Vote for Proposition 1 to build regional parks at an optimal time

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • toosmartforyou Farmington, UT
    Oct. 28, 2012 4:26 p.m.

    The Des News seldom sees a tax-and-spend proposition that they don't endorse and this is yet another example. How can one suggest BORROWING the money when there are such huge maintenance needs that are currently not being funded? That's like buying a new suit when what you really need is to repair your shoes that have worn through the soles. But you can always say "suits are such a good buy right now." The last time I saw a local city want more and more parks and trails the number of people using them were a very small pecentage of the population, whereas everyone was expected to pay for them.

    All this time I thought deficit spending was a problem of magnanimous proportion with Uncle Sam and now we see it trickles down to local government, too. Any politician can spend money they don't have. Why not save for it first? That would show resolve, priciple and discipline.

    Vote NO!!

  • EastCoastMemLib Parkesburg, PA
    Oct. 27, 2012 10:50 a.m.

    "Creating and preserving parks to balance urban sprawl is a legitimate governmental function." Oh, really. Who says? Willing to bet neither the State or US Constitution has anything about open space or battling urban sprawl, both noble causes. Why is spending money on either causes more worthy than say providing every citizen healthcare insurance?

  • casual observer Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 27, 2012 9:54 a.m.

    Creating and preserving parks to balance urban sprawl is a legitimate governmental function. The existence of Liberty park among many others illustrates the wisdom of our early pioneers in providing open spaces. Let's not make this a partisan issue.

  • WHAT NOW? Saint George, UT
    Oct. 26, 2012 6:56 p.m.

    repubs say we're broke.

    How can we continue to spend?

  • LiberalEastCoastMember Parkesburg, PA
    Oct. 26, 2012 1:28 p.m.

    Isn't using public money for the public good socialism?

  • Hellooo Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 26, 2012 8:24 a.m.

    So the county already can not afford from its current revenues to maintain existing infrastructure and the DNEWS is supporting borrowing to build additional infrastructure with no ongoing funds for their maintenance. Obviously, this would be a fiscal mistake, require a future tax increase beyond the bond payment. Something the highly taxed citizens of Salt Lake County can not afford. Why does the DNEWS support the Proposition-just to take advantage of low interest rates??