MORE ON THURSDAY EVENING'S PUBLIC CPAC MEETING

While it's been admitted and stated by both Mark Bauman and Mayor Shantz even before the January 2015 CPAC meeting; nevertheless their ongoing private discussions with Chemtura Canada and the Ontario Ministry of the Environment regarding reforming/mellowing/emasculating CPAC are a public travesty and abomination. CPAC represent the public and were appointed by the last Council to do exactly that. That this Council would speak privately about CPAC and CPAC public issues behind their backs is an act of cowardice and public treachery. That the rest of Council have not stopped this filthy, dispicable behaviour reflects on their lack of intelligence and ethics.

Both Dr. Dan Holt and Sebastian Seibel-Achenbach discused Council's abuse of process in neither reappointing the old CPAC yet nor appointing a new one. This CPAC are being intentionally kept in limbo and treated shabbily by Council. Ron Campbell pointed out that the so called "technical" meetings with Chemtura/CRA/MOE absolutely do not solely require hydrogeologist credentials in order to effectively participate. In fact that is the point. Chemtura do not want CPAC to effectively participate in any fashion whatsoever.

The M.O.E. had requested $1,628 from CPAC in exchange for them providing financial data regarding the off-site cleanup of the Elmira Aquifers. Their Freedom of Information response demanding money in exchange for informing CPAC and the public as to how much of the public's money is being spent on the cleanup is disgusting and yet so typical of M.O.E. behaviour.

George Karlos of the M.O.E. had informed CPAC that they would wait up to two years for lab results from soil or sediment samples in and around Canagagigue Creek. Graham Chevreau of CPAC indicates that the Chemtura site is probably the worst contaminated site in Ontario and should be an M.O.E. priority. He will be getting samples taken professionally and analysed by an accredited lab within a week. His opinion is that the Onatrio M.O.E. are showing a reckless and wanton disregard for public health and safety.

Ron Campbell of CPAC was on a committee years ago that was looking at the possibility of Ontario adopting American principles concerning remediation of contaminated sites. This was of course referencing CERCLA & SARA? better known as "Superfund" sites. He also indicated that Conestoga Rovers (CRA), Chemtura's consultants are fully knowledgable regarding the U.S. cleanup principles. Afterall they made their reputation based at the first Superfund site namely the Love Canal.

Viveienne Delaney of CPAC spoke to CPAC regarding citizens' task forces at the Pine River site in St. Louis Michigan. The task force was given equal status and standing with the experts and other parties. Vivienne also discussed IPEN an organization assisting giving a voice to citizens with environmental problems around the world. A major part of IPEN's public education deals with Persistent Organic Pollutants or POPs. Apparently it is NGOs or Non Governmental Organizations which lead the way demanding both environmental and health studies where required.

Sebastian had quite a discussion/speech to the public and CPAC regarding the culture and climate around public consultation here in Canada. He indicated that it was clear that UPAC/CPAC were set up 24 years ago to fail the public interest. They were set up to be strictly a cosmetic body cheerleading the professionals at Chemtura, CRA and the M.O.E.. He personally has seen over the last four years how those three bodies have been building a resentment to CPAC's impertinence in actually believing that they had some right or even authority to question pronouncements from on high. Sebastian went on to say that in Canada versus the U.S. the populous movement is resented by the authorities and the elites. They simply do not want any power or influence whatsoever to flow to the people as a whole except every four years or so for five minutes when they are voting. In my words, citizens please vote and then f... off until the next election.

Richard Clausi (EH-Team) spoke at the Public Forum section of the Agenda. He expressed his skepticism that there would be any kind of an honest process regarding the private by invitation only alleged "technical" meetings. He also suggested that if Peter Gray (MTE) were to attend he should be permitted to hire a person with a historical background to accompany him such as one Alan Marshall BA (U. of Waterloo 1974) to assist him with overall perspective and analysis.

Lisa MacDonald also spoke at the Public Forum section of the Agenda. She indicated how well committees functioned and were respected during the tenure of the last Council versus the current one. She questioned Woolwich Townships commitment to following written Rules and Procedures such as committee Terms of Reference and even the Townships own Procedural By-laws.

Ken Jensen also spoke at the Public Forum section of the Agenda. Overall CPAC attendance by the public is definitely higher over the last four years versus any other time period. He has personal professional experience with Superfund sites in the U.S. and advised how they are driven by local residents. He indicated that Canada and the U.S. are poles apart and that the U.S. are in a completely different and superior league than Canada in cleaning up industrially contaminated sites. Obvious conflicts of interest as we have here in Elmira are stopped cold via the Superfund process. Client driven consultants and or their friends and colleagues do not drive the cleanups. My words are that here our Councils have embraced both professional and amateur conflicts of interest. According to Ken in the U.S. there are intentionally two adversarial sides of approximate equal strength involved and the truth eventually wins out. The system here in Ontario with the polluter, his consultants and a tame M.O.E. all on the same side is a farce. Here the best citizens can do is to attempt to win the Public Relations battle.

CPAC'S CALM AND QUIET STRENGTH

Last evening CPAC held their fifth public meeting in Woolwich Council Chambers with neither Chemtura nor the Ontario Ministry of Environment (M.O.E.) present. While it is exhiliarating not having to deal with their neverending deceit and obfuscations, obviously they are expected by the public to be present to present their versions of reality and to respond to questions and comments.

Besides public input via my Delegation at the start of the meeting there was also via Public Forum at the end, comments made by Lisa MacDonald, Richard Clausi and myself. CPAC members debated a number of issues arising from the extraordinarily bad behaviour of Woolwich Township over the last six months. These included the Township's wish to use Peter Gray of MTE Consultants to represent themselves in private by invitation only meetings with Chemtura, Conestoga Rovers and the M.O.E.. CPAC again made it very clear that in no way imaginable was Peter Gray attending these private meetings representing CPAC. They also made it clear that while Peter's expertise and reports were vital last October and this spring nevertheless Peter, on his own, was outgunned and overmatched when sitting down with multiple hydrogeologists who had spent over twenty years specifically on the Chemtura file. The opportunities for them to bullshit and bafflegab him with data that he has not seen nor reviewed are endless.

Another issue discussed and debated by CPAC was Woolwich CAO, David Brenneman's e-mail to CPAC advising that Woolwich Council had decided to extend CPAC's term of office by another three months until September 1, 2015. While his phone call to CPAC Chair Dr. Dan Holt appeared to be requesting that CPAC continue on, his e-mail simply advised of Council's decision. Debate was vigorous as the brass and gall of Woolwich Council, in the light of six months of a reprehensible smear campaign by one Woolwich Councillor plus Mayor, was beyond belief. Normally when an elected body or any group in authority request an extension of a term of office it is construed as a vote of confidence in the group they wish to carry on. CPAC's quiet strength and determination has been evidenced by their fortitude during this period of both verbal and written attack (April 9/15 "meeting minutes") by Councillor Bauman and Mayor Shantz.

CPAC member Ron Campbell expressed it best when he stated that CPAC should advise Woolwich Council that they believed according to their Terms of Reference as well as the Woolwich Procedural By-Laws that they CPAC were already into their second term and expected to complete this second four year term as per the specific terms in these accepted and agreed upon documents. The overall response was that CPAC would carry on despite the failure of Council to formally reappoint them in a timely manner. Sebastian Seibel-Achenbach was very clear in his condemnation of Woolwich Council's grotesquely disrespectful behaviour towards the Woolwich citizens volunteering their time on this committee. He and others were frankly skeptical of Council's intentions and motivations regarding this three month extension.

Supposedly Mark Bauman was restored yesterday to Council via Justice Grant Campbell of Superior Court in Kitchener. Of course I have to ask the obvious question namely how do you get restored when the Township allegedly never removed him in the first place? Secondly as previously mentioned here the document (Notice of Default) given to Mark and presumably Justice Campbell appeared on the surface to be flawed as it was missing the penalty of immediate forfeiture of office. Compounding these bizarre goings on is yesterdays late evening e-mail to CPAC by Mark Bauman, resigning from CPAC due to a bad /sour taste in his mouth from the last eight days. Possibly Mark noticed the underwhelming support from CPAC for his predicament or is this just another part of the Township's game plan? Time will very soon tell the tale.

Graham Chevreau gave an astounding presentation last evening. He had prepared a report with overhead slides and pictures regarding a grossly contaminated site in St. Louis Michigan formally known as the Velsicol plant among other names. This chemical factory producing DDT as well as brominated flame retardants is located alongside the Pine River which flows into lake Huron. Graham highlighted both the amazing similarities with our very own Chemtura Canada plant as well as the astounding differences in the remediation of the two sites. The Velsicol plant has had extensive source removal, in situ treatment (both thermal and chemical oxidation) and hydraulic containment. Their Dense Non Aqueous Phase Liquids (DNAPL) have been vigorously delineated and removed to all extents possible.

The differences and extent of remediation at the U.S. plant are a stark reality check to the excuses and deception Elmira citizens have received here from Chemtura, Conestoga Rovers and the Ontario M.O.E..

HAS WOOLWICH TOWNSHIP COMMITTED A TYPE OF FRAUD ON THE SUPERIOR COURT?

Yesterday I posted that Woolwich had screwed up their Notice of Default to Mark Bauman. Today at 10 am. they and Mark were in courtroom 506 Superior Court with Mark and his lawyers as Applicants and Woolwich Township as Respondents. I did recognize the one young Woolwich lawyer. What a joke in that there was no one in opposition present much less informed as to today's courtroom appearance. I got there about 10:06 am. and the Decision had been made. The Judge and courtroom were quiet as I entered probably for a minute or two. Several Woolwich Staff including the Clerk were all present at the back of the courtroom obviously enjoying a paid holiday.

The only reason I showed up was that obviously the Waterloo Region Record had been advised yesterday that Mark & colleagues (Township staff) were attending court today and Luisa D'Amato mentioned it (without the time) in her Opinion article today. I had been expecting an article today from Paige Desmond regarding Tuesday nite's erroneous Notice of Default. I presume she will cover today's Decision by the Superior Court judge.

Regarding the above headline I'm thinking that the judge may have been deceived by the erroneous Notice of Default in that the document failed to include Section 80 (2) (a) namely "The candidate forfeits any office to which he or she was elected and the office is deemed to be vacant and " ... then part (b) regarding ineligibility to be elected or appointed was the only penalty portion of Section 80 (2) that was included on the Notice.

Therefore the question in my mind is whether Mark is now eligible to run in a called by-election for St. Jacobs or will the Township still try to pretend that he was never removed?

MORE WOOLWICH GAMESMANSHIP OR JUST DUMB?

Is it all about face saving or do they have a strategy? Yesterday's Waterloo Region Record carried another Editorial hammering Woolwich Township for their wilful disobedience of the Elections Act in not yet removing Councillor Bauman. Today's Record carrys a Letter To the Editor along similar lines from Richard Clausi. Last evening Mayor Sandy Shantz advised that during Council's just completed In Camera meeting they had issued the Notice of Default to former Councillor Bauman. This Notice of Default was inconveniently buried in the on-line package to last night's Council meeting as page 116 of 123 pages. Nice. Interestingly Mayor Shantz is refusing to use the word "removed". I guess the wee minds at the Township think that if they don't use that word then they've won some kind of victory. It's actually becoming pathetic.

Speaking about their Notice of Default it seems they can't even get it right when they get around to doing it. Both Rich Clausi and another local citizen immediately noticed that the two penalties Mark Bauman is subject to have not both been included. The penalty of being prohibited from running for municipal election until 2022 is included (ie. disallowed to run in 2018) however the equally clear immediate forfeiture of office (Councillor) is not. Is this more gamesmanship by Woolwich or just dumb? That said the first citizen to notice the discrepancy e-mailed Woolwich CAO Dave Brenneman to so advise him. His response was that the Clerk had written it and it had been reviewed and approved by their lawyer. Interesting.

My Delegation last night may have gone over Council's head at the moment. The third paragraph indicated that there are more contraventions by Councillors, of the Elections Act, that have not been brought forward to the Clerk's attention. Once this sinks in I expect they will be even more perturbed than they currently are.

DELEGATION TONITE AT WOOLWICH COUNCIL CHAMBERS

Come on out ostensibly at 6 pm. for the possible fireworks. I say ostensibly 6 pm. because my Delegation is about the sixth one after several dealing with a proposed subdivision in St. Jacobs. Pity that the Councillor for St. Jacobs won't be there although knowing Mark I'm sure he would do his political thing and be very reassuring to the residents that their interests will be given due consideration.

My Delegation will focus on aspects of MECAC or the Municipal Elections Compliance Audit Committee. These aspects will be specific to their efforts past, present and future. The "possible fireworks" I mentioned in the first sentence are in regards to the ability or otherwise of Council to present themselves in a professional manner. It has been my experience that human beings in positions of authority are very long on process, procedure, decorum and appearances while doing their throat slitting behind the scenes. In a similar hypocritical fashion those who moan and wail about other people's "respectful manner" are all about that ie. other people's behaviour not their own.

Therefore this evening as per normal I will approach this Delegation as all others ie. calmly and quietly with a few pearls of wisdom for Council and the public. How Council react and behave is all on Council. Currently they have two members if not missing in action, certainly in a state of limbo. I expect there will be some clarification regarding that state of limbo in the coming weeks.

TOXIC WASTE DUMPING IN GUELPH

I posted here regarding barrels of solvents found buried near Wellington St. and the Hanlon Expressway in Guelph last September 8,9 as well as on December 9 and 18. In the September 9 posting I made it clear of the likelihood of many more barrels being found. Indeed last Friday's Waterloo Region Record carried this story titled "More barrels unearthed at Guelph construction site where chemicals found". From eight last fall they are now up to 29 barrels in various states of corrosion having been excavated. I also advised in one of the December postings that I felt that the extent of contamination was as usual being downplayed. The technical reports were claiming that there wasn't enough groundwater available for testing of chemical contaminants. Despite that a number of test pits showed groundwater infiltration and then immediately they ended the digging. To me that seems almost intended to avoid groundwater and the necessity for testing.

Of the 21 drums recently removed "eighteen of the drums were empty. Two were partially filled with liquid, and one contained a mixture of liquids and solids.". This is about par for the course. Decades of subsurface burial, rust and corrosion means that the solvent contents have all been released into the natural environment. Some will have evaporated into the air, some will still be in the soil and most will have been transported via rainwater infiltration into the shallow groundwater where it will have moved both horizontally towards a surface water discharge and the rest probably gone deeper underground towards the next aquifer below. All allegedly responsible parties and authorities will breathe a sigh of relief if it's been transferred out of site and they can pretend that it's no big deal.

IS FORMER COUNCILLOR BAUMAN THE LAST TO GO?

Yesterday's Waterloo Region Record carried this Editorial titled "Counc. Bauman must step down". The Record Editorial states "The law and the public interest demand nothing less because he failed to file an expense report for last year's municipal election.". In fact he failed to do so apparently for four of his last five elections. Hardly a single small oversight there.

Of interest are the past cases in which removed candidates have gone to the courts and been reinstated by them. I would find it a little surprising if a judge were to reinstate Mark Bauman to his councillor's position after he has refused to step down for failing to file his expense report. This failure is also shared by Woolwich Township. Their heartwarming but inappropriate defence of Mark could actually do him more harm than good. That may be typical of many of their actions ie. ill conceived and counterproductive.

The Record Editorial speaks to this broader concern with Woolwich Township governance. Quoting the Record "Something's amiss in Woolwich these days.". Referring to ongoing councillor issues being examined by an Auditor and former Mayor Todd Cowan's criminal charges the Record states "Whether this is all coincidental or reflects a lax, careless culture matters little. It has to stop."

Then of course we have the province of Ontario. I wonder exactly how impressed they must be with Woolwich thumbing their noses at their legislation? Can the province step in and recommend removal of certain senior staff? Have they done that before at the municipal level? And finally are all the remaining councillors safe in their positions? There are 32 or 33 days left on the 90 day deadline for citizens to knock on the Municipal Clerk's door regarding election expense failures. Tick tock.