Why these continuing communication SNAFU's are tolerated is difficult to understand.

Will This be Another Financial Rape of Port Orange Taxpayers? ….
6+ Month’s Paid Vacation for All ….

 
Good evening Bob,
While I have no doubt that Robin received this attachment today as she has indicated, I would point out that this attachment is dated December 4th 2014 AND Ricaro made clear at last evening’s meeting that it had transmitted to the City some time ago.
It is disheartening to learn that Kemper Sports Management did not forward this information to the clerk’s office KNOWING IT HAD BEEN REQUESTED, AND THAT whomever it was sent to at the City did not think to do so either.
Why these continuing communication SNAFU’s are tolerated is difficult to understand.
The soft cost expenses KSM has presented for payment make clear that it is most imprudent to undertake the proposed course renovations in the middle of their 5 year management agreement. Imprudent that is unless you think it a good idea to keep on paying the salary and benefits for a Food & Beverage operation that is losing money when the golf course is operating much less when it will be closed. Ditto for G&A and Sales & Marketing.
Indeed the detail contained in the attached analysis indicates that less than $200,000 of the $ 524,926 KSM is projecting for soft cost expense reimbursement relates to much ballyhooed ongoing course maintenance they are so fond of quoting. Cart and equipment lease payments exceeding $ 63,000 that are meant to covered out of operations are planned to be rolled up into a new loan thus reliving KSM from that obligation. Fees and salaries including very generous benefits paid to KSM and its management personnel account for nearly half of the $ 524,926 reimbursement KSM is projecting will be required. AND who the heck is getting the $ 35,862 that is planned to be spent on Advertising/Promotion/Marketing and Business development while the course is closed ?
Can one not help but wonder if these soft cost expense projections are anything short of a financial rape of Port Orange taxpayers.
At this point it is unclear what rights and obligations the City has in an agreement I have been told does not addresses management fees and salaries during a period when golf operations are suspended.
The proposed course renovations were contemplated long before the current management agreement was negotiated just over two years ago, and one has to wonder if such legal oversight would be tolerated in other than Port Orange.
This in turn begs the question as to the quality of the legal review this agreement received from the very attorneys taxpayers will now be relying on to advise as to what the agreement does and does not say. Like everything else in Port Orange government this is a royal mess.
The other issue that must be understood is the absence financial acumen being demonstrated in financing soft costs over the long term, that by definition have zero lasting benefit. Operating expenses incurred absent operating revenues become operating losses AND need to be recognized as such. To pretend that an FPL bill or a bag of fertilizer or any other component of these soft costs have a lasting benefit, and that such operating losses should be rolled into 20 year loans is nothing short of deceitful.
The losses incurred by the Cypress Head Golf Course are consuming taxpayer resources. Those losses need to either be reversed, OR otherwise covered by additional clearly disclosed fees or assessments on residents monthly utility bills.
To do otherwise is to saddle future generations with financial mistakes that are being compounded today. That may be acceptable behavior in Washington. It should not be in Port Orange.
I would urge you in your capacity as Chairman of the Golf Board to insist that Manager Harden release the Golf Course inter-fund cash account information for FY 2014 and for the first quarter of FY 2015 so that the financial condition of the Cypress Head Golf Course may be more fully understood ? The hard working taxpayers of Port Orange deserve no less.
Ted Noftall
for responsible government
***************************

 
—–Original Message—–
From: Fenwick, Robin [mailto:rfenwick@port-orange.org]
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 2:24 PM
To: Ted Noftall
Cc: ‘Bob Ford’; ‘Drew Bastian’; ‘Scott Stiltner’; don@amlsfl.com
Subject: RE: Kemper Soft Costs
I just got it today via email from Mike Collins when I asked for it from our conversation today. See attached.
Robin
ROBIN L. FENWICK, CMC
CITY CLERK
CITY OF PORT ORANGE
*******************************

 
From: Ted Noftall [mailto:Ted@tednoftall.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 2:22 PM
To: ‘Fenwick, Robin’
Cc: ‘Bob Ford’; ‘Drew Bastian’; ‘Scott Stiltner’; ‘don@amlsfl.com’
Subject: RE: Kemper Soft Costs
Thank you Robin,
How and when was this attachment transmitted to the City and could you send me a copy of that transmittal.
Ted
for responsible government
********************************

 
From: Fenwick, Robin [mailto:rfenwick@port-orange.org]
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 2:09 PM
To: Ted Noftall
Cc: Ford, Bob; Bastian, Drew; Burnette, Don; Scott Stiltner; Green, Allen
Subject: RE: Kemper Soft Costs
See attached as provided by Mike Collins.
Thanks,
Robin
ROBIN L. FENWICK, CMC
CITY CLERK
CITY OF PORT ORANGE
****************************

 
From: Fenwick, Robin
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 1:30 PM
To: ‘Ted Noftall’
Cc: Ford, Bob; Bastian, Drew; Burnette, Don; Scott Stiltner; agreen@port-orange.org
Subject: RE: Kemper Soft Costs
Ted,
It was not sent through my office, but I have requested the information be sent to me. As soon as I receive it, I will forward it on.
Thanks,
Robin
ROBIN L. FENWICK, CMC
CITY CLERK
CITY OF PORT ORANGE
1000 City Center Circle
*****************************

 
From: Ted Noftall [mailto:Ted@tednoftall.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 1:27 PM
To: Fenwick, Robin
Cc: Ford, Bob; ‘Drew Bastian’; ‘Scott Stiltner’; Burnette, Don
Subject: Kemper Soft Costs
Good morning Robin,
I believe it was at the second last meeting of Council that the Mayor asked Michael Collins from the Golf Course to provide a detail listing of the soft costs Kemper was proposing be paid during the renovation shut down period Council is considering.
Last evening Ricardo from Kemper advised me that analysis had been submitted since the Mayor made that request.
Would you please provide me with that Kemper analysis along with its transmittal to the City because I am not understanding why information such as this is being systematically withheld from public discussion.
Ted Noftall
for responsible government