I think this is very interesting news that there was a potential private buyer for the golf course. As we can all imagine, this scenario could have saved the taxpayers of Dayton lots of money. We could have had a city budget that was not hamstrung by the money earmarked for the golf course. The city budget could have went to rebuilding Dayton's infrastructure. Also, the city would not have needed to go to the Light Board to take out more debt to pay off another debt payment that was coming due.
Before I get into this, I fully understand that the golf course will be owned by the city of Dayton for this season, and I truly hope that the golf course at least breaks even this year.
However, I would like to know why was this information not brought forward much earlier like when there was talk about a private buyer that showed interest in purchasing the golf course? I think this would have been very important information for the citizens of Dayton to know.
Who was/were the one(s) that decided this information was not important enough to share with us? I sure hope they are not on the current Rec Board because we see where that kind of planning has gotten us.
Alternatively, if the golf course had to be owned by the city, the city should have bought the golf course in foreclosure. This simple alternative would have saved the taxpayers while giving the city ownership of the golf course. I understand the difference between the foreclosure purchase price and whatever remaining that was owed to the bank would have been all on the previous owners to pay back. I'm sorry, but that's what happens in the business world. Sometimes people owe money because a business fails. Right now all of Dayton taxpayers are on the hook due to the city buying the golf course for $170,000. Again, I don't think this is how the business world works (unless you are AIG).
The scenario that may happen (which I don't want to happen) is the city of Dayton buys golf course at a high price; however, things don't work out and the city has to sell the course at a low price (much like what happened to the U.S. Government in the late 80's with the Savings and Loan scandals). Of course, there are alternatives such as leasing. However, there is a time when one has to cut losses and quit throwing good money after bad.
After this look back, I hope that the Rec Board comes out with a definitive course of action such as saying we (the Rec Board) will start looking at selling/leasing if the course does not break even or make money this year. Also, figure out who did not think having a potential private buyer for the course was important and keeping that person out of any future decisions regarding the golf course (if they are still a part of the decision making process). We see where this kind of decision making has gotten us so far.
When buying this golf course, other country club buddies didn't want their friends and cohorts to be stuck owing any money. So they worked out a back door deal to spend taxpayers money to bail out their friends. I did you a favor now you owe me one. In a scenario like this the taxpayer always loses. Until it starts coming out and we are educated. There are ways we can take back our city. Do you feel right on how we have been lied to and decieved?
ReplyDeleteD.O. Very well said, great business advice, I wish our City would have followed this at the time. It is now time they step up to the plate and make decisions. This cannot keep going on.
ReplyDeleteApparently nobody wants to address these issues because they can't put a positve spin on why we should own a golf course if this happened.
ReplyDeleteI did vote for city ownership of the golf course and I would vote that way again today. I understand that this was not the vote of most the people on here and you would still not vote that way again. I will not attack you for your beliefs and wants and I hope you will not attack me for mine.
ReplyDeleteI am not on the city council and I'm not on the P&R board. I'm not sure there is anything I can do to help those of you who are upset to resolve your anger. I don't know the answer to your questions. I don't think any of us will get meaningful answers in a blog type forum. This works for discussion, not answers.
I do hope that both sides can come to a resolution so we can either help or atleast not deter the council and board from protecting our tax money in the here and now and future. Like said above, we all need for it to break even.
There are many lessons to learn from both sides of this.
I can't be on here much tonight if at all, so don't write nasty messages about me, it would be like shooting a man in the back, I can't defend myself! LOL
Dayton Taxpayer: I respect your vote. I voted no the first time around and I would vote no again. I have had a strong belief from the beginning that the Golf Course would have fared better under private ownership. The reasons that I feel this way is because a private person would have to put their heart and soul and every waking moment in making this succeed. Also the city would not be in direct competition with other businesses, I do know some have argued this doesn't bother the other businesses but it would have to deflect some purchases away from them. It would not became a tax burden on the citizens of Dayton. It would have not have caused all of the conflict in Dayton. It would not have drove people to have personal vendeda's against other's to the extent of retalitation for just having different belief's. This blog has given us all a chance to discuss this without the bias of our local newspaper, yes there was bias but that is the owner's choice.
ReplyDeleteLooking at this as a business venture: Even if the the golf course would have been sold under forclosure those involved would probably had to own up to some debt. That is the chance you take when you go into business. If there was some private money from citizen's in Dayton loaned to the Golf Course, then maybe these people would have lost their money that is the chance you take whether lending this money or selling things to another business, you know up front you could lose it. I am sure most banks would rather not have a business go into forclosure but they are in the banking business and this happens. I personally do not feel it is my responsibility and the other tax payers in Dayton to have bailed out these others.
I did hear that some people in town were owed money by the golf course and they would have lost that money if the Golf Course would not been sold for full price to the City. I agree with you Dayton Tiger this is a chance you take.
ReplyDeleteDayton Taxpayer:
ReplyDeleteIn the here and now I believe difficult decisions will have to be made. At this time,
I feel that there should be an audit of the Golf Courses and Cities books. I am saying this because of all the questionable problems and what has risen. You can get all of the copies of the financials and review them but with out receipts and ledger entries it is impossible to tell the true story. I would have thought with a problem of money missing that this would have been done at this time for the protection of the rest of the city employees and the city.
I have a theoretical question. If the golf course could be sold but this agreement would no longer allow the "borrowing" of old one and two for parking, little kids soccer, etc. would people approve of this?
ReplyDeleteAlso--what would people think of selling old one and two to help with financing--perhaps someone would like to develop a high-end housing complex right next to a beautiful golf course. Once again, this would no longer be available for use Labor Day (or for concerts or whatever) or for other purposes.
This is a CONCRETE idea I am interesting in discussing--any takers??
Theatregoddess: I read your question and I had to call my person in the know because I thought I had heard that there is an agreement with the city and rodeo about parking. They said there is a 99 year agreement for the rodeo to use old hole one and two for parking.
ReplyDeleteBUT--if the city didn't own it--would this be in effect? Who owns(ed) old one and two--the city or (before recently) the golf course? I have been told old one and two were owned by the golf course=--so how can the city make an agreement?
ReplyDeleteSee how complicated all this is? That's why it is important that at least a couple people on the board know the history--imo. So--someone offers to buy old one and two. Awesome,right? that would bring in much needed funds. BUT WAIT--there is this agreement. AND--what would we do about parking?? AND--perhaps the buyers really want the "driving range." SO--a choice is made and no one is happy. No dishonesty. No power grab--just an unwinnable issue. Wish this were easier . . .
The City owns old one and two. I believe the original golf course board this this to raise some money prior to ever selling the course to the city. Wish it was easier too, but if the conflict is bad now what would it be like if the rodeo people really got irritated?
ReplyDeleteCorrection: I believe the original golf course board sold these to holes to raise money prior to ever selling the course to the city.
ReplyDeleteI don't want to irritate anybody!!! Is that possible???
ReplyDeleteBoy I cannot type tonight.
ReplyDeleteI believe the original golf course board sold these two holes to raise money prior to ever selling the course to the city.
I think it's possible for any of us to irritate others. It's possible!!!!
ReplyDeleteI'll do some research and think on this some more. HMMMM
ReplyDeleteGood Luck!!! Remember last night you said you didn't want an ulcer or to become a major alcoholic!!!
ReplyDeleteThis whole Dayton Mafia thing is HARD. When does the graft start???? LOL
ReplyDeleteThat's something brought up tonight that I haven't heard posted before. When decisions are proposed about the golf course, we have to remember the Rodeo and the Golf Course are loosely married...or friends with benefits so to speak (LOL). Good thinking guys.
ReplyDeleteAre you the Godmother of the Mafia or some sort of underboss? Or does the mob do that and not the Mafia? At any rate, all organized criminals like to drink alcohol so you have a good start into the way of life.
I need to make a correction. The City has always owned the old hole one and two. I think it was an issue with the parking on the holes is why the golf course was changed. I didn't want to give out incorrect information.
ReplyDeleteBut there is like a 99 year parking agreement.
If indeed the city owns old 1 and 2, then the point of selling it with the golf course, if it was sold, is moot. That apparently would not would not go with it. If I remeber correctly it was sold to the city and leased for parking. Assuming for a minute that old 1 and 2 went with the course, I don't think that the parking and soccer aspect would justify keeping the whole golf course if it turns out to be a monetary failure. But as I said and others as well have said, I do believe it is not a part of the golf course any longer. Only that the city owns both under the Park and Rec department.
ReplyDeleteSamaddams: You are completely right. I also checked and the city does own old one and two
ReplyDeleteand always have. So it is a moot point.
Thanks for the information about old one and two. I really didn't know who owned that area. It is a nice large space. Maybe there are some ways that area could be utilized. Flag football, outdoor entertainment with tents...just a thought.
ReplyDeleteCars park all the way up and down the new hole 1 fairway and part of hole 5 when the rodeo specials are on. Not that it would necessarily be a sticking point one way or the other with ownership of the golfcourse, but it would have to be considered what to do with parking at that time.
Dayton Taxpayer: It would be good if the city could get some revenue off old 1 and 2 when not in use for Labor Day. Kids do use it for soccer which is a good thing. I remeber a few years ago their were car shows out there. That would be ideal for that as well. Maybe we could entice someone back here for that. Also there used to be an old tractor show out there as well. What ever happened to those 2 events being out there?
ReplyDeleteIt will be nice when the P&R board has less on their plate and is able to spend some time looking at the other parks. If the camping area could be more attractive or spruced up, shower house remodled (of course that's big $$$) that might attract some people. You know they'd inevitably spend big money at the store and maybe they would golf while they were there too!
ReplyDeleteIt would be nice, but their top priority at this time needs to be the golf course if they are going to make it break even or make a profit this year. It takes lots and lots of work. Time is of the essense. The camping improvements would be nice. I really don't know how much more business it would bring into the community if we would consider the money invested versus the money received. I think a feasability study would have to be done.
ReplyDeleteI've talked with some members of the Dayton Wranglers and they do not think that they were ever loosly married to the golf course, and they thought the statement that they were was joke.
ReplyDeleteso--to recap: the city owns old one and two and has a 99 year agreement with the rodeo for parking. The rodeo does use golf course land for overflow parking (that's where I parked this year) and if the course were sold they most probably wouldn't be able to do this (private owners wouldn't let their assets be torn up, even for something as big as the rodeo--it would be self-defeating). BUT--it is just overflow parking and shouldn't be that big of a deal, right?
ReplyDeleteI would also like to say that (Except for the last post) this strand of discussion has been very productive and informative and not nearly as nasty as some others. Thanks for that
Just have them park down town and have tractor trolleys bring them to the rodeo, and take them back. Pretty simple Kendra? This happens at the state fair and other venues around our fine state.
ReplyDeleteThis worked great when they had the car show and the tractor show up top at the park. I remember riding the tractor trolley out to the park and it worked great. So the overflow traffic wouldn't be a problem. So this can't be used as an excuse if the golf course had to be sold or leased. I also know of several other areas that have been discussed for parking so it would not be a problem. The Wrangler's are very resillent and productive.
ReplyDeleteI was told by a very prominent person in the state of Iowa that when you have problems with a local newspaper printing the whole truth that people should start blogs so the truth can be put out to all the citizens, so now I can see why some want this blog to go, they don't want the truth out. THANK YOU DAYTON OBSERVER!
ReplyDeleteI was also told this by the Fort Dodge Messenger. They said that blogs can be very effective. Ditto Dayton Observer!!!!!!!!!!!
ReplyDelete