WOW, PETERB, THAT IS SOME OF THE MOST AMAZING HORSE HOCKEY I HAVE READ SO FAR ON THIS FORUM. AND THAT'S SAYING A LOT.
Sorry for shouting but pretty much everything in your post is wrong, so before you all go putting a noose around my neck lets get quite a few facts straight. I said what I meant and meant what I said when I stated that I think these decisions should be made by local residents but that they should have both sides to the story. And I'm not they only one that feels that way -- our Coordinating Committee has about a dozen members who are the heart of our organization, we work by informal consensus, and we have discussed and agreed to that policy more than once.
WE DO NOT WORK TO ACTIVELY OPPOSE DISC GOLF ANYWHERE OTHER THAN IN THE NATURAL AREAS OF MCLAREN PARK. PERIOD. Even Golden Gate Park. At the same time, we feel strongly that communities should have as much information as possible on these matters (because we didn't) and they're typically not going to get it from the DGers trying to put in a course. So yes, we have been in contact with other groups from time to time to share information and experiences.
What we know about JSP in San Mateo county is that several of us (not including me) went to one meeting as observers only, out of curiosity. We made no contact with any local neighbors of the park, and they did not contact us. I read on the net about some petition going around but have no more knowledge of it. Most of what we know about the matter is from reviewing web forums and your facebook page, which seems to have disappeared so my (perhaps incorrect) assumption was that it was a dead project. The last I read the county wanted a $50,000 environmental review and then poof, your web presence went missing. So if I have the story wrong, I apologize.
And as for "SMP going out of their way to produce a CEQA comment", I HAVE NO EARTHLY IDEA WHAT THE HELL YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT so put up or shut up, PeterB, I would LOVE to see a copy of such a document posted on this forum for all of us to review.
As for the proposed Soquel course, again, some concerned Santa Cruz locals found our webpage and contacted us, we had a couple of email exchanges and phone conversations but that's entirely the extent of it. EVERYTHING they have done, from their public meetings to their the Pinto Basin reports to their website to their "Birds of Anna Jean Cummings Park" flyer are ENTIRELY the work of "Friends of AJP" volunteers.
We have also been in contact with several other communities around the country over the past couple of years in a similar fashion. We heard from one fellow on the east coast who literally lost an eye from getting hit with a wayward disc, and he even used to be a casual DG player himself. Last we heard he was working on a lawsuit. I could send you some pretty gruesome pictures but I won't.
PeterB, I know you are passionate about this sport but it seems that you have been spinning your own slanted talking points so much that you actually believe them. We have gotten this attitude constantly from SFDGC leadership -- "If someone has problems with the sport or a proposed course it is either because they don't understand it yet or they are crabby old NIMBYs or they are whacko environmentalists who we shouldn't pay attention to anyway". This is completely off the mark, and we resent this attempt at marginalization immensely. We are mostly everyday schlubs who use the park often and love it dearly for it's off-the-beaten-path charms, warts and all. And we are much more numerous than you seem to imagine.
And yes, there are other problems in the park that we also are concerned about. The off-leash Dog Play Area (at 60 acres the largest by far in the City) is seeing significant damage, largely from the professional walkers who bring in large packs that they have no real way of keeping under control. Fortunately, a new law to go in effect in July will limit walkers to 4 dogs per person, or eight with a permit which requires courses in handling dogs. We are hopeful that this will have a positive impact, but it is a serious concern and we have discussed various ways of trying to lesson the impact. And yes, like other City parks we have problems with trash and dumping, which is why we are having another cleanup party in a couple of weeks and will continue to do so. We have issues with motorized dirt bikers on the trails, and the occasional homeless encampment, which we are working with Park Patrol and other City departments to clean up. So yes, we have plenty of problems in McLaren Park, none of which adding a DG course will help.
As for winning the right to a course in McLaren as well as GGP, again PeterB gets the facts pretty much entirely wrong. We had to do a lot of Sunshine Ordinance requests with the City, and lots of other research to finally piece together most of the story,
but you can find it all completely documented here in this SF DG Timeline. The story begins way back in 1997, way before I got involved, with the FIRST time SFDGC tried to put a 27-hole course in McLaren. There was overwhelming community opposition even then. So then they tried stealth mode but clearly that didn't work for them either.
By the way, PeterB, the GGP DG course's original 5-year Memorandum of Understanding with the City ran out over a year ago. Whatever happened with that, hmm? Just curious...
Let me say once again, I really do appreciate more than I can say the comments from many of you that these issues are real, and must be dealt with if this sport is to grow and be successful in the future. I have absolutely nothing against the sport per se, just as I have nothing per se against ball golf or soccer or whatever. One of my girls is on a soccer league and uses RPD-built fields for games, and I am happy to see venues for as many sports as possible in our parks. But in a crowded city we have to be very wise about these decisions, and use our limited resources to the maximum, lest we become yet another concrete jungle with absolutely no place to escape the madness now and then.
Which is why I advocate for co-location of ball golf and disc golf courses. This is such a perfect idea to me, I don't understand why more disc golfers aren't banging down the pro shop doors wanting to put in courses. Our municipal courses really are in trouble financially, and there's absolutely no reason why a pay to play course there with higher non-resident fees and free play for youth, this could solve so many of these issues we are discussing. PeterB, the Gleneagles 9-year contract is up for renewal at the end of this year, and other City courses are options as well, if there is the political will to make it happen. How about we all team up together to make that a reality? It's certainly an idea that I would support whole-heartedly.
Ken