Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Parks Recreation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Oak Harbor to Seek Firms to Update Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan

City of Oak Harbor City Council · October 29, 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

City staff recommended issuing a request for proposals to update the Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Master Plan to replace the 2019 plan, tie recommendations into the city—s comprehensive plan and support grant applications. Council discussed budget pressure, options to reduce cost, and timing relative to other planning studies.

Oak Harbor officials recommended issuing an RFP to update the city—s Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Master Plan, a planning document staff said will guide parkland, trail and facility investments and support future grant applications.

The PROS plan update would replace the 2019 plan and is intended to establish levels of service, a GIS inventory of parks and trails, prioritized projects for the six-year Capital Improvement Program, user-fee and cost-recovery analysis, staffing recommendations and an implementation action plan that can be incorporated into the comprehensive plan.

"The Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan will create a guiding document for future development and redevelopment of the community systems of parks and green spaces, recreation programs over the next 6 years," Parks Director Brian Smith said. He described the plan as both a policy and grant-eligibility document that will "help us to support a prosperous community."

Why it matters: Oak Harbor staff said many grant programs require a current parks plan; the Recreation and Conservation Office prefers plans no older than six years for eligibility. Staff also said recommendations in the PROS plan will be used to prioritize CIP projects and inform decisions about park maintenance, placemaking, and waterfront protections.

Budget, scope and options: Staff noted they had budgeted $80,000 in 2023 for the update but that comparable projects in peer cities had come in much higher. Smith said peer estimates ranged from about $80,000 up to $231,000, and that recent proposals for related plans had been higher than historical expectations. To manage that gap, staff offered three options if proposals exceed the budget: (1) negotiate and narrow consultant scope, (2) perform some work in-house or combine deliverables with the Recreation Center feasibility study, or (3) delay and appropriate more funds in a future budget.

"We set this budget level with the previous administration back in 2023," Smith said. "If we do see proposals come in above what we had budgeted for... we have a couple options. 1 is to negotiate the scope... We can take some of that work in house. We can combine the project with current planning efforts like the feasibility study... or just hold off a little bit and increase the appropriation."

Council response: Several council members said they supported putting the RFP out to see what proposals arrive. Mayor Pro Tem said posting the RFP would be appropriate and cautioned against combining too many efforts in a way that would "muddy the waters." Council Member Stuckey and Council Member Marshall both supported issuing the RFP and evaluating proposals with an eye toward timing the PROS plan with the Recreation Center feasibility study and other pending plans.

Staff timeline: Smith estimated that, if started soon, the PROS update would likely complete in spring 2027 and could be incorporated into the subsequent budget cycle. The final approach will depend on proposals received and council direction.

Context and next steps: The PROS plan will be coordinated with the comprehensive plan major update and other subplans (urban forestry, recreation center feasibility, marina business plan). Staff recommended posting the RFP, evaluating responses against the $80,000 budget figure and returning to council with recommendations for negotiation, scope adjustment, combining projects, or additional appropriation.

Ending: Council members asked staff to bring back any cost or scheduling concerns discovered during the RFP process; no formal vote was taken at the workshop.