A nonprofit group, the Kentucky Tennis & Pickleball Center, has asked Metro Government to lease roughly 25 acres of Joe Creason Park and help finance a $65 million racket‑sports complex (36 tennis courts, 18 pickleball courts, pro shop, restaurant, fitness areas). The plan includes seeking a $20 million city bond and positioning the facility as Bellarmine University’s future tennis home. (Louisville Public Media)

Supporters call the project an economic and recreational win. Critics—including neighboring residents, the Louisville Nature Center and several council members—worry it would privatize scarce public parkland, worsen traffic, and add light and noise pollution. (Spectrum News 1, WLKY)

This debate reminds us that many high‑impact land, parks and financing decisions happen outside the standard Metro Council agenda‑setting process we’ve been mapping. Leases of city‑owned land, bond authorizations, and Parks capital partnerships often move through mayoral agencies, advisory boards or project‑specific memoranda before (or even without) a formal council vote. When the pathway is less transparent, what should the role of resident engagement be?

A “good process” for these off‑agenda items might include:

• Clear advance notice and open‑door meetings whenever public land is in play.
  
• A published decision timeline showing who must sign off—agency directors, boards, the mayor, Metro Council, or bond‑issuing bodies.
  
• Independent impact statements (traffic, environmental, equity) posted online in plain English.
  
• Multiple feedback channels—public hearings, written comments, and neighborhood‑level briefings—before contracts are finalized.
  

We are digging into these structures and exploring ways to surface proposals early, explain the approval chain, and equip neighbors to engage constructively. Have thoughts on improving the process? Let us know—community insight drives stronger, more transparent outcomes.