The next big meeting
On Tuesday evening there is a meeting to hear about the plan, and how the County intends, to dispose of our local Police Service. Before all the new people to Town and those taxfighters amongst us get worked up about somebody daring to buck convention, by not accepting at face value the report prepared for the County lets look at the other side. Here is a copy of the remarks I intend to deliver at the Policing meeting on Wednesday evening. These remarks centre on three topics, one of which is the dubious savings calculations. The basic assumption made by realists is that the premise that the major portion of savings will come from new grants, that the urban municipalities will now qualify for, because somehow they have become Rural by joining in a large geographical area. These grants are not guaranteed and the programme is due for review in 2008.
The other point is that without grants and Police rebates, which are really compensatory sums of money given back to the municipalities for services not received, Cobourg's savings are zilch and the costs to go to the OPP will cost us a couple of million.
The last point is the important one. It does not matter how Cobourg and Port Hope vote on this issue, the Rurals can outvote us! A simple majority of votes can see our Police Services taken away from us, even the weighted voting cannot help us. And to rub salt into our wounds the way the Police costs have been calculated the rurals are using our savings to outvote us. As noted last week the savings calculations have been worked out in a non-traditional manner. The County percentage billing system, used in every other County programme, has been tossed aside in favour of a perversion called, "Fee for Service with Rural Adjustments"
So if you are remotely interested in any of this topic you should head out to the Lions' Centre on Elgin St. The meeting starts at 7pm but the real stuff gets going after the usual powerpoint bore at about 8.10pm.
The Port Hope Policing Meeting
Last Thursday I attended the Port Hope meeting and listened to the presentations. One hour and ten minutes after the meeting opened the Port Hope council was allowed to ask questions. Frankly I was disappointed with the quality of the questions that the collective councillors asked. In the big scheme of things playing to the local crowd by defending the quality of the Communications department didn't excuse the fact that they are gone.
In fact there were only two sparks. One when Deputy Mayor Jeff Lees asked about PSU rebates and the lack of performance to the contract they indicate and when he pointed out that the million dollars per year screening revenue will be lost. The answer to that was intriguing. "The RCMP is not happy with that information (CPIC) being sold privately." and implied that not only would the OPP be reluctant to screen but the practice may soon be outlawed! The PSU rebate question was answered indignantly and bureaucratically. "We always overestimate and Wellington County got back a million!" In a later answer to the question, "How will we get the screening money back if it goes to the County?" Mr Pyatt replied that Port Hope will get the money back in the County percentage 20%. The questioner quickly calculated that the amount coming back was only $59,000 different from the savings on the charts. His assessment - "For $59,000 folks, it just ain't worth it!"
The grant question was answered by Bill Pyatt who said that an assistant deputy had made the statement about the programme being a McGuinty program and it should stay, it is assumed by all that by just expanding the geographical area we automatically qualify, and that the expansion justifies the extra money going to the rurals.
Watkins was challenged by the Port Hope Police Association and asked if the Morley Hicks quote (this was where MH said that the offer of three years employment to all officers "makes the need for severances "unlikely"") was his or that of MH. Pyatt said that he summarized the 8 page opinion into the para in the report. "Were you aware that some of our provisions and benefits are superior to the OPP? Because if they are we have a case for severance!" replied the rep, Pyatt said that MH had copies of the 2 Collective Agreements (Cobourg & Port Hope) and none of the benefit schedules when they wrote the opinion. Interesting.
As to the question about levels of service, "We will have a police service of 130 of which the County will pay for 109" another memorable quote. As a provincial taxpayer we should be costing that. But it indicates that 109 will not provide the same level of service we are getting now.
So the questions just mount up. I was really surprised that nobody mentioned the fact that Port Hope has no chance in the voting to save what they have.
The other point is that without grants and Police rebates, which are really compensatory sums of money given back to the municipalities for services not received, Cobourg's savings are zilch and the costs to go to the OPP will cost us a couple of million.
The last point is the important one. It does not matter how Cobourg and Port Hope vote on this issue, the Rurals can outvote us! A simple majority of votes can see our Police Services taken away from us, even the weighted voting cannot help us. And to rub salt into our wounds the way the Police costs have been calculated the rurals are using our savings to outvote us. As noted last week the savings calculations have been worked out in a non-traditional manner. The County percentage billing system, used in every other County programme, has been tossed aside in favour of a perversion called, "Fee for Service with Rural Adjustments"
So if you are remotely interested in any of this topic you should head out to the Lions' Centre on Elgin St. The meeting starts at 7pm but the real stuff gets going after the usual powerpoint bore at about 8.10pm.
The Port Hope Policing Meeting
Last Thursday I attended the Port Hope meeting and listened to the presentations. One hour and ten minutes after the meeting opened the Port Hope council was allowed to ask questions. Frankly I was disappointed with the quality of the questions that the collective councillors asked. In the big scheme of things playing to the local crowd by defending the quality of the Communications department didn't excuse the fact that they are gone.
In fact there were only two sparks. One when Deputy Mayor Jeff Lees asked about PSU rebates and the lack of performance to the contract they indicate and when he pointed out that the million dollars per year screening revenue will be lost. The answer to that was intriguing. "The RCMP is not happy with that information (CPIC) being sold privately." and implied that not only would the OPP be reluctant to screen but the practice may soon be outlawed! The PSU rebate question was answered indignantly and bureaucratically. "We always overestimate and Wellington County got back a million!" In a later answer to the question, "How will we get the screening money back if it goes to the County?" Mr Pyatt replied that Port Hope will get the money back in the County percentage 20%. The questioner quickly calculated that the amount coming back was only $59,000 different from the savings on the charts. His assessment - "For $59,000 folks, it just ain't worth it!"
The grant question was answered by Bill Pyatt who said that an assistant deputy had made the statement about the programme being a McGuinty program and it should stay, it is assumed by all that by just expanding the geographical area we automatically qualify, and that the expansion justifies the extra money going to the rurals.
Watkins was challenged by the Port Hope Police Association and asked if the Morley Hicks quote (this was where MH said that the offer of three years employment to all officers "makes the need for severances "unlikely"") was his or that of MH. Pyatt said that he summarized the 8 page opinion into the para in the report. "Were you aware that some of our provisions and benefits are superior to the OPP? Because if they are we have a case for severance!" replied the rep, Pyatt said that MH had copies of the 2 Collective Agreements (Cobourg & Port Hope) and none of the benefit schedules when they wrote the opinion. Interesting.
As to the question about levels of service, "We will have a police service of 130 of which the County will pay for 109" another memorable quote. As a provincial taxpayer we should be costing that. But it indicates that 109 will not provide the same level of service we are getting now.
So the questions just mount up. I was really surprised that nobody mentioned the fact that Port Hope has no chance in the voting to save what they have.
2 comments:
Will we see some commentary about the Cobourg meeting? Judging from Peter Fisher's editorial in the paper today, not many showed up.
Nobody is posting comments to this note either. Is it because we know that it's hopeless? With the rural gang ready to out vote us, what's the point of going to a meeting?
It's not like Cobourg Council is going to listen to the citizens and fight for the local police.
Don't know about Port Hope, with lots of folks at their meeting, are they getting organized to fight back?
It seems reasonable enough that the rural areas have the OPP. Without the density of the urban environment, that police force is well suited to provide protection in rural areas.
We need more than that in the towns though - the concentration of people demands more hands-on services than the OPP can provide.
If only Cobourg and Port Hope police forces had merged when the idea came up, we might not be facing this mess now.
Back to the original point, why should we bother? It's a done deal, we are again sold down the river by our illustrious Council.
My head is getting sore!
Yep there will be a report but due to work arrangements it may take a couple of days, all I know is that the fight will move to service levels and how munch we will have to pay for what we have now!
ben
Post a Comment