Tourism committee advances draft park sponsorship policy and outlines county signage plan

San Benito County’s Tourism Committee reviewed a draft sponsorship policy on March 15 that would let businesses and residents sponsor county parks and programs under a framework of eligibility criteria, formal agreements and annual reporting. Grace, the staff presenter, said the policy is intended to distinguish sponsorships from donations, evaluate community impact, and prevent endorsements by organizations tied to alcohol or adult industries.

The draft would apply to county programs, facilities and events and would require written agreements managed by parks staff. Grace said the policy proposes recognition options ranging from social-media acknowledgments and plaques to naming rights for facilities; major naming rights would be eligible only when the sponsor contributed a large share of the cost (the draft notes a 60%-of-cost threshold for name-right eligibility). She also said sponsorship funds would be tracked and reported annually so the county can evaluate the program’s scope and value.

Public commenters and committee members pressed staff for clarifications. One attendee supported a sponsorship program but urged removing or narrowing the offsite-sponsorship language and focusing recognition on on-site assets such as benches or program underwriting. A committee member asked whether typical examples such as bench dedications would fall under the naming threshold and whether cities’ parks would be covered if they lie inside city limits.

Another commenter suggested raising the threshold to 100% for full naming rights and urged the county to actively solicit sponsors rather than wait for inquiries. Committee members discussed jurisdictional limits, noting some parks cited in the exchange are inside city boundaries and may require city-level approval. The presenter acknowledged those limits and said staff would identify which parks are county-owned and which fall under city jurisdiction.

On procedural next steps, the committee asked staff to prepare redlines and additional guidance on ethical screening, recognition types and thresholds, and to return a revised draft for further committee review. Committee members signaled they intend to forward a refined policy to the Board of Supervisors for adoption after stakeholder feedback; no formal vote tally on the policy was recorded in the transcript.

Committee members also received an update on a countywide tourism signage and branding plan designed to help visitors find local attractions, including Pinnacles National Park and mission sites. Staff described a phased approach, beginning with a modest set of directional/identity signs (staff estimated initial costs in the tens of thousands for a pilot of several signs), consistency of color and branding across jurisdictions, and outreach to partners such as chambers, park partners and Pinnacles representatives.

A staff member encouraged stakeholder participation in design and location selection; the committee asked staff to investigate in-house sign production and to coordinate standards so signs are consistent across cities and county roads. The meeting ended with an announcement that high school student Juliet Nordstrom will present youth feedback about parks at an upcoming Board meeting and with staff asking committee members to submit comments to Gracie ahead of the next revision.

Next steps: staff will prepare a redlined sponsorship policy with clarified thresholds and ethical screening, identify which parks are county-owned versus city-owned for policy scope, and bring the revised policy and a signage‑plan work program back to the committee before referral to the Board of Supervisors.