# Surf Cup move



## teamt (Jul 25, 2016)

http://www.10news.com/news/surf-cup-soccer-seeks-move-to-del-mar-polo-fields

Will be interesting to see what plays out.


----------



## GKDad65 (Jul 25, 2016)

Surf has been awarded the lease of the polo fields by the SD city council today!!


----------



## Sped (Jul 25, 2016)

They can finally pave the parking lot and build some bathrooms, lol.  That alone is worth the fight.


----------



## espola (Jul 25, 2016)

GKDad65 said:


> Surf has been awarded the lease of the polo fields by the SD city council today!!


Which "Surf"?


----------



## espola (Jul 25, 2016)

teamt said:


> http://www.10news.com/news/surf-cup-soccer-seeks-move-to-del-mar-polo-fields
> 
> Will be interesting to see what plays out.


How many mistakes can you find in that 10News article?


----------



## espola (Jul 25, 2016)

Sped said:


> They can finally pave the parking lot and build some bathrooms, lol.  That alone is worth the fight.


Was that in their proposal?


----------



## espola (Jul 25, 2016)

The lease as proposed --

Editing note -- the original PDF URL is no longer working, but this one is --

http://dockets.sandiego.gov/sirepub/cache/2/wtculwhsdnn5z4c2pe4ahdjl/96310007262016091340344.PDF

Lease payments are $20,000 a month plus 10% of all sub-rents  (which inspires the question of what rent Surf Soccer Club will pay Surf Cup Sports), adjustable according to cost of living every 5 years.

Lessee will complete the repairs to the public trail graded without permission by the Polo Club.

Lessee may pump up the City's groundwater without paying an additional fee.

Pages 33 and 42 are maps.  The infamous parking lot is not included.

The neighbors have already hired a lawyer who is threatening to sue because large athletic tournaments do not fit within the "allowed uses" cited in the original deed when the land was given to the City of San Diego in 1983 (see page 37).


----------



## Charlotte's Chauffeur (Jul 26, 2016)

espola said:


> The lease as proposed --
> 
> http://dockets.sandiego.gov/sirepub/cache/2/odzmh2onjpuereq0ygikxn5h/96310007252016070034957.PDF
> 
> ...


This issue was addressed by the city attorney.  Basically there's a lot of ambiguity on the definition of allowed uses, and if the issue goes to the court, the court will look to the actual use since 1983.  Because Surf does not intend to expand or change the use of the land moving forward, the city feels comfortable that it will prevail.

My personal observation is that the neighbors' attorney seems to be a bit of a hack, and I'm sure the city is not overly concerned with the threat of a lawsuit.


----------



## espola (Jul 26, 2016)

Charlotte's Chauffeur said:


> This issue was addressed by the city attorney.  Basically there's a lot of ambiguity on the definition of allowed uses, and if the issue goes to the court, the court will look to the actual use since 1983.  Because Surf does not intend to expand or change the use of the land moving forward, the city feels comfortable that it will prevail.
> 
> My personal observation is that the neighbors' attorney seems to be a bit of a hack, and I'm sure the city is not overly concerned with the threat of a lawsuit.


The original deed specifically allows "equestrian activities, jogging, frisbee, and similar activities" as long as it does not involve "large assemblies of people or automobiles".

The neighbors have been complaining for years about the traffic nightmare they face three weekends a year, and they didn't get those big houses on the hill by backing down from a fight.


----------



## Charlotte's Chauffeur (Jul 26, 2016)

espola said:


> The original deed specifically allows "equestrian activities, jogging, frisbee, and similar activities" as long as it does not involve "large assemblies of people or automobiles".
> 
> The neighbors have been complaining for years about the traffic nightmare they face three weekends a year, and they didn't get those big houses on the hill by backing down from a fight.


Right, but what are "similar activities" and what are "large" assemblies?  Those terms are not defined in the lease.  The city attorney said a court would look to the prior use over the last 30 years to help define.  

Because soccer has been played at the polo fields for decades, it is likely a court would find that soccer is a similar activity (and from anyone's "common sense" evaluation, I think soccer would be considered a similar activity).  Likewise, what is a "large" assembly?  500 people, 5,000, 50,000?  It's too subjective in the abstract, but soccer practices and games have occurred at the polo fields for the last three decades and no law suits challenging this have been filed, so the prior use would suggest to the court that these activities would not be considered a "large" assembly of people.  

Given this, the city seems comfortable with its position in light of the threatened legal action from the white-hair contingency overlooking the fields.


----------



## espola (Jul 26, 2016)

Charlotte's Chauffeur said:


> Right, but what are "similar activities" and what are "large" assemblies?  Those terms are not defined in the lease.  The city attorney said a court would look to the prior use over the last 30 years to help define.
> 
> Because soccer has been played at the polo fields for decades, it is likely a court would find that soccer is a similar activity (and from anyone's "common sense" evaluation, I think soccer would be considered a similar activity).  Likewise, what is a "large" assembly?  500 people, 5,000, 50,000?  It's too subjective in the abstract, but soccer practices and games have occurred at the polo fields for the last three decades and no law suits challenging this have been filed, so the prior use would suggest to the court that these activities would not be considered a "large" assembly of people.
> 
> Given this, the city seems comfortable with its position in light of the threatened legal action from the white-hair contingency overlooking the fields.


Are you sure no lawsuits have been filed?  I know that there have been news reports over the years about the neighbor's complaints, and not just whining but formal written complaints to the City.  On top of that, the old lease has expired, the new lease is a new opportunity for haters to hate.

Subjective items in legal documents are how lawyers make the most money.


----------



## Charlotte's Chauffeur (Jul 26, 2016)

espola said:


> Are you sure no lawsuits have been filed?


That's what they said in the SD city council meeting yesterday.  There have been complaints through the years, but no legal action.


----------



## Wez (Jul 26, 2016)

Seems like Surf is successful enough to be able to afford to make the big tournaments flow well by building parking and entrance/exits that alleviate resident concerns about traffic.  If all the residents are concerned about is traffic during these highly successful tournaments that only happen a few times a year, that sounds like a problem that can be resolved to everyone's satisfaction.

Do the residents enjoy any benefits that come from the tax revenue from these tournaments?


----------



## Truth (Jul 26, 2016)

NIMBYs. 

Traffic around the polo fields is at its worst every Friday afternoon, backed up into Carmel Valley going north. And guess what? The polo fields are vacant on Fridays. You can't blame the traffic on soccer or weekend tournaments. Blame explosive growth in Carmel Valley and older two lane roads connecting CV to Del Mar. 

Disengage your schadenfreude, espola. Your hate of Surf and Surf Cup is well established. Surf's win at the polo fields is a win for everyone in youth soccer.


----------



## espola (Jul 26, 2016)

Truth said:


> NIMBYs.
> 
> Traffic around the polo fields is at its worst every Friday afternoon, backed up into Carmel Valley going north. And guess what? The polo fields are vacant on Fridays. You can't blame the traffic on soccer or weekend tournaments. Blame explosive growth in Carmel Valley and older two lane roads connecting CV to Del Mar.
> 
> Disengage your schadenfreude, espola. Your hate of Surf and Surf Cup is well established. Surf's win at the polo fields is a win for everyone in youth soccer.


Schadenfreude?  I have always enjoyed Surf Cup and I don't hate Surf Cup Sports.  They are probably the best non-profit entity one could imagine to manage the Polo Fields.  I am just trying to be realistic  about the situation.  For example, someone mentioned improving the parking lot - maybe they will, but it's not in the leased property.

As for Surf Soccer Club, I have always told the truth about them.  Some people don't like that.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 26, 2016)

Sped said:


> They can finally pave the parking lot and build some bathrooms, lol.  That alone is worth the fight.


Depends.  The parking lot on the North end/Villa De la Valle is privately owned.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 26, 2016)

Wez said:


> Seems like Surf is successful enough to be able to afford to make the big tournaments flow well by building parking and entrance/exits that alleviate resident concerns about traffic.  If all the residents are concerned about is traffic during these highly successful tournaments that only happen a few times a year, that sounds like a problem that can be resolved to everyone's satisfaction.
> 
> Do the residents enjoy any benefits that come from the tax revenue from these tournaments?


What tax benefits would they enjoy?  In recent recent years, large events at the polos have increased.  State and National Cup, CRL Play-in, Presidio Tournament, Lacrosse, etc..


----------



## espola (Jul 26, 2016)

espola said:


> Schadenfreude?  I have always enjoyed Surf Cup and I don't hate Surf Cup Sports.  They are probably the best non-profit entity one could imagine to manage the Polo Fields.  I am just trying to be realistic  about the situation.  For example, someone mentioned improving the parking lot - maybe they will, but it's not in the leased property.
> 
> As for Surf Soccer Club, I have always told the truth about them.  Some people don't like that.


So, "Truth", you disagreed with that.  What part do you think is wrong?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 26, 2016)

Truth said:


> NIMBYs.
> 
> Traffic around the polo fields is at its worst every Friday afternoon, backed up into Carmel Valley going north. And guess what? The polo fields are vacant on Fridays. You can't blame the traffic on soccer or weekend tournaments. Blame explosive growth in Carmel Valley and older two lane roads connecting CV to Del Mar.
> 
> Disengage your schadenfreude, espola. Your hate of Surf and Surf Cup is well established. Surf's win at the polo fields is a win for everyone in youth soccer.


I don't think E hates Surf or Surf Cup.  No organization is without flaws and Surf is not immune to organizational flaws.  

Surf Cup is well established because of their families/volunteers.   Those families saw their fees increase by $500 2 years ago, while free parking passes for Surf Cup Sports events became a thing of the past.  

But Surf does provide opportunities for families/volunteers to work at SCS events to reduce club/tournament fees which is unique to Surf as far as I know.  Kudos to the staff at Surf for managing a work for fees program that has the potential to be a financial nightmare.

SCS still runs a really good tournament.  But Field Marshall gear over the last 2 or 3 years has been pretty lame.  And Connerly needs to bring back the end of year Dinner gala for all surf team managers and SCS volunteers.  Oh! and that VIP section at Man City cup needs to go.  It wreaks of Elitism.  The kids would rather have tournament pins or bag tags!!  Most requested item at SCS events


----------



## Truth (Jul 26, 2016)

espola said:


> So, "Truth", you disagreed with that.  What part do you think is wrong?


As for Surf Soccer Club, I have always told the truth about them.


----------



## espola (Jul 26, 2016)

Truth said:


> As for Surf Soccer Club, I have always told the truth about them.


When did I not?


----------



## SOCCERMINION (Jul 27, 2016)

espola said:


> The lease as proposed --
> 
> Editing note -- the original PDF URL is no longer working, but this one is --
> 
> ...


Does anyone know if there was anything preventing Surf from putting up Lights on the Fields?


----------



## Wez (Jul 27, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> What tax benefits would they enjoy?


I don't know, that's why I asked.  If I was a resident, trying to decided what was best for me and my neighbors, any benefits we received from Surf events would have to figure in to that equation.


----------



## espola (Jul 27, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Depends.  The parking lot on the North end/Villa De la Valle is privately owned.


Over the years I have been told that the lot is owned by Surf Cup, Surf Soccer, the City, the 22nd Agricultural District (Del Mar Fairgrounds operator), and a "private individual".  The only clear evidence I have is an old parking stub that says "22nd Agricultural District", and they own the Horse Park just across the street, so that made sense.  However, some one posted on the old web site that the private owner merely hired 22AD to operate the lot.


----------



## Truth (Jul 27, 2016)

From the communications I've received, this means that there will be far fewer polo matches on the front complex and the grass should improve as a result. In fact, on Monday, the fields at the far East of the property which are always struggling with potholes created by the horses is now in really good shape. We walked around the fields during practice and they are now in the best condition I've seen in 8+ years. 

I don't know about what plans they have to improve the site, but if past experience is any indication, the crazy NIMBY neighbors and lunatic environmentalists will oppose them every step of the way.


----------



## gkrent (Jul 27, 2016)

espola said:


> The original deed specifically allows "equestrian activities, jogging, frisbee, and similar activities" as long as it does not involve "large assemblies of people or automobiles".
> 
> The neighbors have been complaining for years about the traffic nightmare they face three weekends a year, and they didn't get those big houses on the hill by backing down from a fight.


don't they face traffic drama with Del Mar right down the road too?


----------



## espola (Jul 27, 2016)

gkrent said:


> don't they face traffic drama with Del Mar right down the road too?


The racetrack/fairgrounds are on the other side of the freeway.


----------



## Sped (Jul 27, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Depends.  The parking lot on the North end/Villa De la Valle is privately owned.


Looks like they at least plan to lay down some dg to minimize dust.  Anything will be an improvement.


----------



## espola (Jul 27, 2016)

Sped said:


> Looks like they at least plan to lay down some dg to minimize dust.  Anything will be an improvement.


Looks like?  Where did you get that?


----------



## Kicker4Life (Jul 27, 2016)

espola said:


> The racetrack/fairgrounds are on the other side of the freeway.


Yet they affect traffic on said freeway in both directions!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 27, 2016)

espola said:


> Over the years I have been told that the lot is owned by Surf Cup, Surf Soccer, the City, the 22nd Agricultural District (Del Mar Fairgrounds operator), and a "private individual".  The only clear evidence I have is an old parking stub that says "22nd Agricultural District", and they own the Horse Park just across the street, so that made sense.  However, some one posted on the old web site that the private owner merely hired 22AD to operate the lot.


The 22AD is responsible for fee collection only.  The parking lot land is privately owned and Mike Connerly was paying the owner 40K a year to keep the owner from building on it.  At least that is what he told volunteers during Field Marshall Meetings in the past.


----------



## espola (Jul 27, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The 22AD is responsible for fee collection only.  The parking lot land is privately owned and Mike Connerly was paying the owner 40K a year to keep the owner from building on it.  At least that is what he told volunteers during Field Marshall Meetings in the past.


There is a line item in the Surf Cup 2014 Form 990 Schedule O for "Parking" of $23,100.

Surf Cup would be difficult to conduct without that parking lot.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 27, 2016)

espola said:


> There is a line item in the Surf Cup 2014 Form 990 Schedule O for "Parking" of $23,100.
> 
> Surf Cup would be difficult to conduct without that parking lot.


What was it the year before and the year after?


----------



## espola (Jul 27, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> What was it the year before and the year after?


2013 -- $15,684
2012 -- $21,877
2011 -- $17,694


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 27, 2016)

espola said:


> 2013 -- $15,684
> 2012 -- $21,877
> 2011 -- $17,694


Wonder what the property tax is for that land?


----------



## Eusebio (Jul 28, 2016)

Truth said:


> Surf's win at the polo fields is a win for everyone in youth soccer.


Whoa, I don't know if I would go that far.

Most of the teams in Surf Cup are out of state, especially in the older age groups. With only a handful of CalSouth teams and even less San Diego teams.

And ever since Surf moved all their club teams to SCDSL, very few of the local teams actually play on the those fields. So basically any San Diego kid under the age of 12 who plays on a Presidio/SDDA team probably has never set foot on the Polo Fields.

Surf Cup brings lots of tourist money to San Diego and it's great having a prestigious tournament here. But let's not exaggerate and say the Polo Fields is a benefit for everyone in youth soccer. For the vast majority of San Diego youth players, the Polo Fields are about as accessible as a $50k plate political fundraiser in Rancho Santa Fe. Facilities such as the SoCal Complex and Norco have had a greater benefit to area youth teams because they host a wider variety of tournaments and local clubs.

Not saying more tournaments should be held at the Polo Fields (especially with the local residents already complaining). Surf has a good thing going with the Polo Fields with the current events schedule. But it doesn't change the fact that the Polo Fields are essentially a gated community that most San Diego youth players never get to play on. It's probably why most non-Surf families are indifferent to Surf leasing the Polo Fields. And it's probably also why Surf Cup hastily started a new partnership with Presidio several months ago because it was pretty glaring how so few San Diego teams use the Polo Fields despite the size of the facility and it was going to negatively affect their lease request.


----------



## espola (Jul 28, 2016)

Eusebio said:


> Whoa, I don't know if I would go that far.
> 
> Most of the teams in Surf Cup are out of state, especially in the older age groups. With only a handful of CalSouth teams and even less San Diego teams.
> 
> ...


Do you have any more details on that Surf Cup/Presidio partnership?  

Back when my kids' teams played Surf there in Presidio League, we played on the back fields, allegedly because the main surface was reserved for polo.


----------



## Charlotte's Chauffeur (Jul 28, 2016)

SOCCERMINION said:


> Does anyone know if there was anything preventing Surf from putting up Lights on the Fields?


It is my understanding that adding field lights would exceed the use restrictions from the original land grant from the '80's.  There's no way the neighboring antagonistic geriatrics would agree to lighting.


----------



## Surfref (Jul 28, 2016)

Truth said:


> From the communications I've received, this means that there will be far fewer polo matches on the front complex and the grass should improve as a result. In fact, on Monday, the fields at the far East of the property which are always struggling with potholes created by the horses is now in really good shape. We walked around the fields during practice and they are now in the best condition I've seen in 8+ years.
> 
> I don't know about what plans they have to improve the site, but if past experience is any indication, the crazy NIMBY neighbors and lunatic environmentalists will oppose them every step of the way.


I heard the following during the Man City tournament from someone that would know the plans.  What I heard is that the Polo matches will be moved around the hill to the far east fields.  The stables and ring on the south east corner and east end are going to be torn down to allow more field space, limited parking and a small office. The stage on the west end will be torn down to expand that parking lot.  This west end parking will supply more than enough parking for the Surf practices and fall season games.  Should be interesting to see what happens.


----------



## Charlotte's Chauffeur (Jul 28, 2016)

Surfref said:


> I heard the following during the Man City tournament from someone that would know the plans.  What I heard is that the Polo matches will be moved around the hill to the far east fields.  The stables and ring on the south east corner and east end are going to be torn down to allow more field space, limited parking and a small office. The stage on the west end will be torn down to expand that parking lot.  This west end parking will supply more than enough parking for the Surf practices and fall season games.  Should be interesting to see what happens.


The stage on the west end has already been removed and the dirt parking lot has been expanded.  They've also already removed the crappy old "clubhouse" and adjacent buildings on the southeast side of the field and have added a large dirt parking area as well.

I'm really hoping that now Surf Cup has gotten the lease approved they'll be able to pave (or at least gravel) the parking lot and adjoining access roads.  I'm tired of having a perpetually dust coated car!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 28, 2016)

Charlotte's Chauffeur said:


> The stage on the west end has already been removed and the dirt parking lot has been expanded.  They've also already removed the crappy old "clubhouse" and adjacent buildings on the southeast side of the field and have added a large dirt parking area as well.
> 
> I'm really hoping that now Surf Cup has gotten the lease approved they'll be able to pave (or at least gravel) the parking lot and adjoining access roads.  I'm tired of having a perpetually dust coated car!


Iʻll take a dirt coated car over a $3500 surf player fee to finance paving and a restroom.


----------



## GKDad65 (Jul 28, 2016)

Club fees are going up.....


----------



## Truth (Jul 28, 2016)

Eusebio said:


> Whoa, I don't know if I would go that far.
> 
> Most of the teams in Surf Cup are out of state, especially in the older age groups. With only a handful of CalSouth teams and even less San Diego teams.
> 
> ...


I said Surf's win is a win for youth soccer. You read it as "San Diego local soccer". 

If the Polo Fields goes away as a youth soccer complex then already stressed local fields will be stressed even more. 

Surf Cup is the premier college scouting event in the nation. That is a win for youth soccer. 

And maybe it was the margaritas, but didn't I see 18 fields full all weekend last November of all San Diego kids?


----------



## espola (Jul 28, 2016)

Surfref said:


> I heard the following during the Man City tournament from someone that would know the plans.  What I heard is that the Polo matches will be moved around the hill to the far east fields.  The stables and ring on the south east corner and east end are going to be torn down to allow more field space, limited parking and a small office. The stage on the west end will be torn down to expand that parking lot.  This west end parking will supply more than enough parking for the Surf practices and fall season games.  Should be interesting to see what happens.


The back field is a little small for polo -- but the Polo Club won't be controlling the lease any more, so maybe they will just have to accept it -- until a horse or rider is injured by running off the field.


----------



## espola (Jul 28, 2016)

Truth said:


> I said Surf's win is a win for youth soccer. You read it as "San Diego local soccer".
> 
> If the Polo Fields goes away as a youth soccer complex then already stressed local fields will be stressed even more.
> 
> ...


"Surf Cup is the premier college scouting event in the nation"  ???  You need to get out more.


----------



## Sped (Jul 28, 2016)

Truth said:


> I said Surf's win is a win for youth soccer. You read it as "San Diego local soccer".
> 
> If the Polo Fields goes away as a youth soccer complex then already stressed local fields will be stressed even more.
> 
> ...


And eventually Oceanside will be developed over too.


----------



## Sped (Jul 28, 2016)

espola said:


> Looks like?  Where did you get that?


Several of the news stories on their proposal mentioned it.


----------



## Sped (Jul 28, 2016)

espola said:


> Over the years I have been told that the lot is owned by Surf Cup, Surf Soccer, the City, the 22nd Agricultural District (Del Mar Fairgrounds operator), and a "private individual".  The only clear evidence I have is an old parking stub that says "22nd Agricultural District", and they own the Horse Park just across the street, so that made sense.  However, some one posted on the old web site that the private owner merely hired 22AD to operate the lot.


It's privately owned and there has been a proposal to build a senior living project there more than once but it'll need to go to a vote because it's ag land and that sort of use is not permitted.  If you think the lease to surf was a problem, wait until residents get a chance to vote that thing down.  It'll remain parking or become open space before it's ever built.


----------



## teamt (Jul 28, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Wonder what the property tax is for that land?


The county records for the fields shows they pay no tax as the property is owned by the City Of San Diego and appear to be exempt.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 28, 2016)

teamt said:


> The county records for the fields shows they pay no tax as the property is owned by the City Of San Diego and appear to be exempt.


They meaning Surf?  I was asking about the parking lot property owner property taxes.


----------



## Eusebio (Jul 28, 2016)

Truth said:


> I said Surf's win is a win for youth soccer. You read it as "San Diego local soccer".
> 
> If the Polo Fields goes away as a youth soccer complex then already stressed local fields will be stressed even more.
> 
> ...


No. You specifically said this in your post:

"Surf's win at the polo fields is a win for *everyone* in youth soccer."

So I assumed "everyone" would include San Diego local soccer. However I guess if you meant it as "everyone but..." then I'm fine with going with your amended version.

Though if the Polo Fields did go away, then Surf Cup Sports would simply move the tournament entirely to the SoCal complex. They may have to scale back some of the new flight 2 divisions, but Surf Cup did just fine at a single location at the Polo Fields for 25+ years, so I'm sure they could manage with the tournament in Oceanside.

Also SoCal complex has public transportation that goes within a block of the fields and the facilities has greater support from the local residents. If anything the Oceanside residents want the fields/facilities built out more, so it closer matches the original plans. For out of town visitors, Oceanside is actually a better location. You can get to food and hotel fairly easily while avoiding most of the 5 freeway traffic and you're still very close to the beach. They just need to improve the traffic situation going into the complex, but that's an issue that plagues every major venue. The way games get scheduled also affect the traffic congestion. Scheduling 20 simultaneous 8am games of course will cause a traffic pile up at the entrance.

My point, even without the Polo Fields, Surf Cup Sports still has a very good venue available to hold tournaments and it wouldn't really stress local fields since the SoCal complex has enough fields to host full tournaments. It would be Surf Soccer club that would probably take the biggest hit if the fields were moved north.

It's very hot outside so I don't begrudge you for drinking the Kool-Aid. I just disagree with your utopian outlook for Youth Soccer if Surf gets the Polo fields and conversely your dystopian view if they lose the fields. The truth is probably closer to somewhere in the middle of the extremes.


----------



## espola (Jul 28, 2016)

Sped said:


> It's privately owned and there has been a proposal to build a senior living project there more than once but it'll need to go to a vote because it's ag land and that sort of use is not permitted.  If you think the lease to surf was a problem, wait until residents get a chance to vote that thing down.  It'll remain parking or become open space before it's ever built.


The lot is inside San Diego City limits, but just barely.  The city line wanders back and forth along and off Via de la Valle.  Right by the parking lot, the line jogs north for a few yards along Camino Real, then back south so  that the nearest 3 or 4 houses to the east are in the unincorporated County, and then back north so that the gated community on the bluff is in the City.  The only vote against the lease was the Councilwoman who represents that district (which also includes Carmel Valley, Torrey Pines, University City, and La Jolla).


----------



## Truth (Jul 28, 2016)

Eusebio said:


> No. You specifically said this in your post:
> 
> "Surf's win at the polo fields is a win for *everyone* in youth soccer."
> 
> ...


Were you on vacation when 18 fields of kids were playing at the Presidio tournament on the Polo Fields last year?


----------



## Truth (Jul 28, 2016)

teamt said:


> The county records for the fields shows they pay no tax as the property is owned by the City Of San Diego and appear to be exempt.


Incorrect.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 28, 2016)

espola said:


> The lot is inside San Diego City limits, but just barely.  The city line wanders back and forth along and off Via de la Valle.  Right by the parking lot, the line jogs north for a few yards along Camino Real, then back south so  that the nearest 3 or 4 houses to the east are in the unincorporated County, and then back north so that the gated community on the bluff is in the City.  The only vote against the lease was the Councilwoman who represents that district (which also includes Carmel Valley, Torrey Pines, University City, and La Jolla).


Sherri Lightner


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 28, 2016)

Truth said:


> Were you on vacation when 18 fields of kids were playing at the Presidio tournament on the Polo Fields last year?


Thanks to a $500 increase in Surf player fees, Presidio was able to have their tournament at the Polo's.  Thank you Surf families for subsidizing San Diego Youth Soccer through your dollars and volunteerism.


----------



## Sped (Jul 28, 2016)

espola said:


> The lot is inside San Diego City limits, but just barely.  The city line wanders back and forth along and off Via de la Valle.  Right by the parking lot, the line jogs north for a few yards along Camino Real, then back south so  that the nearest 3 or 4 houses to the east are in the unincorporated County, and then back north so that the gated community on the bluff is in the City.  The only vote against the lease was the Councilwoman who represents that district (which also includes Carmel Valley, Torrey Pines, University City, and La Jolla).


You may have misunderstood what I meant by a vote.  This article gives a good summary:  http://www.delmartimes.net/news/2014/nov/13/carmel-valley-senior-living-facility-polo-fields/


----------



## Surfref (Jul 29, 2016)

Charlotte's Chauffeur said:


> The stage on the west end has already been removed and the dirt parking lot has been expanded.  They've also already removed the crappy old "clubhouse" and adjacent buildings on the southeast side of the field and have added a large dirt parking area as well.
> 
> I'm really hoping that now Surf Cup has gotten the lease approved they'll be able to pave (or at least gravel) the parking lot and adjoining access roads.  I'm tired of having a perpetually dust coated car!



Looks like what I heard back in March about the is turning out to be true.  I heard at the time that they would like to pave the parking lot, but did not have that part of the lease.  So, it was going to be difficult to get any improvements done on that northern parking area.  After reading some of the posts on that parking area, I can assume what I heard is true.


----------



## Sped (Jul 29, 2016)

Actually, they never paved any of the site for parking because the polo horses don't like concrete.


----------



## Eusebio (Jul 31, 2016)

futbolkid11 said:


> Surfcup is done. No quarterfinals. High cost. Too many flights. Even the entrance was depressing. No more "Best of the Best" feel. But if they can charge it and get it who came blame them.


Saw this in the B2002 thread, but I figured I would mention it here.

I gotta agree, at least in the Polo Field location, Surf Cup had a very pedestrian feel this weekend unlike previous years. The problems I have (very similar to the post I quoted):

- No more grand entrance. My kids used to get pumped walking through the main entrance under the "Best of the Best" signs with the high energy music pumping. What happened to the grand entrance and why is the tent so far removed from the main parking areas and fields? No wonder I saw so few people wearing Surf Cup T-shirts.
-  Too many flights. I've watched many Surf Cup games over the years and there's a definite drop-off in the quality of play, particularly in the lower flights.
- Lack of Quarterfinals. I was talking to a out of state parent and he was very disappointed that there wasn't any quarterfinals like in previous years, especially for  a 3-day tournament. With only group winners advancing, often the third game is pointless for a lot of teams, so these out of town teams travel far and pay a lot of money just to play 2 meaningful games. However some age-groups do still have quarterfinals, so I wonder again if it's an issue of having too many flights/teams where there's not enough space to have quarterfinals for most brackets.
- Spotty time management. Again, another out of town parent was complaining to me that their games were shortened because the games were running behind schedule. So they're paying a lot of money and they can't even get complete games.
- Lack of game balls. Some fields only had two or just one official game ball. This meant there was often a 30 second delay on goal kicks just to get the ball back in play. These delays really start to add up. There should be a minimum of 3 game balls on every field. 
- No tournament pins. It's a small thing, but it's always frustrating when big tournaments skimp out on the small things, especially with such high entrance fees. The Las Vegas tournaments had the same issue. Most kids love tournament pins and it's not expensive to make.

Anyway my point to post this here wasn't to antagonize Surf supporters but to maybe get some answers from someone in the know about some of the shortcomings and see if they are just temporary. With Surf just getting the Polo Fields, this weekend hasn't been a great showcase for how they're going to run the tournament on those fields going forward. It's felt like just another San Diego tournament.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 31, 2016)

Eusebio said:


> Saw this in the B2002 thread, but I figured I would mention it here.
> 
> I gotta agree, at least in the Polo Field location, Surf Cup had a very pedestrian feel this weekend unlike previous years. The problems I have (very similar to the post I quoted):
> 
> ...


Interesting.  I suppose only time will tell.  The only major change is the grand entrance.  Number of flights have been growing for a couple of years now but all other complaints are normal and have yet to adversely affect annual applications.


----------



## Truth (Jul 31, 2016)

Eusebio said:


> Saw this in the B2002 thread, but I figured I would mention it here.
> 
> I gotta agree, at least in the Polo Field location, Surf Cup had a very pedestrian feel this weekend unlike previous years. The problems I have (very similar to the post I quoted):
> 
> ...


Really? Your 15 - 18 year old really misses a tournament pin?


----------



## Eusebio (Aug 1, 2016)

Truth said:


> Really? Your 15 - 18 year old really misses a tournament pin?


The youngest age group playing this weekend is 2002, so my 13-18 year old really missed the tournament pin.

And I actually still have 3-4 tournament pins that I got when I was 16-17 years old. Back then though, we only played a couple of tournaments a year. They're on a 2x2 shelve (aka my personal shrine) hidden in a corner of the house with cobwebs that has all my youth athletic accomplishments. It managed to avoid banishment to the garage when my kids started playing soccer and even playing in some of the same tournaments.

Anyway, I'm sure some kids toss them in the trash or lose the pins after the first day. But there are a lot of players (of all ages) that like collecting the pins to show-off what tournaments they've been in, especially if it was a premier tournament. If small local tournaments can muster up the resources to provide/sell pins, then I'm sure Surf Cup could as well. Obviously it's nothing close to a dealbreaker and it's a minor issue but parents often question these omissions when they're paying such high entrance fees.


----------



## Surfref (Aug 1, 2016)

Eusebio said:


> Saw this in the B2002 thread, but I figured I would mention it here.
> 
> I gotta agree, at least in the Polo Field location, Surf Cup had a very pedestrian feel this weekend unlike previous years. The problems I have (very similar to the post I quoted):
> 
> ...


I deleted parts of your post that I am not going to comment on.

- I was not at the Polo Fields this past weekend.  At the Oceanside complex everyone had to enter through the huge tent with music playing and the Soccerloco store.  There were players taking team and individual pictures in front of the Surf Cup signs in the tent.  Great vibe and way to enter the tournament.
- With games set only 10 minutes apart, all it takes is one jerk coach that does not get their team on the field when requested by the referee to throw the schedule off.  We had several games where the team manager failed to provide either the player cards or coach cards to the Field Marshal.  The referees cannot check in the players without the cards and on a couple occasions the coaches had to track down their managers, thus delaying the start. The tournament rules state that all games must end 5 minutes prior to the start of the next game.  It is impossible for the referees to get the teams checked in, hydrate and apply sunscreen in 5 minutes.  The 10 games that I worked were within a couple minutes of being on time and we did not have to shorten any games.  Of course we just went to the Gatorade tent on the sideline to hydrate and started calling the players back on the field after 2 minutes during halftime.  Needless to say, it was difficult and took good coordination between the referees, Field Marshals (I worked with some really good FM), and coaches to keep the games on time.
-We usually only had one ball on the fields I worked and the ball would return quickly to the field, usually within seconds.  There are enough spectators, players, etc. around the fields that would help so I had no problems on my fields.

Sounds like a very different experience at Polo Fields vice Oceanside.  I thought Oceanside was run very efficiently.


----------



## SOCCERMINION (Aug 1, 2016)

Things change, I feel lucky that my daughter was able to play in Surf Cup when it truly was Best of the Best. Being one of the few teams attending the Polo fields back in the day made your DD feel Special, it made the trip , expense and hassle of getting family and friends to the polo fields worth it all.
With 60 teams and 3 flights maybey its been diluted a bit, maybey its lost some of its magic and exclusivity,but its still the premier event in our area. And come on guys, you get to see your daughters games on you tube, ( https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpzx06ajBzr8eRLzDibM1og) you dont have to drag you whole family down to Polo Fileds or Cam it yourself for them to see your daughter play. For me its even a bit closer being in Oceanside with better fields. Things change, Im open to it. The top players will still be there ,and there is more Soccer for everyone to enjoy now.
Surf Cup...I'm in....Where do i pay for parking? What's the link to watch other games online while I'm on the fields? Where do i buy my DD her official Surf Cup shirt and where do i get the lettering done! Where is the Smoothy Guy?  Where is the Dippin Dots Guy, Im in , Im in , In Here!!! More More MORE!!!! AGGH HAHAHAHA I LOVE IT!!!!


----------



## GKDad65 (Aug 5, 2016)

Not an impressive start to a new long term lease.  Disappointing.


----------



## Thunderbolt (Aug 5, 2016)

GKDad65 said:


> Not an impressive start to a new long term lease.  Disappointing.


You realize the City Council vote was Monday, and Surf Cup started Saturday following, right? What did you expect, exactly?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 7, 2016)

SOCCERMINION said:


> Things change, I feel lucky that my daughter was able to play in Surf Cup when it truly was Best of the Best. Being one of the few teams attending the Polo fields back in the day made your DD feel Special, it made the trip , expense and hassle of getting family and friends to the polo fields worth it all.
> With 60 teams and 3 flights maybey its been diluted a bit, maybey its lost some of its magic and exclusivity,but its still the premier event in our area. And come on guys, you get to see your daughters games on you tube, ( https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpzx06ajBzr8eRLzDibM1og) you dont have to drag you whole family down to Polo Fileds or Cam it yourself for them to see your daughter play. For me its even a bit closer being in Oceanside with better fields. Things change, Im open to it. The top players will still be there ,and there is more Soccer for everyone to enjoy now.
> Surf Cup...I'm in....Where do i pay for parking? What's the link to watch other games online while I'm on the fields? Where do i buy my DD her official Surf Cup shirt and where do i get the lettering done! Where is the Smoothy Guy?  Where is the Dippin Dots Guy, Im in , Im in , In Here!!! More More MORE!!!! AGGH HAHAHAHA I LOVE IT!!!!


Dippin' dots are dumb........until I tried the oreo cookie dots!!  I gave my daughter more money and told her to get another.


----------



## timbuck (Aug 11, 2016)

Does this improve Presidio/SDDA?
*PRESIDIO – SDDA TO USE POLO FIELDS*
http://goalnation.com/surf-cup-sports-presidio-soccer-league-partnership/


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 11, 2016)

timbuck said:


> Does this improve Presidio/SDDA?
> *PRESIDIO – SDDA TO USE POLO FIELDS*
> http://goalnation.com/surf-cup-sports-presidio-soccer-league-partnership/


Perhaps from a combination of core competencies?  As always, time will tell.  But certainly a long term deal is a win win deal from a club stand point:

*In addition to the new annual showcase and tournament, Presidio Soccer League announced its unequivocal support and endorsement of Surf Cup Sports’ plan to seek permission from the City of San Diego to operate at the San Diego Polo Fields. Earlier this month, the City of San Diego released for public bid a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the lease of the San Diego Polo Fields for the next 25-30 years.*


----------



## timbuck (Aug 11, 2016)

Sure, coaches are important. And good club structure.
But I think access to quality fields is probably the number 1 thing that clubs need to be concerned with.  
He who has the land, wins.


----------



## Eusebio (Aug 11, 2016)

timbuck said:


> Does this improve Presidio/SDDA?
> *PRESIDIO – SDDA TO USE POLO FIELDS*
> http://goalnation.com/surf-cup-sports-presidio-soccer-league-partnership/


That was the article I was referencing in my earlier post. I believe previously Presidio/SDDA were using Ryan Park for their showcases, so the Polo Fields will definitely give them a bigger venue for those events

But to your question does this improve Presidio/SDDA? I don't think really makes a significant improvement. Presidio's problem is that they've been bleeding teams/talent to SCDSL/CSL for years, particularly in the olders. And now with DA expanding into the younger age-groups, it's only going to get worse especially on the boys side..  And on the girls side, you'll have DA, ECNL, SCDSL, and CSL all draining teams/talent from Presidio even further in the olders.

Presidio needs to find a way to be relevant in the changing landscape. Using the Polo Fields for a couple of tournaments is nice but they got bigger problems.


----------

