In your May 23 editorial, you wrote, “Wonder what the anti-McEuenites think now?”
This is a cheap shot, unworthy of your publication.
It’s my understanding that the people who voted Mr. Edinger, Mr. Adams, and me into office in 2011 — and by great margins — were not “anti-McEuenites.” While a handful of people did express a desire for nothing to happen at McEuen, we represented a majority who simply wanted a public advisory vote.
We represented people who would have preferred a more open, honest process to redevelopment of McEuen Field.
We represented people who felt that the total cost — a number that constantly fluctuated — should be more reasonable.
The new park will be enjoyed by everyone. Although it didn’t happen the way I would have preferred, I welcome its success. Therefore, what’s your point in dredging up the animosity of the past and labeling people? Would you prefer that the Park serve as an on-going reminder of how this town was once bitterly divided, or are you willing to put differences behind us and celebrate what nearly everyone agrees was a much-needed improvement to a downtown resource?