Looks as if both sides of the issue have posted today. In one sense, people feel that we need to give the new board a chance to right the golf course. On the other side, people feel that the golf course is draining Dayton's limited resources. Some people feel that the golf course is a great asset to the town of Dayton. I think the other side would agree that the golf course would be a great asset if the golf course was profitable and self-sufficient.
However, the golf course is currently neither profitable nor self-sufficient. Over a year ago the city took on the obligation of trying to make the golf course profitable. Over this year the golf course made capital improvements to the course and to the restaurant. The course also lost money on top of that. Taxes need to be increased in order to make up for that loss. Basically, Dayton is the golf course's credit line and when the golf course needs a bail out, Dayton will be on the hook.
How is Dayton going to get paid back? Think of Dayton as a bank in this case. Now think of how much the golf course is currently indebted to the town of Dayton and think of how many years that will take to pay back the town of Dayton. In the alternative, the money could have been spent on improving the roads and overall conditions in Dayton.
As we can see, the board has some very tough decisions on its hands. This board must make the golf course profitable very soon in order to start paying back the town of Dayton. Otherwise, our taxes are going to be increased to pay for a very toxic asset. The opportunity lost will be huge as streets will be continue to be neglected and the overall appearance of Dayton will diminish.
What are we looking at now? Best possible scenario: golf course becomes profitable and gets Dayton paid back. Options if things go South: Dayton has to continue subsidizing the golf course until the board decides what to do with it. What possible options does the board have if things go South? Sell the course to a private entity. Unfortunately, this might be a loss because the golf course would probably be sold at a discount to what Dayton bought the course at. One other interesting option is selling shares of the golf course to the members to make the course member-owned. This is what is actually done in some communities. However, I believe this option is very unlikely.
Another option could be to lease the golf course. The city would have to continue to pay the bond. It could be leased for even $1.00. I have heard this mentioned by several area business people and they feel this could be a viable option.
ReplyDeleteI don't know how the board can help when you have some of the same people on it that took it down before. don't you think some fresh faces would have given the people of Dayton a little hope.I don't know who in there right mind would give these board members tax money to spend on there owm private club. They won't even raise there membership fees because they don't want to pay more, they don't want other people out there because then it would not be there little click I feel like someone just built a big sand pile in my back yard and sent me the bill.
ReplyDeleteTo the 7:19 post
ReplyDeleteYou don't have a clue what these people are going to do. They may raise rates, they may lease the course out, they may lease out the food business, they may sell it. So stop acting like you know what they are going to do. You are one of the NEGATIVE people that they have been talking about.
look at there past record most have been on before and didn't do any good. you must be one of them GIVE IT TO ME AND LET ME SPEND IT people AND THE CLUE LOOK AT THARE PAST ACTIONS
ReplyDeleteThank you to the 6:48 AM post, leasing the golf course out is also another option that the board would probably entertain. I may have mentioned this alternative in an earlier post.
ReplyDeleteBeen on what? What record?
ReplyDeleteYou just made my point that YOU don't have a clue.
I would like to encourage people to register. Get a google account and sign in with it here. It makes it a lot less confusing following arguments from 10 anonymouses.
ReplyDeleteAs to the person who commented about the sand pile, they are absolutely right. Certain members do not want others to join "their" club. Also using the same people to run it into the ground again is absolutely crazy. Mismanagement is what got the golf course in trouble in the first place. That and the fact that so far no one has said they want to raise fees. Basically the same people want "their" golf course at our expense. I like to snowmobile for recreation. So can I levy a tax on Dayton to support my pleasure too?
ReplyDeleteI would actually like to see the golf course sold to shareholders. Unfortunatly that will never happen. 118 members would not want to kick in the funds and then have to maintain it as well. That is why we now own it, because it failed as an entity unto itself. That is what should be done, but the pro-golf people know it is not viable as a private enterprise unless there are hundreds not just 118 members.
ReplyDeleteActually,taxes support "pleasures" all the time. Fish? State and federal parks funded by TAX MONEY. Drive anywhere to do anything--roads/bridges/etc. Hunt? DNR. Tax dollars supporting recreational activities is not a new idea and is certainly not isolated to Dayton.
ReplyDeleteTo 4:57 PM, those recreational activities that you listed have traditionally been supported by state and federal tax dollars. The difference between those recreational activities and golf: golf is usually a private business, which means tax dollars are not usually used to support golf courses when they lose money. Banks either foreclose or the course gets sold to another.
ReplyDeleteRoads and parks are for the most part pure public goods. They aren't rivalrous or excludable. There are hence no incentives for a private entrepreneur to build or maintain such things. A golf course is a toll good as it is excludable. A golf course then should be able to be supported by private enterprise. If it is unable too, I don't see why the local government should subsidize it.
ReplyDeleteThe golf course at Don Williams is a county funded golf course, Lakeside in Fort Dodge is a city funded golfcourse, Briggswoods in Webster City is a county funded golf course, Lakeside in Jefferson is a State funded golf course. It's not uncommon for citys, countys, and states, to own nad operate golfcourses, the only differences are that some lease out thier clubhouse and others don't. And the new board will be looking at all angles. Board member Al.
ReplyDelete