OCR Text |
Show mm r I t tion in which there is little place for the kind of debasing rhetoric to which we have been subjected over the past few weeks. The reason for the lack of hysterical hyperbole is that we now face an unequivocal issue: Either we are interested and concerned about what happens to the children of Park City, or we don't care. In next week's election, there is no question about performance, intent, fancied ability, individual interest, or other inflammatory inflam-matory charges or counter charges. The issue is clear: do we, or don't we care? There seems to me to be but one possible response to that question: Yes, we care. But while that answer seems so simple to arrive at, I have found a certain ennui on the part of people with still another election. As I talk with others about the need to increase taxing power by voting YES on the voted leeway question, I find many who would rather , leave i,t up to someone else to vote; or avoid at all costs any further increases in our tax burden; or (heaven preserve us) vote against the issue. (The last alternative is totally unthinkable.) We cannot ignore our responsibility whether we have children, grandchildren, other relatives, or no one at all in the school system. We must remain true to our principles and take the issue as a personal per-sonal challenge and vote YES on the voted leeway. Sincerely, ,..,-., Charles G Latterne'r ' " ' Do we care : about our children? To the editor: While we have our individual preferences in elections involving those seeking office, all too often decisions are made on the basis of personality per-sonality and prejudice rather than with reason and considered judgment. In the present instance we will know the results of the campaigning of the "agins versus the ins" shortly before we face an even more significant elec- |