Art Bell's replacements announced

George Nori announced last night, July 3rd, that Ian Punit will take over the Saturday night slot of the Coast to Coast radio show left vacant by Art Bell's retirement. Punit, an Episcopalian minister from Minnesota who is prone to eczema on his hands and a racy sense of humor, has previously hosted on Saturday nights when Bell was away.

Nori will now be hosting on the first Sunday of every month, in addition to his regular week night shows.

The other slots left vacant will be filled by guest hosts for the time being. There will also be the occasional re-run or "best of" show.

A Thelma and Louise Moment

There is considerable evidence that Colleen G., an employee at Carnegie Center, had input into relentless barring of homeless man, Bill Simpson, from the Center. And there is evidence that she had input into the recent unfounded police complaints against Simpson and other suspected bloggers.

Immediately after Bill was barred on June 21st, Colleen returned to work at the Center, after not having been seen for awhile.

A few days before Simpson was last barred on June 21, 2007, Colleen passed him "in a car with a Carnegie kitchen worker wearing a bandanna", waving vigorously and hollering, "Hi Bill!" Simpson was nonplussed. But being a born-to-be-polite Saskatchewanian, he returned the greeting.

It has been pointed out by a Carnegie member watching the Simpson barring case that this attempt to connect with Simpson should be put on record -- since the latest story, the third version now, from the City of Vancouver is that Simpson was barred because employees felt "unsafe". And who would those employees be? Thelma and Louise?

Art Bell Retires from Coast to Coast Radio Show

Art Bell announced last night that he is retiring from his popular Coast to Coast radio show.

Knowing that his listeners have heard him retire on previous occasions, Bell said, "This time it's for real though. (chuckles) It's for real."

Bell explained that this time he was retiring not for some tragedy or emergency, but to be with his wife and infant daughter. He married Airyn (Ruiz) Bell, roughly 40 years his junior, last year -- just a few months after his wife Ramona died suddenly. A daughter, Asia Rayne Bell, was born just a few weeks ago. Bell's voice sounded emotional at times during the announcement, as though he was holding back tears:

“God has blessed me with love in my life at a time, frankly, when I thought I had lost any reason to live following Mona's death: my wonderful wife Airyn and now our daughter Asia. I really want what time the Lord has left for me to be with them."

Bell commented that on June 17^th, he became eligible for Social Security. Then he laughed as he reflected on that fact. He turned 62 on that date.

Bell explained last night that he had needed to return to the air after Ramona's death because his audience was what was "familiar", they were "family" in a way. "All I had left at that dark time in my life was all of you." Being a private person despite being a public figure, he had a very small circle of close friends "and that's about it." But he now needs, he said, to go off the air as he enters a new phase in life. He added that it's not often that a person gets a "second chance" in life.

So listeners can no longer expect to hear Art Bell's relaxed but upbeat voice on Saturday and Sunday nights announcing that it is "my privilege to escort you through the weekend.” But he will still be associated with the Coast to Coast show he helped found, he says, and will be back occasionally to fill in or do a special. Listeners can still reach him, he said, at his two e-mail addresses on the Coast to Coast website.

Although Bell had not mentioned in his retirement announcement at the beginning of the show that he was going to the Philippines, his guest made mention of it at the end of the show when wishing him a good retirement: "I know you're going to the Philippines. Enjoy it." Bell responded, "OK".

Bell reminded his listeners that it had always been a "distinct pleasure" to be their host and then signed off:

"From the high desert. . .Goodbye."

------------------------------------------
See related story, "Is Art Bell Hinting at a Comeback?" at: "Is Art Bell Hinting at a Comeback?"

City on "weak, weak ground" in barring elected blogger.

Bill Simpson, a homeless Carnegie Board member, was standing on the sidewalk in front of Carnegie Centre on Monday evening while the Board meeting took place inside.

Ethel Whitty, the City of Vancouver's on-site manager at Carnegie, was inside at the Board meeting revising her story about why City Hall had barred freshly elected Bill Simpson from entering the Carnegie Center.

The new and improved version of Simpson's barring being presented inside by Whitty was so new in fact that the City had not yet run it by Simpson. This new version of the barring surfaced just a few hours after Internet news sites began reporting that Downtown Eastside senior, Wilf R., had asked Mayor Sam Sullivan to investigate the undemocratic barring of a Carnegie Board member by City managers.

Let's look at the three versions that the Vancouver City vacillators have now provided for the barring of Bill Simpson.

Various versions of the Vancouver City vacillators:

Version 1: Simpson was barred for "blogging" on the Downtown Eastside Enquirer

In Dec. 2006, William "Bill" Simpson arrived at the Learning Centre on the 3rd floor of Carnegie only to be escorted by Co-ordinator Lucy Alderson to the office of Skip, Head of Security, and told that he was barred from the Learning Center. It was because, Alderson told him, he was blogging on the Downtown Eastside Enquirer blog. In the weeks prior, a computer monitor, C.M., says he was interrogated separately by Alderson and Whitty about whether Simpson was blogging, and whether a woman who had been seen chatting with him was blogging.

Simpson quickly made a written request that Carnegie management provide him with the reason for the barring in writing so that he could appeal. But Whitty, Alderson and Skip in Security, have evaded responding for six months now, despite a reminder to do so.

Version 2: Simpson was barred for "linking" to the Downtown Eastside Enquirer blog
When Simpson arrived at the front door of the Carnegie Center last Friday, June 22, 2007, he was stopped by security and told to wait for the arrival of City managers, Ethel Whitty and Dan Tetrault, who work on the third floor. Whitty delivered a letter to Simpson barring him from the entire building indefinitely. In the letter, signed by City Hall's General Manager of Community Services,Jacquie Forbes-Roberts (who was paid $199,032 last year), Simpson was notified that he was being barred for operating a website which "links" to the Downtown Eastside Enquirer blog. He was no longer accused of having written the blog.

In the letter, Forbes-Roberts claimed that the DTES Enquirer blog to which Simpson "links" contains "inaccuracies". Upon reading the letter when Whitty handed it to him, Simpson asked, "What inaccuracies?" Whitty declined to provide him with even one example.

(The letter on City letterhead contained extensive smears, all in the form of sweeping generalizations about the Downtown Eastside Enquirer, all unsubstantiated. The DTES Enquirer will not be reproducing it as we are reviewing our legal options.)

Version 3: Simpson was barred because the Downtown Eastside Enquirer blog to which he "links" allegedly creates a "Work Safe" issue at Carnegie

Between last Friday and Monday, June 25, 2007, the Vancouver City vacillators changed their story again. Whitty arrived at Monday's Board meeting at Carnegie with the new and improved reason for the barring of Simpson, a version which to this day, now Wednesday, Simpson has not been informed of. Whitty announced that the reason for the barring of Simpson was that, "In fact, we are left with an unsafe situation in the Carnegie where there are staff members who are afraid to come into the building because of the situation with the blog." This new angle that Whitty referred to as a "Work Safe" issue had never previously been mentioned or even hinted at, not in the six months that the City of Vancouver management have been subjecting Bill Simpson to barrings. Whitty, predictably, pointed to no specific statement on the blog that had ever made anyone feel unsafe.

Board member Grant Chauncey told Whitty that he had the WorkSafe reference at home. "Maybe you could point it out, where this applies because," he said emphatically, "I don't see it…I want you to show it to me, right, as soon as we leave here." Whitty refused: "I'm not going to show it to you…" Chauncey reminded her that she had a responsibility to explain this barring to the Board. "I'm not actually responsible to you", she retorted.

Then Whitty told Chauncey, "I'm explaining it to you out of respect." But of course she had just refused to explain it.

Two people who several Carnegie members believe have some explaining to do are Mayor Sam Sullivan and City Manager Judy Rogers.

Sam? Judy? Why did the City of Vancouver suppress evidence?

The new 'unsafe Simpson' angle was floated by the City almost immediately after the following politically uncomfortable stories appeared on internet blogs and news sites in response to the barring of Simpson: 1) the City of Vancouver letter barring Simpson had been signed by Forbes-Roberts' who, along with her boss Judy Rogers, had a documented record of complicity in a previous suspicious barring at Carnegie of a politically vocal individual without due process and 2) the Mayor was being asked to remove Rogers as City Manager and member of the Olympic Organizing Committee until a criminal investigation could be carried out into allegations that people on the City payroll were arranging for police harassment of DTES Enquirer bloggers, bloggers who had been vigorously criticizing City managers and supervisory staff for failing to deliver services.

There is speculation that after those stories broke, the City Legal Department, which answers to Judy Rogers incidentally, scrambled to come up with a way to cover asses. They came up with an angle that would make the City calling police on bloggers more palatable to the public: Simpson had been making the Carnegie "unsafe" and employees were "afraid".

When drawing up their new claim that Simpson was creating an "unsafe" environment at Carnegie, the City suppressed evidence to the contrary. That evidence was in the possession of Mayor Sullivan and Judy Rogers. Mayor Sullivan had received a lengthy e-mail dated Mar. 21, 2007, just three months earlier, informing him that Carnegie patrons “using the internet to speak freely about practices at Carnegie” were being placed at risk by the conduct of Board members and workers at Carnegie. The e-mail author portrayed internet writers as the victims, not the cause of the increasingly "toxic" environment at Carnegie. The e-mail began:

"Last Friday, …Bill [Simpson] was subjected to a rude verbal tirade by Robert Sarti, a Board member of the Carnegie. Sarti accused Bill of writing about Carnegie in the news media.

While at Carnegie, [a female patron can be] often seen chatting with Bill. That may be one reason [she has] now become a target of verbal abuse by [a Carnegie Coordinator]....”

The author went on to describe specifics of verbal abuse by workers at Carnegie, including one instance of degrading, misogynous, verbal abuse accompanied by physical aggression, to which this female Carnegie patron had been subjected. Names, times, witnesses, and other specifics were provided.

Sullivan was made aware that he was being contacted because City Manager Judy Rogers had persisted in ignoring the same e-mail. The information had first been sent to Rogers on Dec. 4, 2006. A second copy was sent to her on Dec. 14, 2006, along with a reminder that a response was being awaited.

Like Rogers, Mayor Sullivan did not respond.

Carnegie members want answers. Why was evidence that favored Simpson suppressed by the City when the decision to bar him was being made? Witnesses to the events outlined in the e-mail were never contacted. Neither was the author of the e-mail who had signed with full name and contact information.

City Department headed by Jacquie Forbes-Roberts provides an official website link to a publication verbally abusing bloggers

Evidence revealing that it was the City of Vancouver, not Simpson, that had actively created an unsafe environment at Carnegie, did not have to be hidden in the offices of Mayor Sullivan and Judy Rogers to be ignored in this case. The City ignored a witch hunt approach to the blogger being encouraged in the Carnegie Newsletter, a publication that the City of Vancouver official website identifies as being produced under the managerial eye of Ethel Whitty and Jacquie Forbes-Roberts in Community Services. In the Dec. 15/06 issue, editor Paul Taylor called the DTES Enquirer blogger a "blog bozo", "slimy", a "blank", a "four year old spoiled brat pissing his pants", a "pest". The blogger was further described as a "neighborhood snitch", a "dismal excuse". The City's official website, specifically the page pertaining to the Community Services Dept. headed by Forbes-Roberts, provides a promotional blurb about the "lively" Carnegie Newsletter and a link to it. A link? Isn't that what they barred Simpson for?

Any member of the public choosing to use the link provided by the City department headed by Forbes-Roberts, can treat themselves to Carnegie Newsletter editor Paul Taylor praising Board member Bob Sarti for his role in a witch hunt (by then Bill Simpson had been falsely identified as the blogger) for the blogger: "Bob is one of the unsung heroes for getting to the bottom of this guy's attempts to remain anonymous...." Sarti, who for years wrote in the Carnegie Newsletter under pseudonyms as he worked as a Vancouver Sun reporter, had on two occasions approached Simpson in the corridors of Carnegie, yelling, "Tattle tale Queen of the Carnegie! Tattle tale Queen of the Carnegie!", and wagging his finger wildly at his face. Simpson wrote to Whitty requesting that she call off the "mad dog".

Whitty never barred Sarti, even though several staff persons witnessed his conduct. In fact, Sarti who has recently retired to Hornby Island, was visiting with Whitty, both inside and outside Carnegie, in the days leading up to this month's barring of Simpson. Witnesses report that Sarti was allowed unsupervised access to the Carnegie Association office. Special privileges for special people.

Forbes-Roberts can't claim she didn't know what her Department was linking to. The vitriole she was sponsoring in the Carnegie Newsletter was outlined on the DTES Enquirer in an article about the previous barring of Bill Simpson. Forbes-Roberts had a obligation to familiarize herself with the content of the DTES Enquirer before signing a City letter barring a man for featuring links to its content, and doing severe damage to his life and reputation in the process.

The witch hunt generated in the newsletter and elsewhere by the Carnegie establishment was frightening to one low income member who had been aiding bloggers by confirming dates and times that members were being locked out of publicly-funded services at Carnegie. That individual raised concerns about personal safety back in Dec. 2006, insisting on complete anonymity. It wasn't Simpson that this member was frightened of.

Want to smear bloggers? Do it on City of Vancouver letterhead.

When introducing the new improved third "unsafe" version of the barring, Whitty did not entirely discard the second version. In fact, she allowed photocopies of Forbes-Roberts' letter to be disseminated to all members of the public and Board members at the meeting, despite the fact that it had the label "confidential" on it in tiny letters at the end.

While Whitty had a live audience in front of her, she took the liberty of extending the smear campaign against DTES Enquirer bloggers that her boss at City Hall, Forbes-Roberts, had begun in the letter. Whitty read aloud some of the worst smears that Forbes-Roberts had written and, as was the case in the letter, made no attempt whatsoever to substantiate any of them. Whitty topped up the letter by uttering vicious verbal smears, not all of which had appeared in the letter, and claimed to be relaying the position of the "the City" -- again, no substantiation whatsoever. The DTES Enquirer will not repeat the smears as legal options are being examined. But suffice to say that sweeping, false generalizations were recklessly disseminated at public meeting, with City of Vancouver letterhead being used as a legitimator.

When later in the meeting, a male Board member asked Whitty to be more specific in her critique of the blog that Simpson had linked to, Whitty referred him to the City Hall letter signed by Forbes-Roberts -- knowing that he would find no examples, in that letter, when he got around to reading it.

Whitty ensured that only the false claims she was making would be heard at the public meeting, no other perspective. She refused to answer questions at the meeting about the Simpson matter. Board member Rachel Davis ( a.k.a. Rosetta Stone) balked at this, reminding Board President Margaret Prevost, "You e-mailed me and said that Ethel was here to answer questions." Davis met only with intransigence: individuals with questions would have to go to Whitty's office later to speak to her and another City manager, Dan Tetrault.

When Board member April Smith, a supporter of Simpson, announced that she would like to read a letter on "the Bill Simpson matter", she was quickly told by Jeff Sommers, an old guard left-wing Board member, that she was not allowed to. Sommers, Ph.D. SFU (Geog. '01), a founder of the Strathcona Research group has spoken in the media on issues ranging from housing to human rights on the Downtown Eastside, yet seemed to have no qualms about silencing a perspective favoring a duly elected homeless man. Later in the meeting, when Simpson was nominated for President, Sommers refused to even write his name on the list on the blackboard.

Chauncey confronted Whitty again and again, "These are allegation and there's no crime. And it's not good enough, not good enough! No proof at all." Whitty's admitted that people can be barred from Carnegie without proof: "People are sometimes barred for an allegation." She further admitted that the facts are not always paramount in a decision to bar an individual from Carnegie, that she has in the past been willing to bar a member based on an employee's "feelings." Board member, Sophie Friegang then expressed a view that members have been expressing for years, "There's no protection; anybody can be barred for anything that is allegated [sic]."

Member Terri Williams, with a slight Mississippi accent, pointed out a double standard, that allegations against Carnegie staff are not treated as seriously as those against members. "Ethel," she called out. "What happened with the allegations against Colleen? [a staff person]…Why didn't she get barred?"

Towards the end of the meeting, Chauncey said that although he was not a fan of Simpson, he would defend Simpson's right to free speech. He summarized the view that numerous Carnegie members have expressed about Whitty and Tetrault working with a City Hall lawyer -- without once speaking to Simpson -- to finesse the barring: "They're on such weak, weak ground, they had to get some back-up!"

Mayor asked to investigate barring of Board member by City management

Vancouver Mayor Sam Sullivan and City Manager Judy Rogers are taking the heat today about the barring from Carnegie Centre of Bill Simpson, who was elected as a Board member this month.

On Friday, Simpson received a letter signed by City Hall’s Jacquie Forbes-Roberts, barring him from the entire Carnegie building because he operates a website that “links” to the Downtown Eastside Enquirer blog.

What is foremost on the minds of Carnegie members today is what Bill Simpson was told by City Hall’s on-site manager at Carnegie, Ethel Whitty, after she delivered Forbes-Roberts letter to him. Whitty told this elected Board member that he will not be allowed to attend Board meetings “unless they are held outside the building.” That would include the Board meeting this evening, Monday, June 25^th at 5:50 p.m. in which the Election of Officers -- President, Vice President, etc. -- will occur. Members want him there.

Here are excerpts from a few of the lengthy letters being sent to Mayor Sam Sullivan and City Manager Judy Rogers.

Wilf R., a Carnegie Seniors Program member writes to Mayor Sam Sullivan,

“I'm told that you already have some knowledge about this incident and others like it in the past at the Carnegie, and it's time that something was done.”

As a member of the Carnegie and a supporter of Carnegie member and director William Simpson, I'm asking you to use your office to fully investigate all aspects of the matter.

A male Carnegie volunteer writes to Judy Rogers,

“There are always those who oppose Democracy and Free Speech, especially when such free speech threatens the income of those who live off of the poor, but I am surprised and disappointed that such power would be used from City Hall itself in the person of Jacquie Forbes-Roberts, General Manger, Community Services Group, Vancouver City Hall. Is this what we elected our government to do: heavy-handed thwarting of the public voice and the democratic process?”

Terri W., a Mississippi-born woman in the Carnegie music program, writes to Judy Rogers,

Mr. Bill Simpson has been accused rashly by Carnegie staff of something he is not guilty . . . .If Ethel Whittey has proof of her outrageously unfair accusation, then she should prove it without a shadow of a doubt to the Carnegie Community Centre members who voted for Mr. Bill Simpson as a board member. Otherwise I feel once again the staff at Carnegie is undermining the community spirit whom it serves.

A number of upset members have said they intend to be at this evening's meeting at Carnegie to voice opposition to the City's barring of a Board member they elected. The meeting is open to the public.

Boy accused of stabbing Poeung will not be charged

The 14 year old accused of fatally stabbing 13 yr. old Chris Poeung will walk.

Prosecutors interviewed over 40 witnesses, watched surveillance video and believe the accused acted in self-defence. According to 1130 radio news, "he VPD says the boy was swarmed during a fight involving two groups of teenagers."