Town Square

Post a New Topic

Blackhawk parcel issue may resurface

Original post made on Aug 10, 2009

Some homeowners in Blackhawk are preparing for another fight over the possible sale of vacant lots owned by Blackhawk Country Club. In April 2009, the Country Club along with the Blackhawk Homeowners Association put forth a ballot issue to residents seeking an amendment to their rules that would allow the sale of the parcels on Birchwood Place and Live Oak, which are zoned for parks and recreation.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Sunday, August 9, 2009, 8:35 PM

Comments (5)

Posted by Golf Memeber, a resident of Blackhawk
on Aug 10, 2009 at 7:55 am

It is very arrogant for these H.O.'s that are in opposition to the sale of land surrounding the Country Club, we own the land and have the right to sell it as needed to support our financial situation, it is not a secret that most Country Clubs in the area are having a time of it with the decline in memberships and the decline in due's, if the Club closed all facilities except the Golf Department the HO's would have to find somewhere else to swim and play tennis with their children. Get past it people it's not your land to dictate. We are talking about a few acres. Mr. Elliott is an outstanding President and he has included every opinion in the Club's Residence and this issue is really about people want to keep their free small piece of open space that belongs to the Club.

Don't bite the hand that helps you.

Joe Golfer.


Posted by Rick Pshaw, a resident of Danville
on Aug 10, 2009 at 8:45 am

The tactic of repeatedly attempting to ram something through on the hopes that the opposition will eventually be worn down is common in our society.

The way to put a stop to this nonsense is to require that proponents who lose their argument be required to give up something of value. In the case of the Blackhawk parcels, the next time it comes up for a vote, the proponents will need a simple majority of the vote PLUS TWO PERCENT!

If Alamo attempts an incorporation again all they will need is a simple majority of the vote PLUS TWO PERCENT!

Right now there is no deterrent for repeated ballot issues that fail miserably. Well let's change that. Just add a two percent penalty vote requirement for any ballot measure that fails and is brought up again. And if the next ballot measure fails add another two percent!

Just to keep things fair, if the ballot measure is not brought up again within five years, then the two percent penalty would be erased.


Posted by concerned, a resident of Blackhawk
on Aug 10, 2009 at 9:29 am

If these opponents of selling our land are for real let them pay for the deficites that our club faces every year.I doubt that any of them could pony up a hundred bucks. These are the kind of people that like to run there mouths but have nothing to back them up.


Posted by Luther Johnson, a resident of Blackhawk
on Aug 14, 2009 at 4:01 pm

In the article Frank Elliot is quoted as saying "accusations being leveled against them are simply untrue."

The July 29th country club board meeting minutes say they are "considering requesting a re-vote" and "there was discussion on what kind of informational material should be included as well as specifics regarding the number of valid ballots to be included."

In a July 13th Blackhawk Country Club letter to members, they say " ...regarding the Club's proposal to sell parcels of land...If we revisit this project in the future, we will need even greater member support to ensure its success."

The fact is, in the July 21st meeting with two board members, homeowners were told, "We intend to ask for a re-vote" (timing was not discussed). Their board's July 29th meeting minutes and July 13th letter comments are consistent with this.

The homeowners aren't trying to "blow this up." We're simply quoting what they told us and told their members (via the letter and minutes). So which is it? "Simply untrue" or that they communicated their intention to at some point ask for a re-vote?


Posted by Sue Talia, a resident of Blackhawk
on Aug 17, 2009 at 9:44 am

I was present at the July 21 meeting when Frank Elliott (and Frank Trefeletti) told homeowners the Club intended to seek a new election. Now Frank says it is "simply untrue" and he's "disappointed" in the people who are keeping this alive. What I find disappointing is that Frank says one thing to the homeowners and Club members, and then denies it in the press. While we may disagree on the issue, I would hope we could at least have an honest dialogue.

to clarify, the parcels in question aren't "vacant lots." If they werre, they wouldn't need to be rezoned.


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

A Norman Rockwell Town
By Roz Rogoff | 6 comments | 1,240 views

David Brooks at his Best and Worst
By Tom Cushing | 5 comments | 799 views

Anti-fracking folks rail against railroads
By Tim Hunt | 18 comments | 669 views

Be an Exhibitionist!
By John A. Barry | 5 comments | 254 views