FIBS, OBFUSCATIONS & UNTRUE SWORN STATEMENTS SUBMITTED TO SUPERIOR COURT BY MAYOR SHANTZ

We should all be aware by now of Mayor Shantz's amazing admission in Council Chambers last Tuesday evening. As written here on Wednesday August 25/15 as well as in this past Saturday's Woolwich Observer; Sandy admitted to having submitted an untrue sworn Statement to her July 23/15 Superior Court hearing. Rogers Cable TV (channel 20) also broadcast it and CTV News Kitchener filmed it although I am unaware as to whether they broadcast it. This related to her submitting her 30 page amended Financials to MECAC (Compliance Audit Committee) ten minutes prior to the meeting versus her untrue claim to the court that she submitted it three days prior; thus giving the court the misunderstanding that MECAC had adequate time to read and study the new election expense Financials.

Next we have page 2 and 3, paragraph 8 & 9 of her Affidavit. Sandy advises that she believed that she was not required to have her Financial Statement audited as both her Contributions and Expenses were below $10,000. Highly suspect and unlikely based upon the date of March 23/15 (4 days prior to the deadline) on her second set of Financials submitted to both MECAC and Superior Court.

Page 3, paragraph 12 Sandy claims she retained the services of Tim Adams, accountant, AFTER being advised of my June 16/15 Application for a Compliance Audit. Specifically she states "Upon being notified of that Application and reviewing its contents, I was surprised and upset ...". "I immediately, and on my own accord, retained the services of Tim Adams, an accountant with MAC LLP...". Really Sandy? You received, read, digested my Application and doublechecked your own 10 page Financial Statements, called up Tim Adams, asked him for an Audit which he then did that day in its entirety. You were then called to accept his completed audit, read it carefully, and signed for it all in the same day (June 16). I don't believe that is likely.

Page 4, paragraph 15 (e). Well this statement to Superior Court may be true but essentially you misled MECAC and then reported that deception to the Court as truth. You stated that Web D Zines "...had closed by the time the work on my website was completed.". Your website was completed in September 2014 but Web D Zines did not formally close until March 31, 2015 six to seven months later.

Page 6, paragraph 21. Sandy appears to be suggesting that she was tipped off by MECAC at the July 2/15 hearing that she was in danger of forfeiting her position as mayor. She states that MECAC Chair Carl Zehr made such a suggestion. In fact his suggestion is on page 61 of her submissions in the MECAC Minutes. I do not interpret his suggestion to be what Sandy says. What I'm wondering is if she was indeed tipped off by Chairman Zehr but not publicly and not by his comment as stated on page 61. The reality is that I in writing advised the Clerk Val Hummel that Sandy had forfeited and then had to push the Clerk to get the Default Notice issued.

Page 7, paragraph 25 Sandy again claims that she had her audit carried out AFTER she received my Notice of Application on June 16/15. The evidence on her own amended Financial Statement submitted to both MECAC, her accountant Tim Adams and Superior Court is that she initiated her audit on March 23/15. To date there is no plausible explanation or evidence contrary to this.

At the bottom of the first page and top of the second page of her "Moving Party's Factum" , paragraph 3. is the obviously false statement that while Sandy's first Financial Statement (Feb. 2/15) had incorrect income and expense calculations nevertheless "...all of the information was included on the Form filed.". This Factum submitted to Superior Court in July this year is after Sandy had already received multiple details regarding specific expenses she had not claimed but now finally admits to in her August 6 Financial Statements.

Page two of her Factum, paragraph 6. states that my Application for a Compliance Audit only referenced three issues with Sandy's February 2/15 Financial Statement . This is false as it also referenced failures to record numerous expenses.

The third page of her Factum, paragraph 7. staes that she advised MECAC on July 2/15 that she had repaid the $250 corporate overcontribution. In fact she had only advised MECAC that she was willing to do so.

Page four, paragraph 10. of her Factum Sandy states to the Court that she "...acted in good faith, and with the honest belief that her filing of the Form had been done properly.". Again I fail to see how this could be possible based upon every error and omission she made in her February 2/15 filing was to her advantage by minimizing both her Contributions (income) as well as her expenses thus keeping her below the $10,000 threshold requiring an Audit. Remember that as of this point in time Sandy had not had an audit in her previous three elections and thus probably was unaware that these self induced audits were mickymouse and not remotely close to the scrutiny of a forensic audit.

Paragraph 18. and others repeats the mantra of "good faith", "inadvertence", "error in judgement", "mistaken belief".
The facts in this case do not support those claims to the court.

There are three essential elements required in order to be able to prove perjury. They are 1) proof a statement was false
2) proof the accused knew it was false 3) intent to mislead the court .

We now have admissions by Mayor Shantz both in last week's public Council meeting as well as in her most recent August 6/15 Financial Statements to numerous falsehoods within her sworn statements to Superior Court. This speaks to both elements 1) and 2). Element 3) also requires that there be some advantage or benefit to the individual in commiting the perjury. I submit that Mayor Shantz certainly had a benefit to gild the lily with the court. She specifically was applying to be reinstated as Woolwich Mayor and all of her falsehoods sucessfully assisted that purpose.

I would like to publicly thank both Detective Costa of the Waterloo Regional Police as well as his superviser Staff Sergeant Robert Cowan for their assistance in explaining the elements of Perjury. To date Detective Costa appears to be reluctant to admit to what I believe is obvious. That said I still have a call in to his superviser and trust that further consideration is possible.

WOOLWICH OBSERVER SPEAKS TRUTH TO POWER - SLAMS MAYOR SHANTZ

Today's Woolwich Observer is in my humble opinion one of the more devastating edition's speaking to the credibility of Woolwich Council in general and to Mayor Shantz in particular. A total of four articles, two regarding Elmira's toxic legacy and two regarding the election expenses scandal, have correctly and appropriately exposed much of the wrongdoing of this Council and members during their short tenure. These articles include "As CPAC winds down, longstanding concerns remain" and "New evidence demands further cleanup orders be directed at Chemtura, says watchdog group". The two regarding the expense scandal are "Woolwich resident urges reform in wake of council election expense woes" and "Hahn cleared by audit committee". As an aside for now the K-W Record also published yesterday the following article titled "Woolwich councillor won't face legal action".

The Observer's first listed story above mentions that even Chemtura have finally admitted the obvious in that their pumping and treating of groundwater alone will not achieve full aquifer cleanup by 2028. The following quote is crucial to understanding the mindset or lack there-of, of mayor Shantz namely "That's long been the position of the Chemtura Public Advisory Committee, the environmental watchdog group whose term expires at the end of the month, to be replaced by a more company-friendly arrangement cooked up by Mayor Sandy Shantz."

The second devastating quote speaking to the credibility, integrity and even intelligence of Mayor Shantz is in the second article above and states "...council opted to refer the matter to the new environmental committee the township formed when it opted to disband CPAC to entice the MOE and Chemtura back to the meeting table.". And that folks is the truth. CPAC were not dissolved/disbanded due to any problems or failures on their part but just the opposite. CPAC were honest, intelligent, experienced and INDEPENDENT. They could not be stifled or intimidated by the professional liars and bureaucrats of Chemtura or the Ministry of Environment. CPAC were disbanded by the liars on Council, particularily Sandy Shantz and Mark Bauman, because Chemtura Canada and the Ontario M.O.E. begged them to.

Two quotes stand out for me from the story "Hahn cleared by audit committee". The first by Dr. Dan Holt is ""It shows the system doesn't work," he said of MECAC's decision. "The whole system is designed to protect the elected officials."". The second is the statement by MECAC member Kevin Bambrick who stated "I conclude that it appears that Scott Hahn has contravened provisions of the act relating to campaign finances, and that this matter be referred to a prosecuting attorney for further consideration." That simply and elegantly states what the criteria are supposed to be for the Municipal Elections Compliance Audit Committee's (MECAC) decision. All the excuses, comparisons to others, references to intent, alleged integrity and everything else were simple whitewash. Scott Hahn's Financial Statement was in gross contravention and his attempts to "fix" it including highly suspicious production of after the fact receipts and invoices only dug him deeper into the hole. Let us also not forget the conflict of interest of to date one member of this committee pointed out in yesterday's posting here. Let us also not forget that there were two former regional councillors on MECAC (Zehr & Sudden) and that mayor Shantz currently is a regional councillor. Are there other glaring conflicts of interest as well?

The last article titled "Woolwich resident urges reform in wake of council election expense woes" is a barnburner. Richard Clausi gently, exquisitely and professionally dissected each and every lie, excuse, complaint and overall whining from Councillors Mark Bauman, Scott Hahn and Mayor Shantz. Richard at last Tuesday's Council meeting publicly spanked the entire council for their stupidity, laziness and amateurism surrounding their ridiculous failures and responses to their own members' (3) failures regarding the Municipal Elections Act 1996. Do not forget that both Mark Bauman and Sandy Shantz have multiple elections and terms of council behind them. Scott Hahn has not but clearly he has proven he will be a typical Woolwich Councillor to all our detriment for far too long.

The final dialogue Steve Kannon of the Observer captured was Sandy's "honest I lied" comment to Richard and the public, also captured by CTV and Rogers Cable TV. The "honest I lied" is a famous remark made in the Ontario legislature by M.P.P. Shelly Martel many years ago. Richard's response to Sandy was "Are you telling me you perjured yourself?".

Are the scandals enveloping Woolwich Council over or are they just beginning? I wonder right now how council feel about citizens criticizing and condemning them truthfully after they spent months falsely and dishonestly criticizing and condemning CPAC. Have the idiots and liars on Council learned anything at all or will they continue in their self serving, anti public interest ways?

UNLESS THE GAME IS RIGGED, WOOLWICH WON'T PLAY or... MECAC ARE BIASED, CORRUPT & INCOMPETENT

Exactly as predicted yesterday here in the Advocate, MECAC yesterday manufactured excuses not to send Scott Hahn's probably fraudulent invoice (KKP) and receipts (Mom, Dad, sister) on to the prosecuter and courts. Their excuses were prefaced with comments such as "somewhat disturbing", "no weight to the excuses of family and receipts", "concerned", "bothered by lack of verifiable documentation", "paper trail may have been done after the fact", etc.. Then they countered with "prospects for conviction are low", or the exact opposite as in " courts would find Scott guilty if it went there", "no deceit intended", my favourite being "quite different than not filing at all", bizarely "companies are past the time for prosecution", "opportunity to learn", "no reason to push this further", "did not influence outcome of the election", "Scott's intent was O.K.", and another favourite "technical contraventions".

All in all a great day for privelege, money, political payoffs and bullshit. Dr. Dan played it straight and clearly enunciated the reasons and multiple contraventions of the MEA (election act) as to why Councillor Hahn needed to be sent to the prosecuter. Richard Clausi spoke regarding MECAC's failures on several fronts including due process, incompetence and bias. He also pointed out that MECAC's integrity had been called into question by Mayor Shantz's statement to Superior court that she had given them her 30 page package of new Financials on June 29/15 not on July 2/15 as they had claimed. I pointed out that the Compliance Audit could not verify Scott's receipts and invoice submitted to MECAC which in any other world but Woolwich would have raised the "fraud" word. I also politely criticized MECAC for their bias, corruption and incompetence in accepting Sandy's 30 page package on July 2/15, unread and not remotely understood.

I mentioned in the title that the game was rigged. Including the above "ambush" of myself and possibly MECAC by Sandy what other dirty tricks, deceit and gamesmanship were involved with the entire MECAC process? I received the Draft Minutes of the July 2/15 MECAC meeting from Clerk Val Hummel this week. Sandy received them BEFORE the July 23/15 Superior Court date and indeed entered them into her Affidavit to the Court. Sandy's likely perjured statement (pg.4, paragraph 13) of her Affidavit was never supposed to have been seen by me. This is why her lawyer James Bennet (Madorin Snyder) went apeshit when he found that they had been passed onto me by lawyer Ed W. Hence Sandy's blurting out Tuesday in Council Chambers that her sworn Affidavit to Superior Court was untrue. MECAC knew of her undermining their credibility to help herself get reinstated on July 23 and undoubtedly were all over her for that.

Getting back to the Minutes of Sandy's July 2/15 MECAC meeting. The Clerk (Val) had no Discussion of those Minutes listed on yesterday's Agenda, only Adoption of them. I had to stand up on a Point of Order and even then the Chair Carl Zehr refused Discussion stating that even though I was a party on July 2, I could only quickly handwrite my additions/changes to them now for inclusion later on in the meeting. This I did and I pointed out the extraordinarily biased release of them to me the Complainant versus to Mayor Sandy Shantz. I also pointed out that several MECAC members publicly stated they did not receive them in a reasonable time and hence had not been able to either fully read or study them.

It gets much worse. I mentioned yeserday that loose lips on the MECAC (mun. elect. compliance audit committee) indicated corruption in the process. One MECAC member passed on by telephone that he had been lobbied by either Mayor Shantz or other Woolwich Councillors, in private, prior to the July 2/15 MECAC meeting involving Mayor Shantz. This lobbying was for the direct purpose of improperly and falsely maligning me while boosting the Mayor's alleged integrity and credibility. As bad as it would still be, these lies were not in an in camera meeting.

And now the other barnburner. The Woolwich Observer on January 10, 2009 carried a front page story regarding Dr. Henry Regier being bestowed with the Order of Canada. To the immediate right was a story titled "Builder of St. Jacobs, Milo Shantz dies at 76". On the second page, third column over we learn that one of the MECAC members has been "...a longtime colleague who served as in-house legal counsel for Mercedes (Corp.)". It also states that as of that date this current MECAC member has retained professional ties with Milo Shantz. This MECAC member goes on at great length praising Milo Shantz and clearly is a huge fan and supporter. Meanwhile folks our Mayor Sandy Shantz automatically declares a conflict of interest and steps out every time Mercedes Corp. business comes to Woolwich Council. Guess why.

I have sent this Observer article onto the media, Dr. Dan, Richard, one Councillor and a few other appropriate individuals. Included with the article are the Conflict of Interest Rules for MECAC. These are posted in the Township's website under municipal election and MECAC Terms of Reference. This particular MECAC member took the lead at Sandy's MECAC hearing in order to defend her and deny a Forensic Audit (Compliance Audit). He absolutely has no business NOT declaring a conflict of interest and absolutely no business dealing with any Woolwich Councillor or Mayor regarding election expense contraventions.

Once again folks you can see the corruption inherent in Woolwich dealings. They are hypocrites of the highest order who expect everyone to play by their written rules, except themselves of course. Lying, deception, gamesmanship, bending of rules and conflicts of interest are all in a days work for them.

"...ENCOUNTERS OF THE WORST KIND WITH THE MEA (Municipal Elections Act)."

The above title is but one of Richard Clausi's pointed comments regarding Woolwich Council last Tuesday evening. This morning at 10 am. we, Dr. Dan Holt and a number of other concerned citizens will be present in Council Chambers again to point the way forward to both our elected and appointed authorities. Sometimes their basic intellectual deficits are the problem but usually the problem is more serious. Any honest, uninformed citizen can learn and get involved if they are able to put what spare time they may have, after job and family commitments, into careful observation and listening. Sometimes serious effort is required when reading some of the thicker, denser and more technical documents provided by our authorities but in the case of legal documents and legislation that is usually done on purpose to intentionally discourage citizen participation. Believe me our elected politicians have absolutely no inherent skills in that area either.

This morning our corrupted MECAC committee as demonstrated on July 2/15 and as since confirmed by loose lips on the same committee will be deciding whether to send Councillor Scott Hahn on to the courts for election act charges. This decision is supposed to be based upon the results of the forensic audit produced by Froese & Partners. If recent history is any judge, including one more highly suspicious in camera meeting at 9 am. this morning, then MECAC will manufacture excuses to let him off. The forensic audit was devastating and while it did not use the word "fraud" it certainly made it very clear that there are multiple violations of the elections act (MEA)including the fact that a number of produced receipts and invoices simply can not be verified or confirmed via the audit. In other words the backup ledgers, electronic data and accounting books improperly do not contain the entries that should be there if these receipts and invoices were legitimate.

MECAC have the opportunity to rise above their disasterous, illegal and grotesquely improper behaviour of July 2/15 when they and Mayor Shantz ambushed myself the complainant with thirty pages of financial information, ten minutes before the start of the meeting. Originally we thought she had also ambushed MECAC similarily but then Mayor Sandy signed a sworn Affidavit to Superior Court on July 23/15 saying otherwise. Last Tuesday in Council Chambers she publicly stated that her sworn Affidavit was untrue! Which time was she telling the truth?

SANDY CONFESSES TO SUPERIOR COURT DECEPTION

Nearly a month ago I asked who the liar was, Sandy or MECAC. This was partly in relation to MECAC's horrible acting job on July 2 when they all made a big production of accepting Sandy's new 30 page package of Financial Statements-Auditors Report all while solicitously admitting they hadn't had time to carefully examine it. The acting was bad, the logic and rationale fourth grade and the due process what I'd expect from five year olds playing Perry Mason. Last evening in Woolwich Council, under serious attack by Richard Clausi, Sandy cracked open like a cheap plastic piggy bank stuffed with loonies. My money is on both of them: MECAC & Sandy.

Richard spoke as a Delegate to Woolwich Council about the Election Act and how it was the responsibility of candidates to learn about it and to understand it. He advised that any Woolwich citizen selling themselves as capable of running the Township's business, handling budgets and making difficult decisions had at the very least to be able to follow basic directions as given to all candidates by the Elections Act, the 2014 Candidates Guide, the Municipal Clerk and other assistance offerred. Richard further advised that every single stupid mistake and error offerred up by three Woolwich Councillors was covered clearly in this literature if candidates had taken even a perfunctory look. From Sandy's "associated corporations" overcontribution and alleged "missed" audit to Mark Bauman allegedly not knowing that Acclaimed candidates were still required to file Financial Statements; these questions were all clearly answered in the easy to read 2014 Candidates Guide and FAQs (frequently asked questions).

Richard spoke to all the excuses Woolwich electors have heard this spring and summer from Mark, Sandy and Scott Hahn. Sandy had moaned to MECAC that Mr. Marshall's (moi) world was black and white but that the Elections Act was difficult and full of grey areas. Not so said Richard. He spoke to the failures by MECAC, the Municipal Clerk and by Council. He referred to Council circling the wagons and protecting the old boys club which includes Sandy. No sexism in Woolwich politics. He hammered Council for instructing their lawyers not to present evidence, factum or testimony from the complainant (moi) at Superior Court in the case of both Mark and Sandy. As Richard stated "For sports fans this is called throwing the game.".

Richard emphasized that the area lacking in the Municipal Elections Act (MEA) is in enforcement. He emphasized that Clerk, Council, MECAC and Township Staff are much too close to each other and clearly are looking out for each others interests versus those of the public. Richard in one ten minute Delegation last evening turned Woolwich Council's bullshit upside down and publicly exposed them as being self-serving individuals cheerfully deceiving the public while shooting the messengers demanding compliance with the Elections Act.

And all of this was in front of Steve Kannon of the Woolwich Observer AND Rogers Cable TV (channel 20) AND CTV News. Rogers Cable has already shown the meeting in it's entirety twice (7 pm. live and at midnite) and CTV so far has only shown Graham Chevreau's (CPAC) wonderful Delegation. Hopefully CTV will show Sandy's incredible performance surrounding her confession that her sworn statement to Superior Court, that got her reinstated, was false.

Sandy is clearly all alone in fantasyland right now. She clarified Richard's allegation that her sworn statement in her Affidavit contained a falshood namely that she had given her 30 page package of Financials to MECAC three days prior to the July 2/15 public meeting ie. on June 29/15. However at the July 2/15 MECAC meeting both she and they all claimed they had just received her Financials just as I, the complainant, had. By so claiming to Superior Court Sandy misled Justice David Broad into believing that the Compliance Audit Committee (MECAC) had carefully examined them. She had also deceived him into believing that all her donations and expenses were now accounted for but last Friday's new filings on the Woolwich Township website dated August 6/15 put the lie to that as well.

Everyone in the Council Chambers were then shocked by Sandy's next comments. Richard calmly said to her "Sandy have you just admitted to perjury?" Her response "No, I've since told my lawyer everything and he's supposed to have talked to the judge.". Oh my God! Does this mean Sandy that if I commit murder and mayhem, as long as I confess to my lawyer, everything's O.K.? In Sandy's world the answer probably is yes.

ONE CONTROL FREAK LEARNS FROM ANOTHER

Many years ago prior to Susan Bryant revealing herself as being a bought and paid for supporter of our local political establishment; Susan shared an insight with me regarding former Council member Pat Mclean. I had always wondered, since 2000, when they became so chummy, what the reason was. I also was shocked even earlier on when I learned that Susan's then buddy, Sylvia Berg was running for Mayor with the assistance of Bob Waters. That never made sense considering his antipathy towards the so called outside radicals (APTE) at the time. Regardless Susan advised me that Councillor Pat Mclean was a "control freak". Indeed I certainly saw this through CPAC as Pat constantly was usurping authority as CPAC Chair that she did not have. Other Council members at the time also saw Pat manipulate members and votes privately only to learn at the last minute that their issue or concern suddenly had lost crucial support.

Back to our Mayor. RAC & TAG otherwise known as Really Awful Chemtura Truth Avoidance Groups are an example of the efforts of a control freak. Nasty and somewhat uncontrollable citizen participation has been reduced to a charade. Pat Mclean and various Mayors and Councils have long been offended when individual citizens failed to follow their scripts. Almost as if these citizens including myself thought that we had control of our own thoughts, words and opinions.

RAC otherwise known as the Remediation Advisory Committee is made up of Sandy Shantz, Sandy Shantz and Sandy Shantz combined with the Region of Waterloo, GRCA, Chemtura, M.O.E., the handpicked Chair of TAG plus two more handpicked TAG members. I've listed Sandy three times because afterall she is a Regional Councillor as well as a member of the GRCA all due to her being Mayor. Chemtura and the M.O.E. don't get votes as if they need them within this group. Talk about Pat being a control freak. Sandy puts her to shame with this setup.

TAG consist of the Chair, paid by Chemtura, perhaps funnelled through Woolwich Council. The appointed (by Council) members have zero influence unless they are the two put on RAC. There may well be some knowledgeable and independent members but they will have zero influence. Pat and Susan are in here and they are both grossly comprimised by their years of being recipients of benefits both directly and indirectly from the Region, GRCA and Chemtura. Hence they are in a gross conflict of interest and once again we see the Mayor and Council contravening their own rules and regulations which for them is now publicly proven (ombudsman-in camera meetings & election act violations) standard operating procedure.

Such is the state of "public consultation" now in Elmira and Woolwich. Citizens the only way this can ever be improved upon is by you becoming involved. Liars and cheats thrive within in camera meetings and within environments where honest citizens are too busy to hold our elected politicians accountable. Democracy is not a once every four years exercise. It must be constant supervision.

MAYOR SHANTZ - THREE AUDITS - $ 4,181.00

Well let's not be feeling too sorry for her just yet. Compare Sandy's three audits dated June 16/15 accompanying her March 23/15 Financial Statement and delivered to MECAC on or about July 2/15 followed by the next two audits (Amended/Primary & Supplementary) both dated August 6/15 for a total of $4,181 versus Councillor Scott Hahn's one FORENSIC Audit in the $12,000 neighbourhood. Scott's is paid for via you and me and all the rest of Woolwich taxpayers. Just as importantly this tells us exactly how mickey mouse these routine audits really are. Three for $4,181 versus one Forensic Audit at $12,000. Also realize it's the same accountant doing all three of Sandy's "audits" and just like every other accountant doing these five minute wonders his statement of limitations and qualifications spells out how superficial they really are.

I love Richard Clausi's analogy of the speed trap. The outraged politician caught redhanded by the Elections Act demands a do over, in this case multiple do overs. The citizen caught redhanded doing 75 km/hour in a 50 zone should advise the officer to stay where he is as they are going around the block and trying it a second time. This time they are clocked at 65 km/hour. Not good enough they demand a third attempt and sure enough they are now clocked only doing 55 km/hour. Do you think the police officer won't write them a ticket because even though they still don't have it right , they are after three attempts, less in contravention than originally?

Superior Court made a big deal out of Sandy's self proclaimed "inadvertence" and "honest mistakes". No other third party testified to that only Sandy via her lawyer. I stated in Superior Court on July 23/15 that the March 23/15 dated second Financial Statement combined with the first audit date of June 16/15 was a smoking gun that she had full knowledge of the inaccuracy and errors in her February 2/15 Financial Statement prior to the March 27/15 deadline and did not correct them. Recall that the June 16/15 first audit date meant that her accountant received Sandy's orders and completed her audit the very day that I filed my Application to MECAC (June 16/15) and furthermore that she signed off on the completed audit and picked it up that very day. Highly unlikely.

Then we have further indications of Sandy's behaviour/coverups. On July 2/15 she ambushed me with a 30 page package ten minutes prior to the MECAC meeting. According to Sandy's Affidavit filed in Superior Court she had provided that package to MECAC three days earlier. That is not what MECAC said on July 2/15. One or both are lying but regardless I got ambushed and MECAC had zero legal or moral right to accept that 30 page package at face value without both myself, the compalinant, and themselves thoroughly studying it first. Then let's not forget Sandy's lawyer's blatant blackmail attempt to keep me from appearing at Superior Court. Well done Mr. Bennet. And this is precisely why lawyers are generally held in such contempt by honest citizens. Copies of those e-mails were sent by me to the local media to indicate your and the mayor's grotesque lack of ethics.

This Woolwich Township is how your mayor "defends" herself from allegations of Election Act contraventions.

MORE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FROM SANDY - DO OVER NUMBERS 3 & 4

What a system. The Municipal Elections Act 1996 (MEA) sure talks tough but when push comes to shove it is a pushover. Mayor Shantz is officially a member of the gang who couldn't shoot straight. Her first attempt was dated February 2/15 and was pathetic. Her second botched attempt was dated March 23/15 and she ambushed me and possibly MECAC with it on JULY 2/15. Attempts three and four are both dated August 6/15 and were put on Woolwich Township's website late yesterday afternoon. These last two are courtesy of an Order from Superior Court. Either Sandy filed them by today or she would once again have been out of a job. Numbers 1, 3 and 4 are on the Township website under Municipal Election.

If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery then indeed I am flattered by Sandy. Her second attempt while not quite as pathetic as her first nevertheless was still a stinker. I posted here on August 3/15 the still existing errors. Well good for her despite taking Financial Statement 2 (March 23/15) to both MECAC and Superior Court darn if she hasn't amended it dramatically. She has finally included most of her omissions both intentional and otherwise in these latest two efforts. I am seriously considering sending Sandy an Invoice for my assistance to her in getting her facts and numbers straight.

It's hard to believe but she seems unappreciative of my efforts. The following comment precedes both her most recent Financial Statements. "...I believe the public and those wishing to serve the public should have better protection from submissions that are bent more on creating havoc than protecting the public good.". This says the politician with 31 years bookeeping experience who is up to at least four Financial Statements so far because she doesn't understand what Contributions, Expenses and even Audits are. Further evidence of her bad attitude and living in fantasyland include her claim that "...I have elected to include...". "elected" my butkus! She's pretending that by now five months AFTER the March 27/15 deadline her inclusion of further legal and mandated expenses is somehow voluntary as if they really weren't mistakes. Oh Sandy you really are a very good politician in deflecting blame and guilt but a truly hopeless bookeeper and caretaker of your own finances much less those of Woolwich Township.

You know Sandy based upon your unappreciative and combative attitude I don't know why I should continue to help you out. I mean you've still got time if you want to embarass yourself further by filing Financial Statement-Auditor's Report number five. Here's a hint. Why did you include all your accounting/mickey mouse audit costs in your Supplementary Report (number four) instead of putting the June 16/15 audit costs with your number three Financial Statement? Secondly while you ramble on about your legal costs in your introductory letter you don't include them in either of Financial Statement three or four. Why not? Do you think that because they came out of your personal chequing account they magically aren't real election costs? Once again Woolwich Township have no appreciation for Woolwich volunteers' assistance.

WHY I BELIEVE ELECTION ACT CHARGES ARE NECESSARY FOR MAYOR SHANTZ

My August 3/15 posting here in the Advocate is titled "More New Expense Contraventions By Sandy Revealed". It is neither the sheer number of them nor the size or significance of each one that has led me to my conclusion in the title above. It is based upon very careful study of precedents (case law), the Municipal Election Act (MEA), Sandy's behaviour in stickhandling around MECAC, her lack of forthrightness with Superior Court, the apparent results of her errors and omissions and finally based upon all the preceding, her intent.

I will be very clear here. Intent is a difficult, dangerous and slippery slope. Therefore I up front advise my readers that while the evidence is powerful it is still circumstantial regarding intent. I am giving my honest opinion based upon my analysis and understanding of the facts now known. It is not impossible that a real forensic audit could sink her entirely nor is it impossible that a forensic audit might actually put her in a better light. There is however zero chance that an honest forensic audit could remotely clear her of all wrongdoing. Above and beyond her admissions to date, are all the other already detailed contraventions.

Sandy has admitted that she miscalculated her total Contributions (income) on her Financial Statement by approximately $2,600 thus when corrected it put her above the $10,000 threshold requiring an Audit. On July 2/15 she provided to MECAC the typical quickie audit that all other candidates in the municipal election provided. These candidates included mayors and councillors although primarily regional councillor candidates. All of their audits satisfy the MEA however I repeat they are quickie, 5 minute wonders whose Qualifications and Limitations listed make the exercise essentially a farce.

She sold her "inadvertence" and "honest mistake" defence to MECAC and Superior Court simply by her saying so. Neither party looked carefully at her Financials nor even pretended to do so. I have looked carefully. Her expenses are also thousands of dollars underrepresented. To date this is unproven although I have listed them here on Aug. 3/15. Not only has she failed to list a number of expenses such as campaign kickoff events and meet the candidate events; as well her invoice from cousin Larry for a campaign website does not support his and her interpretation that the twelve You Tube Videos are included.

For me the Ah Ha! moment came when I finally deciphered her Financial Spreadsheet she provided to MECAC. This is a home made document not one done by her bank or any other independent institution. She had appropriately listed her Thank You/Appreciation Public Notices in the Observer and Independent as campaign expenses ($322.05 + $305.10= $627.15). Those expenses elevated her already understated expenses from $9,475.89 to $10,103.04 which alone would have triggered an Audit even without her Contributions (income) being above the $10,000 threshold. Then incredibly she deucted those Thank You/Appreciation Notices from her expense column claiming (wrongly) justification from pages 25 & 26 of the MEC Guide. Oh My God but that is blatant and plain ridiculous! This is a person with 31 years of bookeeping experience?

If Sandy had only messed up her Contribution (income) side I could buy it. If she had only messed up her Expense side by omitting one or two expenses to stay under the $10,000 threshold, maybe. Instead what I see and interpret is a blatant attempt to fudge her expenses on a number of items AND even to the point of deducting $627.15 in Thank You/Appreciation expenses already properly included.

Neither MECAC nor Superior Court permitted myself to have time to study Sandy's ambush material on July 2/15 and then be allowed to present all the evidence to them and argue that Sandy's manifold errors were not "inadvertent" or "honest mistakes". My opinion and interpretation is that they were done intentionally and illegally in order to avoid an Audit which among other things would have added another approximately $750 or more to her expense side. Even so it begs the question...Is this all about vanity and being embarassed by how much she outspent her three opponents combined OR is there still more I haven't discovered? Either a courtroom and or a Forensic Audit are desperately required. Otherwise just throw out the Municipal Elections Act as it is just a scam being pulled on the public.

Of course as suggested yesterday a resignation by Mayor Shantz would abort things and she could avoid further embarassing accountability.

IT'S RESIGNATION TIME, SANDY & SCOTT

Woolwich Council have been aware of the damning evidence within Scott Hahn's Compliance Audit for over a week now. Are they seriously going to wait for next week's 10 am. MECAC (Municipal Elections Compliance Audit Committee) meeting in Council Chambers (Aug. 27) before taking action? Are they prepared to let the public fully understand their complicity as a Council in this mess? The last Council promptly and publicly threw Todd Cowan to the wolves. They had no intention that the public should think that they condoned his behaviour. Is this entire Council so far gone that they are willing to allow an already proven corrupt/incompetent body to make either the right decision sending Scott to Court or to make the wrong decision, hence covering up what smells badly like misrepresentation and deceit of the most blatant kind?

Then we have Mayor Shantz. Council have seen first hand her deterioration over the last few months. All was roses when she and Mark were sucessfully executing their save Chemtura and kill CPAC plans. Yes there were some bumps in the road as CPAC responded publicly in Council and elsewhere to Sandy and Mark's horrible smear campaign against CPAC, myself and especially against the CPAC Chair Dr. Dan Holt. Clearly right about now Sandy must be second guessing using the mayor's Chair and built in credibility to have lied so egregiously about myself, Dr. Holt and CPAC.

Mayor Shantz knows she isn't out of the woods by a long shot. Within the next couple of days she has to refile (#3) her Financial Statement-Auditor's Report. To date she has formally filed one dated February 2/15 which is still on the Township's website. She presented a different set of figures on her March 23/15 Financial Statement to MECAC on July 2/15. This one appropriately was not posted on line as it has no legal bearing or weight. Number three (possibly four) is due thirty days after her July 23/15 sojourn to Superior Court. This one will be accepted by Woolwich's Clerk and posted on their website. Then the last Supplementary Filing including things like lawyers costs etc. is due on September 15/15.

Here is Mayor Shantz's problem. Her imminent new filing is supposed to include all the data already given to MECAC as well as Superior Court that had not been legitimized more than three months after her March 27/15 filing deadline. Justice Broad of Superior Court legitimized it on July 23/15 and ordered her to formally refile it within thirty days. By my count that is this Saturday August 22/15. So Sandy's March 23/15 Financial Statement with Auditor's (two page) Report dated June 16/15 should be the same as what she presented to Justice Broad in Superior Court. I dare you to change or fudge it Sandy. If you do that you are entering Scott Hahn territory and that's a world of hurt. Guess what happens however if she refiles her still error filled and expense light March 23/15 Financial Statement-Auditor's Report? You got it; back to MECAC for a Compliance Audit.

MECAC were bamboozled on July 2/15. Actually it was prior to July 2/15. Next Thursday they get to show their grit if they want. If they properly send Scott to the Courts then there is hope that they value their positions and reputations and given a second chance at Mayor Shantz's still false and erroneous Financial Statement might do the right thing. If not they condemn themselves and her as we do not need MECAC to send her to the Courts. Again Council's support is appropriate but will they step up even at this late date? Who knows, this is Woolwich and a small group have held sway for a very long time. Their sense of entitlement and especially invulnerability has taken a beating recently. Is it enough for them to do the right thing?

CHEMTURA/M.O.E. SUCESSFULLY CHANGE THE CHANNEL

There's an old saying about being careful what you wish for. There has been an illegal conspiracy between Chemtura Canada and the Ontario Ministry of Environment (M.O.E.) for decades. There has also been a conspiracy as defined here yesterday between some Woolwich Council members, Chemtura and the M.O.E., certainly since last fall's election and most likely between one or two of them long prior to the election.

They agreed that the new Council would take charge, assist in manufacturing a crisis, blame and smear CPAC's reputation and then come riding to the rescue by bringing Chemtura and the M.O.E. back into some new, perverted form of public consultation (ie. RAC & TAG). It all went reasonably well until it turned sour. Chemtura & the M.O.E. were planning on riding on the new Council's popularity and coattails. Chemtura and the M.O.E. require a strong and popular Council to help give themselves legitimacy in the public eye.

Well guess what? Our local professional liars and manipulaters are walking around with egg all over their faces. I hope that every new member on RAC and TAG fully understand that they have joined a group with zero credibility and authority. These are committees of a publicly discredited and corrupt Council by their own stupidity and other behaviour. I and others are merely the messengers. It has been an absolute pleasure for me to be able to publicly prove that this Council operate illegally and immorally whenever they can get away with it. Election laws and the Municipal Act violations are the tip of the iceburg.

Immorally includes Sandy and Mark's lead on the immoral and probably illegal dissolution of CPAC nine months into the new term of Council. It includes reopening Applications for six spots on TAG after Applications closed last November 30/14 and they had received eight applications namely five CPAC members, myself, Pat M. & Susan B. . It includes the lies that either Sandy or Mark spoke at public CPAC meetings in October 2014 and January 2015. It includes the lies that Sandy spoke to me in November 2014 after the election, that she was going to keep the old CPAC members all on the reappointed one.

Then there are the lies Sandy has given to MECAC and to Superior Court. That there was a conspiracy ie. a meeting of individuals for an improper purpose is apparent. MECAC met/spoke with Sandy and or some Council members ahead of the public July 2/15 meeting in order to get their ducks in a row. Absolutely no appointed body with a mandate to serve the public interest accepts thirty pages of a last minute submission/ambush and pretends to make a decision not to advance the process based upon the oral testimony of the person/mayor under investigation. Keep also in mind that Sandy in a sworn oath to Superior Court claims that she gave the thirty pages to MECAC on June 29/15 not July 2/15. In that scenario MECAC were part of a charade to fool me and the public. In that scenario I was the sole participant ambushed in the July 2/15 MECAC meeting in Council Chambers.

The channel that was changed was the east side, decades long sucessful discharge of Uniroyal/Chemtura contaminants including DDT and Dioxins, eastwards and southwards onto two neighbours' properties and then into the Canagagigue Creek. Chemtura and the M.O.E. have long known about this as it was done deliberately. Congratulations Chemtura you succeeded in changing the channel with the new Woolwich Council's help. Now who's going to save Council's reputation?

CORRUPTION, BLACKMAIL, CONSPIRACY WE'VE GOT IT ALL RIGHT HERE

Councillors are you still sure there aren't some valid comparisons with the Watergate scandal? In other words the initial offense (election expense contraventions) may be only a three or four out of ten on the ethics scale but the following coverup is an eight. The definition of conspiracy by the way is a joining or meeting of individuals for an improper or illegal purpose. Wow that pretty much covers most meetings of politicians I would expect.

I've been advised by some brave souls who stayed for the whole Council meeting of a week ago that Mayor Shantz did a strange thing late in the evening. Apparently she pulled out Justice David Broad's seven page decision reinstating her and read part of it into the Minutes. Yes that is correct, she read exerpts of it into the record. Exerpts as in cherry picked exerpts. Odd. If she wanted it formally into the record all she had to do was include the whole document, which by the way I believe the Woolwich Observer put on line in its' entirety less than three weeks ago. Of course it should have been in the meeting Package and named in the Agenda. Now the Package was over 400 pages long and while I have looked assiduously for any mention of Justice Broad's decision, even remotely, it simply wasn't mentioned in the Agenda, revised or otherwise.

I was advised by the listener that the cherry picked exerpts unsurprisingly were positive for Sandy and less so for my extremely limited input at the court proceeding. Is this Sandy trying to put her numerous expense contraventions to rest (see Mon. August 3/15 Elmira Advocate) by publicly using a non-trial, narrow and limited legal proceeding to claim vindication prior to further public revelations? Back on August 1/15 I did post here about Justice Broad's Decision and what he badly missed and misunderstood.

Fundamentally and shockingly he admits that he failed to grasp and understand the significance of the March 23/15 date on Sandy's second Financial Statement that she sent to her accountant. Justice Broad's exact words on page 5, paragraph 16 of his Decision were " I had difficulty following the argument related to the significance of that date, but Mr. Marshall appeared to be suggesting that the date on the form suggests that the applicant (Sandy) had knowledge of her error but did not take proper and legal steps to file an auditor's report on time. By this, he sought to call the applicant's good faith into question."

The next paragraph (#17) Justice Broad stated "He was not granted intervenor status in order to bring forth facts to refute the applicant's assertion of good faith set forth in her affidavit. With the greatest of respect to Mr. Marshall, I did not find his argument to be of assistance within the purpose of Rule 13.02.".

On page 2, paragraph 7 of his Decision Justice Broad specified what my input was supposed to be. " ...I granted intervenor status to Mr. Marshall as a friend of the Court for the purpose of rendering assistance by way of argument. I directed Mr. Marshall to avoid any attempt to introduce facts or evidence, but rather to restrict his submissions to argument.". I indeed did not attempt to enter new evidence. Mayor Shantz had already entered into evidence her revised Financial Statement with the March 23/15 date, which date was four days PRIOR to the March 27/15 filing deadline. I understood that I was arguing that this already entered evidence spoke to her having knowledge prior to the deadline that her already filed Statements were inaccurate yet she did not correct/replace them. This absolutely was me arguing bad faith on her part which by using her already entered evidence I understood to be acceptable. Is it possible that Justice Broad missed that the March 23/15 date was already in evidence? I am certain that I had so advised him including the page reference in her submissions.

Regardless one thing should be very clear to readers of this posting. Mayor Shantz's election expenses were NOT remotely examined, clarified or tested at this hearing. Her Affidavit and Factum were automatically accepted as truthful at face value without benefit of new evidence or even cross-examination. My role was extraordinarily limited by Justice Broad. Sandy's lawyers gave short notice to the Court for response by other parties exactly as Councillor Mark Bauman did. In Mark's case I received exactly zero prior notice. This is exactly how both Mark and Sandy have managed to coverup various transgressions over the years. They subvert process, laws and rules to their advantage and to the disadvantage of truth and the public interest.

CORRUPTION INCLUDES SIMPLE RULE BREAKING

A commenter here on the Advocate has recently stated that rules are made by those in power and authority to buttress and support themselves to stay in power, get power and to defend themselves from legitimate attacks by outraged citizens. Hence many rules are not in the public interest. Those that are can be blunted by assurring that like minded people/supporters hold key positions. When councils and other political bodies are the ones appointing Clerks, Council committees, Compliance Audit Committees (MECAC), Chairs of Committees you can see the problems. Municipal Councils are supposed to live by the Municipal Act 2001 but it itself was written by provincial politicians, many who started their political careers at the municipal level. These same Councils write their own Procedural By-Laws which again allow themselves to write the rules for their benefit, not for the public's.

Selective enforcement is also an age old method of stickhandling around awkward rules. I saw this in the behaviour of two different Councils when dealing with election contraventions. Hamilton Council sucessfully went to court to oppose a candidate trying to be relieved of the penalty for failing to file election Financial Statements. Woolwich Council went the exact opposite route in order to support Councillor Bauman and Mayor Shantz. The difference was not in the severity of the contraventions but in the popularity of the candidates. Mark and Sandy are with the program and status quo here in Woolwich. They are not reformers trying to make improvements in our governance.

Woolwich Council themselves are gulity of selective enforcement of both rules and laws. They jumped all over former mayor Todd Cowan for allegedly "steaing" $3,200 via double expensing. Todd paid back $2,700 almost immediately claiming paperwork errors. I am doubtful, however his day in court is coming up in November. Meanwhile Mayor Shantz has made thousands of dollars in errors both in understating her Contributions and in understating her expenses thus avoiding a mandated Audit. She has admitted as of July 2/15 to this as well as to receiving an overdonation from a corporation. Until then she was denying (lying) stating that I was out to lunch and her Financial Statements were fine. She has still refused to admit many more election expense contraventions, some extremely serious, as listed on my August 3/15 posting here. Despite this Council continue to support her as well as Councillor Scott Hahn. His problems are now legion and public since the release of the Forensic Audit on August 11/15. I posted about them on August 14 (last Friday).

Counicl's "support" includes their refusing to provide counterpoint evidence at Superior Court for both Councillor Mark Bauman and for Mayor Shantz. Other support has come from the Woolwich Clerk who said one thing to me (ie. "Woolwich tradition") when I went to her regarding Mark Bauman's failure to file his legally mandated Financial Statement and different testimony to Mark and Council and hence Superior Court.

Woolwich Council have written new Terms of Reference for the RAC & TAG committees of Council. Again we have blatant selective enforcement by Council in order to get their buddies and supporters onto the Technical Advisory Group. Their own rules state that conflicts of interest can not be allowed. I have written here in the Advocate of the incredible, decades long conflicts of interest, that Pat McLean and Susan Bryant have. These include expense paid trips around the country from Uniroyal/Chemtura in the past as well as Pat still enjoying the same via the Chemical Industry Association of Canada (CIAC) of which Chemtura are a member. Pat also voted in favour of Chemtura's last reverification under *Responsible Care. Dr. Dan Holt of CPAC did not. Susan has received employment income from both the Region of Waterloo (RAC member) as well as by her own admission from Conestoga Rovers, decades long consultants to Uniroyal/Chemtura. I provided the recorded, public CPAC meeting date that Susan bragged about this; to Mayor Shantz this spring and all Sandy did was scream about me smearing Susan's name. Susan did that all by herself and mayor and Council are looking the other way because Pat was with Sandy during the campaign (senior centre debate) and both are strongly supported by Chemtura and their corrupt "regulator" the Ontario M.O.E.. Being supported by Chemtura & the M.O.E. for membership on either RAC or TAG is a damning indictment and honest and intelligent (both required) people understand that.

No need to list all the laws this Council have broken and continue to break as recently as last Tuesday (4:30 pm in camera meeting). These include the Municipal Act 2001 and the Elections Act 1996, so far. These are symptoms of pervasive rot morally and politically. I have pointed them out in order to remove the false aura of legitimacy and honesty with which most of Woolwich Council wrap themselves. They are dangerous, vindictive people whose motives are selfish and self centred.

THE MERLIHAN SISTERS ARE ENGAGED IN FOREPLAY WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS

Are the Merlihan sisters, Joesy and Patsy, secret Council sympathizers? Rather than leading the resistance they appear to be giving comfort to the enemy. Has Patsy been seduced by the free meals at taxpayers' expense that Council enjoy? Could Joesy and Patsy simply be throwing a bone to Council by lying about my behaviour in order to curry favour with our vindictive Council? Boy if that is what you girls are doing you're wasting your time. You're also alienating one of the very few informed Woolwich citizens willing to stand up and stick their neck out in order to get better governance. Grow up girls and save your bullets for the guilty in Woolwich. Not only does Council and CTV News have a taperecording of Council's Gong Show last Tuesday evening but I too have been recently blessed with one. I and my wife listened to it yesterday twice and I was absolutely shocked at how calm, quiet and cool I was while being harassed by Councillor Larry Shantz. Anybody who suggests that I was involved in a "rant" or a "tirade" prior to Council walking out are filthy liars Joesy & Patsy. Furthermore the gallery was full including numerous citizens present in regards to the proposed apartment development on Riverside Dr., plus many more. Enough said girls. This is my request for an apology and a retraction from you. If you don't like the style of my request, tough. I'm tired of your bias in regards to myself based upon your weak kneed response to a Libel threat by Brian Beatty, Uniroyal consultant, back in the late 90s for which you've long blamed me.

While we're on the topic of threats perhaps right now is also the time to advise Woolwich citizens regarding one of the in camera meetings that the Ombudsman recently investigated. This was the CPAC in camera meeting at the insistence of CAO David Brenneman held a year ago. Yes indeed the reason for it being in camera was that legal advice was being sought by CPAC. The Ombudsman found very little fault with that meeting and truth be told I simply wanted public exposure to its' contents and purpose. This is but one of the reasons that the Ministry of Environment were involved in a smear campaign of CPAC this past winter and spring. While I was not present for the actual in camera part I was there as a member of SWAT as well as the public when they announced why they were going in camera. Seems that CPAC were so frustrated and upset with the lying and deception of the Ontario M.O.E. that they were seriously considering suing the M.O.E.. I have little doubt that our esteemed and self serving CAO immediately passed that tidbit on to our new pro Chemtura/M.O.E. Mayor.

While I am unhappy with the Observer's ongoing bias and disrespect towards myself I am however able to recognize the excellent work they have and are doing to expose Council's self interest and conflicts of interest. Yesterday's paper has numerous articles doing just that including "Woolwich call to action to M.O.E.", "Auditor finds issues with Hahn's election expenses", "Ombudsman calls for changes to Woolwich's closed-door meetings" and on page 6 the last part of their front page article. Here they at least have the decency to indicate that Council's bad mood Tuesday nite is all about their personal anger towards my exposing Mayor Shantz and Councillor Mark Bauman's election contraventions. Throw in the Ombudsman's Report and my catching them again in the act of an illegal in camera meeting Tuesday at 4:30 pm. and it becomes obvious that their walkout was orchestrated prior to the 6 pm. open session meeting. The Observer and any honest citizen with a brain know that Council are gunning for me.

COUNCILLOR SCOTT HAHN: IS IT TOO EARLY TO USE THE FRA.. WORD?

Make no mistake the word "Fraud" does not appear in the Auditor's thirteen pages of text. Nor has it been determined to be so by MECAC or the courts. That said after multiple readings of the Forensic Audit released by Froese Forensic partners I can say this: Scott Hahn is in a world of hurt caused by the stupidity, arrogance and sense of entitlement of both himself and his family.

A few months back I understood that as a 26 year old first time electoral candidate he had minimal experience in anything including the Municipal Elections Act 1996. That he was so incredibly naive to think that he didn't have to record literally thousands of dollars of Contributions and Expenses towards his election campaign was frankly ridiculous. All that being said, technically MECAC could have thrown the book at him for his failure to properly disclose by the March 27/15 deadline. That they clearly are political appointees whose bias is in favour of the status quo has been amply demonstrated by their bending nay rupturing of their mandate, rules and the law by accepting four time candidate Sandy Shantz's revised Financial Statement and minimal accountant's audit back on July 2/15. They did this allegedly at the time with only ten minutes to read her thirty page submission.

The timing has probably destroyed Councillor Hahn's political career and his reputation. If he had known that MECAC were essentially creampuffs looking to protect political reputations not destroy them; he could have done what he initially did which was to throw himself upon everyone's mercy and relied on his age and inexperience. Instead every appearance and evidence to date is that he and his family have engaged in a coverup. Call it a coverup or call it by the more legal name, regardless Scott has crossed a line. Misrepresentation and deceit are the nicest words I can use after rereading his Forensic Audit. Again Froese Partners may be bound by some linguistic terminology whereas I am not.

In a nutshell Scott claimed that three of his family members split the cost of his election signs rather than his father's company Tri-Mach picking up the whole tab ($1751.50). Well yes it would have been a contravention for Tri-Mach to contribute more than the $750 maximum, the exact same way Mayor Shantz accepted a corporate overdonation; nevertheless in the scheme of things that is not in my mind a criminal act. The problem is that the Forensic Auditor has made it very plain that the expected corporate financial records can not be found. Remember this is Scott's father's company. No electronic records backing this up. No petty cash records showing the alleged $1750.51 cash repayment from Scott's father, mother and live at home sister, who's only income is from babysitting. Oh also the three alleged donors had no corresponding bank withdrawals of cash to back up their story.

Then we have the $962.76 cost of the Brochures produced by KKP or Kwik Kopy Print. This company is owned by Scott's in laws. For me if Scott isn't already sunk this produced "Invoice" by Scott to MECAC is damning. Froese Partners have examined it and interviewed KKP. It turns out that Scott did not produce a real Invoice for MECAC's enlightenment. KKP have advised the Forensic Auditors that it was a "Sample Invoice". Are you kidding me? Best case for Scott is that this is determined to be an illegal corporate overdonation by KKP. Worst case fraud and in between, simple misrepresentation.

Prior to the election and shortly afterwards I thought that Scott was the real deal, despite his inexperience. Two incidents later of him verbally abusing Dr. Dan Holt and then screaming at a woman at this week's Council meeting have not endeared me to him. That he clearly believes that honest mistakes are O.K. is one thing. My opinion regarding his claims and produced documentation was skeptical at the time. I believe the Auditor's inability to find backup documentation is fatal to Scott's credibility. To date the evidence points to him and his family misrepresnting the facts in order to get him off Election Act charges. It is likely that the courts will be very harsh if they believe that Scott and his family have intentionally misrepresnted the facts including producing documents that at best can not be verified.

Scott's only hope is that MECAC throw away all pretense of honesty and non bias at the upcoming August 27/15 10 am. meeting in Council Chambers. It is very sad when our democratic institutions require constant public vigilance for them to do their legally mandated duty. The only clear and obvious decision MECAC need to make on the 27th is that Councillor Hahn needs his election expenses and very sketchy Financial Statements and more examined by the courts. If Scott's behaviour is not sent for judicial examination then you may as well throw out the Municipal Elections Act (MEA). Clearly it is but one more pretend piece of legislation allegedly protecting the integrity of our political system.

THE MAYOR MAKES UP THE RULES AS SHE GOES ALONG... AGAIN

Councillor Scott Hahn is a bully like most of the rest of Council. Also he's no hero. Turns out he likes to scream at women. Why CTV News didn't play the tape of him shouting at a member of the audience is beyond me. Perhaps they think after the just released Forensic Audit that he's got enough problems already. Oh and gosh please notice Sandy that this paragraph doesn't directly match the title above.

The mayor claims on television that I broke the rules. Which rules pray tell would that be? Most likely the ones you are just now frantically writing up. The Woolwich Township Procedural By-Law is on the far right side of their website if you click on By-Laws and scroll down. It along with the Municipal Act dictate the rules for Woolwich Township. The included Description of this by-law is that it is "A By-law to govern the proceedings of Council and Committees". Rule 14.9 as I mentioned last evening (11:30 pm.) on CTV gives the appropriate very few reasons acceptable for Council to refuse to hear a Delegation from citizens. They include coarse or crude language and threats whether physical or legal. Nowhere in their Procedural By-Law does it state that Council can refuse to hear, much less walk out on a Delegate for speaking about more than one topic. The mayor and her cousin Larry whined that I spoke about more than the short title demanded by the Deputy Clerk when you register as a Delegation. If you give a long title or several items the D-Clerk will shorten it up anyways.

Tuesday night was the little kids on Council playing payback. That's how your Council operates Woolwich citizens. Immediately before the Open Session I had caught them in another illegal closed (in camera) session. See yesterday's post for the details. That willingness to yet again flout the Municipal Act AND the express Recommendation (#3) of Ontario's Ombudsman shows the breathtaking arrogance of this Mayor and Council. The Woolwich Clerk at least was honest when she wrote that Woolwich would accept and adhere to all the Ombudsman's demands/recommendations "where practical". Neither she nor Council really have any intention to obey the laws of Ontario if they impinge on their plans. Notice I say their plans, not the public interest. These folks on Council (& mayor) are all about their interests only. Breaking rules and Laws is all in a day's work.

WOOLWICH LAWBREAKERS MASQUERADING AS COUNCILLORS

I suppose based upon the kind of day/week/month Woolwich Council has had it is understandable that they are a little testy. Let's see now there was the Ombudsman's Report published in the Record on Monday detailing illegal activity regarding in camera sessions. There was CPAC's DDT Report published the same day suggesting that all responsible parties (including Woolwich) really haven't been. Scott Hahn's Forensic Audit came out Tuesday on the Woolwich Township website and it is very bad for Councillor Scott Hahn. Council got caught redhanded yesterday afternoon violating the Ombudsman's Report dealing with in camera meetings. Yes you heard that right. I walked in on the pigs at the trough at 4:27 pm. yesterday as they helped themselves surrepticiously to a taxpayer funded meal in the Councillor's Boardroom out of sight, behind the Council Chambers. Turns out they prefer in camera meetings in the Boardroom instead of in Council Chambers because it allows them to literally gobble up more of our tax money while hidden from sight. Finally the previously mentioned Forensic Audit of one of their colleagues is detailed in this morning's K-W Record and apparently sometime yesterday on line.

I suspect that Council are frustrated wondering how I could be responsible for all their public trials and tribulations. Well first off I'm not remotely so responsible, they are. Secondly numerous other citizens, some publicly but many more behind the scenes are helping to carry the load. To them I tip my hat. If and when they want recognition simply say the word.

Regarding yesterday's once again illegal in camera meeting, the Ombudsman made it abundantly clear that Council must hold an open session first in order to go into private session (in camera). When I walked in on them they looked like little children caught with their hands in the cookie jar. They hurriedly rushed out to the partially locked, lights out, curtains down Council Chambers where two Woolwich citizens listened to them grudgingly follow the law. Mayor Shantz through gritted teeth at the start of the public session stared at me and kept repeating "Really ?". Finally I said "Yes Sandy it is the law." No wonder she behaved so badly last evening towards me during my Delegation.

How badly did Sandy behave last evening? She orchestrated Council's unanimous walkout in the middle of my Delegation. Fortunately for me the gallery was full of citizens and they were shocked at Council's behaviour. I was actually the tenth or eleventh speaker as a previously scheduled public meeting interrupted Delegations at 7 pm.. The walkout and followup actions on my part were all recorded by CTV News who were there for CPAC's wonderful DDT presentation. Well done yet again Graham Chevreau.

There were a total of six CPAC and SWAT members present plus citizens who had attended the previously mentioned public meeting dealing with a proposed apartment building being located on Riverside Drive in Elmira. Council Chair Larry Shantz kept interrupting my Delegation with comments and criticisms that I was wandering off topic. Excuse me Sandy's cousin, but it was my Delegation, not yours. This Council seem to think they have the right to censor both content and topics. They do not. My Delegation was perfectly accurate and used perfectly acceptable words although possibly the idiots on Council didn't understand that my statement that "I applaud Mayor Shantz's perspicacity.", is a compliment. Anyhow when they walked out I simply walked around the lecturn and continued my Delegation while facing the full house gallery and with my back to the now empty Councillor's seats.

As I was almost finished my Delegation, Council who had been peaking through the window in the door to Council decided that their tactic had not worked. Yes the tame Staff had slowly shambled out after them but the gallery had remained in full and listened intently to my comments. Quite frankly Council looked like idiots. As they came back in both cousins Larry and Sandy attempted to interupt the last couple of sentences I was speaking. I simply ignored them although when Sandy addressed me rudely and directly I advised her it was time for her to resign. That shut her up.

WOOLWICH COUNCIL SPIRALING OUT OF CONTROL

It's a crisis at Council. After Mark & Sandy manufactured a crisis at CPAC through private discussions/negotiations with Chemtura and the M.O.E.; now we have the real thing occurring with themselves. It really is disheartening and yet I wonder if they've learned anything.

Yesterday the Waterloo Region Record carried two stories devastating to the credibility of Woolwich Council. The first was the front page, lead story in the Record titled "Banned pesticide found in creek". The second was on the front page of the Local section and was titled "Woolwich broke meeting rules, report says". You know I'm wondering at what point Chemtura are going to throw in the towel and wash their hands of this Council. Afterall what good is the support of local politicians whose credibility and confidence with the citizens is in the crapper?

The front page DDT story exposes the danger to both the public and the environment. Mayor Shantz's simplistic and patronizing comments are indicative of both her Council's and Chemtura's attitude regarding ongoing poisoning of our environment. She states "There's no need for people to panic about the creek". Well in fact a little bit of panic is long overdue. DDT at 2,900 times the Ministry of Environment standards is but one of the multitude of chemicals found in the creek. No one knows how toxic and damaging the interaction between DDT, Dioxins, endosulfan, PAHs, NDMA and so much more really is. Each one of those alone are grotesquely toxic yet our Mayor says there is no need to panic.

Then of course we have this same idiot and corrupt Council dissolving CPAC this past spring, effective three weeks from today on August 31. Now isn't that decision biting them in the butt currently. Go ahead Council and support Chemtura and their partner in pollution the M.O.E.. That really is making you look to be in bed with the corporate polluter and his friends. Meanwhile Mark and Sandy continue to lie to anyone who will listen regarding both Chemtura's leakage of contaminants and Council's replacement of CPAC with lapdogs (RAC/TAG) versus a watchdog as CPAC was for the last four and a half years.

In regards to the Ontario Ombudsman and closed meeting (in camera) sessions, once again our Mayor aptly demonstrates her "leadership" skills. Instead of acknowledging Council's and her failures she chooses to deflect blame onto "citizens". Rather bizarely if not showing signs of paranoia she states that "a group of citizens are trying to bring Council down." She further adds that "they're looking at little things and making them into bigger things than they really need to be". Really? The Ombudsman repeatedly uses the word "illegal". I guess for this Mayor and Council after half of them repeatedly broke the Elections Act what is a little illegality regarding the Municipal Act as well?

These illegal meetings and discussions were for improper and devious purposes as well as contravening the letter and spirit of the law. CPAC were smeared and defamed in these in camera sessions and as well the Mayor admits to discussing "errors" of other Woolwich citizens and volunteers working with rural recreation associations. She is not being forthright then and she is not being forthright now.

CHEMTURA'S PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY ONLY WORKS WITH FELLOW TRAVELLORS, DRUNKS & INCOMPETENTS

Take your pick from the above, Woolwich Council only require Chemtura to say CPAC are wrong in order for Council to be able to hold their heads high and make their usual excuses. Oh give them more time. Oh gosh they have so many P.Engineering degrees and other credentials, who are we to call them out? One hand washes the other and both hands are in bed together. Chemtura, their consultants (CRA), the M.O.E.C.C. and most disgustingly the people's representatives (Woolwich Council) have historically been firmly in bed together since long before the 1989 Elmira water crisis.

I would agree that the 2010-2014 Council was an aberration. They had a truth challenged mayor and a mostly newbie Council but they at least weren't in bed with Chemtura which really upset the apple cart. Their support of an honest CPAC was a breathe of fresh air.

Jeff Merriman has sent an e-mail to Council, the M.O.E. and the media allegedly "clarifying" the Woolwich Observer article of August 1/15 regarding DDT in the Cangagigue Creek. The Observer's article was in regards to CPAC's July 2015 Report regarding their sediment testing in and around the creek.

Jeff has dragged out all his tried and proven horse manure and scientific mumbo jumbo that has never stood up to scrutiny by informed, educated and honest individuals. But that is the point. It is only intended to sway your uninformed, uneducated and dishonest councillors. CRAP (Conestoga Rovers & Associates Plans) like hydrophobic properties, old versus new contamination and non transport by groundwater have all been either disproven or taken in appropriate context by experts for decades. This does not however stop Chemtura from trotting them out to appreciative and biased groups like their partner in pollution the M.O.E. and their political partners such as the Region and Woolwich Council.

The bottom line is that there are horrible concentrations of Dioxins, DDT, Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons, Endosulfan and solvents still entering the creek from the toxic waste dump known as Uniroyal/Chemtura. Uniroyal/Chemtura with the assistance of the above mentioned corrupt groups have avoided spending the millions of dollars necessary to end this disgusting abomination and health hazard to both humans and the natural environment. Fourty per cent and rising of the Canadian population have cancer and our authorities know exactly why but their personal interests trump the public interest.

WOOLWICH COUNCIL & STAFF CORRUPTION

Well it's official that Woolwich are corrupt as in riddled with errors. I only asked the Ombudsman to investigate a few particularily egregious cases regarding council's use and abuse of in camera meetings and boy did we hit a home run. I have said here before that Council liars love in camera meetings because there they can allow their imaginations/obfuscations to run wild. At an in camera meeting they can lie to their colleagues for improper purposes and their colleagues aren't legally allowed to tattletale on them. It's a liars paradise.

The other improper purpose of in camera meetings is to allow Council to practice dirty tricks and deeds outside the scrutiny of the public. For example Council wished to find a way around the embarassing situation of having only eight Applications by last November 30th, the new CPAC application deadline. Five CPAC members had reapplied, myself plus two more applicants allegedly unknown to Council (horse manure!). This was discussed improperly and illegally at the January 13/15 in camera meeting according to the Ombudsman's Report located on page 238-253 of the Council package for this Tuesday evening 6 pm.. Furthermore this in camera meeting allowed Mark and Sandy to state false allegations about myself and CPAC members to the rest of Council. Not only is the very early date of January 13 interesting but the Ombudsman has advised us that Council were discussing (false) "performance" issues which I suggest that the polluter (Chemtura) and their corrupt regulator(M.O.E.C.C.) were spewing forth to their fellow travellors.

Other nasty issues by Council include further backddor and backroom disparaging of Woolwich volunteers. This included the January 20/15 in camera meeting discussing volunteer recreation associations. Once again embarassing information to the Township Staff and or Council members can be hidden from the public including personal opinions aka gossip blaming volunteers for Staff and Council mistakes.

The Ombudsman has properly brought Council and senior Staff's (Clerk and CAO) ongoing multiple errors and illegalities (Ombudsman's word) to light. While yet again Council and Staff are using words such as "inadvertent" and "oversight" and the Ombudsman has not categorically dismissed their excuses; I can and do. They have a long history of not only breaking their own Procedural By-Laws, Committee Terms of Reference, Elections Act and Municipal Act procedures and processes but also of using in camera meetings for improper, devious purposes. This Council and Township are not behaving in the public interest but in their own.

MECAC ARE A CORRUPT POLITICALLY APPOINTED (REGIONAL) SMOKESCREEN

The Municipal Elections Compliance Audit Committee or MECAC for short are mandated by the Municipal Elections Act 1996 (MEA). My experience here in Elmira and Waterloo Region is that even in the unlikely scenario that one political body actually want an honest, independent, quasi judicial body; nobody else does. Most likely however the way that senior governments (province) sell greater accountability and transparency to the lower tiers, namely regional and municipal, is by privately advising them of the key loopholes in the legislation. The simplest is to make sure that all appointees (or at least most) are fellow travellors politically. MECAC's behaviour here in Elmira on July 2/15 was blatantly obvious. They had been given their marching orders ahead of time.

Or in the alternative they'd been "briefed" privately. This was Todd Cowan's trick several years back when he lied to his own Council about me and this Blog in order to have Council remove me from CPAC. It takes a special kind of filth to behave in such a fashion and when it comes to deception and lying the only competition to politicians are lawyers.

How does this bode for Councillor Scott Hahn? The Audit by Froese Inc. should be released imminently if our Township Clerk does her public duty. Unfortunately she too has shown tendencies to back Staff and Council at the public's expense. Then MECAC are scheduled to be in Council Chambers on August 27/15 10 am. to decide whether or not to send Scott Hahn to the courts for prosecution under the MEA. Make no doubt Scott's Financial Statement was horribly bad. The MEA is clear on what are grounds for prosecution.

MECAC will receive the real deal forensic Audit not the five minute rubber stamped approval that Sandy and other Mayors and many Regional Councillors all received. Those "Audits" are no more than a formality and a nod to the Election Act (MEA). They essentially advise astute readers exactly of that if read carefully including the Limitations and Qualified Opinion sections.

The Audit will find Scott in gross non compliance with the Act. Similarily a forensic Audit of Sandy Shantz would find the same thing. In order to save Sandy will Scott be thrown to the wolves? Will MECAC make an example of him in order to hide their coverup of Sandy? Or are they all so arrogant and confident in the buddy system that everybody gets off; Scott free so to speak?

WOOLWICH COUNCIL MEETING THIS TUESDAY 6 PM.

This coming Tuesdy August 11 we have Committee of the Whole at 6 PM.. I believe that Vivienne Delaney, Ron Campbell and Graham Chevreau of CPAC will all be speaking as Delegates albeit on various matters. Yours truly is also booked for a little tete a tete with our esteemed Council.

Recently the Ontario M.O.E. have been requesting information from Graham and CPAC regarding their recent sediment testing in Canagagigue Creek. This has been highly ignorant of them under all the circumstances. First off the disrespectful bastards should be making their inquiries through Chair Dr. Dan Holt. They aren't so they can go kiss themselves. Secondly they were invited (again) to attend CPAC two weeks ago when Graham made his presentation regarding the sediment testing done for CPAC. The M.O.E. failed to attend (again). Thirdly they and Chemtura lied like the dogs they are at the April 9/15 pretend "stakeholders" meeting about Dr. Dan, myself and CPAC. Did I already suggest that they could go kiss themselves?

Yesterday's Waterloo Region Record carried an article by Paige Desmond titled "Audit of Woolwich councillor's expenses nears end". There will be yet another meeting in Council Chambers on August 27 at 10 am. I personally will attend and see if those idiots can even look me in the eye after their violation of the Elections Act on July 2/15 in Council Chambers. They illegally accepted Mayor Shantz's last minute second set of Financial Statements and Auditor's Report. I expect the Auditor's report to be damning in regards to Scott Hahn's ridiculous filed Financial Statement. It will be interesting to see if MECAC does the right thing and send it on to the courts for prosecution or whether the subverted MECAC will ride to yet another politicians's rescue.

Woolwich Council and Staff are grossly inept and incompetent in oh so many ways. Let me add but one more way. Most municipal councils including past Woolwich Councils post the schedule of Council meetings for the entire year. Currently on the Township's website we have the fascinating knowledge that Council's last meeting was June 25/15. Seriously that's it folks. Not even this coming Tuesday's Council meeting is posted on-line. Are these folks complete space cadets? We pay them above private industry rates, load them with benefits at our cost and they can't even keep up to date on imminent Council meetings. CAO Dave Brenneman is ultimately responsible for all the staff but I guess he's too busy lately defending all the indefensible behaviours of council members. That and writing ridiculous and dishonest Resolutions disbanding committees of council are obviously distracting him.

WOOLWICH COUNCIL'S BEHAVIOUR IS PUBLICLY BITING THEM IN THE ASS

While the below Editorial from the Record is not 100% accurate, it's close enough. The entire Council knowingly allowed Mark and Sandy to dishonestly and maliciously appease Chemtura Canada and the corrupt Ministry of the Environment by falsely blaming CPAC for their manufactured crisis. Do you think I should have one ounce of sympathy for that pack of incompetents? Should I shrug my shoulders and say "Oh what's more deception and dishonesty by half our Council?




Jul 27, 2015 |


The Record's view: A wake-up call for Woolwich
Waterloo Region Record
By Editorial

Whatever is in the water in Woolwich? Half of the current six-member township council — Mayor Sandy Shantz, and councillors Mark Bauman and Scott Hahn — have made mistakes involving the filing of election expenses. And now they are gasping for air in a sea of embarrassment.

Shantz was removed from the office of mayor on July 8, after she failed to properly file her Oct. 27 election expenses. She has acknowledged violating the act by failing to get an audit, accepting a donation above the limit and incorrectly reporting her election income.

Last week, Justice David Broad agreed to allow Shantz to submit corrected documents and return to office.

Meanwhile, Coun. Scott Hahn is awaiting the result of an audit after he didn't file expenses correctly. The first-time councillor has admitted he didn't claim costs for signs and brochures that family members paid for. They told him the materials were free. The investigation could lead to serious penalties under the Municipal Elections Act.

As for Bauman, he didn't file an expense report at all because he was acclaimed and, therefore, didn't have any campaign expenses. His mistake was complicated by the fact that the township clerk's office failed in its duty to issue a warning ahead of the filing deadline. But under the law, even acclaimed candidates must file. Bauman was removed from office briefly and reinstated by the court.

There are some who call this exercise in accountability a tempest in a teapot. The law is too severe and draconian, they say. Indeed, the Municipal Elections Act is under review, so there are opportunities to correct those concerns. But for now, it is the law, it is there to ensure that elections are fair, and it most certainly needs to be obeyed.

Why is Woolwich particularly troubled by these violations? The answer lies in the fact that its politics are more stormy than its bucolic landscape suggests. Two of the three politicians were targeted by a citizen activist, Alan Marshall, who is unhappy with the way Shantz and Bauman handled an advisory committee concerned with pollution of the township's groundwater. Like many activists, Marshall provokes strong feelings in the people he encounters. He isn't finished, either: he has also asked police to investigate what he says were violations of the law by the township clerk and municipal election audit committee.

But love him or loathe him, Marshall's questions have uncovered multiple infractions of the rules. The resulting embarrassment can be a wake-up call, like a splash of cold water on a sleepy face. And in that sense, Marshall has performed a service to his neighbours.



Council were informed in writing by myself as to there being consequences for their behaviour. I and others have unlike them, honestly presented the truth about three of them and their blatant election expense screwups. Is their public exposure, humiliation and embarassment unintentional? Hell no at least on my part it isn't. Can it be remedied? By honest people of good will it can. Council however will likely continue to deflect, distract and obfuscate; thrashing wildly about blaming the messengers instead of themselves.

CHEMTURA'S FIRE, SANDY'S ELECTION EXPENSES, TROLLS & MORE

O.K. yesterday was an interesting day. In over five years I've never had either the number of hits, views and comments as I did yesterday. I've maintained quite a steady batch of readers with some fluctuations up and down depending on the environmental issue of the day. Certainly this last month I've wandered into politics with the election expense scandals here in Woolwich. I deleted numerous comments yesterday especially the late ones after I'd advised that enough was enough. A couple of too clever by half commenters decided to hijack things with their neverending round and round philosophizing.

There was a small fire at Chemtura a week ago Sunday early in the morning. What is interesting is Chemtura's response or better yet non response to the community group (CPAC) appointed by the last Council to interact with Chemtura environmentally. This is in line with Chemtura's behaviour aided and abetted by our new Woolwich Council since last November. Unfortunately it is only a matter of time until Chemtura have another big one. It's not if it's when.

Indeed in my listing yesterday of both new and old election expense contraventions I left out one still unknown area. This is but one of many glaring weaknesses in the Municpal Elections Act 1996 (MEA). Donations of $100 or less are all lumped together without identification. In Mayor Shantz's case this allegedly is a minimum of seventeen anonymous donors each at $100 or less with a grand total of $1658. The obvious problem is that for example two embarassing $750 donations could be hidden in this large group quite easily and remain anonymous at least until a forensic Audit took place. Whether or not our Mayor is capable of such a "mistake" I leave up to you.

Including the campaign videos (12 of them) I listed eleven different contraventions yesterday although I made clear that number 10 (Brian Shantz) was speculative. Number twelve above ($1658 <$100) is also in the speculative category. Nevertheless what is the motivation for all these contraventions? Is it solely to save approximately $750 on the cost of the quickie audit Sandy finally produced on July 2/15? Are the multiple failures to post legitimate and legally mandated expenses due to embarassment at how much she overspent her three opponents combined campaign expenses? Is she actually hiding corporate or other embarassing donors illegally from the public's view? These questions will only possibly be answered truthfully if and when a full blown forensic audit takes place.

MORE NEW EXPENSE CONTRAVENTIONS BY SANDY REVEALED

Is this a record in the sheer number of "errors" any one politician can make in their Financial Statements? Is Sandy the dumbest 31 year bookeeping veteran on the planet? Or... did she do it intentionally?

Why am I revealing here in this venue Mayor Shantz's errors, mistakes, contraventions and screwups? Yes I've already admitted as per this morning's commenter (Saturday's post however) and elsewhere that it is at least partly due to Sandy's dishonest assault upon and dissolution of CPAC. More specifically I'm revealing all the blatant, obvious attempts to deceive as well as the just plain dumb ones because to date all the other "appropriate" forums are comprimised. Where are the responsible "authorities" pray tell? MECAC illegally accepted her three month late, still error riddled Statements. Superior Court Judge D. Broad doesn't understand the significance of the March 23/15 date on Sandy's revised Financials. The Waterloo Regional Police jumped on former mayor Todd Cowan at Woolwich Council's request but have even refused accepting witness contact information from me regarding Sandy's election expenses because Council are still supporting her.

To date Sandy has ADMITTED :

1) failing to file a mandated Audit by March 27/15

2) accepting a corporate overdonation

3) accepting a donation from Councillor Larry Shantz's Web D Zine Inc. attributed to Larry's Stair Travel Inc.

Note that to date 3) while "explained" is still peculiar and very odd.


UNADMITTED by Sandy are:

4) "Revenue from fund-raising events not deemed a contribution"

5) "Meetings hosted"

6) "Cost of fund-raising events/activities"

7) "Voting day party/appreciation notices" - Sandy did the first, bagged the second

8) Table 1 (Donations) & Table 4 "Separate supplementary attachments" are missing

9) March 23/15 knowingly under oath allowing a false Financial Statement to stand

10) Oh boy this is a really serious one and to date speculative: Allegedly hubby Brian Shantz donated the maximum amount ($750) from his corporation Evenholme Investments. What is weird is that as her hubby, Brian can donate as much as he wants and yet allegedly on her Financial Statement he has donated zero. His only donation ($750) was through Evenholme. Could Evenholme be being used as a proxy illegally for a donor who wishes to remain anonymous? If so my guess would be Chemtura or employees.

Numbers 4, 5, 6 & 7 are the newest provable expense irregularities. Included in Sandy's 30 page last minute submission to MECAC on July 2/15 was her homemade Financial Spreadsheet (pg. 13). The last entry (related to 7) appreciation notices) dated December 22/15 is breathtakingly and extraordinarily stupid and incompetent (at best for Sandy). She has removed two already posted expense items totalling $627.15. She has referenced and included MEC guide pgs. 25 & 26 as her justification. Unfortunately her included reference relates to mayoral campaign expense limits which is totally irrelevant to her deducting from her expenses.

I am sure that this illegal deduction ( 7) ) which reduces her total expenses admitted to date from $10,103.04 (above the audit threshold) to only $9,275.39 (below the audit threshold) is purely coincidence.

4), 5) & 6) relate to Sandy's totally as yet unadmitted and unacknowledged September 16/15 kick-off event as well as her October 8/15 Sip n Bite and October 9/15 Bonnie Lou's restaurant events. There is evidence based upon the dates of her admitted bank deposits that she raked in donations at the first one. Also she has not expensed any of these three events and I am skeptical that commercial restaurants would not charge her for either table space or a meeting room during their supper rush hour. If they donated both space, time and refreshments then that should have shown up in her donations but did not. Also Sandy very nicely indicated for MECAC on her "MEC guide pgs. 25 & 26" not only the previously mentioned justification (wrongly) for deducting $627.15 but also her justification (wrongly) for not including the "Cost of holding a fund-raising function". Thank you Sandy!


So is Woolwich Township being run by an incompetent twit or a 31 year bookeeping veteran who knows her way around expense reports? Maybe there's a third option? Possibly I still haven't found all her contraventions and maybe I've even forgotten some and failed to list them this morning. Happy bookeeping Sandy.

DANG! I knew I'd forgotten some things! Sandy's twelve campaign You-Tube videos. This relates back
to 3) . Larry claims in his June 18/15 letter to MECAC that they are included in his October 21/14 $1500
invoice to Sandy. Unfortunately that is NOT what his October invoice says.

SANDY'S CARTOON, "ALARMING" LEVELS OF DDT, JUSTICE BROAD'S REASONS

Thank you Woolwich Observer and cartoonist Arnold. As a non artist and quasi writer I'm the first to appreciate that a picture, especially a humuorous one, is worth a thousand words. Yesterday's Observer has a cartoon showing Sandy replacing CPAC on a blackboard with RAC and TAG. The caption reads "Despite shuffling some chairs, Woolwich is no closer to a solution for ongoing issues identified at the Chemtura site." The second panel of the cartoon shows the Canagagigue Creek with a three legged heron, a two headed duck, dead fish and another fish walking on legs on the creekbank. The cartoonist has succinctly captured the inherent dishonesty and intellectual thinness of Sandy's dissolving of CPAC a month ago. She did it to appease Chemtura not to help the environment even remotely.

The Observer carry the following front page story titled "Elevated DDT levels found in Canagagigue". While the story is excellent due to Steve Kannon interviewing Graham Chevreau of CPAC nevertheless it continues a disturbing trend of the Observer being missing in action for major Woolwich events. They have not attended public CPAC meetings I would estimate in a decade including this last one on July 23/15 in which Graham presented his report and the MBN Environmental sampling results of creek sediments.

Finally while getting the link to put here for the Observer's DDT story I noticed that Steve has an on-line story also on last week's Superior Court decision by Justice D. Broad. Again Steve was sadly missing in action for that Application by Sandy for reinstatement. The K-W Record, CTV News and the Independent were all there in person.

Steve mentions that Justice Broad referred to Sandy's breach as "trivial". Apparently that "trivial" breach required 134 pages of Affidavits, Factums and case law from Sandy's lawyer to explain. Those 134 pages were filled with self serving horse manure and falsehoods. They falsely claimed good faith, inadvertence and honest mistakes. No mention of Sandy's 31 years of bookeeping experience she brags about. No mention of all the expenses she has even yet not admitted to in her to date TWO Financial Statements with a third on the way. No mention of her gamesmanship with "trial by ambush" at MECAC (Compliance Audit Committee). No mention of her gamesmanship in getting a short notice (four days) Application before Superior Court just like Mark Bauman. Remember I received that Notice formally on the Monday three days before the Court hearing. Even if I'd had a lawyer I could not possibly have filed and served all the parties with them then having four days notice as required.

Then the Judge does himself an amazing disservice by admitting he does not understand the March 23/15 barely legible date on Sandy's second Financial Statement. He claims that he doesn't understand its significance even though he thinks I'm speaking to Sandy's lack of good faith regarding knowingly filing a false Financial Statement. Wow maybe the Judge knows the law but he is an idiot regarding simple dates. Sandy put the March 23/15 date on the Financial Statement she sent to Tim Adams of MAC LLP because that's exactly when she sent it. She knew before the March 27/15 filing deadline that her financials were grossly in error. Sandy's lawyer had no meaningful response when Justice Broad invited him to rebut my argument regarding March 23/15 as I posted here a few days back.

The coverup continues and to date includes Woolwich Council, Clerk, MECAC and dare I even think Superior Court. Maybe the judge can use the incompetent defence of Sandy versus being tarred as part of a coverup. Apparently throwing an unpopular Mayor to the wolves for double expensing is O.K. whereas Sandy is "good" people. She represents what the powers to be view as a marketable commodity that can fool enough people with her appearance and usually soft words. Watch how quickly they abandon her when her election expense issues reach an unfavourable tipping point.