Yesterday I stumbled on Frances Bula’s hidden online gem about Mike Magee, the Chief of Staff to Mayor Gregor Robertson.

I think it is a pretty interesting look at the personality that the Mayor seems to trust more than any other (OK, maybe Amy his wife pulls ahead).

Magee is an enigma in many ways - at one time a star athlete that played hockey for the Blackhawks at the Chicago Forum in a preseason game, he has shifted pretty comfortably into his second career stream.

But what strikes me is the sentiment behind those that have surrounded Gregor Robertson for many years, REGARDLESS of whether you identify with all of their ideals and beliefs or not.

Reading the above-linked profile, or this one which talks about Joel Solomon, Gregor’s chief backer, brings one thing to light.

The involvement of these indivduals in the political realm isn’t about power, or profile, or finncial benefit.  Their invovlement is about initiating change, and making the jurisdiction they are trying to improve (in this instance, the City of Vancouver) better than the way they found it.

These are the excerpts that I find very telling about the motivations behind this group:

“You identify a target, keep disparate groups onside, play the media. And just as skills carry over, so do values. A lifetime of deep belief in the inherent problems of militarization, resource extraction, and global energy consumption doesn’t simply end. Instead, it blooms in the presence of the perfect mate and political vehicle—a man like Gregor Robertson, whose values are essentially Green but who is willing to do whatever it takes to change the world a little.”

“The difference with Solomon and Newell, both born and raised in the United States, was that they focused their investments in one region to make the most sweeping change possible on a social, business, environmental, and political scale.”

”

In a speech in San Francisco in July 2008, Solomon told his audience that his and Newell’s strategy “was to take a long-term look at how to deploy financial resources toward systemic social change focused in one region.

“So we make business investments, charitable grants, support collaborations, leadership development and capacity-building with the hopes of influencing public policy and creating models of sustainability solutions long-term,” he explained in the speech, which is posted on YouTube.”

Critics and political vendettas promote the concept that the change being ushered in at City Hall is “radical” and that American big-money interests are creeping into this city and impacting in a way that is harmful.

Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit.  The Vision agenda thus far has been about tackling homelessness, creating affordable housing options, creating sustainability, focussing on alternative forms of transportation, and making Vancouver a competitive centre for business that harnesses our green agenda to bring investment.

How those planks are in any way “radical” is beyond me.

If one wants to have an argument about how successful they have been, or whether those items should be at the top of the agenda, those are worthwhile queries and considerations to ponder.

But labeling a progressive agenda that looks at a more holistic view of the city as “dangerous” and akin to “social engineering” is once again, back-biting, petty politics.

Take for example former Mayor Sam Sullivan’s push for increased density.  Now I and many other might not have liked how he hoarded the concept as his own, but the fundamentals of what he was trying to achieve made sense.  In fact, it is an ideal that Vision Vancouver now seems intent on continuing.

Take this away from the partisanship for a second, and the commentary that needs to be advanced is that it is refreshing to see wide-eyed optimists and idealists who want to make a positive impact on the community in which they live entering the political realm.

This isn’t about having your name beside a title, or having power and influence in certain circles, or even getting your mug on the evening news.

People can call the Vision Vancouver Mayor, the party’s agenda, and the people who are advancing it in one way or another, whatever they want to insinuate danger, or suspicion, or even malintent. 

But the reality is that these peope do care – they care about getting people off the streets; they care about making Vancouver and its residents more in line with our surroundings and the long-term health of the environment; they care about making the city competitive and an epicentre for cutting edge ideas, concepts and technologies.

Passion in politics driven by belief?  This is the kind of politics that I could get used to. 

It is also something I wish was more prevalent across the country.

Michael Geller participating in a electoral debate with Councillor Geoff Meggs. Too bad he didn't round out his panels this time around.

However, I am going to call him out on the following forum that he is promoting at the SVU Wosk Centre for Dialog on November 14, 2009.

Geller buffers potential criticism for his invitee list with the following:

“While some of the participants have past ties to the NPA, it is proposed that this not be a highly charged event,” says the email dispatch from Geller. “Rather, the intention is to take a look at what has been happening and engage in substantive discussions on key issues to hopefully identify strategies and actions for the coming year.”

Although, as recognized by the boys over at City Caucus:

“Editor’s note: All have had past ties to the NPA, but we take Michael’s point. This is not about the moribund civic party per se.”

The likes of Michael Geller, Alex Tsakumis, Mike Klassen and Daniel Fontaine – some of which are known for their incessant criticisms of the Vision Vancouver administration (Bob Ransford’s previously mentioned name has been removed from this list because I have no concrete evidence to validate him being an incessant criticizer of Vision Vancouver nor do I want to deal with his ridiculous threat of a lawsuit – I apologize for any damage using his name without doing my due diligence might have caused him, and accept that I made an error in judgment)) – are not appropriately balanced out with alternative political perspectives and loyalties.

The inclusion of Frances Bula and Monte Paulson, both noted as journalists with the utmost of integrity in terms of affiliation, just doesn’t cut it.  Nor does the presence of Joel Solomon, who is one of Gregor Robertson’s top financial supporters.

So while I applaud Geller for his intentions, he shortsighted invite list of panelists will turn this forum into little more than a bash Vision Vancouver get together, which is truly a shame.