Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffk
It seems to me there is a critical distinction between Gunstock and other government agencies. Gunstock is a profit generating business. Other government agencies are taxpayer funded necessary evils. Government usually does not “own” or run businesses and the current mess surrounding Gunstock is a prime example of why not.
The philosophy of a business is that it is profitable to all involved. Owners (in this case the County), managers, affiliated vendors, etc. It is absolutely normal that the management of a corporation vote itself bonuses and significant salaries. The expertise of these people is in demand and if the success and profits they generate are not shared with them, they will go elsewhere.
Government does not make a profit. It does not generally understand the necessities of business. They talk about “accountability to taxpayers” and demand audits so they can niggle over small things to assume control over something that they have NO idea how to manage. An example is the $500 campaign donation to Sununu. This is a typical action for a business to take. It is a TINY issue that would have been a Nothing Burger to a business. Even for Gunstock, this should have been a simple suggestion to management that in the future the Commission would prefer that no political donations be made. But government officials can’t solve problems like that. They must make it into some type of major, disruptive problem.
As to an audit, the Country is receiving $7+ M? in earnings from Gunstock this year and has gotten good money in the past years. The resort has a good reputation and improving facilities that draw more customers. Are the people wanting an audit saying that they get NO financial reports from management? That’s absurd. What an audit will be used for is to deep dive for spending that a business would routinely make but government might not. Then the government troublemakers will make ridiculous attacks on management.
Let’s think about the likely outcome of this. The current management gets fed up and leaves. Any decent managers would look at this mess and want nothing to do with it. They can make more money elsewhere. Gunstock would probably end up with political cronies that have no clue how to run the place. Profits would drop and the facilities would go downhill.
Instead of a fishing expedition audit, maybe the politicians should respectfully sit down with the management and ask them about any expenditures they might want more information about.
Government in charge of a business is a bad idea. Government micromanaging a business to government standards is a disaster.
|
JeffK makes some good points. You may be right on different scales, BUT in NH there are examples of government run businesses that are successful. Obvious to most is the state liquor outlets. Another is the state park system which is self supporting. In Hillsborough County the county nursing home is a profit maker.
If I remember correctly, when Mueller, et al, started leasing Sunapee, it was pretty shabby and the renewable 10 year leases allowed them to invest in fixed assets that led to more skiers and other improved revenues. Nobody wanted to lease Cannon, but the money from Sunapee that went to Cannon improvements led to increased skier visits and revenues there too.