Under its 50 Parks Initiative, 53 sites for new parks have been acquired by the city – taking advantage of the real estate downturn and bulldozing foreclosed homes in some cases – and are being developed into parks, playgrounds and recreation areas.  A quarter of the 50 parks are smaller than an acre in size.

“With the addition of the 50 Parks Initiative, about 20% of the parks established during this department’s long history will be the work of the last seven years,” says Barry Sanders, Recreation and Parks Commission President.  One important partner in this initiative has been the Los Angeles Parks Foundation, founded in 2008 and just hitting its stride.

“Probably thirty years of thinking preceded the creation of the foundation,” says Judith Kieffer, Executive Director of the Foundation.  But like many successful start-ups, it took the convergence of some good leaders – including Sanders – and Jon Kirk Mukri, General Manager for the Recreation and Parks Department.  Sanders now wears two hats as head of the Parks Commission and chair of the Foundation.  “Barry is absolutely the right person for the job – and probably the only one who can make this dual-hat role work,” says Kieffer.

The Foundation’s mission is all about a partnership with RAP.  They are not leading but listening, doing things with and for the department as a support organization, not a policy advocate with a “distinct and bright line of separation” between them so as to be independent enough to bring real value.  They promote the department, raise funds for parks and develop a broader constituency for the fate of public parks.

It Takes Two
“We have a good working relationship and we communicate constantly – one of the keys to making our partnership work.”

It worked well when the Republic of Korea came to the Mayor with a request to restore the Korean Friendship Bell, a gift from the Republic to the city in 1976.  The bell sits high on a hillside in Angel’s Gate Park and had become so rusty that it had stopped ringing.  Korea wanted to provide funds so that the bell would be fixed. The Foundation accepted the funds and then hired an expert to repair the bell which now once again rings for ceremonies and services.

Typically there is some re-energized interest in projects that drive their joint interest; there is no formal priority setting.  The Foundation receives donations designated for a specific purpose that the RAP is interested in and the Foundation acts as a record-keeper.  In other cases, they will take the lead and take on the role of general contractor while working closely with the department. They have helped to construct huge projects, especially ones that have been in the system for years lacking the funding to move forward – and including the 50 Parks initiative.

The 50 Parks Initiative was generated by the department and may be the largest urban park expansion in the country.  RAP spearheaded all the initial fundraising and the Foundation supported them.  Together, everybody was cranking to find sources of funding from numerous public and private not for profit sources.  The Foundation hosted meetings with major donors and local banks; teamed with RAP while they pitched the idea to other city agencies, like Housing; and secured funding from philanthropic foundations that only give to nonprofit corporations.

As of May of this year, 45 sites are now publicly owned and ready to be developed as parks.  RAP has built 13 of the sites already.  Once again, the Foundation plays a role in helping with site development, often taking possession and then hiring a contractor to build, working with the city at every step.  “We get a right of entry from the city to take ‘temporary ownership’ of a park, hire developers, get the park built and then turn the site back over to the city.”

Corporate Partners
One way that the Foundation has provided value is by building a reputation with the corporate community, with new partners stepping up for the parks in big and small ways.  The challenge is to gain their support for not only the upfront capital expense but the long term maintenance of a new facility.  “The sustainability issue is probably the key thing in making the partnerships work. No one wants to do anything that is a downstream maintenance issue for the city.”

So for any capital project or program where the parks department sees a need, the Foundation raises additional funds – as they did for the restoration of the mounted patrol horse unit, where they identified funds for the ongoing need for trainers, feed, vets, etc.  Originally created in the early 1970′s, the Ranger Mounted Unit was established to provide services to the users of Griffith Park’s extensive bridle trails. The Foundation, as one of its first projects, provided the funding to restore the unit and add more horses to the fold.

In another case, the Foundation is raising funds for the planned nature conservancy in Griffith Park and the goal will include a $5 million endowment, thanks to their outreach efforts in helping donors understand the value of an ongoing reserve.

Along with corporate support comes the issue of donor recognition.  The Foundation is finding ways to work with the city on signage that recognizes donors, such as plaques on benches – trying to reflect corporate support without compromising the public park experience.  Recently the city had its first ‘naming’ request and is learning the importance of a program and policies to recognize donors.  More requests are coming, too, from promoters, regarding events in the park that can provide value to both to themselves and the city.

A Business Model Taking Shape
The LA Parks Foundation is small.  They currently have two half time employees who provide help with bookkeeping, communications, the website and membership.  Judith herself works three quarter time.  And this year, a new full time project manager has been hired which they share with the department.

They share that staffer with RAP so both can take advantage of his expertise.  RAP, like many other city park departments across the nation, has seen both cutbacks (30% of their operations budget in the last 4 years) and the retirement of some of its most seasoned staffers.

“Typically we don’t do fundraising for city staffing – this has been a baseline issue for us.  As much as we work well with the department, we know we can’t underwrite their staffing.  We try to be sensitive about the best place we can provide value.”

The Foundation has just crossed the $6.5 million level in fundraising since 2008.  They have exceeded their budget every year since forming as the community embraces the idea of a private entrepreneurial partner committed to the city and its goals for parks.  Their success is linked to a 15-member board that uses its own gifts to leverage more – their giving provides a floor for the Foundation’s operations.  When the Foundation takes on a larger role in construction projects, they work with donors and the city on support for their administrative efforts.

“I also needed to understand and see how the city worked in order to figure out how we could work together,” said Judith. There are no weekly staff meetings between the two organizations, but Judith is talking all the time with the department, and she is out in the parks – a lot.  She also attends meetings with park advisory boards, other city departments, city council members and potential donors.

“We team up all the time and represent each other as needed on the same mission. This integrating of our resources around a common mission has absolutely been the key ingredient to our success.”  The City now embraces the partnership and sees how the Foundation can serve the department – and the staff sees it as a tool for them to have more success around their initiatives. “Everything we do is collaborative; we are hand in glove to get where we need to be.”

As the organization grows and takes on additional projects with the city and with friends of the parks groups around the city, they are looking more thoughtfully at their own future.  “We have always had an annual strategic plan which we revisit regularly with the board.  We are poised for a longer term view to help us identify where the next growth spurt will come from.  The fact that we have exceeded our budget expectations every year – that’s a good sign.”

Lessons learned?  “It was so critical that I work very carefully and slowly to integrate the foundation into the city system; building good relations with the city was key.  We slowly built trust as a reliable partner who wanted to work on their behalf – because the city can take money from donors and offer tax benefits without a foundation.  But RAP knew that money was being left on the table by donors not comfortable with giving money to the city for any number of reasons.”

Los Angeles already has a library and a police foundation.  The LA Parks Foundation is the third of its kind, and one more example of the importance of a private partner playing the role of a go-between, adding value with its flexibility and business-like approach.

Kathy Blaha writes about parks and other urban green spaces, and the role of public-private partnerships in their development and management. When she’s not writing for the blog, she consults on advancing park projects and sustainable land use solution

Boston, MA

Image Courtesy of Rose Kennedy Greenway Conservancy

The Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenway is a 15 acre, 1.5 mile long stretch of parks in the heart of Boston created as part of the mitigation plan for the massive public works project known as the “Big Dig.”  Developed and constructed by the State of Massachusetts, the project reworked both road and public transit systems in downtown Boston, adding bridges, two tunnel systems, multiple interchanges, and restoring a city street network.  The state worked with local neighborhoods to develop and implement plans for the 15 acres of parks, which are grouped by the neighborhoods they are adjacent to – North End Parks, Wharf District Parks, Fort Point Channel Parks, Dewey Square Park and Chinatown Park each has their own character and features.

Image Courtesy of Rose Kennedy Greenway Conservancy

Operation, programming, and maintenance for the Greenway are handled by the Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenway Conservancy, a model example of the type of public-private partnership emerging in cities across the United States.  Funding sources include private donations, grants, and earned income, as well as public funding for maintenance and operation.  The Greenway faces some unique maintenance challenges due to the fact that it is essentially a very long, large roof garden covering an interstate, which means that it has minimal soil depth.  Despite this challenge, the Greenway is one of the few organically maintained urban parks in the United States.  Some site furnishings in the park were manufactured by DuMor, Inc.

The Greenway has quickly become a hub for activity in Boston, hosting more than 350 events in 2012 alone, in addition to regular attractions like the Mobile Food program (food trucks and trikes), a seasonal carousel, and interactive water features that attract millions of visitors each year.

For more information on the Rose Kennedy Greenway, please visit:

Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenway Conservancy

MassDOT

City of Boston Parks & Recreation Department

The “Frontline Parks” program is made possible with generous support from DuMor, Inc. and PlayCore.

Credit: Emerald Necklace Conservancy

The discussion was arranged as two panels – one of public sector park agency representatives, and the other of private sector park partner organizations.  The goal of the discussion was to hear a bit from both panels about the benefits and challenges of partnerships between the two.  It turned out to be a revealing and meaningful discussion about the murky territory in which park partnerships now find themselves.

On the public side sat Ed Lambert, Jr., Massachusetts Commissioner for the Department of Conservation and Recreation; Toni Pollak, Boston’s Park Commissioner, and Liam Kavanagh, First Deputy Commissioner for New York City Parks.

On the private side sat Doreen Stoller, Executive Director for Houston’s Hermann Park; Tom Powers, Executive Director for the Boston Harbor Island Alliance; and Yvette Bowden, President of the Piedmont Park Conservancy in Atlanta.  Both Doreen and Yvette sit on CPA’s board of directors.  Jeff Cook, from the Trustees Collaborative for Boston Parks, moderated the panel.

Other than Tom’s relationship to the Massachusetts agencies, no other speakers had ties to each other, so the discussion flowed with the ease that distance from a home base provides.  This allowed the roomful of Boston park advocates and CPA board members a chance to hear, maybe a little more candidly, about the ongoing development of P3 relationships in parks – which for some is that often-recalled process of sausage-making.

Nobody disagreed about the value of private partners in advancing accountability and responsibility – and maybe most importantly, a better management protocol – for parks.  “In 1975, when Daniel Moynihan proposed giving Central Park to the National Park Service to manage there were more city staff working in the park than the Central Park Conservancy has today,” said Liam, “and yet it was considered a failing park.”

Much credit was given by the public agency representatives for the efficiency, flexibility, and enhanced design standards and funding brought by private partners to public parks in the last three decades.  On the flip side they noted that these benefits hadn’t come without challenges – privatization concerns, equity concerns, the added maintenance costs of new capital investments and the need for more guidance in inviting private partners and their demands into public parks.

“There is a continuing role for public agencies to broker a conversation about the role of P3s in parks management,” said Ed.  And from Liam, “There is a need for better ground rules.”

From the private partners on the panel we learned about the demands they face as the public agency budget gaps in their cities grow, along with the expectation that the private sector should fill it – and increasingly not just with capital investment dollars, but with funding for operations and maintenance.

Their challenge is that park donors want recognition, accountability, and a commitment from the city about their role and their investment, a commitment – at least for ongoing maintenance – that is getting harder to negotiate.  After all, it’s supposed to be a partnership.

The shift in thinking about funding for public parks in the last few decades has been monumental.  There is an increasing expectation that the private sector will share in the responsibility of taking care of public parks.  All of this change is occurring without the benefit of a playbook, and rapidly enough that the question was asked, “Have we given up on a strategy to raise more money from the public sector?  Are we now leaving it to the private sector to innovate around funding?”

Credit: Emerald Necklace Conservancy

Thank goodness there is an amazing amount of experimentation; for the moment, minimal guidance (intended or not) and the ambiguity that goes with it is allowing a period of learning in this important transition.  Some of the brightest moments in the discussion came in the form of war stories from both sides about how they managed to find solutions to funding challenges, donor demands, contracting and permitting snafus, and misguided policies.

“With complexity comes opportunity,” said Tom Powers.

In fact, in spite of the challenges, P3s continue to grow.  Toni Pollak cited the fact that Boston has 176 park partners and they are actively soliciting more.  And not just private partners, but partnerships with other government entities like public works, water departments, state agencies and the Corps of Engineers – many of which are now working with the city on a massive daylighting and restoration project for the Muddy River.

Not surprisingly, success breeds success: good parks are highly used and operational demands are increasing. Houston’s Hermann Park saw 6 million visitors last year, supported thankfully with 20,000 volunteer hours.  Visitation at the Boston Harbor Islands is up 160% since 2004.  Piedmont Park, once considered a park only for Midtown Atlanta residents, now serves visitors from 80 different zip codes across the city with a budget that is over 40% earned income.

This netherworld of parks transitioning from being publicly supported to being supported by a mix of public and private funding is, on the one hand, challenging both sides to distraction; but on the other hand, if you can live with a little ambiguity it is an amazingly creative moment in time.

The discussion touched on key questions for advocates and agencies as the parks movement grows.  How can private partners help to move donors from only making sexy capital investments (and the ribbon-cutting and naming rights that go with them) to a more sophisticated understanding of the value of different kinds of investments that will pay returns?  The value and opportunity, for example, in linking operations to programming or the leveraging of earned income from projects that can spin off funding to pay for more equity in parks and programs.

Can the private sector get more sophisticated in leveraging its gifts and investments to require more from the public sector?  How can the public sector get smarter about leveraging funds from outside the parks budget by making a stronger case for parks’ role in aiding transportation, housing, stormwater, and public health solutions?  How can both partners work harder on solutions to move money and other resources from the neighborhoods that have money to those that don’t?  And best of all, how can the growing number of P3s operating around the country get smarter and more competitive through networks like the one that City Parks Alliance offers?

Both sides shared their beliefs in the value of communication, constant dialogue, and a shared sense of mission, strategies and master plans, all with the end goal of building trust.  Without a playbook you have to trust that your partner is going to support you.

“Our work with the city every day is about establishing a new business model,” said Yvette.  “We are listening, talking and working to understand what the city wants – how can we leverage, create and get the resources we need to keep our parks successful.  And most importantly, we are working to assure that Piedmont Park is part of the city’s vision for what it wants to be.”

All the public agency representatives commented on their great appreciation for private partners and their often powerful board members.

“We have a robust committee structure to help our members direct their energies and help us keep moving projects along,” said Doreen.  And from Liam, “These guys have great access, great stories and a good understanding of the need to help push the conversation in a political discussion.”

In some ways the overflowing room was a testimony to the strength of belief in public-private partnerships for parks; when you added up the money, volunteer time, professional in-kind service, professional expertise, new park acreage and countless program schedules just for the parks represented in the room, it was a value of hundreds of millions of dollars.

For all the recognition of the value of ‘private’ partnerships, all of the panel members agreed on the need to continue to affirm that public parks are public, and “…that no nonprofit controls the space.”

“We are stewards for the public,” said Ed.   “Our goal is to protect public access to public parks while acknowledging that our parks need private partner contributions.”

Credit: Emerald Necklace Conservancy

In spite of the ambiguity that results from adding more stakeholders to the park planning and management process, private partnerships are resulting not only in more dollars for parks but a keener sense of management for parks – and the people who use them – turning all that energy and stirring of the pot into real outcomes around design, programs and the user experience.  These kinds of discussions and workshops hosted by the City Parks Alliance are a pleasure for those of us who care about public parks.  It’s a wonderful opportunity to have the chance to hear a bit of inside wisdom from leaders in the field, even as the field sorts itself out and morphs into something new.

Kathy Blaha writes about parks and other urban green spaces, and the role of public-private partnerships in their development and management. When she’s not writing for the blog, she consults on advancing park projects and sustainable land use solution

But getting there takes more than a capital campaign.  Public policies and a civic culture that promotes entrepreneurship play a central role not just in driving small business but in driving new models for the parks business, and the engagement of private partners.  Entrepreneurial thinking is key to revitalizing park management and park investment in a world where government can no longer pick up the whole bill.  Good public policy around innovation and entrepreneurialism can help to build a new and more thoughtful generation of civic leaders, and a new way of working that links public policy and private management to visionary giving.

In last week’s blog I talked about Boston and its focus on innovation and invention.  I also talked about Philadelphia winning the Bloomberg Philanthropies Mayor’s Challenge for its efforts to link private entrepreneurs with public policy challenges.  And this week comes the news that Baltimore is in the game too, with a more direct focus on making the link between innovation and parks.  The Greater Baltimore Tech Council – gb.tc – is using its innovation platform and angel investors to promote “hacking” its parks:

The power to make Baltimore’s parks (and the city, as a whole) sustainable, livable and vibrant lies with us. So we are calling on the citizens of Baltimore to “hack” the city’s parks. By hacking we mean citizens develop their own applications (whether they be technology-based or not) which create simple, tangible benefits for the community.

gb.tc has partnered with the Mayor’s Office of Information Technology and Baltimore’s Department of Recreation and Parks to give Baltimoreans a real opportunity to change our urban green spaces. The goal isn’t just to better life in Baltimore, but to give citizens the chance to build real, sustainable businesses which help achieve this end.

Hack the Parks is making grants available to support the most innovative park improvement proposals. We encourage you to think small, at least to start. The funded projects are all pilots. In addition to seed money, the selected pilot projects will also be given park space or other Rec and Parks resources to test their plans, pivot, and evolve into truly viable products.

The gb.tc effort is about understanding the link between private sector innovation and public sector innovation policy, facilitating interaction among not only the tech community but potential investors and community stakeholders who care about the public realm.  In government, control is vested at the top much more so than in almost any business. If you want an organization to become more entrepreneurial and alert (in this case, to park users), you must give a lot more control to the people who understand the parks ‘market’ and deal with park users.  Connections create innovation.

Once again our friends in Canada are thinking two steps ahead of us in looking at how to blend our public and private leadership for a more potent result.  David Wolfe, in his work looking at economic development and civic governance, talks about building collaborative leadership:

The essential criterion for success in building these new collaborative relationships is finding the right mechanisms to engage members of the community in a sustained effort to advance its economic opportunities. The recruitment of a committed, creative and collaborative leadership is the most essential element for the success of these efforts. These kinds of collaborative leaders invariably share certain characteristics:

• They can see the opportunities;
• They exhibit an entrepreneurial personality, in both a business and a ‘civic’ sense;
• They are willing to cross functional, political and geographic boundaries in pursuit of their strategic goals;
• They demand a sharing of both responsibility and results, and consequently are trusted as credible intermediaries; and
• They are committed to and comfortable working in teams (Montana, Reamer, et al. 2001).

Right from the start, the founders of the Central Park Conservancy understood that a successful park partnership was as much about management as it was about money.

In 1976, Gilder and Soros funded a study of how Central Park could be revived, calling for a private board and modern management. The idea went nowhere; at the time, many thought the park was beyond rescue. Then they met a young landscape planner named Elizabeth Barlow Rogers, whose Central Park Task Force was likewise struggling. In 1978, newly elected Mayor Ed Koch took an interest in this handful of citizen-activists. To capitalize on their opportunity, Gilder and Rogers merged their organizations, creating the Central Park Conservancy in 1980.

“You don’t throw money at the problem,” Rogers realized. “You throw management.”

Photo courtesy of the Central Park Conservancy

The conservancy gradually took the driver’s seat in New York and has become a model for countless other efforts.  A new private partner that raises funds for parks or provides other resources won’t be nearly as successful as one who can take the reins and change business as usual.  For a private partner to provide benefits, they must have the flexibility to bring entrepreneurial ideas to the table and the authority to implement them and make change.

As cities, park departments and friends groups struggle to find a new way of working together, it is important to remember that much depends on the ability of cities to develop the organizational capacity and the civic culture for formulating and implementing new management strategies.  Some cities are trying – because they have parks that are failing or new parks that need private support to get off the ground – but others haven’t figured out that parks are part of a city’s business strategy and to be successful, must be operated in a way that ‘hacks’ the old methods and experiments relentlessly until it finds a new normal.  There is no single blueprint for how this should be done; ultimately, it involves a process of social learning for the civic leadership in each city.

Kathy Blaha writes about parks and other urban green spaces, and the role of public-private partnerships in their development and management. When she’s not writing for the blog, she consults on advancing park projects and sustainable land use solution

A few weeks ago I raised the idea of business model innovation with regard to running parks.  I see much applicability in the research on business innovation for city park governance.  There is a kind of Hi-Lo way of looking at governance and running parks as suggested by Mayor Menino that links the idea of innovation – big picture and cutting edge – with mechanics, the down and dirty of everyday excellence in operations.

I’ve also been reading Governance as Leadership by Richard Chait, William Ryan and Barbara Taylor.  (The Pew Charitable Trust has a nice summary of the book here.)  The book is mostly about reframing the work of nonprofit boards, but I see lessons for reframing the work of P3s, too.

I think that engaging in park partnerships drives the need to focus on governance and thus the ways that the work at hand can be done better; it’s really about finding ways that the partnership, with new resources, can innovate and do the job of running parks differently.

According to our authors, there are two methods of leading which boards follow: task and structure based, or governance based. Most practitioners in the field know that focusing only on organizational structure and management processes won’t lead you to innovate, but it’s always a safe place to begin.

An approach focused on governance means thinking about it in a way that generates real leadership and innovation.  They suggest finding a common purpose before worrying about tasks and structure by looking back on the organization’s history and success, finding clues about its culture, and discovering a common purpose which can become a better starting point for goal-setting.  In the case of parks, it’s about looking at the park’s history and culture of operation with an eye toward sharing governance and what that means and looks like.

Peter Harnik, Director of the Center for City Park Excellence is forever asking, “What’s the problem?” in an effort to sort through the myriad challenges that park managers have.  Deciding on the nature of a problem before trying to solve it makes sense.

Given a common understanding of the problem, all the park partners can start from the same place.  For example, in the case of parks, rather than cut back on services in the face of budget deficits, local governments can engage partners to transform the way parks are managed – what are the ideas, how can we innovate? A successful partnership works because the reason for it is compelling, not coercive, to both partners.  Because, our authors suggest, “…posing catalytic questions and promoting robust dialogue right where the stakes and anxieties are high…” is the place where innovation begins.

This idea hit home for me in reading about some of this year’s winners to the Bloomberg Philanthropies Mayor’s Challenge.  The Mayors Challenge was created, “to celebrate the creative problem solving and incredible innovation that is happening in city halls from coast to coast.”  The goal is to find innovation around the problems and challenges that face local governments in delivering services.  One means for this is linking issues, linking stakeholders and breaking down silos.

While the overwhelming majority of philanthropic support is still issue-specific – e.g. education, health care, the environment, or the arts – the Bloomberg Philanthropies sees the first step in innovation as creating a city-wide strategy where all those issues come together.

Innovating in Philadelphia
One of this year’s winners is the Philadelphia Social Enterprise Partnership [PSEP] which provides opportunities for entrepreneurs who want to tackle traditional public sector problems such as storm water management, gun violence and education.  In March, the group’s proposal was one of five (out of 300) awarded $1 million.

PSEP partners include Good Company Ventures (GCV), the city’s Office of New Urban Mechanics (ONUM) – similar to Mayor Menino’s in Boston, the Wharton Social Impact Initiative and the Mayor’s Office of Information Technology. According to Bloomberg staff, PSEP’s inclusion of non-government leadership was unique among Bloomberg finalists.

PSEP has three core elements: (1) reframe challenges as opportunities for innovators; (2) bring the best ideas to Philadelphia to be developed and challenged with city government at the table; and (3) create a system that allows city government to serve as the testing ground for these new solutions. Each year they work on three major urban challenges.

Here’s the premise of the project in Mayor Nutter’s words:

Historically the tendency of government was to think it had all the answers. We defined problems and we prescribed solutions. You sent us taxes; we delivered services. But current economic and political realities require government to be more focused and strategic in our investments and actions – and though there has been a certain loss of trust in government to just get stuff done – it is at the local level that we are best placed to drive innovation and earn back the trust of our citizens, restoring a sense of hope and optimism about our future.

The role of government is evolving from problem-solver to partnership-builder and, as usual, that change is being driven by city governments. Cities are incubators of innovation…pursuing progressive policies and initiatives tackling some of America’s toughest challenges. Most exciting are not just the initiatives themselves – whether aimed at violence, clean energy, or education – but the ways in which cities are developing them, leveraging the enormous creativity of citizens, entrepreneurs, and other partners to transform the ways we solve problems.

The Takeaway
Philadelphia has essentially created a space outside the government structure that allows innovative ideas to flourish and take root through collaboration and partnership. Here’s an example from the Mayor:

In order to encourage the development of innovative solutions around neighborhood improvement, we’ll bring together the Police Department, Licenses and Inspections, 311, and our community engagement program, PhillyRising, to identify assets including open data, program knowledge, environmental resources, expenditures, and insights to define critical areas of need and opportunity. We’ll pool this information into a national call for ideas, and the 10 most promising will come to Philadelphia to turn these ideas into solutions with the relevant city departments, Good Company Group, a social enterprise accelerator, and the Wharton Social Impact Initiative, among others. The most viable solutions will be piloted inside city government – perhaps with Police or 311, or maybe both – creating a lab for urban innovations.

I like the idea of collaboration with a business innovator and academic and the practitioners whose job it will be to implement the new idea.  This approach has broad appeal for park advocates looking for innovative business models for running parks – everything from governance to linking to other city functions like transportation and housing on the park’s edge are critical to the park’s success.

One of the interesting aspects of this work is the discussion behind the timing of setting goals. Innovation gurus say hold off on committing to goals too fast.  Most of us like to believe that ‘thinking’ has to precede ‘doing’ but goals frequently emerge from action and can inform what the goals should be – I call my version of this the “ready, shoot, aim” approach.  Once a common understanding of the challenge between park partners is found, the next step is to experiment relentlessly to try out new ideas.  Testing ideas before committing to them can help refine them.

This makes a great deal of sense when you look back at all the park conservancies who didn’t start with contracts with their city partners, or MOUs, or even letters of agreement in some cases.  They just agreed on what needed to be done and began to tackle the job, learning in the process. They assumed that their actions would inform a bigger, longer term set of goals as well as a way of working with each that amplified their strengths.  One of the paths to innovation is through partners using their partnership to observe and to ask provocative questions and to find successful ways to address long term issues, not just the tasks at hand.

Kathy Blaha writes about parks and other urban green spaces, and the role of public-private partnerships in their development and management. When she’s not writing for the blog, she consults on advancing park projects and sustainable land use solutions

Baltimore, MD
Patterson Park is one of the oldest parks in Baltimore, but an urban renewal campaign and devoted community groups are giving it new life.  Since 1827, when William Patterson donated the first six acres to the city of Baltimore, the park has expanded to more than 135 acres and serves as the only green space available to residents of the surrounding neighborhood.

In the 1970s and 1980s, both the park and neighborhood fell into decline.  Theft, vandalism, and drug dealing were rampant.  Several attempts to save the park were started and then abandoned.  Patterson Park’s fortunes began to change in the early 1990s with the creation of a stable, active organization called the Friends of Patterson Park, which got to work on restoring and improving the park amenities and structures that had fallen into disrepair.  Site furnishings in the park were manufactured by DuMor, Inc.

In addition to fundraising and forming partnerships, the Friends of Patterson Park have been very effective in community outreach, particularly with the growing Hispanic community around the park.  Outreach to this population has resulted in increased participation in FPP programs and events, as well as additional volunteers and support. In 2009, FPP’s Katie Long – Program Director and Hispanic Liaison – paved the way for the formation of the Friends Consejo Hispano. The Consejo was formed to provide input and ideas for park programs, encourage the community’s participation in the park, and produce the new annual Día del Niño event, which attracts over 1,000 participants.

The Consejo provides the opportunity for leadership and empowerment of the local Latino community, resulting in park projects and programs that bridge cultural and language barriers in one of Baltimore’s most diverse neighborhoods. Programs range from park stewardship work (cleaning playgrounds) to tamale and pinata making classes, to Dia del Nino and other special events that attract people from all cultures and socio-economic levels.

For more information on Patterson Park and the Consejo Hispano, please visit:

Friends of Patterson Park

Baltimore City Department of Recreation and Parks

The “Frontline Parks” program is made possible with generous support from DuMor, Inc. and PlayCore.

I recently caught up with Ed Uhlir, Executive Director for Millennium Park, Inc. (MP, Inc.), to talk with him about lessons learned at the Park and what has surprised him about its success.  “The biggest thing is that it turned out to be such a huge economic engine for the city,” he said. Uhlir recognized the importance of high quality design in creating real estate value but he’s not sure anyone would have predicted the size of the impact that Millennium Park has had.  A 2011 Texas A&M report on the impact of the park tells us,

…it is clear that Millennium Park has generated the following economic impact on the City of Chicago: $490M in total park construction; $ 2.45 Billion in new construction near the park; 70,070 direct, indirect and induced jobs created by new construction in the area; a 57% increase in new residential units near the park (3,587 units since 2005); 29% premium on park units sold with views of the park; five million annual visitors which generate $1.29B in tourism dollars; $5.9M in annual operations costs that feed the local economy; 2,126 new underground parking spaces at Millennium Park; an 11% increase in hotel rooms (751 rooms) near the park; $173.5M donated by 115 founders to specific projects within the park; and 11 fortune 500 companies that donated to the park.

How did that happen?  Ed says, “It’s the world-class art and design.  It has branded the park and added value to the image of Chicago.”  And, I would add, it represents the kind of success that results from effective leadership and a strong public/private partnership. “The private partnership enabled us with flexibility and the ability to be more selective in getting great design.”

One of the things that the Millennium Park planners did so well was to incorporate great art and design that gives the park a sense of beauty beyond its landscaping and gardens.  The challenge now is to continually position the park as cutting edge, with more creative contributors.  “We do have new ‘beans’ every couple of years,” said Ed.  The formal Boeing Galleries in the Park – two outdoor galleries designed for public exhibitions – are a home for changing shows of contemporary art.  Every two years a new show is staged, generally from an artist outside the United States.

And Millennium Park continues to expand its brand by making connections to the properties around it.  The elegant Nichols Bridgeway leads south to the new addition of the Art Institute.  East of the Park, and across Frank Gehry’s BP Bridge over Columbus Drive, there are plans for transforming Daley Bicentennial Park into Maggie Daley Park, a thirty-acre park and children’s play space, with a better connection to the city’s lakefront.

The increase in surrounding property values and the creation of new jobs is one important gauge of the park’s success, but just as important has been the impact the park has had on tourism.  One interesting measure for this, says Ed, is Trip Advisor.  There are over 2,600 reviews for the Park on Trip Advisor, with almost all of them calling their visit “excellent” or “very good.”  Ninety-eight reviewers called their Millennium Park experience “average.”  Out of curiosity, I checked out Trip Advisor reviews for a few other signature parks around the country: New York attractions take the cake with the High Line receiving 5,300 positive reviews, and Central Park has over 12,000 reviews; Olympic Sculpture Park in Seattle has 152 reviews; and Discovery Green in Houston has 60 reviews.

With park visitation up to 5 million annually, the City of Chicago is focusing on its “brand” across the country and world and is opening tourism offices with one of their pitches being, “Come visit Millennium Park.”  Foreign visitors are the fastest growing group of visitors and – though still a small number in comparison to local and regional visitors – they spend more money.

Ed believes that in addition to great art and design, great programming is what brings people to the park, which hosts over 600 free events annually.  “There are lots of opportunities in this small space and everything is free thanks to donors who sponsor many of the programs,” he says.  But there is a potential conflict between donors who made gifts and wanted everything to be free for park users, and the city which needs to balance its budget to keep the programs running.  Endowments, not just for the art but for programs, are now a key part of fundraising.

MP, Inc. currently has $25 million in restricted and unrestricted endowments (not including a $10 million pledge for the outdoor concert pavilion).  Their goal is to double that.  “The private-public partnership is important to making the park work and endowment money helps assure that the partnership continues into the future.”

Half of the board of MP, Inc. is original to when work on the park began in 1996.  Some of them feel like they have accomplished what they set out to do and are ready to move on.  Now, younger family members of original donors are joining the board as membership diversifies from those who built it to those who are committed to enhancing it.  Program endowments – such as the one from McDonalds to manage the Cycle Center and present free morning exercise programs, or Boeing’s endowment of the outdoor art gallery – are increasingly important to keeping the park successful through high quality programs.

When the park opened, The Financial Times described Millennium Park as “…a genuinely 21st-century interactive park [that] could trigger a new way of thinking about public outdoor spaces.”  These days Millennium Park is as much a venue for driving economic impact in the city as it is a respite from the tall, dark skyscrapers that surround it.  Keeping the park vibrant will require the same kind of focus on excellence that made it a success.  Like a museum, the Park will have to manage its art and attractions to keep them fresh – and cutting edge – in order to keep people coming and driving its economic impact.  And that will take new and committed public-private partnerships for managing the park for the next 1,000 years that Cloud Gate shines.

Kathy Blaha writes about parks and other urban green spaces, and the role of public-private partnerships in their development and management. When she’s not writing for the blog, she consults on advancing park projects and sustainable land use solutions.

So went the thinking behind the creation of Central Park Conservancy as recounted by Adrian Benepe, former New York City Parks Commissioner and now Director of Urban Parks for the Trust for Public Land.  Adrian was here in Miami this week, touring the city, talking with park advocates, and looking for ways that the national organization and its cadre of urban park experts could add value to Miami and Miami-Dade County parks.

Adrian talked about the challenges cities face in continuing to be the sole steward for their parks in the face of huge budget challenges, and a list of pressing needs longer than your arm.  Why not, he argued, find new models that not only bring more resources into the equation but also add more value?

His words ring true for cities across the country who increasingly see parks as part of their strategy for economic development while struggling to find new models for developing and operating them – or, as editor and columnist for Fortune magazine, Geoff Colvin sees it, “…developing the most crucial competency for every company today, innovating the business model.”  Substitute the word ‘parks’ for ‘company’ and all his ideas are relevant to our work.

In a recent interview with Urban Land magazine, Colvin extrapolates his ideas about business model innovation for real estate:

It’s a big story in commercial real estate, as the buildings tend to last a long time. But the buildings may last longer than the business model. In an awful lot of businesses, the model lasted for decades, if not a century. It just doesn’t anymore. The ability to envision different business models for a given property is going to be extremely valuable.

And, a source of competitive advantage.  The most important element of business model innovation for parks right now is around governance.   How can cities and their bureaucracies give way to more decentralized, resourceful decision-making?  Park visitors want so much more from their experience than one public agency can manage, even if they had all the financial resources to do so.  A better way is to find a structure that gives all the stakeholders the freedom to express their ideas – through social media to formal advisory roles to a full-fledged partnership stake.

The stakes here are high – as in the case of the High Line development, which has helped to trigger the construction of 40 new buildings, 12,000 new jobs and $200 million of new tax revenue (predicted to hit $900 million by 2020), not to mention the tourism dollars generated from nearly 5 million annual visitors.  Millennium Park, the subject of my next post, has generated $2.4 billion in new real estate construction in the last ten years according to a Texas A&M study.  If, as Adrian says, parks are becoming the linchpin for economic development strategies for cities, then we need to rethink our motivation for P3s as being about much more than a default option for governments due to a lack of money.

The value of a conservancy as a private partner to park agencies is about constituency and constancy.  According to Adrian, in addition to Central Park Conservancy and Prospect Park Alliance, there are 200 ‘friends of the parks’ groups in New York City, as well as a set of city-wide park advocates – all working together to bolster parks.

It may be that we have to start thinking about the business model for parks as a system of interconnected activities and stakeholders; a system that demands flexibility and creativity in determining how a park does business in order to stay vibrant and relevant to its users.  Public agencies can’t have a monopoly on how they runs parks and continue to do it competitively and successfully; they will need to tap into partnerships, external resources and new programs to keep parks vital.

Colvin, in his interview with Urban Land magazine goes on to say,

The problem in doing [business model innovation] is primarily a cultural problem—people just having personal difficulty changing their view of what they do, what the company does. Anytime you change things, you threaten existing interests. Conceptually, making these changes is easy. Even technologically, it’s easy. It’s the human element that makes it difficult.

In Miami, we are challenged with bridging the gap between the city’s now well-established donors and advocates for arts and culture with a small but increasingly vocal group who care about the city’s parks.  Our parks, together with our extensive waterfront are our outdoor living room and another element of our urban culture.  Many of us see a need for a whole new way of thinking about our parks as the city and region experiences another real estate boom – before it becomes too expensive to do so.

Why not?  The weather here is fine, people are outside more than in most cities, and downtown Miami as well as Miami Beach are dense enough now to make bicycling an easy and convenient way to travel.  Why not green our paths and waterfronts and make it easier and more pleasant for residents and visitors to get around this beautiful place – and do it in a way that builds on our economic engine and strengthens peoples’ connection to the city?

Adrian reminded us that with Mayors Bloomberg (New York City) and Nutter (Philadelphia) leaving their jobs as two of the most high profile green mayors in recent history, there is a void in a national mayoral voice making the case for the value of investing in city parks. Who might step in and continue to lead us with innovative governance and business models for running our parks and enlivening our city life?

Kathy Blaha writes about parks and other urban green spaces, and the role of public-private partnerships in their development and management. When she’s not writing for the blog, she consults on advancing park projects and sustainable land use solutions.

But Michele Hodges, Belle Isle Conservancy’s new and very first President, who began work in January of this year, sees it differently – as do its many online fans that see through the deterioration to its great views of the Detroit skyline, beautiful architectural assets and Olmsted-designed promenades that lead to the water’s edge.  It’s those fans who convinced Michele to take the job.  “Belle Isle has an amazing amount of public support and goodwill.  My job is to harness that,” she said.

It’s not like the Conservancy has to begin from scratch. Belle Isle has a long history of private partners supporting the park, starting with the Friends of Belle Isle which was founded in 1972. Joining the effort in 1988, the Belle Isle Botanical Society began raising money for projects to improve the Anna Scripps Whitcomb Conservatory. In 2004, the Belle Isle Women’s Committee was created and its first project was to upgrade Sunset Point.

The Belle Isle Conservancy was formed in the fall of 2011, through a merger of four existing nonprofits – Friends of Belle Isle, Belle Isle Botanical Society, Belle Isle Women’s Committee and Friends of the Belle Isle Aquarium.

“It was the quality of leadership that brought these organizations together, with stakeholders who had worked on behalf of the park for more than 40 years,” said Michele.   By 2009 these leaders knew their future was in working as one team in order to be a stronger advocate for the park.  They secured foundation funding, brought in a consultant and worked for almost two years in aligning their missions and looking forward.

“Community engagement with the stakeholders from the start was important to the merger but it has also laid the foundation for moving forward – now people are already engaged with the park,” she added.

The first stakeholder meetings were held in 2009 to see what advocates wanted for the park.  A user survey was conducted in 2010 – all volunteer driven – with 2200 respondents.  By 2010 merger plans were in the works based on the sentiment of users and advocates that one voice would lead to stronger leadership.  The four organizations voted to move forward in January 2011.

Where Do You Begin?

Sarah Earley, chairwoman of the nonprofit Belle Isle Conservancy, was recently quoted in the local paper as saying, “When we talk about what the park needs, you and I could talk forever.”

Not unlike the downtown BIDs I’ve talked to, “clean and safe” is the first priority.  And as Michele sees it, there is a lot of low-hanging fruit.  “Our first job is capacity building and working to support and enhance the work of our 4500 volunteers.  We have a track record of foundation support and through our annual events, raise $400,000.  It’s all right there for us to harness, put a system in place and get started.”  And getting started in this case means focusing on capacity building – hiring someone to manage the volunteer base and “being a master of leverage” in getting staff and volunteers in place for some key projects that don’t spread the organization too thin.

Working with the City

Beyond an MOU that exists for the Conservancy and the city to work together around managing the aquarium there is no written agreement between the two entities.  The aquarium re-opened to the public last September after shutting down in 2005. A $75,000 grant from the state of Michigan to repair the roof and skylights – and a group of 30 volunteers – keeps the aquarium running and open to the public every Saturday.

Currently the city operates and maintains the park.  Michele said they are looking at the Central Park Conservancy model as one potential way for them to work with the city.  But it is premature to say that they will follow that model.  A master plan for the park was updated in 2005 and the Conservancy has begun talks with the planning firm which did the original plan about what is still relevant.  Assessments will be conducted of all the major assets to develop a capital improvements plan.

Gov. Rick Snyder of Michigan has offered to lease Belle Isle. Under the plan, in the works since last summer, the island would become a state park with an entry fee, thus covering the annual $6 million in maintenance and operations costs — funds sorely needed for the beloved landmark, which in recent years has fallen into disrepair.  But for the moment the city council has nixed the idea.

“We’ll work with whatever entity is at the table,” says Michele.  We were included in the proposal documents as a go-to entity for the state.  We were advocates for the proposal because we saw it as bringing resources to the table; and we saw the lease as an opportunity manage through the crisis.”

The idea is not dead.  An Emergency Financial Manager appointed by the Governor started this week, so it’s possible that the discussion will be re-ignited and involve all three parties.

Building the Budget and the Board

The Conservancy’s budget is almost $1.5 million, including restricted funds, with $700,000 spent annually for operations.  The city spends another estimated $2-3 million in the park.  For the moment there is no earned income revenue, but the idea is on the table.  So is building on the success of their annual fundraisers like the Grand Prix that runs through the park.

Though racing cars through a park is not a common way to raise funds, in June of this year the Grand Prix will once again take place at Belle Isle.  It’s one of their biggest fundraisers and the Grand Prix directors are very supportive of the park.  The Grand Prix though is just one event of many that take place annually in the park and the Conservancy is looking at ways to manage this distinctive event better and in balance with all the other goals and activities for the park.

The Conservancy stakeholders, many of them now on the board, have a 40-year history of working with the city of Detroit.  Each of the original four organizations has representation on the board.  Three or four representatives from city are voting members of the board; a City Councilman is a voting member of the board.

They are continuing to build out their board.  Their bylaws allow for 35 members and they are currently at 19 or 20.  Michele is a big believer in engagement and getting a truly representative board.  They do much of their business by committee – with committees made up of board members and non-members.

The board is balancing the idea of taking on a major capital project early on with doing “lighter, quicker, cheaper” – identifying things that can happen quickly this summer to show improvement.

The P3 Balance

Each time I look at a P3 partnership for parks in a city I wonder how the issue of private conservancies for parks is taking hold.  Given Detroit’s financial woes and challenges, it’s not surprising to see more partnerships blossoming.  Not just private-public but public-public, too, across jurisdictions.  It may turn out to be the best place to trial and showcase what P3s can do in a city.

“Our first goal is to build social capital.  If you don’t have your social capital, cash doesn’t go as far. More than anything else we need the P3 capital – even more than cash.”  Then, Michele says, you can make decisions together and come to conclusions about the right balance together.  “We’re at a very important stage of our growth; we want to find the model that works for our community and has all of our stakeholders involved.”

Many in the city are talking about the right mix of P3s to make the city work well again.  John Gallagher has a long career covering urban redevelopment for the Detroit Free Press, and a new book out about Detroit that looks at reinvention ideas for the city. In a recent column he talks about that public-private balance, saying, “….perhaps the time has come to stop looking at groups like University Circle Inc. [a community service corporation in Cleveland] as a backstop for weak or nonexistent city services and more as a model for a new way of governing urban places.”

And today, while I spoke with Michele, Detroit Mayor Dave Bing announced that local business leaders had come up with $8 million to buy the city ambulances and police patrol cars.  The money from leaders within the Downtown Detroit Partnership will get the city 23 new EMS rigs and 100 police cars.

“Working together we can transform our city,” Bing said.

Kathy Blaha writes about parks and other urban green spaces, and the role of public-private partnerships in their development and management. When she’s not writing for the blog, she consults on advancing park projects and sustainable land use solutions.

Argo Cascades
Canoeing and kayaking the Huron River has long been a beloved pastime in Ann Arbor, and a canoe livery has been in operation there since the late 1800s.  The most popular river trip is a 3.7 mile course that travels through the heart of the city.  Prior to 2012, this river trip required boaters to paddle through a quarter-mile stagnant millrace that ended in a concrete barrier and a difficult portage. The portage made the trip difficult and inaccessible to many people.

The project that became the Argo Cascades began as an attempt to address structural deficiencies along the dam embankment and to improve river recreation opportunities.  The city pursued two options to mitigate infrastructure deficiencies: soliciting bids to repair the dam’s earthen embankment, and issuing an RFP for an entire embankment reconstruction that would provide boat passage. The Parks Advisory Commission and City Council ultimately approved a recommendation to build a boat bypass. The proposed design removed the millrace and replaced it with a series of drop pools, improved accessibility of the adjacent path, and addressed problems in the embankment that were identified by state officials. The design also preserved Argo Pond and Argo Dam, while greatly improving the river trip experience for canoers and kayakers, and included paving 1,500 feet of the Border-to-Border trail that was previously not ADA accessible.

Not only did the Argo Cascades address a multitude of environmental and recreational issues, it has also had an immediate positive effect on the local economy.   The visitor count rose from 36,000 in 2011 to more than 50,000 in 2012, with a corresponding 58 percent increase in revenue.   With the portage gone, tubing and rafting have now been added to the list of activities that can be enjoyed on the river, attracting visitors who would rather float than paddle.  Tubing rentals alone accounted for $20,000 in new revenue in the first season.

The success of the project has had a ripple effect on other sites along the river.  Today the trails, the rock drops and grassy banks are utilized by many to picnic, walk, bicycle, relax, and to listen to the water cascading over the rocks.

For more information on Argo Cascades, please visit:

City of Ann Arbor

Washtenaw County Parks & Recreation Commission

The “Frontline Parks” program is made possible with generous support from DuMor, Inc. and PlayCore.