"I Want What I Want When I Want It."

There are protections on the RCSC golf courses in their deed restrictions, but they all have automatic renewals. After the initial 25 years (i think) time period, every 10 years they renew unless the RCSC would take an action to stop them. The fallout that would come from that would be disastrous and the only reason to invoke it would be for really ugly financial conditions forcing them to do so. We're nowhere near that being the case. That said, it is time for a major overhaul of how we sell golf in Sun City.

The 3 private country clubs have similar covenants of sorts. With roughly 300 homes bordering each of those courses, home owners will go ballistic when the first takes the action to shutter the course they live on. It's happened hundreds of times across the country. The land is far more valuable for development purposes than it will ever be as a golf course. Each of the 3 country clubs were sold in the 2 million dollar range. If it were sold to a developer or builder, you'd be ten fold plus.

Once the 5th water management plan takes effect (2025), the courses will only receive water allocations for tee boxes, fairways and greens; they either convert to desert landscaping or let the roughs turn to dust and dirt. The conversion costs will be $2-$4 million dollars (best guess) and they simply will not be able to afford to do it and playing on dirt, or living adjacent to the course, will be ugly. Across the country, private courses have closed, fenced them and forced settlements to be reached between home owners and course owners. Typically a payoff for the up-charge for a golf course lot (roughly 50K) is a potential remedy.

Something is going to have to give. The RCSC, a few years back, was offered Palm Brook but they needed another course like they needed a hole in their head. The land, had they been able to use it for something other than a golf course, would have been interesting, but the lawsuits and ill will to resolve the legal battles would have offset all of the opportunities it would have provided. In my opinion, they were wise to avoid the challenges.

I suspect once the 5th water management plan is enacted, courses will be given a grace period to conform or adapt, but the State will want to see at the very least a plan and a time line. Push will come to shove.

 

Forgive me if this is a stupid question but...
Since Palm Brook is a privately owned golf course and the covenants are on that property, then what's stopping the Palm Brook people from selling the property to a developer to do what he wishes? I believe all's the new Palm Brook property owners would need to do is not renew the covenant on the land and within 10 years it's free-game for becoming condo's?

Being that Palm Brook is private property the RCSC has no real say? It's not like the home owners living on the golf courses had any guarantee that that property would always remain a golf course!

I get it, I'm sure the home owners would sue, but I'm not so sure it would be a battle they would win?

I may be wrong!

 

So if I understand, a homeowner has little if any contractual "protection" regarding what happens on adjacent golf course property. The deed restrictions only affect the RCSC, and only for up to 10-years if not renewed. That bodes well for the RCSC, not so well for homeowners. Perhaps the RCSC could sell parts of one or more golf courses to developers and use the proceeds to redevelop the remaining areas for recreational use (dog parks, walking/bike trails, a theater?, etc) and desert landscape the property next to adjacent homeowners in some acceptable fashion? Might be a win win when all things are considered.

The Hohokums left the Phoenix area 700-some years ago because of an extended drought that had persisted for over 100-years. Weather changes tend to be cyclical, but not well understood -- our current drought began in 1994 and no one can reliably predict how long it will last. Compared to previous extended droughts, it's reasonable to assume this one is aggravated by man-made climate change factors. It seems foolish for us to be ostriches about it -- pretending we don't know it's happening and hoping it will just "go away". Water in Arizona gets more scarce every day and our water demand increases with every person moving to the Valley (roughly 75,000 a year). This problem requires changes far beyond what we in SC can contribute via desert landscaping initiatives.

 

Long term, given the water issues we all face in the coming decades, there may well come a time when tough decisions need be made by the RCSC. I don't see it in our lifetime IC, simply because the 3 private country clubs will be impacted first. There's 11 golf courses in Sun City, way more than we need or can support. The RCSC can keep subsidizing golf via the PIF and through the yearly assessments as need be. The three private courses have no revenue streams beyond outside play and their rates already are far higher than what the RCSC charges. They will be faced with those tough decisions long before us.

That said, it's high time the RCSC looks closely at how we sell and market our golf. Outside play should NEVER get priority over the members and the idea we sell outsiders half price golf passes is NUTS. On top of that, our own full play passes haven't seen an increase since 2017. The only people paying the going rate for golf are the daily fee users who oddly enough get a $1 increase every year.

We've been abysmal in looking to the future. Shortsighted is being kind. The very idea a board had foisted a 40 million dollar rebuild on the community was crazy. Thank goodness the new board is slowing the roll and is looking at the bigger picture.