Naples' Government Resolution no. 446 - 2016 on the Identification of Urban Spaces as Commons
= "Resolution 446/2016 is important because it recognises the social value of the experience of living in occupied spaces and not only the economic value of the properties".
"The Neapolitan Administration defines common goods as “the tangible and intangible assets of collective belonging that are managed in a shared, participatory process and which is committed to ensuring the collective enjoyment of common goods and their preservation for the benefit of future generations.
The city of Naples recognised seven public properties occupied by citizens and associations as “emerging commons and environments of civic development” through a Council Resolution in 2016. All these buildings were public properties, which had for years been in a terrible state of neglect and decay. Citizens and social movements transformed these spaces into places “that create social capital in terms of collective uses with a commons value.” The seven properties identified by the Resolution are very different in terms of origin and historical evolution, but they share the fact that Neapolitans were worried about speculation and the possible privatisation of the buildings. This concern drove them to take the decision to act first and restore them to the public interest.
The municipalist government of De Magistris has allowed social organisations to continue developing processes of cultural creation and productive innovation: Government Resolution no. 446/2016 has as its objective “the identification of areas of civic importance ascribed to the category of the commons.” Immediately after its publication (the resolution is dated 1 June 2016 but was only publicised recently), some members of the City Council criticised the Neapolitan Government, because according to them it would be better for the city to sell or rent these public spaces to increase the city’s income. The Government was also accused of “legalising” an illegal occupation of public buildings. However, Resolution 446/2016 does not provide leases or concessions for the social movements that occupy the spaces; it only acknowledges the “civic use” they do with them.
What has not been outlined is who has the official responsibility for maintaining the spaces (regular checks, cleaning etc), and so it is unclear if this is the Government’s responsibility, the occupants’ or both. The Resolution specifies that “the person temporarily in custody of the property management of municipal assets identified as a “common good” will have to respond to the principles of good performance, impartiality, cost management, and resource efficiency, respecting the public interest.”” (http://politicalcritique.org/world/2017/naples-common-good-empty-buildings/)
WHAT MAKES A PUBLIC BUILDING A “COMMON GOOD” IN NAPLES?
"The Neapolitan Administration defines common goods as “the tangible and intangible assets of collective belonging that are managed in a shared, participatory process and which is committed to ensuring the collective enjoyment of common goods and their preservation for the benefit of future generations.” The administration has also created a “Permanent Citizen Observatory on the Commons” which studies, analyses, proposes and controls the management and protection of common goods. The Observatory has eleven members, all of whom are experts in legal, economic, social or environmental fields. Seven of these members are appointed by the Mayor and four are citizens selected through simple online procedures.
Following the spirit of the cities of change, Resolution 446/2016 is important because it recognises the social value of the experience of living in occupied spaces and not only the economic value of the properties. It is also important because it establishes “the recognition of public spaces as part of a process of constant active listening and monitoring of the city and its demands, in relation to the collective use of spaces and protection of the commons.”
In order to analyse the forms of management and regulation of the occupied buildings, there are public discussion tables where citizens share decision making power with the Administration. Each space is different so the required management and the profile of the spaces varies from one to another. At the same time they are united through a commitment to the protection of the commons with the objective of keeping cultural, social and political issues alive, for example in the form of workshops and training centres for women, children and unemployed citizens." (http://politicalcritique.org/world/2017/naples-common-good-empty-buildings/)