City presents new Jaycee Park concession term sheet; council presses for stronger repayment, renewal and assignment protections

City staff on May 20 presented a negotiated term sheet for a concessionaire at Jaycee Park and asked council for guidance on moving forward to a formal agreement.

The proposed deal would deliver a city‑built “gray shell” of the concession building; the concessionaire would make a cash payment up front (reported in staff materials as roughly $130,000), commit to a minimum annual guarantee (reported as about $75,000) and a continuing profit share starting at 4 percent with no explicit upper cap in the current draft. Staff said the concessionaire would also finance and construct boat slips estimated at $1.3 million; in the present draft the concessionaire contribution toward docks would be credited so the city reimburses 90 percent rather than the full amount initially planned.

City Manager summarized the differences from the prior proposal: “We are turning over a gray shell to our concessionaire. Our concession owner has agreed to pay 10% of the cost of the building up front and then we’ll continue to pay the balance of that 1.3,” and added the concessionaire would be expected to fund tenant build‑out estimated at a minimum of about $300,000.

Councilmembers’ concerns focused on three contract areas: renewals, assignment/transferability and repayment security. Councilmember StanKey pressed staff on whether the five‑year renewal after the initial 15‑year term would be unilateral or require mutual agreement, noting the city’s potential exposure if a concessionaire walked away after partial amortization of building costs. “If they choose not to renew… do we need language that if they choose not to renew the balance becomes due and payable?” StanKey asked. Several councilmembers urged language that would collateralize obligations or otherwise secure the city’s repayment stream so the city would not have to sue to recover unpaid balances.

Other council members welcomed the improved economics compared with earlier drafts but said they wanted the full concessionaire agreement returned in writing before any vote. “I can live with this with one concern — whether the five‑year renewal is mutual or theirs to have,” one councilmember said, summarizing the majority sentiment that contract language addressing nonrenewal and assignment be firmed up.

Outcome: Council accepted the term sheet as a framework, asked the city attorney to draft a formal concessionaire agreement incorporating protections discussed (renewal mechanics, repayment if renewal not exercised, and reasonable assignment approval), and scheduled review at the next council meeting or committee so members can see final contract language before approval.