TO THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OTTAWA
LE 26-28 FÉVRIER 2007
The POLICE SERVICES BOARD met on 22 JANUARY, 7, 14 and
19 FEBRUARY 2007 and
submits
the item contained in this Report for the information and/or approval of
Council at its meeting of 26-28
FEBRUARY 2007.
La COMMISSION
DE SERVICES POLICIERS s’est réuni le 22
janvier, 7, 14 and 19 FÉVRIER 2007 et soumet
l’article du présent rapport au Conseil pour information et/ou approbation lors
de sa réunion du 26-28 FÉVRIER 2007.
Present
/ Présences :
22 Jan. 07 7
Feb. 07 14 Feb.
07 19 Feb. 07
Chair /
président: H. Jensen H. Jensen H. Jensen H. Jensen
Vice Chair /
vice-président : M. McRae M. McRae M. McRae M. McRae
Members /
Membres : D. Doran D. Doran D. Doran D. Doran
D. Guilmet-Harris D. Guilmet-Harris D.
Guilmet-Harris
B. Monette B. Monette B. Monette B.
Monette
D. Morin D. Morin
L.
O’Brien L. O’Brien L. O’Brien L.
O’Brien
INDEX |
|||
NO./NO |
ITEM |
PAGE |
ARTICLE |
|
Police Services Board |
|
Commission de Services
Policiers |
1. |
2007 OPERATING AND
CAPITAL BUDGET ACS2007-CCS-PSB-0002 |
01 |
BUDGETS
D’IMMOBILISATIONS ET DE FONCTIONNEMENT 2007 ACS2007-CCS-PSB-0002 |
1.
2007 OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET BUDGETS
D’IMMOBILISATIONS ET DE FONCTIONNEMENT 2007 |
BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS
That Council approve:
1.
A
2007 Operating and Capital Budget with a 1.7% inflationary increase as set out
in the 2007 Ottawa Police Service Budget Book dated 7 February 2007.
2.
The
Board’s request that Ottawa City Council review the various options available
to it with respect to habitual problem landlords, in light of the new, broader
powers found in Bill 130 (eg. including both the New Westminster, B.C. model
and other models in Manitoba and Nova Scotia) as well as identifying the
necessity for requesting additional statutory authority from the Province of
Ontario.
RECOMMANDATION DE LA COMMISSION
Que le Conseil approuve :
1.
Le budget de fonctionnement et d’immobilisations de
2007 proposant une hausse inflationniste de 1,7 % , tel qu’il est exposé dans
le document budgétaire de 2007 du Service de police en date du 7 février 2007.
2.
La demande de la Commission quant à l’examen par le
Conseil municipal des diverses options à sa disposition en ce qui a trait aux
propriétaires difficiles habituels en raison des nouveaux pouvoirs plus larges
établis dans le projet de loi 130 (y compris, par exemple, le modèle de New
Westminster, Colombie-Britannique, et d’autres modèles au Manitoba et en
Nouvelle-Écosse) ainsi que la nécessité de demander d’autres pouvoirs légaux de
la province de l’Ontario.
DOCUMENTATION
1. Ottawa Police Service Budget
Book dated 7 February 2007 previously distributed.
2. Presentation
from 7 February 2007 attached at Annex A.
3. Supplemental
report dated 14 February 2007 and accompanying presentation attached at Annex
B.
4. Presentation
from 19 February 2007 attached at Annex C.
5. Extract of Draft Minutes, 22 January, 7 February, 14
February and 19 February 2007 are attached.
ANNEX A
Slide 1 |
|
|
|
Slide 2 |
|
Slide 3 |
|
|
|
Slide 4 |
|
Slide 5 |
|
|
|
Slide 6 |
|
Slide 7 |
|
|
|
Slide 8 |
|
Slide 9 |
|
|
|
Slide 10 |
|
Slide 11 |
|
|
|
Slide 12 |
|
Slide 13 |
|
|
|
Slide 14 |
|
Slide 15 |
|
|
|
Slide 16 |
|
Slide 17 |
|
|
|
Slide 18 |
|
Slide 19 |
|
|
|
Slide 20 |
|
Slide 21 |
|
|
|
Slide 22 |
|
Slide 23 |
|
|
|
Slide 24 |
|
Slide 25 |
|
|
|
Slide 26 |
|
Slide 27 |
|
|
|
Slide 28 |
|
Slide 29 |
|
|
|
Slide 30 |
|
Slide 31 |
|
|
|
Slide 32 |
|
Slide 33 |
|
|
|
Slide 34 |
|
Slide 35 |
|
|
|
Slide 36 |
|
Slide 37 |
|
|
|
Slide 38 |
|
Slide 39 |
|
|
|
Slide 40 |
|
Slide 41 |
|
|
|
Slide 42 |
|
Slide 43 |
|
ANNEX B
|
REPORT RAPPORT |
DATE: |
February
14, 2007 |
TO: |
Chair
and Members of the Ottawa Police Services Board |
FROM: |
Director
General, Ottawa Police Service |
SUBJECT: |
2007 DRAFT OPERATING AND CAPITAL
BUDGETS – SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION |
RECOMMENDATION
On 7 February 2007 staff presented the
Ottawa Police Services Board with the Draft 2007 Operating and Capital Budget
report, and an associated presentation.
The draft budget report followed the directions set by the Board and was
built to achieve an inflationary 1.7% increase in the Ottawa Police tax rate,
and to provide a 0% tax increase. Both
options were formulated on the basis of sustainability. At that meeting, the Board voted not to
receive the report and the draft budget.
One concern articulated by some members
of the Board was that the variance analysis of the 2007 estimates was against
the 2006 Budget and the previously approved Long Range Financial Plan. The operating budget analysis was not
developed against the preliminary 2006 year-end position of the police service.
Some members of the Board were also
dissatisfied with the option presented to achieve a 0% increase in the 2007
Ottawa Police tax rate because it included staff cuts. That option is comprised of the elimination
of all service growth in 2007 and a requirement for staffing and service
reductions totalling $2.2 million. At that time, that option was considered the
only available option derived from sustainable sources for achievement of the
0% tax increase, while not recommended by police management.
This report provides supplemental
information intended to address the concerns expressed at the Ottawa Police
Services Board meeting on 7 February 2007.
DISCUSSION
2006
Preliminary Year End Position
As was reported to the Board on 7 February 2007, the Ottawa Police Service is currently projecting an operating surplus of $431,000 for 2006. These results are still subject to external audit. Following completion of the audit, an upcoming Disposition of Surplus report to the Board will request that City Council set aside these funds for the negotiated one-time retroactivity settlement of a job evaluation review that will be completed in 2007.
With the approval of the OPS Long Range Financial Plan (LRFP) by the Board and by City Council on 18 December 2006, the debt-servicing budget of the Ottawa Police has been transferred from the City to the Ottawa Police, effective in 2007. In 2006, this budget base of $5.238 million achieved a surplus position of $606,000. While the transfer of funds is effective in 2007, for comparative purposes the 2006 base has been restated to be included in the Resource Requirement pages of the proposed budget documentation.
Appendix A is an update to the Ottawa Police Service Resource Requirements page included on page 22 of the previously provided document. The Appendix has been updated to include the preliminary 2006 actual results. The net surplus position of $1.037 million is comprised of the 2006 operations surplus of $431,000 and the restated debt-servicing surplus of $606,000.
Further surpluses have been achieved in the accounts resident on the City of Ottawa books for purposes of calculating the Ottawa Police tax rate. These accounts include an allocation of expenditures for remissions on taxes, and vacancy and charitable tax rebates, and taxation revenues. These taxation instruments that fund the annual operations of the Ottawa Police, including an allocation of payments in lieu of taxes, supplementary taxation revenue, and the property taxation levy also finished 2006 in a surplus position.
Table 1: Ottawa Police Tax Rate 2006 ($ millions)
Expenditure
/ Revenue |
2006 Budget |
2006 Actual |
Surplus / (Deficit) |
|
|
|
|
OPS
Net Operations |
176.0 |
175.6 |
0.4 |
|
|
|
|
City
of Ottawa Books |
|
|
|
Debt
Servicing |
5.3 |
4.7 |
0.6 |
Remissions
and Rebates |
4.5 |
3.9 |
0.6 |
Taxation
Revenue |
(185.8) |
(186.8) |
1.0 |
City
Total |
(176.0) |
(178.2) |
2.2 |
|
|
|
|
Total
OPS Tax Rate |
0.0 |
(2.6) |
2.6 |
The Ottawa Police taxation accounts resident with the City of Ottawa are strictly for funding purposes, and are a requirement of the Ottawa Police tax rate first implemented for the 2005 tax year. The Ottawa Police Services Board, and Ottawa Police staff for that matter, have no input or control over the usage of these accounts or the resulting surplus or deficit in any given year. For 2005 year-end, the disposition of a similar $3.3 million ``below the line`` surplus was to the City of Ottawa tax stabilization reserve, while the surplus from operations of the police service of $360,000 was allocated to the Ottawa Police Reserve Fund. As reported in a memo to City Council on 12 February 2007, the equivalent 2006 surplus from police operations of $431,000 will be requested for contribution to the Ottawa Police Reserve Fund. That disposition will require a motion from the Board, and subsequent approval by City Council.
Table 2 is a revised version of Table 4 included on page VII of the 7 February 2007 document. In this case, the 2007 Budget increase/decrease variance is against 2006 actual spending, rather than 2006 budget. The net increase is $6.6 million as opposed to the $5.6 million variance from 2007 budget to 2006 budget.
Table 2 2007
Draft Operating Budget As Compared to 2006 Actual ($ Millions) |
||||
|
2006 Actual* |
Draft 2007 Budget |
Increase/ (Decrease) |
% Increase/ (Decrease) |
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
Operating Budget ** |
$195.0
|
$201.4
|
$6.4 |
3.3%
|
Recoveries |
(3.1) |
(2.8) |
0.3 |
|
Revenue |
(11.6) |
(11.7) |
(0.1) |
|
Subtotal Revenues and Recoveries |
$(14.7) |
$(14.5) |
$0.2 |
6.1% |
Net Increase |
$180.3 |
$186.9 |
$6.6 |
3.7% |
|
||||
* Preliminary results, subject to audit |
||||
** Gross operations restated in 2006 to
include debt servicing costs |
Over 83% of the 2007 Draft budget is to provide for the costs of the Ottawa Police staff complement. For comparative purposes, the 2007 Budget increase over 2006 actual results is further delineated between net compensation costs and program and fiscal costs in Table 3.
Table 3: 2007 Draft
Operating Budget as Compared to 2006 Actual
Compensation versus Non-Compensation
($000)
Category
of Expenditure |
2006 Actual |
2007 Budget |
Increase / (Decrease) |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
Compensation |
159.2 |
167.5 |
8.3 |
|
Compensation Revenues |
(12.1) |
(11.6) |
0.5 |
|
|
147.1 |
155.9 |
8.8 |
6.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
Program
Operations & Fiscal |
35.8 |
33.9 |
(1.9) |
|
Other
Revenue |
(2.6) |
(2.9) |
(0.3) |
|
|
33.2 |
31.0 |
(2.2) |
-6.6% |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
180.3 |
186.9 |
6.6 |
3.7% |
The incremental compensation requirement
is to provide for the estimated 2007 collective agreement provision for
existing staff, increments for staff moving through their salary grid, the full
year impact of positions added in 2006, and base provisions for pending job
evaluation settlement, responsibility pay, and retiree benefits. These increases are partially offset in
2007 by an increased vacancy allowance of $1.0 million, and the court time
efficiency of $300,000.
Every year, gross compensation costs are
partially offset by compensation driven revenue sources. These include provincial revenue from the
Safer Communities 1,000 Officer Program (SCOOP), secondment revenue for
officers on special projects for other agencies, paid duty recoveries, 911
service recoveries, and recoveries for service to the Ottawa Macdonald-Cartier
International Airport.
The incremental program operations and
fiscal reduction is primarily attributable to the 2007 reduction in debt
servicing costs and materials and supplies, offset by increases in rents,
leases, insurance and utility costs.
Other revenues include the False Alarm Reduction Program fees and police
records checks.
Options to Achieve 0% Tax
Increase in 2007
The draft budget as prepared
by staff was crafted to achieve an inflationary 1.7% tax increase derived from
sustainable funding sources. To achieve
a 0% tax increase for 2007, further solutions of $2.665 million must be
identified. Staff will provide two
additional options to achieve this reduction.
There are two common elements in these options.
Under the 1.7% inflationary tax increase
the SGI 2013 growth plan for sworn officers is formulated around 20 sworn
officers with a start date of September 2007. Requesting 15 new sworn officer
positions and civilianizing 5 existing sworn officer positions would actually
fulfill the plan. The 5 freed-up sworn positions would be transferred to the
SGI plan and allocated to meet growth needs. As a result 5 new civilian positions are also required to
accomplish the plan.
This complement growth will be fully
eliminated for 2007. In light of
continued City growth, this will place additional demands on the existing
service, and Ottawa will continue to lose ground in the Police per Capita
ratio.
As a result, the full-year impact of the
2007 hiring can be removed from the 2008 forecast. This totals $1.3 million of base compensation, increments, and
capital needs.
As
per the Board’s direction, staff reviewed in detail the sources of the 2006
operational surplus of $431,000, and secondment revenues from other agencies
generated a surplus against budget in 2006.
This surplus is considered sustainable, and therefore will be adjusted
in the 2007 estimates.
These common elements total $0.7 million,
leaving $1.965 million of solutions to be identified. Staff provide two options
for consideration by the Board:
0% Tax Increase Option 2 - Sustainable
Option
Contribution from City Tax Stabilization
Reserve ($1.965 million)
Usage of one-time funding for ongoing
base programs requires cuts in the following year, or an inflated tax
increase. Police management has
reviewed the 2007 budget submission, and identified $700,000 of project
expenses to be deemed one-time in 2007, and thereby cut in 2008.
Table 4: 2007
Project Expenses to be cut in 2008 ($000)
Executive
Search |
75 |
Human
Resources Initiatives |
290 |
Full
Year Revenue Increases |
150 |
Facility
Improvements |
70 |
Fixed
Assets |
115 |
Total
2008 Cuts |
700 |
|
|
2007 |
2008 |
Forecast
as Tabled |
|
|
|
|
Net
Increase |
2.66 |
13.55 |
|
Taxation
percentage impact |
1.7% |
8.5% |
Base
Reductions |
|
|
|
|
Elimination
of Year 2 of SGI 2013 |
(0.50) |
(1.30) |
|
Surplus Analysis: Secondment Revenue |
(0.20) |
|
One
Time Solutions |
|
|
|
|
City
Tax Rate Stabilization Reserve |
(2.00) |
2.00 |
2008
Impact |
|
|
|
|
2008 Budget Cuts |
|
(0.70) |
Net Incremental Impact |
|
|
|
|
Net
Increase / (Decrease) |
(2.66) |
0.04 |
|
Taxation
percentage impact |
-1.7% |
0.0% |
|
|
|
|
Updated
Tax Increase % |
0.0% |
8.5% |
0% Tax Increase Option 3 – Not Sustainable
Part 1: Full Liquidation of OPS Reserve
Fund Balance ($1.36 million)
The OPS General Capital
Reserve fund has a current balance of $1.36 million. This balance is attributable to two contributions made in the
past year:
1)
As
approved in the 2006 Budget, $1.0 million was contributed to plan for the
imminent replacement of the Service’s portable radio handsets; and,
2)
By
Board and Council motion, a 2005 operating surplus of $360,000 was retained
within the Ottawa Police.
Within the inflationary increase option
as presented, this current Reserve Fund balance would have been fully utilized
for the capital program by end of 2008.
Table 17 of the previously distributed budget documentation presents
that continuity schedule for the reserve fund. The updated continuity is provided in Table 6, with revisions
shaded:
Table 6:
OPS Capital Reserve Fund Continuity Updated for Liquidation of Opening
Balance ($000)
|
2007 |
2008 |
2009 |
2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Opening
Balance |
0 |
79 |
67 |
49 |
Sources |
|
|
|
|
Tax
Base Contribution |
5,579 |
9,679 |
13,579 |
14,279 |
Project
Closures |
312 |
|
|
|
Interest
Earnings |
0 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
Total
Sources |
5,891 |
9,683 |
13,582 |
14,281 |
|
|
|
|
|
Uses |
|
|
|
|
Project
Funding |
5,812 |
9,695 |
13,600 |
12,950 |
Ending
Balance |
79 |
67 |
49 |
1,381 |
With the liquidation of the current
balance, the 2008 planned contribution to capital (pay-as-you-go) must increase
by $1.5 million to maintain the forecast capital program.
Part 2: Request for City funding
equivalent to Police Related 2006 surplus ($1.037 million)
As noted above in Table 1, the 2006
surplus from direct police operations and debt-servicing costs is $1.037
million. By precedent set with the
2005 surplus and as confirmed by City staff in a memorandum to City Council on
12 February 2007, the $431,000 operating surplus will be retained by the Ottawa
Police. These funds are recommended for
retention to address the one-time costs forecast in 2007 with the settlement of
a job evaluation program, and therefore are not recommend as a solution for
2007 taxation.
With the transfer of the OPS debt
servicing budget from the City’s books to the OPS books in 2007, both the Board
and City Council have approved policy to shift the budgeting for these funds to
the Ottawa Police. By requesting the
2006 surplus of $606,000 be allocated to the OPS, the Board would be requesting
that City Council advance the impact of the new policy by one fiscal year.
The ‘0% Tax Increase Option 3’ impact on
the 2007 inflationary budget and the 2008 forecast are summarized in Table
7.
Table 7: Summary of 0% Tax Increase Option 3 ($ millions)
|
|
2007 |
2008 |
Forecast
as Tabled |
|
|
|
|
Net
Increase |
2.66 |
13.55 |
|
Taxation
percentage impact |
1.7% |
8.5% |
Base
Reductions |
|
|
|
|
Elimination
of Year 2 of SGI 2013 |
(0.50) |
(1.30) |
|
Surplus Analysis: Secondment Revenue |
(0.20) |
|
One
Time Solutions |
|
|
|
|
Liquidation
of OPS Reserve Fund |
(1.36) |
1.36 |
|
2006
OPS Debt Servicing Surplus |
(0.60) |
0.60 |
2008
Impact |
|
|
|
|
Replenishment
of Capital Funding |
|
1.50 |
|
2008
Budget Cuts |
|
(0.70) |
Net
Incremental Impact |
|
|
|
|
Net
Increase / (Decrease) |
(2.66) |
1.46 |
|
Taxation
percentage impact |
-1.7% |
1.0% |
|
|
|
|
Updated
Tax Increase % |
0.0% |
9.5% |
As the 2008 tax increase forecast is increased by 1.0% to 9.5% resulting from the need to replenish the funding for the capital program, this option is not considered sustainable.
The 2006 Draft Estimates and this
supplemental information will be presented to the OPS Board on 14 February
2007.
The short time period between the
original tabling meeting and the submission of supplemental information did not
allow for any consultation and the report was developed entirely through staff
input.
Public meetings for the City Budget as a
whole, including the Police budget, are underway the week of 12 to 16 February
2007. Police staff have been invited to
attend those meetings. Public
delegations and Board consideration and approval of the budget are scheduled
for a special Board meeting on 19 February 2007.
This timetable is consistent with the City budget review and approval process. City of Ottawa budget estimates were tabled on 7 February 2007 and will be formally approved by Council Committee of the Whole from 23 to 28 February 2007.
As presented in this report.
The Ottawa Police Service is presenting a
$201.4 million gross operating budget and a $15.8 million capital budget to
meet the strategic and operational requirements of the police service.
The 2007 Budget has been developed with
the direction and guidance provided by the Board. It achieves the Board direction for 2007 for an inflationary tax
increase derived solely from sustainable sources. Inflationary increases have been mitigated to the maximum degree
acceptable, budget efficiencies of over $1 million have been identified, growth
in staffing has been reduced, and capital formation costs have been reduced
$2.3 million from 2006 levels.
Staff have used a series of
principles to achieve this reduction, but it is not without financial and
operational risk.
Additional options for a 0% police tax rate increase have also been prepared in accordance with Board direction. One option meets all the tests of sustainability.
Upon approval by the Board on 19 February
2007 and City Council at their meetings between 23 to 28 February 2007, staff
will report to the Board each quarter on the financial operations of the
Service and on any financial issues that may require resolution at that time.
Geoff Simpson
Director of Financial Services and
Materiel Management
Debra Frazer
Director General
Vince Bevan
Chief of Police
Appendix A - Ottawa Police Service
Resource Requirements, including 2006 Actual Results
Slide 1 |
|
|
|
Slide 2 |
|
Slide 3 |
|
|
|
Slide 4 |
|
Slide 5 |
|
|
|
Slide 6 |
|
Slide 7 |
|
|
|
Slide 8 |
|
Slide 9 |
|
|
|
Slide 10 |
|
Slide 11 |
|
|
|
Slide 12 |
|
Slide 13 |
|
|
|
Slide 14 |
|
ANNEX C
Slide 1 |
|
|
|
Slide 2 |
|
Slide 3 |
|
|
|
Slide 4 |
|
Slide 5 |
|
|
|
Slide 6 |
|
Slide 7 |
|
|
|
Slide 8 |
|
Slide 9 |
|
|
|
Slide 10 |
|
Slide 11 |
|
|
|
Slide 12 |
|
Slide 13 |
|
|
|
Slide 14 |
|
Slide 15 |
|
|
|
Slide 16 |
|
9. 2007 BUDGET DIRECTIONS
Earlier in the day the following motion was distributed to Board members containing an amended 2007 Budget Direction, as a result of City Council passing budget directions on 15 January 2007 that included a request to the Police Services Board to adopt the same principles as the City:
WHEREAS on December 18, 2006 the Ottawa Police Services Board
adopted the 2007 Budget Direction report and directed staff to use their best
efforts to achieve no increase in taxation;
AND WHEREAS on January 15,
2007, City Council approved the City-wide 2007 Budget Directions report,
amended to clarify that the draft budget options to be tabled on
7 February 2007 be derived solely from sustainable sources that uphold the
Long Range Financial Plan principles and do not adversely impact the City’s
credit rating;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Ottawa Police Services Board be
guided by this principle and amend its Budget Direction to require that staff
use their best efforts to table a 2007 Draft Operating Budget that achieves no
increase in taxation, and that is derived solely from sustainable sources which
uphold the Long Range Financial Plan principles and do not adversely impact the
City’s credit rating.
As the item had not been distributed with the Agenda, the Board was advised it would be necessary to waive the Rules of Procedure to consider the matter.
Vice Chair McRae requested a legal opinion regarding the need to waive the Rules of Procedure. Mr. R. O’Connor, Director, Legal Services referred to the Board’s Procedural By-Law, Section 2 (3), which states that at its own discretion the Board can waive the rules, receive the item and deal with it accordingly.
Moved by H. Jensen
That the Ottawa Police Services Board agree to waive the Rules of
Procedure in accordance with sections 2(3) and 10(3) of its Procedural By-law,
in order to consider additional Item 9 – 2007 Budget Directions.
CARRIED
YEAS: D. Doran, D. Guilmet-Harris, H. Jensen, D. Morin, L. O’Brien
NAYS: M. McRae, B. Monette
Mayor O’Brien gave notice that he had information pertaining to negotiations and requested that the discussion be moved in camera. Mr. O’Connor, Board Solicitor, referenced Section 28 of the Board’s Procedural By-Law and confirmed that the reasons cited by the Mayor were sufficient to move this item in camera at the appropriate time.
When asked by the Chair if staff are ready to follow up on the proposed new direction, Director General D. Frazer indicated they have been busy with budget preparation exercises since the Board considered the Budget Guidelines in December. Budget reviews by the Director General and Deputy Chiefs have been completed and yielded some options. Staff are always looking for efficiencies and a minimum efficiency target of $500,000 has been set within the projected budget envelope. She noted that since 2004 the OPS has generated between $8 and $9 million of efficiencies through various annual exercises. To date, the high level exercises are complete and the efficiency target exercise is underway. The shift in Council’s direction regarding sustainability has somewhat changed the Budget Guideline directive given by the Board in December. Since then, there have been approximately 15 motions introduced by City Council. Ms. Frazer believed the Council motions should be considered by the Board before completing the final review.
Responding to comments made by Councillor Monette about sustainability, Ms. Frazer stated the new resolution would affect all options that use one time funding sources. In some of the funding scenarios, staff considered relying on the use of the police general reserve fund, which has been built up over the last couple of years from surpluses. Under the sustainability definition the City has put in place, this type of scenario would no longer be feasible.
Councillor Monette expressed his surprise at seeing this resolution before the Board as it was his understanding the Board had unanimously decided at its 18 December meeting to have staff look at all options and bring back a zero budget. It effectively makes it more difficult for staff to bring forward a zero budget. Councillor Monette stated he would vote against the new resolution.
Chair Jensen believed the motion would not limit the Board’s options, as the Board is independent of Council and free to arrive at whatever decision it chooses.
Ms. Frazer provided further clarification by noting that in the motions passed by Council, Item 3 requests the Police Services Board to table a draft operating budget that is consistent with the principles Council adopted. Council amended their guidelines to include sustainability and requested the Board to do the same.
Mayor O’Brien wanted to know if the motion was in order, what options were available to the Board and whether the Board is bound by Council’s direction.
Mr. O’Connor confirmed this Board has its own statutory basis and is not required to accept Council’s request. He also confirmed that prior to Council’s meeting this Board had already made its budget decision, but that Council’s disposition from January stated “..that the Police Services Board be requested to table a draft 2007 operating budget that is consistent with the directions identified above.” The new resolution is properly before the Board if members are satisfied it mirrors the excerpt from Council’s disposition.
Responding to a question from Mayor O’Brien about reconsideration, Mr O’Connor confirmed the Board made its decision and forwarded it to Council, making reconsideration one interpretation. However, the Board’s rules indicate a substantive motion may be reconsidered only at the meeting in which the substantive motion was made, which, in this case would be last December. He explained it did not fit within the regular confines of a reconsideration and is not before the Board in that sense. The Chair would have to deem there was new information before the Board in order to have it reconsidered.
The Chair ruled the motions approved by Council were new information and therefore appropriate for the Board to consider.
Member Doran referred to the 18 December 2006 minutes where reference was made to the OPS’ duty to ensure public safety and security in Ottawa. His appreciation of that discussion and the resulting motion was that staff had not been issued a command to achieve a zero increase, but to use their best efforts to achieve a zero tax increase. The Board has a responsibility to respect information that has come forward after that discussion.
Further to Member Doran’s comments, Mayor O’Brien felt that the passing of this motion would ensure the Service will not be able to achieve, or would reduce the odds of achieving, the previous motion. He thought the only responsible way to move forward was to see what staff bring back in terms of a budget, knowing a debate can be had at that time.
Member Guilmet-Harris stated there were many reasons to vote for this motion, one being the fact that the budget would have to be derived solely from sustainable sources that uphold the long-range financial plan principles and not adversely impact the City’s credit rating. She expressed concern that if it is Council’s general direction to the City, why would the Police Services Board go against it?
Member Morin stated that during her six years on the Board, it has been a consistent practice for the Board to align its budget directions with those set by Council. She found it astounding that the three board members who serve on Council are now uncertain about aligning the Police budget with the rest of the City. She wanted to hear the Director
General’s comments about what effect the lack of making a consistent decision would have on work staff must complete by the 7 February 2007 deadline.
Ms. Frazer explained that the work plan for the next 10 days has been mapped out and having a decision within the next two days is critical.
Vice Chair McRae wondered if it would be premature to vote on this motion prior to receiving information from the Mayor in camera. She also wanted to know if it was premature to be considering this motion in light of the fact that the Director General could present the Board with several budget options. Council’s debate about maintaining a sustainable budget also centred on the fact that staff were asked to table two budgets: a zero percent budget and an inflationary budget. It was determined that tabling a zero budget was not necessarily contrary to the notion of not using one time funding.
In response to the Vice Chair’s first question, Chair Jensen believed it would be inappropriate to hold a vote on the issue until the Mayor’s information was heard in camera. Regarding the second point, it is up to the Board to determine if the budget will be standstill or a specific percentage increase.
Mayor O’Brien felt that the majority of members would be comfortable if staff were requested to draw up two budgets: one at zero and one at inflation. He suggested it could be added to the motion as a friendly amendment.
As the Mover of the original motion, Chair Jensen indicated the motion remains in its original state.
Mayor O’Brien noted that last year the City collected $3.3 million more from taxpayers than was used in the Police Budget. He wondered if there was a policy on how surplus money collected by the City is actually used.
The issue of capital formation costs occurred during the creation of the police tax rate. Ms. Frazer explained that the debt costs of some police debentures were on the City’s books while operating costs were on the OPS’ books. At the end of 2005 there was a surplus in the debenture costs, which showed up in the City’s books. On Monday, Council wisely adopted one of the Board’s recommendations that will put the costs of all police related debenture debt into the police tax rate, thereby ensuring all surpluses and deficits fall into the same location. There may again be a surplus in 2006 that will be allocated to police operating needs. In the past, any significant surplus has been contributed to police reserve funds to help offset future capital costs. In summary, the OPS has a practice in place, but an official policy has not been addressed.
At 6:00 p.m., the Board considered the following motion:
Moved by D. Guilmet-Harris
That the Ottawa Police Services Board move In Camera pursuant
to Section 28 of the Procedure By-law to consider information pertaining
to negotiations in relation to the 2007 Budget Directions.
CARRIED
The Police Services Board reconvened in open session at 6:30 p.m.
Before introducing a new motion, Vice Chair McRae emphasized the importance of recognizing that this is an autonomous board. The motion she put forward at the 18 December 2006 meeting directed staff to use their best efforts to achieve a 0% increase; her new motion tonight gives staff the option to table a budget between zero and inflation. Should the opportunity arise to use some gap funding, the Board should consider it, realizing that it would not be appropriate to consider budgeting forever with one-time resources. She believed this motion gives the Board options and does not restrict staff by asking them to do the impossible.
Moved by M. McRae
That the Ottawa Police Services Board direct staff to table a 2007
Draft Budget consistent with the directions set out in the City Council minutes
from January 10, 11 and 15, 2007.
CARRIED
In light of Councillor McRae’s motion being approved, Chair Jensen withdrew his earlier motion.
1. 2007 DRAFT OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGETS
Budget
documents distributed at the meeting
Presentation
by the Director General and the Director of Finance and Materiel Management
Ms. D. Frazer, Director
General, introduced the 2007 Budget to Board members with the assistance of Mr.
G. Simpson, Director of Finance and Materiel Management. (A copy of the presentation is on file
with the Board’s Executive Director.) The budget document is very comprehensive
and summarizes each area of the organization and the money spent. Ms. Frazer commended the following
individuals for the outstanding job in preparing the documentation: Mr. G. Simpson, Mr. W. Salem, Ms. L.
Mercer, Ms. V. McCallum, Mr. O. Bell, Ms. N. Zili and Ms. J. Dorey. She also thanked her colleagues on Executive
Command who have been very understanding and very giving of their time.
Mayor O’Brien thanked staff
for their efforts in putting together this budget. However, he questioned why the budget compares increases with the
2007 Long Range Financial Plan (LRFP) instead of 2006 actuals, which he
understood are normally used when making comparisons. He noted the OPS enjoyed a $3 million surplus in 2006, which
would mean the operating budget was $191 million in actual expenses. He surmised the 1.7% increase being referred
to in this report is really a 4.5% increase over the 2006 actuals. He asked Ms. Frazer for her comments.
The Director General explained
that the starting point of this exercise was the City’s Integrated Financial
Planning Framework where all departments were required to table a LRFP with a
four year forecast. As the Board had adopted
this practice, the document was used as a starting point in comparison to the
inflationary budget option.
The Mayor felt this was not a
fair representation of a budget increase.
He asked if staff could prepare a new budget using actual expenses from
2006, as it would provide a much clearer understanding of the actual growth in
spending.
He noted that the budget
instructions were to present a budget with a zero to inflationary
increase. He referred to a meeting he
had several weeks ago with staff where he received a fairly clear commitment
that a zero budget could be achieved.
He wanted to know what has changed in the past five weeks that caused
this highly editorialized, not recommended, approach to a zero increase budget.
Ms. Frazer stated many of the
approaches to achieving a zero percent increase were feasible prior to having
received Council’s budget direction in January. She explained that when preparing budgets there are many options
that can be used, including: one time options; reserve funds; and one time
funding sources to fund capital expenditures.
Staff have looked
at a range of options suitable
within a police environment, however, they are not sustainable options under
the definition of sustainability provided by Council’s directions.
Vice Chair McRae thanked staff
for all the work involved in tabling this budget and stated that her questions
in no way reflect her thoughts about the work that the Service provides. She noted that in December staff recommended
a $10.4 million increase and are now recommending a $2.7 million increase,
which made her question the credibility of this budget and why staff could not
present a zero increase budget.
Ms. Frazer explained that to
get from $10 million to $2.7 million there are cuts that have to be made and
programs to be scaled back, for example, not getting the full Strategic Growth
Initiative (SGI) plan and no capital formation costs. The Director General drew attention to the impact of delaying
these pressures to the years 2008 and 2009.
Responding to further questions from Vice Chair McRae, Ms. Frazer pointed out
that the OPS has always relied on the City’s approach to growth and growth
estimates for budget purposes, knowing there may be adjustments when the City
reviews it Official Plan in 2008. As
with all City departments the direction has been to stay in tune with that
growth estimate and staff have followed that rule in terms of planning for
facilities and staffing plans. For the
police this means that every time the City expands by about 730 residents, in
theory one more officer should be added to service that growth. Based on growth projections the City
prepared, the OPS would need to add roughly 30 officers per year to keep pace. The budget started with 30 officers and has
been reduced to 20.
Referring to the slide on page
19 entitled Staffing & Service Cuts ($2.2 m) and the impact of 26 fewer
members to serve the public, the Vice Chair wanted to know if this was a
suggestion that police officers would be cut should the OPS go to a zero
increase. Ms. Frazer concurred. Vice Chair McRae found this alternative
unpalatable and suggested this is the type of message that causes the community
to react negatively. She strongly
objected to the language used on the slide and objected to the $2 million
allocated to the south end facility.
She said other south end councillors would agree with freezing that
budget item if necessary.
Member Monette found it
interesting that the Police Service is referred to as a people service business;
he pointed out the City of Ottawa is also a people service business and is also
being asked to bring forward a zero percent increase budget. He expressed his disappointment with the
budget staff have presented. When the
discussion originally occurred every Board member, especially the Council
members, emphasized no staff cuts. He
felt there had to be other areas in the budget where cuts could be made. He demanded to see a zero percent document
before the public consultations begin on 19 February. The Councillor noted he would not be
supporting this Budget.
Member Doran was surprised
that on page 2 of the presentation under the heading “Challenges” there was no
reference to the challenges this type of budget would cause relating to
community safety and security. Changes
in Board composition and City Council and changes to budget timelines are not
significant challenges; the challenge to the public and the possible changes to
service they might experience are far more significant. The graphs on page 18 show operating costs
spiking in 2008, 2009 and 2010 and he wondered if this budget was just
postponing expenses into the future. A
specific increase in the rate does not concern him as much as the impact on community
service.
The Board then voted on the
following motion:
That the Ottawa Police
Services Board receive and table the Ottawa Police 2007 Draft Operating and
Capital Budget for consideration and approval at its meeting on 19 February 2007.
LOST
YEAS: D. Doran, H. Jensen
NAYS: M. McRae, B. Monette, L. O’Brien
Mr. R. O’Connor, Director,
Legal Services and Board Solicitor explained that pursuant to the Police
Services Act there is a requirement that “The format of the estimates, the
period that they cover and the timetable for their submission shall be as
determined by the council.” Ottawa City Council has asked that the draft budget
be tabled today, therefore, it would be possible to forward this to Council
without a recommendation and let Council address it later in the day.
1. TABLING OF
REVISED 2007 DRAFT BUDGET ESTIMATES
Director
General’s supplemental report dated 14 February 2007
Presentation
by the Director General and the Director of Finance and Materiel Management
D. Frazer, Director General
guided Board Members through the presentation that provided supplemental
information intended to address the concerns expressed at the Board meeting on
7 February 2007. (A copy of the
presentation is on file with the Board’s Executive Director.)
Staff
were congratulated for presenting budget issues in a clear and transparent
manner. A discussion resulted from the
presentation and the following points of clarification were made:
·
Per litre fuel costs differ between the Police Service
and the City because police vehicles use unleaded fuel and fuel up at
commercial gas stations at a discount.
The City’s fleet requires mostly diesel fuel and fuel up at City
facilities.
·
The annual budget efficiency target could be
increased, but staff would require sufficient lead-time to launch projects that
would yield the desired efficiencies.
E-Ticketing is an example of an initiative that required advance notice
for its planning, implementation and eventual savings.
·
Eliminating the second year of the Strategic Growth
Initiative as proposed in two of the options would reduce the officer to
resident ratio, causing Ottawa to fall behind the current ratio of
approximately 1:740. The per capita
ratios can be an indication that the Service is unable to meet the Adequacy
Standard Requirements.
·
Hiring additional officers under the SGI plan allows
for more flexibility to meet the increasing growth in community needs as well
as legislative and operational requirements.
Before assigning the additional officers to specific functions, gaps in
the operational model must first be identified.
·
Police Services are subject to many legislative
requirements that necessitate sworn officers fill specific positions. For example, with the increasing changes in
the global environment, especially around Chemical, Biological,
Radiological, and Nuclear (CBRN) Response, a position was
required due to legislative requirements.
The SGI would make it possible to add another position to assist in this
ever-growing area.
·
Staff are always searching for ways to phase in various
financial scenarios while searching for different ways to provide
financing. One successful initiative
was the Provincial Government funding 90 of the 200 SSI positions under the Safer Communities One-Thousand
Officer Partnership (SCOOP).
·
Should the Federal Government follow through on its
plan to bring 2500 new sworn officers into existence, the OPS could begin
building a new growth scenario.
Staffing is a difficult and expensive process for the OPS; Provincial
and Federal partners are necessary to provide financial assistance. Municipal policing is on the front line for
many of the issues being faced in the current global environment.
·
Capital programs are increasing the tax rate forecast
as seen in trends over the next few years (2008, 2009, 2010). There are three key projects in the capital
forecast that are putting pressure on the budget: mobile work stations - $2.1 million in 2008, replacement of radio
handsets - $5 million in 2009 & 2010; and the replacement and refit of IT
infrastructure - $10 million beginning in 2009. These projects will be monitored throughout the year to determine
how best to deal with them in the long term.
·
There are mechanisms within the OPS Budget to replace
every retiree. Without assuming any
expansion to the Service, the plan is built around training approximately 70
people to replace 12 sworn vacancies at year-end and the anticipated
retirements for 2007. Estimates for
hiring to replace retirees will remain in the range of 50 to 60 people for the
next four years unless the SGI plan is implemented, which would allow for an
increase of 30 additional positions.
·
Higher than anticipated growth would result in a
larger SGI plan for subsequent years.
Past experience has shown that an increase in hiring would result in
capacity issues causing too much pressure on coach officers and the facilities
that are used for training purposes.
·
The Board’s Special Meeting scheduled for 19 February
to hear from members of the public has been advertised twice already and will
be advertised again this Friday.
Mayor
O’Brien informed Board members that he attended the Big City Mayors Caucus last
week and it was clear that all municipalities in Canada are dealing with the
same issues as Ottawa. There is a call
for different funding models and alternate ways of looking at cities as bases
of revenue. He was very optimistic that
over the next three years there will be different techniques brought forward to
fund public safety activities.
Moved
by M. McRae
That
the Ottawa Police Services Board receive and table the Ottawa Police 2007
Draft Operating and Capital Budget for consideration and approval at its
meeting on 19 February 2007, as supplemented by the additional information
contained in this report.
RECEIVED
AND TABLED
1. PUBLIC DELEGATIONS
Ms. C. Parrott, Chair, Security Committee,
Hintonburg Community Association was joined by the following individuals from
the Dalhousie, Hintonburg and Vanier communities: Mr. W. Rodney, Member, Security Committee, Hintonburg Community
Association; Ms. B. Rivier, Member, Security Committee, Hintonburg
Community Association; Ms. S. Strudwick, Coordinator, Lebreton Flats
Neighbourhood Watch and Chair, Concerned Citizens for Safer Neighbourhoods; Ms.
P. Connolly, Chair, Dalhousie Security Committee and Coordinator; Ms. L.
Lebreton, Arlington, Bell Neighbourhood Watch; and Mr. B. McConnville,
Chair, Association of Concerned Citizens of Vanier (ACCVACC).
They thanked the police for
their continued support and assistance with the problems in their communities,
but shared with the Board their concerns with regard to habitual problem
properties. (A copy of the presentation is on file with the Board’s
Executive Director.)
The three communities work
together on problems and solutions. Each
member of the delegation spoke of problem landlords and properties in their
respective communities. Using a model
from New Westminster, BC of charging $200 per police call, each speaker
provided cost estimates ranging from $48,000 to $270,000 for police service
calls to nine multi-unit problem properties in their communities over the past
three to five years. They felt that
taxpayers subsidize these landlords by providing excessive police and city
resources to keep the buildings from being completely out of control. These landlords feign cooperation with
authorities but their choice of problem tenants shows that their buildings are
“instruments of crime”.
The few habitual problem
properties that have had a lasting resolution came through hard work by the
community, by shaming the owner or by devastating fires. New innovative solutions are needed. Financial information tabled at the draft
budget meeting shows the success of charging for false alarm calls; the number
of calls has decreased. Similarly,
these problem landlords will only respond if a monetary penalty is
involved. Members of the delegation
have made a number of suggestions to police, City and Provincial
representatives and are looking for leadership in finding solutions to these
excessive drains on police services.
Vice Chair McRae asked Mr.
O’Connor, Director, Legal Services, for legal advice regarding the legislation
involved in implementing some of the models used in other municipalities across
Canada. She indicated a willingness to
give direction to staff to discuss this matter.
Mr. O’Connor responded there
are a host of statutes that would have to be reviewed regarding this
matter. The New Westminster, BC, model
is a municipal property standards by-law, which includes charges for repeat
nuisance calls. It is not a Police
Services Board by-law. In British
Columbia there is a Community Charter that allows municipalities broader
powers. Ontario passed Bill 130, an
amendment to the Municipal Act, on 1 January 2007. City Council will soon be briefed on the new
Bill and will review a number of priority setting issues, which could include
this matter. Fines under Bill 130 for
municipal by-law breaches can be as high as $100,000, if the municipality
chooses. While the matter is not as
simple as it appears, there are other mechanisms City Council may wish
consider.
Mr. O’Connor suggested a
motion from the Police Services Board would be welcome requesting City Council,
in light of the recently enacted Bill 130, to look at this particular issue
with regard to residential tenancies when it does its priority setting review.
Responding to a question from
Mayor O’Brien regarding the number of charges resulting from all the calls for
service, Chief Bevan explained that each call requires police, health and
by-law intervention to build a case to remove the tenant. The problem occurs when a similar tenant
moves in afterwards. It is very much a
case of how to interdict the activity.
He gave the delegation a great deal of credit in bringing this matter
forward. He wanted to clarify that the
OPS has been working strategically on this particular issue as has the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police and,
he believed, the Ontario Association of Police Services Boards. A very good pilot being used in Manitoba is
designed to hold landlords accountable and provide recourse against the
property itself. He wished to have
further discussions with the delegation about ways to eventually implement the
legislative changes that need to be made.
Having Provincial legislation would be the most successful way to
regulate this particular activity.
Deputy Chief S. O’Sullivan
noted that Ontario has a Civil Remedies Act and staff have been working
with their legal department looking at options. She thanked the speakers for their assistance over the years in
mobilizing their communities and indicated that the OPS is committed to
continue working with them and their City partners. She indicated there might be some existing short-term options
that can be implemented as legislation can be slow moving.
Vice Chair McRae appreciated
the collaborative approach suggested by Deputy Chief O’Sullivan and said that
if the City Solicitor suggests this matter requires a motion by the Board to
request Council’s assistance, then it should be done.
Member Morin asked if similar
presentations have been made to the City and its various committees and what
their response was. Ms. Parrott
informed the Board that a number of the speakers would be presenting tomorrow
to Council in terms of property standards issues. Ms. Morin thanked the
delegation for their unique and effective presentation and commended them for
caring so much about their community.
She also thanked them for the respect and support they offer to our police
service.
There being no other public delegations on the
budget, Councillor Monette expressed his disappointment with the public
consultation process, as only members from three communities were present. He suggested there may be a need to review
how the public is consulted and notified in future, and that holding
consultations in Orleans, Kanata and Centretown might be a possibility.
Moved by M. McRae
That the Ottawa Police
Services Board respectfully request Ottawa City Council to review the various
options available to it with respect to habitual problem landlords, in light of
the new, broader powers found in Bill 130 (eg. including both the New
Westminster, B.C. model and other models in Manitoba and Nova Scotia) as well
as identifying the necessity for requesting additional statutory authority from
the Province of Ontario.
CARRIED
That the Ottawa Police
Services Board receive and consider the public delegations on the 2007 Draft
Budget.
RECEIVED
2. APPROVAL OF 2007 BUDGET
2007
Draft Operating & Capital Budget book previously distributed
Director
General’s supplemental report dated 14 February 2007
Chief Bevan explained that the Board is being
asked to approve operating and capital budgets that will keep the police
service on the path towards providing sustainable services for the ever growing
community. The community has expressed
a high degree of satisfaction for the services that the police provide. The Chief believes the OPS is second to none
in Canada and this has been accomplished through good planning and the vision
and support of the Police Services Board, which has insisted on strong and
effective financial planning. A
previous City Council approved the Strategic Staffing Initiative (SSI) that
allowed for proper staffing and deployment of police officers across the new
City. The budget before the Board has
four very distinct options and each has varying degrees of risk.
Staff have built in the opportunity to continue to build a strong and
effective police service that has the proper resources to maintain pace with
the growth of our community and the changing requirements of providing safety
and security in the Nation’s capital. Board members are very familiar
with the police to population ratio that exists and that the OPS is not at the
top of that list, neither in Ontario nor Canada. In order to ensure a ratio is maintained that meets the needs of
the community, prudent financial planning is required. The Chief reassured the Board and the
community that staff have made the best possible efforts to bring forward a
budget that is sustainable, responsive and appropriate in the circumstances.
Director General Frazer and Mr. G. Simpson,
Director, Finance and Materiel Management, reviewed the various options
available for 2007 Budget. (A copy
of the presentation is on file with the Board’s Executive Director.)
Member
Morin proposed a motion to have the Board approve a revised Appendix D to
replace the one originally included at page 9 of the OPS Budget book dated 7
February 2007. Ms. Frazer
explained that the revision to
Appendix D - Identified Budget Efficiencies, consists of a reduction to the
Community Police Centre Strategy, with a corresponding increase in the court
time efficiency to ensure the bottom line remains at $1 million. Savings are improving in court time due to
the change in how business is done at the courts. In addition, a new court was launched this month called First
Attendance Court, which will deal with traffic related tickets issued under the
Provincial Offences Notice. Greater
savings to court costs should be realized with a reduction in court appearances
for traffic officers.
Moved by D Morin
That the Ottawa Police
Services Board approve that Appendix D at page 9 in the 2007 Budget Book dated
February 7, 2007 be replaced with the revised Appendix D dated February 19,
2007.
CARRIED
Member Guilmet-Harris put forward a motion to
replace Recommendation 1 of Item 2 to read as follows:
Resolved that the Ottawa Police Services Board
replace recommendation 1 of Item 2 to read as follows: “That the Ottawa Police Services Board approve and forward to City Council a 2007 Operating and Capital
Budget with a 1.7% inflationary increase as set out in the Ottawa Police
Service 2007 Budget Book dated 7 February 2007.”
Councillor Monette objected to any motions
being considered at this time and felt a discussion of all the options before
the Board should occur prior to any considerations.
Chair Jensen opened the floor to questions
regarding the 2007 Budget and clarified any motions will be dealt with at the
end of the discussion. A discussion
ensued and the following points of clarification were made:
·
Costs for the Job
Evaluation Program have been carried in the budget. A base budget is being carried for the salary component, which
includes retroactivity costs for previous years.
·
The
debt-servicing surplus for 2006 will not be allocated to the Service’s books
until 2007. A significant amount of
debt was retired in 2006, which created a small surplus giving the OPS an
opportunity for a break in debt servicing costs in 2007. The resulting impact is a reduction in the
2007 budget.
·
It is unknown how
the elimination of the Strategic Growth Initiative (SGI) in 2007 will affect
employee morale. Employees have been a
part of the design process for a number of years and the Association is keenly
interested in seeing it brought to fruition.
With this proposal, officers that were hired under SGI would not come
online until late summer 2008. The 32
officers hired in 2006 recently came online to assist with the new districts
and they have had a positive effect on members. The Chief believed the additional SGI officers would have a
similar effect.
·
The manner in
which arbitrations and collective agreements are settled for police services is
very similar to fire services. There is
a long-standing practice that sets out the spread between agreements and is
historically maintained. One police service
settles and then the rest follow suit; arbitrators take this into account. The Ottawa Police Services Board has
demonstrated it is not afraid to take on difficult challenges, as was
demonstrated by the Board going to arbitration over the 3, 6 and 9%
responsibility pay. We have worked hard
at staying competitive.
·
Chair Jensen
provided examples of Police Service settlements in Ontario already reached for
2007 and 2008 that range between 3% and 3.25% for 2007, and between 3% and
3.35% for 2008. These numbers indicate
that the pressures police boards, as employers, are facing are far beyond the
projected inflation rate of 1.7%.
·
There are
currently eight Crown Victoria OPS
vehicles in the Moodie Yard, which is a convenient and secure City-owned
location to store police vehicles before they are migrated into the service. The OPS buys vehicles in batches to obtain
optimal pricing; the cars are delivered in batches and are put into service as
older vehicles are removed. Initiatives
have been taken to reduce police collisions significantly, therefore, fewer
vehicles have been written off, hence the surplus. It was requested that an email version of this response be
forwarded to Councillors Harder, McRae and Monette before the budget debate
begins.
·
The SGI
originated in 2004 as a way to deal with pressures and changes the City could
face over a 10-year horizon. The
geographical growth of the City will have implications on the OPS’ ability to
deliver service. The project was
designed to help the police service bring a plan to the Board with a 10-year
vision of what is required to deliver police service in a seamless way to the
City as it grows.
·
The SGI is
intended to accomplish a reasonable police to population ratio for this
community. At amalgamation the ratio
was 1:515, it is now 1:742. SGI is
intended to at least keep pace with growth.
Ottawa has one of the largest municipal police services geographically
in the country. Officers not only have
to deliver services to more people but they have to drive farther. Models used to serve the urban, suburban and
rural areas need to be adjusted constantly in order to accomplish the police to
population ratio. Should SGI be
unpalatable, the Board and City Council have it within their power to set a
police to population ratio that meets the needs of the community and hire to
that number every year.
·
The number of
officers required for growth were determined by the growth estimates used in
the City’s 2004 Development Charge Study.
Vice Chair McRae indicated those numbers are going to be challenged when
Council does a review of the Official Plan in 2008. She questioned why we would proceed with the SGI when the numbers
are going to be reviewed.
·
Internally the
OPS has issues in the deployment model and as part of the SSI, the Active
Staffing Plan was developed to ensure absences could be backfilled with an
active officer. Despite the fact that
32 positions were added to the front line through last month’s deployment,
vacancies are already being experienced due to maternity leave, parental leave or
illnesses; this is a real pressure regardless of how quickly the community is
growing. More positions need to be
created in the Active Staffing Plan to deal with these absences.
·
The 2007
new-growth hiring plan allocates $500,000 for an intake of 20 officers in
September 2007, including salary and training and equipment components. The full cost would be $1.8 million with the
additional $1.3 million in the 2008 forecast.
Removing the SGI this year would save money in the 2008 forecast,
however, hiring 60 officers in 2008 (i.e. the reinstatement of the 30 officers
from 2007 plus the 30 scheduled to be hired in 2008) as well as replacing
potentially 50 to 55 retirees would present operational issues for the Ontario
Police College. The OPS’ ability to deliver that many police officers in a short
period of time would also be compromised.
One feature of the SGI is the reasonable hiring pace it sets out for the
Police College and the organization.
·
Results of the
investment in the SSI have been to put more cars on the road and more officers
on patrol to respond to calls. If new
officers are hired in 2007, the community can expect to see more initiatives
such as the implementation of the four new patrol areas last month, concrete
bottom line results due to active staffing, a reduction in overtime expenditures,
and staffing of the new divisional offices in the South and West ends of the
City in mid 2008.
·
Scenarios
discussed at a meeting between the Mayor and Chief Bevan on 22 December
2006 were not sustainable as they relied on one time funding and future
dividends. Subsequent to that
discussion Council issued a budget direction requesting two options: a rate of inflation (1.7%) or a zero percent
increase. Both options had to be
sustainable. The Board adopted the same
budget directions at its January meeting.
·
The Police
Service was given direction by the Board and responded with two sustainable
options. Staff are here to respond to
questions and offer the best advice they can based on what is right for the
community, recognizing it is up to the Board and Council to make the decision.
·
When asked what
option he favoured, Chief Bevan indicated he would favour the option that
includes an allocation for SGI.
Councillor Monette referred to previous
discussions when staff was asked to bring back a zero percent budget but that
it not be at the cost of laying off officers.
While the motion did not reference the desire for no lay-offs, the
Councillor assured the Chief that in the future the Board’s wishes would be
written out word for word. He assumed
the Board had agreed to the zero increase options presented at the 14 February
2007 meeting. He indicated he would be
dissenting on the motion for a 1.7% increase and felt it showed complete
disrespect for City Council.
The Chief made clear that staff took Council’s
direction verbatim and brought the two options requested forward to the
Board. Councillor Monette vehemently
disagreed with this statement.
With respect to Councillor Monette’s comments,
Member Doran pointed out that he is on record for having voted and spoken
against a zero increase. Instruction
was quite clear to staff that they were to aim for zero or as close to zero as
possible and bring back different options.
The Chief raised a point earlier in the discussion that Member Doran wanted
to make: that SGI discussions over the past two years went much further than
hiring 20 sworn officers with five being converted to civilians. The level of discussion at that time was
such to accept the presentation and the ideas behind the SGI, that it was a
framework for providing continued safety and security to this City into the
future. He firmly believed that the
current discussion has reduced the SGI to a simplification that misses the
important elements of the initiative.
It also reduces it to a standstill position, which is conceptually in
conflict with a strategic growth initiative.
For the Nation’s Capital to ask for a standstill position when it is
already in a deficit position is a distortion of the very concept of a
strategic growth initiative. The Board
has always supported this initiative.
Vice Chair McRae stated she hoped the Board
could come to an agreement that Council would accept and that would not have to
be sent to the Ontario Civilian Commission on Police Services (OCCPS) for
settlement. She asked if it would be
possible to increase the request for money from the City’s tax rate
stabilization fund from $2 million to $2.5 million, and make hiring the SGI
positions possible. Ms. Frazer said it
was possible to draw another $500,000 for 2007 from the City’s tax
stabilization reserve with City Council’s permission. This would allow staff to preserve the funding for the SGI at the
level of 20 officers. Staff would have
to recast the 2008 salary impact and how it would affect the final 2008
increase.
Vice Chair McRae proposed the following motion:
That the Ottawa Police Services Board approve
and forward to Council Option 2 (Sustainable - Use of City Tax Rate
Stabilization Fund), amended to request that City Council approve a one-time
contribution of $2.5 million from the City Tax Stabilization Reserve Fund to
help offset the OPS 2007 Budget, and to implement the 2007 SGI plan.
Wishing to clarify his position, Mayor O’Brien
stated he relies on the Chief’s input and it is clear there is a common goal to
create a safe, secure and sustainable community for now and into the
future. He stated that in no way should
anyone conclude that these actions and discussions indicate a lack of interest
in investing more in the police service over the coming decade. He said it was a matter of getting the
municipal finances in shape in terms of funding avenues and internal expenses
so that these types of investments can be made freely in the future. The Mayor pointed out this is not in any way
detrimental to the long-term interest of the police service. It is important to draw the line while going
through this priority setting process and the Chief’s cooperation would be
greatly appreciated.
Regarding Vice Chair McRae’s motion, Member
Morin wanted clarification that the success of the motion was based on an
assumption that Council would agree.
Member McRae concurred it was an assumption, however, if it was
appropriate for the Director General to propose the option, it was appropriate
for the Board to consider doing the same.
Looking at the direction Council gave staff to present a sustainable
zero budget, which Ms. Frazer has agreed the previous motion would accomplish,
it is not on the backs of vulnerable people and will not be used forever. By increasing funding from the tax
stabilization reserve, the SGI officers could be hired with a zero percent
increase. She indicated she would not
be a member of this Board if budget building continues in this manner, as it is
not appropriate for future years. She
hoped the Board would agree to a sustainable standstill budget and ensure
future budgets were sustainable.
After doing some quick calculations Ms. Frazer
wanted to ensure the goal for 2008 is kept at an 8.5% tax increase. In order to re-implement SGI some changes
will need to be made. The Board would
have to be agreeable that the SGI officer allocation would be reduced in 2008
from 30 to 20 officers. In this way
staff can guarantee that the motion has no impact on 2008 and fully meets Council’s
definition of sustainability.
Chair Jensen echoed everything said by Member
Doran. Throughout his career in law
enforcement he has witnessed these types of financial exercises as a result of
political imperatives, and he felt the Board was on a slippery slope. One of the reasons police services boards
were established in Ontario and other provinces was to give stability to police
services. He feared the Board would be
jeopardizing the police service in future years if it approved any of the zero
increase options, and would be less than responsible if this was not
considered. He believes there is too
much at stake in the future and too much potential guesswork involving City
Council to put forward the option requesting money from the City’s tax
stabilization fund. He felt the Board
should present City Council with a budget that is responsible from a Police
Board perspective. He acknowledged that
there are members of Council on the Board, but while they are attending Police
Board meetings they are members of the Board and have the same responsibilities
as the other members despite how they came to be there.
The Board then dealt with the motions that had
been proposed during the meeting.
Moved by M. McRae
That the Ottawa Police Services Board approve and forward to Council Option
2 (sustainable use of City Tax Rate Stabilization Fund), amended to request
that City Council approve a one-time contribution of $2.5 million from the City
Tax Stabilization Reserve Fund to help offset the OPS 2007 Budget, and to
implement the 2007 SGI plan.
LOST
Yeas: M.
McRae, B. Monette, L. O’Brien
Nays: D.
Doran, D. Guilmet-Harris, H. Jensen, D. Morin
Moved by D. Guilmet-Harris
Resolved that the Ottawa Police Services
Board replace Recommendation 1 to read as follows: That the Ottawa Police Services Board approve and forward to City
Council a 2007 Operating and Capital Budget with a 1.7% inflationary increase
as set out in the Ottawa Police Service 2007 Budget Book dated 7 February 2007.
CARRIED
Yeas: D. Doran, D. Guilmet-Harris, H. Jensen,
D. Morin
Nays: M.
McRae, B. Monette, L. O’Brien