ARE WOOLWICH TOWNSHIP & MECAC IN A MESS OF THEIR OWN MAKING?

I have in writing from the Township a statement that the Approved Minutes of the October 26/15 MECAC meeting would be posted on the Township's website by yesterday. Guess what? We're still stuck with the highly inaccurate (dishonest?) DRAFT Minutes that have been up all week. The simple act of posting controversial and inaccurate Minutes of that meeting I would characterize as inflammatory. In fact if there's one thing I've learned through this Municipal Elections Act (MEA) process started by Dr. Dan Holt last April; it would be exactly how hypocritical and scheming Woolwich Township Staff (some) and Councillors (most) are.

Mayor Shantz started off pretending that she was all about respectful dialogue. She criticized CPAC for their behaviour and attitude towards Chemtura and the Ministry of the Environment (M.O.E.). She then went right off the deep end with her April 9/15 Minutes of a meeting in which Dr. Dan Holt Chair of CPAC, with CPAC support, chose respectfully not to attend. The mayor and Council were advised specifically why the CPAC Chair would not attend this "pretend stakeholders" meeting on his own, in which multiple representatives from agencies and municipal/regional/provincial governments as well as Chemtura would be in attendance. Mayor Shantz along with Councillor Bauman also loaded the meeting with the likes of Pat McLean and Susan Bryant who's petty noses were still out of joint courtesy of former mayor Todd Cowan's alleged snub of them four and a half years earlier. Those meeting Minutes went so far as to state that CPAC & SWAT members including three PhDs, an owner of an environmental company, a certified chemist, a nurse and more had been physically aggresive and or intimidating to Chemtura and the M.O.E.. Yeah blatant lies really are respectful behaviour. Somewhat similar to years of Chemtura/M.O.E. behaviour.

So right now MECAC and Woolwich Township (mostly but not completely Council) are between a rock and a hard place. Have they figured out that their creative, fictional Minutes portraying me in a bad light and mayor Shantz in a better light, just might blow up in their faces? Poor credibility could be seen as evidence that they are hiding some things from the public and from the courts. Afterall why gild the lily if you're in the right in the first place? Why blatantly change the words spoken at a public meeting, even poorly attended by the public, unless you are hiding certain facts? In the contrary is it possible that the folks taking the Minutes are simply grossly incompetent for the job? I know that Municipal Clerk, Val Hummel, assurred me months ago that an independent professional had done the Minutes of the July 2/15 MECAC meeting. When I pressed her as to whom that independent professional was that made so many errors, Val refused to reply.

Their apparently biased DRAFT Minutes are on public display. If they fix them appropriately as my written corrections advise them, then they are admitting to either or both incompetence or bias. They would also be putting mayor Shantz in difficulty as she has twice now submitted sworn statements to Superior Court (July 23/15) that she has subsequently reneged on publicly. If they don't fix them then are they confident that they can bluster and bluff their way through my criticism and blunt claims that they have misrepresented the words spoken at the October 26/15 MECAC meeting? Are they 100% certain that they are the only holders of the tape recordings taken that day in Council Chambers? Go ahead make my day Woolwich Township.