By Mike Wood

Staff writer

 

Monday, August 26 (9:00 a.m.): A proposal to overhaul the room-reservations process prompted discussion during the Aug. 12 Policy Committee meeting about the costs and benefits of non-residents within Rossmoor clubs.

Committee members weighed the additional impact on facilities costs and GRF staffing resources from clubs with significant non-resident membership and/or attendance at their events. Residents pay an estimated $16 of the monthly coupon toward custodial duties and Recreation Department staff engaged with reservations.

Upon undertaking a large-scale audit of the room-reservation process, Director of Community Services Ann Mottola has been developing a plan that would significantly change how reservations function.

Also, there were “Room Reservations Road Shows” the last week of July to discuss next year’s reservations. This all was prompted by what she called the collapse of the existing format, which became evident late last year as department staff began to port over existing reservations for this year.

The audit found that 15 clubs exceeded the GRF maximum of 20% non-resident members on their rosters; and others exceeded that threshold repeatedly for their club events. Other issues were noted, such as some clubs not showing up for scheduled room bookings, and that the top 12 users accounted for 20% of all bookings.

Proposed changes include charging a rental fee – considerably more costly than the fee charged to a club – if a club’s activities surpass 20% non-residents for a recurring date or are more than 50% non-residents for a one-time event.

Also, clubs that no-show a recurring booking more than twice would lose that booking, and a club member could not transfer a reservation to another organization, including those outside of Rossmoor, the latter being another issue detected in the audit.

GRF General Manager Jeff Matheson framed the non-residents topic within a couple philosophical approaches.

It could be that “non-residents add to the enrichment of lives here, and it’s part of what you paid for already. And yes, there’s an impact, but it’s absorbed. And we should recognize that,” he said.

The other take might be, Matheson added, that “non-residents have an impact that a club or group is benefiting from … that members who are paying into the coupon shouldn’t be burdened by.”

Discussion focused on who bears the cost of usage. As committee member Maxine Topper recounted from a recent conversation she had, “We’re buying their toilet paper. … It’s coming out of my coupon.”

She said there “should be some measure of responsibility on the clubs” while also acknowledging the significant role that non-residents have with Rossmoor organizations’ fundraising efforts.

“We are all paying, through our coupon; we’re all paying to upkeep those facilities,” committee member James Lee said. “One question is that, if all the resident club members are paying something to upkeep those facilities, why aren’t the non-resident club members also contributing to the cost of the upkeep?”

Evaluating wear and tear, for instance, on chair upholstery and cleaning service is important, Policy Committee Chair Leanne Hamaji said, raising this question: “How much do we want to pay out of our coupon, really, to support guests, essentially?”

Committee member Cheryl Hines noted she was “a little shocked that we can have clubs with over 20% (non            -resident members). …

“The other important part of this is that it’s something that we can agree is manageable,” Hines said. “It’s not something that’s over the top.”

Meanwhile, issues uncovered during the audit remain, Mottola said.

“The custodians are an outstanding group of team members,” Mottola said after the meeting. “But it’s difficult for them to keep their head above water.”

It remains challenging to find facility time for new clubs or existing ones seeking new reservation slots.

“We certainly can’t find any recurring space,” Mottola said.

While this meeting, which had a spillover room for attendees in Multipurpose Room 3, didn’t approach the attendance for July’s Policy meeting when close to 50 residents took part, sentiments about the matter remain strong.

“A performance group does not have the same needs as a discussion group that meets once a week or once a month,” Mindy Zuckerman said during Residents’ Forum. “Therefore, what is fair is not equitable, and what is equitable is not necessarily fair, as space requirements for each club varies.

“Yes, there are bad actors, but it seems that we are all being punished for their actions,” Zuckerman added. “We are being treated as if we were delinquent 8-year-olds who have been defacing school property.”

Resident Dave Kosters said he’s convinced that changes will be in everybody’s best interest.

“I think it’s a healthy process, and I think the process will overall benefit Golden Rain staff – they’ve got capacity issues right now,” he said. “I think it’s going to benefit the clubs, and I think it’s going to benefit individual members.”

He asked that plans get the “necessary essential vetting” before any approval.
Policy will discuss this again at its Monday, Sept. 9, meeting, when Mottola will present revisions to wording in the proposal.

“People seem to get upset because they think these policies are being accepted automatically because staff and administration says we should; that isn’t how the process works,” Topper said, noting she’s sorry when residents leave a meeting before the committee discussion occurs. “We review it, and then we do it again and then we possibly review it again before it even gets to the Board for the first time.

“As they say, nothing is written in stone, and those changes are not being implemented immediately.”

Added Matheson: “There has been no rush to change these whatsoever. The important thing is the intent of all of these changes is to make the process better for everyone.”