Ventura County Board of Supervisors: Nurses and Sand

By Sheryl Hamlin

VCMC Staff Shortage and Pay Issues

The Public Comments section of any governmental meeting often yields information not necessarily found on the public agenda. This was true at the regularly scheduled Ventura County Board of Supervisors Meeting on December 8, 2015. The video of the meeting can be seen here. Public comments start at 12:41.

At least ten professionals from the Ventura County Medical Center addressed the dais in what can only be described as a crisis situation in the minds of the speakers. Issues raised were:

• VCMC is a “house of cards” said one speaker
• Nurses are leaving for more pay
• Patients are more violent and one speaker spoke of a hanging into which he intervened
• One speaker spoke of a patient’s death from transfusion issues
• Santa Paula is also experiencing shortages as well as the Ventura facility
• Staffing ratios are lower than ever
• VCMC is unsafe for both staff and patients
• More drop offs from county jail
• The county is owned millions of dollars for services which has not been collected and the new Cerner system did not rectify the situation
• A petition was presented which was collected over several days saying these signatories would leave if the situation is not rectified

Mr. Powers, Ventura County CEO responded that the wage issue has been reopened. Supervisor Long stated that there is a nationwide shortage in this profession and they are working to grow this profession. Supervisor Foy said the county would work it out.

Contrast these testimonies to the presentation given by Barry Fisher of the Ventura County Health Care Agency which was held in Santa Paula.

Broad Beach Restoration Project

This section starts at 54:07 on the video.

Mike Stubblefield who lives in El Rio spoke about the huge project to bring hundreds of thousands of cubic yards of sand to Malibu beach through Ventura County. He had previously written an editorial about this project, where he brings up valid points and then draws an erroneous conclusion.

Supervisor Zaragoza requested Resource Management Agency (RMA) to provide potential impacts to Fillmore and Oxnard residents. He said the project is a “potential hazard to the environment” and displays “total disregard for the community”. He suggested an EIR saying there was potential damage to roads, air quality and children on Vineyard waiting at bus stops.

Supervisor Foy said he has personally been involved with this for a “long time” saying that the California Coastal Commission (CCC) doesn’t care about anything beyond their area. Originally they wanted to pump the sand back up or dredge the harbor, which was considered environmentally unsound. Mr. Foy also said that the miners don’t want to jeopardize their relationships with the cities. “47,000 one way trips over six months” is huge. He said both the cities of Fillmore and Santa Paula are “going crazy” about these truck trips. The sand will continue to come back in and out making an end to this sand replenishment impossible to define.

Supervisor Zaragoza mentioned BEACON, the Beach erosion commission, who should look at this. He also reiterated the need for CEQA analysis, particularly because this is a county to county project. He recognizes the need for sand, but not at “our expense”.

Supervisor Long said that she and Fillmore have been in discussion. Kim Prillhart, Ventura County Planning Director, is looking at options. Supervisor Long said she spoke with one of the members of the CCC who said they got no information about the trucks’ arrival nor does the CCC have authority to look at where and how the product moves.  Dr. Charles Lester is looking at options. The State Lands Commission and Army Corps of Engineers have to review the project next.  She said this was an “unconscionable action by neighbors to do this without dialogue” saying there was absolutely no communication from the CCC to the Ventura County Board of Supervisor.

Note that information has been requested from the CCC by this reporter on 12/7/2015 to clarify information in the reports with no response at this time:

1. In the Staff Report dated 12/8/2014 CCC/TH17A Addendum, the number 600,000 cubic yards of sand was used and 43,000 truck trips. In the October 7, 2015 item 8A Staff Report, the number 22,000 “truck trip loads” is used.  In the 2014 report, the number used is “420 inbound and 420 outbound”, while in the 2015 report, the number used is 420 truck trips per day.  Please confirm the total cubic yards, inbound trips and outbound trips.
2. There is a letter in the file dated July 25, 2014 from the City of Moorpark requesting a route change. This route was subsequently changed. What were the process and the governmental body who made this change?
3. In both the 2014 and 2015 staff reports there is a footnote relating to “Analysis of Extended Trucking Traffic, LLG Engineers, June 9, 2014”, but this report is not on-line. Could you please provide?
4. Does the above traffic study include the 23/126/118 option?

________________________________________________