The Compliance Audit Committee of Perth South has decided not to prosecute Mayor Bob Wilhelm or Council candidate Chuck Armstrong for their failure to open a separate bank account during the 2010 election. But, judging from the reaction of the man behind the drive to have the election finances examined, the issue hasn’t disappeared.
“I suggest that if we head into the 2014 elections without taking further action, this will set precedent for candidates to break . . . rules within the Municipal Elections Act,” wrote 2010 mayoral candidate Roger Fuhr in an email to the Journal Argus. “I do not believe this is in the best interest of the public.”
Chaired by Stratford accountant Howard Minett, the Compliance Audit Committee also included former West Perth clerk/CAO Pat Taylor and Town of St. Marys financial officer Jim Brown. Committee member Ewart Bancroft sent his regrets as he could not be in attendance the night of the decision, Wednesday, Jan. 11.
Perth South Clerk Liz Scott and Township CAO Tim Ivanyshyn were also on hand.
Ken Froese, of Froese Forensic Partners, presented the findings of his company’s audits. He noted that Armstrong admitted he had not opened an account, and that he had made his campaign signs himself. His only expense was a roll of specialized tape he’d used for edging.
“I’m in favour of this,” said Armstrong. “I didn’t understand it was the law, I thought it was for my convenience.
“It’s a great law,” he added. “It helps with transparency.”
Both Armstrong and Wilhelm said they had been told about the need for a bank account by Ivanyshyn, although Wilhelm could not recall when. The Mayor described his lack of a separate bank account during the election as “an error of omission.”
After a time spent in a closed session discussing options with members of the auditing firm, the committee reopened the meeting in order to make their decision.
Armstrong’s case was described as a minor contravention that had no impact on the election. Armstrong was credited for his transparency and, though there was a contravention, it was not deemed particularly serious. The board then decided there was no basis to prosecute.
The same went for Wilhelm. “There’s not anything nefarious going on,” observed Minett. “There’s smoke, but is there fire?”
It was noted that Wilhelm’s costs were well below the expenditure limit and that there was no indication of fraud. Wilhelm was also credited for his transparency.
The committee decided that the only issue was the bank account not being opened, and that something beyond the account issue was needed in order to warrant prosecution.
“I think people know now in this municipality that you have to open a bank account (if you’re going to run for Council),” laughed Minett.
Wilhelm released a statement shortly after which read, in part, “I am pleased with the Perth South Audit Finance Committee’s decision on not to proceed to prosecution. This will allow Council and staff to continue to work on important issues without this distraction...With our budget almost completed we all are looking forward to a very busy and productive 2012.”
Fuhr, who first registered the complaint against his fellow candidates, wrote in his email that he’s disappointed with the decision, with the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, and with the committee itself for seeking the advice of a lawyer behind closed doors.
“Layman should not be making such decisions on the advice of a single lawyer; only judges have the knowledge and responsibility to determine what penalty needs to be enforced and, in my opinion, lawbreakers can not be let off scot free. This practice must be unacceptable,” he wrote.
Fuhr added he is currently reviewing his options and will reserve his next course of action until a later date, “...but if you are a betting man, bet that you will see this matter back in front of a judge very soon.”