El Mirage reviews systemwide parks master plan; council presses on maintenance, security and costs

El Mirage held a council work session in Council Chambers to review a draft Parks and Recreation Systemwide Master Plan and a linked strategic plan that contains 44 recommended actions. Parks and Recreation Director Sean opened the presentation and said the document is a community‑rooted roadmap rather than a commitment to immediate projects or funding.

The master plan, developed with A 110% Consulting and other subconsultants, inventories 14 park locations and measures park acres per 1,000 residents. Consultant Jamie Sabat summarized the level‑of‑service analysis and said the city currently provides about 1.76 acres per 1,000 people, short of the city’s stated benchmark of 5 acres per 1,000. The report estimates a current acreage deficit of roughly 115.9 acres and a projected deficit of about 145.9 acres by 2050 under the study’s population assumptions.

Why it matters: the plan packages strategic priorities and specific actions staff can use to guide future budgets and capital planning. Staff emphasized the plan is intended to inform decisions — not to authorize projects or spending — and proposed a mix of short‑, mid‑ and long‑term actions tied to prioritization and resource requirements.

Council members focused questions on three recurring issues. First, maintenance and safety: councilors said several neighborhood parks lack lighting and appear poorly maintained; staff confirmed an effort to document maintenance capacity, implement a computerized maintenance management system and add hardwired lighting at sites where cameras are installed. Sean said the city plans to add cameras at four additional park locations in the current fiscal year and to pair lighting with those camera installations.

Second, partnerships and service delivery: staff flagged existing intergovernmental agreements (IGAs) — including an IGA with the school district — and noted the YMCA holds a preferred position for some recreation programs. Council asked whether the IGA is current; staff replied it is and will be updated this year. Staff also described options to formalize a partnership with the Desert Kings youth baseball club to increase field use and revenue.

Third, cost and scope questions: council members pressed on Basin Park concept costs, including estimates for restroom facilities and parking. The consultant said cost figures were developed by construction estimators with Arizona‑specific escalation assumptions (including a 4% per‑year escalation in some baselines) and projected amenity costs through 2026–2028. The consultant acknowledged some line items appeared high and offered to provide a deeper cost review in a future work session and during the city’s capital planning process.

Community engagement: the presentation described a yearlong engagement effort that included workshops and surveys. Staff said the statistically valid community survey returned 420 responses, with additional engagement compiled in supplements. A council member challenged how results represented the original town site; staff pointed to a geographic distribution map in the report that staff said shows representation across neighborhoods.

Other specifics noted in the presentation included an estimated recurring cost of about $10,000 a year for a basic recreation management/registration system, action items to formalize youth advisory and adopt‑a‑park programs, and recommendations to evaluate developer partnership opportunities for underserved areas.

What happens next: staff said the master plan and its supplements (executive summary, engagement summary, maps and strategic worksheet) are living documents and pledged to return with more detailed cost information and any requested refinements. No formal adoption or funding decisions were taken at the work session.