REGION OF WATERLOO'S PLANNING DEP'T NOT LOOKING GOOD

So exactly what are the responsibilities of member municipalities within the Region of Waterloo to fully and completely inform regional council and its members of all relevant facts pertaining to their local matters being decided by regional councillors? Is there a broad gentlemen's agreement that as much as humanly possible, regional council will avoid stepping on individual members' toes? After all it was the Region who approached the member municipalities (Townships & Cities) soliciting "rationalization" of their urban/countryside boundaries. Or was it? Is this entire "rationalization" process simply a scam to legitimize various sketchy or otherwise urban expansions? Certainly the one in Elmira is way beyond ridiculous yet to date all the Woolwich and regional politicians appear not to have the slightest problem with it. This includes not even answering the questions and concerns of a number of local citizens who have spoken against it at public meetings. Nothing but bland, deflecting statements about the public good and of reducing development costs on the east side of Elmira versus the west side which appears again ridiculous. Where are the numbers to back up these outlandish claims? Development upon the very broad floodplain of the contaminated (even if it wasn't) Canagagigue Creek simply makes no sense. Roads, bridges and buildings will require greater engineering controls (and elevation) to avoid flood andf water damage forever.

The Director's Order (Control Order) laid upon Mr. Stroh whose farm is on the immediate east side of Uniroyal/Lanxess is a Ministry of Environment Order laid in July 2017 demanding access to his property in order to "investigate" toxic contamination which flowed via both ground and surface water onto his farm decades ago. As with most "investigations" in and around Elmira, Ontario it was conducted by GHD, consultants to Lanxess Canada. As usual it intentionally did not sample the most likely areas of contamination but intentionally focused on those areas closest to and most accessible to the Lanxess property i.e. right along the property line. This also minimized the inconvenience to Mr. Stroh's longtime growing of crops on these contaminated soils.

Soil sampling on Mr. Stroh's property was to a depth of 15 cm. or 5.9 inches. Yes even at these shallow depths and despite decades of wind erosion exacerbated by ploughing and turning over of the soils on the active farm, both DDT and dioxins/furans exceeded all safety criteria. They would have done so even more if the testing had been both deeper and further south where overflow from the east side pits settled in the lowest lying areas to the immediate east of the Stroh Drain, Ditch & Berm (SDDB). Groundwater sampling 240 metres to the east of the Lanxess/Stroh property line has found NDMA in both a shallow and deep aquifer. Interestingly these monitoring wells are cross gradient from Lanxess not downgradient which is more bad news. As stated the "investigation" as usual was typical of GHD's predecessor company (CRA) and of their efforts since they took over from CRA.

Meanwhile the Director's Order was kept hidden from TAG, CPAC, the public and probably the Region of Waterloo. This is exactly how politicians manipulate process and procedures in order to achieve their self-serving goals versus the public interest.

OUT OF TOUCH LOCAL POLITICIANS

I posted here last Tuesday about Wilmot mayor Les Armstrong. I suggested that I agreed with Regional Chair Karen Redman that Mr. Armstrong was "tone deaf". It's all about hot button issues and most professional politicians are experts not at resolving them but at avoiding them. Mayor Armstrong not so much. Talk about incredibly dumb timing with his American video suggesting that the Black Lives Matter movement is fake and not about negative Black life experiences and in particular negative Black experiences in dealing with the police.

Mayor Armstrong has been interviewed by a couple of Waterloo Region Record reporters and while both condemn his bad decision making and initial attempts to justify posting an offensive video, overall I sense that they feel sorry for him. They view him as a 71 year old, out of touch, privileged white dude who just doesn't understand. I tend to agree. That said I am an almost 71 year old, hopefully not out of touch, definitely not privileged white dude. By not privileged I'm suggesting that unlike Mayor Armstrong I have not had above average income for my entire life as he has both as a former police officer and as a long time local and regional politician.

But is there another form of white privilege such as in my dealings with the Waterloo Regional Police? Many years ago while embroiled in an unnecessarily confrontational issue with the Waterloo Region District School Board, I was treated like crap by both the Board members and by those in charge of the Waterloo Regional Police Service. Their harassment, legal and financial threats and legal manipulations were the acts of gutless wonders and cowardly bullies. To this day I look upon school board anti-bullying campaigns as hypocritical posturing along the lines of do as I say not what I do. The biggest school bullies were the senior Board staff and their victims included students and parents.

Notice I said that I was treated like crap by "those in charge of the Waterloo Regional Police Service"? As a middle aged, at the time, white guy usually dressed in a suit with two children in the school system, I was treated very well by any and all rank and file cops that were sent by their superiors to harass me. I even was told by one officer that he enjoyed being sent to deal with me because knowing that I was both dressed up and reasonable he felt that there would be no wrestling on the ground or even having to carry me off the premises because I didn't want any officers to injure their backs by having to carry me. In other words I didn't incite the police officers as they were not the source of my issues with the school board. That said would those same rank and file white police officers have treated me as well if I had been black? I like to think that they would and yet I suspect that after interactions with numerous officers eventually I would have run into a racist and things would have gone bad.

The winter before last I had another interaction with a young, white police officer. By that time I was around 69 years old, had an artificial hip, arthritis in my knees, feet and other hip and was moving pretty slowly. I had for the previous seventeen years tolerated the ridiculous snow ploughing by Woolwich employees that deposited not just snow from the street in front of my house into my double driveway but much worse. The snowplough operator would drop his blade onto Church St. a hundred metres or more ahead of my home on Carriage Hill Dr. He/she would then pick up the snow on Church St., come around the corner on Carriage Hill, continuing to fill his blade to the maximum and then hit the end of my double drive where it was all pushed into the approach to my driveway. The result even with a moderate snowfall was from two to four feet high by twenty feet long.

I had been shovelling the first batch of such a deposit when the plough came around the corner with his second batch. That was it. I stood my ground and refused to move. The plough stopped. I indicated that he could lift his blade and turn away from the curb and go around me. No response. I walked to his side window and indicated for him to roll it down. No go. O.K. I thought I'll just keep shovelling right here until he decides to go around me. Instead he used his radio to call for help. Eventually the police officer showed up. Now I'm not stupid. As the officer approached me on foot I was holding not a wide, plastic snow shovel but a steel bladed, narrow soil and gravel shovel which quite frankly would make an awesome weapon. That shovel was necessary in order to be able to dig into the already heavy, packed snow in the approach at the bottom of my driveway. The officer of course had likely a billy, a gun, maybe pepper spray etc. I was prepared to go to court over this issue but certainly not to physically harm anyone. Hence before the officer got to me I turned and buried the blade of the shovel into the very high snowbank behind me. As I said I'm not stupid and certainly wasn't going to give the officer the slightest impression that I had a weapon in my hands.

I opened the conversation by insisting that he was going to have to ticket me or charge me with something because I was fed up with the snowshovelling situation and wasn't going to voluntarily move from stopping the snowplough emptying its load into my drive. At that point the officer being much younger, larger and armed could likely easily have physically removed me. He chose not to and attempted to deescalate the situation. He was so calm and reasonable that at one point I accused him of being too reasonable and rational making it difficult for me to stay angry. He only smiled. Eventually a compromise was reached that included assistance from him after the plough did its' dirty deed. Since then the plough operators have actually taken an extra two or three minutes to put most of the snow onto the boulevard before my driveway saving me shovelling the bulk of it.

So this interaction occurred when I was much older but just as white. Would every single Waterloo Regional police officer have handled it as well? I doubt it. Would every single Waterloo Regional police officer have handled it as well if I had been Black? I doubt it even more. So without intellectualizing the situation beforehand was I counting on my white privilege or was I just like Mayor Armstrong, blissfully naive?

VIGILANTE JUSTICE & POLICE COVERUP BOTH OVERTURNED

Has anybody noticed a disturbing trend? A "suspect" gets beaten up by the police and then, in order to justify the extent of the beating, the police charge the suspect with resisting arrest. Talk about adding insult to injury. The case of Dafonte Miller has been a cause celebre since his assault in 2016 by two off-duty police officers. The 18 year old suspect of a minor offense was left bleeding, semi-conscious and totally blind in one eye after the two brothers, both police officers, were done with him including chasing him down in order to continue the beating.

What was also extremely disturbing was the approach of both the Toronto Police Service and the Durham (Regional) Police Service in their attempts to shield the Theriault brothers from being held to account for their actions. Charging the victim has become standard operating procedure for police forces and is yet one more reason to continue with calls for some form of police defunding. When it turns out that police actions have caused citizens to be in fear of their lives then drastic action is long overdue.

There was criticism of both law enforcement (police) as well as of the justice system. Both officers were acquitted of obstruction of justice and of aggravated assault. The one officer was convicted of assault only. The judge appeared to make it clear that the self-defence claims by both officers were "razor-thin" and unlikely although they could not be categorically disproven. It's hard to believe that non police officers in the same position would not have been convicted on more charges.

TWENTY MINUTES OF MY LIFE WASTED TRYING TO E-MAIL OUR REGIONAL COUNCILLORS

What a complete waste of time. Over and over again I went on-line looking for either general e-mail or individual e-mail addresses for our regional councillors. The good news is that I kept finding them, the bad news is that after sending my message I kept getting the same crap, namely it didn't go through possibly because the Region have a new website? Well for God's sake take the old one down then. Or have a gd e-mail address that works. Boy this sure is one way of achieving plausible deniability. Post e-mail addresses for regional councillors that don't work. Anyway what I was trying to tell our regional councillors is that the recent approval that they gave Woolwich Township for their proposed expanded (east side) Elmira urban/countryside line is based on incomplete information. Information that there was a Director's Order laid on this east side property (i.e. Stroh farm) for access to investigate toxic contamination nearly three years ago. Yes that information was kept hidden from TAG, the committee of Woolwich council responsible to oversee the cleanup of the aquifers, creek etc. I expect that it was also kept hidden from Waterloo Regional Council. Oh my Sandy you certainly do like to play with fire, don't you?

DIFFERING OPINIONS REGARDING THE DIRECTOR'S ORDER LAID ON MR. RON STROH

Yesterday I suggested that any failure to distribute the July 26/17 Director's Order to TAG was likely the result of human error. To date at least one knowledgeable CPAC member has a different opinion. Their strong opinion is that the Director's Order was given to Woolwich Township with strict orders not to distribute it to TAG members. Considering that TAG members are all appointed by Woolwich Council you can understand the very serious implications if that opinion is correct. Essentially it would be a glaring example of non-transparency and non-confidence in TAG by Woolwich Council or their mayor. It could also be viewed as an example of tokenism when it comes to public consultation by Woolwich Township. TAG have some wonderful members but if they are only being spoon fed partial and selected information, the results of public consultation can at best be limited. So are the options honest, human error by a staffer or did say the mayor specifically advise that staffer not to distribute the Director's Order? Have other similar orders been passed along regarding what TAG can and can't see?

I have somewhat put the cart before the horse here. To be clear I have communicated with some TAG members and to date they have all stated that they have never seen the Director's Order and either had no knowledge of it at all or like myself heard it mentioned verbally at a meeting but then assumed that Mr. Stroh had complied voluntarily.

This whole scenario is very strange. Mr. Stroh and his lawyer and his consultants (Stantec) have been involved in both the Wellesley and Woolwich alleged "rationalization" boundary plans for many years. Mr. Stroh has had Township staff and councils on board for a very long time. Why would he jeopardize the highly favourable to him Woolwich industrial/commercial development plans for his property? Is there any chance that he was simply going through the motions in order to throw close observers off the scent? He did not appeal the Director's Order although he certainly had the opportunity as well as the means to do so. If he had appealed the Director's Order that he apparently was so adamantly against then that appeal would have been public along with the possibility of other stakeholders (TAG for example?) asking permission to become either a party or a participant. That scenario might very well have been a non-starter for either Lanxess Canada or the Ontario Ministry of the Environment... There is a very strong odour of backroom deals in all of this. Backroom deals to eliminate public input, public participation and public consultation. After all the very public Canagagigue Creek runs through these two properties (Stroh & Martin) and it is highly contaminated (dioxin/furan, DDT, mercury, PCBs, PAHs & more). It is a public issue and the private parties involved are doing their best to keep it out of the public venue.

WHAT OTHER DOCUMENTS HAVE WE NOT RECEIVED OVER THE YEARS?

Back in September 2017 RAC (Remediation Advisory Committee) was advised by the Ontario MOE/MECP that they had laid a Director's Order on Mr. Ron Stroh demanding access to his property in order to do soil and groundwater testing. Unsurprisingly we had been told earlier that Mr. Stroh was not enthusiastic about Lanxess orr their consultants GHD sampling on his farm near the border with the Uniroyal Chemical/Lanxess site.

The next thing we know Lanxess and their consultants are doing their sampling of the Stroh soils (and groundwater) and no further mention is made of any Control Order (Director's Order). I figured that Mr. Stroh resisted access until he ran out of time and options and then finally said O.K. Turns out that was not the case. The Control Order was signed by Amy Shaw of the Ministry of Environment, Conservation & Parks (MECP) on July 26, 2017 and then served on Mr. Stroh.

My curiosity was aroused when I was rereading my posting here in the Elmira Advocate for September 8, 2017 which mentioned the Control Order. I knew darn well that I had never seen that alleged document and contacted the TAG Chair and support staff about it. After a very brief suggestion that it was not needed or served on Mr. Stroh, as I had originally assumed, it was found and a copy was sent to me immediately. For that I thank TAG personnel.

At the moment it appears that the document was not handed out to TAG members as well although I am in the process of confirming that. If so, then I am going to assume that it was human error i.e. an honest mistake. I've read the Control Order and other than a couple of glaring errors in the MECP's text, there is nothing that I have seen that is any kind of smoking gun or anything that really needed hiding. Hence my concern. What else has either TAG or the public not received?

COLOURFUL TOWNSHIP MAYORS

Oh boy, here comes a little bit of stereotyping. Mayors, M.P.P.s. M.P.s etc. of larger communities i.e. cities tend to be a little smoother and more polished than those of our rural communities. I'm particularly thinking of former Mayor Bill Strauss up here in the wilds of Woolwich Township. Easily forgotten is his extensive business background in the petroleum industry. Easily remembered is his less than smoothest public presentations and speeches. In one sense, likely a major sense, we elect our politicians more on how they look and sound than on their qualifications. "Qualifications" not just of education, experience, volunteer work but also of class, colour, appearance, dress, speech and gender. Clearly locally reasonably attractive and short men have no problem getting elected and similarly reasonably attractive females can get elected.

What I'm wondering is if Mayor Les Armstrong of Wilmot Township fills the mold of a less smooth, more blunt talking individual getting elected as Mayor than would likely happen in Kitchener, Waterloo or Cambridge. I don't know the man personally however I do know that his words in Saturday's Waterloo Region Record were not smooth or as politically correct as were many of his colleagues. Colleagues whom I do know and do not particularly care for. Unfortunately for Mayor Armstrong, today's Record article is even more damaging for him as it turns out that he posted a video on Facebook framed with the title of "White Lives Matter". Oh boy! That is not good. Regional Chair Karen Redman has referred to Mr. Armstrong's posting as being "reprehensible and tone deaf". Well I certainly have no doubt that it is tone deaf. I would find it reprehensible if in fact he was not tone deaf and fully realized the implications of his posting that video. If he's just not keeping up to what's going on in the U.S. and the world right now then maybe he could claim that he wasn't agreeing or disagreeing with the video and simply passing along a different viewpoint. Something like former mayor Todd Cowan's defence in court that he was both dyslexic and not very knowledgeable about numbers, budgets etc. That is one hell of a defence to a Fraud charge when one's job includes being a guardian of the public purse.

Coincidentally I put Mr. Armstrong in the naughty column here in my post on Saturday in regards to his quoted position regarding defunding the Waterloo Regional Police and putting the money instead directly towards social programs including poverty, employment issues, racism etc. Today's article in the Record is titled "Wilmot mayor unapologetic for sharing "White Lives Matter" video". I hate to praise smooth talking horse manure artists (most politicians) but sometimes they actually do need to listen carefully and then spout what most of the public want to hear even if they themselves (politicians) disagree with it. At least that is if they want to get re-elected which is the raison d'etre (reason to be/purpose) of most of them.