Developer pitches purchase and overhaul of municipal golf course; council raises water and budget concerns

A work session of the City Council on a possible purchase of the municipal golf course convened to receive a presentation from developer Jeff Harbison and to allow council members to ask questions; no formal action or vote was taken.

Mayor (unnamed), who opened the meeting, said, "No decisions can be made. It's simply an opportunity for Jeff to present his, ideas and proposal about purchasing the course as well as an opportunity for the council to ask questions." The city stressed the session was informational only and that any sale would require a separate public hearing after the Bureau of Land Management lease is resolved.

Harbison, who told the council he has consulted on the course for several years, described a plan to reposition the facility as a larger, membership-driven recreation and golf destination. He said the model bundles golf with fitness and other amenities, links the site to a network of other golf properties and relies on out-of-area green-fee revenue and memberships to subsidize local access. Harbison said he intends to invest in parking, irrigation, clubhouse and maintenance equipment and asked the council to consider terms that would allow him to begin operations "the beginning of next season, so there's no added cost."

Harbison repeatedly framed the proposal around a capital infusion and operational changes. He said a networked membership model allows access across multiple courses and that membership dues and out-of-state rates would drive premium revenue while preserving lower-cost options for local players.

Council members and staff focused on three practical constraints: water availability, the course's ongoing budget deficits and community affordability. Several speakers raised the course's current reliance on secondary water shares; Harbison and staff noted the figure frequently cited in the meeting: "177 acre feet." Harbison said any purchase would be contingent on access to water and told the council he would not proceed if water could not be secured. He discussed a 10-year plan to scale down irrigation demands but said he would not accept a perpetual loss of water rights.

City accountant Gary warned the council that the golf course has run at a deficit in recent years and that the city has been covering the shortfall from the general fund. As Gary put it, the city must "come up with some kind of game plan to get it solvent" if the council decides not to sell. He said the financial statements show the golf operation in the red and that continuing to subsidize it without a plan would require using general revenues.

Council members and attendees asked specific operational and community questions. Topics included: - Local access and price: Council members emphasized keeping the course affordable for residents and school programs. Harbison said season passes and bundled memberships would preserve low-cost options for frequent local users while raising rack rates for out-of-area visitors. - Capital and operating budget: Harbison told the council the facility would require a significant capital infusion and steady operating support; during the discussion he cited about a $750,000 annual operations figure ("750,000 minimum") to reach the level of service he described and noted additional one-time capital needs for equipment and irrigation work. - Water and farming impacts: Farmers and other residents expressed concern that selling or reallocating water to support expanded golf operations could affect local irrigation. Council members noted that the city does not control private water shares and that any additional purchases of water shares would be a separate transaction. Harbison said he would seek to acquire more shares if needed and that absence of adequate water would end his interest in the purchase. - Site uses and amenities: Harbison described options for RV hookups or tiny homes for visitors, event space adjacent to the clubhouse, and for two pickleball courts near the fitness center (he said the location was negotiable). Several council members said they supported a site visit and encouraged Harbison to bring the council to see examples at his other properties.

Several council members voiced a broader framing: the city either needs to find a way to keep the course (and fund required improvements) or accept a sale to an operator who will assume operational risk. Harbison said he would assume leases and operations if terms allow; he also said one contract term being discussed would give the city a first right of refusal to buy the property back in future—though no contract was agreed.

The meeting closed with no vote. The council asked staff to continue talking with Harbison and noted that future steps would include more detailed financial information, confirmation of water rights and, if the BLM land and water issues are resolved, a separate public hearing required before any sale. Harbison invited council members to visit his other facilities and to tour the course.