Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoo Parking topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves narrow lease change to let San Diego Zoo vary parking rates, council seeks revenue‑share commitment
Summary
Council voted to approve a limited amendment to the San Diego Zoo's lease allowing the zoo and city to charge different parking rates (enabling resident/member discounts). IBA urged the council to secure a revenue‑sharing commitment for the FY26 budget assumptions; public commenters warned paid parking could reduce access for frequent visitors and lower‑income families.
The San Diego City Council on Sept. 8 approved a limited amendment to the 1979 lease with the Zoological Society of San Diego that removes a sentence barring the zoo from charging different rates or providing credits tied to admission. The change — narrowly tailored to permit differentiated parking pricing — is intended to let the zoo and the city coordinate the roll‑out of paid parking in Balboa Park, currently assumed to start in early October.
Casey Smith, deputy chief operating officer, told the council staff’s recommendation is not a full lease renegotiation but a time‑sensitive, single‑sentence change to coordinate city and zoo paid‑parking implementation. "This is the only change proposed in the lease at this time," Smith said, noting negotiations on a longer lease extension will begin and return to council later this year.
Adam Day, treasurer of the San Diego Zoo Wildlife Alliance, told the council that the zoo historically had the ability to charge for parking but had chosen not to, and that the amendment would allow it to offer different rates — including potential discounts for city residents and members. "Without that change, we wouldn't be able to do so," Day said.
The Independent Budget Analyst, Buku Patel, emphasized the FY26 budget assumes roughly $15.5 million from Balboa Park parking revenue, including about $3 million from zoo parking. The IBA recommended the council seek a written or at‑minimum verbal commitment that a parking revenue‑share agreement will be presented when the larger lease amendment or parking package returns later this year.
Public comment was strongly mixed but skewed toward opposition: frequent zoo visitors, members and neighborhood groups warned paid parking could make routine visits cost‑prohibitive and depress on‑site spending, while others urged strong transparency and a formal revenue‑sharing agreement before implementation. Council members framed the action as a limited, technical step intended to allow the city and zoo to coordinate timelines; several members stressed prioritizing resident discounts in future negotiations.
Councilmember Jennifer Campbell moved staff's recommendation; Councilmember Elo Rivera seconded. The motion passed (corrected tally) 7 yes, 1 no (Councilmember Moreno), with Councilmember Campillo absent. The council and zoo officials said they expect to return later this year with a more comprehensive revenue‑sharing proposal and any additional lease amendments.
