Chaotic effort to create Balboa Park parking fees creating doubts about doing the same at beaches, bays

San Diego city leaders are sharply divided over proposals to start charging parking fees at beaches and bays after recent efforts to charge for parking in Balboa Park have been criticized as poorly handled and chaotic. City Council members expressed support Wednesday for the general concept, contending the city badly needs more revenue to provide crucial services and tackle years of overdue infrastructure projects. But some raised questions about how much money would actually be generated, the logistics of collecting fees in specific places like Mission Bay Park, and whether revenue would significantly outpace costs. And others said they have doubts Mayor Todd Gloria’s administration will honor the council’s wishes that parking fees at beaches and bays apply only to tourists and other people living outside the city. “I’m concerned about an effort on the heels of what I consider to be a very frustrating rollout of Balboa Park parking,” Councilmember Kent Lee told his colleagues on the council’s budget committee. “I don’t trust that we’re going to deliver in a way that earns trust from our residents,” Lee said. “We can say all day that our focus is going to be on non-residents, but I’m still feeling that we are falling short of ensuring that promise is being kept.” Council members expressed similar desires on the Balboa Park parking fees, but residents ended up only receiving discounts compared to non-residents — instead of the fees applying exclusively to non-residents. The parking fees in Balboa Park were criticized as poorly planned because several sets of unintended consequences, such as impacts on students at San Diego High and frequent users like bridge clubs, forced multiple revisions and delays. Initially intended to take effect in early October, the parking fees are now scheduled to start early next year. In addition, the council made several last-minute changes to the mayor’s final proposal to reduce the impact on city residents. And the main reason for the delay was waiting for a resident-verification system to be ready so discounts can be provided. Councilmember Sean Elo-Rivera, the most vocal supporter of parking fees at beaches and bays, said he understands the frustration. “I completely understand why my colleagues are uncomfortable,” Elo-Rivera said. “The last time we did it, it was a rush job and residents ended up getting hit with a fee.” But Elo-Rivera said it still makes sense to move forward. “We remain one of the only coastal cities in Southern California that doesn’t charge anything for parking,” he said. “I think the only responsible thing to do, given the budget situation that we have, is to begin asking visitors to pay their fair share.” Elo-Rivera suggested clarity could help with the mayor’s administration. “My hope is that the administration will hear us loud and clear that this cannot be a resident fee and that they will move expeditiously to get the things in place to allow us to recover the cost of visitors enjoying our beaches and bays,” he said. Matt Yagyagan, the mayor’s director of policy, said Gloria’s staff is willing to discuss new parking fees and other revenue proposals like taxes on vacant storefronts and more aggressive lease negotiations on city properties. “The administration is open to considering all budget mitigations, including additional revenues,” Yagyagan told Elo-Rivera and the budget committee. “You have our commitment to sit down with you, and whoever else may be interested, to vet those out.” Councilmember Henry Foster suggested city officials and the city’s independent budget analyst could study how parking fees are handled at Torrey Pines State Beach, which is within the city limits. “I would agree the conversations on parking have been disappointing,” Foster said. “I’d like to see if the IBA can do some analysis and look at what the state does and how they do it.” Councilmember Vivian Moreno was more skeptical. “To me, it’s unclear how this is going to generate revenue sufficient to offset the costs to properly implement and maintain the program,” Moreno said. This is likely based on concerns raised by the IBA in 2022 that much of Mission Bay Park is former state tidelands, which could restrict how the city uses any revenue generated from parking there. State law requires revenues generated on tidelands to be “expended only for those uses and purposes consistent with the public trust for commerce, navigation, and fisheries, and the applicable statutory grant.” The IBA also noted back then that state public resources code might make it hard for San Diego to give city residents discounts compared to non-residents. The code says “any beach or seashore recreation area owned, leased, operated, controlled, maintained or managed by a city or county, which is open to the use of residents of such city or county, shall be open to all members of the public upon the same terms, fees, charges and conditions as are applicable to the residents of such city or county.” In addition, a parking demand study that a consultant completed for the city in January found that demand for parking was often relatively low in some parts of Mission Bay Park. Parking fees at beaches and bays would need approval from the state’s Coastal Commission because they would affect coastal access. Charles Modica, who leads the office of the IBA, said his staff would assist the council with analyzing any proposals for new city revenue. The full council is scheduled to discuss Nov. 18 what new revenue ideas, if any, to suggest the mayor consider when preparing his proposed budget, which is due by April 15.