I am concerned about what the Occupy Movement means for our public parks. Public parks are the commons in our society, the places where anybody may go to gather and to recreate. Public parks belong to us all, therefore private individual organizations must not be allowed to have exclusive use to them.
Inherit in the concept of a public park is that man is just a visitor, and that nobody resides there permanently. Parks are places where men dwell only temporarily for fellowship or solitude, it is an escape from the private places we normally reside in.
When kayaking on a lake or hiking a mountain, one may stop to enjoy the view. You only stop for a few minutes to enjoy the view, and then you move on. Your experience is non-exclusive, anyone can walk by when your there, or come by five minutes after you’ve left in solitude. Laws prevent you from building a house or setting up long-term residency there, you must move on an allow others to see what you once saw.
Campsites are same way. Whether in a DEC Campground or a back-country site, one can only set up a campsite and camp there for a set amount of time. Typically this is limited to two weeks except during Big Game Season. When your time is up, you must pack up your gear, and leave the site cleaner then you have found it.
When your camping, a campsite becomes your temporary place of residency. You unpack your gear, you make a fire, you set up your tent. You cook your meals there, you camp there, and you probably do your business in an outhouse or in woods a short ways from there. For all purposes, you live there and campsite is like your house for a short period of time.
A campsite is never an exclusive site. Campsites can get elaborately set up, with lots of canopies, tents, lanterns and other gear. Some people hang Christmas lights and drive in large RVs to campsites. You may dwell there for a while but after a number of days you must pack up and leave. Others may then use your campsite, enjoy the views and benefits the public lands provide for all that wish to use them.
Public parks are excellent places for individuals and groups to get together and discuss public business. They are good places to get together and protests. Many parks are large, and can accommodate large groups of people. Many parks are appropriate for camping and other recreational pursuits.
Yet, we can not allow any individual or group to remain in a park for too long of a period. Individuals must remain visitors, those who come only for a short period of time to enjoy the land in solitude or fellowship. Two weeks, needs to remain the maximum use for a piece of land, except in very narrow exception.
… Allowing people to stay too long in a park, only serves to undermine the concept of public lands and the commons.
As all park land (including local parks, county parks, state forests and forest preserve) in NY State belong to all of the people, it is important that they remain in the hands of the people, for all to use and enjoy for all times. Only under specific circumstances can government take park land away from the people, and when they do, they must always replace it with some of comparable or greater value.
Today’s fodder is an excerpt from the Alienation Handbook put out by Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation.
The following have been determined by the courts to be alienations:
The conveyance, sale, or lease of municipal parkland or recreational facilities to another entity, such as an adjoining property owner, a developer, or a school district, which results in the facility no longer being used for public park and recreation purposes.
The lease of municipal park or recreational facilities even though the resource may continue to be used for public park and recreational purposes.
The use of parkland by a municipality for a non-park purpose, such as for a water filtration facility, a landfill, a museum, senior housing, temporary parking of police or municipal vehicles, or street construction.
Restricting to local residents the use of recreational facilities that had previously been open to all persons.
Failure to keep a public park or recreational facility equally open to the public. A public park or recreational facility must be open to the public on an equitable basis. Where availability of public facilities is limited, such as with ball fields or marina berths, the use of facilities should be determined by some method which gives everyone the same opportunity for access, such as assignment on a “first-come, first-served” basis, or by using a lottery system.
These are considered to be non-alienations:
The construction and subsequent issuance of a revocable license for the operation of a park facility such as a cafe, snack bar, parking, or for a boat rental service which serves park patrons in connection with their use of the park.
A revocable permit for the use of park facilities for a special program or function, such as an arts and crafts fair, or a permit of greater duration for the temporary use of park facilities which are not otherwise being used by the public. The permit should contain a provision that it may be revoked at-will by the municipality. A temporary use should not be allowed to lapse into a permanent one.
The operation of a public park or recreational facility by a private concern. A public park and recreational facility need not be operated by a public entity, but may be a facility operated by a private, profit-making concern on behalf of a municipality under a lease or license agreement. To remain a public facility, the agreement must serve a public purpose, and must not result in exclusively private use. Also, the use must be one that is compatible and appropriate for the park or recreational area in question.
Charging ìuse fees, as long as they are reasonable and non-discriminatory. Where use fees are charged, whether by a public or private operator, they should not be in excess of those charged for comparable facilities in the area. A municipality may charge persons who are not residents of the community higher fees than it charges to residents, but case law suggests that non-resident fees should not substantially exceed the comparable fees assessed to residents.
