Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Recreation Centers Opportunity Fund topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council delays Opportunity Fund allocations after questions about equity and unspent rec-center balances
Summary
After a staff presentation on FY27 recreation center budgets and the Come Play Outside program, councilmembers criticized Opportunity Fund scoring and unspent rec-center balances and asked Parks and Recreation to return with a spending and re-scoring plan; staff targeted June 29 for the follow-up.
City staff presented the proposed fiscal year 2027 recreation center fund budgets, a $555,000 Opportunity Fund allocation plan and the 2025 Come Play Outside program report to the San Diego City Council on June 16. The presentation highlighted revenue and expenditures across 62 recreation center funds, a projected FY27 recreation center revenue of about $5.4 million, and an anticipated FY26 ending balance just over $9.7 million.
Deputy Director Sarah Razzo told the council the Opportunity Fund committee identified 14 sites targeted to receive a baseline allocation of $85,000 each, for a total Opportunity Fund distribution of $555,000, and described the committee’s scoring methodology that factors rec-center fund balances, proximity to communities of concern and presence of aquatic facilities. Program Equity Manager Salome Martinez summarized Come Play Outside outcomes and said the program reached tens of thousands of participants and drew more than $2.1 million in contributions in 2025.
Several councilmembers, led by Councilmember Moreno, challenged staff on why District 8 sites received relatively small Opportunity Fund allocations while some rec centers in other districts appeared to carry substantial unspent balances. Moreno said the allocation left her district “left behind” and asked why centers were not spending existing fund balances to support programming, citing a $302,000 balance at one facility and a $34,000 invoice for a requested scoreboard.
Parks staff acknowledged the department had not fully expended some rec-center balances and attributed the variation to the presence of other funding sources — notably philanthropic contributions — and to timing and operational issues. Andy Fields (Parks staff) said the department was aware of specific facility needs and working with local groups on capital fixes. Sarah Razzo said the Opportunity Fund committee focused on sites whose recreation center fund balances were less than the $85,000 baseline.
After extended debate, the council directed Parks staff to return with a plan that outlines how rec-center fund balances will be spent down, an analysis of how Opportunity Fund scoring would change if balances had been spent as intended, and options that could include known incoming revenue (such as a separately scheduled $100,000 Polo Fields payment). The council president and multiple members asked staff to redocket the item for a follow-up discussion by June 29 so that allocations would be settled before the July 1 fiscal-year start.
No final reallocation was approved at the meeting; staff committed to returning with a clearer spending and implementation plan and improved communication with council offices about program and capital needs.
