Castor

Golf Club agreement back before council

The document, as presented, would also commit the Town of Castor to $10,000 a year in funding

By Kevin J. Sabo

For the Advance

A proposed agreement between the Town of Castor and the Castor Golf Club was back before council during their June 14th meeting.

The agreement has been in the works for several months, in an effort to provide sustained and predictable funding to the golf course, as well as to clearly delineate roles and responsibilities of each party.

Town of Castor Chief Administrative Officer Christopher Robblee was charged with creating an agreement between the two parties by Town council, which was subsequently approved at a previous council meeting and sent to the golf club for signature.

The signature never came.

“I got an email from the golf course,” said Robblee.

“They want to impress upon council that they don’t feel supported (with the proposed agreement).”

The golf club found several provisions in Robblee’s document to be unacceptable, according to Robblee, and submitted their own version of the document for the Town of Castor to sign.

Areas of Robblee’s document, which was approved by council before being sent, which the golf club objected to included a six-month dissolution notice, requirement for some projects to be approved by Town council before being started, and a five-year duration of the document before renegotiation and re-signing.

The document submitted to council for consideration removed the six-month dissolution notice, removed the requirement of Town council’s approval for changes to the land, and adjusted the timeline from a five-year duration to being one of “in perpetuity.”

Also, as written, the agreement put forward for council’s consideration removes the Town’s ability to sever the agreement; the proposed agreement could only be severed at the will of the golf course.

The document, as presented, would also commit the Town of Castor to $10,000 a year in funding to the golf club, up from the current $5,000.

“You would be agreeing to this $10,000 a year indefinitely,” said Robblee.

Coun. McDougall disliked the terms of the contract.

“This is pretty one-sided,” he said.

“We can’t go into perpetuity with this contract.”

McDougall motioned for the Town not to sign the proposed agreement, and directed administration to work on another, more equitable agreement, based on elements of Robblee’s first document and the counterproposal submitted by the golf club.

The motion was carried, and the new document will be brought back to a subsequent council meeting.