Transition to Municipal Police Force

[Booter]

Sure. But if the sheriffs are doing police work who is doing the sheriff work they can’t presently fill?

The only police function they do is highways. And there’s a hundred Mounties still attached to the only quasi-police function they do.

I’m not saying you’re not right. But that conversation has been going on since 2004. And the expansion has been glacial.

During the “APP” talk in 2019 the sheriffs in court houses thought they were going to be the new provincial police. No one in the higher government was saying that.

It was always the sheriffs and the peace officers were still going to be doing their function in the tier’d model- the police were going to have to be a new thing.

 

[brihard]

Sure. But if the sheriffs are doing police work who is doing the sheriff work they can’t presently fill?

Sure, but everyone’s short. Why would they be different?

The only police function they do is highways. And there’s a hundred Mounties still attached to the only quasi-police function they do.

I’m not saying you’re not right. But that conversation has been going on since 2004. And the expansion has been glacial.

During the “APP” talk in 2019 the sheriffs in court houses thought they were going to be the new provincial police. No one in the higher government was saying that.

It was always the sheriffs and the peace officers were still going to be doing their function in the tier’d model- the police were going to have to be a new thing.

Yup, I’m obviously speculating. Could well be they do a full cold start, and maybe they does present less obstacles. In any case I think Alberta is, by a wide margin, the most likely contender for the next provincial police service.

 

[Booter]

Sure, but everyone’s short. Why would they be different?



Yup, I’m obviously speculating. Could well be they do a full cold start, and maybe they does present less obstacles. In any case I think Alberta is, by a wide margin, the most likely contender for the next provincial police service.

100%. I agree with you. They have just been short for 25 years back when then were CAPS and never have taken fully over the function- even though it would be dishonest to say they haven’t grown a ton. Probably actually at a faster rate than any other service or police service in Alberta.

They are also proactive and good at identifying new places for them to add value. They also have lots of awesome folks in their ranks. Great ideas too.

The province can wave a hand and give them emergency police powers. The authority and potential exists- like today- that’s not hypothetical.

I just remain of the opinion that when the provincial police happens- the sheriffs will still exist.

They COULD be used as a seed in lots of ways so again you’re correct I think.

I just think from the outside they appear more ready and able than they are. Knowing what I know about their mandate- and the state of some of their programs. Such as the FASST program which is going live in 2024 that I had a look inside the machinery of in August- unless they are playing a hundred year game it doesn’t seem like the provinces goal to use them this way.

 

[Booter]

I think I’m failing to explain my self and am just coming across contrarian. I don’t believe we re just heading to a dissolving of the various RCMP policing contracts but a policing reckoning where “police” work is broken into numerous other new agencies.

Sheriffs and Marshall’s and every thing else is a drift towards more types of specialized law enforcement rather than incoming medium police agencies.

Where there used to be cops and bylaw there are now numerous agencies in the middle with a more nuanced role- the various expansion era of the middle peace officer is coming.

The constant “it’ll free the police up” being the refrain. With the end state being cops do 911 and criminal investigation, ignoring fed for a minute, and the middle peace officers do everything else from traffic to warrants to bylaws to mental health to courts.

Also coming? The problematic era of security companies being contracted by municipalities more frequently to fill in gaps. “Patrolling” streets.

This is a massive incoming issue presently under the radar.

 

[Haggis]

On the federal side, the RCMP are responsible for border integrity between ports of entry (POEs). The CBSA union has been asking for expanded authorities for Border Services Officers allowing them to take on this role. Anyone the Mounties (and other police agencies) scoop between POEs end up being taken to the nearest POE for immigration processing anyways. How many Mounties would this free up? Expanded authorities and a new role might contribute to attracting more people to the CBSA, which is perpetually, and sometimes dangerously, understaffed.

 

[Booter]

On the federal side, the RCMP are responsible for border integrity between ports of entry (POEs). The CBSA union has been asking for expanded authorities for Border Services Officers allowing them to take on this role. Anyone the Mounties (and other police agencies) scoop between POEs end up being taken to the nearest POE for immigration processing anyways. How many Mounties would this free up? Expanded authorities and a new role might contribute to attracting more people to the CBSA, which is perpetually, and sometimes dangerously, understaffed.

Is your collective agreement set up for that? Like the Quebec border thing that had dozens of Mounties there for months- are you guys capable of taking that on as well?

 

[lenaitch]

I think I’m failing to explain my self and am just coming across contrarian. I don’t believe we re just heading to a dissolving of the various RCMP policing contracts but a policing reckoning where “police” work is broken into numerous other new agencies.

Sheriffs and Marshall’s and every thing else is a drift towards more types of specialized law enforcement rather than incoming medium police agencies.

Where there used to be cops and bylaw there are now numerous agencies in the middle with a more nuanced role- the various expansion era of the middle peace officer is coming.

The constant “it’ll free the police up” being the refrain. With the end state being cops do 911 and criminal investigation, ignoring fed for a minute, and the middle peace officers do everything else from traffic to warrants to bylaws to mental health to courts.

Also coming? The problematic era of security companies being contracted by municipalities more frequently to fill in gaps. “Patrolling” streets.

This is a massive incoming issue presently under the radar.

I see problems with the 'layering' of protective services. There is always the temptation for levels of governments to try and find a solution 'on the cheap'. I remember New Brunswick got into some kind of beef with the RCMP and number of years ago and decided to establish a highway patrol; an unarmed, sparsely staffed skeleton service. After all, it's only traffic tickets. All was well until one was shot and killed on the side of the road.

The closer the working conditions, responsibilities and liabilities approach traditional police, bargaining units will quite rightly argue that they should be similarly compensated.

A traffic stop turns into a major drug or weapons seizure. Can the 'traffic wardens' handle it or hand it over to the police? Oh wait, there aren't any police available because the whole goal was to reduce their numbers. Same with mental health incidents. All is well until somebody shoves a gun in their face, then it's a police problem, who might or might not be available.

I can better see more specialized roles, provided the situations don't 'un-nuance' themselves. Outside of major municipalities, the OPP manages court security and prisoner transport through a special constable service. Not without risks but the environment is more controlled.

Some municipalities have tried the private security route for public space patrol. It might improve visibility, but it returns to the problem of what do they do when the real police are needed. Being freed up doesn't mean they are hanging around waiting for a security guard to call; they're off handling 'police' incidents. The other angle is they are currently not publicly accountable. They are not subject to any form of legislated civilian oversight.

 

[Haggis]

Is your collective agreement set up for that? Like the Quebec border thing that had dozens of Mounties there for months- are you guys capable of taking that on as well?

Nothing to do with the Collective Agreement. It's legislation driven.

Did you ever see the Disney animated "Alladin"? We're like the Genie (Robin Williams). "Absolute cosmic powers! Itty bitty little working space."

 

[Booter]

Nothing to do with the Collective Agreement. It's legislation driven.

Did you ever see the Disney animated "Alladin". We're like the Genie. "Absolute cosmic powers! Itty bitty little working space."

I was there when you guys armed- there was all types of objections off any enforcement work based on your collective agreement or some grievance with what people would do and what they wouldn’t.

I’m glad to hear the attitude is different now! You had the authority- you didn’t have the desire.

But I was an outsider and at the time had no collective bargaining so I didn’t really know what I was looking at. It’s possible I was mistaken.

 

[Booter]

I see problems with the 'layering' of protective services. There is always the temptation for levels of governments to try and find a solution 'on the cheap'. I remember New Brunswick got into some kind of beef with the RCMP and number of years ago and decided to establish a highway patrol; an unarmed, sparsely staffed skeleton service. After all, it's only traffic tickets. All was well until one was shot and killed on the side of the road.

The closer the working conditions, responsibilities and liabilities approach traditional police, bargaining units will quite rightly argue that they should be similarly compensated.

A traffic stop turns into a major drug or weapons seizure. Can the 'traffic wardens' handle it or hand it over to the police? Oh wait, there aren't any police available because the whole goal was to reduce their numbers. Same with mental health incidents. All is well until somebody shoves a gun in their face, then it's a police problem, who might or might not be available.

I can better see more specialized roles, provided the situations don't 'un-nuance' themselves. Outside of major municipalities, the OPP manages court security and prisoner transport through a special constable service. Not without risks but the environment is more controlled.

Some municipalities have tried the private security route for public space patrol. It might improve visibility, but it returns to the problem of what do they do when the real police are needed. Being freed up doesn't mean they are hanging around waiting for a security guard to call; they're off handling 'police' incidents. The other angle is they are currently not publicly accountable. They are not subject to any form of legislated civilian oversight.

There is a huge trend in the west with security companies and public spaces. It is a problem. I have personally dealt with the fallout in two large municipalities using it, it is VERY popular with municipal politicians currently, the issues are as you describe but no one cares. It actually increases calls for police in some places.

There is also salary creep like you say- but the answer isn’t just make a super police force- there is too much specialized knowledge in too many things for the average cop to do any of it well when they are expected to know all of it. Back in the day Joe bylaw made minimum wage- now municipal peace officers are 80 to 100k. It isn’t the wage that is attractive- it’s that they spend all their time doing their primary function. Unlike police.

New Brunswick highway patrol was unarmed- these new Agencies and functions are armed functions.

It’s is the direction of drift. Just like limited criminal code authority to all provincial peace officers. I say the same things you’re saying- especially when discussing social workers or outreach workers or in community medical mental health professionals.

 

[Haggis]

I was there when you guys armed- there was all types of objections off any enforcement work based on your collective agreement or some grievance with what people would do and what they wouldn’t.

That seems odd, as the union were the ones pushing for firearms and expanded authorities. Nothing in our collective agreement spells out what are duties are - or aren't.

I’m glad to hear the attitude is different now!

Not universally. Some old attitudes still exist.

You had the authority- you didn’t have the desire.

Actually, it's the opposite. The desire was there, the legislation is the roadblock. It's like the airports. It's not the Customs Act that says we can't be armed in the terminal. It's Transport Canada Aviation Safety Regulations and their definition of a "peace officer". which only includes BSO working immigration, not customs.

 

[Booter]

During that period I was developing some use of force training- delivering it at the user level getting a feel for the trainer portion. I did CBSA, CCG, fisheries officers and Park wardens.

I may be mixing a few things up- but there was an issue with what the CBSA folks at a major airport believed they were required to do. I wasn’t in the room solving the problem- it was above me. I was just there when they voiced their opposition. Maybe it was just one shop.

There was hours of work, length of shift, numbers on shift, types of duty objections,

The only reason I mentioned it- because it’s not a slight and I don’t really recall the granular issues- it just came to my mind when you suggested that you folks would take everything borders- because I would like that.

I was just wondering if there is an actual appetite and tool to temp deploy CBSA agents in austere conditions for a long period of time.

I find your agency very mysterious. As time goes on it’s getting harder to even deploy Mounties on these types of things.

 

[Haggis]

The only reason I mentioned it- because it’s not a slight and I don’t really recall the granular issues- it just came to my mind when you suggested that you folks would take everything borders- because I would like that.

Our union has been arguing that we should. Our authority under the Customs Act and IRPA, while broad, has a footprint limited to the POEs mostly. There are other legislative challenges and logistical issues as well.

I was just wondering if there is an actual appetite and tool to temp deploy CBSA agents in austere conditions for a long period of time.

If equipped and compensated properly, I beleive there is, among the rank and file.

Obviously, I have no idea what the senior levels of management think.

 

[Dhillongs]

Regarding Surrey being "just like Brampton".





If Surrey is "just like Brampton", I wonder if there has been any communication between the two cities on the subject of which "level" of policing is preferred.

For the last half-century, Brampton policing has been "Regional".

well I doubt there has been any communication same way A CBG won't talk to each other but rather with HQ Ottawa and take on orders. I can't see where municipal provincial police would speak with each other to communicate intel. wish they would though that would be helpful.

 

[RedFive]

'No more money for Surrey Police transition' BC Premier says

Huh... who had the provincial government stuffing a Municipal police force down the throat of a municipality then refusing to deal with the repercussions on their bingo card? Anybody?

 

[SeaKingTacco]

'No more money for Surrey Police transition' BC Premier says

Huh... who had the provincial government stuffing a Municipal police force down the throat of a municipality then refusing to deal with the repercussions on their bingo card? Anybody?

As much as I do not care for the BC NDP, this one is on Surrey, IMHO.

I realize now there are layers upon layers in Surrey that I was not previously aware of, but I think a fully functioning SPS needs to be a priority. That, or fully regionalize the entire lower mainland to prevent poaching….

 

[brihard]

As much as I do not care for the BC NDP, this one is on Surrey, IMHO.

I realize now there are layers upon layers in Surrey that I was not previously aware of, but I think a fully functioning SPS needs to be a priority. That, or fully regionalize the entire lower mainland to prevent poaching….

I doubt any of the municipalities with an existing, functioning municipal force would have any interest in having that imposed on them, but I could imagine a regional force comprising the existing RCMP detachments in Richmond, Burnaby, Coquitlam/PoCo, Maple Ridge/Pitt Meadows, and Langley- with or without Surrey. New West and Port Moody (and maybe Surrey) would still exist as pockets within them, but they’re both quite small and their councils and mayors could make a decision in due course if they saw fit to consider a changeover. Or alternatively, maybe pick a municipal boundary and say “I everything east of…” if Richmond, Burnaby, and maybe Coquitlam don’t make sense to include. Once you go east of Coquitlam/Surrey, density drops considerably. A regional service of everything currently RCMP between Langley and Agassiz could make sense, and would somewhat resemble some of the Ontario regional services- Peel, Halton, Durham and York.

But anyway, yeah, this whole Surrey schmozzle remains so disappointing. Everybody except the politicians deserves better than this.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

'No more money for Surrey Police transition' BC Premier says

Huh... who had the provincial government stuffing a Municipal police force down the throat of a municipality then refusing to deal with the repercussions on their bingo card? Anybody?

Own goal by the NDP. They want to put in regional police forces, this was to be the test case and making it go smoothly would be in their interest.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Own goal by the NDP. They want to put in regional police forces, this was to be the test case and making it go smoothly would be in their interest.

Not that am doubting you, but is that in an NDP policy document?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Not that am doubting you, but is that in an NDP policy document?

I am guessing that is their intent based on them forcing Surrey to continue down that route after a Mayor was elected who opposes the SPS in a election that orbited that question.