HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006 03-06 CCP Joint Work Session with Financial Commission iv wy
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL FINANCIAL COMMISSION JOINT WORK SESSION
March 6, 2006
6:30 P.M.
Citv Council Chambers
1. Discussion of Golf Course
2. Adjourn
r� s
City of Brooklyn Center
I A Millennium Community
I To: Mayor and Council Members
Fi
nancial
Commission Members
From: Michael J. McCauley
I City Manager
Date: March 2, 2006
Re: Golf Course Work Session
Attached are materials for Monday night's discussion of the Golf Course. The Work
Session will be held in the City Council Chambers at 6:30 p.m. The purpose of the Work
Session is to develop a sense of direction for the Golf Course finances and operations to
guide a more specific plan or options.
I
I
I
I
i
6301 Shin le Creek Parkwa Recreation and Communit Center Phone TDD Number
g y y
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-2199 (763) 569-3400
City Hall TDD Number (763) 569-3300 FAX (763) 569-3434
FAX (�63) 569-3494
www. cityo fbrooklyncenter.org
rI
City of Brooklyn Center
A Millennium Community
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 22, 2006
TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager
f
FROM: Jim Glasoe, Director of Community Activities, Recreation and Services�.�'',. �''J
SUBJECT: Park and Recreation Commission Recommendation Centerbrook Golf C
I
At the January 2006 meeting of the Park and Recreation Commission, I presented the first draft
of the Centerbook Golf Course Study. The study included background information regarding the
development of the course, a financial history since the course opening, weather history, current
I market conditions, future options for the course and staff recommendations for a formula based
schedule for loan repayment.
After the presentation, I informed the Commission that I would be looking for two
recommendatioans at the February meeting. The first being a value judgment from the
Commission as to how valuable the golf course is as a recreation amenity for the community and
th
e second, any recommendation(s) the Commission might have regarding the finances.
At last night's meeting, the Commission passed two separate motions related to Centerbrook.
The first motion, passed unanimously, indicated the Commission's feeling that the golf course
was an extremely important recreational amenity for the community.
The second motion, also passed unanimously, recommended the City Council consider moving
away from the fixed ainount loan repayment schedule and towards a formula based schedule that
accommodates expenditures in the first quarter of each year and re-establishes a capital reserve.
The Commission o ted to not make s ec'
p ific rec
ommendati
P ons re ardi
g ng the deveiopment of the
formula, recognizing that the Financial Commission and City Council would be in a better
position to make such a determination.
Representatives from the Commission plan to attend the March 6, 2006 joint meeting of the
Financiai Commission and City CounciI to share the Commission's position. As always, please
let me know if you have any questions regarding the recommendation or would like additional
information.
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Recreation and Community Center Phone TDD Number
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-2199 (763) 569-3400
City Hall TDD Number (763) 569-3300 FAX (763) 569-3434
FAX (763) 569-3494
www. cityofbrooklyncenter. org
I
Cl t� O.�
�oo n en
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center MN 55430
r
d x-
k
r�
$::R.d.. i.
I
Centerb�ook
Gol C rs t
ou e S ud
CENTERBROOK GOLF COLiRSE STUDY
TABLE OF C�NTENTS
BACKGROUND 1
FINANCIAL HISTORY 2 3
WEATHER HISTORY 4 5
CURRENT MARKET CONDITIONS 6
I
COMBINED IMPACT 6
OTHER OPTIONS FOR THE GOLF COURSE 7- 9
SUMMARY 9
RECOMMENDATIONS 10
t
CENTERBROOK GOLF COURSE STUDY
I
Centerbrook Golf Course is a nine (9) hole, par three (3) course, owned by the City of Brooklyn
Center. It was built in 1986-87 with a loan from the Capital Improvements Fund. It opened for
business in the Spring of 1988 and was established as an enterprise fund entity. Enterprise
funds were established to account for the financing of self supporting activities of the City
which render services on a user charge basis to the general public.
BACKGROUND
The 1960's and 1970's was a significant time for golf course development in the United States.
This growth paralleled the growth of many recreational activities, spurred on by an
unprecedented increase in disposable income and leisure time. Even though a portion of the
1970's saw the country's economy somewhat stifled by high inflation and tight energy supplies,
the building of golf courses continued. From the mid sixties through the late seventies, the
number of golf courses in Minnesota increased by almost 40% and the number of municipal
courses increased by over 70%.
Wanting to be included in this growth, the City of Brooklyn Center contracted with the design
firm Brauer and Associates to complete a market analysis, feasibility study and master plan for
a golf course in Brooklyn Center. The completed plan was presented in June of 1980.
The report identified the primary market area as a ten rrule radius of the proposed site.
Population trends were identified for the area, including household size. In the report, the
market area population was anticipated to grow by 10%. However, as a result of an anticipated
decrease in household size, the number of households was anticipated to increase by 16%.
Additionally, the study cited census data that indicated the median hausehold ineorne was
comparable to neighboring communities
The number of area golf courses also played a central role in the report. In 1980, there were 30
golf courses within a ten mile radius of the proposed golf course site. Of those, 9 were private
courses, 10 were regulation 28-hole caurses and 8 were area par 3 caurses. T'he Brauer analysis
concluded that the area was capable of supporting a municipal go�f facility.
i
r
CENTERBROOK GOLF COURSE STUDY
FINANCIAL HISTORY
Armed with the 1980 report and design, work began on the financial feasibility of the course.
While staff conducted their due diligence related to the dollars, there was also one additional
item that needed to be remedied. At that time, the National Littie League fieids were located on
a portion of the property that was proposed for the golf course. As a result, discussions began
with the Little League regarding acquiring the property. Eventually, an agreement was reached
with the Little League to relocate their fields as part of the project.
In 1985, staff presented a plan to the City Council that included revised financials and the
relocating of the Little League fields. The estimated cost of the project was slightly over $1.9
miilion dollars, with $1.15 million designated as a loan from the Capital Improvements Fund,
and the remainder paid from the same fund, but without expectation for reimbursement. The
initial interest rate for the loaned portion was set at 5%.
The table below shows the original estimate of the number of rounds of golf anticipated and the
anticipated loan repayment schedule. I have also included the actual numbers since the goif
course's opening.
�e�terbrnok,�olf Caurse Rounds and T.oart Paymen�s
���tou�ds Principal Pa�nent �nkerest Pay�rien#s Loan Balane�
l��ar `�xpectec� c;tuat Expected Ac�uat` �lctuat Acfuar
��ss z�,ot�o 2s,z� �o:op �o:�o f ��,00ni,00` �$i,�od,ocio.c�
1989 27,OQ(f 28;�2� '$11,000.(� $p:OQ $56,250.0(� $1,iQ0,00U.00
F 199Q 29,QOQ 32,232 m $3�,0OO.OQ. $U:00 $57,500.OU: $1,1{�,OOO.flU
t 1�91 30,00(? 36,17� ,$48,OOQ.00 �$20,t�1Q d0);., $$7,50U.Q0. $1,120,0�10.�
=199'L $��U� 3�,643 �fi3,0t)0.(�q $40.00� DO $56,t)Ob.00; �i�,.Q$0,�,(l�f
J.� .�,.r�tV�l ,.7��Ua�..� �lQrLrvV anI �:W �.�t��V.vV� �F3.rWVt�.V1!
19'�4 34 33,�78 $74,OU0.00 {$7D,�?4U iXl� .$56.065.UU $1,150,000,!�?
tZZ 1995 35,00(l 32,257 ,$$3,OU0 4�i1, {$13;�f�t?.O+D� ;z $�7,634 UU"; $1,161„�i00,UD
�.996.. 36,00� 34.429 $89,OQQ.00 $11,�OQ.00" $5$�025.00'
19�? 3Ei,50Q 36,�55 $'94,OOU.00 $5Q,l�OU 00 $57,�U0.00 $1,1d0.�100.Q0
d,
1998 37{UtHi ;29,$g2 $50,OC�.00 $5�,�00 C10 $1,05U,t�.(�i
1999 y.` �37,�OQ r` 34,�26 �50,t�0 (�U $50.00O.Q(t $'1,Uqt},t100,U0
`"2U00 38,000 ,�.�00 Ut) $50,OOU.UO $95U,OO4.U�1
2001 3$,500 28.7� $50,000.00 $5Q.UQ0.00, $9(?O,OO�l.UO
r 2002 39,Ot10 21A�2 $5U,000.�3 $5U,fl00.00 $850,OUO.QQ
k 20D3 �34,500 26,698 $2�,OUO.OU $15.000.00 $835�OU,4t�
20fT4 �U,(,� �2,6�5 $35.00D.00 $35,000.00 �8(1)U,OUO:Ot3
2Ut�5 �50,IX)0.00 $SO,UOO.OQ w $�SU,t�O.tlt1
a
�T'otal's, �$9,5tft3 52�,1f34 $9�9��00 00 $350,UOQ DU $5b5,�24 t� $75QOOOAO
n :a�
.t
"r
5-.' z_
j 'T'ota� Frii►cipal and �nterest Paii� To Date $915,52�.ffd.. F
2
CENTERBRODK GOLF COURSE STUDY
I
As you will note, during the first decade of operation, little progress was made towards
reducing the principal amount. As a result, the loan payment schedule was revised in 1997 to
reflect a principal only schedule. Furthermore, the repayment schedule was revised in 2003 to
accommodate for market conditions. The current loan repayment schedule is as follows.
BROOKLYN CENTER MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE
REVISED November 10, 2003
INTEREST FREE LOAN AMORTIZATION SCHEDULE
Beginning Ending
Principal Annual Principal
Year Balanee Pavment Balance
1998 1 1,150,000 50,000 1,100,000
1999 2 1,100,000 50,000 1,050,000
2000 3 1,050,000 50,000 1,000,000
2001 4 1,000,000 50,000 950,000
2002 5 950,000 50,000 900,000
2003 6 900,000 15,000 885,000
2004 7 885,000 35,000 850,000
2005 8 850,000 50,000 800,000
2006 9 800,000 55,000 745,000
2007 10 745,000 55,000 690,OOQ
2008 11 690,000 60,000 630,000
2009 12 630,000 60,000 570,000
2010 13 570,000 60,000 510,000
2011 14 510,000 60,000 450,000
2012 15 450,000 60,000 390,000
2013 16 390,000 65,000 325,000
2014 17 325,000 65,000 26�,OU0
2015 18 260,000 65,000 195,000
2016 19 195,000 65,000 130,000
2017 20 130,000 65,000 65,000
2018 21 65,000 65,000 0
1,150,000
3
x r
CENTERBROOK GOLF COURSE STUDY
WEATHER HISTORY
Few ventures are more at the mercy of the weather than golf courses. If it is too hot, too cald or
we have precipitation, many golfers choose to stay away. Additionally, as a par-3 course
Centerbook attracts a different type of clientele than your typica118 hole course. We do no get
the "hard core" rain or shine golfer, ours is more of the fair weather variety. If the weather is
below 50 degrees or above 90 degree, or if we have measurable precipitation, or even the threat
of inclement weather, many golfers will stay away.
If these non-golf days happen early in the year, Centerbrook is all the more affected. During the
start of each season, golfers establish playing patterns they follow for the remainder of the
season. By encountering bad weather early in the season, these patterns are disrupted or not
established. The result is fewer rounds for the entire season.
During the past five years, Mother Nature has not been kind. We have had top ten years for
rain and heat. Add a couple of cooler than normal spring seasons, and it adds up to misery for
golf course operators. As the table below indicates, we have lost a significant number of days to
weather.
Days Lost to Weather
High Temp High Temp Rain High Temp High Temp Rain
Below A6ove Below Above
55 Degrees 90 Degrees SS Degrees 90 Degrees
2005 2pp2
April ll 8 April 18 12
May 6 I S May 7 11
June l 13 June 4 16
July 16 5 July 10 13
August 5 9 August 8
September 1 13 September 1 2 ll
October 0 6 October 25 13
Totals 17 23 63 103 Totals 26 16 84 126
2004 2001
April 12 11 April 15 17
May 2 1 13 May 2 2 14
June 10 June 5 13
July 1 12 July 7 8
August 5 4 August 5 8
September 5 1 6 September 1 10
October I 2 October 12
Totals 19 8 56 83 Totals 18 19 70 107
2003 2000
April 13 7 April I S 11
May 2 11 May 1 12
June 9 June 3 14
JuIY 3 I 1 July 2 0
August 7 4 August 1 8
September 5 3 6 September 2 4
October 10 6 October 7 9
Totals 20 13 48 81 Totais 18 6 68 92
4
i
x
CENTERBROOK GOLF CDURSE STUDY
I
Another measure of the impact of weather on operations is its af#ect on league play. As
Centerbrook is a par-3 course, golf leagues compromise a large percentage of the rounds played.
If the adverse weather happens to fall on the days of league play, Centerbrook is doubly
affected. The table below shows the league rounds lost to weather over the last few years.
CENTERBROOK GOLF LEAGUE STATISTICS
Year, 24�5 2004 2003 2002 200I 204Q
of Rounds of Rounds of Rounds of Rounds of Rounds of Rounds
LEAGUES Golfers Canc Golfers Canc Golfers Canc Golfers Canc Golfers Canc Golfers Canc
Monday PM Women 110 770 104 0 103 206 106 108 119 NA 118 118
Tuesday Seniors 63 1$9 84 168 90 0 105 312 98 NA 96 288
1 �I:� ���I I I
Wednesday AM
Women 30 180 34 102 35 70 49 294 47 NA 45 45
I I I f
Wednesday Youth 59 59 78 0 117 117 147 350 123 NA NA NA
1_ f I: i: I
Wednesday PM
Women 68 204 63 NA 73 73 46 316 72 NA 71 213
Thursday AM
Women 50 200 54 54 56 56 54 372 48 NA 55 192
T'hursday PM Men 128 �28 127 127 123 246 123 192 127 NA 130 130
T f
Friday PM Counles 42 0 38 38 32 96 40 96 28 NA 28 28
f
Monday PM FALL
Women 25 25 25 0
Thursday PM FALL
Men 38 0 36 0
TOTALS 613 1 755 643 4
89 629 864 670 2 040 662 0 54
3 1 014
5
x R
CENTERBROOK GOLF COURSE STI.IDY
I
CURERENT MARKET CONDITIONS
Centerbrook was built at a time when the Twin Cities metropolitan area was under served by
the nurnber of golf courses available for play. There were, in effect, more players than courses
available. Not surprisingly then, the first few years at Centerbrook were profitable.
As golf course construction has continued, we are now reaching a point where supply of
courses is more than able to xneet the demand of players. We must now compete with other
courses for players, making it more difficult to end each year in a positive financial position.
The initial 1980 Brauer Report showed 334 golf courses in Minnesota and 132 within fifty miles
of the Twin Cities. The total number of golf courses in Minnesota in 2005 was 482, with almost
200 within 50 miles of the Twin Cities. This represents a 42 increase in courses statewide and
over a 50% increase in metro area courses.
COMBINED IMPACT
With the c
ombined im act of w
p eather, increased competition and a shaky economy, the last few
years have not been good ears for area olf courses. The table below shows net o eratin
Y
g P g
revenue comparisons for neighboring par 3 courses for the last five ears,
Y
Net Operating Revenue Comparisons
Area Par 3
Courses
Year 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000
Brooklyn
Center $13,865.00 $6,166.00 $4,524.00 $24,572.00 $74,352.00
New Hope ($;1,871.00) ($10,976.00) ($4,814.00) $20,554.00 $93,546.00
Brooklyn
Park ($32,074.00) $19,663.00 ($23,621.00) $11,2'72.00 $30,685.00
New
Brighton ($62,326.00) ($79,819.00) ($113,322.00) ($33,287.00) $6,076.00
Roseville ($41,394.00) ($41,290.00) ($63,466.00) ($41,748.00) ($5,952.00)
Eagle Lake ($97,519.00) Not In Operation
(Three
Rivers)
b
CENTERBROOK GOLF COURSE STUDY
I
OTHER OPTIONS FOR THE GOLF COURSE
Over the past many years, many opinions have been posited regarding the golf course and its
future. One of the most common is to sell the golf course for private development.
While seemin 1 sim le, this o tion is frau ht with man obstacles. Attached to this re ort is a
gY
I' P g Y P
letter from Braun Engineering regarding test borings of the golf course site. The report indicates
that "essentially the entire golf course will be construeted over swamp deposits." These
deposits range from 5- 40 feet deep. While swamp (peat) deposits are not insurmountable in
building, they add significantly to the cost.
Also notable on the property are large storm water ponds that are part of a regianal system. In
1998, a large improvement project was undertaken related to storm water. In the project, storm
water from Brookdale and the surrounding area was directed under highway 100 via storm
sewer pipes and is deposited into greatly expanded storm water ponds on the golf course and to
additional ponds located just south of the golf course property. If development of the property
was to be considered, the ponds would need to be relocated.
Somewhat related to the sfiorm water issue, the city maintains a water tower on the property.
As a result of increased Homeland Security issues, any development of the property would
need to be made around the tower, as moving it would be cost prohibitive.
Also adding to the issues is the fact that large sections of the golf course are built on right-of
way owned by the Minnesota Department of Transportation. The aerial on page 8 shows the
MNDOT property.
Finally, the golf course has never been assembled into one property. The parcels would have to
I be combined and the Little League fields split off prior to any sale. These multiple parcels are
also shown on the aerial.
t
CENTERBROOK GOLF COURSE STUDY
I
CENTERBROOK AERIAL PHOTO
Y�` ��f x
y a s� a y x /a r
d' �c c6'a ;�'��-�t ,.c f ,t R;`
s
c r t �r
`r��" �:3�,, _rf" .t�' ,�r
Y y
r.
7 �s r�"
atl
w+ I'aa rt
a r t ''f
dc 4
T a 4 t Ae '"4,:
.f- 5Y y
r
V ��t'-s^s' R
xx�� i f '8'*
F �fi q '4 3}� #w 'qe
x �����p� t
Y��7,�
�y �g-�.
fa ��f. a`
�r°
a \�y
..,a
�s_. ;r, a
'V j"
J
�w A
i
;n f t �a'
a
r
a��
r
.Y
iP
i
f
'�'��`,/�Ii t
i
\f
d
,�,y
�N,
��.o
,z�
v
1.
T
w
�:r. a,�.. a
w
Q �x
One additional option that has been broached is to "privatize" the golf course, or have it run by
an outside management company. The three most common types af golf course privatization
are contract management, long-term lease, and asset sale.
Contract management occurs when a golf course is contracted out ta a private operator on a
relatively short-term (five years or less) management contract. The benefit of a short-term Iease
to the contractors is that they are not responsible for the financial liability of the course and do
not bear the same level of risk associated with other types of privatization. The contractor
receives a management fee, which may be based in part on the contractor's performance.
s
a s
CENTERBROOK GOLF COURSE STUDY
I
Under a long-term lease, the contractor assumes the operating risk for the property and enjoys
the benefits of profits generated by the leased golf course. The aim of a long-term lease is to shift
a significant portion of the risk away from the city and to the private contractor. The term of the
lease is often related to the length of time needed by the private operator to recover investments
in the golf course.
While each of these privatization options has some potential benefits, Centerbrook is a very
small operation, with limited revenues. As such, it would not be an attractive option for most
management companies. Also, without continued invest�nent in the course infrastructure, the
city would stand the risk of inheriting a course that is run-down and in poor condition at the
end of the lease term.
SUMMARY
In the 18 years of the course's operation, the financial picfure has changed dramatically. Most
notably, the construction of both public and private golf courses has continued at a rapid pace,
changing the market considerably. Both the Brauer study, and the 1985 staff report updating
that study believed that about 40,000 rounds played annually was an achievable goal. The
Brauer study indicated this standard would be reached after abou# ten years of operation. As
our actual experience indicates, actual rounds played varies, but has stabilized at between
28,000-33,000 rounds annually. Substantial future growth remains unlikely.
This market limitation obviously limits the amount of revenues available, leaving rate increases
as one of the few sources of additional revenue. Currently, fees are in the top 25 percent of fees
charged at similar facilities.
Of particular concern since the construction of Centerbrook was the lack of a capital reserve.
The Brauer study had identified the need for an annual contribution to a capital reserve.
However, no reserve was created, under the expectation that future needs would be financed
from the Capital Improvements Fund until the Golf Course Fund was generating a consistent
profit.
Analysis of expected tuture operating costs and revenues indicated that, as structured in 1997,
in an average year with no capital improvements required, the golf course should be able to
make interest payments. In a good year, profit that is generated could be used to build a
reserve from which to draw in years when weather is poor or to payment of loan principal.
However, this did not address the issue of a capital reserve, nor was it particularly sound
rnanagement. A plan should be established that, at worst-case, the debt service should still be
made, with average and good years' profits contributing to a reserve fund.
9
CENTERBROOK GOLF COURSE STUDY
I
Efficiencies in management, some additional savings, and identification of new markets can
help manage the variability that weather produces, and reduce the possibility of operating
losses. However, the capital reserve can only be created out of the net income which is now
servicing the debt. After careful review, staff concluded that the only reliable means of creating
a capital reserve was debt restructuring.
Such a plan was completed as a part of the 1998 budget process. By making the construction
loan interest free, the plan established both a capital reserve and a revised loan payment
schedule that would have resulted in the loan being repaid over a period of twenty years.
This loan repayment schedule was subsequently revised in 2003 due to weather and other
adverse market conditions. Additionally, the practice of contributing to a capital reserve fund
was discontinued, as sufficient revenues were not available to fund both the capital reserve and
the principal payment.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends that a revised policy be adopted that reestablishes a capital reserve and
makes principal payments to the Capital Improvements Fund according to a set formula, rather
than a schedule.
During the first quarter of each year, the golf course produces limited revenues until the course
opens for business. However, during that same period, the golf course incurs approximately
$30,000 in expenditures. A capital improvements fund could be reestablished with an annual
contribution of $12,500. Improvements could be scheduled accordingly and presented annually
with the golf course budget.
As a result, a policy could be adopted that calls for any operating revenues in excess of $42,500
annually be directed to the Capital Improvements Fund. Principal payments could still be
tracked until such a time as the original loan is repaid.
I, along with the rest of our Centerbrook staff, recognize that the golf course's finaneial
performance has been less than anticipated over the past few years. However, we feel very
strongly that Centerbrook remains a much needed amenity that, with some adjustment, should
remain financially viable.
I hope the above information provides you with adequate detail regarding Centerbrook's recent
financial history and expectations for 2006. Please let me know if you have questions, or would
like additional information.
�o
Services Since 1957
ENGINEERING TESTING
r..r
INESO A: Minneapolis. Hibbing, St. Cloud. Rochester. St. Paul J.S BRAUN.VE GD KWEMPKE.P.E.
atni�aiec Othres P M ANOERSON OALE N ALLEN. P.E.
NORTH OAKOTA: Bismarck. Wiiliston: MOkTANA: Biilings o.A:K�nusiERfPE �AMESJ.CRAIG.Jr..P.f.
Reply To:
P.O. Box 35108
Mpls., MN 55435
(612) 441-5600
November 26, 1985
City of Brooklyn Center
Attn: Bo Spurrier, P.E.
6301 Shinc�le Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
RE: 85-531 FOUNDATION INVESTIGATION
Proposed Golf Course
a Brooklyn CentQr, MN
Mr. Spurrier:
In response to your authorization of October 8, 1985,. we have
completed 27 borings for the proposed golf eourse. The purpose
of the borings was to evaluate the subsoil and ground water con-
ditions with regard to the construction of the golf course. This
construction includes a club house, storage building, concession
building, three pedestrian bridges, and the various greens, tees,
and fairways.
The borings indicate that essentialTy the entire golf course and i
structures will be constructed over existing swamp deposits. At
the boring locations, the depth to the.bottom of the swamp depo-
sits varied from 5 feet to 40 feet. The majority ot the swamp
deposits encountered in the borings extended to about the 20-foot
depth.
Construction of the golf cour�e will require the placement of
surcharges for the greens and tees and the realization that
everything, except pile supported structures, will settle. For
building support, driven piles will be required.
For complete results of the testing along with our engineering
analysis and recommendations, please ref er to the accompanying
report.
J
C�NSULTING ENGiNEERS SOILS AND MATEAIALS
'•.u.�.;�b
�i�? C
85-531
City of Brooklyn Center
November 25, i985
It has been a pleasure
performing our services for you on this
project. Should you have any questions regarding this report or
if we may provide additional services as planning and construc-
tion proceeds, please contact us at your convenience.
Very truly yours,
BRAUN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC.
Ja es J. Cra g Jr� ,E
Senior Engineer
�i�G����' 7�
Michael M. Aeuer, p,E,
Senior Engineer
JJC/MMH:gec
Attachments
cc: Braue.r.& Associates, Ltd.
Attn: Paul Fjare
Architectural Design Group
Attn: Willis Schellberg
Valley Engineering
Attn: Steve Ha�vey
Y
r, s rPp ;d S�pPO����9 tlocuments are for tne exeluswe use of the atltlressee. In the absence of.our rior written a I
-prPSe�iahon and assume no r p PProvaY
espons�b�hty to any other parties regarding such content.
n ...r».�...._,....__.
�s� y
�i
h: N,
R�. �'�.°�'3 4 3
Ak
g arvA Y� 1 a�
,,��'��7'c r
"�a��`
t�' s ,�:..r w
u d �a .4r
,d�
x., "g
a
i
t s i
i
tl
4 r
r P r
y i
r i
r i
.�r,�,. s�
,i. a.
I I
a��:no o ao� a� ua
a►
n ro uc �on
Constructed 1986 -1987
4 ened: S r�n 1988
p p g
Fundin 1.1 1/Ii ion �oan from other
g
funds
Set u as an Enter rise
p p
Re- a oan for construction
pY
Generate its own o eratin funds and ca ita
p g p
s the on recreationa arnenit that is an
v �y
enter������� rise:���� C�entra�� Park ba fie ds and
p
swi���m m i n������ oo ���a re s����u bsid ized
g: p
e arrnance
Has aid 967 024 to Ca ita Pro'ects
p p
Fund
Has borrowed an additiona 91 500
$20 000 i n 1991
$70, 000 i n 1994
$11 500 i n 1995
Current covers o eratin costs
Y p g
Can enerate exc usive of debt
g
re acement ca ita
p p
i
Park Recreat on Com m ss ar�
Rev ew
Go f Course is a ver im ortant amenit
Y p Y
forthe communit
v
Re-estab ish the ca ita reserve for the
p
Go f Course
Ad' ust oan a ment sched u e to
pY
accommodate re-estab ishment of ca ita
p.
reserve
Centerbrook Golf Course Days Lost To Weather
2000 Totals
2001 Totals
2002 Totals
High Temp Below 55 Degrees
High Temp Above 90 Degrees
Rain
2003 Totals
2004 Totals
2005 Totals
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Net Operating Revenues Area Par 3 Courses
$100,000
$50,000
i
$0
0 Year
2000
2001
2002
$50,000
0 2003
2004
s�
$100,0O
$150,000
Brooklyn Center New Hope Brooklyn Park New Brighton Roseville Eagle Lake
i
Centerbrook Golf League Rounds Cancelled
4 n
LOOo
2001
2002
Rounds Cancelled 2003 i,
2004 I
2005
=c
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
on ons o e
Swamp deposits
I w
V n DO ri ht of way
g
F ood P a i n
Regiona Storm Water reatment system
Water �ower
Generates revenue from ce towers ($45,00�
per year)
'-':�ti;c.�,�? �v:isYr:°��c��.�ti�:�.cs�r:�r;arfiir.�.a�iM�e: I
M
1 �Mrl 4 ,r
l L ��'C e IP !t
.i v r��
'��7,y1 r`.` 1 �c. l,� i! 1
y
C��, 4 w ►�'°y'" L L lasia'�
,��4:�.`�",��'� L y �L �R"aft,w��ir� '�r,� �Y":�
=y i
�i. :^'l. ���_�'r`..T L+�'s'�•�''�r� �.I;i� I
1 �l' �L� �"'y� T *w "�e'
s+h Ii" s 1 'ja .;1\ Vw 1 �p .e.,� �IF
�i 'r. N�
a, f� 1�
r �"ya, ,d�: .R� �r` •�''1�'
i�� i r P
x� �+�i'
A� ��r r,�u�u i
If �H
I �i+
i �5 'l
f t��. t:'� h .},'��r.
•�r�`,� a rt r
•;A, w�i�+:"...-�, ir
1' �on�� �,...v�.� +rsrp...... ��i
i i �t. A'�t� .i. �Ak
"i
a I �I
°k-�+�
R
r'�r
�'r- w -'��I i �,i�
a
s
r �L lL�E
�1► �k' f.
l f,; 4����i, ��t.� .�7L��,�'�,�.
.�j� 4.,_>
p,, t,.
`s
r l
„a; 4f k�
F+��, �ew
F.,
j+ r JI
>y 'k.� +9t r '�F:� M Bjj 1
1 ��l �'1��
r r 1
�t v„�J .fi+�� y'' ��Ci i 0
��!'j y�. I
iy�y a rc 4 r �.`r�d ���x
�r,;;W ��r-
,,�F-���•-
v° ��V L I
d v
i i t �.a.�
t �lp
s r�;,
,1 i i k
y �i P���� I�-v
xa
1 f
4 j,,
M1 1 �wo.
U
I f.
s r4� w�<<� r�:;° r, y
i
4
p 'i
t�
t t S"��'
4 s,�
N
�I d x
y�
i i ry �rt 1r r
Y
Y ?�r�� t y Y
M
e T r
------�.—�.e._ t
r ..±F`_ i'�
3
t
'a 1� a�
f
s t a' a R q�r 1t
r n► z
i t
,r w �F p
i c�
r r
ti i r
t.. t .�'as g ����rv
I!
�E r�'�
+"�p j ,�.1.
4. r
r�,'� .�5. �.,g`,� �i.w�w.
,�s
F .iti*' °m+� a�.,"'"" s 9�
q
t
r
a'��:. ;�t,
�a Y
h �e i' w_ ��h1 i d� a`
alt
4 ��.s'A'
M1
K k�� f ti
J�� sss f
j
i.yf L 4
4e Y �:,9'r i' �e� v.� y
i
z a I w
.,_...�e.. ...a
i i k•�� i
�k s i�
r a
ai h� ��K' r ���q.�,��
f F� r a �-r�
r
s
,.�.-:�_r,.:_���.'� ��fi f _�h��— �'a'���„��'� �"t��
�P
e
�•c
�sa�r...£..�,�ar., .�.���o-.o...u._.ti-o.,.w�w�. �.....a. ..a .�w+�v� ..-..,..F...
a#y�f�1J
lJ1� w�1 1�P
��L� [�en#erbr�a� G���` C'c��irs� �ite �Y
r-� a�
.,,�t�
e
t r Benef t�
U�ca u e
p
Re iona Storm Water ondin site
p g
No a ment to �o f Course when course
p Y
f ooded b storm water detention
y
No a ment for ost o eratin da s durin
p Y g Y g
Storm Water ond construction $49 000
p
Vaintenance of rounds and access to
g
water tower without char e to ufii it
g Y
y
I i
y IA
III
s.
1 I II 'i
I
I
O� 4
I
�I
1. Status� uo
a
2. Discontinue o erations
p
3. Privatization so icit�tion
4. reat a a ments to date as a ied to
p Y pp
principa
5.����� E���sta b���� i s�h a fo r�m u a fo r����tra n sfe rr��i n�� f u n���d
ba ance in excess of Ca ita Reserve
p
tar ets to Ca ita Pro'ects Fund
g p
s
�on us uo
Benefits Disadvantages
Original plan Does not address
Retains amenit capital replacement
Y
May require future
Pays for grounds i�
loans for equipment
upkeep and infrastructure
Provides repayment of Not likel to succeed
y
original loan
r
s
r�.
Benefits Disadvanta es
g
Closure of issue I ncreases General
Fund rnaintenance
costs
Substantial cost to
remove golf course
irnprovements
Loss of recreatianai
amenity
i No f�ture revenues for
Capital Projects Fund
e1
�or� :r�va �za �on
Benefits Disadvanta es
g
Golf course rernains Unlikely to result in
open as amenify capital replacement
No risk of o eratin funding
p g
Ioss Lose expertise of staff
Less Staff tlme Difficult to re-establish if
privatization didn't work
out
Risk of deterioration of
facilities due ta lack of
re-investment
s i
ior� r�� ri r�c� n
Benefits Disadvanta es
g
More realistic Unlikely to fund capita
repayment scenario by and equiprnent n�eds
crediting all payments in the near term
as principal Leaves status uo of
q
Potential to fund underfunding the
replacement enterprise
Maintains Golf Course
as an amenity
l
J
n �a ar es
0
Benefits Disadvantages
Treats Golf Course more Short term
Simllarly t0 Other Less moneys transferred to
recreationa) amenities Capital Projects Fund
Provides for capital and
equipment replacement
Provides stability I
Provides for continuing
potential transfers to
Capital Projects Fund
Same treatment as other
amenities, except it pays
for operations and-
equipment
ecor�nrnen a �or��
1. Go forward based on :the current otentia for
p
the Go f Cou rse
1. Golf Course will not rneet the fi.nancia projections of
its founders
2. Treat Go f Course as other recreationa
amenities
1. Except require operational self:sufficiency
3. Provide for fisca hea th of the Ga f Course
Fund
1. Establish a funding formula that transfers Golf
Course Fund balance above operating capital and
Capital Reserve targets to Capital Projects Fund
Recommendations Cont.
4. Char e costs of oss due to f oodin to
g g
Storm �Water l� ti it
v
g�l�"��ii` Yyi lyq r'.� i
:z>` ����i P 'i�dl'�4,�'� �i���l i1i II;�� I II ESt i z
�l
,.+I
�.��'i
�IM�� p�k
rl
I
y i i
A.
5
i
I
I
�t�,
r
t,��,� 3 a
k
a
a ti
g
�fi r� a vi i �,P'+,r' iw f `v�:'' s:-
p nI�.Y'��
�1�,,
A p S� y
�..�3� 3Y
3 y
�`s �k`� "�vy" b a
+z� s eE3s# D k �...4 4 4 �^y
���x'� T�E�.z 3.a z ���,a�� ri I X
k �4r'av -�.,r� ��,y��y��'���' �3� Y �'a` �'ry�M"F�� 5 Y
i'w54' ,y� S
.�..�r`�� c, "�-;5:#�"��`��� 5 '°����m� �k&.,,�"'�£�Fs� w m�������y r w7r� v�
t� k� t i
s s s�, �,�`��a*.v�' �,h p� v y a
w..
�r3 re t r
r 3� S 'r t
3� c n�
'p' 3 r e �{:�z�y..'�'�' a
�r ,r Y k�"� c a r �R�°`�"�,
^''+�c�,� �»P.�,,t`t' r�ig,. a.'x�ba% a �','��`�f �r ,?4; .w��'.�. �'���"`*3� ..(�..���:wk�
I
Recommendations Cont.
5. Char e a costs of ond maintenance
g p
and o erations ta Storm Water l� ti it
p Y
6. Char e an costs associated with Water
g Y
�ower d isru tions to Water ti it
p Y
7. Write off oans and/or transfer Storrn
Water funds in reco nition of co- ocatian
g