Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget And Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ventura County APCD presents proposed 2025–26 budget; public hearing closed, adoption set for next meeting
Summary
At a public hearing on June 10 the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District presented a proposed FY 2025–26 operating budget of about $9.9 million, pass-through grants of about $10.2 million, and a planned net district cost of roughly $229,580 (after one-time items). The board closed the hearing and scheduled adoption for a later meeting.
Get email alerts on the Budget And Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Ventura County Air Pollution Control District on June 10 presented its proposed fiscal year 2025–26 budget and held the statutorily required public hearing; the board closed the hearing and will consider final adoption at a subsequent meeting.
APCD Executive Officer Ali Gassimi told the board the district’s consolidated proposed operating appropriation (fund 0700) is about $9.9 million, with estimated operating revenue near $9.4 million and a net district cost of roughly $579,580 before adjustments. After setting aside contingency and property-improvement amounts (about $300,000 and $50,000), Gassimi said the “real net cost” for the operating fund is about $229,580. The pass-through grant fund (07001) carries about $10.2 million in appropriation and matching revenue; the district reported that most pass-through funds must be passed to applicants and program recipients.
Gassimi said the proposed budget is staffed to about 49 full-time positions (the presentation also referenced 45 full-time employees and eight extra-help positions for the operating fund), includes roughly $500,000 set aside for mobile-source incentive projects, and assigns about $50,000 toward the Ventura County Transportation Commission for countywide traffic modeling under an existing memorandum of agreement. He said the district expects about $11 million in beginning fund balance for 2025–26 and projected an unassigned fund balance near $10 million after the proposed appropriations and assignments.
Revenue sources shown in the presentation include permitting fees (about 31–32% of revenue), state and federal grants (including EPA grants), DMV fees restricted to motor-vehicle related costs, incentive program dollars and miscellaneous income such as rental and interest. Gassimi said about 73.5% of proposed appropriation is for salaries and benefits, 18.7% for services and supplies, and 8% for fixed assets; salary and benefit costs rose by about $372,000 from the prior year in the proposal, which includes a 3.5% general salary increase. Fixed-asset increases were tied to modernization of monitoring equipment and replacement of three gas vehicles with electric models.
Gassimi reported the district has begun accepting applications for 2025 CALMoyer program and related air-quality incentive grants; he said approximately $4,000,000 is expected to be available for new projects in Ventura County this year and the application deadline is June 27, 2025. He also noted the district installed two temporary air monitors near the Simi Valley landfill truck route to monitor air quality associated with fire debris trucking and reported those temporary monitors showed no abnormal results so far.
Board members asked several operational questions. A board member asked when a normal fee study is undertaken; Gassimi said the study typically begins in February and fee changes would take effect upon rule adoption. A supervisor asked about an anticipated $150,000–$200,000 in fines in the budget; Gassimi said that projection is based on historical penalty records. Board members asked whether federal EPA grant funding was at risk; Gassimi said an administration proposal at the federal level showed a potential reduction and estimated exposure in the range of about $1.0–1.3 million but said the federal budget was not final.
Supervisor Veer asked about the $500,000 set aside for mobile-source projects; Gassimi said that amount is from AB 2766 (DMV fee) funds and will be used for projects such as electric vehicle charging stations along Highway 126 and other mobile-source emission reduction investments; specific projects are still being identified.
The board closed the public hearing after one public commenter (Jane F.) addressed the budget materials. Staff told the board the APCD budget will be adopted at the next meeting and no adoption vote occurred on June 10.
The public presentation and staff answers are part of the meeting record; the board will consider adoption of the proposed budget at the next scheduled meeting.

