Mike Klassen: the pot calling the kettle black

Mike Klassen posted this on Friday evening, clearly settling in for a fun-filled weekend of blogging.  One supposes that he was trying to “out” me.

Well, not only does his post represent the height of hypocrisy when considering the author’s past, but it also doesn’t offer a stitch of information that is groundbreaking.

Let’s clear a couple of things up.

First, it is absolutely no secret that I am favourable towards Vision Vancouver, and for anyone who has read my writings over the past 10 months, that fact has never been hidden.

I managed the campaigns of both Council candidate Kashmir Dhaliwal, who missed out on victory by about 1,000 votes (the closest any South Asian candidate has come to becoming a Councillor since Setty Pendakur), and Raj Hundal, who now sits as a Park Board commissioner.

In fact (and I am extremely happy that Geoff Meggs is now a councillor, as he can back up this version of events from when he served as Larry Campbell’s Chief of Staff), it was my suggestions for the new party that served as the basis for the eventual Vision Vancouver name (check out the proposed speech that I wrote for Campbell).

So, labelling me as someone involved with Vision Vancouver was not in any way breaking news.

That being said, I write what I want, when I want, and how I want.  I don’t have an editor, I don’t have anyone who dictates what stories I can and cannot pursue, and I certainly am not beholden to anyone.

My attack on Stuart Mackinnon was legitimately something that I chose to pursue.

Mackinnon wrote the following in a post on the website of his new political ally:

“Aaron Jasper, the Vision Vancouver Chair of the Park Board, in a press release last week called into question the legalities of holding a plebiscite, claiming that I am “putting the Park Board at risk of a potential lawsuit, in spite of his prior knowledge of a legally binding agreement with the Vancouver Aquarium.” Commissioner Jasper does not state what this ‘legal binding’ agreement is, nor the basis of a potential lawsuit.”

Well Stuart, since you seem to be completely unaware of the agreement signed with the Aquarium, let me direct you back to the minutes from a Park Board meeting held in November, 2006.

More specifically, let me point out the following:

“2006 Aquarium Expansion Proposal

Board members received a copy of a staff report dated November 20, 2006 recommending that the Board approve recommendations A and B.

Moved by Commissioner Zlotnik,

A. THAT the Board approve the attached Vancouver Aquarium
expansion plan subject to the mitigation and compensation
measures outlined in this report;

B. THAT the Board amend the term of the current Stanley Park
Aquarium Agreement to extend the license to 20 years from the start of construction of this proposed project on the basis that no legal rights are hereby created and non shall arise until an agreement to extend has been executed to the satisfaction of the Director of Legal Services and the General Manager.”

Furthermore:

“Moved by Commissioner De Genova,

I. THAT it is the Board’s intention that in 2015 the board review
the Parks Control By-law relating to captive cetaceans.
- Carried.
(Commissioners Herbert and Woodcock contrary)

So, that is what “legally binding agreement” Jasper was referring to.

Make no mistake about it – Mackinnon is well aware of this agreement, and in spite of his utterances within the media that he thinks a lawsuit is unlikely, he also knows that it is a distinct possibility.

Mackinnon states that:

“The plebiscite I am calling for is non-binding, and would be done in order for the Park Board to collect information for the review.”

Fair enough.  But as part of the motion that was unanimously passed by the previous Park Board is this clause:

“THAT it is the Board’s intention that in 2015 the board review the Parks Control By-law relating to captive cetaceans.”

A plebiscite would constitute a review before 2015 (a review in the sense that it would be a plebiscite initiated by the Park Board), which would in turn put the Board in breach of a contract.

Now, did I assist in editing a press release that was sent to me for review?  Yes.

To suggest that the final words or sentiments in the document were not attributable to Park Board Chair Aaron Jasper, however, is without basis and completely ridiculous.

Here’s where the hypocrisy comes in, folks.

Mike Klassen used to do contract work for former Mayor Sam Sullivan.  In fact, I am pretty sure that these contracts were doled out through the City of Vancouver – although I don’t have the proof for that at the moment.

Klassen is also active within the NPA, showing up to meetings and actively pontificating on how the party/association/political entity can become relevant once again.

Yet, when he goes on Global TV, he is identified as a “concerned parent” when referring to Vancouver School Board issues, or a “urban affairs blogger” when talking about City Hall.

Nonetheless, his writings over the past year and a half (which have represented complete and utter disdain for Vision Vancouver and the way in which this administration has run the city) and/or his previous paid employment with Sullivan remains mysteriously absent from the tagline of his media appearances.

So, before Klassen and his holier than thou, high on his horse attitude towards political involvement attempts to tag me, he and others should take a long look the man’s pedigree.  Those who live in glass houses shouldn’t be throwing stones.

And about that proof that I don’t have in my hands quite yet?  Patience, my friends.