过度谴责和福利区的当代适应:19世纪美国城市公园融资的主要工具

IF 0.7 Q4 HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM
J. Crompton
{"title":"过度谴责和福利区的当代适应:19世纪美国城市公园融资的主要工具","authors":"J. Crompton","doi":"10.18666/jpra-2020-10129","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Large public parks in the United States emerged in the 1850s and 1860s with the development of Central Park in New York City and Prospect Park in Brooklyn. Their development was predicated on the conviction that they would be self-financing and not be a drain on the public purse. To meet this criterion, the financing plans for both of them embraced the concepts of excess condemnation and benefit assessments. Because these two parks were the high-profile landmark bellwethers that inspired and informed widespread adoption of public parks by cities throughout the U.S., the two financing vehicles were widely emulated. The use of excess condemnation essentially ceased early in the 20th Century when the courts ruled that eminent domain was an abrogation of private property rights and unconstitutional when it was used to take land from an unwilling seller and subsequently re-sell parts of it to private interests for a profit. Nevertheless, in contemporary times its core principle has re-emerged in three different forms: the property lease model, which links a park with income-producing property that provides initial capital and/or dedicated ongoing resources to maintain and operate the park; reimbursement clauses in parkland dedication ordinances, which enable parkland to be acquired and developed ahead of development by using certificates of obligation or general obligation bonds for which a city will subsequently be reimbursed from the fees received from future fees; and tax increment funding, by which proximate property owners ostensibly pay for redevelopment costs rather than general taxpayers. Instead of funding parks with taxes collected citywide, benefit districts were used to levy assessments on properties within the use radius of a park. The tax was apportioned according to a formula reflecting the proportion of benefits accruing to each property owner. In contemporary times, local governments may similarly facilitate a majority of property owners agreeing to assess themselves an additional property or sales tax to pay for a higher level of service. Alternatively, businesses may do this by establishing a Business Improvement District, whereby businesses levy an assessment on themselves to develop or upgrade a park. Subscribe to JPRA","PeriodicalId":46684,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Park and Recreation Administration","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Contemporary Adaptations of Excess Condemnation and Benefit Districts: The Primary Vehicles for Financing Nineteenth Century Urban Parks in the United States\",\"authors\":\"J. Crompton\",\"doi\":\"10.18666/jpra-2020-10129\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Large public parks in the United States emerged in the 1850s and 1860s with the development of Central Park in New York City and Prospect Park in Brooklyn. Their development was predicated on the conviction that they would be self-financing and not be a drain on the public purse. To meet this criterion, the financing plans for both of them embraced the concepts of excess condemnation and benefit assessments. Because these two parks were the high-profile landmark bellwethers that inspired and informed widespread adoption of public parks by cities throughout the U.S., the two financing vehicles were widely emulated. The use of excess condemnation essentially ceased early in the 20th Century when the courts ruled that eminent domain was an abrogation of private property rights and unconstitutional when it was used to take land from an unwilling seller and subsequently re-sell parts of it to private interests for a profit. Nevertheless, in contemporary times its core principle has re-emerged in three different forms: the property lease model, which links a park with income-producing property that provides initial capital and/or dedicated ongoing resources to maintain and operate the park; reimbursement clauses in parkland dedication ordinances, which enable parkland to be acquired and developed ahead of development by using certificates of obligation or general obligation bonds for which a city will subsequently be reimbursed from the fees received from future fees; and tax increment funding, by which proximate property owners ostensibly pay for redevelopment costs rather than general taxpayers. Instead of funding parks with taxes collected citywide, benefit districts were used to levy assessments on properties within the use radius of a park. The tax was apportioned according to a formula reflecting the proportion of benefits accruing to each property owner. In contemporary times, local governments may similarly facilitate a majority of property owners agreeing to assess themselves an additional property or sales tax to pay for a higher level of service. Alternatively, businesses may do this by establishing a Business Improvement District, whereby businesses levy an assessment on themselves to develop or upgrade a park. Subscribe to JPRA\",\"PeriodicalId\":46684,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Park and Recreation Administration\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Park and Recreation Administration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18666/jpra-2020-10129\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Park and Recreation Administration","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18666/jpra-2020-10129","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

随着纽约中央公园和布鲁克林展望公园的发展,美国的大型公园出现在19世纪50年代和60年代。它们的发展是基于这样一种信念,即它们将实现自负盈亏,而不会成为公共财政的负担。为了满足这一标准,它们的筹资计划都包含了过度谴责和利益评估的概念。由于这两个公园是备受瞩目的地标性风向标,启发并通知了美国各地城市广泛采用公共公园,这两个融资工具被广泛效仿。过度征用的使用在20世纪初基本上停止了,当时法院裁定,征用权是对私有财产权的废除,当它被用来从不情愿的卖方手中夺取土地,随后将其部分转售给私人利益以获取利润时,它是违宪的。然而,在当代,它的核心原则以三种不同的形式重新出现:物业租赁模式,将公园与创收物业联系起来,提供初始资本和/或专用的持续资源来维护和运营公园;《公园用地专用条例》中的偿还条款,允许在开发之前通过使用义务证书或一般义务债券获得和开发公园用地,城市随后将从从未来费用中收取的费用中获得偿还;还有增税融资,通过增税融资,附近的业主表面上为重建成本买单,而不是普通纳税人。不是用全市范围内的税收来资助公园,而是利用福利区对公园使用半径内的财产征收评估税。税收是根据一个公式分摊的,这个公式反映了每个财产所有者所获得的利益的比例。在当代,地方政府可能会类似地促使大多数业主同意对自己征收额外的财产税或销售税,以支付更高水平的服务。或者,企业可以通过建立一个商业改善区来做到这一点,企业可以对自己征收一项评估,以开发或升级一个公园。订阅JPRA
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Contemporary Adaptations of Excess Condemnation and Benefit Districts: The Primary Vehicles for Financing Nineteenth Century Urban Parks in the United States
Large public parks in the United States emerged in the 1850s and 1860s with the development of Central Park in New York City and Prospect Park in Brooklyn. Their development was predicated on the conviction that they would be self-financing and not be a drain on the public purse. To meet this criterion, the financing plans for both of them embraced the concepts of excess condemnation and benefit assessments. Because these two parks were the high-profile landmark bellwethers that inspired and informed widespread adoption of public parks by cities throughout the U.S., the two financing vehicles were widely emulated. The use of excess condemnation essentially ceased early in the 20th Century when the courts ruled that eminent domain was an abrogation of private property rights and unconstitutional when it was used to take land from an unwilling seller and subsequently re-sell parts of it to private interests for a profit. Nevertheless, in contemporary times its core principle has re-emerged in three different forms: the property lease model, which links a park with income-producing property that provides initial capital and/or dedicated ongoing resources to maintain and operate the park; reimbursement clauses in parkland dedication ordinances, which enable parkland to be acquired and developed ahead of development by using certificates of obligation or general obligation bonds for which a city will subsequently be reimbursed from the fees received from future fees; and tax increment funding, by which proximate property owners ostensibly pay for redevelopment costs rather than general taxpayers. Instead of funding parks with taxes collected citywide, benefit districts were used to levy assessments on properties within the use radius of a park. The tax was apportioned according to a formula reflecting the proportion of benefits accruing to each property owner. In contemporary times, local governments may similarly facilitate a majority of property owners agreeing to assess themselves an additional property or sales tax to pay for a higher level of service. Alternatively, businesses may do this by establishing a Business Improvement District, whereby businesses levy an assessment on themselves to develop or upgrade a park. Subscribe to JPRA
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Park and Recreation Administration
Journal of Park and Recreation Administration HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM-
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
23.10%
发文量
40
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信