Or at least favors giving land over at below-market rates to nonprofit entities. If nonprofits then release to for-profits, maybe this gets around this public-resources-for-private-gain skittishness / legal issues. Or maybe it doesn’t.
Another thing is that there are a wide variety of public entities that public lands, and that the terms for using public or public-authority lands likely depend a lot on the missions and regulations that govern the entity. Parks district may be able to do different things than a sanitary district, or a county land bank, or a city planning and development department. At least, that’s the sense I’ve gotten in Chicago.
Comments are closed.