RECREATION & PARKS COMMISSION City of Rialto 150 SOUTH ... · asked the order in which the projects will take place, referring to the exterior painting project and the renovation

RECREATION & PARKS COMMISSION City of Rialto

150 SOUTH PALM AVE. – COUNCIL CHAMBERS Rialto, CA 92376

TUESDAY, MARCH 07, 2017 – 6:30 PM

A G E N D A

I. ROLL CALL

II. INTRODUCTIONS

III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

A. Recreation & Parks Commission Meeting Minutes – February 7, 2017 B. Recreation & Parks Commission Meeting Minutes – February 13, 2017

IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC – (Limit 3 minutes per person)

V. INFORMATION/STATUS REPORTS

A. Program Updates

1. Dog Park Opening Day Presentation

B. Project Updates

2. Park Design – Update from City Council Meeting of 2/28/2017 a. Cactus/Randall b. Frisbie Park Expansion

3. Rialto Community Center – Public Works a. Exterior Painting Project b. Community Center Fence Project c. Community Center Wings Rehab

VI. ACTION ITEMS 1. Request by East Rialto Kiwanis Foundation to provide Bingo at Senior Center

VII. COMMISSIONERS’ REPORT

VIII. ADJOURNMENT

IX. NEXT MEETING – APRIL 4, 2017 – COUNCIL CHAMBERS

In accordance with the Americans with Disability Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Public Works Director, (909) 820-2608. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. [28 CFR 3.5102-35.104 ADA Title II]

Rialto Dog Park Grand Opening February 25th

• Rialto residents no longer have to travel out to enjoy a day at the park with their pooches, the city finally has its first official off-leash dog park.

• The westend of Andreson Park along Lilac Avenue was transformed into a pups playground thanks to Arrowhead United Way and Target’s annual MLK Day of Service.

• The partnership brought together more than 120 volunteers from Arrowhead United Way, local Target Distribution Centers and Rialto Parks and Recreation to create the dog-friendly park complete with painted dog paws leading to the fenced-off park, an obstacle course and free-run area.

Rialto’s New Dog Park

• Rialto residents and city officials joinedArrowhead United Way and Targetrepresentatives to celebrate the grandopening of a new dog park Saturday, February25, 2017 at Andreson Park, 726 S. Lilac Ave.

The dog park is sponsored by

Arrowhead United Way and Target.

After a ceremonial ribbon cutting, officials from the City of Rialto, Target and United Way delivered

brief speeches. Then residents and their pets got to play in the park.

Pets and People enjoyed the grand opening

1

RECREATION & COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION February 07, 2017

Chairman Joe Britt called the February 07th, 2017 Recreation & Community Services Commission meeting to order at 6:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers. I. ROLL CALL Members Present: Joe Britt

Clifford DeVost Jan Morrison John Silva Scott Roberts Sparks Jose Fernandez (Student)

Absent: Josue D. Castillo Also Present: Perry Brents, Community Services Director Julio Salcedo, Community Services Supervisor Kiara Brown, Administrative Aide

Alejandra Gonzalez, Recreation Programmer Jennifer Ramos, Pool Manager Moises Peralta, Assistant Engineer Rafael Trujillo, Councilmember

Following Roll Call, Commissioner DeVost led the Pledge of Allegiance. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Recreation & Parks Commission Meeting Minutes – December 06, 2016 On a motion from Commissioner DeVost and a second from Commissioner Morrison, the minutes of the December 06th, 2016 Recreation & Parks Commission meeting were approved as mailed on a unanimously affirmative vote by all Commissioners present. III. DISCUSSION ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC Commissioner Britt invited members in the audience to discuss any items pertaining to the Recreation and Parks Commission. Ex-Commissioner, Councilman Rafael Trujillo approached the podium and greeted the commission. Councilman Trujillo thanked the commission for allowing him to work with them toward the goal of providing quality programs to the residents of Rialto. The Councilman wants to have an open dialogue, be a voice for the commission on the Council and hopes to continue to work together. Commissioner Britt congratulated Councilman Trujillo and thanked him for all his work while a member on the commission.

2

IV. INFORMATION/STATUS REPORTS

A. Project Updates

1. Community Services Aquatics Program – Jennifer Ramos, Pool Manager

Upon approaching the podium Ms. Ramos greeted the Recreation and Parks Commission and reported on the Aquatics division as follows:

Ms. Ramos informed the commission she has been working for the City of Rialto for 10 years and started as a lifeguard. Ms. Ramos proceeded to give information on the very popular swim classes that are offered to residents that are 6 months old and up. The residents can attend twice per week to get individual or group classes. It is a month long class and swim classes start at the beginning of every month. At the end of the classes, students receive recognition according to their advancement and swim level. Ms. Ramos asked the commission for any question in regards to the swim classes. Commissioner Britt asked if the pool was still the warmest in the Inland Empire to which Ms. Ramos answered in the positive and proceeded to give information on the Aqua Zumba and Water Aerobics class that are very popular with our senior population in the morning and also very popular for all ages in the afternoon. Ms. Ramos continue to report on the contracted competitive swim program “The Rialto Sea Turtle” and the fact that other outside groups also rent the facility for swim meets and events. Councilman Britt asked about what the pros and the cons of the pool facility are, to which Ms. Stated that the fact that the pool is indoors, holds year round activity, has a Jacuzzi and sauna nearby and the staff are respectful and helpful in their service are the positives that have been shared to her by the public. Commissioner Britt then asked how the Commission can assist the pool in their efforts to which Ms. Ramos answered that maybe repairing some items to make the facility more presentable. Ms. Ramos also expressed her efforts in hiring and retaining more lifeguards to be able to extend the hours of the facility. Commissioner DeVost shared some of the improvements that have been made to the facility and complemented how clean the facility always is when he uses it. Commissioner Morrison asked if the recruitment for lifeguards is extended to youth in the high schools. Ms. Ramos answered in the positive and also shared that they target the colleges since they might be more flexible. Commissioner Morrison also asked about the competitions that the swim teams engages on to which Ms. Ramos responded that the swim team does compete right now in Fontana but they are in the process of making our pool their home pool so in the near future they can compete against other cities at our facility.

2. Park Surveys Cactus and Randall – Frisbee Park Expansion: Mr. Brents introduced Mr. Tim Maloney from Community Works Design Group to present on the two projects. Mr. Maloney greeted the commission and proceeded to share some of the highlights of the community surveys that were implemented to get the communities input of both projects.

3

Mr. Maloney mentioned that Mr. Brents had the results of the survey. Both survey were sent to three thousand people within a two mile radius of both areas chosen at random. The survey was in English and Spanish. The survey was also available on the website. There were 220 responses for the Cactus and Randall project. Mr. Maloney continued to go over some of the more popular answers that depicted the interest of the community as asked by the survey. Two options were presented by Mr. Maloney to the Commission with the second option having a community garden taking into consideration the survey answers. A design date was scheduled and some members met at the site for a walkthrough and then met at the Grace Vargas Senior Center for a design discussion. The preferred option was priced at $5,124,000.00 for the Cactus and Randall location. The addition of an extra basketball courts and a rubberized walking path around the sports fields with exercise stations would bring the cost to about $5.3 million, option two. Commissioner Britt asked if the fields would be multi-use fields to which Mr. Maloney answered in the positive. Mr. Maloney also shared that the park would be completely fenced and could be secured at night. Commissioner Silva asked about the lighting of the park, Mr. Maloney answered that they are showing it with lights but it would be up to Council’s decision but at the very least the conduits would be in place. Mr. Brents mentioned that the deadline for the surveys was February 15th so they might still get some additional surveys in. Mr. Maloney continued to present on the Frisbee Park Expansion proposals for the North and South sides of the park which amounts to about 17 acres. Same survey process was explained. 222 survey responses were received to that date. The most popular answers were presented to the commission for amenities and events. Same design process was held with community input. The most popular amenities been more parking lot spaces and for activity a walking path. It was mentioned that the existing snack bar is not going to be touched. Both proposals were introduced with all amenities taking into consideration the community’s input, with the biggest difference been a skate park in one of the proposals. Both proposals greatly increase the available parking spaces. The preferred plan according to the planning meeting is a combination of options 1 and 2 and was priced at $10.2 million, without the batting cage area. Commissioner Sparks expressed his concern about missing a big part of the youth population if an area for skating was not included. Mr. Brents referred back to the surveys answers to which Commissioner Sparks responded that the population who answered the survey might not be representative of the needs for the youth in the area. Mr. Brents explained that it would be further explained in item number six of the agenda.

B. Project Updates

1. Park Maintenance – Public Works – Moises Peralta, Assistant Engineer

a. Rialto Moises Peralta – Rialto Community Center – Exterior Painting Project Mr. Peralta informed the Commission that on the January 24th Council meeting the contract for the Community Center’s exterior painting project was awarded to PolyCom Construction Company for the amount of $88,000 dollars. Once all paperwork is

4

completed, public works will provide the company a notice to proceed. Staff at the community center will be informed as to the dates to minimize impact on services. Mr. Peralta reminded the Commission that this is a CDBG funded project.

b. Community Center Fence Project Mr. Peralta informed the commission that public works would be recommending awarding the project at the Council meeting of February 14th, and this is also a CDBG funded project. Mr. Peralta showed the commission some renderings as to what the fence will look like. Commissioner Britt asked if the characters on the fence would be included to which Mr. Peralta answered in the positive.

c. Community Center Wing Rehab

Mr. Peralta shared with the commission that public works was ready to send out the final scope of work for the 200, 300, 400 and 500 wings of the community center to the Community Service staff for their input. This is not a CDBG funded project but public works did apply for additional funds for this specific project in the next CDBG cycle. Mr. Peralta mentioned that as the project currently stands there is a $400,000 dollar deficit, using the 100 wing renovation as a reference. Commissioner Morrison asked the order in which the projects will take place, referring to the exterior painting project and the renovation of the wings, Mr. Peralta said that the projects need to move fast if not we run the risk of losing the funds due to CDBG regulations.

V. ACTION ITEM Mr. Brents stated that two commission representatives were involved in the ad hoc planning committee, been Commissioner DeVost and Commissioner Morrison. The committee had an opportunity to meet and Mr. Brents invited the two commissioners to share their findings. Commissioner DeVost reported that the first meeting they attended was on January 21st and that they were informed that some aspects of the park were already decided on. They also attended the planning meetings along with the community representatives. Two proposals were drawn up. Some of the comments from the community was to make the fields on these parks practice fields and not have leagues dedicated to this park. Commissioner Morrison agreed with Commissioners DeVost and mentioned that it was very nice to hear the community’s input directly. Commissioner Morrison shared that she feels very good about the involvement of the community and the options that the group came up with. Councilmember Trujillo, also a member of the ad hoc committee, also shared that he hopes this is just the beginning and wants to add extra amenities in the future such as bleachers. A motion by Commissioner DeVost and second by Commissioner Morrison was presented to forward the plans to council for review and approval. The commission voted to forward design three, which is a combination of one and two, to council in the positive unanimously.

5

Mr. Brents then shared with the commission that there is still a final meeting to be held for the Frisbie Park Expansion design. Mr. Brents proposed that if the two commissioners accept the design, then the commission can push it forward to the Council for review and approval. A special commission meeting was also proposed to see the final design before forwarding the design to Council. Commissioner DeVost presented a motion to hold a special meeting to see final design, Commissioner Morrison second the motion. The special meeting was scheduled for Monday, February 13th at 6:30pm at a location to be determined. VI. COMMISSIONERS’ REPORTS STUDENT COMMISSIONER JOSE FERNANDEZ –reported as follows: Student Commissioner Fernandez apologized for not attending the holiday parade, sue to the rescheduling of the event and a prior choir engagement. Following that Student Commissioner suggested the formation of a City Choir that would provide a venue to perform for those that are still interested in this activity and no longer have the chance to participate in other areas that offer the program. COMMISSIONER SCOTT ROBERTS SPARKS–reported as follows: Commissioner Sparks reported that he is working with public works to place banners on certain streets for distinguished scholars that have achieved a 4.0 grade point average and above. COMMISSIONER JAN MORRISON –reported as follows: Commissioner Morrison began by wishing a happy new year to everyone. She further commented on the marketing through the Rialto Progress magazine and proposed to include the theater on the name of the fitness and aquatic center in order to be more representative of the facility. She also suggested that a report on theater activities be reported on a more consistent basis. COMMISSIONER JOHN SILVA–reported as follows: Commissioner Silva shared that he is aware of the challenges a busy park can bring to a neighborhood, but that the commission should think about the greater good to the City and to the youth of the City. COMMISSIONER CLIFFORD DEVOST – reported as follows: Commissioner DeVost reported his attendance to all meetings and his completion of the ethics training, sharing this is the first time he is ask to complete it. Commissioner DeVost asked if they are part of CPRS so he might want to look into going to the conference in Sacramento but was not sure about going. Commissioner DeVost expressed that the regional CPRS conferences are as good as the national ones.

6

COMMISSIONER JOE BRITT – reported as follows Commissioner Britt began by inquiring about the open Commissioner position and the absence of Commissioner Josue Castillo. Supervisor Julio Salcedo informed the Commission that Commissioner Castillo has made contact with the City Clerk’s office and has resigned his seat due to a scheduling conflict with his school hours. Commissioner Britt expressed his awareness of the City’s lag in park square footage to meet the needs of the City’s population. Prior to adjournment, Commissioner Britt called on anyone for any reports and/or updates, and they reported as follows: Mr. Ted Bregoni, with Lockwood engineering, gave an update on replacement of restrooms and concession buildings at the Frisbie, Rialto and Andresen Parks, called phase one. The buildings will be secured and improvements will be made in separate actions to save funds. Mr. Bregoni proceeded to explain the placement and acquirement process of the prefabricated buildings. Mr. Bregoni informed the commission that per Council’s direction the buildings at Rialto City park are been put on hold in an effort to search for more funding. Phase two includes looking for proposals for design on ADA compliance on Frisbie and six other parks. Ms. Alejandra Gonzalez shared she is coming back to the commission. Mr. Brents informed the commission of the Dog Park opening by the City Clerks Office. VII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, Commissioner Britt adjourned the meeting at 8:23 p.m.

1

RECREATION & PARKS COMMISSION

SPECIAL MEETING 1411 S. Riverside Avenue – Grace Vargas Senior Center

February 13, 2017 Chairman Joe Britt called the February 13th, 2017 Special Meeting of the Recreation & Parks Commission to order at 6:45 p.m., in the Grace Vargas Senior Center I. ROLL CALL Members Present: Joe Britt

Clifford DeVost Jan Morrison John Silva Scott Roberts Sparks

Absent: Jose Fernandez (Student) Also Present: Perry Brents, Community Services Director II. INTRODUCTIONS

Ted Rigoni, Consultant Tim Malony, Community Works Design Group III. DISCUSSION ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC – (Limit 3 minutes per person)

None IV. ACTION ITEMS

A. Park Design – Subcommittee Report 1. Frisbie Park Expansion Designs

Chairman Britt reported on the subcommittee for Frisbie Park expansion designs. He explained that the Subcommittee which included himself and Commissioner Scott Sparks, met last week (Thursday, February 9, 2017), as a part of the subcommittee on Frisbie Park Expansion Designs. Director Brents introduced the 2 designs to be discussed 1) Frisbie Park North and 2) Frisbie Park South. Mr. Brents explained that the subcommittee had filtered the designs down to the final designs being presented for consideration by the Commission. Mr. Brents introduced Tim Maloney of Community Works Design Group to present the designs. Mr. Maloney provided an overview and presentation of the two designs 1) Frisbie Park North & 2) Frisbie Park South. Mr. Malony answered questions as the Commissioners discussed amenities, fencing, lighting and costs. Commissioner Morrison, inquired about surveys, she wanted to know about up-to-date surveys, and if there were any changes as a result. Mr. Malony explained that the consultant is working on a final report, however, nothing in the designs have changed as yet. Mr. Brents stated that the Commission should have the final survey report in their next meeting on March 7th. Mr. Maloney, stated, surveys received are being complied and put into a final report. Mr. Britt commented on costs of adding Skatepark to the Frisbie Park design and the cost of the park going from $10, 2000,000 to $13,000,000. Commissioner Morrison commented on whether we were within budget. Mr. Maloney explained, we don’t know what the budget is, the designs are showing what the recommended amenities costs; budget and items to be included would be up to City Council. Ms. Morrison wanted a clarification as to whether gates to close off the park were included. Mr. Maloney said yes, they are. Chairman Joe Britt, called for the vote to recommend the design for Frisbie North and Frisbie South at a projected cost of $13,366,400.00. It was motioned by Commissioner DeVost, with a 2nd by Commissioner Morrison that the designs be recommended to City Council for approval. The Motion passed 5-0. V. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, Commissioner Britt adjourned the meeting at 7:15 p.m. VI. NEXT MEETING – MARCH 7, 2017 – COUNCIL CHAMBERS

Public Works CIP Update – Recreation and Parks Commission March 7, 2017



Here to Serve T he Community Services Department is setting

new goals and keeping focused on the expansion

of programs and special events for our City. Our

department takes pride in our high quality

customer service standards that clearly reflect the

City’s guiding principles.

Preschool & Tiny Tots

Fit4Kids

Youth & Adult Sports

Rialto Fitness & Aquatic Center

Rialto Senior Center

Special Events

IN THIS ISSUE

February 2017

2

Child Development February 2017

Site Supervisor: Ms. RoShaun

Preston Elementary School Staff: Ms. Debbie, Ms. LaTrina , Ms. RoShaun, and Ms. Valarie

Hughbanks Elementary School Staff Ms. LaTrina, Ms. Elbia, and Ms. Savannah

Community Center Staff: Ms. Maria, Ms. Melinda, and Ms. Valarie

Preschool & Tiny Tots

KIDSTUFF: PRESTON PRESCHOOL Our KidStuff Preschool program provides quality Kindergarten readiness activities to youth ages 2 to 5 years of age, who are fully potty trained. All forms of alternative payments are accepted for the community’s convenience. In the month of February our students have been learning about beginning sounds. Our students really enjoyed the vegetable garden in a cup activity for the letter V and enjoyed the underwater project. Through the activities our instructors plan our students are able to strengthen their ability to use their fine and gross motor skills, problem solve, and develop their social skills. For further questions please contact (909) 421-7208.

KIDSTUFF: TINY TOTS PROGRAM Looking for a program that is perfectly designed for your 3-5 year old? Tiny Tots is the answer for your preschooler. Our kids have fun while learning and developing their social skills, creating arts and crafts, enjoying music, story time and creative play. Parent/teacher conferences are scheduled for the week of March 6th. Our instructors are looking forward to discuss each child’s progress and offer tips on how to better prepare for kindergarten. We register every 4 weeks. Register now for our session starting the week of Monday, February 27th. Call now to register! (909) 421-4949

KIDSTUFF PROGRAMS

PRESTON PRESCHOOL ENROLLS WEEKLY! (909) 421-7208

3

Child Development

February 2017

The Community Services Department’s Fit4Kids is currently conducting the 2nd wave of

assessments for the winter session. Participants are assessed on a number of physical activities three

times per session to track their physical progress. This month’s physical activities included soccer

week where participants learned the basics of soccer and exercise while having fun! Some soccer drills

and activities scheduled included: warm-ups, dribbling, passing around the cones, defense and

scoring. Molina Health Care presented on February 22nd and 23rd with an educational presentation

on sugar in daily consumable products for our Fit4Kids participants and their families. They were able

to present, “How much do you know about sugar?”

Fit4Kids is a FREE program for Rialto residents who are 6 to 15 years qualify under low-moderate in-

come households. We look forward to speaking with you soon and working with your child on their

fitness goals.

Fit4Kids Spring Camp

· Monday, March 20th—Friday, March 24th

· Time: 8:00 am to 3:00 pm.

· FREE for those who qualify.

· Must bring lunch, snacks and plenty of water.

· Located at Rialto Community Center 214 N. Palm Ave.

Call (909) 421-4949 for information on how to apply.

4

Youth Basketball (Divisions 2-5)

G i r l s Vo l l e y b a l l

Yo u t h B a s ke t b a l l Division 1

The Rialto Pride has been continuously practicing to remain ready for the

next tournament(s). At this time, we have over 20 participants who want to

be involved with the program. Stay tuned as this program continues to

grow. They have been running scrimmage games against local travel ball teams. As always, the

Rialto Pride would like to send a huge thank you to volunteer coaches for all their hard work and

dedication to the team.

The spring season of Girls Volleyball began on Feb. 3rd, 2017. This season, division 2, the

youngest division, has been merged with the oldest division, division 1. This has not been a

factor as all games have been competitive so far. Although division 2 is the learning division,

the older division will absorb these new players, and grow with the program. Division 1 has 6

competitive teams, 4 of which go to the Playoffs.

The Drop-In Teen Center—The Rialto Drop-In Teen Center Program provides teens with a safe and

nurturing environment where they can develop healthy relationships and participate in activities that

focuses on leadership, teamwork, individual growth and healthy lifestyles. The activities for the month of

February consisted of an “I have a Dream” Speech in remembrance of Dr. Martin Luther King and a Taste

Challenge in where our teens participated in a guess what food it is contest. The Teen Center awarded

Subway gift cards to the top three finalists. To finish up the month, the teen Center celebrated all Januarys

birthday on the last day of the month to honor the participants whom were born in the month of January.

February 2017

The Spring Basketball season began on February 4th, 2017. This season promises to be as

exciting as ever. Opening ceremonies were held Saturday morning, Feb. 4th, 2017, at 9am. All divisions

were represented with at least 1 team per. This season will boast 6 teams in all divisions and 8 in the

8 – 10 year old bracket. The St. Catherine’s Cougars return to defend their crown. In this division, we

also have a new first. We have an all-girls team, the first in the history of this age group. The basketball

program is considering keeping this team and adding them to the Rialto Pride program. We look

forward to their progress during the season.

SPORTS REPORT

5

The New Year brings new challenges to the Rialto Youth Sports Alliance. The

quarterly meeting was held on Feb. 22nd. This meeting discussed the new ap-

proaching seasons, park projects, and city requirements moving forward. This

alliance continues to be a great support system for the local groups

Rialto Youth Sports Alliance

Contact the Community Services Department for more

information regarding the Rialto Youth Sports Alliance

Community Services Department Monday - Thursday 7:00 am—6:00 pm

Closed Every Friday

(909) 421-4949

February 2017

6

Racquetball Tournament

The Fitness and Aquatic Center hosted a round robin style Racquetball Tournament on Saturday,

January 31, 2017 with event check in beginning at 7:00am and the tournament beginning at 8am. The

registration cost was $25 per player. The event included light refreshments and raffles as well as

prizes for the first, and second place teams. There were a total of 15 registered teams with 1st Place

Winners: Ray Llamas and Carlos Mercado and 2nd Place Winners: Jose Raygoza and Jorge Martinez.

Strong by Zumba The Fitness and Aquatic Center is currently offering this high intensity course STRONG by Zumba twice a week. The group exercise class combines high intensity interval training with music motivation. In every class, music and moves sync in a way that pushes you past your perceived limits, with the intent to help the participants reach their fitness goals faster. The class is offered Tuesday and Thursday evenings at 7pm. For more information regarding the class please call 909.820.2611 Swim Lessons Swim lesson registration is currently taking place for the ages of 6 months to adults. The great majority of our classes are currently full. We will be looking to add extra classes to accommodate the demands of our community. On February 11

th-12

th our City of Rialto Sea Turtles Swim Team represented the City of by competing in

the USA IMR IMX Swim meet. The event was held at the Fontana Aquatics Center. We are extremely proud to announce that in this swim meet 3 Rialto sea turtles placed within the top 4 competitors.

1st place Brando Murillo

3rd

place Jahzara Garbutt 4

th place Joshua Del Castillo.

We currently are preparing for the Lifeguard Pre-Test by advertising to the community the opportunity in getting the lifeguard certification plus a chance to get hired as a City of Rialto employee.

To register, or for more information about programs, please call (909) 820-2611.

February 2017

7

Swim Lessons

Due to the increased number of swim lesson participants more

swim lessons times have been added to the daily schedule to

accommodate more participants. Swim lesson registration will also

be occurring every two week throughout the summer to allow for

more children and adults to water safety skills and swimming

techniques.

SilverSneakers

On Friday, August 12, 2016 the SilverSneaker

program participants held their salad bar

potluck following the Senior Fitness exercise

class. The SilverSneaker program focuses on

a low intensity workout for senior

participants and hosts a monthly potluck

social. To see if you are eligible to partici-

pate in the SilverSneaker program please call

(909) 820-2611

Pool Summer Hours and Summer Fun Days The Fitness and Aquatic Center has extended its hours during the

summer season to allow enough time for members and guest to

exercise during lap swim or enjoy our public swim. The Aquatic

center is also hosting the last Summer Fun Days on August 27, 2016

during scheduled recreation swim times every last Saturday of the

month. We will have prices, snacks, and music and fun games for

those participants that join us during our recreation swim.

Lifeguard Testing

On September 10th and 17th, the Fitness and Aquatic

Center will be conducting tests for anyone interested in

becoming a lifeguard. Participants that pass all

requirements will have an opportunity in registering for

our American Red Cross Lifeguard class, which is held at

our facility. The tests will start at 10:00am.

To register, or for more information about programs, please call (909) 820-2611.

September 2016

8

Rialto Senior Center “Add years to your l i fe and l i fe to your years ”

The Grace Vargas Senior Center held our Annual “Sweethearts’ Senior Dance” on Thursday

February 9th from 3:00pm-6:00pm. The dance was sponsored by the Friends of Rialto Senior

Center. Entertainment was provided by Art Cooper & Company. Upon entrance to the dance each

senior participant received a box of Sweethearts’ Candy. We served light appetizers, finger

sandwiches, potato salad, cake, and punch. The cakes were donated by our SCAN Healthcare

Representative Vanesa Layton-Lowe. We had 95 senior participants in attendance, which dance,

socialized and spent time with friends while having a great time. The feedback from the par-

ticipants was all positive. This event was a sold-out event.

FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT SENIOR SERVICES AND PROGRAMS, CONTACT

OUR OFFICE DIRECTLY:

Location: 1411 South Riverside Avenue Rialto, CA 92376 Phone: (909) 877-9706 | Fax: (909) 877-9962

September 2016

Keeping Our Seniors Informed

On Monday, February 13th AGA Medicare Options Representative Elizabeth Lopez held a Free Seminar

at 10:00am. The topic of the seminar was “Doctor’s Visit”. Elizabeth explained the importance of always

being prepared for your next doctor’s visit. Elizabeth provided valuable tips and practices so you and your

doctor can better understand your current state of health.

On Wednesday, February 15th Kaiser Permanente Medicare health plan sales specialist Ismael Robledo

visited from 10:00am-11:00am. During his visit he provided the seniors with information regarding the

basis of Medicare, and Part D drug costs along with extra benefits, such as dental, vision and hearing that

are part of the Kaiser Permanente health plan.

9

August 2016

“Join us at one of the many City Wide Special Events” February 2017

The winter season never stops City-wide Special Events! Currently, the Special Events division is busy planning the annual Spring Eggstravaganza. This event is one of our biggest events of the year as the City of Rialto gathers to celebrate the spring season. Spring Eggstravaganza will be held on Saturday, April 15, 2017 from 11:00am – 2:00pm at Rialto City Hall. This year, Spring Eggstravaganza is taking a trip down the White Rabbit’s hole to the magical world of Al-ice in Wonderland! Children will participate in a variety of activities, including egg hunts, spring crafts, bub-ble fun, an enchanted magic show, photos with the Easter Bunny, and a thrilling experience on the spin-ning Tea Cups ride. Families are also invited to attend the Mad Hatters Tea Party to cool off with some light refreshments and delicious sugar cookies. Our goal is to provide free activities for all community members to enjoy. Businesses and organizations are encouraged to participate in the event as a vendor, information booth, or event sponsor. This year we anticipate over 3,000 people, making Spring Eggstravaganza the perfect opportunity to promote business/organizations, while making a difference in our community. All of this would not be possible without the support from community members and our dedicated volun-teers. This year, Target employees and Eisenhower High School students are helping bring the Easter Bunny, Alice, Mad Hatter, Cheshire Cat, and the infamous Queen of Hearts to Rialto. For more information, please contact us at 909-421-4949.

Page 1

Chapter 5.64 - BINGO GAMES

Sections:

5.64.010 - Bingo defined.

As used in this chapter, "bingo" means a game of chance in which prizes are awarded on the basis of designated numbers or symbols on a card which conform to numbers or symbols selected at random. As used in this chapter, the game of bingo also includes cards having numbers or symbols which are concealed and preprinted in a manner providing for distribution of prizes. The winning cards shall not be known prior to the game by any person participating in the playing or operation of the bingo game. All such preprinted cards shall bear the legend, "for sale or use only in a bingo game authorized under California law and pursuant to local ordinance."

(Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.020 - Organizations eligible for city license to conduct bingo games.

Bingo games shall be allowed for the benefit of organizations exempted from the payment of the bank and corporation tax by Section 23701D of the State Revenue and Taxation Code and a contribution or gift to which would be a charitable contribution under Section 170(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, and mobile home park associations and senior citizens' organizations, provided that the proceeds of such games are used only for charitable purposes.

(Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.030 - License required.

No individual, corporation, partnership or other legal entity shall conduct a bingo game without first obtaining a license from the chief licensing officer.

(Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.040 - Application for license.

Written application for a license required by this chapter shall be made by affidavit under penalty of perjury and filed with the licensing officer on a form supplied by the licensing officer. Such application shall contain:

A. The name of the organization;

B. The names, signatures, addresses, dates of birth, driver's license numbers and expiration dates, and Social Security account numbers for the officers of the organization;

C. The days and hours of operation of the bingo games;

D. A copy of the certificate of letter from the Franchise Tax Board evidencing exempt status under Sections 23701a , 23701b, 23701d, 23701e, 23701f, 23701g or 23701-1 of the Revenue and Taxation Code if so exempt;

E. The address of the premises where bingo games will be conducted;

Page 2

F. A statement of ownership or lease of the premises or other evidence of authority to conduct bingo games at the address indicated;

G. The purposes for which such premises are used by the applicant organization;

H. A statement of ownership of the bingo equipment used in the operation of bingo games at the address indicated;

I. A statement of consent to examination and audit by the city administrator, the city licensing officer or any other person duly authorized by the city council, of any and all records and bank account(s) kept by the licensee pursuant to Section 5.64.100 of this chapter;

J. The name of each individual, corporation, partnership or other legal entity which has a financial interest in the conduct of the bingo games;

K. The name of the person responsible for the operation of the bingo games;

L. Such further information as may be required by the licensing officer to effectuate the purposes of this chapter.

(Ord. 1234 (part), 1995: Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.050 - Investigation of applicant.

Upon receipt of the completed application and the fee, the licensing officer shall refer the same to interested departments of the city, including but not necessarily limited to, the city administrator, city attorney, development services, administrative services, police and fire departments for investigation as to whether or not all the statements in the application are true and whether or not property of the applicant qualifies, and the extent to which it qualifies, as property on which bingo games may lawfully be conducted as to fire, occupancy and other applicable requirements. Any licensee or applicant shall be subject to investigation at any time and applicants for renewal of a license shall be investigated in the same manner as an applicant for a new license.

(Ord. 1234 (part), 1995: Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.060 - Contents of license.

Upon being satisfied that the applicant is fully qualified under the law to conduct bingo games in the city, the licensing officer shall issue a license to said applicant, which shall contain the following information:

A. The name and nature of the organization to which the license is issued;

B. The address where bingo games are authorized to be conducted;

C. The occupancy capacity of the room in which bingo games are to be conducted;

D. The date of the expiration of such license;

E. Such other information as may be necessary or desirable for the enforcement of the provisions of this chapter.

(Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.070 - Summary suspension of license.

Whenever it appears to the city licensing officer that the licensee is conducting a bingo game in violation of any of the provisions of this chapter, he/she shall have the authority to summarily suspend the

Page 3

license and order the licensee to immediately cease and desist any further operation of any bingo games until such time as the licensee has complied with all provisions and requirements of this chapter.

(Ord. 1234 (part), 1995: Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.080 - Appeal of revocation to city council.

A. Any holder of a license whose license is revoked under this chapter shall have the right, within fifteen days after receiving notice in writing of the revocation, to file a written appeal to the city council. Such appeal shall set forth the specific ground or grounds on which it is based. The city council shall hold a hearing on the appeal within thirty days after its receipt by the city, or at a time thereafter agreed upon, and shall cause the appellant to be given at least ten days' written notice of such hearing. At the hearing the appellant or its authorized representative shall have the right to present evidence and a written or oral argument, or both, in support of his/her appeal. The determination of the city council on the appeal shall be final.

B. Any organization whose license is finally revoked may not again apply for a license to conduct bingo games in the city for a period of one year from the date of such revocation; provided, however, if the ground for revocation is cancellation of the exemption granted under Section 23701d of the Revenue and Taxation Code, such organization may again apply for a license upon proof of reinstatement of said exemption.

(Ord. 1234 (part), 1995: Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.090 - Maximum amount of prize.

The total value of prizes awarded during the conduct of any bingo game shall not exceed two hundred and fifty dollars in cash or in kind, or both, for each separate game which is held.

(Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.100 - Profits to be kept in separate fund or account.

All profits derived from a bingo game shall be kept in a special fund or account and shall not be commingled with any other fund or account. The licensee shall keep and preserve for a period of three years, full and accurate records of the total receipts, disbursements, income and expenses received and disbursed in connection with its operation, conduct, promotion, supervision and any other phase of bingo games which are authorized by each separate license issued pursuant to this chapter. The city administrator, city licensing officer or other city council appointee shall have the right to examine and audit such record at any reasonable time, and the licensee shall fully cooperate with the city by making such records available.

(Ord. 1234 (part), 1995: Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.110 - Financial interest in licensee only.

No individual, corporation, partnership or other legal entity, except the licensee, shall hold a financial interest in the conduct of any bingo game licensed under this chapter.

(Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.120 - Exclusive operation by licensee.

Page 4

A bingo game shall be operated and staffed only by members of the licensee's organization. Such members shall not receive a profit, wage, or salary from any bingo game. Only the licensee shall operate such game, or participate in the promotion, supervision, or any other phase of such game.

(Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.130 - Transfer of license prohibited.

Licenses are not transferable and there are no rebates if the bingo operation licensed under this chapter is discontinued during the period for which the license was issued.

(Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.140 - Determination of good moral character.

A. The licensee shall furnish the city licensing officer with the names and residence addresses of all of its members. The members who staff or operate the games shall furnish the city licensing officer with such information as he/she reasonably requires to determine that they are of good moral character. Persons determined by the city licensing officer not to be of good moral character shall not operate or staff a game.

B. The city licensing officer, through the chief of police, shall have the authority to obtain criminal history information for each person operating or assisting in the operation of a bingo game for purposes of determining those who have been convicted within the past five years of crimes involving illegal lotteries, gambling, larceny, perjury, bribery, extortion, fraud or similar crimes involving moral turpitude, and to present such information at any bingo permit hearing; provided, however, that if the city licensing officer shall find that any person investigated does, in fact, have a criminal record, such person shall be notified prior to such permit hearing and may withdraw as a participant, applicant or operator prior to the hearing. If such person shall withdraw, the city licensing officer shall not disclose such person's criminal record, but such person shall not, at any time in the future, be permitted to participate in any way in any bingo operation licensed under this chapter.

(Ord. 1234 (part), 1995: Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.150 - Appeal of operator eligibility to city council.

Any organization member who is denied eligibility by the city licensing officer to operate a bingo game on the basis of moral character shall have the right, within fifteen days after receiving notice in writing of the denial, to file a written appeal to the city council. Such appeal shall set the specific ground or grounds on which it is based. The city council shall hold a hearing on the appeal within thirty days after its receipt by the city, or at a time thereafter agreed upon, and shall cause the appellant to be given at least ten days' written notice of such hearing. At the hearing, the appellant or his/her authorized representative shall have the right to present evidence and a written or oral argument, or both, in support of his/her appeal. The determination of the city council on the appeal shall be final.

(Ord. 1234 (part), 1995: Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.160 - Bingo games open to the public.

All bingo games licensed under this chapter shall be open to the public and not just to members of the licensee's organization.

Page 5

(Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.170 - Certificate of occupancy prerequisite.

Prior to commencing the operation of any bingo games licensed under this chapter, the requirements of Section 5.04.220 of this code shall be strictly observed and complied with.

(Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.180 - Attendance limits.

Notwithstanding that bingo games are open to the public, attendance at any bingo game shall be limited to the occupancy capacity of the room in which such game is conducted, as determined by the fire department and chief building official of the city in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. Licensee shall not reserve seats or space for any person.

(Ord. 1234 (part), 1995: Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.190 - Bingo games conducted on licensee's property.

A licensee shall conduct a bingo game only on property used by such organization for an office, meeting place, or for performance of the purposes for which the organization is organized. The license issued under this chapter shall authorize the holder thereof to conduct bingo games only on such property, the address of which is stated in the application. In the event the described property ceases to be used as an office, meeting place, or as a place for performance of the purpose for which the licensee is organized, the license shall have no further force or effect. A new license may be obtained by an eligible organization, upon application under this chapter, when it again acquires property used by it for an office, meeting place or for performance of the purposes for which the organization is organized.

(Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.200 - Bingo equipment.

All equipment used in the operation of bingo games shall be owned by the licensee authorized to conduct such bingo games.

(Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.210 - Minors not to participate.

No person under the age of eighteen years of age shall be licensed or allowed to operate or participate in any bingo games licensed under this chapter.

(Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.220 - Intoxicated persons not to participate.

No person who is obviously intoxicated shall be allowed to participate in a bingo game licensed under this chapter.

Page 6

(Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.230 - Hours of operation.

No licensee shall conduct any bingo game licensed under this chapter more than six hours out of any twenty-four-hour period. No bingo game licensed under this chapter shall be conducted between two a.m. and ten a.m.

(Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.240 - Participant must be present.

No person shall be allowed to participate in a bingo game licensed under this chapter unless the person is physically present at the time and place in which the bingo game is being conducted.

(Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.250 - City may enjoin violation.

The city may bring an action in court of competent jurisdiction to enjoin a violation of Section 326.5 of the Penal Code or of this chapter.

(Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.260 - Licensing period.

Each license that is issued to organizations which qualify as provided in this chapter shall be issued a license not to exceed one year in duration. Licensees are required to reapply within ten working days following the expiration of the previous license. If licensee fails to reapply within the ten working days' period following expiration of the license, they may be required to apply as an original applicant.

(Ord. 1234 (part), 1995: Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.270 - License fees.

The fee for a license shall be fifty dollars, payable at the time of issuance and each renewal thereof.

(Ord. 1234 (part), 1995: Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

5.64.280 - Terms.

Within thirty days following expiration of the period of the license, each licensee shall file a report made under penalty of perjury with the licensing officer containing the following information:

A. Any changes in or additions to the information required in the application;

B. The total amount of money received from the operation of the bingo games in the previous fiscal year;

C. The total amount paid out in prizes.

(Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

Page 7

5.64.290 - Violation—Penalty.

A. Any person who, through negligence, violates any provision of this chapter shall be subject to a civil penalty of fifty dollars for each such violation or revocation of the license granted hereunder or both such civil penalty and loss of said license.

B. Any person violating any provision of this chapter fraudulently or with intentional disregard of the provisions thereof shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or imprisonment in the county jail for not more than six months, or both such fine and imprisonment; provided, however, pursuant to subsections (b) and (c) of Section 326.5 of the Penal Code, any person receiving a profit, wage or salary from any bingo game authorized by Section 19 of Article IV of the State Constitution and this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punishable by a fine not to exceed ten thousand dollars.

(Ord. 1234 (part), 1995: Ord. 983 (part), 1986)

CACTUS-RANDALL &

FRISBIE PARK SURVEYS

A Project of the City of Rialto

The Resource Group

© February 2017

Cactus-Randall & Frisbie Park Surveys Page 2

Cactus-Randall & Frisbie Park Surveys


TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION _________________________________________________________ 3

BACKGROUND ______________________________________________________________ 3

METHODOLOGY _____________________________________________________________ 3

RESPONSE RATE ____________________________________________________________ 3

II. CACTUS-RANDALL PARK FINDINGS ________________________________________ 4

RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES – Cactus-Randall Park ___________________________________ 4

CURRENT RECREATIONAL FACILITIES & ACTIVITIES – Cactus-Randall Park _________________ 5

FUTURE RECREATIONAL FACILITIES & ACTIVITIES – Cactus-Randall Park __________________ 8

COMMUNITY EVENTS – Cactus-Randall Park ______________________________________ 12

RESPONDENT PROFILE – Cactus-Randall Park ____________________________________ 14

III. FRISBIE PARK FINDINGS ________________________________________________ 17

RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES – Frisbie Park _________________________________________ 17

CURRENT RECREATIONAL FACILITIES & ACTIVITIES – Frisbie Park _______________________ 18

FUTURE RECREATIONAL FACILITIES & ACTIVITIES – Frisbie Park ________________________ 21

COMMUNITY EVENTS – Frisbie Park _____________________________________________ 25

RESPONDENT PROFILE – Frisbie Park ___________________________________________ 27

Appendix A - VERBATIM RESPONSES _________________________________________ 1

NEAREST MAJOR CROSS STREETS – Cactus-Randall Park ___________________________ A-1

NEAREST MAJOR CROSS STREETS – Frisbie Park _________________________________ A-3

COMMENTS – Cactus-Randall Park ____________________________________________ A-5

COMMENTS – Frisbie Park ___________________________________________________ A-7

Researcher Foreword

The Resource Group (TRG), an independent research firm, was responsible for study methodology, survey administration, data collection and analysis and report production.


Cactus-Randall & Frisbie Park Surveys


I. INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND

The Cactus-Randall and Frisbie Park Surveys were conducted under the direction of the City of Rialto. The Resource Group (TRG), an independent applied research firm, was engaged to assist with survey methodology and design, data collection and analysis and presentation and review of findings. As part of the planning process for Cactus-Randall and Frisbie Parks, the City sought the views of local residents to determine the type of recreational facilities needed. The specific purposes of the survey effort were to learn from a sampling of area residents . . .

� Recreational activities residents are involved in most

� Usage of current recreational facilities available at area park sites and whether there is a need for more of the same facilities

� Likelihood of using proposed facilities at Cactus-Randall Park and Frisbie Park and suggestions for other types of facilities

� Likelihood of attending various community events

METHODOLOGY

Working with the City of Rialto, TRG finalized the survey instrument as a direct mail, self-administered survey form. The survey, accompanied with a cover letter from the City explaining the purpose of the survey, was mailed to a random sample of 6,000 households—3,000 within a 1-mile radius of Cactus-Randall Park and 3,000 within a 1-mile radius of Frisbie Park.

Surveys were mailed out the first part of January 2017. Residents receiving a survey were asked to mail back their completed survey at their earliest convenience in the accompanying postage-paid, pre-addressed envelope. They were also provided the telephone number of the City of Rialto if they needed the survey in Spanish or had any other questions. The survey was also made available in English and Spanish on the City’s website at www.yourrialto.com

RESPONSE RATE

By the mid-February 2017, 277 Cactus-Randall Park and 272 Frisbie Park surveys were completed, processed and included in this report.

Surveys Included in Report

TOTAL Mail Surveys Online Surveys

Cactus-Randall Park 277 186 91*

Frisbie Park 272 213 59

TOTAL 549 399 150

* Includes one completed online Spanish language survey


II. CACTUS-RANDALL PARK FINDINGS Presented in this section are findings based on 277 completed Cactus-Randall Park surveys—186 mail and 91 online surveys. One of the surveys completed online was a Spanish-language survey.

RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES – Cactus-Randall Park

Respondents were asked to indicate the kinds of activities and recreation that they and members of their household most enjoy and are involved in most. For recreation, many residents in close proximity to Cactus-Randall Park indicate that they are most often involved in walking, soccer, exercise and fitness and taking their children to the playground. Some 24% of online survey respondents and 31% of mail survey respondents walk for recreation.

Top Recreational Activities Respondents/Household Members Are Involved in Most

Cactus-Randall Survey Respondents

Recreational Activity

Total Respondents

(N=221)

Mail Survey Respondents

(N=186)

Online Survey Respondent

(N=91)

Walking 35.7% 30.6% 24.2%

Soccer 18.1 12.9 17.6

Exercise/fitness 12.7 10.8 8.8

Playground 12.2 8.1 13.2

Basketball 10.4 7.5 9.9

Running 10.4 7.5 9.9

Baseball 9.0 5.9 9.9

Biking 6.8 5.4 5.5

Dog activities 6.8 5.9 4.4

Swimming 6.8 5.4 5.5

Tennis 4.1 3.2 3.3

Football 3.6 2.2 4.4

Skateboarding 3.2 1.6 4.4

Softball 3.2 2.2 3.3

Volleyball 3.2 2.2 3.3

Picnicking 2.3 2.7 0.0


CURRENT RECREATIONAL FACILITIES & ACTIVITIES – Cactus-Randall Park

For the next series of questions, residents were asked to indicate how often they use facilities currently available at area park sites and whether or not they see a need to develop more of these facilities at Cactus-Randall Park. The list of facilities and the percentage of respondents indicating they use the facility "often" or "occasionally" are presented in the table below. The overwhelming majority of all respondents—80% to 90%—indicate they occasionally or often use walking paths, picnic facilities, playgrounds and exercise stations at recreational facilities in the area. About 3 out of 4 online survey respondents also often or occasionally use basketball courts.

Recreational Facilities Available in the Area That Respondents/Household Members Use “Often” Or “Occasionally”


Total Respondents

(N=277)


(N=186)

Online Survey Respondents

(N=91)

Recreational Facility

% that use facility “Often” or

“Occasionally” Recreational Facility




“Occasionally”

Walking path/trail 90.4% Walking path/trail 87.2% Walking path/trail 96.7%

Picnic area/facility 84.2 Picnic area/facility 78.4 Picnic area/facility 95.5

Playground 80.2 Exercise stations 75.0 Playground 92.3

Exercise stations 79.2 Playground 73.7 Exercise stations 87.4

Basketball court 58.5 Basketball court 48.5 Basketball court 77.3

Soccer field 50.6 Soccer field 47.0 Soccer field 57.6

Baseball field 42.5 Baseball field 40.1 Baseball field 47.1

Softball field 38.6 Softball field 36.8 Tennis court 44.7

Tennis court 37.4 Football 34.4 Softball field 41.9

Football 36.5 Tennis court 33.5 Football 40.7

Skate park 32.5 Skate park 32.1 Skate park 33.3


How Often Respondents/Household Members Use Recreational Facility



Total Respondents

(N=277)


(N=186)


(N=91)

Walking path/trail

Often 67.4% 61.1% 80.0%

Occasionally 23.0 26.1 16.7

Never 9.6 12.8 3.3

Picnic area/facility

Often 44.5% 35.8% 61.8%


Never 15.8 21.6 4.5

Playground

Often 49.6% 42.1% 63.7%


Never 19.8 26.3 7.7

Exercise stations

Often 37.6% 34.5% 43.7%

Occasionally 41.6 40.5 43.7 Never 20.8 25.0 12.6

Basketball court

Often 16.6% 15.8% 18.2%


Never 41.5 51.5 22.7

Soccer field

Often 26.7% 23.5% 32.9%


Never 49.4 53.0 42.4

Baseball field ALL MAIL ONLINE

Often 11.7% 8.6% 17.6%


Never 57.5 59.9 52.9

Softball field

Often 9.2% 7.4% 12.8%


Never 61.4 63.2 58.1

Tennis court

Often 10.6% 8.1% 15.3%


Never 62.6 66.5 55.3

Football

Often 10.8% 9.8% 12.8%


Never 63.5 65.6 59.3

Skate park

Often 10.8% 11.1% 10.3%


Never 67.5 67.9 66.7


Considering the facilities currently available in the area, residents were asked if they see a need to develop more of such facilities at Cactus Randall Park. With frequent usage of walking paths, picnic areas, exercise station and playgrounds, responding residents indicate that they would like to see more of these same recreational facilities at Cactus-Randall Park.

Percentage of Respondents That See a Need to Develop More of the Same Recreational Facilities Available in the Area at Cactus-Randall Park



Total Respondents

(N=277)


(N=186)


(N=91)

Walking path/trail 90.9% 86.5% 98.9%

Picnic area/facility 84.9 79.1 95.4

Exercise stations 83.1 80.9 87.1


Basketball court 55.5 54.3 57.3

Soccer field 50.5 51.1 49.4

Tennis court 46.6 46.4 47.0

Baseball field 45.1 47.6 41.0

Softball field 38.1 39.3 36.3

Football 37.7 41.3 31.7

Skate park 37.0 42.3 27.8


FUTURE RECREATIONAL FACILITIES & ACTIVITIES – Cactus-Randall Park

Using a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 is equal to “Not At All Likely to Use” and 5 is equal to “Very Likely to Use,” residents were asked to indicate how likely they and members in their household would be to use a number of facilities at Cactus-Randall Park. The list of facilities and the percentage of respondents indicating they would be “Likely” or “Very Likely” to use the facility at Cactus-Randall Park are presented in the table below. While many respondents indicate they would likely use walking paths, picnic facilities, exercise stations and playgrounds at Cactus-Randall Park, a majority of local residents also indicate expected usage of a parking lot and a multi-use field for activities such as sport practices, games, and Frisbee.

Recreational Facilities at Cactus-Randall Park Respondents/Household Members Would “Likely” Or “Very Likely” Use


Total Respondents

(N=277)


(N=186)


(N=91)


% that would “Likely” or “Very Likely” use facility Recreational Facility


% that would “Likely” or “Very Likely” use facility

Walking path/trail 84.6% Walking path/trail 79.5% Walking path/trail 94.4%

Picnicking area 70.3 Exercise stations 62.9 Picnicking area 84.6

Multi-use field 64.9 Picnicking area 62.8 Multi-use field 80.2

Exercise stations 64.0 Playground 57.9 Playground 71.4

Playground 62.6 Multi-use field 56.5 Parking lot 67.8

Parking lot 58.8 Parking lot 54.1 Exercise stations 66.3

Water play 57.2 Water play 53.1 Water play 65.2

Dog Park*/ Community garden**

44.4 Dog Park* 42.9 Outdoor amphitheater

48.9

Outdoor amphitheater 44.2

Outdoor amphitheater 41.7

Community garden** 47.3

Basketball 30.7 Basketball 29.7 Basketball 32.6

Volleyball 26.9 Volleyball 27.3 Tennis court 29.2

Tennis court 26.1 Tennis court 24.4 Volleyball 26.1

Softball field 22.6 Softball field 23.8 Softball field 20.5

* Facility listed in mail survey only ** Facility listed in online survey only


Likelihood of Using Recreational Facility at Cactus-Randall Park


Recreational Facility Mean*

Not At All Likely To

Use Not Likely

To Use Neutral Likely To

Use

Very Likely To

Use

Walking path/trail

Total (N=277) 4.42 7.9% 3.0% 4.5% 8.3% 76.3%

Mail Survey (N=186) 4.24 11.4 3.4 5.7 8.5 71.0

Online Survey (N=91) 4.77 1.1 2.2 2.2 7.8 86.7

Picnicking area

Total (N=277) 3.98 11.4% 4.2% 14.1% 15.2% 55.1%

Mail Survey (N=186) 3.73 15.7 5.2 16.3 16.3 46.5

Online Survey (N=91) 4.47 3.3 2.2 9.9 13.2 71.4

Multi-use field

Total (N=277) 3.81 15.4% 5.0% 14.7% 13.1% 51.7%

Mail Survey (N=186) 3.50 22.0 5.4 16.1 13.7 42.9

Online Survey (N=91) 4.37 3.3 4.4 12.1 12.1 68.1

Exercise stations

Total (N=277) 3.86 11.0% 6.4% 18.6% 13.6% 50.4%

Mail Survey (N=186) 3.75 14.3 8.0 14.9 14.3 48.6

Online Survey (N=91) 4.08 4.5 3.4 25.8 12.4 53.9

Playground

Total (N=277) 3.81 14.1% 6.9% 16.4% 9.5% 53.1%

Mail Survey (N=186) 3.60 19.3 6.4 16.4 11.1 46.8

Online Survey (N=91) 4.20 4.4 7.7 16.5 6.6 64.8

Parking lot

Total (N=277) 3.62 16.4% 6.5% 18.3% 16.0% 42.7%

Mail Survey (N=186) 3.42 21.5 5.2 19.2 18.0 36.0

Online Survey (N=91) 4.01 6.7 8.9 16.7 12.2 55.6

Water play

Total (N=277) 3.51 21.2% 7.6% 14.0% 13.6% 43.6%

Mail Survey (N=186) 3.33 25.7 8.6 12.6 13.7 39.4

Online Survey (N=91) 3.87 12.4 5.6 16.9 13.5 51.7

Dog park**/Community garden***

Total (N=277) 3.19 24.1% 13.8% 17.6% 8.0% 36.4%

Mail Survey (N=186) 3.12 28.2 12.4 16.5 5.3 37.6

Online Survey (N=91) 3.32 16.5 16.5 19.8 13.2 34.1

* 1=Not at all likely to use/5=Very likely to use ** Facility listed in mail survey only *** Facility listed in online survey only


Likelihood of Using Recreational Facility at Cactus-Randall Park (Continued)




Use Not Likely


Use

Very Likely To

Use

Outdoor amphitheater

Total (N=277) 3.23 21.1% 10.4% 24.3% 12.7% 31.5%

Mail Survey (N=186) 3.12 23.3 11.0 23.9 13.5 28.2

Online Survey (N=91) 3.43 17.0 9.1 25.0 11.4 37.5

Basketball

Total (N=277) 2.64 35.6% 16.5% 17.2% 10.0% 20.7%

Mail Survey (N=186) 2.58 40.7 13.4 16.3 7.0 22.7

Online Survey (N=91) 2.75 25.8 22.5 19.1 15.7 16.9

Volleyball

Total (N=277) 2.52 38.3% 13.0% 21.7% 12.3% 14.6%

Mail Survey (N=186) 2.44 41.8 14.5 16.4 12.1 15.2

Online Survey (N=91) 2.66 31.8 10.2 31.8 12.5 13.6

Tennis court

Total (N=277) 2.38 47.1% 9.7% 17.1% 10.1% 16.0%

Mail Survey (N=186) 2.30 49.4 10.7 15.5 9.5 14.9

Online Survey (N=91) 2.54 42.7 7.9 20.2 11.2 18.0

Softball field

Total (N=277) 2.27 48.4% 11.1% 17.9% 10.7% 11.9%

Mail Survey (N=186) 2.27 47.6 13.4 15.2 11.6 12.2

Online Survey (N=91) 2.25 50.0 6.8 22.7 9.1 11.4

* 1=Not at all likely to use/5=Very likely to use


Residents were asked to indicate if there were other facilities (not included on the suggested list) that they would like to see at Cactus-Randall Park. Among all Cactus-Randall Park respondents, soccer field and swimming pool received the most mentions as “other” facilities residents would like to see at the park. Among online survey respondents, swimming pool had fewer mentions, replaced by more suggestions for a recreation/community center.

Other Recreational Facilities Respondents Would Most Like to See at Cactus-Randall Park


(% of Additional Suggested Facilities)


Total Respondents

(N=277)


(N=186)


(N=91)

Soccer field 12.1% 12.1% 12.2%

Swimming pool 10.3 15.5 4.1

Bike trail 6.5 5.2 8.2

Recreation/community center 6.5 3.4 10.2

Gym 5.6 6.9 4.1

Racquetball/handball court 4.7 5.2 4.1

BBQ pits 3.7 5.2 2.0

Garden 3.7 3.4 4.1

Lake 3.7 0.0 8.2

Senior activity center 3.7 5.2 2.0

Skate park 3.7 0.0 8.2

Football field 2.8 1.7 4.1

Gymnasium 2.8 5.2 0.0

Rock climbing 2.8 1.7 4.1

Golf course 1.9 0.0 4.1

Rugby field 1.9 0.0 4.1

Lighted areas 1.9 3.4 0.0

Tetherball 1.9 1.7 2.0


COMMUNITY EVENTS – Cactus-Randall Park

Using a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 is equal to “Not At All Likely to Attend” and 5 is equal to “Very Likely to Attend,” residents were asked how likely they and members in their household would be to attend a variety of community events. The list of community events and the percentage of respondents indicating they would be “Likely” or “Very Likely” to attend are presented in the table below. A large majority of Cactus-Randall Park respondents would most likely attend a food festival and a holiday celebration in the area. A number of mail survey respondents would also likely visit a community bazaar, flea market and/or farmer’s market, while many of the online survey respondents, who are younger than their mail survey counterparts, would most likely attend an outdoor movie and/or family fun event with games, inflatables, water slides, etc.

Community Events Respondents/Household Members Would “Likely” Or “Very Likely” Attend


Total Respondents

(N=277)


(N=186)


(N=91)

Community Event

% that would “Likely” or “Very Likely” attend Community Event


% that would “Likely” or “Very Likely” attend

Food festival 73.7% Holiday celebration 71.9% Food festival 80.0%

Holiday celebration 73.1 Food festival 70.6 Outdoor movie 78.7

Bazaar/flea market/ farmer’s market

67.2 Bazaar/flea market/ farmer’s market

65.9 Holiday celebration 75.6

Concert in the Park 66.4 Children’s activities 64.8 Family fun event 74.4

Outdoor movie 65.2 Concert in the Park 64.8 Children’s activities 70.0

Family fun event 64.8 Family fun event 59.9 Bazaar/flea market/ farmer’s market

69.7

Children’s activities 60.6 Outdoor movie 58.4 Concert in the Park 69.7

Art, car or other specialty show

58.5 Art, car or other specialty show

58.2 Carnival 66.7

Carnival 57.1 Carnival 52.3 Art, car or other specialty show

58.9


Likelihood of Attending Community Event


Community Event Mean*


Attend Not Likely To Attend Neutral

Likely To Attend

Very Likely To

Attend

Food festival

Total (N=277) 4.06 8.5% 5.2% 12.6% 19.3% 54.4%

Mail Survey (N=186) 3.95 10.6 6.1 12.8 18.9 51.7

Online Survey (N=91) 4.28 4.4 3.3 12.2 20.0 60.0

Holiday celebration

Total (N=277) 4.06 9.7% 4.1% 13.1% 16.8% 56.3%

Mail Survey (N=186) 3.95 12.9 5.6 9.6 17.4 54.5

Online Survey (N=91) 4.28 3.3 1.1 20.0 15.6 60.0

Bazaar/flea market/farmer’s market

Total (N=277) 3.85 10.6% 6.8% 15.5% 21.5% 45.7%

Mail Survey (N=186) 3.83 10.2 7.4 16.5 21.0 44.9

Online Survey (N=91) 3.89 11.2 5.6 13.5 22.5 47.2

Concert in the Park

Total (N=277) 3.84 14.0% 4.9% 14.7% 15.8% 50.6%

Mail Survey (N=186) 3.76 15.3 5.1 14.8 17.6 47.2

Online Survey (N=91) 4.00 11.2 4.5 14.6 12.4 57.3

Outdoor movie

Total (N=277) 3.77 13.9% 9.4% 11.6% 16.1% 49.1%

Mail Survey (N=186) 3.56 18.0 10.7 12.9 14.0 44.4

Online Survey (N=91) 4.19 5.6 6.7 9.0 20.2 58.4

Family fun event

Total (N=277) 3.76 16.1% 4.9% 14.2% 16.1% 48.7%

Mail Survey (N=186) 3.58 19.8 5.6 14.7 16.4 43.5

Online Survey (N=91) 4.12 8.9 3.3 13.3 15.6 58.9

Children’s activities

Total (N=277) 3.68 16.7% 7.6% 15.2% 12.5% 48.1%

Mail Survey (N=186) 3.51 15.3 5.1 14.8 17.6 47.2

Online Survey (N=91) 4.00 10.0 4.4 15.6 15.6 54.4


Total (N=277) 3.61 14.7% 8.1% 18.8% 18.4% 40.1%

Mail Survey (N=186) 3.57 17.0 7.1 17.6 18.1 40.1

Online Survey (N=91) 3.69 10.0 10.0 21.1 18.9 40.0

Carnival

Total (N=277) 3.55 18.0% 9.0% 15.8% 14.3% 42.9%

Mail Survey (N=186) 3.38 21.0 11.4 15.3 13.1 39.2

Online Survey (N=91) 3.88 12.2 4.4 16.7 16.7 50.0

* 1=Not at all likely to attend/5=Very likely to attend


RESPONDENT PROFILE – Cactus-Randall Park

Following is the demographic profile of the 277 Cactus-Randall respondents—186 mail survey and 91 online survey respondents. While slightly more females than males responded to the Cactus-Randall Park survey, among online survey respondents, females outnumbered males 2-to-1. Nearly 40% of all Cactus-Randall Park respondents were 15 to 30 years old. Since younger individuals more frequently use the Internet than their older counterparts, it’s not surprising that more of the 30 and younger respondents completed the online survey. In comparison, the majority of the 25% of Cactus-Randall Park respondents that were 60 years and older were mail survey respondents. About one-half of all Cactus-Randall Park survey respondents are Hispanic. Considering just online survey respondents, the percentage of Hispanic residents responding to the park survey was nearly 69%.

Respondent Demographics


Total Respondents

(N=277)


(N=186)


(N=91)

GENDER

Male 41.4% 44.1% 36.3%

Female 58.6 55.9 63.7

AGE GROUP

15-19 years old 2.2 1.1 4.4

20-29 years old 11.8 8.8 17.6

30-39 years old 25.7 13.8 49.5

40-49 years old 18.4 21.0 13.2

50-59 years old 16.9 21.0 8.8

60+ years old 25.0 34.3 6.6

ETHNICITY

White 25.3% 28.1% 20.0%

Hispanic 54.5 46.7 68.9

American Indian 0.8 1.2 0.0

Black 9.3 12.6 3.3

Asian 4.7 4.2 5.6

Other 5.4 7.2 2.2


Although Spanish is the primarily language spoken at home for about 2 out of 5 responding Cactus-Randall Park respondents, only one Spanish-language online survey was complete and included in this report. About one-fourth of respondents had at least a high school degree or GED, while a nearly similar portion had a bachelor or graduate degree. A greater portion of online survey respondents had a bachelor or graduate degree as compared to mail survey respondents. Nearly 30% of all Cactus-Randall respondents have been in Rialto for 26 years or more, resulting in an average of 19 years in the city. The relatively younger online survey respondents have resided in Rialto for 16 years on average, as compared to an average of 21 years among the comparatively older mail survey respondents.

Respondent Demographics (Continued)


Total Respondents

(N=277)


(N=186)


(N=91)

PRIMARY LANGUAGE SPOKEN AT HOME

English 80.1% 80.6% 79.1%

Spanish 22.0 22.6 20.9

Asian and Pacific Islander 1.4 1.6 1.1

HIGHEST LEVEL OF EDUCATION

Less than a high school degree 4.4% 3.9% 5.6%

High school degree or GED 18.9 23.3 10.0

Some college, no degree 33.3 33.9 32.2

Associate degree 15.6 15.6 15.6

Bachelor degree 17.8 13.9 25.6

Graduate degree 8.9 7.8 11.1

LENGTH OF TIME IN RIALTO

Less than 5 years 11.8% 13.1% 9.1%

5 to 15 years 32.7 25.7 46.6

16 to 25 years 25.9 27.4 22.7

26 to 35 years 21.3 21.7 20.5

36 years or more 8.4 12.0 1.1

Mean number of years in Rialto: 19.2 21.0 15.6


Cactus-Randall respondents had a median of 2 adults and 2 children under 18 in their household. Nearly 59% had household incomes of $50,000 or more. Given that one-fourth of mail survey respondents were 60 years or older, it follows that nearly 34% of this group had no children under 18 living in their household and lower household incomes.



Total Respondents

(N=277)


(N=186)


(N=91)

NUMBER OF ADULTS IN HOUSEHOLD

1 person 8.2% 10.6% 3.4%

2 people 48.1 47.5 49.4

3 people 14.6 14.5 14.6

4 people 19.4 18.4 21.3

5 people 5.6 6.1 4.5

6 or more people 4.1 2.8 6.7

Median number of adults in household: 2 adults 2 adults 2 adults

NUMBER OF CHILDREN (UNDER 18) IN HOUSEHOLD

No children 28.6% 34.6% 19.5%

1 child 20.5 21.1 19.5

2 children 27.7 21.1 37.9

3 children 15.0 15.8 13.8

4 children 6.8 5.3 9.2

5 children .9 1.5 0.0

6 or more children .5 0.8 0.0

Median number of children (under 18) in household:

2 children 1 child 2 children

HOUSEHOLD INCOME

Less than $20,000 7.6% 10.1% 1.7%

$20,000 to $34,999 11.6 13.0 8.3

$35,000 to $49,999 22.2 23.2 20.0

$50,000 to $74,999 29.8 26.8 36.7

$75,000 to $99,999 17.7 15.9 21.7

$100,000 or more 11.1 10.9 11.7


III. FRISBIE PARK FINDINGS Presented in this section are findings based on 272 completed Frisbie Park surveys—213 mail and 59 online surveys.

RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES – Frisbie Park

Respondents were asked to indicate the kinds of activities and recreation that they and members of their household most enjoy and are involved in most. Across all Frisbie Park respondents, the top recreational activities are softball, walking, baseball and basketball. A larger portion of area residents that play softball and baseball were online survey respondents, while a greater portion of residents that walk were mail survey respondents.

Top Recreational Activities Respondents/Household Members Are Involved in Most

Frisbie Survey Respondents

Recreational Activity

Total Respondents

(N=272)


(N=213)


(N=59)

Softball 19.9% 9.4% 57.6%

Walking 18.8 22.1 6.8

Baseball 16.9 14.1 27.1

Basketball 12.1 12.7 10.2

Soccer 8.1 8.0 8.5

Picnicking 7.7 8.0 6.8

Exercise/fitness 7.0 7.0 6.8


Football 4.8 5.6 1.7

Dog activities 4.4 3.8 6.8

Biking 4.0 5.2 0.0

Sports 4.0 4.2 3.4

Tennis 3.3 3.8 1.7

Running 2.9 3.3 1.7

Skateboarding 2.9 2.8 3.4

Volleyball 2.6 1.9 5.1


CURRENT RECREATIONAL FACILITIES & ACTIVITIES – Frisbie Park

For the next series of questions, residents were asked to indicate how often they use facilities currently available at area park sites and whether or not they see a need to develop more of these facilities at Frisbie Park. The list of facilities and the percentage of respondents indicating they use the facility "often" or "occasionally" are presented in the table below. The majority of all respondents in the Frisbie Park area—66% to 74%—indicate they occasionally or often use walking paths, picnic facilities and playgrounds at recreational facilities in the area. Consistent with the finding that many online survey respondents are involved in softball and baseball, nearly 93% indicate they also often or occasionally visit a snack bar.

Recreational Facilities Available in the Area That Respondents/Household Members Use “Often” Or “Occasionally”


Total Respondents

(N=272)


(N=213)


(N=59)







“Occasionally”

Walking path/trail 74.0% Walking path/trail 69.6% Snack bar 92.6%

Picnic area 72.3 Picnic area 67.2 Picnic area 89.7

Playground 66.3 Playground 63.3 Walking path/trail 89.1

Snack bar 56.6 Basketball court 49.5 Playground 76.8

Baseball field 50.2 Exercise stations 46.3 Softball field 75.4

Basketball court 48.3 Snack bar 46.3 Baseball field 72.2

Exercise stations 47.7 Baseball field 44.0 Exercise stations 52.8

Softball field 47.5 Softball field 39.0 Basketball court 44.4

Soccer field 34.2 Soccer field 35.0 Soccer field 31.5

Tennis court 26.3 Tennis court 24.9 Tennis court 30.9

Skate park 21.5 Skate park 20.2 Skate park 25.9


How Often Respondents/Household Members Use Recreational Facility



Total Respondents

(N=272)


(N=213)


(N=59)

Walking path/trail

Often 43.1% 41.9% 47.3%


Never 25.6 29.8 10.9

Picnic area/facilities

Often 23.4% 20.7% 32.8%


Never 27.7 32.8 10.3

Playground

Often 29.8% 26.0% 42.9%


Never 33.7 36.7 23.2

Snack bar

Often 24.2% 13.2% 63.0%


Never 43.4 53.7 7.4

Baseball field

Often 23.7% 17.3% 46.3%


Never 49.8 56.0 27.8

Basketball court

Often 15.3% 14.4% 18.5%


Never 51.7 50.5 55.6

Exercise stations

Often 19.3% 19.5% 18.9%


Never 52.3 53.7 47.2

Softball field

Often 29.1% 16.0% 71.9%


Never 52.5 61.0 24.6

Soccer field

Often 16.9% 16.9% 16.7%


Never 65.8 65.0 68.5

Tennis court

Often 8.1% 7.2% 10.9%


Never 73.3 74.6 69.1

Skate park

Often 8.0% 7.7% 9.3%


Never 78.5 79.8 74.1


Considering the facilities currently available in the area, residents were asked if they see a need to develop more of such facilities at Frisbie Park. With frequent usage of walking paths, picnic areas and playgrounds, responding residents indicate that they would like to see more of these same recreational facilities at Frisbie Park. Online survey respondents also see a need for additional softball fields and a snack bar.

Percentage of Respondents That See a Need to Develop More of the Same Recreational Facilities Available in the Area at Frisbie Park



Total Respondents

(N=272)


(N=213)


(N=59)

Walking path/trail 78.4% 79.4% 75.4%

Picnic area/facilities 74.8 69.9 89.1


Exercise stations 61.4 61.5 61.1

Snack bar 58.4 50.0 81.8

Softball field 49.5 38.5 78.6

Basketball court 45.2 48.3 36.5

Baseball field 41.8 36.1 58.5

Tennis court 39.8 43.9 28.3


Skate park 36.3 39.2 28.3


FUTURE RECREATIONAL FACILITIES & ACTIVITIES – Frisbie Park

Using a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 is equal to “Not At All Likely to Use” and 5 is equal to “Very Likely to Use,” residents were asked to indicate how likely they or members in their household would be to use a number of facilities at Frisbie Park. The list of facilities and the percentage of respondents indicating they would be “Likely” or “Very Likely” to use the facility at Frisbie Park are presented in the table below. While many respondents indicate they would likely use walking paths and picnic facilities at Frisbie Park, a majority of local residents also indicate expected usage of a parking lot. Online survey respondents indicate they would also be likely to use batting cages and softball fields at Frisbie Park.

Recreational Facilities at Frisbie Park Respondents/Household Members Would “Likely” Or “Very Likely” Use


Total Respondents

(N=272)


(N=213)


(N=59)




% that would “Likely” or “Very Likely” use facility

Walking path/trail 68.2% Walking path/trail 67.3% Parking lot 84.2%

Parking lot 62.3 Parking lot 56.0 Batting cages 80.7

Picnicking areas 59.5 Picnicking areas 55.4 Picnicking areas 73.7

Multi-use fields 53.8 Exercise stations 51.5 Softball fields 73.7

Playgrounds 51.9 Playgrounds 50.0 Multi-use fields 71.9

Exercise stations 50.0 Multi-use fields 48.4 Walking path/trail 71.2

Water play 49.2 Water play 45.5 Water play 62.5

Dog park 46.7 Dog park 44.9 Playgrounds 58.6

Batting cages 45.6 Batting cages 35.4 Dog park 52.6

Softball fields 41.8 Basketball 35.0 Exercise stations 44.6

Basketball 34.0 Softball fields 32.5 Basketball 30.4

Volleyball 23.7 Volleyball 23.3 Volleyball 25.0

Tennis courts 20.8 Tennis courts 21.6 Tennis courts 17.9


Likelihood of Using Recreational Facility at Frisbie Park




Use Not Likely


Use

Very Likely To

Use

Walking path/trail

Total (N=272) 3.88 14.7% 4.3% 12.8% 14.7% 53.5%

Mail Survey (N=213) 3.82 15.6 5.0 12.1 16.6 50.8

Online Survey (N=59) 4.08 11.9 1.7 15.3 8.5 62.7

Parking lot

Total (N=272) 3.72 17.1% 4.7% 16.0% 13.2% 49.0%

Mail Survey (N=213) 3.51 21.5 4.5 18.0 13.5 42.5

Online Survey (N=59) 4.47 1.8 5.3 8.8 12.3 71.9

Picnicking areas

Total (N=272) 3.64 17.4% 5.4% 17.8% 14.3% 45.2%

Mail Survey (N=213) 3.50 20.8 5.4 18.3 13.9 41.6

Online Survey (N=59) 4.16 5.3 5.3 15.8 15.8 57.9

Multi-use fields

Total (N=272) 3.40 24.7% 4.5% 17.0% 13.8% 40.1%

Mail Survey (N=213) 3.20 28.4 4.7 18.4 15.3 33.2

Online Survey (N=59) 4.07 12.3 3.5 12.3 8.8 63.2

Playgrounds

Total (N=272) 3.34 24.6% 7.7% 15.8% 13.1% 38.8%

Mail Survey (N=213) 3.25 26.2 8.4 15.3 13.9 36.1

Online Survey (N=59) 3.64 19.0 5.2 17.2 10.3 48.3

Exercise stations

Total (N=272) 3.28 25.2% 7.9% 16.9% 14.2% 35.8%

Mail Survey (N=213) 3.30 25.8 7.1 15.7 14.6 36.9

Online Survey (N=59) 3.20 23.2 10.7 21.4 12.5 32.1

Water play

Total (N=272) 3.13 34.6% 6.7% 9.4% 9.1% 40.2%

Mail Survey (N=213) 3.04 36.4 7.6 10.6 7.1 38.4

Online Survey (N=59) 3.48 28.6 3.6 5.4 16.1 46.4

Dog park

Total (N=272) 3.11 31.4% 8.6% 13.3% 11.0% 35.7%

Mail Survey (N=213) 3.03 33.3 8.1 13.6 12.1 32.8

Online Survey (N=59) 3.39 24.6 10.5 12.3 7.0 45.6

Batting cages

Total (N=272) 2.98 38.5% 7.1% 8.7% 9.1% 36.5%

Mail Survey (N=213) 2.58 46.7 8.2 9.7 11.3 24.1

Online Survey (N=59) 4.35 10.5 3.5 5.3 1.8 78.9



Likelihood of Using Recreational Facility at Cactus-Randall Park (Continued)




Use Not Likely


Use

Very Likely To

Use

Softball fields

Total (N=272) 2.84 40.2% 8.4% 9.6% 10.4% 31.5%

Mail Survey (N=213) 2.49 47.4 9.3 10.8 11.9 20.6

Online Survey (N=59) 4.05 15.8 5.3 5.3 5.3 68.4

Basketball

Total (N=272) 2.59 43.4% 11.7% 10.9% 10.5% 23.4%

Mail Survey (N=213) 2.63 42.0 12.5 10.5 11.0 24.0

Online Survey (N=59) 2.46 48.2 8.9 12.5 8.9 21.4

Volleyball

Total (N=272) 2.35 46.6% 11.6% 18.1% 8.0% 15.7%

Mail Survey (N=213) 2.34 45.1 13.5 18.1 9.3 14.0

Online Survey (N=59) 2.38 51.8 5.4 17.9 3.6 21.4

Tennis courts

Total (N=272) 2.14 54.4% 11.2% 13.6% 7.6% 13.2%

Mail Survey (N=213) 2.21 51.5 11.3 15.5 8.2 13.4

Online Survey (N=59) 1.91 64.3 10.7 7.1 5.4 12.5



Residents were asked to indicate if there were other facilities (not included on the suggested list) that they would like to see at Frisbie Park. Among all Frisbie Park respondents, swimming pool and football field received the most mentions as “other” facilities residents would like to see at the park. Among online survey respondents, football field had no mentions, replaced by more suggestions for a recreation/community center.

Other Recreational Facilities Respondents Would Like to See at Frisbie Park


(% of Additional Suggested Facilities)


Total Respondents

(N=272)


(N=213)


(N=59)

Swimming pool 13.6% 15.7% 10.0%

Football field 11.1 17.6 0.0

Bike trail 9.9 13.7 3.3

Gym 9.9 9.8 10.0

Amphitheater 8.6 7.8 10.0


Recreation/community center 7.4 2.0 16.7

Skate park 4.9 2.0 10.0

More-cleaner restrooms 4.9 3.9 6.7

Sitting areas 3.7 0.0 10.0

Gymnasium 2.5 3.9 0.0

Running trail 2.5 3.9 0.0

BMX track 1.2 2.0 0.0

Garden 1.2 0.0 3.3

Horseshoe court 1.2 2.0 0.0

Lake 1.2 0.0 3.3

Racquetball/handball court 1.2 2.0 0.0

Youth-related facility 1.2 2.0 0.0

Dance area 1.2 0.0 3.3

Shaded areas 1.2 0.0 3.3


COMMUNITY EVENTS – Frisbie Park

Using a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 is equal to “Not At All Likely to Attend” and 5 is equal to “Very Likely to Attend,” residents were asked how likely they and members in their household would be to attend a variety of community events. The list of community events and the percentage of respondents indicating they would be “Likely” or “Very Likely” to attend are presented in the table below. A large majority of Frisbie Park respondents would most likely attend a food festival, a Concert in the Park and a bazaar, flea market and/or farmer’s market in the area. A number of online survey respondents would also attend a holiday celebration and/or an outdoor movie.

Community Events Respondents/Household Members Would “Likely” Or “Very Likely” Attend


Total Respondents

(N=272)


(N=213)


(N=59)

Community Event



% that would “Likely” or “Very Likely” attend

Food festival 71.9% Bazaar/flea market/ farmer’s market

72.5% Food festival 75.9%

Concert in the Park 69.5 Food festival 70.7 Holiday celebration 72.4

Bazaar/flea market/ farmer’s market

68.8 Concert in the Park 69.6 Outdoor movie 69.0

Holiday celebration 64.8 Art, car or other specialty show

66.8 Concert in the Park 69.0


59.8 Holiday celebration 62.6 Family fun event 66.7

Outdoor movie 59.6 Outdoor movie 56.9 Bazaar/flea market/ farmer’s market

55.9

Family fun event 55.1 Family fun event 51.8 Carnival 55.2

Carnival 51.0 Carnival 49.7 Art, car or other specialty show

36.2


Likelihood of Attending Community Event


Community Event Mean*


Attend Not Likely To Attend Neutral

Likely To Attend

Very Likely To

Attend

Food festival

Total (N=272) 3.94 11.4% 5.3% 11.4% 22.1% 49.8%

Mail Survey (N=213) 3.90 11.7 5.4 12.2 22.4 48.3

Online Survey (N=59) 4.05 10.3 5.2 8.6 20.7 55.2

Concert in the Park

Total (N=272) 3.92 10.7% 4.6% 15.3% 21.0% 48.5%

Mail Survey (N=213) 3.94 9.8 4.4 16.2 21.1 48.5

Online Survey (N=59) 3.84 13.8 5.2 12.1 20.7 48.3

Bazaar/flea market/farmer’s market

Total (N=272) 3.87 12.2% 6.5% 12.5% 19.8% 49.0%

Mail Survey (N=213) 3.99 10.3 5.4 11.8 20.6 52.0

Online Survey (N=59) 3.47 18.6 10.2 15.3 16.9 39.0

Holiday celebration

Total (N=272) 3.73 12.3% 9.6% 13.4% 22.6% 42.1%

Mail Survey (N=213) 3.67 12.8 9.4 15.3 22.7 39.9

Online Survey (N=59) 3.91 10.3 10.3 6.9 22.4 50.0


Total (N=272) 3.62 17.3% 6.3% 16.5% 16.5% 43.3%

Mail Survey (N=213) 3.82 13.8 5.1 14.3 19.4 47.4

Online Survey (N=59) 2.97 29.3 10.3 24.1 6.9 29.3

Outdoor movie

Total (N=272) 3.60 13.8% 11.2% 15.4% 20.0% 39.6%

Mail Survey (N=213) 3.53 14.9 12.4 15.8 18.8 38.1

Online Survey (N=59) 3.86 10.3 6.9 13.8 24.1 44.8

Family fun event

Total (N=272) 3.44 18.0% 11.7% 15.2% 18.8% 36.3%

Mail Survey (N=213) 3.33 20.1 12.1 16.1 18.1 33.7

Online Survey (N=59) 3.81 10.5 10.5 12.3 21.1 45.6

Carnival

Total (N=272) 3.37 16.7% 14.4% 17.9% 17.5% 33.5%

Mail Survey (N=213) 3.33 17.6 15.1 17.6 16.6 33.2

Online Survey (N=59) 3.50 13.8 12.1 19.0 20.7 34.5

* 1=Not at all likely to attend/5=Very likely to attend


RESPONDENT PROFILE – Frisbie Park

Following is the demographic profile of the 272 Frisbie respondents—213 mail survey and 91 online survey respondents. While slightly more females than males responded to the Frisbie Park survey, among online survey respondents, females outnumbered males 2-to-1. About 29% of all Frisbie Park respondents were 15 to 30 years old. Among online survey respondents, 64% were 30 years old or younger, while 45% of mail survey respondents were 60 years and older. This age difference between mail versus online survey respondents is most likely due to the fact that Internet usage is more prevalent among the younger population. Among all Frisbie Park respondents, 42% are Hispanic, 28% are White and 23% are Black. Considering just online survey respondents, the percentage of Hispanic residents responding to the park survey was 69%.

Respondent Demographics


Total Respondents

(N=272)


(N=213)


(N=59)

GENDER

Male 43.3% 46.0% 33.9%

Female 56.7 54.0 66.1

AGE GROUP

15-19 years old 1.5% 0.5% 5.1%

20-29 years old 6.7 5.3 11.9

30-39 years old 20.9 13.4 47.5

40-49 years old 15.7 15.3 16.9

50-59 years old 19.4 20.6 15.3

60+ years old 35.8 45.0 3.4

ETHNICITY

White 27.8% 28.3% 25.9%

Hispanic 42.4 34.2 69.0

American Indian 1.2 1.6 0.0

Black 23.3 28.9 5.2

Asian 1.6 2.1 0.0

Other 3.7 4.8 0.0


English is the primarily language spoken at home for nearly 1 out of 10 responding Frisbie Park respondents. About 18% of all Frisbie Park respondents had at least a high school degree or GED, while 37% had a bachelor or graduate degree. Nearly 37% of all respondents have been in Rialto for 26 years or more, resulting in an average of 23 years in the city. The relatively younger online survey respondents have resided in Rialto for 18 years on average, as compared to an average of 42 years among the comparatively older mail survey respondents.



Total Respondents

(N=272)


(N=213)


(N=59)

PRIMARY LANGUAGE SPOKEN AT HOME

English 88.6% 87.8% 91.5%

Spanish 9.2 10.3 5.1

Asian and Pacific Islander 1.5 1.9 0.0

HIGHEST LEVEL OF EDUCATION

Less than a high school degree 0.0% 1.0% 0.0%

High school degree or GED 17.6 15.7 24.1

Some college, no degree 32.1 31.9 32.8

Associate degree 12.6 12.7 12.1

Bachelor degree 20.2 21.6 15.5

Graduate degree 16.8 17.2 15.5

LENGTH OF TIME IN RIALTO

Less than 5 years 13.8% 12.3% 19.3%

5 to 15 years 28.8 27.1 35.1

16 to 25 years 20.8 18.7 28.1

26 to 35 years 12.3 12.8 10.5

36 years or more 24.2 29.1 7.0

Mean number of years in Rialto: 22.6 24.3 16.2


Frisbie Park respondents had a median of 2 adults and 1 child under 18 in their household. Given that one-fourth of mail survey respondents were 60 years or older, it follows that nearly 36% of this group had no children under 18 living in their household. Nearly 45% of residents responding to the Frisbie Park survey had household incomes of $75,000 or more.



Total Respondents

(N=272)


(N=213)


(N=59)

NUMBER OF ADULTS IN HOUSEHOLD

1 person 9.5% 11.2% 3.4%

2 people 55.1 53.7 60.3

3 people 15.2 17.1 8.6

4 people 13.7 12.7 17.2

5 people 4.6 3.9 6.9

6 or more people 1.9 1.5 3.4

Median number of adults in household: 2 adults 2 adults 2 adults

NUMBER OF CHILDREN (UNDER 18) IN HOUSEHOLD

No children 32.0% 36.1% 21.4%

1 child 23.5 27.1 14.3

2 children 24.5 23.6 26.8

3 children 13.0 9.7 21.4

4 children 5.5 2.1 14.3

5 children 1.0 0.7 1.8

Median number of children (under 18) in household:

1 child 1 child 2 children

HOUSEHOLD INCOME

Less than $20,000 4.2% 4.9% 2.1%

$20,000 to $34,999 6.1 5.5 8.3

$35,000 to $49,999 18.4 18.9 16.7

$50,000 to $74,999 25.9 26.2 25.0

$75,000 to $99,999 23.1 22.6 25.0

$100,000 or more 22.2 22.0 22.9

Appendix A Page A-1

APPENDIX A

VERBATIM RESPONSES

Nearest Major Cross Streets – Cactus-Randall Park

To get a sense of their location in terms of Cactus-Randall Park, respondents were asked to indicate their nearest major cross streets. The nearest major cross streets of 181 respondents (65% of all respondents) are presented in the table below.

Nearest Major Cross Streets


Cross Street Cross Street Number of

Respondents

Cactus Randall 23

Riverside 11

Cedar Randall 10

Cactus 8

Randall 7

Cactus Merrill 5

Randall Riverside 5

San Bernardino 5

Bloomington Cactus 4

Cedar 4

Lilac San Bernardino 4

Randall Spruce 4

Riverside San Bernardino 4

Willow 4

Bloomington 3

Cactus San Bernardino 3

Cedar Merrill 3

Cedar San Bernardino 3

Larch Randall 3

Merrill 3

Merrill Riverside 3

San Bernardino Cactus 3

Alru Spruce 2

Baseline Eucalyptus 2

Bloomington Lilac 2

Bloomington Merrill 2

Cactus Lilac 2

Cactus Foothill 2

Cactus Merrill 2

Foothill 2

Appendix A Page A-2

Nearest Major Cross Streets (Continued)



Respondents

Lilac 2

Alru Riverside 1

Alru Willow 1

Ayala 1

Baseline 1

Baseline Willow 1

Bloomington Granada 1

Bloomington San Bernardino 1

Bloomington Willow 1

Cactus Pomona 1

Cactus Valley 1

Cactus Alru 1

Cactus Ayala 1

Cactus Etiwanda 1

Cactus Walnut 1

Cedar Hawthorne 1

Cedar Foothill 1

Foothill Eucalyptus 1

Foothill Lilac 1

Foothill Medical Center 1

Foothill Spruce 1

Larch 1

Larch San Bernardino 1

Lilac Cactus 1

Lilac Cedar 1

Lilac Randall 1

Live Oak Terra Vista 1

Merrill Eucalyptus 1

Merrill Larch 1

Merrill Willow 1

Randall Merrill 1

Randall Willow 1

Rialto 1

Rialto Cactus 1

Riverside Baseline 1

Riverside Bloomington 1

Riverside Locust 1

Riverside Walnut 1

San Bernardino Pomona 1

San Bernardino Randall 1

Walnut 1

Willow San Bernardino 1

Appendix A Page A-3

Nearest Major Cross Streets – Frisbie Park

To get a sense of their location in terms of Frisbie Park, respondents were asked to indicate their nearest major cross streets. The nearest major cross streets of 196 respondents (72% of all respondents) are presented in the table below.

Nearest Major Cross-streets



Respondents

Riverside 27

Baseline 19

Baseline Pepper 13

Riverside Walnut 12

Baseline Riverside 10

Sycamore 8

Baseline Eucalyptus 7

Riverside Easton 7

Acacia 5

Pepper 5

Acacia Easton 4

Baseline Sycamore 4

Riverside 201 Freeway 4

Riverside Casmalia 4

Walnut 4

Acacia Baseline 3

Acacia Sycamore 3

Acacia Walnut 3

Easton Sycamore 3

Eucalyptus 3

Eucalyptus Walnut 3

Baseline Willow 2

Easton 2

Foothill Lilac 2

Foothill Sycamore 2

Lilac 2

Walnut Sycamore 2

Willow 2

Winchester 2

Acacia Riverside 1

Acacia Scott 1

Baseline Cedar 1

Baseline Linden 1

Appendix A Page A-4

Nearest Major Cross-streets



Respondents

Cedar 1

Cedar Etiwanda 1

Chestnut Mariposa 1

Chestnut Walnut 1

Etiwanda Riverside 1

Eucalyptus Pepper 1

Foothill 1

Foothill Cedar 1

Heather 1

Macy Highland 1

Pampas Walnut 1

Pecan 1

Pepper Mariposa 1

Pepper Winchester 1

Riverside Cactus 1

Riverside Highland 1

Riverside Izio 1

Riverside Linden 1

Riverside Live Oak 1

Riverside Shamwood 1

Sycamore Cromwell 1

Walnut Mulberry 1

Walnut Pine 1

Walnut Winchester 1

Willow Chaparral 1

Appendix A Page A-5

Comments – Cactus-Randall Park

Respondents were given the opportunity to include additional comments on the survey. For better understanding, verbatim comments were grouped into major topic areas. Beside each topic heading is a number in parenthesis indicating the number of comments in this topic area. Verbatim comments from Cactus-Randall Park respondents are presented below.

Respondent Comments


RECREATIONAL FACILITIES (10)

A dog park would be highly appreciated. I have been driving out to Rancho Cucamonga or San Bernardino to take my dog to the park. Closer to home would be nice.

Adding a soccer complex should be considered because there is a lack of soccer fields in the area compared to sports such as football, basketball and baseball.

Any park with recreational activities for the youngsters will be good if it is maintained in good operation condition and also help to change the culture of some residents to be part of helping in the events to be successful.

I had no idea a park was going in there! Where can I get this info? Is it all just via the city's website? I am very much into having a park where I can safely run. That would be top of my list! Thank you!

I also want a play area for my dogs!

Interactive spaces that provide information/education for children and adults; walking paths or garden space where kids of school age could plant edibles or learn about native plants/edible landscapes/drought-tolerant plants.

One need that I personally notice is that there is not a tennis space around this neighborhood.

Please consider the needs and interests of people of all ages and ethnicities (races, nationalities - not Hispanics only).

The walking/running trail should be updated, cared for, maintained and modified.

Would love larger, well-lit walking area.

RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES (1)

I have grandchildren and it is nice to have parks in the community with events going on. Their ages are from 2-13 years old.

DON’T WANT OR NEED PARK (6)

Don't want a park here

Don't care about going to parks

All of the park services are available at parks closer to my home (San Bernardino/Lilac)

If it raises my property tax I don't want it! The gangs will only take it over just like every other park in the city!

It's too much traffic there and a dumb place to put it.

I am totally disabled.

SAFETY ISSUES (3)

Keep the park nice by keeping bad element out so family and kids can enjoy the park without problems. Include police patrol.

I need a nice, safe park for my grandchildren.

Your park "Anderson" close to us on Lilac. Just invites all kinds of characters hanging around smoking, drinking, destroying the peace for decent citizens in that area! What do you think another park with do for our community?! Invite more trouble and destroy our clean community! If police would patrol these parks regularly maybe it would improve.

Appendix A Page A-6

Respondent Comments (Continued)


OTHER NEEDS (1)

Fix the streets

OTHER COMMENTS (8)

Just make a good park! Good luck!

Sounds like a great plan!

Thank you for sending this survey to me. I've been waiting for it since last meeting. If there is something I can help please let me know.

Thank you for the future of Rialto. I love to have a park close to my house. 26 years living in Rialto. This is my city.

Thank you for the park!

This is a good idea. Thanks for asking.

We have a lot of family in the area. This would be great.

We have to bring the community together by doing fun stuff so that kids stop doing bad stuff and help each other to succeed and be with their families more often. We can do this. Let's keep being awesome and bring hope and joy back. Rialto CAN!

Appendix A Page A-7

Comments – Frisbie Park

Respondents were given the opportunity to include additional comments on the survey. For better understanding, verbatim comments were grouped into major topic areas. Beside each topic heading is a number in parenthesis indicating the number of comments in this topic area. Verbatim comments from Frisbie Park respondents are presented below.

Respondent Comments


RECREATIONAL FACILITIES (10)

A lot of my responses were based on the fact that my grandkids and great grandkids visit often and would be more likely than I to use the facilities.

Area south of softball fields would be a good place for a dog park. Area does not need to be entirely flat.

Dog park: my family has been traveling to Rancho Cucamonga to use their dog park for years. If a dog park is being considered, use them for the example. Their park has two gated areas for large dogs and one for small dogs. Gates are locked at dusk and the park is monitored and kept clean. Rules are clearly posted. Walking running track: we use Frisbie Middle School track occasionally, but it's always muddy, unleveled and school hours limit access. A level and well-maintained walking/running track would be awesome.

I would love to see a pull-up bar as part of the proposed exercise stations.

Frisbie Park is resourced and known for baseball along with Birdsall Park. Expand Frisbie so that regional tournaments can be accommodated. Provide more soccer fields at Renaissance Rialto to provide more practice and game fields for teams. Don't forget field lighting and please don't impinge on the space for cell towers.

Having a place for children to go to after school with friends and family helps them stay out of trouble. Sports and a place to run helps kids stay healthy.

I would like to see Frisbie Park a softball complex like the soccer complex as when Eucalyptus opens up from 210 to 10 a great way to bring players from around the area together. I am basing use on when my children were younger and participated at Frisbie.

Please develop senior game and exercise areas in your general plan.

Skate park please! Also would like a dog park so I don't have to roam the streets with my dog.

Need more covered areas for picnics. Maybe even made available to reserve in advance even at a fee so you don't have to go sit at park at 5:00 am to get a spot.

OTHER PARK FACILITIES (5)

My daughter would like to see bigger/more bathrooms.

I would like to see more taco stands at night. Give the Mexican food business owner a chance to sell tacos on the street late at night.

What about parking to handle increases in traffic? We get a 4-way stop sign at Easton St & Sycamore!

Park doesn't always have enough parking in area by basketball courts.

We request no structures over one story that would obstruct our view including light fixtures that would trespass neighborhood property (lighting).

RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES (3)

Fireworks like in the past.

To have fireworks like before had people coming from all over the place; put live jazz concert during summer.

We have lived across street from park 38 years. Really enjoyed July 4th fireworks when we first moved here. Enjoyed Jazz Fest last year. Grandkids visit often and would like to see more activities.

DON’T WANT OR NEED PARK (2)

Although I was very negative in my answers, it is because of my age and consequently lack of interest in most of the questions.

I own house. My son lives there but will not use park.

Appendix A Page A-8

Respondent Comments (Continued)


SAFETY ISSUES (8)

Add security. Park used as illegal dumping site. Homeless people make park unsafe.

I am sure there is a need for family events and venues but along with that, enough security to prevent trouble.

Anything to get kids back outside in a safe area that does not draw gang bangers. Outside art projects.

Frisbie Park is an isolated area and frankly don't always feel safe in the area. Good lighting and cameras would be a suggestion if wanting to increase recreational use of the park/area.

Frisbie Park has a problem with homeless people hanging around as well as many youths using the park to drink and get high. The police are not very visible or even present most of the time. My wife is presently afraid to go there with me.

Parks need to be safe and not a breeding ground for drugs or thugs. Good lighting and security are not optional but mandatory to avoid crime.

Safety is an issue for not utilizing the park to-date. Appears to be a homeless hangout.

May need security. Lighting poor at night. A lot of people parking at night. Have heard gunfire.

CLEANLINESS ISSUES (6)

Area on cul-de-sac at basketball court needs to be kept free of trash and dumping. Perhaps cameras needed to discourage the dumping.

Also have more than one cleanup day at Frisbie because there continues to be a large amount of trash that is in the undeveloped areas.

Trash is always visible on the Acacia St hill.

Needs more attention and daily care, aka a better administrator

Rialto park works really hard to keep the restroom clean. I really thank you for the hard work to keep the park so great.

Park is well-manicured overall and suited for all, especially the kids.

OTHER NEEDS (2)

It would be great to also have better restaurants and shopping centers (would love Target in Rialto). I do most of my shopping in other cities. Thanks!

Major improvements are needed on our streets. The streets Pepper, Eucalyptus and Foothill have too many holes. Why hasn't the City of Rialto considered fixing this problem? Rialto is looking pretty bad. Where is my property tax money going to?

OTHER COMMENTS (6)

Establish a program e.g. "Friends of Frisbie Park" where individuals could donate money to Frisbie for upkeep, amenities and/or equipment. And also individuals could donate time to volunteer at the park.

Frisbie Park is a very nice and useful place for a lot of families to have fun.

I'm starting to utilize the parks more. I have a 3-year old granddaughter when she stays with me on the weekends. I find the parks in Rialto are quite nice.

Thanks for having and providing Frisbie Park as a safe, fun and great place to go to during the spring, summer and fall months. Thanks and appreciation for keeping the traffic at a safe pace!

Thanks for seeking resident input prior to adding to/changing Frisbie Park!

When the 210 freeway opened for business, Frisbie Park became the face of Rialto. I am praying that something beautiful and grand for everyone in the community to enjoy and show everyone driving on the 210 freeway what Rialto can do.

Documents

RECREATION & PARKS COMMISSION City of Rialto 150 SOUTH ... · asked the order in which the projects will take place, referring to the exterior painting project and the renovation