The Gainesville City Commission on Oct. 9 moved the Martin Luther King Jr. Recreation Complex and Citizens Field project from concept to action: commissioners authorized staff to solicit design and construction services for remediation and site work, prioritized a competition aquatics facility and multipurpose fields, and directed staff to begin negotiations with the School Board on a potential property transfer of Citizens Field.

What commissioners approved and directed: Andrew Persson, chief operating officer, and NV5 consultants presented an updated site plan and a “scenario 1” cost/element list. The commission authorized staff to prepare a solicitation for final design, remediation, permitting and construction services for site build‑out; to return with a consultant team selection, scope and fee to advance phase 1 design for stadium infrastructure; and to provide direction on which recreational elements should be included in phase 1. The commission also formally instructed staff to begin negotiating with the School Board on a sale/transfer of Citizens Field and related site infrastructure under stated conditions.

Why the school board matters: Commissioners and staff stressed that the stadium footprint and parking/stormwater infrastructure will determine project cost. Kathy H., deputy superintendent for the School Board, told the committee the board’s current position is that it must own property it invests in: “My understanding is…we are required to own the property outright,” she said. Commissioners discussed that the School Board has indicated it could contribute roughly $22–25 million toward stadium construction, demolition and proportional infrastructure costs but that any purchase price or cost share would reduce the board’s construction budget and therefore must be negotiated.

Program priorities and phasing: After extensive design review and a public workshop exercise, commissioners prioritized a first phase that focuses on remediation and site work required for the entire 36‑acre complex, and on delivering an upgraded competition aquatics facility (with supporting pool operations/locker rooms) and improved multipurpose fields. Staff and consultants explained the site includes about 16 acres of green space and roughly 7 acres likely required for wide, shallow stormwater basins; the site also contains a 50‑meter pool constructed in 1975 with original main drains and a pool liner approaching the end of service life.

Stadium, parking and timing: School Board staff said their stadium target is roughly a 3,000‑seat facility; consultants warned that adding a track or extending the stadium footprint into Northeast 14th Street would materially increase site costs. Commissioners authorized the manager to negotiate with the School Board on purchase/transfer terms, including a deed restriction that the property remain a stadium and a request that a new stadium be ready for the 2028 school year (commissioners discussed a 34–36 month realistic build/approval timeline). The commission also requested staff return within 60 days with the status of school‑board negotiations.

Other decisions and conditions: Commissioner Chestnut’s motion asked staff to include in negotiations protections for continued community access (the commission requested preserving existing city event days, e.g., current seasonal access allotted for city activities). Commissioners also directed staff to prepare a solicitation for design services for phase 1 elements and to return with a project budget and refined scope based on available funding sources (GCRA funds, Wild Spaces Public Places allocations, HUD Section 108 and other options). Commissioners asked staff to present senior‑center options and to discuss possible county partnership at a joint meeting on Dec. 10.

Public and operational notes: Consultants noted the site will remain in use during phased construction where possible; staff emphasized the need to sequence pool replacement to keep some aquatic programming available. PRCA operations staff explained that replacing the competition pool and adding an aquatic facility would have lower marginal O&M impacts because lifeguard staff are already in place, though chemical and maintenance costs will rise.

Ending: The commission approved the negotiation and solicitation direction unanimously and asked staff to return with consultant selection, cost breakdowns and detailed funding options for phase 1. Commissioners said they want measurable progress on remediation and site work before committing to additional, higher‑cost elements.