WEIRD BEHAVIOUR BY THE TOWNSHIP

Following is a copy of a Letter I hand delivered this morning to the Woolwich Township Clerk first and then afterwards sent to the Waterloo Regional Police. Late yesterday afternoon I received a response from the Clerk confirming receipt of my Monday July 6/15 letter and further advising me that MECAC have washed their hands of this file /complaint regarding the Mayor's election expenses. Yesterday's e-mail is what prompted today's Letter. The Clerk did not respond to my statements in the July 6/15 Letter that the Mayor had forfeited her seat due to contraventions of the Elections Act.



LETTER TO WOOLWICH TOWNSHIP CLERK, MS. VAL HUMMEL, REGARDING THE ILLEGAL OCCUPANCY OF THE MAYOR'S CHAIR BY SANDY SHANTZ


Ms. Sandy Shantz has publicly admitted numerous contraventions of the Municipal Elections Act 1996 (MEA) including the failure to file an Auditor's Report with her Financial Statement by the March 27, 2015 deadline.

Penalties include automatic forfeiture of her seat (mayor) as per the specific Sections quoted in my Monday, July 6, 2015 letter to you and Mr. Carl Zehr, MECAC Chair.

Neither the Township Clerk (yourself) nor the Municipal Election Compliance Audit Committee (MECAC) have the authority to accept a late return and effectively extend the March 27, 2015 time limit.

You as Township Clerk have failed in your duties to satisfy provisions of the MEA dealing with Notices of Breech, forfeiture etc..

This is to advise you that I am currently attempting enforcement of Ontario law (MEA) via the Waterloo Regional Police Services.


Sincerely Alan Marshall

WOOLWICH TOWNSHIP ARE HEADED FOR AN UNECESSARY SCANDAL

It's becoming more and more difficult to have much sympathy for the characters who are running this Township. That said their sins and misdeeds will negatively affect all of us. Even very minor sins, inappropriately handled, can have major consequences. This Township are currently in the middle of such a self made mess. It seems to be all about face saving, one upsmanship, arrogance and pride.

The three big C's are Coverup, Collusion and Corruption. Depending on one's definitions I believe that the first two C's are a done deal a long time ago. The third C is the biggie and the toughie. For the moment I'll let my opinion on that one sit.

It is my and others understanding that Mayor Shantz has forfeited her position as Mayor whether automatically on March 27/15 for failing to file an Auditor's Report or as recently as June 16/15 when I filed my "Application for a Compliance Audit" AND she received her own private Auditor's report on the same day (MAC LLP). It is even possible that the date for her forfeiture was last Thursday July 2/15 when she finally admitted the obvious namely that she had not filed by March 27/15 an Auditor's Report as legislated by the Ontario government via the Municipal Elections Act 1996.

MECAC MADE A MESS OF LAST THURSDAY'S HEARING. HERE IS THE FOLLOWUP

The following letter was delivered in person at 9:02 am. this morning. I have since received e-mail confirmation that the Clerk's office have sent it to Mr. Carl Zehr.



LETTER GIVEN TO WOOLWICH CLERK FOR MR. CARL ZEHR, CHAIR OF MECAC
Mon. July 6, 2015
MECAC
Attention: Chair Carl Zehr

On Thursday July 2, 2015 your panel met to consider my complaint that Mayor Sandy Shantz was out of compliance with the Municipal Elections Act. You will recall that Sandy Shantz presented a new set of financial statements as well as an Auditor’s Report as the meeting began. You can appreciate that as the complainant, I did not have time to examine them, and hence, my presentation was compromised. After examing them, later in the day, I was puzzled by the date provided on page 8 of the return where the name of the auditor is indicated - March 23, 2015 as well as the date of the auditor’s letter, June 16, 2015, the date of my complaint to you. I was also perplexed as to why this information was not provided to me in a timely manner prior to the start of the proceeding. Was this audit started in March and not submitted?
Your panel ruled unanimously that not much more would be found by sending the case to an auditor since the Mayor had just submitted “new” forms that addressed my concerns. In fact her return is still incomplete as audit costs incurred, March 23/15, and the expense of hosted parties are still unclaimed . Furthermore her submitted financial spreadsheet does not correspond with her list of donations nor has it been revised to reflect her new Contributions or Campaign Income. In short her new and revised Financial Statement is still in serious error.
It is obvious that the case need not be sent to an audit since THE MAYOR, IN SUBMITTING HER NEW FINANCIALS, HAS ADMITTED THAT SHE WAS IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE ACT. No audit was needed to confirm this contravention, which was what my complaint was about. In essence, the Mayor’s own private audit indicates some of the flaws that a more formal audit would have returned with. I also note that it is NOT your privilege to accept a late financial report and allow it to be posted as if it was “legal”.
Without the need for an audit, your panel now needs to deal with the issue of what to do with the contraventions that have now been verified . According to Sections 78 (1), 80 (1) and 80 (2) of the Municipal Elections Act Sandy Shantz forfeited her office by law on March 27/15 and in fact when she admitted that her expense report was incorrect and required an Auditor’s Report. Those dates would have been June 16/15 as well as July 2/15 at the MECAC hearing.
Section 78 (1) of the MEA states that a candidate shall file with the Clerk both a Financial Statement and an Auditor’s Report by 2 pm. of the filing date. Section 80 (1) states that the candidate is also subject to the penalties listed in subsection (2) if he or she fails to file a document as required under Section 78 or 79.1 by the relevant date. Section 80 (2) states that in the case of a default the candidate forfeits any office to which he or she was elected and the office is deemed to be vacant.
I note that in the case of Mark Bauman, the Woolwich lawyer was instructed to remain neutral. He was so nuetral, that no evidence or witnesses, including the complainant was called. The complainant heard of the hearing from a reporter, and, arriving at 10:06 for a 10:00 start, he discovered that the case was over. It is obvious that further action needs to be conducted by an independent counsel chosen by MECAC.
I would appreciate your immediate response indicating when you will re-convene to rule on the next step.
Respectfully Alan Marshall

MAYOR SHANTZ'S ELECTION EXPENSES - THE PLOT THICKENS?

What exactly is going on here? If ever there was proof that submiting late , multi-page documentation is "Trial by Ambush" this is it. I've been rereading the Mayor's 28 pages of allegedly Audited Financial Statements and this I can tell you. Her Auditor did not audit her entire election expense documentation. He audited at best eight pages of her Financial Statement-Auditor's Report Form 4. That's it, a whole eight pages of her 28 page submission all neatly stapled together in one bundle and giving the impression of a comprehensive Audit. It was not! While the Auditor involved is undoubtedly a professional and has done a good job with the limited data he received; he himself very carefully included a "Basis for Qualified Opinion" clause in his report. It reads as follows:

"Due to the inherent nature of the transactions of a campaign, the completeness of contributions and other revenue and expenses is not susceptible to satisfactory audit verification. Accordingly, our verification of these amounts was limited to the amounts recorded in the candidate's accounting records and we were not able to determine whether any adjustments might be necessary to contributions and other revenue, expens, assets, liabilities and net assets.".

A very careful reading (as in two or three times) indicates that the mayor has told the truth in her page and a quarter submission to MECAC last Thursday. Despite the obvious inference that the Auditor audited all of her Thursday's late submissions, her carefully worded submission indicates otherwise. Similarily a very careful reading of the Auditor's page and a half report also indicates that all he audited were the eight pages of her Financial Statement-Auditor's Report Form 4. It is possible that if the Mayor had included this Auditor's Report when it was legally required by March 27, 2015 or even when she filed on February 2/15 that she would be in the clear.

Something is very peculiar here and to date is failing the smell test. The accountant involved, as mentioned yesterday here in the Advocate, is listed on page 8 of her Financial Statement along with the date of March 23, 2015. However his actual page and a half report is dated June 16, 2015. Did he start his audit four days before the filing deadline of March 27/15? If so why did mayor Shantz not exercise her right to an extended deadline while she waited for his audit? Did she allow the March 27/15 deadline to pass while knowing full well that her Financial statement did not have it's mandated Audit included and hence her report was false? These are extremely serious questions and require answers promptly.

The Thursday MECAC meeting was reported as the lead, front page story in both the Friday July 3 Waterloo Region Record and the Woolwich Observer.

SMOKE & MIRRORS, THE MEA, POLITICIANS AND MECAC

Yesterday both the competence and the credibility of the Municipal Elections Compliance Audit Committee (MECAC) were on full display. As was the same for Mayor Shantz. She was rude, nasty and disrespectful which based upon her public preaching also makes her a hypocrite. Thank you Sandy for showing us that we're supposed to do what you say, not what you do. Similarily Councillor Mark Bauman who allegedly spoke in support of our Mayor actually was all about Mark. He whined and carried on about how badly he'd been treated by yours truly. Boo hoo. And again he also showed himself to be the hypocrite as I in the entire process both verbal and written to MECAC have virtually said and written nothing critical or derogatory about Mayor Shantz. Amazing isn't it Mark and Sandy how easy it is to wind someone up? The difference is I wound you pair up by speaking the polite truth about you both whereas in the past you've wound me up with your deception and obfuscation regarding CPAC and Chemtura. Set and match to moi.

MECAC were unbelievable. Mayor Shantz via the Deputy Clerk handed out a 27 page document ten to fifteen minutes before the start of the 11 am. meeting. The Chair, Carl Zehr, arrived at 4 minutes after 11 due to traffic. Several of the MECAC speakers had the honesty (naivety?) to mention the obvious, namely they did not have time to read the Mayor's submission. Nevertheless after the Mayor verbally explained to them that everything in my Application for a Compliance Audit was correct hence she was revising her Financial Statement AND including an Auditor's Report; they bought it hook, line and sinker. Rest assurred the words "Alan was right" did not pass the Mayor's lips. She stickhandled like a pro and attempted to give the impression that all on her own she decided to comply with the Municipal Elections Act (MEA). Did I mention the word "hypocrite"?

MECAC unanimously voted to dismiss my Application on the grounds that the Mayor SAID she had now complied three months late to the MEA. They also by their vote have put themselves, their independence and their credibilty on the line. Nobody, myself included, remotely had enough time to properly absorb the information, including Auditor's Report, in her late submission.

Is her amended Financial Statement- Auditor's Report Form 4 acceptable? The answer is still no. What she submitted yesterday is unsigned and undated by either her or the Township CLerk. The submitted Auditor's Report is dated June 16/15, the very day that I filed my Application for an Auditor's Report. What the hell? BUT... page 8 of her new Financial Statement lists the name of the Auditor, his employer, address, phone number and date that page was written and the date is March 23/15 FOUR DAYS PRIOR to the filing deadline of March 27/15. Curiouser and curiouser. There are different possibilities here. One is simply further mayoralty incompetence and error. The skeptic however might think that while the Mayor allegedly filed her first Financial Statement on February 2/15, in fact she knew that she required an Audit prior to the March 27/15 deadline and initiated the process only to learn he couldn't do it that quickly. She then decided to bluff her way through and pretend all was well. This included lying to the Elmira Independent on June 16 (published June 19) claiming she thought her initial return was without error and one Alan Marshall didn't know what he was talking about. This would also explain how the very same day I filed my Application for a Compliance Audit, she suddenly has one.

These are not the only problems with the Mayor's revised Financial Statement - Auditor's Report. Allegedly she has filed ALL her expense receipts. Oddly several meetings including campaign kick off meetings and Meet & Greet's at two local restauarants appear to be missing. Also there is no response/explanation to my formal request in my Application regarding these missing expenses. Oh and she also didn't claim her Auditing expense as she should have.

All of these failures, inconsistencys and discrepancies were missed yesterday intentionally by MECAC. How do professionals gloss over that kind of incompetence? One by being unanimous in their incompetence. Something like Woolwich Council on occasion. Citizens find it hard to truly believe that they are being scammed by all of them on some issues (CPAC for instance).

I've listed the bad news. The good news is that mayor Shantz has been held to account. She grossly violated the MEA and has been forced to refile (sort of) her Fnancial Statement. She has been forced to include an Auditor's Report as the law demands. She has admitted (backhandedly) that her expense reports were inadequate and inaccurate and that everything I claimed about her contraventions was true and accurate. That is killing her right now when it should not. I repeat that at no time to date have I suggested or inferred that she is corrupt, at least regarding this issue, nor have I stated to the MECAC that she intentionally violated the Municipal Elections Act (MEA). Frankly right this very second I'm not so sure. Those differing Auditor's dates require serious explanation.

WILL THE SEDIMENT TESTING FURTHER EMBARASS THE PARTNERS IN POLLUTION?

Today's Elmira Independependent carrys this story titled "Sediment testing underway by CPAC". Unlike the Ontario M.O.E. who like to sit on their lab results for months and even years when they are embarassing, these results should be available much sooner. As indicated by CPAC member Sebastian, these samples are taken in an area that has never been tested . That is to the everlasting shame of our M.O.E. who are supposed to be responible for the environment as well as responsible to both human and wildlife receptors. There is a swimming pond nearby and the M.O.E.'s failure to test the drain/creek which flows by it is horrific. Children have used this pond for decades while both Chemntura and the M.O.E. have pretended that the Chemtura site is contained. The downstream results of DDT and Dioxins over the last three summers say otherwise.

The M.O.E. will stickhandle and mention some berm testing around the pond which indeed had positive results for DDT & Dioxins. They failed to test sediments in the bottom of the pond and they categorically obfuscated and misled CPAC two summers ago when they claimed there was no pathway from Chemtura over to the pond. My discovery of the Drain last May, as indicated in today's Independent article, devastated the M.O.E.'s remaining shreds of credibility.

COUNCIL CONTINUE THEIR ABUSE OF WOOLWICH CITIZENS & VOLUNTEERS

I've said it before and I'll say it again. This new Woolwich Council are beyond shameless. They know that one media outlet and many citizens have taken their measure and found them to be without honour or morals. Their hypocrisy and willingness to publicly state that black is white also know no bounds.

Currently a Woolwich Staff person is tasked with the job of phoning CPAC members and myself asking if we wish to let our Applications to CPAC stand for the new charade of "public consultation" referred to as RAC and TAG. Eight people filled in Applications as per the process initiated last November by Woolwich Township. The eight included the five honest CPAC members (i. less Councillor Mark Bauman) plus myself. The other two are probably Pat and Susan although the truth challenged folks on Council pretend to claim they don't know. Puleasee!

Therefore there are only eight people in all of Woolwich who applied so by any normal process all eight would be used to fill any openings on the new RAC and Tag committees. Problem is that RAC is already filled with bureaucrats and politicians namely the Mayor, a Councillor, Region of Waterloo, GRCA, the (bought &) paid (for) TAG Chair plus two more loyal to Council TAG members. Regardless TAG members should by any honest and civilized process come from the eight Applications properly received by Woolwich last November.

Of course there is the huge problem that RAC and TAG are so obviously intended to be corrupt. Just look at the proposed membership of RAC plus look at the process Council used to dissolve CPAC and annoint those two abominations. Council members smeared honest, hard working, competent Woolwich volunteers sitting on CPAC. Council abused those volunteers over a period of months and then those very same Council hypocrites have the brass balls to get a staff person to phone them up and ask if they will let their names stand. Woolwich Council shame on you. YOU are the reasons politicians have such a bad reputation and are held in such contempt.