Wednesday, May 27, 2015


Is it all about face saving or do they have a strategy? Yesterday's Waterloo Region Record carried another Editorial hammering Woolwich Township for their wilful disobedience of the Elections Act in not yet removing Councillor Bauman. Today's Record carrys a Letter To the Editor along similar lines from Richard Clausi. Last evening Mayor Sandy Shantz advised that during Council's just completed In Camera meeting they had issued the Notice of Default to former Councillor Bauman. This Notice of Default was inconveniently buried in the on-line package to last night's Council meeting as page 116 of 123 pages. Nice. Interestingly Mayor Shantz is refusing to use the word "removed". I guess the wee minds at the Township think that if they don't use that word then they've won some kind of victory. It's actually becoming pathetic.

Speaking about their Notice of Default it seems they can't even get it right when they get around to doing it. Both Rich Clausi and another local citizen immediately noticed that the two penalties Mark Bauman is subject to have not both been included. The penalty of being prohibited from running for municipal election until 2022 is included (ie. disallowed to run in 2018) however the equally clear immediate forfeiture of office (Councillor) is not. Is this more gamesmanship by Woolwich or just dumb? That said the first citizen to notice the discrepancy e-mailed Woolwich CAO Dave Brenneman to so advise him. His response was that the Clerk had written it and it had been reviewed and approved by their lawyer. Interesting.

My Delegation last night may have gone over Council's head at the moment. The third paragraph indicated that there are more contraventions by Councillors, of the Elections Act, that have not been brought forward to the Clerk's attention. Once this sinks in I expect they will be even more perturbed than they currently are.

No comments:

Post a Comment