Remember when the city staff and ERGA President Bill Dean asked the city council for some adjustments to agreement that governs the operation the public-private for-profit Encinitas Ranch Golf Course? Everything was just rosy, but they were being proactive with their requests! They wanted to create a fund, just in case an earthquake knocked over the golf cart bridge. That way they wouldn't have to wait the extra few weeks it would take to get the Council to approve extra funding for rebuilding the bridge. That was the basic shtick the public was given. It sounded like BS. We were told the golf course's budget was A-okay. Only later was it patently obvious that the golf course was not doing as well as projected (and thus required).
Is propaganda acceptable if it is for a good cause? Like keeping embarrassing stuff hidden.
The golf course has financial problems. No problem. Everything will be fixed (or at least kicked down the road). The rumors are that the City Management, who are also the policy makers for ERGA already worked out a solution. This policy development was done behind closed doors and announced last week at the ERGA meeting.
They are going to "refinance" the golf course.
Burning questions (and you can guess some of the answers):
Will the new bonds increase the golf course's indebtedness?
Will the new bonds cost ERGA more in the end?
Will the new bonds extend the repayment period?
Will the new bonds increase the collateral given to the bond holders?
If the course can't pay its debt now, what is going to change to improve that situation?
How does this debt restructuring impact the City, Carltas' profit sharing, and the Mello-roos homeowners?
Did anyone follow up on the idea of putting the operations contract for the course out to competitive proposals? Why was that a bad idea?
Borrow = Prudent