19th hole

MW 99
JG 106
PG 122
Andrew 78 (We won't be playing with him again)

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

Jim bringing it home on 18

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

Andrew on 17th tee

I was one up on him for the par 3s on the back. He hit this tee shot 50 feet short (from the blues). I hit mine on the green pin high. Then Andrew hit a miracle shot from 50 feet into the hole for a birdie. I three-putted for a bogey. Life is not fair.

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

Traditional 17th portrait

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

Jim sent this pic from his Blackberry. I don't know why he uses such archaic technology. Anyway - he caught me mid-blog.

Andrew on 16

We are having a little par 3 competition on the back. I am one up after parring 12 to his bogey, and we tied here with 5's.

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

Jim missing a putt on 9

Patrick is wondering who his real father is.

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

We are playing with Andrew

He is what we call a "real golfer".

he is 3 over par through 11.

But not old enough to drink. So... I've got that going for me.

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

Missing my birdie putt on 10

Got the par.

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

At the turn..

JG 49
MW 50
PG unknown

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

Jim misses his par putt on 8

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

Pat tees off on six ...

Under the watchful gaze of the golf gods.

On his way to sinking a 30 foot putt and his ever first par in his very first round of golf ever.Well done.

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

Jim's 2nd shot on 4

That is his son Pat standing by his tee shot in the far distance. Jim almost made it to Pat's ball with this, his second shot.

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

Jim hits it right on 3

Off the hill and almost on the green.

On his way to matching my par.

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

Live blogging Lincoln

With Jim and Pat

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

More pics from the holiday raft-up

A fine day with friends on the bay.

Sunset, bridge and Alcatraz

In our wake.

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

De-rafting

After much good cheer (and a few beers) heading back.

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

A moveable feast...

And bar.

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

Trollop meet Morpheus

Morpheus meet Trollop

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

Morpheus Ho!

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

Under the bridge...

Heading for the rendezvous...

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

3rd Annual Christmas Raft Up - Dec. 19th

It is good to have friends with boats. This is the Trollop.

From Jim:

Perfect!!

Can’t tell you what to expect. Could be three boats, could be 8. I think the weather will influence more than a few.

We’ll be bringing the usual plus some champagne, and ingredients for a couple hot/warm holiday beverages. I think we’ll also be cooking up some warm appetizers!!

Bring what you like. That’s a good rule!! I don’t think we’ll be short of anything.

Will be good to see you guys!!

- Jim

---

From: Mike
Sent: Friday, December 18, 2009 9:07 AM
To: Jim; Rick & Mel Orourkali
Subject: Re: 3rd Annual Christmas Raft Up - Dec. 19th

Jim,
I am going to power over on board Rick's Trollop. Sigrid is also probable, but she is a fair weather boater, and will be watching the weather. What should we bring? Just a wild guess - beer? Looking forward to it - mw

Jim Gregory wrote:

Looks like the weather is going to cooperate with us and give us a Sat. with no rain!!

This year we will be anchoring in Belvedere Cove, just off of Tiburon.

Morpheus will be heading out Sat. at about 11:30am. If anyone needs a ride, meet us at RYC, or call us from Sam’s and we’ll come in and pick you up!

This may be your last chance to relax and have a few cocktails with your friends prior to heading off to your traditional travel/party/family Christmas.

We’ll be cooking up appetizers and mixing both hot and cold adult beverages. Lot’s of them!!

Will have our dinghy to ferry folks back and forth to Sam’s, etc.

If you can free up your Sat. afternoon please think about joining us!

Merry Christmas!!

- Jim

Item 11: Rec and Park Commission votes 6-0 to adopt the GM's recommendation...

... to proceed with the recovery plan for the snake and frog and to preserve an 18 hole golf course at Sharp Park.

Another small step forward for the frog, snake and golf course.

Now it is in the Board of Supervisor's lap.

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

UPDATE I:
Corrected vote total in title.
SF Chron story here.


UPDATE II:
SF Public Golf Press Release

December 17, 2009

PRESS RELEASE: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE SAN FRANCISCO REC & PARK DEPARTMENT VOTES TO RENOVATE AND RESTORE HABITAT AT HISTORIC SHARP PARK GOLF COURSE.

SAN FRANCISCO, CA. Future prospects brightened for golfers, frogs, and snakes at the historic Sharp Park Golf Course, following the San Francisco Recreation and Park Commission’s unanimous vote December 17 to adopt Rec & Park General Manager Phil Ginsburg’s recommendation to proceed with a habitat recovery plan for the San Francisco Garter Snake and California Red Legged-Frog, while preserving the 77-year-old, 18-hole, Alister MacKenzie-designed golf course.

The vote to approve the Sharp Park Conceptual Alternatives Report¹ came at the conclusion of a five-month study and one-month public hearing and comment period, pursuant to an Ordinance² adopted May 12, 2009 by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors.

“This is a good day for golf, science, and common sense in San Francisco,” commented a relieved Richard Harris, a San Francisco attorney and co-founder of the San Francisco Public Golf Alliance, which has the golfers’ political opposition to a close-the-golf-course coalition led by the Tucson-based Center for Biological Diversity and the San Francisco parks activist group Neighborhood Parks Council. San Francisco golf legend and U.S. Open Champion Ken Venturi is honorary Chairman of the Public Golf Alliance.³

“Saving the golf course is supported by a broad coalition of golfers local and from around the world, union labor, local businesses, high school and youth sports groups, seniors organizations, historic preservationists, local businesses, and San Francisco and San Mateo County residents and political leaders—including Congresswoman Jackie Speier who represents both counties,” Harris said.

The Commission’s vote in favor of the golf course follows a similar 14-1 vote in favor of the golf by the San Francisco Park, Recreation, and Open Space Advisory Committee at its December 1 meeting⁴, and a ringing December 16 endorsement of the golf course by Laborer’s Local 261, the union representing the San Francisco public golf course gardeners.⁵

Since the San Francisco Chronicle editorialized in favor of keeping the 18-hole golf course on September 3, 2009⁶, the save-the-golf-course cause has been joined by Congresswoman Jackie Speier⁷, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom⁸, and the California Alliance for Golf⁹. Long-time golf course supporters include the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors¹⁰, Pacifica Mayor Julie Lancelle and the Pacifica City Council¹¹, the Washington D.C.-based Cultural Landscape Foundation¹², World Golf Foundation¹³, the Alister MacKenzie Society of Great Britain and Ireland¹⁴, and the Pacifica Chamber of Commerce.¹⁵

“We have contended all along that the golf course is the most environmentally-friendly use of that property. And the Rec & Park Department’s heavily-scientific Sharp Park Study confirms this. The endangered species exist at the golf course precisely because golf is a limited and extraordinarily well-controlled public activity, and golfers are sensitive to their environment,” Harris said. “Open-minded people can see that at many sites—and Sharp Park is one of them—golf can be the most environmentally-friendly use.”

In addition to praising the hard work of his Public Golf Alliance members, Harris singled-out Laborers Union Local 261 for praise. “For some reason, there has been in San Francisco an historic mutual lack of appreciation between some golfers and golf course laborers. We have seen this change over the course of the Sharp Park debate, and we intend in the future to maintain mutually-supportive relations between the golfers and greenskeepers.” Also coming in for high praise were the Sharp Park Golf Club and the Pacifica Community Coalition to Save Sharp Park Golf Course. “The men and women of the Public Golf Alliance, the Sharp Park Golf Club, and the Community Coalition members paraded, wore buttons, signed petitions, passed-out leaflets, showed up at meetings, and did all of the shoe-leather tasks of political organizing, which is very unusual for golfers,” Harris said.

Harris had high praise as well for Rec & Park Executive Director Phil Ginsburg and Department staff who directed the complex five-month study which culminated in the Department’s Sharp Park Report. “This is an extraordinarily beautiful sight and a priceless international public golf treasure,” Harris said. “But it is also one of the most complicated political/environmental/bureaucratic puzzles I have ever worked on,” he said, pointing to issues of frog and snake biology, wetlands hydrology, golf historical architecture, sea walls, and anticipated sea level rise; there are two cities and two counties, with their respective water agencies and recreation departments, the U.S. Department of the Interior and National Park Service, the Corps of Engineers, and Fish & Wildlife Service; state agencies include the Department of Transportation, Department of Fish & Game, State Lands Commission, and Coastal Zone Commission.

“To their credit, SF Rec & Park Executive Director Phil Ginsburg and Project Director Dawn Kamalanathan have not retreated, but have dived into these complexities and tried to make the problems intelligible,” Harris continued. “Now, Congresswoman Speier is taking the lead in working for a regional solution and cost-sharing agreement between the cities, counties, and state and federal entities. The golf community highly values Sharp Park, and the Public Golf Allinace wants to help to simultaneously restore the golf course and the natural habitat.”

Having now obtained approval from the Rec & Park Department, the Sharp Park project will move into project design phase, in conjunction with an ongoing Environmental Impact Report process, for which an Environmental Impact Report is expected by November, 2010. If the restoration project remains on-track, Project Director Kamalanavan told the Rec & Park Commissioners on the evening of December 16, the city can anticipate obtaining permits for the envisioned renovation project sometime in the year 2012.

Item 10: Sharp Park Seawall is up for consideration.

Four hours after I arrived here.

Note to self: Next time - pay attention to the agenda before I get here.

Dawn Kamlanathan is reviewing the engineering report of options for repairing and armouring the sea wall. We then move directly into public comment.

Stumbled through my comments but think I got out what I wanted to say - sort of.

After public comment, Dawn explains that the this is the beginning of a process that may take two years - including Environmental Impact Reports - determining funding sources - public comments -and many many hearings. All the more reason to proceed with the A18 option for Sharp Park now. The frog and snake cannot wait. The course cannot wait.

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

Back at City Hall...

I guess my job was not done. San Francisco Rec & Parks Commission today. The Sea Wall and a vote on the Sharp Park report recommendation is on the docket.

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

My job here is done.

Ending the live blog coverage - for whatever it was worth.  More thoughts later.

What do you think of my festive holiday hat?

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

Public comment still going strong...

Many of the usual suspects on both sides. Barb Arietta, Brent Plater, Richard Harris, representatives of the Laborers Union, many residents of San Francisco and Pacifica alike. No end in sight. But everyone gets their say.

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

Public comment is under way.

Mirkarimi gives Mayor Julie Lancelle of Pacifica the courtesy of first comment. Ross is really moving the comments along. When it was my turn, I called him out in my comment and he snapped back. My time ran out so he got the last word. I will have to be satisfied with a widely unread riposte on this blog. Stay tuned. I'll need to get the clip first for context. 

UPDATE: FWIW - See the clip of my exchange and unsatisfactory "last word" with Mirkarimi LINKED HERE.

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

Biologist Karen Swaim is presenting the history of Sharp Park via aerial photographs

This is the most telling presentation. I don't know if you can see it in this picture, but the image on the screen is an aerial photo of the site in 1928 before the course was built. Laguna Salada is open to the sea, which is poisonous to the red legged frog. The land is all agricultural, not open wild land. The conclusion is incontrovertible. The California red leg frog and the San Francisco garter snake that feeds on them are in the park because of the golf course not in spite of it.

BTW - the laborers union from Lincoln, Sharp, and Harding Park in the orange shirts are here in force. Delighted to see them here.

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

UPDATE 12-18-09:
I've excerpted a clip of Biologist Karen Swaim's presentation from the SFGOVTV.org link to Mirkarimi's meeting.

For anyone who would like to have a real appreciation of who Karen Swaim is, why she is considered The Authority of the SF garter snake, the red leg frog and their habitat at Sharp Park, and why she is recommending the A18 option for Sharp Park (despite the fact that she is not a golfer and does not give a rat's ass about the game), I strongly recommend you invest 14 minutes in this video clip. My hope is that by giving her presentation more visibility, it will help inoculate against the kind of misinformation offered by the anonymous commenter to this post.

Her prez speaks for itself, but here are a few of her choice quotes:

"Our goal is to provide the science about the biology of what is best for the San Francisco garter snake..."

"Golf is not what is responsible for the decline of the San Francisco garter snake."

"This is a photograph from 1928. There is no golf here. The land surrounding Laguna Salada to the East, to the South, to the North, everywhere except the ocean, was agricultural fields. It is not pristine upland coastal prairie that would've been high quality upland for the San Francisco garter snake. You can see that there is a major channel up here [points to Laguna Salada] that illustrates there was connection to the ocean."

"1946 is the very first year the San Francisco garter snake and the California red-legged frog were documented... there are 46 [garter snakes] he gets over two years, and golf has already been here for 16 years."

"In 1978 Sean Berry did his studies and he observed 37 San Francisco garter snakes along this area... and again golf has been in place for 46 years"

"1989 - This [photo] is not long after the the El Nino storms and the big storms of the eighties that resulted in a lot of sea water intrusion into the lagoon. By now, the sea wall is mostly constructed... From 1986 to 1988 some studies were done and no San Francisco garter snakes were found in this area after all the salt water intrusion. That was to a large part because the red legged frog was wiped out by the salt water."

"We're back to present day conditions... the frogs are prolific west of highway one, they are not in any trouble at all west of highway one. San Francisco garter snakes are concentrating again at Mori Point pond and horse stable pond."

"You need to protect the sea wall. You need to have a fresh water managed habitat currently for this species to recover it, and that is all there is to it."

What she said.

David Monroe of Tetratech presents the plan.

This is my third time hearing it. It is a great presentation, but, at this point, I think I could give it myself. Supervisor Sean Elsbernd asked a pertinent question about the objective of the report being reviewed. He reinforced the point that the primary objective of Tetratech's report was to develop a plan that restores habitat for the snake. Not to preserve the course, but to restore habitat for the snake. Their conclusion was that the A18 plan - to restore the habitat and keep 18 holes - was the best plan to meet that objective.

We are now hearing more about kikuyu grass than anyone would ever want to know. Inexplicably, I find the discussion fascinating.

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

Live Blogging the SF Government Audit and Oversight Commitee

Chaired by Supervisor Mirkarimi. Standing Room Only. First up a guest appearance by SF Garter snake, presented by a caretaker from the SF Zoo. Pretty cool. I understand that this is being broadcast live on SFGOVTV.org. As always, I am not sure how well the live blogging will work out, but will give it a shot. I am also preparing for my one minute of Public comment. The pressure is intense. And I am under-caffeinated.

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

More Sharp Park Whack-a-Mole - Brent Plater Edition

In a recent post, I described how the Center for Biological Diversity used "Whack-a-Mole" tactics with the City regarding Sharp Park:

"This can only be explained as a deliberate and conscious campaign of obfuscation. It is trial lawyer trickery. When the the new mole pops up out of the hole (Destroy the course to protect the snake from global warming and the sea!), attention is distracted from the last smashed mole (Destroy the course to protect the snake from golf operations!). This can go on indefinitely. There is always another mole."

And after quoting Congresswoman Jackie Speier's dismissal of Plater's ludicrous "sea rise in 100 years will kill the snake" argument, I said this:

"Brent - consider that mole whacked. Time for a new mole to pop up."

Apparently he is reading my blog and taking my advice. On the eve of Supervisor Mirkarimi's Government Audit & Oversight Committee meeting to consider the fate of the Sharp Park golf course, we have a new Brent Plater mole pop up out of its hidey-hole! What Fun! Here it is! Trace elements of pollutants that can be found in San Francisco Bay as well as in almost every lake, river, stream, pond, culvert or drainage ditch in the greater Bay Area, have been found in the Sharp Park wetland:

"Sharp Park Golf Course maintains several culverts and drainage ditches which the golf course uses to collect storm water and irrigation run-off, and then discharges this water through point sources into endangered species habitats on the property."

Of course they are threatening to sue (yawn). So what else is new. That's what they do. That is the raison d'etre for the Wild Center for Biological Equity and Diversity Insititute.

While all pollution is bad, and these pollutants should certainly not be there, they are going to have a very hard time showing a court that these trace elements in the run-off are having a deleterious effect on the endangered Red Leg Frog. Biologist Karen Swaim has documented beyond any doubt, that there is a a healthy and growing California Red Leg Frog population at Sharp Park. So for all the cries, lamentations and rending of garments about course operations, pollution,and sea rise, the frog at Sharp Park is doing just fine, thank you. It is coexisting with the golf course now, as it has been for the last 70 years, and will do even better after the changes recommended in the 18 hole plan for Sharp Park are implemented. In the meantime, someone needs to get some samples from the frog ponds and creeks at Mori Point, and see if the same pollutants are found there after collecting runoff from a heavy storm. Perhaps the Center for Wild Equitable Diversity should sue the National Park Service too.

But I am falling for a trial lawyer trick by giving this argument credence. It is not a serious argument. It is a distraction. The idea is to distract attention away from all the failed arguments that have gone before. the idea is to get you to Pay no attention to the previous bad arguments behind the curtain.

Pay no attention to the fact that the issues in the original letter from the Center of Biological Diversity threatening to sue the The City that precipitated this entire clusterfork are 100% addressed by the 18 hole solution proposed in the report to the SFPRD. That original letter does not mention global warming, sea rise, or pollution. Then, only golf operations was a problem worth suing over.

Pay no attention that the Plater/CBD arguments about protecting the species from sea rise that may or may not occur 50 to 100 years from now, was dismissed by Congresswoman Jackie Speier and is laughable on its face.

Pay no attention to the preposterous Brent Plater notion that the sea wall must be allowed to fail, rebuilt to the other side of the park, and the entire current viable habitat of frogs and snake made uninhabitable and toxic to the frogs with the hope that the critters will simply relocate somewhere up a restored hill in time. Where, by the way, there are no snake or frogs living now. Really. That is their plan. Kill the existing habitat by permitting salt water incursion, then build a new habitat up the hill where no frogs or snakes live now. Really. I know.

Pay no attention to the continued claims by Plater et. al. that The City is subsidizing a losing golf course for the benefit of Pacificans, when statistics show the plurality of golfers at Sharp Park are San Franciscans, that the course is showing an increase in golfers this year over last, and with over 54,000 green fees, is profitable even after taking a large hit against revenue for "Overhead". Overhead that is redirected to other City services and departments.

Anyone with a third grade arithmetic skill should be able to understand the simple concept that if the amount of a purported course "loss" is less than the amount of overhead sucked out of the course for other City services, it means THE GOLF COURSE IS SUBSIDIZING THE CITY and not the other way around. If the course is closed and the revenues from those 54,000 green fees are lost THE NON-GOLF CITY "OVERHEAD" COSTS WILL STILL EXIST and need to be paid from tax receipts or by cutting costs on other City services since those costs will not be covered by golf revenues. Perhaps we should ask Brent Plater to produce his third grade report card before listening to any more of his advice. Odd. Apparently my caps lock key is sticking. Sorry about that.

Pay no attention to the fact that Brent Plater nor the CBD can explain where the revenue will come from to make up for the lost 54,000 green fees per year, and how they are going to pay for the destruction of the course, the removal of the beautiful "non-native" cypress trees, the disposal of the fairway grass and other debris, and rebuilding a new seawall on the other side of the course to protect the neighborhoods and Highway One in their proposed "restoration" project.

Pay no attention to the fact that Brent Plater is either displaying willful ignorance of mitigation bank rules or lying when he said this to the SF PROSAC committee on July 9th:

“ There should be more walking and biking trails. In a survey golf came out about 16th or 17th. And then this. This is the idea about trying to do something different at Sharp Park that will be consistent with protection of the snake and the frog. This was the recreational desire we know that San Francisco has, and makes a lot of money. We could do a mitigation bank down here. Mitigation bank credits sell for about Three Million bucks a credit. There’s at least 200 acres of property at Sharp Park that could become wetlands for saving the frog. That’s a gross revenue of about Six Hundred Million Dollars. A fraction of that would be necessary to actually maintain the golf course itself. Let’s presume that data is twice inflated, because of the decline in the economy over the past year: Three Hundred Million Dollars. Maybe it would take Ten Million to restore the landscape at Sharp Park. Put another Ten Million in trust in perpetuity to manage it forever, the rest of that is free money that can be spent on whatever the city desires.” - Brent Plater

In fact the report submitted to the city by Westervelt Ecological Services - the authority on setting up and maintaining mitigation banks, told a very different story. From the SF Public Golf letter to PROSAC:

"Briefly summarized, Ms. Triffleman [of Westervelt] told the Rec & Park Commissioners at the November 19 public hearing: (1) there is low likelihood that the federal and state regulatory agencies responsible for mitigation banks would allow hiking trails or any other public recreational use of mitigation bank property, because of potential conflicts with the threatened species; (2) mitigation banks have high up-front costs for construction and permitting, and federal and state grants are not available to pay these costs; (3) the operation and maintenance costs for a mitigation bank would likely be high, necessitating a large endowment to pay such costs in perpetuity; and (4) the prospects for sale of mitigation credits, and the price of such credits, are highly uncertain."

So all of the things that you can see in the phantasmagorical photoshopped version of a "restored" Sharp Park prominently displayed at the Restore Sharp Park Destroy Sharp Park Golf website would not actually be permitted if mitigation banking was used as a funding source. No hiking. No biking. No dogs. None of it would be allowed. No human recreation at all. And - Oh yeah - if they get there way, there also would be no sea wall that you see the happy hikers walking on, and there would be no frogs in the salt poisoned Laguna Salada. It is all pure fantasy.

No, pay no attention to any of these failed arguments to destroy the course, because a new Brent Plater mole has popped out of its hidey-hole. Don't look over there! Look over here! Trace elements of pollution have been found in storm overflow runoff! And... And... We're going to sue!

But in reality, it doesn't matter. None of these arguments are meant to be considered seriously on their own merit. It is all about throwing a lot of stuff at the wall and see what sticks. And in all of this nonsense, something very big and important is being lost.

This is the important thing:

Our board of supervisors is seriously considering taking 400 acres of beautiful ocean front park land, land that belongs to the people of San Francisco, land that was a gift to the people of San Francisco, land that the people of San Francisco choose to share with everyone as a park - and simply give it away. If if happens, this will be the legacy of Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi. He will be known as the man who gave away 400 acres of ocean front park land that belonged to the people of San Francisco.

One more note. If anyone is wondering where Brent Plater learned his techniques, I found this clip from of one of his early cases. It explains a lot:

The Golf War - Sharp Park Front Preview of coming attractions

C U @ City Hall

I've come to rely more and more on the "Fix Pacifica" blog to keep current on scheduled events and meetings related to the Sharp Park controversy. More free wheeling and fun than Pacifica Riptide, it also has a much more open commenting and submission policy. In fact, it exists because many Pacificans could not get their voices heard at Riptide. That's what happens in the Internet Age. As the saying goes - "Information wants to be free".

Barbara Arietta, Chair of the Pacifca Community Coalition To Save Sharp Park Golf Course, has done yeoman's work keeping everyone abreast of the meetings affecting the future of Sharp Park. I've run out of hat tips, but she has sure made it easy for me. For this post, I'll just link, cut and paste her announcements and summary of key meetings happening this week and the issues at stake. Take it away Barb...

This week's (and this year's) Most Important Meetings --Your Attendance Is Urgently Requested

1. Wednesday, December 16, SF BOS Audit and Gov't Oversight Sub-Committee Public Hearing, 1PM, Room 263, Second Floor, SF City Hall This will be the last Public Hearing and opportunity for public to voice their concerns and desires before the SF BOS makes their future ultimate vote about the fate of the Sharp Park Golf Course. Upon hearing the public's comments at Wednesday's meeting, the SF BOS Sub-Committee will make a recommendation to the full SF BOS, who will, at a later date, cast the ultimate vote, after learning both the recommendations of the SF BOS sub-committee from this day's meeting and the voting results of the Rec and Park Bd of Commissioners, from the next day's meeting on December 17th).
2. Thursday, December 17, SF Rec and Park Board of Commissioners Public Hearing, 2PM, Room 416, 4th Floor, SF City Hall
This will also be the last Public Hearing of the SF Rec and Park Board of Commissioners on the fate of the Sharp Park Golf Course. They will be immediately voting after listening to the public that afternoon and that vote/recommendation will then go to SF BOS for their ultimate vote on Sharp Park Golf Course fate.

Monday Afternoon Update to December 17th Rec and Park Commissioners Meeting

As those of you familiar with the posting of the Agenda for public meetings know, it is the rule that the Agenda has to be published 72 hours before a meeting...now that doesn't always happen, but it did this afternoon and it looks like there have been some refinements and clarifications made to the public meeting on Thursday, December 17, 2009 of the SF Rec and Park Board of Commissioners concerning the Sharp Park Issues.

There are now two Sharp Park items on the Agenda for December 17, 2009. And the Agenda reads as follows:

10. SHARP PARK SEA WALL EVALUATION REPORT
Presentation and discussion only on the findings and recommendations contained in the Sharp Park Sea Wall Evaluation Report. (DISCUSSION ONLY)
11. SHARP PARK – CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 19, 2009 MEETING
Discussion and possible action to adopt the General Manager’s recommendation to proceed with the recovery plan for the San Francisco Garter Snake and California Red Legged-Frog and to preserve an 18-hole golf course at Sharp Park. This item is continued from the November 19, 2009 Recreation and Park Commission meeting. Public comment was received and closed.

Follow the subject links to Barb's post for more color on these meetings. Apparently public comment is now closed in the Rec and Park Commission meeting. Glad I got my two cents in at the last one. I'll have more to say about that sea wall though. Stay tuned.

Barbara also posted this great summary of reasons to support Sharp Park Golf. I'll just include the topic list here:

The Case For Saving Sharp Park Golf Course

The Sharp Park Report recommends keeping the popular, affordable, historic and acclaimed Sharp Park Golf Course, while simultaneously creating over 26 acres—-more than 25 percent of the golf course property west of Highway One—of new and restored breeding, foraging, and upland habitat for the threatened California Red-legged Frog and the endangered San Francisco Garter Snake. (Sharp Park Report, Table 3, at p. 50.)

This level of voluntary habitat restoration cannot fairly be characterized as an “all-golf solution,” as golf’s opponents would have it. Nor can the Department’s methodology or its six-month, 400-plus-page study be accurately characterized as a “rush to judgment,” as golf’s opponents say. This is the Department’s third golf study since February, 2007; all of them have recommended continued operation of the Sharp Park course.

1. Sharp Park is a Rarity: a Well-Loved, Modestly-priced, Classic Golf Course.
2. Congressional, San Mateo County, and City of Pacifica Leaders Support the Golf Course.
3. Sharp Park is a legacy of the Great Golf Architect Dr. Alister MacKenzie.
4. The Plight of the Course Has Attention from the World Golf Community.
5. Hole 12 and Course Realignment Proposals Should Be Subject to a Golf Design Competition.
6. The Sharp Park Report Seeks to Balance The City’s Discretionary Effort to Create New Habitat, with the Preservation of the 77-year old Historic Golf Course.
7. There is Broad Public Support For a “Win/Win” Option to Save the Golf Course, While Benefitting Natural Habitat.

Follow the link for the full argument.

See you at City Hall on Wednesday and/or Thursday.