New Search
• Charges are often set too low to collect adequate revenues to meet the actual <br />need for park system expansion. <br />• May require update to system development charge (SDC) ordinances if scope of <br />park services are expanded (e.g., regional parks, natural areas, open space, <br />etc.). <br />User Fees <br />What is it: Fees charged to help cover the cost of a service <br />Who pays: Users of the service <br />Relevant Types: <br />a) Park and Recreation user fee charged to recover part or all of the costs incurred in <br />the provision of park and /or recreation services. <br />Pros: <br />• Considered equitable because the recipient of the benefits pay for the <br />service. <br />• Moderately stable funding source (can fluctuate with discretionary personal <br />income). <br />Cons: <br />• Probably impractical for acquisitions because the magnitude of fee necessary <br />to raise sufficient revenue would be unacceptable. <br />• Publicly unpopular for access to parks and open space. <br />• Accessibility issues — excludes people based on ability to pay. <br />• Fees must pay for administrative overhead costs. <br />• Fees collected may be allocated to the general fund rather than the specific <br />agency /division making the charge. <br />b) Stormwater User Fee charged to recover part or all of the costs incurred in the <br />provision of stormwater services. <br />Pros: <br />• Can be used for land acquisition or easements which function as a <br />component of the natural stormwater system. <br />• Can be used to upgrade SDC standards, resulting in higher SDC rates for <br />future development. <br />Cons: <br />• Restricted to open spaces that meet stormwater management needs. <br />• Increase in stormwater rates may be unpopular with rate payers. <br />• May not relate payment to open space benefits received. <br />• May not address stormwater issues in a watershed context. <br />Open Space Acquisition Funding and Protection Strategies — Draft October 2001 4 <br />