WOOLWICH TOWNSHIP NEED TO PROVIDE TRANSCRIPTS OF PUBLIC MEETINGS IF THEY CAN'T DO A BETTER JOB OF TAKING MINUTES

Really they are pathetic and I've had enough of it. Incompetence including grammar, spelling and typographicals is at worst amateur hour. The real nasty is the blatant, pro Woolwich staff and politicians, bias. Their Committee minutes are also sometimes biased such as various CPAC Minutes from years ago which downplayed M.O.E./Chemtura/CRA incompetence and errors.

The Draft Minutes had me allegedly suggesting things like I was in agreement with the opinion of Tim Ryall of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs. I was not. They had mayor Shantz allegedly stating that she contacted her auditor Mr. Tim Adams AFTER I filed my Application for a Compliance Audit. That was untrue as she had stated at the meeting that she contacted him in May and my Compliance Audit application was dated June 16/15. MECAC member Robert Williams had asked if she or her accountant had written the July Financial Statement and the Draft Minutes stated June while the Amended ones dropped the date entirely thus confusing which Financial Statement the mayor was referring to in her answer..

Page four of the Draft Minutes claimed that MECAC members engaged in a debate in regards to ordering a Compliance Audit or not. They did no such thing. Just like the July 2/15 meeting each member gave his position individually against an audit and there was absolutely no back and forth between them. Page five claimed that I made an "allegation" regarding the low threshold required to order a Compliance Audit. I did no such thing. I made a statement of fact and backed it up with a report from the Ontario Bar Association which I quoted. I had also provided Woolwich Council previously with case law which backed up the same low threshold required for a Compliance Audit.

Both the Draft and Approved Minutes mistated Kevin Thompson's (Smith Valeriote) words on Page one. The Minutes state that Kevin Thompson's term "purposeful reading of the Act" in his Legal Opinion referred to a quick resolution of campaign finance matters when in fact it was in reference to allowing a Compliance Audit Application for the Amended and Supplementary Financial Statements. It is possible that the error here is Kevin Thompson's and not the taker of the Minutes. Regardless it is inaccurate and wrong. The Approved Minutes are simply hilarious on Page two, paragraph two as they now have me stating that Tim Ryall (Municipal Affairs) had stated in his letter that hosting of meetings and appreciation notices are all legitimate campaign expenses. Horse balogna. While the fact is true, Tim Ryall didn't say it and I didn't claim that he did. It then turns bizarre as on the very next page (3) the Approved Minutes reverse the statements again. Now we have mayor Shantz proclaiming accuarately that Tim Ryall told her to oversubmit and hence gives the false impression that these expenses were optional or subjective. They are not. Sandy actually stated "the MEA (Election Act) does not address thank you ads". That's awfully deceptive when you look at the Form 4 (Financial Statement) report which lists voting day party/appreciation notices on page two specifically to be filled in as expenses. All in all these two pages (2 & 3) are a disgrace as far as Minutes go. Two and a half months to produce this inaccurate and biased garbage. And those MECAC idiots approved it. You all deserve each other.

Page four of the Approved Minutes is going to be my last comment today. Larry Aberle allegedly stated that "the increased expenses that were recorded were trivial and represented less than 1% of the candidate's total spending limit.". That's another damn lie! Larry said 1 1/2 % ....LOL. In fact what Larry was talking about was the new contravention revealed earlier at the meeting by mayor Shantz that she had paid for additional sign stakes out of her own pocket rather than through her campaign account and that she had not expensed them. This one particular contravention was indeed only $151 and that was what Larry referred to as being 1 1/2% of her total expense limit. As you can see unsurprisingly this error and all the rest all seem to fall in the mayor's favour.

Woolwich Township you are a bush league bunch of dishonest, old boys club, incompetents. You excel in puffery and horse manure. For what you are paying you should have professional help with ethics and honesty included.