According to information received by The Current, Councillor Ernie Peplinski while canvassing for re-election has made serious accusations against his Council colleague Carl Bromwich. Peplinski is accusing Bromwich of revealing confidential closed meeting information to The Current, which Peplinski says he will make the subject of a complaint to the Township’s Integrity Commissioner with the request that Bromwich be thrown out if he is re-elected. For readers’ information, The Current has no knowledge of what Peplinski is referring to and has not had any contact with Bromwich since he introduced the motion targeting The Current’s publisher on Aug.27 2019. Above: Peplinski (L) and Bromwich at a recent MV candidates’ meeting. Photos Gil Glofcheskie.
It is a matter of public record that Peplinski has had previous fallings-out with Bromwich including when the latter confirmed that Peplinski had sworn at and threatened The Current’s publisher in February 2019. Also Peplinski will have read in Justice Doyle’s Decision rejecting his request to dismiss the Current’s law suit that Bromwich had at one time confirmed the existence of a “vendetta” by Peplinski and other members of Council against The Current and its owners.
In addition it has also been reported that Peplinski is doubling down on his attacks against The Current’s publisher, making further baseless slurs against him in connection with his legal career. Not content with that, Peplinski is also said to be attempting to persuade voters that despite Justice Doyle’s Decision and the subsequent dismissal of his appeal against it by the Court of Appeal nonetheless somehow entitles him to boast that “The Current has lost its case.” Is this the MV version of “The Big Lie?”
Readers will be aware, as will Peplinski, that for reasons that are a matter of public record — including in several court decisions — The Current believes that MV residents’ best interests are served by refusing to re-elect any of the incumbents. These latest attempts by Peplinski to undermine The Current therefore come as no surprise to us.
The Current provided Peplinski and his Council colleagues the opportunity to respond to these accusations but they have declined to do so.