San Diego Union-Tribune (Sunday)

Choice up to voters: Drive to polls or L.A.

- JACK MURPHY Columnist

(Editor’s note: This column by Jack Murphy appeared in the San Diego Union on Sunday, Oct. 31, 1965, two days before Election Day. It has been edited for space.)

This is the choice: Either the voters drive to the polls on Tuesday, or they drive to Los Angeles and Anaheim for the next 20 years to watch major league football and baseball.

If Propositio­n One, the stadium proposal, is defeated San Diego will yield its identity as a big league city and, in a sense, revert to its old role as a suburb of Los Angeles.

As a bush league sports town, San Diego would have a lot in common with the fellow who boasted that his girl “looks like the nearest thing to Liz Taylor.” Asked a friend: “Oh, she’s a beautiful brunette?” Came the reply: “No, she looks like Richard Burton.”

Tuesday’s election will determine whether Los Angeles and Anaheim are the nearest things to big league sports. The media has been trying to communicat­e a sense of urgency because it fears the consequenc­es of a light vote. Those who stay home, neglecting their responsibi­lities as citizens, will cheat both themselves and their community.

City Clerk Phil Acker is forecastin­g that only 48.6 per cent of the registered voters will participat­e in Tuesday’s general election. He also predicts that 40,000 will vote no because they are opposed to anything that costs money. The stadium will require a $27 million bond issue and will be financed by annual payments of $1.44 million over a 35-year period.

Responsibl­e people shouldn’t permit a minority to decide an issue of this magnitude. The stadium is just as important to San Diego’s growth as the cultural, social and educationa­l aspects of the community. And it is economical­ly sound.

It’s Part Of The Good Life

San Diego was severely wounded a while back by a national news magazine which described this city as a “bust” town. Even now newspaperm­en in other cities frequently ask if San Diego has gone bankrupt. This will be purely a local election on Tuesday, but the entire country will be awaiting the result.

This is San Diego’s opportunit­y to demonstrat­e its courage and vitality. Our attractive­ness will be gauged partly by the electorate’s decision.

“The developmen­t of cultural and sports centers help provide the things that make life worth living,” reminds Mayor Frank Curran. “If we are to attract industry, we must have the good life. A stadium is part of the total community.”

“A stadium is the last important project needed to make San Diego a major league city,” says Al Harutunian, general chairman of the Citizens Committee for a Stadium.

Some of the benefits are intangible. Mayor Curran makes the point that big league teams attract big league people in all areas; people who think and act in a big way . ...

Pity The Poor Spectator

Balboa Stadium, 50 years old, was just right for San Diego in 1915. Now it is obsolete for major league activities. Seating is limited and uncomforta­ble, parking is inadequate, and facilities are so crude only four restrooms serve crowds of 30,000.

The spectator set in this community deserves something better.

With a proper facility, I am confident San Diego will support major league sports in major league style . ...

I occasional­ly hear the complaint that people are tired of being “threatened” by the Chargers. These people are merely justifying a negative attitude. It’s easy to characteri­ze an unpleasant fact as a threat. But it’s self-deception.

[Chargers owner Barron] Hilton isn’t threatenin­g San Diego. He doesn’t need to. Modern facilities await him in Los Angeles (Dodger Stadium) and Anaheim, but he prefers San Diego. He hasn’t said a word during the entire stadium campaign; he just signed his name to a 10-year contract. And that, I think, is better than a thousand speeches.

Remember the alternativ­es: a short drive Tuesday, or a long one for the next 30 years.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States