Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Fox Canyon GMA delays adoption of OPV allocation ordinance; Oxnard warns draft could penalize alternate supplies
Loading...
Summary
At its Feb. 25, 2026 meeting the Fox Canyon Groundwater Management Agency received an informational update on proposed revisions to the OPV allocation ordinance. Staff said additional stakeholder negotiation is required; the City of Oxnard said the current draft could disincentivize development of alternative water sources.
At a Feb. 25, 2026 meeting, the Fox Canyon Groundwater Management Agency Board of Directors received a staff update on proposed revisions to the agency’s OPV allocation ordinance and took no action.
Executive staff presenting the item said the revision is not ready for adoption and requires further stakeholder negotiation on three core issues: how to calculate the in‑lieu delivery adjustment (staff will add worked numeric examples showing the math and years), the meaning of the word “available” when applied to substitute (non‑groundwater) water, and whether federal reserved water rights (raised by Naval Base Ventura County) should be referenced in the ordinance. Staff said the draft presented on Jan. 28 has been refined but needs additional clarity before a hearing and adoption.
John (Executive Officer) said the agency intends to continue engagement and include concrete examples in a subsequent draft so stakeholders can see the math behind any in‑lieu credits. He emphasized that some topics remain constrained by court language that requires the agency to treat users equitably, but that separate agreements for complex water purveyors (for example, the City of Camarillo’s desalter project) can be handled on a different basis.
Michael Wolf, Public Works Director for the City of Oxnard, said the language and a recent staff interpretation make it difficult for Oxnard to receive credit for reduced groundwater production resulting from its development of alternate supplies. “The City of Oxnard has spent millions of dollars developing that alternate source and the way the language is written now … we’re not able to take beneficial use of that,” Wolf said, adding that Oxnard is not supportive of the current draft.
Board members and staff clarified that the court’s direction limits treating some users differently, which constrains drafting, but that the agency plans to pursue separate special‑project allocations or agreements where projects are complex and involve delivery or recharge components.
Staff reported stakeholder outreach since the Jan. 28 draft, including individual meetings and email exchanges with the Pleasant Valley (county) water agency/district, Guadalaska Mutual, the City of Oxnard and limited follow‑up with United Water. The agency also announced an informational stakeholder workshop in roughly two weeks and reported approximately 30 RSVPs at the time of the meeting.
No formal action was taken on the ordinance at this meeting; staff received comments and will return with a revised draft for further review or a future adoption hearing.
What’s next: Staff said it will continue stakeholder engagement, add worked numeric examples to the draft ordinance to illustrate how in‑lieu adjustments would be calculated, consult legal counsel on whether to reference federal reserved water rights, and bring a revised draft back for either another informational session or a hearing for adoption.
