In any case, the children's programming director explained that she had had unpleasant experiences in the past when parents expecting to pick their children up at the center found out that their activities had been moved outside without any notice to parents. The men's sports director reminded her that they already have signed permission forms to take the children off premises. That precipitated an argument when both groups seemed to forget that the point was moot anyway since there were no buses available. The assistant executive director resolved the situation the best way that he could by allowing the children's activities to be conducted on one-third of the basketball court. This greatly annoyed the men's sports group. The director ordered that the protective netting separating the two activities (obviously for the benefit of the children) about be erected and then tried once again to smooth things over with the men's sports group. He explained to them that he realized that it was inconvenient to restrict...

However, the alternative would have been to cancel the children's activities, disappoint all of the participants, and probably exacerbate tensions between the two departments, especially on the children's programming side. By allowing the men to use two thirds of the court, the director ensured that they would only lose the use of two of six side baskets and the second main basket at one end of the court. The children's programming proceeded without incident and after the men's basketball practice, the athletic coordinator approached the assistant executive director t apologize for the selfishness of his group. He thanked the director for allowing them to use two-thirds of the court. The director communicated the apology to the children's programming director and her staff and reminded them that their department might want to reciprocate sometime in the future in the event of some other unavoidable conflict over the availability of community center resources.