The financial picture at the St. Albert Senior Citizens' Club has turned itself around, but a lawsuit over how the club manages itself still looms.
At the club's annual general meeting Friday the board of directors revealed a three-year string of deficits was over as the club posted a surplus of $39,849 in 2010.
By contrast the 2009 deficit was $55,878.
President Jim Laing, who finished his term this week, said wrestling the financial challenge was hard, but it came together this year.
"It was a number of factors — the city helped us, club members worked a little harder at raising some money and then we also cut back on some expenses."
He said as a not-for-profit, the club would never be on perfect footing but they were on the right path.
"I think there is probably always going to be a financial challenge, but I think it is moving in the right direction."
He said the club provides a lot of services to its members and for a relatively low fee, which remained unchanged this year.
"It is a good buy for members. They get great value in the club."
Robert Russell, a member who along with several other seniors has raised concerns about the club's finances in the past, said he was pleased to see the picture turning around.
"From a net position that is a lot better after three years of losses and all of our reserves have disappeared," he said. "I was pleased as well. My wife and I have been members for a long time and we were getting very concerned."
Russell's concerns about the club's bylaws remain however, and he said he would continue to pursue a suit against the club and the board of directors for changes they made in 2009.
"I am going ahead and I have the support of some pretty solid people."
Laing said he believes it is past time for the suit to be dropped. The board is confident the changes were done appropriately.
"It clearly says in the Societies Act that is allowed," said Laing. "We went to the registrar and they said everything was correct."
New changes
The membership also approved several bylaw changes at Friday's meeting including changes surrounding special meetings, expulsion of members and board composition.
Many of these changes passed by relatively close votes and the board of directors insisted they be passed as a whole, despite several requests from members to vote on the changes one at a time.
They also limited debate on any proposed amendments to the bylaws to five minutes per amendment.
Russell felt this was unfair.
"I have never in my life in all my years watched bylaws being rammed through and have discussion absolutely limited and curtailed," he said. "We had no chance to speak to a lot of those issues."
The outcome of the vote on all of those bylaws was overwhelming and Laing said despite some objections, that showed the membership supports the changes, which require 75 per cent support.
"The vote for the bylaw was 90 or 85 per cent. I would be concerned, but 75 per cent is a pretty high threshold and we got that."
