OB Rag Staff Report
At the same time City Hall claims new parking fees are increasing support for Balboa Park, the city’s proposed FY2027 budget will actually decrease Park funding by more than $1.8 million, a 12-percent reduction.
General fund expenditures for Balboa Park will fall from $15.5 million in 2026 to $13.6 million in 2027. This is happening concurrently with the elimination of $11.8 million in city funding to local arts organizations, including a number of Park institutions.
A new item in the 2027 budget, “Developed Regional Parks,” accounts for a first-time allocation of $10.8 million. Balboa Park is considered a “developed regional park,” but it isn’t clear if it will receive any money from that allocation.
And it still isn’t clear what, if anything, the Park is receiving from the new parking fees, which were imposed to help fill the City’s budget gap.
In a recent statement, the city said that “Balboa Park’s paid parking program creates a reliable source of funding to support the care and operation of the park.”
That vague claim raises questions that need specific answers. Does this mean parking fee revenues are going directly to the Park as over-and-above support? Or are they instead deposited into the general fund and siphoned off for other uses?
The FY2027 drop in Park resource allocation is taking place just as the City is embarking on a new Balboa Park Master Plan Update. Such updates typically identify park needs and park improvements that will require new funding.
We know long-time Balboa Park advocates dedicate time and effort to the periodic master plan update process. And we respect their dedication.
But we must ask them: Do you feel at all exploited when the City recruits you to work on a plan update it will never fund? And given those circumstances, what incentive does the public have to participate in the planning process?
As the City’s investment in Balboa Park continues to shrink, the issue of Park governance becomes more urgent. As long as the City has complete control over this “crown jewel,” the park’s future prospects will grow dimmer.
The time has come to make Forever Balboa Park a full-fledged conservancy. Let’s work now to begin the transition to a more viable management structure.
I was skeptical at first of giving up the park’s governance. Partly because some advocates were calling it a private/public partnership. When people use these words it usually means public resources being used for private interests. But it has become obvious that the city is not even interested in enhancing or even maintaining this public park. We need management that understands the cultural and recreational value of Balboa Park. So I applaud those who are making the effort and I will, going forward fully support this endeavor. And it goes without saying that we need to repeal the parking fees.
Now that I think of it, how about a Mission Bay Park Conservancy?
When the City of San Diego’s created paid metered parking in Balboa Park they purposefully refuse to create a Balboa Park Parking District that would have required all Parking Revenue to used within the park. Now the Parking Meter Revenue goes into the General Fund. I think paid parking should be eliminated park wide.
I think the Balboa Park Conservancy idea is great.
A potential funding solution for the new Balboa Park Conservancy could be Mandy Havlik and my TOT Reform Ballot Measures for the November 2026 Election. Our Measure 2 is a 4% Replacement Special Tax TOT. With 1% for Penny for the Arts, Balboa Park, and Libraries. Each 1% of TOT = $30 million.
Therefore, there is new revenue of $10 million each for the Arts community which will make them whole, $10 million for Balboa Park Improvements, and $10 million to stop cuts to our Library hours.
Our request for Mayor Todd Gloria’s FY-2027 Draft Budget is to keep on funding the Arts, Balboa Park, and Libraries for 6 months using a 10 year loan from the hoarded $465 million in the SDG&E Underground Surcharge Fund Balance, at 0% interest rate. Then if our Ballot Measures are approved in November 2026, then no cuts are needed, our structural budget deficit is deleted, and the Balboa Park Conservancy can have a dedicated new revenue stream that can offset the anticipated revenue from parking revenue.
Thanks to Kate Callen and her collaborators for keeping us informed on Balboa Park finances. We can only hope the Mayor and City Council will honestly and openly address the issues raised in this — and other — credible news reports and comments on social media expressing similar concerns about the opacity of the budget process related to Balboa Park, parking revenue, and the city’s general fund deficit.
I love the thought of using the hoarded SDG&E underground funding… they certainly are NOT using it to underground utilities .. I’ve been waiting for 35 years, and plan to have to wait another 35 before any meaningful amount gets done. One thing that no one mentions, and perhaps it is not known, is HOW much did the city spend on trash collection before it instituted the new trash fee.. and what is that money going for now?? Is it counted in the city’s revenue stream? or is it gravy that no one will notice. That money should have been considered in creating the new trash fee… and the fee should not have been started as a zero-base cost.
How about going bigger than just Balboa Park?
Why not a Metropolitan Park District of all City Parks?
Separate funding structure, separate Elected Board of Directors and a seaparate Parks Foundation for all parks.
How about the San Diego Parks Conservancy?
I am not usually a fan of anything with “private” in it as it usually costs us more money. However, as far as Balboa Park is concerned I must say we need to get the City out of it. After some checking I’ve seen how a public/private conservancy can work. One of the Cities that Kate pointed out that has gone to this type of structure is St. Louis. Here is a quick overview of what went on in Forest Park in St. Louis (just declared the best city park in the country.)
Missouri History Museum
April 8 at 10:08?AM
When decades of neglect threatened Forest Park, a group of St. Louisans rolled up their sleeves
Around kitchen tables in 1986, they founded a grassroots organization called Forest Park Forever, inspired by St. Louis County Executive Chauncey Shultz’s promise at the park’s 1876 opening:
“I present to you, the people of the County of St. Louis, your own, this large and beautiful Forest Park for the enjoyment of yourselves, your children and your children’s children forever…”
What began as small efforts – raising funds for benches and trees – grew into a nonprofit conservancy overseeing multimillion-dollar restorations and funding over half of the park’s annual maintenance
ensuring the park could thrive for generations to come.
Learn more about the origins of America’s best urban park in our atrium exhibit, “Yours Forever: Forest Park at 150.” Support for this exhibit provided by HOK and Forest Park Forever.
For those not aware: The City of San Diego Charter protects Dedicated city parks. For parks not protected, they are called designated Parks. The difference is that designated parks are subject to sale or other uses. Gemini tells us, “The primary protection for parks in the City of San Diego is established in Section 55 of the City Charter. This section creates a legal ‘firewall’ that restricts how parkland can be used and makes it difficult for the city to sell or repurpose it without public consent.” For designated parks, “According to Council Policy 700-17, these areas can be used for other public purposes if deemed necessary by the Council.”