I’ve been staying out of the whole complicated issue of what is behind the termination of Vancouver’s chief electrical officer Ark Tsisserev just before the Olympics. These kinds of stories, where neither side is willing to speak publicly or clearly about what is going on, are problematic to wade into, as there are often all kinds of issues that one side or the other can’t legally bring up. There have been other terminations of people at city hall under previous administrations that generated some rumblings, but they also went mostly uncovered because there was no real proof of what was going on — just a lot of friends of the fired saying it was a terrible thing, with some sinister motivation behind it, and an official denial from the city, along with vague rumours emanating from same about problems that might have led to the firing.
As I’ve said to others, these kinds of stories remind me of when media used to have a field day in the ’80s accusing the Ministry of Human Resources of all kinds of heartlessness every time someone on welfare said they’d been mistreated. That might have been the case or it might not have been, we never had any way of knowing, because the ministry was legally prohibited from giving details about a particular person’s case that might help explain what was going on.
What seems to be giving the current story legs — and enticing the larger media outlets to start covering it — is that Mayor Gregor Robertson doesn’t seem to be up to speed on what’s going on and is fumbling the ball as he goes out in public to give various explanations. Cover-up? Or just a guy who isn’t very good at giving the “official explanation” for something that can’t really be discussed publicly? I have absolutely no idea. Neither do most people, but that certainly isn’t keeping anyone from debating it. You can read all about it here, here and here.
And just to acknowledge the stinkbomb that my dear friend AT loves to throw over here on this issue: Yes, you’re the most amazing investigative journalist ever on the planet. I am unworthy and I don’t know how I’ve managed to remain employed in journalism for all these years.
23 responses so far ↓
1 landlord // Mar 16, 2010 at 3:46 pm
“…doesn’t seem to be up to speed…”? “…not very good…”? I thought the party line is that it’s all sabotage by disgruntled, un-named “city staff”.
Who approved three year’s salary in Dr. Ballem’s severance package? Who informed Council that Mr. Tsisserev had “retired”?
In the old days journalists found facts (not rumours), then checked them and then published them. Making excuses for incompetence and inexperience is the job of PR flacks in the Mayor’s office. It’s a waste of space on a blog.
2 City Hall Insider // Mar 16, 2010 at 3:47 pm
We all knew Ark would not go without a fight. Was he respected in the hall, yes. Did he make his enemies? Yes.
Did he always toe the line? No.
Ark is the victim of the new regime and this was more a power struggle than anything else.
ps. he is close to 65 or so and will come out with a nice buyout . This is fine cause we all know Ark will land on his feet somewhere.
3 Urbanismo // Mar 16, 2010 at 4:17 pm
4 A. G. Tsakumis // Mar 16, 2010 at 4:18 pm
“I am unworthy and I don’t know how I’ve managed to remain employed in journalism for all these years.”
Wow, Frances! You’re actually asking a question an ever- growing number of people ask themselves every time you provide the kind of horse manure you just posted on this story.
The fact you live in a vacuum is evidence enough.
There are angles on this story that have nothing to do with what people can and can’t talk about. But you can’t report that, because it would mean trashing like-minded doctrinaire entitlement jockeys.
But like the pathetic performance you gave on Vanilla Bill’s program this morning, I expect nothing less.
There is ample evidence of a cover-up on this matter. The Mayor himself has lavishly provided same.
But maybe I should answer your question for you and end this here, once and for all:
Because after some excellent reporting for about half your career you morphed into yet another “believer” of elite liberal media manipulation, under the guise of what’s “interesting”…who don’t care about the public’s right to know (or in this case about the safety of Vancouverites).
There were many reasons to look up to you in the past, the long past. You think ridiculing me and others who didn’t spend your years hoovering the media establishment doesn’t get back to me?? And then have the temerity to ask how I turned on you? You are comical if nothing else. Referring to me as the ‘Michael Bloomberg’ of the B.C. media is neither complimentary, not anything but condescending.
You’ve made yourself a caricature of what you once were by simply forgetting what got you to your current station: Where your reputation lives off the fumes a great past.
Integrity.
Maybe you should have stuck around and helped spit-shine Kirk Lapointe’s pitchfork or Patricia Graham’s broomstick.
5 NotcrazyforAlex // Mar 16, 2010 at 5:13 pm
Alex you are truly the Glenn Beck of Vancouver. I’m shocked at your total lack of respect for people or different opinions other then your own.
Frances you are clearly a person comfortable in your own skin to allow these types of comments against you on your own blog! I’m impressed. Alex just because you yell and put people down doesnt mean your right…..right wing yes, but not factually right or for that matter a better human being then everyone else.
6 Charles // Mar 16, 2010 at 5:26 pm
Folks,
As someone who continues to learn a great deal from Frances’s blog, might I suggest:
1/We acknowledge the difference between a news story and a blog. This is a blog. It’s a place for all the stuff that doesn’t make it into news stories. IE: rumours, ideas, thoughts, invitations… IE it is the journalist’s water cooler. I am grateful to be able to able to listen in on that water cooler conversation, especially because I have noticed that many of Frances’s musings and rumours end up becoming full-blown news stories once she and/or others have followed the research trail. I encourage Frances and her commenters to continue with this terrific format.
2/Since this blog has become somewhat of a water cooler chat, it is reasonable to ask for people not to ruin the conversation with emotional name-calling and temper tantrums.
Frances, I commend you for not taking the bait of Mr. Tsakumis. I look forward to hearing more informed comment, rumours, and theories from everyone.
Thanks for the great reads.
7 Mark // Mar 16, 2010 at 5:39 pm
I’m not sure that I consider the definition of integrity to be going onto someone’s personal blog and launching personal attack after attack at them. Nor would it be my definition of courtesy or kindness or compassion or civility. I’m surprised you didn’t compare Frances to Adolf Hitler!
8 Eleanor Gregory // Mar 16, 2010 at 6:12 pm
Interesting perspective on this, particularly your point that:
“What seems to be giving the current story legs — and enticing the larger media outlets to start covering it — is that Mayor Gregor Robertson doesn’t seem to be up to speed on what’s going on and is fumbling the ball as he goes out in public to give various explanations. Cover-up? Or just a guy who isn’t very good at giving the “official explanation” for something that can’t really be discussed publicly? I have absolutely no idea. Neither do most people, but that certainly isn’t keeping anyone from debating it….”
Having been a public official, I know that the handcuffs really get slapped on when it comes to discussing “personnel matters” with the press or anyone else for that matter. That said, Gregor is not exactly confidence building.
9 gmgw // Mar 16, 2010 at 6:23 pm
Illigitimi non carborundum, Frances.
gmgw
10 spartikus // Mar 16, 2010 at 7:07 pm
I have to agree with Frances here – we’re far too early in the game for definitive statements…except from the most partisan of partisans and certain former columnists who wish to drum up publicity – negative or not – so as to return to the ranks of paid columnists.
That said, there’s something not quite right.
For example, and I know this might destroy my credentials as a Vision propagandiste, Jonathan Ross writes….
My initial suspicions are that city staff didn’t give Council the full story to Council [on Jan 21st], and indeed portrayed Tsisserev’s departure as voluntary. Thus, there was no need for Council to question the suggestion of Johnston as anything but above board.
And I look at the summary of the in-camera portion of that Council meeting and I see…
THAT Council will go into a meeting later this day which is closed to the public,
pursuant to Section 165.2(1) of the Vancouver Charter, to discuss matters related to paragraphs:…
(g) litigation or potential litigation affecting the city.
…well, that just doesn’t quite jive, does it?
11 Dan Cooper // Mar 17, 2010 at 9:06 am
I don’t always agree with Frances, but I don’t even bother to read A.G.: “reportage” that consists solely of invective-filled ranting just doesn’t seem to have any point to me.
12 Dan Cooper // Mar 17, 2010 at 9:10 am
Hmmmm….strike that, and replace with “…mainly of incoherent screams of rage, mixed with invective…”
13 Dave // Mar 17, 2010 at 9:55 am
Well, let’s hope that City Hall Insider has it right, but I have to say that I was (and am still) absolutely stunned to learn of Mr. Tsisserev’s dismissal.
Over the past twenty years I have communicated with many lower mainland municipal officials while negotiating and submitting design guidelines, development permits, and building permits for Architectural and Planning projects. I dealt with many dedicated public servants – but I don’t ever recall working with someone as knowledgeable and helpful as Ark Tsisserev was when I recently pursued information regarding electric vehicle charging systems for multi-family residential projects.
14 Tim Latanville // Mar 17, 2010 at 12:32 pm
Alex,
As I’ve said before, you really need to counselling to deal with your anger issues, I really hope you can get some help. If you require some suggestions on where to get it perahps we can all chip in.
15 MB // Mar 17, 2010 at 1:00 pm
Rushesque windbaggery is not reportage of any kind. It is immaturity posing as rage, trash media at its worst, and little mannery at its best.
16 Chris Keam // Mar 17, 2010 at 4:40 pm
Rushesque windbaggery is not reportage of any kind.
Roy MacGregor agrees.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/when-journalism-is-about-hits-the-craft-goes-amiss/article1500373/
17 A. G. Tsakumis // Mar 20, 2010 at 12:16 am
I find it hysterical how the sycophants come out to defend the queen and like clock work she posts a story on Ian Baillie getting the nod over a NDPer, and tries to argue what middle-of-the-roaders Vision are–proving my point from the post above.
MB, Chris Keam, Timmy?
Olbermannesque/MacGregoresque elitist liberal douchebaggery is not intelligent retortage of any kind. It’s pencil-neckery posing as sanity, cowardliness at it’s worst, and pinheadedness at it’s best.
18 Rocker Rich // Mar 20, 2010 at 2:10 am
Most blogs become echo chambers for those sharing the slant of the writer. They’re also enlivened/besmirched by flamers.
Frances’ best days are not behind her. Joining other ex-Sun alumni at the Globe & Mail gives that paper yet another reason to vie for status as BC’s newspaper of record. (We haven’t really had one since Canwest locked up the West Coast dailies.)
Still, the Vancouver media has badly fumbled the Tsisserev departure. There were enough third-party interventions by private industry, fire-safety experts to offset Ark’s legally-advised silence.
An argument might be made that coverage of the wonky fire-alarm panels could have induced panic just as the Olympics were commencing. Too bad. What if there had been a fire at an Olympic venue causing injury or death? What if there’s one next week at another building that may not have been properly inspected?
Let’s pray such a tragedy never occurs. Because it won’t just be elected officials called to account by any resulting inquiry. City media would also be vilified for sitting on the story.
Finally, did Bill Good really mean it when he asked Frances “Why should my listeners care?” (about Tsisserev). Or was it a rhetorical query to prompt lively conversation? If Bill actually believes this is a dull issue, he should give back his Webster Award posthaste.
19 Frances Bula // Mar 20, 2010 at 8:59 am
@Rocker. One issue with the fire-alarm panels is that the city is distributing emails from Ark saying that they are ok and not a problem. I haven’t heard anyone from the other side come up with anything suggesting that those emails are false or refer only to a narrow issue, not the larger one, or anything along those lines.
20 Chris Keam // Mar 20, 2010 at 10:27 am
I thought I was a fascist?
21 spartikus // Mar 21, 2010 at 8:55 am
I’d like to endorse Charlie Smith’s suggestion.
22 Glissando Remmy // Mar 21, 2010 at 12:51 pm
Spartikus,
I would like to endorse Charlie Smith too. However he shouldn’t have picked up his advice from others… I’m sure he reads lots of blogs and comments… including mine but hey, it must be nice to express other’s views in your own column, too little too late.
This is my comment posted on Alex’s blog five days ago.
“I too want to get to the bottom of this as much as any Vancouver citizen, you know, the unsuspected single mom or dad, the senior on a fixed income, the software programmer and his Czech visiting girlfriend, the Yaletown yuppie and Affenpinscher companion and even the Coal Harbour middle Hong Kong class family taxpaying suckers of this city, they all want to get to the bottom of it.
BTW, where on Earth is Carmen Sandiego? And by Carmen Sandiego I meant the NPA (Naturo- Pathetic Actors) on this one? Weren’t they supposed to be the Medical Alternative to the currently established Medical Vision? Hello, is anybody still alive?
I am member of no Party, but let me tell you, I feel like starting one. The party of one! I would not want them sleeping in my bed even if they were growing on my butt!
Anyway. Following is a piece of simple logic that I played with yesterday. Do you concur?
The QED Thought of The Day
“Strange how the City of Vancouver`s top Manager thinks that QED stands for – QUITE EASILY DONE when everyone else knows that it means – QUOD ERAT DEMONSTRANDUM.”
Let me clarify this one for you. Following are three statements.
Statement ONE
Ark Tsisserev claims he was fired without just cause after decades of impeccable service with the City of Vancouver. (If true, he has the right to sue the City and may be entitled to compensation)
Statement TWO
Penny Ballem claimes that Ark Tsiserev was instead “retired” with dignity. She doesn`t think there was any wrongdoing. (If true, the City is safe from litigation)
Statement THREE
Mayor Gregor Robertson says that he didn’t know about the matter despite him being the head of a Council whose role was to hire Ark in the first place and would have been their role to fire Ark if necessary. (If true, the Mayor`s office is as useful as an extra large condom on a Panda`s yingyang)
DEMONSTRATION
Let`s assume now that statement ONE is WRONG.
(That means that any lawsuit filed by Ark and his lawyer is doomed from the start.)
However, Ark hires lawyer, sues the City and apparently they settle for an undisclosed amount.
If TWO and THREE were RIGHT there would have been NO settlement.
(Note: no accused party would get advice from a top lawyer to go to trial if there was no way in Hell to win the case. Settlement comes to mind in most cases. Eliminates humiliation for the accused and why not mitigates (as in “hides”) path for future lawsuits.)
Which gets us to the one and only conclusion: statement ONE is RIGHT!
QED!
“that which was to be demonstrated”
It bothers me dearly when a manager, public employee or an elected official tries to cover up their one degree of separation wrongdoing with… MY MONEY! I say it`s about the right time for the Taxpayers to correct the situation and have them fired. The City of Vancouver Manager would probably agree with me when I say that is QUITE EASILY DONE.
We live in Vancouver and this keeps us busy.
23 A. G. Tsakumis // Mar 23, 2010 at 8:48 am
The emails being distributed by City Hall DO NOT explain the panel issues.
The tests conducted by Fire Depts of Surrey and Burnaby confirmed that they had to rewrite manuals and put stickers on these panels, warning of impending malfunction if approached with a two-way within two and half feet.
So….cops, fireman and other first responders have radios tuned at a much higher frequency than the two-ways used to “satisfy” Ark Tsisserev.
Frances, go to the final paragraph of Mr. Tsisserev’s “approval”. you will clearly see his message: That FURTHER precautions and measures need to be taken to ensure future life safety issues are not manifest.
Besides, any other issues confirmed by Will Johnston in the Courier last Friday STILL REMAIN UNADDRESSED.
Why?
Perhaps someone will actually ask the Mayor with the same heat of purpose that she asked Sam soooo many tough (but appropriate) questions…
But I won’t hold my breath.
Leave a Comment