Postpone the Vote for the 2017 Capital Improvement Plan

Deferred maintenance should be included in the renovations or completed before renovations are considered.

Deferred maintenance should be included in the renovation or the renovation should be considered after maintenance is up to date.

I appreciate everyones efforts but this second vote is way too soon! I have problems considering an assessment for some of these improvements as I think the scale is still too big (i.e. Patio). I just finished playing golf and not one member was sitting on the patio on a nice Sunday evening. Why do we need a patio that sees 150+ members? My other concern is the financial stability of the club. This is the 4 assessment I have considered in the past 17 years. I have a problem paying an assessment for new entertaining options like an upgraded patio and bar area when I see other areas of the club not being properly maintained. The outside of the golf pro shop looks abysmal and we have newer areas of the club that need to be repaired and painted. With previous assessments, many of the members that left the club were seniors who were not using all the facilities. The individuals that are upset with this Savor 60 plan are very active members and thus we can't afford them leaving the club. Please consider a delay of the vote. We have a chance at improving the health of the club if we do so and might have a chance at improving the facilities.

10 years ago Featured

Is this board really going to ignore a simple request for more information by 275 members (including fellow board members)? In the best interests of all, I respectfully request that the board reconsider this decision-- it's never too late to demonstrate leadership.

So what are the odds of having a unanimous board when the membership is so divided? Sounds like groupthink to me which is what occurs when you amend the bylaws to allow the board to present the slate for the next board with only an up or down vote. It becomes a self perpetuating leadership group who think they are accountable to no one. And by the way, why should athletic members get an equal vote even if they pay the same assessment because they don't pay the same initiation fees or dues?

This project is becoming a distraction.

This Board is extremely one sided and is not HEARING what the membership is telling them (overwhelmingly). The vote needs to be postponed until the new cycle of Board members begins. I feel very misrepresented. If you know folks who feel the same, please encourage them to vote no so we can be heard once again in this July vote seeing as they are refusing to accept this petition request. Over 270 signatures and they feel "confused". Wow.

If I could ask a dumb question....wasn't this conversation started in 2014? Why do people feel it is rushed? If you disagree with the proposal, then I would think you simply vote against it come next week? Not sure why there is a need for a petition and all the comments about rushing, needing member input etc when it seems like the proper steps have already been taken.

This is club business and as club business it should be treated as such, not to be strewn about the pages of Style magazine. Also a easy fix to the obvious push to eliminate the Men's Grille, would be to build a Ladies Grille.

A thorough evaluation of our existing facility and the short and long term budget requirements for maintaining it should be a starting point...then phase in capital improvements as majority membership and financial capacity allow.

We are in favor of further analysis and options assessment. There is no need to rush to an alternative proposal without understanding the holistic implications of the questions raised. We love the club and want to ensure that upgrades and maintenance are part of a sustainable plan for the future.

Part of the discussion needs to be about the board "moving the goal posts" from 60% to 50.01%. in the wake of member push back getting them to 60% the first time. Also, we need better assurances about how the project will deliver what is promised and on budget. The club has a poor history of this, and the $5.4 million debt we carry, most of it from the last over budget project, prevents us from addressing many pressing capital needs.

Bill is a former WOCC board member.

It seems that the proposed plan should be delayed until a firm plan for other issues is in place. Perhaps a grand, master plan needs to be designed that would look further and deeper into the club's needs.

We would like to go back to the drawing board and see how we can upgrade our club to meet the request of the majority. Maybe looking s lots of small projects rather that one large project?

Thanks to all who came up with this petition!!

I have not understood either round of proposals. I cannot help but believe a key objective is to eliminate the men's grill.

I would like more time to review the plan and request the board postpone the vote.

no need for cram job!!!!!!!!

This is democracy in action (the high-tech kind). I feel we should have options for our members to vote on along the idea of a good, better, best choice of 3 alternatives.