1
00:00:11,860 --> 00:00:12,280
Yeah,

2
00:00:18,540 --> 00:00:19,000
we're good.

3
00:00:25,210 --> 00:00:52,450
Good evening, folks. I appreciate everybody's patience. We had a few technical difficulties, but it looks like they've been resolved. So I now call the special open committee of the whole meeting of Monday, June 7, 2021 to order and request that everyone turn their cell phones off for the duration of the meeting. As there are members of council attending remotely, I'll ask the acting clerk to do a roll call to begin the meeting.

4
00:00:52,450 --> 00:00:59,010
members are to respond verbally to the roll call and when voting today. I will ask that when

5
00:00:59,010 --> 00:01:04,390
members aren't speaking that they ensure their computer mics are turned off so we don't experience

6
00:01:04,390 --> 00:01:06,410
any feedback. Alison?

7
00:01:08,820 --> 00:01:11,360
Thank you. Councillor Bush.

8
00:01:28,880 --> 00:01:32,560
I would like

9
00:01:36,690 --> 00:01:43,470
to begin by acknowledging with respect that we are in Treaty III territory and that the land on which we are gathered

10
00:01:43,470 --> 00:01:48,050
is the traditional territory of the Ashenabi and Mati people.

11
00:01:50,540 --> 00:01:52,100
Madam Clerk would like to ask you

12
00:01:52,100 --> 00:01:56,380
to for someone to move and second the motion to convene this special open meeting.

13
00:01:58,780 --> 00:01:59,880
Yes, thank you.

14
00:02:00,480 --> 00:02:07,560
That's what I left upstairs. So yes, I need somebody to motion and someone to second convening this

15
00:02:07,560 --> 00:02:12,500
meeting please. Councillor Price and Councillor Martin McKinnon and

16
00:02:14,770 --> 00:02:17,150
unfortunately in the adventure of

17
00:02:17,150 --> 00:02:22,670
technology. I left the resolutions upstairs. Basically, it's just going to say the council

18
00:02:22,670 --> 00:02:30,730
convene a special open committee of the home meeting for the purpose of discussing the

19
00:02:30,730 --> 00:02:38,790
following under presentations. We have an analysis of policing services from MNPLLP as

20
00:02:38,790 --> 00:02:44,150
well as the addendum, which is the statement from the working circle regarding the discovery

21
00:02:44,150 --> 00:02:50,010
of 215 bodies that form a residential school in British Columbia presented by the working

22
00:02:50,010 --> 00:02:56,490
circle council members and under public notice we have a public notice regarding the public

23
00:02:56,490 --> 00:02:59,970
consultation meeting on June the 24th.

24
00:03:02,460 --> 00:03:06,780
Great thank you. I'd like to call for declarations

25
00:03:06,780 --> 00:03:12,200
of pecuniary interest and the general nature thereof under the municipal conflict of interest

26
00:03:12,200 --> 00:03:14,500
with respect to the agenda for this meeting.

27
00:03:19,670 --> 00:03:24,810
Seeing none, good evening, and I'd like to welcome the general public and

28
00:03:24,810 --> 00:03:29,150
our presenter, MNP, to our special committee of the whole meeting tonight.

29
00:03:30,050 --> 00:03:40,810
As everyone is aware, City Council, formally requested a second contract policing proposal from the Ontario Provincial Police on October 27th of 2020.

30
00:03:41,810 --> 00:03:44,990
This followed a similar request made in 2017.

31
00:03:46,590 --> 00:03:56,250
Three weeks ago, on May 17th, the OPP presented their contract policing proposal to the City of Dryden at a special open meeting of Council.

32
00:03:57,310 --> 00:04:13,650
As part of doing its due diligence, Council hired MNP, one of Canada's largest chartered accountancy and business advisory firms, to provide an analysis of the policing services offered by the OPP and the Dryden Police Service.

33
00:04:13,650 --> 00:04:22,010
This analysis focused on the areas of service delivery, costs, governance, and benchmarking

34
00:04:22,010 --> 00:04:26,710
Dryden's policing activity and crime indicators in the context of other communities.

35
00:04:27,830 --> 00:04:34,830
Having said that, our CAO Roger Nesbitt has been the single point of contact with the

36
00:04:34,830 --> 00:04:38,670
MNP Dryden Police Services and the OPP through this process.

37
00:04:38,670 --> 00:04:46,590
I just like to ask Roger in that role if he could talk a little bit more about for the

38
00:04:46,590 --> 00:04:53,710
public's benefit as well as some of Council's, YMNP was selected, and perhaps for clarity

39
00:04:53,710 --> 00:04:59,090
what was and was not included in the scope of work that Council through the Committee

40
00:04:59,090 --> 00:05:00,970
asked MNP to perform for us.

41
00:05:01,770 --> 00:05:02,030
Roger?

42
00:05:03,790 --> 00:05:11,610
Thank you, Councillor Bush. Just before I get started, Ms. Seiler, I'm getting reports

43
00:05:11,610 --> 00:05:17,290
that our live stream is not functioning. Maybe somebody could check into that. Make sure

44
00:05:17,290 --> 00:05:22,350
that we're getting this meeting recorded. But thank you, Councillor Bush, and through

45
00:05:22,350 --> 00:05:26,870
the chair. Over the past few years, I've had the distinct pleasure of working with Mr.

46
00:05:26,870 --> 00:05:30,170
Lins and the team from M&P on several different engagements.

47
00:05:30,910 --> 00:05:34,730
The M&P team not only brings a wealth and knowledge regarding financial and business

48
00:05:34,730 --> 00:05:39,730
strategy development, but their team members have significant experience and knowledge in

49
00:05:39,730 --> 00:05:44,250
municipal policing, policing leadership, as well as community safety and well-being strategies,

50
00:05:44,830 --> 00:05:47,990
making them very well suited to complete this work for us.

51
00:05:48,970 --> 00:05:55,230
For this engagement, the City requested that M&P update the Dryden Police Service and OPP

52
00:05:55,230 --> 00:06:00,750
service comparison, the financial projections, and the call for service modeling that was

53
00:06:00,750 --> 00:06:04,610
completed during the 2008 and 2019 study.

54
00:06:05,470 --> 00:06:10,930
They were also requested to include benchmarking and municipal comparisons to provide context

55
00:06:10,930 --> 00:06:13,750
to the community safety measurements that are included in the report.

56
00:06:15,310 --> 00:06:21,210
M&P has provided this report to help council and the public better understand the complexities

57
00:06:21,210 --> 00:06:27,650
of this review and to aid council in their ultimate decision to accept or reject the OPP policing proposal.

58
00:06:29,050 --> 00:06:37,510
MMP was not requested to provide any recommendations on which police force would provide the best service for the city of driving.

59
00:06:38,950 --> 00:06:47,070
So again, I welcome Mr. Lins to the meeting tonight and I thank him and the MMP team for their valuable work that they provided for us.

60
00:06:47,070 --> 00:06:48,050
Thank

61
00:06:51,150 --> 00:06:51,550
you, Roger.

62
00:06:52,990 --> 00:06:58,050
In order, just again for the public's benefit as well, in order to ensure that the analysis

63
00:06:58,710 --> 00:07:04,630
fully considered council's questions and concerns, the City's OPP Cost and Committee oversaw

64
00:07:04,630 --> 00:07:10,010
the process to make sure MNPs, terms of reference were followed as described by Mr. Nesbid.

65
00:07:11,530 --> 00:07:16,650
As a matter of procedure, Marin Council will be able to ask any questions they have for MNP

66
00:07:16,650 --> 00:07:19,830
based on the items presented in their report tonight.

67
00:07:20,930 --> 00:07:24,250
Questions I would ask be pertinent to the report only.

68
00:07:25,310 --> 00:07:28,050
Also, although Councillors may have multiple questions,

69
00:07:28,750 --> 00:07:31,750
I will ask that only one question be asked at a time

70
00:07:32,300 --> 00:07:34,010
and I will rotate the questions

71
00:07:34,500 --> 00:07:35,810
through the members of Council.

72
00:07:39,390 --> 00:07:40,870
The public will not be able to answer,

73
00:07:41,090 --> 00:07:42,310
ask questions tonight,

74
00:07:42,310 --> 00:07:44,770
but there will be an open public meeting

75
00:07:44,770 --> 00:07:47,230
for the public on June the 24th.

76
00:07:47,910 --> 00:07:58,710
And next week on June the 14th, I believe we will have a presentation from the Dryden Police Service and the Dryden Police Services Board.

77
00:07:59,910 --> 00:08:04,610
So I think we've covered off the procedural proceedings for the evening.

78
00:08:04,910 --> 00:08:12,390
And so without further ado, I will invite Chad Lins of MNP to present the results of their analysis. Chad, the floor is yours.

79
00:08:14,070 --> 00:08:25,370
Excellent. Thank you. That was flattered. I don't get Mr. Lynn's very often that kind of creep me out of that. But thank you Roger. That was very kind of me.

80
00:08:26,870 --> 00:08:34,450
So thanks folks for having me this evening to present our report to you.

81
00:08:35,310 --> 00:08:39,910
For those of you that I haven't met, I think most I probably have along the way, but for

82
00:08:39,910 --> 00:08:44,070
those that I haven't, my name is Chad Lins, I'm a partner with M&P here in Winnipeg.

83
00:08:44,670 --> 00:08:50,730
I lead the firm's community safety wellbeing consulting practice, so me and my team consult

84
00:08:51,290 --> 00:08:59,210
with police services largely across Canada, as well as with justice departments in related

85
00:08:59,210 --> 00:09:05,650
areas, we also work a little bit with other emergency response organizations like Fire

86
00:09:05,650 --> 00:09:11,070
and Permix Services, but most of it is circled around policing in the justice environment.

87
00:09:11,370 --> 00:09:16,090
So thanks again for having me to go through this. I've prepared a bit of a presentation

88
00:09:16,090 --> 00:09:22,290
that gets the high notes from pieces of the report. Oh, I just lost that report. There it is.

89
00:09:22,290 --> 00:09:28,010
So I'm just going to share that with you and go through it with you quickly.

90
00:09:35,580 --> 00:09:40,500
There is it is it showing up now? Is it sharing? Yeah, looks good from here.

91
00:09:43,590 --> 00:09:46,070
Excellent. So just a bit of an introduction.

92
00:09:46,530 --> 00:09:50,070
You know, some of this was spoken to a little bit already.

93
00:09:50,130 --> 00:09:53,530
But you know, in 2018, 19, we kind of crossed the calendar year.

94
00:09:53,690 --> 00:09:57,350
We were engaged to do an analysis of police services.

95
00:09:58,750 --> 00:10:05,470
we've been re-engaged as Councillor Bush said to update that. I think what we wanted

96
00:10:05,470 --> 00:10:11,890
to do this time was not recreate the last report. We wanted to highlight changes. We wanted

97
00:10:11,890 --> 00:10:18,530
to keep this one a bit more succinct than maybe the last one. I make it a bit more digestible

98
00:10:18,530 --> 00:10:23,550
for folks. So we certainly spent more focus, I think, on areas where maybe there were some

99
00:10:23,550 --> 00:10:30,210
changes from last time compared to areas that were the same. Those things are still in

100
00:10:30,210 --> 00:10:32,510
the last report and would still hold true.

101
00:10:35,650 --> 00:10:38,550
The areas we're going to go through are Councillor

102
00:10:38,550 --> 00:10:42,150
Bush alluded to the benchmarking. One of the things the cost and committee had asked for was

103
00:10:42,150 --> 00:10:46,890
some benchmarking to help provide some context to some of the things that we're talking about.

104
00:10:47,150 --> 00:10:51,150
That was something that wasn't in the last report and I think there had maybe been feedback that

105
00:10:51,150 --> 00:10:56,270
that some of that context would be helpful for people to understand, so we'll go through

106
00:10:56,270 --> 00:11:01,870
the benchmarking. We will go through a service comparison. Again, we've updated the table

107
00:11:01,870 --> 00:11:09,190
that we used last time, at least in a summary form, to walk through with you. We did do some

108
00:11:09,190 --> 00:11:14,650
more stakeholder consultations as well this time in particular, this time we focused on

109
00:11:14,650 --> 00:11:20,750
communities that either had recently switched to or switching to the OPP from a municipal service

110
00:11:20,750 --> 00:11:30,850
and then in reverse, folks that were switching or had recently switched from the OPP to another

111
00:11:31,710 --> 00:11:36,850
service. The only reason I say another service is some of them were not necessarily looking at

112
00:11:36,850 --> 00:11:41,150
their own municipal service, but looking at maybe contracting that with another municipal service,

113
00:11:41,150 --> 00:11:47,750
which is certainly an option to municipalities inside of the act. And then finally, we'll go through

114
00:11:47,750 --> 00:11:53,570
the financial analysis against. We've updated that all with some new numbers. We've taken

115
00:11:53,570 --> 00:12:02,610
a little bit of a different strategy on how to project that out, a spectrum of options

116
00:12:02,610 --> 00:12:09,210
more so than one scenario to try and map out. So we'll go through that as kind of the last

117
00:12:09,210 --> 00:12:16,170
piece of the puzzle. On to the benchmarking. As I mentioned, the Costing Committee had said

118
00:12:16,170 --> 00:12:22,490
It would be nice to have some context where does Dryden sit in some of this to help people

119
00:12:22,490 --> 00:12:25,350
kind of understand some of that context.

120
00:12:25,810 --> 00:12:30,870
We've used primarily statistics Canada data that gets reported to stats can annually

121
00:12:30,870 --> 00:12:31,950
by police services.

122
00:12:32,630 --> 00:12:37,890
There are, I think, one or two small data points that we use from the OPP particularly related

123
00:12:37,890 --> 00:12:44,050
to cost per property, but the vast majority of this comes from stats Canada from 2015

124
00:12:44,050 --> 00:12:50,570
through 2019 inclusive. That's the most up-to-date data that stats can't have. So, we've used

125
00:12:50,570 --> 00:12:56,010
the major indicators that they report on. The first being crime severity index, the second criminal

126
00:12:56,010 --> 00:13:04,990
instance clearance rate. Police can cost sworn off sort of population ratio and then we do a bit

127
00:13:04,990 --> 00:13:11,850
across indicator to look at. Are there trends in there that kind of hold up to what we would typically

128
00:13:11,850 --> 00:13:13,050
expect them to hold up to.

129
00:13:15,940 --> 00:13:20,000
So the first one of those is crime severity index. Crime severity index

130
00:13:20,000 --> 00:13:23,540
is a measure of how much crime is coming to the attention of the police and the seriousness

131
00:13:23,540 --> 00:13:30,780
of that crime. The volume of crimes are multiplied against a weight that are given to them,

132
00:13:30,880 --> 00:13:36,960
the more serious the crime and the higher the weight. And then that math works out into an index

133
00:13:36,960 --> 00:13:44,540
That is a measure of volume combined with seriousness to land on kind of one number.

134
00:13:44,840 --> 00:13:50,900
So inside of the communities that we looked at for benchmarking, we worked with the

135
00:13:50,900 --> 00:13:53,120
cost and committee on what the right communities would be.

136
00:13:53,740 --> 00:13:59,260
Some of them are geographic, you know, canoral, fort, frances, sous-lookout, et cetera, readily.

137
00:14:01,060 --> 00:14:05,100
Some of them are also, you know, similar in size to the best that we could.

138
00:14:05,100 --> 00:14:11,400
You know, benchmarking never being a perfect size, but we tried to get comparator municipalities

139
00:14:11,400 --> 00:14:17,800
that would have had kind of similar populations instant rates, those types of things.

140
00:14:18,160 --> 00:14:25,300
So, inside of that, I didn't have the highest average CSI within that group over that 5-year

141
00:14:25,300 --> 00:14:25,560
period.

142
00:14:25,600 --> 00:14:26,180
That's an average.

143
00:14:26,700 --> 00:14:31,440
Your current CSI is actually higher than 14 right now, but that's the average over those

144
00:14:31,440 --> 00:14:31,660
years.

145
00:14:31,660 --> 00:14:36,140
It also had the second-high growth over that period of time, so annually the average

146
00:14:36,140 --> 00:14:42,920
growth rate was the second-highest at 17% growth over that period of time, which you

147
00:14:42,920 --> 00:14:44,540
can see from the top graph.

148
00:14:46,200 --> 00:14:54,840
And then both violent and non-violinants that are increasing, they split the non-violent

149
00:14:54,840 --> 00:14:58,340
and violence CSI for interest purposes, obviously.

150
00:15:00,000 --> 00:15:28,860
I didn't put that graph on there, but the nonviolence CSI is growing at a faster rate than the violence CSI. So that's in the report as well. So that's crime severity index. I think one of the important things to note here, too, is any one of these topics I don't think can be taken in isolation as well. I think you've got to look at them all together. I think dangerous to extract kind of one of them and take it out of context as well.

151
00:15:28,860 --> 00:15:42,840
also I would encourage folks to kind of look at all of these in in in conglomerate. So so criminal incidents are the occurrence of one or more criminal offenses during a single distinct event regardless of the number of victims.

152
00:15:43,040 --> 00:15:53,140
So it's not call for service. You could have calls for service that don't result in an incident that they're that we determined that there was no incident having occurred there.

153
00:15:53,140 --> 00:16:10,560
So when we when we benchmark dry and against those communities against we had the second highest rate of criminal instance per 100,000 population, which is how that's most often measured to equal it out across communities with different populations.

154
00:16:11,320 --> 00:16:17,460
And it was also tied for the highest average annual growth rate and criminal instances during that same period.

155
00:16:17,460 --> 00:16:25,960
So again, that's been increasing the top graph there just shows a linear regression line which is the best fit line across that graph.

156
00:16:26,880 --> 00:16:33,800
And the formula they're showing that along that line if you use that line as the as the growth over time.

157
00:16:34,560 --> 00:16:39,040
That's an increase of 127 incidents annually over that period of time.

158
00:16:41,080 --> 00:16:45,360
is criminal incidents. So clearance rate is the proportion of criminal incidents

159
00:16:45,360 --> 00:16:51,360
solved by the police. It's a metric that stats Canada reports solved by the police. I've

160
00:16:51,360 --> 00:16:56,500
put in quotations. It can mean a few things. It can mean that a charge was laid. It can mean that

161
00:16:56,500 --> 00:17:02,820
there was enough evidence to lay a charge, but there was a different outcome. So solved, I've left

162
00:17:02,820 --> 00:17:11,500
in quotations, to some degree. So, guys, planetary decreased over that period of time, and it had

163
00:17:11,500 --> 00:17:19,680
the largest decline of the benchmark municipalities. All of them were very close to the same over that

164
00:17:19,680 --> 00:17:27,320
period of time other than one of them. So, yeah, and clearance rate can be affected by

165
00:17:27,320 --> 00:17:32,680
by several things, including the mix of the incidents that are in there.

166
00:17:33,860 --> 00:17:36,480
So again, take that in context too.

167
00:17:38,480 --> 00:17:44,340
So when we get into cost of policing, Jordan has the highest average policing cost per

168
00:17:44,340 --> 00:17:46,800
capita of the benchmark communities at 5.11.

169
00:17:47,120 --> 00:17:49,460
Oh, that's actually the, that is incorrect.

170
00:17:49,780 --> 00:17:52,300
Second highest at 488, sorry about that.

171
00:17:53,900 --> 00:17:58,400
Out of those communities, we've also included the Canadian average in there for interest

172
00:17:58,400 --> 00:18:04,480
sake and then the Ontario average at $276 to give you some perspective. I think Winnipeg is

173
00:18:04,480 --> 00:18:09,180
probably just over that $400 per capita for the Winnipeg fleet service, somewhere in that ballpark.

174
00:18:10,400 --> 00:18:21,220
And then on the per property cost, this comes from the OPP reports these numbers and then this

175
00:18:21,220 --> 00:18:27,200
drive number is based on the cost is reported inside the FIR or divided by the number properties

176
00:18:27,200 --> 00:18:33,020
are in that report as well. So it's the highest of those communities where we were able to do that

177
00:18:33,020 --> 00:18:34,000
comparison as well.

178
00:18:38,270 --> 00:18:42,390
When we look at service strength, so Dryden has a relatively high number of

179
00:18:42,390 --> 00:18:48,690
small officers for its population. So 242 per 100,000. Again, they use the 100,000 population to

180
00:18:50,530 --> 00:18:58,710
provide that evening help for the benchmarking. Canada's average 188 in Ontario 185 over that period of

181
00:18:58,710 --> 00:19:08,050
time. And then some others along the way. You'll see that those particular community are municipal

182
00:19:08,050 --> 00:19:18,390
services. One of the challenges with the OPP can be, because of the regional model, they don't

183
00:19:18,390 --> 00:19:24,270
necessarily allocate officers to a particular municipality, they allocate them to the region,

184
00:19:24,270 --> 00:19:28,390
which makes it a little harder for us to do an apples to apples on some of the

185
00:19:28,390 --> 00:19:33,230
per officer calculations. So you'll find that in ones where we weren't able to do

186
00:19:33,230 --> 00:19:37,990
that fairly, we didn't use them, but use them in areas where we could.

187
00:19:41,700 --> 00:19:42,280
So when

188
00:19:42,280 --> 00:19:45,200
we talk about cross indicators, there are a few things that kind of hold true

189
00:19:45,200 --> 00:19:49,780
and they make sense when you walk through them. For example, this first graph has

190
00:19:49,780 --> 00:19:56,660
the cost per property again, you know, typically communities that have higher

191
00:19:56,660 --> 00:20:03,640
crime severity indexes have more police officers, which equals more cost. That generally holds

192
00:20:03,640 --> 00:20:08,780
true, and when we graph these things out, there are times when we find significant outliers

193
00:20:08,780 --> 00:20:13,120
inside of those things, and there's times where we don't, if everybody in the benchmarking

194
00:20:13,120 --> 00:20:20,420
fits pretty well. And certainly in this case, you know, Dryden has the high CSI of this particular

195
00:20:20,420 --> 00:20:25,520
group, and it also has the highest cost per property. You know, on the graph on the right,

196
00:20:25,980 --> 00:20:31,160
you know, Smith falls, you know, I would say to my, at least stands out in that graph as an example,

197
00:20:31,160 --> 00:20:39,080
but you know, Dryden's high CSI and a number of incidents certainly do fit logically with the

198
00:20:39,080 --> 00:20:43,940
fact that it's cost and it's officers' population are high compared to the comparator group as well.

199
00:20:47,070 --> 00:20:52,610
So that's benchmarking in a nutshell. Again, you know, it was an exercise that we were asked to do

200
00:20:52,610 --> 00:20:57,750
to provide some context and provide some information to folks who likely don't spend a lot of time

201
00:20:58,370 --> 00:21:02,930
working in this type of data or seeing these types of things. So hopefully it provides folks

202
00:21:02,930 --> 00:21:12,630
some context to be able to absorb all of that. So on to the service comparison. So we did this

203
00:21:12,630 --> 00:21:19,210
exercise in the last analysis as well. There are a couple of minor things that have changed that we've

204
00:21:19,210 --> 00:21:24,690
highlighted, but we've included the table from last time with pretty much the same components

205
00:21:24,690 --> 00:21:32,710
to it. So, from a staffing level point of view, DPS has 20 sworn officers at last time,

206
00:21:33,670 --> 00:21:45,810
and five civilians. The new OPP drawing detachment would have 57.89, including the 25.89 that

207
00:21:45,810 --> 00:21:47,550
that were included in the costing proposal.

208
00:21:47,810 --> 00:21:49,650
Of course, the other side of that being the folks

209
00:21:49,650 --> 00:21:51,730
that are already there doing the region.

210
00:21:52,510 --> 00:21:56,850
And then 9.6 civilians, including the six FTEs

211
00:21:57,290 --> 00:21:59,070
that were added in the costing proposal.

212
00:22:01,270 --> 00:22:02,210
Excuse me, Chad.

213
00:22:02,830 --> 00:22:02,950
Yeah.

214
00:22:03,950 --> 00:22:06,870
Would you like questions as you go in each section

215
00:22:06,870 --> 00:22:08,350
or would you prefer to wait till the end?

216
00:22:08,590 --> 00:22:10,130
Whatever works best for you, sir.

217
00:22:11,350 --> 00:22:14,130
Okay, well, we've just finished the benchmarking.

218
00:22:14,130 --> 00:22:16,170
Councillor Shane McKinnon had his hand up.

219
00:22:17,210 --> 00:22:20,470
Councillor McKinnon, did you have a question on the benchmarking?

220
00:22:21,190 --> 00:22:24,910
A number of them. Mr. Chair, thank you very much.

221
00:22:26,230 --> 00:22:29,070
Thank you, Mr. Lins for your report.

222
00:22:30,470 --> 00:22:36,650
As a few things have changed since 2019, and I'm sure we'll get to all of that.

223
00:22:38,250 --> 00:22:43,590
Just to note about my questions, I don't believe we have met or discussed the report at all.

224
00:22:43,590 --> 00:22:45,650
I'm not on the cost and committee.

225
00:22:45,770 --> 00:22:47,350
I'm not on the police services board.

226
00:22:48,050 --> 00:22:52,150
I've got 30 years of police service with 10 as a police executive.

227
00:22:52,870 --> 00:22:55,490
So I'll be asking some questions based on my experience.

228
00:22:55,510 --> 00:22:58,790
The first one is in regards to benchmarking.

229
00:22:59,750 --> 00:23:05,630
I don't know how this particular crime severity index morphed

230
00:23:05,630 --> 00:23:07,010
into the report.

231
00:23:07,630 --> 00:23:09,150
It wasn't in the last report.

232
00:23:10,070 --> 00:23:12,470
I thought we were going to base our decision.

233
00:23:12,470 --> 00:23:32,230
And on this whole thing based based upon cost, but none the last I obviously have this issue with a crash severity index and in particular, I'd like to point to, I think appendix to we could go to appendix to which qualifies some of the things or

234
00:23:32,230 --> 00:23:40,630
to qualify some of the things that you're talking about, and that'd be table eight and appendix

235
00:23:40,630 --> 00:23:40,910
two,

236
00:23:50,500 --> 00:23:51,200
and we're there.

237
00:23:52,340 --> 00:24:05,050
What I have a concern about the indication of violent and property crimes, because if

238
00:24:05,050 --> 00:24:12,030
look at Trident, for example, the violent crimes and the property crimes are almost 50-50

239
00:24:12,030 --> 00:24:20,910
split. That indicates quite a few things. Then if you go to Canora, Canora is almost two times

240
00:24:20,910 --> 00:24:27,830
violent crimes versus property crimes. Sulicout is almost three times violent crime versus property

241
00:24:27,830 --> 00:24:34,230
crimes. Red Lake is twice as many violent crimes as property crimes. Fort Francis is one and a half

242
00:24:34,230 --> 00:24:40,030
times, and these are all estimates, but why aren't we focusing on that?

243
00:24:40,170 --> 00:24:42,070
Why are we not doing it a deeper dive?

244
00:24:42,250 --> 00:24:45,850
And by the way, I think you touched on it, but you didn't clarify it.

245
00:24:46,070 --> 00:24:52,310
It's much easier to solve a violent crime, in my opinion, because you have witnesses,

246
00:24:53,170 --> 00:24:55,350
than a property called crime.

247
00:24:55,830 --> 00:24:58,550
And that skews your clearance rates.

248
00:24:59,530 --> 00:25:07,110
So, benchmarking really needs a deeper dive before it's held out as a tool to determine

249
00:25:07,110 --> 00:25:09,570
such an important issue as this.

250
00:25:10,470 --> 00:25:17,150
You know, Howard Crimes reported by individual police services or the OPP versus the Dryden

251
00:25:17,150 --> 00:25:27,030
Police Service, our theft under $5,000 reported as Crimes, are they cleared in a different

252
00:25:27,030 --> 00:25:27,550
manner?

253
00:25:27,550 --> 00:25:29,350
under the crime severity.

254
00:25:29,510 --> 00:25:33,030
And I know that they're weighted, but how are they weighted?

255
00:25:33,170 --> 00:25:33,930
We don't know that.

256
00:25:34,130 --> 00:25:37,450
So it's almost an indictment of the Dryden Police Service

257
00:25:38,110 --> 00:25:41,210
based upon information that we haven't dug into.

258
00:25:41,810 --> 00:25:44,490
And I appreciate you had, you were either asked

259
00:25:44,490 --> 00:25:46,470
or you volunteered to put it in your report.

260
00:25:47,150 --> 00:25:51,030
But I think it's a poor reflection or an attempt

261
00:25:51,030 --> 00:25:53,350
to poorly reflect on our police service.

262
00:25:54,430 --> 00:26:00,450
You know, our assaults reported after the fact that's the question on a lot of police

263
00:26:00,450 --> 00:26:01,130
services now.

264
00:26:01,650 --> 00:26:08,450
If you were reporting assault duties later, does it, in fact, get reported on the, as

265
00:26:08,450 --> 00:26:09,710
a severe crime?

266
00:26:10,490 --> 00:26:16,510
So, this whole new angle that didn't appear in the 2019 report, I guess it's designed

267
00:26:16,510 --> 00:26:22,670
to show Dryden as a hotbed of crime, but what relevance would it have to this costing

268
00:26:22,670 --> 00:26:32,510
request. You know, I guess that's my question. What relevance does the crime severity

269
00:26:32,510 --> 00:26:41,870
index have to choosing a police service, unless you're insinuating that the OPP can do a much

270
00:26:41,870 --> 00:26:48,150
better job at policing driving? So I don't know the relevance or why it would be in this report.

271
00:26:48,150 --> 00:26:49,230
can you explain that?

272
00:26:51,350 --> 00:26:55,330
Mr. Linz, before you do, I'm going to ask our CAO who's got his hand up to

273
00:26:56,030 --> 00:26:56,810
for comment.

274
00:26:59,290 --> 00:27:05,290
Thank you and through the chair. I'll let Mr. Linz comment, but I would like

275
00:27:05,290 --> 00:27:10,310
to say that MMP was requested to provide this benchmarking data by the Costing Committee

276
00:27:11,430 --> 00:27:19,010
and that's what they did. I think that our DPS leadership could probably shed more light on

277
00:27:19,010 --> 00:27:21,170
on many of these benchmarks next week

278
00:27:21,170 --> 00:27:23,450
when they present two counsel.

279
00:27:24,410 --> 00:27:26,890
And I think some of these questions maybe should be asked

280
00:27:26,890 --> 00:27:28,370
of DPS leadership.

281
00:27:29,210 --> 00:27:30,930
But I think the benchmarking data

282
00:27:30,930 --> 00:27:33,610
does spark many questions, counselor McKinnon,

283
00:27:34,110 --> 00:27:35,450
many like your own.

284
00:27:36,070 --> 00:27:37,590
And I have many myself.

285
00:27:38,910 --> 00:27:41,470
I couldn't agree with you more, Mr. Neswood.

286
00:27:41,550 --> 00:27:42,890
I think you're absolutely right

287
00:27:42,890 --> 00:27:47,930
that we should be hearing from the DPS on this and the OPP.

288
00:27:49,010 --> 00:27:52,410
before it goes out in a survey to the community,

289
00:27:52,410 --> 00:27:55,070
which unfortunately I think happened today.

290
00:27:55,870 --> 00:27:58,370
So I guess you get my point,

291
00:27:58,450 --> 00:28:01,110
but Mr. Linz, thank you if you could respond.

292
00:28:01,930 --> 00:28:05,750
No, thank you and you make some good points.

293
00:28:05,870 --> 00:28:06,830
There's no question, as I said,

294
00:28:06,970 --> 00:28:09,550
I think I caution folks to,

295
00:28:10,030 --> 00:28:12,730
you've got to take this stuff kind of in a conglomerate

296
00:28:12,730 --> 00:28:15,630
and as Roger alluded to,

297
00:28:15,950 --> 00:28:17,890
it was something we were asked to do to provide

298
00:28:19,770 --> 00:28:26,930
some context to it. So folks had some background information and had some understanding of maybe where is Dryden in all of that.

299
00:28:27,970 --> 00:28:33,470
We left it at a fairly purely statistical level to kind of leave some of those elements out, but I agree with you.

300
00:28:33,530 --> 00:28:37,970
There's some nuance to those pieces that you mentioned the clearance rate.

301
00:28:38,770 --> 00:28:48,990
You're absolutely correct if you've got small numbers of relatively petty property crime, etc.

302
00:28:48,990 --> 00:28:52,190
There are lots of those crimes are never solved.

303
00:28:52,710 --> 00:28:56,910
For lots of reasons, often, as you alluded, no witnesses.

304
00:28:57,430 --> 00:29:00,030
At times when folks are busy, they're not a priority as well.

305
00:29:00,150 --> 00:29:04,430
There's lots of other things to be pending priority on to your point about, or serious crimes

306
00:29:04,430 --> 00:29:07,570
typically get the resources and all those other things.

307
00:29:07,870 --> 00:29:12,230
So you're absolutely correct about that.

308
00:29:12,330 --> 00:29:17,990
And again, I caution folks to kind of take none of these stats independently to make any

309
00:29:17,990 --> 00:29:22,350
decision with, but to use them together in context to kind of help help have a general

310
00:29:22,350 --> 00:29:24,690
understanding of kind of what's going on.

311
00:29:26,470 --> 00:29:29,790
Thank you, Mr. Chair.

312
00:29:30,250 --> 00:29:30,450
Thank you.

313
00:29:31,150 --> 00:29:32,670
I'm sorry, Councillor McKinnon.

314
00:29:33,010 --> 00:29:34,510
I have other questions from other Councillors.

315
00:29:35,430 --> 00:29:36,270
Thank you.

316
00:29:41,610 --> 00:29:42,330
Councillor McKinnon.

317
00:29:45,790 --> 00:29:48,710
Thank you, Mr. Chair.

318
00:29:50,470 --> 00:29:55,790
My next question is in regards to cost for property.

319
00:29:55,790 --> 00:29:59,890
And I know we've gone up and down this particular street.

320
00:30:00,000 --> 00:30:29,540
Both in the last report, and this report, and there were some variants there that I think people should be aware of. And one of them is the disparity between using cost per property, using cost per capita, using information from stats Canada, using other Ontario stats on exactly coming up with a cost.

321
00:30:30,300 --> 00:30:34,880
It used to be a per household now for property, for comparison.

322
00:30:35,360 --> 00:30:44,160
Also the fact that we have, Kenore for example, has twice as many properties than we do because

323
00:30:44,160 --> 00:30:48,720
of their amalgamation scheme back in the 80s and 90s.

324
00:30:49,060 --> 00:30:54,540
As well, Silicon has a special deal with the problems on paying.

325
00:30:54,540 --> 00:30:58,720
So, their cost per property are artificially low.

326
00:30:59,540 --> 00:31:06,820
When, in fact, they pay, I would suggest they pay twice as much as you're indicating in your presentation.

327
00:31:07,300 --> 00:31:09,860
But those are a couple of things that the public should be aware of.

328
00:31:10,300 --> 00:31:15,260
I'm asking you to comment on those if that, in fact, was part of your research.

329
00:31:17,380 --> 00:31:24,140
Yeah, so the data we've used, we wanted to keep it the publicly available data that we didn't

330
00:31:25,120 --> 00:31:31,280
do any manipulating to. We wanted to report it as it was reported publicly, so that's why we

331
00:31:31,280 --> 00:31:38,220
used the stats 10 numbers as they sit in the cost per property numbers as they'd want. We had to do

332
00:31:38,220 --> 00:31:43,320
the math on, you know, and again, as I said, we took the cost from the FIR and the properties and

333
00:31:43,320 --> 00:31:44,600
and kind of did that math in our home.

334
00:31:45,360 --> 00:31:49,580
And that's a fully advertised cost as well in there,

335
00:31:49,820 --> 00:31:51,760
the 10, 40 average over the five years.

336
00:31:52,020 --> 00:31:54,380
So that's why we went that route.

337
00:31:57,620 --> 00:32:01,100
So yeah, we didn't include any of those nuances

338
00:32:01,100 --> 00:32:02,580
as we used alluded to though.

339
00:32:05,910 --> 00:32:06,790
Mr. Nesbitt.

340
00:32:11,090 --> 00:32:12,210
Thank you and through the chair,

341
00:32:12,330 --> 00:32:15,570
just to add a further comment, I guess to Mr. Lins,

342
00:32:16,270 --> 00:32:18,690
I think from a standpoint of staff reviewing

343
00:32:18,690 --> 00:32:25,790
the cost per property. Both the treasure and I are very confident in those numbers that are

344
00:32:25,790 --> 00:32:31,910
presented. Councillor Schaiman-Kennedy is correct. There are a handful of municipalities

345
00:32:31,910 --> 00:32:37,690
that qualify for, I'll call it a rebate. I don't know that the province would call it a rebate,

346
00:32:37,790 --> 00:32:43,530
but I'll call it a rebate. And I think silicoats is probably in the neighborhood of about 30 to 35%.

347
00:32:43,530 --> 00:32:51,430
So, right now we know that Canora is the highest cost per property out of all of the

348
00:32:51,430 --> 00:32:53,550
OPP police municipalities.

349
00:32:54,330 --> 00:33:02,150
I think if Siouacou didn't have the rebate, then they may qualify as the highest, but

350
00:33:02,150 --> 00:33:05,810
that does again provide some context to Dryden's costs.

351
00:33:06,970 --> 00:33:07,310
Thank you.

352
00:33:09,760 --> 00:33:10,940
Thank you, Mr. Nesbitt.

353
00:33:11,200 --> 00:33:12,180
Councillor Carlucci.

354
00:33:14,300 --> 00:33:15,120
Thank you, Chair.

355
00:33:15,200 --> 00:33:15,700
I've read your report.

356
00:33:15,960 --> 00:33:18,540
I find it very thorough, very well done, very detailed.

357
00:33:19,320 --> 00:33:22,760
And it's sort of on the same line as that Councillor Schaimie can have asked.

358
00:33:22,860 --> 00:33:29,260
I think you clarified the fact that you did use the FIRs that are public information that anybody

359
00:33:29,260 --> 00:33:30,240
has access to.

360
00:33:31,220 --> 00:33:36,080
And based on that information, I mean, it does show you population, it does show you households,

361
00:33:36,080 --> 00:33:40,680
it does show you a cost of policing fire and whatever else you need to know on those

362
00:33:40,680 --> 00:33:41,320
FIRs.

363
00:33:41,460 --> 00:33:44,640
So really I encourage the public if they need to look at that.

364
00:33:45,100 --> 00:33:48,160
It's something that's to do, right?

365
00:33:48,400 --> 00:33:51,580
So I just want to confirm that you did do that and you mentioned that.

366
00:33:51,720 --> 00:33:52,880
So that was my question.

367
00:33:52,960 --> 00:33:54,240
You answered it at the same time.

368
00:33:54,240 --> 00:33:54,920
So thank you.

369
00:34:01,080 --> 00:34:02,260
Councillor Shane McKinnon.

370
00:34:02,900 --> 00:34:03,800
Thank you, Mr. Chair.

371
00:34:04,000 --> 00:34:09,880
I'm in the last question about this, Mr. Lynn, is regardless of the cost per household

372
00:34:09,880 --> 00:34:19,360
sold for the Dryden Police Service at the present time, but that cost will, according to

373
00:34:19,360 --> 00:34:28,060
your model, go up with the acceptance of an OPP contract, at least for the shorter.

374
00:34:29,580 --> 00:34:33,760
In that three-year proposal, absolutely, yeah, it would go up, yeah.

375
00:34:33,760 --> 00:34:34,620
Yeah,

376
00:34:42,760 --> 00:34:47,380
and Mr. Lynn, if I could just clarify that that's the one time three-year transition

377
00:34:47,380 --> 00:34:51,260
cost to the policing OPP costing model.

378
00:34:51,980 --> 00:34:59,140
Yeah, the three-year model as it's provided is at a higher cost than your current DPS

379
00:34:59,140 --> 00:34:59,720
cost.

380
00:35:00,000 --> 00:35:04,640
So, logically, your numerators going up, the denominators staying the same, or at least

381
00:35:04,640 --> 00:35:05,940
we've assumed it's staying the same.

382
00:35:06,120 --> 00:35:09,380
So that cost for property is going to be higher for those three years, for sure.

383
00:35:09,380 --> 00:35:29,740
And we will not, a community that transitions to the provincial police, those three year transition costs are always generally always higher but they're not those first three years or not on the provincial OPP costing model.

384
00:35:31,140 --> 00:35:32,820
That's correct.

385
00:35:32,820 --> 00:35:39,980
They're there, an agreed upon contract for that three year period after that three year period then the

386
00:35:40,580 --> 00:35:46,560
Model transfers into the call for service cost model. It does use property number of properties for

387
00:35:47,360 --> 00:35:52,640
So to to allocate several costs and will when we get into the cost model will go through those

388
00:35:52,640 --> 00:35:58,360
But there is a transition after year three into that model from the three year contract period

389
00:35:59,830 --> 00:36:03,650
Okay, thank you. I want to carry on with service delivery comparison

390
00:36:04,290 --> 00:36:09,770
Sure. Thank you. Thank you for that. So we talked about the number of officers. So the 20

391
00:36:09,770 --> 00:36:17,430
sworn and five civilian in DPS and the 57, again, including the 25.89 added to

392
00:36:18,330 --> 00:36:24,430
inside of the costee model and the civilians as well. Baring in mind, you know, DPS is a local

393
00:36:24,430 --> 00:36:29,490
policing model. Those officers are dedicated just to the municipality of Dryden and Dryden alone,

394
00:36:29,490 --> 00:36:35,310
Whereas that bigger number of officers in the OPP model is allocated across the region,

395
00:36:35,450 --> 00:36:44,330
which would include the surrounding settlements as well as the provincial region inside of that territory as well.

396
00:36:44,890 --> 00:36:49,650
So more officers, but bigger, bigger space to cover.

397
00:36:49,910 --> 00:36:53,210
So both have 24 seven policing.

398
00:36:53,750 --> 00:36:56,490
We talked to both of both stated minimums.

399
00:36:56,490 --> 00:37:03,990
You know, the DPS in their collective agreement has a two officer on patrol at all times.

400
00:37:04,670 --> 00:37:08,530
Those are often in there for safety reasons.

401
00:37:09,370 --> 00:37:14,490
You know, when we talked to DPS, they stated they believe they're surpassing that probably

402
00:37:14,490 --> 00:37:15,530
three quarters of the time.

403
00:37:16,110 --> 00:37:20,970
They didn't have any data on that that we could use to show any analysis or what that might

404
00:37:20,970 --> 00:37:26,210
look like, how often by how much are they surpassing to off his own patrol at all times,

405
00:37:26,210 --> 00:37:29,490
but certainly anecdotally, they provided that.

406
00:37:30,290 --> 00:37:33,070
You know, from answering calls, and this is something we talked about last time,

407
00:37:33,150 --> 00:37:37,050
you know, certainly the inspector is available to respond to calls while on duty,

408
00:37:37,330 --> 00:37:43,650
even as is the community safety officer and court security officer.

409
00:37:43,950 --> 00:37:45,830
In certain instances there, they're sworn officers.

410
00:37:45,830 --> 00:37:47,650
They could respond to calls as well.

411
00:37:48,550 --> 00:37:50,010
The chief police typically doesn't.

412
00:37:50,230 --> 00:37:51,590
We had talked to him about that.

413
00:37:52,810 --> 00:37:59,610
he typically wouldn't, obviously, if it was an absolute emergency, he could, but he stated he

414
00:37:59,610 --> 00:38:07,010
typically would not. On the OPP side, you know, because it utilizes an integrated regional model,

415
00:38:07,170 --> 00:38:14,190
they don't have a stated minimum built into that, so they won't guarantee an absolute minimum in

416
00:38:14,190 --> 00:38:19,590
any zone at one time, but they did say you could reasonably expect to see three to four

417
00:38:19,590 --> 00:38:23,590
or constables plus a supervisor within the city on a fairly consistent basis.

418
00:38:24,950 --> 00:38:30,790
They do provide that in need times of need either outside of the city of

419
00:38:30,790 --> 00:38:35,250
drive or inside that might shift, depending on where the need is in any

420
00:38:35,250 --> 00:38:39,090
particular instance, but that you could reasonably expect three or four plus that

421
00:38:39,090 --> 00:38:44,110
supervisor. They as well would be able to use their community street crime unit and

422
00:38:44,110 --> 00:38:48,870
the court's security and community safety officers if they needed to in certain

423
00:38:48,870 --> 00:38:53,070
instances, and there's a support and operational

424
00:38:53,070 --> 00:38:56,750
sergeant that could be deployable in certain instances as well.

425
00:39:03,780 --> 00:39:10,100
So the services offered, so the specialized services not offered by DPS are

426
00:39:10,100 --> 00:39:15,860
currently provided by the OPP. The OPP have historically not charged for those

427
00:39:15,860 --> 00:39:22,640
services. At the time that we did the last report, they were sending a letter that

428
00:39:22,640 --> 00:39:27,420
outlined those services, but they weren't charging for them yet. I believe that's still the case.

429
00:39:28,660 --> 00:39:34,000
And then on the OPP side, so they will provide the City of Drywall services that DPS currently

430
00:39:34,000 --> 00:39:41,700
does, as well as their provincial responsibilities, with the exception being the school crossing guards.

431
00:39:42,300 --> 00:39:46,320
And I think there's been some changes maybe in that recently. Change from last time was animal and

432
00:39:46,320 --> 00:39:51,760
parking control was removed from DPS responsibility. That was an exception last time that the OPP

433
00:39:51,760 --> 00:39:57,440
you wouldn't have done, and now that's changed, so it has become moot to some degrees, so.

434
00:39:58,280 --> 00:40:02,520
And in the city of Dryden, we'll continue, regardless of the model that we're responsible for

435
00:40:02,520 --> 00:40:09,540
by-law enforcement and the crossing guards as well, regardless of the model. So, community safety

436
00:40:09,540 --> 00:40:14,780
officer side, Dryden has a dedicated community safety officer. It's dedicated to Dryden and Dryden

437
00:40:14,780 --> 00:40:22,140
alone, the OPP proposal has one CSO in it as well. It would be shared between the municipalities

438
00:40:22,140 --> 00:40:22,740
in the region.

439
00:40:25,000 --> 00:40:29,080
On the community policing side, certainly, you know, when we talk to folks,

440
00:40:29,420 --> 00:40:35,020
you know, DPS is certainly actively involved in the community. When we talk to communities

441
00:40:35,020 --> 00:40:40,940
that have the OPP's police, they echoed the same. They participate actively in involved

442
00:40:40,940 --> 00:40:45,520
involved in community events and parades and all those kind of community elements.

443
00:40:46,760 --> 00:40:51,340
And both, again, feedback from the DPS received me very open and responsive to work with

444
00:40:51,340 --> 00:40:54,320
the city on trying to solve problems in the city.

445
00:40:55,220 --> 00:41:00,460
Feedback we had from folks that have the OPP as their police service was the same that

446
00:41:00,460 --> 00:41:06,600
they are typically quite open to working with the municipality and trying to solve local

447
00:41:06,600 --> 00:41:07,880
problems related to police.

448
00:41:07,880 --> 00:41:08,400
So,

449
00:41:12,760 --> 00:41:18,480
on the additional and extra elements, ambulance calls, so the DPS is currently responding

450
00:41:18,480 --> 00:41:20,480
to and attending all ambulance calls.

451
00:41:21,160 --> 00:41:27,320
The OPP, and this is similar to the last report, what it's, and ambulance calls as they

452
00:41:27,320 --> 00:41:30,020
were dispatched to, if they were dispatched, they would attend, if they weren't dispatched,

453
00:41:30,160 --> 00:41:30,700
they wouldn't attend.

454
00:41:31,860 --> 00:41:34,760
DPS is attending them all at the current moment.

455
00:41:35,940 --> 00:41:41,100
Mental health transport, so in the last report, DPS was still in certain circumstances.

456
00:41:42,120 --> 00:41:45,800
doing some mental health transports, they no longer are, they're providing a security

457
00:41:45,800 --> 00:41:54,560
escort to health service providers to the ambulance. OPP will do the same, both charge

458
00:41:54,560 --> 00:42:01,320
back accordingly for that service. Hospital security, DPS will remain at the hospital

459
00:42:01,320 --> 00:42:08,060
with a patient when requested, subject to availability, and the OPP will remain at the hospital with

460
00:42:08,060 --> 00:42:14,180
the patient for an agreed upon period. Officers typically leave once a form one is signed, so

461
00:42:15,070 --> 00:42:20,660
it's still a little more finite on the OPP side. So, prisoner transport DPS currently

462
00:42:20,660 --> 00:42:27,080
provides the city prisoner transport services. The OPP would do the same and build back on a cost

463
00:42:27,080 --> 00:42:35,320
recovery basis. And court security DPS is currently responsible for court security. On the OPP's

464
00:42:35,320 --> 00:42:40,180
model they would be responsible for, of course, security as well, and they have a mechanism to build

465
00:42:40,180 --> 00:42:45,240
back for that too. And then just from a special team's point of view, the OPP of course has

466
00:42:45,240 --> 00:42:52,320
access to the special teams that drive and currently has access to through the OPP. Again,

467
00:42:52,480 --> 00:42:54,720
the OPP hasn't traditionally charged for those things.

468
00:42:57,000 --> 00:43:00,920
But now it would be a part of the overall

469
00:43:00,920 --> 00:43:01,800
detachment. So

470
00:43:05,890 --> 00:43:11,910
that's a summary on the service side. Sorry, before you let Chad

471
00:43:11,910 --> 00:43:14,410
any questions, Councillors on the service side.

472
00:43:22,140 --> 00:43:23,120
Councillor Shane McKinnon.

473
00:43:23,680 --> 00:43:32,120
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just one question, Mr. Lins. The indication is that the OPP will be

474
00:43:32,120 --> 00:43:39,480
here and ready to go when they're needed and things. If they have an occurrence, let's say,

475
00:43:39,480 --> 00:43:42,360
of the time, 40 minutes away.

476
00:43:44,620 --> 00:43:49,380
And if it's an on-hand, all hands on deck type of occurrence,

477
00:43:49,620 --> 00:43:51,220
they could, in fact, leave the city

478
00:43:51,220 --> 00:43:52,260
unprotected, is that true?

479
00:43:53,880 --> 00:43:56,420
So it's probably a better question for them.

480
00:43:56,800 --> 00:43:57,800
Frankly, that is for me.

481
00:43:58,000 --> 00:44:01,040
They're gonna answer it probably a lot more accurately.

482
00:44:01,780 --> 00:44:03,620
You know, when we've talked to them about those instances,

483
00:44:03,900 --> 00:44:05,360
they have certainly said they have the ability

484
00:44:05,360 --> 00:44:06,340
to shift resources.

485
00:44:07,420 --> 00:44:20,140
I don't think they would use the word unprotected, I think they would say, though, that at times they may have to shift, and I think they would counter by saying at times they could also shift resources in to driving in an all-hands on deck.

486
00:44:20,640 --> 00:44:24,500
But again, it's probably a question that they can answer more accurately than I can.

487
00:44:25,520 --> 00:44:30,100
Thank you. And if I may, Mr. Chair, one more, unless someone else has a question.

488
00:44:30,100 --> 00:44:32,580
Yeah, go ahead, Councilor McKinnon.

489
00:44:33,440 --> 00:44:35,180
Thank you, Mr. Chair.

490
00:44:35,460 --> 00:44:41,840
And we heard from the staff sergeant at the proposal, when they put the proposal forward.

491
00:44:43,820 --> 00:44:50,760
And I wonder if you have a comment on this that the OPP in general are experiencing recruitment

492
00:44:50,760 --> 00:44:55,980
issues way across the province, and I think for a number of reasons, not the least of

493
00:44:55,980 --> 00:44:59,940
which is releasing is not become a...

494
00:45:00,000 --> 00:45:28,540
We'll popular location in the last several years. Is that something that you've gleaned from the folks that you've talked to. So it didn't come up in our interviews. It's a really good question. It didn't come up in our interviews. I would concur with you, though, that we've kind of heard that across the country to some degree that it can be challenging. You know, when we've worked with the RCMP, we've certainly heard that.

495
00:45:28,540 --> 00:45:34,740
some of the bigger municipal services, we've heard that as well. I think for some of the reasons you've alluded to that

496
00:45:36,180 --> 00:45:43,540
It's a very challenging location and that folks are kind of given maybe more scrutiny now than they did 10 or 15 or 20 years ago

497
00:45:44,340 --> 00:45:44,780
so

498
00:45:46,040 --> 00:45:48,120
Pardon me or 30 years ago

499
00:45:50,640 --> 00:45:58,100
I I started going this veered when I was at the farm last month and I realized it wasn't as white as I then you went to white or my thoughts

500
00:46:00,460 --> 00:46:12,680
So it didn't so ask your question. It didn't come up in the interviews. Again, I think it's a good question for them to ask them directly, but I would concur we've heard that generally about policing in general.

501
00:46:13,080 --> 00:46:13,500
Thank you.

502
00:46:13,500 --> 00:46:14,380
Thank

503
00:46:18,440 --> 00:46:24,360
you, and if I may, I think this whole question of turnover within with respect

504
00:46:24,360 --> 00:46:30,960
to OPP or DPS is a good question, and I think we'll have an opportunity next week as

505
00:46:30,960 --> 00:46:36,620
well to hear from the Dryden Police Services in terms of their recruitment issues and what

506
00:46:36,620 --> 00:46:41,240
their turnover rate has been like in the last several years and what challenges they face.

507
00:46:41,240 --> 00:46:46,320
So it might be a good discussion for comparison purposes as well,

508
00:46:48,980 --> 00:46:50,240
Mr. Lind, you want to carry

509
00:46:50,240 --> 00:46:51,880
on with stakeholder consultations?

510
00:46:52,540 --> 00:46:52,960
Sure.

511
00:46:53,200 --> 00:46:58,940
So as I mentioned in the entry, we focused on talking to communities that we're in some

512
00:46:58,940 --> 00:47:02,020
state of flux or had recently been in some state of flux.

513
00:47:02,220 --> 00:47:10,100
That is, they've transitioned from a municipal service to the OPP or counter to that, either

514
00:47:10,100 --> 00:47:14,720
recently are in the process of going the other way from the OPP to another service provider.

515
00:47:16,160 --> 00:47:22,480
So we started with, you know, transition from municipal to OPP. You know, we've labeled

516
00:47:22,480 --> 00:47:27,700
the tables as perceived strengths and weaknesses. Certainly that's the perception of those folks

517
00:47:27,700 --> 00:47:34,160
they have, you know, certain thoughts on it. Whether these, you know, hold true, there's certainly

518
00:47:34,160 --> 00:47:38,120
it's certainly anecdotal evidence, but we've labeled it as perceived just just

519
00:47:38,120 --> 00:47:43,440
to reiterate that. So certainly from the strengths of the transition from municipal

520
00:47:43,440 --> 00:47:49,260
to PPP, you know, I think generally folks said the cost savings offered by the OPP, you were

521
00:47:50,560 --> 00:47:56,820
you know, fairly significant as a contributing factor as to why, you know, there was some desire

522
00:47:56,820 --> 00:48:03,960
to move into that contract paradigm versus the other municipal service. Certainly reduced liability

523
00:48:03,960 --> 00:48:08,560
ability was mentioned and administrative burden I can kind of contract this off and

524
00:48:09,100 --> 00:48:13,440
someone else can handle this now instead of us handling it as a municipality.

525
00:48:15,240 --> 00:48:20,180
Certainly the OPP as related to that are we're perceived to very comprehensive policies

526
00:48:20,180 --> 00:48:25,600
and procedures that we're not having to update and we're not having to review and redo and

527
00:48:25,600 --> 00:48:29,720
they've kind of got that all taken care of in a package for us and that relieves us a lot

528
00:48:29,720 --> 00:48:30,620
of stress and burden.

529
00:48:30,620 --> 00:48:37,300
And certainly folks alluded to the fact that there was concerns about response times

530
00:48:37,300 --> 00:48:38,780
and decreased levels of service.

531
00:48:39,680 --> 00:48:45,260
In general, though, the jurisdictions we spoke to said they were quite satisfied with response

532
00:48:45,260 --> 00:48:49,080
times and level of service to date.

533
00:48:49,380 --> 00:48:51,580
So we just wanted to throw that in there.

534
00:48:51,620 --> 00:48:56,540
It certainly was a concern of theirs, but to date, they've been quite pleased.

535
00:48:56,540 --> 00:49:12,440
So, on the weakness side of moving from municipal OPP in general, folks were mindful to let us know that moving from municipal service to the OPP is quite a time and resource-consuming process.

536
00:49:13,160 --> 00:49:17,220
There's a lot of effort that goes into that and don't underestimate it.

537
00:49:18,660 --> 00:49:24,800
There was also a little bit of discussion around, you know, PPM members, maybe not being

538
00:49:24,800 --> 00:49:30,500
dispatched to some very minor crimes, that maybe their local municipal service was attending

539
00:49:30,500 --> 00:49:30,740
to.

540
00:49:32,360 --> 00:49:36,700
And that they were allocating calls for service on a priority basis and some of those smaller

541
00:49:36,700 --> 00:49:41,340
things, maybe that folks were used to having the police show up to, that maybe they weren't.

542
00:49:41,860 --> 00:49:45,620
And again, that's perception, you know, just to make that point.

543
00:49:46,340 --> 00:49:52,340
And a bit of a discussion around loss of familiarity with officers because of the regional nature

544
00:49:52,340 --> 00:49:57,120
of the OPP, and the fact that as a big organization, folks certainly have lots of opportunity

545
00:49:57,120 --> 00:50:03,280
to move around and take on new things, and that certainly that there can be a bit of that

546
00:50:03,280 --> 00:50:03,680
as well.

547
00:50:04,040 --> 00:50:04,040
So,

548
00:50:07,440 --> 00:50:12,720
on the OPP to another provider, so again, we used the term another provider only because

549
00:50:12,720 --> 00:50:17,940
because there was, it wasn't necessarily that they were going to have their own municipal

550
00:50:17,940 --> 00:50:18,340
service.

551
00:50:18,520 --> 00:50:22,440
There was some looking at contracting to another municipal service.

552
00:50:23,800 --> 00:50:29,740
So perceived strengths, you know, because they had the OPP, you know, generally perceived

553
00:50:29,740 --> 00:50:35,300
to be quite effective at what they do, the good police service, and at the cost again,

554
00:50:35,460 --> 00:50:40,730
you know, were typically lower in comparison to the municipal service that had kind of

555
00:50:40,730 --> 00:50:47,590
receded the OPP and when they had the OPP contract. But on the weakness side, you know, municipalities

556
00:50:47,590 --> 00:50:54,190
really struggled with the call for service model a little bit. You know, I alluded to on the

557
00:50:54,190 --> 00:50:59,370
benchmarking where it's a bit challenging in that because of the regional model, there's not

558
00:50:59,370 --> 00:51:04,790
small officers kind of attached to areas or municipalities or contracts for that matter.

559
00:51:06,110 --> 00:51:21,050
And they don't pay a lot of attention, then, you know, how many officers are here, how many are there, and there were some municipalities that struggled with that, not being able to say, you know, 28% or 28 of these officers are mine because they're used regionally.

560
00:51:22,310 --> 00:51:31,850
Interestingly, the arcing fee does the other way they assign officers to a contract and then I think a time struggle a little bit more to track the calls for service that they go on.

561
00:51:31,850 --> 00:51:49,850
So some jurisdictions also perceive that they're going to put regarding policing priorities were not necessarily acted on if they weren't in alignment with the broader OPP strategy that there was there was other other masters that had to be answered to inside the system.

562
00:51:51,070 --> 00:52:02,990
And then one of the other points is again, these points that we've highlighted here, these are things we had heard a couple of times we didn't put down kind of every little nuanced point, just some things that kind of seem to come up a few times.

563
00:52:04,490 --> 00:52:15,770
The last one being the ability for me is to ask your request additional officers was was often sometimes perceived to be limited in some cases depending on the request so seasonal influx, etc.

564
00:52:16,570 --> 00:52:21,850
again, those are the perceptions of those communities, you know, the OPP or their municipal

565
00:52:21,850 --> 00:52:26,470
services could probably either, you know, refute or confirm any of those things, but certainly

566
00:52:26,470 --> 00:52:31,490
that was the perception of folks from both sides, both from the strengths of weakness

567
00:52:31,490 --> 00:52:33,910
as point of view when we talk to them. So,

568
00:52:37,290 --> 00:52:39,790
any questions on that one before we move on?

569
00:52:44,740 --> 00:52:48,320
Chad, I don't see any hands. I have one question. With respect to

570
00:52:48,320 --> 00:52:55,860
So people transitioning from OPP to another service provider, you noted in the strengths

571
00:52:55,860 --> 00:53:03,040
that the OPP's costs were lower than who they transitioned from in the first place.

572
00:53:03,920 --> 00:53:10,320
And so the driving factor in who did they transition back to or who did they transition,

573
00:53:11,100 --> 00:53:15,680
were in the process of transitioning to given the fact that their costs went down.

574
00:53:15,680 --> 00:53:18,440
What was the prime motivators there and who did they transition to?

575
00:53:20,240 --> 00:53:26,160
So the motivators were, you know, I think a combination of probably these three things on this

576
00:53:26,160 --> 00:53:34,300
slide, you know, some frustration around not feeling they were able to influence some of the

577
00:53:34,300 --> 00:53:40,680
services, I think, in the way that they wanted to was the primary motivator. And I have to apologize,

578
00:53:40,680 --> 00:53:46,160
councilor Bush I don't remember I think one of them might have still been

579
00:53:46,160 --> 00:53:50,460
in transition and I don't mirrored you might be able to help me out I can't

580
00:53:50,460 --> 00:53:54,400
remember and we didn't put it in the report because I think we wanted to give

581
00:53:54,400 --> 00:53:58,840
these folks a little bit of anonymity as well so maybe it's best that I don't

582
00:53:58,840 --> 00:53:59,180
remember.

583
00:54:02,730 --> 00:54:06,150
Okay thank you all go to councillor Shane McKinnon and then councillor

584
00:54:06,150 --> 00:54:06,950
or John Cardo-G.

585
00:54:10,480 --> 00:54:15,900
Mr. Chair, just in regards to this area, Mr. Lynn's,

586
00:54:16,780 --> 00:54:20,340
obviously moving away from our own municipal service

587
00:54:20,340 --> 00:54:24,820
to a OPP service is a win-way street here.

588
00:54:25,000 --> 00:54:26,920
I mean, we're, if we make that decision,

589
00:54:27,040 --> 00:54:27,840
we're not coming back.

590
00:54:28,020 --> 00:54:34,080
We're not looking at other services as an option.

591
00:54:35,380 --> 00:54:38,880
Did you pose the question to any of these municipal

592
00:54:38,880 --> 00:54:46,120
leaders. I assume it wasn't elected officials that was just CAO's as indicated in your report.

593
00:54:46,180 --> 00:54:47,520
That's correct. You were correct. Yep.

594
00:54:49,040 --> 00:54:52,900
Did you pose a question to them? If you could go back in time knowing what you know now,

595
00:54:53,220 --> 00:54:54,940
would you have given up your own police service?

596
00:54:58,200 --> 00:55:02,560
So I would say the ones that are transitioning back. I mean, I don't want to speak for them,

597
00:55:03,360 --> 00:55:06,680
but there are ones that are transitioning away from the OPP.

598
00:55:09,860 --> 00:55:15,260
So again, you know, I think I need to be careful and not speak for them, but they're moving away from me.

599
00:55:15,940 --> 00:55:17,200
For those reasons.

600
00:55:18,000 --> 00:55:19,800
I have other questions, but I see Mr.

601
00:55:20,540 --> 00:55:21,460
Councillor Karloucci.

602
00:55:24,280 --> 00:55:27,160
Through the chair, thanks again for your information.

603
00:55:27,720 --> 00:55:28,580
Just a question, I guess.

604
00:55:29,480 --> 00:55:33,780
Did you have a number of who came, how many went from OPP to another service and then vice versa?

605
00:55:34,620 --> 00:55:36,800
Turn your study to do ask that question.

606
00:55:37,880 --> 00:55:44,900
So we did, but we knew that too when we went into our interviews, we had picked them

607
00:55:44,900 --> 00:55:48,520
for particular reason, i.e. they'd either move to the OPP or moving away.

608
00:55:50,560 --> 00:55:54,500
So I don't think that percentage would be an indicator of some trend.

609
00:55:54,860 --> 00:55:58,980
It was just kind of the communities we had on the list that we knew that had been in some

610
00:55:58,980 --> 00:55:59,420
recent.

611
00:56:00,180 --> 00:56:01,000
Again, flux.

612
00:56:01,260 --> 00:56:02,440
They were making some transition.

613
00:56:02,440 --> 00:56:10,840
So I don't think the percentage of those would be an indicator of any statistically significant

614
00:56:10,840 --> 00:56:11,280
draft.

615
00:56:12,300 --> 00:56:12,880
That's fair.

616
00:56:13,520 --> 00:56:13,820
That's fair.

617
00:56:14,400 --> 00:56:14,780
Thanks.

618
00:56:17,070 --> 00:56:17,910
Thank you, Roger.

619
00:56:21,610 --> 00:56:22,150
Thank you.

620
00:56:22,290 --> 00:56:26,050
Just to add a couple of comments, I guess, to your question, Councillor Bush.

621
00:56:27,250 --> 00:56:32,670
I think overall the communities that we did speak to that were either, you know, I'd signal

622
00:56:32,670 --> 00:56:38,250
that they were looking to move away from the OPP or had already moved away, but we did ask the

623
00:56:38,250 --> 00:56:43,690
question in regards to consideration of moving to their own municipal force and I think in all

624
00:56:43,690 --> 00:56:52,170
cases it was cost prohibitive to do that. So in all cases they were looking at or had contracted

625
00:56:52,170 --> 00:56:58,510
with another municipal, neighboring municipal, larger municipal service to provide policing services.

626
00:56:58,510 --> 00:57:02,010
if that helps to answer your question.

627
00:57:03,490 --> 00:57:04,950
Yeah, Rodgeron is a great point.

628
00:57:05,110 --> 00:57:08,770
I think one of the things to note there as well is they had,

629
00:57:08,890 --> 00:57:09,950
that was an option for them.

630
00:57:10,630 --> 00:57:14,030
They were located in a geography where that was an option for them.

631
00:57:15,130 --> 00:57:18,650
Going back to municipal service, they found cost prohibitive

632
00:57:18,650 --> 00:57:21,110
but they're in a geography where they have some options.

633
00:57:22,630 --> 00:57:27,130
And just further comment in regards to Councillor Shane McKinnon's

634
00:57:29,570 --> 00:57:38,570
question about whether or not elected officials were spoken to. So, this particular study

635
00:57:39,130 --> 00:57:46,070
counselor McKinnon, we talked to city managers, CAOs, at various municipalities. During

636
00:57:46,070 --> 00:57:52,310
the last study though, we did talk with various municipalities. We talked to elected officials

637
00:57:52,310 --> 00:58:07,990
in some of those municipalities and even elected officials that were part of the police services board and such when decision when their decisions were made to transition to the OPP away from a municipal force and and in all of those cases,

638
00:58:09,590 --> 00:58:21,770
you know, those individuals were, they felt that it was the right decision at the time and they felt, you know, really years later that it was still the right decision and they were and very happy with the OPP service.

639
00:58:21,770 --> 00:58:34,510
So we have we have spoken with elected officials police services board members prior board members both current and prior board members in various municipalities thank you

640
00:58:37,510 --> 00:58:38,970
Councillor McKinnon.

641
00:58:39,690 --> 00:58:44,230
Thank you, Mr. Chair and thank you, Mr. Linz and Mr. Nesby for your comments.

642
00:58:45,610 --> 00:58:54,990
I've always felt that there's a certain trepidation by anyone speaking about their police service in a negative fashion.

643
00:58:55,290 --> 00:59:04,450
So I always take that in with a grain of salt, but the media focuses on the negative things rather than positive things most of the times.

644
00:59:04,450 --> 00:59:11,730
and in from minute elected officials, and I don't know Mr. Lindsey whether you heard this or Mr.

645
00:59:12,150 --> 00:59:19,750
Nezboot, whether it was I'm sure there's some anonymity to some of the folks who have been speaking out,

646
00:59:19,910 --> 00:59:26,790
but that they were upset with introductory offers that went sideways. There was a charge. There was

647
00:59:26,790 --> 00:59:32,770
too much after three years. There was no explanation about a call for service rationale that was different from

648
00:59:32,770 --> 00:59:39,610
what was proposed. My specific question is whether or not, because I heard this from an

649
00:59:39,610 --> 00:59:47,690
elected official, that they're in-person policing. So a police officer, he or she, attending

650
00:59:47,690 --> 00:59:52,590
a call, a theft under it. So, you know, my lawnmower is missing. It's the first time I've

651
00:59:52,590 --> 00:59:59,450
called the police in 20 years. I paid taxes in his town. And they've been put to or directed

652
00:59:59,450 --> 00:59:59,850
it to

653
01:00:00,000 --> 01:00:07,840
So, a telephone response unit, taking that personal service away, and I believe that's becoming

654
01:00:08,800 --> 01:00:16,540
certainly in the because of COVID, more rampant, I guess, in southern Ontario than it has

655
01:00:16,540 --> 01:00:21,620
been ever, but do you see that kind of transition, or was that ever discussed with any of these folks?

656
01:00:23,190 --> 01:00:31,990
I can't recall any anecdotes that were similar to that in our discussions with those municipalities.

657
01:00:32,930 --> 01:00:39,970
Certainly we're aware of several of those initiatives that have online reporting,

658
01:00:40,290 --> 01:00:47,190
or some version thereof, for those crimes that you've kind of suggested there,

659
01:00:47,190 --> 01:00:50,910
Councillor McKinnon, the theft under the property, et cetera.

660
01:00:51,750 --> 01:00:53,970
Certainly in Winnipeg as well, we have that.

661
01:00:56,570 --> 01:01:02,090
Now you can take a video of it and send it in and you get your police report number

662
01:01:02,090 --> 01:01:05,230
for insurance and kind of, you know, bobs your uncle to some degree.

663
01:01:05,430 --> 01:01:08,110
I mean, some of that's the deal with the volume of those things.

664
01:01:09,130 --> 01:01:16,010
Some people like that better, but certainly we're certainly aware of those tools that are

665
01:01:16,010 --> 01:01:21,650
out there to some degree, but none of them specifically came up in our interviews.

666
01:01:24,070 --> 01:01:28,590
So yeah, it didn't come off, I guess it's my answer, but we're certainly aware that

667
01:01:28,590 --> 01:01:30,250
those are out there and exist for sure.

668
01:01:31,070 --> 01:01:31,510
Thank you.

669
01:01:35,230 --> 01:01:35,910
Thank you.

670
01:01:35,910 --> 01:01:38,310
You'd like to carry on Mr. Lins?

671
01:01:38,690 --> 01:01:38,950
Sure.

672
01:01:39,790 --> 01:01:43,630
Uh, so the last section is the financial key.

673
01:01:46,010 --> 01:01:51,390
So, you know, we used the similar model to last time.

674
01:01:51,490 --> 01:01:55,130
We had lots of assumptions and pieces in there

675
01:01:55,130 --> 01:01:56,790
that we didn't want to reinvent the wheel on.

676
01:01:57,050 --> 01:02:00,350
But, you know, at the end of the day, we, again,

677
01:02:00,470 --> 01:02:02,810
created the model to try and compare the two models

678
01:02:02,810 --> 01:02:03,790
to the best of our abilities.

679
01:02:04,470 --> 01:02:07,910
You know, on the DPS side, we rely on historical cost trends

680
01:02:07,910 --> 01:02:11,770
to a greater degree in those cost drivers, you know,

681
01:02:11,770 --> 01:02:15,030
with the assumption that the best indicator

682
01:02:15,030 --> 01:02:18,370
of the near futures likely are near pass

683
01:02:18,990 --> 01:02:20,910
and what the trend line looks like.

684
01:02:21,570 --> 01:02:26,210
The OPP model inputs rely on, I guess, really OPP.

685
01:02:26,690 --> 01:02:28,570
So I didn't allude to the contract period,

686
01:02:28,990 --> 01:02:31,930
which is the OPP's cost proposal.

687
01:02:32,450 --> 01:02:34,650
And then when it moves into the costing model,

688
01:02:35,130 --> 01:02:39,230
it relies on the number of properties times some rates

689
01:02:39,230 --> 01:02:40,590
and we'll go through those.

690
01:02:40,590 --> 01:02:46,610
and then it relies on cost for service and using those cost for service to allocate the OPP's

691
01:02:47,150 --> 01:02:54,250
total cost for the municipalities. It's police across those municipalities. It uses a tool

692
01:02:54,250 --> 01:03:00,090
to to cost allocate those so we'll go through that too. This time around we took a bit of a different

693
01:03:00,730 --> 01:03:07,870
strategy instead of coming up with a scenario to model because I think you know we were we didn't

694
01:03:07,870 --> 01:03:12,730
want it to say, hey, we're saying this is what the future looks like. We said, let's have the model

695
01:03:12,730 --> 01:03:17,590
be able to kind of do a bunch of scenarios and see if it reacts in different ways. So we were

696
01:03:17,590 --> 01:03:22,670
able to look at what if calls for service increased by a percent, two percent, three percent. We can plug

697
01:03:22,670 --> 01:03:28,410
any number we really want in there and see what it does. So that's a little bit different than the

698
01:03:28,410 --> 01:03:35,070
last time around where we had picked a scenario. Again, based on the history and the trend that

699
01:03:35,070 --> 01:03:38,990
driving was experiencing but we kind of modeled one of those and here we modeled a bit of a spectrum.

700
01:03:41,580 --> 01:03:47,300
So on the assumption side, I'll really highlight the assumptions that the model uses

701
01:03:47,300 --> 01:03:53,220
and then and then show you some of the results. We can talk about that. So DPS costs have been

702
01:03:53,220 --> 01:04:00,800
increasing at an average of about 3.1 percent annually. If you do that same linear regression slope,

703
01:04:00,800 --> 01:04:04,880
it's both 92 and a half thousand dollars a year out of that five year period.

704
01:04:06,080 --> 01:04:11,720
Historically, some more officer rates were increasing at 2.77% annually on an average.

705
01:04:12,280 --> 01:04:14,980
There wasn't adjustment made at the beginning of the model to reflect

706
01:04:16,060 --> 01:04:21,680
recent collective agreement settlement that wasn't in the 2019 financial statements

707
01:04:22,260 --> 01:04:28,580
and benefits have been recalculated as a result of that settlement to be 25% of salary. So that's

708
01:04:28,580 --> 01:04:29,660
the assumptions we use there.

709
01:04:30,720 --> 01:04:32,520
Night guard cross, we've been increasing costs,

710
01:04:32,780 --> 01:04:35,480
sorry, I've been increasing at 5.14%,

711
01:04:36,160 --> 01:04:39,300
office at 5.53 and benefits on the office side

712
01:04:39,300 --> 01:04:43,200
have been 19% historically of salary costs.

713
01:04:44,060 --> 01:04:49,060
We've used 2% as general inflation for those other elements.

714
01:04:49,740 --> 01:04:52,540
In a police service, most of those costs are covered

715
01:04:52,540 --> 01:04:55,320
by the people as a service organization, you know.

716
01:04:55,900 --> 01:05:02,020
So, you've got a minority of the cost then subjected to general inflation of 2%.

717
01:05:02,020 --> 01:05:06,640
On the capital cost side, we took the capital cost that we used last time.

718
01:05:06,640 --> 01:05:12,720
We had created a capital cost schedule based upon historical capital replacement spending

719
01:05:12,720 --> 01:05:17,600
from DPS, includes, of course, things like cruiser cars and pieces of equipment, et cetera.

720
01:05:17,680 --> 01:05:22,640
We took the time frame that those were typically being replaced and created a schedule for that.

721
01:05:22,640 --> 01:05:30,380
We updated that schedule by adding, we'd add a couple of years to it, and we also added

722
01:05:30,380 --> 01:05:34,380
some inflation to it as well to push that out for the extra couple of years, the model

723
01:05:34,380 --> 01:05:34,780
I added.

724
01:05:37,300 --> 01:05:43,360
So, again, on the cost assumption side, like the last study, we used call for service

725
01:05:43,360 --> 01:05:52,620
volume to determine featured demand, and although not a perfect proxy for officer need, it's

726
01:05:52,620 --> 01:05:55,820
certainly the one that we have, that's most available

727
01:05:55,820 --> 01:05:57,160
and correlated to us.

728
01:05:58,420 --> 01:06:02,000
Call service is also one of the main drivers

729
01:06:02,000 --> 01:06:03,540
of the OPP costing model.

730
01:06:03,760 --> 01:06:06,300
So we felt that that seemed appropriate.

731
01:06:06,700 --> 01:06:09,500
So when we did the first study,

732
01:06:09,660 --> 01:06:13,140
Calls for Service Processor were about 400 at the time.

733
01:06:13,360 --> 01:06:14,680
They're now about 460.

734
01:06:16,940 --> 01:06:20,720
We used 550 as a water line to save.

735
01:06:21,060 --> 01:06:21,940
If we're averaging that,

736
01:06:21,940 --> 01:06:27,780
we're going to have an officer to bring that average down. There was some discussion about

737
01:06:27,780 --> 01:06:36,740
what is that number. You know, 550 is the number we landed on last time when the DPS was involved

738
01:06:36,740 --> 01:06:43,520
in that discussion. So again, you know, certainly I had discussion with the cost and community on what

739
01:06:43,520 --> 01:06:50,320
to do with that. I decided to leave it at the 550 because we had made that decision last time

740
01:06:50,320 --> 01:06:54,700
with DPS's involvement, so that's what we used in this model as well.

741
01:06:55,760 --> 01:06:58,060
That gives, that's quite a bit of stretch,

742
01:06:58,060 --> 01:07:04,660
I mean from 4 or 60 to 550 each officer would be taking on another 90 calls per year

743
01:07:05,500 --> 01:07:08,820
before there would be any increase in officers that are so.

744
01:07:09,780 --> 01:07:11,800
So that's how we built that model.

745
01:07:12,120 --> 01:07:17,160
We had to make some call for service adjustments as we did last time.

746
01:07:19,240 --> 01:07:23,100
We have to remove calls for service when we insert them into the OPP model.

747
01:07:23,320 --> 01:07:25,420
We have to remove calls from service.

748
01:07:26,140 --> 01:07:30,260
That would be considered the OPP's jurisdiction anyway, they would be doing that anyway.

749
01:07:31,180 --> 01:07:38,320
And then we removed calls for service that the DPS currently responds to that the OPP would

750
01:07:38,320 --> 01:07:38,560
not.

751
01:07:38,760 --> 01:07:43,980
So DPS did that for us, helped us out quite a bit to do that.

752
01:07:43,980 --> 01:07:48,840
The larger is one of the DPS where they would attend the OPP

753
01:07:48,840 --> 01:07:52,000
or not are under assistance, the labeled assistance,

754
01:07:52,380 --> 01:07:53,800
and most of those are medical assistance.

755
01:07:55,180 --> 01:07:58,100
Of note, the occurrence data this time around

756
01:07:58,100 --> 01:07:59,300
is different than last time.

757
01:07:59,920 --> 01:08:03,860
So when DPS went to an object, their software provider,

758
01:08:04,400 --> 01:08:07,220
they had directed them to use a different data set

759
01:08:07,220 --> 01:08:08,340
than we used last time.

760
01:08:09,500 --> 01:08:13,000
We spent a lot of time trying to figure that out

761
01:08:13,000 --> 01:08:14,740
and how to reconcile the two.

762
01:08:15,640 --> 01:08:20,600
We worked quite extensively with DPS to try and get that figured out and reconciled to the best of our abilities.

763
01:08:21,360 --> 01:08:26,120
At the end of the day, we came very close, but we're not able to kind of get those two to match.

764
01:08:26,380 --> 01:08:30,860
So if you were to look back at the last study and compare it to this study, some of those numbers are different,

765
01:08:31,660 --> 01:08:35,380
only just because the data set that we were given to use is different.

766
01:08:35,500 --> 01:08:41,300
As I said, we worked quite closely with DPS to try and reconcile those and just weren't quite able to get there.

767
01:08:41,300 --> 01:08:49,080
So we dust them up the best we could and then use the data set that DPS gave us as a result

768
01:08:49,080 --> 01:08:56,740
of that data pull from the record management system to use inside of both models.

769
01:09:00,650 --> 01:09:06,190
So this is a sample. Sorry, I'm just going to cheat here and look at what the next line is.

770
01:09:06,430 --> 01:09:06,610
Okay.

771
01:09:09,240 --> 01:09:14,780
So this is a sample of the OPP cost model just to give you a sense of how it works.

772
01:09:14,780 --> 01:09:19,840
It takes the last three years of calls for service.

773
01:09:20,080 --> 01:09:21,320
It puts them into categories.

774
01:09:22,020 --> 01:09:23,280
It takes a three-year average.

775
01:09:24,320 --> 01:09:27,860
And then it has an average time standard for that kind of call for service.

776
01:09:28,420 --> 01:09:33,500
It multiplies those together and then says as a proportion of the provincial total,

777
01:09:33,780 --> 01:09:36,800
you end up being this much percent of the total.

778
01:09:37,360 --> 01:09:40,000
It adds that all up at the end of the day and says,

779
01:09:40,000 --> 01:09:46,160
because here's your total from the total of all of our costs to police municipalities across the province.

780
01:09:46,860 --> 01:09:50,260
So it's really just a way of saying we police all these municipalities.

781
01:09:50,700 --> 01:09:53,760
We need a way to split it up. Here's the way we split it up.

782
01:09:54,060 --> 01:09:59,700
We, we, a bit of a kid into crime surveillance. We give a waiting of time to certain types of calls.

783
01:10:00,380 --> 01:10:02,560
We, that creates an hours demand for us.

784
01:10:03,160 --> 01:10:08,040
The percent of your hours demand of the total hours demand is going to be your percent of the cost at the end of the day.

785
01:10:11,630 --> 01:10:19,230
So, to be able to then use that in a scenario where we're saying what if

786
01:10:19,230 --> 01:10:23,250
calls for service go up or what if calls for service go down. We took a look at

787
01:10:23,250 --> 01:10:29,550
all of the OPP cost models that they've had since the methodology started and

788
01:10:30,310 --> 01:10:34,290
we looked at total demand, total demand has been increasing at approximately

789
01:10:34,290 --> 01:10:39,530
0.9 percent every year, so that's the hours demand that the OPP is seen. So because

790
01:10:39,530 --> 01:10:45,530
Because it's a cost allocation methodology, if your demand goes up at 0.9%, you will remain

791
01:10:45,530 --> 01:10:48,590
the same proportion of that group going forward.

792
01:10:49,950 --> 01:10:55,650
If, in that case, your cost would go up by the 3.45%.

793
01:10:55,650 --> 01:11:02,170
So I think we talk about the 3.45 here in a bit, but what we did with all the cost models

794
01:11:02,170 --> 01:11:05,830
that exist is we said, okay, here they are, and just five of them now.

795
01:11:05,830 --> 01:11:08,410
and we put the same number of calls for service,

796
01:11:08,750 --> 01:11:10,250
which was Dryden's calls for service last year,

797
01:11:10,250 --> 01:11:11,370
we put them in all the models.

798
01:11:12,270 --> 01:11:14,470
And when we looked at what the cost would spit out,

799
01:11:14,710 --> 01:11:17,670
that was an increase of 3.45% a year.

800
01:11:18,470 --> 01:11:19,530
And then our assumption, of course,

801
01:11:19,530 --> 01:11:21,190
is that the calls for service are the same,

802
01:11:21,470 --> 01:11:25,430
that 3.45% then we are assuming is attributed

803
01:11:25,430 --> 01:11:28,790
to the fact that the OPP's costs just go up over time,

804
01:11:29,030 --> 01:11:30,550
because of salaries and operating costs

805
01:11:30,550 --> 01:11:31,490
and all the other things.

806
01:11:32,150 --> 01:11:34,330
So, so in this particular case,

807
01:11:34,330 --> 01:11:40,810
because the demand for hours is going up 0.9%, if your demand for hours goes up 0.9%,

808
01:11:40,810 --> 01:11:46,610
you are keeping pace with the Joneses as it were, so you would expect then that you would maintain

809
01:11:46,610 --> 01:11:52,730
the exact same proportion of the cost inside the model. However, we would expect that you would

810
01:11:52,730 --> 01:11:59,850
still see that 3.45% increase because that's an operating cost issue. Not a, I make up more of the

811
01:11:59,850 --> 01:12:07,970
calls for service proportionately now issue. So what we did then is we said, okay, if my calls

812
01:12:07,970 --> 01:12:13,870
for service, my demand goes up by more than 0.9%. Now I'm starting to proportionately eat up

813
01:12:13,870 --> 01:12:19,690
a big chunk of the cost. So we looked at doing that a couple of different ways. The way we ultimately

814
01:12:19,690 --> 01:12:29,210
did is we said, for example, if calls for service are going up 3.9% for easy math, then my cost would

815
01:12:29,210 --> 01:12:35,670
then proportionately take on 3 percent more as well or at my cost would go up 3 percent.

816
01:12:36,170 --> 01:12:42,270
The math doesn't quite work out that well. There's a little nuance around it. It's not quite

817
01:12:42,270 --> 01:12:47,430
3 percent, it's actually less than 3 percent. Your cost would actually go up. As the denominator gets

818
01:12:47,430 --> 01:12:51,470
bigger, that becomes less important as well, the gap between you and the rest of the group becomes

819
01:12:51,470 --> 01:12:56,150
less important. But what we did to simplify it is said, let's assume that's the case. It's a

820
01:12:56,150 --> 01:13:01,750
conservative assumption we're overestimating the cost because of that math and that's kind

821
01:13:01,750 --> 01:13:06,530
of the math that we use to determine if your costs for service are going up higher than

822
01:13:06,530 --> 01:13:09,290
the .9, we take the difference and we apply that to your cost.

823
01:13:09,650 --> 01:13:09,650
So

824
01:13:13,970 --> 01:13:21,230
in addition to the per call for service costs, there are some other costs inside of the

825
01:13:21,230 --> 01:13:24,210
model that are based on property numbers.

826
01:13:25,370 --> 01:13:27,450
So the base service cost is the first one.

827
01:13:28,030 --> 01:13:33,210
The average per property cost for the last three years was 183.42.

828
01:13:33,730 --> 01:13:35,350
That rates actually decreased over time.

829
01:13:36,130 --> 01:13:39,690
But again, to be a bit conservative, we left it at 183.42.

830
01:13:39,690 --> 01:13:41,090
We didn't decrease it over time.

831
01:13:41,750 --> 01:13:46,370
We left it where it was and then we left the properties at 3856 as well.

832
01:13:46,910 --> 01:13:50,630
Since the last study, the number of properties has went down as well.

833
01:13:50,630 --> 01:13:52,970
But we didn't forecast any further decreases.

834
01:13:53,050 --> 01:13:54,770
We just left it at the 3856.

835
01:13:55,030 --> 01:14:00,010
So you'll see there's a $707,000 base service charge

836
01:14:00,010 --> 01:14:02,250
across all the years because we didn't want

837
01:14:02,250 --> 01:14:03,970
to forecast a decrease.

838
01:14:04,230 --> 01:14:05,370
Oh, should've clicked.

839
01:14:07,270 --> 01:14:10,010
Prisoner transport is also a per property cost.

840
01:14:10,490 --> 01:14:15,050
It has been increasing by 0.93% average on an annual basis.

841
01:14:15,070 --> 01:14:18,210
So we've used that increase over time.

842
01:14:19,070 --> 01:14:23,150
The accommodations of cleaning, again, as decreased over time, but we held it constant

843
01:14:23,150 --> 01:14:24,730
again just to be a bit conservative.

844
01:14:25,910 --> 01:14:29,710
And then over time, we used, as we did in the last model, we used the OPP's cost and

845
01:14:29,710 --> 01:14:35,170
the proposal on increased it by that annual operating cost estimate that we kind of did

846
01:14:35,170 --> 01:14:39,890
our own math on when we put all the same calls and the different models to find this 3.45

847
01:14:39,890 --> 01:14:40,750
percent increase.

848
01:14:41,110 --> 01:14:45,330
So you'll find that the over time is increasing at that same rate, which is what we did last

849
01:14:45,330 --> 01:14:45,870
time as well.

850
01:14:48,540 --> 01:14:55,540
So, for severance costs, there's really three components, and again, we used the same ones

851
01:14:55,540 --> 01:14:56,020
that are the same.

852
01:14:56,980 --> 01:14:59,360
Three components, one officer, element to it.

853
01:14:59,360 --> 01:14:59,940
there's a little...

854
01:15:02,440 --> 01:15:29,980
So, we've estimated a severance cost of approximately $2 million. So, that assumption, although we don't know what the answer will be, I think, you know, last time we gave kind of a spectrum all the way from zero to 100% of no one being accepted. You know, this time we kind of landed on an assumption here to simplify it a little bit. And we did ultimately last time, too. But I think in the report.

855
01:15:29,980 --> 01:15:31,100
or we provided the spectrum.

856
01:15:31,800 --> 01:15:34,200
So that number assumes the chief police inspector

857
01:15:34,200 --> 01:15:35,780
and the civilians won't transfer.

858
01:15:36,000 --> 01:15:38,580
We have no, you know, that may not be the case,

859
01:15:38,760 --> 01:15:40,080
but that's what this is predicated on.

860
01:15:40,580 --> 01:15:43,120
It also assumes 75% of the remains

861
01:15:43,120 --> 01:15:45,100
will often would transition to the OPP.

862
01:15:45,860 --> 01:15:48,340
And the dispatch contract termination fee,

863
01:15:48,420 --> 01:15:50,260
which I think is $110,000, $10,000,

864
01:15:50,340 --> 01:15:51,600
that exists in all the scenarios.

865
01:15:52,360 --> 01:15:54,420
You'd be going to a different paradigm

866
01:15:54,420 --> 01:15:55,880
and you'd have to pay that fee.

867
01:15:56,020 --> 01:15:57,240
It's part of the of your contract.

868
01:15:57,640 --> 01:16:01,330
So that's Severance Cost.

869
01:16:01,330 --> 01:16:05,010
So just provided some of the visuals that go with that.

870
01:16:05,370 --> 01:16:08,130
You know, again, we provided more of a spectrum this time.

871
01:16:08,130 --> 01:16:09,650
Then we did kind of one scenario.

872
01:16:09,650 --> 01:16:11,690
And here's what the scenario looks like.

873
01:16:12,370 --> 01:16:17,270
The slot on the left is the OPP under the six different.

874
01:16:17,670 --> 01:16:22,070
You know, scenarios that we chose.

875
01:16:22,070 --> 01:16:23,410
One being calls for sure.

876
01:16:23,410 --> 01:16:25,510
There's a flat one that they actually go down 1% every year.

877
01:16:25,970 --> 01:16:28,250
And then increasing 1 through 4% annually.

878
01:16:28,250 --> 01:16:36,290
So that contract periods the same, the other thing is there's a year zero on the OPP one.

879
01:16:36,410 --> 01:16:37,370
There should be a year zero.

880
01:16:37,850 --> 01:16:41,190
It goes from one to 16 on the right. It should go from zero to 15.

881
01:16:41,190 --> 01:16:42,590
My apologies. I can fix that.

882
01:16:44,930 --> 01:16:50,930
The year zero is to include the startup costs in the OPP transition.

883
01:16:51,250 --> 01:16:53,150
So severance is in there.

884
01:16:53,250 --> 01:16:55,050
The startup costs are on equipment, etc.

885
01:16:56,250 --> 01:17:03,650
It's both $3 million, so there's a startup cost at time zero that of course doesn't exist in the DPS version of the model.

886
01:17:04,910 --> 01:17:16,530
So it starts at zero, the OPP starts at three and then that contract period for the OPP would be the same in all the scenarios because it's locked into the greater degree.

887
01:17:17,330 --> 01:17:21,030
And then of course that model changes in the different call for service scenarios.

888
01:17:21,030 --> 01:17:30,730
On the DPS side, there's only four lines there, and it's only because the decline of one percent, the flat and the decrease of one percent, have been cost to them.

889
01:17:30,930 --> 01:17:39,110
It's not enough change in the cost to have added any officers or do anything differently, so they're actually there, but they're kind of layered on top of each other.

890
01:17:39,770 --> 01:17:41,790
Those are annual costs.

891
01:17:48,780 --> 01:18:06,340
So we've also, instead of wrapping them separately, we've graphed them together just a couple of the scenarios to keep it a little simpler but so on the on the left we've got the flat call for service scenario again with DPS starting at zero dollars and the OPP one starting at about 3 million.

892
01:18:07,240 --> 01:18:17,420
And then over time, it shows that OPP contract and then a drop when we start to use the call for service model based upon the assumptions that we've just talked about.

893
01:18:17,700 --> 01:18:25,460
And then kind of go ahead off into time. Those are the annual costs inside that model. We didn't put actual calendar years on here.

894
01:18:25,600 --> 01:18:31,760
We used kind of year zero year one just because we weren't 100% certain where we would end up in the timing of this.

895
01:18:31,760 --> 01:18:38,900
So. And then we also did a cumulative version of the same. So again, kind of same thing.

896
01:18:39,240 --> 01:18:44,120
You know, you find OPP starts at a cumulatively higher cost. And you know, in that year,

897
01:18:44,440 --> 01:18:52,680
eight ish, in the flat calls for service and in your nine ish, the OPP's lower annual cost catch up

898
01:18:52,680 --> 01:18:58,180
and then the two kind of cross. The flat call for service, you know, at the end of the 15 years,

899
01:18:58,180 --> 01:19:04,580
years year, the OPP's cost of approximately 72 million in the DPS 83 and the 4% annual

900
01:19:04,580 --> 01:19:08,360
growth and cost for service were 90 and 99 respectively.

901
01:19:12,470 --> 01:19:18,330
So there was in our final or my final meeting with the costing community, there was a question

902
01:19:18,330 --> 01:19:22,690
to say, could you create a bit of a comparison?

903
01:19:23,450 --> 01:19:29,230
The OPP proposal has more sworn officers in it, so those graphs are comparing the models

904
01:19:29,230 --> 01:19:36,210
as they look today. It was requested, could you show visually what that would look like if we added

905
01:19:36,950 --> 01:19:44,730
officers to DPS to match the number in the OPP proposal? So we added 7, 2.

906
01:19:46,910 --> 01:19:47,470
Again,

907
01:19:48,470 --> 01:19:56,430
use the inflation rate of 2.77% on the salaries and then graph.O. What it really does is create a

908
01:19:56,430 --> 01:20:00,790
bit of a hypothetical about starting with that many officers.

909
01:20:01,550 --> 01:20:05,310
What we did though is we didn't change the parameters around when you would add an officer.

910
01:20:06,090 --> 01:20:09,670
So when DPS starts with that many officers, most of the scenarios, it doesn't actually

911
01:20:09,670 --> 01:20:11,050
change officers.

912
01:20:11,050 --> 01:20:13,610
It never gets to that level where it needs to change them.

913
01:20:13,730 --> 01:20:18,410
So, visually, it looks like it's on an annual basis.

914
01:20:19,270 --> 01:20:24,330
You've got a bigger gap between the OPP and DPS models in both scenarios.

915
01:20:24,950 --> 01:20:29,930
and then cumulatively, again, same thing.

916
01:20:30,290 --> 01:20:32,070
You just find the transition happening a bit earlier

917
01:20:32,070 --> 01:20:33,930
because, of course, DPS now is much higher cost

918
01:20:33,930 --> 01:20:36,070
in this hypothetical scenario.

919
01:20:37,530 --> 01:20:40,110
Again, as I mentioned, DPS doesn't end up

920
01:20:40,110 --> 01:20:41,030
at that much different spot

921
01:20:41,030 --> 01:20:42,110
because we really don't have any officers.

922
01:20:42,110 --> 01:20:43,370
It starts with quite a few officers

923
01:20:43,370 --> 01:20:44,690
and then is able to maintain them

924
01:20:44,690 --> 01:20:45,790
throughout the period of the model.

925
01:20:47,630 --> 01:20:51,270
With in the flat scenario, DPS being about 103 million

926
01:20:51,270 --> 01:20:52,830
versus the OPP 73.

927
01:20:52,830 --> 01:21:00,170
and then DPS really not changing a lot in the 4% hypothetical scenario to 109 versus the

928
01:21:00,170 --> 01:21:01,390
OPP's 90. So,

929
01:21:03,470 --> 01:21:08,250
that is the financial piece. I believe that's the last one. Yeah.

930
01:21:13,090 --> 01:21:28,130
Councilor, that's a lock. So, any questions on that stuff?

931
01:21:34,400 --> 01:21:36,240
Councilor Shane McKinnon.

932
01:21:41,680 --> 01:21:43,580
Talk to you Mr. Chair.

933
01:21:43,760 --> 01:21:44,440
Talk to you so much.

934
01:21:44,680 --> 01:21:47,660
I said I must have learned that we're almost in the encoded bubble.

935
01:21:48,680 --> 01:21:51,100
So I'll just I'll just carry on here.

936
01:21:53,460 --> 01:22:02,360
So the bottom line from your your graphics there is sometime in 2030 or 2031.

937
01:22:03,040 --> 01:22:07,060
If everything that you've indicated comes to fruition.

938
01:22:07,960 --> 01:22:13,660
We may start to see some savings with the OPP.

939
01:22:15,540 --> 01:22:21,700
Yeah, it depends who we, we didn't, again, we didn't put years on the graphs only because we weren't quite sure.

940
01:22:22,300 --> 01:22:25,800
You know when the start would be this took a little longer than we expected to.

941
01:22:25,940 --> 01:22:30,620
So we had visions of kind of trying to map it out month by month or or at least year by year.

942
01:22:30,840 --> 01:22:34,880
And then ultimately decided on using kind of year zero and year one through what not.

943
01:22:35,780 --> 01:22:40,280
Yeah, where those lines cross, that's where you see, that's where you see the cumulative

944
01:22:40,280 --> 01:22:45,840
cost start to flip depending on the scenario that will be in different years.

945
01:22:47,220 --> 01:22:49,420
Thank you, Mr. Lynn. I have more questions.

946
01:22:51,180 --> 01:22:52,660
Yes, Roger first.

947
01:22:55,070 --> 01:22:56,250
Thank you, and through the chair.

948
01:22:58,310 --> 01:23:04,090
Councillor McKinnon's question is, you know, is a good question. I think for many of us that

949
01:23:04,090 --> 01:23:10,990
be looking at this data now for a while. With the OPP suggesting that maybe there should

950
01:23:10,990 --> 01:23:16,990
be a consideration for an increase in sworn officers, I think the question in many people's

951
01:23:16,990 --> 01:23:24,770
minds at this point is the current DPS staffing model adequate from a standpoint of number

952
01:23:24,770 --> 01:23:33,070
of sworn officers. That was the basis for us asking for the hypothetical analysis,

953
01:23:33,070 --> 01:23:40,310
analysis, costing analysis, what if the number of officers were matched in both models?

954
01:23:41,230 --> 01:23:50,130
I think I hope that next week when Chief Paulson and police services board chair bates present

955
01:23:50,130 --> 01:23:53,690
the council, that question can be explored a little further.

956
01:23:54,510 --> 01:24:02,910
Because it would then play into a lot of these assumptions on when calls for services

957
01:24:02,910 --> 01:24:11,050
for DPS would drive the addition of more sworn officers to address that that volume of calls.

958
01:24:12,430 --> 01:24:17,950
So that's a significant question I think that the council should be seeking answers on.

959
01:24:18,330 --> 01:24:18,950
Thank you.

960
01:24:22,600 --> 01:24:25,120
Thank you, Roger. Councillor Shane McKinnon.

961
01:24:28,320 --> 01:24:38,360
Thank you again, Mr. Chair. I'd like to start Mr. Lin's my first area that jumps out at me

962
01:24:38,360 --> 01:24:48,740
is the disparity between your report in 2019 and that released on Friday and granted.

963
01:24:48,880 --> 01:24:56,000
These are all estimates but there's a huge gap in numbers illustrated and I think it's

964
01:24:56,000 --> 01:25:03,080
becomes part of this convoluted calls for service area which I'm going to ask you some questions

965
01:25:03,080 --> 01:25:11,260
about later. But in 2019, you reported the drive police service numbers as being in year

966
01:25:11,260 --> 01:25:26,920
three, according to your information on financial summary 3.3.10. And you reported the numbers

967
01:25:26,920 --> 01:25:36,400
is $4.5 million. In fact, and I realize what it contains, what it has. And most of those

968
01:25:36,400 --> 01:25:41,220
things are a wash because it's a court cost or sometimes a wash and court transportation

969
01:25:41,220 --> 01:25:47,560
and it's grants forward and things like that. But there was, it was in fact, $3.9 million,

970
01:25:48,300 --> 01:25:53,560
which is a difference of like a half million dollars. And you're, and you also reported

971
01:25:53,560 --> 01:26:01,860
in year three, the OPP, so this would be year three, 2021, would be $4.8 million when, in fact,

972
01:26:02,000 --> 01:26:09,380
we just got an estimate from them last week, at $5.2 million, or $365,000 difference. So that's

973
01:26:09,380 --> 01:26:15,800
in the one report, that's the difference of $951,000.

974
01:26:18,240 --> 01:26:25,060
is that, am I reading that properly? Is that the difference between those two reports?

975
01:26:25,240 --> 01:26:30,260
And again, I realized that these are just estimates. But you can anticipate, or didn't,

976
01:26:30,320 --> 01:26:37,060
I am sure, just didn't anticipate three years of 2% increase by the OPP. There's been

977
01:26:37,060 --> 01:26:42,960
one arbitration award for the DPS. I think that's probably why we're all gathered here today.

978
01:26:42,960 --> 01:26:46,340
But can you speak to that?

979
01:26:47,120 --> 01:26:54,060
Yeah, I'm going to try and you're correct in your assumption.

980
01:26:54,860 --> 01:26:57,100
We talked to DPS a little bit about that.

981
01:26:57,580 --> 01:27:00,940
Their costs have been fairly flat over that period.

982
01:27:01,340 --> 01:27:06,340
They did talk about some of their cost containment strategies

983
01:27:06,340 --> 01:27:08,900
that they've employed over that period of time.

984
01:27:09,840 --> 01:27:13,960
They had also, and I don't have my notes in front of me from our discussions with DPS,

985
01:27:14,080 --> 01:27:18,940
but I think they had had some folks, some turnover of people a little bit that had mitigated some

986
01:27:18,940 --> 01:27:19,760
of their costs as well.

987
01:27:22,060 --> 01:27:25,820
So there are some differences there, for sure, that we, you know, as you said,

988
01:27:26,020 --> 01:27:32,740
we certainly wouldn't have anticipated. On the OPP side, you know, on their new cost,

989
01:27:33,680 --> 01:27:37,720
If there are new cost proposals a little bit different, if I recall, I think there's a

990
01:27:37,720 --> 01:27:42,480
few, there's a little extra horsepower in their newest proposal and there was last time

991
01:27:42,480 --> 01:27:44,220
which would have changed, yeah, I think you're right.

992
01:27:45,600 --> 01:27:53,040
So to your point, yes, you're correct, again, I think DPS has done some things to mitigate

993
01:27:53,040 --> 01:27:53,560
some costs.

994
01:27:53,680 --> 01:27:57,760
I think they've had some things happen, that their costs were mitigated, maybe out of their

995
01:27:57,760 --> 01:28:02,340
controlled some degree. Again, on the OPP side, you know, we've got a little bit more

996
01:28:02,340 --> 01:28:06,620
horsepower on the proposal, but you're correct. What we've been asked to do and what we've done is

997
01:28:07,380 --> 01:28:11,820
put together a list of assumptions and say, based on what we know, you know, do these seem like

998
01:28:11,820 --> 01:28:15,900
reasonable assumptions and if we agree they do, what are the financial results of those assumptions?

999
01:28:16,420 --> 01:28:22,040
They're not meant to be predictive. Certainly in any way, shapeable from that anyone would want

1000
01:28:22,040 --> 01:28:27,440
to hold anybody to you, but they're certainly meant to try and show the result of those assumptions

1001
01:28:27,440 --> 01:28:31,240
and if we believe those assumptions to be true, that's as good as we're going to get.

1002
01:28:31,700 --> 01:28:32,640
I'm kind of thinking so.

1003
01:28:33,220 --> 01:28:34,700
Just to follow up, Mr. Chair.

1004
01:28:37,100 --> 01:28:41,080
Yes, when to follow up and then I'm going over to Stephen Langstell role. So go ahead.

1005
01:28:41,740 --> 01:28:46,220
You said this is not to be presumptive.

1006
01:28:46,840 --> 01:28:51,560
That's why you were here. I mean, that's why we asked you to do this report.

1007
01:28:51,560 --> 01:28:57,360
So we can get the best advice we can. So I mean, if you're putting out these numbers,

1008
01:28:59,060 --> 01:29:01,520
We assume that there's some credence to it.

1009
01:29:02,280 --> 01:29:09,140
The best you can, and I understand that, but I think you're the show.

1010
01:29:09,460 --> 01:29:13,080
I mean, you're going to make up some minds here, I'm sure.

1011
01:29:14,500 --> 01:29:20,300
Obviously the public consultation is down the road and we haven't heard from the DPS yet,

1012
01:29:20,300 --> 01:29:23,300
but there's a lot of people going to hang her hat on what you're saying.

1013
01:29:23,600 --> 01:29:27,340
And I just want to point that out because I think it's very important to us.

1014
01:29:27,340 --> 01:29:34,740
Yeah, and I guess just to clarify, not presumptive, but predictive in that, we've not been asked to say,

1015
01:29:35,760 --> 01:29:40,660
predict the future and tell us what it's going to be. What we've been asked to do is do a

1016
01:29:40,660 --> 01:29:45,900
comparison to the best of our abilities based upon the assumptions we have today. I think everyone

1017
01:29:45,900 --> 01:29:49,960
to the greater degree needs to take all of that, as you said, with some grain of salt. We know

1018
01:29:50,500 --> 01:29:55,880
we're not going to nail that to the dollar. What we want to do is get order a magnitude, which is

1019
01:29:55,880 --> 01:29:59,820
really all you can do I think in these scenarios is get kind of order a magnitude track.

1020
01:30:03,140 --> 01:30:03,740
Thank

1021
01:30:09,180 --> 01:30:36,580
you, Mr. Van Stiller. Yeah, good evening, through the chair. A few points, and Chad makes probably the greatest one is that I don't think that MNP was tasked with providing a recommendation or any cost certainty. This is some information for council to consider. And from an order of magnitude, it provides a very solid and

1022
01:30:36,580 --> 01:30:45,140
sound analysis. For somebody who's in a position who provides forecast data, I would not want

1023
01:30:45,140 --> 01:30:53,260
to be held to any of those numbers because when we make an assumption through time, sometimes

1024
01:30:53,260 --> 01:31:01,200
those assumptions don't come to fruition. A good example is with regards to DPS and in 2020 we

1025
01:31:01,200 --> 01:31:07,840
We have five uniform officers leave and they were recruited and replaced, but I think at

1026
01:31:07,840 --> 01:31:14,960
least two were at very the lower levels of those collective agreements.

1027
01:31:15,540 --> 01:31:22,480
So that's going to impact the 2020 costs as well as we have an outstanding collective

1028
01:31:22,480 --> 01:31:23,640
agreement for 2020.

1029
01:31:24,200 --> 01:31:28,620
So the actual 2020 costs are still to be determined with regards to DPS.

1030
01:31:28,620 --> 01:31:45,540
So I just want to provide a little bit of background with regards to the DPS estimate that MNP had done the last time, but also some context around this report that again it's supposed to provide council with an order of magnitude and I think it does a very good job of that.

1031
01:31:53,050 --> 01:31:57,110
Thank you. Just a comment before I go back to Mr McKinnon.

1032
01:31:57,110 --> 01:32:27,090
I think one of the challenges that the Costing Committee had, and I believe that Council will have going forward, and I think the discussion next week with the Dryden Police Service and the Police Services Board might help shed some light on that is the very large difference, the gap in what the Ontario provincial police and our local police force are saying is required in terms of numbers of officers to adequately police and protect our community.

1033
01:32:27,090 --> 01:32:37,250
based on the first police costing committee process, the main driver for local police services

1034
01:32:37,250 --> 01:32:47,850
manning, I believe was primarily population. And the OPP's driver is calls for service

1035
01:32:47,850 --> 01:32:55,350
and criminal activity. So when we looked as a police costing committee at what level of

1036
01:32:55,350 --> 01:33:03,890
calls of service and calls per officer would drive more officers required in the Dryden Police

1037
01:33:03,890 --> 01:33:09,770
Service. Initially, it went from 400 calls per officer to 550 calls per officer.

1038
01:33:10,650 --> 01:33:17,470
And when you look at that, that's a 38% increase in calls per officer before you add any officers.

1039
01:33:19,010 --> 01:33:25,150
So in my mind and in the minds of others, that's an outstanding question about how many officers

1040
01:33:25,150 --> 01:33:28,190
does it actually take to protect our police force?

1041
01:33:28,370 --> 01:33:31,490
We've heard from the OPP what their answer is,

1042
01:33:31,490 --> 01:33:32,910
and I believe next week we'll hear

1043
01:33:32,910 --> 01:33:35,690
from the Dryden Police Service in terms of what their answer is,

1044
01:33:35,790 --> 01:33:40,890
but a number of us struggled with that 38% increase

1045
01:33:40,890 --> 01:33:42,850
in calls, driving an increase in manning,

1046
01:33:42,990 --> 01:33:46,130
because is it a population that drives the increase

1047
01:33:46,130 --> 01:33:49,350
in requirements or is it the actual calls

1048
01:33:49,350 --> 01:33:50,790
for service and criminal activity?

1049
01:33:51,250 --> 01:33:54,550
So in my mind, that's an outstanding item man

1050
01:33:54,550 --> 01:33:58,990
an issue that we still need to get some clarification on it as a council.

1051
01:34:02,410 --> 01:34:11,170
Councillor McKinnon. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think that task is not up to the DPS or the OPP.

1052
01:34:11,470 --> 01:34:17,830
It's up to the advisors from the solicitor general's office and maybe our council members

1053
01:34:17,830 --> 01:34:22,370
who are on the police services board can speak to that. But just if I could carry on.

1054
01:34:23,930 --> 01:34:31,810
So, and the bottom line, I think I'm reading this correctly, is that in 2021, in this year,

1055
01:34:32,750 --> 01:34:39,610
the OPP would cost us $1.287 million more than our own DPS.

1056
01:34:41,930 --> 01:34:44,950
Unless I'm right out of line.

1057
01:34:44,950 --> 01:34:52,970
But I want to digress a little bit to calls for service as an indicator of future costs.

1058
01:34:54,070 --> 01:35:01,750
And I think there's a huge gap between the calls for service assigned by you for calculations

1059
01:35:01,750 --> 01:35:04,530
to the DPS and the OPP.

1060
01:35:05,470 --> 01:35:10,690
And really this is the crux of all the financial statements and we need to be crystal clear

1061
01:35:11,210 --> 01:35:12,190
on this area.

1062
01:35:12,190 --> 01:35:23,990
So, page 21 of your report shows me that the calls for service for DPS, and this is not

1063
01:35:23,990 --> 01:35:29,370
up-to-date, this is 2019, and I understand there's some logic behind that.

1064
01:35:30,420 --> 01:35:37,710
So the average calls for service for annually, I guess, are 7,665.

1065
01:35:38,790 --> 01:35:47,490
For the OPP, they were assigned a cost of $4,917.

1066
01:35:47,910 --> 01:35:54,370
Now, I stand to be corrected, but I think that's a difference of 39% if I'm not mistaken.

1067
01:35:54,370 --> 01:36:08,090
But then if you go to the table 6 where the sample PP calls for service model lives and

1068
01:36:08,450 --> 01:36:15,730
down the left hand column, it appears as though there's all types of things that they

1069
01:36:15,730 --> 01:36:16,330
bill for.

1070
01:36:17,190 --> 01:36:22,670
I can't, for the life of me, understand with the exception of maybe medical calls and there

1071
01:36:22,670 --> 01:36:30,610
can't be that many of those. There certainly can't be 39% or roughly 3,000 medical calls

1072
01:36:30,610 --> 01:36:39,870
that the DPS is going to. So we've created a situation where we're grossly underestimating

1073
01:36:40,490 --> 01:36:45,450
the calls for service on behalf of the OPP unless there's something else. I thought, well, maybe

1074
01:36:45,450 --> 01:36:52,490
it's traffic violations, but no. Traffic violations is in table six. So what in the world can make

1075
01:36:52,490 --> 01:36:58,430
a 3,000 calls difference that we're going to get a break on. I just simply don't understand

1076
01:36:58,430 --> 01:37:06,390
that. Maybe you can explain it to me because if we don't get a break of 39%, it's going

1077
01:37:06,390 --> 01:37:09,350
to cost us an additional $880,000.

1078
01:37:14,160 --> 01:37:21,500
So one thing I should probably clarify, that sample table, I would have to, I don't know

1079
01:37:21,500 --> 01:37:27,960
that those are your numbers. It was a sample that I provided kind of so people could kind of follow

1080
01:37:27,960 --> 01:37:33,700
the way they do it. So I'd have to double check that on if the traffic piece is an element of that

1081
01:37:33,700 --> 01:37:38,280
to be quite frank with you. But certainly we can take a peek at that and see where that came from.

1082
01:37:39,040 --> 01:37:44,120
So for the call exercise because we knew we had to do it because we had done it for the first report,

1083
01:37:45,080 --> 01:37:51,300
we had kind of set the parameters for EPS to help us with that. They own the data. They have

1084
01:37:51,300 --> 01:37:58,160
the data system. So we had kind of given them the direction to say, can you remove calls

1085
01:37:58,160 --> 01:38:05,480
that would be in the OPP's purview regardless? And can you remove calls, particularly the

1086
01:38:05,480 --> 01:38:12,900
assistance ones that DPS would be going to in the P-wood? So they drove much of that process.

1087
01:38:14,140 --> 01:38:18,820
They fed us the information. So we may have to go back to DPS and get some of the details

1088
01:38:18,820 --> 01:38:24,380
on which ones were removed and what volumes.

1089
01:38:25,020 --> 01:38:27,160
I don't have it front of me here.

1090
01:38:28,120 --> 01:38:30,460
I can check to see the last version

1091
01:38:30,460 --> 01:38:33,500
they gave me and Roger me to be able to help out a little bit too.

1092
01:38:34,340 --> 01:38:36,840
So they drove that process.

1093
01:38:38,000 --> 01:38:40,820
So we'd have to double check by that volume.

1094
01:38:41,400 --> 01:38:42,960
I off the top of my head, I don't remember.

1095
01:38:43,120 --> 01:38:45,360
And again, we had them do it for us.

1096
01:38:45,800 --> 01:38:48,180
Because again, they've got access to the system

1097
01:38:48,180 --> 01:38:53,680
in the data. And again, you know, this time when when they went to the software provider optic and

1098
01:38:53,680 --> 01:38:58,400
said, what should we be using? It's a different data set that last time to order a magnitude is the

1099
01:38:58,400 --> 01:39:03,120
same, but the numbers were a little bit different. So we weren't able to really reconcile them either. So

1100
01:39:04,140 --> 01:39:11,320
we could ask DPS for more detailed, you know, granular summary of what was removed off the top of my

1101
01:39:11,320 --> 01:39:17,540
head. And I don't remember and I don't have a year in front of me. Huge financial difference. Thank you.

1102
01:39:18,180 --> 01:39:19,940
Thank you, Roger, then, Stephen.

1103
01:39:23,760 --> 01:39:30,100
Thank you, through the chair. So some of those some of those discrepancies between or differences between calls for service and

1104
01:39:30,740 --> 01:39:32,100
the incidents that are

1105
01:39:32,640 --> 01:39:35,100
billed for in the OPP billing model.

1106
01:39:35,700 --> 01:39:42,540
Many of those calls for service that are removed are covered off in the per-property charge that the OPP has.

1107
01:39:42,980 --> 01:39:50,160
So there's there's one of the sources of the differences. The other source is those calls that DPS are

1108
01:39:50,160 --> 01:39:57,320
are attending that the OPP just would not attend medical assistance would be a good example of that.

1109
01:39:57,920 --> 01:40:03,960
As Chad alluded to, all those worksheets are available, Councillor McKinnon,

1110
01:40:04,580 --> 01:40:09,960
and we'd be happy to share that data in more detail with Council if they're interested in looking at it.

1111
01:40:10,560 --> 01:40:17,960
But that was an exercise that was worked through with DDS to sort through the entire database

1112
01:40:17,960 --> 01:40:29,340
of occurrences that DPS pulled from our incident management system and provided both to the OPP and to MMP for analysis.

1113
01:40:30,460 --> 01:40:31,000
Thank you.

1114
01:40:33,190 --> 01:40:34,630
Thank you Roger, Steven.

1115
01:40:35,470 --> 01:40:39,830
Yeah, through the chair, Roger basically said exactly what I was going to say.

1116
01:40:39,930 --> 01:40:46,770
It's the nuance of once you're into the OPP building model is that there's two components to it.

1117
01:40:46,770 --> 01:40:51,890
One is the per-property cost, and I think it's roughly around, I can't remember off the top

1118
01:40:51,890 --> 01:41:00,210
of my head, it's roughly $100 per property, and then it's the call activity, but it's not

1119
01:41:00,210 --> 01:41:07,870
every single call, a significant amount, and it's probably 30-something percent calls are covered

1120
01:41:07,870 --> 01:41:13,890
off in that per-property charge, and then there's other calls that they then bill for.

1121
01:41:15,110 --> 01:41:21,330
So, I'm very confident that MNP has captured all of the calls appropriately.

1122
01:41:23,250 --> 01:41:29,490
Yeah, and to clarify, I got to give credit to DPS. They kind of were the worst power on that.

1123
01:41:29,630 --> 01:41:34,850
They really helped us mow through that. There was a lot of work there to get that figured out.

1124
01:41:35,090 --> 01:41:41,010
So, they kind of took the reins on it. And Catherine McKinnon alluded to the year 2020

1125
01:41:41,010 --> 01:41:45,950
20 for those that maybe didn't catch it. We didn't use any data or financial information

1126
01:41:45,950 --> 01:41:52,830
from 2020 when we met with the cost and committee at the very beginning. They determined

1127
01:41:52,830 --> 01:42:00,730
that 2020 was just too daunting for lots of reasons in that. There may be elements in there

1128
01:42:00,730 --> 01:42:07,930
that would just skew things. Certainly, we've talked to many police services where 2020 as a COVID

1129
01:42:07,930 --> 01:42:13,530
year has been, you know, in some ways cost it went down. I know that was the one up, calls for

1130
01:42:13,530 --> 01:42:18,710
service, all that kind of stuff. So we just said, let's, let's not use it. So that we're,

1131
01:42:18,770 --> 01:42:24,390
we're at least looking at data kind of pre-coded to the greater degree. So Council, we can't

1132
01:42:24,390 --> 01:42:26,150
elude it to it, but I just wanted to reiterate that.

1133
01:42:29,500 --> 01:42:32,500
Thank you. Councilor, are Roger?

1134
01:42:34,520 --> 01:42:39,880
Thank you, through the Chair. Just add to Chad's comments. That discussion was had with

1135
01:42:39,880 --> 01:42:41,840
with EPS leadership as well.

1136
01:42:42,780 --> 01:42:46,620
And 2020 really did, we're guessing due to COVID

1137
01:42:47,060 --> 01:42:51,400
was really a different year for calls for service.

1138
01:42:52,000 --> 01:42:54,640
The other issue or the other two issues

1139
01:42:54,880 --> 01:42:59,880
to analyze 2020, the OPP didn't request 2020 data

1140
01:42:59,880 --> 01:43:02,540
because of course the request for the OPP costing

1141
01:43:02,540 --> 01:43:05,460
came from council before the end of 2020.

1142
01:43:05,460 --> 01:43:13,280
And the calls for service, police and organizations, they end up closing all calls for service.

1143
01:43:13,440 --> 01:43:20,260
Sometimes it takes time into the year after the current year to close out all those calls for service.

1144
01:43:20,600 --> 01:43:30,180
So again, in discussions with DPS leadership, it was determined that trying to analyze 2020 would not be feasible.

1145
01:43:30,800 --> 01:43:31,460
Thank you.

1146
01:43:31,460 --> 01:43:32,420
Thank

1147
01:43:34,500 --> 01:43:37,200
you, Roger. Councilor Martin-McKinnon, did you have your hand up?

1148
01:43:40,160 --> 01:43:46,400
Yes, I did. Just a comment. And thank you, Chad, for your report. It's exactly what the

1149
01:43:46,400 --> 01:43:53,520
police cost and committee asked you for. And some of that stuff in there was designed to stimulate

1150
01:43:53,520 --> 01:43:54,200
conversation.

1151
01:43:56,720 --> 01:44:03,660
This might have started out as an OPP costing clinic, but it evolved into a

1152
01:44:03,660 --> 01:44:11,320
police costing clinic. And that happened because we see the numbers from the OPP command

1153
01:44:11,320 --> 01:44:18,860
and we say to ourselves, well, maybe our, maybe the DPS is lacking, lacking resources.

1154
01:44:19,080 --> 01:44:23,540
Maybe they're lacking all kinds of things over there that we can't put our finger on.

1155
01:44:24,100 --> 01:44:32,260
So that becomes a cost increase to the city. Either way, we're dealing with some costing

1156
01:44:32,260 --> 01:44:37,840
increases. So the type of stuff you put into your report is very important for us to determine

1157
01:44:39,600 --> 01:44:40,900
that actual fact.

1158
01:44:43,140 --> 01:44:47,180
As a council, we have to look at it as there's going to be a cost increase

1159
01:44:47,180 --> 01:44:55,540
of some kind. There's no doubt about it. And if it's a matter of resources, then we have to resolve

1160
01:44:55,540 --> 01:44:59,800
that the DPS. Where we have to choose to go to the OPP cost.

1161
01:45:02,260 --> 01:45:28,520
So those are all reasons why you can debate the cost all you want. There's going to be a cost increase to this community. And part of what your report is pointing to us is what we need to look at to get to get to that decision, hugely important to talk to DPS and the police services board next week. That's a huge part of this.

1162
01:45:29,300 --> 01:45:38,000
I see everybody going around and around on the questions here and debating what's wrong

1163
01:45:38,000 --> 01:45:43,460
with the report and those are good things to stimulate conversation that we need the

1164
01:45:43,460 --> 01:45:45,120
answers to before we can make a decision.

1165
01:45:46,200 --> 01:45:47,540
My two cents, guys.

1166
01:45:50,910 --> 01:45:52,050
Thank you, Councillor McKinney.

1167
01:45:52,610 --> 01:45:53,930
Councillor Shane McKinney.

1168
01:45:57,240 --> 01:45:58,020
Thank you, Mr. Chair.

1169
01:45:58,640 --> 01:46:08,220
So, I'm looking at this report, I think I referred to it already, and that is an extract

1170
01:46:08,220 --> 01:46:17,000
from your 2019 report, and it's the financial summary, and I had wished that you'd really

1171
01:46:17,000 --> 01:46:20,100
done one for this particular report as well.

1172
01:46:20,660 --> 01:46:27,920
It laid everything out rather well, but not having that, I'm just trying to fill in the blank

1173
01:46:27,920 --> 01:46:38,940
So we have a cost from the OPP of $5.2 million plus vehicle and equipment for $710,000 plus a

1174
01:46:38,940 --> 01:46:48,620
seven package of $2.025 million plus I'm going to be really modest here with the building

1175
01:46:48,620 --> 01:46:55,700
rental parking, direct system, gun lockers, long gun vault. I put down $200,000. It could

1176
01:46:55,700 --> 01:47:07,760
be $1.2 or it could be a lot more than that. Over time is $200,000, $27,000 for the police

1177
01:47:07,760 --> 01:47:23,420
services for a court cost of $232,000. So in 2022, transition costs and things that I haven't

1178
01:47:23,420 --> 01:47:32,700
obviously thought about would be $8.6 million would cost us in the first year. Is that

1179
01:47:32,700 --> 01:47:49,000
most of being accurate. That sounds order-managed. Yeah, and you know, you brought the financial summary so we can, we didn't provide that same table only because we did more scenarios this time, but we could.

1180
01:47:50,060 --> 01:48:00,380
Roger has the model as well, but I could work with him on creating those for you so you'd have the details across those scenarios, but the transition costs are approximately $3 million.

1181
01:48:00,380 --> 01:48:07,400
dollars as you said and then the cost of the contract I think you said 5.3 so you know we

1182
01:48:07,400 --> 01:48:12,300
called it year zero which in financial model is pretty typical to use your kind of the start and

1183
01:48:12,300 --> 01:48:17,280
minute as year zero but but for all intents and purposes in year one you'd be looking at those

1184
01:48:17,280 --> 01:48:23,380
transition costs of three million and then the year first year contract cost of the of the 5.3 that's

1185
01:48:23,380 --> 01:48:23,640
correct.

1186
01:48:25,770 --> 01:48:30,130
The thing I like the most about this report was at the bottom it says payback period was

1187
01:48:30,130 --> 01:48:36,510
8.05 years. You didn't accept that at that time and now you're you're indicating it might be

1188
01:48:36,510 --> 01:48:44,230
eight or nine or more years. Yeah depending on the scenario so as I said I mean we didn't include

1189
01:48:44,230 --> 01:48:49,690
that only because we would have to include several of them but we certainly can if you find that useful

1190
01:48:49,690 --> 01:48:55,570
I can work with Roger on creating those because they're in the model we just have to run all the

1191
01:48:55,570 --> 01:48:57,230
and kind of print the copy of them.

1192
01:48:57,770 --> 01:48:59,690
Sir, let me think it would be a value to us.

1193
01:49:00,150 --> 01:49:01,470
Sure. Yeah, I can work with our own agenda.

1194
01:49:05,600 --> 01:49:05,920
Roger.

1195
01:49:08,770 --> 01:49:09,810
Thank you for the chair.

1196
01:49:10,910 --> 01:49:14,970
It's a little bit ironic, Councillor McKinnon, you request that

1197
01:49:14,970 --> 01:49:18,990
because part of this exercise was to try and slim down

1198
01:49:18,990 --> 01:49:21,050
the overall number of pages of the report.

1199
01:49:21,370 --> 01:49:23,050
I think the last time we got criticized

1200
01:49:23,050 --> 01:49:26,250
because the report was too long to too much data in it.

1201
01:49:26,370 --> 01:49:29,870
But just as Chad said,

1202
01:49:30,590 --> 01:49:33,410
Councillor, we can, we can provide that. They're breakdown.

1203
01:49:34,570 --> 01:49:35,970
We'll get it out to all the council.

1204
01:49:40,230 --> 01:49:40,950
Councilor McKinnon.

1205
01:49:42,170 --> 01:49:48,390
Thank you, Mr. Chair. No, Mr. Nisby. I don't think the last report was too long. It was skewed

1206
01:49:48,390 --> 01:49:54,930
in the wrong way. I think, personally, as is this one, we have 18 graphics in here that

1207
01:49:54,930 --> 01:50:01,470
say that says, you know, we're, we're good, you know, but it's eight or 10 years away.

1208
01:50:03,550 --> 01:50:09,130
And like, I think a report like this, a visual for people to sit down and look at,

1209
01:50:09,530 --> 01:50:17,630
the bottom line is more appropriate. And this is a nice segue into things that I want to ask

1210
01:50:17,630 --> 01:50:23,370
you, Mr. Linda, anyway, aren't in your report. Maybe you have some indicators of whether they

1211
01:50:23,370 --> 01:50:29,510
were discussing. I'm just going to list them and if you don't mind. First of all is response

1212
01:50:29,510 --> 01:50:36,810
time. You know, is the response time for the OPP three minutes or 30 minutes? Is there

1213
01:50:36,810 --> 01:50:41,810
a guaranteed police presence in the community? Excuse me, Councillor McKinnon. Just one question

1214
01:50:41,810 --> 01:50:42,530
at a time, please.

1215
01:50:46,790 --> 01:50:51,930
So response time, you know, we asked this question last time too. Neither

1216
01:50:51,930 --> 01:51:00,730
service was tracking response time, then and weren't this time, so it wasn't factored

1217
01:51:00,730 --> 01:51:05,270
into our discussion. There was a factored into the report because it doesn't exist.

1218
01:51:09,280 --> 01:51:09,800
Thank you, Roger.

1219
01:51:12,500 --> 01:51:16,960
Thank you, through the Chair, just further comment on that. I agree with Councillor McKennan

1220
01:51:16,960 --> 01:51:23,360
on response time. I think it is an important measurement and I think it would probably lead

1221
01:51:23,360 --> 01:51:30,140
to, or at least, you know, be an element in the determination of additional policing

1222
01:51:30,140 --> 01:51:36,920
resources, if that was required. But again, coming from both services, response time,

1223
01:51:37,120 --> 01:51:42,080
I think response time could be tracked because they track incidents and when it's responded

1224
01:51:42,080 --> 01:51:48,100
to, when the call comes in. But it's not something that either service provides any type of reporting

1225
01:51:48,100 --> 01:51:53,280
on, at least when we asked, that was the answer that we got.

1226
01:51:53,980 --> 01:51:56,180
And I do understand that to a point.

1227
01:51:57,140 --> 01:52:03,480
Other first responder agencies, such as Fire, it's definitely easier for them to report

1228
01:52:03,480 --> 01:52:08,900
that because they're almost always starting from a known location.

1229
01:52:09,400 --> 01:52:18,080
Whereas police, if it's a busy shift, they could be at any location and trying to respond

1230
01:52:18,080 --> 01:52:23,880
to a call from that location. So I understand why the agency's are hesitant to report on that.

1231
01:52:24,540 --> 01:52:31,000
But again, I think it would be a measurement that may indicate whether or not an agency needed

1232
01:52:31,000 --> 01:52:33,940
additional amount or one of many. Thanks.

1233
01:52:36,700 --> 01:52:40,980
Thank you. But Mr. Lens, neither one reports it to date,

1234
01:52:41,100 --> 01:52:41,480
though, correct?

1235
01:52:44,460 --> 01:52:48,380
Yes, I believe that's the case, yeah. Because we asked last time too.

1236
01:52:49,940 --> 01:52:50,520
Thank you.

1237
01:52:50,520 --> 01:52:51,100
Okay, thank you.

1238
01:52:53,480 --> 01:52:55,460
Councillor McKinnon, did you have another question?

1239
01:52:56,420 --> 01:52:57,280
A few more.

1240
01:52:58,300 --> 01:52:58,940
Still early.

1241
01:53:01,090 --> 01:53:02,000
Thank you, Mr. Chair.

1242
01:53:02,440 --> 01:53:07,840
And Mr. Linz, I just wonder because it's not in your report, whether you can flesh out

1243
01:53:08,230 --> 01:53:17,680
some of these services that the DPS can get from the OPP, I can tell you in the previous

1244
01:53:17,680 --> 01:53:24,180
life by signed the letters, getting those services. But I think I have been asked by people

1245
01:53:24,180 --> 01:53:29,800
or it was pointed out by people that while the OPP have this and that and the other thing

1246
01:53:30,240 --> 01:53:36,260
and we don't. So, you know, how can we possibly police community? Is there some way you can name

1247
01:53:36,260 --> 01:53:44,700
some of these services because I know I could add to that probably. Yeah, so I can't. I don't

1248
01:53:44,700 --> 01:53:51,160
have them in front of me, but certainly the ones that stand out are the ones that require

1249
01:53:51,680 --> 01:53:56,180
some of the, just the order of magnitude type of things to have the equipment in the capital

1250
01:53:56,180 --> 01:54:01,480
and those kind of things. I know the water rescue is one that certainly isn't their jurisdiction

1251
01:54:01,480 --> 01:54:10,300
as well, so I think the best thing to do, because we've got some notes on it, you know, I can get a

1252
01:54:10,300 --> 01:54:13,660
more detailed list of that for you and provide it.

1253
01:54:14,140 --> 01:54:17,980
Could we be talking about things like K9 Units and emergency response teams and helicopters

1254
01:54:17,980 --> 01:54:19,000
and forensic units?

1255
01:54:19,820 --> 01:54:20,020
Yeah.

1256
01:54:20,220 --> 01:54:21,060
I mean, air services.

1257
01:54:21,540 --> 01:54:27,900
The things that are quite capital intensive are often more challenging for a smaller service

1258
01:54:27,900 --> 01:54:36,920
to go out on their own and have planes and helicopters and large dedicated, as you mentioned, K9 units,

1259
01:54:36,920 --> 01:54:37,340
etc.

1260
01:54:37,340 --> 01:54:51,500
So I wouldn't want to list a bunch in this summer, say one that's incorrect, but we can certainly get those, but as you alluded to, that's the types of things that obviously they have access to, you know, so.

1261
01:54:54,630 --> 01:54:55,310
Yes, Roger.

1262
01:54:56,630 --> 01:55:02,350
Yes, through the chair. I think that is a question for the OPP, but Councilor McKinney,

1263
01:55:02,530 --> 01:55:09,570
if I understand you correctly, I think you're referring to those provincial services that the OPP can

1264
01:55:09,570 --> 01:55:12,990
provide, if that's, if I'm understanding the question correctly.

1265
01:55:15,250 --> 01:55:17,230
And they've, you know, in our

1266
01:55:17,230 --> 01:55:24,510
discussion with them, they've included a couple, you know, that would be less about their provincial

1267
01:55:24,510 --> 01:55:30,470
jurisdiction and just a bit more about kind of order of magnitude stuff. They have investigative

1268
01:55:30,470 --> 01:55:35,750
crews that can come in and take over investigation from patrol officers, for example, so those

1269
01:55:35,750 --> 01:55:40,690
officers can get back on patrol while that unit comes and takes that over. They did mention things

1270
01:55:40,690 --> 01:55:42,910
like that as well that are things that they can offer.

1271
01:55:46,640 --> 01:55:47,460
Okay, thank you.

1272
01:55:54,390 --> 01:55:55,250
Councillor McKinnon.

1273
01:55:56,230 --> 01:56:00,070
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to thank you, Mr. Linz, for your patience

1274
01:56:00,070 --> 01:56:09,010
answering the questions, I guess the best you can. Obviously, you see that this is a very emotional issue and

1275
01:56:09,010 --> 01:56:14,930
as far reaching in future implications for the community and I appreciate your time.

1276
01:56:21,000 --> 01:56:24,540
Councillors, Mayor, any other questions, comments from Mr. Linz?

1277
01:56:33,400 --> 01:56:41,420
Thank you, Mr. Linz. I guess just one other comment that I have and it just maybe refers to a previous comment, but with respect to

1278
01:56:41,420 --> 01:56:49,700
the decision that's in front of Council. We have looked at the various factors and they are in

1279
01:56:49,700 --> 01:56:55,440
the report, the previous report and this report in terms of the areas of service delivery costs,

1280
01:56:55,820 --> 01:57:02,960
governance and benchmarking. And all of those things, all of those things, and we spent most of the

1281
01:57:02,960 --> 01:57:07,760
evening discussing things other than the finances, although we did talk about that, a fair bit.

1282
01:57:07,760 --> 01:57:13,400
But I think it's from my perspective, it's incumbent on this council because this council

1283
01:57:14,080 --> 01:57:20,580
ultimately makes the decision about which agency provides the policing services to the

1284
01:57:20,580 --> 01:57:21,000
community.

1285
01:57:21,260 --> 01:57:27,820
So from my perspective, it behooves all of us to understand as much as we can with respect

1286
01:57:27,820 --> 01:57:34,500
to service delivery cost governance and where we are and make that assessment about not only

1287
01:57:34,500 --> 01:57:41,340
from a cost perspective, but a service delivery perspective in terms of what we, as the leadership

1288
01:57:41,340 --> 01:57:47,120
in this leadership of the community, believe is the best policing service to police

1289
01:57:47,120 --> 01:57:53,100
Dryden going forward. From my perspective, that's the task in front of us. And again, that's the

1290
01:57:53,100 --> 01:58:00,820
body of basically of this report. So we obviously have a lot more work to do. We've got the Dryden

1291
01:58:00,820 --> 01:58:06,780
police services and the police services board coming to make a presentation next week which

1292
01:58:06,780 --> 01:58:12,980
time we'll have the ability to ask all the questions that we have. Then on the 24th of June we have

1293
01:58:12,980 --> 01:58:19,540
an open public meeting as I mentioned earlier to get public input and after all that input then

1294
01:58:20,180 --> 01:58:25,260
it's incumbent on the council then to make a determination at some point going forward

1295
01:58:25,800 --> 01:58:32,900
prior to November about which police service we choose as a council so that's

1296
01:58:32,900 --> 01:58:37,300
the order of business that I believe is in front of us and we have a lot of do

1297
01:58:37,300 --> 01:58:42,810
process to go through before we get to that decision-making point. Chad again

1298
01:58:42,810 --> 01:58:47,950
thank you for your presentation tonight very well done very professionally

1299
01:58:47,950 --> 01:58:54,190
presented and a little bit of homework to do but overall thank you for all of the

1300
01:58:54,190 --> 01:58:56,830
work that you and your team have done in putting this together for us.

1301
01:58:58,010 --> 01:58:58,830
Thank you.

1302
01:58:59,450 --> 01:59:00,530
It's our, it's our pleasure.

1303
01:59:06,600 --> 01:59:06,880
All right.

1304
01:59:07,040 --> 01:59:09,520
Well, let's move on to our next item.

1305
01:59:11,020 --> 01:59:17,240
Three members of the city's working circle at the work, our last meeting of the working

1306
01:59:17,240 --> 01:59:26,160
circle talked at length about the discovery of the 215 bodies at the former residential school

1307
01:59:26,160 --> 01:59:32,120
in British Columbia and potentially what we may want to do as a city in terms of coming

1308
01:59:32,120 --> 01:59:37,840
up with something for council to discuss and I'd like to ask Councillor Shane McKinnon

1309
01:59:37,840 --> 01:59:42,440
as co-chair of the working circle to speak to the draft statement that we put together

1310
01:59:42,440 --> 01:59:47,200
and put some context behind the conversation. Councillor McKinnon,

1311
01:59:54,810 --> 01:59:55,410
sorry I think you're

1312
01:59:55,410 --> 01:59:56,630
muted Councillor McKinnon.

1313
01:59:58,970 --> 01:59:59,870
3

1314
02:00:00,000 --> 02:00:28,120
Thank you, Deputy Mayor Bush and Mayor Wilson and council members on Wednesday of last week, your city of Dryden Working Circle met. And in addition to our agenda was required. And that was a response. Well, I had a city to the terrible tragedy in Canada with B.C. with the discovery of 215 children in an unmarked grave.

1315
02:00:28,820 --> 02:00:34,700
As we know, most council members would mention a tragic event or pay tribute during their

1316
02:00:34,700 --> 02:00:37,640
time at the conclusion of our meetings.

1317
02:00:38,400 --> 02:00:44,080
The working circle is recommending a media release by a mayor and council as leaders

1318
02:00:44,080 --> 02:00:51,720
in our community and is offering a draft as presented for discussion and approval.

1319
02:00:51,720 --> 02:01:14,520
Just on a personal note, the good work that the working circle and council have done with the upcoming renaming of Boozhu and Memorial Avenue and I want to say that Memorial Avenue in particular has taken on a whole more specific meaning for me with these revelations.

1320
02:01:15,500 --> 02:01:21,800
I wonder if the clerk can read the letter if that's appropriate.

1321
02:01:28,900 --> 02:01:32,440
You could read the letter, but I guess at the end of the day,

1322
02:01:34,500 --> 02:01:40,060
all of council would probably want to have a look and have some input on to the final version.

1323
02:01:40,420 --> 02:01:48,540
So it may, all I'm suggesting is that it may change based on either the discussion tonight or or however we go forward with it.

1324
02:01:48,540 --> 02:01:54,700
But I think the context of what we're trying to say is probably relevant.

1325
02:02:01,740 --> 02:02:03,060
So yeah, go ahead and read it.

1326
02:02:03,260 --> 02:02:06,640
And just recognizing that it may or may not change a little bit.

1327
02:02:09,620 --> 02:02:10,640
Hey, thank you.

1328
02:02:10,940 --> 02:02:18,800
And I'm going to apologize before we get too far into this because there's no way I'm going to be able to pronounce a few of these words.

1329
02:02:19,480 --> 02:02:26,800
So, the letter that was presented currently State City of Dryden Mayor and Council were deeply

1330
02:02:26,800 --> 02:02:32,660
saddened by the horrific discovery of the remains of 215 children buried at a former residential

1331
02:02:32,660 --> 02:02:40,580
school on a territory in Camelooks, British Columbia. Many of our residents and those of our

1332
02:02:40,580 --> 02:02:45,680
neighboring communities are survivors of residential schools or the children and grandchildren of those

1333
02:02:45,680 --> 02:02:50,980
survivors. We may never know, we may never fully know the harm that was done to individuals

1334
02:02:50,980 --> 02:02:57,040
or to the culture of our indigenous community, but we must do our utmost to ensure that this type

1335
02:02:57,040 --> 02:03:03,500
of racist, destructive governance never repeats itself. Dryden City Council strongly supports the

1336
02:03:03,500 --> 02:03:09,460
city of Dryden working circle and their work to bring our indigenous and non-indigenous community

1337
02:03:09,460 --> 02:03:15,040
members closer together. Their recommendations are reflective of the truth and reconciliation

1338
02:03:15,040 --> 02:03:22,400
report and are aligned with the goals of the Dryden Area Anti-Racism Network and other organizations

1339
02:03:22,400 --> 02:03:29,040
who make Dryden a better community. Treaty III territory had six residential schools.

1340
02:03:29,440 --> 02:03:35,660
Gord Alexander is Indian Residential School, Macintosh Indian Residential School, St. Mary's

1341
02:03:35,660 --> 02:03:42,180
Indian Residential School, Cecilia Jeffrey Indian Residential School, Pelican Lake Indian Residential

1342
02:03:42,180 --> 02:03:47,820
school, St. Margaret's Indian Residential School. The legacy of pain and suffering experienced

1343
02:03:47,820 --> 02:03:52,920
at these institutions did not end when they closed. These schools existed for over 100

1344
02:03:52,920 --> 02:03:58,160
years and Friday's discovery may not be the last. We must continue to listen and respect

1345
02:03:58,160 --> 02:04:02,780
the survivors of the system and found the strength and courage to bring their experiences to light.

1346
02:04:03,600 --> 02:04:08,540
In the interim, it is the city's goal to educate ourselves, listen to the concerns of all

1347
02:04:08,540 --> 02:04:13,640
citizens and ensure that Dryden is a better place to live, work, and play for everyone.

1348
02:04:14,320 --> 02:04:16,460
Greg Wilson, Mayor, City of Dryden.

1349
02:04:20,950 --> 02:04:22,250
Thank you, Madam Clerk.

1350
02:04:24,450 --> 02:04:28,810
So the recommendation and the goal is to come up with wording that's acceptable to counsel as a

1351
02:04:28,810 --> 02:04:33,870
whole and to direct staff to issue a media release as soon as possible. That's the recommendation.

1352
02:04:34,350 --> 02:04:40,150
So I'll show that open to the rest of Council. And who was involved in that was not the

1353
02:04:40,150 --> 02:04:45,170
working circle, it was the council members of the working circle that put this draft

1354
02:04:45,170 --> 02:04:50,430
together Michelle Price, myself and Councillor Shane McKinnon. So that's our recommendation

1355
02:04:50,430 --> 02:04:54,570
to council. So I'll throw it open to the rest of the council for discussion.

1356
02:05:16,640 --> 02:05:17,200
Council

1357
02:05:17,200 --> 02:05:20,260
And I can very much support the work that the work in circle.

1358
02:05:21,080 --> 02:05:25,540
My council members and friends have put into this statement.

1359
02:05:25,680 --> 02:05:28,020
It's very telling, very appropriate.

1360
02:05:29,240 --> 02:05:29,980
Thank you.

1361
02:05:43,870 --> 02:05:46,330
Mayor Rotten or Councillor Martin McKinnon, any thoughts?

1362
02:05:59,280 --> 02:06:04,220
Yeah, I can, I, like Dave, I can support this 100%.

1363
02:06:05,300 --> 02:06:11,060
I don't, I'm, I'm learning about mentioning specific schools.

1364
02:06:11,060 --> 02:06:18,500
I don't want to politicize this any more than it can.

1365
02:06:19,340 --> 02:06:23,460
It's a tragic, tragic event that we have to make sure never happens again.

1366
02:06:24,780 --> 02:06:29,220
But at the same time, we have to start and find ways for people to heal.

1367
02:06:30,140 --> 02:06:35,680
And when we constantly drag up examples, it doesn't work much for me.

1368
02:06:35,680 --> 02:06:41,980
but I'll support anything that anybody wants to put out.

1369
02:06:43,460 --> 02:06:54,340
It's a tragic, tragic event and there's, if folks like us live back in those times, this wouldn't happen. That's all I can say.

1370
02:07:04,340 --> 02:07:04,960
Thank you.

1371
02:07:04,960 --> 02:07:12,960
As I said last week, I can see us coming out with something and first I wanted to thank

1372
02:07:12,960 --> 02:07:18,280
the working circle for its request to mayor and council last Thursday evening to respond

1373
02:07:18,280 --> 02:07:24,860
to the tragic discovery of those remains of those 250 children in Kamloops the week before

1374
02:07:24,860 --> 02:07:30,660
in May 27th and I'd also like to thank the three councilors on the working circle committee

1375
02:07:30,660 --> 02:07:36,200
who put a lot of hard work into preparing a draft for public release and I what I would

1376
02:07:36,200 --> 02:07:40,280
like to do is just take some time this week to reflect before getting something before

1377
02:07:40,280 --> 02:07:42,180
council next Monday if that's acceptable.

1378
02:07:48,320 --> 02:07:49,260
Councillor Carlucci.

1379
02:07:50,900 --> 02:07:54,300
Yeah, I agree with that as well but I was going to read it. I'll go back if I'm going to

1380
02:07:54,300 --> 02:07:55,480
be off screen for a second here.

1381
02:07:57,800 --> 02:07:58,340
Can you say Army?

1382
02:07:59,660 --> 02:08:00,680
Yes again, we can.

1383
02:08:01,280 --> 02:08:06,040
Yeah, so for me I agree with Councillor Martin. We can get rid of the name at the bottom and

1384
02:08:06,040 --> 02:08:10,840
which says, PneC territory has six residential schools,

1385
02:08:11,120 --> 02:08:13,820
the legacy of paying the staff experience

1386
02:08:13,820 --> 02:08:16,040
in these institutions carry on from there.

1387
02:08:16,200 --> 02:08:18,620
I think that's where I'd like to see the change

1388
02:08:19,220 --> 02:08:20,480
and the rest of it do support.

1389
02:08:21,120 --> 02:08:22,800
So that's where I invite Matt.

1390
02:08:33,550 --> 02:08:36,510
That would give us, are we aligned council?

1391
02:08:36,630 --> 02:08:40,570
Is it acceptable to take the next four business days

1392
02:08:40,570 --> 02:08:42,930
essentially and probably less than that

1393
02:08:42,930 --> 02:08:44,810
to get it on to the agenda for next Monday?

1394
02:08:44,810 --> 02:08:48,990
and put out a note at the end of Council meeting next Monday.

1395
02:08:53,530 --> 02:08:54,510
Councilor Dave McKay,

1396
02:08:57,720 --> 02:08:59,260
sorry, Dave, you're on mute.

1397
02:09:03,120 --> 02:09:11,940
I think it's very appropriate to get it out right now and as for naming the schools,

1398
02:09:12,780 --> 02:09:21,280
this really brings it home for me because as a kid playing hockey, we place hockey and

1399
02:09:21,280 --> 02:09:27,220
At the school in Pelican Lake and I've got a cottage

1400
02:09:27,220 --> 02:09:31,440
over by Macintosh. It really makes you realize how

1401
02:09:32,860 --> 02:09:36,120
integrated this was in our area, the school system,

1402
02:09:37,080 --> 02:09:41,440
and how very detrimental it was for our area and

1403
02:09:42,220 --> 02:09:48,040
our indigenous neighbors. So I think we need to get this out.

1404
02:09:51,400 --> 02:10:02,140
I don't think in my mind if this is anyone way you can say this is politicizing anything this is factual. So thank you.

1405
02:10:08,030 --> 02:10:09,030
Other comments?

1406
02:10:12,520 --> 02:10:13,680
Councillor Shane McKinnon?

1407
02:10:14,980 --> 02:10:28,000
Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. I might have been on the same hockey team as you the back of the day. I can remember that as well, but I agree with you and I like to make a suggestion if we remove the names of the schools.

1408
02:10:29,080 --> 02:10:38,960
If that's more palatable for council members that we do send that out at the end of this meeting, but that's my suggestion as well.

1409
02:10:43,400 --> 02:10:54,400
Sorry, I just I didn't catch part of that. So you were suggesting if we remove the names of the schools and we send it out this evening, that would be my preference or as soon as possible.

1410
02:10:58,240 --> 02:10:59,020
Other thoughts?

1411
02:11:01,740 --> 02:11:02,700
Councillor Carlucci?

1412
02:11:03,520 --> 02:11:07,880
Yeah, I agree. If it's get out as soon as we can, the names stay if they stay if they

1413
02:11:07,880 --> 02:11:13,280
don't be dog time. It's a very powerful letter and I think that it needs to get out.

1414
02:11:15,190 --> 02:11:15,990
Councillor Price?

1415
02:11:17,630 --> 02:11:26,250
Thank you. I agree with Councillor McKay. I actually do believe that the names of the schools

1416
02:11:26,250 --> 02:11:34,290
need to stay in the presence of this letter. I think it's very important for us to recognize

1417
02:11:34,730 --> 02:11:43,730
the history of our community and taking it out I think removes that part of that history and

1418
02:11:45,110 --> 02:11:54,730
this letter in itself is very emotional for a lot of people and we've been given the task

1419
02:11:54,730 --> 02:12:01,070
and a very proud task of making a positive change in our community.

1420
02:12:01,870 --> 02:12:08,670
And this letter is telling everyone that we're here for support.

1421
02:12:09,470 --> 02:12:14,270
And this would be no different if this had happened to someone five years ago.

1422
02:12:14,750 --> 02:12:18,930
It's the same thing. We are here to support and to help heal.

1423
02:12:18,930 --> 02:12:26,930
And I don't think that we shouldn't neglect saying where that healing is going to and where it's coming from.

1424
02:12:27,510 --> 02:12:33,290
So for me, I think it's important that we leave the school names in there.

1425
02:12:33,630 --> 02:12:37,030
And I think it's very important that we do this here and now.

1426
02:12:37,990 --> 02:12:47,190
And it's not necessary to wait to say this because to me it's no different than offering condolences

1427
02:12:47,190 --> 02:12:49,150
is to something that will happen yesterday.

1428
02:12:49,990 --> 02:12:52,610
We have heard this and we're reaching out

1429
02:12:52,610 --> 02:12:55,250
and we're putting that out there that, you know,

1430
02:12:55,390 --> 02:12:59,470
what, we're here to help and to send our condolences

1431
02:12:59,470 --> 02:13:02,530
in any way possible that we can do as a community.

1432
02:13:08,430 --> 02:13:10,450
Yeah, I have to say from my perspective

1433
02:13:10,450 --> 02:13:13,670
that I prefer something sooner than later,

1434
02:13:13,670 --> 02:13:17,550
just due to the fact that the longer we wait

1435
02:13:17,550 --> 02:13:20,010
it just gets more and more distant in people's minds

1436
02:13:20,010 --> 02:13:30,090
and people move on, new stories change, etc. But I'm also in favor of, I understand, I understand

1437
02:13:30,090 --> 02:13:37,810
the desire maybe to put some specific names in, but I'm more comfortable just saying six residential

1438
02:13:37,810 --> 02:13:44,430
schools in our area and getting it out now as opposed to later.

1439
02:13:50,760 --> 02:13:52,680
Councillor Martin McKinnon and

1440
02:13:52,680 --> 02:13:53,780
and marbles and your thoughts?

1441
02:13:59,490 --> 02:14:03,170
Like I said, I'll support whatever you guys want.

1442
02:14:05,970 --> 02:14:08,330
I understand what Michelle's saying too, so.

1443
02:14:09,990 --> 02:14:12,550
I'm sorry I used the word politicized.

1444
02:14:12,710 --> 02:14:13,690
That's not how I meant it.

1445
02:14:18,410 --> 02:14:21,250
Let's get the letter out and let's move on.

1446
02:14:21,470 --> 02:14:23,490
We've got lots of work to do in this area.

1447
02:14:24,390 --> 02:14:27,850
We have to get, we're very functional at it right now.

1448
02:14:27,930 --> 02:14:29,510
We have to get even better at it.

1449
02:14:29,510 --> 02:14:32,490
So, let's move on, folks.

1450
02:14:35,930 --> 02:14:42,490
Just if I could, and my fellow councillors on the working circle can add their perspective

1451
02:14:42,490 --> 02:14:49,590
as well, but we have a very positive group in the working circle, the Indigenous and

1452
02:14:49,590 --> 02:14:50,670
non-Indigenous members.

1453
02:14:52,390 --> 02:14:54,330
Nobody is focusing on blame.

1454
02:14:54,510 --> 02:14:59,650
Everybody is focusing on what we can do moving forward in a positive manner.

1455
02:14:59,650 --> 02:14:59,950
Thank you so much.

1456
02:15:00,270 --> 02:15:30,030
And we see this, we see this letter proclamation, whatever you want to call it as just another, just another example of working together and bringing our indigenous and non-indigenous communities closer together. And so, there's not, there's really no, there's been really no politics in this discussion. It's all been about moving forward and just recognizing what happened and working with each other and recognizing that

1457
02:15:30,030 --> 02:15:36,150
a significant element of our population has suffered through these things in ways that

1458
02:15:36,150 --> 02:15:38,290
we probably can't relate to.

1459
02:15:43,080 --> 02:15:50,100
So could we have a vote in terms of two things, one, getting it out now versus next week

1460
02:15:50,100 --> 02:15:55,560
and secondly, including or not including the naming of the six residential schools?

1461
02:15:55,740 --> 02:16:02,820
So first, who's in favor of naming the six residential schools?

1462
02:16:02,820 --> 02:16:03,540
four

1463
02:16:10,830 --> 02:16:16,350
in favor. How about getting it out tonight or next week? Tonight,

1464
02:16:23,020 --> 02:16:23,200
Mayor

1465
02:16:23,200 --> 02:16:25,920
Wilson, can you abide by that?

1466
02:16:29,300 --> 02:16:31,660
Well, I believe in democracy, so majority rules.

1467
02:16:34,760 --> 02:16:36,900
Okay, thank you. Appreciate your support.

1468
02:16:40,040 --> 02:16:42,100
These are not these are not easy issues.

1469
02:16:42,900 --> 02:16:48,560
And unfortunately, I'd have to say that we're all living with legacies of

1470
02:16:48,560 --> 02:16:54,320
the past and, you know, we're all going to have to work these through probably through

1471
02:16:54,320 --> 02:16:59,020
our lifetimes and well into the next generation before we really start to see the kind of

1472
02:16:59,560 --> 02:17:00,780
progress we're all looking for.

1473
02:17:05,500 --> 02:17:05,700
All right.

1474
02:17:05,860 --> 02:17:06,280
Thank you.

1475
02:17:09,420 --> 02:17:10,400
Public notices.

1476
02:17:10,700 --> 02:17:13,980
I'll ask the Acting Clerk to review the public notice, Allison.

1477
02:17:17,720 --> 02:17:18,060
Thank you.

1478
02:17:18,240 --> 02:17:23,640
The public notice advises there'll be a virtual public consultation meeting at 6 p.m. Thursday,

1479
02:17:23,880 --> 02:17:25,720
June the 24th.

1480
02:17:25,720 --> 02:17:27,780
Members of the Dryden Police Service, OPP,

1481
02:17:28,160 --> 02:17:29,860
and City of Dryden staff will be in attendance

1482
02:17:29,860 --> 02:17:32,220
to address questions and comments from the public

1483
02:17:32,220 --> 02:17:34,400
regarding the OPP Costing Proposal,

1484
02:17:34,760 --> 02:17:37,500
which would prevent a council on May 17th.

1485
02:17:37,600 --> 02:17:39,280
The public can participate in the meeting

1486
02:17:39,280 --> 02:17:41,240
by registering to speak in advance

1487
02:17:41,560 --> 02:17:44,160
by emailing meeting at Dryden.ca,

1488
02:17:44,480 --> 02:17:46,800
no later than June 21st.

1489
02:17:47,260 --> 02:17:50,060
If members of the public don't want to participate in the meeting,

1490
02:17:50,060 --> 02:17:52,340
but would still like to provide questions or comments,

1491
02:17:52,340 --> 02:17:54,660
that would be read and responded to at the meeting.

1492
02:17:54,660 --> 02:18:03,040
They can email them to meeting at Dryden.ca or leave a voicemail message at 223-1160

1493
02:18:03,660 --> 02:18:06,140
also know later than June 21st.

1494
02:18:07,080 --> 02:18:13,300
Anyone who would like to watch the meeting will be able to access the agenda in the video on the city's website

1495
02:18:13,300 --> 02:18:17,480
where the video will be available at 6 p.m. on the 24th.

1496
02:18:17,760 --> 02:18:22,900
The video remains on the website after the meeting for anyone who's unable to watch it live.

1497
02:18:22,900 --> 02:18:30,940
The full public notice was available on the website in the agenda package for tonight's meeting.

1498
02:18:35,380 --> 02:18:37,320
Great. Thank you. Madam Clerk.

1499
02:18:40,420 --> 02:18:43,280
I think we've concluded all of our business for this evening.

1500
02:18:43,540 --> 02:18:48,340
So, Madam Clerk, could you ask for someone to move and second the motion for adjournment please?

1501
02:18:48,960 --> 02:18:52,100
Certainly. I'd be looking for someone to move and second the motion for adjournment.

1502
02:18:52,100 --> 02:18:54,840
and Councillor Price and Councillor Caroleucci.

1503
02:18:56,260 --> 02:18:58,860
Moved by Councillor Price, seconded by Councillor Caroleucci

1504
02:18:58,860 --> 02:19:00,820
that this meeting hereby adjourned.

1505
02:19:01,600 --> 02:19:02,620
All in favor?

1506
02:19:06,130 --> 02:19:06,690
Carried.

1507
02:19:07,870 --> 02:19:09,550
All right, thank you. We stand adjourned.

1508
02:19:09,730 --> 02:19:10,930
Please turn your mics off.

1509
02:19:11,770 --> 02:19:13,170
Night off. Thanks, everyone.

1510
02:19:14,670 --> 02:19:15,490
Letter, thank you.

1511
02:19:16,110 --> 02:19:16,870
Night off.