Family or Individuals...Which is it ?

Spending...It Divides a Community and it's Publications

OR

If there was ever a manner in which to dramatize the difference between financial responsibility and lack there of, one only has to compare the commentary between David's Anthem Journal, Anthem Today, Anthem Opinions, and Today's Anthem View.

This community has a number of blogs/forums in which people have the opportunity to express their views, but the difference between them is glaring in terms of exercising financial responsibility.

One merely has to read the commentary of Anthem Today, Anthem Opinions, and Today's Anthem View and see that most arguments having to do with spending association funds make a case for RESPONSIBLE SPENDING, while those on David's Anthem Journal, is quite a different matter.

Rather than looking at expenditures through the eyes of an individual who actually incurs them, that publication and those few who comment there most often look at spending as a matter of insignificance...that other factors are more important, that when looking at the "whole", it matters little as to the amount being spent...because it will be spread amongst a large number of individuals.

Whereas one blog's supporters have an attitude of "your dues have not increased" or "the annual assessments are reasonable" , the others look at the issue quite differently. 

Those others...often referred to as "malcontents" amongst other derogatory terms, look at spending in a manner that more closely reflects "need" and "value" with the objective of REDUCING expenses to obtain an acceptable retirement standard.

In addition, those others...are portrayed as "wanting Vic's to fail", when in fact...

NOTHING COULD BE FARTHER FROM THE TRUTH.

Those others wish him success...but with HIS MONEY not YOURS.

And most importantly, those others look at unnecessary spending as draining a large pot that some day has to be replenished, rather than "drain it now, and we'll let those who follow us replenish it".

That "others" attitude speaks more for the "little guy", the one who may want a particular amenity, but may not be in a position to afford it.  Those are the people Anthem Today, Anthem Opinions, and Today's Anthem View look at first....

...believing that those who do have the means for "the finer things" should not impose their financial wants on others,  but instead accept a reasonable spending standard in a homeowners association, while financing their "extra amenities" themselves.

Whereas one line of thought says "spend", the other line of thought prefers "think before you spend."

What prompted this article was an email that I received from a resident who looked closely at "spending" and placed our latest restaurant's need for public assistance in a prospective, some of you might never have considered.

Where individuals that have made comments on David's Anthem Journal look at Vic's Restaurant in these terms....

"I appreciate having a fine dining place such as this to add to our upscale amenities list and maintain the reputation of our wonderful community"

"The majority of us seniors need to give them pats on the back and try to support them once or twice a month"

"OK, let's compare the cost to the $5 she spends on a slot machine when she visits her local casino"

"Like Carol said, where are the classy people in this classy community"

"We should all say how lucky we are to have, not only this fantastic view, not have to drive miles for a fabulous meal, and have people who are WILLING TO MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO KEEP US HAPPY, here in Anthem. We should all be willing to support Vics, at least once a month"

"Communities like ours, whether they are country clubs or Sun Cities, invariably find it necessary to subsidize on site restaurants, and this is something we should more actively consider,  This is especially true given our location and the competition Vic's has to contend with. One of our directors, Jerry Gardberg, made a motion to dispense with rent altogether. I think he had it right,  Such a move would proactively send the message to Vic's that we value having his restaurant here and will do whatever is necessary to help him succeed."

"Eliminating the rent altogether would help them, cost us very little, and in the long run, we would simply be acting in our own best interests."

...those comments made on Anthem Today or Anthem Opinions address the subject in an entirely different manner....

"The fact is, I don't know any Anthem Today poster who doesn't love this community and our neighbors, the people living in it."

"The sharply declining gross sales figures paints a dim picture of continued operation unless a gross monthly income of $60,000 will be profitable enough to stay in business"

"Don't forget...“we the people” of SCA must pay for all repairs and maintenance of restaurant equipment"

"A privately owned restaurant is not an amenity, no matter who says it is. If I choose to make an investment, that is my choice not the choice of a bunch of people who want something for their own self satisfaction."

"Whether it's a pack of cigarettes, a bottle of beer, or a coffee at Starbucks---those are the things I choose not to spend on myself. But I am forced by 7 people, who do not know me in addition to any other concessions extended to keep Vic's in operation."

"The $24,000 reduction of rent is only a small portion of our yearly expense for restaurant capital improvements and reserves.or my situation from Adam, to spend it to maintain a business I choose under my own free will not to patronize."

"My choices of what I spend my remaining retirement funds on are decided by my medical needs, my mortgage requirements, my utility use, and food and fuel - and should not be decided by 7 people who want a place close by to get lunch at a discount for themselves"

"The restaurant is owned and serviced by Vic's. We own the property that we rent out. NO landlord supports a tenant with payments for equipment and its' maintenance. No landlord rewrites the lease in midstream."

"Thus SCA members are already subsidizing the operations of the restaurant via the taxes. SCA pays the property taxes, Vic’s does not."

I know a number of the individuals in this later group...and in just about every case....these individuals are in a financial position where dollars spent one way or another, would not affect their lives to any major extent...

But this 'OTHER" group is quite different than the former....as evidenced by the commentaries.

...they know that "Meals on Wheels" make increasing stops to Sun City Residents...

..they know that some residents have budgets that do not allow them to enjoy lifestyles of "the rich and famous"....

...they know that achieving fiscal responsibility "for the whole" is more important than providing "wants" for the rich....

...and consider those individuals not as fortunate as others,  every bit as "classy" as some who look at "class" by examining material possessions.

That..is the difference that separates community blogs...and YOU, as residents must determine what is, and what is not...CLASS !

...those who only look at THEMSELVES...

...or...

...those who look at ALL TOGETHER as a FAMILY.

Dick Arendt