To the Editor,

Maricopa’s proposed 58-acre destination park is an exciting opportunity — but it also comes with significant responsibility. With roughly $100 million earmarked in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan, this is a generational investment. We need to make sure we get it right.

Before decisions are finalized, I want to hear directly from the community: What do you want to see in this park? What would your family actually use? And what should be prioritized in Phase 1?

Recent data presented to Council gives us valuable insight. At Copper Sky and Pacana Park, ballfields are heavily used (69-73%), and multi-purpose fields also see strong demand (54-56%). But ramadas see very limited use (3-8%), and large lawn areas — like the Great Lawn — are barely utilized, at around 2%.

That raises an important question: Do we need another large lawn space? Open space matters, but we should be thoughtful about how much we build and whether it reflects actual usage.

The same applies to the idea of adding another lake. At our last council meeting, an Arizona Game & Fish representative noted that Maricopa already has access to premier fishing lakes — better than many other communities. That should prompt us to ask whether a new lake is the best use of taxpayer dollars, or if those funds could be better directed toward amenities we know residents will use.

There’s also a broader planning issue we shouldn’t ignore. The proposed budget includes a Parks and Recreation assessment — something that hasn’t been done in over 15 years. That assessment should provide critical, data-driven guidance on what our community truly needs. It only makes sense to wait for those results before moving forward with major decisions on new park development.

Phase 1 is especially critical. It will shape first impressions and determine whether the project builds momentum or skepticism. We should prioritize high-demand, high-impact amenities from the start.

This park should reflect the needs of Maricopa residents — not assumptions or templates from other cities. With a project of this scale, community input isn’t optional — it’s essential.

I strongly encourage residents to share their thoughts — not just in general terms, but specifically: what should be built, what should come first and what may not be necessary.

You can email me directly at [email protected], and I encourage you to copy the full City Council so your voice is heard. With a $100 million investment on the table, your input matters.

Let’s make sure we’re building a park that truly serves our community — both today and for generations to come.

Councilmember AnnaMarie Knorr
City of Maricopa