Just wanted to pass along some interesting tidbits:
The $25,000 that is being asked for tomorrow morning will be used in part to pay off a note coming due before July 1. Add the $25,000 to the $107,000 lost this past year to get the new figure.
Also, in last night's meeting there was an interesting discussion about the new greenskeeper.
Heard on the street:
-Sounds like golf memberships are down this year, and
-Sounds like a corporate sponsor may not be a corporate sponsor this year due to bad economic conditions.
Clarification: With regards to corporate sponsor, I should say corporation who had corporate events at golf course in the past.
I have some comments about your "heard on the street" section. Obviously who ever quoted this has no clue about golf courses. The membership isn't counted now. Golf season isn't here yet. You count memberships at the end of the season, not the begining.
ReplyDeleteSecond, I have no clue what the corporate sponsorship is.
If any one can clarify this for me I would really appreciate it.
Thanks
Al
I heard some things around town also, it has to do with a group of people that are trying to out to sabatage the parks and rec board along with the golf course itself. The people involved are Brad Carstenson and some of his anti-golfcourse group along with at least one of the City Counsel members. Anyone else heard this?
ReplyDeleteSo someone finally brought names into this. Wow....
ReplyDeleteWhat do you mean by sabotage the parks and rec board and golf course? Physically as in vandalism or just try to tie their hands? If you mean keeping them honest (and no I am not saying they are are dishonest) then I am all for that. No one that I have talked to wants to sabotage anything/anyone. It all comes down to fiscal responsibility and accountability plain and simple. And to be fair and honest I never heard anything about a corporate sponsor either.
ReplyDeleteJust trying to get some facts
ReplyDeleteNo I haven't heard anything about anything about sabotage. Boy is that a paranoid statement. If the golf and rec board can make the golf course money or break even then great.
ReplyDeleteI thought they hired a Greenskeeper at last weeks council.
D.O. are people supposed to be naming names on the blog?
I have heard that a several certain council members have made deflammatory comments and veiled threats about some people that were against the taxes being raised. I didn't go on here and name names. Because it is hearsay.
And I didn't get paranoid about it. My Halo has been in pretty good shape
This is proof that the Dayton Observer only prints what he wants you to know, no different than the Dayton Review, in his eye's. If you D.O, went out to talk to a corporate sponsor, which the parks and rec's board does not have, it is apparent you didn't listen or only heard what you wanted to hear. If you are out trying to find the parks and rec's board a corporate sponsor that is great, it could help the club house out a great deal, you know it can use it, since you seam to know every thing. it is true that the golf hole sign sponsorships expire at the end of this year. That does not mean that this will cause additional expense on the parks board. These signs are payed for by the sponsors and not the golf course.
ReplyDeleteI don't know, It sounded like they were doing whatever they could to interfere with the working s of the board. It's just what I heard. That's what alot of the blogs on here, is stuff that people have heard.
ReplyDeleteAs most of you can tell, I guess you could count me as anti-golf course; technically. I am not anti-golf because I don't happen to play. In fact I would be pro-golf if it was proven to help Dayton in some way other than just to say "we have a golf course." My only complaint is the money aspect of the whole venture. As everyone knows it failed as a private entity. Why, I am not sure. If it showed promise of breaking even after paying all its bills including the loan to buy it, then I would say great. I don't want to sabotage anything at all, just be open minded enough to say if it loses money it is time to sell it. A lease might be okay too, if the lease included an agreement by the person/people leasing it to keep it up. That way no one could lease it for 5 years for a dollar a year and make their money, but then give it back in need of repairs again. Just like leasing a vehicle.
ReplyDeleteIf you state the Mayor, or Travis, or Gallentine, which has been stated, i guess you have been naming names, haven't you? So i guess fair is fair, right, or was that just hear say? And about hiring of the greens keeper, the parks and recs board does the hiring, the council only approves who they hire.
ReplyDeleteAs far as I am concerned names can be named if there is some validity. We all know who the council members are and which one voted to hire their own son, that is public record. That last comment was not a slap to anyone either. It was merely stating that some names cannot be omitted. We all know who the Mayor is and what he says at the meetings. Is there any proof that Brad who was mentioned earlier is doing anything wrong by questioning the way things are being done? I have been to council meetings where he has spoken and simply asked for answers to legimate questions.
ReplyDeletesamadamslite, the golfcourse before the city took it over came up short about the amount it paid in property taxes.
ReplyDeleteThe figures were gone over by the last golfcourse board. It was found that if the city took it over the course could actually make money. Without the amounts of the property taxes paid each year, the interest difference on the loan, and insurance, those items would put it in the black. These figures didn't include the full-service kitchen, or deck. Just the city taking over the course and changing nothing.
I thought that the council voted on the Greenskeeper. Doesn't that happen after the parks and rec board brings it to the council.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the city council may have asked or the light board offered, last year for the 25,000.00 but the parks and recs board has NOT asked for 25,000.00 from either.
ReplyDeleteI believe there was still money lost after the captial improvements.
ReplyDeletesamadamslite,
ReplyDeleteI've heard that Mr. Carstenson states whatever helps his position, no matter if it's true or not.
I think that I wouldn't be casting stones with names unless you want everything else that be said as hearsay to be printed here with names.
ReplyDeleteI don't think you want to start this.
to post 10:49
ReplyDeletePeople have been doing it to the Mayor and members of the council, since the start of this blog. The only difference is that the names themselves were never mentioned but, they just as well have been, cause everybody knew who was being talked about. So, it's already been started. It's about time the other side got pointed out.
Due to the heat of the day, I find it important to remind everyone that the community took a vote to keep the golf course. At this time it was said that the city would bond for the 170,000.00 to purchase it, witch was approved by a majority of the community, aprox. 72% of the voters. The voters knew when they voted they wound have to come up with that money to pay the 170,000.00 bond. This is what the tax increase is for. It is apparent that some people don’t want to pay the higher taxes because they don’t golf, or they don’t care if the course is in Dayton. I respect their opinion, but remember to respect the 72% voters that wanted to keep it. Some of the people that voted for it, don’t golf.
ReplyDeleteWell I have heard there were threats against me and several others since this all started about raising the property taxes. I choose not
ReplyDeleteto bring this up or name names. This will start some real problems that I do not think any of us want to deal with. If you want to post my name and cast stones and see how far it will go. Have fun. I have stayed nice and polite with all of this. I will continue to blog and stay nice unless I am forced to change my stance.
Sorry, go back and look at earlier blogs and the names were mentioned!
ReplyDeleteHow many people voted. It was maybe 72% in favor but very few voted. As it was said before it was an emotional time and the weather was bad and it was not a good voter turnout. I bet if it was held tomorrow the turnout would be extremely different.
ReplyDeleteto 10:58
ReplyDeleteWhat do you mean threats were made against you and others? What kind of threats?
The vote was no where near the majority of the community. The people who wanted city ownership had a strong showing. I have however talked to more than 100 people who say they would vote against now. Many just assumed the measure would be defeated before hand.
ReplyDeleteTlhe threats were: That I and several others that were against the raise in property taxes had better make sure that we do nothing wrong or we would really be in trouble. I hoped that this wasn't true and wanted to believe that people could have an honnest disagreement without these things arising. I still feel that I can do this. I still know and care about many of the people that have differing views than I do. This is really sad.
ReplyDeleteAnd i have spoken with more that 100 people that stated they would vote to keep it again.
ReplyDeleteTo the person who wants to name names. I guess go ahead and due it, but I would hope you post your own name as well since you feel the way you do. I personally don't remember naming names is a slanderous way.
ReplyDeletepost 11:01
ReplyDeleteSo you're saying that if there is light voter turnout, the vote doesn't matter and should be re-voted, or made as an excuse. You want to be able to re-vote all elections just because the turnout was low. So, if your candidate didn't win the presidential election you should get to vote again because there weren't very many voters?
I think if you look back at other areas in the blog the voter turnout was discussed. Economic times are very different now.
ReplyDeleteIt is sad that some may not have been able to get out and vote, that is a right that we all have. but it is our responsibility to get out and vote on that day, every one knows well in advance what day and where the polling place is. that is not a justifable reason to not have voted!
ReplyDeleteI understand that the we are paying taxes on that initial 170,0000. But what I believe the Parks and Rec Board are working on is to make money or break even. Most people cannot afford to continue to support a business that is loosing money. This also has been talked about extensively. I think we all understand that we need to see what this year brings. I just think people were concerned how long the golf course would keep going in the red. And this has been addressed here and in the DR.
ReplyDeleteEconomic times change from year to year, don't they? Should we shut all power off to the city from 7pm to 12pm to help everyone out with the economic times? or should we ask every one to stop driving their pickup trucks on saturday and sunday to allow the nations crude oil supply to build. maybe walmart is broke and will need to close thier doors. maybe we should shut all the buisnesses in dayton to shut down after 1pm, this would be sure to lower our light bills, wouldn't it.
ReplyDeleteTo 11:08
ReplyDeleteYeah, I wouldn't mind a re-vote on the presidential election. All kidding aside, I am very much in favor of the electoral process. However, public opinions, facts, and the bottom line are always changing. The golf was presented as a business that would lose a little money to begin with. Not approx. $45,000 dollars with improvement numbers. No one projected approx. $1.35 increase in property tax. No one projected a reduction in road money going along with it. The fact of the matter to me is that a new vote, isn't a re-vote. A vote in November or in 2010 or whenever would be a new vote.
A couple quick notes:
ReplyDeleteFirst, as stated by samadamslite, naming names is legit if backed by the public record. I've never named names that have not been backed by public record.
Second, I made a mistake by posting something I've heard. If memberships are up year-to-date, that's great. If they're not, that's not good and I hope they get better. As for corporate sponsorship, I should have said corporation not having its events at the course anymore. I hope this is not true.
If I'm wrong, I'm wrong and I will state that I'm wrong in a future post.
I will not post anymore heard on the street posts anymore. The fact remains regarding the $25,000 and the Light Board.
Finally, don't be naming names because you feel your side is getting slighted. If you have facts, figures, or anything to back up how well the golf course is doing, e-mail them to me and I will post them. As I said before, no more heard on the street.
Remember, if you have figures showing positive signs for the golf course, get them to me and I will post those to show all readers of this blog how well the course is doing.
DaytonFlyer, Say what you will and call it what you want it's still a revote.
ReplyDeleteOk then re-votes are common place in the world then.
ReplyDeleteTo 11:22, I can tell you have not had to make tough choices in these economic times. There are people that have to choose between buying their medicine, food or keeping their lights on. I have had to make some tough choices but am not complaining because I am very happy to be here and be able to make these choices. We just need to be realistic.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the advisory board may have gotten ahead of them selves by making so many capitol improvemnts in the clubhouse, but it has been done, and i believe that all five council members voted to do many of those changes. We need to see what the parks and recs board can get done between now and the end of the fiscal year, july 1st. I hope they can make strides to make it profitable, or they will have to do something drastic at that time. I wish good luck.
ReplyDeleteTo 11:22, so would you be in favor of paying 1.35 in taxes to repave our streets? or just not pay at all. Just asking not to disagree they need done.
ReplyDeleteTo 11:34
ReplyDeletePersonally I am against the tax increase. Also without knowing the total budget and other stuff with out all the money spent on the golf it's hard to say.
To 11:34 that is a hard question to answer because so many variables are involved. Without the purchase of the Golf course the taxes would not have been raised already, also
ReplyDeleteif the Golf course budget was not in place I do not know how this would effect the city budget, due to fact the golf course at this time is not self suffcient. Possibly without these variables the taxes would not have had to be raised to repair some roads.
DF i don't think it is hard to say, either you would pay 1.35 in taxes to pave them or not, i am not asking about anything else. only about paying more taxes to pave the streets.
ReplyDeleteI was just trying to answer your question not say that the city is going to own the golf course for at least this year and if it does well which I hope it does, restaurant and golf course it will remain city owned if not very difficult decisions will need to be made. I am not and never have been against the golf course just the fact that parameters needed to be set on continued ownership if it does not break even or make money
ReplyDeleteTo: Anonymous 11:42pm There are to many variables. So your question is moot point.
ReplyDeleteIf we want better streets maybe we should go to the city and ask for a referendum to raise our taxes 1.35 per thousand to repave our streets. I would probable in favor of that. Everything that we do now cost more money, sorry that is a fact of life, i would be in favor because i wan't this community to grow not die.
ReplyDeleteNo, straight up I would not. I don't understand your question. We can't raise our by another $1.35 after doing once already. Then if didn't own the golf course we wouldn't have to raise it anyway.
ReplyDeleteIt's not a moot point, the question is would you pay 1.35 more per 1,000 assest value on your property to improve the streets or not. you cannot say your taxes would not have gone up if we didn't by the golf course, you don't know that.
ReplyDeleteI still feel it's moot point so with this I am saying Good Night. It's the bewitching hour.
ReplyDelete12:oo
Good night, thanks for the input.
ReplyDeleteBefore I'm done for the night, I have to clear up one thing. The person that was discussed earlier as trying to sabatage the P&R board. (From now on known as "he who shall not be named")Has his facts wrong, By malice or mistake, I won't guess. The corporate sponsor/outing has not been lost. At last nights meeting the board was going through the tournement schedule, and the clubhouse manager was asked if a certain corporate outing had been set yet. Her answer was "I haven't heard anything from them yet". Knowing something about this outing, it's kind of early for them to set a date yet. So, for "he who shall not be named" to quote as fact, that we lost a corporate sponser/outing was unfortunate. As it gives the public the view that there's one more thing going wrong with the course. So my advice to everyone is; don't take everything as the truth. The minutes when published, will give everyone the info they need to make up there own mind without someone elses interpretation.
ReplyDeleteWith that said good night.
ReplyDeleteBoard Member
Al
Al, Thank you, I'm glad that all is misconception. I would hope that all goes well for the golf course. I don't think this will hurt the golf course as you cleared it up.
ReplyDeleteThanks again,
so, the golf course got the $25,000 this morning? sounds as if the majority of it is going to pay off a note.
ReplyDeleteI really hope the course starts to bring in some money. I don't think the course can continue borrowing money to pay off debts. I am really hoping if people want a membership they go get one.
ReplyDeleteIt's not all about memberships. You don't have to be a member, or even like golf to eat at the clubhouse. People need to spend a little money at the clubhouse.
ReplyDeleteI just referred a group of people from out of town to eat at the club house. I don't eat out like I used to.
ReplyDeleteI don't understand why the 25,000.00 was borrowed now and why. Could someone please explain this to me? Isn't this the time that memberships and other fees would start being paid? If the course was purchased in April of last year shouldn't this be the time where we can really see how it did last year?
ReplyDeleteApparently the $25,000 was borrowed/given to the golf course as per an agreement last year. Most of it supposedly is for the note due. I do not know the amount of the note and what was left over and where it went/is going out there. That is the story I was told. If anyone has the exact answer it would be appreciated.
ReplyDeleteI believe a portion of the $25,000 was being used to pay off a note that was coming due. The note was probably coming due before the golf course gets the budget alloted from the city council and the golf course did not have the money to pay this off. I don't know if this means the golf course will pay back the $25,000 when the course receives their budget from the city.
ReplyDeleteIt would be nice if they did pay it back. That remains to be seen.
ReplyDelete4 people from out of town told me they golfed Dayton once last year, really enjoyed it, and plan to come back more this year. That's great news!
ReplyDeleteNice to hear people want to golf here this year. Does anyone know much from the city budget is going to the golf course this year?
ReplyDeleteNot to be pessimistic but has the golf course made enough money to pay back the 25,000.00?
ReplyDeleteThen be optimistic and support those who are trying to help the course make enough money to pay it back.
ReplyDeleteApparently around $250,000 is the new budget for the golf course. I believe that starts July 1st or so. Whenever the new fiscal year starts. Anyone that has the exact figures please post them.
ReplyDeleteI have supported the golf course as much as I can, I can no longer afford to eat out, so I certainly cannot afford to golf. So what would you like me to do? Not talk about it any longer? I hope it can break even but it will have to do it without my financial support other than the tax increase.
ReplyDeleteBack to the Greenskeeper. Is there a Greenskeeper for this year? Does anyone know?
ReplyDeleteSamaddamslite: I have heard that amount also, maybe someone from the board can tell us, since I sure they should have copy of the budget by now. Or at least I hope they do.
ReplyDelete