Bid Selection Task Force
March 20, 2006
Chapman, Carolyn Chrone, Beverly Rhyan, Margaret
Hanson
Also present: Ann Dodson, Jim Romaine, Frank Miller and members of the Finance Committee
An overview of the task force’s responsibilities and timeline was presented. It described the sequence of events that will be included in the selection process. Among these are the distribution of a survey to get input from SCT golfers, development of specifications to be included in the Request for Proposal (RFP) and transition of golf operations to the company selected. Issues related to transition to outside management were discussed including the need for the management company to provide details of their operating policies and the requirement for the company to submit to the Community Association Board an annual operating expense plan.
A summary of utility charges for the White Wing and Legacy Hills clubhouses for 2005 was presented. Monthly electric charges, by meter, were reviewed. Currently the CA allocates 50% of the utility charges to golf and 50% to the restaurants which share the facilities. The meter at Legacy Hills includes both golf and restaurant usage. The cart barn at Legacy Hills is very similar in usage to the one at White Wing. Both include an ice machine and a ball washer as well as chargers for golf carts. The cart barn at White Wing is on a separate meter and can be used to determine the actual electrical usage by the golf operation. Based on the usage at White Wing, it was estimated that the actual cost for electricity related to the cart barns is significantly less than the 50% allocated in the CA budget. The Finance Committee agreed to review the information presented and the request for reallocation of utility fees at their meeting on Tuesday, March 21.
Some specific costs that will be outside the golf operations budget were discussed. These included the cutting of Level 3 areas and maintenance of the waterscapes on holes 9 and 10 on Legacy Hills. It was suggested that the management company selected could maintain these areas for an additional fee or the maintenance could be outsourced to another company.
The Finance Committee asked whether there might be a cost of transition to outside management and requested that, if so, this be identified separately in the proposal submitted by the bidders. The type of contract (fixed fee vs cost plus fee with incentives) was discussed briefly. Some Finance Committee members expressed a preference for a fixed fee contract.
Dennis presented an outline of how revenues and expenses would be managed. All revenue (member fees, etc) will be collected by the CA. Revenues collected through the pro shops (daily play fees, etc) will be deposited daily in the CA account. All expenses related to the leases, utilities, etc will be paid by the CA. The management company will be responsible for their payroll expenses. It was requested that revenues from the golf operations be placed in a separate fund and that interest accrued be credited to golf operations rather than to the general CA fund. Ms. Dodson indicated that this practice had been instituted in 2005.
The Golf Reserve Fund was discussed. This is funded based on the Reserve Study completed a few years ago. The Reserve Fund is intended to cover expenses over and above routine operational costs. Currently the fund does not include a provision for replacing the greens at Legacy Hills. Funds are deposited to the Reserve Fund account as needed.
It was agreed that any policy issues that arise in the development of the RFP or in contract negations with the selected provider will be not be decided by the Task Force but will be referred to the CA or Golf Committee.
The draft RFP was discussed with minor revisions suggested. It was agreed that specific information about current personnel requirements should not be included in the RFP. Also, there was a discussion of the type of contract (fixed fee vs cost plus) that should be sought. Members of the Task Force disagreed on this issue with some favoring a fixed fee contract and other advocating a cost plus approach. A meeting has been scheduled for Wednesday, March 22 to discuss the RFP in detail and to finalize the RPF for submission to the CA Board.