Amherstburg Police Services Board’s Decision Re Cheap Silver Police Retirement Badge

Featured

Mayor DiCarlo confirmed that it was a Board decision to provide a cheap silver retirement badge to Sgt. Jim Saxon and he did anticipate it might be an issue. Nothing changed.

Two sets of badges were ordered – one in silver for all retiring officers in 2013/2014 and another in gold for everyone but Sgt. Saxon.

As of November 18, 2014, APSB members were John Sutton, Frank Cleminson, Pauline Gemmell and Wayne Hurst.

Also posted to bullyinginpolicing.com on the saxon page.

UPDATE: Town of Amherstburg Ordered to Conduct Further Records Search

On August 10, 2020, the compliance date for Information and Privacy Commission ORDER MO-3934-I, the Town of Amherstburg requested an extension until September 30 to complete further searches and provide affidavits and representations about the additional searches in satisfaction of Order Provisions 1- 3.

As posted in Town of Amherstburg Ordered to Conduct Further Records Search). the first three Order provisions are:

  1. I order the town to conduct a further electronic search in response to the appellant’s request using the email addresses of the EA and any other staff in the CAO’s office.
  2. I order the town to conduct a further search of its electronic and paper record holdings for records that may flow from the May 8, 2017 email referred to in paragraph 24 of this order.
  3. I order the town to provide me with an affidavit sworn by the individual(s) who conduct(s) the further searches by August 10, 2020 describing its search efforts. The affidavit(s) should include the following information:
    1. the names and positions of the individuals who conducted the searches;
    2. information about the types of files searched, the nature and location of the search(es) and the steps taken in conducting the search(es);
    3. the results of the search(es); and,
    4. if the search described in order provision 2 does not yield any further results, an explanation.

The Adjudicator understood from the town’s letter that the Town of Amherstburg has commenced the additional searches, which have yielded a large volume of records that require review; and that there have been some delays in completing the additional searches due to demands on staff time because of emergency declarations for COVID-19 and flooding.

In response, the Adjudicator amended the compliance date in Order Provision 3 to be September 30, 2020.

Any further requests for extension must be made before September 15 and the appellant will be given an opportunity to make representations. Requests for additional time for compliance with Order Provisions 1-3 beyond September 30 that are received after September 15 will not be granted, unless extraordinary circumstances are present.

The Adjudicator clarified that the order was issued by the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario, which is an Office of the Legislative Assembly and independent from the provincial government.

Town of Amherstburg Ordered to Conduct Further Records Search

The Information and Privacy Commissioner Ontario issued ORDER MO-3934-I regarding the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act request to the town for correspondence regarding the police costing from the town’s CAO (and his staff) to the OPP.

ORDER:

  1. I order the town to conduct a further electronic search in response to the appellant’s request using the email addresses of the EA and any other staff in the CAO’s office.
  2. I order the town to conduct a further search of its electronic and paper record holdings for records that may flow from the May 8, 2017 email referred to in paragraph 24 of this order.
  3. I order the town to provide me with an affidavit sworn by the individual(s) who conduct(s) the further searches by August 10, 2020 describing its search efforts. The affidavit(s) should include the following information:
    1. the names and positions of the individuals who conducted the searches;
    2. information about the types of files searched, the nature and location of the search(es) and the steps taken in conducting the search(es);
    3. the results of the search(es); and,
    4. if the search described in order provision 2 does not yield any further results, an explanation.
  4. The information should be provided by way of representations with the affidavit that may be shared with the appellant unless there is an overriding confidentiality concern.
  5. If the town locates additional responsive records as a result of its further search, I order it to issue an access decision to the appellant in accordance with the requirements of this Act , treating the date of this order as the date of the request.
  6. I reserve the right to require the town to provide me with a copy of the information it discloses to the appellant in accordance with this order.
  7. I remain seized of this appeal to deal with: any outstanding issues arising from order provisions 1 to 3; and, if the parties are unable to resolve them, any additional time that may be required by the town to comply with the order due to the current COVID-19 situation.

Windsor Police Service Board Ordered To Disclose Additional Police Proposal Records

The Information and Privacy Commissioner Ontario issued Order MO-3927 regarding an Appeal of Windsor Police’s decision to withhold access to parts of its policing proposal to Amherstburg.

Read Want The Windsor Policing Proposal? Pay For It for a detailed background that began in June 2018. Mayor DiCarlo advised the Windsor response would be made public.

Windsor Police relied on several reasons for its decision, including discretionary exemptions: sections 11(f) (economic and other interests), 6(1)(b) (closed meeting), 8(1)(c) (reveal investigative techniques and procedures), (e) (endanger life or safety), (g) (intelligence information), (i) (security) and (l) (facilitate commission of an unlawful act).

ORDER:

  1. I do not uphold WPSB’s decision that section 52(3) applies to pages 23, 24, 28, 29 and 32 of the record and order it to issue an access decision with respect to the these pages. For the purposes of the procedural
    requirements of the access decision, the date of this order is to be treated as the date of the access request.
  2. I uphold the WPSB’s decision to deny access to the information on pages 45 and part of 47 (the code information only) on the basis of section 8(1) (l) of the Act .
  3. I order the WPSB to disclose the following pages of the record: 33, part of 47 (the non-code information), 48, 49, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 61, 62, 64, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 122, 130 and 131 by providing the appellant with a copy of these pages by July 7, 2020.
  4. In order to verify compliance with order provisions 1 and 3, I reserve the right to require the police to provide me with a copy of the access decision and the records sent to the appellant.
  5. The timelines in order provisions 1 and 3 may be extended if the police are unable to comply in light of the current COVID-19 situation. I remain seized of the appeal to address any such requests.

UPDATE: Windsor Police Service Information and Privacy Co-ordinator requested a 30 day extension from July 6, 2020.

Police Costing Comparison Amherstburg And Orangeville Part 4 Mayor’s Statement

Part 4 of this series was delayed pending the outcome of my January 17 request to Mayor DiCarlo. A simple question resulted in a complicated process without an answer; more on that below and in a future post.

Orangeville Mayor Brown issued a formal Statement on Orangeville Council’s OPP decision the day after and it is posted on the town of Orangeville’s site.

January 17 to DiCarlo, one of the questions submitted regarding the Windsor Police takeover was: would you please provide me with any official statement you issued as mayor regarding the vote in favour of the windsor police takeover.

January 20, Mayor DiCarlo’s response was: Unfortunately I do not keep personal records of the information you are requesting as the Town is responsible for such.  Please forward your requests to the CAO’s office.

January 20 to DiCarlo: just to clarify, i’m not requesting personal records and i do not believe the town is responsible for an official statement you may have issued as mayor. my question is simply did you issue one in relation to the windsor police takeover?

January 20 from DiCarlo: I understood what you were requesting. Any official statements I made would have been forwarded by/through the Town, not me personally.  I don’t keep copies of those.  If they were made to the media, they would be available in the media.  I do not keep a record of all of my media interviews. I cannot provide records of information I do not keep.  However, the parties I referred to do keep those records, thus my referral to the CAO’s office.

January 20 to Miceli: since the mayor has referred me to contact you, i’m requesting any official statement the mayor issued regarding the vote in favour of the windsor police takeover.

January 27 to Miceli: followup

February 12 to council: request that council consider creating a protocol to answer inquiries from taxpayers and media; mentioned a couple of examples of exchanges with town employees, including Miceli not answering January 20 and 27 emails.

February 12: DiCarlo forwarded request to council to CAO Miceli with an FYI notation.

February 18 from Miceli, in part: I will request that all information you seek be made through MFIPPA process and the Clerk will determine the appropriate dissemination of information. This is the proper way to handle your requests.

February 18 to Miceli: not all requests require a formal FOI request when dealing with an open government; since I believe one is unnecessary in this instance, my requests stand. the mayor claimed you have the records so you will have to decide whether or not to honour my requests. 

Police Costing Comparison Amherstburg And Orangeville Part 3 Council Motions Requesting OPP Costing

Any municipality wishing to request a contract proposal for the provision of policing services by the OPP must submit a council resolution requesting a proposal for the cost of OPP policing to the Ministry.

Orangeville
First request:
January 2014 Council Resolution to request costing proposal from OPP.
April 2017 OPP Costing Analysis presentation to Council.

Second request:
December 2018 Council Resolution to request a costing proposal from OPP.
January 2019 Town’s request approved and an initial meeting with OPP was held.

Amherstburg
December 2014 Resolution to obtain an OPP Costing.
January 2017 Resolution, in part, to work with the OPP on the OPP costing.
No initial meeting with OPP was held.
Fall 2017 cancelled.

Police Costing Comparison Amherstburg And Orangeville Part 2 Police Complement

  • Orangeville Police Complement            OPP Proposed Complement
  • Chief                                1                         Superintendent            0.58
  • Deputy                             1
  • Staff Sergeant                  2                         Staff Sergeant              1
  • Sergeant                          6                         Sergeant                      6
  • Constables                    31.8                       Constables                35
  • Overtime Equivalent         1.1                       Overtime Equivalent  1.1
  • Total Complement       42.9                      Total Complement 44.6
  • Amherstburg Police Complement          Windsor Police Proposed
  • Chief 1                                                        Shall be 30 full time including
  • Deputy 1                                                     the Officer in Charge.
  • Staff Sergeant 0
  • Sergeant 6
  • Constables 23
  • Special Constable 1
  • Total Complement 32                               Total Complement 30

Police Costing Comparison Amherstburg And Orangeville Overview

theburgwatch compared the main framework of police costings in Orangeville and Amherstburg.

Disclaimer: this Amherstburg Orangeville Comparison Police Costing is provided for informational purposes only. theburgwatch.com makes no representations as to accuracy, completeness, currentness, suitability, or validity of any information on this site and will not be liable for any errors, omissions, or delays in this information or any losses, injuries, or damages arising from its display or use. All information is provided on an as-is basis.

Mayor DiCarlo’s Response RE Windsor Police 1 Year Anniversary Comment

As mentioned in the post, Windsor Police Takeover One Year Latertheburgwatch requested DiCarlo to expand, specifically, on what the ‘quite a bit of service’ is and submitted the following to him:

according to an am800 article re the one year anniversary of the windsor police takeover, you mentioned, “From what I can tell, on the surface, we’re actually getting more for our money which was really the key that we were looking into this for. Initially, it was really just saving money, but it looks like we’ve added quite a bit of service for cost savings.” for the burgwatch, would you expand, specifically, on what the ‘quite a bit of service’ is.”

A.  “I spoke to all of the news outlets about this issue, so I’ll have to try and recall the context.  That I remember for that particular article, the context of the statement was in relation to feedback received from residents regarding the increased presence of police officers across the town.”

Mayor DiCarlo Pleased With Windsor Police

Blackburn News reports how pleased Mayor DiCarlo is with the Windsor Police takeover.

DiCarlo is quoted in this article, “We have access to a lot of services that we never did before. Obviously Windsor Police is a much bigger operation with a lot more to offer,” said DiCarlo.

Have we not always had access to a lot of services?

It was my understanding that since the Amherstburg Police Services Board was obliged to provide adequate and effective policing we either had all the services that were required or had access to them through the OPP and/or Windsor.

Obviously, the OPP is an even bigger operation that also has a lot to offer but no OPP costing was obtained for comparison sake.

While the article also mentioned, “the town realized a half a million dollars in savings by switching over to the Windsor Police Service,” we never knew if we might have saved significantly more through a switch to the OPP.  After all, one of the corrective actions listed in the Deloitte Report 2014 was, “look for shared service opportunities with neighbouring municipalities,” which could have easily meant to share OPP policing with the majority of Essex County.

Windsor Police Takeover One Year Later

An am800 report, Amherstburg Mayor happy After One Year With New Police Service, quoted DiCarlo, “I’ve heard from almost nobody still opposed,” he says. “I’ve heard from a lot of people who were concerned early on and after the switch many of them have said that it turned out to be a really good idea. From the feedback I’m getting from the residents, it has made a very noticeable difference.”

“From what I can tell, on the surface, we’re actually getting more for our money which was really the key that we were looking into this for. Initially, it was really just saving money, but it looks like we’ve added quite a bit of service for cost savings.”

theburgwatch requested DiCarlo to expand, specifically, on what the ‘quite a bit of service’ is.

Questions About Stat Pay Suit

After having read the Windsor Star article (the article) that reported Berthiaume is suing the town for stat pay, some questions came to mind so I’m looking forward to the trial with the hope that answers will be provided.

Are taxpayers on the hook for the lawsuit?

Under the Legal Indemnification section of his agreement, s. 15 (b) states:

“Upon retirement the Board shall continue to provide legal indemnification in all matters presently before the courts or future matters arising as a result of Chief Tim Berthiaume’s responsibilities of the Amherstburg Police Service. These matters being directly associated to his position as the Chief of Police of the Amherstburg Police Service.”

Was Berthiaume eligible for stat pay?

His agreement with the Amherstburg Police Services Board, signed on April 15, 2014 by John Sutton, Wayne Hurst, Frank Cleminson, and Pauline Gemmell, effective until June 30, 2019 states:

Statutory Holidays
12.2
The Chief shall be allowed to work a statutory holiday and take another day off in lieu subject to the approval of the Board.”

Was it necessary for him to work stat holidays? And, if he did work them, why didn’t he just take a day off in lieu as required by the Agreement?

Did Berthiaume work any stat days during his 6-month paid hiatus in a defunct position?

The Amherstburg Police was abolished on December 31, 2018 and the Windsor Police contract became effective January 1, 2019. According to the article, Berthiaume advised he would not transition until after the expiry of his existing contract effective the end of June 2019.

Why would the Board agree that Berthiaume would “take another day off in lieu” while former Board members support his claim that he is owed money in lieu?

The Agreement states:

“Employment, 2.2, “The Parties agree that the salary and working conditions of this agreement shall be reviewed on an annual basis as per the provisions of the Police Services Act. In accordance with section 115(2) and 31)1)(d) of the Act it is the Board’s duty to annually determine the remuneration and working conditions taking the Chief’s submissions into account. This provision may be waived if remuneration and working conditions, by agreement of both parties, are agreed to for a period of more than one year.”

When Windsor Police was awarded the contract, did the Board review Berthiaume’s Agreement knowing the Amherstburg Police would cease to exist on December 31, 2018?

The article referred to former Board member Rozankovic who said a contract is a contract and the board was committed to paying Berthiaume until his expired at the end of June.

Was the Agreement in conflict with the Police Services Act?

Section 16 (a) of the Agreement states, “Any term or provision of this Agreement that is in conflict with the Police Services Act or any successor act or regulations thereunder is void and of no effect.”

The Police Services Act Reduction or abolition of police force

40 (1) A board may terminate the employment of a member of the police force for the purpose of abolishing the police force or reducing its size if the Commission consents and if the abolition or reduction does not contravene this Act.

Criteria for Commission’s consent

(2) The Commission shall consent to the termination of the employment of a member of the police force under subsection (1) only if,

(a)  the member and the board have made an agreement dealing with severance pay or agreed to submit the matter to arbitration; or

(b)  the Commission has made an order under subsection (3).

Order imposing arbitration

(3) If the member and the board do not make an agreement dealing with severance pay and do not agree to submit the matter to arbitration, the Commission, if it is of the opinion that it would be appropriate to permit the abolition of the police force or the reduction of its size, may order the member and the board to submit the matter to arbitration and may give any necessary directions in that connection.

What did OCPC decide?

In its last paragraph of the decision, OCPC consented to the abolition of the APS under section 40 of the PSA subject to the following conditions:

    1. Amherstburg must deliver to the Commission a signed copy of the contract with the City of Windsor which substantially implements the Proposal.
    2. The receipt by the Commission of written confirmation from the APSB that an agreement as to severance pay has been made with any member of the APS whose employment is terminated as a result of the abolition. Failing such an agreement, the APSB must provide written confirmation to the Commission that an agreement has been made with such members that any severance pay dispute will be referred to arbitration. If no such agreements are made within 90 days of today’s date the Commission will order that all remaining severance pay disputes will be referred to arbitration.

Was the matter mediated?

Section 3.1 of the agreement states, “In the event that the Chief and the Board are unable to agree to salary and benefit terms in subsequent years of this contract, either party shall have the right to refer the matter to a mediator selected jointly by the Chief and the Board. Should an agreement not be reached through the mediation process, either party may refer the matter to an independent arbitrator selected jointly by the Chief and the Board. Each party will bear their own costs of mediation and arbitration with the costs of the mediator and/or arbitrator being shared 25% for the Chief and 75% for the Board.

Why was Berthiaume’s contract not ended as a result of the abolition on December 31, 2018 pursuant to PSA s.40? 

the burg watch is 8 years old

Eight years ago, the burg watch was the first site to create a permanent record council’s performance as a reminder to voters heading to polls.

Early posts were about council’s contravention of the Municipal Act following the Ombudsman Review Of Closed Meeting, flip flops and a lack of commitment to accessibility.

In 2014, the burg watch provided an historic opportunity for residents to question the candidates directly. Despite being threatened with legal action and negative comments, I feel it was a worthwhile endeavour even if not everyone responded as that indicates, to me, their future behaviour.

In 2018, posts referenced another Ombudsman’s Report of council’s and the JPAC’s contravention regarding in camera meetings on the Policing RFP and council’s decision to choose Windsor Police Service without obtaining an OPP costing as promised.

Thank you to those who support the burg watch.