---
To: Mayor and Council
Copy: Town Manager
The three undersigned individuals are all residents of Oro Valley. We each have an idea on how the golf course dilemma should be resolved. One is an ex-Councilman who voted against the purchase of the property, the other is the current President of the Men’s Golf Association, and the third is an extremely interested and involved officer in a local HOA. We have set aside our biases in order to provide this communication to you.
We understand that you are the decision makers of Oro Valley. We believe that you cannot make a responsible decision until the following questions have been thoroughly investigated and answered without political bias or agenda.
Please consider the following questions:
1. What is the vision for the future of the golf courses?
2. What objective(s) are you attempting to achieve with the subject decision? For example: Minimize the tax subsidy? Protect property values? Maximize public access?
3. What quantitative and qualitative metrics (payroll, utility/water costs, maintenance, green space acreage, space and time allocated for public use, etc.) are going to be evaluated and who are the subject matter experts that will quantify the metrics?
4. Explicitly describe the “community outreach process” you believe necessary to be implemented prior to making a decision regarding the future of the golf courses.
5. What is the amount of acreage that will be repurposed as part of each of the golf configurations described in the Town Manager’s May 24, 2019, Memorandum to the Mayor and Council? (Attached) Please add an additional option that was not mentioned in the attached Memorandum, that being to convert to the original 18-hole configuration.
6. What would be the cost per acre for the repurposing acreage of the golf configurations described in question 5 above, and what authority was used to determine such cost?
7. Would any of the repurposed acreage in each of the above configurations (to include the original 18 configuration) be repurposed to green space and, if so, how much acreage would be involved and at what level as described in page 9 of the attached Memorandum?
8. How long would completion of the repurposing process take for any acreage involved in the above configurations, and how was that timeline determined, and by what authority?
9. What level of tax support would be required for each of the above configurations, including the costs for repurposing acreage, and the five-year costs for maintenance for the repurposed acreage associated with those configurations that include repurposing?
10. What is the revenue reduction to the Water Utility for reclaimed water currently paid by the golf operation that would result from each of the subject reconfigurations? OR – What is the true cost of providing reclaimed water to the golf courses under the current configuration, and how is this cost modified by each of the proposed configurations?
11. How was the estimated revenue reduction in the Water Utility that is described above determined?
12. In what manner would any revenue reduction described above be addressed by the Water Utility if a golf configuration resulting in such a revenue reduction were adapted?
13. If a golf configuration is adopted that requires the repurposing of acreage in a manner that would impact existing, or establish new washes, what would the provisions of the Federal Clean Water Act have on such work, and what steps are in place to address such impacts, if they exist?
14. What discussions have taken place, or are currently taking place, to involve HSL and the Pusch Ridge HOA in the potential of those entities taking on the responsibility of the 9-hole Pusch Ridge course?
15. What, if any, actions have taken place by Town officials to investigate the possibility of leasing the Town owned golf courses?
16. What, if any, consideration have Town officials given to the possibility of entering into a Private/Public partnership regarding the operation of the Town’s golf courses?
17. Has the Town prepared itself for the numerous lawsuits that will likely be filed if property values are adversely affected by any decision made with respect to the golf courses?
18. What specific actions has the Town considered to grow revenue (raise member dues, green fees, HOA assessment) and reduce payroll and irrigation (turf reduction) costs?
19. Will the Community Center Fund, with its sales tax revenues, be able to cover any additional debt service which might be needed?
20. Does the Town of Oro Valley have a fiduciary responsibility to the property owners on or near the golf courses?
21. Does the town know the assessed impact of lost business and tax revenue from visitors if the golf courses were to be shut down or change significantly?
22. Have Town Officials that may have personal interest in the outcome other than official business recused themselves from any deliberations or decisions?
We sincerely hope that you will seriously address each of the issues presented so that the decision that you ultimately make is truly in the best interest of the entire Oro Valley community.
Respectfully,
Rob Wanczyk
Michael Schoeppach
Mike Zinkin
