Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion GroupsGeneral TopicsLow CarbWeightWatchers
WeightAdviser.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Weight Loss Forum / General Topics / May 2004

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Curves, Gyms, etc., a  question.

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Auntie Em - 09 May 2004 08:01 GMT
I have an acquaintance who has recently moved into my neighborhood from
someplace in California.  We were discussing "working out" the other day, as
he is something of a fitness buff, and I need to lose weight.

He told me where he lived in California that he would go to the gym at the
local highschool for free every day.  Apparently, the sports department of
the school was well funded (of course), and they had a spiffy exercise room
for the students.  He explained to me that he had approached the schools
principle stating that he was a tax payer and that he had paid for the
equipment and that he should be allowed to use it since, 75 percent of the
time, no students are using the equipment.

I thought this was a very interesting argument and something that I might
look into.  Has anybody else done this?

Em
Jarkat2002 - 09 May 2004 08:44 GMT
>I have an acquaintance who has recently moved into my neighborhood from
>someplace in California.  We were discussing "working out" the other day, as
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
>Em

I haven't.... but as a parent I would strongly object to unknown adults in the
school.

~Kat

"The early bird gets the worm, the second mouse gets the cheese."
Jeri - 09 May 2004 11:17 GMT
<snip>
> He told me where he lived in California that he would go to the gym
> at the local highschool for free every day.  Apparently, the sports
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> I thought this was a very interesting argument and something that I
> might look into.  Has anybody else done this?

I'm with Kat on this. Plus, as a taxpayer I'd strongly object to the
equipment being used by people that it wasn't purchased for. It doesn't
matter that the students don't use it 75% of the time. That means it won't
wear out as fast or need as much maintanance which is also paid for by tax
dollars. I'd also be concerned about the school's liability if something
were to happen.

If this is something you want to do I'd suggest approaching your school
district's continuing ed department to see if an adult education fitness
class could be set up or even possibly official open gym time. There would
be a fee but it would most likely be considerably less than a gym
membership.
Signature

Jeri
"Change is inevitable, except from vending machines."

Kasey - 09 May 2004 12:51 GMT
Greetings:

You seem to be posting from Germany. I can only speak for the United
States, and your post claims this occurred in California.

>>He told me where he lived in California that he would go to the gym at the
local highschool for free every day.  Apparently, the sports
department of
the school was well funded (of course), and they had a spiffy exercise
room
for the students.  He explained to me that he had approached the
schools
principle stating that he was a tax payer and that he had paid for the
equipment and that he should be allowed to use it since, 75 percent of
the
time, no students are using the equipment.<<
<<

That's a very old and specious argument.

In the United States, one can make that "claim" about any local, state
or federal facility -- the White House, the Pentagon,  City Hall. Yes,
taxpayers fund the facility, the equipment and the staffs' salaries,
but for the facility's stated purpose.

If that argument were valid, what would stop any taxpayer from using
the school's computers and phones to run a business after school is
out? Or the chemisty lab? Or the kitchen? Should the school nurse
treat any taxpayer off the street when she's not treating students?
Should one be allowed to ride on a school bus if there are seats
unoccupied by students?

Certainly, many schools and other public facilities make meeting space
and equipment available to groups, but usually for a fee and under
very controlled circumstances. And some well-equipped schools will
make exercise facilities, especially swimming pools, available to
certain segments of the local population, such as senior citizens,
again under very controlled circumstances.

But the claim has no basis in fact, law or reality. Think of the
liability issues alone that would arise, not to mention the wear and
tear, cleanup problems, security concerns and potential for vandalism,
theft and illicit activity.

As always, YMMV.

Kasey
365/266/???
JMA - 09 May 2004 14:47 GMT
> I have an acquaintance who has recently moved into my neighborhood from
> someplace in California.  We were discussing "working out" the other day, as
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
> Em

The weight room at our local H.S. is open to the public most evenings and
the indoor track is open early in the morning before school.  The pool is
open at some point when the swim teams and local swim club aren't
practicing.  It was one of the agreements made when they passed the
referendum to build the facilities.  The weight room is full of teenagers
and parents with their 10 year olds most every night so I prefer the gym.
It's less than $1 a day and the hours are more flexible.

Jenn
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2012 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.