[All] Fw: Beware of the views of the Media re: Waterloo Merger

[Louisette Lanteigne]

It's time to say it like it is. 
 
I sent this email to the ministries and the London Rep for the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing who USES the KW Record as a means of following up on local planning matters.  Please let me stress this email is no reflection to the many wonderful reporters that ARE out there doing good work. Bob you are one of the best. There are good staff members out there but it is imperative that the ministry at least go into reviewing local matters with a healthy dose of reality. 
 
Lulu :0)

--- On Wed, 2/24/10, Louisette Lanteigne <butterflybluelu at rogers.com> wrote:


From: Louisette Lanteigne <butterflybluelu at rogers.com>
Subject: Beware of the views of the Media re: Waterloo Merger
To: Tim.Ryall at mah.gov.on.ca, dduncan.mpp at liberal.ola.org, tabunsp-qp at ndp.on.ca, norm.millerco at pc.ola.org, hhampton-qp at ndp.on.ca, ahorwath-co at ndp.on.ca, bill.murdoch at ontla.ola.org, mprue-qp at ndp.on.ca, joyce.savoline at pc.ola.org, jbradley.mpp at liberal.ola.org, jgerretsen.mpp at liberal.ola.org, jmilloy.mpp at liberal.ola.org, spupatello.mpp at liberal.ola.org, gerry.martiniukco at pc.ola.org, lpendergast.mpp at liberal.ola.org, elizabeth.witmerco at pc.ola.org, "Gord Miller" <commissioner at eco.on.ca>, braidp1 at parl.gc.ca, flaherty.j at parl.gc.ca
Date: Wednesday, February 24, 2010, 12:34 AM







Hello
 
Please read the following in regards to the KW merger ballot question and how this issue is being reflected in the media.
 
First a bit of history on my experiences with Record Staff.
 
As a resident of Waterloo who has survived an OMB process, I can state first hand that the KW record printed false headlines and I made them do retractions, They published slanderous comments and I made them publish a letter to the editor which I wrote to undo the accusations they made towards me that said I was against development. (My sister works for a housing company in Trenton Ontario and my uncle is a developer in New Brunswick. It's a silly thing to imply)  
 
When I posted an ad for a fundraiser to help my OMB appeal, it was published in the classifieds beside "Gigi the she-male" adjacent to the Escort section. When I complained  I made them refund my money ($350) and they republished my add and wrote an article about my event. 
 
When I won my OMB concessions for PL071044, they never printed ANYTHING to state what the concessions were. When a motion was made to quash witnesses after the experts meeting resolved all the issues, they published that I LOST the OMB.  I don't have to make this up. Read the headline:  http://news.therecord.com/article/426730 
 
What the article failed to state is that the expert minutes arrived to the OMB chair unratified by one single signature from developer's experts. I was not even privy to the final copy until the hearing began.  Ms. Rogers, the solicitor for the developer  spent the whole time slandering me and I was not allowed to state what concessions we won openly because the document was not fully ratified until the day after the hearing. I knew we secured all concessions. I couldn't say anything. That's why I simply wept. It was pure frustration. That entire hearing was designed to spin things as if I lost the OMB process.
 
The "KW" Record are corporate sponsors of the Waterloo Regional Home Builders Association. http://www.wrhba.com/  And the home builders purchase ads for new housing to pay for the publication. It would not be unreasonable to state the publication might have a bias when it comes to planning matters and fair media coverage.
 
Today in the February 23rd 2010 edition of the KW Record, the headline covers the the topic regarding Monday night's city council meeting. I scanned it for your reference since I could not find it on the KW Record Website. There are a few topics of this nature that do not show up in the on line publication. 
 
See the attachments and pay particular regard to the comments they made in the last paragraph and then view the attachments for the Minutes of the Meeting that I personally took and compare the two. 
 
This newspaper used 22 words to reflect the views of 11 of the 12 delegates who opposed the ballot question.  The one delegate who supported the motion gave a very brief statement to council but he received 53 words in the paper to reflect his view. Make of that what you will. Is this fair and balanced reporting?
 
The KW Record made the public look like idiots but the actual minutes show a very smart,  politically aware public who opposes the process because it does not reflect reasonable procedural logic. This reality is not reflected in the KW Record article at all.
 
I hope this information will be of assistance to you. If you have any questions or comments about this kangaroo court process please don't hesitate to contact me.
 
Thank you kindly for your time.
 
Louisette Lanteigne
700 Star Flower Ave.
Waterloo Ontario
N2V 2L2
519-885-7619
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/all_gren.ca/attachments/20100223/d832af7c/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: feb22record.jpg
Type: image/pjpeg
Size: 259237 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/all_gren.ca/attachments/20100223/d832af7c/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Feb22WaterlooCityCouncilLanteigneMinutes.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 59904 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/all_gren.ca/attachments/20100223/d832af7c/attachment.doc>