Isla Vista CSD outlines parking enforcement plan, seeks $300,000 loan from county in July

District staff updated the board on a draft parking program intended to reduce hazardous and obstructive parking in Isla Vista and to discourage unnecessary private-vehicle trips.

Jonathan Mayer, the district general manager, said staff are finalizing a plan that would create an in-house parking enforcement unit housed in Public Works and Sustainability. The proposed first-year operating cost is roughly $400,000; staff recommended seeking a one-time loan of $300,000 from an Isla Vista parking mitigation fund held by Santa Barbara County to cover startup costs. Ticket revenue would first replenish the loan and then fund ongoing operations, with staff aiming for a revenue-neutral program over time.

Mayer described the enforcement design as a combination of on-foot enforcement and automated data collection. Staff would deploy license-plate recognition (LPR) on bikes or scooters to record long-duration parking and congestion metrics; on-foot staff would then follow up to issue citations and provide education. Proposed scope includes seven-day coverage, two to four full-time-equivalent enforcement staff, customer service for ticket appeals, outreach and education campaigns before enforcement begins, and coordination with county law enforcement for towing and other legal authorities that the district itself lacks.

Staff said the district will promote alternatives (car-share/co-op, shuttles and transit options, orientation messaging for incoming students and parents) and run an education campaign in fall 2025 with mock tickets and outreach before the enforcement launch. The current timeline calls for: county approval and funding decision in early July; agreement and policy work in late summer and fall; staff hiring and equipment procurement in early 2026; and a program launch in spring 2026.

Board members and public commenters focused on equity and safety concerns. Several speakers asked how the program would affect people living in vehicles, residents who must park for periods longer than 72 hours (medical reasons, car breakdowns, work schedules), and low-income residents. Public commenters asked for safe-parking alternatives, an exemption or hardship-appeal process, and limited enforcement zones for people who lack other options. Staff said multiple safe-parking sites currently exist and that staff will not publish their locations for safety reasons; staff also said the final program design will include processes to address hardship and special cases.

Directors emphasized prioritizing enforcement of high-risk, health-and-safety violations first (blocked driveways, blocked fire hydrants, sidewalk and daylighting obstructions, bus stops and bike lanes) and using education to change behavior. The board heard that state law requires specific remittances from tickets (for example, a statutorily prescribed portion of ticket revenue goes to courts) and that the district will need to contract or purchase ticket-management and online payment systems.

Staff will meet individually with county supervisors before the supervisors July board meeting to request the loan and delegation of limited enforcement authority; the district intends to return to the board with final MOU terms, cost details and an operational design before procurement and hires. No vote was required on the update.

Board members asked staff to clarify enforcement hours, towing procedures, fine structure and training for staff who will perform enforcement. Staff said these operational details remain in design and will be brought back to the board for policy decisions.