Friday, July 10, 2015
"SHANTZ STRIPPED OF MAYORALTY"
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.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Wow you really have nothing better to do than waste the townships money. Reality check, Sandy absolutely destroyed everyone else in the mayor running. Quit wasting the townships time and money on the worthless crap. How about instead we contribute the money to a splash-pad or road upkeep. Between you and Holt you guys are just sour old men with nothing better to do. Why don't you take a poll of the people in the township that want money spent on an audit vs. money actually spent on the community. Maybe you should even look at getting some of the money spent on retirement homes. It's just a matter of time.
ReplyDeleteThe poll would also show the people of this Township want their government officials to do the jobs they are paid for. Some of whom are on the sunshine list I might add. If this people did their jobs would any of this matter? Its time people are held accountable and its unfortunate Mr Marshall seems to be the only one doing it.
DeleteAl, you seem like an interesting dude -- a commendable shit disturber, so to speak. I like how you don't let people get away with anything, and tell it like it is. Don't let the haters get to you; the devil is in the details, and someone needs to hold "the powers that be" to account.
ReplyDeleteThank you commenter #2. Commenter #1 you have an interesting point of view along with a sense of humour. Thank you for your comment. You do ask about a poll of community members. I'm willing to bet that a poll asking residents/voters if they want more transparency and accountability of Councillors in all matters would come back with a majority of Yes responses.
ReplyDeleteAlan, I would bet the farm that commenter #1 has a dog in this fight..
ReplyDeleteKeep up the GREAT WORK.. we need more like you..
How can anyone in their right mind criticize you for fighting for the people of Woolwich?
I guess I answered that already..
I appreciate accountability but not at the cost of $25,000 or even up to $50,000 that has been spent over the cowen case. There's nothing more frustrating then hearing kids playing Timbits soccer can't have balls this year because there's not enough money in the budget but yet we can fork out $50,000 to audit someone. Shantz is not a fraud, the audit provided was from a very reputable firm and it showed her spend just over the minimums allowed. I don't think an extra $1,000 can buy your the 3,000+ votes she won buy. Plus, the Shantz family has piles of money so she's not being the mayor the rip us off. She's there for the people. And the people showed they want her. Instead of bashing her and trying to remove her and brag about it, why not put your intelligence to use and help her. Isn't the township of Woolwich one of the best at coming together for each other? Why not stick together and work towards making the best impact on the community overall.
ReplyDeleteSoccer balls? Our tax's don't pay for woolwich soccer to buy soccer balls. How much money would be saved if those being paid from our tax dollars did their jobs. Would there be a need for an audit to begin with? As for Cowan, you should be appalled again tax payer paid jobs made a decision to spend that amount of money to lawyers instead of doing THEIR job. Keep up the good work Mr Marshall.
DeleteClearly you have 1) not read the 2 page Audit 2) have not read the accompanying twenty pages that were not audited 3) are a hopeless optimist which while not inherently wrong can and has led you down the garden path
ReplyDelete