Er yes it is... but golf is not bad, it's good. When I hear folks bemoan golf I am reminded that this is one of the amenities that drew me to Sun City. I am also aware that these folks are not attacking golf per se but are upset by the history of the "golf community's" consumption of available PIF resources. For me the key performance metric is how we compare to our competitors and national standards in terms of capital and operating cost per round. Also, I am a big fan of having an understandable master plan for golf that is approved by the membership. Bill Pearson always likes to refer to special interest groups and their adversaries as warring factions. Due to limitations of RCSC financial resources (money), these groups (tribes) fight with each other to secure their piece of the pie every year. Golf is no different than other groups except for the fact that it is generally larger, much more cohesive and very vocal. As a result, our golf courses are a very high priority item (as they should be). IMHO, they add more value to one's home than any other amenity. IMHO the lack of a master golf plan (or any master plan for that matter) results in a repetitive cycle of dysfunctional battles over limited resources and inefficient use of those resources. Some call this the squeaky wheel gets greased approach to allocating resources. I call it inexcusable and dangerous to our community. My answer is to adapt a data-based member approved master plan that only gets adjusted when circumstances significantly change. The board then returns to its proper role - oversight. And what say you?
This is a topic i have written volumes on and to this day, golf may well be one of the most misunderstood activities in Sun City. It's not my fault, it's not my job to explain to new buyers how and why Sun City works. As a Sun City historian, former RCSC board member, former golfer and avid fan of self-governance i've tried many times to help those moving here better understand. It's complicated for sure. I almost always start with this statement: Sun City is a golfing community; it always will be. With 8 courses RCSC owned and 3 privately owned courses within our white walls, we have a massive per-capita number of residents compared to the number of holes available. Unfortunately the number of actual golfers is and always has hovered around that 15% mark. That's almost to the number that DEVCO projected when Sun City opened, with their calculations being in 12%-15%. Here's the other piece to my statement: Sun City is a golfing community; it always will be..."but, at what cost?" This is where the rubber always meets the road and this is where the history is so damned important. The RCSC, in the mid 70's, was reluctant to take ownership of the golf courses. There was a reason and i could quickly pull out the articles that explained why. The board and the community at large understood, one day they could become "money pits." Those were their words splashed across local newspapers in 1977. The deal to buy them took several years. John Meeker wanted the RCSC to own them, because DEVCO had no intention of ownership. Initial offers were just to give them to the RCSC. It took numerous attempts, but it finally happened when the RCSC bought them for $10 and a cup of coffee. Anyone who digs deeper will read the deal included all of the golf equipment and during the 18 month trial period, DEVCO added more than $100k in incentives. Golfers wanted us to own them and the agreement included ridding the courses of outside play. The RCSC wanted to know if they could survive without the influx of golfers DEVCO brought in to help sell homes. The RCSC also agreed in the documents that golf would be self-sustaining. An agreement that to this day is vague and poorly interpreted and often argued as to its meaning. Let me be blunt; in my opinion, the RCSC owning them was far better than DEVCO selling them off to private companies (which was the plan if the RCSC didn't buy them). If we had 11 privately owned and run golf courses in our community, golf would have been twice as expensive for members and by now, half of them would be gone. Some would argue that's a good thing, i'm not one of them. Owning those 8 golf courses has provided RCSC members with affordable rates and ample tee times. It has also (and still does) provide an attraction that sells countless numbers of homes across the community. While 15% is far from a majority, it is a huge number of homes/buyers who moved to Sun City, whether they play golf, buy a home with a golf course view, or like all the green space. Win/win/win. The downside is; it has become a money pit. But, it's our money pit and so we are obligated to maintain the courses. The problem has been (don't hate the messenger here), we allowed a small group of golfers to dictate the terms and conditions for the past 20 years. Full play pass buyers, along with small groups have enjoyed the best tee times at the lowest (well below market value) rates. It wasn't some master plan, it evolved and as we kept spending money on courses, we measured our successes by the number of rounds played. The standard was 300,000 but the pandemic sent the number soaring. Hitting 350,000 rounds played was like some magic elixir. In reality, it beat the shit out of our courses, we saw non-residents (who joined small groups) take members tee times and the will to fix the problems was lost to a golf director who had been around a long time, had little will to change and those who it worked best for were contented. Perhaps nothing irritates me more than the cries by golfers about how unfair it is they have to pay for golf. That was how the community was built and sold. The centers were given to the RCSC/members, the golf courses and bowling alleys were sold with conditions that included paying to play. The other aspect that drives me wild is the argument that golfers are subsidizing all the other amenities. Not so, the number of years golf has generated a profit (surplus) since 1977 can be counted on one hand (maybe one finger). The new director of golf has his hands full. He's inherited a mess that should have been addressed years ago. He can't afford to ignore any of those challenges. My advice to him is the same i gave the previous golf director: Build a relationship with the entire golf community, not just the full play pass buyers or just the small group participants. We've let the minority dictate to the majority (of golfers) far too long. To John's point, a master plan needs to factor all of this in, and so much more that presents a vision for our future. As a community we've been flying by the seat of our pants way too long and worse yet, we've suffered the outcomes of being clueless on where we are going. It's time to fix it gang, time to fix it.
I agree it is time to fix the golfing issues. I attend many of the Golf Advisory Committee meetings when I am in SC. They are trying to remedy some of the problems. Not sure they are overly concerned about the cost to non golfers of RCSC though. They are mostly concerned about their own pocketbooks. I am a golfer. Although I don't play as much as I used to, I can assure you that I would not have purchased a home in Sun City if golf wasn't an amenity offered by RCSC. Of the six homes on my block, only two do not have a golfer. All but me play several times a week. One of my neighbors usually plays the North Course. I have never heard her complain about the sand traps there and she is 86 years old! I have only played 9 holes there once so I can't speak to them. I simply don't remember that they were demonstrably more difficult than other courses. It doesn't make sense to spend the money on them when the water issues need to be addressed at the South Course. One problem I foresee for the new golf director is that his office is right off of the pro shop at Riverview. I visited Brian once and he had multiple golfers come in to "chat" with him. I believe that makes it difficult for the Director of Golf to be objective and not to develop friendships with the golfers that have plenty of time to stop in and give their two cents worth. I would suggest that the Director of Golf have his office at the Corporate headquarters. I am not in a "small group" that gets preferred tee times for a couple of bucks a round. Truthfully I was aghast when I found that out especially that nonresidents are allowed to be part of them. There have been some modifications but it is still an unfair situation for the rest of us. I have also been told not to touch those small groups because the Members in them will get irate. Since I don't play that often and can usually get tee time somewhere close to when I want to play, I am not affected that much. However it flies in the face that all Members have equal rights. That's my two cents worth on the subject. Now I am going to finish watching this week's meeting video. I'll probably be back with additional comments.
I will say it again, give me an ADWR and Golf plan I can understand, and I will be happier. I feel duped by the Quail Run decision because, it is my understanding it does little to address the ADWR requirements yet is being entirely funded by funds ($6,000,000) set aside for ADWR compliance. As I said before, there is no one on this board that I trust. Coming from an accounting/finance/legal background I can easily understand golf course economics. What I am being told does not add up. The story I hear is we are constantly redesigning courses we do not spend enough on to maintain properly. At the same time, we are giving cheap golf passes to frequent golfers which causes more play and more maintenance. Moreover, we are unwilling to enforce rules (# of carts per group rule) that would reduce wear and tear on the courses. Many maintain that the golf courses are supposed to be operated at a breakeven level so that golf fees cover golf operating expenses which is proving difficult to do. All of this has to be paid for and from what I understand Preston Kise is looking only at alternatives to pay for this that do not impact his golf fees. Good luck! The reality I see is this. It is in the best interests of the community to do what is necessary to make golf in Sun City sustainable for the long term. To do that, we have to prioritize our spending in the following manner: (1) Meet ADWR requirements in as cost-effective manner as possible, (2) adopt and enforce rules designed to limit the wear and tear on our courses. (3) charge the amount needed to cover the cost of proper maintenance of the courses and equipment. Golf course capital improvements should only be considered after the above three items have been satisfied. Just one man's opinion.
