I was very surprised to hear that Ignacio Velazquez, in his
recent opinion piece in your paper, accused Pinnacle publisher
Tracie Cone of talking poorly about a proposed arts center.
Velazquez wrote that her comments came during a meeting he had with
her a couple of years ago. I was surprised because I too attended
the meeting and Cone never made the comments attributed to her.
I was very surprised to hear that Ignacio Velazquez, in his recent opinion piece in your paper, accused Pinnacle publisher Tracie Cone of talking poorly about a proposed arts center. Velazquez wrote that her comments came during a meeting he had with her a couple of years ago. I was surprised because I too attended the meeting and Cone never made the comments attributed to her.
Cone and I met Velazquez at his restaurant, next to which the center was being proposed, and Cone spoke positively of the need for an arts center. She said such a center would “make the cool factor of this town go way up.” (She is much more articulate in print than in person.) However, Cone added that until other more basic community needs were provided for – such as affordable housing, park land and in particular a woman’s shelter – her paper could not in good conscience give an arts complex a ringing endorsement.
Velazquez quoted Cone as saying, “What’s in it for me?” But if Mr. Velazquez is speaking of the same meeting I attended, this is untrue. In fact, if anyone was asking someone for something, it was Velazquez. He wanted her paper to endorse the project whole-heartedly. She said she couldn’t because of the other unmet needs. If and when they are met, I’m sure Cone will be an art center’s first and fiercest advocate.
Kyle Hull,
Hollister
