Laserfiche WebLink
• <br /> City of Mounds View Staff Report <br /> July 2, 1997 <br /> Page 2 <br /> obtain insurance on thegolf course as additional protection even if it contracted with a • <br /> private operator resulting in doubling the insurance cost. (Estimated additional cost- <br /> $2,500). <br /> • Depending upon how a contract was structured, it could result in the need to pay property <br /> taxes. (Estimated cost$20,000 to $30,000) <br /> • A private operator would have to have their own accounting system for payroll, financial <br /> reporting, etc. while removing this operation from the city would not directly reduce our <br /> costs. (Estimated additional cost$12,000). <br /> • A private operator would need to obtain their own health insurance and retirement <br /> coverage which would generally be more expensive for a small group. On the other side, <br /> fewer benefits (retirement) would need to be provided resulting in some offsetting <br /> savings. <br /> There are also some structural problems, including: <br /> • The course has been in operation for several years and as such, has acquired equipment to <br /> operate the course. If the City contracts for course operations, the city would have to sell <br /> the equipment, use the equipment at other locations, or enter into an arrangement with the <br /> operator to use/lease the equipment, which results in complications in the contract <br /> relating to maintenance on and the condition of the equipment. <br /> • The City has hired employees and if we now contract for the operation of the course, how <br /> will we deal with existing employees. <br /> While an arrangement taking into account all these factors could be structured, it still appeared • <br /> that the added cost from contracting out the management of the course would more than offset <br /> the advantage and as such, I am proposing a highbred approach under which we would enter into <br /> a management contract with the current superintendent. He would be paid a base salary <br /> ($40,000) and we would set the total payroll costs at a percentage of total revenues (proposed <br /> 44%). He would be given total control over the hiring, promotion and firing of all employees <br /> and setting of all salaries, subject to certain constraints such as following applicable federal and <br /> state policies and guidelines (Fair labor standards, ADA, veterans' preference, family medical <br /> leave act, etc.), and paying of required benefits such as retirement, social security, etc. For other <br /> benefits such as health insurance, vacation, sick leave, etc.,he would develop his own policies. <br /> The City would pay the employees and at the end of the year, an adjustment would be made to <br /> the superintendent's salary based upon the agreed percentage of total revenues, less golf course <br /> payroll costs. <br /> Gross revenues would exclude interest earnings. Rates for the subsequent year would be <br /> proposed by the golf course superintendent during the budget process. If a need to adjust the <br /> rates during the year arose, a process such as a committee comprising the superintendent, finance <br /> director and mayor and one councilor would meet to approve any rate revisions. Any discounts <br /> offered will be considered a reduction of gross revenues. Sales tax owed will be considered a <br /> reduction from gross revenues. Advertising will be considered an expense but must be included <br /> as a separate line item that must be approved by the City. The markup on merchandise must be • <br /> at least 30% while the markup on food and beverages must be at least 100%, provided that sales <br />