Guest |
04-30-2005 01:23 PM |
BC tracks Fate in Question
Got an email from a spy out in BC..(lol...spy)..
Quote:
Well I was at the shop today where Roger, CamRC President, received a couriered letter from the city of coquitlam today. In it there was an incident that supposedly took place this weekend on sunday. According to the letter there was someone using the track during a posted time that was not ours. As the story goes this person presented ID and informed the user not to use the track. The user then supposedly followed the person back to the road where they were parked and threw a stone at them.
Needless to say the facility use card issued by the city has been revoked and the track has been shut down. According to them the track will be leveled on May 16, 2005.
I think this speaks for itself.
Cam RC is in the process of disputing the allegations and trying to work with the city to resolve this and any other issues.
Ronny
|
Since then
Quote:
I just spent a good 10 minutes on the phone with Barry Elliot (General Manager of Leisure and Parks Services), and it doesn't sound good.
Apparently there were a number of people identified as being members of the club (one said Roger had his use card, and several others have been seen at club races in the past), and they were verbally abusive to the official from the City of Coquitlam and when she was leaving the rock was thrown - however this is not why the track has been closed.
It's because of a number of things, boiling down to the club and its members not following the rules:
- Obviously and intentionally disrespecting the times of use, and this being reported by the flight club.
- Posts on this forum being abusive towards the flying club. Yes, they read this forum and know what has been said.
- Signs at the track being changed against the City of Coquitlams will.
- The flight club has been there for 30 years and there have never been any issues with them - and there has been a ton with Kamikaze.
He summed it up well with "acting like it does, there's no way that the club will be able to use public land - you'll have to buy your own land", and "a lot of bridges have been burnt". The verbal abuse & stone throwing by track members was the final straw, but it'd have broken sooner or later anyway - they were ready to close the track 2 weeks ago (on the Sunday), but didn't have proof that it was club members using the track at that time. They did this time (regardless of the verbal abuse and stone throwing), and now it's closed. He also said that the club should look for another President because of how poorly Roger was handling (read: not at all in their opinion) the issues the council had.
I have to agree with Barry - however much this sucks and is really really disappointing, he's right. I'm new around here, so don't know much, but it's hard to argue with such a long list of complaints. Rules are rules, it doesn't matter if you like them or not - and the club was constantly breaking them. I just hope we can find somewhere else.
|
[quote]My opinion on complains..is the )I just spent a good 10 minutes on the phone with Barry Elliot (General Manager of Leisure and Parks Services), and it doesn't sound good.
Apparently there were a number of people identified as being members of the club (one said Roger had his use card, and several others have been seen at club races in the past), and they were verbally abusive to the official from the City of Coquitlam and when she was leaving the rock was thrown - however this is not why the track has been closed.
It's because of a number of things, boiling down to the club and its members not following the rules:
- Obviously and intentionally disrespecting the times of use, and this being reported by the flight club.
- Posts on this forum being abusive towards the flying club. Yes, they read this forum and know what has been said.
- Signs at the track being changed against the City of Coquitlams will.
- The flight club has been there for 30 years and there have never been any issues with them - and there has been a ton with Kamikaze.
He summed it up well with "acting like it does, there's no way that the club will be able to use public land - you'll have to buy your own land", and "a lot of bridges have been burnt". The verbal abuse & stone throwing by track members was the final straw, but it'd have broken sooner or later anyway - they were ready to close the track 2 weeks ago (on the Sunday), but didn't have proof that it was club members using the track at that time. They did this time ( regardless of the verbal abuse and stone throwing), and now it's closed. He also said that the club should look for another President because of how poorly Roger was handling (read: not at all in their opinion) the issues the council had.
I have to agree with Barry - however much this sucks and is really really disappointing, he's right. I'm new around here, so don't know much, but it's hard to argue with such a long list of complaints. Rules are rules, it doesn't matter if you like them or not - and the club was constantly breaking them. I just hope we can find somewhere else.
Quote:
My position on complain lists are this. (and I speak from both sides of the fence.) Generally the issues where rules are being violated are known, and not acted on, until something happens that prompt action...then all the skeletons are pulled from the closet...I'm sure both clubs would be cupable for any number of violations, and this is just the excuse needed to terminate the arrangement.
|
This letter was sent by the president of their club.
Quote:
Mr. Elliott,
We have been working through some of the problems you describe, with your staff.
We recently met with Kathy, Geoff and Ric on site and we agreed that we would take a more proactive approach to spreading the word regarding appropriate track use. To that end we have raised the issue at our weekly drivers meetings and told drivers in no uncertain terms what the rules are. We have posted times and information on our website and have shared the info with any racer/enthusiast we have seen in the last several weeks. There are probably some members who have not yet received our most recent messages.
There are problems with non-club members using the track at unauthorized times. I emailed Kathy Reinheimer regarding that very issue just yesterday. On Sunday, while waiting to fly my heli at the allocated time (1:00 pm), I observed some cars at the RC car track. I went over to the track and informed the persons there that the track was not available today. They immediately left, but highlighted some problems with the sign at the track. They thought that WCRCAF was a car club that had the track booked at the time. I pointed out that WCRCAF was a flying club that had the flying field booked, not the car track. They asked why was a flying club shown on the model car track schedule. I again explained. There has been considerable misunderstanding regarding the wording on the sign as I have already pointed out to Kathy. These misunderstandings might well have been avoided if we had been involved with the wording of the sign.
The regular club members know the procedure well and do not abuse it. The new members may not remember all the available times and may be confused by the acronyms on the sign. I have frequently found non-members using the track at inappropriate times and explained the ropes to them.
I am not aware of the specific issue you describe as having happened on Sunday, April 24. However, I have the following questions:
1) Who was the staff member who attended? Was she a Bylaws officer? In uniform? Plainclothes?
2) Did the staff member have and produce valid id identifying herself as legitimate staff?
3) How many persons were operating cars on on the track at the time? Were other people in the area too? Non operators? Spectators?
4) How did she establish that the persons using the track were in fact club members? Verbal? Shown i.d.?
If a club member indeed acted as you describe, our club is equally concerned. The club can take action, like warnings, suspension and/or expulsion from the club, for incidences such as you describe.
Our club is very committed to honoring the terms of our agreement with the City. The disagreement last year resulted only because the City reneged on a verbal commitment to us. As a result we have been labeled as disregarding the terms of our agreement which seems to have resulted in a permanent negative opinion of our club - with 2 strikes against us before any discussion happens on almost any subject. Even this year, while we have held only 2 events to date, we have been held responsible every time our track is misused by someone.
Regarding simultaneous car and heli use - this issue was only raised last October (6 months ago), not "over the past several years". Despite repeated requests, the City has not provided any compelling reason for its decision. The 2 reasons stated show only a lack of understanding of the issue. Yet we have been unable to meet with you to discuss the issue, despite repeated requests by us. We acknowledge the City's right to make decisions, but surely the City is compelled to make the best decision possible and maximize facility use where possible. When new info is received, surely decisions can be reviewed and revisited. It would also have made sense to contact the groups affected by the decision to see if there was any other info available that might impact the decision. Surely City staff have a responsibility to its citizens to make decision making processes transparent and to consider any new info that might come available. To date all we have heard on this issue is that the decision has been made (with no input from either heli or car group), and that the City will not even entertain discussion about it. We have been asking for a meeting about this issue since October. We were told that it would be discussed in April. In March we asked that the meeting be scheduled as early as possible in April since our outdoor season was starting at the beginning of April. Finally on April 18, a meeting was scheduled for April 26 (hardly early April), only to be cancelled indefinitely on April 25.
All winter we were holding out hope that a meeting would be held, reason would prevail, and that assigned times would return to last years frequency. As a result we did not finalize our 2005 schedule - we still haven't - and were going only on an interim schedule. As a result, some users may not have yet been aware of what the authorized times were. We were working on making people more aware, especially after our last meeting 2 weeks ago with your staff, but some track users, members and non, were probably not aware that times were different from last year. I am reasonably certain that the offending person was probably a newbie, non racer who hadn't yet got the message about proper track times.
I apologize if the person treated your City rep improperly. Such behavior is never acceptable.
I trust that this situation can be discussed and resolved. I assure you that, as we promised your staff, we are committed to improving awareness of the new rules and have been doing so. When can we meet to discuss the situation?
|
Here is a response to this letter
Quote:
Dear Mr. Brown:
Our staff member did identify herself and provide her business card to your members. One of the individuals was identified by another person at the track, and is listed on the facility use license as a member, one indicated "Roger has mine" when asked for his facility use card, and in any event, the staff member recognized three of the track users from previous meetings.
It seems that your club blames the fixed wing flyers for the City's enforcement actions with respect to your club. I wish to make you aware that the City has been monitoring your group's use of the site on its own initiative, due to your group's continual disregard of its allotted times, under both the current and previous facility use licenses, and not at the request of, or on the basis of complaints from any group.
The revocation of your facility use license as set out in my letter of yesterday stands. I understand that you are scheduled to appear as a delegation at the Committee meeting on May 9, 2005. Should you wish to dispute my decision, I suggest you raise it with the Committee at that time.
|
Quote:
Mr. Elliott,
I have done some further research into this matter.
From what I can gather so far, a club member (who was not using the track - they had been at the flying field) drove up as the confrontation was happening and verified to me that the person in question did indeed verbally abuse your staff member (I understand the staff member was Kathy Reinheimer). However, they both deny that any rock was thrown (rather a minor point). The 2 club members who were there both became members in early March. They are not regular racers and we seldom see them. From what I learned they were not aware of the new rules. Apparently they stopped at the flying field and asked the flyers there if they minded if they used the track and were told to go ahead. The persons at the track also misunderstood the sign at the track, thinking that WCRCAF was a car club that also had the track booked at the time. Being new members this year they did not know what the acronyms stood for and mistakenly thought WCRCAF was a car club. This further emphasizes the importance of running proposed sign wording past the affected groups before final posting. We have asked for such a process for some time now.
May we please have a list of who Kathy identified at the track as well as the number of persons who were there and the number of persons who were seen to be operating cars. Kathy has only been to one meeting ever with us - a meeting at the track. We know who all the members were who attended that meeting. We have already eliminated all of the persons at that meeting as possibly there at the time, so her statement that she identified 3 users from previous meetings is definitely not accurate. Further, we understand that only 2 persons were at the track with cars at the time with 2 more persons watching, and then 2 more persons driving up as the confrontation occured. The 2 persons using the track did not know each other, and the 2 persons arriving later did not know either of the 2 already present, so it is doubtful if a name was received from any of them.
Regarding your 2nd paragraph, we asked your staff why we were being singled out for all this attention. They specifically told us that they operate primarily on the basis of complaints and that there had been complaints about us. Your bylaws officer attended at one of the complaints and found it to be unsubstantiated. In fact, I had been at the track entrance on that Sunday morning to make sure nobody was using the track (as part of our new agreed upon vigilance). Nobody even attempted to use the track, yet the WCRCAF phoned the bylaws officer with a false complaint that the track was being used. According to your staff at our on-site meeting, no specific documented improper use of the track exists, other than unsubstantiated complaints. Members of the WCRCAF have confided to some of our members that other WCRCAF members are indeed behind the complaints. They also stated they have been asked by the City to monitor our use of the track, not only during their time of use, but at all times possible. Have your staff been misleading us? They specifically told us they react primarily to complaints. We stated we were attempting to get along by not complaining about other groups, but your staff said that complaining when we observe improper action is only being a responsible citizen. We have passed that thought on to our members with a recommendation to keep the City aware of improper goings-on at the Park.
Our group has not "continually disregarded its allocated times" as you claim. The issues regarding last years times have been explained numerous times to you and your staff. Your staff member told us we could start early if the WCRCAF left early. Based on that promise, we signed the FUL. Later, in spite of numerous correspondence with her, she never denied promising us that. Do you not find that very strange? If we were making a false claim about her promise, surely she would have addressed that claim during one of the numerous times it was raised. I thought this was all behind us and that we were starting this year off with a clean slate. However, the issue keeps coming up, being thrown in our face, and therefore we must continue to attempt to set the record straight. Leaving last years issues aside, there appears to one documented occurrence of use of the track at improper times - last Sunday. Just 2 weeks ago we met with your staff to discuss ways to stop persons from using the track at improper times. We suggested several things we could do and we have done them - posting on our website, info at our drivers meeting, mentioning whenever members are seen. Your staff said that our website was encouraging persons to use the track at improper times. I personally have searched our website and cannot find the alleged "encouragement" although I found the old 2004 schedule and a picture of the new sign posted at the track. I have asked Kathy to tell me the location of the information. She has not done so. I suspect it might be in our forum, which I do not control - it is merely a link on our website. Even so, I spent 2+ hours searching for it. If I could find it, I could have it changed or deleted. This was the prime example provided to us by your staff of how we were encouraging misuse of the facility, and as far as I could find, it too was unfounded, yet we continue to be painted with the "uncooperative" brush.
Since our last meeting with your staff, we have done everything we promised to help improve the situation. However, it takes some time to get the message out to everyone. It does not happen instantly. We are working on ways of getting the messages out quicker - phone, email, etc, but it is not all in place yet. If you have been monitoring the situation for some time as you say, I presume you must have noticed some improvement in the last 2 weeks.
I also believe that we should be entitled to due process. If you receive information serious enough to consider revoking facility use, surely it is encumbent on you to verify that information, and to hear any information from affected parties before offering a judgement. Who knows what extenuating circumstances there might be. We all know the tendency of people to resist changing their opinions/decisions after they have been made. It seems that regardless how compelling the information we provide is, it is very difficult to change a decision after the fact. We have run into such situations time and again. In the meantime, while appeals are pending it would seem reasonable to permit the track to remain operational until a final decision is made. It seems there are considerable differences of opinion as to what happened last Sunday.
We would like to be heard fairly and with an open mind. We would like to be heard promptly. We do not want to be shuffled down the line to the next in command or to some Committee. We would like to meet with people who want to work things out, rather than with people who want to mandate things before all the facts are heard. I believe these are reasonable expectations for us to have of the bureaucrats who make the important decisions affecting our lives.
I again ask for a meeting with you and/or your staff to resolve this. I have been asking for such a meeting since October, 2004. I was told the April time allocation meeting was the place to raise these concerns, but now even that meeting has been cancelled.
|
|