To the editor:
I was just rereading the city candidate debate that was held here a short time ago. Included in that story is the following line: "noting a recreation center was the only significant project not yet complete. Several others called for the building of a rec center."
I am not saying that having a rec center would not be a nice thing, but we need to look closely at the recent use tax introduced by the city council. The city council said that if the use tax is not approved that some services may need to be cut.
That being the case, how can anyone running for any office in the city of Craig, honestly ask for a use tax and, at the same time, try to tell the community that the city has the money to spend millions of dollars on a rec center? A rec center that will require a lot of money to maintain and keep open.
If the city does have this much extra cash lying around, why are they asking for more taxes? And if they do not have the cash in hand, how can they propose such a thing as building a rec center?
I believe that attempting to build a rec center will result in a huge debt the city cannot repay, and/or a huge maintenance debt that the city cannot afford.
Things such as rec centers are very nice to have, but to build them the city must have the cash in hand, or a substantial inflow of money to spend on it. From what I have seen lately Craig has neither.
One local candidate cited to me that a rec center would generate "the admission fees but also food, drink, and (people to) shop the businesses."
In my mind spending many millions to get back a few sandwich sales does not add up.
We cannot adopt the same policies as the federal government and try to spend our way to prosperity. It simply will not work.