How critical was the mood at the city council meeting?

If you read the front-page story in Wednesday’s Review, "Questions surface about park plan", last Tuesday’s city council meeting was a firestorm of controversy. The article emphasized the discord at a meeting that was mostly positive and optimistic.

Here’s what the Review said, with emphasis added to their most evocative language:

At the City Council meeting Sept. 21, speaker after speaker peppered councilmembers with concerns largely focused on the council’s procedure for acquiring the land. Some said the deal seemed sudden and secret. They wanted assurance that increased traffic in the Cypress Cove neighborhood would be addressed if the land becomes a park.

Others had concerns about the land itself.

[...]

At the council meeting several residents commented that they were excited at the prospect of finally having a community park, offering to help the city to shape the project.

But they were also concerned and critical.

They said they felt blindsided by the city’s purchase and feared the effects of increased traffic and noise associated with creating a park at the end of Stone Pine Road, the main road through the neighborhood.

One person wanted to know how the city planned to address parking issues.

Overall, most were troubled that so much had transpired behind closed doors.

I reviewed the tape of the meeting to see if I had completely misread the mood of what I found to be a pretty positive hearing. I don’t hold grudges. But I will never forgive the Review for making it necessary for me to watch this damned city council meeting tape over and over.

There were nine speakers. Four of them (not "most") expressed (legitimate) concerns with the process.  Six of the speakers were from Cypress Cove and all said they were concerned about parking and traffic, but all save one seemed optimistic about the park and working with the city on the plan.  Suzanne Hyder, the president of the Cypress Cove Homeowners Association, said that 10% of residents came to a meeting about the park and that "there were many positive comments" at the meeting.

What struck me was the hopeful tone of the testimony. These people were clearly surprised by the decision and concerned about the traffic impact. They wanted to work with the city to address the issue. But it was clear they were looking forward to having a park next door and believed the city would act in good faith.

This question of tone seems like a quibble. But after watching the city council meeting, I could hardly believe that the Review was describing the same meeting that I had attended. It certainly gives the impression that the neighbors were angrier and more negative than they really were. What will be the effect of this story on Cypress Cove residents who are still undecided about the park?