San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria wants to get rid of the city’s beach fire rings, a longtime staple for locals and tourists alike, to help close a projected $258 million budget deficit.
The proposed cut appears in Gloria’s draft budget for the 2025-26 fiscal year. The $5.65 billion spending plan aims to reduce ongoing costs across departments while avoiding widespread service cuts. But some amenities, like the fire rings, weren’t spared.
City spokesperson Benny Cartwright wrote that the fire rings could be removed in phases starting this summer, depending on staffing. The savings would come from scaling back maintenance and staff hours tied to the roughly 180 fire rings currently scattered across city beaches.
“The projected savings is approximately $135,000 annually. This helps close the budget deficit by eliminating an ongoing annual expenditure within Parks and Recreation Department’s operating budget,” wrote Cartwright.
This isn’t the first time the city has tried to eliminate the fire rings. In 2008 and 2010, officials proposed eliminating them to close budget gaps. Public donations, including a $90,000 contribution from the San Diego Foundation, helped keep the rings in place. Bob Kelly, the former president and CEO of the foundation, said the rings have endured because they represent something bigger than beach bonfires. Editor’s note: Kelly is on Voice of San Diego’s board.
“It’s an iconic image of San Diego and it’s been part of our culture for forever,” Kelly said.
Kelly remembers how community members rallied to preserve them during past cuts, even when city officials at the time weren’t on board. To him, the rings offer one of the few low-cost, family-friendly public spaces left in the city.
“People with little income can go out and enjoy the beach,” Kelly said. “That’s rare.”
But this time, the San Diego Foundation may not be coming to the rescue.
Foundation spokesperson Theresa Nakata said the group is currently focused on its strategic plan and its fiftieth fundraising campaign. The Foundation declined to comment on its past support or its decision to focus on other areas during this time.
Councilmember Jennifer Campbell, who also serves as Vice Chair of the city’s Environment Committee, told Voice that the fire ring cuts are one of several belt-tightening measures under consideration.
“With the current budget deficit, we are having to make some tough decisions about what we can and cannot fund in the upcoming fiscal year,” Campbell wrote in an email. “In the Mayor’s Proposed FY26 Budget, the Beach Fire Ring Program reduction is only one of several reductions proposed for the Parks & Recreation Department. While I understand that it may be disappointing for some that the City-provided beach and bay fire rings may not be available this year, this is the financial reality we are facing this year. We must preserve funding to the best of our ability for core City services like police, libraries, and infrastructure repairs.”
Cartwright told Voice that getting rid of the fire rings could have additional benefits beyond budget savings. It may help with air quality and reduce the number of late-night gatherings and illicit activities that often occur around the rings, especially in high-traffic beach areas. The move could also lessen the need for police enforcement and maintenance tied to those gatherings.
The city’s website explicitly states that beach fires outside of city-approved fire rings are illegal. That means lighting your own fire on the sand or using makeshift pits is prohibited on San Diego beaches. However, propane-powered devices would remain a legal alternative to bonfires.
“Illegal fires may be easier to enforce given that any wood fires burning on the beach would now be illegal since they are not contained within a city-provided fire ring,” Cartwright wrote.
Still, he acknowledged that eliminating the city’s fire rings may not stop beachgoers from lighting fires. It may push them to darker corners of the sand, with fewer safety controls and more cleanup headaches. Cartwright said fires without city-approved rings often leave behind nails, screws and other debris.
The City Council will take up the issue during its May 19 meeting as part of this year’s budget process. Residents can attend and offer feedback before a final vote, scheduled for June 10.
What if we just added fire ring and beach cleanup to the list of things that people have to do while on probation or doing community service for a DUI conviction? I see them on the sides of the road. Why can’t they be driven to the beach as well?
While that sounds dandy on the surface, the cost of supervising that would far exceed the cost of a city employee just handling the fire rings.
What is lost in some of this reporting is that the fire squares address a public safety issue. Sand is incredibly efficient at retaining heat, for many hours. Many people (including small children) have been very seriously injured by inadvertently stepping on sand superheated by a beach fire. The squares mostly relegate beach fires to marked and contained areas. Removing them will not eliminate beach fires. There’s no one on city staff to enforce that.
Total BS, the so called budget savings is minimal, the real intent is to punish the people for not approving a sales tax increase to fund the Mayor and Council funding follies. People should be livid, the message set with the ‘No Vote’ was ‘live within your means like average people do every day’. First fund the benefits the taxpayer majority pays tax for: health, police, fire, libraries, parks, beaches (including fire pits) and street repairs; then you can spread the balance over your pet projects.
The savings amounts to $1 on $4200. How excited would you be to have your $4200 mortgage payment reduced by a buck? Meantime, the City and SANDAG continue to invest in bike paths – – so far spending between $2-$7 million per mile to support 1% of daily transportation trips. The City plans to spend another $14.7 million in 2025, 100 times more than the savings from the fire rings. It’s not about the money…
Yes, the city gov is corrupt, without question. But the toxic smoke created from wood burning will not be missed.
This is beyond silly and penny wise but pound foolish. Save $135k by closing the rings but then its one more thing gone that used to attract tourists and their money from out of town. I dont buy the logic that it saves money from police patrols and illicit activities. Thats just lazy thinking, so why not just close all city parks and beaches? These elected officials are stewards of public property and resources, whose job it is to let citizens enjoy them- not find ways to discourage that because it costs a little money. Its like it costs money to have a car and commute, think of all the money we would save if we all quit our jobs and stayed home instead!
Great news! No more toxic wood smoke! Sorry polluters! Not ……
On the other hand, our city’s handling of taxpayer money is incredibly corrupt. Please bring DOGE to San Diego!