GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. — Tuesday's Grand Rapids city commission meeting centered largely on the story 13 ON YOUR SIDE brought you that day: concerns over a now-controversial proposal that could bring three new towers to the city's riverfront skyline.
However, there was something else that also caught some people's attention.
This point of controversy was another ambitious plan set for a new soccer stadium also set for Downtown Grand Rapids.
Less than one week before, the Kent County Board of Commissioners had approved a motion relating to how much money from the county's hotel lodging tax would be used to fund the project.
"These projects don't happen on their own," Grand Action 2.0 Executive Director Kara Wood told the commission last week. "It's through these intentional public-private partnerships that make these transformational projects happen in our community."
Additional funds were made possible by county voters back in August when roughly 54 percent voted to allow a hike in its tax from the current 5% to 8%.
Supporters long tied the push to helping pay for developments like the stadium, even putting the broad intent of the increase in the ballot proposal.
"As Commissioner Baker alluded to, the vote in August was very clear that this was one of the projects we would be moving forward," Commissioner Kris Pachla said.
But when the county board decided last week to use money from the tax to make payments toward a $100 million bond for the project, the decision wasn't unanimous.
"I was the only county commissioner to vote against them," Commissioner Ivan Diaz told the city commission on Tuesday, as they were set to consider their own resolution on the amendment. "And I did so for a very specific reason."
The amendment was built off of a pre-existing agreement in which money from the tax to be will also be put toward making payments on a roughly $27 million bond for the new amphitheater currently being built on the other side of the river.
Projects outside of downtown, Diaz believed, should be given more consideration.
"I attempted to table the amendment until February so that more communication could be had with the community and so that potentially some of the lodging excise tax could be used to fund projects - or to fund events, rather - that otherwise wouldn't happen," Diaz said.
Even some who voted for it did have their own concerns.
"My biggest hesitation is that $100 million from the county is a lot of money from the lodging and excise tax," Pachla said, though he did vote to pass the amendment.
"I will be voting in favor of this," County Commissioner Katie DeBoers said. "But at the same time, I'm a little bit concerned of how we go in the future and I would like to ensure that no more county revenue or dollars is going to be spent into this project."
In an 18 to 1 vote, the commission sent the proposal forward, with some echoing the interest of listening to the will of the voters.
On Tuesday, the city commission passed its motion through a unanimous vote on its consent agenda, seemingly clearing the way for the plan.