The Right Opinion
Making Parks Decent Again
America is filled with parks that are filthy, dangerous and badly maintained. The governments in charge plead: We can't help it. Our budgets have been slashed. We don't have enough money!
Bryant Park, in midtown Manhattan, was once such an unsavory place. But now it's nice. What changed? Dan Biederman essentially privatized the park.
With permission from frustrated officials who'd watch government repeatedly fail to clean up the park, Biederman raised private funds from "businesses around the park, real estate owners, concessions and events sponsorships. ... (S)ince 1996, we have not asked the city government for a single dollar."
Sounds good to me. But not to Shirley Kressel, a Boston journalist.
I asked her what's wrong with getting the money from private businesses, as Dan does.
"Because it goes into private pockets," she said.
So what?
"Because it's very good (for Dan) to use the public land for running a private business, a rent-a-park, where all year 'round there's commercial revenue from renting it out to businesses. He keeps all that money. People don't realize that."
So what? I don't care if they think the money is going to Mars. The park is nice, and people don't have to pay taxes to support it.
The park is certainly more "commercial" now. The day I videotaped, there were booths selling food and holiday gifts. The public seemed fine with that.
Biederman is not finished with his efforts to save public parks. He next wants to apply his skills to the Boston Common. The Common is America's oldest public park, and like many others, it's largely a barren field. Biederman doesn't want to seek business funding, as he did with Bryant Park, because the area is not as commercial. Instead, he would combine the Bryant Park and Central Park models. I know something about Central Park because I'm on the board of the charity that helps manage it. When government managed Central Park, it was a crime zone. Now it's wonderful. Those of us who live near it donated most of the money that renovated and now maintains Central Park. It's not a business arrangement.
Kressel says she'll fight Biederman's plan for Boston.
"(W)e don't need ... to teach our next generation of children that the only way they can get a public realm is as the charity ward of rich people and corporations," she said. "We can afford our public realm. We're entitled to it. We pay taxes, and that's the government's job."
The Central Park model "doesn't work for 98 percent of the country," she added.
I don't know what'll happen to the rest of the country, but it's working in Central Park. Why not try it in Boston? It's working for the public.
"It's not, because these people, the money bags, get to decide how the park is used and who goes there and who the desirables are and who are the undesirables. Undesirables are primarily homeless people. ... Homeless people have to be somewhere. If we don't make a system that accommodates people who don't have a place to live, they have to be in the public realm."
Biederman has a ready answer: "We have the same number of homeless people in Bryant Park today as we had when it was viewed by everyone as horrible in the early 1980s. What we didn't have then -- and we have now -- is 4,000 other people. The ratio of non-homeless to homeless is 4,000 to 13 instead of 250 to 13. So any female walking into Bryant Park who might have in the past been concerned about her security says, 'This doesn't look like a homeless hangout to me.' The homeless people are welcomed into Bryant Park if they follow the rules. And those same 13 people are there almost every day. We know their names."
Once again, the creative minds of the private sector invent solutions that never occur to government bureaucrats. If government would just get out of the way, entrepreneurship and innovation, stimulated by the profit motive, will make our lives better.
COPYRIGHT 2010 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS, INC.
DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

11 Comments
Brian
Wednesday, December 1, 2010 at 11:37 AM
Simply stated, isn't Ms Kressel's argument that all private business is bad, as are all people who have the means and inclination to donate to and support a cause such as this one? Her perspective seems to be familar; increase taxes so government can do it all. Private business is bad. Individuals aren't capable of taking care of the issue, whatever it might be, locally.
mrkim
Wednesday, December 1, 2010 at 12:35 PM
Another fine perspective on the American condition John, thanks!What this article also seems to point to is that our govt. on the municipal, state and federal levels has grown itself to a point where it's become so over-regulating, over-reaching and over-laden with layer upon layer of ineffectual policy as to have made itself totally ineffective at accomplishing anything of relevance.Really, when the govt. claims they can't even manage public common areas like parks, what possibility truly exists that they should even contemplate regulation, much less legislation regarding matters of any real socio-political relevance? If one simply looks backward to a point 100 years ago, we were the most prosperous country on the globe ..... and that didn't require taxation, nor regulation of every iota of life here in these United States.Sometimes the past can reveal some interesting clues in how we could best move forward, and just perhaps, today is one of those times ;>)
Mike McGinn
Wednesday, December 1, 2010 at 1:10 PM
I love it!! Typical liberal!Shirley Kressel says, "We can afford our public realm. We're entitled to it. We pay taxes, and that's the government's job."Who's the "We" in "We can afford our public realm"? If by "We" she means the small percentage of rich people who pay the large percentage of the cost, I think she meant to say, "They can pay for my public realm".And where in the Constitution does it say we are entitled to public space, let alone anything else? There are certain rights delineated in that document, but I haven't seen ANY entitlements.As for paying taxes, WE are almost to the point where half of US don't pay taxes anymore. Some are even paid a net income on April 15th. That makes about half of us not tax payers, but the net recipients of public charity (better known as welfare).Lastly, where does it say that it's the governments job to provide a public realm?
TJS
Wednesday, December 1, 2010 at 3:30 PM
Let's apply this kind of thinking to Indian reservations. Give all the land to the residents, the Indians. They're living in a situtation similar to Plymouth Colony when it was a commune - everyone was poor. The Indians themselves should decide to overthrow their communal ownership and convert it all to private property to be used or sold as they see fit.
Pondering Patriot
Wednesday, December 1, 2010 at 3:34 PM
Shirley Kressel is a true picture of a socialist. Give me "your" stuff so I can have what "I" want. It's your duty.Great article and show John.It's amazing how you can show them proof that private donations work but they refuse to "see".Socialist can not be reasoned with but it show the rest of us there is another way.
Jody
Wednesday, December 1, 2010 at 4:07 PM
Ms. Kressel is the eiptome of the Liberal. Private, willing donations are bad. "(W)e don't need ... to teach our next generation of children that the only way they can get a public realm is as the charity ward of rich people and corporations." Yet it's perfectly fine in her mind to stip money from people by force (taxes) to provide HER vision of a "public realm."Maybe it's time to teach our children that if they want something, they have to work for it. It isn't the government's job to provide a park or anything else for their pleasure and convenience.
John Singer
Wednesday, December 1, 2010 at 4:34 PM
Ms. Kressel misses the point!!This is communalism at it's best!Private citizens donating their wealth for a "profit".I'll guess that even those businesses that do not contribute, gain.This is how Capitalism works. I want it, I'm willing to work for it, I'm willing to pay for it.
Brian
Wednesday, December 1, 2010 at 5:44 PM
"(W)e don't need ... to teach our next generation of children that the only way they can get a public realm is as the charity ward of rich people and corporations,". Instead, she'd rather teach our next generation to be the charity ward of the government. What a (fill in the blank).
Jack Green
Thursday, December 2, 2010 at 4:03 PM
The job description for the congress is Article one Section eight or our wonderful constitution - - - -No where does it mention PARKs So where does the liberals get the idea about what congress can do? ???
R C
Thursday, December 2, 2010 at 6:47 PM
If a private company can do a better job than the government and make some money for their business and it does not cost the taxpayers a dime? It's a win, win,win result.Thanks John. Keep up the great work.
Kate in New York
Saturday, November 24, 2012 at 4:11 PM
Shirley Kessler is a typical Liberal Loon. LOL! I'd like to her frequent parks when they are overrun by homeless people, drug dealers, prostitutes etc. Proof that shirley is 200 percent wrong in her Loony ideals is the difference between what Bryant Park '& Central Park used to look like and what it looks like today.
The logical sane people in the world really need to stop entertaining twits like Shirley. Just ignore them cause what they have to say is of no common sense anyway