Sun City West golf committee debates higher public fees and staffing levels in FY26‑27 budget

The Sun City West golf committee spent much of its March 12 meeting scrutinizing next year’s operating budget, debating how to pay for persistent maintenance staffing shortages while protecting resident privileges and considering a proposal to raise public prime‑time green fees.

Pat O’Hara, golf operations, reviewed operations and programs, noting the Sun City West Classic (April 18–19) had 96 of a 120‑player field signed and that the Green Team developmental program has 316 participants and produced roughly $120,000 in attributable spending through March 6. Cliff Swan, who presented the financial review, said golf is budgeting about 320,000 rounds and that the division is projected to finish the year with a subsidy “around $772,000” in the proposed budget — an improvement from larger deficits in earlier years but still a significant subsidy to the association.

Why it matters: golf is a major revenue and expense center for the recreation association. Non‑member rounds account for about 18–19% of play but roughly 28–30% of revenue, so pricing and tee‑time policy directly affect how much of the amenity’s cost is covered by outside play versus member dues.

Staff defended the proposed staffing and wage approach as necessary to meet course standards. Cliff Swan and Todd Patty (environmental services manager) said roughly two‑thirds of golf’s cost base is labor and the budget reflects a 2% payroll increase plus merit adjustments and a modest inflation allowance. Committee members pressed whether the wage line should be held flat to reflect unfilled positions; staff replied the positions turn over and that policy requires budgeting to planned service levels. “If they all showed up tomorrow, we’d hire them,” one staff speaker said when explaining why positions remain budgeted despite recurring vacancies.

A central policy debate revolved around green fees. Staff proposed modest increases (for example, $1 for prime‑time members and $3 for prime‑time non‑members) and asked the committee to consider holding member‑guest rates steady while raising the public prime‑time round fee. Multiple committee members and public speakers pushed for larger public increases: one member said publicly raising the peak public rate to $85 (or higher, depending on cart) would add revenue without materially reducing demand in the association’s immediate market.

Staff asked the committee for time to model impacts before formal recommendation. Cliff Swan said he would run numbers that hold member‑guest rates steady and raise the public prime‑time rate from the proposed $81 to $85 and report the budget impact at the April meeting. Staff also recommended the committee review twilight and super‑twilight pricing in tandem so off‑peak demand and member protections are considered together.

Committee members and the public raised operational questions about implementing differentiated guest/family pricing. Several speakers urged the association to find ways — via software upgrades or pre‑purchased guest credits — to distinguish true family guests from frequent outside players who book through member slots; staff said current systems limit their ability to vet and track those categories but that the issue is on the strategic‑plan path.

What’s next: staff will run a model on the suggested public‑rate increase and present revenue impacts and twilight scenarios at the April committee meeting. The committee did not take a formal vote on fees at the March meeting.

Quote highlights: Pat O’Hara said of the developmental Green Team program, “we find that this is a very worthwhile program.” Cliff Swan summarized the budget tradeoffs: “this budget proposes we can bring the subsidy to under $800,000 if we hit our round and revenue targets.” A committee member urged more aggressive public pricing: “I think we can get to $85 and not lose a dollar and actually increase revenue.”

Ending: The committee set an April follow‑up to review modeled rate alternatives and twilight adjustments; no final fee changes were adopted at the March 12 meeting.