Plain City Council continued its work session to review an RFQ to select a consultant to develop a parks master plan for two priority sites: the Ranko site (formerly identified in materials as the Ranco property) and Pastime Park. Staff described the procurement as a qualifications‑based RFQ (no fee requested upfront), with an anticipated open date in January, proposals due in February, interviews and shortlists in February and selection for council consideration in March.

Staff said Pastime Park is a 43‑acre site that currently includes disc golf, volleyball, basketball, pickleball, walking trails, a baseball field, a youth building, shower houses and a campground. Keizer Field, the aquatic center and the youth building were identified as elements the staff currently expects to keep in their present locations; other park elements are open to relocation and re‑design. For the Ranko site, staff said there are existing asphalt and concrete pads and multiple water wells; consultants should have experience with sites that require environmental remediation or mitigation and with relevant site surveying.

The expected RFQ deliverables include conceptual site plans, cost‑to‑construct estimates, site surveys, environmental assessments or coordination with remediation constraints, at least two public presentations to the parks board and council, and suggestions for potential funding sources. Staff said they will use an electronic bid platform for submissions, shortlist candidates for interviews and negotiate fees after the qualifications‑based selection; staff also recommended reaching out to neighboring jurisdictions (for example, Dublin and Hilliard) to benchmark typical scope and cost.

Council members emphasized design guardrails and priorities: multiple members said the council’s primary objective is to secure multipurpose grass athletic fields (a cloverleaf layout was discussed as a preferred option), maintain parking and concessions/bathroom relationships, and avoid proposals that diverge from recreational priorities (one member specifically cited an example of an unintended drive‑in movie concept from a public forum). Several council members recommended forming a short‑term advisory subcommittee that would include staff, representatives from the Parks & Recreation committee, PCABA and JASA stakeholders, and one or two council members to help evaluate RFQ responses, advise on the design vision and participate in community engagement phases.

On funding, staff noted a $100,000 capital fund placeholder for land acquisition and council discussed whether that amount should be preserved for opportunistic land purchases or reallocated toward development; council members commented that full development will likely require larger financing (bonds) and asked staff to consult with the finance office and David Conley about financing options versus paying from cash. Staff said the park buildout is more likely to occur in a later fiscal year and that a bond or phased financing is a realistic expectation for total development costs.

Next steps: staff will incorporate council input on priorities and selection committee membership, aim to publish the RFQ in early January (some members suggested a mid‑January submittal window to avoid holiday scheduling conflicts), and return with recommendations for an advisory group and selection schedule. Council members expressed general support for moving the RFQ forward.