Vivian Krause: My open letter to Joel Solomon

Follow The Money
Krause does what every smart investigator does

Once again we present the work of Vivian Krause (Twitter: @FairQuestions) whose latest Vancouver Sun op/ed "The American attempt to kill B.C.’s salmon farms" dominates the opinion pages. We’ve asked Vivian to update us on her questions to Joel Solomon, Tides Canada and the money behind Vision Vancouver. What follows are the fruits of her research. Despite sending this letter to Solomon several weeks ago, Vivian has yet to receive a response from Solomon.

To: Mr. Joel Solomon, President of the Endswell Foundation

RE: The Endswell Foundation

Background:

The campaign against Alberta oil and the campaign for a federal ban on oil tanker traffic on B.C.’s north coast, is a campaign against one of Canada’s most important industries and exports. The outcome of this campaign will affect Canada for years into the future so its fair for Canadians to inquire about who’s funding this campaign, and why.

According to my research that has been published in the Financial Post and the Vancouver Sun, the U.S. Tides Foundation and Tides Canada have funded 36 organizations that campaign against Alberta oil.

As far as I can tell, one of the single, largest Canadian donors to Tides Canada has been the Endswell Foundation ("Endswell") which has had total expenditures of $28 million over the past ten years, according to Canadian tax returns. U.S. tax returns show that since 1997, Endswell has granted $12 million to Tides Canada. Of that, $8.7 million was granted since 2003. That accounted for 99 percent of the total funds granted by Endswell since 2003.

The Dogwood Initiative runs NO TANKERS, a campaign for a federally-legislated ban on tanker traffic. This campaign only seeks a ban against tanker traffic on B.C.’s north coast, not on the south coast. As such, this isn’t really a tanker ban. This is more like a trade ban that would block oil exports to Asia and land-lock Alberta oil within North America. This would mean that the U.S. would continue to be Canada’s only big customer for our oil. According to The Dogwood Initiative, its supporters include Tides USA (the "Tar Sands Fund"), Tides Canada and the Endswell Foundation.

Considering the importance of Endswell as a funder of both Tides Canada and the Dogwood Initiative, I believe that its fair to inquire about the money behind the Endswell Foundation. Further reasons for my inquiries are given here.

The names of the companies in which Endswell had corporate bonds in the late 1990s are plain to see from U.S. tax returns. In contrast, the names of the corporate stocks in which Endswell has had investments since 2000 do not indicate the company or the industry to which these investments pertain. Considering that Endswell had early investments in gas companies and a pipeline company, it seems fair to inquire as to whether Endswell has had investments in these industries since 2000. If Endswell and its funders have no interests in the oil and gas industry, Endswell should have no hesitation to say so.

On the basis of the background information and analysis that I have presented in previous letters and at this blog, I am writing to ask the following questions:

1. The Origin of the Assets of the Endswell Foundation

Note: click graphs for large versions, hit esc to minimize

Fig Endswell JSCO $979,527 Some Vancouver media have described you, Mr. Solomon, as a "millionaire philanthropist," as "a modest version of the later generation of the Kennedy/Rothschild/Rockefeller class" and as "a member of the inherited wealth club." In August of 2010, a Vancouver Sun journalist reported, "Joel Solomon and his friend Carol Newell are multimillionaire philanthropists who have given away or invested their money (italics added) in sustainable organizations, in an effort to make the world a better place." Another Vancouver writer reported, " Joel Solomon has put his millions (italics added) into new, business-first socialism."

According to U.S. tax returns, since 1997 the Endswell Foundation has paid a total of $979,527 to Joel Solomon, Joel Solomon Co. and "JSCO." The salary reportedly paid to Joel Solomon, as president of the Endswell Foundation, increased from $144,142 in 2006 to $186,189 in 2008.

My questions are:

  • Are you the millionaire philanthropist behind the Endswell Foundation, as the media has reported, or are you a paid employee who has received nearly $1 million from the Endswell Foundation, as indicated in U.S. tax returns, or perhaps both?
  • Tides Canada says that Carol Newell founded Tides Canada and "placed" $60 million in various organizations and businesses. Endswell says that Carol Newell "founded" Endswell. Was part of the $60 million that Carol Newell "placed" used to start the Endswell Foundation? If so, was that Carol Newell’s own money or was that money "placed" by her on behalf of others?
  • Back in 1997, Endswell received a gift of $3.4 million with the stipulation that it could not be spent for 10 years. Where did that money originate?
  • From 2008 to 2009, the assets of the Endswell Foundation went from $10.9 million to $504,801, according to publicly available Canadian tax returns. What happened?

2. Corporate Bonds and Stocks

  • In 1997, 1998 and 1999, Endswell reported that it had corporate bonds in 20 companies. Of those 20 companies, three were gas companies: B.C. Gas, Consumers Gas Ltd. and Nova Gas Transmission. According to on-line information from TransCanada, Nova Gas Transmission is a wholly owned subsidiary of TransCanada which owns the Keystone pipeline that began operations in June of 2010. In 1997 and 1998, Endswell also reported about $400,00 in corporate bonds named "Trans Quebec Maritimes." Were these bonds part of TransCanada?
  • In 1997, 1998 and 1999, Endswell had about $400,000 in corporate bonds named TIDES. Were these bonds affiliated with the U.S. Tides Foundation or with Tides Canada Foundation? In what industry are or were the TIDES corporate bonds that Endswell held?
  • Since 2000, in which industries and companies are the Genus and Real Assets stock that Endswell has investments? Was any of this stock in companies in the oil and gas industry? According to U.S. tax returns filed by Endswell, the ending book value of Endswell’s total corporate stocks went from $13.4 million in 2003 to $51,973 in 2009.

Fig Endswell Other Income $2.2 Million 3. Management Fees & Income

  • What is the origin of the $2.2 million that Endswell received as "management fees" and "other income" between 2001 and 2009?"
  • In addition to the $75,000 that Endswell was paid by the David & Lucile Packard Foundation, has the Endswell Foundation received funds from any other USA foundations, either directly or indirectly?

4. Grants to Tides Canada for $12 million

According to my calculations based on U.S. tax returns, since 1997 Endswell has made grants for a total of approximately $17 million. Of that about $12.6 million was granted to Tides Canada and a small number of organizations that are closely affiliated with Tides Canada.

  • To which organizations did Tides Canada re-grant the $12.6 million from the Endswell Foundation, and for what purpose?
  • Did any of the $12.6 million that was granted to Tides Canada end up in the long-term investments of Tides Canada – which increased from $1.4 million in 2003, to $20.2 million in 2009, according to Canadian tax returns?

5. The $11.4 Million Dollar Question

Since 2003, fully 99 percent of the total funds granted by Endswell went to Tides Canada. While virtually no grants at all were made to any organization except Tides Canada, Endswell reported expenditures of $11.4 million. Expenditures increased markedly even as Endswell virtually stopped grant-making to all organizations other than Tides Canada (see figure below). Total yearly expenditures on overhead (expenditures other than grants) almost doubled from nearly $1 million in 2003 to nearly $2 million in 2007. While $11.4 million was spent on overhead, the amount that was granted to Tides Canada over the same period, was only $8.7 million, according to my calculations.

Since the Chairman of the Board, the president and the treasurer of the Endswell Foundation are also intimately involved with Tides Canada – and hold almost the same positions in both charities – I would have thought that Endswell would have been able to make $8.7 million worth of grants to Tides Canada without having to spend $11.4 million in the process. Indeed, according to publicly available information from Revenue Canada, the treasurer of the Endswell Foundation, the treasurer of Tides Canada Foundation and the treasurer of Tides Canada Initiatives Society is the same person: James Morrisey.

Why did Endswell need to pay $11.4 million for expenses while it was simply transferring money to Tides Canada? This is what I am referring to as the $11.4 million dollar question.

* Fig The $11.4 Million Q (no grid lines)

From 2003 to 2008, Endswell’s annual office expenses increased from $172,250 to $765,395. Why did office expenses increase so sharply? Why did Endswell even need an office during the years when Endswell made no grants at all to any organizations other than Tides Canada? And what happened in 2009? Were office expenses reported as "other expenses?" Why did Endswell spend $765,395 on office space and expenses in 2008, the same year that it seems to have begun to shut down?

2 Figs Endswell Office & Staff Costs

Why did Endswell’s expenditures on staff increase markedly even as Endswell wasn’t making any grants to any organizations other than Tides Canada? During 2004, 2006, 2008 and 2009 when Endswell staff made not one single grant to any organization other than to Tides Canada, what were the staff doing?

6. Increases in Expenditures Since 2004

Fig Hewlett Grants $12 Million The year 2004 is when the William & Flora Hewelett Foundation paid Tides Canada $70,000 "to develop a strategic plan to address the oil and gas industry in British Columbia." Since then, Hewlett has paid $12 million to various organizations – including Tides Canada and Tides USA – to address the oil and gas industry in Canada. On top of that, Hewlett has paid $17 million for the Great Bear Rainforest and other projects in Canada.

Does the increase in the spending of the Endswell Foundation have anything to do with the implementation of the Hewlett/Tides Canada plan to address B.C.’s oil and gas industry, or is it just a coincidence that after 2004, office expenditures, staff-related costs, salaries of senior management and professional and consulting fees all increased substantially?

7. Charitable Programs and Programme Support

RC Grantee & Program Support

Who received the $3.3 million that Endswell reported to the I.R.S. that Endswell spent on "grantee support and education, and program support?" Was this money paid to Tides Canada – the organization that seems to have been virtually the only grantee of the Endswell Foundation since 2003?

Why did the amount paid for "program support" increase from $32,973 in 2008 to $903,840 in 2009? To whom was this money paid?

What are the charitable programs that Endswell was conducting while it made no grants at all to any organization except Tides Canada?

How much support has the Endswell Foundation granted to the Dogwood Initiative?

8. Professional & Consulting Fees

Since 2003, while 99 percent of grant funding went to Tides Canada, why did Endswell need to spend $2.3 million for professional and consulting services? Why did the amounts paid to these companies increase significantly after 2004?

For what type of ”consulting services” did Endswell pay Interdependent Investments Ltd., Candid and Real Assets? For Candid which was paid $529,531, I couldn’t find a B.C. Company Summary, a web-site, or any other on-line information.

Endswell IIL Ltd. $US1.4 Million 9. Interdependent Investments Ltd.

Why did Endswell need to pay $1.4 million to Interdependent Investments Ltd., a company whose only two officers are Joel Solomon and Martha Burton, according to a B.C. Company Summary?

When Interdependent Investments Ltd. made campaign contributions for $6,000 to Vision Vancouver, did any of this money originate from the Endswell Foundation?

10. Renewal Partners

Fig Endswell Renewal Staff $2.3 Million Why did Endswell pay $2.3 million (2004-2009) to individuals who are on staff at the "investment firm," Renewal Partners? According to U.S. tax returns, the salaries paid to some of these individuals – including Joel Solomon and Martha Burton – seem to have doubled or tripled over a few years.

According to the Vancouver Sun’s database, Renewal Partners contributed $70,469 and Strategic Communications contributed $83,314 to Vision Vancouver and Mayor Gregor Robertson’s 2008 mayor campaign. Until recently re-writing its web-site, Strategic Communications said that it is a "partner" of Renewal Partners. Strategic Communications also contributed nearly $34,000 to the N.D.P (2005-2007). For a small company, this seems like a lot to me. Would these substantial campaign contributions have been feasible if the Endswell Foundation hadn’t been paying the salaries of Renewal Partners – to the tune of $2.3 million since 2004?

Renewal Partners says that it has invested in 75 companies. At the web-site of Renewal Partners, I could only find the names of 26 companies. As far as I can see, Renewal Partners has invested in more companies in the United States (New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, Colorado and California) than in Vancouver. Why so much "investment" in the United States?

As I have said before, if I have presented anything that is factually incorrect, of if I have missed any important points, please let me know.

Sincerely,

Vivian Krause

Please read: Copyright Notice & Disclaimer. All dollar figures are U.S. dollars unless noted. For more of Vivian’s research visit www.Fair-Questions.com.

CityCaucus.com wins privacy challenge against City of Vancouver
Vision pollster gets personal with questions about sexuality

Broken image or link? Click here to report it or visit citycaucus.com/typo.

About The Author

  • Fred

    This information should be forwarded to Revenue Canada for review. The numbers are so weird that this could be one giant “charity” fraud that launders money back & forth, buys political influence and does it all under the guise of being a “charity”
    It certainly seems to stink, so an investigation to find out what is going on would be appropriate and Revenue Canada would be a neutral investigator to comb through their books and get answers to all these questions Vivian has raised.
    If Mr. Solomon is a wise man, he will volunteer for a public audit. If he doesn’t it will sure look like he has something to hide.
    What would Mr. Solomon want to hide?

  • Shauna

    blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
    It’s time to get a life Vivian/City Caucus/NPA.
    Your attempt to try and paint Mr. Solomon as some evil person is pathetic.
    Vivian, your innocent house mother persona who is just asking ‘fair questions’ is a joke.
    🙂

  • The Angry Taxpayer

    Gee,
    You sound a bit nervous and defensive there, Shauna…
    🙂

  • douglas

    Shauna: Does the math look right to you?
    Total Income = $20 100 000
    Grants = $8 700 000
    Expenditures = $11 400 000
    Cost to Endswell per dollar donated to Tides Canada:
    $1.31 (not including money donated) In other words, $1 goes to Tides Canada for every $2.31 flowing through the coffers. If you are looking for a needy organization to donate money to, would you choose this one?

  • Joel, is that you?

  • Fred

    Well this response convinces me this isn’t just smoke, it is in fact FIRE.
    Don’t know who Shauna is trying to cover up for but anyone with more than two functioning brain cells would read Vivian’s questions and know there is a problem, not make snide, juvenile ad hominem drive by smears.

  • jason

    I hope our local media asks tough questions during the next election…I’m tired of Robertson just avoiding questions by “playing dumb” (I’m assuming he’s playing).
    Our mayors involvement with individuals like Solomon deserves some serious scrutiny and demands that our media bring it to light so that voters are aware of who’s pulling the levers and padding the purse.

  • Al A

    Tongue in cheek here, why should the left get to have all of the fun conspiracy theories? It is only fair that tough questions should be asked about who is funding anti-Canadian oil propaganda.

  • George

    Dear Vivian,
    To simply say thank you, for all your hours of labor, research,stress, frustration,risk, does not seem to be adequate…
    You have my utmost respect, and gratitude for all your efforts.
    Your reports have been so detailed and labor intensive..
    You Vivian, are tenacious, brave,and a caring Canadian…and even though it does seem woefully inadequate…
    Thank you

  • JR

    Vivian ….Thanks for the great work. Uncovering the truth behind the secretive, Solomon/Newall Investment/Charity scam empire is a mighty task.

  • Steven Forth

    Please add me to the list of people who would like to thank Joel Solomon for his many contributions to business in Vancouver. He does excellent work and has my full support. Also add me to the list of people who are opposed to tanker traffic off the BC coast, who believe that the bitumen sands (they are not oil sands) need much better regulation and capture of externalities and that salmon farms have been expanded too quickly with foreign capital and much tougher environmental assessment is needed. Nor do I buy or eat farmed salmon.

  • Mr. Forth, I have been told that you work for Joel Solomon. Is that true? In several of the photographs of Joel Solomon’s events, there is a man named Steven Forth. Is that you?

  • Shauna, are you Shauna Sylvester who is or has been the Executive Director of IMPACS, an organization that has been funded by the Endswell Foundation? If so, how much funding has your organization been granted through Endswell and/or Tides Canada?

  • Unless every single person who posts here is willing to swear they will never accept work from any group involved in issues related to topics discussed on this blog, questioning the motives of particular posters, without looking at everyone, especially the anonymous commentators who are prolific… and unaccountable, strikes me as an attempt to silence critics by inferring they shouldn’t be allowed to have an opinion on issues that matter to them.
    If connect the dots is a game we want to play, then real names should be mandatory for all. If issues are the topic of conversation, then arguments should stand and fall on their own merits.

  • Oh, and any unproven claim stated as fact should be accompanied by some form of unbiased corroboration or citation supporting the poster’s argument, or at the very least a logical explanation for reaching said conclusion. The reason why Frances Bula’s blog delivers excellent, mostly civil discussions, and this one tends to stray towards mudslinging, seems to be because Fabulites expect a higher level of discourse and police themselves accordingly.

  • Max

    Interesting Chris, Vivian only asked if they were two people she has crossed paths with, one way or another.
    After she referenced Steven Forth, I googled him.
    He is associated with Renewal Partners and has spoke at various conferences/talks.
    It is an attempt at deflection of a bigger issue.
    As for ‘mudslinging’, please refer back to ‘Shauna’s’ original post. She opened the door.

  • George

    I absolutely agree everything with everything you have stated here Max..the people in question have all used their real names.. Shauna did open the door…it was her choice.

  • My comments are directed to everyone who comments Max. As you’ve noted, you can google Steven (assuming it’s the same person) and make your own assessment of his agenda, so there’s enough transparency there that people can read his comments with those caveats they see fit.
    What name should we google to see if you’re just a concerned citizen? See how there’s an uneven playing field?

  • George

    Fair enough Chris,
    But for some it isn’t a fair playing field. There are some folks that have their voice silenced by this administration.
    I’m struggling for the right words here, to achieve clarity, so try and bare with me here.
    How can they have a voice without reprisals from Vision..Sadly Vision does have a track record for bullying.
    I notice on FB site very few folks use their own names, and to be really fair here, on that site you folks are pretty much all on the same team.
    In many cases, in some way many are receiving some form of benefit from Vision or affiliated connections, perks, employment, community benefits etc.
    How can that be leveled out?

  • See George. You’re one of the worst offenders. I’m not on anybody’s ‘team’ and I challenge you to offer some evidence that I support any political party over another. I support good policies (and defend them) on topics that I have some smattering of knowledge. That’s why it’s a rare thing to see me offer any comment on the complexities of development or housing topics. If I was a staunch Vision or NPA supporter I would parrot the party line just for the sake of bulwarking my team’s position.

  • “I notice on FB site very few folks use their own names”
    I don’t have an issue with anonymous posters. My beef is with people who hide behind a nom de plume and then attack the motivations of those who don’t.
    If it’s OK for people to protect their economic interests anonymously, then it’s absolutely OK for people to do so without hiding their identity.

  • George

    Chris please read what I wrote I never said you were Vision, but you do fall under the category of a benefit as you have always been clear that you are involved with the cycling coalition, and support what some of us find financially unfair.
    I am trying to be civil with you right now Chris to give fair debate to your point, there is no need to attack.

  • boohoo

    George,
    You say:
    “In many cases, in some way many are receiving some form of benefit from Vision or affiliated connections, perks, employment, community benefits etc.”
    Do you have the slightest shred of evidence to back that up?

  • boohoo

    George,
    You say:
    “In many cases, in some way many are receiving some form of benefit from Vision or affiliated connections, perks, employment, community benefits etc.”
    Do you have the slightest shred of evidence to back that up?

  • George

    yes

  • George:
    I appreciate the clarification, but your previous post mentioned Vision and the current administration, not cycling advocacy. I don’t feel my inference was unfounded.

  • boohoo

    Please share!
    If not, then it’s as empty as can be.

  • George

    fair enough Chris
    I don’t write for a living so I can understand how you might have missed the OR in my sentence…
    ‘”Vision or affiliated connections, perks, employment, community benefits etc. ”
    I think we have allowed enough diversion I will back out now so we can keep the focus on the thread…
    Vivian has written a wonderful piece and that should be the debate…
    you and I will have to agree to disagree..

  • George

    good try boo,
    but this conversation was between Chris and I…
    now lets discuss Vivian’s post.

  • George

    Totally off topic,
    I love this quote, thought I’d share, somehow I feel it is appropriate. I could be wrong…
    I dedicate this to you Vivian.
    “If you don’t stand for something you will fall for anything.” ~ Malcolm X

  • Connections are absolutely the point here George. That’s the a big part of Ms Krause’s concerns from what I can tell. Boohoo’s question is totally on-topic and asking you to substantiate your comments isn’t a deflection.

  • rf

    Once again the real Green Scientologist hypocrisy shines through.
    Forth, Shauna, and the rest of the Endswell gravy-train windbags, want to try and justify that it’s OK for their “side” to break the rules….because they think their cause is more moral than others.
    Dodge the questions. Try and rain praise on their Boss Hog, Joel (pretty pathetic to be spewing the net full of praise for the people paying you). It really makes Forth not much different from Jonathan Ross. Ewwwwww.
    Making a living off of charity dollars.
    Is Moral Scoundrel an oxymoron?
    Keam, you are exempt from this rant. Your agenda is not a secret.
    Forth – time’s up. You spent the last few months spewing these BORING anecdotes and comments of what you want to read on political blogs.
    All along you are a Vision-Solomon crony living off the proceeds of what will be proven to be tax fraud.
    Shameless.

  • George

    Chris
    in life there are always going to be folks that just irritate the crap out of each other… you, boo and I are those people.. Accept it. I have.
    Most of the time I just play with you because I can. It entertains me.
    Again since it has always been important to you to respect the thread and stay on topic, I suggest we get back to the topic…
    Vivian and her excellent article..

  • boohoo

    George,
    You implied many people who post on fb “In many cases, in some way many are receiving some form of benefit from Vision or affiliated connections, perks, employment, community benefits etc”
    I asked if you could back it up and you said yes. So do it.
    You can’t make this kind of baseless insinuation and then go ‘hey, we need to get back on topic’. If you have something to accuse, or some insider knowledge, spit it out.

  • @RF
    Appreciate the exemption.
    You mention breaking the rules, but I don’t see where Krause has made that supposition. I understand you aren’t happy with the situation, but which rules are being broken in your estimation? Assuming there aren’t any rules being broken, but we all decide to ban cross-border philanthropy in the future, how is that materially different from someone choosing to invest in a foreign company that might hire lobbyists to influence Canadian policies?

  • Max

    @ boohoo:
    They cycling coaltion gets (taxpayer) money from the City of which they use to push their agenda to get more taxpayer)money.
    That is what George is referring to.

  • boohoo

    Max,
    Are you George’s spokesman now?
    He was referring directly to posters on francesbula’s blog. Nothing mentioned about cycling. Nothing mentioned about any specific topic actually, just a vague insinuation that people on francesbula get perks, jobs, and other benefits from vision.
    That’s a pretty interesting statement, a shred of evidence to support it is all I ask.

  • Max

    @ boohoo:
    It was covered by City Caucus; Aug. 12, 2010….
    One of the most effective and visible lobby groups (outside the development industry) has to be the Vancouver Area Cycling Coalition (VACC). They are very active within the City’s powerful Bicycle Advisory Committee and have been making their presence felt for years.
    According to their 2009 financial statements, their successful lobbying efforts are partially funded by:
    â—¦Fed/Prov/Municipal Taxpayers: $159,764.02 (Delta, New Westminster, Surrey, Pitt Meadows, District of North Van, Metro Vancouver, Maple Ridge, Vancouver Coastal Health, BC Hydro and the City of Vancouver are all listed as financial contributors)
    â—¦Translink: $165,430
    â—¦Private Funding/Donations: $88,717.15
    *******
    It is interesting to see how they spend the money.

  • boohoo

    Again, Max, this has nothing to do with the VACC. Do you want the full quote? Ok.
    “”How can they have a voice without reprisals from Vision..Sadly Vision does have a track record for bullying.
    I notice on FB site very few folks use their own names, and to be really fair here, on that site you folks are pretty much all on the same team.
    In many cases, in some way many are receiving some form of benefit from Vision or affiliated connections, perks, employment, community benefits etc.
    How can that be leveled out?””
    No mention of cycling there. Just vague accusations of corruption. Anyway, unless you’re George, it’s got nothing to do with you–not sure why you’re defending him.

  • rf

    “the rules” I refer to are tax and campaign finance rules.
    Green/Vision parishoners donate money to Joel Solomon’s “charities”. They get a tax deduction for doing so.
    The “charities” then give money to people and entities that donate money to fund Vision political campaigns.
    Municipal campaign contributions are not tax deductible.
    My hypothesis is that the Green parishoners believe that it’s ok for them to circumvent this rule because they believe their cause is more moral than the “other side”.
    I think that it’s tax fraud.
    If I gave money to Polygon Homes Inc., who then turn around and gave money to Peter Ladners’ campaign, I don’t get a tax deduction.
    If I gave money to Stong’s Market, who then turn around and gave money to Peter Ladner’s campaign, I don’t get a tax deduction.
    But Vision/Solomon and co. think that they are entitled to cheat the rules. Give money to Tides Canada, get a tax deduction. Tides gives money to Renewal Partners, then Renewal Partners gives money to Gregor. Ta-da, tax deductible municipal political campaign donations.
    So how is that not breaking the rules?

  • “Anyway, unless you’re George, it’s got nothing to do with you–not sure why you’re defending him.”
    I’m starting to believe it’s entirely possible one or the other is a ‘sock puppet’ The pattern of the two anonymous personas defending each other’s comments again and again is a big warning flag. It happens here, and over at Fabula-land.

  • @RF
    appreciate your response. I understand why you dislike the process. Putting aside personal politics, it appears the process is within the rules though, right? What we need is some kind of overall change to the campaign donation process address your concerns?

  • rf

    I’m saying that it appears to not be within the rules.
    Here’s a link to RevCan’s site on Charitable donations.
    http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/chrts-gvng/chrts/plcy/thn-eng.html#P387_22137
    key part
    “Political activities and social advocacy.
    A charity cannot engage in any political activities to support or oppose a political party or a candidate for a political party.
    A charity cannot try to influence public opinion on a broad social question, or to advocate for a change in law or policy.
    However, a charity can spend up to 10 % of its resources on non-partisan political activities that help to accomplish the charity’s purpose. ”
    So people donate to Tides/Endswell. Tides pays (and suddenly jacks up the salaries of) Joel Solomon, Claire Newell, gives money to Renewal Partners, boost contracts to StratCom, etc…
    Low and behold, these same names make the big money contributions to Gregor and Vision.
    Just imagine if Suncor set up a “Protect the Oil Sands Envirmonent” Charity. And then all these companies/executive started donating money, taking tax deductions, and then the charity started funding a “Sustainable oil sands Partners” (the opposite of ,say, Renewal Partners). Then suddenly, Sustainable Oil Sands starts funding NPA political campaigns to the tune of 64% of their funding, and T.Boone Pickens was the biggest backer?!
    I believe that a Revenue Canada/IRS audit of the affairs of Tides/Endswell/Solomon/Newell etc.. will reveal that they are indeed breaking rules.
    Take away the tax deduction and it’s all fair.
    But when one political party is funded by tax deductible “charity”, the playing field is not level. And I find it ‘morally smug’ that (i believe) Visionites actually think it’s ok for them to break the rules, simply because they believe their cause is in everyones best interest.

  • George

    boo, timing is everything..
    In trying to twist my words you are missing(intentionally) the point, and in my opinion,you are trying to deflect.
    People tend to congregate with others that they have something in common with.. Birds of a feather, the fact that others come to my defense reinforces this theory. Even little children in a school yard understand that concept.
    Here we try and hold the politicians feet to the fire…we at this site are obviously unhappy with Visions methods, ..a tactic you are currently over zealously practicing. Why?
    A very Vision tactic.. bully, disarm, deflect, discredit, change the subject, attack the target…go after the weak… just look at what happened to ARK, Charlene, anyone that does not bow down to the feet of Vision..and look at the consequences…
    I don’t think I’ve ever noticed you haveing anything to say about the injustices, people that are unfairly, wrongly fired, or die in fires…WHY ?
    Other sites agree with current administration…because they are getting their needs met. Bike lanes, gardens, chickens, tall buildings… some of us aren’t happy and our wants aren’t being heard so we come here.. not hard to figure out…
    That is all I meant with my comments, but you are making a mountain out of a mole hill because you don’t like my sarcastic personality. Perhaps as I have repeatedly stated my attempt at humor wasn’t very good,
    But no something here doesn’t pass the smell test..WHY?
    What can that be.. you are spending way to much time focused on me and this issue.. WHY?
    As for anyone backing me up I DO NOT KNOW anyone that posts her I DON”T THINK SO anyway..That is what makes it fun. WHY?
    As to your tell me or else… right! I don’t bully very easy..there are many with stories to tell, I’d be willing to bet if you keep this up many will step forward.. I know it for a fact…many folks hold brown envelopes.. If anything you are shooting yourself in the foot.
    Did I UNINTENTIONALLY hit a nerve, by the aggressive campaign here I think I did… WHY?
    I apologize for any statement that offended. If I did offend, curiously your moniker never appeared there boo, so why is this an issue for you…I am usually known because I tell the truth, and in some cases, a little too much. WHY?
    There are certain monikers here that I notice NEVER have the courage to post with sites that challenge their crap…fear?
    “Let no man provoke me without fear of impunity” I love that quote.. the Scottish Black Watch Brigade used it in WWII..
    I have never had that problem..EVER.. in fact some of the toughest Blog owners give me nothing but gracious praise….WHY?
    My comments are always accepted by all sites and have received nothing but courteous intelligent comments by administrators, fellow bloggers, including FB…
    So why is it I have to ask, I only rankle Boo and Chris.. why is that boo.. for once I would like an answer..I KNOW YOU WON”T ANSWER…
    If folks choose to back me up online it is because they either agree, or understand what I’m saying. So where does the problem lie….WHY?
    We don’t like each others blog abilities,and tactics, but in your case it lies deeper.. what have I stumbled upon..what are you afraid of.. an old fart like me, that likes to talk politics with other like minded souls??? WHY?
    What did I stumble on… I obviously have come close to something, what is it and what does my information unfold.. What is it that you fear? WHY?
    Why am I making a fellow unconnected to anything or anyone blog poster (you) so angry I can literally feel the spittle hitting your keyboards? WHY?
    You give me too much credit.. or do you? WHY?
    Again I will point out that the topic on hand is really the issue..WHY won’t City Hall come clean about what happened to Ark, the unjustly fired Safety Electrical Inspector, and Charlene Robbins a 38 year veteran at city hall… what is being hidden from us, as tax payers and voters…we would like to know… WHY?

  • Glissando Remmy

    The Thought of The Day
    “It was a nice and quiet summer. That night I went to the beach for a walk. No souls in sight; so I thought. While down there, out of boredom and perhaps a tiny curiosity I lifted a rock. The moment I directed my flashlight under the slimy stone, hundreds of green sea cockroaches scattered in all directions. I guess they were waiting for the Tides… Startled, I dropped the rock back on its footprint. Unh-huh, some of the roaches never made it. I guess…oh, well.”
    Some thought, eh?
    But enough about Solomon and Partners; the thing is, when Vivian Krause lifted the Renewal rock, the philanthropists started to get excited. Hit them high, hit them hard but don’t hit them in the pocketbooks,in the offshore accounts and in their creative accounting!
    Life under a rock is sweet, when you sit in a room with a desk a chair and a phone, call yourself ‘executive director’ and dispense $millions$ every which way…mostly, their way.
    ‘Philanthropists’, eh?
    Don’t quote me on this one but, if there is trouble anywhere in the world, you can bet your money, one of them is working hard at it!
    As it turned out, not everything is well when it ‘Endswell’!
    We live in Vancouver and this keeps us busy.

  • George

    @ Max thanks for GETTING IT.. I regret that my post wasn’t clearer yesterday.. I don’t have professional writing skills but one really must wonder why I caused such a ruckus.. why indeed,
    the follow up comments definitely have told a whole other story…
    I actually have had conversation with a staff at Stratcom some time ago… I was told they do the polling for NDP/Vision. I was aware this poll was coming up, but I was as shocked as everyone, with the content of the poll itself… to me it was mining at it’s best.
    Very sad that it has stooped to this level in our society… my feeling is that what goes on in ones bedroom is your business, should have nothing to do with the government… in some countries answering that question honestly would be putting your life in peril..
    Just as answering that question, or one of Mental Health years ago at the Border was cause to send you back to Canada for fear of spreading Aids/or Mental Illness leading to violence..

  • Max

    I find it interesting that since Vivian confronted Steven Forth about his/her identity, he has not been back on-line.
    Not a comment.
    Now, Steven Forth is typically on this site – at least once a day…..
    Silence.
    FYI, when I googled Steven Forth and Renewal Parterns, he is listed with Indigo Books/Music.

  • George

    Just a thought…
    Chris says
    “”I’m starting to believe it’s entirely possible one or the other is a ‘sock puppet’ The pattern of the two anonymous personas defending each other’s comments again and again is a big warning flag.””
    After going back and reading the posts I think Chris/boo are referring to Max, I have always paid attention to Max comments, obviously Chris has not… disclaimer here I do not know nor have I ever met Max. I do know from paying attention what his credentials are, and find his comments are usually right on..considering Max’s backgrounder that has been offered up online… I would expect no less…
    Chris= boohoo, the more I think about it… could boo be a sock puppet for Chris?? perfect, they both have that sarcastic, sanctimonious ring in their comments.. they always show up in tandem.
    Wouldn’t that be a riot considering Chris would like everyone to use their own names… just sayin Chris, it is pretty suspect to me…I notice and I have previously posted that once you and I get into it, boohoo always shows up, exactly as what has happened on this thread…suspect or coincidence? Why?
    Could it be possible that some times you Chris, find it to be a ball and chain around your neck to be only one persona..
    Like I said folks it is all in the timing…

  • Max

    ‘She’, George
    I’m a she….:)

  • George

    I know that.. a comment once about being a high heel kind of girl is what gave it away..
    I just opted to go with the name gender, only because I’ve never met a dude named Max… yet!!

  • George

    I know that.. a comment once about being a high heel kind of girl is what gave it away..
    I just opted to go with the name gender, only because I’ve never met a dudette named Max… yet!!

  • George

    @ Max
    when I Google “Steven Forth Vancouver”, I get something totally different,radically different and very telling… If it is the same Steven 😉 but the Steven I found does like to cycle….
    how does that old saying go… one word a thousand misinterpretations..

  • Max
  • boohoo

    “Here we try and hold the politicians feet to the fire…we at this site are obviously unhappy with Visions methods, ..a tactic you are currently over zealously practicing. Why?”
    You’re gonna have to be more specific on this one.
    “I don’t think I’ve ever noticed you haveing anything to say about the injustices, people that are unfairly, wrongly fired, or die in fires…WHY ?”
    Because I’m a horrible, uncaring person.
    “But no something here doesn’t pass the smell test..WHY?”
    Good question George, good question.
    “What can that be.. you are spending way to much time focused on me and this issue.. WHY?”
    I’m asking you to support your statement of some insider knowledge. It’d be great if it wasn’t just bs as I suspect 🙂
    “As for anyone backing me up I DO NOT KNOW anyone that posts her I DON”T THINK SO anyway..That is what makes it fun. WHY?”
    OK
    “I know it for a fact…many folks hold brown envelopes.. If anything you are shooting yourself in the foot.
    Did I UNINTENTIONALLY hit a nerve, by the aggressive campaign here I think I did… WHY?”
    Here you go again claiming some secret knowledge but I somehow suspect you won’t provide it.
    “I am usually known because I tell the truth, and in some cases, a little too much. WHY?”
    This sounds like a rhetorical question? A little crazy, but rhetorical.
    “I have never had that problem..EVER.. in fact some of the toughest Blog owners give me nothing but gracious praise….WHY?”
    Again, sounds rhetorical…but cause you’re a great guy?
    “So why is it I have to ask, I only rankle Boo and Chris.. why is that boo.. for once I would like an answer..I KNOW YOU WON”T ANSWER… ”
    I can’t answer for everyone else George, not sure what answer I could give?
    “If folks choose to back me up online it is because they either agree, or understand what I’m saying. So where does the problem lie….WHY?”
    I don’t really get why you’re asking why here?
    “We don’t like each others blog abilities,and tactics, but in your case it lies deeper.. what have I stumbled upon..what are you afraid of.. an old fart like me, that likes to talk politics with other like minded souls??? WHY?”
    Is it just me or is this getting creepy?
    “I obviously have come close to something, what is it and what does my information unfold.. What is it that you fear? WHY?”
    What information? You’re just a windbag with opinion like me as far as I know.
    “Why am I making a fellow unconnected to anything or anyone blog poster (you) so angry I can literally feel the spittle hitting your keyboards? WHY?”
    You have amazing abilities to detect emotion through keyboards!
    “You give me too much credit.. or do you? WHY?”
    Perhaps you’re off your meds here now.
    “WHY won’t City Hall come clean about what happened to Ark, the unjustly fired Safety Electrical Inspector, and Charlene Robbins a 38 year veteran at city hall… what is being hidden from us, as tax payers and voters…we would like to know… WHY?”
    Not sure I’m the one you should be asking.
    Whew! I’m tired now. That was a good rant George! A little crazy, but good!

  • “Chris= boohoo, the more I think about it… could boo be a sock puppet for Chris?? ”
    No, but thanks for playing.

  • George

    boo or is that Chris
    for you to spend this much time answering, leads me to believe, I have hit on something, and yes among other things I’m very intuitive.. I have hit a nerve.
    good of you to plant the seed…
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bd2B6SjMh_w

  • No George, I’m afraid your intuition is as poor as your speech recognition.
    cheers,
    CK

  • George

    Chris
    To me it sounds exactly like Andrea Reimer on that tape. I stand by that…
    Am I wrong, maybe,
    I think any rational person would come to the conclusion that it would be more appropriate for Councilwoman Reimer to defend herself.
    Councilwoman Reimer can come forward and deny it herself in any venue, here or through the media she has that access… why are you so vigorously defending her honor?
    Are you and boo the new Johnathon Ross replacements?
    How do you know for sure it isn’t her on that recording… do you have inside information you would like to share?
    What makes your opinion correct and mine wrong?
    Is it my imagination or has anyone else noticed it is only boo and Chris ranting here…denying that it is the Councilwoman… WHY?
    What is in it for you?
    Both of you 😉

  • “Is it my imagination or has anyone else noticed it is only boo and Chris ranting here…denying that it is the Councilwoman… WHY?”
    I’m not keen on anonymous Internet commentators making spurious, unfounded and idiotic allegations. It’s unethical and lowers the tone of the discussion. In the long run it just discourages good people from politics.
    The real question is who benefits from that kind of behaviour? Certainly not the people reading the blog or anyone seeking a reasonable debate over civic issues.

  • “Councilwoman Reimer can come forward and deny it herself in any venue, here or through the media she has that access… why are you so vigorously defending her honor?”
    I’m defending a principle George. I’d make the same comments regardless of which politician you smeared with quasi-paranoid ramblings.

  • George

    ah so we go back to that tactic right Chris.. where is boo?
    so now instead of answering the questions you revert back to anonymous poster tactic…isn’t that where we started..anyone can go back to the beginning of this thread and conclude that we have come full circle…
    Some of us feel “Shauna and Steven” were diverting this conversation away from questions asked about Joel Solomon and Tides Foundation …
    you and boo have tried to derail the absolutely astounding research done by Vivian….
    So what has been accomplished here.. I’ll tell you Chris, some delusional old fart has baited you to post until you made yourselves look a bit fanatical…WHY?
    Joel Solomon has some “splanin” to do…
    There needs to be some questions asked about Tides Foundation.. and who knows where that will lead..all we can do is connect the dots..
    I agree with Vivian there needs to be a magnifier put on Joel Solomon..
    Vivian is on to something none of this passes the smell test….
    Good night Chris/boo I’m signing off for the night… Talk amongst yourselves.

  • George

    Glad to see you have principles Chris…
    I might suggest that throwing around the mental health slurs/inuedoes..
    especially since the city is trying so hard to get provincial and city taxpayer funds to help with the mentally ill, might not be a really smart idea Chris..attacking someone that might be ill is picking at low hanging fruit..
    Principles my a**

  • “you and boo have tried to derail the absolutely astounding research done by Vivian.”
    You need to re-read the thread. I made the suggestion to Max that who was behind a theory matters less than the content of the theory, esp. when it’s backed up by good research. As usual, unbiased comments don’t pass muster with you George, because they don’t serve your aims, and you popped in with the usual blarney.

  • George

    Bullying is a form of abuse. It involves repeated acts over time attempting to create or enforce one person’s (or group’s) power over another person (or group) , thus an “imbalance of power”.[2] The “imbalance of power” may be social power and/or physical power. The victim of bullying is sometimes referred to as a target. Bullying types of behavior are often rooted in a would-be bully’s inability to empathize with those whom he or she would target.
    Bullying consists of three basic types of abuse – emotional, verbal and physical. It typically involves subtle methods of coercion such as psychological manipulation. Bullying can be defined in many different ways. Although the UK currently has no legal definition of bullying,[3] some US states have laws against it.[4]
    Bullying ranges from simple one on one bullying to more complex bullying in which the bully may have one or more ‘lieutenants’ who may seem to be willing to assist the primary bully in his bullying activities. Bullying in school and the workplace is also referred to as peer abuse.[5
    I “believe I’m the target of a bully” for speaking my mind….I am becoming very concerned for my safety as a continued pattern is emerging.
    I will no longer respond to this person and I expect the same in return.
    This is getting out of control/escalating, I am asking you to stop…
    This is exactly why people require anonymity…
    I APOLOGIZE TO EVERYONE FOR MY POOR JUDGMENT AND FOR CONTINUING THIS DISPLAY OF CHILDISHNESS.
    I was ineffectively and inappropriately trying to stand up for myself.
    This was a mistake.. please fellow bloggers forgive my part of this bad behavior..
    I have been very honest in the past about my mental health status in this forum, I allowed someone to push my buttons..
    I am truly sorry…and ashamed..not for anything I said, I stand by my words, but for my continued inappropriate reactions….
    George

  • Max

    A picture of Steven Forth at a Renewal Partners function:
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/renewalpartners/2432514822

  • Max

    @ George:
    You have no reason to apologize to anyone.
    Just as with everyone else, you are welcome to post your thoughts and opinions and I for one, find many of your opinions enlightening.
    As for on-line bullying, sadly it happens. We try to teach our kids that it is wrong, yet adults are not any better.
    Because this is not a face to face exchange, it is easy. I doubt many would be brave enough to say to someone’s face what they so readily type online.
    The only thing I can tell you, is ignore it, don’t give it a second thought and don’t let anyone bait you.
    Afterall, it is a greater relfection on the ‘bully’ than it is on the intended target.
    Have a good day and let it go.
    ……:)
    Max

  • George hasn’t been bullied or silenced or anything like it. He injected himself into a conversation betw you and I Max, made unfounded, erroneous allegations and is now trying to wrap himself in the mantle of victim. Frankly, that’s classic bully behaviour. Expecting people to offer proof or rationale for their comments isn’t.
    Two things are supposedly sacrosanct in our culture. Innocent until proven guilty, and the right to know your accuser. Do you disagree with those principles?