Other side of Twin Lakes | Federal Way letters
Published 7:06 pm Monday, January 25, 2010
We have been residents of Twin Lakes for 40 years. We were members of the Twin Lakes Golf and Country Club for a number of years when our two sons were young and my husband served on golf activities and the invitational committees.
We know both sides as members and non-members. Through what we can only perceive as poor management, the Twin Lakes Golf and Country Club has lost many members and now the Twin Lakes Homeowners Association is presenting us with an “opportunity” to bail out the TLGCC by paying a monthly fee of $25 for the next 15 years so that we can have the privilege of using their facilities — golf, swimming, tennis and restaurant/bar — all for an additional price.
There is no “free lunch” here, people. Jane Hill tells us that this will give us our own “Community Center” with amenities that don’t currently exist. This sounds like more “pie in the sky.”
We reside in the second to the last home in Twin Lakes, and our property values will not be aversely impacted. Those people living on the golf course could in reality have their property values impacted, if the “Henny Penny sky is falling” occurs. Schools are basically funded by the state — if there is an increase in enrollment, the Federal Way School District will deal with that — strip malls, townhouses, etc. The City of Federal Way will need to deal with zoning, etc., and we as residents of Federal Way have a say in that also. Are we going to “hell in a hand basket?” Not if we stand our ground and vote “no.” I have enough faith to believe that we can control our own destiny.
Every piece of information we have received from the Twin Lakes Homeowners Association has been “vote yes.” We have received no information from them with regard to supporting a “vote no.” Shouldn’t an association that is financed by its members maintain a neutral attitude and present both sides of the argument so that we can make an informed decision? Even the proxy form makes it very simple for the “yes” vote, while a “no” vote forces those people to have to appoint someone to vote “no” for them. I get the feeling that if a “vote no” prevails, they are concerned that their livelihood may be in jeopardy. I respect the freedom of choice — I just feel we have the right to hear both sides.
Betty Lou Erickson, Twin Lakes
