A new approach to police budgets
We are now deep into budget discussions for the City’s 2016-2018 Operating Budget and there are still difficult decisions ahead over which initiatives to fund and which ones we can reduce to get closer to a reasonable tax increase. This year – as in the past – police funding draws a significant amount of attention.
On Friday, I made a motion aimed at giving the Edmonton Police Commission (the body that oversees the Edmonton Police Service) predictable funding and reducing their need to come before Council with their caps in hand each year. My suggestion for a formula-based approach is fairly simple: funding increases for the next three years would be directly tied to population growth and municipal inflation (which is driven mainly by wage and energy costs). This removes much of the ‘politics’ from the police budget and gives Chief Knecht the latitude to plan for the long-term. For example, EPS knows that next year, this will net out to approximately a $3 million increase in their funding.
Long-term sustainable funding models are extremely useful for planning and budgeting. That’s why municipalities have long called for this type of stable funding relationship with senior orders of government. I think it’s important that we do as we say, and give the police the certainty they need in order to make long-term recruitment and deployment decisions.
As our largest operating expense, policing cost and prevention strategies are key points of discussion when Edmonton and Calgary talk about inking a new deal with the province through the City Charter. There is no question that the EPS is being asked to assume responsibilities beyond their traditional scope. For example, on any given day police will respond to many complex mental health, addiction and homeless cases – essentially acting as social workers with guns. My new formula-based approach to EPS also comes with a promise to work together in advocating to the Province on re-setting the way ‘big city’ policing is funded in Alberta – and ways we can work with the provincial government to free up our officers from court delays, social disorder brought on by homelessness, crime driven by addictions and underlying mental health problems.
At a minimum, Edmonton and Calgary need the same 10 cents on the dollar that other cities get from the province for policing, to say nothing of the communities below 15,000 that get 30 cents on the dollar for policing covered, or municipalities under 5,000 who get policing cost entirely covered by senior orders of government.
Ideally, with partnerships on prevention and coordinated approaches to organized crime, cyber crime, human trafficking and other crimes that are not localized, we can go further and contribute to reducing provincial justice and incarceration costs as well.
4 thoughts on “A new approach to police budgets”
Comments are closed.
This might be a viable method to deal with budgeting “but” it overlooks one major issue right from the outset….
The City Of Edmonton Police Service is massively understrength to deal with today’s current population. Before you can deal with and create ‘formulas’ for dealing with the future, you have to deal with the present and the present reality.
Edmonton needs an large increase in Police personnel. Until a ‘solution’ can be found in joint partnership with senior governments to deal with the “many complex mental health, addiction and homeless cases – essentially (police) acting as social workers with guns”, restricting the the bargaining process is not going to work.
Wake up, effective policing is not going to work without and increase in manpower, hence money.
As I drive through the city, I’ll often see 1 police officer at a collision site, then continue down the road and see a crew of 5 ‘engineers’ repairing a pothole. The money is there, it just needs to be found.
Don, isn’t it a reality that we spent money foolishly on things we don’t need like barricades in Pleasantview on 109 Street? That the considerable money spent on this disaster could have been evaded by the City consulting initially with the EPS?
How much of the labor, materials, planning and development could have wisely gone towards hiring additional peace officers?
The vast consensus in the communities of Allendale and Pleasantview is that this Chief Rod is a very wise man. That you have failed again to allocate money where it should go to Utopian dreams elsewhere which have failed. That…….poof…..that money is gone for good.
Police men and women keep us safe. They always have and always will.
Shame city council, shame.
Not sure where to post this one. We have a minimum of 3 or 4 coyotes living in the area of Allendale and Pleasantview.
My brother comes home from work at 1 am and sees them eating in our and other people’s garbage. Fact is we see them roaming around in the middle of the day. Have phoned 311 a number of times. They just ask if the coyotes are being aggressive.
Don, we have kids, the elderly and people with pets in the neighborhood. Are you going to assume responsibility for attacks in the future? Calling them “unfortunate”?
Having lived on farms and ranches, these are wild animals. You are turning a blind eye to this issue. Are you assuming responsibility for future attacks by just passively dismissing them now?
Don these are not not Wiley Coyote from Bugs Bunny. They are wild animals. Remember, kids, the elderly, etc..
Sad Don, sad. Don, proactive rather than reactive? : D
A good day in Edmonton as the disaster on 106st Street has been resolved in favor of the vast majority of voters. Hopefully the same will happen with the Engage 106 Street nonsense.
The reality is that a huge amount of tax payer’s money was wasted on the above. This could have been easily evaded by putting it to a vote well in advance of implementing the changes.
So the wasted money is gone forever. This money could have easily been allocated to hiring more peace officers and the said communities would have supported this without question.
So when Chief Rod (who we all like) asks for more money for policing, he is given limited money. The other money is allocated to silly projects which the tax payers don’t support. This represents a huge amount of money-our money.
The City has come up with these non supported ideas as if it is a game. Hey let’s negatively impact this community.
Our lives, communities and tax dollars are not games Don.