How has the council performed? The voters will be the judge Park City voters have an opportunity Tuesday, Nov. 8 to make known their opinions on the performance of the current City Council. During the last four years the term served by the three incumbents seeking re-election many things have happened hap-pened in and around city government. Many things have happened in the community also, things that are directly attributable to the current council. All other criticisms aside, the members of this council can't be accused of sitting back with their feet up. The central issue in this election is whether or not taxpayers tax-payers feel the new programs, capital improvements and t increased services are worth the price they are paying. In ; bringing the city to a streamlined state from a very casual ; and almost haphazard small-town government, the council has had to spend money. The current budget is substantially substan-tially higher than it was four years ago. Has the council come too far too fast? Or did it step in just ; in time to pull Park City from archaic and faltering systems so that we could properly embrace a bustling .. future? That question will be answered by individual Park City residents in the voting booth. Some of the accomplishments of the current City Council will be with Park City for a long time. The revamping of the " aging water system is a good example of what this council is capable of doing. And although the overhaul came at a -: critical time and will continue to serve the city well into the future, the cost of water has gone up substantially. The renovation of the Miners Hospital and the City Hall will long remain monuments to the energy of this City Council. The preservation of those buildings is very important impor-tant to Park City's history and its image of itself. The renovation of the Miners Hospital was paid by a bond approved by the voters. But the work on City Hall was not.' Even though this project was funded in part by a $70,000 grant, the renovation will still cost the taxpayers about (380,000. Although property taxes have risen substantially in the last four years, they still only account for about 20 percent of current city revenues. That means that, as the budget increased, in-creased, the council had to find new ways to fund city projects, services and maintenance. The council has been aggressive in its hunt for grant monies, a fact that is reflected in many instances, including the new bus system, as well as parks and roadways. The council was also responsible for the Utah Legislature's decision to grant Park City a resort sales tax. Whether residents believe that tax is beneficial to them will weigh in their election decision. As important as anything that can be seen, this council has revamped the way the city runs. Park City's Building and Planning departments don't bear even the slightest resemblance to those of the past. The current city government, go-vernment, has structured those departments so that developers, planners and builders bear the brunt of the costs for those services. Beyond the building and planning department the current government runs, if not perfectly, much more efficiently than previously. The City Council can take credit for that. But if the current council candidates want to take the credit for the good they have done, they must also take the credit for the increased expense that has come along with improvements and other prices that the citizens feel they have been asked to pay. This council has embraced Park City's future straight on. In order to put the store in order they dealt aggressively with the growing pains of a boomtown. This council has made some big decisions that have changed the face of Park City. Some of those decisions cost a lot, some made a lot, some involved deals that raised a few eyebrows. Has this City Council tried to put Park City in order too fast? Has it made Park City a better place to live than it was four years ago? Will its decisions benefit this community com-munity in the long run? The answer is up to you. -CKS