Commission recommends revised aquatics partnership policy to Council, lowers residency threshold for top tier

The Beaches, Parks and Recreation Commission recommended that City Council approve a revised aquatics partnership policy with an amended residency threshold for the top partnership tier.

Staff presented the draft policy, which (as written) created a three-tier partnership structure, clarified definitions for competitive vs. recreational programming, added minimum participation thresholds for in-water activities, required an annual roster-based participant fee (proposed at $5 per participant per year), established a three-strike violation policy and shortened partnership terms to one-year renewable increments. Carrie Lawrence, the department’s program supervisor, summarized the changes and said the third tier was added “to bridge the gap so that it helps reduce the financial strain for organizations that narrowly miss that top tier.”

Public commenters included Mark Matheson and other representatives of the San Clemente Aquatics team. Matheson described the organization’s long-standing contribution to city pools and said the proposed 90 percent residency threshold (in the draft) would “punish [the club] for its success in drawing swimmers from other neighboring clubs,” adding that “a nonresident does not displace a resident.” Speakers urged the commission to preserve resident access while acknowledging the value of large competitive programs that bring events and visitors to the city.

Commission discussion focused on balancing resident access with program viability and pool-space limitations. Staff noted the city has limited pool capacity and currently two senior partners using significant allocations: the San Clemente Aquatics team and the San Clemente Water Polo Club. Commissioners sought a modest adjustment to the residency thresholds to avoid frequent exceptions.

The commission approved an amendment to change the tier-1 residency requirement from 90 percent to 88 percent. A separate amendment to reduce the proposed $5-per-participant annual fee to $4 failed on a roll-call vote (three in favor, five opposed). The vote on the fee reduction was recorded in the transcript as: Commissioner Delagoski — Yes; Vice Chair Garcia — No; Commissioner Grace — No; Commissioner Haskins — Yes; Commissioner Johnson — Yes; Commissioner Khan — No; Commissioner McCain — No; Commissioner Smith — absent; Commissioner Ben North — No. (Transcript spelling of one commissioner’s name varied in the record; article uses the names as recorded at roll call.)

After amendments, the commission moved to recommend the amended policy to City Council for review and approval; that motion passed by voice vote. The commission also asked staff to include the roster and monitoring provisions and to review allocation impacts for pools as part of the department’s upcoming fee study.

The revised policy, as forwarded to Council, keeps a required minimum roster-to-allocation rule and retains an annual participant verification mechanism intended to prevent inflated rosters; staff cautioned that facility revenue does not fully cover operating costs and that a broader fee study is planned. Commissioners asked staff to return with fiscal analysis during the Council review process.

No changes to current allocations were made at the meeting; commissioners noted any reallocation of pool time or further discount changes would be addressed during the fee and allocation review process.