Denver contemplates fee to work out in city parks

[RblDiver]

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2013/07/13/workout-groups-may-have-to-pay-to-use-city-parks/

I have to admit, I'm somewhat torn about my thoughts on this one. On the one hand, it's a public park, why shouldn't it be used?

But on the other, I do feel that commercial enterprises should pay a fee (the business, not the users, though yes in the end the cost'd be passed to them). Otherwise it's like they're getting a form of a subsidy, unduly enriching themselves off taxpayer money, etc.

(Plus, I imagine a large number of the people doing so are yuppies anyway, so hit 'em in the wallet! lol).

What do ya'll think?

[SuperiorDG]

First off Denver sucks and I would not go to one of their parks, too many people. I once lived in the Wash park hood and that park gets pretty damn crowed as it is. Second, if you run one of these businesses out of your house and use the park as your gym then why not charge a fee? This is in a way is unfair computation to gyms in the area that pay rent on their gyms. Besides, some of those not so hot mommas with those strollers, walking side by side and yapping their gums, really clog up the paths.

[def90]

A commercial enterprise using public property to make money has to pay a fee.. if that wasn't the case why bother setting up a legitimate storefront when you can park a cart in a park for free? Yes they should pay, the fee that the city is asking for may be a little steep though.

[Delfuego]

Sounds like more taxes to me, from a city that just pisses money down the drain... [fyou]

[Ah Pook]

Forest Service requires permits and fees for using their land.

If I ride my bike on FS land it is free. If I'm leading tours they want their cut.

[Dave_L]

Everyone has to pay the piper.

[SA Friday]

The parks are already paid for through taxes. This is just a tax hike of another color.

[WETWRKS]

The liberals have never seen a tax they didn't like.

As for fees...they have already paid for it. In their taxes. Pretty soon they will try charging an entrance fee to all parks.

What a bunch of garbage.

[Stone83]

Yet another reason to NOT live in the city limits of Denver....

[Irving]

Not upset* about this. Public areas are not provided to businesses as money making avenues.

*Not in concept anyway. I haven't read the article. Since Denver is involved, I'm sure there is some aspect of this that will piss me off.

[WETWRKS]

I see no reason people shouldn't be allowed to make $ in a park. Next they will want to charge a fee to everyone who brings their dog to the parks because you may be a professional dog walker. Then everyone who takes photos in a park because you may be a professional photographer. Then...

[spongejosh]

If you think it's wrong to charge a fitness class to use the park, would you be ok with food carts, pot stands and fake purse/sunglasses stands being put up in parks for free?

[WETWRKS]

If you think it's wrong to charge a fitness class to use the park, would you be ok with food carts, pot stands and fake purse/sunglasses stands being put up in parks for free?

Anything that has a stand/cart has to have a special license and they have limits where they are allowed to set up. Doesn't apply to this.

[spongejosh]

What if the park is just full of people walking around selling purses and sunglasses like Washington DC? I'm sure at one time they didn't need a permit for a cart either and went through this same process.

[Gman]

Who owns the park, the people or the government empowered by the people? Who is going to check if people using the park are residents of the locality who pay taxes or may be from another area to charge the non-residents a fee?

Next they'll be pulling a Boulder and will be looking to charge non-residents a fee to use their roads?

Where does it end, when every aspect of our lives is controlled by some government authority?

[mtnrider]

I had some family in town a month or so ago and they wanted to see Red Rocks. So I took them down on a Saturday or Sunday morning and was disgusted that the whole place had been turned into a personal gym for several hundred people. They just wanted to walk around and enjoy the beauty of the place but every where you turned we thought we were at Globo-Gym.

Edit: Most of the work outs appeared to be run/organized so my 2 cents if they are running there gym and making money at the parks they should be paying

[ben4372]

If they do this they sure as shit better start regulating bicycles. Testing, safety inspections, insurance. I don't want a bike with no insurance and bad brakes hitting a child.

[Ronin13]

Just FYI to those who do any "boot camps" at Red Rocks... that's owned by Denver Parks. That's all I really have to say, as what I'm thinking has already been stated.

[Monky]

For those of you who have never done a workout in the park... Red rocks or whatever... A lot of them are free. Granted it usually does drum up business for the trainer/gym/box but still.

Basically they want people to pay more for the joy of being healthy.

All of you guys bitching and saying good can eat a bag full of dicks. You're as bad as the fudds with gun control.


Sent by a free-range electronic weasel, with no sense of personal space.

[RonMexico]

I honestly don't see a problem charging larger private fitness groups. I do workout regularly .... 5+ days a week and it chaps my ass when a group occupies too much space or when I approach them and ask how long they will be using a certain area.The rude reply from the instructor is something like; I have 3 classes today for the next 4 hrs.

Like others have said its the cost of running a business

[bogie]

They sound like squatters. They should rent a space or get a permit like everybody else.

[davsel]

Anything that has a stand/cart has to have a special license and they have limits where they are allowed to set up. Doesn't apply to this.
From the article:
“A lot of these groups really are businesses that provide their goods and services in the park,” JeffGreenhttp://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/icon1.png (http://denver.cbslocal.com/2013/07/13/workout-groups-may-have-to-pay-to-use-city-parks/#) with Denver Parks and Recreation said. “If they don’t have a permit, they’re kind of breaking the law.”

Apparently it does apply.

[WETWRKS]

From the article:
“A lot of these groups really are businesses that provide their goods and services in the park,” JeffGreenhttp://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/icon1.png (http://denver.cbslocal.com/2013/07/13/workout-groups-may-have-to-pay-to-use-city-parks/#) with Denver Parks and Recreation said. “If they don’t have a permit, they’re kind of breaking the law.”

Apparently it does apply.

There is a big difference between paying a one time fee to get a license to operate a cart on a street corner and:


Now city council is considering adopting a permit and fee structure. Under it the cost for one 90-minute session would range from $4.50 to $32.50 depending on the park, season and time of day for groups of 25 people or less.

Moreover...who is going to monitor this?

And where do we draw the line? If I offer to pay you to teach me to shoot a pistol and we go on public land should you have to pay a fee on that? What about teaching me to ride a horse on public land? I mentioned Photography earlier in the thread...anyone taking photos need to be taxed because they might make money off them.

I know many daycares that use public parks to entertain the kids...should they start getting hit with fees because they are using the park as part of a business?

The government isn't there to make $ off every aspect of our lives. At least it SHOULDN'T be there to make $ off every aspect of our lives. Public land is there for everyone to use. And if they make money off it so be it. We need to get away from the idea that the government is there to make money off everything around them.

[Jer]

Clever way to word a tax on being healthy.

[SamuraiCO]

it's progressive policies biting the progressives in the ass again. They hate to be left out of any activity they can tax and control. And thise dimwits can't believe those they voted into power want their pound of flesh. Just like the FDA coming after people who want unpastorized milk and milk products, but those people helped grow our Gov to the size it is and now it runs over everyone.

Nope, the park is paid for and budgeted. There is no additional cost to the activities. No security needed. The city is just looking for their vic.

[newracer]

I am kind of torn on this one. However I am leaning towards that idea that most of the people that enroll in these classes are probably residents of Denver and already pay for the park so they shouldn't pay again.

[Dave_L]

They aren't charging the individuals even though the cost is going to trickle down. They're charging the business owner. The tax payers don't pay for my office space. No one is trying to charge the individual that wants to go work out at the park. It's not a tax on "being healthy". It's a fee to use a space to operate a business/use the park for more than just your individual use like your taxes charge you for. You have to pay money to "rent" a pavilion at most parks. Why? If we already pay, we should complain about those fees too. After all, no added security/cost to the city. You're just using the park as it was intended.

[RblDiver]

I am kind of torn on this one. However I am leaning towards that idea that most of the people that enroll in these classes are probably residents of Denver and already pay for the park so they shouldn't pay again.

Same reason why I'm a bit torn. But on the other hand, having commercial classes there increases wear and tear beyond the point where it'd be if they weren't being held. Sort of like if you have a public park where people walk every now and then, fine, not much use. But suddenly have a football team practice there regularly, and suddenly it'd be more torn up and require additional maintenance to keep it the way it was.

If anything, it's the commercial aspect which'd drive me to say go for it. (Well, that and I'm in FoCo, not Denver :P lol)

[Snowman78]

My wife does boot camps at a park, but she does it for free.

[sabot_round]

If the classes/workouts or whatsoever are for free, why charge the person offering his services? If it's for profits, why not? The problem is...how do you enforce it? That is a question for our "illustrious" elected leaders to answer.

[Snowman78]

BTW: If anyone wants to join us for the boot camps, feel free to let me know. We meet on Tue nights at 6:30pm at a park in Thornton (136th and Holly) Free, No BS or trying to sell anything. My wife's hobby is fitness and she loves to do this shit. We just started a new 8 weeks program.

[centrarchidae]

I'm not totally opposed to a fee for using public parks for for-profit activites.

On the other hand, I am morally opposed to Denver Excise and License and every single f***ing thing that those f***ing people do, including breathing. I have to deal with them, professionally, and they mainly hire the people who were too damn dumb or power-trippy to get hired at TSA.

DE&L can choke on a sockful of male genitalia.

[Gman]

More money going from the private sector into the government sector is really going to help us citizens how?