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.

It’s a decision that is not sitting well with the man who spearheaded the push to have the election finances examined.

“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,” says 2010 mayoral candidate Roger Fuhr. “I do not believe this is in the best interest of the public.”

The committee’s decision was announced Jan. 11 when Ken Froese, of Froese Forensic Partners, presented the findings of his company’s audits.

He noted 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 in reference to the Elections Act regulation that stipulates candidates must open an account for campaign expenses. “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 Perth South CEO Tim Ivanyshyn, although Wilhelm could not recall when.

The mayor called his lack of a separate bank account during the election as “an error of omission.”

After a closed session discussing options with members of the auditing firm, the committee reopened the meeting in order to make its 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, his actions were not deemed particularly serious. The board decided there was no basis to prosecute.

The same went for Wilhelm.

“There’s not anything nefarious going on,” suggested committee chair and Stratford accountant Howard  Minett. “There’s smoke, but is there fire?”

It was noted that Wilhelm’s costs were well below the expenditure limit and there was no indication of fraud. Wilhelm was also credited for his transparency.

The committee decided the only issue was the bank account not being opened, and that something beyond the account issue was needed in order to warrant prosecution.

Wilhelm released a statement stating he was pleased with the committee’s decision not to proceed to prosecution.

“This will allow council and staff to continue to work on important issues without this distraction,” he added. “With our budget almost completed we all are looking forward to a very busy and productive 2012.”

Fuhr, who registered the complaint against his fellow candidates, says he is disappointed with the decision, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, and with the committee itself for seeking the advice of a lawyer behind closed doors.

“Laymen 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,” he says. “This practice must be unacceptable.”

Fuhr adds 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.”