HomeMy Public PortalAboutAB 03-26 Attachment A
City of McCall
Date: February 21, 2003
To: City Council
Cc: Golf Course Advisory Committee, City Manager
From: Dan Pillard, Director, Golf and Parks Operations
RE: Golf Course Rates
After
carefully considering the Golf Course Advisory Committee’s recommendation, I am recommending the City Council not adopt the Committee’s recommended fee structure. Ultimately I am the
person most responsible for the success of the City’s Golf Course and feel that I must make the best recommendation to Council based on good business practices, and that only with good
data can you make good decisions. Listed below are my reasons:
We are about to enter a season with a new professional, the second in two years, and any additional changes that will
create distractions should be avoided.
The major change the Committee seeks is the establishment of a local rate. While I agree that attempting to increase play and a sense of ownership
of the McCall Golf Course are important to our continued success, doing so at this time is not in our best interest. We have no data to evaluate the impacts, or projected impacts of
such a change. We do not know how many of our golfers are local and how many are not. Allan Morrison, our new professional, will have a Point of Sale system that tracks the level of
detail we need to have good data to make sound decisions. Until we are able to establish the baseline data that answers these questions, we will not be able to measure success when
we do make changes in rates that differentiate between locals and non-locals. I would recommend we defer implementation of this type of rate structure until at least the end of the
coming season to allow for the creation of baseline data so we can measure success in the future.
Early Purchase Discount: we sell less than 300 season passes, and to reduce the fee as the GCAC recommends, we would have to sell an additional 40 passes to recoup the lost revenues.
If we were able to use the funds for several months, as Brundage Mountain does with their $199 season pass, perhaps it would make sense. However, the short period between the date
the season opens and the date the GCAC wants to use for the discount, we would certainly lose money. If we were able to require purchase in September for the following season, it could
be a viable option. I am unwilling to risk over $15,000 in season pass revenues at this time.
When we sold season passes for $450, we had 299 sales. Last year the $500 pass, coupled
with the $99 discount, resulted in lower season pass revenues. Given the number of rounds played was down significantly across the industry, we are unable to draw any definitive conclusions
about the success or failure of the $99 pass. I do not think we need to reduce the pass cost lower than $450, but do think that reverting to the $450 pass would be a prudent change.
I
think it is vital to allow the new professional to offer discounts during off peak times to generate play that we would otherwise lose. I support the Golf Committee’s recommendation
regarding discounts, with the added provision that either I or the City Manager approve the discounts in advance. I believe this will address some of the GCAC’s desire to give the locals
more incentive to play while filling off peak times, allowing everyone to benefit.
I have included for Council review the rates from the last two years, the Golf Advisory Committee’s
proposed rates, and my alternative proposal. I will inform the Chair of the Golf Advisory Committee of my decision and ask him to attend the Council meeting to respond to questions
Council may have on the different structures. It is my hope that I will be able to continue to work effectively with the members of the Golf Committee, despite our different views on
this subject. I will also support Council’s decision on the fee structure.
Given there are new fees proposed, we will schedule a public hearing for formal adoption.