Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the City Priorities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
South Pasadena council narrows FY 2026–27 priorities to urban forestry plan, traffic controls and community services
Summary
At a special study session, the South Pasadena City Council identified three new priorities for staff to phase into the FY 2026–27 budget: an urban forestry management plan, upgrades and traffic-mitigation measures (including feasibility of speed cameras), and a data-driven review of community services and events. Council asked staff to phase costs and return with implementation steps.
South Pasadena’s City Council met in a special study session and narrowed new FY 2026–27 priorities to three items the body asked staff to phase into the coming budget cycle: (1) develop and begin an urban forestry management plan, (2) pursue upgrades to traffic control devices and traffic‑mitigation measures (including assessing speed‑camera feasibility and enforcement), and (3) evaluate community services and events for access and cost effectiveness.
Alma Medina, assistant to the city manager and the session’s presenter, framed the exercise as a way to move from abstract goals to outcomes staff could reasonably deliver. “The point is to find alignment around a small set of priorities that staff can realistically do,” Medina said, urging council members to focus on achievable results.
Council members described what success would look like for each priority. One member said the urban forestry plan was a commitment tied to the city’s tree‑ordinance work and should be budgeted and begun even if it becomes a multi‑year effort. On traffic, council members pointed to recurring complaints about vehicle speeds and pedestrian safety; supporters of speed cameras argued they could improve safety and pay for themselves over time, while others cautioned legal challenges and administrative costs could reduce net revenue.
Councilors also prioritized a review of community services and events to better match programming with resident needs. Speakers emphasized gathering usage data (who uses programs and how often), exploring reservation systems for facilities, and coordinating with partners such as schools and nonprofit providers to avoid duplication and improve equity in access.
The session included a brief public comment from a Zoom resident who said coyotes have become a neighborhood safety concern and asked whether wildlife-management expertise could be built into city contracts or budgets. Staff noted animal control contracts (for example, with the Humane Society) and offered to follow up.
On housing, members asked for more council engagement on recent state housing laws and tools to track progress toward the city’s housing‑element commitments. Councilors urged staff to prepare parcel‑level and covenant‑tracking information so the city can demonstrate progress to the California Department of Housing and Community Development and respond to changing statutory requirements.
Staff said the input will inform the FY 2026–27 budget materials and proposed departmental work plans; the three chosen new priorities will be brought back in the budget process with phasing and cost estimates. The special study session adjourned at 8:05 p.m.
