Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Contracts And Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Leawood resident urges review of Troon Iron Horse contract, highlights incentive fees and revenue sources
Summary
Resident Ron Vine told the governing body the city’s golf‑management contract with Troon contains multiple revenue streams favorable to the operator and urged a cost‑benefit review, focusing on an incentive fee that he said cost taxpayers about $70,000 in 2023 and 2024.
At the May 5 Leawood Governing Board meeting, resident Ron Vine urged city staff to conduct a cost‑benefit review of the city’s management contract for Iron Horse Golf Course with Troon, saying contract terms are overly favorable to the operator and costly to taxpayers.
“This language and terms of the contract are highly favorable to Troon to the detriment of the citizens of Leawood,” Vine said. He told the governing body the contract makes Troon eligible to receive revenues from eight sources, including a base management fee, an incentive management fee, 100% of alcohol sales profits, consulting fees on capital improvements, cooperative marketing commissions, procurement services, vendor rebates and fees, and centralized services charges.
Vine focused in particular on the incentive management fee. He said the original contract (dated Dec. 29, 2009) set an incentive threshold at $1.6 million in gross revenues and offered Troon a 5 percent incentive on revenues above that threshold; the threshold remained $1.6 million until 2023 when it rose to $1.8 million. Vine said gross revenues are now about $3 million a year and that Troon’s incentive fee cost the city about $70,000 in both 2023 and 2024. He estimated that if the contract continues unchanged to its scheduled end in 2028 the incentive fee could cost taxpayers $450,000 to $500,000 even if revenues do not increase further.
Vine recommended either eliminating the incentive management fee or moving the threshold up (he suggested $3 million) and asked that any review be led by people who have not previously overseen the contract. He also urged that staff provide a cost‑benefit analysis for each of the eight revenue sources he listed.
Mayor Mark E. Elkins acknowledged Vine’s analysis and thanked him for his time. No formal action or motion on the contract was taken by the governing body during the meeting; Vine’s prepared text was noted as having been provided to members of the governing body and to staff.
