COMMENT ⊗   VALID 00005 PAGES
C REC  PAGE   DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002								July 14, 1979
C00013 00003					  The ad-hoc Pool Committee
C00025 00004						The Sequoias
C00028 00005	I hereby pledge the sum of $ _______ for the construction of a pool
C00032 ENDMK
C⊗;
							July 14, 1979
Partial answers to document "Regarding the May 25 Progress report.." of July 6,
1979, signed by Messrs Goodale, Croke, Vaughn, Williams, Burdick and Koolen.

1) The Pool committee is a creature of the Resident's Council and it was asked
"... to continue its study and report its findings." by the Resident's Council
(who else?). The May 25th report was our answer to this request.  The report was
circulated in the belief that ALL residents should be kept informed of the
current status of the study.  The report was marked as a Progress Report and,
obviously, NO DECISION had or has been made.

2) Location:. The committee thought (perhaps erroneously) that the residents,
whose homes are contiguous to the suggested site, would like to have all of the
facts that the committee had collected and would like to see what the proposed
site would look like before being again asked for their views (they were asked
in the original questionnaire).

The committee has recently altered its site recommendation because some of the
residents whose apartments face this site are still strongly opposed to its use.

Perhaps we should ask for a written ballot from those whose apartments face the
site to determine the wish of the majority.  Some of our residents seem to
believe that matters of this sort should be decided by a majority vote and that
the wishes of a minority should be ignored.

3) Costs:  Obviously, the quoted cost figures are only estimates.  We will not
know what the actual costs will be until we receive firm quotations and we are
not yet in a position to ask for bids.  We will have to have some assurance that
the necessary funds can be raised by voluntary contributions before the
Resident's Council will be in a position to ask the Board of Directors for
permission to proceed.  Delays in deciding to build a pool will, of course,
increase its cost because of continuing inflation.

4) Maintenance: Again, the ad-hoc committee is in no position to ask residents
for firm commitments.  We can set outside limits on what the costs might be,
based on the experience of individuals living in this area who have pools of
comparable size.  A $600 per month figure would certainly be more than adequate
for perhaps the seven months during which the pool would be kept open and
heated.  The costs when the pool was not in use would be very much less.

5 Liability: A figure of $420 per year has been quoted by the insurance agent
who handles the NCPH's insurance for liability coverage of $4,500,000 for the
addition of a pool. See our July 9th report for further details.

6) Lifeguard:  No one is going to enforce the two-adult rule.  Thousands of
condominiums, most of the private clubs in this area and many retirement homes
do not have such a rule.  The ad-hoc committee does however recommend it.

7) Care of the pool: Just as the users of the Waldron Shop assist in the
maintenance of the shop, we would expect the users of the pool to do a certain
amount of maintenance work.  The ad-hoc committee has made inquiries as to the
recent experience of other retirement communities and found them all to be
satisfied with the services rendered by pool mantenance firms.

8) Size of the undertaking:  Anything that is done by the residents and for the
residents involves a lot of work for a few individuals.  Fortunately, there are
usually several individuals who are will do what is necessary.

The ad-hoc committee is quite willing to amend the questioned statement to read
"As long as the cost of the installation is borne by those who use it, there
seems to be little justification for not having a pool just because a majority
of the residents WILL NOT BE USERS."

The committee has acted on the assumption that the costs should be borne by the
users, and it still is recommending this policy.

In the unlikely event that the management should decide to take over the cost of
maintaining the pool, this would mean an increase of not more than one or two
dollars per month per resident.  We all now pay more than this for the
maintenance of many facilities that are only used by a small fraction of the
residents.  The cost of maintaining the Sequoias Coach (which many residents
never use) is several times the cost of maintaining a pool.  The Bowling Green,
the surrounding shrubbery, the storage building and the toilets are maintained
through out the year with the cost borne by all residents.  Hanson Hall is
maintained, cleaned and heated for small groups without a great objection being
raised.

9) Operating procedure: Obviously the pool will belong to the NCPH and the NCPH
would be, in the last analysis, solely responsible for its management and
upkeep.  The committee was not and is not attempting to take over this
responsibility.  The rules that were suggested were only suggestions.

Let us remember, however, that many things are now left to the Resident's
Council and to its various committees.  For example, the Square Dancing
Committee charges (and collects) a fee, keys to the Waldron Shop are issued by a
committee, users of the Bowling Green pay a fee to a committee for the use of
grounds that are owned and maintained by the NCPH, etc..

10) Rules: Formal rules will have to be made by the management and the
management will be responsible for their enforcement. Peer pressure is fairly
effective at The Sequoias and many informal rules are formulated by committee
action and are honored with a minimum of enforcement.

11) Who will decide: Obviously the Board of Directors will decide.  The
Resident's Council can only recommend.  One can hope that their recomendation
will be based on the long time interest of The Sequoias, its present and future
residents.

The question at issue is: Do we want The Sequoias to be an attractive Retirement
Community, catering to active people with a variety of different interests, or
do we want it to turn into an Old Folks Home of the traditional kind where the
women rock and the men twiddle their thumbs?  But seriously, most retirement
homes do have pools and a high proportion of the people already on our waiting
list would like to have a pool at The Sequoias.  This trend will continue.
Other retirement communities are being established in this area and they all
have pools and seem to consider them to be a necessary feature.

				  The ad-hoc Pool Committee
				  July 14, 1979

  A critique of the document dated July 6, 1979 signed by Messrs. Goodale,
  Croke, Vaughn, Burdick and Koolen.

  The July 6th document has been Xeroxed with comments interposed at the
  appropiate locations so that the positions of this group and the ad-hoc
  Pool Committee may be directly compared.  A difference in left margin
  indentation and in type font has been used to identify the two sources.


  1) The Pool committee is a creature of the Resident's Council and it was
  asked "... to continue its study and report its findings." by the
  Resident's Council (who else?). The May 25th report was our answer to this
  request.  The report was circulated in the belief that ALL residents
  should be kept informed of the current status of the study.  The report
  was marked as a Progress Report and, obviously, NO DECISION had or has
  been made.


  2) Location:  The committee thought (perhaps erroneously) that the
  residents, whose homes are contiguous to the suggested site, would like to
  have all of the facts that the committee had collected and would like to
  see what the proposed site would look like before being again asked for
  their views (they were asked in the original questionnaire).

  The committee has recently altered its site recommendation because some of
  the residents whose apartments face this site are still strongly opposed
  to its use.  We are, however, writing the twelve residents whose homes are
  contiguous to this area and we are asking them to write brief notes to the
  Resident's Council outlining their reasons for favoring or opposing this
  site so that their views may be properly considered at the special meeting
  of the Council on July 26th.



  3) Costs:  Obviously, the quoted cost figures are only estimates.  We will
  not know what the actual costs will be until we receive firm quotations
  and we are not yet in a position to ask for bids.  The NCPH will have to
  have some assurance that the necessary funds can be raised by voluntary
  contributions before this next step can be taken.  Delays in deciding to
  build a pool will, of course, increase its cost because of continuing
  inflation.


  4) Maintenance:  Again, the ad-hoc committee is in no position to ask
  residents for firm commitments.  We can set outside limits on what the
  costs might be, based on the experience of individuals living in this area
  who have pools of comparable size.  The monthly fees would, of course, be
  set high enough to meet the actual costs and to provide some reserve.


  5 Liability:  A figure of $420 per year has been quoted by the insurance
  agent who handles the NCPH's insurance for liability coverage of
  $4,500,000 for the addition of a pool.

  We have also discussed this matter with the Chairman of the Board of
  Directors of the NCPH (the Honerable Thomas M. Jenkins) and he has assured
  us that the comprehensive liability insurance applies equally to residents
  and to outsiders.  He also stated that the residents, members of the
  resident's council, etc., are not in any way civilly liable for accidents
  on the property, both, because they have no vested interest in the assets
  of the corporation and because they are not allowed, by law, to
  participate in the management of the corporation.  Members of the Board of
  Directors might be held responsible, and they are covered by separate
  liability policies for five million dollars each.


  6) Lifeguard:  No one is going to enforce the two-adult rule.  Thousands
  of condominiums, most of the private clubs in this area and many
  retirement homes do not have such a rule nor do they have life guards.

  7) Care of the pool:  Just as the users of the Waldron Shop assist in the
  maintenance of the shop, we would expect the users of the pool to do a
  certain amount of maintenance work.  The ad-hoc committee has made
  inquiries as to the recent experience of other retirement communities and
  found them all to be satisfied with the services rendered by pool
  mantenance firms.

  8) Size of the undertaking:  Anything that is done by the residents and
  for the residents involves a lot of work for a few individuals.
  Fortunately, there are usually several individuals who are will do what is
  necessary.

  The ad-hoc committee is quite willing to amend the questioned statement to
  read "As long as the cost of the installation is borne by those who use
  it, there seems to be little justification for not having a pool just
  because a majority of the residents are not interested IN USING THE POOL".

  The committee has acted on the assumption that the costs should be borne
  by the users, and it still is recommending this policy.  This will be a
  matter for the administration to decide and we can only make our wishes
  known to them.  It seems unlikely that they would go counter to the
  expressed wishes of the residents.


  9) Operating procedure:  Obviously the pool will belong to the NCPH and the
  NCPH would be, in the last analysis, solely responsible for its management
  and upkeep.  The committee was not and is not attempting to take over this
  responsibility.  The rules that were suggested were only suggestions.

  Let us remember, however, that many things are now left to the Resident's
  Council and to its various committees.  For example, the Square Dancing
  Committee charges (and collects) a fee, keys to the Waldron Shop are
  issued by a committee, users of the Bowling Green pay a fee to a committee
  for the use of grounds that are owned and maintained by the NCPH, etc..

  10) Rules:  Formal rules will have to be made by the management and the
  management will be responsible for their enforcement. Peer pressure is
  fairly effective at The Sequoias and many informal rules are formulated by
  committee action and are honored with a minimum of enforcement.

  11) Who will decide:  Obviously the Board of Directors will decide.  The
  Resident's Council can only recommend.  One can hope that their
  recomendation will be based on the long time interest of The Sequoias, its
  present and future residents.


  The question at issue is:  Do we want The Sequoias to be an attractive
  Retirement Community, catering to active people with a variety of
  different interests, or do we want it to turn into an Old Folks Home of
  the traditional kind where the women rock and the men twiddle their
  thumbs?  But seriously, most retirement homes do have pools and a high
  proportion of the people already on our waiting list would like to have a
  pool at The Sequoias.  This trend will continue.  Other retirement
  communities are being established in this area and they all have pools and
  seem to consider them to be a desirable and necessary feature.

						  The ad-hoc Pool Committee
						  Paula Burr
						  Betty Hone
						  Ray Kelly
						  Jack Mansfield
						  Ray Pierce
						  Charles Ross
						  Arthur Samuel, Chairman.
					The Sequoias
					July 16, 1979

This is an appeal for pledges of funds to pay for the construction of a
swimming pool and associated jacuzzi at The Sequoias.  At the moment, we
are asking only for pledges so that the success of the project can be
assured before any actual gifts are received.  Gifts, when made, will be
payable to the NCPH and they may be reported as charitable contributions
for income tax purposes.

We will need to raise at least $40,000 to cover the construction costs.
It will be nice if we raise somewhat more than this amount as a hedge
against rising prices and to take care of any unexpected costs.

Several substantial pledges have already been made in advance of this
appeal, two for $5000, two for $2000, and others for lesser amounts.  We
hope and expect that several additional pledges of similar amounts (or
even larger) will be received and that there will be many pledges of
smaller amounts.  Will you do your part?

We realize that many residents are contributing to other causes that they
feel take presidence over this appeal, but even token gifts will help
swell the total and will be gratefully received.

Your pledge may be returned to any member of the Pool Committee or, if you
prefer, your anonymity may be safe guarded by handing your pledge
personally to Mr. Dillon.  In any case, the pool committee does not intend
to reveal the identity of any donor unless authorized to do so by the donor.

						  The ad-hoc Pool Committee
						  Paula Burr
						  Betty Hone
						  Ray Kelly
						  Jack Mansfield
						  Ray Pierce
						  Charles Ross
						  Arthur Samuel, Chairman.
I hereby pledge the sum of $ _______ for the construction of a pool
and associated jacuzzi at The Sequoias.   I understand that this pledge
does not in any way give me any special status as a possible user of the
pool and jacuzzi when they are built.   My gift will be an irrevocable
charitable contribution.   The only reservation is that this pledge will
not be called for payment if the NCPH Inc. should decide, for any reason,
not to proceed with the construction of the pool and jacuzzi.


Date __________		Signed _______________________

_
















I hereby pledge the sum of $ _______ for the construction of a pool
and associated jacuzzi at The Sequoias.   I understand that this pledge
does not in any way give me any special status as a possible user of the
pool and jacuzzi when they are built.   My gift will be an irrevocable
charitable contribution.   The only reservation is that this pledge will
not be called for payment if the NCPH Inc. should decide, for any reason,
not to proceed with the construction of the pool and jacuzzi.


Date __________		Signed _______________________

_