Should San Diego rethink its Balboa Park parking fee program? – San Diego Union-Tribune

A new poll of San Diego residents shows 80% want new parking fees in Balboa Park eliminated or reduced.

The move to charge for Balboa Park parking has prompted complaints from museums, nearby residents and businesses.

The poll, which was conducted by Survey USA for The San Diego Union-Tribune and 10News, said 69% of respondents indicated they would visit the park less often because of paid parking.

City officials have said the parking fees are needed to plug budget shortfalls. Fees range from $5 to $10 per day for city residents and $8 to $16 for others.

Question: Should San Diego rethink its Balboa Park parking fee program?

Economists

Norm Miller, University of San Diego

YES: The park is a major amenity for residents and should be free for city residents, who already pay indirectly via property taxes, and cheap for county residents. Low or zero parking fees clearly encourage park visits, adding to the museum, restaurant and shop revenues. Perhaps consider a parking fee that can be waived with a purchase or paid museum entrance as some shopping centers do?

David Ely, San Diego State University

YES: City officials should re-estimate the expected revenue from the parking fees given the opposition. If the public turns out to be more price sensitive than first assumed, a large drop in the number of visitors will result in less revenue being collected than anticipated and not worth exposing the city to the backlash. The impact on museum admissions revenues should also be considered. Lower fees or free parking on some days could be considered.

Ray Major, economist

YES: Using parking fees to plug a budget gap caused by elected officials’ inability to manage head count and other expenses is an insult to every San Diego County resident. Balboa Park is the “peoples” park and should be available for all to use for free. Prudent fiscal management of city operations could more than close the budget deficit. The problem is that elected officials are unwilling to make the hard decisions that need to be made.

Caroline Freund, UC San Diego School of Global Policy and Strategy

NO: Free parking exists only in the game of Monopoly. User fees help pay for city infrastructure and park maintenance. Surveys about taxes and fees aren’t particularly meaningful. “I love new fees and taxes!” said no one ever. What San Diego may want to rethink is implementation and communication: Explain why the new price structure makes sense and be transparent about where the money goes.

Kelly Cunningham, San Diego Institute for Economic Research

YES: Balboa Park, museums and cultural sites should remain a community benefit for the entire region. Consequences of continually attempting to fleece the public with fees have unwanted outcomes. Charging for parking reduces visits to the park and lessens other potential spending. Parking fees effectively price out more cost-sensitive, less empowered economic populations from enjoying one of the region’s last low- or no-cost amenities. Museums and nonprofits also experience reductions in attendance and revenues.

Alan Gin, University of San Diego

YES: The city needs revenue to address budget issues. Normally, the users of the park should be expected to help cover the cost of operating and maintaining the park. The problem is that the parking fee could have a regressive impact, as it could negatively impact poorer people more than those with higher incomes. The fees are a higher portion of low-income households’ budgets. Also, low-income households have fewer recreation/entertainment options.

James Hamilton, UC San Diego

NO: New taxes and fees are never popular. But the Balboa parking charge will result in less economic damage than many of the other taxes that the city is likely to propose. Rather than rethink the parking fees, I would encourage the city to re-examine its assumption that the solution to our budget challenges is to find new sources of revenue. I recommend starting with a re-evaluation of the increases in spending over the past decade.

Executives

Bob Rauch, R.A. Rauch & Associates

YES: Residents, tourists and park employees oppose the new fees. Even with discounted rates for verified residents, the perception is that a historically free civic space is being monetized. Rates are complicated and vary widely. The park’s museums depend heavily on local visits, and this plan risks significantly reducing demand. Use automatic license‑plate recognition for residents, no portal registration, no charge for resident parking, modest fee for out-of-town visitors.

Chris Van Gorder, Scripps Health

YES: While stabilizing the city budget should be the No. 1 priority for council, lawmakers must balance fees and taxes that are positive for the government entities and negative for everyone else. In this case, the fees will stop some from enjoying amenities at Balboa Park, which will negatively impact those businesses and ultimately the city.

Jamie Moraga, Franklin Revere

YES: Paid parking at Balboa Park has hurt museums, attractions and residents alike. The program sparked strong opposition from the outset from locals and visitors, with many machines vandalized and attendance sharply declining. Though intended to address a city budget gap and support the park, the policy has caused more harm than good. It’s time to reverse this ineffective measure and for the mayor and council to explore alternative ways to help fund Balboa Park and close the city’s shortfall.

Phil Blair, Manpower

YES: Too much too fast. Government owes it to its constituents to, whenever possible, move slowly and thoughtfully. No one likes to have to start paying for something that was once free. Trash pickup is a good example. Understanding that some other budget items will have to be cut to balance the city’s budget is part of the reality voters need to understand. Parking should have started low and gradually increased over the years.

Gary London, London Moeder Advisors

YES: The rollout appears a bit rocky. Here are some candidate alternative or supplemental programs: Raise the museum rates and rebate that back to the city; Implement surge pricing, charging more when demand is high, and nothing when it isn’t; Shuttle bus system to free off-site lots at Morley Field, which is mostly wasteland; finally, spread out the pain by modestly charging for parking at Liberty Station and Belmont Park.

Not participating this week: 

Austin Neudecker, Weave Growth

Have an idea for an Econometer question? Email me at phillip.molnar@sduniontribune.com. Follow me on Threads: @phillip020