ONTARIO CIVILIAN COMMISSION ON POLICE SERVICES
IN THE MATTER OF an application by the City of Peterborough and the Village of Lakefield for the amalgamation of their respective police services.
Presiding Members:
Sam Cancilla, Member
Brenda Weese, Member
Appearances:
Terrence M. McLaren, Chief, Peterborough Community Police Service
Jeff A. Pritchard, Chief, Lakefield Police Service Sylvia Sutherland, Mayor, City of Peterborough Bob Helsing, Reeve, Village of Lakefield
Tony Cournyea, Councillor, Village of Lakefield
Kate Ramsay, Chair, Lakefield Police Services Board
Dean Audley, Policing Services Advisor, Ministry of the Solicitor General and
Correctional Services
Tom Birch, President, Lakefield Police Association
Marc Habgood, President, Peterborough Police Association
George Loyst, President, Senior Officers Association
Hearing Date: November 25, 1998
Background:
The City of Peterborough is located in the southern part of the county of Peterborough, 140 Kilometers north-east of Toronto. It has a population of approximately 68,748 and covers an area of 5,475 acres. There are approximately 30,073 households. The annual assessment is 3.4 billion dollars.
The Peterborough Community Police Service was established in 1850 and currently has an authorized strength of 104 uniform and 39 civilian members. The community receives 24 hour services delivered through a team policing model. The 1998 budget is $9,448,698.
The Village of Lakefield covers an area of 293 hectares and is situated approximately 16 kilometers north of the City of Peterborough. A portion of Smith Township lies between the two municipalities. There is a population of
2,321 in approximately 1,098 households. The Village has an assessment of 142 million dollars.
The Lakefield Police Service was established in 1875. It currently has an authorized strength of 5 police officers, 2 part-time civilians, 2 part-time constables, and 3 auxiliary constables. The force follows the generalist constable concept and provides 18 hour dedicated service to the community. A telephone on-call system is available for coverage of the remaining 6 hours.
Both police agencies provide the 5 core police services required by section 4.2 of the Police Services Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter c. P. 15 as amended (the “Act”). These include crime prevention, law enforcement, assistance to victims of crime, public order maintenance and emergency response. They also provide proactive and reactive policing community based programs.
The Peterborough and Lakefield police services have a long history of cooperation. This is reflected in a number of joint initiatives such as community service presentations and criminal investigation. Peterborough provides full dispatching service for Lakefield, including responding to radio and telephone inquiries, hosting CPIC and all associated responsibilities.
The amalgamation proposal is the result of a process that was initiated in September 1996. The decision to examine options for policing the Village of Lakefield was prompted by:
increasing difficulty for smaller police agencies to address higher standards set through new provincial initiatives and court decisions;
increased community awareness and demand for higher levels of service resulting in higher costs;
higher tax rates for communities, a significant portion of which were policing costs; and,
increased cost for training and technical services.
Lakefield Deputy Reeve Mary Smith stated, “the economy of scale means our police service costs are more per household than the neighbouring OPP costs or Peterborough City costs.”
Similarly, the Peterborough Community Police Service was interested in exploring the benefits and cost efficiencies that might be achieved through expansion of their service area.
The Lakefield Police Services Board initially identified three options:
Expand the Lakefield Police Service into Smith and Douro Townships. This would create an economy of scale for Lakefield taxpayers and reduce their costs.
Inquire if the Peterborough Community Police Services Board would be interested in expanding their service into the Village of Lakefield.
Inquire if the OPP would be interested in policing the Village of
Lakefield by contract and what the costs would be.
As the information-gathering proceeded, the options grew to nine (5 different OPP options and a Peterborough County option). The scenarios provided varying levels of service with costs ranging from lower to higher than the current police budgets.
Reeve Bob Helsing stated, “it is important for the people to fully understand the issues and options, and the implications for the police protection in the Village.” He also asked for as many residents as possible to voice their opinions before the council made its decision.
Lakefield public meetings were scheduled for May 28, 1998 and June 9, 1998. Participants at the meetings had access to displays, handouts, presentations and question and answer periods. All meetings received wide press coverage from local media. Debates were at times heated. There was strong support for maintaining a municipal Lakefield Police Service.
In mid-June 1998, the Lakefield Council and Police Services Board decided to support an amalgamation between the Peterborough and Lakefield Police Services. Peterborough City Council and Police Services Board also approved the proposal in principle.
The Process:
A Steering Committee and two subcommittees were created, with representation from the relevant stakeholder groups. Their tasks included studying all aspects of the proposal for the amalgamated service. Matters relating to collective agreements, budgets, name/location, human resources, administration, assets/liabilities and board structure were discussed and resolved.
In July 1998 the Steering Committee recommendation was that the two police services should amalgamate and that both councils should enter into an agreement pursuant to section 6 of the Act. The recommendation was accepted.
The Law:
Policing in Ontario is governed by the provisions of the Act.
Section 4(1) imposes on municipalities the obligation to provide “adequate and effective police services in accordance with its needs”. Section 4(5) provides that this responsibility rests with area municipalities in Peterborough and Lakefield.
The obligation to provide “adequate and effective police services” can be met 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 with 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.
Where two or more municipalities with existing police forces wish to amalgamate those services, section 6 applies. It states:
6(1) Despite any other Act, the councils of two or more municipalities that have police forces may enter into an agreement to amalgamate them.
(2) The agreement shall deal with,
(a) the establishment and, subject to section 33, the composition of a joint board for the amalgamated police force;
(b) the amalgamation of the police force and the appointment or transfer of their members;
(c) the joint board’s use of the assets and its responsibility for the liabilities associated with the police forces;
(d) the budgeting of the cost for the operation of the amalgamated police force;
(e) any other matter that is necessary or advisable to effect the amalgamation.
(3) The agreement does not take effect until the Commission has approved the organization of the amalgamated police force.
(4) Appointments to a joint board for an amalgamated police force may be made before an agreement takes effect.
Further, section 40 of the Act provides that if any reduction in the membership of a police service is proposed the consent of the Commission is required.
The Issues:
The nature of the legislative scheme is self-evident. It is to ensure that existing police services are not amalgamated unless the proposed arrangement can satisfactorily meet the policing needs of the communities in question.
Any proposed amalgamation must provide for appropriate organization, staff, equipment, and facilities to ensure adequate and effective policing. An acceptable agreement must be in place to deal with key issues such as civilian governance (i.e., the composition of a joint board), the transfer of staff, assets, liabilities, budget, and any other necessary matter. Further, if the proposal calls for the termination of existing members of any service, necessary arrangements must be in place for proper severance.
Accordingly, the purpose of our public meeting is three fold.
First, the Commission is to receive and review the proposal which has been approved by the various councils and police services boards. We are to consider any public comments and submissions.
Second, assuming we are satisfied that the proposal allows for “adequate and effective police services” in all of the concerned communities then we must examine the agreement to determine whether or not it contains all of the necessary elements required by section 6(2).
Third, if any member of an existing municipal service is to be terminated as a result of the proposed agreement, we must determine whether or not any arrangements have been made with respect to severance or whether there is consent to refer any unresolved matters to arbitration. If such an agreement has not been reached then the Commission may order the parties to arbitration.
The Agreement:
The amalgamated Police Service will be known as “The Peterborough Lakefield Community Police Service.” This will ensure that the identities of the two communities are maintained.
Headquarters for the police service will be the current Peterborough location at
500 Water Street. This state of the art building, strategically located near the downtown, contains all support functions required to deliver adequate and effective police service. In addition to a central lockup, video interviewing and breath test rooms, fingerprint facilities, an indoor range, record keeping and communication facilities, there is room for future expansion.
Lakefield Police Service is housed in a beautiful historical post office located at the corner of Queen and Bridge streets, the main downtown intersection. The building has been renovated to suit the needs of the police service. The location is well suited to walk-in traffic and will function as a detachment office. The civilian staff will be available 8 hours a day during the week. Video monitored
interview rooms, temporary prisoner holding cells and an OMPPAC terminal will be available for officer use.
The new joint Police Service Board will be comprised of:
Mayor or Designate of the City of Peterborough
Reeve or Designate of the Village of Lakefield
Two members appointed by the Lieutenant Governor in Council who live or work in the City of Peterborough
One community person appointed by the council of the City of
Peterborough.
Communications will be provided by a digitally trunked, 5 channel radio system which has been providing dispatch for Lakefield Police Service for 10 years.
There will be no requirement to change telephone numbers, nor is long distance calling service required. The existing system provides an automated ring-over to Peterborough. There is a 911 emergency call response in place for both communities. The radio system has the capacity for expansion of services and interagency operability.
Full fleet services will be available through the City of Peterborough. All vehicles will be equipped with mobile radios. Police vehicles in the Lakefield patrol zone will be equipped with in-car repeaters.
The amalgamated fleet consists of:
13 marked cruisers
6 marked police vans
1 marked prisoner van
2 marked canine vehicles
2 unmarked traffic units
4 unmarked police cruisers.
With the exception of two part-time constables who are taking severance, all members of the existing police services will be offered employment with the new service.
Records management will be located at Headquarters. This includes OMPPAC, CPIC, records validation, warrants and summons, court files, personnel records, and all administrative files relative to policing.
The budget distribution and cost sharing arrangement was arrived at through consultation with municipal finance directors and CAO’s. The averaging formula was based on 1997 enumeration, 1998 budget documents, and assessment rolls. It will be reviewed every three years, consistent with municipal enumeration.
Peterborough
Lakefield
Population Households Municipal Assessment Individual Budgets
68,748 (96.73%) 30,073 (96.48%) 3,399,647,550 (95.99%) $9,448,698 (95.13%)
2,321 (3.27%) 1,098 (3.52%) 142,110,543 (4.01%) $483,892 (4.87%)
An average of the factors results in a cost sharing formula in which Peterborough would contribute 96.08% and Lakefield 3.92%.
The agreement states that the 1999 budget will not exceed the combined totals of the 1998 individual services. There will be no decrease in service. In fact, while costs have been stabilized, services in some areas have been enhanced. The budget also includes the new Police Services Board expenses.
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNTS
Details
Peterborough
Lakefield
Total
1998 Budget 1999 Amalgamated Savings
9,448,698 9,408,695 $40,003
483,892 377,000 $106,892
9,932,590 9,785,695 $146,895
Estimated one-time startup costs of $45,000 will be offset by Lakefield assets being brought into the new police organization.
All current assets will be transferred to the new police services board. Any surplus of assets will be used to reduce future costs. All existing liabilities have been identified and will become the responsibility of the new police services board.
The City of Peterborough will assume responsibility for processing all financial matters.
The Commission’s November 25, 1998 public meeting at the Selwyn Outreach Centre was well attended. Members of both councils and police service groups spoke in favour of the amalgamation. There were no submissions opposing the proposed agreement.
Mayor Sylvia Sutherland felt the agreement just made economical good sense. She noted the City of Peterborough was not as large a benefactor as Lakefield, however she and her council fully supported the amalgamation.
Reeve Bob Helsing commented that, after working closely with Peterborough Police Service for the past 10 years, he had a very high comfort level with the amalgamation agreement.
Decision:
Section 4(1) of the Act imposes on municipalities the obligation to provide
“adequate and effective police services in accordance with its needs.”
Under section 5 a municipality may establish its own police force, share services with another community or enter into an agreement with the Ontario Provincial Police.
Section 6 of the Act provides that two or more municipalities that have police forces may enter into an arrangement to amalgamate them.
The formal means of such an amalgamation is an agreement or contract dealing with board composition, the appointment or transfer of members, use of assets and responsibility for liabilities, budgeting for the operational costs of the amalgamated police force and any other matter necessary or advisable to effect the amalgamation.
Section 6(3) states the agreement does not take effect until the Commission has approved the organization of the amalgamated police force.
Peterborough/Lakefield have presented a proposal somewhat similar to other amalgamations received by the Commission; Bradford/West Gwillimbury (1996), Meaford/Thornbury (1997), Hanover/Walkerton (1997).
The proposal is for the most part well organized and identifies significant benefits for both municipalities.
Essentially the agreement creates a detachment office serving Lakefield at the existing police office location. Lakefield will be designated as patrol area five with
24-hour emergency response, 18-hour dedicated coverage and drive-through patrols during the remaining six-hour period. The combined new service will consist of 150 members: 109 police officers and 41 civilians. The existing 3 auxiliary members will remain in Lakefield and an auxiliary program will be introduced in Peterborough.
Peterborough has enhanced 911 service. Lakefield does not have 911 service but emergency calls to Lakefield Police Service are automatically forwarded to Peterborough Police after the Lakefield office is closed. Peterborough will continue to provide all communications.
The City of Peterborough will provide financial administration services. Lakefield’s share of policing agreement costs will be 3.27%; Peterborough’s is
96.73%, based on 1997 population. This seems fair to both and is subject to review every three years. All assets are to be transferred to the new police services board, all existing liabilities have been identified and will be transferred and any surplus assets will be sold to reduce “start-up” costs estimated to be
($45,000.00). The new service appears to have been provided with the necessary level of funds.
The only change in personnel is in Lakefield, where two part-time constables on temporary contract have agreed to a severance package.
OMPPAC and CPIC, records validation, warrants, summonses, court files, personnel records and administrative files will be located at headquarters in Peterborough. Lakefield detachment will maintain an OMPPAC terminal, temporary prisoner holding and video interviewing rooms.
Both Chiefs Pritchard and MacLaren were asked “does this agreement provide adequate and effective police services for your communities?” Both replied yes.
The target date for the amalgamation is January 1, 1999.
One of the requirements in section 6 is that the proposed agreement deals with the establishment and subject to section 33, the composition of a joint board for the amalgamated police force.
Peterborough/Lakefield propose the following board structure in their amalgamation agreement. Article 2 of the Amalgamation Agreement reads:
(a) There shall be established a Police Services Board to be known as the Peterborough, Lakefield Community Police Services Board, the composition of which shall consist of the Reeve of the Village of Lakefield, or another Council member appointed by resolution of that Council, and the Mayor of the City Peterborough, or another Council member appointed by resolution of the Council, and two persons appointed by the Lieutenant Governor in Council, and one person appointed by agreement of the councils of the participating municipalities who is neither a member of a council of the participating municipality nor an employee of a participating municipality.
(b) It is further agreed that save and except the Council representatives, the Board composition of the remaining three members shall as much as local control will allow, consist of:
(i) two provincial appointees who live and/or work in the City of Peterborough and;
(ii) one public appointee who lives and/or works in the City of
Peterborough as appointed by the Council of the City of
Peterborough.
Article 2(b) refers to local control. Webster’s dictionary describes control as “to have the authority or ability to regulate, direct or dominate a situation.” Local is defined as “pertaining to, being in, or serving a particular area or place.” The
only local control authorized by the Act is the authority to appoint three members in accordance with the statute.
The composition of police services boards is dealt with in the Act. Section 27 states:
There shall be a police services board for every municipality that maintains a police force.
(10.1) The term of office for a member appointed by resolution of a council shall be as set out by the council in his or her appointment, but shall not exceed the term of office of the council that appointed the member.
(13) A judge, a justice of the peace, a police officer, a person who practices criminal law as a defence counsel may not be a member of a board.
Composition of police services boards is defined in section 31. This section provides specific powers enabling boards to fulfil their public oversight role of police services.
Other than the disqualification of judges, police officers, justices of the peace, and criminal defence lawyers as stated in section 27(13) and the exclusion of municipal employees and council member as stated in section 33(5)(b), it would appear no one else is disqualified from sitting on a police services board, subject to their appointment by the authorized body.
Section 33 states:
(1) Despite any special Act the councils of two or more municipalities may enter into an agreement to constitute a joint board.
(2) The agreement must be authorized by by-laws of the councils of the participating municipalities and requires the consent of the Solicitor General.
(3) the provisions of this Act that apply to boards also apply with necessary modifications to joint boards.
(5) The joint board of municipalities whose combined population according to the last enumeration taken under s. 15 of the Assessment Act exceeds 25,000 shall consist of,
(a) two persons who are members of the councils of any participating municipalities appointed by agreement of the councils of the participating municipalities;
(b) one person appointed by agreement of the participating municipalities, who is neither a member of a council of a participating municipality nor an employee of a participating municipality.
(c) two persons appointed by the Lieutenant Governor in
Council.
In the Peterborough/Lakefield scheme, it is proposed that the third municipal appointee to the new board shall only be approved if that appointee resides and/or works in Peterborough and shall be appointed by the Council of the City of Peterborough.
The Police Services Act is paramount in the matter of police service board composition. The statute is lucid and does not require supplementary discourse. It cannot be set aside by an agreement between parties which, in fact or appearance, contravenes or seeks to circumvent legislative provisions.
We believe that the councils of Peterborough and Lakefield should be able to agree on a third appointee without the necessity of including conditions in their amalgamation agreement. The criterion should be selecting a suitably qualified person for the job, regardless of where they live or work. Any reference to board composition in the agreement should be in accordance with section 33 of the Act.
We recognize the benefits of the amalgamation to both communities, and the hard work and information-sharing efforts made by the stakeholders. They have produced a practical, workable plan which should provide for adequate and effective policing. We are satisfied that the appropriate transition arrangements have been implemented. We thank the many participants from Lakefield and Peterborough and Chiefs McLaren and Pritchard for a professional, courteous presentation, and the tour of the facilities.
Subject to the deletion of Article 2(b), we approve the organization and authorize the amalgamation in accordance with section 6(3) of the Act. This decision is effective December 30, 1998.
We require that we be provided with a copy of the revised agreement.
DATED THIS 29TH DAY OF DECEMBER 1998.
Sam Cancilla
Member, OCCPS
Brenda Weese
Member, OCCPS