Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Finance Parks Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parks commission backs revised user‑fee schedule, eases community‑garden change and lowers large‑event deposit
Summary
The Costa Mesa Parks and Community Services Commission voted unanimously to send a revised parks user‑fee schedule to City Council, approving catch‑up increases while setting the park rental security deposit for events over 50 attendees at $200 and postponing changes to community garden fees.
Get email alerts on the Municipal Finance Parks Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Costa Mesa Parks and Community Services Commission voted unanimously June 11 to forward a revised parks user‑fee schedule to the City Council after commissioners negotiated two last‑minute changes.
The commission’s recommendation asks council to adopt a consolidated fee schedule that largely updates rates not adjusted since 2019 — staff and the consultant said regional inflation and increases in labor costs justify a roughly 30% catch‑up on many recreation and facility fees. The commission approved the schedule with two amendments: hold community‑garden fees unchanged for now, and set the refundable park rental security deposit for gatherings of more than 50 people at $200 (the staff proposal had been $300).
Consultant Terry Madson said the proposed increases are intended as a corrected baseline rather than a new revenue strategy: “If the city had applied standard annual inflationary adjustments since 2019, many of these fees would be roughly where we propose today,” Madson said. Staff also highlighted small or no changes to youth programming and senior aquatics to limit impacts on vulnerable users.
Vice Chair Wright, who moved the recommendation, framed the update as a modest step to stabilize services and reduce the need for deeper service cuts later. “Seventeen percent cost recovery is too low for a decade of flat fees,” Wright said, arguing the update helps protect programming while continuing to favor residents and nonprofits.
Commissioners debated nonresident multipliers, sports‑user rates and deposit levels before endorsing a motion that Dor(n) Parker seconded. Commissioners emphasized additional follow‑up: a request that staff undertake targeted outreach to sports user groups and a commitment to re‑examine certain fees within six months, including fly‑field permits and other high‑use facilities.
Outcome and next steps: The commission’s 7–0 recommendation will be incorporated into a citywide master fee schedule for City Council consideration on the August 4 agenda. Staff estimated the net fiscal effect could be roughly in the low‑to‑mid six‑figures if participation remains steady; the consultant described that as an informed estimate rather than a guaranteed projection.
Votes and formal action: The commission recorded a unanimous vote to forward the amended fee schedule to council. The motion text as recorded by the commission: approve the parks and recreation proposed user‑fee increases as presented with two changes — set the park rental fee deposit for groups over 50 people to $200 and do not increase community garden fees at this time. The motion carried 7–0.
The commission also directed staff to pursue additional community engagement with sports user groups, return with a follow‑up on community gardens after the evaluation team’s work, and to monitor program participation in the coming year to report any unexpected revenue or participation shifts.

