#2718 Aging public facilities （老朽化する公共施設） June 28, 2014

  大学受験生用のテクストとして6月5日付のジャパンタイムズ紙の社説を紹介する。

  1960年代と1970年代につくられた公共施設が老朽化して修理もしくは建て替えが必要になっている。つくられてから40年から50年たつのだから、コンクリート製の建物でも耐用年数に達している。度重なる地震に加え、亀裂に雨水が入り鉄筋を腐らせ、腐った鉄筋が傍聴することでコンクリートがはがれるというようなことが起きている。このまま使い続けると事故になりかねない。そうした建物を修理したり建て替えるのにどれくらい必要なのかすらわかっていない。記事の中には図書館が例に挙げられている。
　人口減少と高齢化と少子化が同時進行するなかで、公共施設の修理や建て替え費用をどうやって工面するのかという話だ。財源は増税しかないのである。
　国ばかりでなく全国の市町村が税金の無駄遣いなどできるような状況にない。ところが全国の地方自治体は無駄遣いのまっさかりだ、根室市をみればよくわかる。
　

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2014/06/04/editorials/aging-public-facilities/
============================

Aging public facilities

The deterioration of many public facilities built by local governments in the 1960s and 1970s is a growing problem. Because most prefectural and municipal governments are in difficult financial straits due to soaring social welfare costs and shrinking populations, they must decide which facilities to repair and which facilities to close or integrate. They need to carefully study the condition and use rate of these facilities, and listen to local residents’ opinions.

In most cases, local governments have different sections managing different facilities such as municipality offices, schools, libraries, public health centers and community centers. Therefore they need to first create a register listing the basic data of individual facilities, such as age, construction costs, floor size, earthquake-resistant strength, use rate and maintenance costs. Only after compiling this data can they tackle the question of what to do with the facilities. By considering the population trend, degree of need, the cost-benefit factor of each facility and residents’ views, local officials should decide whether to reconstruct, repair, abolish or integrate facilities. Privatization could also be an option.

Issuing a report on the conditions of aging public facilities and their maintenance costs will help local governments gain residents’ understanding of their plans for such facilities.

Local governments need to consider the possibility of cooperation with adjacent municipalities concerning the integration of public-facility functions. For example, it may be possible to house various branch offices of a prefectural government or other administrative offices in the building of a public facility that for cost-cutting reasons has been earmarked for closure. Prefectural governments should share relevant data with municipalities to facilitate joint use.

Municipal governments need to consider local residents’ views to determine if specific facilities such as libraries should be closed or integrated. If a library must be shuttered, they should consider moving its books to another facility like a community center so residents can continue to use them.

A big factor in dealing with aging public facilities is available funding, which is likely decreasing in areas where populations are rapidly falling. If local governments in such areas write plans to reconstruct or repair public facilities without paying sufficient attention to budgetary constraints, they will face difficulties later. They need to carefully calculate the size of future tax revenues and expenditures.

To help local governments, the central government should be flexible about a rule that requires local governments to partially return subsidies used to fund the construction of public facilities if their usage changes from the originally approved purpose. Minimizing the amount of subsidies that must be returned would be helpful for local governments that plan to integrate public facilities for cost-savings reasons.

============================
*たくさん読まないと力がつかない、高校生諸君は自力で読んでみたらいい。



にほんブログ村