Mole Valley - Data Obtained Under Freedom Of Information

Background    Emails re Dirt & Slim Staffing    Pool Test Results   Other Items (unsupervised gym, 20p charge introduced without consultation, unsafe lighting in pool, failed air conditioning)

Background              

I wrote to Mole Valley District Council in November 2005 seeking information on the performance of LC. It appears that despite a number of issues concerning leisure provision reported in the local  papers, no reports on LC's performance for councillors or senior managers have been prepared. This is all the more surprising as Audit Commission reports on the council in 2003 and 2004 drew attention to the need for better performance management. The 2004 report stated, “Performance management, particularly in councillor reports, does not focus sufficiently on priorities or outcomes. Officers and councillors are not provided with comprehensive progress information that allows them to manage performance against corporate and service objectives across a range of indicators with sufficient frequency.”

The 2004 Audit Report also noted "The council is unable to demonstrate value for money in the delivery of its services. ...  There has not been rigorous challenge to the financial sustainability of some significant community assets such as Dorking Halls, which receives a high subsidy from the council, and Leatherhead Leisure Centre, which is losing money in the face of competition from the private sector. Without a robust approach to determining value for money from its services, the council is not able to challenge the way services are provided or evaluate alternative options for provision."

I have asked the Council to confirm that they have sent everything that I am entitled to see. In the meanwhile, below are extracts from some of the papers sent to me. 

In the meanwhile, the Mole Valley District Council meeting on 13.12.05 considered a report which informed Members of the outcome of negotiations with LC and recommended 6 to 5, "That the settlement reached be approved, subject to the matters referred to in the report." An earlier meeting on 18.10.05 refers to an informal approach to LC re a "Capital Contribution and Management Fee" and recommended that "That capital funds of up to £750,000 be released to allow negotiations with Leisure Connection to proceed." I imagine the local rate payers would feel happier about such expenditure if there was evidence that the current payments are delivering value for money.

There is little direct comment from LC in the council sent papers. As ever, LCW is happy to add links to its website for LC to refer to where it wishes to state its case. PB

Emails re Dirt and Slim Staffing

An email dated 20.10.05 from the Council's Leisure Development Manager to an LC Manager relaying a telephone complaint from a pool user. "Her main issues were that when ever she comes to do aquafit or swim the changing rooms are in a real state with food on the floor, sweet wrappers, hairs in the drains and generally the floor looks filthy... she said that she thought the cleaning had gone downhill over the last couple of months." 

The council officer goes on to say:

I went to the centre to see for myself what the current standards were and I have to be honest its not a pretty sight. Main points were;

1. Thick amount of hairs in the drain by the showers

2. drain grates looking black and dirty again

3. a black hair/dirt build up on the drain grates

4. around the feet of all the cubicles build up of dirt

5. behind the doors of all family cubicle weeks of dirt

6. Family change and most heavily used changing rooms black

7. strainer baskets at the end of each drain run have clearly not been emptied (your staffs responsibility or cleaners?) since they were cleaned out in May, consequently they smell and are full of flies who are loving the atmosphere. These must be cleaned each week.

The email goes on to ask questions about what checking is taking place and then says:

"(Name deleted) and I have discussed staffing in the centre and whether or not he slim staffing structure is having a negative impact on areas such as cleaning, customer interaction, reception and even to an extent of providing a good service to the public... I am just a little concerned that everyone seems stretched too much and that the building and customers suffer and will continue to do so. For example, yesterday,  I had to sign off some actions from monitoring, (name deleted) seemed very stretched and not that interested in cleaning the main rear entrance (which was filthy with cobwebs, dust etc.)...

In addition, this week I have had one councillor ask me about reception staff as it took him 15 minutes to be served and then he didn't get the information he wanted. Plus two other customers this week kept ringing for 20 minutes to get through to reception...

I have found the original staffing structure that was agreed by us and it seems that the current structure is a lot slimmer..."

The same officer sent a second email the next day with details of badminton players frustrated by courts not being set up for their booking.  Reception told them the court would be set up while they were changing but it was not. "Eventually they gave up and tried to use the gym instead only to be told they couldn't leave their bags while they used the treadmills for 10-15 minutes. Thoroughly fed up they left the centre and... no doubt will be writing to you.  Prior to this two weeks ago footballers turned up to find a trampoline on their court.  We are not having a good week, what I find difficult to understand is that I am told the pool changing rooms do not get checked regularly enough because staff have set ups to do and then I get feedback on set ups not being done either."

Dorking Pool Test Results

Keep in mind that LC were  the operator in 2002 when Which? magazine said that  Dorking Swimming Centre could pose "a potentially serious health risk" to swimmers. See local paper coverage.  

Mole Valley District Council now employ their own or independent staff to carry our sampling of pool water. The selection below shows the same issues time after time, yet LC's own testing should have alerted them to the problems and the actions needed. Unless automatic monitoring equipment is fitted, pool operators are required to test the water prior to use and thereafter every two hours till closing. Yet on 10 inspection visits "backwashing" is called for. What prevented LC from carrying out a standard procedure based on its own pool samples before the inspection?

 TDS refers to "total dissolved solids" and measures everything dissolved in the water, quite a lot of which are unsavoury, such as sweat oil, mucus or urine. Chloride and sulphate compounds promoted by high TDS can corrode pool equipment and surfaces. "Free chlorine" is chlorine that has not yet combined with pollutants in the pool. "Combined chlorine" refers to chlorine that has reacted with sweat, cosmetics etc. to form new compounds. "Ppm" = parts per million.

10.6.04 Both Pools "TDS and combined chlorine are higher than recommended. Please increase dilution of pool, perhaps by increasing frequency of backwashing. Chlorine controller requires recalibration..."

21.8.04 Main Pool "TDS and combined chlorine levels are high indicating heavy bather load, this may result in bather discomfort. A backwash is required to help reduce and dilute." Teaching Pool "as pool, a backwash is required..."

28.9.04  "I was concerned about the high reading for free chlorine in the main pool. I was unable to obtain a reading for total chlorine as it was outside the measurable parameter of the PC check-kit (i.e. +6.0).   In other words it was off the scale of the testing kit used. Acceptable limits for free chlorine are given as 0.5 to 3.0 milligrams per litre. The report also notes that at 11.15am the Centre staff had not carried out their own test scheduled for 11.00am and that there appeared to be no overshoes for visitors to the pool area to wear.

30.9.04 Main Pool "High combined chlorine and high TDS indicates pool is over concentrated. Recommend increased frequency/duration of backwashing to introduce fresh mains water." 

25.10.04 Both Pools " Over concentrated with chemicals. At moment an introduction of fresh water is required by backwashing. Free chlorine should then be set at 150 - 175 ppm."

25.11.04 "Both systems require more frequent backwashing to introduce fresh water. This will reduce the TDS levels and also reduce and maintain low combine chlorine levels..."

16.12.04 Main Pool "Combined chlorine and TDS are high indicating heavy bather loads, this may result in bather discomfort. A backwash is required to help to reduce this..." 

25.1.05 Main Pool "Free chlorine reserve is very low. This has given rise to high combined chlorine level with high TDS. Will result in bather discomfort, a backwashing is required to reduce this problem..." Teaching Pool "Combined chlorine levels are high due to heavy bather loads and backwash is required to help with bather discomfort..."

3.1.05 "TDS high, combined chlorine approaching advised limit. Backwashing recommended."

17.3.05 "Over concentrated with chemicals at then moment. Recommend a backwash is carried out to reduce the high TDS ..." 

18.4.05 Main Pool "Very high levels and high combined chlorine will result in bather discomfort. A long backwash is required and regular backwashing is required..." Teaching Pool "Free chlorine is high along with high TDS indicates heavy bathing load. backwashing is recommended..."

13.6.05 Main Pool "Combined chlorine levels are high indicating heavy bather loads. A backwash is required and free chlorine increased to 1.50-1.75 ppm..." Teaching pool "Very over concentrated, a backwash is required. Free chlorine should be maintained at 1.50-1.75 ppm..."

27.9.05 Main Pool "Ph is high reducing effectiveness of chlorine. Advise to reduce to 7.2 to 7.8. TDS also high which can be reduced via backwashing." Teaching Pool " Ph slightly high... Free chlorine also high and should be kept at 1-2 ppm (parts per million). TDS high - advise backwashing."

Other Items

A letter from a District Environmental Health Officer to LC dated 7.5.04 written under the heading "Health & safety at Work etc Act 1974", refers to a complaint about the gym being unsupervised between 5.30 and 8pm on May 8 and 9.  The letter states, "It is likely that you are placing members of the public a risk because you are not providing adequate staff supervision..." and requires LC to carry out a risk assessment. Attached to this letter is a pool safety monitoring form completed by LC but no further information about the risk assessment requested. 

A letter from the Council's Leisure Development Manager to LC's Area Manager dated 12.11.04 makes clear that LC's introduction of a 20p entrance charge at Dorking Leisure Centre was done without consulting  the council. "The implementation of the 0.20p entrance charge has not been discussed or agreed in the usual fashion of the fees and charges and therefore we would ask you to reconsider and ultimately remove the entrance charge from the operation of the centre."

An undated but detailed note from a Council  Health & Safety Assistant  to the Council's Leisure Development Manager about lighting following a visit to the Dorking pool. This records 15 out of 8 lighting units were not working and represents a loss of a further three units since a previous visit (undated). "We are therefore in a position of having low and deteriorating light levels... The range of lighting we identified this morning from our own meter at water level varied from 140 lux to 80 lux, with the lowest readings experienced at both ends. If immediate replacement or augmentation is not reasonably practical, this Department's recommendation would be that the risk assessment is reviewed to take into account the significant deterioration in lighting conditions... There are still concerns revolving around life guarding with particular reference to monitoring the bottom of the pool at both ends."

A letter was sent by the same H&S Assistant to LC on 25.7.05 about lighting. He says. "I am concerned that there were poorly lit areas of the pool and if immediate replacement or augmentation of lighting is not possible I require you to review your risk assessment... as soon as possible... " The letter goes on to recommend that due to the poor quality of lighting there should be life guards at both ends of the pool and a third lifeguard for busy times.

A letter was sent by a Principle Environmental Health Officer to LC on 1.9.05 under the heading "Health & safety at Work etc Act 1974"  concerning excessive temperatures at Dorking Sports Centre. A temperature of 90°F was recorded in the gym on 30.8.05. It also notes it took over a week to provide temporary equipment that has had a noticeable effect on the ambient temperature. "Further, I note from your staff that this is not the first time the air conditioning has failed."

Top