Councillor Kristian Graziano has issued a statement in response to a ruling that he violated Georgian Bay Township’s Code of Conduct. He was found to have treated staff with disrespect, resulting in intimidation.
The township’s Integrity Commissioner has suggested he be given a reprimand, forfeit 15 days pay and take training on respectful workplace policies. The councillor says he takes seriously the finding and commits to learning from this experience. But he also takes issue with the process calling it imperfect.
Council decided Monday to postpone a decision because Graziano was not at their meeting.
They did issue a reprimand to Councillor Brian Bochek and instruct him to formally apologize to staff for a similar violation.

View the integrity commissioners report here

Graziano’s full statement is below:

Statement from the Office of Councillor Kristian Graziano
For Immediate Release – December 3, 2025

On December 1st 2025, Georgian Bay Township Council voted to receive as information the findings of the Integrity Commissioner’s Final Report concerning Complaint #060625, in which I was one of two named respondents.
As a public servant elected to serve with transparency and accountability, I accept the Integrity Commissioner process and findings. Staff, in my opinion are subject matter experts who deserve Council’s consideration and due respect. That said, the conclusion was made in relation to my efforts to advocate for an elderly resident seeking relief from a punitive fine per Georgian Bay Township By-law 2024-005-AD, and for asking policy-focused questions during a Council meeting on a proposed firearm discharge by-law.

I want to be clear: no bad faith, dishonesty, or personal gain was found. Of the eight allegations brought forward, seven were dismissed outright.

I also wish to share that I formally requested a brief deferral of this agenda item so that I could be present and in person to address the public directly. Unfortunately, despite having been fully available in November, prior to the report being withdrawn and rescheduled for December at the instructions of the Commissioner, my request was denied by staff, in consultation with the Mayor and IC. Section 29.1 of the Code was later cited by the Mayor during council discussions.
Instead, I was advised that I could attend, submit a written statement or stay silent on the matter—despite my request to address the public and Council formally.

Members of council however, voted to set aside section 29.1 and defer any discussion(s) until I was able to be present and speak to the matter directly. I am grateful to my colleagues for recognizing that a fair process requires all parties—especially those named in a public report—be given the opportunity to respond in person before a decision is rendered. Despite pressure to proceed in my absence, Council made the principled decision to defer this matter, in keeping with the democratic values of transparency and procedural fairness.
Upholding Integrity in Public Office
Integrity is more than a term in a policy document. It is the ongoing commitment to honesty, transparency, and ethical decision-making. Since first being elected in 2018, I have worked to uphold these values by challenging policies vis a vis the consensus of the majority to those I serve, asking difficult questions, and standing up for the people I represent—even when it is politically inconvenient.

This report affirms that such advocacy is not only acceptable but essential. The Commissioner writes:
“Raising questions or disagreeing with staff recommendations in itself is not misconduct… Members of Council are entitled to scrutinize proposals and voice dissenting opinions. Doing so is part of healthy governance.”
I’m proud that this principle was upheld in the report.

The Integrity Commissioner process is important, but it is also imperfect. Most residents are unaware that:
Integrity Commissioners are recommended and hired by staff, not Council
They only investigate councillors, not staff
They unilaterally choose which complaints to investigate and bill the municipality directly
A 2022 judicial dissent by Justice Ramsay warned of these powers being misused:
“Elected councillors should not be inhibited… by the potential for an integrity investigation based on criticism in council meetings… Councillors owe a duty to the electors…”
The Ontario government is now reviewing this system, and I personally welcome reforms that strike a better balance between accountability and procedural/investigatory fairness.
My Commitment Moving Forward
My role as Georgian Bay’s Ward 3 Councillor remains unchanged. I will continue to advocate for my constituents—respectfully, and transparently.
If the cost of representing their voice is a temporary suspension of part of my honorarium, I accept that. I did not seek public office for compensation, but to serve with purpose.
Going forward, I will continue to reflect, grow, and advocate respectfully in service to my community with integrity and accountability at the centre of everything I do.
Thank you for your continued trust.

Kristian Graziano
Ward 3 Councillor