The San Diego County Board of Supervisors has approved a $9.16 billion budget that increases spending by $523 million, but the plan has drawn sharp criticism from economists and taxpayer advocates who warn it could set the stage for a budget crisis similar to the one that has plagued the city of San Diego.
The budget adds roughly 100 new positions to the county payroll and draws some funding from reserves. County officials say the spending increases are necessary because of federal cuts to food stamps and Medicaid under the Trump administration’s “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” which could cost the county an estimated $300 million and require 1,000 new staff to administer over time. The San Diego Union-Tribune reported that the board approved the budget on Thursday afternoon after debate over its long-term sustainability. The vote followed weeks of public hearings and analysis by local fiscal watchdogs.
The county is using $68.4 million from its estimated $1.3 billion in reserves to cover the extra costs. Democratic supervisors have maintained that the county’s finances are strong and not at risk of veering into a crisis. However, a panel of economists surveyed by the Union-Tribune was overwhelmingly skeptical.
Kelly Cunningham of the San Diego Institute for Economic Research called the approach fiscally unsound. “Expanding programs and staffing without identified, sustainable funding resources places the county on an unsound fiscal path,” he said. “Using one-time revenues for ongoing obligations masks structural deficits and shifts burdens to future budgets.”
James Hamilton of UC San Diego drew a direct comparison to the city’s recent troubles. “One of the missteps that contributed to the city’s budget problems was hiring new city workers at a faster rate than the city was growing,” he said. “The county is making the same mistake.”
The San Diego County Taxpayers Association found that county staffing has grown 28% since 2011, over four times faster than the county’s population, which grew just 6.5% over the same period. “The county spends more every year to grow its workforce while its infrastructure is allowed to crumble,” said Mark Kersey of the Taxpayers Association. “More than half of the county’s general fund comes from Sacramento and Washington, but county data shows it has not used its own discretion to prepare for planned cuts. That is not sustainable.”
Not all economists were critical. Alan Gin of the University of San Diego noted that the county has had costs imposed on it by federal policy changes. “To prevent medical and food crises for many people, it is using $68.4 million out of the county’s estimated $1.3 billion in reserves,” he said.
The budget debate reflects a broader tension in San Diego County between addressing immediate social service needs and maintaining long-term fiscal stability. Voters will have a say on potential tax measures in November, which could determine whether the county can sustain its current spending trajectory.
