Contributor Opinion By Art Stigile: Response To Redgate Golfers
Feb 24, 2009 8:00 - 1 Comment
>This is a contributor opinion. Rockville Central encourages readers to submit such opinions for consideration — the more voices the better. We especially welcome people who disagree with us. We ask that all such contributions be civil and we reserve the right to edit (in consultation with the author) or reject. Contributor opinions should not be seen as reflecting opinions held by Rockville Central editors, as they are just as frequently at odds with our own views. That’s the whole point!
The following contributor opinion is by Art Stigile.
I read with interest Joe Jordan’s recent contributor’s opinion about the RedGate Golf Course, and I listened closely to the statements made by many golfers at the recent Citizen’s Forum. Golf is not my game, but I understand and respect their passion. I think hockey is life. But if golf is your passion, I hope you can continue to enjoy playing at RedGate for many years.
Unfortunately, nothing that I heard from golfers deals with one very important inconvenient truth. RedGate is drowning in a sea of red ink, and taxpayers are being asked to fork over increasingly large subsidies for as far as the eye can see. Over its first 28 years, golfers paid for all of RedGate’s operating and capital expenses. Since FY99, the golf course has operated in the red every year, except one, despite receiving $600,000 in taxpayers subsidies over the past three years. The current budget projects an FY09 deficit of $275,745 that grows to $388,479 in four years. By the end of FY13, RedGate’s cumulative deficit is expected to exceed $2 million – more than the expenses to run RedGate for one year. Red seems to be the appropriate color for the golf course.
Who’s paying for this? Taxpayers.
It wasn’t supposed to be this way. In May 2006, Mayor and Council approved a Five Year Business Plan for RedGate. (See here.) The Plan promised to put RedGate “in the black” by FY09.
By any measure, the Plan has failed.
The Plan identified two key ingredients to success – average dollars spent per round, and total rounds played. Below are the Plan’s projections for both measures and results to date. Results have fallen far short of the Plan, and the results for FY09 will not be any better, given the sharp drop in rounds played last summer.
I have 2 questions for golfers. Why should we taxpayers subsidize golfers? How much subsidy is enough?
The closest thing to answer that I’ve heard is that the City subsidizes other recreation, so why shouldn’t it subsidize golfers? I’ll tell you why. I pay high taxes, with no complaints, to fund services that benefit all of us – a first-class police force, good roads, conservation of our natural resources, snow removal – and to provide opportunities to less fortunate folks who are struggling to stay afloat in the worst economy in 35 years. I don’t expect to pay high taxes to subsidize middle-class adults who can afford to pay for their favorite recreation.
If golfers disagree, if golfers feel they are entitled to a taxpayer subsidy, then I have a suggestion. The Community Services section of the Rockville budget provides funding to nonprofits that provide social services to the needy. Let’s add a line for Taxpayer Subsidies to Golfers. That way, golfers can come down to City Hall each year and explain to Mayor and Council and to all taxpayers why they have a higher priority than folks who are finding it hard to stay in their homes and pay for their kids’ health care.
Frankly, I’d rather spend my tax dollars helping the truly needy.
There is an alternative. Increase fees immediately by $7-8 per round of golf, and it would eliminate the annual deficit.
Art Stigile
For any analysis of the disposition of Red Gate, all impacts must be considered.>
We live in an America where everything seems to be subsidized in one way or another, where the playing field is never truly level.
And apparently we all like it that way, at least a majority of us,it would appear. For instance, public schools are subsidized - if you define subsidy as payment by people who do not directly use the system. Even the idea of actual students contributing to purchase a few of the books they use was met with strong resistance. But the determination has been made that regardless of the current users (students), the system benefits all citizens to the extent that it is reasonable that all persons pay for it.
So the question becomes “does operating a Golf Course benefit city residents to the extent that it is worth subsidizing?” Does it add value and benefit to living in the City?
That’s a question Citizens need to answer. I don’t think its worth subsidizing, but I suppose I am biased by the fact that I do not play golf.
I have heard its a golf course of marginal goodness anyway. Cut it loose.