What is A Subsidy & How Does it Apply to Yorktown Grill?

Home/Topics/What is A Subsidy & How Does it Apply to Yorktown Grill?

What is A Subsidy & How Does it Apply to Yorktown Grill?

Home Forums Anthem Opinions What is A Subsidy & How Does it Apply to Yorktown Grill?

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)
  • Author
  • #8934
    Rana Goodman


    By Robert Stern

    The usual definition of a subsidy is a sum of money granted by the Government or Public Body to assist an Industry or business so that a price of a commodity or service may remain low or competitive. Generally a subsidy is a fixed sum of money not a blank check. Blogger Berman spins and distorts the definitions to apply to all costs and expenses that SCA incurs as subsidies.

    The Developer of SCA subsidized a restaurant owner as a sales tool. Subsidy was cancelled when selling stopped and the non owned SCA restaurant owner went out of business. Yorktown is now 100% owned by homeowners. There is no longer a subsidy. There are only financial losses.

    Blogger Berman attempts to redefine subsidy, amenity, costs and expenses and concludes that homeowners must choose how big of a” subsidy” they are willing to pay for the Restaurant. Here is how absurd that though process is. SCA has an annual budget process that budgets how big of a loss/expense the restaurant will have. The Board of Directors makes that decision. Homeowners then can by a 90% negative vote can show up at the ratification meeting and reject the budget. If not BUDGET APPROVED! Is his argument absurd enough yet? It gets worse. In reality its a blank check “subsidy” not a fixed amount because the budget doesn’t control spending. The board does.

    The ratified 2024 Budget has an anticipated $200,000 YORKTOWN loss budgeted but everyone should now know by now that the $200,000 was a bogus number and accordingly the “subsidy” is a moving target, a blank check. There are no short term controls in the existing contract that limit the current operational losses. And these past boards have not honored the budget anyway. They spend at will as evidenced by the addition of unbudgeted jobs. Homeowners ratification rights as absurd as they are at 90% were violated. There is no accountability except through elections. And that ought to be enough for homeowners to reject current President Steve Anderson endorsed by Berman.

    And to make matters worse the board admitted intentionally low balling the 2024 budgeted loss. So who do you trust? Hopefully not Berman and his allies. They continue to mislead homeowners and spin. You can fool some of the people all of the time.

    Then Berman attempts to justify a $500,000 fixed annual” subsidy”( which is not fixed) by telling you its only 7.6 cents per household per day. Would it be a better value costing about 3 tenths of a penny each hour? No! It’s still $500,000 annually and it isn’t fixed. I think requiring each homeowner to pay $70 per year special assessment to offset Restaurant losses is not desired by a majority of homeowners. And it is not a fixed amount. Blogger Berman’s presentation on his “subsidy” question is absurd. And absurd is defined as wildly unreasonable,illogical or inappropriate.

    So essentially this non conversation is over. And what you really have to decide is who do you want in charge of SCA’s financial decisions and management? Hopefully it isn’t Berman, Anderson, Seddon and accomplices.They have really hurt the community financially and not just with the restaurant. If you haven’t voted, please do so for John Marshall, Ben Leibson and Forrest Quinn. We need competence not absurd spin. That’s the choice.

    The pocketbooks we save will be our own!

Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.