Community Corner

Resident to Village: Why Waste Our Tax Money in Hiring a Consultant?

The Keep the Village Greens Committee Chairman wants answers as to whether a consultant to evaluate the Woodridge golf course's quality is really necessary.

Woodridge Patch accepts letters to the editor. The following was submitted by Woodridge resident Mike Huber.

If you're interesting in submitting a letter, e-mail Woodridge Patch Editor Sabrina Wu at sabrina@patch.com.

-------------

We’ve now had time to digest the PowerPoint presentation that was prepared and shown at the last Village of Woodridge Board meeting by Village Administrator Katy Rush despite not being on the pre-printed agenda. While we’re getting used to the Village’s tendency to act first and allow for public input later, we would like to address some of the things that were mentioned in that PowerPoint as well as the Village Greens Study Information Sheet (see link above) posted on the Village of Woodridge website the following day.

Find out what's happening in Woodridgewith free, real-time updates from Patch.

The phrase “cost reductions impact the quality of the course and cannot be maintained long term” caught our attention.

We would simply like someone at the Village of Woodridge tell us if this is a statement of fact or a statement of opinion? 

Find out what's happening in Woodridgewith free, real-time updates from Patch.

If it’s a statement of fact, then where did you get these facts?  The Village of Woodridge is adamant about hiring a consultant to present details on the 'long term viability' of the golf course.  If you already have the answers, Ms. Rush, then why waste our tax money in hiring a consultant?  If you're already knowledgeable enough about the business of golf courses to know that cost reduction can't be sustained, then why seek outside opinions? 

If, on the other hand, this is merely a statement of opinion, then by making that statement aren’t you guilty of prejudicing this entire process? Haven’t you already formed and made public your stance on this issue? By making the statement ‘cannot be maintained long term’, haven’t you already prejudiced the consultants results, the Board's thinking, and shaped the public discussion in the manner you see fit, that the course isn’t sustainable and redevelopment is the only option? 

So which is it Ms. Rush; when you state that “cost reductions impact the quality of the course and cannot be maintained long term”.  Is that based on fact or opinion?  

We're waiting for an answer.

—Michael Huber, Woodridge resident, Chairman, Keep the Village Green Committee


Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here