Arlington proposing to close county gymnastics program

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those interested, County work session on this yesterday.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrPkJSDlBpQ&t=1657s

Take aways:

Gymanstics program NOT currently covering facility costs
Historically rec program used to subsidize competitive team.
Serious issues finding qualified instructors and they detailed all the things they've done to try to recruit instructors.
Since there are not enough instructors, currently rec classes are being canceled to be sure the competitive team can continue on
Barcroft is NOT heavily used during the day as compared to other rec centers (this is based on data)

The issue of a recreational and adaptive gymnastics program should be separated out from the competitive team.

The DPR presentation was completely misleading. It didn't contain any of the information that every single gymnastics class is filled the moment it opens and that there's tons of demand. They also made it pretty clear that they haven't considered any alternative classes for the Barcroft space to try to make up for the shortage of gymnastics coaches. Other gyms hosts related classes like ninja classes, cheer classes, birthday parties, and senior or adult fitness classes during the day. There are lots of options even without qualified gymnastics coaches. Competitive programs also often host private lessons at a super high margin to help cover overhead. None of these options have been explored by DPR.

In their presentation Dpr also made it sound like the facility is empty during peak hours with only one gymnast being on a piece of equipment at a time. But if you've ever been there, that's not how the program works. All the gymnasts are working in circuits so everyone is practicing and equipment is utilized by more than one gymnast and shared. It was a very misleading description. The facility used to support rec classes for another 1700 kids per year. DPR is trying to represent that they don't have capacity for more classes because the equipment is so bulky and they need space for safety. That's just wrong. The reason the facility isn't being utilized more is because DPR isn't scheduling more classes.

The DPR presentation also pointed to alternative gymnastics programs that make absolutely no sense and aren't real alternatives for those in Arlington, including those super far away including in Fredericksburg, toddler gyms that don't offer real gymnastics, or other programs that are completely oversubscribed with no openings and waitlists. It was very misleading.

The DPR presentation also decline to answer board member questions about out the rec gymnasts fee waivers, charging those costs directly to the program when those are fees at the county subsidizes. Those were broken out for the swim program but DPR lumped them in with the cost for gymnastics to try to make fee recovery look worse.

By contrast, AAC fees are barely increasing next year with some only increasing $2 and there was no assessment of cost recovery for that program. The County Manager is proposing to spend more than a million dollars subsidizing Long Bridge next year, with the facility cost running a deficit of more than $3 million only propped up by the Boeing donation.

DPR also haven't stated any actual need for the Barcroft facility other than gymnastics. The plan is to leave it empty for at least a year with no proposal for what to do with it. They've shown no need for additional gym space or a shortage of space for classes, or even a budget to host things in that space. There's been no actual assessment of what would be done with that facility that has already been purchased by the county and maintained by the county and outfitted by the county. They also haven't done any assessment for what it will cost to turn the facility into whatever they think they are going to do with it because they have no plans.

Not going to take the time to refute this point by point but I watched the presentation and don’t agree with things you wrote.

People should watch it themselves. It’s really only first 45 minutes of the presentation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those interested, County work session on this yesterday.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrPkJSDlBpQ&t=1657s

Take aways:

Gymanstics program NOT currently covering facility costs
Historically rec program used to subsidize competitive team.
Serious issues finding qualified instructors and they detailed all the things they've done to try to recruit instructors.
Since there are not enough instructors, currently rec classes are being canceled to be sure the competitive team can continue on
Barcroft is NOT heavily used during the day as compared to other rec centers (this is based on data)

The issue of a recreational and adaptive gymnastics program should be separated out from the competitive team.

Forgot this one -

They started the adult gymnastics program to try to get a pipeline of qualified instructors and it didn't work. Apparently there has been some community idea volunteers can be trained to help. With such a specialized and risky sport, County has not done this.

This was a totally stupid idea and shows how incompetent DPR are in running the program. I've heard that older gymnasts in the Barcroft program have tried to get jobs teaching classes or summer camps and DPR never gets back to them. There's absolutely no reason that a high school junior or senior couldn't help teach a class.

I though the adult classes were really important and there was widespread demand for adult gymnastics.

There is. But it wasn't a good idea for a recruiting technique. Those classes seem to be really popular. But as DPR admitted, they haven't resulted in hiring those adults as coaches

I don’t know if you’re the person who said it’s a stupid way to recruit instructors. Doesn’t seem stupid to me. You get creative if you can’t find people.

If you told the high school gymnasts on the competitive team that they each need to teach a rec class per week to keep the program open, you'd immediately have an entire slate of coaches. And they'd do it for free just to be able to keep doing gymnastics.

[Anonymous]

PP what you are demanding is the county work harder to subsidize your competitive gymnastics team. I mean cmon. I don’t want them spending their time doing that as a taxpayer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those interested, County work session on this yesterday.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrPkJSDlBpQ&t=1657s

Take aways:

Gymanstics program NOT currently covering facility costs
Historically rec program used to subsidize competitive team.
Serious issues finding qualified instructors and they detailed all the things they've done to try to recruit instructors.
Since there are not enough instructors, currently rec classes are being canceled to be sure the competitive team can continue on
Barcroft is NOT heavily used during the day as compared to other rec centers (this is based on data)

The issue of a recreational and adaptive gymnastics program should be separated out from the competitive team.

The DPR presentation was completely misleading. It didn't contain any of the information that every single gymnastics class is filled the moment it opens and that there's tons of demand. They also made it pretty clear that they haven't considered any alternative classes for the Barcroft space to try to make up for the shortage of gymnastics coaches. Other gyms hosts related classes like ninja classes, cheer classes, birthday parties, and senior or adult fitness classes during the day. There are lots of options even without qualified gymnastics coaches. Competitive programs also often host private lessons at a super high margin to help cover overhead. None of these options have been explored by DPR.

In their presentation Dpr also made it sound like the facility is empty during peak hours with only one gymnast being on a piece of equipment at a time. But if you've ever been there, that's not how the program works. All the gymnasts are working in circuits so everyone is practicing and equipment is utilized by more than one gymnast and shared. It was a very misleading description. The facility used to support rec classes for another 1700 kids per year. DPR is trying to represent that they don't have capacity for more classes because the equipment is so bulky and they need space for safety. That's just wrong. The reason the facility isn't being utilized more is because DPR isn't scheduling more classes.

The DPR presentation also pointed to alternative gymnastics programs that make absolutely no sense and aren't real alternatives for those in Arlington, including those super far away including in Fredericksburg, toddler gyms that don't offer real gymnastics, or other programs that are completely oversubscribed with no openings and waitlists. It was very misleading.

The DPR presentation also decline to answer board member questions about out the rec gymnasts fee waivers, charging those costs directly to the program when those are fees at the county subsidizes. Those were broken out for the swim program but DPR lumped them in with the cost for gymnastics to try to make fee recovery look worse.

By contrast, AAC fees are barely increasing next year with some only increasing $2 and there was no assessment of cost recovery for that program. The County Manager is proposing to spend more than a million dollars subsidizing Long Bridge next year, with the facility cost running a deficit of more than $3 million only propped up by the Boeing donation.

DPR also haven't stated any actual need for the Barcroft facility other than gymnastics. The plan is to leave it empty for at least a year with no proposal for what to do with it. They've shown no need for additional gym space or a shortage of space for classes, or even a budget to host things in that space. There's been no actual assessment of what would be done with that facility that has already been purchased by the county and maintained by the county and outfitted by the county. They also haven't done any assessment for what it will cost to turn the facility into whatever they think they are going to do with it because they have no plans.

It really sounds like there is a secret plan for the facility in the background. None of this makes sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those interested, County work session on this yesterday.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrPkJSDlBpQ&t=1657s

Take aways:

Gymanstics program NOT currently covering facility costs
Historically rec program used to subsidize competitive team.
Serious issues finding qualified instructors and they detailed all the things they've done to try to recruit instructors.
Since there are not enough instructors, currently rec classes are being canceled to be sure the competitive team can continue on
Barcroft is NOT heavily used during the day as compared to other rec centers (this is based on data)

The issue of a recreational and adaptive gymnastics program should be separated out from the competitive team.

Forgot this one -

They started the adult gymnastics program to try to get a pipeline of qualified instructors and it didn't work. Apparently there has been some community idea volunteers can be trained to help. With such a specialized and risky sport, County has not done this.

This was a totally stupid idea and shows how incompetent DPR are in running the program. I've heard that older gymnasts in the Barcroft program have tried to get jobs teaching classes or summer camps and DPR never gets back to them. There's absolutely no reason that a high school junior or senior couldn't help teach a class.

I though the adult classes were really important and there was widespread demand for adult gymnastics.

There is. But it wasn't a good idea for a recruiting technique. Those classes seem to be really popular. But as DPR admitted, they haven't resulted in hiring those adults as coaches

I don’t know if you’re the person who said it’s a stupid way to recruit instructors. Doesn’t seem stupid to me. You get creative if you can’t find people.

If you told the high school gymnasts on the competitive team that they each need to teach a rec class per week to keep the program open, you'd immediately have an entire slate of coaches. And they'd do it for free just to be able to keep doing gymnastics.

Yes I’’m sure in all their free time not in school or doing competitive gymnastics or their other obligations it will overlap perfectly for when people want rec classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP what you are demanding is the county work harder to subsidize your competitive gymnastics team. I mean cmon. I don’t want them spending their time doing that as a taxpayer.

DPR's time is compensated by the fees they earn from rec classes. If they aren't doing their job and they keep cutting offerings year over year, then revenue keeps dropping year over year, resulting in cuts year over year. This year it's gymnastics. Next year it could be swim or senior programs or teen programs. It's a downward spiral. There's no reason the gymnastics program can't be self-supporting and offer gymnastics to a wide range of kids and adults in Arlington.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those interested, County work session on this yesterday.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrPkJSDlBpQ&t=1657s

Take aways:

Gymanstics program NOT currently covering facility costs
Historically rec program used to subsidize competitive team.
Serious issues finding qualified instructors and they detailed all the things they've done to try to recruit instructors.
Since there are not enough instructors, currently rec classes are being canceled to be sure the competitive team can continue on
Barcroft is NOT heavily used during the day as compared to other rec centers (this is based on data)

The issue of a recreational and adaptive gymnastics program should be separated out from the competitive team.

Forgot this one -

They started the adult gymnastics program to try to get a pipeline of qualified instructors and it didn't work. Apparently there has been some community idea volunteers can be trained to help. With such a specialized and risky sport, County has not done this.

This was a totally stupid idea and shows how incompetent DPR are in running the program. I've heard that older gymnasts in the Barcroft program have tried to get jobs teaching classes or summer camps and DPR never gets back to them. There's absolutely no reason that a high school junior or senior couldn't help teach a class.

I though the adult classes were really important and there was widespread demand for adult gymnastics.

There is. But it wasn't a good idea for a recruiting technique. Those classes seem to be really popular. But as DPR admitted, they haven't resulted in hiring those adults as coaches

I don’t know if you’re the person who said it’s a stupid way to recruit instructors. Doesn’t seem stupid to me. You get creative if you can’t find people.

If you told the high school gymnasts on the competitive team that they each need to teach a rec class per week to keep the program open, you'd immediately have an entire slate of coaches. And they'd do it for free just to be able to keep doing gymnastics.

Yes I’’m sure in all their free time not in school or doing competitive gymnastics or their other obligations it will overlap perfectly for when people want rec classes.

Lol. You mean after school and weekends? Teens are available the same times that rec classes are demanded. And yeah, they would find an hour or two in their week to avoid having to quit gymnastics or commute multiple hours per week to a gym super far away

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those interested, County work session on this yesterday.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrPkJSDlBpQ&t=1657s

Take aways:

Gymanstics program NOT currently covering facility costs
Historically rec program used to subsidize competitive team.
Serious issues finding qualified instructors and they detailed all the things they've done to try to recruit instructors.
Since there are not enough instructors, currently rec classes are being canceled to be sure the competitive team can continue on
Barcroft is NOT heavily used during the day as compared to other rec centers (this is based on data)

The issue of a recreational and adaptive gymnastics program should be separated out from the competitive team.

The DPR presentation was completely misleading. It didn't contain any of the information that every single gymnastics class is filled the moment it opens and that there's tons of demand. They also made it pretty clear that they haven't considered any alternative classes for the Barcroft space to try to make up for the shortage of gymnastics coaches. Other gyms hosts related classes like ninja classes, cheer classes, birthday parties, and senior or adult fitness classes during the day. There are lots of options even without qualified gymnastics coaches. Competitive programs also often host private lessons at a super high margin to help cover overhead. None of these options have been explored by DPR.

In their presentation Dpr also made it sound like the facility is empty during peak hours with only one gymnast being on a piece of equipment at a time. But if you've ever been there, that's not how the program works. All the gymnasts are working in circuits so everyone is practicing and equipment is utilized by more than one gymnast and shared. It was a very misleading description. The facility used to support rec classes for another 1700 kids per year. DPR is trying to represent that they don't have capacity for more classes because the equipment is so bulky and they need space for safety. That's just wrong. The reason the facility isn't being utilized more is because DPR isn't scheduling more classes.

The DPR presentation also pointed to alternative gymnastics programs that make absolutely no sense and aren't real alternatives for those in Arlington, including those super far away including in Fredericksburg, toddler gyms that don't offer real gymnastics, or other programs that are completely oversubscribed with no openings and waitlists. It was very misleading.

The DPR presentation also decline to answer board member questions about out the rec gymnasts fee waivers, charging those costs directly to the program when those are fees at the county subsidizes. Those were broken out for the swim program but DPR lumped them in with the cost for gymnastics to try to make fee recovery look worse.

By contrast, AAC fees are barely increasing next year with some only increasing $2 and there was no assessment of cost recovery for that program. The County Manager is proposing to spend more than a million dollars subsidizing Long Bridge next year, with the facility cost running a deficit of more than $3 million only propped up by the Boeing donation.

DPR also haven't stated any actual need for the Barcroft facility other than gymnastics. The plan is to leave it empty for at least a year with no proposal for what to do with it. They've shown no need for additional gym space or a shortage of space for classes, or even a budget to host things in that space. There's been no actual assessment of what would be done with that facility that has already been purchased by the county and maintained by the county and outfitted by the county. They also haven't done any assessment for what it will cost to turn the facility into whatever they think they are going to do with it because they have no plans.

It really sounds like there is a secret plan for the facility in the background. None of this makes sense.

Ok so if you listen to the presentation they say they are going to review the facility and figure out what is possible in terms of repurposing with a plan to have a conversation what to move in there and I think they acknowledged 55+ has growing needs. Someone on board said 12 months seemed too long.

I don’t think it’s a secret plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those interested, County work session on this yesterday.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrPkJSDlBpQ&t=1657s

Take aways:

Gymanstics program NOT currently covering facility costs
Historically rec program used to subsidize competitive team.
Serious issues finding qualified instructors and they detailed all the things they've done to try to recruit instructors.
Since there are not enough instructors, currently rec classes are being canceled to be sure the competitive team can continue on
Barcroft is NOT heavily used during the day as compared to other rec centers (this is based on data)

The issue of a recreational and adaptive gymnastics program should be separated out from the competitive team.

Forgot this one -

They started the adult gymnastics program to try to get a pipeline of qualified instructors and it didn't work. Apparently there has been some community idea volunteers can be trained to help. With such a specialized and risky sport, County has not done this.

This was a totally stupid idea and shows how incompetent DPR are in running the program. I've heard that older gymnasts in the Barcroft program have tried to get jobs teaching classes or summer camps and DPR never gets back to them. There's absolutely no reason that a high school junior or senior couldn't help teach a class.

I though the adult classes were really important and there was widespread demand for adult gymnastics.

There is. But it wasn't a good idea for a recruiting technique. Those classes seem to be really popular. But as DPR admitted, they haven't resulted in hiring those adults as coaches

I don’t know if you’re the person who said it’s a stupid way to recruit instructors. Doesn’t seem stupid to me. You get creative if you can’t find people.

If you told the high school gymnasts on the competitive team that they each need to teach a rec class per week to keep the program open, you'd immediately have an entire slate of coaches. And they'd do it for free just to be able to keep doing gymnastics.

Yes I’’m sure in all their free time not in school or doing competitive gymnastics or their other obligations it will overlap perfectly for when people want rec classes.

Lol. You mean after school and weekends? Teens are available the same times that rec classes are demanded. And yeah, they would find an hour or two in their week to avoid having to quit gymnastics or commute multiple hours per week to a gym super far away

People do also want rec classes for 0-5 during the day. Do they not have gymnastics practice after school or in the evenings? The competitive gymnasts are free all afternoon, evening and weekends to provide a regular commitment. That is great. Problem solved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP what you are demanding is the county work harder to subsidize your competitive gymnastics team. I mean cmon. I don’t want them spending their time doing that as a taxpayer.

DPR's time is compensated by the fees they earn from rec classes. If they aren't doing their job and they keep cutting offerings year over year, then revenue keeps dropping year over year, resulting in cuts year over year. This year it's gymnastics. Next year it could be swim or senior programs or teen programs. It's a downward spiral. There's no reason the gymnastics program can't be self-supporting and offer gymnastics to a wide range of kids and adults in Arlington.

Well they said there is a reason. they can’t hire qualified people to teach this activity safely and they said other activities they’ve been able to bounce back and hire people. They mentioned life guards.

I think a disconnect is perhaps their standards of who to hire don’t match what you all find acceptable. I guess it’s their gym and they should figure out what risk they can tolerate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP what you are demanding is the county work harder to subsidize your competitive gymnastics team. I mean cmon. I don’t want them spending their time doing that as a taxpayer.

DPR's time is compensated by the fees they earn from rec classes. If they aren't doing their job and they keep cutting offerings year over year, then revenue keeps dropping year over year, resulting in cuts year over year. This year it's gymnastics. Next year it could be swim or senior programs or teen programs. It's a downward spiral. There's no reason the gymnastics program can't be self-supporting and offer gymnastics to a wide range of kids and adults in Arlington.

Watch the presentation.

They look at programs in terms of community benefit vs individual benefit etc. No one said DPR is fully recovering it's costs to run their dept through fees.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP what you are demanding is the county work harder to subsidize your competitive gymnastics team. I mean cmon. I don’t want them spending their time doing that as a taxpayer.

DPR's time is compensated by the fees they earn from rec classes. If they aren't doing their job and they keep cutting offerings year over year, then revenue keeps dropping year over year, resulting in cuts year over year. This year it's gymnastics. Next year it could be swim or senior programs or teen programs. It's a downward spiral. There's no reason the gymnastics program can't be self-supporting and offer gymnastics to a wide range of kids and adults in Arlington.

Well they said there is a reason. they can’t hire qualified people to teach this activity safely and they said other activities they’ve been able to bounce back and hire people. They mentioned life guards.

I think a disconnect is perhaps their standards of who to hire don’t match what you all find acceptable. I guess it’s their gym and they should figure out what risk they can tolerate.

This isn't that different than the same hiring issues you hear with APS. I know of Barcroft coaches who are furloughed during covid who have availability to coach who haven't been contacted and they haven't tried to return because it's such a hassle. I also know of coaches who interviewed at Barcroft and wanted to work there and ultimately ended up at another gym because Barcroft wasn't getting back to them. And you hear about teens from the team who've applied for spot and also haven't heard back. You can pretend it's standards or you can accept that they're not doing a great job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP what you are demanding is the county work harder to subsidize your competitive gymnastics team. I mean cmon. I don’t want them spending their time doing that as a taxpayer.

DPR's time is compensated by the fees they earn from rec classes. If they aren't doing their job and they keep cutting offerings year over year, then revenue keeps dropping year over year, resulting in cuts year over year. This year it's gymnastics. Next year it could be swim or senior programs or teen programs. It's a downward spiral. There's no reason the gymnastics program can't be self-supporting and offer gymnastics to a wide range of kids and adults in Arlington.

Watch the presentation.

They look at programs in terms of community benefit vs individual benefit etc. No one said DPR is fully recovering it's costs to run their dept through fees.

I watched the presentation and you can hear the county manager explain the year-over-year cuts stating that they have to go deeper every year. And the more you cut the less revenue you have so the more you have to cut the next year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP what you are demanding is the county work harder to subsidize your competitive gymnastics team. I mean cmon. I don’t want them spending their time doing that as a taxpayer.

DPR's time is compensated by the fees they earn from rec classes. If they aren't doing their job and they keep cutting offerings year over year, then revenue keeps dropping year over year, resulting in cuts year over year. This year it's gymnastics. Next year it could be swim or senior programs or teen programs. It's a downward spiral. There's no reason the gymnastics program can't be self-supporting and offer gymnastics to a wide range of kids and adults in Arlington.

Well they said there is a reason. they can’t hire qualified people to teach this activity safely and they said other activities they’ve been able to bounce back and hire people. They mentioned life guards.

I think a disconnect is perhaps their standards of who to hire don’t match what you all find acceptable. I guess it’s their gym and they should figure out what risk they can tolerate.

So if there aren't gymnastics coaches, why don't they hire cheer coaches or someone to teach ninja classes or fitness classes in the space? Why don't they offer open gyms with a higher gymnast to staff ratio? Why don't they offer more toddler and preschool classes that require a lower skill level for the coaches? Why don't they offer birthday parties or private lessons that have a much higher margin? All of these are things that other gyms do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP what you are demanding is the county work harder to subsidize your competitive gymnastics team. I mean cmon. I don’t want them spending their time doing that as a taxpayer.

DPR's time is compensated by the fees they earn from rec classes. If they aren't doing their job and they keep cutting offerings year over year, then revenue keeps dropping year over year, resulting in cuts year over year. This year it's gymnastics. Next year it could be swim or senior programs or teen programs. It's a downward spiral. There's no reason the gymnastics program can't be self-supporting and offer gymnastics to a wide range of kids and adults in Arlington.

Watch the presentation.

They look at programs in terms of community benefit vs individual benefit etc. No one said DPR is fully recovering it's costs to run their dept through fees.

I watched the presentation and you can hear the county manager explain the year-over-year cuts stating that they have to go deeper every year. And the more you cut the less revenue you have so the more you have to cut the next year.

This is not what he said. At all.

The County overall has had to take cuts for many years at this point due to expense increases outpacing revenue increases. DPR has already taken many cuts to services in past years. So the “easier” ones have already been taken. That is what he said.

The part you’re saying about the more you cut the less revenue you have so you have to cut more the next year is made up. And doesn’t even make sense. They are not cutting programs that are bringing in more money than they cost.