Dirk Richwine knew he had a problem when his grounds managers began complaining of long streaks of torn-up turf in the parks of Henderson, Nevada. It didn’t take much sleuthing to determine the cause of the damage: Unauthorized athletic trainers had their boot-camp customers running sprints in harnesses connected to truck tires. It was great workout, and participants enjoyed the challenge, but the groundskeepers who had to repair the damage were less than thrilled.

When Richwine, who works as recreation superintendent for Henderson’s Parks and Recreation Department, took stock of the situation, he realized truck tires were just part of the problem. Boot-camp operators were using pavilions and ramadas as staging areas for their classes. The instructors tied rope netting to the roofs of ramadas for climbing drills and used picnic tables as step-up platforms for cardio training. As park employees considered all of the problems associated with unauthorized and unregulated use of public parks and facilities—loss of revenue, wear and tear, displaced citizens, etc.—one risk stood out most prominently: legal liability and responsibility.

“We were getting complaints from the public, and when we observed what they were doing, we found it to be dangerous,” Richwine says.

With a population of 270,000, Henderson is comparable in size to Buffalo, New York, and Newark, New Jersey. And like municipalities of all sizes, Henderson shares similar concerns over rogue operators in its parks. While boot camps have become the face of unauthorized private vendors, other groups and individuals pose the same set of problems. Sports clinics, sports leagues, and coaches taking over tennis and basketball courts top the list. But it’s the recent phenomenon of boot camps that really got the attention of park and recreation managers.

A Google search of “boot camps” in any city will turn up a wide range of businesses varying in size and sophistication. Many even post calendars and schedules on their websites listing parks as class sites. Some, of course, are formally affiliated with park agencies. But a recent query of NRPA members through the association’s NRPA Connect online network produced a torrent of responses from agencies upset with unauthorized park vendors.

Some, like Henderson’s parks agency, have fashioned regulatory programs that manage to accommodate private vendors without hurting the everyday experience of their citizens.

Others, however, tell Parks & Recreation that unregulated vendors often flaunt posted regulations governing park usage.

But the agencies with successful programs say ample measures can be taken by any park system to achieve equitable accommodations.

“We know that trainers are using our parks in Morris County, New Jersey,” says Denise Lanza, assistant deputy director of the county’s parks commission. “We would like to get them to do so, which would include a fee. But we can’t always connect with them to let them know this is required.”

For Lanza, the issue goes beyond rules and regulations. Trainers can use Morris County parks, but they need to pay in order to do so.

“It seems unethical to use publically supported space for purely commercial gain,” Lanza says. “It’s certainly a way to keep operating costs down when you don’t have to rent an indoor space.”

A Victim of Its Own Success
Palisades Park in Santa Monica, California, may well epitomize the impact of rogue exercise classes and fitness boot camps. The narrow, verdant strip of parkland is framed by the Pacific Ocean on one side and the City of Santa Monica on the other three, which in turn is bordered by the City of Los Angeles. Even without boot camps, Palisades Park has all the users it can handle. But when exercise classes and boot camps began disrupting the activities of regular park users, the city’s Department of Community and Cultural Services had to take action.

Until recently, the park had a “rogue” vendor for the past 10 years, a yoga instructor tolerated by the city in the absence of problems. Then came a wave of classes that crowded out the regular users, particularly residents of the condos, apartments, and hotels across the street.

Karen Ginsberg, the city’s director of community and cultural services, describes the National Historic Landmark park as intended for walkers, joggers, parents with strollers, and picnickers.

Ginsberg found a sympathetic ear with Santa Monica’s Recreation and Parks Commission, and her department undertook a one-week usage survey of Palisades Park last October. The survey recorded usage between 6 a.m. and 7 p.m. for the week.

“We wanted to see where the classes are, the types of activities going on, how big the classes were, and what equipment was being used,” Ginsberg says. “It’s not that we hadn’t been out there before, but we wanted to do it in a systematic way.”

They learned a lot.

Seventy-three group classes and 74 semi-private and private classes operated during the survey week. The highest concentration occurred at the north end of the park. Seventy-five percent of the group classes and 82 percent of the private and semi-private classes took place between 7 a.m. and 1 p.m. Some classes had as many as 40 participants.

Ginsberg learned that between 90 and 95 percent of the classes used some type of equipment: mats, bench presses, kettle bells, cones, ropes, boxes, and signage. Some classes attached equipment to trees, which is prohibited at all times.

Ginsberg’s department is currently compiling a set of regulations to deal with unauthorized vendors. They’ve checked out the situation in other cities to assess their approaches, and her department is also receiving guidance from elsewhere in Santa Monica’s city government.

She stresses that they’re seeking balance in their approach. “We want health and fitness, and we want to accommodate the needs of all users,” she says. “There’s a lot of consensus for regulating fitness groups.” Even the vendors are asking for guidance, she says. “They want to know what they can and can’t do.”

If all goes according to plan, Santa Monica’s city council will take action by mid-March, and any regulations it approves can be in effect by the start of the city’s fiscal year on July 1.

Rights Versus Privileges in Henderson
In Henderson, Nevada, the issue came to a head after a slow buildup of situations.

“We had a boot-camp person who felt it was her right to run her business in a public park and that we were impacting her business—she couldn’t understand that the park was for the public good. She had a truck and a trailer that she would park lengthwise in a parking lot where we had a spray pad,” Richwine recalls. “It was just crowding the park, and park users were getting upset because she would do whatever she wanted. So we had to put all this infrastructure together.”

That was when Richwine delegated Michele Howard, the department’s recreation coordinator, to produce a comprehensive set of regulations and an application process for private vendors to complete in order to do business in the city’s parks. The guidelines clearly state that “any Commercial for-profit business that is interested in using a city park as a location for delivery of a program or service is required to obtain a Commercial Fitness Rental Permit.”

Applicants must pay a $25 application fee to be considered for three- and six-month slots, which cost $300.00 and $600.00 respectively. They must agree to a 24-point array of regulations, including:
• A city license
• $1 million in liability insurance that must also include the city as being insured
• Proof of good standing with Nevada’s secretary of state

If an agency’s goal is universal community health and wellness, then boot camps could be said to complement that mission. One problem, says Tom O’Rourke, director of Charleston County, South Carolina’s Parks and Recreation Commission, is that unlicensed vendors operate in a vacuum.

“When a renegade person puts on a boot camp in a public park, no one knows but the attendees,” O’Rourke says. “If a municipal recreation department puts on the same program and sells its benefits, it gives the municipal department credibility within their community and makes elected people feel like they are making their communities healthier.

“A department-wide health and wellness initiative puts your park in a different light,” he continues. “The 6 a.m. boot camps that are independent are usually put on by fitness people trying to make money—not that there’s anything wrong with that. But if a boot camp is just one utility that gets you to a higher goal of total fitness, it could be better.”

A Winning Marriage in Reno
That’s a goal Andy Bass, recreation manager for Reno, Nevada’s Parks, Recreation, and Community Services, has had since his college days. Once he got established in Reno’s parks and recreation program, he became aware of unregulated vendors. Like O’Rourke, Bass saw advantage in the greater good that could be achieved if private vendors partnered with the city to provide fitness programs. In fact, Bass and his colleagues preempted private fitness providers by enlisting them in community programs.

“Our program is different,” Bass says. “Our goal was to promote healthy lifestyles and ways to fight obesity in the community.
“We went to fitness centers in our city to have them offer free fitness classes,” he continues. “They said ‘What?!’”

He then explained to them his goal of community fitness and identifying partners to accomplish this at zero cost to the community. In 2012, Bass had found enough private fitness clubs and centers to send trainers to four outdoor classes in Reno parks and four indoor classes when the weather turned cold. Some trainers conducted the classes as part of their jobs for their companies while others volunteered their time, frequently accepting small donations from participants.

Bass describes the venture as successful for both the participants and the hosting clubs. Participants, who come from all demographic groups, have shown demonstrable improvement in fitness and weight loss. The fitness clubs, on the other hand, get exposure through television and newspaper coverage, which has brought them new customers.

“It’s a true partnership,” Bass says.

However, the most difficult part in the Reno program was finding partners, he admits. Once they had them, the program went smoothly. The long-term challenge, on the other hand, is the free nature of the classes. “Getting the word out takes marketing,” Bass says. “Everyone who hears about it says ‘Wow!’”

He believes any agency can emulate the Reno program. It takes very little staff time—“just me,” he says. “It pretty much takes care of itself.”

Legal Issues
James Kozlowski is an attorney and associate professor in the School of Recreation, Health, and Tourism at George Mason University in Virginia. He also writes “Law Review,” a monthly column for Parks & Recreation. His column in this issue (page 22) explores the case law surrounding a ban on public smoking in parks. Kozlowski sees parallels between smoking bans and restricting unauthorized use of parks.

“The same reasoning [banning public smoking in parks] could apply to commercial and unauthorized/unpermitted coaching/sports activities in parks,” Kozlowski says. “Just like public smoking, public agencies are certainly not ‘powerless,’ and such practices should not be tolerated, because they allow private entities to put public parkland to unauthorized uses. Such unauthorized uses need to be defined.”

Agencies that feel stymied or powerless in dealing with unauthorized businesses should reconsider their situation, Kozlowski believes. “If, indeed ‘many simply tolerate the practice or feel powerless to enforce what regulations they have,’ they are not doing their job to provide public recreational opportunities, not unfettered and unregulated use of parkland by commercial or private sports entities or individuals,” he says. “There are numerous examples of ordinances, regulations, and policies that define unauthorized and/or unpermitted uses and activities. Such policies should be certainly written to avoid claims of arbitrary and ad hoc enforcement,” Kozlowski continues. “And, such regulations should include reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions not targeted to a particular suspect class (e.g., race, creed, color, religion, national origin).”

See examples of case law surrounding this topic.

Phil Hayward is a Virginia-based writer and former editor of Parks & Recreation.