What About The Master Cuisine Contract?

[Rana Goodman]

Editors note: Readers, Please forgive the font size, I am in the middle of the Pacific, heading home, using a strange computer

system and this is the best I could do. Rana

 

By Robert Stern

Fellow homeowners

I went to the Town Hall to comment on the Masterpiece Cuisine pending deal and was disappointed by the presentation and format. There were a lot of misstatements and not any opportunity to challenge. Here is my point of view. First some facts:

 

1.It’s a deal with a Catering Company not a Restaurant operator.

 

2.This catering company in essence moves its entire operation to our facility and gets the following: a. Free rent for 10 years b. Free Utilities. c. full use of our KITCHEN, OFFICE AND DINING equipment not providing one $ for depreciation and Reserve replacement funding d. an opportunity to place slots in our facility and own 100% of profits. e. includes usage of our vacant rooms for events for nonmembers.

 

3.We in essence become an enabler of a 24/7 catering business with NOT a lot of benefit to SCA. Their major focus is producing and shipping product out the back door to other destinations.  Big truck suppliers with size and weight will wear down our parking lot causing earlier maintenance on our dime.

 

4. SCA gets 4 days of 3-hour Breakfast bars and 3 hours of Happy Hours a week. We do get room rentals on events. There is a provision in the contract that does require a full-service restaurant but the Town Hall spokespersons made it clear that was not going to happen on day one and there was no provision to ensure that it would happen at all.

 

5. I find that a bit curious as this is what SCA restaurant supporters mainly wanted. In my view the restaurant committee has failed its main mission by proposing this contract. Much of the detail on issues is unfavorable to SCA. For example, SCA pays for all the removal of trash created by Masterpiece Cuisine’s catering business. Does that make sense to you? It doesn’t to me.

 

My conclusions are that this is not a good deal for SCA and, if approved, will bring a number of unintended consequences. Homeowners at the Town Hall raised issues related to gaming and conducting events for nonresidents. My view is though this deal may turn out to be financially viable in not harming us much it will not accomplish the stated goal of providing homeowners a restaurant or the kind of food and beverage service that homeowners expressed they wanted.

 

I have talked to and heard board members express that if we don’t do this deal then there is no deal out there and I respond by saying it is better to make no deal than a bad deal. This Masterpiece Cuisine deal is a bad deal because there is no guarantee for the kind of food and beverage service that the community desires. And that was the objective of the Restaurant Committee. It has failed that mission. 

 

Under the current draft contract Masterpiece Cuisine is required on Day 1 (which is March 1) to provide the full-service restaurant. That won’t happen. So, if the board approves this deal and then a new board comes in May 1 and no full-service restaurant has appeared then Masterpiece Cuisine is in default. What good is that? Masterpiece Cuisine would have a period of time to cure the default and if not would be in breach and SCA can tell them to pack their bags. Lawsuit?

 

That is why this is a bad deal.  Masterpiece Cuisine must provide a full-service restaurant. This Wink Wink: Nod Nod approach by the committee and perhaps the board is dangerous and should not be approved.

• This topic was modified 1 year, 6 months ago by Rana Goodman.
• This topic was modified 1 year, 6 months ago by Rana Goodman.
• This topic was modified 1 year, 6 months ago by Rana Goodman.
• This topic was modified 1 year, 6 months ago by Rana Goodman.
• This topic was modified 1 year, 6 months ago by Rana Goodman.
• This topic was modified 1 year, 6 months ago by Rana Goodman.
• This topic was modified 1 year, 6 months ago by Rana Goodman.
• This topic was modified 1 year, 6 months ago by Rana Goodman.

[Steven H]

It’s not a perfect deal, but way better than the previous one. Masterpiece is transitioning to the new space, and as a fully operating catering business already, this takes time and focus. To expect a full operating restaurant from day 1 is not realistic. How big a restaurant operation we end up with really depends on US. If the DEMAND is there,(as reflected in receipts) it is in the operator’s interest to expand the restaurant to meet the demand and increase profits. We already well know that a stand-alone restaurant cannot survive there. The catering model is the only one that provides a buffer for our seasonal residence changes, and gives the ability for a restaurant operation to expand and contract to our current needs. Masterpiece is taking a big existential risk by moving and expanding their business here. Our risks and costs are minimal, and the potential for something great are there, provided that we actually patronize the on-site restaurant and use MP for catering as much as possible. In the past, we have created full-service restaurants here that were designed to bleed out and die, based on our poor decisions. It seems that the good folks who engineered this really did their homework, to create something that will actually last, without financially breaking us.

[Rana Goodman]

I was very pleased to hear today that signing the contract has been put on hold to work out the kinks with Masterpiece.
I hope that HOA owners know that (paraphrasing) our CC&Rs state that the area is the be a restaurant IF POSSIBLE.
We are currently heading home from vacation, so rather than stress over this issue,  i can make it to the next board meeting with my fingers crossed that there won’t be more surprises.

• This reply was modified 1 year, 6 months ago by Rana Goodman.

[Author]

Posts