Corporation of the Town of Perth (Re), 2013 ONCPC 4001

OCPC-DSB #13-01

2013 ONCPC 4001

ONTARIO CIVILIAN POLICE COMMISSION

IN THE MATTER OF an application for consent to abolish the Perth Police Service

DECISION

Panel: David C. Gavsie, Chair Roy B. Conacher Q.C., Member

Meeting Date: December 5, 2012

Meeting Location: Perth, Ontario

Ontario Civilian Police Commission 250 Dundas Street West, Suite 605 Toronto, Ontario M7A 2T3 Tel: 416-314-3004 Fax: 416-314-0198 Website: www.ocpc.ca

Appearances:

1. John Fenik – Mayor, Corporation of the Town of Perth

2. Stephanie Gray – Chair, Perth Police Services Board

3. Steve McElvray – Perth Police Association

4. Pat Capello – Chief, Perth Police Service

5. Sgt. Paul Legault & Staff Sgt. Rod Case – Ontario Provincial Police

6. Insp. Gerry Salisbury – Ontario Provincial Police

7. Lana March – resident

8. John Chalmers – resident

9. Carl Rubino – resident

10. Michael Wicklum – resident

11. Stuart Howard – resident

Written submissions were received from Ms. Gray and Ms. March.

Application:

1. An application (the “application”) to the Ontario Civilian Police Commission (the “Commission”) has been made by the Corporation of the Town of Perth (the “Town” or “Perth”) pursuant to s. 40 of the Police Services Act R.S.O. 1990 c.P. 15 as amended (the “Act”) for consent to disband the Perth Police Service (the “Service”).

2. If granted by the Commission, it is the intention of the Town to have policing in the Town provided by the Ontario Provincial Police (“OPP”) under contract with the Government of Ontario.

Background:

3. Perth is located on the Tay River in Eastern Ontario. It has a population of approximately 6,300. Perth was originally settled in 1816. Originally founded as a military settlement, the Town now focuses upon culture, recreation and heritage to attract visitors. As Perth approaches its 200th anniversary it has a rich living history with a variety of heritage attractions, arts, cultural events and festivals. The population increases significantly in the surrounding County in the summer season as the area contains many cottages, resorts and other tourist attractions.

4. The Service has been in existence for approximately 100 years and provides policing within the Town.

5. The Lanark Detachment of the OPP (the “Detachment”) provides policing services to the areas of Lanark County adjacent to the Town. Its responsibility also extends to parts of Frontenac County. There are many lakes, canals, rivers, Provincial highways, and two Provincial parks within the Detachment area.

6. The Service currently has 15 uniform officers including a Chief, an Inspector, two Sergeants and 11 Constables. This represents an officer to citizen ratio of 1 to 415.5 (15 officers to 6,232 residents). The Service employs support staff consisting of 11 civilian members including one administrative clerk, 2.5 full-time Court Special Constables and seven communicators, five of which are full-time employees.

7. The OPP Lanark Detachment currently is staffed by 80 uniformed officers consisting of one Inspector, one Staff Sergeant, six Sergeants and 72 Constables. This represents an officer to citizen ratio of 1 to 651 (80 officers to 52,153). They are supported by 9.5 civilian employees.

8. The Service operates from a police facility located at 1881 Rogers Road in Perth. This facility consists of general and administrative offices, four adult cells and one youth detention cell.

9. The Detachment is located at 75 Dufferin Street in Perth which is a modern policing facility with access to 10 cells suitable for short term lockups. Three are at the Perth station, two at Sharbot Lake and five at Carleton Place satellite facilities. The Detachment has the ability to designate cells for Youth Offender detention.

10. Both the Service and the Detachment utilize the Brockville Jail located at 10 Wall Street, Brockville for long-term incarcerations. The distance from Perth to Brockville is 65 kilometres.

11. All Court matters arising from incidents in Perth are dealt with in the Court in Perth with the exception of Youth Court matters which take place in Smith Falls.

12. As noted, for many years, policing in the Town has been provided by the Service. However, the budget for the Service has been increasing and as a result, the Town decided to obtain a costing from the Government of Ontario to have the OPP provide policing to the Town. This culminated in the Application. The chronology of events leading up to the Application was the following:

1. October 18, 2011 – Council for the Town passed Motion 11-200 at its regular meeting approving submission of a request to the Government of Ontario for an OPP costing;

2. October 19, 2011 – Town CAO John deRosenroll wrote a letter to Minister Jim Bradley, then Ontario’s Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services (“MCSCS”) requesting an OPP costing;

3. November 18, 2011 – MCSCS Deputy Minister Ian Davidson wrote to CAO deRosenroll saying that approval for an OPP costing had been granted and that the OPP was so notified;

4. January 3, 2012 – The first meeting between Town officials and the OPP occurred, followed by a number of subsequent meetings. At the first meeting, the OPP indicated two policing models were available: a stand-alone option for the Town to have its own detachment, or an integrated model integrating Town policing with the Detachment (the “Integrated Detachment Model”);

5. January 13, 2012 – Town CAO, Treasurer and Solicitor met with OPP representatives to discuss the costing process;

6. February 9, 2012 – Representatives of the OPP attended and addressed the members of the Perth Police Services Board (the “Board”) to explain the basic OPP costing procedure and the formal approval process;

7. February 21, 2012 – Representatives of the OPP attended and addressed Town Council to outline the process;

8. March 2012 – Various meetings took place with Council, Council Committee of the Whole and the Board to discuss various matters including the proposal to retain an independent consultant to review and report on the policing options;

9. April 2012 – Further meetings occurred to exchange information;

10. May 17 & 18, 2012 – The OPP presented Town officials with a draft proposal which was discussed;

11. June 5, 2012 – At a Committee of the Whole meeting, Council received the OPP proposal containing two options, a stand-alone model and the Integrated Detachment Model. Council also received a separate report prepared by a consultant on the adequacy and effectiveness of policing services if either the Service or the OPP provided them to the Town. The consultant expressed the conclusion that “in either case, each option provides adequate and effective police services and is consistent with the regulations”.

12. June 7, 2012 – Council held an open meeting for members of the public to attend and ask questions of the OPP. Members of the Board and the Service also attended to provide information and answer questions from the public;

13. June 12, 2012 – Committee of the Whole of Council met and received local delegations with respect to the OPP proposal;

14. June 26, 2012 – At a regular Council meeting, further delegations regarding the OPP costing were received. Council then voted (six in favour, one opposed) to accept the Integrated Detachment Model proposal of the OPP. Council adopted Motion No. 2012 – 109 in support of its decision; and

15. June 27, 2012 – Mayor Fenik, on behalf of the municipality, wrote to the Commission requesting that a disbandment proceeding under s. 40 of the Act be initiated.

13. Details of the OPP proposal were requested by the Commission and these together with other relevant information were provided by letter dated October 10, 2012 from Town Mayor John Fenik to the Commission (the Table of Contents for the information provided to the Commission is reproduced as Appendix “A” to this decision).

14. As is its practice in disbandment proposals, the Commission decided that a public meeting would be held to formally consider the OPP proposal and obtain community input. The public meeting was scheduled for and held at 4 p.m. on Wednesday, December 5, 2012.

15. Notice of the Public Meeting was published twice in the Perth Courier on November 22nd and 29th, 2012.

Exhibits

16. The following were tendered as exhibits at the Public Meeting:

Exhibit 1 – Corporation of the Town of Perth Proposal and materials with letter dated October 10, 2012, tendered by Mayor Fenik (referred to above);

Exhibit 2 – Address by Stephanie Gray, Chair of the Board;

Exhibit 3a – OPP Presentation and CD, from Sgt. Paul Legault of the OPP;

Exhibit 3b – Lanark County Integrated Detachment Model from Sgt. Paul Legault;

Exhibit 4 – Written submissions from Lana March; and

Exhibit 5 – Perth Police Services Board Minutes as referred to by Dr. Carl Rubino.

The Law

17. Policing in Ontario is governed by the Act. A municipality must provide “adequate and effective police services in accordance with its needs” – s. 4(1) of the Act. Under s. 5 of the Act, this can be accomplished by the municipality:

a) establishing and maintaining its own police force;

b) entering into a joint policing arrangement with another municipality that is contiguous; or

c) contracting with another municipality or with the OPP for police services.

18. Where a municipal police force has been established, it can only be disbanded or abolished with the approval of the Commission – [s. 5(1)6 and s. 40(1) of the Act].

19. The consent of the Commission is subject to two requirements.

20. First, the Commission must be satisfied that what is being proposed to replace the existing arrangement would allow for the continuation of adequate and effective policing for the community in question – [s. 40(1) and s. 4(1) of the Act].

21. Second, the Commission must be satisfied the employees of the police force are dealt with in a fair manner. Specifically, the Commission must be satisfied that any employee whose job may be terminated has reached a severance agreement with the police services board if the proposal is approved, or agreed to submit the matter to arbitration. If there is no agreement either with respect to settlement or arbitration, the Commission may order the matter to arbitration – [s. 40(2) and (3) of the Act].

22. If the two requirements are met, the Commission may then authorize the municipality to enter in a new policing arrangement – [s. 5(1)6 of the Act].

Proposal by OPP

23. The OPP proposal which Town Council wishes to implement is to have the Town policed as part of an integrated Detachment.

24. The OPP proposal is slightly confusing from this perspective. At the bottom of page 9 of the proposal, the following is stated in setting out what the OPP decided regarding the positions of the Chief and Inspector of the Service:

… The OPP held a conference call involving senior command staff members on May 22, 2012 with respect to this matter. The decision reached was that if the two senior officers were to apply for a position with the OPP and be accepted, and through the rank determination process they would enter the OPP at a rank senior to that of Constable, the Town would be responsible for their costs. This option would be treated as a contract enhancement if the executive officers elected to transfer to the OPP. The OPP also considered a situation wherein the two officers decided not to seek employment with the OPP, and the OCPC (the Commission) agreed to a reduction of two full time uniform positions. Sergeant Legault was instructed to add a clause to the proposal to address the aforementioned OPP concerns.

25. From the above quotation and from both the note to Table D on page 15 of the proposal and the narrative which follows that note on pages 15 and 16 of the proposal, the Panel understands staffing will be the following:

a) if neither senior officer of the Service chooses to become a member of the OPP or neither is accepted by the OPP, the proposed uniform strength of the Integrated Detachment Model will be augmented, expressed in FTE terms, by 0.09 of both the Inspector’s position and the Staff Sergeant’s position, by two Sergeant’s positions, and by 11 Constables;

b) if only one senior officer so chooses and is accepted, the augmentation stays the same except the number of Constables will be 12; and

c) if both senior officers so choose and are accepted, the augmentation stays the same as in (a) above, except that the number of Constables will be 13.

26. The OPP will continue with the initial augmentation for three years at which time a “needs” assessment will be carried out and the appropriate complement for the Detachment determined.

27. Not knowing at the time of the public meeting on December 5, 2012, whether either of the senior officers of the Service will be transferred to the OPP, the Panel is going to assume that neither will transfer so that the augmentation to the Detachment for uniform Town policing expressed in FTE terms will be:

(i) Inspector – 0.09

(ii) Staff Sergeant – 0.09

(iii) Sergeants – 2.00

(iv) Constables – 11.00

TOTAL – 13.18 FTE positions.

Analysis and Comparators

28. The OPP has utilized a specific proposal development methodology since 1991 which includes the following analytical factors: (1) workload analysis; (2) deployment issues; (3) community consultation and needs analysis; and (4) calls for service analysis.

A. Workload Analysis

29. This factor takes into account the total hours related to calls for service and officer availability.

30. The calls for service in the Town over a three year period were counted according to type of incident.

31. The OPP has developed a standardized calculation of the average time required to investigate each type of incident from the time of the initial call until completion of the investigation including court disposition.

32. Similarly, an administrative support factor is derived from daily activity reports submitted by front-line officers across the Province and is added to the hours derived from the particular municipality’s calls for service. This information is added to obtain the total hours required to provide the policing service to the community.

33. Officer availability is determined by examining the amount of time an officer is available for front-line services which averages 1,467 hours per officer per year allowing for non-front-line service time for such factors as vacation and sick leave etc. That figure is then divided into the total hours required to provide police services to arrive at the number of officers required.

B. Deployment Issues

34. In analyzing this factor, the need for officer safety, geographical size of patrol areas and community service requirements are examined.

C. Community Consultation and Needs

35. In analyzing these factors, there are discussions with members of the community, municipal representatives and police personnel to confirm the existing level of police service and ensure that the proposed policing options meet the needs and desires of all stakeholders. The municipality’s proposal outlines the activities undertaken to engage and obtain input from such stakeholders.

36. The municipality indicated that it wanted to maintain the same level of front-line service.

D. Calls for Service

37. In arriving at its proposal, the OPP analyzed calls for Criminal Code matters that the Service had handled on average the last three years and similar calls the Detachment had handled for the past four years.

38. The Detachment had an average of 2,870.6 Criminal Code calls per annum and had an average of 80 uniform officers. This produces a ratio of each officer handling 35.8 of these calls per annum, or three per month.

39. Perth had an average of 394.6 Criminal Code calls and had an average of 15 uniform officers. This produces a ratio of each officer handling 26.3 of these calls, or just over two per month.

40. Assuming the Integrated Detachment Model had been in effect for the prior three to four years, the Detachment would have handled 3,265.2 Criminal Code calls and had a complement of 95 officers (including the Chief and Inspector of the Service). This produces a ratio of each officer handling 34.4 of these calls per annum. Without the Chief and Inspector, the ratio would be 35.1, or slightly less than three per month.

E. Police to Population Ratio

41. Currently, the police to population ratio for the Service is 1 to 415.5 based on a population for the Town of 6,232 and 15 uniform positions of the Service. The same ratio for the Detachment currently is 1 to 651 based on a population of 52,153 in Lanark County and 80 uniform positions of the Detachment.

42. Under the proposal, the ratio under the Integrated Detachment Proposal would be 1 to 627 based on a combined population of 58,385 and 93 uniform positions. If both the Chief and the Inspector transition to the OPP, the ratio would be 1 to 614.

F. Civilian Resources

43. The Service currently employs 11 civilian members. The Detachment currently has 9.5 civilians working.

44. Under the proposal, the following will be added to the Detachment on a FTE basis: 1.38 clerks, 2.5 Court Special Constables and 0.5 of a caretaker position.

G. Auxiliary Police Resources

45. The Service has one Auxiliary Police Officer. Under the proposal, the Town will have 19.

H. Other Police Resources

46. The Service does not have a dedicated Criminal Investigations Unit (“CIU”) but has two officers trained in the field. The Detachment has six Detective Constables trained in criminal investigations supervised by an East Region Detective Sergeant. Under the proposal, the Detachment will have a CIU and one of its Detective Constables will be dedicated to the Town. Its members will specialize in areas such as street crimes, youth crime and drug law enforcement.

47. Regarding court case management, the Service has 2.5 Special Constables assigned to court for security. The Detachment has three full-time officers responsible for court case management. There will be one Sergeant supervising three dedicated full-time officers who will provide court case management for the Detachment, and who will also supervise 2.5 Special Constables who will provide court security.

48. As for community services such as school liaison, the Service does not have a dedicated Community Services Officer, but does have officers who have received special training in the field. The Detachment has three dedicated full-time officers providing community services and media requests, two of whom are assigned to duties in the Town. Under the proposal, the Detachment will have four officers in community services, of whom one will be assigned to the Town. They will liaise with the community and schools, and will deliver current programmes the OPP is involved with. The Detachment will also establish a Community Policing Committee comprised of volunteers committed to improving community based policing within the Town.

49. Further, under the proposal, the Detachment will have an officer dedicated to Traffic Management assigned to Perth.

50. The proposal contains information that the OPP has specialized training in fields which the Service does not have, such as all-terrain vehicles, bike patrol, commercial vehicle inspection, DNA collection, emergency response, firearms inspector, marine operator, motorcycles, radar instructor and technical traffic collision investigation.

I. Shift Scheduling

51. Service Constables assigned to front line duty are on either an eight or 12 hour rotational shift, which are a mixture of day, afternoon or night shifts. Sergeants are on 10 hour shifts, days or evenings. The Chief and Inspector normally work Monday to Friday, from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. The Inspector schedules administrative staff.

52. The Detachment currently operates with four platoons (Constables and Sergeants) working on 12 hour rotational shifts. The Crime Unit members work on nine hour rotational shifts. The Detachment Commander, the Operations Staff Sergeant, Administrative Sergeants and civilian administrative support staff work essentially a regular eight hour shift Monday to Friday between approximately 7:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.

53. The proposal calls for 24 hour proactive and reactive OPP coverage for the Town. There will be rotating 12 hour shifts on a four platoon roster basis commencing at 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. On each Detachment platoon of 15-17 Constables and a Sergeant or Shift Supervisor, at least two Constables will be assigned to the Town. Crime Unit members will work a nine hour rotational shift. Senior Detachment officers will work on eight hour shifts. Administrative support staff will continue on their current schedule.

J. Patrol Zones

54. Currently, the Service divides and patrols the Town in seven zones. The Detachment is currently divided into six patrol zones for its total area.

55. Under the proposal, the Town will be a new and distinct patrol zone for the Detachment known as Zone 7.

K. Supervision

56. The Service currently has a Chief, an Inspector and two Sergeants providing supervision to 11 Constables, creating a Constable to Supervisor ratio of 2.75 to 1.

57. The Detachment has one Inspector who is the Detachment Commander, one Staff Sergeant who is the Operations Manager, and six Sergeants supervising 72 Constables. The Constable to Supervisor ratio is 9 to 1.

58. Under the proposal, the Detachment, based on there being one Inspector, one Staff Sergeant and eight Sergeants to 85 Constables, would have a supervisor ratio of 1 to 8.5. A full-time Contract Sergeant position will be established specifically for the Town. The Sergeant will be working out of the Detachment and providing front-line supervision to the Constables within the Perth zone. There will be four platoons, each having a minimum of two Constables assigned to the Town. Additionally, there will be operational supervision available from the on-duty Sergeants at the Provincial Communications Centre in Smith Falls, 24 hours per day, seven days per week.

L. Police Facilities

59. The Detachment’s facility at 75 Dufferin Street in Perth will continue to be the host facility for the Detachment under the proposal. Cells in the facility meet the adequacy standard. The Detachment has 16 guards available.

M. Police Facility – Hours of Operation

60. The current Service facility is open and accessible to the public 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

61. Under the proposal, the Detachment facility would be open to the public Monday to Friday, 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. For service outside these hours, a telephone located at the front of the Detachment facility would connect the caller immediately to the OPP’s Eastern Ontario Communications Centre in Smiths Falls.

N. Communications

62. A Provincial Communications Centre (“PCC”) is the incoming call centre and acts as the primary interface for both routine and emergency calls, including 9-1-1 calls. The OPP currently has five PCC’s, all operating in conformity with Ontario Regulation 3/99 enacted under the Act dealing with adequacy standards. As indicated above, the Eastern Ontario PCC is located in Smith Falls.

63. PCC’s are operated with redundancy in mind. If the Eastern Ontario PCC becomes inoperable, the Orillia PCC will instantly pick up communications for it. There are also failure mechanisms in place to correct an interrupted power supply. Communications in the field are based on a FleetNet Radio system with communication towers strategically placed throughout the area providing interconnected communications within talk groups.

64. Residents of Perth will not experience any changes with regard to the 9-1-1 system. The OPP already provides 9-1-1 services to the area served by the Perth Detachment.

65. The Smiths Falls PCC is well staffed with officers, administrators and operators.

O. Police Records

66. Upon disbandment of the Service, CPIC files and Niche RMS police management records relating to the Town will be transferred to the Smith Falls PCC and will be maintained there in accordance with the OPP’s records management system.

P. Additional Equipment

67. Under the proposal, the following changes to equipment would occur from that of the Service to the OPP Detachment dedicated to the Town:

a) marked police cars would increase from four to five;

b) the Service’s two unmarked cars would not be continued, nor would the Service’s two bicycles;

c) the Service’s breathalyser would not be used. However, roadside screening devices would be increased from two to five;

d) spike belts would increase from two to five;

e) radars would decline from four to three, but there would be one radar detection device;

f) tasers and arms would be the same number, but the type would change to the model used by OPP officers.

68. In addition to the above, the Detachment will be able to draw upon all of the specially trained officers, supervisory personnel and equipment within the OPP resources across the Province.

Consultant’s Report

69. At its meeting of April 17, 2012, Council enacted By-law 4276 being a report prepared by Chalmers and Associates on Police Service Delivery Review (the “Chalmers Report”). An overview of the Chalmers Report was provided to Council at a Special Committee of the Whole meeting on June 5, 2012. The full Chalmers Report was included as part of Exhibit 1.

70. Specifically, John Chalmers, the author of the Chalmers Report was asked to consider the two options for policing in the Town – the Service and the OPP Integrated Detachment – and indicate whether each would provide the Town with adequate and effective policing in accordance with its needs.

71. The conclusion after analysis, was that each option would do so, and either option would comply with the Act and regulations enacted thereunder.

Submissions at the Public Meeting

A. Mayor John Fenik

72. Mayor Fenik reviewed the process followed by Council in approving the OPP Integrated Detachment Model including opportunities for public input, the Chalmers Report and the multi-media approach to inform the public and to ask for their input.

73. He also indicated that severance arrangements are in place for all service members, except for Chief Capello.

74. The Mayor indicated that the final Council vote on the OPP Integrated Detachment Model was not unanimous, as one councillor voted against the proposal. But the Mayor and the other supporting councillors were satisfied that this Model would provide adequate and effective policing for the town. It was “right” from fiscal, governance, sustainability and deployment perspectives. It will not put anyone at risk. He felt assured knowing that the OPP had many resources to draw upon.

B. Chair Stephanie Gray

75. Ms. Gray is Chair of the Board. She indicated that the Board did not take a position on the Town’s policing proposal. She said the Board worked with the Town on the transition plan. Its Human Resources Sub-Committee negotiated with the Perth Police Association (the “Association”) and came to an agreement regarding severance on November 30, 2012. That agreement was ratified by the Association on December 2, 2012 and on December 4th by the Board. Council agreed to fund the requirement and the agreements for both uniform and civilian employees are in place.

76. While there have been discussions with the Chief there is no agreement with him. Ms. Gray asked the Panel to allow 30 to 60 days from its decision, if favourable, for the Board and the Chief to work out an arrangement failing which both parties have agreed that the matter would go to arbitration.

77. Ms. Gray indicated she agreed with the Chalmers Report. The Board did not raise any concerns regarding the adequacy and effectiveness of the OPP Integrated Detachment Model proposal. Everything was approved. Ms. Gray’s written submission which she read was made Exhibit 2.

C. Steve McElvray

78. Mr. McElvray is President of the Association. The Association felt that the process was well done. A transition team was formed and a number of meetings held. He said that the sworn and civilian members of the Association voted separately on the OPP Integrated Detachment Model, and each group were unanimously in favour of that Model. He also indicated that the Association has signed an agreement.

D. Chief Pat Capello

79. Mr. Capello is Chief of the Service. He stated that the OPP is a good organization, as is the Service. The Integrated Detachment option has been decided upon by Council. He stated it was a tough process. He and the Board are continuing their discussions on settling his severance issues.

E. Paul Legault

80. Mr. Legault is a Sergeant with the OPP. He provided a hard copy and a CD containing his slide presentation at the public meeting. These were made Exhibits 3a and 3b.

81. Sgt. Legault reviewed the various steps in the costing exercise undertaken with the Town. He also explained that the OPP has 119 policing contracts serving 150 municipalities. All but one are under an integrated model. In addition, the OPP polices 172 municipalities under a non-contract relationship.

82. Sgt. Legault’s presentation provided a lot of the information contained in the Decision under the heading “Proposal by the OPP”, above.

83. Regarding by-law enforcement in the Town, Sgt. Legault indicated the OPP will enforce municipal by-laws, except those dealing with building standards and animal control. He also indicated that when the OPP enters into a municipal contract, emphasis is placed on accountability to municipal council through the meetings of senior detachment officers with the local police service board and the community.

84. As part of Exhibit 3a, Sgt. Legault provided a line organization chart as to how the Detachment would look once the disbandment of the Service took place, if the Commission approved it.

F. Gerry Salisbury

85. Mr. Salisbury is an Inspector with the OPP, and Lanark County Detachment Commander. He gave an overview of the Detachment including the area served by it. He described transition plans and also the communications service for the Town after disbandment of the Service. He assured the Panel that the Detachment will continue to work closely with the Board and he has already met with them to discuss their role.

86. He advised that if the current Chief and Inspector of the Service transition to the OPP, the cost will be considered enhancements to the proposal and payable by the Town. Currently, the Chief has not agreed on a severance or transition position and the Inspector has agreed to terms of severance but has not yet exercised his options.

87. He confirmed that a training session will commence in March 2013 for current Service officers to transition to the OPP. He confirmed that there will be no difference in the number of officers policing the Town.

88. Insp. Salisbury indicated that Perth would always have officers looking after policing needs. If some are called away to deal with a situation elsewhere, arrangements would be made immediately for other officers to be called in to continue policing in the Town.

G. Lana March

89. Ms. March is a past Mayor of the Town and also a past Chair of the Board. She provided a written copy of her 19 page submission – Exhibit 4.

90. Her concerns started with her statement that the OPP “have stated and promised many times that adequate and effective policing to them means 92 percent of the time, or 19 times out of 20, the OPP will respond immediately to a call for service”. She indicated “the Commission must ensure this intended result will actually occur”.

91. Ms. March referred to a 2005 audit report from the Ontario Auditor General which raised concerns about the OPP and its adequacy and effectiveness. She also referred to past disbandment decisions of the Commission and how they may not apply to the present situation.

92. Ms. March referred to a number of points in the OPP Integrated Detachment Model proposal and indicated, in her view, the Commission should ensure their accuracy or that commitments would be kept or ensure the policing services will be provided in an accountable manner.

93. She expressed her concern that the Commission should, as an independent oversight body, verify and assure that the information upon which it bases its decision be as accurate as possible and not necessarily based solely upon information provided by the OPP and the consultant. Her concerns about the proposal also relate to possible service reductions in other areas of the Detachment area and/or delays in service to calls in Perth if officers from outside the Town are required to respond to calls in Perth.

94. She questioned how the Commission verifies the sustainability and maintenance of the service levels and the methodology of calculating the number of police officers required. She pointed out that Carleton Place was being policed under an integrated model with the Lanark Detachment and has more officers’ time assigned with a population of 10,000 than is proposed for Perth with lesser officers’ time and a higher cost.

H. John Chalmers

95. Mr. Chalmers is a lawyer and a former prosecutor who has developed expertise in the evaluation of the delivery of policing services in compliance with the legislated standard of adequacy and effectiveness. He is a resident of Perth and authored the Chalmers Report at the request of the Town. He examined all of the relevant information and criteria for both the current Service and the proposed Integrated Detachment Model from the perspective of the needs of both the Province and Perth. He confirmed the conclusion in the Chalmers Report, namely that each of the Service and the OPP Integrated Detachment Model proposal would provide adequate and effective policing for the Town based on its needs and which would be in accordance with Ontario Regulation 3/99 under the Act.

I. Carl Rubino

96. Dr. Rubino was a former Member of the Board. He indicated he addressed the Board at its meeting on October 11, 2012, expressing three concerns and leaving written notes with the Board. A copy of the Board minutes of October 11, 2012 with Dr. Rubino’s submissions attached was made Exhibit 5.

97. Dr. Rubino’s concerns were:

a) There should be a higher number of full-time OPP officers for policing in the Town than that proposed by the OPP;

b) The OPP contract should state that the Board will receive monthly reports from the OPP about their response time; and

c) If there are any changes to costing, the public should be informed.

J. Michael Wicklum

98. Mr. Wicklum is a business owner in Perth. In his comments, he raised three issues:

a) Conflict of Interest – He alleged a member of Council had a conflict because of current or past involvement with the OPP, and this had not been disclosed. He also stated that Mr. Chalmers had done work for the OPP in the past with the inference he was in a conflict situation;

b) Public Consultation – He indicated there was not enough public consultation before Council voted to proceed with the OPP Integrated Detachment Model proposal; and

c) Transparency – He stated the public had not been informed enough to determine if the policing to be provided would be effective.

99. He challenged the process by which the entire proposal was approved by Council and questioned why Council did not ask for a comparative costing from the Board.

100. He submitted that the short time between the public open meetings and the decision by Council prevented adequate discussion and debate effectively shutting down any opposition.

K. Stuart Howard

101. Mr. Howard is a former Director of Education of a Lanark County School Board. He commented on adequacy, especially in police dealing with youth and with the community. He expressed the view that there has developed a sensitive and strong social relationship between the police and the community. Bringing the OPP will strain that relationship and the Town may lose control of policing. He also was concerned that policing costs will increase if the OPP are employed.

Reasons for Decision

1. Adequate and Effective Police Services

102. Section 4(1) of the Act requires Perth to provide adequate and effective police services in accordance with its needs.

103. Section 4(2) of the Act sets out the minimum for adequate and effective services:

a) crime prevention;

b) law enforcement;

c) assistance to victims of crime;

d) public order maintenance; and

e) emergency response.

104. Section 4(3) of the Act requires a municipality, in providing adequate and effective police services, to have the infrastructure and administration necessary which includes vehicles, boats, equipment, communication devices, buildings and supplies.

105. However there is no definition of “adequate and effective police services”, so one has to look at past decisions of the Commission and certain sections of the Act in dealing with this subject.

106. Generally speaking, past decisions of the Commission on applications under s. 40 of the Act have been dealt with on a comparative basis, namely, how does the proposed policing model and structure compare to what has been historically in existence. If it is generally comparable and if past staffing levels were considered adequate, then the proposed or current level is presumed and considered to be “adequate and effective”.

107. The Service currently provides police services to the Town. The population of the Town is approximately 6,300. There are 15 uniformed officers including a Chief and an Inspector. Those numbers lead to a ratio of one officer for 420 residents. The dedicated strength in the Town under the OPP Integrated Detachment Model would be 15.18 on the assumption that the Chief and Inspector choose to transfer to the OPP. If either chooses not to so transfer, their positions would be filled by the OPP on a contract enhancement basis for a period of three years, at which time an assessment of the calls for service would be made to compare with provincial standards to determine the needs of the Detachment. Therefore the police to population ratio would remain quite similar. Both the current and proposed ratios for the Town are favourable when viewed in the national and provincial context. On the latter point, we note that past Commission decisions have approved ratios of officers to population significantly higher than proposed in this case.

108. For such numbers to be meaningful they must be reviewed in the context of officer workload.

109. The Service currently employs 11 civilian members. A large proportion of civilians would lose their jobs, because the Detachment currently employs people in the same job function. Also communicators with the Service would not be needed in that communications for the Detachment will be handled by the Smith Falls PCC.

110. Based on a three year average, the Service has handled 394.6 Criminal Code offences with its 15 uniform officers. In the past four years, the Detachment has handled an average of 2,870.6 Criminal Code offences with its complement of 80 uniform officers. The Service’s ratio is 1 to 26.3. The Detachment’s ratio is 1 to 35.8. Combining the two, there would be an annual average of 3,265.2 Criminal Code offences handled by 95 uniform officers, or a ratio of 1 to 34.4.

111. The average officer to Criminal Code incident over the last 10 years in Canada (2001 to 2010) has ranged from 41.3 to 30.3 (Statistics Canada, “Police Resources in Canada – 2011”, Catalogue no. 85-225-X). Therefore, the Integrated Detachment average ratio of 1 to 34.4 would be manageable and within the national average.

112. There are also clear benefits to the Town from increases in volunteer auxiliary officers (one now for the Service, to 19 for the Detachment); police officers with specialized training, increased numbers and additional equipment in the Detachment, and the availability of OPP officers with specialized training in a large number of fields.

113. The proposed communications arrangement is that calls for service will be handled by the Smith Falls PCC. It has redundancy features to ensure that calls are answered and responded to. Mapping of the Town will be done so that communicators in the PCC will know the street layout and addresses in the Town.

114. The OPP will create a new zone for the Town, providing dedicated Constables to it and also supervisory personnel.

115. The Detachment will continue to use its building at 75 Dufferin Street in Perth as the host building for the Detachment. Although the building will not be open 24 hours, seven days a week, it will be open during regular business hours. When the building is not open, members of the public wishing to contact the police will be able to do so by using a telephone at the front of the building which will connect them immediately to the Smith Falls PCC who will then determine the appropriate response.

116. Having reviewed the Proposal filed as part of Exhibit 1 and considered the oral and written submissions received, the Panel has concluded that the proposed staffing levels, consolidation of management and administrative functions, the introduction of significantly more auxiliary officers, the access to the broad range of OPP support services and equipment will provide a policing service at a level at least equivalent to if not exceeding the current level of service to all of the Town’s residents whether permanent, seasonal or otherwise.

117. It will allow for an acceptable officer to citizen ratio, officer to crime ratio and supervisor to officer ratio well within current national and provincial standards.

118. As raised in the written and oral submissions, we would like to address the issue of the potential loss of the expertise, goodwill and social engagement between the current staff of the Service and the citizens of Perth that may occur if policing is transferred to the OPP. We note that the proposal provides for the offering of employment to all current officers of the Service and no doubt a majority, if hired, will likely initially elect to remain or be placed by the OPP in the community which will continue to benefit from their knowledge and expertise regarding the Town and its residents.

119. On a second issue, we note the concern expressed about the possible use of officers assigned to Perth being required in other areas of the Detachment and the reverse possibility of Detachment officers from outside having to answer calls for service in Perth. While this may occur from time to time, we note that the proposal clearly commits the OPP to assign the specified numbers of uniform staff to dedicated services within the Town and to meet the response times as stated in the proposal.

120. With regard to the proposed policing facilities, communications and equipment, the officers will continue to deploy from the current Detachment facility at 75 Dufferin Street, Perth, a modern and efficient building to be used as the main facility. The Town will determine the future of the existing Service facility at 1881 Rogers Road.

121. Concerns were expressed that the Detachment facility will only be open to the public during normal business hours. However, we are satisfied that the arrangements to provide a telephone service at the building and the fact that dispatch services will be transferred to Smith Falls PCC will provide effective communications access to policing services.

122. Such concerns have been expressed in other situations, namely, that dispatchers may not be familiar with the municipality. The proposal calls for training of OPP dispatch staff about all features of the municipality.

123. In City of Orillia (17 January 1996, O.C.C.P.S.) the Commission stated:

Concern was expressed about having the dispatching function operate from Barrie. It must be noted that the dispatching function in many parts of Ontario is not located in the community that it directly serves. This is true of both the Ontario Provincial Police and a number of municipal police services. To our mind the measure of “adequacy” is not where such a service is based, but how well it is organized and managed. This is certainly something in which the Ontario Provincial Police has expertise.

124. We agree with that statement.

125. The jurisdiction of the Commission has been outlined at the beginning of this decision. While challenges have been expressed to the process involved in arriving at the approval of the municipal council to seek the alternative policing services and also the costs of providing such services, those issues are not within the mandate of the Commission in the application of s. 40 of the Act and O.Reg. 3/99.

126. Likewise, we have heard submissions that the changes to the policing in Perth will have a potentially negative impact on the policing of the remainder of the areas serviced by the Lanark County Detachment. The evidence presented to this Commission indicates that the current levels of service to those areas will not change.

127. Therefore, the Panel has concluded that the OPP Integrated Detachment proposal which the Council has voted to accept will enable the Town to provide adequate and effective police services in accordance with the needs of the Town.

2. Termination Arrangements

128. The Panel was advised at the public meeting on December 5, 2012 that with the exception of the Chief, all members of the Service – uniform and civilian – had agreed to severance arrangements, and that Council has agreed to fund the financial requirements under those arrangements. Both the Association and the municipality have signed appropriate agreements.

129. Ms. Gray, the Chair of the Board, asked the Panel for a 30-60 day period from its Decision to make arrangements with the Chief, failing which both the Chief and the Board have agreed that the determination of termination arrangements would go to arbitration.

130. Ms. Gray also advised the Panel that the Inspector, similar to the Chief, has not yet decided whether or not he wishes to transfer to the OPP. Regardless of his decision, severance arrangements have been agreed to in either case.

131. Therefore, except for arrangements with the Chief, the second test has been met.

Comments on Submissions

132. Two submissions made at the public meeting require the Panel to make comments about them.

133. Several times Ms. Lana March indicated that the Commission should “ensure” or in effect “guarantee” that something would or would not happen if the OPP Integrated Detachment Model proposal would be approved. The Commission does not “ensure” or “guarantee” anything in making its decision in connection with a s. 40 application. Nor does the Commission have the staff or the budget to independently verify the figures and calculations used in the proposal, as Ms. March also suggested we do regarding the Application.

134. There will be an agreement between Perth Council and the Solicitor General. The terms of that agreement and Board oversight, both as set out in s.10 of the Act, will create obligations and responsibilities of policing in Perth and how the same will be established and monitored.

135. Second, Mr. Michael Wicklum in his submissions raised allegations of conflict of interest. It is not the responsibility of the Commission in s. 40 applications to deal with those. Rather there are other means and forums in which such allegations can be pursued.

Decision and Order

136. The Commission consents to the Town’s request under s. 40 of the Act to abolish the Service to permit policing under contract with the OPP based on the Integrated Detachment Model proposal. Subject to the following condition, the Commission consents to the termination of all current members – uniform and civilian – of the Service.

137. The above consent is subject to the condition that the Board and the Chief shall have a maximum of 60 days from the date of this Decision to agree on a severance arrangement for the Chief. If no agreement is reached, the Commission orders that the arrangement shall forthwith proceed to arbitration.

138. A copy of the agreement between the Town and the Government of Ontario implementing the Integrated Detachment Model is to be filed with the Commission forthwith upon its signing.

DATED AT TORONTO, THIS 17th DAY OF JANUARY, 2013.

David C. Gavsie Roy Conacher Q.C.

Chair, OCPC Member, OCPC

APPENDIX A

Contents

Background .. ........... ........................................................ ...................... ........ ........... ....................... 6

Decision to Request a Costing from the Ontario Provincial Police............................................ 6

Decision to Request a Costing from the Ontario Provincial Police 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ... ...... 00.00 .....00 00 00. 6

Meeting with the Town January 13, 2012 ............................................ 00 ........... ......................... 7

Meeting with the PSB February 09, 2012 ................................................................................... 7

Meeting with Town Council February 21, 2012......................................................................... 8

Committee of the Whole Meeting with Council on March 6, 2012 ........................................... 8

PSB meeting March 08, 2012 ..................................................................................... ................ 8

Meeting with the Town March 16, 2012 .................................................................................... 8

Town Council meeting March 20, 2012 ..................................................................................... 8

Site Visit and Building Inspection March 21, 2012.................................................................... 9

PSB meeting April12, 2012 ....................................................................................................... 9

Town Council meeting April 17, 2012 ....................................................................................... 9

Proposal for the Provision of Policing Services of the Town ..................................................... 9

Meeting of May 18, 2012............................................................................................ ................ 9

Committee of the Whole Meeting with Town Council June 5, 2012 ........................ ............... 10

Public Consultation June 7, 2012.............................................................................................. 10

Committee of the Whole meeting June 12, 2012...................................................................... 10

Town Council meeting June 26, 2012 - vote to accept OPP Proposal..................................... 11

Request to the OCPC for approval to disband the Perth Police Service................................... 11

Basis for Proposal ........................................................................................... ................ ........... ... 12

Factors Considered in the Development of an OPP Costing Proposal ..................................... 12

1 . Workload Analysis ................ ..................................................................................... 12

2. Deployment Issues.................. .......... .......................................................................... 13

3. Community ty Consultation and Needs .................................................................... .......... 13

4. Calls for Service Analysis- Town of Perth ...................................................................... 1 3

History ofPerth............................................................... . ................................ ............................ . 14

Policing the Town of Perth .................................................. ................................... ...................... 1 5

Police Resources - Current Structure................................................. ....................................... 15

Proposed Structure .................................................................................................................... 15

Analysis of Police to Population Ratio ..................................................................................... 17

Current ............ ...................................................................................................................... 1 7

Proposed ............. .................................................... .............. ......................................... . ....... 1 7

3

Civilian Resources .................................................................................................................... 18

Current .................................................................................................................................. 18

Proposed...............................................................................................:································ 18

Auxiliary Police Resources....................................................................................................... 18

Current .................................................................................................................................. 18

Proposed................................................................................................................................ 18

Other Police Resources ............................................................................................................. 18

Criminal Investigations Unit..................................................................................................... 18

Current .................................................................................................................................. 18

Proposed................................................................................................................................ 19

Court Case Management........................................................................................................... 19

Current .................................................................................................................................. 19

Proposed.................................................................................................................................... 19

Community Services................................................................................................................. 19

Current .................................................................................................................................. 19

Proposed................................................................................................................................ 20

Traffic Management.................................................................................................................. 20

Proposed................................................................................................................................ 20

Other Specialized Training ....................................................................................................... 21

Shift Scheduling........................................................................................................................ 22

Current .................................................................................................................................. 22

Proposed................................................................................................................................ 22

Patrol Zones .............................................................................................................................. 23

Current .................................................................................................................................. 23

Proposed................................................................................................................................ 23

Supervision ............................................................................................................................... 23

Current .................................................................................................................................. 23

Proposed................................................................................................................................ 23

Police Facilities.........................................................................................................,............... 24

Current .................................................................................................................................. 24

Proposed................................................................................................................................ 24

Police Facility Hours of Operation ........................................................................................... 24

Current .................................................................................................................................. 24

Proposed................................................................................................................................ 24

4

Additional Equipment............................................................................................................... 25

Secure Facilities (Lockups)....................................................................................................... 26

Court ......................................................................................................................................... 26

Communications ....................................................................................................................... 26

Transition Planning ................................................................................................................... 28

Other Items................................................................................................................................ 28

Strategic/Business Planning ............................................................... ................................... 28

Human Resources ................................................................................................................. 28

Police Records .......................................................................................................................... 29

Other Detachment Policing Responsibilities ............................................................................ 29

Municipal Responsibilities.................................................................................................... 29

Analysis of Criminal Offences to Officer................................................................................. 29

Current .................................................................................................................................. 29

Proposed................................................................................................................................ 30

Proposed Policing Structure Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Resources ...................................... 30

Provincial Responsibilities........................................................................................................ 31

Provincial Highways ............................................................................................................. 31

Provincial Waterways ........................................................................................................... 31

Provincial Parks .................................................................................................................... 31

Municipal Summary.............................................................................................................. 32

Appendix "A"............................................................................................................................... 36

5