Replies

The Presidio Trust Act, by Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco), desperately needed the support of environmentalists to win congressional approval.

The bill did something that had historically been considered anathema to environmental leaders: it turned control of a national park over to a private, unelected trust controlled by big businesses and real estate developers.

But Pelosi promised that this bitter pill would be coated in green: the park's general management plan, she insisted, would prevent the place from becoming an intensively developed office complex (see "Presidio Inc.," 1/12/94).

The Tides Foundation and the Energy Foundation, which were part of the first nonmilitary project at the Presidio, the Thoreau Center, were also key supporters of Pelosi's plan (see "Anatomy of a Sellout," 10/8/97). They all had sweetheart leases at the park – and neither they nor the groups they funded would utter a peep against the privatization of the park.

But now even they are taking issue with the direction the trust is taking. Friedman of Tides told us that the foundation's comments would be along the same lines as those of other environmental groups. And while the Energy Foundation isn't taking a position on the project, executive director Hal Harvey told us he personally opposes it. "I think the decision to develop that whole corner of the park is a big mistake," he said.

The Presidio Alliance, which represents the nonprofits located at the Presidio, is not taking an official position on the project. But it did send out a copy of the National Parks and Conservation Association's stated objections to the proposal.

At the time Pelosi's bill was going through Congress, critics pointed out that the bill gave the trust the ability to ignore the general management plan – and that, in fact, the bill turned the plan on its head by requiring the trust to make financial return the top priority for the use of park land.