Dispatches from the San Francisco Golf War -
I attended the San Francisco Budget and Finance Committee Meeting which was open to public comment. Lines formed down the hall and around the corner in City Hall. We were asked to assemble by interest group or issue, and the group was given alphabetical "tickets" and guidance on when we might expect to gain entrance to the committee room. We were in group "M" and four hours was the guesstimate. It turned out to be pretty accurate. It still took another hour before we got in our two minutes each, and believe it or not, I waited around to hear the opposition.
It was heartbreaking to listen to the some of the disadvantaged who will be affected by the cuts needed in the San Francisco budget. The reality is the money is simply not there and years of reckless spending by an irresponsible Board of Supervisors voted into office by irresponsible San Francisco voters are coming home to roost.
Most everyone was there to defend their financial turf, demanding their portion of the shrinking San Francisco pie not be touched. As near as I can tell, the golfers were the only ones at the meeting not asking for money, ready and willing to pay higher fees and contribute more to the City in order to help with the budget crisis.
Hanging around City Hall for five hours, one has the opportunity to reflect on just WTF one is doing there. The fact is, I was there because the WEBLEEDU Institute (Wild Equity Biodiversity Litigation for Ecological Extortion and Deep Untruths) were there to demand the closure of Sharp Park. It's not like there is any financial case to be made for closing the course. In round numbers, Sharp Park golf operating revenues exceed expenses by $100,000 -$400,000 every year depending on weather conditions and numbers of rounds played. The City of San Francisco charges Sharp Park $200,000 - $250,000 in overhead charges that are used to fund non-golf related SF government salaries and services. Therefore, Sharp Park may look on an accounting basis like it is making a $100,000 profit or suffering a $100,000 loss after subsidizing the City of San Francisco to the tune of $250,000. If Sharp Park Golf was to disappear, the $250,000 in overhead expenses would still exist in San Francisco and the shortfall from Sharp Park would have to be made up by higher taxes or cutting salaries and services. It is pretty simple really.
This should be obvious to everyone, but some people do not believe in arithmetic and continue to lobby for the destruction of this historic landmark Alister MacKenzie course. Since they are attending budget meetings and spreading misinformation about the finances of the course, the course supporters must also attend the meeting to correct them. That is why we were there.Welcome to Democracy in Action - San Francisco style.
Since we waited five hours to get in our two cents (literally two minutes each) I decided I had to post some excerpts on the blog to justify this colossal waste of time.
I posted two youtube videos excerpting the comments of both supporters and detractors of the course (as well as a fair and balanced explanation why the detractors arguments about Sharp losing money is complete bullshit). To demonstrate my fair and balanced approach to blogging, each video is 10 minutes long.
Look, I know these videos are lame. You get what you pay for. If you want production values - you'll have to look elsewhere.
Loading...
9:30
Voices for Sharp Park at SF Budget Committee Meetingby DWSUWF89 views
Link to this comment:
Video Responses
All Comments (0)