01-23-20.COMMUNICATION TO COMMUNITY

January 23, 2020, Issue 3

A Message from the Clubhouse Planning Ad Hoc Committee

Dear Members, It is our desire to continue to keep the communi- ty abreast of the current events and the commit- tee’s thinking on the New Clubhouse project, so here are some important updates… and one very important request: • The New Clubhouse Planning Ad Hoc Committee continues its professionally guided process to vet the options for a New Clubhouse. • Member workshops, surveys and conversa- tions continue to give us valuable feedback. • We have narrowed down the site options to two – The “Existing Clubhouse Site” and the “Tennis Court Site” . The “9 th Hole Site” has been eliminated. • NO DECISION HAS BEEN MADE ON THE PROPOSED SITE. Your input will help us make this decision. Executive Summary:

Clubhouse Planning Ad Hoc Committee Herbert Selzer, Chair Cary Luskin Jonathan Mayblum Krista Nicklaus David Rosenblatt Robert Scherer Professionals: Jesse Sukhu, Owners Rep. Steve Johnston, Consultant Brian Idle, Architect

• We are too early in the process to have reliable cost estimates but we continue to adhere to the budget goals that started this process.

• Concurrent work on the project financing has begun and will be an important determinant.

• Significant operational cost efficiencies should be attainable from a new, more efficient clubhouse and should help reduce effective member cost. • To bring this exciting project to a vote in April we need you to APPROVE the necessary funds ($545,600) from the Capital Improvement Fund. • This is NOT an assessment. It is simply an authorization of available funds and a part of the total development budget.

Continues on Page 2

Page 2

Project Updates: The New Clubhouse Planning Ad Hoc Com- mittee continues to vet the options for a New Clubhouse and to gather the information neces- sary to make a proposal to the membership sometime in the early spring. Our efforts, at every step, are guided by the advice of our out- side consultant, Global Golf Advisors (GGA), who is the leading golf club and residential community advisor in the world. They continue to lead a well-founded process seeking feed- back from our members that will result in a New Clubhouse proposal being one that satisfies the desires of the largest majority of members and inconveniences the least. Member Feedback: The initial part of the feedback has been gathered through the recent workshops and a second, more detailed part will be gathered via a prepared survey that will go out to all mem- bers by the first week of February. This survey will ask certain questions designed to guide us further. It will be viewable and conducted on- line. For those of you that may have difficulty accessing this, the club will provide assistance so all members can submit responses. Lastly, we have spoken to many of the committees and committee chairs and, as well, have made ourselves available (and will continue to) for one on one chats with as many members as possible. The feedback that we have received to-date has been invaluable. So, keep your eye out for the survey. That is our next important step. It will have a series of check-the-box questions of course, but before that it will allow everyone to view online a de- tailed presentation of the project by our archi- tect Brian Idle of Peacock and Lewis and a re- view of the two site choices along with Brian explaining the pros and cons of each. Finally, it will have a section for “additional comments” for items that you would like to bring to the commit- tee’s attention beyond the questions asked. The survey responses will help the commit- tee and the professionals narrow the two site options down to one. Then all the work and cost estimating will be focused on that site...which will then be presented to the membership for a vote in April.

Alternative Sites: All of our conversations with members have referenced, at one point or another, variations of three basic sites for the New Clubhouse. The information that we have gathered has resulted in our focus being narrowed down at this juncture to two sites for further ex- ploration and development - The “Existing Clubhouse Site” and the “Tennis Court Site” . A third potential site, the “9 th Hole Site”, has been removed from considera- tion as it just simply had too many potential issues and specific effects on our neighbors for us to move forward with at this time. We know that not everyone will agree with the conclu- sions reached with the professionals but we simply ask everyone to respect the exhaustive process that we are going through and to re- main focused on the exciting outcome of a New Clubhouse, regardless of its ultimate loca- tion. However, it is important to emphatically state that NO DECISION HAS BEEN MADE ON THE PROPOSED SITE. Your input will help us make this decision. Importantly, from what we know at this stage, cost will not be a determinant between one site or the other. Project Cost: One of the things that many people keep asking about is, indeed, the overall cost. We understand…we consistently ask as well. But it is simply too early in this process to give cost estimates that we can rely on for anyone’s con- sumption. While we are constantly asking our Owner’s Representative, Jesse Sukhu, to keep close tabs on a rough running cost estimate, there are way too many outstanding variables, including the most obvious of items such as site selection, interior layout, square footage, furnishings, etc. that would radically alter the numbers. After all is said and done, our goal is to make sure that we propose the “right” club- house project, in the “right” location and that we do so by consuming all the useful input and information our committee and our profession- als can digest. Importantly, we continue to adhere to the same budgetary goals that started this process. And, we are committed to being fully transparent throughout and will communicate any reliable pricing info as soon as we have it. Continues on Page 3

Page 3

Project Funding and Financing: This Committee remains keenly aware that certain factors can be even more important than price differentials in determining what this clubhouse will actually cost our members. How this project is financed, interest rate levels (they are down since the renovation financing was originally obtained), amortization periods (a new structure can be rationally amortized over a longer useful life) and of course the very realizable operational and capital savings that results from a newer, smaller and more effi- cient structure will all be important elements of the effective member cost. In regard to this last item, our management team will be working very closely with our professionals on the func- tional design of the clubhouse to maximize fu- ture efficiencies and budgetary savings. In ad- dition, several members with significant experi- ence in project financing are already at work narrowing down financial institutions and fi- nancing alternatives ahead of the project’s de- velopment. Now The Request – We Need Your Help To Approve The Next Stage Of Funds In order to come back to the community with the right project…and with reliable cost estimates…we will need to expend some of the project’s ultimate budget during the course of these next few weeks for essential items such as architectural layouts, surveys, site testing, civil engineering, and presentation materials and, of course, the professionals who perform this work. There is simply no other way to get a prudent and reliable proposal to the membership without performing all of these necessary and desirable steps. As stated, this entire process is guided by GGA and is for the protection of the membership. At this juncture we need the membership’s support to authorize the funds, as requested. This is not a request for an assessment… but simply an approval of funds that we al- ready have currently available in the Capital Improvement Fund. The current club by-laws require that the community’s members must approve any expenditure in excess of $200,000 for any project not otherwise provided for in the

budget for that fiscal year. The total amount sought for approval is $545,600. This is a purposely conservative estimate that includes a 10% contingency. The exact list of these po- tential expenditures was presented on Monday, January 20th at the Special Meeting and is at- tached to the ballot distributed to each member. These costs are NOT additional costs to the New Clubhouse project but simply the part of the cost that will be spent to deliver the pro- posed project for a membership vote . All funds will be held in abeyance until spent and, given our conservative estimate, it is possible that not all the funds will be spent. Any leftover funds will be put towards future project costs. Conclusion: This is both a very exciting time for French- man’s as well as a critical inflection point. GGA has been clear in its advice that a New Club- house is important to protect our brand, our value, our competitive standing and even our sustainability . We are being guided by a great group of professionals and hope to deliver a fully vetted New Clubhouse project for a membership vote in the early spring. We are receiving sup- port from a wide and diverse group of the mem- bership and this is a hopeful sign. It is indeed our fervent hope that this New Clubhouse project will act as a long overdue catalyst for greater com- munity harmony and it is indeed our intent that this project will benefit every single member. Therefore, the Ad Hoc Committee asks that you vote to “APPROVE” the funding neces- sary to complete our mandate.

Thank you, in advance, for your support.

Sincerely,

The Clubhouse Planning Ad Hoc Committee

Page 4

13495 Tournament Drive, Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.Frenchmanscreek.com