I’m going to
wax philosophical today. I’ve been
writing this blog long enough to know that doing so isn’t going to change the
world. And that’s okay. If I change the way just one person thinks
about the land-use process, or about life, then I’ll have had a good day.
Many years
ago, I was president and part-owner of a minor league baseball team. It was a great experience. Expensive, but a source of memories and
stories that will make me smile forever.
Those in the North Bay may remember the Sonoma County Crushers who
played in Rohnert Park until 2002. My
club was in the same league.
I rarely
note my baseball experience in this blog because it has little pertinence to
land use or to urbanism. But once in
awhile, I can find a way to connect some dots.
Today is one of those times.
During the
life of the ballclub, we had one particular fan. I’ve forgotten his name, so I’ll call him the
Vacuum Cleaner Guy. If I recall
correctly, he had at least some college, perhaps even a degree, but he’d never
found an office situation where he could be successful. He’d tried a small business, but again
failed. By the time I got to know him,
he was earning a living as a door-to-door vacuum cleaner salesman.
But it
wasn’t much of a living. And his
ballpark spending reflected his life situation.
He was always looking for free or discounted tickets. And he never patronized the ballpark
concessions, always sneaking his dinner into the park.
We didn’t
mind having the Vacuum Cleaner Guy in the ballpark. Every person in the stands adds to the
ambience of the experience, which brings fans back to more games. But Vacuum Cleaner Guy wasn’t a source of
revenue.
Which was a
shame because revenue is often scarce in minor league baseball. An affiliated ballclub with good local
government support can be financially stable.
Perhaps no one gets rich, but the operation can be sustained from
year-to-year.
But we
weren’t in those categories. We were an independent
ballclub so we paid the players ourselves instead of having a Major League club
cover the payroll. (The photo above is
of the ballfield of an independent ballclub in Ohio.) And the management team which preceded my
time as president had burned a number of community bridges, so we weren’t
getting any favors from City Hall or the Park and Recreation District.
We were
discreet in talking about our uncertain finances. Even if it was occasionally true, to say publicly
that we were unsure of meeting payroll the following week would have damaged
the turnstile count and the clubhouse morale.
But we often told the press that our ability to return for the following
season would depend on selling more season tickets or securing more
sponsorships. The fans understood the cues
we were giving.
In
particular, Vacuum Cleaner Guy took our situation to heart, often waylaying me
during ballgames to impart his wisdom, most of which was in the form of
spending money to make money. He was
sure that rebuilding the ballpark restrooms would increase ticket revenue by
more than the cost of the construction, that improving the beer selection would
greatly increase sales, and that adding more vendors in the stands would
increase concessions sales by more than the additional costs.
Of course,
there were many reasons to discount his advice.
To begin, his own career path didn’t provide any grounds to value his wisdom. For another, he didn’t have the capacity to
spend any more money at the ballpark than he already did, so he was assuming behavior
by the general public that wasn’t consistent with his own situation.
But the most
important reason to set aside his suggestions was that he never made an effort
to learn about the finances of minor league baseball. I wouldn’t have told him everything. It wouldn’t have been appropriate to share
salary information or to provide updates on litigation risks elsewhere in the
league, but there was much that could have helped inform his opinions. However, despite being generous with his
suggestions, he never once asked about percentage of revenue that came from
gate receipts, the structure of beer vendor arrangement, or the impact of
workers’ comp insurance.
It’s awfully
hard to value the opinion of someone who makes no attempt to understand the
parameters of the problem.
(Coincidentally,
a second illustration of the same point also comes from my baseball years. Another of the co-owners, and perhaps the
best friend of my adult years, began a career in politics during that time. He soon reached a position of prominence in
the state budget process. Citizens from
across the state would seek time with him to lobby for funding priorities, often
in the field of public education.
Whenever
someone began a conversation about education funding, Ben would ask what
percent of the current state budget was dedicated to education. If he received the right answer, which was
close to fifty percent, he would take the conversation seriously and engage in
an extended give-and-take over budget priorities.
But when he received
the wrong answer, which he often did, with most folks putting the percentage
far below fifty percent, he would judge that his time was being wasted by folks
who hadn’t done their homework and would cut the conversation short.)
And this
brings us back around to land use. In my
role as a commenter on land-use practices, policies, and realities, I chat with
many folks about North Bay land-use issues.
I’m not surprised that many don’t understand the give-and-take of the
process, or the underlying realities of zoning codes versus raising capital
versus construction costs versus impact fees versus absorption rates.
But I’m very
surprised when so many have no interest in learning about these topics. Instead, the attitude is frequently, “I don’t
need to understand the process and the factors that affect it. I only need to say what land uses I want and
expect them to appear.”
I’m not
going to defend the way we do land use.
Anyone who has read this blog over the past three years knows that I
have many issues with how the system has evolved, from the implementation of
CEQA to the calculation of impact fees to the risk aversion that is often
driven by banking regulations.
But to
complain about the results of the land use process and to advocate for other
solutions without deeming the understanding of the process as worthy of one’s
time is akin to letting go of a china tea cup in mid-air and then protesting
bitterly about gravity when the cup shatters on the floor.
(By the way,
I’m also not setting myself up as some fully-informed land-use savant. I’m constantly studying and learning, and
hope never to cease.)
Unable to
overcome the ill-will left behind by the earlier management team, we eventually
shut down the baseball team. It was a
sad day, but we were out of options.
Even if he’d bother to educate himself, I don’t think Vacuum Cleaner Guy
could have helped save the day. The hole
we inherited was too deep.
But nobody
is going to shut down North Bay land use.
Instead, if it continues on the path it has followed for the past seven
decades, it’ll just keep digging a deeper hole.
If that future isn’t appealing, now is the time to become educated and
to make a difference. No one should be a
Vacuum Cleaner Guy.
Next time,
I’ll tackle a question recently raised by a reader, “Is there such a thing as
bad urbanism?” The question forced me to
reassess some definitions I’ve been using.
As always,
your questions or comments will be appreciated.
Please comment below or email me.
And thanks for reading. - Dave Alden (davealden53@comcast.net)
Very good analogy between land use policy and your independent league baseball ownership career.
ReplyDeleteI deal regularly with staff and board members that share similar traits with the "vacuum cleaner guy"
On unrelated note the posting photo reminds me of a very pleasant evening with friends watching baseball in northern Ohio.
Hello.. Thank for your helpful infomation.
ReplyDeleteI have a 4 room house, all hardwood floors, 4 levels. One shedding cat and a sloppy husband.. What is the cheapest, easiest to maneuver, vacumum that I can use also in a sewing room that would pick up thread and not be too heavy to carry through the house and do you recommend any of the steam mop/vacuum cleaner combos.. I would love to have that as storage space is limited.
Winnie, I appreciate the comment, but I think you failed to grasp the thrust of my post. I was only making a point about someone who happened to be a vacuum cleaner salesman. I'm not claiming any knowledge of vacuum cleaners, a point on which my wife would quickly concur.
Delete