Golf Course status report

During the upcoming city council meeting, Wednesday, August 17, there will be a status report (Item 19, the last agenda item on the agenda) on the transition of the golf course operation to Donovan Brothers Golf, LLC. The agenda item is as follows:

Reports
19. Arroyo Seco Golf Course's status report on operations and finances during the transitional period (no staff report)

As a reminder, the lease with Lohmann Golf expired at the end of June 2011. Negotiations for a new long-term lease with Donovan Bros. Golf were held up over a proposed extension of the driving range. In the original instructions from City Council (5-0 vote), a small piece of property located between the existing driving range and Nature Park (but within the original footprint of the golf course property) was to be added to the park and landscaped by North East Trees, an urban forestry non-profit. In spite of this directive, the property became part of the negotiations with Donovan Bros. The golf management company wanted to extend the golf course into this previously unused land. Upfront cost for the extension was to be paid by Donovan Bros. but fully reimbursed by the city through rent credits.

Citizen objection to the golf course extension and the city's failure to file CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) documents resulted in a temporary agreement with Donovan Brothers. Since the expiration of the lease with Lohmann Golf, Donovan has been paid by the city to manage the facility. It is my understanding that they will be reporting to City Council on Wednesday on "the operations and finances" during this period.

As a reminder, under the long-term lease agreement being negotiated by the city and Donovan Brothers, the golf course management company would provide upfront capital for facility improvements to be reimbursed by the city through rent credits. The company would pay the city rent to manage and run the facility, and would cover operating expenses. Profits generated by the facility would go to the management company. In this arrangement, if capital improvements do not result in increased revenue the city is still fully responsible for the outlay of funds via these ongoing rent credits.

Under the temporary agreement, the city pays Donovan Bros. a fixed amount to run the facility, but keeps the profits. It is my understanding that capital improvements are paid by the city in this temporary arrangement, but resulting increases in generated revenue are kept by the city. In contrast to the long-term agreement, the outlay of capital for improvements is linked with an expected increase in revenue.

Through this long process I have written blog posts, newspaper editorials, and spoken at city council meetings explaining my position on the driving range extension issue. I have tried hard to be accurate in describing what I believed was being negotiated. If now, or in the past, I made any erroneous statements, I welcome corrections.

Previous blog posts:

WildSuburbia Blog

April 20, 2011: City Council to Review Driving Range Extension in Closed Session
April 6: City Council Action Item 19: Driving Range Extension
April 1, 2011: Driving Range Extension on City Council Agenda
March 19, 2011: Golf Course vs Habitat
March 6, 2011: City Council considers extending golf course

Native By Design Blog (Nature Park blog)

April 20, 2011: City Council to Review Driving Range Extension in Closed Session
April 15, 2011: 4/17/11 (Sunday) Cleanup & 4/20 (Wed) City Council Meeting 4/17/11 (Sunday) Cleanup & 4/20 (Wed) City Council Meeting

PARK CLEANUP - Saturday, July 9, 9 am - noon

I haven't been in the Nature Park for about 2 weeks. At last visit it was really weedy! Argh!! If it is very hot we will weed and clean up in the shade - and if it is really, really hot, we won't stay too long. Hope to see some of you there, even if just to walk around and do some bird watching.

We will also be discussing plans to do a planting next January. Hoping to have some ideas on ways to improve the central area with paths and plants. Please, join in the discussion!


View Larger Map

Meet at the park info sign on Pasadena Ave and then head down into the park. The group will pull weeds, pick up litter, and enjoy the park. Come for the whole time, for an hour, or just stop by to say hello.

Nature Park entrance on Pasadena Ave., east of the York St. Bridge

Remember to:
- wear sunscreen, hat, sunglasses
- bring water
- bring gardening gloves and tools (weeders, trowels, whatever you use in your own garden)
- comfortable work clothes, including work shoes (sneakers or boots)
- binoculars for bird watching (optional)

Children must be under adult supervision at all times. There is poison oak in the park, which we will point out before we start.

Please pass this info along to anyone else you think might be interested in the park. If you know of anyone who doesn't use the internet, let me know so we can be sure they are kept in the loop.

PARK CLEAN UP: Saturday, June 4, 9 am - noon

Back from travels afar. I was actually homesick after three weeks away and am really looking forward to checking out the nature park. Hope to see some of you there.

Meet at the park info sign on Pasadena Ave and then head down into the park. The group will pull weeds, pick up litter, and enjoy the park. Come for the whole time, for an hour, or just stop by to say hello.

Nature Park entrance on Pasadena Ave., east of the York St. Bridge

Remember to:
- wear sunscreen, hat, sunglasses
- bring water
- bring gardening gloves and tools (weeders, trowels, whatever you use in your own garden)
- comfortable work clothes, including work shoes (sneakers or boots)
- binoculars for bird watching (optional)

Children must be under adult supervision at all times. There is poison oak in the park, which we will point out before we start.

Please pass this info along to anyone else you think might be interested in the park. If you know of anyone who doesn't use the internet, let me know so we can be sure they are kept in the loop.

May Weeds and More

We had a nice turn out for the May 7th cleanup. In addition to the "old reliables" there were two Arroyo Vista students and parents, and a couple of other adults, along with two adorable little dogs.





We focused mostly on the central mounds where castor bean seedlings, mustard and other exotics were planning an attack. I would like to say that the weeds are in retreat but, alas, this is a long-term project. We have made amazing progress but it took years to get this way and it will takes years to reverse it.

Park Enemy: castor bean seedlings. Pull if you see them.


Weeds, as many of you know, are just plants growing in places you do not want them to be. Here in California, and throughout much of the world, many plants from far away places have found a good home with few nature enemies and little competition. They are aggressive bullies that force out the native plants, reducing biodiversity and limiting food supplies for native animals. Some, like castor bean, grow so large that they shade out our lovely, delicate native wildflowers. Other weeds, like arundo, suck the water from the ground, forcing out all other plants, and providing poor habitat for most birds. Where these non-native, invasives grow, little else can grow.

In California, hillsides and fields of multi-colored wildflowers once teamed with life and delighted all who saw them. Now mustard colors the slopes a lovely yellow, but unfortunately at the expense of lupines, tidytips, poppies, phacelias, and untold other wonders. When I hike I see the mustard and ripgut everywhere and I wonder whether we will ever win this battle and restore balance and diversity to the land.

Since Friends of the Nature Park started weeding back in spring of 2006 I have thought hard about methods of weed control. I've read books and articles on the subject and spoken with experts. I see progress but wonder what we could do to be more successful with the limited resources we have.

Weed control by our group has only involved pulling. Weeds with no flowers or seeds are pulled and left to dry up in the sun. Weeds with flowers or seeds are bagged and removed. This has the disadvantages of being very labor intensive, difficult once the ground dries up, and it causes a great deal of soil disturbance.

I have been thinking about trying another method: weed whipping the exotics to keep them from going to seed. We would have to visit the park frequently to make sure we never let the weeds reach maturity. We would also have to be very careful to target the weeds, allowing any native seeds to germinate and grow. Timing is critical. We would go after each weed right as it emerges.

Anyone who has been working at the Nature Park knows how difficult and frustrating this work is, but they also know how much progress we have made. We are beginning to see some native that would never had made it if the weeds had been allowed to grow. There has been more miners lettuce (Claytonia perfoliata), fiddleneck (Amsinckia), and miniature lupine (Lupinus bicolor). Mugwort (Baccharis salicifolia) is sprouting here and there, and golden currant (Ribes aureum) is appearing all over. Jimson weed (Datura wrightii) is also doing very well. Coast live oaks (Quercus agrifolia) and southern California walnuts (Juglans californica) are sprouting from seed.

So when those who have not seen where we have come from, what we are up against, and how much progress we have made, comment on the condition of the park, I want them to get educated by coming on down to help out.

The state grass, purple needlegrass (Nassella pulchra) appeared on the mound near the deerweed.


A lovely stand of blue elderberry (Sambucus mexicana) with wild cucumber (Marah macrocarpus), golden currant (Ribes aureum), and jimson weed (Datura wrightii).



Blue wildflowers of globe gilia (Gilia capitata) grow with buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), sagebrush (Artemisia californica), and bush sunflower (Encelia california), all coastal sage scrub plants.

Delicate tendrils of wild cucumber (Marah macrocarpa) curl from the stems.


Deerweed (Lotus scoparius) is a native shrub found in areas of disturbance, like our Nature Park.


Jimson weed (Datura wrightii) is another early pioneer plant for areas that have experienced rapid change or disturbance.

City Council to Vote on Recommendation to.....

The golf course extension is once again on the agenda for the next open session of city council, Wednesday, May 4, 2011. I am really trying to get this right but I'm no lawyer and so I am not completely clear on it. The following is a cut/paste of the agenda item and the supplementary info on it in the agenda packet.

May 4, 2011 Agenda Item 12. Consideration to add the property adjacent to the back of the driving range to the golf course lease agreement.

Agenda Packet, Item 12:
Recommendation
May 4, 2011

Consideration to Add the Property Adjacent to the Back of the
Driving Range to the Golf Course Lease Agreement

It is recommended that the City Council:
I. Direct staff as to whether the Council wishes to consider including a portion of the property adjacent to the back of the range to the proposed lease agreement with Donovan Bros. Golf;

2. Direct staff as to whether it wishes to consider an approximate 27 yard extension to the driving range; and

3. Direct staff to return with a lease agreement including exact measurements of a proposed extension, capital improvement items, rent credits and appropriate California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Fiscal Impact
None.

Commission Review and Recommendation
The Arroyo Seco Lease Committee recommended Donovan Bros. Golf to operate the City'S Golf
Course.

Background
Formal negotiations with Donovan Bros. Golf began during Closed Session on March 2, 2011 and subsequently during closed session on March 16, 2011. At the March 16, 2011 Closed Session, City Council asked staff to bring the option of extending the driving range to open session. Staff presented a proposed extension of the driving range to the City Council at the April 6, 2011 where a motion to have the City Council consider allowing for a full extension failed. However, City Council directed staff to return to negotiations with Donovan Bros. Golf and propose a less-than-full extension of the driving range, which would leave a reasonable space between the Nature Park and the extended driving range.

Analysis
During negotiations with Donovan Bros. Golf on April 27, 2011 they were asked if they would be willing to enter into a lease with the City for the operation of the Golf Course if the driving range were to remain at its present length. Donovan Bros responded by saying that they were not willing to lease the golf course without the right to extend the driving range. Donovan feels that the driving range is the amenity that needs the most attention and extending it would make the golf course a more-viable operation. They did say that they would accept an approximate 27 yard extension of the driving range and they were willing to curve the fence, however this would prove more costly.

Should the City Council direct staff to bring back for its consideration a recommendation to allow for an extension of the driving range, staff will work with the Planning Deparhnent to begin the appropriate CEQA process. Furthermore, Staff will also address the pending grant applied for and awarded to North East Trees to expand the nature park into the unimproved area in the back of the driving range.

Legal Review
The City Attorney has reviewed this report.

Public Notification of Agenda Item
The public was made aware that this item was to be considered this evening by virtue of its inclusion on the legally publicly noticed agenda, posting of the same agenda and reports on the City's website and/or notice in the South Pasadena Review and/or the Pasadena Star-News.

As I read this, Donovan Bros. is not interested in leasing the golf course without being able to extend the driving range. The compromise number is 27 yards, as opposed to the original 35 yard extension. It is not clear to me exactly where either of these lines would be. My question to Donovan Brothers is, if the extension of the driving range is so important to the success of the entire golf course facility, are you willing to take on some of the financial risk?

I also received a couple of emails from individuals who believe that the golf course extension can not be included in the proposed lease until the environmental assessment is done.

I stand firm on not wanting any extension of the golf course driving range because of:
1. Financial risk for the city in the form of rent credits for "improvements" and incentive to make improvements. (Isn't increased business enough incentive? What other South Pasadena business is given rent credits, tax credits, or whatever to make business improvements?)

2. The land is better used as habitat for the health and well-being of plants, animals and people.

3. This very city council approved plans by a vote of 5-0 in 2009 to extend trails from the Nature Park into this land. In fact they approved a proposal by North East Trees to take on the project. An "about-face" reduces the city's credibility when it claims that it has an good environmental record. I am concerned that this move will make it harder for the city to get funding for projects for clean water, clean air, and other environmental improvements.

4. Before the land is given to the golf course it should be vetted fully with the public. This means the public is entitled to clear, accurate and complete information on what is at stake, including answers to the following questions:

1. What will be the exact location of the border and what type of fencing will be used?
2. How much soil disturbance and grade change is needed to extend the driving range?
3. If soil is to be removed, how will it be disposed of? If there has been dumping on the site and the soil is contaminated, who will pay for the cleanup?
4. How much is this project likely to cost and who will pay for it - both now and later? What are the possible cost overruns?
5. How much is the Environemental Assessment and possible full EIR likely to cost the city? Will Donovan Bros. pay this upfront also? Will they get rent credits to cover the preconstruction costs even if they fail to get final approval for the extension?
6. How much additional money can we expect the extension to generate and how are these numbers calculated?
7. How will the trees be protected during construction and during use of the land as a driving range?
8. How much pesticide- and fertilizer-contaminated runoff can be expected to enter the Arroyo Seco from the turf grass?
9. How much additional water will be required to maintain the area and where will this water come from?
10. Other water issues: Is the golf course currently irrigated with water drawn from the Arroyo Seco? Is this legal? If it has been irrigated with Arroyo Seco water, will it be allowed to continue to use this water and even increase this usage? Is it safe to use water drawn from the Arroyo Seco on turf that children and adults play on?
11. Is it legal to include this provision (extension of the golf course driving range) in the lease before environmental review?
12. Why should the lease include this provision before these questions are answered?

Let your city council know where you stand on this! I hope to see you at the city council meeting on Wednesday, May 4, 2011, 7:30 PM.

PARK CLEAN UP: SATURDAY, May 7, 9 am - noon

Castor bean is trying to make a come back but we won't let it! Pulling these little seedlings is easy to do and very therapeutic. For those wishing to use a bit more muscle, there are plenty of larger, more entrenched weeds to attack.

Meet at the park info sign on Pasadena Ave and then head down into the park. The group will pull weeds, pick up litter, and enjoy the park. Come for the whole time, for an hour, or just stop by to say hello.

Nature Park entrance on Pasadena Ave., east of the York St. Bridge

Remember to:
- wear sunscreen, hat, sunglasses
- bring water
- bring gardening gloves and tools (weeders, trowels, whatever you use in your own garden)
- comfortable work clothes, including work shoes (sneakers or boots)
- binoculars for bird watching (optional)

Children must be under adult supervision at all times. There is poison oak in the park, which we will point out before we start.

Please pass this info along to anyone else you think might be interested in the park. If you know of anyone who doesn't use the internet, let me know so we can be sure they are kept in the loop.

City Council to Review Driving Range Extension in Closed Session

On April 6, 2011 the South Pasadena city council voted against (Ten and Sifuentes for and Schneider, Putnam and Cacciotti against) directing staff to negotiate with Donovan Bros. on a full extension of the driving range to the border with the Nature Park. On a 5-0 vote, the city council directed staff to negotiate in closed session a compromise position with the prospective golf course lessee.

For more information on this meeting, please call the city and request the meeting minutes. They were posted on the web but have since been taken down. I wrote about the meeting on this blog. There is also information in the following newspapers:

The South Pasadena Patch
The Pasadena Star-News
The South Pasadena Review, April 13, 2011, p.2, Council Seeks Compromise on Golf Course Driving Range

Having read through the 58-page agenda packet (yes, several page were "intentionally left blank" but it was quite a read) here are my continuing concerns about this endeavor.

Opposition to Including Extension of the Driving Range in the Golf Course Lease

I am opposed to the inclusion of an extension of the driving range in the golf course lease agreement on the following grounds.

1. Environmental concerns
Loss of habitat, increased irrigation (there are serious questions about the legality of withdrawing water from Arroyo Seco without proper Water Master rights), runoff concerns, and protection of native trees during construction and operation of the driving range extension. As the UC researcher noted during the April 6, 2011 city council meeting, although runoff from turf grass may be minimal, not having seen this site, it is not known whether runoff into the Arroyo Seco would increase or not. Although the city council voted to instruct staff to negotiate with the golf course lessee to protect trees in the land in question, there was no serious proposal on how to protect these trees and still create a driving range that may require significant grade changes. There was no arborist report on the trees, nor was there any information on the changes that might be needed to the existing grade in order to accommodate the driving range activity, both recreational and maintenance.

2. The public was not adequately informed of change in land use for the extension of the driving range
Although the Golf Course Lease Subcommittee did allow for public comment from February 2007 through June 2010, there were no public comments in support of a driving range extension. In fact the minutes for the February 17, 2010 city council meeting indicate that the council rejected a potential expansion of the driving range.

According to minutes of the February 17, 2010 city council meeting (attachment 4, page 298), on a vote of 5 - 0 city council advised city staff to “issue proposed RFP... taking into consideration changes recommended by Councilmember Cacciotti: … Section 1.5 to convey that the Nature Park will be expanded for trails and deletion of a footnote that states the range can be extended 30 yards; allowances are to be made to take into consideration the grant from Supervisor Antonovich that will involve moving a fence; and that the next lease agreement exclude a triangular piece of property (90 ft. by the Arroyo and 180 ft by the trail).”

Furthermore, the city had issued an RFP for use of this land as an extension of the Nature Park and unanimously approved a resolution for a $150,000 project from North East Trees to extend the trail, remove weeds, plant native plants, and place rocks and boulders in the area.

3. Financial considerations
The Arroyo Seco Golf Course RFP states in item 8. Operator Upfront Investment (pp. 265-266) that the golf course lessee will front the money to be returned through rent credits.

“City will negotiate a substantial Rent Credit which will compensate the Operator for the cost of money invested in approved Capital Improvements plus an incentive for making the investment. The Rent Credit will be applied to the annual rent as long as it takes to recapture the Operator’s investment.”

In other words, the risk for and cost of the capital improvements are completely assumed by the city. If the driving range extension does not result in significantly higher revenue, the amount of money the city will receive from the golf course lessee will be reduced by the Rent Credit until the investment, “plus an incentive for making the investment,” is fully repaid to the lessee.

It should be noted that the driving range grossed $232,763 in 2006, $219, 215 in 2007, $187,571 in 2008. We have no estimates on the cost of the driving range extension but even with significant increases in gross revenue from the driving range, the costs may be sufficiently high to make this improvement fiscally unwise.

4. Legal considerations
For changes in land use, CEQA requires an environmental analysis to determine whether a full EIR is required. Even if a Negative Declaration is ultimately issued after having conducted environmental analysis, a public comment period applies. In any event there has been no Negative Declaration or environmental analysis. I don’t believe there is a categorical exemption from CEQA because the property in question was encompassed within the footprint of the prior lease as the City Attorney appeared to suggest at the prior council meeting. With all of the physical changes and disturbance of ground that would ensue from the driving range extension, it strains credulity to think that CEQA would not apply.

There may be serious questions about whether the city was in compliance with the Brown Act during the Closed Session City Council meeting of March 2, 2011, during which the driving range extension was discussed. This would also apply to tonight's closed session meeting, item 5, in which according to the April 6, 2011 motion, the city will be negotiating a "compromise" position for a partial extension of the driving range. Although real estate negotiations on price and terms of payment can be executed in closed session, changes in land use are not specifically covered. Furthermore, the Supreme Court case of Laurel Heights Improvement Association teaches that the environmental analysis must precede any discretionary action by city council.

Full disclosure of the financial, environmental, and open space consequences of the driving range extension should be brought out into the open and given adequate time for public review and comment in accordance with applicable law.

City Council should take the appropriate time to review these points and possible needed actions. If there is concern regarding the impending expiration of the current lease, a number of solutions should be explored, including having the current operator function on a month-to-month basis, having the Department of Recreation and Parks operate the facilities on a temporary basis, or the city could go forward and enter into a lease with Donovan Bros., addressing all other modifications and improvements except the extension of the driving range. That last issue could be resolved by lease amendment, if necessary.