All posts by Raymond Tomlin

About Raymond Tomlin

Raymond Tomlin is a veteran journalist and educator who has written frequently on the political realm — municipal, provincial and federal — as well as on cinema, mainstream popular culture, the arts, and technology. View all posts by Raymond Tomlin →

#VanPoli | Vancouver City Council | Wiebe MUST Resign | Pt. 2

September 23, 2020#VanPoli Civic Politics, BC Politics, Politics, VancouverRaymond Tomlin

Green Party of Vancouver elected officials on Council, School Board and Park Board Say Goodbye | Green Party of Vancouver elected officials currently sitting on City Council, School Board and Park Board (save David Wong, pictured lower right)

Continuing from Part One of our three-part series on why Vancouver City Councillor Michael Wiebe must resign his position on Council …
Stalemate | Aggrieved Citizens Head to the B.C. Supreme Court

With receipt of the investigator’s report written by respected municipal affairs lawyer and UBC professor, Raymond E. Young, submitted on September 12, 2020 to Vancouver City Manager Sadhu Johnston, and Mayor Kennedy Stewart, mandating that Green Party of Vancouver City Councillor Michael Wiebe is duty bound to resign his seat on Council, arising from an egregious Code of Conduct violation and undeclared Conflict of Interest, and that Mr. Wiebe not further be allowed to run for office for any elected body in the period prior to the next municipal election (in the autumn of 2022), and the subsequent refusal — thus far — by Councillor Wiebe, or any of his Green Party of Vancouver colleagues, to validate Mr. Young’s findings and recommendation, the question arises …
Where do the good citizens of Vancouver, and Mr. Wiebe’s colleagues on Vancouver City Council go from here, what comes next in the process of resolution respecting the scandalous fiasco that currently consumes both the attention of Vancouver’s beleaguered City Councillors, and citizens? Vancouver City Councillor Sarah Kirby-Yung states in the tweet above, posted on the morning of September 21st, 2020, that she and other Councillors have a legal obligation that precludes our elected Councillors from speaking on an “open code of conduct investigation.” In point of fact, there is no “open” code of conduct investigation — that investigation came to a conclusion on the morning of Saturday, September 12th, when investigator and lawyer Raymond E. Young submitted his completed report to Vancouver City Manager Sadhu Johnston, and to the office of the Mayor, Kennedy Stewart.

Readers should know that on Monday morning, September 21st, 2020, Francie J Connell, the City of Vancouver’s longtime Director of Legal Services, posted an e-mail to Mayor and Council advising our elected officials that they may not discuss the matter of the recommendation made by Raymond E. Young mandating that their fellow Councillor Michael Wiebe must resign his office — neither with each other, nor most particularly in the public weal, lest they themselves find that they are charged with a Code of Conduct violation. Such order by the city’s top legal official effectively muzzles our elected officials. Wonder why you haven’t heard boo from Lisa Dominato, Colleen Hardwick, Rebecca Bligh, Christine Boyle, Mayor Kennedy Stewart, and the remaining members of Council in the current circumstance involving Councillor Wiebe? Now, you know why.

Vancouver City Council, 2018 thru 2022, left to right: Councillors Rebecca Bligh, Christine Boyle, Colleen Hardwick, Pete Fry, Adriane Carr, Mayor Kennedy Stewart, Melissa De Genova, Jean Swanson, Michael Wiebe, Lisa Dominato, and Sarah Kirby-Yung.

There is an option open to Vancouver’s City Councillors to bring a motion forward to Council mandating that their colleague, Michael Wiebe, resign his seat on Council, requiring a two-third vote of Council in favour of such a motion. Were such a motion to pass, there would be no force of law behind it, as the Municipal Affairs Act of British Columbia does not allow for the removal of an elected official by her or his fellow Council colleagues.

The only other avenue of redress should Councillor Michael Wiebe choose not to voluntarily resign as a City Councillor in the city of Vancouver, would be for 10 citizens / registered voters within the city of Vancouver to take the matter to the British Columbia Supreme Court, asking the courts to enforce the recommendation of the authorized investigator hired by the City of Vancouver, to enforce the investigator’s mandated recommendation: that Councillor Wiebe be ordered by the Court to vacate his Council seat.
VanRamblings is advised that such a process is now underway.

Not to get too deep into the woods, but quite honestly Michael Wiebe and City of Vancouver Councillors, and the Mayor do not want this matter proceeding to the courts. Why not?
Any time one goes to court, not only can the outcome of the court proceeding not reasonably be predicted, the Supreme Court Justice could very well expand the scope of the proceedings, and rule in ways that Councillors and the City might find injurious, substantively limiting the power and authority of elected officials and staff at The Hall going forward.
A digression. Here’s an example of how things can go awry. In 2006, the Board of Variance sued the Mayor and Council for their unprecedented decision to remove all of the appointed members of the Board, to be replaced by individuals associated with the majority party in civic office. Respected jurist George McIntosh — then considered to be one of the top 25 lawyers in Canada, and at present a British Columbia Supreme Court Justice — was hired to argue the City’s case. The position of the City prevailed — a new Board was appointed by Mayor Sam Sullivan’s Council.
Although the matter had not been raised during the court proceeding, in his ruling, the Supreme Court Justice who heard the matter, found that a central provision of the mandate of Boards of Variance in British Columbia was ultra vires, ordering the revocation of the authority of Boards of Variance to hear “third party appeals” — which is to say, from that day forward Boards of Variance, as they had done for 55 years, could no longer provide a forum for aggrieved citizens to argue that the city (or more particularly, developers) must not move forward with a development citizens believed was contrary to the best interests of, or was detrimental to, the citizenry of a neighbourhood within the city where they reside.
Here’s what VanRamblings believes will happen when the matter of Councillor Michael Wiebe’s resignation from Vancouver City Council, arising from an egregious conflict of interest, and self-dealing, is heard by the Court: the Court will order Mr. Wiebe to vacate his Council seat forthwith.
VanRamblings believes, however, that the Justice will not limit her / his jurisdiction in the matter to the simple removal of Mr. Wiebe from office. Rather, we believe that the complainants will be awarded court costs, such that Mr. Wiebe — and the Green Party of Vancouver — will be liable for tens of thousands of dollars for having brought the matter forward to the Courts, when the simplest resolution to the matter would have been for Councillor Wiebe to abide by the recommendation of the investigator.
In addition, it is probable that the Justice will revoke the provisions of the Code of Conduct of the City of Vancouver, a code that serves to prevent Councillors from properly carrying out their responsibilities to the citizens of Vancouver who elected them to office. Even more, it is highly probable that the Justice will effectively re-write existing provincial municipal affairs law that precludes members of an elected body from removing an elected official who has engaged in conduct detrimental to the interests of the citizenry — going forward, then, any elected official who “acts out” in an unparliamentary fashion, be it on Council, School Board or - in Vancouver - Park Board, may be removed from office, either by a two-thirds vote of her / his colleagues, or arising from an investigative report recommendation that the elected official be removed from office.

Further, VanRamblings believes it to be entirely likely that, sooner than later, the province of British Columbia will step in to bring resolution to matters respecting Councillor Wiebe’s removal from Vancouver City Council. Although there is a provincial election underway, and Ministers of the Crown are now candidates, and not officials of the government carrying out their ministerial responsibilities, it is entirely likely that British Columbia’s Deputy Minister of Municipal Affairs, Kaye Krishna, could ask the Deputy Minister for the Attorney General, Richard Fyfe, to appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate the particular circumstance involving Councillor Michael Wiebe.

#VanPoli | Vancouver City Council | Wiebe MUST Resign | Pt. 1

September 22, 2020#VanPoli Civic Politics, BC Politics, Politics, VancouverRaymond Tomlin

On Sunday morning, September 20th, at 10:30 a.m., Charlie Smith, the longtime editor of The Georgia Straight, and avid and well-practiced journalist covering municipal politics in Vancouver, broke the story that UBC professor and esteemed municipal affairs jurist Raymond Young, following an exhaustive three-month investigation authorized by the office of the Mayor of Vancouver, “declared that [Green Party Vancouver City] Coun. Michael Wiebe is disqualified from holding local office until the next election, due to a conflict of interest.” Says Young in his report …

“Despite apparently being knowledgeable about conflicts of interest, on May 13th, Councillor Wiebe put forward the amendment [for] ‘staff to work directly with business operators to identify immediate patio seating options.’ Councillor Wiebe had to know that he was a business operator,” Young wrote. “His proposed and passed amendment enabled Councillor Wiebe to wear two hats when dealing with city staff: that of the Council member and that of the business owner.

“This was a clear conflict of interest situation that he deliberately set in motion. This conflict of interest cannot be viewed as an inadvertent action.”

Raymond Young recommended in his 14-page report — submitted to Mayor Kennedy’s Stewart’s office on September 12th — that “it would be ‘appropriate’ for Wiebe to resign his seat on council,” arising from a conflict that involved his ownership of Eight ½ Restaurant Lounge, and substantive financial interest in the Portside Pub, both of which businesses directly benefited from Wiebe wearing ” two hats when dealing with city staff: that of council member and that of business owner,” Young wrote in his findings.

At this point, let’s backtrack a little, to more fully contextualize the timeline of events that led up to Raymond Young’s determination that Councillor Michael Wiebe must resign his seat on Council, and disqualify him from holding office on city council, the park board, other local government, or as a trustee under the Islands Trust Act until the next general election.
On June 5th, 2020 at 9:48 a.m., The Straight’s Charlie Smith published an article calling into question the propriety of Wiebe’s involvement in “participating in the discussion of a matter, vote on a question in respect of a matter because of a direct or indirect pecuniary interest.”

On his financial disclosure statement and on his Linkedin profile, Wiebe lists himself as the owner/operator of Eight 1/2 Restaurant Lounge (151 East 8th Avenue). It won approval for its application for a free temporary patio permit from June 1 to October 31. These permits allow business owners to use on-street parking space or sidewalks in front or beside their establishments.

According to the May 13 city council minutes, Wiebe did not absent himself from discussions or voting on a motion to “approve in principle the prioritization of additional staff and budget resources to support the allocation of flexible, innovated, and expedited patio space”. In addition, that motion directed staff “to seek out cost recovery opportunities where possible and where reallocation of public space may be for private use”.

On May 27, Wiebe seconded a motion by NPA councillor Sarah Kirby-Yung calling on council to temporarily waive all permit and application fees associated with the temporary expansion of patio spaces.

Under section 145.2 of the Vancouver Charter, a council member must issue a declaration if they consider that they are “not entitled to participate in the discussion of a matter, or to vote on a question in respect of a matter” because of a direct or indirect pecuniary interest. If a councillor has a direct or indirect pecuniary interest, the council member must not remain or attend at any part of a meeting in which this matter is under consideration. In addition, a councillor cannot participate in a discussion, vote on the matter, or influence the voting on the matter.

“A person who contravenes this section is disqualified from holding office as described in section 145.911 [disqualification for contravening conflict rules] unless the contravention was done inadvertently or because of an error in judgment made in good faith,” the Vancouver Charter states.

On June 4th, 2020, Vancouver City Hall had issued a permit to Eight ½ Restaurant Lounge, one of 14 restaurants to receive approval for a patio. Wiebe submitted his application on June 1st. According to various reports, in the weeks leading up to June 1st, Wiebe worked with city staff to prepare the drawings and provide all of the necessary documentation required for a successful patio application — giving him a lead time for his application that would have been unavailable to other applicants … which is to say, those not sitting on Council, and those citizens who did not have as ready access to city staff as would be the case with a sitting City Councillor.

On June 6th 2020, non-practicing lawyer Michael Redmond, based on The Straight story above, lodged a Code of Conduct complaint with the City of Vancouver, triggering Raymond Young’s city-authorized investigation.
Upon receipt of the Code of Conduct complaint, Councillor Wiebe attended at City Manager Sadhu Johnston’s office to be advised of the complaint, and to sign off on the appointment of the individual who would conduct the investigation. Mr. Wiebe readily agreed to Mr. Young taking on the role of investigator, committing to his full co-operation with the investigation.

In fact, that June 6th meeting in the City Manager’s office was the last time Mr. Wiebe appears to have given any thought at all to the investigation, for in point of fact, he did not either meet with Mr. Young, nor provide answers to any of the questions submitted by Mr. Young to Mr. Wiebe, nor did he provide any aid whatsoever to Mr. Young in the conduct of the Code of Conduct complaint that had been lodged against him. Mr. Wiebe, it would appear, only gave thought to the matter when Charlie Smith published his Sunday morning, September 20th article in The Georgia Straight.There has been speculation in the community as to whether someone in the Mayor’s office was the source who provided Raymond Young’s report to The Straight. In fact, VanRamblings is advised that it was the complainant, Mr. Redmond, who provided Mr. Smith with a copy of the Young report, which he had received from Mr. Young on September 12th, the same date the report was submitted to the Mayor’s office. We understand that a second municipal affairs reporter — who we expect was CBC municipal affairs reporter, Justin McElroy — was also provided with a copy of the report.

In the curious and curiouser department, when Councillor Sarah Kirby-Yung lodged a formal Code of Conduct complaint against her fellow Councillor, Jean Swanson, City Manager Johnston sent out notification of the complaint to Council and senior city staff. The Code of Conduct complaint against Ms. Swanson was amicably resolved when Councillor Swanson provided an apology to Councillor Sarah Kirby-Yung.

Vancouver City Council. Councillor Colleen Hardwick looks askance at a Council colleague

In the past two years, Councillor Colleen Hardwick has had two Code of Conduct complaints filed against her, the nature of both investigations requiring Ms. Hardwick to engage the services of a municipal affair lawyer, Bob Kasting, requiring of her the expenditure of monies in legal fees to respond to each complaint.

Relating to both Code of Conduct complaints, the City Manager posted e-mails to Council and senior staff informing them of the filed complaints.

Relating to the first complaint filed against Councillor Hardwick, The Breaker News’ Bob Mackin published an article on July 11, 2019, writing the following …

Lawyer Henry Wood dismissed pro-density activist Peter Waldkirch’s Jan. 16 complaint against Colleen Hardwick, finding no evidence that the 2018-elected councillor used her PlaceSpeak.com civic engagement company improperly.

Waldkirch’s complaint to city manager Sadhu Johnston took issue with a page on the PlaceSpeak website showing Hardwick and an image of city hall with the headline “You don’t need to wait for an election to have your voice heard — I’m listening.” Waldkirch, a research lawyer, alleged that Hardwick was confusing citizens and using public office to benefit her private company.

“I do not believe it is appropriate for her to use it for city business and there is at least the appearance of this,” Waldkirch wrote in the email to Johnston, obtained via freedom of information.

Waldkirch went further on Twitter, just over 30 minutes after his initial complaint to Johnston. He publicly accused Hardwick of “attempted privatization” of public engagement and called PlaceSpeak a “black box.”

In his report, Wood wrote, “We are dealing with a soft launch of a consultation site on which the only question posed was ‘Do you think that you are being heard by the City of Vancouver?’ There is no obvious potential conflict arising from the substance of that issue.”

Further to the above, Councillor Hardwick had offered the services of PlaceSpeak to all members of Council, at no charge, furthering lessening any appearance of impropriety or conflict.

Note might be made at this point that, as is the case with the Code of Conduct complaint filed against Councillor Wiebe, investigators hired to investigate Councillor Hardwick received in excess of $20,000, on each occasion, for their investigative work, and the writing of a report.

Yes, that’s right, in excess of $60,000 has been paid to date to investigators conducting inquiries, and the writing of reports, related to Code of Conduct complaints lodged against two Vancouver City Councillors. One Councillor was exonerated … twice. One was not.

Note should also be made that although the City Manager’s office posted e-mails to Council and senior staff relating to the Code of Conduct complaints filed against Councillors Swanson and Hardwick, at no time did the City Manager post correspondence to Council and senior staff respecting the Code of Conduct complaint filed against Councillor Wiebe.

One is left to wonder, why would that be the case?

Note should further be made that Councillor Hardwick took the matter of the Code of Conduct complaints seriously, and determined early on that she would require the services of her own legal counsel in order that she might properly respond to each Code of Conduct complaint.

Councillor Michael Wiebe, on the other hand, appears not to have taken the Code of Conduct matter at all seriously, and unlike his more mature distaff Council colleague did neither engage the services of legal counsel to traverse the rocky shoals of legal engagement, nor in any way, shape or form co-operate with the investigation, not meeting with investigator Young, nor answering any of the questions provided to him by Mr. Young.

Why is it that Vancouver City Councillor Michael Wiebe chose to — it seems abundantly clear to this writer — not take the filing of a Code of Conduct complaint against him at all seriously, why did he consciously choose not to engage the services of his own legal counsel and, finally, why did Councillor Wiebe not co-operate with Raymond Young in the conduct of the investigation of the serious Code of Conduct complaint filed against him?

VIFF 2020 | Mind Expanding, Savagely Feminist & Hitchcockian

September 21, 2020Cinema, VIFF 2020Raymond Tomlin

Only three days to go until the start of the 39th annual Vancouver International Film Festival, when most films will be available through your computer at home, your laptop, or on your TV, employing Apple TV, Roku, an Amazon Firestick, or Chromecast, any of which will allow you access to the 100+ films VIFF programmers have scheduled virtually in 2020.
Now, VanRamblings has been doing our bit to bring you up-to-speed on VIFF 2020, but there are others out there who are also working to prep you for the big event.

For instance, Shane Scott-Travis at Taste of Cinema has prepared his annual list of 15 VIFF films he believes you should not miss, explaining in cogent and convincing detail why that is the case.
For instance, in no particular order, the following three films …

Last and First Men (directed by Jóhann Jóhannsson, Iceland). Mr. Scott-Travis writes, in part, “… the ambitious and sadly posthumous release from composer Jóhann Jóhannsson that has drawn comparisons to Kubrick and Tarkovsky, as challenging and creative as it is mind-expanding and moving. Narrated by Tilda Swinton, and presented as an immersive monolithic artifact from the future, irrevocably connected to our past.”

Violation (directed by Madeleine Sims-Fewer and Dusty Mancinelli, Canada). Says Mr. Scott-Travis, “This nerve-jangling revenge picture, set in the deceptively pastoral Québec Laurentians, is one of the most explosive genre film directorial débuts in some time. The writing and directing team of Dusty Mancinelli and Madeleine Sims-Fewer (who also leads the exceptional cast) cut their teeth making several memorable and menacing short films now make a feature length début most people will be enjoying online through VIFF Connect.
Violation is an elegantly filmed and disturbingly savage feminist revenge film that actually is feminist, and at VIFF 2020 essential viewing.”

Sanzaru (directed by Xia Magnus, USA). Says Mr. Scott-Travis, “While paying homage and taking visual cues from 70s horror films, not to mention the gloomy Gothic sensibilities of Henry James’ pitch black classic The Turn of the Screw, Sanzura promises to be more than your typical creaky old haunted house yarn. The first feature from Xia Magnus, the Texas-set chiller begins as Filipina caregiver Evelyn (Aina Dumalo) moves into the large country estate of Dena Regan (Jayne Taini); it’s here, in this perfectly eerie setting, that the troubles begin.
Already garnering promising notices from the festival circuit, Sanzura has been praised for its Hitchcockian story elements, suggesting parallels to recent genre breakout films like Hereditary and Relic. Just the sort of perfect midnight fare you require for your next injection of nightmare fuel.”

Year in, year out for 39 years, Vancouver’s alternative newspaper has emerged as the ‘go to’ media outlet for reliable, informed, out of the box and engaging Vancouver International Film Festival reviews. In 2020, during VIFF Virtual, such once again proves to be the case — with a difference this year, given that most of The Straight’s VIFF reviews were first printed in their sister paper, Toronto’s Now magazine.
Still and all, writerly élan makes for a wondrous read no matter the source of the original film reviews, and there are a great many reviews this year to aid you in putting your VIFF 2020 virtual film festival online schedule together, to completely consume your life over the 14 days commencing this upcoming Thursday, September 24th.

Music Sundays | Mimi & Josefin | Life Affirming

September 20, 2020Diversions, Food & Health, Music, Pop CultureRaymond Tomlin

Amidst our current pandemic, in these most difficult and trying of times, when sometimes things seem as if all is lost, with the dysfunction and division extant in America just down south, with the passing of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and, locally, with this morning’s revelation by Charlie Smith in the newspaper where he has been the publication’s respected editor since 1991, The Georgia Straight, that Raymond Young, long one of our city’s and our nation’s most esteemed lawyers, whose practice focuses on all things municipal, recommending that Green Party of Vancouver City Councillor Michael Wiebe resign his seat on Council, arising from an egregious conflict of interest … well, these are not easy times for Michael, one imagines in particular today, nor for any of us.
Yesterday, I scrapped a Stories of a Life column I had written that, in essence, held my daughter to account for not using her many gifts to make a difference in the world that would benefit us all — if there was ever a person capable of achieving such, it is my very bright and compassionate daughter, Megan. The column was neither hopeful nor helpful — and who needs that given our current dire collective societal circumstance?
With that thought in mind, I looked to publish something today that is possessed of hopefulness, something inspiring and life affirming, and that has been for me much of last year and all of this year, the début of sisters Mimi & Josefin — the daughters of soprano Hélène Lindqvist, and music professor Philipp Vogler — on the German version of The Voice Kids, whose harmonies in their unique and compelling rendition of Thom Yorke and Radiohead’s 1993 hit, Creep, is both transporting and almost otherworldy.
So, without further adieu, Mimi & Josy …