HOA Board Approves $1.3M Basic Cable Contract
The 175 East Delaware Place HOA Board just approved a $1.3 million, three-year ad-supported basic cable contract that imposes the cost on every owner, an unavoidable subsidy for a dying service that negatively impacts property values.
Brought to you by Drew McManus, your neighbor in 7908.
The $1.3 million contract with Comcast requires every owner to subsidize cable TV for a shrinking minority of users who would still be able to purchase it directly. But here’s what makes this decision particularly troubling: the board relied on selectively interpreted data from a low-response survey. That data barely returned a third of owners, and only a minority of those showed, at best, lukewarm support.
What This Costs Every Owner
The Technology Committee’s own documentation reveals the financial impact on residents. The contract has “monthly costs not to exceed $35,000 with an annual increase of 3%,” which translates directly to higher HOA fees for everyone.
A Skewed Story
The Technology Committee, chaired by Jacob Lopata, conducted a survey, and the results hardly constitute a ringing endorsement for this expensive contract.
Despite those numbers, Lopata frequently presented survey results as if they represented all owners, claiming in the board meeting that more than 70% of owners want Comcast in some form. This inaccurate narrative was crafted from a deliberately selective reading of meager data.
In Question 3 of the survey, only 29.07% (75 responses) explicitly preferred to stay with Xfinity/Comcast as the provider.
An additional 46.90% (121 responses) were open to investigating other bulk providers for potentially higher service at a lower cost.
Lopata misrepresented these figures by combining these categories to assume that “more than 70% of owners want Comcast in some form”.
This claim is misleading because nearly half of that percentage (the 46.90%) were not expressing a desire for Comcast specifically, but rather an openness to alternatives and better deals.
Confirmation Bias In Action
Lopata’s framing of the data appears to reflect confirmation bias, with decisions seeming to follow a preferred outcome rather than emerging from open analysis.
- After-the-fact comparison: A comparison quote from DirecTV was obtained late in the process, with key details not publicly shared with owners. It was only sought after some residents desired alternatives to Comcast. This implies the comparison was just a formality.
- Crucial omission: Owners were never asked if they’d prefer a roughly $50 monthly deduction from their assessments to spend as they wish, a glaring oversight that would have truly revealed owner sentiment.
Cable TV Is a Failing Business, But the Committee Chair Didn’t Seem to Notice
The cable television industry is experiencing an unprecedented, accelerating decline. As such, this contract represents a fiscally dubious investment. This industry trend data was readily available and could have informed the committee’s and board’s deliberations had it been presented. Here’s what Lopata left out of his board recommendation:
- Cable TV is rapidly declining. Major U.S. ad-supported pay-TV providers lost about 5.5 million subscribers in just one year ending September 2023, showing an industry in free fall. [Source: Leichtman Research].
- Cost drives cord cutting. A significant 73% of ad-supported pay-TV subscribers have considered canceling their service due to the high price of traditional cable compared to more affordable streaming options with flexible payment options [Source: Parks Associates Research].
- New buyers avoid cable. Linear TV viewership for adults aged 18-49 dropped 29% from 2018 to 2023. Paying higher HOA fees to subsidize an unwanted cable service will deter potential buyers and negatively impact property values. [Source: Nielsen’s Total Audience Report].
This Is Not An Amenity, It’s An Unavoidable Subsidy
Let’s be clear: the board didn’t negotiate an amenity. They locked every owner into a three year mandatory fee. This isn’t a perk; it’s a subsidy.
Only a minority want ad-supported basic cable, so everyone else must pay, whether they use it or not. Individual subscriptions for those who want cable would continue to be available without interruption to their existing service. Instead, all owners are paying roughly $1,836 for basic, ad-supported cable most residents rarely, if ever, use.
Perhaps the most problematic element is that Lopata’s committee recommended “continuing with a bulk TV contract for now” and sticking with Comcast, and then treated the survey as validation. That isn’t due diligence. That’s justifying a decision already made and, more to the point, the exact rationale used by the board for justifying the two previous renewals.
Hurting Your Property Values
This decision will hurt property values. Mandatory fees for unwanted services make our units less attractive. Higher monthly costs narrow the buyer pool, especially for younger generations actively avoiding buildings with forced cable.
Consider this: major real estate platforms like Zillow and Realtor.com don’t even include basic cable as a search filter, because modern buyers simply don’t prioritize it. Prospective owners learning they’ll pay roughly $612 per year for unwanted ad-supported basic cable will simply move on, because they will see it as a sign of shortsighted governance.
Future buyers, unaware of it when they purchase, will question the board’s financial decision making and ability to distinguish between essential building services and personal entertainment.
The Bottom Line
The board has committed owners to $1.3 million for a service most households will abandon by 2027.
This isn’t just a failure of foresight; it’s a decision that prioritizes a rapidly declining industry with our money. During the meeting, recorded on video, when a few board members dared to question it, their voices were not heard. Their fellow board members listened to respond, not to understand and Lopata frequently interrupted them, ignoring their recognized speaking time, all to ensure the outcome.
Four voted against it. Four…out of 48.
As a result, every owner is committed to paying roughly $1,836 per unit for ad-supported basic cable. Simply put, the better option would have been to return that money to owners and let residents choose their own entertainment. The Association could leverage that as a selling point to prospective buyers by highlighting forward thinking judgement.
For now, owners should feel empowered to demand answers. Go to Technology Committee Chair Jacob Lopata and the committee members: owners Andrews, Cornelis, Dunn, Glatt, Griffin, Gupta, Hirschland, Siefken, Timmerman, and Williams. If you see any in the common areas, ask them if they supported this recommendation (spoiler: some didn’t), and for those who also serve as board members (Cornelis, Dunn, Hirschland, Siefken, Timmerman, and Williams), why they did not consider any of the points above.