ONTARIO CIVILIAN COMMISSION ON POLICE SERVICES
IN THE MATTER OF an application for the abolishment of the Hawkesbury Police Service
Presiding Member: Murray W. Chitra, Chair Appearances:
Gilbert Héroux, former Chief Administrative Officer and Clerk, Town of
Hawkesbury
Richard Cazabon, Sergeant, Ontario Provincial Police Mike Aho, Staff Sergeant, Ontario Provincial Police Lucien Berniquez, Mayor, Town of Hawkesbury
Joffre Dupuis, Acting Chief, Hawkesbury Police Service
Claude Boileau, President, Hawkesbury Police Association
Michael Mitchell, Director, Police Support Programs Branch, Ministry of the
Solicitor General and Correctional Services
Margery Wenkoff, Citizen
Claudette Laroque, Citizen
Jacques Laflamme, Constable, Hawkesbury Police Service
Hearing Date: May 27, 1998
Background:
The Town of Hawkesbury is located on the south shore of the Ottawa River in the United Counties of Prescott and Russell. It is an industrial community with a largely French speaking population of 10,300 residents. It also serves as the business centre for the county and parts of the province of Quebec located to the north.
For a number of years policing in the Town has been provided by a municipal police force on a twenty four hours a day, seven days a week basis. That force is currently composed of sixteen uniformed officers (one chief, three sergeants and twelve constables) and six and a half civilian employees (four full time and one
part time dispatcher, one court officer and one administrative clerk) operating from a police station located at 419 Cartier Boulevard.
On July 12, 1993 Hawkesbury Town Council (“Council”) passed a resolution requesting that the Ontario Civilian Commission on Police Services (the “Commission”) conduct an inquiry under section 25 of the Police Services Act, R.S.O 1990, c. P.15 as amended (the “Act”) into the operation and administration of the Hawkesbury Police Service (the “Service”). This request was initiated because of concerns about morale, leadership and the relationship between various police stakeholder groups.
It was determined that the concerns raised would be best addressed by a focused inspection by the Police Support Programs Branch of the Ministry of the Solicitor General and Correctional Services (the “Ministry”) . This inspection took place over the course of sixteen days in early 1994. The Inspection Report, which was completed in May of that year identified a number of areas of concern and made 31 recommendations for improvement largely directed at human resources management issues.
In order to comply with these recommendations the Hawkesbury Police Services Board (the “Board”) prepared a Plan of Action. Funding for certain aspects of the Plan was included in the Board’s 1995 estimates. The total amount requested was not approved by Council. As a result, a hearing under section 39 of the Act took place before the Commission on October 25, 1995.
At page 18 of its decision dated February 15, 1996 the Commission made a number of suggestions, including that:
(a) the Board review its Plan of Action and develop a phased-in lower cost alternative to implement the outstanding recommendations:
(b) Council ensure that the necessary funds are available to implement the staged Ministry recommendations;
Despite overall progress, as of this date, a number of the recommendations remain outstanding.
On April 10, 1997 the Board passed a resolution requesting a costing for police services from the Ontario Provincial Police (the “OPP”). A similar resolution was adopted by Council on April 28, 1997. Approval to undertake the costing was granted on May 28, 1997.
A series of meetings were held between representatives of the OPP, the Board and Council. As well, members of the public were invited to participate in
community interviews held on July 8, 9, and 10, 1997. A total of twenty three individuals participated.
A proposal was presented by the OPP on October 1, 1997 which essentially offered the Council and the Board three options. On November 3, 1997 Council passed a resolution accepting the option calling for an “integrated” detachment. The Board passed a similar resolution on November 4, 1997.
After this, a series of discussions took place about the possibility of modifying the option to include enhanced counter reception service. As a result, the agreed upon option was modified. The revised option was adopted by resolution of Council on May 12, 1998 and by the Board on the following day.
In anticipation of this agreement Council requested that the Commission conduct a hearing under section 40 of the Act. The Commission agreed to this request and a public meeting was scheduled to take place in the Town of Hawkesbury on May 27, 1998. Notice of this fact were published in both English and French in local newspapers.
This meeting took place in municipal council chambers at 600 Higginson Street. A total of ten presentations or submissions were made. Written material and other documents were provided in support of the various positions taken. This information forms the basis of this decision.
The Law:
Policing in Ontario is governed by the provisions of the Act.
Section 4(1) of the Act imposes upon municipalities the obligation to provide “adequate and effective police services in accordance with its needs”. This may be accomplished in a number of different ways. A municipality may establish and maintain its own police force, enter into a joint policing arrangement with another municipality, or contract for policing services from the OPP.
For a police service to be “adequate and effective” it must have the necessary staff, administration, equipment, infrastructure, and facilities to perform certain functions. According to section 4(2) of the Act these include crime prevention, law enforcement, assistance to victims of crime, public order maintenance, and emergency response.
Once a municipal police force has been established, it can only be abolished for the purpose of putting in place one of the other policing options (i.e. OPP contract policing), after following the procedures set out in the Act. Specifically, section 40 provides that:
40(1) A board may terminate the employment of a member of the police force for the purpose of abolishing the police force … if the Commission consents and if the abolition … does not contravene this Act.
(2) The Commission shall consent to the termination of the employment of a member of a police force under subsection (1) only if,
a) the member and the board have made an agreement dealing with severance pay or agreed to submit the matter to arbitration; or
b) the Commission has made an order under subsection
(3).
(3) If the member and the board do not make an agreement dealing with severance pay and do not agree to submit the matter to arbitration, the Commission, if it is of the opinion that it would be appropriate to permit the abolition of the police force … may order the member and the board to submit the matter to arbitration and give any necessary direction in that connection.
If the Commission is of the view that these requirements have been met, then a municipality may enter into a contract with the Solicitor General under section 10 of the Act for policing services to be provided by the OPP.
The Issues:
The nature of this scheme is self-evident. It is to ensure that no municipal police force is abolished unless arrangements are in place which will satisfactorily meet the policing needs of the community in question. Any new arrangement must provide for appropriate staff, administration, equipment, infrastructure, and facilities to ensure adequate and effective policing. As well, no employee of a municipal police force is to be terminated without steps being taken to ensure a proper severance agreement.
Accordingly, the purpose of this proceeding is two-fold.
First, the Commission is to receive and review the proposal which has been accepted by Council and the Board. This is to be done with the assistance of any public comments and submissions.
Second, assuming that the proposal allows for “adequate and effective” policing, the Commission must determine whether or not an employee is to be terminated as a consequence of abolition. If this is the case, and the parties have reached
an agreement with respect to severance or have consented to have any outstanding matters referred to arbitration - then the matter ends there. If such agreement has not been reached then the Commission may order the parties to arbitration.
That being said, it is worth noting that given the wording of the Act there are a number of matters beyond the Commission’s purview. It is not the Commission’s role to judge the relative merits of local versus OPP contract policing in a particular community or the potential for any proposal to save or increase policing costs. These are matters for Council and the Board to assess.
It is not the Commission’s function to judge whether or not what is being proposed is superior to what may already be in place or some other alternative. The Commission’s focus is to determine whether the arrangement being proposed meets the requirements of the Act. Finally, it is not the Commission’s function to determine what constitutes an appropriate severance arrangement. That is a matter for bargaining between the parties and, in the absence of agreement, for arbitration.
The Proposal:
The proposed policing arrangement was described to us in detail by Mr. Héroux with the assistance of a number of witnesses.
Essentially, what is being advanced is the creation of a detachment which would integrate policing for the Town of Hawkesbury with existing local OPP resources. In practice this would mean the establishment of a local OPP unit with forty five uniformed officers and ten and a half support staff. All would be bilingual.
The integrated detachment would be managed by a staff sergeant with the assistance of five full time sergeants. They would in turn supervise the activities of thirty nine constables. Their work would be supported by three and a half clerical staff, two court workers, four receptionists and one cleaner who would also act as co-ordinator of fleet maintenance and repair.
Of the total complement, a number of officers would be dedicated to policing the Town of Hawkesbury. Specifically, this would include fifteen constables (two allocated to criminal investigations, one to community policing and the balance to patrol duties), 1.9 sergeants and .38 of the time of the staff sergeant. As well, one clerical and two court workers would be assigned exclusively to Hawkesbury issues. Four receptionists would provide counter services at the integrated facility and participate as part of a Differential Response Unit sixteen hours a day, five days per week.
At the present time the Hawkesbury Police Service does have a formal program for the use of auxiliary police officers. The proposed arrangement would allow for the use of auxiliary staff.
A workload analysis, prepared by the OPP, focused on the number of incidents experienced by the current service in the calendar years 1995 and 1996. Based on this analysis, it is proposed that these officers be dedicated to provide 25,160 hours of policing exclusively to the Town of Hawkesbury at an estimated annual cost of $1,723,463.
The Town, which is approximately 1000 hectares in size will be divided into two zones. These zones will be patrolled twenty four hours a day, seven days a week by one of the four platoons to be established from the total constable complement. Officers would be scheduled to work ten hour shifts.
In terms of equipment, the dedicated officers would be provided with six police vehicles. New telephone equipment would be installed and new mobile radios purchased. Officers and civilian staff would continue to have access to both OMPPACC (a common police computerized record management and reporting system) and CPIC (a national police information system).
Dispatching services for the new detachment would be provided primarily by the OPP Kanata Communications Centre using a toll free 1-888 number. That facility currently employs twenty six and a half civilian dispatchers under the supervision of six sergeants and one staff sergeant. A sergeant is on duty twenty four hours per day.
Currently, the Hawkesbury Police Service receives approximately six hundred phone calls a month handled by local dispatchers. Under the proposed arrangement it is anticipated that about four hundred of these calls will be taken by Kanata and the balance locally by detachment staff.
It is proposed that the present OPP detachment on Highway 34 be closed and OPP staff now working in that facility be relocated to a renovated and expanded Hawkesbury Police Service building located in town on Cartier Boulevard. A detailed architect’s plan for the renovated facility has been provided. As well, a letter dated May 27, 1997 stating that the Town and OPP have reached an agreement in principle on accommodation issues has been filed.
This move is scheduled to take place once construction has been completed. Tenders are currently being solicited.
All existing uniformed officers of the Hawkesbury Police Service would be offered employment with the OPP. A similar arrangement is proposed for five of the current full time civilian employees. The one remaining full time employee would accept early retirement. The final part time civilian staff member has been offered
a severance package. Correspondence from the Hawkesbury Police Association dated May 26, 1998 indicates that this proposed arrangement is satisfactory.
Decision:
Is what is being proposed likely to provide the Town of Hawkesbury with
“adequate and effective police services”?
The Act does not define what constitutes “adequate and effective police services”. However, some assistance in this regard can be found in two sources. These include certain provisions of the legislation and prior decisions of the Commission.
These decisions have, in different contexts, articulated various means to measure “adequacy”. These measures have included historical (levels in the past), comparative (relative to communities of a similar size), prospective (anticipated), and alternative (other means to provide). Clearly, not all measures would apply in every instance.
Given the key factors of staffing, administration, equipment, infrastructure and facilities is this proposal acceptable?
As noted earlier, the Commission has some experience in policing matters related to the Town of Hawkesbury. We initiated the focused inspection which took place in 1994. As well, we conducted a hearing in 1995 under section 39 of the Act dealing with the force’s annual budget: Town of Hawkesbury (February
15, 1996).
At the time of the inspection, the population of the community was approximately ten thousand and the authorized strength of the police force was twenty two. This was composed of nineteen uniformed officers (one chief, three sergeants, twelve full time constables and three part time constables) and three civilian employees (two secretaries and one dispatcher).
At the current time, the population of Hawkesbury is slightly over ten thousand and the actual strength of the police force is twenty two and one half. That is sixteen uniformed officers (one chief, three sergeants, and twelve full time constables) and six and-a-half civilian employees (four and a half dispatchers, one court worker and one administrative clerk). While the total complements are similar, the composition of the force is clearly different. This change appears to be in response to recommendations made with respect to improving both dispatch and court services.
Given the transfer of certain functions to civilian staff, the historical full time uniformed policing complement in Hawkesbury would appear to be sixteen. This compares favourably with communities of a similar size. For example, the Commission recently considered a request for the abolition of the Goderich Police Service in Town of Goderich (October 27, 1997). That community of seventy five hundred was policed by a force of thirteen uniformed officers.
The proposed arrangement would appear to have a number of advantages. First, it would reduce middle management positions (i.e. sergeants). Second, it would allow for the dedication of two officers to criminal investigations and one to community policing. This should permit certain key recommendations in the audit report to be met. Finally, the presence of an integrated detachment of forty five uniformed officers in the heart of town should greatly increase visibility and allow for the ready deployment of other OPP officers in emergency situations.
The total integrated complement of thirty nine uniformed officers would be supported by ten and a half civilian staff. These seems more than sufficient. The total working complement in turn would be supervised by five sergeants and one staff sergeant. This represents a proposed span of control of one supervisor for approximately every nine employees. As the Commission indicated in Town of Orillia (January 17, 1996) such a range is reasonable.
Mr. Héroux, supported by Acting Chief Dupuis stated that in his view this arrangement will be more than sufficient. They are supported by Mr. Michael Mitchell of the Police Support Programs Branch of the Ministry of the Solicitor General and Correctional Services. Two members of the public sought clarification of the proposal, but no concerns were expressed.
Overall, I am satisfied that from the perspective of staffing and administration the proposal should allow for adequate and effective policing. As well, it should facilitate the implementation of the outstanding inspection recommendations.
This brings me to the question of equipment. As noted earlier the proposed detachment will have access to OMPPAC and CPIC. New telephone and radio equipment will be installed. The Hawkesbury officers will receive the necessary uniforms, training and weapons. An amount is allocated for each officer for office supplies. Six vehicles will be allocated to the fifteen dedicated officers, to be used during their ten hour shift. Overall, this seems satisfactory.
I have also considered the proposed dispatching arrangement. It is particularly important that citizens of a community be able to contact their police service in cases of emergency and that officers have an effective means to respond to such calls.
The OPP Kanata Communications Centre with over thirty dispatchers and supervising sergeants should be more than able to deal with the six hundred monthly calls from Hawkesbury. This is particularly the case given the plan to deal with approximately two hundred of those calls locally.
This leaves the issue of facilities. As noted earlier, it is proposed that the existing OPP Detachment on Highway 34 be closed and all officers moved to an expanded Hawkesbury police station.
The existing Hawkesbury police station is centrally located in a renovated community centre. It is a large modern building with more than sufficient parking and space for expansion. I have examined both the building and the architect’s plan. When completed, the overall infrastructure and facility would clearly be adequate.
However, neither a formal lease or renovation contract have been signed. In Town of Goderich (October 27, 1997) the Commission denied a request for abolition because practical details relating to the proposed facilities had not been fully determined.
The facts in this case would appear to be somewhat different in that a facility has been identified, plans prepared, an agreement in principle to lease signed and the Hawkesbury officers will remain in their building during renovations. Accordingly, I do not feel that this omission is fatal to this application.
Given that there are no outstanding or unresolved concerns with respect to severance the requirements of section 40(2) are met.
Accordingly, the Commission hereby consents to the abolition of the Hawkesbury Police Service in order that policing can be provided by means of a contract with the Solicitor General for the services of the OPP.
This consent is effective October 1, 1998. It is conditional upon the Commission receiving prior to that date:
a signed copy of the final lease for the proposed integrated detachment facility located at 419 Cartier Boulevard and the corresponding agreement for furniture and office equipment;
a signed copy of the construction contract for the proposed renovation of the facility in accordance with the submitted plans setting out clear dates for completion; and
a copy of the building permit for the proposed work.
DATED THIS 26TH DAY OF JUNE,
1998Murray W. Chitra
Chair, OCCPS