By allowing ads to appear on this site, you support the local businesses who, in turn, support great journalism.
Many golf rounds may go up $2 each
A golfer is shown on the back 9 of the Manteca Golf Course.

In an occurrence rarer than a hole-in-one Manteca’s municipal golf course scored a year with more revenue coming in than operating expenses in fiscal year 2020-2021.

A study by Pro Forma Advisors LLC shows Manteca netted $210,900 with $1,647,900 of revenue from 73,160 rounds against $1,437,000 in operating expenses.

But in order to guard against a projected drop in play and a need to start putting aside at least $150,000 a year toward $3,875,000 in anticipated capital improvement projects to keep the municipal course playable, the Manteca City Council is being asked when they meet tonight at 7 p.m. to raise green fees.

The fees, as recommended, for 18 holes would go from:

*$25 weekday for a resident to $27.

*$29 weekday for a non-resident to $31.

*$29 weekend for a resident to $31.

*$34 weekend for a nonresident to $36.

*$21 weekday for a resident senior to $22.

*$21 weekday for a non-resident senior to $22.

*$17 weekday for 9-hole junior to $18.

*$19 weekend for 9-hole junior to $22.

*$19 twilight weekday to $20.

*$20 twilight weekend to $21.

*$14 super twilight weekday to $15.

*$16 super twilight weekend to $17.

Active military at $15 weekday and $17 weekend would remain unchanged as would 18-hole junior players at $12 for weekday and $14 for weekend.

Monthly passes, as recommended, would go from:

*$114 for adult residents to $129.

*$139 for adult non-residents to $159.

*$99 for senior residents to $114.

*$119 for senior non-residents to $144.

*$50 for juniors for those 17 and under to $55.

*$5 for youth on course after 10 a.m. to $6.

*$99 for disability residents to $109.

*$119 for disability non-residents to $129.

The pass holder surcharge for weekend pay will remain at $17.

The study indicated the city will have to consider subsidies for the golf enterprise account by tapping into the general fund if rounds played go below 70,000.

The subsidy would be $272,200 if 50,000 rounds are played, $189,500 if 60,000 rounds are played and $62,600 if 65,000 rounds are played.

At some point between 65,000 and 70,000 rounds the course revenue would cover all costs. That includes the $150,000 set aside for the capital improvement projects reserve.


Capital reserve

critical to keep

course playable

The course has it had a reserve for capital improvement projects. Putting one in place was deemed critical to setting aside funds for addressing typical wear and tear. As such it would keep the course playable and would avoid tapping into the general fund to subsidy gold operations.

Several years ago the golf course the council elected in 2018 when Ben Cantu became mayor directed staff to put in place a plan to address all operating and maintenance needs of the golf course in a bid to eliminate general fund subsidies of the golf course that spanned back to at least the mid-1990s.

The subsidies started shortly after the city entered into a $2.2 million lease purchase agreement to build what some have described as a “country club style” two-story clubhouse. The lease purchase has been paid off but there are now other capital improvement projects needed for the golf course that was built in the former site of a municipal wastewater plant and adjoining city landfill along Union Road.

A 2017 outside analysis by Gene Krekorian Pro Forma Advisors put all costs of yearly maintenance on the table as well as adding a set aside of $100,000 a year for a capital improvement reserve. It also for the first time in at least two decades showed the true costs of operating the course although many critics of the city contended those charges shouldn’t be slapped against the golf course since the functions involved were being handled by existing staff in city administration, finance, and parks. The critics noted in 2017 such charges aren’t made to other recreational facilities.

The big difference is the golf course is set up as an enterprise fund much like water, sewer, and solid waste. As an enterprise fund it is supposed to cover its own costs via rates charged users without tapping into the general fund.

The city for years took $155,000 from the general fund to subsidize senior and youth.

The 2017 study concluded the course would need an annual general fund subsidy of $314,200.

The council, at the time, approved the first of two rate increases but the subsidy continued and there was no sizable set aside for the capital improvement reserve.


To contact Dennis Wyatt, email