Matt -
Good to know I'm surving a depression here in WNY - however, I think your newspaper may be dated. Most of the manufacturing left a few decades ago, so really we've simply been in a "low growth" period. But at the same time, when your job market isn't oversaturated and real estate isn't speculatively valued, it certainly helps soften the blow of the recent times.
Regarding NYC, I meant to type "growing / highly populated area" (either) - meaning areas that there would be a reason for a government to add a golf course to a market. If, as you say, an area does not have excess demand, then I think the criticisms in the article may be valid. If the point is for a municipality to make a profit at the expense of existing privates, that could be viewed as "unfair competition." However, if the course is truly self-sustaining and not having losses subsidized, it diminishes the "unfairness" argument. But to a different point, what other usage would you suggest for condemned or abandoned land? If not converted to something that had a public use (albeit, possibly to the detriment of other courses), what other usage would you suggest? Would you give it away for housing / office development (which may give a new private developer an unfair advantage vs. existing developers?) Or would it be better to leave the land idle so other private course operators could function with less competition?
Now, if municipalities are converting existing land for a community purpose that is underserved or over charged, I don't view that as a problem, unless there are large losses being subsidized. If the course is break-even or even turning a profit, then I can't understand why there would be any relationship between the golf course operations and budget cutbacks elsewhere.
Sorry - starting to wander in my thoughts - maybe I'll take a break for the night to watch my Sabres!