Budget: Omaha Golf Courses

[Brad]

Budget: Omaha Golf Courses

I am looking for positive ways to solve Omaha's budget issues.  In this thread I would like to discuss positive ways to help Omaha's city owned golf courses.

Nebraska state law does not allow cities to sell park land, and a golf course is considered a park.  Therefore if Suttle closes the golf course, the land will have to be maintained as a park.  

City golf courses offer a service that many privately owned golf courses don't.  Mainly to seniors and youth.  Keeping youth off the street and seniors active is important.

Even though some people gripe about MECA, there is one fact you can't argue and that is they are successful.  What about establishing a MECA like management for the golf courses of Omaha.  Give them incentives where as if they are profitable, the make bonuses.  

My dad (an avid golfer) and I were discussing it last night and he told me that there is thought that goes in to purchasing for a privately owned golf course, more hands on management of private golf courses, and no management in city hall that drains from a golf courses budget.

They said the City courses combined loose 750,000 a year, with Benson, Elmwood, Applewood, Maple Village, Westwood, miller park, and  fontenell (ames not bellevue) this is not a big loss and could easily be turned around.

Thoughts?

[thenewguy]

I've always thought it would be cool to have a tournament that utilized all the courses.  Get some form of sponsorship from a few people, encourage participants to join for a fee, and publish the standings in the paper.  Surely that would help bolster some revenue from people going to each course to practice, and also would allow for minimal spectator attendance.  Kind of like a pro tour, just in Omaha.

[joeglow]

I've always thought it would be cool to have a tournament that utilized all the courses.  Get some form of sponsorship from a few people, encourage participants to join for a fee, and publish the standings in the paper.  Surely that would help bolster some revenue from people going to each course to practice, and also would allow for minimal spectator attendance.  Kind of like a pro tour, just in Omaha.

The World Herald already does their publinks tournament.  Maybe they could convert it.

[OmahaJaysCU]

Lets be honest, if you are willing to pay 10-15 bucks to play a par 3 course (westwood), then you have problems.

[TechnicalDisaster]

Lets be honest, if you are willing to pay 10-15 bucks to play a par 3 course (westwood), then you have problems.

I don't golf, so I have no idea what you're talking about.  Is 10-15 too much?

[Brad]

6 firms bid to run golf courses

http://www.omaha.com/article/20100128/NEWS01/701289819

Interest is high among companies looking to run Omaha's municipal golf courses.

The City of Omaha received six bids from firms across the country by Wednesday's deadline. It will take city officials at least a week to go through the proposals, Omaha parks administrator Steve Scarpello said.

“It's good to see that there's interest,” Scarpello said.

[OmahaBen]

Lets be honest, if you are willing to pay 10-15 bucks to play a par 3 course (westwood), then you have problems.

I don't golf, so I have no idea what you're talking about.  Is 10-15 too much?

10-15 for Westwood or Miller Park without renting a pull cart is too much, yes. Par 3 courses should be $1/hole.

Elmwood, Applewood, and Benson can charge more. They're real courses. $15 for 9 or $25-30 for 18 isn't unreasonable for those.

[MrPoloShirt]

Solution:  Sell Westwood, Applewood, and Benson.

Problem solved.

It's not the government's job to provide entertainment for people.

[OmahaBen]

Solution:  Sell Westwood, Applewood, and Benson.

Problem solved.

It's not the government's job to provide entertainment for people.

Yeah, who needs public parks, swimming pools, libraries, or ice rinks...  :roll:  :roll:

[thenewguy]

Man, this all sounds so familiar....i'm having deja vu.

[Brad]

Solution:  Sell Westwood, Applewood, and Benson.

City can't sell parkland... That's why they are going to lease the courses to a company that can run them.

[MrPoloShirt]

Yeah, who needs public parks, swimming pools, libraries, or ice rinks...  :roll:  :roll:

I don't, I don't use any of those services.  Why should I have to pay for them?

Why should I be able to extort my neighbor into paying for something I want?

Why don't we build a city race track?  What about city public health clubs?  Where do you draw the line?

It's no the government's job to provide these services.

[S33]

Yeah, who needs public parks, swimming pools, libraries, or ice rinks...  :roll:  :roll:

I don't, I don't use any of those services.  Why should I have to pay for them?

Why should I be able to extort my neighbor into paying for something I want?

Why don't we build a city race track?  What about city public health clubs?  Where do you draw the line?

It's no the government's job to provide these services.

I agree, to an extent. However, a city is responsible to provide a decent quality of life for it's citizens, unfortunately, many elements to quality of life aren't revenue generating ventures and would require tax payer assistance and government oversight.

Golf courses, swimming pools, ice rinks...and the like, I do not get. Those could easily be privately funded and turn a profit. heck, they would be better off privately owned.

I would encourage the city to provide one of those old Roman public baths for members of the public who feel their personal hygein is unimportant, though.  :D

[OmahaBen]

It's no the government's job to provide these services.

It's not the government's job to provide libraries or public parks? Really? And what planet are you from? Such facilities have been governmental mainstays going back to the Romans, Greeks, and Egyptians

You can make an argument about pools and ice rinks (and golf courses) if you want, though I think it's fair to say that it's not an absurd notion that they fall into the same category as parks/soccer fields/softball fields/etc. - all under the guise of the parks department.

I don't use any of those services.  Why should I have to pay for them?

Because we live in a civilized society, and our society says that certain goods and services should be made available to all members of said society.

Also, if you've never used a library or public park, you've led an absolutely dreadful life. I'm sorry.

[MrPoloShirt]

Also, if you've never used a library or public park, you've led an absolutely dreadful life. I'm sorry.

And I've used parks, but the city does not have to provide them.  Homeowners associations can provide them.  And in the inner city, public charities, which often build parks, and schools, which already have playground set up, can provide these services.

Public parks out west and nothing but a waste, and public parks out east are nothing but a place for gang activity and teenagers to cause trouble.

[S33]

I read 3-4 books per month.  It costs about $6 shipped from Amazon for used, new hard cover books are around $20.  I save about $600 a year using the library.

Surely you can find a more efficient way to review the content in your books rather than those big environmentally unfriendly blocks of tree. =-)

[TechnicalDisaster]

I read 3-4 books per month.  It costs about $6 shipped from Amazon for used, new hard cover books are around $20.  I save about $600 a year using the library.

Surely you can find a more efficient way to review the content in your books rather than those big environmentally unfriendly blocks of tree. =-)

Isn't it efficient to reuse books from the library? To heck with e-books.  And my name's not Shirley.

[OmahaBen]

and our society says that certain goods and services should be made available to all members of said society.

Total |expletive|.

Show me where it says that, besides in the mindset of some ultra left wing nutcase who thinks it's the government's job to raise, clothe, feed, and entertain you.

Quit stealing money out of my pocket because you want to go ice skating, or play basketball in the park or some other BS activity that you cannot afford.

I always love it when internet trolls call me left wing. When they call me ultra-left wing it's even more precious. Proof that I must be doing something right.

You can be a fiscal conservative and still believe that certain services are best provided by the government. Libraries and public parks are as much traditional governmental functions as police and fire fighters.

[MrPoloShirt]

I always love it when internet trolls call me left wing. When they call me ultra-left wing it's even more precious. Proof that I must be doing something right.

You can be a fiscal conservative and still believe that certain services are best provided by the government. Libraries and public parks are as much traditional governmental functions as police and fire fighters.

'

Yeah I'm a troll because I don't want to pay for some yokel's golfing habit.

Nice way to AVOID my question.  Proof you cannot back up your stupid claims.

[S33]

I always love it when internet trolls call me left wing. When they call me ultra-left wing it's even more precious. Proof that I must be doing something right.

You can be a fiscal conservative and still believe that certain services are best provided by the government. Libraries and public parks are as much traditional governmental functions as police and fire fighters.

'

Yeah I'm a troll because I don't want to pay for some yokel's golfing habit.

Nice way to AVOID my question.  Proof you cannot back up your stupid claims.

What about the qwest center and other similar venues? City or private? And why?

[Bosco55David]

It's official, the golf courses will not be going private.

City Nixes Golf Course Privatization Plan

http://www.ketv.com/news/22728337/detail.html

OMAHA, Neb. --

City officials told KETV NewsWatch 7 they are scrapping plans to bring in a private management company to run Omaha’s municipal golf courses.

The mayor's office said today it would instead look at improving marketing efforts, providing online services and expanding concessions at those courses. PGA professionals still staffing nine-hole city courses will be moved to 18-hole courses, officials said.

[Brad]

Do the sell beer at the 9-hole City Courses?  That would generate more money.

[joeglow]

I always love it when internet trolls call me left wing. When they call me ultra-left wing it's even more precious. Proof that I must be doing something right.

You can be a fiscal conservative and still believe that certain services are best provided by the government. Libraries and public parks are as much traditional governmental functions as police and fire fighters.

'

Yeah I'm a troll because I don't want to pay for some yokel's golfing habit.

Nice way to AVOID my question.  Proof you cannot back up your stupid claims.

What about the qwest center and other similar venues? City or private? And why?

Exactly.

[StreetsOfOmaha]

MrPoloShirt, while I agree with some of what you have said, I can't say how thankful I am that you are not in a position of public authority. You don't seem to care about anybody but yourself.

The fact is there is nothing but gray area as far as the eye can see when it comes to what should be a public service and what should be privatized.

Forget "sports car". How about just a "car", which people elect to buy and expect to have all the roads in the world to drive them on and free parking at all destinations. Are interstates and free parking human rights?

I'm not going to say too much about the golf course issue, because I think the "sport" is a huge waste of time, and an even bigger waste of space and resources. That publicly owned and operated courses even exist is despicable. If I came up with a game tomorrow that required 200 acres just for me to play this "game", and then expected governments or the free market to just provide this to me, you all would think I was nuts. Then again, if enough people enjoy playing this "game" I suppose the market would respond.

See how "smart" the free market can be?  :roll:

[TechnicalDisaster]

I don't like the city paying for golf either, until I looked up the 2009 city budget:

http://www.ci.omaha.ne.us/departments/f ... F_prpp.pdf

Cost of operating Golf courses (p.40): $3,102,450
Revenue from Golf courses (p.41): $3,384,343

Percent of Operating Expenses Returned by Golf Revenue: 100%

Golf courses are the example of how I think public services for entertainment should be implemented.  Public funds to get the project started and finished, and then a viable business plan for the entertainment to be self sustaining and even profitable afterwords.

[MrPoloShirt]

MrPoloShirt, while I agree with some of what you have said, I can't say how thankful I am that you are not in a position of public authority. You don't seem to care about anybody but yourself.

Incorrect.  I of all people am defending the average citizen.  People like many in this thread only care about themselves, because they feel they can tax others to pay for services they want.  I am defending rights of the taxpayer, people who work hard everyday to see their money squandered by "big government" types.

The fact is there is nothing but gray area as far as the eye can see when it comes to what should be a public service and what should be privatized.

True, but that does not give anyone the right to "give up" the use of logic to know that a golf course, of all things, is a waste.

Forget "sports car". How about just a "car", which people elect to buy and expect to have all the roads in the world to drive them on and free parking at all destinations. Are interstates and free parking human rights?

Give it a rest.  Cars are here to stay.

I'm not going to say too much about the golf course issue, because I think the "sport" is a huge waste of time, and an even bigger waste of space and resources. That publicly owned and operated courses even exist is despicable. If I came up with a game tomorrow that required 200 acres just for me to play this "game", and then expected governments or the free market to just provide this to me, you all would think I was nuts.

If you're going to respond to my post, I would like a response to this.  If you say this about golf courses, is your opinion the same about public parks?  If not, then you're hypocritical.  I do not think public parks should exist either.  Although they do provide nice green space and look nice when well kept.

[StreetsOfOmaha]

Give it a rest.  Cars are here to stay.

No, cars as we know them are not here to stay. That wasn't even the point, though.

Anyway, I figured you or somebody would pull the park card.

There needs to be ample public green space. It's a huge quality of life issue.

And there should be facilities for recreation within certain parks, which there usually are (horse shoes, volleyball and tennis courts, playgrounds, etc.). The difference is that these are free and open to anyone, and don't take up a ton of land relative to the park.

Frisbee golf is a great example of how that can work into a park space. People can play frisbee golf, but the course is still part of the park, and anyone can walk through or use it.

Other than putting and chipping greens, I don't see how there could be open-access golf courses which are seamlessly integrated with a park, because there is the safety issue of having people swinging clubs around trying to whack a tiny ball which then shoots off the tee at incredible speeds.

[Bosco55David]

No, cars as we know them are not here to stay.

It'll be quite some time before we move away from traditional cars. I imagine the next logical step from here would be BioFuels, but even that is several years off at best.

Right now we're seeing some pretty significant gains in automotive technology. This year Ford will be releasing the 2011 Mustang GT which gets increased engine displacement (302 cubic inches vs. 281) making 412 horsepower (up from 315) and increased fuel mileage (25mpg). Just a few years ago not many would have thought you could get that kind of performance out of a dealer stock car with similar sized V-8 engine.

[Bosco55David]

I do not think public parks should exist either.

Brilliant idea. Tell ya what, you find us some private company willing to buy huge chunks of land for us to use free of charge while they pay for the maintenance and up keep of the parks and you got yourself a deal.

Good luck. You're gonna need it.

[joeglow]

THis is why politics sucks:  build and support the sh*t I want, but the |expletive| you want is unnecessary and a waste.

You mean I cannot walk on the floor of the Qwest whenever I want?  THat is BS and a waste of money.

[S33]

No, cars as we know them are not here to stay. .

Yes, yes they are. Whether they are run from gasoline, water, garbage, or happy thoughts, they are here to stay.

[StreetsOfOmaha]

No, cars as we know them are not here to stay. .

Yes, yes they are. Whether they are run from gasoline, water, garbage, or happy thoughts, they are here to stay.

No. They are not.

Their mode share will gradually decrease over time as more and more people tend toward walkable, bikable, and transit-oriented neighborhoods. The generation which still worships the car will gradually die off, and their great mistakes will become the stuff of history books.

[Bosco55David]

No, cars as we know them are not here to stay. .

Yes, yes they are. Whether they are run from gasoline, water, garbage, or happy thoughts, they are here to stay.

No. They are not.

Their mode share will gradually decrease over time as more and more people tend toward walkable, bikable, and transit-oriented neighborhoods. The generation which still worships the car will gradually die off, and their great mistakes will become the stuff of history books.

Do you have any idea how far off in the future that would be? That assumes it does happen, which it's about 99.9% certain that it won't. Suffice it to say, it'll never happen in our lifetime.

Expecting a mass phase shift away from the automobile in America is a pipe dream at best.

[S33]

No, cars as we know them are not here to stay. .

Yes, yes they are. Whether they are run from gasoline, water, garbage, or happy thoughts, they are here to stay.

No. They are not.

Their mode share will gradually decrease over time as more and more people tend toward walkable, bikable, and transit-oriented neighborhoods. The generation which still worships the car will gradually die off, and their great mistakes will become the stuff of history books.

Dude, you are crazy! Do you realize that without forms of independent travel such as cars, probably 90% of the geographical US would be cutoff from the countries population?

You cannot efficiently build rail infrastructure to integrate the hundreds of thousands of townships throughout the US. I also realize you hate the rural population, but I'm doubting horse and buggy are an acceptable status quo regardless of how uncultured and barbaric you may think they are.

You have officially lost your mind! Independent travel will ALWAYS be a part of our lifestyle. Maybe not you, but not everyone is like you.

[StreetsOfOmaha]

I also realize you hate the rural population, but I'm doubting horse and buggy are an acceptable status quo regardless of how uncultured and barbaric you may think they are.

Whoa whoa whoa. Where is this coming from?

It continues to amaze me how much people blindly assume they know about some one based on limited forum messaging.

Anyway, if you can't see past your nose to know that there are other options for rural transportation, then it's no use for me to try to make a blind man see by responding to you on this forum.

Bosco55David, it may not be in our lifetimes, but thank you for acknowledging it.

I'm sure 18th and 19th century American slaves couldn't imagine a time when a black man would be president, and look what happened in a couple hundred years. The future is closer than we think.

[nebugeater]

I also realize you hate the rural population, but I'm doubting horse and buggy are an acceptable status quo regardless of how uncultured and barbaric you may think they are.

Anyway, if you can't see past your nose to know that there are other options for rural transportation, then it's no use for me to try to make a blind man see by responding to you on this forum.

OK, humor me and expand on what there is that is acceptable to you.  I am just curious?

[Bosco55David]

Whoa whoa whoa. Where is this coming from?

It continues to amaze me how much people blindly assume they know about some one based on limited forum messaging.

Anyway, if you can't see past your nose to know that there are other options for rural transportation, then it's no use for me to try to make a blind man see by responding to you on this forum.

Responses like this are why people are constantly hammering away on you on this forum man.

Bosco55David, it may not be in our lifetimes, but thank you for acknowledging it.

I'm sure 18th and 19th century American slaves couldn't imagine a time when a black man would be president, and look what happened in a couple hundred years. The future is closer than we think.

Quite different issues there. In the 1800's we fought a civil war over slavery and the mainstream civil rights issue lasted until the 1960's and 70's.

We're not fighting any wars over cars. Cars haven't divided half the country. There aren't legal and moral implications that come from owning cars, and right now they are simply the best mode of transportation for Americans. That's not going to be changing anytime soon, if ever.

[RegisResident]

Ice rinks are not able to run as a for-profit venture, but are needed to let people play sports that require ice... its a quality of life issue.

Cities and governments in general need to get involved in certain activities that create a higher quality of life... sure we could live without a hockey rink, a soccer field, a park, etc. but what would our kids do for fun? What would we do for fun?

In terms of cars going away- I think if you look to either of the coasts you will see the future... A lot of cities that abandoned mass-transit years ago are going back to the drawing board and rebuilding their mass-transit systems... we're even talking about mass transit here in Omaha (the streetcar). There are some cities where you no longer need to own a car because there are car loaner programs that allow you to pay a monthly fee and use a car when you need it. Generally the price of fuel will dictate how quickly our country moves away from individual cars, but I would guess that within the next 10-20 yrs. we'll see the shift. There will always be cars/trucks in rural areas, but within cities I think the shift away from cars will happen faster than most of us think.

[Big E]

Let's also conveniently overlook the fact that it took massive lobbying from the auto industry, four-decades and half a trillion (inflation adjusted) dollars from the feds to implement the national highway system which made the free-market supported, privately owned mass transit systems of pre-WW2 obsolete.

[StreetsOfOmaha]

Responses like this are why people are constantly hammering away on you on this forum man.

Yes, but it's consistently from the same few forumers, so I don't really mind too much.

Quite different issues there. In the 1800's we fought a civil war over slavery and the mainstream civil rights issue lasted until the 1960's and 70's.

We're not fighting any wars over cars. Cars haven't divided half the country. There aren't legal and moral implications that come from owning cars, and right now they are simply the best mode of transportation for Americans. That's not going to be changing anytime soon, if ever.

You read WAAAAY too much into that. The point is, if someone at that time said that someday there would be a black president, they would have been thought a fool because people lacked the capacity to imagine a world which was any different from the status quo of the day.

nebugeater, before I humor you, maybe give it a little thought and think about a system that could be put into place allowing for people to get where they need to go without cars, or at least without individual car ownership. I'm curious what YOU can come up with, because it really doesn't have to be complicated and is not any great mystery.