Ordinance No. 2026-XX
Amending Chapter 22 – Public Safety Special Transactions and Use Tax City Council Regular Meeting | Date, 2026
22.48 Severability.
If any provision of this chapter or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the chapter and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.
SECTION II
This ordinance, following its adoption by at least five (5) affirmative votes of the Council and its publication, shall become effective upon the approval of the tax imposed hereunder by two-thirds of the voters of the City voting thereon at an election called for that purpose. The “operative date” of the tax imposed hereunder shall be as provided in section 22.35.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY this X day of MONTH, 2026 by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
APPROVED:
Greg Bozzo, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________
Kim Mancera, City Clerk
City of Gilroy
Public Safety Special
Transactions and Use Tax
Implementation Plan
Adopted: December XX, 2026
Table of Contents
Contents
Introduction..................................................................................................................................................3 Background...................................................................................................................................................3 Administration, Oversight, and Implementation..........................................................................................3 Term of Plan .............................................................................................................................................3 Restrictions on Use of Funds....................................................................................................................3 Citizens' Oversight ....................................................................................................................................4 Fiscal Accountability .................................................................................................................................4 Amendment of the Implementation Plan.....................................................................................................4 Spending Priorities/Proposed Use of Funds.................................................................................................4
Introduction
On November 3, 2026, the voters of the City of Gilroy ("City") approved a 0.25 percent ( one-quarter of one percent) transactions and use tax to enhance funding for public safety services in the City. The tax is codified as Gilroy City Code ("GCC") Chapter 22, Article V, titled “Public Safety Special Transactions and Use Tax” (“Public Safety Tax”).
As part of the voter-approved ballot measure, and pursuant to GCC section 22.45, “Permissible uses: Implementation Plan,” the City is required to prepare and establish an Implementation Plan for the expenditure of tax proceeds. This Implementation Plan provides a background on the Public Safety Tax and guidance for the spending of tax proceeds as authorized by the voters. This Implementation Plan follows and advances the purpose for the Public Safety Tax by only funding expenditures related to public safety services.
Background
On November 3, 2026, the voters of the City approved the Public Safety Tax as a special tax of the City. The ballot measure was approved by more than two-thirds of City voters. The Public Safety Tax imposed a 0.25 percent (one-quarter of one percent) transaction and use tax upon all retailers in the City for the sale of all tangible personal property sold at retail in the City. This tax was designed to supplement public safety funding.
Administration, Oversight, and Implementation
Term of Plan
This Implementation Plan will remain in force for the duration of the Public Safety Tax levied within the City, starting in April 2027, and will continue in perpetuity unless repealed by the voters. The Implementation Plan, as written in this first edition, will consist of a broad percentage allocation among the three funding categories:
Infrastructure, Police, and Fire. As experience is gained using the Public Safety Sales Tax proceeds and ongoing costs are funded by those proceeds, the plan may be modified to varying levels of specificity. Each edition of the plan, as amended, will then be in effect until the next amendment is adopted by the City Council.
Restrictions on Use of Funds
Pursuant to GCC section 22.45, all proceeds of the Public Safety Tax shall be accounted for and designated for use by the City only for the public safety services set forth in the GCC subsection 22.45(a) and this Implementation Plan. This Implementation Plan may be amended from time to time by a majority vote of the City Council, so long as the funds are utilized for public safety services and infrastructure.
The Citizen’s Oversight Committee for the Public Safety Tax may consider and render recommendations for amendments to this Implementation Plan, but the Implementation Plan may only be amended by the City Council at its discretion, within the confines of the Public Safety Tax permissible uses.
No revenues collected pursuant to the Public Safety Tax may be used to replace previous General Fund expenditures on Police and Fire department operating expenses at budgeted levels for Fiscal Year 2026-27 as adopted on June 2, 2025. The General Fund amounts adopted for Fiscal Year 2027 for the two departments are detailed below:
Police $33,643,758
Fire $16,012,655
Total $49,656,413
It is the intent of the voters that revenues collected under the Public Safety Tax supplement, rather than supplant, existing City expenditures for public safety. There is an allowance for certain exceptions to this, as detailed in the ordinance.
Citizens' Oversight
GCC subsection 22.45(e) established a Citizens' Oversight Committee to monitor the expenditures of revenue collected pursuant to the Public Safety Tax and report to the people and the City Council. Members of the Citizens' Oversight Committee are to be appointed by the City Council. The Committee consists of seven members. The Citizens' Oversight Committee members cannot be current City employees, officials, contractors, or vendors of the City. Past employees, officials, or vendors shall be eligible to serve on the Committee, if there are no conflicts of interest as determined by the City Attorney. The Citizens' Oversight Committee is charged with reviewing expenditures of revenue collected pursuant to the Public Safety Tax to determine whether such funds are expended for the purposes specified in this Implementation Plan, and issuing reports on its findings to the City Council and the public at least annually. Committee members may also review the annual financial or performance audits performed by an independent auditor.
To preserve the integrity and independence of the oversight process, Committee members will not play a formal role in contracting, project management, or any other aspect of the public safety measure funding.
The Committee is not charged with decision-making on spending priorities, schedules, project details, funding source decisions (e.g., leveraged funds, developer fees, etc.), financing plans, or tax rate assumptions. The Committee shall serve in an advisory-only role to the City Council and City Administrator and may therefore make recommendations about amendments to this implementation plan, but shall not have a role in approval of any amendments.
Fiscal Accountability
The amount generated by the Public Safety Tax and how it is used shall be included in the annual audit of the City's financial operations by an independent certified public accountant.
Amendment of the Implementation Plan
This Implementation Plan may be amended from time to time by a majority vote of the City Council, so long as the funds are utilized for public safety services as outlined in the Public Safety Tax measure.
Spending Priorities/Proposed Use of Funds
For the first budget cycle (Fiscal Years 2027-28 and 2028-29), the Public Safety Tax revenues shall be appropriated by the following percentages, for use in determining appropriations in the two fiscal years’ budgets, all terms having the meaning as described in the Public Safety Tax:
• Infrastructure: Use of 15% of total proceeds;
• Police: Use of 56% of total proceeds; and
• Fire: Use of 29% of total proceeds.
8.3. City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Council Consideration of Placing a Potential Sales Tax Ballot Measure for the November 2026 Election Ballot
Meeting Date: April 6, 2026
From: Matt Morley, City Administrator
Department: Administration
Submitted by: Harjot Sangha, Finance Director
Prepared by: Harjot Sangha, Finance Director
STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS: Develop a Financially Resilient Organization Ensure Neighborhood Equity from City Services
Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure
RECOMMENDATION
1. Council discussion and direction on whether to pursue the placement of a sales tax ballot measure before the Gilroy community for the 2026 General Election.
2. If proceeding with placement, then determine whether to pursue it as general tax or special sales tax.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Gilroy continues to face increasing fiscal pressure driven by rising service demands, escalating costs, and longstanding infrastructure and public safety needs. In 2024, the City Council placed a dedicated public safety sales tax measure before voters as a special tax, requiring two-thirds voter approval, which received encouraging results; however, it did not obtain the required threshold. While that effort focused specifically on police and fire services, the City’s current financial environment reflects broader and more complex needs that extend beyond public safety alone.
8.3. Public safety remains a critical priority, such as staffing for the Santa Teresa Fire Station; however, the City is also experiencing increasing cost pressures and needs in areas such as public works, traffic and pedestrian safety, and infrastructure maintenance. These competing demands continue to strain the City’s General Fund, which is the primary source of discretionary funding for most municipal services.
Given these conditions, staff is bringing forward for discussion and direction from the City Council on whether to place a ballot measure before the community at the November 2026 general election. If so, whether to pursue a more flexible funding approach through a general transaction and use tax, which would require majority voter approval and allow revenues to be used across a wider range of City services. While a general tax does not legally restrict how funds are spent, staff proposes that the Council establish a clear spending framework and accountability measures to ensure alignment with community priorities.
BACKGROUND
As previously presented to the City Council, including in the April 8, 2024, staff report, the City has not fully recovered staffing levels following the 2009 recession and subsequent fiscal impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. At the same time, service expectations and operational demands have continued to increase. Public safety services alone account for approximately 64% of General Fund expenditures, reflecting both their importance and the financial pressure they place on limited resources.
Prior analyses identified significant staffing and infrastructure needs within both the Police and Fire Departments, including additional sworn officers, dispatch personnel, and fire personnel required to meet service demands and adequately staff existing and future fire stations. These needs remain valid today and continue to represent an unfunded obligation.
However, since 2024, the City’s fiscal challenges have broadened. Inflationary pressures, increased service costs (for example, services provided by the County), and ongoing infrastructure needs—particularly related to streets, parks, traffic safety, and other public facilities—have further constrained the City’s ability to maintain current service levels, let alone expand them.
ANALYSIS
The core policy question before the City Council is whether to pursue a local transactions and use tax (local sales tax) measure and, if so, how best to structure it to meet the City’s current and future needs.
Current and Future Needs
8.3. Fire
Because the fire service operates 24 hours a day, every day of the year, staffing a single position around the clock requires more than one person. After accounting for shifts, time off, training, and vacancies, it takes approximately 3.76 firefighters to cover one position continuously. Since each fire engine is staffed with three personnel—a captain, an engineer, and a firefighter/paramedic—it takes about 11 to 12 firefighters to fully staff one fire company year-round.
Today, the City operates three fire companies. Expanding service to a fourth company at the Santa Teresa station would increase staffing needs to at least 45 personnel. This expansion would improve response times, enhance coverage in growing areas of the city, and reduce service disruptions, such as temporary station closures and reliance on overtime. Adding a fifth company (a truck/aerial unit at Chestnut station) would require approximately 57 personnel, including relief. This additional unit would expand the Department’s capabilities for more complex emergencies, including multi-story structure fires, commercial incidents, rescue operations, and specialized ventilation needs, while also improving overall service levels and insurance ratings. As the Department grows from three to four, and eventually five companies, it is also recommended to add a Deputy Fire Chief to maintain effective management, oversight, and coordination of operations, training, and long-term planning.
The staffing model demonstrates that expanding fire service in Gilroy—particularly with a fourth station—requires additional personnel to ensure safe, reliable, and responsive emergency services for the community.
Position Currently
Authorized
Five Fire
Company
Deployment
Staffing
Required
Required
Relief for
Five Fire
Companies
Total
Positions
Needed
Additional
Positions
Needed
Fire
Captain
12 15 0 15 3
Engineer 9 15 0 15 6
Firefighter/
Paramedic
19 15 12 27 8
Total
Positions
40 45 12 57 17
Estimated Cost = $3.6 million/year
Police
The Police Department continues to experience staffing gaps relative to both historical service
8.3. levels and updated workload expectations. As identified in the April 2024 staffing analysis, the Department requires additional sworn, field support, and specialized support personnel to meet current service demands.
The Department remains below recommended staffing levels by multiple positions across classifications, including patrol officers, communications staff, and records personnel. These gaps impact the Department’s ability to respond proactively to community needs, maintain reasonable workloads, and adapt to increasing service demands driven by population growth, regulatory requirements, and evolving public safety expectations.
While the City has managed these constraints through operational adjustments, continued reliance on existing staffing levels is not sustainable without impacting service delivery, response times, or officer workload and retention.
Position Type Recommended
Staffing Level
FY26
Authorized
Staffing Level
Additional
Positions
Needed
Sergeant 12 11 1
Corporal 9 9 0
Police Officer 51 45 6
Community
Service Officer
(CSO)
5 4 1
Public Safety
Communicators
20 14 6
Records 9 8 1
Estimated Cost = $2.5 million/year
Public Works
In addition to public safety staffing needs, there is also a critical need for capital investment in public works infrastructure that directly supports the safety of residents on our streets and in our neighborhoods. This includes improvements such as safer intersections, enhanced crosswalks, traffic calming measures, and Safe Routes to School enhancements that protect students and families traveling to and from school. Investments in sidewalk repairs, bike lane improvements, street lighting, and signal upgrades all play a vital role in reducing accidents and improving overall safety for pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers. While these needs are well understood, limited funding has constrained the City’s ability to implement these safetyfocused projects at the necessary pace, resulting in a backlog of improvements essential to protecting the community.
8.3. Other Needs
The aforementioned analysis has outlined the needs of three core Departments that rely on discretionary funding to deliver services and projects. Other Departments across the organization are no exception to the growing demands and have unmet needs to provide optimal levels of service.
In addition to identified staffing and operational needs, the City faces a growing but not yet fully quantified liability related to deferred facility maintenance. Many of the City’s public assets— including streets, parks, recreation facilities, and the Civic Center campus—are aging and require ongoing investment to remain safe, functional, and aligned with community expectations. While routine maintenance continues, limited funding has constrained the City’s ability to proactively address lifecycle replacements, system upgrades, and major repairs. As a result, deferred maintenance needs have accumulated over time and are expected to increase as facilities continue to age. Council has recently taken action to establish a Capital Infrastructure Reserve (CIR) and a related funding policy to begin addressing capital infrastructure needs. It is important to note that these anticipated expenses constrain the City’s ability to incur additional operating costs supporting public safety.
The City Council has made economic development a clear priority by establishing a dedicated Economic Development Department and hiring an Economic Development Director to advance business attraction, retention, and long-term revenue growth. These efforts are foundational and expected to yield meaningful fiscal and community benefits over time; however, by nature, economic development is a long-term strategy that requires sustained investment and patience before it can begin generating significant new revenues. In contrast, pursuing a quarter-cent transactions and use tax would provide an immediate and locally controlled funding source, enabling the City to address pressing service delivery needs in the near term while continuing to build a stronger economic base for the future.
The table below presents the City’s current sales tax forecast through FY32, including the projected year-over-year percent change and corresponding dollar change. As shown, the base forecast reflects relatively modest growth over time, generally aligned with inflationary (CPI-level) increases rather than significant expansion in the local economy.
To illustrate the potential impact of economic development efforts, staff applied a simplified, hypothetical assumption of incremental growth above the baseline, beginning at 1% in FY28 and gradually increasing to 5% by FY32. This scenario reflects a reasonable “long game” outcome where sustained economic development efforts begin to yield measurable increases in sales tax revenue over time.
8.3. Fiscal Year FY24-25 FY25-26 FY26-27 FY27-28 FY28-29 FY29-30 FY30-31 FY31-32 Base Sales Tax Forecast $ 20,478,000 $ 20,062,000 $ 20,248,000 $ 20,580,000 $ 20,873,000 $ 21,121,000 $ 21,319,000 $ 21,491,000 % Change (Base) - -2.00% 0.90% 1.60% 1.40% 1.20% 0.90% 0.80% $ Change (Base) - (416,000) 186,000 332,000 293,000 248,000 198,000 172,000 Added Growth from Econ Dev. (%) - - - 1.00% 2.00% 3.00% 4.00% 5.00% Added Revenue from Econ Dev. ($) - - - 205,800 417,460 633,630 852,760 1,074,550 Total w/ Econ Dev Impact $ 20,478,000 $ 19,646,000 $ 20,434,000 $ 21,117,800 $ 21,583,460 $ 22,002,630 $ 22,369,760 $ 22,737,550 As can be seen, even under this optimistic growth scenario, it would take approximately 4–5 years to generate meaningful incremental revenue, and by FY32, the additional annual revenue—while helpful—would still be insufficient on its own to fully fund major service expansions such as staffing a new fire station. This analysis underscores that while economic development is a critical long-term strategy for strengthening the City’s revenue base, it does not provide an immediate or sufficient solution to address the City’s current and near-term service and staffing needs.
In summary, the City’s identified service, staffing, and infrastructure needs—across public safety, public works, and facilities—clearly exceed the resources currently available within the General Fund. These are not new challenges, but they have become more pronounced over time and are increasingly difficult to address through existing funding alone. Given this reality, it is prudent for the City Council and the community to consider whether placing a transactionsand-use tax measure on the ballot is an appropriate step toward addressing some core priorities. Doing so would allow voters the opportunity to weigh in on a locally controlled funding solution to sustain and enhance the services and infrastructure that are fundamental to the community’s safety, quality of life, and long-term stability.
Potential Local Sales Tax Measure
A transaction and use tax, commonly referred to as a local sales tax, is paid on taxable goods purchased within the City and is applied to both residents and non-residents. Because of Gilroy’s regional retail draw, a significant portion of this revenue is generated by individuals who do not reside in the City, which helps distribute the financial burden more broadly. Based on current estimates, a 0.25% tax would generate approximately $4.5 million annually.
Under State law, the City’s ability to increase its local sales tax rate is limited, and a 0.25% increase represents the maximum available capacity under the current cap.
In considering a ballot measure, the Council must determine whether to structure the tax as a general tax or a special tax. A special tax would dedicate the revenue to specific purposes, such as public safety, but would require approval by two-thirds of voters. In contrast, a general tax requires only a simple majority vote but does not allow for legally binding restrictions on how the funds are used.
Given the City’s expanded fiscal needs beyond public safety, a general tax structure may provide a more practical and flexible approach. It would allow the City to respond to changing
8.3. conditions over time while increasing the likelihood of voter approval. At the same time, staff recognize the importance of maintaining public trust and ensuring that any new revenue is used in a manner consistent with community expectations.
To address this, staff would recommend that the City Council adopt a spending framework that prioritizes key service areas, which can be adjusted based on future needs. Under this approach, new revenues could be directed first toward fire services to address the staffing to cover the Santa Teresa Station. The second priority could be police services, including staffing, support functions, and community safety initiatives. The third priority would be public works infrastructure, with a focus on traffic safety improvements, pedestrian safety enhancements, and maintenance of streets and public facilities. The funding could be allocated incrementally in that order of priority, or in any combination thereof.
Potential Service Delivery Enhancement with $4.5 million/year in New Local Sales Tax Service Enhancement Amount
Fire:
Minimum 45 staffing to cover the Santa Teresa Station
$1,300,000.00
Police:
One Sergeant, six Police Officers, one CSO, six Safety
Communicators, and one Records
2,500,000.00
Public Works:
Traffic and bike/Ped. Safety infrastructure improvements 700,000.00
Total $4,500,000.00
This table identifies one potential use of funds for additional sales tax revenue. Of note, this revenue continues to leave a gap in funding, notably for a fifth fire station. Staff would anticipate other efforts, including development, both through construction and business development, to contribute to future needs.
Although this framework of utilizing funds for public safety alone would not be legally binding under a general tax structure, it would provide clear policy direction and accountability for the allocation of funds.
To further reinforce transparency and accountability, staff recommend establishing a community oversight committee composed of Gilroy residents. This committee would review the collection and expenditure of tax revenues and provide annual public reports to the City Council. In addition, independent annual audits could be conducted to ensure that funds are used in accordance with Council-adopted policies or an established framework.
Other Considerations
8.3. Staff anticipates a November ballot with a number of competing initiatives. Local funding for schools (Gavilan and Gilroy Unified) would likely be among them. In the realm of sales tax, the measures would likely be regional. This could create resistance among likely voters.
Support from community partners highlighting keeping local dollars local could be an effective way of driving interest. In addition, community focus on safety is high, pointing to an opportunity that may be difficult to find in the future.
It is also inciteful to note that sales tax in Gilroy is paid by patrons whose origin is outside the city limits due to our substantial retail infrastructure. This would shift some of the costs of city resources to these users.
At times, sales tax measures contain a sunset date. The sunset date would force the reconsideration of the tax a point in time in the future. This can be a significant and effective control measure to ensure funds are spent as expected. It is important to note, however, that the funds would fill an ongoing operating need and a sunset date could risk creating service level reductions in the future should the funding end.
With respect to polling, given the environment, timing, and past election results, staff would not recommend conducting polling or a community survey and instead pursue this as a true grassroots effort, similar to the 2024 initiative.
ALTERNATIVES
The Council could direct staff not to proceed with the local sales tax measure for the November 2026 General election.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
There is no direct fiscal impact of receiving this report. However, the following fiscal impacts have been identified in anticipation of the Council's potential decision-making. • $150,000 to $200,000 – Ballot Measure – This cost estimate is for the County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters to place the ballot measure on the November 2026 election.
• Other legal and administrative costs for drafting the resolutions and ballot materials.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
Should Council ultimately decide to put this initiative before the Gilroy community, additional outreach will be conducted to provide information regarding the process and the measure.
8.3. NEXT STEPS
If the Council directs staff to proceed with placing a local sales tax ballot measure, staff will take the necessary steps to complete the requirements and return to the Council for formal approval by June 2026.
Attachments: None
10.1. City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Consider Re-opening Wayland and Hanna Parking Lots at Las Animas Veterans Park
Meeting Date: June 1, 2026
From: Matt Morley, City Administrator
Department: Public Works
Submitted by: John Doughty, Public Works Director
Prepared by: John Doughty, Public Works Director
STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS: Not Applicable
RECOMMENDATION
Receive the report, consider community input and provide direction on whether to initiate trial re-opening of Wayland Lane Parking Lot and/or Hanna Street Parking Lot at Las Animas Veterans Park.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On February 9, 2026 the City Council considered a FAIR Memo prepared and submitted by Council Member Marques. The Memo sought City Council support to evaluate and consider re-opening of the Wayland Parking Lot at Las Animas Park on a trial basis.
The City Council authorized staff to proceed with further evaluation of the request. Staff included the Hanna Parking Lot in this assessment as the lot was also closed by City Council for similar stated reasons. Staff has documented existing conditions and provided possible options to address on-site ADA deficiencies and costs associated with re-opening.
BACKGROUND
History Leading to Parking Lot Closures
10.1. • January 31, 2022 – Issues of tents being erected at Las Animas Park, including in the handball courts and vandalism of restrooms and other facilities, commences an effort to find ways to address the conditions created by the unhoused using the park as living accommodations and issues with loitering during all times of the day in parking lots adjacent to residential areas. • March 2022 through mid-April 2022 – Issues continue to intensify at Las Animas Park. Enhanced coordination between the Program Administrator for the unhoused, as well as the Police Quality of Life team and Recreation, to connect the unhoused with services and resolve the prohibited camping at the park. • June 7, 2022 – A complaint was received from the Gilroy Tennis Club about revenge vandalism to the tennis courts arising from a conflict between the Tennis Club and soccer players. Cameras were installed in the park. • August 1st and 15th, 2022 – Public comments were received regarding illegal andnuisance-related activity happening repeatedly at the Hanna Street Parking Lot, including assault, rape, shots heard, burglary, drug paraphernalia in the lot near the lot next to the playground, nudity, loud music/noise, public intoxication, trespassing, and suspicious behaving persons and vehicles to name a few. • Late August 2022 - Following the council meetings, a series of site visits, e-mail correspondence, and meetings followed regarding constructing a locking gate to lock the lot after-hours, cameras for monitoring activity in the lot, and discussions about possible ways to enforce the closure were held.
• August 18, 2022 – City Administrator forwarded an e-mail to Council from a resident regarding the proposed improvements to address the lot. In the e-mail, the City Administrator informed Council of the procurement and eventual installation of the locking gate for use when closing the parking lot. • Mid-September 2022 – Correspondence between an engaged resident and the City Administrator demonstrates the order placed for the gate and the intent to lock the gate when the park closes. Additionally, signs were installed to denote the park's closure at 11 p.m., as well as signage restricting parking along Hanna Street near the neighborhood entrance to the park.
• Late October 2022 – Due to costs, the proposed gate required bidding. Bidding was requested for construction.
• January 17, 2023 – The Parks and Recreation Commission, based on the issues relating to late use of the parks, recommended adjusting park closure times for Las Animas Park from 11 p.m. to 10 p.m. Closing time remains 11:00 p.m. per Municipal Code.
• February 2023 – The locking gate is installed at the Hanna Parking Lot.
Immediate improvement is witnessed in the parking lots. • March 15, 2023 – An e-mail was received from a resident concerning issues at the Las Animas neighborhood parking lots, requesting that staff close the parking lots permanently. The e-mail also listed negative activity in the parking lot overnight with cold temperatures.
• March 16, 2023 – Once the park closed for the day, the gates remained locked with signs informing of the temporary closure of the parking lots for an
10.1. undetermined amount of time.
History Post Closure
• March 28, 2023 – A community meeting was held at City Hall in the evening with the neighbors around the parking lots to discuss the issues experienced at the park and, more specifically, the subject parking lots. The residents again advocated for the permanent closure of the residential parking lots. • April 10, 2023 – The City Administrator met with representatives of the Gilroy Tennis Club to discuss the Wayland Lane Parking Lot closure. Around the time of closure, the City received complaints from the GTC concerning closing the parking spaces. At that time, the City Administrator offered to allow the GTC use of the lot during tournaments and other significant events but otherwise determined that the health/safety issues outweighed the convenience of those parking spaces. Thus, the lot would remain closed.
• There is no record that GTC took up staff’s offer to open the lots during tournaments and significant events.
• On February 9, 2026 the City Council considered a FAIR Memo prepared and submitted by Council Member Marques. The Memo sought City Council support to evaluate re-opening of the Wayland Parking Lot at Las Animas Park. • On February 9, 2026, the City Council supported the request and directed staff to return at a future date to discuss potential re-opening of Wayland Park. • On March 24, 2026, the Parks and Recreation Commission considered the question of re-opening both Wayland Lane and Hanna Street Parking Lots. Eight residents provided comments on the item. Following comment and deliberation, the Commission by a vote of 6-0 (Commissioner Bozzo absent), recommended the City Council keep the parking lots closed until a comprehensive plan is developed to address undesirable activity in Las Animas Park.
ANALYSIS
Overview
Council Member Marques has requested the City Council consider directing the City Administrator to re-open Wayland Parking Lot located on the west side of the park, near the tennis courts. The request came via FAIR Memo which is included as Attachment
1. Wayland Parking Lot along with the Hanna Parking Lot were closed indefinitely by the then City Administrator on March 16, 2023. The Closure followed a series of actions and responses by the city which ultimately were deemed inadequate/unsuccessful. On September 18, 2023, staff presented a report to the City Council as follow-up to the closure detailing the background and rationale for closures which is included as
10.1. Attachment 2. The background section of this report includes a synopsis of the process leading to closure of both parking lots.
The FAIR Memo focused on Wayland Parking Lot in response to requests of the Gilroy Tennis Club (GTC) to re-open the lot nearest the tennis courts. GTC is a non-profit organization that has provided financial support to maintain the Las Animas tennis courts. GTC indicates that many members and other tennis enthusiasts often used Wayland Parking Lot to access the courts. The City has fielded a few inquiries from other park users asking why the Wayland Parking Lot was still closed. Beyond the tennis courts, the Wayland Parking Lot provides access to handball courts, the basketball court and baseball fields.
This report also includes discussion of the Hanna Parking Lot which is located at the terminus of Hanna Street approximately 125 feet west of Arnold Drive. The Hanna Lot serves as access to the satellite public works yard which serves Las Animas Park.
Hanna Lot connects to nearby playground equipment and picnic area. This lot is relatively close to the planned pickleball courts and existing dog park.
Existing Conditions
Wayland Parking Lot—General Observations
• One (1) ADA parking space
• 15 standard parking spaces
• Locking swing gate at entry (Wayland Lane)
• One (1) parking lot light
• Access to park amenities via pedestrian bridge West Branch Llagas Creek The Wayland Parking Lot is in overall poor condition. There are significant alligator cracks both in the access drive as well as the parking lot itself. There is uplift and significant cracking on the drive aisle from a tree root. The parking lot is usable, but the lot will optimally need significant restoration in the next 2-5 years if opened to the public.
Parking space delineations are in need of refreshing. A single parking lot light provides minimal security coverage. Lighting is called out due to the lighted tennis courts, which under the Municipal Code, are open until 11:00 PM. It is likely that additional lighting would be of concern to the neighboring homes. Sharp cut-off designs and timers could significantly reduce impacts beyond the parking lot boundaries. Electrical/lighting improvement costs have not been estimated at the present time as there is no immediate obligation to improve with initial re-opening and any electrical work would be most appropriate during major rehabilitation.
Required Improvement for Re-Opening. The City Building Official visited the site and identified several issues with the ADA parking space and accessible path of travel from the ADA parking space. The ADA space exceeds cross and running slopes and the signage and markings are non-compliant (see Attachment 3, Photo 2). The concrete
10.1. ramp extending from the ADA space, exceeds running slope and will require installation of a handrail (see Attachment 3, Photo 3). Additionally, the pedestrian bridge is lacking required wheel stops between the bottom of the rail and the bridge decking (see Attachment 3,Photo 3). Correction of these items is necessary to re-open the parking lot. Estimated cost for all work is less than $25,000.
Hanna Parking Lot—General Observations
• One (1) ADA parking space
• Twenty-two (22) standard parking spaces
• Locking swing gate at entry (located on park property) • No parking lot lights
• Access to park amenities via existing ADA compliant pedestrian path The Hanna Street lot is in slightly better condition than Wayland. There is visible cracking. Staff would recommend re-sealing of lot and re-striping of parking spaces in the next 12-18 months to extend life of the lot should it be re-opened. One of the challenges for this lot is illegal parking and nuisance activities that reportedly occur on the remnant piece of Hanna Street (Arnold Drive to the park boundary). This portion of the street is posted with restricted parking hours from 11:00 pm to 6 am as part of initial mitigation efforts. Staff placed temporary barriers at the entry as a pilot. One neighbor has raised issues with these barriers due to “increased parking” on Arnold Drive. An adjoining neighbor has suggested relocating the swing gate to Arnold Drive which would necessitate further discussion on street abandonment and liability. Following action of the City Council, it is recommended that the temporary barriers be removed.
Required Improvement for Re-Opening. The City Building Official visited the site and identified minor issues with the ADA parking space and no issues with the accessible path of travel from the ADA parking space. The ADA parking space would need to be re-striped and new compliant signage added (see Attachment 4, Photo 2). Correction of these items is necessary to re-open the parking lot. Estimated cost for all work is approximately. $1,500.
As noted previously, the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) discussed the possible re-opening of the two parking lots (see Attachment 5--PRC Minutesof March 24, 2026). A number of residents spoke to the Commission and advocated for keeping the lots closed. The general consensus of those speaking was that the closures had significantly reduced nuisance issues. The Police Department provided summary data of activity in the vicinity of the two parking lots. The data is of limited value in that there was a change in the data collection system. The data indicates less activity which coincides with community comments. Data and commentary reflect the post-Covid era in which many of the issues including camping on parking lots would not be permitted to occur/continue. Staff appreciates the community input and by no means questions their experieces. Staff will note that it remains unclear if the results were causal or corollary and whether re-opening would result in the same Covid-era issues. City staff can say
10.1. firsthand that there remain challenges at Las Animas Park with vandalism, graffiti and other nuisance activities with the vast majority of the activity not occurring in the two open parking lots (which are not gated or restricted). We can also attest that the vast majority of the activity we note is not reported to the Police Department and therefore not captured in their data. The PRC acknowledged that the additional parking spaces could be beneficial to overall park use, notably the new pickleball courts, but recommended keeping the lots closed, pending a more comprehensive plan/implementation for Las Animas Park. It is anticipated that the City Council will receive similar neighbor input during consideration of this item.
There are currently 121 off-street improved parking spaces between Las Animas East (54) and Las Animas West (67) Parking Lots. Wayland and Hanna Parking Lots represent a total of 38 improved parking spaces which are currently not available for use. There exists on-street parking adjacent to Las Animas as well. The Wayland and Hanna Parking Lots are located closest to existing homes and one approach to reopening could be to set hours of operation for the parking lots from, for example, Sunrise to Sunset or 8:00 am to 6:00 pm. This would limit use to daylight hours and reduce nuisance impacts. At present, the Public Works Department does not have the means to close and lock the swing gates in the evening but could accommodate morning unlocking. Daytime usage would reduce/eliminate the need for additional/new lighting. With regard to the small portion of Hanna Street, the City could further restrict/eliminate parking altogether in conjunction with the re-opening of the lot.
Enforcement would fall to Gilroy Police Department.
Staff has attempted to provide the City Council and community with a factual assessment of the existing conditions, overall park challenges and potential benefits of re-opening under certain circumstances.
The question of re-opening ultimately is a policy decision of the City Council.
ALTERNATIVES
Alternative 1--Re-open only Wayland Lane Parking Lot. This alternative would provide 23 additional parking spaces for Las Animas Park and offer alternative access to neighborhoods to the east. As noted, there would be costs associated with bring ADA parking and access up to code. It is anticipated that community members/neighbors will not be supportive of reopening.
Alternative 2--Re-open only Hanna Street Parking Lot. This alternative would provide approximately 23 additional parking spaces for Las Animas Park and offer alternative access to neighborhoods to the east. Additionally, the parking lot would provide additional/alternate parking for the new pickleball courts. As noted, there would be
10.1. costs associated with bring ADA parking up to code. It is anticipated that community members/neighbors will not be supportive of re-opening.
Alternative 3--Re-opening both Wayland and Hanna parking Lots. Opening both parking lots would provide additional parking spaces for patrons of Las Animas Park. As noted, there would be costs associated with bring ADA parking and access up to code. It is anticipated that community members/neighbors will not be supportive of re-opening.
Alternative 4--Take no action. This alternative would leave both parking lots closed until some indeterminate time. The action would not necessitate addressing ADA compliance in and connecting to the parking lots. The park would continue to operate less 38 parking spaces. There would be no costs associated with bringing ADA parking and access up to code. It is anticipated that many community members/neighbors will be supportive of leaving the lots closed.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
Staff is seeking guidance from the City Council. There are ADA costs associated with re-opening one or both of the parks. Wayland Lane Parking lot ADA costs are estimated to be $30,000. Hanna Street parking lot ADA costs are estimated to be $1,500. While not directly related to re-opening, staff has identified future ADA path of travel work near the tennis courts which will exceed $100,000. This work is not currently funded or included in the Five Year CIP.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
The Parks and Recreation Commission considered the request at their March 24, 2026 meeting. Community members provided comment and were made aware of the upcoming City Council meeting.
NEXT STEPS
Next steps will be driven by the decision of the City Council.
Attachments:
1. Attachment 1--FAIR Memo
2. Attachment 2 September 28, 2023 Council Report
3. Attachment 3 Photos of Wayland Lot
4. Attachment 4 Photos of Hanna Lot
5. Attachment 5 Special meeting minutes 3-24-2026
Las Animas Wayland Parking Lot
During covid, homeless were allowed to shelter in place in city parks and parking lots.
Unfortunately, under the leadership of the previous city administrator, police were not directed to do sweeps of the Wayland and Hanna Street Parking Lots at Las Animas Park when crime occurred.
Being the Wayland Parking lot is concealed, individuals set up camping in the parking lot and drug dealing and drug use became a lifestyle. There are neighbors who live right adjacent to this parking lot that got fed up with the criminal behavior. After enduring gang fights, weapons, and consistent drug use, a group of neighbors from the neighborhood got together and convinced the City Council to close both city parking lots permanently.
One neighbor gave the Council at a City Council meeting, a petition with 98 signatures in strong support of closing down the two parking lots – Hanna Street (because that is where she lived) and Wayland. Based on her petition and a few neighbors’ arguments that night, the Council voted to close the two lots. However, when she emailed the petitions to each of the Council members after the meeting and the petitions were looked over, there were only 20 valid signatures. The rest of the signatures were from different parts of the city and countryside which were not valid since the signers had never experienced firsthandwhat the neighbors were going through.
Since that time, the Gilroy Tennis Club Board members have tried to get the Wayland Parking lot re-opened. A gate was installed at the entryway to this parking lot which was to be locked at 10:00 every night. Any car refusing to leave, was to be towed at the owner’s expense. After two nights, our former city administrator suspended this policy because car owners were refusing to move. The city manager would not have them towed because he said it was too much work for the city employees—even though, the tow truck company would do all the paperwork.
So for three years now, this parking lot has been permanently closed. Our club would like to have it re-opened and policed correctly. My vice-president, Bob Nettleblad, and I have spoken with the Police Chief, various police officers and the mayor. Police and the police chief have said there is no problem in policing the lots.
It is important to have the Wayland Parking lot re-opened because of its close proximity to our tennis courts. At night with it getting dark so early, there are no lights between the handball courts and the Mantelli Parking Lot. We are walking in darkness and feel unsafe listening to the various voices in the park that we cannot see. We feel that keeping the lot closed, is a serious safety issue.
I have tried to set up a meeting with the home owners’ association to no avail. These people like the serenity of the closed lot and do not want to see it re-opened. However, it can be argued that every resident knew what he or she was moving next to when the home was purchased. This is a city owned park supported by tax payers. Tennis players, Little League families and people coming to walk their dogs have all been inconvenienced by a few people who want it kept closed for their own wishes.
It would never be suggested that the parking lot should be returned to its original crime ridden state. What is being suggested is that we open it on a trial basis and the police patrol the park regularly. The parking lot could be locked up first when the City’s security team comes on duty.
There are solutions that need to be addressed. Shutting down of city run property is not the way to deal with criminal activity. We want this activity extinguished not moved around the City. Opening up these lots on a trial basis to see what needs to be mitigated is the best way to get a win for all.
********************************************************** (We are arguing for the Wayland Parking lot but we have no objection to whatever is decided for the Hanna Street parking lot.)
March 24, 2026 Page 1 of 8 Parks and Recreation Commission Special Meeting Minutes
City of Gilroy
Parks and Recreation Commission
Special Meeting Minutes
March 24, 2026 I 6:00 PM
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Javier Martinez called the meeting to order at approximately 6:00 PM, noting the presence of a quorum and welcoming Commissioners, staff, and members of the public.
2. ROLL CALL
3. FLAG SALUTE
Vice Chair Miller led the Pledge of Allegiance
4. SECRETARY'S REPORT
Secretary reported that the meeting agenda and packet were posted on March 18, 2026, in compliance with the Brown Act.
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion: Approve the minutes as presented
RESULT: Pass
MOVER: Vice Chair Emily Miller
SECONDER: Commissioner Luis Ramirez
AYES: Commissioners Felios, Martinez, Brinton, Jimenez, Ramirez ABSENT: Commissioner Bozzo
6. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
6.1 Approval of March 24, 2026, Parks and Recreation Commission Special meeting agenda The Commission reviewed the agenda for the March 24, 2026 meeting.
Motion: Approve the March 24, 2026 agenda as presented
RESULT: Pass
MOVER: Commissioner Ramirez
SECONDER: Commissioner Felios
AYES: Chair Martinez , Vice Chair Miller, Commissioners Felios, Martinez, Brinton, Jimenez, Attendance Attendee Name
Present Javier Martinez, Chair
Emily Miller, Vice Chair
Luis Ramirez, Commissioner
Andrew Brinton, Commissioner
Greg Felios, Commissioner
Jesse Jimenez, Commissioner
Absent Salvatore Bozzo, Commissioner
March 24, 2026 Page 2 of 8 Parks and Recreation Commission Special Meeting Minutes
Ramirez
ABSENT: Commissioner Bozzo
7. INTRODUCTIONS
Staff introduced Ryan Osenton, Project Manager with Public Works, who would be presenting the Civic Center Master Plan item.
8. PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Mila Krupa– Community Member
Expressed ongoing concerns about lack of shade at playgrounds, noting increasing temperatures limit usability for children. She encouraged adding natural shade trees in addition to structures and identified Carriage Hill and Sunset Parks as examples.
Malachi Diaz – Community Member
Presented a proposal for a disc golf course with a defined loop layout, signage, and safety guidelines. He proposed a community kickoff event and requested staff collaboration to refine the plan.
9. NEW BUSINESS
9.1 Civic Center Master Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Report Update Presenter Ryan Osenton – Public Works Project Manger
Mr. Osenton presented the Civic Center Master Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Report. He explained that the existing plan was adopted in 2002 and that significant population growth has created increased demand for updated civic facilities.
He reviewed conditions of existing buildings, including City Hall, Wheeler Auditorium, the Senior Center, and the Annex, noting that these facilities are aging and require substantial reinvestment. He explained that one factor prompting the plan update was the cost of major system upgrades, including multi-million-dollar estimates for building systems such as HVAC.
Mr. Osenton outlined proposed redevelopment elements including:
• New City Hall
• Multi-generational facility
• Recreation facility with aquatic components
• Civic park space
He clarified that the police station and library are not part of the redevelopment scope. He also stated that the public comment period for the Environmental Impact Report remains open through Friday.
Public Comment
Alicia – Community Member
Alicia provided comments regarding the pool design and encouraged the City to review facilities in Morgan Hill, specifically noting preference for centrally located stairs and channel features.
March 24, 2026 Page 3 of 8 Parks and Recreation Commission Special Meeting Minutes
She also encouraged the City to consider inclusive programming, referencing Mitchell Park Community Center and Ada’s Café in Palo Alto as examples of spaces that provide opportunities for individuals with developmental disabilities.
In response, staff noted that the project remains at a very early stage and that programming for the buildings has not yet been developed but agreed that the idea was a valuable one to consider.
Commission Discussion
Commissioners asked questions regarding project scope, timeline, and community use.
9.2 Update of Las Animas (Oaks) Restroom Installation
Presenter Matt Jones – Deputy Public Works Director
Matt Jones reported the replacement of a 30-year-old restroom with a modular CXT unit, completed largely in-house over 6.5 months (336 labor hours).
He credited John Souza for leading the project and noted a target opening date of April 10.
Commission Discussion:
Commissioners asked questions regarding:
• the anticipated installation timeline
• long-term maintenance requirements
• durability and performance of modular restroom units
• how the new facility will improve park usability and accessibility Staff responded that the selected unit type has performed well at other locations and is expected to provide a reliable long-term solution for park users.
9.3 Discussion and Recommendation Closure of El Roble Tennis Courts Presenter John Doughty – Public Works Director / Staff Liaison Mr. Doughty stated that the El Roble courts are in extremely poor condition and described them as unsafe and no longer playable. He noted ongoing complaints from the public and stated that the courts present liability concerns.
He explained that repair is not feasible and recommended closure and eventual removal, with the possibility of relocating courts to a more visible and appropriate area.
Public Comment
Allison Robinson – Community Member
Ms. Robinson emphasized the importance of maintaining recreational space and stated that local families already lack access to sufficient courts.
She encouraged the City to replace or repurpose the courts rather than eliminate them and suggested basketball or pickleball as alternatives.
Commission Discussion
March 24, 2026 Page 4 of 8 Parks and Recreation Commission Special Meeting Minutes
Commissioners discussed safety concerns, liability, and potential future improvements, including replacement options such as basketball or pickleball courts.
Motion: Close the El Roble tennis courts due to safety concerns MOVER: Vice Chair Miller
SECONDER: Commissioner Ramirez
AYES: Vice Chair Miller, Commissioners Felios, Jimenez, Ramirez NAYES: Chair Martinez, Commissioner Brinton
ABSENT: Commissioner Bozzo
RESULT: Motion Passed (4–2)
9.4 Discussion and Recommendation on Potential Reopening of the Wayland and Hanna Parking Lots
Staff presented background regarding the continued closure of the Hanna and Wayland side parking lots at Las Animas Park. The presentation included discussion of prior Council direction, safety concerns, operational challenges, ADA-related issues, pavement and lighting conditions, and neighborhood impacts.
Staff explained that the Hanna Street area had previously been barricaded in advance of July 4 due to concerns about fireworks and other problematic activities. Staff also explained that the Wayland lot is a unique site adjacent to a planned unit development and has generated recurring concerns from nearby residents.
Public Comment
Mario Maciel – Community Member
Mr. Maciel, a long-time Gilroy resident living adjacent to the parking lots, expressed opposition to reopening them. He stated that nearby residents experience ongoing impacts related to crime, homelessness, and disruptive behavior. He referenced past incidents affecting his household and emphasized that the park should remain a safe and positive asset for the neighborhood.
Joe Pagoaga – Community Member
Mr. Pagoaga stated that he moved to the neighborhood during a time when significant issues were occurring at the Wayland parking lot, which impacted his quality of life. He noted that he works in park operations and is familiar with similar challenges. He shared that nearby residents remain concerned and referenced a letter submitted by a neighbor who was unable to attend.
Letter read by Joe Pagoaga on behalf of Shannon Glasper – Wayland Court HOA Treasurer – Community Member
Ms. Glasper expressed opposition to reopening the Wayland parking lot, citing ongoing impacts to nearby residents, including safety concerns, disruptive behavior, and reduced quality of life. She emphasized that the burden of these impacts falls primarily on adjacent homeowners and noted that alternative parking options remain available.
Alicia – Community Member
Alicia expressed concerns regarding reopening the Wayland and Hanna parking lots, citing potential impacts to neighborhood safety and quality of life. She encouraged careful consideration of longterm effects and balancing public access with resident well-being.
Daniel Medina – Community Member
March 24, 2026 Page 5 of 8 Parks and Recreation Commission Special Meeting Minutes
Mr. Medina expressed support for reopening the parking lot, citing concerns about loss of public access, aesthetics, and emergency access. He also noted issues related to overflow parking and safety in surrounding areas.
Skip Bloom – Community Member
Mr. Bloom expressed opposition to reopening the Wayland parking lot, citing past issues including noise, disruptive behavior, and safety concerns. He stated that conditions improved following the closure.
Daphne Deithcman – Community Member
Ms. Deitchman expressed support for keeping the parking lots closed, citing personal safety concerns and improved conditions since closure. She noted that reopening could negatively impact neighborhood safety.
Araceli Vaquera – Community Member
Ms. Vaquera expressed concerns about reopening the Wayland parking lot, citing prior negative impacts to neighborhood safety and quality of life. She supported maintaining the closure and prioritizing resident well-being.
Commission Discussion
Commissioners discussed the tradeoffs between neighborhood impacts and public access, as well as safety, enforcement, emergency access, parking demand, condition of the lots, possible future resurfacing, lighting, and the need for broader community input.
Motion: Recommended City Council keep the Hanna and Wayland parking lots at Las Animas Veterans Park closed pending further evaluation and community input MOVER: Vice Chair Emily Miller
SECONDER: Commissioner Luis Ramirez
AYES: Chair Martinez , Vice Chair Miller, Commissioners Felios, Martinez, Brinton, Jimenez, Ramirez
ABSENT: Commissioner Bozzo
RESULT: Motion Passed Unanimously (6–0)
9.5 Update on Maintenance Efforts at Los Arroyos Park
Presenter Matt Jones – Deputy Public Works Director
Mr. Jones provided an update on maintenance and sidewalk repair efforts, noting a more targeted and proactive approach due to staffing and operational constraints. He reported that staff have been identifying and addressing trip hazards in phases, prioritizing high-use areas, including a location near the KinderCare preschool.
Commissioners asked questions about prioritization, long-term maintenance, and how staffing levels affect the pace of repairs.
9.6 Discussion and Possible Action to Affirm Formal Parks and Recreations Commission Tabling
March 24, 2026 Page 6 of 8 Parks and Recreation Commission Special Meeting Minutes
Staff introduced the item regarding Parks and Recreation Commission participation in community outreach efforts, including opportunities for Commissioners to engage with the public through tabling and event attendance.
Staff explained that participation in community events provides an opportunity for Commissioners to connect directly with residents, share information about parks and programs, and gather feedback from the community.
Staff also discussed the possibility of coordinating logistics for tabling, including staffing, materials, and scheduling, and emphasized the importance of ensuring consistent messaging and representation when participating in public events.
Commission Discussion
Commissioners discussed:
• interest in participating in community events and outreach efforts • the value of engaging directly with residents to better understand community needs • opportunities to increase visibility of the Commission and its role • coordination with staff to identify appropriate events and expectations for participation Commissioners expressed general support for increased outreach and indicated interest in participating in future events as opportunities arise.
Direction to Staff
The Commission provided general direction to staff:
• identify upcoming events suitable for Commission participation • provide additional information regarding logistics and expectations • coordinate future opportunities for outreach and engagement No formal action was taken.
10. OLD BUSINESS
10.1 NONE
11. DEPARTMENT UPDATE
11.1 Public Works Park Maintenance and Operations Updates Staff provided updates on ongoing park maintenance efforts, including repairs to park infrastructure and addressing safety-related issues such as damaged amenities and general upkeep.
Staff noted that maintenance work continues across multiple park locations and is prioritized based on safety, usage, and available resources.
11.2 Recreation Division Updates
Staff provided updates on recreational programming and community activities within the park system.
Staff discussed ongoing and upcoming programs and noted continued efforts to provide opportunities for community engagement through park-based activities.
March 24, 2026 Page 7 of 8 Parks and Recreation Commission Special Meeting Minutes
11.3 Parks CIP Updates
Staff provided updates on current and upcoming park-related projects, including coordination and progress on improvements discussed throughout the meeting.
Staff noted that project timelines and priorities continue to be evaluated based on available funding and operational capacity.
12. COMMISSIONER PARK REPORTS AND COMMENTS
Commissioners provided updates regarding park conditions, recent site visits, and community feedback.
Commissioner Jesse Jimenez shared observations related to park conditions and noted the importance of ongoing maintenance to address issues before they become larger concerns.
Vice Chair Emily Miller discussed recent community interactions and emphasized the importance of maintaining clean, safe, and accessible park spaces.
Commissioner Luis Ramirez provided observations regarding park usage and noted continued activity at various park locations. He emphasized the importance of maintaining amenities such as restrooms, lighting, and seating areas.
Commissioners also discussed:
• general park conditions across multiple locations
• maintenance needs and response times
• safety-related concerns, including lighting and trip hazards • the importance of maintaining high-quality park facilities for the community Commissioners acknowledged recent maintenance efforts and emphasized the importance of continued communication with staff regarding park conditions and improvements.
13. DIRECTOR’S REPORT
John Doughty provided updates on ongoing projects and coordination efforts within the Parks and Recreation Department.
Mr. Doughty reported that a fully executed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for the Story Walk at San Ysidro Park has been received. Staff noted that coordination with the school district and final site logistics are ongoing, and installation is anticipated in May.
He also discussed opportunities to align the project rollout with upcoming community events, including Party in the Park at San Ysidro Park, to enhance community engagement and visibility.
14. FUTURE COMMISSIONER INISTIATED ITEMS
Commissioner Jesse Jimenez asked about the appropriate process for bringing forward future discussion items and whether commissioner-initiated topics should be included under this section.
Staff clarified that this section is intended for identifying future agenda items and that coordination with staff would be needed to schedule items for upcoming meetings.
Commissioners also discussed the value of including a more structured opportunity on the agenda for Commissioner report-outs, including participation in meetings, events, and other related activities.
March 24, 2026 Page 8 of 8 Parks and Recreation Commission Special Meeting Minutes
Staff indicated that adjustments to the agenda format could be considered to better capture Commissioner updates and feedback.
Commissioners also discussed follow-up related to the disc golf proposal, and staff noted that additional review and coordination may be needed before bringing the item back for future consideration.
15. ADJOURNMENT
Meeting ended at 8:38 pm