The Fayetteville City Council delayed approving a new downtown parking management contract after a lengthy debate over costs, policy direction, and the lack of a clearly defined plan for how parking should work downtown.
The move on Tuesday came as frustration grows with a parking system that has struggled with reliability, public complaints, and budget shortfalls. Councilmembers signaled they want a policy framework—not just a contractor—before committing to a long‑term agreement that could shape downtown mobility for years.
Ahead of a council work session on Tuesday, city staff recommended awarding a multi-year contract to Pivot Parking to manage the city’s parking system, which includes over 2,000 city-maintained public parking spaces.
The proposed agreement would run for the remainder of the current fiscal year plus two full fiscal years before ending in June 2029.
The proposed contract would cost the city $678,306 in its first year, followed by $672,169 in FY 2028 and $746,079 in FY 2029. Costs would continue to rise in later years, reaching $770,438 in FY 2030 and $795,630 in FY 2031.
After FY 2031, any renewed term of the contract would rise by about 3.3% each year, under the vendor’s proposed escalation rate.
Pivot Parking launched in 2020, according to its website, and manages over 100 locations across the Sunbelt and beyond, delivering full-service parking programs for municipalities, garages, and private partners.
The company is based in Fort Lauderdale. In North Carolina, it operates in Wrightsville Beach, Wilmington, Surf City, and Carolina Beach.
The city has contracted with a third‑party parking management company Republic Parking System, doing business as “Park Fayetteville,” since 2020 to run downtown parking. The company manages the parking system, collects fees, and cleans and maintains parking decks. That contract costs about $750,000 per year.
Concern: Contractor Before Policy
On Tuesday, several councilmembers objected to being asked to choose an operator before nailing down the city’s broader parking strategy.
During a work session on August 3, the city council and staff discussed a number of changes to the city’s downtown parking program needed to stabilize it and reduce its reliance on taxpayer dollars.
The three‑part proposal included higher special‑event rates, increased citation fees, and converting a permit‑only lot into paid parking, according to a presentation by Assistant Public Services Director Brian McGill.
McGill described the proposed changes as the first phase of a broader restructuring. He also said that staff were in the final stages of selecting a new parking management vendor who would be expected to return with a second phase of recommendations after a deeper analysis of the system later this year.
Although city staff said they would present official recommendations at the August 24 council meeting, that did not happen.
The city’s communication manager, David Scott, told CityView that staff postponed the recommendations to allow for further conversations with the proposed contractor, city council, city management, and downtown stakeholders.
“A new date for the recommendations to return to Council has not been set,” Scott wrote in an email on September 2.
On Tuesday, Mayor Mitch Colvin questioned why council was being asked to select a vendor without first seeing a comprehensive financial and operations plan for downtown parking.
“You’re asking us to make a decision on a provider without a financial plan,” Colvin said.
A key feature of the proposed contract requires the new operator to return within 30 days of the contract start date with recommendations to either increase revenue or reduce costs in the parking program. Staff were targeting a November 1 start for the new contract.
Councilmember Lynn Greene pressed for clarity on what that 30‑day clause means and what happens if council doesn’t like what the company proposes.
McGill said the 30‑day clock would start when the vendor takes over the city’s parking operations, and staff would vet recommendations before bringing them to the city manager and council.
Greene questioned the structure. “I’m a little concerned that we’re signing up for something and then we’re asking them to go back and clarify exactly what it is they think they can do differently,” she said.
She argued that if the city wants fresh ideas, proposers should have been required to show up front, in their bids, what they could do differently from the current contractor, rather than after the award.
McGill responded that staff shared all the information they had with bidders, but acknowledged the city does not have every detail of the system’s “nooks and crannies” at its fingertips and is relying on the operator’s expertise once in place.
“We are relying on the contractor to then go back, identify those numbers, and identify things that staff are not aware of that they can then base their recommendations on,” McGill said.
He also noted the contract contains termination provisions, and said it would be up to staff to hold the contractor accountable and recommend ending the contract if performance falls short.
Signage, Kiosks, and User Experience
During the discussion Tuesday, Colvin and other members focused heavily on the user experience downtown, especially for visitors trying to figure out where and how to pay.
The mayor said complaints he hears most often are that there is not enough clear signage and that kiosks are either hard to find, difficult to use, or unreliable. He questioned whether the city’s request for proposal directs the new contractor to actively tackle those problems.
“I was trying to look at the scope of work you were asking here for the contractor, not just maintenance of it, but we need to really look to improve the quality of it,” Colvin said.
McGill said staff have heard mixed feedback on signage—some say there isn’t enough, while others complain of “sign pollution”—and that city staff continuously reassess sign locations in partnership with the contractor and downtown stakeholders.
“We are going to be working with the current contractor, next contractor…and working with the downtown community to see where signs can best be implemented for what we’re trying to accomplish, which at the end of the day is not only to provide wayfinding but also safety,” McGill said.
Equipment is another sticking point. The city currently has 34 pay stations that McGill said are no longer manufactured, with spare parts lost in a past flood.
Only one bidder, current contractor Republic Parking, included the cost of replacing kiosks in its proposal. The others, including Pivot, proposed helping the city assess options and procure equipment but did not include those capital costs in their bid totals.
Councilmember Deno Hondros said downtown merchants and visitors have repeatedly complained that kiosks “don’t always work,” and questioned why the request for proposal and draft contract do not contain a more explicit plan for equipment replacement and reliability.
“You have to provide a reliable method for the users to pay. If you don’t do that, then the whole paid parking program falls apart,” Hondros said.
Beyond payment mechanics, councilmembers returned to longstanding complaints about the Hay street parking deck downtown—from graffiti and litter to breakaway gate arms and perceived security issues.
McGill told council that deck maintenance, graffiti removal, and related duties are covered in detail in the proposed contract’s scope of work.
Councilmember D.J. Haire asked for confirmation that deck cleanliness is squarely inside the contractor’s responsibilities; McGill said it is.
Public Input and Next Steps
Several councilmembers said downtown users and businesses need a stronger voice before Fayetteville locks in a new long‑term parking operator.
Councilmember Shaun McMillan urged the city to go further, suggesting a public hearing or similar process so everyday users and merchants can weigh in on potential rate increases and enforcement changes before they take effect.
By the end of the discussion, the council reached a consensus to send the parking contract back to staff and revisit it at a future work session.
City Manager Doug Hewett said staff will return with a clearer breakdown of roughly a dozen‑plus issues they uncovered in the current contract—such as deck maintenance, special‑event enforcement, revenue handling, and ticket appeals—and show how each one is addressed in the proposed agreement with Pivot Parking.
He also said the city will ask Pivot representatives to attend that session and explore holding an informal drop‑in meeting so downtown stakeholders can question the recommended vendor directly.
Government reporter Rachel Heimann Mercader can be reached at rheimann@cityviewnc.com or 910-988-8045.
