We’ll be discussing that in my city council committee on Tuesday.
Following a blistering surprise audit that found a lack of control over cash at the city-owned Bowden Golf Course, some Macon City Council members are pushing again to sell the course and get out of the golf business.
I haven’t made up my mind, but I’m leaning toward “no.”
{ 25 comments }
Government should only step in where there are needs that cannot be met by the private sector. This raises two questions:
1. Is golf a need / necessity? No.
2. Are private companies able to run golf courses successfully? Yes.
So, if you’re saying that the city of Macon should own a golf course, why not have the city open restaurants, hardware stores, gas stations, etc. After all, eating is a need. Being able to fix your shelter is somewhat of a need. And as a golfer, getting around town is certainly more of a need to me than playing golf.
I understand the “quality of life” argument. If there’s really a demand for golf in Macon though, a privately owned golf course / driving range should fare well on it’s own without any need for public ownership.
I agree with David.
Erick if you are a true conservative you should be firmly in the “No” position.
If it already owns the land there doesn’t seem to be too much of a problem I guess. Raise revenue without raising taxes.
The largest problem is that the course has been a money loser for two decades. It has never, ever earned money for the city and stopped breaking even a long time ago.
City of Gainesville has the same problem. It should be sold to someone who knows what they are doing.
Since the IRS and Bureau of Land Managment owned and operated the Mustang Ranch in Nevada until it was finally sold on Ebay, nothing much wrong with a city developing a golf course until it can be sold into private sector.
I believe the state of Georgia owns 7 of the 37 courses in the state.
And, how many of them operate with a surplus?
I could be wrong but they are all in state parks which are profitable.
http://georgiagolf.com/net/go/georgiagolf.aspx?s=7277.7277.2.17
Interesting to see the south and east Georgia locations and how far they are away from Macon which might bode well for the Macon facility economics?
Sorry, but your question is irrelevant. The City of Macon already owns a golf course. The question is what to do with it. Unless the city, state, or Mercer has any specific need for the land you aren’t going to find much interest in the private sector. So, for now I’d just make sure it’s being run as well as it can be.
Maybe that doesn’t make me a “true conservative” but I can live with that.
My questions weren’t meant to be only for instances where the government is looking to get into a particular business. They also apply in areas where the government is already in business as tests as to whether it’s a business the government should stay in. So, when read correctly, when you take those two questions into account, the city of Macon should sell the golf course. If the private sector doesn’t have much interest, then there probably isn’t much interest in playing golf in that particular area then is there?
how is owning a golf course different from a city park or ballfield?
I was going to make that point as well. I am not sure how I feel about it, but how is a set of swings (toys for children) different than a gold course (toys for adults) or a swimming pool (a toy of everyone)?
City parks and public recreation ballfields generally do not compete with private sector/for profit entities. They are considered “public goods” with postivie externalities and little need for a fee to justify the use of an extra user.
Golf courses require a high degree of upkeep, and it is very efficient to charge for each additional user.
More importantly, the private sector can demonstrate it can deliver golf courses when there is a market need. Because it is generally revenue negative to try and charge for the use of parks, they are best provided by government. Golf courses should be provided by the private sector.
As it is usually difficult for a city to acquire large tracts of land, I wouldn’t necessarily recommend selling the golf course just in case the land is needed in the future. But the operation of the course should be put out for public competitive bid.
So then, what about swimming pools? It is very easy to charge per user there.
What about baseball fields, tennis courts and other athletic venues? Many of these are easy to charge on a per person or team basis.
Is it because golf if a sport that is played mainly by the well to do that it is so easily dumped into another category?
Personally I hate golf, even though I was a Putt Putt tournament player when I was in college. But, I do not find it consistent if the government is allowed to own tennis courts, archery fields and ball fields, but not golf courses.
In a perfect world, the government shouldn’t provide a service if the private sector can.
I’m generally a “local control” guy first. If a local community decides it wants to have any of these things, I don’t see anything wrong with them taxing themselves to have it, especially if there’s not a competing private sector enterprise already offering the service.
I would say generally, however, the preferred method of doing so would be by providing the infrastructure via some type of development authority/bond issuance, and the operation bid out on a regular, competitive basis and operated by a private firm.
I agree with your view, for the most part. I was just trying to dig at the part that I thought lacked consistancy.
Now, I think we are on the same page.
I just voted down every comment in this thread.
The rating system will lead to great success!
I’m not saying the government should be in the business of owning ballfields either. Or boat ramps, stadiums, halls of fame, skate parks, tennis courts, badmitton courts, volleyball courts, shuffleboard (courts?), horse shoe pits, bowling alleys, or anything else that provides a place for organized sports or events to take place. Let organizations, non-profits and the rest of the private sector run things that can be funded by private money… not tax dollars.
From the article… “The closest the course came to breaking even was fiscal 2007, one year after Hall’s prediction. It lost about $133,000 that year, according to the city finance office.”
So basically what some here are saying is that everyone in the city of Macon (population 97,606 according to Google) should pay a dollar or two every year to keep the course open. Keep in mind that’s per person. So a family of four is spending $4 to $8 in the course’s best year on something that they probably don’t even use.
Of course, I don’t live in Macon… I live in Milton. So personally I don’t have any money going towards it. I think the residents in the area should be allowed to vote on it. But if Milton was debating keeping or selling a golf course, I’d be all for selling it. We have plenty of private courses around here, and a public course shouldn’t be competing against the private sector. Then again, Milton doesn’t own a golf course, so there’s no need for that debate.
ideally, yes it should probably be run by some other entity than macon parks and rec.–but it sounds like it really needs an accounting makeover to see what is actually there and then it could probably be run to break even, and upkeep costs could be kept down by working w/ some of the schools as an internship opportunity for students w/ an interest in landscape architecture, golf course management, and other ag related fields
Yeah, I don’t see how this is any different from any other city park, other than it’s designed specifically for golf as opposed to soccer or football or baseball, none of which likely turn a profit for the city.
The lack of control is an issue, but one that can be worked out.
No buyers right now for acreage, so selling it in a down market seems really stupid. Better to figure out how to build a better mousetrap — increase fees by a dollar, add babysitting services for parents to leave their kids while they play, whatever — and move forward.
What is the point of a government entitiy owning a golf course? Really, just look at Lee County and the fiasco that Grand Island has become.
Anyone else here actually played Bowden? I have. Place was a ghost town and poorly maintained. With the number of courses in Macon at a similar price point and in better shape, I think that the City should see if there are folks interested in purchasing it. Now if the City wants to sink some money into it so that the poison ivy does make the rough unplayable (among other things), it might be a money maker for the City.
Amazing that closing the city’s golf course isn’t a flashpoint. But if we were talking about the pool it would be a whole other discussion. I know of several cities whose pools run deficits along similar lines and cannot do anything other than throw more money into the losing proposition.
The city of Gainesville spent millions fixing up the city course a few years back and it did not help. The place is so poorly run that the Country Club that is right next to it, won’t even use it. The club members go to a course miles away. That’s bad.
Sell it of lease it to a company that knows what it’s doing.
Comments on this entry are closed.