On forum scrutiny


To The Editor:


Again, I find myself the subject of one of your misguided editorials. I refer to your October 1, 2009 editorial on why the candidate debate, offered by the Coalition for a Sustainable Fish and Wildlife Habitat, is not an impartial source for such a forum.


Your reason for its lack of impartiality is that Richard Kelly, the president of the coalition, and me as a member and also treasurer of Bill Smith’s campaign, have also come out against the 4-poster, as if this is the only environmental issue affecting Shelter Island. It seems as though the Reporter would like to make it so.


My question to the editor is this: Since the League of Women Voters forum for the candidates meets your full approval, does one of the League’s past officers and the planned moderator of this forum’s affiliation with the Deer and Tick Committee, a pro 4-poster organization, not have to stand up to the same scrutiny that the coalition does? Does every other organizer of a forum need to be investigated as to who they are voting for or who they made political contributions to? 


Mr. Kelly has stated in a conversation with you that the questions would come directly from interested Shelter Islanders, and even asked you to be co-moderator, which you refused. Would this not be impartial enough for you? Or is it just your agenda to stifle any difference of opinion?


My last question to the editor is this: When the Reporter endorses a candidate for any particular office, does the Reporter then stop publishing news and information regarding the election even though it could be construed as bias toward the unendorsed candidates? Need I say more?


FRANK VECCHIO, Treasurer 


Shelter Island Preservation Committee