The river! This is the big topic of the week.
Background:
We’ve been destroying the river the last few years.
The basic problem is overuse. This is a photo from a 2023 parks presentation:
That is a LOT of people.
To get specific, overuse causes three basic problems:
1. Safety: it’s super hot and people get very drunk.
That’s a dangerous set-up for heat stroke, falling on rocks, getting into fights, and accidental drowning.
2. The environment: the river gets destroyed.
This is also from the 2023 presentation:
This is from the 2024 presentation:
and
It’s all of the litter, and all of the repeated trampling of the banks, and the erosion of the aquatic wild rice and habitats for endangered species. It’s all bad.
3. The cost.
City staff really haven’t even brought up the price tag in the past few years, because the litter, damage to river, and lack of safety were so off the rails.
But of course, all solutions require people, and people’s labor costs money. So this is looming.
…
Solutions
The 2023 season was so bad that Council realized we need to do something. So in 2024, we passed a can ban. Summer 2024 was the first implementation.
But it did not go well. Basically, we couldn’t enforce it because we were so overrun with crowds and safety concerns. Here’s my write up of the situation last year.
So this spring, Council cautiously agreed to try Managed Access for 2025.
That means this:
around Rio Vista and the falls.
Everyone thinks these fences are very ugly and sad! They’re not wrong. But I’m going to make the case that the fences are a good first step. It is a work in progress.
Basically, the falls, swimming pool, and tennis courts at Rio Vista were fenced off. In order to access them, you had to walk to one of the three entrances:
On weekends and holidays, those entrances were staffed. They’d check to make sure you weren’t bringing in anything banned, like alcohol or a bunch of styrofoam plates.
On the big holiday weekends – Memorial Day, 4th of July, and Labor Day – they also closed off Cheatham street altogether:
They also increased staffing. There were at least ten more employees just to staff the entrances and exits on weekends and holidays. There are a lot of hands on deck, picking up trash, monitoring situations, and available for emergencies:
It’s a really big operation.
…
What does the public think?
At citizen comment for the workshop, three people spoke. I think they are all very involved in river clean-up efforts.
Major themes:
- Fences significantly reduced the size of the crowds
- Fences significantly reduced the amount of trash in the river
- Fences significantly protected the riparian zones of the river, ie the wild rice and other environmental spots.
- There is more work to do. There was still a ton of litter.
- Let’s look at places that have done this well – for example, Copenhagen has a sustainable tourism program. Tourists can get perks if they pick up litter or take public transportation.
….
What does city staff say?
Litter started off rough, at the beginning of the summer.
Fences were put up at the end of May. Then:
Looking good!
And some data:
Note: July was much rainier and less-hot than usual. The 4th of July was pretty much rained out (while the tragedy was unfolding in Kerr County and elsewhere). So it wasn’t just strictly the fences.
You know these cute little litter boats?
They track how much trash gets collected in them:
…
Here’s how city staff summarized the summer:
More good than bad!
Did visitors just go to a different part of the river?
Staff said no, they did not see an increased number of problems upstream or downstream from Rio Vista. It seems like everyone wants to be at the falls.
(It could still happen after a few years, of course. But it has not happened yet.)
…
Overall, everything seems optimistic!
That is my personal belief, too – that this year, things were less dangerous and destructive than they’ve been in the past.
…
So that’s 2025. What about the future?
Here are the big questions for Council today:
1. Do they want to keep fencing off Rio Vista in the future? (ie “Managed Access”)
2. Do they want to start charging out-of-towners for river access?
Let’s take these one at a time.
The fencing.
Another angle:
Everyone hates the big, bulky chain link look. Including me!
Can we at least make it look a little nicer?
Maybe!
Staff is not proposing that we put up permanent fencing. This would only go up between Memorial Day and Labor Day.
Council questions:
Q: Would we rent or buy the prettier fencing?
A: We’d buy it. It would cost about $75K. Renting the fences this past summer was roughly $15K.
Q: People were cranky about the tennis courts being inside the fencing . Can we find a way to make them easier to access?
A: Yes, we can definitely explore this for next year.
Bottom line: Does Council want to continue with the fences?
Mostly yes. Alyssa and Amanda are both a little squirrelly on the question, but they’re more yes than no.
Note: I am a hard yes. You only get one river, and overuse will kill your river. This is a dead on, textbook-example of a Tragedy of the Commons.
….
2. Should we charge admission?
The problem is that we’re running a giant operation here, all summer long, and it requires a lot of staff. Furthermore, it mostly isn’t San Marcos residents using the river.
This is an old slide from 2024:
(Zartico is a company that tracks cell phone data. We paid them to track people on the river and tell us where people went afterwards. Yes, it’s a teeny bit creepy.)
The point being, about 1/3 of the park visitors were local, and 2/3 were in from out of town. Here’s 4th of July from 2024:
More from San Marcos, but still under 50%.
No one is proposing that we charge admission to San Marcos residents. But should we charge out-of-town visitors an admission fee?
What does everyone else do?
Lots of cities charge fees:
….
And so now, San Marcos?
City staff is recommending yes, we should start charging.
Here is what they propose to council:
What does Council think?
Jane: we should start our season earlier than Memorial day.
Answer: That just costs even more.
Alyssa: How would residents get a river pass?
Answer: You’d sign up in person or online. Like getting a library card. It would be a physical hard copy.
Alyssa: One per household or one per person?
Answer: Per person.
Alyssa: Even kids?
Answer: I mean, you all are council. You tell us what you want.
Amanda: I have strong reservations about this. The river is a natural resource. I don’t like the idea of commodifying it. I don’t like the precedent it sets. New Braunfels probably started out only charging a little, and now it’s $25 to set out a blanket. And their river is still trashed.
Jane: Our out-of-town visitors aren’t spending money here. They’re not contributing to the tax base that pays for these parks. I don’t want to charge residents, but I’m okay charging out-of-town guests. They need to share the cost.
She’s referring to things like this (from 2024)
Saul: How much revenue would this bring in?
Answer: We have no idea. It’s hard to even figure out how many people go to the river.
Let’s break it into categories
1. San Marcos Residents
No one is proposing that we charge San Marcos residents. But there’d have to be some sort of free pass system.
Every time you add a layer of inconvenience, you trip up vulnerable residents. (Think: undocumented community members who don’t feel safe signing up, or harried single mothers who keep forgetting to sign up. Etc.) Alyssa and Amanda voice some of these concerns.
2. People just outside the city limits.
What about people who live nearby? Like you have a San Marcos mailing address, but you’re not officially in city limits?
Jane, Shane, Saul, Matthew: They should get a reduced admission price.
Alyssa, Amanda, Lorenzo: they should be free.
3. Actual out-of-town visitors?
Lorenzo: Yes. We should charge them.
Jane: Yes. Same.
Alyssa: I don’t know. This needs more work.
Amanda: Kids at least should be free.
Saul: I agree on the free kids.
Matthew: I’m fine with what staff proposed.
Shane: [never turns on his microphone, I have no idea]
Alyssa: Who’s gonna pay $100 for a season pass? Come on. This needs work.
Fair point, Alyssa.
Overall: It’s a little hard to follow, but I think this is where everyone lands:
Yes, charge out-of-town guests: Jane, Lorenzo, Shane, Saul, Matthew
Maybe. We’re not sure yet: Alyssa, Amanda
No one is a hard no.
What do I think?
I’m on the fence. I hate the increase in bureaucracy and bookkeepping, and I wish for a state where we just properly funded parks and local governments. (See also: socialized health care is much cheaper than private insurance because it’s so much less paperwork, bureaucracy, and red tape.)
I also hate the idea that everyone on the river would have to keep a plastic card on a lanyard around their neck.
On the other hand, here we are – with actual bills to pay and actual rivers to save, people to keep safe – and that all costs money.
Maybe the river pass can be made into a little bracelet?
…….
Lorenzo: can we hold an evening workshop instead of a 3 pm workshop, so that more residents can attend?
Everyone agrees this is a good idea.
Bottom line: City staff will bring back more rate models and Council will have another workshop. But it looks like the writing is on the wall. I think it’s likely.
…..
One last workshop topic.
Paid parking at the Lion’s Club
We’re midway through a pilot year of paid parking at the Lion’s Club. It’s free for all residents, but you do have to register. (Register here!)
How’s it been working?
Ok, so it just started.
A few notes:
- They have not yet been ticketing anyone, but they’re about to start. (Apparently there have been problems with Texas State students. Students can park there, as residents who want to use the parks, but not to go attend class at Texas State. I have no idea how they can tell who is doing what.)
- “ETJ” stands for extra-territorial jurisdiction, ie the people who live nearby the city, but not in the actual city limits.
The main question: do we want to charge people less if they live in the ETJ? On the one hand, they don’t pay property taxes. On the other hand, they do come to San Marcos to go shopping, and so they pay sales tax.
How do we want to handle people who live close to San Marcos?
Charge a reduced fee: Matthew, Shane, Jane
Keep it free: Alyssa, Amanda, Saul, Lorenzo
There’s some minor quibbling about what “close” should mean. Anyone in who lives in SMCISD? Anyone with a San Marcos mailing address? some third option? I think they settled on SMCISD.
The San Marxist 