By Bill Vezzoso Jr.
May 15, 2008
Dear Editor,
I’m shocked at the paper’s portrayal of the stop GarCo injustice website as one sided. The title says it’s only my family’s side, when over 100 verifiable people have all signed and many have voiced their opinions. Where is the balance? How many will it take for this paper to report the story how the citizens of our county and state see it? Why were none of their comments included in the story?
It is unbelievable that anyone thinks it's “ridiculous” that the county ignored first hand testimony from 5 people, testimony from a district court judge, an original 1990 citation proving the then BOCC acted as an official body, and testimony from a business that was closed because of the action in 1990/91. What did the county provide for evidence to contradict that? Where is their response to our Feb 5th, 2007 presentation?
Judge Gannett said in the BOA hearing, “It may simply modify what other enforcement actions could be taken by the county against the defendant for the same type of violation (P90 L7-L14).” Gannett stated, “Mr. Vezzoso, my memory tells me, fell into the category of Mr. Zamora and there then offered a similar deal by the county prosecutor (P79 L20-25 & P80 L1-2).”
Your paper says the website didn’t present any of the counties evidence, which is false. The transcripts in their entirety, including all of the counties arguments, are posted online. I point specifically to Feb 5th, 2007 and ask where their response is to what McCown called “overwhelming materials”? This only proves that an organization is needed to keep in check the counties actions and what picture is presented in the paper.
The names and voices were not fairly reported in the article. I ask: How over 100 people that signed their names and voiced strong comments, in less than two weeks, is not reported on? How is one “ridiculous” comment made from one neighbor included in the article but not one of the 35+ statements on the website? Hmmm.
Bill Vezzoso Jr.
