Private funds spark a ‘Golden Age’ for public parks

In roughly half of major US cities nonprofits raise money to fund public parks, led by New York's Central Park Conservancy, which has provided more than $700 million since 1980.

Carlo Allegri/Reuters/File
A man and boy ride a sled down Cedar Hill in New York's Central Park in January 2015. The private nonprofit Central Park Conservancy contributes nearly $40 million per year to help with the upkeep of the park. Private funding has become a vital source of revenue for the maintenance of public parks nationwide.

A boom in privately funded conservancies is contributing to a "golden age" in city parks but also raising questions about philanthropy’s influence in the public arena, according to a report released today [Feb. 10].

Roughly half of major cities have one or more nonprofits that raise money for public parks and often help manage operations, according to the report by the Trust for the Public Land, a national group that works for the creation of urban parks. New York has nearly two dozen conservancies, and Atlanta, Boston, and Houston each have at least three.

Of the 41 conservancies studied by the trust, more than half have come online since 2000. These have helped spark increased big gifts to parks, says the group’s Adrian Benepe, a former parks commissioner for New York City. A well-run conservancy, he says, can give philanthropists confidence that their money will be spent wisely.

The granddaddy of conservancies is the 35-year-old nonprofit that supports New York City’s Central Park. It has raised more than $700-million since 1980—success that has spawned more than a few imitators aimed at fixing up run-down historic parks.

"Former flagship parks that were the pride and joy of 19th-century cities had been allowed to deteriorate in the mid- and late 20th century," Mr. Benepe says, "and it took private citizens saying, ‘We’re drawing a line in the sand, and we will not let this happen.’ "

Five conservancies in the report had an average of at least $10 million in annual revenues from 2009 to 2012: Central Park Conservancy (New York; $39 million); Friends of the High Line (New York; $24 million); Detroit Riverfront Conservancy ($14 million); Forest Park Forever (St. Louis; $13 million); and Prospect Park Alliance (New York; $10 million). Twenty groups had annual revenues of less than $2 million.

The report notes that thorny issues often accompany the creation of conservancies, with critics questioning whether they give elites a vehicle to assume control of a public resource.

The report also raises the question of whether governments will cut park funding as private sources of cash become available.

Jack Linn, a former official in New York’s Parks & Recreation Department, says in the report: "Conservancies are Plan B. They should not be perceived as the default approach to funding park upkeep and restoration. There’s a real danger in removing the public obligation to fund park and recreation systems."

This article originally appeared on the website of The Chronicle of Philanthropy.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.