Shocking news: Harding Park big money loser

[Dan King]

A recent audit by the SF Board of Supervisors shows SF muni courses are big money losers.

Click here for Becky Bowman's San Francisco Chronicle story.

Dan King

Although difficult to quantify, the benefits to the city go far beyond the dollars and cents which accrue to the Recreation and Park Department.
 --San Francisco Recreation and Park General Manager Yomi Agunbiade, trying to justify the city subsidizing the PGA Tour.

[SB]

$23M in renovation costs??

[Brent Hutto]

$23M in renovation costs??

Yeah, just imagine how many non-tangible benefits can accrue when you lay out that many "dollars and cents".

[Mike Benham]

It seems, from the few figures given, that Harding has been unable to pay back any of the principal used for the rennovation.  The article lightly glosses over the fact that the rennovation was almost 50% over budget for a total cost of $ 23.6 million.  This points to the simple possibility that if the project was on budget at $ 16.0 million then they would not be losing money.

It has been discussed here, with great civility, where did the $ 23.6 million go to rennovate Harding Park.

It would be interesting to know, and it is probably public record, what the scope of the project and what the original budget of $ 16 million was to pay for ... the course was overhauled, the driving range rebuild in a new location, new maintenance facilities, new maintenance equipment, the Fleming 9 rennovated, new parking lot and service roads and huge new clubhouse, restaurant, pro shop and offices.

[PThomas]

what a f***ing joke!

similar to the brillance of cities helping to pay for sports stadiums for rich owners of teams

[Joel_Stewart]

I hope Les Claytor responds especially about the costs which he refused to discuss previously?

I started a thread a few months ago about using a real architect for this course and discussing the dirty politics that have destroyed this project so it shouldn't be any surprise.

The other losers are Sharp Park and Lincoln Park golf courses, the public golfers with increased green fees, the taxpayers who will have to pay the debt among others.

[PThomas]

since it just got a new TV deal maybe the Tour can help pay

[Joel_Stewart]

"According to Rose, the renovation of the 18-hole Harding and nine-hole Fleming golf courses at Harding Park, which began in 2002, wound up costing $23.6 million, which was $7.6 million, or 47 percent, over the original estimate of $16 million."

The main question which nobody will answer is exactly where did the $23.6 million go?   How much did the PGA tour architectural services receive?

[Lynn_Shackelford]

Don't overlook that if you walk around the clubhouse you will see that part of it was built with donated private funds.

[Mike_Cirba]

I think I hear Gib sharpening his pencil.  

[Mike Benham]

The main question which nobody will answer is exactly where did the $23.6 million go?  

Only The City can answer this question.

[Kevin_Reilly]

How did the course handle the recent storms?

[ForkaB]

The shocking news would have been:

HARDING PARK PROJECT COMES IN WAY UNDER BUDGET!  SUPERVISORS VOW TO USED MONEY SAVED TO REDUCE GREEN FEES.  SUCCESS OF PROJECT LEADS TO COMMITMENT TO RENOVATE SHARP PARK AND REBUILD LINCOLN PARK.  DOAK, COORE AND CRENSHAW HIRED TO BUILD 54-HOLE COMPLEX ON SURPLUS PRESIDIO LAND.  MAYOR RESIGNS TO ACCEPT OFFER TO JOIN AUGUSTA NATIONAL.  GIB PAPAZIAN NAMED IN HIS PLACE.

[Doug Siebert]

$23.6 million??  Christ, how much did Shadow Creek cost to build?  I mean, they already had the land at Harding Park, so what the hell could they have done to spend that kind of money?  Does it have a clubhouse that rivals Mar-A-Lago in square footage or what?

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Where is Jeff Brauer when you need him to further explain. (I seem to remember him sticking-up for Chris "The Grey Bandit" Grey and bagging on Geoff Shac in a previous post on this topic.)

[Tony Ristola]

If I remember correctly Cypress CG cost 9 million (1992 dollars). The course had 10 sump stations, 9 ponds, all the bulkheading for the ponds had to be earthquake proof; liquifaction of the soils was the problem, and they moved about 400,000 yards of dirt.

[Joel_Stewart]

Where is Jeff Brauer when you need him to further explain. (I seem to remember him sticking-up for Chris "The Grey Bandit" Grey and bagging on Geoff Shac in a previous post on this topic.)

Nether Jeff or Les will comment but not sure they know anything.   The point I made earlier is nobody knows the itemization of the budget or the overuns.   I still think the PGA tour architectural services possibly enriched themselves to the tune of $5 to $10 million in exchange for bringing a tour event (the AMEX) to Harding Park.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dan King,

To  be fair, I think you have to seperate the normal operating budget from debt service.

Without debt service it appears that the operation makes money.

Going from 16,000,000 to 23,000,000 seems hard to imagine, but spending $ 16,000,000, absent acquisition costs, seems hard to imagine.

Joel Stewart,

Why wouldn't the financials be a matter of public record ?

How can the city NOT reveal the info ?

Do San Francisco and California have "Sunshine" laws ?

[Tom_Doak]

Joel:

Sebonack cost $105 million, on an original "budget" of $80 million, so was I a total fool?  [Or maybe it was Jack!]

Golf course architects seldom have much control over the total costs of a project.  You seem to be on some sort of witch hunt here.  I have no idea what anyone charged for their services here, but I would wager that the lawyers and the engineers made more off the project than the golf course architects did.

[A_Clay_Man]

Tom, How much of that 105 mil was lawyers and engineers?
Besides, you were in the nieghborhood of 25% overbudget not 47.

A witch hunt is neccessary when accountability is so inherent in our sport. So, why don't municipalities call penalties on themselves?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak,

A good part of the cost of Sebonack was land acquisition.

Harding Park didn't have that problem, and most of the infrastructure was already there.

Somewhere, the original budget for the project has to exist.
And, somewhere, the line item final accounting has to exist.

I don't think anyone can draw any definitive conclusions until both documents are made public.

Joel Stewart,

Attributing 5-10 million to design fees would seem unrealistic.

[Tom_Doak]

Adam:

I don't know the detailed numbers, I really don't.  Even if I did, I couldn't share them in a public forum, because Sebonack is a privately owned project.

I just think Joel should not be making accusations about how much someone "enriched themselves" on a project without having the facts in print.  And, since neither Chris Grey nor Les Claytor would have negotiated the deal between the Tour and the city, I don't understand why their names keep getting dragged into it.

[Jimbo]

here is some illumination on operating issues.  see about p.12 of the pdf

More detail on page 146 of pdf

http://www.sfgov.org/site/uploadedfiles/recpark/RPDAuditFinalReport.pdf

[Tom_Doak]

Jimbo:

Thanks for that link!  I'm going to read the whole thing, but the figure I saw on page 3 or 4 was pretty interesting -- the capital shortfall for the SF Park & Recreation Department's budget is $589 million!!!!

So they're actually doing pretty well with the golf course.  

[Michael Hayes]

The link that Jim provided is a huge document...go to page 146 of the doc. to find discussion on the Golf Fund...From my reading so far it looks like this project was doomed from the start...

MH

[Tags:]

Tags: