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

“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.” From Ray Tomlin Statement

WOW. If true…no comments!

FIRST. Ballem CANNOT “ask” someone to resign from this Board. The Board is not appointed by Ballem or by any of the City Staff and THAT request is a crass 101 intimidation technique.

SECOND. This Board serves the PUBLIC INTEREST (apparently) with no interference from the City Staff (again apparently) and is made out of VOLUNTEERES! Yes Penny, YOU cannot fire a volunteer! The difference between YOU and any VOLUNTEER serving on the numerous boards and committees is that YOU are PAID (for reasons I don’t understand yet) and they are NOT (see the irony here?) for doing mainly the same thing : assisting our CITY. Judging by the way the City has been managed during the past years we don’t need either a City “Manger” and/or City “politicians”. I bet we can do as good or even better without any of them. Savings right there! Imagine (wishful thinking) we fire them all tomorrow, well, I doubt they would even be employable, because I can’t see how their backstabbing, misinformation tactics, cronyism, bullying, arrogance, backroom dealing and party politics be used as transferable skills.

I think it is about time for us the public to call these entire hypocrites on their BS (bureaucratic shenanigans). WatchUfink?

“…Tony and Arminder didn’t do everything Ray thought they would. Not coincidentally, Tony Tang is a Vision board member and Arminder Randhawa is the wife of park-board commissioner Aaron Jasper.”
From Frances B and Ray T phone conversation.

There you go. So it turns out that this Board is as “independent” as a house cat. Shameful, no, disgusting really! A VV board member, a VV park commissioner’s wife and the only one that wasn’t VV is…OUT! How people change. It seems like yesterday, when they were COPE activists and NDP supporters; when Aaron was driving a school bus during Mel Lehan’s first shot at our Premier and Arminder was photo shooting with Carole James, Ray was there too. Then priorities changed. Jobs changed. Real estate in Vancouver changed. VV pulled a Brutus technique on COPE and voila, people changed. Not for the better, not for the better I may say. At least now thanks to Ray (the only one with a spine so far) we know. Pitiful!

Oh, and one more thing that I read not long ago, cited from memory, of course with a bit of editing, you don’t need to speak German to get this. It just feels appropriate, that’s all!

“Bewegen , bewegen Sie Elefant Volk , Sie klein erbärmlich Kräfte , Sie unterirdisch Sklavinnen. ICH Penny , bin gehend nach ausschlagen ihrer Dummköpfe bis zu Sie werden anerkennen mich als ihrer endgültig Chef. Ich bin Gott und Sie sind nicht , Sie jämmerlich Affen. Ich bin ein Ballem! ”

Moral bankrupty . . . live with it . . .

I also spoke with Ray last night, but found his meticulous notes, records and information far more credible than your interpretation.

1) What is the wife of Vision Vancouver Parks Commissioner Aaron Jasper doing sitting on the Board of Variance??? He is a REALTOR. She sits on a Board that has access (through Planning etc.) to a great deal of information about city properties, planning, bylaw changes etc. For Aaron to be FOOL enough to have allowed this to happen is stunning. No one is saying anything untoward is taking place but the potential, at least, apparent conflict of interest is glaring.

2) I think the mtng with Penny Ballem and Ray will be interesting to talk about…

3) How is Tony Tang, a developer (my discovery) Chair of the Board of Variance?

4) The Vision majority on the B o V want to kick up a number of responsibilities to council. Why? Does this not sound familiar? Ballem meets problem, intimidates (according to Ray), problem won;t acquiesce, so problem is eliminated under the specious guise of moving on or “incompatibility”. Can you say ‘Sue Mundick’? It’s just a different scale. The common denominator here is Ballem, whose over-reaching, once again, has cost the city a non-partisan, unbiased employee/worker/committee member, etc.

5) When Vision were campaigning, they did so, in part, to return the B o V “back to where it was”. Really? They’re gutting it by loading partisan hacks, with little background, if at all, in real estate matters. Randawa is a para-legal for Christ’s sake! What about the others? Nada (except for Tang, who would be fine if he were NOT active in the building business in Vancouver–not that there is anything intrinsically wrong with this, but the potential for conflict is, again, glaring)

The only criteria that seems to have been met here is that four Vision hacks were appointed along with a long-time COPE stalwart, Tomlin, but a VERY decent and unbiased guy, who has done some superb work in the past. A real loss for the B oV.

Yup, Vision really are operating differently from Sam’s crew. Yup…sure are….yup…