Fresno's city officials have been in a really crabby mood lately, trying to charge anyone living outside the city limits $2 extra for going into the city parks. What provincial nonsense. Read today's editorial by clicking here.
Despite the arrogant comments of one guy, who suggests that people who don't agree should get out of town more (for the record, between us, we've traveled to every continent in the world and one of us has lived abroad) we think this idea of setting up a two-tier system violates all safe and sane marketing strategies. Beyond that, even if it was a neighborly idea -- which it is not -- the city brain trust can't even figure out a quick system for figuring out who lives in the city, who lives in the county and who doesn't. These folks need to pull in their claws and play nicely with others.
What do you think?
This denizen of two continents (American and European) is not a lawyer,
but instinctively feels that the proposed surcharge for out-of-town visitors of Fresno's parks is wide open to legal challenge.
The understanding being that government can neither control nor monitor
the movements of the citizenry. But in an indirect, convoluted way, that is exactly what the City of Fresno is trying.
During the five plus decades I have lived in this area, it happened more
than once that city governments had to make court-ordered refunds
of illegal fees and other charges collected. Government had to come
up with mega-bucks in lump sums, exceeding the ill made gains from before.
The fee should be the same for all and I don't really see people flocking to our parks from out of the area. They are just ok. Woodward is nice most of the time
Arrogant? Me? I certainly apologize if that's the way that my lack of writing skills came across. I flunked basic college English twice, so I know that I am humble about that and many other things (looks, brains, wealth, physique).
But I am sensitive to the old "Fresno is an Informational Island" theory espoused by our wise former Mayor Whitehurst (I mean this sincerely, lest my writing be misinterpreted). There are other places that have a multi-tiered fee system, and some of them have better parks then we do. I also know that logically one does not necessarily follow another. But I think it is worth considering before it is discarded.
Many public golf courses have different rules for residents and non-residents too. Is it right? Beats the heck out of me. I couldn't say.
But before we get the citizenry all stirred up, I do think that it's good to see what else is going on around our state so that we can all make informed opinions. This is the point that I meant to make.
Your less-than-arrogant subscriber,
Craig
To flunk ENGL 1, that takes some doing.....for the ugly or the hansome.
Isabell,
They kept writing "did not follow instructions" on the top of my papers. I'm not sure what they meant by that.
I guess I was more suited to Creative Writing classes.
I'm back in school now and am managing to get A's on my papers. I guess I should have just waited 25 years before heading to college!
Craig
The problem isn't with the parking fee here, it seems to me. Let the city go ahead and charge $5 to park at Roeding, along with the other two big city parks. I'm willing to pay for it and so should residents of the county be willing to pay for it. Roeding is a terrific park.
The real problem is that the zoo people have done very little with their Measure Z money. It wouldn't be a problem paying an extra $2 for everyone to park there if there was actually something good to see at the zoo.
No disrespect intended for the few modest upgrades recently and for the hardworking people of the zoo and Storyland staffs. But until the zoo board gets its act together, the biggest marketing problem that the zoo has it its own ineptitude.
Don't worry about the "arrogant" label, Scharton. I think the Editorial Board is just protecting their franchise on condescending, preachy writing. That's their livelihood, after all.
Re: Mike D
The tone of the last post is really unexpected. And I have read them all since that one month back when I became a BLOG person.
Sorry if I threw you off, Isabel. Maybe editorial writers have a license to be preachy, but I still think it's a bit of the pot calling the kettle "black" to label a poster "arrogant" for one off-hand remark. Mr. Scharton is actually one of the most thoughtful bloggers we have locally. I thought he deserved better.