City Scraps Antipollution Plan, Seeks Another : Oxnard: Administrators warn the council that they might not meet a Feb. 1 county deadline. A four-day workweek is impractical, officials say.

In a stunning reversal that could cost city taxpayers thousands of dollars, the Oxnard City Council voted Tuesday to scrap its antipollution plan and instructed staff to “go back to the drawing board.”

The unanimous vote ignored pleas from Personnel Director Dene Jones, City Manager Vern Hazen and Mayor Nao Takasugi, who warned the council that the city could not have a new plan in place by the Feb. 1 county deadline.

Failure to comply on time with county Rule 210--aimed at reducing morning rush-hour traffic--carries penalties of up to $25,000 a day. City Transportation Director Lino Corona, who had worked on the plan since February, said he had serious doubts that the county will give Oxnard an extension.

However, Councilman Michael Plisky implied that the city would not pay the county fines without a fight. “Remember the Boston Tea Party,” he said.

Rule 210 requires that large employers such as city governments reduce the number of trips to work between 6 and 10 a.m. on weekdays to reduce pollution generated by rush-hour traffic jams.

Under the county rule--established to meet state and federal mandates--employers must make a good-faith effort to increase morning ridership to 1.35 passengers per car, or about four people to every three cars.

In July, the council formally approved a four-day workweek to reduce the number of trips to work. Plisky cast the lone vote against the plan, which called for most employees to work 10-hour shifts and take Fridays off, or work nine-hour shifts and take every other Friday off.

The city even printed about 1,000 brochures outlining the plan, and the county approved it in August.

But on Tuesday, as the council discussed closing City Hall on Fridays, council members Dorothy Maron, Manuel Lopez and Gerry Furr had changed their minds.

Echoing arguments that Plisky had made in July without success, they said 10-hour days were too taxing for employees and would be detrimental to the city. They said that closing City Hall on Fridays would be an inconvenience to residents, although none attended the meeting to complain.

In July, the council discarded several alternative approaches, including one adopted by both Ventura and Simi Valley that provides financial rewards to employees who don’t drive solo to work.

Thousand Oaks adopted a plan based on the four-day workweek. The county’s remaining cities do not have to submit plans until next year because they are not considered large employers.

On Tuesday, Oxnard council members charged that Rule 210 is seriously flawed--Plisky repeatedly called it “a joke”--and hinted that they would challenge it in court.

The rule does not credit the city for staff reductions or penalize it for allowing employees to come in on Saturday, council members said.

Plisky proposed a plan based on penalizing employees who don’t car-pool, walk or ride bikes to work. Maron proposed having some employees come in before 6 a.m. and others after 10 a.m. But Hazen reminded council members that both approaches had been thoroughly evaluated and rejected in July.

He also reminded them that the city staff had worked hard to gain support for the plan from employee unions and that the prospect of a compressed workweek had generated a lot of excitement among workers.

Takasugi then made a motion to go forward with the city’s original plan, but nobody supported him. He later sided with his colleagues in instructing staff to come back with a new plan.

After the vote, staff members appeared to be disappointed and confused. Personnel Director Jones said her office had spent the equivalent of one person working full-time for three months to implement the plan that the council approved in July.

“I was surprised because the council had previously approved a plan based almost exclusively on the compressed week,” Jones said.