We the undersigned ask that you reconsider and reverse the decision to allow a smoking area on the Club House balcony approved at a recent Master Board meeting.  We have been told this is a secluded area that is not utilized on a regular basis but in season all space is highly utilized and may impact members attending the Club House. Since more homes have been sold in the past year and people prefer outside dining, this space would be best utilized by all.  The effects of second-hand and third-hand smoke are real and it has been proven to cause serious health issues for people, even if outside. Smoke travels, fans do not stop the effects of second-hand and third-hand smoke, in fact it may even spread it further. We understand there is a smoking area outside the Club House entrance, however no food was served there and people do not gather there to socialize.  Perhaps there should be a discussion whether this should even be allowed. 

 

As a community, we cannot accommodate everyone’s wishes, we all understand that. But without a doubt, the vast majority of people at Treviso would prefer our Club House remains nonsmoking.  For the Board to listen to a few voices at the risk of health issues to the many is something that should not be done. Given that Icon management and the Treviso Board overwhelmingly approved a Blue Zone community only a short while ago, this is against the principles of the Blue Zone community and contradicts the wishes of our community as a whole.  In addition, you are now asking restaurant workers to serve the non-smoking community and the smoking community – this puts their health at risk and allows the smoke to be carried on their clothes to the nonsmoking patrons. This is not the experience we believe the workers or Treviso residents and their guests should be subject to.

 

Smokers are welcome to enjoy smoking in permitted outside areas and in their home but not at a setting where the Board and membership are trying to bring more Treviso members to better utilize the Club House for dining, social gatherings, etc. This may create the opposite effect - people may stay away from the Clubhouse when smoke is nearby. 

 

While the Board evaluated utilization of the land outside the community, the Board mentioned wishing to protect the homeowners’ investment in their property.  Yet this decision is not a decision that will improve our investment. Smoking is perceived as a negative activity and this could financially impact our investment and if nothing else, increase the costs to the members. Higher insurance rates, cleaning costs, future ventilation and remediation, etc.   Would you or a real estate agent promote this benefit when people are looking at Treviso as a community to live? We don’t think so.  

 

We also believe there should have been a broader public forum/meeting on this subject when residents were in the community and focused on the Treviso Bay community.  It is very disappointing that a decision of this magnitude was done during the summertime when limited people were around to discuss and represent their opinions all while we are acclimating to the re-opening of the country after the COVID pandemic. Let us be a community that believes in an open forum.

 

Thank you for your consideration and again, we ask that you reverse this policy change and remove smoking from the Club House balcony.