A few thoughts about an Election Day many Indianapolis residents chose to skip.

It’s hard to imagine how supporters of the Wishard Memorial Hospital project — specifically Matthew Gutwein, head of the Marion County Health and Hospital Corp. — could have done a better job of presenting their case to voters.

Gutwein criss-crossed the county in recent months to pitch the $754 million proposal to community groups, civic organizations and anyone else who was willing to listen. His presentations were compelling and airtight. He secured a bipartisan and wide-ranging group of endorsements, including politicians, educators, business groups and religious leaders.

The message was clear: The buildings that make up the nearly century-old Wishard are deteriorating. Without the proposed building project, the future of the much-needed hospital is cloudy. A crucial part of the campaign involved reminding local residents of the importance of Wishard. Voters interviewed Tuesday seemed to have received the message.

“It provides a good service,” Sarah Roberts said after she voted at a Northside precinct. “Because of Wishard, you know anyone can get care in this county even if they don’t have money.”

“Quality care,” her husband, Martyn Roberts, added.

The state recently began to ask voters to decide the fate of many public projects. Advocates of this process argue that voters will embrace worthy projects. That sounds wonderful, in theory. But is this really how we want to select hospital and school projects? After all, how many people seriously followed the Wishard debate?

That is a particularly important question to ask when turnout is as low as it was Tuesday, and important projects can be derailed by a small number of opponents.

Wishard Memorial Hospital is a crucial piece of Central Indiana’s health-care infrastructure. State lawmakers should have had the courage to sign off on the project without passing the buck to voters.

Yet, there is a benefit to the process. Any lingering complaints about the Wishard project — and there weren’t many — can be countered by this message: The voters have spoken.

The Wishard initiative should serve as an example of how to undertake major public building projects in the future. The strength of the proposal came from years of meticulous planning.

Gutwein built up $150 million in savings to offset the cost of the project. He has worked to round up private contributions. Health and Hospital Corp., meanwhile, has identified and secured new funding sources.

As such, supporters have repeatedly promised that the project would not rely on property tax increases. It was an important argument in a county that has experienced recent bouts of property tax trauma.

Critics have disputed the property tax claim, saying it’s not a guarantee because of volatility regarding health-care finances.

They didn’t make a good case. Regardless, the anti-tax critics have been shortsighted. If ever there was a worthy recipient of additional tax dollars, this was it.

Although there’s nothing wrong with opposing a public spending project, many opponents of the Wishard referendum harmed their cause with juvenile, mean-spirited rhetoric.

Some opponents posted online comments railing against minorities and others who receive care from Wishard. A blogger repeatedly called supporters of the project liars and cheats. Some critics offered thoughtful concerns about the project. Unfortunately, many simply offered ugly nonsense.

They lost — deservedly so.