Subject: Finance & Governance City Council Committee (March 11, 2025): Agenda D.2.
From: Ronald Arruejo <[email protected]>
To: [email protected],Aaron Starr <[email protected]>,[email protected] Cc: "Lopez, Luly" <[email protected]>, "Lai, Dee" <[email protected]>, "Pearson II, Joe" <[email protected]>, "Pengilley, Jeff" <[email protected]>, "Fischer, Stephen" <[email protected]> Date Sent: Saturday, March 8, 2025 2:05:00 PM GMT-08:00 Date Received: Saturday, March 8, 2025 2:06:07 PM GMT-08:00 Attachments: Finance & Governance Committee Agenda Report Item D.2. (March 11, 2025).pdf Honorable Members of the Finance & Governance City Council Committee:
First, congratulations on all your elections and subsequent appointment to Oxnard City Council’sFinance & Governance Committee. Thank you for serving the public in the various positions within thegovernance of Oxnard both on the Oxnard City Council and on this city council committee.
This communication is in relation to Agenda Item D.2. Planning Commission Stipend Discussion. Werespectfully request approval of Resolution No. 2024-22 as originally presented and approved by the Planning Commission on August 15, 2024. In the opinion of the Planning Commission, webelieve that this resolution most effectively supports the pillar of Organizational Effectiveness. Asstated in the staff report, “the purpose of the Organizational Effectiveness strategy is to reinforce,stabilize, improve, and strengthen the organizational foundation of the City in order to build a modern,high-functioning City government that effectively and efficiently supports the operating departments inproviding high-quality services and programs for our residents and businesses”.
A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Oxnard Pertaining to Compensation forMembers of the Planning Commission (Resolution 2024-22), if ultimately passed, will encourage morequalified persons to become and retain being members of the Planning Commission who arecompensated comparably to the other cities within Ventura County and the surrounding counties. Asthe most populated city in the county, it makes logical and equitable sense to introduce compensationfor the time and work of the commissioners.
We look forward to discussing the options and improvements recommended by the CommunityDevelopment staff to ensure the best proposal for the discussion and (hopefully) approval of this in thiscity council committee and the full City Council. We strongly urge approval of Resolution No. 2024-22 as originally presented and approved by the Planning Commission on August 15, 2024.
Relevant Meeting Recordings:
Planning Commission (August 15, 2024): https://www.youtube.com/live/bEfbSG2yJzQ? si=jKoQtlmzD7CHUBEz&t=3174
City Council (September 17, 2024): https://www.youtube.com/live/0r2WKkho_Vo?t=10981s Thank you kindly for your time and attention to this matter put forward by the Planning Commission and additionally processed and presented by the Community Development staff. We look forward toyour action on this item in the Finance & Governance City Council Committee on March 11, 2025. 1 / 30
Best,
Planning Commission Chair Ronald J Arruejo
2 / 30
FINANCE AND GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE
AGENDA REPORT
REPORTS
AGENDA ITEM NO. D.2
DATE: March 11, 2025
TO: Finance & Governance Committee
FROM: Jeff Pengilley, Community Development Director, (805) 385-8208, [email protected]
SUBJECT: Planning Commission Stipend Discussion. (20 minutes)
RECOMMENDATION
That the Finance and Governance Committee:
1. Determine whether to recommend to the City Council the provision of a monetary stipend for members of the Planning Commission in recognition of their service; and
2. If the Committee recommends a stipend, provide specific recommendations to the City Council regarding the details of the stipend, such as the amount and whether it should be paid on a monthly basis or per meeting attended.
Please click the following link to view the required Measure M pre-recorded presentation video:
https://youtu.be/hmduscD_GBs
BACKGROUND
The Oxnard Planning Commission (Commission) consists of seven members who serve at the pleasure of the City Council and may be removed and replaced at Council’s discretion. The qualifications for Planning Commissioners are that they must reside in the city and be at least 18 years of age. Commissioners are nominated by Councilmembers to four-year terms, unless a vacancy occurs during the term of a commissioner.
A member of the commission may serve up to two consecutive terms.
Pursuant to the Oxnard City Code (OCC), the members of the Commission do not receive compensation for their time preparing for or attending Commission meetings, which is consistent with the other City of Oxnard Citizen Advisory Groups (CAGs). As with other CAGs within the City, the OCC outlines that the City Council shall provide the funds and equipment necessary for the work of the Commission. Any changes to the compensation of the Commission would be at the discretion of the City Council.
At the request of the Commission, on August 15, 2024, City staff placed on the Commission Agenda a study session/report discussing the proposal of stipends for members of the Commission. At the meeting, Ronald Arruejo, Chair of the Commission (Chair), prepared and submitted a memo highlighting the role of the Commission, a rate comparison looking at Oxnard compared to other cities and the benefits of providing a stipend to the Commission (Attachment 1). The Chair prepared a resolution in support of providing a stipend to the Commission for approval by the full Commission.
After a presentation by the Chair, the Commission discussed the proposal, noting generally that they were 3 / 30
appreciative of the discussion and that while there was no compensation, it was an honor to serve on the Commission. Following the deliberation, the Commission voted 5-0, with one absence and one abstention, to approve the resolution as prepared by the Chair. As noted above, the approval of compensation for the Commission is at the discretion of the City Council. The approved Planning Commission resolution (Attachment 2) only had the effect of allowing the Chair and up to two other Commission Members to present the resolution to the City Council during the City Council public comment period.
The Chair then presented the resolution to the City Council and, while the resolution could not be discussed in detail at the meeting, the Council directed staff to bring the item to Committee for further discussion.
In summary, the request included the following modifications:
1. Removes “Members shall serve without compensation” from Section 2-96 of the OCC
2. Amends Section 2-97 of the OCC to add five new sections, with the major elements being:
• $150 per meeting for every member of the Planning Commission • Reimbursement to the Planning Commission for actual and necessary expenses incurred for City-related business.
DISCUSSION
Based on the analysis below, staff is seeking Committee direction on four questions:
1. Does the Committee recommend that the City Council adopt an ordinance to amend Chapter 2 of the OCC and a resolution amending the Planning Commission Bylaws providing for Planning Commission stipends? If so, direction on the following items is necessary for staff to develop an ordinance and resolution for Council consideration.
2. Should the stipend be based on a per meeting rate, a flat monthly rate, or an annual rate?
3. If the stipend is a flat monthly or annual rate, should attendance be required in order to receive the stipend? If so, should there be a maximum number of meetings the Commissioners can miss within a month or year, whether excused or unexcused? If the Committee recommends a per-meeting stipend, then direction on these questions is not necessary.
4. What is the appropriate stipend amount?
ANALYSIS
Role of the Commission
The Commission is one of seven CAGs established by the OCC within the City. However, the role of the Commission differs from many of the other CAGs in the City in that the Commission's roles and responsibilities are defined in State Law. The Commission’s role is to make sound land use decisions supporting the mission statement. The mission of Oxnard’s Planning Division is to create, preserve and enhance the quality of the City’s natural and built environments through implementation of the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Adopted Specific Plans, Local Coastal Plan, and the Coastal Zoning Ordinance. More specifically, pursuant to Section 2-95 of the OCC, the Commission has three core functions:
1. The functions and duties assigned to the commission by the code and other ordinances and resolutions of the city council;
2. The functions set out in Cal. Gov't Code, Sections 65103, 65400, 65401 and 65402; and
3. The duties imposed on a commission by Cal. Health and Safety Code, Section 33000. 4 / 30
Under State Law, the primary applicable code section is Government Code Section 65103, which outlines that each planning agency (Commission) shall perform all the following functions:
a. Prepare, periodically review, and revise, as necessary, the general plan. b. Implement the general plan through actions including, but not limited to, the administration of specific plans and zoning and subdivision ordinances.
c. Annually review the capital improvement program of the city or county and the local public works projects of other local agencies for their consistency with the general plan, pursuant to Article 7 (commencing with Section 65400).
d. Endeavor to promote public interest in, comment on, and understanding of the general plan and regulations relating to it.
e. Consult and advise with public officials and agencies, public utility companies, civic, educational, professional, and other organizations, and citizens generally concerning the implementation of the general plan.
f. Promote the coordination of local plans and programs with the plans and programs of other public agencies.
g. Perform other functions as the legislative body provides, including conducting studies and preparing plans other than those required or authorized by this title.
In the City, the Commission is the decision maker on Special Use Permits, Variances, Administrative Relief from Parking Provisions, Parcel Map Waivers, and Coastal Development Permits. The Commission is the appeals body for Development Design Review Permits, Downtown Design Review Permits, Minor Modifications, Temporary Use Permits, Coastal Exemptions, Emergency Permits, Categorical Exclusions, Development Review Permits, Administrative Modifications, and Final Restoration Plans. Lastly, the Commission is responsible for making recommendations to the City Council on Zoning Code/Subdivision Ordinance Text Amendments, Zone Changes, Tentative Subdivision Maps, Development Agreements, Specific Plans, General Plan Amendments, and Annexations.
In addition to the items above, pursuant to Government Code Section 65402, a Finding of General Plan Conformity must be made by the Commission for any acquisition, disposition, vacation, or abandonment of any real City property by the City. Specifically, the Commission is to determine whether the location, purpose, and extent of such proposed real property transaction conforms with the 2030 General Plan. This section also applies to acquisitions and depositions by the County or other local agencies within City jurisdiction.
Time Commitment
The Commission currently holds their meetings on the first and third Thursday of each month at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, however, while rare, special meetings can be convened as needed. While there is a potential for up to 24 meetings each year, one or two meetings are often removed from the calendar due to conflicts with holidays. Meetings are held on an as-needed basis, so meetings are canceled when there are no items that are ready for the Commission’s review or if the Commission fails to achieve a quorum (4 members).
Based on data from 2023 and 2024:
• There were a total of 16 meetings held in 2023 and 14 meetings held in 2024. • Over that time period, there was an approximately 80 percent attendance rate. • The average meeting lasted 1 hr and 20 minutes and 1 hr and 41 minutes, respectively. However, it is important to note that, due to the variation in the items that come before the Commission, the time of meetings varies from approximately 30 minutes to 6 hours. 5 / 30
• The same variation can be found in the length of the Commission Packets as well, which can range from around 125 pages to over 3,000 pages when including environmental documents, such as the recent Teal Club project and Lockwood 3 projects.
Potential Benefits of Commission Stipends
As noted above, the Commission serves important functions prescribed by the State. These functions are critical for the growth of a city, as sound decision-making is important for the development of a city, particularly, as planning and, more specifically, housing planning has become a focus of state regulations.
While staff are not making a recommendation in favor or against the provision of stipends, the Chair laid out the following potential benefits:
1. Encourage qualified people to become members of the Planning Commission
2. Increase retention of members, which helps with institutional and historical knowledge of projects.
Although not stated in the Chair's memo to the Planning Commission, if the stipend requires attendance at meetings, then the stipend would also encourage attendance of those appointed to the Commission. Although it rarely occurs, lack of attendance by Commissioners can delay decisions on development projects, impacting developer timelines. Also, commissioner turnover requires additional training and funding (approximately $2,000 per commissioner) and additional staff time to bring the new commissioners up to speed. Returning Commissioners can also bring much-needed experience and continuity, which is beneficial for new members and developers.
Survey of Other Agencies
The Chair conducted a survey of other neighboring agencies in Kern, Los Angeles, Santa Barbara, and Ventura Counties, which was verified by City staff. As shown in the table (Attachment 3), the majority of agencies surveyed (29 of 38 (not including Oxnard)) in the region provide some sort of stipend. Of those surveyed, only three (3) are confirmed to provide mileage reimbursement.
The agencies that provide a stipend generally provide a stipend on a per-meeting basis and the majority of those require attendance to receive the stipend. The per-meeting stipend generally ranged from $10 to $350. As an alternative, a few agencies provide a flat monthly stipend which ranged from $50 to $543, some of which required commissioner attendance and some did not.
The Chair’s memo (and the Resolution) presented to the Planning Commission inaccurately stated in Section 3 that Oxnard is the only planning commission body which does not receive compensation in Ventura County. Based on the Chair’s research, the City of Port Hueneme does not have a separately appointed planning commission. It was unknown if and how much the compensation for the City of Ventura is, and the cities of Ojai and Fillmore did not respond to his inquiries when the Resolution and memo were presented to the Planning Commission.
CONCLUSION
If the Committee recommends a stipend, staff recommends, or provides the following context for Committee consideration:
1. The Oxnard Board of Commissioners receive $50 per meeting and are required to attend the meeting to receive the compensation.
2. The Planning Commission resolution recommended $150 per meeting. The data provided in Attachment 3 shows twenty-two (22) agencies provide a per meeting stipend. Of those, one county provided $350 per meeting and one city provided $263 per meeting, with the remaining twenty (20) reporting a per meeting amount or a range between $10-$150 per meeting. 6 / 30
3. The data provided in Attachment 3 shows seven (7) of the surveyed agencies provide a monthly stipend, rather than a per meeting stipend. Of those seven (7) agencies, one agency provided $543 and another provided $375 with the remaining five (5) agencies ranging from $50-$200 per month. Putting the Chair’s recommendation of $150 per meeting in context of a monthly stipend would generally equate to $300 per month based on the adopted schedule of two meetings per month. However, it is important to note that prior Oxnard data shows there were 14-16 meetings per year. If the Council Committee recommends a monthly stipend, staff would not recommend simply extrapolating the Chair’s recommendation to a monthly stipend (meaning $300 a month). If the desire of the Committee is to recommend a monthly stipend, staff suggest consideration of a minimum number of meetings and attendance requirements.
4. Based on the survey data, the existing practice with the Oxnard Board of Commissioners and the data concerning the number of meetings held by the Oxnard Planning Commission, staff recommend a per meeting stipend and the requirement to attend the meeting to receive the compensation.
5. The Chair included language in the resolution regarding reimbursement to the Planning Commission for actual and necessary expenses incurred for City-related business. There was no discussion at the Commission meeting regarding reimbursement.
STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
This agenda item supports the Organizational Effectiveness strategy. The purpose of the Organizational Effectiveness strategy is to reinforce, stabilize, improve, and strengthen the organizational foundation of the City in order to build a modern, high-functioning City government that effectively and efficiently supports the operating departments in providing high-quality services and programs for our residents and businesses.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
There are no financial impacts associated with this agenda item. However, if the stipend for the Commission is ultimately approved by City Council, the funding for the Commissioner stipend would come from the General Fund.
The Chair proposed $150 per meeting for every member of the Commission. Based on the recommendations in the Chair's proposal, the maximum cost would be approximately $25,200 per year, assuming a stipend of $150 per Commissioner per meeting and a total of 24 meetings per year with all commissioners in attendance.
However, based on the data from the last two years, there were a total of 16 meetings held in 2023 and 14 meetings held in 2024. Over that time period, there was an approximately 80 percent attendance rate. Based on these two data points, with seven Commissioners, the stipend would have been $16,800 and $14,700, respectively, if attendance is not required, and reduced to approximately $13,440 and $11,760, respectively, if attendance was required.
The amounts above are for illustrative purposes only, as the exact cost could vary based on the stipend amount, methodology, and the number of meetings held.
The Chair also included language in the resolution regarding reimbursement for city-related expenses. Without any criteria developed for what qualifies for reimbursement, staff is unable to estimate the potential costs.
If the City Council ultimately recommends we proceed with the stipend proposal, further analysis of the financial impacts will be conducted, and the specific financial impacts will be presented in a future City Council agenda item.
Prepared by: Joe Pearson II, AICP, Planning & Environmental Services Manager
ATTACHMENTS
7 / 30
1. Chair Arruejo’s Proposal for Stipends for Members of the Planning Commission Memo
2. Planning Commission Resolution 2024-22
3. Survey of Other Communities
4. Presentation
8 / 30
MEMO
DATE: August 15, 2024
TO: Planning Commission
CC: Joe Pearson II, Planning & Environmental Services Manager Ken Rozell, Chief Assistant City Attorney
FROM: Ronald Arruejo, Planning Commission, Chair
SUBJECT: Proposal for Stipends for Members of the Planning Commission UPDATED
1. Recommendation: That the Planning Commission:
a. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-XX pertaining to compensation for members of the Planning Commission; and
b. Consent to the Chair and up to two other members (as selected by the Chair) of the Planning Commission to represent the Commission regarding the aforementioned Resolution in accordance with Rule 10 – ‘Restriction on Representation’ of the Rules and Procedures of the Planning Commission of the City of Oxnard.
2. Summary of Planning Commission
The current Duties (Sec. 2-95), Composition (Sec. 2-96), Finances (Sec. 2-97), and Televised Proceedings (Sec. 2-98) of the Planning Commission of the City of Oxnard are detailed in Sections 2-95 through 2-98 of the Oxnard City Code and as summarized below:
a. SECTION 2-95. DUTIES.: The Planning Commission performs functions and duties as assigned by the Code and other city council ordinances and resolutions, functions set out in Cal. Gov’t Code, Sections 65103, 65400, 65401, and 65402, and duties imposed by the Cal. Health and Safety Code, Section 33000. b. SECTION 2-96. COMPOSITION.: The Planning Commission shall consist of seven members, each nominated by a member of the city council concurrent with the term of the nominator, approved by the city council, and serving no more than two consecutive terms. A quorum will consist of four members. A commission 9 / 30
will select a chair and vice chair each year for one year or until their successors are appointed.
c. SECTION 2-97. FINANCES: “The city council shall provide the funds and equipment necessary for the work of the commission.”
d. SECTION 2-98. TELEVISED PROCEEDINGS.: “To the extent feasible, public proceedings of the commission shall be televised.”
3. Status of Compensation for Oxnard Commissioners in Comparison to the Rest of Ventura and Surrounding Counties
The members of the Planning Commission of the City of Oxnard do not receive compensation for their time attending Planning Commission meetings and, according to data received as of August 4, 2024, and compiled in Attachment B, is the only planning commission body (which is separate from the elected members of the municipality or county) which does not receive compensation in Ventura County.
In order to encourage qualified persons to become members of the Planning Commission, it is prudent and logical to offer compensation to current and future members to both increase retention and applications to serve as a member. All the members of the Planning Commission consist of members who are serving their first term.1 It is possible and reasonable that if compensation were offered, there would be more members still serving on the Planning Commission for a second term, thereby contributing to the Planning Commission with their institutional and historical knowledge in the deliberation of the items that come before the Planning Commission.
Utilizing just data for the cities2 in the County of Ventura and the County of Ventura itself, those that compensate their planning commission members monthly average $300 per month3 and those that compensate them per meeting average $110 per meeting4. Attendance is not generally required for compensation paid monthly but is generally required for compensation paid per meeting. Only one body pays their members mileage.
1 There are members who have previously served on the Planning Commission, but none of have reappointed to their current term of membership.
2 The City of Port Hueneme does not have a separately appointed planning commission, it is unknown if and how much the compensation for the City of San Buenaventura is, and the Cit ies of Ojai and Fillmore have not yet responded to inquiries regarding compensation for members of their Planning Commission. 3 Rounded to the nearest $10.
4 Rounded to the nearest $10.
10 / 30
Utilizing data for all the cities and the county board in Ventura County and the surrounding counties of Santa Barbara, Kern, & Los Angeles5 as compiled in Attachment B, 78% of the cities receive some compensation. For those that compensate their planning commission member monthly average $190 per month6 and those that compensate them per meeting average $110 per month7.
4. Summary and Conclusion:
In order to improve the retention and recruitment of qualified persons to become Planning Commission members and that those members are compensated comparably to Planning Commission members of other cities, offering compensation to current and future members is in the best interests of the City. It is recommended to approve Resolution No. 2024-XX to communicate to the City Council the support of the Planning Commission along with the reasons for compensation for members of the Planning Commission and to Consent for the Chair (and up to two other members) to represent the Planning Commission as it relates to Resolution 2024-XX.
Attachments:
A. Resolution 2024-XX
B. Planning Commission Member Stipend Data Received as of August 4, 2024 (Corrected)
5 Data was solicited from every city and county in Ventura, Kern, & Santa Barbara Counties, Los Angeles County, and every city with a population above 75,000 in Los Angeles County. Data was not received from all cities and counties in and surrounding Ventura County.
6 Rounded to the nearest $10.
7 Rounded to the nearest $10.
11 / 30
RESOLUTIONNO.2024-XX
ARESOLUTIONOFTHEPLANNINGCOMMISSIONOFTHECITYOFOXNARD
PERTAININGTO COMPENSATIONFORMEMBERS OFTHEPLANNING
COMMISSION.
WHEREAS,SECTION2-97.FINANCESoftheOxnardCityCodeauthorizestheCityCouncil toprovidethefundsandequipmentnecessaryfortheworkofthecommission;and WHEREAS,thecityhasnotadoptedanordinancethat providescompensationto membersofthePlanningCommissionforattendanceatPlanningCommissionmeetings;and WHEREAS,inordertoencouragequalifiedpersonstobecomemembersofthePlanning Commissionandto ensure that members ofthePlanningCommissionare compensated comparablytoPlanningCommissionmembersofothercities,itisinthebestinterestsofthe CitytoprovideforcompensationtomembersofthePlanningCommission;and WHEREAS,theCityCouncilmayestablishthecompensationofvariouscityboardsand commissions;and
WHEREAS,thePlanningCommissionoftheCityofOxnardistheonlymunicipalor countyplanningcommissionintheCountyofVenturawhichhasabodyseparatefromthe electedmembersofthemunicipalityorcountywhichdoesnotreceivecompensation.
NOW, THEREFORE,BEITRESOLVEDBYTHEPLANNINGCOMMISSIONOFTHECITYOF OXNARD:
SECTION1.IncorporationofRecitals.Theaboverecitalsaretrueandcorrectandare incorporatedhereinbythisreference.
SECTION2.CEQA. ThePlanningCommissionfindsthisResolutionisexemptfromthe CaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct(CEQA)pursuanttoCEQAGuidelinesSection15061(b)(3) (“generalrule”or“commonsense”)thatstatesCEQAappliesonlytoprojectswhichhavethe potentialforcausinga significant effectontheenvironment. Where it canbeseenwith certainty, asinthiscase,thatthereisnopossibilitythattheactivityinquestionmayhavea significant effectontheenvironment.AsthisactiononlyrequeststheCityCouncilconsider future ordinanceamendments,theactivityisnotsubjectto CEQA. Any future ordinance amendments,ifpursued,wouldbesubjecttotheprovisionsofCEQA,asapplicable.
SECTION3.ThePlanningCommissionrequeststhat theCityCouncilamendSECTION 2-96.COMPOSITION.oftheOxnardCityCodebyamendingtoreadasfollowsasamendedand restatedtoreadasfollows:
12 / 30
SECTION2-96.COMPOSITION.
A. Thecommissionshallconsistofsevenmembers.Memberofthecommissionshall serveandmayberemovedandreplacedatthepleasureofthecitycouncil,shall resideinthecity,andshallbeatleast18yearsofage.
B. …
C. …
D. …
E. …
SECTION4.ThePlanningCommissionrequeststhat theCityCouncilamendSECTION SECTION2-97.FINANCES.oftheOxnardCityCodebyamendingtoreadasfollowsasamended andrestatedtoreadasfollows:
SECTION2-97.FINANCES.
Thecitycouncilshallprovidethefundsandequipmentnecessaryfortheworkofthe commission.
A. PlanningCommissionersshallreceivecompensationintheamountofOneHundred andFiftyDollars($150)permeetingforeverymemberofthePlanningCommission.
B. PlanningCommissionersmaywaivetheirowncompensationonanannualbasisby givingwrittennoticeto theCityManager until suchtimethat thePlanning Commissionerretractstheirwaivingoftheirowncompensationoruntiltheendof theirtermofappointment.
C. Thecompensationsetforthhereinshallbecomeeffectiveinthefirstfullmonthafter theapprovalofthisordinance.
D. Thecompensationset forthhereinisexclusiveofanyamountspayabletoeach memberofthePlanningCommissionforreimbursement ofactualandnecessary expensesincurredforCity-relatedbusiness.
E. PlanningCommissionersshallnotbeeligibleforanyhealthinsurancebenefits.
Section5.Severability.IfanyprovisionofthisResolutionortheapplicationthereofto anypersonorcircumstanceisheldinvalid,suchinvalidityshallnotaffectotherprovisionsor applications,andtothisendtheprovisionsofthisResolutionaredeclaredtobeseverable.
Section6.TheSecretaryshallcertifytheadoptionofthisResolution.
PASSED,APPROVED,ANDADOPTEDbythePlanningCommissionoftheCityofOxnardonthis 15thdayofAugust,2024.
______________________________
13 / 30
RonaldArruejo,Chair
IherebycertifythattheforegoingisatruecopyofaResolutionadoptedbythePlanning CommissionoftheCityofOxnardatameetingheldonthe15thdayofAugust,2024,andcarried bythefollowingvote:
AYES: Commissioner(s):
NOES: Commissioner(s):
ABSENT: Commissioner(s):
ABSTAIN: Commissioner(s):
RECUSED: Commissioner(s):
______________________________
JoePearsonII,Secretary
14 / 30
Month Meeting
Los Angeles Alhambra N/A N/A
<ĞƌŶ ƌǀŝŶ Eͬ Eͬ ϲͲϴŵĞĞƚŝŶŐƐͬLJĞĂƌ͖ϭϬͲϯϬ
ŵŝŶƵƚĞƐĞĂĐŚ
Los Angeles Bellflower 300 150 Yes No M.C. 2.32 Info from website ^ĂŶƚĂ
ĂƌďĂƌĂ ƵĞůůƚŽŶ ϱϬ zĞƐ EŽ
Los Angeles Burbank N/A N/A M.C. 2-1-405 Info from website Ventura Camarillo 125 Yes No
^ĂŶƚĂ
ĂƌďĂƌĂ ĂƌƉŝŶƚĞƌŝĂ ϲϬ zĞƐ EŽ ZĞŝŵďƵƌƐĞŵĞŶƚĨŽƌĐŝƚLJ
ďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐ
Los Angeles Carson 100 Yes No
sĞŶƚƵƌĂ ŽƵŶƚLJŽĨ ϭϱϬ zĞƐ zĞƐ
^ĂŶƚĂ
ĂƌďĂƌĂ ŽƵŶƚLJŽĨ ϯϱϬ zĞƐ zĞƐ
Los Angeles El Monte 75 Yes R. 9622
Los Angeles Glendale N/A N/A Info from website
Los Angeles Hawthorne 50 Yes No Info from website
Los Angeles Lakewood 50 Yes No Info from website
Los Angeles Lancaster 75 Yes No Info from website
^ĂŶƚĂ
ĂƌďĂƌĂ >ŽŵƉŽĐ Eͬ EŽ
<ĞƌŶ DĐ&ĂƌůĂŶĚ ϱϬ zĞƐ EŽ D͘͘ϬϬϬϭͲϮϬϮϮ ϭŵĞĞƚŝŶŐƉĞƌŵŽŶƚŚ sĞŶƚƵƌĂ DŽŽƌƉĂƌŬ ϮϬϬ ϭϬϬ zĞƐ EŽ Z͘ϭϵϵϭͲϳϯϬ DĂdžϮϬϬͬŵŽŶƚŚ sĞŶƚƵƌĂ KdžŶĂƌĚ Eͬ Eͬ D͘͘ϮͲϵϲΘϮͲϵϳ
Los Angeles Palmdale 125 Yes No 150 for chair & 100 for others per meeting
Los Angeles Pasadena 50 Yes No M.C. 2.105.125
OtherMunicipal Code /
Resolution
Per _____ AttendanceCounty MileageCity
15 / 30
Month Meeting OtherMunicipal Code /
Resolution
Per _____ AttendanceCounty MileageCity
Los Angeles Pomona N/A N/A
<ĞƌŶ ZŝĚŐĞĐƌĞƐƚ ϮϬϬ EŽ EŽ
^ĂŶƚĂ
ĂƌďĂƌĂ
^ĂŶƚĂ
ĂƌďĂƌĂ ϱϬ zĞƐ EŽ
Los AngelesSanta
Clarita 263 Yes No Info from website
^ĂŶƚĂ
ĂƌďĂƌĂ ^ĂŶƚĂDĂƌŝĂ ϳϱ zĞƐ EŽ
sĞŶƚƵƌĂ ^ĂŶƚĂWĂƵůĂ ϱϬ EŽ EŽ Z͘ϯϳϲϭ ϭŵĞĞƚŝŶŐͬŵŽŶƚŚ͖ƉĂŝĚ ƋƵĂƌƚĞƌůLJ
<ĞƌŶ ^ŚĂĨƚĞƌ ϱϬ EŽ hŶŬŶŽǁŶ D͘͘ϳϬϳ
ĂŝůLJƐĂůĂƌLJĨŽƌĐŝƚLJͲƌĞůĂƚĞĚ
ďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐΘŽƚŚĞƌƌĞůĞǀĂŶƚ
ĞdžƉĞŶƐĞƐ͘
sĞŶƚƵƌĂ ^ŝŵŝsĂůůĞLJ ϱϰϯ EŽ EŽ
^ĂŶƚĂ
ĂƌďĂƌĂ ^ŽůǀĂŶŐ ϭϬϬ EŽ EŽ
Los Angeles South Gate 125 Yes No M.C. 54952.3 Info from website <ĞƌŶ dĂĨƚ ϱϬ EŽ EŽ Z͘ϯϴϱϬͲϭϳ
<ĞƌŶ dĞŚĂĐŚĂƉŝ ϭϱϬ EŽ EŽ
sĞŶƚƵƌĂ dŚŽƵƐĂŶĚ
KĂŬƐ ϯϳϱ EŽ EŽ
Los Angeles Torrance 10 Yes No Must attend at least 2/3. sĞŶƚƵƌĂ sĞŶƚƵƌĂ hŶŬŶŽǁŶ hŶŬŶŽǁŶ DϮ͘ϰϭϱ
<ĞƌŶ tĂƐĐŽ Eͬ Eͬ
Los Angeles West Covina 150 75 Yes No Info from website Los Angeles Whittier N/A N/A
16 / 30
17 / 30
18 / 30
19 / 30
Stipend Survey of Other Communities
County City
Stipend Per
Month
Stipend Per
Meeting
Required
Attendance
Mileage
Reimbursment
1 Kern Arvin - - N/a No
2 Kern MacFarland $50 - Yes No
3 Kern Ridgecrest $200 - No No
4 Kern Shafter $50 - Yes No
5 Kern Taft $50 - Yes No
6 Kern Tehachapi - - No No
7 Kern Wasco - - N/a Yes
8 Los Angeles Alhambra - - N/a No
9 Los Angeles Bellflower $300 $150 Yes No
10Los Angeles Burbank - - N/a No
11Los Angeles Carson - $100 Yes No
12Los Angeles El Monte - $75 Yes No
13Los Angeles Glendale - - N/a No
14Los Angeles Hawthorne - $50 yes No
15Los Angeles Lakewood $100 $50 Yes No
16Los Angeles Lancaster - $75 Yes No
17Los Angeles Palmdale $200 $100 Yes No
18Los Angeles Pasadena - $50 Yes No
19Los Angeles Pomona - - N/a No
20Los Angeles Santa Clarita - $263 Yes No
21Los Angeles South Gate - $125 Yes No
22Los Angeles Torrance - $10 Yes No
23Los Angeles West Covina $150 $75 Yes No
24Los Angeles Whittier - - N/a No
25Santa BarbaraBuellton $100 $50 Yes No
26Santa BarbaraCarpinteria - $60 Yes No
27Santa BarbaraCounty of - $350 Yes Yes
28Santa BarbaraLompoc - $50 Yes No
29Santa BarbaraSanta Barbara - $50 Yes No
30Santa BarbaraSanta Maria $300 $75 Yes No
31Santa BarbaraSolvang $100 - Yes No
32Ventura Camarillo - $125 Yes No
33Ventura County of - $150 Yes Yes
34Ventura Moorpark $200 $100 Yes No
35Ventura Santa Paula - $50 No No
36Ventura Simi Valley $543 - No No
37Ventura Thousand Oaks $375 - No No
38Ventura Ventura - - No No
20 / 30
PLANNING COMMISSION STIPEND
Joe Pearson II, AICP, Planning Manager
Community Development Department
Finance and Governance Committee
March 11, 2025
21 / 30
Background
At the request of the Commission, on August 15, 2024 City staff placed on the Commission Agenda a study sessions/report to discuss the proposal of stipends for members of the Commission.
At the meeting, Ronald Arruejo, Chair of the Planning Commission prepared and submitted a memo highlighting the role of the Planning Commission, a rate comparison looking at Oxnard as compared to other cities, and benefits of providing a stipend to the Planning Commission.
The Commission discussed the proposal and following the deliberation, the Commission voted 5-0, with one absence and one abstention to approve the resolution as prepared by the Commission Chair.
The Commission Chair then presented the resolution to the City Council. While the resolution could not be discussed in detail at the meeting, the Council directed staff to bring the item to Committee for further discussion.
2 22 / 30
General Request By The Planning Commission
The request included the following modifications:
1. Removes “Members shall serve without compensation” from Section 2-96 of the OCC
2. Amends Section 2-97 of the OCC to add five new sections, with the major elements being:
a. $150 per meeting for every member of the Planning Commission b. Reimbursement to the Planning Commission for actual and necessary expenses incurred for City-related business.
3 23 / 30
Role of the Planning Commission
The Oxnard Planning Commission consists of seven members.
The Commission is one of seven Council Advisory Groups established by the OCC within the City of Oxnard. However, the role of the Commission differs from many of the other CAGs in the City in that the Commission's role and responsibilities are defined under State Law.
Pursuant to Section 2-95 of the OCC the Commission has three core functions:
• The functions and duties assigned to the commission by the code and other ordinances and resolutions of the city council;
• The functions set out in Cal. Gov't Code, Sections 65103, 65400, 65401 and 65402; and
• The duties imposed on a commission by Cal. Health and Safety Code, Section 33000.
Pursuant to Chapters 15, 16, and 17 of the OCC, the Commission functions as the decision maker, appeals body, or recommendation body on a variety of permits. As well as, being responsible for making General Plan Conformity determinations. 4 24 / 30
Items for Consideration
Staff is seeking direction on the following questions:
1. Does the Committee recommend that the City Council adopt an ordinance to amend Chapter 2 of the OCC and a resolution amending the Planning Commission Bylaws providing for
Planning Commission stipends?
2. Should the stipend be based on a per meeting rate, a flat monthly rate, or annual rate?
3. If the stipend is a flat monthly or annual rate, should attendance be required in order to receive the stipend?
a. If it is a flat monthly rate or annual rate should there be a maximum number of meetings that can be missed?
4. What is the appropriate stipend spend amount?
5 25 / 30
Analysis
1. Time Commitment - The Commission currently holds their meetings on the first and third Thursday of each month at 6:00 p.m. in Council Chambers, however, while rare, special meetings can be convened as needed.
2. Potential Benefits of Commission Stipends - A stipend could encourage the participation of qualified individuals and regular attendance of those appointed to the Commission.
3. Survey of other Agencies - The majority of other cities surveyed provided some level of compensation. The per meeting stipend generally ranged from $10 to $350. As an alternative, a few agencies provide a flat monthly stipend which ranged from $50 to $543, some of which required commissioner attendance and some did not.
6 26 / 30
Conclusion
If the Committee recommends a stipend, staff recommends, or provides the following context for Committee consideration:
1. T wenty-two agencies provide a per meeting stipend. Of those, one County provided $350 per meeting and one city provided $263 per meeting, with the remaining twenty reporting a per meeting amount or a range between $10-$150 per meeting.
2. Seven of the surveyed agencies provide a monthly stipend, rather than a per meeting stipend. Of those seven (7) agencies, one agency provided $543 and another provided $375 with the remaining five (5) agencies ranging from $50-$200 per month.
3. If the desire of the Committee is to recommend a monthly stipend, staff suggests consideration of a minimum number of meetings and attendance requirements.
4. The Chair included language in the resolution regarding reimbursement to the Planning Commission for actual and necessary expenses incur. 7 27 / 30
Financial Impact
• There are no financial impacts associated with this agenda item, however, if the stipend for the Commission is ultimately approved by City Council, the funding for the Commissioner stipend would come from the General Fund.
• Based on the recommendations in the Chairs proposal the maximum cost would be approximately $25,200 per year, assuming a stipend of $150 per Commissioner per meeting and a total of 24 meetings per year
• However, based on the data from the last two years, there were a total of 16 meetings held in 2023 and 14 meetings held in 2024. • The amounts above are for illustrative purposes only, as the exact cost could vary based on the stipend amount, methodology, and the number of meetings held.
8 28 / 30
Recommendation
That the Finance and Governance Committee:
1. Determine whether to recommend to the City Council the provision of a monetary stipend for members of the Planning Commission in recognition of their service; and
2. If the Committee recommends a stipend, provide specific recommendations to the City Council regarding the details of the stipend, such as the amount and whether it should be paid on a monthly basis or per meeting attended.
9 29 / 30
End of Presentation
30 / 30