Spokane City Council approved a local-option commercial parking tax intended to raise transportation funding and discourage surface parking that fragments downtown, passing the ordinance (c36 8 01) by a 5–2 vote. The measure sets a proposed 6 percent rate for structured parking with an efficient land‑use credit and includes exemptions for employees, students and residential uses to be defined in forthcoming public rules.

Administration official John Snyder, who presented the proposal, told council the tax is permitted by state law and would be used only for transportation purposes, saying parking tax revenue "is only to be used in transportation purposes by state law, and that's what we intend to do here." He framed the policy as one tool in a broader strategy to redevelop surface lots and fund projects such as Spokane Falls Boulevard.

Public testimony ran more than two hours and split sharply. Brian Wurst, general counsel to the Spokane Airport Board, said the airport could see a "diversion" of revenue and asked the council not to adopt the ordinance, telling the council, "please, please, please do not adopt this ordinance." Business and property interests including Riverpark Square and the Spokane Business Association argued the tax would harm downtown employers and residents and said development economics in the current market would not be altered by the tax. Betsy Cowles of Riverpark Square said the tax "is not going to develop surface parking" and urged council clarity on how revenues would be spent.

Proponents including Eric Lowe of Spokane Reimagined and residents such as Sarah Rose framed the tax as a modest way to discourage land speculation and help fund transit and infill housing. Lowe described the proposal as "a modest attempt to disincentivize the destruction of our downtown to facilitate land speculation." Several speakers urged clear implementation rules and a sunset or evaluation period to judge effectiveness.

Council deliberations focused on implementation details (how exemptions will work for employees and residents), potential legal or contractual impacts on the airport and timing. Several members supported delaying implementation until April to allow time for rulemaking and coordination with stakeholders. The ordinance was adopted on the record 5 to 2 after that discussion. Council directed staff to develop public rules to define and operationalize the exemptions and reporting mechanisms.

What happens next: administration staff will draft the public rules and implementation procedures referenced by council; the council set a delayed implementation window to allow for coordination and rulemaking. Advocates and opponents said they expect further engagement on eligible exemptions and how revenue will be allocated to specific transportation projects.