Council overrides mayor's veto to advance par-3 golf course concept plan
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
SubscribeSummary
On a 6–2 roll-call vote council overrode the mayor's veto to approve a concept-plan contract with Norby for a par-3 golf course design phase; the move authorizes a $9,000-ish design phase and keeps the broader project subject to future council approvals.
The City Council voted 6–2 to override the mayor's veto and approve a concept-phase contract with Norby for a proposed par-3 (three-hole) golf project. The vote followed extended discussion about budget authority, the contract's place within previously approved funding and whether additional future approvals would be required.
Staff described the approved action as the preliminary design phase for the project, with the design fee roughly $9,200 and the project's construction-phase contracts to return to council for bid approval because they exceed the city's bid threshold. City staff said the overall estimated city cash contribution to the project could be approximately $417,000 from the general fund if the project moves forward, and clarified that the design-phase contract was included in the original project budget.
Public commenters were sharply divided. Stuart Hanson urged council caution about spending general-fund dollars on golf projects while water rates and essential services remain priorities. "Deciding how to vote shouldn't matter if you're up for reelection," Hanson said, arguing council should prioritize taxpayer needs. Conversely, supporters said the project would enhance quality of life, serve beginners and youths, and act as a feeder course for both municipal and private 18-hole facilities.
Council members discussed whether each subsequent contract would require separate council approval (staff said yes for bid-limit contracts) and whether the golf course should reform rate-setting to avoid recurring subsidy requests. After roll-call voting (Barrington aye; Bathke no; Charts aye; Smith aye; Savers aye; Goldhammer aye; Dozier no; McCardell aye), the override passed 6–2. The council directed staff to return with design results and reminded members that future project phases will require additional approvals.
