How Small Towns Can Ride The Public-Private Partnership Wave

Public-private partnerships offer a unique opportunity to redevelop and revitalize smaller communities around the country. A public-private partnership, also known as a P3 or PPP, is an agreement between a private company and a public body that allows for the public sector to transfer certain risks and responsibilities to the private sector. 

P3s, when structured properly, can provide an opportunity for small communities to develop new facilities and infrastructure, which can be a catalyst for community redevelopment. Two popular P3 delivery methods are known as a design-build-finance (DBF) and design-build-finance-operate-maintain (DBFOM). These delivery methods can be used to relieve significant burdens and risks from the public sector. 

Urban communities have gotten a lot of attention in recent years for improving assets using public-private partnerships. The lack of public funding and the abundance of private capital has made P3 a popular tool for delivering public facilities and infrastructure. However, smaller underserved communities also have significant needs for improved facilities and infrastructure. The needs of smaller communities are much more pressing than those of sprawling urban centers.

Complicating the issue is the fact that many smaller communities often have not constructed new facilities or infrastructure in decades. A well-structured P3 shifts risk from the public sector to the private sector while focusing on allowing the construction activity to be executed by local contractors, subcontractors and vendors. A well-structured P3 also allows municipalities to incorporate small and minority-owned business participation requirements that can be managed in a more transparent manner. 

The use of national resources partnered with the local workforce creates an inherent best value proposition for the community. When the construction dollars stay within the local community, these dollars can turn over six to seven times, creating a significant impact on the bottom line for the community.

Smaller communities typically do not have the technical resources and expertise to deliver capital projects efficiently. Also, the traditional design-bid-build methodology has proven to be a time-consuming and often more costly method of delivering public projects, especially in smaller communities. The lack of sophisticated construction management experience and the lack of integration between the design, construction and finance often results in projects that are over budget and of inferior quality. 

However, these communities still have a substantial need for new infrastructure, public safety facilities, courthouses, healthcare facilities, parks, museums and much more. The ability to make needed improvements to public facilities and infrastructure results in a better quality of life for the citizens and increased revenues for the public agency. 

 

Source: Forbes