Supervisors continue debate on Rec and Park golf-course task force, send matter back for one week

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors continued for one week an ordinance to create a Rec and Park golf-course task force after nearly two hours of debate over membership, timeline and whether the new body is necessary.

Supporters said a task force would provide a structured review of golf-course operations and options for fiscal sustainability; opponents called the panel duplicative and urged immediate action to stop further decline at courses such as Lincoln Park.

Supervisor McGoldrick moved amendments to the ordinance to add two task-force members — one a public-golf-course gardener with at least five years’ experience, another a resident of Pacifica who uses Sharp Park — and to shorten the proposed task-force term. McGoldrick said adding those members and reducing the timeline would produce a more inclusive, faster review. General Manager Yaomi Agunbiotti of the Recreation and Park Department told the board that a consultant-led study and an advisory body were under development and awaiting final approval steps before work could begin.

Supervisor Ellsberg argued the city already has sufficient information and oversight bodies — the Rec and Park Commission and existing staff — and opposed a new advisory panel, calling further delay ‘‘a dereliction of our duty.’’ Supervisor Daly urged ending general-fund subsidies for courses immediately and said he would vote to do so. Supervisor Mercarini pressed Rec and Park for an update on a $35,000 add-back in the budget intended to pay for related analysis; Agunbiotti said a scope of work had been prepared and that contracting documents were under review by the Human Resources Commission.

The board adopted amendments to shorten the task-force term (members discussed 12, 6 and 18 months during debate), removed language about studying adaptive reuse of golf-course land and added representatives including gardeners and an identified Pacifica user. After additional amendments and a motion to continue the item to allow staff and supervisors to reconcile language, the board voted to continue the item one week by roll call (8 ayes, 3 noes). The item will return for further consideration at that time.

The debate highlighted three recurring themes: whether the task force would duplicate existing commissions and studies, how fast the city should move to preserve or change golf operations, and how to ensure adequate public participation and consultant vetting. Rec and Park staff said contracting for the consultant and advisory process was in progress and expected to move forward once the Human Resources Commission completed its review.

Supervisors asked staff to provide clear information on the consultant scope, the add-back budget status, and how the task force would interact with the Rec and Park Commission and previously commissioned studies. The item will return to the board in one week for another vote.

(Notes: This article summarizes debate on ordinance items numbered 9–11 on the board calendar and the ensuing floor amendments and votes.)