Police Budget Decreased
Monday, February 25, 2013 @ 4:28 PM
Prince George, B.C.- City Council has decided to roll back the Police Services budget to $20.4 million.
The initial budget proposal was $21.6 million, Council wanted that trimmed back to $20.4 million, which is still $1 million more than had actually been spent in 2012.
At issue was the annual surplus, a surplus which has routinely be returned to the City once the year ends, however, at least one councillor thought perhaps the amount of the average surplus should be trimmed from the proposed budget and put to other uses.
According to the report presented by Rob Whitwham, the Director of Public Safety and Civic facilities, the high surplus recorded last year ( just over $2 million) was an “anomaly”. RCMP Superintendent Eric Stubbs says the high amount from last year is the reflection of a number of high paying positions which were vacant, including a couple of staff sergeants and a crime analyst. He says there were also a high number of staff on health or maternity leave and the City does not have to pay wages for those on such leaves. Superintendent Stubbs says Council’s proposed budget of $20.4 million may be $1 million more than was spent last year, but more than half of that amount would be eaten up by wage and pension increases, and there would not be enough left to pay the salaries for the vacancies that have been filled.
According to Supt. Stubbs, the contract with the City is for 128 members, and the budget actually supports 121 members. He says if the budget is rolled back, there would only be enough funding for 109 members. He adds that should there be any complex investigations, such as homicides, there may not be enough money to cover the costs and the City would be on the hook for any overages."We need more boots on the road" says Superintendent Stubbs, but in order to achieve that, he says there needs to be a more aggressive approach to recruitment. He says he needs flexibility so that when there are special initiatives, he’s not "robbing Peter to pay Paul" in taking officers from one unit to boost the initiatives that need to be addressed.
"This is not meant to be a cutting of the RCMP budget" said Councillor Cameron Stolz who was the one who suggested the roll back. "But at the end of the year, if you’ve gone over, then I see no problem in us saying O.K, we’ve gone over, we should have listened to our staff on risk management."
Councillor Dave Wilbur says he understands that it is difficult to push aside the "cushion" that has existed in past years.
Supt. Stubbs says a Resource Study in 2008 recommended the detachment increase it’s size to 140 members, an increase that has yet to materialize “Since 2008, the demands on our members have increased in regards to more accountability for their actions and more complex investigations, (Example: Domestic violence, computer related investigations, use of force documentation). This increased demand and stress placed on our general duty members cannot be sustained. With the proposed 2013 budget for only 109 members, I’m concerned that we are going in the wrong direction” writes Supt. Stubbs in his report.
His report offered this chart, which indicates the contract level and the budget support for the corresponding year.
Inspector Anderson , the 2iC in charge of operations, has put a great deal of focus on targeting prolific offenders, Superintendent Stubbs says he is not certain that kind of project, which goes after those who cause the most problems in the community, could continue with just 109 members "The smaller we get, the harder it will be to accomplish those goals."
He says special units, such as the downtown enforcement unit, domestic violence, or youth at risk, are not "funded" units, they are officers borrowed from general duty. Without the funding as initially requested, those officers will have to go back to general duty.
The decision was made at a meeting of Council this afternoon, the second time the Police Services budget was presented. Not all councillors were in attendance, as Garth Frizzell and Murry Krause were absent, and Councillor Frank Everitt atttended by phone.
Comments
So they cut the budget to police “Canada’s Most Dangerous City”?
missing from this analysis are three items:
– the actual expenditures for each year
– some sort of “crime” count per year
– population served per year
Then perhaps a meaningful discussion could occur … interesting .. the missing three sets of numbers are actuals whereas the discussion to date and the numbers presented focus on hypothetical
So we have increased budgets for everything but policing? Guess we’re looking to maintain our dangerous city label. Way to go.
Once again the decisions of this City Council simply bogle my mind. A strong police presence in this, the most dangerous city in Canada, is absolutely essential – I can’t imagine the reasoning behind their decisions.
Way less speed traps…means less revenue for the city. Sort of like shooting yourself in the foot.
The police have no one to blame but themselves. Another example of why the public in BC has no confidence of the management of the RCMP. The Chief says he ‘needs boots on the road’, yet he admits to stealing from first responders to staff a redundant downtown enforcement unit and domestic violence unit. The downtown enforcement unit should have gone when the problems downtown all but evaporated. The lobby groups succeeded in getting the domestic violence unit……but was there really a need ? Where were the supporting facts, numbers ? The RCMP can’t provide the 128 members the City has budgeted for in past years…..because of their staffing policies, slow inadequate promotion system, generous and unaccountable sick leave, etc. And the Chief says
prolific offenders may now get overlooked as a cost saving……..why ? Sounds like a hollow threat to me. When I call 911 I want a first responder. The police need to get back to the basics and ‘get more boots on the road’
http://www.omnicorp.com/
We don’t need as many police on the street anymore because there is less traffic on the street lol, they pulled them all over for dui. (This is a joke for all you people who might not get it)
Who will watch people talking on cell phones?
My question is the City wants a 3,5 persent tax increase on average from the citzens but – yet no one has said a word but the approximate one hundred thousand dollars our City Fire Rescue Service spent on outfitting there members:
with nice down filled club jackets – estimated cost $700.00 per unit – these jackets can not be used anywhere close to a fire they will melt aka club jackets but they do look good.
Pyjama’s for all that sleep at night – have to be some sort of uniform issue for sleeping the night away – anyone else get those supplied by there employer
and lets not forget the wonderful personal boots good to -100 degrees F – good for washing there vehicles behind the firehalls cause they are not safety rated to be used in any stucture fire
Am I the only one that see’s a problem here.
Maybe someone should be looking for an official answer to this line on the budget
Just wondering
No matter what the budget is the monies come from the citzen’s pockets lets be accountable all the way around
Comments for this article are closed.