277
Ordinance No. __________ (Planning and Zoning Permit No. 24-570-02) City Council Date: June 30, 2026 Page 3 of 5 served by existing or planned utilities, transportation, and service systems. The proposed Zone Change
does
not
represent
a
significant
change
in
the
2030
General
Plan
and
Zoning
Ordinance
nor
does
it
result
in
significant
new
environmental
impacts
that
have
not
been
previously
evaluated.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OXNARD DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Recitals above are true and correct and incorporated herein by this reference.
SECTION 2. The City Council finds that the Zone Change is internally consistent with all
other
provisions
of
the
City
of
Oxnard
2030
General
Plan.
SECTION 3. The City Council finds that the Zone Change will not be detrimental to the public
interest,
health,
safety,
convenience,
or
welfare
of
the
City.
SECTION 4. The City Council finds that the project site associated with the Zone Change
is
physically
suitable
in
terms
of
design,
location,
operating
characteristics,
shape,
size,
topography,
and
the
provision
of
public
and
emergency
vehicle
access,
and
public
services
and
utilities
and
is
served
by
highways
and
streets
adequate
in
width
and
improvement
to
carry
the
kind
and
quantity
of
traffic
the
proposed
use
would
likely
generate,
to
ensure
that
the
proposed
use(s)
and/or
development
will
not
endanger,
jeopardize,
or
otherwise
constitute
a
hazard
to
the
property
or
improvements
in
the
vicinity
in
which
the
property
is
located.
SECTION 5. The City Council determines that the proposed Zone Change from Residential
Multiple
Family
(R-2)
zone
to
Community
Reserve
(CR)
Zone
is
the
best
use
for
the
subject
project
site.
SECTION 6. The City Council determines that the Zone Change is in the best interests and
welfare
of
the
City
and
its
residents.
SECTION 7. In approving this ordinance for the Zone Change, the Planning Commission,
in
accordance
with
the
California
Environmental
Quality
Act
(CEQA),
determines
that
the
Project
will
not
have
a
significant
impact
on
the
environment
as
identified
and
discussed
in
MND
No.
25-03.
Pursuant
to
the
California
Environmental
Quality
Act
(CEQA)
Section
15060,
the
City
of
Oxnard
as
the
Lead
Agency,
has
prepared
an
IS/MND
(State
Clearinghouse
No.
2025101167)
in
accordance
with
the
requirements
of
the
California
Environmental
Quality
Act
(CEQA,
Public
resources
Code
§
21000,
et
seq.),
the
regulations
promulgated
thereunder
(14
California
Code
of
Regulations,
§15000,
et
seq.,
CEQA
Guidelines),
and
the
City’s
Environmental
Review
Guidelines.
The
IS/MND
identifies
and
discusses
potential
impacts,
mitigation
measures,
and
monitoring
requirements.
SECTION 8. The City Council Approve Planning and Zoning Permit No. 24-570-02 (Prezoning)
is
approved,
as
shown
on
the
map
attached
hereto
as
Exhibit
1 and
incorporated
herein
by
reference.
278
Ordinance No. __________ (Planning and Zoning Permit No. 24-570-02) City Council Date: June 30, 2026 Page 4 of 5 SECTION 9. Except as expressly amended herein, the City’s Zoning Ordinance Map shall
remain
in
full
force
and
effect
and
shall
apply
to
the
property
affected
by
this
Ordinance.
SECTION 10. Pursuant to Government Code Section 36933(c)(1), the City Attorney was designated
to
prepare,
and
the
City
Clerk
published,
a
summary
of
this
Ordinance,
and
a
certified
copy
the
Ordinance
was
posted
in
the
Office
of
the
City
Clerk
a
minimum
of
five
days
before
the
City
Council’s
adoption
of
the
Ordinance.
SECTION 11. The City Clerk shall certify as to the adoption of this ordinance and shall cause
the
summary
thereof
to
be
published
within
fifteen
(15)
days
of
the
adoption
and
shall
post
a
certified
copy
of
this
ordinance,
including
the
vote
for
and
against
the
same,
in
the
office
of
the
City
Clerk,
in
accordance
with
Government
Code
Section
36933.
Ordinance
No.
_____
was
first
read
on
June
30,
2026,
and
finally
adopted
on________
to
become
effective
thirty
days
thereafter.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 30th day of June 2026, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
_____________________________
Luis A. Mc Arthur, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: _______________________________ ___________________________ Lourdes A. López, City Clerk Stephen M. Fischer, City Attorney Exhibit: Exhibit 1: Proposed Zoning Map EXHIBIT 1
279
Ordinance No. __________ (Planning and Zoning Permit No. 24-570-02) City Council Date: June 30, 2026 Page 5 of 5
280
RESOLUTION NO. _____________ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OXNARD
APPROVING
PLANNING
AND
ZONING
PERMIT
NO.
24-620-03
(GENERAL
PLAN
AMENDMENT)
TO
AMEND
THE
LAND
USE
MAP
OF
THE
GENERAL
PLAN
TO
CHANGE
THE
LAND
USE
DESIGNATION
OF
A
0.66 PARCEL
FROM
RESIDENTIAL
LOW
MEDIUM
(RLM)
TO
PUBLIC
SEMI
PUBLIC
(PSP)
TO
ALLOW
FOR
THE
CONSTRUCTION
OF
A
NEW
TWO-STORY
FIRE
STATION
(FIRE
STATION
NO.
3)
AND
RELATED
IMPROVEMENTS
LOCATED
ON
THE
EXISTING
0.66-ACRE
PROPERTY
AT
150
HILL
STREET
(APN:
203-0-120-130).
FILED
BY
CITY
OF
OXNARD
PUBLIC
WORKS
DEPARTMENT
(THE
“APPLICANT”)
ON
BEHALF
OF
THE
CITY
OF
OXNARD,
LLC,
214
S.
C
STREET,
OXNARD,
CALIFORNIA
93030
(THE
“PROPERTY
OWNER”).
WHEREAS, on October 7, 2024, City of Oxnard Public Works Department (the “Applicant”
and/or
“Permittee”),
submitted
a
request
to
approve
Planning
and
Zoning
Permit
No.
24-620-03
(General
Plan
Amendment),
to
amend
the
land
use
map
of
the
General
Plan
to
change
the
land
use
designation
of
a
0.66 acre
parcel
from
residential
low
medium
(RLM)
to
Public
Semi
Public
(PSP),
as
identified
in
Exhibit
1,
to
allow
for
the
demolition
an
existing
one-story
fire
station
(Oxnard
Fire
Station
No.
3)
and
the
construction
of
a
new
two-story
fire
station
building
(Fire
Station
No.
3),
reduced
front
yard/setbacks,
reduced
side
yards/setbacks,
increased
lot
coverage,
and
increased
building
height,
use
of
tandem
parking,
exterior
building
signage,
locating
a
trash
enclosure
near
the
property
line,
and
related
improvements
located
on
the
existing
0.66-acre
property
at
150
Hill
Street
(“the
Project”);
and
WHEREAS, on October 7, 2024, the “applicant” also filed the following entitlement applications
with
the
City
of
Oxnard,
Zone
Change
(PZ
24-570-02),
Special
Use
Permit
(PZ
24-500-07),
Zone
Text
Amendment
(24-580-03),
and
Initial
Study/Mitigated
Negative
Declaration
(IS/MND)
No.
25-03
;
and
WHEREAS, the City of Oxnard as the Lead Agency, has prepared Final IS/MND 25-03 in
accordance
with
the
requirements
of
the
California
Environmental
Quality
Act
(CEQA,
Public
resources
Code
§
21000,
et
seq.),
the
regulations
promulgated
thereunder
(14
California
Code
of
Regulations,
§15000,
et
seq.,
CEQA
Guidelines),
and
the
City’s
Environmental
Review
Guidelines;
and
WHEREAS, pursuant to provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and CEQA
Guidelines,
Section
15063,
and
following
an
Initial
Study
and
environmental
assessment
of
possible
adverse
impacts,
the
project
will
not
have
a
significant
effect
on
the
environment
because
of
the
inclusion
of
certain
mitigation
measures
for
which
lessened
potential
adverse
impacts
to
a
level
of
less
than
significant.
Therefore,
the
Planning
Division
has
prepared
a
Mitigated
Negative
Declaration
with
mitigation
measures
and
monitoring
program
in
accordance
with
the
provisions
of
CEQA,
including,
without
limitation
CEQA
Guidelines
Sections
15070,
15071,
15072,
and
15073,
which
have
been
incorporated
as
conditions;
and
281
Resolution No. __________ (Planning and Zoning Permit No. 24-620-03 City Council Date: June 30, 2026 Page 2 of 6 WHEREAS, a Notice of Intent to Adopt an Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration
(IS/MND)
(MND
No.
25-03)
for
the
Project
was
published
and
posted
on
October
27,
2025,
at
the
State
Office
of
Land
Use
and
Climate
Innovation
(LCI)
website
and
at
the
Ventura
County
Recorder’s
Office
pursuant
to
CEQA
Guidelines
Sections
15072
and
15073;
and
WHEREAS, the public comment period on the Draft IS/MND ran for thirty (30) days commencing
on
October
27,
2025
and
ending
on
November
26,
2025;
and
WHEREAS, after the close of the comment period on the IS/MND, the IS/MND was modified
as
set
forth
in
Chapter
2 Response
to
Comments
of
the
Final
IS/MND
document;
and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the
State
CEQA
Guidelines,
the
City
has
prepared
Final
IS/MND
No.
25-03
containing
all
comments
received
on
the
Draft
IS/MND
written
responses
to
all
substantive
comments,
and
necessary
changes
to
the
text
of
the
Draft
IS/MND
No.
25-03;
and
WHEREAS, on April 2, 2026, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing
to
consider
the
Applicant’s
request
to
approve
Planning
and
Zoning
Permit
No.
24-620-03
(General
Plan
Amendment);
and
WHEREAS, the Commission considered Final IS/MND No. 25-03 prior to taking action on
the
Project;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission concurrently recommended the City Council approve
a
Zone
Change
for
the
project
site
(PZ
24-570-02);
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission concurrently recommended the City Council approve
a
Zone
Text
Amendment
(PZ
24-580-03);
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission approved a Special Use Permit for the project site (PZ
24-500-07);
and
WHEREAS, on June 30, 2026, the City Council of the City of Oxnard conducted a duly noticed
public
hearing
to
consider
Planning
and
Zoning
Permit
No.
24-620-03
(General
Plan
Amendment)
in
accordance
with
the
City’s
2030
General
Plan
and
Oxnard
City
Code;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds after due study and deliberation that the public interest
and
general
welfare
require
the
approval
of
a
General
Plan
Amendment
to
amend
the
land
use
map
of
the
General
Plan
to
change
the
land
use
designation
of
a
0.66 acre
parcel
from
residential
low
medium
(RLM)
to
Public
Semi
Public
(PSP)
as
identified
in
Exhibit
1;
and
282
Resolution No. __________ (Planning and Zoning Permit No. 24-620-03 City Council Date: June 30, 2026 Page 3 of 6 WHEREAS, the pursuit of the General Plan Amendment is a reasonable exercise of the City’s
police
powers
to
ensure
the
continued
health,
safety,
and
welfare
of
the
public
by
providing
housing
opportunities
for
the
residents
of
the
City
of
Oxnard;
and
WHEREAS, the proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the policies and directives
in
the
2030
General
Plan
and
Zoning
Ordinance
to
allow
development
to
those
areas
that
can
be
served
by
existing
or
planned
utilities,
transportation,
and
service
systems.
The
proposed
General
Plan
Amendment
does
not
represent
a
significant
change
in
the
2030
General
Plan
and
Zoning
Ordinance
nor
does
it
result
in
significant
new
environmental
impacts
that
have
not
been
previously
evaluated;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds after due study and deliberation that the applicant agrees
with
the
necessity
of
and
accepts
all
elements,
and
requirements
of
this
Resolution
as
being
a
reasonable
manner
of
preserving,
protecting,
providing
for,
and
fostering
the
health,
safety,
and
welfare
of
the
citizenry
in
general
and
the
persons
who
work,
visit
or
live
in
this
development
in
particular.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Oxnard hereby
approves
a
General
Plan
Amendment
(PZ
24-620-03),
which
amends
the
City’s
2030
General
Plan
Land
Use
Map,
in
accordance
with
Exhibit
1 attached
hereto
and
made
a
part
of
this
Resolution.
SECTION 1. The Recitals above are true and correct and incorporated herein by this reference.
SECTION 2. The City Council finds that the General Plan Amendment is internally consistent
with
all
other
provisions
of
the
City
of
Oxnard
2030
General
Plan
SECTION 3. The City Council finds that the General Plan Amendment will not be detrimental
to
the
public
interest,
health,
safety,
convenience,
or
welfare
of
the
City.
SECTION 4. The City Council finds that the project site associated with the General Plan
Amendment
is
physically
suitable
in
terms
of
design,
location,
operating
characteristics,
shape,
size,
topography,
and
the
provision
of
public
and
emergency
vehicle
access,
and
public
services
and
utilities
and
is
served
by
highways
and
streets
adequate
in
width
and
improvement
to
carry
the
kind
and
quantity
of
traffic
the
proposed
use
would
likely
generate,
to
ensure
that
the
proposed
use(s)
and/or
development
will
not
endanger,
jeopardize,
or
otherwise
constitute
a
hazard
to
the
property
or
improvements
in
the
vicinity
in
which
the
property
is
located.
SECTION 5. The City Council determines that the proposed change in land use designation
as
identified
in
Exhibit
1 is
the
best
use
for
the
subject
project
site.
SECTION 6. The City Council determines that the General Plan Amendment is in the best
interests
and
welfare
of
the
City
and
its
residents.
283
Resolution No. __________ (Planning and Zoning Permit No. 24-620-03 City Council Date: June 30, 2026 Page 4 of 6 SECTION 7. In approving this Resolution for the General Plan Amendment, the City Council
finds
and
determines
that
the
Project
will
not
have
a
significant
impact
on
the
environment
as
identified
and
discussed
in
MND
No.
25-03.
Pursuant
to
the
California
Environmental
Quality
Act
(CEQA)
Section
15060,
the
City
of
Oxnard
as
the
Lead
Agency,
has
prepared
an
IS/MND
(State
Clearinghouse
No.
2025101167)
in
accordance
with
the
requirements
of
the
California
Environmental
Quality
Act
(CEQA,
Public
resources
Code
§
21000,
et
seq.),
the
regulations
promulgated
thereunder
(14
California
Code
of
Regulations,
§15000,
et
seq.,
CEQA
Guidelines),
and
the
City’s
Environmental
Review
Guidelines.
The
IS/MND
identifies
and
discusses
potential
impacts,
mitigation
measures,
and
monitoring
requirements. SECTION 8. The City Council approves Planning and Zoning Permit No. 15-620-03 (General
Plan
Amendment),
as
shown
on
the
maps
attached
hereto
as
Exhibit
A
and
incorporated
herein
by
reference.
SECTION 9. Except as expressly amended herein, the 2030 General Plan Land Use Map shall
remain
in
full
force
and
effect
and
shall
apply
to
the
property
affected
by
this
Resolution.
SECTION 10. The action of the Planning Commission is a recommendation which may not
be
appealed.
SECTION 11. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
284
Resolution No. __________ (Planning and Zoning Permit No. 24-620-03 City Council Date: June 30, 2026 Page 5 of 6 PASSED and ADOPTED this 30th day of June 2026, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
Luis A. Mc Arthur, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________ Lourdes A. L ó pez, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________ Stephen M. Fischer, City Attorney Exhibits: Exhibit 1: Proposed 2030 General Plan Land Use Designation Map EXHIBIT 1
285
Resolution No. __________ (Planning and Zoning Permit No. 24-620-03 City Council Date: June 30, 2026 Page 6 of 6
286
ORDINANCE NO. ____________ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING PLANNING AND ZONING
PERMIT
NO.
24-580-03
(ZONE
TEXT
AMENDMENT)
TO
APPROVE
AMENDMENTS
TO
THE
OXNARD
CITY
CODE
(OCC)
CHAPTER
16 §SEC.
16-264.
LOT
COVERAGE
TO
MODIFY
LOT
COVERAGE
ALLOWED
IN
THE
COMMUNITY
RESERVE
(C-R)
ZONE
TO
ALLOW
FOR
THE
CONSTRUCTION
OF
A
NEW
TWO-STORY
FIRE
STATION
AND
RELATED
IMPROVEMENTS
LOCATED
ON
THE
EXISTING
0.66-ACRE
PROPERTY
AT
150
HILL
STREET
(APN:
203-0-120-130).
WHEREAS, on October 7, 2024, City of Oxnard Public Works Department (the “Applicant”
and/or
“Permittee”)
submitted
a
request
to
approve
Planning
and
Zoning
Permit
No.
24-580-03
(Zone
Text
Amendment),
to
amend
chapter
16 of
the
Oxnard
city
code
pertaining
to
lot
coverage
allowance
in
the
community
reserve
zone
to
allow
for
the
demolition
an
existing
one-story
fire
station
(Oxnard
Fire
Station
No.
3)
and
the
construction
of
a
new
two-story
fire
station
building
(Fire
Station
No.
3),
reduced
front
yard/setbacks,
reduced
side
yards/setbacks,
increased
lot
coverage,
and
increased
building
height,
use
of
tandem
parking,
exterior
building
signage,
locating
a
trash
enclosure
near
the
property
line,
and
related
improvements
located
on
the
existing
0.66-acre
property
at
150
Hill
Street
(“the
Project”);
and
WHEREAS, on October 7, 2024, the “applicant” also filed the following entitlement applications
with
the
City
of
Oxnard,
Special
Use
Permit
(PZ
24-500-07),
Zone
Change
(PZ
24-570-02),
General
Plan
Amendment
(PZ
24-620-03),
and
Initial
Study/Mitigated
Negative
Declaration
(IS/MND)
No.
25-03;
and
WHEREAS, the City of Oxnard as the Lead Agency, has prepared Final IS/MND No. 25-03
in
accordance
with
the
requirements
of
the
California
Environmental
Quality
Act
(CEQA,
Public
resources
Code
§
21000,
et
seq.),
the
regulations
promulgated
thereunder
(14
California
Code
of
Regulations,
§15000,
et
seq.,
CEQA
Guidelines),
and
the
City’s
Environmental
Review
Guidelines;
and
WHEREAS, pursuant to provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and CEQA
Guidelines,
Section
15063,
and
following
an
Initial
Study
and
environmental
assessment
of
possible
adverse
impacts,
the
project
will
not
have
a
significant
effect
on
the
environment
because
of
the
inclusion
of
certain
mitigation
measures
for
which
lessened
potential
adverse
impacts
to
a
level
of
less
than
significant.
Therefore,
the
Planning
Division
has
prepared
a
Mitigated
Negative
Declaration
with
mitigation
measures
and
monitoring
program
in
accordance
with
the
provisions
of
CEQA,
including,
without
limitation
CEQA
Guidelines
Sections
15070,
15071,
15072,
and
15073,
which
have
been
incorporated
as
conditions;
and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Intent to Adopt an Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration
(IS/MND)
(MND
No.
25-03)
for
the
Project
was
published
and
posted
on
October
28,
2025,
at
the
State
Office
of
Land
Use
and
Climate
Innovation
(LCI)
website
and
at
the
Ventura
County
Recorder’s
Office
pursuant
to
CEQA
Guidelines
Sections
15072
and
15073;
and
287
Ordinance No. __________ (Planning and Zoning Permit No. 24-580-03) City Council Date: June 30, 2026 Page 2 of 5 WHEREAS, the public comment period on the Draft IS/MND ran for thirty (30) days commencing
on
October
27,
2025
and
ending
on
November
26,
2025;
and
WHEREAS, after the close of the comment period on the IS/MND, the IS/MND was modified
as
set
forth
in
Chapter
4 of
the
Response
to
Comment
document;
and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the
State
CEQA
Guidelines,
the
City
has
prepared
Final
IS/MND
No.
25-03
containing
all
comments
received
on
the
Draft
IS/MND
No.
25-03
written
responses
to
all
substantive
comments,
and
necessary
changes
to
the
text
of
the
Draft
IS/MND
25-03;
and
WHEREAS, the Commission considered Final IS/MND No. 25-03 prior to taking action on
the
Project;
and
WHEREAS, on April 2, 2026, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing
to
consider
the
Applicant’s
request
to
approve
Planning
and
Zoning
Permit
No.
24-580-03
(Zone
Text
Amendment)
to
amend
chapter
16 of
the
Oxnard
city
code
pertaining
to
lot
coverage
allowance
in
the
community
reserve
zone
to
allow
the
construction
of
a
new
two-story,
and
related
improvements,
in
accordance
with
Sections
16-575
through
16-590
(Zone
Change)
of
the
Oxnard
City
Code;
and
WHEREAS, on June 30, 2026, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing to
consider
the
Applicant’s
request
to
approve
Planning
and
Zoning
Permit
No.
24-580-03
(Zone
Text
Amendment)
to
amend
chapter
16 of
the
Oxnard
city
code
pertaining
to
lot
coverage
allowance
in
the
community
reserve
zone
to
allow
the
construction
of
a
new
two-story,
and
related
improvements,
in
accordance
with
Sections
16-575
through
16-590
(Zone
Change)
of
the
Oxnard
City
Code;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed zone text amendment would be a reasonable
exercise
of
the
City’s
police
powers
to
ensure
the
continued
health,
safety,
and
welfare
by
allowing
lot
coverage
to
exceed
25%
of
the
total
lot
area
for
projects
in
the
Community
Reserve
(CR)
zone
with
the
approval
of
a
Special
Use
Permit
(SUP);
and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed zone text amendment conforms to the
following
City
of
Oxnard
2030
General
Plan
Goals
and
Policies;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed ZTA is in the public interest and reflects
the
input
from
residents
and
stakeholders
in
the
community,
and
decision-makers.
There
are
no
changes
recommended
under
the
proposed
ZTA
that
would
reduce
or
compromise
existing
standards
that
protect
the
health,
safety
or
general
welfare
of
the
City;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds after due study and deliberation that the applicant agrees
with
the
necessity
of
and
accepts
all
elements,
requirements,
and
conditions
of
this
288
Ordinance No. __________ (Planning and Zoning Permit No. 24-580-03) City Council Date: June 30, 2026 Page 3 of 5 Resolution as being a reasonable manner of preserving, protecting, providing for, and fostering the
health,
safety,
and
welfare
of
the
citizenry
in
general
and
the
persons
who
work,
visit
or
live
in
this
development
in
particular.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OXNARD DOES ORDAIN
AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated herein
by
reference.
SECTION 2. The City Council finds that the Zone Text Amendment is internally consistent
with
all
other
provisions
of
the
City
of
Oxnard
2030
General
Plan.
SECTION 3. The City Council finds that the Zone Text Amendment will not be detrimental
to
the
public
interest,
health,
safety,
convenience,
or
welfare
of
the
City.
SECTION 4. The City Council determines that the Zone Text Amendment is in the best interests
and
welfare
of
the
City
and
its
residents.
SECTION 5. In approving this Ordinance for the Zone Text Amendment, the City Council,
in
accordance
with
the
California
Environmental
Quality
Act
(CEQA),
determines
that
the
Project
will
not
have
a
significant
impact
on
the
environment
as
identified
and
discussed
in
MND
No.
25-03.
Pursuant
to
the
California
Environmental
Quality
Act
(CEQA)
Section
15060,
the
City
of
Oxnard
as
the
Lead
Agency,
has
prepared
an
IS/MND
(State
Clearinghouse
No.
2025101167)
in
accordance
with
the
requirements
of
the
California
Environmental
Quality
Act
(CEQA,
Public
resources
Code
§
21000,
et
seq.),
the
regulations
promulgated
thereunder
(14
California
Code
of
Regulations,
§15000,
et
seq.,
CEQA
Guidelines),
and
the
City’s
Environmental
Review
Guidelines.
The
IS/MND
identifies
and
discusses
potential
impacts,
mitigation
measures,
and
monitoring
requirements.
SECTION 6. The City Council hereby approves Planning and Zoning Permit No. 24-580-03
(Zone
Text
Amendment),
attached
hereto
as
Exhibit
1 and
incorporated
herein
by
reference
as
recommended
by
the
Planning
Commission.
SECTION 7. Except as expressly amended herein, the Oxnard City Code shall remain in full
force
and
effect.
SECTION 8. Pursuant to Government Code Section 36933(c)(1), the City Attorney was designated
to
prepare,
and
the
City
Clerk
published,
a
summary
of
this
Ordinance,
and
a
certified
copy
the
Ordinance
was
posted
in
the
Office
of
the
City
Clerk
a
minimum
of
five
days
before
the
City
Council’s
adoption
of
the
Ordinance.
SECTION 9. The City Clerk shall certify as to the adoption of this ordinance and shall cause
the
summary
thereof
to
be
published
within
fifteen
(15)
days
of
the
adoption
and
shall
post
a
certified
copy
of
this
ordinance,
including
the
vote
for
and
against
the
same,
in
the
office
of
the
City
Clerk,
in
accordance
with
Government
Code
Section
36933.
Ordinance
No.
_________
was
289
Ordinance No. __________ (Planning and Zoning Permit No. 24-580-03) City Council Date: June 30, 2026 Page 4 of 5 first read on June 30, 2026, and finally adopted on _________________ to become effective thirty
days
thereafter.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 30th day of June 2026, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
_____________________________
Luis A. Mc Arthur, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: _______________________________ ___________________________ Lourdes A. López, City Clerk Stephen M. Fischer, City Attorney Exhibits: Exhibit 1: Proposed Zone Text Amendment
290
Ordinance No. __________ (Planning and Zoning Permit No. 24-580-03) City Council Date: June 30, 2026 Page 5 of 5 EXHIBIT 1 Zone Text Amendment To Allow Lot Coverage To Exceed 25% Subject To Approval
Of
A
Special
Use
Permit
Section 16-264. Lot Coverage: Section 16-264 of Chapter 16 of the Oxnard City Code is hereby amended
to
allow
a
lot
coverage
of
buildings
or
structures
to
exceed
25%
of
the
lot
area
subject
to
a
Special
Use
Permit
to
read
as
follows
(new
text
underlined
and
highlighted
in
yellow):
SEC. 16-264. LOT COVERAGE.
The total area of the parcel which may be covered by buildings or structures shall not exceed
25%
of
the
total
lot
area.
Additional
lot
coverage
may
permitted
on
approval
of
a
special use permit as provided in sections 16-530 to 16-553.
291
Fire Station No. 3
Planning & Zoning Permit Nos. 24-570-02 (Zone Change), 24-620-03 (General Plan Amendment), 24-580-03 (Zone T ext Amendment), and IS/MND No. 25-03 1 Joe Pearson II, AICP , Planning Manager
Community Development Department
City Council
June 30, 2026
292
Project Description
The project includes the following requests:
PZ 24-570-02 (Zone Change)
• T o change the zoning from R2 to CR.
PZ 24-620-03 (General Plan Amendment)
• T o the general plan land use designation from RLM to PSP .
PZ 24-580-03 (Zone T ext Amendment)
• T o allow lot coverage exceeding 25% with the approval of a SUP .
PZ 24-500-07 (Special Use Permit) (Approved by PC)
• T o demolish an existing one-story fire station (Oxnard Fire Station 3) and construct a new 2-story fire station on an existing 0.66-acre parcel. 2 293
Project Location
• Subject site: 150 Hill Street
• West of Saviers Road
• The property is currently
developed as Fire Station 3
3 294
Site Plan
4 Hill St
295
Floor Plan
5 First Floor Second Floor
296
Elevations
6 North Elevation
East Elevation
South Elevation West Elevation
297
Background
• As the oldest station in the City, the current site is no longer sufficient to meet the operational requirements of the Oxnard Fire Department (OFD). • The increased building size is needed to continue providing essential services to the City and plan for future needs. According to a Facility Assessment, the long-term priority for the existing fire station is to have, at minimum, three apparatus bays. • On April 2, 2026, the Planning Commission approved the SUP and recommended City Council approve the associated Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), GPA, ZC, and ZTA with a 7-0 vote to allow for the Project. With the Planning Commission’s approval of the SUP , the only remaining items needing action before the City Council are the GPA, ZC, and ZTA and CEQA determination. 7 298
General Plan Amendment
• Property currently designated as Residential Low Medium (RLM) • Intended for Low-rise apartments and detached and attached single-family residences. • Request for general plan amendment to Public /Semi Public land use designation:
• Allows for private, quasi-public, and public buildings and facilities owned by the City, County, State, Federal agencies, or other organizations that serve the general public such as fire stations. public/semi-public and open space uses including public utility structures and public schools, among others.
• Impact of general plan amendment:
• Will establish consistency for the fire station project site. • Allows for redevelopment of the site consistent with standards appropriate for the proposed use.
8 299
Zone Change
• Property currently zoned as Multiple Family Residential (R2) • Intended for low-density, multi-family dwellings, as well as emergency shelters for families, and supportive housing.
• Request for zone change to Community Reserve (CR) zone:
• Allows for a variety of public/semi-public and open space uses including public utility structures and public schools, among others.
• Impact of zone change:
• Will establish consistency for the fire station project site and adjacent parcels. • Allows for redevelopment of the site consistent with standards appropriate for the proposed use.
9 300
Zone Text Amendment
• Zone T ext Amendment to allow lot coverage to exceed the maximum lot coverage of 25% of the total lot area in the CR zone, subject to approval of a Special Use Permit.
• Amendment would apply City wide on any property within the CR zone. • Any increase above the standard would require PC approval. • Fire Station 3 proposes a lot coverage of 33.6%.
10 301
Environmental Review
• Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15060, the City of Oxnard as the Lead Agency, prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) in accordance with the requirements of CEQA (Public resources Code § 21000, et seq.), the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 California Code of Regulations, §15000, et seq., CEQA Guidelines), and the City’s Environmental Review Guidelines. • The IS/MND was available for public review from October 27, 2025, to November 26, 2025. • Comment Letters were received during public review period and are included in the Final Draft of the IS/MND, along with responses to each of the comments. • No substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on environment. • The IS/MND includes a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program that details the process to implement the required mitigation measures.
11 302
Public Notice
• Notice of City Council hearing was provided:
• Newspaper
• On-site posting; and
• Mailed to property owners within 300 feet
• T o date, no public comment has been submitted in support or in opposition of the project.
• Four community meetings were held in late 2023 and early 2024 in Cal-Gisler neighborhood, District 4, Kamala neighborhood, and a Fire Station 3 Open House.
12 303
Staff Recommendation
1. Conduct a public hearing; and
2. Adopt a Resolution certifying Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) No. 25-03 for the Fire Station No. 3 Project (Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation State Clearinghouse No. 2025101167); and
3. Adopt a Resolution approving Planning and Zoning Permit No. 24-620-03 for a General Plan Amendment subject to certain findings; and
4. Approve the first reading by title only and waive further reading of the proposed ordinance titled: an ordinance of the city council approving Planning And Zoning Permit No. 24-570-02 (Zone Change) to allow for the construction of a new two-story fire station and related improvements located on the existing
0.66-acre property at 150 Hill Street (APN: 203-0-120-130);
5. Approve the first reading by title only and waive further reading of the proposed ordinance titled: an ordinance of the city council approving Planning And Zoning Permit No. 24-580-03 (Zone T ext Amendment) to approve amendments to the Oxnard City Code (OCC) Chapter 16 §Sec. 16-264. lot coverage to modify lot coverage allowed in the Community Reserve (C-R) zone to allow for the construction of a new two-story fire station and related improvements located on the existing 0.66-acre property at 150 Hill Street (APN: 203-0-120-130).
13 304
305
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
REPORTS
AGENDA ITEM NO. N.1
DATE: June 30, 2026
TO: City Council
FROM: Michael Wolfe, Public Works Director, (805) 385-8055, [email protected]
SUBJECT: Second Amendment to the Joint School/Park Use Agreement (A-6571) for the Maintenance, Operation and Use of the School and Park Facilities in the River Park Specific Plan Area.
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council authorize the Mayor to execute the Second Amendment to the Joint Use Agreement with the Rio School District for the maintenance, operation, and use of the school facilities in Riverpark.
(This item did not originate in Committee because it is a continuation of an item previously approved by the City Council on November 9, 2011.)
Please click the following link to view the required Measure M pre-recorded presentation video: https://youtu.be/8RFObmyAicE
BACKGROUND
Since 2005, the Rio Vista Middle School and Del Mar Elementary School sites, located within Riverpark, have been jointly maintained under a Joint Use Agreement (Attachment 2) between the City of Oxnard, through Community Facilities District No. 5 (“CFD-5” or “Riverpark”), and the Rio School District. The First Amendment to the Agreement that is included in Attachment 2 was executed in 2011 to adjust the times that the joint use areas are available to the public and to further clarify the maintenance responsibilities for each party.
In July 2025, Rio School District officials and staff initiated a discussion with the City to explore shifting the fenceline between the two schools to accommodate a larger playground area. As this directly affects the Joint Use area that is identified within the Agreement, it was determined that this provided both parties the opportunity to amend the Agreement in order to better suit current site usage and memorialize existing conditions. This includes the School District assuming the responsibility for the exterior landscaping in front of both the Rio Vista Middle School and the Del Mar Elementary School, since these areas are not used as “Joint Use Areas” as defined under the Agreement.
DISCUSSION
The changes for the revised areas of responsibility are identified within the new “Exhibit A” of the Second Amendment (Attachment 1), which clearly shows the maintenance areas of responsibility for each party and clarifies the ownership of the fencelines around the School District's property. The following is a summary of the key changes reflected in the Second Amendment:
306
OPERATIONAL CHANGES
ORIGINAL SCOPE NEW SCOPE
City maintains street parkways and exterior school-
frontage landscaping in addition to the Joint-Use
playfields.
City continues to maintain street parkways and Joint-
Use playfields. School District assumes responsibility
for exterior and school-frontage landscaping.
City maintains front and rear school parking lots. School District assumes responsibility for front parking lots. City retains rear parking lots, aligning
maintenance responsibilities with current practice.
Basketball courts shown as Joint-Use area with
unclear maintenance responsibility
Basketball courts removed from the Joint-Use area
and School District assumes maintenance
responsibility aligning with current practice.
Fenceline layout shown as originally installed with
unclear maintenance responsibility.
Proposed School District fenceline changes shown
with Rio School District ownership clearly named,
aligning with current practice.
Buffer area between school playfields included in
Joint-Use area.
Buffer area between school playfields removed from
Joint-Use area and identified as School District
maintenance responsibility.
These changes were tentatively agreed to by School District staff and the Second Amendment was approved by the Rio School District Board on May 18, 2026, at their regularly scheduled Board Meeting (Attachment 3). This Second Amendment will align the existing obligations of both Parties with the actual joint use that has developed over time, permit the School District to make fencing adjustments between the two schools, clarify areas of responsibility, and reduce the maintenance obligation of the City and CFD for areas that primarily serve the School District.
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
This Amendment will reduce the amount of landscape that is currently maintained by the CFD-5 landscape contractor.
The CFD-5 maintained landscape will be reduced by roughly 60,000 square feet with an estimated savings to the CFD of $50,000 for Fiscal Year 2026-27. Cost to maintain these areas for Fiscal Year 2026-27 and beyond will be borne by the Rio School District.
COMMITTEE OUTCOME
This item did not originate in Committee because it is a continuation of an item previously approved by the City Council on November 9, 2011.
Prepared by: Steve Howlett, Assistant Public Works Director, Anthony Miller, Special Districts Manager
ATTACHMENTS
1. Second Amendment to A-6571
2. Original Agreement and First Amendment A-6571
3. March 18, 2026 Rio School District Staff Report
4. Presentation
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
Second Amendment to the Joint School/Park Use
Agreement (A-6571) for the Maintenance, Operation
and Use of the School and Park Facilities in the River
Park Specific Plan Area.
City Council
June 30, 2026
Anthony Miller, Special Districts Manager
Public Works Department
1 330
2 That the City Council authorize the Mayor to execute the Second Amendment to the Joint Use Agreement with the Rio School District for the maintenance, operation, and use of the school facilities in Riverpark.
RECOMMENDATION
331
3 • Since 2005, the Rio Vista Middle School and Del Mar Elementary School sites, located within Riverpark, have been jointly maintained under a Joint Use Agreement between the City of Oxnard, through Community Facilities District No. 5 (“CFD-5” or “Riverpark”), and the Rio School District.
• The agreement was amended in 2011 to adjust the times that the joint use areas are available to the public and to further clarify the maintenance responsibilities for each party.
BACKGROUND
332
4 • In July 2025, Rio School District officials and staff initiated a discussion with the City to explore shifting the fence line between the two schools to accommodate a larger playground area.
• This affects the Joint-Use area that is identified within the Agreement.
• This provided both parties the opportunity to amend the Agreement in order to better suit current site usage and memorialize existing conditions.
BACKGROUND
333
5 • The changes for the revised areas of responsibility are identified within the new “Exhibit A” of the Second Amendment.
• The following table includes a summary of the key changes reflected in the Second Amendment
DISCUSSION
ORIGINAL SCOPE NEW SCOPE
- City maintains street parkways and exterior school-frontage landscaping in addition to the Joint-Use playfields.
- City continues to maintain street parkways and Joint-Use playfields. School District assumes responsibility for exterior and school-frontage landscaping.
- City maintains front and rear school parking lots. - School District assumes responsibility for front parking lots. City retains rear parking lots, aligning maintenance responsibilities with current practice.
- Basketball courts shown as Joint-Use area with unclear maintenance responsibility
- Basketball courts removed from the Joint-Use area and School District assumes maintenance responsibility aligning with current practice.
- Fenceline layout shown as originally installed with unclear maintenance responsibility.
- Proposed School District fenceline changes shown with Rio School District ownership clearly named, aligning with current practice.
- Buffer area between school playfields included in Joint-Use area. - Buffer area between school playfields removed from Joint-Use area and identified as School District maintenance responsibility. 334
6 • These changes were tentatively agreed to by School District staff and the Second Amendment was approved by the Rio
School District Board on May 18, 2026, at their regularly scheduled Board Meeting.
• This Second Amendment will align the existing obligations of both Parties with the actual joint use that has developed over time, permit the School District to make desired fencing adjustments between the two schools, clarify the areas of responsibility, and reduce the maintenance obligation of the City and CFD for areas that are exclusively used to serve the School District.
DISCUSSION
335
7 • This Second Amendment will reduce the amount of landscape that is currently maintained by the CFD-5 landscape contractor.
The CFD-5 maintained landscape will be reduced by roughly 60,000 square feet with an estimated savings to the CFD of $50,000 for Fiscal Year 2026-27.
• Cost to maintain these areas for Fiscal Year 2026-27 and beyond will be borne by the Rio School District.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
336
End of Presentation
337
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
REPORTS
AGENDA ITEM NO. N.2
DATE: June 30, 2026
TO: City Council
FROM: Javier Chagoyen-Lazaro, Chief Financial Officer, (805) 200-5400, [email protected]
SUBJECT: Ratification of Emergency Amendment to Agreement with Macias, Gini & O’Connell for Additional Audit Procedures Related to the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2025.
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council ratify the execution of an emergency amendment to the professional services agreement with Macias, Gini & O’Connell (MGO) in an amount not to exceed $40,000.00 for an overall amount not to exceed $1,259,759.75 for additional audit procedures necessary to complete the independent audit of the City's Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) and Single Audit Report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025.
(This item did not originate in Committee.)
Please click the following link to view the required Measure M pre-recorded presentation video: https://youtu.be/Qtsuj5VTZyA
BACKGROUND
The City annually engages an independent certified public accounting firm to perform an audit of the City's financial statements and to conduct the federally required Single Audit in accordance with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS), the Uniform Guidance, and applicable state requirements.
The independent audit is a critical component of the City's financial accountability framework. The auditor's opinion provides assurance to the City Council, residents, investors, grantor agencies, bondholders, and other stakeholders regarding the fairness of the City's financial statements and the City's compliance with major federal grant programs.
Following the presentation of the Audited Financials Statements and the Single Audit Reports for FY 2024-25 to the Finance and Governance Committee on May 12, 2025, and prior to presenting those reports to City Council on May 19, 2026, the independent auditors were presented with assertions of an unknown nature made by the elected City Treasurer regarding matters related to the City's financial reporting. Although City management had previously provided all requested documentation and representations supporting the financial statements, professional auditing standards require the auditors to evaluate any new information and perform further procedures to determine whether the assertions had any impact on the audit opinion.
As a result, the auditors recommended expanding their work to independently verify the assertions, review supporting documentation, conduct additional interviews and testing, and assess whether the matters raised affected the City's financial statements, internal controls, or compliance requirements. The Chief Financial Officer, in consultation with the City Attorney, determined that the circumstances required prompt action in order to avoid any delays in the issuance of the City’s required financial reports. Obtaining competitive proposals was determined to be impractical and not in the City’s best interest. As such, the amendment had to be executed prior to Council approval in order for MGO to immediately commence the additional work.
338
Because immediate action was required and there was insufficient time to seek prior Council approval without jeopardizing the City's interests, staff executed the emergency amendment pursuant to the City's emergency purchasing authority. In accordance with Section 4-41(B)(2), staff is now presenting this item to the City Council for ratification.
DISCUSSION
The additional procedures performed by the auditors are outside the scope contemplated under the original audit engagement and therefore required an amendment to the existing professional services agreement.
The emergency amendment was necessary because any delay in completing the audit would have exposed the City to significant financial and operational risks, including:
● Delays in issuance of the City's ACFR and Single Audit Report; ● Potential suspension, delay, or loss of access to approximately $300 million in existing and prospective grant funding; ● Increased scrutiny from federal and state grantor agencies; ● Potential adverse impacts to the City's credit ratings and borrowing costs; ● Reputational harm affecting the City's standing with investors and oversight agencies; and ● Disruption to the City's ongoing financial operations and strategic initiatives.
Staff determined that obtaining the additional audit services from the City's existing independent auditors represented the most efficient and prudent course of action. The incumbent auditors possess institutional knowledge of the City's financial operations and had already completed the majority of the audit work. Procuring a separate firm to perform the required procedures would have caused substantial delays, duplication of effort, and additional costs.
The emergency amendment will allow the auditors to complete the necessary procedures and proceed toward issuance of the independent auditor's opinion and Single Audit Report, thereby protecting the City's financial interests and ensuring continued compliance with external reporting requirements.
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
Funding for the additional services is available within the Finance Department's Fiscal Year 2026 operating budget.
COMMITTEE OUTCOME
This item did not originate in Committee.
Prepared by: Javier Chagoyen-Lazaro, Chief Financial Officer
ATTACHMENTS
1. First amendment MGO agreement 325000539
2. Auditor's Scope Expansion Additional Services Letter
3. 325000539 Original Professional Services Agreement with MGO
4. Presentation First Amendment MGO Contract
339
340
341
342
343
w
ww.mgocpa.com Macias Gini & O’Connell LLP
2121 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 2200
Los Angeles, CA 90067
1 May 26, 2026
VIA E-MAIL
Mr. Alexander Nguyen, City Manager
Mr. Javier Chagoyen-Lázaro, Chief Financial Officer
City of Oxnard
300 West 3rd St.
Oxnard, California 93030
[email protected]
[email protected]
Dear Mr. Nguyen and Mr. Chagoyen-Lázaro:
Macias Gini & O’Connell LLP is in receipt of the letter from Kenneth Rozell dated May 21, 2026. We have also reviewed the City’s response to our letter dated May 19, 2026, to Mayor Luis Mc Arthur and additional correspondence from elected Treasurer Molina (attached). We acknowledge the actions of the City’s management regarding the disposition of legal rulings related to elected Treasurer Molina’s functions as the City Treasurer and that elected Treasurer Molina declined to meet with Mayor Luis Mc Arthur and Eric Sonstegard, Assistant City Manager, and would only express his concerns to the auditors.
As stated in our letter to Mayor Luis Mc Arthur , we are bound by generally accepted auditing standards (AU-C Section 560) to evaluate new information brought to our attention after the auditor’s release date where there is uncertainty on whether the information could have an impact of the independent auditor’s report had the auditor known of the information during the audit and evaluate the new information to determine if there is an impact to the independent auditor’s report. The matter brought to our attention by the elected City Treasurer has caused us to be skeptical whether there is an allegation of wrongdoing or missing financial statement disclosure that may have an impact on the independent auditor’s report.
Because we a still unclear about the nature of the allegation and comments made to me from the elected City Treasurer, we will not rescind the recall of the independent auditor’s reports dated May 4, 2026, for both the basic financial statements and single audit report for the year ended June 30, 2025.
After consideration of the City’s response to our letter and the correspondence received from elected Treasurer Molina, we have developed a proposed action plan to resolve this matter and reissue the independent auditor’s reports. However, if we cannot reasonably complete these actions through the cooperation of elected Treasurer Molina or City management and/or further information is identified relating to the condition of the City’s records, the availability of appropriate audit evidence or indications of a significant risk of material misstatement of the financial statements because of error, fraudulent financial reporting or misappropriation of assets which, in our professional judgment, prevent us from completing the audit or fo rming an opinion, we retain the unilateral right to take any course of action permitted by professional standards, including, but not limited to, declining to express an opinion or issue a report, or withdrawing from the engagement.
344
2 The following are our proposed actions:
1. Meet with elected Treasurer Molina and obtain clarity on his comments made in the meeting with me on May 19, 2026, and discuss concerns he may have regarding the City’s financial reporting.
2. Based on our meeting with elected Treasurer Molina we will review our audit risk assessment, including fraud risk, to determine if revision and further audit procedures are necessary based on our judgement.
3. Evaluate and document the disposition of the judicial orders and actions taken by the City’s management to comply with the orders and conclude as to the significance on the City’s financial reporting.
4. Evaluate and conclude on the impact of the new information on the independent auditor’s reports and determine whether we can provide opinions on the City’s basic financial statements and major federal programs.
5. Determine whether the new information and the results of any additional audit procedures result in deficiencies in internal controls or matters of material noncompliance over financial reporting that we are required to report on in accordance with generally accepted auditi ng standards and Government Auditing Standards.
6. Have management provide an updated management representation letter.
7. Upon successful completion of the above procedures, and if we have a reasonable basis for our conclusion, update the date and reissue the independent auditor’s reports.
This additional work is outside the scope of our original engagement and contract with the City. We are estimating the additional fees for the level of effort required to complete the action items above will be between $30,000 to $40,000.
Upon your approval, we can begin the additional scope of work the week of June 1, 2026, and provide daily status to you on our progress through completion.
Let me know if you would like to proceed with our proposed action plan.
Sincerely,
cc: Stephen Fischer, City Attorney ([email protected]) Kenneth Rozell, Assistant City Attorney ([email protected]) Eric Sonstegard, Assistant City Manager ([email protected]) Stephanie Sessions Perkins, MGO General Counsel ([email protected]) Attachment: Email from Philip Molina dated May 21, 2026 345
Attachment
3 346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
Ratification of Emergency Amendment to
Agreement with Macias, Gini & O’Connell
for Additional Audit Process Related to
Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2025
June 30, 2026
Presented by:
Javier Chagoyen-Lazaro, City of Oxnard
Chief Financial Officer
379
Recommendation 2
That the City Council ratify the execution of an emergency amendment to the professional services agreement with Macias, Gini & O’Connell (MGO) in an amount not to exceed $40,000.00 for an overall amount not to exceed $1,259,759.75 for additional audit procedures necessary to complete the independent audit of the City's Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) and Single Audit Report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025. 380
BACKGROUND 3
The elected City Treasurer made assertions of an unknown nature regarding matters related to the City's financial reporting, before the presentation of the FY 2024-25 Audited Financial Statements and Single Audit Reports to City Council scheduled for May 19, 2026.
The auditors recommended to expand their work to independently verify the assertions, review supporting documentation, conduct additional interviews and testing, and assess whether the matters raised affected the City's financial statements, internal controls, or compliance requirements.
The CFO and City Attorney determined that an emergency amendment was necessary because any delay in completing the audit would have exposed the City to significant financial and operational risks.
381
Recommendation 4
That the City Council ratify the execution of an emergency amendment to the professional services agreement with Macias, Gini & O’Connell (MGO) in an amount not to exceed $40,000.00 for an overall amount not to exceed $1,259,759.75 for additional audit procedures necessary to complete the independent audit of the City's Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) and Single Audit Report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025. 382
5 Questions / Discussion
383
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
REPORTS
AGENDA ITEM NO. N.3
DATE: June 30, 2026
TO: City Council
FROM: Stephen Fischer, City Attorney, (805) 385-7483, [email protected]
SUBJECT: City Council Remote Access Disruption Policy.
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council adopt a resolution titled, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Oxnard Adopting a Policy Regarding Disruptions of Remote Access During City Council Meetings"
(This item did not originate in Committee.)
Please click the following link to view the required Measure M pre-recorded presentation video: https://youtu.be/XckFc8GPU-w
BACKGROUND
Senate Bill (SB) 707 amended the Brown Act to require all “eligible legislative bodies” to comply with additional meeting requirements. The City Council meets the statutory definition under SB 707 of an “eligible legislative body” because Oxnard's population exceeds 30,000 residents. Among other SB 707 requirements, as an “eligible legislative body,” the City Council must establish a policy on how to address a disruption of telephonic or internet service that occurs during a City Council meeting by July 1, 2026.
Among the various SB 707 requirements, all “eligible legislative bodies” are required to offer remote public access to City Council meetings by either:
a. Two-way telephonic service, or
b. Two-way audiovisual platforms.
The City already complies with the SB 707 requirement of conducting City Council meetings in a hybrid format via Zoom (with call-in option). Additionally, to ensure public access and participation, SB 707 requires all “eligible legislative bodies” to establish a policy on how to address disruption of telephonic or internet service connection that occurs during a meeting. The City Council is the City’s only “eligible legislative body” for purposes of this policy.
The policy outlines the procedural steps for the City Council to follow if the hybrid remote access platform (Zoom or equivalent) is disrupted, which will include the City Council deciding whether to adjourn the open session or recess from open session for one hour or until remote access services are restored. If remote access services cannot be restored within one hour and the City Council intends to continue in open session, then the City Council must conduct a roll-call vote confirming that good faith efforts were made and that the public interest in continuing the meeting outweighs the need for remote access (Government Code Section 54953.4(b)(1)).
Members of the public will still be able to view City Council meetings if the hybrid remote access platform services cannot be restored; however, such resources do not constitute a two-way telephonic or two-way audiovisual platform as required by SB 707.
384
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 is no financial impact.
COMMITTEE OUTCOME
This item did not originate in Committee.
Prepared by: Luly Lopez, City Clerk, Jason Zaragoza, Deputy City Attorney
ATTACHMENTS
1. City Council Meeting Disruption Policy Resolution
2. City Council Meeting Disruption Presentation
385
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF THE CITY OF OXNARD
RESOLUTION NO. ______
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OXNARD ADOPTING
A POLICY REGARDING DISRUPTIONS OF REMOTE ACCESS DURING CITY
COUNCIL MEETINGS
WHEREAS, pursuant to Senate Bill 707, Government Code Section 54953.4 requires that, beginning July 1, 2026, eligible legislative bodies provide members of the public an opportunity to attend open and public meetings through a two-way telephonic service or a two- way audiovisual platform, subject to the exceptions stated in that section; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 54953.4, subdivision (b)(1)(A)(i)(I)(ib)(Ia), requires an eligible legislative body, on or before July 1, 2026, to approve at a noticed public meeting in open session a policy addressing disruption of telephonic or internet service occurring during meetings where remote access is required; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 54953.4, subdivision (b)(1)(A)(i)(I)(ib)(Ic), establishes requirements for recessing and reconvening a meeting and for making good faith efforts to restore service if a disruption prevents members of the public from attending or observing the meeting remotely; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is the City’s only “eligible legislative body” for purposes of Government Code Section 54953.4; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to adopt a policy that implements the requirements of Government Code Section 54953.4.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Oxnard resolves as follows:
SECTION 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth.
SECTION 2. The City Council adopts the Disruption of Remote Access During City Council Meetings Policy attached hereto as Exhibit A.
SECTION 3. This Resolution implements Government Code Section 54953.4. It does not create rights beyond those required by state law and does not expand the obligations imposed by this section.
SECTION 4. If any provision of this Resolution or the application of any such provision is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions or applications of this Resolution that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Resolution are severable and the City Council declares that it would 386
have adopted this Resolution irrespective of the invalidity of any particular portion of this Resolution.
SECTION 5. This Resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 30TH day of June 2026, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Luis A. Mc Arthur, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Lourdes A. Lopez, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
Stephen M. Fischer, City Attorney
387
EXHIBIT A
DISRUPTION OF REMOTE ACCESS DURING CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
Section 1. Purpose
The purpose of this policy is to establish procedures for responding to disruption(s) of telephonic or internet services that provide two-way remote access for the public to attend and participate during City Council meetings. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54953.4, the City Council adopts this policy to ensure statutory compliance, transparency and public access during City Council meetings.
Section 2. Background
Senate Bill 707 (SB 707) requires all “eligible legislative bodies” to offer remote public access to City Council meetings by either (1) two-way telephonic service or (2) two-way audiovisual platforms. Under the statutory definition provided in SB 707, the Oxnard City Council is an “eligible legislative body” and is required to adopt, on or before July 1, 2026, a policy on how to address telephonic or internet service connection disruption that inhibits the public from accessing or observing a City Council meeting.
Section 3. Definitions
For purposes of this policy:
a. “Disruption” means any failure, outage, or other interruption in the City’s telephonic or internet service that prevents members of the public from attending or observing in public open meetings of City Council.
b. “Remote Access Services” means the two-way telephonic service and/or two-way audiovisual platform (e.g., Zoom or equivalent) used to provide real-time remote public attendance and observation of public open meetings of City Council.
Section 4. Applicability
This policy applies to all open and public meetings of City Council at which remote public access is required per Government Code Section 54953.4(b)(1)(A)(i)(I)(ia) but does not apply in those circumstances where the Brown Act provides that remote public access is not required.
Section 5. Response to Disruption of Remote Access Services
If Remote Access Services are disrupted during a public open meeting of City Council, then the following steps must take place:
a. The City Council shall immediately announce the disruption to the public; b. The City Council must either adjourn the open session or recess from open session for at least one (1) hour to make a good faith effort to restore the Remote Access Services; c. During recess, the City Council may meet in closed session as permitted by Government Code Section 54953.4; and
d. If following recess of the meeting, Remote Access Services have not been restored within one (1) hour, then City Council may reconvene the meeting if it adopts, by roll-call vote, a finding that it made good faith efforts to restore the Remote Access Services and that the public interest in continuing the meeting outweighs the public interest in remote public access.
388
Section 6. Efforts to Restore Remote Access Services
The City Council shall make good faith efforts to restore Remote Access Services, which may include:
a. Troubleshooting platform or teleconferencing software; b. Resetting or replacing audiovisual equipment;
c. Attempting alternative connection methods;
d. Contacting necessary support staff or service providers; or e. Switching to back-up equipment or platforms, if available.
Pursuant to the Recordkeeping section of this policy, the City Clerk shall make a record and enter into the meeting minutes the disruption and restoration efforts undertaken by City Council.
Section 7. Reconvene Open Session
Open session may reconvene upon restoration of Remote Access Services, or after one (1) hour has elapsed from the time of disruption, whichever is earlier.
a. If Remote Access Services have been restored after one (1) hour, the City Council may reconvene the meeting in open session as normal.
b. If Remote Access Services have not been restored after one (1) hour, the City Council may reconvene the meeting in open session only after the following, or a substantially similar, finding is adopted by a roll-call vote of the City Council:
“The City Council of the City of Oxnard has made good faith efforts to restore telephonic or internet service in accordance with its adopted policy and the public interest in continuing the meeting outweighs the public interest in remote public access.”
Section 8. Recordkeeping
If Remote Access Services were disrupted, then the City Clerk shall make a record and enter into the meeting minutes the following:
a. The nature and time of the disruption;
b. Whether open session was adjourned or the City Council complied with the procedures of this policy;
c. The restoration efforts undertaken;
d. The time the meeting was reconvened (if applicable); and e. The finding adopted (if applicable).
389
390
City Council Remote Access Disruption Policy
City Council
June 30, 2026
391
That the City Council adopt a resolution titled "A
Resolution of the City Council of the City of Oxnard
Adopting a Policy Regarding Disruptions of Remote
Access During City Council Meetings"
RECOMMENDATION 2
392
• What SB 707 Requires:
• Eligible legislative bodies (cities with population >30,000) must provide two-way remote public access (telephonic or audiovisual) for all open meetings.
• Must adopt a written policy on handling disruptions to remote access services by July 1, 2026.
• The policy must address recess procedures, good faith restoration efforts, and findings to continue the meeting if service cannot be restored.
BACKGROUND: SB 707 and the Brown Act 3
393
Definitions 4
• Disruption: Any failure, outage, or interruption in the City's telephonic or internet service that prevents members of the public from attending or observing open meetings of the City Council via remote access.
• Remote Access Services: The two-way telephonic service and/or two-way audiovisual platform (e.g., Zoom or equivalent) used to provide real-time remote public attendance,
observation, and participation in City Council meetings. 394
Response to Disruption Procedure 5
1. Announce: City Council immediately announces the disruption to the public in open session.
2. Decide: Council elects to either adjourn open session or recess for at least 1 hour to restore service.
3. Restore: During recess, staff makes good faith efforts to restore Remote Access Services. Closed session permitted as allowed.
4. Reconvene: If not restored after 1 hour, Council may reconvene only after roll-call vote adopting the required finding. If restored within the hour, Council may reconvene.
395
Required Finding 6
If Remote Access Services are not restored within one hour, the City Council may reconvene the meeting in open session only after adopting the following (or substantially similar) finding by roll-call vote:
"The City Council of the City of Oxnard has made good faith efforts to restore telephonic or internet service in accordance with its adopted policy and the public interest in continuing the meeting outweighs the public interest in remote public access." 396
Good Faith Efforts to Restore 7
1. Troubleshooting platform or teleconferencing software issues
2. Resetting or replacing audiovisual equipment
3. Attempting alternative connection methods or platforms
4. Contacting necessary support staff or service providers
5. Switching to back-up equipment or platforms, if available 397
Record Keeping Requirement 8
If Remote Access Services are disrupted, the City Clerk shall record the following in the meeting minutes:
• The nature and exact time of the disruption
• Whether open session was adjourned or the Council followed the recess procedures
• The specific restoration efforts undertaken
• The time the meeting was reconvened (if applicable)
• The finding adopted by roll-call vote (if applicable) 398
Adoption & Implementation 9
Adoption: City Council adopts the Resolution and Policy on June 30, 2026 (effective immediately).
Scope: Applies only to City Council meetings (the sole 'eligible legislative body' under the statute).
399
QUESTIONS
10 400