Cape Coral council rejects immediate removal of concession building at JC Park; residents demand further review

Councilmember Lehman moved to strip the planned concession building from the JC Park construction plan and relocate the volleyball courts and lawn‑game areas, arguing the current layout creates a safety hazard for the playground and that residents have repeatedly objected to the park’s design.

Councilmember Lehman made the motion to “get rid of the building completely from the concessionaire, not have a concessionaire at all at JC Park, move the volleyball court and the lawn games over to where that building was,” and Councilmember Lastra seconded the motion for discussion.

Nut graf: The City Council spent a large portion of its April 2 meeting debating whether to alter the construction contract for JC Park after the city terminated the P3 concession agreement with the REEF and questioned provisions of the Fortress Secured LLC construction contract. Supporters of redesign argued for quicker public access and safety changes; opponents warned that changing the plans now would trigger significant costs and delays.

Most councilmembers said altering the construction contract at this stage would be expensive and legally risky. The city attorney told the council that design changes “could be altered” but cautioned “Will there be a monetary expense associated with that? 100%,” and that the city had authorized up to $7.5 million in subcontractor work under the current construction agreement.

Public comment at the meeting was dominated by speakers who said they wanted the project improved or paused for independent review. Longtime residents and activists raised concerns about the park’s grading and drainage, the fence and construction noise, the unresolved REEF concession partnership and possible cost overruns.

Tom Shadrach, a resident who said he had followed the project for years, urged an independent investigation into how the project evolved and why decisions moved forward without broader public review. “I think the 5 new council members who weren't involved… would be the smart thing for you to do, to get it investigated and look at that whole process,” he said.

Julia Tari, who had been a frequent critic of the P3 partnership, told council the private concession plan produced few community benefits. “So far, we've gotten no money. We've spent money that was never voted on, never put in our budget. And the total number of jobs that are gonna be created are a whopping 20 in a city of 200,000 people,” she said.

Other residents reported flooding and grading concerns around the project site and sought staff follow‑up. Suzanne Leimerts, who lives one block from the park, said water came within inches of entering her ground floor and warned that new grading could push more water toward homes: “If you put that part… the way it is now… it's gonna hit these two canals. And it's right smack through our front door.”

Council discussion split roughly along two lines. Members who opposed immediate plan changes said the construction and concession agreements are separate and that changing the construction contract midstream could expose the city to claims and delay opening the park. Councilmember Laster said she could not support the motion without a quantified cost estimate and worried that “we don't have a quantity quantitative cost.”

Councilmembers urging changes said the community’s concerns about safety, alcohol sales and hours should be addressed before the park is completed. Councilmember Lehman said several residents had asked for limited operating hours, no alcohol sales and modifications to delivery/food‑truck operations in the park.

The council voted on Lehman’s motion to remove the concessionaire building and reposition amenities. The roll call recorded Councilmember Lehman in favor and seven members opposed. The motion failed, 1–7.

Separately, Councilmember Lastra called the question earlier in the discussion to end debate and put the matter to a vote; that procedural motion carried 7–1.

City Manager Mark Mason told the council that construction work already includes about $1.2 million in payments and that the subcontractor commitments and staged work make any redesign costly and likely to cause delays. He recommended continuing construction and pausing only the concessionaire selection while the project proceeds.

Ending: Councilmembers asked staff to continue outreach and provide additional cost estimates and a clearer timeline. Members also said they want to explore options for protecting nearby properties from flooding and to collect more information on the terminated concessionaire agreement before any further changes are made.