Neighborhood concern that a fenced dog park would eat away the grassy space at Emerson Park compelled the San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Commission’s decision to leave it out of renovation plans.
“Friday Night Lights youth flag football is the largest youth organization in the city of San Luis Obispo,” Friday Night Lights Commissioner Mark Broersma wrote in a letter read out by a local coach at the meeting. “The city has always struggled to keep up with the practice and space demand of this growing sport, which now has a significant female participation … as a result, our only option of late is Emerson Park and while it is small, this has been the best space available for practices.”
Met with a flood of written and spoken comments from the public at its Feb. 4 meeting, the commission voted 7-0 to proceed with other improvements to Emerson Park—restrooms, water stations, safety and walkway lighting, new blacktop surfacing and seating area pathways, an instructional and educational garden zone, a redesigned and expanded playground, and an upgraded basketball court.
It will re-evaluate the potential of adding a dog park to the mix in about 18 months, after the improved park is reopened. Parks and Rec anticipates that the new park will be open to the public in early 2027.
“The green space is critical. I have a son too, and he plays [Friday Night Lights], so I know that space is hard to find, especially in the fall when baseball fields are being renovated, and Emerson Park is usually the one that’s not closed,” Parks and Rec Commissioner Kari Duperron said. “I know we’re at a hard spot though. If we take out the dog park, then maybe the whole plan drops.”
SLO plans to add the new amenities using $2.8 million from the California State Parks Proposition 68 grant that it won in 2021—the only city in the county to secure the award that year.
With the renovated park’s price tag closer to $3.5 million, the city will dip into the park improvement fund to foot the remaining cost, according to Parks and Rec Director Greg Avakian.
“Staff will hold approximately $300,000 within that fund to not be spent on other city park improvements for that 18-month period in case the dog park amenity is voted back in to be added,” he told New Times via email. “If not, then the funds will be ‘released’ back into the park improvement fund to be used for future projects at any park within the city.”
At the meeting, the Parks and Rec Commission deliberated between reducing the size of the proposed half-acre dog park and eliminating the dog park proposal altogether.
‘I know we’re at a hard spot though. If we take out the dog park, then maybe the whole plan drops.’
— Kari Duperron, SLO Parks and Rec Commissioner
Avakian recommended placing the dog park idea in the “add-alt” or additional alternative category to avoid putting the state grant at risk. He said that making the dog park “add-alt” would give the project leeway to make an addition without a full redesign and also the ability to finish the necessary paperwork and initiate construction of the park project.
Avakian told New Times that the proposed dog park is a “key piece” that qualified the city for the state grant.
“The city received the grant based on the application to the state, which included a variety of upgrades,” he said. “If the city removes a key amenity upgrade, then it could jeopardize and disqualify the city for the grant award as the Prop. 68 Committee selected the city of SLO based on the application and items included to enhance Emerson Park.”
The Parks and Rec Commission decided to follow the “add-alt” route. The State Parks Proposition 68 grant review committee will respond to Parks and Rec staff’s finalized proposal memo, including comments from the public and data, within two months. The park improvement project will move forward with the inclusion of the dog park if the grant review committee rejects the proposed change.
Old town SLO resident Benjamin Winter told New Times the decision was “dizzying.” He complained that the city never asked the public if they wanted a dog park at Emerson Park at all, rather they only conducted a survey on what features were preferred.
“The neighborhood understands the commission’s concern about the grant’s vulnerability, but there is no reason to believe that removing the dog park from the plan compromises the grant or that its contingent on its inclusion,” Winter said. “That felt like a scare tactic. We hope to keep staff accountable to transparent correspondence with the state and that the dog park will be permanently removed from the plan.” ∆
This article appears in Feb 19-26, 2026.