A barrister, not city manager Penny Ballem, should review departure of chief electrician Ark Tsisserev

NPA councillor Suzanne Anton will bring forward an unusual notice of motion  at the Tuesday (March 23) Vancouver city council meeting.

It concerns council's replacement of Ark Tsisserev as  Vancouver's chief electrician on January 21. In the preamble to her motion, she noted that "questions have been raised" about whether he resigned, retired, or was pushed.

Anton  also mentioned in her preamble  that other questions have been asked. She wrote that those included whether Tsisserev raised issues about the electrical work at the Olympic Village or at LiveCity sites.

Her motion calls for city manager Penny Ballem to report back to council in-camera to provide detailed reasons for Tsisserev's departure and  to provide information about any settlement paid to him.

In addition, Anton wants Ballem to brief council in-camera about issues related to electrical work at the Olympic Village and about the qualifications  required to be the chief electrician.  

Tsisserev's replacement, Will Johnston, is not an electrician.

Under the Vancouver Charter, the chief electrician is appointed by council. It's bizarre that a councillor would bring forward a motion asking the city manager to explain the departure of a council appointee in-camera to the very council that supposedly made the decision to get rid of him.

That is, unless council didn't make the decision, which would be a serious matter.

Bloggers  who regularly  attack Mayor Gregor Robertson and Vision Vancouver—such as Alex Tsakumis and Mike Klassen—have been making hay of Tsisserev's departure. Tsakumis has claimed that Ballem actually fired the chief electrician even though he can only be dismissed by council.

I don't always  agree with what Tsakumis writes, though he has been very tenacious about this issue.  For those who don't know him,  Tsakumis is  a long-time Conservative  political activist and former Bill Vander Zalm aide who  denies that human activity is responsible for global warming.

Tsakumis has also served two terms on the NPA board. So Anton's motion, in effect, is saying questions have been raised by, among others, a former member of her party's board of directors.

To be fair to Tsakumis, he  has cited concerns by people with a great deal of knowledge, including Electrical Contractors' Association of B.C. executive director Deborah Cahill and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.

Meanwhile, Klassen carries his own political baggage. He  created citycaucus.com with Daniel Fontaine, who was former NPA  mayor Sam Sullvan's chief of staff. Klassen also worked on Sullivan's campaign against wards in 2004.

After Sullivan became mayor, Klassen was appointed to the Vancouver planning commission.

In  a recent  column in 24 hours, Klassen cited five reasons why people should care about Tsisserev's departure. The fourth concerned potential safety threats at Olympic venues and the fifth concerned cover-ups and the use of gag clauses.

The attacks on  the mayor's handling of this  resulted in a pro-Vision blogger, Jonathan Ross, leaping into the fray to try to  discredit Tsakumis.

Ross, who previously managed the campaign of Vision council candidate Kashmir Dhaliwal, did this with documents leaked to him by a friend at city hall. Ross's excited response  could suggest that Vision operatives are worried about the potential political  impact of the allegations. Or it could merely indicate that there isn't much to this so-called scandal.

Meanwhile, Tsisserev appears to have signed a confidentiality agreement with the city as part of a settlement.

With such obvious partisans duelling over Tsisserev's departure, this situation cries out for an impartial evaluation.

The solution isn't an in-camera briefing by Ballem, as Anton has recommended.

A far better  approach would be for council to clear the air by appointing a barrister to investigate and file a public report on the issue.

If Ross is correct  with his assertion that nothing is amiss, the Vision-controlled council has absolutely  nothing to fear.

Under section 176 of the Vancouver Charter, council has the power to do this in connection with  "any matter connected with the good government of the city or the conduct of any part of its business".

Surely, the safety of the Olympic Village and LiveCity sites meets this criteria. The barrister appointed under this section has the power to order a person to answer questions and produce documents. And if the person refuses, the barrister  may apply for a court order forcing compliance.

If the person continues to refuse, the barrister has the power to apply to have the person found in contempt of court. This can send someone to jail.

The city has a big financial stake in the Olympic Village, particularly after it replaced a New York hedge fund as the lender. But the city is also the regulator over the project. This creates the appearance of a conflict of interest, which is why an independent review is desirable.

The taxpayers should be concerned  for another reason.  There's a chance that a crafty lawyer will seize on  questions contained in Anton's motion  to blame the city for any future  fire-related liabilities at the Olympic Village.

In addition, people who are considering buying units at the Olympic Village deserve an independent review.

Ballem might not like it, particularly if she fired Tsisserev without consulting council. But council shouldn't worry about this.

What's more important is protecting the taxpayers' interest and preserving respect for the city's oversight of building safety. The best way to accomplish this would be to appoint a respected barrister  to get to the bottom of this matter.

And by "respected", I don't mean an ass-kissing consultant  who gives clients what they want to hear. And I also don't mean lawyers who've contributed generously in the past to Vision Vancouver or those with long ties to the labour movement.

If council wants to ensure public confidence in the Olympic Village, it will hire someone with a track record of integrity for occasionally taking an unpopular position and who has no ties to the governing party.  If council  adopts this approach,  the public will be far more likely to  accept the conclusions in the  final report.

Follow Charlie Smith on Twitter at twitter.com/csmithstraight.

Comments

26 Comments

spartikus

Mar 21, 2010 at 9:53am

Seems entirely reasonable to me, Charlie.

0 0Rating: 0

glen p robbins

Mar 21, 2010 at 11:12am

There is no position from which this situation looks reasonable. Politically it is very unattractive and appears like a lot of noise -- and not what is relevant. Is there any truth to the allegations that proper inspections did not or would not allowed to occur at the Olympic 'site' which is situated in the city of Vancouver and involves the city electrician?

The terms of the settlement should be made public for in order to consider how much of the settlement is about 'leaving' and how much is about 'hush money'.

I like Gregor Robertson's work as mayor -- I hope he and council can do better on this --than they currently are.

0 0Rating: 0

Jerry R

Mar 21, 2010 at 4:41pm

Any settlement that requires non-disclosure is always suspect.

Any settlement that voids our right to know how tax dollars have been spent is always suspect.

And any settlement that dismisses a respected public servant "without cause" in favor of a private benefit "with cause" is inevitably suspect.

This issue is growing rapidly in public awareness. Charlie has proposed something eminently fair-minded, transparent and in the public interest. No one can possibly object.

0 0Rating: 0

Jim

Mar 22, 2010 at 3:00pm

For some reason, Tsisserev's departure is still a mystery but one must assume that these decisions are made with the best interest of the taxpayers in mind. The fact that there has been limited response from the City on this matter could lead one to conclude there is much more to this story than the electrical expertise of one individual. Taxpayers should question whether the "expertise" of Tsisserev was overshadowed by other issues, and do we really all this “dirty laundry” aired in public? I have full confidence in the officials I voted for to run the City. Anton should focus on something more constructive.

0 0Rating: 0

A. G. (Alex) Tsakumis

Mar 23, 2010 at 2:52pm

Hi Charlie:

To suggest that I am somehow partisan in this matter over the illegal firing of Arkady Tsisserev as City Electrician is a little rich.

You are among many local civic observers to have hailed my previous criticisms of Sam Sullivan as being chief of his political career's coffin nails.

Would that make me partisan, um, against, ah, my own? Your contention that Suzanne's motion is one raising objections made by me, as a former NPA Director, is absurd--that is a contrived slander which is easily debunked.

Additionally, Gregor Robertson announced his candidacy in my former column in 24 Hours. I received several exclusives from his bailiwick and I was supportive and hopeful that he would bring real change to City Hall after Sam's disaster(s).

Was I not the same former NPA Director then?

And, frankly, your characterization of me as a "political activist" is also inaccurate, if not inflammatory: I was a speech writer in Ottawa for the Mulroney government and was a campaign organizer...but "activist" has different connotations. I'm a RED Tory. for example, I happily and fully support gay rights, including marriage and adoption and a woman's right to choose.

Of course, the gratuitous knock that I am a global warming skeptic was simply par for the course, eh? There is a plethora of evidence to suggest that the science is hardly settled and the people who are being adversely affected are the poor and underprivileged--those you are usually an able advocate for, no?

Charlie, I expect better of you than this. You could have contacted me, either through my website or email directly.

I guess that wouldn't have made more exciting copy though.

I wish you continued success.

0 0Rating: 0

Charlie Smith

Mar 23, 2010 at 3:22pm

Alex,
I don't recall hailing your previous criticisms of Sam Sullivan. Please enlighten me with the reference. It's possible that this occurred. I just don't recall ever doing this.
Charlie

0 0Rating: 0

grant g

Mar 24, 2010 at 3:14pm

It seems certain NPAers have no problem with the cone of silence that was placed around Estelle Lo`s neck, was it not Estelle Lo who warned the NPA run city about the way the Millennium development deal was structured,she warned that the city was on the hook for everything!

And how did that deal work out,Gregor had to ask Victoria to change the Vancouver charter to allow the city to borrow upwards of a $1billion dollars,to pay off the New York hedge fund Fortress? And Intrawest who owns Whistler Blackcomb also owed Fortress,$1.6 billion to be exact.

So how come Sam Sullivan/Peter Ladner/Susan Anton selected the little known company Millennium over bids from companies like Concord Pacific and Wall development,proven companies with proven records in BC with Substantial assets,oh how indeed....Wasn`t Paul Barneau on the board of Armeco? I believe he was.....So the Athletes villages spirals over budget,Gregor comes to the rescue,I give Gregor full marks for making the best of a terrible NPA deal with the little known Millennium development,Gregor certainly didn`t drag the NPA or the "silenced"Estelle Lo through the mud....

Charlie, to me it sounds like a bunch of sour puss NPAers crying wolf,wolf,wolf....

Cheers

0 0Rating: 0

Jerry Thompson

Mar 24, 2010 at 4:46pm

We need an investigation - period Charlie. You can site all the NPA'ers current or former jumping on this story but lets look at the details.

1) The city has had to pay a compensation package to a guy 12 months away from retirement. Obviously something is going on here.

2) The guy ran a department putting good money in the city's coffers, while bringing the latest in electrical safety to Vancouver's buildings.

3) Will Johnston has admitted that Olympic sites were not to code and were unsafe. Would you have liked to been warned of an emergency by bullhorn? Seriously I would expect this in Sochi, not in Vancouver.

4) If electrical safety was compromised, what else was? The Tsisserev firing isn't the only thing that needs to be investigated now - the entire construction of the Olympic Village is suspect after these allegations. There isn't a chance in hell I'd buy a unit there and I will certainly be warning anyone who asks me not to either.

5) The Charter issues are glaring here. If council was informed then why on earth does Suzanne Anton need to ask questions about what really happened.

Either Ballum has broken the law all on her own, and needs to lose her job, or the mayor has acted in concert with her deception and needs to be called to task in the public eye for his involvement.

I could keep going here, but none of the above has anything to do with politics from the NPA. Now lets talk about an effective opposition in this town.

Everyone knows you slant to the left Charlie, thats cool you work for the straight and are from what I understand an avid COPE supporter. No big deal.

However, if you and Allan Garr, and Frances Bula, would get off your collective rear-ends and actually call our local politicians to task as you would the NPA, or anyone to the right of center, maybe, just maybe, it wouldn't have to be the NPA past and present attempting to keep Vision actually working for ALL of the people, instead of just their friends and supporters.

Or Charlie, have you forgotten that there are those out there that want and expect good government regardless of what party they are attached to?

I'll go one more step for you Charlie. Back from 2001 to 2005 the press played a major role in assisting the then 2 member NDP MLAs in Victoria in exposing BC Liberals for the very same type of politics and decision making that Vision is doing today in Vancouver.

Where are you now?

0 0Rating: 0

A. G. (Alex) Tsakumis

Mar 24, 2010 at 8:06pm

Charlie:

Happy to oblige. You wrote a column in which you referred to my dogged reporting of Sam's (pathetic) record. That's where. I neither remember the date, nor the column specifically, but it was sent to me by various city hallers who were surprised I would get a compliment out of anyone at the decidedly left leaning Georgia Straight. But alas, I told them it must have been a slow news day...

As for Mr. Gough's meanderings above:

1) I wrote two columns supportive of how Gregor handled the Olympic Village fiasco. In those columns I condemned the NPA, specifically Sam, for endorsing THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION THAT MILLENIUM BE THE CHOSEN PARTY TO BUILD THE SITE. I have gone on record as having supported the bid of Terry Hui of Concord or Peter Wall of Wall Development. And not for the fictitious reasons Grant Gough has concocted into some bizarre conspiracy (for which I hope Paul Barbeau sues him). Mr. BArbeau was the lawyer of record for Armeco, a company related to Millenium development, a company which had nothing to do with the bid for the Olympic Village Nor was Paul Barbeau, at any time, on good terms with Sam Sullivan, in order for Mr. Gough's mythology to even have a snowball's chance in hell of survival. I sat next to Barbeau at the board room table and we both were on record as saying the contract would have been better off in the hands of Peter Wall, then Terry Hui. Wall, by far, had more experience in that kind of development.

2) At the time of the bidding, Millenium was in an apparently sound financial footing and overpaid, in cash, by $20 million dollars. The criteria set by the city (a very bad move) was to take cash over carry--meaning they considered all the players abut even, it boiled down to whom would pay more. Bad choices certainly, but hardly the conspiratorial drivel proffered by Mr. Gough, who's website remains a well-head of defamatory statements about anyone not supportive of the NDP. Those willing to bash behind 'anon' or contrived names need not apply any semblance of reason to their comments. The court of SOBER second thought, it ain't...

3) Again, when I was supportive of Gregor, I was still a former NPA Director, where was the bias argument then?

Thx for the time here Charlie. I wish you well.

0 0Rating: 0

Charlie Smith

Mar 24, 2010 at 11:38pm

Jerry,
My column asked for an investigation by a barrister.

By the way, I'm not an avid supporter of any party. Sometimes I write columns that recommend certain courses of action. I have a tendency to favour greater transparency, more fairness, and a wise use of taxpayers' dollars. These three points have underpinned much of my writing on issues ranging from transportation to child poverty to health policy to legal affairs. I don't consider myself a rabid supporter of COPE or any other party.

I enjoy reading columns by Jeffrey Simpson, Lawrence Martin, and Paul Krugmann, none of whom can be considered radical left wingers unless you're a member of the Tea Party.

I'm also concerned about what might happen to the planet if greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere keep rising. I worry about the disappearance of industrial and agricultural land in the region. And I fear that Jeff Rubin might be correct with his analysis of global oil markets. I wish other media outlets would pay more attention to these areas, but they don't. I enjoy working at the Georgia Straight because I'm not constrained from writing about these topics.

Our paper tries to shine a light on certain issues, such as discrimination against transgender people or economic unfairness against people of colour, with the hope that it will help create a fairer society. This lets people who are pursuing those laudable goals realize that there is a media outlet in this town that will give them a voice.

Charlie Smith

0 0Rating: 0