Letters

STRONG TONIC

Thank you for Bob Rowland’s eloquent description of the toll drunk drivers take on their victims and society as a whole [“One Too Many for the Road,” June]. The story gave a complete but sad picture of the true cost of this crime.

When I moved east some years ago, I tried to explain to native New Englanders that California truly had sanctions against this type of behavior. Sadly, states in this part of the United States are nowhere close to making offenders accountable. I assure you, if their DUI laws were even close to what yours are, and cars were taken away from offenders, it would help.

Hearing from victims and having to look them in the eye is a strong tonic. The financial pain is also effective. I hope your story opens eyes, not just locally but beyond.

MARILYN E. JESS
SHAFTSBURY, VERMONT

SEARCH FOR TRUTH

As a longtime subscriber to San Diego Magazine, and one who agreed to be interviewed by the author, I was disappointed and shocked to read s.d. liddick’s article regarding San Diego’s pension crisis [“The Harder They Fall,” July].

I strongly disagree with the basic premise of the article, that the “young kids” elected to the city council in 2000 are primarily responsible for the pension mess. More importantly, it is factually wrong. Two of the five members the author cited as being elected in 2000, Charles Lewis and I, did not take office until December 2002, after all of the benefit and pension-funding votes were made. Mr. Lewis and I participated in no such votes. Instead, our predecessors, Byron Wear and George Stevens—both at the end of their political careers, not the beginning—were in office during that time. While Ralph Inzunza was in office during many of the relevant votes, he did not take office until mid-2001, not 2000. So the notion that the council was engulfed in the year 2000 by a “new breed” majority of “young, slick” councilmembers (who, according to the article, were just too busy being “political animals” to pay attention to city business) is both wrong and factually inaccurate.

A partial list of some additional blatant, though perhaps less significant, inaccuracies: that Scott Peters represents District 2 (he represents District 1); that Toni Atkins was a chief of staff in her current council office before being elected (she was not); that I was a chief of staff in my council office before being elected (I was never a chief of staff, and I worked for a different council office); that I was “convicted” of a crime (I was never convicted because the judge in my case only entered judgments of acquittal, and threw out all nine jury verdicts, not just seven); that Ralph Inzunza and I made “tainted votes” (we never voted on anything related to “Strippergate.”) All of this makes it practically impossible to rely on any other “facts” espoused by the writer.

I am embarrassed that I agreed to be interviewed for more than one hour for this story. Indeed, I was quoted several times in the article, although the context in which I offered those comments was different than the context in which they were ultimately used. It is disturbing that the simple facts listed above (among others) were never checked and, more importantly, that the writer never told me that he was doing a pension story that would be titled “The Harder They Fall,” featuring unflattering caricatures of all city councilmembers (not to mention my cracked head, having fallen off a wall). I would have had much more insightful (and more on-point) comments had the author shared the true scope of his article with me.

Finally, and perhaps most shocking, was the writer’s repeated reliance on “an anonymous source from the U.S. attorney’s office” to dole out personal potshots about city councilmembers. Even U.S. Attorney Carol Lam must agree with me that it is improper and unprofessional for assistant U.S. attorneys to serve as anonymous sources of personal, below-the-belt media quotes, let alone those that pertain to pending cases. But shame in particular on the author for printing the quotes of a “source” (especially one who demands anonymity) from an office clearly biased (and misinformed) when it comes to City Hall. Doing so under these circumstances is about as valuable as relying on me as an anonymous “source” commenting about the competency of the lawyers at the U.S. attorney’s office.

I do agree with the author’s contention that “the search continues for truth in San Diego’s pension morass.” One of the problems is that it is easy to write another hyperbolic article regarding San Diego’s pension mess, relying on quotes from anonymous prosecutorial “sources” and others with bones to pick with City Hall. It is more difficult to write a factually accurate analysis of a complex financial and political issue. I personally know the members of the city council and the city employees the writer castigates in this article, and his treatment is unfair and often inaccurate, particularly with respect to Toni Atkins, Scott Peters and Jim Madaffer, who seemed to take the brunt of the author’s vitriol.

MICHAEL ZUCCHET
SAN DIEGO

Author s.d. liddick responds: Scott Peters represents San Diego City Council District 1, not 2. Toni Atkins was a policy analyst and council rep for Christine Kehoe, not chief of staff. Michael Zucchet worked as an aide in the office of Councilmember Valerie Stallings—not chief of staff—before moving on to work for San Diego City Fire Fighters. However, the suggestion that these inaccuracies compromise the article’s conclusions is misguided. A primary assessment of the piece was that early in the new century San Diego’s city council comprised a group of relatively young councilmembers, all steeped in the political life and process. After the election in 2002, three of five council positions were filled by former council chiefs of staff; two other councilmembers, Atkins and Zucchet, had more than a dozen years between them in council offices or positions that worked extensively with City Hall and local government. I stand behind the conclusion that the city council—as it was composed after 2002 (not 2000)—was both relatively young (especially compared to councils of yore, which were often manned by retirees and semi-retirees) and made up of professional politicians.

As to the charge that I treated some characters with vitriol: I couldn’t be more personally detached from that group. I had no preconceived ideas about any of these subjects; no animosities, biases or prejudices. I came to the conclusions I did after scores of hours of formal interviews, informal conversations, exhaustive reading, entire days spent in newspaper archives and long hours at City Hall.

FURTHERMORE

I would have loved the chance to respond to the anonymous “critics” of my environmental record in the July article on the San Diego City Council [“The Harder They Fall”], especially those who suggest I refuse to offend business interests. For the record, here’s my record:

—In 2001, I voted against the reopening of Sorrento Valley Road, in order to preserve and maintain our open space, despite tremendous pressure from the tech community in my district. That area is now a permanent refuge for walkers and bicyclists.

—I was one of two to vote against the Fenton Carroll Canyon development in Mira Mesa, because that project used box culverts and fill dirt in a restored creek bed instead of constructing a bridge. For this, I was criticized by the local business community.

—I led the approval of a new Local Coastal Program for La Jolla, through the city of San Diego and the Coastal Commission, which now provides important new restrictions on bluff-side development and clarifications on protection of hillsides. The plan angered property-rights activists.

—In 2004, I endorsed a countywide proposition to greatly restrict development in San Diego’s back country, which was opposed by business and development interests.

—As chair of the city’s clean water task force, I was proud to champion one of the finest accomplishments for the environment by city government in decades. We reduced sewer spills by 80 percent between 2000 and 2004 through an aggressive program of sewer pipe cleaning and replacement.

Sometimes I will disagree with the environmental community on a particular issue, as I do with any interest group. And many times I agree with developers when their proposals help our city by concentrating new growth where there is already concrete. I support intense downtown development and infill projects, so new homes don’t have to devour more farms and hillsides, or jam up our freeways from here to Temecula. Additionally, the voter-approved suburban development that is taking place in my district is built the right way, with train connections, protections for habitat and national landforms, and strict storm-water runoff controls.

SCOTT H. PETERS
PRESIDENT
SAN DIEGO CITY COUNCIL

BORN EVERY MINUTE

This is in response to your article on Giuliana Bosco [“Hook, Line and Sucker” by Tom Basinski, July]. I knew her in college, at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. For some reason, I had a dream about her tonight, and I got up to get on the computer and search classmates.com for her. She’s not listed at all under her high school—St. Joseph’s in Kenosha. So I Googled her name. You can imagine my astonishment when I pulled up your article, just recently posted! What are the chances?

I haven’t dealt with Giuliana since I left Madison in the summer of 1998. She duped me and all her roommates with stories of fake people, fake money. She was an all-around liar. I smiled when you reported the juror saying she wanted to shout, “Liar, liar, pants on fire!” That’s what I wanted to do, too! She really sucked us all in! It wasn’t until another roommate also started checking things out that everyone found out Giuliana was a total scam artist. She only got me for a couple hundred dollars.

She called me during the summer of 1997 from Italy and told me she had been raped and the doctor’s bill had to be paid. How could she call her parents for the money? They would insist she come home, she said. My (now-deceased) grandmother loaned me the money to send to her. I cannot tell you how stupid I feel for believing all her lies. She had a fake award created that supposedly said she was an honor student in the Med Scholars program at UW. When I started getting suspicious, I called the Med Scholars program and asked if they awarded this particular honor. They said no.

I lived with this woman and three other girls! She had us so wrapped up in lies that by the end of the semester we all were mad at each other (based on Giuliana’s lies) and none of us spoke to each other (which in the meantime prevented us from comparing stories that would have exposed Giuliana’s lies). Eventually, we all found out. I’ll never forget my roommate sitting us down and saying, “Well, basically everything she told us was a lie; she made it all up . . .”

I am so glad she is locked up.

CATRINA (TINA) GROSZ
WEST ALLIS, WISCONSIN

HOOKED

I was alerted to your “Hook, Line and Sucker” article, and I’m still shaking after reading it. For years I’ve talked about writing a book—calling it Friend or Faux?—and telling the world about my experiences as a friend and roommate of Giuliana Bosco.

Giuliana was my college roommate in the mid-’90s. I figured she had found college the place to get a fresh start. I didn’t realize it was just a jumping-off point for her lies and deceit. My stories pale in comparison to this article, but lies about her health, family, education, employment and personal history abound.

Finding your story was shocking, but I can’t say entirely surprising.

HEATHER PETERSON
MADISON, WISCONSIN

---

LETTERS WELCOME: San Diego Magazine invites letters from its readers. Send comments to Letters to the Editor, San Diego Magazine, 1450 Front Street, San Diego, CA 92101 or to tblair@sandiegomag.com (e-mail) or 619-230-0490 (fax). Letters must be signed to be considered for publication. Please type or print your name, as well, and include a daytime phone number. E-mail should include the writer’s full name and city. We reserve the right to edit letters for clarity and to excerpt them.

Do you like what you read? Subscribe to San Diego Magazine »