Age, Biography and Wiki
Kimberly Rogers was born on 1961 in Greater Sudbury, Canada, is a Student. Discover Kimberly Rogers's Biography, Age, Height, Physical Stats, Dating/Affairs, Family and career updates. Learn How rich is She in this year and how She spends money? Also learn how She earned most of networth at the age of 40 years old?
Popular As |
N/A |
Occupation |
Student |
Age |
40 years old |
Zodiac Sign |
N/A |
Born |
, 1961 |
Birthday |
|
Birthplace |
Greater Sudbury, Canada |
Date of death |
9 August 2001, |
Died Place |
Sudbury, Ontario, Canada |
Nationality |
Canada |
We recommend you to check the complete list of Famous People born on .
She is a member of famous Student with the age 40 years old group.
Kimberly Rogers Height, Weight & Measurements
At 40 years old, Kimberly Rogers height not available right now. We will update Kimberly Rogers's Height, weight, Body Measurements, Eye Color, Hair Color, Shoe & Dress size soon as possible.
Physical Status |
Height |
Not Available |
Weight |
Not Available |
Body Measurements |
Not Available |
Eye Color |
Not Available |
Hair Color |
Not Available |
Dating & Relationship status
She is currently single. She is not dating anyone. We don't have much information about She's past relationship and any previous engaged. According to our Database, She has no children.
Family |
Parents |
Not Available |
Husband |
Not Available |
Sibling |
Not Available |
Children |
Not Available |
Kimberly Rogers Net Worth
Her net worth has been growing significantly in 2022-2023. So, how much is Kimberly Rogers worth at the age of 40 years old? Kimberly Rogers’s income source is mostly from being a successful Student. She is from Canada. We have estimated
Kimberly Rogers's net worth
, money, salary, income, and assets.
Net Worth in 2023 |
$1 Million - $5 Million |
Salary in 2023 |
Under Review |
Net Worth in 2022 |
Pending |
Salary in 2022 |
Under Review |
House |
Not Available |
Cars |
Not Available |
Source of Income |
Student |
Kimberly Rogers Social Network
Timeline
In early 2004, the government of Dalton McGuinty implemented a three per cent increase in welfare rates, to be followed by an annual cost of living increase, and eliminated the lifetime suspension of benefits. However, the McGuinty government never implemented most of the inquest's other recommendations.
The government of Ernie Eves did not implement any of the Rogers inquest's recommendations before it was defeated in the 2003 provincial election. Community and Social Services Minister Brenda Elliott dismissed the recommendations as unnecessary tinkering with a system that "was working effectively".
Social Planning Council of Greater Sudbury chair Janet Gasparini, who had been a prominent media commentator in the Rogers case, was elected to Greater Sudbury City Council in the 2003 municipal election.
On 19 December 2002, the jury delivered its decision. Their first recommendation was that the lifetime suspension of benefits should be eliminated — temporary suspension would still be permitted as a penalty, but could no longer be imposed retroactively on a person whose fraud conviction predated the adoption of the legislation.
Kimberly Rogers (c. 1961 — 9 August 2001) was a Canadian woman whose suicide in 2001, while under house arrest for a disputed welfare fraud conviction, caused extensive controversy around Ontario Works (the Ontario government's welfare system). Rogers' death led to an inquest which recommended significant changes to the Ontario welfare system.
On 25 April 2001, Rogers pleaded guilty to fraud before Justice Greg Rodgers of the Ontario Court of Justice. Justice Greg Rodgers stated that she had engaged in "almost four years of deception and dishonesty."
Sean Dewart, a Toronto lawyer, launched a constitutional appeal on Rogers' behalf, successfully having Rogers' welfare suspension reversed by Justice Gloria Epstein. On 31 May 2001, Epstein ruled that "for a member of our community carrying an unborn child to be homeless and deprived of basic sustenance is a situation that would adversely affect the public — its dignity, its human rights commitments and its health care resources."
Rogers' body was found in her apartment 11 August 2001 by her boyfriend, Terry Pyhtila. Eight months pregnant, she had been dead for several days in an apartment without air conditioning. At the time, Sudbury was subject to a record-breaking heat wave, with six days of temperatures over 30 degrees Celsius, during the week of Rogers' death. A formal inquest was convened in October 2002.
In the fall of 1999, the welfare office learned of her student loans, and ordered Rogers to repay $13,486 in benefits. With the overpayment automatically deducted from her monthly welfare cheque, Rogers was left with $18 each month after paying her rent. As well, she was facing criminal charges for welfare fraud.
A resident of Sudbury, Rogers was receiving standard Ontario welfare benefits of $520 per month, while paying $450 per month in rent. From 1996 to 1999, she also received a total of $49,000 in student loans from the Ontario Student Assistance Program (OSAP) to study social services at the city's Cambrian College. Rogers graduated with a grade point average (GPA) of 3.5.
When Rogers first began her studies, receiving both welfare and student loans was legal, but the practice was banned in 1996 by the Progressive Conservative government of Mike Harris as part of its welfare reform legislation. Rogers continued to receive both welfare and student loans after the practice became illegal. There was no evidence that she was ever informed of the change in regulations.
The jury also indicated that suspension and/or prosecution should not necessarily be automatic, but that each case should be evaluated by Ontario Works administrators and/or a stakeholder committee to determine the most appropriate response to the individual situation. As well, the jury ruled that drug benefits should not be suspended even when regular benefits were, that Ontario Works should make more effort to uncover fraud situations earlier so that the penalties had less emotional and financial impact on the recipient, and that the government should review the adequacy of social assistance rates, which until then had not been raised since the Harris government cut the rate to $520 per month in 1996.