MINUTES

OTTAWA-CARLETON POLICE SERVICES BOARD

CHAMPLAIN ROOM

24 January 2000

5:00 P.M.

 

PRESENT

Chair: Councillor H. Kreling

Vice Chair: Mr. G. Baskerville

Members: Mr. D. Adam, Ms. E. Buckingham, Regional Chair B. Chiarelli,

Councillor J. Legendre, Mr. J. McCombie

 

ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR

Wendy Fedec, Executive Director, explained that Section 28 of the Police Services Act requires the Board to elect a Chair at its first meeting each year, and provides the option of electing a Vice Chair. Accordingly, she requested nominations for the positions of Chair and Vice Chair. Only one nomination was received for each position.

Member McCombie put forward a Motion that Councillor Herb Kreling be nominated to the position of Chair of the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Services Board.

Moved by G. Baskerville

That nominations for the position of Chair be closed.

CARRIED

Moved by J. McCombie

That Herb Kreling be appointed Chair of the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Services Board.

CARRIED

 

Member McCombie put forward a Motion that Mr. Grahame Baskerville be nominated to the position of Vice Chair of the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Services Board.

Moved by H. Kreling

That nominations for the position of Vice Chair be closed.

CARRIED

Moved by J. McCombie

That Grahame Baskerville be appointed Vice Chair of the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Services Board.

CARRIED

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

That the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Services Board confirm the Minutes of the 20 December 1999 meeting.

CARRIED

 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT of ATTENDANCE -

Mr. Michael Mitchell, Mr. Maurice Hodgson and

Mr. Bart Caron - Ministry of the Solicitor General Ontario

Chair Kreling acknowledged the presence of Mr. Mike Mitchell, Mr. Maurice Hodgson and Mr. Bart Caron from the Ministry of the Solicitor General, Policing Services Division and welcomed them to the meeting. He noted Mr. Hodgson is the Board’s newly appointed Police Service Advisor.

In response to a question from member Legendre, Mr. Hodgson indicated he would be available to the Board and its members on both a formal and informal basis, and would distribute his business cards before the end of the evening.

 

PUBLIC DELEGATIONS

1. a) NICHOLAS PATTERSON

(Deferred from previous meeting)

Documents submitted by Mr. Patterson are on file with the Board’s Executive Director.

In summary, Mr. N. Patterson purported that among the ten largest police services in Ontario, the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Service (OCRPS) is the most inefficient, based on information from Statistics Canada. He alleged that gross incompetence on the part of the Police Services Board, an astonishing lack of proper monitoring by Regional and City Councils and poor media coverage have hidden the precipitous decline of policing in our community. He believed that the OCRPS urgently needs a new Chief of Police and that the perfect candidate should be sought throughout North America. He suggested that the best possible Police Chief be selected based exclusively on professional policing criteria, embracing only proven competence and merit, regardless of linguistics.

 

b) VICTORIA MASON

Documents submitted by Ms. Mason are on file with the Board’s Executive Director.

Ms. V. Mason stated the purpose of her presentation was to request an audit of the Sexual Assault Unit of the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Service, similar to the review conducted in Toronto, to give rape victims an opportunity to come forward and speak about what happened to them. She believed the police have a cavalier attitude towards rape victims and she stressed the importance of believing rape victims when they come forward. She suggested that the rape unit should accommodate women with a lawyer, a doctor, a psychiatrist and a nurse. She also felt police officers could benefit from sensitivity training to assist them in their dealings with rape victims.

 

c) AL DORANS - "Bill C-68: The Real Truth About Gun Control"

Documents submitted by Mr. Dorans are on file with the Board’s Executive Director.

Mr. A. Dorans stated firearm owners support reasonable and effective gun control laws that reduce crime and save lives. He purported that Canadians use firearms 64,000 times a year for self protection against criminals and animals resulting in 3,300 lives being saved every year. He suggested that civilian ownership of firearms deters violent crime and mass killings. He noted that in American states where gun availability is higher, crime rates are significantly lower. Mr. Dorans believed that to ban firearms would cause criminals to declare open season on citizens, their families and private property.

 

d) HINTONBURG COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION

Documents submitted by the Hintonburg Community Association are on file with the Board’s Executive Director.

Ms. C. Parrott, Chair, Security Committee, Hintonburg Community Association, expressed her belief that people don’t understand the effects of street prostitution on communities and its links to other criminal activity. She indicated the purpose of the delegation’s presentation is to tell the Board about their experiences and initiatives and to ask for help. She explained that street prostitution started very abruptly in Hintonburg in the summer of 1992. Within weeks, drugged prostitutes were walking down the middle of the community’s main street, flashing customers and anyone else in the vicinity. Residents were completely unprepared and quickly learned the ramifications of street prostitution: discarded syringes and used condoms in their streets, parks, sand boxes and yards; people afraid to be on the streets because of the aggressive behaviour of prostitutes and drug dealers; and continual attempts by "johns" to solicit women in the neighbourhood. She believed the same could happen to any community and stated the residents of Hintonburg have learned to fight back.

Ms. B. Primmer indicated that before purchasing a home on Bayswater Street, she and her former spouse carefully examined the neighbourhood in terms of neighbours, children in the community, schools, playgrounds, bus stops and local businesses. When they found everything to their liking, they moved in. She stated that within two years, her dream fell apart when street prostitution moved into the community. She relayed many stories from residents of Hintonburg about situations they’ve had to endure as a result of the prostitution problem in their community and she noted the problem affects homeowners as well as businesses in the area.

Ms. R. Russo indicated that not only does she live in the community, she also owns a business in the area. She expressed her shock at the effects of street prostitution on her home and business. She professed to witnessing an otherwise quiet, insignificant neighbourhood become a noisy, dangerous, scary and completely unsafe place. She described some of the situations she and clients of her store have been subjected to because of prostitutes.

Ms. Russo stated the neighbourhood is slowly reshaping itself. The many successes of the community association and the police have affected such change as to restore hope for the community’s future. She stressed that street prostitution hurts businesses and endangers women and children. She re-iterated, prostitutes and drug dealers go hand in hand and result in violence, crime, chaos, fear, disease and destruction. In closing, she asked Board members to carefully consider the community’s concerns and she stated that with the invaluable assistance of the Police Service, residents will take back their streets.

Mr. V. Fandrey, a resident of Hintonburg since 1979, stated that until street prostitution became a problem in his community, he had very liberal views on prostitution. He indicated that when he began to notice discarded syringes in area parks, he developed the habit of cleaning up neighbourhood parks in the early morning, before children went out to play. When people did not believe that he was picking up used syringes and other nefarious debris in their parks, he started saving them. He stated he has collected approximately 2,000 used syringes and condoms.

Mr. Fandrey noted that despite the rage that was felt among residents, they decided to work within the system to deal with the problem and have had many successes. For example, the community association appeared before the Region’s Community Services Committee last year to lobby for a clean-up program. The program was implemented as a pilot project and is working well.

As one of the people who helped found the John School, and having spoken at every session, Mr. Fandrey felt it is a great leap forward. It was started as a pilot project in 1996 and its goal is to educate men about the effects of street prostitution on a community and its links to other crimes. In closing, he stated the Hintonburg community wants prostitution sweeps to continue.

Mr. J. Baltz, President of the Hintonburg Community Association, stated that though street prostitution and the crimes that come with it have been the major problem in Hintonburg for the past eight (8) years, residents have not waited for help. The Hintonburg Community Association has undertaken a number of initiatives aimed at solving these problems and has worked with the Police Service, Regional Council, City Council and other community groups to develop a range of effective programs.

Mr. Baltz listed many of the initiatives undertaken by the Hintonburg Community Association and its residents to deal with street prostitution such as: an active neighbourhood watch program; development of the Sex Trade Activity Reporter; Star Cards, which are distributed to residents; active participation in the John School; working with the Crown Attorney’s office to get community impact statements heard in court; supporting longer sentences and taking seriously crimes that damage communities; a program to teach landlords how to deal with problem tenants; a program to deal with uncooperative landlords; and working with municipal agencies to ensure the strict enforcement of zoning by-laws, property standards and licensing by-laws. These strategies have worked. There are now only a handful of problem properties in Hintonburg, in contrast to approximately 40 two years ago.

Mr. Baltz stressed street prostitution and drug dealing will remain major priorities in Hintonburg. The community has often worked in partnership with the Police in the past, and would like to thank those who have helped by showing an understanding of the issues and working to develop unique approaches with the community. The Hintonburg Community Association wants to keep working towards improvement and needs the continued support of the Police and the political structure.

Mr. Baltz stated the purpose of tonight’s presentation is to request the following: the continuation of the John School; more prostitution sweeps; an increased Police presence; support for a new and expanded program to get prostitutes off the streets and into treatment; and the Police Service’s help in an education program to be launched in the Spring, aimed at debunking the myths of street prostitution.

Chair Kreling thanked the delegation for their presentation. For the information of Board members, he indicated he had been corresponding with members from the delegation over the past few weeks and had indicated to them the Board’s support for the continued co-operative efforts between members of their community, the Police Service and the Board. He noted that members of the community have been very supportive and complimentary towards police officers with regard to their work in Hintonburg and he thanked them for bringing the matter to the attention of the Board.

Regional Chair B. Chiarelli believed this community association is a model of commitment. He noted the tremendous difference they have made in their community and he felt the Police Service would be lost without such community support. He took the opportunity to compliment and thank members of the Hintonburg Community Association and to encourage them to continue their work because it is making a huge difference.

In response to a request from member Legendre for clarification, Mr. Baltz stated the delegation’s first request was for the continuation of the John School. The request has been prompted by recent publicity. He acknowledged there had been a slip in confidentiality, which is needed for the program to work, and the community association wants assurances that the entire program will not suffer as a result of one incident.

With respect to the request for assistance with a public education campaign, Mr. Baltz stated the community association has found that the more opportunities they have to tell their story and to make the point that the women and girls are soliciting because they are addicted to drugs, the more people understand the dangers of street prostitution. He re-iterated that when prostitutes moved into the neighbourhood, drug dealers followed because the two cultures feed off one another.

B. Primmer saw a public education campaign as a means to make people aware of the impacts of street prostitution across the entire Region and to re-motivate those who are working on such issues so that they continue with the work they do.

C. Parrott noted, from speaking with participants of the John School, that most of them had no idea of the effects of street prostitution. She stated people have expressed the need for such information to be more widely available. The Hintonburg Community Association has some ideas for a region-wide public education campaign.

In response to a request from member Legendre for a staff comment with respect to the four requests made by the delegation, Deputy Chief Mackie stated there is an on-going partnership with the Hintonburg community and it is the Police Service’s intention to continue working with this and other communities facing such social problems. He expressed the Service’s intention to continue working with the John School and to evaluate ways of improving it. He acknowledged there are issues around expanded education schools and stated the Police Service will continue to look at options to build on past successes. He thanked the Hintonburg community for their support. He noted recent staffing changes in the community and expressed the belief that the new District Inspector will do an excellent job of continuing to work towards solving this problem.

In response to another question from member Legendre, Chief Ford stated the John School is funded by the participants. Ms. Parrott indicated the program makes money. Though there is a time commitment required from the Police Service and other involved agencies, there is no cost to the Service. Chief Ford explained that the profits from the School are used to help fund other diversion programs and he re-iterated the Service’s commitment to continuing the program.

Member Legendre wondered if it would be possible for a Board member to attend one of the John School sessions as an observer. Deputy Chief Mackie suggested member Legendre speak to Mr. D. Pepper, Director, Community Development, as he is involved with the prostitution networking group.

In response to a question from member Legendre with respect to the delegation’s request for more prostitution sweeps, Ms. Primmer explained that in 1999, there were less prostitution sweeps than in 1998. The association believed the community suffered because of the reduction and would like the number of sweeps to be restored, at least to the 1998 level.

Deputy Chief Mackie acknowledged there may have been fewer sweeps in Hintonburg in 1999, though he did not know the exact figures. He indicated there were sweeps conducted in the Byward Market and other areas where prostitution is a problem. He explained prostitution sweeps are the responsibility of the District Inspector, in liaison with the community response unit. He promised to obtain statistical data for the number of sweeps in 1998 and 1999.

Member Legendre indicated he would be interested, not only in the number of sweeps in Hintonburg, but in the total number taking place region-wide. He wondered if staff could provide such data for the past three years. Deputy Chief Mackie took note of this request.

Chair Kreling noted the presence of Regional Councillor L. Davis and invited her to address the Board.

Councillor Davis indicated that when she was first elected to Regional Council in 1994, the community was grappling with this issue. At that point, people didn’t want to talk about the problem because they feared it might draw more attention to their community. She noted that at the time, community-based policing was nowhere near what it is today. There has been a tremendous gain in terms of the partnerships that have evolved in the community. She noted the hard work of residents in the community and the partnerships they’ve formed with various agencies such as the Police Service and the Region’s Health Department, and she thanked all those who have worked to form these partnerships and to rid Hintonburg of this problem. She also noted this community has waited very patiently for its own community police centre and she wondered when that might become a reality.

Deputy Chief Mackie indicated that as soon as the Service can find a location that is suitable, affordable and geographically appropriate, the community police centre will be established. He hoped that would happen by early summer.

Councillor Davis thanked him and she thanked the Board for taking the time to hear the delegation’s presentation.

 

e) Joan Gullen, Round Table Against Violence Against Women

Ms. J. Gullen indicated she sits on the Round Table as a community representative from the Regional Coordinating Committee to End Violence Against Women. The Round Table is designed to addressed the criminal justice system as it responds, or does not respond, to women who have been assaulted. Members of the group include Chief Ford, the Chief Crown Council and the Region’s Commissioner of Social Services.

Having had an opportunity to review the job description for the new Chief of Police, she stated members of the Round Table feel it is a very managerial description and is lacking with respect to the importance of issues such as community policing, working relationships with the community and violence against women. She noted that assault calls are the single largest category of calls received by the police, making violence against women an issue of primary importance. Ms. Gullen felt these are very compelling reasons why sensitivity and a commitment to these issues should be written into the job description and form part of the interview process. She also requested that the Board find a way to reach out to the community to solicit their input on the criteria for the new Chief of Police. She felt that would benefit the process and enhance the public’s trust in the Police Service.

For the information of Board members, Chair Kreling indicated he had been approached by Regional Councillor W. Byrne about this and had indicated to her that because the Board had already advertised the position, he felt it would be difficult to convene a public meeting on the requirements of the position. However, in recognition of the need for the public to have input into the process, he had suggested to her that groups could provide correspondence to him, as Chair of the Board and a member of the selection committee, and that he would share any such correspondence with the Board. He believed that Councillor Byrne had been satisfied with the suggestion.

Chair Kreling stated it is the Board’s intention to seek a Chief of Police who is committed to community policing initiatives, who is sensitive to women’s issues, community issues, and the Service’s youth initiatives. He maintained the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Service is striving for excellence on these fronts and will continue to do so.

Ms. Gullen was pleased to hear of the Board’s commitment to these issues. She re-iterated the Round Table was worried that these attributes were missing from the job description.

Vice Chair Baskerville wondered if Ms. Gullen’s comments were based on the newspaper advertisement for the position. He believed the detailed job description indicated a definite requirement to be knowledgeable in the area of implementing community policing and he confirmed that documents given to the consultants contained material indicating this as a criteria for their search.

Member Buckingham did not believe it was too late for the Board to hold a public meeting. She noted the Board will have to meet during the month of February to formulate interview questions. She stated her intent to put forward a motion under "Other Business" later in the meeting, directing that the Board hold a special meeting in the middle of February to solicit input from interested members of the community on what they see as the specific requirements for the next Chief of Police. She acknowledged that the Board has put together a general job description but felt that the interview process would provide an opportunity to explore specific issues. She felt that if the Board wants to be seen as listening to the community, it has to provide a formal opportunity for the public to provide their perspective.

Member Legendre suggested that it might suffice to list this as an item on the Board’s regular agenda. He wondered if there was enough public interest to warrant holding a special meeting.

Because the next regular Board meeting would not take place until the end of February, member Buckingham indicated her motion would direct that a special meeting be held in mid-February. She felt that would allow the Board sufficient time to use the public input to formulate a suitable range of interview questions before the interview process begins, in late February or early March.

That the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Services Board receive these presentations for consideration.

RECEIVED

 

ITEMS OF BUSINESS

2. Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Tuck Shop

- Presentation by Director, Financial Services and Materiel Management

Ms. D. Frazer, Director, Financial Services and Materiel Management, provided a presentation on the OCRPS Tuck Shop which highlighted: the concept behind the Tuck Shop; the products being sold; the team of staff members involved in the initiative; and the workplan to bring the Tuck Shop to a full-time operation.

She explained the concept was to design a line of high-quality soft goods that would bear the two OCRPS logos, the heraldic crest and the shoulder flash. To ensure that none of the products sold would be replicas of items used by an officer in the line of duty, staff selected casual wear to be sold in the Tuck Shop. In order to keep prices reasonable, a 25% profit margin was built-in, compared to the average 100% mark-up on soft goods in the retail world, and all profits are donated to charitable groups. As a result of profits from the December test pilot, donations have been made to the Ottawa Police Youth Centre Christmas Tree Initiative and to the Kidney Foundation, the latter being a criteria for holding the Tuck Shop at Carlingwood Mall. Ms. Frazer listed the dates, times and locations the Tuck Shop has been open for business to date, and noted it has received an overwhelmingly positive response. She acknowledged that some people have called expressing a concern about children being taught to recognize and respect the police badge and hat. Staff have explained the distinction between the casual wear being sold by the Tuck Shop and a police uniform, highlighting the fact that no items resembling an official police uniform or badge are being sold by the Tuck Shop.

Mr. Frazer indicated that in order to continue the Tuck Shop operation, staff are analyzing all its sales, by product and by event, to determine the best selling items and the most worthwhile locations. Staff feel that for a minimum investment, permanent locations can be developed beside the Qarter Master area at 474 Elgin and at the new Police and Public Safety Institute at Algonquin College. She also noted there are a multitude of possibilities for using the Tuck Shop at temporary sites to work with community partners in fundraising initiatives.

Member Legendre was concerned about the potential for individuals involved in fraudulent activities to use such items as the portfolios, or other business-like items, to give the impression that they are associated with the Police Service. He noted the OCRPS is not the first Police Service to operate a Tuck Shop and he wondered if any cases such as what he described have ever been reported. Chief Ford stated he was not aware of any such cases and indicated the operation of a Tuck Shop is a practice that is undertaken by every major police service in the country.

Member Legendre also expressed a concern about the amount of staff time being devoted to this initiative. Ms. Frazer explained that initially, staff spent approximately two hours per week collectively in developing and ordering the products and establishing prices. She indicated this project has vitalized staff. She did not see it involving a tremendous amount of staff time and she believed it would amount to a two to three hour a week obligation.

Member McCombie was confident the Tuck Shop would do well. He noted the biggest Tuck Shop in the world is at the FBI Academy in Virginia, where almost anything associated with the FBI can be bought, and he indicated he had never heard of it being misinterpreted.

That the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Services Board receive this presentation for information.

RECEIVED

 

3. AUDIT OF HUMAN RESOURCE POLICIES

- Director, Management and Audit Services’ report dated 19 Jan 00

Member Buckingham felt that $35,000 to $50,000 is an extremely broad range and, depending on the evaluation criteria, could result in a very wide range of proposals coming forward. Ms. S. Josselyn, Director, Management and Audit Services, RMOC, explained that the cost is estimated at this range because the sampling methodology is still unclear and will be key.

Member Buckingham believed what will drive the price is the number of days it takes to go through a file and what level of effort is deemed to be reasonable. She argued that with such a wide range in the budget, the consulting firms will not be bidding on the same basis. She also noted this is typically a very busy time of year for consulting firms, which may have a bearing on many firms’ availability.

Ms. Josselyn estimated that to have a team working on the project, which is required to ensure objectivity and balance, will cost approximately $50,000. In light of this, member Buckingham felt the budget should be set at $45,000 to $50,000, to make it clear to the bidding firms what level of effort is anticipated. However, she had some difficulty with spending $50,000 of the Board’s Professional Services budget on this project and indicated she would be drafting a motion to reduce the range for this audit to $40,000 to $45,000.

Member Legendre asked what assurance he had that these Terms of Reference will result in the review of cases rising out of events described in the Laidlaw report. He felt the Laidlaw report was clear in recommending that the Board review those cases. He believed that his motion of 6 December 1999, which the Board approved, also clearly directed that those cases be reviewed.

Chair Kreling indicated he had spoken with Mr. Laidlaw by telephone in regard to the content of this Request for Proposal and the project’s Terms of Reference and asked him whether his recommendation with respect to the human resource issue was specific to certain cases. Mr. Laidlaw responded the recommendation in his report was not specific to any particular personnel files, and suggested the Board would want to be comfortable that the human resource practices of the Service are appropriate, are being adhered to, and are in line with other police services. Chair Kreling stated that Mr. Laidlaw felt the Board might in fact be going further than might have been expected as a result of the recommendation in his report.

In response to member Legendre re-iterating his question, Ms. Josselyn indicated her understanding of the recommendation was that the Board should conduct an audit of the Service’s human resource practices, and she stated that is the purpose of the Terms of Reference.

Member Legendre indicated he too had spoken with Mr. Laidlaw, as well as with someone else at the Ontario Civilian Commission on Police Services (OCCPS). He was surprised to hear the Board Chair cite Mr. Laidlaw, and noted his own conversation with him was obviously different from the Chair’s. He speculated that perhaps this was due to the way the present report was characterized. He stated there was no secret made of the intent of his motion on 6 December 1999. As he introduced his motion on that day, he spoke about Mr. Laidlaw’s reference to transfers that appeared to have been punitive. He wanted assurances that those cases would be reviewed as part of the human resource audit. He acknowledged the need to look at other issues as well, but he was adamant that those specific cases be reviewed. Ms. Josselyn indicated the audit will produce a report that will comment on the current policies and procedures of the Police Service and its evolution since amalgamation, but the random sample review will be focussed on current policies.

In response to a further question from member Legendre, Ms. Josselyn indicated the audit will not specifically look at transfers that occurred as a result of events that took place in the fall of 1997. Member Legendre argued that in passing his motion of 6 December 1999, the Board specifically asked that this be done.

As a point of order, Vice Chair Baskerville referenced the 6 December 1999 meeting minutes and noted the changes the Board had made to member Legendre’s original motion. In particular, the section being referenced by member Legendre was deleted.

Member Legendre maintained the portion of his motion that passed specifically referred to the events of the fall of 1997. He believed the discussion in the minutes of that meeting are also clear in that the Board was specifically discussing the Laidlaw report and the transfers that occurred, which appeared to have been punitive. He re-iterated his argument of 6 December about the importance of sending a clear message to the Service that officers can be in receipt of allegations concerning senior management, and can deal with those allegations appropriately without fearing for their careers. He indicated he had been told by Mr. Laidlaw and by others at OCCPS that this does not constitute getting into operational matters. He maintained this Board is the oversight agency for the Police Service and if it does not provide oversight in this matter, it is not doing its job.

Chair Kreling acknowledge some members of the Board may have individual opinions with regard to the content of the RFP but he maintained it is the result of interviews with five members of this Board.

Member Legendre stated that if the final report of this audit does not provide answers to his questions with regard to transfers that occurred in the fall of 1997, he would be at it again.

Vice Chair Baskerville believed that in order for an audit to be valid, it has to be based on a random sample. He noted the transfers in question may or may not turn up in that sample, but he argued that if the auditors are directed to review those particular files, it becomes less of an audit and more of an investigation. He stated he was happy with the way the RFP had been prepared and was hopeful that all types of cases would fall into the random sample.

Member McCombie thought staff had done a great job in preparing the RFP and he believed it covered everything. He was not in favour of lowering the amount of the budget because he felt the range of $35,000 to $50,000 was adequate, though he hoped the final cost would be around $40,000. As for reviewing specific cases, he thought is seemed vindictive on the part of member Legendre and he maintained the Board can not be revisiting this issue continually. He stated that after the Laidlaw report was released, he had hoped the Board and the Police Service could put this issue in the past and move on.

Member Adam indicated that though he had supported the motion on 6 December, he would be voting against the motion before the Board tonight. He did not want to fund the audit because he felt the Board is not interested in finding out what happened. He thought member Legendre was right and that unless those specific cases are reviewed, the audit will be a waste of time and money.

Chair Kreling spoke in favor of proceeding with the audit. He stated it is an issue that the Board’s Policy Committee had discussed in preparation of the 2000 budget, that the Board should engage in external audits to ensure the Service has practices that are transparent and effective. He believed external audits are a valid part of oversight.

Moved by E. Buckingham

That the project budget for this audit be adjusted to $40,000 to $45,000.

LOST

YEAS: E. Buckingham, G. Baskerville, H. Kreling

Nays: D. Adam, J. Legendre, J. McCombie

Moved by D. Adam

That the Board reduce the amount to $1.

Chair Kreling ruled the motion out of order. He stated Board members can disagree on valid discussion but to put forward a motion for a dollar is a mockery.

The Board then voted on the report recommendation.

That the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Services Board approve the Terms of Reference for the retention of a consultant to conduct an audit of human resource practices within the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Service.

CARRIED

(D. Adam dissented)

 

4. BOARD SUPPORT REQUIREMENTS

- Chair, Human Resource Committee’s report dated 12 Jan 00

Member Legendre requested clarification as to where the position will be advertised. Vice Chair Baskerville confirmed it will be advertised in the local newspapers, including the local French newspaper.

That the Ottawa-Carleton Police Services Board approve that the Board’s resource requirement be filled on a contract basis and that $40,000 be allocated in the first year (year 2000) for this purpose.

CARRIED

(D. Adam dissented)

5. Police Services Board Reporting

Requirements from the Chief of Police

- Chief’s report dated 14 Jan 2000

Member Buckingham believed there were a number of other things listed in the Board’s Policy Manual that were not included in the report. She expressed difficulty with the timing with which the Board receives its quarterly financial reports. She maintained that the Board can not manage costs when they are reported more than three months in arrears. She felt if the Board is to manage costs, it should receive it’s financial information the month following when they were incurred. She wondered why it takes so long to receive these reports.

Ms. Frazer explained that with the new SAP system, financial information is posted on the internal website two days after month end and transaction details are e-mailed to managers as required. She noted the third quarter financial report would have been to the Board in November had it not been for the accelerated budget process. She noted the dates staff have put forward for the coming year will see quarterly financial reports rising to the Board approximately one month after the close of each quarter.

Member Buckingham argued that if financial information is posted on the internal website two days after month end, it shouldn’t take six weeks, based on the schedule listed in the current report, to get a report before the Board. Ms. Frazer indicated she would be happy to share the reporting cycle with the Board and explained, by way of an example, that if staff get their information on the internal website on February 2, they would have to provide a report to the Board’s Executive Director by February 16 in order to meet the deadline to have it included on the February agenda. She argued, that does not allow time to take the information back to section managers and confirm their plans to year end.

Member Buckingham maintained that the Board will not get its first meaningful financial report until about May and by that time staff should have some idea of the trends. In any event, she wondered why the Board has to wait until May 2000 to get a report on the 1999 year-end results. Ms. Frazer indicated that timeline is driven by the Region’s process for audited financial statements.

In response to further comments from member Buckingham, Ms. Frazer indicated staff would be happy to bring forward a set of unaudited financial statements to the Board with the revisions to follow after the Region has completed the auditing process.

Member Buckingham noted the report made no mention of the requirement to provide performance appraisals for the deputy chiefs, the organization as a whole, and the director general. She stated she also expected the Chief to report on a staffing plan.

Chief Ford stated the evaluations of the deputy chiefs and the director general are not listed in the report because they have already been provided. In terms of the staffing plan, he believed it would form part of the business plan being developed. He suggested he could meet with the Board’s Human Resource Committee to clarify any confusion on this matter.

S. Kanellakos, Director General, explained that in preparing this report, staff did not include items that will be coming forward as a result of the Adequacy Standards such as: the technology plan; the facilities plan; and the staffing plan. Those will be treated as separate items and reported on as the Service progresses through the implementation checklist. He indicated this report is based on items listed in the Board’s Policy Manual and its purpose is to provide timelines for the various reports.

Member Buckingham suspected staff had dealt with the section of the Policy Manual that pertains specifically to the Chief’s reporting requirements and indicated there are reporting requirements included in other sections of the Manual. She noted this report states a report was submitted to the Board’s Human Resources Committee in December. She argued that submitting a report to a sub-committee does not constitute informing the Board.

That the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Services Board receive this report for information.

RECEIVED

 

6. Report on the Review of the Basic Cost Structure - OCRPS

- Chief’s report dated 19 Jan 00

Member Buckingham noted there are a number of good recommendations contained in the consultants report and requested that staff bring forward a quarterly report with regard to their implementation. Chief Ford suggested a motion be adopted to that effect.

Moved by E. Buckingham

That the Board receive a quarterly report from the Chief on the status of the implementation of the recommendations.

CARRIED

 

That the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Services Board receive this report for information.

RECEIVED

7. Award of Tender for Marked Police Vehicles

- Director, Financial Services & Material Management’s report dated 17 Jan 00

That the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Services Board award the tender for the purchase of full-size police package vehicles to Jim Keay Ford Lincoln Sales (Orléans, Ontario) for an amount of $1,217,952.58 including applicable taxes.

CARRIED

 

8. 1999 Third Quarter Financial Report

- Director, Financial Services & Material Management’s report dated 19 Jan 00

Vice Chair Baskerville noted an exceptionally large variance in the total costs for legal services, a deficit of $187,000, and he asked staff to elaborate on how this has occurred and what action can be taken to prevent it from recurring.

S. Kanellakos explained that part of the deficit is related to the Region’s Legal Department recovery, which includes their charge back for three staff members and for external disbursements in litigation. The rest of the deficit relates to internal legal costs generated by Mr. Westwick as legal counsel to the Chief. He indicated that in an effort to reduce legal costs, staff have been speaking with Mr. Johnston about adjusting the charge-back portion and he noted there was a provision in the 2000 budget for hiring one staff person to work with Mr. Westwick to do more work in-house.

Vice Chair Baskerville asked if staff would be bringing forward supplementary estimates to amend the 2000 budget once an agreement has been reached with Mr. Johnston. S. Kanellakos indicated staff would not be bringing forward amended estimates because the Service has been able to absorb the over-run in this account. The meeting with Mr. Johnston will resolve the matter so that the Service does not have to continue absorbing such costs.

In response to a question from member Legendre, Mr. Kanellakos clarified the Region’s Legal Department charges the Police Service for one lawyer, one legal clerk and one administrative support person at a total cost of $158,000. Police Service staff would like to meet with Mr. Johnston to discuss the appropriate level of legal services for the OCRPS. He stated the meeting is not about reducing the amount of funding for the Board’s legal services.

In response to a further questions from member Legendre with regard to the service Mr. Westwick provides as legal counsel to the Chief and its the impact on the cost problem, Mr. Kanellakos summarized that the Service has effectively segregated its legal services in terms of the Board obtaining legal counsel from Mr. Johnston and his staff, and the Chief and Police Service obtaining legal counsel from Mr. Westwick. Both areas contribute to the cost over-run.

Member Buckingham wondered what staff anticipated legal costs would be in relation with the OC Transpo inquest. Chief Ford indicated total costs would depend on how long the inquest lasts, though he believed it would be in the range of $40,000 to $50,000. In response to a further question from member Buckingham, the Chief confirmed that the Service has retained outside counsel for the inquest.

Member Buckingham noted the costs for the inquest would impact significantly on an already strained budget for legal services and she recalled that for the past two years, she has argued that the Service does not budget enough for legal services.

That the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Services Board receive this report for information.

RECEIVED

 

9. Possible Use of Video Court and Cost of Transferring Prisoners

- Chief’s report dated 17 Jan 00

Member Buckingham was intrigued to learn from the report that the mileage rate the Service can charge the Province for costs incurred in moving prisoners has not changed in over 20 years. She wondered if that information was correct and if so, what the Board could do to precipitate a change to the formula. She maintained that if the rate was reasonable in 1977, it cannot possibly be reasonable today.

Pursuant to a suggestion from Chief Ford, member Buckingham indicated she would draft a motion directing the Board to send correspondence to the Minister of Correctional Services expressing its belief that the rate, which has been in place since 1977, is long overdue for revision. She also suggested that the correspondence be copied to the Attorney General and all local members of provincial parliament.

Vice Chair Baskerville noted the conclusion of the report states that the Service is now receiving $67,366 per annum under the cost recovery formula. Inspector H. Durand confirmed that is the total recovered for 1999. However he noted that in 1998, the OCRPS recovered approximately $97,000. He explained that various factors contributed to a reduction in the amount the Service was able to recover in 1999.

In order to get an idea of the discrepancy between the costs of delivering the service and the funds the OCRPS is receiving towards it, Vice Chair Baskerville asked for an estimate of the costs for prisoner transport. Inspector Durand indicated that the cost recovery amounts to $19.70 per trip whereas the estimated cost for staff is $221.60 per trip, not including vehicle costs.

Vice Chair Baskerville indicated he would be supporting member Buckingham’s motion. He recalled the Board had discussed this matter at a previous meeting which had resulted in correspondence being sent to the Ministry advocating the use of video conferencing. He believed the Board must pressure the authorities to provide reasonable recovery costs. He maintained the OCRPS is obliged to provide the service but it is not related to the core functions of policing.

Member Legendre suggested that member Buckingham’s motion include a recommendation that the cost recovery rate also be adjusted annually to reflect the ever increasing cost of delivering the service. Otherwise, he believed the Service would find itself in the same situation in the future.

Moved by Member Buckingham

That correspondence be sent to the Minister of Correctional Services indicating that the mileage recovery rate needs to be adjusted to take into account the increased costs since 1977 and thereafter annually.

CARRIED

 

That the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Services Board receive this report for information.

RECEIVED

 

10. S.I.U. Investigation - Injury in Cellblock

- Chief’s report dated 10 Dec 1999

That the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Services Board receive this report outlining the results of the S.I.U. investigation and the Professional Standards investigation.

RECEIVED

 

11. S.I.U. Investigation - Motor Vehicle Accident - October 6, 1999

- Chief’s report dated 10 Dec 1999

Member Legendre inquired as to the state of the Provincial Police Pursuit Guidelines and wondered how they differ from previous guidelines.

Deputy Chief Mackie believed the guidelines were passed on 15 December. He indicated the Ministry sent out a training video with an intent to have the guidelines implemented by 30 December, but that date was pushed back because of training issues.

M. Mitchell confirmed the guidelines have been adopted as regulation. He explained the key difference is that the previous guidelines were optional whereas now they are regulatory under the Police Services Act, and are mandatory. He added, a training program is being prepared by the Ontario Police College.

Member Legendre requested that the training video be made available for the Board’s viewing. He suggested it could be added as an item on the Board’s agenda for March.

That the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Services Board receive this report outlining the results of the S.I.U. investigation and the Professional Standards investigation.

RECEIVED

 

12. MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL: CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF POLICE BOARDS

- Executive Director’s report dated 14 Jan 00

That the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Services Board approve payment of $700 to the Canadian Association of Police Boards for its 2000 membership fee.

CARRIED

 

13. MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL:

ONTARIO ASSOCIATION OF POLICE SERVICES BOARDS

- Executive Director’s report dated 14 Jan 00

That the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Services Board approve payment of $4,000 (plus GST) to the Ontario Association of Police Services Boards for its 2000 membership fee.

CARRIED

 

14. Quarterly Complaints Report - Part V,

Police Services Act (Period Ending December 31, 1999)

- Chief’s report dated 18 Jan 00

In response to an inquiry from member Legendre with respect to a particular complaint, Deputy Chief Bevan explained that no arrest was made in that case because, although officers managed to stop the vehicle and recover the stolen goods, the operator of the vehicle managed to escape apprehension.

That the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Services Board receive this report for information.

RECEIVED

 

15. COMMENDATION LETTERS (SINCE LAST BOARD MEETING)

- Chief"s report dated 17 Jan 00

That the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Services Board receive this report for information.

RECEIVED

 

16. CHIEF’S VERBAL REPORT

Chief Ford reported the following items:

That the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Services Board receive this report for information.

RECEIVED

OTHER BUSINESS

17. SPECIAL MEETING TO SOLICIT COMMUNITY

INPUT ON REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW CHIEF OF POLICE

Chair Kreling indicated member Buckingham had put forward a motion with respect to the Board holding a special, facilitated meeting to obtain input from the community on the requirements for the next Chief of Police.

Member Buckingham stated her motion is further to the presentation heard by the Board earlier in the meeting. She acknowledged the Board has gone through a process of creating a profile for the position but she felt there is a small window of opportunity, as the Board prepares for the interview process, to solicit public input. She did not believe it could wait until the next regular Board meeting as she believed the interview process would begin in late February or early March.

J. McCombie indicated he did not support the suggestion because he felt it would not be fair to apply the solicited criteria to the short-list of candidates and not to all potential candidates.

Member Buckingham believed it would provide an opportunity for the Board to gather information that could help fine-tune the interview questions.

Moved by E. Buckingham

That the Board hold a special facilitated meeting in both official languages in mid February to obtain input from interested members of the community on what they see as requirements for the next Chief of Police.

CARRIED

(D. Adam, J. McCombie

dissented)

 

INQUIRIES

1. Changeover to Digital Radio System and Media Satisfaction with New Arrangements

Member Legendre referenced a presentation he had attended with regard to the Service’s changeover to the new digital radio system. He indicated he had since received a complaint from a member of media who is unhappy with the new arrangements and he inquired about the status of the situation and the level of satisfaction with the new system.

Deputy Chief Bevan stated a report has been prepared and circulated to Board members which deals with the media’s level of satisfaction with the new system since its implementation, and which speaks to the future of creating access through the OCRPS website. He indicated he too had received a copy of the complaint referenced by member Legendre and he would be speaking with the complainant to deal with the particular incident. He also noted recent staff changes and indicated he would follow-up to ensure all new staff members understand their role.

 

CONSIDERATION OF MOTION TO MOVE IN CAMERA

That the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Services Board adjourn the public portion of its meeting to move In Camera to discuss Confidential Items 1 through 5 pertaining to personnel, financial and litigation matters, in accordance with Section 35(4)(b) of the Police Services Act.

CARRIED

 

ADJOURNMENT

The meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m.

 

 ____________________________ _____________________________

W. Fedec H. Kreling

Executive Director Chair