On the agenda: San Marcos meeting — License Plate Recognition (May 18)

City of San Marcos
Regular Meeting
Parking Advisory Board
May 18th, 2026, 6:00 pm
City Hall: Conference Room
630 E. Hopkins Street
San Marcos, Texas 78666
Please click the link below to join the meeting:
https://teams.microsoft.com/meet/24535978798407?p=JdJt00payu7AzmUW8k
Meeting ID: 245 359 787 984 07
Passcode: ee25bJ3R
The presiding officer for this meeting will be present at the meeting location described above.

I.

Call To Order

II.

Roll Call

III.

Citizen Comment Period:
Persons wishing to participate (speak) during the Citizen Comment portion of the meeting must
email [email protected] prior to 12:00PM the day of the meeting. A call-in number to join by
phone or link to join by a mobile device, laptop or desktop computer will be provided for
participation.
MINUTES
1. Consider, by motion, the approval of regular meeting minutes:
a. April 20, 2026
PRESENTATION ITEMS
1. Presentation from Parking Enforcement on process leading to immobilization of vehicles
REPORT ITEMS
2. Board questions, if any, regarding the monthly reports from enforcement
3. Receive an update on items previously requested from the Communications Department
4. Receive an update on the City Park Paid Parking Pilot Program
DISCUSSION ITEM

5. Discussion on the Downtown Paid Parking Research Committee recommendation and
consideration of a recommendation resolution of a Downtown Parking Benefit District
from the full board at a future meeting
6. Discuss staff and Parking Advisory Board members presenting to outside stakeholders to
get feedback on a Downtown Parking Benefit District recommendation
7. Discussion of proposed amendments to Chapter 82 of the City of San Marcos Code of
Ordinances to ensure all comments from the board were incorporated prior to additional
review.
8. Discussion on the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) parking on N. LBJ drive
ACTION ITEMS

FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
1. Board Members may provide requests for discussion items for a future agenda in accordance
with the board’s approved bylaws. No further discussion will be held related to topics proposed
until they are posted on a future agenda in accordance with the Texas Open Meetings Act.

IV.

QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION WITH PRESS AND PUBLIC. This is an opportunity
for the Press and Public to ask questions related to items on this agenda.

V.

ADJOURNMENT

Notice of Assistance at the Public Meetings
The City of San Marcos is committed to compliance with the American with Disabilities Act.
Reasonable modifications and equal access to communications will be provided upon request. If
requiring Sign Language Interpreters or alternative formats, please give notice at least 2 days (48
hours) before the meeting date. Individuals who require auxiliary aids and services for this meeting
should contact the City of San Marcos ADA Coordinator at 512-393-8000 (voice) or call Texas Relay
Service (TRS) by dialing 7-1-1. Requests can also be faxed to 855-461-6674 or sent by e-mail to
[email protected].
For more information on the Parking Advisory Board please contact Charles Campbell at
[email protected]

PARKING ADVISORY BOARD

MEETING MINUTES
April 20th, 2026

PARKING ADVISORY BOARD
MINUTES

REGULAR MEETING
April 20th, 2026

The Parking Advisory Board convened a regular meeting via Teams online format and in-person on
April 20th, 2026.
I.

Chair, John David Carson called the meeting to order at 6:17 pm.

II.

Board Members in Attendance
Chair John David Carson
Vice Chair Dr. Rosalie Ray
Mayor Jane Hughson
Council Member Matthew Mendoza
Alana Rosenwasser
Ida Miller
Jovan Marin
Gabrielle Moore
Staff Present
Multimodal Parking Initiatives Manager, Charles Campbell
Transit Manager, Amy Finn
Parking Coordinator, Marissa Roldan
Iris Castro, Senior Adm Assistant
City Marshal, Tiffany Williams
Assistant Director of Parks and Recreation, Jessica Ramos

III.

CITIZEN COMMENT PERIOD
There were no citizen comments

MINUTES
1. Consider, by motion, the approval of regular meeting minutes:
a. March 16th , 2026
A motion was made by Ida Miller and seconded by Chair John David Carson to approve and
amend the March 16th meeting minutes noting Ida Miller’s attendance and approval of item
5e1.
The motion was carried by the following vote:

1

PARKING ADVISORY BOARD
For:

6-

Absent

0-

MEETING MINUTES
April 20th, 2026
Chair John David Carson, Vice Chair Dr.
Rosalie Ray, Jovan Marin, Ida Miller, Alana
Rosenwasser, Gabrielle Moore.

REPORT ITEMS
1. Board questions, if any, regarding the monthly reports from enforcement
a. Presented reports that were provided within the Agenda Packet.
b. Board did not have any questions.
2. Receive an update on items previously requested from the Communications
Department
a. No update currently.
b. Board requested that information about Communications Department
items request be passed onto the new Multimodal Parking Initiatives
Manager.
3. Receive an update on the City Park Paid Parking Pilot Program
a. Staff reported that since the additional sign indicating that the City Park
lot is a paid lot has been installed average payment compliance has risen
to approximately 60% from approximately 40%.
b. Staff reported that $307,000 in revenue has been collected since the pilot
program’s implementation.
c. Staff indicated that achieving higher payment compliance rates is made
more difficult by the ratio of non-frequent visitors at City Park.
d. Staff explained that payment compliance is calculated using:
# 𝑜𝑓 𝑃𝑎𝑦𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑠 𝑅𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑑
# 𝑜𝑓 𝑃𝑎𝑦𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑠 𝑅𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑑 + # 𝑜𝑓 𝑇𝑖𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑡𝑠 𝐼𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑒𝑑
4. Present the updated Parking Income Statement
a. Staff presented the income statement noting the information required for
wholistic parking revenue review is not included in the current statement
but has been requested for future statements.
b. Chair clarified that the first “Off-street Parking Fees” row represents the
parking lot off MLK while the second represents the Hutchison St lot.
5. Receive an update from the Downtown Paid Parking Research Committee
a. Chair advised of the following
i. The occupancy report data was collected by city staff and Texas
State Students in February, March, July, August, September,
October, and November.
ii. Chair noted that the parking occupancy assumption is currently
unchanged after the implementation of paid parking and that this
will likely need to be modified for the entire model.
DISCUSSION ITEM
6. Discussion of proposed amendments to Chapter 82 of the City of San Marcos
Code of Ordinances to ensure parking regulation procedures and processes are
fully aligned, including revisions to provide consistency across all parking citation

2

PARKING ADVISORY BOARD

MEETING MINUTES
April 20th, 2026

hearings and appeals and to reflect current operational and technology
capabilities.
a. Staff noted that the mayor’s suggestions are not yet included in this
version of the packet.
b. Board recommended defining failure to respond and setting alternative
to the online payment portal.
c. Mayor recommended defining “oversized vehicle”. Board noted that
definition may already exist and be cited from elsewhere.
d. Board recommended adding “parking” to all sections of level 3 parking
violations.
e. Chair discusses changing requirement to be sent to collections to be 2
tickets that remain unpaid after 90 days instead of just 1 ticket that
remains unpaid after 90 days. Board recommended defining delinquent
ticket and other relevant terms and using them in this section to provide
clarity.
f. Board recommends aligning paid parking collections criteria to the current
booting collections criteria with possible timing and definition amendments.
g. Chair recommends introducing the term of windshield immobilization
without using the term “barnacle”.
h. Board recommends talking about immobilization in more general terms.\
i. Chair John David Carson suggested that citations by mail section is
broadened to increase safety for citations officials by allowing citations to
validly be issued by mail. This notion was seconded by Vice Chair Dr.
Rosalie Ray. Staff recommended that members of the board send
suggestions for draft language.
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION WITH THE PRESS AND PUBLIC
No questions from the press or public
IV.

ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:03pm by Chair John David Carson

Staff Liaison

Board/Commission Chair

Notice of Assistance at the Public Meetings
The City of San Marcos does not discriminate on the basis of disability in the admission or access to its
services, programs, or activities. Individuals who require auxiliary aids and services for this meeting should
contact the City of San Marcos ADA Coordinator at 512-393-8000 (voice) or call Texas Relay Service (TRS)
by dialing 7-1-1. Requests can also be faxed to 512-393-8074 or sent by e-mail to
[email protected]

3

Violation Code

Violation Description

Count of
Violation

201

201 - Parked Overtime

538

201 238

201 - Parked Overtime 238 - Double Parked

2

201 251

201 - Parked Overtime 251 - Backed Into Head-In Angled Parking

1

202

202 - Parked Blocking Bicycle Lane

2

203

203 - Parked in Fire Lane

16

203 240

203 - Parked in Fire Lane 240 - Parked in a Lane of Traffic

1

205

205 - Disabled Parking Violation

26

205 203

205 - Disabled Parking Violation 203 - Parked in Fire Lane

1

208

208 - Large Vehicle Parked in Residential Area

2

209

209 - Parked Within 4' of a Mailbox

3

209 230

209 - Parked Within 4' of a Mailbox 230 - Parked in a No Parking Zone

1

219

6

219 230 240

219
219 -- Parked
Parked Within
Within 30'
30' of
of aa Traffic
Traffic Control
Control Device
Device 230 - Parked in a No Parking Zone 240 - Parked in a Lane
of Traffic

219 242

219 - Parked Within 30' of a Traffic Control Device 242 - Parked Left Side Street/Facing Traffic

1

225

225 - Interfering with Enforcement

13

230

230 - Parked in a No Parking Zone

86

230 242

230 - Parked in a No Parking Zone 242 - Parked Left Side Street/Facing Traffic

2

232

232 - Parked Blocking Crosswalk

1

234

234 - Parked in Loading Zone

5

235

235 - No Parking Zone - RPP

11

236

236 - Wheels over 18" from Curb

2

236 202

236 - Wheels over 18" from Curb 202 - Parked Blocking Bicycle Lane

1

236 202 238

236 - Wheels over 18" from Curb 202 - Parked Blocking Bicycle Lane 238 - Double Parked

1

236 230

236 - Wheels over 18" from Curb 230 - Parked in a No Parking Zone

1

237

237 - Parked Within 15' of Fire Hydrant

5

1

238

238 - Double Parked

22

240

240 - Parked in a Lane of Traffic

2

242

242 - Parked Left Side Street/Facing Traffic

37

242 201

242 - Parked Left Side Street/Facing Traffic 201 - Parked Overtime

1

242 230

242 - Parked Left Side Street/Facing Traffic 230 - Parked in a No Parking Zone

1

243

243 - Parked on Grass

5

245

245 - Parked on Sidewalk

3

247

247 - Oversized Vehicle in Angled Parking

1

248

248 - Parked on Street for Sale or Repair

4

249

249 - Parking in Front/Side Yard or Vacant Lot

4

251

251 - Backed Into Head-In Angled Parking

14

251 225

251 - Backed Into Head-In Angled Parking 225 - Interfering with Enforcement

1

252

252 - Head-In into Back-In Angle Parking

48

Grand Total

872

Month
January '22
February '22
March '22
April '22
May '22
June '22
July '22
August '22
September '22
October '22
November '22
December '22
January '23
February '23
March '23
April '23
May '23
June '23
July '23
Aug '23
September '23
October '23
November '23
December '23
January '24
February '24
March '24
April '24
May '24
June '24
July '24
August '24
September '24
October '24
November '24
December '24
January '25
February '25
March '25
April 25'
May 25'
June 25'
July 25'
August 25'
September 25'
October 25'
November 25'
December 25'
January 26'
February 26'
March 26'
April 26'

Number of Citations Paid

Downtown Parking Citations Issued and Paid
Citations Issued
Percent of citations issued that have been paid
441
42.63%
419
44.63%
588
42.18%
551
47.73%
749
42.32%
904
35.73%
909
32.67%
1012
47.13%
1420
39.08%
1033
50.44%
908
44.38%
903
42.64%
982
37.27%
671
39.79%
997
33.80%
1025
41.17%
994
39.74%
1084
31.73%
1037
36.45%
1090
46.33%
1048
50.48%
896
48.55%
777
46.59%
708
46.75%
854
46.37%
879
44.82%
669
57.25%
527
47.44%
372
53.49%
373
45.84%
461
57.05%
625
41.60%
777
48.78%
710
58.73%
610
60.49%
391
94.63%
383
68.41%
380
61.58%
311
89.71%
752
45.21%
518
75.48%
570
69.12%
554
68.23%
NuPark Data
0.00%
161
16.15%
1491
24.48%
748
53.21%
784
74.36%
670
65.37%
1092
47.89%
1014
65.19%
872
63.88%

188
187
248
263
317
323
297
477
555
521
403
385
366
267
337
422
395
344
378
505
529
435
362
331
396
394
383
250
199
171
263
260
379
417
369
370
262
234
279
340
391
394
378
NuPark Data
26
365
398
583
438
523
661
557

2022
1400

100.00%
90.00%
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%

1200

1000
800
600
400
200
0
January '22 February March '22 April '22
'22
Number of Citations Paid

May '22

June '22

July '22

Citations Issued

August '22 September October November December
'22
'22
'22
'22
Percent of citations issued that have been paid

2023
1400

100.00%

1200

80.00%

1000

800

60.00%

600

40.00%

400

20.00%

200
0

0.00%
January '23 February March '23 April '23
'23
Number of Citations Paid

May '23

June '23

July '23

Citations Issued

Aug '23 September October November December
'23
'23
'23
'23
Percent of citaitons issued that have been paid

2024
1400

100.00%

1200

80.00%

1000

800

60.00%

600

40.00%

400

20.00%

200
0

0.00%
January '24 February March '24 April '24
'24
Number of Citations Paid

May '24

June '24

July '24

Citations Issued

August '24 September October November December
'24
'24
'24
'24
Percent of citations issued that have been paid

2025-2026
100.00%
1400

90.00%

1200

80.00%

70.00%

1000

60.00%
800

50.00%

600

40.00%
30.00%

400

20.00%

200

10.00%

0

0.00%

Number of Citations Paid

Citations Issued

Percent of citations issued that have been paid

Downtown San Marcos Parking
Analysis and Recommendation
City of San Marcos Parking Advisory Board
Working Draft - May 2026

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 1 of 49

Table of Contents
Table of Contents .................................................................................................... 2
Executive Summary................................................................................................. 3
Existing Conditions & Objectives.............................................................................. 5
Downtown Parking Recommendation .....................................................................19
Technology Recommendation ................................................................................31
Parking Management Staffing Recommendation .....................................................46
Implementation Timeline .......................................................................................49

APPENDIX ITEMS:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Downtown Parking Benefit District Map
Downtown Parking Benefit District Rate Table
Occupancy Data
Enforcement Data
Survey Results
Downtown Parking Benefit District Model Exports
Downtown Parking Benefit District Application

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 2 of 49

Executive Summary
The San Marcos Parking Advisory Board recommends that a parking benefit district be
implemented downtown to achieve the following goals:
-

Allow residents and visitors to park for longer without incentivizing additional Universityrelated parking downtown
Better manage parking supply to support downtown businesses
Create a reliable stream of revenue from the private use of the public curb for downtown
improvements
Expand options for downtown business employees to relieve the current exclusively
fine/penalty-based structure creating inequitable hardship

To achieve this, the Parking Advisory Board recommends the procurement and implementation of
new parking technology capable of implementing the following program aspects:
- Three distinct districts:
o A Downtown Core bounded by University Dr. and San Antonio St. to the north and
south and Fredericksburg St. and Lyndon Baines Johnson Dr. (LBJ) to the west and east
o A North of Hopkins area running from Hopkins St. north to Texas State University,
bounded on the west by Moore St. and on the east by CM Allen Pkwy
o A South of Hopkins area that extends south from Hopkins to one block south of the
Moore St / North St / San Antonio St intersection along San Antonio to Commanche,
down Commanche to Martin Luthur King Jr. Blvd (MLK), over to Guadalupe St, down
Guadalupe St to Cheatham St, and over to CM Allan Pkwy
- The Downtown Core and the North of Hopkins area are recommended to have 30
minutes of free time during weekdays, while the South of Downtown zone would allow
60 minutes of free time. During weekend and evening hours, all areas would expand to 60
free minutes.
- Residents that register their parking session would receive an additional 60 minutes
free parking time for a total of two-free hours (the same as current policy) in all areas
excluding the North and Core zones during the weekday peak when University demand
requires additional restriction.
- Both physical meters and app-based payments
- Permits be sold to downtown businesses for employees
- The ability for businesses to validate/provide discounted parking
- Free parking downtown within the regulated time limits for economically disadvantaged
residents, validated by existing City support programs, and all Accessible parking spaces
The PAB recommends starting the initial price (after the applicable grace period / free time) at
$1/hr. Within the Core, additional hours would be $2, up to a maximum of 8 hours. The PAB also

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 3 of 49

recommends charging for overnight parking to dissuade downtown residents from using on-street
parking for long-term personal vehicle storage.
If council approves, we recommend implementing the Paid Parking District in Fall 2027 after a softlaunch over the summer, in conjunction with the start of the Texas State University academic year.
[Executive Summary to be expanded to cover Summarize Existing Conditions, Parking Benefit
District Structure, Projected Revenues/Expenses, and Concluding Rationales for overall policy
recommendation]

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 4 of 49

Existing Conditions & Objectives
For more than thirty years, residents, visitors, and downtown businesses – and their employees –
have expressed frustration with parking in downtown San Marcos. Even non-drivers have
complained about the abundant use of the public curb for private vehicles without sufficient
management. And, while there has long been a public outcry to ‘do something about downtown
parking,’ there has not been a consensus on the problem(s) or how to address them.
Before evaluating solutions, the Parking Advisory Board (PAB) endeavored to catalogue the variety
of issues – whether perceived or substantiated – that have been expressed by frustrated downtown
goers. This section first reviews survey data from 2018 and 2025. It then turns to empirical data,
first on enforcement and then on utilization and turnover. The data are drawn from both past
studies as well as more recent updates from 2024 – 2026 by City staff and Texas State University
students. Finally, it ends with a synthesis of the primary issues with downtown on-street parking
and pairs each issue with a Guiding Objective used by the Parking Advisory Board to derive
proposed recommendations.

Public Survey
Survey Context
Despite its seemingly dull nature, parking in America has become an emotional, triggering topic for
many. Anecdote and personal experience often obscure consideration of systematic issues,
especially those that challenge the status quo. The car-dominated landscape of contemporary
development can also create an impractical expectation for parking in downtowns and other
compact, walkable areas. Desires for convenient parking often ignore the spatial realities of
historic urban cores built before the dominance of automotive transportation. If the city were to
provide the kind of expansive free parking found in sprawling suburban areas, geometry would
simply dictate the destruction of places like downtown San Marcos. And yet, that experience
colors perspectives and desires. It is therefore understandably difficult for the average driver to
refrain from demanding abundant, free parking at all times and places.
Acknowledging the resulting difficulty for a survey to effectively guide parking policy, the Parking
Advisory Board ultimately favors a data-driven approach that is principally informed by experts and
best practices to assess the performance of downtown parking and develop solutions. That said,
the PAB is not dismissive of the experiences, challenges, and hardships of residents, visitors, and
employees accessing the Downtown by personal vehicle. There are valuable insights to be
captured to better inform parking management policy by surveying the opinions of stakeholders
and residents.
Prior to developing recommendations for downtown parking, the PAB requested that City staff
furnish the most recent downtown parking survey(s) for review and conduct two new ones: one

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 5 of 49

open to downtown business owners (called the “Stakeholder” survey hereinafter) and another
open to the general public (called the “Community” survey hereinafter).
2018 DASM Stakeholder Parking Survey
It appears the most “recent” prior stakeholder survey focused primarily on downtown parking was
conducted in 2018 by the Downtown Association of San Marcos (DASM) shortly after the City first
launched License Plate Recognition (LPR) enforcement. That survey collected 46 responses from
downtown business and property owners and revealed a near even split of opinions of the
implementation of paid parking. However, there were areas of broad agreement. 88% of
respondents stated that the blanket 2-hour time limit was not meeting the needs of customers,
employees, and visitors. 75% responded that, if the City were to implement paid parking, they
would favor a Parking Benefit District where any excess revenue was spent solely on downtown.
Open comments highlighted several sentiments including requests for a public downtown parking
garage, concerns about downtown employees and affordability, a lack of longer stay parking
options, support for alternative transportation, and the need for enforcement improvements.
2025 City-led Stakeholder Parking Survey
The 2025 surveys largely reinforced public sentiment but did offer some new insights. Beginning
with the Stakeholder survey, the effort collected 41 responses. Of those respondents, 71% of
private businesses indicated they relied almost exclusively on public, on-street parking for
customers and employees. In fact, only 5% indicated they did not rely on public, on-street
parking at all – demonstrating an exceptional reliance on a public asset for private commerce.
When asked to convey their top concern, Stakeholders overwhelmingly highlighted two issues: a
lack of parking availability (46%) and the restricted time limit (32%). However, when asked to
prioritize improvements to on-street parking the issues flipped with 56% favoring more “options for
parking on-street longer than two hours” and 32% prioritizing “increased availability of short-term
parking.” It is notable that just over a third of responses to this question selected answers that
related to enhanced enforcement and stiffer consequences for violating parking ordinances. And,
consistent with the DASM survey, respondents were split on whether paid parking would benefit
them with 56% responding with “Yes” or “Indifferent” and 44% responding “No.”
For any funds generated by paid parking or a Parking Benefit District, Stakeholders showed a clear
preference for creating additional public off-street parking and expanding employee programs and
enhancing downtown maintenance, safety, and security.
In terms of framing the perspectives of stakeholder respondents, 65% were affiliated with a
business north of Hopkins, 68% operated an entertainment or restaurant business, and 50% felt
there was “minimal or no parking available.” The respondent pool was deemed too small for any
statistically significant assessment of cross tabulation group analysis.
Open responses referenced similar themes to the 2018 DASM survey, including concern for
employee parking, the impact paid parking could have on their business, some skepticism that
parking revenues would be spent downtown, notes regarding overnight parking by residents and
Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 6 of 49

guests of downtown housing, and continued references to the desire for a downtown public
garage. Several respondents expressed support for paid parking but with an exemption for their
employees.
2025 City-Led Community Survey
The open Community Survey received the most sizable data set with 574 respondents,
predominately (69%) from residents that visit downtown but do not live or work there. Only 66
responses came from non-residents and 99 (17%) from Texas State University students.
Interestingly, nearly 70% felt that parking was “Sometimes” or “Always” available, though when
asked to identify the top issue with downtown parking 55% indicated a “Lack of parking
availability.” While most respondents indicated daytime parking (8AM – 5PM) nearly 2/3rds (64%)
also indicated they used parking during the 5PM to 10PM hours and 20% stated they visit very late
night / early morning.
Like the Stakeholders, many (17%) noted primary support for downtown parking funds being spent
on “additional public off-street parking” but there was collectively strong support for nonautomotive transportation modes led by expanding pedestrian (14%), transit (10%), and bike (8%)
infrastructure which would be supported by enhanced streetscaping (13%).
On the matter of paid parking, the likely payers were similarly split on paid parking with 53% noting
opposition and 47% supporting or expressing indifference. When considering this query was
asking users to pay for a currently “free” service, these responses were viewed as surprisingly
favorable to paid parking by some on the PAB.
The PAB expressed interest in isolating the responses of non-residents as a proxy for tourism. Most
(77%) indicated they came Downtown primarily for Dining and Entertaining or Shopping. 64% of
this response group supported paid parking with proceeds used for Downtown improvements and
50% indicated their top priority was pedestrian improvements.
Open comments in the Community Survey varied somewhat from the Stakeholder responses with
more respondents referencing students parking downtown to access campus, notes regarding
safety issues when maneuvering vehicles that are parking or exiting a space, and many comments
that their openness to paying was dependent on the pricing.
Some commenters indicated that they’d be more likely to come downtown with paid parking
creating more available spaces. Other comments indicated they’d be less likely to come
downtown if they had to pay. Still others wanted on-street parking to remain free but with the
addition of paid off-street garages, a recommendation in conflict with parking research and best
practice.

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 7 of 49

A significant number of comments questioned whether there was even a parking problem as much
as an issue with people not being willing to walk a modest distance. Others encouraged less
dedication of downtown space to vehicles, whether parked or moving, and asked the City to
prioritize housing, transit, and alternative forms of mobility in the core instead of spatial or financial
investments in parking.
Perhaps more than the percentages themselves, the open comments of all the surveys highlighted
for the Parking Advisory Board the challenges with forming parking policy based predominately on
public sentiment.
Summary of Survey Insights
• Extreme reliance on free use of a public asset for commercial purposes
• Lack of longer stay options felt to be harming businesses
• A near even split on whether paid parking is desired
• Clear support for a parking benefit district, if paid parking is implemented
• Desire for more off-street supply and increased turnover of on-street spaces
• Otherwise divergent priorities for use of parking revenues with Stakeholders favoring safety
and maintenance and the Community favoring streetscape and alternative transportation
• Caution basing parking policy on public sentiment outside points of clear consensus

Enforcement Protocols and Data Analysis
San Marcos has modernized its enforcement technology and processes over the years, including
the deployment of mobile License Plate Recognition to scan parked vehicles during regulated time
periods and flag potential violations for ticketing. The City recently upgraded both its enforcement
software and hardware, which are discussed in more detail in Technology Section. Additionally,
the parking enforcement function has also evolved in recent years by transitioning primary
enforcement from the San Marcos Police Department to the City Marshal’s Office, which is
discussed in more detail in the Staffing Recommendations section. And finally, a 2024 update of
citation fees and immobilization (aka ‘booting) policies and the 2025 roll-out of Barnacle1
immobilization devices for exceptionally delinquent parkers have added more consequence to
parking violations.
The result has been a material increase in the percentage of citations paid. While the City’s
backend reporting module has not historically facilitated precise matching of the date of citation to
date of payment, the City has been tracking paid vs. issued citations monthly since at least April
2019 (per Jan 2022 PAB Agenda Packet). The 2019 average collection rate was just 33%, meaning

A modern immobilization device that fully obscures a vehicle’s window shield until removed by the offender
upon credit card payment. The device includes GPS tracking and must be returned after removal.
1

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 8 of 49

two out of every three parking citations were simply ignored by the violator. In contrast the average
collection rate had increased to 68% as of July 20252.
This is marked improvement toward a goal of policy compliance, but room for improvement
remains. Industry targets for collection rates vary substantially based on the mechanisms the
ticketing entity has at its disposal. Generally, parking citations are simply a civil offense in San
Marcos. The City has recently gained the ability to look up license plates and mail collection
notices to the registered owner of vehicles with unpaid tickets.
The City may also wish to investigate implementing additional consequences, such as use of a
collection agency or placing a hold on vehicular registration renewals for exceptional
delinquencies, to further improve collection rates. Given its available options for holding
violators accountable, the Parking Advisory Board believes the City of San Marcos should
target a collection rate of at least 80% within 90-days of ticket issuance.
Effective and respected enforcement is a prerequisite for a parking operation that ensures
compliance to City parking ordinances without providing additional taxpayer burden, but it is not
sufficient on its own for efficient, equitable management of the valuable space along the
Downtown public curb. To fully assess the efficacy of a parking management program, utilization
and financial data must be gathered and analyzed.

Parking Data Collection and Analysis
There are over 50 parking violation codes currently monitored by parking enforcement, but most
citations relate to overstaying the nearly blanket 2-hour maximum parking stay in downtown. Three
common metrics for assessing compliance with parking time limits (whether paid or unpaid) are
Occupancy, Turnover, and Violation Rate. For the purposes of this report, “Occupancy” refers to
the percentage of parking spaces on a block-face that are occupied at the time of measurement.
“Turnover” refers to the number of vehicles that use a typical parking space within a studied area
over a given time. Overtime “Violation rate” is the number of vehicles in violation of regulated time
limits.
Industry targets for these metrics may vary by circumstance, but the generally accepted heuristic is
to avoid exceeding an 85% average occupancy on any block-face. This number ensures public
parking assets are well-utilized while an open space or two remain available for new parkers
arriving at their destination. Targets for Turnover and Violation Rate are less established, but the
report conducted by Kimley-Horn for the City suggested a target of five to seven vehicle “turns” per
regulated day per space and a Violation Rate of 3 – 5%.

July 2025 was the last month prior to a hardware and software transition that confounded enforcement data
for some months until system roll completed implementation and processes stabilized early 2026.
2

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 9 of 49

2018 Kimley-Horn Parking Utilization Data
In August and September of 2018 (one day each month), Kimley-Horn conducted an analysis of the
City’s License Plate Recognition system and spot readings of select high-demand blocks to
extrapolate occupancy at 10AM, 1PM and 7PM and to approximate Turnover and Violation Rates on
a select section of blocks. A more detailed breakdown of their results can be found in the source
study, but Kimley-Horn reported the peak collection hour during its 2018 collection effort to be 1PM
with an overall downtown parking occupancy rate of 70% at that time but with 19 high-demand
blocks exceeding 85% Occupancy representing 42% of the 722 spaces included in their study.
Kimley-Horn also conducted some limited analysis of Turnover at only 2.3 vehicles per space per
regulated day (approx. 9AM to 5PM) and of Overtime Violation Rate at 11%.
2024-2026 City and Texas State Parking Utilization
While the 2018 data was informative and supported Kimley-Horn’s recommendation to implement
paid parking at that time, it is now out of date. Current staff and the Parking Advisory Board desired
a more up-to-date and thorough study. A combination of City parking staff and Texas State
University students enrolled in GEO 4356 Urban Infrastructure Management completed “feet-topavement” direct observational counts in 2024 and 20253. Those data collections included
observations during early morning, weekend, and late-night hours which Kimley-Horn had not
included. These systematic counts were completed along a prescribed, consistent route for
observation with each discrete collection event taking 90 to 120 minutes.
The 2024 collection was completed by City staff across 16 individual observations between
February and September surveying the 867 catalogued downtown parking spaces at various
periods Monday through Saturday from 10AM to 7PM. Subsequently, from September to October
2025, Texas State University students collected 63 unique observations4 of 787 parking spaces with
collection days and times aimed at filling in data gaps in the early morning (6AM), Thursday –
Saturday nights (8PM and Midnight), and Saturday daytime (1PM). Collectively, these latest data
collection efforts represented over 3,000 individual block observations and created a data set for
parking analysis previously unavailable.
Turnover and Violation Rate
In March of 2026, City enforcement staff and parking management collaborated on a single-day
focused mobile LPR data collection effort wherein license plate reads were taken at an enhanced
frequency (approximately every 20 minutes) on four blocks: the 100 Block of E Hopkins, the 100
Block of N LBJ, the 100 Block of N. Guadalupe, and the 200 Block of N. Guadalupe. This focus
allowed staff to analyze license plate reads for Turnover during the regulated day as well as
violation rate. For the observed date, turnover on these blocks ranged from 3 to 5 vehicles per

3 A 2023 collection exercise was also completed by Texas State students and delivered key insights into collection methodologies, but
its data is excluded as a more honed process was utilized for the 2024 and 2025 collections

4

For student collections, multiple students collected during the same periods for comparative and accuracy purposes. Some student

observations were excised from the data set where outlier information indicated the rigor of the sample may not be sufficient

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 10 of 49

regulated day (3.6 across the four-block study area) and the violation rate was 6.3%. Both metrics
remain outside recommended Kimley-Horn targets.
While managing down Violation Rate is important for parking management, Turnover is not
necessarily a metric that has a universal target value but which may vary on a block-by-block basis.
Low turnover may be desired by businesses that require longer-term client stays (e.g., a salon or
mediation office) while business providing quick service to customers (e.g., cleaners or quick
service restaurants) may favor rapid turnover. Low turnover within proximity of the University may
indicate that public on-street spaces are being utilized for campus access rather than local
business support. Alternatively, if evaluated alongside occupancy, low turnover could be an
indication of a block with low on-street parking demand. Regardless, systematically and
periodically tracking Turnover on a per block basis before and after changes in regulations can be
insightful and is recommend, especially as new policies and ordinances are implemented and
assessed.
Occupancy
For the purposes of evaluating the existing conditions, the PAB focused most closely on analyzing
Occupancy across several dimensions: overall, per block for 50 blocks, across parking zones, by
time of day, and by day of week. Detailed result tables are included in the Appendix but will be
discussed in more detail in this section.
For analysis, Average Occupancy was placed into bands matching those originally established by
Kimley-Horn:
• RED: Greater than 90% indicating parking demand is in severe need of management
• ORANGE: Greater than 85% indicating occupancy that exceeds industry best-practice
• YELLOW: Greater than 75% indicating a well-used public resource to monitor
• GREEN: Greater than 50% indicating ample parking availability
• BLUES: Less than 50% indicating a block with open capacity
First, Kimley-Horn’s 2018 observed single afternoon peak weekday5 occupancy was compared to
the average weekday afternoon occupancy collected in 2024-2025. Occupancy was observed to
increase from 70% à 78% and 26 blocks were observed with occupancy above the 85%
threshold – representing half of blocks and parking spaces in the 2024-2025 study.
Weekday Afternoon Peak Comparison
2018 Kimley-Horn
2024-2025 City/TXST
Overall Occupancy
70%
78%
Blocks >85%
19
26
% Spaces
42%
50%
5 As noted, Kimley-Horn reported a peak at 1PM on a weekday. 2024-2025 weekday afternoon collections were conducted at 2PM and

the average of all collected 2PM readings are utilized for the comparison instead of simple one peak day

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 11 of 49

Expanding out to all measured time periods from the 2024-2025 collection from 10AM to Midnight6,
the overall downtown average occupancy was measured 76% with 36% of blocks (18 blocks)
exceeding the 85% threshold.
Overall Block Band Analysis, excluding 6AM
Threshold

# Blocks

% of Blocks

90%
85%
75%
50%
25%
0%
Total

12
6
11
13
6
2
50

24%
12%
22%
26%
12%
4%
100%

Notable, the number of blocks averaging above 85% occupancy is nearly 50% (24 blocks) when
evaluating whether a block averaged over 85% during either the current regulated period (M-F, 8AM
– 5PM) or “After Hours” (Thursday/Friday after 5PM and all day Saturday). [Note this is comparing
average occupancies across all days and times period collected, not only at the afternoon weekday
peak as in the prior paragraph.]
Based on a visual analysis of blocks exceeding the 85% during currently regulated times, the
Parking Advisory Board grouped blocks into three parking areas, as shown in the map in the
Appendix. A Core Zone includes the main courthouse square and is generally bound by University
Dr. to the north, LBJ Dr. to the east, San Antonio St. to the south, and Fredericksburg St. to the west.
A North Zone includes all blocks north of Hopkins St., excluding those in the Core Zone, and a
South Zone includes all blocks south of Hopkins St., excluding those in the Core Zone. These
zones were used in the analysis of days of the week and times of day to inform final
recommendations.
During the weekday, peak occupancy is observed in the North zone measuring at nearly 95%
across all northern blocks at 11AM, dipping slightly over lunch, and then returning to near 90%
during the 2PM collection. These results support the thesis that public, free downtown parking
closer to Texas State campus is being used for access to the University.

Time of Day (weekdays)
Proposed Zone
Core
North
South
Grand Total

6:00 AM
12%
27%
33%
23%

10:00 AM
70%
84%
41%
68%

11:00 AM
78%
94%
52%
78%

12:00 PM
78%
78%
48%
71%

2:00 PM
82%
88%
56%
78%

7:00 PM
88%
82%
68%
80%

8:00 PM
73%
64%
77%
70%

6 6AM excluded as an outlier collection period with limited on-street parking use

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 12 of 49

While only exceeding the 85% threshold during 8PM collections (taken Thursday and Friday
evenings), the Core zone demonstrated the most consistent occupancy demand throughout the
weekday and the South zone had the lowest parking demand pressures.
A different picture emerges in the late-night hours of Friday through Saturday at midnight. One of
the key additional insights gleaned from the 2025 samples is that the midnight parking
occupancies were among the highest of all the collected time periods. Perhaps surprisingly,
the late-night demand extends well into the South zone boosting its overall occupancy almost
identical to the Core at midnight. Demand in the North Zone wanes noticeably after hours.
Thursday midnight collections were not taken but are assumed to also show elevated parking
demand based on anecdotal reports.

Time of Day (Friday Midnight & Saturday)
Proposed Zone
Core
North
South
Grand Total

12:00 AM
96%
69%
95%
85%

1:00 PM
92%
79%
87%
85%

8:00 PM
73%
67%
78%
72%

Conversely, there were more limited instances of early morning (i.e., 6AM) occupancy exceeding
the industry target of 85% across zones, though certain blocks did show relatively high 6AM
occupancy indicative of some downtown residents using on-street parking for regular vehicular
storage that could be detrimental to adjacent businesses’ morning customer base.

Early Morning
Proposed Zone
Core

Tuesday

Thursday
12%

Grand Total
12%
12%

North

26%

28%

27%

South

31%

34%

33%

Blocks near or above 50% occupancy at 6AM were limited to the following, all being near Texas
State campus, dormitories, or downtown residential complexes. Occupancies were generally
below 60% except directly abutting Texas State University:
• San Antonio between Guadalupe & Fredericksburg
• San Antonio between Fredericksburg & Comanche
• Comanche between Lindsey & Pat Garrison
• Lindsey between Comanche & Fredericksburg

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 13 of 49

•
•
•
•
•
•
•

North St. between Burleson & Lindsey
N. LBJ between University and Concho
Concho between N. LBJ & Guadalupe
Fredericksburg between Pat Garisson & Lindsey
Hutchison between Comanche & North St.
S. Guadalupe between MLK and the Railroad Tracks
MLK between Guadalupe and Fredericksburg

Given the breadth and collection methods, the Parking Advisory Board has a level of confidence in
the utilization data collected by City staff and Texas State students in 2025. While the Kimley-Horn
data from 2018 has served as a useful benchmark, the comprehensive nature of this collection
provides a firmer foundation off which the Parking Advisory Board can draw conclusions about
existing conditions and derive recommendations toward a more effective public parking program
for the future.
Despite substantial the improvements in enforcement since 2019, the 2024 / 2025 data
demonstrate deteriorating conditions and utilization far above recommended industry targets
during peak demand, particularly daytime in the Core and North Zone and in the Core and
South Zones at the midnight collection. While early morning parking occupancies were
generally low overall, some blocks indicate overnight residential parking use that may impede
morning access to downtown businesses. These observations support the case for additional
parking management strategies beyond enforcement alone.

Inequity
The idea of charging for a resource previously viewed as free can justifiably spark concerns of
inequity. Using a price-based rationing system for parking risks excluding people based on their
ability to pay, and so the PAB looked for data that could link income to parking demand.
Unfortunately, we currently only have one metric that can link parking demand downtown to
income, and that is the address information on unpaid violations older than 30 days. From the
address, we can get the median income range for the census tract, providing a snapshot of income
for the subset of vehicles that were not able to immediately pay their tickets.
When looking at all violations mailed between September 26th 2025 and December 10, 2025, 58%
are from Census tracts with a median income above $75,000 (Figure X). For reference, the median
income in San Marcos in 2024 (the most current census data available) was $48,091 (Table S1901
ACS 1-year estimate), and there are only 3 (of 20) census tracts within the city boundaries with a
median income over $75,000, The next question we asked was how many of these addresses were
within the 78666 zip code, since the distribution of violations did not match the SMTX census
tracts.

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 14 of 49

Only 135 of 787 violations were from 78666, or roughly 17%. In other words, when it comes to
inequity, we also need to recognize that our lower-income town is subsidizing free parking for
visitors who are disproportionately wealthier. Moreover, this unmanaged free parking is creating
conditions where long-term residents do not feel able to go downtown because they are unsure of
being able to find parking. Downtown businesses are closing and new businesses may hesitate to
go in because of parking concerns. These also create equity concerns.

Further, the current system that solely assesses parking fines for overstays without offering more
affordable compliant rates options can impact certain at-risk groups disproportionately. Patrons
of businesses as varied as salons, professional offices, and tattoo artists with appointments in
excess of the allowed two-hour time period often have no choice but to receive a ticket for overstay
or disrupt their task to play the farcical game of “musical chairs” and move their vehicle to a new
space to avoid citation. And, while on-street public parking is not likely the best solution for
employees of downtown businesses, many downtown employees feel placed in an impossible
situation.
This brings us back to the citation data. When we look only at the 135 violations within 78666, we
see a distribution that somewhat reflects our city (though still with a few higher income tracts from
elsewhere in the zipcode). These represent not visitors who missed a ticket, but residents who are
confronting a parking system that does not work for their current conditions. Each of these
violations is at least $50 in fines, but for the proportion that are fined for overstays (the majority of
fines downtown) these could be a dollar or two of predictable payment in a paid parking system.

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 15 of 49

While a user-fee based system such as paid parking necessitates a thoughtful approach to mitigate
the potential for inequity, the current system that solely relies on fines to regulate a public asset
can also become a highly regressive and inequitable form of taxation.
And finally, it is also important to note that the substantial costs of maintaining the “free” public
parking in the current system socializes those costs to the entire population – whether they park
downtown or even drive at all. We know from the academic literature that non-drivers are
disproportionately lower-income than those who own cars, so our current system of subsidizing
car owners is itself inequitable.7 There are many public costs that governments rationally socialize,
but especially in an challenging municipal finance environment, it is worth reconsideration as to
whether on-street downtown parking should be one of them.

Parking’s Impact on City Finances
While on-street parking in San Marcos is currently deemed “free,” there is are substantial
operating, maintenance, capital, and opportunity costs related to public parking management.
Prior to 2024, the City was not isolating and tracking the revenues and expenses from parkingrelated activities from other accounts in the general fund. While the accounting processes needed
to full isolate parking revenues and expense are not yet established, the Parking Advisory Board
now receives a “Parking Income Statement” quarterly which aggregates operating income
(predominately enforcement fines) and offsets it against operating and management expenses
such as fuel, personnel, software, signage, and more.
Prior to the increase of parking fines in 2024, the City was running about a $10,000 per month loss
only accounting for operating expense. While operations now are approaching break-even
King, D. A., Smart ,M. J., and Manville, M. (2022) ”The Poverty of the Carless: Toward Universal Auto Access”
Journal of the American Planning Association 42(3) 464-481
7

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 16 of 49

following the updated fee structure and enforcement and collection improvements, the capital,
maintenance, and opportunity costs are likely the greatest expenses and not yet fully captured.
The cost of maintaining the surface pavement, while more periodic, is a significant expense for the
City. And, most of all, the opportunity cost of the public space dedicated to free on-street parking
is exceptional. On-street parking could instead be street trees, safer sidewalks, improved lighting,
protected bike lanes, bus stops, cafe seating, outdoor market displays, biofiltration areas, and a
host of other elements that enhance the public realm and the community.
Certainly, on-street parking provides a substantial benefit, but there are costs and trade-offs which
are not free, but currently socialized to be borne by the general public and not recouped by the
motorists utilizing the spaces outside of fine assessments for overstay or other violations.

Issue Summary
Synthesizing the survey information, observational data, and stakeholder and user feedback and
anecdotes, the Parking Advisory Board compiled the following summary of issues with current
downtown parking.
•

•

•
•

•

Limited Parking Availability Hinders Access to Downtown Businesses: Occupancy
exceeds industry recommendation on nearly half of all downtown blocks during rotating
periods of peak demand. Potential visitors arriving by personal vehicle may be discouraged
from patronizing downtown business because of the uncertainty of parking availability. The
issue appears exacerbated by external demand as the 2-hour time limit accommodates
non-customer uses, such as parking for visits to Texas State campus or long-term
residential use
Limited Longer-stay Options: Limited options for parking needs greater than 2-hours put
undue pressure on customers, employees, and others to feel they cannot visit downtown
without the added stress and expense of an overstay violation. Further, the temptation of
free parking on-street limits the motivation for users to find off-street lots and many offstreet lots therefore are priced for an efficient marketplace.
Overstaying Time Limits: Overstay rate double industry standard. University and employee
parking are primary contributing factors.
Loopholes & Limited Consequences: The City has made great strides in enforcement and
consequences over the last five years; however, violation and collection rates remain well
off targets. Tolerance for what is known as “musical chairs” (which refers to the practice of
drivers relatedly shifting their vehicle to nearby spaces to avoid exceeding the 2-hour
parking lime) and the large gap of intermediate consequence between a few unpaid tickets
and the severity of delinquency required for vehicle immobilization allow the bulk of
parking violations to go unpaid with relative impunity.
Technology Limitations: Once again, the City has made strides in upgrading technology;
however, there remains a number of disparate systems in use across various parking
functions that present an opportunity for system integrations to make the whole greater
than the sum of its parts.

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 17 of 49

•

•

•

Public Expectations: Decades of lack policy, enforcement, and consequences have bred a
culture of non-compliance or regard for parking rules. Further, expectations created by
suburban development and a gap in education on urban parking context and socialized
costs has created an environment where many may view paid parking as individually
extractive vs. supportive of the vitality and vibrance of the downtown.
Inequity: The current free-with-fines system fosters unpredictable parking availability that
intimidates many, socializes the costs of parking private vehicles on the public curb, and
regressively fines population segments with the least disposable income.
Financial Burden on City: Parking management has historically operated at a significant
municipal loss. While improvements are moving operational expenses toward or just
above break-even, the substantial capital and opportunity costs of maintaining on-street
parking current fall to the City’s general fund obligations

Guiding Objectives
Naming the key issues allows the Parking Advisory Board and Staff to outline Guiding Objectives
toward addressing each. The PAB identified following objectives for consideration while evaluating
its recommendations.
• Limited Parking Availability à Increase on-street availability to consistently have a few
open spaces on all blocks (85% industry standard) and prioritize space availability for
customers of downtown businesses. Support alternative transportation options that
reduce parking demand. Consider systems which help guide parkers to areas with
available spaces
• Overstaying Time Limitsà Increase enforcement efficiency and efficacy; add parking or
payment options for needs greater than 2 hours. Reduce overstay violation rate below 5%
with a long-term target of 1-2%.
• Limited Longer-stay Options à Create options for longer-stay customer parking; utilize
parking revenue to support additional affordable employee parking options; encourage use
of underutilized off-street lots.
• Loopholes & Limited Consequences à Modernize policies to better support
enforcement; consider additional consequences for unpaid tickets to assist in achieving a
collection rate above 80%
• Technology Limitations à Implement system integrations toward a more consistent and
cohesive parking management technology platform
• Public Expectations à Demonstrate benefits to parking availability; expand parking
options; reinvest revenues to enhance downtown; publicize successes
• Inequity à Add parking options and enhance alternative transportation to expand
downtown access. Reduce fines by increasing compliance. Investigate tools such as
discounts, grace periods, etc. to promote equity. Reduce financial the burden of “free”
downtown parking for private vehicles on the general public/fund.

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 18 of 49

Downtown Parking Recommendation
Overview
The Parking Advisory Board recommends that a Downtown Parking Benefit District (PBD) and a
municipal paid parking program be implemented to manage both on-street parking spaces and
publicly available off-street lots in downtown. This program would maintain free parking time for
short stays while introducing the ability for downtown drivers to pay for extended stays – rather
than forcing them to move their vehicle every two hours as required by current policies. City
residents that register their vehicle would additional free time for parking sessions. Businesses
would also have the opportunity to buy/validate parking for their customers at a discounted 25%
rate. Downtown employees would gain access to a permit program for off-street and some limited
on-street spaces. And, to maintain and expand access for all, the Parking Advisory Board
recommends that accessible (aka ADA) spaces and parking for low-income City residents be free.

Parking Benefit District
A parking benefit district (PBD) is designed to ensure that the revenues generated from paid parking
are used within the area where the paid parking is located. They are considered a parking
management best practice because they link payment to the resources and areas the user is
using—you’re paying to park downtown to experience downtown, and a PBD ensures that your
payment gets reinvested back in downtown.
San Marcos passed a parking benefit district ordinance in January 2024. In the ordinance parking
benefit districts are defined as areas in which a percentage of revenues generated will go to fund
improvements that:
1) Promote walking, cycling, and public transit
2) Enhance the public realm
3) Improve parking efficiency or availability
Under the ordinance, districts need to include at least 100 potential paid parking spaces. They can
be created by city council, either on their own initiative or by recommendation from another board
or commission. Each district requires a separate ordinance, and there are no PBDs currently in San
Marcos. If one is established, revenues first go to cover the costs of operating the district. Once
costs are covered, not less than 80% of revenue remaining will be reinvested in the district.
Establishing a PBD for downtown would create a stable revenue stream for downtown
improvements, like street trees, sidewalks, and maintenance workers, freeing up tax dollars
currently spent on these items to go to other parts of the city. It also provides a potential revenue
stream for any future bonds necessary to expand parking availability.

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 19 of 49

Parking Regulation Specifics: Hours, Geographies, and Rates
Hours
Based on its review of existing parking demand and utilization information, the Parking Advisory
Board recommends a multiple-part approach to expanding the hours of parking management.
• Expand parking enforcement to Thursday, Friday, and Saturday nights and Saturday
daytime8. This aligns with downtown stakeholders request for more enforcement and
empirical observational data regarding unregulated periods of peak demand.
• Implement paid parking 8am to 5pm Monday-Wednesday and 8am-midnight ThursdaySaturday. Sunday and evening hours Monday-Wednesday would remain free.
• Eliminate free overnight parking to ensure residents of downtown properties are not
utilizing the public curb for long-term parking storage to the detriment of downtown
businesses and organizations.
• Maintain a period of free time for all parkers with expanded free time for residents that
generally aligns with the current policy, except for certain high demand zones during peak
Paid parking is intended to expand access to downtown, especially for those that wish to stay
longer by paying for additional time, without relying solely on a punitive fine-based system or
unduly extracting parking fees from residents or the economically disadvantaged (as addressed in
more detail below).
Geographies
The recommendation divides downtown into three parking zones:
• A Downtown Core bounded by University Dr. and San Antonio St. to the north and south
and Fredericksburg St. and Lyndon Baines Johnson Dr. (LBJ) to the west and east
• A North of Hopkins area running from Hopkins St. up to the Texas State University campus,
bounded on the west by Moore St. and on the east by CM Allen Pkwy
• A South of Hopkins area that extends south from Hopkins to one block south of the Moore
St / North St / San Antonio St intersection along San Antonio to Commanche, down
Commanche to Martin Luthur King Jr. Blvd (MLK), over to Guadalupe St, down Guadalupe St
to Cheatham St, and over to CM Allan Pkwy

8

Expanded enforcement resources could potentially be funded in partnership with Texas State University.

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 20 of 49

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 21 of 49

These zones are based on the existing demand and utilization patterns of downtown parking with a
goal of promoting more turnover along the most heavily trafficked blocks and incentivizing longerstay parkers to utilize parking spaces with less demand.
Free Time (Grace Period)
Because students, teachers, and guests of the University substantially increase the demand for
long-term parking near campus during the day, the Downtown Core and the North of Hopkins
area are recommended to have 30 minutes of free time during weekdays, while the South of
Downtown zone would allow 60 minutes of free time. During weekend and evening hours, all
areas would expand to 60 free minutes.
Resident Discount (Additional Free Time)
Residents that register their parking session would receive an additional 60 minutes free
parking time for a total of two-free hours (the same as current policy) in all areas excluding the
North and Core zones during the weekday peak when University demand requires additional
restriction. For this free time policy to be implemented and other objectives to be maintained it is
imperative that the City transition to zoned enforcement to eliminate the “musical chairs”
described elsewhere herein. Additionally, the PAB recommends that the resident parking benefit of
one additional free hour be limited only to those that reside in properties within the City Limits that
pay property taxes which support the continued cost burden of maintaining the downtown onstreet parking spaces.
The registration for the additional free resident time should be integrated with existing city parking
programs that provide parking benefits to City residents, such as the City Park permit program, to
reduce administrative burden on the citizenry and staff. Any resident that enrolls in either program
should automatically receive the benefits of the other. As discussed further in the Technology
Recommendation, to receive the discount residents may need to register their stay and pay via
mobile app or website instead of an on-street pay station based on technical limitations.
On-Street Hourly Rates and Time Limits
Across all of downtown, the first paid hour (after the applicable free time) would be $1. In the
Downtown Core, where current parking space utilization frequently nears 100% and higher
turnover is valued given the concentration of retail businesses, additional hours would increase to
$2/hr, up to a maximum of 8.5 hours per parking session. Outside of the Downtown Core, the rate
would be $1/hr, up to a maximum parking session of 12 hours. Parking maximums would be
inclusive of any free-time applicable, and parking would be sold only in increments of $1 without
change or unused time refunds.
To discourage residents of downtown from using on-street parking for long-term vehicle storage
that reduces available space for downtown businesses and visitors, the Parking Advisory Board
recommends eliminating free overnight parking in the downtown. To accommodate special
circumstances and discourage intoxicated driving, overnight parking would continue to be allowed

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 22 of 49

for a fee. Overnight parking rates would allow parking from midnight to noon for $15 in the
Downtown Core and $10 in the other downtown parking zones.
Downtown Business Validation
While not required of any business, the Parking Advisory Board recommends the City deploy an
option for downtown businesses to offset part or all of any paid parking charges for their
customers. This is commonly referred to as “validating” a customer’s parking. The functionality of
this feature and deployment options are discussed in further detail in the Technology
Recommendation, but it is recommended that downtown businesses be able to purchase
validations on behalf of their customers at a 25% discount.
On-Street Permits
For downtown businesses (and a limited number of downtown residents9), the Parking Advisory
Board recommends a permit system in which businesses can pay $75/month to park in select onstreet spaces which have historically seen lower demand10. Permits will be allocated annually, with
one permit per qualified applicant until supply runs out. If there are more permits than applicants,
additional permits would be allocated by business size and available off-street parking —
businesses with no other parking options would be prioritized over those with some available
parking. On-street parking spaces would also be available to hourly parkers so on-street permit
holders would not be guaranteed an available spot, but an on-street permit would provide a
significant discount to the hourly parking rates.
The recommended permit rate of $75 / month is believed to be below market rate, but the Parking
Advisory Board recommends this reduced rate be maintained for at least the first two years to help
ease the transition for downtown employers and employees. While the limited number of resident
on-street permits will be valid 24/7/365, on-street business permits cannot be used for overnight
parking. All permits are non-transferable but may be reassigned to a different license plate no more
than once per month.
Off-Street Permits and the Employee Parking Pilot Program
In addition to the on-street permits, the Parking Advisory Board is also recommending that the city
implement a permit system across three of the four surface parking lots it currently owns or
partially leases. Final rates may be subject to negotiation between city staff and its lot managers,
but the PAB recommends the lot at Hopkins St. and CM Allen Pkwy, which are currently used for
the Employee Parking Pilot Program (EP3), have an initial, non-subsidized price of $40/month for
unreserved spaces and $50/month for reserved spaces. Two other lots would only have unreserved
options, but both would be open to the EP3 as well. The lot at the corner of MLK and S LBJ is
recommended to have a $35/month target rate. Because it is in the higher demand Downtown
9 Only residents of an existing 6-plex or smaller residential property without an off-street parking space for their unit
10 (See Map in Appendix, but generally available on Hutchinson St. between North St. and Blanco St.; Fredericksburg St. south of San
Antonio St. and north of MLK; MLK between Fredericksburg St. and Guadalupe St.; Guadalupe between MLK and the railroad tracks; S
LBJ in-between the railroad tracks; Edward Gary south of San Antonio St.; and, San Antonio St between Edward Gary St and CM Allen
Pkwy).

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 23 of 49

Core, the lot at Hutchinson St. and Guadalupe St. may more reasonably have a target price of
$80/month. The PAB recommends the EP3 would continue, with the Downtown PBD (in lieu of the
General Fund) subsidizing 50% of the aforementioned prices for qualifying downtown businesses.
After the Kissing Alley construction project is completed, the Parking Advisory Board recommends
that the existing surface parking lot leased from Texas State University and adjacent to the current
Fire Station on the south side of Hutchinson between Guadalupe St. and LBJ become an hourly offstreet parking lot open to all with pricing that matches the North of Hopkins zone.
Key elements of the PABs recommendation are summarized in the following table, a more
complete version of which is included in the Appendix of this report.
CORE AREA
DAYS / TIMES
MONDAY - THURSDAY
FRIDAY - SATURDAY
SUNDAY
FREE TIME
SAN MARCOS RESIDENT BENEFIT
1ST PAID HR
ADD'L HOURS
MAX TIME
OVERNIGHT RATE (12AM TO NOON)

NORTH OF HOPKINS 2

SOUTH OF HOPKINS

8 AM - 5 PM

8 AM - 5 PM

8 AM - 5 PM

8 AM - MIDNIGHT

8 AM - MIDNIGHT

8 AM - MIDNIGHT

FREE

FREE

FREE

30 MINUTES

30 MINUTES

60 MINUTES

Add'l Free Hour after 5PM & Sat

Add'l Free Hour after 5PM & Sat

Add'l Free Hour (all times)

$1.00

$1.00

$1.00

$2.00

$1.00

$1.00

8 HRS

12 HRS

12 HRS

$15.00

$10.00

$10.00

ON-STREET PERMIT 1

$75 per month

BUSINESS VALIDATION DISCOUNT

25% DISCOUNT OFF HOURLY RATES
3

ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES (ADA)
UTILITY ASSISTANCE / LIFELINE RESIDENTS 3
OVERNIGHT PARKING

FREE
FREE
NOT PERMITTED WITHOUT PAYMENT OR RESIDENTIAL ON-STREET PERMIT

Parking Manager Adjustments
The hours of enforcement and rates stated above are the Parking Advisory Board’s
recommendation for the initial implementation. Despite the care and thought that have been put
into this recommendation, it is possible that situations may arise in which modifications to the
hours and rates are necessitated for the efficient and equitable administration of the Parking
Benefit District.
As such, the Parking Advisory Board recommends that the Parking Manager be empowered to
modify the hours and rates within predefined ranges. The Parking Manager would be permitted to
take immediate action to change a rate; however, the Parking Manager must bring any changes to
the Parking Advisory Board for ratification at its next regularly scheduled meeting. Additionally, it is
recommended that City Council review the Downtown Parking Benefit District’s policies, including
hours and rates, no less than every three years.

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 24 of 49

The recommended Parking Manager Authorized Ranges are: Hourly Rates (free to $4/hr.); Permit
Rate ($5 to $150 per month); Maximum Hourly Parking Time (2 to 12 hours); Maximum On-Street
Permit Time (2 days to Unlimited); Hours of Enforcement (All Days/Hours, except Sunday).

Strategies to address spillovers and equity concerns
Spillovers
A major consideration for paid parking programs is what happens just outside the boundaries. If
boundaries are drawn too small, drivers park just outside the regulated area and walk creating
spillover problems for residents of those streets. To mitigate potential spillovers, the Parking
Advisory Board recommendation covers all of downtown (not just the highest occupancy areas)
and uses the recommended zones to adjust rates and regulations to match demand for different
areas. Even so, there could be potential spillover effects to the East Guadalupe, Dunbar, and
Heritage neighborhoods. For these neighborhoods, the Parking Advisory Board recommends that
revenues from Parking Benefit District be used to cover the Residential Parking Zone application
fees (if any) and ongoing permit costs of any residents that live within a Residential Parking Zone
established or proposed within a ¼ mile of the proposed Parking Benefit District. The decision to
form a Residential Parking Zone would continue to sit with the residents of each block per existing
City ordinance.
ADA accessibility
The Parking Advisory Board recommends that ADA spaces remain free, and that a vehicle with an
accessibility tag may remain parked in an ADA space up to the maximum time of the applicable
parking zone (i.e., 8.5 or 12 hours). If this results in difficulties for other ADA permit holders, the
Parking Manager is authorized to reduce the maximum time as per the Parking Manager Adjustment
policy.
Preserving access for low-income neighbors
The Parking Advisory Board recommends that residents who are already registered with the city for
other forms of assistance (e.g. residents of the housing authority, section 8 voucher recipients,
utility assistance, WIC) be emailed with a notification of the paid parking program and how to
register to secure their additional free hour. Staff should also go to complexes to assist in
registering. If desired by council, low-income neighbors could also be eligible to request either a
unique code to use for free downtown parking or a free permit attached to their license plate,
depending on what technology ends up being most effective at the time of implementation. As with
ADA, the free spaces would be valid up to the maximum time of the applicable parking zone. If this
results in difficulties for other permit holders, the parking manager is authorized to reduce the
maximum time as per the Parking Manager Adjustment policy.

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 25 of 49

Parking Benefit District Revenue & Expense Projections
With a comprehensive set of recent occupancy data and proposed downtown parking policies
grounded in desired outcomes for the community (and not fee extraction), the Parking Advisory
Board wished to test the feasibility of its recommendations with a financial model.

Existing Parking Operations Finances
The PAB started by referencing the existing financial picture of parking operations developed over
the past several years as the City’s parking management and enforcement operations have
become more robust. Over the most-recent trailing 12 months at the time of model creation, the
City was generating approximately $415,000 in annual parking-related revenues offset by nearly
$430,000 in annual parking-related expenses. While still a deficit function, parking operations has
had marked improvement from the approximately $10,000 per month loss observed prior to the
adopted parking fine adjustments enacted in 2024.

Parking Operations Statement of Activties
Revenue
Paid On-Street Parking
Off-Street Lot - MLK
Off-Street Lot - Hutchison
City Park Lot
Parking Enforcement Fines
Uncollectable Fines
Special Event Fees
Residential Parking Permits
Other Operating Income
Revenue Subtotal

Expense
Depreciation Expense
Employee Parking Program
Fuel (Enforcement)
Maintenance and Repairs
Merchant Services (CC Fees)
Personnel
Postage
Residential PP Fees Paid
Signage
Software
Supplies
Telephone
Training
Uniforms
Expense Subtotal
Net

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

EXISTING BASELINE
T12 (Apr '25 - Mar '26)
$
$
$

4,642
19,205

$
$
$
$
$
$

600,772
(210,270)
245
414,594
EXISTING
Existing T12

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

18,000
8,758
8,691
1,279
Unk
299,825
179
84,079
5,002
1,732
1,723
429,268

$

(14,674)

Page 26 of 49

City Park Paid Parking Pilot Program (CP5) and Potential Parks PBD
The existing baseline notably excludes revenues and expenses associated with the City Park Paid
Parking Pilot Program (CP5) launched in 2025 which began charging non-residents for parking at
the City Park lot adjacent the Pauline Espinosa Community Hall.
Over its first nine and a half months of operations, the CP5 generated approximate $210,000 in
paid parking fees and $75,000 in fines but has created significant administrative burden for the
Parks Department diverting substantial amounts of time up to the Director and Assistant Director
level.
The Parking Advisory Board has recommended that the Parks Department apply to create a Parks
Parking Benefit District (PBD) to better isolate parking revenue generated in and around the City
Parks for use in improving, maintaining, and operating the Parks while also better spreading the
administrative burden of maintaining the CP5 program and making it permanent. Both Parks staff
and its advisory board have stated the intention to bring forward a Parks PBD application soon.
Given this expectation, the PAB elected to include a future Parks PBD revenues (based on observed
performance to date) and expected expanded parking personnel expenses (based on staff
feedback) into consideration for a more complete view of the revenues and expenses of the City’s
parking operations with both a Downtown PBD and a Parks PBD operating alongside broader
parking operations.

Downtown PBD Projections
General Methodology
To model the revenue potential of the recommend Downtown PBD policies, four common “time
blocks” were created based on observed patterns in the occupancy data, qualitative assessment,
and proposed parking rates:
• Time Block A (Overnight Parking): Midnight to 8PM, Monday - Saturday
• Time Block B (Weekday): 8AM to 5PM, Monday – Friday
• Time Block C (Saturday): 8AM to 5PM, Saturday
• Time Block D (Weekend Nights): 5PM to Midnight, Thursday – Saturday
For each time block, an informed assumption was made regarding the percentage of parkers that
would stay for total durations ranging from 30 minutes or less, up to the maximum allowed session
per proposed zone (e.g., 8 hours) to arrive at an average duration parked per Time Block per Zone.
By then applying the occupancy observed for each Time Block / Zone pair (discussed in Existing
Conditions section above) to those assumptions, an Implied Turnover was calculated for each
Time Block / Zone pair. The Implied Turnover was then used to calculate the total number of
parking sessions within each Time Block / Zone pair by multiplying it by the total number of spaces
in the applicable zone. Distributing those sessions back through the duration assumptions yields

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 27 of 49

the total number of cars parked in each duration rate band to generate the revenue for each Time
Block / Zone / Parking Stay grouping.
As an illustrative example, if Time Block B (Weekday) has 303 spaces in the Core zone that
turnover an average of 2.8 times during that nine hour time block and 25% of those parkers stay two
hours at a total rate of $3, then $636.73 would be generated from the parkers in the two-hour
duration rate band for that Time Block / Zone pairing. Summing together all the duration rate bands
and zones provides total revenue per Time Block occurrence which can then be used to create
weekly, monthly, and annual total revenue projections.
Core Assumptions
Perhaps the most significant assumption for the model is the percentage of parking sessions in
each duration rate band for each Time Block / Zone pair (e.g., on average, what percentage of
parked cars will park for 2 hours in the Core Zone on a typical Weekday). Without an existing paid
parking system or fixed, continuously observing occupancy sensors, collecting this data is
impractical.
Additionally, because the Downtown PBD recommendation includes additional free time for City
residents, an estimation of the percentage of non-resident parkers on average in each Time Block /
Zone pair was also assumed.
For these assumptions, the PAB relied on the estimations of staff that monitor downtown parking
daily and cross-checked the resultant Implied Turnover percentages against the spot-checked
turnover rates described above in the Existing Conditions section.
The parking occupancy observations downtown also indicate there is clear seasonality currently in
parking demand, driven predominately by the Texas State University academic calendar. A
seasonality curve was generated in part by indexing to the month with maximum occupancy
observations (November) and reducing revenue in other months by the observed reduction in
average occupancy. Some months where observation data was not collected were estimated.
Seasonality
Weeks
Seasonality Adjustment
Unsubsidized Rev. Projected
Subsidized Rev. Projected

January
3.43
85%
$ 126,468
$ 111,693

February
4.00
85%
$ 147,546
$ 130,309

March
4.43
90%
$ 172,964
$ 152,757

April
4.29
75%
$ 139,487
$ 123,191

May
4.43
70%
$ 134,528
$ 118,811

June
4.29
65%
$ 120,889
$ 106,766

July
4.43
55%
$ 105,700
$ 93,352

August September October November December
Annual
4.43
4.29
4.43
4.29
3.43
50.14
60%
85%
90%
100%
85%
78%
$ 115,309 $ 158,085 $ 172,964 $ 185,983 $ 126,468 $ 1,706,392
$ 101,838 $ 139,617 $ 152,757 $ 164,255 $ 111,693 $ 1,507,039

Adjustments and Tuning
Several adjustments were made to the general methodology discussed above. Of course, it is not
known exactly how the recommended parking policies will impact occupancy and turnover across
the downtown. It is possible paid parking will reduce the overall occupancy of parking spaces in
some areas, but not others; It is possible increasing costs for longer-stays will encourage more
turnover on some blocks. It is possible the introduction of compliant longer-term parking options
(currently almost universally capped at 2 hours) will increase longer-term stays on some blocks.
Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 28 of 49

Nevertheless, the percentage of vehicles estimated to currently be in each duration rate band by
staff was adjusted by the PAB based on reasonable expected behavioral change within each Time
Block / Zone pair. Further, for some pairs, the observed occupancy was adjusted downward based
on expected impacts of paid parking, such as the proposed elimination of free overnight on-street
parking reducing the overall occupancy of vehicles parked overnight.
Non-Modeled Variables
Certain policies that will ultimately influence total parking revenue were not integrated based on
the expectation that the contributed revenue will not be significant enough to influence decision
making. That includes revenue lost from granting free parking to economically disadvantaged
residents, accessible space parkers, and validation discounts provided to downtown businesses.
The revenue generated by on-street parking permits sold to local businesses has also not been
modeled. This should not minimize the importance of these policies, but they were deemed
prudent exclusions from the financial analysis to manage the overall complexity of the model.
Revenue Scenarios
As one of the objectives of a Downtown PBD is to relieve excess demand and create more
availability for customers of downtown businesses, some reduction in observed occupancy is
expected and even desired by stakeholders; and reduced occupancy may reduce revenue. As
such, three scenarios were generated simply by modifying the percentage of the observed
occupancy across all time zones and blocks by a set percentage. Expenses are assumed to be
fixed and a range of Revenue and Net Benefit are shown based the following:
• Pessimistic: 50% reduction in occupancy à $1,019,693 in Downtown PBD revenue
• Conservative: 25% reduction in occupancy à $1,522,039 in Downtown PBD revenue
• Aggressive: No reduction in occupancy à $2,024,386 in Downtown PBD revenue
Expenses
Annual expenses for base parking operations were largely scaled off the trailing 12-month
expenses through March 2026. Notable exceptions are Personnel Expense which are modeled to
increase based on the Staffing Recommendation herein from approximately $300,000 to $750,000
and Software-as-a-Service costs which are anticipated to increase to approximately $15,000 per
month. For each of the proposed PBDs, capital investments ($75,000 for the Parks PBD and
$250,000 for the Downtown PBD) were depreciated into the Statement of Operations based on 6%
weight-average-cost-of-capital (WACC) and a 5-year depreciation period.
Parking Benefit District Net Benefit Calculations
Finally, the model assumes that Base Parking operations consolidate general overhead and
enforcement expenses and collects all enforcement fines, while any PBDs collect any parking fees
and pays its dedicated capital expenses. As enforcement does not provide self-sustaining
revenue, this would result in a deficit balance for Base Operations which would be offset by a fee
each PBD would “pay” Base Operations for its services. The fee is modeled to be proportionate to
the Net Income generated by each PBD and is limited only to a total amount that balances Base
Parking Operations to $0.
Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 29 of 49

Results
Exports of the Parking Operations Statement of Activities (i.e., Income Statement), the Time Block
model, and the Personnel/Staffing model are included in the Appendix.
Rounded totals are shown in the chart below for each scenario.
Downtown PBD
Paid Parking Projected Revenue / YR
Net Funds for DWTN Investment / YR

Pessimistic
$1,020,000
$475,000

Conservative
$1,520,000
$930,000

Aggressive
$2,025,000
$1,400,000

For the “Conservative” scenario, a full Parking Operations State of Activities is included below with
a version with category notes included in the Appendix.
Parking Operations Statement of Activties
Revenue
Paid On-Street Parking
Off-Street Lot - MLK
Off-Street Lot - Hutchison
City Park Lot
Parking Enforcement Fines
Uncollectable Fines
Special Event Fees
Residential Parking Permits
Other Operating Income
Revenue Subtotal

PROJECTION AFTER PBDS
Base Operations Parks PBD
Downtown PBD
$
$
$ 1,507,039
$
$
$
15,000
$
$
$
$
$
265,263 $
$
695,509
$
$
(173,877)
$
6,000
$
250
1,522,039

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

Total
1,507,039
15,000
265,263
695,509
(173,877)
6,000
250
2,315,184

PROJECTION
Expense
Base Operations Parks PBD
Downtown PBD
Depreciation Expense
$
18,000 $
17,400 $
57,998
Employee Parking Program
$
$
30,000
Fuel (Enforcement)
$
13,037
Maintenance and Repairs
$
18,000
Merchant Services (CC Fees) $
18,476 $
9,284 $
53,271
Personnel
$
757,900
Postage
$
500
Residential PP Fees Paid
$
$
500 $
1,000
Signage
$
12,000 $
5,000 $
10,000
Software
$
180,000
Supplies
$
10,000
Telephone
$
3,000
Training
$
10,000
Uniforms
$
3,000
Expense Subtotal
$ 1,043,912 $
32,184 $
152,270

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

Total
93,398
30,000
13,037
18,000
81,031
757,900
500
1,500
27,000
180,000
10,000
3,000
10,000
3,000
1,228,366

Net

$

(516,031) $

233,079

$

1,086,818

Base Ops Charge

$

516,031

$

(75,039) $

(440,992) $

Net to Benefit District

$

-

$

158,040

928,778

$

527,882

$

265,263

$

$

$

1,369,769

$

1,086,818

The conclusion of the financial assessment is that the recommended Downtown PBD parking
policies are feasible even under pessimistic revenue generation conditions. The Net (or
Excess) funds generated by a Downtown PBD could be significant, ranging from nearly
$500,000 to $1,400,000 – a sum that could provide material enhancements to the Downtown.

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 30 of 49

Technology Recommendation
Objective:
Reliable access to parking can be vital to residents and visitors moving about a city. A wellmanaged public curb and parking resources helps promote equitable public access to goods,
services, entertainment, and opportunity. Historically, San Marcos has not had the capacity to
manage a complete public parking system; but, as it has hired experienced parking personnel and
built organizational capability, the city has now positioned itself to move forward with the
development of a more robust parking management system. This document provides
recommendations for the technology needed to support this work, with the goal of providing
seamless, efficient, centralized, and transparent public parking services across the city.

Recommendation Summary
•

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Implement a Parking Management System that requires vendors to utilize Open APIs
o System modules include Enforcement, Payment, Permits, Validation, and Reporting
o Customer interfaces include a parking website, mobile app, and physical meters
Track parking sessions via LPR (license plate recognition) (i.e., no physical tags or tickets)
Enhance enforcement with ticket-by-mail and defined enforcement zones
Consolidate all payment interactions (e.g., fine payment, rate payment, permit payment) to
a consistent user interface experience
Ensure customer interfaces are natively bilingual (English-Spanish) with more languages via
automation
Deploy some physical parking meters for accessibility, but predominately configure system
for digital payments (i.e., web or mobile app)
Use pay-by-app and website to unlock modern parking features beyond meter capabilities
Acquire a stand-alone URL, such as ParkSMTX.com, that prioritizes clear customer
interactions and transactions. Link back to main City website for policy documentation
Maintain limited in-person and by-phone payment options
Merge all permit types (e.g. parks, residential, any future paid parking) into a single system
and interface for consistent and clear customer relationship management
Implement a validation module that allows the City to provide discounts (e.g., to residents)
and businesses to offset all or a portion of customer parking, if they so choose
Create Parking Management Dashboard(s) that track Key Performance Indicators that map
to the City’s Parking Management Goals
Create Parking Benefit Districts and a more robust series of general ledger codes to more
precisely track financial performance of municipal parking management
Continually monitor the market for new parking technologies, such as real-time fixed
occupancy sensors, that can provide multi-purpose benefits to Parking Management

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 31 of 49

•

Investigate innovations such as electronic user notification prior to citations and using lightduty, zero-emission vehicles (e.g., ebikes, eCab, LSV) for downtown LPR scans

Introduction to Parking Management System Technology
Parking management technology has evolved significantly since the days of chalking tires to
measure time-of-stay and feeding coins into single-space meters. Digitalization and automation
have become commonplace, but capabilities continue to rapidly evolve and the City must take
care in selecting both the specific features to deploy as well as the underlying system architecture.
This document is intended to catalogue the various components of a modern parking management
system and provide the Parking Advisory Board’s recommended technology, both hardware and
software, to modernize the City’s parking management.
Proprietary Systems vs. Open APIs
Generally, systems can be divided in two structures:
1. Proprietary Systems where a single vendor controls the entire suite of parking management
system modules (e.g., Enforcement, Payment, Permitting, etc.)
2. Open Application Programing Interfaces (API) Based Systems where system modules from
various vendors and service providers can share information and interoperate to create a
complete parking management system
A proprietary system delivers a single point of contact for vendor management, but typically with a
less diverse feature set and limited flexibly to adapt or improve the system with the agility often
required to tune parking policy. In practice, a hybrid system may be deployed where a primary vendor
provides most modules and interfaces but utilizes open APIs that allows for some modules,
interfaces, or features to be provided by another vendor.
The Parking Advisory Board (PAB) recommends the City implement a parking management
technology architecture based on Open APIs and standardized data formats. This approach
expands opportunities for parking operation to benefit from evolving best-in-class solutions
available for each module and minimizes lock-in to a single provider, regardless of how many
vendor(s) are ultimately awarded initial contract(s).
Systems & Features vs. Process
Generally, this document is focused on systems and features and not the specific processes for
implementation. For example, the PAB will recommend herein a type of physical meter and priority
features it should have; however, it will not detail the process flows of completing a payment at a
meter. Process flows can be vendor-specific and are best left for a future implementation phase.

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 32 of 49

Trade-offs and Priority Features
Even with a Parking Management System based on Open APIs, the City should be prepared that it is
unlikely every recommendation in this document can be feasibly deployed, even mixing and
matching best-in-class vendors for the various modules of the system.
Feature parity may eventually come to the industry, but parking management systems continue to
rapidly change, and industry-wide adoption of new features takes time. Further, the specific
configuration of some desired features described herein may not (yet) be available from any vendor
or require cost-prohibitive customizations. As such, certain “Priority” features are highlighted in this
document with an ❉ to help manage future decisions when trade-offs are identified.

Overview of Parking Management Systems Modules and Customer Interfaces
Parking Management System Modules
The Parking Advisory Board has identified the following modules of parking management systems:
• Enforcement: The enforcement module must integrate hardware and software for tracking
vehicle stays in real-time, issuing citations when required, and collecting data on utilization
of public parking facilities. It must be accurate and user-friendly for the City’s parking
technicians and managers. The enforcement module must also be able to track delinquency
for unpaid fees/rates/citations and assist with collections or other enforcement action, such
as immobilization. Frequently, this module forms the heart of the parking management
system, synthesizing information from other modules to apply the parking polices that apply
to each parking session.
• Payment: The payment module must be able to efficiently charge and receive payments
from motorists based on information received from other modules. The City will need to
receive payments for parking fines/penalties as well as fees/rates. It is important to provide
motorists multiple payment interfaces such as a website, mobile app, meter, and other inperson locations.
• Permit: The permitting module should allow the City flexibility to create programs which
provide certain vehicles special entitlement either to utilize restricted public parking
facilities or to use standard public parking facilities under special terms.
• Validation: A validation module may be required to provide third parties an opportunity to
pay for other motorists parking fees/rates (such as a business owner paying for its
customer’s time) or to provide discounts to motorists that quality (such as residents).
• Reporting: A reporting module can be important to aggregate data from the various other
modules, commonly in the form of a dashboard. Monitoring and managing to key parking
performance indicators is critical to an efficient use of the public curb. A public dashboard
or data reporting can be useful in communicating the benefits and purpose of a robust
parking management program to citizens.

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 33 of 49

Each of these modules will receive a section below with specific recommendations from the PAB.
Ideally, a single-vendor or platform would control each module as defined in this document.
Customer Interfaces
Motorists will need to interact with these modules indirectly through interfaces. The primary
interfaces contemplated by this document are:
•
•
•

Physical Meter (aka Pay-Station) ❉: A meter or pay-station enables a motorist to pay
parking rates in person at the time of parking.
Mobile App: A mobile app can increase user convenience, expand feature sets not available
at a meter, and accommodate motorist that do not have access to a PC or full web browser.
Parking Website❉: The City’s parking website should endeavor to allow a motorist to
complete most City parking transactions in one place. It should also contain or link to all
information available regarding public parking facilities and policies.

Text, phone, or in-person interactions should also be available but will typically direct the user (or
city staff member) to utilize one of the primary interfaces above to complete a transaction.

Enforcement Module
Existing Conditions
The City of San Marcos currently uses a License Plate Recognition (LPR) camera system for on-street
parking compliance. The LPR system uses cameras mounted on enforcement vehicles to
automatically read license plates and track parking durations. This technology helps ensure vehicles
comply with the 2- and 4-hour parking ordinance regulations by identifying and flagging vehicles that
have overstayed the permitted time limits. Parking Enforcement (a part of the City Code Compliance
department) utilizes a mobile license plate recognition system to patrol the on-street paid parking
and permit areas.
This LPR enforcement system captures the vehicle’s license plate info, GPS location, original time
stamp, and secondary time stamp. The time stamp data is automatically cross-referenced to the
current two- and four-hour regulations. If the time stamps violate the regulation, an enforcement
agent can then issue a violation via a handheld unit, which syncs directly with the system to ensure
accurate and efficient ticketing in real-time. Because the current configuration and policy do not
enforce parking zones (i.e., groups of spaces, such as one side of a block or multiple blocks),
motorists are able to move just one space over to avoid citation for an over-time stay. This has
contributed to a ‘cat-and-mouse’ game where violations of the intent of the City’s parking policy are
occurring without violating the letter of the law.
The hardware associated with enforcement includes 3 vehicles equipped with 2 mobile Motorola
LPR cameras per vehicle, 3 handheld IPS enforcement units, and 3 Dodge Durango patrol vehicles.
For the enforcement module software, the City’s current vendor is IPS. The City updated its LPR
camera and handheld hardware and signed a new contract with IPS and Motorola in May of 2025 and
Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 34 of 49

it runs through April of 2030. The hardware package owned or leased by the City at any given time
can limit features available to the modules of the Parking Management System regardless of
software capabilities.

The City currently utilizes an enforcement payment portal that allows users to conveniently pay or
dispute violations online. This portal includes real-time access to violation details, timestamps, and
location data captured by the LPR enforcement system. This portal also includes an option to submit
disputes, providing supporting documentation or explanations for review. However, this portal is
separate from the City’s permitting portals and other parking tools.
Recommendations
• Enable ticket-by-mail to send minor violations to the DMV registered vehicle owner11.
Continue to post physical notices for any citations that could start a process resulting in
the immobilization, towing, and/or impoundment of a vehicle ❉
•
•
•
•
•

•

Configure the enforcement system for Downtown to enforcement zones12 ❉
Utilize a common payment module and interface for the collection of both citations and
regular parking rates ❉
Prioritize interoperability of the enforcement module with the reporting module to track key
performance indicators of compliance with the City’s parking policies
Configure the enforcement system to produce utilization data by downtown zone13
For dedicated downtown patrol, exchange conventional vehicles for more nimble,
electrified vehicles mounted with LPR cameras (e.g., eBike, eCab, LSV). Consider multipurpose functions such as public safety patrol or fixed route circulator14
For motorists that register a parking account with the City, develop a courtesy notification
system that prompts any the account holder of an impending violation and provides the
motorist a brief opportunity to come into compliance to avoid citation15

In addition to having the potential to improve collections, this process enhances the safety of enforcement
agents by minimizing face-to-face confrontations with motorists, reducing the risk of disputes and potentially
hostile interactions.
12
This would recognize a vehicle that parks within a zone and then moves to another space within the same
zone during the same enforcement period to be continuing a single parking session. This could be to the
motorist’s benefit (e.g., using all the value of a day-permit for come and go parking) or to the benefit of the
public (e.g., a motorist cannot circumvent City policy simply by moving its vehicle a short distance to
simulate the start of a new parking session.)
13
Utilization data collected by the enforcement module will likely be limited only to the hours of enforcement
unless additional technologies (such as fixed, mounted occupancy sensors) are deployed at additional
expense.
14
Parking enforcement can retain a single larger vehicle for deploying immobilization devices.
15
This type of system may not currently be available from current service providers and a custom solution
may be cost-prohibitive to implement.
11

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 35 of 49

Payment Module
Existing Conditions
Currently, the City primarily collects payments related to enforcement activities. The enforcement
payment portal allows users to conveniently pay or dispute violations online. This portal includes
real-time access to violation details, timestamps, and location data captured by the LPR
enforcement system. This portal also includes an option to submit disputes, providing supporting
documentation or explanations for review. Individuals can also pay their parking violations in
person at the San Marcos Municipal Court.
In July 2025, the San Marcos launched a paid parking pilot program at the City Park parking lot to
better manage demand, improve turnover, and support long-term parking system
sustainability. The program utilizes Flowbird payment kiosks to process both cash and credit card
transactions on-site, with credit card payments securely processed through Chase Merchant
Services. In addition, PayByPhone offers convenient smartphone app and web-based payment
options for customers who prefer contactless transactions. City Park Resident parking permits are
administered through IPS Group ensuring streamlined account management and tracking. For
enforcement and compliance, the City implemented fixed license plate recognition (LPR)
technology through Motorola’s Vigilant software in coordination with IPS to support citation
issuance and collections. Together, these integrated systems allow the City to evaluate
performance metrics, user behavior, and revenue performance while maintaining a customerfocused parking experience.
The City of San Marcos utilizes IPS group to administer and collect payments for the City’s
residential permit zone parking program. Through IPS, residents can apply for, renew, and manage
permits through a centralized online platform, creating a streamlined and user-friendly experience.
The system supports secure payment processing, eligibility verification, permit tracking, and
reporting, allowing the City to maintain accurate records while improving operational efficiency.
Parking agreements for the Hutchison Lot are coordinated and managed through the City’s Main
Street Department, which oversees tenant relations, space allocation, and agreement compliance.
Once agreements are executed, invoicing and payment collection are administered through the
City’s Finance Department to ensure accurate billing, revenue tracking, and proper financial
controls. In addition, the Parking Enforcement Department utilizes Motorola’s Vigilant Solution and
IPS system, including license plate recognition technology, to efficiently enforce parking
regulations within designated residential zones associated with the program.
The disparity in these various payment systems and processes can lead to inefficiencies for City
staff and confusion for the public. It is viewed by the Parking Advisory Board as a current barrier to
efficient parking management.

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 36 of 49

Further, the City has certain policies, such as an early-payment incentive or late-payment penalty,
that adjust the citation value based on the timing of payment. While initial implementation of these
policies required manual intervention by parking enforcement, the City’s recent transition to IPS for
mobile LPR enforcement processing is expected to allow application of these policies to be
automated.
General Recommendations
The Parking Advisory Board recommends that the City consolidate parking revenue events
(e.g., fine payment, rate payment, permit payment) into a single payment module and
customer interface for consistency of user experience and efficiency of staff management.
Ideally, a single vendor can provide a sufficient solution for all payment events.
If multiple interfaces are required to deliver an optimized and comprehensive set of parking
management system capabilities, the City should develop a common payment landing page on its
webpage and app that at least consolidate starting-point URL links for the different types of
transactions (e.g., fine payment, rate payment, permit payment) that then deliver the user to the
required module/interface.
Additionally, the City should ensure all its customer-facing interfaces – but especially those
related to payment and enforcement – are natively bilingual with English and Spanish❉ with a
preference for adding broader language support via automated translation services that are now
widely available.
The City must determine whether to utilize a payment module that has the capability to synthesize
data from other modules or to simply function as a transaction processor. A system that can
synthesize data would be required to utilized information provided by other modules to calculate
and charge appropriate rates or citation penalties. A transaction processor would simply post and
facilitate payment for amounts furnished to it by another module and then communicate back
payment status to the enforcement and/or reporting modules.
Further, the City should either surface and mitigate limitations of its standard merchant services
provider or be flexible in utilizing another merchant service provider to ensure it can accept rapidly
adopted and more secure touchless (e.g., tap-to-pay, NFC) transaction methods.
Preliminary research indicates that payment modules with the most robust features are frequently
integrated with a common vendor for the enforcement module. Regardless as to whether it is the
payment module or the enforcement module that does applies policy logic, the Parking Advisory
Board recommends a single module be appointed to synthesize data from all module sources and
to implement the City’s parking policy framework to reduce system architecture complexity.

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 37 of 49

Recommendations by Customer Interface
Options for collecting parking payments have evolved substantially since the coin-operated
individual meters utilized generations ago when San Marcos last had paid on-street parking. The
Parking Advisory Board recommends a variety of payment options for user convenience,
enforcement staff safety, ease of maintenance, and deployment of a robust feature set for
downtown parking management. This section will focus recommendations on each Customer
Interface.
This section assumes all Customer Interfaces will be configured to utilize a pay-by-license plate
methodology and does not require paper parking passes/license/tickets. Pay-by-text is not
recommended as a stand-alone interface that would involve charges via the motorist’s cellular
carrier; however, it is recommend as a tool to direct parkers to the City’s app or mobile-friendly
website.
Recommendations for Pay-by-Meter:
Physical meters are falling out of favor with customers and parking management entities in
exchange for more cost-effective, flexible, and convenient digital options. Physical meters are a
significant upfront expense (or lease commitment), require more intensive maintenance
requirements, and introduce the potential for vandalism. Despite these drawbacks, the Parking
Advisory Board believes maintaining some physical meter presence is important for equity
and accessibility. Use of meters should be continually evaluated with the expectation that over
time they may be entirely replaced with digital interfaces. The Parking Advisory Board
recommends:
•

Use multi-meters instead of single-space meters to manage cost, maintenance, and

•

security ❉
Meet ADA standards at and around each multi-meter, including routes from nearby
accessible parking spaces ❉

•

Limit deployment of meters to intersections to balance accessibility with cost ❉

•
•
•

Meet industry standard PCI compliance ❉
Complete a lease vs. buy analysis prior to procurement of meters
Supplement multi-meters with frequent signage directing motorists to the City’s parking
app or website via posting an URL, QR code16, and/or text number
Accept credit card (chip and NFC/contactless/tap-to-pay) and cash, but no coins
Do not make change for transactions
Do not offer refunds for unused time
Utilize solar power to reduce installation costs and increase sustainability

•
•
•
•

Citizens of other communities have been tricked by fake signage and QR codes that direct customers to a
fraudulent payment sites. The City must take care to prevent spoofing of text or QR codes by considering
posting height, scheduled signage reviews, and consumer advisories.
16

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 38 of 49

•
•

Accept codes for discount or validation
If possible, recognize license plates registered with special City entitlements (e.g., resident
discount, permit, need-based free parking) and apply applicable rates

Recommendations for Pay-by-App:
Parking apps hosted on platforms like the Apple App Store and Google Play store have continued to
gain popularity and parker familiarity. Most municipal parking applications are developed by a
third-party vendor and ‘white-labeled’ with a municipality’s custom branding. For example,
Passport Labs is the mobile app vendor for both Austin and San Antonio while ParkMobile provides
mobile app services to New Braunfels and other major Texas cities such as Dallas and Houston.
The City of San Marcos has partnered with established parking management systems vendors such
as FlowBird, IPS, and PayByPhone for its City Park paid parking pilot for various technologies but
not a mobile app. The Parking Advisory Board recommends:
•

Mirror core functionality of the multi-meter for payment at time of parking ❉

•
•
•

Provide access to validation module to process discounts ❉
Create a ‘white-label’ app that utilizes City of San Marcos branding
Facilitate motorist registration for parking programs (e.g., permits, resident entitlements)
or, at minimum, link-out to web portal
Develop iOS “App Clip” and Android “Instant Apps” that allow visitors to pay with their
mobile device without full app download

•

Recommendations for Pay-by-Website
The City’s current parking website is housed within the City’s overall website managed by
CivicPlus. The Parking Management page mixes a variety of objectives from general citizen
education to transactional processes, such as permit registration and citation payments. A mix of
platforms are used from basic web forms to third-party payment portals. The structure of the City’s
CivicPlus platform appears to create barriers to clear permitting and payment process flows. The
Parking Advisory Board recommends:
•

•
•

Create a standalone ParkSMTX.com (or similar) website that prioritizes clear customer
interactions (e.g., payments and permit registrations) and links back to the City’s CivicPlus
platform for policy documentation ❉
Create a phone-optimized (aka mobile responsive) webpage for basic payment processing
at the time of parking
Ensure a customer can complete any City parking transaction on the ParkSMTX website
that they could complete on at a physical meter or via the app

Recommendations for Other Payment Options
Parking citations can currently be paid in person at the San Marcos Municipal Court during regular
business hours, by mail, or by phone. The Parking Advisory Board recommends these options

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 39 of 49

be maintained with city staff members processing these payments utilizing the new payment
module for processing receipts.

Permit Module
Existing Conditions
A parking permit is a special entitlement that allows a vehicle to be parked in an otherwise
restricted zone or to be exempted from standard enforcement policies. Historically, permits were
physical hangtags or stickers displayed on the vehicle, but LPR has enabled permitting to become
digital as well.
The City already issues digital parking permits for its Residential Parking Zone (RPZ) program.
While registered vehicles are recognized digitally by the LPR enforcement system and entitled
through an automated process, up until the fall of 2025 the registration process for residents within
an RPZ was somewhat manual with an online form that is not directly tied to the parking
management system and proof of address documentation that had to be separately emailed to the
City Marshal’s office. As of the date of this document, the City is in the process of transitioning the
RPZ permit registrations into the same online portal utilized for the City Park permits furnished by
IPS. Additionally, guest hang-tags and temporary permits are still physical.
Recently, the City has also launched a paid parking pilot program for its City Park lot adjacent the
Pauline Espinosa Community Hall. City residents are effectively issued permits that exempt them
from the paid rate structure. The customer interface for this process is managed by IPS through
their thepermitportal.com interface.
Recommendations
With an expected increase in the types of permits and expected continued expansion of the RPZ
program, the Parking Advisory Board recommends:
•
•
•
•
•

All permits be integrated into a unified Permits Module
Migrate guest and temporary permits to LPR fully removing physical permitting
Require a platform that can facilitate multiple permit types per vehicle
Prioritize a platform that assists in validating applicant eligibility
For certain permits, consider auditing a selection of applications vs. dedicating the
extensive staff time to review every registration

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 40 of 49

Validation Module
Existing Conditions
Parking Validation refers to the process of a third-party, other than the motorist, paying for or
discounting the motorist’s parking session. This third party could be business or the City itself (in
which case, the City is simply foregoing revenue vs. expending cash).
To the motorist, validation may seem as though their parking is “free,” though the validating entity
(such as a business) is absorbing the cost of the motorist’s parking in full or at a discounted rate. In
the past, validation would frequently occur with gated parking and physical tickets through a
process of manual or digital stamping and a parking attendant’s review.
Today, systems are available that allow a third-party to issue payment or discount codes to a
parker to be input at the time of payment. Alternatively, some vendors provide web portals that
allow third parties to directly pay or discount a motorist’s parking fees on the motorist’s behalf by
refencing the license plate. In either case, the third parties decide how much of a motorist’s
parking fees it wishes to pay or discount.
The City has recently introduced its first validation processes as part of the City Park paid parking
pilot. Validation codes are offered to parties reserving the Pauline Espinosa Hall for events. These
codes may be entered into the physical kiosk on site operated by Flowbird. Additionally, the City
has offered the Lion’s Club Tube Rental located on site to set up a business validation account with
PayByPhone if it so chooses.
Recommendations
The Parking Advisory Board recommends that the city include validation to implement core
aspects of its overall paid parking recommendation, including resident discounts17, and to
support businesses that may want to share in their customer’s transportation costs.
•
•

Implement delayed payment processing and/or citation issuance to allow parkers and
the validating entity time to qualify the parker to validate their current parking session
If a validation system generates payment codes for validation, ensure:
o Businesses can offer one-time codes usable only for a single parking session
o The City can issue codes that are valid for an entire year or more
o A process is implemented to prevent code abuse, such as matching codes to
license plates or limiting the total discount or number of uses

While this recommendation contemplates something like a City-wide resident discount being
accommodated via the Validation Module, some vendors may be able to better implement that strategy via a
Permit Module. Ultimately, the naming convention is unimportant to the motorists.
17

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 41 of 49

Discount and validation are features that may only be able to be implemented via mobile app or
web interface. While not a core requirement, the Parking Advisory Board recommends the City
also investigate whether its selected physical meter can also accept validation codes.

Reporting Module
Existing Conditions
The City currently generates most of its reports from its enforcement system or by inputting
information manually into data tables and graphs utilizing programs such as Microsoft Excel.
These reports are used internally, and some are provided to the Parking Advisory Board.
Utilization data is only able to be collected using individual human observation, data entry, and
manual analysis. The same is true for turnover data. The result is that core performance data is
available only from a very limited number of moment-in-time snapshots. Data accuracy and trend
analysis are very difficult or impossible to complete. Staff is doing well to provide tracking with the
resources they have; however, a robust reporting module or other systems are not currently in
place.
Financially, the City collects and pays all parking related transactions out of or into the General
Fund. While some specific general ledger codes exist to isolate many parking-related transactions,
data must be manually aggregated and complied to create a Parking Management income
statement. Staff began compiling this quarterly financial report in 2024, which has been useful in
highlighting the cost of enforcement and the subsidy an enforcement-only parking management
approach has been requiring prior to the 2024 citation fine schedule revisions adopted by Council.
Lastly, from an enforcement and collections perspective, the City’s current system allows for the
generation of a listing of the total number of citations or warnings issued by month by violation
code and the associated total fine value issued (though not necessarily collected). Conversely,
collections are reported in bulk associated with the month payment is received. The result is that
only a rough approximation of collection rate can be assigned to any enforcement month and
compliance with specific parking policies is difficult to track or monitor outside of raw citation
counts.
Dashboard Recommendations
The Parking Advisory Board recommends that the City procure a Reporting Module that
includes a Parking Management Dashboard (or Dashboards) that can aggregate data from all
the other modules and continuously report out key performance indicators (KPIs) that align
with the City’s Parking Management goals.
A Parking Management Dashboard is a comprehensive, user-friendly platform that integrates data
from all Parking Management System modules into a consolidated view. It provides real-time

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 42 of 49

insights through customizable charts and graphs, enabling users to monitor compliance, revenue
trends, and other performance data immediately.
At a minimum a dashboard should be available for City Staff to monitor performance of the system,
make real-time adjustments within their authority, and reporting out to the Parking Advisory Board
and City Council periodically. Additionally, a public-facing dashboard could be configured as a
tool to offer the public transparency by displaying key metrics and trends to stakeholders and
community members. Some example data points for a parking Dashboard are shown in the table
below. The Parking Advisory Board recommends:
•

Develop a Parking Management Dashboard for Staff and Parking Advisory Board tracks KPIs

•

that map to the City’s parking management goals ❉
Create a public-facing Parking Management Dashboard that highlights performance and
the benefits of a robust parking management to the public

PARKING DASHBOARD ANALYTICS
Category

Description

Revenue !Monitoring
Avg Length of Parking Stay
Average Revenue per Transaction
Parking Revenue per Zone
Parking Meters Health Meter
Parking Revenue by Type
Violations Issued
Violation Revenue
Violation Collection Rate
Violations by Category!
On-Street Parking Permits Issued
On-Street Permits per Zone
Validation !Monitoring
Parking Project Goals
Parking Benefit District Projects

Tracks and analyzes total parking revenue across all payment sources and locations.
Measures the average duration of parking sessions based on payment records.
Calculates the average amount collected per parking payment, excluding ticketing.
Breaks down parking revenue by specific geographic areas or zones.
Monitors the operational status and functionality of parking meters.
Reports revenue distribution across different payment methods.
Tracks the total number of parking Violations issued within a given period.
Measures revenue generated from parking Violations paid during a given period..
Calculates the percentage of issued Violations that have been successfully paid during a given period.
Provides a breakdown of violations by ordinance category:
Counts the total number of active on-street parking permits.
Provides a breakdown of parking permits issued by zone.
Tracks the usage of parking validations issued by businesses or organizations.
Defines key objectives for parking management initiatives and tracks progress.
Tracks projects or programs funded by revenue, ensuring reinvestment in approved projects.

Finance-related Recommendations
Prior to initiating paid parking in areas throughout the City, the Parking Advisory Board
recommends that Parking Benefit Districts (PBD) be created to isolate revenue collected
within each PBD such that excess funds collected from parking management can be spent to
the benefit of the properties and public spaces within the applicable PBD. This approach to
parking management has been demonstrated across the country to materially improve areas
subject to parking demand pressures. It also demonstrates the value of the public curb and
highlights the investments the City can make back into the community though an efficient parking
management program.

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 43 of 49

Further, the Parking Advisory Board recommends that the City work with its Finance
department to further isolate and categorize revenue and expense events related to the
Parking Management city-wide. These should include categorization of generalized expenses
(such as enforcement personnel that serve the entire City) as well as more specific costs that may
allocate solely to a particular area or region of the City (such as meters serving the downtown). The
City should then develop a methodology for allocating generalized parking expenses
proportionately to any PBD to fairly determine how much excess revenue, if any, each PBD has
created for reinvestment within its boundaries.
Once these coding enhancements are complete, the Parking Advisory Board recommends
that quarterly financial statements be reviewed with the Parking Advisory Board at an overall
Parking Fund level and individually for each PBD.
•
•

•

Create Parking Benefit Districts prior to launching paid parking in an area ❉
Create a Parking Management fund (or otherwise further isolate reporting within the
General Fund) and report quarterly statements on the financial health of parking operations
and each PBD, as applicable ❉
Integrate a high-level summary of financial performance into the Dashboard

Utilization Data-related Recommendations
While some collection of utilization data (e.g. occupancy, turnover) can and should be collected by
a modern, mobile LPR system, that data can be subject to accuracy and usability challenges given
the realities of a camera that is in continuous motion and relies on lines of sight that may be
periodically obstructed. As funding allows, either from excess PBD revenues not slated for other
priorities, grants, or otherwise, the City may consider fixed occupancy sensors from vendors such
as Cleverciti.
Unlike mobile LPR cameras that monitor for violations of parking policy, fixed occupancy sensors
focus on the entire space and not the license plate of a parked vehicle. By maintaining a consistent
view of a block or other group of spaces, they system can report occupancy and turnover data
continuously and accurately without the need for significant data analysis or assumptions.
Beyond those benefits, in their full implementation, occupancy sensors can also be utilized for
motorist wayfinding to parking and to communicate parking availability. Displays at intersections
can direct motorists to vacant spaces to enhance customer satisfaction and reduce circling that
negatively impacts traffic, road user safety, and air quality.
System-Wide Data Privacy, Security, and Open API Requirements
The Parking Advisory Board recommends each component of the City’s parking management
system—including enforcement, payment, permitting, validation, reporting, and all customerfacing interfaces—be designed and deployed with data privacy and security as foundational
requirements.
Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 44 of 49

Each module processes sensitive information such as license plate data, payment credentials,
account information, location data, and transactional records. All systems will be required to
comply with applicable federal and state data protection laws, Payment Card Industry Data
Security Standards (PCI DSS) where applicable, and recognized cybersecurity best practices. It is
recommended that data be encrypted and protected through secure authentication mechanisms
and governed by role-based access controls with comprehensive audit logging.
Consistent with the Parking Advisory Board’s recommendation to adopt an Open API–based
system architecture, all data exchange between modules and third-party services are required to
occur through secure, well-documented APIs that follow industry standards for authentication,
authorization, and data minimization. APIs must support secure token-based access, granular
permissioning, and the ability to restrict or revoke access without disrupting the broader system.
Open APIs are intended to enable interoperability and vendor flexibility—not to expand data
exposure—and should be implemented in a manner that preserves system integrity and prevents
unauthorized access.
The Parking Advisory Board recommends the City of San Marcos retain full ownership, control, and
governance authority over all data generated or processed by any parking management system
component, regardless of vendor or module, and no vendor shall claim ownership or use such data
for any secondary purpose, including resale, marketing, analytics, or product development,
without the City’s explicit written authorization. The City shall also retain the unrestricted right to
access, export, and delete its data at any time. including upon contract termination, and Open APIs
are required to support data portability using standardized formats to minimize vendor lock-in.
Customer-facing interfaces—including physical meters, mobile applications, and web portals—
shall adhere to privacy-by-design principles and collect only the minimum data necessary to
complete a transaction or provide a service. Clear, accessible privacy disclosures must be
provided to users, describing what data is collected, how it is used, and how long it is retained.
Data retention schedules should be defined by module and enforced consistently across all
integrated systems.
Together, these requirements will ensure that the City’s Open API parking management
architecture remains secure, privacy-conscious, interoperable, and aligned with responsible
municipal data stewardship.

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 45 of 49

Parking Management Staffing Recommendation
The City of San Marcos’ current parking team includes a Parking Manager (vacant as of May 2026)
providing strategic oversight and direction, a Parking Enforcement Coordinator, and four full-time
equivalent (FTE) Parking Enforcement Technicians. These functions are assigned from the City’s
Public Works (parking management) and City Marshal (parking enforcement) departments.
As the City of San Marcos transitions from free, time-restricted parking to a more managed system
with Parking Benefit Districts and paid zones in high-demand areas, the scale and complexity of
daily operations will grow significantly. Expansion in parking management tasks and oversight has
already been observed as the City has launched its first paid parking lot at City Park – where the
City Parks and Recreation department has also allocated staff resources.
While the Parking Manager will continue to guide policy and strategy, additional parking
management staff will be needed to ensure smooth operations, customer service, and
accountability as the City’s parking programs expand. Some expansion of enforcement team
members is also anticipated to support compliance with the City’s parking policies.
Operational Needs Driving Additional Staff
1. Permit Processing: Reviewing and approving residential zone, on- and off-street permits,
managing renewals, and maintaining accurate records.
2. Revenue Collection: Collecting and reconciling funds from pay stations, preparing
deposits, and ensuring financial accountability.
3. Customer Service: Assisting residents, visitors, and businesses with parking inquiries,
troubleshooting payment issues, and providing timely support.
4. Data & Reporting: Compiling utilization, enforcement, and revenue data to support the
Parking Manager and prepare reports for the Parking Advisory Board.
5. Equipment & Infrastructure Maintenance: Monitoring pay stations, signage, and other
infrastructure, ensuring reliable operations and vendor coordination.
6. Expanded Coverage: As paid parking expands into more days and longer hours, staff
support will be needed to provide consistent operational coverage.
7. Additional Parking Enforcement Support: As Parking Benefit Districts (PBD) are created,
dedicated enforcement staff may be justified to serve specific geographies or expanded
hours of enforcement. Additional staffing may also be required to respond effectively to
peak demand periods, special events, and permit-zone enforcement requirements
Current Position Descriptions
1. Multimodal Parking Initiatives Manager
a. Oversees all citywide parking management strategies and initiatives
b. Guides the development and implementation of long-term parking management
strategies, aligning operational goals with the City’s mobility, sustainability, and
downtown development objectives.

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 46 of 49

c. Coordinates with all City departments, boards, vendors, and community
stakeholders to improve parking compliance, enhance user experience, and
promote sustainable initiatives
d. Ensures compliance with City ordinances, state laws, and administrative
procedures related to parking enforcement and appeals.
e. Analyzes parking data and revenue trends to develop operational reports,
performance metrics, and recommendations for program improvements.
f. Currently 1 FTE that reports to an Assistant Director of Public Works
2. Parking Coordinator
a. Oversees the planning, coordination, and daily operations of the City of San
Marcos Parking Program and wrecker services.
b. Develops and updates Parking Division policies, procedures, and training programs.
c. Supervises parking personnel, including scheduling, performance evaluation, and
payroll.
d. Manages wrecker service operations, investigates violations and complaints,
maintains inspection records, and coordinates with TDLR.
e. Provides support to city departments regarding parking and towing issues; available
for limited after-hour callouts.
f. Performs administrative tasks such as data entry, reporting, and permit processing;
maintains radar signage and related data.
g. Currently 1 FTE that reports to City Marshal
3. Parking Enforcement Technician
a. Enforces timed parking in the City’s downtown area; observes and monitors timed
parking; issues citations accordingly.
b. Monitors for illegal parking in handicap areas and fire lanes; prepares and issues
related citations.
c. Boots/Barnacle vehicles; coordinates the towing of illegally parked and/or
abandoned vehicles.
d. Assists Parking Coordinator as necessary or required and wrecker enforcement
issues.
e. Effectively communicates with dispatch over radio for calls for service pertaining to
Parking.
f. Currently 3 FTE (3 full-time, 2 part-time) that reports to the Parking Coordinator
Public Works staff outlined two new roles that would likely be required to manage the PBDs
effectively with the following descriptions.
New Position Descriptions
1. Parking Program Administrator (Est. $75,000 to $80,000 fully loaded with benefits)
a. Supports daily operations and customer service.
b. Manages permits and reporting.
c. Serves as a primary contact for public inquiries.
d. Provides critical support to effectively roll out and sustain a comprehensive paid
parking management strategy
2. Parking Maintenance Technician (Est. $50,000 to $55,000 fully loaded with benefits)
a. Handles inspections, collections, and upkeep of pay stations and signage.
b. Reconciles and secures revenue.

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 47 of 49

c. Coordinates with vendors on service and repairs.
Ultimately, the Public Works and Enforcement departments provided into the PAB input into the
expected total staffing needs to serve this recommend which would include: one (1) Multimodal
Parking Initiatives Manager, one (1) Parking Program Administrator, one (1) Parking Maintenance
Coordinator, one (1) Parking Enforcement Coordinator, five (5) full-time Parking Enforcement
Technicians, and three (3) part-time Parking Enforcement Technicians. These recommendations
and current/expected salaries were incorporated into the Personnel expense in the financial model
and analysis herein.

Funding Strategy
These positions will be supported directly by revenues generated by Parking Benefit Districts. This
ensures the overall parking management function is self-sustaining and does not place any
additional burden on the City’s general fund. As parking revenue grows, staffing investments will
directly support the integrity, transparency, and long-term success of the City’s parking program.

Staffing Conclusion
The launch of Parking Benefit Districts and a more sophisticated management of public parking
resources introduces new responsibilities that cannot be managed effectively by the existing
parking team structure. Addressing staff requirements alongside an expansion of parking programs
will ensure the program has the staffing capacity to operate efficiently, maintain public trust, and
deliver on the City’s broader mobility and economic goals.

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 48 of 49

Implementation Timeline
If the council approves PAB’s recommendation to implement paid parking downtown, the PAB
recommends at least a 6-month procurement timeline, given the complexity of the technology
required to implement an effective parking management program. The PAB also recommends that
full implementation be in place for the start of the fall semester at Texas State after a soft-launch in
the preceding summer. Given the these timing recommendations, the PAB recommends beginning
paid parking at the earliest in Fall 2027. This section lays out PAB’s recommendation for the full
implementation timeline.
After making its recommendation and in advance of council’s consideration, the PAB will first seek
input from downtown stakeholders in summer 2026, including the Main Street Advisory Board,
Downtown Association, the Parks and Recreation Board, the South Square Collective, the
Chamber, the Hays Caldwell EDC, and Texas State. Based on their feedback, the PAB may revise
its recommendation resolution. The goal of this step is to ensure the proposal has broad support
from the downtown community.
In fall 2026, the PAB will work with City staff on a more general education campaign about the
current policies and enforcement. This will include outreach to Texas State students, particularly at
orientation, as well as social media posts and outreach to local businesses. Enforcement has
shifted considerably over the last few years, including the addition of the windshield-based
immobilization device (known as Barnacles), introduction of some 4-hour spaces in low-demand
areas, and the employee parking pilot program. There are also potential additional changes to the
parking ordinances currently under review, which would also be part of this campaign if approved.
The goal of this campaign is to bring awareness of current parking policy and test the ability of the
city and committee to communicate changes in advance of a major new policy such as the launch
of the Downtown PBD.
If the Council chooses, we anticipate the recommendation resolution being brought before it in the
Fall of 2026. Council approval would set up spring 2027 for three concurrent processes: a new
education campaign on the policy (using lessons learned from the fall), hiring of additional staff
required to administer the PBDs, and technology/software/services procurement by city staff. Paid
parking downtown could be soft launched in summer 2027, during the busy river season, and then
a full launch would coincide with the start of the Fall 2027 semester.
This timeline is dependent on council approval sometime in the fall of 2026. If approval does not
come until spring 2027, the timeline could be compressed if staff believe procurement can be sped
up or deferred to Winter 2028. Regardless of final launch date, PAB recommends that sufficient
time be allocated for an education campaign, and that full deployment occur when Texas State is
in session to maximize the potential program benefits.

Downtown Parking Analysis and Recommendation

Page 49 of 49

Downtown Parking Benefit District (PBD) Implementation
2026
2027
Task
May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar April May June July Aug Sept
PAB Downtown Parking Benefit District (PBD) Recommendation Discussion Item
PAB Downtown PBD Recommendation Vote
PAB Downtown PBD Informational Feedback Presentations
- Parks Board (meets 3rd Thursday at 5:30, meets June 18th doesn’t meet in July)
- Main Street Board (meets 3rd Wednesday at 5:30)
- Downtown Association
- South Square Collective
- Texas State University (informal)
- Chamber/Hays Caldwell EDC (Informal)
PAB Downtown PBD Recommendation Sent to Council for Discussion / Approval
PAB Evaluation of Downtown PBD Feedback & Updates, as necessary
PAB Outreach Committee Education Campaign on current policy and enforcement
Parking Technology / Services Procurement
PAB Outreach Committee Education Campaign on Roll Out of Downtown PBD
Summer 2027 Downtown PBD - Soft launch
Fall 2027 Downtown PBD - Full launch