Chair: Councillor H. Kreling
Vice Chair: Mr. G. Baskerville
Members: Ms. E. Buckingham, Councillor J. Legendre, Mr. J. McCombie

Mr. D. Adam, Regional Chair B. Chiarelli

In response to a question from member Legendre, Deputy Chief Mackie indicated the bike school will be held at 474 Elgin Street.

Member McCombie re-iterated a previous inquiry with respect to the possibility of imposing a publication ban on the names of people who attend John School. Chief Bevan indicated he would have to check on the status of that inquiry though he did not believe the Service could impose such a ban.

- Chief’s report dated 15 Sep 00

Chief Bevan recalled in July of last year, a blind person, while with his guide dog, was refused access to an Ottawa convenience store. Following that incident, questions and issues arose with regard to the level of awareness and training provided to members of the Police Service for dealing with members of the blind, deaf-blind and visually impaired community. To address those issues, representatives of the blind, deaf-blind and visually impaired community worked with members of the Police Service to develop and deliver a program aimed at heightening awareness and training police officers on their needs.

Staff Sergeant G. Meehan indicated it was a pleasure to work with this group to develop the training syllabus for the OCRPS. He described the process by which the group was formed, its membership, and the development and delivery of the training syllabus. He noted the sub-committee, comprised of Mr. T. Green, Ms. P. Leclair, Ms. V. Collicott, Ms. A. Farrow, Mr. I. Martin, Mr. P. Marcinov, Ms. T. Marcinov and Mr. R. Marsoleil, represented a wide range of expertise ranging from law, education, administration and blind, deaf-blind and visually impaired community advocacy.

Mr. T. Green re-iterated that these issues arose out of an incident in which he and his guide dog were refused access to a convenience store in July 1999. He recalled that members of the blind, deaf-blind and visually impaired community spoke before the Police Services Board on three separate occasions following that incident. In August 1999, an initial meeting was held with staff of the Police Service to discuss training, and the committee mentioned by Staff Sergeant Meehan was formed in November 1999. Mr. Green felt the training of front-line officers is a beginning of awareness and sensitivity to issues and problems faced by guide dog users and persons who are blind in the Ottawa-Carleton area. He hoped the positive steps taken by the Police Service and Board would lend themselves to other areas such as the upcoming municipal election and other emergency services.

Staff Sergeant Meehan indicated should other emergency services want to use the syllabus, the Police Service will make resources available at its professional development centre. He invited Chief Bevan and Chair Kreling to join him in presenting a token of appreciation to Mr. Ian Martin, Ms. Tracy Marcinov, and Mr. Paul Marcinov for their assistance in delivering the training to front-line officers. He stressed their commitment in terms of time and expertise and noted it was an onerous task.

Chief Bevan explained the Police Service has prepared plaques for each individual which read "In recognition of your contribution to police officer training for blind, deaf-blind and visually impaired community awareness, April 5 through May 10 2000, presented by the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Service".

Chair Kreling thanked staff for drawing the Board’s attention to all the good work that has been done with respect to this initiative. On behalf of the Board, he thanked Mr. Martin, Ms. Marcinov, and Mr. Marcinov for their efforts and commitment to helping the Police Service and the community at large better understand the accessibility challenges that members of the blind, deaf-blind and visually impaired community face on a daily basis. He also thanked all the members of the committee who participated in the initiative.

Member Legendre recognized and commended Mr. T. Green for his perseverance in propelling the issue forward and bringing it to the Board’s and the public’s attention. He noted a lot of good has come out of a bad situation.

Member Buckingham felt the outcome was a great one-time effort however, she inquired about the Service’s plans to offer refresher training to its officers.

Chief Bevan indicated the Service recognizes that there is a place for this kind of training in the organization and noted Ms. Marcinov has offered to continue with the program. The program will be required training for any new officers coming into the organization and the Service will try to deliver refresher training for existing officers.

Deputy Chief Mackie explained this item was place on the agenda to follow-up on a request from member Legendre for an update on the Ministry’s pursuit guidelines and the Service’s training program. He introduced Sergeants L. Bustard and R. Keindel and invited them to make the presentation.

Sergeant L. Bustard explained the Solicitor General of Ontario initiated a review of pursuits following the deaths of several third parties during suspect apprehension pursuits and asked the Policing Services Division to prepare a comprehensive report on pursuits. The report, released 12 February 1999, made five recommendations. Three of the recommendations pertained to: the provision of funding on a one-time basis for helicopter projects and their evaluation; amendments to the Highway Traffic Act; and amendments to the Criminal Code to include stiffer penalties for drivers who decide to flee police. The presentation will focus on the other two recommendations, which pertain to: amending the policy of Suspect Apprehension Pursuits (SAP) through regulation; and the training of officers, supervisors and dispatchers on pursuits.

The OCRPS has implemented a policy to ensure compliance with these statutory amendments which includes: initiating/continuing SAP, a three-part test; utilizing alternative methods/tactics when following or stopping a fleeing vehicle; discontinuing/terminating a pursuit; intentional contact; jurisdiction; monthly reporting to the Ministry; and training.

Staff showed a synopsis of the fifteen minute video prepared by the Ministry of the Solicitor General on the new policy/regulation.

Sergeant R. Keindel indicated the legislation, which came into effect 1 January 2000, requires that all sworn members, supervisors and dispatchers be trained by 31 December 2001, giving police services two years to ensure all affected staff receive the required training. He noted officers are governed by existing training, standing orders and policies until after they have received training. The training must be delivered in two parts, the first part being an academic component which must be completed before moving on to the second practical component.

During the academic component, trainees discuss the three-part test which every officer must consider before engaging in a pursuit: 1) that a criminal offence has been committed or is about to be committed, 2) that there is a need to identify the vehicle or its occupant and no alternatives are available, and 3) that the pursuit never outweighs the risk to public safety. They also discuss restrictions, the role of communications and supervisory personnel, alternatives to pursuits, jurisdiction issues, intentional contact, and an evaluation of training, the results of which are forwarded to the Ontario Police College (OPC). Sergeant Keindel explained the new legislation has brought changes to the issue of jurisdiction in that the Service where the pursuit was initiated has decision-making responsibilities throughout the pursuit unless it decides to turn it over to an adjacent jurisdiction.

The practical driver training component is designed with officer and public safety in mind. It is conducted on local city streets and focuses on co-operative driving principles. Finally, trainees learn termination methods such as spike belt deployment, rolling blocks and pin maneuvers.

Sergeant Keindel explained the two training components do not have to be conducted in conjunction with one another. The practical component is conducted year-round on city streets and the academic component is offered year-round at the Professional Development Centre. The legislation requires that refresher training be conducted on a bi-annual basis, though it leaves it to the discretion of individual police services to decide whether it will offer refresher training annually or bi-annually to its members. The OCRPS currently conducts refresher training on a bi-annual basis but will re-assess the need as the program gets up and running.

In response to questions from Vice Chair Baskerville, Sergeant Keindel indicated he is familiar with the RCMP’s training facility in Orleans however, the Service does not use it to conduct the practical component of the pursuit training. He explained the training is designed to be done on city streets and is typically done at average speeds. It involves four vehicles, with two instructors on board at all times.

In response to questions from member Legendre, Sergeant Keindel explained the legislation requires that police services report monthly on pursuits, even if there have been none. He believed the reports are for statistical purposes however, an OPC report is submitted by any officer who has been involved in a pursuit. With regard to the consensus test conducted at the end of the academic component of the training, Sergeant Keindel explained the previous model called for an individual test and posed some problems in terms of administration and tracking. Therefore, a committee reviewed the requirements and suggested that a consensus test be conducted. The class is broken down into small groups and each group answers fifteen questions. A consensus is reached by each group in answering the questions. They then present their answers to the facilitator and put their names on the exam.

- Chief’s report dated 20 Sep 00

- Chief’s report dated 18 Sep 00

Member Buckingham was delighted to see the Service was moving forward on this item. She noted the report indicates the Board will be kept briefed on different aspects of the project initiatives as they proceed. She indicated she would like to see a more definitive reporting cycle. She suggested that updates could perhaps be provided to the Board on a quarterly basis. She noted so much of the Service’s future capability in how it positions itself is dependant on the human resources policies and practices implemented. She believed the OCRPS will be stronger as a result of implementing the recommendations made by the external firm commissioned to look at the Service’s practices.

Member Buckingham noted the report recommends outsourcing at the same time as it suggests the Service will require additional resources. She believed that is contradictory and maintained that if outsourcing is intended to generate savings, staff should be able to do it within existing budgetary envelopes.

Chief Bevan suggested it might be appropriate for staff to report on the staffing plan in June and December. He believed that would tie in well with the Service’s promotional and transfer processes as well as with other reporting cycles already in place. With respect to outsourcing and the associated costs, Chief Bevan indicated the possible outsourcing solutions identified in the report would require temporary funds. He noted the Service is sensitive to the budget pressures the Board is subject to, therefore, staff have resolved to find money within existing budgetary envelopes. The costs were identified in this report because he felt it wise to identify, for the information of Board members, that the Service anticipates outsourcing some of these responsibilities in much the same way as it uses consultants in other areas of the organization.

Member Buckingham felt the June and December reporting cycle would be adequate. She noted one of the areas staff have identified for potential outsourcing relates to background checks. Since the OCRPS conducts these as part of the recruitment process, she assumed this would involve on-going costs.

Chief Bevan indicated the proposal to outsource background checks is still in the preliminary stages and staff identified it in the report for the Board’s information.

Vice Chair Baskerville was pleased to see the implementation plan. He expressed his appreciation for the work that has been done in this area and for the work still to be done. He referenced the objective under recommendation 4.1.2, of the "Goals & Objectives" which states "Position the Human Resources to more effectively participate in an integrated corporate planning process". He felt the statement is rather vague and suggested that if what is meant by it is that the Human Resource function has to be an integral part of the planning process, it should say that. He agreed with the objectives listed in section 4.2.1 under "Goals & Objectives" and suggested that staff might want to also consider a more formal process by which feedback can be given to unsuccessful applicants. He noted other jurisdictions have been criticized because unsuccessful applicants felt they were not sufficiently briefed.

Chief Bevan indicated he would have to discuss that suggestion with staff because of the number of people the Service deals with in its recruitment process. He noted that from time to time, a case arises that generates a significant workload for staff and such a commitment may be too onerous for the current staff resources.

Vice Chair Baskerville appreciated that such difficulties can arise and re-iterated that he raised it because the issue has come up in other jurisdictions.

In response to questions from Vice Chair Baskerville with respect to the third activity listed in section 4.2.3 under "Timelines and Accountability", which states "Continue to identify impediments to attracting recruits", Ms. C. Roy, Acting Director, Human Resources, confirmed that statement applies to the monitoring of the application of standards to various groups within the population such as women and racial groups. She explained the next activity, which refers to market groups, refers to the community the Police Service is serving and trying to look at the participation rates and applicant levels from visible minorities and women.

Vice Chair Baskerville referenced the activities listed in section 4.3.1 under "Timelines and Accountabilities" and suggested that in addition to conducting detailed research on incremental screening processes in other police organizations, the Service might want to look at similar hierarchical organizations such as military systems. He felt there might be some broad parameters that would be worthwhile investigating. He wondered if the screening criteria would be based on such things as performance appraisals. Ms. Roy confirmed that is one of the components staff is reviewing.

In response to further questions from Vice Chair Baskerville with respect to the development of tools to support the career management process, Ms. Roy explained the Career Management Strategy refers to a mapping out process that members would follow to go from one position to another, or from one rank to another, in terms of training, competencies and how they would be linked.

Vice Chair Baskerville referenced section 4.3.4 under "Timelines and Accountability" which suggests the Service evaluate the impact of introducing discretion in applying its current policy restricting eligibility for promotion of Constables before they complete eight years of service. He wondered whether that implies the present policy is acceptable and would only be by-passed in exceptional circumstances, or whether the Service will reconsider whether eight years is appropriate.

Chief Bevan indicated the Executive has had extensive discussions about the eight year rule and the five year rule and though a great deal more consultation is needed, the Service is reviewing those policies.

Member Legendre was pleased to see the report was finally before the Board. He felt it has been a while in coming forward. He noted the background refers to when the Board asked for the report but it makes no reference to what prompted it. He recalled that the Laidlaw report, which made some severe criticisms of the Service’s human resource practices, is what prompted the Board to ask for this report. He noted the background section indicates that part of the purpose of the audit was to "support decision making based on proven performance and merit of staff" and he asked staff to point out the recommendations in the report that specifically address that objective. He felt that was one of the driving reasons for the audit because the Laidlaw report suggested there may have in the past been punitive practices. He wondered how this report would correct such practices, if they existed. He also wondered how staff will in future be assured that promotions or transfers will be based on their track record, their career development, and the needs of the organization.

Chief Bevan began by addressing the issue of timing. He recalled that when the Board received the consultants’ report in June, it was agreed staff would bring forward an implementation plan in September. With respect to member Legendre’s question about the specific recommendations that address the purpose of ensuring decision making is based on proven performance and merit, Chief Bevan pointed to recommendation 4.3.2 under "Goals & Objectives" and recommendation 4.3.2 under "Timelines and Accountability" which recommend that "… the Human Resources Section create supporting tools for career management such as: Career Maps or Career Development Handbooks.". He explained the Service’s strategy has been to implement a more accountable process for transfers and to create tools to allow members to manage their career development. The Service is trying to create a performance appraisal system that can be used as a development tool for members by identifying strengths and weaknesses and being a living process by which members can get instant feedback, assistance and career counselling. He noted that a good deal of responsibility will fall on operational people because they are in the best position to give career advice and guidance to members who are working their way through the organization. He indicated the Service is trying to develop a strategy and create a process that will aid members, from the time they come in as new recruits, in continuing their development through middle service and getting to where they would like to be in the organization and where the organization can best use their skills and abilities. The process will involve the performance appraisal system, training programs and peer counselling. With respect to accountability following transfers, Chief Bevan indicated the Service will implement a checklist, developed by Deputy Chief Hill, and will be prepared to respond to questions from members as to why transfers have taken place.

In response to questions from member Legendre with respect to a performance appraisal system, Chief Bevan indicated that regular performance appraisals will be one of the elements considered in the promotional process but maintained, what is important is the development aspect. The Service wants to avoid any opportunity for ambush appraisals by implementing an incident file process where things done well and things that need improvement are dealt with at the time of an incident. He felt this would lead to members understanding where their strengths and weaknesses are and what is expected of them. That is seen as the foundation of the personal development program.

Member Legendre was glad the Service has gotten to where it will be implementing such systems and he hoped the recommendations would, in fact, be implemented. Chair Kreling noted the requirement for staff to report to the Board semi-annually is meant to ensure implementation.

- Director, Property Services’ report dated 19 Sep 00

Member Legendre noted the criteria for the vendor made no reference to food and wondered if members of the Police Service were consulted on the request for qualifications. He suggested that perhaps the next time the contract is let, the users of the facility should be consulted. Mr. Moore, Property Services, indicated the next time will be better because the contract requires that a formalized customer feedback survey be conducted bi-annually.

Ms. D. Frazer, Acting Director General, explained that in the last stage of the evaluation process, volunteer members were asked to participate in the review. She clarified that part of the food service plan was for the vendor to provide menu items and a feel for the range of items they would be providing in terms of variety and nutritional value. The contractor being recommended is the current vendor and Ms. Frazer stressed, their approach has always been to actively seek feedback from members. She stated staff will be happy to provide information of that nature in the report coming to the Board the next time the contract is let.

- Chief’s report dated 20 Sep 00

In reading the report, member Buckingham noted there are a number of things the Service does because they have historically done them. She wondered what the legal obligations are in these areas. She stated the fact the Service has been doing something for a long time means nothing to her.

Chief Bevan agreed with member Buckingham’s comment and stated that if staff find something that should more appropriately be done by another organization, the Service will enter into negotiations with that organization to achieve the desired savings.

Member Buckingham noted the report makes references to finding out what other police services do. She stated she does not care what other police services do. Any service currently offered by the OCRPS which it has no obligation to provide should be passed on to a more appropriate organization.

Chief Bevan noted the report makes references to advances in technology and he expected there would be changes once technology is fully on stream. In particular, he believed the integrated justice system would have a significant impact, not only on police services but on the court and crown system as well. The Service needs to re-allocate resources to meet some of the new obligations imposed by the adequacy standards and it is responsible for picking up some newly emerging issues. However, he hoped staff will be able to find efficiencies. He added staff in the court and records sections have also been asked to review their operations for possible efficiencies.

In response to a question from member Buckingham with respect to timeframes for seeing impacts on the budget, Chief Bevan indicated he expects to see impacts in 2001 though he could not ascertain how early in the year such impacts would be seen. He noted the analysis and recommendations should be available in time for the preparation of the 2001 budget estimates, therefore any such savings will be reflected in the draft budget.

Vice Chair Baskerville thanked Chief Bevan and his staff for bringing the report forward and keeping the Board up to date. He believed this is an on-going process that will probably go on for some time. He noted the annex to the report identifies target dates and he felt staff have provided a good update. He noted the report makes references to leave patterns and absenteeism and he wondered if staff will be reviewing the use the various forms of leave.

Chief Bevan indicated this is an area the Service is actively working on, and a report is being prepared for the Board’s Human Resources Committee.

D. Frazer explained the Service is incorporating absenteeism as one of the elements it will be able to monitor through the new time attendance and scheduling system currently being rolled-out to users. Human resource staff will be working with the vendor to develop customized reports and standard reporting so that information can be provided to sections managers. She hoped the Service will be using such information for decision-making by the end of the year.

- Chief’s report dated 12 Sep 00

- Acting Director General’s report dated 18 Sep 00

Member Buckingham noted the biggest pressures are overtime and legal costs and that secondment revenues are listed among the solutions. She wondered what sort of target levels are set for secondments as she believed this suggests they are running higher than planned.

Chief Bevan stated that from time to time the Service is responsible for responding to certain issues. He noted, for instance, that the Service currently has two members working in Kosovo and revenue is generated by that. He also noted the Service currently has, on a cost-recovery basis, officers working at the Criminal Intelligence Service of Canada. At any one time, the OCRPS has 20 to 22 members out on secondments. However, the Service has of late tried to minimize secondments for operational reasons. He indicated the OCRPS is currently at its maximum exposure to secondments, and all secondment requests are scrutinized very closely in terms of continued commitments and operational needs.

Member Buckingham recognized the value of secondments but maintained that because of retirement projections, the Service has to start paying close attention to the number of secondments it approves. She indicated she was surprised to see it listed as a solution to budget pressures. She believed this indicates there are a significant number of them to help make up the $690,000 saving identified in the report. She stressed the need to balance secondments against operational requirements and wondered if the large number of secondments are contributing to the significant amount of overtime.

Ms. Frazer explained the Service generally budgets in the range of $600,000 per year for secondment revenues. At this point, staff are projecting approximately $153,000 of secondment revenue beyond that base because of the kind of secondments the Service has been able to take advantage of this year. She explained that secondments are not always recovered and this year, the OCRPS has been fortunate in that respect. She stated it would be incorrect to say the Service is sending members on secondment to solve its budget issues; it just happens to be how it has unfolded this year.

Ms. Frazer did not believe the number of secondments is causing additional pressures on overtime. She explained that overtime pressures are coming about in trying to catch up to retirements. There have been retirements in the Service’s cell block, information desk and communications centre. Because of the process of recruiting, training and bringing people through the organization to replace those retirements, there is a time lapse during which existing staff are having to log overtime to cover off. She stated the OCRPS has taken great steps in recruiting to ensure staffing levels are maximized and the Service is currently within four positions of being fully staffed. However, the organization is adjusting to bumping those people into the positions where they are ultimately required. She noted part of what the Board saw in the Human Resource Implementation Plan is a plan to move the human resources function into the planning strategy so that the Service can anticipate such gaps from recruit to employee, plan transfers around that timing, and close the gap. She believed the Service will be fully staff this year and the staffing plan for 2001 will maintain that level and help close some of the gaps. Fortunately, there have been savings in other areas of the budget that are allowing staff to work around the issues this year.

Member Buckingham was glad to hear the Service is moving towards managing people as a strategic resource. She felt it is imperative to move in that direction.

Vice Chair Baskerville stated if the forecast for surplus is correct, staff should be commended because based on the Service’s operating budget of $130M, the surplus represents less than 1 tenth of 1 percent. He noted overtime is a perennial problem however, he was aware that staff are working on it and he was hopeful that over time, it will come under control. He noted one of the solutions listed in the report refers to savings in equipment and program supplies. He wondered if this meant that staff were skimping on the tools they need to do their jobs as a short term solution to bring down expenditures.

Ms. Frazer explained some of those savings are due to the stock piling the Service did in preparation for the millennium. Staff did a lot of purchasing towards the end of last year in anticipation of a front-line operational exercise that never happened. Those savings are primarily coming out of the Quarter Master budget and are directly related to the fact that the Service does not have to restock as quickly as it normally would. However, staff are keeping the budget bases where they are because they reflect a more normal year of operation.

- Chief’s report dated 18 Sep 00

- Executive Director’s report dated 18 Sep 00

- CAPB Vice President and Executive Director’s joint report dated 13 Sep 00

Chair Kreling indicated this item is being brought forward at the request of the Board of Directors of the Canadian Association of Police Boards (CAPB). He explained that normally, the CAPB holds its annual conference in conjunction with the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police (CACP). Because the CACP is holding its 2002 conference in Quebec City and the CAPB has no members in Quebec, it was suggested that Ottawa would be a destination close enough to allow delegates to attend both conferences if they so desire. He noted that hosting the conference would require the Board to contribute approximately $5,000 to host a reception.

Vice Chair Baskerville indicated he has attended the conferences for the past three years and he felt they were very useful meetings. However, he felt a certain precedence has been set with respect to receptions and functions. He suggested the Board may have to find sponsors for such events and he wondered if this would be an impediment to hosting the conference.

Chair Kreling confirmed the Saint John Board "rolled out the red carpet" for delegates at this year’s conference and they sought sponsorships to assist them in that. However, he did not feel any board is compelled to do that nor did he want to commit to such a standard. He expressed his view that it is part of doing business for a host board or municipality to extend greetings to conference delegates by hosting an event.

Member Legendre did not have a problem with the Board hosting an event and he noted from the report that various things are optional or up to the host board. He indicated there is such a variety of activities available in the nation’s capital that he hoped this Board would show more imagination than to offer a golf tournament.

Member Buckingham felt the expense of hosting a reception can easily be justified. She noted the cost of sending three members to the conference in another location would easily exceed the cost of hosting one event. Therefore, she suggested it would be appropriate to fund such an event from the Board’s Conferences and Conventions budget.

Chair Kreling supported hosting the conference. In response to comments from member Buckingham with respect to the need for more interaction between the CAPB and the CACP, he acknowledged the different venues would make it difficult. However, he noted the two associations will try to have some overlap at their 2001 conferences in Saskatoon.

- Executive Director’s report dated 19 Sep 00

Member Legendre noted this item was placed on the agenda at his request. He was impressed with what the Federal Government is proposing. However, he felt the report should make more frequent reference to judicial authorization, and that it should provide for specialized training for "designated" peace officers, senior officials and agents under the direction and control of an officer. He felt the paper seems to make the assumption that one designates a peace officer and he or she suddenly has the skills and knowledge to properly judge various situations. He suggested that may not always be the case without training being provided.

Vice Chair Baskerville was pleased this item was being raised. He felt the draft legislation goes some way toward giving officers the latitude they need to do their job in terms of infiltrating organized crime and dealing with serious threats to society, but he wondered if it would be sufficient. He noted the draft makes reference to the ability of a competent authority to designate a senior official, and wondered if this refers to a Chief of Police or other senior police officer.

Chief Bevan stated there is precedence in the Criminal Code for providing that the official be such a person and he has carried such a designation in the past. With respect to the issue of whether or not the legislation goes far enough, he noted the Federal Government listened to recommendations that came out of a Law Amendments Committee of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police (CACP) and much of this paper was prepared as a response to, and in consultation with, the CACP. However, he noted things have changed since the law was tabled. The recent shooting of a journalist in Montreal has spawned demands from various provincial Solicitor Generals for tougher measures. He indicated the Federal Government is looking at tougher means for dealing with organized crime and has asked for input as to whether this, and other pieces of legislation, are going to help in that regard. Chief Bevan was very hopeful that this and other legislation supportive of the underlying premise would be put into place to allow the police to do the job of dismantling organized crime.

Member McCombie noted the new RCMP Commissioner has made proposals along these lines and is encouraging parliament to act on it. He felt this is a step in the right direction.

Chief Bevan stated he is also very encouraged by the leadership being shown by the RCMP Commissioner and the Solicitor General of Canada in bringing about realistic change in the war on organized crime.

Chair Kreling indicated the Canadian Association of Police Boards (CAPB) has expressed its support for this legislation. However, he noted there was a concern raised that the paper should provide greater detail about the individuals who can be involved and the type of involvement permitted.

- Policy Committee Chair’s report dated 19 Sep 00

Chair Kreling noted the amended protocol distributed to Board members at the meeting to replace the one included in the agenda.

Member Buckingham explained the original Annex contained an additional statement which said that the Board and Chief of Police will host a public information session on current policing issues in the Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton at least once annually. She noted there is no requirement under the Police Services Act or the Adequacy Standards for the Board to do that. She believed the Board may, in part, already be doing that by having quarterly meetings in the various communities, but she maintained there is no need to make reference to it in the protocol. She stressed the Board’s obligation under the provincial Adequacy Standards Regulation is to share information with Regional Council, to agree on a date when the Board will provide a business plan to Regional Council, and to have a protocol on making that business plan public. She believed that is all the protocol should address and the additional paragraph included in the original Annex does not relate to any of those things.

Member Legendre indicated that paragraph was the thing he liked most about the protocol and indicated he was going to suggest amending it to make it clear that such information sessions would be Board meetings and not the responsibility of the Chief, though he hoped the Chief would attend any such sessions. He felt such a session would be a useful exercise and a healthy tradition to develop because it would foster dialogue and demonstrate openness. He believed the fact that it is not required by law should not prevent the Board from doing it. He expressed his disappointment in seeing the amended protocol and indicated he would be moving that the paragraph be re-inserted and amended to make it clear that such information sessions are the sole responsibility of the Board.

Member Buckingham stated she has no problem with advising the City Clerk of any additional meetings the Board chooses to hold, but she questioned why the Board would enter into an agreement with Council to hold public information sessions. She argued the paragraph does not belong in this protocol, the purpose of which is to enter into an agreement with Council with regard to information sharing and the development of a business plan. She did not see any point in putting something into an agreement that does not need to be there.

On a point of clarification, Chair Kreling noted that the protocol refers to the Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton Council. He wondered if the protocol would come into effect immediately on January 1, 2001.

In response to questions from members on the effective date of the protocol and whether the Board would have to enter into a new agreement with the in-coming Council after January 1, 2001, Ms. Fedec indicated legal staff have advised her that in order to be in compliance with the Adequacy Standards, the Board has to enter into an agreement with Council before January 1, 2001 and that any agreements entered into with the current Council would carry forward into the new City.

- Policy Committee Chair’s report dated 19 Sep 00

Vice Chair Baskerville referenced the "Chief’s Requirements - General Requirements" section of the Board’s Policy Manual which states that "The Chief of police shall ensure that all practices, activities, decisions, or organizational circumstances are consistent with the Police Services Act of Ontario, other relevant statutes, contractual agreements, etc…". He noted the Act makes specific references to the disposal of property, and the matter is more than adequately covered in the Service’s policies and procedures. Therefore, he questioned whether the reference in the Policy Manual would be deemed as sufficient policy direction to the Chief. Secondly, he wondered if the Board should specify the frequency for receiving requests to convert property to police use.

Member Buckingham stated not everyone reads and remembers all the pertinent legislation. She explained that was part of the reason why some items were included in the Board’s Policy Manual; i.e. to provide a single point of reference for new board members. She agreed it may be beneficial to have a footnote in the Policy Manual to make reference to the specific legislation. With respect to the need to specify a timeframe for staff to bring forward reports requesting the conversion of property to police use, member Buckingham suggested it should be left up to the Service. Staff may find it beneficial to bring forward such reports several times a year because they can not convert property without explicit approval from the Board. She felt that requirement indirectly forces the Service to pick some sort of cycle.

Vice Chair Baskerville subscribed to the notion of having footnotes in the Policy Manual because the Act contains some very specific directions on the disposal of various items, such as money and firearms, and he felt those sections should be highlighted for future board members. Furthermore, he felt this would provide the covering umbrella for the policy that is already in place in the Police Service.

- Chief’s report dated 19 Sep 00

Mr. D. Pepper, Director, Community Development, provided some background on the Partnership in Action (PIA) initiative. He stated last year’s assembly held in November allowed the Police Service to set a framework, within the context of district policing, to have regular annual contact with the community. This year’s assembly will be broken down into two days. The Friday evening component will feature: a presentation by Chief Bevan entitled "Moving Forward With District Policing"; a presentation on some of the refinements that have been made to the service delivery model; and an opportunity for members of the community to ask questions and foster networking at an information fair. The Saturday morning will be spent in the main PIA assembly focusing on a rejuvenation of Neighbourhood Watch and the Service’s partnerships wth various community safety committees. The rejuvenation will allow the Service to fulfill a number of goals: update Neighbourhood Watch partners on district policing and the changes that have been made; enhance community mobilization efforts; increase the community’s involvement in crime prevention and traffic management; and help rejuvenate Neighbourhood Watch, which will need to come together in a more coordinated fashion. Staff see this as an ideal time to bring together the various Neighbourhood Watch programs and begin a process to help them determine how they will work together in the new City of Ottawa.

Member Buckingham indicated she attended the last PIA assembly which she felt created a lot of positive feelings and good will. She recalled that a number of action items came out of the break-out groups held last year, and she wondered what sort of feedback there has been to those groups. She felt staff need to close that loop.

Mr. Pepper stated that as opposed to closing the loop, staff want to build on it. He explained that two things have happened with respect to the work that came out of last year’s assembly. Copies of the PIA Bulletin have been distributed, which provides a quick summary of the assembly and a checklist of the milestones to date as well as future actions. He indicated the districts that helped coordinate actual sessions at last year’s assembly have been working on specific issues in their respective communities, and continuing the relationship building that is occurring there.

Because staff want to use this year’s assembly as a benchmark to look back at where the process has come from and define where it is going, Mr. Pepper indicated this year’s assembly will feature an Assembly Bulletin that will contain: a brief overview of each district as they are currently encompassed; the issues raised at last year’s assembly; progress to date; and new information that is of interest and relevance. Participants will be able to leave with a city-wide focus of every district and the issues that have been defined in the past. Participants will be able to use that information as a basis on which to engage some of the discussion at the assembly and for their future work as neighbourhood watch committees and members.

In response to questions from member Buckingham with respect to the proposed structure for the various workgroups on the Saturday, Mr. Pepper indicated a planning committee consisting of members of the Police Service, the Neighbourhood Watch executive and other safety groups, are still working on defining how the Assembly can best meet the Service’s and the community’s needs. The committee is considering having morning sessions based on existing districts and afternoon sessions more focused on neighbourhood watch issues. He believed the various neighbourhood watch programs may want to examine how they will structure themselves as a grouping of neighbourhood watches across the new City. Currently there is one umbrella group, the Ottawa Neighbourhood Watch Association (ONWA), which acts as a designated group and does some coordination, but that does not necessarily occur in all municipalities.

Member Buckingham surmized it sounds as though staff see the morning session as building on last year’s assembly and the afternoon session as an opportunity to try and nudge the various neighbourhood watch groups towards a single structure.

Mr. Pepper noted that is a reasonable assessment however, staff are very conscientious of the delicate relationship that exists between the current municipalities and the various neighbourhood and rural community watch programs.

In response to a question from member Buckingham, Mr. Pepper indicated Board members are, of course, invited to attend any of the sessions.

Member Legendre wondered who provides translation services for the PIA written material. He noted some of the headlines are very hard to comprehend and he had to go back and forth between the French and English versions to make out their meanings. Mr. Pepper responded the translation is provided by a private firm however, the OCRPS has a series of checks and balances with every translation. He explained the Service uses a process of parallel translation as opposed to direct translation. He promised to go back and check on the translation of the specific document referenced by member Legendre.

Vice Chair Baskerville, on behalf of the Board, acknowledged receipt of the invitation extended by Mr. Pepper and thanked him for the presentation.

- Chief’s report dated 19 Sep 00

- Executive Director’s report dated 19 Sep 00

Moved by J. McCombie

The meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m.

W. Fedec, Executive Director
H. Kreling, Chair