Now Reading
Kroetsch says he is being stonewalled by city over apology

 

Kroetsch says he is being stonewalled by city over apology

LGBTQ Advisory Committee Chair Cameron Kroetsch is still looking for an apology from the City for censuring him for allegedly releasing information about identifiable individuals The Integrity Commissioner’s report left the clear impression was that Kroetsch had posted a tweet that named a former city staffer who had been crucified in social media for having had white supremacist ties in his past, along with a member of the Hamilton Police Services Board. As they spoke on the issue, at the meeting that led to the censure, councillors appeared to be under the same impression– that Kroetsch had released the names of the individuals. It turned out, however, that Kroetsch had only referred to them by their titles. In the latest twist, it appears the names of the individuals, not the titles, were also posted on the city’s website in a link to the Hamilton Police Services Board minutes, and that they had been available for public scrutiny for a year.

In an interview on CHML’s Bill Kelly show lawyer Wade Poziomka, acting for Kroetsch, told Kelly that in his client’s interaction with the Integrity Commissioner there was no attempt made to arrive at a mediated resolution, as the IC indicated had been done in 14 other matters referred to the commissioner. He said his client was interviewed once and the next he heard about the matter was receiving the draft report that went to council. A letter from the Hamilton Legal Clinic mentioned that Kroetsch submitted a 102 page response to the IC that was scarcely mentioned in the final report.

Kroetsch has asked for a judicial review of the process that led to the censure but says he would prefer a mediated solution and an apology. In a letter released this week, Kroetsch says he has been stonewalled by city staff.

Principles Integrity, who have been the city integrity commissioner for two years are currently engaged in a fee dispute with Hamilton Councillors, some of whom are suggesting the appointment be reconsidered. At the same time the IC was slammed by Councilor Sam Merulla over and adverse ruling against him for language he used against a company in a private dispute.

What's Your Reaction?
Don't Agree
0
Happy
0
In Love
1
Not Sure
0
View Comments (5)
  • Who are Princoles Integrity? Does not sound like one individual!

    What is the feud between consultant and City all about?? Do the innocent tax payers get to pay for another fiasco that our civic leaders have unleashed on them??

    There are a couple other councillors, whose integrity needs to be looked at. Veiled threats, derogatory comments about a certain marginalized group of Hamiltonians and those who fight for justice for that group.

    Hang in there Cameron, the truth shall prevail.

    “Oh what a wicked web we weave
    When we practice to deceive”

  • nice to see Sammy get slapped.
    Long overdue.
    And I have a hunch he is about to make his situation even worse.Our monkey with a shotgun rarely disappoints.

  • Well Me Graham, did you read the latest news, the monkey is demanding a judicial review. He did not swear, he only used Street language. LMAO!!!

    Merulaa does not support Cameron, at all. He is only concerned about himself.

    The taxpayers are going to be on the hook for more legal fees because of the clowns we call civic leaders.

  • On the cbc, it is reported that a co owner of Principles Integrity is a former city solicitor.

    I smell nepotism!!

    Dead skunk in the middle of the road, as the song goes.

    • I agree completely, she has no business in that position, and if Council can’t see a potential conflict-she should have.
      That said, this is the first meaningful action by an IC that I am aware of…….and I support her conclusions completely.
      I am going to choose to be hopeful.
      We’ll see.

      Merry Christmas.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

© 2019 The Bay Observer. All Rights Reserved.

Scroll To Top