My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN010604
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2004
>
CCMIN010604
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2007 10:56:38 AM
Creation date
12/19/2003 9:15:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
1/6/2004
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN010604
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
35
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Mr. Iremonger indicated that rounds of golf have been declining in the past three <br />to four years. Seventy-five thousand rounds was the initial projection, but staffbelieves <br />that 55,000 rounds is a conservative estimate. He noted that the incentive to be paid is <br />based on actual rounds, but caps out at $75,000. <br /> <br /> Mr. Campbell asked how CourseCo could distribute the maximum $75,000 <br />incentive fee? <br /> <br /> Mr. Iremonger reported that all of the expenditures for the golf course are based <br />on an operating budget for the golf course, including the salaries of the Superintendent <br />and golf pros. The management fee to CourseCo is to hire and train employees, and to <br />fulfill its other contractual obligations. <br /> <br /> Mr. Wolfe stated that the management fees are provided to CourseCo and it is its <br />discretion as to how it uses the money. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky asked if the Parks and Recreation Commission could change the fee <br />structure at any point after Council had adopted the budget? <br /> <br />Mr. Wolfe said no. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky wanted to be sure that Council had the ability and the power to set <br />the rates as part of the overall budget. <br /> <br /> Mr. Wolfe indicated that Council had the ability to set the rates as part of the <br />overall budget process. Typically, increasing the golf related fees can become a <br />contentious process. Based on CourseCo's experience, it is recommended that any <br />changes to the fees be conducted at the Parks and Recreation Commission level. He <br />pointed out that the annual budget is presented to Council for its final approval and at that <br />point, Council could determine whether it wanted to raise the fees, express its concerns or <br />send it back to the Parks and Recreation Commission. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky indicated that the Parks and Recreation Commission is an advisory <br />committee to the Council for setting the fees and expenditures for the operation of the <br />golf course. <br /> <br /> Mr. Wolfe stated that he was correct and that Council would ultimately have the <br />final decision to approve the spending plan for the golf course. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky referred to Item 16.03, Appeal of the City Manager's Decision, of <br />the Operator Agreement and noted that the decision of the City Manager regarding the <br />fees may be appealed to the Parks and Recreation Commission. He asked why this <br />appeal process was necessary, as it seemed everything came down to the annual operating <br />budget? He was unsure when this actual process would take place. <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 10 01/06/04 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.