The people of San Francisco have been very supportive of our parks, passing previous bond measures by a two-thirds majority and establishing the Open Space Fund. Implicit in past public support has been a promise that our parks will continue to be free and our clubhouses will remain open to everyone.

However, the current Recreation and Park management and commission have unilaterally changed that approach. We are distressed by the thinly veiled privatization of parklands and clubhouses described by the Department as "Site Specific Revenue Generation", and by the policy of "Find Value and Extract It" that currently governs the Recreation & Parks Department. Excessive fees and fee-based programming are separating City residents into those who can afford to participate and those who are losing access by being priced out.

We are further distressed by the proposed placement of an industrial plant in Golden Gate Park, by the planned eviction of the 33 year recycling center, and by the planned replacement of grassy meadows in Golden Gate Park with artificial turf.

We were deeply concerned by the 2010 firing of the recreation directors and the subsequent outsourcing and reducing of the programming for families and kids.

Resident and Park Advocates observations and concerns are systematically and routinely met with no response or outright dismissal ,by both Recreation and Parks Department staff and the Recreation and Parks Commission.

Our Parks and Recreation facilities are essential, not optional, for the health and recreation of the City's residents, especially in harsh economic times. Under current management, free access to our parks and community clubhouses is being increasingly restricted. The same management is spending millions of tax dollars improving locations only to close them and put them up for lease to private entities, which do not offer the breadth of programming offered formerly by City employees.

We love our parks and recreation facilities. We are interested in sustainable funding for our parks and recreation system. However, without a significant reversal of current policies and practices, we cannot support a funding stream for the Recreation & Parks Department that will reinforce the current policies, because they are antithetical to the protection of public space.

TBOP