You’re right. And your upbeat words fall like petals on this old guys ears. Thanks

As explained by Nick Gioello, Tim Ernster, and Mike Goimarac, the situation with the bids on the Barbara Antonsen Memorial Park were not regular Requests for Participation. The process was in the form of a “competition” whereby specific standards were set for candidates who chose to participate. This created much more time consuming efforts which was the criteria upon which the decision to offer stipends to the two losing proposals was decided.

A question remains unanswered. Will Sedona have future projects warranting this special competitive category? That, of course, remains to be seen. However, speculating on changes the revised Community Plan will impose relating to land use, it appears chances for that to become a reality might very well be elevated. Almost all reference to maintaining a small town atmosphere have been eliminated reinforcing the intention for increased density and, perhaps, eventually an enclosed recreation center, etc. We shall see.

Can you clarify, two architectural firms ( not chosen) got paid for submitting a bid? Do I understand this correctly? If so, I have never heard of such blatant misuse of municipalities monies. It makes me want to see how else the City is spending taxpayer’s money.
Thank you.

If this small plot of land is to become the “Heart of Sedona” then isn’t it going to take a few creative masterminds to figure out where the masses will park their cars? Of course stated intentions to collaborate with other organizations to develop the property will surely relieve incorporated Sedona from being on the hook for further indebtedness including offers of stipends. Phew! That’s a relief.