By Joseph Hanania Santa Monica
I read with interest your article Tuesday (SMDP, Oct. 5, page 1) on the unresponsiveness of city bureaucracy to city residents and business owners. Let me cite but one example.
I regularly play tennis at Reed Park, which has six “lighted” courts for night play. When those lights, which are already significantly less powerful than the lights at Westwood, Rancho Park and surrounding communities, burn out, they have been replaced with excruciating slowness.
But at least they have been replaced — until now. About three months ago, the lights on court three went out. All of them. Completely. Making that court nearly as dark as a back street alley, and certainly impossible to play on.
Despite the city’s home page proudly advertising Reed Park as having “six lighted courts,” every complaint about this was met with a variety of excuses. And so, more than a month ago, I called Rich Rollins, who is listed as principal community services supervisor, and left a message on his answering machine.
I never heard back from him. Instead, I heard back from the manager at Reed Park that the problem was complicated but on its way to being fixed, etc.
Now, here’s the interesting part. Within the past several months, Rollins has substantially raised fees on all pay courts, including those at Reed Park. Whereas a year ago, the city charged $2 per person per hour to play, it now charges $2.50, a 25-percent hike. Whereas the quarterly pass formerly cost $35 per three months, it now costs $45, an approximately 30-percent hike. And whereas the city used to charge Santa Monica Tennis Club, which operates under its aegis, $5 per hour per court, it now charges $8 an hour, a 60 percent increase.
And what necessitated these 25-, 30-and 60-percent hikes in tennis fees? When he does care to make himself available, Mr. Rollins cites increased costs of maintaining the courts, coupled with decreasing usage. Decreasing usage which comes, for example, from the continuing blackout on court three.
The city, after all, still has to pay the personnel who make the reservations. It still has to pay for the upkeep, such as sweeping and washing the courts and maintaining the nets. With no lights, however, it just doesn’t get any revenue in return.
Apparently, this makes sense to Mr. Rollins as the best way to run the city’s courts. But the problem goes further, as I learned several years ago while freelancing an article on Santa Monica city government.
Our elected officials, including our mayor, get put into office for a fixed term, while the bureaucrats who run the system stay on indefinitely. Thus, it was a simple matter to interview the mayor. It was also simple to interview department heads who have a genuine interest in making city government work — and yes, they do exist and are most often bright and idealistic.
Unfortunately, as I learned, there also exist department heads who somehow see themselves as above the public they allegedly serve, de facto running their bailiwicks without oversight.
Thus, although I had requested it and the mayor had passed on my request both beforehand and again during our interview, the director of planning never showed up to discuss plans for reviving downtown Santa Monica. Both the mayor and the head of the department of transportation graciously answered my questions. The director of planning, however, could not be bothered.
To this day, I have never knowingly met her. Which brings us back to Mr. Rollins, whose increasingly costly tennis program would have trouble passing muster even in the inner city.
Just when, Mr. Rollins, do you plan to fix the blackout on court three? How will you prevent a similar situation from arising again? Finally, Mr. Rollins, how do we, the people, get you to answer to us?
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on October 12, 2004. Read the original PDF.