Changes to San Diego’s paid parking plan in Balboa Park are now estimated to reduce revenue by nearly $9 million, representing more than half of the expected $16.8 million budget deficit. Following months of delays in implementing parking changes at Balboa Park, the city is adding free zones and unplanned discounts for residents and frequent users in hopes of reducing public backlash against its parking missteps.
Over the last year, San Diego raised parking prices, suspended revenue sharing with local parking districts, installed new parking meters in several neighborhoods and made state-mandated parking changes near intersections. In some areas, the city doubled existing $1.25-per-hour rates to $2.50 an hour. It also raised prices to as much as $10 per hour near Petco Park, meaning parking could cost more than $50 for a Padres game.
The Padres summed up the city’s failings in a statement: “The city made this decision without meaningful input from key stakeholders, including the Padres organization. We have not yet received information regarding how the new parking revenue will be reinvested locally.”
Balboa Park is also undergoing major changes, with new parking meters charging $2.50 an hour and day rates of up to $16.
“I think we’ve always looked at parks of our city and region as a little more sacred than a way to balance the budget,” said Jim Kidrick, president of the San Diego Air and Space Museum.
The mayor and City Council have failed to convince museums, the Padres, businesses, drivers and visitors that its increased parking revenue will be spent on improving parks and infrastructure, rather than as a cash grab to cover other spending.
Last year, the city seized control over parking meter revenue, changing who decides how that money is spent. In the past, a portion of parking meter revenue went to specialized community parking districts. There were seven districts in San Diego, though only four had metered spaces. The community parking districts ensured that some of the parking revenue was reinvested in that area, creating a user fee.
That’s what you want, a user fee. Parking fees should fund the maintenance and improvement of parking and other infrastructure in the immediate area, benefiting nearby residents and businesses. But the city claimed it needed to seize control of the parking revenue because administrative costs exceeded the benefits of local district control. Audits found that 35% of the community parking districts’ budgets went to administrative expenses, which the city believes are relatively fixed. Centralizing these costs makes sense if the funds remain a user fee and are directed toward tangible traffic, safety and parking improvements within that community district.
The city did commit $1.8 million of the freed-up community parking district money to have electricians fix broken streetlights in parking meter zones. But $5.67 million existed in community parking district reserves, so drivers, residents and businesses are right to be concerned about the lack of guardrails preventing the siphoning of parking funds from the communities that generate them.
Similarly, parking fees at Balboa Park make more sense if they go back into park maintenance, not if they’re shifted to cover other spending elected city leaders want.
San Diego should implement a binding revenue-sharing formula and strong oversight to ensure a significant share of parking revenue is reinvested in the districts that generate it.
With politicians facing rising public anger over parking fees and some council members already backtracking, it would be wise to adopt a plan that gradually increases parking rates, boosting them during high-demand periods without unduly penalizing workers, residents and small businesses. Better communication with local businesses, more visible signage, event notifications and routing messages would also help reduce confusion for residents, park visitors and sports fans.
These steps would get San Diego closer to its goals of increased safety, access, local investment and economies of scale. In some ways, the city is right: Drivers and users should pay for the city infrastructure they use. But San Diego’s leaders would be on much stronger political and policy ground if money from the new parking meters, fees and other increases they’re implementing were dedicated to improving local infrastructure rather than as a cash cow for city coffers.
Derr is a transportation policy analyst at the Reason Foundation.