Sheeper’s Annual Report
APPENDIX A
Parks and Recreation Commission
Meeting Date: 2/23/2022
Staff Report Number: 22-PRC-003
Presentation: Aquatics program annual report
Maybe the format of Appendix A is exactly what is required by the Parks Committee: in which case it should be restructured. However, I find it lacking in reality and credibility.
a. Most of the entries are from the same dates. Perhaps that is when questionnaires were turned in. However, few people actually fill out questionnaires but they do send complaints.
b. What counts are actual communications to Sheeper and these apparently are not tabulated. The fact that the City Council received complaints that had previously fallen on deaf ears supports the assertion that there were other communications.
c. Many of the entries are duplicative (verbatim) in various categories.
d. Zip codes for respondents are listed and a great number of them are from Portola Valley, Atherton and even much further afield,
e. There is an over abundance of feedback from the Triathlon and Masters participants
f. Participants in the Aquacize and Wellness participants were not even polled. Probably because their programs were partially or totally eliminated.
g. The overall impression from the Report is that patrons are more than satisfied. However, Yelp had 73 reviews listed and the overall listing rate was only 3.5 out of 5 stars
h. I know for a fact that many people have complained to Mr. Sheeper about various problems and have either received no response or a totally inadequate one.
At the last City Council Meeting, Mr. Sheeper was asked to address some of the complaints about his failure to reactivate the Wellness program, designed specifically for older and disabled residents, based on his assertion that there is no one to teach the program. This is despite the fact that the long time instructor (with whom the participants were well satisfied, and who is still available) has not been rehired.
Mr. Sheeper further assured the Council that he had been negotiating with a Ph.D. Physical Therapist to teach the program but that this person contracted covid: a fact that does not inspire confidence in his potential selection! Furthermore, he informed the Council that this program would likely start March 1: just a week away from now! So far there has been absolutely no communication or updates as to any details. This is particularly galling since there has been a plethora of updates concerning the Masters Program, Tennis lessons, Swim lessons and team sports.
The Burgess pool is a community pool, for all ages and abilities and is not a Team Sheeper monopoly as it seems to have become. It is to be hoped that the City will provide better governance over whomsoever gets to run the pool operations in future. As of now it seems that the city has abrogated all responsibility in that regard, and has even failed to ensure that the facility is ADA compliant, which exposes it to liability. At the very least, the City should be receiving some kind of financial report as to the operations. In the future it might be an option to consider different governance for the two pools, since the potential patrons are likely different given the large number of high tech firms moving into E. Menlo Park. Plus the pool configurations are different.
BOTTOM LINE: All is not without problems at Burgess and things need to improve. One thing that could be done to protect the many small kids is to require full vaccination.
