Dear editor,

This letter is in regard to the lead article on page A9 of the Friday, Jan. 14 Record.

I wish to point out to you some inaccuracies in that article.

In the third paragraph, your reporter quotes Mr. (Union Bay Improvement District chair Alan) deJersey saying there was a 鈥渕ob atmosphere鈥� at the Dec. 15 trustee meeting.

I was at that meeting throughout. While there were, indeed, 52 members of the UBID rate-paying public there, there was no 鈥渕ob atmosphere,鈥� there was no 鈥渉eckling from the 50 or 60 attendees鈥� (paragraph four), and neither Mr. Livesey nor Mr. Goldswain 鈥渢ook [the] opportunity to grandstand while they have all their supporters there鈥� (also paragraph four) there was no grandstanding or provocative behaviour on the part of any of these people.

Indeed, I was singularly impressed with the restraint and courteousness shown by Messrs. Livesey and Goldswain while addressing their requests measuredly, plainly and all in order, to the chair in the face of immediate stonewalling and dismissiveness from the chair.

At the same meeting, when it  was opened briefly to questions from the floor, the questioners were rudely 鈥渟tuffed鈥� by the chair. At those moments there were occasional muffled grunts, as when you have been kicked in the stomach, from the public gallery.

Again, I was singularly impressed with the forbearance of the public; plainly, they know how to behave at a public meeting.

There is no mention in the article of this context of the meeting 鈥� and without context the reader is at a loss to put it in perspective and make his or her own judgment of what went on at that meeting. They are left instead with a slew of ugly innuendoes from the fine artistry of Mr. deJersey鈥檚 sledgehammer.

But what is really striking is that your reporter failed to notice that Mr. deJersey wasn鈥檛 at that meeting.

Writing in his own voice in the first paragraph, your reporter says 鈥渇ollowing an apparently raucous board meeting last month,鈥� etc.

The use of 鈥渁pparently鈥� in the opening paragraph of the article would seem to indicate that the reporter knew that his story was secondhand. So secondhand that perhaps he, along with Mr. deJersey, actually didn鈥檛 attend the meeting.

This kind of journalism is not acceptable 鈥� not in your paper, not in any other paper; it does not serve the public. As a matter of fact, my Record is kindly delivered to my door by your carrier; I didn鈥檛 order it or pay for it.

W.H. Ellis,

Buckley Bay

Editor鈥檚 note: Reporter Scott Stanfield was, in fact, not at the meeting because our hard-working newsroom staff cannot cover everything. The story was a combination of statements from Bruce Livesey and Cleve Goldswain and comments from Alan deJersey. Mr. deJersey was also not at the meeting, which our reporter could not know from the way the UBID chair described the meeting.