A call for more defined disciplinary procedures in the clubhouse

Due to a recent 30 day clubhouse suspension, some questions have arisen. I write this with  the possibility of avoiding unnecessary lawsuits.
At issue is the time between offenses and the documentation associated with them. one question is: Is there currently a written procedure on dealing with offenses, and in particular, what offenses are deemed serious enough to warrant suspension from the clubhouse or any other WPRF facility?
Obviously someone having a verbal argument would not have as much weight as a physical assault, however someone being told by a security personnel to depart a WPRF parking lot 25 minutes before it closes may just be overstepping their bounds a bit. Maybe a reminder that the lot and the clubhouse is closing would be appropriate, but to tell the people talking by their cars that they have to leave at that moment was not the best way to go about it.
Something should be written, a Standard Operating Procedure, not just for the Security Team, but also for WPRF. Standards that once put on paper and brought before the Delegates for approval.
I propose the following:
Offenses occurring within a calendar year/season:
First Offense breaking club rules, a verbal warning that shall be documented as a verbal warning and kept on file for the offender.
Second Offense, A written warning from WPRF informing the offender that should a third offense happen, there will be a suspension of up to 15-30 days.
If there is a fourth offense, a 90 day suspension.
Offenses that would cause automatic suspension: Physical assault.
Depending on the severity, 30 to 90 days.
A second offense within a season shall be suspended for the remainder of the season. Should the offense be within the last 90 days of a season, then the suspension will carry over to the next season.
A Disciplinary Hearing Panel should meet with WPRF Manager every twice a month, their function will be to review all sides of the complaint.
President Israel suggested that maybe we need to have an Ombudsman in the Village again, maybe he is right.
I would hate to see the Village go to court over and over unnecessarily.