City Gym

As I watched the replay of last week's Folsom City Council meeting on cable I noted that the Council had voted to provide direction to staff to apply for a grant to help in the funding of a $4 - 5 million City Gym. I am opposed to using tax dollars for such purposes; especially in these times of Local City cutbacks in services caused by the reduction of VLF car tax and other revenue. California is in a severe budget crisis caused by overspending and reduced tax revenue and yet the City wants to build a City Gym that will not only unfairly compete with the 5 or 6 fitness related businesses established within the City; but, will divert scarce tax dollars to building a permanent memorial to Steve Miklos (Current City Mayor).

I would be interested in knowing if there is a consensus of Folsom City Tax Payers who are opposed to the tax subsidized construction and ongoing maintenance of a City Gym and would like to organize business and citizen opposition to this plan.

Agreed!! City Council is making another bad move. Miklos pushed the swimming complex through, with the result of about a 300K annual deficit.

City leased park ground for a private gym. Why should the city go in competition to a organization that is leasing from the city for the same purpose.

Ernie Sheldon wants four gym's in the city. We now have 37 parks and with the possible loss of VLF monies how can we carry such a financial burden of upkeep and maintence of these facilities?

Does Miklos want to bankrupt the city, with all the fat pay raises, pension funds, medical funds etc. two or three assistant city managers, all pushed through in secret.

I can't agree with those who think the acquatic center and parks are luxuries, just like the proposed gym. The park acreage is required in the city's general plan and is there for a reason. As the population grows, people need someplace besides their backyard to enjoy open space and fresh air. Kids need places to play ball, other than the street. The pool was promised for something like ten years and only recently became a reality. All decent communities have a community pool. Not everybody can afford Broadstone or a backyard pool. The library is also important. There is no private counterpart and again, it serves a populace that would otherwise not have access to books and computers. Not everyone in Folsom has a pc. And the school libraries close at 3:30 or 4:00, some ridiculous hour, probably because of the expense of staffing. I'm also biased in favor of facilities serving young people. Kids, especially teens, are more prone to get into trouble if there aren't fun, healthy activities right here in Folsom.

The gym, however, is completely unnecessary. Kids can use school facilities, adults can join private gyms. There are so many of them that there's one for everyone's budget. City's are supposed to provide essential services that aren't readily available in the private sector--not optional private recreation.

On the other hand, perhaps we could afford a gym if we trimmed down the personnel budget; salaries, pension, etc. How many bureaucrats would have to be canned to fund one gym, two gyms? [that's not a math question, but a rhetorical one.]

Hey good point Val....

Does anybody have a handle on what it costs in personel $$$ for the City Manager's office.... ?

Is anyone seriously considering a "city" gym?---------when after more than 10 years a library is still being HASSLED? And------with the state deficit bringing problems to all of us? The fire station hdqs. bldg. has a great gym in it, and that building is now going to be for public use, INCLUDING the gym. Also, the 24 hr. Fitness gym is fairly cheap, I hear! GET REAL PEOPLE!!!

City gym hmmm....... This will be the first I see anywhere. Doable?

Since my initial post on the City Gym I have been spreading word that Steve Miklos is trying to kick start his project to build this permanent memorial to himself. I've received nothing but negative comments about this planned project so far. I've also contacted 90% of the Fitness related businesses in Folsom and they knew nothing about the effort to build this City Gym. All of these businesses were opposed; naturally, since this tax subsidized facility would provide unfair competition to the Fitness related businesses in the City. A few businesses asked me what support did I need to further get the word out to oppose this wasteful spending of scarce tax dollars.

Please help in sending a clear message to those on the City Council that we don't want our tax dollars spent on a City Gym. I'll continue to gather opposition. Don't let the City blind side us like they did on the Skate Park and the BMX track!

Give us the emails and we will send out messages.

folsomBlondie ... I'll post the City Council Email addresses as soon as I collect them.

FolsomFats .... I researched your point on the 300K annual deficit for the swimming complex. The following was taken directly from the City's Parks and Rec Budget Summary for Fiscal Year 2003-04.

Aquatics ...

Expenditures - $1,093,488
Program Revenue - $647,090

General Fund (Deficit) - $446,398

This projected deficit is actually greater than the actuals for Fiscal year 2002-03! So .. the deficit for the Aquatics Program is GROWING LARGER!

I suspect that the City Gym (if built) will operate a significant deficit as well. Thank you Mr. Miklos!

Mayor Steve Miklos wants a City Gym. If I were a betting person, I BET HE GETS IT.

We have talked on this net before. Well if one person, the mayor, wants it then the rest of the city council should vote for it too!!!! Right?? WRONG

I don't think so.

I or my family will never use one and I am sure there are a lot more people out there that do not want their tax dollars going to a GYM.

Since when are gyms different than ball fields or swimming pools? To play basketball or volleyball you need a gym. To swim you need a pool. To play softball or soccer you need appropriate fields. While one big pool may serve the city well, in order to have youth and adult sports programs, multiple fields/gyms are required (only 10 people can play basketball on a court at one time). That's why we have dozens of softball fields. Have any of you tried to reserve a gym in town? It's nearly impossible in the winter (I've been trying for several months to get one for a basketball game). As for the competition with the private sector argument, there are now two private basketball courts in Folsom (Broadstone and 24-hour), and soon to be a couple more at the Jack Kemp Park facility. At peak times, those courts are always full, and you have to be a member to use them. The "you can join a cluib for those facilities" argument is a slippery slope. If park facilities, including pools, ball fields and courts are not within the realm of city services, then what next? Private trash pick up. Private security for every neighboprhood. Heck, who needs public schools? They just compete with the private schools out there! What differentiates desirable communities like Folsom from the rest of sprawlburbia is quality of life ammenities, and parks and recreation facilities are near the top of the list. And similarly, since when are park facilities like the pool supposed to make money (or even break even)? That's what taxes are for, and that's why we've got every big box retailer and car dealership on earth in town, so we can cash in on the sales tax and have better services than Orangevale.

The thinking that Government should be and do everything for everybody is what caused the budget crisis that makes this State the laughing stock of the entire nation. I enjoy launching models rockets. Does this mean that the City should construct and maintain a remote area where I can launch my rockets? How about sky diving? Let's see what happens if I try for a landing in a City Park. The police would escort me to the nearest police station! Perhaps the City should construct and maintain an area where I can touch down after each jump!

I have lived in a number of communities in a number of States; and believe it or not, park and recreation facilities are constructed by Developers and maintained by the neighborhoods through association fees. Government has no involvment. This is the way things should be! Lets eliminate all of those park facility development fees that are imposed on the Builders and pass the savings to those who are purchasing the homes. Then maybe the $20,000 impact fees would be reduced and provide more affordable housing for people who have been priced out of the market!

BTW .. What's wrong with privatizing trash collection? It's done in many communities throughout this country very successfully! Then there's the public school system ... well ... that's a subject for another topic on this board!

For those who want to express their opposition to the City Gym here's the Email addresses to the City Council taken directly from the City's web site!

Steve Miklos themayor@folsom.ca.us
Eric King eric@ericking.org
Kerri Howell corrprincess@ardennet.com
Andy Morin andy@themorins.com
Jeff Starsky jstarsky@folsom.ca.us

Let's tell the City Council that we don't want public funds used for a City Gym!

They are going to build a city GYM (period). All I can say is that I hope they charge each person using it, either as a person, a group, or whatever.

There is going to be a lot of upkeep costs on a building like an enclosed gym. They are going to have to pay people to work in the gym, plus heating, air conditioning, water, all these extra costs.

The people that use it should pay pay pay.

What burns me is that we have been told that we do not have the funds to finish the parks in Folsom but today in the Bee it states that our Parks and Rec. dept. have $1.25 million dollars to put torwards the city gym!?!?!?!?! What gives?

The GYM has been in the city plans for some time now. You are right, where is the rest of the money coming from? They want some large corporations to kick in is what I am hearing.

Maybe name it INTEL GYM or MCI GYM. Who knows!!!!

Just make the people that use it PAY