Friday, August 28, 2015


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.


  1. You are really grasping at straws here. It is an incredibly weak argument regarding the conflict of interest on the MECAC. It seems that every time somebody does something that you disagree with, you search for a reason to oust them - just to make their lives miserable. Kind of a sneaky way to try to get people to fear your self-imposed "consequences" for not obeying you. Modern-day bullying at its finest. It doesn't matter who is on Council - you will always find something to complain about and smear people.

    What exactly do you want here? What does our Council have to do to get you to lay off? Put you on TAG or something? Or would you just keep going anyway because this is how you get your jollies?

    The deterioration of your mental health has been fascinating to watch over the past few years. It's like watching a train wreck. Keep writing, Alan. None of the people that you smear on this blog read it anymore (I asked them)... you have been dismissed as being a lunatic. Just keep sitting in front of your computer, writing, writing, writing... the same 5 (3?) supporters will keep commenting on this blog "Good Work Alan" and the rest of the world rolls their eyes.

  2. Couldn't agree more with anonymous @ 9:20am.
    Alan just wants all of council to lose their seats because they booted him off of the CPAC a few year's ago. He holds a big grudge against them and won't stop until they are unseated as he is. He tries to spin it that he's helping the township etc. but really he just has a personal vendetta against the council. It's sad to see an old man waste away his final days like this. Spending time with family and friends to me would be the much more enjoyable option...but I guess if you don't have friends there's not much else to do.

  3. Thank you Mark & Joey for your comments. First off you twits this Council never kicked me off of CPAC. Try to get your facts straight. Secondly feel free to dispute the facts, data, dates, quotes etc. presented in today's posting if you dare. Shooting the messenger (me) is all you've got. Thirdly calling me an old man (65 nearly 66) is both politically incorrect and pure ageism. Grow up both you twits. If you're lucky someday you'll be this age. Mark you can't be all that far off. Regarding people not reading my Blog anymore I had over 150 individual hits yesterday alone. Regarding the no friends comment by the second commenter well apparently I've got at least five apparently according to the first commenter. Regarding the insults, piss off you pair of anonymous yellow bellies. Anonymous, irrelevant insults are usually deleted and will be in the future.

  4. Sorry folks. I deleted number five anonymous comment as it was simply insulting number four's english & more. In deleting appropriately number five I think I also removed number four by accident. Sorry number four your comment was acceptabl.

  5. Just deleted number five again (on purpose). Look dummy, comment on the content of the posting or go play elsewhere. This is not a forum for spelling critiques or personal insults irrelevant to the posting or other serious comments.

  6. But it is really really fun to point out your numerous shortcomings.....

    1. hey 1;17 ; Keep drinking the "cool-aid" then!

  7. Interesting article in the Woolwich Observor today by Steve Cannon; excerpts below;

    "Reviewing the court documents, Clausi noted Shantz claimed she submitted an audited statement to MECAC on June 29 even though committee members seemed to be getting the document just prior to a July 2 hearing.

    “Are you telling me that you perjured yourself?” he asked Shantz.

    Clearly taken aback, Shantz said the date given to the court was an error, one she raised with her lawyer who was to talk to the judge about it."

  8. Another Article in the Woolwich Observer by Steve Cannon with the headline "New evidence demands further cleanup orders be directed at Chemtura, says watchdog group states" AND

    "For Coun. Patrick Merlihan, it’s important to keep pressure on the ministry to do more about the contaminants that first precipitated a drinking water crisis in Elmira in 1989. “This has been dragging on for 25 years. We do want answers for our citizens on this.”

    On the other hand Bauman is refered to " Coun. Mark Bauman pushed for the matter to be referred to TAG for further study before taking any action. “I don’t want to jump to assumptions,” he said, noting that CPAC’s study does strongly suggest there are more problems. “The evidence that they have is compelling.”

    Obviously the current CPAC agrees.

    This anonymous would like to state at this point that it is obvious that Bauman is a more talented politician at this point however Merlihan is a much better man. Merlihan is not so wishy washy and appears to be seriously concerned about the Township budgets and taxpayers.

    It is absolutely clear that Mr. Marshall has been right all along!