See Schedule of ‘Surge Pricing’ Beginning Sept. 1
Editordude: The following is from local grassroots policy advocate Lisa Mortensen’s Wednesday, August 20 email blast, written in response from to Jay Clevenger, Community Representative of Councilmember Stephen Whitburn’s office, to her inquiry about changes to parking fee structures downtown within the Ballpark District. This is what’s referred to as “surge pricing.” Clelvenger’s original email follows Lisa’s questions. The email was edited for brevity purposes.
By Lisa Mortensen
My first question is, will the pricing go into a specific account that will be audited to make sure the funds are directed at the specific infrastructure and maintenance uses that you mentioned in your message below? Or will the funds be placed in the general fund?
I read the IBA report and it states: “FISCAL AND POLICY DISCUSSION – While many administrative reforms are being presented, some of the changes in the parking reform are anticipated to result in additional revenue for the City, including the General Fund.”
This concerns citizens because we know that funds that are placed in the General fund can be used at the mayor’s (and council’s) discretion and not for the original stated intent. Assertions about intended uses and benefits that have been made in the past have not always been honored, and that is one reason for the broken infrastructure we have today and for increased/increasing charges for many city services, including metered parking, which has already been raised to $2.50/hour at the same time that parking has been restricted because of the new 20-foot rule. We also have concerns about the stated goal of implementing new neighborhood residential permit parking programs, which have proved to be very unpopular with residents and difficult to manage effectively. This is something that should be advanced in neighborhoods only after considerable local community input and thorough impact analysis.
My second question is, why is the west end of downtown in the Marina District included as part of the ballpark district when it comes to defining the surge pricing zone?
I was under the impression the ballpark district was east of the Gaslamp and in the east village community. The surge pricing will cover Broadway on the north side, State on the west side, Harbor drive on the south and 16th on the east. That covers the west end of downtown in the Marina District, going
beyond the promotional label for this plan or any reasonable argument for its necessity.
My third question is, what analysis has been done as to the economic impacts of implementing surge pricing?
I was shocked to see from the chart provided that surge pricing will be implemented for parking meters on 17 out of the 30 days in September. So, the “surge” will actually be the norm for six hours on over half the days in that one example month. The surge times include the busiest times for local retailers and for dining and entertainment venues. This could radically affect the bottom lines and pricing strategies of area businesses and their abilities to attract patrons and workers (especially for the many low-wage service jobs). Of course, this will also have economic impacts on local residents and their temporary workers and visitors (from housecleaners and realtors to family and friends), possibly affecting how people make decisions when weighing the pros and cons of living downtown, where the city wants and needs to continue to encourage residential density.
My final question is, what evaluation has been done about the likelihood of surge pricing actually achieving the stated goal of a meaningful increase in public transportation use?
The city’s existing public transportation system is inadequate to the need. It might work well enough for some attendees of Padres games and special events, though clearly not all. But for anyone looking for a night on the town, or trying to get to work, a professional appointment, or a private event in a tight timeframe, the trolley and bus system we offer, with its limited routes and schedules (not to mention issues of safety and comfort, especially late at night downtown), is not going to be an acceptable choice. Downtown should be accessible to citizens from all areas of our city, not too overpriced and inconvenient to be worth the trip.
Of course, I could ask many similar questions about the new plan to charge for parking in Balboa Park, including in the zoo lot. What is the cost-benefit analysis of that plan, given how it might affect attendance at museums and other venues, zoo memberships, volunteerism, tourist visits, recreational opportunities for low- and middle-income city residents (especially families), etc.? A lot is being carelessly put at risk, especially given our city’s high inflation rate.
As you know, Jay, all of my questions about parking are related to underlying citizen frustrations about bloated city management staffing, soon-to-come city salary increases (including for top earners), the council’s refusal to fight the mayor’s veto override, and so on. Add to that list the negative consequences of bad city decision-making regarding everything from pensions to real estate. Of course, infrastructure and quality of life improvements have been de-prioritized as a result. This is an unsustainable business model for the city.
And all of this is in the context of insufficient opportunities for the public to be heard and, even more importantly, to have influence. The way that council meetings are conducted and the way that our Councilmember, your boss Steve Whitburn, in particular, does not engage directly with many public groups and informed individuals who ask to meet with him in person is a continuing problem.
You can react to this email by believing that I am being difficult because I am calling out for more detail on issues and these views may be contrary to yours but my reasoning is the same as the vast number of San Diegans which has led to a genuine loss of trust and confidence in our elected officials which is at an all-time low. This is not just me talking, read the San Diego Union Tribune letters to the editor. I realize most of the local media wants to have access to city hall, so they won’t do the hard-hitting interviews, but letters to the editor are from the citizens’ own voices. And those letters have rarely if ever been complimentary since 2020, when Todd and many of our councilmembers came into office.
Jay, I hope we can continue to engage like this and that with this engagement, the city will be open to addressing some of our suggestions. We welcome an in-person meeting that will lead to sensible solutions.
Very sincerely,
Lisa
Good afternoon Lisa,
Regarding your inquiry about changes to parking fee structures downtown within the Ballpark District: in June 2025, the San Diego City Council approved a series of parking reforms proposed by Mayor Todd Gloria, which included dynamic (“surge”) pricing for meters in the Ballpark District.
The intent of this specific aspect of the reforms is to increase funding for infrastructure, drainage, and safety improvements within the Downtown Parking District, while also encouraging the use of budget-friendly, climate-conscious transportation alternatives, such as the bus or trolley, which have recorded increased ridership over the past few years.
The new fee structure is slated to take effect on September 1, according to the latest update from the Transportation Department; you can read about it here: https://www.sandiego.gov/parking/specialevents. I’ve also attached a map of the parts of Downtown it will affect for your reference.
Our office frequently hears from residents and visitors about the condition of streets, sidewalks, and other public infrastructure downtown. The additional funding generated through these parking reforms will help address repairs and maintenance for these public resources, improving safety for pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers. The package also included a new residential parking permit program for lower-density neighborhoods near major employment centers such as hospitals, something Councilmember Whitburn strongly advocated for and hopes to expand to other parking-challenged neighborhoods.
Lastly, I want to note that my role as a community liaison is to communicate constituent concerns, feedback, and questions to the Councilmember and our team, as well as assist residents across the five communities I serve with a wide range of often time-intensive casework. While I understand these issues can be frustrating, characterizations such as the suggestion that Councilmember Whitburn is “A.W.O.L.” are inaccurate and not conducive to a productive exchange. I would kindly ask that we keep future correspondence constructive so I can best assist you and the residents of the neighborhoods I serve across District 3.
As always, let me know if I can be of any further assistance and I will do my best to help where I can.
Yours in service,
Jay Clevenger (he/him/his)
Community Representative | Bankers Hill, Golden Hill, Middletown, Mission Hills, & South Park
Office of Councilmember Stephen Whitburn
City of San Diego, Third District
