts from future conditions. By looking at public support, technical adaptive capacity, and other factors, jurisdictions identify their core capability for resilience against issues such as sea-level rise. The adaptive capacity assessment provides jurisdictions with an opportunity to identify areas for improvement by ranking their capacity high, medium, or low.

6.3.9 Integration Opportunity
The assessment looked for opportunities to integrate this mitigation plan with the planning and regulatory capabilities identified. Capabilities were identified as integration opportunities if they can support or enhance the actions identified in this plan or be supported or enhanced by components of this plan. Planning partners considered actions to implement this integration as described in their jurisdictional annexes.
289
Existing Regulations
6-9

6.3.10 Expansion of Existing Capabilities
Local hazard mitigation plans are required to document each jurisdiction’s ability to expand on and improve existing policies and programs. For this plan update, all planning partners reviewed their existing capabilities through the jurisdictional annex process (see Volume 2) and developed mitigation actions to address identified gaps in their capabilities or to expand on or improve existing capabilities.

In the analysis to assign each mitigation action to a defined category (see Section 23.3), these actions are classified as “community capacity building” actions, which are defined as follows:

Actions that increase or enhance local capabilities to adjust to potential damage, to take advantage of opportunities, or to respond to consequences. Includes staff training, memorandums of understanding, development of plans and studies, and monitoring programs.

Of 275 actions identified by the jurisdictions adopting this plan, 105 were identified as community capacity building actions that will expand on or improve the capabilities of the planning partnership.

6.4 HAZARD MITIGATION CAPABILITIES FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT The identification of hazards of concern and the areas that they affect allows local communities to review expected future development to assess whether it would be at risk from those identified hazards.

Avoiding such future risk is a core element of local hazard mitigation. Through the capability assessment described in Section 6.3, all planning partners identified their ability to address risks to future development posed by identified planning area hazards of concern. The planning partners’ general plans and other planning activities provide guidance related to hazard mitigation and future development as follows:
• Dam failure—Dam failure is currently addressed as a stand-alone hazard in the safety elements of many municipal partners’ general plans. Flood-related policies in the general plans will help to reduce the risk associated with dam failure for all future development in the planning area. Municipalities participating in this plan have established comprehensive policies regarding sound land use in identified dam failure inundation hazard areas. Most of the areas vulnerable to severe impacts from dam failure intersect the mapped flood hazard areas. However, there are structures on the perimeter of the dam failure inundation outside of the regulated floodplain that are not subject to floodplain management codes and standards. These structures would be considered to be more vulnerable than those constructed with floodplain codes and standards. • Drought—Each municipal planning partner in this effort has a general plan with policies directing land use and dealing with issues of water supply and the protection of water resources.

These plans provide the capability at the local municipal level to protect future development from the impacts of drought. In addition, water providers in the planning area have plans and programs in place to balance competing needs for water resources within the planning area. • Earthquake—Ventura County and participating cities strictly enforce all seismic building codes and design standards to prevent loss of life and property caused by earthquake. Municipal planning partners are encouraged to establish general plans with policies directing land use and dealing with issues of seismic safety. These plans provide the capability at the municipal level to protect future development from the impacts of earthquakes. Public education, cooperation with the development community, and individual preparedness are essential as the planning area welcomes thousands of new residents and hundreds of new businesses to each year. 290
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-10
• Flood—All municipal planning partners have general plans that address frequently flooded areas in their safety elements. Additionally, all municipal planning partners are participants in the NFIP and have adopted flood damage prevention ordinances in response to its requirements. With 20 percent of communities and the County participating in the CRS program, there is incentive to adopt consistent, appropriate, higher regulatory standards in communities with the highest degree of flood risk. All municipal planning partners have committed to maintain their good standing under the NFIP through initiatives identified in this hazard mitigation plan.

Communities participating or considering participation in the CRS program will be able to refine this commitment using CRS programs and templates as a guide. • Landslide—The State of California has adopted the International Building Code (IBC) by reference in its California Building Standards Code. The IBC includes provisions for geotechnical analyses in steep slope areas that have soil types considered susceptible to landslide hazards. These provisions assure that new construction is built to standards that reduce the vulnerability to landslide risk.
• Sea-Level Rise and Coastal Erosion—Sea-level rise and coastal erosion are addressed as part of climate change adaptation and resilience in the general plans of Ventura County and coastal cities. By coordinating their general plans with climate change adaptation strategies, cities and the County will be better able to make wise land use decisions as future growth impacts coastal areas affected by sea-level rise and coastal erosion. • Severe Storms—Impacts from winter storms and thunderstorms can be addressed through proactive planning and utilization of best available information in making land use decisions.

Severe storms are not currently addressed as a stand-alone hazard in the safety elements of municipal partners’ general plans, but programs such as building code enforcement, public information, and early warning will help Ventura County manage the likely impacts of severe storm events as the County expands and grows.
• Severe Weather—The most common severe weather events that impact the planning area are damaging winds, extreme temperatures, and heavy rain. Many of the impacts associated with severe weather hazards, including wind events, can be addressed through proactive planning and utilization of best available information in making land use decisions. Severe weather is not currently addressed as a stand-alone hazard in the safety elements of municipal partners’ general plans, but programs such as building code enforcement, public information, and early warning will help Ventura County manage the likely impacts of severe weather as the County expands and grows.
• Tsunami—The tsunami inundation maps provided by the California Department of Conservation offer jurisdictions a way to guide development away from tsunami-prone areas. By coordinating their general plans, cities and the County will be better able to make wise land use decisions as future growth impacts tsunami hazard areas. • Wildfire—The expansion of development into high wildfire hazard areas can be managed with strong land use and building codes. The planning area is well equipped with these tools, and this planning process asked each planning partner to assess its capabilities with regards to the tools. As Ventura County experiences future growth, it is anticipated that the exposure to this hazard will remain as assessed or even decrease over time due to these capabilities. • Other hazards of interest—Agricultural and biological as well as pandemic hazards primarily result in ecological, recreational, economic, and vital impacts, but are not considered in the future development and land use decisions of municipal partners’ general plans. 291
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Part 2—RISK ASSESSMENT
292
293
7-1

7. RISK ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
This plan evaluated risks associated with each identified hazard of concern for individual incorporated cities and for the unincorporated portion of Ventura County. The following steps were used to assess risk for each hazard:
• Identify and profile the hazard—The following information is given for each hazard:
 A summary of past events that have impacted the planning area  Geographic areas most affected by the hazard
 Event frequency estimates
 Severity descriptions
 Warning time likely to be available for response.
• Determine exposure to the hazard—Exposure was assessed by overlaying hazard maps with an inventory of structures, facilities, and systems to decide which of them would be exposed to each hazard.
• Assess the vulnerability of exposed facilities—Vulnerability of exposed structures and infrastructure was evaluated by estimating potential impacts on people and damage to property and the environment in the event of a hazard incident.

For each hazard, one of the following assessment approaches was used, depending on the nature of information available for the hazard:
• Quantitative assessment—Performed when numerical data is available to define risk.

Available hazard data may include financial impact, probability, or the number of injuries and deaths.
• Qualitative assessment—Uses words to describe and categorize the likelihood and consequences of a risk when numerical data is unavailable. In this type of analysis, defined terms (words) can represent a range of possibilities.

7.1 RISK ASSESSMENT TOOLS

7.1.1 Mapping
National, state, and county databases were reviewed to locate available spatially based data relevant to this planning effort. Maps were produced using geographic information system (GIS) software to show the spatial extent and location of hazards when such datasets were available. These maps are included in the hazard profile chapters of this document and the jurisdiction-specific annexes in Volume 2.

Details regarding the data sources and methodologies employed in these mapping efforts is located in Appendix C.
294
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 7-2

7.1.2 Modeling
Overview
FEMA developed the GIS-based program Hazards U.S. (Hazus) to identify areas that face high risk from earthquakes, hurricanes, floods, and tsunamis by estimating losses. Hazus provides a wide range of inventory data, such as demographics, building stock, critical facilities, transportation and utility infrastructure, and multiple models to estimate potential losses from natural disasters. The program maps and calculates hazard data and damage and economic loss estimates for buildings and infrastructure. Its advantages include the following:
• Provides a consistent methodology for assessing risk across geographic and political entities. • Provides a way to save data so that it can readily be updated as population, inventory, and other factors change and as mitigation planning efforts evolve. • Facilitates the review of mitigation plans because it helps to ensure that FEMA methodologies are incorporated.
• Supports grant applications by calculating benefits using FEMA definitions and terminology. • Produces hazard data and loss estimates that can be used in communication with local stakeholders.
• Is administered by the local government and can be used to manage and update a hazard mitigation plan throughout its implementation.

Levels of Detail for Evaluation
Hazus provides default data for inventory, vulnerability, and hazards; this default data can be supplemented with local data to provide a more refined analysis. The model can carry out three levels of analysis, depending on the format and level of detail of information about the planning area:
• Level 1—All of the information needed to produce an estimate of losses is included in the software’s default data. This data is derived from national databases and describes in general terms the characteristic parameters of the planning area. • Level 2—More accurate estimates of losses require more detailed information about the planning area. To produce Level 2 estimates of losses, detailed information is required about local geology, hydrology, hydraulics and building inventory, as well as data about utilities and critical facilities. This information is needed in a GIS format. • Level 3—This level of analysis generates the most accurate estimate of losses. It requires detailed engineering and geotechnical information to customize it for the planning area.

7.2 RISK ASSESSMENT APPROACH

7.2.1 Hazard Profile Development
Hazard profiles were developed through web-based research and review of previously developed reports and plans, including community general plans and state and local hazard mitigation plans.

Frequency and severity indicators include past events and the expert opinions of geologists, emergency management specialists, and others.
295
Risk Assessment Methodology
7-3

7.2.2 Exposure and Vulnerability
Flood, Dam Failure, Earthquake, and Tsunami
Community exposure and vulnerability to the following hazards were evaluated using Hazus:
• Dam Failure, Flood, and Tsunami—A Level 2 (user-defined) analysis was performed for general building stock and for critical facilities. Current mapping for the planning area was used to delineate hazard areas for flood, dam failure, and tsunami and estimate potential losses. To estimate damage that would result from these inundation-based hazards, Hazus uses predefined relationships between water depth at a structure and resulting damage, with damage given as a percent of total replacement value. Curves defining these relationships have been developed for damage to structures and for damage to typical contents within a structure. By inputting inundation depth data and known property replacement cost values, dollar-value estimates of damage were generated.
• Earthquake—A Level 2 analysis was performed to assess earthquake exposure and vulnerability for four scenario events and one probabilistic event:
 A Magnitude-7.16 event on the Oak Ridge Fault with an epicenter 4.5 miles northwest of Moorpark.
 A Magnitude-7.16 event on the San Cayetano Fault with an epicenter 10 miles northnorthwest of Fillmore.  A Magnitude-8.03 event on the San Andreas Fault with an epicenter 27.5 miles northnortheast of Fillmore.  A Magnitude-7.12 event on the Ventura-Pitas Point Fault with an epicenter 2.5 miles north of San Buenaventura.
 The standard Hazus 100-year probabilistic event.

Landslide, Sea-Level Rise & Coastal Erosion, Severe Storms, Severe Weather, and Wildfire
Historical datasets were not adequate to model future losses for these hazards of concern. However, areas and inventory susceptible to some of the hazards of concern were mapped by other means to evaluate exposure. A qualitative analysis was conducted for other hazards using the best available data and professional judgment.

Drought
The risk assessment methodologies used for this update focus on damage to structures. Because drought does not impact structures, the risk assessment for this hazard was more limited and qualitative than the assessment for the other hazards of concern.

7.3 SOURCES OF DATA USED IN MODELING AND EXPOSURE ANALYSES

7.3.1 Building and Cost Data
Replacement cost is the cost to replace an entire structure with one of equal quality and utility.

Replacement cost is based on industry-standard cost-estimation models published in the 2021 edition of RS Means Square Foot Costs. It is calculated using the RS Means square foot cost for a structure, 296
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 7-4
which is based on the Hazus occupancy class (i.e., multi-family residential or commercial retail trade), multiplied by the square footage of the structure. The construction class and number of stories for single-family residential structures also factor into determining the square foot costs.

Replacement cost values and detailed structure information derived from parcel and building footprints data were loaded into Hazus. When available, an updated inventory was used in place of the Hazus defaults for critical facilities and infrastructure.

7.3.2 Hazus Data Inputs
The following hazard datasets were used for the Hazus Level 2 analysis conducted for the risk assessment:
• Flood—The effective Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM) for the planning area was used to delineate flood hazard areas and estimate potential losses from the FEMA 1-percentannual chance and 0.2-percent-annual-chance (100- and 500-year) flood events. Using the DFIRM floodplain boundaries and base flood elevation information, and the USGS’s 1-meter digital elevation model data, flood depth grids were generated and integrated into the Hazus model.
• Dam Failure—Dam failure inundation area boundaries and depth grids data for were provided by the California Department of Water Resources the following dams: Arundell Barranca, Bouquet Canyon, Castaic, Lake Eleanor, Lake Sherwood, Lang Creek Detention Basin, Las Llajas, Matilija, Pyramid, Runkle, Santa Felicia, Senior Canyon, Sinaloa Lake, Stewart Canyon Debris Basin, Sycamore Canyon, Westlake Reservoir, and Wood Ranch. The individual dam depth grids were combined, and the combined depth grid was integrated into the Hazus model.

Where dam inundation areas overlapped the maximum depth was used. • Tsunami— California Geological Survey tsunami inundation zone data and NOAA’s 5-meter digital elevation model data were used to develop an inundation depth grid that was integrated into the Hazus model.
• Earthquake—Earthquake ShakeMaps and probabilistic data prepared by USGS were used for the analysis of this hazard. A National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program soils map from the California Department of Conservation was integrated into the Hazus model, as were liquefaction zones and susceptibility to deep-seated landslide data from the California Geological Survey.

7.3.3 Other Local Hazard Data
Locally relevant information on hazards was gathered from a variety of sources. Data sources for specific hazards were as follows:
• Drought— No GIS format drought hazard area datasets were identified for Ventura County. • Landslide—The California Geological Survey provided data on susceptibility to deep-seated landslides. Areas categorized as very high and high susceptibility (Categories X, XI, VIII, and VII) were used in the exposure analysis.
• Sea-Level Rise and Coastal Erosion—Sea-level rise data were provided by USGS’s Our Coast, Our Future tool. Sea-level rises of 25 cm (no storm) and 100 cm (no storm) were used for the exposure analysis. The 25-cm scenario was chosen as the level nearest to the “high” 297
Risk Assessment Methodology
7-5
projection of 8 inches (20 cm) of sea-level rise by 2030 used by the VC Resilient Project. The 100-cm scenario was chosen as the interval nearest to the State of California Sea-Level Rise Guidance (2018 Update) of 3.5 feet (106 cm) by 2050.
• Severe Storms—No GIS format severe storm area datasets were identified for Ventura County. • Severe Weather—No GIS format severe weather area datasets were identified for Ventura County.
• Wildfire—Fire severity zone data for local and state responsibility areas were acquired from California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). Very high and high fire severity zones were used in the exposure analysis.

7.3.4 Data Source Summary
Table 7-1 and Table 7-2summarizes the data sources used for the risk assessment for this plan.

Table 7-1. Hazus Model Property and Hazard Data Documentation Data Source Date Format
Property parcel data including building information (use code, square footage, year built)
Ventura County 2021 Digital (GIS)
Building footprints Ventura County 2018 Digital (GIS)
Building replacement (square foot) costs RS Means 2021 Digital (pdf) Dam breach inundation maps (inundation boundaries and
depth grids)
California Department of Water Resources 2018-20 Digital (GIS) ShakeMaps—Oak Ridge (Onshore) M7.16; San Cayetano
M7.16; S. San Andreas (PK+CH+CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB)
M8.03; Ventura-Pitas Point M7.12
USGS 2017 Digital (GIS)
NEHRP soils (VsMapV3_Geology) California Department of Conservation 2015 Digital (GIS) Seismic Hazard Zone Maps for Liquefaction California Geological Survey 2017 Digital (GIS) Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM) – Ventura County effective 1/29/2021 with latest LOMR effective date 6/18/2021 FEMA 2021 Digital (GIS)
Susceptibility to deep-seated landslides California Geological Survey 2011 Digital (GIS) Sea-level rise data (USGS Coastal Storm Modeling System v3.0, Phase 2)
Our Coast Our Future (OCOF) 2018 Digital (GIS)
Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning California Emergency Management Agency, California Geological Survey, and University of
Southern California – Tsunami Research Center
2009 Digital (GIS)
Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in Local Responsibility Areas
California Department of Forestry and Fire
Protection
2007 Digital (GIS)
Fire Hazard Severity Zones for State Responsibility Areas California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
2007 Digital (GIS)
USGS 1-meter LiDAR digital elevation model U.S. Geological Survey 2018 Digital (GIS) NOAA Coastal Services Center Coastal Inundation Digital Elevation Model (5-meter resolution)
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
2012 Digital (GIS)
298
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 7-6
Table 7-2. Hazus Model Critical Facilities Data Documentation Data Source Date Format
Sheriff stations Ventura County Provided 2021 Digital (GIS) Fire stations Ventura County Provided 2021 Digital (GIS) Schools Ventura County Provided 2021 Digital (GIS)
Wastewater treatment plants Ventura County Provided 2021 Digital (GIS) Sewer lift stations Ventura County Provided 2021 Digital (GIS) Recycled water pumps Ventura County Provided 2021 Digital (GIS) Red Cross shelters Ventura County Provided 2021 Digital (GIS) Hospitals Ventura County Provided 2021 Digital (GIS)
Fire district facilities Ventura County Fire Protection District Provided 2021 Digital (GIS) Potable water system facilities Casitas Municipal Water District Provided 2021 Digital (GIS) Potable water system facilities Calleguas Municipal Water District Provided 2021 Digital (GIS) Potable water system facilities City of Camarillo Provided 2021 Digital (GIS) California jurisdictional dams California Department of Water Resources Downloaded 2020 Digital (GIS) Wastewater treatment facilities California State Water Resources Control Board Downloaded 2020 Digital (GIS) Power plants California Energy Commission Downloaded 2020 Digital (text) Electric substations California Energy Commission Downloaded 2020 Digital (GIS) Natural gas stations California Energy Commission Downloaded 2018 Digital (GIS) California rail stations California Department of Transportation Downloaded 2020 Digital (GIS) Public airports California Department of Transportation Downloaded 2020 Digital (GIS) Military airports California Department of Transportation Downloaded 2020 Digital (GIS) Ports California Department of Transportation Downloaded 2020 Digital (GIS) Local highway bridges California Department of Transportation Downloaded 2020 Digital (GIS) State highway bridges California Department of Transportation Downloaded 2020 Digital (GIS) Local Emergency Operations Centers Homeland Infrastructure Foundation-Level Data Downloaded 2020 Digital (GIS) Veterans Health Administration Medical Facilities Homeland Infrastructure Foundation-Level Data Downloaded 2020 Digital (GIS) Cellular towers Homeland Infrastructure Foundation-Level Data Downloaded 2022 Digital (GIS) FM transmission towers Homeland Infrastructure Foundation-Level Data Downloaded 2020 Digital (GIS) AM transmission towers Homeland Infrastructure Foundation-Level Data Downloaded 2022 Digital (GIS) TV analog station transmitters Homeland Infrastructure Foundation-Level Data Downloaded 2022 Digital (GIS) FDIC insured banks Homeland Infrastructure Foundation-Level Data Downloaded 2022 Digital (GIS) Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) facilities extracted
from EPA Facility Registry Service (FRS): Facility
Interests Dataset
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Downloaded 2020 Digital (GIS) Critical facilities identified in the planning partner
annexes for the Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional
Hazard Mitigation Plan
Planning partners (California State University
Channel Islands, Calleguas Municipal Water
District, Ojai Valley Sanitary District, Saticoy
Sanitary District, United Water Conservation
District, Ventura County)
2021 Digital (text)

7.4 LIMITATIONS
Loss estimates, exposure assessments and hazard-specific vulnerability evaluations rely on the best available data and methodologies. Uncertainties are inherent in any loss estimation methodology and 299
Risk Assessment Methodology
7-7
arise in part from incomplete scientific knowledge concerning natural hazards and their effects on the built environment. Uncertainties also result from the following:
• Approximations and simplifications necessary to conduct a study • Incomplete or outdated inventory, demographic or economic parameter data • The unique nature, geographic extent, and severity of each hazard • Mitigation measures already employed
• The amount of advance notice residents have to prepare for a specific hazard event.

These factors can affect loss estimates by a factor of two or more. Therefore, potential exposure and loss estimates are approximate and should be used only to understand relative risk. Over the long term, the planning partners will collect additional data to assist in estimating potential losses associated with other hazards.
300
301
8-1

8. DAM FAILURE

8.1 GENERAL BACKGROUND

8.1.1 Definition and Classification of Dams
A dam is an artificial barrier that can store water, wastewater, or liquid-borne materials for many reasons—flood control, human water supply, irrigation, livestock water supply, energy generation, containment of mine tailings, recreation, or pollution control. Many dams fulfill a combination of these functions. They are an important resource in the United States. In California, dams are regulated by the State of California Division of Safety of Dams. Additional regulatory oversight of dams is cited in Chapter 6 and described in Appendix B.

The California Water Code (Division 3) defines a dam as any artificial barrier, together with appurtenant works, that does or may impound or divert water, and that either:
• Is 25 feet or more in height from the natural bed of the stream or watercourse at the downstream toe of the barrier (or from the lowest elevation of the outside limit of the barrier if it is not across a stream channel or watercourse) to the maximum possible water storage elevation; or
• Has an impounding capacity of 50 acre-feet or more.

Dams can be classified according to their purpose, the construction material or methods used, their slope or cross-section, the way they resist the force of the water pressure, or the means used for controlling seepage. Materials used to construct dams include earth, rock, tailings from mining or milling, concrete, masonry, steel, timber, plastic, rubber, and combinations of these.

8.1.2 Causes of Dam Failure
A dam failure can damage ecosystems and communities downstream. Partial or full failure can occur as a result of one or a combination of the following reasons (Federal Emergency Management Agency 2016):
• Overtopping caused by floods that exceed the dam capacity (inadequate spillway capacity) • Prolonged periods of rainfall and flooding
• Deliberate acts of sabotage (terrorism)
• Structural failure of materials used in dam construction • Movement and/or failure of the foundation supporting the dam 302
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-2
• Settlement and cracking of concrete or embankment dams • Piping and internal erosion of soil in embankment dams • Inadequate or negligent operation, maintenance, and upkeep • Failure of upstream dams on the same waterway
• Earthquake (liquefaction/landslides).

Many dam failures in the United States have been secondary results of other disasters. The most common causes are earthquakes, landslides, extreme storms, equipment malfunction, structural damage, foundation failures, and sabotage. Poor construction, lack of maintenance and repair, and deficient operational procedures are preventable or correctable by a program of regular inspections.

Terrorism and vandalism are serious concerns that all operators of public facilities must plan for; these threats are under continuous review by public safety agencies.

8.1.3 Planning Requirements
State of California
All dams whose inundation areas may impact the planning area have emergency action plans (EAPs) on file. The EAPs must include the following (Cal OES 2021):
• Emergency notification flow charts
• Information on a four-step response process
• Description of agencies’ roles and actions in response to an emergency incident • Description of actions to be taken in advance of an emergency • Inundation maps
• Additional information such as revision records and distribution lists.

After the EAPs are approved by the state, the law requires dam owners to send the approved EAPs to relevant stakeholders. Local public agencies can then adopt emergency procedures that incorporate the information in the EAP in a manner that conforms to local needs and includes methods and procedures for alerting and warning the public and other response and preparedness related items (Cal OES 2021).

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Dams that fall under the jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) also have specified planning requirements. FERC cooperates with a large number of federal and state agencies to ensure and promote dam safety and, more recently, homeland security. FERC requires licensees to prepare emergency action plans and conducts training sessions on how to develop and test these plans. The plans are designed to serve as an early warning system if there is a potential for, or a sudden release of water from, a dam failure or accident to the dam. The plans include operational procedures that may be used, such as reducing reservoir levels and reducing downstream flows and procedures for notifying affected residents and agencies responsible for emergency management. 303
Dam Failure
8-3
These plans are frequently updated and tested to ensure that in emergency situations everyone knows what to do, thus saving lives and minimizing property damage.

8.1.4 Secondary Hazards
Dam failure can cause secondary hazards of landslides, bank erosion, and downstream habitat destruction. It may worsen the severity of a drought by releasing water that might have been used as a potable water source.

8.2 HAZARD PROFILE

8.2.1 Past Events
There is no record of a failure of any dam located in Ventura County. However, the failure of one dam in another county had catastrophic effects in Ventura County. The St. Francis Dam in the San Francisquitos Canyon in Los Angeles County (within the Santa Clara River watershed) was constructed to provide 38,000 acre-feet of storage for water from the Los Angeles–Owens River Aqueduct. The midnight collapse of the dam in March 1928 occurred after the newly constructed concrete-arch dam was completely filled for the first time. The resulting flood swept through the Santa Clara Valley in Ventura County toward the Pacific Ocean, about 54 miles away. At its peak, the wall of water was reported to be 78 feet high; by the time it hit Santa Paula, 42 miles south of the dam, the water was estimated to be 25 feet deep. Almost everything in its path was destroyed, including structures, railways, bridges, livestock, and orchards. By the time the flood subsided, parts of Ventura County lay under 70 feet of mud and debris. Nearly 500 people were killed, and damage estimates exceeded $20 million. The communities of Piru, Fillmore, Santa Paula, Bardsdale, Saticoy, Montalvo, and El Rio sustained extensive life and property loss from the flood (Ventura County 2015).

According to the 2013 State of California Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan, there have been nine failures of federally regulated dams in the state since 1950. Overtopping caused two of the nine dam failures in the state, and the others were caused by seepage or leaks. The state’s most recent dam emergency occurred in February 2017 when the Oroville Dam in Butte County was on the verge of overflow. The dam’s concrete spillway was damaged by erosion and a massive hole developed. The auxiliary spillway was used to prevent overtopping of the dam, and it experienced erosion problems also. Evacuation orders were issued in advance of a potential large uncontrolled release of water from Lake Oroville, but such a release did not occur.

After this incident, state officials ordered that flood-control spillways be reinspected on 93 California dams with potential geologic, structural or performance issues that could jeopardize their ability to safely pass a flood event. The 2017-2018 Ventura County Grand Jury investigated the condition of more than 20 dams in or adjoining Ventura County. The Grand Jury found that 14 of these dams (10 in Ventura County and 4 in Los Angeles County) could cause significant loss of life and property if they failed. Four of these dams, all under the jurisdiction of the State of California Division of Safety of Dams (DSOD), are identified as having existing or potential deficiencies (Ventura County 2018). 304
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-4

8.2.2 Location
List of High-Hazard Dams
There are 10 state regulated dams in Ventura County, and 4 state regulated dams outside the County whose failure could lead to inundation in Ventura County. In particular, if dams in the Santa Clara River watershed in Los Angeles County fail, the resulting flood would affect the Santa Clara River corridor, which includes Fillmore, Santa Paula, Oxnard, and Port Hueneme, as demonstrated by the 1928 event (Ventura County 2015). Table 8-1 lists the dams that constitute failure hazards for Ventura County.

Their locations are shown on Figure 8-1. The National Inventory of Dams (NID) provides the most recent inspection dates for these dams, as shown in Table 8-2.

Table 8-1. Ventura County Dams with Potential to Endanger Lives and Property Name
National
ID#
Hazard
Potential Owner
Year
Built Dam Type
Crest
Length
(feet)
Height
(feet)
Storage
Capacity
(acre-feet)
Condition
Assessment
Arundell Barranca CA01412 Extremely High VCPWA-WPa 1996 Earthen Embankment 368 57 155 Satisfactory Casitas CA10139 High Federal 1959 Earthen Embankment N/A 334 283,727 N/A Ferro Debris
Basin
CA01299 Significant VCPWA-WPa 1986 Earthen Embankment 265 45 24 Satisfactory Lake Eleanor CA00737 High COSCAb 1881 Constant Radius Arch 140 37 104 Satisfactory Lake Sherwood CA00736 Extremely High SDCc 1904 Constant Radius Arch 350 45 2,600 Satisfactory Lang Creek
Detention Basin
CA01368 Extremely High VCPWA-WPa 2004 Earthen Embankment 345 67 263 Satisfactory Las Llajas CA01217 Extremely High VCPWA-WPa 1981 Earthen Embankment 580 96 1,250 Satisfactory Matilija CA00312 Extremely High VCPWA-WPa 1949 Variable Radius Arch 620 163 1,800 Poor Runkle CA00313 Extremely High VCPWA-WPa 1949 Earthen Embankment 250 41 100 Satisfactory Santa Felicia CA00805 Extremely High UWCDd 1955 Earthen Embankment 1,275 213 100,000 Fair Senior Canyon CA01019 High SCMWCe 1964 Earthen Embankment 970 76 72 Satisfactory Silt Pond CA01589 High Brett Jones N/A Earthen Embankment N/A 80 20 N/A Sinaloa Lake CA01018 High SLOAf 1925 Earthen Embankment 800 30 205 Satisfactory Stewart Canyon CA01159 Extremely High VCPWA-WPa 1963 Earthen Embankment 1,263 34 890 Satisfactory Sycamore Canyon CA01266 Extremely High VCPWA-WPa 1981 Earthen Embankment 1,520 40 890 Satisfactory Wood Ranch CA00850 Extremely High CMWDg 1965 Earthen Embankment 1,020 146 11,000 Satisfactory a. Ventura County Public Works Agency—Watershed Protection b. Conejo Open Space Conservation Agency
c. Sherwood Development Company
d. United Water Conservation District
e. Senior Canyon Mutual Water Company
f. Sinaloa Lake Owners Associates, Inc.
g. Calleguas Municipal Water District
Sources: California Department of Water Resources Division of Safety of Dams, 2020; U.S. Army Corp of Engineers National Inventory of Dams, 2021
305
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#* #*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#* #*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
Fillmore
Moorpark
Simi Valley
Santa Paula
Oxnard
Ojai
Port
Hueneme
Camarillo
San
Buenaventura
Thousand Oaks
Lake Piru
Lake
Casitas
¬«33 ¬«118
¬«34
¬« ¬«118 126
¬«150
¬«1
¬«1
¬«23
¬«126
¬«23
¬«33
¬«33
¬«34
¬«1
¬«150
¬«232
¬«33
¬«23
£¤101
Figure 8-1. Locations of Dams in Ventura County
Data Sources: Ventura Co.,
CA DWR, Esri
#* California Jurisdictional Dams
County Boundary
Cities
Major Roads
±
06 3
Miles
306
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-6
Table 8-2. Ventura County Dam Inspection Dates
Dam Inspection Date Dam Inspection Date
Arundell Barranca 2/13/2018 Runkle 2/14/2018
Casitas N/A Santa Felicia 5/10/2017
Ferro Debris Basin 2/13/2018 Senior Canyon 5/24/2018
Lake Eleanor 5/25/2018 Silt Pond N/A
Lake Sherwood 5/24/2018 Sinaloa Lake 5/23/2018
Lang Creek Detention Basin 2/14/2018 Stewart Canyon 2/13/2018 Las Llajas 2/14/2018 Sycamore Canyon 2/14/2018
Matilija 2/13/2018 Wood Ranch 5/23/2018
The Ventura County Public Works Agency—Watershed Protection (VCPWA-WP) owns and operates the Matilija Dam, which received a “Poor” rating by the DSOD. The DSOD rating was based on concerns as to the ability of the dam—specifically the wing walls—to withstand a 7.5 magnitude earthquake. While the analysis did not appear to indicate complete failure, it indicated a likelihood of significant weakening. There are roughly 8 million cubic yards of debris behind Matilija Dam, and a big storm could push huge amounts of mud and water over the top, overwhelming bridges, culverts and roads below (Ventura County 2018). The VCPWA-WP is working to complete the feasibility analyses, design engineering, CEQA, and implementation of a project to remove the Matilija Dam.

The United Water Conservation District owns and operates Santa Felicia Dam on Lake Piru. The District is currently designing improvements to the existing outlet and spillway. The dam’s “Fair” rating is primarily due to deficiencies in the dam’s outlet that could result in damage should a maximum credible earthquake occur before the District completes the planned upgrades (Ventura County 2018).

Inundation Mapping
A key element for EAPs required for dams in California is a map defining the potential downstream inundation should the dam fail. For this risk assessment, dam failure inundation areas for which inundation mapping was available were combined into a single inundation area. These included all extremely high and high hazard dams where dam breach inundation area data is available. The combined dam failure inundation area is shown in Figure 8-2. Simultaneous failure of all dams is highly unlikely, but the assessment provides information adequate for planning purposes.

8.2.3 Frequency
Dam failure events are infrequent and usually coincide with or follow events such as earthquakes, landslides and excessive rainfall and snowmelt. Only one recorded failure has occurred on a dam that impacted the planning area, so no estimate of frequency or probability of future occurrence can be developed based on the historical record. Although the 2017 Oroville event raised public concern about dam failure, the probability of such failures remains low in today’s regulatory environment. 307
Fillmore
Moorpark
Simi Valley
Santa Paula
Oxnard
Ojai
Port
Hueneme
Camarillo
San
Buenaventura
Thousand Oaks
Lake Piru
Lake
Casitas
¬«33 ¬«118
¬«34
¬« ¬«118 126
¬«150
¬«1
¬«1
¬«23
¬«126
¬«23
¬«33
¬«33
¬«34
¬«1
¬«150
¬«232
¬«33
¬«23
£¤101
Figure 8-2. Dam Failure Inundation Area Used for Risk Assessment Data Sources: Ventura Co.,
CA DWR, Esri
Combined Dams Inundation Area
County Boundary
Cities
Major Roads
±
06 3
Miles
308
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-8
All dams face a “residual risk” of failure, which represents the risk that conditions may exceed those for which the dam was designed. For example, dams may be designed to withstand a probable maximum precipitation, defined as “the maximum depth of precipitation at a location for a given duration that is meteorologically possible” (Sarkar and Maity 2020). The chance of occurrence of a precipitation event of a greater magnitude than that represents residual risk for such dams. This in turn represents a theoretical probability of future occurrence for a dam failure event, though the probability of an event exceeding the assumed maximum is not generally calculated as part of dam design.

8.2.4 Severity
California’s Division of Safety of Dams has developed a hazard potential classification system for statejurisdiction dams, as shown on Table 8-3. This system is modified from federal guidelines, which recommend three-tier classification. The California system adds a fourth hazard classification of “extremely high.” Dams classified as extremely high hazard are expected to cause considerable loss of human life or would result in an inundation area with a population of 1,000 or more. (California Division of Safety of Dams 2021) Dams within state jurisdiction listed in Table 8-1 are classified in this system.

Table 8-3. State of California Downstream Hazard Potential Classification Hazard Category Direct Loss of Life Economic, Environmental, and Lifeline Losses Low None expected Low and principally limited to dam owner’s property Significant None expected Yes
High Probable (one or more expected) Yes, but not necessary for this classification Extremely High Considerable Yes, major impacts to critical infrastructure or property Source: California Division of Safety of Dams, 2021

8.2.5 Warning Time
Advance Warning of Failure
Warning time for dam failure varies depending on the cause of the failure. Events of extreme precipitation or massive snowmelt can be predicted in advance, so evacuations can be planned with sufficient time. In the event of a structural failure due to earthquake, there may be no or limited warning time. The USGS Earthquake Hazards Program has several dam-safety related earthquake programs, including dam-specific earthquake monitoring programs in California to help monitor safety concerns following seismic events.

Time for Failure to Occur
The process of the dam failure affects warning time. Earthen dams do not tend to fail completely or instantaneously. Once a breach is initiated, discharging water erodes the breach until either the reservoir water is depleted or the breach resists further erosion. Concrete gravity dams also tend to have a partial breach as one or more monolith sections are forced apart by escaping water. The time of breach formation ranges from a few minutes to a few hours. 309
Dam Failure
8-9
Time After Failure Before Downstream Areas Are Affected Flood waters from a failure of the Wood Ranch dam at Bard Reservoir would reach the City of Camarillo in approximately 1 hour and 40 minutes. The natural drainage would enter Camarillo along the Las Posas Arroyo through Somis (City of Camarillo 2007). The number of people to be alerted and evacuated can vary widely. There may be few people along the river in winter, when only permanent residents are apt to be present; but there may be many more people in summer, with the presence of recreational visitors.

Another factor that must be considered is the initial flow in the river when the failure occurs. The initial flow is normally very low on all the rivers from May through October. During the winter, the initial flow is much higher and at times may even be equal to or greater than flood stage. This wide variation in initial flow has a significant impact on the areas that must be evacuated.

8.3 EXPOSURE
Exposure to the dam failure hazard was assessed by overlaying the mapped combined inundation area in Figure 8-2 with planning area features including general building stock and critical facilities. Detailed results by jurisdiction are included in Appendix D; countywide summaries are provided below.

8.3.1 Population
The estimated total population living in the evaluated dam failure inundation zone is 267,136 (31.7 percent of the total planning area population).

8.3.2 Property
Table 8-4 summarizes the estimated property exposure in the evaluated dam failure inundation area.

Figure 8-3 shows the Hazus-defined occupancy class of all buildings in the combined dam failure inundation area. These occupancy classes provide an indication of land use within the mapped hazard area. Some land uses are more vulnerable to dam failure inundation, such as single-family homes, while others are less vulnerable, such as agricultural land or parks.

Table 8-4. Exposed Property in Evaluated Dam Failure Inundation Area Acres of Inundation Area 254,761
Number of Buildings Exposed 72,448
Value of Exposed Structures $28,821,842,548
Value of Exposed Contents $22,630,155,206
Total Exposed Property Value $51,451,998,753
Total Exposed Value as % of Planning Area Total 28.5%
310
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-10
Figure 8-3. Building Count by Occupancy Class in the Dam Failure Inundation Zone

8.3.3 Critical Facilities
Figure 8-4 shows critical facilities located in the dam failure inundation zone by facility type. The total count of critical facilities in the dam failure inundation zone (406) represents 26 percent of the planning area total of 1,588. A breakdown by municipality is provided in Appendix D.

Figure 8-4. Critical Facilities in Dam Failure Inundation Area Residential
61,269
85%
Commercial
5,268
7%
Industrial
1,697
2%
Agriculture
1,896
3%
Religion
263
0%
Government
1,241
2%
Education
814
1%
54 41
48 48
2 91
130
0 30
60 90
120
150
Number of Facilties in Hazard Area
Communication
Energy
Food, Water, Shelter
Hazardous Materials
Medical and Health
Safety and Security
Transportation

21.6%

36.9%

22.9%

51.6%

20.0%

23.3% 24.9%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Facilties in Hazard Area as % of Planning Area Total
Communication
Energy
Food, Water, Shelter
Hazardous Materials
Medical and Health
Safety and Security
Transportation
311
Dam Failure
8-11

8.3.4 Environment
All natural features in the dam failure inundation zone are at risk from the dam failure hazard.

8.4 VULNERABILITY
The vulnerability of people, property, and critical facilities was evaluated for the combined dam failure inundation area. Appendix D shows results by jurisdiction; countywide summaries are provided below.

8.4.1 Population
Vulnerable populations are all populations downstream from dam failures that are incapable of escaping the area before floodwaters arrive. This population includes the elderly and young who may be unable to get themselves out of the inundation area. The vulnerable population also includes those who would not have adequate warning from a television, radio emergency warning system, siren, or cell phone alert. Impacts on persons and households for the combined dam failure inundation area are estimated through the Level 2 Hazus analysis. Table 8-5 summarizes the results.

Table 8-5. Estimated Dam Failure Impacts on Population
Number of Persons Displaced 207,158
Number of Residents Requiring Short-Term Shelter 14,254

8.4.2 Property
Properties closest to the dam failure inundation zone would experience the largest, most destructive surge of water. Low-lying areas are also vulnerable since they are where the dam waters would collect.

Properties in the dam failure inundation zone that are built to National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) minimum construction standards may have some level of protection against dam failure inundation, depending on the velocity and elevation of the inundation waters. These properties also are more likely to have flood insurance. Table 8-6 summarizes the loss estimates for dam failure.

Table 8-6. Estimated Impact of a Dam Failure in the Planning Area Number of Buildings Impacted 63,936
Estimated Loss, Structures $6,795,872,395
Estimated Loss, Contents $8,126,268,419
Estimated Loss, Total $14,922,140,815
Total Loss as % of Total Replacement Value 8.3%

8.4.3 Critical Facilities
Significant facilities predicted by Hazus to be affected by the modeled dam failure include the following:
• 10 wastewater treatment facilities
• 36 hazardous material sites
• 1 hospital
• 18 fire stations or battalion headquarters
• 60 schools
• 120 road bridges
312
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-12
Hazus was used to estimate the number of critical facilities affected by dam failure and the resulting percent of damage to the building and contents. Figure 8-5 compares the predicted number of affected facilities to the number of exposed facilities. Between 50 and 96 percent of exposed facilities are predicted to experience some damage, depending on the category.

Figure 8-5. Critical Facilities Exposed to and Affected by Mapped Dam Failure Inundation Area Figure 8-6 shows the estimated damage to critical facilities for the modeled dam failure. Depending on critical facility category, the average amount of damage to structures, measured as a percentage of total value, ranges from 2.3 to 30.0 percent of total value, and average damage to contents ranges from

29.4 to 84.1 percent.

Figure 8-6. Average % of Damage to Critical Facilities Caused by Modeled Dam Failure 54 41 41
48 2
90 130
50 39
30 36
1 80
125
0 50
100
150
Communications Energy Food, Water &
Shelter
Hazardous
Material
Health & Medical Safety & Security Transportation
Number of Faciliities Exposed or Affected
Exposed Facilities
Affected Facilities

23.0 18.9

30.0 18.4

11.9 14.5

2.3 84.1

36.3 52.9

31.0 48.2

52.1 29.4
0 20
40 60
80 100
Communications Energy Food, Water &
Shelter
Hazardous
Material
Health & Medical Safety & Security Transportation
Average Damage as % of Total Value
Damage to Structure
Damage to Contents
313
Dam Failure
8-13
Typical vulnerabilities of these facilities include the following:
• Transportation routes are vulnerable to dam failure inundation and have the potential to be wiped out, creating isolation issues and significant disruption to travel. Those that are most vulnerable are those that are already in poor condition and would not be able to withstand a large water surge.
• Utilities such as overhead power lines, cable and phone lines in the inundation zone could also be vulnerable. If phone lines were lost, significant communication issues may occur in the planning area due to limited cell phone reception in many areas. • In addition, emergency response would be hindered due to the loss of transportation routes as well as some protective-function facilities in the safety and security category located in the inundation zone. Recovery time to restore many critical functions after an event may be lengthy.

8.4.4 Environment
The environment would be vulnerable to a number of risks in the event of dam failure. The inundation could introduce foreign elements into local waterways, resulting in destruction of downstream habitat and detrimental effects on many species of animals, especially endangered species such as the tidewater goby.

8.5 SCENARIO
An earthquake in the region could lead to liquefaction of soils around a dam, without warning during any time of the day. A human-caused incident such as a terrorist attack also could trigger a catastrophic failure of a dam that would impact the planning area. Failure of a high hazard dam in the County would likely result in losses of life, roadways, structures, and property, and exert severe impacts on the local economy. While the possibility of failure is remote, results would be devastating.

The worst-case scenario would involve failure of the Santa Felicia Dam. In addition to severe property damage and potential injuries or loss of life, loss of water from Lake Piru could lead to reduction in available water used to replenish underground basins in the County. Coupled with the ongoing drought throughout the state and already low water supply availability, this damage could lead to significant water shortages.

8.6 ISSUES
The most significant issues associated with dam failure involve properties and populations within inundation zones. Flooding as a result of a dam failure would significantly impact these areas. Warning time for dam failure plausibly would be limited. Moreover, dam failure is frequently associated with other natural hazard events such as earthquakes, landslides, or severe weather, which limits predictability of dam failure and compounds the hazard. Important issues associated with dam failure hazards are as follows:
• A significant number of the structures located in the dam failure inundation zone are located outside of special flood hazard areas, meaning that they are not constructed to withstand floodwaters and are less likely to be covered by flood insurance. Even structures that have been 314
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-14
designed with flood hazards in mind may not be able to withstand the height and velocity of flow from a dam failure event.
• Addressing security concerns and the need to inform the public of the risk associated with dam failure is a challenge for public officials.
• California law requires that a property’s location in a dam failure inundation be disclosed to a buyer if the seller or the seller’s agent has knowledge of the property’s location within the hazard area or if the local jurisdiction has compiled a list of parcels that are in the inundation area and has posted at the offices of the county recorder, county assessor, and county planning agency a notice that identifies the location of the list. This information is only available by request from county planning.
• Dam failure inundation areas are often not considered special flood hazard areas under the National Flood Insurance Program, so flood insurance coverage in these areas is not common. • Dam infrastructure may require repair and improvement to withstand climate change impacts, such as changing in the timing and intensity of rain events. • Federally regulated dams have an adequate level of oversight and sophistication in the development of emergency action plans for public notification in the unlikely event of failure.

However, the protocol for notification of downstream residents of imminent failure needs to be tied to local emergency response planning.
• In the event of a dam failure that interrupted land line phone service, significant issues with communication could occur.
• Limited financial resources for dam maintenance during economic downturns result in decreased attention to dam structure operational integrity, because available funding is often directed to more urgent needs. This could increase potential for maintenance failures. • Mapping for federally regulated dams is already required and available; however, mapping for non-federally regulated dams that estimates inundation depths is needed to better assess risks associated with failure of these dams.
• Although mapping is required for federally regulated dams, development downstream of dams and upgrades to older dams may have altered inundation areas; however, these inundation maps may not have been updated for significant periods of time. Encouraging property owners of dams to update EAPs and inundation maps will ensure availability of the most accurate data to assist emergency planners and local officials.
• Most dam failure mapping required at federal levels requires determination of the probable maximum flood. While the probable maximum flood represents a worst-case scenario, it is generally the event with the lowest probability of occurrence. Mapping of dam failure scenarios for non-federal-regulated dams that are less extreme than the probable maximum flood, but have a higher probability of occurrence, can be valuable to emergency managers and community officials downstream of these facilities. This type of mapping can illustrate areas potentially impacted by more frequent events to support emergency response and preparedness actions.
• The concept of residual risk associated with structural flood control projects should be considered in the design of capital projects and the application of land use regulations. • There may be dams located in the planning area that do not meet regulatory thresholds for jurisdiction under State of California or federal programs. 315
9-1

9. DROUGHT

9.1 GENERAL BACKGROUND
Drought is a significant decrease in water supply relative to what is typical in a given location. It is a normal phase in the climate cycle of most regions, originating from a deficiency of precipitation over an extended period of time, usually a season or more. This leads to a water shortage for some activity, group or environmental sector. Drought can be characterized based on various impacts or measurements:
• Meteorological measurements such as rainfall deficit compared to normal or expected rainfall • Agricultural impacts due to reduced rainfall and water supply (e.g., crop loss, herd culling, etc.) • Hydrological measurements of stream flows, groundwater, and reservoir levels relative to normal conditions
• Direct and indirect socio-economic impacts on society and the economy (e.g., increased unemployment due to failure of an industry because of drought).

Drought is a normal phase in the climatic cycle of most geographical regions. If the weather pattern that causes a drought lasts a short time (a few weeks or a couple of months), the drought is considered short-term. If the weather pattern becomes entrenched and the precipitation deficits last for several months or years, the drought is considered to be long-term. It is possible for a region to experience a long-term circulation pattern that produces drought, and to have short-term changes in this long-term pattern that result in short-term wet spells. Likewise, it is possible for a long-term wet circulation pattern to be interrupted by short-term weather spells that result in short-term drought.

9.1.1 Monitoring and Categorizing Drought
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Drought Indices The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has developed several indices to measure drought impacts and severity and to map their extent and locations:
• The Crop Moisture Index measures short-term drought weekly to assess impacts on agriculture.
• The Palmer Z Index measures short-term drought on a monthly scale. • The Palmer Drought Severity Index is based on long-term weather patterns. The intensity of drought in a given month is dependent on current weather plus the cumulative patterns of 316
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-2
previous months. Weather patterns can change quickly, and the Palmer Drought Severity Index can respond fairly rapidly.
• The Palmer Hydrological Drought Index quantifies hydrological effects (reservoir levels, groundwater levels, etc.), which take longer to develop and last longer. This index responds more slowly to changing conditions than the Palmer Drought Index. • The Standardized Precipitation Index considers only precipitation. A value of zero indicates the median precipitation amount; the index is negative for drought and positive for wet conditions. The Standardized Precipitation Index is computed for time scales ranging from one month to 24 months.

Figure 9-1 shows examples of these indices as of mid-November 2021.

U.S. Drought Monitor
The U.S. Drought Monitor (USDM) is a map that is updated weekly to show the location and intensity of drought across the country. The USDM uses a five-category system (National Integrated Drought Information System 2021):
• D0—Abnormally Dry
 Short-term dryness slowing planting, growth of crops
 Some lingering water deficits
 Pastures or crops not fully recovered
• D1—Moderate Drought
 Some damage to crops, pastures
 Some water shortages developing
 Voluntary water-use restrictions requested
• D2—Severe Drought
 Crop or pasture loss likely
 Water shortages common
 Water restrictions imposed
• D3—Extreme Drought
 Major crop/pasture losses
 Widespread water shortages or restrictions
• D4—Exceptional Drought
 Exceptional and widespread crop/pasture losses
 Shortages of water creating water emergencies
The USDM categories show experts’ assessments of conditions related to drought. These experts check variables including temperature, soil moisture, water levels in streams and lakes, snow cover, and meltwater runoff. They also check whether areas are showing drought impacts such as water shortages and business interruptions. Associated statistics show what proportion of various geographic areas are in each category of dryness or drought, and how many people are affected. U.S. Drought Monitor data go back to 2000.
317
Drought
9-3
Figure 9-1. Example Drought Index Maps, Current as of November 18, 2021 318
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-4

9.1.2 Drought Impacts
Drought can have a widespread impact on the environment and the economy, although it typically does not result in loss of life or damage to structures, as do other natural disasters. The National Drought Mitigation Center uses three categories to describe likely drought impacts:
• Economic Impacts—These impacts of drought cost people (or businesses) money. Farmers’ crops are destroyed; low water supply necessitates spending on irrigation or drilling of new wells; water-related businesses (such as sales of boats and fishing equipment) may experience reduced revenue.
• Environmental Impacts—Plants and animals depend on water. When a drought occurs, their food supply can shrink, and their habitat can be damaged. • Social Impacts—Social impacts include public safety, health, conflicts between people when there is not enough water to go around, and changes in lifestyle.

The demand that society places on water systems and supplies—such as expanding populations, irrigation, and environmental needs—contributes to drought impacts. Drought can lead to difficult decisions regarding the allocation of water, as well as stringent water use restrictions, water quality problems, and inadequate water supplies for fire suppression. There are also issues such as growing conflicts between agricultural uses of surface water and in-stream uses, surface water and groundwater interrelationships, and the effects of growing water demand on uses of water.

Vulnerability of an activity to drought depends on its water demand and the water supplies available to meet the demand. The impacts of drought vary between sectors of the community in both timing and severity:
• Water supply—The water supply sector encompasses urban and rural drinking water systems that are affected when a drought depletes ground water supplies due to reduced recharge from rainfall.
• Agriculture and commerce—The agriculture and commerce sector includes the reduction of crop yield and livestock sizes due to insufficient water supply for crop irrigation and maintenance of ground cover for grazing.
• Environment, public health, and safety—The environmental, public health, and safety sector focuses on wildfires that are both detrimental to the forest ecosystem and hazardous to the public. It also includes the impact of desiccating streams, such as the reduction of in-stream habitats for native species.

Drought generally does not affect groundwater sources as quickly as surface water supplies, but groundwater supplies generally take longer to recover. Reduced precipitation during a drought means that groundwater supplies are not replenished at a normal rate. This can lead to a reduction in groundwater levels and problems such as reduced pumping capacity or wells going dry. Droughts can affect groundwater storage as reserves are drawn down in anticipation of drought impacts. Such conjunctive use assists in drought resilience, but it can take years to replenish the water that was stored. Shallow wells are more susceptible than deep wells. Reduced replenishment of groundwater affects streams. Much of the flow in streams comes from groundwater, especially during the summer when there is less precipitation and after snowmelt ends. Reduced groundwater levels mean that even less water will enter streams when stream flows are lowest. 319
Drought
9-5

9.1.3 Defined Drought Stages in California
During critically dry years, the California State Water Resources Control Board can mandate water entitlements on water right holders to address statewide water shortages. Table 9-1 shows the state drought management program stages mandated to water right holders.

Table 9-1. State Drought Management Program
Drought Stage State Mandated Customer Demand Reduction Rate Impacts Stage 0 or 1 <10% Normal rates
Stage 2 10 to 15% Normal rates; Drought surcharge
Stage 3 15 to 20% Normal rates; Drought surcharge
Stage 4 >20% Normal rates, Drought surcharge

9.1.4 Secondary Hazards
The secondary impact most commonly associated with drought is wildfire. A prolonged lack of precipitation dries out vegetation, which becomes increasingly susceptible to ignition as the duration of the drought extends. In addition, lack of sufficient water resources can stress trees and other vegetation, making them more vulnerable to infestation from pests, which in turn, can make them more vulnerable to ignition.

9.2 HAZARD PROFILE

9.2.1 Planning Area Water Supply and Drought Response
Water Supply Strategy
Groundwater provides about 67 percent of the locally utilized water in Ventura County (Ventura County Public Works Agency 2020). Additionally, more than 100,000 acre-feet of potable water is imported annually from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. The remainder of local water comes from surface and recycled water sources.

Calleguas Municipal Water District (MWD), Casitas MWD, and United Water Conservation District (UWCD) are the main water providers for much of Ventura County, allowing other jurisdictions, water districts, and private utilities to coordinate in order to ensure continual water supply necessary to maintain health, safety, and economic well being of residents, businesses, and community organizations. These three water districts have developed long-term water supply strategies for customers in Ventura County:
• Calleguas MWD is active in regional water planning, conservation, watershed protection and development of reclaimed water.
• Casitas MWD is actively engaged in managing existing local water resources and planning for water security.
• UWCD offers unique approaches to regional watershed management, responsibly conserving and enhancing resources, and protecting the environment while meeting water demands. 320
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-6
Water supply strategies recognize that drought year shortfalls could be significant. Dry years could result in cutbacks of up to 20 percent, but 10 to 15 percent is the more consistent standard. Calleguas MWD and Casitas MWD maintain Urban Water Management Plans that outline the following:
• Water source reliability over a 20-year timeframe
• Water shortage contingency plans
• Drought risk assessment
While the three districts are the primary water service agencies in the County, they are not the only option for residents and businesses. Some water purveyors and residents in the County have wells on their property. The last available report shows 4,016 active water wells in Ventura County (Ventura County Watershed Protection District 2015).

Water Supply Infrastructure
Calleguas MWD receives water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California brought south by the State Water Project. Calleguas MWD built a pipeline network to bring water into Ventura County, including the Santa Susana Tunnel that connects to Metropolitan’s system in Los Angeles County. Lake Bard reservoir (Figure 9-2) was built to store water for peak summer and emergency demand. Las Posas Aquifer Storage and Recovery Well Field is also used to store water that is not immediately distributed to purveyors. The stored water is treated before entering the Calleguas MWD system.

Figure 9-2. Calleguas MWD’s Lake Bard Reservoir
Source: Calleguas MWD
Only 17 percent of the Casitas MWD’s water comes from groundwater; 83 percent comes from Lake Casitas (Figure 9-3). The lake fills primarily from the natural flow of local creeks and the Robles Diversion. The diversion is a large canal that brings water about 7 miles from the Ventura River. This diversion accounts for about one-third of the lake’s water each year. 321
Drought
9-7
Figure 9-3. Casitas MWSD’s Lake Casitas
Source: Casitas MWD
UWCD built the Freeman Diversion (Figure 9-4) to redirect water from the Santa Clara River to spreading basins for groundwater recharge. The Santa Felicia Dam and Lake Piru Reservoir recharge downstream groundwater basins through conservation releases when downstream basins are at their seasonal lows. The Pumping Trough Pipeline delivers surface water from the Santa Clara River and deep wells to agricultural users.

Figure 9-4. UWCD’s Freeman Diversion
Source: The Fillmore Gazette
322
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-8
Defined Drought Levels
Ventura County does not have a defined drought level. County and regional drought response is determined case by case, and response priorities are typically based on imminence of potential water shortages. Drought stages defined by the California State Water Resources Control Board (see Table 9-1) can serve as a reference for County and stakeholder agencies when determining need for response.

Calleguas MWD adopted a resolution on August 18, 2021, declaring a Stage 2 water shortage and calling for enhanced water use efficiency efforts. For Casitas MWD, drought conditions remain in effect since the Board of Directors declared Stage 3 water supply conditions on April 27, 2016. The primary source of water for UWCD is managed by the Fox Canyon Groundwater Management Authority, which sets allocations for each water pumper and imposes water shortage contingency plan levels. Significant penalties are levied on purveyors if they take delivery of water in excess of their allocations.

9.2.2 Past Events
California Department of Water Resources hydrologic data from the early 1900s shows multi-year droughts from 1912 to 1913, 1918 to 1920, 1922 to 1924, and 1929 to 1934, 1959 to 1961 (California Department of Water Resources 2003). The following sections describe more-recent prolonged droughts that have impacted the planning area.
2020 Ongoing Drought
The 2020-21 water year was the second driest year on record, with a near record low storage in California’s largest reservoirs. August 2021 was the driest and hottest August on record since reporting began. The executive proclamation of drought emergency includes Ventura County. Executive orders include water conservation and a ban on wasteful water practices. 2012 to 2017 Drought
The period from 2012 to 2014 ranked as the driest three consecutive years for statewide precipitation.

Calendar year 2014 set new records for statewide average temperatures and for record-low water allocations from the State Water Project and the federal Central Valley Project. Calendar year 2013 set minimum annual precipitation records for many communities. Detailed executive orders and regulations addressed water conservation and management. The statewide drought emergency was lifted in April 2017.
2007 to 2009 Drought
The state proclaimed a statewide drought emergency on June 4, 2008 after spring 2008 was the driest spring on record, with low snowmelt runoff. On February 27, 2009, the state proclaimed a state of emergency for the entire state as severe drought continued. The largest court-ordered water restriction in state history (at the time) was imposed.
323
Drought
9-9
1987 to 1992 Drought
California received precipitation well below average levels for four consecutive years. While the Central Coast was most affected, Southern California counties were also affected. In 1991, the State Water Project sharply decreased deliveries to water suppliers. By February 1991, all 58 counties in California were experiencing drought. Urban areas as well as agricultural areas were impacted. 1976 to 1977 Drought
California had a severe drought due to lack of rainfall during the winters of 1976 and 1977. 1977 was the driest period on record in California at that time, with the previous winter recorded as the fourth driest in California’s hydrological history at that time. The cumulative impact led to widespread water shortages and severe water conservation measures statewide. Over $2.6 billion in crop damage was recorded in 31 counties. FEMA declared a drought emergency (Declaration 3023-EM) on January 20, 1977.

9.2.3 Location
Drought is a regional phenomenon that has the potential to impact the entire planning area. A drought affects all aspects of the environment and the community simultaneously and has the potential to directly or indirectly impact every person in the planning area as well as adversely affect the local economy.

9.2.4 Frequency
Drought has a high probability of occurrence in the planning area. From January 2000 to November 2021, some part of Ventura County experienced a USDM rating of D1 or higher in 604 out of 1,142 weeks— more than half the time (see Figure 9-5). The planning area has also been included in USDA drought disaster declarations in eight of the past nine years (U.S. Department of Agriculture 2021a).

Historical drought data for the planning area indicate there have been four significant multi-year droughts in the last 45 years (1976 to 2021), amounting to a severe drought every 10 to 11 years on average.

Figure 9-5. Percent of Ventura County Affected by Each USDM Rating, 2000 – 2021 324
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-10
Source: U.S. Drought Monitor, 2021

9.2.5 Severity
The severity of any given drought depends on the degree of moisture deficiency, the duration, and the size and location of the affected area. The longer the duration of the drought and the larger the area impacted, the more severe the potential impacts.

U.S. Drought Monitor Ratings
Ventura County has a history of severe droughts. As shown in Figure 9-5, at least part of the county has experienced extreme (D3) or exceptional (D4) droughts more than once since 2000.

Drought Impact Reporter
The National Drought Mitigation Center developed the Drought Impact Reporter in response to the need for a national drought impact database for the United States. Information comes from a variety of sources: on-line, drought-related news stories and scientific publications, members of the public who visit the website and submit a drought-related impact for their region, members of the media, and staff of government agencies. The database is being populated beginning with the most recent impacts and working backward in time.

The Drought Impact Reporter indicates 1,316 impacts from drought that specifically affected Ventura County from January 2011 through November 15, 2021 (National Drought Mitigation Center 2021).

Most (70.2 percent) are based on media reports. The rest are from the Community Collaborative Rain, Hail & Snow Network. The following are the reported numbers of impacts by category (some incidents are assigned to more than one impact category):
• Agriculture—323
• Business and Industry—107
• Energy—15
• Fire—195
• Plants and Wildlife—361
• Relief, Response, and Restrictions—601
• Society and Public Health—340
• Tourism and Recreation—137
• Water Supply and Quality—769

9.2.6 Warning Time
Predicting drought depends on the ability to forecast precipitation and temperature. Scientists at this time do not know how to predict drought more than a month in advance for most locations. Only generalized warning can take place due to the numerous variables that scientists have not pieced together well enough to make accurate and precise predictions. 325
Drought
9-11
Determination of when drought begins is based on impacts on water users and assessments of available water supply, including water stored in reservoirs or groundwater basins. Different water agencies have different criteria for defining drought. Some issue drought watch or drought warning announcements.

9.3 EXPOSURE
All people, property and environments in the planning area would be exposed to some degree to the impacts of moderate to extreme drought conditions.

9.4 VULNERABILITY

9.4.1 Population
The entire population of the County is vulnerable to drought events. Drought can affect people’s health and safety, including health problems related to low water flows, poor water quality, or dust. Droughts can also lead to loss of human life (National Centers for Environmental Information 2021). Other possible impacts include recreational risks; effects on air quality; diminished living conditions related to energy, air quality, and hygiene; compromised food and nutrition; and increased incidence of illness and disease (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2020).

9.4.2 Property
No structures will be directly affected by drought conditions, though some structures may become vulnerable to wildfires, which are more likely following years of drought. Droughts can have significant impacts on other types of property such as landscaped areas and economically important natural resources. Drought causes the most significant economic impacts on industries that use water or depend on water for their business, most notably agriculture and related sectors (forestry, fisheries, and waterborne activities), power plants, and oil refineries. In addition to losses in yields in crop and livestock production, drought is associated with increased insect infestations, plant diseases, and wind erosion. Drought can lead to other losses because so many sectors are affected - losses that include reduced income for farmers and reduced business for retailers and others who provide goods and services to farmers. This leads to unemployment, increased credit risk for financial institutions, capital shortfalls, and loss of tax revenue. Prices for food, energy, and other products may also increase as supplies decrease.

9.4.3 Critical Facilities
Critical facilities as defined for this plan will continue to be operational during a drought. Critical facility features such as landscaping may not be maintained due to limited water resources, but the risk to critical facility core functions is low.
326
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-12

9.4.4 Environment
Groundwater and Streams
Drought generally does not affect groundwater sources as quickly as surface water supplies, but groundwater supplies generally take longer to recover. Reduced precipitation during a drought means that groundwater supplies are not replenished at a normal rate. This can lead to a reduction in groundwater levels and problems such as reduced pumping capacity or wells going dry. Shallow wells are more susceptible than deep wells. Reduced replenishment of groundwater affects streams. Much of the flow in streams comes from groundwater, especially during the summer when there is less precipitation and after snowmelt ends. Reduced groundwater levels mean that even less water will enter streams when stream flows are lowest. Where stream flows are reduced, development that relies on surface water may seek to establish new groundwater wells, which could further increase groundwater depletion.

Other Potential Losses
Environmental losses from drought are associated with damage to plants, animals, wildlife habitat, and air and water quality; forest and range fires; degradation of landscape quality; loss of biodiversity; and soil erosion. Some of the effects are short-term and conditions quickly return to normal following the end of the drought. Other environmental effects linger for some time or may even become permanent.

Although environmental losses are difficult to quantify, growing public awareness and concern for environmental quality has forced public officials to focus greater attention and resources on these effects. The following are potential impacts of drought:
• Wildlife habitat may be degraded through the loss of wetlands, lakes and vegetation. The degradation of landscape quality, including increased soil erosion, may lead to a more permanent loss of biological productivity.
• Drought conditions greatly increase the likelihood of wildfires, a major threat to agricultural resources.
• Water shortages and severe drought conditions would have a significant impact on Native American tribes’ way of life in fishing and farming subsistence. • Scenic resources in the County are vulnerable to the increased likelihood of wildfires associated with droughts.
• Drying up of recreational reservoirs could reduce tourist values. • Any shortage of water supply can have significant economic impacts.

9.5 SCENARIO
A multi-year drought that impacts the entire west or the State of California, similar to the 2012 to 2017 drought, is the worst-case scenario for the planning area. The 2012-2017 drought and the wildfires and floods that followed it caused extensive damage to natural systems. If another severe multi-year drought occurs before these systems have a chance to recover, it could exacerbate the stress already placed on existing planning area water resources.
327
Drought
9-13

9.6 ISSUES
The planning team has identified the following drought-related issues:
• Alternative water supplies need to be identified and developed, as well as alternative strategies to allocate and distribute existing water sources.
• Alternative techniques (groundwater recharge, water recycle, local capture and reuse, desalination, and transfer) could stabilize and offset snowpack water supply shortfalls that may affect imported water.
• There is a need for local or regional drought-level indicators to correspond with water conservation measures.
• Drought in the county could increase and expand fire-prone areas and adversely affect the agricultural economy.
• If tension increases over surface water, additional draw-downs to groundwater supplies may occur.
• More studies need to be done regarding overall county water usage and how it relates to the economy to prepare for a worst-case scenario drought.
• Planning must address the degree of future development in drought-prone areas. • Drought frequencies and durations may increase due to climate change. • Water conservation should be promoted to a greater extent, even during non-drought periods. • Frequent or prolonged droughts may limit the County’s and residents’ ability to successfully recover from or prepare for more occurrences.
328
329
10-1

10. EARTHQUAKE

10.1 GENERAL BACKGROUND
An earthquake is the vibration of the earth’s surface following a release of energy in the earth’s crust.

This energy can be generated by a sudden dislocation of the crust or by a volcanic eruption. Most destructive quakes are caused by dislocations of the crust. The crust may first bend and then, when the stress exceeds the strength of the rocks, break and snap to a new position. In the process of breaking, vibrations called “seismic waves” are generated. These waves travel outward from the source of the earthquake at varying speeds.

10.1.1 Earthquake Location
The location of an earthquake is commonly described by its focal depth and the geographic position of its epicenter. The focal depth of an earthquake is the depth from the Earth’s surface to the region where an earthquake’s energy originates (the focus or hypocenter). The epicenter of an earthquake is the point on the Earth’s surface directly above the hypocenter.

10.1.2 Earthquake Geology
Tectonic Plates
The Earth’s crust, which is the rigid outermost shell of the planet, is broken into seven or eight major tectonic plates (depending on how they are defined) and many minor plates. Where the plates meet, they move in one of three ways along their mutual boundary: convergent (two plates moving together), divergent (two plates moving apart), or transform (two plates moving parallel to one another).

Earthquakes, volcanic activity, mountain-building, and oceanic trench formation occur along these plate boundaries. Subduction is a geological process that takes place at convergent boundaries of tectonic plate, in which one plate moves under another. Regions where this process occurs are known as subduction zones, and they have the potential to generate highly damaging earthquakes.

California is seismically active because of movement of the North American Plate, east of the San Andreas Fault, and the Pacific Plate to the west, which includes the state’s coastal communities. The transform (parallel) movement of these tectonic plates against one another creates stresses that build as the rocks are gradually deformed. The rock deformation, or strain, is stored in the rocks as elastic strain energy. When the strength of the rock is exceeded, rupture occurs along a fault. The rocks on opposite sides of the fault slide past each other as they spring back into a relaxed position. The strain energy is released partly as heat and partly as elastic waves called seismic waves. The passage of these seismic waves produces the ground shaking in earthquakes. 330
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 10-2
Faults
Geologists have found that earthquakes reoccur along faults, which are zones of weakness in the earth’s crust. When a fault experiences an earthquake, there is no guarantee that all the stress has been relieved. Another earthquake can still occur. In fact, relieving stress along one part of a fault may increase it in another part.

Faults are more likely to have future earthquakes on them if they have more rapid rates of movement, have had recent earthquakes along them, experience greater total displacements, and are aligned so that movement can relieve the accumulating tectonic stresses. Geologists classify faults by their relative hazards. “Active” faults, which represent the highest hazard, are those that have ruptured to the ground surface during the Holocene period (about the last 11,000 years). “Potentially active” faults are those that displaced layers of rock from the Quaternary period (the last 1,800,000 years) (California Department of Conservation 2019a).

Determining if a fault is “active” or “potentially active” depends on geologic evidence, which may not be available for every fault. The majority of the seismic hazards are on well-known active faults. However, inactive faults, where no displacements have been recorded, also have the potential to reactivate or experience displacement along a branch sometime in the future. An example of a fault zone that has been reactivated is the Foothills Fault Zone. The zone was considered inactive until evidence of an earthquake (approximately 1.6 million years ago) was found near Spenceville, California. Then, in 1975, an earthquake occurred on another branch of the zone near Oroville, California (now known as the Cleveland Hills Fault). The State Division of Mines and Geology indicates that increased earthquake activity throughout California may cause tectonic movement along currently inactive fault systems.

10.1.3 Earthquake-Related Hazards
According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Earthquake Hazards Program, an earthquake hazard is anything associated with an earthquake that may affect resident’s normal activities. This includes the following:
• Surface Faulting—Displacement that reaches the earth’s surface during slip along a fault.

Commonly occurs with shallow earthquakes, those with an epicenter less than 20 kilometers. • Ground Motion (shaking)—The movement of the earth’s surface from earthquakes or explosions. Ground motion or shaking is produced by waves that are generated by sudden slip on a fault or sudden pressure at the explosive source and travel through the earth and along its surface.
• Landslide—A movement of surface material down a slope. • Liquefaction—A process by which water‐saturated sediment temporarily loses strength and acts as a fluid. Earthquake shaking can cause this effect. • Tectonic Deformation—A change in the original shape of a material due to stress and strain. • Tsunami—A sea wave of local or distant origin that results from large‐scale seafloor displacements associated with large earthquakes, major submarine slides, or violent underwater volcanic eruptions.
331
Earthquake
10-3

10.1.4 Earthquake Classifications
Earthquakes are typically classified in one of two ways: By the amount of energy released, measured as magnitude; or by the impact on people and structures, measured as intensity.

Magnitude
An earthquake’s magnitude is a measure of energy released at the earthquake source. It is commonly expressed by ratings on the moment magnitude scale (MW). Most people have heard about the Richter scale, but the moment magnitude scale is a more accurate measure of magnitude (U.S. Geological Survey 2021c). It is based on the product of the distance a fault moved and the force required to move it. The scale is as follows:
• Great— MW > 8
• Major— MW = 7.0 – 7.9
• Strong— MW = 6.0 – 6.9
• Moderate— MW = 5.0 – 5.9
• Light— MW = 4.0 – 4.9
• Minor— MW = 3.0 – 3.9
• Micro— MW < 3
Intensity
The most commonly used intensity scale is the modified Mercalli intensity scale. Table 10-1 lists perceived shaking and damage potential for structures using this scale. The scale is represented visually using shake maps, which show the expected ground shaking produced by an earthquake with a specified magnitude and epicenter. An earthquake has only one magnitude and one epicenter, but it produces a range of ground shaking at sites throughout the region, depending on the distance from the earthquake, the rock and soil conditions at sites, and variations in the propagation of seismic waves from the earthquake due to complexities in the structure of the earth’s crust. A shake map shows the variation of ground shaking in a region immediately following significant earthquakes (for technical information about shake maps see (U.S. Geological Survey 2021e)).

Table 10-1. Mercalli Scale and Peak Ground Acceleration Comparison Modified Potential Structure Damage Estimated PGAa
Mercalli Scale Perceived Shaking Resistant Buildings Vulnerable Buildings (%g) I Not Felt None None <0.17%
II-III Weak None None 0.17% - 1.4%
IV Light None None 1.4% - 3.9%
V Moderate Very Light Light 3.9% - 9.2%
VI Strong Light Moderate 9.2% - 18%
VII Very Strong Moderate Moderate/Heavy 18% - 34%
VIII Severe Moderate/Heavy Heavy 34% - 65%
IX Violent Heavy Very Heavy 65% - 124%
X – XII Extreme Very Heavy Very Heavy >124%
a. PGA = peak ground acceleration. Measured in percent of g, where g is the acceleration of gravity Sources: (U.S. Geological Survey 2021b); (U.S. Geological Survey 2011) 332
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 10-4

10.1.5 Ground Motion
Earthquake hazard assessment is based on expected ground motion. During an earthquake when the ground is shaking, it also experiences acceleration. The peak acceleration is the largest increase in velocity recorded by a particular station during an earthquake. Estimates are developed of the annual probability that certain ground motion accelerations will be exceeded; the annual probabilities can then be summed over a time period of interest.

The most commonly mapped ground motion parameters are horizontal and vertical peak ground accelerations (PGA) for a given soil type. PGA is a measure of how hard the earth shakes, or accelerates, in a given geographic area. Instruments called accelerographs record levels of ground motion due to earthquakes at stations throughout a region. PGA is measured in g (the acceleration due to gravity) or expressed as a percent acceleration force of gravity (%g). These readings are recorded by state and federal agencies that monitor and predict seismic activity.

Maps of PGA values form the basis of seismic zone maps that are included in building codes such as the International Building Code. Building codes that include seismic provisions specify the horizontal force due to lateral acceleration that a building should be able to withstand during an earthquake. PGA values are directly related to these lateral forces that could damage “short period structures” (e.g. single-family dwellings). Longer period response components determine the lateral forces that damage larger structures with longer natural periods (apartment buildings, factories, high-rises, bridges).

Table 10-1 lists damage potential and perceived shaking by PGA factors, compared to the Mercalli scale.

10.1.6 Earthquake Mapping Programs
ShakeMaps
The USGS Earthquake Hazards Program produces maps called ShakeMaps that map ground motion and shaking intensity following significant earthquakes. ShakeMaps focus on the ground shaking caused by the earthquake, rather than on characteristics of the earthquake source, such as magnitude and epicenter. An earthquake has only one magnitude and one epicenter, but it produces a range of ground shaking at sites throughout the region, depending on the distance from the earthquake, the rock and soil conditions at sites, and variations in the propagation of seismic waves from the earthquake due to complexities in the structure of the earth’s crust.

A ShakeMap shows the extent and variation of ground shaking immediately across the surrounding region following significant earthquakes. Such mapping is derived from peak ground motion amplitudes recorded on seismic sensors, with interpolation where data are lacking based on estimated amplitudes.

Color-coded instrumental intensity maps are derived from empirical relations between peak ground motions and Modified Mercalli intensity. In addition to the maps of recorded events, the USGS creates the following:
• Scenario ShakeMaps of hypothetical earthquakes of an assumed magnitude on known faults • Probabilistic ShakeMaps, based on predicted shaking from all possible earthquakes over a 10,000-year period. In a probabilistic map, information from millions of scenario maps are combined to make a forecast for the future. The maps indicate the ground motion at any given 333
Earthquake
10-5
point that has a given probability of being exceeded in a given timeframe, such as a 100-year (1-percent-annual chance) event.

National Seismic Hazard Map
National maps of earthquake shaking hazards provide information for creating and updating seismic design requirements for building codes, insurance rate structures, earthquake loss studies, retrofit priorities and land use planning. After thorough review of the studies, professional organizations of engineers update the seismic-risk maps and seismic design requirements contained in building codes (Brown, et al. 1998). The USGS updated the National Seismic Hazard Maps in 2018. New seismic, geologic, and geodetic information on earthquake rates and associated ground shaking were incorporated into these revised maps. The 2018 map, shown in Figure 10-1, represents the best available data as determined by the USGS.

Figure 10-1. Peak Acceleration (%g) with 2% Probability of Exceedance in 50 Years Source: USGS, 2018
Alquist-Priolo Zone Maps
Alquist-Priolo zone maps generated by the State of California show regulatory zones for potential surface fault rupture where fault lines intersect with future development and populated areas. The purpose of these maps is to assist in geologic investigation before construction to ensure that new structures are not located on an active fault. Alquist-Priolo maps were referenced, but not specifically used, in the assessment of risk for this plan. They are available online at:
http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/index.html?map=regulatorymaps. 334
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 10-6

10.1.7 Liquefaction and Soil Types
Soil liquefaction occurs when water-saturated sands, silts or gravelly soils are shaken so violently that the individual grains lose contact with one another and float freely in the water, making the ground like a pudding. Building and road foundations lose load-bearing strength and may sink into what was previously solid ground. Unless properly secured, hazardous materials can be released, causing damage to the environment and people.

A program called the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP) creates maps based on soil characteristics to help identify locations subject to liquefaction. NEHRP soil types define the locations that will be significantly impacted by an earthquake. Table 10-2 summarizes NEHRP soil classifications. NEHRP Soils B and C typically can sustain ground shaking without much effect, dependent on the earthquake magnitude. The areas that are commonly most affected by ground shaking have NEHRP Soils D, E and F (Southern California Earthquake Center 2018). In general, these areas are also most susceptible to liquefaction. The areas that are most commonly affected by ground shaking have NEHRP Soils D, E and F.

Table 10-2. NEHRP Soil Classification System
NEHRP Soil
Type Description
Mean Shear Velocity to
30 m (m/s)
A Hard Rock 1,500
B Firm to Hard Rock 760-1,500
C Dense Soil/Soft Rock 360-760
D Stiff Soil 180-360
E Soft Clays < 180
F Special Study Soils (liquefiable soils, sensitive clays, organic soils, soft clays >36 m thick)

10.1.8 Secondary Hazards
Earthquakes can cause disastrous landslides. River valleys are vulnerable to slope failure, often as a result of loss of cohesion in clay-rich soils. Earthen dams and levees are highly susceptible to seismic events, and the impacts of their eventual failures can be considered secondary risk exposure to earthquakes. Depending on the location, earthquakes can also trigger tsunamis. Additionally, fires can result from gas lines or power lines that are broken or downed during the earthquake. It may be difficult to control a fire, particularly if the water lines feeding fire hydrants are also broken.

10.2 HAZARD PROFILE

10.2.1 Past Events
Although no large (M 5.0>) earthquakes have occurred recently within Ventura County’s boundaries, a number of relatively large earthquakes in other areas have caused damage within the county. These earthquakes occurred in 1925 (Santa Barbara), 1927 (Point Arguello), 1933 (Long Beach), 1941 (Santa Barbara), 1952 (Tehachapi), 1971 (San Fernando), and 1994 (Northridge). Additionally, damaging earthquakes occurred in the County in 1950 (north of Ojai), 1957 (Hueneme), 1963 (Camarillo), and 1973 (Point Mugu). The three most recent events are as follows (Ventura County 2015):
335
Earthquake
10-7
• San Fernando, M 6.5, February 9, 1971—This event was caused by oblique-slip reverse faulting in the San Fernando fault zone. The earthquake caused the destruction of freeway interchanges, houses, and buildings and severe damage to three hospitals in the San Fernando Valley. The earthquake claimed 65 lives. Although the epicenter was within 25 miles of Ventura County, damage sustained within the County was minor.
• Point Mugu, M 5.3, February 21, 1973—The Point Mugu earthquake was responsible for at least five injuries and more than $1 million damage in the Point Mugu–Oxnard area, though damage was confined mainly to the vicinity of the epicenter. Large boulders fell down onto State Route 1 at Point Mugu, partially blocking the road. More than 7,000 customers lost electricity for several hours. Most reported damage was to windows, ceilings, plaster, chimneys, and shelved goods, though structural damage and broken pipes were also reported. Although much less powerful than the San Fernando earthquake of 1971, the Point Mugu earthquake was similar in focal mechanism.
• Northridge, M 6.7, January 17, 1994—This blind thrust earthquake occurred along the Northridge thrust fault. It was the strongest earthquake instrumentally recorded in an urban setting in North America and caused parking structures, apartments, office buildings, and sections of freeways to collapse. Approximately 25,000 dwellings were rendered uninhabitable.

Total damage exceeded $44 billion. The incident resulted in 51 deaths.

Table 10-3 lists recent earthquakes with a magnitude of 5.0 or greater within a 100-mile radius of Ventura County.

Table 10-3. Recent Earthquakes Magnitude 5.0 or Larger Within 100-mile Radius of Planning Area Date Magnitude Epicenter Location
April 5, 2018 5.3 29km SW of Santa Cruz Island
March 29, 2014 5.1 2km NW of Brea Springs
July 29, 2008 5.4 5km S of Chino Hills, California
Source: USGS

10.2.2 Location
Fault Locations
As in most of southern and coastal California, the potential for earthquake damage exists throughout Ventura County because of the number of active faults within and near the county. These faults are shown on the California Geological Society Fault Activity Map of California. Descriptions of the active faults are provided below. The locations of the active and potentially active faults are shown on Figure 10-2.

Significant faults are as follows (Ventura County 2015):
• Malibu Coast fault system—The Malibu Coast fault system includes the Malibu Coast, Santa Monica, and Hollywood faults. The system begins in the Hollywood area, extends along the southern base of the Santa Monica Mountains, and passes offshore a few miles west of Point Dume. The 1973 Point Mugu earthquake, described in the previous section, is believed to have originated on this fault system.
336
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 10-8
Figure 10-2. Local Fault Locations
Source: (U.S. Geolgoical Survey 2021a)
• Oak Ridge fault system—The Oak Ridge fault system is a steep (65 degrees) southerly dipping reverse fault that extends from the Santa Susana Mountains westward along the southerly side of the Santa Clara River Valley and into the Oxnard Plain. The system is more than 50 miles long on the mainland and may extend an equal or greater distance offshore.

Several recorded earthquake epicenters on land and offshore may have been associated with the Oak Ridge fault system. Portions of the system are zoned by the state as active. • Pine Mountain thrust fault and Big Pine fault—These two large faults occur in the mountainous portion of Ventura County north of the Santa Ynez fault; the faults are located 9 and 16 miles north of the City of Ojai, respectively. The Pine Mountain thrust fault is reported to have ruptured the ground surface for a distance of 30 miles along its length during the northern Ventura County earthquakes of November 1852.
• San Andreas fault—San Andreas is the longest and most significant fault in California.

Because of clearly established historical earthquake activity, this fault has been designated as active by the State of California. The last major earthquake on this fault near Ventura County was the Fort Tejon earthquake of 1857, which was estimated at M 8.0 and would have caused considerable damage if there had been structures in the southern part of the county. There is a 59 percent chance that an M 6.7 quake or larger will occur on this fault within the next 30 years. 337
Earthquake
10-9
• San Cayetano–Red Mountain–Santa Susana fault system—This fault system consists of a major series of north-dipping reverse faults that extend over 150 miles from Santa Barbara County into Los Angeles County. Within this system, the San Cayetano fault is the greatest hazard to Ventura County; it is a major, north-dipping reverse fault that extends for 25 miles along the northern portion of the Ventura Basin. The San Fernando earthquake of 1971, described in the previous section, was caused by activity along this fault. • Simi–Santa Rosa fault system—This fault system extends from the Santa Susana Mountains westward along the northern margin of the Simi and Tierra Rejada valleys and along the southern slope and crest of the Las Posas Hills to their westerly termination. • Ventura-Pitas Point fault—The western half of this fault is known as the Pitas Point fault, and the eastern half is known as the Ventura fault. The Pitas Point fault extends offshore into the Pacific Ocean and is roughly 14 miles long. The Ventura fault extends into the communities of Ventura and Sea Cliff and runs roughly parallel to portions of U.S. 101 and State Route 126.

The fault is roughly 12 miles long. The Ventura-Pitas Point fault is a left-reverse fault.

NEHRP Soil Type and Liquefaction Mapping
Figure 10-3 shows NEHRP soil classifications in Ventura County. Figure 10-4 shows areas in that have moderate, high or very high susceptibility to liquefaction.

10.2.3 Frequency and Severity
The California Department of Conservation probabilistic ground shaking maps, based on current information about fault zones, show the PGA that has a certain probability of being exceeded in a 50- year period. Figure 10-5 shows the expected peak horizontal ground accelerations for a probability of 10 percent. Ventura County is in a high-risk area, with a peak PGA exceeding 60 percent of gravity near the northern border of the County (California Department of Conservation 2019b). Ongoing field and laboratory studies suggest the likely maximum magnitudes and recurrence intervals for the major local faults shown in Table 10-4.

Table 10-4. Likely Maximum Magnitudes and Recurrence Intervals Fault Likely Maximum Magnitude Recurrence Interval
Malibu Coast fault system M 6.7 2,908 years
Oak Ridge fault system M 6.9 299 years
Red Mountain fault system M 6.8 507 years
San Andreas fault M 8.0 300 years
San Cayetano fault system M 6.8 150 years
Santa Susana fault system M 6.6 138 years
Simi–Santa Rosa fault system M 6.7 933 years
Ventura-Pitas Point fault system M 6.9 not available
Source: (U.S. Geolgoical Survey 2021a)
338
Fillmore
Moorpark
Simi Valley
Santa Paula
Oxnard
Ojai
Port
Hueneme
Camarillo
San
Buenaventura
Thousand Oaks
¬«33 ¬«118
¬«34
¬« ¬«118 126
¬«150
¬«1
¬«1
¬«23
¬«126
¬«23
¬«33
¬«33
¬«34
¬«1
¬«150
¬«232
¬«33
¬«23
£¤101
Figure 10-3. NEHRP Soil Class
Data Sources: Ventura Co.,
CGS, Esri
C (Dense soil/soft rock)
D (Stiff soil)
E (Soft clay)
Water
County Boundary
Cities
Major Roads
±
06 3
Miles
339
Fillmore
Moorpark
Simi Valley
Santa Paula
Oxnard
Ojai
Port
Hueneme
Camarillo
San
Buenaventura
Thousand Oaks
Lake Piru
Lake
Casitas
¬«33 ¬«118
¬«34
¬« ¬«118 126
¬«150
¬«1
¬«1
¬«23
¬«126
¬«23
¬«33
¬«33
¬«34
¬«1
¬«150
¬«232
¬«33
¬«23
£¤101
Figure 10-4. Liquefaction Zones
Data Sources: Ventura Co.,
CGS, Esri
Liquefaction Zones
County Boundary
Cities
Major Roads
±
06 3
Miles
340
Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 10-12
Figure 10-5. Peak Ground Acceleration (%g) with 10% Probability of Exceedance in 50 Years

10.2.4 Warning Time
There is no current reliable way to predict the day or month that an earthquake will occur at any given location. Research is being done with warning systems that detect the lower energy compressional waves (P waves) that precede the secondary waves (S waves) experienced as an earthquake.

Earthquake early warning systems may provide a few seconds’ or a few minutes’ notice that a major earthquake is about to occur. The warning time is very short, but it could allow for someone to get under a desk, pause hazardous or high-risk work, or initiate protective automated systems in structures or critical infrastructure.
341
Earthquake
10-13
New technology is being developed for early warnings. For example, MyShake is a global smartphone seismic network for early warning that can keep users informed about earthquakes. It monitors for earthquakes using data from smartphone sensors. More information about the MyShake technology and the USGS ShakeAlert project is available online at https://myshake.berkeley.edu/about-us.html.

← All documents from this meeting