An Exercise in Liability

New Lakeside Exercise Equipment
Those regularly visiting "their" Lakeside Park will have noticed the new exercise equipment (black) plunked into bald mounds of cedar chips - with verdant growth walkers were used to removed except for the odd tree, and some obligatory rocks added.

This across from the "old" exercise equipment (yellow) - now promptly and conveniently labeled a "liability". Supposedly an insurance risk - thus needing to be removed! Even though - despite the findings of Public Works experts - there is nothing wrong with any of this equipment, except moving parts should be greased and nuts tightened periodically. Basic maintenance. Which - in the past - only happened on users' specific insistence!

Regardless - yellow machines with moving parts currently operate smoothly, particularly after being lubed by rain.
Having used most of this equipment regularly since its installation - I know. How many - if any! - from Public Works and City Hall as such have - who knows.

While the yellow equipment allows for a well-rounded work-out - its effectiveness increased by added reps - the black equipment does not. For instance - doing basic crunches for abdominal strength - elementary! - is out: there is no black bench for that purpose.

It would have been reasonable to survey concerns - going from yellow to black - of those using the yellow sets - before arbitrarily deciding on their black replacements: but this was not done. 

Neither - to my knowledge - did the previous Council (publicly) approve this. 
But should have. Or not. 

Therefore two questions present themselves:
Who - single-handed - originated/implemented the black project?
and
Why?

Costs
According to Colin McClure, the City's Chief Financial Officer (CFO):
"The City was successful in our application with CBT for this project receiving $65K.
The budget was set for $130K - it appears we will be over by approximately $13K ..."

So - if the whole project costs (about) $143K, and the CBT contributes 65K: Nelson tax-payers get stuck with (about) 78K for exercise equipment which largely duplicates what we have (well-functioning and in a pleasant setting) already. 

It never fails to astound how much money there is at City Hall for vanity projects, while City streets and sidewalks present consistently growing real "liability" issues. 

The Liability Angle
With the general similarity between the yellow and the black - it stands to reason that possible liability-rules apply to both.
But - while the yellow equipment in its simple functionality presents little danger to users even with the most trying abuse - more significant black liability-coverage may be needed across the great cedar-chips divide.

Dangerous Black Equipment
4 machines present very real - while ignored by more experts - liability issues: because their use at any time, by anyone is dangerous! 

3 of them - too difficult for the park-purpose - would be more appropriate in a high-energy, supervised setting - with knowledgeable users wearing a lower-back-supporting weight-belt, the kind power-lifters usually wear: lifting-processes there and here being similar.

Since the average user - here clearly not identified - is not a pumped gym-rat: those behind the project might consider donating this too advanced equipment to the fire-hall or cop-shop.

These machines work with pressure against piston-resistance. While the resistance can be calibrated on a dial - proper body-alignment - focused on/coming from the lower back - is crucial with any calibration to prevent possible severe injury there. But the average user may not know about this. 
Dial-calibration does not allow for a user's specific needs/capacity: even the lowest setting must be difficult for many.

Instructional user-pics - up to 10 very small ones per/no words - face away from the hands-on user.
Go figure! Literally!

Many won't be aware of the danger in using these machines: the more resistance - the more dangerous, particularly because their design is awkward - thus using them is awkward to begin with.

The CFO says: "I did have Cathy Potkins, who is an expert in exercise and cardiac physiology with Interior Health help in the selection of equipment, and we had a recreation consultant assist as well."
Right!

While the CFO's explanations are given in first-person-singular - it is highly unlikely that he actually is the driving force behind the project, except for its financial aspects.
But Kevin Cormack, CAO, immediately comes to mind. He is the one exclaiming "Liability!" - to categorically shut down the topic - when it briefly comes-up in the last COW of the previous Council.

McClure continues: "I'm thinking, if we need to, we can add additional written guidance/instruction on site and/or have a few learning sessions, potentially with an instructor (volunteer) this spring/summer."

"We" probably don't need to and won't - until a serious accident between now and next spring/summer wakes up everybody real quick.

Clear - easily accessible/readable/absorbable - instruction must be part of each piece of equipment. But isn't! Instructional user-pics should be of women also. But aren't! Guided properly - anyone must be able to work-out how to use each set/machine safely by her/himself. 
If not - the set/machine shouldn't be there! 
Simple!

In contrast: the yellow - to be dumped - equipment - its use easy to work-out - with prominent written instructions/benefits an integral part of each set/machine - provides everything the black equipment doesn't.

The 4th machine in question is to test (improve?) the user's balance on a round, flat plate - 16" across, 12" off the ground - supported on a spring in its center from below. When one steps on this plate it wobbles in any direction - possibly greatly.
While there are 2 handles for holding on: one of two images provided shows a user simply standing on the plate - not holding on; the other has him standing on one leg - arms stretched out horizontally, also not holding on!
Any moisture, frost, snow or ice on the plate will keep it just about permanently slippery!
A nightmare in the making, particularly for unsupervised children and seniors not too steady on their feet to begin with.

Speaking of children. All sets/machines say: 13+ (age for users)! As if they care - particularly on Saturdays - with soccer played by hordes of those way under 13 across the cedar-chip wasteland, and many of them climbing unsupervised all over these sets/machines.
Because climb they must!
This should have been factored into the black planning-process - as crucial!

Council's Involvement
While this Council is not responsible for approving the project: it does inherit its consequences. Therefore - their involvement - specifically that of Councillors Renwick and Page, representing the City on the regional Recreation Commission - is appropriate at this point.

Opinions have to be voiced, decisions have to be made from the very beginning, because if Council(lors) won't step-up - somebody else will for them.
And take over soonish! For good (figure of speech) - period!

This User's Involvement
With degrees in physical fitness and gerontology, my work emphasized psycho-physiological well-being - mind/body - throughout the aging-process. While working for the San Francisco Department of Aging as ombudsman for the elderly, I also counseled on gerontological issues and taught exercise classes.

My observations here have value: based on academic knowledge, experience, concern - and common sense.

I see little of that anywhere in this black exercise set-up.




Image credits:
pinterest
fogofint



City Council
nelsoncouncil@nelson.ca

Colin McClure, CFO
cmcclure@nelson.ca

Kevin Cormack, CAO
kcormack@nelson.ca

Aimee Ambrosone, Director - Delivery of Benefits
aambrosone@cbt.org