Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening everyone and welcome to the city of Oxnard Planning Commission for Thursday, December 4, 2025. This meeting will come to order at 6 p.m. The public may view the meeting from home on the city's website, Spectrum Channel 10, Frontier Channel 35, or on the city's YouTube website. To participate in the meeting, the public may provide comments to the planning commission via email at planning@oxnner.org no later than 5:00 PM on the day of the meeting or through the city's website at oxner.org/city-me or call the planning division office. Additionally, those wishing to speak can dial the phone number listed at the bottom of the screen, follow the instructions to access the meeting, and press star 9 to raise your hand indicating your intention to speak on the agenda item being discussed. Madam Secretary, can we please have the roll call?

Chair Orjo, present. Vice Chair, Dr. Stewart, present. Commissioner, Dr. Lopez, here. Commissioner Nash, present. Commissioner Schuli, present. Commissioner Barca, present. We have a quorum. Thank you, Madam Secretary. We will now move on to the pledge of allegiance. Um, I will lead us. Please stand if able to uh right hand over your heart and begin. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you everyone. We will move on to agenda item C. Public comments on items not on the agenda. At this time, a person may address the planning commission on matters within the jurisdiction of the planning commission, including information consent items and any time not appearing on the agenda. The planning commission cannot take action on any item presented during public comments that is not on the agenda and such item may only be referred to to the com commission secretary. Persons wishing to speak on public hearing items should do so at the time of the public hearing. Madam Secretary, do we have any public comments for items not on the agenda? No chair.

Thank you very much. We'll move on to D consent agenda. Uh one, approval of the 2026 planning commission calendar and approval of the minutes for September 4, September 18, October 18, and November 6. Um are there any items that the commission would like to pull to discuss or vote on separately or differently? Uh, seeing none, I'll just look for any general comments. Um, any corrections for the minutes? And if not, I'll look for a motion to approve the calendar as distributed and the minutes as distributed. Commissioner, Dr. Lopez,

I'll move to approve the uh agenda and minutes as presented. Thank you. I'll second it. Seconded. Okay. Thank you. It has been moved by Commissioner Dr. Lopez and seconded by Vice Chair Dr. Stewart to approve the 2026 planning commission calendar approval of the minutes for September 4, September 18, October 18, and November 6 as distributed. Is there any discussion uh before we vote? Madam Secretary, can we have the roll call, please? Commissioner Dr. Lopez, I. Vice Chair, Dr. Stewart I, Commissioner Nash. I, Commissioner Schuli,

I, Commissioner Barca. I, Chair Arjo, I. This motion passes. Thank you. Um, uh, for the first time with section A and with no public hearings agenda for this meeting, there's no need for exparte declarations. The meeting can go forward, past public hearing, and go past also study session reports, and go on to section H, community development staff updates. um with an update on AB130 and SB131 SQL reforms and impact on housing projects. Mr. Pearson or Mr. Zerugosa.

Sure. Sure. So, good evening, chair, commissioners, assistant city attorney Jason Zeruggoza. Um tonight, Joe and I are going to be presenting on AB130 and SB131, uh key provisions of the bill, uh the bills that were adopted, uh in June of this year, effective July 1. Um and both bills have the the really the the key there is streamlining streamlining housing developments in California, right? And so um we'll try to we'll try to keep the discussion high level. Uh we'll do an overview of SQUA. Um some of you have enough experience to probably teach a SQA course yourselves, but so we'll do a very very general high level of SQA and then go into the key provisions of the bills and then we ask to take questions at the end. Um uh and uh with that, yeah, we'll begin the presentation. Okay. So, here's an overview of what we're going to talk about. So, background on AB130 and SB131. Uh, a highle summary of key provisions. Uh, excuse me if my voice goes out. I'll try to uh to power through these slides as best I can. Um, so AB130 um will go over the key urban infill exemption um that has been codified as well as tribal consultation and labor standards. So, again, key provisions of the bills. Um and then with regard to SB131, the near miss streamlining and what that means as well as um housing element reasonzoning exemptions um and then other other SQA exemptions and updates um that have also been codified but again we'll we'll try to keep the discussion um more general. So um again you know going with the kind of basics what is SQA as you all know um the California envir environmental quality act enacted in 1970 modeled after the federal um I wouldn't say equivalent but but uh the federal uh law the national environmental policy act um and it applies to projects that require discretionary approvals by public agencies um and then requires analysis

of potential significant environmental impacts as well. And then as you all know as you have experienced this with various projects that have come before you, the lead agency must determine if a project is exempt um requires a negative declaration, mitigated uh negative deck or a full-blown EIR. Um and so the purpose of SQA, contrary to uh what some may believe, um is not to prohibit projects. It's to require agencies to disclose uh potential significant environmental impacts and then to adopt feasible mitigation or alternatives um or to explain why approval is justified despite those impacts. Um and so obviously there are uh challenges um to SQA. It's not perfect. Um over the years uh the scope of the analysis has expanded and so there are cumulative impacts that come with that. Right? Projects that uh take longer uh for review. U when you're looking at longerterm impacts of a project obviously um that can make the process take longer cost more and sometimes uh as you have experienced as well people uh can delay projects by either threatening lawsuits or actually initiating litigation um whether um whether there is merit to that litigation or not. So again you've you've all experienced some of that. So again, that was that was about as as fast a SQA overview as you can possibly give, but it is important um background when going into what AB130 and what SB131 um are attempting uh to do. So these are budget trailer bills enacted as part of the 2025 2026 state budget uh package. uh they were modeled on prior legislation proposals AB 609 um and SB 607 um signed into law as I said before June 30 uh with an effective date of an immediate effective date actually July 1, 2025. So um the measures uh at a very

high level again um amend the public resource code and the government code to accelerate housing production by establishing new SQA exemptions and streamlining procedures with primary application to housing development projects. Okay. So AB130 uh creates new SQA exemptions for uh urban infill housing projects um as well. It does other things too and we'll go into those provisions of of uh of the bill. Um and then SB131 adds 13 new exemptions. Um streamlines review of housing projects that nearly qualify um for those exemptions. Um and those 13 exemptions may not be directly related to housing uh development but um as you'll see in the last slide um they are uh exemptions that are meant to uh support the development of housing in some respects. Okay. So the definition of housing development projects. So under AB130, a qualifying housing development project includes projects consisting solely of residential units, mixeduse projects where at least 2/3 of the new or converted square footage is designated for residential use or mixeduse projects of 500 units or more with at least 50% residential square footage and no transient lodging. So the exemption, it's important to keep in mind it also applies to transitional or supportive housing, farmworker housing, and associated ministerial permits and public improvements. So the exemptions would also apply to any public improvements that are necessary um in necessary in furtherance of that housing project as well. So it's not just the the actual development of the housing, but also the the uh ministerial permits and public improvements that go along with that with those projects. Um, for a project to qualify for an AB130 exemption, it can't be bigger than

20 acres, um, or 5 acres if it's if it's under a builder's remedy, um, or a builder's remedy project. Um, and it has to be in a city or in an urban area per the census. Um, and it has to be infill, meaning basically surrounded by existing development, homes, uh, shops, parks, etc. Um, so you've got a a size requirement or acreage requirement. Um and then the fact that it has to basically be in a city or in an urban area as well. Um and then it has to be infill. Um for consistency, uh this this part is interesting that to qualify for an AB130 exemption, the housing development has to be consistent with an applicable general plan, zoning ordinance, or where relevant a local coastal program. And then where a general plan and zoning are not aligned. Um it this again with the furtherance with with the idea that they're trying to streamline housing development projects. The project is deemed consistent if it complies with either document. So either the general plan or or the zoning ordinance. Um and then that the project has to achieve a minimum density equal to 50% of the default density specified in the certified housing element. So again, uh it it's got to be consistent with either the general plan or the zoning ordinance. So prohibited sites, um this is also uh one of those things where like if you ask questions on like would it apply in this circumstance or that one uh the answer is going to be we don't know yet for some of this. But um AB130 generally bars the exemption for sites with wetlands, prime farm farmland, uh protected habitats, conservation easements or local coastal zones. So um and then you got risky sites like um hazmat sites, very high fire hazard zones, earthquake fault zones, flood um uh flood hazards uh sort of zones. even

in in those risky sites, um the exemption might apply, but it would only be eligible if you have full proof of uh uh full proof of full mitigation. Now, what that means, we don't know. They didn't really give examples of what full mitigation would mean for projects on those specific sorts of sites. Um the other important thing here is that the exemption is not available if any portion of the project is for transient lodging. So, hotels, uh, motel, bed and breakfast, etc. Um, the exemption also wouldn't apply, um, if the project would require the demolition of any, um, uh, site that has been registered in a national, state, or local historic register before the date the preliminary application was submitted to the city. So again um would not apply in if any of the project is for transit lodging. So hotels, motel, bed and breakfast or if demo would be required for a historic structure. Um AB130 also and this is just this this is kind of it's important but it it wasn't the main emphasis uh of the bill as I read it through the legislative history. um that AB130 would require a phase 1 environmental site assessment and then if a recognized environmental condition or hazardous uh releases are identified, a phase 2 ESA as well and then full remediation before the exemption uh would be eligible. Um and then for a project that's within 500 ft of a freeway, um those buildings have to incorporate air filtration systems and HVAC units serving any habitable space. And then um there would have to be a prohibit uh it it then uh prohibits balconies or operable windows that face the freeway. So that's to just minimize the um exposure to traffic related air pollutants. Um you've experienced some of that. I I don't know necessarily with with freeway, but certainly where like a project is near like a railway or

something like that. Um but this is specific to um uh projects you wouldn't wouldn't qualify for the exemption um if if the windows of a residential project face the freeway. Um and that again is to minimize exposure to to traffic related air pollutants. Okay. So this one is is uh how do I put this? um it it can uh even though even though the goal is to streamline housing, this one actually provides uh I wouldn't say barriers but additional time right to the approval process. So tribal consultation under AB130 is mandatory. So the lead agency which of course would be us for those uh projects in the city um must notify the California Native American tribe that's traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project within 14 days. Um, the tribes would then have 60 days to request formal consultation and if requested, the consultation must begin within 14 days of acceptance and then conclude within 50 uh 45 days with an optional 15-day extension. I know it's a lot. It's on it's on the slide and we'll have to keep track of these days as as we get experience with these projects. Um the other important piece here is that there's no agreement that's required but any of those mitigation measures that are agreed upon they become enforceable conditions of approval. So you may see those in projects that come before you um that again if there are mitigation measures that are result of these tribal consultations they will be uh conditions of approval that will come before you as a planning commission. Um the other thing the other aspect of this is that the that we have to defer to the tribe on the identification significance and treat treatment of uh tribal cultural resources. Um and then a final project decision has to be made within 13 days after the consultation ends. Um there is a provision in there that allows in certain circumstances for

an additional 90 days I believe. Um but uh but those are the general timelines that would apply. Um here's another another uh piece of this that you all have experienced in some respects with regard to conditions of approval as well um which are uh certain labor labor standards or requirements um that are imposed on the some of these projects. So for projects where 100% of the units are uh restricted to lower income households all construction workers have to be paid prevailing wages as determined by the uh DI. And then for any building that exceeds 85 ft in height above grade, the project has to comply with uh skilled and trained labor requirements. Um and then there's prevailing wage obligations that come with that as well. Um but there's a carveout for not for us but for San Francisco in there. So unique rules that apply to San Francisco projects. Um and I don't know that there's anything nefarious there. It may be the case that they have um stronger labor standards than than would be required by um uh state law. Uh but there is a carve out there for San Francisco. Um but again, the the purpose stated uh in the bill is to ensure fair compensation, workforce quality for projects that that are going to benefit from this expedited SQL review. So if you're going to benefit from it, pay the workers a quality wage basically. Okay. So that's AB130 in a nutshell. SP131. I think the the and I think I know that the key uh to to this bill is really the the near what's called the near miss streamlining. Um so it applies exclusively to housing development projects that would qualify for a statutory exemption or a categorical exemption but for a single disqualifying condition. Um, so the example um that I've seen in other presentations on this is basically like you have a 100 unit apartment building

in a downtown urban area fully meets like a class 32 infill exemption, right? So, it would meet the exemption a SQA exemption um under 5 acres consistent with zoning and general plan. No significant traffic or noise impacts except for the project maybe it slightly exceeds like a noise ordinance uh during construction due to like an additional month of construction needed for foundational work on a small portion of the site. So it would meet an exemption but for this one thing um and in those situations the lead agency would then conduct a SQL review that li that's limited to the noise impacts related to that extra month. So requiring like a um uh um so so you'd analyze just that one that one additional impact basically. Um um so then then you could put like a management plan in place. So limited hours, sound barriers, but it wouldn't require analysis of alternatives, cumulative effects, um the growth inducement that's needed. It basically enables like a um streamlined uh M andD and then faster approval um and then you avoid a full EIR. So it's again that's why it's called a near miss exemption. So, but for that one thing you the project would qualify for a SQL exemption. Um, so we don't know, you know, I I don't know, Joe, what maybe, well, I won't put you on the spot, but we don't know how this will work in in practice, but that's an example that's that's out there.

And yeah, and just in relation to that, it is beneficial because a lot of times when you do have that one kind of near miss, what ends up happening is then you have to go do a full document. And so that's significant cost and time evaluating things that would have normally been you know exempted if not for again that one issue whether it's noise or something else. So rather than having to go forward and do like a full bio assessment and um you know aesthetics and traffic and all these other types of things that would have kind of been seen as exempt. We can now just focus in on that one issue area. So again, helping to streamline and reduce the costs that would be put onto a potential developer. And as we talk about housing, those additional costs ultimately get reflected in the prices of those um residential units. All right. So then there's the housing element reszoning exemption as well. So, um SP 131 does create a new um statutory SQA exemption for reszonings that implement a jurisdiction's approved um housing element schedule of action. So, that basically means that any um zoning change required by a certified housing element um to meet RENA goals, it's now exempt from SQL review um under the public resources code, but there are important guard rails that are in place. So the exemption would not apply if the reasonzoning would allow the uh distribution centers or oil and gas infrastructure. Um it also excludes natural and protected lands like wetlands, habitat for protected species or lands under conservation easements. Um the bottom line is it basically allows an agency to reszone to meet housing goals quickly without squid delays as long as we avoid um uh industrial uses and basically uh respect kind of environmental red lines that are in place. Um so again just keeping in mind that that the goal of this is to streamline housing while still trying to

like strike a healthy balance between that and necessary environmental review and considerations, right? Um, so, uh, they aren't perfect. Uh, but that that's that's kind of the goal. Um, and these are this is a list of some of the other statutory exemptions, um, that are now in place. And again, as you'll see, like they may not be directly um, you know, uh, about the creation of housing itself, but they're related to, right, agricultural housing projects. So that one is directly related, but small disadvantaged community water systems, community water wildfire risk reduction projects, um linear broadband deployments, daycare centers, rural health clinics, food banks, pantries, high-speed rail uh support facilities, etc. So um the they're they're tied to the creation of housing, but it's not necessarily like directly, you know, building houses pretty much or building units. Um, so that's the overview of AB130 and SP131. I know that was quick. Um, but that's uh, and again, so, you know, if you have questions, some of the answers might be, hey, we don't know at this time. We'll get back to you. Uh, because again, these are these are new laws, but we'll we'll do our best. And I do also just want to note um as you guys may remember you guys actually have already approved an SP131 with the food share project that came before as they were preparing to do a more significant environmental document. This bill got passed and so they were able to take advantage of that and help again reduce having to go through that much longer more costly environmental process. Um and then also just in return ter terms of the costs, you know, again the those costs of those mitigate negative decks and ES have gone up significantly just in the past few years. Um you know there's probably a time where they were like $20,000 on

average and now we're seeing over $100,000 for those same types of documents. They've gotten much longer as additional studies have been required and as there additional challenges that are put forward. So in order to kind of cover those off, there's much more analysis and things that are going into these that have again increased the cost significantly. So this bill or these bills and together are really trying to help minimize that especially for these projects that we are trying to encourage. So it is overall I believe a benefit.

Well, thank you very much for that highlevel overview. Um Mr. Zergosa and Mr. Pearson, greatly appreciate it. And can I confirm that we got this presentation before city council? That's correct. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Appreciate that. I I know that uh Councilman PLO has been looking at this for the city council. Um uh I'm not sure if you're going to need to do one for them, but you can always direct them to this presentation. Um I thought it was quite a good overview. Um I have a couple questions, but uh I'm going to defer to the commission with their questions if you have any. Um before going to mine, see Commissioner Dr. Lopez,

I do have a couple questions. Uh and thank you uh for the presentation. Uh I very much appreciate the spirit, I think, and the goal of what these measures um um strive to do. And so just some notes that and questions uh that came up during the presentation. Is this a temporary measure or a permanent new normal moving forward? No, the the the bills are in place going forward. I don't see a sun I didn't see a sunset date in them. So no, the these are our these are our laws. Normal.

Um and in basic terms, uh you know, what does this mean or potentially mean for for Oxnard and is there any conflict or with with the sore measures that we have adopted here locally and how those interact or intersect?

Um so commissioner Dr. Lopez in terms of soar, this wouldn't change that. Um one of the things that this still requires is that it's compliant with the general plan in the zoning. So um obviously all the sor lands are designated as agricultural so that wouldn't these bills in and of themselves would not allow for the development of housing projects on like the sore lands or agricultural lands. Um specific to Oxnard um it would essentially again just help streamline some of those projects as obviously the state and the city is seeing housing shortages and wanting to um try to address those. This will become another tool to help push those projects forward or even outside of housing like the food share project um which is also an amenity for both the city as well as the county. It helps to push those projects forward or provide an easier path forward for those projects while still respecting the zoning and the um general plan which outlines the vision for the city. So, and then some of the other things that are still required such as the consultation. So, it still builds in some of those protections to make sure that we're, you know, respecting, you know, the heritage and things that are out there. Um, but just also helping to streamline and reduce that costs and potential for challenges, you know, where there's no real issues identified.

Great. Thank you. And then um I was thinking about the Teal Club project that came before us and how it was discussed that that was likely the last potential urban village development be that was available. Does this change it change that and or are there any uh you know pieces of land real estate that uh would potentially be uh developed uh for larger developments like that? Um so in terms of till club till club would be too large for something like this and it included a because of 20 acres or

yeah till club is like 150 or so acres. Um additionally that included a general plan and zone change. So also and we'll address your question but also one thing I just want to note here is it once again kind of puts that emphasis on the importance of the zoning and the general plan designations when a reszone or general plan amendment is proposed and once we allow those things um this again helps to streamline that. So once we kind of designated for that use there's less discretion in terms of preventing that use in the future. Um but in terms of uh other um urban villages, so Till Club was one. We do actually have another one of the city's urban villages currently in process. It's uh what's commonly referred to as the Mhar property on the corner of Rose and Commun Del Soul. The high school was recently developed there, but the the rest of the land around it, it was a total of about 100 acres, is also considered to be an urban village per our general plan. So that project is actually in process. We're working on the ER uh for that right now. Um again, that would be too large for something like this. Um and I'm not sure if there's other urban villages. There's a property kind of off of Wanimi Road that's also not currently covered by Soore. Um it was at one point referred to as the Southshore project which didn't move forward but that is another site that is technically outside of the sore that could be a large uh development coming forward but in large part we are looking at infill development just based on the buildout of the city at this point moving forward.

Perfect. And just because I had touched and name checked the teal club project. I know that when that item came before us and now I'm drawing reference to slide number 14 with the labor requirement. I know that we had set that out with um the um what is it the prevailing wage and then the city council scratched it off. So again would this supersede that and is that project not applicable to it because it came before this did it come before the July one? Um so toe club used or toe club had an e so they didn't use this bill so that prevailing wage requirement only apply in the event that they were trying to use this bill as a streamlining process. Okay. So it would not apply to yeah that project.

Thank you for that clarification. Uh two other I also wanted to just add that that that um that would apply where there are 100% of the units that are restricted to low-income households. Oh. As well. Great. Awesome. Thank you. Um and so two other quick questions. There was something on slide 13 where it mentioned deference to tribes on cultural resources that um has this been a factor here in Oxard of us coming across anything uh belonging to native people?

Um so commissioner um since I've been here we have not had a uh we regularly send out the tribal consultations. It's required when we have a mitigated negative deck or an EI that we do that. um as well as a few other things like uh general plan amendments. There's other state bills or state laws that are in effect that require that. Um when generally when we sent that out, we have not received a request for consultation on those. So generally it kind of runs the the consultation period and then sometimes we'll get um comments back that simply say you know ensure that you have a monitor on site during the um excavation or you know make sure that there's a phase one uh cultural resource report conducted and follow the recommendations of that report. But in general we have not had um a request for consultation on the project yet.

Nice. Thank you for that uh background information there. Uh and just last question here, it's kind of a catch-all, but with the bottlenecks that we experience here uh in the city um and more specifically the department the planning department, do we anticipate this helping uh in significant ways to impact uh our housing shortage?

Um that is a difficult question. Um so this again creates another tool for people to use. Um so we will be able to like projects will be able to get through in a more timely manner as well as um avoid the additional cost of a you know full-blown environmental document. Um however there's still other parts that go into that. You know they still have to get their building permits. They still have to um and more importantly finance the actual construction. We have quite a few projects right now that are entitled but just haven't moved forward yet. Um, so while yes, this is another tool to kind of help shorten that review period, um, there's other factors that essentially come into play when looking at the actual construction of housing and how they get from, you know, the point where it's approved by this body or council or director to actually having the construction take place.

Yeah, absolutely. Well, thank you so much for entertaining those questions. Thank you, Commissioner Dr. Lopez. Any others from the commission before my couple questions? Um, and thank you again, Commissioner Dr. Lovis, you struck out a couple of mine, so I won't be as verbose as I usually am. So, um, I, uh, have two questions. Um, the first in regards to page five. Um, is there a limit? I I saw the timelines, but is there a limit on the number of times a project can go? Um, I thought there was, and, um, has it been reduced or increased in this bill? the number of times a project can go in front of a government body.

Um, the chair RJO that wasn't impacted by this. There's still, and apologies, I can confirm, but I believe it's five, no more than five hearings or public hearings for a qualifying like housing project. Okay. Thank you. I remember it was five plus or minus one from mine and Commissioner Dr. Lopez's first year. So, yeah, thank you for that. Just wondering. Yeah. So that that would include just to be clear that that would also include director hearings that be have that that are part of that

procedures. Thank you for that. And then on page nine in regards to the builder's remedy, I I thought that builder's remedy was only applicable to cities that didn't have an housing element approved. Yes, that is correct.

Okay, perfect. Um that's all my questions. Any other from the commissioner commissioners before we move on to the next agenda item? Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Mr. Zergosa. Mr. Pearson, greatly appreciate it. Um, if you go in front of the council, well, we'll see what happens. So, um, just advise council to look at this um, presentation if they have any and come up with more questions um, if you do need or want to present to them. So, appreciate that. Um, we will now move on to section I, planning commission business. Um, oh, before we do that, um, Mr. President, is there any other updates that you'd like to make at this time?

No, that's correct. Um, so, Chair Rjo and commissioners, um, the only update is that the next meeting will be cancelled. So, this is the last meeting for the year. Um, and then, uh, beginning with next year, there's a few projects that are, um, looking to move forward. Uh we have a housing project over in the Dunes area that is getting close to being ready to come before the commission. Um as well as another housing project over in the Colonia neighborhood um Harrison Apartments which is also um currently going through it consultation process but will also be coming before the the board.

Thank you, Mr. Pearson. And um can I confirm that that next meeting will be the January 15th? Thank you. Um, yes. I'm not 100% sure if they will actually make that first meeting, but they will be coming in the first part of the year, I would say. So, the first meeting is January 15th. I'm just not sure if those projects that I mentioned will be going on that date.

Acknowledge. Thank you. Thank you very much. Um, okay. We'll now move on to section I, planning commission business review parliamentary procedures and rules. I'll um request kindly um if Diego if you could um put on the presentation and just as a preview to everyone that I just wanted to do a little bit of a wrap up um just review of everything and add in a couple um nuggets of information um just going forward um with this being technically the end of um uh my term as chair of the planning commission. So, I just wanted to bring this out for a couple people. Um, I have it in a a question form for most of it. So, what I'm going to do is ask question. Uh, you don't have to say the answers. Um, try to lock in your answer and see if you get it correct. Um, so it should be uh somewhere from easy to um maybe more difficult questions, but um if anything, all of these questions have some in some way have come up before the planning commission. So, um they weren't uh gotten from the thin air. So, um I just want to remind everyone um you know like uh people usually ask and um I had to recently um say like what the planning commission does and so this is just you know the good um one sentence the mission out of the Ox planning division is to create preserve and enhance the quality of the city's natural and built environments through the implementation of the general plan zoning ordinance adopted specific plans local coastal plan and the coastal zoning ordinance and our role is to make sound land decisions supporting the mission statement. And so we do a lot of things, but if someone wants that broken down in just to one sentence, um uh you can tell them to go to the the planning division or planning commission uh website on the Oxnard um website and um they can see all the good stuff that our staff does and um allows us to read and uh do the

good work for the city. Um let's see. So um I have a couple of questions in regards to the meeting. um how we conduct business here in the planning commission. So um so there's just three questions. Um what is not required to be disclosed at the commission meeting prior to the item being considered? There are four in our bylaws here. There are at least one correct question or one correct answer for all the questions. So but is but what is not required to be declared at our exparte declarations? um site visits, conflict of interest, financial impacts, or previous meeting attendance. So, I'll give you one a couple seconds to lock in your answer or answers. And previous meeting attendance is not required to be there, but uh we also have um if you have exparte communication, I didn't add that into the list because um that was a give me answer that you wouldn't um that'd be easy. So, um, anyways, going to our next, how many minutes does an applicant have to present under a public hearing item? Um, in our current bylaws, so it did did change um, in the bylaws revision. I think that only really affected uh, me, Commissioner Dr. Lopez, Commissioner Nash, Vice Chair, Dr. Steuart, we had two different, but in our current bylaws, do we give an applicant 10 minutes, 15 minutes, 20 minutes, or the preference of the commission? So, um, again, like I said, there's at least one right answer, um, for all the questions. And so, right now, we have 15 minutes in our bylaws. However, we are able and we have been able to increase the time um

depending on a motion in a second and a vote of the commission or if the chair uh requests additional time and there's no objection. So, um two possible correct answers for that. Mr. Chair, uh, Commissioner Nash, I I I find it interesting that, uh, previous applicants have not gone beyond the 15 minutes. So, we do we do have a way to extend that and that's that's, you know, that's good.

That's correct. And, um, we also do have the option to, um, decrease the time, although I've never seen us do that. If anything, we have given select members sometimes more time um if they've had a public comment, but for the actual presentation, we have at one point at least one time given uh additional time. Uh vice chair, Dr. Stewart. Yes. I guess I have a general question. So, we have bylaws.

Let's say this commission as a whole decides that they want to do something that takes us outside of the bylaws or may even conflicts with those bylaws. Do we have the ability as a board up here to at any time vote unanimously that we want to do something that violates one of our bylaws? Yes. How does that work?

Yes. Um the easy answer is yes, we do. We have a provision called suspending the bylaws. Um but you can only suspend the bylaws for those uh bylaws that are in the form of a rule. So in general um we'll just use examples. we can suspend the bylaws for everyone for two people to speak at once. Um, and it needs a twothirds vote. And so that's in the process or that is in the form of a role that h is a meeting process. But we can't um suspend a role in terms of removing a chair or a vice chair because that is not the in the form of a role that is um uh that is not in a meeting procedure that is uh something that is uh a set action that needs to be done. So it's not processing a meeting, it's a separate action. So um I think that's the easiest way to say it. So, if it's in uh it's how to make a meeting go, then you can suspend the bylaws by twothirds vote. But if it's in terms of a uh type of topic um like how we do our elections, we can't just do it by appointment. Um uh so I think that's the easiest way to say it. So hopefully that um uh answers your questions. Um there have been times when we've we've suggested suspending the uh bylaws for something, but there have been usually multiple ways um to go about it. Um and so um it will be up to the chair um to uh suggest that um in regards to the commission. So thank you for that vice chair Dr. Stewart. Um any others on the commission before you continue? So um I have our final question for this section. Are meetings required to adjourn by a certain time? and if so, what time and any related information?

So, we have no meetings are not required to adjourn by a certain time. Yes, 9:00 p.m. unless extended by majority. Yes, 10 p.m. unless extended by a 2/3 vote. Yes, 11 p.m. unless extended by a unanimous vote. Um, I'll just say me and Dr. Lopez had uh or Commissioner Dr. Lopez had much experience with this one. So, have you lock in your answer and it is yes at 10 p.m. unless extended by a 2/3 vote. Every time that we have gone though to the 10 p.m. um we have been able to power through um the 10 p.m. um without any objection from the commission whether it's been under commissioner uh or past chair uh commissioner Chavez or um I don't know if that's ever happened under my chairmanship. So anyways, so um and then a couple questions with parliamentary procedure that's specific to Robert's rules, but of course that's what the rules that we fall under.

Vice chair, Dr. Stewart, just wanted to make a a general comment. Uh myself and Commissioner Nash have been past the midnight hour in the past. I apologize commission.

I apologize for that. That was under your um first times on the planning commission. So I apologize for that. and those were in person. Um ours uh mine and commissioner Dr. Lopez was on Zoom so it's slightly easier um to get past the 10 p.m. Um so yeah um just an overview again what is Robert's rules uh gives due regard to every member's opinion um makes decision uh with a variety of questions hopefully in a very efficient use of time and it's supposed to be suitable for any type of organization from uh just two to um hundreds or thousands. So um uh this should be relatively easy. How many main motions can be normally considered at the same time? Um 1 2 3 or four and it's only one. We can consider a motion that has multiple items. We just went over that this meeting when we had the meeting uh commission meeting and the four agenda items. Um, you can always have a what I would like to call compounded main motion and they could be separated um by request or demand of a vote to separate the items if they can be individually voted on. But you can always have a motion with multiple actions. Um, and it's up to the chair and the commission to decide um if it can be divided further or if it should be divided further. Um what motion can be made to change most pending motions? Uh uh previous question uh postponing definitely amending or committing or referring and we have done all four of these sometime at least in the last five years. So

knock in and it is just amend. So you have a motion there. We want to amend what someone has uh properly made and seconded. Um just to review very briefly previous question um we think that deliberation has gone on too long. Um someone moves the previous question second twothirds vote um and we go directly into a vote postpone definitely. We just want to wait um to bring out the item later in the meeting either by time or by order into the agenda and committing or referring. um we would like it to go into uh discuss an item or a topic in committee. Um that basically happened when we had a bylaws revision. We referred by revision to an ad hoc bylaws revision committee. And a couple more questions. A member does not know what parliamentary action to make. What can the member do to get the correct or recommended parliamentary action? um raise a parliamentary inquiry, raise a point of order, request for or raise a point of information, or simply ask the chair. Um and then a hint, there's at least one correct answer. And you can either the for more formal one is to raise a parliamentary inquiry or just to ask the chair. Um I'm not going to expect you to need to do parliamentary inquiry. Usually many of you have been already comfortable enough to ask the chair um and I process it as a parliamentary inquiry just in terms of the role so that everyone understands um but it is uh the chair gives their opinion. You don't have to follow it. Um and you can do whatever you want after that if you do it. Um if the chair rules against you for some reason, you can

raise a point of order if you disagree with it. Um, and then if you still disagree with the chair, um, you can appeal the decision of the chair. Um, vice chair, Dr. Stewart, did you have some? Oh, you already answered it. I wanted to talk about point of order, but you went there. Perfect. Yes. Um, and Commissioner Dr. Lopez, uh, in in the last part you just said that you can motion to overrule the chair. Does that carry a minimum vote requirement?

Yes. Um, so I'll I'll state it really briefly because it has some special debate rules. Um, uh, so you raise a parliamentary inquiry, the chair says something, um, you do something or the chair does something, you disagree with it, raise a point of order. If the chair doesn't um, uh, uh, uh, what was it? doesn't agree with uh your point um the chair disagrees with the uh the point by the member then you can appeal the chair when you appeal the decision of the chair um when you do that um I'll ask the chair will ask for a second and then after that the rules of the debate go that the chair gets to speak and defend her position everyone gets one chance to debate and then the chair can have a conclusion debate That's the only time that you can only uh debate once. Um and then after that the uh what was it? The vote goes not to agree with the person who made the appeal, but the vote goes that um the the question is on sustaining the decision of the chair. Um and if it even just gets a tie vote, if there's an even number of member, um the decision goes to the chair to sustain the decision. Um, it just needs a majority vote, but a tie goes to the chair. Oh, yeah. And then I think this is the last question. Um, how can the chair be temporarily removed from their duties? Um, moving to suspender roles approving a committee of the whole uh by the chair's discretion and by absence. and you have seen at least well I gave the hint already but anyways lock in your decision um for at least

one of the correct answers and all of them can be done so if you've seen in my absence um vice chair Dr. to it has taken over. Um, sorry, I'm going backwards. Um, by the chair's discretion, um, if I believe that I am not or it will look like or is actually a conflict of interest, um, I, uh, step aside from the chair and vice chair, Dr. Stewart takes over, which you've seen once. Um we have gone into a committee of the whole when commissioner Nash took over um uh as chair prom in terms of a particular agenda item topic. Um and you can you can also move to suspender roles and remove me. Um it does need a it would need a twothirds vote. So there are various ways to temporarily remove me uh from the chair either for a limited or rest of the meeting. Vice Chair Dr. Stewart.

Yes. Can you give me an example of suspending the rules to remove you? I Yeah, that's um I move to suspend the rules uh to remove Cherjo from or yeah, Chair from the position of chair. uh second is made um debate is made um and then if there's a twothirds vote then I will be uh temporarily removed from the chair for whatever duration is made in the motion.

So we talk about the process but what would trigger that kind of a process? Um uh anything could um usually it would be because the chair in your opinion um is not uh uh handling the meeting in the way that you think it should. Whether that's right or not doesn't matter. It's whether at least twothirds of you think it's right. So yeah, and I thank you all for letting me be able to um give you a little bit of my knowledge in regards to parliamentary procedure. Um, again, like I said, um, if you have any groups or organizations that have the need or want, um, I'm I'm trying to gain my experience into advising groups in their bylaws or their meeting procedures, um, in the hopes of possibly becoming a professional registered parliamentary one day. So, I greatly appreciate it. Um, before moving on to adjournment, I'll ask if there's any other, um, general questions, uh, comments before going to adjournment. Vice Dr. Stewart,

am I assuming that the January meeting we're going to be voting for chair and vice chair or will does that happen in a particular month? Yeah. So, um I will formally request Mr. Pearson to put that if he thinks that it is the most efficient and likely for the meeting. Um but I'll defer to Mr. Pearson at this time for that question. Next question. Oh, okay. I'll ask Mr. Pearson first. I'll have it answered. Thank you.

So, yes, Chair Rejo and Vice Chair, Dr. Stewart, the intent would be to bring that to the first meeting, which would be the um January 15th meeting. Um I will coordinate with the chair, but yeah, that would be the meeting where the vote would take place. And if not, then we could continue that to the next meeting if there wasn't going to be um you know, in the past, we've wanted all of the commissioners to be there. So, if certain commissioners couldn't be there, we could potentially push that but the intent would be to bring it to the first meeting. Thank you, Mr. Person. Vice Chair, Dr. Stewart.

Yeah. So, right now we're on two cycles. Is the bylaws and being lazy, I haven't looked it up, permit more than two cycles through or is there a limit? Um, as of my last reading on the bylaws, there is currently no limit to the amount of times consecutively that any member can serve as chair or vice chair. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Chair, Dr. Stewart. Um, if there are no one else at this time, oh, uh, Commissioner Dr. Lopez,

a couple, uh, quick little notes here. So, first, great job again to our staff and our chair on their presentations tonight. Uh, and maybe I should have said this earlier, but also uh great job to our secretary with the minutes uh that were prepared and adopted. I know it's uh a laborous task and it's not always a labor of love. Uh so I wanted to recognize uh the minutes uh this evening. Uh given that it's our last meeting of the year. Um um happy holidays to everyone. Uh Tamal Festival this weekend here in downtown Oxnard. If you're around and available, encourage folks to go. And of course a happy and safe uh new year. So see everyone in 2026.

Thank you for that, Commissioner Dr. Lopez. I again forgot that this was our last meeting for the year. Any others from the commission at this time? Um yeah, I'd like to add on um thank you for um this has been a great term and a great time to um be chair of the planning commission this past year. Um very happy to have our new commissioner Barca here. um looking forward um hopefully soon to a seventh member of the planning commission, but um I'm glad to um have been here serving as chair for this past year and I look forward to the future um at least for the next three years of um mine uh Commissioner Dr. Lopez's and someone else's um whoever needs for the next three years or however long we're all spending on the planning mission. So, thank you so much. Um, before I move to adjournment, um, I'm just going to relay a brief funny comment. Um, one of our former commissioners, um, you know, when I first became vice chair and chair, I was very self-conscious and, um, it was helpfully criticized to me or I was kindly criticized that I felt a little bit too formulaic and wooden. And so, um, I kind of laughed. Um uh I was kind of tickled when um some uh former commissioner said that uh I made the meetings fun. Um so um I hope that you all find it a little bit um not as arduous as you might have think a government meeting is. Um and um hopefully I can improve in whatever position I'm on the planning commission in the future. So I really appreciate that from our former commissioner. Um and uh with no further business, the um the meeting will be adjourned if there's no objection. Um before we officially adjourned, um I'm going to ask all the

commission members to stay for a couple minutes so that we can have a a group uh picture. So um the meeting is adjourned at 6:57 p.m. Thank you all and good night.