Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Recreation Fees topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Village hears Kemper Sports pitch to continue dynamic pricing at municipal golf course; trustees ask for more pass‑holder data

Vernon Hills Village Board · November 19, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Kemper Sports presented 2024 rounds/revenue and proposed continuing dynamic pricing for the municipal course in 2025 with modest base rate and pass adjustments; trustees asked for more granular pass‑holder rounds data and recommended limiting resident increases.

Kemper Sports representatives told the Vernon Hills Village Board on Nov. 12 they plan to continue dynamic pricing at the municipal golf course for calendar 2025 and recommended modest increases to base rates and annual passes, while trustees pressed for greater sensitivity analysis and resident protections.

Vince Suarez, vice president of operations for Kemper Sports, and Kevin Lind, the course’s general manager, reviewed year‑to‑date figures: roughly 17,751 rounds through October and revenue up about 10.3% year‑over‑year, producing higher revenue despite slightly fewer rounds. Suarez described the dynamic pricing model (two‑hour dayparts, weather and booking patterns) and said the operator can adjust floor and ceiling rates in real time. Kemper proposed a modest increase to the base resident rate and a wider dynamic range to capture higher‑demand dayparts, along with a recommended $50–$75 change in some annual pass categories.

Trustees expressed hesitation about raising resident access costs for juniors and weekday pass holders. Trustee discussion repeatedly urged keeping the resident 5‑day pass affordable to encourage junior play, and several trustees asked Kemper to return with additional data showing how many rounds pass holders play and modeled revenue under alternative scenarios (for example, $1 base increases with a larger dynamic ceiling).

The board asked staff to receive a follow‑up memo with pass‑category breakdowns, rounds per pass holder, and modeled revenue impacts under smaller base increases and higher dynamic ceilings. No final rate ordinance or vote occurred; staff said a formal rate approval would return to the board at a later meeting.