Oxnard council hears hours of public comment as debate continues over OPAC management contract

The Oxnard City Council on Feb. 18 heard hours of public comment about whether to extend a five‑year operating agreement with Sterling Venue Ventures (SVV) for the Oxnard Performing Arts and Convention Center (OPAC), with nonprofit leaders urging the city to give the nonprofit direct management of the center’s ballrooms and meeting rooms.

Staff recommended that the council authorize the mayor to execute a facility management agreement with Sterling Venue Ventures to extend SVV’s operation, maintenance and management role for five years. Council members disclosed a range of ex parte contacts about the item; Councilwoman Rodriguez recused herself from the agenda item because she said she owns property within 1,000 feet of the site.

Why it matters: Speakers said management of the center affects community arts programming, youth workforce and education partnerships, and rental revenue that funds nonprofit programming. The nonprofit and SVV both argued they are best placed to serve Oxnard’s cultural needs; the council did not vote on the recommendation during the portions of the meeting captured in the transcript.

The staff recommendation on the agenda asked the council to authorize a five‑year amendment to the facility management agreement between the City of Oxnard and Sterling Venue Ventures. Council members briefly noted prior communications with both SVV and OPAC representatives before the public comment period began.

Supporters of Sterling Venue Ventures said SVV has expanded programming and improved safety and maintenance since taking over theater operations. Gabriel (Gabe) Hoffman, identified as an employee of Sterling Venue Ventures, told the council, “These are the type of events and experiences that SVV brings to the table and to the community,” and described school and community productions that he said SVV helped host. Amber Norton, also identified as a Sterling employee, said she is a lifetime Oxnard resident and asked the council to “re‑sign our five years, and let’s continue to grow.” Victor Valdez, who said he supervises security for Sterling in Oxnard, said the property is safer since Sterling took over and asked the council to renew Sterling’s contract so SVV could “continue to keep making this place successful and safe for everyone in our community.”

Nonprofit leaders and staff urged a different approach: to grant the nonprofit board separate management rights for the center’s two ballrooms and five meeting rooms while SVV retains theater operations. Gary Davis, identified as chairperson of the nonprofit board, summarized the nonprofit’s proposal: the board would receive management rights for the two ballrooms and five meeting rooms; the nonprofit would remit 50% of meeting/ballroom rental proceeds to the city; and the nonprofit would reset the annual revenue target for the city to $120,000 (up from a $90,000 target set in February 2020). Davis said the nonprofit would continue to refer liquor and kitchen needs to Sterling when required by licensing, and said a short‑term agreement of 18–24 months would be acceptable if the city preferred that step.

Executive director Carolyn Mullen described the nonprofit’s community programming and cited recent rental returns to the city. “Year after year our nonprofit has surpassed the city's $90,000 rental target,” Mullen said, and she provided figures: $102,000 in fiscal 2022–23 and about $177,000 in fiscal 2023–24, adding that the nonprofit was on track during the current fiscal year to approach $200,000. Christian Ramirez, identified as the nonprofit’s director of events and programs, listed staff and program examples and said the nonprofit runs free year‑round youth art classes, family art nights and workforce programs.

Some community speakers recommended a different path for the long term. Manuel Herrera, speaking for Citizens for Better OPAC, criticized the staff report as being one‑sided in favor of Sterling and urged the city to issue a new request for proposals (RFP) for a theater operator who would partner effectively with the nonprofit. Herrera also said the city should start planning for needed long‑term building maintenance rather than “kicking the can down the road.”

Multiple speakers described the center as a unique venue in the region that hosts cultural events, youth programming and community celebrations. Teen and youth program participants and alumni told the council the nonprofit’s free programs provided opportunities they would not otherwise have.

What was not decided: The transcript does not record a council vote on the staff recommendation. Nonprofit representatives asked the council to continue the city’s February 2020 agreement for one month while staff and the nonprofit redrafted terms for consideration in March; that request was presented as an appeal to the council but does not appear to have been adopted during the portion of the meeting captured here.

The council received a large number of public speakers on the item — dozens of residents, nonprofit staff and SVV employees spoke — and the discussion indicated ongoing disagreement among the city, the nonprofit board and Sterling about how the center should be managed going forward. Staff and the nonprofit indicated they would continue to meet and attempt to produce revised agreements and financial clarifications for council consideration.

If the council proceeds with the staff recommendation, it would authorize the mayor to execute a five‑year amendment with Sterling Venue Ventures; if the council accepts the nonprofit’s proposal, the city would negotiate a separate management agreement for the ballrooms and meeting rooms and specify revenue sharing and operational responsibilities.

Until the council records a formal motion and vote, the future management structure and the city’s next steps remain under discussion. The city manager and staff were expected to continue working with both parties and to provide updated agreements and financial details for a future meeting.