Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Donation Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Golf pro proposes limits on donated green‑fee passes; committee asks staff to refine policy
Summary
Bangor Municipal Golf Course presented a proposed donation-request policy setting a standard two weekday green‑fee passes per request, a proposed annual cap of 30 donated passes and 501(c)(3) documentation requirements; the advisory group asked staff to refine eligibility language and return next month.
Rob Davis, head golf professional at the Bangor Municipal Golf Course, introduced a new staff handbook and a draft donation-request policy that would standardize how the course handles charitable requests.
Davis told the advisory committee the policy would generally offer two weekday green‑fee passes per approved request and require nonprofits to provide proof of 501(c)(3) status. “We give standardly now 2 weekday green fee passes,” he said, and the draft sets a maximum of “30 passes annually” to avoid undermining the course’s revenue during peak season.
The proposed policy lists ineligible recipients including political campaigns, for‑profit businesses and individual medical fundraisers. Davis said the cap reflects recent practice and demand: “I can promise you we probably get requests of 100 or upwards,” he said, adding that unrestricted giveaways during high‑demand summer dates would harm revenue.
Committee members debated whether eligibility should be limited to organizations located in Bangor or include groups that serve the Bangor community. Suggestions included allowing Bangor organizations to apply annually while neighboring towns could be eligible on a two‑year cycle, and using an online form to track prior recipients and disable applications once the yearly allotment is exhausted.
Robin, the committee chair, summarized the discussion and asked staff to revise the draft policy language to clarify geographic and eligibility criteria and return to the advisory committee next month for final review; the group tabled formal adoption pending that revised draft.
The committee did not take a final vote on the policy at the meeting; staff said they would circulate edited language and bring a final version back for a thumbs‑up vote.
