Arrow-right Camera
The Spokesman-Review Newspaper

The Spokesman-Review Newspaper The Spokesman-Review

Spokane, Washington  Est. May 19, 1883
Cloudy 35° Cloudy
News >  Features

Feedback: Riverfront Park upgrade

Riverfront Park upgrade draws yeas, nays

 (Source:)
(Source:)

A ballot measure this fall will ask Spokane voters to finance a $60 million bond to renovate and update Riverfront Park. If passed, part of the money will go to fixing long-ignored problems: failing bridges, cracked sidewalks and leaky ceilings. But most of the money will go to remaking the park for a new generation, creating a central plaza and promenade, reviving the pavilion as a year-round event center, constructing a new home for the historic Looff Carrousel, building an ice rink near City Hall on the park’s southwest edge and lighting the park at night, among other things. We asked our Facebook friends if they were for, against or undecided about the measure. Here’s a sampling of the responses:

Barbara Martinez

Riverfront Park is an important place in Spokane for the community for many reasons, I support this! Although I must say I wish we could pass a $60 million dollar bond to get our streets fixed! Seems like every day there is new construction on our roads yet they’re always in such poor condition …

Laura Elizabeth Wagner

Yes!!!!! Worth it for sure … we need to maintain what we have and offer more points of interest to our city. A zoo and aquarium would be awesome too. … nice to go to Seattle for those things but would be nice to not have to drive four hours for a day outing.

Dustin Wozny

I’m voting no. I’m not in for raising taxes for this.

Nina Rudd

The changes made in the ’70s made a world of difference for Spokane, time to update for our grandkids.

Brian Rolshoven

Typical thinking – 60 million for a park and still short a parking lot.

Nichole Burrell-Crosby

I’m absolutely for it! Sadly, I’m familiar with the voting history in Spokane and I will be pleasantly shocked if the citizens approve it.

Dan Matthews

On your map, how about a different shade color for anyplace we can park our cars without fees. That’s the info that’ll affect my vote.

Heather Smith

I’m disturbed by how much lip service the town gives to a landscape architect … Olmsted, and that they didn’t hire landscape architects for this design. Landscape architects design parks … I am trying to see some sort of cohesiveness in this design but can’t find it. Landscape architects designed Central Park, Prospect Park, Manito, and Olmsted’s son was a big proponent of Spokane’s Riverfront Park. If you are going to spend that much money it needs to be a gem … we can do better.

Mark Steward

I’m for it! If we are going to compete with other cities to attract businesses we need to invest in our infrastructure. Let’s make Spokane an even more wonderful city to work, live and play! Vote yes and yes!

Andrew Bodenstein

Absolutely yes. No tax rise for this!! This only refinances existing stuff so rates stay the same! I feel like not enough people understand that. Oh and there’s also a big bill for the roads coming up too so people screaming about the roads can be happy too. Yes yes and once again yes.

David Tremblay

No. There’s way more important things to spend money on.

Cary Huether

This will bring needed tourist dollars to the area and make downtown livelier and safer. I’m for it.

ChazBetz Bowman

The streets in this city and infrastructure could use a major overhauling. $60 million spent on that would make way more sense. I’ll be voting a big NO! When will these city leaders realize there’s more to it than Riverfront Park and downtown.

Judy Thomas

I’m sure there is $$ set aside for some of these projects, but not enough. … 60 mil would go a long ways building railroad over or underpasses, or sidewalks for the kids to walk down to get to school so they don’t have to fight the snow and traffic. Or how about more help for low income or the homeless? But no, we want green grass for the park or another bridge for the walkers to take their afternoon breaks, or pig out in the park or or or or. … get real, we need real solutions to real problems, not make believe land.

Blaine Matthew

I’m enthusiastically for the measure. Riverfront Park is a huge attraction for our city and is in serious need of revitalization. And the best part? Taxes will stay the exact same. No increases. I’d say that’s a win-win.

Shanna Mower

The park definitely needs an update. People keep talking about Expo ’74 and the 40th anniversary. But what’s changed in 40 years? The big red wagon? The condition of that park is sad. There is no tourist attraction here. We are doing nothing to help the city’s economy.

Joel Preuninger

I will vote yes. It doesn’t raise taxes because it replaces a bond that is expiring.

Alice Galeotti

Vote yes! Admirable use of creative financing, and the park BOND is separate from the street maintenance LEVY. I hope they both pass.

Rod Fuller

Will be over budget and behind schedule like all other such projects. A big fat NO from me.

Richard Kielbon

Yes. Of course. How small minded it would be to not. BUT I really think the design could be of higher quality. All the features seem pretty obvious and I don’t get a sense of surprise or delight. We should spend the time and effort for a world class design competition.

The Spokesman-Review Newspaper

Local journalism is essential.

Give directly to The Spokesman-Review's Northwest Passages community forums series -- which helps to offset the costs of several reporter and editor positions at the newspaper -- by using the easy options below. Gifts processed in this system are not tax deductible, but are predominately used to help meet the local financial requirements needed to receive national matching-grant funds.

Active Person

Subscribe to the Coronavirus newsletter

Get the day’s latest Coronavirus news delivered to your inbox by subscribing to our newsletter.