Supes table plan for $5 pickleball, tennis court reservations

San Francisco lawmakers have tabled a proposal to charge $5 to reserve select public tennis and pickleball courts in The City after hearing pushback from players.

For now, reserving a public court will remain free, after the San Francisco Board of Supervisors’ Budget and Appropriations committee unanimously voted late last month to postpone consideration of the proposal.

The San Francisco Recreation and Park Commission unanimously passed a proposal in May to charge a $5 reservation fee at 28 San Francisco courts, but some pickleball and tennis players protested with petitions and letters to elected officials in an effort to keep court access free, stating that the fee posed an undue hardship for those who couldn’t afford it.

The proposed fee would cover the cost of administering the system to reserve public courts, as well as fund court maintenance, said Dana Ketcham, RPD Director of Property Management and Permits.

Ketcham added that the department reviewed reservation fees in other cities, and found that “no city provides reservations without fees,” and that the $5 per-hour, per-court fee the department proposed was “the lowest we could find.”

Supervisor Connie Chan, who chairs The City’s Budget and Appropriations committee, said that the committee needs to have more discussion over the court reservation-fee structure before making a final decision. Supervisors Chan, Rafael Mandelman, Myrna Melgar and Shamann Walton unanimously voted to table the decision on June 26, while Supervisor Aaron Peskin was absent.

Chan said she “supports more free play over The City,” but added that she doesn’t oppose a fee to reserve courts.

“I understand there is a challenge with the budget deficit , so I’m not saying we should not be charging a fee,” she said. “But Instead of charging a fee across the board, I urge [the department] to reconsider the reservation fee charging model.”

In May, Chan wrote a letter to Rec and Park General Manager Phil Ginsburg sharing her concerns about the proposed fee. Chan said the $5 an hour fee is inequitable, and that “establishing and charging reservation fees would pose a disproportionate hardship for older adults, and those on fixed incomes who do not have the luxury to be able to set aside expenses” to play on The City’s tennis and pickleball courts.

Even those who can afford the fee said the proposal is unfair to residents.

“The City already invested in the materials that are in a space that's being offered publicly. So why now are they wanting to capitalize on something when it's a trend,” pickleball player Joe Haley told The Examiner.

Haley, who said he plays five days a week on The City’s public courts, said he would look into joining a private club if a fee was imposed.

“Why would I pay to go and play at a rundown court that's not maintained, and then with the extreme weather conditions that San Francisco has, when I can go and play pickleball indoors on Treasure Island?” he said.

But Haley added that not all residents have the means to do that — private clubs, like the one at Treasure Island, cost $60 or more a month, and “not everyone can afford that, or even have reliable transportation to get there,” he added.

It’s unclear when city officials will revisit the $5 reservation fee. Tabled legislation can be reintroduced by any supervisor within a 12-month span.

“To ensure equity in our parks system, including the tennis and pickleball courts, means we need to make sure everyone can play and recreate no matter their socio-economic status,” a spokesperson for Supervisor Chan said in an emailed statement. “This fee would have created a ‘pay-to-play’ system in our public parks and move us away from the direction of an equitable parks system.”

Suzy Safdie, a pickleball player who helped gather signatures for a petition opposing the reservation fee, and petition organizers Lisa Shaw and Peter Mueller sent a joint statement to The Examiner, extending “sincere gratitude to the Board of Supervisors and the Mayor’s office for their time, attentive listening, and most importantly, for recognizing that the proposal was flawed and inequitable to the broader community.”

“We wish that [the Recreation and Parks Department] would have engaged with the tennis and pickleball communities to explore an alternative path. We invite the department to work with us now to find more equitable solutions for this and other pickleball related issues,” the group said.

It’s not the first time the pickleball community successfully rallied over court preservation. City officials last month responded to the pleas of The Crossing at East Cut’s devoted pickleball fans by postponing a park project that would have closed the courts there temporarily. The downtown location is one of the most popular places to play pickleball in The City, equipped with three concrete courts.