The underlying issue from the City Administration’s perspective, is not necessarily how sustainable the golf course is, but that the City is looking to improve the fiscal performance of known to be successful forms of generating revenue for the Parks. They want to ensure this without loosing the true intention of the park, and fuel the recovery from the economic downturn.

One piece which should be carefully examined, is that if any non- conforming uses are considered, that public process and strict oversight measures be put in place. I did not like reading the associated retail space and envisioning a strip of golf stores a long the road. That would be unacceptable to create a mini golf strip mall.

You are correct. I think I am responding to Bancel’s comments in the coverage. I think the group he represents is worried about a driving range on the front nine. In re-reading the RFP, I believe my suggestion of a ferris wheel or dirt bike track would not pass muster.

The time allowed for this RFP is amazingly short; even shorter for the city to review and award a contract to. It seems out of character for the city to be able to act so quickly. Let’s sit and watch. It won’t be long for something (or nothing) to happen.

“In addition to the general conditions stated in Appendix B, the City will require as a term of any agreement the retention of its right to periodic performance and quality reviews with the right of early termination at specified junctures based on performance issues and/or default; elements of control and supervision(including but not limited to full access to books and records, controls as to hours of operation, product and service lines, pricing of products and services, advertising and branding; the ability to maintain an on-site Parks office; and a minimum percentage of gross income from various components of golf course operations (e.g. green fees, cart rentals, driving range ball rentals, golf shop merchandise sales, food and beverage sales) with a minimum required payment, such that the balance of gross income less expenses would constitute the selected Respondent’s compensation.”

They are not asking for a driving range. Frankly, I am very curious to see what they get back from respondents…if they get anything at all.

Not sure how much sense any golf operations make for the city of Ann Arbor. But, here is something that illustrates how odd the Huron Hills RFP is.

Almost every driving range I’ve ever seen is sort of on the edge of a city – cheap property that will be used for something more expensive later. Ann Arbor is taking land that probably would sell for $150,000 an acre and turning it into a driving range. You would have to look hard to find another city that will turn an 18 hole golf course into a 9 hole golf course and add a driving range onto prime property.

Driving ranges are sort of ugly – lots of netting to prevent the stray balls from going on to streets. Lots of lights to accommodate after work golfers, etc. How likely would it be for a private driving range to get approved for some property on N. Huron River Drive that is yet to be developed or in the property along Washtenaw and Platt. Not likely. But, since this is city owned property we could put in a ferris wheel and a dirt bike racing track because someone projected it would bring in more money than the current golf operations.

I’d appreciate anyone explaining how a public/private partnership at Leslie would take money from the city while a partnership at Huron Hills would not.

Re: “A commitment to growing the game of golf.”

How is that principal of benefit to Ann Arbor citizens? If golf is not growing as a sport without our help, it seems doubtful that our efforts would turn it around. On the other hand, if it is growing, it doesn’t need our help. Are we currently making expenditures in such an effort?

Harvey Kaplan

So after all these expenses, how can this partnership make enough money to cover these expenses and the city administrative charge?

And, if/when it is a failure, we end up with the debris on top of the former front 9.

Go take a look at the former batting cages at Vet’s Park. I believe that was a concession to make money years ago. It is now a concrete slab enclosed by a fence. It is pretty small but the city hasn’t seen the need to spend the money to tear it down. Tearing down a failed driving range usually is for something profitable like a housing development. That’s what happened to the Liberty driving range.

If the reporting is accurate, Mr. Berla is either misinformed or is being deliberately misleading. The Farmers Market is a park operated by the Parks Department, with city personnel. There are many vendors, not a single corporate partner with the city. These vendors may buy an annual permit, much as the city currently sells season passes to the golf courses, or the vendors may buy daily permits, like daily greens fees at the golf courses. The operation of the Market is much more similar to the current operation of the golf courses than the proposed lease. As such, it is incorrect to use it as an example of an acceptable lease of the park land.

If Mr Berla believes the Market is a good example, he should support this type of direct city use and reject the leasing our our parkland.

The city golf courses do not run big deficits. In fact, the revenue from the courses pretty much cover the cost of running the courses. The financial problems arise from charging the golf courses the administrative fees assessed all city operations. Even if we closed both golf courses, those administrative cost would need to be covered, likely by assessing larger fees on other city operations.

The golf budget deficits are a fiction based on administrative fees unrelated to the actual cost of operating the golf courses. It would be sad to see that fiction used as a basis for destroying Huron Hills.

I know it sounds cynical or conspiratorial to suggest that the RFP process is being used to develop parkland. Please note that a developer has proposed replacing nine holes of golf with a driving range and “associated” retail operations. Recall, if you will, that the idea of a hotel/conference center for the library lot came from a developer, too. That suggestion was followed by an RFP process just to see what ideas might be out there. Not surprisingly, the ideas that survived that process were for hotels and a conference center. Watching the same folks go through the same kind of RFP process and believing that the results will be similar is not illogical or conspiratorial.

For more information, visit: [link]