26-28 FEBRUARY 2007

LE 26-28 FÉVRIER 2007



The POLICE SERVICES BOARD met on 22 JANUARY, 7, 14 and 19 FEBRUARY 2007 and submits the item contained in this Report for the information and/or approval of Council at its meeting of 26-28 FEBRUARY 2007.


La COMMISSION DE SERVICES POLICIERS s’est réuni le 22 janvier, 7, 14 and 19 FÉVRIER 2007 et soumet l’article du présent rapport au Conseil pour information et/ou approbation lors de sa réunion du 26-28 FÉVRIER 2007.



Present / Présences :


                          22 Jan. 07               7 Feb. 07                     14 Feb. 07                     19 Feb. 07

Chair /

président:            H. Jensen                H.  Jensen                   H.  Jensen                    H.  Jensen

Vice Chair /

vice-président :   M.                          McRae                        M.  McRae                   M.  McRae M.        McRae

Members /

Membres :          D. Doran                D.  Doran                   D.  Doran                     D.  Doran

                          D. Guilmet-Harris                                      D.  Guilmet-Harris        D. Guilmet-Harris

                          B. Monette             B.   Monette                B.   Monette                  B. Monette

                          D. Morin                                                                                       D.  Morin

                          L. O’Brien              L.   O’Brien                 L.   O’Brien                  L. O’Brien

















Police Services Board




Commission de Services Policiers




















That Council approve:


1.         A 2007 Operating and Capital Budget with a 1.7% inflationary increase as set out in the 2007 Ottawa Police Service Budget Book dated 7 February 2007.


2.      The Board’s request that Ottawa City Council review the various options available to it with respect to habitual problem landlords, in light of the new, broader powers found in Bill 130 (eg. including both the New Westminster, B.C. model and other models in Manitoba and Nova Scotia) as well as identifying the necessity for requesting additional statutory authority from the Province of Ontario.






Que le Conseil approuve :


1.         Le budget de fonctionnement et d’immobilisations de 2007 proposant une hausse inflationniste de 1,7 % , tel qu’il est exposé dans le document budgétaire de 2007 du Service de police en date du 7 février 2007.


2.         La demande de la Commission quant à l’examen par le Conseil municipal des diverses options à sa disposition en ce qui a trait aux propriétaires difficiles habituels en raison des nouveaux pouvoirs plus larges établis dans le projet de loi 130 (y compris, par exemple, le modèle de New Westminster, Colombie-Britannique, et d’autres modèles au Manitoba et en Nouvelle-Écosse) ainsi que la nécessité de demander d’autres pouvoirs légaux de la province de l’Ontario.









1.      Ottawa Police Service Budget Book dated 7 February 2007 previously distributed.


2.      Presentation from 7 February 2007 attached at Annex A.


3.      Supplemental report dated 14 February 2007 and accompanying presentation attached at Annex B.


4.      Presentation from 19 February 2007 attached at Annex C.


5.      Extract of Draft Minutes, 22 January, 7 February, 14 February and 19 February 2007 are attached.





Slide 1



Slide 2

Slide 3



Slide 4

Slide 5



Slide 6

Slide 7



Slide 8

Slide 9



Slide 10

Slide 11



Slide 12

Slide 13



Slide 14

Slide 15



Slide 16

Slide 17



Slide 18

Slide 19



Slide 20

Slide 21



Slide 22

Slide 23



Slide 24

Slide 25



Slide 26

Slide 27



Slide 28

Slide 29



Slide 30

Slide 31



Slide 32

Slide 33



Slide 34

Slide 35



Slide 36

Slide 37



Slide 38

Slide 39



Slide 40

Slide 41



Slide 42

Slide 43









February 14, 2007



Chair and Members of the Ottawa Police Services Board



Director General, Ottawa Police Service






That the Ottawa Police Services Board receive and table the Ottawa Police 2007 Draft Operating and Capital Budget for consideration and approval at its special meeting on 19 February 2007, as supplemented by the additional information provided in this report.



On 7 February 2007 staff presented the Ottawa Police Services Board with the Draft 2007 Operating and Capital Budget report, and an associated presentation.  The draft budget report followed the directions set by the Board and was built to achieve an inflationary 1.7% increase in the Ottawa Police tax rate, and to provide a 0% tax increase.  Both options were formulated on the basis of sustainability.  At that meeting, the Board voted not to receive the report and the draft budget.


One concern articulated by some members of the Board was that the variance analysis of the 2007 estimates was against the 2006 Budget and the previously approved Long Range Financial Plan.  The operating budget analysis was not developed against the preliminary 2006 year-end position of the police service.


Some members of the Board were also dissatisfied with the option presented to achieve a 0% increase in the 2007 Ottawa Police tax rate because it included staff cuts.  That option is comprised of the elimination of all service growth in 2007 and a requirement for staffing and service reductions totalling $2.2 million. At that time, that option was considered the only available option derived from sustainable sources for achievement of the 0% tax increase, while not recommended by police management. 


This report provides supplemental information intended to address the concerns expressed at the Ottawa Police Services Board meeting on 7 February 2007.  




2006 Preliminary Year End Position


As was reported to the Board on 7 February 2007, the Ottawa Police Service is currently projecting an operating surplus of $431,000 for 2006.  These results are still subject to external audit.  Following completion of the audit, an upcoming Disposition of Surplus report to the Board will request that City Council set aside these funds for the negotiated one-time retroactivity settlement of a job evaluation review that will be completed in 2007.


With the approval of the OPS Long Range Financial Plan (LRFP) by the Board and by City Council on 18 December 2006, the debt-servicing budget of the Ottawa Police has been transferred from the City to the Ottawa Police, effective in 2007.  In 2006, this budget base of $5.238 million achieved a surplus position of $606,000.  While the transfer of funds is effective in 2007, for comparative purposes the 2006 base has been restated to be included in the Resource Requirement pages of the proposed budget documentation. 


Appendix A is an update to the Ottawa Police Service Resource Requirements page included on page 22 of the previously provided document.  The Appendix has been updated to include the preliminary 2006 actual results.  The net surplus position of $1.037 million is comprised of the 2006 operations surplus of $431,000 and the restated debt-servicing surplus of $606,000.


Further surpluses have been achieved in the accounts resident on the City of Ottawa books for purposes of calculating the Ottawa Police tax rate.  These accounts include an allocation of expenditures for remissions on taxes, and vacancy and charitable tax rebates, and taxation revenues.  These taxation instruments that fund the annual operations of the Ottawa Police, including an allocation of payments in lieu of taxes, supplementary taxation revenue, and the property taxation levy also finished 2006 in a surplus position. 


Table 1: Ottawa Police Tax Rate 2006 ($ millions)


Expenditure / Revenue

2006 Budget

2006 Actual

Surplus / (Deficit)





OPS Net Operations








City of Ottawa Books




Debt Servicing




Remissions and Rebates




Taxation Revenue




City Total








Total OPS Tax Rate






The Ottawa Police taxation accounts resident with the City of Ottawa are strictly for funding purposes, and are a requirement of the Ottawa Police tax rate first implemented for the 2005 tax year.  The Ottawa Police Services Board, and Ottawa Police staff for that matter, have no input or control over the usage of these accounts or the resulting surplus or deficit in any given year.  For 2005 year-end, the disposition of a similar $3.3 million ``below the line`` surplus was to the City of Ottawa tax stabilization reserve, while the surplus from operations of the police service of $360,000 was allocated to the Ottawa Police Reserve Fund.  As reported in a memo to City Council on 12 February 2007, the equivalent 2006 surplus from police operations of $431,000 will be requested for contribution to the Ottawa Police Reserve Fund.  That disposition will require a motion from the Board, and subsequent approval by City Council.      


Table 2 is a revised version of Table 4 included on page VII of the 7 February 2007 document.  In this case, the 2007 Budget increase/decrease variance is against 2006 actual spending, rather than 2006 budget.  The net increase is $6.6 million as opposed to the $5.6 million variance from 2007 budget to 2006 budget.


Table 2

2007 Draft Operating Budget As Compared to 2006 Actual ($ Millions)




Draft 2007





% Increase/







Gross Operating Budget **















Subtotal Revenues and Recoveries





Net Increase






* Preliminary results, subject to audit

** Gross operations restated in 2006 to include debt servicing costs



Over 83% of the 2007 Draft budget is to provide for the costs of the Ottawa Police staff complement.  For comparative purposes, the 2007 Budget increase over 2006 actual results is further delineated between net compensation costs and program and fiscal costs in Table 3.


Table 3:  2007 Draft Operating Budget as Compared to 2006 Actual

               Compensation versus Non-Compensation  ($000)           


Category of Expenditure

2006 Actual

2007 Budget

Increase / (Decrease)












Compensation Revenues















Program Operations & Fiscal





Other Revenue






















The incremental compensation requirement is to provide for the estimated 2007 collective agreement provision for existing staff, increments for staff moving through their salary grid, the full year impact of positions added in 2006, and base provisions for pending job evaluation settlement, responsibility pay, and retiree benefits.   These increases are partially offset in 2007 by an increased vacancy allowance of $1.0 million, and the court time efficiency of $300,000.


Every year, gross compensation costs are partially offset by compensation driven revenue sources.  These include provincial revenue from the Safer Communities 1,000 Officer Program (SCOOP), secondment revenue for officers on special projects for other agencies, paid duty recoveries, 911 service recoveries, and recoveries for service to the Ottawa Macdonald-Cartier International Airport.


The incremental program operations and fiscal reduction is primarily attributable to the 2007 reduction in debt servicing costs and materials and supplies, offset by increases in rents, leases, insurance and utility costs.  Other revenues include the False Alarm Reduction Program fees and police records checks.


Options to Achieve 0% Tax Increase in 2007


The draft budget as prepared by staff was crafted to achieve an inflationary 1.7% tax increase derived from sustainable funding sources.  To achieve a 0% tax increase for 2007, further solutions of $2.665 million must be identified.  Staff will provide two additional options to achieve this reduction.  There are two common elements in these options.


Common Element 1:  Elimination of Year 2 of SGI 2013 ($500,000)


Under the 1.7% inflationary tax increase the SGI 2013 growth plan for sworn officers is formulated around 20 sworn officers with a start date of September 2007. Requesting 15 new sworn officer positions and civilianizing 5 existing sworn officer positions would actually fulfill the plan. The 5 freed-up sworn positions would be transferred to the SGI plan and allocated to meet growth needs.  As a result 5 new civilian positions are also required to accomplish the plan. 


This complement growth will be fully eliminated for 2007.   In light of continued City growth, this will place additional demands on the existing service, and Ottawa will continue to lose ground in the Police per Capita ratio. 


As a result, the full-year impact of the 2007 hiring can be removed from the 2008 forecast.  This totals $1.3 million of base compensation, increments, and capital needs.

Common Element 2:  Increased Expectation for Secondment Revenue ($200,000)


As per the Board’s direction, staff reviewed in detail the sources of the 2006 operational surplus of $431,000, and secondment revenues from other agencies generated a surplus against budget in 2006.  This surplus is considered sustainable, and therefore will be adjusted in the 2007 estimates.


These common elements total $0.7 million, leaving $1.965 million of solutions to be identified. Staff provide two options for consideration by the Board:


0% Tax Increase Option 2 - Sustainable Option


Contribution from City Tax Stabilization Reserve ($1.965 million)

An option for Board consideration is to request that the City of Ottawa provide a one-time contribution from the tax stabilization reserve to offset the remaining incremental solution to reach a 0% increase.  This request would require a motion from the Board, and subsequent approval by City Council.

Usage of one-time funding for ongoing base programs requires cuts in the following year, or an inflated tax increase.  Police management has reviewed the 2007 budget submission, and identified $700,000 of project expenses to be deemed one-time in 2007, and thereby cut in 2008.   


Table 4:  2007 Project Expenses to be cut in 2008 ($000)


Executive Search


Human Resources Initiatives


Full Year Revenue Increases


Facility Improvements


Fixed Assets


Total 2008 Cuts


As summarized in Table 5, the identified 2008 cuts and full year effect of the SGI 2013 elimination are sufficient to offset the one-time solution in 2007, and therefore maintain the forecast 2008 tax increase of 8.5%.


Table 5:  Summary of 0% Tax Increase Option 2  ($ millions)





Forecast as Tabled




Net Increase




Taxation percentage impact



Base Reductions




Elimination of Year 2 of SGI 2013




Surplus Analysis: Secondment Revenue



One Time Solutions




City Tax Rate Stabilization Reserve



2008 Impact




2008 Budget Cuts



Net Incremental Impact




Net Increase / (Decrease)




Taxation percentage impact







Updated Tax Increase %



As the 2008 tax increase forecast remains unchanged, this option is considered sustainable.


0% Tax Increase Option 3 – Not Sustainable 


Part 1: Full Liquidation of OPS Reserve Fund Balance ($1.36 million)


The OPS General Capital Reserve fund has a current balance of $1.36 million.  This balance is attributable to two contributions made in the past year:


1)   As approved in the 2006 Budget, $1.0 million was contributed to plan for the imminent replacement of the Service’s portable radio handsets; and,

2)   By Board and Council motion, a 2005 operating surplus of $360,000 was retained within the Ottawa Police.


Within the inflationary increase option as presented, this current Reserve Fund balance would have been fully utilized for the capital program by end of 2008.   Table 17 of the previously distributed budget documentation presents that continuity schedule for the reserve fund.   The updated continuity is provided in Table 6, with revisions shaded:


Table 6:  OPS Capital Reserve Fund Continuity Updated for Liquidation of Opening Balance ($000)












Opening Balance




















Tax Base Contribution





Project Closures





Interest Earnings





Total Sources















Project Funding










Other Uses





Ending Balance






With the liquidation of the current balance, the 2008 planned contribution to capital (pay-as-you-go) must increase by $1.5 million to maintain the forecast capital program.


Part 2: Request for City funding equivalent to Police Related 2006 surplus ($1.037 million)


As noted above in Table 1, the 2006 surplus from direct police operations and debt-servicing costs is $1.037 million.   By precedent set with the 2005 surplus and as confirmed by City staff in a memorandum to City Council on 12 February 2007, the $431,000 operating surplus will be retained by the Ottawa Police.  These funds are recommended for retention to address the one-time costs forecast in 2007 with the settlement of a job evaluation program, and therefore are not recommend as a solution for 2007 taxation.


With the transfer of the OPS debt servicing budget from the City’s books to the OPS books in 2007, both the Board and City Council have approved policy to shift the budgeting for these funds to the Ottawa Police.   By requesting the 2006 surplus of $606,000 be allocated to the OPS, the Board would be requesting that City Council advance the impact of the new policy by one fiscal year.


The ‘0% Tax Increase Option 3’ impact on the 2007 inflationary budget and the 2008 forecast are summarized in Table 7. 



Table 7:  Summary of 0% Tax Increase Option 3  ($ millions)






Forecast as Tabled




Net Increase




Taxation percentage impact



Base Reductions




Elimination of Year 2 of SGI 2013




Surplus Analysis: Secondment Revenue



One Time Solutions




Liquidation of OPS Reserve Fund




2006 OPS Debt Servicing Surplus



2008 Impact




Replenishment of Capital Funding




2008 Budget Cuts



Net Incremental Impact




Net Increase / (Decrease)




Taxation percentage impact







Updated Tax Increase %




As the 2008 tax increase forecast is increased by 1.0% to 9.5% resulting from the need to replenish the funding for the capital program, this option is not considered sustainable.




The 2006 Draft Estimates and this supplemental information will be presented to the OPS Board on 14 February 2007. 


The short time period between the original tabling meeting and the submission of supplemental information did not allow for any consultation and the report was developed entirely through staff input. 


Public meetings for the City Budget as a whole, including the Police budget, are underway the week of 12 to 16 February 2007.  Police staff have been invited to attend those meetings.  Public delegations and Board consideration and approval of the budget are scheduled for a special Board meeting on 19 February 2007.


This timetable is consistent with the City budget review and approval process.  City of Ottawa budget estimates were tabled on 7 February 2007 and will be formally approved by Council Committee of the Whole from 23 to 28 February 2007.



As presented in this report.




The Ottawa Police Service is presenting a $201.4 million gross operating budget and a $15.8 million capital budget to meet the strategic and operational requirements of the police service.


The 2007 Budget has been developed with the direction and guidance provided by the Board.  It achieves the Board direction for 2007 for an inflationary tax increase derived solely from sustainable sources.  Inflationary increases have been mitigated to the maximum degree acceptable, budget efficiencies of over $1 million have been identified, growth in staffing has been reduced, and capital formation costs have been reduced $2.3 million from 2006 levels.  Staff  have used a series of principles to achieve this reduction, but it is not without financial and operational risk.


Additional options for a 0% police tax rate increase have also been prepared in accordance with Board direction.  One option meets all the tests of sustainability.


Upon approval by the Board on 19 February 2007 and City Council at their meetings between 23 to 28 February 2007, staff will report to the Board each quarter on the financial operations of the Service and on any financial issues that may require resolution at that time.


Geoff Simpson

Director of Financial Services and Materiel Management

Debra Frazer

Director General


Vince Bevan

Chief of Police


Attach. (1)

Appendix A - Ottawa Police Service Resource Requirements, including 2006 Actual Results




Slide 1



Slide 2

Slide 3



Slide 4

Slide 5



Slide 6

Slide 7



Slide 8

Slide 9



Slide 10

Slide 11



Slide 12

Slide 13



Slide 14




Slide 1



Slide 2

Slide 3



Slide 4

Slide 5



Slide 6

Slide 7



Slide 8

Slide 9



Slide 10

Slide 11



Slide 12

Slide 13



Slide 14

Slide 15



Slide 16







Earlier in the day the following motion was distributed to Board members containing an amended 2007 Budget Direction, as a result of City Council passing budget directions on 15 January 2007 that included a request to the Police Services Board to adopt the same principles as the City:


WHEREAS on December 18, 2006 the Ottawa Police Services Board adopted the 2007 Budget Direction report and directed staff to use their best efforts to achieve no increase in taxation;


AND WHEREAS on January 15, 2007, City Council approved the City-wide 2007 Budget Directions report, amended to clarify that the draft budget options to be tabled on 7 February 2007 be derived solely from sustainable sources that uphold the Long Range Financial Plan principles and do not adversely impact the City’s credit rating;


THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Ottawa Police Services Board be guided by this principle and amend its Budget Direction to require that staff use their best efforts to table a 2007 Draft Operating Budget that achieves no increase in taxation, and that is derived solely from sustainable sources which uphold the Long Range Financial Plan principles and do not adversely impact the City’s credit rating.


As the item had not been distributed with the Agenda, the Board was advised it would be necessary to waive the Rules of Procedure to consider the matter.


Vice Chair McRae requested a legal opinion regarding the need to waive the Rules of Procedure.  Mr. R. O’Connor, Director, Legal Services referred to the Board’s Procedural By-Law, Section 2 (3), which states that at its own discretion the Board can waive the rules, receive the item and deal with it accordingly. 


Moved by H. Jensen


That the Ottawa Police Services Board agree to waive the Rules of Procedure in accordance with sections 2(3) and 10(3) of its Procedural By-law, in order to consider additional Item 9 – 2007 Budget Directions.




YEAS:      D. Doran, D. Guilmet-Harris, H. Jensen, D. Morin, L. O’Brien

NAYS:      M. McRae, B. Monette

Mayor O’Brien gave notice that he had information pertaining to negotiations and requested that the discussion be moved in camera.  Mr. O’Connor, Board Solicitor, referenced Section 28 of the Board’s Procedural By-Law and confirmed that the reasons cited by the Mayor were sufficient to move this item in camera at the appropriate time. 


When asked by the Chair if staff are ready to follow up on the proposed new direction, Director General D. Frazer indicated they have been busy with budget preparation exercises since the Board considered the Budget Guidelines in December.  Budget reviews by the Director General and Deputy Chiefs have been completed and yielded some options.  Staff are always looking for efficiencies and a minimum efficiency target of $500,000 has been set within the projected budget envelope.  She noted that since 2004 the OPS has generated between $8 and $9 million of efficiencies through various annual exercises.  To date, the high level exercises are complete and the efficiency target exercise is underway.  The shift in Council’s direction regarding sustainability has somewhat changed the Budget Guideline directive given by the Board in December.  Since then, there have been approximately 15 motions introduced by City Council.  Ms. Frazer believed the Council motions should be considered by the Board before completing the final review.


Responding to comments made by Councillor Monette about sustainability, Ms. Frazer stated the new resolution would affect all options that use one time funding sources.  In some of the funding scenarios, staff considered relying on the use of the police general reserve fund, which has been built up over the last couple of years from surpluses.  Under the sustainability definition the City has put in place, this type of scenario would no longer be feasible.


Councillor Monette expressed his surprise at seeing this resolution before the Board as it was his understanding the Board had unanimously decided at its 18 December meeting to have staff look at all options and bring back a zero budget.  It effectively makes it more difficult for staff to bring forward a zero budget.  Councillor Monette stated he would vote against the new resolution.


Chair Jensen believed the motion would not limit the Board’s options, as the Board is independent of Council and free to arrive at whatever decision it chooses.


Ms. Frazer provided further clarification by noting that in the motions passed by Council, Item 3 requests the Police Services Board to table a draft operating budget that is consistent with the principles Council adopted.  Council amended their guidelines to include sustainability and requested the Board to do the same. 


Mayor O’Brien wanted to know if the motion was in order, what options were available to the Board and whether the Board is bound by Council’s direction.


Mr. O’Connor confirmed this Board has its own statutory basis and is not required to accept Council’s request.  He also confirmed that prior to Council’s meeting this Board had already made its budget decision, but that Council’s disposition from January stated “..that the Police Services Board be requested to table a draft 2007 operating budget that is consistent with the directions identified above.”  The new resolution is properly before the Board if members are satisfied it mirrors the excerpt from Council’s disposition.


Responding to a question from Mayor O’Brien about reconsideration, Mr O’Connor confirmed the Board made its decision and forwarded it to Council, making reconsideration one interpretation.  However, the Board’s rules indicate a substantive motion may be reconsidered only at the meeting in which the substantive motion was made, which, in this case would be last December.  He explained it did not fit within the regular confines of a reconsideration and is not before the Board in that sense.  The Chair would have to deem there was new information before the Board in order to have it reconsidered. 


The Chair ruled the motions approved by Council were new information and therefore appropriate for the Board to consider. 


Member Doran referred to the 18 December 2006 minutes where reference was made to the OPS’ duty to ensure public safety and security in Ottawa.  His appreciation of that discussion and the resulting motion was that staff had not been issued a command to achieve a zero increase, but to use their best efforts to achieve a zero tax increase.  The Board has a responsibility to respect information that has come forward after that discussion. 


Further to Member Doran’s comments, Mayor O’Brien felt that the passing of this motion would ensure the Service will not be able to achieve, or would reduce the odds of achieving, the previous motion.  He thought the only responsible way to move forward was to see what staff bring back in terms of a budget, knowing a debate can be had at that time. 


Member Guilmet-Harris stated there were many reasons to vote for this motion, one being the fact that the budget would have to be derived solely from sustainable sources that uphold the long-range financial plan principles and not adversely impact the City’s credit rating.  She expressed concern that if it is Council’s general direction to the City, why would the Police Services Board go against it?


Member Morin stated that during her six years on the Board, it has been a consistent practice for the Board to align its budget directions with those set by Council.  She found it astounding that the three board members who serve on Council are now uncertain about aligning the Police budget with the rest of the City.  She wanted to hear the Director

General’s comments about what effect the lack of making a consistent decision would have on work staff must complete by the 7 February 2007 deadline.


Ms. Frazer explained that the work plan for the next 10 days has been mapped out and having a decision within the next two days is critical. 


Vice Chair McRae wondered if it would be premature to vote on this motion prior to receiving information from the Mayor in camera.  She also wanted to know if it was premature to be considering this motion in light of the fact that the Director General could present the Board with several budget options.  Council’s debate about maintaining a sustainable budget also centred on the fact that staff were asked to table two budgets: a zero percent budget and an inflationary budget.  It was determined that tabling a zero budget was not necessarily contrary to the notion of not using one time funding.


In response to the Vice Chair’s first question, Chair Jensen believed it would be inappropriate to hold a vote on the issue until the Mayor’s information was heard in camera.  Regarding the second point, it is up to the Board to determine if the budget will be standstill or a specific percentage increase.


Mayor O’Brien felt that the majority of members would be comfortable if staff were requested to draw up two budgets: one at zero and one at inflation.  He suggested it could be added to the motion as a friendly amendment.


As the Mover of the original motion, Chair Jensen indicated the motion remains in its original state.


Mayor O’Brien noted that last year the City collected $3.3 million more from taxpayers than was used in the Police Budget.  He wondered if there was a policy on how surplus money collected by the City is actually used.


The issue of capital formation costs occurred during the creation of the police tax rate.  Ms. Frazer explained that the debt costs of some police debentures were on the City’s books while operating costs were on the OPS’ books.  At the end of 2005 there was a surplus in the debenture costs, which showed up in the City’s books.  On Monday, Council wisely adopted one of the Board’s recommendations that will put the costs of all police related debenture debt into the police tax rate, thereby ensuring all surpluses and deficits fall into the same location.  There may again be a surplus in 2006 that will be allocated to police operating needs.  In the past, any significant surplus has been contributed to police reserve funds to help offset future capital costs.  In summary, the OPS has a practice in place, but an official policy has not been addressed.


At 6:00 p.m., the Board considered the following motion:


Moved by D. Guilmet-Harris


That the Ottawa Police Services Board move In Camera pursuant to Section 28 of the Procedure By-law to consider information pertaining to negotiations in relation to the 2007 Budget Directions.




The Police Services Board reconvened in open session at 6:30 p.m.


Before introducing a new motion, Vice Chair McRae emphasized the importance of recognizing that this is an autonomous board.  The motion she put forward at the 18 December 2006 meeting directed staff to use their best efforts to achieve a 0% increase; her new motion tonight gives staff the option to table a budget between zero and inflation.  Should the opportunity arise to use some gap funding, the Board should consider it, realizing that it would not be appropriate to consider budgeting forever with one-time resources.  She believed this motion gives the Board options and does not restrict staff by asking them to do the impossible.


Moved by M. McRae


That the Ottawa Police Services Board direct staff to table a 2007 Draft Budget consistent with the directions set out in the City Council minutes from January 10, 11 and 15, 2007.




In light of Councillor McRae’s motion being approved, Chair Jensen withdrew his earlier motion. 




Budget documents distributed at the meeting

Presentation by the Director General and the Director of Finance and Materiel Management


Ms. D. Frazer, Director General, introduced the 2007 Budget to Board members with the assistance of Mr. G. Simpson, Director of Finance and Materiel Management.  (A copy of the presentation is on file with the Board’s Executive Director.)  The budget document is very comprehensive and summarizes each area of the organization and the money spent.  Ms. Frazer commended the following individuals for the outstanding job in preparing the documentation:  Mr. G. Simpson, Mr. W. Salem, Ms. L. Mercer, Ms. V. McCallum, Mr. O. Bell, Ms. N. Zili and Ms. J. Dorey.  She also thanked her colleagues on Executive Command who have been very understanding and very giving of their time.


Mayor O’Brien thanked staff for their efforts in putting together this budget.  However, he questioned why the budget compares increases with the 2007 Long Range Financial Plan (LRFP) instead of 2006 actuals, which he understood are normally used when making comparisons.  He noted the OPS enjoyed a $3 million surplus in 2006, which would mean the operating budget was $191 million in actual expenses.  He surmised the 1.7% increase being referred to in this report is really a 4.5% increase over the 2006 actuals.  He asked Ms. Frazer for her comments. 


The Director General explained that the starting point of this exercise was the City’s Integrated Financial Planning Framework where all departments were required to table a LRFP with a four year forecast.  As the Board had adopted this practice, the document was used as a starting point in comparison to the inflationary budget option. 


The Mayor felt this was not a fair representation of a budget increase.  He asked if staff could prepare a new budget using actual expenses from 2006, as it would provide a much clearer understanding of the actual growth in spending.


He noted that the budget instructions were to present a budget with a zero to inflationary increase.  He referred to a meeting he had several weeks ago with staff where he received a fairly clear commitment that a zero budget could be achieved.  He wanted to know what has changed in the past five weeks that caused this highly editorialized, not recommended, approach to a zero increase budget.


Ms. Frazer stated many of the approaches to achieving a zero percent increase were feasible prior to having received Council’s budget direction in January.  She explained that when preparing budgets there are many options that can be used, including: one time options; reserve funds; and one time funding sources to fund capital expenditures.  Staff have looked

at a range of options suitable within a police environment, however, they are not sustainable options under the definition of sustainability provided by Council’s directions.


Vice Chair McRae thanked staff for all the work involved in tabling this budget and stated that her questions in no way reflect her thoughts about the work that the Service provides.  She noted that in December staff recommended a $10.4 million increase and are now recommending a $2.7 million increase, which made her question the credibility of this budget and why staff could not present a zero increase budget. 


Ms. Frazer explained that to get from $10 million to $2.7 million there are cuts that have to be made and programs to be scaled back, for example, not getting the full Strategic Growth Initiative (SGI) plan and no capital formation costs.  The Director General drew attention to the impact of delaying these pressures to the years 2008 and 2009.

Responding to further questions from Vice Chair McRae, Ms. Frazer pointed out that the OPS has always relied on the City’s approach to growth and growth estimates for budget purposes, knowing there may be adjustments when the City reviews it Official Plan in 2008.  As with all City departments the direction has been to stay in tune with that growth estimate and staff have followed that rule in terms of planning for facilities and staffing plans.  For the police this means that every time the City expands by about 730 residents, in theory one more officer should be added to service that growth.  Based on growth projections the City prepared, the OPS would need to add roughly 30 officers per year to keep pace.  The budget started with 30 officers and has been reduced to 20.


Referring to the slide on page 19 entitled Staffing & Service Cuts ($2.2 m) and the impact of 26 fewer members to serve the public, the Vice Chair wanted to know if this was a suggestion that police officers would be cut should the OPS go to a zero increase.  Ms. Frazer concurred.  Vice Chair McRae found this alternative unpalatable and suggested this is the type of message that causes the community to react negatively.  She strongly objected to the language used on the slide and objected to the $2 million allocated to the south end facility.  She said other south end councillors would agree with freezing that budget item if necessary.


Member Monette found it interesting that the Police Service is referred to as a people service business; he pointed out the City of Ottawa is also a people service business and is also being asked to bring forward a zero percent increase budget.  He expressed his disappointment with the budget staff have presented.  When the discussion originally occurred every Board member, especially the Council members, emphasized no staff cuts.  He felt there had to be other areas in the budget where cuts could be made.  He demanded to see a zero percent document before the public consultations begin on 19 February.  The Councillor noted he would not be supporting this Budget. 

Member Doran was surprised that on page 2 of the presentation under the heading “Challenges” there was no reference to the challenges this type of budget would cause relating to community safety and security.  Changes in Board composition and City Council and changes to budget timelines are not significant challenges; the challenge to the public and the possible changes to service they might experience are far more significant.  The graphs on page 18 show operating costs spiking in 2008, 2009 and 2010 and he wondered if this budget was just postponing expenses into the future.  A specific increase in the rate does not concern him as much as the impact on community service.


The Board then voted on the following motion:


That the Ottawa Police Services Board receive and table the Ottawa Police 2007 Draft Operating and Capital Budget for consideration and approval at its meeting on            19 February 2007.



YEAS:      D. Doran, H. Jensen

NAYS:     M. McRae, B. Monette, L. O’Brien


Mr. R. O’Connor, Director, Legal Services and Board Solicitor explained that pursuant to the Police Services Act there is a requirement that “The format of the estimates, the period that they cover and the timetable for their submission shall be as determined by the council.” Ottawa City Council has asked that the draft budget be tabled today, therefore, it would be possible to forward this to Council without a recommendation and let Council address it later in the day. 


Director General’s supplemental report dated 14 February 2007

Presentation by the Director General and the Director of Finance and Materiel Management


D. Frazer, Director General guided Board Members through the presentation that provided supplemental information intended to address the concerns expressed at the Board meeting on 7 February 2007.  (A copy of the presentation is on file with the Board’s Executive Director.)


Staff were congratulated for presenting budget issues in a clear and transparent manner.  A discussion resulted from the presentation and the following points of clarification were made:

·        Per litre fuel costs differ between the Police Service and the City because police vehicles use unleaded fuel and fuel up at commercial gas stations at a discount.  The City’s fleet requires mostly diesel fuel and fuel up at City facilities.

·        The annual budget efficiency target could be increased, but staff would require sufficient lead-time to launch projects that would yield the desired efficiencies.  E-Ticketing is an example of an initiative that required advance notice for its planning, implementation and eventual savings. 

·        Eliminating the second year of the Strategic Growth Initiative as proposed in two of the options would reduce the officer to resident ratio, causing Ottawa to fall behind the current ratio of approximately 1:740.  The per capita ratios can be an indication that the Service is unable to meet the Adequacy Standard Requirements. 

·        Hiring additional officers under the SGI plan allows for more flexibility to meet the increasing growth in community needs as well as legislative and operational requirements.  Before assigning the additional officers to specific functions, gaps in the operational model must first be identified. 

·        Police Services are subject to many legislative requirements that necessitate sworn officers fill specific positions.  For example, with the increasing changes in the global environment, especially around Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear (CBRN) Response, a position was required due to legislative requirements.  The SGI would make it possible to add another position to assist in this ever-growing area.

·        Staff are always searching for ways to phase in various financial scenarios while searching for different ways to provide financing.  One successful initiative was the Provincial Government funding 90 of the 200 SSI positions under the Safer Communities One-Thousand Officer Partnership (SCOOP). 

·        Should the Federal Government follow through on its plan to bring 2500 new sworn officers into existence, the OPS could begin building a new growth scenario.  Staffing is a difficult and expensive process for the OPS; Provincial and Federal partners are necessary to provide financial assistance.  Municipal policing is on the front line for many of the issues being faced in the current global environment.

·        Capital programs are increasing the tax rate forecast as seen in trends over the next few years (2008, 2009, 2010).  There are three key projects in the capital forecast that are putting pressure on the budget:  mobile work stations - $2.1 million in 2008, replacement of radio handsets - $5 million in 2009 & 2010; and the replacement and refit of IT infrastructure - $10 million beginning in 2009.  These projects will be monitored throughout the year to determine how best to deal with them in the long term. 

·        There are mechanisms within the OPS Budget to replace every retiree.  Without assuming any expansion to the Service, the plan is built around training approximately 70 people to replace 12 sworn vacancies at year-end and the anticipated retirements for 2007.  Estimates for hiring to replace retirees will remain in the range of 50 to 60 people for the next four years unless the SGI plan is implemented, which would allow for an increase of 30 additional positions.

·        Higher than anticipated growth would result in a larger SGI plan for subsequent years.  Past experience has shown that an increase in hiring would result in capacity issues causing too much pressure on coach officers and the facilities that are used for training purposes. 

·        The Board’s Special Meeting scheduled for 19 February to hear from members of the public has been advertised twice already and will be advertised again this Friday.


Mayor O’Brien informed Board members that he attended the Big City Mayors Caucus last week and it was clear that all municipalities in Canada are dealing with the same issues as Ottawa.  There is a call for different funding models and alternate ways of looking at cities as bases of revenue.  He was very optimistic that over the next three years there will be different techniques brought forward to fund public safety activities. 


Moved by M. McRae


That the Ottawa Police Services Board receive and table the Ottawa Police 2007 Draft Operating and Capital Budget for consideration and approval at its meeting on 19 February 2007, as supplemented by the additional information contained in this report.


                                                                                                            RECEIVED AND TABLED







Ms. C. Parrott, Chair, Security Committee, Hintonburg Community Association was joined by the following individuals from the Dalhousie, Hintonburg and Vanier communities:  Mr. W. Rodney, Member, Security Committee, Hintonburg Community Association; Ms. B. Rivier, Member, Security Committee, Hintonburg Community Association; Ms. S. Strudwick, Coordinator, Lebreton Flats Neighbourhood Watch and Chair, Concerned Citizens for Safer Neighbourhoods; Ms. P. Connolly, Chair, Dalhousie Security Committee and Coordinator; Ms. L. Lebreton, Arlington, Bell Neighbourhood Watch; and Mr. B. McConnville, Chair, Association of Concerned Citizens of Vanier (ACCVACC). 


They thanked the police for their continued support and assistance with the problems in their communities, but shared with the Board their concerns with regard to habitual problem properties. (A copy of the presentation is on file with the Board’s Executive Director.)


The three communities work together on problems and solutions.  Each member of the delegation spoke of problem landlords and properties in their respective communities.  Using a model from New Westminster, BC of charging $200 per police call, each speaker provided cost estimates ranging from $48,000 to $270,000 for police service calls to nine multi-unit problem properties in their communities over the past three to five years.  They felt that taxpayers subsidize these landlords by providing excessive police and city resources to keep the buildings from being completely out of control.  These landlords feign cooperation with authorities but their choice of problem tenants shows that their buildings are “instruments of crime”.


The few habitual problem properties that have had a lasting resolution came through hard work by the community, by shaming the owner or by devastating fires.  New innovative solutions are needed.  Financial information tabled at the draft budget meeting shows the success of charging for false alarm calls; the number of calls has decreased.  Similarly, these problem landlords will only respond if a monetary penalty is involved.  Members of the delegation have made a number of suggestions to police, City and Provincial representatives and are looking for leadership in finding solutions to these excessive drains on police services.


Vice Chair McRae asked Mr. O’Connor, Director, Legal Services, for legal advice regarding the legislation involved in implementing some of the models used in other municipalities across Canada.  She indicated a willingness to give direction to staff to discuss this matter. 


Mr. O’Connor responded there are a host of statutes that would have to be reviewed regarding this matter.  The New Westminster, BC, model is a municipal property standards by-law, which includes charges for repeat nuisance calls.  It is not a Police Services Board by-law.  In British Columbia there is a Community Charter that allows municipalities broader powers.  Ontario passed Bill 130, an amendment to the Municipal Act, on 1 January 2007.  City Council will soon be briefed on the new Bill and will review a number of priority setting issues, which could include this matter.  Fines under Bill 130 for municipal by-law breaches can be as high as $100,000, if the municipality chooses.  While the matter is not as simple as it appears, there are other mechanisms City Council may wish consider. 


Mr. O’Connor suggested a motion from the Police Services Board would be welcome requesting City Council, in light of the recently enacted Bill 130, to look at this particular issue with regard to residential tenancies when it does its priority setting review.


Responding to a question from Mayor O’Brien regarding the number of charges resulting from all the calls for service, Chief Bevan explained that each call requires police, health and by-law intervention to build a case to remove the tenant.  The problem occurs when a similar tenant moves in afterwards.  It is very much a case of how to interdict the activity.  He gave the delegation a great deal of credit in bringing this matter forward.  He wanted to clarify that the OPS has been working strategically on this particular issue as has the  Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police and, he believed, the Ontario Association of Police Services Boards.  A very good pilot being used in Manitoba is designed to hold landlords accountable and provide recourse against the property itself.  He wished to have further discussions with the delegation about ways to eventually implement the legislative changes that need to be made.  Having Provincial legislation would be the most successful way to regulate this particular activity.


Deputy Chief S. O’Sullivan noted that Ontario has a Civil Remedies Act and staff have been working with their legal department looking at options.  She thanked the speakers for their assistance over the years in mobilizing their communities and indicated that the OPS is committed to continue working with them and their City partners.  She indicated there might be some existing short-term options that can be implemented as legislation can be slow moving. 


Vice Chair McRae appreciated the collaborative approach suggested by Deputy Chief O’Sullivan and said that if the City Solicitor suggests this matter requires a motion by the Board to request Council’s assistance, then it should be done. 


Member Morin asked if similar presentations have been made to the City and its various committees and what their response was.  Ms. Parrott informed the Board that a number of the speakers would be presenting tomorrow to Council in terms of property standards issues. Ms. Morin thanked the delegation for their unique and effective presentation and commended them for caring so much about their community.  She also thanked them for the respect and support they offer to our police service.


There being no other public delegations on the budget, Councillor Monette expressed his disappointment with the public consultation process, as only members from three communities were present.  He suggested there may be a need to review how the public is consulted and notified in future, and that holding consultations in Orleans, Kanata and Centretown might be a possibility.


Moved by M. McRae


That the Ottawa Police Services Board respectfully request Ottawa City Council to review the various options available to it with respect to habitual problem landlords, in light of the new, broader powers found in Bill 130 (eg. including both the New Westminster, B.C. model and other models in Manitoba and Nova Scotia) as well as identifying the necessity for requesting additional statutory authority from the Province of Ontario.




That the Ottawa Police Services Board receive and consider the public delegations on the 2007 Draft Budget.





2007 Draft Operating & Capital Budget book previously distributed

Director General’s supplemental report dated 14 February 2007



Chief Bevan explained that the Board is being asked to approve operating and capital budgets that will keep the police service on the path towards providing sustainable services for the ever growing community.  The community has expressed a high degree of satisfaction for the services that the police provide.  The Chief believes the OPS is second to none in Canada and this has been accomplished through good planning and the vision and support of the Police Services Board, which has insisted on strong and effective financial planning.  A previous City Council approved the Strategic Staffing Initiative (SSI) that allowed for proper staffing and deployment of police officers across the new City.  The budget before the Board has four very distinct options and each has varying degrees of risk.  Staff have built in the opportunity to continue to build a strong and effective police service that has the proper resources to maintain pace with the growth of our community and the changing requirements of providing safety and security in the Nation’s capital.  Board members are very familiar with the police to population ratio that exists and that the OPS is not at the top of that list, neither in Ontario nor Canada.  In order to ensure a ratio is maintained that meets the needs of the community, prudent financial planning is required.  The Chief reassured the Board and the community that staff have made the best possible efforts to bring forward a budget that is sustainable, responsive and appropriate in the circumstances.


Director General Frazer and Mr. G. Simpson, Director, Finance and Materiel Management, reviewed the various options available for 2007 Budget.  (A copy of the presentation is on file with the Board’s Executive Director.)


Member Morin proposed a motion to have the Board approve a revised Appendix D to replace the one originally included at page 9 of the OPS Budget book dated 7 February 2007.  Ms. Frazer explained that the revision to Appendix D - Identified Budget Efficiencies, consists of a reduction to the Community Police Centre Strategy, with a corresponding increase in the court time efficiency to ensure the bottom line remains at $1 million.  Savings are improving in court time due to the change in how business is done at the courts.  In addition, a new court was launched this month called First Attendance Court, which will deal with traffic related tickets issued under the Provincial Offences Notice.  Greater savings to court costs should be realized with a reduction in court appearances for traffic officers. 


Moved by D Morin


That the Ottawa Police Services Board approve that Appendix D at page 9 in the 2007 Budget Book dated February 7, 2007 be replaced with the revised Appendix D dated February 19, 2007.




Member Guilmet-Harris put forward a motion to replace Recommendation 1 of Item 2 to read as follows: 


Resolved that the Ottawa Police Services Board replace recommendation 1 of Item 2 to read as follows:  “That the Ottawa Police Services Board approve and forward to City Council a 2007 Operating and Capital Budget with a 1.7% inflationary increase as set out in the Ottawa Police Service 2007 Budget Book dated 7 February 2007.”


Councillor Monette objected to any motions being considered at this time and felt a discussion of all the options before the Board should occur prior to any considerations. 


Chair Jensen opened the floor to questions regarding the 2007 Budget and clarified any motions will be dealt with at the end of the discussion.  A discussion ensued and the following points of clarification were made: 

·          Costs for the Job Evaluation Program have been carried in the budget.  A base budget is being carried for the salary component, which includes retroactivity costs for previous years. 

·          The debt-servicing surplus for 2006 will not be allocated to the Service’s books until 2007.  A significant amount of debt was retired in 2006, which created a small surplus giving the OPS an opportunity for a break in debt servicing costs in 2007.  The resulting impact is a reduction in the 2007 budget.

·          It is unknown how the elimination of the Strategic Growth Initiative (SGI) in 2007 will affect employee morale.  Employees have been a part of the design process for a number of years and the Association is keenly interested in seeing it brought to fruition.  With this proposal, officers that were hired under SGI would not come online until late summer 2008.  The 32 officers hired in 2006 recently came online to assist with the new districts and they have had a positive effect on members.  The Chief believed the additional SGI officers would have a similar effect. 

·          The manner in which arbitrations and collective agreements are settled for police services is very similar to fire services.  There is a long-standing practice that sets out the spread between agreements and is historically maintained.  One police service settles and then the rest follow suit; arbitrators take this into account.  The Ottawa Police Services Board has demonstrated it is not afraid to take on difficult challenges, as was demonstrated by the Board going to arbitration over the 3, 6 and 9% responsibility pay.  We have worked hard at staying competitive.

·          Chair Jensen provided examples of Police Service settlements in Ontario already reached for 2007 and 2008 that range between 3% and 3.25% for 2007, and between 3% and 3.35% for 2008.  These numbers indicate that the pressures police boards, as employers, are facing are far beyond the projected inflation rate of 1.7%. 

·          There are currently eight  Crown Victoria OPS vehicles in the Moodie Yard, which is a convenient and secure City-owned location to store police vehicles before they are migrated into the service.  The OPS buys vehicles in batches to obtain optimal pricing; the cars are delivered in batches and are put into service as older vehicles are removed.  Initiatives have been taken to reduce police collisions significantly, therefore, fewer vehicles have been written off, hence the surplus.  It was requested that an email version of this response be forwarded to Councillors Harder, McRae and Monette before the budget debate begins.

·          The SGI originated in 2004 as a way to deal with pressures and changes the City could face over a 10-year horizon.  The geographical growth of the City will have implications on the OPS’ ability to deliver service.  The project was designed to help the police service bring a plan to the Board with a 10-year vision of what is required to deliver police service in a seamless way to the City as it grows. 

·          The SGI is intended to accomplish a reasonable police to population ratio for this community.  At amalgamation the ratio was 1:515, it is now 1:742.  SGI is intended to at least keep pace with growth.  Ottawa has one of the largest municipal police services geographically in the country.  Officers not only have to deliver services to more people but they have to drive farther.  Models used to serve the urban, suburban and rural areas need to be adjusted constantly in order to accomplish the police to population ratio.  Should SGI be unpalatable, the Board and City Council have it within their power to set a police to population ratio that meets the needs of the community and hire to that number every year. 

·          The number of officers required for growth were determined by the growth estimates used in the City’s 2004 Development Charge Study.  Vice Chair McRae indicated those numbers are going to be challenged when Council does a review of the Official Plan in 2008.  She questioned why we would proceed with the SGI when the numbers are going to be reviewed.

·          Internally the OPS has issues in the deployment model and as part of the SSI, the Active Staffing Plan was developed to ensure absences could be backfilled with an active officer.  Despite the fact that 32 positions were added to the front line through last month’s deployment, vacancies are already being experienced due to maternity leave, parental leave or illnesses; this is a real pressure regardless of how quickly the community is growing.  More positions need to be created in the Active Staffing Plan to deal with these absences. 

·          The 2007 new-growth hiring plan allocates $500,000 for an intake of 20 officers in September 2007, including salary and training and equipment components.  The full cost would be $1.8 million with the additional $1.3 million in the 2008 forecast.  Removing the SGI this year would save money in the 2008 forecast, however, hiring 60 officers in 2008 (i.e. the reinstatement of the 30 officers from 2007 plus the 30 scheduled to be hired in 2008) as well as replacing potentially 50 to 55 retirees would present operational issues for the Ontario Police College. The OPS’ ability to deliver that many police officers in a short period of time would also be compromised.  One feature of the SGI is the reasonable hiring pace it sets out for the Police College and the organization. 

·          Results of the investment in the SSI have been to put more cars on the road and more officers on patrol to respond to calls.  If new officers are hired in 2007, the community can expect to see more initiatives such as the implementation of the four new patrol areas last month, concrete bottom line results due to active staffing, a reduction in overtime expenditures, and staffing of the new divisional offices in the South and West ends of the City in mid 2008.

·          Scenarios discussed at a meeting between the Mayor and Chief Bevan on 22 December 2006 were not sustainable as they relied on one time funding and future dividends.  Subsequent to that discussion Council issued a budget direction requesting two options:  a rate of inflation (1.7%) or a zero percent increase.  Both options had to be sustainable.  The Board adopted the same budget directions at its January meeting.

·          The Police Service was given direction by the Board and responded with two sustainable options.  Staff are here to respond to questions and offer the best advice they can based on what is right for the community, recognizing it is up to the Board and Council to make the decision.

·          When asked what option he favoured, Chief Bevan indicated he would favour the option that includes an allocation for SGI. 


Councillor Monette referred to previous discussions when staff was asked to bring back a zero percent budget but that it not be at the cost of laying off officers.  While the motion did not reference the desire for no lay-offs, the Councillor assured the Chief that in the future the Board’s wishes would be written out word for word.  He assumed the Board had agreed to the zero increase options presented at the 14 February 2007 meeting.  He indicated he would be dissenting on the motion for a 1.7% increase and felt it showed complete disrespect for City Council. 


The Chief made clear that staff took Council’s direction verbatim and brought the two options requested forward to the Board.  Councillor Monette vehemently disagreed with this statement.


With respect to Councillor Monette’s comments, Member Doran pointed out that he is on record for having voted and spoken against a zero increase.  Instruction was quite clear to staff that they were to aim for zero or as close to zero as possible and bring back different options.  The Chief raised a point earlier in the discussion that Member Doran wanted to make: that SGI discussions over the past two years went much further than hiring 20 sworn officers with five being converted to civilians.  The level of discussion at that time was such to accept the presentation and the ideas behind the SGI, that it was a framework for providing continued safety and security to this City into the future.  He firmly believed that the current discussion has reduced the SGI to a simplification that misses the important elements of the initiative.  It also reduces it to a standstill position, which is conceptually in conflict with a strategic growth initiative.  For the Nation’s Capital to ask for a standstill position when it is already in a deficit position is a distortion of the very concept of a strategic growth initiative.  The Board has always supported this initiative. 


Vice Chair McRae stated she hoped the Board could come to an agreement that Council would accept and that would not have to be sent to the Ontario Civilian Commission on Police Services (OCCPS) for settlement.  She asked if it would be possible to increase the request for money from the City’s tax rate stabilization fund from $2 million to $2.5 million, and make hiring the SGI positions possible.  Ms. Frazer said it was possible to draw another $500,000 for 2007 from the City’s tax stabilization reserve with City Council’s permission.  This would allow staff to preserve the funding for the SGI at the level of 20 officers.  Staff would have to recast the 2008 salary impact and how it would affect the final 2008 increase.


Vice Chair McRae proposed the following motion:


That the Ottawa Police Services Board approve and forward to Council Option 2 (Sustainable - Use of City Tax Rate Stabilization Fund), amended to request that City Council approve a one-time contribution of $2.5 million from the City Tax Stabilization Reserve Fund to help offset the OPS 2007 Budget, and to implement the 2007 SGI plan.


Wishing to clarify his position, Mayor O’Brien stated he relies on the Chief’s input and it is clear there is a common goal to create a safe, secure and sustainable community for now and into the future.  He stated that in no way should anyone conclude that these actions and discussions indicate a lack of interest in investing more in the police service over the coming decade.  He said it was a matter of getting the municipal finances in shape in terms of funding avenues and internal expenses so that these types of investments can be made freely in the future.  The Mayor pointed out this is not in any way detrimental to the long-term interest of the police service.  It is important to draw the line while going through this priority setting process and the Chief’s cooperation would be greatly appreciated. 


Regarding Vice Chair McRae’s motion, Member Morin wanted clarification that the success of the motion was based on an assumption that Council would agree.  Member McRae concurred it was an assumption, however, if it was appropriate for the Director General to propose the option, it was appropriate for the Board to consider doing the same.  Looking at the direction Council gave staff to present a sustainable zero budget, which Ms. Frazer has agreed the previous motion would accomplish, it is not on the backs of vulnerable people and will not be used forever.  By increasing funding from the tax stabilization reserve, the SGI officers could be hired with a zero percent increase.  She indicated she would not be a member of this Board if budget building continues in this manner, as it is not appropriate for future years.  She hoped the Board would agree to a sustainable standstill budget and ensure future budgets were sustainable. 


After doing some quick calculations Ms. Frazer wanted to ensure the goal for 2008 is kept at an 8.5% tax increase.  In order to re-implement SGI some changes will need to be made.  The Board would have to be agreeable that the SGI officer allocation would be reduced in 2008 from 30 to 20 officers.  In this way staff can guarantee that the motion has no impact on 2008 and fully meets Council’s definition of sustainability.


Chair Jensen echoed everything said by Member Doran.  Throughout his career in law enforcement he has witnessed these types of financial exercises as a result of political imperatives, and he felt the Board was on a slippery slope.  One of the reasons police services boards were established in Ontario and other provinces was to give stability to police services.  He feared the Board would be jeopardizing the police service in future years if it approved any of the zero increase options, and would be less than responsible if this was not considered.  He believes there is too much at stake in the future and too much potential guesswork involving City Council to put forward the option requesting money from the City’s tax stabilization fund.  He felt the Board should present City Council with a budget that is responsible from a Police Board perspective.  He acknowledged that there are members of Council on the Board, but while they are attending Police Board meetings they are members of the Board and have the same responsibilities as the other members despite how they came to be there. 


The Board then dealt with the motions that had been proposed during the meeting.


Moved by M. McRae

That the Ottawa Police Services Board approve and forward to Council Option 2 (sustainable use of City Tax Rate Stabilization Fund), amended to request that City Council approve a one-time contribution of $2.5 million from the City Tax Stabilization Reserve Fund to help offset the OPS 2007 Budget, and to implement the 2007 SGI plan.




Yeas:          M. McRae, B. Monette, L. O’Brien

Nays:         D. Doran, D. Guilmet-Harris, H. Jensen, D. Morin


Moved by D. Guilmet-Harris


Resolved that the Ottawa Police Services Board replace Recommendation 1 to read as follows:  That the Ottawa Police Services Board approve and forward to City Council a 2007 Operating and Capital Budget with a 1.7% inflationary increase as set out in the Ottawa Police Service 2007 Budget Book dated 7 February 2007.




Yeas:          D. Doran, D. Guilmet-Harris, H. Jensen, D. Morin

Nays:         M. McRae, B. Monette, L. O’Brien