Friday, July 31, 2015


Yesterday's Elmira Independent carrys two interelated stories titled "Court ruling reinstates Woolwich mayor Sandy Shantz" and secondly "DDT found in creek sediment". The first story has several paragraphs at the end which spell out the destruction and dissolving of CPAC under the guise of bringing back Chemtura and the M.O.E. to the table. The mayor and Councillor Bauman while both firmly in bed with Chemtura/M.O.E. orchestrated the so called "crisis" of those two parties boycotting public CPAC meetings. Gail Martin's article also advises us that the Compliance Audit Committee (MECAC) according to Sandy's lawyer, did not have the authority to receive Sandy's late Audit and revised Financial Statement. Hence Sandy illegally avoided a full blown forensic audit being ordered by MECAC.

Sandy has cheerfully misinterpreted the Judge's decision to reinstate her, prior to his written decision. She states that "It was all honest mistakes. I'm glad the judge could see that." Perhaps Sandy might want to wait for the judge's written decision first. She may well have a shock coming to her depending on what the judge thinks about the March 23/15 date written conveniently so illegibly in his copy along with other anomolies in her written statements. Regarding Sandy's ingenuous comment about her accountant's "clerical error" that too will come back to bite her. I explained in detail here last Monday the truth about that supposed "error". The March 23/15 date is Sandy's and she alone put it in her report.

As usual Gail Martin and the Independent were the only media present at CPAC's public meeting on Thursday July 23/15. This meeting she has described in detail in her "DDT found in creek sediment" story. This was her front page lead story for the Independent's final print edition. The irony is obvious as this might be CPAC's last public meeting as appointed by Council Woolwich representatives and volunteers.

The data presented by Graham Chevreau was collected by MBN Environmental and analysed by a recognized professional lab. Chemtura/M.O.E. and their fellow travellors including RAC & TAG will have great difficulty in minimizing and undermining this professional report although I expect that won't stop them from trying. If there's one thing I've learned both recently and over the years it is that professional liars love their work.

The DDT hits were all over the map although consistently way above the M.O.E.'s most stringent standard of 7 ppb. These standards are based upon factors such as distance from surface water, presence of potable groundwater, available receptors to the contaminants etc.. The highest reading of DDT in Canagagigue Creek sediments was found by the M.O.E. in 2012 and was 12,000 ppb (parts per billion). CPAC's July 2015 highest detection of DDT in the creek was 20,000 ppb. That level is enormous and will be adversely and severely affecting life in the creek and beyond.

Also found in the creek were polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) which are carcinogenic, mutagenic and teratogenic. Further results also included common solvents as well as endosulfan " organochloride insecticide that is highly toxic, bioaccumulates and is a known endocrine disruptor.". While adults suffer it is children who are most vulnerable especially early in life.

CPAC will be presenting a Resolution to Woolwich Council on August 11/15 asking for their support in pressuring the Ministry of the Environment to increase their testing and to take steps to stop ongoing Chemtura contamination from spreading offsite. It is my expectation that the same Council hypocrites who dissolved CPAC to curry favour with Chemtura will nonetheless go through the exercise of accepting CPAC's Resolution publicly while privately reassuring Chemtura and the M.O.E. that they have everything under control. This is Woolwich politics at its' finest.

Thursday, July 30, 2015


1) Public smearing of Woolwich volunteers (CPAC) by Chemtura (& the M.O.E.)

2) Ongoing leakage of solvents, PAHs, Endosulfan, Dioxins, DDT & metabolites into the Canagagigue Creek

3) The Stroh Drain (east side) bypass to the creek including exposure route to children

1) Chemtura and the M.O.E. were under appropriate siege by the Chemtura Public Advisory Committee. Immediately upon taking office (within days) our new Mayor was on the attack criticizing CPAC at the October public CPAC meeting. She and Mark Bauman continued this relentless and untruthful assault upon Woolwich volunteers attacking their credibility, competence, integrity and even alleging physical intimidation and harassment of Chemtura and the M.O.E.. All this without a lick of honest evidence before them.

2) Ministry of Environment studies in 1995-96, 2012, 2013 prove discharges of Dioxins and DDT downstream of the company into the Canagagigue Creek. They (M.O.E.) so far have kept the completed results for 2014 hidden from CPAC. They are saving them for two committees (RAC & TAG) better suited to their polluting personalities and deceptive ways. RAC & TAG take over on September 1, 2015. CPAC's recent study and sampling (July 2015) indicates the other contaminants as well as DDT.

3) This is the smoking gun of intentional illegal dumping into the creek even after the 1989 Elmira water crisis. This manmade Drain circa 1985 runs parallel to Chemtura's eastern property border and within 20-25 metres of it. It takes ground and surface water from both the Stroh property and the Chemtura property and directs it into what was originally a natural spring that flows southwards past a manmade swimming pond and into the Canagagigue Creek. This pond is filled with both groundwater and the original natural springwater. The latter is via a pipe which contrary to Mark Bauman's claim that it only helps fills the pond via a sluice type structure when dammed; in fact gravity flows on its' own directly into the pond. This pond has been used by Mennonite children for decades.

Sandy Shantz's election has saved Chemtura Canada hundreds of millions of dollars in east side cleanup costs. It has saved the Ontario M.O.E. possibly a public inquiry into their negligence, corruption and collusion with Chemtura. Her election totally changed the channel that was all about a manmade offsite toxic liquid bypass that may include an Interceptor Trench capturing all Chemtura's east side toxic groundwater and diverting it east and south. Two professional reports have now condemned the Chemtura/M.O.E. actions and non-actions on their east side.

The RAC group consists of Sandy, likely Mark B., GRCA, Region and a paid by Chemtura Chair of TAG. TAG will include Sandy's campaign helper Pat McLean as well as Susan Bryant. Those two have for years personally benefited by their amicable association with Chemtura.

This entire revolution and rescue of Chemtura was totally dependant upon Sandy Shantz winning the election. Sandy was herself improperly rescued by the Region's MECAC (election compliance committee). They had but one duty and that was to order a full blown forensic audit of her election expenses. They illegally accepted her months late revised Financial Statement and two page "audit" instead on July 2/15.

Was there too much at stake here including regional and provincial politicians worried about public exposure for their October 7, 1991 "sweetheart" deal with Uniroyal Chemical (Chemtura) ? Too much at stake here that is to let this important election be left entirely up to the voters aka "unwashed masses"?

Wednesday, July 29, 2015


Sandy's Affidavit presented to Superior Court on July 23/15 contained the following possibly ficticious facts (ie. horse manure). Page 4, Paragraph 13. stated "On June 29, 2015 I provided the MECAC with a package containing a letter setting out my submissions to them and enclosing an updated Form and audited statements from Tim Adams, as well as a letter of explanation from Larry Shantz of Stair Travel Inc. which addressed a concern raised by Alan Marshall.". Sandy also enclosed as Exhibit D the Draft Minutes of that MECAC meeting which to date yours truly still has not formally received. Apparently certain priveleges accrue to being Mayor even in quasi legal proceedings.

All those present for the July 2/15 MECAC meeting saw Sandy's 30 page stapled (and hand numbered pages) package handed out at approximately 10:50 am.. I received them for the first time that day as well and commented harshly on the late delivery and was so recorded both by microphone /taperecording as well as in the Draft Minutes. MECAC members while recorded on tape also commenting on the late delivery were less so recorded in the Draft Minutes. Nevertheless all present including the media clearly understood that that package had just been delivered. Indeed Sandy even apologized for it's late delivery at the start of her presentation.

In hindsight I can see three possible scenarios. !) Sandy fudged to Superior Court in her Affidavit. 2) MECAC lied intentionally and profusely to the media and the public on July 2/15 and hence they both lied like dogs and had conspired ahead of time to do so. 3) O.K. this is a corollary of 1) ie. Sandy and MECAC told the truth on July 2/15 and indeed she handed it out then for the first time as everyone understood and stated. So either Sandy was part of a deception with MECAC on July 2 or she lied in her Affidavit to Superior Court on July 23/15.

Sandy's page 5, paragraph 16. Sandy tells the court "...after much discussion amongst the MECAC members, a decision was made by the MECAC to dismiss the Application of Alan Marshall.". That is total horse manure. Tom Jutzi of MECAC started the ball rolling by saying he wished to dismiss my Application for the following reasons... . Each MECAC member then followed individually giving their reasons immediately for dismissal. There was no discussion amongst them whatsoever. There was zero back and forth. It was an obvious predetermined outcome that each one pathetically tried to justify individually.

Sandy's Affidavit page 4, paragraph 12 stated "Upon being notified of that Application (ie. my June 16 Application for an Audit) and reviewing its contents, I was surprised and upset to realize that I may have failed to have my my financial statements audited when it was required and that there may have been errors with my Form or my campaign financing.". That statement to the court contrasts nicely with Sandy's claim in this week's Elmira Independent (currently online) that "...she had not sought an audit of her expenses until late May.". If the Independent story is correct then Sandy's statement to the court is false. Conversely if she told the court the truth why is she making false claims to the media?

Tuesday, July 28, 2015


Actually her upcoming September Financial Statement might actually be her fourth one I'm told. Amazing what 31 years as a bookeeper can do for you. She will of course be adding her five minute two page "Audit" expense plus her lawyer's expenses to her September Financials. Keep clearly in mind her two page June 16/15 "Audit" was NOT remotely a full blown forensic audit as Scott Hahn is currently going through. Those auditors (Froese Inc.) are interviewing witnesses and looking at expenses and donations in extreme detail. While even the very best of forensic audits are not totally foolproof nevertheless they elevate the level of scrutiny a thousand fold over Sandy's two pager from MAC LLP.

CPAC have cheerfully left Woolwich Council and the Ontario Ministry of Environment (M.O.E.) a ticking time bomb. It is the "CPAC Canagagigue Creek Report - Final, July 21, 2015". This report while a group effort by CPAC was nevertheless spearheaded by CPAC member Graham Chevreau. CPAC and SWAT all assisted from discussion and research to actually accompanying the professionals from MBN on their field trip into the wilds of Woolwich ie. the Canagagigue Creek and neighbours south and east of the Chemtura site.

I have been proud to assist CPAC and SWAT over the last four and a half years both technically and historically. At the same time as they have exposed the fallacies and myths of Chemtura's and the M.O.E.'s "pretend" cleanup; they have also exposed Woolwich Councils, both past and present for what they are. With one notable term (2010-2014) being the exception Woolwich Councils have been securely in bed with Chemtura and the M.O.E.. Yes it has been a conspiracy including municipal, regional and provincial bureaucrats and politicians. If you need a roster of all the guilty parties then simply look at the makeup of the RAC & TAG committees. The former are the politicians and bureaucrats and the latter will primarily be the citizen syncophants and co-optees sucking up for more freebies.

CPAC's time bomb condemns the Ontario M.O.E. for allowing nay promoting the discharge of Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) down the Canagagigue Creek all the way to the Grand River and further. These POPs include Dioxins, DDT, DDD, DDE, Endosulfan 1 & 2 and so much more. They also include Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs). We the citizens of Elmira and Woolwich have condemned both our Mennonite neighbours downstream as well as wildlife and the environment to serious health degradation by our failure to stop Chemtura and their friends on Council.

Friends there has been a conspiracy since at least 1989 to coverup the extent of environmental damage and the possibility of restoration in our lifetimes. It has been hand in hand with our local politicians. This conspiracy includes municipal elections. It includes grooming of both citizen activists as well as grooming of politicians. It includes bending of if not complete rupturing of any and all rules that stand in their way. Do not be fooled by soft words, smiles and professions of running on "integrity". Politics itself is a conspiracy to improperly assist the powerful among us to maintain their status and privelege. It requires constant lying and deception. The one bright light is the fear our politicians have of us. They are terrorized with fear that we will find out the truth about them.

Monday, July 27, 2015


Or.... is her lawyer looking over his shoulder at either the Law Society or perhaps even future criminal charges? Is he distancing himself from a sinking ship? Funny how when given the opportunity by Justice Broad to rebut my "smoking gun" March 23/15 testimony; Mr. James Bennett did nothing but mumble semi-incoherently about a non-existent June 19, 2015 date. He may have been thinking about the June 16/15 date on the accountant's report but he clearly was disconcerted.

Our Mayor has advised us in both the Waterloo Region Record ("Shantz back as Woolwich's mayor") and in the Elmira Independent ("Court ruling reinstates Woolwich mayor") that it was her accountant's fault. He "...used the wrong date" as per the Record and as she stated in the Independent " was a clerical error..." from the accountant's office. Now this could be an opportunity to laugh out loud at the mayor's neverending excuses ie. the accountant did it.

Instead I will share some of my research with my readers. I have been involved in phone conversations with two professional chartered accountants since approximately July 4, 2015. They advise me that standard accounting practice is to date an audit on the date that the client "accepts" the audit. This usually means that the client either meets her accountant in his office or elsewhere at which time she reads it and signs for it. The accountant's secretary/clerk types up and dates both the audit and in this case the eight page Financial Statement using the acceptance date in this case of June 16/15.

June 16/15 is the very date that I had given Woolwich Clerk Val Hummel my Application for a Compliance Audit. For Sandy to "accept" and sign for her audit on June 16/15 clearly indicates it was already done ahead of time. Yes the accountant 's clerk did not change the existing March 23/15 date on Sandy's Financial Statement. That date was on that document courtesy of Sandy from way back in March prior to the filing deadline of March 27/15. If the clerk hadn't missed changing SANDY'S DATE (March 23/16) to the acceptance date of June 16/15 I would not have stated in Superior Court last Thursday that "...the mayor knowingly submitted false information.". I would not have said in court "she covered it up.".

Sandy accepted and signed for her audit on June 16/15. What a shocker for her when I, the day after she presented it at the July 2/15 MECAC (Compliance Audit Committee), noticed the March 23/15 date on her Financial Statement. Now this is interesting. Her accountant offerred to replace his two page audit and her returned eight page Financial Statement with new ones all dated June 16/15. He made this offer in very early July but with a condition. For him to replace them he required the original copies given to seven MECAC members plus one Alan Marshall back, first.

This is why Sandy is now pretending that her March 23/15 Financial Statement is her accountant's fault. She hasn't requested either myself or presumably MECAC to return our copies to her so that she can get her new, adjusted, career and integrity saving June 16/15 dated copy. The reason may be that she didn't want to tip off MECAC about the significance of the March 23/15 date on their copies. It could also be that she was assurred by her lawyer that I'd never get the chance to spill the beans in Superior Court.

Last but not least, Sandy has bragged about her 31 years of bookeeping experience with her husband's firm. Do you think that just maybe Sandy had full confidence when she sent off her revised March 23/15 Financial Statement to her accountant that the incriminating date would never again see the light of day? Once again all of this can be proven absolutely (or not) by a full blown forensic audit. Odd how Sandy has done her best to avoid that action.

Saturday, July 25, 2015


Two Councillors this past winter and spring manufactured and choreographed a "crisis" at CPAC. Two Councillors this spring and summer got booted out of office for serious indifference and contempt of the Municipal Elections Act. Yes they were the very same pair. Karma is indeed a bitch. It is my opinion that those attitudes of indifference to the law and contempt of rules, regulations and citizens are running rampant within Woolwich Township, including senior staff and council.

The rest of Woolwich Council sat back and allowed Sandy and Mark to dismantle and dissolve the best Chemtura Public Advisory Committee (CPAC) there has ever been. Woolwich Council looked the other way while the township's CAO aided and abetted the smear campaign of Woolwich volunteers by Sandy, Mark, Chemtura and the Ministry of Environment (M.O.E.). Was that all done simply because of the sour grapes and jealousy of two former CPAC members who were behind Sandy throughout her mayoralty campaign? Did she make promises to them for their support during her campaign? Was it because of right wing ideological beliefs favouring busines (corporations) at the expense of the citizens and the environment?

Or is it much worse than the above? How peculiar that the pair who were front and centre to destroy CPAC at Chemtura's desperate bidding (new Dioxin & DDT exposure routes); allegedly never received a nickel in campaign election donations from them. Legal donations or otherwise. I don't see a nickel from Chemtura or their employees, management, suppliers or customers clearly and legibly written down in their election expense reports.

Make no mistake these election expense reports (Financial Statements) are a joke. They are routinely fudged at the minimum and blatant fraud at the extreme. They are "voluntary compliance" run amok. I've already written how easy it would be to hide two $750 donations to Sandy say from Dwight Este and Jeff Meriman of Chemtura within her unnamed less than $100 each donations total of $1,658. Other donations/ bribes/ expressions of adulation etc. could simply be donated to her via cash and then put into her campaign account as say $5,500 from her and her husband.

To date this can not be proven. A real forensic audit might actually be able to prove it one way or the other. Yet Sandy pulled a fast and illegal one on the Compliance Audit Committee (MECAC) with her revised Financial Statement dated March 23/15 and two page audit. Sandy improperly shortcircuited the forensic audit route with still incomplete and erroneous financials on July 2. Then she went the tried and proven sneak into Superior Court route that worked so well for Mark. Both of them were aided and abetted improperly according to Justice David Broad by the Township's "no position" or "nuetral" stance in Court.

Again I was denied proper legal Notice to respond even if I had the money to hire a lawyer to intervene. Instead when I as a courtesy gave written notice to Sandy's lawyer (James Bennett of Madorin Snyder) that I would attend to seek Friend of the Court status, he started sending me threatening and intimidating e-mails .

All of this behaviour by our Mayor and Council is bizarre. Is this truly, simply because of the multitude of stupid errors exposed so far in her financials or is she hiding more? Again only a real forensic audit has any hope at all of finding the truth.

Friday, July 24, 2015


In order to get you to answer the two burning questions above I am going to flatter you. SANDY SHANTZ Did Not SPEAK A SINGLE LIE in Superior Court yesterday. First off she didn't speak at all and secondly when that need arises you simply hire a lawyer.

So did Chemtura donate at all to Sandy's campaign? According to her admittedly horribly erroneous February 2/15 Finacial Statement maybe. But afterall it's admittedly erroneous. She received $1,658 worth of allegedly below $100 each donations. Who were those donors? A full forensic Audit would have told us but apparently the privelege of also being a Regional Councillor exempts one from following the Elections Act and being ordered by the Municpal Elections Compliance Audit Committee (MECAC) to get one. Her five minute "Audit" submitted was not a forensic Audit.

What about her second kick at the can? That would be her illegal and unacceptable do over dated March 23/15 presented to MECAC on July 2/15. Well that anonymous $1,658 is still in there. Plus we now have a box clearly marked at the bottom of Table 1 indicating there is a supplementary attachment for more donors of greater than $100 each. Of course that supplementary attachment isn't there. Oh and of course absolutely no explanation why not because there still hasn't been a forensic Audit done.

Sandy now gets a third do over courtesy of Superior Court yesterday. It's due by September 15/15. Well sort of a third do over. I've had two people tell me that her February 2/15 Financial Statement wasn't really her first one posted on the Township's website. Boy I've got to suspect that her husband has given her stickhandling lessons. Her time at the school board would also have prepared her for a life of deception. The School Board like jail tends to prepare career deceivers also known as politicians.

Judge Broad criticized Woolwich Township's do nothing/nuetral position at Superior Court yesterday. He applauded my intervention on behalf of the public interest essentially because Woolwich Township (Council) failed in their duty to do so. The Judge referred to Counterpoint argument and evidence that was sadly lacking until I came along. Judge Campbell in Mark Bauman's case apparently couldn't have cared less despite my name being mentioned as the complainant in Mark's case.

Jaimie Bennett of Madorin Snyder took his lumps from the Judge as well. Jaimie kept hurling accusations at me including referring to the Elmira Advocate as well as to the "groundwater committee" (CPAC) issues. The Judge repeatedly told Jaimie that a citizen's right to hold a politician accountable is not removed just because he has had earlier disagreements with said politician. Jaimie's lies and bullshit via e-mail this past Tuesday was not raised in court. As I had told him it was untrue, irrelevant nonsense. Jaimie's alleged quoting in his e-mails of lawyer Gary Petker was also interesting. If Petker is blabbing untruthfully or otherwise about a confidential Settlement (at his client's insistence) from eleven years ago then he could be in big trouble. If Jaimie has lied about Petker's mouthing off then perhaps Garry you should sue him, you miserable shyster.

I will be looking to obtain a copy of Judge Broad's Decision. As is par for the course both the Township and Sandy's lawyer will not advise me or supply it when it's ready. That Decision may have given Sandy's job back but at what cost? The Judge might very well expose the March 23/15 smoking gun date of her revised Financial Statement, indicating Sandy's untruthfulness to the public, to MECAC and to the Court.

Thursday, July 23, 2015


The much vaunted lawyer James Bennett of Madorin Snyder got his ass kicked today and he knows it. Both Sandy and her hubby looked like they'd been kicked in his gonads. Judge Broad (honest that's his name) was fair in getting me to change from fact/evidence argument into straight argument on the facts & evidence already entered. This was three hours in the making in order for Bennett and Mr. Kidd of the Township to speak before we even debated my intervenor status as a friend of the court. Legal case law may have been made by my submissions and the Judge's rulings giving me status. I don't believe for one second he knew if given status I could destroy the Mayor's credibility so quickly and thoroughly. The March 23/15 smoking gun of her having prior knowledge of the errors, inaccuracies and omissions in her February 2/15 Financial Statement was devastating. Despite this the Judge gave her the Mayor's job back counter to case law on that. I expect his argument will go that there was more harm being done with her out of office than caused by her bad faith, dishonest errors and intentional non compliance with the Elections Act.

My stock rose dramatically with every honest person in the room and Sandy's is in the toilet. By the way, the "glare" got put in his place when it was all over.

Wednesday, July 22, 2015


Well it's officially gone from very weird to bizarre. I will leave it up to you readers to decide. Yesterday I received four e-mails from Mr. James Bennett of Madorin Snyder law firm. The first sent at 9:24 am. simply advised me that he would not communicate with me as he was dealing with my lawyer Mr. Ted Wellhauser. I responded by advising him that Mr. Wellhauser was not my lawyer. I then received three more e-mails namely 10:24 am., 3:00 pm. and lastly at 9:05 pm.. Each e-mail in my opinion became more and more threatening.

Mr. Bennett is attempting to intimidate me not to attend Superior Court tomorrow morning at 10 am.. I had sent him an initial polite and respectful e-mail at 8:48 am. to advise him that I would be attending Superior Court at 10 am. to request leave (permission) from the Judge to intervene under Rule 13.02 (Rules of Civil Procedure) to be a "Friend of the Court". This would not give me party status but would allow me to address the Court and to enter fact evidence which would assist the Court in their determination as to whether or not to reinstate Sandy Shantz to her forfeited Mayor's position.

The intimidation/ blackmail? is in relation to a nearly twenty year old civil law case (1996) regarding a teacher from the Waterloo Region District School Board. I will post here Sandy's lawyer's last e-mail yesterday to me. "Mr. Petker and his client tend to differ. Surely you and your search for truth will want the Court and the public to know the truth about your history.". His 10:24 am. and 3:00 pm. e-mails included details which I do not believe such as an outstanding judgement against me.

The final Settlement to that case was negotiated by my lawyers at the time namely White Duncan. The Settlement was filed with the Court in July 2004. In the intervening eleven years I have received exactly zero correspondence from the courts or anybody else suggesting outstanding judgements.

Yesterday I sent copies of Mr. Bennett's first two threatening e-mails to me to four media outlets as well as to local friends and colleagues. After I finish posting here I will send the last one (9:05 am.) as well.

At the minimum Sandy's lawyer is desperate to keep me away from Superior Court tomorrow. His behaviour is disgusting and reprehensible. Not being a lawyer or police officer I do not know if it is illegal. What the heck is going on here?

Tuesday, July 21, 2015


MECAC on July 2/15 has been appropriately referred to as a " dog and pony show".

Former mayor Sandy Shantz's last minute presentation of 30 pages of Financials to MECAC was "trial by ambush".

Mark Bauman's Superior Court appearance last May was for all intents and purposes a midnight move.

Sandy's Superior Court appearance this Thursday at 10 am. while not a complete sneak; nevertheless effectively robs citizens of adequate time to prepare and address her glaring omissions of fact that she will present to the Court.

Both Mark and Sandy continue to misrepresent the facts when they publicly suggest that both MECAC and Mark's reinstatement somehow have adequately addressed their election expense shortcomings. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The Woolwich Observer reported last Friday (8 am.) that Sandy Shantz was appearing in court this Thursday. The Observer at the absolute latest must have known no later than Thursday morning. Yours truly the MECAC Applicant & Complainant in this case, who had been advised that he would be informed ahead of time by Woolwich Township's lawyers, was so informed yesterday morning by e-mail; FOUR DAYS after the newspaper was so advised.

Fifty percent of this current Council have accurately and appropriately been brought to an accounting for their gross and ridiculous errors of omission and commission in filing their election Financial Statements. Hence they are in a gross conflict of interest position when they pretend to be Respondents yet again this Thursday to Sandy's Application for reinstatement.

Monday, July 20, 2015

WHAT'S IT ALL ABOUT SANDY Sung to the Tune of "What's It All About Alfie?"

WHY WHY WHY? Why the incredible coverup? Why the lies? Why the apparent perjury otherwise known as Foreswearing? Perjury/Foreswearing means lying under oath. This isn't only in court it also refers to lying on sworn statements. For example Sandy's February 2, 2015 Financial Statement has a signed Declaration/Oath on the first page which she has signed. Similarily I would wonder if her signed cover letter to a body appointed for the purpose of enforcing the Municipal Elections Act (MECAC) if untruthful, would also have similar consequences? Finally the fact that her March 23/15 revised Financial Statement given to MECAC on July 2/15 was unsigned, has bothered me. Is that of little consequence or huge? Did she intentionally leave it unsigned to avoid further future judicial discipline?

To date, based on the limted evidence available, I have yet to see definitive proof or a smoking gun as to an absolute single overwhelming motive for Sandy Shantz's election expense report contraventions, illegalities and untruths. Of course if MECAC had done their legislated duty, a full blown forensic Audit would most likely have told the tale. They utterly failed whether from inherent corruption, inherent incompetence or even possibly subtle bias exacerbated by lies from the candidate.

I have a suspicion only that she has received donations, legal or otherwise which she finds embarassing. They could be via the still bizarre and inadequately explained Stair Travel/Web D Zine companies owned by her cousin and Council colleague Larry Shantz. Or even worse it might be donations whether corporate or personal from Chemtura Canada. That indeed would be embarassing and speak loudly to her integrity after her full on assault on CPAC (to Chemtura's delight) this past winter and spring.

Still that political embarassment could possibly cause her to commit potentially fraud and perjury? It seems bizarre. It seems frankly stupid. To date that's my conclusion albeit the evidence is not all in.

Saturday, July 18, 2015


Must have been a misunderstanding. Surely the promises made to me by various authorities over at 24 Church St. in Elmira were not lies. Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. After the Mark Bauman sneak into and out of Superior Court without advising the Applicant (Complainant) me; I've made a stink about being properly and formally advised this time. That includes even by Woolwich Township's law firm. Well you guessed it. Nada!

I repeat that I don't think they are beyond redemption; egomaniacs proving they are in control and to hell with you Mr. Marshall. Naw they're much too appreciative of the benefits of taxpayer funded job security, pay and medical benefits to cross the line of no return. Union protection only buys you so much and in fact Council and possibly the CAO are not union protected.

Yesterday's Woolwich Observer advises that former mayor Shantz is off to Superior Court this Thursday at 10 am.. Well I've been asked what are her chances and the answer is even more obvious than it was with Councillor Mark Bauman. If she and her lawyer are unopposed as they are by Council and or anybody else than she will skate. It will be a walk in the park. This despite the long list of contraventions of the Elections Act including the failure to file an Audit which got her turfed from her job as mayor.

Then there are the intangibles such as what exactly are the Regional Police doing at the moment. Have they tacitly or implicitly thrown in the towel? Have they determined that holy crap there IS something here and we'd better do our duty? They too like the school board and Woolwich Council are a power unto themselves and that's how they like it. They too are basically unaccountable and that's how they like it. Note I said "basically" unaccountable.

Friday, July 17, 2015


Mark Bauman illegally sat on Woolwich Council from March 27/15 until approximately May 28/15. While the Township Clerk belatedly issued him a Notice of Default, he and the Township then pretended that he hadn't lost his seat. He was prevented however from sitting at Council (and CPAC) until his stickhandling end run around the Elections Act, myself and justice.

Sandy Shantz illegally held the Mayor's office from March 27/15 until July 8/15. She too was spared a Notice of Default illegally for all those months. She is still out of office since her removal which is appropriate considering the more egregious nature of her filing faults, errors and omissions than Mark's four time failure to file when acclaimed.

During this crucial period TWO Woolwich Councillors lobbied and lied like dogs in order to manufacture a crisis and to then scapegoat CPAC for their crisis. They met both secretly and publicly with Chemtura and the Ministry of Environment and conspired to remove and destroy public consultation surrounding the Chemtura Canada cleanup. Sandy and Mark initiated, led and used a private by invitation only meeting of "pretend" stakeholders as the basis for dissolving CPAC. This they accomplished at the end of June.

This April 9 "pretend" stakeholders meeting did not include CPAC, myself or SWAT. This April 9/15 "pretend" stakeholders meeting was hosted and chaired by "TWO PRETEND WOOLWICH COUNCILLORS". This April 9/15 meeting was the basis for the dissolution of CPAC as stated in CAO David Brenneman's Resolution to Council in June. That meeting and the Resolution flowing from it have no force and no authority.

CPAC HAVE BEEN ILLEGALLY & IMPROPERLY REMOVED . Just love how Woolwich Council treat Woolwich volunteers.

Allegedly CPAC's last meeting is next Thursday, July 23 at 6 pm. in Council Chambers.

Thursday, July 16, 2015


Did former mayor Shantz illegally occupy the Mayor's Chair for over three months? It now again appears the answer is YES! My authoritative source who advised me last weekend that the words "automatic forfeiture" do not exist in the Municipal Elections Act 1996 (MEA) has reconsidered after I sent him/her page 22 of the 2014 Candidates' Guide For Municipal Elections. This is where I had spotted that term and indeed he/she has now advised that the 2010 Candidates Guide also appears to interpret certain violations such as non filing of documents as being penalized by automatic forfeiture of office. Therefore Sandy Shantz held office illegally from March 28/15 until July 8/15 when the Clerk finally did her provincially legislated duty and issued her a Notice of default, triggering her removal from office. Mark Bauman also illegally held office from March 28/15 until I pulled the plug on him by advising the Township Clerk in May that he had forfeited his office.

MECAC under the Chairmanship of Carl Zehr has behaved shamefully. This regionally appointed committee, mandated by the MEA to enforce said legislation, are a joke. While to date they have followed the rules with Councillor Scot Hahn, they have made a mockery of them regarding Sandy Shantz. Firstly they had no authority to accept her revised Financial Statement - Auditor's Report on July 2/15; more than three months overdue. They had but one proper and legal decision to make and that was to order a FULL BLOWN AUDIT of her financials. Secondly as they include a political scientist, accountants and a lawyer why were they ignorant of the fact that she had already FORFEITED her position? OR WERE THEY? News flash Carl. Either you and your committee are ignorant/incompetent or you're corrupt. Which one is it?

If I were Scot Hahn I'd be wondering why Woolwich Council have thrown me to the wolves while improperly and possibly illegally protecting Sandy. You're the only one of the three who hasn't held office illegally this spring. Same thing with Regional Council. Oops did I say that out loud? Apparently being a Regional Councillor as Sandy is, buys you some protection from due process and the Elections Act (MEA). Recall how quickly Woolwich Council threw Todd Cowan to the wolves? With their endorsement/recommendation; the Waterloo Regional Police immediately started an investigation for criminal charges. Then they sent it up to the O.P.P. who indeed laid charges. Currently Woolwich Council continue to protect Sandy at all political and legal levels. Let's see how long that lasts.

It is slowly dawning on me that Sandy's troubles may have absolutely nothing to do with ignorance. Afterall her facebook page indicates that she has 31 years of bookeeping experience. That is not insubstantial. She has more years as a bookeeper that Councillor Scot Hahn has been on this planet. That would be worthy of teasing except of course I'm even older than Sandy is. Dang! So does this mean she has experience with accountants/auditors going over the books on an annual basis or more? I would think yes. Does this mean she knows the ins and outs of the dates that auditors/accountants put on audited financial statements? Again I would think yes. Does this mean that she knows that normally the auditor would date her audit not on the date she submitted it, but on the date she accepts, possibly by her signature, the audit? Again yes. Therefore Sandy would have had every confidence that the probable March 23/15 submission date of her revised Financial Statement would never become public knowledge. Oh Sandy, sometimes the best laid plans of politicians go astray.

Wednesday, July 15, 2015


I hand delivered a Letter addressed to the Woolwich Clerk and to MECAC (Municipal Election Complianc Audit Committee) yesterday afternoon. It advised MECAC and Chair Carl Zehr that there was going to be a revised Financial Statement- Auditor's Report issued by Sandy's accountant shortly. Her accountant was not pleased with the presentation of his Audit which only covered eight of her thirty pages; being buried in the middle of that hand numbered (by Sandy) and stapled package. He also is planning on changing a date on one of the documents which will point out what myself and MECAC missed with the "trial by ambush" tactic Sandy used delivering this package approximately ten minutes prior to the start of the meeting. I am requesting that MECAC reconvene in order to receive the Auditor's revised Financial Statement-Auditor's Report and also requesting that I be given at least ten minutes on the Agenda to speak to MECAC. On July 2 the Agenda arbitrarily gave me only five minutes and I could not even respond to some of the nonsense presented afterwards. This process was done intentionally.

Other issues with Sandy's revised Financial Statements include missing Supplementary pages regarding Table 1 and Table 5. A box at the bottom of these Tables has now been checked indicating "Additional information is listed on separate supplementary attachment". That may well be but where is it? I sure didn't get it. Table 1 is a list of individual Contributers of more than $100 and Table 5 deals with Inventory of Goods and Materials from previous campaigns. Potentially these supplementary pages would list more income from unknown donators as well as more previously unlisted expenses. Is there any remote possibility that our esteemed former mayor could be hiding political donations from oh let's say Chemtura Canada? That would go way past embarassing considering her pro Chemtura and anti CPAC stance this past winter and spring.

What is clear is that Sandy still has numerous unlisted expenses on her most recent Financial Statements including those You-Tube videos produced by Web D Zines owned by Councillor Larry Shantz. Above and beyond hidden donors in her unproduced "supplementary attachment" is $1,658 of donations by unknown donors allegedly each under $100. Once again do we have Chemtura management or employees in this group as well? What else is Sandy hiding I wonder.

Tuesday, July 14, 2015


Similar to the Mark Bauman case, Woolwich Council will not appear at the former mayor's upcoming Superior Court hearing in order to provide all evidence or clarification. Rather they again have advised the Township lawyers to take a hands off position which they refer to as nuetral or no advice. Therefore yet again a Township elected official who has violated the Municipal Elections Act will likely be restored to their position without the judge hearing both sides of the case. While I am the Applicant who requested a Compliance Audit I am not being called either as a Party, a Respondent or in any other capacity. Allegedly I will this time be informed ahead of time as to when this Superior Court hearing will take place.

According to Mr. Don Kidd, the Township's lawyer, "The Township position is that will take a nuetral position and defer to the judgement of the Superior Court judge before whom mayor Shantz's lawyers will be making an application and otherwise it will continue to meet it's stautory obligations".

What an incredible cop out. There is evidence that the former mayor knew prior to the March 27/15 filing deadline that her currently filed Financial Statement was wrong in numerous aspects. This Council by not presenting all evidence and witnesses to the Superior Court are knowingly aiding and abetting this travesty of justice.

Monday, July 13, 2015


One is currently facing the courts albeit with repeated adjournments effectively delaying closure. The other has easily navigated the regionally appointed and apparently, politically subservient MECAC (Election Compliance Audit) committee. However former mayor Shantz is in a ton of hurt right now. Pat, Susan, Mark, Chemtura (Jeff, Dwight, Helder) and the Ontario Ministry of Environment please sit up and take notice. Your political leader, who along with Councillor Mark Bauman, has dissolved CPAC effective August 31, is toast. In my opinion it is proper for the Fraud Division of the Waterloo Regional Police to aggressively investigate; however I believe that the former mayor can continue to put herself in more legal jeopardy, the farther and harder she attempts to dig herself out.

Woolwich Council I will be acting upon your suggestion this morning. If it is a sincere attempt to do the right thing you will receive credit. If it is a scam and a delay you will go down with the sinking ship. That is my promise to you. Everything has been clarified this past weekend. That said the nastiest thing I could possibly due to Sandy, Council and Woolwich Township is to do absolutely nothing. In other words let her do her thing at Superior Court and NOT spend my time and effort opposing her Application for Reinstatement. This goes back to the first paragraph regarding the hole she is in, only getting deeper. I believe that I and like minded individuals have the smoking gun and have connected all the dots. Of course everything will be explained to the Fraud Division asap.

Saturday, July 11, 2015


The biggest scandals and downfalls of public figures often result from relatively minor transgressions being grossly mishandled. When those in positions of authority, courtesy of the voters, forget that they are there on the sufferance and ongoing confidence of those same citizens; then strategical blunders on a massive scale can occur. It appears that the first choice of political leaders is to deny, deflect, distract and attack. Then comes the coverup. It is much too easy for those in the public eye to misuse that ready access to the media. Everybody wants to interview them. It is so easy to get their message out that they can be careless with the truth.

Watergate was a third rate burglary of an office building. They stole some paperwork for Pete's sake. And it toppled a Presidency. In our Woolwich Watergate we have a previously unknown rookie Councillor apparently with a well off family willing to finance his campaign. He accepted a significant amount of money and when it came time to report his election expenses he seriously screwed them up to the tune of thousands of dollars. I do not know if he received advice that nobody cared, nobody will catch on or not.

Councillor Bauman has admitted that he improperly failed to file election expense reports four times! The rules/law that ALL candidates MUST file is in the Municipal Elections Act, it is in the Candidates Guide to Municipal Elections (2010 & 2014 at the least), it is on the front page of the Financial Statement Form 4 and finally in a package given to all candidates including Mark, it is spelled out. So after as the legislation demands he was declared in default and forfeited his office what does he do? He sneaks into Superior Court on the quiet so as not to warn either electors or the Complainant/Applicant namely myself. Woolwich Council pretend to be the Respondent versus his now being the Applicant to the Court, asking to restore his seat on Council. Council ordered their lawyer not to oppose the Application. In other words don't inform me, don't produce any evidence contrary to Mark's pleadings. I had evidence that should have been heard by the Judge. It was not, to the shame and disgrace of Woolwich Council, Staff and Mark Bauman. He sneaked his Council seat back instead of permitting all evidence to be given to Judge Campbell.

Former mayor Shantz's behaviour is in my opinion the worst of the lot. She held the mayor's Chair for over three months after being in Default. When she, Staff and Council were so advised in writing including quoting the exact Sections and sub sections of the Municipal Elections act 1996, they went into coverup mode. They dug in their heels and refused to do their legally mandated duty to rectify the matter. That as much as her major election expense errors is why I am in discussions with the Waterloo Regional Police. She should have resigned immediately if the Woolwich Clerk refused to pull the trigger and issue her a Default Notice. Council should have stepped up and demanded that both the Mayor and the Clerk follow both the honourable and legal path. They did not. And now they have indicated that they are on the same legal path as they did for Mark Bauman. That said there is a glimmer of hope. I have received a tantalizing hint of honesty from an appropriate source. We shall see.

Friday, July 10, 2015


The above title is taken precisely from today's Woolwich Observer front page, lead story. I apologize to Steve, Joe and Pat for so doing although with an excuse. Let's see now; the laws around plagiarism "...aren't black or white, they are grey". Or any attempt by you to enforce them would be "frivlous or vexatious". Oh even better...if you enforce plagiarism laws then you are "targeting" me. O.K. if truth be told I'm teasing our former mayor over her unwillingness to take responsibility and ownership for her quite frankly bad bookeeping, significant contraventions of the Election Act and her ongoing refusal to either include all her expenses or at least an explanation (excuse?) for those she is so refusing and I've so pointed out.

Finally I'm also teasing some of the rest of the media. CTV News appear to have gotten it straight with their broadcast last evening. The K-W Record however have not yet. Also the Township and former mayor are "spinning" the story to make it appear as if she "stepped down" or "stepped back". Woolwich Township horse manure! The former mayor was "stripped" of her position. She has lost her position. She has forfeited her position. She has been removed from her position as mayor.

Two points: The appearance given at the MECAC meeting by Sandy Shantz's documents was that the Audit prepared by Mr. Adams covered her entire 28 page Financials filed with myself and the Compliance Audit Committee (MECAC). Closer examination, which MECAC absolutely did not do prior to their Decision to drop my Application for an Audit, says otherwise. Both Mr. Adams first few paragraphs and even possibly Sandy's two page covering letter also indicate otherwise if read slowly and carefully.

As yet there has been no answer given regarding the two different dates for the Audit provided by Sandy Shantz. The date on the actual Audit is June 16, 2015 the very day that I filed my Application For... . The other date on Sandy's page 8 of her Financial Statement is March 23, 2015... FOUR DAYS PRIOR to the March 27, 2015 filing date deadline.

Besides these concerns we still don't have any explanation of documentation regarding Sandy's other expenses including campaign meetings she hosted. Larry Shantz's explanation regarding the You-Tube videos does not jive with his Invoice which clearly refers only to the campagn Website done by Larry's other company, Web D Zine. Sandy and Woolwich will move heaven and earth for her not to answer these reasonable and important questions.

Thursday, July 9, 2015


There is a wonderful letter To The Editor in today's Waterloo Region Record by one Rev. David J. Brown. He describes in detail the former Mayor's excuses and failure to take responsibility for numerous serious contraventions of the Municipal Election Act (MEA). More and more are being discovered since the former mayor so kindly submitted 28 pages to the Municipal Election Compliance Audit Committee (MECAC) last Thursday. For example it is beginning to appear as if Councillor Larry Shantz and his family overcontributed to his cousin's campaign. Larry's two page Letter "explaining" why he named Stair Travel Inc. as the donor of $750 to Sandy Shantz versus Web D Zine Inc., the actual donor of the campaign website, is patently ridiculous. The elephant in that particular room is the twelve You-Tube videos filmed at a dozen different locations on twelve different days. Still we have absolutely zero admissions/confirmations as to the market value of that commercial product and whether it was paid for "off the books", as an illegal overcontribution or some third option.

There are still no receipts much less admission or denial that expenses were involved with campaign events at Sip n Bite Restaurant in Elmira and at Bonnie Lou's in Floradale. Yet another event was held and the information sent to MECAC who have given every appearance of being a regional committee of political appointees; taking orders from particular Regional politicians. Guess who's at the head of my list?

Now we talk about the Coverup. Sandy Shantz's occupancy of the Mayor's Chair for the last three months is front and centre. First enabler of that scandal was Woolwich Township Clerk, Val Hummel. Possibly Woolwich CAO Brenneman aided and abetted. While I have documentation ensnaring the Clerk, I do not for Mr.Brenneman on this issue at least. Woolwich Council do not have clean hands. They've been involved and have made no public attempts to discipline the Mayor after they became aware that she was in Default. MECAC's dog and pony show last Thursday was both disgraceful and amateur hour. It is very difficult to believe that they had not received their marching orders prior to the 11 am. meeting. Then after their Chair Carl Zehr received my Letter of July 6/15 expressly and specifically quoting the Sections of the MEA that appeared to order the forfeiture of the Mayor's seat; they ran for cover. They hid behind the illegal and improper decision they made last Thursday.

Yes there is also the obfuscation and ongoing "spin" being disseminated by the Mayor and Clerk in the media. Many of their statements are not accurate. Their obvious hope at any Court proceedings are to again totally isolate and remove myself from the process. Any honest, straightforward process will doom the former mayor both for her election expense irregularities and for the past and present coverup of them and of her occupancy of the Mayor's Chair for three months after being in Default.


Wednesday, July 8, 2015


Following is a copy of a Letter I hand delivered this morning to the Woolwich Township Clerk first and then afterwards sent to the Waterloo Regional Police. Late yesterday afternoon I received a response from the Clerk confirming receipt of my Monday July 6/15 letter and further advising me that MECAC have washed their hands of this file /complaint regarding the Mayor's election expenses. Yesterday's e-mail is what prompted today's Letter. The Clerk did not respond to my statements in the July 6/15 Letter that the Mayor had forfeited her seat due to contraventions of the Elections Act.


Ms. Sandy Shantz has publicly admitted numerous contraventions of the Municipal Elections Act 1996 (MEA) including the failure to file an Auditor's Report with her Financial Statement by the March 27, 2015 deadline.

Penalties include automatic forfeiture of her seat (mayor) as per the specific Sections quoted in my Monday, July 6, 2015 letter to you and Mr. Carl Zehr, MECAC Chair.

Neither the Township Clerk (yourself) nor the Municipal Election Compliance Audit Committee (MECAC) have the authority to accept a late return and effectively extend the March 27, 2015 time limit.

You as Township Clerk have failed in your duties to satisfy provisions of the MEA dealing with Notices of Breech, forfeiture etc..

This is to advise you that I am currently attempting enforcement of Ontario law (MEA) via the Waterloo Regional Police Services.

Sincerely Alan Marshall

Tuesday, July 7, 2015


It's becoming more and more difficult to have much sympathy for the characters who are running this Township. That said their sins and misdeeds will negatively affect all of us. Even very minor sins, inappropriately handled, can have major consequences. This Township are currently in the middle of such a self made mess. It seems to be all about face saving, one upsmanship, arrogance and pride.

The three big C's are Coverup, Collusion and Corruption. Depending on one's definitions I believe that the first two C's are a done deal a long time ago. The third C is the biggie and the toughie. For the moment I'll let my opinion on that one sit.

It is my and others understanding that Mayor Shantz has forfeited her position as Mayor whether automatically on March 27/15 for failing to file an Auditor's Report or as recently as June 16/15 when I filed my "Application for a Compliance Audit" AND she received her own private Auditor's report on the same day (MAC LLP). It is even possible that the date for her forfeiture was last Thursday July 2/15 when she finally admitted the obvious namely that she had not filed by March 27/15 an Auditor's Report as legislated by the Ontario government via the Municipal Elections Act 1996.

Monday, July 6, 2015


The following letter was delivered in person at 9:02 am. this morning. I have since received e-mail confirmation that the Clerk's office have sent it to Mr. Carl Zehr.

Mon. July 6, 2015
Attention: Chair Carl Zehr

On Thursday July 2, 2015 your panel met to consider my complaint that Mayor Sandy Shantz was out of compliance with the Municipal Elections Act. You will recall that Sandy Shantz presented a new set of financial statements as well as an Auditor’s Report as the meeting began. You can appreciate that as the complainant, I did not have time to examine them, and hence, my presentation was compromised. After examing them, later in the day, I was puzzled by the date provided on page 8 of the return where the name of the auditor is indicated - March 23, 2015 as well as the date of the auditor’s letter, June 16, 2015, the date of my complaint to you. I was also perplexed as to why this information was not provided to me in a timely manner prior to the start of the proceeding. Was this audit started in March and not submitted?
Your panel ruled unanimously that not much more would be found by sending the case to an auditor since the Mayor had just submitted “new” forms that addressed my concerns. In fact her return is still incomplete as audit costs incurred, March 23/15, and the expense of hosted parties are still unclaimed . Furthermore her submitted financial spreadsheet does not correspond with her list of donations nor has it been revised to reflect her new Contributions or Campaign Income. In short her new and revised Financial Statement is still in serious error.
It is obvious that the case need not be sent to an audit since THE MAYOR, IN SUBMITTING HER NEW FINANCIALS, HAS ADMITTED THAT SHE WAS IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE ACT. No audit was needed to confirm this contravention, which was what my complaint was about. In essence, the Mayor’s own private audit indicates some of the flaws that a more formal audit would have returned with. I also note that it is NOT your privilege to accept a late financial report and allow it to be posted as if it was “legal”.
Without the need for an audit, your panel now needs to deal with the issue of what to do with the contraventions that have now been verified . According to Sections 78 (1), 80 (1) and 80 (2) of the Municipal Elections Act Sandy Shantz forfeited her office by law on March 27/15 and in fact when she admitted that her expense report was incorrect and required an Auditor’s Report. Those dates would have been June 16/15 as well as July 2/15 at the MECAC hearing.
Section 78 (1) of the MEA states that a candidate shall file with the Clerk both a Financial Statement and an Auditor’s Report by 2 pm. of the filing date. Section 80 (1) states that the candidate is also subject to the penalties listed in subsection (2) if he or she fails to file a document as required under Section 78 or 79.1 by the relevant date. Section 80 (2) states that in the case of a default the candidate forfeits any office to which he or she was elected and the office is deemed to be vacant.
I note that in the case of Mark Bauman, the Woolwich lawyer was instructed to remain neutral. He was so nuetral, that no evidence or witnesses, including the complainant was called. The complainant heard of the hearing from a reporter, and, arriving at 10:06 for a 10:00 start, he discovered that the case was over. It is obvious that further action needs to be conducted by an independent counsel chosen by MECAC.
I would appreciate your immediate response indicating when you will re-convene to rule on the next step.
Respectfully Alan Marshall

Saturday, July 4, 2015


What exactly is going on here? If ever there was proof that submiting late , multi-page documentation is "Trial by Ambush" this is it. I've been rereading the Mayor's 28 pages of allegedly Audited Financial Statements and this I can tell you. Her Auditor did not audit her entire election expense documentation. He audited at best eight pages of her Financial Statement-Auditor's Report Form 4. That's it, a whole eight pages of her 28 page submission all neatly stapled together in one bundle and giving the impression of a comprehensive Audit. It was not! While the Auditor involved is undoubtedly a professional and has done a good job with the limited data he received; he himself very carefully included a "Basis for Qualified Opinion" clause in his report. It reads as follows:

"Due to the inherent nature of the transactions of a campaign, the completeness of contributions and other revenue and expenses is not susceptible to satisfactory audit verification. Accordingly, our verification of these amounts was limited to the amounts recorded in the candidate's accounting records and we were not able to determine whether any adjustments might be necessary to contributions and other revenue, expens, assets, liabilities and net assets.".

A very careful reading (as in two or three times) indicates that the mayor has told the truth in her page and a quarter submission to MECAC last Thursday. Despite the obvious inference that the Auditor audited all of her Thursday's late submissions, her carefully worded submission indicates otherwise. Similarily a very careful reading of the Auditor's page and a half report also indicates that all he audited were the eight pages of her Financial Statement-Auditor's Report Form 4. It is possible that if the Mayor had included this Auditor's Report when it was legally required by March 27, 2015 or even when she filed on February 2/15 that she would be in the clear.

Something is very peculiar here and to date is failing the smell test. The accountant involved, as mentioned yesterday here in the Advocate, is listed on page 8 of her Financial Statement along with the date of March 23, 2015. However his actual page and a half report is dated June 16, 2015. Did he start his audit four days before the filing deadline of March 27/15? If so why did mayor Shantz not exercise her right to an extended deadline while she waited for his audit? Did she allow the March 27/15 deadline to pass while knowing full well that her Financial statement did not have it's mandated Audit included and hence her report was false? These are extremely serious questions and require answers promptly.

The Thursday MECAC meeting was reported as the lead, front page story in both the Friday July 3 Waterloo Region Record and the Woolwich Observer.

Friday, July 3, 2015


Yesterday both the competence and the credibility of the Municipal Elections Compliance Audit Committee (MECAC) were on full display. As was the same for Mayor Shantz. She was rude, nasty and disrespectful which based upon her public preaching also makes her a hypocrite. Thank you Sandy for showing us that we're supposed to do what you say, not what you do. Similarily Councillor Mark Bauman who allegedly spoke in support of our Mayor actually was all about Mark. He whined and carried on about how badly he'd been treated by yours truly. Boo hoo. And again he also showed himself to be the hypocrite as I in the entire process both verbal and written to MECAC have virtually said and written nothing critical or derogatory about Mayor Shantz. Amazing isn't it Mark and Sandy how easy it is to wind someone up? The difference is I wound you pair up by speaking the polite truth about you both whereas in the past you've wound me up with your deception and obfuscation regarding CPAC and Chemtura. Set and match to moi.

MECAC were unbelievable. Mayor Shantz via the Deputy Clerk handed out a 27 page document ten to fifteen minutes before the start of the 11 am. meeting. The Chair, Carl Zehr, arrived at 4 minutes after 11 due to traffic. Several of the MECAC speakers had the honesty (naivety?) to mention the obvious, namely they did not have time to read the Mayor's submission. Nevertheless after the Mayor verbally explained to them that everything in my Application for a Compliance Audit was correct hence she was revising her Financial Statement AND including an Auditor's Report; they bought it hook, line and sinker. Rest assurred the words "Alan was right" did not pass the Mayor's lips. She stickhandled like a pro and attempted to give the impression that all on her own she decided to comply with the Municipal Elections Act (MEA). Did I mention the word "hypocrite"?

MECAC unanimously voted to dismiss my Application on the grounds that the Mayor SAID she had now complied three months late to the MEA. They also by their vote have put themselves, their independence and their credibilty on the line. Nobody, myself included, remotely had enough time to properly absorb the information, including Auditor's Report, in her late submission.

Is her amended Financial Statement- Auditor's Report Form 4 acceptable? The answer is still no. What she submitted yesterday is unsigned and undated by either her or the Township CLerk. The submitted Auditor's Report is dated June 16/15, the very day that I filed my Application for an Auditor's Report. What the hell? BUT... page 8 of her new Financial Statement lists the name of the Auditor, his employer, address, phone number and date that page was written and the date is March 23/15 FOUR DAYS PRIOR to the filing deadline of March 27/15. Curiouser and curiouser. There are different possibilities here. One is simply further mayoralty incompetence and error. The skeptic however might think that while the Mayor allegedly filed her first Financial Statement on February 2/15, in fact she knew that she required an Audit prior to the March 27/15 deadline and initiated the process only to learn he couldn't do it that quickly. She then decided to bluff her way through and pretend all was well. This included lying to the Elmira Independent on June 16 (published June 19) claiming she thought her initial return was without error and one Alan Marshall didn't know what he was talking about. This would also explain how the very same day I filed my Application for a Compliance Audit, she suddenly has one.

These are not the only problems with the Mayor's revised Financial Statement - Auditor's Report. Allegedly she has filed ALL her expense receipts. Oddly several meetings including campaign kick off meetings and Meet & Greet's at two local restauarants appear to be missing. Also there is no response/explanation to my formal request in my Application regarding these missing expenses. Oh and she also didn't claim her Auditing expense as she should have.

All of these failures, inconsistencys and discrepancies were missed yesterday intentionally by MECAC. How do professionals gloss over that kind of incompetence? One by being unanimous in their incompetence. Something like Woolwich Council on occasion. Citizens find it hard to truly believe that they are being scammed by all of them on some issues (CPAC for instance).

I've listed the bad news. The good news is that mayor Shantz has been held to account. She grossly violated the MEA and has been forced to refile (sort of) her Fnancial Statement. She has been forced to include an Auditor's Report as the law demands. She has admitted (backhandedly) that her expense reports were inadequate and inaccurate and that everything I claimed about her contraventions was true and accurate. That is killing her right now when it should not. I repeat that at no time to date have I suggested or inferred that she is corrupt, at least regarding this issue, nor have I stated to the MECAC that she intentionally violated the Municipal Elections Act (MEA). Frankly right this very second I'm not so sure. Those differing Auditor's dates require serious explanation.

Thursday, July 2, 2015


Today's Elmira Independependent carrys this story titled "Sediment testing underway by CPAC". Unlike the Ontario M.O.E. who like to sit on their lab results for months and even years when they are embarassing, these results should be available much sooner. As indicated by CPAC member Sebastian, these samples are taken in an area that has never been tested . That is to the everlasting shame of our M.O.E. who are supposed to be responible for the environment as well as responsible to both human and wildlife receptors. There is a swimming pond nearby and the M.O.E.'s failure to test the drain/creek which flows by it is horrific. Children have used this pond for decades while both Chemntura and the M.O.E. have pretended that the Chemtura site is contained. The downstream results of DDT and Dioxins over the last three summers say otherwise.

The M.O.E. will stickhandle and mention some berm testing around the pond which indeed had positive results for DDT & Dioxins. They failed to test sediments in the bottom of the pond and they categorically obfuscated and misled CPAC two summers ago when they claimed there was no pathway from Chemtura over to the pond. My discovery of the Drain last May, as indicated in today's Independent article, devastated the M.O.E.'s remaining shreds of credibility.

Wednesday, July 1, 2015


I've said it before and I'll say it again. This new Woolwich Council are beyond shameless. They know that one media outlet and many citizens have taken their measure and found them to be without honour or morals. Their hypocrisy and willingness to publicly state that black is white also know no bounds.

Currently a Woolwich Staff person is tasked with the job of phoning CPAC members and myself asking if we wish to let our Applications to CPAC stand for the new charade of "public consultation" referred to as RAC and TAG. Eight people filled in Applications as per the process initiated last November by Woolwich Township. The eight included the five honest CPAC members (i. less Councillor Mark Bauman) plus myself. The other two are probably Pat and Susan although the truth challenged folks on Council pretend to claim they don't know. Puleasee!

Therefore there are only eight people in all of Woolwich who applied so by any normal process all eight would be used to fill any openings on the new RAC and Tag committees. Problem is that RAC is already filled with bureaucrats and politicians namely the Mayor, a Councillor, Region of Waterloo, GRCA, the (bought &) paid (for) TAG Chair plus two more loyal to Council TAG members. Regardless TAG members should by any honest and civilized process come from the eight Applications properly received by Woolwich last November.

Of course there is the huge problem that RAC and TAG are so obviously intended to be corrupt. Just look at the proposed membership of RAC plus look at the process Council used to dissolve CPAC and annoint those two abominations. Council members smeared honest, hard working, competent Woolwich volunteers sitting on CPAC. Council abused those volunteers over a period of months and then those very same Council hypocrites have the brass balls to get a staff person to phone them up and ask if they will let their names stand. Woolwich Council shame on you. YOU are the reasons politicians have such a bad reputation and are held in such contempt.