Having asked the question in one of my previous articles about the legality of the "in kind" work being done on our sports complex, I contacted the attorney general's office. I was told that it is legal, and here's why. According to state statute, all the city and the county commissioners have to say it is for the good of the public and they can spend all they want as long as they say they have a source of income. I think we know where a lot of that income comes from when we pay our property taxes. I contacted our Rep. Eber Phelps, and he said he did not know of a statute like that and he was going to check it out. After waiting about three or four weeks and not getting an answer, I decided to write this.

When I asked the gentleman in the attorney general's office that if most people thought the complex was going to be built with a 0.05 percent sales tax, then how could they spend all this other money? His answer was "Where on that ballot did it say that they can't?" My next question was, "If you say they are legally right, don't you think they are morally wrong?" His answer to that was that if the people of Ellis County don't like it, file a lawsuit. Where are all the people that kept telling us during this campaign that this will all be paid for with that 0.05 percent sales tax that will "sunset" in four years?

Anybody wondering what is happening in our government, from local on up? Why is it that all our governments are short of money and then all of a sudden it is coming out of the woodwork. The state doesn't have any, the county doesn't know how it is going to pay for a new county administrator, the city didn't have $200,000 to pay for this water runoff study (which they have to do by law) and now we have all this extra manpower to do over hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of free work. The city is taking $100,000 out of the water fund to put in a bigger waterline for future development in the northwest area. Isn't that line supposed to be paid for with the "special fee" on the infrastructure that the city puts in before they can build? Just asking.

All of a sudden we are taking $100,000 from the water department, we are going to build three ball fields with city tax money, (property taxes?). The county is doing at least $148,000 worth of earth moving, the state is doing all free labor on the interchange and we are supposed to be short of money? Of course, there is a simple solution, as always. We will all find out when we get our tax notices. What are all these employees doing when they are not building a sports complex? I hope the new administrator will make this issue his first priority. But then, on the other hand, the county commissioners already decided that those employees don't have enough to do or how else could they spend as high as six weeks of labor, plus all the equipment and fuel, for free just because the people were, in my opinion, misled about what was "not" put on the ballot. It's hard for me to believe that all our "legal beagles" didn't know about this statute. I also know that they were not allowed to say anything before the election since it was not the city or the county that put it on the ballot.

Now we are going to hire two people to work in the road and bridge department. There are actually three openings. Looks to me that it's poor timing on the county commissioner's part knowing that they are doing $148,000 worth of work for nothing, especially since somebody did not put the same information on the ballot that, in my opinion, they knew all along.

Remember folks, the next time you vote for something that the ballot specifies how it is going to be paid for, it is what the ballot "does not" say how they can pay for it that is going to put wrinkles in out wallets. Go figure. Folks, hang on to your hat because we all know that when the four years are up; where are the hundreds of thousands of dollars going to come from for the maintenance. Yes, it's what the ballot "did not" say. I will say this in defense of our city fathers. They did not ask for this project, so any subsequent tax increases to maintain this project cannot be blamed on them. Not entirely. Well, maybe a little. At least some?

Remember when I said. "What will they take away from us next?" Well, they didn't take this one away, they just made it absolutely meaningless. The thing that counted was what the ballot "did not" say. How convenient. In my book, just because it is legal doesn't make it morally right.

Vernon Sylvester Befort

Hays