Tag Archives: mayor ken sim

#VanPoli | Backgrounder on Vancouver’s 2026 Municipal Civic Election

As is almost always the case, the 2026 race for power at Vancouver City Hall is shaping up as one of the most consequential elections in the city’s history.

Four years ago, voters handed a sweeping mandate to current Mayor, Ken Sim.

In 2026, the central question of this year’s civic election is a simple one: has Vancouver become a better, more affordable, more livable city under Ken Sim?

For Mayor Ken Sim and ABC Vancouver, the answer is yes. For many others — and certainly members of the opposition parties — the answer is an emphatic NO.

In 2022 Mayor Ken Sim’s party, ABC Vancouver, campaigned on public safety, housing approvals, reducing street disorder, and delivering major civic projects.

Mayor Sim has repeatedly highlighted the city’s efforts to hire 100 additional police officers — ABC Vancouver has, in fact, hired well more than 100 new police officers — and 100 mental-health nurses — the latter commitment would have to be considered an abject failure, with Business in Vancouver reporting that 41 mental health workers were brought on to staff various response teams … as of June 2026, only about half of those hires were registered nurses — to accelerate housing construction approvals, and prepare Vancouver for the  current FIFA World Cup.

ABC Vancouver has argued that it has brought a business-oriented approach to City Hall after years of political fragmentation.

Yet for many Vancouverites, the Ken Sim years have been anything but smooth.

Housing affordability remains the defining issue in Vancouver.

Despite record levels of housing approvals, rents remain high if not the highest in Canada, while home ownership continues to be out of reach for most young families and workers.

Public safety, homelessness, addiction, and visible street disorder remain persistent concerns, particularly in the DTES and surrounding neighbourhoods.

Concerns about transportation, climate policy, development pressures, and the spiraling costs associated with hosting FIFA World Cup matches have also entered the civic conversation. Polling released earlier this year suggested Vancouver residents remain sharply divided in their assessment of the ABC administration, with many polls registering  ABC Vancouver at 10% support among Vancouverites.

Those divisions have fueled a broad anti-Sim movement on the political left.

The most visible expression of that opposition has been COPE’s “Evict Ken Sim” campaign.

Led by COPE Mayoral candidate Stephanie Allen, the Coalition of Progressive Electors (COPE) has framed the election as a referendum on what it describes as an increasingly corporate and developer-friendly City Hall. The slogan has become a rallying cry among activists who believe Sim’s administration has failed renters, marginalized residents, and neighbourhood communities. COPE’s fundraising appeals openly ask supporters to help “evict Ken Sim” as Mayor.

But make no mistake, COPE is not alone in its criticism of the Mayor.

Recognizing that vote splitting helped ABC achieve its landslide victory in 2022, Vancouver’s progressive parties have once again attempted something unusual.

COPE, OneCity Vancouver, and the Green Party of Vancouver have negotiated an electoral co-operative agreement intended to reduce competition among progressive candidates and maximize their chances of defeating ABC candidates. Sadly, the agreement has not proved entirely successful at the centre-left unity goal.

As we wrote last week, the Mayoral field itself remains crowded.

Ken Sim is seeking a second term and remains the clear front-runner — at least according to civic election commentators, lawyer Kyla Lee and This is Vancolour’s Mo Amir, a sentiment the two have expressed in their role as civic affairs panelists on CBC Vancouver’s On The Coast afternoon programme — in part because he benefits from name recognition, an established — if broken, in the eyes of many — political machine, and the advantages of incumbency.

OneCity Vancouver has nominated William Azaroff, an affordable housing advocate whose campaign has not only emphasized affordable housing, but protections for tenants (provincial jurisdiction), climate action, and expanding public services.

The Green Party has nominated popular incumbent Vancouver City Councillor Pete Fry, who has positioned himself as a pragmatic progressive focused on neighbourhood planning, sustainability, and balancing growth with livability.

COPE has put forward Stephanie Allen, whose campaign has focused on renters’ rights, social and affordable housing, labour issues — including re-instating the Livable Wage Programme jettisoned by Mayor Sim early in his term of office — working with the provincial and federal governments to implement an affordable $40 a month transit pass for those whose incomes fall below $40,000 a year — which is an laudable environmental initiative, as well — and challenging what Ms. Allen describes as the monied backers of ABC Vancouver, and the elites influence over civic politics that ill-serves the interests of most citizens.

Meanwhile, Councillor Rebecca Bligh has launched the new Vote Vancouver party, creating another centrist option that could attract voters dissatisfied with both ABC and the traditional left.

Colleen Hardwick, and her TEAM for a Livable Vancouver civic party, have also launched a campaign for elected office, focused on neighbourhood empowerment, and transparency in decision-making at Vancouver City Hall.

Perhaps the most hopeful campaign for office in 2026 comes in the form of Kareem Allam and his Vancouver Liberals party, whose platform is centred on fiscal discipline; a socially progressive approach to governance that is focused on making the city affordable again for working and middle-class families; addressing the drug crisis on the DTES by ridding our city of the cryptocurrency ATMs so well loved by Mayor Ken Sim and the offshore drug lords who fuel the drug crisis that has taken so many lives in our city and our region; ridding Vancouver of our city’s disturbing rat infestation; working collaboratively with opposition Councillors; requiring fewer managers while hiring more front line workers; strengthening the role of the City’s Integrity Commissioner, and funding Vancouver’s Park Board properly in order that Park Board Commissioners might work to repair and renovate Vancouver’s increasingly dilapidated community recreation centres.

The controversies surrounding Ken Sim are likely to dominate much of the coming Vancouver municipal election campaign.

Critics have accused ABC of excessive centralization of power, a lack of transparency in decision-making, and governing in a manner that has marginalized opposition Councillors. Debates over policing, housing policy, encampment responses, development approvals, and FIFA-related expenditures have all generated political friction. Former allies have occasionally become critics, and opposition parties have attempted to portray the Mayor as increasingly disconnected from ordinary Vancouver residents.

Mayor Ken Sim’s re-election strategy will likely emphasize stability, competence — it is but to laugh — and the argument that major reforms require more than a single four-year term.

The mechanics of the 2026 Vancouver civic election are already taking shape.

Vancouver has announced expanded voting opportunities for 2026, including more advance voting locations, larger voting sites, and more than 2,200 election workers. Election Day is Saturday, October 17, 2026.

While the city has not yet finalized all advance voting dates, advance polls are expected to open in the weeks leading up to Election Day, continuing Vancouver’s recent practice of offering multiple opportunities for early voting.

Voters will elect not only a Mayor but also 10 City Councillors, 7 Park Board Commissioners, and 9 school trustees. We will also decide several capital borrowing questions that could shape municipal infrastructure spending for years to come.

In many ways, Vancouver’s 2026 election has become a contest between competing visions of the city itself.

One vision, represented by Ken Sim and ABC emphasizing growth, public order, and managerial governance. The other, represented by the city’s progressive parties, argues for stronger social programmes, requiring landlords to repair pest infested and rundown SROs, legislating deeper affordability measures, taking an activist approach to rebuilding infrastructure, opening up City Hall to citizens, and adopting a community-driven approach to development in our city.

By the evening of October 17, Vancouver voters will have decided whether Ken Sim’s sweeping victory in 2022 marked the beginning of a new political era — or is merely an unfortunate interlude, a one and done for Mayor Sim’s right-of-centre civic party — in the city’s long tradition of progressive municipal politics.

The answer will determine not only who occupies the Mayor’s office through autumn 2030, but what kind of city Vancouver hopes to become in the decade ahead.

Kareem Allam on the Vancouver Park Board, Preserve the Elected Board

The Association Presidents Group (APG) representing 17 community centre associations across the City of Vancouver, released a statement in 2024 strongly urging Premier David Eby to “reconsider his commitment to proceeding with the elimination of the Vancouver Park Board.”

The APG says Vancouver Mayor Ken Sim’s decision is “undemocratic.”

“We do not believe 8 City Councillors can decide to abolish the Park Board elected by thousands of Vancouver citizens in October 2022,” it said, in the press release, which may be found below.

“We believe the Park Board can only be removed after a civic election in October 2026, and only if Vancouver citizens have made that choice. Neither the City nor the Province have a mandate to remove the Park Board.”

The Association Presidents Group (APG) says ABC Vancouver Mayor Ken Sim’s motion to eliminate the Vancouver Park Board was announced and passed in a week without any engagement with the APG organization and other key stakeholders.

“There was no transition plan to demonstrate the alleged benefits of such a decision. The reasons announced have been questioned by many stakeholders including dozens of former Park Board Commissioners and Community Centre Associations,” said representatives with the Association Presidents Group.

Vancouver’s independent and elected Board of Parks and Recreation has served Vancouver for over 135 years. Vancouver is the only city in Canada with an elected Park Board and is the only city in North America other than Minneapolis to place its focus on growing a vibrant parks and recreation system as a constituent element to the citizens served by the municipal governments in both cities — up until the untoward December 13, 2023 decision by Vancouver Mayor Ken Sim and his super majority team of ABC Vancouver City Councillors.

VanRamblings reader Mara writes to correct some of the information above …

MANY cities in the United States have elected park boards including: Tacoma (Washington State), Bainbridge Island (Washington state), Bend (Oregon), Willamalane (Oregon), Simi Valley (California), Three Rivers Park District (Minnesota), and over 350 cities in Illinois (Naperville, Joliet, Rockford, Springfield are the big ones, but there are 350 others), and nearly every city in North Dakota (Fargo, Bismarck, Minot, Williston, others). There are also elected park districts in northern California, Montana, Colorado, Florida, West Virginia, New York state, and Massachusetts.

In Canada, Cultus Lake in British Columbia has an elected park board.

I say this because Vancouver IS NOT an outlier. It needs to keep its independently-elected park board, but people need to realize it’s one of many. If you keep repeating Ken Sim’s lie about Vancouver being an oddity, it feeds into his narrative.”

Thank you, Mara. At the moment, for some, the Contact VanRamblings function on the site is not working. We are working on resolving that issue.


Preservation of an Elected, Independent, Responsive Vancouver Park Board 


Here’s the Association Presidents Group Press Release 

The Association Presidents Group (APG) believes Vancouver Mayor Ken Sim’s attempt to abolish the elected Vancouver Park Board is undemocratic.

We do not believe 8 City Councillors can decide to abolish the Park Board elected by thousands of Vancouver citizens in October 2022. We believe the Park Board can only be removed after a civic election in October 2026, and only if Vancouver citizens have made that choice.

Neither the City nor the Province have a mandate to remove the Park Board.

Mayor Sim’s motion was announced and then passed within one week without any engagement with the Community Centre Associations and other key stakeholders. There was no transition plan to demonstrate the alleged benefits of such a decision. The reasons announced have been questioned by many stakeholders, including dozens of former Park Board Commissioners and Community Centre Associations.

The elected Park Board has served Vancouver well for over 135 years.

Voters created an elected Park Board because they wanted parks and recreation to be a high-profile priority in Vancouver. Commissioners run for office because they are passionate about protecting and expanding our parks and recreation programmes. It is their priority concern and responsibility.

The Mayor’s proposal would have Commissioners replaced by City Councillors who have a multitude of responsibilities resulting in a less responsive and effective working relationship for community stakeholders. City parks and recreation will not be the first priority for City Councillors.

The APG rejects the Mayor’s claim that the Park Board is broken.

We believe it has been critically underfunded by City Council for several decades.

Many of the examples cited by the Mayor for the elimination of the Park Board are in fact already the City of Vancouver’s responsibility. They own and maintain the buildings and infrastructure in the Park Board system.

For example, Park Board frequently recommends renewal and expansion of Community Centres for additional space to accommodate children’s programmes but it is City Councillors who decide on the funding. Parents complain that programme spaces for their children are inadequate. Those concerns should be directed to City Hall.

A decision to eliminate the elected Park Board must be determined democratically in the next municipal election if it remains part of the ABC platform. Let the voters of Vancouver make such an important decision.

Sign the APG Petition asking the Premier not to eliminate Park Board.


For more information please contact either of the following APG members:

(copy and paste either or both of the following e-mail addresses into your e-mail programme)

Jerry Fast <jerryfast@shaw.ca>

Kathleen Bigsby <kmbigsby@gmail.com>


The Auditor General’s Report released yesterday on his audit of recreation facility asset management at the Vancouver Board of Parks and Recreation (Park Board) and City of Vancouver (City).

The Report, as submitted by Mike Macdonell, Auditor General reads in part …

“The Park Board manages 24 community centres, 14 pools and eight indoor rinks, which are owned by the City, with responsibility for maintenance shared between the Park Board and City departments. The audit determined that these facilities were not effectively managed to align with strategic goals, meet service level priorities and optimize asset lifecycles.

The 46 recreation facilities included in the audit have an estimated infrastructure funding deficit of $33 million per year, which is part of the City’s significant overall infrastructure deficit of $500 million per year.

Many of the Park Board facilities’ building systems have been extended well beyond their intended useful life. As of 2022, the City’s data showed that 72% of recreation facilities were in poor or very poor condition, from an asset management perspective, based on the cost of required repairs and maintenance relative to the facility’s replacement value. Although the lower rating does not mean that facilities are unsafe, these assets generally cost more to maintain, repair or improve and are closer to requiring renewal.

The Park Board and the City aimed to improve the condition of recreation facilities so that 70-80% were in good or fair condition by 2050. However, there were no agreed-upon facility asset management investment plans to fund such a significant increase in condition.

The audit found that the City did not have a Council-approved policy or strategy, or a formalized capital asset management framework, to guide asset management planning for recreation facilities and ensure consistent alignment between community expectations, service delivery targets, and the maintenance strategies needed to support them.

The City provided building maintenance services to the Park Board guided by an agreement created in 2014, but the audit found there was no operating level agreement that defined respective Park Board and City staff responsibilities.

The agreement also did not define accountability or reporting requirements from the City to the Park Board for its provision of asset management services. The audit found that Park Board Commissioners did not receive consolidated information on asset-related service levels, performance indicators and funding scenarios to support their responsibility to oversee recreation asset management.”

VanRamblings believes that preserving our elected Park Board is critical for the livability of our city, to continue to prioritize the high quality of service provided to us by our community centres, pools and hockey rinks, and the maintenance of Vancouver’s more than 400 parks for the ongoing enjoyment of Vancouver citizens.

Crypto, The Scam Currency Championed by Vancouver Mayor Ken Sim

Cryptocurrency promised a democratized financial future.

In practice, it functions like a casino wrapped in techno-mystique — ideal for laundering money and enriching insiders.

The Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the world’s Anti-Money Laundering standard-setter, warns that without strong rules, “virtual assets … risk becoming a safe haven for the financial transactions of criminals and terrorists.”

FATF Chainanalysis traces tens of billions in tainted money each year — its 2025 report estimates illicit crypto addresses received about $40.9 billion in 2024 (likely nearer $51 billion once all is identified). FATF Chainalysis has issued red-flag indicators and repeated calls for tougher global action precisely because criminals employ crypto to launder funds.

Crypto’s core economic claim — “value” — is equally shaky, fraudulent even.

The Bank for International Settlements writes bluntly that crypto assets “have no intrinsic value and lack a backing authority,” making prices prone to sudden swings. Bank for International Settlements reviewers have long argued they are “akin to a commodity money (although without any intrinsic value in use).” That hollowness fuels boom-and-bust cycles in which sophisticated players harvest gains while latecomers eat losses, the ultimate Ponzi scheme.

Who actually wins?

Not the many, but the whales (the very very wealthy, the 1%). Academic work and regulators document extreme concentration: the top 10,000 Bitcoin holders controlled a massive share of supply, revealing “participation … still very skewed toward a few top players, which is to say, the wealthy one per cent.” Such concentration means market moves are often dictated by a tiny cohort of the very wealthy, who can move liquidity and sentiment at will — hardly a people’s money.

Against this backdrop, Vancouver’s Mayor Ken Sim has championed making the city “Bitcoin-friendly,” even floating paying municipal property taxes and holding reserves in Bitcoin — “a hill I am willing to die on,” he told Business in Vancouver’s Mike Howell this spring while awaiting a staff report.

BIV reporting in December 2024 detailed his motion to explore accepting Bitcoin for taxes / fees and investing a portion of city reserves. Tying essential public revenues to an asset class that lacks any intrinsic value is fiscal brinkmanship, not innovation. (Bank for International Settlements)

Crypto currency certainly doesn’t serve the interests of the citizens of Vancouver.

The pattern is clear: a system tailor-made for obfuscation — bafflement, bewilderment, mystification, puzzlement — celebrated by a wealthy minority that profits from volatility, and promoted as “the future” despite watchdogs’ alarms.

When the smoke clears, crypto looks less like finance for the many and more like a high-risk conduit for the few — plus a convenient money laundering tool for the criminal underworld.

And this is the fraudulent “currency” Mayor Ken Sim champions?