Following last week’s balanced and well-written article “Candidates differ on county government’s role, I was looking forward to a comparison of the District 2 candidates Angie Homola and Jill Johnson. I was disheartened to read the article “Differences stark in race” that appeared on Oct. 24.

The article begins by referring to tension between the two candidates and provides a history of their positions six years ago on the proposed expansion of the Urban Growth Area. What the article left out, although the paper had the facts at the time of going to press, was that Angie was correct. Jill had misrepresented the facts to the city council and in a survey of the 484 members of the Oak Harbor Chamber, only 62 responded and only seven stated they were in favor of the expansion.

It states that Angie is hard to get hold of but does not give sources. Based on articles I have read in this paper, she is very accessible to her constituents and goes out of her way to address their concerns. It next states she was fired from a position she held in the county planning department for reasons that are in dispute. Angie was not fired but took a layoff due to a hostile work environment in 2003 and this was thoroughly explored and reported in this paper during the 2008 campaign. There is no dispute.

The last section “A change in tone” finally provides some balance in reporting for those who continue to read to the very end. How can I continue to trust this paper when I see such bias?

Carole Dawes
Coupeville