Editor:
Mr. Maykel, (using some of your words) it is unfortunate that some Pacificans, like yourself, with the assistance of several environmental associations and their lawyers are endeavoring to obstruct, with the intent to deny Pacificans, San Franciscans and golfers everywhere a gem of a golf course and a game loved by more than 50,000+ plus golfers annually at Sharp Park.
You and your cronies like Mr. Plater have no qualms spreading miss-truths about Sharp Park and golfers in general. When Mr. Plater stands up at the Native Plant Society meeting and accuses the present Management at Sharp Park of under reporting rounds and keeping the money for themselves, that was the last straw for me. Mr. Plater continues to quote Joe Faulkner at meetings, when he was asked by Joe Faulkner to stop doing so.
Yes it is true that some were out of line at this meeting and I apologized directly to Mr. Plater and to Mr. Davidson for their actions. One has to remember that it is hard for people to talk about emotional issues and not get emotional.
Imagine if Sharp Park was already the Frog Park you want, and someone wanted to take it away and say your form of recreation is not important? That you can go hike somewhere else. That we don’t care about your hiking and stewardship and friendships that have been created throughout the years. What if some group wanted to turn it into a golf course? How would feel? Would you all not get a little emotional at meetings? I think so.
Why does Sharp Park have to make money? Why do you as a Pacifican care if it makes money? You pay no taxes towards it. Does Golden Gate Park make money? Parklands are created by cities & counties for its citizen’s recreation. Are parks supposed to make money? When I asked Mr. Plater & Mr. Davidson this question at that meeting they had no answer and actually said that was a good point.
Some myths & omissions by you in your letter of last week.
Your Point #1
Tree Removal.
You do not actually say that no trees will be removed at the Golf Course site if you takeover. In all of the pictures shown on Mr. Plater’s slick little website, there are hardly any tress in those pictures. It was said at the Native Plant Soceity meeting that the Cypress trees on the course are non-native and may need to go. As for tree removal at Mori Point, I do not remember any trees there so of course none were removed. I rode motorcycles there for years as a member of the Coastside Motorcycle Club and no trees then and none now.
Your Point #2
No one I know of in the “golf group” has said anything in regards to closure of the Archery Range.
Your point #3
While the golf course does have some drainage problems, due to the infestation of the tules and reeds surrounding the Laguna Salada, I would not describe these problems as significant ecological problems. You make it sound like a waste dump. Also, for the hundredth time, any financial problems at the course are a fairly tale being told by you and your friends. First you all said it is losing millions. Now your claim is $30,000-$300,000 annually. This spread in dollar amounts is so large it is hard for anyone to take this claim seriously.
Your Point #4
I have not seen anywhere that the majority of SF Supes support giving this property to the GGNRA. Most SF Residents and taxpayers are tired of seeing their city give away valuable property to the Federal Government.
Your Point #5
While playing Sharp Park weekly, I know for a fact that there are more people using the golf course and facilities than are at Mori Point. On Saturdays & Sundays, a group of 4 golfers goes off the first tee every 10 minutes. This is 40 golfers per hour. At any given time, they could be as many as 216 players on the course in a four hour span. Now, obviously not every hour of daylight will have this many players on the course but it is many, many more than are using Mori Point. These players generally stay on the course and out of sensitive areas. Will this happen with your frog park? Will all hikers respect the sensitive area as us golfers do now?
Your other issues and concerns:
1. What part of the sidewalk on Francisco is unsafe for pedestrians and bicyclists? I pass by there often and see no threat. Is the sidewalk there under the jurisdiction of Pacifica or SF? I know there are tree and root issues with the sidewalk but you make it sound like a war zone.
2. You are correct, the fence does need some repair but only in a few spots. It is not quite the “visual blight” you make it seem though.
4. The berm walkway is unstable in the winter? I thought you all wanted to tear it
down and return the area to its original condition?
We can all live together on this beautiful piece of land, Frogs, Snakes, Golfers and Hikers. Giving it to the GGNRA/Federal Government will not only take away a classic golf course but impede any co-existence of all who enjoy this property. Leave Sharp Park Golf Course a golf course. Yes improvements are needed to the course, but what a destination for golfers everywhere if these improvements can be done. This is what Pacifica really needs, not more hiking areas.
Butch Larroche
Lifelong Pacifica resident & SPGC tournament Director
Mr. Maykel, (using some of your words) it is unfortunate that some Pacificans, like yourself, with the assistance of several environmental associations and their lawyers are endeavoring to obstruct, with the intent to deny Pacificans, San Franciscans and golfers everywhere a gem of a golf course and a game loved by more than 50,000+ plus golfers annually at Sharp Park.
You and your cronies like Mr. Plater have no qualms spreading miss-truths about Sharp Park and golfers in general. When Mr. Plater stands up at the Native Plant Society meeting and accuses the present Management at Sharp Park of under reporting rounds and keeping the money for themselves, that was the last straw for me. Mr. Plater continues to quote Joe Faulkner at meetings, when he was asked by Joe Faulkner to stop doing so.
Yes it is true that some were out of line at this meeting and I apologized directly to Mr. Plater and to Mr. Davidson for their actions. One has to remember that it is hard for people to talk about emotional issues and not get emotional.
Imagine if Sharp Park was already the Frog Park you want, and someone wanted to take it away and say your form of recreation is not important? That you can go hike somewhere else. That we don’t care about your hiking and stewardship and friendships that have been created throughout the years. What if some group wanted to turn it into a golf course? How would feel? Would you all not get a little emotional at meetings? I think so.
Why does Sharp Park have to make money? Why do you as a Pacifican care if it makes money? You pay no taxes towards it. Does Golden Gate Park make money? Parklands are created by cities & counties for its citizen’s recreation. Are parks supposed to make money? When I asked Mr. Plater & Mr. Davidson this question at that meeting they had no answer and actually said that was a good point.
Some myths & omissions by you in your letter of last week.
Your Point #1
Tree Removal.
You do not actually say that no trees will be removed at the Golf Course site if you takeover. In all of the pictures shown on Mr. Plater’s slick little website, there are hardly any tress in those pictures. It was said at the Native Plant Soceity meeting that the Cypress trees on the course are non-native and may need to go. As for tree removal at Mori Point, I do not remember any trees there so of course none were removed. I rode motorcycles there for years as a member of the Coastside Motorcycle Club and no trees then and none now.
Your Point #2
No one I know of in the “golf group” has said anything in regards to closure of the Archery Range.
Your point #3
While the golf course does have some drainage problems, due to the infestation of the tules and reeds surrounding the Laguna Salada, I would not describe these problems as significant ecological problems. You make it sound like a waste dump. Also, for the hundredth time, any financial problems at the course are a fairly tale being told by you and your friends. First you all said it is losing millions. Now your claim is $30,000-$300,000 annually. This spread in dollar amounts is so large it is hard for anyone to take this claim seriously.
Your Point #4
I have not seen anywhere that the majority of SF Supes support giving this property to the GGNRA. Most SF Residents and taxpayers are tired of seeing their city give away valuable property to the Federal Government.
Your Point #5
While playing Sharp Park weekly, I know for a fact that there are more people using the golf course and facilities than are at Mori Point. On Saturdays & Sundays, a group of 4 golfers goes off the first tee every 10 minutes. This is 40 golfers per hour. At any given time, they could be as many as 216 players on the course in a four hour span. Now, obviously not every hour of daylight will have this many players on the course but it is many, many more than are using Mori Point. These players generally stay on the course and out of sensitive areas. Will this happen with your frog park? Will all hikers respect the sensitive area as us golfers do now?
Your other issues and concerns:
1. What part of the sidewalk on Francisco is unsafe for pedestrians and bicyclists? I pass by there often and see no threat. Is the sidewalk there under the jurisdiction of Pacifica or SF? I know there are tree and root issues with the sidewalk but you make it sound like a war zone.
2. You are correct, the fence does need some repair but only in a few spots. It is not quite the “visual blight” you make it seem though.
4. The berm walkway is unstable in the winter? I thought you all wanted to tear it
down and return the area to its original condition?
We can all live together on this beautiful piece of land, Frogs, Snakes, Golfers and Hikers. Giving it to the GGNRA/Federal Government will not only take away a classic golf course but impede any co-existence of all who enjoy this property. Leave Sharp Park Golf Course a golf course. Yes improvements are needed to the course, but what a destination for golfers everywhere if these improvements can be done. This is what Pacifica really needs, not more hiking areas.
Butch Larroche
Lifelong Pacifica resident & SPGC tournament Director
41 comments:
What's the difference in what Venezuela's Communist Dictator Hugo Chavez tried to do and what anti-sharp park golf course people are trying to do? Remember? Chavez tried to shut down the golf courses, because he said they were of the bourgeois and it is not a sport for the people. He said he would like to change the golf courses into parks, so all people can enjoy it. The working class that are employed by the golf course were outraged. Other golf courses he did close eventually were used for drilling for oil, tomato farms, or houses for the poor. All Nationalized. Government Run.
Joe Faulkner
2479 45th St.
San Francisco, CA. 94117
July 31, 2009
To Whom It May Concern
Alister MacKenzie and the Sharp Park Golf Course
I write this letter to correct false information about me and my work that has been spread by advocates of closing the Sharp Park Golf Course,
including Mr. Brent Plater and the Center for Biological Diversity and related entities. They have been misusing my name and misrepresenting my work and my opinion about the history and design of the golf course. And I want it to stop.
Specifically, I have seen a letter, dated July 20, 2009 from Mr. Plater to Pacifica Planning Director Michael Crabtree, which identified me as "a San Francisco golf program employee and author of a history on San Francisco golf wrote in 1978," and attached a copy of a webpage from the "Restore Sharp Park" project of the Center for Biological Diversity and Nature in the City, that identified me as the author of one of"... the only two published histories about Sharp Park Golf Course, both of which conclude that there is no MacKenzie legacy at the course today." (I enclose a copy of that letter with its attachment.)
I have learned also that Mr. Plater in a July 7, 2009 power point and oral presentation to the San Francisco Park and Recreation Open Space
Advisory Committee, made a similar claim that I have published a golf history that concludes that "what exists at Sharp Park today has nothing to do with Alister MacKenzie's design," which "really doesn't exist any more," and was
"washed away into oblivion".
Mr. Plater's and his organizations' statements about me and my conclusions about Sharp Park are false and misleading. He did not contact or
speak with me before making his July 7 presentation or writing his July 20 letter.
I am not, and have never been a published golf historian. I am a greens keeper at a San Francisco golf course. In 1979, when I was an
undergraduate at San Francisco State University, I wrote a class paper on the subject of San Francisco's public golf courses. In 2007, I provided a copy of that paper to the San Francisco Golf Task Force, of which Mr. Plater was a member.(I enclose copies of the two pages of my class paper that deal with Sharp Park.)
Nowhere in my college class paper do I say or "conclude" that the Mister MacKenzie-designed golf course at Sharp Park was destroyed or "washed away." or that there "is no MacKenzie legacy at the course today." These are Mr.
Plater's arguments, not my statements or my conclusions—or my opinions.
To clear the record, I will here state my opinions and conclusions about the history and architecture of Sharp Park, based upon a lifetime of being a San Francisco resident and a golfer on the city's courses, including Sharp Park, and a greens keeper on golf courses in the city.
As ¡t exists and as golfers play it today, Sharp Park has 12 holes—all lying west of Highway One—that are original holes designed by MacKenzie.
Two other holes near the ocean (current holes 12 and 16) are played in original MacKenzie fairways, but do not have original greens. The course today lacks five of its original holes (being original holes numbers 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8) that were taken out of play when a seawall was built some time after MacKenzie's death,
and were replaced by four new holes east of Highway One, which I believe were designed by his assistant Jack Fleming. Bo Links, a San Francisco golf writer, historian, and amateur golf architect, has obtained copies of old news reports, including hole descriptions, and course maps from the time of Sharp Park's opening in 1932, as well as old and recent aerial photographs, which clearly
show the continuing existence of the original MacKenzie holes west of Highway One. Mr. Links' source materials are more extensive and more reliable than what I used years ago as the basis for my undergraduate class paper.
Today's Sharp Park Golf Course is nearly 80 years old, so naturally there have been some changes in its remaining original holes, but these have been relatively minor, such as trees growing, the shapes of sand traps changing,
and some traps filling-in with grass. This sort of change happens over the years at historic golf courses, as at all historic landscapes. It does not mean that Sharp Park's essential character or worth have been lost or destroyed. They have not been. And it certainly does not mean that MacKenzie ceased being the architect.
Alister MacKenzie was one of history's greatest golf architects, renowned for his beautiful, functional landscapes. San Francisco and Pacifica
are lucky to have at Sharp Park such a beautiful public golf course created by such an artist. And I hope that the environmentalists, golfers, politicians, and other good people of these cities will work together to preserve the artwork of this master, while preserving as well the creatures—including the golfers—that now
inhabit and use and enjoy that masterwork.
Joe Faulkner
cc: Mr. Brent Plater
Center for Biological Diversity
Very curious that the Tribune editor decieded to edit out this part of my LTE.
"You and your cronies like Mr. Plater have no qualms spreading miss-truths about Sharp Park and golfers in general. When Mr. Plater stands up at the Native Plant Society meeting and accuses the present Management at Sharp Park of under reporting rounds and keeping the money for themselves, that was the last straw for me. Mr. Plater continues to quote Joe Faulkner at meetings, when he was asked by Joe Faulkner to stop doing so.
Yes it is true that some were out of line at this meeting and I apologized directly to Mr. Plater and to Mr. Davidson for their actions. One has to remember that it is hard for people to talk about emotional issues and not get emotional".
Looks like they are pulling a Riptide!
Butch,
Unfortunately, neither the Tribune nor Riptide will allow you to call someone a lair when they don't tell the truth. Perhaps we can create a feel good buzz word for Brent Plater, like "factually challenged"? Because, we wouldn't want to hurt Brent's feelings, the lying scheming self-promoting egocentric Narcissist.
that should be a "liar" not a "lair". You probably can't call someone a "lair" on Riptide either if you support economic growth and sustainability for the City of Pacifica.
Butch,
Brent Plater never accused "the present Management at Sharp Park of under reporting rounds and keeping the money for themselves".
Here is what really happened:
When challenged on his figures about the course's shrinking usage, he said that he got his numbers directly from the golf course management, therefore the only way they could be inaccurate would be if the course was underreporting rounds played. He then assured the group that he had no reason to think that was the case.
Mr. Plater's comments, while unnecessarily divisive, were factually accurate, while your interpretation of them was not.
Also, Mr. Plater doesn't need permission from a book's author to quote from that book, as you, Joe Faulkner and the Pacifica Tribune should know.
A newspaper has an obligation to stick to the facts and not allow personal attacks, which would explain why that segment of your letter was deleted.
Apparently, Plater, Butler, and the frog and snake crowd have no such obligation, since they continue to lie like a rug. When one of the foundations for your argument continues to be based upon a community college paper (even after the author himself has indicated that you are misrepresenting him!), you lose the moral high ground in most people's eyes.
Stick to the facts???
Ian, where is the audio tape of the meeting you said you were going to make public? As I remember it, he did say that and there was quite an uproar fom the crowd when he did say it. Play the tape, if I'm wrong, I will issue a public apology.
Why is it ok for the Frog & Snake group to spread "miss truths" but when called out on it that accuse others of lying?
This is laughable. Plater takes quotes from a book to make a statement, and the author of the book repeatedly states that Plater is misrepresenting what he stated in the book. Apparently, Plater doesn't need permission from the author to misrepresent him. Only in the completely amoral universe of Brent Plater is this acceptable.
Have no illusions; Plater will say whatever promotes Plater's agenda for that day. It is not about truth, or honesty, or integrity. Personally, if I were quoting a book and the author told me I clearly didn't understand what he wrote . . . I'd feel pretty low to keep quoting it.
Kind of reminds me of the episode of "Cheers" when Dr. Frasier Crane tries to imbue some "culture" into the bar crowd by reading aloud A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens . . . Frasier begins, "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times . . ." to which the patrons immediately cry, "well which was it?"
Butch,
I gave a copy of the audio to Maybury, but he said he couldn't post it for technical reasons. Anyway, the audio was only of the presentation, not the question and answer period.
Things that make you say Hmmmmmmmmmm!!!!
As was said in the day on Laugh In........
Very Interesting!!!!
Alex, I'll take "Convenient Excuses" for 500.
I'm pretty amazed. For a guy who can find any City Council appearance of Tod Schlesinger and splice a video and have it on youtube in 48 hours . . . Ian Butler sure seems technically deficient when it comes to defending Brent Plater.
Don't worry, Jeff my man. We've got the TV26 editing staff working overtime on this one. We've almost got Plater's lips synched up with the MLK "I've got a dream..." speech. Some technical hiccups? Sure. But nothing we here at Butler Productions can't overcome... Roll 'em baby... ACTION!
I wasn't there, but if what Brent Plater said caused such a strong, immediate reaction in the room, then I'd have to think he said something pretty outrageous.
It sounds like Plater outright accused the golf course management of skimming money. Having seen him in action, saying something like that would fit his style.
Next up, "My dog ate the video".
well like you say, Snoop, "what's the use of the truth if you can't tell a lie sometimes?"
Lie? I thought there was some lurker or troll on this site who forbid us from using that word???
Honest Snoop, if the shoe fits, throw it. The only people who bristle when you call them a liar are . . . pretty much liars.
Love you Jeffy!
Do you think Tiger Woods would ever come and check out Sharp Park Golf Course?
I bet Bill Murray would. Someone call him up and ask him.
It's too bad I can't post a proper recording of the evening, but here is Horace Hinshaw's take on it from his column in the Tribune (remember that he is an avid golf course supporter himself):
"To the credit of Mr. Plater and Mr. Davidson, they handled themselves very professionally. They waited until calm was restored in the room and continued to respond to questions. Apologizes are definitely in order by those people making emotional outbursts."
As for Jeff's comment about liars, it's eerily similar to how they used to test for witches.
Yes Ian, it is too bad you can't post a recording of the meeting, but like you said earlier, you did not record probably the most important part of the meeting, the Q & A.
As Horace said in his column, the actions of some were out of line for sure. I apologized directly to Plater & Mr Davidson and also to you I think. The trib for some reason left this part out of my LTE:
"Yes it is true that some were out of line at this meeting and I apologized directly to Mr. Plater and to Mr. Davidson for their actions. One has to remember that it is hard for people to talk about emotional issues and not get emotional".
Why would the Trib do that? Maybe to make the golf crowd look bad? I for one now know that when I attend any meeting on this issue in the future I will take notes and times when things are said.
I will video tape it for you, Butch. I have skills and equipment.
Okay, Ian. Let's quote Horace Hinshaw's column in the Tribune:
"For an hour and one-half, the speakers made their presentation and then accepted questions from the audience. Actually, my interpretation of the presentation, other than getting educated on the red-legged frog and garter snake, did not provide any information that we already didn't know about the desire of Mr. Plater to restore the golf course as a natural habitat."
I contend that the entire purpose of the presentation was to ellicit the exact response/outburst displayed by the golf course supporters when Plater made his well crafted, carefully calculated inflammatory remarks. Nothing more. And, of course, the media would be standing by, all too eager to report the despicable behavior of the golf course supporters as something akin to a "Neanderthals Gone Wild" film. You see, in CBD attorney Plater's twisted court of public opinion, this is how you win battles - something he learned well in his years of study at the Kennedy School of Government and Boalt Hall Law School.
Of the many accounts of Plater's presentation, I have yet to see any substanitive description of the presentation itself. As Hinshaw states, "Nothing we didn't already know...". So Butch, stop apologizing and for heaven's sake, stop agonizing. You and your buds were simply pawns in Plater's faux environmental chess game. No shame there. You had not experienced his ethically challenged tactics as many of us had through a painful year of "Negotiated Rulemaking" for a Pet Policy in the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA).
You see, Brent, Pacificans are too smart to believe this whole thing hinges on style points for good manners. And Ian, it isn't about neener-neener camera snippets either. It's about a game, plain and simple. A game steeped in tradition and loved by millions. The golfers don't expect you to understand that, just to respect it.
My first (and thankfully ONLY) experience with Mister Plater was during the Planning Commission hearing where they debated the historical landmark designtion of Sharp Park Golf Course. Mister Plater stated that we was not associated with the Center for Biological Diversity, in an effort to present himself as an "objective" and "independent" voice. Hogwash.
From my blackberry I was able to Google "Brent Plater" and found his profile on findlaw.org and linkden, and both listed his contact information with the CBD. So I said so at the podium. Mister Plater approcahed me afterwards (I think it was after he got a good and well deserved tongue lashing from Bo Links for misrepresenting Joe Faulkner's book) and said he was no longer with the CBD and if I had any questions I could call him.
Fine, I said. I'll call you at the CBD because that is the contact information I have.
Plater's capacity to distort reality is matched only by the gullibility and willingness of his cheerleaders in Pacifica to continually promote his lies. I also appreciate that Ian Butler is willing to post here because I am sure the more people read his posts, the more his credibility gets shot. Works for me.
My PC is running super slow today so my ability to edit my posts is horrible. That one sentence should read "Mister Plater stated HE was not associated with the CBD"
" I contend that the entire purpose of the presentation was to ellicit the exact response/outburst displayed by the golf course supporters..."
Interesting theory Rocky. So when Brent made the same presentation a week later in San Francisco and all the attendees listened respectfully, he sure must have been disappointed.
"You see, Brent, Pacificans are too smart to believe this whole thing hinges on style points for good manners."
So the disruptive behavior of your group proves their superior intellect? Looks like someone took a side trip to oppositeland. Rocky, you do Pacificans a disservice to come up with lame justifications for their immature behavior. The right thing to is apologise and move on.
I've attended meetings where I heard blatant falsehoods, such as "the snakes are doing just fine with the golf course as it is!" Rather than yelling out "That's a bunch of crap!" and disrupting the meeting, I went to the source, such as my interview with an SF zookeeper, which showed that their Sharp Park numbers are as low as a dozen, which no rational person would characterize as "doing just fine". You can see that here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dhyTuHPnrA
I understand that golf is "a game steeped in tradition and loved by millions", but there is no game on earth important enough to justify the permanent extinction of a species. That is why I support a compromise 9 hole course. There is plenty for both sides to hate about a 9 hole course, but it does keep a Mackenzie course in Pacifica, and allow the endangered species there to expand their habitat. Here is the SF Chronicle's editorial position:
"San Francisco officials should consider a compromise that would let both golfers and nature lovers co-exist. At issue are both a low-priced course ($24 for a weekend round) and habitat for two signature species. One idea: a nine-hole course with the remaining fairways restored to wetlands. Another option: Preserve the course's most historic holes. So far, the arguments are building to a needless all-or-nothing showdown..." 9/3/09
The SF Supervisors report should be out in a few days and then we shall hopefully see which approach is feasable. In the meantime, let's take a deep breath, curb our tempers, and stop demonizing anyone who has a different opinion. Otherwise, no matter what happens, we will all lose.
Boy, I can't wait to see that report. San Francisco officials. Ha! Like that makes it legit. The fight is still on. Call your Congress People and Senators and ask them to help Pacifica Keep Sharp Park Golf Course. Write to the Mayor of SF, Write to our Governor of Cali. Do not stop. Everyday, call and write an elected official and ask them to Help Protect Sharp Park Golf Course. I have. Call Now!
Who is demonizing who here? I've heard Brent Plater acuuse people of stealing, he has accused Pacifica council members of showing up to meetings drunk. The double standrds put out by him and the CBD are laughable.
"Snakes at SFO, we can't win that fight, but maybe we can at Sharp Park". The CBD said it. Do they really care about snakes and frogs or are they just building a resume?
"There is no game on earth important enough to justify the permanent extinction of a species?"
Ian, this really has no equivalency in the quest to distroy Sharp Park Golf Course. Locally the frogs and snakes are endangered not threatened, and they live from Sonoma through Santa Cruz counties.
The frogs and snakes exist at Sharp Park Golf Couse precisely because the Golf Course exists, and makes a nice habitat for them there. You knew that, so what the point of distroying the Sharp Golf course, must be another reason?
Thank you Kathleen for you suggestions.
I find it hard to believe the CBD crowd would remain civil and calm if someone tried to make a land grab of Mori Point, eliminating the park and habitat to build a golf course, and did so through deception and misinformation.
Ian, for some crazy, inexplicable, and probably convenient reason you seem to keep forgetting that Sharp Park is not designated as critical habitat for either the SFGS or the RLF. This is the ONLY relevant issue. As has been stated before, from the perspective of the subject experts, i.e., the US Fish and Wildlife Service, Sharp Park will have absolutely NO effect on the ultimate survival or extinction of these species. Period. From a legal perspective, the significance of Sharp Park as a habitat for these specieds is no different than Highway 280, lane 7 at the Sea Bowl or even your own living room with respect to the recovery of the SFGS or the RLF - something I am confident you already know. Therefore, it follows that any assertions made by you or Brent that retaining the golf course will somehow contribute to the "permanent exitinction" of the SFGS and RLF is baseless and without merit (stronger words are appropriate).
Hence, I stand by my assertion that Brent's presentation, even his whole campaign to Restore Sharp Park is designed to create controvery and elicit outrage. It is all a part of Brent's plan to promote himself.
Ian please go back to trying to be the "Funny Guy" because as a scientist you leave much to be desired...
yeah, you are right, Jeffrey. Born and raised in SF, I witnessed the radicals and how they behave first hand in my own front yard. This is what I have witnessed growing up in SF: War Protesters, Protestors against Oil Co. (who were bussed in, I saw them get dropped off in a back alley) Protestors who will just protest against any private business, I have witnessed the following acts from these people; Crapping on private property by pulling their pants down in front of me and guns shot in my direction, throwing vegetables at me and other innocent bystanders, pissing on the streets, exposing body parts, yelling and screaming non-stop. When they are done they leave the biggest mess in the streets for the working people - taxpayers to pay for it to be cleaned up. And I was just a working girl on my way to work. So, get over it. We will talk loud, we will protest, but I doubt it if any of the pro-golf park people would ever do any of the above to anybody or their property. Oh the things I have seen.
well Kathleen when the day comes that Butch or one of the golfers tries to file a false police report against Brent Plater - as one of Pacifica's disgraced former planning commissioners tried to do against a wealthy out of town developer - then I will see cause for alarm. Getting angry and vocal when Plater is clearly trying to antagonize the crowd is certainly nothing to make a big noise about.
Do not listen to the anti-golf course people. They are well trained by radicals. Many of their leaders are schooled in environmental law and hold degrees that make them look like they know what they are talking about. But, behind their phony agenda is nothing more than wanting control and power over the people, who they like to refer to as "the uneducated". Don't believe me? Visit their websites. Some will label me as an extremist, I am not, all I do is read what they write and it goes against everything I beleive. They scare me. If fear motivates me to take action, then so be it.
When you do call your elected official, always be courteous. Do not be afraid, my experience calling has always been good. Most of the time they are very friendly, although speaker pelosi's people sound a little stressed, but call her anyway. Might as well start at the top. They work for you and like hearing from you.
News from Sacramento "water deal" the legislature passed. Bigger government control over our water, removes all dams with no quarantee to build new ones. 4.4 billion to liberal environmentalists projects. This raises the price of water on us, taxing for overuse. This calls for an election nov 2010 for an 11 billion water bond. Needs majoirty approval of states voters. You can vote against this and call your elected officials and tell them you do not want this.
Post a Comment