Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Ocean Shores committee questions golf course contract, profits and oversight

August 29, 2025 | Ocean Shores, Grays Harbor County, Washington


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Ocean Shores committee questions golf course contract, profits and oversight
Ocean Shores finance committee members on Aug. 28 raised questions about the city’s relationship with the municipal golf course, recent payments to the city and whether the manager’s contract should be put out for bid when it expires.

Finance staff told the committee they had sent a demand for a wire of $29,004.29 to the city from the operator; the presenter said the amount would be available to return to the golf course account. "Tomorrow, we should have 29429 dollars that we can put back towards the golf course account," the presenter said.

Committee members revisited long‑running concerns about whether the golf course should be run to generate profit or be managed primarily as a community amenity. One attendee said, "I never considered the golf course to be an income source," adding that the course’s value to the local economy comes largely from tourism-related spending.

Others said the city has not seen steady profits. "We've made no profit before. Okay. We had capital expenditures before," the presenter said. The presenter added, "I would argue that we still don't have any profit. 0. Because this might be a great month, but next month, we could get $0 again and owe them."

Contract and oversight questions: Committee members discussed whether the existing contract automatically renews or requires a request for proposals (RFP) at its end. Staff said if the contract terminates there should be an RFP process similar to other city service contracts. Members also raised environmental monitoring questions about fertilizer and nutrient runoff from the course and whether the management company is following promised ground‑care practices.

What the committee did not do: There was no formal motion to rebid or terminate the management contract. Members asked staff to check the contract expiration and renewal language and to bring options to the council when appropriate.

Ending: Committee members said they want clearer financial reporting from the operator and better transparency on capital versus operating expenditures before making decisions on the contract.

Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!

Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.

Get instant access to full meeting videos
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Washington articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI