In response to a request for opinion by Delegate Ben Kramer (D-19), the office of Maryland’s Attorney General has found that a provision in the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission’s (M-NCPPC) lease with the Montgomery County Revenue Authority (MCRA) covering Sligo Creek Golf Course that permits the course to be shut down on a consultant’s opinion is illegal. This strengthens the hand of the Sligo Creek Golf Association in their efforts to keep the course open.
In 2006, M-NCPPC signed a lease with MCRA placing its four golf courses under MCRA’s operations. The lease contained a provision allowing MCRA to send one of the golf courses back to M-NCPPC if a third party found the course to have an “adverse impact” on the entire public golf course system and forbidding M-NCPPC to operate the property as a golf course if it competed with other MCRA-operated courses. The Attorney General’s office found that particular provision to be illegal. While M-NCPPC has the legal authority to lease its courses, it does not have the legal authority to delegate the decision on whether to close one of its courses to any third party – including MCRA or any consultant. Following is the relevant language in the opinion from the Attorney General’s office:Under the Lease Agreement, if the Revenue Authority’s consultant determines that operation of a particular course is “adverse” to the golf system – a term not found in the statute and not defined in the Lease Agreement – and the Revenue Authority accepts that finding, the golf course is returned to M-NCPPC. If all that determination did was return the golf course to M-NCPPC’s direct control, there would be little issue under the nondelegation doctrine. However, once a park has been “extracted” from the lease and returned to M-NCPPC for that reason, the Lease Agreement purports to restrict M-NCPPC’s continued use of that park as a golf course for the remaining term of the lease, which could be as long as 40 years. M-NCPPC is barred from operating the park as a gold course even if, in M-NCPPC’s judgment, it is the most suitable use of the property.
The Attorney General office’s opinion strengthened the argument behind Delegate Kramer’s local bill prohibiting M-NCPPC from signing leases that contain provisions forbidding it from operating park properties as golf courses. That bill was heard by the Montgomery County Delegation yesterday. The bill ran into opposition because even though Kramer had the law on his side, his manner of presentation offended several delegation members.
The Lease Agreement thus effectively delegates a critical decision governing use of certain M-NCPPC parks, possibly for decades, to another agency – and, in a certain respect, to a private consultant hired by that agency – applying an undefined standard that may be at odds with the charge given to M-NCPPC in Article 28. In my view, M-NCPPC did not have authority to agree to a provision delegating its decision concerning the future use of a park that is extracted from its lease with the Revenue Authority. As a result, that provision is likely not enforceable by the Revenue Authority against M-NCPPC.
This is not to say that the M-NCPPC could not itself find the report of the Revenue Authority’s consultant persuasive, give credence to the Revenue Authority’s view that continued operation of a particular course is not viable, and come to the same conclusion. It could determine, for similar reasons, that Sligo Creek Golf Course should not continue to be operated as a golf course in its current form and that there are superior park uses of the property over the next 40 years. However, it is M-NCPPC, not the Revenue Authority or its consultant, that is charged by its statute with making the ultimate decision.
One person in the room commented, “Drama drama, as usual. Kramer is dislikable, and every word he said was losing votes. Then he accused Park & Planning of dishonesty. Not cool. More votes lost. Then he said anyone who votes against him doesn’t support honesty and transparency in government. More votes lost.” Delegates Kathleen Dumais (D-15) and Craig Rice (D-15) pushed to delay the bill. Delegates Luiz Simmons (D-17), Al Carr (D-18) and Ana Sol Gutierrez (D-18) pushed back in favor of the bill, with Delegate Jeff Waldstreicher (D-18) arguing that the Attorney General’s opinion clinched the case for the bill. Waldstreicher, Carr and Gutierrez represent the district that contains Sligo Creek Golf Course. Kramer’s bill won out by an 18-5 vote in the delegation, but not without a cost. One attendee fumed, “Delegate Kramer is arrogant and ineffective. Just because he says his bill is about whether you want transparency or don’t want transparency does not make it so. He has set up a false dichotomy to serve his own purposes. He may have won the battle today, but he also took one more step down the seemingly never-ending path of pissing off his colleagues.”
Because Kramer’s bill has passed the Montgomery Delegation, it has a good chance of passing through the General Assembly. But that does not decide the Battle of Sligo Creek Golf Course. All that will be decided is that MCRA cannot use its lease provisions to close Sligo. M-NCPCC could still decide to close Sligo on its own, and the County Council could decide not to subsidize it. Advocates for the course still have a lot of work to do.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Sligo Creek Golf Course Gets a Boost
Tuesday, March 09, 2010
Two Courses, Two Different Standards
By Woody Brosnan.
When is it worth $1.9 million to invest in a money-losing golf course?
Answer: When the golf course is near one of the wealthiest parts of Montgomery County.
The Montgomery County Revenue Authority, which tried to close Sligo Creek Golf Course because it said the down-county course was losing money, wants to spend $1.9 million in county golfers’ money on improvements to the Poolesville Golf Course in western Montgomery County.
Let’s compare the two-golf courses.
Poolesville is an 18-hole course on West Willard Road and is the westernmost county course. It is half-an-hour from one of the county’s most popular courses, Falls Road. In between the two courses are Potomac and North Potomac, where coincidentally or not, a majority of the Revenue Authority board members reside. Poolesville had 35,000 rounds of golf in fiscal year 2008 and 30,000 rounds in fiscal year 2009.
Sligo Creek is a 9-hole course on Sligo Creek Parkway and is the only county course below the Beltway. Sligo had about 30,000 rounds of golf in fiscal year 2008 and about 25,000 in fiscal year 2009. By comparison, the county’s most popular course, Needwood, had 71,000 rounds in FY2008 and 65,000 in FY2009. (All county golf courses lost rounds last year because of awful weather.)
Both Poolesville and Sligo struggle to break even when you consider just expenses and revenues, and both courses lose money, more than $160,000 apiece in FY2009, when you add in the management fee charged by the Revenue Authority in Rockville for the costs of its bureaucracy.
In recent years, the Revenue Authority has offered substantial discounts through online tee-time sites to try to lure golfers to Poolesville. And of course the Revenue Authority tried to close Sligo but was blocked when the County Council came up with $150,000 to subsidize Sligo this year.
The Revenue Authority has now proposed a six-year capital improvements program (CIP) that would spend about $10 million of its golf revenues on county golf courses. It includes $1.9 million for the Poolesville Golf Course to add a new food and beverage area to the golf shop building, demolish an old unused clubhouse, replace the irrigation system and build a new parking lot.
Now, $1.9 million is roughly what it would cost to build a new irrigation system and clubhouse for Sligo Creek Golf Course AND replace the bunkers and make some other fixes. The Revenue Authority has argued that it does not make sense to invest its money in Sligo because the course would never generate the revenues to cover the cost of the projects.
At last Thursday’s meeting of the Planning, Housing and Economic Development Committee, Council Member Marc Elrich effectively exposed the Revenue Authority’s double standard when he pointedly asked if the courses included in the CIP could cover the cost of the projects with revenues from those courses.
The Revenue Authority’s executive director, Keith Miller responded that the projects were not “revenue enhancements” but were designed to maintain the golf course system as a whole.
Elrich asked specifically whether Poolesville would generate enough revenues to cover the cost of the $1.9 million in capital improvements. Miller responded that the old clubhouse is unsafe and that the irrigation system has to be replaced to maintain the course.
Finally, when Elrich pressed Miller again, noting the difference between the argument now and what was said "about another course," Miller responded that Poolesville was the only county course in the western part of the county.
This is not to knock Miller, who is working with the Sligo Golf Course Golf Association to come up with ways to use volunteers and fund-raising efforts to keep Sligo going.
The Sligo Creek Golf Association and its representatives on the county’s Sligo Creek Golf Course did not ask to be included in this year’s CIP or for another subsidy. Instead, the task force recommended that the county explore the option of asking a private operator to take over Sligo. The Sligo Creek Golf Association also is planning its own fundraising efforts to invest in improvements at the course.
But we also agree with Miller. The county’s nine golf courses should be considered a system and it is important that every area of the county be served, including if necessary by using revenues from the most popular courses to make improvements at the less-utilized courses.
We have no wish to stop the improvements at Poolesville and the other courses. But we also believe that the County Council should make a decision about Sligo’s direction before it gives final approval to the Revenue Authority’s spending plan.
Woody Brosnan is the Chairman of political outreach for the Sligo Creek Golf Association.
Tuesday, November 03, 2009
Hard Hats and Small Politics in Rockville
What does the mock hard hat below have to do with the current relationship between Montgomery County Executive Ike Leggett and the County Council? Quite a bit, actually.
At last week’s unveiling of the new Silver Spring library, Executive Branch staff handed out the above hats calling for a pedestrian bridge between the Wayne Avenue parking garage and the library. (Just Up the Pike posted a picture showing the director of the library system holding one of the hats.) Leggett advocated for the bridge to enable greater accessibility for disabled people. The County Council voted down the bridge in July by 8-1, with George Leventhal dissenting, citing the bridge’s $750,000 cost and the fact that the library was ADA-compliant without it. There is no indication that the council will reverse that vote in the near future, if ever. But Leggett made a point of noting that the building’s design would accommodate the bridge and had the above hats passed out to make a point: namely, that he is right and the council is wrong. Advocates for the disabled, who favor the bridge, are no doubt applauding.
We express no opinion on the merits of the bridge, but this episode is part of an evolving pattern of the Executive’s budgetary conduct and his relations with the County Council. On the one hand, Ike Leggett is definitely running for a second term as a fiscal conservative. There is no question that he has moved to limit the growth of spending to match the county’s anemic revenues, as he is required to do by law. The FY 2010 operating budget recently passed by the County Council contains the first tax-supported budget cut since FY 1992. But Leggett also negotiated the most recent union contracts with MCGEO, the Fire Fighters and the Police that have been criticized by Council President Phil Andrews and others as unaffordable. And the council trimmed $20 million from Leggett’s charter-limit-breaking tax increase in 2008 at the behest of Andrews, Duchy Trachtenberg and Roger Berliner, all of whom believed “labor savings” were important at that early stage of the budget crisis.
At the same time that Leggett is preaching fiscal conservatism, he is supporting small but prominent spending items sometimes aimed at noisy constituencies. The Silver Spring library pedestrian bridge, which appeals to the disabled, is one example. Two others include the $150,000 appropriation for Sligo Creek Golf Course, which was approved by the council, and the new police helicopters, which will probably never get council approval. Leggett shows no sign of backing off on the bridge or the helicopters despite their massive unpopularity with the council. This is smart politics since small, highly motivated constituencies make for excellent field soldiers in an election. But some Council Members will see this as little more than posturing that is inconsistent with the Executive’s attempts to acquire the high ground on the issue of fiscal prudence. It is the council, after all, that has the responsibility for deciding the ultimate fate of the budget.
And so when Ike Leggett’s people pass out “Build the Library Bridge” hats, they are poking eight Council Members in the eye over an issue that has already been decided. That has not escaped their notice. Leggett is still the Executive, and likely will still be the Executive after 2010, but his current politics of going small will only shrink his political capital with the council.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Council Approves $150,000 for Sligo Creek Golf Course
Following is the press release from the County Council.
From the office of Montgomery County Councilmember Valerie Ervin:
The Montgomery County Council today voted 7-2 to approve a $150,000 appropriation to keep Sligo Creek Golf Course in Silver Spring in operation until June 30, 2010—the end of the County’s Fiscal Year 2010. Without the special appropriation, the course was scheduled to close on Oct. 1. Councilmember Valerie Ervin, whose district includes Silver Spring, and other Councilmembers said that a task force the Council voted today to create will have to consider many options for the best long-term solution for the golf course’s future.
Neil H. Greenberger
Legislative Information Officer
Montgomery County Council
240-777-7939
Contact: 240-777-7970
Montgomery Council Approves Funds to Keep Open Sligo Creek Golf Course
Councilmember Ervin Fought for Funding to Keep Course Open Until June 30, 2010; Now Long-Term Solution is Needed
ROCKVILLE, Md., September 29, 2009 — The Montgomery County Council today voted 7-2 to approve a $150,000 appropriation to keep Sligo Creek Golf Course in Silver Spring in operation until June 30, 2010—the end of the County’s Fiscal Year 2010. Without the special appropriation, the course was scheduled to close on Oct. 1.
Sligo Creek Golf Course is a 65-acre, nine-hole golf course located inside the Beltway in Sligo Creek Park. The course has been in operation since 1927 and became the County's first public course in 1946. The vast majority of Sligo Creek Golf Course users are County residents and more than half are 50 and older. Beginning golfers and youth also utilize the course to learn the game of golf.
Councilmember Valerie Ervin, who represents Silver Spring, appreciates the support of her Council colleagues, but said there is more work to be done. "While I am ecstatic that we have saved the course today, we can't be in this same situation at the end of June," said Councilmember Ervin. "The Council is immediately going to convene its own task force to look at what will be necessary to preserve the golf course over the long-term."
In addition to Councilmember Ervin, voting for the special appropriation were Councilmembers Roger Berliner, Marc Elrich, Nancy Floreen, George Leventhal, Nancy Navarro and Duchy Trachtenberg. Council President Phil Andrews and Councilmember Mike Knapp voted against approving the funding.
Tuesday's agenda also included a resolution to establish a Sligo Creek Golf Course Task Force, which was sponsored by Councilmembers Ervin, Elrich, Floreen, Leventhal and Trachtenberg. The purpose of this group will be to implement a plan that will lead to the self-sustainability of Sligo Creek Golf Course. If the task force develops recommendations that are not self-sustaining, it must identify and justify ongoing costs to the County.
Several options have been discussed by Councilmembers on how to save the golf course, including Councilmember Ervin's recommendation to develop a public-private partnership with the Department of Veterans Affairs at the federal or state level and non-profit organizations that provide recreational opportunities. The goal would be to provide therapeutic golf to veterans returning home from Iraq and Afghanistan.
"Growing up in a military family, I know about the tremendous sacrifices soldiers and their families make each and every day," said Ervin. "Providing therapeutic golf for veterans in and around the Washington Metropolitan area at Sligo Creek Golf Course would be a small way to give back to those who have given so much and could maintain this treasured community recreational asset."
Councilmember Leventhal said he wants the task force to consider many options.
"I'm optimistic that the task force can bring a recommendation back to the Council that addresses the long-term financial viability of the golf course,” said Councilmember Leventhal. “My office has worked to produce a memo that details several long-term options and I hope that this document can serve as a starting point for the discussion on how we can keep Sligo Creek Golf Course open and self sustaining."
Councilmember Floreen said: “Because we are dealing with significant fiscal constraints, we must work together to find creative ways of making the golf course self-sustaining. I’m optimistic this group will be able to come up with thoughtful recommendations within the short timeframe.”
Councilmember Elrich said: “Since the threat of closing Sligo Creek Golf Course arose this spring, I have supported keeping golf on Sligo. I applaud the local community groups, neighbors and golf advocates who have fought to preserve this course. Now the hard work begins for us to find a workable solution that will keep this course alive and thriving for generations to come.”
Councilmember Ervin said the task force will work with community members to find the right long-term solution for the course.
"While we all recognize these are difficult economic times, I'm confident that members of this Council Task Force will think of innovative ways we can keep the course operational without unduly burdening taxpayers," said Councilmember Ervin. "I look forward to working with this group as they develop their recommendations. I also want to thank the Sligo Creek Golf Course association for all of their advocacy and support for saving the course."
The Sligo Creek Task Force must provide its initial report to the County Council on or before Jan. 19, 2010.
# # # #
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Sligo Creek Golf Association Says it Has the Votes
Following is the press release from the Sligo Creek Golf Association.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Sligo Creek Golf Association Comments on PHED Committee Vote
Following is the press release from the Sligo Creek Golf Association.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Why Do People Get Angry with Government? A Golfer’s Story
By Woody Brosnan.
The moment was surreal. I was being ordered to leave an open meeting of the board of the Montgomery County Revenue Authority so they could meet behind closed doors with their lawyer to discuss... the Open Meetings Law.
Why, I asked. “It’s in the state code,” the lawyer responded.
But upon reflection the action Tuesday was only the latest example of the disdain for the public that I have seen from two of Montgomery County’s most powerful agencies as I worked with others to try to save the Sligo Creek Golf Course.
Public officials who express alarm over the hostility and lack of civility at town hall meetings and health care forums might consider that this behavior may not be just a reflection of the impact of hyperbolic talk show hosts, but also is the result of the encounters of citizens with the agencies to which elected officials have entrusted so much power.
As a reporter for 35 years, I covered both elected bodies and regulatory agencies. I received an AP award in Tennessee for a series on how state regulatory agencies often became captive of the industries they regulated and stifled competition.
But I gained a new perspective this summer as an activist for Sligo Creek Golf Course in dealing with the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission and the Revenue Authority. (I won’t go into the entire history of the golf course so well documented in this blog’s series. These opinions are my own and not that of the Sligo Creek Golf Association.)
On May 26, parks staff members held a community event to gather opinions on the reuse of the golf course. They encountered more than 100 golfers, many of whom had only learned of plans to close the course the week before. After some boisterous discussion, the parks staff, to their credit, agreed to include a golf course option in their recommendations to the planning board.
In the next few weeks, I and other golfers and non-golfers submitted their ideas to the staff for how to combine golf with other purposes at Sligo Creek. We and the County Council operated in the belief that M-NCPPC would come back to the Council in December with golf and non-golf options.
Those hopes were dashed July 16 when the planning board met. Perhaps it was a signal of the evening to come when Chairman Royce Hanson and then-board member John Robinson dallied over dinner, keeping the standing-room only crowd waiting 15 minutes past the scheduled start time.
After hearing from more than 30 witnesses, the vast majority of whom favored golf, Hanson declared he did not want “our staff to waste their time” on the golf course option. Gee, don’t they work for us, not them, I thought.
Jean Cryor looked down from the dais, and in a mama-to-little-children voice, said she did “not want to raise our expectations.”
That night spawned the Sligo Creek Golf Association, a community of golfers, neighbors and environmentalists who were once strangers. Now 68 days, 1,000 yard signs, and 2,000 signatures on petitions later, we have hope.
The County Council has met with us individually and collectively, and we are hopeful they will find a way on Tuesday to keep the course open past Oct. 1 so we can work together on a long-term solution.
So maybe I was expecting a little more receptiveness when fellow SCGA board member Ted Power and I dropped by the Revenue Authority board meeting Tuesday morning.
The authority’s Executive Director, the oft-maligned Keith Miller, was courteous. The board was another story.
Chairman Stephen Edwards accused me of setting “pre-conditions” when I said that SCGA wanted to discuss many options at the course but could not support lights or night-time activities on the course. Another board member asked our opinion on the Revenue Authority’s original proposal for a two-decker, 72-stall, course destroying, and lighted driving range. My god, I thought, they still think they can peddle that old chestnut.
Perhaps they had not seen the “Keep Sligo Golf Open” signs.
Four out of the five board members live in Potomac or North Potomac, according to the most recent appointment announced by County Executive Ike Leggett. Nothing against Potomac, but is it the only repository of knowledge about revenue bonds in the county?
But the reception was no better from the Silver Spring, but not-near-Sligo member, Phillip Feliciano. When I talked about making the course more attractive and an environmental education by planting flowers and native plants, Feliciano sneered, “Why don’t you make it into a park?”
Feliciano went on to recommend that the county close and sell the Margaret Schweinhaut Senior Center on Forest Glen Road near the course and use the proceeds and part of the property to build a driving range and a putt-putt course.
When I suggested that Sligo needs to be marketed as a community course to inside-the-Beltway businesses and residents, I was told that that the Revenue Authority markets “the system,” not individual courses. (Not true, in my opinion. The authority expends a great deal of effort to try to market Little Bennett Golf Course, the biggest money-loser in the system.)
These are the folks that SCGA is expected to work with in the coming months if we can keep the course open. I expect we’ll manage with the help of the county executive and the council.
In contrast to the agencies, county elected officials have treated the Sligo Creek community with respect and openness, even when some have a different point of view.
But I have a couple of suggestions for the executive and the council members when they appoint or confirm the members of these powerful boards.
Don’t just look at their technical qualifications or political background.
Quiz them on their knowledge of the Open Meetings and Open Records laws and make them swear fealty to both.
And then write up some guidelines for how to deal with citizens and make them swear to follow those too.
Why are these suggestions important? Because in the final analysis these boards/commissions will continue to negatively impact the public's image of elected government to the citizens of Montgomery County.
Woody Brosnan is the Chairman of the Political Outreach Committee, Sligo Creek Golf Association.
Tuesday, September 08, 2009
Labor Day Pictures
Thanks to Barrie Carr, Senator Nancy King (D-39), Delegate Saqib Ali (D-39) and the Sligo Creek Golf Association for these pictures from the Kensington and Gaithersburg Labor Day Parades.
Kensington
U.S. Senator Ben Cardin
Attorney General Doug Gansler
County Executive Ike Leggett
County Council Member Nancy Floreen. Note how well-behaved her dog is!
County Council Member Marc Elrich. Note the sign: No Developer Influence!
State Senator Rich Madaleno (D-18), in blue, leads the District 18 Delegation.
Delegates Jeff Waldstreicher (left) and Al Carr (center), teammates in District 18.
These are only a few of the Al Carr supporters who showed up. Delegate Carr, a former Town Council Member in Kensington, had a strong turnout on his home turf.
The District 18 booth, swarming with more Carr fans.
Sligo Golf Course supporters made a strong showing.
Sligo golfers take over Connecticut Avenue.
Sligo Creek Golf Association President Karen Howland speaks with a Fox 5 reporter. Politicians beware!
Gaithersburg
Senator Nancy King (D-39) and friends wearing their colors.
Senator King was named "Distinguished Friend of Gaithersburg" this year even though her district borders, but does not include, the city. We hear that King is Gaithersburg's go-to person in Annapolis.
Delegate Saqib Ali and friends.
Monday, August 17, 2009
Sligo Creek Golf Association Proposes Plan to Save Course with No Taxpayer Subsidy
Following is the press release from the Sligo Creek Golf Association (SCGA).
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Kramer and Ficker, Together Again
Former District 4 County Council candidates Ben Kramer and Robin Ficker are re-united at a new venue: Sligo Creek Golf Course. But the course is outside District 4 and Kramer’s state legislative district. That has people talking.
In our history of the Battle of Sligo Creek Golf Course, the names Ben Kramer and Robin Ficker do not appear. That’s because neither of them were involved until very recently. Kramer is a Derwood resident who represents state legislative District 19 as a Delegate. Ficker is an East County resident (if you believe him) or a Boyds resident (if you believe his property tax records). Sligo lies in state legislative District 18 (represented by Senator Rich Madaleno and Delegates Ana Sol Gutierrez, Jeff Waldstreicher and Al Carr) and County Council District 5 (represented by Valerie Ervin). Kramer was defeated by Nancy Navarro in the Council District 4 special election primary and Ficker lost to her in the general. Both men are rumored to be running for council again. Kramer’s refusal to endorse Navarro against Republican Ficker has still not been forgotten by Democratic Party loyalists. The fact that the two of them are surfacing at Sligo fuels talk of their future ambitions.
Kramer has attended two recent meetings of the Sligo golfers to much praise. One Sligo supporter wrote on Facebook, “For a second week in a row, proponents of golf at Sligo owe great thanks to Delegate Ben Kramer. Having just written a letter to Valerie Ervin offering his support and assistance in protecting the golf course, Del. Kramer again showed up in person at the golf course snack bar for our regular Tuesday meeting (BTW, no meeting Tuesday the 11th). He spoke extemporaneously and passionately on the details of his argument against the MCRA’s rationale for closing the course.” Kramer claimed to have met with Council Member Duchy Trachtenberg, who according to the golfer “may well be sympathetic to our cause if you are persuasive.”
That would be an improvement. Your author made an appointment to meet with Council Member Trachtenberg to discuss the golf course on February 13, 2008. She canceled it due to bad weather and we were never able to get her office to set another appointment. In July 2009, Trachtenberg’s office wrote the email below containing numerous factual inaccuracies (such as the supposed takeover of the course by the Revenue Authority on October 1, which is the date the Revenue Authority is due to give it up). That email made Trachtenberg look really ill-informed in the community and the staffer who wrote it should be disciplined. If Kramer can educate Trachtenberg – who was the only Council Member to endorse his District 4 candidacy – on the basic facts of the issue, perhaps he can be of service.
Just an aside: do Kramer’s District 19 constituents know about all the time he has spent working on an issue inside District 18? What would they think if they did know?
Before the Sligo golfers get too excited over Kramer’s aid, they need to contemplate a few facts. Any politician can write a letter and show up at a meeting. If Kramer really wanted to be helpful, he could try to get a bond bill passed through the General Assembly paying for part of Sligo’s capital costs. Last year, Kramer was the lead sponsor on a bond bill securing $150,000 for the Olney Theatre Center for the Arts. If Kramer is such a passionate defender of Sligo, what is stopping him from getting a commitment from the House leadership for a bond bill of similar size for Sligo? The Olney bond bill matches the amount of public funding requested by County Executive Ike Leggett to keep Sligo open.
Of course, no such thing is going to happen. The state budget is a fenced-off disaster zone with little to no money available for any kind of bond bills, much less any financing golf courses. And Kramer, who ticked off the Governor and the General Assembly leadership by voting against the slots amendment, the slots authorization bill and the millionaire tax would not be first in line for money if any was available. In any event, Kramer’s deficient record on telling the truth creates ample grounds for skepticism of anything he says.
Why is Kramer suddenly active outside his council and legislative districts? Our sources see this as preparation for a coming at-large County Council run. The fact that the course is in the district of Council Member Valerie Ervin, the most active backer of victorious former Kramer opponent Nancy Navarro, makes his cross-border advocacy all the more interesting. This has nothing to do with golf and everything to do with politics.
Robin Ficker has also suddenly become active on Sligo. We admire his energy. Who else splits time between running for office, passing anti-tax amendments, crusading against Bethesda road stands and campaigning for public golf courses? Ficker is urging the Sligo golfers to hold a protest march down Forest Glen Road and is offering road signs (one of his specialties). When a course supporter warned his colleagues not to “get in bed with Robin Ficker,” Ficker replied, “Your heart holds hate for me.” If the golfers do take Ficker’s advice and hold a march, we hope they will avoid the Intersection of Death for their own safety.
All of the above distracts from one key fact: Valerie Ervin is doing a lot of work behind the scenes on Sligo. Her office is trying to arrange a partnership involving the Maryland Department of Veterans Affairs to save the course. Ervin is one of five freshman Council Members (the others being Trachtenberg, Navarro, Marc Elrich and Roger Berliner) who never voted to transfer Sligo to the Revenue Authority, an action that led to the current dispute. The freshmen had no role in causing Sligo’s problems, but together they can certainly fix them.
So Ben Kramer can write a letter a week and Robin Ficker can march to his heart’s content. In the tiny cubicles of the County Council building, the real work of preserving the course goes on.
Friday, August 07, 2009
Broad Coalition Launches Non-Profit to Save Sligo Creek Golf Course
Following is the press release from the new organization, which announces its website and its support for Council Member Valerie Ervin's proposal to preserve the course. Your author has rarely seen a new civic group get organized as quickly and as formally as this one.
Thursday, August 06, 2009
Ervin Makes New Proposal for Sligo Creek Golf Course
Following is a letter written by Council Member Valerie Ervin to the Maryland Department of Veterans Affairs. The Gazette reports that this approach has some support.
August 4, 2009
The Maryland Department of Veterans Affairs
Mr. James A. Adkins, Secretary
Mr. Wilbert Forbes, Deputy Secretary
The Jeffrey Building, 4th Floor
16 Francis Street
Annapolis, MD 21401
Secretary Adkins and Deputy Secretary Forbes:
I am writing to propose an innovative partnership between Montgomery County and the Maryland Department of Veterans Affairs focused on therapeutic golf for veterans at Sligo Creek Golf Course in Silver Spring, Maryland. This publicly owned, nine-hole golf course faces an uncertain future because of the fiscal constraints confronting Montgomery County. One option being considered by some county lawmakers would close the Sligo Creek Golf Course on October 1, 2009. Instead of losing this valuable community asset, I propose that the course begin to serve veterans, especially those who are returning home from Afghanistan and Iraq with injuries that can be ameliorated by golf.
As you may know, a similar model can be found in Washington at the American Lake Veterans Golf Course (www.alvetsgolfcourse.com), which is dedicated to providing, teaching and promoting the benefits of golf to veterans including those who are receiving medical care and outpatient veterans who have disabilities. The goal of creating a similar partnership in Montgomery County would be to provide a therapeutic environment where all golfers can enjoy the benefits of golf, such as exercise and relaxation, in a positive and accepting social environment.
At the American Lake Veterans Golf Course, hospital in-patients and their guests have first priority on the course. Persons in possession of a Veterans Universal Access Identification Card and their guests may also use the course. In addition, active duty and retired military with military identification cards and their guests may play on the course. Military hospital in-patients play at no cost, and golf clubs, balls, tees and carts are also provided free of charge. Authorized military personnel are required to pay green and cart fees. The course is open seven days a week, except during the holiday season. Tee times are not required and golfers play on a first-come, first-served basis.
It is my understanding that the American Lake Golf Course is operated and maintained by an all volunteer force consisting of grounds crews, maintenance personnel, operating staff and management personnel. This course is not supported by government funds and operating and capital costs are paid for with annual pass and daily green fee revenues. Friends of American Lake Veterans Golf Course, a 501 (c)(3) non-profit organization, also raises funds to support the course. For example, they are currently raising $5.5 million for a new rehabilitation center.
Sligo Creek Golf Course is the only publicly owned, nine-hole golf course inside the beltway, and it is located only five miles from the National Naval Medical Center and three miles from Walter Reed Army Medical Center. Also, many military families live in the Washington Metropolitan Area and could conveniently take advantage of this resource.
There is strong support for maintaining the Sligo Creek Golf Course in the neighboring community and among golfers throughout Montgomery County. Many residents have banded together to form a non-profit organization to help save the course, and more information can be found at www.savesligogolf.com.
Sligo Creek Golf Course serves an important community need and its closure would be detrimental to Montgomery County. Re-establishing another golf course inside the beltway would be nearly impossible and an extremely expensive task. Despite Montgomery County’s dire budget constraints this year, I believe that we cannot be short-sighted about preserving this important community resource over the long-term.
These trying economic times call on all of us to think creatively. When I saw the information about the American Lake View Golf Course, I knew this model is something I wanted to explore for Sligo Creek Golf Course. While public use and golf course access must be maintained, I know that by working together we can come up with a plan to make the course an even greater community resource.
On a personal note, I grew up in a military family. I know what soldiers and their families go through each and every day to serve our country. I think this proposed partnership is a small way that I can help to give something back to those who have given so much.
I would love the opportunity to take you and appropriate staff members on a tour of Sligo Creek Golf Course and to talk more about potential partnership opportunities. Please contact me at your earliest convenience, so that we can begin discussing what is possible for our soldiers and Montgomery County residents at the Sligo Creek Golf Course.
Sincerely,
Valerie Ervin
Montgomery County Councilmember, District 5
The Battle of Sligo Creek Golf Course, Part Four
The last myth of Sligo Creek Golf Course is a doozy and demonstrates a bit about how our county government functions.
Myth #3: Ike Leggett is the savior.
I first joined the Sligo battle in the summer of 2007. Several politicians have taken tangible actions to help the cause since then. Council Member Valerie Ervin obtained MCRA’s detailed financial records when they claimed they didn’t exist, protested when MCRA broke the Open Meetings Act and has devoted significant staff time to this issue. Council Members Ervin, Marc Elrich, George Leventhal and Nancy Floreen helped defeat MCRA’s expansion proposal. County Executive Ike Leggett recommended against the expansion in early 2008. But other than that, the County Executive was not much of a player in the debate for two years until he called for a $150,000 taxpayer subsidy last week.
Now here is what the mainstream media has never reported. Less than two weeks before Leggett’s announcement, his Assistant Chief Administrative Officer – the second-ranking member of Leggett’s management team – wrote the following email to a constituent stating that Sligo could not be saved:Dear Ms. [Name Withheld]:
So why did the County Executive’s office change course? Last month, Council Member Valerie Ervin directed the council staff to figure out how Sligo could remain open. The big question was how to finance it and the staff began working through the options. Leggett’s staff got wind of this, ran to the press and prematurely proposed tax dollars so that they could be hailed for “saving” Sligo.
I am responding on behalf of Mr. Leggett to your email questioning the Montgomery County Revenue Authority's proposed return of the Sligo Creek Golf Course to the Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission. I don't know if you have the historic background, so I am briefly recapping what led up the Revenue Authority, which operates under the direction of an independent Board, agreeing to assume the MNCPPC courses.
The arrangement arose out of Council budget deliberations about MNCPPC's budget. The MNCPPC golf system was structured to be paid for out of user revenues and not from the County's tax supported general fund. In fact, MNCPPC found that its system costs were not covered by user revenues and the general fund was subsidizing the MNCPPC golf system.
The Revenue Authority has its own successful system of public golf courses. These courses were being operated profitably and were not being subsidized by the County's general fund which is limited and covers many competing needs such as schools, roads, government facilities, etc. Councilmembers recognized this and that there was duplication with two separate public systems of golf and that efficiencies could be realized by combining the two together.
Thus, the Revenue Authority Board agreed, with the approval of the MNCPPC and the County Council, to take over and merge the MNCPPC golf courses into its golf course system and create a single system of public golf. The Revenue Authority assumed all of the debt that went with these golf courses as well. The Revenue Authority is not supported by tax funds. Because it was assuming MNCPPC's debt obligations for its golf courses, it needed to ensure that these courses did not become a financial drain that would impair the system of public golf.
The Revenue Authority found that the Sligo Creek Golf Course is not profitable. In an effort to make the Sligo Creek Golf Course profitable, the Revenue Authority proposed making changes to the golf course that would encourage greater family use of the facility including a driving range, rerouting the golf course to be played as a 3-hole, 6-hole or 9-hole course and to provide a modest miniature golf area. Over the past two years, the Revenue Authority worked with Community members trying to find a solution for the Sligo Creek golf course to enable it to achieve financially stable operations. Unfortunately the community process was unsuccessful in establishing a common ground and the Revenue Authority Board made the difficult decision to return the Sligo Creek course to the MNCPPC.
The County Council approved the lease amendment that will enable the course to continue to be operated by the Revenue Authority through the Fall of this year. The Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission is now considering park recreation uses for this property so the park will continue to be available to the community. For more information you may want to contact Park and Planning's Department of Parks at (301) 495-2500.
It is very unfortunate that a better solution could not be achieved. If you need more specific information about golf you may also wish to speak with Mr. Keith Miller, Executive Director of the Revenue Authority. He can be reached at (301) 762-9080.
Sincerely,
Diane Jones
Diane R. Schwartz Jones
Assistant Chief Administrative Officer
101 Monroe Street, 2nd Floor
Rockville, Maryland 20850
tel. 240.777.2561
I have written over 600 blog posts chronicling Maryland and Montgomery County politics. Rarely have I seen a more inexplicable political reversal. First, only days before calling for tax money for golf, Leggett warned of the need for furloughs. How will the public employees, not to mention the Lords of Annapolis, regard his cries of poverty on the budget now? (And let’s not forget the helicopters.) Second, at the time Leggett’s staff put out their announcement, they already knew of the opposition it would receive. Many in the council building believe that Leggett wants to look like Santa Claus while the nine Grinches are pelted with snowballs by the Sligo golfers. Third, the work of finding a way to keep the course open had already begun at the direction of Valerie Ervin. True public service involves quiet, relentless work behind the scenes. It does not always show up on newspapers or blogs, but that is how the heavy lifting gets done. Government by press release benefits no one.
It is time to end the Battle of Sligo Creek Golf Course once and for all. If Sligo is to remain a golf course, it can be returned to MCRA with no need for county tax money. If MCRA refuses to take it back, the County Council can turn down its capital budget requests and the General Assembly can reject all of its local bills. MCRA can not hold out for long against that kind of pressure. As for our increasingly scarce tax dollars, they are best used for protecting our schools, supporting public safety, building our infrastructure and maintaining the social services on which our most vulnerable residents depend.
Wednesday, August 05, 2009
The Battle of Sligo Creek Golf Course, Part Three
There are several misconceptions about the Battle of Sligo Creek Golf Course. Let’s deal with two big myths right now.
Myth #1: Sligo threatens the solvency of the Revenue Authority.
The Montgomery County Revenue Authority (MCRA) turned back Sligo, one of four courses it leased from Park and Planning, on the grounds that it was “adverse to the entire golf system.” Former County Council Member Steve Silverman, who oversaw the drafting of the lease between MCRA and Park and Planning, defined that term in his remarks on the day the council approved the lease:The threshold test is not that a particular course is losing money but that, in fact, it is the loss of monies in connection with one of the golf courses is adverse to the entire golf system which means in effect, it has the potential for taking the entire golf system. Under those circumstances, the tenant could take that Park golf course and return it to Park and Planning.
The consultant’s report that MCRA relied upon to turn back Sligo (starting on page 24 of this council briefing document) did show that Sligo was losing money. The report calculated Sligo’s net income (including depreciation) as $38,427 in FY 2006, -$100,697 in FY 2007 and -$168,358 in FY 2008. But the report also projected that MCRA’s nine-course system would earn positive net income even with Sligo in it of $187,203 in FY 2009, $255,178 in FY 2010, $322,914 in FY 2011, $390,210 in FY 2012 and $456,843 in FY 2013. The report knocked Sligo’s need for capital investment, but admitted, “Little Bennett does provide the most direct economic loss of any facility in the system.”
MCRA’s own consultant shows that the golf course system is solvent and will be consistently profitable even if Sligo continues to lose money. Little Bennett’s losses ($309,071 in FY 2007 and $326,462 in FY 2008) are double to triple Sligo’s losses and pose a greater problem to the system.
In any case, MCRA is not a private-sector business that should seek to maximize profit. Rather, it is a custodian of public assets. It is time for MCRA to remember its mission.
Myth #2: Sligo needs taxpayer subsidies to survive.
Some people are asking, “Why should we spend taxpayer money on golf?” The answer is that we don’t have to.
Advocates on all sides of the Sligo issue must understand that the county’s budget problems are real. The county is facing a $370 million deficit next year, the third tough year in a row. County employees gave up their cost of living adjustments this year and may have to do it again. The County Executive is recommending furloughs. The state budget is in terrible trouble and the Governor will be announcing more cuts before Labor Day. Some of those cuts may affect state aid to the counties. And the Gazette reports that a handoff of teacher pensions from the state to the counties, a proposal that would disproportionately devastate Montgomery County, is a real possibility.
The above constraints generate real questions of equity in allocating public funds. Golfers who do not patronize Sligo have legitimate reason to question why their tax dollars should be spent to support just one golf course while the others are expected to pay for themselves. Many people do not play golf and would prefer protecting their schools and public safety services. A gigantic coalition of minority groups fought against social services cuts last spring. Will they now support spending tax dollars for golf as the budget grows worse? Under these conditions, any politician who advocates re-initiating taxpayer subsidies for golf while at the same time cutting school, police and social spending risks getting called a limousine liberal in the next election.
But these problems are rendered moot if MCRA takes back Sligo. As we have shown above, their own report states that their entire system can continue to make money even if Sligo loses it. Given that fact, taxpayer support is unnecessary.
We’re not done yet. We’ll debunk Myth #3 in tomorrow’s conclusion.
Tuesday, August 04, 2009
The Battle of Sligo Creek Golf Course, Part Two
By the end of 2006, the Montgomery County Revenue Authority (MCRA) had leased four golf courses from Park and Planning to complement its existing system of five others. MCRA’s mission, given to it by the County Council, was to make sure that the four courses stopped losing money. MCRA Executive Director Keith Miller’s idea for doing that was simple: pick the course with the most marketing potential and expand it. But Miller, a Long Island native who had never before lived in Montgomery County, was not familiar with our political culture. And one of our culture’s cardinal rules is that MoCo residents demand input over what happens in our neighborhoods. When we don’t get it, we fight.
Within months of acquiring its new lease, MCRA and a hired consultant designed a plan to construct a $4.7 million expansion to Sligo Creek Golf Course that added a lighted driving range and at least one mini-golf facility. The course’s neighbors in the North Hills of Sligo Creek Civic Association found out about the plan through the newspaper. The community expressed growing skepticism about the project based on its traffic and noise impacts, the stormwater and other environmental consequences of building impervious surfaces near Sligo Creek and the shining of bright lights near neighboring homes. The project also occurred in the context of a new expansion by Holy Cross Hospital and the dangerous conditions at the nearby Georgia Avenue-Forest Glen Road intersection. Soon enough, the neighbors joined forces with activists in Friends of Sligo Creek to ask questions about what MCRA was doing with Sligo. That’s when I got involved.
First, we wanted to know how each of MCRA’s golf courses was doing financially. MCRA told us they did not publish individual golf course financial data, but Council Member Valerie Ervin’s office intervened and obtained it for us. Next, we wanted a traffic study illustrating how the project would impact the nearby roads – especially the infamous Georgia-Forest Glen intersection. When the study was completed in late 2007, it did not include Georgia-Forest Glen at all and calculated that the Colesville-Sligo Creek Parkway intersection would only have two additional car trips per hour during evening rush. But the consultant’s study predicted that Sligo’s revenue would rise from $516,869 in FY 2006 to $2,955,215 in Year Five after the expansion – a nearly six-fold increase. So revenues would multiply by six times with barely any increase in traffic. We didn’t believe that for a second.
In January 2008, MCRA held a public meeting to sell its expansion proposal to the community. More than 200 residents voiced their objections in a room containing several politicians and County Council staffers. We were not merely expressing our discontent with the features of the expansion (although MANY people did so). We also had researched MCRA’s finances and found out that while Sligo lost $100,696 in FY 2007, the golf system as a whole earned $1.565 million in operating income and $623,000 in net income. The real drains on MCRA’s finances were not Sligo, but were Little Bennett Golf Course (which lost $301,821) and the airpark (which lost $303,252). There was simply no need for the expansion project. The lease between Park and Planning and MCRA was working: the golf course system was solvent.
Undaunted by our opposition, MCRA asked the County Council to approve their expansion project. And so we met with the council one by one, starting with the Council Member who was there first: Valerie Ervin. By the spring of 2008, MCRA knew we had them licked and withdrew their capital request. But the conflict was far from over.
MCRA handpicked an advisory committee to recommend what should be done with the course. In the beginning, only three of its eleven members came from the community. When I attempted to attend the first meeting as an observer, MCRA Executive Director Keith Miller told me it was a private meeting and asked me to leave. That was a blatant violation of the state’s Open Meetings Act and Valerie Ervin’s office immediately protested. Eventually, Miller asked me and other residents to join and we spent the summer of 2008 trying to figure out how to make Sligo more profitable. After four months of work, we drafted a report on how to improve the course which can be found on page 46 of this council briefing document.
MCRA never gave our suggestions a chance. Instead, they hired a consultant to write a justification for turning Sligo back to Park and Planning. The County Council agreed to let MCRA walk away from the course last spring, triggering an all-out revolt by neighbors and golfers to save it. Last week, County Executive Ike Leggett asked the council to arrange for a $150,000 taxpayer subsidy to keep the course open for another year while its fate could be revisited. But the clock is ticking as the course is scheduled to close on October 1.
The Battle of Sligo Creek Golf Course has gone on for more than two years. What makes this conflict so unfortunate is that it did not have to happen. And it is awash with misinformation that cries out for the truth. We will take on the three biggest myths about Sligo starting tomorrow.
Monday, August 03, 2009
The Battle of Sligo Creek Golf Course, Part One
Much has been written about the fate of Sligo Creek Golf Course in numerous blogs and MSM articles. But all of these writers came to the dispute late. I live five blocks from Sligo and have dealt with the issue for more than two years. Now let the history of the conflict be told in full.
The controversy has its roots in actions undertaken by the County Council in 2006. Park and Planning operated four county-owned golf courses: Northwest, Needwood, Little Bennett and Sligo. The four-course system had lost money for seven years in a row, with the annual loss growing from $522,759 in FY 2000 to $1,432,178 in FY 2006. Those losses required taxpayer subsidies approved by the council. At the same time, the Montgomery County Revenue Authority (MCRA), a quasi-governmental entity controlling five other public golf courses, had earned positive net income for seven years in a row. The County Council’s Planning, Housing and Economic Development (PHED) Committee became convinced that MCRA was a better golf manager than Park and Planning and could make the county’s four-course system solvent. So the Council unanimously approved a bill that directed Park and Planning to lease the four courses to MCRA with the expectation that better management could stop the losses.
The lease contained one out for MCRA: it could turn over a course back to Park and Planning if that course lost so much money that it posed a threat to the system’s solvency. The language in the lease states:Upon a determination by Tenant [MCRA], based upon an independent financial analysis of the entire Golf System that indicates that any of the Park Golf Courses is adverse to the entire Golf System, Tenant shall have the right to extract any of the Park Golf Courses from the Lease and return it to the Landlord [Park and Planning]; provided, however, Tenant shall first present such findings to the Planning Board and the County Council to consider alternatives to closing the Park Golf Course. Upon the return of such Park Golf Course to Landlord, Landlord shall not operate such Park Golf Course in competition with Tenant as determined in accordance with Section 2.1. Other than as provided in Section 3.2.2, Tenant may not exercise its right to close the Little Bennett Golf Course under this Section 12.2 until the Little Bennett Debt has been paid and released in full.
Council Member Steve Silverman, then the Chair of the PHED Committee, elaborated on the circumstances under which MCRA could turn a golf course back to Park and Planning on the day of the vote:The threshold test is not that a particular course is losing money but that, in fact, it is the loss of monies in connection with one of the golf courses is adverse to the entire golf system which means in effect, it has the potential for taking the entire golf system. Under those circumstances, the tenant could take that Park golf course and return it to Park and Planning.
Just prior to MCRA’s taking over Sligo and the other three Park and Planning courses, MCRA hired Keith Miller as its new Executive Director. Miller is an extremely bright and aggressive golf course manager who was once a Regional Manager for Arnold Palmer. But he had two problems. First, Little Bennett Golf Course, one of the four turned over to MCRA by Park and Planning, suffered from debt service costs of $405,000 per year and the lease specifically prohibited MCRA from shedding it. Second, the Montgomery County Airpark, which is also operated by MCRA, was experiencing growing financial problems and conflict with the surrounding community. Miller wanted to find a way to stabilize MCRA’s finances and he quickly concluded that the best way to do it was to exploit one of his system’s most valuable assets: Sligo Creek Golf Course.
Miller’s plans collided with Sligo’s neighbors in ways that led to today’s dispute. We’ll find out how in Part Two.
