4/16/1996 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

M M M Sandridge Golf Club _ , ! TAS Report December 6, 1995 off. Typically, problems occur when the revenues generated by golf operations are put into a general fund and then divided among vari.ous other areas rather than strictly used for facility operations. In my opinion, the Sandridge facility has been reasonably successful to this point and while some adjustments in how operations are handled could be made, I would tend to discourage contracting out maintenance of the courses. While your Turf Advisory Service fee helps to defray expenses related to this visit, the USGA largely subsidizes this service, as well as provides funding for extensive turfgrass and environmental research at numerous colleges and universities across the country. As a result cif these ongoing turfgrass research efforts, several, new varieties of grasses, including buffalo, zoysia, bent and possibly bermudagrass can be expected on the mar',et during the next year or two. Furthermore, with the USGA's continued involvement in Environmental Research, an additional $1.5 million has been allocated for the next three years, including $100,000 per year earmarked specifically for wildlife resoarch on golf courses. In conclusion, your suppert of the USGA Green Section and our research efforts are most definitely appreciated We are sincerely committed to assisting your efforts of producing and maintaining the best possible turf conditioning at your facility through the most efficient means, with the utmost consideration of insuring that golf courses remain a positive influence on the environment. I look forward to working with you in the future and encourage you to call should you have any additional questions concerning this report, the research efforts of the USGA or any matter regarding the maintenance of.your course. Sincerely, 2F John H. Foy Director, Florida Region USGA Green Section Mr. Scott next addressed the maintenance costs prepared by OMB Director Joe Baird. He estimated that the total in-house cost could be reduced to $804,080. He believed a $50,433 error had been made in the calculation of the total personnel expense. 23 APRIL 16, 1996 "or< :97 Pacl 830