Senior walk-in

Tonight, the City Council is all set to make a decision on whether or not to turn over operationsof the Chuck Corica Golf Course to a private company.   Of course, as we remember the item was continued from December because of illness by one of the consultants.   However since then the City Council has received a very cranky letter from the Seniors Golf Club asking the City Council to not move forward with the staff recommendation to lease out the operations.   From the Alameda Journal:

…the golf commission, which has “reluctantly” supported turning over the operations of the complex should the city be unable to commit the $10 million needed to complete needed improvements, primarily to the Jack Clark and Earl Fry courses.

“If you polled the golf commissioners, if they favor turning it over to a private operator or not, they all would say no — or the majority would say no,” Humphreys said Friday. “I don’t know why the city has to spend $10 million all at once.”

…

That request followed a report released in September by the National Golf Foundation, which found that between 2001 and 2006, the number of rounds played at the complex declined by nearly 73,000 rounds or about 35 percent, while total receipts fell by $1.35 million or about 25 percent.

During the same period, wages and benefits increased by $502,000 or some 27 percent.

…

As of Oct. 31, the complex had $2.1 million in reserves. A recent city report notes that the complex lost $42,000 a month in the first four months of this fiscal year. “Unless changes are made, the decline in reserves will continue until they are exhausted.”

Humphreys’ letter takes issue with the analysis, saying that the city is draining off money from the course in the form of “payments-in-lieu-of taxes (PILOT), return-on-investment (ROI) and surcharges and other cost allocations.

“These payments are essentially coming out of the course’s reserve funds,” the letter says, “which will be completely depleted within the next several years if the city insists on continuing such fees.”

However, assistant city manager David Brandt on Friday said the course still would be operating in a deficit if the fees were no longer being collected…

While there are certain elements of the two page letter that might be compelling, in the end it’s all based on speculation.   Speculation that in five to ten years when more baby boomers retire that they will be drawn to the golf course as though that is their calling in life: to golf.   Speculation that if the Mif Albright course (recommended for closure) was reworked and the practice area was removed then it would be appealing to short course players.  Speculation that if the Golf Course could be released from paying fees to the City that they would be not be bleeding money — that one was refuted by David Brandt in the Journal article.

Then there is the issue of: “just find the money to fix it and continue running it ourselves” position.   Personally, if there were about $4 million in Rec and Park money to use somewhere I wouldn’t put it into the Golf Course.   A lot of parks need some form a maintenance or upgrades and to me, a Golf Course that could be run just as ably by a private company who would expend their own money to make the necessary upgrades, would be so far down the list for needing funds.  $4 million is the number used to just build the banquet facility and upgrade the driving range.  

For me the letter was very, “why can’t we keep it the way it is?” A very Alamedan sentiment, I must say.  However, the consultant report was very clear about the what the problems with the golf course are and what it needs in order to draw more players.   The regional competition has much more superior facilities than Chuck Corica and even the lower greens fees can’t draw folks to play.   Something needs to be done, and unfortunately, the letter from the Seniors Club simply did not provide a strong enough alternative.