The Commercial Serve Permit Ad Hoc Committee in Encinitas on Jan. 16 discussed changes to how the city will issue commercial surf-school permits, moving to longer agreements and adding objective safety measures and enforcement tools.

Dave Knapp, director of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Arts, told the committee the council asked staff to consider longer permits to give surf operators business stability. "The agreement that we went through through the RFQ process was meant to be a 1 year plus 1 year agreement," Knapp said, then outlined options including a 3-year initial permit with a 2-year extension or a 3+3 model. Committee members and local instructors generally favored a 3+2 approach as a balance between certainty and oversight.

The committee and staff focused heavily on making the RFQ (request for qualifications) and scoring rubric more objective and safety-focused. Julie Gilliam and staff walked the group through the draft rubric, which would check required documents (business registration, insurance) and weight a school’s safety record and "good standing" heavily in scoring. Commission member Kimball, who researched other cities’ approaches, said a five-year effective term (3+2) is common and allows operators to invest in their business while providing periodic review points.

Marine safety lead Chief Josh Gordon presented a detailed safety plan that would be incorporated into the RFQ and into daily operations. The plan would require instructors to be 18 or older, hold current CPR/AED and first-aid certification, and complete a documented surf-instruction safety class. Gordon said instructors would carry a city-issued instructor card demonstrating completion of required training and that lifeguards and marine-safety supervisors would have the authority to stop work when conditions exceed safe limits. "If conditions exceed the ability of the least capable student, instruction shall immediately stop," Gordon said.

Gordon also proposed objective operational controls: daily student rosters or an app for check-in; emergency-contact and signed liability waivers on site; a maximum general-instruction ratio of 3 students to 1 instructor; no more than 30 students in the water for a single organization at one time (staff discussed lowering the number to 20 under the proposed safety thresholds); and mandatory reductions to ratios when conditions (crowding, visibility, side drift) warrant.

To make enforcement and follow-up more data-driven, staff outlined a QR-code system lifeguards would use to record infractions or safety incidents in real time. Those time-stamped reports would be routed to Parks staff and the surf school, creating a documented record used in future RFQ scoring. Gordon said the system would be used to identify trends over a season or multiple years, not to punish a single shortcoming.

Operators raised practical concerns about implementation: many hire instructors close to or during the summer season, and staff acknowledged the need for convenient midseason certification options. The committee discussed a "lead instructor" model that would allow a certified lead to supervise newer hires while the city offers periodic (for example weekly or biweekly) training sessions so newly hired instructors can be certified quickly.

Color-coded high-visibility rash guards were confirmed as a requirement to help lifeguards visually identify permitted instructors and students. Operators asked whether the city could offer a bulk-purchase option or piggyback on junior-lifeguard purchasing to reduce cost; staff said they would explore options.

On site maximums, staff reviewed prior council direction and explained there is not a precise mathematical formula for allocations; instead staff considered water conditions, parking and historical use when assigning per-location caps. The committee discussed contentious examples such as Beacons (where operators protested very small split zones) and Swami's (where some operators prefer 20 per-time caps). Staff proposed treating large noncommercial beach camps (for example the YMCA) under a separate MOU that would set distinct "in-water" participant caps and "on-beach" totals.

No formal vote was taken; the ad hoc committee asked staff to draft a consolidated package (3+2 permit term recommended by several members, the RFQ rubric, safety plan, and location maximums/contingency guidance) for public review and to return in mid-February for final edits before council consideration.

Operators speaking during oral communications welcomed clearer rules but urged attention to on-the-ground practicability. Cruz Morales, owner of Buenasolas at Moonlight Beach, said he appreciated a process that gave ‘‘every school…a high standard’’ but cautioned against rules that shut new entrants out. "The beaches are public and not owned by 1 single individual," Morales said.

The committee emphasized it seeks to raise safety and accountability while helping local operators succeed. Staff will refine definitions (for example, what constitutes an "infraction"), pilot the lifeguard reporting form, and produce draft language for the RFQ and MOU options for the YMCA and other outlier programs before returning to the ad hoc committee.