Question of the week [June 1-7]: With high-profile projects like the National Links Trust putting a spotlight on historic municipal courses, should local cities subsidize public golf as a community asset, or should muni courses be expected to operate entirely as self-sustaining, profitable businesses?
The First Call Inbox archives | View
— — — — — — —
Thomas Lyman | Beverly Hills, FL
They should be self-sustaining.
—————
Jim Armentrout | Millboro, VA
The external benefits of golf courses should be weighed alongside their economic sustainability. That said, there are numerous cases where the economics are disastrous for a government entity, and rational measures should be taken.
—————
Tom Howell | Bladenboro, NC
They should be supported in order to keep them affordable for the regular player.
—————
Jim Greaves | Easton, MD
Some subsidy.
—————
Mark Andersen | Cornelius, NC
I like the idea of local cities subsidizing public golf, as it provides a better chance for these courses to encourage the game at a decent price. This option should offer more opportunities for new golfers entering the sport.
—————
Thomas Klabunde | Tempe, AZ
Public golf is a community asset, just like tennis courts, pickleball courts, soccer fields, baseball fields, and city parks. Any of these facilities with grass use water, but whenever the debate starts, the first finger pointed about "saving water" is directed at golf courses.
Golf courses in Arizona are used pretty much dawn to dusk, 365 days a year, in contrast to soccer or baseball fields. Try to find anyone using those facilities on a weekday afternoon. In addition, golf courses offset operating and maintenance costs by generating revenue—something pretty much none of the other facilities do. Beyond recreation, golf courses provide wildlife habitat, open space, and help offset the heat island effect from concrete, pavement, and other development.
—————
Ralph Thomas Powers | Bradenton, FL
Muni courses should be operated as self-sustaining, profitable businesses that are run by people experienced in the golf industry.
—————
Kim Sabatino | Edmond, OK
They should be self-sustaining businesses.
—————
Mark Kazich | Darien, IL
The land is a community asset, as it provides acres of open space and can be a habitat for native plants and animals. However, the business end needs to price itself so that it doesn't operate at a deficit. This means adjusting staff and programs accordingly, even if those decisions meet resistance.
—————
Branham Stovall II | Wilmington, NC
I think it should be a combination of both. The muni here in Wilmington is a huge community asset for so many people who are not members of the mostly private courses around the area. They have a group called "Friends of the Muni" which raises money for the course to help offset expenses, add upgrades, and fund the First Tee program.
—————
James Shields | Carmichael, CA
Self-sustaining, profitable businesses.
—————
Pete Croppo | Bayfield, Ontario
I participated in a task force to decide whether to maintain or close a local muni-owned course. It was the latest of three courses established to expand the city's golf portfolio and take advantage of the profitability of two older courses. It was built on city-owned land that originally was a landfill and couldn't be used for anything other than a park, but it sat in an expanding residential community with riverfront views.
It appeared to be a win-win, yet it never achieved profitability and always required funding to meet the city's goal of "golf has to pay for golf." Because the city provided all kinds of funding for other parks and rec projects, they ultimately signed off on killing the course. The task force implored the city to recognize the contribution of golf to the health, exercise, and enjoyment of its citizens. Personally, I believe the task force made the right call to recommend continued support, but it failed at the dollars-and-cents budget level of the City Council. Bottom line, as a business: "Golf is a game that takes balls."
—————
Jim O'Connell | Cincinnati, OH
No.
—————
Douglas Fraser | Ocean City, NJ
Despite the upturn in golf participation, the private sector reaped the biggest bonus. Many public facilities are subsidized by the cities and towns in which they operate. Most city-owned courses operated by local governments are poorly run, underfunded, and a vehicle for cronyism and no-show jobs. Many opt for management companies which, for the most part, do "okay"—meaning they put in as little as possible to operate, but if the city breaks even, local politicians are happy. If the cities themselves hired qualified, smart golf and food-and-beverage professionals without the restraints of municipal bureaucracy, these courses would be community assets that could turn a profit.
—————
Ric Clarson | Dallas, TX
A public golf course is no different than a public library, aquatic center, park, or public building. It is part of a city's quality of life. All require maintenance and capital improvements. Though public golf course operators should aim to break even or generate a profit, capital improvements need additional funding. There are no members to assess or resort fees to tap into. Establishing a capital improvements fund or using an occasional bond fund can provide financing for these major improvements. Just because a golf course is public doesn't mean it cannot stand on its own. It starts with good management, solid maintenance practices, and realistic green fee pricing.
—————
Bob Brown | Sagamore Hills, OH
I think cities should help. I live in an area where the city took over a course that was basically a shag field and turned it into one of the nicest, most well-maintained courses in the area. It is so nice that two local high schools now use it as their home course.
—————
Kevin O'Brien | Foster City, CA
Cities should subsidize public golf and encourage building challenging public courses, such as Harding Park in San Francisco.
—————
Anthony Austin | Orlando, FL
Public golf should be protected and supported. In the same breath, failing operations must be challenged to perform.
—————
Art Williams | Luzerne, PA
All municipal courses should be subsidized as a community asset. This is how you "grow the game." With prices soaring, a young golfer has nowhere to play if not for munis, and seniors can enjoy their golden years without high green fees. However, they need to keep costs within reason. No mansion-sized clubhouses, for example. Have grass bunkers instead of sand, hire regular help, and let the PGA pros hang their shields if they want to offer lessons.
—————
Jesse Cunningham | Beverly, MA
Each state has a golf association that runs tournaments and championships. There should be a committee of officers from each state association that selects which courses qualify for historic significance. That takes a lot of the politics out of deciding which courses deserve recognition and funding. We definitely need to protect and preserve those courses.
—————
The First Call invites reader comment. Write to editor Stuart Hall at shall@buffalogroupe.com. If your comment is selected for publication, we will not publish your email address. We reserve the right to edit for clarity and brevity.
Front: Neumann Golf Course, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Photo: Cincinnati Recreational Commission Golf Courses.