Documents prove that Ark Tsisserev signed off on safety concerns

Posted by Jonathan Ross

A telling set of documents regarding the Ark Tsisserev affair have been sent to CivicScene, challenging the trumped up claims of a group of political motivated individuals.

I have just received a very telling set of documents regarding the Ark Tsisserev issue, which has now taken on a level of political maneuvering and innuendo that doesn’t line up with the facts.

Alex Tsakumis writes in his post from yesterday morning that:

“…this whole matter began after I was leaked the email stream between Ark Tsisserev and his colleagues, from October, November and December of last year and then into early January–when he first raised concerns related to life safety issues with respect the the Olympic Village and then was concerned about inspection limitations for the pending Olympics.

He adds in a challenge regarding the safety sign-off by Tsisserev:

“If all Olympic venues were approved by city electrical inspectors in accordance with all recognized electrical and safety standards, release all the reports.”

In a post from February 9, Tsakumis also seems to suggest that Ark was fired as the whistleblower who was bringing forth safety concerns, and whom the city wanted to silence:

“An outstanding employee is fired after he spent the last two months of his tenure seeking answers to safety concerns about the Olympic Village that would be filled to the brim by unsuspecting Olympic athletes from all over the world not ten weeks from when Mr. Tsisserev discovered something might be wrong. In the midst of, presumably, seeking corrections, that exemplary employee is unceremoniously marched out of his office like a common thug, in front of his staff…”

I now have evidence in hand that proves otherwise.

Read the rest of this entry »

New Information on Ark Tsisserev

Posted by Jonathan Ross

The shock over Ark Tsisserev needs some clarity.

I have done a little digging on the Ark Tsisserev story, and this is what I have found out from conversations in and around City Hall.

Ark was dismissed following City Council approval of a shared services review recommendation to combine the city electrician position with the head of licensing and inspections

Vancouver is one of the few cities that still had a stand-alone electrician

It was normal process for the dismissal to take place in camera, because the electirician position was a direct hire/dismissal by council

All venues, permanent and temporary for the Olympics were inspected by city staff and signed-off before an occupancy permit was given

There were zero electrical or fire issues arise at any of the venues during the Games – the city’s safety and inspection record speaks for itself

Any specific concerns that had been raised – such as faulty electrical panels in the Olympic Village – were inspected by city staff and no safety issues were found.

That being said, this is about the city’s reputation.

The Electrical Contractors Association (ECA) deserved immediate hearing on the issues raised about codes not being met during the Games.

The City would be wise to sit down at the staff level with contractors, union representatives, and other relevant stakeholders – not to review Tsisserev and his dismissal, to but give confidence in safety inspections going forward.

Off to a meeting, but I will check back in later in the day and challenge the claim of certain individuals perpetrating the story of a fire at one of the Olympic venues.

Embellishment is the first word that comes to mind.

What was City Council told about Ark Tsisserev on January 21?

Posted by Jonathan Ross

City Council doesn't seem to be getting a full picture on a number of issues within City Hall.

Far be it from me to try and rival what Tsakumis is doing with this story, because his investigation over the past month and a half has been quite extensive.

For those unfamiliar with the issue, here is the Vancouver Courier’s Allen Garr and his account of the situation.

But in the vein of last week’s Vancouver Sun column, I am specifically interested in the January 21 in-camera City Council meeting that notified Council of Tsisserev’s departure and suggested Will Johnston, former Chief Building Official, as his replacement.

More specifically, I want to know what city staff conveyed to the electeds.

Read the rest of this entry »

Promoting Vancouver in Ottawa is smart politics

Posted by Jonathan Ross

Scenes like this, whether it is our former Mayor or our current Mayor sitting down with the Prime Minister, are positive and unworthy of petty political criticism.

I just got a chance to read Gary Mason’s fluff piece on Mayor Gregor Robertson (reminding me why his long-winded minor hockey road trip columns as a Vancouver Sun sports reporter were so excruciating), and came across this excerpt:

“Mr. Robertson recently returned from Ottawa where he spent time “bumping” into politicians in the hallways. He was also made available to the media to comment on the federal budget. Beyond that, it wasn’t obvious what his trip to our nation’s capital accomplished.

The truth is it was mostly about exposure and establishing Mr. Robertson, among members of Ottawa press corps, as a player. He plans to travel there even more in the coming months. It is all part of a grand strategy being concocted in the mayor’s office to reposition the city – and the man who runs it – on the national scene with an eye to wielding more clout.

This, apparently, is an early product of the swagger, confidence and influence Vancouver imagines it now has post-Olympics.”

The “swagger” Mason refers to is true to an extent, as Robertson is a hot property these days.

But whether it was four years ago after Sam Sullivan’s Turin flag-waving affair, or now after our own experience with the Olympics, having the Mayor in Ottawa with nothing specific on the agenda other than promoting Vancouver and the office is a worthwhile endeavour.

What is more, critics on both sides of Vancouver’s municipal spectrum are wrongheaded for engaging in such petty criticisms over these trips.

Read the rest of this entry »

Fri Mar 19, 2010

March 2010
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
  
 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31  

FACT OF THE DAY

An article titled Vancouver Politics by Paul Tennant in The Vancouver Book (1976), describes the entry of TEAM onto the civic political scene in 1968. TEAM, wrote Tennant, “sought to be a moderate reform group appealing to persons of all political ideologies.”

On their left was COPE (the Committee of Progressive Electors), also formed in 1968, and on their right was the NPA (the Non-Partisan Association), which had been a power in city politics for nearly four decades, and which “held that the affairs of the city should be run by those with the necessary knowledge and experience, i.e., those with a professional-managerial background, in order to run the city in a business-like way.”

The reformers, on the other hand, “felt that civic decision-making should be open to the public, with leadership coming from a cross-section of the population, and rule going to the working class majority. This group was concerned about land use, they advocated city control, and preferred to structure politics around the neighborhood concept.”

Quote OF THE DAY

“It was very diverse, and we got together by word of mouth. There were professors, business people, labor, lawyers and from all across the city. It was a coalescing of people around the idea we should do something.” – former City Councillor Setty Pendakur on the formation Vancouver’s reform movement and its political manifestation – TEAM – came into being in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s.

Archive

Tags