Look, we love parks. Parks are great. Green space, fresh air, kids on swings — it's basically the one thing everyone across the political spectrum can agree on. But in a city that routinely turns simple infrastructure projects into multi-year, multi-million-dollar odysseys through bureaucratic purgatory, even the words "new park feature" should come with an asterisk and a budget disclaimer.

San Francisco has a well-documented habit of spending eye-watering sums on projects that other cities handle for a fraction of the cost. Remember when a single public toilet cost $1.7 million? We remember. So when a new park concept starts making the rounds, the first question shouldn't be "how fun will the swings be?" It should be "how much is this going to cost, and who's making sure the money is spent wisely?"

To be clear: we're not against playgrounds, swing sets, or neighborhood green spaces. Quite the opposite. Well-maintained parks are one of the few genuinely good things local government can provide. They boost property values, give families a reason to stay in the city, and contribute to the kind of street-level community that makes neighborhoods actually livable.

But the devil is always in the details — permitting timelines, contractor costs, maintenance budgets, and whether the project actually reflects what residents want or what a planning committee decided they should want.

We'll be keeping an eye on Cat's Corner Swings Park as more information emerges. In the meantime, here's our unsolicited advice to City Hall: build it well, build it on budget, and for the love of all that is fiscal, don't let it become another monument to government bloat.