Voters between rock and a golf course on land vote

Dan Kulin

Friday, Oct. 22, 2004 | 9:31 a.m.

As Boulder City Mayor Bob Ferraro sees it, the city's voters are faced with deciding whether to sell their way out of millions of dollars in debt or resign themselves to paying annual subsidies on loans taken to build the $22 million Boulder Creek Golf Club.

Those opposed to the sale of city-owned land around the golf course say they fear a large and dense development will go there and they wonder if the money would be used for something other than the golf course debt.

City voters will decide Nov. 2 whether or not to support the sale of about 45 acres on the northeast side of the golf course. According to the ballot question, money from the sale is expected to be used to pay off the debt on the golf course, which has lost more than $3 million since it opened almost two years ago.

Between 50 and 70 homes are expected to be built on the land if it is sold for development.

The proposed land sale is going to the voters because the City Charter requires that any sale of 1 acre or more of city-owned land be approved by the voters.

The question is an advisory question, which means the council would not be legally bound to sell the land if the voters support the sale. However, because of the charter requirement, the voters could block the proposed sale by voting no on the ballot question.

Ferraro said he strongly supports the land sale because he thinks it would "relieve some of the stress on people" who worry about the large debt taken on to build the golf course and because it would help pay off the debt. The sale would also give people a chance to move into the city, which strictly limits new development to 130 buildings a year.

Ferraro said he has "no doubt it will pass." But if the voters reject the sale, the mayor said the city will probably have to use the general fund to help pay off the debt.

Philip de Langis, 74, a Boulder City resident, said he thinks voters will approve the sale, but he's not happy about it.

"Can you imagine what the politicians will do once they get their hands on that money?" de Langis asked.

The written argument for passage of the ballot question says money from the sale would be used to help pay off $10 million in revenue bonds, which helped pay for the construction of the course, plus a $3.25 million loan used to purchase equipment. Any remaining money would be used to help pay off the $8 million loan from the city Utility Fund that went toward construction of the golf course.

City commissioned studies of a sale show the city could expect $15 million to $17 million for the land, City Attorney Dave Olsen said.

But de Langis, who helped write the argument against the sale for the ballot, said he's sure the elected leaders would find a way to spend that money on other projects.

"Sooner or later the politicians would find a way to spend that money," de Langis said.

He said the city will also have to allow construction of 200 homes on the land.

Deborah Booth, who also helped write the argument against the sale for the ballot, said she too thinks the development would end up with more homes than city leaders say now.

The council would have to approve any development plans for the property.

The argument against the sale includes the claim that the city has not studied how best to solve its financial problems, and a no vote would give more time to consider other options.

Also, if the land is sold there is a possibility the city would be legally obligated to keep the course open, Booth and de Langis argued.

But Olsen said the city would only be bound to keep the golf course open if, for example, a golf club membership came with the purchase of one of the homes.

archive