I definitely don't mind paying for structural damages related to hurricanes, or OT or other labor charges related to repairs, but I'm not happy with the membership being required to cover "lost revenues from operating activities" or "employee loss of work". $4300 Lost Revenue (?) 12,000 Lost Revenue Stay and Play (?) $5000 for string lights $1000 paper bags $15000 in employee lunches

A medium sized alligator surfaced with a large deer head today on osprey. Keep those pups away from the water!

The marathon started off great today. So many runners. Hope new folks fall in love with the island and join the club.

I am voting "No" on the debt assessment. It's a difficult and complicated choice. I know several others who are doing the same. I was very disappointed in the tone of Tom's recent letter to the membership which read like a ransom note. Other members have noted the same. D(http://same.My)espite that, my decision to vote "No" is based on what I heard (and did not hear) in the Open Session. It's obvious the club needs money to pay its crushing debt.  I know that the club management has allowed its banking relationships to deteriorate along with the club infrastructure. The Board of Directors and management team has painted themselves into this corner.  I was hoping for something closer to a mea culpa in the Open Session. I know Jeff Smith has to field calls from angry vendors but, frankly, this is why he is paid a six-figure salary. He's great at spinning phrases such as as "liquidity challenges", "scramble money", and "headwinds", but he's terrible at generating realistic forecasts- even once. Looking forward, the nominating committee has put forth two candidates, one of which does not live here and has no board experience, and another who has held a leadership position for years while our finances unravelled. My confidence is not high and I'm worried about being back in this same position as early as February. There are other options. The club's credit is already damaged. Instead of asking the membership for yet another financial lifeline, it's time for the BOD to get creative and make hard decisions that may be unpopular in the short term. Reduced ferry runs, lifetime memberships, increases on freight, executive salary reductions or partial deferrals, and opening up desirable tee times at our world famous golf course should be on the table. There are no rental properties available to drive ancillary revenue? Then make the rental program terms actually worthwhile for homeowners. It is the Board's responsibility to get creative to solve the problems which they, alone, have created over the past 3-4 years. I'm hopeful that write-in candidate Clay Burton can do what needs to be done. Clay, you've got my vote. I know that many people feel like they have no choice but to vote yes, but where does it end without significant changes? As Kaye Earles said in the open session, there are other options that are simply being ignored or overlooked.

This information is being privately emailed throughout the membership and it deserves being aired-out for accuracy and validation. It is being publicly listed that the salaries paid to the past CEO and current CFO might be as high as $1m combined. That is, approx $667k for Doug Egly (former CEO), and approximately $348k for Jeff Smith (CFO). In all other respects, the other salaries listed in this document appear to be in line with their roles. Many members trading this information would like to know if this information is factual, or erroneous, as it seems very high. Two+ years ago it was revealed that our lines of credit were being used to fund operations and there were questionable accounting irregularities under the watch of our Treasurer. Our CFO continued to paint a rosy picture while repeatedly missing recovery forecasts. The membership frequently received last-minute financial reports, often the night before meetings, that were structured in ways to limit scrutiny.  Last year a large group of concerned property owners recognized impending issues and formally requested financial transparency from Gary Baum (Pres), Tom Donohoe(VP) and Jeff Smith. They were stonewalled. Plainly, the members were told that certain financial information will not be disclosed. This needs to change... but there are no means to do so. The Small Biz Association, however, is determined to account for our $1.3m PPP loan. US Senators earn $174k/year, and the US President makes $400k. The CEO of Ford makes $21m. However, the HP membership is not permitted to know our own executive compensation while at the same time being asked to relieve the club's debt.  Why the secrecy?  In the absence of transparency we can only assume the facts would not be well received. With certainty, the new CEO and CFO should be well compensated for success.  However, they should not be incentivized for lack of performance. This is the heart of the question. Is the information being emailed around the club accurate?  I would like to know whether our CEO has been paid north of $600k per year, and whether our CFO is taking in $340k a year despite underperformance. I would like to know if severance packages were paid while our vendors were not. I would like to know the salary of the interim CEO and how the new CEO will be compensated including incentives and perks. PDF Document attached for your review, and the source of the information included.

In the 2022 Member Feedback Survey, the membership was specifically asked whether it was helpful to have a "straight ticket" on the board nomination process. In those results, the membership overwhelmingly stated its dissatisfaction with the process, with nearly 51% of the club owners showing either moderate or strong opposition to the practice of limiting leadership choice. Those results are below: Why does the Board and the nominating committee ignore actionable member feedback regarding a fixed election? Because they know the membership is nearly powerless to do anything about it. The nominating committee is solely responsible for stacking the board with candidates who have enabled irresponsible spending and gross mismanagement for the past several years. It borders on negligence. 60% of the members surveyed have little to no confidence in the Board's ability to manage finances and the nominating committee is responsible for placing those Board members with their "straight tickets". For the two open Board seats the committee has put forth only two candidates, Tom Donahoe and Julie Gorman. The committee held back two applicants because... well, they don't want people's feelings to get hurt. All this while the current Board has managed the club to the brink of insolvency. Tom Donahoe, one of the committee's two shoe-in nominees, is also conveniently the board liaison for the committee. While Tom is great at tough talk, he presided on the Board while Doug Elgy, Jeff Smith and Adam Martin ran the club's credit and reputation into the ground and have crippled us with $2m in past due payables. Tom was at the helm when the Board failed to track a $500k ferry overage despite boasting about "cost controls". Tom was at the helm when the Board decided to pay $50k+ to Reese Jones and vanity marketing brochures instead of investing in basic infrastructure such as ADA compliant elevators and leaky roofs. I don't know much about Mrs. Gorman but per her application she has only been on the island for approximately 15 months over the past 3 years. She has a background in medical billing and has never sat on a board in any shape or form - ever. She has, however, been on the transportation committee who is partially responsible for the marine and roads fiasco and is proposing a reduction of services in the cart repair department. These are our only choices. We can do better. This community has many potential Board candidates who are sitting on the sidelines. I hope you step up. We need nuts & bolts operations experts who have no reservations about "retiring" ineffective management as it becomes clear change is needed. I am praying for additional nominees. I'm not arguing that Tom and Julie don't deserve to run for the board because they certainly do. I'm arguing that they should not run uncontested. I am arguing that the membership deserves a choice- in fact, we are owed it based on the above surveys in which a majority of the membership disagree with a straight ticket and the direction of leadership overall.