Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not really whether demand is there. It’s should the county be doing it at all. I don’t really need to pay tax dollars so Larlas can take heavily subsidized gymnastics in prime County space that could be used to serve residents more broadly. Let alone subsidizing some kind of club gymnastics team. Who knew that was even a thing.

Private places will fill the gap eventually if the county stops doing it.

Barcroft also has baseball facilities. Should we do away with those? What about the many many soccer fields? The $$$ aquatics center and HS pools? Let’s just get rid of all youth programs so your precious tax dollars don’t have to support any of this. 🙄 Clearly we shouldn’t subsidize things you random poster don’t personally use.

I don't know the nature of the arrangement but GW paid for the upgrades to the baseball field and it's their home field and then can be used by other when not in use by them. Did the gymnastics team pay for all the improvements and equpment in the gym?

How many times is this going to come up. If individual groups want to use any of these spaces -a pool, a field, a gym, they share with others and participate in a process to rent or reserve the field or facility and pay a fee. The asset is managed by the County and shared by a wide group of people for multiple uses and it is widely available to all. This is DPR's role. Manage community assets for our recreational use. It is not their role to fund and run an elite gymanstics gym with equipment that is only needed and used by competitive gymnasts.

What upgrades? What are you talking about?

The team is always sharing the facility with rec classes. All the equipment is being used at the same time with groups rotating on a schedule. The team only gets the gym to themselves at times they don't run rec classes (e.g., holiday weeks or late evenings). At that point the incremental cost is having the lights on.

There's no separate rental fee because the team is run by the county so parents pay the county directly at the rate set by the county. They have tighter control by managing the facility directly instead of renting it to a third party.

In 2017 the County dropped several million to upgrade Barcroft.

https://www.arlingtonva.us/Government/Projects/Project-Types/Uncategorised/Barcroft-Gymnastics-Expansion-Project

And the fact the county is not charging the program sufficient fees to cover costs is why it’s on the chopping block.

This is the crux. We might all agree it's a terrific program, but it might not be a financially viable program for the country at this time.

It sounds like a big part of the project was just county maintenance:

Installation of staff lockers
Renovation of the existing women’s locker room
New building roof
Replacement of three roof-mounted air handling units for the building’s HVAC system

There are other things in the building besides gymnastics.

The first two items (usually biggest comes first):

Conversion of the existing gym into a gymnastics area
Renovation of the existing gymnastics area

Anonymous wrote:
That said, it would be idiotic to close the program. DPR got into a pickle b/c they spend a ton of money to transport the basketball side of the gym to accommodate the class demand the boys team. Then COVID messed everything up, along with bringing in a director who wanted to promote only Xcel and not DP. oops. They need to increase staffing and have been having troubles. How about an on-site training program? You aren't going to train those coaches needed for higher level competitive athletes, but you could certainly train up to a pre-team level for all the classes.

Realistically the Xcel thing might need to happen. This should not be mistaken with me approving of the director changes. That was a separate issue and im honestly kind of amazed that after all that this is where it ended up. But I’m just taking the Xcel issue on its own.

I’d love to see a step down sort of solution to that so that optionals can remain within their current programming. But maybe for lower levels and all incoming team athletes, that’s the move to keep having a gymnastics program which includes competitive options. There are multiple gyms in VA that only compete Xcel and it encompasses the skill level that most lower levels will end up at. I know that’s not really something everyone wants to hear but I’ll put it out there. Xcel has been a very positive thing for most private facilities. Let’s keep our minds open, it may be necessary to save it.

I hope to see the numbers soon. But let’s say there’s an option to go back to the original space. Moving to mostly Xcel would make that easier. I don’t know a lot about the boys Xcel. But I believe for the lowest levels there’s an option where you don’t need to use rings yet and can use mats for P bars. This is what USA Gymnastics created as a solution to address these kinds of challenges. I don’t know if other gyms in the state utilize that program at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not really whether demand is there. It’s should the county be doing it at all. I don’t really need to pay tax dollars so Larlas can take heavily subsidized gymnastics in prime County space that could be used to serve residents more broadly. Let alone subsidizing some kind of club gymnastics team. Who knew that was even a thing.

Private places will fill the gap eventually if the county stops doing it.

Barcroft also has baseball facilities. Should we do away with those? What about the many many soccer fields? The $$$ aquatics center and HS pools? Let’s just get rid of all youth programs so your precious tax dollars don’t have to support any of this. 🙄 Clearly we shouldn’t subsidize things you random poster don’t personally use.

I don't know the nature of the arrangement but GW paid for the upgrades to the baseball field and it's their home field and then can be used by other when not in use by them. Did the gymnastics team pay for all the improvements and equpment in the gym?

How many times is this going to come up. If individual groups want to use any of these spaces -a pool, a field, a gym, they share with others and participate in a process to rent or reserve the field or facility and pay a fee. The asset is managed by the County and shared by a wide group of people for multiple uses and it is widely available to all. This is DPR's role. Manage community assets for our recreational use. It is not their role to fund and run an elite gymanstics gym with equipment that is only needed and used by competitive gymnasts.

What upgrades? What are you talking about?

The team is always sharing the facility with rec classes. All the equipment is being used at the same time with groups rotating on a schedule. The team only gets the gym to themselves at times they don't run rec classes (e.g., holiday weeks or late evenings). At that point the incremental cost is having the lights on.

There's no separate rental fee because the team is run by the county so parents pay the county directly at the rate set by the county. They have tighter control by managing the facility directly instead of renting it to a third party.

In 2017 the County dropped several million to upgrade Barcroft.

https://www.arlingtonva.us/Government/Projects/Project-Types/Uncategorised/Barcroft-Gymnastics-Expansion-Project

And the fact the county is not charging the program sufficient fees to cover costs is why it’s on the chopping block.

This is the crux. We might all agree it's a terrific program, but it might not be a financially viable program for the country at this time.

It sounds like a big part of the project was just county maintenance:

Installation of staff lockers
Renovation of the existing women’s locker room
New building roof
Replacement of three roof-mounted air handling units for the building’s HVAC system

There are other things in the building besides gymnastics.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not really whether demand is there. It’s should the county be doing it at all. I don’t really need to pay tax dollars so Larlas can take heavily subsidized gymnastics in prime County space that could be used to serve residents more broadly. Let alone subsidizing some kind of club gymnastics team. Who knew that was even a thing.

Private places will fill the gap eventually if the county stops doing it.

Barcroft also has baseball facilities. Should we do away with those? What about the many many soccer fields? The $$$ aquatics center and HS pools? Let’s just get rid of all youth programs so your precious tax dollars don’t have to support any of this. 🙄 Clearly we shouldn’t subsidize things you random poster don’t personally use.

I don't know the nature of the arrangement but GW paid for the upgrades to the baseball field and it's their home field and then can be used by other when not in use by them. Did the gymnastics team pay for all the improvements and equpment in the gym?

How many times is this going to come up. If individual groups want to use any of these spaces -a pool, a field, a gym, they share with others and participate in a process to rent or reserve the field or facility and pay a fee. The asset is managed by the County and shared by a wide group of people for multiple uses and it is widely available to all. This is DPR's role. Manage community assets for our recreational use. It is not their role to fund and run an elite gymanstics gym with equipment that is only needed and used by competitive gymnasts.

What upgrades? What are you talking about?

The team is always sharing the facility with rec classes. All the equipment is being used at the same time with groups rotating on a schedule. The team only gets the gym to themselves at times they don't run rec classes (e.g., holiday weeks or late evenings). At that point the incremental cost is having the lights on.

There's no separate rental fee because the team is run by the county so parents pay the county directly at the rate set by the county. They have tighter control by managing the facility directly instead of renting it to a third party.

In 2017 the County dropped several million to upgrade Barcroft.

https://www.arlingtonva.us/Government/Projects/Project-Types/Uncategorised/Barcroft-Gymnastics-Expansion-Project

And the fact the county is not charging the program sufficient fees to cover costs is why it’s on the chopping block.

My kid wasn't even alive in 2017. I have no idea what happened back then.

The county sets the fees. I haven't seen any discussion about them being too low until a couple of days ago, with no specific information being provided. Why isn't the county using the same policy to set youth sports fees across the board?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not really whether demand is there. It’s should the county be doing it at all. I don’t really need to pay tax dollars so Larlas can take heavily subsidized gymnastics in prime County space that could be used to serve residents more broadly. Let alone subsidizing some kind of club gymnastics team. Who knew that was even a thing.

Private places will fill the gap eventually if the county stops doing it.

Barcroft also has baseball facilities. Should we do away with those? What about the many many soccer fields? The $$$ aquatics center and HS pools? Let’s just get rid of all youth programs so your precious tax dollars don’t have to support any of this. 🙄 Clearly we shouldn’t subsidize things you random poster don’t personally use.

I don't know the nature of the arrangement but GW paid for the upgrades to the baseball field and it's their home field and then can be used by other when not in use by them. Did the gymnastics team pay for all the improvements and equpment in the gym?

How many times is this going to come up. If individual groups want to use any of these spaces -a pool, a field, a gym, they share with others and participate in a process to rent or reserve the field or facility and pay a fee. The asset is managed by the County and shared by a wide group of people for multiple uses and it is widely available to all. This is DPR's role. Manage community assets for our recreational use. It is not their role to fund and run an elite gymanstics gym with equipment that is only needed and used by competitive gymnasts.

What upgrades? What are you talking about?

The team is always sharing the facility with rec classes. All the equipment is being used at the same time with groups rotating on a schedule. The team only gets the gym to themselves at times they don't run rec classes (e.g., holiday weeks or late evenings). At that point the incremental cost is having the lights on.

There's no separate rental fee because the team is run by the county so parents pay the county directly at the rate set by the county. They have tighter control by managing the facility directly instead of renting it to a third party.

In 2017 the County dropped several million to upgrade Barcroft.

https://www.arlingtonva.us/Government/Projects/Project-Types/Uncategorised/Barcroft-Gymnastics-Expansion-Project

And the fact the county is not charging the program sufficient fees to cover costs is why it’s on the chopping block.

DP. And acting like a rec program and a competitive program use the same equipment is disingenuous.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not really whether demand is there. It’s should the county be doing it at all. I don’t really need to pay tax dollars so Larlas can take heavily subsidized gymnastics in prime County space that could be used to serve residents more broadly. Let alone subsidizing some kind of club gymnastics team. Who knew that was even a thing.

Private places will fill the gap eventually if the county stops doing it.

Barcroft also has baseball facilities. Should we do away with those? What about the many many soccer fields? The $$$ aquatics center and HS pools? Let’s just get rid of all youth programs so your precious tax dollars don’t have to support any of this. 🙄 Clearly we shouldn’t subsidize things you random poster don’t personally use.

I don't know the nature of the arrangement but GW paid for the upgrades to the baseball field and it's their home field and then can be used by other when not in use by them. Did the gymnastics team pay for all the improvements and equpment in the gym?

How many times is this going to come up. If individual groups want to use any of these spaces -a pool, a field, a gym, they share with others and participate in a process to rent or reserve the field or facility and pay a fee. The asset is managed by the County and shared by a wide group of people for multiple uses and it is widely available to all. This is DPR's role. Manage community assets for our recreational use. It is not their role to fund and run an elite gymanstics gym with equipment that is only needed and used by competitive gymnasts.

What upgrades? What are you talking about?

The team is always sharing the facility with rec classes. All the equipment is being used at the same time with groups rotating on a schedule. The team only gets the gym to themselves at times they don't run rec classes (e.g., holiday weeks or late evenings). At that point the incremental cost is having the lights on.

There's no separate rental fee because the team is run by the county so parents pay the county directly at the rate set by the county. They have tighter control by managing the facility directly instead of renting it to a third party.

In 2017 the County dropped several million to upgrade Barcroft.

https://www.arlingtonva.us/Government/Projects/Project-Types/Uncategorised/Barcroft-Gymnastics-Expansion-Project

And the fact the county is not charging the program sufficient fees to cover costs is why it’s on the chopping block.

This is the crux. We might all agree it's a terrific program, but it might not be a financially viable program for the country at this time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not really whether demand is there. It’s should the county be doing it at all. I don’t really need to pay tax dollars so Larlas can take heavily subsidized gymnastics in prime County space that could be used to serve residents more broadly. Let alone subsidizing some kind of club gymnastics team. Who knew that was even a thing.

Private places will fill the gap eventually if the county stops doing it.

Barcroft also has baseball facilities. Should we do away with those? What about the many many soccer fields? The $$$ aquatics center and HS pools? Let’s just get rid of all youth programs so your precious tax dollars don’t have to support any of this. 🙄 Clearly we shouldn’t subsidize things you random poster don’t personally use.

I don't know the nature of the arrangement but GW paid for the upgrades to the baseball field and it's their home field and then can be used by other when not in use by them. Did the gymnastics team pay for all the improvements and equpment in the gym?

How many times is this going to come up. If individual groups want to use any of these spaces -a pool, a field, a gym, they share with others and participate in a process to rent or reserve the field or facility and pay a fee. The asset is managed by the County and shared by a wide group of people for multiple uses and it is widely available to all. This is DPR's role. Manage community assets for our recreational use. It is not their role to fund and run an elite gymanstics gym with equipment that is only needed and used by competitive gymnasts.

What upgrades? What are you talking about?

The team is always sharing the facility with rec classes. All the equipment is being used at the same time with groups rotating on a schedule. The team only gets the gym to themselves at times they don't run rec classes (e.g., holiday weeks or late evenings). At that point the incremental cost is having the lights on.

There's no separate rental fee because the team is run by the county so parents pay the county directly at the rate set by the county. They have tighter control by managing the facility directly instead of renting it to a third party.

In 2017 the County dropped several million to upgrade Barcroft.

https://www.arlingtonva.us/Government/Projects/Project-Types/Uncategorised/Barcroft-Gymnastics-Expansion-Project

And the fact the county is not charging the program sufficient fees to cover costs is why it’s on the chopping block.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not really whether demand is there. It’s should the county be doing it at all. I don’t really need to pay tax dollars so Larlas can take heavily subsidized gymnastics in prime County space that could be used to serve residents more broadly. Let alone subsidizing some kind of club gymnastics team. Who knew that was even a thing.

Private places will fill the gap eventually if the county stops doing it.

Barcroft also has baseball facilities. Should we do away with those? What about the many many soccer fields? The $$$ aquatics center and HS pools? Let’s just get rid of all youth programs so your precious tax dollars don’t have to support any of this. 🙄 Clearly we shouldn’t subsidize things you random poster don’t personally use.

I don't know the nature of the arrangement but GW paid for the upgrades to the baseball field and it's their home field and then can be used by other when not in use by them. Did the gymnastics team pay for all the improvements and equpment in the gym?

How many times is this going to come up. If individual groups want to use any of these spaces -a pool, a field, a gym, they share with others and participate in a process to rent or reserve the field or facility and pay a fee. The asset is managed by the County and shared by a wide group of people for multiple uses and it is widely available to all. This is DPR's role. Manage community assets for our recreational use. It is not their role to fund and run an elite gymanstics gym with equipment that is only needed and used by competitive gymnasts.

What upgrades? What are you talking about?

The team is always sharing the facility with rec classes. All the equipment is being used at the same time with groups rotating on a schedule. The team only gets the gym to themselves at times they don't run rec classes (e.g., holiday weeks or late evenings). At that point the incremental cost is having the lights on.

There's no separate rental fee because the team is run by the county so parents pay the county directly at the rate set by the county. They have tighter control by managing the facility directly instead of renting it to a third party.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The county should at least calculate the cost of the program (including things like utilities and maintenance for the facility, but not building it as that is more akin to turf fields at this point) and ask the families if they can lay the higher fees. The slash and burn budgeting is going to bite them, and they better not tear down or otherwise use a facility purpose-built for gymnastics for storage or just close it. That would be a waste of already-spent money!

The county also needs to hold itself accountable for fully staffing and utilizing the space if the expectation is to recover fees. Private gyms do things like host birthday parties for a fee to bring in revenues. If the county doesn't have qualified coaches for more classes, they need to do things to fill the facility that don't require highly qualified coaches (e.g., 4 yo birthday parties that can be led by someone who is good with kids, but not a gymnastics coach).

The County is supposed to turn into a birthday party provider to subsidize kids doing gymnastics? Whut.

The county already allows private rentals of fields, pavilions, and rec center rooms for parties. My kid’s travel team pays fees to use the Barcroft indoor baseball facilities. DPR offers party rental packages that include bounce houses and skate nights. You can book parts of the aquatics center for private events. So it’s not like the county hasn’t already gotten into the birthday party business to subsidize activities.

And County staff run the parties at these places? That is what people are suggesting here.

Yes.

I have been to some of these parties at above places mentioned and I don't think saying they "run the party" is accurate. They provide access to space or a room. Skate nights are happening anyway, for example. The bounce house is just there and you rented accesss for an hour and a room. At a pool, you're part of free swim and then you get a room after. There is not someone guiding children through activities like you would need at a gymnastics party or you get at one of the private places. Or we're just letting them loose on the equipment and that is the party?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The county should at least calculate the cost of the program (including things like utilities and maintenance for the facility, but not building it as that is more akin to turf fields at this point) and ask the families if they can lay the higher fees. The slash and burn budgeting is going to bite them, and they better not tear down or otherwise use a facility purpose-built for gymnastics for storage or just close it. That would be a waste of already-spent money!

The county also needs to hold itself accountable for fully staffing and utilizing the space if the expectation is to recover fees. Private gyms do things like host birthday parties for a fee to bring in revenues. If the county doesn't have qualified coaches for more classes, they need to do things to fill the facility that don't require highly qualified coaches (e.g., 4 yo birthday parties that can be led by someone who is good with kids, but not a gymnastics coach).

The County is supposed to turn into a birthday party provider to subsidize kids doing gymnastics? Whut.

The county already allows private rentals of fields, pavilions, and rec center rooms for parties. My kid’s travel team pays fees to use the Barcroft indoor baseball facilities. DPR offers party rental packages that include bounce houses and skate nights. You can book parts of the aquatics center for private events. So it’s not like the county hasn’t already gotten into the birthday party business to subsidize activities.

And County staff run the parties at these places? That is what people are suggesting here.

Yes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The county should at least calculate the cost of the program (including things like utilities and maintenance for the facility, but not building it as that is more akin to turf fields at this point) and ask the families if they can lay the higher fees. The slash and burn budgeting is going to bite them, and they better not tear down or otherwise use a facility purpose-built for gymnastics for storage or just close it. That would be a waste of already-spent money!

The county also needs to hold itself accountable for fully staffing and utilizing the space if the expectation is to recover fees. Private gyms do things like host birthday parties for a fee to bring in revenues. If the county doesn't have qualified coaches for more classes, they need to do things to fill the facility that don't require highly qualified coaches (e.g., 4 yo birthday parties that can be led by someone who is good with kids, but not a gymnastics coach).

The County is supposed to turn into a birthday party provider to subsidize kids doing gymnastics? Whut.

The county already allows private rentals of fields, pavilions, and rec center rooms for parties. My kid’s travel team pays fees to use the Barcroft indoor baseball facilities. DPR offers party rental packages that include bounce houses and skate nights. You can book parts of the aquatics center for private events. So it’s not like the county hasn’t already gotten into the birthday party business to subsidize activities.

And County staff run the parties at these places? That is what people are suggesting here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not really whether demand is there. It’s should the county be doing it at all. I don’t really need to pay tax dollars so Larlas can take heavily subsidized gymnastics in prime County space that could be used to serve residents more broadly. Let alone subsidizing some kind of club gymnastics team. Who knew that was even a thing.

Private places will fill the gap eventually if the county stops doing it.

Barcroft also has baseball facilities. Should we do away with those? What about the many many soccer fields? The $$$ aquatics center and HS pools? Let’s just get rid of all youth programs so your precious tax dollars don’t have to support any of this. 🙄 Clearly we shouldn’t subsidize things you random poster don’t personally use.

I don't know the nature of the arrangement but GW paid for the upgrades to the baseball field and it's their home field and then can be used by other when not in use by them. Did the gymnastics team pay for all the improvements and equpment in the gym?

How many times is this going to come up. If individual groups want to use any of these spaces -a pool, a field, a gym, they share with others and participate in a process to rent or reserve the field or facility and pay a fee. The asset is managed by the County and shared by a wide group of people for multiple uses and it is widely available to all. This is DPR's role. Manage community assets for our recreational use. It is not their role to fund and run an elite gymanstics gym with equipment that is only needed and used by competitive gymnasts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So people don't get confused, it's important to point out those leos mentioned by the previous poster are NOT paid for by the county. Meet fees, coaching fees and all apparel are paid for by the families with athletes. These aren't coming out of your tax dollars.

As they should be! But people have said upthread the coaches are considered county employees. Are the families covering 100% of coaching costs? Are the families covering any of the cost of maintaining a gymnastics gym? Insurance?

It sounds like from those in the know that maintenance of these facilities is no small thing. The county can’t be renting out to everyone if they don’t have the staff to ensure the facilities and equipment are kept in 100% safe condition 100% of the time. There really is no comparison to any other type of facility.

The county doesn't provide parents with a breakdown of how our fees are used. How would we know? We pay fees to the county and fees to the parent association. Presumably APR applies the same methodology to set gymnastics fees as it does for other youth sports.

Just like Dynamic and YMCA, staff (not necessarily coaches) are present during rentals to make sure guests act appropriately. That's not an obstacle.

Are they checking to make sure the uneven bars and pads and other apparatus are in 100% safe condition at all times? County facility = county liability

They don't let kids on the advanced equipment during rentals. They have a set of low bars that kids can use safely.

When there were birthday parties, the party portion was held in the gymnastics mezzanine and the gymnastics portion was basically the same setup as preschool rec classes (without parents). It was staffed by gymnastics staff throughout the duration of the use of the gymnastics facility and it was during regular operating hours of Barcroft so facility staff were also in their normal roles.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So people don't get confused, it's important to point out those leos mentioned by the previous poster are NOT paid for by the county. Meet fees, coaching fees and all apparel are paid for by the families with athletes. These aren't coming out of your tax dollars.

As they should be! But people have said upthread the coaches are considered county employees. Are the families covering 100% of coaching costs? Are the families covering any of the cost of maintaining a gymnastics gym? Insurance?

It sounds like from those in the know that maintenance of these facilities is no small thing. The county can’t be renting out to everyone if they don’t have the staff to ensure the facilities and equipment are kept in 100% safe condition 100% of the time. There really is no comparison to any other type of facility.

The county doesn't provide parents with a breakdown of how our fees are used. How would we know? We pay fees to the county and fees to the parent association. Presumably APR applies the same methodology to set gymnastics fees as it does for other youth sports.

Just like Dynamic and YMCA, staff (not necessarily coaches) are present during rentals to make sure guests act appropriately. That's not an obstacle.

What are the fees? As I mentioned upthread, I know AAC is about half to a third of the cost (or even less) to comparable competitive swimming clubs. All of which charge separately for meets and gear beyond basic fees.