Before discussing the manipulation of the 2026 budget, this writer would like to first extend sincere kudos to the clubhouse chef and his team for “delivering” an impressive $19k profit to the October F&B operations. And with this improvement, the year to date loss has now been trimmed to $550k. (1) Not only is this good news, but it clearly demonstrates that a minimum of break even results can be achieved with vigilant management and oversight.
And given that, one would think that leadership would embrace that reality as well by raising the bar of expectations and accountability. But alas, they do not.
A complete disconnect . . .
Instead, during the budget presentation meeting, the POA Treasurer introduced a board guidance containing a $500k subsidy of the F&B operation. (2) Subsequently, the 2026 operating budget reflecting a $533k F&B loss was approved by the board at the November 20th open meeting and posted to the POA website. (3)
Note: Despite the favorable October results, the budget forecasts a $678k loss by year end December 2025.
And just as strangely, in the latest Voice of the Community survey , (4) leadership appeared to seek property owner blessings for the subsidization of member and guest meals at the clubhouse. This subsidy is currently estimated by leadership at $15 per household per month.
As for that 2026 Operating Budget . . .
And not only does the budget continue to forecast exorbitant food and beverage losses, the 2025 Board of Directors has now approved an operating budget for 2026 (3) that will generate a net operating loss after depreciation of $631k. Approval of this budget violates Article V, Section 5.2 of the 2006 Association bylaws (5) which state verbatim:
“The Operating Budget must be balanced: expenses must not exceed revenues.”
In fact, this same time last year, an article was posted on this site (6) noting that the 2025 operating budget (7) reflecting a net operating loss of $59k did not comply with the 2006 Association bylaws. At that time, leadership did not dispute this assertion nor did they make any adjustment to the budget totals. Instead, any evidence of a loss has now been wiped clean in both the GM’s 2026 slide presentation (8) as well as in the historical data provided in the actual 2026 operating budget (3) posted to the POA website.
And unlike the original 2025 operating budget that openly reflected a net operating loss of $59k, the 2026 operating budget has hidden the $631k operating loss by shifting non-operational revenue totaling $2.9 million into the operating revenue category.
This shift in the presentation of revenue not only deviates from 2025 but it also deviates from the presentation in all years prior.
Make no mistake.
This shifting of revenue is not only inaccurate, it is pure deception.
Note: For clarity, one must only place the GM’s slide presentation of the 2025 operating budget side by side with the GM’s 2026 slide presentation to see the obvious deviation and deception.
And what exactly is non-operational revenue? . . .
Specifically, capital assessments and Capital Contribution Fees, as they are not intended to be used for operational purposes.
For example, the fourth amendment to the declaration of covenants dated January 2021 restricts the use of the Capital Contribution Fees to “the acquisition, improvement, maintenance and/or enhancement of Common Properties of the Association.” (9) Any use for operational purposes would be expressly forbidden.
In addition, the capital assessments are clearly designated for capital purposes as shown in the GM’s own slide presentation. (10)
Thus, these fees and assessments should never be included in general operating revenue.
In fact, one might reasonably question if this was done in order to “cover up” the $631k loss by making the budget appear to be balanced in compliance with the Association bylaws.
Where those capital assessments and fees really belong . . .
And although the 2026 capital plan also required by Article V, Section 5.2 of the 2006 Association bylaws (5) fails to designate it’s source of funding, the capital assessments and Capital Contribution Fees projected at $2.9 million will instead help provide funding needed for those capital projects totaling $9.8 million. (11)
The remainder of those expenditures will presumably be funded by the balance in the Capital Fund that includes the $1.7 million employee retention tax credit , transfers from the operating account and the Master Plan Fund.
After 2026, capital funding is anyone’s best guess.
Note: It is important to keep in mind that the Treasurer acknowledged that capital assessment increases were deferred due to receipt of the $1.7 million employee retention tax credit. (12a)
And now, given the POA Treasurer’s repeated reference to the 350 hours spent by management and the Finance Committee constructing the 2026 budget, (12b) it is profoundly disappointing that this community has been presented with such an inaccurate and obviously manipulated financial document.
This is not okay.
Rewriting history . . .
Further, when viewing the budget document posted to the POA website, it is shockingly revealed that not only has non-operational revenue been inaccurately shifted to the operational budget, but the historical data from previous years (whether budgeted or actual totals) has been altered.
Specifically, other general revenue such as interest income, fees from past due accounts, etc. have been removed from the historical “Other General Revenue” category and reassigned to the GM’s administration department boosting it’s performance. Further, by shifting income into administration, the historical performance data does not correspond to the actual financial performance of that department over the years as posted to the POA website.
Note: And while, it is certainly recognized that allocation of resources and expenses may adjust over time, previous historical data should not be altered to fit a new narrative. Instead, any changes in the construction of the budget going forward should simply be explained.
Needless to say, with all the undocumented changes, it is quite difficult to even ascertain that employee benefits account for 84% of the assessment increase as so prominently emphasized by both management and leadership. Especially when, for example, interest expense alone on the $15 million loan with Wells Fargo almost doubles in 2026 to $493k.
Again, this is not okay.
Property owners are encouraged to view the previous operating budgets posted to the POA website in order to recognize the magnitude of manipulation of data found in the 2026 budget. Interested property owners may contact this writer for copies of budgets prior to 2023 as those are no longer available on the POA website.
An unpleasant joke . . .
And now, to quote the POA Treasurer’s attempt at humor during his requests for approval of various items at the November 20th open board meeting,
“You know, treasurers can make the money work any way they want.” (12c)
Rather than being humorous, perhaps that is exactly what the Treasurer, management and the Finance Committee did given the plethora of inaccurate, misleading and manipulated financial data included on the posted 2026 budget document.
Maybe it’s time for the Treasurer to put a lid on it.
There you have it.
. . . . .
Should you believe the information found in these posts is important, please continue to share with your friends and neighbors wherever possible. As for those who wish to see additional articles posted in the future, please subscribe for an email notification or check back frequently. And as always, feel free to contact me directly at thepcrosses@gmail.com for questions or further discussion. Meanwhile, best wishes for a joyful holiday season. Take care, stay safe and thank you for your readership.
Patricia Cross
10438 Big Canoe
References:
1) October 2024 Financial Package, Income from Operations, Pg. 5, (POAwebsite>login>POA>financials>2025>October)
2) 2026 Budget Presentation, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVBvcYsiWTw at 4:30
3) 2026 Operating Budget (POAwebsite>login>POA>financials>Budgets>2026>OperatingBudget
4) Voice of the Community survey
5) Article V, Section 5.2 of the 2006 Association bylaws
6) “Spent into oblivion”, December 3rd, 2024, bcmatters.org, https://bcmatters.org/spent-into-oblivion/
8) GM’s 2026 slide presentation
9) Article VI, Section 14 (e), Fourth amendment to the Amended and Restated General Declaration of Covenants, dated January 4th, 2021, No login required. Go to https://www.bigcanoepoa.org/property-owners/poa-community-governance/governing-documents/covenants/ and click on Covenants CCF 2021.
10) the GM’s own slide presentation
11) 2026 Capital Budget, (POAwebsite>login>POA>financials>Budgets>2026>CapitalBudget)
12) Big Canoe POA Board Meeting, November 20th, 2025, 18th, 2024, video on Youtube at a) 36:55; b) 37:45; c) 43:45, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t02C60Z5XKs
I follow this blog- and am impressed with the level of detail and oversight provided. I believe that there is a pressing and legitimate need for some form of an ethics committee. Month after month the writer provides information suggesting that oversight of the POA leadership is long overdue.
Once again Patricia Cross offers an analytical report of what is going on with POA finances, aka, our money.
Rather than giving Property Owners a true and valid view of our budgets and financial situation, our board and GM have become spin masters presenting inaccurate financial positions. Then they joke about it.
As we are looking for a new GM next year, it is imperative we hire an individual or management company with solid credentials, effective experience and a realistic plan to improve how Big Canoe is managed. Presently we appear to be hosting a dog and pony show, often ignoring the wishes and direction of those paying the bills.
The renovated Clubhouse is beautiful as it should be after spending millions of borrowed dollars to spiff it up. I hope we don’t hear talk of anything else needed to add to the existing expense. That would certainly indicate poor planning and budgeting. It amazes me that Clubhouse parking was not addressed and improved. Perhaps offering valet service would be an immediate improvement as hiking from the far reaches of the parking lot isn’t fun, especially in bad weather. Occasionally a golf cart offers rides to the Clubhouse but that’s unpredictable.
Undoubtedly the best addition to the Clubhouse is our excellent chef and his talented staff. He is top of the line and I sincerely hope we can keep him.
With new members joining the board soon, perhaps they will take the time and their influence to make changes that reflect honesty and the wishes of Property Owners. We desperately need accountability.
I don’t want to pay a stinkin penny to the new & improved Taj Mahal. We had a beautiful wedding for our daughter in 2017 at the Chimneys catered by Talk of the Town. Beautiful event, but I guess that made too much financial sense to keep up that space with the proper ( much cheaper) renovations. So market the heck out of the Clubhouse to any Tom, Dick & Harry…or Mary and let them pay through the nose for the upscale experience & leave me out of it. Blessings to you Patricia.
The Chimneys was a wonderful venue and I was sorry to see it dismissed. I chaired two events at The Chimneys, both were fun and had a good traffic flow. It was an intimate, friendly venue and could have been a jewel in Big Canoe.
So shortsighted by the POA. Yes, it had structural issues but with careful planning and budgeting, those problems could have been handled. We missed the mark on that decision.