What a mess.
The two groups of board directors from Hillcrest Riley Park were at B.C. Supreme Court most of yesterday (somewhat to the bemusement of Judge Anthony Saunders, who had been called in from New Westminster to deal with this pressing case) with tales of directors being ousted from the board, unexplained spending, charges for membership going through to a charity affiliated to president Jesse Johl, and much more.
In the meantime, back at the centre, there have been huge fights over releasing association money for Halloween and Easter activities to the park-board staff trying to plan things. Local residents are irate. Park-board staff are feeling harassed. Et cetera.
This is all with a backdrop of Hillcrest being one of the most vocal associations fighting the park board over its plan to get all its centres to sign on to a single-membership deal and to share the money they take in from their programming with have-not community centres. While all the associations have concerns about the park board’s plans to change everything, six associations decided to fight it in court rather than negotiate privately.
As far as I know, most of the other associations are backed by their communities, Kerrisdale and Killarney in particular. But something seems to have gone amiss at Hillcrest, where the board (which has a high number of people with NPA affiliations), is fighting among itself as well as with the park board. Former NPA council candidate Ken Charko is leading the faction of those who’ve resigned or been voted off the board. One-time NPA candidate Jesse Johl (who was actually dumped by the party before the election) is the board president and head of the remaining group.
Hillcrest was not always so at odds with the park board. In fact, the board and the association collaborated extensively over the plans to replace the old Riley Park community centre with the one that was used as a facility for the 2010 Olympics.
The volunteer associations that co-manage the city’s community centres with the park board have, in the past, often been outstanding partners. In fact, it was always my theory that the park board was able to build such lavish centres, using the city’s best-known architects, because they had the backing of the community associations. And most of them are still working well, as far as I know. (At least, I’m not being contacted by irate members, as I am with Hillcrest.)
But when things go wrong with these little organizations, which often consist of a small group of hyper-involved people who don’t get much attention from the broader community, boy, can it go wrong.
My story on the current state of things is in the Globe here. But that’s barely the surface. I’ve attached various court documents below.
My Globe story:
One of the city’s highest-profile community centres has become so bogged down by infighting and political battles that the city’s park board has had to step in and pay for some of its traditional popular activities – such as the annual Easter egg party – because of the gridlock.
The centre’s board of directors are fighting each other in court.
And residents are starting to complain that leadership of the Hillcrest Riley Park Community Centre Association has been hijacked by people with a political agenda who are spending a big chunk of the association’s million-dollar reserves on legal fees to fight the Vision Vancouver park board.
“It’s all anti-democratic. The board has been taken over by a small group and their interest is in litigation, not programming,” said Art Bomke, a University of B.C. professor emeritus who is a long-time member. He said a number of residents are organizing to try to challenge the board’s activities.
Hillcrest, a former 2010 Olympics venue visited by 1.6 million people annually, has been front and centre the past year in a battle with the Vancouver park board, along with five other centres, to prevent the board from imposing a more centralized membership and money-sharing system.
The park board, linked politically to the Vision Vancouver city council, has come under harsh criticism, accused of trying to push around well-meaning groups of volunteers.
But the association’s directors – many of them with affiliations to the city’s other major civic party, the Non-Partisan Association – are now fighting each other after agreeing unanimously to fight the park board.
They spent the day at B.C. Supreme Court on Monday, after one group said they’d been kicked off the board illegally and accusing other directors of violating the B.C. Societies Act on numerous fronts.
Along with all that, there were allegations in court filings and during the proceedings Monday that local residents’ association membership fees have appeared on their credit-card statements as charges to a charity headed by board president Jesse Johl – a one-time NPA candidate and current organizer of an obscure party called Vancouver First – and that the board approved a $250,000 contract for outside services, even though board members were told there was no contract for them to view.
Mr. Bomke, who has lived in the midtown Riley Park area for 40 years, said the community-centre associations have always been somewhat vulnerable to being dominated by a small group of people who have their own ideas about how to run things.
But the current situation, which includes $300,000 in legal fees spent recently, is unprecedented and highlights some systemic problems.
“This centre takes in $800,000 a year. It’s sitting on $1-million. It really calls into question whether an association with this kind of income can function with a part-time volunteer board.”
Even the judge hearing whether to force a postponement to the centre’s annual general meeting, scheduled for this Friday, was mystified by the intense, and intensely complicated, fight.
“This reminds me of what [former U.S. president] Woodrow Wilson once said about a battle at Princeton University: ‘The reasons why the politics of the academy are so vicious is because there’s so little at stake,’ ” said Justice Anthony Saunders, who had been called in from New Westminster for the case.
Mr. Bomke said some local residents are trying to mobilize to get information and control. That had been made extremely difficult by the decision of the current board (now reduced to only five, from 12, after a number of directors were either voted off by the others or quit) to hold an annual general meeting this Thursday with little notice.
The battling board directors, led by former NPA candidate Ken Charko on the side of those who had been kicked off or left, and Mr. Johl’s group reached a settlement late Monday that deferred the annual general meeting and provided for an agreement about reasonable bylaws.
18 responses so far ↓
1 IanS // Apr 15, 2014 at 10:37 am
Indeed, what a mess.
From a quick review of the factual differences and the number of affidavits filed, I am skeptical that this can be resolved by Petition.
2 canadianveggie // Apr 15, 2014 at 1:06 pm
Hard to argue against the parks board taking over control of the community centres, when the most vocal advocate for independence is completely dysfunctional.
3 Ainslie // Apr 15, 2014 at 1:41 pm
This is the same Ken Charko that tried to sue the NPA and then tried to take over the NPA in a hostile takeover. Ken Charko lives by Dunbar Community Centre and not Hillcrest. He should be ashamed of himself trying to taking over a Hillcrest Board. That Association holds many community events and this story is so one sided.
4 Robert // Apr 15, 2014 at 5:01 pm
Ken Charko is a very political indivual with ties to the federal conservatives, BC conservatives, the NPA and now Team. Instead of providing a service to the community, he’s trying to hijack a board. Two Team members on the lawsuit. Leave Hillcrest alone and quit. Leave Mr. Johl alone and stop trying to make this political. Shame on you Ken.
5 Jonathan Baker // Apr 15, 2014 at 5:07 pm
$300,000 for parks board litigation??? Has anyone checked their time sheets?
6 Carol // Apr 15, 2014 at 8:44 pm
The Thursday April 17th meeting has not been cancelled as of 8:43 pm April 15th.
7 rf // Apr 16, 2014 at 6:57 am
I watched the story last night and could not help but feel like Nikki Sharma was being a little insincere.
I don’t question that the litigation funds needs to be audited and the paper trail on membership fee charges should be established.
However, let’s keep in mind that this community association and Vision/Park Board have been in a protracted battle over how community centre funds are distributed.
I hope Johl has not been a wolf in sheep’s clothing. If there has been geniune mishandling of funds, shame on them.
But Nikki Sharma alluding to it with a little miss innocent face made me puke a little in my mouth.
Vision picked a fight. The board side fought back, hopefully on principles (political or community…I’m not so sure it matters)
To then run to the media and allude to embezzlement of sorts seems more like a hardball move (pretty good one, mind you) by Vision for political purposes.
I’m disappointed the reporter never pointed out that Sharma was hardly an impartial whistleblower (or maybe flashlight weilder is a better term).
8 Everyman // Apr 16, 2014 at 7:47 am
None of this seems like a productive use of community centre resources.
9 Carol // Apr 16, 2014 at 10:18 am
Where does Jesse Johl live? That is a question a lot of the community would like answered.
10 westygrrl // Apr 16, 2014 at 10:36 am
I know it’s all about the politics, but if one keeps the focus on the issue of governance (or lack thereof), fiduciary duty, and responsibility to the community the Association purports to serve, things are clear.
It’s a mess, the organization and its resources have been used in questionable ways, and neither the centre nor its users are being well-served. It’s an association in complete disfunction that has lost its credibility and legitimacy.
11 teririch // Apr 16, 2014 at 10:53 am
@rf:
I saw that news brief.
Keep in mine Sharma is now running for Vision Council and well, we have all seen how vicious they can be.
12 rf // Apr 16, 2014 at 11:47 am
@teririch
That’s what I meant by “insincere”. It’s not a coicidence that Trevor Loke was shopping his mug on the news with the “free wi-fi” thing.
And this is less about Hillcrest and more about Nikki Sharma getting her mug out there pre election.
It’s a form of campaigning. I may not like them but I’ll give them credit for playing the media like a fiddle.
13 Frances Bula // Apr 16, 2014 at 4:54 pm
Just to let all of you know: The “Ainslie” here is not Ainslie Kwan from Killarney, I’ve been told by a couple of people. Nor is the “Robert” connected to Kerrisdale. In fact, the comments from both “Ainslie” and “Robert” are coming from the same IP address, so it appears someone is creating some smoke here.
14 Bill McCreery // Apr 16, 2014 at 5:04 pm
Thank you Frances for the clarification, and further to that:
Robert, in an effort to keep things as factual as possible in this matter please be advised that Ken Charko is not a member of TEAM. He has attended two or three TEAM events over time, as have a number of other’s who are members of other Vancouver political parties, including Vision, COPE and the NPA.
15 Peter Ladner // Apr 17, 2014 at 11:03 am
Meanwhile, at Kits Community Centre, which has had the same president for 20 years, a $350k commercial/community kitchen goes unused while prevailing wisdom among local food activists is that we have a shortage of such kitchens. Attempts to make it available to local groups have failed. What gives?
16 John Geddes // Apr 17, 2014 at 11:22 am
Frances @13
I believe your blog provides a very useful purpose for sharing ideas and differing perspectives, but I have never understood why you allow anonymous or semi-anonymous posts. In my view it encourages overly aggressive and often unconstructive comments. Worse, you are now saying that someone or group is manipulating the comments we are reading.
To fellow posters, if you are not willing to have your name stand behind your words, then I, for one, heavily discount anything you are posting.
17 teririch // Apr 17, 2014 at 1:02 pm
Sorry not delibertly meaning to hijack this thread but this is worth noting:
On the topic of food security, Kits Neighborhood House has a great program in place that is open to everyone and a great benefit to those on fixed/low incomes – Fruit and Veggie Deal
http://www.kitshouse.org/programs/food-security/fruit-veggie-deal/
(A dear friend who is on a fixed income is particiapting in this program and it is a blessing for her)
Feel free to share the info!
18 Dave Pasin // Apr 17, 2014 at 1:38 pm
We all need to be aware that there are multiple issues involved in the Hillcrest situation and they don’t necessarily reflect upon every Community Centre or Association in the City .
Bandwagon jumpers, the political hacks (yes the Meggs and Sharma’s of the world) and trolls (see Frances’s comments above) are by inference casting dispersions on the hundreds of directors and volunteers who contribute massive amounts of time to their local Community Centres.
As a long time director of the West End Community Centre Association, I have witnessed the trials and tribulations of operating a Community Centre first hand, and despite the misinformation of the uninformed, the majority of people are members and Directors because they want to contribute to their communities NOT because they have personal or political agendas.
Unlike those who have never been involved in their Community Centre Associations (See Vision Park Board and Council members for reference) staff, directors and volunteers give of their time to better their communities and ask little in return but to be contribute to providing programs and services that better the communities they serve.
Are there Directors with agendas?.. of course, just as there opponents with their own agendas trying to score cheap political or personal points at the expense of others reputations and hard work.
Community Centres do need some oversight (which I remind everyone already exist in the form of yearly audits, elections, oaths of office amongst other things). is there room for improvement?… of course.
Is this cause for throwing out the baby with the bathwater.. absolutely not.
We have had an effective, responsive, heavily used Community Centre model for over 40 years in Vancouver.
While the processes within and of operating Centres may need some updating, it is not cause for wholesale change and the disruption of a system of governance, programs, activities and meeting places that have proven to be very effective and the envy of many other communities around the province and country.