Board of Supervisors — June 9, 2026

Ladies and gentlemen, we're going to go ahead and get started. I'm gonna call to order this meeting of the Ventura County Board of Supervisors of June 9th 2026. Clerk please call the roll.

Yeah, thank you Chair Garrell members of the board CEO Dr. Johnson it's tremendous honor to be here to help celebrate Recreation and Parks Month for July. Jerry Cooper worked a lot of hours on this video it's got a lot of fun stuff and some really exciting things at the end so I don't want to spoil it. So

let's yeah let's let it fly thank you

Find your next adventure in Ventura County Parks. Ventura County Parks isn't just your favorite place to camp. From coastal and inland camping, local and regional day use parks, community centers for special events, community collaborations and outreach, and so much more! As we recognize and celebrate July is Recreation & Parks Month, Ventura County Parks would like to highlight some of our community partners and programs.

Boys and Girls Club of Greater Oxnard and Port Hueneme. Of Greater Ventura County. Boys and Girls Club of Santa Clara Valley. Conejo Valley Archers Nyland Promise Oakview Park and Resource Center.

Ojai

Valley Baseball League. Piru Neighborhood Council. Piru Youth Sports. Stepping Stones Writing Program. Ventura Gen & Mineral Society. As stewards of public land, Ventura County Parks staff ensure our guests can recreate in safe well-maintained and environmentally friendly spaces. To celebrate July is Recreation and Parks Month visit any Ventura County Regional Park and receive waived day use gate fees on the 4th of July On Saturday, July 18th join Ventura County Parks and Conejo Open Space Conservation Authority at 8am for a ranger guided hike on the Hill Canyon trails. Attendees can meet park rangers at the Santa Rosa County Park Gazebo.

Come say hi to our team at our upcoming community events! Visit us at the Agriculture Building at the Ventura County Fair on August 1st, 2nd, 8th and 9th from 12 to 4 p.m. Come join us at our Coastal Cleanup Day event at Steckel Park on Saturday September 19th. Sign ups coming soon! What is your next Ventura County Parks Adventure? Tag us on Facebook or Instagram with the hashtag VCParksAdventure We look forward to seeing you in Ventura County parks.

That was fantastic let's give it up for Jerry and that video. Thank you thank you for making that presentation. Would you like to make any remarks? I want to offer that opportunity before I make a few.

Just the only thing missing from the video is the thank-you to Jerry and our team who's now 27 strong with our new Park Service Ranger 3 series allowing us to expand services and our Assistant Parks Manager.

Yeah, thank you. And I might have been mentioned in the video or you might have mentioned it if so I missed it but I on July 4th that we're waiving all fees for parks and celebration of the nation's 250th celebration and I'm just I know that in the parks park in my district is is just beloved by the community and is very unique. It's not your traditional Park. Supervisor Long.

I just wanted to send my appreciation to all of our staff. Really appreciate the work that you've done, not only just to keep our parks up but with storms and damages and upgrades it's been a lot of work. And I just really appreciate the thoughtfulness and making sure that everything is ready for people to be recreating outside. Just want to say thank you very much.

Yeah, thank you. So the five of us would love to come down and join all the parks team to come up to the podium we're going to take a picture together and just celebrate you and say thank you. Come on down. Well that was fun. Thank you for sharing that moment of inspiration and for everyone for being here we're going to move now to agenda item number 5, that's a gender review and Levine Act disclosures before we pivot to the CEO are there any Levine Act disclosures by members of the Board of Supervisors?

Chair

yes please.

Agenda item 20 I received a campaign contribution of more than $500 within the past 12 months from the fence factory rental

Okay, thank you. Supervisor Lopez? I have one Levine Act disclosure actually two Within the past 12 months, I did receive a donation in excess of $500 from the fence factory rental and are an Atmore & Sons and Sheet Metal Workers local union number 104. So those are Levine Act disclosures for item 20 related to item 20 so just want to make that clear is that fine County Council? All right thank you So I ask for a motion to well not as pivot to CEO doctor Johnson.

Thank you so much, Mister chair good morning supervisor staff on the tenants today. The gender review for today is as follows item 8 general public comments to public comment letters have been submitted 18 county executive office receiving file list of ceremonial proclamations to be presented outside of a board of supervisors meeting A revised attachment a has been submitted. Item 52 supervisor Lopez presentation proclaiming June 19th 2026 as Juneteenth Independence Day in Ventura County, a powerpoint presentation has been submitted item 53 supervisor Lopez presentation honoring and recognizing the month of June 2026 as LGBTQ plus Pride Month in Ventura County. A PowerPoint presentation has been submitted. Item 55, Supervisor Goral, presentation of a proclamation celebrating the 151st Ventura County Fair, the 2026 fair poster has been submitted.

Item 57, Supervisor Goral, presentation proclaiming the month of June 2026 as Wildfire Awareness and Preparedness Month in Ventura County, one public comment letter and a PowerPoint presentation have been submitted Item 62, airports. Public hearing for approval of the Department of Airports fiscal year 26-27 rent and fee schedule. 19 public comment letters have been submitted. Item 63, General Services Agency public hearing regarding adoption of a resolution approving the engineer's report and ordering levy of assessments for the Oak View School Preservation and Maintenance District. One public comment letter has been submitted. Item 68, Resource Management Agency Planning. Public hearing regarding a report on the County of Ventura's feasibility studies of implementation of an inclusionary housing program and a housing impact mitigation fee program.

A PowerPoint presentation and three public comment letters have been submitted. Item 71, Board of Supervisors. Recommendation of Supervisor Garrell to receive and file a presentation by Innovation Technologies Consortium President Steve Kinney on the recent Ventura County Community Summit on Robotic Autonomous Systems. A PowerPoint presentation has been submitted. And finally, item 73, County Executive Office. Receive and file the fiscal year 26-27 recommended budget for the county of Ventura. A PowerPoint presentation and one public comment letter have been submitted. Thank you, Mr. Chair that concludes agenda review.

Thank You dr. Johnson madam clerk are there any comments public comments on this item?

Thank you chair girl. There are no public comments for any of our agenda review at this time. Thank you

All right. Thank you just seeking a first and a second

Thank you, Chair Garrell. There are currently 10 speakers in our queue and as a reminder to members of the public who wish to address the board today with public comment on any agenda item please visit VenturaCounty.gov forward slash BOS comment for participation information and instructions. For in-person public comment please check in with the deputy clerk at the entrance of the boardroom if you wish to make comments you must be in the board room or if you're participating remotely you must be connected to the meeting via zoom or telephone before the close of the public comment period for that agenda item Request to make public comment on an agenda item will be accepted until the public comment period for each agenda item is complete. For our remote participants, please accept the prompt to be promoted and unmute your mic when it's your turn to speak.

And for all public comments The in-person speakers present in the boardroom will be called upon first, followed by remote participants. At the discretion of the chair, general public comment regarding county related matters that are not listed on the agenda but are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the board may be moved to the end of the meeting and I'm going to call your names in threes when I call your name please proceed to the podium.

Our first speaker is going to be Angeline Smart followed by Cecil Falconer and Audrey Carmen Angeline Smart.

Good morning, my name is Angeline Smart and my husband Peter Smart was an Oxnard police officer. And he then became an investigator for the County of Ventura retiring as a senior investigator. I have here today a letter written by Michael Bradbury and I'm going to speak on his behalf this letter. Regarding Bruce the dog, dear members of the Ventura County Board of Supervisors. Throughout my 33 years in public service I came to appreciate that some of the most difficult decisions facing government are not simply questions of authority but questions of judgment. Public officials must balance legal responsibilities community expectations and the obligation to act carefully fairly and humanely before taking irreversible action. My wife and I also understand these issues from a personal perspective for the past 35 years, we have rescued dogs including dogs facing euthanasia and at times have cared for as many as 13 dogs at our ranch That experience has reinforced for us that many dogs can have a safe and humane path forward when people are willing to look carefully at the individual animal and the available placement options.

I'm writing in that spirit regarding Bruce. I understand that Bruce remains alive and in county custody, and that a qualified sanctuary rescue placement has offered a lawful and humane path forward. I also understand that Bruce's treatability and placement suitability have not been fully evaluated. In those circumstances the County should not take the irreversible step of destroying him without first giving life-saving alternatives, full and fair review. I also understand that Animal Services continues to pursue Bruce's destruction without fully evaluating those alternatives. That has contributed to continued dispute and emergency litigation over Bruce's fate Before any irreversible action is taken, the county should support a lawful life-saving resolution.

Most importantly, Dr. James Crosby, an internationally recognized expert in dog behavior, dog aggression and dog bite investigation has concluded that Brew should be transferred to the sanctuary care rather than destroyed. I understand that animal services staff have also described Bruce as a model citizen while in custody. In light of those facts, careful review is warranted.

Thank you for your comment. You've used your three minutes.

We have the letter thank you very much.

Our next speaker is going to be Cecile Falconer followed by Audrey Kamin and Sean Little.

Good morning Supervisors, my name is Cecile Gorolla-Faulkner. I live in Oxnard. I'm taking over the remainder of Mr. Bradbury's letter. Okay, in light of those facts careful review is warranted. California law recognizes both public safety and the preservation of animal life. It expresses a policy against euthanizing adoptable or treatable animals when lifesaving outcomes are available And California shelter laws recognize mandatory release to rescue obligations when a qualified nonprofit rescue organization request an animal before euthanasia.

There is no public benefit in destroying Bruce if a qualified Sanctuary, which there is a qualified sanctuary can where the sanctuary can place the dog in public health safety and welfare while preserving his life. The Board of Supervisors should ensure that Ventura County Animal Services and County Council give full consideration to any lawful alternative that would avoid the unnecessary destruction of an animal for whom safe placement exists. This is not a request to disregard the county's responsibilities and liabilities, it is a request to pursue those responsibilities in a manner that is careful humane lawful and consistent with California's policy favoring life-saving outcomes when they are available I therefore urge the county To work with the sanctuary rep rescue representatives, Bruce's supporters and appropriate experts to support a lawful transfer to a qualified sanctuary rescue placement.

And thank you for your consideration. respectfully Michael D. Bradbury. Now, for me we were here before in May Bruce's supporters came to this board meeting I was one of them and asked for one thing to pause the euthanasia process long enough for the county to carefully review what had happened. We raised concerns about the 15th April 15 hearing we raise concerns about the short time allowed The witnesses that were not heard and the lack of full review of life saving alternatives. And the fact that further legal review was still being pursued.

The board acknowledged the e-mails you thanked everybody thank you. You indicated that Bruce was in your minds but while the community was asking for review animal services still scheduled Bruce for destruction. The forced emergency litigation in federal court It forced Bruce's supporters into crisis mode to keep him alive. That should not have happened. The board was on notice that there were unresolved legal, factual and ethical questions. The board was on notice that alternatives existed including the sanctuary that the shelters worked with before. The board was on notice that people were still trying to seek review. And now we are here again. Cecil thank you

for your comment. You've used your three minutes.

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is going to be Audrey Carmen followed by Sean Hiddle and Rose Sutton.

Morning Supervisors, thank you for your time. I'm here as an additional supporter of Bruce. I work as a nurse in the surgery department at Ventura County Medical Center and before that in March of 2020 I volunteered to be one of the first COVID hygienists so I've worked in ICU, DOU, telemetry, DOU which I stated again, med surge and I've been across all the other hospital departments So that being said, I've put in an astronomical number of hours at the hospital scheduled and on call serving this county. And very happily so those hours have been taxed to support Ventura County. And as we can see some a lot of that money is being put to excellent use by the support of the parks which I can't tell you enough how much my father spends his retirement in parks he sees the parks more than me Unfortunately, I'm disheartened to learn that some of that county money is now being used to pay lawyers to defend the order of Bruce's euthanasia.

To defend killing a dog when beautiful alternatives as stated before exist. This is deeply upsetting to me and I understand that public safety matters. I work in health care, I've cared for dog bite patients. I understand the harm risk and responsibility and what it means to take public safety seriously especially in June July when families are out and about and we definitely have an increase in cases But that being said, I don't understand why Bruce has to die given that there is an expert who supports the sanctuary care. As stated, there's a passionate sanctuary rescue option ready to help him and like I said this is not a proposal to release Bruce back into his family, back into the community. It's a proposal to transfer him to a place where he could live safely and securely where he wouldn't be free to leave thus reducing any risk of further public harm Because dogs are wonderful.

They're pure, loyal, passionate and they're full of love. They comfort people. They help people heal and they're some of the best therapy many of us can ever receive. I use it for myself after work and my neighbor brings her dogs to our PICU and our peds unit because they're awesome! So, I don't understand why the county is still allowing or defending death as the answer to Bruce's issue.

So, I'd like to invite especially in June and July each of you to spend time at one of our local parks and see the dogs who bring joy to this community. Watch people stop to pet them, watch families smile, and watch how much they mean to people. And think about the one who may be missing, Bruce. If Animal Services gets its way, Bruce will not be missing because he was given sanctuary. He will be missing because he was killed even though people were fighting for him, even though alternatives existed and even though this board fortunately now still has a chance to act so please do not let that happen.

Please do not use county resources to defend destruction when those same resources could be used to support a lawful life-saving resolution.

Thank you for your comment. Our next speaker is going to be, excuse me, Sean Hiddle followed by Rose Sutton and then Winona Bergy Krantzoff.

Good morning supervisors my name's Sean Hiddle and I'm here to support Bruce the animal services keep telling people keep telling the public that April 15th order is final and that Bruce must be destroyed That leaves out the important facts that the April 15th order originally said there was a right to appeal within five days. Bruce's family and attorney relied on that language and tried to seek further review.

Then on May 6, Judge Burrell said he would change the April 15th order by removing that appeal language. To our knowledge no final corrected order has been officially filed and notice has been given. And no notice has been given. That matters because Bruce's family is not done asking the court to look at what happened. Once final corrected order is officially filed and a notice is given, they plan to ask the court for another chance to present the witnesses and evidences that were not heard on April 15th.

If the Animal Services kills Bruce before that can happen, the court will never be able to fix what went wrong. This is not over in a clean, simple way. Animal service keeps suggesting while all this remains unsolved, animal services still trying to kill Bruce. That should concern this board. Bruce should not be destroyed while the order is still being cleaned up, while legal rights are still being pursued and while the sanctuary options remain available.

The Board does not We need to decide every legal issue today, but it should not let animal services act as if there's no issues left. Bruce is alive. Legal review is still ongoing and the board still has a choice. Please do not allow animal services to kill Bruce while these questions remain unsolved. Thank you.

Thank you for your comment Sean. Our next speaker is going to be Rose Sutton followed by Winona Burgey-Kransoff and Rebecca Spranlin.

Good morning, supervisors. My name is Rose Sutton and I live here in Ventura County my entire life. I know Bruce. He is a friend of my dogs. My dog saved my life when my son was murdered three years ago. He never left my side. Dogs play a huge role in my life. And so I'm here on Bruce's behalf once again. I want to address the county's 30 day argument In its own court filings, the county relied on Ventura County's dangerous dog ordinances and told the federal court that April 15th order required compliance within 30 days.

The ordinance language they rely on says that the court may set a reschedule to make sure its order is followed. It does not say animal services must kill a dog within 30 days. It does not create a mandatory kill by date for the agency. That distinction matters Much of the compliance language in these cases is directed at owners. Things like licensing, enclosure notices, signs, spay or neuter and other conditions when a dog is not destroyed.

It is not a command that animal services must kill Bruce by certain date. But animal services and County Council have used the 30 day argument to make the public believe that they had no choice but to destroy Bruce if that happens. That is misleading. The order did not set a specific date for Bruce to be killed it did not say Bruce had to be destroyed on May 15th.

It did not prevent the county from seeking clarification It did not prevent the county from supporting a stay. It did not prevent the county from returning to court and it did not prevent the county from working toward a lawful sanctuary or rescue transfer. Animal Services and County Council have used 30 day language to make the public believe that they had no choice or will have no choice but to destroy Bruce just as they have hidden behind an order that ensures are that remains unresolved.

The matters This matter is because Bruce should not be kept be asked to accept the we had Bruce the board should not be asked to accept that we had no choice when choices existed. Animal services had choices County Council had choices and this board still has a choice Bruce is alive. Sanctuary options exist. Legal review is ongoing. Serious questions remain unresolved.

Please direct Animal Services and County Council to stop treating destruction as an inevitable choice here, and to support a lawful life-saving resolution before any irreversible action is taken. Once Bruce is gone he's never going to be able to come back. You guys can't right or wrong if that happens. Thank you Rose for your comment.

Our next speaker is going to be Winona Burgey-Kranthoff, followed by Rebecca Spradlin and Nina Glaskutter.

Good morning, Supervisors. My name is Winona Burgey-Krasnoff. I live in Ventura. I'm here to support Bruce. I want to talk about SPARC, the Santa Paula Animal Rescue Center. Bruce was adopted from SPARCC. That matters because SPARCC's adoption paperwork gave SPARCK a continuing role if Bruce's family could no longer keep him or if euthanasia was being considered. In plain terms, SPARACC had a right to be contacted, SPARCC had a right to step in Spark had a right to try to help Bruce. And VCAS knew Bruce was connected to Spark. VCAS records connected Bruce to Spark, Bruce's family told Animal Services that Bruce came from Spark. VCAS also had reason to know that Spark origin dogs are not just ordinary impounds with no rescue history and no rescue organization behind them.

But Spark was not treated like a rights holder before Bruce was ordered destroyed. Spark was not given a real chance to step in, present its position and pursue a non-lethal outcome before animal services moved towards destruction. Now Spark is going to court to protect its rights and Bruce's life. The board does not need to sort through every contract provision today, but it should understand this basic point. Animal services should not kill Bruce while the rescue organization he came from is actively trying to assert its rights and help save him. If Bruce is killed now, SPARC's rights will not just be ignored, they will be erased forever and so will Bruce. Please direct animal services and county council not to destroy Bruce while SPARC role, SPARC's rights and available sanctuary options remain unresolved.

I also want to speak about California's policy for animal shelters. California law does not treat euthanasia as the default answer when life-saving outcomes are available. California has made clear that adoptable and treatable animals should not be killed when they can be saved. That policy matters here because Bruce is alive, qualified sanctuary and rescue options exist, and Bruce's treatability has never been fully and fairly evaluated. Treatable does not mean perfect. It does not mean immediately adoptable to anyone anywhere under any circumstances. Treatability includes whether an animal can be helped, managed, placed or cared for with appropriate support.

Animal services pursue destruction without first doing the kind of careful behavior and placement review that should happen before a shelter animal is killed. That is especially troubling because Animal Services own staff described Bruce as a model citizen while he remains in custody. Staff notes also describe him as easy to handle, easy to vaccinate with no signs of fear anxiety or stress that concerned the animal care team. Those facts should have triggered more review not less If Animal Services' own staff described Bruce this way, if qualified sanctuary and rescue options exist and if an independent expert has already recommended sanctuary care. Why has animal services continued to push toward death instead of supporting a lawful life-saving outcome?

Bruce deserves independent good faith consideration of the life saving options available now. Please support a lawful life saving resolution that allows Bruce to be transferred to a qualified sanctuary rescue. Thank you so much for your time.

Thank you for your comment. Our next speaker is going to be Rebecca Spradlin followed by Nina Glosker and then Bruce McVicker.

I'm here as a supporter of Bruce. I want to focus on the expert evidence in Bruce's actual behavior in custody. Doctor James Crosby is an internationally recognized expert in dog behavior, dog aggression and dog bite investigation. He has reviewed Bruce's case and concluded that Bruce should be transferred to sanctuary rather than destroyed. Animal services did not fully and fairly evaluate Bruce's treatability before pursuing destruction, it did not fully and fairly evaluate whether sanctuary care could address any public safety concerns while preserving Bruce's life.

Instead animal services kept pushing towards death. That is why the board oversight is needed. Also in recent court filings, the county described the efforts to save Bruce as part of a scheme. That word matters. It's not a scheme to ask for a court review. It is not a scheme for a rescue organization to assert its rights. It is not a scheme for community members to ask elected officials for oversight. I actually two of you I have emailed and I did not get a response from.

And it is not a scheme to ask that a living dog not be killed while serious legal, factual and ethical questions remain unresolved. What should concern this board is not that people are fighting to keep Bruce alive. What should concern this board is that animal services have treated Bruce and his destruction as inevitable despite multiple lawful off-ramps Animal services could have supported further court review. It could have supported pause, it could have supported independent expert evaluation. It could have worked towards sanctuary or release transfer. It could have treated California's life-saving policy as something real.

The board should not accept that framing without scrutiny. But instead, Animal Services and County Council have continued to defend destruction while giving the public shifting explanations for why they supposedly had no choice. Multiple reasons. This is a moment for oversight. Please direct animal support services to stop defending the destruction as the only path because we are asking for oversight, not sympathy.

Before any irreversible action is taken, the board should direct Animal Services and County Council to pause destruction, fully review available life-saving alternatives and support a lawful transfer to a qualified sanctuary or rescue placement which has already been found. I've sat with this dog for more than 60 days in a row and I watch him. And I stay with him and I'm begging you to save his life. He doesn't deserve to be destroyed, he deserves to live out his life as a working animal on a shelter that's already been taken care of paid for and established. Thank you for your time.

Thank you for your comment our next speaker is going to be Nina Gleskutter followed by Bruce McVicker and James Frey

Good morning Supervisors, my name is Nina and I'm a supporter of Bruce. I want to close by being very clear killing Bruce will not end this matter it will not answer why Bruce's treatability was never fully and fairly evaluated it will not answer why animal services own notes describe Bruce as a model citizen Easy to handle, easy to vaccinate while the agency continues to push for destruction. It will not answer why sanctuary and rescue options were not fully supported. It will not answer why Sparks rights were not fully heard before Bruce was ordered destroyed. It will not answer why the public was told animal services had no choice when lawful off-ramps existed And it will not answer why this board was asked to accept animal services framing instead of requiring independent oversight.

This is no longer only about Bruce, it's about oversight of animal services. Director Rodriguez came to Ventura County after leaving Seattle Animal Shelter amid public controversy involving staff, volunteers, rescue and accountability concerns. We are now hearing serious concerns from volunteers, rescue partners and community members here in Ventura County. The board should not ignore this pattern.

But today the most urgent point is this the board must not allow animal services to kill Bruce simply because there may be a gap in court protection. A temporary gap between court orders should not become permissioned to destroy him serious legal and ethical questions remain unresolved sparks claim property rights in Bruce remain unresolved spark says those rights are protected they came from the Bruce came from their rescue and those rights were never fully heard before Bruce was ordered destroyed. If Animal Services kills Bruce now, those rights will not be ignored. They will be erased forever and so will Bruce.

If Bruce is killed while these questions remain unresolved the public will continue asking what happened? Who made these decisions? Why the board allowed animal services to proceed. We will continue seeking answers through public records, we will continue seeking accountability through the courts. We will continue coming back to this board and we will continue asking whether animal services reflects Ventura County's values in California's life-saving policy for shelter animals.

If the county allows Bruce to be killed while the issues remain open, there may also be further legal consequences. Bruce is still alive. The board still has a choice. Killing him will not end the questions and will make them louder more serious and impossible to undo. Please direct Animal Services and County Council not to destroy Bruce, even if there is no court stay in place. While legal review sparks rights sanctuary options and serial serious ethical questions remain do not let animal services kill Bruce first and answer questions later please do not kill Bruce. Thank you

Nina thank you for

your comment

Okay, our next speaker is going to be Bruce McVicker who's joining us today on Zoom. However we do not see Bruce McVicker online so we're gonna go ahead and go to James Frye. James I see that you are promoted with your camera on so if you unmute your mic you'll have three minutes to give your comment

Thank you. Good morning supervisors my name is James Fry and I previously submitted Ventura County public records for today's meeting regarding 8513 North Ventura Avenue, which is located in district 1. I would like to briefly walk through those records because I believe they raise important questions regarding the county's handling of the project and the application of Ventura County ordinance involving non-conforming structures.

The first exhibit is the actual stop work notice on October 7, 2021. This notice states construction was occurring without permits and required the owner to provide full scope of work and attain all required permits and clearances. The second exhibit is the county's own access record documenting the same stop work action and code enforcement case. The third exhibit is the actual permit C-21001135, which county record shows was issued over the counter on October 11th 2021. This is only two business days after the stop work notice was issued.

The fourth exhibit is the later severity hold issued on December 2021. In that record, the county states the approved permit scope had been exceeded, that roof sheeting and structural framing work had already occurred without inspections and that a full set of plans would now be required before any more inspections to continue. I also submitted the county planning language for ordinance section 8113612, which states that when more than 50% of a nonconforming structure roof or floor area is voluntarily removed. The structure must be brought into conformity with current zoning regulations.

My question to the board is very simple. How did this project move from a stop work notice, to a severity hold requiring full set of plans? And later the approved plans that appear to show the previous identified work as existing conditions. I'm not asking the board to make a legal conclusion today. I am asking for transparency and a clear public explanation regarding these county records.

At further meetings, I intend to continue presenting additional public records relating to this matter including the zoning clearance records, the expired approvals, the changing citizens access entries, the second floor storage designation and later a re-roof permit that was issued after the original permit had already been finalized. Thank you for your time.

And if you guys can thank

you for your comment, James. Thank you. Okay.

Thank

you. Thank you. Sure girl that concludes a public comment for this item. Thank you.

All right. Thank You. That concludes that agenda item and we're going to pivot to our 9am time certain agenda items beginning with number 52 presented by Supervisor Lopez.

Great, thank you chair and happy to kick off the proclamations this morning as we are well underway in the month of June and a number of celebrations that are taking place this month. I am honored to bring a proclamation to recognize the Juneteenth Independence Day and of course ahead of the celebration that will take place in Oxnard just a little over a week away. And so I want to invite a few representatives from the Juneteenth celebration committee of Ventura County who have been working for 35 years, I would say more than 35 years to ensure that the celebration and this moment can happen here in Ventura County. So I want to start with Mr. Bruce Stewart who is a president of the Juneteenth Celebration Ventura County and has been involved for over 35 years so I'll hand it off to you Mr.

Stewart to introduce the rest of the guests here with us today.

Yes, thank you very much. I'd like to introduce my co-chairperson Julia Dixon who works hard every year to make sure everything goes well with the Juneteenth. She's been the co-chair for the past at least 10 years along with Angela Landers and they do a magnificent job I'd like to introduce Mrs. Toby Gibson, she works hard and just anything that we ask her to do Mr. Buddy Gibson who has been involved with Juneteenth the length of time that I've been involved in Juneteenth and I think most of you know Buddy Gibson I'd like to further introduce Lawrence Lee, who works with us. He puts up a display every year in the Oxnard Public Library advertising our Juneteenth program and he also brings a special program every year to the Oxnard Library talking about Juneteenth.

Wasn't able to do it this year because of personal things going on his life but he has done it for the past five years and we really appreciate all his hard work And I'd like to introduce Derek Wilson, who's in charge of our media programs. He takes care of all the PSAs and setting up events like today. Now, I'd like to invite you all to come to our Juneteenth celebration which will be Saturday the 20th of June from 10 AM until 6 PM because it's our 35th anniversary. We're extending it 1 hour because we expect a lot of people to come and a lot of things going on for those of you who don't know. I think everyone here probably does know what Juneteenth is all about. It is a day June 19th 1865 in which the slaves in Texas found out that they were free two and a half years after the signing of the Emancipation Proclamation by Abraham Lincoln.

And they were so exuberant and excited that they started celebrating it every year. And the thing that I, in my mind about those people that day that found out they were asked what are we going to do? We are going to find our families. To me, that is tremendous. After all that time, all they could think about was their families. I can think of one slave mother who would walk 12 miles from one plantation to another every night to say goodnight to her son. This is the kind of dedication that these people had. And so please come out and join us, you'll have a wonderful time we're going to have music we're going to have food we're gonna have crafts we're gonna have demonstrations so it'll be a wonderful time thank you very much

Thank you Mr. Stewart and thank you. Thank you, Mr. Stewart. Thank you to the committee for joining us this morning and for the work that you put in. The organization is all volunteer based so appreciate all the time and the resources that are contributed to our community to ensure that we continue to recognize this day and the history here not only locally but in our country. So with that, we do have a proclamation and I look forward to being there on the 20th for the presentation there. And do invite everyone who is able to join to come out to Plaza Park on June 20th. Thank you Chair.

Thank you for that flyer and for this amazing event. And back to Supervisor Lopez for agenda item number 53.

Yes, thank you Chair and following in these celebrations for the month of June. One of the great privileges as members of Board of Supervisors that we have is the ability to bring forward these proclamations for our county making sure that we recognize different parts of our community and demonstrate to the people in our county that we are working to foster community. Building community is a deliberate process, a process to foster belonging mutual trust and shared purpose Today I am proud to bring forward the proclamation recognizing the month of June as LGBTQ plus month in Ventura County and raising the progress pride flag over the county government center.

Our proclamations are also an opportunity for us to recognize the individuals and organizations who are doing the work of community building, creating trust and fostering connections every day. This year, I am honored to recognize a group of people from California Lutheran University for their powerful work on campus and creating a meaningful welcoming friendly and health conscious space for our LGBTQ plus community. Their work is diverse from pride fest to spiritual reflection to academic classes These multiple connections help ensure all members of the campus and our community, and particularly the LGBT plus community feel valued empowered and connected. So at this time I would like to invite a number of people from California Lutheran University to share a few words.

And that includes I'll start with Dr. Peter Carlson pastor Elizabeth Galen also known as Pastor Beth Ashley Anda, Jonathan Leon and Ryan Rojas. So I'll let you all figure out who speaks first.