There's no question, we live in a virtual mecca for golfers. Sun City is 7 miles wide and 3 miles wide. Contained within that small space is an amazing 11 golf courses. 8 owned by the RCSC and 3 private country clubs. On a holes per capita basis, one of the highest in the country. In addition, we have been pouring massive amounts of money from the preservation and improvement fund into them. From total course renovations to updated water distribution systems, new wells, better water distribution, new maintenance barns (sorry, but they are golf, not facilities), improved outdoor patios and at South a soon to be opened pro shop and golf car storage facility. And let's not forget the conversion to desert landscaping on several courses. We can debate how much money has been shoveled at them and clearly some of it was desperately needed. Unfortunately the numbers we have been shown isn't the sum total of the investments. There's been money from capital budgets allocated, we just don't know how much but we do know it wasn't allocated back into determining the yearly rates for golf. Years back DEVCO set aside golf and 10 pin bowling as having to remain revenue neutral. No one ever talks about that these days. The sad fact is whenever they increase rates they decrease play. It's always been a challenging balancing act. I've been harping about this since my time on the board. During my three years on the board the makeup was a majority of golfers. Between a GM focused on golf and board members loving the improvements, it was an easy sell. What drove me wild was; there was no long range plan to try and increase play. We simply believed if we spent a bushel basket of money, they would come. I'd read the countless articles on the sport struggling across the country and wonder when common sense would settle in. I'm still waiting. It's too early to scream fire, but the last two reports from the director of golf included these comments: March: A sluggish January followed by a wet and cold February have resulted in a decrease of 6,762 rounds compared to prior year. Through February, 68,550 rounds have been played, the second lowest total in the last seven years. Okay, crappy weather will do that. But then this April report on March play yesterday really peaked my interest: Total golf rounds for March were 42, 930, 891 fewer than prior year and the second lowest recorded total in the last 14 years. Poor weather March 11 through March 13 resulted in 2,263 less rounds from prior year. I didn't finish the rest of the paragraph about how it was all good because we actually exceeded budget projections. There's not enough time to try and explain how we do budgets. Suffice to say, i've never seen budgeting done like we do in Sun City. And so we are clear, March was gorgeous here. It was cool, but no rain. My point is, pay attention RCSC. If this is a sign of things to come...
Too funny IC. I only wish the stats we are seeing, reading were worth a chuckle. If memory serves me, last year and for the past several (at least 5 or 6) we have had a course closed. That makes these stats even more daunting because i do believe all 8 of them have been open this entire year. Someone help me out if i am wrong eh? To help folks understand, even from our earliest roots, only about 15% of the population golfed. If it has varied over the years, it was only a percentage point or two either way. Beyond the golfers, there are about 10% of the homes in Sun City built on golf courses. Not all of them are golfers, as folks simply like looking out their kitchen window or sitting on their patio enjoying the open green spaces. There's no question, the golf courses are an added value and help sell Sun City. My question has always been, at what cost is too much? Because the downside now is we have ignored any number of the other things that makes Sun City so special. Playing catch-up will be difficult, costly and challenging. Thank goodness we are in Sun City where no one is ever to blame for dumb choices.
It's always been interesting to me why those with golf course lots have been so against any suggestions that the course be transformed to a park. I know they think their property value would suffer, but would it? They'd still be able to enjoy sitting on their patio and enjoy the open green spaces of a park; if/when the course/park is forced to transform to "desert" landscaping because of water rationing, it'd still be open spaces and would still provide that virtual view. To me personally, the Sonoran desert is beautiful. Before moving to SC I lived on an acre of desert -- about half of my yard had the desert plants that needed it (burr sage, globemallow, brittle bush, etc) on drip irrigation to keep the area close to the house more "green" in the heat of the summer. Of course the trees (ironwood, mesquite, palo verde), cactus (hedgehog, saguaro, ocotillo, cholla, prickly pear), creosote bush, chuparosa, etc. needed no supplemental water, so the water used was negligible. To me, a lush Sonoran desert landscape is just as serene as the grass I had when living in another part of the country. And it had the added benefit of no mosquitoes! And no mowing the grass once or twice a week -- I only had to do yard work once a month.
Well IC, the courses were deeded in perpetuity so no chance on the park thing. As for desert landscaping, I personally like for three reasons, one, we live in a desert, two, it saves a ton of water every year. If I remember Jan at the last annual meeting, she stated that we saved seventy million gallons of water last year, which lowers our water bills and fills the aquifer. Finally, a contigent of golfers whine about because they have to hit off some sort of gravel which replaced grass for the rough when they shank their shots. My advice, don’t hit your ball into the desert landscape.
Quail Run golf course is not deeded in perpetuity and is certainly an option....IF the Board wants to exercise some courage and is truly concerned about competition as one board member ran on such platform. It is time the vocal minority not hold hostage the majority whose property values and enjoyment of the community are being negatively impacted. The majority who own houses not on a golf course are missing out on the number one amenity sought by new retirees not to mention they continue to subsidize a declining game to their own personal detriment. Think of what would happen to the majority homeowner property values if Sun City had an open air park with walking trails for dogs and people alike.
As to IC’s comment, I think houses situated on a park that could be accessed from one’s back yard would be highly desirable. Put me down for one.
That's not necessarily true. Not easy, but not necessarily impossible. The courts would have to decide. For sure, if/when maintaining the property as golf courses becomes impractical, the RCSC will have to do something and there are only two choices I believe -- revert property to Del Web or try to have restriction removed.
If I remember correctly, about six or seven years ago it was discussed turning Quail into a park. The residents were going crazy over this, ARS was beating the war drum and Jan had not any deep research. It turned out that once a title search was performed, it was discovered that this property was deeded in perpetuity. I spoke to some Quail residents at the time and among their complaints was dog/animal pet dropping’s everywhere, people walking on the course/park could look in their windows (I guess there is some sort of force field that prevents golfers from doing the same) and my favorite was that Mexicans will come and have large family picnics there leaving chicken bones everywhere. Somehow I could not convince them it was private property and this coul not happen. This is my recollection on the matter.
I think you will find that DW failed to establish a deed restriction when they passed title of QR to the RCSC. Some time later the RCSC put the deed restriction on it themselves. I've read it's pretty much a slam dunk that if you put a restriction on the deed to your own property the court will remove it if you petition them to do so. Back then, those of us suggesting that they make QR a multi-use park + dog park chose QR for that supposed ease of removing the restriction.
I stand corrected. The thing is will the Board and Jan go along with this removal. Then there will be the inevitable blowback from the residents along QR. This could get messy, but only time will tell.
Yes, messy -- in oh so many ways. My sense of reality back then (for the QR Park idea) was there were thousands of dog owners, walkers, nature buffs, gardeners, etc. who wanted it made a park, many thousands who could care less either way, and a few thousand golfers and adjoining property owners who were against it. The RCSC did what it usually does -- fail to understand/care what the majority of the membership wants. As I recall they did a survey of a few hundred (mostly golfers) and, based on those results, declared that the membership was against the idea of making QR a park. Case closed!
