GILROY
– District 1 County Supervisor Don Gage has issued a key
recommendation for the future of Bear Ranch, announcing his support
Thursday for the combination of a golf course and events pavilion
as centerpieces of the county’s new parkland east of San
Martin.
GILROY – District 1 County Supervisor Don Gage has issued a key recommendation for the future of Bear Ranch, announcing his support Thursday for the combination of a golf course and events pavilion as centerpieces of the county’s new parkland east of San Martin.
His recommendation counters both the county’s Parks Commission and a community task force. Both groups voted to support a 500-person events center and campground model over golf at the site of the new 3,600-acre county park flanking Coyote Lake east of Gilroy.
Gage teamed with District 3 County Supervisor Pete McHugh to endorse the concept of an 18-hole golf course paired with a 200-person events center during the Housing, Land Use Environment and Transportation committee meeting in San Jose, saying the proposal combines both a good mix of uses with the potential to generate revenue for the county.
“Right now our parks system loses a lot of money every year, and we don’t have the option to do that anymore …” Gage told onlookers. “Every time we look at a park we’re developing, we need to look at (getting) a return on our investment.
“Here, we can do that.”
Gage’s decision does not mean the proposal is set in stone. He asked the full Board of Supervisors to make a final call on the park’s prospective features sometime next month. But his recommendation is key because the park is entirely within his supervisorial district.
The choice was not entirely unexpected. Gage revealed a personal vision for a golf course at the park as early as last March’s supervisorial election.
After majorities of both the county’s Parks Commission and a community task force subsequently voted to support the events center and campground model over golf, Gage asked the county to design a combination alternative and secure a more solid financial analysis of all three options.
The combination of a golf course and slimmed-down events center he chose Thursday would dominate most of the roughly 300-acre “western flats” area northeast of San Martin Avenue that is considered to be the most developable part of the hilly park.
As currently envisioned, the events pavillion could operate either as an independent facility with its own entrance, kitchen and patio seating or as part of the course.
Like the other two alternatives, the favored proposal also would include an equestrian center, facilities for fishing, off-leash dogs, historical interpretation and environmental education, although it would have smaller group picnic and passive open space or habitat restoration areas.
At $17.45 million for capital investment, according to the most recent projections, the golf/events combination would involve the highest initial capital investment of the three options, while yielding a 17 percent return. But it could generate the most net long-term revenues for the county – roughly $14 million over three decades.
The golf proposal course without the center would yield a 16 percent return on an initial investment of $14.75 million and generate $11 million in net revenue over the 30 years. It would use 110 to 150 acres of the western flat.
The events center and campground alternative was expected to generate an estimated $5 million in net revenue and a 32 percent return on an initial $4.5 million capital investment, while using 25 to 50 acres.
However, there’s risk involved. Each scenario in the analysis by Oakland-based Strong Associates assumes the improvements are financed with tax-exempt bonds for a term of 31 years, with the county bearing the cost of debt service.
With the tax-free bonds, the county likely would have to operate the facilities on management contracts instead of long-term leases, according to a county staff report – contracts it said are generally not as profitable as leases and that places liability for operational losses on the county.
In an earlier interview, Gage said he wasn’t too concerned and didn’t consider it a major risk.
“Any business is a risk,” he said. “The thing about a park that reduces the risk is it’s very cheap entertainment for people. People stay home more and utilize the facilities where they live …
“And if you have a municipal golf course that people can afford, they’re going to use it.”
Speakers both for and against a course appeared at Thursday’s hearing.
Supporters of the events and camping option have said it could provide a wider range of uses than a golf course, as well as an opportunity to restore native habitat.
They also note all advisory groups have favored the events center and camping option – including a second 8-to-5 vote Tuesday by the task force, which consists of recreational enthusiasts and San Martin residents. All dissenters sided with Gage’s choice.
“The public has considered the options and doesn’t want a golf course,” Kelly Crowley of the county’s Audubon Society told the committee. “The other alternative supports a broader swath of the public.”
But golf supporters have argued a course would meet a demonstrated need for inexpensive golf in the county and generate much-needed revenue.
The facility could provide a place to relax and catch valley views, San Martin resident Bill Konle said.
“It would be a beautiful, wonderful opportunity for the county to have something special there,” he said.
County parks staff are expected to submit the recommendations to supervisors Dec. 10 or 17. What emerges will be tooled into a formal draft master plan and undergo environmental review before coming back to supervisors for final approval.
Park-wide total capital costs are estimated between $15 and $31 million, depending on which option is chosen.
The ranchlands have remained off-limits to the public since the county purchased them for $11 million in 1998 as planners worked with the task force to meld them into the existing Coyote Lake County Park.
But Gage urged patience at the hearing, noting the county could face lawsuits if it isn’t careful in building the improvements.
“We do want to move quickly, but we want to do it right,” he said.
