8/23 SCA Board votes on Restaurant proposal

Home/Topics/8/23 SCA Board votes on Restaurant proposal

8/23 SCA Board votes on Restaurant proposal

Home Forums Where I Stand 8/23 SCA Board votes on Restaurant proposal

This topic contains 5 replies, has 4 voices, and was last updated by  Rana Goodman 3 weeks, 2 days ago.

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #4743

    Rana Goodman
    Keymaster

    At the SCA board meeting today8/23/18 the vote was 5 to 2 passing the G2G restaurant proposal. Only Forrest Quinn and Aletta Waterhouse voted on the side of the residents who spoke out against this outrageous (my opinion)  document.

    Quinn’s main objection was that he had asked repeatedly for financials from G2G and they had failed to deliver them, something that didn’t seem to hinder the balance of the board. Aletta felt that more workshops were needed to garner more feed back from the owners and I wish that, under the circumstances of the added items in this new lease proposal the other board members had agreed with her.

    Personally I can go along with no rent, I can even go along with contributing some advertising like we have in the past, what I’m adamantly against is SCA paying for the things a private business, and let’s face it, the board may call this an amenity, but it is a private business since it is open to the public, should pay for things it wants to entice customers in. like entertainment, TVs & NFL games, boxing, gaming, advertising, etc. etc. and so forth…

     Several issues regarding food were brought up and it is not known if the board will or won’t ask for special consideration or if those clubs will need to now go off site. Joan Roth mentioned that the ICCC and several other Asian clubs annually have packaged meals of Chinese food, Havurah has kosher style meals and Neighborhood watch has take-out pizza. Pizza is one thing but can “Denny’s” supply kosher or Asian meals?

    Why is SCA paying the utilities? Quinn states it costs $20,000 to put in a separate electric meter, well we are paying 450,000 for clean the grease traps, we are spending a small fortune on all the other things called for in this agreement, $20,000 for these meters is chump change if you figure that a business can run up amazing utility bills in the course of a year when they don’t give a damn what the total bills come too… My electric bill is $500 per month and that is for my home, I’m not cooking, cooling or heating a restaurant and kitchen of 7,000 plus square feet. Now add water, sewer, gas… I can just imagine what the bills will run in that place!

     TAKE A DEEP BREATH ALL, THE FUN IS JUST BEGINNING!

     Our new President is Candice Karrow, Secretary Aletta Waterhouse…

    Sincere Good wishes to you both

    #4745

    Rod MacKinnon
    Participant

    Another change approved at the board with no discussion and no clear communication of what it means, the board approved a change which allows proactive inspections of properties for compliance.  Expect the compliance police to roam the neighborhoods looking for issues.

    Although I am against this policy somewhat, I am completely against how this change was made.

     

    I am am relatively new here and have attended a few board meetings.  It appears the board frames items to limit any controversy and basically ignores member inputs.

    #4746

    Jim Furse
    Participant

    It would be nice to be able to believe that we could have a successful restaurant, one that a large portion of residents would like to support – and not to mention,  to take advantage of & enjoy that great floor space! We have lived in SCA since 2000, and have been through unsuccessful restaurant attempts so many times before. Unfortunately, not to mention all the subsides, we wonder if this one looks any better. It seems that there is a prolonged tendency to want something that most residents can’t relate to.

    Hope I’m wrong, but I’m wondering if this one is something like one of the previous attempts several yrs ago to bring in a restaurant. Residents were invited that time to attend presentations from several restaurant groups, which talked about what they would offer. Afterwards, my wife spent at least 15 minutes with one group & discussed whether they really thought SCA residents would support a restaurant like what they proposed?” She said they responded, saying  “no, we will have to advertise heavily and bring in customers.” Nothing against non-residents, and maybe many other folks here don’t agree with our question, but we wondered SCA residents should share, and subsidize, our great space with a majority of outsiders?  Anyway, that  group did turn out to be the one that SCA approved. There’s been so many attempts that I can’t remember how long it was before that restaurant group also was out-of-here too.

    #4747

    Denise Bianca
    Participant

    We have lived here since 2003. The first iteration of Trumpets was terrific and we went there often and thoroughly enjoyed it. After the owner got rid of Chef Kevin, who was a wonderful Executive Chef, the quality of food and service went downhill drastically. That was the beginning of the end for Trumpets. All of the restaurants that have been here were open to the public.

    We have still tried to support each place (the greatest challenge was supporting the one that followed Trumpets…ugh) but my concern with whatever restaurant goes in the space is that it is very hard to please people in this community. When Vic’s first opened we thought the food was excellent but the constant complaining by the residents became a problem. Frankly, it is difficult for us to understand why, when we live in one of the best age restricted communities in the country, people complain about absolutely everything and there is so much negativity. It has taken a lot of fun out of living here.

    #4749

    Rana Goodman
    Keymaster

    Denise, I think the negativity you are seeing now is not so much with the restaurant since many people would like to see one in Anthem Center, it is with the amount of “asks” that G2G has laid out and that the board has bowed down to. Most of the things SCA is paying for are things that any business should be doing to entice customers into the place.

    Free rent is one thing, even a regular free ad in the Spirit, but why are we giving free linen service, the back page of the Spirit, free ads on SCA TV, FREE utilities, $34,000 in entertainment, and the myriad of other things they keep adding on? G2G is not a “start up business” and yet we are giving away the farm. It makes the residents I have spoken to very resentful and not want to patronize the place at all… It is fundamentally wrong.

    #4751

    Rana Goodman
    Keymaster

    From former President Favil West:

    Nearly 19 years ago I moved to SCA stating, “this is my last move.” I will keep my word. Obviously through the passing of those years I have seen 19 boards, was elected 3 times and served as an officer on 6 of those boards. I also served as board liaison to one restaurant lease negotiation and served on 2 lease modification teams one of which I was the team leader. I mention this only as background information.

    This board has rejected advice given by a number of professional negotiators, realtors, and others recommending that they hire a leasing agent specializing in restaurant leasing. (I did this with my own buildings) They decided to negotiate the lease themselves, a huge error in judgment. When you own the asset only those without experience want to meet eye to eye. The asset owner nearly always keeps the negotiations at arm’s length. Never once did I meet with people leasing from me. Never once did I meet with the owner of buildings I leased. I always met with the leasing agent. It is the way smart people deal. I think it is clear that the negotiators representing the Association have no leasing experience, are incompetent in this area, and they may be negligent in representing the best interests of the Association.

    Candidly, I am embarrassed to say I voted for all but one of these people. (I cannot call them directors as they clearly do not understand the duties of a board member)

    This lease term letter reflects the eventual lease document and will be very costly to the association and its unit owners. This term letter, in my opinion, reflects both the arrogance of this board as well as their intent to  ignore their fiduciary responsibility to the association.

    It has become increasingly clear why SCA, a community that once was the number 1 senior community in the country, has sunk so low in such a short period of time. It certainly reflects adversely on the last 3 boards and on its management.

    As you know there are no inoculations, nor anything else you can do for stupid and that is what we at SCA are facing with this board..

    Favil

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.