MUNICIPAL CORRUPTION, INTIMIDATION & BLACKMAIL

Mayor Shantz mockingly referred to myself at the last MECAC meeting as having "conspiracy theories". Interesting as to how politicians constantly deny collusion and conspiracies which unfortunately are a part of the human condition. As far as the political condition goes they are standard operating procedure. Nothing gets done without private and secret discussions/negotiations taking place first. When it comes to the recent debacle in Breslau regarding the proposed sale of their parkland, lo and behold it now appears that Woolwich staff were quietly discussing that two years ago even after Council emphatically turned it down.

Woolwich CAO Brenneman has recently threatened me in an e-mail with legal action due to my insistence that he and staff correct the now Approved October 26/15 MECAC Minutes. Mr. Brenneman refuses to discuss the specific serious errors in them including false statements attributed to myself. The Minutes are biased and as the meeting was to allegedly discuss Mayor Shantz's election contraventions you can guess which way staff or possibly senior management have tilted those Minutes. This goes so far as to have both misquoted me in the mayor's favour as well as misquoting her admission to further contraventions, pretty clearly to protect her. A few corrections were made between the Draft Minutes which were posted with full knowledge of their errors from December 7/15 until January 8/16 and the Approved Minutes now on the Township's website.

There are many definitions of corruption including "riddled with errors". That definition and more covers Woolwich Township's intentional and dogmatic mishandling of the Municipal Elections Compliance Audit Committee (MECAC) Minutes. Both David Brenneman and staff have received e-mails since December 9/15 advising them of the errors and falsehoods in their Minutes, both Draft and Approved.

The blackmail in the above title is my definition of blackmail and may or may not be the legal definition. You be the judge. The mayor's lawyer in several e-mails threatened to expose a twenty year old civil court case I was involved in if I attended mayor Shantz's Superior court hearing last July. I advised him that it was irrelevant and that I didn't appreciate his scurrilous behaviour. I then attended court and against his protests to the court was granted "friend of the court" status and allowed to speak. This lawyer's name is Jaimie Bennett and I believe he also represented Mark Bauman in his surrepticious trip to Superior Court in order to get reinstated to Woolwich Council. At no time was I the complainant in Mark's case given any notice whatsoever of this legal manoevre.

Again you the readers be the judge. Do these facts represent corruption, intimidation and blackmail?