Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks And Recreation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Riverside Park grant request sparks debate over historic carousel, softball field and long-term costs
Summary
A parks matching-grant proposal for Riverside Park prompted intense public comment and a split among council members; the finance committee declined to forward the funding commitment after residents spoke for preservation and others urged seizing a rare grant opportunity.
The finance committee and special council meeting on July 15 heard hours of public input and staff presentations on a proposed Land and Water Conservation Fund (and related state) matching-grant for a phased Riverside Park renovation. Parks staff said the first phase would build an inclusive SmartPlay Volo Air playground, accessible pathways, pavilions and a multiuse field and estimated a roughly $1.3 million project if the city and the Redevelopment Corporation (RDC) each committed $250,000 in match.
Jan, representing parks staff and the parks board, described the project as phased and said the carousel pavilion and existing train would not be removed in the first phase: “We're not taking anything out at this time… The existing train is gonna stay,” she said, and noted the parks board would work with the carousel leaseholders to protect those elements. Jan also outlined the proposed match: she said RDC had committed $250,000 and the parks had about $153,000 toward the match; if the city supplied $250,000 the project could leverage roughly $653,387 in matching funds for a $1.3 million project.
But many residents pushed back. Paul Wilhelm of Logansport Landmarks urged protecting the carousel building and train, questioned the plan’s public engagement and warned about maintenance and a future funding obligation: “You will be saddling the next council… with a $250,000 obligation,” he said, urging delay. Penny Reinhart, a carousel board member, said the carousel and train carry local history and described ongoing engineering work to address maintenance and accessibility. Other speakers, including neighborhood residents and a softball manager, asked that the plan retain or adapt the 90-year-old softball diamond rather than remove it.
Council members debated timing and fiscal prudence. Several members said they were worried about projected revenue declines in 2027–28 and the council’s ability to commit matching funds for future years. The finance committee did not forward the parks-match item after a consensus vote in committee; the Chair reported, “It dies here.” Jan urged the council to reconsider in future budget cycles and said she still had outstanding bills related to grant work, but with the committee vote the parks application will not move forward at this time.
