.jpg)
Letters from Our R eaders
In a response to last week’s article in the paper concerning the city owned sports complex, the questions really are not “Complex”.
Although city government and public school systems are both supported by tax dollars, their purpose is very different. School systems are to provide education to students, city governments are to provide services to citizens. As we are all aware, they both can be very expensive.
Through the district school board, I was on the planning committee for the Complex nearly 25 years ago. At that time it was clearly the City Council that saw the need for the city to provide more and better recreational facilities for Hartington. (Many of us can remember that the city owned and maintained the Felber Park football field, and the condition that was in.)
They also had the wisdom to know that an enhanced recre ation facility was part of the many services cities provide. The past council also had the foresight to know that to guarantee both school systems in our community would have equal access, neither should own any part of it. A vote by the citizens of Hartington on a bond issue clearly supported their plan.
I believe if a vote were taken again today the people of this town would again strongly support a facility that would be owned and maintained by the city.
Years ago, it was clearly understood that the equal rent both school systems paid would go into a fund that would be used for repair and maintenance of the track. If the city has been receiving between $12,000-$16,000 a year for 22 years, there certainly should be funds available to make repairs at the Complex. Yet, knowing that the city is nearly $1 million in debt, I think we can assume that money went to other projects.
— Rita Kathol Pedersen Hartington
