Subject: Item G Public Comment on Items not on the Agenda From: Karla Alejandra >
To: [email protected]
Date Sent: Tuesday, December 2, 2025 11:41:22 AM GMT-08:00 Date Received: Tuesday, December 2, 2025 11:41:38 AM GMT-08:00 The Santa Paula City Council recently unanimously passed an item that allocated city funds from their budget surplus to go to organizations that help the undocumented community (Poder Popular/Lucha, 805 UndocuFund, Food Share, Community Action of Ventura County). Last year (June 19, 2024), the city of Oxnard posted a an article that spoke of a surplus for the city. The article states that the city had a "budget surplus of approximately $35 million by the conclusion of Fiscal Year 2023-2024". The article also states that $20 million would be used to pay long-term debt and that $9.5 would be used to bolster the reserve fund. What happened to all this money? If it was already used up, what was it used for? Additionally, if it was already used, who decided that it would be used for what it was used? What happened to the several millions that the last city council members stated would be saved for "a rainy day"? It's been raining on the undocumented community for the past 12 months. The bare minimum you passed for $200k a year for an additional public defender attorney at the county level doesn't cut it. Not when families and community members are still struggling to figure out where their loved ones were violently taken to and how they will make ends meet and pay for lawyer fees. The community needs money. And you keep lying and saying that the city has none to spare. You made a deal with the devil to continue allowing GenOn to commit environmental racism and continue polluting South Oxnard and Port Hueneme because you claimed that South Oxnard community needs the money. Basua even invoked the memory of Carmen Ramirez to justify her Yes vote. It is evident that you have money. Tonight you will be approving the appropriation of $37,500 into the city funds from a donation. The very least you can do is distribute that money back into the undocumented community. If not directly, then to organizations that are directly helping them. Such as the 805 Undocufund and VC Defensa. No more excuses. No more lies about the city not having money. Give the community the financial support it needs.
Karla Alejandra Zamora
she/her/hers
3 / 3
Subject: Fwd: Comments to Agenda Item D.1 on 2 December 2025 City Council Meeting From: "Lopez, Luly" <[email protected]>
To: Dee Lai <[email protected]>
Date Sent: Tuesday, December 2, 2025 2:59:25 PM GMT-08:00 Date Received: Tuesday, December 2, 2025 2:59:39 PM GMT-08:00 Attachments: Dec 2 City Council comments.docx
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Raymond Blattel
Date: Tue, Dec 2, 2025 at 10:33 AM
Subject: Comments to Agenda Item D.1 on 2 December 2025 City Council Meeting To: Luis McArthur <[email protected]>, Gabriela Rodriguez <[email protected]>, Gabe Teran <[email protected]>, Bert Perello <[email protected]>, Starr, Aaron <[email protected]>, Gabriela Basua <[email protected]>, Michaela Perez <[email protected]>, Lopez, Luly <[email protected]> 1 / 3
D.1 OPD Presentation
Thank you for the presentation. Slide #8 - the presentation indicates that there were slightly over 35,000 California Vehicle Code violations in 2024, including parking and traffic violations. I recently submitted a Public Records Act request - #25-516 - for ALL CVC violations issued within the Oxnard city limits for 2025. The city’s initial response included the time frame from Jan 1 to 31 October, 2025 – more promised on December 4. Adding all of the citations issued from the city’s response, parking and traffic violations included, the total came to 4,750. Using the monthly average of citations issued thus far and extrapolating to the year’s end, that comes to about 5,000 citations. Now that’s a big drop compared to 35,000. Why is this? I can think of at least 3 things: (1) the motorists within the Oxnard city limits have dramatically turned over a new leaf and have driven and parked much for carefully and legally on 2025 – but from what I’ve observed, this is highly improbable; (2) the OPD has become increasingly lax in their enforcement – this is certainly possible - but from 35,000 to 5,000? That’s a big drop in enforcement and also highly improbable; and (3) I don’t want to come out and say it but you can guess what it might be. All it would take is another PRA for 2024 to find out.
Furthermoe, OPD has claimed, in writing, that just under 2,200 CVC 2500(n) citations, which covers the new daylighting parking law, have been issued in 2025. In addition, a police Corporal, also in writing, has claimed the he personally has written CVC 2500(n) citations himself. Funny thing is, remember the PRA that I mentioned earlier? Well, the city’s response was provided in .xlsx format which includes a ‘search’ function. When I search for 22500(n) citations, the tool finds ZERO, NIL, NADA. Now isn’t that strange? I’ll let you draw your own conclusions.
Staffing slide: this slide indicates 242 sworn officers and an estimated 198,733 population as of 1 January of this year. If one considers that 26% of this population is over 65 years of age and under 12 years of age and then recompute the ratio of officers to the population most likely to use or need the police force, the new ratio is 1.65 officers to 1000 population (vice 1.22). This is a more attractive ratio.
Slide 19: from 2015 to 2018, there was a steady climb in injury collisions. 2024 had the second highest in the past decade. Speeding is certainly a contributor – and prevalent on Gonzales Road - as I’ve complained to OPD.
It would seem that the major take-away from this presentation is, as expected, a continuing plea for more money and more officers and more equipment. Hasn’t Public Safety eaten a large percentage of available resources already? Per the briefing, OPD already has 242 sworn officers - how many does it take? There were 22 vacancies in 2024 but 778 applications. With just a 3% success rate for the applicants, those 22 vacancies would be filled. Seems pretty reasonable.
D.1 OFD Presentation
2 / 3
Thank you for the presentation. The presentation on slide #8 indicates there were greater than 34,000 Unit Responses but only 22,519 Unit Calls? What more responses than calls for service? What is a typical example of a response not initiated by a service call.
Here’s something that I’ve observed just last month. An ambulance, with emergency lights and sirens activated, turned from Gonzales onto Entrada and stopped at a house in the first block.
Then a short time later came a fire department ladder truck, also with emergency lights and sirens activated, after the ambulance had already arrived. Is there such a thing as the ambulance saying ‘we got this’? Was the OFD response necessary? There was no fire. Does the OFD get credit for a response in this instance? In another incident several months ago, there was an accident at the Oxnard Blvd intersection to Wagon Wheel. As I drove up, the tow trucks were loading up the damaged vehicles and multiple police vehicles were there still. Then comes a fire truck. Why? The game is already over – no sense showing up in uniform. In this case, did the OFD again get credit for a response? It seems to me that there weren’t really needed.
It would seem that the major take-away from this presentation, like the Police Chief’s is, a continuing plea for more resources. You want to rebuild the fire stations? What’s wrong with what you currently have? You don’t need a facility designed by Frank Lloyd Wright. In my opinion, if you have the necessary equipment, personnel and training, you should be able to provide adequate services from a barn. You need a new training facility? Why? What’s wrong with the old Oxnard High School? There was no detailed explanation as to the deficiencies with the existing facility, just that a new one is needed – or wanted. Just what is hampering successful training at the existing facility? Call volumes outstripping residential growth? There is no proof of this – just a statement. The slides show response compliance with the standards and even with continual improvements. Where’s the issue? Hasn’t Public Safety eaten a large percentage of available resources already?
3 / 3