I admit I’m a genuinely lazy person. If I can avoid walking, I usually do. I’ll drive a block and a half to the 7-Eleven for a gallon of milk. I use the “people mover” walkways in airports. I’d really like to find one of those automatic dog walkers like George had in “The Jetsons” so my pooch could be exercising while I’m sitting on my butt watching her.
|
|
That said, I prefer to walk when I’m playing golf. Why?
First, it’s supposed to be exercise. By definition, it’s recreation and that implies some form of activity beyond depressing a gas pedal and a brake.
Second, you get to experience the golf course, not just navigate it.
Third, when I’m playing just for fun, it’s usually with my wife or kids. Walking along together is a nice chance to share some time in the outdoors and bond.
Fourth, I’m cheap, and on those occasions when I’m just playing for fun and actually paying a green fee (again, usually with my kids here at one of the Metroparks courses in Cleveland), I see no reason to drop an extra $20 for nine holes.
So, here’s the thing. Even though I completely understand the revenue implications of mandating the use of a golf car and even though I know that certain hilly tracks demand the use of a golf car, I hate it. I particularly hate the notion of requiring carts at a government-owned facility. I agree with the rebels described in this article who make an excellent case that munis are public property and people should be able to walk on them.
My question is whether any of you – particularly those at munis which require golf cars – can explain how you justify this … other than money. It seems like nothing more than a revenue grab to me, but maybe you can explain it.
Pat Jones is president of Flagstick LLC.