Skip to content

Sechelt Chamber cries foul over renewal of visitor centre contract

District of Sechelt
chamber
Sechelt and District Chamber of Commerce president Kim Darwin is unimpressed with Sechelt council’s handling of the Sechelt Visitor Centre contract that left the Chamber unable to put in a bid this month. The Chamber held the contract to operate the visitor centre for several years but lost the contract in 2004 to the Sunshine Coast Community Services Society, which was recently awarded another five-year contract by the District of Sechelt.

The Sechelt and District Chamber of Commerce is crying foul this week over the awarding of the Sechelt Visitor Centre contract without a public request for proposals (RFP) process.

In a five to two vote on Feb. 3, Sechelt council decided to renew the district’s contract with Sunshine Coast Community Services Society (SCCSS) to continue operating the Sechelt Visitor Centre for another five-year term.

After the vote, Chamber of Commerce president Kim Darwin left the meeting in disbelief.

“Honestly, I was shocked that an RFP wasn’t issued. With all of their messaging about fairness and the lack of fairness from the former council, I actually was really surprised,” Darwin said, noting the Chamber would have put in a bid for the contract.

Following the meeting, Darwin penned a letter to the District outlining the Chamber’s frustration.

“We are deeply disappointed that we were not afforded an opportunity to present an application for tender for the Sechelt Visitor Centre contract and request a reasonable explanation as to why council felt it necessary to circumvent the District’s procurement policy in this regard,” the letter stated. 

In an emailed statement, Sechelt Mayor Bruce Milne said the district would be preparing a formal response to the letter but noted an RFP is “only one way to ensure an open and transparent procurement policy.”

“They are usually initiated at an early stage of a process when preliminary study is required to better understand the scope of a project,” Milne said.

“In this case, the district had legal contractual obligations to consider a renewal of the contract (as negotiated in 2011) in good faith. SCCSS and the district have been in those discussions since August 2015. Renewal clauses typically imply or assume ‘on good performance’ or ‘satisfactory evaluation.’ There were no indications that service performance had not met contracted expectations over the past five years.”

Another issue impeding the issuing of an RFP was the fact that all of the SCCSS financial statements relating to the visitor centre had been requested by councillors and then released to the public by way of council agendas, creating an un-level playing field.

“That doesn’t seem to be a fair way to deal with any other groups who might want to come forward,” Milne said during the meeting.

“If that was a business they’d just go nuts on it in terms of the apparent conflict and the lack of confidentiality, and it was councillors who asked for that material to come forward.”

Councillors Darren Inkster and Darnelda Siegers pushed for some from of public process before the awarding of the contract for another five years.

“Historically if we go back a number of years ago and it came up for renewal, there was a public process,” Inkster said.

“I try to be consistent and that’s what I was comfortable with a number of years ago and recommended to be fair, and that’s where I’m comfortable again.”

Interim corporate officer Gerry van der Wolf noted that issuing a renewal of the contract to SCCSS wasn’t out of line with district policy.

“Certainly our purchasing policy requires that purchases of goods or services be done by a tender or by proposal, but in this case the contract that was entered into did allow for an option to renew, so it’s very clear that was envisioned at the time. As long as both parties agreed to renew it then it could be renewed,” van der Wolf said.

When the question was called, all but Inkster and Siegers voted in favour, and SCCSS was awarded the contract for another five-year term.

The total SCCSS budget to run the visitor information centre for one year (as reported for April 1, 2015 to March 31, 2016) is $90,611 with $56,239 of that budget coming from the District of Sechelt.

The rest of the funds are obtained through a Destination BC grant, a summer student grant, visitor centre memberships, ticket commissions, sales and donations, and interfund transfers if necessary.

For the price, SCCSS staffs the visitor centre, maintains an up-to-date website, provides furniture, display racks and other required equipment to operate the centre, maintains the interior of the premises, provides statistical reports to the district on a monthly basis, and provides annual audited financial statements.

The society also must ensure the Sechelt Visitor Centre is a member of Tourism BC and that it meets the network terms, conditions and criteria of a full status visitor centre.