[redanman]

Honestly, I'd rather see the economics work out for more affordable golf.

Call me a socialist.  Guilty.

[Jerry Kluger]

It has been my experience that little competition into an airport results in higher fares, so if only one airline is servicing a location the fares are quite high.  Further, I believe Southwest only uses one type of plane and the limited capacity of the Bandon resort would make the whole economic picture of setting up a terminal with security, staffing, etc. plus the number of possible passengers makes it questionable that a commercial carrier would come in there.

[Kalen Braley]

It has been my experience that little competition into an airport results in higher fares, so if only one airline is servicing a location the fares are quite high.  Further, I believe Southwest only uses one type of plane and the limited capacity of the Bandon resort would make the whole economic picture of setting up a terminal with security, staffing, etc. plus the number of possible passengers makes it questionable that a commercial carrier would come in there.

Jerry,

This is true, Southwest doesn't fly any of the smaller planes.  But you can't assume they would all be flying in to see Bandon Dunes Resort.  I mean after all Sandpines isn't too far off.

On a more serious note though, Portland to the north and Sacramento to the south are the closest "major" airports to the area.  So if this did happen where they could get bigger airlines in there then it could allow access to all of southern Oregon as well as "true" Northern California.

However like you I'm not buying it.  This seems more of a sell job akin to publicly fianced stadiums for the "good" of the local community.  When in reality its nothing more than a means for Mr. Money bags owner to further fatten his wallet with a free stadium and outrageous ticket prices.

[Jerry Kluger]

Kalen: My concern for the purpose of this discussion is whether Bandon is going to become another Kohler, i.e., too expensive for most of us to play.  I am not addressing the issue of corporate perks.

[Kalen Braley]

Kalen: My concern for the purpose of this discussion is whether Bandon is going to become another Kohler, i.e., too expensive for most of us to play.  I am not addressing the issue of corporate perks.

Thanks for the clarification Jerry,

As for Bandon, it already is too expensive for most to play.  But I can't say I necessarily have a problem with that.  If the market will bear it then thats fine.

But when it comes to taxpayers footing the bill for an upgraded airport, thats a different animal.

[Dan Kelly]

Kalen: My concern for the purpose of this discussion is whether Bandon is going to become another Kohler, i.e., too expensive for most of us to play.

That jet has already flown, hasn't it?

And, even so, I see nothing but higher and higher prices ahead. When you publicize it, and they come, there's no other possibility, is there?

I'm not saying there should be. I'm only saying: Would that it were otherwise.

[Mike Erdmann]

The money put into the Coos Bay airport expansion wasn't tax money, it was Oregon lottery proceeds that are designated for economic development projects.  I know the leftist NYT wants to exploit the rich vs. poor class warfare element, but look at the facts.  The southern Oregon coastal economy has been in horribly dismal shape for many years since the virtual collapse of the natural resource based timber and fishing industries.  Mike Keiser comes in and takes a monumental risk in creating Bandon Dunes, creates a huge tourist draw that creates hundreds of new jobs, draws tens of thousands of tourist visitors that never would have come otherwise, and pumps up the entire surrounding economy.  And the NYT wants to bitch about lottery dollars being spent on the airport expansion because rich folks will be the ones getting the benefit?  Hell, given the choice I'll take rich tourists over poor ones anyday.  They're the ones that will be dropping thousands of dollars each during their stay - all of which creates jobs and tax income to the county, state and federal governments.

[Kalen Braley]

The money put into the Coos Bay airport expansion wasn't tax money, it was Oregon lottery proceeds that are designated for economic development projects.  I know the leftist NYT wants to exploit the rich vs. poor class warfare element, but look at the facts.  The southern Oregon coastal economy has been in horribly dismal shape for many years since the virtual collapse of the natural resource based timber and fishing industries.  Mike Keiser comes in and takes a monumental risk in creating Bandon Dunes, creates a huge tourist draw that creates hundreds of new jobs, draws tens of thousands of tourist visitors that never would have come otherwise, and pumps up the entire surrounding economy.  And the NYT wants to bitch about lottery dollars being spent on the airport expansion because rich folks will be the ones getting the benefit?  Hell, given the choice I'll take rich tourists over poor ones anyday.  They're the ones that will be dropping thousands of dollars each during their stay - all of which creates jobs and tax income to the county, state and federal governments.

Mike,

No doubt Mr. Keiser did take a massive risk and it paid off well.  But its not explicitly about the money being spent on the airport, its about where else it can be spent,its the opportunity costs.  Spend $31 Mill to benefit a few that are already well off, or spend it elsewhere to benefit the less fortunate.

[Jim Bearden]

Jee what a surprise NYT against capitalism. BTW they and lefties and environmentalists destroyed lumber industry. I guess BD doesn't contribute anything to to the local economy.

[Mike Erdmann]

Mike,

No doubt Mr. Keiser did take a massive risk and it paid off well.  But its not explicitly about the money being spent on the airport, its about where else it can be spent,its the opportunity costs.  Spend $31 Mill to benefit a few that are already well off, or spend it elsewhere to benefit the less fortunate.

Kalen, that's my point.  You may think that the $31 million benefits a few rich folks flying in on corporate jets, but the real benefit does accrue to the less fortunate.....to the people that are now employed by Bandon Dunes resort, to the business owners and employees of the local stores where the tourists and resort employees spend their money, to the local residents and businesses that have had their property values increased, to the governments who have millions of dollars in new income and property taxes that they otherwise wouldn't have had.  If the airport wasn't expanded, many of these well-off visitors would have gone elsewhere for their golf vacation.  They didn't expand the airport for aesthetic reasons, they did it to help attract this kind of clientele that spends plenty of money in the local economy.

[Eric Johnson]

BTW they and lefties and environmentalists destroyed lumber industry.

I assume "they" are the NYT.  Could you provide supporting data for that statement?  Frankly, I'm confused by your comment.

[Eric Johnson]

Mike,

No doubt Mr. Keiser did take a massive risk and it paid off well.  But its not explicitly about the money being spent on the airport, its about where else it can be spent,its the opportunity costs.  Spend $31 Mill to benefit a few that are already well off, or spend it elsewhere to benefit the less fortunate.

Us South Coast residents fly in and out of OTH too!

[Jim Colton]

Mike,

No doubt Mr. Keiser did take a massive risk and it paid off well.  But its not explicitly about the money being spent on the airport, its about where else it can be spent,its the opportunity costs.  Spend $31 Mill to benefit a few that are already well off, or spend it elsewhere to benefit the less fortunate.

Kalen, that's my point.  You may think that the $31 million benefits a few rich folks flying in on corporate jets, but the real benefit does accrue to the less fortunate.....to the people that are now employed by Bandon Dunes resort, to the business owners and employees of the local stores where the tourists and resort employees spend their money, to the local residents and businesses that have had their property values increased, to the governments who have millions of dollars in new income and property taxes that they otherwise wouldn't have had.  If the airport wasn't expanded, many of these well-off visitors would have gone elsewhere for their golf vacation.  They didn't expand the airport for aesthetic reasons, they did it to help attract this kind of clientele that spends plenty of money in the local economy.

I agree with Mike.  The article misses the boat by not considering these factors.  It only looks at the jobs created versus cost of creating those jobs.  Anything to boost tourism is causing people from a different area to drop money in your area.  It quite possible that if Bandon Dunes were never built, I could go my whole life and never set foot in Oregon.  Instead, I went last year and will likely go back at least every 3-4 years.  And I played 4-5 other courses and stayed in a couple non-Keiser accomodations along the way.  I'm sure I'm not the only one who is in the same boat.  There may be others who come to Oregon for the first time, fall in love with the place and realize they want to move/retire there.

[Jason Blasberg]

Folks:

The public subsidy issue is a red herring  . . . that type of thing goes on everywhere for all kinds of public works projects and if you don't like CEOs taking the jet to BD sell your stock.

The real issue and what really offends me as both a lover of Bandon Dunes and liberal New Yorker is that it's ludicrous for the NY Times to pit dwindling timber and salmon resources against Bandon Dunes . . .

I guarantee the journalist was really interested in the timber farmer's story and needed something else to sell the story to his editor (hence the airport expansion and corporate jet subsidy story line).  The real issue in that piece is the contemplated public taking for private use issue.  

Can't say I blame the timber farmer but let's call it what it is . . . someone out in Portland should do some work pro bono for him and make sure that guys land is not siezed . . .  If anyone knows and cares to share the details of how that dam issue is resolved it would be good to know.  

Is there really a proposed public taking of private land to build a dam for Bandon Dunes?  There must be more to that story, who knows the details?

This smacks of NY Times golf bashing to me.

[Bob_Huntley]

Folks:

The public subsidy issue is a red herring  . . . that type of thing goes on everywhere for all kinds of public works projects and if you don't like CEOs taking the jet to BD sell your stock.

The real issue and what really offends me as both a lover of Bandon Dunes and liberal New Yorker is that it's ludicrous for the NY Times to pit dwindling timber and salmon resources against Bandon Dunes . . .

I guarantee the journalist was really interested in the timber farmer's story and needed something else to sell the story to his editor (hence the airport expansion and corporate jet subsidy story line).  The real issue in that piece is the contemplated public taking for private use issue.  

Can't say I blame the timber farmer but let's call it what it is . . . someone out in Portland should do some work pro bono for him and make sure that guys land is not siezed . . .  If anyone knows and cares to share the details of how that dam issue is resolved it would be good to know.  

Is there really a proposed public taking of private land to build a dam for Bandon Dunes?  There must be more to that story, who knows the details?

This smacks of NY Times golf bashing to me.

As usual, JK gets to the real story here. The "Takings" clause.

I don't give a damn what Mike Keiser thinks when he says that the guy should be well compensated for his property etc.
The timber guy has something he wants to keep and no one has the right to deprive him of his fief. I happen to know something about "takings", having dealt with a certain Comrade Mugabe.

Bob

[Mike Erdmann]

Look, the dam in question here is not a matter of Bandon Dunes vs. a small timber owner.  I don't have first hand knowledge of the situation, only from what I've read, but the town of Bandon has limited drinking water resources and will run out of water in about 15 years unless they develop another source.  This dam will be a needed future water source for the town of Bandon, will benefit dozens of area cranberry farmers who need the water too and yes, may benefit Mike Keiser's future golf expansion plans as well.  It was the cranberry farmers, not Mike Keiser, who initiated the plans for the dam.  They were short of money and Mike Keiser, realizing the dam could be of benefit to his plans as well, bought into a 15% share of the dam.  The dam is needed by the town of Bandon and by area agriculture, regardless of Keiser's plans.  

To me, this seems like a proper use of eminent domain by a local government that needs to expand necessary infrastructure.  I'm a firm believer in private property rights, but government has to have the right of eminent domain, otherwise cities could never keep up with providing the infrastructure needed for growing communities.

The more you learn about it, the more it pisses you off that an intellectually lazy NYT reporter painted it as a woeful small landowner vs. greedy Gulfstream-flying corporate welfare.

[Bob_Huntley]

Mike,

Have you ever lost a property to a quasi-government authority or to a private party by ukase? Until you do so, I suggest that you tread warily on this matter.


Bob

[Mike Erdmann]

Bob, what am I missing?  This isn't a situation of government taking one individual's property for the benefit of another individual.  It's a situation where a local government needs to create an additional source of drinking water before they run out of capacity, they've studied a variety of options and determined that a dam in this location is the most feasible alternative.  Mike Keiser may benefit from it, but the dam is needed with or without him.

Our founding fathers recognized that there would be a need for government to take private property for public use, that's why it's enshrined in the 5th amendment of the US Constitution that "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation".  If government didn't have the right of eminent domain, we wouldn't have our freeway systems, airports, water systems, etc.  Property owners absolutely must be compensated 100%, but just because there have been abuses elsewhere (such as Rhodesia) shouldn't mean that there's no place for eminent domain takings here.

[Bob_Huntley]

Mike,

Forgive me if I misread the article. I thought I read of the importance and economic impact that Bandon had on this once economically distressed area and that water, or lack thereof, could be a problem for future growth. Is the timberman's property the only place where this cachement could be used?

Just asking.

Bob

[Mike Erdmann]

The trouble with the NYT article is that it doesn't even mention the town's own need for a new water source, and just paints it as Mike Keiser's need.  

From what I understand, this landowner's property is the most feasible location for a new reservoir.  

[Jason Blasberg]

The trouble with the NYT article is that it doesn't even mention the town's own need for a new water source, and just paints it as Mike Keiser's need.  

From what I understand, this landowner's property is the most feasible location for a new reservoir.  

That's exactly what is so poor with the NY Times reporting . . . it casts the stage as BD vs. the timber farmer.  

I find it inconceivable that in a geographically diverse environment like Bandon that one location is the only feasible dam location.  Why not a man made recycled water resovoir?  What about a salt water treatment facility?  With all that natural rain water the town of Bandon needs to build a dam on this guy's land?  That makes zero sense, unless it really is the only way there could be sufficient water for a 5th BD course.  

Something else is in play here.  I just hope the timber farmer has good counsel.  

[Pete_Pittock]

 Reading the article and watching the video makes me view Mike Keiser as the unfortunate middleman. Somehow I don't think this is any publicity he was seeking.
 The NYT is looking at corporate executive perks and how that effects the stockholders and taxpayers as corporate profits are eroded.
 I think the timberman/fisherman who was featured only became a land owner through marriage this year based on an article linked through Geoff Shackelford's site at http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2007/2/4/the-future-of-bandon.html.  Read the comments section.
 There are probably more sites where a dam could be built,
and all of them would have the same problems, just a different set of players.
 The airport expansion is little different than one exposed in a Wisconsin earmark that caused a foofrah in Congress this week. Most of Coos County is growing thanks to the Bandon Dunes economic engine. A natural gas pipeline is being built connecting to the Willamette Valley lines. There is a good likelihood an LPG terminal may be sited. Likewise a drydock.
The Port just bought 1000 acres on the north shoreline west of US101. A golf course there is not out of the question.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()