Reply To: SCA President’s Report 2/22/24

Home/Reply To: SCA President’s Report 2/22/24

Reply To: SCA President’s Report 2/22/24

Home Forums Community Meetings and Events SCA President’s Report 2/22/24 Reply To: SCA President’s Report 2/22/24

Martin Winger


Well the pressure to get this information posted worked and as expected the January LOSS was $50,766 on pace with November 2023 to generate a projected $500,000 to $600,000 restaurant LOSS for 2024. If you remember I reported to you that the 2024 Budgeted Loss for the restaurant was fabricated at $200,000 by the board.

The board’s 2024 homeowner assessment was artificially kept low when you couple the real expected restaurant losses with the two now unbudgeted hires wrongfully added to payroll just recently meaning if the budget had been honestly done adding another $1million of expense your annual assessment would have been another $140 annually or $35 quarterly. That board played games and lied to keep your 2024 assessment lower that what it should have been based on their real intentions. A new board majority coming May 1st with your help electing them is going to have their hands full based on the failed leadership of this current board. You are not going to like it because your 2025 assessment is likely to be a 20% hit when you include dealing with the responsibly of the underfunded reserves.

Looking purely at the restaurant financials for January 2024 on the website here are a few observations:
1. Utilities and Insurance have not been included as Steve Anderson failed to keep his allocation promise and I am guessing that adds at least a $5,000 additional monthly cost.
2. Banquet sales were 25% higher than their modest budget while food sales were off 30% from their overly optimistic budget. This just means that enough people are not showing up for lunch and dinner. I have received feedback from observers stating that SUNDAYS are totally dead and weekdays are lucky to see a one time daily seating of maybe 30% capacity. That’s just another recipe for a failed restaurant. So to the “amenity” crowd how much annual loss is ok? And to those that think individual meal sales are going to rise over time because you were told they would, what is going to cause that?
3. Food costs were hit with an 11% food spoilage factor. Some spoilage is normal.
4. Labor costs for supervision and managerial are out of whack for the volume of business taking place. Wait staff labor is also too high.

So with WHG wanting to push catering and events to all comers, that is the only financial path to save the amenity. So I support that as it is the only way to keep us out of harm’s way. And it may not work. But WHG thinks it’s worth a shot. Homeowners have raised lots of concerns that that practice will tarnish the very amenity that they were sold and wanted.

Some homeowners want the plug to be pulled contractually after the one year mark. That may be the right decision. But you must have a board majority in place that has sound financial leadership from business people and be willing to be honest and transparent with homeowners. This new board majority if elected must clean house and rid the ranks of excess payroll and underperformers. It will be a challenge fixing years of bad policy. But it has to start with you and your votes.

Elections matter. Stay focused on the desired outcome.