Another questionable tweet about Occupy Vancouver coming from city staff

Post by Daniel Fontaine in



If there was ever any question regarding whether the senior ranks of Vancouver's public service are politicized, a recent tweet will help to put that issue to bed. The City's Director of Communications may have thought she was being cheeky, but her tweet referencing the Occupy Vancouver "99%" slogan is not going over well in some circles.

The timing of Mairi Welman's tweet couldn't have been any worse. That's because the City of Vancouver is currently before the courts asking for an injunction to shut down the encampment. Her tweet sent out on Saturday states:

Hey 99%. City Election Advance Polls: Day 4 - voting opens today at 8:00 AM at all 5 locations, including City Hall

I'd be interested to know what the 1% of Vancouver voters Welman ignored thinks of her tweet. That's because they send a considerable amount of property and business taxes each year down to city hall. For Heaven's sake, even Mayor Gregor and many of his top donors are considered as "one percenters".

Interestingly, rather than questioning the content of Welman's tweet, city councillor Heather Deal quickly sent it out to all of her followers (see above image). Deal is no wallflower when it comes to sending out controversial tweets of her own. A few months back she made national headlines when she tweeted out about the lobster feast she and her fellow politicos consumed courtesy of taxpayers.

But Welman's tweet should come as no surprise. On October 15th an anonymous staffer in her communications department tweeted this out to the Occupy Vancouver squatters:

#occupyvancouver rumour you will be kicked out at 10pm false, but pls allow others nearby to sleep tonight by lowering PA volume!

I realize some of you will argue we should simply cut Welman's some slack. After all, she's just trying to be funny and encouraging people to get out and vote. But in the hyper-sensitive world we know as a civic election campaign in Vancouver, this kind of messaging can quickly raise eyebrows. And in this instance, I do think people have good reason to question Welman's judgement.

Is Welman's tweet a career killer? Hardly. But it is yet another reminder to voters of how partisan the upper ranks of Vancouver's civil service have become over the last three years. Given the poor turnout for past civic elections, I think Welman should be encouraging 100% of the voters to get out and vote, not just the "99%". What do you think? Leave us a comment below.

- Post by Daniel. You can follow us on on Twitter @CityCaucus or you can "like" us on Facebook at


Oh come on Daniel - surely we can all agree that the City of Vancouver staff can encourage citizens to vote in municipal elections! Talk about demanding Vancouver become a "no fun" city again - it was just a touch of humour that I find appealing in what has been a tense situation.

One might also presume that most of the 1% who run the global economy don't live in Vancouver. Or that if they do, they don't need to be reminded to vote!

I didn't see the tweet, but I like it. Anything that encourages people to vote is a step in the right direction.

On a related note, I received the Vancouver Voters' Guide in the mail, and was very impressed by it. I lived in various suburbs of Vancouver up until a few years ago, so am not sure if this is the same sort of package as in previous elections, but I think the city did a good job of assembling information for voters. And it doesn't come across as being at all political to me.

Wow! Just when I thought that CityCaucus couldn't be more ridiculous in its feeble attempts to manufacture trivial nontroversies. Congrats! You have out done yourselves again. Now how about moving back to more important issues.

This is Vancouver, there are no consequences for anything. She'll have a good laugh over this with her other elitist buddies.


Huh, the tweet mentioned the 99%. The 1% is the elite. Yet you accuse her of being elite. Please just think for one second before posting. Your post made no sense at all.

Completely inappropriate behaviour and tweet. But don't expect any accountability from a mayor who didn't pay his transit tickets and ran a red light. Oh yeah, and from a mayor who encouraged 150000 people to come downtown and drink and party. Then they trashed biz's to the tune of 6 million bucks. Oh yeah, and the guy that says it's okay to break bylaws on the front lawn of the art gallery. What a joke this city has become. What a joke.

Occupy Vancouver is no longer a legitimate protest movement.

It is now just another squat.

Did you notice how the squatters today went back to protest the Woodwards condo development again? It's the same losers that lived in a tent squat trying to prevent that development! And the same losers who put up a tent squat on Main Street.

The City of Vancouver has a protocol now to prevent squats from being set up, but Mayor Moonbeam over-ruled city staff and the police to allow this new squat to be set up.

The tent city on the VAG lawn should forever more be known as "Gregor's Squat".

i like her pitch...and i am an occupy supporter.
things would likely be a lot different right now if the 99 had been voting all along. the problem is that they have been voting according to the news and the twisted message put out by the one percent, who own almost everything, tell us everything, and right now are working full throttle to choke occupy.

Gregonistas are obviously very worried, otherwise they would not be spamming comments section on City Caucus.

Given that a majority of opposition candidates said Ballem would get the boot if they got in, maybe other recent hires should be a bit mote cautious when sounding off. Especially since the communications department has become so bloated under Juice Boy. Easy target for cuts.

I think it's bloody hilarious you think
a) There is such a thing as a gregorista, as though there is some brainwashed mass out there.
b) That the comments section on a internet blog has any bearing on the election!

Too funny.

Another day, another screwup by the NPA on a brochure. Yesterday it was "forgetting" to include Anton. Today it was including a girl in a brochure from Langley without permission. Her parents are talking about suing. Langley, that explains everything. It always seemed by their policies that they are trying to appeal to suburban voters.

Anyway, if they can't even put simple campaign brochures together, how can they run a large city.

@ Really:

I'm sorry ...did you hiccup? Did you not already post this statement under another blog topic?

Tell Vision you need a coffee break, or better pay, or a bike lane or something..

The Thought of The Evening

" Bill Tieleman's... Menial Billet says: 'I have nothing of value to add, so... here are my thoughts!'"

So then, why did you do it Bill, why oh, why?

... not from the Geoff Meggs "Somewhere Over The Viaducts" collection, though...

For real tweets on real matters go here:!/glissandoremmy

We live in Vancouver and this keeps us busy.

No, that was only mentioning "forgetting" Anton. The last post didn't mention today's folly of not asking permission to use the girl from Langley's photo.

oh max really? really?

I've seen posts from you and many other verbatim on other blogs or even in other threads on the same blog.


@ (Getting) Really-Show up at a public gathering,get your picture taken with a politician and then act outraged when the photo is used? $ound$ like $omeone i$ $iezing an opportunity. Why accept an apology when you can $ue.

seems to me there is some sort of automatic consent when photo is taken on public property. Please correct me if I am wrong.

I know that the same type of Voter's Guide went out for sure in the last election (2008) - not sure about previous to that.

It's called "implied consent". Put your child in front of a politician for a photo op and the courts kind of expect it can be used in public materials. It's not like Anton used the kid's yearbook photo. This is a tempest in a teapot with COPE stirring up the tea leaves.

The mayors squat might possibly cost him the job. I noticed a large turnout at the advance poll on Saturday at West End Community Centre. I think a few people might be angry about the current situation.


The first question that came to mind who was the adult or adults that were present when the photo was taken?

It is not just a random shot and I would think either the parents or a relative were standing by as th photo was snapped - which is implied consent.

Councilor Anton did the correct thing by apologizing directly to the family. The fact they are looking to legal acton well..... I'll hold my opinion on that.


Pot, kettle, black.

What is it exactly that you bring to the conversation table aside from your typical statice responses.


I'm not the one whining about him pointing something out twice, you are. Yet you and others do that frequently.


I've made several comments on posts that have to do with actual policy, I guess here I'm posting on par with these silly, non-news, irrelevant posts.

Check out!

Paid Advertisement

Paid Advertisement