There was an extended debate over spending just $250 at the Monthly Board Meeting yesterday; but they are spending thousands-of-dollars to send the Fitness Manager to a Fitness Seminar in San Diego, California. Couldn’t they just have spent the $250 without public debate, or were they putting on a show?
They have cut 17 employee jobs (2 in security at the North Gate) but they are hiring another layer of management. Why are they adding a new position, a new full time Assistant Manager to oversee the pool managers, the Marina and to help out at the fitness Center?
I know that the Board does not like to be second-guessed, but why don’t they walk the talk?
13 users commented in " Cost Cutting – Whom are they kidding? "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackThe “extended debate” had nothing to do with cost. It was all about preserving the Character of Big Canoe. This is a top priority for the POA. The discussion revolved around McDaniel Meadows..how to preserve and enhance them. One potentially controversial item is a limited burn. There was a passing mention that the costs (which initially were thought to be substantial) were only $220. The cost was not the topic–it was the environment.
Mr. Crouch,
Would you comment on the new layer of management?
Why are we hiring management people while we are firing so many of our employees?
Bob Crouch, Since we are cutting employees to reduce costs, why are we spending $1000s to send a manager to a fitness conference?
I will not comment on anonymous postings. Identify yourselves and there is a possibility for dialogue.
What a cop-out.
Must be true.
It certainly is true. Read the article in Smoke Signals Online. Surely, you didn’t expect a rational explanation. Apparently, none of our management wants to actually deal with employees directly. We have to spend big bucks on an amenity manager so Klask won’t be distracted by having direct reports, now the fitness center manager is taking the same approach, ostensibly as a “cost saving measure.” Does anyone understand that the overages in the amenities are being paid by everyone else? Regardless of what John Seferian says, these deficits, whether it is golf, tennis or food and beverage result in higher assessements for everyone and higher charges for ammenities.
I noticed a new website out there that is interesting, having to do with POA members and
their “rights”.
Check http://www.bcanoepoa.blogspot.com to check it out
You can no longer bring food or beverages to the tennis courts or the swimming pools. You must buy your refreshments there.
Beer at the tennis courts has gone from $1.25 to $2.50 per can; a 100% increase.
What is the POA Board’s explanation?
“When you are at a POA managed facility - you can’t bring in food or drink” Terry Bacigaliupo, Board Director
“The swim operation does not make money. If people want food and beverages there, they can buy it. Movie theatres don’t allow people to bring in food either” Bill Wilson, Board Director.
Note: When cost cutting doesn’t save enough money, you tax the property owners by making the amenities more costly.
There is a rumor that the Board will be taking extreme measures to increase revenues and that the Sconti Clubhouse will soon have pay-toilets
Someone should tell Bill Wilson that we don’t own the movie theatres; the property owners do own the amenities.
FIRE the Amenity Director!!!!!!!!!! You hear that Board. That clown has down nothing for this community. Then eliminate the position. He comes up with stupid idea after stupid idea after stupid idea.
There is about $120K+/year in cost savings.
Here you people go again. For-profit corporations own the movie theatres. The POA is a non-profit corporation and owns the amenities.
They are going to add a Director of Golf. Isn’t this another layer of management?
If so, shouldn’t Jim Story’s title of Director of Amenities be changed to Director of Directors?