Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Sports Recreation Development topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commission directs staff to revise sports-complex RFP, to coordinate with Junction City before applying for tourism grant

2380692 · February 24, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Commissioners discussed a countywide sports-complex feasibility study and directed staff to rewrite the request for proposals and consult with city officials and relevant agencies before submitting a travel-and-tourism grant application.

Geary County commissioners agreed to have staff revise a request-for-proposal for a sports-complex feasibility study and to coordinate with Junction City and other stakeholders before applying for a travel-and-tourism grant now open for applications.

A private presenter raised ideas for a sports and recreation facility that could include pickleball, softball and walking trails; commissioners and county staff discussed whether the RFP should focus on the city, be countywide, or be broadened to avoid duplicating work already underway. Commissioner Trish Giordano and others emphasized the need to talk with the city manager and community development officials before spending county money on feasibility work.

Commissioners and staff referenced other projects and funding efforts that intersect with the proposal: a DCIP infrastructure grant window, a Flint Hills Regional Council Brownfields study (public information sessions forthcoming) and a separate grant award for a Rural District No. 4 water-storage project of $192,500. Commissioners noted competing regional proposals and cautioned that submitting an application that duplicates another jurisdiction's project could weaken grant chances.

County staff said some dedicated sports-complex funds exist and that an RFP could be paid from those funds if a selected proposal were worthy; several commissioners said they did not want to repeat a previous RFP that received no follow-up. The commission asked staff to rewrite the RFP language to make the scope clearly countywide, to brief the city manager, to check with the state and Corps of Engineers about possible site constraints (floodplain or state-park restrictions) and to return with an update at the next meeting.

No formal vote was taken on building a complex or on committing grant-match funds; the commission's action was a direction to staff to refine the RFP and coordinate with municipal and state partners before submitting applications.