Mike:

Thanks for the link!Mike:

Thanks for the link! As a supporter of the building fund, I think it is important that the Feasibility and Vision Committee specifically address all of the questions – including the “should we have a building?” type and list answers pro and con. It is my belief that on balance, it will be clear that the pros will greatly outweigh the cons.

The main reason I bring this up, is that for the second year in a row, while volunteering to help with the building fund table, I was confronted with the statement that the building fund is unnecessary and a scam. (I didn’t catch the gentleman’s name on his tag, btw.) However, I did tell him that I too felt it was important that members with concerns about a project of this magnitude deserve to know that their concerns are addressed in good faith by the appropriate committee(s). If I had been armed with more information – in particular an “official statement” from the club, it would be easier to address members with these kinds of concerns.

In the meantime, I think it is fantastic that the club has been able to move forward to this point in the building fund project, and also it is my impression that the project enjoys the overwhelming support from the majority of the membership. I have only limited information, but in the two stints I have worked at the building fund table during the convention, I have received many more positive comments than negative ones with regards to supporting the project. I certainly look forward to my first visit when the project comes to fruition!