Ray Tomlin: My public statement after being fired from the Vancouver board of variance
STATEMENT September 26, 2009
TO: MEDIA
Vancouver
FROM: Ray Tomlin
(Former) Member, Board of Variance
Subject:
1. Recission, Appointment of Ray Tomlin, Vancouver Board of Variance
2. Decision. Opening of Investigation into Allegations of Board impropriety
At 9 a.m. today I received a communication, delivered to me by courier, from the Office of the City Manager, and the Acting City Clerk (see attached), advising me that my recent appointment to the Vancouver Board of Variance had been rescinded, effective September 24, 2009.
At the same in-camera meeting of Vancouver City Council, I was informed that Council also directed the City Manager to conduct an investigation into concerns raised by this writer in a September 11, 2009 memorandum delivered to the City Manager, the Deputy Gen. Mgr. of Community Services, members of Council, and members of the Board (see attached).
The September 11th memorandum detailed procedural improprieties that "demean the Board's performance and imperil its work, which in turn reflects upon the integrity of Council, all of which deprives the public of the expected service from one of the City's valued institutions." The memorandum also details suspected non-compliance of some of the Board's statutory duties, e.g. conducting in-camera discussions of Board business.
In receiving my letter of dismissal, wherein "City Council concluded that your activities as a Board of Variance member have resulted in a complete breakdown of the ability of the Board to carry out its statutory duties," it is ironic that Council concluded that my activities as a Board member contributed to the above-mentioned breakdown, when in fact the focus of my activities and memorandum were to compel the Board to adhere to its statutory duties, and "proven, longstanding Board custom and practice."
I am particularly upset that I was not provided with the opportunity to address Council prior to the taking of their decision, which I unfortunately suspect was based on false information given to Council by Dr. Ballem.
Previously, Dr. Ballem had convened a one-hour meeting with me, on Tuesday, Sept. 15th wherein she alleged "obstructive" behaviour on the part of this writer, as a member of the Board, such information based on hearsay, all of which I denied categorically, without reservation, at the meeting. At that meeting, Dr. Ballem demanded my resignation. I did not do so as her information did not warrant my resignation. It is the hope of this writer that Dr. Ballem did not repeat these false, injurious allegations to Council.
While I am dismayed to have been summarily dismissed from my position as a member of the Board, I have faith in Council that after a fair and impartial investigation into the claims made in the September 11, 2009 memorandum that I will be fully exonerated and reinstated to the Board.
My commitment to public service, and the integrity and duties of the Board of Variance, one of our cities' most cherished institutions, remains unfazed despite the events of recent days.
I am confident going forward that Council will come to adhere to the principle of evidence, trial and then verdict, and reverse themselves on the hasty and (suspected) ill-informed decision to rescind my appointment.
I look forward to serving, soon again, with distinction on this honourable Board.
Ray Tomlin
(Former) Member, City of Vancouver Board of Variance
Comments
2 Comments
Alicia
Sep 29, 2009 at 7:35pm
RAY TOMLIN'S DISMISSAL
PUTS INTO QUESTION
VANCOUVERITES' ABILITY TO PREVENT
DEVELOPER BREACH OF ZONING BYLAWS
CITY COUNCIL MUST REINSTATE RAY TOMLIN.
Suppose that a developer asks the City to relax zoning bylaws so that the developer may erect a ten-story building beside your place of residence. You are entitled to argue against it before the decision is made. You are also entitled to appeal a decision to allow the breach. Who hears the case? The Board of Variance. The Board of Variance is an important and powerful organism of our city government that has the authority to overrule decisions by the planning department concerning development permits, zoning, signage, and trees.
Given its power, it is of utmost importance that the Board of Variance be made up of fair-minded people and that it proceed with the utmost transparency. This is what Ray Tomlin, then member of the five-member council-appointed Board, argued when his colleagues decided that they did not need to see an affected neighbourhood before ruling on a case. Ray also argued transparency when he opposed his colleagues' decision to hold meetings behind closed doors, in violation of the Vancouver Charter and other statutes.
During July and August, Ray pleaded with his fellow members to explain their decisions. He appealed to the City Manager when his colleagues refused his entreaties. The result? He was fired.
Ray's dismissal raises serious questions that this new City Council needs to answer:
'Is the City running roughshod over Ray Tomlin because he presents a potential obstacle to a smooth run for developers?'
'Why is a member of the Board punished for wanting transparency?'
Ray Tomlin must be reinstated.
Vancouverites need Ray Tomlin back on the Board of Variance because he represents our interests. We need Ray back on the Board of Variance because if an ordinary Vancouverite ever has to appear before the Board of Variance, Ray will be working hard to make sure that the appellant gets a fair hearing.
Many patient Vancouverites have been letting down their guard placing their trust in this new City Council that has replaced the NPA. It behooves this new Council to show us that it did not get elected to simply do more of the same. Or does the new City Council represent the same interests as the old?
Alicia Barsallo
Lawrence Boxall
Sep 29, 2009 at 11:19pm
This Vision group was touted as an left-alternative to Cope. The more time goes by, the more they look like an alternative to the NPA as in "sugar-coated NPA." So Vancouver politics is becoming like US politics with the seeming destruction of Cope as a viable political force. You have the Smoothy Right-wing Vision and the Hardass Right-wing NPA, but no moderate and definitely no left. We need to get serious about organizing an alternative, a left alternative to the opportunists who are currently running our City. How about a coalition of progressive electors or something along those lines?