Capital Reserve Shortfall Before Roof Replacement
You are the controller for a 180-room full-service hotel owned by a partnership and managed under a franchise agreement. The reserve for replacement is funded at 4% of gross rooms revenue, per the management agreement, and currently holds $410,000. A roofing consultant reports the main roof has 2–3 years of service life remaining; replacement is estimated at $1.35 million today, escalating roughly 4% annually. The ownership partnership is distributing excess cash to partners each quarter and has asked you to hold the reserve contribution flat for the next two years to support distributions. Current-year gross rooms revenue is projected at $9.2 million. The lender's debt service coverage ratio covenant is 1.25x; you are currently at 1.31x.
1. Quantify the gap and assess whether holding the reserve flat is viable.
Read the worked answer
At 4% of $9.2M, the annual contribution is $368,000. Holding it flat for two years forgoes two years of contributions, roughly $736,000, leaving the reserve at $410,000 while the roof cost escalates to about $1.35M × 1.04² ≈ $1.46M in two years. The gap is roughly $1.05M - the reserve covers only about 28% of the projected cost. That is not viable on the current trajectory. Even with full contributions, two years adds $736,000, bringing the reserve to about $1.15M against a $1.46M need - still short. The conclusion: the reserve is underfunded for this capital event regardless, and pausing contributions widens a gap that will have to be closed by a capital call, a loan, or deferred maintenance. Frame this for ownership as a financing decision, not a distribution decision.
2. Ownership wants distributions. What options do you present, and what is your recommendation?
Read the worked answer
Present at least three: (1) continue full reserve funding and accept lower distributions - preserves the asset but does not fully close the gap; (2) pause contributions and plan a capital call or supplemental loan at replacement time - maximizes near-term distributions but shifts risk to partners and may pressure the DSCR; (3) a middle path - reduce contributions modestly and accelerate a phased roof project or secure a capital commitment now. Recommend the middle path with a written capital plan: maintain contributions near 4%, begin design and bidding 18 months out to lock pricing, and secure a standby capital commitment from partners. Note the DSCR constraint: incremental debt for the roof would reduce coverage from 1.31x toward the 1.25x covenant, so any borrowing must be sized against that floor. The recommendation should be documented and acknowledged by ownership in writing.
3. What governance step protects you if ownership overrides your recommendation?
Read the worked answer
Document the analysis and the recommendation in writing, including the quantified gap, the escalation assumption, and the DSCR impact. Present it to ownership formally and request a written acknowledgment of the decision to defer. This is not about assigning blame - it is about ensuring the decision is informed and recorded, which protects both the controller and the partners and supports the annual audit. Also confirm whether the management agreement or franchise standards require a minimum reserve balance; if so, deferral may breach a contractual obligation, which changes the conversation from preference to compliance.