Commissioners Present: Anne O’Connell (Chair), Andrea Johnson (Vice-Chair), Carl Blanchard, John Kissida, Jeff Odell, David Valcourt, Wyn Morton and David Whitney
Others Present: Jay Packett, Director of Operations, Colin Walsh, Golf Course Superintendent, Peter Lombardi, Town Administrator, Mimi Bernardo, Town Accountant, Rob Harris (CCMGA), Donna Potts (9-Hole Women’s Assn.), Sarah Robinson (18-Hole Women’s Assn.) and Bill Meehan (Finance Committee Liaison).
THIS MEETING WAS HELD REMOTELY WITH AUDIO AND VIDEO RECORDED. The meeting may be viewed at: http://video.brewster-ma.gov/CablecastPublicSite/show/5320?channel=1
Anne O’Connell called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm after reading remote meeting guidelines and procedures.
Public Comment:
Course Operations Questions and Concerns:
Review and discuss draft NGF Consultant Study (Peter Lombardi/Mimi Bernardo; Jay Packett; Golf Commission):
- The meeting was turned over to Peter Lombardi, assisted by Mimi Bernardo, to address the context of the request for a report for which this report was started. Peter Lombardi explained this has been an important issue for several years and was precipitated by the State Department of Revenue when they did their full analysis of the Town’s over-all financial management. They delivered a report in June of 2019 and as part of that analysis their recommendation was that it made the most sense to transition to a full traditional enterprise fund accounting. The Golf Department operates under a special revenue fund; that statute reads that upcoming budgets and those expenses are technically to be funded either with reserves or revenues from the prior year. He then explained the concept of the enterprise fund where revenues are matched from a given fiscal year to cover expenditures associated with that fiscal year. The recommendations to transition to a traditional enterprise fund were directed to both the Water Department and the Golf Department. The finance team worked with the Water Department and it is formally an enterprise fund for Fiscal 21. Relative to the NGF report and analysis, the concept of the enterprise fund accounting is intended to make sure those services pay for themselves; if there are extenuating circumstances the general fund is not precluded from providing subsidies in a given fiscal year to cover an anticipated deficit. An RFQ was issued, and the National Golf Foundation was selected as the preferred vendor for this project, and they have been working on it ever since.
Questions and comments from Associations and liaisons:
- Discussion followed as to how various projects would be funded. In answer to Anne O’Connell’s question, Peter Lombardi said the Special Revenue Account is not in compliance with the law in place. It is not appropriate for golf finances. Mimi Bernardo concurred.
- Jay Packett discussed the recommendations from the NGF regarding the physical plant and customer service. Tee time allocation in the report was not accurate. The merchandising program was not presented accurately. The pricing structure needs to be reviewed. The point-of-sale system was reviewed; some features of the Chelsea System are not applicable to The Captains and will be reviewed. Marketing has been expanded with new information available. Thanks to Wyn Morton the website has been updated. Advertising has been ramped up over the past few months. Marketing needs to focus on young adults in order to regain them, with a young adult membership possibly beginning next year. Local rental and real estate companies will be supplied with brochures to use in their marketing plans. The report made good points regarding teaching programs. Some of the clinics were cut back because of the loss of a third golf professional. Steve Knowles is very active with Nauset Community Education doing two programs each season. The junior golf school will continue to move forward. Conditions at the golf course were discussed. Annual and daily fees were reviewed; member costs per round are low in certain instances. Revenue per round is higher than average. The town does not charge for various services. Wages are slightly higher than standard and will be reviewed with Colin Walsh. Capital projects were discussed, the most important should be addressed first. The nautical theme of the golf course needs to be visually enhanced. The clubhouse roof needs to be replaced. Jay Packett thought it was a great report and looks forward to making The Captains the best course.
- Colin Walsh said his time with Tim Gerrish was very informative; the report suggested a lease program for equipment and should be investigated. Features of the golf course were reviewed. The maintenance building needs to be made safer for the employees and brought closer to OSHA recommendations.
- Andrea Johnson didn’t think the NFG was very clear with tee time allocation and visitor rounds and would like to see more information and questioned which part of the POS system needs more technology.
- Carl Blanchard would like to see prioritization of the capital projects for a 5-year plan. Anne O’Connell remembers seeing list of priorities and will search for the list and distribute it to all.
- Dave Valcourt said there were some excellent recommendations by fiscal year, but he would like to see a list of priorities; there was an absence of the mention of discussions of the solar projects and its effects on The Captains financial projections and golf operations; the Commission specifically requested that the National Golf Study address its requirements to develop a strategy to reach out to the town’s non-golfer population and to create awareness of a full suite of benefits that The Captains brings to Brewster. This should include factual financial advantages such as no cost to taxpayers, self-sustaining, etc. as well as other major projects in Brewster’s efforts to minimize the use of nitrogen and other contaminates and to tell other good news stories about what Brewster does for the non-golfing taxpayers that live in Brewster. The golf study provides several specific capital equipment purchases over five year FYs periods and although this is useful information, he would request they give their assessment of what the specific requirements should be for the numbers and types of equipment for an 18-hole and a 36-hole facility, i.e. how many mowers, how many sprayers must be maintained at Captains, and are there new and potentially emerging technologies or equipment that could provide Captains multi-functional pieces of equipment that might create efficiencies during the operation of maintenance. He said they told us what we should be replacing for people and staff but not for equipment. Regarding irrigation and maintenance facility mitigations, he would like any information that they could share with us to help us see and understand the timing of the decision points. It appears in conversation with Colin Walsh that irrigation renovations are going to require at least a 2-plus year time lead so we can be aware of that and not just look at the fiscal years when we spend the money, but when we need to make the decision to spend the money in order to get on the docket of the providers and get in the ques so we’ve got that reserve time. Captains enjoys the support of the Friends of Captains which the golf study does not recognize or provide any recommendations as to how other municipal facilities may have leveraged the kind of support that the Friends of Captains brings and share ideas with us for other ways to take care of business other than just spending money gotten through our yearly income. Re references to professional and trained staff, does the NGF have any best practice examples or training and certification programs that should be considered for staff and folks that work on the golf course?
- Jeff Odell noted incorrect recognition when referred to as the Lakewood Courses. He was encouraged by the endorsement of the financial performance as The Captains is not the typical municipal course that’s bound to fail, and as a resort course there is a different revenue picture than the national look of municipals. Regarding first impression issues coupled with retaining the golf population that emerged during COVID and may be looking for a home course, how do we take their improvement recommendations and tie that together with golf traffic for financial purposes? Over the years, we’ve done our financial analysis compared to other municipal courses on the cape and have come out on top which is verified by their report. The other point is golfers playing 53% of the rounds for 37% of the per round revenue playing at a 47% discount underscores the need to look at a biannual membership rate adjustment in order to maintain the financial position to support the capital improvements referred to. The other point is the reference that unlike typical municipal enterprise accounts, golf accounts have the outside market competition to contend with. The public cannot be forced to play more golf. Recommendations and financial projections must be looked at from a self-supporting plan. How do we cover these necessary improvements?
- John Kissida agreed with Jeff Odell regarding the funding sources and would like to know what the outside funding mechanisms are or have some recommendations and would like to see some examples. There are a number of courses outside of Massachusetts that use CPA monies. It would be nice to know where that has been used to see if some of that money could possibly be used to offset costs, especially since recreation is being provided to all, especially seniors. The 5-year projection seemed out of sync on irrigation that it pushed it so far forward. If you look at the appendix it shows basic irrigation systems going up to thirty years before they need replacement, but the report talks about twenty-five. This changes the dynamics of costs and where things can be prioritized if pushed within that twenty-five years. We have not yet gotten the final on the irrigation study, but it basically says the system is in good condition and could be pushed out a greater time period before looking at replacement. It also stated or the discussion was made that the best way to approach this would be to do a whole 36 so there’s no problem with two golf courses that have ten and eight holes on two different courses that don’t have irrigation systems that match one another. He would also like to see more relative to that, He likes the idea of improvements to the starter shack and the first tee area and would also like to see improvements at the tenth tees since people are sent off the back tees as well. He and Colin Walsh had a meeting regarding the first tees before the report was issued relative to things that might be done immediately to make it better including some pruning so people can see the first tees from the patio. The curb appeal on the other side of the clubhouse needs to be looked at. There is a bag storage in bad condition and landscape that hasn’t been maintained in a while that needs to be done to improve sight lines as you come in the driveway. They mentioned no on-course restrooms but that was not in the budget. It was interesting that the range revenue is lower, but it is because it is remote. The question is there anything that can be done to encourage people to use the range, especially visitors when they’re coming to the course. He would like to see a different look if the irrigation is pushed out further instead of the few years that he, Colin Walsh and Andrea Johnson were talking about with the consultant. What does looking at three, five, seven years out vs. 2025-2026 as a starting date and doing a bigger package do to the over-all finances? They gave numbers for the new forward tees which are needed and are required, but they didn’t say which ones should be the priorities and gave two different numbers of $4,000 on one course and $4,500 on the other course. They will not all be done at once, and it will be interesting to see where they think the best locations for the forward tees should be first. He is assuming that includes irrigation improvements that would be retrofitted. If the irrigation is to be done, how do you do that with 8 Port if you’re going to do a major reconstruction in that time period when it depends on which course the irrigation system falls on and how those improvements would be made? They talked about bunker reduction, but they didn’t say where. It would be interesting to get their recommendations specifically as to where they see the problems. He has been looking at the cart paths and knows where the problems are on those. They also didn’t talk much in detail about signage; there is a problem with signage, and he would like to know what they are recommending.
- Wyn Morton said under the heading of marketing efforts, they didn’t mention at all the internet marketing strategy referred in the internet marketing business as “branding” which has been being done for five years. He doesn’t know if they are aware of this concept but it’s one of our primary marketing avenues and he would like them to acknowledge if they are aware of this strategy and if they have any comment going forward, i.e. should it be continued or tweaked, and if so, in what way? Another thing missing was a statement looking 5 to 10 years down the road when the course is forty to fifty years old as to what their thoughts are to consider a remodel or redesign of the course. You hear of other courses where a different architect comes in, refurbishes things, the look of the course and so on after decades of use. He wanted a statement to that effect which he did not see.
- Anne O’Connell reiterated Andrea Johnson’s comments about tee time allocation and thinks
we need our conceptual process to be addressed—that’s where the push is coming from the members–and input as to whether that formula makes sense would be very helpful for a discussion that will be held. They did not mention at all (reading from the RFQ) “analysis of 9-hole play opportunities as it relates to generating additional revenue.”. 9-hole play was not mentioned at all that she found. She spoke of a section in the league section that says that league play represents a key source of late afternoon weekday rounds. Clearly, they don’t understand what is going on with the leagues. Jay Packett said he caught that when reading the report. Jeff Odell said he has seen that in other studies they have done. They are referring to the “Mom and Pop” golf course that has industrial leagues that play 9 holes after work as a key source of revenue for the typical municipal course and is probably just a cut-and-paste comment that stayed in the report–maybe that applies to the Lakewood Courses but not to The Captains.
- There are several welcome guests and Anne O’Connell will take comments from anyone who will raise their hand. Bill Meehan commented he read the report and did notice a couple of inaccuracies, some of which are minor, such as referring to the location as the east end of Cape Cod and correcting it to the east end of Brewster. They refer to the number of possible golfers in this market without defining this market. The two areas he would most focus on is their remarks as to running golf as an enterprise account; the report is inaccurate in this respect. The work of the commission taking this draft and moving forward should focus on the capital recommendations. Anne O’Connell asked those who had comments to forward them to Jay Packett so he can put them together and get back to the NGF. She asked Peter Lombardi where the Selectboard fits into this.
- Peter Lombardi had a few follow-up questions and comments. The indirects are based off a methodology that came from an analysis done on the Water Department rate study six years ago and thinks these indirects need to be revisited to make sure they are accurate and that they capture the costs that are there. Methodology is consistently being applied. The second is relative to wages and how competitive we are in the market, not that our salary ranges aren’t in sync with the market, but it’s the fact that we have a lot of veteran employees that have been there for a long time and are at the top of their pay grades so that may impact how they compare in terms of the market. All the Golf Department employees are included in the town’s compensation and classification study which is ongoing. Results are expected in the next few months. Public course and private course data have been included recognizing the market isn’t entirely driven just by public municipal courses. More information will be forthcoming in terms of compensation for our employees. Regarding the costing on the maintenance building just a reminder that prevailing wage needs to be accounted for when looking at the maintenance project which may be the reason the number came in as low as it did. Estimates for other capital projects seem to be in line. Referring to John Kissida’s referral to other funding sources and potentially seeking CPA funds for some of Captains’ capital projects, Peter Lombardi discussed the possibility of that being another financing mechanism which needs to be known sooner rather than later, making sure it is vetted on the town’s behalf as it will have an impact on a lot of other projects on the horizon. As to Anne O’Connell’s question about where the Selectboard fits in, he said that once there is a final report from NGF based on all the feedback provided to them by the commission that would be the time that would be appropriate for a meeting with the Selectboard, the Golf Commission with the NGF there to present and answer questions, possibly using a power point presentation. Jay Packett will put together a document to be sent to the NGF and asked that input from the Commission be made available to him by the end of the weekend. Anne O’Connell indicated suggestions are welcome and asked about financials in the short and long terms. Peter Lombardi discussed funding and asking the NGF to include this in their final work product. He also discussed financials going forward. Mimi Bernardo discussed the most recent and anticipated financials depending on the economy. Bill Meehan discussed financial goals. John Kissida suggested asking the NGF for typical retained earnings. Carl Blanchard questioned the 5-year proposal and suggested asking for a 10-year plan. Peter Lombardi (reading from the RFQ) said a 10-year plan was requested and believes the NGF is using the past year as a baseline and projecting forward which could be a problem. Discussion followed regarding past and future years’ financials. John Kissida asked Jay Packett for an update on the latest anticipated schedule for the solar project at the range and when there will be access for play, since there was no one there last Friday and the golf course is losing revenue. The project manager reports access will be very soon. They weren’t there Friday because they were waiting for the electricians on Monday and couldn’t do anything because of other ongoing construction. Wyn Morton sent out a request to the commissioners for a biography and selfie for the website to be sent to Jay Packett. Colin Walsh likes the look of the website and announced Dwight Wiggin is retiring after 31 years of service to The Captains. Jay Packett gave kudos to Dwight Wiggin and wishes him well. He’s leaving April 23.
Topics the Chair did not reasonably anticipate:
None.
Future agenda items and meetings:
April 13 – regular business meeting.
Discussion of progress on the NGF report.
Plans for the meeting on April 27
A motion was made by John Kissida, seconded by Andrea Johnson to adjourn the meeting. Motion passed unanimously.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dorothy Vesperman
Department Assistant