A FLURRY OF LAST MINUTE (& LATE) SUBMISSIONS

It just gets weirder by the minute. I received two e-mails last evening from the Township Clerk, namely at 5:19 pm. and then again at 10:16 pm.. These e-mails received to date are dozens and dozens of pages and yet three of the ATTACHMENTS sent me I've already advised Clerk Hummel that the data did not come through. Aside from what is on some of these documents is the bizarre fact that they are all past the Township Clerk's deadline of 4 pm. Wednesday October 21/15. Now keep in mind this deadline was for sending submissions to MECAC. Commonsense would indicate that as a Party to the proceedings that I should also have received them at the same time. Apparently not as I'm still waiting. Also keep in mind that my mailbox is a 1 1/2 minute car ride from the Township building. A phone call or e-mail advising me of the hand delivery would have been appropriate if the Township Clerk was too busy to e-mail what she had by 4 pm. or if she was having computer problems. As I said bizarre.

Some of what I received includes an opinion by a lawyer for Smith Valeriote on behalf of the Township. Yes as indicated here yesterday this law firm both by my opinion as well as by the Clerk's opinion "....only takes their instructions from Council, and where appropriately delegated, senior staff.". Essentially their lawyer has provided glimmers of clarity surrounded by expanses of fog.

There are also submissions from mayor Shantz which can best be described as more of the same, namely excuses. They are irrelevant at this stage. It is not MECAC's mandate to determine why or how a candidate has messed up their original February 2/15 Financial Statements so badly. This Statement is the one that was filed prior to the March 27/15 deadline and is the only one upon which MECAC must determine whether the mayor contravened the Municipal Elections Act. Everything following may indeed be further evidence of all her contraventions, such as greatly increased Total Contributions as well as increased Total Expenses above the $10,000 threshold requiring an auditor's report. For example letters "explaining" the differences in her expenses are irrelevant. Letters "explaining" advice she did or did not receive from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs is also irrelevant. The only relevant information for MECAC is exactly what they had (and more since) last July 2/15 when they improperly denied a Compliance Audit of the mayor's Two Financial Statements plus other evidence.

She contravened the Elections Act both by my undisputed evidence as well by her own admissions. That is the only relevant information and it requires a full Compliance Audit (Forensic Audit) of the mayor's campaign expenses and donations. This Compliance Audit is not punitve it is investigative. Only after it is completed does MECAC then decide whether they wish to send mayor Shantz on to the courts or prosecuter for further investigation and or charges under the Municipal Elections Act 1996 (MEA).