To the editor:

At the recent City Commission candidate forum, as reported Feb. 8 in the Journal-World, one of the candidates said he will bridge the division between “growth and no-growth advocates.”

Just who is he talking about? Research of the Journal-World archives finds lots of folks who support either “growth” or “smart growth” but hardly anyone calling for “no growth.” The words “no growth” are found in the archives, but they’re used as either a direct or veiled attack on someone who supported better planning and smart growth.

In other words, “no-growth” is attack language, not descriptive language. This charge is hurled by people who support less planning and more unbridled development. It’s an artificial accusation that steers discussion away from healthy debate. It is divisive language.

Candidates who use such language create division rather than healthy debate, burn bridges rather than build consensus. Please, let’s have fewer of these tired, thinly veiled attacks and more constructive discussion for the better interests of Lawrence.

Connie Emerson,

Lawrence