Click this link to optimize Open Arlington for screen readers Skip to Content
An official website of Arlington County government
Open Arlington Logo

Is the fee structure for Arlington’s gymnastics and aquatics teams appropriate?

No Responses On Forum

0
<20

0

0 responses
<20
2
20-29

2

2 responses
Tap to select
20-29
5
30-39

5

5 responses
Tap to select
30-39
19
40-49

19

19 responses
Tap to select
40-49
7
50-59

7

7 responses
Tap to select
50-59
2
60-69

2

2 responses
Tap to select
60-69
0
70-79

0

0 responses
70-79
2
>79

2

2 responses
Tap to select
>79
39
Age not shared

39

39 responses
Tap to select
Age not shared
Show all statements

No responses on forum from users within the age group of <20


Are you an Arlington County resident?

No responses yet.

If not Arlington, Virginia, of what city/ state are you a resident?

No responses yet.

Which of the following describes your personal experience and familiarity with Arlington County's DPR gymnastics and aquatics teams and classes? Please check all that apply.

No responses yet.

Do you support modifying the budgeting process so that gymnastics and aquatics team participation fees are based on the expected number of participants and direct costs with the goal of recovering no more than 100 percent of those costs?

No responses yet.

Do you support DPR assessing a surcharge for non-residents who belong to Arlington County's aquatics and gymnastics teams?

No responses yet.

If you answered yes to the previous question, what level of surcharge would you support?

No responses yet.

Would you support DPR setting an annual cap on the surcharge?

No responses yet.

If you answered yes to the previous question, what annual cap level would you support?

No responses yet.

Would you support DPR reviewing and adjusting this cap as needed to correct for inflation and other economic factors every five years?

No responses yet.

Is there anything else you'd like to say about the fees and surcharges associated with Arlington County's gymnastics and aquatics teams?

No responses yet.

Beginning in January, the work group will take stock of the operating model for these teams. Do you have any input you would like to provide on this topic at this time?

No responses yet.

Is there anything else you would like to add?

No responses yet.

Survey Feedback: How clear and understandable were the questions asked and options provided in this survey?

No responses yet.

Your answers will NOT be saved

This is the form that was used to collect responses. It's here so you can try it and see how it worked when the topic was open.

The topic is now closed, and anything you enter into this form will not be saved.

Part : 1 Demographic Information
Choose 1 option
* required
Choose at most 4 options

 

Part 2: Participation Fees for Arlington County's Gymnastics and Aquatics Teams

The Arlington County Board adopted a “cost recovery model” in 2010 to set targets for registration and participation fees for programs operated or sponsored by DPR, including these teams. The model stipulates that DPR must recover a higher percentage of costs when a program’s benefits are more individualized.

For Arlington's gymnastics and aquatics teams, DPR seeks to recover at least 85 percent but not more than 100 percent of direct program costs (such as personnel and equipment), including an allocated portion of DPR’s overhead (such as marketing, registration, and scheduling).

DPR currently calculates participation fees (for these teams and for other programs) by determining the minimum enrollment needed to run the program. It determines annual fees by dividing the total costs to be recovered by the minimum level of enrollment.

However, actual enrollment has typically exceeded the minimum level. Thus, revenue from team participation fees has generally exceeded the maximum 100 percent recovery level. DPR returns excess revenue to Arlington County's general fund.

The work group determined that the team participation fees are higher than the average fees charged by comparable facilities in the DC Metro area.

Therefore, the work group is considering recommending that DPR adjust the way it calculates these fees by:  

  1. Determining participation fees based on the expected (versus minimum) number of team participants; and
  2. Establishing a collaborative fee-setting process that involves DPR, team coaches, and representatives from the teams' parent associations.

If adopted, these adjustments would be likely to reduce participation fees, bringing the amount charged for gymnastics team membership closer to levels seen across our region and potentially reducing total fee revenue in the short term.

Choose 1 option
* required

 

Part 3: Surcharges Paid by Families of Non-Resident Members of Arlington County's Gymnastics and Aquatics Teams in Addition to Participation Fees

According to DPR, the non-resident surcharges have no quantitative basis and are not tied to any specific policy objective. Surcharges for non-resident team members are not uniform and currently range from 12 to 46 percent of the individual’s participation fee. This translates into a cost of $135-$865 for gymnastics team members and $135-$908 for the aquatics team members.

The work group supports a more uniform approach for setting non-resident surcharges. After reviewing non-resident surcharges of comparable county- and municipal-run gymnastics and aquatics programs in neighboring jurisdictions, it found that some levied surcharges of between 10 and 20 percent, some cap these surcharges at a specific dollar amount, and some nearby programs do not collect any non-resident surcharge at all.

The work group is considering recommending that DPR:

1. Establish a uniform surcharge for non-resident athletes of 10 percent.
2. Cap surcharge payments on an annual basis at $200.

As a result, individuals’ surcharges would still vary depending on their participation fee but none of them would rise above $200 a year. In contrast, the prior proposal to adopt a uniform 50 percent surcharge beginning in the 2015 fiscal year would have resulted in surcharges as high as $2,530 for some non-resident team members.

The work group is also considering a recommendation that surcharges be reviewed every five years and the cap could be adjusted based on economic factors.

Choose 1 option
* required
Choose at most 1 option
Choose 1 option
* required
Choose at most 1 option
Choose at most 1 option

 

Part 4 – What Else, What's Ahead, and Your Feedback

 

Choose at most 1 option
Check out our guidelines for civility

Fields marked with * are required