fbpx
Thursday, September 19, 2024
HomeBusinessEmbattled Owner of Lutsen Resort and Superior Shores Shares Perspective Following July...

Embattled Owner of Lutsen Resort and Superior Shores Shares Perspective Following July 31 Court Hearing

By Joe Friedrichs, The Shore Thing Podcast

When Bryce Camp­bell purchased Supe­rior Shores in January 2020, his intention was to “conquer” it.

“Our entire career was founded on turn­ing underperforming properties around, and Superior Shores was to be our ultimate chal­lenge,” Campbell told this reporter just be­fore midnight July 31.

In a rare interview with the press, Camp­bell said the recent events involving his ownership of two re­sorts on the North Shore “would appear to be right out of a movie.” Lutsen Re­sort in Cook County burned to the ground in February. More re­cently, the lone judge presiding over the North Shore stripped Campbell of his ability to operate and manage Superior Shores near Two Harbors.

“I have been abso­lutely crushed by the recent events,” Camp­bell said. “Not only the events themselves, but the betrayal that has come with them.”

North Shore Judge Steven Hanke issued an emergency rul­ing on July 24 that temporarily removed Campbell’s control of operations at Superi­or Shores. The order, among other things, appoints a tempo­rary manager to be in charge of operations at Superior Shores because the “property and its rents and prof­its are in danger of loss and material impair­ment.” Hanke upheld the ruling during a July 31 hearing that lasted more than three hours. Hanke also gave attor­neys involved with the case on both sides until August 7 to file briefs in the case.

What’s known with certainty is that Joe Re, who previously owned Superior Shores with his business partner Dale Jensen, agreed to sell Superior Shores to Campbell on a con­tract for deed four years ago. The COVID pandemic changed the hospitality industry about three months lat­er, with Campell and Re agreeing, at least over emails presented to the court this week, to alter the terms of the deal.

During Wednesday’s hearing, Re’s attor­ney, Mark Thieroff, said Campbell has not honored the terms of the contract for deed. Thieroff said insur­ance policies at the re­sort were canceled for nonpayment, real es­tate taxes went unpaid, and Campbell repeat­edly failed to produce required financial re­ports.

As a result, Han­ke agreed to place Superior Shores under the manage­ment of Kinseth Hospitality Compa­nies, Inc., which is based in Coralville, Iowa. During the July 31 hearing, the company’s executive vice president, Bruce Kinseth, said some of his staff arrived at Su­perior Shores on July 26 following Hanke’s ex parte order and the appointment of the en­tity as the “receiver,” or temporary man­agers, of the resort. Upon initial review of the situation, Kinseth described Superior Shores as a “financial disaster.”

According to the or­der signed last week by Hanke, under Campbell’s ownership at Superior Shores “association dues have not been timely paid, real estate taxes are delinquent, and pay­ments to various local vendors have not been made,” among numer­ous other allegations. Kinseth, who appeared via Zoom during Wednesday’s hearing (as did all the partici­pants), said his team were unable to find any financial statements for the past two years. They also discovered a “tremendous amount” of bills due, Kinseth said, adding that some people Campbell and the resort owe money to have come to the property “demanding payment.”

One of the key issues that surfaced in the ini­tial emergency order from Hanke signed July 24 and continu­ally addressed during the July 31 hearing were lump sum, or “balloon payments,” due from Campbell to sellers Re and Jensen. According to the July 24 order s i g n e d by Han­k e , C a m p ­b e l l failed to make the n e a r l y $13 mil­lion in balloon p a y ­ments to the sell­ers as required by June 1 of this year.

Camp­bell and his at­t o r n e y, S c o t t Wi t t y , provided ema i l s to the court Wednes­day that they say show Re agreed to extend the deadline of the balloon payments un­til June 2025. While speaking under oath during this week’s hearing, Re said the agreement was never officially completed. Witty questioned Re at length on this spe­cific topic during the hearing, pointing out that the seller agreed to and implemented every other term in the unsigned agreement, including lowering interest rates during the early days of the COVID pandemic.

Witty claims that the terms of the con­tract for the deed were altered regarding Campbell’s ownership of Superior Shores during “COVID-19 stay-at-home orders.” As a result, the bal­loon payments that to­tal approximately $13 million were not due until June 2025. Ulti­mately, it could be up to Hanke to determine if the emails consti­tute a legally binding agreement or not.

For his part, Camp­bell says “so much” of what he heard during the July 31 regarding his finan­cial woes and alleged mismanagement of Superior Shores “was recycled and not the truth.” Campbell and Witty say the Supe­rior Shores property is fully insured, and that any taxes owed against the property were on schedule to be paid. Witty and Camp­bell did not specifi­cally address claims about money owed to contractors, vendors, and others that Thier­off noted and are list­ed in court records.

In fact, Campbell suggested during the court proceedings and to this reporter that Superior Shores is in better financial shape and physical condition than it was when he bought it.

“It’s certainly my opinion that the actions of the seller and lender are simply taking ad­vantage of a property that was worth $14.5 million when we took over and the most re­cent valuation put the property at just under $30 million,” Camp­bell said in an emailed statement. “This is because of our hard work and impressive unit sales.”

Campbell said during Wednesday’s hearing that he sold units at the resort totaling $4 million during the first half of the year. In addition, there are several more units with pending sales, likely generat­ing several more mil­lion dollars. Campbell noted that unit sales hadn’t been occurring at the resort on this scale since 2008.

“Our financial abil­ity was about to be better than it’s ever been,” Campbell said Wednesday.

Witty described Re’s request to have a tem­porary management company come on board and strip Camp­bell of his rights to run the resort as “a ploy to get the property back by the seller, who now realizes that the buyer has put a ton of mon­ey into improving the property.”

Campbell said the plaintiffs “tried to discredit our con­cerns that a receiver is detrimental to the business” during the hearing Wednesday. In another email sent to this reporter Aug. 1, Campbell said tangi­ble results are already coming in that support his concerns.

“While I’m sure Kinseth Hospitality is successful, a property in receivership rare­ly is. I’ve seen hun­dreds of properties throughout the years in various deal flow networks, and every time one is in receiv­ership, the numbers are always abysmal,” Campbell said. The reality is simple: a re­ceiver cannot perform the same success as an owner-operator who’s onsite putting in their own blood, sweat, and tears.”

Campbell said it did not take long for his concerns to be vali­dated. For example, the week prior to the court order, Campbell explained, Superi­or Shores brought in $160,000 in reserva­tions. In the week im­mediately following the appointment of Kinseth Management at Superior Shores, the resort only generated $105,000 in reserva­tions, according to Campbell.

Despite recent warn­ings from the city of Two Harbors that util­ities would be shut off at Superior Shores, alleged vendor debts, and lawsuits and other claims alleging finan­cial mismanagement for lack of payment that now stretch across two counties, Camp­bell said he hopes “everyone sees the truth” that his compa­ny was “current on our monthly payments, that our debt isn’t due until next year, that the property was in fact in­sured.” Campbell said he hopes “most of all” that people understand that the resort recently was “doing well finan­cially” and “enjoying great success” of re­cent unit sales.

“I’m so very proud of the work we did at the property,” Camp­bell said in his state­ment sent to the Shore Thing. “The testimo­ny I heard (July 31) regarding the property condition was insult­ing, especially com­pared to what it was four years ago. There certainly is still work to be done at the place, it’s dated, but we have so many plans to continue to improve this diamond in the rough.”

RELATED ARTICLES
- Advertisment -

Most Popular