A bedrock principle of fiscal conservatism should be the Benefit Principle.
The unrealized potential of parkland dedication ordinances is arguably the lowest hanging fruit of capital funding sources for parks.
The prevailing patterns of park and recreation services will be the result of actions from three sets of actors.
Learn why some communities embrace market/benefit equity or demand as their guiding principle for allocation resources.
A synopsis of an equity discussion between NRPA’s Kevin Roth and Dr. Crompton.
Find out the four widely used interpretations of equity.
Coproduction helps minimize the impact of budget cuts on service delivery by developing strategies for transitioning the programming element of these services to the groups that benefit from them.
Positioning public parks and recreation as vehicles for enhancing public health remains an important justification for the field’s tax support.
This column focuses on four frameworks that facilitate collaborative partnerships between park and recreation departments and private-sector partners.
In public-private partnerships, both a park and recreation department and its partner bring assets to a collaboration that make it a viable proposition.
While the private sector can contribute to park departments by investing funds for operation, maintenance and/or capital development, there are four additional aspects of private-sector involvement that may be even more attractive.
Successful synergy from collaboration requires fusing the complementary resources of the partners in a project that mutually benefits all parties involved.
One of the striking characteristics of our field is the plethora of organizations that produce recreation services in the public, commercial and nonprofit sectors.
Why are joint provisions a superior alternative to joint-use agreements?
Understand why forward-thinking measures mean inserting a reimbursement clause in parkland dedication ordinances.
In the current environment of a major economic recession and subsequent large decreases in local government funds for parks, the principle of "value capture" to pay for the construction and/or operation of parks is worth revisiting.
Taking a closer look at the economic costs and benefits of parks and open spaces that have largely been ignored in planning studies in the past.
In addition to proximate distance, there are two other features of parks and open space that influence a property’s value: the proportion of park-like space in the locale and views from a property.
Learn how a consistent annual decline in the number of golf players has affected property values in golf communities and what can be done to help failing courses.
Read a review of 21 studies that measured the impact of golf courses on property values and how the impact of golf courses is different from parks.
It is a trail’s functionality or activity potential that is likely to confer added value, not the panorama of attractive open space.
An analysis of 33 studies, which measured the impact of distance from a park on the sales price of a residence, reveals six key points.
Conventional belief states that parks are a costly investment from which a community receives no measurable financial return. However, this perspective overlooks the enhanced property taxes stemming from increased increments of value at properties located close to parks.
