Wow. Talk about influence. The election hasn’t even taken place, yet the General Manager has already adopted the narrative taken from one candidate and Finance Committee member (1) by referring to the $13k September Food & Beverage (“F&B”) loss as a subsidy while proclaiming it cost each property owner only $4.40 or less than a cup of Starbucks coffee. (2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UImvGmEPcjY at 15:30. What an innovative twist and what a dog and pony show.
Meanwhile, the GM conveniently omitted the year to date F&B losses which would have confirmed that the losses actually cost each property owner $189.23 after just nine months of operation. Using the GM’s own math, that averages out to $21.03 per month. Ummm, perhaps that explains the GM’s omission of the year to date totals.
It really is all about how you spin things.
But, to be completely fair, kudos should be in order to the GM for bringing back an amenity performance slide , if only for F&B. (3) In fact, kudos are probably also due to those property owners who continue to stand up and demand more from our leadership by letting their voices be heard.
And although September losses were much improved, year to date F&B losses now total $569k before adding the real subsidies such as interest expense, housekeeping, taxes, insurance and depreciation expense described by this writer in previous posts. (1) (4)
Note: Further, both the GM and finance committee member/board candidate appear to dispute the financial statements and measures and tracking reports posted to the POA website which clearly appropriately refer to the F&B and other results as a (loss). In fact, the candidate even contradicts these reports by stating, “Calling this a “loss” is misleading. It’s a subsidy, and it’s a conscious choice communities like ours make.” (1) (5)
Looking at this all a bit differently . . .
Given that leadership refuses to address the F&B problem while also seemingly refusing to subject the function to a forensic audit in order to identify the real reasons for the continued losses, perhaps there is a more equitable way to allocate those costs.
Rather than spreading the losses across the entire community regardless of their patronage, it might be more reasonable to allocate those costs to the bar tabs and dinner checks of the property owner or guest that actually partakes of the product.
For example, management’s measures and tracking reports (6) reflect year to date F&B covers at 69,179. Excluding bar tabs and using that data alone, each meal would be increased $8.23 rather than consuming $21.03 of every property owner’s assessment each month.
Note: That $8.23 increase would be even less, if data on bar tabs was available and included in the calculation.
Now, this writer recognizes that this might be an over-simplistic example, however, it might demonstrate that the operating losses of the F&B function should somehow be allocated to the facility’s customer base rather than the community as a whole.
As a reminder . . .
The real subsidy to the food and beverage function already comes from every property owner in the form of capital expenditures (recognized over time as depreciation expense) estimated at $28k + per month; interest expense currently at approximately $21k+ each month; clubhouse cleaning contract at $11k per month; taxes and insurance. (1) (4)
And for the record, although our governing documents may have been constructed to imply that capital expenditures would be shared equally by all property owners, nothing can be found in the documents requiring all property owners to “subsidize” operational losses of the amenities.
Maybe it’s time to fix the problem rather than fixing the definition.
But alas . . .
It seems that our elected leadership has no intention of fixing the problem given the POA Board Treasurer’s (former Finance Committee member) announcement at the November 12th budget presentation that included the oddly worded board guidance,
“Deliver a $500,000 subsidy for the Clubhouse operation including benefits”. (7)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVBvcYsiWTw at 4:30
Well now, in an obvious show of solidarity, it is apparent that the Board, at least two board candidates and the GM are calling the shots from the same playbook by seeking to redefine the F&B losses to the community as nothing more than an acceptable and budgeted subsidy.
Note: Ironically, the GM meanwhile references the amazing F&B performance which will be disclosed at the open board meeting.
Fiscal insanity . . .
Our leadership has just approved and spent $7.7 million on a renovated clubhouse plus almost an additional million for kitchen equipment, kitchenware, retaining wall and architectural and engineering fees only to “deliver” a $500k “subsidy” for the clubhouse operation contrary to projections of increased revenue.
Seriously?
For now . . .
Other content from the budget presentation has not been fully processed but discussion will be forthcoming. Suffice it to say, it was an extravaganza of slides and pie charts as has become the norm.
As for those dissatisfied with the status quo, please do continue to stand up and let your voices be heard.
It really does matter.
. . . . .
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, take care, stay safe and thank you for your readership.
Patricia Cross
10438 Big Canoe
References:
1) “Still more of the same”, October 13th, 2025, bcmatters.org, https://bcmatters.org/still-more-of-the-same/
2) Big Canoe POA board meeting, October 30th, 2025, video on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UImvGmEPcjY at 15:30.
4) “Still more of the same: Part Two”, October 27th, 2025, https://bcmatters.org/still-more-of-the-same-part-two/
5) https://poa.rogerhackler.com/the-clubhouse-debate-clearing-the-air/
6) Measures and Tracking – September 2025 (POAwebsite>login>POA>financials>MeasuresAndTracking>2025>September)
7) 2026 Budget Presentation, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVBvcYsiWTw at 4:30
Yes, those of us who truly care about the governance of Big Canoe will keep questioning the methods of operation applied to our community. I still am amazed Scott Auer said he didn’t want to bore property owners with financial overload. What is this man thinking and where is he coming from? Many of us are very interested in all financial matters and want full disclosure. We are the funders of our community.
We really are a small town and having a GM administrator requires a background in community management and a proven track record showing positive results. We have not had that.
I will say our present GM and senior staff along with some members of the board are skilled spin masters. What kind of transparency is that?
While many good and wonderful things make Big Canoe a fabulous place to live, unless we acknowledge and plan for contingencies, our community will eventually disconnect with the values that made our community stand out as a well rounded, stellar place to live.
Questioning is not the bad thing some diehard POA cheerleaders think it is. It takes many voices to make a community thrive.