HomeMy WebLinkAboutStudy Session - Proposed Improvements to Huntington Beach Sp ��tsTiNGTo 2000 Main Street,
oF,�1P�47,s,"
. $ Huntington Beach,CA
92648
` te- _- City of Huntington Beach
_ z
-,couNn t o'
File #: 26-715 MEETING DATE: 8/18/2026
Subject:
Study Session: Proposed Improvements to Huntington Beach Sports Complex
Attachment(s):
1. PowerPoint Presentation
IrlArxi 4nt
al/of Huntington Beach Page of 1 Printed on 8/13/2026
powered by LegistarT""
54
City Council/Public Financing ACTION AGENDA August 18,2026
Authority
fund balance to fulfill the 10% grant match requirement.
Supplemental Communications- None
Public speakers- 1
Approved 6-0-1 (Burns-Absent- out of room)
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
17. 26-714 Study Session: Landify
Community and Library Services Manager Chris Cole facilitated a presentation
regarding the MOU for Landify and Jonathan Brayden, Representative from Landify
spoke about the project and answered questions from City Council regarding the
project.
18. 26-715 Study Session: Proposed Improvements to Huntington Beach Sports
Complex
Follow up from Council meeting in July, Zack Zithisakthanakul, Chief Financial
Officer provided a report of recommendations on actions to move forward. Finance
Commissioner Dave Chenault provided his own presentation (unofficial- not
reviewed or produced by City staff) on the Sports Complex.
CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 19-25)
City Clerk
19. 26-673 Approved and Adopted Minutes
Recommended Action:
Approve and adopt the City Council/Public Financing Authority regular meeting minutes
of July 21, 2026.
Approved 7-0
Community and Library Services
20. 26-573 Approved and authorized execution of a License Agreement
between the City of Huntington Beach and Saddleback Church
for use of space at the Huntington Beach Senior Center in
Central Park
Recommended Action:
Page 7 of 10
7ING
. cjovk P 0 RA i-
<5.)‹riiir"
�•
„iris .
i i /�i if��� �(/rat
- - Sports Complex
�� � � _ Follow-up : Finance
- :._ Commission, ,:::i •
Recommendation. 17, 19 , rs <cs Cli,„4,4c 0
0 IVT�
August 18, 2026
55
Background
• On July 7, 2026, a presentation was provided to City Council regarding proposed
improvements to the Huntington Beach Sports Complex (Sports Complex) by City
staff and HBSC Partners, LLC.
• City Council unanimously voted to refer the proposed improvements of the Sports
Complex to the Finance Commission for review and direct staff to assist in
providing the Finance Commission Sub Task Committee with the data they need to
provide a written recommendation to City Council by the August 18 City Council
meeting, including concurrent dialogue with HBSC Partners, LLC.
• The Finance Commission Sub Task Committee is comprised of Commissioners #1.11 w•ING1 /ai
Boomgarten, Chennault and Geery. Al J•.•\N�pRPORgrfo°�V�
•.F \
UNTY l"
Meeting Dates
Since July 7, staff have attended the following meetings:
• Monday, July 13: Sub-Committee Meeting
• Monday, July 20: Sub-Committee Meeting
• Wednesday, July 22: Finance Commission Regular Meeting
• Monday, July 27: Sub-Committee Meeting
• Wednesday, July 29: Sports Complex Methane Monitoring System Meeting
• Wednesday, August 5: Finance Commission Special Meeting
�UTIN6T0
O` �OHPORgr0'• V
y f - _ tiaF
`% '•,ten
CI; , s
ts:..-.$".of�yam t,y,�.•�'1"
•••~� 17 1903 A:�•��
GF%NM? CP\�
August 5 FinnCommission
a ce
Special
Meeting
The Sub-Committee presented the following recommendations, which were approved
by the Finance Commission for recommendation for City Council Consideration:
1 . CEQA first, no agreements until complete
2. Issue an RFI to maximize value and resident benefit
3. All upgrades must follow City procurement rules
4. Establish minimum base rent + revenue share
5. Modernize parking & field use rates
6. Independent Audit of HBSC Partners' three agreements ��NTINGr0
•.•` ORPOAAT•`'•
7. Move agreement oversight to Treasury/Legal engagement o; \N fo •tip
8. Public engagement before any facility changes
cp •�ter:;sw,�"'as'/r __
crc
61DUNP? GPI.
Finance Commission Recommendation
1 . CEQA First, No Agreements
Until
Complete
Background
• HBSC Proposed Changes: HBSC Partners has proposed significant upgrades
and operational changes
• CEQA Requirements: Because the Sports Complex sits atop a former county
landfill with an aging methane management system, it is expected most
proposed changes will require CEQA review
• CEQA Timeline: CEQA can take 3 months to over a year, or longer.
• City Oversight: Jennifer Villasenor with CLS and Legal, is leading the CEQA
process
<<II inic o4,
Q` •N�ORPORgTf'o '
Recommendation ,y r.: - '••..
• Do not execute any agreements, contracts or MOUs until CEQA is fully compl e s
and the City understands what is permissible and at what cost. " - r=
0
=
'v•y4,fB !7 P.•'j�
• HBSC Partners should pay for all CEQA-related costs (scope, studies, cF ••..,.,,,.790°..• ��
environmental services), not the City. COUNTY �P�
Finance Commission Recommendation
2 . Issue a RFI to Maximize Value
Resident Benefit
Background
• Upgrade Potential: The City recognizes there are significant opportunities for
expanded uses and upgrades.
• Resident & Revenue Goals: The City seeks increased resident benefit and
increased revenue.
• Operator Market: Many qualified operators would be interested in managing the
Sports Complex.
a, ,xO-1. G 7.0
Q` `•\N„OfiPORgrf /1/ \
o•••
yA
•e
AUNTY c ,'
t
Finance Commission Recommendation
2 . Issue a RFI
to Maximize Value
Resident Benefit
Recommendation
• Issue a RFI immediately to ensure the City receives the best possible suggested
upgrades, alternative usage options, improved operational and revenue
performance, and enhanced value that improves revenue to the City and usage by,
and value to residents.
• Require a formal response by HBSC Partners so City has a formal proposal for
review and consideration.
• Responses should be evaluated by CLS, Legal, Environmental, Finance, CLS
Commission, t�'''and the Finance Commission to determine whether continuing with -r:NG _
i� �,�N.......,,TO
HBSC Partners beyond 9/27/27 is in the City's best interest. with.
o� ,N�OPPORgTFo���
'sue 1
1
UUNTY CPi�
Finance Commission Recommendation
3 . All Upgrades
Must Follow City
Procurement
Rules
Background
• City Ownership: The Sports Complex is a City-owned public asset.
• Major Upgrades: Proposed upgrades are multimillion-dollar capital improvements.
Recommendation
• All approved upgrades and changes must follow City procurement processes,
ensuring transparency, competitive bidding, and compliance with City code and
charter and state and federal requirements.
�O1*INGT�
.• mire,o •.,��,
' Q
v •y�;8 17 19:9 P� QQ
c��0ONTY CP'
Finance Commission Recommendation
4 . EstablishMinimum +
Rent
Revenue h S ar e
Background
• Current Financial Burden: The Sports Complex currently costs the City roughly $1
million per year.
• No minimum Rent: The existing agreement does not include a minimum monthly
rent.
Recommendation
• Create a new agreement requiring a guaranteed minimum base rent to ensure
positive cashflow. ,,�� .`ING-
• Add a revenue-sharing structure above the base rent to reward strong operator &,..,N5;;;*;;....
performance. � : •••:(1‘7.
oi iQ (,
y . _.� : z
COUNTY O;\'"
s �
Finance Commission Recommendation
5 . Modernize Parking & Field
Use
Rates
Background
• Rate Restrictions: Operators must adhere to fixed parking and field-use rates.
• Market Flexibility: Operators believe significant additional revenue is possible with
market-based pricing.
Recommendation
• Consider removing rate restrictions and direct staff and the Finance Commission to
develop new market-aligned rates for parking and field use.
• Determine equitable revenue split between the City and operator.
• Finance Commission works with staff to create an agreement framework that is 01 \<\\��•N Toni`.
'N0RPORATe°
enforceable and in the City and resident's best interest. IL-\Y_�� •.''•..��``
cam • , � y
COUNTY �Pr��
Finance Commission Recommendation
6 . Independent Audit
of HBSC
Partners ' Three Agreements
Background
• HBSC Partners currently holds three agreements:
• Sports Complex Operations
• Concessions Lease
• Outer Field Maintenance
• The Finance Commission has noted non-compliance concerns.
• Self-reported revenue has never been independently validated, despite rent being
based on revenue percentages.
\\ IN TO
- _ ti•.f
CN
• .. C,3
CJ
C_:;;• "
••mod. 17.....
°LINTY GPti
Finance Commission Recommendation
6 . Independent
Audit of HBSC
Partners ' Three Agreements
Recommendation
• Conduct an independent audit of financial reporting and operational compliance
across all three agreements.
• Audit should be directed by the Finance Commission with assistance from City
staff.
• Refer any breaches to Legal for remediation, termination, or recovery of funds as
appropriate.
• Note: Audit recommendation attached as separate document — this was
approved by Finance Commission.
O` .••�„oRPOR41t'..ole 17 °
%%NT`i GPs\.
Finance Commission Recommendation
7 . Move Agreements
Oversight
to
Treasury/Legal
Background
• Enforcement Issues: Current agreements have not been consistently enforced.
• Staff Limitations: Weekly meetings occur, but enforcement actions have not
been taken or escalated.
Recommendation
• Move management of HBSC agreements to Bill Krill's team and Legal.
• Also move oversight of Equestrian Center, Meadowlark and Yacht Club
agreements under the same structure. 1'INGr�
• Place Bill Krill's team under Treasury leadership for stronger financial O`..••,„�ORPRRgTf ••
oversight.
"••.B f7 190° ��'•
�`�' 0UNT\cP'
Finance Commission Recommendation
8 . Public Engagement BeforeAny
Facility
Background
• Lack of Public Review: HBSC Partners has worked with staff for two years on
proposed upgrades without public review.
Recommendation
• Engage an independent facilitator to conduct public meetings on all proposed
changes.
• No changes to facilities or operations should proceed until public feedback is
collected. NT�i'#� iNG
• Findings should be reported to City Council, Finance Commission and CLS i or.•••,N�oRPORAre_°
Staff and CLS Commission.
1
\\��C B , �
1,9a 'Po•-\O ,'`
=%%%NTY q,
City Council ee ac
Staff requests City Council direction on the following:
• Finance Commission Recommendations
• Continued dialogue with HBSC Partners
• Any other feedback
�\ TING7-_A
•N••N•.y 'Y
•.•\yORPORA lee°••
�cFC.;B ti As ° P � �
�� T`! CPS\
„.„,,,,,.,,,,,_ ,...„_.‘,„.
Questions ? .. .„, ,
Jj �h: rt.*.":�. s ','C'� Pte .
p +�•raet ��'uf y P 4
. '£ � -
. '
.., ..
---
s...... ...„...-_._.... „. _..-„L „-_, _
, .,
, _
-, ,,,,,.,,,,,„, ,,,,,;,,,,,,,,,,,„,,, ,., ._ _....: ,.._, 4,,_,.... ,.
..4„,,,,..„ .,,,,. ...:.,,,, ,..,,,,, . ,—.7::: - ,fr"V--,,,,:14.- •
', ;. .
..;'...+4'''''...
,.^ =�" -�-•,te le' - elk- 74:-*.l-1,-,":" '"N ''''' ''' '' ''.:., ,k‘‘,.pR'''''''-'''''''''r- ''' 4
''
ry� fit' i' Nc 2 w£ R °".
Audit of City-Owned Sports Complex (Huntington Beach, CA)
Title:Motion Directing the City Manager to Conduct a Comprehensive Operational and Financial Audit of the City-Owned
Sports Complex
Motion:
The Finance Commission moves to ask the City Council direct the City Manager to initiate a comprehensive audit of the
City-owned sports complex located in Huntington Beach, including but not limited to its operational practices,financial
management, maintenance procedures, staffing structure, contract administration, and revenue-generation activities.
The audit will include review of 3 agreements with the city for all of the items listed below
• Sports Complex Operation Agreement
• Concessions Lease
• Outer Field Maintenance Agreement for 6ba11 fields in the city parks service agreement
The audit shall include the following components:
1. Operational Review
o Evaluation of facility management practices,scheduling systems, maintenance protocols,safety
compliance,staffing levels, and adherence to city policies.
o Assessment of whether current operations meet community needs, industry standards,and
cost-efficiency expectations.
o Review of Alcohol licensing and practices and compliance with Conditional Use Permit requirements
o Assessment of compliance with operational obligations in the agreement with the city
2. Financial Review
o Full analysis of revenues, expenditures,fee structures,vendor contracts, concession agreements,and
capital improvement costs including onsite and online.
o Verification of financial controls,accounting accuracy, and compliance with municipal financial policies.
o Compliance with revenue share percentage and rent payments including timeliness and amount
o Identification of any inefficiencies, losses, or opportunities for improved revenue capture.
3. Contract and Vendor Assessment
o Review of all third-party agreements, including maintenance, concessions, event hosting, and sports
programming.
o Evaluation of procurement processes,contract performance, and compliance with city requirements.
4. Community Benefit and Utilization Analysis
o Examination of facility usage rates,accessibility, community programming, and alignment with public
expectations.
o Assessment of whether the complex is meeting its intended public purpose.
5. Recommendations and Reporting
o The City Manager shall present a written report of findings and recommendations to the City Council
within 90 days, including any proposed operational improvements,financial reforms,or policy changes.
Purpose:This audit is intended to ensure transparency, accountability, and optimal performance of a major public asset,
and to confirm that the sports complex is being operated in a manner that maximizes community benefit and
responsible stewardship of public funds.
The following additional components of the audit include
SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION - Meeting Date: 8/18/2026 Item No. 18 (26-715)
piwida ehennaaie, vt
fat l -i L e Lii/I:4 Z4J
• Performance benchmark requirement: "The audit shall compare the facility's performance to similar municipal
sports complexes in Orange County and statewide."
• Public transparency requirement: "All audit findings shall be made publicly available on the City's website
within 10 days of presentation to the Council."
• Follow-up action: "Staff shall return with an implementation plan for all recommended improvements within 60
days of the audit's acceptance by the city."
Oversight of the Audit
While city staff will be involved in the contracting, payment,facilitation, and gathering of information for the audit,
overall direction and guidance—including scope and deliverables as well as the final report review and presentation to
council and the public—will be the responsibility of the Finance Commission.
Deliverables
The selected auditing firm will conduct an independent review of the operational and financial management of the
City-owned Sports Complex and any other businesses or organizations operating within the city owned facility or
associated with the city-owned facility including facilities, parking lot, and operations. Deliverables will include:
• A comprehensive assessment of operational practices, including compliance with all terms and performance
obligations outlined in the management or lease agreement or concession agreement.
• An evaluation of financial controls, reporting accuracy, revenue collection, expense management,and
adherence to approved budgets and financial requirements.
• A review of rent payments, invoices,and revenue reports from the vendor for accuracy and timeliness and
calculation of any late penalty or missed or deficient rent payments to the city
• Review and detailed statement of revenue whether online or in-person sales
• Identification of any discounts or"free" products or services or any write-offs and their impact on the revenue,
profit,and amount of rent paid
• Detailed reporting of expenses and a detailed Income statement and balance sheet for the last 5 years from
2021 through 2025 CY and all of CY 2026 that is available
• Headcount of fulltime, part time, and volunteer staff and payroll for each category by position and estimate of
annual hours worked
• Identification of any deficiencies, risks,or non-compliance issues,along with recommended corrective actions.
• Identification of any assets claimed to be owned by the operator that are located within the boundary of the
city asset
• A final written report summarizing findings, supporting documentation, and actionable recommendations for all
of the items listed above with the intention of improving transparency,accountability, operational effectiveness,
and revenue generation.
• Recommendations to improve operation to deliver more value to residents and increased revenue to the city
• Review of agreements and compliance with city requirements not limited to council approval, insurance
requirements, and review by the city legal team.
Timeline
• Audit will commence within 30 days of approval of audit by city council and complete and delivered to the
finance commission within 6 months from the date the audit is requested by the city council.
City
HB Sports Complex
Finance Commission
City of Huntington Beach
8/12/26
SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION -Meeting Date: 8/18/2026 Item No. 18 (26-715)
Pre' 14'61,-4/ /e 14:x krte tuthad2tdi
LI)
LL an vtm Ati *4l
N ��Bk$R�S"dY $�
C
� O� xx fit'
O
4—, ftwi
/'�
V /
_ ?VA 2^
X 2"4"Ns
± Srie� � 5t R
-
n , R "
W
(:)-
0
(/)
L-
0
0-
(..r)
H isto ry of Sp orts Comp lex — Brownfield Rehab
• 1940's -1960's — 30-acre site was operated as an unlined municipal solid waste landfill
• Millions of cubic yards of commercial and household waste were buried up to 35 feet deep
• 1960's Dump Closed
• When landfill operations ceased in the 1960s, the site was capped with a soil layer varying from 4
to 25 feet thick—partially composed of silty sand dredged from the Santa Ana River. Without
engineered bottom liners, subterranean anaerobic decomposition naturally began generating
significant quantities of landfill gas (primarily methane and carbon dioxide), along with volatile
organic compounds (VOCs).
• Present Day
• The buried organic waste has matured, the landfill gas generation rate has naturally decayed.
Current operational data indicates the system extracts roughly 40 standard cubic feet per minute
(SCFM) of gas at a methane concentration of around 30%.
• A complex Gas Recovery and management system is in place . The system remains under strict
quarterly surface emission and perimeter probe monitoring regulated by SCAQMD, the Regional
Water Quality Control Board, and the Orange County Waste and Recycling agency.
• Mushroom Farm — The site also housed the Ocean View mushroom farm — closed in the
1980's
4 _is- I
Sports Complex Approved by Voters in 1996 - Measure L
• 1996 - Ballot Measure L narrowly approved by voters in general election for
$1.5 Million in Spending to build the Sports Complex — passed by 284 votes
• In Favor — 34,604
• Opposed - 34,320
• Total Votes — 68, 924
• City issued bond in 2001 for $31,360,000 for several projects. $18,420,000
was earmarked for Sports Complex Construction after voters approved $1.5
million to build it — additional spend after contractor went bankrupt
;}fit Shall the City of H n hnglcn Beach at a cost of Yes +
, - L $1.5 million construct lighted soccor and soft•
ball F-2 ds, a roer hockey and snack bar cone No +
cession, parking. reslrooms, and related
• 1nproven a 1s in an undeveloped porter of Huntinglon Cen1;al
h . Pa.rk, south 0 TalbeI Avenue and east G, Golderrr e t Street, on
-.-a property that was I'orr erty a landfill and mushroom farm?
3 Bonds - Total Cost of Bond Payments and interest in
Net Present Value — $ 36 Million to date (should be
checked ) and will likely end near $40 million
• Nominal bond values supplied by city finance department ( Amount
shown is portion of bond that can be allocated to the sports complex)
Sports Complex
Principal Interest Total Paid
2001 Series A 3,794,426.02 7,862,886.27 11,657,312.29
2011 Series A 8,285,473.34 3,502,672.73 11,788,146.07
2020 Series B 3,741,566.55 298,912.25 4,040,478.80
15,821,465.90 11,664,471.25 27,485,937.15
• Net Present Value using National CPI — About $36 million
• More still to pay — Approx $2 Million
Remaining 2020 Series B — Approx $2 Million
FY 27, FY 28, FY 29 - Approx $640,000 per year
FY 2030 — Approx $144,000
The total cost to build the Sports Complexpaid by
the city in Net Present Value — $ 38 - $40 Million
_ _ _ - a �
,
• Approximately $38 - $40 Million to date to build the w . 'w
Sports Complex in present day dollars ' ' (
c
• This does not include the annual expenses like water, t „r - ,. '
electric, landscaping, maintenance, bathroom - A ® `°
cleaning, capital costs associated with the concession 0 Ilk 5
buildings, sewer, tree trimming, trash collection ... _
• This also does not include capital expenses like ‘ ,.
parking lot repairs, methane collection replacement,
LED lights, driveway, batting cages
Ongoing Capital Expenses
• There are ongoing capital expenses associated with the Sports
Complex including lights, electrical, parking lot ....
• These are estimated around $3 - $4 Million or more in the next
few years
'‘ .ter ' F :r
t 1.•A - _ 'M _ fin._
a
y . �_
: � � -
fi _ � a ,re , , ,. ,°
.�. . rt. _ v..'4 e •�`//y eR
jai ,
I � �
- ,,-1 I 0().' till
mil
'I'V.3 t 4.'.';',' Y,', -'1'•''!'-'7, -.,'
. LIf fir-��%i .y��gyLti
i 't';
y t V
,;•06,-.V.+r tt�, 1 tz Y .- ,..." .. ,t '1141.
W u4K 4.4;,,,!Vs,,,, , •V-P47*In ,t 4r rev z
Ongoing - Gas Extraction and Monitoring
• .� ._. _ , $1.
r,•-� • . . .
.
•
' • ,'t' + �'�t,,.y •• s !"
��7 y. I _
1.. '• __. ^'7 >♦�.� •
a,. +awe •
1M.0 fi
I. a , 1
• .F 4.04 .'+• •rA:• row r....
o•_j .. ..o...
�.�
.
. terracon 1•14,,wn
Basic Description of Landfill Gas
System
Monitorin /Extraction
g
System Architecture & Components
34 vertical gas extraction wells distributed across the site footprint.
A 10-horsepower gas extraction blower facility to pull sub-slab methane and
landfill gases.
Activated carbon canister scrubbers and filtration units to filter emissions prior
to release/venting, compliant with South Coast AQMD Rule 1150.1 standards.
Main header piping connecting into the local landfill gas collection grid.
Monitoring Extraction and MonitoringLayout
piagram of Landfill Gas Monitoring/Extraction System
ctI . I fr• , j ; j II
;,,t.
7
Il
F,---. . .
/,
C'7/
1p. 7-- _ _,__ ,.:,....._.,. ..: _$.
F
3Tr 4i;.
%
n
Monitoring Extraction and Monitoring Layout
` • ,' 22'.•;mss.J.
`. \ •-., t \• v r1.--:II: -.9 ,1�
.•
•
.; a ta,.-2 • -
•
Mt r0 -23 '
•
• •• ii • AM*, . •• •. .
•.r I •'�Gw-'C�- •4.'sA-+� .. *u.':-♦92 • * • ♦ ♦ . - C 1'
it
. t,4 '. t v3;♦-6
r
• . r.
. 1---
i— - • . .,GW. • �w+'i tt.Tnc
.`
4.• • 6'♦-0.`ij
• 1 • • hoc a K_. : .
. .. •Hip a.-..Olt
•
- 1! COMJI.eY Tr.w•
•• . •Met,.; ue...o...NAM I.
.NI tr.Hsr,n:uw.a•
}I4
•
•
f y� .•
` t .1
1 MT
• r -
ESESEII
99.
•r ' -� • `I- , ierracon ��
.i.,�" • _ MO Sin POINTS
• J-
t. "�• .r• .••n,.Ki.t w•Mabyt•hl:RAG :Ai 1D*d,a.t
•w L
Aging System That Will Need Replacement
Full System Infrastructure Replacement ($350,000—
F._ $800,000+)
• If the entire extraction infrastructure across the Sports
Complex footprint required full replacement (re-drilling
extraction wells, relaying headers, replacing sub-slab vapor
barriers, and updating the blower/treatment skid):
Ballpark • Well Field Work (34 Extraction Wells): Drilling, well
screens, heads, and piping run roughly $8,000 to $15,000
F s l+I m ate of _ per well ($270,000 - $500,000+ total).
Replacement • Collection Piping & Trenching: High-density polyethylene
(HDPE) header piping across the park grounds adds
COS l+S $50,000 to $150,000+ depending on surface restoration
requirements (pavement, turf, or hardscape).
• Blower Skid & Controls: $50,000- $100,000+.
• Engineering, CEQA/Permitting & Construction
Management: Soft costs typically add 20% to 30% to the
total capital outlay.
Financial Highlights of Current Operations
• Net loss of around $1 million a year to city
• Annual rent approximately $900 - $950K a year
• $725K in Parking (this raised significantly when city raised parking from $1 to $10)
• $200K in Rent from operations
• Annual costs to city approximately $2 million a year
• $650K in Bond Payments
• $625K Operating Expenses
• $500K to $750K a year average ( LED lights, driveway & parking lot, switches)
• Major Capital projects on horizon include methane systems, parking lot, irrigation
system
• Details on next slide
• Note — 40% of parking revenue is allocated for Capital Improvements in
Sports Complex
HB Sports Complex
Revenue Share Fy22/23 FY 23/24 Fy24/25 FY 25/26 FY 26/27** FY 27/28** **Estimated
,Parking $ 130,160.73 $ 203,176.83 $ 729,126.00 $ 713,081.00 $ 713,081.00 $ 713,081.00
Revenue Share $ 127,214.85 $ 160,006.16 $ 201,139.00 $ 227,109.00 $ 227,109.00 $ 227,109.00
,Total Revenue $ 257,375.58 $ 363,182.99 $ 930,265.00 $ 940,190.00 $ 940,190.00 $ 940,190.00
Expenses Fy22/23 FY 23/24 Fy24/25 FY 25/26 FY 26/27** IFY 27/28**
Water $ 88,000.00 $ 88,000.00 $ 88,000.00 $ 88,000.00
Electricity $ 110,000.00 $ 110,000.00 $ 107,099.00 $ 117,758.00
Methane Mitigation $ 231,000.00 $ 231,000.00 $ 231,000.00 $ 231,000.00
Field&Landscape Maintenance $ 135,000.00 $ 135,000.00 $ 135,000.00 $ 135,000.00
Restroom&Janitorial Maintenance $ 38,400.00 $ 38,400.00 $ 39,600.00 $ 39,600.00
Restroom Paper/Cleaning Supplies $ 9,600.00 $ 9,600.00 $ 9,600.00 $ 9,600.00
Equipment Replacement $ 6,390.00 $ 182,689.00
Tree Maintenance $ 83,879.20
Natural Turf Replacement $ 17,000.00 $ 17,000.00 $ 17,000.00 $ 17,000.00
Total Operating Expenses $ 629,000.00 $ 629,000.00 $ 634,793.00 $ 821,751.00 $ 629,000.00 $ 629,000.00 Total FY 22/26 Revenue-Expenses
....milemil► I Revenue less Expenses $ (371,624.42) $ (265,817.01) $ 295,472.00 $ 118,438.00 $ 118,438.00 $ 118,438.00 $ (223,531.43)
Fy22/23 FY 23/24 Fy24/25 FY 25/26 FY 26/27** FY 27/28** FY 28-FY 30**
Bond Payments $ 717,270.97 $ 694,756.00 $ 681,553.32 $ 671,340.54 $ 660,626.91 $ 661,745.10 $ 784,000.00
Capital Improvements Fy22/23 FY 23/24 Fy24/25 FY 25/26 FY 26/27** FY 27/28**
LED Lights $ 442,644.00 $ 335,000.00 $ 560,000.00
Sports Turf $ 181,840.00 $ 62,020.00
Switching $ 300,000.00
Pump $ 90,971.00
Driveway Repair $ 400,000.00
Batting Cage $ 330,000.00
Total Capital $ 624,484.00 $ 62,020.00 $ 300,000.00 $ 490,971.00 $ 665,000.00 $ 560,000.00
miii♦ ITotal Annual FY Cost Paid By City I $ 1,970,754.97 I $ 1,385,776.00 I $1,616,346.32 I $ 1,984,062.54 i $ 1,954,626.91 I $1,850,745.10 I
Total Cost to City FY 22/26
Net Cost To City After Revenue Share&Parking $(1,713,379.39) $(1,022,593.01) $ (686,081.32) $(1,043,872.54)H $(1,014,436.91) $ (910,555.10) $ (6,390,918.27)
Per Robert Szilagyi
The current 2020 Lease Revenue Bonds,Series B,require annual debt service payments of approximately$1.6 million annually through FY27-29
with the final payment declining to approximately$360,000 in Fiscal Year 2029-30.
**The Sports complex is 40.32 pct of the bond
Sports Complex Usage Trends
DecliningUsage DuringHBSC Partners Management
Roughly1/3 of Usage by cocal Residents
only
• Attendance is Declining
• This is based upon data reported by city staff
• City Supplied Data Set —
• Usage Data Provided from city owned Placer.Al tracking software
FY Totals Total Unique Resident Non-Resident PCT of Resident to
July 1- June 30 Total Visits Visitors Visitors* Visitors* Non Resident
22-23 830,900 438,400 158,100 280,300 36%
23-24 767,900 421,100 138,392 282,708 33%
24-25 705,000 392,900 122,600 270,300 31%
25-26 676,700 383,900 129,276 272,786 32%
City Supplied Data Set - Usage Data Provided from city owned Placer.AI tracking software
Trends
• Total Visits- Declining each year: Three-year cumulative decline: -154,200 (-18.6%)
• -63,000 (-7.6%)from 22-23 4 23-24
• -62,900(-8.2%)from 23-24 4 24-25
• -28,300 (-4.0%)from 24-25 4 25-26
• Unique Visitors -Also declining, but at a slightly slower rate: Three-year cumulative decline: -54,500 (-12.4%)
• -17,300(-3.9%)
• -28,200 (-6.7%)
• -9,000(-2.3%)
• Resident Visitors -Sharp drop in first two years, slight rebound more adult league games played during the week at Sports Complex: Net
three-year change: -28,824 (-18.2%)
• -19,708 (-12.5%)
• -15,792 (-11.4%)
• +6,676(+5.4%)
• Non-Resident Visitors -Very stable compared to residents: Net three-year change:-7,514 (-2.7%)
• +2,408 (+0.9%)
• -12,408 (-4.4%)
• +2,486 (+0.9%)
• Resident Share of Total Visitors -36% - 33% - 31% - 32%
• I believe the slight uptick in 25-26 is driven by the resident rebound due to additional games during the week of adult leagues .
How Does Placer. AI determine the Home" of a
Visitor of the Sports Complex
•City Owned Tracking Software — Placer.Al
•Uses anonymous location signals from mobile apps with location permission
'Identifies where a device spends most nights (9 PM-6 AM) over multiple weeks
•Assigns that nighttime location to a Census Block Group (neighborhood-level, not an address)
•No personal data is used — no names, phone numbers, area codes, or exact addresses
•"Home" = inferred nighttime pattern, not the user's actual residence
Nearly all teens have access to a
smartphone at home
of U.S. teens ayes 1,3 to tJ who say they have or have
access to the followiny devices at home Link to 2025 Pew Research Study
smartphone 95
Desktop/Laptop 88 Nearly all teens have access to a smartphone at home
computer I Pew Research Center
Gaming console epi 83
Tablet computer 70
Note:Those who did not give an answer are not shown.
Source:Survey of U.S.teens conducted Sept. 18-Oct. 10,2024.
d Technology 2024"
PEW RESEARCH CENTER
HBSC Proposal Update and Recommendations
__ _,
' ) . 1
ri„ , :
ii•A )
4
it
--........jkli
Lite* r
Update on HBSC Partners Proposal
• All comments as of 8/4/26
• Verbal description of project ( does not match the PowerPoint that was presented to City
Council)
• 20 Year Agreement
• Soar Academy (enclosed cross training facility)
• 23 Acres of Sports Turf
• Completely enclose Sports Complex to create gates where admission is required for entry
• Double parking rates with 73% of parking revenue flowing to over 20 year period
• No outside food allowed in sports complex
• Complete control of all aspects including all maintenance
• Expense covered by HBSC — unclear, different versions of proposed expense coverage given verbally
• Challenges
• No written proposal or financial projections submitted by HBSC Partners available to public
• Significant legal and environmental challenges
• CEQA and EIR required for Soar Academy due to methane remediation issues
• CEQA and EIR likely to be required for Sports Turf
• No formal Resident input
• Ongoing issues with Current HBSC Partner agreements — especially concessions lease and batting cages
Sports Complex Recommendations — Strategic Drivers
. Operational Performance — The Sports Complex is heavily used but under-optimized for
revenue generation for both the City and operators.
. Facility Upgrades — Modernized fields, amenities and alternate uses may expand
revenue opportunities and potentially reduce long-term maintenance costs.
. Resident Benefit — The City should evaluate options that increase offerings, benefits,
and access for Huntington Beach residents.
. Revenue Generation for the City — The sports complex relies heavily on parking revenue -
80% of total revenue that flows to the city - and is costing city around $1 million a year
Recommendations — Passed 6-0 by Finance commission
• Recommendation 1 — CEQA First, No Agreements Until Complete
• Background
• HBSC Proposed Changes — HBSC Partners has proposed significant upgrades and operational changes.
• CEQA Requirements — Because the Sports Complex sits atop a former county landfill with an aging methane
management system, it is expected most proposed changes will require CEQA review.
• CEQA Timeline — CEQA can take 3 months to over a year, or longer.
• City Oversight — Jennifer Villa-Senor team, with C&L and Legal, is leading the CEQA process.
• Recommendation
• Do not execute any agreements, contracts, or MOUs until CEQA is fully completed and the City understands
what is permissible and at what cost.
• HBSC Partners should fund all CEQA-related costs (scope, studies, environmental services), not the City.
• Recommendation 2 — Issue an RFI to Maximize Value and Resident Benefit
• Background
• Upgrade Potential — The City recognizes there are significant opportunities for expanded uses and upgrades.
• Resident & Revenue Goals — The City seeks increased resident benefit and increased revenue.
• Operator Market — Many qualified operators would be interested in managing the Sports Complex.
• Recommendation
• Issue an RFI immediately to ensure the City receives the best possible suggested upgrades, alternative usage
options, improved operational and revenue performance, and enhanced value that improves revenue to the
city and usage by, and value to residents.
• Require a formal response by HBSC Partners so the city has a formal proposal from them
• Responses should be evaluated by C&L, Legal, Environmental, Finance, the C&L Commission, and the Finance
Commission to determine whether continuing with HBSC Partners beyond 9/7/27 is in the City's best interest.
Recommendations
• Recommendation 3 — All Upgrades Must Follow City Procurement Rules
• Background
• City Ownership — The Sports Complex is a City-owned public asset.
• Major Upgrades — Proposed upgrades are multimillion-dollar capital improvements.
• Recommendation
• All approved upgrades must follow City procurement processes, ensuring transparency,
competitive bidding, and compliance with City code and charter.
• Recommendation 4 — Establish Minimum Base Rent + Revenue Share
• Background
• Current Financial Burden — The Sports Complex currently costs the City roughly $1 million
per year.
• No Minimum Rent — The existing agreement does not include a minimum monthly rent.
• Recommendation
• Create a new agreement requiring a guaranteed minimum base rent to ensure positive
cashflow.
• Add a revenue-sharing structure above the base rent to reward strong operator performance.
Recommendations
• Recommendation 5 — Modernize Parking & Field Use Rates
• Background
• Rate Restrictions — Operators must adhere to fixed parking and field-use rates.
• Market Flexibility — Operators believe significant additional revenue is possible with market-based pricing.
• Recommendation
• Consider removing rate restrictions and direct staff and the Finance Commission to develop new
market-aligned rates for parking and field use.
• Determine equitable revenue split between the city and operator
• Finance Commission works with staff to create an agreement framework that is enforceable and in the City
and resident's best interest.
• Recommendation 6 — Independent Audit of HBSC Partners' Three Agreements
• Background
• HBSC Partners currently holds three agreements:
• Sports Complex Operations
• Concessions Lease
• Outer Field Maintenance
• The Finance Commission has noted non-compliance concerns.
• Self-reported revenue has never been independently validated, despite rent being based on revenue
percentages.
• Recommendation
• Conduct an independent audit of financial reporting and operational compliance across all three agreements.
• Audit should be directed by the Finance Commission with assistance from City staff.
• Refer any breaches to Legal for remediation, termination, or recovery of funds as appropriate.
• Audit recommendation attached as separate document
Recommendations
• Recommendation 7 — Move Agreement Oversight to Treasury / Legal Engagement
• Background
• Enforcement Issues — Current agreements have not been consistently enforced.
• Staff Limitations — Weekly meetings occur, but enforcement actions have not been taken or escalated.
• Recommendation
• Move management of HBSC agreements to Bill Krill's team and Legal.
• Also move oversight of Equestrian Center, Meadowlark, and Yacht Club agreements under the same
structure.
• Place Bill Krill's team under Treasury leadership for stronger financial oversight.
• Recommendation 8 — Public Engagement Before Any Facility Changes
• Background
• Lack of Public Review — HBSC Partners has worked with staff for two years on proposed upgrades without
public review.
• Recommendation
• Engage an independent facilitator to conduct public meetings on all proposed changes.
• No changes to facilities or operations should proceed until public feedback is collected.
• Findings should be reported to City Council, Finance Commission, and C&L staff and commission.
ah
1: =o Requested Actions
• Do not execute any agreements until CEQA(s) completed
• HBSC Partners to pay for all CEQA costs if they decide to move forward
• Direct staff to develop and issue RFI immediately
• Require a formal written proposal
• Do not renew current agreement with HBSC Partners on 9/7/27 and instead, create a
new, more favorable agreement based upon recommendations in this presentation
• Immediately authorize an audit on all current agreements with HBSC Partners
• Move oversite and management of Sports Complex under Treasury
• Engage Public for direction and support
HB Sports
Complex
Landfill Gas Monitoring/Extraction System Analysis
Public Works Dept.
July 29, 2026
SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION -Meeting Date: 8/18/2026 Item No. 18 (2
(Pn) 14di_Gb &11Ve /11)%t-U--it "14. ) 6e, g_ ./1/.4/9-(dJ
•
r-.I. •
f
. • . •t
� Basic Description of L n -_. p a dfill Gas
{ • Monitoring/Extraction System
: , ; ,•
M , i i
} ,,,f
I I. ! t System Architecture & Components
} •
• •
.. 9 fi , . 0
•1 t 34 vertical gas extraction wells distributed across the site footprint.
• • !1
+' ._A 10-horsepower gas extraction blower facility to pull sub-slab methane and
1, 1`` landfill gases.
Activated carbon canister scrubbers and filtration units to filter emissions prior
to release/venting, compliant with South Coast AQMD Rule 1150.1 standards.
ti
Main header piping connecting into the local landfill gas collection grid.
• The Operational Era (1940s - 1970s)
• Unlined Municipal Dumping: Long before the sports
complex was built, the 30-acre site was operated as an
unlined municipal solid waste landfill (often referenced
alongside the broader Gothard Street / Central Park landfill
footprint).
• Refuse Accumulation: Millions of cubic yards of
History & commercland household waste were buried up to 35 feet
deep.
Ba c k ro u n d • Closure & Dredged Cover: When landfill operations
ce
ased in the 1960s, the site was capped with a soil layer
varying from 4 to 25 feet thick—partially composed of silty
sand dredged from the Santa Ana River. Without engineered
bottom liners, subterranean anaerobic decomposition
•
naturally began generating significant quantities of landfill
• gas (primarily methane and carbon dioxide), along with
volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
• Grand Opening & Continuous Operation (2000s -
Present)
• Sports Complex Opening (2003): The $16 million+, 45-
acre Huntington Beach Sports Complex officially opened,
serving as a model for brownfield redevelopment.
• Gas Production & System Output: Over the decades, as
& the buried organic waste has matured, the landfill gas
H i st o ry generation rate has naturally decayed. Current operational
B data indicates the system extracts roughly 40 standard
a C kgro und FM) of gas at a methane
cubic feet per minute (SCFM)
of around 30%.
• Ongoing Regulatory Oversight: The system remains under
strict quarterly surface emission and perimeter probe
monitoring regulated by SCAQMD, the Regional Water
Quality Control Board, and the Orange County Waste and
Recycling agency.
T*1- r3 1-
L. r `t7 •_ si m (N
F1 . { I , .•• , F Yr :]ar�LLOO , r g'il
In ut
•
/ — ..1 6 ;
i I ':a ≤ 6
.I I I , .,
Ii I C
I I 0
• I i 2..
I L .
* I s
1 to
yt
1 8 0 8
z w Jilt
w •/J
♦ '
U I �
' 41 i ' I j ' i i
fi
1 L ',,_ _ _Ni__ . • Vi. 1\.1\\\\Uri: i :
V r\i'." ,
V , hia
8 u fi 41‘ I fri
. •
•. • I
17i1:S[S]NH3]lpf)
•
i1 �
If _.
Diagram of Landfill Gas Monitoring/Extraction System
r1 _.._
1 _ — _ vn r 't. a i '.� ); ,111 # NO•15.00 E015.0 a..
—`. • V _ -�..� -°. ,.•.. \,\ y` �.- , f `. 21.8 2263063 98 60,7758 L el
'�� - �` -y. 7',. is-,, �` 2143 120301,29 6027))091
II 1-LL=ij rjl 11iI.f �I 'n_` �% 9703051 23. 2203033 93 660027957.19
2»ee.)
', I{ �^�. / _ - �, - ' 21)0 2203039 40 6772»56.26
j"qtr
6znis23)9 EIU
y.101 -•
•
z1o. 211 >/u� 5• •
:),> a7 60,'1555.11
` rr� y •� ?rt. 2,0]090 43 6027486 61
—9 I I'17..�p �i•
2763 22OY56v•J 6027.5 a,
_ \`�`Y'TL{_L{_{I I I_' 11111 94i ../ 2793
94 10Q1 83. 6020075 s�
/ 1��Y },•j,'�` �,• ..:• Y i 2799 2202,181.29 6010166.11
I� L !iii
� 803 a1
2.3 607111 24 1. 2 1241122 424622900 22�� Y • // .�_ { .441 2202.366 .2770391•
2202255 7 ` / , `� •- .22..22__..._._ , I .a�l0, 21024 r5.�C 60))26.6,
2448 2202444.2 6o27a».21
G �! - I1 I I602)15 .
r
11,9
Y ]' T. . ` • - 2812 5202667 26 .10.9•
t � -- �'E•'-i _ _ r 9011 220,766.!1 6622731 56
- 26'4 7202740 27 .27917.0'
-r. ' _ 1,o_ ----JJ� - ���� - 2816 2207516.8:63 .2279616�.01-
` .6 e n
.__-."" r 2917 2102631.00 602.5 2 31
_" - -- - -—_� --- : 26,6 1201918 7 60,7745J[
¢...__ , l - 2819 2.03050.90 6027550.94
_
H 1' _ 182' 2202919 a, 6027,22,6
• I" • - ..... f II •3;'51',/,,/'‘, / - 3 34 60.061 12
2824 2823 220211 49 6029122 92
_ f ✓
-_ i 28. 7202631 11 40261.95
N�' t� �.� "- 1877 210 27..00 96 IE:
2619 2.254649/ _t + ' za3s -203011 n I E f {1 { : _ � �1 ( l,u, »26 2,03346 51! -__6 193) 21023440)I 6 6__ H.1 I �, I »:s laoie 5S:e I �� i2 0 2702 9.40 23 2992 201
`t _ 2953 2262905.50 6026318 31
// ! 36805 f 602600.150t059 _ 2966 '02411 91 609.35 34
-� 14) _ � --- . . �� �1- 8955 ]2024.054 402847740
``, ":1-:-17::,--.. ' - 2976 :262740:::::
602624329_-....._ ] ` 2944 250]633 ,0,)])2.91f ' 1� _y>!�- 7r [� 1 201102'4726'9• 802.,606V LVVaca, 2202 6 6,2,264•,
I 1 /- 16603 720272027 026499'0 4:14 I ) � ��y•
1 2455 2102507 Be 6026885.09
±�1 • I 1 ^ _� - 2966 6 68 60.713.62.
II / 'x011. 1 , ]9eB 7207,5
3;.`]w 80.713.620101
! f'Sr- _ —_ J,� _� .1_ 1001 2703005.50 6425113 62
--' It
100
1 - 1
_. —--:. —._ _.... ._ __.--__-. ...... __-_.. -__-- ..
_ --- • a --T --.; "� METHANE GAS AS-8!J,Lr
-- 1 , ,R3 Hun tiny2on B000ls CCntr01 Pork ..6-,.,
.r ,,1.
�.�.�_ ..__. � -••••• Sports Compfer
-_ _.. — _ , .. - rcx
.62 —
,- . Y'a 1176). Crest ma a”,
.ii ,.4 r , t
rt,
t
• , ti y
a.
r L i - G al , t E !
ii M
Ilk
g
i se ..._
, , ., a .v .
r• - 3.
I+ 0 ��
•
L r�
_T d ?1
sr
* ♦ u
` •
ki
r • { L
. Hit
�, :.
o
O •a .4CS „, f - a
•5. '� a .y it'ti
• - - - L+
f +
*
•
•
SD
- n v .
•
•
? 1 A 1P' 71._..4.3' 4 7 'ail - •' . '- * 0 -,. . '
aaaas.aaurvxo
ce! - ^_ -- ...�- •--`•------•
_♦. • t• • - _, _..-i---- + •
rire
• �",/rJ r .r . - µ 'yam ,f
1 ' <. !(. 1.• -`1 . _ r ' •,,
s_ d , .4
1 .1 • Y I- ,
R '.!•? - .
Full System Infrastructure Replacement ($350,000 -
$800,000+)
• If the entire extraction infrastructure across the Sports
Complex footprint required full replacement (re-drilling
extraction wells, relaying headers, replacing sub-slab vapor
barriers, and updating the blower/treatment skid):
Ballpark • Well Field Work (34 Extraction Wells): Drilling, well
+ screens, heads, and piping run roughly $8,000 to $15,000
E S l I mate of per well ($270,000 — $500,000+ total).
R e • Collection Piping & Trenching: High-density polyethylene
(HDPE) header piping across the park grounds adds
COStS $50,000 to $150,000+ depending on surface restoration
requirements (pavement, turf, or hardscape).
• Blower Skid & Controls: $50,000- $100,000+.
• Engineering, CEQA/Permitting & Construction
Management: Soft costs typically add 20% to 30% to the
total capital outlay.
From: Paula Schaefer
To: CITY COUNCIL(INCL.CMO STAFF);suoolementalcomm(asurfcity-hb.orq
Subject: 8/18 CC Meeting Agenda Item#26-715 HB Sports Complex
Date: Monday,August 17,2026 2:45:27 PM
Mayor and CC members:
I attended a recent Finance Commission meeting at which the current management company
(HBSC Partners LLC)proposed significant infrastructure changes to the Complex. The
proposal was scant on details and contemplated a large increase in revenue to the City, while
the LLC's current management agreement has not been fully implemented. While increased
revenue is certainly valued, I urge you to consider all the factors before committing to any
additional investment in the Complex.
Several factors for the Council to consider are:
Where is the marketing analysis that supports the large dollar investment that HBSC
Partners LLC wants the City to make?
Does the proposed building comply with Measure C (Charter Section 612)?
Has the current management agreement been audited as to warrant consideration of this
proposal?
Has the current management agreement been amended to allow for the consumption of
beer and wine at the Complex including additional insurance?
A word of caution is needed here; please do not repeat the "Symphony of Flowers" debacle.
We all know how that ended - an irritated community and unnecessary spending by the City.
Paula A. Schaefer
SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION - Meeting Date: 8/18/26 Item No. 18 (26-715)