Alma City Commission approves DNR grant application to repair Riverside Park with 25% local match

The Alma City Commission voted to submit an application to the Michigan Department of Natural Resources seeking grant funding to repair and upgrade assets at Riverside Park, approving Option A with a 25% local match.

The vote authorizes staff to pursue state funding for a Riverside Park package that the city estimated at roughly $460,000 (including an overlook deck rebuild, pavilion roof/cleanup and site amenities). During discussion staff said a 25% match would mean requesting about $345,000 in grant funds with a local match of about $115,000; commissioners reserved the right to increase the city's match if the grant scoring process indicated it would improve the city's chances.

Why it matters: Commissioners said Riverside Park is a heavily used gathering place and that the wooden overlooks and decks have reached the end of their useful life. Staff described structural issues on several decks and cited accessibility and ongoing maintenance concerns that make the project a priority for grant funding.

Details of the proposal: Eric, who led the presentation, walked the commission through the proposed work and cost estimates: an overlook/deck rebuild (engineer estimate cited near $360,000), pavilion cleanup and steel roof (about $60,000) and replacement of site amenities such as affixed picnic tables (about $40,000), which together comprised the $460,000 Riverside Park project. Eric also described two additional possible projects — a large boat-launch overlook deck (estimated near $310,000) and a smaller conservation-park overlook (about $200,000) — that the city could include in alternative application packages.

Grant programs and match requirements were central to the discussion. Eric summarized two programs under consideration: the Land and Water Conservation Fund (maximum grant about $500,000 with a 50% local match requirement) and the Natural Resources Trust Fund (maximum around $400,000 with a minimum 25% match). He recommended submitting applications to both programs and selecting which award to accept if both were funded. Eric said that “whatever our match is will be coming out of the fund balance” to pay the local share.

Commissioners debated scope and long-term maintenance. Several suggested avoiding elevated wooden overlooks where possible and instead using shore-based concrete pads or other lower-maintenance solutions to reduce future repair costs and maintenance burdens. Staff warned that floodplain and engineering constraints could limit concrete options in some sections and that some elevated structures may be necessary to cross grade or flood-prone areas.

Public comment and vote: During the public hearing one resident, identified as Brad of 416 Yale Ave., gave brief remarks from the podium. After closing the public hearing the commission moved to adopt the resolution to apply under Option A with a 25% match; the motion carried by voice vote. One member stated, “I will vote no.”

Next steps: Staff will submit the application to the Michigan Department of Natural Resources. If the city receives a preliminary score or is asked to increase its match to improve competitiveness, commissioners indicated they would revisit their commitment before final acceptance of funds.