Thousand Oaks City Council
August 30, 2022

STATUS OF PREVIOUS PLAN ACTIONS
Note that this section only applies to jurisdictions that are conducting updates to previously approved hazard mitigation plans. If your jurisdiction has not previously participated in an approved plan, enter an “X” in the box at the beginning of this section and do not complete the section. We will remove this section from your final annex.

Also note that this section is further back in the annex than the rest of the Phase 1 content. Some Phase 2 sections are included before it.

All action items identified in prior mitigation plans must be reconciled in this update. Action items must all be marked as ONE of the following; check the appropriate box (place an X) and provide information as follows:
• Completed—If an action has been completed since the prior plan was prepared, check the “Completed” box and provide a date of completion in the comment section. If an action has been initiated and is an ongoing program (e.g. annual outreach event), you may mark it as completed and note that it is ongoing in the comments. If an action addresses an ongoing program you would like to continue to include in your action plan, see the “Carried Over to Plan Update” bullet below. • Removed—If action items are to be removed because they are no longer feasible, a reason must be given. Lack of funding does not mean that it is no longer feasible, unless the sole source of funding for an action is no longer available. Place a comment in the comment section explaining why the action is no longer feasible or barriers that prevented the action from being implemented (e.g., “Action no longer considered feasible due to lack of political support.”). If the wording and/or intent of a previously identified action is unclear, this can be a reason for removal. A change in community priorities may also be a reason for removal and should be discussed in the comments. • Carried Over to Plan Update—If an action is in progress, is ongoing, or has not been initiated and you would like to carry it over to the plan update, check the “Check if Yes” column under “Carried Over to Plan Update.” Selecting this option indicates that the action will be included in the mitigation action Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing City/County Annex Template 5 plan for this update. If you are carrying over an action to the update, include a comment describing any action that has been taken or why the action was not taken (specifically, any barriers or obstacles that prevented the action from moving forward or slowed progress). Leave the last column, “Action # in Update,” blank at this point. This will be filled in after completing the updated action plan in Phase 3.

Ensure that you have provided a status and a comment for each action.

THIS COMPLETES PHASE 1

HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN INPUT
When preparing the hazard mitigation action plan in Phase 3, all action items from your jurisdiction’s previous hazard mitigation plan that are marked as “Carried Over to Plan Update” will need to be included in the action plan.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing City/County Annex Template 6 PHASE 2 INSTRUCTIONS

CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT
Note that it is unlikely that one person will be able to complete all sections of the capability assessment alone. The primary preparer will likely need to reach out to other departments within the local government for information. It may be beneficial to provide these individuals with background information about this planning process, as input from them will be needed again during Phase 3 of the annex development.

Planning and Regulatory Capability
In the table titled “Planning and Regulatory Capability,” indicate “Yes” or “No” for each listed code, ordinance, requirement or planning document in each of the following columns:
• Local Authority—Enter “Yes” if your jurisdiction has prepared or adopted the identified item; otherwise, enter “No.” If yes, then enter the code, ordinance number, or plan name and its date of adoption in the comments column. Note: If you enter yes, be sure to provide a comment with the appropriate code, ordinance or plan and date of adoption. • Other Jurisdiction Authority—Enter “Yes” if another agency (e.g., a state agency or special purpose district) enforces or administers the identified item in a way that may impact your jurisdiction or if any state or federal regulations or laws would prohibit local implementation of the identified item; otherwise, enter “No.” Note: If you enter yes, be sure to provide a comment indicating the other agency and its relevant authority.
• State Mandated—Enter “Yes” if state laws or other requirements enable or require the listed item to be implemented at the local level; otherwise, enter “No.” Note: If you enter yes, be sure to provide a comment describing the relevant state mandate.
• Integration Opportunity—Enter “Yes” if there are obvious ways that the code, ordinance or plan can be coordinated with the hazard mitigation plan. Consider the following:
 If you answered “Yes” in the Local Authority column for this item, then enter “Yes” for integration opportunity if any of the following are true:
o The item already addresses hazards and their impacts and should be updated to reflect new information about risk from this hazard mitigation plan o The item does not address hazards and their impacts but is due for an update in the next 5 years and could be updated in a way that does address hazards and impacts o The item identifies projects for implementation and these could be reviewed to determine if they can be modified to help address hazard mitigation goals o The item identifies projects for implementation and some of these should be considered for inclusion in the hazard mitigation action plan for your jurisdiction  If you answered “No” in the Local Authority column for this item, then enter “Yes” for integration opportunity if your jurisdiction will develop the item over the next 5 years Note: Each capability with a “Yes” answer to Integration Opportunity will be discussed in more detail later in the annex. You may wish to keep notes when assessing the Integration Opportunity or review the “Integration with Other Planning Initiatives” section below. • Comments—Enter the code number and adoption date for any local code indicated as being in place; provide other comments as appropriate to describe capabilities for each entry. DO NOT OVERLOOK

THIS STEP
Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing City/County Annex Template 7 For the categories “General Plan” and “Capital Improvement Plan,” answer the specific questions shown, in addition to completing the four columns indicating level of capability.

Development and Permit Capability
Complete the table titled “Development and Permitting Capabilities.” Fiscal Capability
Complete the table titled “Fiscal Capability” by indicating whether each of the listed financial resources is accessible to your jurisdiction. Enter “Yes” if the resource is fully accessible to your jurisdiction. Enter “No” if there are limitations or prerequisites that may hinder your use of this resource.

Administrative and Technical Capability
Complete the table titled “Administrative and Technical Capability” by indicating whether your jurisdiction has access to each of the listed personnel resources. Enter “Yes” or “No” in the column labeled “Available?”.

If yes, then enter the department and position title. If you have contract support with these capabilities, you can still answer “Yes.” Indicate in the department row that this resource is provided through contract.

Education and Outreach Capability
Complete the table titled “Education and Outreach.”

National Flood Insurance Program Compliance
Complete the table titled “National Flood Insurance Program Compliance.” Community Classifications
Complete the table titled “Community Classifications” to indicate your jurisdiction’s participation in various national programs related to natural hazard mitigation. For each program enter “Yes” or “No” in the second column to indicate whether your jurisdiction participates. If yes, then enter the classification that your jurisdiction has earned under the program in the third column and the date on which that classification was issued in the fourth column; enter “N/A” in the third and fourth columns if your jurisdiction is not participating. If you do not know your current classification, information is available at the following websites:
• FIPS Code— https://www.census.gov/geographies/reference-files/2018/demo/popest/2018- fips.html

HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN INPUT
When preparing the hazard mitigation action plan in Phase 3, review all the above capability assessment tables and consider including actions to provide a capability that your jurisdiction does not currently have, update a capability that your jurisdiction does have, or implement an action that is recommended in an existing plan or program.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing City/County Annex Template 8 • DUNS #— https://www.dnb.com/duns-number.html
• Community Rating System— https://www.fema.gov/floodplain-management/community-rating- system
• Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule— https://www.isomitigation.com/bcegs/iso-s-building- code-effectiveness-grading-schedule-bcegs.html
• Public Protection Classification— https://www.isomitigation.com/ppc/ • Storm Ready— https://www.weather.gov/stormready/communities • Firewise— http://www.firewise.org/usa-recognition-program/map-of-active-participants.aspx • Tsunami Ready— https://www.weather.gov/tsunamiready/communities Adaptive Capacity for Climate Change
Consider climate change impact concerns such as the following:
• Reduced snowpack
• Increased wildfires
• Sea level rise
• Inland flooding
• Threats to sensitive species
• Loss in agricultural productivity
• Public health and safety.

With those impacts in mind, complete the table titled “Adaptive Capacity for Climate Change” by indicating your jurisdiction’s capacity for each listed criterion as follows:
• High—The capacity exists and is in use.
• Medium—The capacity may exist, but is not used or could use some improvement. • Low—The capacity does not exist or could use substantial improvement. • Unsure—Not enough information is known to assign a rating.

This is a subjective assessment, but providing a few words of explanation is useful. It is highly recommended that you complete this table with an internal planning team after reviewing the results of the other capability assessment tables.

HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN INPUT
When preparing the hazard mitigation action plan in Phase 3, review all the adaptive capacity criteria and consider including actions to improve the rating for those rated medium or low, to make use of the capacity for those rated high, or to acquire additional information for those rated unsure.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing City/County Annex Template 9 INTEGRATION REVIEW
For hazard mitigation planning, “integration” means that hazard mitigation information is used in other relevant planning mechanisms, such as general planning and capital facilities planning, and that relevant information from those sources is used in hazard mitigation. FEMA recommends integration as follows:
• Integrate hazard mitigation plan goals with community objectives (e.g. incorporate the goals for risk reduction and safety into the policies of other plans). • Use the risk assessment to inform plans and policies (e.g. incorporate risk assessment findings into land use plans, site plan review, emergency operations plans). • Implement mitigation actions through existing mechanisms (e.g. include mitigation projects in the capital improvement plan).
• Think about mitigation before and after a disaster (e.g. build recovery planning on existing mitigation plans and goals).

After reviewing the plans, programs and ordinances identified in the capability assessment tables, identify all plans and programs that have already been integrated with the hazard mitigation plan, and those that offer opportunities for future integration. The simplest way to do this is to review the Planning and Regulatory Capabilities table to see which items were marked as “Yes” under the Integration Opportunity column.

Existing Integration
In the highlighted bullet list, list items for which you entered “Yes” under the Integration Opportunity column of the “Planning and Regulatory Capability” table because the plan or ordinance already addresses potential impacts or includes specific projects that should be included as action items in the mitigation action plan.

Consider listing items marked as Completed in the “Status of Previous Plan Actions” table if they were indicated as being ongoing actions. Provide a brief description of how the plan or ordinance is integrated.

Examples are as follows:
• Capital Improvement Plan—The capital improvement plan includes projects that can help mitigate potential hazards. The City will act to ensure consistency between the hazard mitigation plan and the current and future capital improvement plans. The hazard mitigation plan may identify new possible funding sources for capital improvement projects and may result in modifications to proposed projects based on results of the risk assessment.
• Building Code and Fire Code—The City’s adoption of the 2016 California building and fire codes incorporated local modifications to account for the climatic, topographic and geographic conditions that exist in the City.
• General Plan—The general plan includes a Safety Element to protect the community from unreasonable risk by establishing policies and actions to avoid or minimize the following hazards:
 Geologic and seismic hazards
 Fire hazards
 Hazardous materials
 Flood control
 Impacts from climate change.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing City/County Annex Template 10 • Climate Action Plan—The City’s Climate Action Plan includes projects for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to likely impacts of climate change. These projects were reviewed to identify cross-planning initiates that serve both adaptation and mitigation objectives.

Opportunities for Future Integration
List any remaining items that say “Yes” in the Integration Opportunity column in the Planning and Regulatory Capabilities table and explain the process by which integration could occur. Examples follow:
• Zoning Code—The City is conducting a comprehensive update to its zoning code. Additional mitigation and abatement measures will be considered for incorporation into the code. • Capital Improvement Projects—Capital improvement project proposals may take into consideration hazard mitigation potential as a means of evaluating project prioritization. • Post-Disaster Recovery Plan—The City does not have a recovery plan and intends to develop one as a mitigation planning action during the next five years. The plan will build on the goals and objectives identified in the hazard mitigation plan.

After you have accounted for all items marked as “Yes” under the Integration Opportunity column, consider other programs you may have in place in your jurisdiction that include routine consideration and management of hazard risk. Examples of such programs may include: tree pruning programs, right-of-way mowing programs, erosion control or stream maintenance programs, etc. Add any such programs to the integration discussion and provide a brief description of how these programs manage (or could be adapted to manage) risk from hazards.

INFORMATION SOURCES USED FOR THIS ANNEX
Note that this section will ultimately describe all information sources used to develop this annex, but that only the sources used for Phases 1 and 2 will be listed at this point. Additional sources will be added with the preparation of the Phase 3 annex.

This section should describe what resources you used to complete the annex and how you used them.

Several items are started for you, but be sure to update and enhance any descriptions. Providing this information is a requirement to pass the state and FEMA review process.

THIS COMPLETES PHASE 2

HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN INPUT
When preparing the hazard mitigation action plan in Phase 3, any plans that fall into the “Existing Integration” category should be reviewed and elements from them should be included in the action plan as appropriate.

HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN INPUT
When preparing the hazard mitigation action plan in Phase 3, an action to integrate any identified “Opportunities for Future Integration” should be considered for inclusion in the action plan.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing City/County Annex Template 11 PHASE 3 INSTRUCTIONS

RISK ASSESSMENT
Jurisdiction-Specific Natural Hazard Event History
In the table titled “Past Natural Hazard Events,” list in chronological order (most recent first) any natural hazard event that has caused damage to your jurisdiction. If it was a federally declared disaster, include the FEMA Disaster #, otherwise enter N/A in that column. Include the date of the event and the estimated dollar amount of damage it caused. You are welcome to include any events, but special attention should be made to include major storms and federally declared disasters. Refer to the table below that lists hazard events in the planning area.

Table 1. Presidential Disaster Declarations for the Planning Area Type of Event FEMA Disaster # Date Damage Assessment
$

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing City/County Annex Template 12 We recommend including most large-scale disasters, unless you know that there were no impacts on your jurisdiction. Specifically, we recommend that you include these events if you have damage estimate information or can provide a brief description of impacts that occurred within your community. In addition to these events, refer to the NOAA NCDC storm events database included in the toolkit. We recommend conducting a search for the name of your jurisdiction in order to identify events with known impacts. Other potential sources of damage information include the following • Preliminary damage estimates your jurisdiction filed with the county or state • Insurance claims data
• Newspaper archives
• Emergency management documents (general plan safety element, emergency response plan, etc.) • Resident input.

If you do not have estimates for costs of damage caused, list “Not Available” in the “Damage Assessment” column or list a brief description of the damage rather than a dollar value (e.g., Main Street closed as a result of flooding, downed trees and residential damage). Note that tracking such damage is a valid and useful mitigation action if your jurisdiction does not currently track such information.

Hazard Risk Ranking
Risk ranking identifies which hazards pose the greatest risk to the community, based on how likely it is for each hazard to occur (this is called the community’s exposure) and how great an impact each hazard will have if it does occur (this is called the community’s vulnerability). Every jurisdiction has differing degrees of risk exposure and vulnerability and therefore needs to rank risk for its own area. The risk ranking for each jurisdiction has been calculated in the “Loss Matrix” spreadsheet included in the annex preparation toolkit.

The ranking is on the basis of risk ranking scores for each hazard that were calculated based on the hazard’s probability of occurrence and its potential impact on people, property and the economy.

The results for your jurisdiction have already been entered into the “Hazard Risk Ranking” table in your Phase 3 annex template. The hazard with the highest risk rating is listed at the top of table and was given a rank of 1; the hazard with the second highest rating is listed second with a rank of 2; and so on. Two hazards with equal risk ranking scores were given the same rank. Hazards were assigned to “High,” Medium,” or “Low” risk categories based on the risk ranking score. If you wish to review the calculations in detail, the appendix at the end of these instructions describes the calculation methodology that the spreadsheet uses.

Review the hazard risk ranking information that is included in your annex. If these results differ from what you know based on substantiated data and documentation, you may alter the ranking and risk categories based on this knowledge. If you do so, indicate the reason for the change in your template. For example:
“Drought was ranked as low; however, the jurisdiction’s economy is heavily reliant on water-using industries, such as agriculture or manufacturing, so this hazard should be ranked as medium.”

HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN INPUT
When preparing the hazard mitigation action plan in Phase 3, you will need to have at least one mitigation action for each hazard ranked as “high” or “medium.” Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing City/County Annex Template 13 Jurisdiction-Specific Vulnerabilities
Repetitive Loss Properties
A repetitive loss property is any property for which FEMA has paid two or more flood insurance claims in excess of $1,000 in any rolling 10-year period since 1978. In the space provided, the following information has been included in your annex based on data provided by FEMA:
• The number of any FEMA-identified repetitive-loss properties in your jurisdiction. • The number of any FEMA-identified severe-repetitive-loss properties in your jurisdiction. • The number (if any) of repetitive-loss or severe-repetitive-loss properties in your jurisdiction that have been mitigated. Mitigated for this exercise means that flood protection has been provided to the structure.

Other Noted Vulnerabilities
Review the results of the risk assessment included in the toolkit, your jurisdiction’s natural events history, and any relevant public comments/input, then develop a few sentences that discuss specific hazard vulnerabilities. You do not need to develop a sentence for every hazard, but identify a few issues you would like to highlight. Also list any known hazard vulnerabilities in your jurisdiction that may not be apparent from the risk assessment and other information provided.

Spending some time thinking about the results of the risk assessment and other noted vulnerabilities will be a big help in the development of your hazard mitigation action plan. The following are examples of vulnerabilities you could identify through this exercise:
• About 45 percent of the population lives in the 0.2 percent annual chance flood hazard area, where flood insurance is generally not required.
• A magnitude 7.5 earthquake on the Smithburg Fault is estimated to produce nearly 1 million tons of structure debris.
• Over the past 10 years, the jurisdiction has experienced more than $6 million in damage from severe storm events.
• More than 50 buildings are located in areas that would be permanently inundated with 12 inches of sea level rise.
• The results of the public survey indicated that 40 percent of Smithburg residents would not be able to be self-sufficient for 5 days following a major event. • An urban drainage issue at a specific location results in localized flooding every time it rains. • One area of the community frequently loses power due to a lack of tree maintenance.

HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN INPUT
When preparing the hazard mitigation action plan in Phase 3, if your jurisdiction has any repetitive loss properties, you should strongly consider including a mitigation action that addresses mitigating these properties.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing City/County Annex Template 14 • A critical facility, such as a police station, is not equipped with a generator. • A neighborhood has the potential to have ingress and egress cut off as the result of a flood or earthquake (e.g. a bridge is the only access).
• Substantial number of buildings in one area of the community are unreinforced masonry or soft-story construction.
• An area along the river is eroding and threatening public and/or private property. • A large visitor population that may not be aware of tsunami risk.

HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN
Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
The hazard mitigation action plan is the heart of your jurisdictional annex. This is where you will identify the actions your jurisdiction would like to pursue with this plan.

Select Recommended Actions
All of the work that you have done thus far should provide you with ideas for actions. Throughout these instructions, green boxes labeled “Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Input” have indicated information that needs to be considered in the selection of mitigation actions. The following sections describe how to consider these and other information sources to develop a list of potential actions.

Be sure to consider the following factors in your selection of actions:
• Select actions that are consistent with the overall purpose, goals, and objectives of the hazard mitigation plan.
• Identify actions where benefits exceed costs.
• Include any action that your jurisdiction has committed to pursuing, regardless of grant eligibility. • Know what is and is not grant-eligible under various federal grant programs (see the fact sheet on FEMA hazard mitigation grant programs in the annex preparation toolkit and the table below).

HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN INPUT
When preparing the hazard mitigation action plan in Phase 3, consider including actions to address the jurisdiction-specific vulnerabilities listed in this section.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing City/County Annex Template 15 Table 2. Federal Hazard Mitigation Grant Program Eligibility by Action Type Eligible Activities
Hazard Mitigation
Grant Program BRIC
Flood Mitigation
Assistance
Mitigation Projects
Property Acquisition and Structure Demolition √ √ √
Property Acquisition and Structure Relocation √ √ √
Structure Elevation √ √ √
Mitigation Reconstruction √ √ √
Dry Floodproofing of Historic Residential Structures √ √ √ Dry Floodproofing of Non-residential Structures √ √ √
Generators √ √
Localized Flood Risk Reduction Projects √ √ √
Non-Localized Flood Risk Reduction Projects √ √
Structural Retrofitting of Existing Buildings √ √ √
Non-structural Retrofitting of Existing Buildings and Facilities √ √ √ Safe Room Construction √ √
Wind Retrofit for One- and Two-Family Residences √ √
Infrastructure Retrofit √ √ √
Soil Stabilization √ √ √
Wildland fire Mitigation √ √
Post-Disaster Code Enforcement √
Advance Assistance √
5 Percent Initiative Projects* √
Aquifer and Storage Recovery** √ √ √
Flood Diversion and Storage** √ √ √
Floodplain and Stream Restoration** √ √ √
Green Infrastructure** √ √ √
Miscellaneous/Other** √ √ √
Hazard Mitigation Planning √ √ √
Technical Assistance √
Management Costs √ √ √
* FEMA allows increasing the 5% initiative amount under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program up to 10% for a presidential major disaster declaration. The additional 5% initiative funding can be used for activities that promote disaster-resistant codes for all hazards. As a condition of the award, either a disaster-resistant building code must be adopted or an improved Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule is required.
** Indicates that any proposed action will be evaluated on its own merit against program requirements. Eligible projects will be approved provided funding is available.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing City/County Annex Template 16 Material Previously Developed for This Annex
Capability Assessment Section—Planning and Regulatory Capability Table, Fiscal Capability Table, Administrative and Technical Capability Table, Education and Outreach Table, and Community Classification Table
Review these tables and consider the following:
• For any capability that you do not currently have, consider whether your jurisdiction should have this capability. If so, consider including an action to develop/acquire the capability. • For any capability that you do currently have, consider whether this capability can be leveraged to increase or improve hazard mitigation in the jurisdiction. • If any capabilities listed in the Planning and Regulatory Capabilities table have not been updated in more than 10 years, consider an action to review and update the capability and, as appropriate, incorporate hazard mitigation principles or information obtained in the risk assessment. • Consider including actions that are identified in other plans and programs (capital improvement plans, strategic plans, etc.) as actions in this plan.

Capability Assessment Section—National Flood Insurance Program Compliance table Review the table and consider the following:
• If you have no certified floodplain managers and you have flood risk, consider adding an action to provide key staff members with training to obtain certification. • If your flood damage prevention was last updated in or before 2004, you should identify an action to update your ordinance to ensure it is compliant with current NFIP requirements. • If you have any outstanding NFIP compliance issues, be sure to add an action to address them. • If flood hazard maps do not adequately address the flood risk within your jurisdiction, consider actions to request new mapping or conduct studies.
• If you wish to begin to participate in CRS or you already to participate and would like to improve your classification, consider this as an action.
• If the number of flood insurance polices in your jurisdiction is low relative to the number of structures in the floodplain, consider an action that will promote flood insurance in your jurisdiction.

Capability Assessment Section— Adaptive Capacity for Climate Change Table Consider your responses to this section:
• For criteria that you listed as medium or low, think of ways you could improve this rating (see adaptive capacity portion of the mitigation best practices catalog). • For criteria you listed as high, think about how you can leverage this capacity to improve or enhance mitigation or continue to improve this capacity.
• For criteria that you were unable to provide responses for, consider ways you could improve your understanding of this capacity (see mitigation best practices and adaptive capacity catalog).

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing City/County Annex Template 17 Integration Review Section
Review the items you identified in this section and consider an action that specifically says what the plan, code, ordinance etc. is and how it will be integrated. For items that address land use, include them in the prepopulated action in your template that reads as follows:
“Integrate the hazard mitigation plan into other plans, ordinances and programs that dictate land use decisions in the community, including ______________.” Risk Ranking Section
You must identify at least one mitigation action that is clearly defined and actionable (i.e. not a preparedness or response action) for every hazard that is categorized in the risk ranking as “high” or “medium” risk.

Jurisdiction-Specific Vulnerabilities Section
Review the vulnerability issues that you identified in this section and consider actions to address them (see mitigation best practices catalog). Two examples are shown in the table below.

Table 3. Example Actions to Address Jurisdiction-Specific Vulnerabilities Noted Vulnerability Example Mitigation Action
About 45 percent of the population lives in the

0.2 percent annual chance flood hazard area
where flood insurance is generally not required.

Implement an annual public information initiative that targets residents in the

0.2 percent annual chance flood hazard area. Provide information on the availability of relatively low cost flood insurance policies.

An urban drainage issue results in localized
flooding every time it rains.

Replace undersized culverts that are contributing to localized flooding. Priority areas include:
• The corner of Main Street and 1st Street
• Old Oak subdivision.

Status of Previous Plan Actions Section
If your jurisdiction participated in a previous hazard mitigation plan, be sure to include any actions that were identified as “carry over” actions.

Other Sources
Mitigation Best Practices Catalog
A catalog that includes best practices identified by FEMA and other agencies, as well as recommendations from the steering committee and other stakeholders, is included in your toolkit. Review the catalog and identify actions your jurisdiction should consider for its action plan.

Public Input
Review input received during the process, specifically the public survey results included in your toolkit.

Common Actions for All Partners
The following six actions have been prepopulated in your annex template; these six actions should be included in every annex and should not be removed:

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing City/County Annex Template 18 • Where appropriate, support retro-fitting, purchase or relocation of structures located in high hazard areas, prioritizing those structures that have experienced repetitive losses and/or are located in high or medium ranked hazard.
• Integrate the hazard mitigation plan into other plans, ordinances and programs that dictate land use decisions within the community.
• Actively participate in the plan maintenance protocols outlined in Volume 1 of this hazard mitigation plan.
• Continue to maintain good standing and compliance under the NFIP through implementation of floodplain management programs that, at a minimum, meet the NFIP requirements:
 Enforce the flood damage prevention ordinance.
 Participate in floodplain identification and mapping updates.  Provide public assistance/information on floodplain requirements and impacts. • Identify and pursue strategies to increase adaptive capacity to climate change. • Purchase generators for critical facilities and infrastructure that lack adequate back-up power.

In addition, the core planning team recommends that every planning partner strongly consider the following actions:
• Develop and implement a program to capture perishable data after significant events (e.g. high water marks, preliminary damage estimates, damage photos) to support future mitigation efforts including the implementation and maintenance of the hazard mitigation plan. • Support the County-wide initiatives identified in Volume I of the hazard mitigation plan. • Develop a post-disaster recovery plan and a debris management plan. • Develop and/or update plans that support or enhance continuity of operations following disasters.

The specifics of all these common actions should be adjusted as needed for the particulars of each community.

Complete the Table
Complete the table titled “Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix” for all the actions you have identified and would like to include in the plan:
• Enter the action number (see box on next page) and description. If the action is carried over from your previous hazard mitigation plan, return to the “Status of Previous Plan Actions” table you completed in Phase 1 and enter the new action number in the column labeled “Action # in Update.” • Indicate whether the action mitigates hazards for new and/or existing assets. • Identify the specific hazards the action will mitigate (note: you must list each hazard by name; simply indicating “all hazards” is not deemed acceptable).
• Identify by number the mitigation plan objectives that the action addresses (see toolkit). • Indicate who will be the lead in administering the action. This will most likely be a department within your jurisdiction (e.g. planning or public works). If you wish to indicate more than one department as responsible for the action, clearly identify one as the lead agency and list the others in the “supporting agency” column.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing City/County Annex Template 19 • Enter an estimated cost in dollars if
known; otherwise, enter “High,”
“Medium,” or “Low,” as determined for
the prioritization process described in the
following section.
• Identify funding sources for the action. If it
is a grant, include the grant-providing
agency as well as funding sources for any
required cost share. Refer to your fiscal
capability assessment to identify possible
sources of funding and refer to the table
on page 15 of these instructions for
project eligibility for FEMA’s hazard
mitigation assistance grant programs.
• Indicate the time line as “short-term” (1 to
5 years) or “long-term” (5 years or greater) or “ongoing” (a continual program) Mitigation Action Priority
Complete the information in the table titled “Mitigation Action Priority” as follows:
• Action #—Indicate the action number from the Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix table. • # of Objectives Met—Enter the number of objectives the action will meet. • Benefits—Enter “High,” “Medium” or “Low” as follows:
 High—Action will provide an immediate reduction of risk exposure for life and property.  Medium—Action will have a long-term impact on the reduction of risk exposure for life and property, or action will provide an immediate reduction in the risk exposure for property.  Low—Long-term benefits of the action are difficult to quantify in the short term. • Cost—Enter “High,” “Medium” or “Low” as follows:
 High—Existing funding will not cover the cost of the action; implementation would require new revenue through an alternative source (for example, bonds, grants, and fee increases).  Medium—The action could be implemented with existing funding but would require a re- apportionment of the budget or a budget amendment, or the cost of the action would have to be spread over multiple years.
 Low—The action could be funded under the existing budget. The action is part of or can be part of an ongoing existing program.
• Do Benefits Exceed the Cost?—Enter “Yes” or “No.” This is a qualitative assessment. Enter “Yes” if the benefit rating (high, medium or low) is the same as or higher than the cost rating (high benefit/high cost; high benefit/medium cost; medium benefit/low cost; etc.). Enter “No” if the benefit rating is lower than the cost rating (medium benefit/high cost, low benefit/medium cost; etc.) • Is the Action Grant-Eligible?—Enter “Yes” or “No.” Refer to the fact sheet on FEMA hazard mitigation grant programs in the annex preparation toolkit and the table on page 15 of these instructions.

Action Numbering
Actions are to be numbered using the three-letter code for your jurisdiction shown below, followed by a hyphen and the action’s sequential number:
• Ventura, County of—VCO-1, VCO-2…
• Camarillo, City of—CAM-1, CAM-2…
• Fillmore, City of—FIL-1, FIL-2…
• Moorpark, City of —MPK-1, MPK-2…
• Ojai, City of —OJC-1, OJC-2…
• Oxnard, City of —OXN-1, OXN-2…
• Port Hueneme, City of —PTH-1, PTH-2…
• Santa Paula, City of —STP-1, STP-2…
• Simi Valley, City of —SIM-1, SIM-2…
• Thousand Oaks, City of —THO-1, THO-2…
• Ventura, City of —VEN-1, VEN-2…
Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing City/County Annex Template 20 • Can Action Be Funded Under Existing Program Budgets?—Enter “Yes” or “No.” In other words, is this action currently budgeted for, or would it require a new budget authorization or funding from another source such as grants?
• Implementation Priority— Enter “High,” “Medium” or “Low” as follows:
 High Priority—An action that meets multiple objectives, has benefits that exceed costs, and has a secured source of funding. Action can be completed in the short term (1 to 5 years).  Medium Priority—An action that meets multiple objectives, has benefits that exceed costs, and is eligible for funding though no funding has yet been secured for it. Action can be completed in the short term (1 to 5 years), once funding is secured. Medium-priority actions become high-priority actions once funding is secured.
 Low Priority—An action that will mitigate the risk of a hazard, has benefits that do not exceed the costs or are difficult to quantify, has no secured source of funding, and is not eligible for any known grant funding. Action can be completed in the long term (1 to 10 years). Low-priority actions may be eligible for grant funding from programs that have not yet been identified. • Grant Pursuit Priority— Enter “High,” “Medium” or “Low” as follows:
 High Priority—An action that meets identified grant eligibility requirements, has high benefits, and is listed as high or medium implementation priority; local funding options are unavailable or available local funds could be used instead for actions that are not eligible for grant funding.  Medium Priority—An action that meets identified grant eligibility requirements, has medium or low benefits, and is listed as medium or low implementation priority; local funding options are unavailable.
 Low Priority—An action that has not been identified as meeting any grant eligibility requirements.

Actions identified as high-grant-pursuit priority actions should be closely reviewed for consideration when grant funding opportunities arise.

Note: If a jurisdiction wishes to identify an action as high priority that is outside of the prioritization scheme for high priorities, a note indicating so should be inserted and a rationale should be provided.

Analysis of Mitigation Actions
In the table titled “Analysis of Mitigation Actions,” for each combination of hazard type and mitigation type, enter the numbers of all recommended actions that address that hazard type and can be categorized as that mitigation type. The mitigation types are as follows:
• Prevention—Government, administrative or regulatory actions that influence the way land and buildings are developed to reduce hazard losses. Includes planning and zoning, floodplain laws, capital improvement programs, open space preservation, and stormwater management regulations. • Property Protection—Modification of buildings or structures to protect them from a hazard or removal of structures from a hazard area. Includes acquisition, elevation, relocation, structural retrofit, storm shutters, and shatter-resistant glass.
• Public Education & Awareness—Actions to inform residents and elected officials about hazards and ways to mitigate them. Includes outreach projects, real estate disclosure, hazard information centers, and school-age and adult education.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing City/County Annex Template 21 • Natural Resource Protection—Actions that minimize hazard loss and preserve or restore the functions of natural systems. Includes sediment and erosion control, stream corridor restoration, watershed management, forest and vegetation management, wetland restoration and preservation, and green infrastructure.
• Emergency Services—Actions that protect people and property during and immediately after a hazard event. Includes warning systems, emergency response services, and the protection of essential facilities.
• Structural Projects—Actions that involve the construction of structures to reduce the impact of a hazard. Includes dams, setback levees, floodwalls, retaining walls, and safe rooms. • Climate Resilience—Actions that incorporate methods to mitigate and/or adapt to the impacts of climate change. Includes aquifer storage and recovery activities, incorporating future conditions projections in project design or planning, or actions that specifically address jurisdiction-specific climate change risks, such as sea-level rise or urban heat island effect. • Community Capacity Building—Actions that increase or enhance local capabilities to adjust to potential damage, to take advantage of opportunities, or to respond to consequences. Includes staff training, memorandums of understanding, development of plans and studies, and monitoring programs.

This exercise demonstrates that the jurisdiction has selected a comprehensive range of actions. This table must show at least one action to address each “high” and “medium” ranked hazard. Planning partners should aim to identify at least one action for each mitigation type, but this is not required.

An example of a completed “Analysis of Mitigation Actions” table is provided below. Note that an action can be more than one mitigation type.

Sample Completed Table – Analysis of Mitigation Actions Hazard Type
Action Addressing Hazard, by Mitigation Type
Prevention
Property
Protection
Public
Education &
Awareness
Natural
Resource
Protection
Emergency
Services
Structural
Projects
Climate
Resilience
Community
Capacity Building
High-Risk Hazards
Dam Failure EX-2, 3, 4, 5, 6 EX-1, 6 EX-4, 6 EX-8, 11 EX-3, 4, 8, 9, 10 Drought EX-2 EX-1 EX-4 EX-3, 4, 8, 9, 10
Medium-Risk Hazards
Earthquake EX-2, 3, 4, 5, 7 EX-1, 7 EX-4 EX-8, 11 EX-3, 4, 8, 9 Flooding EX-2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 EX-1, 6, 7 EX-4, 6 EX-9 EX-8, 11 EX-6 EX-3, 4, 8, 9, 10 Landslide EX-2, 3, 4, 5, 7 EX-1, 7 EX-4 EX-8, 11 EX-3, 4, 8, 9, 10 Low-Risk Hazards
Severe Weather EX-2, 3, 4, 5, 7 EX-1, 7, 9 EX-4 EX-8, 9, 11 EX-8, 7 EX-3, 4, 8, 9, 10 Wildfire EX-2, 3, 4, 5, 7 EX-1, 7, 9 EX-4, 9 EX-9 EX-8, 11 EX-3, 4, 8, 9, 10

PUBLIC OUTREACH
FEMA requirements for public outreach will be met by the County’s engagement efforts and are included in the main part of the plan. These may include public meetings, a StoryMap, surveys, etc. If individual jurisdictions want to have a more robust outreach for their local community, the public outreach table in each annex may be used to memorialize those local efforts.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing City/County Annex Template 22 This table should record local public outreach efforts made by your jurisdiction to inform the community of the plan update process. Examples may include local surveys on hazard awareness/preparedness, social media blasts, press releases, and outreach to local groups (CERT, senior citizen organizations, etc.) This section is optional.

INFORMATION SOURCES USED FOR THIS ANNEX
This section should describe what resources you used to complete the annex and how you used them. The sources used for Phases 1 and 2 should have been entered previously. List any additional sources used for the preparation of the Phase 3 annex. Review to ensure that all materials used in all three phases are identified. Providing this information is a requirement to pass the state and FEMA review process.

FUTURE NEEDS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND RISK/VULNERABILITY
In this section, identify any future studies, analyses, reports, or surveys your jurisdiction needs to better understand its vulnerability to identified or currently unidentified risks. These could be needs based on federal or state agency mandates.

This section is optional.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
Use this section to add any additional information pertinent to hazard mitigation and your jurisdiction not covered in this template. This section is optional.

THIS COMPLETES PHASE 3

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing City/County Annex Template 23 APPENDIX— Risk Ranking Calculation Methodology
The instructions below describe the methodology for how risk rankings were derived in the “Loss Matrix” spreadsheet provided with the annex preparation toolkit. The risk-ranking for each hazard assessed its probability of occurrence and its potential impact on people, property, and the economy. Refer to the Loss Matrix spreadsheet in order to follow along.

Probability of Occurrence
A probability factor is assigned based on how often a hazard is likely to occur. The probability of occurrence of a hazard event is generally based on past hazard events in an area, although weight can be given to expected future probability of occurrence based on established return intervals and changing climate conditions. For example, if your jurisdiction has experienced two damaging floods in the last 25 years, the probability of occurrence is high for flooding and scores a 3 under this category. If your jurisdiction has experienced no damage from landslides in the last 100 years, your probability of occurrence for landslide is low, and scores a 1 under this category. Each hazard was assigned a probability factor as follows:
• High—Hazard event is likely to occur within 25 years (Probability Factor = 3) • Medium—Hazard event is likely to occur within 100 years (Probability Factor = 2) • Low—Hazard event is not likely to occur within 100 years (Probability Factor = 1) • None—There is no exposure to the hazard and no probability of occurrence (Probability Factor = 0) Potential Impacts of Each Hazard
The impact of each hazard is divided into three categories: impacts on people, impacts on property, and impacts on the economy. These categories are also assigned weighted values. Impact on people was assigned a weighting factor of 3, impact on property was assigned a weighting factor of 2 and impact on the economy was assigned a weighting factor of 1.

Impact factors for each category (people, property, economy) are described below:
• People—Values are assigned based on the percentage of the total population exposed to the hazard event. The degree of impact on individuals will vary and is not measurable, so the calculation assumes for simplicity and consistency that all people exposed to a hazard because they live in a hazard zone will be equally impacted when a hazard event occurs. Impact factors were assigned as follows:
 High—25 percent or more of the population is exposed to a hazard (Impact Factor = 3)  Medium—10 percent to 24 percent of the population is exposed to a hazard (Impact Factor = 2)  Low—9 percent or less of the population is exposed to the hazard (Impact Factor = 1)  No impact—None of the population is exposed to a hazard (Impact Factor = 0) • Property—Values are assigned based on the percentage of the total property value exposed to the hazard event:
 High—25 percent or more of the total replacement value is exposed to a hazard (Impact Factor = 3)
 Medium—10 percent to 24 percent of the total replacement value is exposed to a hazard (Impact Factor = 2)
 Low—9 percent or less of the total replacement value is exposed to the hazard (Impact Factor = 1)
Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing City/County Annex Template 24  No impact—None of the total replacement value is exposed to a hazard (Impact Factor = 0) • Economy—Values were assigned based on the percentage of the total property value vulnerable to the hazard event. Values represent estimates of the loss from a major event of each hazard in comparison to the total replacement value of the property exposed to the hazard. For some hazards, such as wildland fire and landslide, vulnerability may be considered to be the same or a portion of exposure due to the lack of loss estimation tools specific to those hazards.  High—Estimated loss from the hazard is 10 percent or more of the total replacement value (Impact Factor = 3)
 Medium—Estimated loss from the hazard is 5 percent to 9 percent of the total replacement value (Impact Factor = 2)
 Low—Estimated loss from the hazard is 4 percent or less of the total replacement value (Impact Factor = 1)
 No impact—No loss is estimated from the hazard (Impact Factor = 0).

Impacts on People
The percent of the total population exposed to each hazard of concern with a defined extent and location (e.g. floodplain) can be found in the loss estimate matrix in the green highlighted column. For those hazards that do not have a defined extent and location the entire population or a portion of the population is considered to be exposed, depending on the hazard. For the drought hazard, it is common for jurisdictions to list “low” or “none,” because all people in the planning area would be exposed to drought, but impacts to the health and safety of individuals are expected to be minimal.

Impacts on Property
The percent of the total value exposed to each hazard of concern with a defined extent and location (e.g. floodplain) can be found in the loss estimate matrix in the blue highlighted column. For those hazards that
do not have a defined extent and location (e.g. severe weather) the entire building stock is generally considered to be exposed. For the drought hazard, it is common for jurisdictions to list “low” or “none,” because all structures in the planning area would be exposed to drought, but impacts to structures are expected to be minimal.

Impacts on the Economy
The loss estimates for each hazard of concern that was modeled (i.e. dam failure, flood, earthquake) can be found in the loss estimate matrix in the
purple highlighted column. For those hazards that have a defined extent and location, but do not have modelled loss results, loss estimates can be the same as exposure or a portion thereof. For example, a large percentage of the building stock may be exposed to landslide or wildland fire risk, but it would not be expected that one event that resulted in loss to all exposed structures would occur. For those hazards that do not have a defined extent and location, exposure is based on the hazard type.

Risk Rating for Each Hazard
A risk rating for each hazard was determined by multiplying the assigned probability factor by the sum of the weighted impact factors for people, property and the economy:

Risk Rating = Probability Factor x Weighted Impact Factor {people + property + economy} Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing City/County Annex Template 25 This is the number that is shown in the risk ranking table in your template. Generally, score of 30 or greater receive a “high” rating, score between 15 and 30 receive a “medium” rating, and score of less than 15 receives a “low” rating.

Item No.7D

1-1

1. JURISDICTION NAME

1.1 LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING TEAM
Primary Point of Contact Alternate Point of Contact
Name, Title
Street Address
City, State ZIP
Telephone: xxx-xxx-xxxx
e-mail Address: [email protected]
Name, Title
Street Address
City, State ZIP
Telephone: xxx-xxx-xxxx
e-mail Address: [email protected]

This annex was developed by the local hazard mitigation planning team, whose members are listed in Table 1-1.

Table 1-1. Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Team Members Name Title
__________ __________
__________ __________
__________ __________
__________ __________
__________ __________
__________ __________
__________ __________

1.2 JURISDICTION PROFILE

1.2.1 Location and Features
___[jurisdiction name]___ is in ___[general location description]___ The current boundaries generally extend from ___[describe]___, encompassing an area of ___[area in square miles]___.
___[general description of key features]___

1.2.2 History
___[jurisdiction name]___ was incorporated in ___[date]___. ___[brief historical summary]___ Item No.7D

Municipal Annex Template Jurisdiction Name
1-2

1.2.3 Governing Body Format
___[general description]___.

The __[name of adopting body]___ assumes responsibility for the adoption of this plan; __[name of oversight agency]__ will oversee its implementation.

1.3 CURRENT TRENDS

1.3.1 Population
According to ___[identify data source]___, the population of ___[jurisdiction name]___ as of ___[month year]___ was ___[population]___ Since ___[year]___, the population has grown at an average annual rate of ___[number]___ percent.

1.3.2 Development
_DESCRIBE TRENDS IN GENERAL__.

Identifying previous and future development trends is achieved through a comprehensive review of permitting since completion of the previous plan and in anticipation of future development. Tracking previous and future growth in potential hazard areas provides an overview of increased exposure to a hazard within a community.

Table 1-2 summarizes development trends in the performance period since the preparation of the previous hazard mitigation plan, as well as expected future development trends.

Table 1-2. Recent and Expected Future Development Trends Criterion Response
Has your jurisdiction annexed any land since the preparation of the previous hazard mitigation plan? Yes/No If yes, give the estimated area annexed and
estimated number of parcels or structures.
____________
Is your jurisdiction expected to annex any areas during the performance period of this plan? Yes/No If yes, describe land areas and dominant uses. ____________ If yes, who currently has permitting authority over
these areas?
____________
Are any areas targeted for development or major redevelopment in the next five years? Yes/No If yes, briefly describe, including whether any of the
areas are in known hazard risk areas
____________
How many permits for new construction were
issued in your jurisdiction since the preparation of
the previous hazard mitigation plan?
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Single Family __ __ __ __ __
Multi-Family __ __ __ __ __
Other __ __ __ __ __
Total __ __ __ __ __
Provide the number of new-construction permits for
each hazard area or provide a qualitative
description of where development has occurred.
• Special Flood Hazard Areas: #
• Landslide: #
• High Liquefaction Areas: #
• Tsunami Inundation Area: #
• Wildfire Risk Areas: #
Item No.7D

Report Title Jurisdiction Name
1-3
Criterion Response
Describe the level of buildout in the jurisdiction,
based on your jurisdiction’s buildable lands
inventory. If no such inventory exists, provide a
qualitative description.
____________

1.4 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT
This section describes an assessment of existing capabilities for implementing hazard mitigation strategies. The introduction at the beginning of this volume of the hazard mitigation plan describes the components included in the capability assessment and their significance for hazard mitigation planning.

Findings of the capability assessment were reviewed to identify opportunities to expand, initiate or integrate capabilities to further hazard mitigation goals and objectives. Where such opportunities were identified and determined to be feasible, they are included in the action plan. The “Analysis of Mitigation Actions” table in this annex identifies these as community capacity building mitigation actions. The findings of the assessment are presented as follows:
• An assessment of planning and regulatory capabilities is presented in Table 1-3. • Development and permitting capabilities are presented in Table 1-4. • An assessment of fiscal capabilities is presented in Table 1-5. • An assessment of administrative and technical capabilities is presented in Table 1-6. • An assessment of education and outreach capabilities is presented in Table 1-7. • Information on National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) compliance is presented in Table 1-8. • Classifications under various community mitigation programs are presented in Table 1-9. • The community’s adaptive capacity for the impacts of climate change is presented in Table 1-10.

Item No.7D

Municipal Annex Template Jurisdiction Name
1-4
Table 1-3. Planning and Regulatory Capability

Local
Authority
Other Jurisdiction
Authority
State
Mandated
Integration
Opportunity?
Codes, Ordinances, & Requirements
Building Code Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Comment: Enter Comment
Zoning Code Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Comment: Enter Comment
Subdivisions Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Comment: Enter Comment
Stormwater Management Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Comment: Enter Comment
Post-Disaster Recovery Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Comment: Enter Comment
Real Estate Disclosure Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Comment: Enter Comment
Growth Management Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Comment: Enter Comment
Site Plan Review Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Comment: Enter Comment
Environmental Protection Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Comment: Enter Comment
Flood Damage Prevention Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Comment: Enter Comment
Emergency Management Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Comment: Enter Comment
Climate Change Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Comment: Enter Comment
Other Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Comment: Enter Comment
Planning Documents
General Plan Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Is the plan compliant with Assembly Bill 2140? Yes/No
Comment: Enter Comment
Capital Improvement Plan Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
How often is the plan updated? ____________
Comment: Enter Comment
Disaster Debris Management Plan Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Comment: Enter Comment
Floodplain or Watershed Plan Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Comment: Enter Comment
Stormwater Plan Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Comment: Enter Comment
Urban Water Management Plan Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Comment: Enter Comment
Item No.7D

Report Title Jurisdiction Name
1-5

Local
Authority
Other Jurisdiction
Authority
State
Mandated
Integration
Opportunity?
Habitat Conservation Plan Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Comment: Enter Comment
Economic Development Plan Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Comment: Enter Comment
Shoreline Management Plan Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Comment: Enter Comment
Community Wildfire Protection Plan Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Comment: Enter Comment
Forest Management Plan Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Comment: Enter Comment
Climate Action Plan Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Comment: Enter Comment
Emergency Operations Plan Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Comment: Enter Comment
Threat & Hazard Identification & Risk Assessment (THIRA) Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Comment: Enter Comment
Post-Disaster Recovery Plan Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Comment: Enter Comment
Continuity of Operations Plan Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Comment: Enter Comment
Public Health Plan Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Comment: Enter Comment
Other Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Comment: Enter Comment

Table 1-4. Development and Permitting Capability
Criterion Response
Does your jurisdiction issue development permits? Yes/No If no, who does? If yes, which department? Enter Response Does your jurisdiction have the ability to track permits by hazard area? Yes/No Does your jurisdiction have a buildable lands inventory? Yes/No

Item No.7D

Municipal Annex Template Jurisdiction Name
1-6
Table 1-5. Fiscal Capability
Financial Resource Accessible or Eligible to Use?
Community Development Block Grants Yes/No
Capital Improvements Project Funding Yes/No
Authority to Levy Taxes for Specific Purposes Yes/No
User Fees for Water, Sewer, Gas or Electric Service Yes/No If yes, specify: Enter Response
Incur Debt through General Obligation Bonds Yes/No
Incur Debt through Special Tax Bonds Yes/No
Incur Debt through Private Activity Bonds Yes/No
Withhold Public Expenditures in Hazard-Prone Areas Yes/No State-Sponsored Grant Programs Yes/No
Development Impact Fees for Homebuyers or Developers Yes/No Other Yes/No
If yes, specify: Enter Response

Table 1-6. Administrative and Technical Capability
Staff/Personnel Resource Available?
Planners or engineers with knowledge of land development and land management practices Yes/No If Yes, Department /Position: Enter Response
Engineers or professionals trained in building or infrastructure construction practices Yes/No If Yes, Department /Position: Enter Response
Planners or engineers with an understanding of natural hazards Yes/No If Yes, Department /Position: Enter Response
Staff with training in benefit/cost analysis Yes/No
If Yes, Department /Position: Enter Response
Surveyors Yes/No
If Yes, Department /Position: Enter Response
Personnel skilled or trained in GIS applications Yes/No If Yes, Department /Position: Enter Response
Scientist familiar with natural hazards in local area Yes/No If Yes, Department /Position: Enter Response
Emergency manager Yes/No
If Yes, Department /Position: Enter Response
Grant writers Yes/No
If Yes, Department /Position: Enter Response
Other Yes/No
If Yes, Department /Position: Enter Response

Item No.7D

Report Title Jurisdiction Name
1-7
Table 1-7. Education and Outreach Capability
Criterion Response
Do you have a public information officer or communications office? Yes/No Do you have personnel skilled or trained in website development? Yes/No Do you have hazard mitigation information available on your website? Yes/No If yes, briefly describe: Enter Response
Do you use social media for hazard mitigation education and outreach? Yes/No If yes, briefly describe: Enter Response
Do you have any citizen boards or commissions that address issues related to hazard mitigation? Yes/No If yes, briefly describe: Enter Response
Do you have any other programs in place that could be used to communicate hazard-related information? Yes/No If yes, briefly describe: Enter Response
Do you have any established warning systems for hazard events? Yes/No If yes, briefly describe: Enter Response

Table 1-8. National Flood Insurance Program Compliance
Criterion Response
What local department is responsible for floodplain management? Enter Response Who is your floodplain administrator? (department/position) Enter Response Are any certified floodplain managers on staff in your jurisdiction? Yes/No What is the date that your flood damage prevention ordinance was last amended? Enter Response Does your floodplain management program meet or exceed minimum requirements?
Meets/Exceeds
If exceeds, in what ways? Enter Response
When was the most recent Community Assistance Visit or Community Assistance Contact?
Enter Response
Does your jurisdiction have any outstanding NFIP compliance violations that need to be addressed?
Yes/No
If so, state what they are. Enter Response
Are any RiskMAP projects currently underway in your jurisdiction? Yes/No If so, state what they are. Enter Response
Do your flood hazard maps adequately address the flood risk within your jurisdiction?
Yes/No
If no, state why. Enter Response
Does your floodplain management staff need any assistance or training to support its floodplain management program?
Yes/No
If so, what type of assistance/training is needed? Enter Response Does your jurisdiction participate in the Community Rating System (CRS)? Yes/No If yes, is your jurisdiction interested in improving its CRS Classification? Yes/No If no, is your jurisdiction interested in joining the CRS program? Yes/No How many flood insurance policies are in force in your jurisdiction?a Enter Response What is the insurance in force? $_______
What is the premium in force? $_______
Item No.7D

Municipal Annex Template Jurisdiction Name
1-8
Criterion Response
How many total loss claims have been filed in your jurisdiction?a Enter Response How many claims are still open or were closed without payment? Enter Response What were the total payments for losses? $_______
a. According to FEMA statistics as of MONTH XX, 20XX

Table 1-9. Community Classifications
Participating? Classification Date Classified
FIPS Code Yes/No _______ Date
DUNS # Yes/No _______ Date
Community Rating System Yes/No _______ Date
Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule Yes/No _______ Date Public Protection Yes/No _______ Date
Storm Ready Yes/No _______ Date
Firewise Yes/No _______ Date
Tsunami Ready Yes/No _______ Date

Table 1-10. Adaptive Capacity for Climate Change
Criterion
Jurisdiction
Ratinga
Technical Capacity
Jurisdiction-level understanding of potential climate change impacts High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Jurisdiction-level monitoring of climate change impacts High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Technical resources to assess proposed strategies for feasibility and externalities High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Jurisdiction-level capacity for development of greenhouse gas emissions inventory High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Capital planning and land use decisions informed by potential climate impacts High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Participation in regional groups addressing climate risks High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Implementation Capacity
Clear authority/mandate to consider climate change impacts during public decision-making processes High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Identified strategies for greenhouse gas mitigation efforts High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Identified strategies for adaptation to impacts High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Champions for climate action in local government departments High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Item No.7D

Report Title Jurisdiction Name
1-9
Criterion
Jurisdiction
Ratinga
Political support for implementing climate change adaptation strategies High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Financial resources devoted to climate change adaptation High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Local authority over sectors likely to be negative impacted High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Public Capacity
Local residents knowledge of and understanding of climate risk High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Local residents support of adaptation efforts High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Local residents’ capacity to adapt to climate impacts High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Local economy current capacity to adapt to climate impacts High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Local ecosystems capacity to adapt to climate impacts High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
a. High = Capacity exists and is in use; Medium = Capacity may exist, but is not used or could use some improvement; Low = Capacity does not exist or could use substantial improvement; Unsure= Not enough information is known to assign a rating.

1.5 INTEGRATION REVIEW
For hazard mitigation planning, “integration” means that hazard mitigation information is used in other relevant planning mechanisms, such as general planning and capital facilities planning, and that relevant information from those sources is used in hazard mitigation. This section identifies where such integration is already in place, and where there are opportunities for further integration in the future. Resources listed at the end of this annex were used to provide information on integration. The progress reporting process described in Volume 1 of the hazard mitigation plan will document the progress of hazard mitigation actions related to integration and identify new opportunities for integration.

1.5.1 Existing Integration
Some level of integration has already been established between local hazard mitigation planning and the following other local plans and programs:
• Plan or Program Name—Description
• Plan or Program Name—Description
• Plan or Program Name—Description
• Plan or Program Name—Description
• Plan or Program Name—Description
Item No.7D

Municipal Annex Template Jurisdiction Name
1-10

1.5.2 Opportunities for Future Integration
The capability assessment presented in this annex indicates opportunities to integrate this mitigation plan with other jurisdictional planning/regulatory capabilities. Capabilities were identified as integration opportunities if they can support or enhance the actions identified in this plan or be supported or enhanced by components of this plan. The capability assessment identified the following plans and programs that do not currently integrate hazard mitigation information but provide opportunities to do so in the future:
• Plan or Program Name—Description
• Plan or Program Name—Description
• Plan or Program Name—Description
• Plan or Program Name—Description
• Plan or Program Name—Description
Taking action to integrate each of these programs with the hazard mitigation plan was considered as a mitigation action to include in the action plan presented in this annex.

1.6 RISK ASSESSMENT

1.6.1 Jurisdiction-Specific Natural Hazard Event History Table 1-11 lists past occurrences of natural hazards for which specific damage was recorded in this jurisdiction Other hazard events that broadly affected the entire planning area, including this jurisdiction, are listed in the risk assessments in Volume 1 of this hazard mitigation plan.

Table 1-11. Past Natural Hazard Events
Type of Event FEMA Disaster # Date Damage Assessment
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Item No.7D

Report Title Jurisdiction Name
1-11

1.6.2 Hazard Risk Ranking
Table 1-12 presents a local ranking of all hazards of concern for which this hazard mitigation plan provides complete risk assessments. As described in detail in Volume 1, the ranking process involves an assessment of the likelihood of occurrence for each hazard, along with its potential impacts on people, property and the economy.

Mitigation actions target hazards with high and medium rankings.

Table 1-12. Hazard Risk Ranking
Rank Hazard Risk Ranking Score Risk Category
1 _______ _______ High/Medium/Low
2 _______ _______ High/Medium/Low
3 _______ _______ High/Medium/Low
4 _______ _______ High/Medium/Low
5 _______ _______ High/Medium/Low
6 _______ _______ High/Medium/Low
7 _______ _______ High/Medium/Low
8 _______ _______ High/Medium/Low
9 _______ _______ High/Medium/Low

1.6.3 Jurisdiction-Specific Vulnerabilities
Volume 1 of this hazard mitigation plan provides complete risk assessments for each identified hazard of concern.

This section provides information on a few key vulnerabilities for this jurisdiction. Available jurisdiction-specific risk maps of the hazards are provided at the end of this annex.

Repetitive Loss Properties
Repetitive loss records are as follows:
• Number of FEMA-identified Repetitive-Loss Properties: XX • Number of FEMA-identified Severe-Repetitive-Loss Properties: XX • Number of Repetitive-Loss Properties or Severe-Repetitive-Loss Properties that have been mitigated: XX Other Noted Vulnerabilities
The following jurisdiction-specific issues have been identified based on a review of the results of the risk assessment, public involvement strategy, and other available resources:
• Insert as appropriate.
• Insert as appropriate.
• Insert as appropriate.

Mitigation actions addressing these issues were prioritized for consideration in the action plan presented in this annex.

Item No.7D

Municipal Annex Template Jurisdiction Name
1-12

1.7 STATUS OF PREVIOUS PLAN ACTIONS
If your jurisdiction has no previous hazard mitigation plan, please enter an “X” in the box at right and do not complete this section.

Table 1-13 summarizes the actions that were recommended in the previous version of the hazard mitigation plan and their implementation status at the time this update was prepared.

Table 1-13. Status of Previous Plan Actions
Removed;
Carried Over to
Plan Update
Action Item from Previous Plan Completed
No Longer
Feasible
Check
if Yes
Action #
in Update
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Item No.7D

Report Title Jurisdiction Name
1-13

1.8 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN
Table 1-14 lists the identified actions, which make up the hazard mitigation action plan for this jurisdiction.

Table 1-15 identifies the priority for each action. Table 1-16 summarizes the mitigation actions by hazard of concern and mitigation type.

Table 1-14. Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
Benefits New or
Existing Assets Objectives Met Lead Agency Support Agency Estimated Cost Sources of
Funding Timelinea
Action xxx-1—Where appropriate, support retrofitting, purchase or relocation of structures located in hazard areas, prioritizing those that have experienced repetitive losses and/or are located in high- or medium-risk hazard areas.

Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
Existing Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response High HMGP, PDM, FMA
Short-term
Action xxx-2— Integrate the hazard mitigation plan into other plans, ordinances and programs that dictate land use decisions in the community, including ______________
Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
New & Existing Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Low Staff Time, General Funds
Ongoing
Action xxx-3—Actively participate in the plan maintenance protocols outlined in Volume 1 of this hazard mitigation plan.

Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
New & Existing Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Low Staff Time, General Funds
Short-term
Action xxx-4—Continue to maintain good standing and compliance under the NFIP through implementation of floodplain management programs that, at a minimum, meet the NFIP requirements:
• Enforce the flood damage prevention ordinance.
• Participate in floodplain identification and mapping updates. • Provide public assistance/information on floodplain requirements and impacts.

Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
New & Existing Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Low Staff Time, General Funds
Ongoing
Action xxx-5—Identify and pursue strategies to increase adaptive capacity to climate change including but not limited to the following:
• _______.

Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
New & Existing Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Low Staff Time, General Funds
Short-term
Action xxx-6— Purchase generators for critical facilities and infrastructure that lack adequate backup power, including ________.

Hazards Mitigated: Dam failure, earthquake, flooding, landslide, severe weather, tsunami, wildfire Existing Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response
Action xxx-7—Description
Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Action xxx-8—Description
Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Item No.7D

Municipal Annex Template Jurisdiction Name
1-14
Benefits New or
Existing Assets Objectives Met Lead Agency Support Agency Estimated Cost Sources of
Funding Timelinea
Action xxx-9—Description
Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Action xxx-10—Description
Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Action xxx-11—Description
Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Action xxx-12—Description
Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Action xxx-13—Description
Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Action xxx-14—Description
Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Action xxx-15—Description
Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Action xxx-16—Description
Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Action xxx-17—Description
Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Action xxx-18—Description
Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Action xxx-19—Description
Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Action xxx-20—Description
Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response a. Short-term = Completion within 5 years; Long-term = Completion within 10 years; Ongoing= Continuing new or existing program with no completion date
Acronyms used here are defined at the beginning of this volume.

Item No.7D

Report Title Jurisdiction Name
1-15
Table 1-15. Mitigation Action Priority
Action
#
# of
Objectives
Met Benefits Costs
Do Benefits
Equal or
Exceed Cost?
Is Project
Grant-
Eligible?
Can Project Be Funded
Under Existing
Programs/ Budgets?
Implementation
Prioritya
Grant
Pursuit
Prioritya
1 3 High High Yes Yes No Medium High
2 7 Medium Low Yes No Yes High Low
3 3 Low Low Yes No Yes High Low
4 6 Medium Low Yes No Yes High Low
5 7 Medium Low Yes No Yes High Medium
6 3 High Medium Yes Yes No Medium High
7 _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____
8 _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____
9 _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____
10 _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____
11 _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____
a. See the introduction to this volume for explanation of priorities.

Table 1-16. Analysis of Mitigation Actions
Action Addressing Hazard, by Mitigation Typea
Hazard Type Prevention
Property
Protection
Public
Education &
Awareness
Natural
Resource
Protection
Emergency
Services
Structural
Projects
Climate
Resilience
Community
Capacity
Building
High-Risk Hazards
____________ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____________ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____________ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____________ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ Medium-Risk Hazards
____________ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____________ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____________ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____________ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ Low-Risk Hazards
____________ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____________ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____________ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ a. See the introduction to this volume for explanation of mitigation types.

1.9 PUBLIC OUTREACH
Table 1-17 lists public outreach activities in connection with this hazard mitigation plan update for this jurisdiction.

Item No.7D

Municipal Annex Template Jurisdiction Name
1-16
Table 1-17. Local Public Outreach
Local Outreach Activity Date
Number of People
Involved
____________ _____ _____
____________ _____ _____
____________ _____ _____
____________ _____ _____

1.10 INFORMATION SOURCES USED FOR THIS ANNEX
The following technical reports, plans, and regulatory mechanisms were reviewed to provide information for this annex.
• ___[jurisdiction name]___ Municipal Code—The municipal code was reviewed for the full capability assessment and for identifying opportunities for action plan integration. • ___[jurisdiction name]___ Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance—The flood damage prevention ordinance was reviewed for compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program. • <INSERT DOCUMENT NAME AND DESCRIPTION OF HOW IT WAS USED> • <INSERT DOCUMENT NAME AND DESCRIPTION OF HOW IT WAS USED> • <INSERT DOCUMENT NAME AND DESCRIPTION OF HOW IT WAS USED> • <INSERT DOCUMENT NAME AND DESCRIPTION OF HOW IT WAS USED> • <INSERT DOCUMENT NAME AND DESCRIPTION OF HOW IT WAS USED> The following outside resources and references were reviewed:
• Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex Development Toolkit—The toolkit was used to support the identification of past hazard events and noted vulnerabilities, the risk ranking, and the development of the mitigation action plan.
• <INSERT DOCUMENT NAME AND DESCRIPTION OF HOW IT WAS USED>

1.11 FUTURE NEEDS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND RISK/VULNERABILITY Insert text, if any; otherwise, delete section

1.12 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
Insert text, if any; otherwise, delete section

Item No.7D

1 INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING SPECIAL-PURPOSE

DISTRICT ANNEX TEMPLATE
Jurisdictional annex templates for the 2022 Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan update will be completed in three phases. This document provides
instructions for completing all phases of the template for special-purpose districts.

The target timeline for completion is as follows:
• Phase 1—Team, Profile, Trends, and Previous Plan Status  Deploy: May 10, 2021
 Due: June 21, 2021 by close of business
• Phase 2—Capability Assessment, Integration Review, and Information Sources
 Deploy: July 6, 2021
 Due: August 20, 2021 by close of business
• Phase 3—Risk Assessment, Action Plan, Information
Sources, Future Needs, and Additional Comments
 Deploy: September 9, 2021
 Mandatory Phase 3 Workshop: September 23, 2021
 Due: October 25, 2021 by close of business, Pacific
Time. No due date extensions!
Please direct any questions and return your completed
Phase 3 template in electronic format to:

Megan Brotherton
Tetra Tech
Phone: (808) 339-9119
E-mail: [email protected]

A Note About Formatting
The template for the annex is a Microsoft
Word document in a format that will be
used in the final plan. Partners are asked
to use this template so that a uniform
product will be completed for each partner.

Content should be entered directly into the
template rather than creating text in
another document and pasting it into the
template. Text from another source may
alter the formatting of the document.

The section and table numbering in the
document will be updated when completed
annexes are combined into the final
document. Please do not adjust any of the
numbering.
______________________
For planning partners who participated in
the 2015 planning effort, relevant
information has been brought over to the
2022 template. Fields that require attention
have been highlighted using the following
color coding:
• Yellow: Text has been brought over
from 2015 Plan and should be
reviewed and updated as needed.
• Pink: This is a new field that will
require information that was not
included in 2015.

Please un-highlight each field that you
update so that reviewers will know an
edit has been made.

New planning partners will need to
complete the template in its entirety.

Item No.7D

Appendix B.2
Instructions and Templates for
Special Purpose District Annexes
Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing Special-Purpose District Annex Template 2 PHASE 1 INSTRUCTIONS

CHAPTER TITLE
In the chapter title at the top of Page 1, type in the complete official name of your district (e.g. West County Fire Protection District #1, Johnsonville Flood Protection District). Do not change the chapter number. Revise only the jurisdiction name. If your jurisdiction’s name has already been entered, verify that wording and spelling are correct; revise as needed.

LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING TEAM
Points of Contact
Provide the name, title, mailing address, telephone number, and e-mail address for the primary point of contact for your jurisdiction. This should be the person responsible for monitoring, evaluating, and updating the annex for your jurisdiction. This person should also be the principle liaison between your jurisdiction and the Steering Committee overseeing development of this plan.

In addition, designate an alternate point of contact. This would be a person to contact should the primary point of contact be unavailable or no longer employed by the jurisdiction.

Note: Both of these contacts should match the contacts that were designated in your jurisdiction’s letter of intent to participate in this planning process. If you have changed the primary or secondary contact, let the planning team know by inserting a comment into the document.

Participating Planning Team
Populate Table 1-1 with the names of staff from your jurisdiction who participated in preparing this annex or otherwise contributed to the planning process for this hazard mitigation plan.

JURISDICTION PROFILE
Overview
Provide a brief summary description of the following:
• The purpose of the jurisdiction
• The date of inception
• The type of organization
• The number of employees
• Funding sources
• The type of governing body, and who has adoptive authority.

This should be information that is specific to your jurisdiction and will not be provided in the overall, planning area-wide mitigation plan document. Provide a statement similar to the example below:

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing Special-Purpose District Annex Template 3 EXAMPLE: The Johnsonville Community Services District is a special district created in 1952 to provide water and sewer service. A five-member elected Board of Directors governs the District. The Board assumes responsibility for the adoption of this plan; the General Manager will oversee its implementation. The District currently employs a staff of 21. Funding comes primarily through rates and revenue bonds.

Service Area
Provide a brief description of the following:
• Who the District’s customers are and an approximation of how many are currently served • The area served, in square miles
• The geographic extent of the service area
This should be information that is specific to your jurisdiction and will not be provided in the overall, planning area-wide mitigation plan document. Provide a statement similar to the example below:

EXAMPLE: The Johnsonville Community Services District serves unincorporated areas of Jones County east of the City of Smithburg, including the communities of Johnsonville, Creeks Corner, Jones Hill, Fields Landing, King Salmon, and Freshwater. The current total service area is 3.3 square miles. As of April 30, 2020, the District serves 7,305 water connections and 6,108 sewer connections.

Assets
List District-owned assets in the categories shown on the table (and described in the sections below).

Include an approximate value for each asset and a subtotal value for identified assets in each category.

Property
Provide an approximate value for any land owned by the District.

Equipment
List equipment owned by the District that is used in times of emergency or that, if incapacitated, could severely impact the service area (vehicles, generators, pumps, etc.). Provide an approximate replacement value for each item. Equipment of similar type may be listed as a single category (e.g., “3 diesel-powered generators”). For water and sewer districts, include mileage of pipeline under this category.

Critical Facilities
List District-owned facilities that are vital to maintain services to the service area. Include the address of each facility. Provide an approximate replacement value for each line. Critical facilities are generally defined as facilities owned by the District that are critical to District operations and to public health or safety and that are especially important following hazard events, including but not limited to the following:
• Structures or facilities that produce, use, or store hazardous materials (highly volatile, flammable, explosive, toxic and/or water-reactive materials)
Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing Special-Purpose District Annex Template 4 • Hospitals, nursing homes, and housing facilities likely to contain occupants who may not be sufficiently mobile to avoid death or injury during a natural hazard event • Mass gathering facilities that may be used as evacuation shelters (such as schools or community centers)
• Transportation infrastructure such as roads, bridges and airports that provide sources for evacuation before, during and after natural hazard events
• Police stations, fire stations, government facilities, vehicle equipment and storage facilities, and emergency operation centers that are needed for response activities before, during and after a natural hazard event
• Public utility facilities such as drinking water, stormwater, and wastewater systems that are vital to providing normal services to damaged areas before, during and after natural hazard events.

The table below shows an example of assets to be listed in this section.

Sample Completed Table – Special District Assets
Asset Value
Property

11.5 Acres $5,750,000
Equipment
Total length of pipe 40 miles ( $1.32 million per mile X 40 miles) $52,800,000 4 Emergency Generators $250,000
Total: $53,050,000
Critical Facilities
Administrative Buildings – 357 S. Jones Street $2,750,000 Philips Pump Station – 111 Fifth Avenue N. $377,000
Total: $3,127,000
NOTE: Placeholders in the table of assets request ADDRESSES for critical facilities. These addresses will not be included in the final published annex, but are needed in order to perform risk mapping and risk analysis for the hazard mitigation plan. Include the addresses in the table if convenient. If not, then provide a separate document listing all critical facilities and addresses for use in development of the hazard mitigation plan.

CURRENT TRENDS
Provide a brief description of previous growth trends in the service area and anticipated future increase or decrease in services (if applicable). This should be information that is specific to your jurisdiction and will not be provided in the overall, planning area-wide mitigation plan document. Provide a statement similar to the example below:

EXAMPLE: The Johnsonville Community Services District originally was formed to serve only the Johnsonville area. The District’s service area expanded throughout the years to include the full area served today. Total customers have increased by 3 percent since 2010. Population in the service area is not projected to change significantly over the next 10 years, and the District has no plans to expand its service area.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing Special-Purpose District Annex Template 5 STATUS OF PREVIOUS PLAN ACTIONS
Note that this section applies only to jurisdictions that are conducting updates to previously approved hazard mitigation plans. If your jurisdiction has not previously participated in an approved plan, enter an “X” in the box at the beginning of this section and do not complete the section. We will remove this section from your final annex.

Also note that this section is further back in the annex than the rest of the Phase 1 content. Some Phase 2 sections are included before it.

The hazard mitigation plan update must describe the status of all action items from each jurisdiction’s previous hazard mitigation plan. Each action item must be marked as ONE of the options below by checking the appropriate box (place an X) and providing the following information:
• Completed—If an action has been completed since the prior plan was prepared, check the “Completed” box and provide a date of completion in the comment section. If an action has been initiated and is an ongoing program (e.g. annual outreach event), you may mark it as completed and note that it is ongoing in the comments. If an action addresses an ongoing program you would like to continue to include in your action plan, see the “Carried Over to Plan Update” bullet below. • Removed—If action items are to be removed because they are no longer feasible, a reason must be given. Lack of funding does not mean that it is no longer feasible, unless the sole source of funding for an action is no longer available. Place a comment in the comment section explaining why the action is no longer feasible or barriers that prevented the action from being implemented (e.g., “Action no longer considered feasible due to lack of political support.”). If the wording and/or intent of a previously identified action is unclear, this can be a reason for removal. A change in community priorities may also be a reason for removal and should be discussed in the comments. • Carried Over to Plan Update—If an action is in progress, is ongoing, or has not been initiated and you would like to carry it over to the plan update, check the “Check if Yes” column under “Carried Over to Plan Update.” Selecting this option indicates that the action will be included in the mitigation action plan for this update. If you are carrying over an action to the update, include a comment describing any action that has been taken or why the action was not taken (specifically, any barriers or obstacles that prevented the action from moving forward or slowed progress). Leave the last column, “Action # in Update,” blank at this point. This will be filled in after completing the updated action plan in Phase 3.

Ensure that you have provided a status and a comment for each action.

THIS COMPLETES PHASE 1

HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN INPUT
When preparing the hazard mitigation action plan in Phase 3, all action items from your jurisdiction’s previous hazard mitigation plan that are marked as “Carried Over to Plan Update” will need to be included in the action plan.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing Special-Purpose District Annex Template 6 PHASE 2 INSTRUCTIONS

CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT
Note that it is unlikely that one person will be able to complete all sections of the capability assessment alone. The primary preparer will likely need to reach out to other departments within the local government for information. It may be beneficial to provide these individuals with background information about this planning process, as input from them will be needed again during Phase 3 of the annex development.

Planning and Regulatory Capability
List any federal, state, local or district ordinances, plans, or policies that apply to your jurisdiction and relate to hazard mitigation. Provide the date of last update and any comments as appropriate. The table below shows an example of items to be listed in this section.

Sample Completed Table – Planning and Regulatory Capability Plan, Study or Program
Date of Most
Recent Update Comment
District Design Standards 2010
Capital Improvement Program Updated annually covers 5 year timeframe Emergency Operations Plan 2000
Facility Maintenance Manual 1990
State Building Code 2016
Division of State Architects Review of all building and site design features is required prior to construction Fiscal Capability
Complete the table titled “Fiscal Capability” by indicating whether each of the listed financial resources is accessible to your jurisdiction. Enter “Yes” if the resource is fully accessible to your jurisdiction. Enter “No” if there are limitations or prerequisites that may hinder your use of this resource.

Administrative and Technical Capability
Complete the table titled “Administrative and Technical Capability” by indicating whether your jurisdiction has access to each of the listed personnel resources. Enter “Yes” or “No” in the column labeled “Available?”.

If yes, then enter the department and position title. If you have contract support with these capabilities, you can still answer “Yes.” Indicate in the department row that this resource is provided through contract.

Education and Outreach Capability
Complete the table titled “Education and Outreach.”

HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN INPUT
When preparing the hazard mitigation action plan in Phase 3, review all the above capability assessment tables and consider including actions to provide a capability that your jurisdiction does not currently have, update a capability that your jurisdiction does have, or implement an action that is recommended in an existing plan or program.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing Special-Purpose District Annex Template 7 Community Classifications
Complete the table titled “Community Classifications” to indicate your jurisdiction’s participation in various national programs related to natural hazard mitigation. For each program enter “Yes” or “No” in the second column to indicate whether your jurisdiction participates. If yes, then enter the classification that your jurisdiction has earned under the program in the third column and the date on which that classification was issued in the fourth column; enter “N/A” in the third and fourth columns if your jurisdiction is not participating. If you do not know your current classification, information is available at the following websites:
• FIPS Code— https://www.census.gov/geographies/reference-files/2018/demo/popest/2018- fips.html
• DUNS #— https://www.dnb.com/duns-number.html
• Community Rating System— https://www.fema.gov/floodplain-management/community-rating- system
• Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule— https://www.isomitigation.com/bcegs/iso-s-building- code-effectiveness-grading-schedule-bcegs.html
• Public Protection Classification— https://www.isomitigation.com/ppc/ • Storm Ready— https://www.weather.gov/stormready/communities • Firewise— http://www.firewise.org/usa-recognition-program/map-of-active-participants.aspx • Tsunami Ready— https://www.weather.gov/tsunamiready/communities Adaptive Capacity for Climate Change
Consider climate change impact concerns such as the following:
• Reduced snowpack
• Increased wildfires
• Sea level rise
• Inland flooding
• Threats to sensitive species
• Loss in agricultural productivity
• Public health and safety.

With those impacts in mind, complete the table titled “Adaptive Capacity for Climate Change” by indicating your jurisdiction’s capacity for each listed criterion as follows:
• High—The capacity exists and is in use.
• Medium—The capacity may exist, but is not used or could use some improvement. • Low—The capacity does not exist or could use substantial improvement. • Unsure—Not enough information is known to assign a rating.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing Special-Purpose District Annex Template 8 This is a subjective assessment, but providing a few words of explanation is useful. It is highly recommended that you complete this table with an internal planning team after reviewing the results of the other capability assessment tables.

INTEGRATION REVIEW
For hazard mitigation planning, “integration” means that hazard mitigation information is used in other relevant planning mechanisms, such as capital facilities planning, and that relevant information from those sources is used in hazard mitigation. FEMA recommends integration as follows:
• Integrate hazard mitigation plan goals with community objectives (e.g. incorporate the goals for risk reduction and safety into the policies of other plans). • Use the risk assessment to inform plans and policies (e.g. incorporate risk assessment findings into emergency operations plans).
• Implement mitigation actions through existing mechanisms (e.g. include mitigation projects in the capital improvement plan).
• Think about mitigation before and after a disaster (e.g. build recovery planning on existing mitigation plans and goals).

After reviewing the plans, programs and ordinances identified in the capability assessment tables, identify all plans and programs that have already been integrated with the hazard mitigation plan, and those that offer opportunities for future integration.

Existing Integration
In the highlighted bullet list, provide a brief description of integrated plans or ordinances and how each is integrated. Consider listing items marked as Completed in the “Status of Previous Plan Actions” table if they were indicated as being ongoing actions. Examples are as follows:
• Capital Improvement Plan—The capital improvement plan includes projects that can help mitigate potential hazards. The District will act to ensure consistency between the hazard mitigation plan and the current and future capital improvement plans. The hazard mitigation plan may identify new possible funding sources for capital improvement projects and may result in modifications to proposed projects based on results of the risk assessment. • Emergency Operations Plan—The results of the risk assessment were used in the development of the emergency operations plan.

HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN INPUT
When preparing the hazard mitigation action plan in Phase 3, review all the adaptive capacity criteria and consider including actions to improve the rating for those rated medium or low, to make use of the capacity for those rated high, or to acquire additional information for those rated unsure.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing Special-Purpose District Annex Template 9 • Facilities Plan—The results of the risk assessment and mapped hazard areas are used in facility planning for the District. Potential sites are reviewed for hazard risks, and appropriate mitigation measures are considered in building and site design.

Opportunities for Future Integration
List any plans or programs that offer the potential for future integration and describe the process by which integration will occur. Examples follow:
• Capital Improvement Projects—Capital improvement project proposals may take into consideration hazard mitigation potential as a means of evaluating project prioritization. • Post-Disaster Recovery Plan—The District does not have a recovery plan and intends to develop one as a mitigation planning action during the next five years. The plan will build on the mitigation goals and objectives identified in the mitigation plan.

Consider other programs you may have in place in your jurisdiction that include routine consideration and management of hazard risk. Examples of such programs may include: tree pruning programs, right-of-way mowing programs, erosion control or stream maintenance programs, etc. Add any such programs to the integration discussion and provide a brief description of how these program manage (or could be adapted to manage) risk from hazards.

INFORMATION SOURCES USED FOR THIS ANNEX
Note that this section will ultimately describe all information sources used to develop this annex, but that only the sources used for Phases 1 and 2 will be listed at this point. Additional sources will be added with the preparation of the Phase 3 annex.

This section should describe what resources you used to complete the annex and how you used them.

Several items are started for you, but be sure to update and enhance any descriptions. Providing this information is a requirement to pass the state and FEMA review process.

THIS COMPLETES PHASE 2

HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN INPUT
When preparing the hazard mitigation action plan in Phase 3, any plans that fall into the “Existing Integration” category should be reviewed and elements from them should be included in the action plan as appropriate.

HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN INPUT
When preparing the hazard mitigation action plan in Phase 3, an action to integrate any identified “Opportunities for Future Integration” should be considered for inclusion in the action plan.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing Special-Purpose District Annex Template 10 PHASE 3 INSTRUCTIONS

RISK ASSESSMENT
Jurisdiction-Specific Natural Hazard Event History
In the table titled “Past Natural Hazard Events,” list in chronological order (most recent first) any natural hazard event that has caused damage to your jurisdiction. If it was a federally declared disaster, include the FEMA Disaster #, otherwise enter N/A in that column. Include the date of the event and the estimated dollar amount of damage it caused. You are welcome to include any events, but special attention should be made to include major storms and federally declared disasters. Refer to the table below that lists hazard events in the planning area.

Table 1. Past Natural Hazard Events
Type of Event FEMA Disaster # Date Damage Assessment
$

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing Special-Purpose District Annex Template 11 We recommend including most large-scale disasters, unless you know that there were no impacts on your jurisdiction. Specifically, we recommend that you include these events if you have damage estimate information or can provide a brief description of impacts that occurred within your community. In addition to these events, refer to the NOAA NCDC storm events database included in the toolkit. We recommend conducting a search for the name of your jurisdiction in order to identify events with known impacts. Other potential sources of damage information include the following • Preliminary damage estimates your jurisdiction filed with the county or state • Insurance claims data
• Newspaper archives
• Emergency management documents (general plan safety element, emergency response plan, etc.) • Resident input.

If you do not have estimates for costs of damage caused, list “Not Available” in the “Damage Assessment” column or list a brief description of the damage rather than a dollar value (e.g., Main Street closed as a result of flooding, downed trees and residential damage). Note that tracking such damage is a valid and useful mitigation action if your jurisdiction does not currently track such information.

Hazard Risk Ranking
Risk ranking identifies which hazards pose the greatest risk to the community, based on how likely it is for each hazard to occur (this is called the community’s exposure) and how great an impact each hazard will have if it does occur (this is called the community’s vulnerability). Every jurisdiction has differing degrees of risk exposure and vulnerability and therefore needs to rank risk for its own area. Risk rankings for cities and the county have been calculated in the “Loss Matrix” spreadsheet included in the annex preparation toolkit.

These rankings are on the basis of risk ranking scores for each hazard that were calculated based on the hazard’s probability of occurrence and its potential impact on people, property and the economy.

The risk ranking methodology used for cities and counties is not usable for special-purpose districts because the risk-related mapping generally does not align with the boundaries of districts. To rank risk for your District, use the following procedure:
• Find the risk ranking scores in the Loss Matrix spreadsheet (on the “Risk Ranking Summary” tab) for the county overall and for any cities whose area overlaps that of your District. • For each hazard, generate a risk ranking score for your District by calculating the average of the scores for those other jurisdictions.
• Rank the hazards based on those average scores:
 Assign the rank of 1 to the hazard with the highest risk ranking score, the rank of 2 to the hazard with the second highest ranking score; and so on.
 Assign the same rank to any two hazards with equal risk ranking scores • If the resulting ranking differs from what you know based on substantiated data and documentation, alter the scores and ranking as needed based on this knowledge.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing Special-Purpose District Annex Template 12 • Assign each hazard to the risk category of “High,” Medium,” or “Low” based on the risk rating score:
 Low for scores of 0 to 15
 Medium for scores of 16 to 30
 High for scores greater than 30
Enter the results of this analysis in the “Hazard Risk Ranking” table in the template; enter the hazards in order of ranking, with 1 at the top of the table.

Jurisdiction-Specific Vulnerabilities
Review the results of the risk assessment included in the toolkit, your jurisdiction’s natural events history, and any relevant public comments/input, then develop a few sentences that discuss specific hazard vulnerabilities. You do not need to develop a sentence for every hazard, but identify a few issues you would like to highlight. Also list any known hazard vulnerabilities in your jurisdiction that may not be apparent from the risk assessment and other information provided.

Spending some time thinking about the results of the risk assessment and other noted vulnerabilities will be a big help in the development of your hazard mitigation action plan. The following are examples of vulnerabilities you could identify through this exercise:
• Over the past 10 years, the jurisdiction has experienced more than $1 million in damage to critical assets from severe storm events.
• 17 critical assets are in areas that would be permanently inundated with 12 inches of sea level rise. • One significant District asset is not equipped with a generator and four District buildings are unreinforced masonry or soft-story construction.
• An area along the river is eroding and threatening a District-owned treatment facility.

HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN
Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
The hazard mitigation action plan is the heart of your jurisdictional annex. This is where you will identify the actions your jurisdiction would like to pursue with this plan.

HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN INPUT
When preparing the hazard mitigation action plan in Phase 3, you will need to have at least one mitigation action for each hazard ranked as “high” or “medium.”

HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN INPUT
When preparing the hazard mitigation action plan in Phase 3, consider including actions to address the jurisdiction-specific vulnerabilities listed in this section.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing Special-Purpose District Annex Template 13 Select Recommended Actions
All of the work that you have done thus far should provide you with ideas for actions. Throughout these instructions, green boxes labeled “Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Input” have indicated information that needs to be considered in the selection of mitigation actions. The following sections describe how to consider these and other information sources to develop a list of potential actions.

Be sure to consider the following factors in your selection of actions:
• Select actions that are consistent with the overall purpose, goals, and objectives of the hazard mitigation plan.
• Identify actions where benefits exceed costs.
• Include any action that your jurisdiction has committed to pursuing, regardless of grant eligibility. • Know what is and is not grant-eligible under various federal grant programs (see the fact sheet on FEMA hazard mitigation grant programs in the toolkit and the table on the next page).

Material Previously Developed for This Annex
Capability Assessment Section—Planning and Regulatory Capability Table, Fiscal Capability Table, Administrative and Technical Capability Table, and Education and Outreach Table Review these tables and consider the following:
• For any capability that you do not currently have, consider whether your jurisdiction should have this capability. If so, consider including an action to develop/acquire the capability. • For any capability that you do currently have, consider whether this capability can be leveraged to increase or improve hazard mitigation in the jurisdiction. • If any items listed in the Planning and Regulatory Capabilities table have not been updated in more than 10 years, consider an action to review and update the capability and, as appropriate, incorporate hazard mitigation principles or information obtained in the risk assessment. • Consider including actions that are identified in other plans and programs (capital improvement plans, strategic plans, etc.) as actions in this plan.

Capability Assessment Section— Adaptive Capacity for Climate Change Table Consider your responses to this section:
• For criteria that you listed as medium or low, think of ways you could improve this rating (see adaptive capacity portion of the mitigation best practices catalog). • For criteria you listed as high, think about how you can leverage this capacity to improve or enhance mitigation or continue to improve this capacity.
• For criteria that you were unable to provide responses for, consider ways you could improve your understanding of this capacity (see mitigation best practices and adaptive capacity catalog).

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing Special-Purpose District Annex Template 14 Table 2. Federal Hazard Mitigation Grant Program Eligibility by Action Type Eligible Activities
Hazard Mitigation
Grant Program BRIC
Flood Mitigation
Assistance
Mitigation Projects
Property Acquisition and Structure Demolition √ √ √
Property Acquisition and Structure Relocation √ √ √
Structure Elevation √ √ √
Mitigation Reconstruction √ √ √
Dry Floodproofing of Non-residential Structures √ √ √
Generators √ √
Localized Flood Risk Reduction Projects √ √ √
Non-Localized Flood Risk Reduction Projects √ √
Structural Retrofitting of Existing Buildings √ √ √
Non-structural Retrofitting of Existing Buildings and Facilities √ √ √ Safe Room Construction √ √
Infrastructure Retrofit √ √ √
Soil Stabilization √ √ √
Wildfire Mitigation √ √
Post-Disaster Code Enforcement √
Advance Assistance √
5 Percent Initiative Projects* √
Aquifer and Storage Recovery** √ √ √
Flood Diversion and Storage** √ √ √
Floodplain and Stream Restoration** √ √ √
Green Infrastructure** √ √ √
Miscellaneous/Other** √ √ √
Hazard Mitigation Planning √ √ √
Technical Assistance √
Management Costs √ √ √
* FEMA allows increasing the 5% initiative amount under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program up to 10% for a presidential major disaster declaration. The additional 5% initiative funding can be used for activities that promote disaster-resistant codes for all hazards. As a condition of the award, either a disaster-resistant building code must be adopted or an improved Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule is required.
** Indicates that any proposed action will be evaluated on its own merit against program requirements. Eligible projects will be approved provided funding is available.

Integration Review Section
Review the items you identified in this section and consider an action that specifically says what the plan, code, ordinance etc. is and how it will be integrated.

Risk Ranking Section
You must identify at least one mitigation action that is clearly defined and actionable (i.e. not a preparedness or response action) for every hazard that is categorized in the risk ranking as “high” or “medium” risk.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing Special-Purpose District Annex Template 15 Jurisdiction-Specific Vulnerabilities Section
Review the vulnerability issues that you identified in this section and consider actions to address them (see mitigation best practices catalog).

Status of Previous Plan Actions Section
If your jurisdiction participated in a previous hazard mitigation plan, be sure to include any actions that were identified as “carry over” actions.

Other Sources
Mitigation Best Practices Catalog
A catalog that includes best practices identified by FEMA and other agencies, as well as recommendations from the steering committee and other stakeholders, is included in your toolkit. Review the catalog and identify actions your jurisdiction should consider for its action plan.

Public Input
Review input received during the process, specifically the public survey results included in your toolkit.

Common Actions for All Partners
The following three actions have been prepopulated in your annex template; these three actions should be included in every annex and should not be removed:
• Where appropriate, support retro-fitting, purchase or relocation of structures located in high hazard areas, prioritizing those structures that have experienced repetitive losses and/or are located in high or medium ranked hazard.
• Actively participate in the plan maintenance protocols outlined in Volume 1 of this hazard mitigation plan.
• Purchase generators for critical facilities and infrastructure that lack adequate back-up power.

In addition, the core planning team recommends that every planning partner strongly consider the following actions:
• Identify and pursue strategies to increase adaptive capacity to climate change. • Develop and implement a program to capture perishable data after significant events (e.g. high water marks, preliminary damage estimates, damage photos) to support future mitigation efforts including the implementation and maintenance of the hazard mitigation plan. • Support the County-wide initiatives identified in Volume I of the hazard mitigation plan. • Develop a post-disaster recovery plan and a debris management plan. • Develop and/or update plans that support or enhance continuity of operations following disasters.

The specifics of all these common actions should be adjusted as needed for the particulars of each community.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing Special-Purpose District Annex Template 16 Complete the Table
Complete the table titled “Hazard Mitigation
Action Plan Matrix” for all the actions you have
identified and would like to include in the plan:
• Enter the action number (see box at right)
and description. If the action is carried
over from your previous hazard mitigation
plan, return to the “Status of Previous
Plan Actions” table you completed in
Phase 1 and enter the new action number
in the column labeled “Action # in
Update.”
• Indicate whether the action mitigates
hazards for new and/or existing assets.
• Identify the specific hazards the action
will mitigate (note: you must list each
hazard by name; simply indicating “all
hazards” is not deemed acceptable).
• Identify by number the mitigation plan
objectives that the action addresses (see toolkit).
• Indicate who will be the lead in administering the action. This will most likely be a department within your jurisdiction (e.g. planning or public works). If you wish to indicate more than one department as responsible for the action, clearly identify one as the lead agency and list the others in the “supporting agency” column.
• Enter an estimated cost in dollars if known; otherwise, enter “High,” “Medium,” or “Low,” as determined for the prioritization process described in the following section. • Identify funding sources for the action. If it is a grant, include the grant-providing agency as well as funding sources for any required cost share. Refer to your fiscal capability assessment to identify possible sources of funding and refer to the table on page 14 of these instructions for project eligibility for FEMA’s hazard mitigation assistance grant programs. • Indicate the time line as “short-term” (1 to 5 years) or “long-term” (5 years or greater) or “ongoing” (a continual program)
Mitigation Action Priority
Complete the information in the table titled “Mitigation Action Priority” as follows:
• Action #—Indicate the action number from the Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix table. • # of Objectives Met—Enter the number of objectives the action will meet. • Benefits—Enter “High,” “Medium” or “Low” as follows:
 High—Action will provide an immediate reduction of risk exposure for life and property.  Medium—Action will have a long-term impact on the reduction of risk exposure for life and property, or action will provide an immediate reduction in the risk exposure for property.  Low—Long-term benefits of the action are difficult to quantify in the short term.

Action Numbering
Actions are to be numbered using the three-letter code for your jurisdiction shown below, followed by a hyphen and the action’s sequential number:
• Cal State/Channel Islands—CSU-1, CSU-2…
• Calleguas Municipal Water—CAL-1, CAL-2…
• Casitas Municipal Water—CAS-1, CAS-2…
• Channel Is. Beach CSD—CIB-1, CIB-2…
• Conejo Recreation & Park—CRP-1, CRP-2…
• Ojai Valley Sanitary—OVS-1, OVS-2…
• Pleasant Valley Recreation & Park—PLV-1, PLV-2…
• Saticoy Sanitary—SAT-1, SAT-2…
• Triunfo Water & Sanitation—TRI-1, TRI-2…
• United Water Conservation—UWC-1, UWC-2…
• Ventura County Fire Protection—VFP-1, VFP-2…
• Ventura County Office of Education—VOE-1, VOE-2…
• Ventura County Watershed Protection—VWP-1, VWP-2…
• Ventura County Emergency Services—VES-1, VES-2…
• Ventura Regional Sanitation—VRS-1, VRS-2
Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing Special-Purpose District Annex Template 17 • Cost—Enter “High,” “Medium” or “Low” as follows:
 High—Existing funding will not cover the cost of the action; implementation would require new revenue through an alternative source (for example, bonds, grants, and fee increases).  Medium—The action could be implemented with existing funding but would require a re- apportionment of the budget or a budget amendment, or the cost of the action would have to be spread over multiple years.
 Low—The action could be funded under the existing budget. The action is part of or can be part of an ongoing existing program.
• Do Benefits Exceed the Cost?—Enter “Yes” or “No.” This is a qualitative assessment. Enter “Yes” if the benefit rating (high, medium or low) is the same as or higher than the cost rating (high benefit/high cost; high benefit/medium cost; medium benefit/low cost; etc.). Enter “No” if the benefit rating is lower than the cost rating (medium benefit/high cost, low benefit/medium cost; etc.) • Is the Action Grant-Eligible?—Enter “Yes” or “No.” Refer to the fact sheet on FEMA hazard mitigation grant programs in the annex preparation toolkit and the table on page 14 of these instructions. • Can Action Be Funded Under Existing Program Budgets?—Enter “Yes” or “No.” In other words, is this action currently budgeted for, or would it require a new budget authorization or funding from another source such as grants?
• Implementation Priority— Enter “High,” “Medium” or “Low” as follows:
 High Priority—An action that meets multiple objectives, has benefits that exceed costs, and has a secured source of funding. Action can be completed in the short term (1 to 5 years).  Medium Priority—An action that meets multiple objectives, has benefits that exceed costs, and is eligible for funding though no funding has yet been secured for it. Action can be completed in the short term (1 to 5 years), once funding is secured. Medium-priority actions become high-priority actions once funding is secured.
 Low Priority—An action that will mitigate the risk of a hazard, has benefits that do not exceed the costs or are difficult to quantify, has no secured source of funding, and is not eligible for any known grant funding. Action can be completed in the long term (1 to 10 years). Low-priority actions may be eligible for grant funding from programs that have not yet been identified. • Grant Pursuit Priority— Enter “High,” “Medium” or “Low” as follows:
 High Priority—An action that meets identified grant eligibility requirements, has high benefits, and is listed as high or medium implementation priority; local funding options are unavailable or available local funds could be used instead for actions that are not eligible for grant funding.  Medium Priority—An action that meets identified grant eligibility requirements, has medium or low benefits, and is listed as medium or low implementation priority; local funding options are unavailable.
 Low Priority—An action that has not been identified as meeting any grant eligibility requirements.

Actions identified as high-grant-pursuit priority actions should be closely reviewed for consideration when grant funding opportunities arise.

Note: If a jurisdiction wishes to identify an action as high priority that is outside of the prioritization scheme for high priorities, a note indicating so should be inserted and a rationale should be provided.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing Special-Purpose District Annex Template 18 Analysis of Mitigation Actions
In the table titled “Analysis of Mitigation Actions,” for each combination of hazard type and mitigation type, enter the numbers of all recommended actions that address that hazard type and can be categorized as that mitigation type. The mitigation types are as follows:
• Prevention—Government, administrative or regulatory actions that influence the way land and buildings are developed to reduce hazard losses. Includes planning and zoning, floodplain laws, capital improvement programs, open space preservation, and stormwater management regulations. • Property Protection—Modification of buildings or structures to protect them from a hazard or removal of structures from a hazard area. Includes acquisition, elevation, relocation, structural retrofit, storm shutters, and shatter-resistant glass.
• Public Education & Awareness—Actions to inform residents and elected officials about hazards and ways to mitigate them. Includes outreach projects, real estate disclosure, hazard information centers, and school-age and adult education.
• Natural Resource Protection—Actions that minimize hazard loss and preserve or restore the functions of natural systems. Includes sediment and erosion control, stream corridor restoration, watershed management, forest and vegetation management, wetland restoration and preservation, and green infrastructure.
• Emergency Services—Actions that protect people and property during and immediately after a hazard event. Includes warning systems, emergency response services, and the protection of essential facilities.
• Structural Projects—Actions that involve the construction of structures to reduce the impact of a hazard. Includes dams, setback levees, floodwalls, retaining walls, and safe rooms. • Climate Resilience—Actions that incorporate methods to mitigate and/or adapt to the impacts of climate change. Includes aquifer storage and recovery activities, incorporating future conditions projections in project design or planning, or actions that specifically address jurisdiction-specific climate change risks, such as sea-level rise or urban heat island effect. • Community Capacity Building—Actions that increase or enhance local capabilities to adjust to potential damage, to take advantage of opportunities, or to respond to consequences. Includes staff training, memorandums of understanding, development of plans and studies, and monitoring programs.

This exercise demonstrates that the jurisdiction has selected a comprehensive range of actions. This table must show at least one action to address each “high” and “medium” ranked hazard. Planning partners should aim to identify at least one action for each mitigation type, but this is not required.

An example of a completed “Analysis of Mitigation Actions” table is provided below. Note that an action can be more than one mitigation type.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing Special-Purpose District Annex Template 19 Sample Completed Table – Analysis of Mitigation Actions Hazard Type
Action Addressing Hazard, by Mitigation Type
Prevention
Property
Protection
Public
Education &
Awareness
Natural
Resource
Protection
Emergency
Services
Structural
Projects
Climate
Resilience
Community
Capacity
Building
High-Risk Hazards
Dam Failure EX-2, 3, 4, 5, 6 EX-1, 6 EX-4, 6 EX-8, 11 EX-3, 4, 8, 9, 10 Drought EX-2 EX-1 EX-4 EX-3, 4, 8, 9, 10
Medium-Risk Hazards
Earthquake EX-2, 3, 4, 5, 7 EX-1, 7 EX-4 EX-8, 11 EX-3, 4, 8, 9 Flooding EX-2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 EX-1, 6, 7 EX-4, 6 EX-9 EX-8, 11 EX-6 EX-3, 4, 8, 9, 10 Landslide EX-2, 3, 4, 5, 7 EX-1, 7 EX-4 EX-8, 11 EX-3, 4, 8, 9, 10 Low-Risk Hazards
Severe Weather EX-2, 3, 4, 5, 7 EX-1, 7, 9 EX-4 EX-8, 9, 11 EX-8, 7 EX-3, 4, 8, 9, 10 Wildfire EX-2, 3, 4, 5, 7 EX-1, 7, 9 EX-4, 9 EX-9 EX-8, 11 EX-3, 4, 8, 9, 10

PUBLIC OUTREACH
FEMA requirements for public outreach will be met by the County’s engagement efforts and are included in the main part of the plan. These may include public meetings, a StoryMap, surveys, etc. If individual jurisdictions want to have a more robust outreach for their local community, the public outreach table in each annex may be used to memorialize those local efforts.

This table should record local public outreach efforts made by your jurisdiction to inform the community of this hazard mitigation plan update process. Examples may include local surveys on hazard awareness/preparedness, social media blasts, press releases, and outreach to local groups (CERT, senior citizen organizations, etc.) This section is optional.

INFORMATION SOURCES USED FOR THIS ANNEX
This section should describe what resources you used to complete the annex and how you used them. The sources used for Phases 1 and 2 should have been entered previously. List any additional sources used for the preparation of the Phase 3 annex. Review to ensure that all materials used in all three phases are identified. Providing this information is a requirement to pass the state and FEMA review process.

FUTURE NEEDS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND RISK/VULNERABILITY
In this section, identify any future studies, analyses, reports, or surveys your jurisdiction needs to better understand its vulnerability to identified or currently unidentified risks. These could be needs based on federal or state agency mandates.

This section is optional.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
Use this section to add any additional information pertinent to hazard mitigation and your jurisdiction not covered in this template. This section is optional.

Item No.7D

Ventura County Hazard Mitigation Plan Instructions for Completing Special-Purpose District Annex Template 20 THIS COMPLETES PHASE 3

Item No.7D

1-1

1. DISTRICT NAME

1.1 LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING TEAM
Primary Point of Contact Alternate Point of Contact
Name, Title
Street Address
City, State ZIP
Telephone: xxx-xxx-xxxx
e-mail Address: [email protected]
Name, Title
Street Address
City, State ZIP
Telephone: xxx-xxx-xxxx
e-mail Address: [email protected]
This annex was developed by the local hazard mitigation planning team, whose members are listed in Table 1-1.

Table 1-1. Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Team Members Name Title
____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________

1.2 JURISDICTION PROFILE

1.2.1 Overview
Insert Narrative Profile Information, per Instructions.

The __[name of adopting body]___ assumes responsibility for the adoption of this plan; __[name of oversight agency]__ will oversee its implementation.

All fire districts should include the following sentence (non-fire special purpose districts should delete the sentence):

The District participates/does not participate in the Public Protection Class Rating System and currently has a rating of #.

Item No.7D

Special-Purpose District Annex Template District Name
1-2

1.2.2 Service Area
The District service area covers ___[area in square miles]___, serving a population of _ population_.

1.2.3 Assets
Table 1-2 summarizes the assets of the District and their value.

Table 1-2. Special Purpose District Assets
Asset Value
Property
_number_ acres of land $_value_
Equipment
_description_ $_value_
_description_ $_value_
_description_ $_value_
_description_ $_value_
_description_ $_value_
Total: $_value_
Critical Facilities
_description – Include Address_ $_value_
_description – Include Address_ $_value_
_description – Include Address_ $_value_
_description – Include Address_ $_value_
Total: $_value_

1.3 CURRENT TRENDS
Insert summary description of service trends.

1.4 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT
This section describes an assessment of existing capabilities for implementing hazard mitigation strategies. The introduction at the beginning of this volume of the hazard mitigation plan describes the components included in the capability assessment and their significance for hazard mitigation planning.

Findings of the capability assessment were reviewed to identify opportunities to expand, initiate or integrate capabilities to further hazard mitigation goals and objectives. Where such opportunities were identified and determined to be feasible, they are included in the action plan. The “Analysis of Mitigation Actions” table in this annex identifies these as community capacity building mitigation actions. The findings of the assessment are presented as follows:
• An assessment of planning and regulatory capabilities is presented in Table 1-3. • An assessment of fiscal capabilities is presented in Table 1-4. • An assessment of administrative and technical capabilities is presented in Table 1-5.

Item No.7D

Special-Purpose District Annex Template District Name
1-3
• An assessment of education and outreach capabilities is presented in Table 1-6. • Classifications under various community mitigation programs are presented in Table 1-7. • The community’s adaptive capacity for the impacts of climate change is presented in Table 1-8.

Table 1-3. Planning and Regulatory Capability
Plan, Study or Program
Date of Most
Recent Update Comment
Name of code, ordinance, policy, program or plan _____ _____ Name of code, ordinance, policy, program or plan _____ _____ Name of code, ordinance, policy, program or plan _____ _____ Name of code, ordinance, policy, program or plan _____ _____ Name of code, ordinance, policy, program or plan _____ _____

Table 1-4. Fiscal Capability
Financial Resource Accessible or Eligible to Use?
Community Development Block Grants Yes/No
Capital Improvements Project Funding Yes/No
Authority to Levy Taxes for Specific Purposes Yes/No
User Fees for Water, Sewer, Gas or Electric Service Yes/No If yes, specify: Enter Response
Incur Debt through General Obligation Bonds Yes/No
Incur Debt through Special Tax Bonds Yes/No
Incur Debt through Private Activity Bonds Yes/No
Withhold Public Expenditures in Hazard-Prone Areas Yes/No State-Sponsored Grant Programs Yes/No
Development Impact Fees for Homebuyers or Developers Yes/No Other Yes/No
If yes, specify: Enter Response

Item No.7D

Special-Purpose District Annex Template District Name
1-4
Table 1-5. Administrative and Technical Capability
Staff/Personnel Resource Available?
Planners or engineers with knowledge of land development and land management practices Yes/No If Yes, Department /Position: Enter Response
Engineers or professionals trained in building or infrastructure construction practices Yes/No If Yes, Department /Position: Enter Response
Planners or engineers with an understanding of natural hazards Yes/No If Yes, Department /Position: Enter Response
Staff with training in benefit/cost analysis Yes/No
If Yes, Department /Position: Enter Response
Surveyors Yes/No
If Yes, Department /Position: Enter Response
Personnel skilled or trained in GIS applications Yes/No If Yes, Department /Position: Enter Response
Scientist familiar with natural hazards in local area Yes/No If Yes, Department /Position: Enter Response
Emergency manager Yes/No
If Yes, Department /Position: Enter Response
Grant writers Yes/No
If Yes, Department /Position: Enter Response
Other Yes/No
If Yes, Department /Position: Enter Response

Table 1-6. Education and Outreach Capability
Criterion Response
Do you have a public information officer or communications office? Yes/No Do you have personnel skilled or trained in website development? Yes/No Do you have hazard mitigation information available on your website? Yes/No If yes, briefly describe: Enter Response
Do you use social media for hazard mitigation education and outreach? Yes/No If yes, briefly describe: Enter Response
Do you have any citizen boards or commissions that address issues related to hazard mitigation? Yes/No If yes, briefly describe: Enter Response
Do you have any other programs in place that could be used to communicate hazard-related information? Yes/No If yes, briefly describe: Enter Response
Do you have any established warning systems for hazard events? Yes/No If yes, briefly describe: Enter Response

Item No.7D

Special-Purpose District Annex Template District Name
1-5
Table 1-7. Community Classifications
Participating? Classification Date Classified
FIPS Code Yes/No _______ Date
DUNS# Yes/No _______ Date
Community Rating System Yes/No _______ Date
Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule Yes/No _______ Date Public Protection Yes/No _______ Date
Storm Ready Yes/No _______ Date
Firewise Yes/No _______ Date
Tsunami Ready Yes/No _______ Date

Table 1-8. Adaptive Capacity for Climate Change
Criterion
Jurisdiction
Ratinga
Technical Capacity
Jurisdiction-level understanding of potential climate change impacts High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Jurisdiction-level monitoring of climate change impacts High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Technical resources to assess proposed strategies for feasibility and externalities High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Jurisdiction-level capacity for development of greenhouse gas emissions inventory High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Capital planning and land use decisions informed by potential climate impacts High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Participation in regional groups addressing climate risks High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Implementation Capacity
Clear authority/mandate to consider climate change impacts during public decision-making processes High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Identified strategies for greenhouse gas mitigation efforts High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Identified strategies for adaptation to impacts High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Champions for climate action in local government departments High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Political support for implementing climate change adaptation strategies High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Financial resources devoted to climate change adaptation High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Local authority over sectors likely to be negative impacted High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Item No.7D

Special-Purpose District Annex Template District Name
1-6
Criterion
Jurisdiction
Ratinga
Public Capacity
Local residents knowledge of and understanding of climate risk High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Local residents support of adaptation efforts High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Local residents’ capacity to adapt to climate impacts High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Local economy current capacity to adapt to climate impacts High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
Local ecosystems capacity to adapt to climate impacts High/Medium/Low Comment: Enter Comment
a. High = Capacity exists and is in use; Medium = Capacity may exist, but is not used or could use some improvement; Low = Capacity does not exist or could use substantial improvement; Unsure= Not enough information is known to assign a rating.

1.5 INTEGRATION REVIEW
For hazard mitigation planning, “integration” means that hazard mitigation information is used in other relevant planning mechanisms, such as capital facilities planning, and that relevant information from those sources is used in hazard mitigation. This section identifies where such integration is already in place, and where there are opportunities for further integration in the future. Resources listed at the end of this annex were used to provide information on integration. The progress reporting process described in Volume 1 of the hazard mitigation plan will document the progress of hazard mitigation actions related to integration and identify new opportunities for integration.

1.5.1 Existing Integration
Some level of integration has already been established between local hazard mitigation planning and the following other local plans and programs:
• Plan or Program Name—Description
• Plan or Program Name—Description
• Plan or Program Name—Description
• Plan or Program Name—Description
• Plan or Program Name—Description

1.5.2 Opportunities for Future Integration
The capability assessment presented in this annex indicates opportunities to integrate this mitigation plan with other jurisdictional planning/regulatory capabilities. Capabilities were identified as integration opportunities if they can support or enhance the actions identified in this plan or be supported or enhanced by components of this plan. The capability assessment identified the following plans and programs that do not currently integrate hazard mitigation information but provide opportunities to do so in the future:

Item No.7D

Special-Purpose District Annex Template District Name
1-7
• Plan or Program Name—Description
• Plan or Program Name—Description
• Plan or Program Name—Description
• Plan or Program Name—Description
• Plan or Program Name—Description
Taking action to integrate each of these programs with the hazard mitigation plan was considered as a mitigation action to include in the action plan presented in this annex.

1.6 RISK ASSESSMENT

1.6.1 Jurisdiction-Specific Natural Hazard Event History Table 1-9 lists past occurrences of natural hazards for which specific damage was recorded in this jurisdiction Other hazard events that broadly affected the entire planning area, including this jurisdiction, are listed in the risk assessments in Volume 1 of this hazard mitigation plan.

Table 1-9. Past Natural Hazard Events
Type of Event FEMA Disaster # Date Damage Assessment
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______
Insert event type _______ Date $______

1.6.2 Hazard Risk Ranking
Table 1-10 presents a local ranking of all hazards of concern for which this hazard mitigation plan provides complete risk assessments. As described in detail in Volume 1, the ranking process involves an assessment of the likelihood of occurrence for each hazard, along with its potential impacts on people, property and district operations. Mitigation actions target hazards with high and medium rankings.

Item No.7D

Special-Purpose District Annex Template District Name
1-8
Table 1-10. Hazard Risk Ranking
Rank Hazard Risk Ranking Score Risk Category
1 _______ _______ High/Medium/Low
2 _______ _______ High/Medium/Low
3 _______ _______ High/Medium/Low
4 _______ _______ High/Medium/Low
5 _______ _______ High/Medium/Low
6 _______ _______ High/Medium/Low
7 _______ _______ High/Medium/Low
8 _______ _______ High/Medium/Low
9 _______ _______ High/Medium/Low

1.6.3 Jurisdiction-Specific Vulnerabilities
Volume 1 of this hazard mitigation plan provides complete risk assessments for each identified hazard of concern.

The following jurisdiction-specific issues have been identified based on a review of the results of the risk assessment, public involvement strategy, and other available resources:
• Insert as appropriate.
• Insert as appropriate.
• Insert as appropriate.

Mitigation actions addressing these issues were prioritized for consideration in the action plan presented in this annex.

1.7 STATUS OF PREVIOUS PLAN ACTIONS
If your jurisdiction has no previous hazard mitigation plan, please enter an “X” in the box at right and do not complete this section.

Table 1-11 summarizes the actions that were recommended in the previous version of the hazard mitigation plan and their implementation status at the time this update was prepared.

Table 1-11. Status of Previous Plan Actions
Removed;
Carried Over to
Plan Update
Action Item from Previous Plan Completed
No Longer
Feasible
Check
if Yes
Action #
in Update
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Item No.7D

Special-Purpose District Annex Template District Name
1-9
Removed;
Carried Over to
Plan Update
Action Item from Previous Plan Completed
No Longer
Feasible
Check
if Yes
Action #
in Update
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment
Insert Action Number & Text
Comment: Enter Comment

1.8 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN
Table 1-12 lists the actions that make up the hazard mitigation action plan for this jurisdiction. Table 1-13 identifies the priority for each action. Table 1-14 summarizes the mitigation actions by hazard of concern and mitigation type.

Table 1-12. Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
Benefits New or
Existing Assets Objectives Met Lead Agency Support Agency Estimated Cost Sources of
Funding Timelinea
Action xxx-1—Where appropriate, support retrofitting, purchase or relocation of structures located in hazard areas, prioritizing those that have experienced repetitive losses and/or are located in high- or medium-risk hazard areas.

Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
Existing Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response High Grant Funding Short-term Action xxx-2—Actively participate in the plan maintenance protocols outlined in Volume 1 of this hazard mitigation plan.

Hazards Mitigated: All hazards
New & Existing Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Low Staff Time, General Funds
Short-term
Action xxx-3— Purchase generators for critical facilities and infrastructure that lack adequate backup power, including ________.

Hazards Mitigated: Dam failure, earthquake, flooding, landslide, severe weather, tsunami, wildfire Existing Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response
Item No.7D

Special-Purpose District Annex Template District Name
1-10
Benefits New or
Existing Assets Objectives Met Lead Agency Support Agency Estimated Cost Sources of
Funding Timelinea
Action xxx-4—Description
Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Action xxx-5—Description
Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Action xxx-6—Description
Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Action xxx-7—Description
Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Action xxx-8—Description
Hazards Mitigated: Enter Response
Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response Enter Response a. Short-term = Completion within 5 years; Long-term = Completion within 10 years; Ongoing= Continuing new or existing program with no completion date
Acronyms used here are defined at the beginning of this volume.

Table 1-13. Mitigation Action Priority
Action
#
# of
Objectives
Met Benefits Costs
Do Benefits
Equal or
Exceed Cost?
Is Project
Grant-
Eligible?
Can Project Be Funded
Under Existing
Programs/ Budgets?
Implementation
Prioritya
Grant
Pursuit
Prioritya
1 _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____
2 _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____
3 _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____
4 _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____
5 _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____
6 _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____
7 _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____
8 _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____
9 _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____
a. See the introduction to this volume for explanation of priorities.

Item No.7D

Special-Purpose District Annex Template District Name
1-11
Table 1-14. Analysis of Mitigation Actions
Action Addressing Hazard, by Mitigation Typea
Hazard Type Prevention
Property
Protection
Public
Education &
Awareness
Natural
Resource
Protection
Emergency
Services
Structural
Projects
Climate
Resilient
Community
Capacity
Building
High-Risk Hazards
____________ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____________ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____________ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____________ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ Medium-Risk Hazards
____________ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____________ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____________ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____________ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ Low-Risk Hazards
____________ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____________ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____________ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ a. See the introduction to this volume for explanation of mitigation types.

1.9 PUBLIC OUTREACH
Table 1-15 lists public outreach activities for this jurisdiction.

Table 1-15. Local Public Outreach
Local Outreach Activity Date
Number of People
Involved
____________ _____ _____
____________ _____ _____
____________ _____ _____
____________ _____ _____

1.10 INFORMATION SOURCES USED FOR THIS ANNEX
The following technical reports, plans, and regulatory mechanisms were reviewed to provide information for this annex.
• <INSERT DOCUMENT NAME AND DESCRIPTION OF HOW IT WAS USED> • <INSERT DOCUMENT NAME AND DESCRIPTION OF HOW IT WAS USED> • <INSERT DOCUMENT NAME AND DESCRIPTION OF HOW IT WAS USED> The following outside resources and references were reviewed:

Item No.7D

Special-Purpose District Annex Template District Name
1-12
• Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex Development Toolkit—The toolkit was used to support the identification of past hazard events and noted vulnerabilities, the risk ranking, and the development of the mitigation action plan.
• <INSERT DOCUMENT NAME AND DESCRIPTION OF HOW IT WAS USED>

1.11 FUTURE NEEDS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND RISK/VULNERABILITY Insert text, if any; otherwise, delete section

1.12 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
Insert text, if any; otherwise, delete section

Item No.7D

Item No.7D

ATTACHMENT #3
DPW: 520-10\gw\ev\Council\083022\Ventura County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Resolution Attachment 3.docx

RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS ADOPTING THE 2022

VENTURA COUNTY MULTI-HAZARD MITIGATION

PLAN REQUIRED BY FEDERAL DISASTER
MITIGATION ACT OF 2000
WHEREAS, the City of Thousand Oaks has experienced several State and Federally declared emergencies: and
WHEREAS, the Federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires cities to identify risks posed by natural and human-caused emergency incidents, and prioritize ways to manage disasters; and
WHEREAS, the adoption of the 2022 Ventura County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan is in compliance with the requirements of Assembly Bill 2140 (2007) which requires that City emergency plans are coordinated with the City’s General Plan Hazards Appendix; and
WHEREAS, the Ventura County Board of Supervisors adopted the 2022 Ventura County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan at its regular meeting on July 12, 2022.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Thousand Oaks City Council resolves to adopt the plan entitled “2022 Ventura County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan” as an updated community plan that identifies risks posed by natural and human-caused emergency incidents and prioritizes effective ways to address emergencies and to:

1. Adopt in its entirety, Volume I, City of Thousand Oaks Annex, and appendices of Volume II of the Ventura County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan.

2. Use the adopted and approved portions of the Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan to guide pre and post incident mitigation of identified hazards.

3. Coordinate strategies identified in the Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan with other plans, programs, and mechanisms under the City’s jurisdictional authority.

Item No.7D

DPW: 520-10\gw\ev\Council\083022\Ventura County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Resolution.docx

2 5
0 9

4. Continue to support on-going countywide mitigation efforts and participate in the countywide planning process as described by the County Multi- Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan.

5. Support and promote the mitigation successes of all Cities, Special Districts, and the County of Ventura.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 30th day of August 2022, by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Bob Engler, Mayor
City of Thousand Oaks, California
ATTEST/CERTIFY:

Cynthia M. Rodriguez, City Clerk
Date Attested: _____________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Office of the City Attorney
Tracy Friedl, Assistant City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO ADMINISTRATION:

Andrew P. Powers, City Manager
The presence of electronic signature certifies that the foregoing is a true and correct copy as approved by the City of Thousand Oaks City Council on the date cited above.

Item No.7D

TO:City Council
FROM:Bob Engler, Mayor
Ed Jones, Mayor Pro Tem
DATE:August 30, 2022
SUBJECT: Community Funding Review Committee Appointments RECOMMENDATION:

1. Approve Community Funding Review Committee reappointment of Kathleen Marely to serve a three-year term ending July 2025.

2. Approve Community Funding Review Committee appointments of Megan Lysaght, Denise Monden, and Henry Montalvo to serve three-year terms ending July 2025.

3. Approve Community Funding Review Committee appointment of Ashley Orozco to fill the unscheduled vacancy and serve the remainder of the term ending July 2024.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

No Additional Funding Requested. Minimal staff time for costs associated with coordinating interviews, appointments, and preparing support materials, is included in the Adopted FY 2022-23 General Fund Budget.

BACKGROUND:

The Community Funding Review Committee (CFRC) consists of nine members who serve three-year, staggered terms. The role of the CFRC is to serve as an advisory body to City Council relative to funding recommendations of Community Grant Program administered through the City Manager’s Office. The Community Grant program currently consists of four grants: Community Sports Grant, Community Environmental Enhancement Grant, Community Events Grant, and the Community Social Services Grant.

Item No.7E

Community Funding Review Committee Appointments
August 30, 2022

3 5
5 An open application period for the current five vacancies (four scheduled vacancies with a term through July 2025, and one unscheduled vacancy with a term through July 2024) was opened May 3, 2022, and closed June 16, 2022.

Public outreach took place in May and June and included news postings on the City’s website and social media channels. An ad was placed in the Acorn on May 5, 2022. Ads were run in the newsletters of the Greater Conejo Chamber of Commerce, Center for Non-Profit Management, the Conejo Senior Volunteer Program, and the Goebel Adult Community Center. In addition, emails were sent to local community agencies that work with non-profit organizations. Complete information can be found on the dedicated Community Grants webpage (www.toaks.org/grants) on the City’s website.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:

Eleven applications were received. Interviews with all 11 applicants were scheduled for June 29, 2022 and took place via Zoom. The interview committee consisted of Mayor Engler and Mayor Pro Tem Jones. After reviewing applications and conducting interviews, the following reappointment is recommended: Kathleen Marely. Additionally, the following appointments are recommended: Megan Lysaght, Denise Monden, and Henry Montalvo. To fill the unscheduled vacancy, the following appointment is recommended: Ashley Orozco. Recommended appointment applications are included as Attachment #1.

COUNCIL GOAL COMPLIANCE:

Meets the following City Council goals:

A. Create a more equitable, accessible, safe, welcoming, and inclusive government and community regardless of race, color, ethnicity, religion, sex, physical or mental ability, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, age, language, education, and/or socio-economic status.

C. Operate City government in a fiscally and managerially responsible and prudent manner to ensure that the City of Thousand Oaks remains one of California's most desirable places to live, work, visit, recreate, and raise a family.

G. Continue City's commitment to community and cultural programs and services (such as Performing Arts/Theatres, Libraries, TOTV, Visual Arts, Youth and Senior Programs).

PREPARED BY: Sarah Mailes, Community Services Analyst
Attachment:

Attachment #1 – Applications
CMO:110-20\H: COMMON\Council Items\2022 Staff Reports\083022\083022 CFRC Appointments Staff Report Item No.7E

City of Thousand Oaks Boards & Commissions
Application Form
Profile
Solicitantes que necesiten asistencia en español, por favor llamen al (805) 449-2151.

Megan Lysaght
First Name Last Name
Primary Phone Alternate Phone
Street Address Suite or Apt
Thousand Oaks CA 91360
City State Postal Code
Email Address
Please note: Resolution No. 2003-105 Sec. 17, Duplicate Appointment, provides that unless specifically authorized by City Council, no citizen may serve on more than one standing Citizen Board, Commission or Committee.

How did you learn of this vacancy?
On the City of TO website
Occupation/Work History - Check all applicable: *
Employed
U.S. State Department Program Officer
Employer Job Title

N/A N/A
Additional Employer Additional Job Title
Must be a City resident. Are you a resident of Thousand Oaks? Yes
ATTACHMENT #
Item No.7E

Interests & Experiences
Why are you interested in serving on this board/committee and what do you believe you can contribute?
I am interested in serving as both a new resident of Thousand Oaks and as a native Ventura County resident. I want to volunteer to serve my city. I believe public service makes a difference.

Please list all relevant experience supporting appointment to this board.

Master in Public Policy and Administration, CLU 2009
U.S. State Department, Program Officer - manages nearly $10 million in taxpayer funds vis-a-vis three Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs programs
Please list current and past involvement with civic, volunteer and non-profit organizations, including City boards/committees, and the dates of activity.

Previous was a Program Manager of the Youth Exchange and Study program at American Councils for International Education, which is a grant of more than $16 million dollars across 37 countries and 48 states
Certification
Please agree with the following statements
That all information in this application is complete, truthful, and accurate to the best of my knowledge.

If appointed, I understand it is my responsibility to notify the City of changes that would affect my membership on the board.

I recognize that Board membership requires my attendance at meetings and/or events. I am willing and able to make this commitment of time and effort to serve.

I understand that the Public Records Act (PRA) allows for public review of this application.

I am not an official or employee of the City of Thousand Oaks.

I understand that checking this box constitutes a legal signature confirming that I acknowledge and agree to the above statements.

Agree
Electronic Signature - Please type your First and Last name If appointed, I understand that I will be required to file a Conflict of Interest Statement (Form 700) pursuant to Fair Political Practices Commission regulations.

If appointed, I understand that I will be required to complete Ethics Training for Local Officials (AB Item No.7E

1234) within one year of appointment and every two years thereafter.

No Committee member shall participate in the discussion of, or vote on, a request if said member is also a member of the organization requesting funds.

Item No.7E

City of Thousand Oaks Boards & Commissions
Application Form
Profile
Solicitantes que necesiten asistencia en español, por favor llamen al (805) 449-2151.

Kate (Kathleen) Marley
First Name Last Name
Primary Phone Alternate Phone
Street Address Suite or Apt
Thousand Oaks CA 91360
City State Postal Code
Email Address
Please note: Resolution No. 2003-105 Sec. 17, Duplicate Appointment, provides that unless specifically authorized by City Council, no citizen may serve on more than one standing Citizen Board, Commission or Committee.

How did you learn of this vacancy?
I am currently a member of the Community Funding Review Committee.

Occupation/Work History - Check all applicable: *
Employed
Ember Technologies, Inc. Controller
Employer Job Title

N/A N/A
Additional Employer Additional Job Title
Must be a City resident. Are you a resident of Thousand Oaks? Yes
Item No.7E

Interests & Experiences
Why are you interested in serving on this board/committee and what do you believe you can contribute?
I have lived in Thousand Oaks most of my life. I love this area and my neighbors and feel compelled to engage where I can. I enjoy contributing to my community in a direct, personal manner, as evidenced by my involvement in Search & Rescue. I am fiscally-minded and believe that I am well suited for engaging in discussions with fellow committee members aimed at assessing various funding requests and providing informed, unbiased recommendations to City Council.

Please list all relevant experience supporting appointment to this board.

I am a CPA with a bachellor's degree in Accounting. I have 30 years of experience in corporate accounting and finance management for global, publicly-traded companies. I have been a Board member for two not-for-profit organizations.

Please list current and past involvement with civic, volunteer and non-profit organizations, including City boards/committees, and the dates of activity.

I currently serve on the Community Funding Review Committee, and prior to its consolidation with the other grant committees I served on the Community Funding Review Committee responsible for reviewing the Sports Facility Endowment Fund (SFEF) and Community Enhancement Program (CEP) funding requests. Additionally, since December 2009 I am an active field team member of Ventura County Search and Rescue Team #3 (East Valley mountain search & rescue), having served on its Board for over a decade (several of those years as chairperson).

Certification
Please agree with the following statements
That all information in this application is complete, truthful, and accurate to the best of my knowledge.

If appointed, I understand it is my responsibility to notify the City of changes that would affect my membership on the board.

I recognize that Board membership requires my attendance at meetings and/or events. I am willing and able to make this commitment of time and effort to serve.

I understand that the Public Records Act (PRA) allows for public review of this application.

I am not an official or employee of the City of Thousand Oaks.

I understand that checking this box constitutes a legal signature confirming that I acknowledge and agree to the above statements.

Agree
Item No.7E

Electronic Signature - Please type your First and Last name If appointed, I understand that I will be required to file a Conflict of Interest Statement (Form 700) pursuant to Fair Political Practices Commission regulations.

If appointed, I understand that I will be required to complete Ethics Training for Local Officials (AB 1234) within one year of appointment and every two years thereafter.

No Committee member shall participate in the discussion of, or vote on, a request if said member is also a member of the organization requesting funds.

Item No.7E

City of Thousand Oaks Boards & Commissions
Application Form
Profile
Solicitantes que necesiten asistencia en español, por favor llamen al (805) 449-2151.

Denise Monden
First Name Last Name
Primary Phone Alternate Phone
Street Address Suite or Apt
Thousand Oaks CA 91320
City State Postal Code
Email Address
Please note: Resolution No. 2003-105 Sec. 17, Duplicate Appointment, provides that unless specifically authorized by City Council, no citizen may serve on more than one standing Citizen Board, Commission or Committee.

How did you learn of this vacancy?
City Website
Occupation/Work History - Check all applicable: *
Employed
Sage Publications Senior Corporate Accountant
Employer Job Title

N/A N/A
Additional Employer Additional Job Title
Must be a City resident. Are you a resident of Thousand Oaks? Yes
Item No.7E

Interests & Experiences
Why are you interested in serving on this board/committee and what do you believe you can contribute?
I have been a Thousand Oaks resident for 25 years , raised my family here, and absolutely love living in the Conejo Valley. I have benefitted from a lot of programs that our Conejo Valley offers- the schools, Parks and Recreation, the Arts, Open Space and helping with services for less fortunate in the community. I am interested and desirous to find more ways where I can give more of my time to nurturing our local community. Joining this review committee offers a seemingly perfect opportunity to share and utilize my financial expertise, and all the skills, knowledge and experience I have gathered during my finance career. I have been fortunate to have developed a broad business knowledge and to have experienced many diverse business situations and issues which I am certain will be an asset to serving on an advisory committee such as this.

Please list all relevant experience supporting appointment to this board.

I am a CPA. working as an accountant and corporate finance professional for over 30 years. My employment history is quite varied, and spans over companies large and small, including non-profit, Fortune 500, and small to medium private companies- and spans over multiple industries including Media , Entertainment, Education, and Construction Management. Briefly- I started out as a Public Accounting Auditor for one of the "Big 4", then spent many years at Universal Studios in the Film and TV divisions- ending my career as a Vice President of Finance. More recently I intentionally shifted my career to more local companies and into the realm of Education - serving as the CFO for local La Reina High School for 5 years and currently for the past 7 years at Sage Publications in the Corporate Finance department . I have served in leadership roles and in consulting capacity. I have served on Financial committees reporting to Board of Directors as well as handled Financial filings for companies reporting to the SEC and shareholders. I am experienced in the review of complex contracts and can easily interpret financial information. Over the years I have had to be part of many tough business decisions..

Please list current and past involvement with civic, volunteer and non-profit organizations, including City boards/committees, and the dates of activity.

I have not served on any official City boards or committees yet., although I previously applied for Council on Aging but was not chosen. I am currently an active member of non-profit Conejo Valley Order of Eastern Star #632 where I hold an office and am on the Financial Review Committee. While working for Non profit school- ( La Reina High School 2010-2015 ) I was able to serve as Head of Finance and Audit Committee and had opportunities to serve as key committee member on other group committees like the HR Benefit committee, WASC committee and Presidential search committee. I have spent many years ( 15 +) volunteering for smaller organizations :ie: example: holding various titles at multiple School PTA/PFA's (2002-2017) , multiple titles on Newbury Park High School Band Boosters,(2014-2017) , Boys and Girls Club of Conejo Valley,, regular active volunteer for AYSO youth soccer and Conejo Little League for my children's younger years.. I do regularly try to volunteer for special events at Senior Concerns , Oxnard Rescue Mission . In the pre Covid days I was a frequent contributor to the Conejo Valley Meal and Shelter Program by providing and serving periodic meals. I visit Downtown Women's Center multiple times year to serve dinners . Currently I am increasing my volunteer commitment to include Meals on Wheels as my work schedule allows. My own personal goal for 2022 is to significantly increase my time serving in volunteer capacity and I want the benefits of my time to go to Conejo Valley . I would wecome the opportunity and be so excited to be accepted on the Community Funding Review Committee.

Certification
Item No.7E

Please agree with the following statements
That all information in this application is complete, truthful, and accurate to the best of my knowledge.

If appointed, I understand it is my responsibility to notify the City of changes that would affect my membership on the board.

I recognize that Board membership requires my attendance at meetings and/or events. I am willing and able to make this commitment of time and effort to serve.

I understand that the Public Records Act (PRA) allows for public review of this application.

I am not an official or employee of the City of Thousand Oaks.

I understand that checking this box constitutes a legal signature confirming that I acknowledge and agree to the above statements.

Agree
Electronic Signature - Please type your First and Last name If appointed, I understand that I will be required to file a Conflict of Interest Statement (Form 700) pursuant to Fair Political Practices Commission regulations.

If appointed, I understand that I will be required to complete Ethics Training for Local Officials (AB 1234) within one year of appointment and every two years thereafter.

No Committee member shall participate in the discussion of, or vote on, a request if said member is also a member of the organization requesting funds.

Item No.7E

DENISE MONDEN, CPA
Accomplished Finance Professional, Business Partner, Leader, CPA & CGMA. Unique experience gained by serving in Fortune 500 corporation as well as mid-size global, small business and non-profit arenas. Demonstrated ability for analysis. Excels at providing operational and customer support. Highly transferable skills. Results oriented. Initiative-taking. Adaptive learner. Hands on. Action focused.

Deadline Driven. Collaborative. High integrity.

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
♦♦SAGE Publishing, Inc. • Thousand Oaks, CA • 2015 - current Senior Accountant
Global research and academic publishing company- Independently owned.

Business Partner with financial oversight of Corwin Subsidiary ($40+ million). Individual Contributor Key Achievements:
• Actively manage revenue process and provide cross departmental support for continuous improvements related to global Professional Learning products. • Oversee Sales commissions reporting. Implemented process improvements resulting in considerable time savings, elimination of manual input and added transparency to stakeholders. • Serve as content expert and lead oversight of Global Royalties and licensing for key thought leaders. Provide cross departmental support.
• Implemented regular collaborations with Global subsidiaries to offer expertise, align procedures, controls, and financial issues. Ongoing efficiencies.
♦La Reina High School • Thousand Oaks, CA • 2010 - 2015 Chief Financial Officer (CFO)
$10 million independently funded Non-Profit Catholic High School.

Administrator providing full oversight of financial and budgeting operations of the school. Reported to President and Board of Directors. Led 3 employees. Key Achievements:
• Developed process for awarding Financial Aid - directly increasing student enrollment due to earlier notification (60 days) to parents and standardized award measures. • Accelerated cash collections and enhanced access to vital information by executing outside partnership for handling of tuition billing and student enrollment. • Negotiated enhancements to employee benefit programs resulting in cost savings (5%). • Spearheaded new policy to build cash reserve to fund unanticipated plant repairs. • Established system to manage Donor pledges and costs over school’s first Capital Campaign ($7 Million)
♦NBC Universal (Universal TV/Universal Pictures) • Universal City, CA 1990 - 2010 Fortune 500 Company and leading global media and entertainment giant.

TV Production Finance - (Independent Consultant-Yoh) • 7 years Provided various financial services as needed. Proven flexible in handling multiple complex roles and tasks. Key Achievements:
• Served as interim Controller, interim SG&A Director, and interim Production Accountant. • Implemented controls to more efficiently manage TV product titles master data base.

Vice President, Worldwide TV Syndication Finance / Vice President, Worldwide Marketing & Distribution Finance • 5 Years
Key business partner providing accounting oversight and operational support to Motion Picture and Television executives. Led team of 11 employees. Key Achievements:
• Executed financial models used by executives in exploring new product and markets. • Developed accounting procedures for new specialty brand (Universal Focus Features). • Implemented workflow process to approve marketing PO’s resulting in enhanced cost control, increased efficiency, and improved timing of cash flow. • Enhanced Co-op advertising process improving cash collections by 30 days average.

Item No.7E

DENISE MONDEN, CPA •• Page 2 •
♦NBC Universal (Universal TV/Universal Pictures) • Continued Controller, Motion Picture Finance, Universal Pictures• 5 years Responsible for generating divisional quarterly profit projections, financial reporting and analysis, and overseeing general ledger accounting for the motion picture division of Universal Pictures. Led team of 25 employees. Key Achievements:
• Spearheaded outsourcing of film distribution freight bill processing achieving +10% savings (+$1 million) on freight costs and adoption by other divisions within the company. • Key team member on change initiatives resulting in $15 million in annual cost savings on travel and entertainment spending, and reduced payment processing time by 14 days. • Designed and implemented a bonus incentive plan for motion picture sales executives. • Supervised team to successfully reduce time spent (by 5 days) generating quarterly profit projections and provide results to management in more value-added time frame.

Director, Motion Picture Finance, Universal Pictures
• 3 years
Responsible for maintaining accurate film “Ultimates” and amortization models for all active Universal Pictures titles and consolidating the reporting by various divisions represented in complete film life cycle. Led team of four employees.

OTHER VITAL EXPERIENCE
♦Parking Structure Builders, Inc. • Westlake Village, CA • 2009 - 2016 CFO and Financial Consultant- Part time
$30+ million privately held construction contractor specializing in precast parking lots.

Provide ongoing as strategic financial advice to owners/management. Key Achievements:
• Implemented annual budgeting process and monthly cash flow reporting. • Developed controls over Construction contract and construction in progress reporting. ♦Arthur Andersen & Co • Certified Public Accountant • Audit Senior • Health Care and Small Business focus

PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION & LICENSING
CPA- Certified Public Accountant – State of California
CGMA Achieved – Active License
California State University, Northridge
Bachelor of Science in Business Administration – Accounting Women in Leadership Certificate – Antioch University- Santa Barbara Disruptive Six Sigma Certification
Excellent communication skills
Computer proficient. Expert in Microsoft Excel and Office Suite products.

Experienced with systems Epicor, XL-Connect, Blackline, Microsoft CRM, Power Bi, Tagetik, SAP, SAGE-Construction, QuickBooks and others.

Item No.7E

City of Thousand Oaks Boards & Commissions
Application Form
Profile
Solicitantes que necesiten asistencia en español, por favor llamen al (805) 449-2151.

Henry Montalvo
First Name Last Name
Primary Phone Alternate Phone
Street Address Suite or Apt
Westlake Villages CA 91361
City State Postal Code
Email Address
Please note: Resolution No. 2003-105 Sec. 17, Duplicate Appointment, provides that unless specifically authorized by City Council, no citizen may serve on more than one standing Citizen Board, Commission or Committee.

How did you learn of this vacancy?
Through email
Occupation/Work History - Check all applicable: *
Employed
Kiefer Aquatics Sales Manager
Employer Job Title

N/A N/A
Additional Employer Additional Job Title
Must be a City resident. Are you a resident of Thousand Oaks? Yes
Item No.7E

Interests & Experiences
Why are you interested in serving on this board/committee and what do you believe you can contribute?
Having attended and organized community events, I see the need for a body such as this. I would like to be part of the process and ensure smaller or emerging programs help get the funding they may be looking for to be a success while providing the needed resources to help establish projects grow. I have held executive level positions both professionally and organizationally bringing deep understanding of budgeting, marketing, and strategy.

Please list all relevant experience supporting appointment to this board.

I am a relationship and community focused leader with 25 years of diverse nonprofit and business world experience in building strong relationships, volunteer management, strategic planning, and stakeholder development. I have held executive level positions offering demonstrated ability at building partnerships with organizational stakeholders; cross functional collaboration with community leaders; and development of actionable strategies resulting in achievement of organizational goals.

Please list current and past involvement with civic, volunteer and non-profit organizations, including City boards/committees, and the dates of activity.

Conejo Open Space Trail Action Committee, Board Member (Alternate), 2022 - present Westlake High School Instrumental Music Boosters, President, Director, Volunteer, 2017 - present
Buen Vecino, Member, 2021 - present
Certification
Please agree with the following statements
That all information in this application is complete, truthful, and accurate to the best of my knowledge.

If appointed, I understand it is my responsibility to notify the City of changes that would affect my membership on the board.

I recognize that Board membership requires my attendance at meetings and/or events. I am willing and able to make this commitment of time and effort to serve.

I understand that the Public Records Act (PRA) allows for public review of this application.

I am not an official or employee of the City of Thousand Oaks.

I understand that checking this box constitutes a legal signature confirming that I acknowledge and agree to the above statements.

Agree
Electronic Signature - Please type your First and Last name Item No.7E

If appointed, I understand that I will be required to file a Conflict of Interest Statement (Form 700) pursuant to Fair Political Practices Commission regulations.

If appointed, I understand that I will be required to complete Ethics Training for Local Officials (AB 1234) within one year of appointment and every two years thereafter.

No Committee member shall participate in the discussion of, or vote on, a request if said member is also a member of the organization requesting funds.

Item No.7E

Item No.7E

Item No.7E

City of Thousand Oaks Boards & Commissions
Application Form
Profile
Solicitantes que necesiten asistencia en español, por favor llamen al (805) 449-2151.

Ashley Orozco
First Name Last Name
Primary Phone Alternate Phone
Street Address Suite or Apt
Thousand Oaks CA 91320
City State Postal Code
Email Address
Please note: Resolution No. 2003-105 Sec. 17, Duplicate Appointment, provides that unless specifically authorized by City Council, no citizen may serve on more than one standing Citizen Board, Commission or Committee.

How did you learn of this vacancy?
The City's Twitter account.

Occupation/Work History - Check all applicable: *
Employed
Lafayette Group, Inc. Project Control Specialist
Employer Job Title

N/A N/A
Additional Employer Additional Job Title
Must be a City resident. Are you a resident of Thousand Oaks? Yes
Item No.7E

Interests & Experiences
Why are you interested in serving on this board/committee and what do you believe you can contribute?
It is with great enthusiasm that I submit my application to serve on the Community Funding Review Committee.

I believe myself to be a strong candidate for this position based on my educational background, past work experience, and passion for public service.

Throughout my graduate studies, my coursework in Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods, Financial Management, Public Policy Development and insight into the mechanics of local government agencies have equipped me with a grounded understanding of local government and community needs.

Additionally, my past work experience has allowed me the opportunity to serve as a Research Assistant aimed at improving the lives of those suffering from homelessness, interning for municipal government agencies, and serving as a community organizer. These past work experiences have exposed me to the inner-workings of government at the local and Federal level while providing a hands-on approach to community development, community outreach and grassroots organizations.

My passion for public service is what brings me to apply to serve on the Community Funding Review Committee. I understand the privilege that comes with not only serving one’s own community but also being a fair and impartial representative for all citizens through that service.

If given the opportunity, I would like to further discuss how I can contribute to the City of Thousand Oaks and the Community Funding Review Committee.

Please list all relevant experience supporting appointment to this board.

All of my relevant experience to support my appointment to the board is listed below and is expanded upon in my attached resume:

I am a 17 year resident of Thousand Oaks, having attended high school at La Reina High School and college at California Lutheran University. I have a Master's Degree in Public Administration from San Diego State University where I specialized in public policy development and implementation.

I have extensive experience working with and for various community organizations and government agencies.

Currently, I am a contract specialist and financial analyst for a government contractor working alongside the Department of Defense advising on and maintaining the fiscal solvency on multiple award contracts.

Please list current and past involvement with civic, volunteer and non-profit organizations, including City boards/committees, and the dates of activity.

Planned Parenthood Volunteer; 2016-2018
Intern with the City of Del Mar; June 2017 – May 2018
Research Assistant with the SDSU Research Foundation; December 2016 – July 2017 Intern with United States Senate, Office of Senator Gillibrand; May 2018 – July 2018 District Representative with the U.S. House of Representatives, Office of Congresswoman Brownley; December 2018 – August 2019
Appointed Assembly Delegate for State Assembly member Jacqui Irwin; 2019 Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion Committee Member for Lafayette Group, Inc.; January 2022 – Present
Vice President of Fundraising for the Ventura County Young Democrats; May 2022 – Present Certification
Please agree with the following statements
Item No.7E

That all information in this application is complete, truthful, and accurate to the best of my knowledge.

If appointed, I understand it is my responsibility to notify the City of changes that would affect my membership on the board.

I recognize that Board membership requires my attendance at meetings and/or events. I am willing and able to make this commitment of time and effort to serve.

I understand that the Public Records Act (PRA) allows for public review of this application.

I am not an official or employee of the City of Thousand Oaks.

I understand that checking this box constitutes a legal signature confirming that I acknowledge and agree to the above statements.

Agree
Electronic Signature - Please type your First and Last name

If appointed, I understand that I will be required to file a Conflict of Interest Statement (Form 700) pursuant to Fair Political Practices Commission regulations.

If appointed, I understand that I will be required to complete Ethics Training for Local Officials (AB 1234) within one year of appointment and every two years thereafter.

No Committee member shall participate in the discussion of, or vote on, a request if said member is also a member of the organization requesting funds.

Item No.7E

ASHLEY OROZCO PHONE
EMAIL

EDUCATION
M.A. | San Diego State University
Major: Public Administration
B.A.| California Lutheran
University
Major: English Literature
Minor: Creative Writing &
Women’s Studies

CERTIFICATIONS
o Security Clearance: Secret
o ICS 100, 200, 700, & 800;
FEMA
o ICS 300 & 400; CISA
o Contracting Officer’s
Representative Course

VOLUNTEER
o Lafayette Group, Inc.;
Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
Committee Member
o Ventura County Young
Democrats; VP of
Fundraising

EXPERIENCE
Project Control Specialist | Lafayette Group, Inc. | August 2019 – Present Client facing member of the Program Operations/Finance team charged with the financial management of $15 millio n portfolio. Duties include federal government contract management, risk assessment, financial forecasting, and contract deliverables.

District Representative | U.S. House of Representatives , Office of Congresswoman Brownley | December 2018 – August 2019
Cultivated and built relationships with community stakeholders and elected officials. Charged with preparing the member’s talking points and official letters, staffing the member at events, conducting constituent casework, and providing local policy updates.

Senior Fellow | Progressive Turnout Project | August 2018 – November 2018 Built a sense of community among vote rs. Orchestrated weekly canvassing and phone banking events; led a team of 15 interns. Directed over 1,300 Get Out The Vote volunteers resulting in 200,000 doors knocked district wide leading to a decisive win in a Congressional campaign.

Press Intern | United States Senate, O ffice of Senator Gillibrand | May 2018 – July 2018
Conducted and summarized daily res earch of relevant news clippings including news articles, te levision and radio mentions.

Intern II – City Manager’s Office | The City of Del Mar | June 2017 – May 2018 Chaired in planning and executing ci ty's Emergency Operation Center drill; drafted staff reports, organized commu nity appreciation events, and aided HR in hiring processes.

Research Assistant | SDSU Research Foundation | December 2016 – July 2017 Conducted qualitative and quantitative da ta collection and analysis on issues relating to homelessness with in the city of San Diego.

SUMMARY
Dedicated professional and public servant with over 8 years of public and private sector experience, specializing in communications, marketing, community organizing, and finance.

CMO:110-20\H:COMMON\Council Items\2022 Staff Reports\083022\CFRC Appointments Attachment #1 Item No.7E

TO:City Council
FROM:Bob Engler, Mayor
Ed Jones, Mayor Pro Tem
DATE:August 30, 2022
SUBJECT: Council on Aging Appointments
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Approve Council on Aging reappointments of Gail Ginell and Patricia Lownes to serve two-year terms ending July 2025.

2. Approve Council on Aging appointments of Bertha Miranda and Thomas Neary to serve two-year terms ending July 2025.

3. Approve Council on Aging appointment of Mary Jane Taintor to fill the unscheduled vacancy and serve the remainder of the term ending July 2023.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

No Additional Funding Requested. Minimal staff time for costs associated with coordinating interviews, appointments, and preparing support materials, is included in the Adopted FY 2022-23 General Fund Budget.

BACKGROUND:

The Council on Aging (COA) consists of nine members who serve two-year, staggered terms. The role of the COA is to serve as an advisory body to the City Council on matters dealing with older adults.

An open application period for four scheduled vacancies was opened June 7, 2022, and closed July 7, 2022. Public outreach took place in June and July and included news postings on the City’s website and social media channels. Ads were run in the Goebel Gazette, the Conejo Senior Volunteer Program Newsletter, and placed around the Goebel Adult Community Center. In addition, special announcements were made to local community groups working with older adults, Item No.7F

Council on Aging Appointments
August 30, 2022

3 5
8 including the Conejo Senior Resource Network and Moving Senior’s Forward.

Complete information can be found on the dedicated Community Grants webpage (www.toaks.org/grants) on the City’s website.

One Commissioner resigned on July 26, 2022, creating an unscheduled vacancy with a term to July 2023. The Notice of Vacancy was posted the same day. There are currently five (5) total vacancies.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:

Nine applications were received. Two applicants did not meet the eligibility requirements for the Council on Aging, as one does not live in the City, and one is employed by the City.

In-person interviews with all seven eligible applicants were scheduled for August 8, 2022. Due to schedule conflicts, two applicants were rescheduled for a Zoom interview that took place on August 12, 2022. The interview committee consisted of Mayor Engler and Mayor Pro Tem Jones. After reviewing applications and conducting interviews, the following reappointments are recommended: Gail Ginell and Patricia Lownes. Additionally, the following appointments are recommended:

Bertha Miranda and Thomas Neary. To fill the unscheduled vacancy, the following appointment is recommended: Mary Jane Taintor. Recommended appointment applications are included as Attachment #1.

COUNCIL GOAL COMPLIANCE:

Meets the following City Council goals:

A. Create a more equitable, accessible, safe, welcoming, and inclusive government and community regardless of race, color, ethnicity, religion, sex, physical or mental ability, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, age, language, education, and/or socio-economic status.

G. Continue City's commitment to community and cultural programs and services (such as Performing Arts/Theatres, Libraries, TOTV, Visual Arts,Youth and Senior Programs).

PREPARED BY: Sarah Mailes, Community Services Analyst
Attachments:

Attachment #1 – Applications
CMO:110-20\H: COMMON\Council Items\2022 Staff Reports\083022\083022 COA Appointments Staff Report
Item No.7F

Item No.7F

Interests & Experiences
Why are you interested in serving on this board/committee and what do you believe you can contribute?
I have spent most of my life in Thousand Oaks and have a lot of connections. I went to school here and raised my children in the schools from K-12. I have been continually active in the community and was a busy parent volunteer while my kids were in school. Serving on the Council on Aging helps me to serve my community in another way and to reach out to those people in my age group and older. I love Thousand Oaks and my long history with the city moves me to want to help make things as good as possible for the members of the community. I still think of Thousand Oaks as a small town; it just has more people than when I was a child here.

We want to encourage families to move to Thousand Oaks, but we also want to help older adults find a reason to stay in town. I know that I can contribute to the council in reaching out to older adults to help them become more involved in the wide variety of activities offered here.

Please list all relevant experience supporting appointment to this board.

One of my jobs is as a group leader for Road Scholar. I lead travel tours for mostly older adults (sometimes the programs include grandparents and grandchildren). I have, thus, worked a lot with the age group that the Council on Aging serves. I believe that helps me to be an effective commissioner on the council. I grew up in Thousand Oaks from the age of 9-1/2 and have had a continuous connection to this city during college and afterward. As an adult, I have lived in Thousand Oaks for nearly 32 years. I have been an active volunteer that whole time, whether at my temple, the schools, the school district, the sports leagues, Boy Scouts, or in the general community. . I am currently serving as treasurer for the third time for a campaign of a candidate for the Conejo Valley Unified School District Board of Education (and my candidate won the first two times) because I care about the schools and that is my way of helping the best candidates be placed in office. I am also a current member of the Conejo Unified School District Wellness Committee (since 2012) and in my second term on the Measure I Citizens' Bond Oversight Committee (2015-18 and again beginning in 2021). I was on a school site council for 14 consecutive years (sometimes on two site councils at the same time), including eight years as president. I enjoy being involved and working in the organizations that I am interested in. I have enjoyed helping all of these organizations be as good as they can be. I feel it's important to know what is going on in the community and I read the papers and social media and usually have a good handle on what's happening in T .O. I think all of my volunteer work suits me well in being a contributing member of the Council on Aging.

Please list current and past involvement with civic, volunteer and non-profit organizations, including City boards/committees, and the dates of activity.

As already noted, I am a current member of the CVUSD Wellness Committee and Measure I Citizens' Board Oversight Committee. I am also an active member at my temple and participate in the choir, and several committees. I was a temple board member for many years and I am also a member of a local Hadassah group. I have served on the Council on Aging for the past two years, my first city board, and I have enjoyed it very much, even with many virtual meetings and activities. I also served as a volunteer usher at the Civic Arts Plaza for a number of years. My husband writes reviews for the weekly Acorn newspapers and we attend many of the local theater events, including many performances by the schools and so I help to promote those activities as well.

Certification
Please agree with the following statements
Item No.7F

That all information in this application is complete, truthful, and accurate to the best of my knowledge.

If appointed, I understand it is my responsibility to notify the City of changes that would affect my membership on the board.

I recognize that Board membership requires my attendance at meetings and/or events. I am willing and able to make this commitment of time and effort to serve.

I understand that the Public Records Act (PRA) allows for public review of this application.

I am not an official or employee of the City of Thousand Oaks.

According to the Council's By-Laws, members must be 55 years or older. By checking this box I affirm that I meet this requirement.

I understand that checking this box constitutes a legal signature confirming that I acknowledge and agree to the above statements.

Agree
Electronic Signature - Please type your First and Last name Item No.7F

GAIL ELLEN GINELL
EXPERIENCE Road Scholar, Group Leader, Oct. 2017 to present.

Tour leader for educational programs primarily geared toward adults age 50 and over. Responsible for travel logistics and group dynamics on travel programs organized by a nonprofit travel company.

Gail Ellen Ginell, Editor, Sept. 1998 to present
Freelance editor for college alumni magazine. Edit and review columns from class secretaries on a quarterly basis. I have also been a regular editor of school bulletins, and other publications of local groups.

Gail Ellen Ginell, C.P.A., Sept. 1983 to present. CPA license received in 1985.

Freelance business in the areas of tax, accounting, and computer work. Clients include both individuals and businesses. Work may be recurring on a regular basis or may be one-time-only project work. Skills used include tax and accounting knowledge, organization of financial or other records, consulting, and computer work. Experienced in the use of Microsoft Office programs. Skilled in the use of Lacerte and Drake tax return computer services and in the use of Quicken and QuickBooks.

EDUCATION M.B.A., UCLA Graduate School of Management, June 1983 A.B., Magna Cum Laude, Occidental College, June 1979.

ADDITIONAL Council on Aging Commissioner, 2020-present
Conejo Valley Unified School District Bond Oversight Committee, 2015-18, 2021- present
Temple Adat Elohim Social Action Committee, 2015-present Temple Adat Elohim Chorale Member, 2015-present
Conejo Valley Unified School District Wellness Committee, 2012-present Conejo Valley Unified School District Bond Oversight Committee, 2015-18, 2021- present
Conejo Valley Unified School District Conejo Valley Learning Center Committee, 2016-2017
Conejo Valley Unified School District Advisory Council, 2009-2013 Thousand Oaks High School School Site Council, 2007-2013, including four years as president
Thousand Oaks High School Parent Faculty Association volunteer Temple Etz Chaim Board of Directors, 1998-2009
Redwood Middle School Site Council, 2004-2009, including two years as president Aspen Elementary School Site Council, 1999-2006, including two years as president Aspen Elementary PFA Board, 1999-2006, including three years as treasurer PERSONAL Interests include: travel, musical theater, school district volunteer, temple choir, needlework, sewing, recreational and spectator sports, music, cooking, college alumni activities, work with charities, and spending time with family and friends.

REFERENCES Available upon request.

Item No.7F

Item No.7F

Interests & Experiences
Why are you interested in serving on this board/committee and what do you believe you can contribute?
As a current member of the COA, my desire is to serve on the commission again. My desire is to continue the important work of the COA in serving the needs of the Adult Community of Thousand Oaks.

Please list all relevant experience supporting appointment to this board.

Prior to my retirement on June 1st, I was a Sr. VP with Bank of America. Some of my job responsibilities included, Training Development and Execution, Procedure Development and Execution, and Customer Experience Lead. I also managed teams of 7 employees in the mortgage servicing area. I am a self-starter who was consistently recognized for my leadership skills and dedication to the success of employees and the organization.

Please list current and past involvement with civic, volunteer and non-profit organizations, including City boards/committees, and the dates of activity.

Current COA Board Member, Donor Steward, Friends of the Thousand Oaks Library.

Certification
Please agree with the following statements
That all information in this application is complete, truthful, and accurate to the best of my knowledge.

If appointed, I understand it is my responsibility to notify the City of changes that would affect my membership on the board.

I recognize that Board membership requires my attendance at meetings and/or events. I am willing and able to make this commitment of time and effort to serve.

I understand that the Public Records Act (PRA) allows for public review of this application.

I am not an official or employee of the City of Thousand Oaks.

According to the Council's By-Laws, members must be 55 years or older. By checking this box I affirm that I meet this requirement.

I understand that checking this box constitutes a legal signature confirming that I acknowledge and agree to the above statements.

Agree
Electronic Signature - Please type your First and Last name Item No.7F

Item No.7F

Interests & Experiences
Why are you interested in serving on this board/committee and what do you believe you can contribute?
I retired early last year in the hopes of applying myself to interests such as this that affects us as seniors. I believe I would be an asset because I ran my own business for 42 years, did everything from marketing to administrative duties, bookkeeping, managed court reporters in Southern CA and did all business correspondence, emails, etc. I am a good listener, proficient in English and Spanish and am motivated and a self-starter. I would like to assist seniors towards independence, health, and dignity through compassion, education, and advocacy. That would be my goal.

Please list all relevant experience supporting appointment to this board.

I dealt for 42 years working with court reporters, videographers, interpreters, attorneys, judges, etc. I assisted court reporters in being independent and responsible reporters and I advocated for them when situations came up that needed my involvement. I also taught some classes in grammar and customer relations. On a different level of experience I also served as a caregiver to my brother for 10 years and worked with doctors, nurses, caregivers, etc. That experience taught me to be compassionate, understanding, being an advocate for my brother with all medical personnel and other caregivers.

Please list current and past involvement with civic, volunteer and non-profit organizations, including City boards/committees, and the dates of activity.

I just retired last June of 2021 and am now looking towards serving and volunteering in different aspects for the City of Thousand Oaks. I am highly motivated and excited on the coming ventures!
Certification
Please agree with the following statements
That all information in this application is complete, truthful, and accurate to the best of my knowledge.

If appointed, I understand it is my responsibility to notify the City of changes that would affect my membership on the board.

I recognize that Board membership requires my attendance at meetings and/or events. I am willing and able to make this commitment of time and effort to serve.

I understand that the Public Records Act (PRA) allows for public review of this application.

I am not an official or employee of the City of Thousand Oaks.

According to the Council's By-Laws, members must be 55 years or older. By checking this box I affirm that I meet this requirement.

I understand that checking this box constitutes a legal signature confirming that I acknowledge and agree to the above statements.

Agree
Item No.7F

Electronic Signature - Please type your First and Last name Item No.7F

Item No.7F

Interests & Experiences
Why are you interested in serving on this board/committee and what do you believe you can contribute?
Like many cities, we have a large number seniors who need to be informed about and engaged in the support services available to them. My parents were fortunate enough to live comfortably throughout their lives, but I am aware of many seniors that do not have the physical, mental or financial capacity to live and thrive in their senior years. I want to play a small and humble role in helping whomever I can in our area.

Please list all relevant experience supporting appointment to this board.

Past President, Habitat for Humanity San Fernando & Santa Clarita Valleys Chapter BOD (now part of the Greater LA chapter), Past President Santa Monica Chamber of Commerce BOD, Past President California Preservation Foundation BOD, Past President Society for Marketing Professional Services-Los Angeles BOD, Conejo Valley Chamber of Commerce's Senior Resources Network Committee member.

Please list current and past involvement with civic, volunteer and non-profit organizations, including City boards/committees, and the dates of activity.

Please see prior section.

Certification
Please agree with the following statements
That all information in this application is complete, truthful, and accurate to the best of my knowledge.

If appointed, I understand it is my responsibility to notify the City of changes that would affect my membership on the board.

I recognize that Board membership requires my attendance at meetings and/or events. I am willing and able to make this commitment of time and effort to serve.

I understand that the Public Records Act (PRA) allows for public review of this application.

I am not an official or employee of the City of Thousand Oaks.

According to the Council's By-Laws, members must be 55 years or older. By checking this box I affirm that I meet this requirement.

I understand that checking this box constitutes a legal signature confirming that I acknowledge and agree to the above statements.

Agree
Electronic Signature - Please type your First and Last name Item No.7F

Item No.7F

Interests & Experiences
Why are you interested in serving on this board/committee and what do you believe you can contribute?
I am a senior, and I am interested in Senior issues. I feel many of our Seniors have financial issues, and they struggle to be able to obtain many services available because they are either not aware they are available or are not able to muddle through all the hoops to apply for these services. Many seniors have mobility and cognitive issues, and are not able to obtain health care, do their grocery shopping, etc. Finally, many seniors are without family or friends. They are lonely and need options for socialization. Our community is affluent and has the ability to help many of our seniors with our resources. I am a people person, very approachable, a good listener, very organized, intelligent, and interested in helping to solve senior issues.

Please list all relevant experience supporting appointment to this board.

I graduated in 1978 from the University of Nebraska with a M.A. in Adult and Continuing education. I am trained to motivate and train adults. Right after graduation I worked at an Open Door Health Center, where they provided many services to the underserved in Lincoln,Nebraska community. My husband and I moved in 1979 to Los Angeles, and I worked at UCLA as House Staff Liason. In 1983 we moved and I worked as office manger when my husband went into private practice.

Please list current and past involvement with civic, volunteer and non-profit organizations, including City boards/committees, and the dates of activity.

I was very busy juggling being a mom, keeping house, and running a dental office during the years my husband was in private practice, so I was not involved in outside organizations. Soon after I retired in 2009 I became a very active volunteer in the local community theater. I was involved in all aspects of the theater, but spent most of my time as a costume designer.

Certification
Please agree with the following statements
That all information in this application is complete, truthful, and accurate to the best of my knowledge.

If appointed, I understand it is my responsibility to notify the City of changes that would affect my membership on the board.

I recognize that Board membership requires my attendance at meetings and/or events. I am willing and able to make this commitment of time and effort to serve.

I understand that the Public Records Act (PRA) allows for public review of this application.

I am not an official or employee of the City of Thousand Oaks.

According to the Council's By-Laws, members must be 55 years or older. By checking this box I affirm that I meet this requirement.

I understand that checking this box constitutes a legal signature confirming that I Item No.7F

acknowledge and agree to the above statements.

Agree
Electronic Signature - Please type your First and Last name Item No.7F

Mary Jane Taintor
I am applying for a position on The Council of Aging because I would like to have an opportunity to make a difference in the life of other seniors in our community. My graduate work prepared me to be able to motivate and teach management how to train their employees most effectively. This has enabled me to be able to work well with all people. I am 76 years old, and I have had many experiences and developed many skills that give me a very broad base of experience. I have always been very interested in helping others. I feel with my background and skill set I would be a valuable asset to this council. My husband and I first came to Los Angeles in 1979 when my husband was appointed head of the Endodontic department at the UCLA School of Dentistry. I soon accepted a job as House Staff Liaison for all the interns and residents at UCLA hospital. We kept our condo in Sherman Oaks after we moved away, and returned here several times a year. We moved to Westlake Village in 2006, and began living here full time after we retired in 2009. We love this area, and I would like to help make it even better for our seniors.

EDUCATION
1964 Pampa High School, Pampa, Texas
1973 -1976 University of Iowa – B.A.
1976 -1978 University of Nebraska M.A. (Adult and Continuing Education with a minor in Educational Administrartion)

WORK EXPERIENCE
1965 -1967 Managed dental office in Kansas City, Missouri (Husband was in Dental school) 1967 – 1972 Managed husband’s dental practice in Petersburg, Alaska 1978-1979 Open Door Health Center (Non-Profit Organization), Lincoln, Nebraska Item No.7F

-advocate for low income people to get free dental and eye care from licensed professionals in the community
-managed a weekly free dental clinic for exams and xrays for low income using licensed dentists in the community and dental students from the dental school -recruited optometrists and audiologists to be available to do testing at the weekly dental clinics
1979 – 1983 House Staff Liaison at UCLA Hospital
--served as liaison between Housestaff and the Hospital Administration -Responsible for all non-clinical aspects of the 956 house staff (interns and residents)
--responsible for insurance coverage, meal tickets, pharmacy cards, medical ID cards, lockers, and sleep rooms
--in charge of the annual Housestaff Orientation for all new interns and residents in July
--produced a House Staff Manual each year
1983 -1987 Manager for husband’s Endodontic Practice in Anchorage, AK 1988 – 2006 Manager for husband’s Endodontic Practice in Memphis, TN -responsible for daily operations of the office, supervising the employees, inputting data into the computer and generating a day sheet, balance sheet, insurance forms, and referral letters to referring dentists
-responsible for bank deposits, payroll, W2’s, and quarterly reports -interacted with other referring offices regarding their patients 2006 Retired
2006 2009 Volunteer at the Germantown Community Theatre

PROFESSIONAL SKILLS
- Very much a people person
- Good listener
- Makes good decisions
- Well organized
- Detail Oriented
Item No.7F

- Able to complete tasks in a timely manner
- Self motivated
- Excellent writing skills

PUBLICATIONS
Taintor, Jerry F. with Mary Jane Taintor: The Oral Report, The Consumer’s Common Sense Guide to Better Dental Care, Facts on File, NY, 1988
Taintor, Jerry F. with Mary Jane Taintor: The Oral Report, The Consumers Common Sense Guide to Better Dental Care, Ballantine Books, NY, 2nd Edition, 1989 CMO:110-20\H: COMMON\Council Items\2022 Staff Reports\083022\083022 COA Appointments Attachment #1 Item No.7F

TO:Andrew P. Powers, City Manager
FROM:Clifford G. Finley, Public Works Director
DATE:August 30, 2022
SUBJECT: Grand Jury Report – Water Purveyor Cybersecurity RECOMMENDATION:

Authorize the Public Works Director to provide written response to the May 11, 2022, Ventura County Grand Jury report, "Cybersecurity of Water Providers in Ventura County," and forward response to the Grand Jury.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

No Additional Funding Requested. The cost of evaluating the Grand Jury report and preparing a response is included in the Adopted FY 2022-23 Water Fund Budget.

BACKGROUND:

The City received the 2021-2022 Ventura County Grand Jury report on June 6, 2022. The Grand Jury investigated the cybersecurity strategies of Ventura County public water providers. There are 64 community water systems that supply drinking water to residents of Ventura County. The Grand Jury investigation focused on public water providers, as almost 80 percent of the water agencies in the County are operated by the County, its cities, or special districts. Fourteen public water purveyors were interviewed. The review was initiated following hacking and ransomware attacks on water providers throughout the country over the past few years. The purpose of the report is to address the vulnerability of Ventura County water providers to similar cyber-attacks, which could disrupt clean water availability and/or water provider business operations, potentially threatening public health and safety.

The Grand Jury assessed the abilities of Ventura County water providers to prepare, train, and defend against system breaches and cyberattacks with respect to both Information Technology (IT) used to bill consumers and record usage, and the Operational Technology (OT) used to control and monitor treatment and delivery of the water supply. Operational systems providing remote access and industrial management controls for water treatment, storage, and distribution are known as Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems.

Item No.7G

Grand Jury Report – Water Purveyor Cybersecurity
August 30, 2022

3 6
1 In the report (Attachment #1), the Grand Jury recognized that both the IT and SCADA systems have inherent cyber vulnerabilities, being dependent upon computer networking, remote access, and user and operator awareness, and that cybersecurity of both systems is essential to the safe and effective delivery of water. The Grand Jury found inconsistencies among the various water providers in their levels of cybersecurity, training, frequency of assessments, recovery plans, and their knowledge, and awareness of incident reporting requirements and available government cybersecurity services. The Grand Jury also considered that the report’s findings and recommendations could potentially provide useful information to a malicious actor, as could the responses of the various water providers to this report. Therefore, this report did not make overly specific assertions of vulnerabilities or recommended remedies.

The Grand Jury recommended that the following measures for Ventura County public water providers be adopted:
-Regular assessments of cybersecurity, addressing both IT and SCADA, consistent with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) recommended best practices. -Regular sharing and exchange of information regarding cybersecurity threats, attacks, protections, and remedies, and provide training, using such forums as the Association of Water Agencies Ventura County (AWAVC).
-Use of free federal and state expert assistance to enhance cybersecurity. -Regular cybersecurity awareness training.
-Address recovery from cybersecurity incidents in business recovery plans. -Establish a CISA-compliant internal protocol for reporting cyber incidents.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:

Pursuant to California Penal Code Sections 933.05, the recipient of the report is required to state whether it agrees or disagrees with each finding in the report and explain the basis for disagreeing with any finding or portion thereof.

The City must also report how it proposes to address, or has addressed, the specific recommendations in the report. The responses to the report must include one of the following allowable actions for each recommendation:

Item No.7G

Grand Jury Report – Water Purveyor Cybersecurity
August 30, 2022

3 6
1 1. The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary of the implemented actions;

2. The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation;

3. The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. The timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury Report; or

4. The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation given.

Per the Grand Jury Report, the City is to respond to Findings F-01, F-02, F-03, F0- 4, F-05, F-06, F-07, F-08, and F-09, and recommendations R-01, R-02, R-03, R- 04, R-05, R-06. The City’s response has been prepared and can be found in the August 30, 2022, Response to the 2021 - 2022 Grand Jury Report (Attachment #2).

COUNCIL GOAL COMPLIANCE:

Meets the following City Council goal:

B. Provide municipal government leadership which is open and responsive to residents, and is characterized by ethical behavior, stability, promoting public trust, transparency, confidence in the future, and cooperative interaction among civic leaders, residents, business representatives, and staff, while recognizing and respecting legitimate differences of opinion on critical issues facing the City.

PREPARED BY: Eddie Hughes, IT Manager
Michael Devlahovich, Utilities Maintenance Supervisor
Attachments:

Attachment #1 – Ventura County Grand Jury Report "Cybersecurity of Water Providers in Ventura County” dated May 11, 2022
Attachment #2 – Cover letter and written response to Grand Jury Report FIN:190-10 DPW:1000-70\eh\ev\Council\2022\08302022\Grand Jury Cybersecurity staff report.docx Item No.7G

2021 - 2022
Ventura County Grand Jury
Final Report
Cybersecurity of Water Providers
in Ventura County
May 11, 2022
ATTACHMENT #1
FIN:190-10 DPW:1000-70\eh\ev\Council\2022\08302022\Grand Jury Cybersecurity Att 1.pdf Item No.7G

This page intentionally blank
Item No.7G

2021-2022 Ventura County Grand Jury Final Report

Cybersecurity of Water Providers in Ventura County 1

Cybersecurity of Water Providers in Ventura County

SUMMARY
Cyber-attacks are a serious threat to the public drinking water supply. Recent cyber-attacks around the United States have resulted in community water supplies being poisoned or their suppliers’ business operations being held hostage by ransomware. In recognition of this critical threat, the 2021-2022 Ventura County Grand Jury (Grand Jury) investigated the cybersecurity of Ventura County public water providers.

The Grand Jury investigated two primary areas of cyber vulnerability in the water sector: the Information Technology (IT) used to bill consumers and record usage, and the Operational Technology (OT) used to control and monitor treatment and delivery of the water supply. Malicious actors can take advantage of network vulnerabilities and/or weak user access controls in either IT or OT to disrupt the business and the water service, and potentially degrade public safety.

The Grand Jury found that Ventura County relies on a complex network of public and private water wholesalers and retailers. The investigation encompassed those public water providers who supply 76% of Ventura County water users and concluded that there is considerable opportunity for improvement of cybersecurity policies and procedures.

The Grand Jury recommends that Ventura County water providers seek out and utilize free Federal and State expert support for implementing cybersecurity best practices, such as regular vulnerability assessments and cyber training for all employees. The Grand Jury further recommends that water providers utilize forums such as water agency associations to share information concerning cybersecurity threats, attacks, protections and remedies.

The Grand Jury recommendations can serve as a model to strengthen the cybersecurity of all Ventura County water providers.

METHODOLOGY
The Grand Jury obtained information from the following:
• Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) website
• Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) website • American Water Works Association (AWWA) website
• Water Information Sharing and Analysis Center (WaterISAC) website • Internet research to gather information from a variety of authoritative sources
• Audio-visual presentation entitled “Water Supply Conditions and Drought Update” to the Simi Valley City Council, October 11, 2021 • Interviews with officials who have knowledge of the IT and OT of the community water systems in Ventura County
Item No.7G

2021-2022 Ventura County Grand Jury Final Report

2 Cybersecurity of Water Providers in Ventura County

BACKGROUND
The Cyber Threat
In 2021, there were two well-publicized attempts by malicious actors to poison water supplies in Oldmar, Florida and the San Francisco Bay area. (Ref-01, Ref-02) In March 2019, a hacker gained unauthorized access to a public water plant in Kansas. (Ref-03) Ransomware attacks against water providers occurred in various locales, including Nevada, Maine, New Jersey, and California between September 2020 and August 2021. (Ref-04) These cyber-attacks involved the IT systems supporting the providers, such as customer account information and billing, as well as the OT systems that operate the water provider’s physical plant. (Ref-01, Ref-04, Ref-05) The Grand Jury investigation addressed the vulnerability of Ventura County water providers to similar cyber-attacks, which could disrupt clean water availability and/or provider business operations, potentially threatening public health and safety. (Ref-02)
In 2019, the AWWA declared that “[c]yber risk is the top threat facing business and critical infrastructure in the United States.” They also reported that “given the very real threat and significant consequences, it is critical that organizations prioritize cybersecurity and take reasonable steps to prevent, detect and respond to cyber incidents.” The AWWA further observed that “optimistic reliance on sovereign immunity defenses or insurance policies, or an unconfirmed expectation that someone else within the organization is ‘handling’ cybersecurity issues, are not sufficient to protect an organization or its leaders from the repercussions of a cyber-attack….” (Ref-06) In response, CISA has published best practices for enhancing cybersecurity, including but not limited to risk assessments, user training, data backup and multi-factor authentication for remote access. (Ref-07) In January 2022, the Biden-Harris Administration announced a new Water Sector Action Plan to secure water systems from cyberattacks. (Ref-08) The action plan, sponsored by the EPA and its federal partners, encourages the water sector to adopt technology which will enable early detection of cyber threats. (Ref-09) The plan will also boost information sharing about cyber threats between water utilities and the federal government. (Ref-08, Ref-09)
Ventura County Water Infrastructure
According to EPA’s Water Systems Summary for Quarter 4 2021, there are 64 community water systems that supply drinking water to the residents of Ventura County. (Ref-10) About 98% of the county water is supplied by the 25 largest systems. The Grand Jury investigation focused on public water providers, as almost 80% of the county water agencies are operated by the County, its cities, and special districts. The Grand Jury investigation addressed 95% of these community water systems, corresponding to 76% of Ventura County water users. (Att-01) More than half of the water delivered to Southern California homes and businesses is imported from Northern California by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) through the State Water Project and from the Colorado River. (Ref-11) The MWD allocates a portion of this water to Ventura County. (Ref-05) As shown on the Ventura County Water Purveyors map, two wholesale water Item No.7G

2021-2022 Ventura County Grand Jury Final Report

Cybersecurity of Water Providers in Ventura County 3

providers, Calleguas Municipal Water District and United Water Conservation District, are primarily responsible for distribution of this imported water to Ventura County communities. As shown on the Ventura County Water Purveyors map, these water districts provide water to every city in Ventura County except the City of Ojai, which is served by Casitas Municipal Water District. (Att-02) The water that comes from the MWD is already filtered and treated; the water from local sources is filtered and treated locally. (Ref-05, Ref-12, Ref-13) Some imported water is re- treated if it has been stored for any length of time prior to its delivery to the end user. (Ref-05) Each of these points of distribution and treatment is a potential target of a cyber-attack. (Ref-04, Ref-05)
Limitations to Scope
In many cases, the IT support for municipal water systems was housed within the respective city IT division rather than dedicated to the water department. As the cybersecurity of the cities’ IT divisions was addressed in a recent Grand Jury report, the 2021-2022 Grand Jury elected not to make it our primary focus. (Ref-14) Although the Grand Jury did not interview all of Ventura County water providers, the Grand Jury recommendations could serve as a model to strengthen the cybersecurity of all.

The Grand Jury also considered that this report’s findings and recommendations could potentially provide useful information to a malicious actor, as could the responses of the various water providers to this report. Therefore, this report does not make overly specific assertions of vulnerabilities or recommended remedies.

DISCUSSION
For each water provider, the chemical treatment, filtration, storage and distribution of water are controlled by OT, which is remotely accessed and managed by an industrial control system identified as the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system. (Ref-05, Ref-15) Hereafter this report will focus on SCADA as the cyber vulnerable component of OT. SCADA operators are trained in manual operation of pumps, valves and other equipment as backup in the event of SCADA failure or interruption. Additionally, each provider employs enterprise IT systems that support their workforce and provide customer interface,, including usage tracking and billing for services rendered. Both the IT and SCADA systems have inherent cyber vulnerabilities, being dependent upon computer networking, remote access and user and operator awareness. SCADA administrators interviewed represented their systems to be less vulnerable due to fewer authorized users. (Ref-05) However, any cyber-attack on SCADA “…could result in devastating physical consequences to such things as critical infrastructure and services, the environment, and even human life.” (Ref-16)
Seven of the 14 water providers interviewed by the Grand Jury have experienced some form of cyber-attack within the last five years, ranging from successful phishing attacks to ransomware. (Ref-05) These attacks exploited cyber vulnerabilities such as an attacker’s familiarity with the network, vulnerability of connected devices, or poor access controls. (Ref-05, Ref-17) The AWWA website provides tools and a robust suite of guidance to support cybersecurity assessments, Item No.7G

2021-2022 Ventura County Grand Jury Final Report

4 Cybersecurity of Water Providers in Ventura County

including review of security weaknesses. (Ref-18) CISA offers a variety of exercises simulating cyber-attacks, many levels of cyber awareness training, and detailed vulnerability assessments, all of which are free to the recipient. Additionally, CISA offers resources to address vulnerabilities identified by their assessments. (Ref-19) The California State Water Resource Control Board also offers information to assist water agencies in becoming more cyber aware and cyber resilient. (Ref-20) Only three of the water providers interviewed have pursued available state or federal assistance to improve cybersecurity. (Ref-05)
The Grand Jury investigation revealed that all Ventura County public water providers interviewed have some level of cybersecurity for their IT and SCADA. Ten of 14 water providers interviewed have recently conducted cyber vulnerability assessments, however the complexity level and frequency vary among those assessments. (Ref-05) Cybersecurity experts recommend that a robust cyber security program includes firewalls, backups, controlled VPN access for mobile devices and multi-factor authentication. (Ref-21, Ref-22) All the water providers interviewed utilize remotely accessible IT and SCADA systems. Thirteen of 14 water providers interviewed employ firewalls, VPN access and/or multi-factor authentication to protect against unauthorized access. The water providers also employ various forms of data backup; some utilize the Cloud, while others utilize remote servers. (Ref-05)
Per the America’s Water Infrastructure Act of 2018, every drinking water utility that serves at least 3,300 citizens was required to submit a Risk and Resilience Assessment by June 30, 2021 and update it at least every five years. (Ref-23) These assessments specifically address SCADA vulnerability. All Ventura County water providers interviewed by the Grand Jury are aware of this requirement, and 12 of 14 have completed the assessment. (Ref-05)
The Biden-Harris Administration’s Water Sector Action Plan and CISA recommend raising the awareness of cyber risks and lessons learned from past incidents in the water and wastewater sector through cybersecurity training and information sharing. (Ref-08, Ref-21) Twelve of 14 Ventura County water providers interviewed by the Grand Jury have recently conducted cyber training in addition to the operator training required to achieve and maintain operational certification. All water providers interviewed are members of professional water associations such as the Association of Water Agencies Ventura County (AWAVC), the Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) and AWWA; however, none have shared information with other local providers regarding cyber-attacks. (Ref-05) The AWWA encourages member agencies to ensure their business recovery plans identify potentially disruptive events including cyber-attack, estimate their impact, and implement mitigation strategies. (Ref-24) Thirteen of 14 Ventura County water providers interviewed by the Grand Jury confirmed that their agencies had some form of business recovery plan, but not all addressed recovery from cyber incidents. (Ref-05) CISA directs that all cyber incidents must be reported to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in addition to local law enforcement. (Ref-21) All water providers interviewed agreed that cyber incidents should be reported, however only five of 14 identified FBI or DHS as report recipients. (Ref-05)
Item No.7G

2021-2022 Ventura County Grand Jury Final Report

Cybersecurity of Water Providers in Ventura County 5

FINDINGS
F-01. The Grand Jury finds that cybersecurity of both IT and SCADA systems is essential to safe and effective delivery of water.

F-02. The Grand Jury finds inconsistent levels of cybersecurity for IT systems among the investigated water providers.

F-03. The Grand Jury finds inconsistent levels of cybersecurity for SCADA systems among the investigated water providers.

F-04. The Grand Jury finds that the level of training on cybersecurity is inconsistent among the investigated water providers.

F-05. The Grand Jury finds that the level and frequency of cybersecurity assessments are inconsistent among the investigated water providers.

F-06. The Grand Jury finds that knowledge of cyber incident reporting requirements is inadequate among the investigated water providers.

F-07. The Grand Jury finds that there is insufficient information exchange among the interviewed water providers regarding cybersecurity threats, attacks, protections and remedies.

F-08. The Grand Jury finds that there is insufficient awareness among public water providers of available government expert cybersecurity services and support for water provider systems.

F-09. The Grand Jury finds that not all the investigated water providers’ business recovery plans addressed recovery from a cyber incident.

RECOMMENDATIONS
R-01. The Grand Jury recommends that the investigated public water providers regularly assess their cybersecurity, addressing both IT and SCADA, consistent with EPA and CISA recommended best practices. (F-01, F-02, F-03, F-05)
R-02. The Grand Jury recommends that the investigated public water providers regularly share and exchange information regarding cybersecurity threats, attacks, protections and remedies, and provide training, using such forums as the AWAVC. (F-01, F-02, F-03, F-04, F-06, F-07) R-03. The Grand Jury recommends that the investigated public water providers use free federal and state expert assistance to enhance cybersecurity. (F-01, F-02, F-03, F-05, F-06, F-07, F-08)
Item No.7G

2021-2022 Ventura County Grand Jury Final Report

6 Cybersecurity of Water Providers in Ventura County

R-04. The Grand Jury recommends that the investigated public water providers regularly conduct cybersecurity awareness training. (F-01, F-02. F-03, F-04)
R-05. The Grand Jury recommends that the investigated public water providers address recovery from cybersecurity incidents in their business recovery plans. (F-01, F-02, F-03, F-09)
R-06. The Grand Jury recommends that each investigated public water provider establish a CISA-compliant internal protocol for reporting cyber incidents. (F-01, F-02, F-03, F-06)

RESPONSES
Responses required from:

The following agencies within 90 days:

Calleguas Municipal Water District (F-01, F-02, F-03, F-04, F-05, F-06, F-07, F-08, F-09) (R-01, R-02, R-03, R-04, R-05, R-06)
Camrosa Water District (F-01, F-02, F-03, F-04, F-05, F-06, F-07, F-08, F-09) (R-01, R-02, R-03, R-04, R-05, R-06)
Casitas Municipal Water District (F-01, F-02, F-03, F-04, F-05, F-06, F-07, F-08, F-09) (R-01, R-02, R-03, R-04, R-05, R-06)
Triunfo Water District (F-01, F-02, F-03, F-04, F-05, F-06, F-07, F-08, F-09) (R-01, R-02, R-03, R-04, R-05, R-06)
United Water Conservation District (F-01, F-02, F-03, F-04, F-05, F-06, F-07, F-08, F-09) (R-01, R-02, R-03, R-04, R-05, R-06)
Ventura County Public Works Agency (F-01, F-02, F-03, F-04, F-05, F-06, F-07, F-08, F-09) (R-01, R-02, R-03, R-04, R-05, R-06)
City of Camarillo Department of Public Works (F-01, F-02, F-03, F-04, F-05, F-06, F-07, F-08, F-09) (R-01, R-02, R-03, R-04, R-05, R-06)
City of Fillmore Public Works Department (F-01, F-02, F-03, F-04, F-05, F-06, F-07, F-08, F-09) (R-01, R-02, R-03, R-04, R-05, R-06)
City of Oxnard Public Works Department (F-01, F-02, F-03, F-04, F-05, F-06, F-07, F-08, F-09) (R-01, R-02, R-03, R-04, R-05, R-06)
City of Port Hueneme Public Works Department (F-01, F-02, F-03, F-04, F-05, F-06, F-07, F-08, F-09) (R-01, R-02, R-03, R-04, R-05, R-06)
City of Santa Paula Public Works Department (F-01, F-02, F-03, F-04, F-05, F-06, F-07, F-08, F-09) (R-01, R-02, R-03, R-04, R-05, R-06)
City of Simi Valley Public Works Department (F-01, F-02, F-03, F-04, F-05, F-06, F-07, F-08, F-09) (R-01, R-02, R-03, R-04, R-05, R-06)
Item No.7G

2021-2022 Ventura County Grand Jury Final Report

Cybersecurity of Water Providers in Ventura County 7

City of Thousand Oaks Public Works Department (F-01, F-02, F-03, F-04, F-05, F-06, F-07, F-08, F-09) (R-01, R-02, R-03, R-04, R-05, R-06) City of Ventura, Ventura Water (F-01, F-02, F-03, F-04, F-05, F-06, F-07, F-08, F-09) (R-01, R-02, R-03, R-04, R-05, R-06)

REFERENCES
Ref-01. Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency. Alert (AA21-042A):

Compromise of U.S. Water Treatment Facility, February 12, 2021. https://www.cisa.gov/uscert/ncas/alerts/aa21-042a Accessed May 7, 2022
Ref-02. Collier, Kevin. NBC News, June 17, 2021. 50,000 Security Disasters Waiting to Happen: The Problem of America's Water Supplies. https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/security/hacker-tried-poison-calif- water-supply-was-easy-entering-password-rcna1206 Accessed May 7, 2022
Ref-03. Water Information Sharing and Analysis Center (Water ISAC). Insider Threat - Former Employee Indicted for Unauthorized Computer Access with Intent to Harm a Kansas Public Water District, October 21, 2021. https://www.waterisac.org/portal/updated-october-21-2021-insider- threat-–-former-employee-indicted-unauthorized-computer Accessed May 7, 2022
Ref-04. Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency, Alert (AA21-287A):

Ongoing Cyber Threats to U.S. Water and Wastewater Systems, October 14, 2021. https://www.cisa.gov/uscert/ncas/alerts/aa21-287a Accessed May 7, 2022
Ref-05. Interviews with Ventura County water providers
Ref-06. Germano, Judith H. Cybersecurity Risk & Responsibility in the Water Sector. American Water Works Association, 2019.
https://www.awwa.org/Portals/0/AWWA/Government/AWWACybersec urityRiskandResponsibility.pdf Accessed May 7, 2022
Ref-07. Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency. Cyber Security Practices for Industrial Control Systems.
https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Cybersecurity_Be st_Practices_for_Industrial_Control_Systems.pdf Accessed May 7, 2022

Item No.7G

2021-2022 Ventura County Grand Jury Final Report

8 Cybersecurity of Water Providers in Ventura County

Ref-08. The White House. Fact Sheet: Biden-⁠Harris Administration Expands Public-Private Cybersecurity Partnership to Water Sector, January 27, 2022. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements- releases/2022/01/27/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-expands- public-private-cybersecurity-partnership-to-water-sector/ Accessed May 7, 2022
Ref-09. United States Environmental Protection Agency. EPA Announces Action Plan to Accelerate Cyber-Resilience for the Water Sector, January 27, 2022. https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-announces-action-plan- accelerate-cyber-resilience-water-sector Accessed May 7, 2022 Ref-10. United States Environmental Protection Agency. SDWIS Federal Reports Search. Water Systems Summary for Quarter 4 2021. https://ordspub.epa.gov/ords/sfdw/sfdw/r/sdwis_fed_reports_public/2 1?clear=RP,RIR Accessed May 7, 2022
Ref-11. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. How We Get Our Water: Infrastructure Serving Our Communities.
https://www.mwdh2o.com/your-water/how-we-get-our-water/ Accessed May 7,2022
Ref-12. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. Metropolitan’s Water Treatment Plants: Safeguard Public Health, September 2018. https://www.mwdh2o.com/media/4360/water-treatment- plants-fact-sheet-final_web.pdf Accessed May 7,2022
Ref-13. Miller, Joanna M. Working out the Bugs: Calleguas Playing it Safe with New Treatment Plant. Los Angeles Times, September 27, 1995. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1995-09-27-me-50595- story.html Accessed May 7,2022
Ref-14. Ventura County Grand Jury Final Report. Cybersecurity Strategies for Cities in Ventura County, April 17, 2020.
https://vcportal.ventura.org/GDJ/docs/reports/2019-
20/Cybersecurity_Final_Report_2019-2020.pdf. Accessed May 7, 2022 Ref-15. Williamson, Graham. OT, ICS, SCADA – What’s the difference? Kuppingercole Analysts, July 7, 2015.
https://www.kuppingercole.com/blog/williamson/ot-ics-scada-whats- the-difference Accessed May 7, 2022
Ref-16. Maddison, John. Resolving the Challenges of IT-OT Convergence. CSO.

June 21, 2018. https://www.csoonline.com/article/3283238/resolving- the-challenges-of-it-ot-convergence.html Accessed May 7, 2022

Item No.7G

2021-2022 Ventura County Grand Jury Final Report

Cybersecurity of Water Providers in Ventura County 9

Ref-17. Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency, Alert (AA21-209A):

Top Routinely Exploited Vulnerabilities, August 20, 2021. https://www.cisa.gov/uscert/ncas/alerts/aa21-209a Accessed May 7, 2022
Ref-18. American Water Works Association. Cybersecurity & Guidance: What Water Utility Leaders & Professionals Should Know.
https://www.awwa.org/Resources-Tools/Resource-Topics/Risk- Resilience/Cybersecurity-Guidance Accessed May 7, 2022
Ref-19. Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency. CISA Services Catalog. https://www.cisa.gov/publication/cisa-services-catalog Accessed May 7, 2022
Ref-20. California State Water Resources Control Board. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov Accessed May 7, 2022
Ref-21. Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency. Preparing for and Mitigating Potential Cyber Threats ISA Insights, December 15, 2021. https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/CISA_INSIGHTS- Preparing_For_and_Mitigating_Potential_Cyber_Threats-508C.pdf Accessed May 7, 2022
Ref-22. Ekran Systems. 15 Cybersecurity Best Practices to Prevent Cyber Attacks in 2022, April 6, 2022.
https://www.ekransystem.com/en/blog/best-cyber-security-practices Accessed May 7, 2022
Ref-23. Environmental Protection Agency. America’s Water Infrastructure Act of 2018, January 3, 2018. https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and- drinking-water/americas-water-infrastructure-act-2018-awia Accessed May 7, 2022
Ref-24. American Water Works Association. Emergency Response and Recovery Planning for Water Systems: A Kit of Tools.
https://engage.awwa.org/PersonifyEbusiness/Store/Product- Details/productId/7944 Accessed May 7, 2022

ATTACHMENTS
Att-01. Ventura County Water Providers by Population Served Att-02. Map of Ventura County Water Purveyors

Item No.7G

2021-2022 Ventura County Grand Jury Final Report

10 Cybersecurity of Water Providers in Ventura County

GLOSSARY

TERM DEFINITION
ACWA Association of California Water Agencies
AWAVC Association of Water Agencies Ventura County
AWWA American Water Works Association
CISA Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency
CWS Community Water Systems
DHS Department of Homeland Security
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation
IT Information Technology
OT Operational Technology
SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
VPN Virtual Private Network
Water ISAC Water Information Sharing and Analysis Center

Item No.7G

2021-2022 Ventura County Grand Jury Final Report

Cybersecurity of Water Providers in Ventura County 11

Attachment-01
Ventura County Waster Providers by Population Served

Item No.7G

2021-2022 Ventura County Grand Jury Final Report

12 Cybersecurity of Water Providers in Ventura County

The Grand Jury developed this pie chart and the following table with data from EPA Safe Drinking Water Information Service Federal Reports Search. (Ref-10)

COMMUNITY WATER PROVIDERS POPULATION SERVED
Oxnard Water Department 200,232
(City of) Ventura Water 113,500
Ventura CWWD No. 8 - Simi Valley 94,738
Cal American Water Company 69,828
Thousand Oaks Water Department 53,157
Golden State Water Company - Simi Valley 43,934
Camarillo Water Department 40,481
Ventura CWWD NO. 1 - Moorpark 38,703
Camrosa Water District 30,000
City of Santa Paula 29,321
Port Hueneme Water Department 21,926
California Water Service Company - Westlake 19,477
Fillmore Water Department 15,222
Oak Park Water Service (now Triunfo) 12,200
Casitas Municipal Water District 11,042
23%
13%
11%
6%
5%
5%
3%
3%
3%
2%
1%
5%
20%

VENTURA COUNTY COMMUNITY WATER PROVIDERS
(by population served)
Oxnard Water Dept
Ventura City Water Department
Ventura CWWD No. 8 (Simi Valley)
Thousand Oaks Water Dept
Camarillo Water Department
Ventura CWWD No. 1 (Moorpark)
Camrosa Water District (Camarillo &
Santa Rosa Valley)
City of Santa Paula
Port Hueneme Water Dept
Fillmore Water Dept
Casitas Municipal Water District
Small Public Community Water
Systems
Item No.7G

2021-2022 Ventura County Grand Jury Final Report

Cybersecurity of Water Providers in Ventura County 13

COMMUNITY WATER PROVIDERS (CONTINUED) POPULATION SERVED Ojai Water System 6,712
Ventura River Water District 5,700
Channel Islands Beach CSD 5,180
Pleasant Valley Mutual Water Company 5,000
Meiners Oaks CWD 4,200
Naval Base Ventura County, Port Hueneme 3,500
Ventura CWWD No. 19 - Somis 3,275
Warring Water Service Inc. 2,100
Cal American Water Company - Las Posas Estates 2,049
Ventura CWWD No. 17 - Bell Canyon 2,049
Crestview Mutual Water Company 2,040
Vineyard Avenue Acres MWC 1,820
Cal American Water Company - Rio Plaza 1,716
Naval Base Ventura County, Point Mugu 1,700
Ventura CWWD No. 38 - Lake Sherwood 1,527
Vineyard Ave Estates MWC 1,200
Dempsey Road Mutual Water Company 990
Rio Manor Mutual Water Company 983
Nyeland Acres Mutual Water Company 915
Garden Acres Mutual Water Company 840
Limoneira Ranch #1 832
Senior Canyon Mutual Water Company 800
Yerba Buena Water Company 690
Rancho Sespe Workers Imp Association 600
Cloverdale Mutual Water Company 455
Strickland Acres 429
Saviers Road Mutual Water Company 368
Fillmore Irrigation Company 353
Sisar Mutual Water Company 340
Siete Robles Mutual Water Company 323
Casitas Mutual Water Company 238
Cypress Mutual Water Company Inc. 228
Del Norte Mutual Water Company 211
Saticoy Club (Ventura Water) 196
U.S.N., San Nicolas Island 187
Glenview Mobile Park 160
Navalair Mobile Home Park 160
Elkins Ranch 150
Middle Road Mutual Water Company 134
Solano Verde Mutual Water Company 100
Item No.7G

2021-2022 Ventura County Grand Jury Final Report

14 Cybersecurity of Water Providers in Ventura County

COMMUNITY WATER PROVIDERS (CONTINUED) POPULATION SERVED Fillmore West Mobile Home Park 99
Tico Mutual Water Company 70
South Mountain Mutual Water Company 58
Community Mutual Water Company 53
Esterina Properties 50
San Cayetano Mutual Water Company 46
Krotona Institute 31
Rincon Water & Road Works 25
Waters Road Domestic Users Group 25

Item No.7G

2021-2022 Ventura County Grand Jury Final Report

Cybersecurity of Water Providers in Ventura County 15

Attachment-02
Map of Ventura County Water Purveyors

Item No.7G

2021-2022 Ventura County Grand Jury Final Report

16 Cybersecurity of Water Providers in Ventura County

Item No.7G

ATTACHMENT #2
Response to 2021-2022 Ventura County Grand Jury Report
Report Title:Cybersecurity of Water Providers in Ventura County Report Date:August 30, 2022
Response By:Public Works Department of the City of Thousand Oaks In response to the 2021-2022 Ventura County Grand Jury Report titled, “Cybersecurity of Water Providers in Ventura County” dated May 11, 2022 and received June 6, 2022, and in compliance with California Penal Code section 933.05, the City of Thousand Oaks provides the following responses.

RESPONSE TO FINDINGS
City agrees with findings numbered: F-01, F-02, F-03, F-04, F-05, F-06, F-07, F-08, and F-09.

City does not have actual knowledge of these facts with respect to the other water providers; however, City agrees that it is possible that there are inconsistencies among agencies. Not all findings are applicable to the City of Thousand Oaks, as described in the response to recommendations below.

RESPONSE TO RECOMMENDATIONS
The City has carefully reviewed the Recommendations in the Grand Jury Report and has the following responses to the Recommendations. The Grand Jury Report statement of the Recommendation is presented first, followed by the City’s response.

R-01. The Grand Jury recommends that the investigated public water providers regularly assess their cybersecurity, addressing both Information Technology (IT) and Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA), consistent with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) recommended best practices. (F- 01, F-02, F-03, F-05)
City Response: The City has implemented this recommendation and continues to do so on an ongoing basis. The City completed a Risk and Item No.7G

2 5
3 5
Resiliency Assessment in December of 2020 as an EPA requirement for public water systems. The City has implemented certain cybersecurity measures as part of a current SCADA system upgrade project which includes many CISA recommended best practices. The City’s IT system has quarterly penetration tests performed by a third party, as well as regular reviews of the City’s cybersecurity practices as it relates to the Center for Internet Security (CIS) Top 18 Critical Security Controls.

R-02. The Grand Jury recommends that the investigated public water providers regularly share and exchange information regarding cybersecurity threats, attacks, protections and remedies, and provide training, using such forums as AWAVC. (F-01, F-02, F-03, F-04, F-06, F-07)
City Response: The City has implemented this recommendation and is an active member of the Association of Water Agencies Ventura County (AWAVC), which provides collaboration and best practices, including an annual cybersecurity presentation by the CISA and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The City is also a member of the Multi State Information Sharing and Analysis Center (MS-ISAC) which provides information related to threats and vulnerabilities related to cybersecurity for government agencies.

R-03. The Grand Jury recommends that the investigated public water providers use free federal and state expert assistance to enhance cybersecurity. (F- 01, F-02, F-03, F-05, F-06, F-07, F-08)
City Response: The City has implemented this recommendation in part. City is currently an active member of the MS-ISAC. Additionally, the City will establish a membership with the Water ISAC.

R-04. The Grand Jury recommends that the investigated public water providers regularly conduct cybersecurity awareness training. (F-01, F-02, F-03, F- 04)
City Response: The City has implemented this recommendation. The City requires all new employees to attend and pass cybersecurity training.

Existing employees are required to attend and pass cybersecurity training on a two-year cycle. Additionally, the City IT Governance Committee meets regularly to discuss projects, cybersecurity, training, and internal policy decisions. The City has implemented regular random phishing attack tests for staff. During the month of October, Cybersecurity Awareness Month, the City promotes awareness and provides tips, training, and resources related to maintaining cybersecurity.

Item No.7G

2 5
3 5
R-05. The Grand Jury recommends that the investigated public water providers address recovery from cybersecurity incidents in their business recovery plans. (F-01, F-02, F-03, F-09)
City Response: The City has not yet implemented this recommendation but is in the process of addressing this subject, which should be completed in the current fiscal year. The City currently has a robust backup system and strategies in place for recovery from cybersecurity incidents.

R-06. The Grand Jury recommends that each public water provider establish a CISA-compliant internal protocol for reporting cyber incidents. (F-01, F-02, F-03, F-06)
City Response: The City has implemented this recommendation and has a well- established internal incident reporting system in place coordinated through the City’s IT Division. Public Works and IT coordinate on cybersecurity incidents related to Public Works items and the IT Division completes internal reporting procedures and depending on the incident, reports externally to the appropriate reporting agencies. The City is aware that cyber incidents must be reported to various external agencies, some of which include the FBI, Secret Service, local law enforcement, and others.

SUMMARY
The City of Thousand Oaks wishes to thank the Grand Jury for its review of current practices related to public access to the City's cybersecurity strategies. The City Council appreciates and welcomes the efforts of the Grand Jury in their review of City practices.

Date: ____________________ Signed:________________________________ Bob Engler, Mayor
City of Thousand Oaks
Number of Pages Attached: 0
DPW: 1000-70\mr\ev\Council\2022\08302022\Ventura County Grand Jury Report At 2.docx Item No.7G

TO:Andrew P. Powers, City Manager
FROM:Clifford G. Finley, Public Works Director
DATE:August 30, 2022
SUBJECT: Water Shortage Emergency Measures
RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt resolution to modify water use restrictions pursuant to Municipal Code Section 10-2.1112.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

No Additional Funding Requested. Staff time required to prepare this report is included in the Adopted FY 2022-23 Water Fund Budget.

BACKGROUND:

On March 28, 2022, the Governor issued an Executive Order calling on all residents to reduce water use by 15 percent from 2020 levels. On April 26, 2022, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) declared a Water Shortage Emergency Condition and adopted an Emergency Water Conservation Program (EWCP) for service areas that depend on supplies from the State Water Project (SWP). On April 27, 2022, Calleguas adopted Resolution No. 2042 declaring a Water Shortage Emergency Condition and adopting an EWCP to reduce non-essential uses of water and preserve available water supplies for the greatest public benefit in their service area.

On May 24, 2022, City Council adopted Resolution No. 2022-023 declaring a Level 4 Water Supply Shortage with minor modifications pursuant to Municipal Code Section 10.2.1112. On May 25, 2022, MWD issued their Emergency Water Conservation Program Handbook (version 1), which states that Member Agencies must limit watering duration to no more than 10 minutes, effective July 1, 2022.

On June 14, 2022, MWD issued a memorandum to SWP-dependent agencies to extend the deadline to September 1, 2022, for them to modify the watering limit duration to 10 minutes (Attachment #1). The attached resolution (Attachment #2) modifies the City’s current water restrictions to place a new watering time limit of 10 minutes per day per station on outdoor irrigation as required by MWD.

Item No.10A

Water Shortage Emergency Measures
August 30, 2022

3 5
7 DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:

Water conservation measures under a Level 4 Water Shortage are described in Municipal Code Section 10-2.1107 and limit outdoor watering to one day per week using hand watering or low volume irrigation systems. Exceptions are made to this restriction to allow an additional day of watering and the use of spray sprinklers for specific applications including active public playing fields and active recreation areas in public parks, licensed daycare centers and schools, golf course fairways and greens, non-turf vegetation planted and essential to maintain slope stability on steep slopes, and fuel modification zones.

In addition, as part of the City’s Level 1 permanent water conservation requirements, there is a limit on watering duration of 15 minutes per day per irrigation station/zone, which applies to spray sprinklers but not to low volume drip irrigation systems. In order to comply with the MWD Emergency Water Conservation Program requirement, the City must modify this from a 15- to 10- minute limit effective September 1, 2022, as discussed in the July 5, 2022, staff report to City Council.

The City’s Level 4 water use restrictions have been in place for more than two months. Education, outreach, and enforcement mechanisms have been developed and implemented by staff. Outreach has included local newspaper articles and ads, social media postings, a dedicated website, webinars/presentations, and mailings to all residents, businesses, and Homeowner Associations (HOAs).

Geographic Information System (GIS)-based applications have been developed to record, track, and monitor both publicly-reported and staff-observed violations.

Towards the end of June, the City hired Cobalt Security Services to assist with overnight water patrols within the City’s service area and record observed violations through the mobile GIS application. Staff developed a dashboard to view and track violations (see below). Staff issue door hangers at properties where violations are observed, followed by a letter mailed to the service account holder.

To date, 1,089 first violation warnings (no fine) have been issued. These warnings include current restriction information and provide water saving resources. Further violations at the same property result in escalating fines. To date 128 citations have been issued; 114 are second violations ($100 fine), twelve are third violations ($200 fine), and two are fourth violations ($500 fine)
The GIS dashboard, as shown on the following page, and associated applications are used by customer service and support staff to assist residents with questions regarding restrictions, violations, citations, and compliance. An average of three- to-four staff are providing full time daily customer support to residents and businesses.

Item No.10A

Water Shortage Emergency Measures
August 30, 2022

3 5
7 Significant water savings have been achieved by the community since the water use restrictions were established. In June 2022, the City’s water service area showed a 30 percent use reduction relative to June 2021 and June 2020. July 2022 data showed a 35 percent use reduction compared to the previous two Julys. In spite of these savings, water use exceeds the City’s target established by Calleguas by 28 percent.

The transition period for moving from spray sprinklers to drip systems expired at the end of July. This should generate additional water savings. In addition, bi- monthly data is now available for all customers showing water use since the restrictions went into force. This data will allow staff to strategically focus resources on users who have not reduced their water use.

Item No.10A

Water Shortage Emergency Measures
August 30, 2022

3 5
7 The annually averaged water use target for the City is 80 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) and the seasonally adjusted target is 106 gpcd for the summer months.

Current water use in the City’s service area stands at 136 gpcd. Based on the performance of SWP-dependent areas overall in currently meeting the region-wide target, MWD has postponed their decision on imposing an outright ban on outdoor watering. Should the MWD Board make such a determination in future, the City would need to mandate an equivalent ban within 30 days. Regardless of whether such a ban is imposed, MWD may begin to impose a penalty of up to $2,000 per acre-foot on water used in excess of each water agency’s target beginning December 2022. Thus, it is incumbent on the City to strive to meet the reduction target this year to avoid a significant financial penalty.

One unfortunate side effect of reduced water use in the City is the maintenance of chlorine residual levels required to meet water quality standards. With lower water use, water remains in our reservoirs for longer than normal. Over time, the chlorine concentration decreases, creating a challenge to meet mandated chlorine residual levels. The City is monitoring this situation closely and exploring ways to mitigate low chlorine residuals through possible shifting of watering days for significant water users, or by mechanical and chemical means.

COUNCIL GOAL COMPLIANCE:

Meets the following City Council goal:

F. Provide and enhance essential infrastructure to ensure that the goals and policies of the Thousand Oaks General Plan are carried out and the City retains its role and reputation as a leader in protecting the environment and preserving limited natural resources.

PREPARED BY: Helen Cox, Sustainability Division Manager Attachments:

Attachment #1 – Memorandum from MWD on watering limit duration Attachment #2 – Resolution
DPW: 1000-90\ev\Council\2022\08302022\ Water Shortage Measures staff report.docx Item No.10A

Date: June 14, 2022
To: State Water Project Dependent Area Coordination Group (via e-mail) From: Brad Coffey, Manager, Water Resource Management Group Subje
ct: Modification of the Emergency Water Conservation Program Handbook to extend the deadline to modify watering limit duration
On May 25, 2022, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California issued the Emergency Water Conservation Program Handbook (version 1). In the handbook, Section 3.1.1 (Eligible Outdoor Water Restriction Criteria) states, in part:

Me
tropolitan does not specify the day of the week or any method of even/odd house numbering for the watering restrictions. Metropolitan does, however, require that Member Agencies limit watering times to prevent substitution of water use from restricted days to permitted days. For this purpose, watering duration will be limited to no more than 10 minutes, effective July 1. In addition, it is advisable that the Member Agency also adopt a mechanism before September to enforce the banning of all outdoor watering in the event the General Manager later determines that such a ban is necessary to preserve SWP supplies. [emphasis added]
Pri
or to distribution of the handbook, some Path 1 agencies established watering durations of 15 minutes. Accordingly, Metropolitan is changing the July 1 date above to September 1 to allow sufficient time for the agencies to return to their governing bodies to further reduce the watering duration to be consistent with the handbook.

Not
e, however, that Path 1 agencies who did not specify a watering duration of 15 minutes or less are not compliant with the handbook. This is because outdoor watering could be fully substituted from restricted days to newly permitted days.

If
you have any questions regarding this change, please contact me at (213) 217-5845 or [email protected].

Si
ncerely,
Bra
d Coffey
Manager, Water Resources Management Group
ATTACHMENT #1
DPW: 1000-90\ev\Council\2022\08302022\ Water Shortage Measures Att 1.pdf Item No.10A

DPW: 1000-90\ev\Council\2022\08302022\ Water Shortage Measures Resolution Attachment 2.docx

2 5
3 2
ATTACHMENT #2
RESOLUTION NO.

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF THOUSAND OAKS ENACTING AN ADDITIONAL

WATER CONSERVATION MEASURE PURSUANT TO
MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 10-2.1112
WHEREAS, a reliable minimum supply of potable water is essential to the public health, safety, and welfare of the people and economy of the southern California region; and
WHEREAS, careful water management that includes active water conservation measures in times of drought is essential to ensure a reliable minimum supply of water to meet current and future water supply needs; and WHEREAS, Article X, Section 2 of the California Constitution declares that the general welfare requires that water resources be put to beneficial use, waste or unreasonable use or unreasonable method of use of water be prevented, and conservation of water be fully exercised with a view to the reasonable and beneficial use thereof; and
WHEREAS, California Water Code section 375 authorizes water suppliers to adopt and enforce a comprehensive water conservation program to reduce water consumption and conserve supplies; and
WHEREAS, on November 16, 2021, City Council adopted a water conservation ordinance, codified in Article 11, Chapter 2, Title 10 of the Thousand Oaks Municipal Code, that became effective on January 1, 2022 and which sets forth six levels of water conservation measures; and
WHEREAS, Calleguas Municipal Water District (Calleguas) provides the water for the City of Thousand Oaks and is reliant upon deliveries of water imported by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan) from the California State Water Project (SWP), and is considered an SWP dependent agency within the Metropolitan service area; and
WHEREAS, the State of California has entered a third consecutive year of drought during which annual precipitation, snowpack, and resultant runoff levels have been markedly below that which is needed to both adequately replenish key reservoirs and meet current water demands; and

Item No.10A

DPW: 1000-90\ev\Council\2022\08302022\ Water Shortage Measures Resolution Attachment 2.docx

2 5
3 2
WHEREAS, on October 19, 2021, Governor Gavin Newsom proclaimed that a state of emergency exists in all California counties due to severe drought conditions, and called on all local and regional water suppliers to implement Water Shortage Contingency Plans (WSCP) that are responsive to local conditions; and WHEREAS, on November 9, 2021, Metropolitan declared that specified drought emergency conditions exist within its service area and called on all member agencies to immediately implement conservation to reduce the use of SWP supplies; and
WHEREAS, on November 16, 2021, City Council declared a water supply shortage and urged residents and businesses to voluntarily reduce usage by 15 percent from 2020 usage to extend SWP storage reserves; and WHEREAS, on March 18, 2022, the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) announced that it reduced the calendar year 2022 SWP allocation to Metropolitan to five percent, and current projections indicate that the final allocation will remain five percent; and
WHEREAS, DWR has a limited supply of water available for SWP contractors to utilize for Human Health and Safety (HH&S) but that access to HH&S water requires: the contractor to demonstrate robust conservation efforts with mandatory requirements; the repayment of all HH&S water in future years; and future investments to reduce reliance on the SWP to meet HH&S needs; and WHEREAS, Metropolitan announced that, in light of the five percent SWP allocation, there are insufficient supplies to meet normal demands in SWP- dependent areas in calendar year 2022, and declared a water supply emergency at their April 26 Board meeting requiring all SWP-dependent water agencies to limit watering to one day per week equivalent, or meet volumetric requirements requiring a reduction of greater than 50 percent or face volumetric penalties of up to $2,000 per acre-foot effective June 1; and
WHEREAS, Calleguas, on April 27, 2022, passed Resolution 2042 declaring a Water Shortage Emergency Condition in the Calleguas service area mandating that water users within their service area restrict irrigation to one day per week (or equivalent) with enforcement or meet volumetric requirements requiring a reduction of greater than 50 percent by June 1; and WHEREAS, on May 24, 2022, City Council adopted Resolution 2022-023 declaring a Level 4 Water Supply Shortage with minor modifications pursuant to Municipal Code Section 10-2.1107; and
Item No.10A

DPW: 1000-90\ev\Council\2022\08302022\ Water Shortage Measures Resolution Attachment 2.docx

2 5
3 2
WHEREAS, on May 25, 2022, Metropolitan issued the Emergency Water Conservation Program Handbook (version 1), in which Section 3.1.1 (Eligible Outdoor Water Restriction Criteria) states, in part that Member Agencies limit watering duration to no more than 10 minutes, effective July 1; and WHEREAS, on June 14, 2022, Metropolitan issued a memorandum to SWP-dependent agencies to extend the deadline for them to modify the watering limit duration to 10 minutes to September 1st; and
WHEREAS, Municipal Code Section 10-2.1112 provides that City Council upon adoption of a resolution may implement water conservation measures in addition to the prohibited uses of water identified in Sections 10-2.1104, 10-2.1105, 10-2.1106 10-2.1107 10-2.1108 and 10.2-1109.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Thousand Oaks resolves as follows:

Watering or irrigating of turf, landscape, or other vegetated areas with potable water using a landscape irrigation system or a watering device that is not continuously attended is limited to no more than ten (10) minutes of watering per day per station. This watering limit does not apply to low volume or low flow systems such as drip or subsurface irrigation.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 30th day of August 2022, by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:
________________________________
Bob Engler, Mayor
City of Thousand Oaks, California
ATTEST/CERTIFY:
_________________________________
Cynthia M. Rodriguez, City Clerk
Date Attested: ____________________
Item No.10A

DPW: 1000-90\ev\Council\2022\08302022\ Water Shortage Measures Resolution Attachment 2.docx

2 5
3 2
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Office of the City Attorney
_________________________________
Tracy Friedl, Assistant City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO ADMINISTRATION:
_________________________________
Andrew P. Powers, City Manager
The presence of electronic signature certifies that the foregoing is a true and correct copy as approved by the City of Thousand Oaks City Council on the date cited above.

Item No.10A

TO:Andrew P. Powers, City Manager
FROM:Clifford G. Finley, Public Works Director
DATE:August 30, 2022
SUBJECT: School Crossing Guard Program Overview
RECOMMENDATION:

Receive staff presentation on the history of the crossing guard program, current program policies, and practices in neighboring communities. Provide direction to staff on potential modifications to the current program.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

No Additional Funding Requested. Minimal staff time to prepare staff report included in Adopted FY 2022-23 General Fund Budget. Impacts to program budget will vary depending upon City Council direction.

BACKGROUND:

On June 14, 2022, City Council was provided a report regarding the Crossing Guard Program and recommendations for changes to crossed locations (Attachment #1) for the 2022-23 school year. City Council requested staff return with additional information before acting on the recommendations in the report.

History
There are currently 24 City-managed and funded school crossing guard locations serving 20 school campuses citywide, consisting of 15 elementary schools and five middle schools (Attachments #2 and #3). The City has the largest number of crossing guard locations of any single agency in Ventura County. The program budget for FY 2022-23 is $347,000, the largest of any agency solely operating a crossing guard program. The current program requires a minimum of 30 total staff for effective operations including 24 assigned crossing guards, two senior supervisory guards, and four substitute guards. The City’s Transit Program Manager oversees day-to-day supervision of the program, and other Public Works staff provide support. The program has been continuously operated by the City since 1965.

Item No.10B

School Crossing Guard Program Overview
August 30, 2022

3 5
3 The current minimum salary for a Crossing Guard is $22.50 per hour and the average direct cost to the City is $14,500 per crossed location. In the 1970’s, the annual cost of crossing guard placements was budgeted at $810 per location (not adjusted for inflation).

The earliest reference to consider placing a crossing guard at an area school was at the November 17, 1964, City Council meeting. City Council reviewed a request for a crossing guard at the intersection of Erbes Road and La Granada Drive. City Council at that time agreed to accept financial responsibility for the cost of the crossing guard starting with the 1965 school year. The crossing guard cost was to be initially funded by the County until the City began funding it for the next school year.

At the July 6, 1965, meeting, City Council agreed to assume responsibility of the costs for an additional crossing guard for the then Valley Oaks School District (precursor to the Conejo Valley Unified School District). Since 1964, City Council has considered actions on crossing guard placement approximately 100 times. From founding of the City until at least the mid-1970s, recommendations for crossing guard placement were reviewed and brought to City Council by the Ventura County Traffic Safety Committee with concurrence from the Public Works Director and/or City Engineer. It is unclear (based on available records) when decisions regarding crossing guard placement were moved internally, but according to staff research it appears to have been in 1977.

Multiple reports reference a City Council adopted standard for crossing guard placement in 1977; however, an exhaustive review of all records and minutes from 1977 cannot confirm if City Council formally adopted a standard, and there are no references to crossing guard standards in the Municipal Code. However, a report to the City Council dated September 14, 1999, from the Community Budget Task Force entitled, “Minimum Community Standards” includes the oldest written reference to crossing guard placement standards that staff could locate. The standards listed in the report are consistent with the standards currently applied when making recommendations to City Council.

The 1999 Community Standard Guide noted that “Crossing Guards are generally not stationed at signalized intersections” which is consistent with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD). The CA MUTCD provides guidance and identifies standards for virtually every aspect of traffic control within the State of California and generally is the basis for traffic safety recommendations to City Council. Lastly, the report indicates the City’s standard is a “Department practice” and “Discretionary.”
Item No.10B

School Crossing Guard Program Overview
August 30, 2022

3 5
3 State and Federal Standards
The CA MUTCD is California’s version of the federal standards that define and govern the use of traffic control devices throughout California. The CA MUTCD includes standards for placement of Crossing Guards and establishes minimum vehicle and pedestrian volumes. The standards currently used by staff have lower thresholds to meet for both pedestrian and vehicle volumes (see Table 1 below).

Locations must meet both pedestrian and vehicle count standards to be considered for crossing guard service. The City currently has Crossing Guards assigned to four signalized intersections, which is an uncommon practice based on discussions with other agencies surveyed in Ventura County and adjoining Los Angeles County cities.

Crossing Guard Standards exist to effectively and objectively evaluate the need for Crossing Guards by comparing data collected against well thought out requirements so decisions to place Crossing Guards are consistent. Meeting both pedestrian and vehicle minimum thresholds indicates the potential need for adult supervision to assist students to find gaps in traffic flow to cross the street.

City Standard
The current City standard to evaluate Crossing Guard placement (marked in bold) and the corresponding State vehicle and pedestrian standards per the CA MUTCD are shown below in Table 1:

Table 1 – Crossing Guard Standards
Minimum Peak Hour
Volumes AM and PMLocation Type
Vehicles Pedestrians
Uncontrolled Intersection
No traffic control on higher volume
approaches (2-way stop)
City Standard
State Standard
300
500
20 40
Controlled Intersection
traffic control on all approaches
(4-way or 3-way stop)
City Standard
State Standard
300
500
20 40
Signalized Intersection City Standard
State Standard
300
500
20 40
Pedestrian and vehicle counts were performed at the Crossing Guard locations in Spring 2022. Based on those figures, and the current City standards as listed above in bold, a total of 10 of the 24 existing crossing locations do not currently meet the standard to qualify for continued placement of a Crossing Guard. If the CA MUTCD standards were applied instead, including no Crossing Guards at signalized intersections, 16 of the 24 locations would not qualify for continued placement of a Crossing Guard.

Item No.10B

School Crossing Guard Program Overview
August 30, 2022

3 5
3 DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:

Seventeen municipal agencies and local school districts in Ventura County and nearby Los Angeles County were surveyed regarding their crossing guard programs and 13 responses were received (Attachment #4). The survey asked the following questions:
· Who is the funding agency?
· Number of Crossing Guard locations?
· Overall program budget?
· Is the program directly operated or contracted out?
· Does the agency follow CA MUTCD guidelines?
· Who is the final approval authority?
Funding
Of the public agencies that responded to the survey, only the County of Ventura does not fund any crossing guard operations in some manner and instead delegates that responsibility to the individual school districts in unincorporated areas. One agency, City of Moorpark, directly supports two crossing guard locations in the community with the balance of five locations funded and managed by the local school district as a separate program.

The City of Port Hueneme jointly funds their Crossing Guard program with the local school district. At one time, after several years of negotiations the school district assumed responsibility, but subsequently declined to fund or staff the program citing liability concerns. The City of Ventura’s program is a collaboration of the City and local school district, with the city funding locations that are fully compliant with the CA MUTCD standards, and the school district funding other locations that are desired, but do not meet the state standard. There is an approximate 25%/75% split of funding between the City ($80,000) and school district ($270,000).

Locations
The fewest number of crossing-guarded locations reported was three (Fillmore and Westlake Village). Cities of Camarillo and Simi Valley each have 12, Oxnard 14, while Ventura has 19 locations. The City of Thousand Oaks currently has 24 locations. Simi Valley, a city of similar size and population, has half the crossed locations. The number of crossing guard locations per 1,000 residents was also analyzed, which typically is one crossing guard location per every 2,500-5,000 residents. Most agencies were in or close to this metric. The City of Oxnard has the least number of guards per capita at 14,350 residents per crossed location.

Budget
Annual program budgets vary greatly and not all agencies report program costs the same way, but Ventura and Thousand Oaks have the highest program costs.

Item No.10B

School Crossing Guard Program Overview
August 30, 2022

3 5
3 Oxnard, with 19 locations, was unable to provide budget figures for comparison.

The cost per location ranges from a low of $8,500 (Simi Valley) to a high of $21,000 (Port Hueneme). Contracting was generally reported by agencies to be more costly than direct operation. However, administrative costs to manage an internal program versus a contracted program may have unknown impacts on overall costs.

Direct Operation or Contract
Most small agencies contract out their service (Fillmore and Moorpark are exceptions) and of the large agencies surveyed, only Ventura contracts out. Every agency that contracts for services, uses the same firm, All City Management Services, based in Santa Fe Springs, CA. Of the municipal agencies surveyed, only City of Moorpark uses staff not specifically hired to be Crossing Guards, instead using hourly staff assigned to other duties.

CA MUTCD
Most municipal agencies surveyed use the CA MUTCD for their standards. City of Moorpark is an example of an exception, but noted they only have two locations, both of which have been in operation for many years. For school districts, the responses indicated decisions were made based on school and PTA requests in consultation with local police and traffic engineers. No single uniform standard was identified.

Final Approval Authority
Current City process is for staff to conduct an engineering study, analyze the data and make recommendations to the Traffic and Transportation Advisory Commission (TTAC). Based on TTAC direction, a final recommendation is made to City Council for consideration. Some discretion is exercised when making recommendations as was demonstrated at the June 14, 2022, City Council meeting. Only five of the ten locations that currently do not meet minimum standards were recommended be closed while the five other locations were recommended be studied for an additional year.

There is not a universally accepted process for deciding approved locations. Only four municipal agencies (Agoura Hills, Port Hueneme, Simi Valley, and Thousand Oaks) have City Council as the final decisionmaker. In the City of Ventura, City Council is consulted for budgetary reasons only. Decisions for placement are based on Traffic Engineer, Ventura Police Department, and school district staff consensus. In the City of Oxnard, the Traffic Engineer and Oxnard Police Department make the crossing guard decisions. The City of Westlake Village has a similar process in consultation with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Office. In the cities of Camarillo, Fillmore, and Moorpark, the decision is made at the City Manager level.

Item No.10B

School Crossing Guard Program Overview
August 30, 2022

3 5
3 For the 2022-23 school year (which began August 24) twenty-four school locations are scheduled to be staffed as directed by City Council at the June 14, 2022, meeting depending on availability of crossing guards. One of those school locations is in the County unincorporated area of Lynn Ranch (Madroña Elementary). By County policy, the Conejo Valley Unified School District is the agency responsible for providing crossing guards at that location, if desired. The City has been providing coverage at this location since September 1993 as a result of resident petitions. City Council direction at the September 7, 1993, City Council meeting was to fund full operation for six months, then seek County assistance for partial funding beyond that time. The rationale for accepting this responsibility appears to have been that even though the school was in the unincorporated area, more than 80 percent of the students attending lived within City limits. Further discussion took place at the February 8, 1994, City Council meeting regarding the County’s unwillingness to provide 15 percent support for this location, with the City Manager directed to try to find a resolution. The minutes reviewed beyond this date do not provide any indication if City Council formally moved to accept 100 percent responsibility for this location and it appears to have been continually staffed since that time.

The City is facing an additional challenge with the Crossing Guard Program due to ongoing labor shortages which are impacting our ability to staff the 24 approved crossing locations. At least four crossing locations are expected to be unstaffed at the beginning of the school year. The four locations are locations staff recommended for closure at the June 14, 2022, City Council meeting. Three of these locations (Madroña, Aspen, and Banyan Elementary Schools) were without crossing guards in the previous school year for the entire year, or for long periods, due to staffing shortages. The fourth location, Ladera, lost their crossing guard to retirement over the summer. A total of five staff retired or resigned over the summer, and program staff has been working to fill these vacancies. The Banyan and Ladera locations are expected to be filled shortly after the Labor Day holiday, the Madroña and Aspen locations before the end of September based on current recruitments being processed.

Summary
The majority of local municipal agencies fund crossing guard services directly, some with financial participation with the local school district. The CA MUTCD is the preferred standard used by municipal agencies in making determinations for crossing guard placements. There are significant variations on the number of guard locations by agency based on population, a fairly even split to directly operate or contract for guard services, and several methods for determining who has final approval authority for guard placement.

Item No.10B

School Crossing Guard Program Overview
August 30, 2022