To the extend public-private partnerships can augment our general fund
revenue without limiting the level of service for our residents, they should
be explored. In a prior question, I spoke about the possibility of using public
improvement districts (PIDs) to help maintain and enhance parks, without
additional impact to our general fund. This is an example where the
benefits to the private entities are not in conflict with the public, so
everyone can benefit from the partnership.

Where I would get concerned is where the partnership encroaches more
onto the privatization spectrum. Providing access to parkland for families is
an important function of local government, which supports community
health and education. The ability to pay should not influence whether a
family has access to our parks.