Board of Park Commissioners

Board of Park Commissioners Regular Meeting Minutes Monday, May 13, 2019 C I T Y O F 3:00 - 5:00 P.M. WICHITA 455 N Main City Hall 1 st Floor Board Room Wichita, Kansas 67202 Members Present: Troy Palmer, Bill Ramsey, Hoyt Hillman, Alejo Cabral, Tori Deatherage Members Absent: Ty Tabing, Eddie Fahnestock City Staff: Troy Houtman (Director, Park & Recreation), Penny Garding (Clerk), Elizabeth Harlenske (Assistant City Attorney), David McGuire, Reggie Davidson, Troy Hendricks, Cody Lack, Mark Manning (Finance) Golf Advisory Committee Members Present: Richard Schodorf, Cindy Renard, Tom West, Debbie Burch Guests: Ella Baccus (Arts Partners), Wess Galyon, Bob Aldrich Item Descrietion Call to Order Troy Palmer, President, called the meeting to order at approximately 3:03 p.m. Announcements There were no Announcements. Public Comments Wess Galyon, President, Wichita Area Builders Association, Bob Aldrich, member of WABA. Making a request of the Park Board that consideration be given to renaming The Big Arkansas River Park to coincide with the changing of the name of the Wichita/Valley Center Floodway to the MS "Mitch" Mitchell Floodway. Three years it was suggested we look into getting something like that done to recognize the tremendous contribution Mitch made during his lifetime to the betterment of Wichita by promoting economic development, minimize flooding and things of that nature. He came up with the notion and we began the process. We appeared before you a couple years ago and you approved us erecting a display in the Big Arkansas River Park about the Big Ditch and tying MS Mitchell to the dynamics of the Big Ditch as it is commonly called and why it was built so people could have a better understanding of what the Wichita/Valley Center Floodway was developed for. It is an amazing project and is probably one that couldn't be built today because of just trying to get the approval. It was nominated as one of the top public works projects of its time when it was finished in the early 50's. It lost out to a large canal being built in the United States at that time. If it had never been built, today, with all this rain, we would be underwater down here. There was a lot of controversy about building that project, but ultimately with enough flooding taking place, the Chamber, County Commission and others got on board. The City Council of Wichita appointed a flood control study committee and that is what led to what was ultimately done. After the Park Board approved the erection of the display in the park we proceeded to go congress and seek a change in Wichita/Valley Center Floodway. Thanks to Congressman Estes and Senator Moran we were able to achieve that. The House took BOARD OF PARK COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING May 13, 2019 Page 1 of 16  action through a resolution on 7/25/17. It was introduced in the House and there was no opposition and it passed. It was moved to the Senate and met no opposition there. It was approved and President Trump signed it into law on 12/21/18. The name of the Wichita/Valley Center Floodway will be changed to the MS "Mitch" Mitchell Floodway. We thought, in recognition of Mitch, who became an iconic figure over the years because of the work he had done in this regard and the benefit the city derived from it, it is only fitting that we ask you to consider a name change that coincides with the changing of the name, to the MS "Mitch" Mitchell Floodway Park. Bob Aldrich, President and CEO, Wichita Railway Service and member of Legislative Committee for the Wichita Area Builders Association. Thank you for taking the time and hearing us. At one time Mr. Mitchell and he both served on Park Board. If you want to put things in a dollar-sense, this project has saved hundreds of millions of dollars, not only for Wichita, Sedgwick County, the State and Federal. There probably isn't anyone in this room that hasn't gone over the Big Ditch lately and seen lots of water in there. If it wasn't for Mitch it would be downtown. He hopes everyone will consider this and move it forward for approval. Palmer stated this qualifies right? Harlenske responded yes, the Park Board would act as an official naming committee under the City Council Policy 13. It would need to go on the agenda next month and make a recommendation to City Council, who has the final say. Houtman stated today we wanted to introduce the topic so you can ask for it to be on the agenda for next month. We spoke to Mr. Galyon earlier and they will come back next month to answer any questions. This gives you an opportunity to think about any questions you want answered. We provided some information and could do a presentation if you want. This is a well-known topic everyone is familiar with. We will ask the Park Board to make a vote and then the Park and Recreation Department will go to council within the next two to three weeks after that and make the presentation for the official naming. Palmer stated he would like to see it on the agenda and asked to have the information sent to the absent board members so they can see it as well. 1 Approve Minutes Recommended Action: Approve, sign and file minutes of the April 8, 2019, Board of Park Commissioners Regular Meeting. Motion by Ramsey, second by Cabral, IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY VOTED to approve, sign and file the minutes of the April 8, 2019 Board of Park Commissioners Regular Meeting (5-0). 2 New Items for Consideration There were no New Items for Consideration. 3A Arts Partners - Generation STEAM Ella Baccus, Arts Partners. We are here to present the Generation STEAM program. We want to show the results of the work and ideas these students have come up with. She shared video about the program. BOARD OF PARK COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING May 13, 2019 Page 2 of 16 Students from Jardine STEM and Career Explorations Magnet Middle Academy, in collaboration with Wichita State University College of Engineering and Arts Partners Teaching Artists. We had an artist and engineering team in the classroom to help student• come up with concepts that use art and green technology to solve a real problem in the park. Students shared their projects using solar energy as a solution to a lighting problem in Planeview Park at the basketball court. There will be a summer program at Jardine that the kids could start working on the real sculpture. The next group of students participated in a STEAM Fair. There were several designs from their school and they are the winners. There were local judges from the industry and community. Students explained how their idea could bring more people into Planeview Park. Their plan is to build a water feature that will provide a fun and safe place to cool off in the summer. There are no public pools or water parks in their neighborhood. The design is a Teapot in a Cup. A solar panel will provide the energy to pump water for the feature. Students from L'Ouverture Career Explorations and Technology Magnet Elementary School thought about designs for McAdams Park. They held a STEAM Fair and these are the designs that were picked. There were solar, wind and kinetic energy designs. Students explained their design of a system of wind and water exploration that would help people cool down in the summer so they can enjoy McAdams Park. The next project was a wind powered tea cup using wind power to generate electricity to help with a carousel that lights up at night. The kinetic energy project is a dog water bowl. This will help the park because a lot of homeless dogs are in the area could get help. The idea would have a trampoline that when you jump on it stores energy and can then push water fresh water into the bowl. The electro-swing project deals with the problem of not enough light at night to play basketball and other activities in the park at night. This project would do that by a swing that creates electricity, making baskets on the basketball court would create electricity. There was a sunflower sprinkler project that would fit well with the pool at McAdams. The solar merry-go-round would generate its own power using a solar panel. Cabral thanked Arts Partners and WSU for their support. The idea was they presented solutions to some capital improvement projects that have been identified. Both Council members Johnson and Clendenin were judges for the projects and are aware of some of the ideas presented. Moving forward, as we begin to reimagine and put forth ideas we remember these students and some of the ideas they presented. Palmer thanked the students for sharing their ideas. He is excited to see what they keep doing and continue to bring forward. Houtman thanked Ella and her team. We are looking at other things in the future and see the opportunities of working with some of the young people in the community. We are always looking for innovative ideas, especially those that save BOARD OF PARK COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING May 13, 2019 Page 3 of 16  money. This is the first of several we are going to be working on. We are looking forward to working with Ella and her team and doing more. 3B Golf Passes Hendricks stated we have been talking about a new possible pass structure for the last year or so. Mark Manning will present pertaining to what the budget analysts have looked at with all of the information provided over the last 3-4 months. Manning will present his thoughts, not saying it is the way to go or not the way to go, but he has come up with some things that may not have been looked at that could cause some problems. Houtman added when we were scheduled to go to Council Workshop last month, there were some questions about the golf passes. We wanted to look at it one more time. Council and the City Manager want to have Mr. Manning and Finance look at it so we can have a better understanding. They asked to have the presentation to the Golf Advisory Committee as well as the Park Board to answer any questions you have. We are scheduled to go back to Council for their Workshop at the end of this month. We want to make sure there are no questions and you understand what the passes are about, the pros and cons and what some of the outcomes/unintended outcomes are if we go forward with this. Council will ask did Park Board and Golf Advisory Committee see this. Manning stated he was asked to look at rate plan and give some background from a financial standpoint. He views everything in terms of risk and reward. Our green fee is $25, $27 at Auburn Hills. We don't generate $25 on hardly any of our rounds; in fact only about one-third of our rounds are sold at full price. Two-thirds are discounted to some degree; our average round revenue is ab out $18 per round. He shared the Opportunity Chart which shows we are losing $12 per round on green fees. But the opportunity is here (where indicated), we have a couple high margin add on business that generate a lot of marginal revenue for us. We are making about $7 cart rental on every single round, and we are selling 130,000 rounds. Doing the math, that is $1M. Even better, we actually generate about $11 per cart revenue on rounds where people rent carts. The same goes for concessions. Why do we have golf passes, why do we offer discounts? We want to attract demand from groups, i.e. students. We want to reward loyalty, about 30% of our revenue is generated by golf fees. That has been consistent over the last two decades. Discounts arE offered to stimulate off-peak utilization. An advantage of passes is we want to stimulate demand for high volume add-ons: carts and concessions with very low marginal costs. Passes are an invaluable source of customer data, which is available for marketing purposes. You can generate a lot of data by selling passes. We have roughly 900 passes with discount and student passes, etc. About 90% of those are seniors. That is not a favorable demographic long-term unfortunately. The risk/return in pass strategy is like buying a Sam's membership. You judge how many bulk purchases you need and will you BOARO OF PARK COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING May 13, 2019 Page 4 of 16 save enough on those purchases to offset the cost of the membership. The risk is you buy the membership and forget to go. The reward is if you buy the membership and can save more on purchases than the cost of the membership. Same with golf passes. The risk is the fixed cost, the price of the pass. The reward is if you play a bunch of rounds you will drive down the marginal cost. The City has a risk/reward ratio too. It is going to reduce our marginal revenue. The benefit is we are going to create a loyal and faithful cadre of golfers. To optimize our pass strategy, we would retain our current pass holders, generate new pass holders, maximize rounds as much as possible and maximize our marginal revenue program. He shared charts showing our current pass strategy. For the Super Senior Pass, the breakeven point is 10 rounds. If you know you are going to golf more than 10 rounds you should buy pass; if you don't think you will golf more than 10 rounds you probably shouldn't buy a pass. The average Super Senior plays 27 rounds per year. The Senior Pass has a higher breakeven point, you need to play about 16 rounds to break even. Seniors are playing an average of about 40 rounds per year. The Seven-Day Pass breaks even at 48 rounds. The average Seven-Day Single Pass holder is playing about 101 rounds. We are discounting a lot of revenue, but the benefit to the golf system is we are selling a golf cart and concessions. And, hopefully we would not have generated these had it not been for the discount provided. His understanding is it would adjust to a fixed rate model. That is a good idea because a lot of our costs are fixed so it would match a fixed base monthly subscription. Presumably it would stimulate rounds by eliminating the marginal cost under this system, you can pla� as many rounds as you want with zero marginal cost. Presumably I would be stimulated to play as many rounds as possible. Why is that good for us? If we can sell you a $10 and make a spread of $2 on a concession for every round you are playing, even though you are not paying us to play on course, hopefully we are generating $12 from you on a golf cart and drink. Some of the risks he sees, there is a risk that could alienate a large segment of senior golfers. You will get no marginal revenue from your current high volume golfers. And, it could be very difficult to enforce the monthly contract provisions. A summary was shown showing the same number of passes sold for the current and potential strategies. The numbers are about 200,000 higher than what we sold last year. BOARD OF PARK COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING May 13, 2019 Page S of 16 A risk that he sees, is the Super Senior breakeven point is going to raise to 31 rounds. The average Super Senior is playing 27 rounds. On average it would be financially irrational to buy the new pass. This indicates if you play 27 rounds, not only would you probably not buy the pass, but you are going to raise the price. Maybe you play 50 rounds, this is a good idea. The Super Senior market was segmented into the number of rounds played per year, the graphic shows the breakeven is 10 rounds; about 60 of the 300-400 that play less than 10 rounds. If you look at 30 rounds or less you've got about 200 of your Super Senior golfers playing less than breakeven. It's a risk that should probably be considered. Seniors are similar but not as extreme. The breakeven is going to be 31 rounds and their average is 40. Not as stark of a problem. He did not plot it, but there is probably a sizeable amount that are less 31 rounds. You are also going to raise the price on your average senior golfer about $60. The 7-Day Single is not going to be a problem, they are all going to love this. It is going to reduce their breakeven point. However, your theoretical loss is going to be even wider. He has pointed out the potential risks. There is also a huge potential reward. Pricing golf should be part of holistic survival strategy. Price is a component of marketing strategy. Marketing should be part of a survival strategy, encourage consideration of any pricing proposals as part of a more holistic proposal for the survival of our golf system. Hillman asked what our capacity is on marginal days. If you look at marginal days, if someone has a season pass, they will probably come out on those days because have pass. We could increase capacity overall. It is going to smooth out the peak times. This is something we proposed a year and a half ago. Manning stated he can't answer technical questions but if we can drive demand to off-peak periods and stimulate high volume margin add-ons, this would work perfectly. Richard Schodorf stated we are in need of revenue. As Manning pointed out there may bE some people who are unhappy, but we not only need money to breakeven, we need money to improve the course and the play. You have an opportunity to go after people that may not be playing that much by selling a different opportunity. The Golf Advisory Committee envisioned an advertising campaign that included trying to have a three-hole cart rate. Try to get more people on the course, utilizing the facility we already have. They are talking about the possibility of maybe closing one and looking at closing another rather than taking the opportunity to at least see if, through a different pricing strategy we can drive demand. There are a lot of people who play country clubs. This rate would be far less than that. How do we become competitive with the resources? We would like you to consider, try it for a year. This type of subscription service has been successful wiH BOARD OF PARK COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING May 13, 2019 Page 6 of 16 the YMCA. We need to do something. He is a Super Senior. If you look at what they are paying monthly and they could play week days and have the opportunity to play weekends and not pay anything, you would have more people. You will always have people that don't like change. We hope you will take a look at it, we had long and hard debates, went out to the community, talked to the golfers and, with the idea of keeping the courses open and in good shape, most of them like the idea of an investment and like the flexibility. We should give it a try. Houtman stated from a staff perspective, we have spent a lot of time looking at something that needed to make some changes. We wanted to do something that is going to give us more revenue opportunities. This is something that came along and we wanted to explore it. There is definitely some great opportunities. Having a steady stream of revenue is fantastic. The biggest concern is, if someone in the middle of the season decides not to pay, how do we get those collections. We will still have the daily fees, if someone does not want a pass, they can still come and use the golf course on a daily pass. There are some opportunities and some draw backs as well. We are ready to present this to Council if that is something you want us to do. Make sure everyone aware of these options. Palmer stated we keep raising golf prices, why can't we just lower them across the board. Houtman responded in some ways we have because we have so many different passes. Manning pointed out there is a large percentage of golf that is already discounted, down to $17 per round on average. We looked at that in the past and wanted to change some of that and have more revenue per round. We are currently way under the market. Palmer asked wouldn't more rounds be better than no rounds though. Houtman responded you have to find the sweet spot. If we discount everything and have a lot of rounds but not making much revenue, then we would see a degradation of the course, we would need more staff, there would be more overhead, more costs etc. With more rounds there is more overhead as well. Deatherage asked what part the Park Board will play in the continuation of this. Will we see it again, have final approval over pricing structure, etc. Houtman responded Council will decided the pricing structure, but they always want your consideration and recommendation. Deatherage responded so at what point with that come back to us to view proposed structure for passes. Houtman responded he will ask for the board's recommendation or support and then take it to Council later this month. If they have questions, take it back to them later at a regular Council meeting for them to vote on. Deatherage asked if pricing had already been determined or are you going to go back and do pricing after they say they are okay with passes. Houtman responded prices have already been determined for each one of these. Deatherage would like to see that information before saying whether or not she supports it. Houtman stated it was BOARD OF PARK COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING May 13, 2019 Page 7 of 16 presented to Park Board in the past, and can do it again. Deatherage stated she thought the numbers were going to be reworked. According to this it looks like the numbers need to be adjusted. Hendricks stated the numbers have not changed since the presentation was made to the Park Board last May. Ramsey indicated that was a year ago, please refresh our memory. Manning pulled up slide with pricing. Hendricks went through the prices. Hillman stated the only difference from what we have seen before is that we were looking at monthly numbers. Hendricks stated the spreadsheet everyone was given included both. Hillman stated we have seen these before, there is no reason we cannot have a motion and move forward today. Deatherage stated we had also discussed a young professional pass as well. She thought they would be reworked from the last time. Palmer stated he remembered in the conversation we talked about age ranges. Hendricks stated that is correct, he is looking for the email. Manning stated those are included in the "Other 101", he did not price them out. Hendricks indicated he would find the email and forward it to the Board members. Palmer stated Manning's graph that breaks out the groups provides enough information to make a decision. Hillman motioned that they include the monthly fees on the Council Workshop information so they can see the same thing we've seen before, and move it ahead for review by City Council. Geter stated this has been a struggle and we have offered our group to help, to Houtman. We feel so marginalized, why there is this attitude about not telling golfing public. Our numbers are different. The City provided us a revenue sheet from 2017 that shows 1,400 season passes: 200 youth, 900 senior. That is totally different than what Manning has. He can't be sure you have the right numbers to go forward. One element that was not mentioned is the Senior Pass is 5-day pass. Hendricks responded that is not correct. It was changed in 2008, the Golf Committee at that time made the recommendation to change the Senior Pass to where they could play on Saturday, Sunday and holidays, after 12:00. Geter statec you are not operating in a vacuum, you are operating in a volatile market in this area, including Derby, Sand Creek, Cheney. For $300 a year you play all year with a cart at Sand Creek. The great advantage for Wichita is five courses. The marketing thing never comes forward out of these presentations. If you are going to make this work, think about what the real values are. When Council looks at it and asks these questions about what are you competing with, is there an opportunity to get some of those golfers. It would be nice to see that addressed. Another key point he is asked about is what is the strategy converting existing passes. Do you have a policy that will allow them to convert that to the new system? It is true what Manning said the bad thing about seniors, but the good thing is we are all going to become seniors. We have a lot of trouble getting this information and having it available to show the golfers. He would like to see it in a form that could be posted at the golf courses so every golfer can see how it affects them. It was proposed it would be monthly only, you sign up for a monthly deduction from your checking account. Some will ask why they can't do it all at once. They would like to see the flexibility in paying. They would like to have these points addressed before going to Council. They want to see it all on the table. They would like to help make it work but there is this BOARD OF PARK COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING May 13, 2019 Page 8 of 16 attitude about not wanting any input from people that gets in the way. We would like to be there for you. Houtman stated he disagrees with that because he has had a meeting with you and spent time with and answered emails as well, but his first priority is to work with the Golf Advisory Committee. Geter responded the Golf Advisory Committee is not as representative of the golfing public as it might be. Hendricks responded to Deatherage's earlier question with the passes that we add there would be a Junior Pass, ages 17 and under, for $6.50 per month. The Senior Pass, ages 62 and over, for $65 per month, for $780 annually. A Retired Military Pass would be ages 45 over, and would be $75 per month or $900 annually. A Young Adult pass, up to age 30, would be $75 per month or $900 annually. The Adult pass, which is age 31 over, up to age 62, would be $90 per month or $1,080 per year. A Couples pass would be $110 per month, or $1,320 per year. Those are the rates we talked about for those passes. The reason you don't see Students up here now is because last year we sold 17. That is the total number of Student Passes sold in the City of Wichita last year. You don't see High School passes, because that is an agreement we have with high schools, which generates about $20,000 in revenue. Our agreement with them is not going to change, but in our total pass numbers we sell in a year, they are included in that. Those fees will not change. This is pertaining mainly to fees that the general public will pay. Geter stated he is referring to numbers they were provided that show 200 youth passes. Hendricks stated that is the High School passes. Goter asked if there was anything in a published form they could look at instead of just having someone read it. Give us a chance to look at it. You are going to have a much greater chance of success if you allow us to buy into it up front. We will be advocates, we want to help make it work. But the shadowy form of bringing stuff forward... Hillman asked Goter what the best time frame would be. We don't want to rush it but want to get it done. Goter responded do it whenever you can. This may generate as much as $240,000 additional revenue. If that is the case, you should have done it last year. Why would you wait for something that has that potential? Houtman responded we have been asking Council for this for a while. He takes his direction from the City Manager and Council as to when to bring items to them. He made this request even before they did. We have been very antsy to make this happen. We are working within the constraints we have. We are providing the information to the people that ask for it. We would be very happy to give that again in any form or manner that is requested or needed. Palmer asked Houtman if his presentation to City Council will have all these numbers. Cabral recommended that you also include a comparison to some of the other regional courses. You mentioned Sand Creek, one of their 7-day non-resident passes is $175 per month. The most expensive we are proposing is $90. Audience member stated Sand Creek includes carts and range cards. Cabral responded even with that they are still BOARD OF PARK COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING May 13, 2019 Page 9 of 16 significantly below regional competitors with one course. Derby was about the same with $195 at one and $145 at another. Deatherage asked to go back to slide #14. What she is getting from this is it would take 31 rounds for the potential Super Senior pass to breakeven with the proposed pricing. Hendricks responded that is correct. Deatherage stated the average rounds played is only 27. Hendricks responded that is correct. Deatherage added it appears to her some of the pricing needs to be reworked if this is just one example of one of the pass structures. Ramsey - left meeting 4:16, returned 4:18 Houtman stated there are a lot of different ways to slice this. There has got to be the right sweet spot. Will this make people play an extra four rounds to make it to that breakeven point? Do we want to lose that revenue that we are expecting as well? There are a lot of variables when we look at pricing. Mr. Manning is sharing that information so we know what that is. If we take it to Council and they say that price is too much, then we have to make that adjustment. These are the numbers we are looking at to help make some additional revenues to meet some of the expenses we have. Hillman added we are also encouraging seniors to start playing on weekends. That will make a difference. That may make up the extra rounds. Palmer the price structure, the Y uses, lots of people use it for a monthly revenue generating standpoint. This makes sense. He understands what Deatherage is saying as well, to the general public, they see it takes 31 rounds for me to breakeven but 27 rounds is enough for them to buy the pass. Deatherage stated she has felt that the current pass system is way too complicated. She is in favor of creating these unlimited membership things. Also she does strategic planning and marketing for a living, before we say yes to this and send it on to Council, we have the recommendation for them to go through with it she would like to see that there was research done on the numbers and we are picking the right amount. We have discussed before that the City is not always the best at running a business so why not take input from the people that are paying that amount and do our research. Palmer responded what Cabral did looking at even just one course, this model works because they are doing exactly that at Sand Creek Station. Deatherage stated the model is good, she does not feel comfortable saying yes without knowing more about the numbers. Palmer asked if the numbers change her opinion of the plan. Deatherage responded the idea itself. Palmer stated we are letting the smarter people in the room say that $1,080 is a good price for a 31 y/o to play golf. If it flops on its face, then we visit this again in a year saying we need to change our price structure. Deatherage responded wouldn't you just put more effort into it now so you are not wasting time in a year. Palmer asked what is the effort. What data are you going to get that says ... Deatherage stated it could be perfect, doesn't know. Palmer stated maybe the data doesn't exist. Ramsey stated you have to pass it so you know what is in it. Palmer added you have to at least see what it does. Houtman stated he mentioned earlier we don't know what the sweet spot is. It is a moving target. What is the philosophy, do we want to give a great price break to everyone, do we want to have it closer together or further apart. There are a lot of things to think about. We don't have BOARD OF PARK COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING May 13, 2019 Page 10 of 16  all the data, we have to start from these pricing points and can adjust going forward. Hendricks added Hidden Lakes has a program similar. Their 7-day Golf only single pass is $1,427; the Couples pass is $1,975; their Senior pass $1,265 and their Junior pass is $468. That is golf only and does not include carts. If you want to add carts then their 7-Day Single goes to $2,358, the Couple goes to $2,873 and the Senior goes to $2,208. Palmer asked if we have the option to add carts. Hendricks responded no. We have talked about it but as Manning stated that is one of our largest revenue streams other than greens fees. It is our #2 revenue producing thing. The thing we require everyone to do that comes to play our golf courses is pay a greens fee. We don't require them to take a cart. Sand Creek Station includes their carts in their passes because they are mandatory. You have to take a cart, it doesn't matter what day of the week it is. Audience member stated she has had a 7-Day Couples pass for four years. She can go to Hidden Lakes and the number or rounds that she and her husband played last year, she could save $1,350 by going to Hidden Lakes. She does not play five courses. Doesn't play Clapp because does not feel safe, does not play Sim because it is slow. Plays at Mac in ladies league and plays Tex. Her fee there would include cart, green fee, range ball passes. Hendricks responded correct for $2,873 a year. She stated it would be $2,208.96 per year. He stated he just pulled it from their website. Deatherage stated the biggest red flag is between page 14 and 15 how there is such a difference between the two. For a Super Senior Pass breakeven is 31 rounds, with the average of 27. But with the Senior Pass breakeven is 31 rounds with the average of 40. It goes from one extreme to the other and she then questions where the numbers come from. Palmer stated that is the current strategy. Hendricks stated the current strategy as Manning has on the Super Senior Pass, their breakeven right now is 10 rounds and they average about 27 rounds. With the new pass structure they would be at 31 rounds to breakeven. On the regular senior pass the current breakeven is at 17 and they would also be at 31 because they both will be a Senior Pass. It is not going to break it down to the two types. They are averaging 40 rounds a year. We have a percentage of our Super Seniors that we could possibly alienate that would not end up playing on our golf courses. Deatherage stated then wouldn't we have the pricing to it is either one or the other. It's more than the average or lower than the average. Why is one higher and one lower? Hendricks asked if she was referring to the new pass. Deatherage responded as compared to .... Palmer stated the Senior is all one pass now, there is no Super Senior any more. Hendricks stated that is correct, it becomes one Senior Pass. Ramsey stated they are just giving a comparison of what a Super Senior was paying compared to what they would. Deatherage responded okay, that makes sense. Schodorf stated the Golf Advisory Committee went to all the courses, talked to the members and posted it. From a practical standpoint we looked at the numbers and the City of Wichita and all the other golfers are subsidizing the Super Senior. We cannot operate a course at what we are offering them. We knew we were not going to make BOARD OF PARK COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING May 13, 2019 Page 11 of 16 everyone happy, but we were formed by the City Council and the Park Board, to look at golf and try to make it an operation that made business sense and could pay its bills. In doing so we might alienate a few people, but the bottom line is if we don't pay our bills there are going to be alternatives that include looking at closing another course or two. That was not acceptable in their minds. Renard stated she thinks Deatherage is concerned about, and so is she, is it is hitting the seniors in a negative way but the single regular season pass holder benefits by this new. We have more seniors that we do singles 7-day pass. Hendricks responded they also looked at what the seniors are paying in the different courses around us and we are still less than what they are at the rates we put together. That was also taken in to consideration as well when we came with this price structure. Deatherage stated her main concern is that we have done our due diligence to make sure the prices are right. She is not saying we have or have not, she just has not heard any information on it. Compared to the last time we were presented this, she was under the impression some changes were going to be made. We talked about raising the Young Professionals one past 30 for multiple reasons. A couple things that haven't changed. Goter stated the product is one thing, marketing is the other essential element. You can't just throw this out there and say magic is going to happen. How are you going to...what does this look like, what is your message. It would help if you had that in hand when you take the product to Council. That has been missing up to this point. Houtman expressed agreement and stated we need to know what we are going to be offering before we can make a strong marketing plan. We need that direction from Council and from the Park Board and Golf Advisory Committee. Once we know what direction we are going we have a strong idea on how we are going to market it and how we will fundraise to get this message out and get people interested in this pass. Palmer asked Hillman if he is still making his motion. Hillman responded he made the motion but would be happy to withdraw it or let it move on to the.... It is quite possible that some of the public and golf committee would normally have met in a day or two from now, but are here today could get together and develop a marketing plan with some suggestions and then take it forward. Palmer responded the marketing plan does not have to be decided today. We have to decide today if we want City Council to look at pass structure. Maybe with the caveats that Deatherage is talking about, the 30-35. Having the information from the other courses on what their prices are, if this is fair, so they can say we want to move forward with passes. Then you have to determine what the numbers are. Marketing is great and yes it will have to happen but we have to get past this first step. Hillman then made a motion that we authorize Houtman and his staff to work with the City Council and develop the marketing plan and share it with the City Council for workshop review and on to vote. BOARD OF PARK COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING May 13, 2019 Page 12 of 16  Deatherage stated the key is not whether or not she supports the actual numbers, but the theory of having a plan she would support. Ramsey asked what are we looking for, specifically. Houtman responded he is looking for when he is making the presentation to Council at the end of the month and they ask him has the Park Board seen this, are they supportive of this philosophy of this pass, he can say yes or no. Ramsey responded so you are simply looking for a recommendation from the Park Board that we support the philosophy for a pass structure. Houtman responded that is correct. Ultimately it is Council that will decide what is the actual cost for each of the passes. They may have questions similar to what Deatherage is pointing out. Why is the pass at this particular cost, is this something we have compared with other markets within this area. Is it something we think we need to increase our rate of returns. Are we giving too much of a discount. Those are all questions they will ask and we will be able to answer them. But the first thing they will ask is if this is the recommendation from the Golf Advisory Committee and is it supported from the Park Board. Ramsey made a substitute motion to recommend the Park Department move forward with Park Board's recommendation that we support this philosophy. Hillman second. Unanimous vote. Motion by Ramsey, second by Hillman, IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY VOTED to recommend the Park Department move forward with Park Board's recommendation that we support this philosophy (S-0). Houtman stated after he makes the presentation to Council Workshop, if they are supportive of it, will come back and present to Council for their approval. Workshop is only informational, they will not make a vote at that time. They will probably have a lot fo the same questions and we will need to come back with answers to those questions. One thing we need to do come up with ideas on how to transition from one pass system to the other. When we know what is going to be moving forward, then we can come up with a better marketing plan for that. It is hard to build marketing plan and then Council goes a different direction, the he is stuck with a marketing plan that was created for something they did not support. Our marketing team will have their work cut out for them once we know what direction we are going. Deatherage stated for the sake of support and communication she would recommend they also include why they went with those prices when presenting to City Council. Houtman responded that is a good suggestion and will make sure we do that. He stated to Mr. Hendricks a good explanation to the price points for each of these passes. That is backed up with a lot of market research and comparisons. The Golf Advisory Committee had a lot of input into each of the prices as well. Palmer stated we are going to bypass the other updates. We have Confluence here to talk about the Clapp Plan and we will conclude with that. BOARD OF PARK COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING May 13, 2019 Page 13 of 16 4 Recreation Update (Reggie Davidson) Houtman stated Davidson has been doing great. We have all kinds of great things going on. We had the Young Lions obstacle course this weekend at OJ Watson. We had an Open Streets event the weekend before. We've had all kinds of things going on. The Rec staff has been doing great. Harlenske left meeting 4:35. 5 Golf Update (Troy Hendricks) Houtman stated we have been going through the process with the Transformation Committee. Hillman and Tabing are on the committee. He shared a PowerPoint. Lashonda Garnes has been leading this process. There has been a lot of community engagement and meetings. The Transformation Committee has also been meeting on own. Coming up with the philosophy behind what this change of Clapp and going from a golf course to a park. There has been recommendations that they will be going forward and present at the same Council Workshop. Council asked for a visual of what could be at the park. We set down with some landscape architects: Jeff Best and Phil Meyer, they do a lot of work in Wichita, along with PJ Novick, who is here, from Confluence. We have three different versions that we got from the Transformation Committee. That committee is about 12 people. We divided them into three groups and we will go over what they thought the park might look like. These are just suggestions and ideas. We have three conceptual ideas that we were able to get from the group. It was interesting is they were similar in how they used the park and what ideas they want to see in there. PJ Novick stated these are just concepts 1, 2 and 3, there is no ranking. Concept 1 has a new entry road, a parking lot, some opportunity for some retail, rental facility, a plaza space for food trucks, etc., a central gathering space. A common thing through all concepts is developing some large ponds. The aesthetics of having water in a park gives us the opportunity to work with flood issues by digging them deeper. We then use that soil to add topography to the park. This concept has an amphitheater space with a large view out shelter, then access to the main portion of the park. Toward the south is a destination/inclusive playground with restrooms. There is access to the road and parking lot. On the other side we have the opportunity for some type of education facility maybe a satellite library. Around the entire concept there are neighborhood connections, perimeter trail. They tie back to the neighborhood and in to the grade school and senior housing. Concept 2 is a little different with an entry and a roadway that has a cross intersection that gives direct access to the park. We've got neighborhood connection. There is more green space and a special event center where you can seat 150-200 people. Parking and great views out to the greenspace. There is a rental facility where you could rent a bike or scooter. In the heart of the park is the opportunity for a sky trail, a vertical playground in the trees. We have parking, a boathouse with the larger ponds. There is a destination playground in the corner with existing trees, zip lines and some water play. There is another large pond, a group shelter close to parking, pickleball or tennis and then the connection to the neighborhood. This group wanted to make sure the green buffer along senior housing is maintained. BOARD OF PARK COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING May 13, 2019 Page 14 of 16 Concept 3 has a roadway coming all the way through and connecting at two points. There is a large group shelter taking advantage of the space and the neighborhood connection. Right off the next entry drive is a dog-friendly restaurant and bar. There is an amphitheater against a potential pond, an event venue, rental opportunities and then a kid zone sky trail. They didn't define it but, adventure play. Then additional trails and neighborhood connection. There are similarities between all three but then there are subtle differences to each. Houtman added there are just a couple things he wants to add. We listened to a lot of different voices and a lot of different things. What we heard was not a large commercial development, but things that support a green space. One thing being talked about is building a hill for year round use, snow/sledding in the winter, a bicycle hill in the fall, fitness in the summer. All three groups met separately and came up with similar ideas. LaShonda did a lot of good work. He is taking it to Council Workshop end of month. Transformation Committee met regularly helping with conceptual ideas. Ramsey stated these are exciting. This is going to be exceptional. There is a lot of opportunity here. Houtman stated one comment going back to looking at philosophies and thinking about the intended outcomes versus the unintended outcomes. One thing we always look at when finding funding to support the maintenance and operations. How are we going to be able to do this without having a whole lot of budget? What kind of development could be put in that is acceptable. The philosophy that came back was that is not what we want. This will raise the rest of the neighborhood. Hopefully it will gain support from other business nearby and around to help find ways and other mechanisms of opportunities with special events or other revenue generating items that is not a public business. Ultimately we may need to look at some type of public/private partnership. The Snow Brothers group comes to mind. This is a great footprint. All three of these concepts have great ideas within them. Ramsey stated the public/private partnership is what he is excited about, envisioning something like the spaces in front of Union Station. This is the right way to go to make things happen. There is a lot of opportunity. Palmer added it gives the City and this part of town something to be proud of. Ramsey added they are making this a destination park. Hillman stated most all of the groups left Harry Street bare. They see that potentially as an area for public/private partnership to development. Then let the market shop for combination that would be of the most benefit. He appreciates all the effort everyone put into it so that we have a lot of green space left. We are going to have a really nice park when we are done. Houtman stated the group paid attention to the neighborhood as well as the people across the street. Looking at how things are going to impact and interact with people across the street and within a block or two. We did not give much thought to the school district. There were some ideas on how to partner with school district and seeing if there are opportunities for not just programming but infrastructure improvements. BOARD OF PARK COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING May 13, 2019 Page 15 of 16  Houtman stated it would be great to get motion of support to move forward with this if you are supportive of the philosophies and concepts. Ramsey motioned, Palmer second. Unanimous vote. Motion by Ramsey, second by Palmer, IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY VOTED to support the Park Department in these philosophies and concepts {5-0). 6 Golf Advisory Committee Update (Eddie Fahnestock) Deferred to June Meeting. 7 Wichita Parks Foundation Update (Troy Houtman) Deferred to June Meeting. 8 Pawnee Prairie Park Update (David McGuire) Deferred to June Meeting. 9 OJ Watson Park Committee Update (Troy Houtman) Deferred to June Meeting. 10 Aquatics Master Plan Update (Troy Houtman) Deferred to June Meeting. 11 President's Update (Troy Palmer) Deferred to June Meeting. 12 Director's Update (Troy Houtman) Deferred to June Meeting. Adjourn There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at approximately 5:00 p.m. The next regularly scheduled meeting will be held on Monday, June 10, 2019. BOARD OF PARK COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING May 13, 2019 Page 16 of 16