Sechelt Senior Centre unjustly closes its pool room
By Steve Lee 9/9/2012 9:51:00 PM
Open letter to SSAC members – Sep 09, 2012 It has been almost three months since the pool room was closed at the Sechelt Senior Activity Centre. If you have read the note posted on the door you would likely have been led to believe that the members who used the pool room are just an unruly, defiant bunch. I would like to present you my perspective. It was said that the room should be closed because “Pool Players don’t pay”. When I checked the financial report in June, the revenue intake was in excess of 60% above the projected year-to-date revenue. If any players who are indeed not paying, it would have been a rare isolated incident. Closing the room is not the answer. If stores are closed because of shop lifting and Translink shuts down the Skytrain because of fare evasion, citizen would end up with little or no services. Furthermore, different fee structures were proposed by members to solve the alleged problem but were not even given a chance. It was also said that pool players were seen to be drinking and smoking in the games room. I am a regular player and I have never seen anyone doing that. I guess those who took part would know better. If that was the case, why didn’t the Board enforce the policy instead of closing the room? It was also said that the room can generate more revenue if rented out as a meeting facility. Although it is not a very popular game, this activity was approved by the members as a budgeted regular program at an AGM and has been for many years. What is the hurry to disband the service mid-year, give away a very nice pool table, deny a request to take this to a general meeting and do the renovations without any budget allocations? Getting rid of the pool room is a change in service delivery. It was done without consulting the members as was done when the lounge was created. There should have been strategic or business planning for the Centre. In summary, here’s what I think: 1. The Board claimed that certain bad behavior of some of the members caused the closure of the room but without due regard to the rights and interest of the honest and well behaved members. 2. The Board eliminated a regular and long time service without consulting its members. 3. The Board also claimed to have done it for economic reasons but without any business planning for the Centre. 4. The Board abdicated its responsibility to enforce its own rules and failed to consider the long term purpose of Centre. Many of the players have since found alternate facilities to play the game but unfortunately some did not, and will have to move on without such enjoyment. Sincerely, Steve Lee
(12)(9) Click on a thumb to register your overall agreement or disagreement with the subject of the letter.
If you want the REAL story -- come to the Sechelt Seniors Activity Centre and ask anyone on the Board of Directors what actually happened and why it happened. — SSAC Monday, September 10, 2012
The interesting thing is that I requested (on Sep 09, 2012) the Centre to post my letter on its website as a member expressing his viewpoints. Needless to say, it was not posted nor did I receive a response. I wrote a follow-up email (on Oct 12, 2012)to the Centre and made the same request and/or a response to my earlier email. Lo and behold, I did get a response from the President declining the request and saying that the letter "...does not provide a positive purpose and merely create negativity for the Centre..." In my return email I suggested that they (the Board Members) should ask themselves if they have the right to control and censor communication to the members.
I wonder if I will get an answer. — Steve Lee Sunday, October 14, 2012