Garden City commission votes 8–1 to send disc golf proposal to city council for cost and liability review

Corey Kramer, a Garden City resident, told the Parks & Recreation commission he wants to install a disc golf course at City Park and argued it would draw players to town and provide low-cost recreation for residents. Kramer, who said he grew up in Garden City, presented site layouts, safety measures and equipment quotes and proposed a phased approach that could start with nine baskets.

Kramer cited national participation and equipment costs in his pitch: “There are over 17,000 disc golf courses worldwide,” he said, and told commissioners he collected vendor quotes “ranging from about 3,800 to 4,200 for nine baskets.” He described options for tee pads (natural, concrete, turf or pour-in-place) and estimated about $432 per concrete pad (equipment-only), noting installation and labor would add to that cost.

Commissioners pressed on safety and siting after viewing Kramer’s video and layout. Kramer said he revised hole positions to avoid crossing main walking paths and cited PDGA (Professional Disc Golf Association) guidance and the uDisc app for course layout and player information. Staff explained that a formal liability and budget review would be required before any purchases, and that projects near certain dollar thresholds may require city manager or city council approval.

During the public hearing, resident Melanie said the proposed area is too small and raised concerns about dogs, children and parties in the park, warning that an errant disc could hurt a small pet or child: “One of those just hit it and kill it, you think I’m not gonna sue the park?” she said. Commissioners and staff responded that signage, visibility and tee placement could mitigate many risks and that any next step would focus on investigation, not immediate spending.

Committee member (S4) moved to forward the recommendation to city council “so they can go look and see what some costs are gonna be for, like, liability and different things,” and Committee member (S10) seconded. The commission voted 8–1 to recommend that council investigate the proposal further; the motion was explicitly to pursue investigation and not to encumber funds.

Next steps: staff said they would collect firm quotes, complete a liability due‑diligence review and, if needed based on costs, identify whether the project fits as a capital improvement or requires a separate budget amendment before council action. Kramer and supporters said they would continue outreach to potential sponsors and volunteers to reduce city expenses.