Port Hope - Northumberland County

Municipality of Port Hope
November 1, 2007
Bill Pyatt, County C.A.O. &
Jack Watkins, Consultant

Introductions
• Bill Pyatt, Chief Administrative Officer, County of
Northumberland
• Jack Watkins, Consultants on Police Services
Inc.
• Port Hope Council
• Port Hope Police Services Board
• OPP Staff - S/Sgt. Rod Case
- Inspector Doug Borton
2

Meeting Format
7:00 - 8:00 Formal presentation by staff
and the study consultant
8:00 – 8:45 Port Hope Council questions
8:45 Questions and Comments
from the public
Copies of presentation slides at rear
3

Recording of Comments
• Written comments invited
• Summary of verbal comments
• All comments will be passed on to County
Council
• Summaries back to your Council
4

Meeting Goals
• Share information with you
• Answer your questions
• Hear your concerns and comments
• This is NOT a decision making meeting
• Port Hope Council will be asked to make a
decision in next 2-3 months
5

Why Do A Policing Study
• County Council concerns with rising
policing costs in recent years and looming
major expenses in near future
6

Study Objectives
• Carry out accurate cost comparisons:-
The existing policing arrangements
Versus
A single County-wide policing model
• Look at existing and future costs
• Examine the other implications of going to
County-wide policing
7

Options for County-wide Policing
1. One OPP Contract with County
2. County signs a Contract with the Town of
Cobourg to police entire County
3. County signs a Contract with the Municipality of
Port Hope to police entire County
8

Options Not Being Considered
1. West and East Northumberland Police
Services
2. A County Municipal Service, i.e. County
assuming Port Hope and Cobourg and
expanding
3. Durham Region
9

Study Management
• Steering Committee comprised of
- 7 Mayors (County Council)
- 7 Local Chief Administrative Officers
- 1 County of Northumberland C.A.O.
• Assisted by consultant – Jack Watkins
10

Study Process
• 5 Phases
• Preparatory work – 2005
• Consultant selection – December 2005
• Projected completion – Feb. 2008
11

Phase 1 – Study Process
• Study organization
• Study objectives
• Decision-making model
• Detailed work plan
• Completed in November 2005
12

Phase 2A – Cost, Services, Statistics
• Costs – historical, existing & looming
• Staffing
• Assessment of facilities and equipment
• Different levels of service
- urban to rural
- municipality to municipality
13

Phase 2B - Governance
• Existing Police Service Boards
• Possibilities for a County-wide model
• Goal to ensure appropriate local input into
key policing decisions
14

Phase 2C – Police Funding
• Province provides Police Services Grants
• Document existing Police Service Grants
• Determine Provincial grant under a County-wide
model
• Investigate alternative methods of charging out
County-wide policing costs
15

Phase 3 – Municipal Consultation
• Public meetings in each municipality
• Presented Phase 2 findings
• Presented existing levels of service
• Obtain feedback on community expectations and
priorities
16

Phase 4 – Request for Proposals (RFP)
• Ask Port Hope, Cobourg and OPP if they wish to
compete for County-wide service
• Develop detailed RFP for County-wide contract
• Spell out expected service levels
• Call, receive and evaluate proposals
• Compare to existing costs
17

Phase 5 – Municipal Consultation
• Visit each Municipal Council with detailed cost
comparisons
• Request Council resolutions
• Final report to County Council
18

Existing Policing
• Number of officers
• Costs
• Provincial Grants
• Net local costs
• Buildings and Communications
19

Overview of Staffing Update
Cobourg
Police
Port Hope
Police
Municipal
OPP
Chief of Police 1 1 0
Deputy Chief 1 1 0
Inspector 1 0 .78
Staff Sergeant 0 0 .78
Sergeants 5 4 4.54
Constables 24 19 53.14
Civilians-Full Time 14 11 6.77
Civilians-Part Time 21 4 0
20

2006 Staffing Ratios
Population # of Officers Ratio
Brighton 10253 10.93 1 : 938
Port Hope-Ward 1 12300 25 1 : 492
Port Hope-Ward 2 3735 4.8 1 : 778
Trent Hills 12247 20.63 1 :594
Town of Cobourg 18210 32 1 : 569
Alnwick/Haldimand 6435 7.01 1 : 918
Hamilton Township 10,972 9.2 1 : 1193
Cramahe Twp. 5950 6.67 1 : 892
OPP 49592 59.24 1 : 838
Municipal 30510 57 1 : 535
TOTAL 80102 116.24 1 : 689
21

2006 Policing Costs-Per Population
Gross Costs Population $per Person
Alnwick/Haldimand $814,184 6435 $126.52
Brighton $1,166,923 10,253 $113.81
Town of Cobourg $4,928,274 18,210 $270.63
Cramahe Twp. $712,211 5950 $119.70
Hamilton Twp. $983,128 10,972 $89.60
Port Hope-Ward 1 $3,151,018 12,300 $256.18
Port Hope-Ward 2 $534,797 3,735 $143.18
Trent Hills $2,221,040 12,247 $181.35
TOTAL Policing Costs $14,511,665 80,102 $181.16
22

Provincial Grants
• Provincial Police Services Grants allocated under
the Ont. Municipal Partnership Fund (OMPF)
• Provided to rural municipalities, large geographic
areas, limited tax base
• Presently Cobourg and Port Hope Ward 1 not
eligible for grants
• Other 5 municipalities plus OPP service in Port Hope
Ward 2 eligible and receive total of $1,700,000
23

Net Costs After Grants
Port Hope Police Service:
$256.18 per person
Cobourg Police Service:
$270.63 per person
Average OPP Services:
$129.70 per person
24

Policing Infrastructure-Facilities
Town of Cobourg
• Aging building, designed as armoury
• Difficult access, stairways, no elevator
• Evidence storage lacking
• Many building defects, HVAC, water pipes
• Requires significant financial expenditures
25

Policing Infrastructure-Facilities
Port Hope
• Small and poorly laid out
• No designated Young Offender cells
• Evidence storage lacking
• Insufficient space for staff
• Requires significant financial expenditures
26

Policing Infrastructure-Facilities
OPP
• New facilities in Cobourg and Trent Hills
• Brighton recently refurbished
• Ground floor handicapped access
• Proper cell areas
• Significant room for expansion
• No investment required
27

Policing Infrastructure-Communications
Cobourg and Port Hope
• 30 year old communications systems
• By 2008 no replacement parts for trunk
equipment
• Officers use portable radios to single repeater
• Only one officer can talk at a time
• Cobourg radios not encrypted
• No 100% coverage
• No redundancy or back-up other than the
Simplex Provincial System
28

Policing Infrastructure-Communications
OPP
• Province-wide system with Bell
• Dispatch in Smiths Falls, emergency capabilities
• OPP vehicles have in-car repeaters
• Full redundancy
• Allows multiple users at same time
• 100% County coverage
• OPP communications are encrypted
29

Police Services Boards
• Currently 7 across County
• Municipalities less than 300,000 have 5 on Board
• Board composition
- 3 locally appointed
- 2 Provincially appointed
• Each Board supported by Local Community
Policing Advisory Committees
30

First Round of Public Consultation
• Open House/Public Meetings in each
municipality in Spring 2006
• To present info on existing policing and get
feedback on levels of service
• In general poorly attended
31

Feedback from First consultations
• Residents like their existing policing
• Worried about possible changes
• Did not know existing service levels but wanted
them retained
• Concerns re reduction in PSB’s
• Concerns re cost allocations
• Surprise at cost differences
• Rural concerns re costs rising
32

Request for Proposals
• Cobourg, Port Hope and OPP asked if they
wished to respond to RFP
• Cobourg and Port Hope decline
• Consultant finalizes detailed RFP
• OPP submits their proposal April ‘07
33

Essential Elements of RFP
• Existing service levels in each municipality must
be maintained
• Includes specialized rural and urban patrols
• Retains all existing uniformed officers
• Maintain Cobourg and Port Hope satellite
“downtown” offices
34

OPP Proposal
• $14,388,550 per year for existing service levels
• $14,633,621 per year with enhanced civilian
entry
• Does not include Police Services Usage (PSU)
Rebate
• Includes overtime usage contingency of 9%
• OPP Policy to include these high level
allowances in first years of new contract
35

PSU Rebate
• At end of year OPP provide rebate for times
when officers are deployed outside the County
• Applies primarily to OPP staff doing Provincial
duties, e.g. Hwy. 401
• Average Five Year PSU Rebate is 9.5%
• Using 9% the rebate is $1,317,025
• In Wellington Cty. Rebate was $1,613,157 on a
$10,613,000 contract
36

Overtime Allowance
• OPP Proposal Includes 9% = $777,326
• Actual 5 Year Average 5% = $431,798
Reduction from 9% Factor = $345,528
37

Adjusted OPP Proposal
Original Proposal $14,388,550
PSU Rebate Adj. -$ 1,317,025
OT Factor Adj. -$ 345,528
Realistic 2007 Cost $12,728,997
38

Police Services Grant Changes
• With County-wide policing all costs are eligible for
funding
• Eligible costs go from $6 million to $13 million
• Rural factors decrease because of addition of Port
Hope and Cobourg urban areas
• BUT overall grant increases from $1.7 million to
$2.8 million
39

Summary Cost Comparison
OPP
County-wide
Status Quo
1. Policing Costs $14,633,621 $15,860,689
2. Less Civilian Entry - $245,072 N/A
3. PSB Costs $20,000 $173,047
4, Less OT at Actual - $345,528 N/A
5. Expected PSU Rebate - $1,317,025 - $685,334
6. OMPF Grant - $2,801,226 - $1,707,207
TOTAL $9,944,770 $13,641,195
TOTAL COST SAVINGS $3,696,425
40

Cost Apportionment
• If County-wide service:
• Costs are removed from local tax bill
AND
• Costs are added to County tax levy
• More than one method of allocating costs to
each municipality
41

Alternatives Considered
1. Percentage Weighted
Assessment
2. Fee for Service with Rural
Adjustment
42

Percentage Weighted Assessment
• Identical to most other county services
such as roads, ambulance
Municipality
Percentage
Alnwick/Haldimand 8.94%
Brighton 11.62%
Cobourg 24.78%
Cramahe 6.51%
Hamilton 13.53%
Port Hope 20.84%
Trent Hills 13.78%
43

Cost Apportionment – Option #1
Percentage Weighted Assessment
Existing NET
Costs**
New County-
Wide Service
Difference
Alnwick/Haldimand 629,962 889,070 259,109
Brighton 979,965 1,155,593 175,627
Town of Cobourg 5,145,772 2,464,336 - 2,681,436
Cramahe Twp. 638,459 647,410 8,951
Hamilton Twp. 896,326 1,345,540 449,214
Port Hope 3,742,040 2,072,509 - 1,669,531
Trent Hills 1,608,671 1,370,402 - 238,269
TOTAL Policing Costs $13,641,195 $9,944,860 $3,696,335
** NET = TOTAL COST MINUS PROVINCIAL GRANT
44

Fee for Service with Rural Adjustment
• Steering Committee wanted to have an
option based upon principles:-
• Pay for extra service
• Consider rural affordability
• Equitable share in increased Provincial
grants
45

Fee for Service with Rural Adjustment
• Three Steps:-
1. Allocate Policing Costs Based Upon #
of Officers per municipality
2. Subtract EXISTING Police Service
Grants
3. Subtract pro-rated share of additional
$1.1 million Police Services grant
46

Cost Apportionment – Option #2
Fee For Service With Rural Adjustment
Existing Costs
New County-
Wide Service
Difference
Alnwick/Haldimand 629,962 513,851 - 116,381
Brighton 979,965 761,574 - 218,392
Town of Cobourg 5,145,772 3,207,727 - 1,938,045
Cramahe Twp. 638,459 410,401 - 229,058
Hamilton Twp. 896,326 737,496 - 158,830
Port Hope 3,742,040 2,877,971 - 864,069
Trent Hills 1,608,671 1,436,110 - 172,561
TOTAL Policing Costs $13,641,195 $9,944,860 - $3,696,335
47

Ensuring Costing Principles
• Can a future Council change
No repeal – A provision of a bylaw passed
under clause (1) shall not be repealed in
whole or in part after it comes into force
48

Other Considerations
• One-time cost in change-over
• Impacts on existing Port Hope and
Cobourg staff
• Cobourg and Port Hope Police Buildings
• Police Service Board arrangements
• Experiences of Comparators
49

One-Time Costs
• Cobourg Detachment $138,000
• Port Hope Detachment $ 38,000
• Equipment $609,000
TOTAL $785,000
Plus Severances
for Surplus Civilian Employees
To be Determined
50

Cost Avoidances
1. Major Upgrade to
Cobourg Police Detachment
2. Major Expansion to
Port Hope Detachment
3. Major Upgrades of Cobourg
and Port Hope Police
Communications Systems
T.B.D.
T.B.D.
T.B.D.
51

Impacts – Uniformed Officers
• Guaranteed positions with OPP with no
loss of seniority, benefits
• Pensions can be transferred
• Officers stay in Port Hope and Cobourg for
a minimum of 3 years
• No severance implications
• Senior officers similar provisions with one
exception
52

Impacts – Civilian Employees
• 26 part-time and full-time employees
affected
• There will be severance obligations
53

Buildings
• Cobourg and Port Hope should retain
“Downtown” detachment buildings
• Need to consult with Cobourg & Port Hope
• Rental or purchase or other
54

Police Service Board
• One five-person Board allowed
• Consultant has studied “Best Practices” in
Ontario and made recommendations
• Recommend competency-based selection
• Has worked very well in other areas
• Community Policing Advisory Committees
play a key role also
55

Comparators’ Experiences
• 3 similar OPP municipalities in size,
geography and demographics
• Wellington County
• United Counties of Stormont Dundas
and Glengarry
• City of Quinte West
• Consultant interviewed community leaders
• Very positive feedback on OPP service and
single Police Service Board
56

CONCLUSIONS
1. Only OPP interested in providing Countywide
service
2. County-wide costs savings $3.7 million,
$3.45 million with enhanced civilian entry
3. Cost savings are based upon maintaining
existing levels of service
57

CONCLUSIONS (cont’d)
4. By using part of savings (6%) opt for
enhanced civilian entry, frees up officers
25% more on beat
5. After grants, savings per municipality from
$116,381 to $1,938,045.
Port Hope = $864,069
6. Others who have consolidated under OPP
say it has been very positive
58

CONCLUSIONS (cont’d)
7. Council needs to ensure the cost allocation
cannot be changed.
8. Officers affected are guaranteed jobs
9. Civilian employee surpluses – 26 FT & PT
10. Some one time costs - $785,000
11. Avoids multimillion dollar Cobourg & Port
Hope expenditures
59

The Triple Majority
• For policing to go from a lower tier
responsibility up to the County, ALL THREE of
the following tests must be passed:
1. A majority in favour at County Council
AND
2. A majority of the seven lower-tier Councils
AND
3. The total number of electors in the lower tier
municipalities that have passed resolutions
under 2. form a majority of all the electors in
the County.
60

NEXT STEPS
• Seven Public Meetings – Oct., Nov./2007
• Steering Committee considers feedback
• County Council request to each member
municipality to respond to question – “Do you
support moving the responsibility for policing
from local level to upper tier
61

NEXT STEPS (cont’d)
• County Council considers same motion
• If one of the three test fails, change does not
happen
• Likely timing – Jan. – Feb. 2008
• Steering Committee or individual Councils
may request addition information
62

THANK YOU FOR YOUR
ATTENTION
AND YOUR PATIENCE
63