Category Archives: Accountability

Human Rights Tribunal Ontario Hearing Reminder

Posted on by

A countdown calendar has been added to the right sidebar regarding the hearing of an Application by James Saxon v. Amherstburg Police Service Board and Amherstburg Police Association and an allegation of discrimination because of age.

The hearing is open to the public and it would be a good opportunity to see taxpayer dollars at work.

As mentioned in a previous post, the Tribunal denied the Amherstburg Police Services Board’s request to dismiss or defer the Application. The Board requested that the Tribunal defer consideration of the Application pending the outcome of collective bargaining between it and the union representing the applicant.

The Tribunal decided, “In my view, deferral is not appropriate in this case since there are no parallel proceedings between the parties. In my view, the fact that the Board and the union representing the applicant will commence their next round of bargaining sometime in 2014 is not a reason to defer consideration of this Application. The Application concerns the failure to pay disability benefits after the applicant turned 60 years old. There is no parallel proceeding in this case that is underway that would cause the Tribunal to defer consideration of the Application.”

Council Will Consider Possible Budget Reductions

Posted on by

Ron Giofu, The River Town Times, reports that town council will consider budget reductions of zero, two, four, five or ten per cent, but it may be mid-February or early March before actuals could come before town council.

Councillor Leo Meloche said based on his business background, he knows it takes time for year-end numbers to be finalized. “If we are going to make the right decisions, we have to have the right information,” said Meloche.

Council will need more information than just the numbers; when it considers each department’s submission, including the police department budget, will council be able to differentiate between necessity and wish list items?

While council does not have the authority to approve or disapprove specific items in the estimates, the Police Services Act states, “council shall establish an overall budget for the board for the purposes described in clauses (1) (a) and (b) and, in doing so, the council is not bound to adopt the estimates submitted by the board.”

There has been reluctance in the past to address policing costs, either by claims of autonomy or by not obtaining an OPP costing, so we’ll see what this council does to control police spending.

In an earlier post, Council Could Cut More, I mentioned that “Policing costs and/or any proposed cuts to the police budget were missing. In an April 8, 2014 CKLW post, Police Chief Tim Berthiaume was confident council will approve the police budget, saying his force is one of the most cost-effective in the province.”

The Auditor General of Ontario’s Cost Comparison of Municipal Police Services estimated per capita cost of police services for a population between 15,000 and 49,999 was:

  • Municipal Police Service $284.00
  • OPP – with contract $150.00
  • OPP – no contract $131.00

We taxpayers do not need budget setting decisions based on subjective information; we need well informed elected officials willing to act in the responsible manner they promised they would.

If a few ‘nice to have but don’t need’ items are cut, they probably won’t even be missed.

Amherstburg Police Services Board Ignored Question About Legal Fees

Posted on by

The October 21, 2014 Amherstburg Police Services Board Minutes, attached to the December 15, 2014 Council Agenda, do not include my October 4 request to the Board to place my correspondence on its meeting agenda.

I followed up on Sutton’s September 17 letter and requested, “the date(s) of scheduled negotiation meetings and also to request if a decision has been made to hire a consultant and if so, if there was a competitive process and if there was, i’d like an electronic copy of the notice/advertisement for a consultant.

i would also like to know the legal cost to the board/taxpayer with regard to the human rights tribunal of ontario discrimination application by j. saxon.”

I emailed again on October 28, “as you will note from the email below of october 5, i requested my correspondence be placed on the board’s agenda for the next meeting.

i understand the board held a meeting on october 21 and therefore i’m writing to request what the board’s action was regarding my requests.”

No response was received; no surprise and no accountability?

Instead of ratepayers receiving correspondence from staff advising of outcomes, like in the good old days before we became an amalgamated metropolis, citizens are forced to search information via inaccessible web sites and lengthy 300+ page documents with no links to individual reports.

Enough already! Essex County can do it, why can’t Amherstburg?

Commentary by Linda Saxon

Outstanding Town Litigation Excludes Amherstburg Police Service

Posted on by

The Monday, December 15, 2014 Council Agenda (still, unfortunately, found off site) includes a Report to Council regarding the Council Update on Outstanding Town Litigation.

There is fine print indicating what is not included, but the Amherstburg Police Service is not mentioned.

In a December 2011 post, Amherstburg Police Chief Berthiaume Tight-lipped About Deployment, I mentioned how Chief Tim Berthiaume stated, “the amherstburg police service does not ‘breakdown’ legal expenses.”

If the police service legal fees regarding outstanding litigation are excluded from the Report to the Town, should the police service then submit its own Report to the town but this time with a breakdown of fees – for prosecutions, defending claims, complaints, etc.?

Brampton mayor to launch full probe of city hall

Posted on by

Brampton’s newly elected mayor Linda Jeffrey will ask former Ontario Auditor General Jim McCarter to review the city’s books and plans to invite the provincial ombudsman, Andre Marin, to investigate the city as soon as Bill 8 gives him the power to do so.

“Both individuals have strong credentials and years of experience that will benefit our city. Just as the Deloitte review of the previous administration highlighted problems that needed correcting, these reviews should help us identify what needs correcting and will help establish the necessary foundation Brampton needs so we can move forward,” said Jeffrey.

Jeffrey announced the accountability moves at her inauguration Monday night, as she formally takes over the office from the scandal-plagued former mayor, Susan Fennell.

Full story at the Toronto Star.

Procedural By-law Status Unknown

Posted on by

Commentary by Linda Saxon

This was written in response to Anthony Leardi’s comments in his RTT Guest Column November 5, 2014.

I do not believe the issue is the Mayor’s postponement of meetings since the council approved procedural by-law clause provides him with the authority to do so; that is not a loophole.

And yes, ‘everyone still gets a pay cheque’ because of his or her salaried positions, elected or otherwise, regardless of how many meetings were held or cancelled.

As for the lawyer being called, council was free to accept or reject his advice.

Since the clerk did not adhere to the mandatory clause to call a meeting according to both the Municipal Act and the procedural by-law, the issue is why council allowed the non-compliance and what, if any, action it took as a result.

A new procedural by-law was to have been approved back in August but due to a lengthy meeting, there was a motion to defer the report and by-law to September 8, although it was not included on that agenda.

There was no notice to the public regarding the draft Procedural By-law because apparently there is no requirement for notice.

Regardless, I submitted my comprehensive review to members of council on September 7.

On October 7, I requested the status on my procedural by-law submission that no one had responded to.

On October 20, I submitted my review to the clerk, who acknowledged that it would be added to the next scheduled meeting, which I assumed was November 3 as a result of the petition.

The 2008 Procedural By-law has not changed in six years, so why the current council would approve a new one defies logic.

Hopefully, the new council will examine job descriptions, areas of responsibility, codes of conduct and actually be transparent and accountable.

The True Cost of Police Body Worn Cameras

Posted on by

Finally, the true technology related cost of the cameras is revealed, as reported in Hamilton News:

“Ferguson’s comments followed a presentation on the cameras made to the board on Monday by police staff that indicated the cost to introduce them could be about $3.8 million in the first year and total approximately $14.8 million over five years. The costing includes hardware, storage infrastructure, software and staffing. Based on a five-year lifespan for the hardware, the initial investment would reoccur at the end of the fifth year.

The presentation also highlighted various legislation and privacy issues that would need to be addressed if officers were to wear the cameras that can record video and audio.”

Ottawa Police Chief Charles Bordeleau wants no part of officers wearing body-worn cameras and questioned the cost.

Amherstburg Police is scheduled to conclude its study by the end of 2014 and select a body worn camera for patrol officers or shelve the project if not feasible for APS needs.

Hard to imagine this technology is feasible and affordable in Amherstburg when large services dismiss it due to high costs, including the cost of transcription to submit evidence in court.