Parks promise

To the editor:

In 1994, after listening to the promotion of a sales tax issue scheduled for public vote, I voted for the tax. The promotions stated the tax would be used for Parks and Recreation projects in the city. I was aware Lawrence’s public recreational facilities were inadequate.

I became concerned when I began reading that the current City Commission was considering using these tax proceeds for other purposes. This paper reported insufficient funds prevented completion of a park in northwest Lawrence. Parks and Rec needs still exist.

I located a ballot used to send this tax message to the public. Much to my surprise, after the prominent print hawking park use, smaller print purported to give authority to use the funds for other purposes. That bothered me. An attorney friend provided me with a court decision in a comparable case in Kansas that held the catch-all language was ineffective.

This paper has previously reported the city’s humongous court litigation expenses. Regardless of potential additional legal expenses, I have to wonder why the original promise to the voters is not remembered. I urge you to note the names of those commissioners who disregard the promise. I urge you to consider in future elections whether any promises made by such commissioners can be trusted.

Larry Hatfield,

Lawrence