[Jeff_Brauer]

TMac,

So now you are bringing up the old "TePaul altered the documents" argument?  Or just your tired "you can't rely on club minutes" argument?

That said, I don't really recall who posted that, if it was retyped, etc.  I am sure Mike Cirba has that somewhere on his computer.  But, the context has been typed out and it isn't too hard to figure out what they were talking about.

[JESII]

Tom Macwood,

I have seen a scanned image of the hand written minutes noting "five plans". I don't have it, and do not have the words in their exact sequence in my mind but I can assure we are getting an accruate understanding of what was written. Other than you, my position has been accepted by both sides as objective so take this post as you will.

[JESII]

Jeff,

Doesn't the word "approximate" imply the flexibility you mention right from the beginning?

On a To Scale Map, they don't have the excuse of saying "approximate location of the road" means they just didn't measure it exactly so don't hold us to this precise location. It has to me...this border has some flexibility...

Even if they didn't intend as much flexibility as was ultimately used (~30 yards either way) it sure would have been enough to go up for the green and down from the tee. Merion has 6 other situations currently that use between 85 and 110 yards of width for two side-by-side holes to pass one another and that doesn't count the original 1-10-11-12 sequence/cluster.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jim,

I think we have the same understanding.  I believe they had a temporary deed based on the road alignment, which was changed when the final design was agreed to.  So yes, I think it was approxmiate as in flexible to be changed, not approximate as in casually drawn.

I don't think there were any huge limits on flexibility other than the club not wanting to buy any more acreage than required because of cost, and maintaining minimum radius alignments on Golf House Road.  However, given its not all that graceful near 15 green, the developer obviously was sympathetic and lived up to his end of the deal.  I bet they would have preferred the long flowing alignment, or something close to it rather than a near right hand turn.  And, as you mention, they lost one potential lot.

[Tom MacWood]

Jim
If the routing was not finalized how do you explain Wilson preparing the fairways and greens?

[Jeff_Brauer]

TMac,

A reasonable question, but its common to turn up the existing sod as soon as possible in spring because it takes a while for the roots and clumps to disintegrate.  Given they weren't doing much grading in the fw, and greens were probably not prepared in any special way either, if they were planning on seeding all the areas but the three fw areas with Merion Blue Grass, then it makes sense they would turn all the soil.

Of course, it does beg the question of how they new it was 15 fw, but I think that number didn't come until Wilson's later remembrances, and not from contemporaneous dox, so by then, he knew they had approx 3 fw of existing grass to be used.

[Mike Cirba]

Let's look at Francis' remembrance again...



Does he really say the first 13 were complete and they were trying to figure out how to put in the last 5? Would any sane human being who was tasked with designing or building 18 holes have 13 of them set in stone with no viable solution for the other 5?

My point is, that regardless of the timing, once the swap occurred all other "plans" would have been tweaks within the corridor such as various lengths of 14 and 15 or 2 and 6 or 7 - 9.

Also, I think suggesting the Thompson motion in the April minutes was without a doubt the Francis Swap is a bit aggressive. Could be, but not without question at this point.



Jim,

A few things...yes, I think he does say the first 13 were designed prior to the final five.   Whether that was by months, weeks, days, or minutes he does say that.  

As far as sanity....

Yes, if there was no land of the triangle in play at that time as some have argued, then they would have been absolutely INSANE to box themselves into the remaining property with the final five of their proposed championship course still not routed.

Total and complete bonkers!   They should have been taken away in shackles frothing at the mouth!!  They would have been the biggest bunch of nincompoops ever to be assembled.  

However, I've already shown that if some of that triangle was in play, albeit narrower and longer, it would have been very possible to get five holes in there...they just wouldn't be ideal and they just wouldn't have been able to create an alternate route around the quarry on 16.




I also think there was one other element you're not considering.

Apparently the Francis routing not only required them to reconfigure the road and adversely affect the real estate element but it also very probably required them to add three additional acres to their purchase!   I'd be willing to bet that most of the other options only used the 117 acres originally secured.  

That to me is what seems to be a very good reason for working out a few variations.   It is also reason to me to bring CBM back down to have him validate their thinking about which routing was best, and help them to sell their case.

***EDIT***  Also, Jim...If you're wondering why they'd have so much unusable land right across the street from the clubhouse, think about the configuration of the original 1st hole.

[JESII]

Mike,

That's you combining Francis' Swap into Thompson's motion in the minutes. Certainly possible, but not absolute.

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

Actually, no, I'm not doing that really.

I'm saying;

1) Francis told us his brainstorm allowed the placement of the final five holes that completed the routing.

2) Francis's brainstorm routing plan was the one that got implemented.

3) Francis brainstorm routing plan required 120 acres, not the 117 the club had originally secured.

4) The April 19th meeting minutes reflect the need to purchase those additional three acres, wherever they were located.


I guess it's possible that the purchase of the 3 acres additional wasn't necessitated by Francis's brainstorm, or that they gave back land previously purchased somewhere else besides the land across the street from the clubhouse, but circumstantially it's a pretty strong case, I think you'd admit?

[Mike Cirba]

Jim
If the routing was not finalized how do you explain Wilson preparing the fairways and greens?


Tom,

You tried to sell that one a while back and nobody was buying. 

Merion wanted to plow the entire property prior to addiing fertilizer and then manure and seed in the fall, less 20some acres thought to have enough good sod growth to support their needs.

This included areas for roughs, fairways, and greens.

On March 29th 1910 Wilson wrote P&O that they were planning on doing some ploughing and "rough work" within a week.

That never happened, actually.   If you have the Morrison/Paul book you'd know that originally Merion thought they'd try to do this inhouse with their own superintendent, but then realized they really didn't have the equipment and manpower to maintain their existing course while building a new one, and the hiring of a contractor was proposed at the April 19th Board Meeting.

[JESII]

Jim,

Actually, no, I'm not doing that really.

I'm saying;

1) Francis told us his brainstorm allowed the placement of the final five holes that completed the routing.

2) Francis's brainstorm routing plan was the one that got implemented.

3) Francis brainstorm routing plan required 120 acres, not the 117 the club had originally secured.

4) The April 19th meeting minutes reflect the need to purchase those additional three acres, wherever they were located.


I guess it's possible that the purchase of the 3 acres additional wasn't necessitated by Francis's brainstorm, or that they gave back land previously purchased somewhere else besides the land across the street from the clubhouse, but circumstantially it's a pretty strong case, I think you'd admit?

Mike,

Your points 2 and 3 are not supported by BOTH Francis and Thompson, you're combining their independent words to justify them as fact. Francis does not say his idea required three additional acres and the minutes do not say their were 5 distinct ROUTING PLANS. These are possibilities, but they are not fact.



To answer Tom M, I think they had the bones of the routing complete and the "five plans" were variations on a theme. The course lends itself to many potential tweaks they could have been considering after establishing a basic route around the property. 2 and 3 (current 6), 7 - 8 - 9, 12 and 13, 14 and 15.

[Mike Cirba]

Jeff,

In Wilson's letters to P&O he doesn't refer to "three fairways", but only to 20-some acres.

In ALL of the letters that passed between the men there is not a single reference to the location of NOT A SINGLE tee, fairway, or green, or any other golf feature.

Instead, Tom argues that because Hugh Wilson refers to it as a "course" as opposed to what it was, a "field", that this is somehow meaningful or indicative of a completed routing.

It's funny he accused me of reading between the lines yet sees Barker on the midnight train to Georgia and Barker's handiwork buried in his Ardmore Corn Field of dreams with less than a shred of evidence.  

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

We know that on February 1st, 1911 Hugh Wilson wrote that Merion had acquired 117 acres, the same number that they had secured in November 1910.

We know that Francis's routing was the one accepted on April 19th, 1911 and we know that it required 120 acres.

Just saying...

I think the rest is just semantics.   If they were five different plans and each had a course layout on it then by definition it's five different routing plans.

I know you say that they were 'tweaks', but I'm not sure we know.   Didn't we just agree that making a change in one area by definition created additional changes and considerations up and down the chain?

By the way, did you get my point about the location/configuration of the 1st hole limiting them?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike,

We know for sure that the final routing required the three acres, and I think the minutes say that.  As I said, I think HW referred to our problem in building 18 greens and tees and 15 fw later on in his remembrances.  But the letters don't reference specific golf holes, even when doing so to indicate soil samples would have made sense.  Thus I think its hard to conclude that on Feb 1 Wilson had a routing that he sent to Piper.

Jim,

Going back to the routing(s) they don't just magically appear all at once. I can think of a lot of routings I have done where at some point I have most of it figured out, or many sections, but am left to struggle with just a portion.  And yes, at some points, I decide I am sticking with these 13 (or whatever) holes and confining my changes to the holes I have trouble with.

Its a constant narrowing down process and at some point, you have to leave the good stuff you have figured out alone and fix it within a limited area to arrive at the final.  Which is why Francis recollections read to me as if they were fixing the last five holes last or near the end.  But, its certainly not clear enough to know that level of detail.

But, I think we are still pretty firm ground when saying they had five plans to present CBM on 4-6-11.  I know others will say they are different types of plans (maybe they wanted to show CBM where they were taking soil samples?) but they just have to be routing plans, by whatever name they may have called them.  It was the logical step in the process at that time of process.

I wonder if they would do any routing before going to get instructions from CBM at NGLA.  However, it seems the minutes recalling the trip to NGLA hint that they had some plans and routings, no?  They came back an prepared more plans at that point, indicating they at least noodled on the routing before the March meeting, but CBM's ideas probably showed them they had to go back to square one, using his ideas.  (I Know some of the Philly boys say the record shows they did not talk about routing at NGLA, just hole concepts, but I don't see it that way.  It would be hard to talk design and not touch on both)

To me, that puts the routing between Feb 1 and April 6, perhaps picking up steam like a locomotvie after returning engergized from NGLA.  So, most of the narrowing down process took a month - from my perspective a very real time frame.  And, they didn't necessarily need more contact with CBM - they could hhave compared calendars while at NGLA to set up the next meeting.

[DMoriarty]

So much for trying to cover all this in a more organized and productive manner.  
________________________________________________________________

Jeff Brauer,  I am waiting for you to explain what it is about your methodology that would allow you to add key words to the source material and drop key words from my quotes?
- Why did you add the word "ROUTING" to the source material and then pretend that the source material directly contradicted my statement when it did not?
- Why did you remove the word "ROUTING" from my quote and then pretend that the source material directly contradicted my statement when it did not?

I am trying to understand your methodology here, and so far as I can tell it has nothing to do with accurately representing me or the source material and cannot possibly be geared to figuring out what actually happened, but I am waiting for your explanation to the contrary.  
________________________________________________________

Bryan,  

I'm not sure we can have a productive conversation in this environment, but I guess I will give it a shot.

There is a lot about that Lesley report to the board that I don't understand and a lot of open questions out there about it that people aren't even asking.  

1. Is the transcript we have been given accurate and authentic?  I've never seen the actual minutes.  I have been denied access to them by both MCC and MGC.  I know that TEPaul keeps claiming that anyone can look at them, but this is false.  Wayne has arranged it so is the minutes are not available through normal channels, or at least they are not available to anyone who might actually view them with a critical eye.   So at this point it is impossible to know if what we have been given is an accurate and complete record of what happened.  
  Unfortunately we have been provided a number of different versions of the transcript of this supposed report over the years, and this only adds to the uncertainty about its authenticity.  Add to that the fact that on multiple occasions the Faker Flynn authors have put forth inaccurate and incomplete information and claimed it was authentic.   So it is difficult to know whether to trust this information or not.  
  That said, I hope this latest version in accurate, but I really wonder about what was before and after that report in the records and why the rest of the records for that meeting were not included on the Flynn Faker pdf.  Why wouldn't they have included the records where the golf course was actually approved?  
  As it is we have little choice but to work of of what we have, but we should all keep in mind the possibility that games are still being played with this material, as games have been being played for years.

2.  Who is the author of the report?
   The answer seems obvious.   Lesley is the author.  "Golf Committee through Mr. Lesley, report as follows on the New Golf Grounds."    But in the past TEPaul and Mike have tried to argue that this was something Wilson had written and that Lesley was reading for Wilson.  That doesn't make any sense to me and there is no indication of this in any text I have seen.  If this is the case then they ought to bring forward information supporting this.

3. What were the many different courses?  
   From the beginning of the report, "Your committee desires to report that after laying out many different courses on the  new land . . ."  I assume that the "many different courses" were variations on the route of the golf course.  
 The many "different golf courses" could easily refer to variations of routings.  While it is far from clear, the description could refer to the variations up to that point, including Barker's rough routing, CBM/HJW's suggested changes and alterations to Barker's plan (including the addition of the land behind the clubhouse,) Lloyd's and Francis' attempts to make this fit onto the pre-swap land, and the post swap routing that Francis figured out.

4.  Who from Merion went to NGLA?  We've always assumed it was the Construction Committee, but this report casts doubts on that.  Lesley wasn't on the Construction Committee, yet he reports that "on OUR return [from NGLA], WE arranged . . ."   It sure sounds like he was at NGLA.  In Wilson's 1916 chapter makes it sound as if his Construction Committee was there, so there is some confusion in my mind who was actually there.  There are other reasons I have my doubts about who was there and who wasn't, but I will hold them for now.   Let's just say that it is somewhat of an open question, at least in my mind.  

5.  What were "his plans?"  Lesley reported, they "spent the evening looking over HIS PLANS and the various data he had gathered abroad in regard to golf courses . . . ."   Since all of you guys seem to think "plans' is synonymous with routing, then this ought to settle it right?   I didn't think so.   Rather you guys have tried to explain this away, arguing these must be plans from overseas or plans for NGLA but they couldn't possibly be plans for Merion - anything but that!  But we know that CBM told them he needed a contour map and we know that they had a contour map for months at least.  So it seems entirely possible that they were there going over CBM's plans for Merion and data from overseas, on which those plans were based.   We don't know, but it is certainly a possibility.  

6. What was meant by:  "On our return, we re-arranged the course and laid out five different plans?"[/i]  This is another statement which is far from clear, yet you some here think it only could mean one thing:   Merion came up with five different routings on their own and these routings really must have had nothing to do with the trip to NGLA.  I find this preposterous for many different reasons, but mainly because it ignores the first half of the sentence and ignores that these guys had just been going over this stuff with CBM!
a.  The reading ignores the first half if the sentence.   The "re-arranged the course."   Course is singular.   Before the NGLA meetings they had tried "many different courses" --plural, as in they had tried a number of routings.    But after the  NGLA meeting they rearranged the course --singular as in they rearranged the course to fit with what had been decided.   If this sentence is talking about routings, this seems to be the place where it is talking about routings.  
b.  What were these "five plans?"   Many have pretended these were distinct routings and that Merion came up with them after and without CBM.  But we don't know this, and to me it seems unlikely given that they also rearranged the singular course.   The differences could have had to to with hole lengths or green designs (should the 14th hole be the double plateau green and the 15th the hog's back green, or visa versa?) The differences could have had to do with the order in which the holes played.  (Should the course start the 14th thus ending with a par 3?  Or should it  Start on the par 3 13th and end on the 12th?   Should the redan come after the 2nd hole? )  We don't know.  
c.  What is meant by "laid out" five different plans?  For that matter, when Lesley used this phrase earlier when speaking of the different courses, and what did he mean there?  Were these five different plans that they had developed at NGLA and were laying off on the ground to see how they worked?   Were these five different pland the CBM "plans" referred to above?   It is not at all clear.    

I could go on.  There are many more ambiguities. But the bottom line is for me is that rather than excluding CBM from the design process as Mike and Jeff pretend, this Lesley passage puts CBM and HJW right it heart and calling the shots!

In other words, I don't think we can parse out the "five plans" language and pretend that these two words explain how really Merion came up with the plans without input and guidance from CBM/HJW's both right before and right after!  If the trip to NGLA and CBM/HJW's return visit weren't key details of the design process, Lesley wouldn't have explained them, nor would he have thanked CBM/HJW years later for their help!

[Jeff_Brauer]

David,

I explained it - in my mind there is nothing else that those could be oher than routing plans.

[JESII]

Jeff,

Specific to Merion, if nothing changed other than shortening #2 by 100 yards to a par 4 and lenghening #6 (formerly #3) by 75 yards to a par 5, would that be two distinct routings?

[Mike Cirba]

Golf Committee through Mr. Lesley, report as follows on the new Golf Grounds:

Your committee desires to report that after laying out many different courses on the
new land, they went down to the National Course with Mr. Macdonald and spent the
evening looking over his plans and the various data he had gathered abroad in regard
to golf courses. The next day was spent on the ground studying the various holes,
which were copied after the famous ones abroad.

On our return, we re-arranged the course and laid out five different plans.
On April 6th Mr. Macdonald and Mr. Whigham came over and spent the day on the ground, and
after looking over the various plans, and the ground itself, decided that if we would lay
it out according to the plan they approved, which is submitted here-with, that it would
result not only in a first class course, but that the last seven holes would be equal to
any inland course in the world. In order to accomplish this, it will be necessary to
acquire 3 acres additional.

After the Committee Reported, a Mr. Thompson proposed the following;

Whereas the Golf Committee presented a plan showing a proposed layout of the new
Golf Ground which necessitated the exchange of a portion of land already purchased
for other land adjoining and the purchase of about three acres additional to cost about
$7500.00, and asked the approval of this Board, it was on motion
Resolved, that this Board approve of the purchase and exchange, and agree to pay as
part of the rental the interest on the additional purchase.


Parse, schmarse...it says what it says.

[DMoriarty]

David,

I explained it - in my mind there is nothing else that those could be oher than routing plans.

So then by your methodology, if you think your understanding of something is correct, then it is okay for you to pretend that words are in the source material when you know that they are not?  And it is even okay for you to delete words out of your direct  QUOTATIONS of my words?   

Do I have that about right?

[Jeff_Brauer]

David,  I think we have asked the questions and answered them to our own satisfaction.  As to repeating myself on the deletion of the word routing, I keep asking myself, "Why does he pick on irrelevant items but refuse to answer factual questions, like "if not routing, just what were those plans?"

Actually, you kind of do, or at least speculate in your post above.  I agree with lots of what you wrote and don't see the argument that I am trying to cut CBM out of the design process in this period.  Point by point:

1.   I don’t believe the transcript has been altered.

2.   Regarding points 2 and 4, I think it’s clear that Lesley was reading it for the committee, not only because of the committee structure TePaul described once but just from general context.  If Lesley was the author, wouldn’t “Golf Committee through Mr. Lesley, report as follows on the New Golf Grounds."  Read as Mr. Lesley, report as follows on the New Golf Grounds." ?

I think this is a case of you outthinking yourself.  I don’t know why anyone should bring forth supporting information for a red herring such as you being the only one who doesn’t think it reads the most direct way possible.

Your point 4 is moot if Lesley is reading for the committee, which is the most reasonable interpretation.

3.   I agree that the words "Your committee desires to report that after laying out many different courses on the new land . . ."  could mean a few different things.  I will bet donut to dollars it has nothing to do with Barker’s routing, done for McConnell on a different parcel.  They had moved on by that point.

Sure, changing from courses to course could be significant, or a careless slip. Either way, they do say they were laying out (routing in my parlance) before the NGLA trip, and I think we can all agree on that, based on their words.

4.   Covered Above

5.   What were "his plans?"  Yes, this can read a few ways, too.  Or it could be both his GBI plans, his golf course, and whatever routings had been prepared.  We know the committee did some in advance, but only these words suggest CBM did.  Possible, but unconfirmed.  If we presume the minutes are so carefully worded as to distinguish course from courses, would not the same letter distinguish between the committee laying out plans and CBM?

In my case, I have always thought they were there for free flowing discussion and interested in both routing and the features.  I would bet both were discussed at some point, but that two days wasn’t enough to finalize a routing, given how much time we know was devoted to looking at NGLA.

6.   Not sure, but if they say they laid out five plans, I figure they laid out five plans.  Course and Courses is word parsing.  That said, we cannot know how different each of these plans was.  And to the degree that (at least for CBM) routing and placing features were intertwined more than most, then it is quite possible that some of these plans, and some of parts of these plans had features on them.

But laying out a golf course usually refers to routing.  Feature design is usally called feature design.

As to your last paragraph and your “bottom line”, Mike and I are not excluding CBM from the design process at all.  I am not trying to say Merion came up with the plans without input and guidance from CBM/HJW's in those two visits.  No doubt the NGLA trip and subsequent visit were big impacts.  I have said that all along and you keep telling me I haven’t.

 The record doesn’t show any more contact, but I believe those three contacts over four days were more than enough for CBM to impart what he could impart to Merion to go back and build the course.

[JESII]

Jim,

By the way, did you get my point about the location/configuration of the 1st hole limiting them?

No, but I know we've discussed in the past that the first green was built with the drawing of Golf House Road from November right through it...is that your angle?

[Mike Cirba]

Jeff,

I agree and this is way past the point of ridiculousness.

Why for God's sake would CBM ever have to come back down to "approve" his own plan?

David is just trying to find any way possible to twist every word and meaning to exclude Hugh Wilson and his committee and then turns it around as if we're trying to exclude CBM.

It's pointless and logic doesn't matter, because learning the truth is not the goal...in the least.

[DMoriarty]

David,  I think we have asked the questions and answered them to our own satisfaction.  As to repeating myself on the deletion of the word routing, I keep asking myself, "Why does he pick on irrelevant items but refuse to answer factual questions, like "if not routing, just what were those plans?"

You haven't answered my question at all.   You explained that you think you know what was meant, but that is no reason to misrepresent it to us and it is certainly no reason to misquote me, removing the key word from my quote.  

This is not the first time you have done this to my quotes Jeff.

Would you explain why you misquoted me?   Because you haven't so far.

____________________________

As for the rest.  My comments were for Bryan.  I really could care less what you think about any of it. We already know what you will believe that the document means whatever you need to to support your conclusion.  

It is a bit like you changing my quote.  You have your answer already, so you just change my quote to suit your answer.  Here you know the answer already, so you just twist the words to suit that answer.   You write off some words to typos or mistakes when they clearly are not, you ignore other words, and you tilt everything your way.  You have little or no basis for any of it, but you do it because it produces the answer you want.  

Yet you have the nerve to attack my essay as without factual basis?   A farce.  

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

The way the first hole was designed and built cuts off access to get to the other side of the property north of the clubhouse in any way other than behind it, where they built 13.

Essentially, it was built in this way to accommodate the need for the road crossings on 10, 11, & 12...those holes would have been too short given property constraints south of Ardmore Avenue at that time for holes running north and south.   So, number one essentially was built curving around the 10th green and 11th tee, and pressed so hard against the boundary that they actually needed to get a sliver of land beyond the boundary of the Johnson Farm.

Given that first hole location, how would you ever use the land directly across the street from the clubhouse??   No wonder Francis tells us it didn't fit with ANY GOLF PLANS (again, indicating multiple routings at that point).

So, if you think about it from the perspective of the first 13 holes being relatively easy to locate per Francis, the ONLY place you could be at that point given your first hole is over behind the clubhouse by the 13th green.

Now, I know you've been over there, but think about your options from that point on if you still had five holes to go.

Now, think about your options if there was no land available north of the 17th green, a mere pittance past the quarry.

You are correct...they would have had to have been INSANE if they did this without at least some of the triangle land already available to them in their planning.

I don't think they were insane men.

Here's what they would have had left to work with....for their final five holes.



Note how much of the remaining land is taken by the quarry.

Recall where the first hole ran, essentially blocking any other route but coming up from 13 behind the clubhouse.

Again, I don't think they were insane men, but if there was no triangle land available to them in their planning prior to Francis they would have been absolutely certifiable.

[DMoriarty]

Imagine Dom Toak, the foremost expert in golf design, trying to help out some golfers who admittedly didn't know the first thing about what they are doing.  

- Doak visits their site, gives them some advice, maybe makes some changes or additions to a rough routing someone else had done a few weeks before, and tells them that he can't tell them for sure it will work without a contour map.

- They try to use the rough routing and his advice to  stake out a course, but it doesn't quite fit, but one of them has a brainstorm about adding a little land to the north so they can get it to fit.    

- They still arent entirely sure what they are doing or what they should do, so these guys (who may have already sent Toak the contour map he needed) go visit him at his home course.  He likes the change to the routing the one guy came up with and he tells them to go with that.  He also takes them around and shows them plans and tells them in more detail what he thinks they should do and where, and he may even give them some different options and choices on how to do certain things.  And he tells them to head back, to stake out the different options, and that he would come down in a few weeks and check on it.

-  They return home and rearrange the course to include the routing the one had suggested and also lay out some different options pursuant to their conversations.  

-Toak comes down a few weeks later as promised and looks at the ground again and how the different options fit on the land and decides on the best option (which may have been a combination of the different options.)

-  These guys report to their board that Toak approved the plan they are presenting and that Toak thinks it will make a great course.   The board hears this and approves the plan and they build the course according to plan.  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()