The Okaloosa Board of County Commissioners on Tuesday unanimously approved direction for staff to procure a vendor for paid parking services at select beach access points, parks and boat launches.
- The system could be tested initially at Beach Access Lots 1-7 on Okaloosa Island, Beasley Park, and boat launch parking at Marler Park and Cinco Bayou.
Jeff Peters, parks and facilities director, presented project guidelines that would keep parking free for Okaloosa County residents, likely reduce or eliminate fees during winter months from November through February, and maximize technology while minimizing upfront capital costs to the county. The system would operate through a revenue-sharing arrangement with a vendor rather than requiring significant upfront investment.
“There’s a lot of different avenues you could go,” Peters told commissioners. “Really today we’re looking for direction from the board on moving forward with the pay to park system.”
Commissioner Drew Palmer said he was “very much in favor of making sure that we limit the charging on parking to the non-residents of the county.”
- “The staff heard that loud and clear on the initial discussions,” Peters responded, adding staff would bring back that recommendation.
Chairman Trey Goodwin said he was intrigued by the concept after examining revenue generated by neighboring jurisdictions with similar systems. He said revenues could help offset property tax burdens on unincorporated citizens who pay the special parks tax.
“This could help offset some of that, may not eliminate it, sure,” Goodwin said. “But it could certainly help offset it and reduce that burden on our property taxpayers.”
Various entities already charge for parking in the area, including the military at $10 daily at its Okaloosa Island beach park, private lots in Destin, and the City of Pensacola’s extensive pay-to-park systems at parking garages, on-street locations and beach areas. The City of Destin also charges at its public parking lot on Highway 98 and issues resident parking passes for city residents.
- Peters said existing systems would allow the county to learn “what works and what doesn’t in order to better pick an optimal system for the County’s needs.”
The proposed guidelines call for enforcement built in by the vendor, technology that allows customers to check parking availability, and a flexible system that gives the county ability to make adjustments by location. The system would be auditable and would not lock the county into a long-term agreement.
Staff noted the funding would be used for capital improvements and maintenance of park and recreational facilities and could potentially lower the park MSTU rate. Peters said that with potential state legislative funding changes, “the county may need to pursue revenue efforts like these as replacement funding for revenue shortfalls.”
County documents identified additional potential paid parking locations including James Lee Park and the Boardwalk on Okaloosa Island.
- However, the agenda item notes that as staff works through details of any system, some locations “may be too small to make financial sense, some may require parking layout changes, have grant restrictions, and others may have complications like a restaurant on site. Those more unique sites may take time to fund capital costs or work with tenants on the mechanics of a system.”
Staff will return to commissioners with a vendor procurement and detailed options before any contract is finalized.
5 Responses
Yes, yes, yes!
Ridiculous idea. The county supports a whole tourism department and marketing company to incentivize tourism to get people to come here. The bed tax collected and money spent here by tourists is what justifies the expenditures to fund the TDD and marketing company. Seems very inhospitable to tell people to come here and then slap them with a parking fee. In order to police residents from non residents it will need attendants to do verifications. Instead of chasing revenue from a limited number of parking spaces, the commissioners would be wiser to control the millions they have allowed private beach umbrella vendor businesses to take by using our public beaches for their personal profits. For years vendors were allowed to get permits for as many as eleven public beaches for one annual fee of $550. These vendors can set up unlimited numbers of umbrella setups and charge whatever they want. The county would make millions in revenue from the public beaches! If the county leaders want to fill the coffers for improvements, the gold mine is the public beaches- not the parking lots. This is another great idea for a private vendor to start a business and the county will get a fraction of the revenue. The wool is off our eyes.
I hope the county holds public hearings on this. It’s not an idea, it’s ludicrous. To ease congestion? C’mon now. Funding for maintenance? Cmon now, there’s bed tax funds for that, from TOURISM. Tourists from outside Okaloosa County are the very ones filling the county coffers!
Free public beach access is what separates us from the greedy politicians of Destin City & Walton County. Citizens whose livelihood depends on tourism should revolt. Lastly, a 3rd party business should never, ever get their hands on the access points on Okaloosa Island or the Boardwalk
Red and Fox make good points, especially about being counterproductive to the tourist business. Poor tourists: they pay to fly or drive here, pay to use the bypass, pay the bridge toll, pay the hotel tax, …. you get the picture. Some logistical issues:
1. The vehicle tag is not necessarily indicative of the residence of the owner, so a human (or an AI-driven automaton will be required to verify residency (driver or all occupants?).
2. The attendant’s booth or unmanned device and gate will take up valuable parking space.
3. Has a cost-benefit analysis been done to include attendant’s pay, entrance construction costs, associated installation and maintenance of appropriate utilities, back-up power, plans and costs to resolve gate ‘disagreements’. I’m certain that any contractor that bids the effort will find it cost-effective because they would have no reason not to (will the bid analysis be audited?). Does the bid include all upfront costs to include necessary construction as well as costs of contract cancellation and ‘deconstruction’ of associated facilities/equipment?
4. Clearly, a website would be a part of the system. I’d hate to see the algorithm developed by AI that would allow county residents to pre-register for free access and how that would be overseen to prevent abuse.
5. Although I’m certainly not advocating for it, the only paid parking system that makes some operational sense is paid parking for all with an automated pay station.
Would that include handicap parking 🅿️ spots also?