Volume LXVI: Magical Monday

Okay every One, I’m ‘officially’ back.  Thank You very much for being here, and for Your continued support in My absence.  I appreciate You, truly.

For this Magical Monday Edition, I Will be Keeping it short (or so I am thing King).  Friday, May 31st at 1:37 Post Midi, I received this letter as an email attachment in response to My reply to the ‘city Determinations’ of the investigation conducted by Housing Services [into My complaint regarding the Salvation Army].  Wow, what a mouthful!

The email was sent by Shelley VanBuskirk, director of Housing Services which seemed to Me a peculiar choice.  It’s true, Housing Services is responsible for ensuring shelter compliance with the Emergency Shelter Standards, but previous determinations of the investigation confirmed that Shelley VanBuskirk lied to chair Deans and members of council in a memo she Writ on April 28th of 2018, insisting clients were not required to participate in religious activities to enter any of their programs when in fact, they were.  It was a mandatory requirement of all programs offered by the Salvation Army and part of the application process at that time of Shelley’s memo.  As Shelley mentions in the letter, the application forms have since been updated.

My point, is that Shelley is not trustworthy.  If she lied to chair deans and members of council before, what is to stop her from doing it again and/or for suggesting things are being done that may, in fact, never actually get done?  Her Word doesn’t mean anything.  She has a motive to lie, if only to cover her own negligence and avoid accountability.  She also ignored My complaint for almost two months and did not respond until she was compelled to do so under the direction of the city’s legal council.  Ignoring a complaint is an insult to the complainant – it says One doesn’t even care the other was injured.  So Shelley is developing something of a reputation for adding insult to injury, and now she is suggesting I was barred from the shelter because My ‘overall actions and behaviour were a risk to staff and clients’.

When I first received the Letter on Friday, I knew there was something ‘Magical’ about it, “1:37”.  37 isn’t My ‘Magic’ number for no reason…  However, when I finally opened the email and read the letter (which I didn’t do for several hours), I was furious.  I took a long, deep breath, and for a moment, I thought I might actually exhale fire – but that’s probably because I had just finished watching Game of Thrones.

Responding to a letter like this is kind of like walking away from an ‘impulse buy’ shopping experience.  It’s very satisfying to respond immediately and allow all the Fire in My Soul to burn My adversaries without mercy, just the same as it can be very satisfying to buy a chocolate bar One suddenly decides One ‘needs’.  No doubt the chocolate bar will be satisfying, but was it really necessary?  Is the chocolate bar of any real benefit to the buyer, other than the momentary indulgence?  Probably not.

Similarly, the chocolate bar is going to be just as satisfying later as it Will be now.  So instead of immediately responding to the letter while I was craving chocolate, I decided to put it aside until I felt ready to ‘treat’ My Self.  That ‘Magical Moment’ was Monday.

Okay, I suppose once I include My response to Shelley VanBuskirk’s last Letter, this Post won’t be as short as I was anticipating.  I do not like to be ‘unkind’ to People – not even People who screw up because We all screw up!  What I can’t stand, is when someone screws up and fails to admit they screwed up, even when caught in the Act.

Somewhere down the road (and sometime reasonably soon), I Will Give an example of how Shelley (and/or Housing Services) should have responded to My complaint (in light of the city’s [own] determination of the facts).

For now, I am sharing the email I sent to Shelley this afternoon in response to her most recent letter.  I would say ‘enjoy’ but I’m not sure that’s appropriate…

Good Afternoon, Shelley,

I had been under the impression the city of Ottawa was hoping to resolve this complaint amicably.

So far, this investigation has revealed that You, Shelley VanBuskirk, have Willfully fabricated information and made false claims to Chair Deans and members of Council in Your reports to the city regarding [the Salvation Army’s] compliance with the Shelter Standards and the Ontario Human Rights Code.

You claimed in Your memo to Chair Deans and members of council that ‘Established and visible issue/complaint resolution processes’ were currently in place on April 25th of 2018. This investigation revealed that no such complaint resolution process was ever in place, and the Salvation Army was given two weeks to establish a complaint resolution process and provide signage to notify clients that a copy of the complaint resolution process could be obtained by request.  You gave the Salvation Army until the 15th of May, 2019 to comply with a policy You had assured Chair Deans and members of Council was already in place over one year previous, proving You lied to Chair Deans and members of city Council regarding the shelter conditions.

The second false claim You made, was assuring Chair Deans and members of council that no programs offered by the Salvation Army require any religious affiliation or association to participate.  You insisted You were able to confirm that fact, yet I advised You that I was absolutely compelled to participate in a Christian chapel service preached by individuals who have little to no knowledge of God, and was threatened with expulsion from both the Life Skill program and the facility if I failed to attend chapel service.  This was not only well known to clients of the shelter, but was also included as a mandatory condition of the [Life Skills] application form.  I demanded a copy of My Life Skills application to evidence this requirement – You failed to produce the document I was as King of You for, though You assure Me the application forms have since been ‘updated’.

I also demanded the city produce a copy of the email Jason Prevost allegedly sent to a lady from the ByWard Market inquiring about My work.  It is a simple request that would absolve Jason Prevost of My belief that he willfully sabotaged an opportunity that could have been of great benefit to My situation, and in meeting My overall goals.  I previously stated that if Jason Prevost is not able to prove that he did follow up as he claimed to have done, that the city’s determination to withhold proof of Jason’s claim would result in My belief that My opportunity was willfully and deliberately sabotaged.  I hereby stand on this claim.

I was permanently denied access to the shelter without cause or incident.  In the first resolution meeting with the city, ‘the city’ (Housing Services) had agreed they would require Jason Prevost to respond to My letter providing his cause(s) for having Me permanently barred from the facility.  That letter was to be produced by Housing Services no later than April 1st and was never produced.  The city (Housing Services) retained that the Shelter does not have to give reason for denying access to the facility, though the conditions outlined in the Emergency Shelter Standards are very clear.  Now, You, Shelley VanBuskirk, Wish to further insult My character by suggesting My overall behaviour and actions were a risk to staff and/or clients without providing any evidence or information to support Your allegation?  I can’t help but feel You are Willfully determined to antagonize Me and cause Me further injury and harm by Way of Your comments

What makes this so shameful, is that (I believe) the People of Ottawa would like to think that organizations like Housing Services, which have a DUTY and RESPONSIBILITY to ensure the city’s emergency service providers (such as the Salvation Army) are acting in compliance with the Emergency Shelter Standards and other Ontario legislative Acts, are Given their respective duties and responsibilities to PROTECT the People of Ottawa, NOT the negligence of shelter operators failing to comply with the Standards and/or willfully causing harm to their clients.

Since the very onset of this complaint, Housing Services (Shelley VanBuskirk) first ignored My complaint and refused to respond to My emails.  When I filed an application to the Divisional Court, Housing Services insisted they were ‘working with Me directly’ (though they had not responded to My last email in over two months and had the complaint listed as ‘closed’ on the city of Ottawa’s website).  Despite these facts, I gave Housing Services the benefit of the doubt in this regard, and welcomed the opportunity to resolve this matter amicably.

You are suggesting that the bed bug epidemic is acceptable, though I have found nothing that exempts the Salvation Army from compliance with Ottawa’s Property Standards Act, which states that vermin (bedbugs and other parasites INJURIOUS to humans) are not acceptable on a property AT ANY TIME (whether or not the property is occupied).  If bedbugs are ‘injurious’ to humans and an ‘acceptable’ condition for clients of shelters to be subject to, then I presume the city of Ottawa is going to be compensating everyone subject to shelters for their injuries and the mental anguish sustained while subject to sleeping with bedbugs and other vermin in a shelter situation?  Is an individual not entitled to compensation if harmed by another?  If You are ‘okay’ with clients of the Salvation Army being subject to daily harm, then You are liable for the injuries these individuals sustain.  If You are Willfully choosing to cause harm to Canada’s People, You must also be Willing to compensate them for their injuries…  Or are You of the Mind that the homeless don’t have the right to be free from injury and harm at the expense of the city’s service providers?  Are their lives so meaningless to You?

That is the nature of this complaint.  ‘The city’ acknowledges the harm and injury I suffered as a client of the Salvation Army, the city knows I was compelled to participate in a Christian chapel service against My Will and knows this directly violates My Spiritual rights.  The injury here is that much greater when One comprehends just how seriously I take My Spiritual integrity.  The city knows I was subject to a bedbugs epidemic (almost continuously), knows that bedbugs are injurious to humans and in violation of the Ottawa Property Standards Act, yet has offered no sympathy for the injury I suffered as a result of this condition, and considers the situation and continuous harm to clients ‘acceptable’.

Finally, You have now suggested that I was a risk to the clients and staff of the Salvation Army – another absolutely fraudulent claim that is of great offence to My Character.  We know You are no stranger to making false claims, but this I take great exception to.  You have until Friday to rescind Your last letter, offer an apology and an appropriate resolution.  Failure to do so Will result in the commencement of legal Action against You (the city of Ottawa) and the Salvation Army.

I believe Your last letter was designed to willfully provoke and antagonize Me, and has caused further injury by Way of insulting My character and making false claims against Me.  As such, I am as King of You to refrain from contacting Me any further for any reason and ask that all future correspondence be communicated through the legal counsel that was afforded to the city with respect to this Matter, Genevieve Langlais.

Have a Blessed day,

King Sean,

House of von Dehn,

Hand of Stephen,

Kingdom of God.