News

Form Fitness told to leave after failing to pay rent

City orders gym to pay about $500,000 or vacate Bryant Street building

On Nov. 17. 2022, the city of Palo Alto issued a notice to Form Fitness to pay $500,000 or vacate the site at 445 Bryant St. Photo by Magali Gauthier.

After more than two decades in downtown Palo Alto, Form Fitness now appears to be entering its final stretch.

The gym, which is located at 445 Bryant St., has fallen behind in rent since the COVID-19 pandemic forced it to temporarily shutter in March 2020 and then reopen with new restrictions, including a mask requirement that prompted some users to stay away, gym owner Sassan Golafshan said. Business has never fully recovered, he said.

Form Fitness is hardly the only business that saw its revenues dwindle during the pandemic. Numerous establishments, including The Old Pro and Dan Gordon's in downtown and Antonio's Nut House and The Counter on California Avenue, closed during the pandemic. The gym is, however, in a unique situation. The gym's landlord is the city, which developed the two-story building next to the public garage in 2001 with the intention of using rent proceeds to support youth programs.

In 2004, the council selected Form Fitness as the tenant to occupy the building, bowing to popular demand and overruling a recommendation from city staff to select a restaurant called Saffron Club Restaurant, according to meeting minutes from that time. The gym, which at the time was occupying a smaller location on Forest Avenue, moved to Bryant Street shortly thereafter.

But the longstanding partnership between the city and Form Fitness turned acrimonious over the past year, as Golafshan repeatedly failed to make his rent payments and the balance grew to more than $1.3 million, according to Golafshan and the city. The City Council met numerous times this year in closed session to discuss the lease situation. It did not take any formal actions nor reach any resolutions that could preserve the agreement.

Help sustain the local news you depend on.

Your contribution matters. Become a member today.

Join

Things escalated last week, when the city issued Golafshan a 28-day notice to "pay or quit." The Nov. 17 notice, issued by the city's real property manager Sunny Tong, advised Golafshan that if he fails to pay $500,000 or vacate the premises, the city will commence legal proceedings against the gym, declare forfeiture of the lease and recover damages for each day that the gym remains occupied, as well as costs of lawsuit.

The notice pertains only to rent that has been due since December 2021, which totals $504,646 (the monthly rent went up from $41,163 per month to $43,301 in July). Of that amount, the gym paid a total of $13,350, leaving it with a balance of $491,296, according to the letter.

Golafshan does not dispute the charges, but he has argued both publicly and in a recent interview that the gym should not be blamed for the recent loss of revenue, which he maintains was caused by the pandemic and subsequent restrictions.

"The city is my landlord. The city is also my executioner," Golafshan said in an interview. "I don't understand how the city manager, the city attorney and everyone involved actually thinks this is something they can do to a Palo Alto resident and successful business owner."

Before the pandemic, he noted, he had never been late on any payments nor reneged on any commitments.

Stay informed

Get daily headlines sent straight to your inbox in our Express newsletter.

Stay informed

Get daily headlines sent straight to your inbox in our Express newsletter.

"Now, they're basically coming after me for money that I'm supposed to miraculously find," Golafshan said.

He is not the only person who wants Form Fitness to stick around in its downtown location. In recent weeks, resident Jaclyn Schrier has been circulating an online petition calling for the council to "save Form Fitness." The petition, which had accumulated 565 signatures as of Wednesday afternoon, urges the council to forgive Form Fitness all past due rent, fees and assessments. In exchange, the gym would provide 20% discounts to all city residents and employees as a public benefit. Going forward, the gym would pay the city rent totaling 15% of its gross sales rather than a fixed monthly amount under this arrangement.

Supporters also formed a group called Friends of Form Fitness and took out an ad seeking to get more signatures.

"With the imminent closing of Form, downtown Palo Alto will no longer have a full-service fitness facility with membership open to the public to meet our community's wellness needs during this time of great health concern," the petition states. "We, residents of Palo Alto and our closest neighbors, urge you to work with Mr. Golafshan to maintain Form as part of our community."

Earlier this year, Golafshan appealed to the council to give him time to recover before collecting the due rent. Before council went into a closed session on Jan. 10 to discuss the lease, he told the council that many restaurants and other businesses in the downtown area are benefitting from federal loans and deferred rent. Council members, he said, have been urging landlords they know to work with tenants who cannot afford to pay rent.

Golafshan asked the city to forgive past due rent and offered at that time to pay 10% of gross sales, which he acknowledged were "piss poor at best" because of health concerns. He said he would like to remain in the Bryant Street location for at least the next four years, which is the remaining term of his 10-year lease.

"Because as the city shutters down, as all these businesses go up for lease, it only ... accelerates the destruction of the city and the community at large," Golafshan told the council.

The argument did not sway the city, which continued to seek rent payments. The uncertainty over the gym's future further limits his ability to attract new customers, Golafshan said in an interview.

"Everyone asks and I can't lie. I simply tell them the truth. I don't know where we're going to be three, or four or five months from now," he said.

While he and the Friends group were hoping that the council would agree to a revenue sharing agreement, the proposal fell well short of the city's expectations. Council member Tom DuBois said the city was and remains willing to discuss alternatives but he said Golafshan has been "inconsistent" when it comes to meeting his commitments. At one point, according to DuBois, Golafshan agreed to vacate but did not follow through.

'I don't know where we're going to be three, or four or five months from now.'

-Sassan Golafshan, owner, Form Fitness

And while a gym is a desirable amenity, the rent remains far from market rates and the business does not seem to be workable, he said.

"I think there was a willingness to try to work together, but it seemed to be coming from one side," DuBois said.

DuBois said he would be happy to discuss any plan that the Friends group can come up with to pay back some of the rent and establish a reasonable rate going forward. To date, however, the city and the gym have not gotten anywhere near an agreement.

"If Friends of Form Fitness were able to raise money and pay it off, I'd be happy to have it stay," DuBois said. "But in terms of going forward, we've not been able to come to an agreement."

The dispute over Form Fitness is also bringing to the forefront broader questions about how the city is managing its properties, many of which are rented out at well below market rate to nonprofits like LifeMoves and Avenidas, which provide social services, and to organizations and artists in studios at the Cubberley Community Center. DuBois said the council needs to discuss the question: "How do we manage these public facilities and how can we be fair to everyone that's renting?'"

Council member Greg Tanaka has repeatedly raised that question. Tanaka, who frequently challenges his colleagues on fiscal matters, argued in an interview that the city's tendency to rent out land to nonprofit organizations and small businesses for low rates is neither viable nor responsible at a time of economic uncertainty. Instead, the city should charge all of its tenants market rates, he argued. If the council believes these tenants bring value to the city, it should pay these organizations directly.

While he declined to discuss the Form Fitness dispute, citing the fact that this has been subject to closed session discussions, Tanaka suggested that the city generally could have been more flexible in dealing with its tenants. He said he supports relaxing rules for what types of businesses can operate in the city, including easing restrictions for chain stores.

"It's a little disingenuous for us to insist that commercial landlords do rent deferrals and build parklets, but we refuse to do it for our own commercial tenants," Tanaka said.

But while the city did not accept Golafshan's proposed terms, Form Fitness did benefit from the city's rent relief program, Meghan Horrigan-Taylor, the city's chief communication officer, said in an email. The city also worked with the gym to come up with a new lease structure that included sharing revenues, she said.

Horrigan-Taylor said Form Fitness had earlier informed the city that it would vacate fully by January, though it later updated that date to October. The city issued its notice to vacate because the business "has not paid rent, and they did not honor their commitment to shut down operations by the end of October or take steps to vacate," she wrote.

'It's a little disingenuous for us to insist that commercial landlords do rent deferrals and build parklets, but we refuse to do it for our own commercial tenants.'

-Greg Tanaka, City Council member, Palo Alto

Despite their efforts to reach a deal, the city and the gym have each rejected the other's proposal. The city reviewed the gym's latest proposal, which was submitted in October, and found it to be "not a viable solution since it may result in rental rates similar or lower than city subsidized nonprofit rates," Horrigan-Taylor wrote. She said the city tentatively plans to engage a real estate broker to find a new tenant.

The building is located in a "planned community" zone that the council created in 2000. If Form Fitness departs, potential replacements could include retail uses, a teen center or office use, though any offices would be restricted to the second floor.

While the gym's lease remains in dispute and the end of the road appears imminent, Golafshan still hopes the city will give him a reprieve. A gym, he argued, is the ideal use for the site. He noted that the city is continuing to explore construction of a public gym, a project that appeared viable in January when philanthropist John Arrillaga offered to donate $30 million to the project. While Arrilaga's death in late January effectively scuttled that proposal, the council reaffirmed in March its desire to build a public gym.

Golafshan suggested that the easiest way for the council to make progress on this endeavor is to help him remain in downtown Palo Alto.

"This isn't just about my personal needs. This is about all the members of the community and all the residents not having a healthy option. They just don't have it. Nothing exists downtown," Golafshan said. "I encourage the City Council to take a step back, look at the big picture and look into working with me."

Craving a new voice in Peninsula dining?

Sign up for the Peninsula Foodist newsletter.

Sign up now
Gennady Sheyner
 
Gennady Sheyner covers the City Hall beat in Palo Alto as well as regional politics, with a special focus on housing and transportation. Before joining the Palo Alto Weekly/PaloAltoOnline.com in 2008, he covered breaking news and local politics for the Waterbury Republican-American, a daily newspaper in Connecticut. Read more >>

Follow Palo Alto Online and the Palo Alto Weekly on Twitter @paloaltoweekly, Facebook and on Instagram @paloaltoonline for breaking news, local events, photos, videos and more.

Get uninterrupted access to important local city government news. Become a member today.

Form Fitness told to leave after failing to pay rent

City orders gym to pay about $500,000 or vacate Bryant Street building

by / Palo Alto Weekly

Uploaded: Fri, Nov 25, 2022, 6:59 am

After more than two decades in downtown Palo Alto, Form Fitness now appears to be entering its final stretch.

The gym, which is located at 445 Bryant St., has fallen behind in rent since the COVID-19 pandemic forced it to temporarily shutter in March 2020 and then reopen with new restrictions, including a mask requirement that prompted some users to stay away, gym owner Sassan Golafshan said. Business has never fully recovered, he said.

Form Fitness is hardly the only business that saw its revenues dwindle during the pandemic. Numerous establishments, including The Old Pro and Dan Gordon's in downtown and Antonio's Nut House and The Counter on California Avenue, closed during the pandemic. The gym is, however, in a unique situation. The gym's landlord is the city, which developed the two-story building next to the public garage in 2001 with the intention of using rent proceeds to support youth programs.

In 2004, the council selected Form Fitness as the tenant to occupy the building, bowing to popular demand and overruling a recommendation from city staff to select a restaurant called Saffron Club Restaurant, according to meeting minutes from that time. The gym, which at the time was occupying a smaller location on Forest Avenue, moved to Bryant Street shortly thereafter.

But the longstanding partnership between the city and Form Fitness turned acrimonious over the past year, as Golafshan repeatedly failed to make his rent payments and the balance grew to more than $1.3 million, according to Golafshan and the city. The City Council met numerous times this year in closed session to discuss the lease situation. It did not take any formal actions nor reach any resolutions that could preserve the agreement.

Things escalated last week, when the city issued Golafshan a 28-day notice to "pay or quit." The Nov. 17 notice, issued by the city's real property manager Sunny Tong, advised Golafshan that if he fails to pay $500,000 or vacate the premises, the city will commence legal proceedings against the gym, declare forfeiture of the lease and recover damages for each day that the gym remains occupied, as well as costs of lawsuit.

The notice pertains only to rent that has been due since December 2021, which totals $504,646 (the monthly rent went up from $41,163 per month to $43,301 in July). Of that amount, the gym paid a total of $13,350, leaving it with a balance of $491,296, according to the letter.

Golafshan does not dispute the charges, but he has argued both publicly and in a recent interview that the gym should not be blamed for the recent loss of revenue, which he maintains was caused by the pandemic and subsequent restrictions.

"The city is my landlord. The city is also my executioner," Golafshan said in an interview. "I don't understand how the city manager, the city attorney and everyone involved actually thinks this is something they can do to a Palo Alto resident and successful business owner."

Before the pandemic, he noted, he had never been late on any payments nor reneged on any commitments.

"Now, they're basically coming after me for money that I'm supposed to miraculously find," Golafshan said.

He is not the only person who wants Form Fitness to stick around in its downtown location. In recent weeks, resident Jaclyn Schrier has been circulating an online petition calling for the council to "save Form Fitness." The petition, which had accumulated 565 signatures as of Wednesday afternoon, urges the council to forgive Form Fitness all past due rent, fees and assessments. In exchange, the gym would provide 20% discounts to all city residents and employees as a public benefit. Going forward, the gym would pay the city rent totaling 15% of its gross sales rather than a fixed monthly amount under this arrangement.

Supporters also formed a group called Friends of Form Fitness and took out an ad seeking to get more signatures.

"With the imminent closing of Form, downtown Palo Alto will no longer have a full-service fitness facility with membership open to the public to meet our community's wellness needs during this time of great health concern," the petition states. "We, residents of Palo Alto and our closest neighbors, urge you to work with Mr. Golafshan to maintain Form as part of our community."

Earlier this year, Golafshan appealed to the council to give him time to recover before collecting the due rent. Before council went into a closed session on Jan. 10 to discuss the lease, he told the council that many restaurants and other businesses in the downtown area are benefitting from federal loans and deferred rent. Council members, he said, have been urging landlords they know to work with tenants who cannot afford to pay rent.

Golafshan asked the city to forgive past due rent and offered at that time to pay 10% of gross sales, which he acknowledged were "piss poor at best" because of health concerns. He said he would like to remain in the Bryant Street location for at least the next four years, which is the remaining term of his 10-year lease.

"Because as the city shutters down, as all these businesses go up for lease, it only ... accelerates the destruction of the city and the community at large," Golafshan told the council.

The argument did not sway the city, which continued to seek rent payments. The uncertainty over the gym's future further limits his ability to attract new customers, Golafshan said in an interview.

"Everyone asks and I can't lie. I simply tell them the truth. I don't know where we're going to be three, or four or five months from now," he said.

While he and the Friends group were hoping that the council would agree to a revenue sharing agreement, the proposal fell well short of the city's expectations. Council member Tom DuBois said the city was and remains willing to discuss alternatives but he said Golafshan has been "inconsistent" when it comes to meeting his commitments. At one point, according to DuBois, Golafshan agreed to vacate but did not follow through.

And while a gym is a desirable amenity, the rent remains far from market rates and the business does not seem to be workable, he said.

"I think there was a willingness to try to work together, but it seemed to be coming from one side," DuBois said.

DuBois said he would be happy to discuss any plan that the Friends group can come up with to pay back some of the rent and establish a reasonable rate going forward. To date, however, the city and the gym have not gotten anywhere near an agreement.

"If Friends of Form Fitness were able to raise money and pay it off, I'd be happy to have it stay," DuBois said. "But in terms of going forward, we've not been able to come to an agreement."

The dispute over Form Fitness is also bringing to the forefront broader questions about how the city is managing its properties, many of which are rented out at well below market rate to nonprofits like LifeMoves and Avenidas, which provide social services, and to organizations and artists in studios at the Cubberley Community Center. DuBois said the council needs to discuss the question: "How do we manage these public facilities and how can we be fair to everyone that's renting?'"

Council member Greg Tanaka has repeatedly raised that question. Tanaka, who frequently challenges his colleagues on fiscal matters, argued in an interview that the city's tendency to rent out land to nonprofit organizations and small businesses for low rates is neither viable nor responsible at a time of economic uncertainty. Instead, the city should charge all of its tenants market rates, he argued. If the council believes these tenants bring value to the city, it should pay these organizations directly.

While he declined to discuss the Form Fitness dispute, citing the fact that this has been subject to closed session discussions, Tanaka suggested that the city generally could have been more flexible in dealing with its tenants. He said he supports relaxing rules for what types of businesses can operate in the city, including easing restrictions for chain stores.

"It's a little disingenuous for us to insist that commercial landlords do rent deferrals and build parklets, but we refuse to do it for our own commercial tenants," Tanaka said.

But while the city did not accept Golafshan's proposed terms, Form Fitness did benefit from the city's rent relief program, Meghan Horrigan-Taylor, the city's chief communication officer, said in an email. The city also worked with the gym to come up with a new lease structure that included sharing revenues, she said.

Horrigan-Taylor said Form Fitness had earlier informed the city that it would vacate fully by January, though it later updated that date to October. The city issued its notice to vacate because the business "has not paid rent, and they did not honor their commitment to shut down operations by the end of October or take steps to vacate," she wrote.

Despite their efforts to reach a deal, the city and the gym have each rejected the other's proposal. The city reviewed the gym's latest proposal, which was submitted in October, and found it to be "not a viable solution since it may result in rental rates similar or lower than city subsidized nonprofit rates," Horrigan-Taylor wrote. She said the city tentatively plans to engage a real estate broker to find a new tenant.

The building is located in a "planned community" zone that the council created in 2000. If Form Fitness departs, potential replacements could include retail uses, a teen center or office use, though any offices would be restricted to the second floor.

While the gym's lease remains in dispute and the end of the road appears imminent, Golafshan still hopes the city will give him a reprieve. A gym, he argued, is the ideal use for the site. He noted that the city is continuing to explore construction of a public gym, a project that appeared viable in January when philanthropist John Arrillaga offered to donate $30 million to the project. While Arrilaga's death in late January effectively scuttled that proposal, the council reaffirmed in March its desire to build a public gym.

Golafshan suggested that the easiest way for the council to make progress on this endeavor is to help him remain in downtown Palo Alto.

"This isn't just about my personal needs. This is about all the members of the community and all the residents not having a healthy option. They just don't have it. Nothing exists downtown," Golafshan said. "I encourage the City Council to take a step back, look at the big picture and look into working with me."

Comments

Judy Hall
Registered user
Downtown North
on Nov 25, 2022 at 9:31 am
Judy Hall, Downtown North
Registered user
on Nov 25, 2022 at 9:31 am

An Unlawful Detainer (eviction proceeding) is filed when a tenant is not paying their rent. No different than any other commercial or residential rental.

The site could easily be used for other programs and businesses (municipal or private).


Annies biped
Registered user
Midtown
on Nov 25, 2022 at 10:58 am
Annies biped, Midtown
Registered user
on Nov 25, 2022 at 10:58 am

What an opportunity for the city! It could rent the bottom floor to La Comida, the Palo Alto Senior Nutrition Program, for $1 per year just like it rents the 450 Bryant Clark Building to Avenidas, the Palo Alto Senior Center for $1 per year. Both senior programs would be located very close to each other, something that would be advantageous for all Palo Alto seniors. The city could rent the top floor at market rate to a business or businesses thus helping to fund the youth programs. What a win win situation for all involved!


Barbara Gross
Registered user
Crescent Park
on Nov 25, 2022 at 11:58 am
Barbara Gross, Crescent Park
Registered user
on Nov 25, 2022 at 11:58 am

The gym has been an important asset to the community. Landlords defrayed income during the pandemic crisis. Gyms were hardest hit. Work it out!


Online Name
Registered user
Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on Nov 25, 2022 at 12:14 pm
Online Name, Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
Registered user
on Nov 25, 2022 at 12:14 pm

A few questions: 1) Why did the city reject the city council's recommendation for the Saffron Club restaurant, 2) who is the preferred new tenant they want instead of Form Fitness), 3) what if anything does this have to do with the city's new push for a city-owned NEW gym and its support for replacing retail/restaurants with even more gyms? 4) does the city even know that the gym that replaced Anthropologie on Alma is now vacant and looking for tenants?

Finally, why can't the city abide by the rules it forces on commercial landlords>

The first suggestion to put in non-profits is a good one. As is the suggestion to convert it to housing to meet our absurd housing goals.

Maybe our "leaders" can show some creativity for a change.


rita vrhel
Registered user
Crescent Park
on Nov 25, 2022 at 4:09 pm
rita vrhel, Crescent Park
Registered user
on Nov 25, 2022 at 4:09 pm

Sounds like the "Friends" could try and raise the necessary money for the gym if they want it to stay.

565 people out of, I believe, Palo Alto's estimated 66,000, is actually not a lot of support.....similar to people signing up for PA's proposed fiber network.

The City needs, IMO, to manage their property to the benefit of all taxpayers and residents. I believe there are plenty of fitness centers in the area.

I support the suggestion about La Comida. They should, however, be housed in Avenidas since Avenidas is paid by the City to provide senior nutrition services on site. This has been a source of contention for several years ever since Avenidas' expansion and remodel. This really is shameful and needs to be settled.
Thank you


Morgan
Registered user
Meadow Park
on Nov 25, 2022 at 8:52 pm
Morgan , Meadow Park
Registered user
on Nov 25, 2022 at 8:52 pm

It's fairly well known that the owner of Form Fitness is, at times, acted in an unprofessional, odd, and irrational manner towards the members of the club and the employees.

There are members and employees that were treated poorly and kicked out of the gym or fired for no reason.

As for the petition's offer of 15% of revenues, how much does the gym make per month? In order to cover the approximate $43k in rent the city can make on that site, the gym would need to bring in around $290K/month. How many members does Form have? Golafshan is only offering 10% which means they would need to bring in $430K/month. Or is he just hoping not to pay as much in rent, period?

So, Golafshan would like to forgive past rent and also reduce future rent?

If Golafshan wasn't paying rent for the past year or so, what did he think was going to happen? He seems to want to have all of the benefits but isn't even willing to sit down and seriously discuss options.

How many Palo Alto residents are benefitting from this "public benefit"?


Tom DuBois
Registered user
Midtown
on Nov 26, 2022 at 4:24 pm
Tom DuBois, Midtown
Registered user
on Nov 26, 2022 at 4:24 pm

Just to be clear the rent from this building IS dedicated to teen programs (the article was vague about that). As the former Bryant St Teen center, when it was developed into a parking garage and a building, the building rent goes to pay for a lot of teen programs in the city. Without that rent, our teen programs suffer.


Morgan
Registered user
Meadow Park
on Nov 26, 2022 at 9:34 pm
Morgan , Meadow Park
Registered user
on Nov 26, 2022 at 9:34 pm

@Tom DuBois
Thanks for the extra info. However, why would the city allow one delinquent tenant to deprive the youth of the city from programs that could use the money?

If this were a privately owned building, I doubt they'd allow this to continue as long as the city has. It was mildly understandable if one was to assume that the city was trying to help out Golafshan in a time of need and no one was really being impacted. However, if that money is earmarked towards programs that truly have a public benefit, it makes no sense to let it drag on for so long.


Jennifer
Registered user
another community
on Nov 27, 2022 at 12:08 pm
Jennifer, another community
Registered user
on Nov 27, 2022 at 12:08 pm

"It makes no sense to let it drag on for so long."

Everything drags on. It's Palo Alto. Why? Overanalyzing and overthinking, which leads to hesitation and inaction. Sad.


Barbara Gross
Registered user
Crescent Park
on Nov 27, 2022 at 1:36 pm
Barbara Gross, Crescent Park
Registered user
on Nov 27, 2022 at 1:36 pm

Form Fitness is a small business, operated by a local resident. This affects real people. Since income from the rent is dedicated to a specific use, renting to a non profit for below market rate wouldn’t make sense. As an aside, Avenidas was mentioned as an opportunity to raise revenue for the city - do you understand the city does not not fund services for seniors - and that is their contribution for having those services in our community.
I go back to private landlords were asked to make sacrifices during the pandemic - some did and some didn’t. Raising the rent for Form Fitness during the recovery period seems disingenuous and frankly deleterious to the process. What a poor standard the city sets for the business community.


Moctod
Registered user
University South
on Nov 27, 2022 at 4:20 pm
Moctod, University South
Registered user
on Nov 27, 2022 at 4:20 pm

Form fitness is the the last general-use gym left in the University Avenue area. It the present owner needs to declair Form Fitness bankrupt, then I am very sorry, but so be it.

However, walk over and take a look at the building if you have a real interest in this issue. Hundreds of thousands of dollars have been put into the structure to make an excellent ADA compliant gym. The changing rooms, accessible showers and bathrooms, banks of a few hundred lockers, excercise classrooms, mirrored walls with handrails and floor surfaces make for a "turn-key" gym that could be leased to another operator. The elevator is well inside and it would take a considerable amount of time and expense to convert this building to another use.

Palo Alto needs a gym downtown and we should all consider that if this facility closes, our residents will need to drive to other facilities, none of which are within walking distance.

Over just the last ten years I have watched retailers and servives that the local residents use be driven out of the University Avenue area by high rents. Remember University Art? How about Stanford Electric? There was also a sporting goods store, stationary shop and a few bars that the locals loved. All are gone or have moved out of Palo Alto. Another drive our residents must take from a city that speaks so loud and often about car emissions.

A local gym is an undeniable positive for the physcial fitness of our residents. Should the city of Palo Alto join our wealthy landlords and try to squeeze out the last dollar in rent from this location? I hope that they will consider the need for a gym here when they are caculating the rent they (actually, we) will charge for the Form Fitness building.


S. Underwood
Registered user
Crescent Park
on Nov 27, 2022 at 6:28 pm
S. Underwood, Crescent Park
Registered user
on Nov 27, 2022 at 6:28 pm

Our City Manager and management is a joke. No longer a funny one.


Annette
Registered user
College Terrace
on Nov 28, 2022 at 5:54 am
Annette, College Terrace
Registered user
on Nov 28, 2022 at 5:54 am

Reviving an old plea: bring back the like button. If it existed, I would give a thumbs up to the posts by Barbara Gross, Moctod, and S. Underwood. The long view/big picture are consistently overlooked and there's tremendous inconsistency in the messaging that comes out of City Hall.

Being committed to the SCAP goals requires local goods and services. Justifying car-light development and pedestrian oriented districts hinges on public transportation. Going electric requires a robust and reliable electrical grid. Being committed to public safety requires full staffing in PAPD and PAFD. And being committed to the health of the community requires certain types of space, including open space and gyms.

Ideas, thoughts, lofty goals, the annual priority list, etc are all fine and dandy, but also pretty much pointless if not matched by action.


Bystander
Registered user
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Nov 28, 2022 at 7:57 am
Bystander, Another Palo Alto neighborhood
Registered user
on Nov 28, 2022 at 7:57 am

I agree with Annette to bring back the like button. I would call it an agree button and only available to registered users perhaps registered users who have been registered for over a month.

Otherwise, we can spend time putting together our thoughts, typing a good comment, and then the echo chamber is silent. We have no idea if we are alone in our opinion or if a few others share the opinion.

I think there is a value in knowing that others do agree with us. When it comes to certain articles, such as perhaps announcing a candidate for a vacant space on a board, the feature could be removed for those certain articles.


jaclyn schrier
Registered user
Downtown North
on Nov 28, 2022 at 1:37 pm
jaclyn schrier, Downtown North
Registered user
on Nov 28, 2022 at 1:37 pm

Please be welcome to read -- and sign! -- the petition mentioned in the article at Web Link

Form Fitness is a special place. Beyond providing a super gym, Sassan Golafshan has built a community. Many would feel its loss.

We urge the city and Sassan to work out their differences. A downtown should have a gym. It's only a matter of time until fitness facilities recover and it would be a shame to lose this jewel.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Post a comment

In order to encourage respectful and thoughtful discussion, commenting on stories is available to those who are registered users. If you are already a registered user and the commenting form is not below, you need to log in. If you are not registered, you can do so here.

Please make sure your comments are truthful, on-topic and do not disrespect another poster. Don't be snarky or belittling. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

See our announcement about requiring registration for commenting.