1 Message to Public Works and Transportation Committee
Regarding: Agenda Item No. D.1. on the April 14, 2026, Meeting Agenda - Channel Islands Harbor Water Quality Implementation Plan Workshop
From: Channel Islands Neighborhood Council/Marine Advisory Committee Background
The harbor water quality was observably impacted following the power plant closure in 2018. Since the pumping (average 1.5 billion gallons per month) stopped, the canal drains into the harbor instead of into the ocean. Effectively the canal flow was reversed, and the tidal flow pulls the canal water into the Harbor. Therefore, the water quality remediation effort must consider both the Canal and the Harbor.
The staff report indicates that the four waterways’ districts, Harbour Island WAD-Zone 2, Seabridge CFD, Westport CFD and Mandalay Bay WAD-Zone 1, are required to fund costs associated with maintaining and managing the Harbor and its water quality. Clearly, these four communities would not be responsible for the entire Harbor or the quality of the water in the whole Harbor. A more detailed review of the situation would identify the following:
1) Harbour Islands district has been at the maximum tax for several years. Even basic services, such as landscaping, have been decreased. In short, there are no funds available from this district.
2) The Westport and Seabridge formation documents included a planned shallow bay beach in Seabridge. The water quality remediation in the formation documents addressed elevated bacteria as that was a concern for the beach. The bacterial remediation in the formation documents focused on increased circulation from pumps located in Seabridge. The beach was not developed and the remediation of bacteria at that beach is mute. Moreover, there is no mention of responsibility for pesticides, herbicides, nutrients, or any other pollutants which would be the responsibility of Westport or Seabridge.
3) Mandalay Bay was developed long before there was any significant discussion around the power plant closure. Therefore, there is nothing in the formation documents for this situation. In addition, the formation document indicates that the district would only be responsible for water quality conditions attributed to the Mandalay Bay district. There has been no established data to support that the pollutants are attributable to Mandalay Bay.
Fundamentally, the parties responsible for pollutants entering the canal and harbor should be responsible for the necessary remediation funding.
2 / 25
2 Volunteers collected samples and the Water Board listed the Harbor and Edison Canal impaired for pesticides and a metal. Bacteria was included but not new since the plant closure. Craftwater Engineering was engaged to develop a plan to remediate the water quality. The workshop is a discussion of the Phase 1 projects recommended by City Staff.
The Craftwater Report identified four Contaminants of Concern:
Concern Category Reason Potential Sources
Bifenthrin Pesticide Toxicity to Wildlife Agricultural/landscape runoff Permethrin Pesticide Toxicity to Wildlife Agricultural/landscape runoff Copper Metals Toxicity to Wildlife Urban runoff/anti fouling, boat paint, and aerial deposition
Low
Dissolved
Oxygen
Eutrophic
Conditions
Water Quality Indicator Poor Mixing/Circulation
Regarding the low dissolved oxygen, we believe that the potential source would be better described as nutrients from agricultural/landscaping sources. Staff include this comment later in the report.
It is also important to understand that while there are probably hundreds of drains into the canal and harbor, we believe that there are five very large drains that collectively have the highest impact on water quality. It is also important to note that all the drains will have some urban runoff and some agricultural/landscaping runoff. However, the area around the drains provides some insight into the type of runoff. The five major drains include:
• Oxnard West and Hemlock – primarily urban runoff
• Doris, Fifth St, and Wooley – primarily agricultural runoff We very much appreciate the efforts of the City Staff to address this unique and complex issue. Specifically, we appreciate Special Districts and Public Works contributions. The effort has been on-going since 2018 and will continue for many more years. We are pleased to collaborate with the city and volunteer our time to help with the effort and reduce the cost to the city.
Comments
Our view is that there are three broad approaches to addressing the harbor water quality issue:
1. Prevention – Also called Source Control, keeping the pollutants from entering the water.
3 / 25
3 2. Mitigation – Reducing the impact of the pollutants after they enter the water primarily through dilution.
3. Avoidance – Restoring historic drainage patterns to keep agricultural pollutants from entering the harbor.
It is important to note that, all other things being equal, Prevention is preferable to the other two approaches and Mitigation is preferable to Avoidance.
The Craftwater Plan identifies three categories in the Phase 1 Plan:
1. Non-Structural – Efforts that do not involve construction. For example, outreach to agricultural stakeholders.
2. Structural – Building or installing assets that address water quality. For example, filters on the drains.
3. Receiving Waters – Restoring historic drainage patterns and/or improving circulation. For example, opening a new canal to the ocean to drain harbor or canal water.
Applying the “Balanced Approach” and “Balanced and Focused Approach” to the ten recommended projects that used the Balanced Approach recommended in the staff report result in similar but not identical conclusions.
Listing the projects by the Study Categories, we would support the following efforts because they focus on the more harmful and frequent contaminants in line with the Balanced and Focused Approach and with consideration for projects that may help with future regulatory approval:
Category Strategy/Project Cost Comment
Non-
Structural
Pesticide Source Control
– Agricultural
Coordination
$50,000 Addresses contaminants of
concern
Non-
Structural
Trash Reduction –
Mechanical Filtration
$100,000 May help with regulatory
approval/good to do even
though not addressing
contaminants of concern
Structural Agricultural Runoff
Treatment Pilot
$75,000 Addresses contaminants of
concern
Monitoring Post Implementation
Monitoring
$50,000
Annually
Suggest Pre and Post
Monitoring as an essential
element to measure progress
Funding Funding from Grants $75,000 Essential Effort
4 / 25
4 There are some strategies/projects that we recommend should be deferred or rejected as follows:
Category Strategy/Project Cost Comment
Non-
Structural
Street Sweeping and
Catch Basin Cleaning
$100,000 Defer-Already performed and
does not directly address
contaminants of concern
Non-
Structural
Illicit Discharge
Detection and
Elimination
$50,000 Reject-To some extent there
are existing procedures for
this situation and likely this is
not frequently occurring
Structural Wilson Park Infiltration $100,000 Defer-Distance from harbor and not likely to address
significant volumes of
contaminants of concern
Structural Oliviera Plaza parking lot
Infiltration
$150,000 Defer-While it would help
with the pollutants entering
the Oxnard West drain,
locating filtration to cover a
larger area would be more
beneficial than just a parking
lot
The remaining project is included in the Receiving Water Category. It is the Passive Edison Canal Connection project. The Receiving Water Category, an Avoidance approach, was added to address concerns from MAC. We appreciate the effort to collaborate on this project.
However, we have serious concerns. The Passive Edison Canal Connection entails opening the north end of the canal to the ocean. The theory is that it will increase the flow of ocean water through the canal thus flushing away the pollutants. However, there is a prevailing southerly current along the Oxnard coast. Simply opening the north end of the canal will produce a SOUTHERLY flow through the Edison Canal which will INCREASE the flow of pollutants from the canal into the harbor. It is unknown if the increased flushing will be enough to offset the added pollutant load. In addition, the pollutants would have to flow about four miles to get to the mouth of the harbor. Also, it is likely that expensive dredging will be required like the current efforts at the mouth of the Harbor. Therefore, we do not recommend approval for this project.
5 / 25
5 It is important to consider that the Elimination Approach would address all pollutants in the water and would be the ‘last ditch’ approach if prevention and mitigation approaches proved to be unsuccessful. Therefore, it would be prudent to evaluate what would be the best project for this purpose.
A less risky and less costly approach may be a pumping option that would recreate the NORTHERLY flow of water in the canal that was produced by the pumps at the Mandalay Generating Station. This northerly flow prevented the canal runoff from draining into the harbor, producing clear water conditions for 60 years before the pumps were shut down.
The pumps operated only intermittently during the last few years before shutdown and the harbor water quality was still clear. All that is required to prevent the flow of pollutants into the harbor is that the outflow at the north end of the canal be greater than the total flow rate coming into the canal. We estimate that a continuous pump flow of as low as three thousand gallons per minute (4.3 million gallons per day) would be sufficient. Coastal Commission approval is possible, given that they already approved the Ventura Water Pure Outfall Project just three years ago. And we believe that Coastal Commission staff would be open to this strategy if the overall water quality program included other source control measures that are included elsewhere in this study.
A pilot project to install a small pump at the north end of the canal has a far higher chance of success than opening the north end of the canal. The cost estimate is at least an order of magnitude lower than the $82 million for Craftwater's recommended Passive Edison Canal Connection project. Once installed and operating for a few months we would know if this approach works and is worth proceeding with a permanent solution. Or at least know that we have viable option should the prevention and mitigation approaches turn out to be inadequate.
We request the committee request that the staff revisit the Passive Edison Canal Connection Project considering the above and any additional relevant information. We are happy to collaborate with staff on this critical project.
Summary
We appreciate the efforts of the Special Districts and public works staff on this complicated issue. We appreciate the support of City Counsel who have appropriated $1.3 million to fund harbor water quality efforts.
We submit an alternate phase 1 prioritization – Balanced and Focused methodology.
Based on that methodology, we support five projects for inclusion in Phase 1. We also generally support three projects for future phases depending on what we learn during Phase 1. We do not support one project. And we request that the passive Edison Canal 6 / 25
6 Connection project be replaced by a pilot pumping project. We recognize that any of the Receiving Water Strategies would have high financial and regulatory hurdles to clear.
However, the pumping effort is the only project that has a history of proven success. For that reason, we believe that it must be considered.
We are happy to meet with you and to address any questions or concerns that you may have.
As always, we appreciate your efforts to make Oxnard even better! Your Dedicated Volunteers,
Channel Island Neighborhood Council
Marine Advisory Committee
7 / 25
Subject: Harbor Water Quality Workshop, 14 April 2026
From: 'jon schwalbach' via City Clerk <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Date Sent: Monday, April 13, 2026 10:26:25 AM GMT-07:00 Date Received: Monday, April 13, 2026 10:26:29 AM GMT-07:00 Dear Oxnard City Council and Staff,
I write to express concerns about the proposed allocation of $250,000 for study of receiving water mitigation strategy: Passive Edison Canal Connection (p. 33 of the Implementation Plan Presentation). These same funds could be better spent investigating and perhaps even piloting a low-flow option of pumping out the north end of the Edison Canal. The cessation of this activity, after all, is what caused our increase in harbor contaminants in the first place. More details on this alternative mitigation have been supplied by MAC members previously so I will not repeat them here, but only note that the Craftwater evaluation focused only on residence time as a metric, missing the point of removing contaminants from the canal (the main source of introduction to the harbor).
The passive canal connection is rife with issues that will render it a non-starter, even without a study. As a geologist, I understand the volumes of sediment introduced to the coast by the Santa Clara River, and the processes that distribute the sediments along the shore. The sand trapped at the Channel Islands Harbor is periodically pumped south to nourish the Port Hueneme beaches. Interrupting that system with another coastal structure would result in many issues that would require costly and recurrent remediation.
I urge you to reconsider the allocation of those funds, and support the MAC position to further investigate the limited pumping option as the most reasonable receiving water mitigation strategy.
Sincerely,
Jon R. Schwalbach, Ph.D.
Geoscience Consultant
Oxnard, CA
Exported using Save Emails as PDF by cloudHQ
8 / 25
Subject: Public Works and Transportation Committee Comments for April 14, 2026 Meeting From: "
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Date Sent: Monday, April 13, 2026 4:04:42 PM GMT-07:00
Date Received: Monday, April 13, 2026 4:04:45 PM GMT-07:00 Dear City Clerk and Public Works & Transportation Committee Members, I am a resident of the Channel Islands neighborhood and I strongly support the written public comments submitted by the Channel Islands Neighborhood Council Marine Advisory Committee (CINC/MAC)regarding Agenda Item D.1. on the April 14, 2026 meeting agenda.
The CINC/MAC volunteers have worked on this harbor water quality issue since 2018 and have provided a thoughtful, balanced, and practical set of recommendations. I particularly support their Balanced and Focused Approach, which prioritizes:
• Prevention and source control, especially coordination with agricultural stakeholders and treatment of agricultural runoff (the biggest contributors of pesticides like bifenthrin and permethrin)
• Smart, cost-effective Phase 1 projects such as the Agricultural Runoff Treatment Pilot, Pesticide Source Control, Trash Reduction, Monitoring, and Grant Funding • Replacing the risky and expensive Passive Edison Canal Connection project with a low-cost pilot pumping project at the north end of the canal to restore the historic northerly flow that kept the harbor clear for decades
I urge the Committee to adopt the CINC/MAC recommendations and ask staff to seriously evaluate the pilot pumping alternative before moving forward with the Passive Canal project.
Thank you for your work on this important issue and for protecting the water quality of our Channel Islands Harbor.
Sincerely,
Alan Glen
Exported using Save Emails as PDF by cloudHQ
9 / 25
Subject: Agenda Item D.1. Channel Islands Harbor Water Quality Implementation Plan From: 'Mark Wolfe' via City Clerk <[email protected]> To: [email protected]
Date Sent: Monday, April 13, 2026 7:21:25 PM GMT-07:00
Date Received: Monday, April 13, 2026 7:21:42 PM GMT-07:00 I support the public comments submitted by the Channel Islands Neighborhood Council Marine Advisory Committee regarding the Harbor Water Quality Plan. Please prioritize source control, agricultural runoff treatment, and consider the pilot pumping option instead of the Passive Edison Canal Connection.
Sincerely,
Mark Wolfe
Exported using Save Emails as PDF by cloudHQ
10 / 25
Subject: Agenda Item D.1. Channel Islands Harbor Water Quality Implementation Plan From: "'Eugenio (Gene) Sanchez (CHILEMAR Inc.)' via City Clerk" <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Date Sent: Monday, April 13, 2026 7:34:24 PM GMT-07:00
Date Received: Monday, April 13, 2026 7:34:30 PM GMT-07:00 Dear City Clerk and Public Works & Transportation Committee Members, I am a resident of the Channel Islands neighborhood, and I strongly support the written public comments submitted by the Channel Islands Neighborhood Council Marine Advisory Committee (CINC/MAC) regarding Agenda Item D.1. on the April 14, 2026 meeting agenda.
The CINC/MAC volunteers have worked on this harbor water quality issue since 2018 and have provided a thoughtful, balanced, and practical set of recommendations. I particularly support their Balanced and Focused Approach, which prioritizes:
Prevention and source control, especially coordination with agricultural stakeholders and treatment of agricultural runoff (the biggest contributors of pesticides like bifenthrin and permethrin)
Smart, cost-effective Phase 1 projects such as the Agricultural Runoff Treatment Pilot, Pesticide Source Control, Trash Reduction, Monitoring, and Grant Funding Replacing the risky and expensive Passive Edison Canal Connection project with a low-cost pilot pumping project at the north end of the canal to restore the historic northerly flow that kept the harbor clear for decades
I urge the Committee to adopt the CINC/MAC recommendations and ask staff to seriously evaluate the pilot pumping alternative before moving forward with the Passive Canal project.
Thank you for your work on this important issue and for protecting the water quality of our Channel Islands Harbor.
Sincerely,
Exported using Save Emails as PDF by cloudHQ
12 / 25
Subject: Agenda Item D.1. Channel Islands Harbor Water Quality Implementation Plan From: "Sheftz, Brent" <Brent
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Cc:
Date Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2026 7:56:14 AM GMT-07:00 Date Received: Tuesday, April 14, 2026 7:59:29 AM GMT-07:00
Dear City Clerk and Public Works & Transportation Committee Members, I am a resident of the Channel Islands neighborhood and I strongly support the written public comments submitted by the Channel Islands Neighborhood Council Marine Advisory Committee (CINC/MAC) regarding Agenda Item D.1. on the April 14, 2026 meeting agenda.
The CINC/MAC volunteers have worked on this harbor water quality issue since 2018 and have provided a thoughtful, balanced, and practical set of recommendations. I particularly support their Balanced and Focused Approach, which prioritizes:
Prevention and source control, especially coordination with agricultural stakeholders and treatment of agricultural runoff (the biggest contributors of pesticides like bifenthrin and permethrin)
Smart, cost-effective Phase 1 projects such as the Agricultural Runoff Treatment Pilot, Pesticide Source Control, Trash Reduction, Monitoring, and Grant Funding
Replacing the risky and expensive Passive Edison Canal Connection project with a low-cost pilot pumping project at the north end of the canal to restore the historic northerly flow that kept the harbor clear for decades I urge the Committee to adopt the CINC/MAC recommendations and ask staff to seriously evaluate the pilot pumping alternative before moving forward with the Passive Canal project.
Thank you for your work on this important issue and for protecting the water quality of our Channel Islands Harbor.
Sincerely,
Brent & Linda Sheftz
Exported using Save Emails as PDF by cloudHQ
17 / 25
CLICK HERE TO READ ONLINE
Exported using Save Emails as PDF by cloudHQ
18 / 25
Subject: Agenda Item D.1. Channel Islands Harbor Water Quality Implementation Plan From: Mark Weinberg
To: [email protected]
Date Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2026 8:22:55 AM GMT-07:00 Date Received: Tuesday, April 14, 2026 8:26:28 AM GMT-07:00 Dear City Clerk and Public Works & Transportation Committee Members, I am a resident of the Channel Islands neighborhood and I strongly support the written public comments submitted by the Channel Islands Neighborhood Council Marine Advisory Committee (CINC/MAC) regarding Agenda Item D.1. on the April 14, 2026 meeting agenda.
Exported using Save Emails as PDF by cloudHQ
20 / 25
The CINC/MAC volunteers have worked on this harbor water quality issue since 2018 and have provided a thoughtful, balanced, and practical set of recommendations. I particularly support their Balanced and Focused Approach, which prioritizes:
Prevention and source control, especially coordination with agricultural stakeholders and treatment of agricultural runoff (the biggest contributors of pesticides like bifenthrin and permethrin)
Smart, cost-effective Phase 1 projects such as the Agricultural Runoff Treatment Pilot, Pesticide Source Control, Trash Reduction, Monitoring, and Grant Funding Replacing the risky and expensive Passive Edison Canal Connection project with a low- cost pilot pumping project at the north end of the canal to restore the historic northerly flow that kept the harbor clear for decades
I urge the Committee to adopt the CINC/MAC recommendations and ask staff to seriously evaluate the pilot pumping alternative before moving forward with the Passive Canal project.
Thank you for your work on this important issue and for protecting the water quality of our Channel Islands Harbor.
Sincerely,
Mark and Inge Weinberg
035
Exported using Save Emails as PDF by cloudHQ
21 / 25
Subject: Agenda Item D.1. Channel Islands Harbor Water Quality Implementation Plan From: William Clark <[email protected]>
To: Public Works and Transportation Committee <[email protected]> Date Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2026 8:46:50 AM GMT-07:00 Date Received: Tuesday, April 14, 2026 8:46:54 AM GMT-07:00 Dear City Clerk and Public Works & Transportation Committee Members, As president of the Channel Islands Waterways Homeowners Association, I strongly support the written public comments submitted by the Channel Islands Neighborhood Council Marine Advisory Committee (CINC/MAC) regarding Agenda Item D.1. on the April 14, 2026 meeting agenda.
The CINC/MAC volunteers have worked on this harbor water quality issue since 2018 and have provided a thoughtful, balanced, and practical set of recommendations. I particularly support their Balanced and Focused Approach, which prioritizes:
Prevention and source control, especially coordination with agricultural stakeholders and treatment of agricultural runoff (the biggest contributors of pesticides like bifenthrin and permethrin)
Smart, cost-effective Phase 1 projects such as the Agricultural Runoff Treatment Pilot, Pesticide Source Control, Trash Reduction, Monitoring, and Grant Funding Replacing the risky and expensive Passive Edison Canal Connection project with a low-cost pilot pumping project at the north end of the canal to restore the historic northerly flow that kept the harbor clear for decades
I urge the Committee to adopt the CINC/MAC recommendations and ask staff to seriously evaluate the pilot pumping alternative before moving forward with the Passive Canal project.
Thank you for your work on this important issue and for protecting the water quality of our Channel Islands Harbor.
Sincerely,
Bill Clark
President of CIWHOA
Exported using Save Emails as PDF by cloudHQ
23 / 25
Subject: Fwd: Agenda Item D.1. Channel Islands Harbor Water Quality Implementation Plan From: "Lopez, Luly" <[email protected]>
To: Dee Lai <[email protected]>
Date Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2026 4:29:52 PM GMT-07:00 Date Received: Tuesday, April 14, 2026 4:30:04 PM GMT-07:00 ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Scott Von Lanken
Date: Tue, Apr 14, 2026 at 9:41 AM
Subject: Agenda Item D.1. Channel Islands Harbor Water Quality Implementation Plan To: [email protected]
Dear City Clerk and Public Works & Transportation Committee Members, I am a resident of the Channel Islands neighborhood and I strongly support the written public comments submitted by the Channel Islands Neighborhood Council Marine Advisory Committee (CINC/MAC) regarding Agenda Item D.1. on the April 14, 2026 meeting agenda.
The CINC/MAC volunteers have worked on this harbor water quality issue since 2018 and have provided a thoughtful, balanced, and practical set of recommendations. I particularly support their Balanced and Focused Approach, which prioritizes:
Prevention and source control, especially coordination with agricultural stakeholders and treatment of agricultural runoff (the biggest contributors of pesticides like bifenthrin and permethrin)
Smart, cost-effective Phase 1 projects such as the Agricultural Runoff Treatment Pilot, Pesticide Source Control, Trash Reduction, Monitoring, and Grant Funding Replacing the risky and expensive Passive Edison Canal Connection project with a low-cost pilot pumping project at the north end of the canal to restore the historic northerly flow that kept the harbor clear for decades
I urge the Committee to adopt the CINC/MAC recommendations and ask staff to seriously evaluate the pilot pumping alternative before moving forward with the Passive Canal project.
Thank you for your work on this important issue and for protecting the water quality of our Channel Islands Harbor.
Sincerely,
Scott Von Lanken
Exported using Save Emails as PDF by cloudHQ
1 / 3
/ 3
Subject: Fwd: Canal
From: "Lopez, Luly" <[email protected]>
To: Dee Lai <[email protected]>
Date Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2026 4:30:09 PM GMT-07:00 Date Received: Tuesday, April 14, 2026 4:30:21 PM GMT-07:00 ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: J Vreeke
Date: Mon, Apr 13, 2026 at 7:56 PM
Subject: Canal
To: [email protected]
I support the public comments submitted by the Channel Islands Neighborhood Council Marine Advisory Committee regarding the Harbor Water Quality Plan. Please prioritize source control, agricultural runoff treatment, and consider the pilot pumping option instead of the Passive Edison Canal Connection.
Sincerely,
Jim Vreeke
Exported using Save Emails as PDF by cloudHQ
3 / 3