Golf is not a four-letter word

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.

 

THANK YOU, BILL, FOR THE SPOT ON ANALYSIS. I have nothing to add!

 

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.

 

Well said John and this false narrative that what we spend on golf courses and golf out-buildings from PIF doesn't really cost us anything is nonsense. The other day the CFO explained to me the ADWR 2025 plan wasn't golf's fault because we were being forced to do it. No shit Dick Tracy. The who, what, why and where's aren't the issue, they are however the reality.

We've refused to be realistic about the cost of golf; i wrote years ago, the net investment from PIF was going to be in the 100 million dollar range (between 2000-2030). I wasn't complaining about it, i wanted/needed someone to recognize the ugly reality that massive dollar figure was going to strip the community of nearly half the money generated by home sales. It looks now like it will be in the 40%-50% range.

The point was always; we could not continue to sell prime time tee times for $5 or $10 an hour. That the structure we had been caught up in was ludicrous on its face. That a small cabal of golfers enjoyed the best of the best while the remaining majority of golfers got what was left. I was screaming into a tunnel and the only response was "i hated golf."

The reality is the 2025 water management plan is smack dab in our faces. The Long Range Planning Committee isn't looking at it as how do we keep the golfers happy, they understand we have enormous pressure that has to be addressed. So much so, the board has brow-beat several committee members into submission and they quit; that is tragic. I mean that, those quitting were mostly younger and for all intensive purpose, our future.

I'll ask again, if there are really a handful of sand traps on the North Course that golfers can't chip out of, why not just redo those and be done with it? If golfers need the back nine tiff/tuff-turf replaced to match the front nine (it does save something by needing less water), just replace it. Why in God's name do we need to spend $100,000 on a golf course design we just had done a while back? BTW, in all likelihood, it will be the same designer. I expect the board to announce the actual cost came back less in the hope we believe they saved us money...while the design if implemented will be in the $2-$3 million dollar range (nice savings eh?)

This is exactly why some of us watching from the outside scratch our heads and ask; "really?, what happened to common sense?"

 

Common Sense? IMHO those words are not to be used in reference to this Board. I am more concerned about the liability for what appears to be multiple flagrant breaches of fiduciary duty and RONR. While I am very bothered by very large amounts of MY MONEY being spent without an overall plan in place I do not want to have my money spent defending lawsuits or paying exorbitant fees to insure reckless behavior. We have said it here multiple times, while we appreciate the volunteer efforts of the Board, we rightfully expect that they will perform their duties in a fiduciarily responsible manner. IMHO I don't think any of these board members understand what their obligation is, so they hide behind corporate lawyers and Title 10. Sorry, but all that know me know that I am brutally honest.

Here are but a few of the obvious concerns:

• IMHO wholly inadequate board training of members with no prior experience in being a board member. Qualification criteria for being a board member which disqualifies close to 40% of the dues paying membership from being board members.
• Repeated violations of RONR and no parliamentarian to advise on the requirements
• Apparent manipulation of process - Secret bylaw committee again???
• Engaging in what appears to be deceptive practices - the last board meeting being just one of many examples.
• Not having an overall plan in place with supporting rationale for millions of dollars of expenditures
• A treasurer with no formal accounting or finance training "overseeing" 10's of millions of dollars of spending. If you are going to have a treasurer with no formal experience or training, at least make sure they go through adequate training.
  
• Spending lavishly on special interest groups while dragging their feet on putting a plan in place.
• Ignoring or misrepresenting committee recommendations BY THE CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE and then making a prepared statement when caught. Really???

I have taken the time to compare our governance to other similar communities and IMHO we are in trouble big time. Maybe the lawyer is advising board members that they are untouchables but someday some lawyer with dollar signs in their eyes is going to go after them personally. FYI the lawsuit I filed in good faith did not seek any monetary damages. It simply asked the court to compel the board to allow the 1,700 members represented at the annual meeting to vote.

 

I’ve lived in Sun City for 16 years and I don’t see where what is happening with the BOD is anything new or different. Pet projects always seem to end up receiving a priority and regardless of what is promised, board members will almost always expose their own personal agendas. As long as people are willing to allow untrained, and often incompetent, people make multi-million dollar decisions based on a whim, why do you folks expect anything different to happen. Seems to me the people bitching the most about this board are the same ones that a few months ago were claiming that this board was different and they were going to do great things. Until you give board members proper training and proper direction, nothing going to change. We cannot expect great results without a master plan.

 

Larry, I agree 100%. It appears to me that Board members do not want to make a sensible plan because it limits their ability to raid the piggybank. John

 

The Board members individually and their family are indemnified by the Corporation under the Bylaws.

 

Timely article.

The Real Reason Retirees Are Abandoning Golf Communities

"That doesn’t mean golf communities will vanish overnight, but it does mean developers and residents alike may need to rethink their offerings if they want to remain relevant in a changing world."

https://www.savingadvice.com/articl...retirees-are-abandoning-golf-communities.html

 

I guess it’s a question of do you want to pay the additional maintenance cost to maintain the courses or pay the attorney fees to defend the corporation will face from the golf course homeowners when the decision is made to close the courses. And what happens if the homeowners win? Where does that money come from?

 

Click bait. Read the writers bio. She writes about everything.

 

From the Golf Lessons Channel

– Recommendations ⁢for Sustainable and Equitable Golf Courses in Urban and Suburban Environments

• Design Principles⁢ for Sustainable Golf‌ Courses:

1. ⁣ – ‌Promote ⁣native vegetation and reduce water⁤ consumption by adopting drought-tolerant grasses and ⁢minimizing irrigation systems.

⁣⁢ – Implement integrated pest management techniques ⁤that prioritize⁤ non-chemical methods to protect biodiversity and reduce environmental pollution.
– Consider using biodegradable ⁤materials and recycled products in ⁤course construction and maintenance to lessen ⁣the ecological footprint.

• Role in Equitable Access and Social ⁤Inclusion:

– ‌Establish partnerships with community groups ⁢and organizations to offer affordable memberships and programming,⁤ ensuring ⁣golf’s⁤ accessibility‍ to⁤ all.

• Community Benefits and ⁣Collaboration:

‍- Engage local residents in the planning process to ensure⁣ alignment with neighborhood needs and ⁣priorities.
-⁤ Establish‍ green ⁢spaces and‍ wildlife corridors within ⁣the golf course that serve as valuable amenities for the community.
‍ – ⁢Foster collaborations with neighboring schools, parks, and recreation facilities to expand recreational opportunities and⁢ strengthen community bonds.

I chose to highlight the importance of using golf courses as a green space and corridor for the community. The community pays for the space so it should also have access to the space beyond golf. The article further states the need to expand recreational opportunities in order to strengthen community bonds. Making green spaces more available and accessible could also encourage a greater desire to be more supportive of the courses themselves.

From the Christian Science Monitor


WHY WE WROTE THIS
A story focused on
TRANSFORMATION
Former golf courses are growing wild again, increasing the amount of public green space in the U.S. In the process, they are teeing up solutions for long-standing environmental challenges.
The case for rewilding
The San Geronimo Golf Course was built in the 1960s in anticipation of a suburb that never materialized. Over the decades, owners came and went. But one figure remained constant: Mr. Steiner, an ecologist with a passion for restoring the local creek.

For more than 30 years, Mr. Steiner worked to remove a defunct dam and revive the stream’s natural flow – all while golfers teed off just yards away. When the course closed permanently in 2018, he saw an opportunity to reimagine the land as a wildlife sanctuary.
Tripp Heller was among the skeptics. He had been a nature-loving golfer at the San Geronimo course for over a decade and had preferred it to stay that way. These days he’s on board with the nature preserve, saying, “It’s outperformed my expectations and potential disappointments.”

It’s become clear to him that the land is being managed well, he says, adding that there’s much more public use by dog walkers, families with children, and bird-watchers.


“I certainly miss the golf course, but the ecological benefits outweigh it,” he says.

Just offering some other perspectives about golf and the golf courses. Not recommending or suggesting anything, just that there needs to be a better understanding of the space, how it’s utilized, and other aspects of the land use.
No need to kill the messenger.

 

Carole,

I hope you are not threatened again for expressing your opinion. I have always believed, despite the constant harassment and threats from the Board, that bad things happen when good people stand by and do nothing. You are a good person.

Stand tall!

John

 

Dave,

When I was a lone dissenting director, I asked for a copy of the D&O policy, and I was sent copies of every insurance policy RCSC had and basically told to figure it out. OK, I get it, those that dare question the majority will be punished.

John

 

Agree with excerpts in Carole Martinez’s post:

“I chose to highlight the importance of using golf courses as a green space and corridor for the community.

• The community pays for the space so it should also have access to the space beyond golf.

The article further states
• the need to expand recreational opportunities in order to strengthen community bonds.

• Making green spaces more available and accessible could also encourage a greater desire to be more supportive of the courses themselves.”

When a course closed permanently:
“… opportunity to reimagine the land as a wildlife sanctuary. … land is being managed well, much more public use by dog walkers, families with children, and bird-watchers.”

#
? How many golf courses does Sun City really need?
? At what cost to the entire membership?
! Time to “reimagine” our land use !

 

So how do you propose to circumvent the deed restrictions that say that they must be used as golf courses or revert back to their original owner?

 

Worth exploring. We need solutions.

 

John,
Thank you for your concern and your unwavering support. I truly don’t feel threatened by anything. I rescinded the post because of the tone of how it was written, that’s on me. Rather than edit and amend, it would have read even worse with a poorly worded post. So yes in order to keep the natives content, it was easier to remove, the entire shabang. You bet there was comments about what I wrote, I would have suspected nothing less. Here’s the thing about writing an opinion on a chat board, it affects nothing, it changes nothing. Some folks may become touchy about the topic but that’s life. It’s a matter of opinions. You may have heard the opinions are like arse holes, Everybody has one and they usually stink. No, I didn’t just call anyone an a$$ okay?
Divergent ideas, such as the golf post I made or my concern about an abuse of Fiduciary Responsibility by a director, are just that ideas. Ideas have been the cornerstone of life and sharing ones thoughts and ideas should be done in a way that honors and respects the people who need a place at the table. Unfortunately, the table and the rug has been pulled out from under our collective feet and handed over to a special interest group. This is where the disappointment originates from., The willingness to use the office of director to influence the outcome which now will cost more money, more than likely costs to the members will exponentially increase and the whole community while this person who would believe this has no bearing on the outcome. I am not threatened by what I write, I simply let get things out of hand once in a while and have to edit accordingly.