An Ancaster resident says she wants more answers on how her confidential business proposal to process medical marijuana into edibles surfaced publicly during the heated debate over the future of a popular artesian well on Sulphur Springs Road.
Joanne Turnell said she was shocked a city building inspector divulged her cannabis plan to the Spring Valley Community Association last fall as it considered her request that it offer to buy the well from the Hamilton Conservation Authority for $1.
She hoped her well proposal would avoid the need to restrict public access once a new limit for arsenic took effect on Jan. 1, but the association rejected the idea following a closed session during which her pot plan was disclosed.
The conservation authority’s directors ultimately opted to support Ancaster Coun. Lloyd Ferguson’s solution of introducing a swipe-card entry system and having people sign a waiver acknowledging the water exceeds the limit and isn’t for human consumption.
Turnell said the city has informed her two employees were “disciplined appropriately” for breaching confidentiality on her cannabis plan, but won’t disclose their identities or how they were reprimanded.
She said she only learned of the breach from a close friend who was on the Spring Valley’s board of directors at the time but resigned after the Sept. 28 meeting.
Turnell said she’d made preliminary inquiries about her business plan to the city’s economic development division and wasn’t ready to go public because cannabis is controversial.
She said her proposal was to process legally acquired medical marijuana and she wanted to know what city approvals she might require.
“That’s very sensitive information,” said Turnell, who maintains the disclosure was designed to cast her in a negative light.
“I was concerned that my neighbours were thinking that I was selling cannabis out of my house or something,” she said. “I’ve got teenagers in high school and I don’t even want people thinking I have cannabis in my house. It’s still not legal.”
Email correspondence between the city and Turnell shows she was informed in mid-October her concerns about the cannabis disclosure were enough to look into the matter.
On Nov. 3, Glen Norton, the economic development division’s director, apologized for the disclosure, advising her that two unnamed city employees “were interviewed and disciplined appropriately.”
“I cannot reveal to you the nature of the discipline, but can assure you the employees involved understand what they did (was) wrong and are apologetic for it,” Norton stated.
Turnell pressed for more details, but the city’s human resources department told her the matter had been closed.
City spokesperson Jen Recine reiterated that position in an email response to a request for comment, calling the breach “a confidential personnel matter.”
“We do expect all of our employees to maintain the level of confidentiality expected within the parameters of their jobs and by our residents, and we are clear with employees about that expectation,” Recine said.
“Further, we appreciate it being brought to our attention and we did express that, as well as an apology, to Ms. Turnell.”
Unhappy with the city’s response to date, Turnell has twice asked the city’s integrity commissioner to investigate — initially into her suspicion Ferguson somehow played a role, and then into the two employees.
Commissioner George Rust-D’Eye has rejected both requests, stating she has provided no factual basis to justify investigating or even notifying Ferguson of her complaint and that his oversight role is limited to councillors’ conduct.
Ferguson said he only became aware of the breach when asked for comment and doesn’t know the two employees responsible.
“The only thing I know about this issue is (the information in) your email,” he said.
Turnell said she’s pretty certain she’s determined who the employees are, but is concerned there’s no avenue to pursue the matter further.
She said she’s put her business plan on hold to see how the pending legalization of recreational pot pans out, but believes her experience is troubling.
“Other small business owners should be concerned about what they share with the City of Hamilton if they don’t have a process to keep people’s business plans safe,” Turnell said. “I do think it’s a serious issue.”
An Ancaster resident says she wants more answers on how her confidential business proposal to process medical marijuana into edibles surfaced publicly during the heated debate over the future of a popular artesian well on Sulphur Springs Road.
Joanne Turnell said she was shocked a city building inspector divulged her cannabis plan to the Spring Valley Community Association last fall as it considered her request that it offer to buy the well from the Hamilton Conservation Authority for $1.
She hoped her well proposal would avoid the need to restrict public access once a new limit for arsenic took effect on Jan. 1, but the association rejected the idea following a closed session during which her pot plan was disclosed.
The conservation authority’s directors ultimately opted to support Ancaster Coun. Lloyd Ferguson’s solution of introducing a swipe-card entry system and having people sign a waiver acknowledging the water exceeds the limit and isn’t for human consumption.
Turnell said the city has informed her two employees were “disciplined appropriately” for breaching confidentiality on her cannabis plan, but won’t disclose their identities or how they were reprimanded.
She said she only learned of the breach from a close friend who was on the Spring Valley’s board of directors at the time but resigned after the Sept. 28 meeting.
Turnell said she’d made preliminary inquiries about her business plan to the city’s economic development division and wasn’t ready to go public because cannabis is controversial.
She said her proposal was to process legally acquired medical marijuana and she wanted to know what city approvals she might require.
“That’s very sensitive information,” said Turnell, who maintains the disclosure was designed to cast her in a negative light.
“I was concerned that my neighbours were thinking that I was selling cannabis out of my house or something,” she said. “I’ve got teenagers in high school and I don’t even want people thinking I have cannabis in my house. It’s still not legal.”
Email correspondence between the city and Turnell shows she was informed in mid-October her concerns about the cannabis disclosure were enough to look into the matter.
On Nov. 3, Glen Norton, the economic development division’s director, apologized for the disclosure, advising her that two unnamed city employees “were interviewed and disciplined appropriately.”
“I cannot reveal to you the nature of the discipline, but can assure you the employees involved understand what they did (was) wrong and are apologetic for it,” Norton stated.
Turnell pressed for more details, but the city’s human resources department told her the matter had been closed.
City spokesperson Jen Recine reiterated that position in an email response to a request for comment, calling the breach “a confidential personnel matter.”
“We do expect all of our employees to maintain the level of confidentiality expected within the parameters of their jobs and by our residents, and we are clear with employees about that expectation,” Recine said.
“Further, we appreciate it being brought to our attention and we did express that, as well as an apology, to Ms. Turnell.”
Unhappy with the city’s response to date, Turnell has twice asked the city’s integrity commissioner to investigate — initially into her suspicion Ferguson somehow played a role, and then into the two employees.
Commissioner George Rust-D’Eye has rejected both requests, stating she has provided no factual basis to justify investigating or even notifying Ferguson of her complaint and that his oversight role is limited to councillors’ conduct.
Ferguson said he only became aware of the breach when asked for comment and doesn’t know the two employees responsible.
“The only thing I know about this issue is (the information in) your email,” he said.
Turnell said she’s pretty certain she’s determined who the employees are, but is concerned there’s no avenue to pursue the matter further.
She said she’s put her business plan on hold to see how the pending legalization of recreational pot pans out, but believes her experience is troubling.
“Other small business owners should be concerned about what they share with the City of Hamilton if they don’t have a process to keep people’s business plans safe,” Turnell said. “I do think it’s a serious issue.”
An Ancaster resident says she wants more answers on how her confidential business proposal to process medical marijuana into edibles surfaced publicly during the heated debate over the future of a popular artesian well on Sulphur Springs Road.
Joanne Turnell said she was shocked a city building inspector divulged her cannabis plan to the Spring Valley Community Association last fall as it considered her request that it offer to buy the well from the Hamilton Conservation Authority for $1.
She hoped her well proposal would avoid the need to restrict public access once a new limit for arsenic took effect on Jan. 1, but the association rejected the idea following a closed session during which her pot plan was disclosed.
The conservation authority’s directors ultimately opted to support Ancaster Coun. Lloyd Ferguson’s solution of introducing a swipe-card entry system and having people sign a waiver acknowledging the water exceeds the limit and isn’t for human consumption.
Turnell said the city has informed her two employees were “disciplined appropriately” for breaching confidentiality on her cannabis plan, but won’t disclose their identities or how they were reprimanded.
She said she only learned of the breach from a close friend who was on the Spring Valley’s board of directors at the time but resigned after the Sept. 28 meeting.
Turnell said she’d made preliminary inquiries about her business plan to the city’s economic development division and wasn’t ready to go public because cannabis is controversial.
She said her proposal was to process legally acquired medical marijuana and she wanted to know what city approvals she might require.
“That’s very sensitive information,” said Turnell, who maintains the disclosure was designed to cast her in a negative light.
“I was concerned that my neighbours were thinking that I was selling cannabis out of my house or something,” she said. “I’ve got teenagers in high school and I don’t even want people thinking I have cannabis in my house. It’s still not legal.”
Email correspondence between the city and Turnell shows she was informed in mid-October her concerns about the cannabis disclosure were enough to look into the matter.
On Nov. 3, Glen Norton, the economic development division’s director, apologized for the disclosure, advising her that two unnamed city employees “were interviewed and disciplined appropriately.”
“I cannot reveal to you the nature of the discipline, but can assure you the employees involved understand what they did (was) wrong and are apologetic for it,” Norton stated.
Turnell pressed for more details, but the city’s human resources department told her the matter had been closed.
City spokesperson Jen Recine reiterated that position in an email response to a request for comment, calling the breach “a confidential personnel matter.”
“We do expect all of our employees to maintain the level of confidentiality expected within the parameters of their jobs and by our residents, and we are clear with employees about that expectation,” Recine said.
“Further, we appreciate it being brought to our attention and we did express that, as well as an apology, to Ms. Turnell.”
Unhappy with the city’s response to date, Turnell has twice asked the city’s integrity commissioner to investigate — initially into her suspicion Ferguson somehow played a role, and then into the two employees.
Commissioner George Rust-D’Eye has rejected both requests, stating she has provided no factual basis to justify investigating or even notifying Ferguson of her complaint and that his oversight role is limited to councillors’ conduct.
Ferguson said he only became aware of the breach when asked for comment and doesn’t know the two employees responsible.
“The only thing I know about this issue is (the information in) your email,” he said.
Turnell said she’s pretty certain she’s determined who the employees are, but is concerned there’s no avenue to pursue the matter further.
She said she’s put her business plan on hold to see how the pending legalization of recreational pot pans out, but believes her experience is troubling.
“Other small business owners should be concerned about what they share with the City of Hamilton if they don’t have a process to keep people’s business plans safe,” Turnell said. “I do think it’s a serious issue.”