Question Authority

Before the world of blogging opened before him, Wild Bill was an inveterate writer of letters to editors – and a damn successful one with numerous letters appearing in the Washington Post, the Boston Globe and many other smaller papers. But it was such a pain to have to boil one’s thoughts down to the very small number of words under the tiny maximums permitted. And, of course, about ninety percent of them didn’t make it while the stupid rants of lesser lights filled space that could have been used to educate and entertain the readers.

But blogging changed everything. Bloggers could say what they wanted at any length they chose. The only limit was their perception of the patience of the readers they’d lured to their sites. Since last August, I haven’t written a single letter to an editor, relying on my blog to serve as bait for as many readers as possible. I’ve been lucky, and the number who tune in on my pieces increases slightly with each posting.

But under prodding from a few wise guy friends and relatives, my weakness was exploited and I sent a poison pen missile to the local section of the Washington Post about a proposal by the Fairfax County, VA Park Authority to single out seniors for a rate increase to play golf. It was fun, my old mean streak shown like a beacon.

Wild Bill’s not the even handed angel he portrays when his personal ox is gored. Here’s his little dab of spilled bile.

“To the Editor:

The Fairfax County Park Authority has looked into the future and completely misread it. Instead of seeing the need for more open space that might be used by its citizens for recreation, it has determined that the best course of action is to identify one of the groups most in need of such facilities and the one most likely to use them in off peak hours – seniors – and to price out the poorest among them. Naturally, they expect these same seniors – the largest growing group of taxpayers in the county by the Authority’s own reckoning – to support Park Authority bonds.

The proposed increase in fees for seniors on county golf courses makes no sense. I’m in my seventies and play golf at Pinecrest, Burke Lake, Greendale, the two courses at Twin Lakes, and on semi-public facilities throughout the region about once a week during the fair weather months, so I’m subsidized to the tune of about $100.00 per year under present policy.

The Authority is correct in its assumption that seniors will grow both in number and as a percentage of the county’s residents, but for them to work backward from that to the solution that poorer seniors must be driven from these courses by draconian price increases defies logic, especially since – at least as it relates to Pinecrest, Greendale, and Burke Lake, the facilities most often cited in the media – the authority has its facts wrong. The idea that seniors are overwhelming these courses is simply not true.

No serious affluent golfer of any age would play these courses on a regular basis. Anyone with means and serious intent is a member of a country club or plays the rapidly proliferating semi-private courses throughout the region that compete aggressively for off peak affluent players. Most of the golfers playing Burke Lake, Pinecrest and Greendale are far from wealthy, and I invite the members of the Authority to check these parking lots for BMWs and Mercedes.

That senior charges should increase while junior golfers retain their present rates is rank age discrimination and defies logic. The increase for seniors is designed to head off an avalanche of golfers, while the junior fees are set to encourage growth of play to develop the customers of tomorrow. In view of the new holes coming on line in Lorton, are there really going to be too many off-peak players?

Taxes on senior owned property increases far faster than their retirement income and they are under great cost pressure. Yet they are called upon – begged – to support school and park bonds. While the Authority judges seniors to be daft, if the proposed rate increase for seniors stands, older members of the community would be foolish to support any future park bond issues.

Seniors are generous in support of children through our votes and our taxes. So to demonstrate where the county’s priorities lie, the Authority proposes to remove one of the small subsidies from seniors who pay far more taxes than they get in services and continue to subsidize school age youngsters to play golf. Seniors pay taxes, do not require new roads, don’t attend school, and don’t play subsidized golf on the weekends so, “Off with their heads!” This seems a poor way to preserve the social compact within the county.

Obviously, the intent of the new rate schedule is to ration play by cost, to increase income, and to reduce wear and tear on the facilities. I won’t argue with those goals but would point out that an independent study will almost certainly show that virtually all prime tee times on the three courses above and both Twin Lakes courses are reserved long before play begins. It is obvious that an economic model that does not result in some open spots indicates a rate schedule that is too low. Therefore, it is clear that the Park Authority is trying to balance its budget on golfers who play on off peak hours.

The proposed rate increase is based on faulty analysis, is discriminatory, and will result in bad public policy. See you at the polls!

Sincerely,”

Life’s too much fun not to question authority.

Blog on!

Wild Bill