Councilmembers on Oct. 21 questioned the process used to issue an expression‑of‑interest solicitation for City Park — a long‑used youth and community recreation site — even as staff said the request was driven by longstanding stormwater and flood damage that threatens the park’s future.

Councilmember Albert Tarantino opened the discussion saying he had not been consulted before the city issued the solicitation and that residents and league users should have been engaged earlier. “Why aren’t we reaching out to the community?” he asked, urging more transparency and earlier public input on any potential redevelopment or partnership.

City staff and the commissioner of recreation described repeated storm damage at the site, citing several high‑cost events. The presentation listed April 2007 storm damage of about $1,600,000 and damages associated with Hurricane Ida (reported as roughly $700,000), and said total FEMA‑reimbursed damages to date exceed $2,400,000. Staff said those recurring events and a constrained right‑of‑way limit the level of protection achievable if improvements are routed outside the park; placing stormwater infrastructure in the park would provide a higher level of protection but require major work to the playing fields.

Staff outlined the city’s approach: solicit concepts that would show whether an outside partner could invest in enhanced stormwater infrastructure and higher‑quality recreational amenities while preserving community access and programming. Staff repeatedly emphasized that the RFP / expression‑of‑interest is concept‑finding only and does not commit the city to a private‑operator outcome; if any proposer advances, the process would include a technical review committee, a public engagement phase and council votes before any agreement is reached.

Councilmembers asked for clarity on continuity of programming, fees for youth groups and how the city would ensure equitable access if an outside operator were involved. Several councilmembers insisted on explicit program and fee protections for “grandfathered” youth organizations and on council review before any final MOU or lease. Some members pressed staff to show alternative funding mechanisms — bonding, grants, nonprofit partners — in addition to public‑private partnership options.

Regarding costs for stormwater improvements, staff said designs are in progress and estimates will be refined; staff noted a range of figures during the presentation (the consultants referenced figures during design work and stressed that final cost estimates will be presented in a follow-up). Staff also warned that federal FEMA reimbursements are not guaranteed in perpetuity and that the city should pursue multiple funding streams to protect the park for the long term.

No council vote was requested on Oct. 21. Councilmembers directed staff to increase community engagement, make specifics about continuity of programming and fees explicit in any solicitation, and return with detailed proposals if any concepts pass technical review.