Club Business

This message was sent to the Nominating and Marketing Committees in response to the Nominating Committee's email regarding the upcoming Board Election.

Mon, Jul 7

Statement & Request for Action

While I appreciate the Nominating Committee’s stated intent to be transparent, it remains unclear how the Committee itself is formed. There is no election, nomination process, or defined appointment mechanism—raising serious concerns about legitimacy and accountability.

If, as stated, the Board does not appoint members of the Nominating Committee, and the Committee does not take direction from the Board, then who appoints the Committee? Without a clear answer, it appears to function as a self-perpetuating body—insulated from member oversight.

Even more troubling, the Committee amended its charter two years ago to remove the requirement to keep meeting minutes, further cloaking its actions in opacity.

The Committee continues to present only one candidate per open Board seat, despite repeated requests from members since 2022 for a more democratic process with at least two candidates per seat. This approach, combined with a burdensome petition process for challengers, undermines the integrity of our elections and member trust.

It is also unclear whether the Committee considers representation by membership type—such as Signature Golf versus Signature Club—when nominating candidates. If the Board is meant to serve the entire membership, then its composition should reflect the actual makeup of the community.

Therefore, I am formally requesting that the Marketing Committee conduct a new member-wide survey to assess the community’s preference regarding Board elections—specifically whether members support having multiple candidates per open seat. If the majority supports this, I ask that the Nominating Committee respect the will of the membership and revise its approach accordingly.