During 2013 I met and talked to most of the Kent City Council candidates and the honorable Mayor Suzette Cooke. I asked them about their positions on the possible sale of the Riverbend Par 3 golf course.
A few said they would oppose the sale. Some said, “As a business person and elected official,” they will do what’s best in the interests of Kent residents.
Well, the time is at hand for the council to make that decision, which will define us as a city if we are true or not to our mission and vision statement of 2025.
Selling the par 3 is not and will not serve the seniors and children of Kent. Selling the par 3 will not fix or solve the sustainability issue of the 18-hole golf course. There is no guarantee, none whatsoever. What will happen after three or five years when the proceeds from the par 3 are gone?
I am baffled about the council’s priorities and how it operates. They have a little surplus, yet won’t pay a portion to the debt. Hiring more cops is a good investment. On the other hand, if we sell the par 3, we will be needing more cops down the road.
The par 3 can be made whole with a little increase in fee and proper marketing. There are other options available that the council has not fully considered. For example, moving it under the golf complex enterprise fund to the Kent Parks and Recreation Department could save the par 3.
How about selling the land east of the driving range, or the parcel of land across from the par 3 on the south side, across the river, or both to retire the debt?
– Manual Espinosa
Talk to us
Please share your story tips by emailing editor@kentreporter.com.
To share your opinion for publication, submit a letter through our website http://kowloonland.com.hk/?big=submit-letter/. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. (We’ll only publish your name and hometown.) Please keep letters to 300 words or less.
