Council debates golf course RFPs at PC meet

Two persons gave comment during a public hearing on amending a golf course commission ordinance up for adoption at Wednesday’s St. Mary Parish Council session.
Councilman Glenn Hidalgo offered amendment last month, which sought to transfer authority of receiving and authorizing requests for proposals (RFP) from the Atchafalaya Golf Course Commission to the parish council.
Within the last few months, the commission had sought RFPs but did not approve any of those submitted, prompting Hidalgo and other members to question if the commission was acting in the best interest of the parish.
Jerry Adams, of Patterson, first addressed the council during the public hearing. He is a member of the commission, but he urged the council to support Hidalgo’s move. “We have been losing money ever since we have been open… (have) cut the expenses down to the bare bones, and it’s hard to maintain a quality golf course…it’s like a downward spiral.”
Adams said the parish sent out a 57-page RFP when he believed an 11-page document would have attracted more submissions.
“Then you asked the same commission, that would not vote for sending out the RFP, to review those proposals,” Adams said. He said letters were sent asking if fees were negotiable and if they’d work on a performance basis, as well as meet personally with the commission. All agreed, and Adams said two reduced their fees in the response.
“I strongly suggest you consider that when you vote on the ordinance,” he concluded.
Terry Guarisco, Morgan City, said though he’s expressed opinions on the golf course in the past and “it seems like you just get blown off…you were elected by the residents of the parish to operate whatever the parish operates. The commission was not elected, y’all were elected. There’s no reason why y’all should be knuckling under to the commission. They should have no authority over anything y’all do. If you don’t like what they do, you put them off (the commission). They can’t just do what they want to do.”
Guarisco asked, “Why can’t you find some company to take, not rent it from you, take it over. Lease it to them a dollar a year. If they make money, good, if they don’t, that’s their problem. After a certain percentage of profit, the parish gets a percentage. You’re automatically saving a quarter million dollars a year.”
He added that “if someone else is running it, all of the gas and oil excuses and stuff, that doesn’t change. It’s still the same economic impact. Y’all need to be in control, and from what I’m reading here, you’re not. You need to change this situation…if you don’t play golf (as a taxpayer) you don’t do anything. You can go to the restaurant, but that’s different. It’s a lot of money for a select group of people to use.”
During the regular parish council session, Hidalgo said “the council is not looking to take over the golf course…it’s looking to hire a company.”
Hidalgo said the ordinance only addressed management companies and RFPs. “I think it would be in the best interests of the taxpayers for us to talk to these companies,” he said.
“So what we’re doing is micromanaging this board,” Councilman Dale Rogers noted.
Councilman J Ina asked if the commission has “done everything they could possibly do to rectify the situation at that course?” He said he’s talked to some members and they felt they’ve been working hard to solve the problems.
Hidalgo said, “That’s the whole point. They’ve done what they can do. But these (companies) do this for a living. That’s their job, to run golf courses and make them work. We got seven people in a part time position, and it’s not working, and it hasn’t worked in 14 years. Right now it’s on track to lose more money than last year.”
Rogers said he understood that the parish is outlaying money to cover the losses every year, but he said the course’s economic impact is difficult to measure in terms of lodging, fuel and the like. “I just don’t like taking over a board and micromanaging it,” he said.
Councilman Craig Mathews said other agencies, such as hospital service districts, that engage in management contracts that “have had undesirable outcomes over the years” but the boards of commissioners are still intact and have authority. “This is not an arrangement that is unheard of.”
Councilman Gabriel Beadle said that if passed, the ordinance would basically have the commission doing nothing. He said parish services such as boat launches and recreation facilities are open because “there’s funding for it. None of these make money for the parish except that” they are used by citizens to pay fees for use.
“So to say only people who play golf use the golf course, but let’s leave the restaurant open…I think that’s the wrong point of view,” he said. “We’ve done our due diligence, we asked them to look at RFPs, said we don’t want them. Couldn’t get a second to look at them. So who are we to say these people are wrong and you don’t know what you’re talking about?”
Mathews disagreed, saying that the golf course commission would still have authorities to exercise, just as other boards and commissions do. “But at the end of the day those commissioners still have the authority to manage that operation,” he said.
Ina said if the commission is not doing what some parish council members wish, and are forced to, it may spread to other panels.
“This is the first time we’ve disagreed with a board that we appoint,” Council Chairman Kevin Voisin said. “We selected, and we voted on, and didn’t like the way they took up business and so we’re going to take control over, take that out. In my opinion you hire a management company they’re going to take over everything. That board is going to be pretty much useless.”
Mathews objected, saying he never said the commission was not doing its job, but reminded Voisin that the commission itself admitted it has done all it can to make the course viable.
Councilman Ken Singleton said the commission has done its job “again and again” and cited an issue with cart batteries and found incorrect units, which were replaced by the manufacturer, saving the commission $50,000. “So they are continuing to do the job,” he said.
Hidalgo’s ordinance failed with Ina, Rogers, Kenneth Singleton, James Bennett, Sterling Fryou, Paul Naquin, Beadle, Voisin against. In favor were Mathews and Hidalgo. Patrick Hebert was absent.
There was also a lengthy debate over RFP’s for audit services, with some council members in favor of seeking the best fee quote, and others in favor of keeping things as they are. A resolution to rescind a previous action by the council to request RFPs was rescinded with Bennett, Beadle, Hidalgo, Singleton voting no; in favor were Fryou, Naquin, Voisin, Mathews, Rogers, Ina, with Hebert absent.