Herschlag: Another Golf Course Fairy Tale

A member of the city’s golf course advisory committee and the ad-hoc golf course building committee made at least one statement that was incorrect and another that is at best misleading in a Concord Monitor My Turn piece published on Jan. 14. As Daniel Patrick Moynihan stated, “You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.”

The writer states, “It’s true that not every golfer is a Concord resident, although Concord residents do get a reduced greens fee.” Not true. A quick trip to the golf course’s web page on the city’s webiste, “These rates are available to everyone – no matter where you live.” I did not add the underlining, that is how it is written under the membership section.

Remember the person providing the public with this false information is a member of two golf course committees and a supporter of building the new clubhouse.

The second item that raises eyebrows is when the writer states, “… the yearly revenues at the course have increased from about $800,000 ten years ago to over $2,000,000 in 2024. This means that golf course expenses are paid by the golf course, not the taxpayers, and excess monies are available for the city general fund.”

The golf course has increased their revenue as stated and the golf course does transfer money to the city’s general fund. But what the writer fails to tell you is how much the general fund (you the tax payer) has contributed to keep the golf course afloat.

Even as the golf course is meeting expenses for its day to day operations and returning a significant amount of revenue to the general fund, it doesn’t cover the millions of dollars already spent on course improvements or the future costs as anticipated in the city’s capital improvement plan.

In fact the city’s finance director has stated on a number of occasions the general fund will be responsible for a significant portion of the costs for a new clubhouse. Even if the clubhouse costs ‘only’ eight million dollars, the bond payments over 20 years without interest will be $400,000 a year. The $120,698 the golf course transferred to the general fund in 2024 and the golf course reserve fund, still leave a gap between golf course expenses and revenue.

And the kicker, the writer states, “Did you know that the current clubhouse is over 60 years old, not up to code, and has ongoing maintenance issues?”

Also true, but they left out that the clubhouse had a major renovation around 1990. Approximately thirty five years not sixty. They left out why the clubhouse has not been maintained. A combination of a lack of funds (in the past) and demolition by neglect. And it is important to remember the renovation intentionally did not winterize the clubhouse.

This may come as a surprise, but I do believe there is no other option than to rebuild the clubhouse. But…The golf course committees and the administration have a responsibility to tell you the whole story, not just the parts that fit their narrative. They have a responsibility to rebuild a facility that not only meets the needs of those using it but can be sustained by those using it, while funding all the costs associated with the golf course.

And they had a responsibility when discussions behind closed doors began around 2019, when a member of the city council approached the NH Golf Association about being a tenant in a new clubhouse, to inform you of those discussions, sooner rather than later.

In the future when a mayor appoints residents to city committees let’s hope they will select those who are wiling to take the time to at least do a minimal amount of homework before writing an article that misleads you.