Two years, five months

Posted by Magda
Former finance director David Kennedy got a payout from the city equivalent to two years, five months of his salary. That comes to just over $340,000, less deductions. The agreement stipulates that if Kennedy secures alternate employment, the city will pay a lump sum equal to half of the remaining payments.

Kennedy, you might remember, left the city mysteriously in July 2007. I filed a freedom of information request at the time to find out why he left and how much he got. The city denied the request, so it went to mediation and then adjudication, which resulted in me finally getting the settlement along with a few emails related to his departure.

The documents do little to explain why he left, though there is a letter from Hans Loewig, chief administrative officer, to Kennedy dated July 9, 2007, saying this:

"the City of Guelph has undertaken a review with respect to the operation of the city's finance department. This has resulted in a decision that your employment with the city will no longer be continued after [date blacked out]."

There is a clause in the agreement that specifically states it will not be released through freedom of information request.

"The employee and employer acknowledge and agree that the parties would not enter into this agreement absent such provision," the agreement says.

I talked to Loewig this morning regarding that clause, and he said he considers the information in the agreement to be private, which is why the clause is there. "Personal information is personal information," he said.

Read more about this in the Mercury tomorrow.

• Kennedy details, Sept. 12, 2008
• Shouldn't be harder for journalists, Feb. 1, 2008

Comments

[D C]

Hans Loewig sure seems to have a lot of power around here.

does anyone know the circumstances under which he left the City of Brantford a few years ago?

who exactly is this guy?

[Edward Pickersgill]

So it appears that Dave Kennedy is still on Guelph payroll... is that what the Mercury article is actually saying?

[Magda]

He is still being paid by the City of Guelph, yes.

[Leonard]

This then means that Kennedy was fired and all the talk about him retiring, including councilor Wettstein’s “he chose to retire” were great big lies. Any idea why he was fired? Will his pay be disclosed in the annual salary disclosure for those earning over $100,000? How does his payout compare to others that left?

[Magda]

Larry Kotseff, the city's former chief administrative officer, got 13 months pay. Read the story here: http://news.guelphmercury.com/article/358428.

[Meaford]

What did David Creech get for a payout in 2004?

Although he resigned I am sure he received a bundle.

Please investigate, I am sure you will find he received more than Kennedy.

[Meaford]

As an fyi, Kennedy did some work in Meaford with Creech this past year. Also Meaford is looking for a Treasurer.

How would this play into his final settlement?

[Magda]

I don't know anything about whether Creech got a settlement.

The contract says that if Kennedy earns any "remuneration" during the time the city is paying him, that will be subtracted from the city's payments; if he gets alternate employment, the city pays him a lump sum of half of what he's owing. I'm assuming the first scenario is what applies to what he's already done in Meaford: http://news.guelphmercury.com/article/315674

[Meaford]

Creech's engagement in Meaford is the same as Guelph, very little if any documentation. Council did not pass a bylaw to hire him at $1000 a day.

His approach in Guelph is the same as it is in Meaford. Everything is a secret.

[Meaford]

IT IS CONFIRMED.

David Kennedy is to start as the Treasurer of Meaford.

This should mean that the city would not have to pay his full settlement.

I think we just save you guys a bundle of money!

[Bill D.]

I'm no fan of secrecy, but if someone from city staff or councillors spoke in public about why Kennedy was cut loose, he could sue the city and the lawyers would get rich, and it would be the taxpayers who would pay the bill. People get let go in government all the time, but the Mercury really seems to have an obsession with Kotseff and Kennedy.

[D C]

come on Bill, an "obsession"? ... trying to unveil unaccountable and entrenched, backroom secrecy surrounding the resignations/firings of two very senior city decision-makers, complete with hush hush packages to the tune of a half million dollars is an "obsession"? i call it responsible journalism.

on a moral level, the secrecy is disgusting and city staff and councillors keeping the rest of us in the dark should be ashamed of themselves. is this really what 'serving the public' is supposed to be about?

but Bill, you seem to not be bothered by it. do you know something the rest of us dont? does ANYONE know anything around here?

[Bill Dunlop]

By "obsessed" I mean there is a level of curiosity that goes beyond journalism. Hey, we're all curious (me included)...and no, I don't have inside info.

But I also know, after 30 yrs in civil service at the provincial level, that the reasons will never be public. The Merc can't seem to accept that. It has nothing to do with council being secretive. The last council did the same thing with Creech, and the council before that with Bradburn (even though someone squealed on that one and we ended up paying even more!) Sometimes a change in leadership is a good thing, and there's a price to pay for it.

I just don't want to have to pay for lawyers if there is a breach of confidentiality. It'll add up pretty quick and we can't afford it.

BD

[Magda]

FYI: I have removed portions of some of the comments in this thread that were attacking named individuals.

[Magda]

I will, however, look into Kennedy's role in Meaford. Thanks for pointing that out.