Call the roll.

Thank you, Council President.

Councilmember Campbell.

Councilmember Whitburn.

Here.

Councilmember Foster.

Councilmember Von Wolper.

Councilmember Pro Temley.

Council President Pro Timley?

Here.

Councilmember Campillo.

Councilmember Moreno.

Present.

Councilmember Elo Rivera.

And Council President Lacava.

Present.

Also attending the meeting, our city attorney Heather Ferber, Deputy Director in the IBA's office, Jillian Andalina and myself, your city clerk, Deanna Fuentes.

Thank you, Council President.

All right, thank you, City Clerk.

Quorum is now present.

We will begin this morning with an invocation by Clerk Fuentes, followed with the land acknowledgement and the Pledge of Allegiance led by Councilmember Moreno.

Grant those who hold office in this city the spirit of wisdom, charity, and justice, though with steadfast purpose, they may faithfully serve in their offices to promote the well-being of all people.

We respectfully acknowledge that the Cumier Nation are the original inhabitants of the unceded land, now known as San Diego.

Despite enduring the horrors of genocide and colonization, the Cumier spirit remains unbroken.

We honor the resilience of their ancestors who fought to protect their culture and land.

Today they carry their legacy forward, ensuring that their traditions continue to thrive in gratitude and strength.

We stand with the Kumier Nation connected to our past and committed to a thriving future.

Please face the flag, put your hand over your heart and repeat after me.

For which it stands.

One nation under God and divisible with liberty and justice for all.

Clerk, please go over how the public can offer their testimony.

Thank you, Council President.

I'll highlight the slide on the screen that reviews how the public can offer their public testimony during today's meeting.

If you're in person, please complete a speaker's lip looking at the entrance of chambers and bring it to the front of the room.

No further in-person testimony will be taken once council begins virtual testimony.

For better meeting management purposes, each speaker will have one minute per item per person.

If you would like to speak on three or more items, you will have a maximum of three minutes.

If you are speaking virtually, please be sure to raise your hand by pressing star nine or the raise your hand icon now.

Thank you.

Thank you for that.

And then please proceed with reading the closed session items into the record.

Thank you, Council President.

Conference with legal counsel existing litigation pursuant to California Government Code Section 54956.9 D1 is CS1, Abdullah Wright versus City of San Diego et al.

CS2 is Daniel Patz, Daniel V City of San Diego.

Conference with real property negotiator pursuant to California Government Code Section 54956.8 CS3 is 3220, 3240, 3250, and 3500 Sports Arena Boulevard, San Diego, California.

Under negotiation is the price and payment terms for potential long-term ground leases with Midway Rising LLC to redevelop the city owned real property located at 3220, 3240, 3250, and 3500 Sports Arena Boulevard, San Diego, California, public employment performance evaluation to pursue it to California Government Code Section 54957 B1 CS4.

Title, City Clerk.

Thank you, Council President.

All right, with that, please proceed with public comment.

We have no public commenters here in Council Chambers, so I've started the five-minute timer, and I'm going to those participating remotely.

Currently have three individuals in the queue.

Please be sure to let us know what item or items you wish to speak to.

Eleanor, if you can please unmute.

Can you hear me?

Yes, we can.

Please proceed.

Let me know which item or items you wish to speak to.

All of them.

All of them?

Yes.

You'll have three minutes, please proceed.

It's interesting that this council has openness and transparency.

Yet you discuss your lawsuits, which are funded by taxpayers in closed session.

You also negotiate leasing public grant to developers in closed sessions.

Why are you doing this?

Where is the transparency?

Is it easier not to bring public attention to the fact that you are leasing public grant to billionaire corporations for minimal yearly rents?

Are you redeveloping this land to create more peckens and staccums?

To create all your smart cities and your smart grids to herd people into the peckings and staccums.

You say your members are trained in the importance of accurate financial disclosure.

Yet that's not what it appears to people who've sent in public records requests.

These requests are delayed and delayed and delayed for months on end before we get the information.

And apparently you need to redact most of the information that's been requested in order for it to be accurate.

I don't understand how they have to uh create transparency.

Also strongly it's suggest that you brush up on the California constitution, or otherwise you're going to be facing many more lawsuits.

This council has violated the constitution over and over again, and you refuse to listen to what the people are asking.

You just go ahead anyway with whatever you want to do with a pretense of letting people talk and a pretense of allowing people in so that you can supposedly listen to them.

Um I think that you really need to start listening to the people, or you're all going to be coming down because people are not happy.

This is not a threat.

I'm telling you what is going to happen.

People are not putting up with all of the monitoring, the tracking, the being surveilled, the fees that you've added, you want to increase wastewater, you want to increase sewer rates, you want to increase taxes on property, which is already illegal.

You've got all the money in your general fund that covers everything that you're asking for, and yet you asking for more and more.

We do not consent.

Thank you.

That concludes your comments.

We'll move on to the next speaker then.

8700, if you can please unmute and let me know which item or items you wish to speak to the uh good morning, thank you.

I will be speaking on a two, three, and four, please.

You'll have three minutes, please proceed.

Thank you.

Uh CS2 is tiered water rates.

How can we bring stability, more transparency, and more accountability regarding the process of water rates for all the people of San Diego?

It starts simple.

We all need water to live.

Then in the process of making it clean, safe, and available, it gets complicated.

So many rules, so many regs, and so many authorities involved.

And now we have this litigation.

With the spirit of the law, that's the spirit of the law and the letter of the law.

Let's have the conversation that needs to happen now.

Thank you.

PS3, mid-way rising project, price and payment terms for potential long-term ground leases.

It's good to see that midway is continuing to rise.

From the beginning, the project team use the words do diligence in their reports to us.

I really appreciate that.

Please keep our long-term vision alive and well for the affordable housing units planned for this historic project.

Thank you.

And CS4.

Diana.

Performance evaluation.

I have five simple words.

A five-star performance again.

A five-star performance again.

Thank you.

Have a beautiful day.

Love to all.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Richard.

If you can please unmute.

And please let me know which item or items you wish to speak to.

We do not hear you hearing Council Chambers.

I will need to move on to the next speaker.

Zoom user, if you can please unmute.

All right, thanks for taking my call.

I'd like to speak to all three of them.

Okay.

I want to take this time for a moment of silence for Charlie Kirk, who died or got gunned down by some uh transsexual lover guy.

And um let's see.

He Charlie is bringing the cockroaches.

And they're all scattering.

Sir, I'm apologizing for interrupting.

Could you save that for non-agenda public comment and just speak to the consent items?

You can unmute and continue speaking to consent to the closed session items.

You gotta have transparency on what you guys are voting on, just like the first lady said on all the items different times you come before the people and maybe get uh one of a different location where people can come there and park.

Like it's like the building department moved over to Mission Valley, that two-story place.

Guys can park for free.

It's accessible, it's safe.

Instead of coming up in your building or that building there, you guys are discussing city business.

And it's really hard to get up there, man.

And it doesn't have fire sprinklers, too.

You're risking the the actual communities health to come up there and talk in case the fire breaks out or something.

You know, so you need to I like you guys in order to discuss these topics.

Let's have a safer place like in Mission Valley, you can lease it or something.

Thanks a lot.

That does conclude public comment on closed session.

If you had technical difficulties and were not able to speak, you can email in to City Clerk at Sandieago.gov and those will be distributed to the council.

Thank you, Council President.

All right, thank you, City Clerk.

We will now recess into closed session and reconvenes council today at 2 p.m.

or shortly thereafter.

Good afternoon.

I will now reconvene the city council meeting of Monday, September 15th, 2025.

Clerk, please call the roll.

Thank you, Council President, and Councilmember Campbell.

Councilmember Whitburn.

Here.

Councilmember Foster.

Councilmember Von Wilbert.

Council President Pro Temley.

Councilmember Campillo.

Councilmember Moreno.

Councilmember Elo Rivera.

And Council President Lacava.

Present.

Also attending the meeting, our assistant city attorney Leslie Fitzgerald, Deputy Director in the IBA's office, Gillian Andalina, Council Affairs Advisor in the Mayor's Office, Coda Zeiser, and myself, your city clerk, Diana Fuentes.

Thank you, Council President.

Thank you, City Clerk.

Uh quorum is now present.

It is good to see that we can attract people of all ages here this afternoon.

Uh, because I think I see a lot of uh new faces that may have not have been in council chambers uh before.

We're gonna uh read our script regarding disruptions uh and then just a little bit of instructions to help us move the meeting along.

So before we start today's meetings, I want to remind everyone about the city's practices and procedures for public comment at our city council meetings.

We certainly welcome the public participation and the robust turnout.

Speakers may address the council during public comment and also in connection with a specific line of business on the agenda.

However, the city must make sure that no one person or a group of people disrupt the meeting in a way that prohibits other speakers from expressing their ideas and opinions, such as excessive yelling, screaming, or speaking beyond one's allotted times or examples of behavior that disrupts the meeting.

So to make sure that everyone here has an opportunity to address the council, I will alert an individual or individuals if I think their conduct becomes disruptive.

If the disruption continues, I will rule the individual out of order.

If the disruption continues, I will rule the individual out of order, and if the disruption continues further, I will declare a recess so we can restore order.

At that point, I will direct the individual leave.

And if the individual refuses, the police will escort the individual out of the building.

It has happened.

So if we have to repeat this process of warning and recessing the meeting, all members of the public will be excused from the council chamber.

We don't want that.

But credentialed media will be allowed to remain.

And once again, we have these practices and procedures to protect the right of other speakers who wish to address the council and to allow the council to conduct the public's business.

So as I mentioned, there's going to be a lot of passion.

There's a lot of frustration, there's a lot of excitement going forward.

The best way for you to communicate when either staff is speaking, a council member is speaking, or a member of the public is speaking.

If you love what they are saying, then you can put thumbs up.

It's a very visible indication.

If you don't like what they're saying, thumbs down comes across very, very clearly.

So rather than clapping or cheering or booing or anything in between, that's the best way to communicate.

And like I said, from up here, it is very, very visible.

I see some folks have signs.

Thank you for keeping them low so you're not blocking the view of anybody behind you.

And so with that, um, we will get on with the meeting.

So uh first, are there any uh comments from our mayor's office, council, city attorney, independent budget analyst, or city clerk, I believe the IBA would like to make a comment.

Thank you so much, Council President Julian Andolino at the IBA's office.

I just wanted to make a quick note that Charles, the independent budget analyst um, is on paternity leave until November.

So just wanted to put that out there.

And since I have the mic, I just wanted to do a reminder that our fiscal year 2027 council budget priorities memoranda are due to our office next week on Wednesday.

Thank you so much.

All right, thank you, Jillian.

Not seeing anybody else wishing to speak.

Uh clerk, please go over how the public can offer their testimony.

Thank you, Council President.

I'll now highlight the slide on the screen that reviews how the public can offer their public testimony during this afternoon's meeting.

The order can be found on the agenda summary found online or at the table in the back of the room.

If you are in person, please complete a speaker slip located at the entrance of chambers and bring it to the clear box at the front of the room.

Council ambassadors are available near the entrance of chambers and can assist with questions and speaker slips.

Again, if you are seating time, please make sure you are present when that person speaks.

I will be calling your name and you'll need to raise your hand in order to have your time seated as well.

Please be sure to submit all of those speaker slips together in one package at one time.

No further in-person testimony will be taken once the council begins virtual testimony.

Thank you, Council President.

All right, thank you, City Clerk.

So before we get on to the Balboa Park items, uh clerk, please introduce item 200.

Item 200 is an informational item.

Item 200 is a city council informational training disclosure responsibilities of council members under the federal securities laws.

I did just want to note for the public that the overflow room is available if you need to stretch your legs during any time of this meeting.

The overflow room is the committee room through these chambers through these doors in the back.

Thank you.

All right, thank you.

With that, staff, um, please introduce yourselves for the record and let us know how much time you need.

Uh Chief Deputy City Attorney Brett Bartelotta, and with me is Dan Deaton outside General Disclosure Council with Nixon Peabody.

I'd like to just make a few intro comments if that's all right.

Thank you so much.

Um I just wanted to provide that the context that every year, in accordance with the financial training program adopted by the city council.

Um that happened in 2006.

The IBA arranges two trainings each year focused on key financial topics, and today's training covers the city council's disclosure responsibilities under the federal securities laws.

Their program recommends disclosure training to be provided every two years.

Um, and the training was last provided to the council in September 2023.

The disclosure training for city council is also a requirement of the city's disclosure ordinance that was adopted in 2004.

Um then when we say disclosure-related documents, we are talking about things like preliminary official statements for bond issuances, the city's annual financial statements, and the city's annual budget document.

These are all sources of information that investors can reasonably rely upon in deciding whether or not to purchase city debt offerings.

And the city council is periodically asked to review and or approve some of these documents, which is the reason that we have this training.

The training will be provided by Dan Deaton of Nixon Peabody Law Firm, and Mr.

Deaton serves as disclosure counsel to the city, working under a contract administered by the city attorney's office.

Brett Bartalata, Deputy City Attorney for Finance and Disclosure, we'll join Mr.

Deaton in making the presentation.

And lastly, I do want to let you know that I will be walking around providing a feedback survey about the training, would really appreciate it if you could fill it out.

It's one of our KPIs.

And then I will come by and collect it after the training.

So with that, I'll hand it over to staff.

Thank you.

Okay.

All right.

Well, good afternoon.

We are going to take to your answer to your question 15 minutes is how long was this going to take.

So the city every year issues bonds to finance a variety of different infrastructure needs that range from that are back from the general fund to the to water, wastewater, and a variety of other bonds that are issued to finance that it was infrastructure uh needs.

And when the city does that, it prepares offering documents that detail in detail describes the terms and conditions of the bonds and then the financial and operating condition of the fund that supports those bonds.

The point of today is to explain to the city council under the federal securities laws what are the responsibilities of the members of the City Council with respect to those disclosures.

So let us get to the end of this training to begin with and just say what's the bottom line for you as City Council members, what are you being asked to do in connection with these disclosures?

And it's twofold.

First, to be aware of the the city's process for preparing these.

The city maintains robust policies and procedures to ensure that it that it prepares accurate and complete disclosures and to be aware of those, as we'll explain down uh later on in the presentation.

And then second, members of the city council have their own uh responsibility to speak up and identify issues, and we'll talk about that more too.

Um so the the these trainings never used to happen.

They never used to happen, and about 20 years ago, things really altered in our in the market of municipal bonds across the country.

Um and the the SEC, which is the body that's responsible for enforcing what we refer to as the Federal Securities Laws, um, um, really did not take an active role in the municipal securities market.

And in in and instead, really sort of looked at it as the good market that was uh um different than the corporate market, particularly at that time, um, where the the the SEC is trained, intuitively trained to to catch lying, cheating, and stealing.

And that the the SEC really didn't take that as something that was a concern for our market.

But about 20 years ago, the SEC woke up to these realities and said, you know, it's true, our market really is not dominated by a lot of lying, cheating, and stealing, but but our market with municipality, state, and local governments um has its own problems and its own issues that it needs to deal with.

And and these problems, as they woke up to them, realized that it required the SEC to become very involved in our world.

And through the the three main problems that they talked about were the silo effect that, yeah, government can be balkanized into bureaucratic silos, and that can get that can cause right hand not to know what left hand is doing.

Second, just a lack of systematic process, and really what that really is is that it has its own bureaucratic intuition that can cause disclosure processes to be put to the side and not being not being done in a systematic and orderly way that ensured that the disclosure is going to be effective.

And then finally, state and local government experiences at at times inappropriate low uh levels and impacts of political influence.

Um a story on this is really the best way to go about this, which is the the story of City uh of Allen Park, Michigan is one that we have for you this this afternoon.

And it's it's it's actually a fairly remarkable story of how people really did not understand that they would violate the federal antifraud laws.

Um the city of Allen Park in Michigan had planned a movie studio project, and uh they believed that it would provide much needed economic development for their city.

Uh the original plan detailed 146 million dollar facility with eight sound stages led by a Hollywood executive director.

They proceed to issue two series of bonds, um, and they and they they actually intended to repay investors with a significant amount of the revenues that these movie studio uh projects would produce.

But by the time the bonds were issued, uh the movie studio project was a fraction of its size and had merely become nothing more than a vocational school.

Um none of these changes were reflected in the bond offering documents or other public statements, which continued to repeat the re-origal plans for the Movie Ostudo project, even though it meant that Alan Park was in serious financial trouble.

What is interesting about this is that there was no evidence that anybody ever intended to keep the information out of the offering document that that an eighth studio uh movie project had turned into really not even a movie studio in the first instance, or that there had been a huge amount of revenues expected from this project that the general fund very much needed that were never that what that in fact was not going to be available.

In fact, nobody ever really fully realized that what they had put in the offering document wasn't true.

Um the uh um what what occurred was that the mayor of the city of Allen Park had continued to tout this movie studio project, um the full project in the political sphere.

And the people that were preparing the disclosure document did not know that that was actually not even the fact of the situation.

So when the people prepared the disclosure document, they didn't know what the mayor knew, and the mayor didn't know that the people who were preparing the disclosure document didn't actually know what was going on with respect to the movie studio project.

The SEC took the extraordinary action of charging the mayor of the city of Allen Park with a control person theory, saying these were people that were all under your control.

So what they did, you did, as it were, in that sense, and charged the mayor on that basis.

That he had made these statements, and on the basis of that control process, he had uh actually became he ended up settled settling with the SEC and being charged with that action.

Um and so what we really what we learned from Malin Park and and the SEC staff was very vocal about this action because they thought it really made a big difference in our marketplace because they used it to show how confusing state and local government can become.

The mayor didn't know what the staff was preparing, and the staff didn't know what the mayor knew.

And the and and the mayor continued to tell the political story.

The staff told the story they understood of what it was what it was, and it wasn't until the dust settled that everybody realized that they had given an outright false story to investors.

And in that situation, um investors lost very, very real money.

What the SEC really tried to um um impress upon people in conferences and other places about this action was that the uh um is that if you were the staff of a of a state or local government, put yourself in the shoes of the staff of of Allen Park.

How do you know what you know how if you don't ask, kind of a story?

But the SEC was perhaps even more vocal when it came to people who may actually be deemed to be controlled persons under the under the Federal Securities Laws, mayor, governing body members, such as city council members, and and and saying uh put yourself in the in the in the shoes of the mayor of the city of Allen Park.

Um, and how would those people preparing the disclosure know what he knew if he didn't ask about it and if he didn't ask how that was actually being disclosed to investors?

And and and so that the city of Allen Park shows the the real reality of what really is the problem, so oftentimes of municipal disclosure, which it isn't that people are going and and and uh um trying to say something false or trying to mislead investors, overwhelmingly that's not the case.

The overwhelming number of cases that come in uh to the SEC that are against issuers are right hand not knowing what left hand is doing overwhelmingly.

And the silo nature of government lends itself to that problem.

So, what does that mean that's that that issuers do?

Uh the um the first thing is is that uh um they develop sound policies and procedures.

Brett's going to go uh describe the the procedures of the city of San Diego that it has maintained for over 20 years now.

Um but those policies and procedures need to do what?

Connect silos, make it so that the that as a matter of process, right hand always knows what left hand is doing.

Develop a working group, a space where people can talk about what the right kind of disclosure looks like.

Leave enough documentation to create a systematic uh um process to ensure compliance with those policies and procedures, and training, which is not much more than explaining to people what the law expects them to be doing, what the issuer could be doing, what for them to expect to do.

The second thing that that that that issuers focus on a lot in our market and state and local governmental market is is to tell the credit story.

And the credit story is sort of a made-up number term uh because it's trying to describe to people that look, there's a lot of stories that go on within state and local government.

And uh, and this is a very specific story designed for a very specific audience.

Um at the end of the day, all failures that go to uh um to bond investors come down to not telling them the whole story that they care about.

And what is the story that they follow they care the bond investors care about?

And the phrase that I was trained with was follow the cash flow.

Um, what's the fund that is has the revenues that the bondholders gonna get paid back from?

What's the uh um what what what are the expenditures that compete with debt service?

Um, what's what what are the reserves?

Um, what what's uh and what are the potential casualty events that are there wrapped together as a whole, the this is the kind of information that bondholders need to know in order to make a good decision whether to purchase the bonds and at what price to buy those bonds.

So I'm gonna turn it over to um Brett, who's now going to explain the City of San Diego's disclosure regime.

Thank you, Dan.

Uh as we all know, as Jillian said in the beginning, the disclosure ordinance came into being in 2004 out of the uh pension crisis uh of the city as one of the requirements of the ordinance, it established the disclosure practices working group, uh DPWG, and the city's audit committee.

Um it was required that the city established disclosure controls and procedures so that the city would follow in the development of disclosure documents.

Here's the composition of the DPWG.

And the point, other than Dan is outside General Disclosure Council, these are all people, offices by their nature, should have a good understanding of the financial and operating aspects of the city.

So ideally, it's a good group to be generally informed of what is going on in the city, obviously, with the support of much staff.

To Dan's point about what the SEC looks for and the point of controls, we have mandatory trainings every two years.

Gillian mentions this as well.

That's why we're here today.

That's why in November we will be training city staff that's very much involved in development of disclosure documents as well as the mayor.

Financial staff and DOF gets updated accounting practices as pertains to disclosure documents as well as the Department of Finance Finance puts out the internal financial controls report annually.

Again, one of the things that was created was the audit committee as a result of the disclosure ordinance.

During the development of the annual comprehensive financial report, the AC for a member of the audit committee does participate in the DPWG meetings to make sure that uh those concerns are voiced.

We do have the written controls and procedures, and one of the things, uh, as Dan mentioned and has mentioned before, the SEC, like it's great, it's important in enforcement actions.

They will often insist that a municipality develop and uh adopt controls like the city has, but it doesn't do you any good if you have controls but you don't follow them.

You'd be better off not having them because it's a way that they can see you messed up.

And so we are very adamant about following the procedures that we do have.

Um Jillian mentioned at the beginning, disclosure documents.

What are they?

You guys at the last week you adopted one of them, the preliminary official statement for the least revenue bonds.

You've been through this process.

That was the culmination of that long process.

Of course, the ACFR is another one.

Anything that's outwardly facing upon which an investor would use to make an informed, hopefully, decision on buying or not buying the city's uh securities.

Uh, we do have timelines in place within the controls, meaning that it is unreasonable to give delivered to council the day before you're supposed to vote on approving a POS the documents.

These are hundred page plus documents, DPWG.

We give days to review and vet before approval or certification is required.

Um we do have a contributor log, so the document document retention policy, so that we know which department delivered what information that went into what section of the POS in case there is an issue.

Um then you all are very familiar with the certifications that you receive along with the securities responsibilities memo, um, lead DCA uh David Powell last week sent you all or two weeks ago in advance of last week's meeting proving the least revenue bond POS that document that included not only a summary of your responsibilities but all of those copies of all the certifications that every uh department director, uh CFO, I signed as well.

So you get the whole package is the point.

Uh again, official statements.

Uh I don't need to go through all of those, but between official statements and ACFRs, um appropriate certifications are received from all contributing departments so that when the document is presented to you at council, you know in advance that the appropriate people from each contributing department have reviewed, they have signed off that the information they provided is accurate and complete, which is really the point.

Um has a different role.

Uh mayor and city attorney, they certify us to the accuracy of the POS, DPWG refers uh for approval and certification, uh, city staff and management from all the departments.

We have third-party advisors who also contribute information.

Uh we have, in addition to Dan, we do each transaction gets bond and disclosure council, and your role is to review all of that to accept the certifications, ask your questions, and sign off for publication of the marketing document, and with regard to the AC for uh, of course, the audit committee weighs in as well.

And now Dan will wrap it up.

Yeah, so coming back to where we started, what is it that the city council's responsibilities are?

Well, first is be aware of the disclosure policies and procedures.

They do change every other year or every year, and that's because things change and things matter, and being able to be aware of, hey, I know something is going on in this department.

Why is this department not being involved?

Is the kind of reason what you would want to be focused on there and be satisfied that this this captures what you believe is reasonable.

Um but then the second is is that you as the city council are a part of the disclosure policies and procedures as well.

In a sense, governing bodies are their own silo in that sense.

And we have had we've seen many situations where governing body members are actually uh aware of things.

The staff is not aware of us at all.

And and the whole key of process is making no assumptions that people know things.

And so when when uh when when city council members come to approve official statements, you should do an elephant in the room analysis and say, look, are there big issues that are facing the city or facing the specific credit that's going on there that that really would matter to an investor if you were in their position, and we consistently that's what we see.

Pension underfunding was there.

Uh the Movio Studio project that I just gave, accounting steps that are uh artificially inflate uh numbers.

Consistently governing body members are more involved than they actually realize that they are, they're not as detached as it seems, and that and the and we and and the city needs to know your knowledge as well.

And so if you're aware of these pressing issues, speak up and say how what are you aware of this, and um how is this being dealt with in the disclosure?

That is it.

All right, thank you very much for that presentation and the training uh that uh we've all agreed to take a couple of times a year.

Uh this is an information item, but clerk please proceed with public comment.

Thank you.

Allegedly, Audra, if you can please come forward.

I don't see her here.

Oh, sorry.

You have time seated to you by Evelyn.

Evelyn, please raise your hand.

Thank you so much.

And we have some speakers in the queue as well.

So we'll go to a minute and a half.

You'll have three minutes.

I bet it's so interesting to hear you guys talking about protecting investors.

Love it.

Shows who you guys is, you know, are working for, making sure that you're protecting their money so they don't make any bad investments.

What about the rest of the people?

Just wondering if you're ever going to care about them enough to protect their investments into the government that you guys sit and waste our money, and you're like sitting here trying to talk about um, you know, trained to catch lying, cheating, and stealing, all from the lying, cheating stealers.

That is so funny.

I love it.

It's like it's just such an inverted world to have people, you know, it's like such a Marxist ideology, the things you guys do, you know, like invert it and say that someone else is doing what you're doing, and we better stop that.

We're gonna combat it.

We're gonna protect their investment all while you you know charge the people more, knowing that they're like in dire straits.

Oh, we are like, we want to listen to the people all while you silence them, you know, and even when people come and protest things, doesn't really matter.

You know, like we want to represent the people, you mean your investors, right?

And your stakeholders, you have all these different language for like the people you really care about.

Oh, while you tell it to the people you work for and lie straight to their face, and then you're like, we need to make sure no one's lying here, right?

Yeah, it's interesting what we pay you guys to do.

It'll be interesting one day when you're on this side, right?

Just hoping that somebody's gonna listen to you guys, you know, not just waste your money, put it into people's pockets, murder people with it, you know, increase fees, everything.

While you guys sit up there on a dice, go home to your nice lavish homes, you know, while people live on the streets and die on the streets at the hands of you guys, like you, Stephen Whitburn, when you say people are safe in Tent City, all while 12 people have died.

It's interesting.

Yeah, but the people see clearly in your decisions today, they will continue to see that you do not represent the people.

You never have, but you always have time to course correct, make different decisions, and actually do what we pay you to do, which is not to protect the investors, it's to represent the people that you were put up there to do, but we know the voting system is flawed, and they just install people like you so that you can continue with your destruction to kill, steal, and destroy, just like the god of this world.

It's to represent the people that you were put up there to do, but we know the voting system is flawed, and they just install people like you so that you can continue with your destruction to kill, steal, and destroy, just like the God of this world.

So good job.

Hello.

That does conclude public comment on this item here in Council Chambers going to those participating remotely.

We currently have several speakers with their hands up, call starting with Paul the Bold.

You'll have a minute and a half, please proceed.

Uh yeah.

Um, speak of investors, um, you're uh taking all our money, and we are stakeholders just like the investors.

Look it up in the dictionary if you don't believe me.

Uh, and I just wanted to say that bonds would be a great way to finance your money sucking schemes like Balboa Park parking or the trash tax.

Maybe you don't think you don't have the money for interest payment, but shame on you for going straight to the people.

For my part, I imagine there are many people who would be willing to settle for a bit lower of an interest payment to just to keep their kids happy and going to the zoo and having fun on the weekend or break time or whatever.

I mean, you know, let them have fun.

I guess that's yeah, they're stakeholders too.

Thanks.

Comments, sir.

Yep.

Thanks.

Okay, thank you very much.

Zoom, if you can please unmute.

You'll have a minute and a half.

Please proceed.

All right, thanks for your time.

Well, I'm glad the gentleman explained this thing did that one example.

But they could have just done the our own example in 2004.

We got named Enron by the C from San Diego, because we were so much fraud involved in the pension system.

And luckily, somebody in the pension board came forward, a whistleblower, and she showed that hey, the left hand knows what the right hand's doing.

The right hand's talking in the money in the back pocket.

They're ripping off the pension board and the pension system for their buddies, big time.

Even so much the feds came in and took us over.

The feds had a we had a four or five years guy from the IRS and the feds on the board.

Make sure we uh didn't just scam the money like we were doing, man.

It was Enron by the sea.

The young people probably don't really know what Enron is, but uh it was a major, I guess C GE who ripped off everybody for billions of dollars, and the guys went to jail.

So next time use an example, use our own city, 2004.

I'm not saying anyone's doing that now, but it was uh not something to be proud of that happened and a lot of things.

Uh I don't I don't know.

I think some guys went to prison for it, but the left hand knew what the right hand was doing.

They were doing kickbacks and stuff like that for greasing their palms in what thank you, next is 8813.

If you can please unmute 8813.

I can't unmute for you.

I will have to move on.

There you go.

We don't hear you here in Council Chambers.

I will need to move on if you're having technical talk.

Okay, I'm here.

I'm here.

Can you hear me?

Can you hear me?

Hello?

Yes, please proceed.

Okay.

Thank you.

So uh what I wanted to say was I bet you like seeing those new faces, right, Lakava, instead of the regular attendees who are paying close attention to what you all do.

Uh okay.

So, yeah, exactly.

The gentleman was saying the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing, and that's government in a nutshell.

And usually both hands are busy stealing from the hardworking taxpayers.

Um this council needs a major audit.

Uh now, not next quarter, not after another consultant slide deck, an audit with teeth.

You are being reckless with our money.

The people deserve to know where every dollar goes.

You keep lying and misleading the public, the very people who are supposed to be your bosses.

Somehow the script flipped.

Public servants now serve themselves and globalist agendas.

While the public is uh left play paying the bill, our government is backwards.

We are private citizens.

The government should know nothing about our private lives.

They are public servants.

We should know everything about their contracts, their meetings, their conflicts, their deals, no more bearing items and consent calendars, no more rubber stamping, no more.

We'll get to it later.

And while we're naming names, recall Todd Glory already.

When leaders jet off and spend uh on photo op while telling us to tighten our belts, they have lost their moral authority.

My apologies, your time has concluded, Blair Beekman.

You are our next speaker.

Please proceed.

I had to do a couple things here.

Um, Blair Beekman.

Um thanks for this item.

I thought uh at the beginning of this item and talking about the disclosure, it was being talked about uh disclosure in relationship with the public.

Um I don't know how much that is a part of this item, but I thought it's an interesting subject as you are dealing with new disclosure matters overall, uh, and how council can understand things.

Um I suppose to eventually present ideas to the public.

But um, it was really interesting to learn of 2004.

Um pension issues here in San Diego in San Jose.

We had uh a serious pension meltdown in 2010.

That it sounds like you guys are going through the same thing in 2004.

And it was explained in public comment how serious it was, and um good learning lessons.

I think there can be important learning lessons, how we talk about the future uh tech accountability overall, and I'm sure that uh from these uh previous pension uh lessons that it is how yourself try to address check accountability uh when possible.

So good luck in how these sort of disclosure matters can relate to the public and how we talk about say closed session reporting, how that how the small ways it can be accessible, more accessible in the open public process.

Good luck in working in those ways and good communication.

I mean, these are the ideas of how to develop good communication between ourselves.

Uh good luck in our efforts to do that with all our practices and that's your time has concluded.

We'll go to speaker 8700.

I will note for the record the five-minute timer has concluded.

There are two speakers in the queue.

No additional speakers will be taken.

Please proceed.

Uh, thank you, uh Joyce and District Three.

A big thank you to the IBA.

These trainings are so valuable, and when they occur, I really uh learn from them and find them very valuable for the public.

So thank you for that, and thank you for everybody that rolls them out for us.

So on the disclosures, uh one of the uh the uh speaker uh used the word in his PowerPoint, uh elephant in the room.

I really appreciated that terminology and the way they explained it in the PowerPoint, because that's a very, very important place to go.

It's like uh a deep dive where there can be uh stuff exposed that are uh is really important and can be overlooked.

So uh on the bond fund balances, uh, I really appreciate the disclosure on the balances, uh, the priority, the priority of the use of those funds, the conflict of interest regarding camp, the conflict of interest that's that's a statement, uh, campaign finance disclosure.

So all of the disclosure documents are available to the public, and that's really great.

So anybody that does want to look at them, they're there for you to inspect.

So thank you again for this.

It's very valuable, and I appreciate it so much.

Thank you for those comments.

Our final speaker is Eleanor, if you can please unmute.

Okay, all right.

Second Consuelo suggestion about a major audit.

There appears to be major mismanagement finances, and that's talking euphemistically because I'm not sure we could call it mismanagement.

I believe there is absolute fraud and corruption going on with the taxpayers' money and city council.

Public requests for financial information is being stalled.

People have been sending in requests since August, and you don't have the financial information to send out two months later.

Where is your transparency as far as that's concerned?

We have a major financial deficit when you are increasing everything on a daily basis.

Parking is always going up.

You're taking away parking uh spaces and turning them into back lanes and then charging people to pay.

The other thing that I noticed in that gentleman's uh presentation when he was talking about staff training, he said there's a need um to give more advance when people are reading through documents.

That would be wonderful for the public too.

We get very little advanced notices to what's on your agenda.

We look at the agenda the day before and are confronted by hundreds and hundreds of pages of Mambo Jumba.

Why don't you simplify it and put out your agenda a week in advance?

Would that be too difficult or transparent?

Your time has concluded, and that concludes not uh public comment for item 200.

Thank you.

All right, thank you, City Clerk.

Uh, this is an information item, so no motions required.

I'll turn over to my colleagues for any questions and comments.

We'll go to Councilmember Elo Rivera.

Uh thank you, Council President.

I don't have much to say.

I just want to say thank you, uh, Julian and the IBA's office.

Um, and thank you for the presentation.

Um to know uh why we have the rules that we have, um, best practices, lessons learned, um, all of those in the name of us ensuring that we don't repeat um bad decisions and and mistakes from the past.

So thank you to the IBA and thank you, Council President, for docking the item.

All right, thank you, Councilmember.

And we'll go next to Councilmember Vaughn Wolbert.

Uh yes, thank you very much for the presentation and um for establishing the working group, which also provides a multi-jurisdictional look at every single bond that we issue.

I appreciate that as well.

And you know, this the city did have terrible financial decisions in the past.

We work called Environment by the C.

I am old enough to know what that means.

And uh, I'm glad we're not doing that in the future.

At the same time, issuing these bonds is incredibly important.

You know, we we wouldn't be able to produce the new libraries and the streets that we are producing, and we had to emergency radios and fire apparatus and all sorts of other things that we are using for the infrastructure projects that we need to serve our residents.

So we need to get this right, and we need to do it uh in the way that the law complies with, and so I appreciate you bringing this forward.

I also have been reading through the SEC's determination against the city of Allen Park, Michigan.

Uh, that is a wild case.

Uh it looks like the city staff knew a little more than they said they did.

And the mayor should have known me because it's a city population of 28,000.

I lived in a city of 28,000 enrollment, Mississippi.

You know everything about anyone's business.

So anyway, we will not be going down that road here at the city of San Diego because we actually have uh documents in place.

Uh, we do rely on staff, of course, to make sure that they're presenting us with the information that is true and accurate, but that's why there are the working group is there so that everyone has a seat at the table before it's brought to city council.

So I'm glad we have these procedures in place, and I do um thank you for this training.

All right, thank you, council member.

Not seeing anybody else on the lights.

Uh, I'll add my thank you for this and training.

I very much appreciate it.

Thank you.

I will note that item 200 did have two uh web comment forms in opposition that were distributed to the council.

My apologies, Council Fresno, for not saying that sooner.

All right, thank you for catching that city clerk.

And with that, please introduce item 201.

Item 201 is the Bobo Park paid parking user fee.

If you'd like to speak on this item, please submit your speaker slip to the front of the room in the clear box.

And if you are participating remotely, now's the time to raise your hand by dialing star nine if you're calling in or the raise your hand icon.

Thank you, Council President.

All right, thank you.

All right, city staff, as you settle yourselves in, introduce yourselves for the record and let us know how much time you need for the presentation.

Thank you.

In about 18 minutes for the presentation.

All right.

Start when you're ready.

All right.

Good afternoon, Council President and Council members.

My name is Conrad Ware, program manager within the parks and recreation department.

And this afternoon, I will be providing an update on the proposed implementation of paid parking framework for Baobo Park.

Joining me with the presentation today is Deputy Director of Babo Park, John Richards.

We're bringing forward proposed actions for council approval regarding paid parking in Baobo Park.

The proposal would establish new user fees under the City Council's Category 3 fee policy, since these relate to the use of government property.

At the same time, the proposal requests that council make a finding that park employees, volunteers, and contractors serve a direct public purpose to the park and therefore should be able to park for free in designated areas.

If approved, the new fees would take a take effect October 6, 2025, and that the Department of Finance would then update the city's rate book and the city clerk would post the information online for full public access.

This presentation comes after an informational item presented on July 28th.

We appreciate the feedback provided and seriously considered all requests while prioritizing the $12.5 million of assumed revenue that was approved in the FY 2026 adopted budget.

This initiative is being led by the Parks and Recreation Department in close coordination and collaboration with various departments across the city, and at the request of the mayor and city council.

The purpose of the program is threefold.

First, to improve how we manage parking in one of our city's most visited public spaces.

Second, to support the long-term financial sustainability of Baobo Park, and third, to enhance the overall visitor experience by reducing congestion and improving overall access.

This effort cannot be completed by the city alone, and we are thankful for the input and consultation from various Baobo Park stakeholders, including Forever Balboa Park, the Baobo Park Cultural Partnership, the San Diego Zoo, and the Baobo Park Committee.

Much of the plan that we're proposing today is based on the feedback from these stakeholders.

In this slide, I want to take a moment to note the strong cross-department collaboration that makes implementing this project possible.

From a planning and implementation perspective, core departments like transportation, office of the city treasurer, parking enforcement, and parks and recreation lead efforts around strategy, infrastructure, and service delivery.

Transportation assists with analyzing parking studies and recommending strategies to improve parking and circulation within the park.

The Office of the City Treasurer has assisted with the purchasing and installation of parking meters and managing the creation of a proposed resident portal.

SDPD parking enforcement will lead enforcement efforts, and parks and recreation is leading stakeholder outreach, wayfinding signage coordination, and overall plan logistics.

Support from teams like communications, DOF, PNC, special events, and the city attorney's office all ensure we have the tools and legal advice needed to move this project forward.

It's a truly coordinated effort that helps us deliver an efficient and well-managed parking solution for Balboa Park.

While the council is not voting on every aspect of this proposal, in this presentation, we'll cover the entire proposal, including the proposed tiered rate structure, the approach for resident discounts, and parking accommodations for park-based employees and volunteers.

We'll also walk through additional components, including the zoo, waivers for improvement projects, on park road meters, payment kiosk and enforcement systems, revenue use, our public outreach strategy, and how we will use data and performance performance metrics to adjust as needed.

At the heart of the program is a parking strategy focused on surface lots and park roads within Balboa Park.

This proposed structure is based on data and findings from the parking demand management study that was presented to council earlier this year.

That study included detailed data of lot by lot occupancy, average length of stay, and arrival and departure times for park visitors.

On the right hand of the slide, you can see a map of the park highlighting the locations of each lot studied.

Areas outlined in orange indicate those evaluated during the study.

These findings are foundational to the development of a balanced and effective pricing model for Balboa Park.

To do this, we are proposing three pricing levels, referred to as level one, level two, and level three, all based on proximity to key destinations and observed demand.

The goal is to better manage demand by pricing parking in a way that reduces congestion in high traffic areas while preserving accessible options for short-term and cost-sensitive visitors.

This table displays average occupancy and total parking space availability across the off-street lots and on-street roads that were studied within Balboa Park.

These occupancy rates reflect usage patterns on both weekdays and weekends.

For example, parking lots such as Casa de Baboa, the Natural History Museum, and the Fleet Science Center North all had occupancy rates above 85%, indicating consistently high demand.

In contrast, lots like Starlight Bowl, Inspiration Point, and the Veterans Museum saw much lower average occupancy rates, often well below 50%.

This disparity will help to explain the proposed tiered assignment assignments, which price higher demand central lots at a premium while encouraging the use of underutilized lots through lower rates or free short-term parking.

Based on data from the parking demand study, we are proposing a framework for new rates.

Additionally, we have updated the names of the affected parking lots to ensure clarity of the locations.

We are proposing an all-day rate of $12 for the highest tiered lots, which are highlighted in blue on the map.

If a $12 all-day rate were to be approved for the most in-demand level one lots, then level two and level three lots would each be priced at $6 per day, or 50% off the level one rate.

Level two and level three lots are highlighted in green and yellow.

Level three lots, which is lower inspiration point, would offer the first two hours free, after which the flat $6 all-day rate would apply.

This tiered system helps us balance accessibility with smart demand parking management.

In addition to surface lots, we are proposing the installation of hourly parking meters along selected streets within Balboa Park, which are highlighted in orange.

The proposed rate is $2.50 per hour to match adjacent neighborhoods, and meters would operate from 8 a.m.

to 8 p.m.

seven days a week.

The streets include Presidents Way, Village Place, Balboa Drive, El Prado, Quint Street, and Juniper Street.

It's also important to note that ADA accessible spaces, of which there are 180, approximately 1080 within the park, would remain free of charge and not subject to time limits.

We are also proposing that all park roads be eligible for free and unlimited parking for those displaying ADA placards.

This brings consistency with on street rules and regulations.

This general approach ensures that visitors have options based on their parking needs and preferences.

I also want to take a moment to clarify that this proposal does not include the installation of parking meters in the East Mesa of Balbow Park.

I also want to call your attention to the purple streets on the attached map.

Those are on street parking areas that will be considered for parking meters in item S 400 today, but they are part of an overall effort to provide consistency throughout the park and surrounding streets.

In response to council interest, we are proposing a resident parking discount program.

This would allow verified city of San Diego residents to receive a 50% discount on the level one all-day rate.

Using the same $12 sample rate, a resident could purchase all day parking in a level one lot for just $6 instead of 12.

This program is designed to maintain affordable access for San Diegans while allowing the city to charge full rates to tourist and non-city residents.

The discount would only apply to off-street lots, not to on park road metered parking.

Through the creation of an online portal, residents would sign up for a parking account where they would submit documentation to verify their address.

There'd be a one-time account verification fee of $5, and once verified, residents could log in and purchase daily parking at the discounted rate.

The license plate used to access the park would be tied to the residents' account and verified electronically by enforcement staff.

Because kiosk themselves cannot perform resident verification, this account-based model ensures only eligible residents receive the discount.

This program would be administered by the office of the city treasurer, and it's expected to launch in early 2026 following portal development and user testing.

The Office of the City Treasurer recommends implementing this as a three-year pilot program to allow for policy refinement over time.

In July 2025, staff received feedback and developed financial projections based on public and council feedback.

The proposed inputs on the left, based on input from the July Informational Item, include a $10 fee at level one, $5 at level 2, and $5 at level 3.

Level 3 parking would have included four free hours with enforcement running from 8 in the morning until 6 in the evening.

Under this model, total revenue was estimated estimated at $2 million, resulting in a net fiscal year 2026 revenue shortfall of approximately $8.7 million.

On the right, a staff's recommendation, the input under this option increase the inputs under this option increase level one rates to $12, level two to six, and level three to six dollars.

Free parking at level three would be reduced from four hours to two hours, and enforcement staff or enforcement hours would extend from eight in the morning until eight in the evening.

This model generates an estimated 10.3 million dollars in net revenue, leaving net fiscal year 2026 shortfall of approximately $785,000.

That deficit decreases when revised tram costs are factored in at a cost of $415,000.

This brings the variance decrease to approximately $450,000.

All revenue collected from paid parking in Balbo Park will go into a dedicated special revenue fund, not the city's general fund per the guidance of the city attorney.

This new fund will support a wide range of eligible park improvements, including daily operations, staffing and maintenance, road repaving and lighting upgrades, tram service enhancements, and security enhancements, signage landscaping, and deferred capital needs.

This model ensures that parking fees benefit the park directly and help maintain long-term financial sustainability.

City staff, nonprofit employees, and registered volunteers, in addition to contractors, are the backbone of Balbow park operations.

To support their ongoing service, we are proposing at this time free parking in level two and level three lots for these individuals highlighted in green and yellow.

As a change from the previous proposal and as a result of stakeholder feedback, we are extending the opportunity for these park based team members to park on the West Mesa for free.

If they choose to park in level one lots or on park road metered spaces, standard rates would apply.

This approach provides access while also reserving premium spaces for park visitors.

The program will include clear eligibility criteria and a management plan to ensure integrity and efficiency.

We will also be implementing trans tram service enhancements to support employee transportation transportation to these work locations.

Next slide.

Balboa Park parking permits for level two and level three lots are reserved for park-based employees, contractors, and volunteers who provide a direct public benefit to the park, including registered city volunteers, approved nonprofit volunteers, authorized contractors, and employees of organizations or nonprofits with a lease or special use permit within Balboa Park.

Permits may only be used while actively serving in those roles, not by general members of organizations, and the city may revoke those permits in cases of misuse.

The zoo operates under a long-term lease that expires in 2034, which shapes how we approach parking there.

The amendment approved last week by the City Council gives the zoo more flexibility in how it manages parking.

They are no longer required to charge everyone the same flat rate, which allows discounts or special rates for residents, employees, and volunteers.

As such, the zoo has full discretion over parking operations and policies moving forward, subject to existing lease terms.

We are modernizing the parking experience through the proposed install installation of kiosk based pay-by-plate systems.

Visitors will enter their license plate and pay at a kiosk or scan a QR code on signs throughout the park or throughout the lot to pay via their smartphone.

The Park Smarter app will also allow users to pay or extend time remotely.

For example, if a park visitor parked at Inspiration Point and after enjoying two hours of free parking, they wanted to extend their visit within the park, they would have the ability to extend their time to the all-day $6 rate remotely with no need to return to the kiosk.

Parking enforcement will be handled by the city's parking enforcement division to check to see if a license plate is within the kiosk database.

Wayfinding signage will be compliant with the Baobo Park signage guidelines and funded through parking revenues if new rates are approved.

Kiosk are also ready for installation.

December nights would be exempt from paying into the parking management fund.

Any parking fees collected during the event go directly to support the event, and these are handled by a third-party service.

That arrangement will continue under the Office of Special Events.

In the meantime, staff will come back with recommendations on parking fee rates for special events and filming after working further with impacted stakeholders.

Now to address unforeseen impacts and situations and to encourage continued investment within the park, the department requests that parking fees may be waived at the discretion of the mayor or designee when temporary operational or construction needs require the use of parking areas.

Examples include the short-term use of parking spaces for staging materials, storing equipment, or establishing temporary facilities.

One specific example of this would include the upcoming $7 million Natural History Museum Roof Replacement Project.

This project will require temporary use of neighboring parking lot of the neighboring parking lot to assist with equipment staging, and it is staff's recommendation to weigh parking fees to ensure that the city does not add additional cost to organizations improving the park.

Waivers are limited to activities directly related to infrastructure, capital improvement, or preservation projects that support the repair, protection, or enhancement of city-owned park assets.

City staff is committed to clear, accessible public outreach leading up to implementation with assistance from the communications department.

Staff will initiate a communication strategy that will include ongoing presentations to the Balbo Park Committee for feedback, on-site signage improvements throughout the parking areas, updated pages on the city's website highlighted here in blue with FAQs and maps, press releases to ensure media coverage, and social media campaigns for timely updates and reminders.

Our goal is to ensure residents and visitors are well informed and feel confident navigating the new system.

We will measure five key indicators to evaluate program performance and provide opportunity for potential revisions.

These are proposed to include parking occupancy and unique vehicle counts by parking lot to evaluate demand and pricing effectiveness, resident participation to ensure that discount program is reaching its intended audience, revenue collected versus projections to assess uh assess financial sustainability, compliance with enforcement based on citation data, and stakeholder feedback gathered through regular meetings.

To summarize, simply by implementing paid parking, the city will have the ability and additional statistics and information to make informed policy recommendations in the future.

These metrics will be reviewed quarterly with a formal one-year evaluation report provided to the council that includes recommendations for adjustments as needed.

In summary, the proposed proposed plan introduces new parking rates and policies across Balboa Park.

Level one lots would have a $12 all-day rate rate, while level two and level three lots would be six dollars all day.

Parking enforcement would run from 8 a.m.

to 8 p.m.

daily on park road, meter parking would be 250 an hour with a four-hour maximum.

At inspiration point, visitors would get two hours of free parking.

Free parking will be provided for park-based employees, contractors, and volunteers and level two and three lots, as well as the West Mesa.

Holidays would remain exempt from parking fees, and ADA parking with a placard will be expanded to all park roads.

If approved, the program is scheduled for rollout starting October 6th with signage, kiosk, and citywide communications.

A resident portal will also go live near January 2026.

In summary, the proposed actions are approving new park user fees under the city council's category three fee policy, since these again relate to the use of government property.

Also making a finding that park employees, volunteers, and contractors surveyed direct public purpose to the parks, so they would continue to park at no cost in level two and level three lots and on the West Mesa.

That new fees would take effect October 6th, 2025, and that the Department of Finance would then update the city's rate book and the city clerk would post the information online for public access.

This concludes our presentation.

All right.

Thank you very much for the presentation.

And with that, the IBA would like to make some comments first.

Thank you so much, Council President.

We've got Baku Patel on the Zoom here that will provide our office's comments.

Thanks, Jillian, and uh good afternoon, Council members.

As mentioned, um, Bakup Patel from the IBA's office.

The proposal before the council today to establish a paid parking program within Bellboa Park, uh, as you heard, is largely consistent with what was previously presented to the council as an informational item back in July.

At that meeting, several council members expressed an interest in exploring certain adjustments to the mayor's proposal with the primary goal of reducing the potential financial burden on park visitors.

These included a lower rate structure at $10 per day for level one and $5 per day for levels two and three, the shorter enforcement time that ends at 6 p.m., as well as increasing the amount of free parking hours in level three, among other potential adjustments.

Now the the impact to those who visit the park is, of course, an important consideration, but this decision must be balanced against the trade-off of potentially significant budgetary impacts.

To that end, our office released IBA report 25-30 this past Friday, which summarizes the projected fiscal impact of implementing any individual adjustment that was discussed back in July or combination thereof on the fiscal year 26 adopted budget.

As the council is already aware, but as a as a reminder, uh the FY26 budget includes a total of 12 and a half million dollars in revenue that was assumed would be generated from parking revenue in Bellboard Park, and implementing any of the previously discussed amendments will result in less revenue relative to the mayor's proposal and increase the general fund budget shortfall overall.

Thank you, Council President.

Uh that concludes my comments.

Uh I am available for questions.

Thanks.

All right, thank you, Baku and Jillian.

And with that, clerk, please proceed with public comment.

Thank you, Council President.

We do have over 120 speakers.

We have about 118 here in council chambers now and currently 14 with their hands raised in the virtual queue.

I will ask that we do have yellow reserve seats in the front.

When I do call your name, please come up to those yellow reserve seats so that we can have a easier time to the microphone.

There are two microphones available, a taller one and a shorter one.

You can use whichever one you like.

They're both on.

So we will proceed if I can have the following individuals.

Jennifer Estela Stallwork, if she can come up to the microphone, please, and then Jean Ninos, Mary Austin Baim, Kelly Mooney, Michael Warbert and Philippe Gagney, Jim Corington, and Peter Kamiski.

If you can all please come up to the yellow reserve seats.

Now, Jennifer, you have people seeding you time.

If they can please raise your hand, their hand.

Kathleen Knotts Levine, please, thank you.

Matt Baker.

Matt Baker.

Oh, thank you.

You can come up to those yellow reserve seats too.

So you'll have two minutes, please proceed.

Good afternoon.

My name is Jennifer.

I'm a retired nurse and also a member of the Redwood Bridge Club community in Balboa Park, which has over 300 members, most of us seniors.

Learning to play bridge is not a casual experience.

It's immersive and requires many of us to play up to four times a week.

Under the current proposal, that would cost me about $2,000 a year to park.

For seniors like myself on a fixed income, this would be a financial burden and it's not sustainable.

Our club and many others in the park provide more than recreation.

They provide intellectual stimulation, social connection, and protection against isolation at a time in life when those needs are most critical.

If meter parking moves forward without a community-based permits program, many of us will no longer be able to participate.

We respectfully ask Council President Joe Lacavia, Councilmember Sean Alla Rivera, Councilmember Kent Lee, Councilmember Marnie Von Wilbert, and Councilmember Henry Foster to respectfully reconsider and support a permit program before any paid parking system moves forward.

We are your parents and we are your grandparents.

Please help us to stay connected to our community.

Thank you.

Okay, I appreciate the uh passion.

The thumbs up or the thumbs down has worked very, very effective.

We could stay with that, then we can move right along.

And that 120 minutes of public comment.

Thank you, Council President.

Matt Baker, if you can please come up.

You'll have one minute, please proceed.

Okay.

All right, you guys.

Is anybody really buying this that they're doing this to uh help parking?

I mean, we all know this is a money grab, it's a cash grab, okay.

For us to give you more money is like your crackhead friend shows up at your house, asks you for a thousand dollars, you give them a thousand dollars, they blow it on crack and come back and ask you for more money.

The only thing is now they're trying to charge me money to sit on my own couch, and they're gonna pay me back with the money that they steal from me for sitting on my own couch.

This is our property.

It has been our property for over a hundred years.

So has the trash been for over a hundred years.

And don't let them shut you down.

This is public comment.

This is we, the people, the people that own this.

This is not your little park to charge us to go on the merry-go-round.

You did not build Balboa Park because people like you are incapable of building anything.

We, the people demand that these parks and these streets that we have had for our whole lifetimes.

Your time has concluded, sir.

Your time has concluded.

Oh, Jean Ninos.

Gene Nino's your time has concluded, sir.

No one wants it.

Will you listen to the people?

Are you gonna extend the courtesy to the public?

Only Edward Glory.

All right, this is your first warning.

Thank you, Jean.

Please come forward.

I've paused your time.

If you can please speak uh closer to the microphone so that we can uh I'm here to help you make a this difficult decision.

You have a budget deficit you're trying to fix, but I'm suggesting that you not fix it in this way.

There's many seniors, many other people that have made their plans to live their retired life by doing good deeds and having a healthy retirement in Balboa Park.

They could not plan to have this raise of all these fees for parking.

There's no way they could plan for that.

So I ask you, are they collateral damage of your bill to raise the fees in Balboa Park?

And that's what will happen is that all these people who have plannedly to retire in a nice way to be helpful, to be healthy, and yet they can't plan, they can't do it.

Thank you.

Next is Mary Austin.

You have time seeded to you by Lou Krisha Locke.

Thank you.

You'll have two minutes, please proceed.

My name is Mary Austin Bain, and I'm nearly 80 years old, retired and a proud member of the Redwood Bridge Club.

I'm extremely concerned about the negative impact parking meters on the West Mesa of Balboa Park will have on our club.

If attendance drops, and we have done a survey with our members, and we believe that it definitely will.

The club may not survive.

We recognize the difference between the center mesa, and we would ask you to recognize the difference between the center mesa, which attracts tourists, and the West Mesa, which was serves local residents and seniors as myself.

Please delay the vote on this until January 1st.

We need proper research and discussions for fair solutions.

Let's discuss a fair permit system for all nonprofits.

Annual permits at one cost or semi-annual permits at a different cost, maybe a little higher.

Quarterly permits at even a little bit higher, which will be easier on seniors that have fixed monthly incomes and could even bring in more revenue for the city.

Please keep this vital nonprofit community club alive.

Thank you.

The next speakers to be taken will be Mark Michael Warburton, Philip Gagney, Jim Coddington, Peter Kamiski, Virginia Woford.

If you can all please come up to the yellow reserve seats, please proceed.

Members of the council, I respect the difficult budget position that you're placed in.

And I am grateful for those modifications that you have made.

But I remain in disagreement over this fee.

No more, absolutely no more than five years.

Any continuation of the parking fees would require voter approval.

This offers your constituents a light at the end of the tunnel.

And it generates revenue for the city while pursuing other financial opportunities, including a reasonable tax measure.

In addition, parking should be free on free Tuesdays.

And for equitable reasons, please allow at least one weekend day a month for families to attend.

Thank you for that concluding remark, Michael.

At the San Diego Model Railroad Museum, this is going to cut deep in two ways.

The first, our visitor experience is run by senior volunteers.

And we're already hearing from our volunteer group that they're going to have difficulty with access and performing what they do every day.

And the second way is we're already anticipating a huge loss in attendance revenue.

So much so that we've already laid off three staff members, and in a small staff of 12 people, that's a quarter of our people, right?

This is not good.

And at the very least, please have uh a citizen discount available when this launches, so that the people who come to the majority of our visitors are local, so at least the locals can have a discount.

And then second, extend the time uh for the free parking and free visitation.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next is Philip Gagney.

Philip.

You have several people speeding seeding you time.

Martha Jordan.

If you can please raise your hand, Martha Jordan, thank you.

Patricia Kelly, Sandra Antonell, and Mary Hall.

Thank you.

You'll have five minutes, please proceed.

Council President uh President La Cava, Council members.

Good afternoon, and thank you for the opportunity to address you.

My name is Philippe Gagnier.

I'm a resident of North Park.

I stand before you in opposition to any parking fees in Balboa Park.

This part, our park, should never be seen as an income opportunity to help resolve the city's budgetary problems.

The proposed parking fees will not fix our city's systemic issues.

The projected income barely represents 0.14% of your budget of our budget.

A more equitable solution must be found.

The negative impact on low-income, middle income families, and the frequent weekly park users of this regressive tax is not proportional to the small potential budgetary gains it may achieve.

This solution seems ill-conceived, hastily proposed, and argued by using flawed logic.

One of which is the following bottom line that we have heard from city staff, from council member staff, and from some council members themselves, which goes like this.

Well, this item is in the budget, and therefore it is non-negotiable.

Socrates, Aristotle, please come to my rescue.

Somebody or somebody's put this item in the budget.

Therefore, somebody or somebody's can take the item off the budget or at least improve it.

The idea that a budget item is forever unchangeable and has become the 11th commandment is not very convincing.

Another objection that we have heard from Mayor Gloria's staff seems to imply that all Balboa Park users are the same.

We are not Balboa Park visitors.

We are users of the park.

We you we we play, we we have fun in the park.

But they're not the same.

It's common sense that someone who uses the park one or two or three times a year will not be impacted the same way as somebody who uses the park one, two, three or four times a week.

It's not the same.

Therefore, we should not we should be able to find a common sense solution to this obvious disparity.

The frequent weekly users on the West Mace of Balboa Park have come forward, particularly the members of the bridge club, and are offering a possible solution.

We are proposing a yearly parking permit system that would bring guaranteed income to the city.

To the best of my knowledge, we are the only stakeholders who have proposed an actual income flow to help the city address its budgetary problem.

I know that some of you on the council have been exploring the idea of a citywide permit.

An opportunity to see if this is a viable possible solution on a more citywide.

Why not try it out and analyze it and see if it works?

Council members, please don't take any action that will lead to the closing of our club.

Please vote yes on a yearly permit system for the West Mesa.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next is Jim Cottington.

After that, we'll be will be Peter Kamiski, excuse me, I'm saying Virginia Wolford, Carol Harris, Mike Kelly, David Wageman, and Richard Blum.

If you can all please be making your way up to the yellow reserve seats at the front.

Please proceed.

Thank you for the opportunity to come in to speak with you.

You see behind us what is called the greatest generation.

People that fought in our wars, build our communities, cared, paid taxes, supported our government, and now you're about to take something away from them after they've done so much.

You know, when I see people that talk about senior adults and wanting to help them, there's two types of people, in my view.

There's those who speak that, and then there are those who take action.

I hope that you guys won't be just the ones that speak and say, Yeah, we care about them, but you'll be people that will take some action and pass a permanent parking for them.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next is Peter Kamiskin.

You have several people that have seated your time.

And just to clarify, you did want to update your speakers up to be for item 201 instead of S500, correct?

Correct.

Thank you.

I'll make note of that on your speaker slip.

Uh Bo Bach, if you can please raise your hand, Kate Burnett.

Okay, thank you.

Anthony Zelig, Gilliar Reza, Marla Phelps.

I see you, thank you.

And Rita Vandergaugh.

Thank you.

You'll have eight minutes.

Please proceed.

Good afternoon, Council President and Council Members.

My name is Peter Komisky, and I represent 23 cultural organizations within the Balboa Park Cultural District.

As is no surprise, we remain opposed to the introduction of paid parking in Balboa Park.

As you have noted before from the DIES, this is not primarily a parking management plan, it is a revenue plan.

And I appreciate the recognition of that.

While I have raised operational cautions in the past, today I'll focus on revenue.

I begin by recognizing the work of the independent budget analyst in developing revenue scenarios.

Their projections already indicate a decrease in budgeted parking revenue.

That's a warning sign.

Even on financial terms, this plan carries uncertainty and risk.

Research confirms what many of us know.

Introducing or increasing paid parking creates barriers to access and reduces visitation at cultural institutions and parks.

These impacts do not seem to be fully reflected in the IBA or Department of Transportation Productions.

Two priorities are critical, and failure to deliver them will reduce revenue by discouraging local visitation.

First, the revenue of the residence rate not to exceed five dollars must be in place from day one.

Delaying that discount until 2006 26, as is the current plan, means locals pay full price immediately for the level one lots.

Yet, as Mike Warburton indicated, locals make up the majority of visitors to the park outside the summer peak.

If they stop coming or come less frequently, the city loses repeat attendance, goodwill, revenue, not just from parking, but from tickets, memberships, and concessions across the district.

Second, free parking must be meaningful.

Two hours is not enough in remote lots like Inspiration Point, where transit into the core takes time.

A three-hour minimum is necessary so families and visitors can enjoy the park without fear of the little pop-up that says, okay, you can now pay money without fear of a fine when they get back to their car.

Anything less reduces visits, and once again reduces your revenue.

Council must look at the full revenue picture, not just the parking line in the city's budget.

Every dollar lost from decrease vegetation affects dozens of organizations, large or small.

I often think that many people look at Balbaugh Park and just look at the large organizations.

We heard one of the organizations today identifying that they've already proactively lost three of their team members with the presumption of decreased revenue.

Assuming larger organizations can absorb the impact and therefore everything's fine, ignores the smaller ones and the ripple effects on the broader ecosystem that makes the park thrive.

In closing, I urge the mayor's office and council to commit to further work on critical items, park boulevard improvements, actual parking management, utilization studies for team members and resident parking and enforcement times, which all direct both access and revenue.

If today's outcome is to move forward, please ensure those two things.

At minimum that the $5 resident rate is locked in from day one, and that free parking for the remote lots is at least three hours.

Balbo Park is a cultural destination and an economic driver for our city.

It must remain accessible to residents and visitors alike if it is to thrive, and if the city is to achieve the revenue that it seeks.

Thank you very much for your time today.

Thank you, Virginia Wilfer.

Hello.

I'm a Redwood member and have been a member of the club for some time.

I support many of the museums in Balboa Park.

And I'm very concerned, there has not been paid parking in this park since 1868 when the park was originally created as City Park.

And there's no reason for it to begin now.

It really affects more than 80 organizations that make their home in the park, with all of their volunteers, with all of the tourists that come, and all of the many people from around the world that come to see some of our most famous things.

I urge you to rethink, regroup, and please don't make this the cash cow that it kind of looks like.

Thank you.

Carol?

Carol Harris.

If I if you can please come up to the yellow reserve seats for those other speakers, it really does help with people coming up.

Thank you so much, Carol.

Please proceed.

Sure.

Thank you, City Council, for allowing me to speak.

I'm just urging you as you vote on this issue to think about the Redwood members and the senior members and what impact this is going to have on their individual daily lives.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next is Mike Kelly.

After Mike Kelly will be David Waicheman, Richard Blum, Theresa Daly, Judith Blum, Sharon Huber, and Deborah Hill.

If you can please start making your way up to the yellow reserve seats, you'll have one minute.

Please proceed.

We recognize that sometimes it is necessary to make unpopular decisions because no other choices are available.

But let's be honest, the West Mesa parking situation is not that because other choices are available.

Other choices that raise revenue and can meet the needs of the West Mesa users.

This is not a choice between revenue and no revenue.

It is a choice between revenue and more revenue, with the full knowledge that using more revenue disenfranchises some West Mesa users, especially seniors.

Shouldn't your choices reflect our needs whenever possible?

And it is possible.

Please represent us.

Thank you, David Wageman.

Good afternoon.

I'm David Wagman.

I'm a resident of Bankers Hill and a member of the San Diego Lawn Bowling Club.

Bellboard Park belongs to the people.

Paid parking will turn the community treasure into a place for those who can only afford afford it.

This park was built on the idea of open access to the public.

Parking fees will undermine that.

It loss of there will be a loss of diversity, volunteerism when the paid parking is put in place.

The city will spend far more replacing the free labor, the expertise that we now enjoy.

This proposal risks turning Balboa Park into another paid entertainment district instead of a welcoming public space.

Protect the legacy of the open space and volunteerism that has been the defining part of Balboa Park.

Thank you for that concluding remark.

Richard?

Thank you.

Council President and members, my name is Richard Blum.

I'm an active member of the Redwood Bridge Club and a member of the board of directors of the club.

We've conducted a survey.

Half of our members say they can't afford $10 to play for four hours.

Some won't come at all, some will come less frequently.

And with that loss of attendance will be a loss of revenue, and with that loss of revenue, the club will not be able to continue.

And then the other half who either don't need to park because they live in the neighborhood or already have blue placards or can afford to park, won't need to park there either because the club will fold.

And at that point, the revenue provided for to the city at $10 for four hours will go to zero.

That's not a way to generate revenue for the city.

There are a lot of good reasons that the club needs to be there for social reasons, intellectual reasons, cognitive development, but driving revenue to the city.

Thank you for that concluding remark.

Thank you, Teresa.

Have a permit system, and you'll have revenue.

Thank you for your time.

Hi, my name is Theresa Day, and I'm here in support today in support of the Redwood Bridge Club.

As you know, it's a 75-year-old institution that provides vital mental stimulation, social connection to San Diego's elderly residents, many on fixed incomes, as you've heard here today.

Your parking meter plan will charge our members $10 per week, $30 or $10 per visit, $30 weekly for those who play three times a week.

It adds up to about $1,500 to $2,000 a year.

Our survey shows, as you've heard, that many of our members will not be able to park that often.

This will decrease the participation in our games.

The games won't be able to go on.

The club will fold.

So we urge you to approve our permit solution that we've provided we've put on the table for you.

It'd be very meaningful for all of us to be able to continue to play at the Redwood Bridge Club.

I invite you all to come see it.

It's a jewel in the in the park.

The park itself is a jewel in San Diego.

It's our park.

Please support us.

Thank you.

Judith Blum.

Balboa Park is far more than a place that tourists come or museum members come occasionally.

It's a vibrant home of many nonprofits that create community for San Diego residents.

I'm a member of the Redwood Bridge Club.

I attend two to three times per week, four hours per visit.

I've learned to play bridge.

I've made new friends.

I'm engaged cognitively and socially, and a result, my health and well-being benefits.

Our club has proposed a solution.

Without it, our attendance will fall and the club will falter.

You know, sometimes the consequences of a decision that is made are unknown.

But in this case, we've said repeatedly what the consequences are likely to be.

Thank you for that concluding remark.

Sharon.

Hi, I'm Sharon Hugers, and I moved here with my husband 30 years ago from Okaboje, Iowa, to help bring our grandkids to Balboa Park many, many times camping.

And we love San Diego.

I lost my husband a year ago, and I've never lived alone.

And I panicked.

And I found this bridge club, and through this, David has taught us every day to keep our minds so active.

He is the most dedicated man I've ever met.

Not only that, I have met so many friends, and at least 12 of them text me every day, keep me happy, and I pray that you do not take this away from us.

Last night I went and got brave enough to take dancing lessons at Bellboa Park and realize that's twice a week.

That means I now have to pay six times a week to park at Balboa Park.

Please don't take this away from us.

Deborah Hill.

Deborah Hill.

Hello, Council members.

I'm a resident of North Park.

I've lived there for 35 years.

I pay my taxes, and I'm just so happy to use Balboa Park as one of my places to go on a regular basis, including the Redwood Bridge Club.

Now, when you were elected, you promised to do no harm.

You we voted you in because you were supposed to do something good for the community.

So if you vote yes on this, you are doing harm.

And we are asking you to please take into consideration all of the programs that challenge and enrich both for old people and young people.

There's plenty of young people in this room.

So please think about this.

You will be ripping the heart out of the park and your communities if you vote yes on this parking.

So please reconsider and think of something else to do about it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Diane Mosley.

Diane, M-O-S-E-L-Y.

After that, if I can have uh Katie Christensen, Nicholas Isola, Malia Young Penn, um Zarya Hamilton, Dane Coolbreath, and Sydney Cova.

If you can all please come up to the yellow reserve seats.

Starting with Diane, you can come up to the microphone.

Hi everyone.

Um, I'm Diane Mosley.

I am a member of the San Diego Lawn Bowling Club.

You'll see a few of us in our blue shirts out here tonight.

And we have the exact same problem that the Redwood Bridge Club has.

We have a lot of seniors that are part of our group, and asking us to pay between $750 and $10 a day extra to bowl is going to be a problem.

But what nobody has mentioned so far is that the West Mesa clubs are being forced to pay the most money, $250 an hour to park, when East Mesa sports clubs have free parking.

How does that fair?

And Mr.

Whitburn, your own your own district.

If the parking on Balboa Drive is $250 an hour, where do you think all those construction workers are gonna park?

Where do you think waitresses that work in in the uh restaurants around there are gonna park?

It's gonna be a disaster.

Thank you for your district.

I'm wearing one of those shirts.

Hi, I'm Katie Christensen.

I'm a proud, proud member of the San Diego Lawn Bowling Club.

And incidentally, the club has been here since 1932 in the same location.

And I'm just wondering, we think you're discriminating against the lawn bowling club and the bridge club.

There are no parking meters in Balboa Park for the tennis courts, the swimming pool, the bocce ball and patank courts, the golf courses, the butt the baseball field, the frisbee golf, and the dog park.

Does it really is it really fair that we should be paying these prices?

Thank you.

Nicholas Isola?

Good afternoon, council members, staff, and community members.

My name is Nico.

We are very thankful to have the ability to speak our opinions here today.

I want to tell a quick story about myself.

My my family and I went through a natural disaster crisis that turned our income to zero dollars.

In the Lahaina fires, everything we built up was destroyed.

My parents' livelihoods were destroyed in a fire.

This is just one of many situations of our students at San Diego High School.

Many students at San Diego High School are going through harsh financial issues similar to mine.

My family, along with many other families of San Diego High School cannot afford this cost.

It is a burden that would be added on to many of our complex situations.

This is who you are affecting.

Today we are merely asking for the students of San Diego High School to be able to be able to park at Inspiration Point for free and remain going to school for free because this directly affects us and our families' financial situations.

Thank you for your consideration.

Good afternoon, Council members.

For as long as I can remember, San Diego High students have parked at inspiration point.

As a student, this plan directly affects me, and I'm naturally opposing it.

But this goes beyond me.

It affects families, our daily lives, and even our ability to succeed after high school.

Charging San Diego High students results in over a thousand dollars in parking fees and could force families at our Title I school to choose between basic needs like electricity and water bills.

For many, it means extra shifts or even second jobs.

These fees could even push students to leave our school entirely, whether it be freshman incoming freshmen or current students.

Education is a fundamental right.

Why should it be undermined for resonant purpose revenue purposes?

While the goal isn't while the goal is in everyone's best interest to meet the quota, we urge a fair compromise that doesn't underre that doesn't harm underrepresented communities.

Thank you.

Zarya Hamilton.

Good afternoon, Council members.

We the students are here to advocate for an exemption from the proposed $6 fee Monday through Friday, as we are the majority of people parking at Inspiration Point on weekdays.

If unemployed, the financial burden would not fall on us, but rather our parents.

If passed, parents have the following options.

Pay a thousand and eighty dollars per year to continue their child's established commute, sacrifice their own time to try their students to and from school or find alternative transportation.

We urge the city to not make families have to choose, but rather take into consideration the students they serve.

Roughly 80% of our students identify as low income, therefore $6 a day, or rather a cost at all, is more of an ask than you may think.

Inspiration Point is not just a parking lot, it's a fundamental to San Diego High's culture.

To lose this in favor of fees would be a disservice to us all.

We hope that after all have spoken, change will follow.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

My name is Dane Colbreath, and I am a senior at San Diego High School.

Today I'm speaking on behalf of the San Diego Unified Student Union against pricing students out of our own public schools.

And today that might just happen at inspiration point.

We are not against all parking fees, but we are absolutely against balancing a budget on the backs of our city's future.

Us students.

I urge you all to consider the nuances of this broad policy and wait to make necessary changes that help empower the next generation of our city.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

My name is Sydney Sarah, and I'm a senior at San Diego High School.

I come to the board to talk about how students should have free parking and not have to pay the $6 that you guys are charging us for.

Taking the parking away from us will cause parents to have time, will have will cause parents to take time off from work to drive students to school every day, and the result will make parents lose financial income.

Another concern is students would have to take public transportation to and from school.

And although that we have free passes, it's time consuming and it takes about an hour and a half max for students to get to school.

If you take our parking away from us, the attendance at our school would rapidly drop.

And every year San Diego High loses students.

And so if we don't have our parking, then we might not have a school in the next five years.

And for me personally, I play flag football, and so leaving at nine o'clock at night and not having parking is kind of dangerous, especially walking downtown.

Thank you.

Thank you for concluding.

The next speakers can please come forward.

Precious Sari.

Mia Ashanti Gutiérrez de Yes, Terrence Denton, Paul Krueger, Ann Stoop, and uh Nathan Williams, if you can all please come up to the yellow reserve seats and precious your first up at the mic.

Hi, I'm Precious, and I'm 16 years old and I will be speaking out about free parking.

It has come to my intention that the city will be charging high school students just to pay for parking and to attend school.

Most of the students who live out of country, it could be very difficult for them, especially those who are low-income students.

There are students from other places who travel just to go get an education.

Some also play sports, some also have jobs and other things outside of school and can't afford to spend $120 and more every month just to get a good education and to park close to the school.

Some students, oh shoot.

Also, because not everybody lives near a bus stop and it usually takes forever for the bus to come.

It could some students can't afford to miss the bus every single day because that could also affect attendance.

Education is mandatory.

If you have written comments, you can definitely email them to City Clerk at Sandieago.gov and they can be distributed.

Mia?

Okay, thank you.

Terrence Denton.

You have time seated to you by Rosemary Johnston.

You can please raise your hand.

Oh, sorry, she's right behind you, but I take the council president's word for it.

Two minutes, please proceed.

My name is Terry Dutton.

I'm a retired attorney for the county.

I live in La Jolla and I use Balboa Park about three times every week.

I'm concerned that your constituents' conference confidence in city government fell badly after the mishandling of the trash collection fees.

And everyone, everyone including yourself, I'm sure, uh, hates parking fees in Balboa Park.

But now city residents will be reminded of this action every time they go to the park, which is very frequently for many of us.

I'm here in the hope that you'll amend this parking plan to fix a significant unfairness to city residents.

City residents pay for Balboa Park and the zoo through our property taxes and sales taxes and even a special property tax for the zoo.

How do city visitors aren't being made to pay their fair share of the cost of the park in the zoo?

And I plead you to give city residents free access.

The meter parking at $6 in all lots is just too much.

And confidence in the city government will not recover from this.

At the very least, the 50% discount should be applied to all the lots, and street parking around the park should be free for city residents.

I also hope you'll give seniors and especially kids a chance to keep using BPAC and Muni Gym by increasing the number of free hours for parking at Inspiration Point to at least three.

Change of shoes, play your sport, change your shoes again, get back to your car in two hours.

I believe the two and a half million dollars that the IBEA estimates for this change to three hours is wildly overstated.

Please appear to be.

Thank you for that concluding comment.

Paul Kruger.

You have time seated to you by Sue Taylor.

Thank you.

And Rose Ann.

Thank you so much.

You'll have three minutes and your audio visual is displayed.

Oh, yeah.

Those are uh self-evident.

It's just showing how the mayor and some council members have reserved parking wherever they go.

But that's that's not that is not uh that's not my point.

My point is um what you're hearing today from all these groups tells us one thing, which is that you're rushing.

Please don't rush.

If this is the way you need to get the revenue, please give it two weeks or three weeks.

Have every comment made by all these people reviewed by staff and get an answer for every one of their concerns.

I went to the September 4th Boboa Park Committee, meaning all these people were there.

The mayor's staff acknowledged that this has gone too fast, but put the onus on you for reinstating some of the expenditures and needing then to generate revenue faster.

So please just take a deep breath.

Two or three weeks isn't gonna break the bank.

You need to do it right.

I want to use the rest of my time to point out what is a really disturbing uh uh misleading, and I would say Orwellian uh students.

Um report by the city, and please, I don't mean this personally.

It is insulting that we're told that this would enhance the overall visitor experience in Balboa Park.

That is Orwellian.

It does not incorporate stakeholder feedback.

That's the whole point of why we're here today.

Here we are from July 28th, a whole new group.

We just learned today, these students, and the impact that this is gonna have on them because they park in inspiration point.

It's not efficient.

How in what way is it efficient?

It's completely inefficient to the to the process and the result.

It doesn't demand, it doesn't manage demand, it simply reduces demand by pricing people who can least afford it out of the opportunity to go to the park.

It simply reduces demand by pricing people who can least afford it out of the opportunity to go to the park.

Um lastly, the most disturbing thing is the mayor's insistence on somehow making people believe that this is gonna generate extra money for Balboa Park.

The IBA has made it absolutely clear.

Your council president has made it absolutely clear.

This money passes through a special fund.

It goes to the general fund, it reimburses for expenditures that we will have already have in Balboa Park, and I find it extremely insulting that it would be mischaracterized.

Lastly, the kudos to the bridge club for coming forth with a plan to raise a placard, but you have many other groups here that cannot afford to pay placard rates from their membership.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

And stoop.

After that, we'll have Nathan Williams, Jill Denny Soto, Pam Farmer, Catherine Cabine, Dennis Williams, and David Walters.

If you can please start making your way up, please proceed.

Good afternoon.

Um you have all my comments, so I'm just gonna share a few with you.

I am a 65-year-old San Diego native.

My daughter and I are employed by the Old Globe Theater.

Um, and I have been a dancer with San Eco Civic Dance in the park for 12 years.

Balboa Park is a public green space, and its parking should be free to all.

Free parking for employees and volunteers should not be restricted to distant areas like Inspiration Point.

By making employees and volunteers park in distant lots and either walking in or taking the tram, you will simp significantly adding to commute times, thereby decreasing our quality of life.

Some of the people I work with have more than one job and will have to shorten the hours they work at at the globe so that they will be able to make it to their other jobs on time.

Many students from San I know many dancers from San Diego Civic Dance who live in North County or East County and would not be able to enjoy resident parking rates.

Many of them are seniors on incomes and would have difficulty even affording the reduced rates.

Thank you, Nathan Williams.

Poor children can't afford to park at all.

Nathan, you have time seated to you by Hillel Jacobs.

Please raise your hand.

Thank you so much.

You'll have two minutes, please proceed.

Um, good afternoon, council members.

My name is Nathan Williams, and I'm a senior at San Diego High School.

Um I sat here during this earlier today making a speech for this, and now I think I'll go a little bit off script for that after the study that was presented to all of us earlier.

In that study, so many different groups were brought up except for students.

I heard this name or the word student zero times during the whole presentation.

And that seems absurd to me because students, especially in Inspiration Point, use that parking lot so much.

And students need access to free parking at Inspiration because we have so many students that drive to school in order to access their education.

And if that parking is taken away from us students without our consent, really, then we will be one of the schools, San Diego High School, one of the schools in this in our district without access to free parking.

And that is again absurd to me because we are the oldest school in San Diego, established in 1882, and there's no reason why we should not have access to free parking.

We are a Title I school, and as it's been repeated many times, so many of our students, over 80% cannot afford this added expense.

I did the calculations for $250 an hour, and it was $1,080.

Now hearing that a lot of tier three parking lot will be $6 after the two-hour free period, that comes over $2,000 added to a family's budget that they now have to find a way to scrounge up that money, and that is unacceptable.

So please reconsider.

Jill, Denny Soto.

Hi, my name is Jill, and I'm here on behalf of myself, the teachers, volunteers, and the 2,895 registered dancers of the San Diego Civic Dance Arts.

I strongly oppose the proposal to charge for parking in Balboa Park.

This plan the mayor's office has shown is completely tone-deaf to all the volunteers, employees, clubs, seniors, and communities that benefit from Balboa Park.

Balboa Park has always been a place where we could all go to take a quick stroll, spend a day picnicking with friends, taking class, and most importantly, it has always been a beautiful place to go when you don't have a lot of extra money to spend.

We are getting squeezed with extra fees like paying for trash, and I get it.

Reducing the deficit is important, but please don't do it on the backs of seniors, kids, low-income families, and volunteers that benefit from the park.

The people of the city need to know that you are hearing us.

Balboa Park has given so much to us over the years.

The proposal will be a devastating blow to the seniors' parents and kids' participation in the San Diego Civic Dance Arts Program, along with having to give up all the other ways we enjoy.

Thank you for that concluding comment.

Pam Farmer.

Pam Farmer, you have time seated to you by Gay Burns.

Thank you.

Pam Farmer, you'll have two minutes.

Hello.

My name is Pam Farmer.

I live in Point Loma and I'm a member of the Redwood Bridge Club.

I am here to voice my strong opposition to the proposal for paid parking in Belboa Park and the West Mesa, which gives no consideration for nonprofit groups and senior citizens like myself.

I attended the Balboa Park Committee meeting on September 4th.

They gave this same presentation that we just saw, this PowerPoint presentation.

At the end of the presentation, the chairperson called for a vote, and the Balpoa Park Committee gave a resounding no vote to this plan.

The plan, which is just mentioned, is not even close to promoting its stated goal.

It was just quoted of enhancing the overall experience for park visitors.

I am asking you today to wisely choose to pause your implementation of paid parking.

Take time to conscientiously review all of the input from all of these concerned constituents, and at the very very least, include a permit system for nonprofit organizations of the West Mesa.

These permits would simply allow us at Redwood to continue to enjoy our bridge games and not lose our entire club membership due to unreasonable parking fees.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Catherine Cabinian, and then after that, we have Patricia Law, Dennis Williams, David Walters, Michael Schmidt.

If you can all come up to the yellow reserve seats.

Catherine, you have time seated to you by Karen Wayman.

You can please raise your hand, Karen.

Thank you.

Carolyn Sherman.

Thank you so much.

My name is Kathy.

Excuse me.

There was the same person twice.

So Karen and Carolyn, if you can please raise your hands at the same time.

Okay, so then that's just one person, so you'll have two minutes.

I'm taking David Walter's speech because y'all refuse to let him speak twice because he's going to talk on the next proposal.

And what he's asking for is not that we are here just to say no.

We're offering a real compromise.

We're from the Redwood Bridge Club.

We want a permit system for community-based nonprofits.

150 dollar annual permits would keep 95% of our membership engaged.

And our organization alone would generate $30,000 in yearly revenue for the city that's sustainable and fair.

It's not a free pass.

It's a balanced solution that meets your fiscal goals and preserves essential community programs.

The San Diego Zoo already has a permit system for its members.

If the city can accommodate the largest institution in the park, you can accommodate community-based organizations that serve thousands of residents everything every week.

Anything less is inequitable.

If you will not work with us, you do not get to take from us.

If you're not going to work with us on the permit, you need to vote no.

And I'm going to use my last 57 seconds to ask Joe Lacava, the attorneys, and Kent Lee to file an ethics complaint against Sean Elo Rivera.

Because he held up a coffee cup that called all of these old people fascist.

You can look at his coffee cup.

I am very upset.

He is insulting all of these people by calling them fascist.

Look at his coffee cup.

Look at it.

It's black.

And it says, calls everyone a fascist in this room.

I don't appreciate him, and there needs to be an ethics investigation on that.

If he's a private citizen, he can call us all the fascists he won, and I'll let him.

But he's not a private citizen.

He's a city council member.

He does not get to call the voters, and he does not get to call the people of San Diego fascists unless he has some kind of proof.

And he has no proof.

I know all of these people from Redwood Bridge Club.

No one in here is a fascist.

I am very upset about that.

Very angry.

Patricia Law.

Patricia Law.

As a lifetime San Diego resident who was of a low-income family, we went to the park every Sunday for our entertainment.

We were part of the international houses.

I have performed for years for the Christmas on the Prado.

I have worked for years as a dance teacher and a performer in the Starlight Opera.

I could not have done all of these things as a low-income person.

I was a single parent for 25 years with two children living on $9,000 a year.

Our only entertainment was being able to go to the park and being able to walk around.

We couldn't even afford to go in the museums.

You are taking this away from all of the poor people who live in San Diego, who do not have anywhere to go.

And the biggest insult is I live around the park, so now my park, my only park in my neighborhood, I will have to pay to go to my local park.

You do not have to pay to go to any other local parks.

But I will be paying to go to my local park.

Your time is concluded.

Thank you.

Dennis Williams.

Good afternoon.

My name's Dennis Williams.

I'm the treasurer of Redwood Bridge Club and a club member, and I urge you to support the amendment that we've put before you for a parking permit.

Why wouldn't you?

First of all, it raises money, raises revenue for the city, guaranteed money, and it helps all the club members, majority of which are seniors on a fixed income, defray future costs if the ordinance ordinance passes to help us continue with the activities that promote healthy aging.

It helps with cognitive abilities, social interaction, and social friendships.

So call upon your better angels and support this amendment.

Thank you.

David Walters.

You have time seated to you by Sarah Ball.

Please raise your hand.

Gail Tinnerman.

Justin Hartley.

Janet Van Buzkirk.

Thank you.

You'll have five minutes.

Please proceed.

Greetings.

My name is David Walters, and I'm the club manager of the Redwood Bridge Club.

We have been fighting for our survival ever since we learned of this plan to implement paid parking in Balboa Park.

We are the only organization who's come forth with a constructive solution, one that protects community access while generating civity city revenue.

At present, it is unclear what the city considers a reasonable annual cost for a resident to participate in Baboa Park activities.

I have not heard that in the presentation.

I think that's a very important number for you guys to consider as you listen to all the people who talk here today.

The current plan could cost local residents $600 to $2,000 a year.

A burden it's insane.

A burden most seniors and families simply cannot afford.

Not just for my club, but for all the community-based organizations in Balboa Park.

Paid parking will hurt those who use the park the most.

Create an annual parking pass.

Cities and park systems nationwide already do this.

The San Diego Zoo just announced they're going to do this.

Affordable passes ensure frequent visitors can continue participating in activities they love.

The only reason it's not happening is the lack of political will.

I have met with the city staff.

I have met with your staff.

Every time I am told no, no permit system, no compromise.

Councilmember Whitburn told me this council says no to a compromise.

But we, the people most affected, are left out of these discussions.

We are ready to negotiate a solution, but we need your leadership.

So I ask you, will you generate more revenue by keeping thousands of local members engaged or by driving us out and collecting only collecting fees only from those visiting tourist attractions while destroying the communities that make Balboa Park a living cultural center?

When you chose to serve as elected officials, you promised to support seniors, families, and community members.

Moving forward with paid parking without a fair permit system violates those commitments.

Give us the option to buy in at a reasonable annual rate so we can continue supporting the park.

The organizations we love and the communities that make Balboa Park thrive.

This policy threatens community-based organizations that keep Balboa alive for local residents.

Families will stop coming, and membership organizations will collapse.

Balboa Park will become a hollow tourist venue rather than the living, breathing community space it has always been.

We are fighting for our survival.

Choose community over unchecked revenue.

I asked the city council today to commit to implement a fair permit system for all community-based organizations in Balboa Park.

And if you cannot do that, then vote no on paid parking and find your money elsewhere.

There are other ways to get your money if you can't work on something more equitable and fair.

Don't roll this out as is.

Michael Schmidt.

After Michael Schmidt, we have Kathy Vandenhuewal.

You can please come up to the yellow reserve seats.

If you can all please come up to the yellow reserve seats, please proceed.

Hi, welcome.

Um district um six.

Um I'm Michael Schmidt.

Um I think this I'm commenting on the budget because I think this is bullshit that you guys are trying to.

I mean, are putting us to now pay um the upward of um meter um parking and the others.

I think you should just um stop the budget from doing from the city from doing that to the customers, including this crowd in the back of me.

Um I would love it if you did that from my customers.

Thank you very much.

Kathy Vaniable.

Kathy, you have several people seating your time if they can please raise their hand.

Um Renate Adler.

Thank you.

Jan McNamara.

Tercia Delgen.

Kate Kalen.

Tim Davy.

Ron Higgury.

Ron H I G E.

Thank you.

Andrea Fire.

Thank you.

You'll have eight minutes, please proceed.

Thank you.

And I will try not to take all eight minutes.

Um, good afternoon, council members.

I have spent the last 25 years living and volunteering in Greater Golden Hill, including as the Golden Hill representative on the Balboa Park Committee.

I am not here today on behalf of the committee or any other group.

I am simply here sharing my opinions and experience and objection to the parking fee structure for Balboa Park.

Although the city has a large budget deficit, the general fund has grown by 70% over the last decade from 1.28 billion in FY16 to a projected 2.17 billion this year.

During that time, the budget for Balboa Park has remained essentially unchanged.

During the time I have been on the Balboa Park Committee, I have heard nonprofit staff and volunteers provide public comment on issues related to crumbling infrastructure, sewage backflows, pipe leaks, the unfunded infrastructure and maintenance needs for Balboa Park have never been prioritized in the city budget.

To add insult to injury, the current adopted budget slashes almost all general funds support other than what is assumed funding received from this paid parking.

This truly doesn't provide money to spend in the park or to address these infrastructure needs.

Greater Golden Hill has no other parks.

We are blessed by being adjacent to Balboa Park.

It is our community park.

But if this item passes, we will have the unfair burden of having to pay to go to our community park.

Our community and the communities adjacent to Balboa Park in District 3 will be the most impacted by this parking fee structure since we go to the park multiple times a week.

Not just go to the museums or zoo or other attractions, but for all of our recreation and open space needs.

Community parks and open spaces should be free for all city residents, and Balboa Park is our community park.

Reasons why I feel this fee structure is rushed and poorly planned.

Volunteers.

The only reason Balboa Park has been able to provide activities, cultural events, and maintained gardens is thanks to the hundred, if not thousands of volunteers who love this park.

Most of these volunteers are elderly and are being asked to park far away from the central portion of the park where they donate their time to the city.

Volunteers should park for free anywhere within the park because they will park where they're volunteering.

Please don't put more burdens on these people who often carry tools, large musical instruments, or cultural decorations for events.

Groups like the bridge club or dance clubs that provide low-cost activities for our communities, they hold events multiple times a week.

This fee structure will price out many of the members of these clubs.

The so-called two-hour free parking at Inspiration Point will not be available.

Inspiration Point is one of three parking lots set aside for free parking for thousands of employees and volunteers.

Even if you're lucky enough to get a two-hour spot, that still leaves little over one hour to enjoy a museum if you account for the logistics and travel time.

Resident discount.

The parking fee structure you are asked to approve today acknowledges that they are not ready to implement any discount parking for residents.

And they don't plan to provide any discounts when they start charging for parking in Balboa Park next month.

No plan yet for special events like the Greater San Diego Science and Engineering Fair that's held at the Activity Center in March, adjacent to Inspiration Point.

This lot is nearly completely full on those days with parents, volunteer judges, and educators that put on this event.

And this is the biggest science fair in the county.

Think about the other events in the park, such as the Twilight Concerts, Gardens, Artists' Village, Botanical Building, Playgrounds, Activity Center, the Timpkin, Free Museum Tuesdays, and open space areas enjoyed by the residents of San Diego.

Many people who enjoy these cannot afford to park there when you put this fee structure in place.

There's extremely limited public transportation to the park and no direct public transportation from Greater Golden Hill.

In volunteering for Golden Hill over the past couple of decades, the biggest ask I have heard from our community members is to have better access within and to Balboa Park for our community.

This policy today will only create further barriers and impact those who can least afford it.

Please reconsider this action and vote no on this item.

Please don't charge the community members of Golden Hill and District 3 to access our community park.

Yeah, I just wanted to say one thing because I have to.

When the city said that they did this in consultation with the Balboa Park Committee, at best that is overstated.

And I do want to reiterate that the Balboa Park Committee unanimously voted against this policy.

Thank you.

Nick Hill Plether Booker.

You have time seeded to you by Tiffany Goff.

Sorry, Tiffany, I missed your hand.

Thank you so much.

Two minutes, please proceed.

Good afternoon.

My name is Nick Hill Plattner Booker, and I'm a junior at San Diego High School.

Council members, the decision that you are about to make will have a significant influence on current and future San Diego High students.

We are a Title I school, and within the district, we serve the majority of homeless students in the city and have some of the lowest average income compared to other high schools.

If this bill is passed, it will mean that students would have to pay upwards of a thousand dollars a year, or more depending on their extracurricular activities.

Simply trying to get to school.

This would be a great failure by the city via posing a costly burden on already vulnerable students who are supposed to be one of the first priorities in the legislative process.

San Diego High students have no parking alternatives.

There is no space for students to use parking lots already on our school's campus.

We are in support of the council's decision to increase taxation in order to keep libraries and other important institutions open who play a vital role in the lives of students and other community members.

But we have to be careful to make sure that the means of generating revenue don't in turn hurt San Diego's least protected residents.

For then the point of gaining this new revenue is lost.

Students should not be forced to pick up the tab for years of debt accumulation.

This measure doesn't profit off of students, but rather the vulnerable in San Diego.

If passed, it would be an act of austerity on San Diego High students who already face difficult financial circumstances and go to school with a dire monetary situation.

This measure will have a significant negative impact on the lives of San Diego High students.

We, the already vulnerable, should not be forced to bear the brunt of this attempt to generate revenue.

We ask you to stand by us and your promises made to your constituents and the communities of San Diego.

Thank you.

Andres Alba Carlanos.

You have time seated to you by Tim.

Tim there you go.

Tim Douglas.

You'll have two minutes, please proceed.

Okay.

Good afternoon, Andras Alva Carden, that's the representative of ASULOCO 127 speaking in support of establishing the Balboa park paid parking user fees per the recommendations of staff.

Just as a reminder, for those council members who voted to pass the annual budget, you also voted to rely on revenue generated from these user fees.

These user fees considered prime destinations within Balboa Park, the opinions of stakeholders and the actions of city council.

These user fees introduce pricing tiers based on demand and proximity to said destinations within the park.

And these user fees incorporate suggestions from stakeholders in emphasizing maintaining projected budgeted revenue and promoting best management practices.

Moreover, these user fees make sense.

The city will install hourly parking meters along the streets within the park and will do so by matching the hourly rates of adjacent streets.

The city will also enforce daily hours targeting times of highest use or activity.

Last, the user fees considered the various users of the park from city employees to those with disabilities.

That is, parking will continue to be provided for free to park-based employees, nonprofit institutions, and registered volunteers.

It also allows residents to receive a 50% discounted parking rate and ADA designated parking spaces within parking lots will be exempt from time limits and parking fees.

For these reasons and more, AS Local 127 supports the Balboa Park paid parking user fees.

Thank you.

All right, I'm gonna give the group one first warning.

Let people speak.

I'm letting you clap and cheer the folks that you agree with.

Do not boo the people you don't agree with or you disagree with.

Thumbs down, it communicates very, very effectively.

Thank you.

Thank you.

If I can ask the following individual to please come up to the microphone and then the following individuals to please come up to the yellow reserve seats, Patty Riddle, Madison McNamarry, Ellie Cryer, Edward Stones, Andrea Zinko, and um Spencer Wyatt Spencer.

Patty Riddle, Madison McNamarry, Ellie Cryer, Edward Stones, Andrea Zinko, and Spencer.

Wyatt Spencer.

Patty, you have time, people seeding you time, if they can please raise their hand.

Joan Borman.

Thank you.

Julia Gregory.

Julia Gregory.

Oh.

Thank you.

She's right behind you.

Susan White.

You'll have three four minutes.

Please proceed.

I'm Dr.

Patty Riddle.

I am a member of the Balboa Park Committee and chair of the community recreation group for Balboa Park Morley Field.

One of the three goals of this parking fee program is to support long-term financial sustainability.

The city owns the zoo and safari park.

The city could get a steady yearly 40 million dollars from the zoological society, the nonprofit that manages both.

In 1934, the zoo society was in financial trouble, and city residents agreed to pay an extra property tax that goes to the zoo society.

So since 1934, city residents have been paying property tax and sales tax that support Balboa Park and the zoo, in addition to this property mill tax.

Tourists and other people outside the city pay none of this.

According to both the city charter and the lease with the zoo society, the mayor would be allowed to withhold the mill tax revenues if it's in the best interest of the city, and now it is.

The lease expires in 2034, but until then, the city can withhold this revenue and negotiate with the zoo society to give the city all Safari Park and Zoo parking revenue.

The nonprofit Zoo Society can afford this.

How is this possible for a nonprofit?

At our Balboa Park Committee's September 4th meeting, some 200 citizens attended.

We listened for over three hours to one-minute speeches by over 80 people representing at least 18 programs.

There was overwhelming opposition to this program.

After the committee heard this, we voted unanimously not to support the plan.

At MUNY Gym, the basketball players and at Balboa Park Activity Center, or BPAC, the Badbit the Badminton Kids and the table tennis senior citizens on fixed incomes come to play several times a week.

This keeps kids out of trouble.

It's a drug prevention program.

The plan says they can park at Inspiration Point for two hours free.

Then they have to pay at least $6.

Very few people stay for only two hours.

And we want them to stay longer and out of trouble.

They can't afford to pay $6 several times a week.

At your July 8th City Council members, several of you members suggested that city residents get free or discounted parking.

Council member Von Wilpert agreed that inspiration point should have four free hours.

And even your parking demand management study suggests inspiration point be free.

If you must charge parking fees against cities residents' wishes, at least make the inspiration point parking lot free for four hours and give city residents a break.

In 2024, uh if you want to charge kids and seniors think you can come to Balboa Park.

Thank you.

If you'd like to submit your comments, we can definitely pass them out.

Madison McNamara.

Good evening.

My name is Madison McNamara.

I'm a 16-year-old junior at San Diego High, and although I'm very frustrated about this topic, I'll remain calm and brief about the subject.

We're asking students to be allowed to continue parking at Inspiration Point on weekdays for free.

If this parking fees are approved, my family, which is a single mom and three children, will not be able to afford to park at school.

Adding nearly a thousand dollars a year for parking is an unnecessary burden for our youth who are already paying for activities outside of school.

Sports, music, tutoring, and other programs are a put a financial strain on families.

Without the ability to drive, many students would be forced to rely on the city bus.

This exposes us to potential violence and risk when we are simply just trying to get an education.

Speaking for myself, my peers, and my family, I ask you to reconsider this proposal.

I ask you to understand our position, to look up from your desks and see us.

Supporting students by keeping parking accessible.

Sorry.

Ellie Cryer.

Ellie Cryer.

After that will be Edward Stones and then Andrea Zinko.

Please proceed.

Hi, my name is Ellie Creer, and I'm a junior at San Diego High School.

In nine days, I will get my driver's license, but based on this proposal, I have nowhere to park.

Because our campus borders downtown.

We save students from a wide range of incomes, like the cities, races, and genders.

San Diego High's student body has long been predominantly low income.

Many rely on their parents, but for others like me, earning a license and having a place to park is what makes attending school possible.

Parking is not a luxury, it is a necessity.

If these opportunities are taken away, our ability to learn will be jeopardized.

Personally, I will rely on parking not only to get myself to school every day, but to also drive my younger sister.

And we rely on support and opportunities provided by our city and our government to access education and secure our futures.

Without parking, students like me will lose access to the idea of accessible education.

I speak today for myself, my family, and many others at San Diego High.

I urge you to please reconsider the proposed parking plan and to recognize the real struggles that will arise if a price is placed on our right to education.

Thank you.

Edward Stones, hello, my name is Edward Stones.

I'm a junior at San Diego High School.

Um San Diego High is a Title I school with a student population of many lower income or impoverished households.

The school scrapes by on funding that's too little for education already, and as such has not had the resource to build or buy its own parking lot, a privilege most schools in San Diego never even have to think about.

With the city's lackluster public transportation, driving school is the only practical option for most students, many of whom whose parents can't feasibly take them.

The sole savior of these many students has been inspiration point.

It's still a good five minutes from school and seven minutes from any class, but we make do.

Finding these many students a thousand dollars per year to go to a public school where they're legally required to be is absurd and absolutely unacceptable at a school uh where many students live in a state where a thousand dollars can be the difference between a week's food on the table or hunger or even a roof over their heads or homelessness.

The city of San Diego absolutely needs to do one or more of at least three things.

Either get all of its citizens far enough above the poverty line where a thousand dollars is a negligible amount, develop transportation public transportation to the point where all students can reliably get to school in 30 to 45 minutes, or at the bare minimum exempt SDHS students.

Thank you for that concluding from the complete or completely from the parking lot.

Your time has concluded.

Andrea Andrea Zenko, president San Diego's Belboa Park Puppet Guild.

We operate the Marie Hitchcock Theater.

You should be doing your survey right now and looking at the parking lots, not in July when there's big events, etc.

In September and January, you can sit there and throw a spitwat and not hit a car.

So this is important to all of us.

Also, Mr.

Ela Rivera, I would really, I'm one of your constituents, and I'd love to know how a 7.3 billion dollar organization equates to Balboa Park.

SeaWorld is not Balboa Park.

Balboa Park is open to all residents.

Historically speaking, this is an important aspect and an important item for everyone in San Diego, including puppeteers, including all the volunteers, including everybody in here, not just the institutions.

I keep hearing the institutions talking about their parking.

I'm concerned about the fact that we're also not going to have a cash issue.

Thank you for that concluding comment.

Wyatt Spencer.

Why, you have time ceded to you by Alexander Aeneas.

Thank you.

Kennedy Murphy.

Ivy Mirzma.

And uh Gray.

Thank you.

That's your last name.

Thank you.

You'll have five minutes, please proceed.

Good afternoon, council, staff, and community members.

My name is Wyatt Spencer, and I'm a senior at San Diego High School.

A couple of weeks ago, when I was starting to learn about this plan, I created a form open to San Diego High students, parents, and teachers to gather information.

In total, I received over 230 responses, of which the majority were students were students.

From this, I can confidently say that the proposed parking plan deprioritizes the people it tries so hard to defend.

While the plan attempts to raise funding to enable the city to properly execute its program in an equitable way, the plan does the exact opposite.

Instead of benefiting off tourists, it targets San Diego's most vulnerable populations.

When schooling, when school lunch initially became free to students, people were overjoyed.

They would save over $360 on an annual basis.

Implementing this plan would be a gross contradiction of our government's priorities.

The total annual cost for a student parking at inspiration point every day for an entire school year would be a whopping $1,080.

This raises the question.

Why should students and their families have to pay not have to pay for school lunch, but have to play pay three times more for something as necessary and simple as transportation.

Considering our students' bodies comp our student body's composition, this price for attending school is impossible.

Public education was created for three reasons being accessible, affordable, and guaranteed.

This plan tears down every one of these principles.

Students noted another implication.

By forcing students to find alternative plans of transportation, working families would have to cut time out of their schedules to drop off and pick up their students.

One one parent said, quote, I would have to continue to drive him daily, which interferes with my work.

Another student mentioned that, quote, I would not be able to get to school because I live far away and nobody's able to drive me or my brother.

To prioritize funding over even the ability to access education would be a betrayal to San Diegans like no other.

Similarly, the plan would increase parties and absences drastically.

One student mentioned, quote, I would miss a good part of my history and physics physics classes, likely every day.

Additionally, many students noted that involvement in extracurriculars, including clubs, sports, and school events outside of school hours would decrease out of the fear of cost and endangering their families.

Making young adults stop pursuing their passions because of their fear for hurting their family isn't a choice that we or they should have to make.

It is the city's responsibility to support and enrich their residents, not hide opportunities behind paywalls which practically nobody are able to get through.

As a city of San Diego Youth Commissioner, I can say that it is incredibly ironic to put so much effort into a plan titled The Child and Youth Strategic Plan while targeting our city's most vulnerable populations.

It saddens me as I read through my city's quote priority areas of focus as part of its guiding strategic plan.

As I read through the proposed parking plan, I see these areas of focus be thrown aside.

The plan does not comply to the city's pri the um, it does not create, quote, more affordable housing.

It makes it even more difficult and forces families to grapple with increasingly difficult financial burdens.

The plan does not, quote, protect and enrich every neighborhood.

It disincentivizes it.

The plan does not, quote, advance mobility and infrastructure, it makes it impossible.

The plan does not, quote, champion sustainability, it makes students have to compromise their education.

And lastly, the plan does not, quote, foster regional growth, it stunts it.

Our solution is simple.

Give an exemption or a waiving fee to San Diego High students during weekdays at inspiration point.

Using per using permits authorized by both San Diego High administration and the city of San Diego to complete verification, students would have the ability to parkate partake in one of their most basic rights, basic rights without the fear of endangering their family or their future.

Alongside some of my fellow students, I organized the San Diego High School walkout today.

We walked down from our campus and to City Hall alongside hundreds of my fellow students.

For too long, this has been a one-sided conversation, wherein students are not where students are either not typically present or left out entirely.

On behalf of my student body, parents, teachers, staff, and the greater community, I implore you to take time to listen to me and my fellow students and not disregard the people who this plan targets the most.

Please reiterate your commitment to placing people over profit and thank you for your consideration.

Alex Schuler, Alex Schuler, S C H U E L E R.

After that, Christopher R.

Julie Cuevas, Pantilla H, Elizabeth Givens, Diana Hyatt, or Deanna Hyatt, allegedly Audra, if you can all please come up to the yellow reserve seats.

Alex, you have time seated to you by Bernardino Bernardino, can you please, or Bernardino, can you please raise your hand?

I don't see anyone raising their hand.

Has he left?

Bernardino?

Then we'll have to go with one minute, please proceed.

Good afternoon, Council members.

My name is Alex Schuler.

I'm a student at San Diego High School and a dancer with the San Diego Civic Dance Association.

I'm typically in the park for seven days a week or multiple hours a day.

This proposed parking plan directly impacts myself as well as over 2800 dancers in the program and over 1,600 students at San Diego High.

For many families, the added financial burden would make consistent school attendance or participate participation in dance impossible.

As a Title I school and a dance program with fee waiver opportunities, both communities exist to support these struggling financially.

This plan undoes that support, stripping opportunity from students and directly harming the most vulnerable youth of the city for profit.

This plan has not received enough time, thought, or research, and is not ready to be enacted.

The plan is in dire need of reflection and revision to account for all groups.

Thank you.

Christopher R.

Christopher, you have time seated to you by Cynthia Brown.

Thank you.

And then Michael Brackney.

Thank you.

You'll have three minutes, please proceed.

Thank you.

My name's Chris Tapor.

I've been a volunteer in Balboa Park since 1974.

I host of uh performer, producer, director for hundreds of programs, performances, workshops, and events in Balboa Park.

Sam Woodhouse, artistic director of the San Diego Repertory Theater, dubbed me the Joe Papp of San Diego.

Over the years I've served as a midwife and facilitator to many citizen actors, performers, and poets who have gone on to become performance professionals, published authors, and true lovers of the art.

Currently, though, my through the work of the H1 services in the San Diego Park and Rec.

We offer over 18 different free workshops in the program or programs in the Balboa Park area.

This is just a fraction of what's available every week across the entire park.

Without our programs, many of these members feel forced to declare we don't have a life.

They have cars, they have cars, but can barely afford gas and insurance, much less meter money.

My participants have informed me that if they have to pay parking, they will no longer be able to participate.

It is felt that this is not a substantial remedy for the city's financial problems, but more a quick fix.

Even the MPS rates are rumored to be increased.

There are just too many adjustments needed to make this transition successful.

Don't change, don't charge.

Or don't change the parking in Balboa Park.

Even in its random state, the people know how to work it.

Changing it will not make it better.

It's a question of stewardship.

What is best for all?

Let us all remain part of the park that we love so much as a cornerstone in our culture.

So no change, no charge.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Julie Cuevas.

Good afternoon, Council members.

I'm Julie Cuevas, a dancer with the San Diego Civic Dance Arts, who commutes multiple times a week from Carlsbad for the inclusive and incredible arts programs in Balboa Park.

I'm here to oppose the Barter Plan for paid parking in the park.

Charging six to twelve dollars will price out the very communities who keep the park vibrant, especially the children, the senior citizens, and all the volunteers who spend hours here weekly, if not daily.

And for programs like SDCDA with nearly 3,000 students and 20,000 volunteer hours annually, it's devastating.

There are no nearby tram stops or safety measures currently proposed for late-night rehearsals or shows.

And asking kids, seniors, and volunteers to walk nearly a mile in the dark from the theater to Inspiration Point is not just inconvenient, it's unsafe.

This plan does not enhance the visitor experience.

It discourages it.

Balboa Park, San Diego's cultural heart, because thank you for that.

Please keep it that way.

Panthea.

Good afternoon.

Balboa Park is San Diego's cultural heart and a sanctuary that many people from every walk of life have enjoyed for years.

I personally drive from Encinitas every week for dance classes because of the affordability, and we have we don't have the same prices up there.

And with um paid parking, there's no more affordability, and the city will lose their revenue, class revenues.

Charging for parking will especially harm working families, seniors and fixed incomes and community groups who already struggle with transportation costs.

If there will be paid parking, City of San Diego class participants and volunteers should be exempted, and providing a free parking permit can be a solution.

I respectfully urge you keep parking free for residents of San Diego City and County.

Thank you.

Thank you, Elizabeth Givens.

Yes, uh Elizabeth Givens, um Bellboa Park is at a crossroad.

If parking fees are imposed, the ripple effects could be devastating.

Possible outcomes, local and tourist visitor numbers will decline, and museum and restaurant revenues will decrease.

Museum, um they will need to cut staff, shorten hours, and even raise entry fees.

Volunteerism will plummet.

Spanish artist, Spanish village artist, Oregon pavilion concerts, and international cottages will see fewer visitors.

Worse, our park will become off-limits to low-income families, depriving them of the enrichment museums offer.

Like the cuts to libraries, parks, and rec centers, the parking fee will especially harm children and seniors.

Our treasured park will become a tragic testament to the failings of city leaders to prioritize cultural and open space resources for the entire population.

Not just those with means.

Diana Hyatt.

Good afternoon, City Council.

My name is Diana Hyatt.

I'm the president of the San Diego Model Railroad Museum.

The real elephant in the room is paid parking to our sustainability.

We all remain opposed to paid parking in the park.

We've heard from we've heard from many people in public comments that they're opposed.

One person is apparently a four.

There's unacknowledged collateral damage that will come from this.

So far, I've seen zero concessions by the mayor's office or city council.

We need at least five concessions.

Five dollars for residents, free parking for remote lots like Inspiration Point to accommodate San Diego High School, Navy Hospital, and San Diego City College students.

Paid parking ends at five o'clock, not eight.

We all close at four or five o'clock.

Annual and semi-annual permit systems should be put into place.

And I agree with one other comment or sunset clause, two to five-year max.

Please get your financial house in order.

Thank you.

Allegedly, Audra.

And then Evelyn, near seeding her time.

Thank you.

You'll have two minutes.

Talk about disenfranchising people.

It's funny you guys talk about being in a democracy, and then look what's gonna happen.

You're gonna have the majority tell you what they want, and you're not gonna listen because you guys don't listen to the people.

This has nothing to do with what people think either.

I mean, they don't want you guys in your cars.

You gotta understand that they want you to walk and bike everywhere, and the way to do that is to de-incentivize people.

That's why they're bringing down a vehicle miles travel tax as well, right?

Increasing the gas, and they want us to take public transit, but they don't even provide it in a way that is going to make it so that people can use it.

So it's really sad to see what you're actually doing.

This is along the lines of elder abuse.

Um, and I would just say domestic terrorism because you guys are homegrown extremists that are coming after the people, wanting us to make up for your own negligence.

And the money that you're gonna get from this isn't gonna go where you're saying.

That's the sad thing is that you want to say that this is you know going to be a parking solution.

We don't need you guys to solve problems that don't exist.

You create the problems that then you want to have a solution to.

But there's not a problem with the way that it was working.

But when you take away parking spots, when you make people pay for things, this is how you guide people into a new way of living.

Because you guys work for globalists, you don't work for the people, and it's disturbing.

The way that you talk, the way that you pretend to care about the people when you know everybody that's gonna have to pay for it, doesn't want it.

You're going to make it so that people don't go to the park, but you don't care because you know what?

The money that you're gonna need from that, you're gonna come after the people anyway.

And put people on the streets.

It's like it doesn't matter, right?

Because Steven, you guys got Tent City right there.

Should everybody just pack their bags and go start going to the gates and say, can we be welcome here?

Because we can't afford to do anything else in the city.

How about you fix the city and make it look good before you guys come after the people for money?

It looks like crap, and it's a reflection of every single one of you.

Kathleen Kehan.

Kathleen, you'll be coming up if I can have the following individuals.

Please come up to the yellow reserve seats.

Paul Rumberger, Joel Butler, Clifford Wheeler, Nicole Hayes, and Chad Heatherly.

Hi, my name is Kathy Keen.

Um, I'm a resident of Hillcrest, and uh Balboa Park is my backyard.

Um I'll be impacted when the parking fees go into effect.

Those I'm just outside the region, so those who will be avoiding the parking fees will be parking on my street.

Um despite that, I'm very much in favor of the idea of paid parking for Balboa Park.

I can read the room.

I get it.

Um, but we should be encouraging other ways to get to the park besides the car.

Those who think free parking is free are mistaken.

They need to read the high price of free parking by Donald Schuop.

Please do that.

I think it's important.

Um I want you to be strong.

The I believe the city and these seniors and these kids and the institutions can and will find creative solutions to make this work.

We've heard some good ideas.

Hey, I was nice to you guys this whole time.

Respect.

Um we could set appropriate parking rates, and it can be done.

Please do that.

Thank you for your concluding remarks.

Paul Rumberger.

Good afternoon.

My name is Paul Rumberger.

I live up in uh North County in the 5th district.

And I'm here uh as a member of the Redwood Bridge Club.

I'm here to support them and their efforts.

As it relates to this paid parking problem, uh, this is gonna destroy, if not close uh the bridge club.

And I've submitted an impact statement.

Most of the impact you've heard already today, but I've submitted an impact statement for you to uh consider.

Uh there is one proposal on the table by the Redwood Bridge Club that uh generates money for the city and allows the local residents to continue their activities.

But what I'm not hearing in all this, and I've been listening to it since July, is if not, if this what we're proposing isn't gonna work, why not?

So it would really be helpful to hear from uh the council members on why this proposal won't work.

And the last thing I have for you is 120 commenters, only two are in favor.

So this is a good one.

And we're saying no.

Thank you.

Joel Butler.

Hi there, my name's Joel Butler.

Um, I'm a lifetime citizen of San Diego.

Uh I'm a father.

My daughter uh dances at SDCDA uh between five and seven days a week.

Uh so this is gonna affect us.

Um this is a real loser.

This this program is a loser.

This is going to be political poison for all of you.

This is only the people could show up on a Monday at two.

There are a lot of people who are pissed about this.

I have not heard one person except for these two guys and that lady over there who said anything good about this plan for 10 million dollars.

Okay, so I've come up with another plan that you can look at and go back to the drawing board, and it says something like you can get a year past for a reasonable price, and you can buy that at the kiosk, and that way anybody can go to any of the lots and use them.

It doesn't have to be a premium or look, you know, a lower price lot, you can use it for a reasonable price, and the people who didn't think ahead and buy a pass who don't live here will have to pay extra.

Thank you for that concluding remark.

Clifford Wheeler.

Clifford Weiler, almost good evening.

Um, I've been here before, you know I take a different path.

This is a different path, a different issue.

It has to do with disability placards.

An item and you're in your agenda, item uh 201, you have a proposed resolution 2026 97 and the recitals in section E8, it says parking spaces located outside park roads to be exempt from both time limits and parking fees with valid uh ADA placards, except that is not carried into your action items.

So you're you're you might say it in the recitals, but you're not doing anything about it.

And also, I would encourage you to add parking lots.

The union representatives mentioned that there's disability slots.

There's never enough.

And by the way, even though nobody's mentioned this, unfortunately, a lot of people in this room might wind up with disability placards and cannot walk the distances that would be required for other lots.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Nicole Hayes.

After Nicole Hayes will be Chad Heatherly, Ramsey's Lara, Rose Porter, Amanda, and Cesar Javier.

If you can all please come up to the yellow reserve seats.

Nicole, you have one minute, please proceed.

Good afternoon, Council members.

My name is Nicole Hayes.

I live in North Park, and my family uses Balboa Park and Morley Field every day.

My son plays soccer and baseball at Morley Field, and my daughter dances for SDCDA.

That was my husband that you just saw.

She uses the classrooms at Casa del Prado and the Casa del Prado Theater, as well as War Memorial.

In fact, my daughter was one of the dancers that performed for you guys at the inauguration just back in December as a member of the SDCDA company.

These are the faces, all the people here, those dancers.

This is who is being affected by this plan.

And this plan is not well thought out.

It doesn't even pay for itself, as we saw in the presentation.

Please, I urge you guys to vote no on this.

There should be no parking, paid parking, period.

It prevents the thousand, as the plan we saw, it prevents the thousands and thousands of workers and volunteers and the thousands and thousands of people enrolled in the programs at the park from count continuing to park for the where they need to go.

There are several programs and we need I'm sorry, your time has concluded.

I do have to be fair with everybody.

If you have any written comments, you can send them to us and we can print them out.

Chad Heatherly.

Chad, you have several people that have seated your time, they must raise their hand and be present.

Connie Chapman, thank you.

Teresa Allener, Carol Stanley, Kimberly, Mary Hoop, Joanne Boyd, Helen Bragg, William Davenport.

Thank you for the explanation.

Beth Davenport.

Leave with her.

I believe.

G J E.

Jerry.

No.

Jerry Thompson.

Thank you.

Lorraine Pickles.

Edward Heyler.

And Sam Ames.

So it was originally 14, takeaway two is 12.

I am proud that I can do math right now.

Please continue.

Good afternoon, Council members.

My name is Chad Heatherly, and I represent the San Diego Square Dance Association.

You are about to make a momentous decision.

One that will have a lasting and potentially irreversible impact on many lives across our city.

Once the city invests in meters, enforcement, trams, and supporting infrastructure to convert Balboa Park's parking lots and streets into a revenue stream, it will be difficult politically and financially to undo that decision.

That's why it is so important to get this right the first time.

Let me be clear.

Imposing new parking fees at Balboa Park may look fiscally responsible on paper, but it would in practice be socially regressive, culturally damaging, and politically short sight.

Let's talk about the impact on community organizations like the square dance clubs that call Balboa Park home.

COVID-19 hit our community like a tsunami.

Membership plummeted from more than 400 to 225.

We're just now beginning to recover.

Six square dance clubs use Balboa Park for regular weekly dances and big weekend dances.

Those big weekend dances draw dancers from all over the country, and those dancers pay hotel taxes.

If parking fees are imposed, some of these clubs may not survive.

This would be devastating not only to us, but to the cultural and community fabric of the park.

Dancing isn't just recreation.

It's social, it's active, it's joy, and it builds community.

These are exactly the types of activities we should be encouraging, especially for seniors.

Instead, this policy would punish them.

It is a civic treasure, a gift, as John and Adolph Spreckles declared in 1914, to the people of San Diego and the people of the world.

The Spreckles brothers donated what would now be over three million in today's dollars to create the organ pavilion.

Do you think they would support turning this gift into a gated community acceptable to only those who can afford to pay?

Affordable public access to this park is a cornerstone of its mission.

Just as we need affordable housing, we also need affordable recreation, and Balab Park, Balboa Park is one of the last places where all San Diegans of all incomes and backgrounds can enjoy beauty, culture, and community at no cost.

But let's also consider how we got here.

Second only to the police department, yet the pension fund remains only 74% funded.

Proposition B, which was approved by 66% of San Diego voters in 2012 as a step toward pension reform was later invalid due to a procedural error, not because of a shift in public opinion.

And just last year, Measure E, a proposed sales tax increase failed by only 3,500 votes.

Most of these issues are now water under the bridge.

You can now no longer change them, no matter how great egregious the decision may have been, but there is one critical issue the council can still address the long-term sustainable of the city's pension system.

City leaders must engage in constructive dialogue with public employee unions and begin the difficult but necessary work of restructuring the pension plan.

This work is essential to securing the city's long-term fiscal health.

Please don't do what your predecessors have done.

Don't leave this issue to future city council.

The longer we have to act, the more Daconian, Draconian the ventral pension reductions will have to be.

Frankly, I believe that if proposition B were still in place, the city wouldn't be in a position where they are proposing to charge citizens to park at Balboa Park.

You cannot regain public trust by burdening seniors, low-income families, and working people with parking fees.

Alienating voters, many of whom are engaged, informed, and active members of our community is not the way to build support for future ballot managers or re-election campaigns.

This proposal is more than a parking issue.

It is the canary in the coal mine, a sign that we need a serious long-term approach to for now to financial planning.

Please act now while we still have time to do this right.

But the right choice, the courageous choice, is to prioritize the needs of the people who depend on this park the most.

Once again, this won't even pay for half of that.

Originally they said 15 million, but now it's down to 10.

Most likely it's going to be down to eight.

For once again, 30 million dollars we gave to SDPD.

So once again, how does SDPD help the financial and physical conditions of these people more than Balboa Park?

If you can tell me, that'd be great, but I don't think you have an answer.

And on top of that, the fact that it's gotten this far, and as our and San Diego High School isn't even considered.

There's students that are facing thousands of dollars in parking fees, and they're not even considered, and we're already to this point.

We have the we have the infrastructure purchase, we have the machines purchased, and you guys didn't even consider them.

These are children.

I graduated.

It's not my problem.

But the fact that it's going to be their problem and the kids after them's problems, what the hell, Matt?

Like, that's all I have to say.

What the hell?

Frost Porter.

Look down this lonesome road before you travel on.

You're putting your careers at risk by infuriating the community one more time.

Uh, and and you're not going to get 10 million out of it.

The the research that went into this thing was two days.

Uh two days in July, as Andrea Zinko pointed out.

Peter Komiskey has made this clear.

You're not going to get 10 million.

And the students at risk, nobody thought about students, nobody thought about the Navy.

I guess you've thought about some volunteers, but the park is insulted too much by this.

And lot O, you got lotto from the park.

And I just I just don't think this is going to work for you guys if you pass it.

There are other good solutions suggested.

The Redwood Bridge Club had one.

Uh the idea of maybe dipping into the sacred flow of money to the zoo, that's another idea.

Think, think again.

And I want to say I've never been more proud of San Diego High School or to be a caver than today.

Amanda?

Amanda, please counsel.

After that will be Cesar Javier as our last speaker here in Council Chambers.

Please proceed.

Hi there.

Thank you so much for hearing me today.

Councilmember Whitburn, I wonder if you think it's fair that this district of nine is asking your district to raise this money.

Because a majority of it will come from your constituents in District 3 as well as the surrounding ones.

I think that's grossly unfair.

I wonder if you guys would be as eager to jump on this.

If your community centers and your community parks, where can your constituents find place reasons to meet up with their community to get out of their house to access green space for mental and physical health?

I wonder if you think that would be just.

I wonder if your constituents would be here today to tell you how grossly inappropriate that is.

That is it.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Please vote no.

Caesar Javier.

You have time seated to you by Purita Javier.

You'll have two minutes.

Even my participation, you try to dictate my body language is talking.

Did you hear it?

We are solid.

Because this is all destruction.

Balboa park issue, parking fee.

Yes or no?

It's a divine intervention.

A huge screen for two us to see what's going on.

Bud and ugly.

When they took up this is all for you, San Diego.

Thank you.

Where is the mayor here?

A failure in leadership.

And Dr.

Campbell is just smiling.

Could not even solve the primary survival kit, we call clean air.

Look at the front corners, buck, east west.

Urin smelling.

Dr.

Campbell.

And where is Concillo Rivera?

Our District 9, who is supposed to use the money of large chunk of money for three parks.

Where is the money, Mr.

Rivera?

This is another Balboa Park corruption.

It is through Chair.

La Caba.

He approved, including you, of course.

The eleven queens and kings.

The only way for them to get our trust is for them to be in prison.

Or authoritarian government musketry in public.

Your time has concluded.

That does conclude public comment here in Council Chambers.

I will just note for the record that Calvin Roberts did submit a speaker slip in a favor, but did not wish to speak.

We also received 199 comments via the web comment form, 197 opposed to in favor.

Those were distributed to the council.

I've started the five-minute timer hearing council chambers going to those participating remotely.

We currently have 21 speakers in the queue.

It is one minute apiece.

Eleanor, if you can please unmute.

Balboa Park was gifted to the people, and it should remain just that gift.

Now you want to steal even more.

This park was not bought by anyone, so why should the people pay to use it?

That gift came with a promise of enjoyment for all people.

But now you want to remove this gift from those who cannot afford it.

This changes the gift of belonging for all into a place of exclusion.

You claim to care about mental health, yet this is a place where people can connect with nature to heal, but only for those who can afford it.

This plan is working exactly as you desired.

Destroy the community.

This council needs to be in jail for committing treason against the people.

Your time has concluded, Jeremy Holley.

If you can please unmute.

Yes.

I'm here.

Please proceed with your comments.

You shouldn't have to pick and choose who gets free and who doesn't get free parking.

You must vote no.

The fact that the treasure accountant said that you guys already have the machines purchased and are ready for installation is extremely conservative and shows that you're not capable of the consideration of us constituents.

Paywalling Balboa Park will block so many people.

Low income and marginalized communities are those most disproportionately impacted when they are restricted access to culture, arts, and nature.

For youth without free access to the culture and arts studies have shown they have lower graduation rates and college attendance rates.

Decrease college cognitive development, less civic engagement, and pass these problems on for generations.

Find another way to get the money.

The zoom ill tourism, but not from the marginalized communities that so many of you council members use as photo props for your social media post.

I'm so proud of everyone speaking there.

Thank you for standing strong.

Vote no.

Thank you.

Next is Northern, if you can please unmute.

Introducing paid parking would create an insurmountable barrier for working families and seniors on fixed incomes who already face rising costs across our city.

Free parking preserves the park's role as a welcoming public space, ensures continued support for our museums and cultural institutions, and upholds our responsibility to keep this historic treasure accessible to all.

It is imperative to keep free parking in Valboa Park.

Count up the number of individuals who have spoken in person and virtually today, and it is hundreds to two.

Your time has concluded.

8813, if you can please unmute.

Okay, go and follow here.

And uh yeah, uh amen to the previous speakers, all of them in uh opposition.

And I love the fact that the room is filled with those who are going to be directly affected, but I want to let you guys know that there are plenty.

Well, actually, no, a handful of others that are paying attention to like Sandag, the county, this city council, and they are all in lockstep with something called the United Nations agenda for the 21st century.

I encourage you, I urge you to please look into this.

It's not a conspiracy theory.

This is what so, like a previous uh speaker mentioned, Audra, they're trying to get you out of your cars, they're trying to penalize you, but people aren't paying attention, and they take advantage of that.

And that's the thing, you know.

Somebody mentioned the budgetary problem.

Um, the budgetary problem is due to uh it's due to the corruption and greed, buddy, and that's what's so.

The city of San Diego has the most obedient, trusting, and complying residents, and for that, this council continues to take advantage and take away so much.

They're trying to do it.

Thank you, Zoom user.

If you can please unmute.

The five-minute timer also concluded.

There are 18 speakers with their hand up.

No additional speakers will be taken after that.

Zoom user, please proceed.

You guys had a brown act violation.

You didn't do not agenda public comment at the beginning of this meeting.

But the thing is, where is Councilman Rivera?

Is he in the back there?

Jacking off with some guacamole on one of his interns that he hired.

Gave her a raise, and now you can like security guys to go back there and check.

Where is the councilman?

Man, we gotta deplore his buddies too, man.

We're calling I Son Rears buddies to lower the parking fees.

That'd be a great thing to do, man.

He's got to have some uncles, some aunts, some neighbors that need to go back to Mexico or some other countries.

So it's gonna get wild, man.

You guys can go vote.

No, or the party's over or the party's on.

You gotta rise up.

You gotta rise up.

Thank you.

Next user is Paul.

If you can please unmute.

Okay, pump pump pump, the people for money.

What comes out of the pipeline?

Money to keep the zoo and museum people happy.

Money to keep the city happy.

Money for exparking meter enforcement if you're lucky.

Ms.

Riddle today told you where the zoo money goes.

And of course, you exempt the bigwigs from paying.

Of course, you'll want more like spoiled kids.

You just want to get more money and don't care who it will harm.

But especially if that's all hurt, you big time, heard the park, and her deso.

You can expect a lot of people to shy away from exorbitant parking fees, spend less on amusements, craft mementos, and museums.

Looks like a few admin staffers and all in town and out-of-town visitors alike will be charged more just for parking.

You can expect less of them, and this will won't get you away from the case.

Your time has concluded.

Bruce Coons, if you can please unmute.

Um thank you, uh Bruce Coons.

Thank you, Bruce Coons, executive director of Saber Heritage Organization.

We operate the Marston House in the northwest corner of Alabama Park.

Most of our visitors park on Seventh Avenue, Balboa Drive, and Sixth Avenue.

Uh the elimination of the free parking in that area will be a great detriment to the neighborhood that we're in for the neighborhood parking.

There's only a few spaces there, but also to the operation of the museum.

We um invest over uh a hundred thousand dollars a year subsidizing the operation at the museum.

Uh, and we just completed a million-dollar restoration.

I don't know any institution that can afford to lose any visitors at all.

It's particularly hard in the northwest corner of the park.

Um it uh it's just unconscionable, I think, also to uh remove the last best free escape valve for the citizens of San Diego.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Next is Javier, if you can please unmute.

Yes, um, and good afternoon.

Um, so I'm Javier.

I'm uh vice president of the of this of the parent board of San Diego Civic Dance Arts, and I'm uh I want you all to know um that the plan that is being proposed today in front of you is tone deaf, is not up to par and does not reflect the current situation at Boba Park.

Um, the tram service enhancements.

What are the solutions there?

Right?

Resident Discome until 2026, not sufficient.

Um STCDA um is uh has over close to 3,000 students and 74 staff that that take classes and perform at cost at Prado Theater.

You are putting all that in jeopardy if you vote yes on this measure.

We've we attract thousands of people to our performances, and we're gonna discourage visit to them.

So I I plead with you to vote no because that's your duty today.

Thank you.

Thank you for your concluding comments, Sandy.

If you can please unmute.

Hi, my name is Sandy Wright, and I'm one of the leaders of the Rose Garden Corps.

Um, there's 65 volunteers that work weekly in the Rose Garden, and we appreciate we'll be able to park for free, but we really need to park nearby the Rose Garden, like behind the net or the space center or parking on Park Boulevard.

You carry in a five-gallon bucket with our tools and our blowers.

Um, many of the people are retirees who are older and cannot carry the stuff long distances or jumping in up and down off of a tram or something.

Um paying for parking will cost us many volunteers who have already said they will not pay to park to um volunteer for three or four hours a couple times a week.

So we could like you just consider some kind of a placard we could hang up or something where we could park anywhere and then have our tools with us and carry them over to the park.

Thank you very much, and um appreciate you considering getting us close to the park to the rose garden.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next is Tom, if you can please unmute.

Hi, I'm a lifelong uh resident of San Diego, and I urge you all uh to photo on this.

Bubble parks if you've heard of San Diego's Crown Jewel.

It's also a historic legacy park, and it was gifted as free land to the city of San Diego communities.

The city has other options to close the budget gap, but it's not been fully explored.

We can implement a voter approved cash collection fee, take part of that tax to pay for the problem for the maintenance, adjust the hotel tax and visitor taxes.

Revisit a modern sales tax increase.

Currently, San Diego is 7.75.

The state averages 8%.

Use that quarter percentage point to pay for San Diego.

Um explore public and private partnerships, something that's been brought up before by the owners of Qualcomm and other organizations that they would fund part of the renovation of Bob Well Park.

That's not going to explore as part of this alternatives.

Um look to Sandag.

Looks the state and community governments for grants and loans, et cetera, that can be done.

Vote no on this.

Save yourself the remote effort, save your political careers, vote no on parking about on paid parking.

Next is Kathleen Lippett, if you can please unmute.

Thank you.

Cultural cultures that dismiss past accumulation of wisdom that codified policies and decisions that supported public health, quality of life, and high community standards, do so at their political political peril.

The city should be prohibited from monetizing public access, preserved for public parks, recreational facilities, and low cost community opportunities for low-income senior populations and community volunteers.

No one sitting on this dies should have the privilege of moving on to any other public office given the disregard for the public voice, the whim of short-term idiotic decisions adopted without regard for unintended collateral damage to shore up a city deficit created by fiscally irresponsibility and then transfer it to the back of taxpayers should follow you the rest of your public lives.

Imagine if instead of dedicating our park system from was your time concluded.

Blair Beakerman is next.

I will also note that as I had noted earlier, the five minute timer had concluded.

So if you're raising your hand, we will not be taking any more speakers, but you can email any comments into cityclerk at San Diego.gov.

Thank you, Blair Beekman.

Please proceed.

Hi, thank you.

Blair Beekman.

Uh please keep rates down to the identifiable good feeling levels of city government services, for instance, two to five dollars.

Please be with city council.

You can put off finalizing this matter if it is needed to.

And please continue to consider parking at inspiration point as a minimum of three to four hours.

I hope councilpersons and city government staff can really know how to take to heart the months of public comment time on these matters.

And as council person Ella Livera has eloquently spoken about in committee recently, current data collection practices and new downtown parking meters simply has to be better questioned.

I hope the plethora of surveillance and data collection technology with new Bellboard parking meters would simply be more openly addressed and as a fact of life.

The city of San Diego simply has an awesome progressive history that we should begin to better be better acknowledging.

It can help invite a continued feeling of welcome and better understandings of San Diego's past and future for city, county, and out-of-town residents.

And with a new more tiered system of parking taxes, permits and fees that are developing at this time.

Thanks for your time.

If you can please unmute.

Thank you.

Balancing the budget versus balancing the needs of the people.

Which one was approved and adopted for FY26?

It's a big question, isn't it?

I want all of the voices of all of the people who spoke here earlier and today to give yourself a big thank you, as I do.

This is called freedom.

The freedom of your voice, the freedom of your visibility, the freedom of your values.

I'm not looking for a yes or no on this.

I'm looking for awareness, adaptation, acceptance, and action and action.

This is called resilience.

We all have it.

Please activate it.

That's what's going to work.

I love all of you so much.

This is freedom.

Thank you.

I love you.

Thank you.

Phone number and again 534.

If you can please unmute 534.

5344.

I can't unmute.

There you go.

I'm just calling on behalf of what everybody else has been saying and how this is just complete fucking bullshit.

And just there's so many people who have been going to Bubble Wall Park for years.

And who have not they can't even afford gas.

You know, you can't afford like shit in fucking San Diego.

Nobody can afford anything in San Diego.

And there's lots of kids who have to go to school, who have to pay for parking.

And it's not gonna affect, it's literally not gonna affect anybody for the better.

So yeah.

That concludes your comments.

Okay.

Guthrie Leonard, if you can please unmute.

Hi there.

Um I am a low-income resident of San Diego.

I cannot afford to own a car.

And so when I look at the zero sum game that is uh budgets, it's it's kind of insulting to me that we can talk about um low-income residents needing to access the park when I, you know, I would love to have more services.

I'd love to have more funding for the public transit.

That's the only way for me to get to the park, but it's a zero sum game.

And so I can see the writing on the wall.

I don't believe this is gonna pass today, but I'd like you guys to think about um the entirety of the people of San Diego, and that includes a healthy amount of people who actually can't even afford a car.

So I I would appreciate that.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Uh Leif Genser, if you can please unmute.

Hello there, my name is uh Leif Gensert.

Um, I'm a little bit surprised here that Bubwell Park is always tolerant as the crown jewel of San Diego, but with that much parking, we can do so much better.

So the the right question to ask is why is there so much parking in the first place?

And I would love to point out that the public transport access to the park could be a lot better.

We could have higher frequency by now we could have built rail, but now we're stuck in this arguing for free parking as if that's the only way to access the park.

So I would uh advise that we need to talk about making public transport access better.

And I would love if all the people who argue in favor of equity would do the same at MTS meetings, arguing for more frequency routes, more routes, later service, more safety on public transport.

Um, yeah, so we can't we can sustain everybody driving everywhere, so I would appreciate if there was some consideration for better public transport services.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next is Sad.

If you can please unmute Hello, Council members.

My name is Saad, I'm a resident of district three.

Uh the city has already planned to use 11 million dollars from parking fees to pay for basic services.

If you make the parking free or cheaper, that money has to come from somewhere else, like closing libraries early or cutting out for school programs or defunding police stations.

Here's the hard truth.

The family we want to help most will lose more from those service cuts than they would from a pick paying to park a few times a year.

Right now, parking looks free, but everyone's taxes already pay for it.

That means people who can't even afford cars are helping pay for parking spots used by people who can afford cars.

When you price parking, the most popular spots stop sitting empty while people stop uh while people circle looking for spaces.

So this will allow for spots to turn over so more families can actually visit the park.

We need honest choices.

Cutting services hurts working families more than parking fees do.

Thank you and argue to support this proposal.

Thank you.

Next is a San Diego Civic Youth Ballet.

If you can please unmute.

Yes, hello, thanks so much for hearing me.

My name is Danica.

I'm the artistic director at the San Diego Civic Youth Valley.

I would just like to quickly mention that we oppose this proposal.

Um our key concerns um are for our staff that we um we are there late at night, and our staff is primarily female.

So we I would ask that we are allowed to park in any of the level parking spots for free for employees.

And I would also urge you to implement the residence free or the residence discount as quickly as possible because we do have over 400 students coming.

Some of them come six days a week, and it's a huge cost up um, you know, impacting students who drive themselves.

And um, yeah, that's it.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Next is phone number ending in 7499.

After that, we have Adam and then speaker 1384 will be our last speaker.

Please proceed Bob Kazuski here.

Only two got it right so far.

This is a clear example that elections have consequences.

Everyone can see that every single city council seat and the mayor's office is occupied by those on the left.

Remember that the left has a stated agenda to eliminate private vehicles and force all of us into their dangerous mass transit system.

They also have a war on cash.

Those who are, those are the hidden agendas behind the ongoing squeeze to both eliminate and charge for parking throughout this city.

Also, as Joe Lacava and Todd Gloria clearly know, the city is already giving away a documented gross income of over 1.4 million dollars every year due to their gross mismanagement of the Tory Pines gliderport park.

Rather than that 1.4 million dollars going to the city every year, their lease of our property gives that money to a private business.

Now they want you to make up for it.

Wake up and throw them all out of office.

Thank you.

Next is Adam, if you can please unmute.

Hi, my name is Adam Shuttleworth.

I am with the San Diego Model Rail Road Museum.

And I am against this plan because I come to this museum at least three times a week, if not more.

My family has worked at this park for at least 20 years, if not longer.

I have been coming to this park for 30 years since I was a baby in a stroller.

Parking should have been free for life, for the life of the city.

It should not be paid for parking.

I carry a 30-pound bag every weekend to run trains full of wonderful trains that the audience loves.

If this bill passes, we will lose so many museums.

I do not want to see this happen.

If it does, City of San Diego will heavily suffer.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our final speaker is 1384.

Our final speaker is 1384.

Please unmute.

Hello, Ernie Captain, La Jolla resident.

Turning our speed on into a privilege for a light is completely illegal under any terms.

Tell me, does my story high to access past labor includes Mission Bay, Balboa Park?

$10 a day, $400 annually.

This blood by a threat of violence or else.

This is public source in the city leaseholder.

Coming out of Joe LaCava's office.

City leaseholders using the colour of authority to rob the public, pocketing the money into private accounts.

This terrible injustice has been going on for years and needs to end.

The proposed San Diego Recreational does just that.

It ends the dispute once and for all by separating the business from normal public access.

San Diego Recreational stops the crime, restoring public access to a free park.

The waiver allows all parties to remain and operate as a club, making just as much money, if not more, by welcoming tourists to visit the rest of San Diego.

It's a win for city.

Thank you, Council President.

All right, thank you, City Clerk.

And before we go any further, please give a nice warm round of applause for our city clerk and the managing.

All right, I'm gonna kick things off in this conversation.

Let's see where we go.

So I want to thank you, John, Conrad, Parks and Rec staff, Ahmad, transportation staff, treasurer office, special events staff, the IBA, uh, Emily and the mayor's office for all the work you've done starting, I believe, like actually last January in this conversation.

I want to thank to the public that spoke today for those of you that are actually still sticking around.

Um three and a half so far, hours so far.

Those that have been active in the process, uh, and I want to thank the proud cavers that uh marched and spoke today.

As you've heard the FY26 budget for difficult choices in our June deliberations, and this council chose to preserve hours at libraries, rec centers, and public restrooms at our parks and beaches.

And to make that possible, we looked at all areas where we generate where we could generate revenue while keeping San Diego accessible to San Diegans.

This conversation started as early as last spring, uh, and then in June, this council agreed with the mayor to include revenue from paid parking at Balboa Park and again in July.

So now we're here to set the policy to make this possible, possibly to set the policy.

We'll see.

We have a severely under-resourced budget for the size of the city that we are, and that makes it difficult to maintain the core services that residents expect of us, including public safety.

We know that this will be an uncomfortable change, no doubt, from the testimony we heard today.

But I think there was also a little bit of recognition that Balboa Park has been chronically under-resourced with no dedicated source of funding for the majority of the park.

And I want to respond to a number of comments that were made.

This was being brought forth by the park and rec department.

Balboa Park is under the Balboa, under the park and rec department.

Balboa Park is one part of every single park in rec throughout the city.

And so when we allocate a budget for them, they have to decide how to spend that.

And you may remember last April, we were thinking about closing every other public bathroom in Balboa Park.

Every other public bathroom in Mission Bay and the beaches.

We were talking about closing recreation center hours, because there's only one park and rec budget that they have to figure out how to meet all the public's needs.

And I will admit that for all the testimony I've heard, I think a couple of people talked about it.

What I didn't hear was we're happy with the public bathrooms in Balboa Park.

We're okay with the drainage systems that don't work or the irrigation systems that are broke, the buildings that are in a bad shape in condition.

That's all part of this conversation going forward that the city is struggling to figure out how to do.

This would be funding if it's approved.

That would be lockbox into Balboa Park.

There's a second item that comes up next.

I think we're all familiar that National Parks, State Parks, and Amusement Parks all charge for parking.

Paid parking allows the city to generate resources, which can and will be invested back into the park, maintain this asset, as I mentioned.

And through this process, we've heard preferences, we've studied trend and all while monitoring how the revenue would be impacted, as we had that robust discussion at council last July.

All of these uh issues were reflected in the council's comments when this was heard as an information item in July.

So let's see how well we listened.

So with this feedback, uh we have a new proposal, not the one that has been brought forward by staff, to try to strike a better balance that eases us in the bay parking, ensures significant discounts for city residents, and makes tourists pay their fair share.

So I want to respond to at least three things that I heard.

One, again, employees and volunteers will not be paying for parking.

I know there's some disagreement about where they will park, but they will not pay for parking.

Um the folks that are focused on the West Mesa, those are primarily the clubs there, the chess club, lomb bowling, um, the bridge club.

Um will the mayor's office commit to studying the idea of a residential annual or monthly parking permit?

Yes, we will.

We're happy to do so.

Okay.

That will be the conversation.

Um, but um I appreciate that commitment.

Um, to those who thought that the high school uh issue was being raised for the very first time today.

We knew about the high school issue.

Uh, my understanding again to the mayor's office is that we are working with the school district on a solution so that uh the high school students do not have to pay for parking.

Yes, we're happy to continue working with the high school to identify a solution for the students or the teachers.

Okay.

Uh we'll let the school district and the high school make those announcements, but uh we did recognize that.

But again, thank you to the high school students that took the time to show up and speak eloquently.

So with that, um clerk, if you could put my table up on the screen, and hand out hard copies as well.

I am glad I'm going for cataract search on Tuesday because I can't read that.

But hopefully you can get closer to the screen up there and see what it says.

So what the proposal that several of us have developed is in response to some of the things we heard.

The original idea was to go full boat between now and whenever the residential portal would be developed.

We don't think that's a good idea at all.

We've heard that from several parties.

So it will not be full boat, as you can see on kind of the top section going forward.

An $8 a day rate.

Right.

And also a half day rate as well.

And we heard so many people talk about the two hours out in Inspiration Point, another side of Park Boulevard was just not enough.

So this proposal increases that to three hours free with a five dollar rate for everyone to make it a little more possible to for those people that spend a couple of hours in the park, they'll have enough time to park, get into the park, uh enjoy their couple of hours that they routinely spent pay.

Once we have the resident portal operational, which may be around January 1st or thereabouts, we will raise non-resident rates and discount city resident rates.

And again, for city residents, it's gonna remain at these lower rates.

For non-residents, the ones that do not contribute to uh the city property tax.

Prices will be increased to ten dollars for four hours and sixteen dollars a day in the tier one lots, and ten dollars a day in tier two and tier three lots.

We think this is where, and this is what really where the original idea that the council described last June really originated was for uh the non-city residents.

So this proposal provides residents with rents that should make the park more accessible to them while allowing us to invest more resources in the park.

And I realize that more work needs to be done to address the issues highlighted by the students, and we're talking with the high school and the school district, so that is in play.

Um, and how we address the bridge, chess and lawn bowling as others I said on the West Mesa.

So, and we know that there's a lot of assumptions and unknowns, as many people have mentioned, and we will monitor, remain flexible and adjust as necessary to meet the needs of our park, our adopted budget, and our city residents.

And I'm ready to wrap up.

Uh thank you for committing to coming back to monitoring this quarterly and then coming back in a year.

So this park is for San Diegans, and we will keep it that way.

And with that, I move the staff recommendation with the rates amended as shown on the table there.

All right, that concludes my comments.

Um we'll now go to council member Ilo Rivera.

Thank you, Council President.

Um thank you uh staff for your work on this.

Um Emily, want to say special thank you to you for all the work you've done on this.

Um thank you, Council President, for the thoughtful motion you've put forward.

Um I want to take a quick step back.

Actually, I'll do a couple more thank yous and then and then I'll get into it.

I I also want to say thank you to um folks who showed up here and have been engaged in the process over the last several weeks understanding what some of the challenges are and making a good faith effort to address those challenges while meet the needs of folks who um who could be negatively impacted by the the proposal that uh was initially put forward.

Uh so the bridge club, uh I appreciate the spirited advocacy, and you were solution-oriented.

That's really really helpful.

Uh I cannot stress what a difference it makes when a shared goal is expressed, when a willingness to um recognize when there are real uh challenges and barriers that the city is facing is acknowledged, and then uh the uh the willingness to work toward a solution.

So thank you for doing that.

Thank you for advocating in that way.

It is incredibly helpful to us uh when that when that happens.

Along those lines, Mr.

Kabisky, thank you to the Balbo uh uh park partnership for also recognizing the benefits.

I understand that the preferred um the preference would be no parking fees anywhere, um, but you gave us some stuff to work with toward toward the end, and that is also helpful in getting toward uh what we see here.

Uh and then finally the students um from San Diego High.

I know many of your colleagues your classmates had to go home.

Um look, access to education could not be more important to me.

Um just a quick story, I won't take too long on this.

I spent a good amount of my career prior to being a council member advocating for free transit passes for youth.

And my first day on that job was at San Diego High, um trying to enroll uh students in that effort.

So we've created that program.

Uh every student in San Diego now has free access to transit.

Uh my colleagues here, Councilmember Moreno and Councilmember Whitburn helped vote to make that make that happen.

Um, with the explicit intent of ensuring that cost is not a barrier to accessing education and opportunity.

So it's incredibly important to me that uh the city is working with San Diego Unified and San Diego High School to make sure that that remains the case for those of you who need to drive.

And I will encourage you and your classmates to let us know how we can make MTS the bus and trolley system, one that is a is even more appealing to you all.

Um so with all that being said, we still have problems to solve for.

This past spring, thousands and thousands of San Diegans called upon the city council to protect funding for parks and rec and for the library department.

And one of the ways that we did that was by look starting in a more earnest way to look toward non-residents to start to pay their fair share.

The current model of people coming to this city using its resources and not paying a fair share is unsustainable.

It simply will not work.

It has not worked, and is one of the reasons we are where we are.

And so this initial idea came from that concept that non-residents start to chip in, that uh they provide resources in such a way that doesn't just keep Elbo Park a great park, but makes it a better park.

Council President, you you you said it very well.

I think we all know that as much as we love Belbo Park, there are some parts of that park that are ugly, uh, mainly inside the restrooms.

And it doesn't need to be that way.

Uh it doesn't need to be that when a parent takes a toddler to the playground, they have to go home rather than use the restroom that's there.

It just should not be like that.

And the one one of the ways that we achieve that is by better resourcing the park, and I think we are taking a step in in the direction of doing that.

One thing that I want to make perfectly clear though, because this did come up in the good faith, I think the good faith effort to provide alternatives to parking revenue.

This is not the fault of the city employees.

The financial situation the city is in has nothing to do with city employees being overly c overcompensated, or even or even the the pension issues that were discussed earlier.

The city of San Diego was a bad place to work for a very long time.

And one of the ways that we've made this a more attractive place to work is by making it a competitive employer.

A city is no different than a company in that respect.

If we don't pay people a competitive wage, if we don't provide them competitive benefits, they will not work here.

And you all suffer the consequences of that.

We've seen it, we saw it, and we've seen it before, and we can't head down that road again.

And we certainly cannot have the folks who clean those bathrooms, and if I may have my additional three minutes, the folks who clean those bathrooms, who mow those lawns, um, who fix those street lights, who put out the fires and protect your your safety, they are not the scapegoat here.

Very, very dishonest politicians told you they they were, and that's not true.

There are no public services without public employees.

So, how do we get the resources that we need?

We we we harness the the the uh the potential of the city, its place as a world-class tourist destination, and we make that work better for its residents.

And while I would like to see the discounts for in my ideal world, we would have had you know free park even more free parking for residents and even deeper discounts.

We did commit to a certain number in the budget, and it would be irresponsible for us, I think, um, to to undercut that in a way that we would know would lead to service cuts in other areas.

And there's a reality that for every dollar we do not collect here, um, we are going to need to find somewhere else.

So uh council president, I appreciate the proposal you've put forward.

I appreciate that this leans heavier on non-residents.

I think it's incredibly important that we do that.

Every dollar that we do not receive from non-residents is a dollar that San Diego residents are subsidizing for people's vacations and trips into this city, and we should not be asking them to do that, and we certainly cannot afford to do that as a city.

So uh thank you for the thoughtful proposal.

I look forward to seeing uh the the monthly and annual permits explored.

I very much uh look forward to seeing uh the students at San Diego High School be given confidence in knowing that they won't have to pay to get to school, and uh with that I second your motion.

Thank you.

All right, thank you, Council um member.

So we have a motion by myself and a second by Council Member Ilo Rivera to move the staff recommendation with the amended rights as shown on the table on the screen.

And we'll go next to Council President Pro Tam Lee.

Thank you, Council President.

Uh thank you to the staff for their presentation and the work you've undertaken to this point.

Um I think there's no uh there's no being shy about saying that that has been a tremendous amount of work and there's gonna be a lot more ahead, um, I believe, and even just the weeks ahead.

Um, I do want to thank all the members of the public for speaking.

Um today was not the first hearing on this topic.

I think we heard from a lot of folks in the last uh presentation as well.

Um, and I'll be very frank that it was very frustrating for me to see a proposal returned today to this council that looked almost the same as what was brought up in the last hearing that we had.

Um I too, like my colleagues am not here to sugarcoat the fiscal challenges that the city faces.

I think everyone here has probably followed the media this year to recognize that when we walked into this fiscal year that the city was facing a significant budget shortfall of over 250 million dollars.

We had in this very room a lot of fights about how to spend the limited dollars that exist um as a city.

And we had significant discussions about how we could reduce the cuts that were being proposed to libraries, rec centers, and other programs across the city.

So, yes, I think the need for revenue and how that is connected to the plan that you see today is simply a fact.

And no amount of spin that we provide uh from any level of city government changes that fact.

And I think it's important that we just be transparent with the public about that.

As a result, I think it's also true that the alternative to generating revenue is that we have to consider what other cuts have to be taken instead.

So, as you have heard, much of this council fought for a final budget, including dealing with vetoes and the need to override those vetoes to avoid many of the cuts that would have come on the same backs of youth, seniors, residents with limited incomes, and much more, spread across the entire city.

Um it is simply the fact that the effort to recover costs in areas such as parking, and this is only one small piece of the revenue uh discussions that we have all had an overall effort that this council was making to save Monday library hours in numerous branches, to restore hours at all of our rec centers across the entire city, and to ensure that other programs that we have determined to be vital to those same populations were not written of.

Finally, I I will also argue that it is also true that I believe this city should be able to put forward a program that meets what many of you have asked for, and what I believe this council asked for in the last hearing that we had.

A parking program that prioritizes the very residents of the city of San Diego that are here today, but maximizes the recovery of costs from visitors and especially tourists.

I'm gonna agree with everyone in the room today that the proposal that's been put forward does not meet those needs.

The original proposal.

I don't see how I could have supported what was presented uh between the mayor and the staff.

Um but that's also why recognizing all of those discussions, we've worked uh very much with the council president, uh council member Ila Rivera to look at all of the available options, including this new proposal, which I believe better prioritizes residents by expanding free hours and providing greater flexibility and discounts to those residents while shifting the burden of these costs to visitors.

I'm also gonna agree with everyone in this room that we have to consider the unique circumstances in which residents utilize the park, and that goes beyond just employees and volunteers.

So when we hear from the Redwood Bridge Club, um from the lawn bowling uh group club and others, uh San Diego High School, thank you to the students for coming out today.

I think this is all feedback that is not new today.

This is feedback that this council has heard, uh either individually or in the last hearing, uh, or that we've recognized our challenges for this item.

And so I think my frustration, to be frank, in the last couple of weeks that we've had between the hearings is to come back today and recognize that those issues have not been resolved.

And I frankly think it is completely possible that we should be able to fix those issues.

And I'm gonna ask from the mayoral mayor's staff, not just the commitment that we resolve that through some study moving forward, but that there's a commitment that we find a way to resolve this in the short time that we've got with the implementation coming forward.

Because I don't think there's any other way that we can approach whether it's bridge club players or high school students, the fact that this will be an extremely significant change without a solution.

Yes, Council President uh Pro Tem agreed.

Um I think those are critical um efforts that need to be made prior to implementation, both for Bridge Club and other members as well as the high school.

And so, yes, you have that commitment and then some.

Let me also follow up around uh about the students from San Diego High School because I think it would be really easy for me to just say that it should not be the responsibility of the city, but really the responsibility of the school and San Diego Unified to provide parking for their students.

But frankly speaking, we're here today, and we're having this discussion, we're hearing this feedback, and the reality is I think it's incumbent that all of the parties, and that includes the city and Sandy Unified, need to urgently address the issue facing students.

Um the district really does need to provide that parking.

I see no reason why some kind of memorandum of understanding between the city and the school district cannot be established to ensure that students don't have to pay to park to go to school.

Um that is something, again, I'm hoping that uh not just hoping, but I am really expecting that we will get resolved in time for this to be implemented.

Thank you.

Um, to the updated proposal that's been presented.

Um, we've heard from residents as well as Bubble Park stakeholders loud and clear.

Um, yes, we recognize that for their for a group of folks, the easiest answer is we should absolutely not charge for parking at all.

Um, and I think based on what you've already heard from me to this point, you might recognize that I don't believe that is an option that we can consider.

Um, but I don't think that means we can't make changes that meet the feedback that we've heard in return.

Um so a couple of pieces of this proposal that I think are really important changes to meet that feedback.

First is the the fact that the two hours of parking, free parking at inspiration point, we've all recognized is simply not enough.

Um, frankly, at the last hearing I advocated for four.

Um I've even asked staff to consider the analysis of more and whether there is a possibility of consider whether user behavior would change so much that we couldn't allow free parking all day.

Um and so I I want you to know we are having these conversations.

Um I want to thank many of you for your feedback to again reaffirm that three hours is not sufficient.

I think if the trade-off is that people, residents simply no longer going go to Baboa Park, we all lose.

Um, and so I am hopeful that um that that change has a significant impact for those who visit Baboa Park regularly.

Many of you have also shared that the five dollar threshold is a critical number for residents, and I absolutely agree.

Um today's proposal recognizes that threshold that also provides flexibility, knowing that the data has shown up to this point that residents typically utilize the park for four hours or less in a visit.

So I think it's important that that all-day parking for residents starts at five dollars.

Um many of you also have shared that the jarring change between October uh October's implementation and when the visitor rates are implemented is also a significant issue.

And what you will find as a big piece of this proposal is that now it now starts all of the rates at the resident rate.

I'll take another minute if thank you, Councilmember Foster.

That starts at the resident rate as opposed to starting at the non-resident rate.

Um, and then finally, I think the urgency is clear.

Um, we do need to have this implemented.

Uh, there is no denying that the budget um included the revenue uh that was assumed here.

I think there are a lot of factors out there where even with all the data that staff has crunched, the IPA, thank you very much for your work here and uh with each of our offices, that the actual end results of the revenue generated is uncertain.

And so what you see before you today is a proposal that we best believes is less about accomplishing just the revenue numbers, but accomplishing what all of you have asked for as residents and our best attempt at reaching that level of balance.

So I thank you to my colleagues for their effort here.

I will be supporting this proposal moving forward, but I also recognize this is not the end of the discussion, whether it's to solve the problems we've identified or to revisit this in the half-year mark or one year mark.

Um this isn't just set in stone.

Um how we move forward is important so that Bubble Park continues to be the treasure we all talk about.

Thank you.

All right, thank you, Council President Pro TAM for your comments and your contributions to right sizing this.

Um we'll go next to Councilmember Campbell.

Thank you so much, Council President, and I also want to thank you for your opening remarks and reminding us about the majority vote uh that the council made on the unbalanced budget in June, which two of us, Councilmember Morano and myself were the only ones who voted no.

I voted no because it wasn't balanced, and the rules are we must balance the budget.

It's very difficult to take the responsibility fiscally, money wise, to balance the budget when we don't have enough revenue, and it's difficult to make the decisions and the choices what to cut.

But just as councilmember Lee just said, when we don't have enough revenue in, we have to consider what is it that we should cut.

And so the majority of the council felt very bad about cutting the things that had been suggested by the administration, and they went ahead and put a lot of things back in with what I called at the time pie in the sky, thinking that later on they could get more revenue to fill that hole.

Well, that just isn't realistic, and it's not adult, it's not mature, it's not responsible.

We have to pass a balanced budget every June by July 1st.

And we have to look forward to 2026, that we must do that.

We must be responsible enough to make the hard budget choices of what we're gonna cut so that the thing balances.

That is the law in this city, and we should uphold the law.

I know it's tough.

I know it's tough.

I originally was a total no on this proposal, but I I agree uh with the proposals.

Uh, first of all, uh I think that we uh the the questions of the mayor's office is answered for us that yes.

They will look into the two things about the students, so there's some weird laws about how we can't provide free parking for students at inspiration point, but maybe they're teachers, in which case the teachers could empty out of the school lot, give the school lot to the students to park in for free, and let the teachers park for free on behalf of the city at inspiration point.

Whatever we can look into it.

We're gonna look into it, and the mayor's office has agreed to that.

Um the other thing uh the other thing is uh to remember that volunteers and employees will park free, handicapped, of course, will be free as it is in most uh spaces that are that are publicly owned.

I I just wanted to um have a point of information with uh the maker of the motion, our council president.

I believe that we should have no change in park fees, in other words, no fees, until the resident portal is opened.

I just don't think we can we can go from October 1st to the first of the year with these additional charges to people when there's no break for the residents.

So I suggest that we amend your motion to say there will be no fee changes until we have the resident portal functional, operational, and that hopefully will be by January 1st.

And at that time, I believe we should take the bridge club's idea that and all the clubs that people come to several times a week, that they be allowed as residents to have a 150 a year pass to park and to enjoy the activities that they enjoy.

And for those of us who don't go to the park as often, so that would be like at five dollars a day, it would be ten visits.

So with me, I would say I don't go very often to the park, and when I go, I don't mind paying five dollars as a resident of the city to park.

So I I think we should have it five dollars a day for residents of the city in lots one and two, and I think we should have uh in lot three, uh five dollars a day or three hours free.

And I'm almost done.

And uh I also think we have to consider that non city residents also include county residents.

So our neighbors in the county who visit the park and help us in the park with what they provide for us while they're there.

I think that $16 a day is too much to ask of them.

I think $10 a day for a non-city resident who doesn't use the park very often is good, and tourists ten dollars a day.

I think if it's more than that, they're not gonna come.

And we don't want them not to come.

We want them to be there.

And so I I agree with several parts of this uh uh bottom line here where the revised proposal would be ten dollars a day for a whole day in lots one and two for non-resident, and or if they only want to come for four hours, five dollars for the four hours for the non-resident, and um I think uh an inspiration point, uh ten dollars a day with three hours free is fine if they want to save that three bucks by by parking at inspiration point.

I don't I don't think they will, but anyway, I think that would work.

So I will not be in favor unless there is no fee charged until the resident portal is functional.

But otherwise, I agree with with changes, except that I think the city residents should pay five dollars a day when they don't visit often.

Those who visit often, 150 bucks a year.

And I know this isn't gonna plug that budget hole.

It's gonna help a little bit.

The state law is that money we make from parking, stays in the area where the money has been made, and therefore it will be going to help the park.

So that's that's a good thing.

And then the other thing is uh another time we'll vote on a different issue, and that's the parking around the park.

That's a that's another issue.

Um, although I see that um the council president has put on street murder mo uh on street parking meters on his list at $250 per hour or $10 max for a whole day.

And uh that's not too bad either, because a lot of those are people who are visiting Hillcrest or or tourists, etc.

So I'm okay with that part.

Well, the but the bridge club can park for $150 a year in the park.

Okay, uh, that's all I have to say right now, and thank you very much for your consideration.

All right.

Uh thank you, Councilmember Campbell.

Uh, we might have to take a recess to kind of figure out what the financial impact for some of the ideas that you suggested.

Um the modified rates that were presented was intended to say with the portal without the portal, not a residents are paying the same price.

So before and after we're paying, they're paying the same price.

Um we skinnyed up the um the city resident portion um and then um have the non-residents uh pay uh so that they're contributing to the use of the park and and to help us improve the park going forward.

Um and so this was a pretty delicate balance of lowering the price on the residents and then uh figuring out how we meet that deficit by raising the prices on the non-residents, and which was really the original idea as long ago as June.

Um the city or the mayor's office is committed to looking at that licensing program because there's also to be blunt uh some legal implications of that of what we can do, uh, but it certainly has enough merit that we're gonna take a good hard look at it.

Um so this gives us a framework for today while we're working on those.

Um do you want to talk about it more?

Because otherwise we got to take a recess and figure out what the implications are.

Okay.

Um so hold your thoughts, council member Whitburn.

Um do you want to jump in, Councilmember Whitburn?

Or do you want to wait?

I'm happy to wait.

Yeah.

Okay.

Um so let's take a 15-minute recess, which will oh yeah.

Thank you.

I just I have some questions on the proposal before we recess.

Um, and I I also want to thank everyone for coming in today.

Um, we've seen all ages here and people from all parts of the city, and I'm sure the county as well.

So thank you for your comment.

Um, thank you.

I'm very impressed by our high school students, in fact.

Um and my grandfather played bridge until he was a hundred years old uh in Denver, Colorado, and I know how important it is to um his well-being to it was to many people's well-being in my family.