Council discusses renewing Great Life affiliation for municipal golf course amid access and revenue debate

Council members and staff spent much of the meeting discussing whether to renew an affiliation with Great Life that brings discounted rounds to the municipal golf course and pays the city per check-in.

An unidentified presenter described how payments are calculated under the Great Life arrangement: per check-in for nine holes (quoted as "275") and double that for players who log 18 holes (spoken as "550"). The presenter said cart and food-and-beverage sales increase total revenue and noted the 18-hole effective per-player revenue is lower than the 9-hole rack rate, which the presenter cited as "$32" for nine holes and about "$28.50" effective for an 18-hole play.

The presenter urged negotiating rather than simply accepting the current terms, pointing to seasonal rate groupings (March–May; June–August; September–October) and suggesting a counteroffer on the per-swipe amount: "I think we should counter an offer, because I think they went away with 275 for the first few months. I think 2.50 or $2," the speaker said.

Other members raised operational and community-access questions. One unidentified speaker asked directly, "Are we doing something that handicaps folks here in Beresford?" citing concerns that heavily discounted Great Life rounds could limit local residents’ ability to book tee times during peak demand. The presenter responded that on ideal days the course is often "maxed out," but said they had not yet seen sustained community complaints and that affiliation had helped convert "a dozen or more" Great Life users into full-time members.

The discussion also covered administrative safeguards: the presenter described photo verification at check-in and said instances of misuse were "very few." A question about revenue structure clarified whether Great Life payments are strictly per-swipe or include an affiliation cap (quotations in the meeting referenced caps of "2,000 or 3,000"); the presenter said past months (June, July) had come close but did not confirm reaching a firm cap.

No formal motion or final vote to renew or change the affiliation was recorded in the public portion of the meeting. Council members discussed negotiating higher per-swipe amounts and monitoring capacity so local players are not displaced; the discussion was left open for follow-up rather than a binding decision.

The council moved on to routine business and later entered an executive session on personnel. The affiliation issue was discussed at length and will return for further consideration or a staff recommendation before any public vote.