Editorial: Bayfront Park is too good for golf Editorial: Bayfront Park is too good for golf (October 19, 2005)

We hope City Council members think long and hard before deciding to build a golf course at Bayfront Park, with or without playing fields.

This is one of the city's very last large parcels of open space, and even though its location off the busy Bayfront Expressway makes it somewhat less accessible, it is contiguous to the approximately 1,500 acres of the San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge that are inside Menlo Park city limits. To build a golf course in this setting would be totally out of step with state and federal efforts to restore the bay lands.

We doubt if many residents are aware that Bayfront Park exists, and even fewer take advantage of its fantastic Bay views and rustic hiking trails. But the recent state purchase of the adjacent Cargill salt ponds and the ongoing effort to restore them to tidal marsh will make Bayfront Park one of the few places where visitors can get a close-up view of the tidal marshes and wetlands that used to ring the Bay. And trails in the park belong to the developing Bay Trail system, another reason to be careful with full-scale development of this resource.

We know the City Council is concerned about the $187,000 annual cost to maintain the park. The city has only $1 million left in the account accrued from fees paid by garbage haulers years ago that has been paying for the park's upkeep. But when that money runs out, the city will be faced with an annual expense that will have to be paid out of the general fund, not an appealing idea in the current climate of budget deficits and evaporating sales tax revenue.

The council's answer to this predicament appears to be to generate income from a golf course/playing field combination that supposedly will pay for the area's upkeep. We would have preferred to see the city ask residents first about their preferences for park development, rather than assume the revenue-based golf option to be the best. An early public hearing also might have brought out a way to reduce the operations cost, including finding a way to lower the outlay for a park ranger, which is nearly $100,000 a year.

The council also could have been more upfront with its decision to seek golf course proposals, made at a lightly attended Saturday goal-setting session last March. Many residents were unaware that the decision had been made to go forward with the golf course options.

The current economic downturn presents some very tough decisions for the current council, including this one. Should the city develop its resources no matter what the environmental cost, or hold on and look for better, more creative solutions? Menlo Park is suffering financially now, but the city remains one of the wealthiest on the Peninsula, at least when the size of its reserves are considered.

Bayfront Park is an open space preserve that could attract many more visitors due to its proximity to the national wildlife refuge. It could also become a run-of-the-mill golf course that might or might not be successful. Palo Alto and Mountain View already have courses of this caliber and neither is making a lot of profit.

We have no doubt that the coming debate over the future of Bayfront Park will be vigorous. We just hope it goes beyond deciding which golf course plan to support. There is a much bigger picture out there.

E-mail a friend a link to this story.