The 20-year status quo should not be disturbed without demonstration of a compelling reason to change. The 2002 ordinance was well-researched and argued as to its reason and mission, with guardrails providing for precise results and accountability. Just because staff wants more "flexibility" rationalizes nothing--staff always wants more "flexibility" and less council oversight. Further, I see this as a cash-grab from a special fund to finance long-established general fund programs like Concerts in the Park, to then fund unnecessary expenditures. This also will likely lead to unnecessary competitiveness among city groups, creating city animosity and soaking up staff time. That, and leading to the funding of city programs that likely are unnecessary and forgotten within days of their performance. The lack of support from the community for change as cited in the staff report validates that a change isn't needed--the argumentation burden is not on those who like the current program.