As Proposition A’s term end date approached, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors (BOS) anticipated the loss of Proposition A funding and placed Proposition P – Safe Neighborhood Parks Tax Measure on the ballot for the November 2014 general election. Proposition P would have authorized Los Angeles County and the District to levy, for 30 years, a special parcel tax that would continue the work of the sun-setting Proposition A. Although a majority of voters supported the measure (62 percent), Proposition P required two-thirds (66.6 percent) approval and did not pass. The process that led the placement of Measure P on the ballot had several shortcomings, including: a short time frame following the Board of Supervisors’ approval of the ballot measure for education of and consideration by the voters, and the absence of a substantial analysis of the needs that the additional revenue would address.
Understanding the critical importance of park and recreation funding in the County, the Board of Supervisors passed a motion in November 2014 directing the Los Angeles County Chief Executive Office and Department of Parks and Recreation to provide a plan to produce a Countywide Comprehensive Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment. The plan was approved by the Board in February 2015, with a $3.5 million budget. The Countywide Comprehensive Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment (PNA) was finalized and presented to the Board of Supervisors on May 9, 2016.
The PNA was an 18-month process that garnered detailed information from all 88 cities and unincorporated areas within Los Angeles County about the quality of their local parks, their current access to parks and recreation facilities, and overall park needs, including public meetings and project lists developed and prioritized by members of each community. The collected data and documentation helped determine the scope, scale, and location of neighborhood park needs in Los Angeles County. This effort led to the formation of study areas determined by High and Very High Park Need, which served a fundamental role in the subsequent introduction of Measure A two years later. As groundbreaking as the PNA was, it did not inventory existing public recreational lands and amenities from the regional perspective. This crucial shortcoming was addressed in a Board Motion four years later.