CITY PRIORITIES: GOLF CARTS AND UNITED BROWNSVILLE

By Juan Montoya
During Tuesday's meeting of the City of Brownsville City Commission, a few items dealing with the Brownsville Municipal Golf Course were submitted to the commissioners for their approval.
Aside from authorizing the requests by Parks and Recreation Director Damaris McGlone for "supervisors and maintenance workers I & II and 10 employees, to attend the 2016 Texas Recreation
& Parks Society (TRAPS) South Region Maintenance Rodeo, on January 21, 2016, in Portland, Tex., there were others
The commissioners voted to award a contract for the recreation center roof to a vendor for $95,700, the award of a  $57,900 contract to fix the golf course retaining wall and pipeline crossing project, and an additional $267,000 for a new fleet of 70 golf carts.
This was too much even for the likes of commissioner Deborah Portillo who pointedly asked whether the city was still subsidizing the golf course.
Although no one in finance could tell her the exact numbers at the meeting, the truth of the matter is that Portillo's uncomfortable question was right on the mark.
Brownsville operates the golf course at a loss yearly, and has done so ever since the course was taken over by the city. And it stands to reason. There are a number of world-class golf courses in and around the city. The Valley International Country Club has two; one of nine holes an another with 18.
Before it fell into disrepair, there was the Ft. Brown Memorial Golf Course, but the River Bend Country Club with 18 holes is still there, as is the Rancho Viejo Country Club with two course (El Diablo and El Angel), the South Padre Island Golf Club with two courses, the Treasure Hills Golf Club with 18 holes, and the Cottonwood XXI Country Club course with 9 holes.
So why then, should the taxpayers of Brownsville subsidize a municipal course when there are so many other public courses available nearby? If the golf carts were amphibious given the serious drainage and flooding problems in the city then we'd be for them in a heartbeat!
"Our winter visitors love them." McGlone replied defensively. "It's a big draw to our city."
That answer unintentionally shows the mindset of a territorial bureaucrat.
McGlone replaced Chris Patterson, another parks and rec bureaucrat who pushed for a skate park at Oliveira Park and instead of settling for a reasonable facility, heeded the suggestions of "professional" skaters and vendors to raided the Community Development dollars and ended up with a world-class concrete ramp and skate monstrosity that often sits idle in the park.
 Patterson justified it by citing a public hearing held where "young and veteran skate board enthusiasts" and skate park contractors (American Ramp) convinced him that the city should fleece the Southmost barrio of $300,000 to build a state-of-the art skate facility to allay their desires to have a nice place to play.
He didn't mention any public hearing held in the Southmost area to determine whether the residents there were OK with having the money go for hurricane protection (a dome) for their neighborhoods be siphoned off for such crucial necessities as a $450,000 place for skaters to hang out.
"The contractors were on hand at the Public Input Meeting to incorporate the comments and suggestions from the public...," Patterson wrote.

Both Patterson and then-City Finance Director Pete Gonzalez buttressed their arguments under the guise of preventing crime and giving neighborhood youth an alternative to criminal activity. In other words, "If we don't make this substantial amendment and take part of the $535,000 from the Southmost area and give them what they want, why we might be inducing these impressionable youth to a life of crime."
The 2016 budget approved by city commissioners indicates that "the Brownsville Golf Center Fund includes $504,400 in revenues and a general fund cash subsidy of $308,000. The total expenses are $1,136,445."
But let's not pick on McGlone. Hers is not the only department which receives subsidies to operate.
*The Motor Vehicle Parking Fund shows $635,950 in revenues and $534,854 in expenses, barely breaking even. If the parking fees had not been doubled in 2015, this would still be subsidized by the general fund.
*The city's Public Transit Fund shows an operating loss of $4,817,603. The budget states that "Please note that all public transit systems in the United States operate at a loss. This is the reason why the federal and state governments provide cash subsidies to transit systems."
*The Airport Fund budget shows revenues of $2,665,534 and a cash transfer of $1,643,000 from the General Fund.
*The Convention and Tourism Fund includes a $320,000 cash transfer from the general fund.
Now, some could say that public transit, the airport, and the attracting of tourist are justifiable public expenses.
But do we really need parking meters and a staff downtown? Downtown Harlingen is doing just fine without any or the associated operating expenses and employees.
And how about the golf course? It it really worth it to service a minuscule number of players (or seasonal Snowbirds) who can't pay their way?
Which brings us to the annual $25,000 that the city pays to United Brownsville in the form of "membership" (read protection) fees annually. Why do we need them?
As it is, the 2016 city budget is subsidized to the tune of $12 million by a "transfer" of that amount paid by the ratepayers of the Public Utility Board, that is, the same Brownsville residents who pay their taxes to the city in the form of property and sales taxes.
 With PUB rates rising to pay for Tenaska and the excesses of the city, is it any wonder that the city commission – which can't operate without a subsidy itself – doesn't blink an eye to burden the double-taxed residents to subsidize these frivolous endeavors?