Policing Costs for Rural Communities on the Way

Thursday, January 18, 2007 01:40 PM

North District Chief Superintendent Barry Clark and P.G. Detachment Superintendent Dahl Chambers make presentation

North District Chief Superintendent Barry Clark, and Prince George Detachment Superintendent Dahl Chambers appeared before the Regional District of Fraser Fort George to talk about the changes in policing costs for small an rural communities.

This spring, the Province will collect from smaller communities (populations under 15 thousand) some of the costs of policing. Clark says every police officer costs about 130 thousand dollars, and the province picks up 70 per cent, or 100 thousand dollars. The new legislation will see the province try to recover 35 cents of every dollar paid into policing through local taxation.

The change, says Clark, will mean the average northern rural homeowner can see somewhere between 27 and 45 dollars added to their property tax bill. The amount will be collected much in the same way as school taxes are collected.

Services such as highway patrol, dispatch, legal, special investigations, will not be added to the cost of rural policing. “Service will remain the same” says Clark.

Clark says community consultation is paramount, and that is why detachments are developing their performance plans for the coming year ahead “The whole idea here is that when a police officer gets up in the morning and straps on the gun belt, that they know what the priorities are”.

“We want each detachment performance plan to be in line with that community, one size does not fit all” says Clark.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Thursday, January 18, 2007 01:40 PM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: Andyfreeze on January 19 2007 4:38 PM

As we have come to expect from our government,the hand is back in the pocket once again!No suprises there,but the issue of collecting from smaller communities for policing costs just doesn't sit very well in terms of fairness.My first question would be exactly who pays this extra money besides the homeowners in the community? Anybody?A 27 to 45 dollar per annum tax increase isn't all that much,but it is interesting to note that once again,it will be the north that gets whacked...to say nothing of the little guy getting it..again!And what about communities that are in very close proximity to native reserves? As far as I know,these areas are not considered taxable by the district but still require the same level of service.How much of the RCMP's time will be billed out for calls away from the main community onto reserve land? And what IS the precentage of time spent away from the community ON reserve lands? Will these reserves be paying their share as well? Or just the registered homeowners? And Superintendent Barry Clark's comment about a police officer getting up in the morning and "strapping on the gun belt"..? Is that what the "priorities' are? How did guns get into this? Sounds like a fatalistic attitude to me,and one we could well do without at that!Maybe we just can't afford this kind of policing anymore and need to look for viable alternatives.What if a community decides not to pay..or can't afford it? Does that mean no more RCMP for them? I can't help but wonder just who was the brains behind this latest government download? There are far too many questions that need to be dealt with before we just lay down and say ok to something that will once again cost us more of our hard earned dollars!(not that we have choice)Is there anyone out there that can explain this a lttle better?

Posted by: Harbinger on January 20 2007 10:26 AM

Cost of policing? Wow!! $130 thou, eh? A vigilante with a smuggled gun could be construed as lowest bidder. No one out there can explain this a little better. Everything the government touches turns to crap. When the First nations get all their own self-governments, all 51 of them, I am sure we can ask them to negotiate chipping in for these policing costs. I am sure they will more than receptive.