Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the It Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Finance committee recommends $1.5 million Microsoft license agreement to Oxnard City Council
Summary
The Oxnard City Finance & Governance Committee on April 14 recommended the City Council authorize a three‑year agreement with CW Corporation to purchase Microsoft licenses not to exceed $1.5 million, voting 3–0 to forward the measure.
The Oxnard City Finance and Governance Committee on April 14 recommended that the City Council authorize the mayor to sign an agreement with CW Corporation to purchase Microsoft licenses for a three‑year term not to exceed $1.5 million.
The recommendation covers a contract term of May 1, 2026, through April 30, 2029, and was introduced by staff from the Information Technology Department. Robert Rubin, identified in the meeting as the city’s chief information officer, was present to answer questions from committee members.
Committee members did not raise substantive questions during the presentation. After a brief public‑comment period in which a speaker said he had no objection to the licensing purchase, a committee member moved to forward the item to the full City Council; a second was recorded and the clerk announced the motion carried, 3–0.
Votes at a glance - Approval of minutes (consent agenda): motion carried, 3–0. - Recommendation to City Council — CW Corporation/Microsoft licenses (Item D1): motion carried, 3–0.
What the agreement covers and next steps According to the staff summary presented to the committee, the proposed agreement would fund Microsoft licensing for city systems for the specified three‑year term with a total contract not to exceed $1.5 million. The committee’s action was a recommendation to the City Council; the full council will need to approve and the mayor authorized to execute the agreement before any contract is finalized.
Context and public comment During the meeting’s public‑comment period, a resident who identified himself as Jim said he did not object to the licensing purchase but used his time to raise broader concerns about the city’s information‑technology programs, including the ERP implementation, and asked why some IT matters had not come before this committee. Those remarks were commentary and did not change the committee’s recommendation.
The committee adjourned after announcing a future agenda item; the licensing agreement now moves to the City Council for final action.
