Meeting Date: Monday, June 24, 2019
To: Mayor Mills and Members of Council
From: Denyse Morrissey, Chief Administrative Officer Report: CAO 2019-08
Subject: Police Services Options & Review – Ontario Provincial Police and Shelburne Police Services
Recommendation
Be it Resolved that Council of the Town of Shelburne:
1. Receive report CAO 2019-08 for information regarding Police Services Options & Review – Ontario Provincial Police and Shelburne Police Services; and that
2. Council provide direction to staff and approve either:
Option 1 Advise the Ontario Provincial Police by July 15, 2019 that their contract policing proposal dated January 14, 2019 to provide policing services to the Town of Shelburne is accepted; Or
Option 2 Advise the Ontario Provincial Police by July 15, 2019 that their contract policing proposal dated January 14, 2019 to provide policing services to the Town of Shelburne is not accepted.
Report CAO2019-08 Page 1 of 22 Background
The significant capital costs associated with a renovated or new building for the Shelburne Police Services and evaluating options to avoid these significant capital costs and resulting long term debt (using a 15 to 20 year loan) and taxation impacts was the primary reason that a contract policing proposal was requested from the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) by the Town of Shelburne. The Shelburne Police Service had indicated there are significant deficiencies and inadequacies with the current facility which are related to privacy, space and safety.
It was recognized and acknowledged that the quality of services and commitment of the Shelburne Police Services, established in 1879, were not in question. It is also recognized that a review of policing services options and considering another police force as the service provider can be a very difficult process for any town or municipality, the local police force and their community to undertake.
In 2017, a number of other communities were also reviewing contracting with the OPP. On December 4, 2017 Council requested the OPP provide a costing for the provision of policing services to the Town of Shelburne. The OPP had been scheduled to present to Council on July 16, 2018. The presentation date was rescheduled to January 2019 due to the municipal election in October 2018. That rescheduling decision was made by Council on June 16, 2018. On January 14, 2019 the OPP presented the costing for the provision of policing services.
The Shelburne Police Services 2019 gross operating budget is $2,620,571 with revenues of $124,544 or a net budget of $2,496,027. The 2019 capital budget is $93,000. The 2019 budgets are provided in Appendix 1.
Not included or charged back to the Shelburne Police operating budget are the Town staff costs related to such items as payroll and benefits administration, accounts payable, accounts receivable, building and facility services and utilities. These costs are in the Town’s administration budget. Based on the 2019 budget the estimated cost for these services is $83,600.
The OPP’s estimated 2019 annual policing cost is $2,686,029 plus one time costs of $414,428. The combined cost is $3,100,277. The OPP’s January 14, 2019 costing proposal is provided in Appendix 2. The OPP provides a three year transition contract. This includes providing the same staffing numbers as the Shelburne Police currently have for three years (except for administrative staff). Starting in year four the Town of Shelburne contract costs would be based on the OPP’s standard billing model.
Based on the Town’s 2019, a 1% percent tax adjustment is about $69,550.
Report CAO2019-08 Page 2 of 22 On March 25, 2019, the OPP presented to Council their “Billing Model” which is comprised of two categories: the base service costs plus calls for service costs. The OPP’s presentation is provided in Appendix 3. As of June 6, 2019 the OPP polices 326 of Ontario’s 444 municipalities. The OPP’s average cost per property in 2019 was $359. An example of a 2019 cost estimate using the billing model is provided for Mono Township in Appendix 4.
The list of communities that have moved to the OPP from 2001 to 2019 is:
. Deseronto Police 2001 . Meaford Thornbury Police 2002 . Ingersoll Police 2002 . Carleton Place Police 2003 . Elliot Lake Police 2003 . South Bruce Grey Police 2003 . Quinte West Police 2003 . Prescott Police 2004 . Aitkokan Police 2005 . Temiskaming Shore Police 2007 . Essex Police 2009 . Kenora Police 2009 . Leamington Police 2010 . Wawa Police 2011 . Perth Police 2013 . Pembroke Police Service 2012 . Stirling-Rawdon Police Service 2017 . Midland Police Service 2018 . Espanola Police Service 2018 . Wingham Police Service 2018 . West Nipissing Police Service 2019
Municipalities that requested OPP contract policing proposals from 2016 to 2019 and which cancelled the process, remained with their local police force or contracted with another local force are:
. Smith Falls process cancelled in April 2016 . Brockville proposal declined in February 2017 . Prince Township proposal declined in June 2017; contracted with Sault Ste. Marie PS) . Aylmer process cancelled in July 2017 . Amherstburg process cancelled in Fall 2017, contracted with Windsor PS . Deep River proposal declined in December 2017 . Owen Sound proposal declined in December 2017
Report CAO2019-08 Page 3 of 22
. Orangeville 1st proposal declined in December 2017; second costing requested - OPP presented June 10, 2019 . Dryden proposal declined in May 2019
Analysis
In 1994, an extensive renovation of Town Hall was undertaken, and it included about 5,000 square feet for police services. The $2.1 million project, which had some government grant funding, increased the useable space in Town Hall from 9,000 square feet to 17,000.
As stated under the background section of this report, The Shelburne Police Service had indicated there are deficiencies and inadequacies with the current facility which are related to privacy, space and safety.
A request for proposal (RFP) for a Facility Strategic Plan 2015-2035 was issued by the Shelburne Police Services Board in 2015. The study was completed by Water Fedy and is dated October 22, 2015. The purpose of the study was to complete a review of the existing police facility to identify potential deficiencies that affect the daily operations of the police service
The Walter Fedy 2015 report had summarized the estimated costs which did not include land, servicing, furniture and equipment, (FFE) and other applicable costs:
Option 1 Renovate and expand the current facility $3,143,000 Total area: 8,000 square feet Option 2 Acquire and adapt another facility $2,415,000 Total area: 8,500 or 9,000 square feet Option 3 Construct a new one-story facility $4,132,000 Total area: 8,500 square feet
During the review process the Shelburne Police Services had also indicated they required increased space or about 10,000 square feet. Facility accommodation continued in 2017 and included four options, which were about 10,300 to 10,978 square feet for police services were considered including purchasing other buildings for renovation. The estimated costs* were:
Renovation of Town Hall and Expansion of Council Chambers $6,410,000 Renovation of Town Hall (no Council Chambers) $5,530,000 New Police Station ** $5,830,000 Purchase and renovate another building $5,320,000 *based on 2015 construction costs ** location not stated
Report CAO2019-08 Page 4 of 22 The chronology of the review of policing services is listed below:
November 27, 2017 Notice of Motion regarding police services and requesting a costing from the OPP
December 4, 2017 Council requests the OPP to provide a costing for the provision of policing services to the Town of Shelburne
July 16, 2018 OPP scheduled to present to Council. On June 16, 2018 it is rescheduled to January 2019 due to the municipal election in October 2018.
January 14, 2019 OPP presents the costing for the provision of policing services
January 28, 2019 Council approves the hiring of a consultant to study and compare policing services and costs between OPP and Shelburne Police Services
March 5, 2019 Consultant is hired
March 25, 2019 OPP presents the OPP Billing Model to Council
March 27 – June 5, 2019 On Line survey for community to provide the input to Council on policing services and capital project costs
April 3, 2019 Community information meeting and Q&A with the OPP
May 13, 2019 Shelburne Police Services present the 2018 Annual Report to Council, and Information meeting with Q&A with public
June 3, 2019 Consultant’s report presented to Council; special Council meeting at the CDRC
June 10, 2019 Staff report re: Council’s April 8, 2019 direction for summary of all former space considerations developed by the police accommodation sub- committee; and review of a renovation or expansion of the current facility at a cost not to exceed $3 million.
June 24, 2019 Staff report and recommendation to Council on policing services
July 15, 2019 Town of Shelburne 6-month deadline to respond to the OPP
Report CAO2019-08 Page 5 of 22
Consultant’s report and presentation June 3, 2019
Pomax Consulting was contracted, via RFP, by the Town of Shelburne to complete a study and analysis of policing options comparing the services, costs, legislation, governance, and service level of the Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police, and to draw conclusions and make recommendations. The consultant’s report is provided in Appendix 5. In performing this assignment Pomax:
. examined three years of Shelburne Police Services data from both the computer aided dispatch and record managements systems; . examined 3 years of uniform crime reporting survey statistics; . accessed the crime severity index for Shelburne and other communities; . calculated 10 years of billing model and calls for service costs; . conducted seven costing analyses models comparing Shelburne Police Services and Ontario Provincial Police costs; . reviewed applicable legislation; . assessed operational provision of services; . attended public information sessions in Shelburne; . conducted a survey of 21 municipalities that have services provided by the OPP (seven responses); and, . examined governance and organizational structures of the municipal and provincial police services.
The consultant’s report outlined that in arriving at their conclusions and recommendations they took into account:
. expected population and dwelling change in the municipality; . the Ontario Provincial Police transitional costing proposal; . calls for service costs using the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) billing calculation method; . capital expense forecasts for the Shelburne Police Services; . capital expense estimates for the OPP for the first three years (the transition) and application of capital expectations within the billing method years to the end of 2029; . amortization schedules for loans of $3 million and $7 million from Infrastructure Ontario for possible renovation of the SPS facility;
Report CAO2019-08 Page 6 of 22 . estimated operational costs for the Shelburne Police Services for each year of the 10-year period, 2020 – 2029, using three staffing scenarios; . revenue expectations for each scenario; . asset disposal for each scenario; . severance, and pension protection costs for Shelburne Police Services staff members if a decision is made to accept the OPP policing proposal; . adjustments to account for the most recent Ontario Provincial Police arbitration awards for uniformed and civilian employees retroactive to 2019; . expected salary increases for Shelburne Police Service uniformed and civilian employees for the period 2020 to 2029; . applicable legislation; . a survey of municipalities receiving service from the OPP; and, . comments and concerns expressed by residents of Shelburne through the media, an online survey conducted by the municipality, and at public meetings.
The consultant’s June 3, 2019 report was updated on June 11, 2019. It increased the estimated severance costs to $2,360,079 from $2,156,419. There are three separate contacts (Police Chief, Uniformed Officers, and Civilian staff) and each is for the period January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2019.
The estimated upper cost calculation for severance is based on the three contracts/agreements related to 17 full time positions or one police chief, 14 uniform officers and 2 civilian staff. The estimates are based on using a calculation that all Shelburne Police Services staff who are hired by the OPP receive severance.
As was already stated Pomax conducted seven costing analyses models comparing Shelburne Police Services and Ontario Provincial Police costs. Based on the seven scenarios the ten year cumulative savings ranged from $3.9 million to $12.4 million. Some scenarios included the capital costs for a renovated or new building for the Shelburne Police Services. In every scenario there was estimated savings to the Town of Shelburne in choosing to contract the OPP and avoidance of significant estimated facility capital costs for the Shelburne police.
Report CAO2019-08 Page 7 of 22 The consultant’s report summarized:
That the evidence of police services by the Ontario Provincial Police is a reasonable option for the town. Evidence also indicates that the same quality of and level of service currently experienced by the Town of Shelburne will continue if the town decides to contract with the OPP but at a much lower cost.
We recommend that the Town of Shelburne contracts for policing services with the Ontario Provincial Police
Renovation of the Current Police Facility at a Cost Not Exceeding $3 Million
On June 10, 2019 staff presented, as directed by Council on April 8, 2019 space concept plans for police services based on a “renovation and expansion of the current facility at a cost not exceeding $3 million dollars”. The following was included in that report:
The approach taken in this review was that $3 million dollars is the maximum amount that would be borrowed. The capital costs for an expansion would also include the current and estimated five-year future development charges (DCs) for police services. As of May 24, 2019, the police service related DCs are about $437,400. Based on planned development the DCs estimated from 2020 to 2025 are about $435,000. The current and estimated DCs are $872,400. The expansion project budget could be about $3.86 million including current and future DCs. The timing and year of a renovation would impact whether there would be a need to either borrow internally or use a short-term Infrastructure Ontario loan to fund any unreceived DCs. A general space plan based on 8,760 square feet has been developed. It is comprised of renovating 2,608 of the existing 5,000 square feet and adding an additional 3,760 square feet. It is also based on updating the space plans developed by SBA in 2016 and 2017. The general space plan is based on functions being located on three floors and also adding a dedicated elevator for exclusive police use.
At the June 10, 2019 Council meeting the following resolution was passed:
BE IT RESOLVED THAT Council receives report CAO 2019-07 for information regarding the Shelburne Police Services facility review – general background and summary;
Report CAO2019-08 Page 8 of 22 AND THAT the report be referred to the Police Services Board and Chief of Police for consideration and comment for Council’s consideration at the June 24, 2019 meeting.
Shelburne Police Services Board Response: Police Facility Review Report
The following response was provided by the Shelburne Police Services Board on June 19, 2019:
On the matter of the CAO's accommodation report and request for comment, that the Shelburne Police Services Board can agree that the proposed renovation drawing(s) as provided meet with the earlier identified (Walter Fedy Strategic Plan 2015-2015 conducted October 2015) space needs and functional program analysis requirements of being between 8000 to 9000' - suggested as necessary in meeting current and future adequate accommodation requirements however; the Board does not possess sufficient building knowledge nor expertise to comment on whether the proposed design, being spread over 3-floors, either meets with i) specific code requirements (E.g. size of holding cells proposed) and/or ii) the efficient and necessary functional needs of a working police station. To that end, the Chief has expressed considerable concern with the current proposed plans.
Community Engagement and On-Line Survey
Separate from the analysis completed by the consultant was an on-line survey. The “Have Your Say Shelburne Police Survey” was open from March 28, 2019 to June 5, 2019. The full survey results and comments are provided in Appendix 6.
The survey was completed by 520 people. 477 people indicated they lived in Shelburne and 43 did not live in Shelburne. The survey asked how important are eleven categories to a person when considering policing services.
The survey results by category are:
Q1 Having a local police office within the Town of Shelburne Not important at all 41 (7.9%) Of little importance 49 (9.4%) Of average importance 51 (9.8%) Very important 103 (19.8%) Absolutely essential 276 (53.1%)
Report CAO2019-08 Page 9 of 22 Q2 Personally knowing your police officers Not important at all 58 (11%) Of little importance 65 (12.5%) Of average importance 119 (22.9%) Very important 153 (29.4%) Absolutely essential 125 (24.0%)
Q3 Cost of policing Not important at all 18 (3.5%) Of little importance 58 (11.2%) Of average importance 189 (36.3%) Very important 148 (36.3%) Absolutely essential 107 (20.6%)
Q4 Foot patrol Not important at all 24 (4.6%) Of little importance 53 (10.2%) Of average importance 141 (27.1%) Very important 174 (33.5%) Absolutely essential 128 (24.6%)
Q5 Speeding enforcement Not important at all 13 (2.5%) Of little importance 22 (4.2%) Of average importance 113 (21.7%) Very important 168 (32.3%) Absolutely essential 204 (39.2%)
Q6 24 hour availability Not important at all 5 (1.0%) Of little importance 10 (1.9%) Of average importance 46 (8.8%) Very important 91 (17.5%) Absolutely essential 368 (70.8%)
Q7 Reducing cost of policing Not important at all 52 (10.0%) Of little importance 102 (19.6%) Of average importance 192 (36.9%) Very important 75 (14.4%) Absolutely essential 99 (19.0%)
Report CAO2019-08 Page 10 of 22 Q 8 Response time to calls Not important at all 2 (0.4%) Of little importance 3 (0.6%) Of average importance 45 (8.7%) Very important 150 (28.8%) Absolutely essential 320 (61.5%)
Q9 Officer in the schools Not important at all 31 (6.0%) Of little importance 54 (10.4%) Of average importance 143 (27.5%) Very important 139 (26.7%) Absolutely essential 153 (29.4%)
Q10 Police Services Board Not important at all 39 (7.5%) Of little importance 61 (11.7%) Of average importance 183 (35.2%) Very important 163 (31.3%) Absolutely essential 74 (14.2%)
Q11 RIDE enforcement Not important at all 7 (1.3%) Of little importance 17 (3.3%) Of average importance 89 (17.1%) Very important 154 (29.6%) Absolutely essential 253 (48.6%)
Two questions were asked regarding police facility capital costs and taxes:
Q1 The estimated costs to build a new police station is in the range of $4 million to $7 million.
How much more per year (for about 20 years) would you be willing to pay in taxes to fund a new police station?
$200 - $249 47 ( 9.0%) $150 - $199 34 ( 6.5%) $125 - $149 32 ( 6.2%) $100 - $124 47 ( 9.0%) $ 50 - $ 99 55 (10.6%) $ 20 - $ 50 37 ( 7.1%) Not willing to pay extra taxes 195 (37.5%) Willing to pay any amount 73 (14.0%)
Report CAO2019-08 Page 11 of 22 Q2 Rather than a new police station, one option is to renovate the existing police station at an estimated cost between $2 million to $3 million.
How much more per year (for about 20 years) are you willing to pay in taxes to fund a renovation of the existing police station?
$200 - $249 32 ( 6.2%) $150 - $199 31 ( 6.0%) $125 - $149 35 ( 6.6%) $100 - $124 57 (11.0%) $ 50 - $ 99 57 (11.0%) $ 20 - $ 50 67 (12.9%) Not willing to pay extra taxes 163 (31.3%) Willing to pay any amount 78 (15.0%)
Community Petition – Submitted June 10, 2019
A petition to “Keep Our Shelburne Police Service” was submitted to Council on June 10, 2019 regarding “the future of the Shelburne Police Service and the Town of Shelburne’s consideration of replacing same with service from Dufferin detachment of the Ontario Provincial Police”.
The following information introduced the signatures – ‘We, the undersigned, being concerned residents and/or business owners of the Town of Shelburne, do strongly believe that it would be in our best interest to continue to have our local policing needs served by the Shelburne Police Service rather than having those needs contracted out to the Dufferin detachment of the Ontario Provincial Police, and we urge our duly-elected members of council to retain the Shelburne Police for our Town policing needs’.
The petition had 1059 signatures comprised of 696 with a Shelburne address, 309 did not have an address in Shelburne, and 54 were unknown (no address or information). There was also about 6 duplicate signatures.
Financial Impact
Capital Projects and Debt: Current, Upcoming and Borrowing Capacity
The current Town debt is $5,292,888 for projects including “Sister Streets” and various water and sewer projects. The term remaining is seven years to seventeen years. The annual debt payment is $586,550.52. The debt presentation by the treasurer dated February 11, 2019 regarding debt is provided in Appendix 7.
Report CAO2019-08 Page 12 of 22
The chart below summarizes the current debt by project and term:
The list of anticipated 2020 to 2023 infrastructure projects and estimated costs is summarized:
Connecting Link $ 1,087,486 Well 3 Arsenic $ 1,770,000 Sewage Treatment Plant EA $14,000,000 New Water Storage $ 3,561,000
Total $20,419,086
The standard practice in most Ontario municipalities is to set the Annual Repayment Limit (ARL) at 40% of the provinces 25% debt capacity rule. The Towns recently passed Debt Management Policy is based on an eligibility of 40% of the provinces 25% debt capacity rule. The total remaining borrowing capacity is estimated to be approximately $8,500,000 and this is based on using a 20 year term at 3%. The annual debt payment for a loan using this scenario would be $571,603. This ARL debt limit would not increase for the next seven years when two loans are retired in 2026; or unless own source revenues increase significantly.
Report CAO2019-08 Page 13 of 22
It is important to note that the conversion of the ARL figure, for debt servicing, into a gross remaining total debt amount, has many variables to consider such as term length, current market conditions and loan value. Therefore, the figure of $8,500,000 is a snapshot in time as it is subject to many variables that would result in the changing of this figure.
The anticipated borrowing needs for $20,419,086 in projects (which does not include the Connecting Link as the project will not proceed if the grant is not received) is estimated to be upwards of $12,000,000 - $15,000,000. While we would apply for all eligible grants of the day, in the absence of significant grants, these borrowing estimated costs would exceed our debt policy limit. The estimated borrowing needs for these projects have already taken into consideration a potential phased in approach for the waste treatment plant, the reserve transfers, increasing water and sewer (wastewater) fees and future Development Charges collection.
Without a phased in approach to the waste treatment plant $14 million project, project debt funding would exceed the estimated $8,500,000 debt limit and the policy as approved by Council on June 10, 2019. While staff would not recommend increasing the debt repayment burden the following is provided for information purposes only: to provide for increased debt borrowing the policy could be amended and the ARL could be increased to 50% or 55% of the provinces 25% rule. This would provide the Town with an estimated $12,850,000 or $15,030,000 of total additional borrowing, respectively.
Increased debt load for capital projects can be funded through a tax increase or a reduction of costs or Town service levels or a combination of both. Water and sewer capital projects are separate “user pay budgets” and are generally not impacted by the Town’s operating budget and therefore the tax rate. In addition to development charges being used to pay for water and sewer capital needs an increase in water and sewer rates would be needed to pay for the associated long-term debt and staff have already started a review of the 2017 Water Rate Study.
The debt load limit, whether it be $8,500,000 or if it was increased to $12,850,000 is not sufficient enough to include facility capital needs or the debt needed for a policing facility. The facility needs of police services was recently reviewed based on what space could be provided for a cost of up to $3 million plus applicable development charges.
Additionally, the Town’s financial statements are consolidated with the Joint Boards of Management such as the Shelburne and District Fire Department, the Shelburne Library, the Centre Dufferin Recreation Complex and the BIA. As a result, the Town’s borrowing capacity allotment under the Annual
Report CAO2019-08 Page 14 of 22 Repayment Limit (ARL) is not solely for the Town’s use. The Town must leave enough room within the borrowing capacity to fund emergency needs of the Town and the boards.
Police Facility and Future Capital Costs
The costs to borrow either $3 or $7 Million for police facility needs have been used for the calculation. It is based on the Municipal Sector lending rates from Infrastructure Ontario on May 14, 2019 and which are subject to change:
Term Rate 5Y 2.35% 10Y 2.65% 15Y 2.85% 20Y 3.00% 25Y 3.09% 30Y 3.13%
The Town’s debt policy as approved on June 10, 2019, outlines that no term of borrowing can be longer than 20 years.
The borrowing costs for $3 or $7 Million based on a 20 year and 15-year debenture are summarized below.
Term 20 Years 20 Years Loan Amount $3,000,000 $7,000,000 Annual Interest Rate 3% 3% Scheduled Payment (2) $100,281.31 $233,989.71 Annual Payment $200,562.62 $467,979.42 Number of Payments 40 40 Total Interest $1,001,252 $2,359,588.48 Taxation/Levy Impacts +2.88%* +6.73% *estimated based on 2019 budget
Term 15 Years 15 Years Loan Amount $3,000,000 $7,000,000 Annual Interest Rate 2.85% $2.85% Scheduled Payment (2) $123,593.52 $288,384.87 Annual Payment $247,187.04 $576,769.75 Number of Payments 30 30 Total Interest $707,805.52 $1,651.546.22 Taxation/Levy Impacts +3.55% * +8.29% *estimated based on 2019 budget
Report CAO2019-08 Page 15 of 22 The loan amortization schedules for a $3 million and $7 million debenture from Infrastructure Ontario based on 20 years and 15 years is provided in Appendix 8.
Based on the Town’s 2019, a 1% percent tax increase/decrease is about $69,550.
Tax impacts for a $3 million or $7 million loan based on either a 15 year or 20 year term are detailed below for various locations and tax classes based on 2019 Tax Assessment and Rates.
The sample tax impacts by 2019 assessment shown on the two above charts are for police facility needs based on borrowing $3 million or $7 million. This is exclusive of any other annual tax supported operating budget adjustments
Report CAO2019-08 Page 16 of 22 or increases, phased in assessment values (increases), or other capital project funding requirements that may occur and which would impact the tax percent increase.
OPP Start Up Costs
The OPP’s costing proposal included $414,248 for initial start up costs. As of May 24, 2019 the police service related DCs are about $437,400. The current DCs can be used to fully fund the one time start up costs. These costs include such items as uniform and equipment for 15 staff, training for 15 staff, patrol vehicles, portable radios, handheld radar.
The Debt Management Policy
The debt management policy was adopted June 10, 2019. It states that the Town shall issue long-term debt for the following purposes only:
• New building construction; • Building additions; • New road construction, bridges, culverts, or other road infrastructure needs; • Water and wastewater capital projects, or other water and wastewater infrastructure needs; • Purchase of property, with or without existing structures
The Debt Management Policy also states that Medium Term Financing – for periods greater than one year but less than five years can be financed through borrowing from Reserve Funds (Internal loan not to exceed 50% of the total fund balance; with an interest rate not less than the prime rate at the time of borrowing)
The 2016 Reserve and Reserve Fund Policy
The Reserve and Reserve Fund Policy adopted in 2016 states that temporary inter-fund borrowing to cover a reserve fund shortfall is permitted and encouraged to avoid external debt charges.
However, borrowing from a reserve or reserve fund may occur only when an analysis of the reserve has determined that excess funds are available and that the use of these funds will not adversely affect the intended purpose of the reserve. The policy also recognizes that reserves have a direct impact on the credit rating of the municipality and its attractiveness to lenders when negotiating future debentures. A generally accepted target for debt to reserve ratio is 1:1 or one dollar of reserves to every dollar of debt.
Report CAO2019-08 Page 17 of 22 Severance costs – Shelburne Police Services
As stated earlier in the report, the consultant’s June 3, 2019 report was updated on June 11, 2019 and increased the estimated severance costs to $2,360,079 from $2,156,419. The estimated severance costs are based on the three contracts/agreements related to 17 full time positions with the Shelburne Police Services comprised of one police chief, 14 uniform officers and 2 civilian staff.
Borrowing from the Town’s reserves, with interest, in 2020 can fund the $2,360,079 of estimated severance related costs. It has been assumed that all severance payments are lump sum payments rather than salary continuance. If salary continuance was implemented for any staff or the estimated severance costs were less, the amount needed to internally fund from reserves would decrease.
The internal loan can be paid back, with interest to applicable reserves, from the annual operating savings achieved with the OPP. The funding approach for severance is based on applying reserves and paying back $1,198,940 plus $119,502 interest to the applicable reserves over 3 to 5 years:
Name of Reserve Amount
HR Reserve * $ 53,000
Tax Stabilization Reserve * $225,000
General Capital Reserve * $920,940
General 2019 Estimated Year End Surplus $280,000 (OMPF, staff gapping, includes Contingency)
Police Accommodation Reserve $132,616 (Town’s 2017 operating surplus)
Police Equipment Reserve $ 81,931
Police Operating Reserve $424,097
Police Benefits Liability Reserve $ 62,495
Police 2019 Estimated Year End Surplus $180,000 (3 yr average)
TOTAL $2,360,079
*reserve funds applicable: $119,502 interest on $1,198,940 at 2.25%
Report CAO2019-08 Page 18 of 22 After the severance related costs are funded in 2020 the estimated reserve balance would be $6,021,910. This meets the reserve policy requirements as the Town would remain above the 2019 year end debt amount of $4,870,171. It allows for the recommended debt to reserve ratio to still be met.
Repayment to Reserves: Internal Borrowing
The repayment of $1,198,940 plus $119,502 interest would be paid in 2023 and 2024. In 2023 two payments of $329,600 each or a total of $659,200, and 2 payments in 2024 of $329,600 and $329,643 or a total of $659,243.
Operating Costs and Future Savings – OPP
For purposes of comparison we have summarized the estimated annual operating cost for policing services with the OPP during the 3 year transition contract and excluded estimated severance related costs in 2020. The OPP’s operating cost per property is higher than the Shelburne Police Service during the three year transition contract. However, there are also no capital and long term debt costs for a renovated or new police facility.
The cost per property uses the Pomax report estimated costs for OPP policing under the billing model compared to the Shelburne Police Services operating budget projections provided to Pomax for the same period.
The estimated operating savings with the OPP would begin in 2023. It would take until 2025 for all costs due to significant costs associated with Shelburne Police severance to be fully recovered from the operating savings achieved by contracting the OPP.
The estimated 10 year (2020 to 2029) cumulative savings are $6,687,509 and are solely based on annual operating costs. Avoidance of capital costs and corresponding debt payment for 15 or 20 years, whether $3 million to $7 million have not been included in the estimated total savings.
The Town’s estimated 10 year cumulative operating savings when severance related costs are included would be about $5,369,066.
Report CAO2019-08 Page 19 of 22 The estimated operating cost and savings for 2020 to 2029 is summarized. The chart, as the size below is quite small due to the amount of data, is also provided in Appendix 9.
Starting in 2023, should the Police Services Board or Town want an additional or dedicated OPP officer for a specific service area only (ie: 30 per week or .75 of an officer for traffic enforcement or school resource officer) as an ‘enhancement’ the cost estimate incorporating one enhancement for comparison purposes is shown. The 2019 enhancement cost for Mono Township of $95,296 was escalated at 2% annually.
The estimated 10 year (2020 to 2029) cumulative savings including an “enhancement” is $5,935,688. The Town’s estimated 10 year cumulative operating savings when severance related costs are included would be about $4,617,245 as summarized. The chart, as the size below is quite small due to the amount of data, is also provided in Appendix 9.
Report CAO2019-08 Page 20 of 22 OPP – Policing Costs Per Property Local Municipalities
The OPP’s web site also provides detailed information on the year over year cost comparison for communities policed by the OPP for 2015 to 2019. This includes the cost per property.
The 2019 estimated costs per property for the following local municipalities is summarized. Expanded information for each municipality listed below is provided in Appendix 10.
Place 2019 cost per property
. Adjala-Tosorontio/Essa/New Tecumseth $391.91 . Blue Mountains $340.56 . Clearview Township $346.37 . Collingwood $425.86 . Grey Highlands $322.67 . Kincardine $364.47 . Mono $346.02 . Orillia $566.44 . Port Hope $322.56 . Southgate $343.18 . Wasaga Beach $370.55
Polices & Implications
Town of Shelburne 2019 Debt Management Policy
Town of Shelburne 2016 Reserve and Reserve Fund Policy
Ministry of Municipal Affairs & Housing (MMAH) – Annual Financial Information Return (FIR) - Schedule 81 – Annual Repayment Limit (ARL)
Consultation and Communications
Not applicable
Supporting Documentation
Appendix 1 – 2019 Budgets Shelburne Police Services
Appendix 2 – OPP Contract Policing Proposal, January 14, 2019
Appendix 3 – OPP Billing Model Presentation to Council, Town of Shelburne, March 25, 2019.
Appendix 4 - 2019 OPP cost estimate for Mono Township
Report CAO2019-08 Page 21 of 22
Appendix 5 - A Study and Analysis of Policing Options: Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police. Pomax Consulting, June 3, 2019 (and revised June 12, 2019.)
Appendix 6 – The Have Your Say Shelburne Police Survey, March 28, 2019 to June 5, 2019.
Appendix 7 – Long Term Debt Capacity Update – February 11, 2019
Appendix 8 - Loan amortization schedules for $3 million and $7 million debentures from Infrastructure Ontario based on 20 years and 15 years.
Appendix 9 – Charts - The estimated operating cost and savings for 2020 to 2029 with OPP and with OPP enhancement.
Appendix 10 – OPP policing costs: year over year cost comparison charts for various area municipalities, 2015 – 2019.
Respectfully Submitted:
______Denyse Morrissey, CAO
Report CAO2019-08 Page 22 of 22 Appendix 1 to CAO2019-08
FUNCTION: PROTECTION SERVICES SERVICE: POLICE PROTECTION
REVENUES 01-2020
GL ACCT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 2017 2017 2018 2018 2019 2019 vs 2019 vs 2020 2021 2022 FINAL ACTUAL FINAL ACTUAL FINAL 2018 2018 ESTIMATED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED BUDGET YEAR END BUDGET YEAR END BUDGET $ % BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 5201 GAIN OR LOSS ON SALE OF ASSET 3,000 5,373 4,000 6,984 5,000 1,000 25 5,000 5,000 5,000 5402 GENERAL POLICE REVENUE 5,000 4,957 5,000 5,855 5,000 0 0 5,100 5,202 5,306 5403 RCMP FINGERPRINT REVENUE 1,000 770 1,000 755 1,000 0 0 1,020 1,040 1,061 5404 CRIMINAL RECORD CHECKS 7,000 12,139 9,500 13,272 11,000 1,500 16 11,220 11,444 11,673 5407 POLICE RIDE GRANT 8,900 8,895 8,944 8,954 8,944 0 0 9,123 9,305 9,491 5410 DOG LICENCES 10,000 18,570 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5418 D.A.R.E. REVENUE 1,700 100 1,500 50 500 (1,000) -67 510 520 531 5419 PAID DUTY REVENUES 19,000 17,513 18,000 10,481 12,000 (6,000) -33 12,240 12,485 12,734 5421 TRF FR BICYCLE UNIT DONATION 500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5422 SAFER COMMUNITIES GRANT 35,000 36,500 35,000 35,000 35,000 0 0 35,700 36,414 37,142 5427 COURT SECURITY REVENUE (CSPT) 5,294 5,294 6,100 6,177 6,100 0 0 6,177 6,300 6,426 5428 TSF FROM OPERATING RESERVE 40,000 69,807 40,000 40,000 40,000 0 0 40,000 40,000 40,000 5434 TSF FROM DEVELOPMENT CHGS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 POLICE REVENUES 136,394 179,918 129,044 127,528 124,544 (4,500) -3 126,090 127,711 129,366
ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION Draft Budget Provided by Shelburne Police Services Board FUNCTION: PROTECTION SERVICES SERVICE: POLICE PROTECTION
EXPENDITURES 01-2020
GL ACCT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 2017 2017 2018 2018 2019 2019 vs 2019 vs 2020 2021 2022 FINAL ACTUAL FINAL ACTUAL FINAL 2018 2018 ESTIMATED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED BUDGET YEAR END BUDGET YEAR END BUDGET $ % BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 7101 POLICE SALARIES 1,597,652 1,456,168 1,698,915 1,538,191 1,784,580 85,665 5 1,899,118 2,056,091 2,172,774 7150 POLICE BENEFITS 408,299 384,536 446,638 388,646 413,504 (33,134) -7 436,909 461,016 485,847 7151 POLICE EHT 28,363 28,730 33,147 30,212 34,666 1,518 5 36,906 39,963 42,262 7152 POLICE WSIB 43,098 39,694 45,802 42,066 50,143 4,341 9 53,396 57,881 61,060 7201 POLICE SERVICE BRD EXPENSE 4,500 7,192 6,000 9,261 6,250 250 4 7,000 7,000 7,500 7203 POLICE SERVICE BRD TRAINING 1,500 10 1,500 534 2,500 1,000 67 2,500 2,500 2,800 7301 POLICE CLEANING ALLOWANCE 4,000 3,000 4,500 0 0 (4,500) -100 5,500 5,500 6,000 7302 POLICE OFFICE SUPPLIES 7,500 19,214 8,500 9,693 9,200 700 8 9,500 9,500 10,000 7303 POLICE COMPUTERS 16,000 10,345 16,000 16,292 16,000 0 0 16,320 16,646 16,979 7304 POLICE COMPUTER SUPPORT 16,000 22,953 16,500 22,360 17,500 1,000 6 18,500 18,500 19,500 7307 POLICE RADIO MAINTENANCE 5,000 3,863 5,000 3,306 5,100 100 2 5,202 5,306 5,412 7308 POLICE BANKING FEES 500 385 500 420 510 10 2 520 531 541 7311 POLICE VEHICLE GAS/MAINTEN 47,000 52,206 47,000 56,566 50,000 3,000 6 52,000 52,000 54,000 7312 POLICE EQUIP & SUPPLIES 8,000 11,440 8,500 13,343 9,000 500 6 9,500 10,500 11,000 7313 POLICE CLOTHING 8,000 10,334 9,500 11,667 8,800 (700) -7 10,500 10,500 11,500 7314 POLICE PHOTOCOPIES 5,000 4,039 5,000 4,858 5,100 100 2 5,202 5,306 5,412 7315 DOG BY-LAW EXPENSES 4,000 3,093 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7316 POLICE LEGAL/PROFESSIONAL FEES 10,000 8,823 10,000 10,698 10,200 200 2 10,404 10,612 10,824 7351 POLICE MEMBERSHIP/CONV 5,000 3,505 5,000 6,399 5,500 500 10 6,000 6,000 6,500 7352 COMMUNITY SERVICE INITIATIV 2,000 3,412 2,000 2,773 2,040 40 2 2,081 2,122 2,165 7361 POLICE CRUISER INSUR & LIC 14,500 15,765 16,000 16,658 16,320 320 2 16,646 16,979 17,319 7362 POLICE GUARD PRISONER FEE 1,000 143 1,000 1,122 1,020 20 2 1,040 1,061 1,082 7368 POLICE TRAVEL & MEALS 3,500 4,477 3,500 6,306 3,570 70 2 3,641 3,714 3,789 7369 POLICE TELEPHONE 11,000 9,084 10,000 8,734 9,900 (100) -1 11,500 11,730 11,965 7371 POLICE RADIO DISPATCH 62,045 62,044 63,906 64,721 65,184 1,278 2 66,488 67,818 69,174 7372 POLICE TRAINING COURSES 15,000 11,996 15,000 14,099 14,300 (700) -5 14,586 14,878 15,175 7373 POLICE POSTAGE & MAINTENANCE 1,500 841 1,500 2,758 1,530 30 2 1,561 1,592 1,624 7374 CRIME STOPPERS 1,000 0 1,000 1,000 1,020 20 2 1,040 1,061 1,082 7381 CISCO 3,000 2,394 3,000 1,596 3,060 60 2 3,121 3,184 3,247 7382 POLICE WEB SITE 700 673 700 1,155 714 14 2 728 743 758 7405 POLICE ADVERTISING 1,700 460 1,500 426 1,530 30 2 1,561 1,592 1,624 7406 RCMP FINGERPRINT FEE 1,200 725 1,200 500 1,224 24 2 1,248 1,273 1,299 7602 TSF TO CAPITAL EQUIP RESERVE 20,000 25,373 50,000 50,000 50,000 0 0 50,000 50,000 50,000 7603 TSF TO POST EMPLOYMENT BENEF. 0 21,053 20,835 20,835 20,607 (228) -1 20,636 20,636 20,636 7615 TSF TO POLICE OPERATING RESERVE 0 173,113 0 200,431 0 0 0 0 0 0 POLICE EXPENDITURES 2,357,557 2,401,082 2,559,143 2,557,627 2,620,571 61,428 2 2,780,855 2,973,736 3,130,850
NET FUNDS TO BE RAISED (2,221,163) (2,221,164) (2,430,099) (2,430,099) (2,496,027) (65,928) 3 (2,654,765) (2,846,024) (3,001,484)
ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION Draft Budget Provided by Shelburne Police Services Board Salary Contracts Expire in 2019 7301 Clothes Cleaning Allowance Included in Salary Line as Taxable Benefit 7315 Dog By-Law Expenses moved to By-Law Dept. FUNCTION: PROTECTION CAPITAL PROJECTS CAPITAL PROJECT: POLICE CAPITAL PROJECTS
REVENUES: 02-2020
GL ACCT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 2017 2017 2018 2018 2019 2019 vs 2019 vs 2020 2021 2022 FINAL ACTUAL FINAL ACTUAL FINAL 2018 2018 ESTIMATED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED BUDGET YEAR END BUDGET YEAR END BUDGET $ % BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 5401 POLICE PROVINCIAL GRANTS 0 0 0 0 12,000 12,000 100 0 0 0 5402 TRF FROM POLICE DC CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5403 REVENUE FUND TAX BASE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5404 TRF FROM OPERATING RESERVE 34,400 59,402 75,800 45,462 23,000 (52,800) -70 28,500 10,000 15,000 5405 TRF FROM CRUISER RESERVE 50,000 50,000 36,000 38,669 58,000 22,000 61 33,000 47,500 30,000 POLICE CAPITAL REVENUE 84,400 109,402 111,800 84,131 93,000 (18,800) -17 61,500 57,500 45,000
ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION
EXPENDITURES: 02-2020
GL ACCT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 2017 2017 2018 2018 2019 2019 vs 2019 vs 2020 2021 2022 FINAL ACTUAL FINAL ACTUAL FINAL 2018 2018 ESTIMATED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED BUDGET YEAR END BUDGET YEAR END BUDGET $ % BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 7500 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE 84,400 109,402 111,800 84,131 93,000 (18,800) -17 61,500 57,500 45,000 7504 TRANSFER TO ADMIN RESERVE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7504 TRANSFER TO POLICE CAP RESERVE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 POLICE CAPITAL EXPENDITURE 84,400 109,402 111,800 84,131 93,000 (18,800) -17 61,500 57,500 45,000
NET FUNDS TO BE RAISED 0 (0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CAPITAL PROJECT: POLICE CAPITAL PROJECTS (Continued)
CAPITAL PROJECTS 2019 7500 Replace Cruiser #92 & Radio - marked 2015 Ford Explorer - fully amortized in 2019 - 3 year rotation $ 50,000 Fume Hood $ 5,000 2 Drug Roadside Screening Unit (Requested Federal-Provincial funding for this purchase) $ 12,000 Repeater (unpurchased from 2018) $ 26,000 $ 93,000 CAPITAL PROJECTS 2020 Additional Unmarked Cruiser + Radio - DC eligible due to growth - no discount $ 33,000 Interview Recording Equipment $ 8,500 Additional Tasers $ 20,000 $ 61,500 CAPITAL PROJECTS 2021 Replace Cruiser #91 & Radio - marked 2017 Ford Explorer - fully amortized in 2021 - 3 year rotation $ 47,500 Replace Roadside Devices $ 10,000 $ 57,500 CAPITAL PROJECTS 2022 Replace Cruiser #90 & Radio - 2016 Ford Taurus - Stealth Car - Fully amortized in 2020 - 4-5 year rotation $ 30,000 Replace Intoxilyzer $ 15,000 $ 45,000 CAPITAL PROJECTS 2023 Replace Cruiser #92 & Radio - marked 2020 Ford Explorer - fully amortized in 2021 - 3 year rotation $ 55,000 Replace Cruiser #94 & Radio- marked 2018 Dodge Charger - Fully amortized in 2022 - 4-5 year rotation $ 40,000 $ 95,000 sale of asset recognized as revenue and transferred to Police Cruiser Reserve** Appendix 2 to CAO2019-08
o t F c Ec +, UJ G l- o \J t I c J o o C) t{r L o o) e= I 5 a. -a;Z- ,.Y *, N*b c (tr .cI J ^-c $ I $69 a \- l- o TJ >cI- o o r-? z k aa CL I 5Yu c +r_ (o 3n rr{ Lr) # o llr o iqa t- CE o- o o- o H; I o-o o) c CE c EOo(l) II F cc rh, o z oo a F= o ooa@ o o-o- O E $ -c a b o O E, ) .Eo a);3 o l () U) o AE=oEi: o) C c c o C .9 .oo o g c 6sE c oU) o 6 o J;O o .9 tr t c q) o -ilin> (I o) c .9 F F-ro o6 0) .o 6 6 Eq (! i6 t o) o o oo, =c $ .c o uJ 3 E l c -ll qi) bE= O) E t E Ll- e, 9 T a .N oo_ .!L I c @ E t o E 6 o 6 o o c il-O o tlj z z o (o =
o) G E o= c ! - o o o f E o co E o o oE L;ctr 9€ o o o @ o d) (/)'E f.;s o P o c) o c c o g -aL = o= ! uJ G o Ltrt a c ER E9 3 C) E (s o o E.e c l gE !^ o E (Eq) (5 .EE o a of a o o.N m.8"UG c od] -c) E o o 6 oor 6(, (s o lz >6 .o o o c o : o5.tr G o E .o (6P a N a '6o E3 .= tv 69 o) '- o o .9: l! i) *od o 'S=c9] ::o o E5 o o o .9 .o. co o E o tro eq s s o ul o- !ad O (L
E f o (5 ao- 6o o ru6 co_ c : oo (gf .-LoC .9 o o c: = 6 a 3 c >,u) GUJE (5 -@co '6 Ed] :> (E0 o G# o? o I o5 t- 0) .9. '=ooc MEEE /\ 5 J c E m (s :o f .9 gof,E E -e: o t o .Eo o E ,fib 6 o !!> f, .o o =oEO fu",3 a o _:l o o OE o o co o E co f a) Oo Lnt€s ==o9 G (/) .E ?o C) E c o 6E (6x od ! FC o $ c ! o E() O o .9 E> .9 .9 o o oo Fo- IL t- E o ! - a 6P (U 'c € l q) o b- o(,=6 o c o= a c E s @c L o f E o : o a co f o G c s E -c s C d] o 0) c = E E E d] c) E o o o o E =E c o ([o o l c o G 6 g E E o EE @ o 9 o l (I E$F"s c q) a co o.9 f L = o a E gr C) o (5 o) o o0) (L c C) .o :0 '6 E () e c QA f 6 () o f (I] o L a go 3,H E Err o 3s sE= -f *'= E. E AECLH141TYIT E l.a>;rU *g b;!!=o to66gbtr; E E q ?: viOa ==o,rnAr-t/-b> LLutE ()trG tEo o:'U Ek:.3 EE; cEE;+ s7rr *, iiEt';N- E.IE:e EObo g ?g E iE o.9 obtr> ;EE q € E i c; oo {=, II E.Et,g E€ € o=o A 4 + E t.g = = o6 E Oc n=$; i -2 El; s ::: E : F E !i F o0090.':N-1,? OOOrorot-dc"tF oooooooao .:..-"*a-.*. {i ..'...
a .= o f c #, f o : L (U E o o- E (J 9E o I .E do o E E f o t- 5 E ,\=r- o E : o c i H(n : -c+t z IL o 9 tr (g o IL XE : .g II o o t, t,, o LR C) : (U ? o I ; t{- o rL6 1. +, o o) (U L oa a +t a a o l-a a ,^\>\N f o o o I J v t{- o a .; G # o6 .= i! L -c O .1- N :: a o C) a i', o o 'oq E o t- c tr o o o t- (E : i a 8! :0 tr, o t-- o \ t @ aE- -J E tl = +, l{-o IE o o o * 5 .9 - e -c ! a tr o 8= -*, o ct, tr o- bE + 00 o c oao fl p N :s='fL U) r\ g fg t-o F II ctg- ., ': -. t{ tF F o o)E < o N tr + s nl ''ir: ol (0 ro taf' ' o)
17 ) grll J 1- o o & J { 6 rJI o z (l) r o '= o t- CE cl. o o a I AE L { L zl- o o (U .9 AA--a o-> =od E P=i f E> 9,.: E= g' Eq Lo o f fi H H5 E P +,L IE isPHgP:€ JI .{E€ &o d u =E E .aq€ EEtE? IE S dnFi> I o I oaoooaoa I LIE o c C 29EE o o EE c, 'gEEe,o 9'o E CD EEii'bs o o.^=Ai E-=x c 336rul o) FE E PE$ (nLv'ooXo=o = Ur.= f EEs E b lia=*EFP f E g Ebg s Et'tsE 3 €E#=fiFE .g i; uEF aoooooa oq-a C)l-o> taoc) 2 od= .\-' o l_sF o ts @ I !q o b +=x b€..';= () = o TI c=rq)F.qtu;^- L 8E'go o :qsoe z- o o ohic='cn +, P.6 IE L colLt2'E c O qo c o o O a I oJ I E G 3eo-ts tr f,(U o a _c) e TI t- * {l * IE ;'t I L o)?E 4 I rll\1 o .= 6J
2 q I 'af EOC) I o ; i i 9trEe l ; irAt_- I t od i) =odf I i $o'E'=lE,8g I EEH6 i. I. T.I'UFO i ! t o o a t: Fnfi: -9' -g fli q) o gEE o-SEE o f--Ao) () ,^\ '= .= II
L -5COE oo g 8! 'aI o *.L o q 'HE c o .-=o, 6E 'oo-t q O: () U) SU q c) .e, d, I b o og J H -de c 06o. o €> (u 6 c o()ao o : 0 o I- (fi cY!l-rI .= -*, TIfl = =O o Luu- IE o)> L gE uE .= en +f Jgl-L E b€ Y< o so > 9 KE:- II €> tr ;u Po .=E TE6 !--- TI ;E oA E:E 15C |ol E H dE 3 'I E g il lbg cuod ic ; il od ?- O FE'=*F o)9'= a>EE E.=e6.ec.=o;> =o s3 TFEFE gghEo (L9E EE f ,i8 (..U'-FFl.LO- r.u oooao O o a a J
Lo o *,L IE I J # C' :o o c E g.e !- tt\ o IE .=(J6$O 3E $o o f,$ .F E eobg.e= @o c I u)E-c o c+' o IE 8eb c(uc E c o-0q) E eo E qj-c c +, o .e l- I- t- (U Y o II h 8b A q trE l.- o' c o-o .:- o F€= F o AE e o o) F o o=-c -t-- v tr, = FE b E (u .= 11\ ^E E5 (') .9,r 5rp E&f! lrl,, , \ E b.H a gE cn ob E\J oOli o HE -a+>=-tvs bE c t\1 F, gO6F E eE tt t s SPil. (E 6 ,a?;g d F .s oEoPE=€.q = =EeEVE E E tE cu t To-=Fbt .9 .= .9 t- troo.EO5Frt. b\JE E o)tr > O 988fi8 &EH oooooo a o o a
J { I ,t I' co) .a-t *f o' C) g TLo { II tl- ! tr $ : II a L IE L +, a F $= o I ?-9fi ]f, o) IE c I E c J c t5 G G .0 fl o;\- -c tr u \L, ,-r a C) tr tsA-8- o) o o iFI r-r (u c :g ut = o t,o g Eo i-'lFt'=' o- o TI ()t- t- o .g o o' v Et 0=a=,E a tr 6sEFE o R ct) P}+t o : o eg fi F E c .9 .9, (U -PoUEFLL Ir,AI- -c o-> $ I ? F S e f (J g= o= :q)u o c> EfitL I tLE;EqE rJ- O - I t E& oooooaa o o CD tp g;e Ftb g >.q €.= = b S=eEg; : g FeFfre;g EE P o ee: PE :; S € e: F r TI *f afi;eEHuEfrgEEp o 1lS:.9b E E > Fo .eeocdqb11g6d'oP rts IIJ ts g*EEc H 5 E frF f; E I g SEEESHES | ' I ' IE a o *f IE I uJ o E L o TI I ao o () lltti, II L o o rcllrr E o +f LIE o' o +, tr I U) c) a O o O E o c L t- o o= o Go a U' E AE q) 0) o'F J t- =o .g @ U' a f eb o o o o .9, o c) 0e : f $ G (u od c o E c =E6o o L o- c o) c o OO o :q c c $ o- .Eof .9 c o :q E o E II J 0) c) o9 U) I E E g (U- o o- E J o q) a o) (/, tc .T '= (U c o !-(U a o '6 o o E o G Bo o- c f =E o J = o II o U' o a o6 t- t-o f, o o L co c o- o o E o) o) FE a o c c c €!- .9 o o (U o o) c) (U q) U) e9 o o (U It c) .9. o- a ab o C) .E E +, '5 b.g a E :g .S -o IE O E c 3b o) L a (U c) b9 c E= (u o o) o = o bP :0 o c q) '=-o @ \./ o fl :g o) E'= o o- tr c o o -o(/) E I o cq) o- (U o a o o- E .q @ o Lo=c) $ c) a a () E .g E a c o '= o +,o o c bP c O II o)o o IL lh .C o o t-o = o c o ot o o_ o tr r.u r.u JO O o o O o m o o o IJI -= \J *e)fi)qu $- J- 5*LJ=EFrf r t o fTT L- o. L{-diHff) \\J F J r .L. gL-kr
l*r={-\*f,L# L' $cu r* g z F\* i1 I Y H- f G-g.t ; \l tr\ * *-, \lr' tq o $*>"p +-d ;ft o ec FK 5- t\J /rq g** A. \ir'fl\ \IJ $- t*Y!Vt tsh d\ I t* F* q"!.J tsit t-I-- EE \!,, "&*r 1 q-l F ef)ffi= !{-- sjn/'l \ t-J z r+- uJ o ffinL-J w-t--r 6 JgooJ VP E LlJ co rtL> F i (oP i'#"9 trF d}. )ocE rlJ-:U-;i- ,t-Y oi* dLOOF ft3 :!trn'rlr/\ ' (E(E '@o o-x.trY 00 Phi; C)P U =t E= o -- >@=U =';ugffd .g: L 53o d o 5F 2a I o 6= J o L) O +. e€ (, ;.9(o-C I FFFr-r- o(J J irZ 88888 E9 L LUL!Lllrr rJ1 oP +, >>>5d ()E EEtaq. -ooorE fiEH OOOU(J >> o :Vl -c E>(o E '= bo o -= E, 5to fl uJ atz FFFFFFF !()=b-O o >ftQ @aao@a@ .9(o IE 2t OOOOOOO t- JJJJJJJ o{: t! tl- LL LL LL LL LrL oo EHE o, .;-= E da o- -cE oo=d=z F(o IE tr) U .0, u' >ar llJ E-o I ltJ l! €= X r- c-l abo IE FFFFFFF o-= 6 i/, a@@@a@a '-Pc ?=t 4fra ()OOOOOO t- 61o E JJJ-JJ-JJ .=(J,E oIJJ EHE LL Ll t! LL LL tl- LL t q0)(c* d'o A*E-cJ E 60u>oc o.l< o o lzc-.-P(J o IYP: E:-a aaa@aaaFFFFFFF tle o ooooooo t* ^-v O J-JJJJJ-J e EH= tLtl-LLl,Llll!LL us- o d@t oJ oJ oJ 5cO L oL(J !5:orbP r EaE 7= 1 FFFFFFF Eza @@@@ a @ u) 3:b ooooooc) t* P^.- JJ-JJJJJ R 'r= ci trHE Il- I.L Il- I.L I,L IL LL X(!o- d,n t -6=--.i 9 <;o- *(JOo- oo :o c o o t- t- o t,f J-cu C) OX f c-c(UAt- t- lvt .F' a -l a o -C-rO+, t_ o o c P:,A(u\-' L c o 7i(U Lu- 5 o N V/ \\ V) +, N $ I TJ =Eo,_{ Etu t 5 E L o E # a P=::o *d'i o o ; s &s 5 o t-o go IL rNCq$ o d g .- trr o T\ o t*t' tr, ,t) o t .,} t8 *, c t1' -s g o l,ll i- l o (, o ,l- ct E l- ? f ox I +, c-coA+,t- (, o l\'' -t f -c a (U IE t- +rrl_ fl t, P 6.8 o o a (U (u\-/ o co 6u:u, a c o o N ._{ E tu N co .-, gx +t tr c F = cto o l- ; EE t- = O=J rNCr) a F 1 o o- 1 "*b:. E ;E z o dc o G i o 3E <6 Jt/J o LO=5 5 o o bo e (, o z n 1 1 1 P uzFo o {al o>zO L N, I J G @b F a # ua @ 3 o E g a z tz zz. 3 o NEI AP t:j ! 6 E 1 I uuF E L r t zt5 si i FJ 3 E E! *. HAZ 6E ,znF odg o i6 uu> 1 =rF '!oo o (t) tr {a o 1
N s E t!: 1t o t o E tl! o zF 2 ul I q I F o r"t u E rf F l! p, z c o :' o o r o o z oo t o o L F ul o I E F z F {. o J z F r 2 J c) J u J ,u 3 Eqr g:E gtE .j
-rE E?E Hg$ {r d
,li
i:r . '': , ':' ; 'lii l- EAo\ a'- o'==-t- A-t o-$ E gcoq,u =L 'Ct- \-/r^\ v'/\ '=L ul *-iALLL tr O c TI o E Fb* II c frc I o 9>c7iz,o a OX+'C o v c'; +f coo=t- II tr .i cu tr-O-, 5 E E 1go)> $e o .= burE (J .e E 8- d s L? F @ N 0 f3Fi{- @ \. lr- C o 2' o o o= -s'F sl $ N P trEb.9=\-r- 6= o o o => o coo r -o5=.j .b 8- tsui oE +f + eE ,o lE# d E LU.r-r(nO33 otr E troL { YE - 6 tc - IEE s *+o.=E P; > Ff; =.l-: > Oc-.? E SE : i6 U-:;i ry >a .€;._e F fi E,= q g €xc> E 7 E f flooP- x\r/ tr5E# 6a ; g E v,:= b 5 (, E E yt-,e E 0 E qp - Ero o d E o-^s.b (J 3b .=F p 8 E }.c t +, E(orof ptp5 5 : =i ==q o e tr3> H F:= * F;- o a o o a o o a q c c oc -o(o(JO o.= o .8 r F.- p o o 3a iq o EHog l{F.rE-.: R t\ fv-.-- I >5=o=th 6 a E o oY tso-I o+5 9'a- EE 8 TE E= o E -;e E# E 3# gO@oE#io f r- o o-_ o'F E 7 @ uo'i f A5P L -cG+r.o -.F c= o O w: ac E'E 3= bb oo !- v-n\ ac Ee€?;qJ aI- YE=.911\ t- €$ m o+l tr (u otr rnO(/)> pPp- ;o E+t!Er-(Lr)oxoo) s E ;c) o q) b€ 8 II 0.o 5cn =& a o a E950 E o tr LO P (o -- I b!L (u Egsg EF 8#5a oo' ; o=8 vE - .= L., .= €v F : ^69- .N .= *,s+i:F- =Ots E+. -!#;':.€F'ir L ; OOJ r€ vl LL tn 'kt: tEo +t * 15cco s crl= w Ke ,# Gtr, g *f E. ffiEE3t##lin o o tr $ €"alPe F UoE(!- E" Et- (U= o J ]O > do : .qo A i:- o ba o= J -c 'Fo '\v, tL +t G+' .= @a L.qr+\#t l{-c) \-, EEsoo(U $ of c o "9 o= tr e-b t- \F- II ooo o AF o o-,oh- TI o r tts =o3o o FN'=P8b G L : a >,5 ,Tt f +, -g l- b= (, ?i5E o -> lz LG trO-,-5(1)E eb fl sau =$ 6= tr tloo l- v o a$ @ +t +, 9>=o o cc l- +t O Eeic'-(tr|O) E : - N oo I I -ar q - c cF 8E E a cJ g \-F L c(u .q /^\=XrE 3,.0 E- F\o+ \J o- o .iJtr x$ o \-4 P-Qa o (oly- 6'o- E o8 69 E orL o o oo Jt * o E-o a o $= ;o :o-o a .9iC-'=O)r- E Oc bog a (l) -O t- :o -C O- O rO Hc g\ c) cr\ +, c +' .> o vEa CF'6 l\E N-c cu o I\J o a € F EE 8 bo SE€ o o o o o o * ul *-s TJ fff J- fl)tr o 3- o- -"Y J ffiffi rn\// tr!h l-aE& \J -a. dl [ O# z F I \- * n tq o A - o CE Ll* cu e4\ o- ,+t wJ t\,F 11 o k-&,r\V n t: AJCI}J- Cn t zl- o =r* = (\r C) +f TL () O LIE o *, tr c o .9 (, a .9, C o E II# E II o o O tr o IEL .9 F o s (L IE f:. c (o s N .g c o o = +t (U o t- U) (U 'o) +t o c J o r NI :
= I-9$ o L+t.J -t g E'3 I EE^38 o= f^bEpo EE$ -) ?,F b E€i UE -t L(J - *. P ##8 o t-t l-2ELr*, F v o i- = - LIE T *. tr E =. E=_06 k o- o -^c O- (J E P;,Yi= o g5-o= o tr E*eirE TIo *. 8;€ F.9 II r- F.\v C L(J.A \l/ L o *, (U tr .e -: 65 .> o o IE +, ct L =i-tr-O.9--, o *,L ? I dp l-G' tr F ocL-=c *, o IJJ ,Loq\v$ F .Ar F l- I G o IL -<'*l ()tu6p E 'F.o 5,atu: o co .9 F'= o l-o 'F > -o ct _=Y>- rr+b> lt -J $ O +, +, .= cb o 9r^r(f)C: A\i o e €JJ; O $ tr L (E -J t\ t- o F P L'=3E:3 F -I q .=r--Y=J d) C F dE€,fl== .9> 6' Ct * $ $ * * * (v) E E:g O O O q * c/) * rt r o F o atc o G) lU5 F= P ao OE E(l) O'L o) U'J O O * t c') O (Y) E= tr 8_E o LO CA t _a6 rFTI o= .EEc!- lF o- ct, IE c= # ro o (L 06= oo- E o) p8 '= o o o s Ns ot TL o (\t cco- o (l) N R.9 o fl J :1 .= G o ?)aX= E s8.E (D cob IE .9 8€9 o' (Lo6 I EE:; o.9 N ro 0-6 co IE c> O O o N \- IL l.L FI $Oa .a=c) u, r E 6 b o9 (t 69b E o 3Eoo?,o- ar o E> o AX+J(J q lz =Xoa o fr o o : L fi:E.o-EYafo=g .g tro(/)! L O- ,- L.t- L o= E c -C E uJ l+ q) 8z d F o E o ; .9 a t l- c b R6E o q) o (u .g -c t- o) o o O E C) t- '- o '5 !-3)P lJ- .- o q) -o E l.- -\ G o c o o a o +) o l -co o f o a o (U .g o- o) c (s o '6 .9 o- (U -o q) E?6E o -c o o o o J :> .o f E-c o (L O o c a 0 O U) P o C) ogOE * ***** CF} d) c-.} FE qr}^ u->_ (I) (l> €- c{"-
o (v-rcc}r{uJr cf) rJ-l *f l-* u.} 1.-. F- ff) (J? €cr TI u I lf) g] f\ lJl (.C]- q tF {si r'-t .+ cj t.{f f"-Flr-}-Fd- -,f' C(Jr=r o r.rf- tr o {.f r r;f {Jt:} c!-) g)-r]r(= rJ" tr u-l {:{ F- LC}* q:f c.rt lcf'' vt qrr(Jc:J.€d ci =t(l] E r (tl r tr __j' IE l(l ri- F ACl \F rf) (FJ rr- T* C) q! qc, trl g! c,D lf) Fu f*- tf) {.o (c} o u.l 'F-.ft) Rl-' F F+Fe* C e fn' (o o Ll- .!r. \F TIL c!', !- IE .il-OOG O -G tfI f,r;Crq=rO s (rl (+ .e €Jf'"J 1l? o o u, - 'tr -E e c EL r- IE TI I c/l TI LE qOJ TI L 6 :: q.} (J 0) o) m En .g qfi (t' -: rf, ([}t u, (tl o0 E "F- r{_ E 1t}, 0j tr.rl(l)qJ -g O E r: t!7 tvE (I' (J tL) ([) L \---r Ccl (N E Ea. .-a r[ R g)E c L It) o s{l ? .!tr E ld rJ,, +{t \v l- :t o _c : r (l) - t) (E' (-} h (tl : o #..tr II E_U IE Fl-/r c) (g tu =IE E T} c tr tl, cl 1-- rfl B- VJ {1.} -= !-. (r, Eirf: : ftt (u E r.fl 3 PE --.J_r w ul .-- c'- (J " E ilEH r- tsru rf Fs) o) -i.jftT ru € EfiT ([l itr Ff '|J o_h : E .= c: L (> c *o FO :f .tr o,:t r iFr {l) {tr otr ht E6 EJ .- -i5 rf F(n (t} {lJ E -6h) EI =b rt.} tt t_^ Ll- (tE (FT L{- rtl r+-o= ___J E (f, {J 5 lqrl c {--. r-- o*= di .|tttt {t) () '=_ E e) _(f,t F-C' (/) (J g) u(tt E.g l- F 5Jq =Ff, =ftt b # o) if -.- I O tt) drl EI L) = -l qer{} cq- a (*{L(-)
f*J €fi cO F- r- +f) Ef cl.r c.:l €.:' ffr r-- F- acr o (o (4 1-11 CD (;gt rA? {D # E C.O. qrII G C\l f{- (q o tr o tr q0 o o ul \iF lfj' cr l--- f,r lqF fig II l-l ({f F Ets !\- +.J EF fu L irl r,{f r-- (o ft--(C?- CI (\l I d 9*:- oIE lF lF a{J o{,:' IE L} fl {rD o -rrr-.A iE .s., 'I' q{l} +, IE(ll E-6 {l} L i- q €.} E o E:,: UD= c q E TE ET :V-' O .g t{} q E"hjE- fr- Erd {t} fi_ L_ JI sr H : .; 3- E -g "gHLG- E ff)- ff (ET o E.*G':= E ._* -e ffj .'.) fi rTt h * H *nu r:}- -fft-- (b gE := rrt -(5 +il F E ffi E- {r? E |-r &t ,fl.} o -G ?j E # c c} EEtr:E e = (E rr- fr=b.F= _ect 4 f:_ .r-r-=Ed r=- {J ,gl f,) (-} -G t"t'J-f A E Eg ,[} E ._ *c: E- rf E ]- o 4 +J'$! t7 = F.G c{ o) O ,Al (.L) @ (.t) r r r uJ cr-l ui o, e{ o c{ \ a c{ Yo C.l O) e-l O aO |r) f'- aO O) r CDEfm(OOC{oOcr}(O(!C{- o \ s- !n- cf- oq fo- \ q q. oq. o N f\l (r) F 'f)-C{ C\l F CD cll fn 0} L _ C! 1r1 f_ _(\ JI {J ETI tr og x IJJI FI C\ \- (\t C1-) (Y) e) fl} q) (f) \it- \F IIJ rrl OCi r-* 0.) 1\ (o \t- OO O, c, O \1" \ t-. (D Ct (r) !- F (c} F- tr) (\ ()) u' {,H F- Nt-Lf; FY* tr TI+f IE u0) L (tr a E ,}j E o Ut G) @ v, lu g (u ''9 c q) o E o : ''6 arf C) 6 E . (} () O) o := o_ e (.t= o P $t rl. . :oA F >< C, OJ C. ul # x a OJ lrJ '.= o b, o o $ : o- u L E1 o. (trt iJ oI (I) '"5 $ a L o g '. E E(t .E a (u L 'tr L uJ (l) o rt) {J o .(E : c : TI $ 'c (s CI_ \. L 0) x0) I- E'od {l) o o r) .rt *t o o r: o-:t l -; ..(') () (J B cl E o- o_ I (t) {t) o () 0) o J od L o C) o c E ft F .ll-' o" @:di o .E c a .g o 'Ll.i 'p PJE .g E u o J E (u -j=o f o v) .+o E $(D € u CI q r= s E LU ! TU L rS 'i6 llJ a- ofr o +, ,g E-UE O od cI c ES J IJ E od $ JnI! E E (u l- .o = (l)q E o E o = z' -E (u - (J E L $ 0) 0) rt o a o E (tr (} o o ,s E 0) o atE o .-o.= L rr (} l- a b # o o. o r,E ttr(l)(l) (.) E c o U o trFE-E o o>r] f ]J' f (Q r.(} l{? {\| r-l|-? l!? CE} (:t> rk.,{-{ F_ eLi_! c5 (= .qr c: m qt c.?_- cO_- fr_ \t- rfj_ O)_ f{ ts-: C\t-r cc| Er-_ r]r) € €r l{? C-*J -_(5r F f\.1 LtJf,tr-!-.ri'{,:\- or f{ !--f C} + ET ct
o #@& @&e+e+ffi+ffi U* {J ,(;q (v) -IE o go o L -Hrfi (:ttt I CJ *f qt (, E (J r.Lrg, IE #E L fltEF_E -Gt rf rv rJt *. -CE (l, '= :> tr c..L{} LJF o Edt (J .ii _g a Efi #trJ)L EI Hg a Eg oo E -rr $ o tfl t- +,a rar =f o) $ o- o,g t-U) J a o +, .9 .== c lz o E C) $ - - (,= o o) _oE J c t IFLF- o) +, I c c t- o - o f =$ o dE J (, o_ m O o o o o o F +, o $sFEH$ oG N @ c L H o o +t rF o o .FJc o (- *,o c) o o o q)a tr o l- 3 o o- o '= CL q uJ (-O f E x Oo +,I o IIJ L l- Ea +,(E o' 5! +,a *L., a a tr .+aE ct) -c II +t (, EEN9 .= c TI E o I OA?,9;g -J E o cL./.= E (o I = tr o e,i h g E - l- {r, o r EE cD '--'y r o 'l r 16 F -- O--o u) o F(UrrsLt o p 6 8 o (U E ^H$EHa E O E od !D E o o i,-rc,. = o- +, (U o < (u a o .=aE r; += = E o q H LI E, * II (sE.g od g *, o- o E o t-o L vt,q6 i5 F 6 6 UJ t L tr I rL L = (E E8-g€.=.q +, E E T 5 ,fr E Fo oc -c (U -co .-r ,=(U @ 6=o IL I E= 5e o_o b Y N.= O-q- # -c .--zo .Yt 'E tr .^(ot_)=6 (-)obE aE Y@r o o o (u-b E >]f o\1 A o Se E 9 a o o' +t -'E o IE cq o fiEE tr OOt: Xcc IE g hJGN ir!qca F e q-> o'= o) =g oAo a g o S E E b .sb II f $9 O -c$o # c) y): -a -o_^-EL \- .= IE a\t-J ;i\t/ o-\\- L_ E b s 6.e L U)EFT .= l- #' o lF g =-cE:co tr EE $ geE I 9Y= c) o h o-g b E J9run r O6:e >'= L E;e 6 #t o sEs IJ o sgE H .e .YOL3E c E cu c O-O =Pl-^o> b t u= o E= U E o a a I \Fcocu o E c Eg,$5u5 o oXc) II m.YG fl LIE n?, = o .gsa\o E ioo IIo o+'> tr 3e o 2g Es (, EE F6 I IE E HE *fi TI r1r a () E $!e 'oo) tr '+' a..Y '- $ +. IE tr P E? e E TI e L .E = L FE f; o c -ocE; ft t gs gE € *f F l o r Ee E g : Fg H H>F3 O<8 -E 6 dE 6 a o o o o a ot- -o E o .l-, c E o o) c c E o ,{-, E #, (u c (U G o t, E -o q c (u .a o o -g) c # E iio (u o f *, E t-o c) CL G o +, o o a o) x E (J o t-o c o o o- 'l l- E (E o z c 1-a t- c $ c I o- o $ o o (E .9 -c #t o o) a $ $ @ c a E a c= o #, o c o = CL o- o- f U) o a Lo o 'l o c € o c o i- o CL o o t- c o- c *, (U +t o O o (J (u -o o) .l-, +t (E c '-a o .9 a l- E C) '== o +, G= t- rL 'cc c -o c I o (U o f f o 'lc C) t- t- t rL o q) m o F F tF a o o a a o o a -c+t .g= -c ca o +t (U t-o ,Ar E o) hfl c tr o =o1- (, !t '$ Y o :o .= E cu .9 o I o E q o 1- o E- o o o .F' o)o fl E t- c(U (UQ o +,G) fl .9 +, E I o l- sg x G (U= rF,o o o (u -c LL^9 z o (U o CL -o 9o l-o otr o_ J- J- CL t-F ,^f *, o_ u J (J o a= eo (E a l- o o-c *, 'l.F () oa tr o o o t- -Oo (J z o_ a a =so = O O O O O O N N N (o (o ro I I I O) (r) O) N N N cn cn cn LN rn LN O O O D N N tr TIo fl -- G P E .2 L (u a-(J rFo o tr -J CL I lE ln *, Lo 6 {., () -J CL ,2 IE o (u fl Y a- tr uog o I .I o o I vo CL (, ttt =o .C- o- P o o CL -(U g CL C Y .I (J o tn .E V a- -P (E -J C (tr o o (u o- u0 T' o. o- l- C o. o a- t c o |t) J Appendix 3 to CAO2019-08 c TIo rF Tts, o +,ct G G q, o a F= c) S9ru qt L --- L* \"8 o- t-- L {*-i I .9 .d o, I E s#ffi 'E Cl, =*- o c#;* oa - (J = o .q ct) o- E & g o- E II (J I o '= I o TI o- o m (s o t a-\ I lns l \-o"/ ftl ot- o oaO r+,r- -agIC G' G fiqt- FR e II +,fr))E l- +lI - Frr 8 J E:-I - - - o g-H- -g E !E.l- -q ct) rF- .9 o .O l-=a:-l-L E F o- (! '6 b EP b .Fl- o- o-E o- t*o o- o_o_=o_ o (! oo-o oc ooo lilLfli)t o'f E a 0) 6) ul E o E # ()o) c t,lL tr o LJ?:EO ol J E {0 .9\ .g) 6 ah fiF!F E EF gH o A o,o 6 e e(JF z Eo(!O Pv, o ESF io cctr $ fi o- >/ -L 0 (r, X.c o & 'E6b,9 O:::fP'* 0. E ; sE* uJ rtgg' Foa) E, PSPn th g'EE* 6F:a tr $F s E # o {.1o gE< o EnJ E G o t*:fi E ac n fifit ltJ rF = E YftJ9OE O b{ E.s) o b'E * { e42 E N a! EFE;L-A\lU c:9pE c J o uJ .g 6 6' E' gEfiE fiEspEE*e rPE' E E,gEEE,SEg- * g o .=rE-@ .gF.=ho.:Jon s E $E ii r ? rL fi o c y (')fi E jj o o 8 a EE E lll t- $F;s E i; 5 t SE e E&8,b9F55 qo- F aiatl- ?*f r 6 gJ ED o *. u rFo z o rg 5 x o. @ o L rl.l t c tn r! o- € (0 ) x E c + o (n sf o $E Ffn fn c SS q rr}, tE $ F{ € ooG $r a SE F{ _o o'=q= o e NI u) {r} c+ o E F oq 0( + o -O t-{ {., HS lt o a s L €b o ul 1r\ g pI .9 (J tn tt E8 E fn o r(l -o :f a OB) Elf CD -g o- o O.hc o @ o =.s-o P\ I ul o EEE o Et .g (g o" o.= o l- N o_ =o o S HH E '6 (, J A. u a E HE L iPb o- '= F.{ O} \ c z E o> o '{/l c !4 a- (U+C E E *EH f 5(Jb\J\ (J J € E" U -Fo iD:i- CD (4o(J O F t ,ggi :,/,i\ L Lo o IE d)i= A E Ir-i '5 o- ata EO.= k Ito S-qP o o- J rF E;.EE.h'= ln s H F; L tr c .= r.t c' ;EP * ss o- o o qREd o0)c t- L 9 :=Es Q-5rS:R o L- = t- (s E :EEi x E Ffo $ d>Q .d z o letgtgagFE 'd.s E +f .E 6EE Eq '= o'< *, f {.1 ? c 96'=JL.- cLi; g g feF E o 5 FE E E $ E P E :$$E o o o ?t?,t0 =b !EE P SSPE-) +, +, @ g, 6 0) E o ul q) c E : F (J o ol.hc E o 5e ctr E Fe o E IJJ Z- at o;lE = o #E u, if.(l) $ -(Jl- F,g i c Eo 2 E .-s' rsg' g &s o ;>'F I :o ccC fi & eic,a R 'E6b.9 0 {t o,al8* : gF cL E ; SHB lt =*Fe 'iF o u) g)LEnr A e, s?pn !, .='Xccl*o ort d .Lj 6F*r: tr .F Sges cl o gt<= o E Ltl rg .r El b 9re6= U $g-g,eEe s N €#E; E EF;gE gEEgs J @ fiE€ il. E : *+8fr E ,535 g o T 9EF.E g cb 6 't! .St Et ?.'E fi t T n a s sE li E? giAs 8 .118.=hO.!lOiE.E'E P H,Ei.8 € .E H AEE E rg L S s Pidfizfl55 a. F td.;H t e: E ?*Tr 6 t, = gJ Et (, (J rFo 2 o (! o- o tro a. .g tr x E E o o e o 'g o F t, Io TE ct L c o o EL l= l- 4- o o o- o o .Ec o= f c o tt.9) iE tr =t =i o ugoo=6 c e E + F{ U' osf IIJ {r} s (J rn t, fn = cro tn o ol/)c CN E 'Fc$ UJ o E o- b.e o u, o- o-.= (9 aJ .,g H; 7/ ro 6ha.d.- (J- (E*;c ; *E -I tu € E'= E =E* o:T- (E (I)Fa e 2 EE -.- o +, rx(o.=A =ur(l,-Ll o- @ gE = g -H; J fl fr t c o(t)Ei= I I o sEE I F .€Eo g E 'E q{ tsgtfiP*ggF if,r* F E H 'rsX ()Tt z, o EEE E+ '= (l)'=E |E L- 3 {r, 96'= cL6 o g Egs*Egggtg =rv'g I = o ?+? A =b* I t o .() E o- 'Efi '5 o (LlL o (d o /"N \"o/ 1- g kl bJCL 13() = dt tt1 o l4l *E L' aJt (!t L9 r! s g =J z. d.= = LIJ rn= =a/t H € (l trJ (.) g !I d v a- =U C' 4 o ca tl.! t{, g. CJ E TRANStrARENT lJl l+, F 6i OZ U1 ur) O (-) tJ O Lrl L' tr IJ a + Lrl O e =O O tn F qF F - c, 2 o- L Ld O =4 O J gJ Ed =(} CL =:f \-l CJ g J i\J (-J tJE < tJ.4 = -t 2 ttt = (.) F(f F E. = o 6- = I I B (5 -r =VJ =CD :o,O F mE t! G ?- E U1 T- a i!=L< Lrl IJJ I e tu HE IEF tJ', *. Lr- <- ,<= I >- L! _t J () TI >- c-< tra EEn E#H o- 'N& o- tgEE= LTJ LJ e5 v') g ei O h& un EO tJ1 m = tJ <(/) HEg = a- (J = { o- =HH o- UIVJ *-H J Ll.lrI o D o u = .() E E J o- EE- _E 6 F- rS =! "6 Lr.t 8- hHd .FF Ei= (9 g Hc=E _H 2 :E- J) o. - ffi o u:u w L- z.* O (d 5IJ -E, d F J _H E o m @ ,a fLcr)oq Lg' o Ia ealn o o !t o p F-q # E o) (!o c lt E Efi $ E P :g .9. a @ (1, o 8.gfl o o- l- E ggE E + -o .^- N (o tE 6 o.(/) E' E E o- o.=2- od +: 8- Ee b 8_ o :0 a=i c fr trF 3 gq b.', *9tro_ CJ :l eE OL q, E Itsb 5 5e6 sFEs 'EO V,E gGO- o o g:i e_ ?E q .vt 6 J b gE t rl ,ll -PII t, t- -OOct €5 fr E'u Bc pE I .o.o tl * *, O.9F(!v -g,a"e- ob _e.3;8 F (t ot> aP $I E.E o 95 EE.:E- a E a a E; t' rsF e-c ;l s;5 o o Eg EE;o ; 9TI FHPtr'= (J o th 6,l $ E E€ EE E3.ggf;€ O 3l Eo- + I := o rl 6 E a a a a o g= (tr E - 5l Ec El CL o + E PE; TI EI B H9 ol .9*r=r -c{F-o C) rrll :Aa y II U,I al Eg 5l 8t s =:ml =:A G ol gp€ Esl 5n€ ol 6 ap' a ? J \t F€ g6 g 8l e, .e - eO) 6g,E € I 68 ::I rl gHf; g EsEo -Jl g *.8; t.s SI fiE oXP Ee.= E =l I E 5 = r-I d' Y! =l ol g O E'FN o- L (' trE ='- -.6 5qr^ EE'.= b oo st=l cn oo- {t) o- e fr--ti gl r .g E oa .g ol E=iE o=EqaHIg 9)rtr Y (l,c c ts E rl o sFE0E L o- o a.l o 9 : g o .A V, G' HEE .gs E c fi o .fib:€3;g irt :g b o "6 ct) o'E m ; -E+s o p a EO Eo* 6EN E R 3 b L '= oo) oe = o_ o - FO EE gE * L o E*gE F E o- ct :o9,8 EgHE HF S E o _gE"E g $ i 8 b ==OO = o a a a a Yo"/latri\ +,c; (U CU t- c +,a c:f P'? .= q, o'aP F r> Ec (J = (U II tloY E'a h 'o(u (1, *8F t- = o C" 8eFt\ 14 E E q, -(Ul-(U 0-o o .e,9 O o CN o o-F ct I a gE - - m .=Frbq o-t €> I trjoro=tL CA coo c 8Ef= 83fr o AI- - II l-, - c, oor,- *, F1- - E qeg E '- ;$ E nc< II 'E-eoE (uF qr OE o e d o 7ro o '> o o(U\., +J - Ef E b5g +, .Ac o = E C t- O- .c) CD ::o$0 -gl,ng E u.> rt- o-= o- C 8:E o= Ea (s T- '6 o \JE,\oo .Fc I =Eho-== EE-8. II o - *, th e:9:g L Fot-r o- HE85F5 lLt \L/r- = o m a FJJ'r\CC o (U CL ;o (d m E> o dh- ol- L =I o- @ o o 3o 3, E r-lol c ol o 6€€ #lF" F -cl (U ol D @ .Ar al f =Eo ol o CN trl 83 $'gEl x I (Ul (u :q g lJ- cl o E e E el d .el c) Hl C) EI r- ? v ^e v ol E .9 R.P ol o N q, ol E =;: r-lol o C.) ol TI -c a .9 EsitEe r o .-,=; g E = q, (U = o- (U= q; ggs$ CN :a o *E L c F== s€i = Q) Efi l{ro oao a I I rtr CJ (o LO I o @ E l- il - G' F a T' € t- tt o o o *, oo o= I F =oo5 q) .9- o.= a .O o LL E = o-S O o- ct) o- .F ,6(! U'= o'! lJ. q '5 o =- r o II tF il lb I5 o- m o rf-o o = s !- -(E o (! rlJo o o F o {'rt*r}t o-l c 'o o F (t) 5 G) a rF' cO o I F a .=a+. +, o ct) =.90) o, l-F a +85 L\- c og o C)6N - a o ca) t lt (J!a o q)- (JXl.\ ^o) o IJJ trqo=i- o @nicO (JV $YOc o(/) o =F; CJ -o'- $ tJl lJ- P'S F =$5 uD - o o-d a o o 'E_alO q, e Ehfi - t q7.,q- IIJ FFb\-a- ,^r G t xo^.9 E'-\4 t, I- .Yr a 'dp .u IJJ o G$ T F o cOe.= IIJ 6 +, b: P a o =qu''@xo) )ao'= tr -O- o a =LlrL ct- I-tkcu o OO m ooHO IJ. '-o o a : E'=p @ T)(l)- o- () F J o)o a €E**E J (t) I o g h,€E Pro= o o b3 (tr t F CL IIJ =F=€Eu(uOL,tr 8 II -! o.= = o C) F -e=d8 TI o G JI I =o- o .g o- E (L o 'sfi '= c') o o- o o- I- (d ct o IrtA Yo',/ #to .- - t- o E CN o o- tn o) (u IJ.) o o- rn o)ts CJ 1t> Fl CU L ES o LJ At '-(o rl NH- o@ c sf 1t> +) Rc; th cn o ;E rn (J 0Jo rn '=3 (n oqo o) C') F I F o- o- o F o c) = GJ LCJ I oJ q)a E, IJJ ::, r.cF hf--h6{]r .=uFi:^.V tu c nt C = b qr: E *^ * * 6 Lf 5E oU frL E A -J CoC-:5 =^ 'oEC.- -.J n N L/ a = .Yli L, ! C C tn m g b o g (u :tr;e 4 o, "ab*il] := *7 a a z, bI tn t- ry F* (o 5 Etiq d o S[Ec c o =k E B A tn OJ .q o t- Eteu - ItEsE3 ELrtr 55E o o ; r]c I :L F,",9* .FO LJ \J o (u o .H 'rP u,5* F* ;: -:E a,.) o o ru i 5g ng _rb 5E E E I -o o t- nsr|[email protected] (o 6 O O O? A1 O= T]E ; i J o o E. .! N NLJ NLJ f{4 fr= L C- - o (J rts E (o o cbI :q .g CL c c E I : o o- q, -o E (J (U (It (I' (o '6 I (J q q '5l- I Fci o' o LLI o o t-o Zo o o o- Ei o LU5 ; ; l- F3 3 {-,G z.= = c I J t = = I o j :,*I t I i @ rt: iI (g CJ cL'-t ,. oo-cL 'o e)cD= -l slF .==-l -I2 I t.i =o-xo- t =o --8o @ '-qgg.YclFO rr =REo-ooF O5oo-Ag 'ci'5 3 = g 'G-o = E'i36 IJJ () I! .t Appendix 4 to CAO2019-08 di- Ontario Police o.F.P. Municipal Policing Bureau Provincial provinciale Bureau des services policiers des municipalit6s Police de l'Ontario 777 Memorial Ave. 777, avenue Memorial Orillia ON L3V 7V3 Orillia ON L3V 7V3 Tel: 705 329-6200 Tel. : 705 329-6200 Fax: 705 330-4191 Tdl6c.: 705 330-4191 File Reference: 612-2.0 September 24,2018 Dear CAO/Treasurer, Please find attached the OPP municipal policing 2019 Annual Billing Statement package. This year's billing package includes a statement for the 2017 year-end reconciliation. The final cost adjustment calculated as a result of the 2017 annual reconciliation has been included as an adjustment to the amount being billed to the municipality during the 2019 calendar year. The OPPA Uniform and Civilian Collective Agreements expire on December 31, 2018 and negotiations are undenvay for the next agreement. Estimated salary rates incorporated in the 2019 municipal policing annual statements are set to reduce the risk of municipalities potentially incurring significant reconciliation adjustments. A 1.9% general salary rate inciease has been estimated based on current trends of municipal policing salaries. The final reconciliation of the 2019 annual costs will be included in the 2021Annual Billing Statement. For more detailed information on the 2019 Annual Billing Statement package please refer to resource material available on the internet, www.opp.calbillinqmodel. Further, the Municipal Policing Bureau will be hosting a webinar intormation session in October. An e-mail invitation will be forwarded to the municipality advising of the session date. lf you have questions about the Annuar Biiling statement please e-mail O.PP. M PB. Fi nancial. Serviges. U nit@O pp. ca Yours truly, M.M. (Marc) Bedard Superintendent Commander, Municipal Policing Bureau OPP 2019 Annual Billing Statement Mono T Estimated cost for the period January 1 to December 31, 2019 Please refer to www.opp.ca for 2019 Municipal Policing Billing General lnformation summary for further details. Cost per Property Total Cost s s Base Service Property Counts Household 3,339 COmmercial and lndustrial 716 Total Properties 3,455 189.54 554,861. Calls for Service (see summaries) Total all municipalities L56,779,914 Municipal portion 0.2413% 109,51 379,362 Overtime (see notes) 12.22 42,219 Contract Enhancements (pre-2015) (see summary) 27.58 95,296 Prisoner Transportation (per property cost) 2.27 7,843 Accommodation/Cleaning Services (per property cost) 4,90 16,930 Total 2019 Estimated Cost 346.O2 1,195,510 Year Over Year Variance (estimate for the year is not subject to phase-in adjustment) 2018 Estimated Cost per Property 347.41 2019 Estimated Cost per Property (see above) 346.02 Cost per Property Variance (Decrease) 1.39 2017 Year-End Adjustment (see summary) (13,379) Grand Total Billing tor 2019 t,7g2,t3L 2019 Monthly Billing Amount 98,511 OPP 20L9 Annual Billing Statement Lof18 OPP 2019 Annual Billing Statement Mono T Estimated cost for the period January 1 to Decembe r 3L,20L9 Notes to Annual Billing Statement 1) Municipal Base Services and Calls for Service Costs - The costs allocated to municipalities are determined based on the costs assigned to detachment staff performing municipal policing activities across the province. A statistical analysis of activity in detachments is used to determine the municipal policing workload allocation of all detachment-based staff as well as the allocation ofthemunicipal workloadbetweenbaseservicesandcallsforserviceactivity. For20lgbillingpurposestheallocationofthe municipalworkloadindetachmentshasbeencalculatedtobe56.2%BaseServicesand43.S%CallsforService. Thetotal 2019Base Services and Calls for Service cost calculation is detailed on the Bose 5e rvices and Calls for Service Cost Summory included in the municipal billing package. 2) BaseServices-Thecosttoeachmunicipalityisdeterminedbythenumberof propertiesinthemunicipalityand thestandard province-wide average cost per property of S189.54 estimated for 2et9, The number of municipal properties is determined based on MPAC data' The calculation of the standard province-wide base cost per property is detailed on Bose Services and Calls for Service Cost Summory included in the municipal billing package, 3) CallsforService-Themunicipality'sCallsforServicecostisaproportionateshareof thetotal costof municipal callsforservicecosts calculated forthe province. A municipality's proportionate share of the costs is based on weighted time standards applied to the historical callsforservice, Themunicipality'stotal weightedtimeiscalculatedasapercentageofthetotalofall municipalities, 4) - Overtime Municipalities are billed for overtime resulting from occurrences in their geographic area and a portion of overtime that is not linked specifically to a municipality, such as training. Municipalities are not charged for overtime identified as a provincial responsibility. Theovertimeactivityforthecalendaryears2014,2Ol5,2Ot6and2OtT hasbeenanalyzedandaveragedtoestimate the 2019 costs. The costs incorporate the estimated 20L9 salary rates and a discount to reflect overtime paid as time in lieu. The overtime costs incurred in servicing detachments for shift shortages have been allocated on a per property basis based on straight time. Please be advised that these costs will be reconciled to actual 2019 hours and salary rates and included in the 2021 Annual Billing Statement. 5) Court Security and PrisonerTransportation (CSPT)- Municipalities with court security responsibilities in local courthouses are billed courtsecuritycostsbasedonthecostofthestaffrequiredtoprovidedesignatedcourtsecurityactivities.20Lgcostshavebeen based on 2017 security activity. Prisoner transportation costs are charged to all municipalities based on the standard province-wide per property cost. These costs will be reconciled to the actual cost of service required in 2019, The Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services (MCSCS) has not finalized the 20L9 municipal grant allocations and therefore the grant allocation has not been included in the annual billing statements. Municipalities will be notified of their 2019 grant allocation in the fall of 2018 and the 2019 municipal CSPT grants will be credited to municipalities in 2019, 25% in February and the remainder by 5eptember. Please note that a review of 2018 reconciled costs will need to be compared to the actual grant allocated for 20L8, lf the grant amount is more than the reconciled costs, an adjustment will be made to your 20i.9 grant allocation. 6) Year-end Adjustments -The 2017 adjustment accounts for the difference between the amount billed (excluding grants and revenue) based on the estimated cost in the Annual Billing Statement and the reconciled cost in the Yeqr-end Summory . Allcosts in the Annual Billing Ststement have a salary component, The delay in the settlement of the 2015 to 2018 OPpA Uniform and Civilian CollectiveAgreementsresultedinanestimateof the20lTgeneral salaryrateincrease. Theactualweightedaveragecostof a uniform FTE decreased slightly (0.6%) from the estimated rate. The salary rate reconciliation impact on the cost of Base Services and CallsforServicecostsofthemunicipalityisminimal, Themostsignificantyear-endadjustmentsareresultingfromthecostof actual versusestimatedmunicipal requirementsforovertime,contractenhancementsandcourtsecurity. Thesecostsarereconciled considering not only salary and benefit rate updates but also the extent of service provided during the year. OPP 2019 Annual Billing Statement 2ofL8 OPP 2019 Estimated Base Services and Calls For Service Cost Summary For the Period January 1 to December 31, 2019 Total Base Services Salaries and Benefits and Base Calls for Base Calls for Service Services Service Uniform Members (Note 1) tTE s lnspector 25.77 100.0 1.58,283 953 4,078,953 Staff Sergeant-Detachment Commander tL4t 100.0 141,618 1,615,861 1,61s,861 Staff Sergeant 32.05 100.0 1i2,790 4,235,690 4,236,690 Sergeant 222.66 56.2 118,511 26,387,6s9 14,823,356 11,564,303 Constables 1,809.53 55.2 100,708 r82,234,r47 102,367,668 79,866,479 Part Time Constables. 5.44 s6.2 Total Uniform Salaries 2,106.86 t27,367,887 97,62t,618 statutory Holiday Payout , .:- 3,s64 7,489,461 4,315,256 3,174,205 Shift Premium 685 L,395,777 784,065 617,772 Benefits (Fulltim 28.Q9%, part-time e tnsp. 27.06%, t4.73%l ., ...... 6 846 a1 Total Uniform Salaries & Benefits Detachment Civilian Members (Note t) Court Officer. 15.57 56.2 65,648 1,022,739 574,420 447,719 Detachment Administrative Clerk. , . . 173.t4 56.2 64,693 71,200,946 6,292,041 4,908,905 Detachment Clerk Typist 0.44 56.2 57,362 25,239 14,347 10,899 Detachment Operations Clerk , . . L,67 56.2 63,077 105,339 (o ?of 46,046 Crime Stopper 0.81 56.2 729 27 Total Detachment Civilian Salaries 191.63 72,402,392 6,967,767 Benefits (26,10% of Salaries) , . .3,237,024 !,81?,187 1,4!q,$7 Total Detachment Civilian Salaries & Benefits 81,1X.3 L5,639,4L6 8,786,354 6,853,062 Support Staff (Salaries and Benefits) (Note 2l Communication Operators 6,564 13,829,429 7 ,967,7L7 s,86t,7t8 Prisoner Guards . 1.,715 3,613,265 2,08!,753 t,53L,5I2 0perational Support . 4,642 9,780,044 5,634,692 4,745,352 RHQ Municipal Support 2,477 5,218,692 3,006,706 2,2L1,986 Telephone Support ,122 257,037 148,090 108,947 Office Automation Support 644 1,356,818 781,719 575,098 Mobileand Portable RadioSupport,...,., 168,313 L88 3?7,17? 228t779 _ Total Support Staff Salaries and Benefits 3:44412'3e7 Le'84e'!Zo 11,102,e47 Total Salaries & Benefits 339,380,420 196,805,859 t42,574,561 Other Direct Operating Expenses (Note z) Communication Center. . 782 383,449 220,921 162,528 Operational Support 6JJ I,708,663 984,432 724,237 Rl'1Q Munigip3l Support 232 488,792 281,613 207,t78 Telephone 1,373 2,892,719 1,666,616 r,226,103 Mobile Radio Equipment Maintenance . . , . 163 344,305 198,356 t45,949 Office Automation - Uniform 2,1.40 4,508,680 2,597,639 t,9tt,o4L Office Automation - Civilian 1,685 322,897 t8r,407 t41,489 Vehicle Usage 8,3s7 17,594,388 10,136,851 7,457,527 Detachment Supplies 539 1,13s,598 654,265 481,332 Uniform & Equipment 1.,944 4,706,313. 2,365,673 L,740,638 Uniform & EquipmentCourtofficer,..,.., 929 14.465 8,729 6.336 Total Other Direct Operating Expenses 33.500.26s 19,295,913 L4,204,?52 Total 2019 Municipal Base Services and Calls for Service Cost 372,880,686 2L6,L07,772 \56,779,914 properties Total OPP-Policed Municipal T,LAO,LLz Base Services Cost per Property s189.54 OPP 2019 Estimated Base Services and Calls For Service Cost Summary 3of18 OPP 2019 Estimated Base Services and Calls For Service Cost Summary For the Period January 1 to December 31, 2019 Notes Total Base Services and Call for Service Costs are based on the cost of salary, benefit, support and other direct operating expenses for staff providing policing services to municipalities. Staff is measured in full-time equivalent (FTE) units and the costs per FTE are described in the notes below. 1) Full-time equivalents (FTEs) are based on average municipal detachment staffing levels for the years 2014 through 2017. Contract enhancements, court security, prisoner transportation and cleaning staff are excluded. The equivalent of 89.03 FTEs with a cost of 514,357,486 has been excluded from municipal costs to reflect the average municipal detachment FTEs required for provincially-mandated responsibilities eligible for Provincial Service Usage credit. Salary rates are based on weighted average rates for municipal detachment staffing by rank, level and classification. The 2019 salaries were estimated based on the 2018 rates set in the 2015 to 201.8 QPFA Uniform and Civilian Collective Agreements with an estimated overall general salary rate increase of 1S%for 2019 applied. The benefit rates are based on the most recent rates set by the Treasury Board Secretariat, (201.8-19). Salary rates, Statutory Holiday Payouts, Shift Premiums, and Benefit costs are subject to reconciliation. FTEs have been apportioned between Base Services and Calls for Service costs based on the current ratio, 56.2%Base Services : 433% Calls for Service. 2) Support Staff Costs and Other Direct Operating Expenses for uniform FTES are calculated on a per FTE basis as per rates set in the 2018 Municipal Policing Cost-Recovery Formula. OPP 20L9 Estimated Base Services and Calls For Service Cost Summary 4of18 OPP 2019 Calls for Service Billing Summary Mono T Estimated cost for the period January I to December 31, 2019 Calls for Service Count 20L9 Total % olTotal 2019 Estimated Calls for Service Billing Four Year Average Weighted Provincial Calls for Workgroups 2014 2015 2016 20L7 Average Time Time Weighted Service Cost Standard Time A B C=A*B (Note 1) (Note 3) Drug Possession L 9 9 13 8 6.4 51 0.00320/o 5,003 Drugs 2 1 L 2 2 37.0 56 0.0035% 5,423 Operational 361 373 396 409 385 3.6 r-,38s 0,0863% 13s,338 Operational 2 310 778 251 26A 275 1.3 3s7 4.0223% 34,900 Other Criminal Code Violations L1. 15 15 t4 L4 7.9 109 0.0068% 1,0,61_4 Property Crime Violations 82 138 158 109 122 6.8 828 0.0516% 80,894 Statutes & Acts 63 87 51 51 63 3,3 208 0.0130% 20,3t4 Trafflc 140 L47 135 135 139 3,4 473 A.A29s% 46,26r Violent Criminal Code 25 20 29 28 26 15.9 405 0.0253o/o 39,616 Total 995 L,068 1,045 L,A2t 1,032 3,872 0,24t?o/o 378,362 ProvincialTotals (Note4) 381,258 363,779 364,615 368,L94 369,462 1,604,533 100,0% 156,778,974 Notes to Calls for Service Billing Summary L) Showing no decimal places, for billing purposes the exact calculated numbers have been used 2) Showing 4 decimal places here, for calculations 9 decimal places have been used 3) Costs rounded to 0 decimals 4) Provincial Totals exclude data for both municipal dissolutions and amalgamations OPP 20L9 Calls for Service Billing Summary 5of18 This page intentionally left blank OPP 2019 Calls for Service Billing Summary 6of18 OPP 2019 Calls for Service Details Mono T For the Calendar Years 2014 to 20L7 Calls for Service Count Four Year Calls for Service Billing Workgroups 2014 2015 20L6 20L7 Average Grand Total 995 1,068 1,045 L,A2r. 1,032.25 Drug Possession 1 9 9 13 8.00 Drug Related Occurrence 0 2 t 2 1,25 Possession - Cannabis 7 7 8 10 6.50 Possession - Other Controlled Drugs and Substances Act 0 0 0 t 0.25 Drugs 2 7 t 2 1.50 Production - Cannabis (Marihuana) (Cultivation) 0 1 0 0 0.25 Trafficking - Cannabis 0 0 0 2 0.50 Trafficking - Heroin 0 0 1. 0 0.25 Trafficking - Other Controlled Drugs and Substances Act 2 0 0 0 0.s0 0perational 361 373 396 409 384.75 Accident - non-MVC - Construction Site 0 0 I 0 0.2s Accident - non-MVC - lndustrial 1 0 1 T 0.75 Accident - Non-MVC - Others 0 0 t 0 0.25 Accident - non-MVC - Residential 0 1 0 0 0.25 Alarm - Master Code 3 8 5 T2 7.0Q Alarm - Others 5 8 4 21 9,50 2 Animal - Dog Owners Liability Act 2 1, t L75 Animal - Left in Vehicle 0 2 1 0 0.75 Animal - Master Code '1, 2 1 0 1,00 Animal - Other 10 3 L0 7 7.5Q Animal Bite 0 0 2 2 1.00 Animal lnjured 7 7 2 4 5.00 Animal Rabid t 0 0 3 1.00 Animal Stray 7 8 6 3 6.00 Assist Fire Department 8 7 8 3 6,50 Assist Public 68 69 90 127 88.50 By-Law - Master Code 0 2 0 0 0.s0 Compassionate Message 3 L 0 0 1.00 Distressed / Overdue Motorist 1, 0 0 t 0,50 Dogs By-Law 1 0 0 0 0,25 Domestic Disturbance 26 25 27 47 3r,25 False Fire Alarm - Building 0 4 L 7 1.50 Family Dispute 27 23 28 19 24.25 Fire - Building 4 1. 5 7 4.25 Fire - Other 1 1 5 t 2.00 Fire - Vehicle 0 3 3. 2 1.50 Fire Alarm - Master Code 0 0 1 0 0.25 Firearms (Discharge) By-Law 0 1 T z 1,00 Found - Household Property 2 0 0 0 0,s0 Found - License Plate 0 t 0 0 0.25 Found - Others t 1. 2 T L.25 Found - Personal Accessories 2 2 1, 2 1,75 Found - Radio, TV, Sound-Reprod, Equip 0 7 U 0 0,25 Found - Sporting Goods, Hobby Equip 0 0 1. 0 0,25 Found - Vehicle Accessories 0 I 0 n 0.25 OPP 2019 Calls for Service Details 7of18 OPP 2019 Calls for Service Details Mono T For the Calendar Years 2014 to 20L7 Calls for Service Count Four Year Calls for Service Billing Workgroups 20L4 2015 2015 20L7 Average Found Property - Master Code 4 6 2 0 3.00 Hawkers & Peddlers By-Law 0 0 0 t 0.25 lnsecure Condition - Building 6 5 t 2 3,50 lnsecure Condition - Vehicle 0 1 0 0 0.25 Lost - Accessible Parking Permit L 0 0 0 0.25 Lost - Computer, parts & accessories 0 0 1. 0 0,25 Lost - Household Property 0 0 1" 0 0.25 Lost - Jewellery 1 0 0 0 0.25 Lost - License Plate 8 2 t L 3,00 Lost - Others 1, 2 0 L 1.00 Lost - Personal Accessories 0 2 1_ 2 1.,25 Lost - Photographic Equipment 0 0 1 U 0.25 Lost - Radio, TV, Sound-Reprod. Equip. 0 0 0 1 0,25 Lost Property - Master Code 0 3 T 0 1.00 Medical Assistance - Master Code 0 0 t 0 0,2s Medical Assistance - Other 0 0 0 1 0.25 Missing Person - Master Code 0 t 0 0 0.25 Missing Person 12 & older 2 4 2 3 2,75 Missing Person Located 12 & older 4 4 4 3 3,75 Missing Person under 12 0 0 2 2 1.00 Neighbour Dispute 9 t4 t2 16 12.75 Noise By-Law 2 t 0 0 0.75 Noise Complaint - Animal t 0 3 2 1,50 Noise Complaint - Business 0 0 0 t 0,25 Noise Complaint - Master Code 0 0 t 0 0,2s Noise Complaint - Others 8 6 5 2 5.25 Noise Complaint - Residence t4 25 tL 5 13,75 Noise Complaint - Vehicle 0 L 1 1 0.75 Other Municipal By-Laws 8 3 A 2 4.25 Phone - Master Code 0 L 3 3 1.75 Phone - Nuisance - No Charges Laid 10 9 6 7 6.50 Phone - Other - No Charges Laid 0 4 1 3 2,00 Protest - Demonstration 0 0 2 0 0.50 Sudden Death - Accidental 0 1 0 0 0,25 Sudden Death - Natural Causes n 3 4 6.25 - Sudden Death Others 0 t 7 1. 0,75 Sudden Death - Suicide 0 0 L 1 0.50 Suspicious Person 32 25 32 30 29.75 Suspicious vehicle 41. 35 68 37 45.25 Traffic By-Law 3 2 7 0 1,50 Trouble with Youth 6 t2 8 8 8.50 Unwanted Persons 6 8 5 6 6,25 Vehicle Recovered - Automobile I 4 1, U 1.50 Vehicle Recovered - Master Code I 1 0 0 0.50 Vehicle Recovered - Trucks 0 0 1 2 0.75 Operational2 310 278 25t 26A 274.75 OPP 20L9 Calls for Service Details 8of18 OPP 2019 Calls for Service Details Mono T For the Calendar Years 2014 to 20L7 Calls for Service Count Four Year Calls for Service Billing Workgroups 20L4 20t5 2016 20L7 Average 911 call - Dropped Cell 0 3 4 10 4.25 911 call / 911 hang up 160 116 103 90 117.25 91L hang up - Pocket Dial 11 13 6 10 10.00 False Alarm - Accidental Trip 50 45 37 34 41,50 False Alarm - Cancelled 30 32 26 24 28.00 False Alarm - Malfunction 33 32 31 32 32.00 False Alarm - Others 8 12 28 44 23.00 False Holdup Alarm - Accidental Trip t 5 1 1, 2.00 False Holdup Alarm - Malfunction 0 t 1" 0 0.50 Keep the Peace 17 19 1"4 15 16,25 Other Criminal Code Violations L1 15 15 t4 73.75 Animals - Cruelty 0 0 1 0 0.25 Animals - Kill or iniure 0 0 0 t 0.25 Bail Violations - Appearance Notice 0 0 0 1, 0.25 Bail Violations - Fail To Complv 4 4 2 3 3,2s Bail Violations - Others 0 1" 0 0 0,2s Bail Violations - Recognizance 0 I 0 0 0,25 Breach of Firearms regulation - Unsafe Storage 0 0 1 n 0.2s Breach of Probation 0 0 I 5 1.50 Counterfeit Money - Master Code 0 0 0 t 0,25 Counterfeit Money - Others 0 0 0 1 0,25 Disobey court order / Misconduct executing process 0 0 1 0 0.25 Disturb the Peace t T 1 1: 1.00 Libel - Defamatory t 0 0 0 0.25 Obstruct Justice / Fabricate Evidence 0 T 0 n 0,2s Obstruct Public Peace Officer 0 7 1 0 0,s0 Offensive Weapons - Other Weapons Offences 0 1, 2 0 0,75 Offensive Weapons - Possession of Weapons 0 0 0 1 0.25 Offensive Weapons - Prohibited 0 L n 0 0.25 Offensive Weapons - Restricted 0 0 7 0 0,2s Possession of Burglary Tools 0 0 1 0 0.25 Prostitution - Other Prostitution 1 0 0 0 0.25 Public Mischief - mislead peace officer 2 L T 0 1.00 Trespass at Night 2 1 1 0 1.00 Utter Threats to damage property 0 I 0 0 0,25 Utter Threats to Property / Animals 0 T 0 0 0.25 Uttering Counterfeit Money 0 0 1, 0 0.25 Property Crime Violations 82 138 158 109 12L.75 Arson - Building 0 0 t 0 0.25 Arson - Others 0 0 1 0 0,2s Break & Enter 1,1. 25 33 27 22.50 Fraud - False Pretence Over 55,000 t 0 0 I 0.s0 Fraud - False Pretence Under 55,000 0 0 3 0 0.75 Fraud - Forgery & Uttering 0 0 0 1. 0.25 Fraud - Fraud through mails 0 1 0 0 0,25 Fraud - Master Code 0 L t 0 0.50 OPP 2019 Calls for Service Details 9of18 OPP 2019 Calls for Service Details Mono T For the Calendar Years 2014 to 2QL7 Calls for Service €ount Four Year Calls for Service Billing Workgroups 20L4 2015 2016 2077 Average Fraud - Money/property/security Over 55,000 L t 3 2 r,75 Fraud - Money/propertv/securitv Under 55,000 0 2 8 10 5.00 Fraud - Other 3 6 9 2 s.00 Fraud - Steal/Forge/Poss./Use Credit Card 0 3 2 0 1.2s ldentity Fraud 0 0 0 I 0.25 lnterfere with lawful use, enjoyment of property 0 3 0 0 0.75 Mischief - Master Code 24 24 34 18 25,00 Mischief Graffiti - Non-Gang Related 7 1 0 0 0.50 Personation with lntent (fraud) 0 0 0 L 0.2s Possession of Stolen Goods over SS,OOO 0 t 0 0 0.25 Possession of Stolen Goods under SS,OOO T 0 U 1 0.50 Property Damage 2 2 7 0 L.25 Theft from Motor Vehicles Over 55,000 0 t 0 I 0.50 Theft from Motor Vehicles Under SS,O0O 8 72 2t 9 12.50 Theft of - All Terrain Vehicles 0 2 2 1 1.25 Theft of - Automobile 1 7 2 2 1,50 Theft of - Motorcycles 0 0 7 0 0.25 Theft of - Other Motor Vehicles 0 0 1, 0 0.25 Theft of - Trucks 0 1 3 0 1,00 Theft of Motor Vehicle 0 5 4 3 3.00 Theft Over S,SOOO - Construction Site 0 0 0 t 0,25 Theft over 55,000 - Boat (Vessel) t 0 n 0 0.25 Theft Over 55,000 - Boat Motor 0 0 1" 0 0.25 Theft over Ss,ooo - Buildine I 0 0 0 0.25 Theft Over 5S,OOO - Master Code 2 T 1, 0 1.00 Theft Over ss,Ooo - Other Theft 0 T 1 0 0,s0 Theft over 55,000 - Trailers t 0 2 0 0,75 Theft Under 55,000 - Bicycles 0 t 1 0 0.50 Theft Under SS,OOO - Boat (Vessel) 0 0 0 L 0.2s Theft Under SS,OOO - Boat Motor 0 1 0 0 0.25 Theft under ss,ooo - Building 0 t t 0 0.s0 Theft Under 55,000 - Construction Site 0 3 0 0 0.75 Theft Under 55,000 - Farnr Agricultural Produce 0 L 0 0 0,25 Theft Under 55,000 - Farm Equipment 0 1. 0 0 0,25 Theft Under 55,000 - Gasoline Drive-off 6 10 6 7.25 Theft Under 55,000 - Master Code 2 2 2 7 7.75 Theft Under Ss,ooo - other Theft L3 27 6 22 L7.00 Theft Under 55,000 - Persons 1. 0 0 0 0.25 Theft Under SS,OOO - Trailers 0 0 t 3 1.00 Thefr under 55,000 shopliftins L t t 1 1.00 Unlawful in a dwelling house 0 0 L 0 0,25 Statutes & Acts 63 87 51 51 63.00 Custody Dispute 0 t 0 0 0,25 Landlord / Tenant 8 10 9 4 7,75 Mental Health Act 8 9 8 6 7,75 Mental Health Act - Attempt Suicide 5 6 T 3 3,75 OPP 2019 Calls for Service Details 10 0f 18 OPP 2019 Calls for Service Details Mono T For the Calendar Years 2014 to 2OL7 Calls for Service Count Four Year Calls for Service Billing Workgroups 2014 20L5 2016 20L7 Average Mental Health Act - No contact with Police 0 0 t 0 0.25 Mental Health Act - Placed on Form 0 0 4 5 2.25 Mental Health Act - Threat of Suicide 3 4 6 5.00 Mental Health Act - VoluntarV Transport 0 2 3 2 t.75 Trespass To Propertv Act 39 52 20 24 33,75 Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) 0 0 1 1 0.50 I ratttc 140 147 135 135 139.25 MVC - Fatal (Motor Vehicle Collision) 2 2 1 0 1.25 MVC - Others (Motor Vehicle Collision) t 2 1 0 1.00 '1. MVC - Pers. lnj. Failed to Remain (Motor Vehicle Collision) L I 2 1..25 MVC - Personal lnjury (Motor Vehicle Collision) t7 T7 18 7 74.75 MVC - Prop. Dam. Failed to Remain (Motor Vehicle Collision) 4 6 6 7 5.75 MVC - Prop. Dam. Non Reportable 1,4 2T 22 33 22.50 MVC - Prop. Dam, Reportable (Motor Vehicle Collision) 100 95 80 84 89.75 MVC (Motor Vehicle Collision) - Master Code 1. 3 5 3 3.00 Violent Criminal Code 25 2A 29 28 25.50 Assault - Level 1 10 L3 t4 8 71.25 Assault With Weapon or Causing Bodily Harm - Level 2 2 0 5 10 4.25 Criminal Harassment 3 3 6 3 3.75 Forcible confinement t 0 0 0 0.25 lndecent / Harassing Communications 1 0 0 0 0,2s Mischief - Cause Danger to Life 0 0 1 0 0.25 Other Assaults / Admin Noxious thing 0 I 0 0 0.25 Other Criminal Code * against public order 1 0 0 0 0.25 Sexual Assault 3 I 3 4 2.75 Utter Threats to Person 3 2 0 3 2.00 Voyeurism 7 0 0 0 0.2s OPP 20L9 Calls for Service Details L1 0f 18 This page intentionally left blank OPP 2019 Calls for Service Details 12 of L8 OPP 2019 Contract Enhancement Cost Summary Mono T Estimated cost for the period January 1 to December 37,20t9 2018 Cost-Recovery Formula Salaries and Benefits Uniform Members (Note 1) S/frf Positions S Sub-Total Total Part-Time Constables. {Note 2) 80,183 0.75 60,137 Total Uniform Salaries 60,r37 Shift Premiums 685 5t4 Benefits (28.09% of Salaries; Part-time L4.73%l 8,8s8 Total Uniform Salaries & Benefits 69,509 Support Costs - Salaries and Benefits Communication Operators 6,564 4,923 Prisoner Guards . 1,715 L,286 Operational Support 4,642 3,482 RHQ Municipal Support 2,477 1,858 Telephone Support 122 92 Office Automation Support 644 483 Mobile and Portable Radio Support 188 282 Total Support Staff Salaries and Benefits Costs L2,4OS Total Salaries & Benefits 8L,9L4 Other Direct Operating Expenses Communication Centre 182 r37 Operational Support 811 608 RHQ Municipal Support 232 L74 Telephone 1,373 1,030 Mobile Radio Equipment Repairs & Maintenance 163 245 Office Automation - Uniform 2,140 1,60s Vehicle Usage , , 8,3s1 6,263 Detachment Supplies & Equipment si9 404 Uniform & Equipment 7,944 2,976 Total Other Dlrect Operating Expenses L3,382 TOTAL ESTIMATED ENHANCEMENT COST 95,296 Total OPP Policed Municipal Properties 3,455 Cost per Property S27.s8 OPP 2019 Contract Enhancement Cost Summary 13 of L8 OPP 2019 Contract Enhancement Cost Summary Mono T Estimated cost for the period January 1 to December 31, 2019 Notes 1) Salary rates are based on weighted average rates for municipal detachment staffing by rank, level and classification. The 2019 salaries were estimated based on the 2018 rates set in the 2015 to 2018 OPPA Uniform and Civilian Collective Agreements with an estimated overall general salary rate increase ol L.9% for 2019 applied. The benefit rates are based on the most recent rates set by the Treasury Board Secretariat, (20L8-19), Salary rates, Statutory Holiday Payouts, Shift Premiums, and Benefit costs are subject to reconciliation, 2) Part-time Constables are classified as casual part-time. They are included in the shift premium calculations, They are not entitled to the Statutory Holiday payouts. They are entitled to certain benefits which are estimated and calculated at L4.73% of their salaries, Their positions are also taken into consideration for the calculation of other direct operating expenses. OPP 201.9 Contract Enhancement Cost Summary L4 of 18 OPP 20L7 Reconciled Year-End Summary Mons T Reconciled cost for the period January 1 to December 3t,20t7 Cost per Property Total Cost s s Base Service Property Counts Household 3,Lt4 Commercial and lndustrial 118 Total Properties 3,232 190.38 615,308 Calls for Service Total all municipalities L46,777,213 Municipal portion 0.233L% 105.85 342,105 Overtime 13.83 44,690 Contract Enhancements (pre-2015) (see summary) 27.72 89,585 Prisoner Transportation (per property cost) 2.16 6,98L Accommodation/Cleaning Services (per property cost) 4,85 15,675 Total 2017 Reconciled Cost 344.78 t,L14,345 Year Over Year Variance (reconciled cost for the year is not subject to phase-in adjustment) 2016 Reconciled Cost per Property 345.74 2017 Reconciled Cost per Property (see above) 344.78 Cost per Property Variance (Decrease) 0,96 2017 Billed Amount (1, t27,724) 20L7 Y ear-End-Adj ustme nt (13,3791 Note The Year-End adjustment above will be included as an adjustment on the 2019 Billing Statement, This amount will be incorporated into the monthly invoice amount for 20L9. OPP 20L7 Reconciled Year-End Summary 15 of 18 OPP 2Ot7 Contract Enhancement Cost Summary Mono T Reconciled cost for the period January 1 to December 37,20t7 2016 Cost-Recovery Formula Salaries and Benefits Uniform Members (Note 1) Positions s Sub-Total Total Part-Time Constables. (Note 2) 0.75 57,887 Total Uniform Salaries 57,887 Shift Premiums 509 Benefits (2696% of Salaries; Part-time 1.4.68%) 8,498 Total Uniform Salaries & Benefits 65,893 Support Costs - Salaries and Benefits Communication Operators 4,51,5 Prisoner Guards . 1,15 1 Operational Support 3,rgt Telephone Support 90 Office Automation Support 40t Total Support Staff Salaries and Benefits Costs 9,347 Total Salaries & Benefits 76,24L Other Direct Operating Expenses Communication Centre 167 Operational Support 559 RHQ Municipal Support 1,718 Telephone 921, Mobile Radio Equipment Repairs & Maintenance 845 Office Automation - Uniform 1,091 Vehicle Usage s,922 Detachment Supplies & Equipment 377 Uniform & Equipment L,735 Total Other Direct Operating Expenses L3,?44 Total 2017 Reconciled Enhancement Cost 89,585 Contractual Hours Reduction, lf Applicable (Note 3) 2017 Reconciled Enhancement Cost s89,585 OPP 2017 Contract Enhancement Cost Summary 17 of 18 OPP 2OL7 Contract Enhancement Cost Summary Mono T Reconciled cost for the perio{January L to December 3t,20L7 Notes 1) Salary rates are based on weighted average rates for municipal detachment staff by rank, level and classification, The 2017 salaries incorporate the January L,2017, L5% ,and July L,2017,0.409|,o , general salary rate increases set in the 2015 to 2018 OppA Uniform and Civilian Collective Agreements. The benefit rates are based on the rates set by the Treasury Board SecretariaL, (20t7- 18). 2) Part-time Constables are classified as casual part-time. They are included in the shift premium calculations. They are not entitled to the Contractua I payouts, They a re entitled to certain benefits which are ca lculated at L4.68% of their sa la ries. Their positions are also taken into consideration for the calculation of other direct operating expenses. 3) The enhancement contractual hours were met for this period. Contractual Hours Calculation Billable Uniform Contract Enhancement Hours Worked L,491 Calls For Service Hours Removed TOTAL UNIFORM ENHANCEMENT HOURS WORKED IN CONTRACT L,491 Minimum Hours Required ih Contract 0.75 FTEIxI4IT 1,063 Hours Provided to Municipality Above Required Minimum 428 OPP 2017 Contract Enhancement Cost Summary 18 of 1.8 Appendix 5 to CAO2019-08 The Town of Shelburne A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police June 3rd, 2019 Table of Contents Executive Summary………………………………………………………………………………………….. i Introduction and Background ...... 1 Methodology ...... 2 The Costing Analysis ...... 3 3.1 Scenario Comments ...... 4 3.2 Scenario Explanations ...... 5 3.3 Most Economical SPS Model Comparison with OPP Proposal ...... 9 3.4 Conclusion: Most Economical SPS Model Comparison with OPP Proposal ...... 12 3.5 Comparison: Scenario B-2 and the Ontario Provincial Police Proposal ...... 12 3.6 Conclusion: Most Probable SPS Model Compared to the OPP Proposal ...... 16 An Operational Comparison of Policing Provision ...... 17 4.1 Ontario Police Services Legislation – Service Standards ...... 17 4.2 Service Level ...... 18 4.3 The Role of the Police Services Board ...... 19 4.4 Response to Incidents ...... 21 4.5 Local Knowledge and Involvement ...... 22 4.6 Municipal Survey ...... 23 Conclusions and Recommendations ...... 25 5.1 Conclusion ...... 25 5.2 Recommendation ...... 25 Tables Table 1: Scenario Descriptions ...... 3 Table 2: Shelburne Police Services Staffing and Capital Cost Scenarios Compared to OPP Proposal Costs 4 Table 3: Cumulative 10-Year Gain (loss) per Property - OPP Service Provision ...... 7 Table 4: Shelburne Police Services Complement Changes to 2025 as Identified by the Chief of Police .... 12 Table 5: Police Services Board Responsibilities Within a Section 10 Contract ...... 20 Table 6: Most Frequent Incidents Shelburne Police Service 2016 - 2018 ...... 23 Table 7: Municipal Survey ...... 24 Table 8: Frequency of Incidents by Type 2016 - 2018 ...... 35 Charts Chart 1: 10-Year Cumulative Gain (Loss) to the Town of Shelburne if the OPP Proposal is Accepted ...... 8 Chart 2: 10-Year Cumulative Gain (Loss) Per Property if the OPP Proposal is Accepted ...... 8 Chart 3: Annual Policing Cost Comparison: Scenario A ...... 9 Chart 4: Average Cost Per Property Comparison: Scenario A ...... 10 Chart 5: Annual Gain (loss) if the OPP Provide Police Services compared to SPS Scenario A ...... 11 Chart 6: Cumulative 10-Year Gain (loss) to the Municipality if the OPP Provide Police Services compared to SPS Scenario A ...... 11 Chart 7: Annual Policing Cost Comparison: Scenario B-2 ...... 13 Chart 8: Average Cost Per Property Comparison: Scenario B-2 ...... 14 Chart 9: Annual Gain (loss) if the OPP Provide Police Services compared to SPS Scenario B-2 ...... 15 Chart 10: Cumulative 10-Year Gain (loss) to the Municipality if the OPP Provide Police Services compared to SPS Scenario B-2 ...... 16 Appendix A: Line by Line Assessment of Comparative Policing Scenarios Appendix B: Frequency and Type of Incidents 2016-2018 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police Executive Summary Pomax Consulting was contracted by the Town of Shelburne to complete a study and analysis of policing options comparing the services, costs, legislation, governance, and service level of the Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police, and to draw conclusions and make recommendations. In performing this assignment Pomax • examined three years of Shelburne Police Services data from both the computer aided dispatch and record managements systems; • examined 3 years of uniform crime reporting survey statistics; • accessed the crime severity index for Shelburne and other communities; • calculated 10 years of billing model and calls for service costs; • conducted seven costing analyses models comparing Shelburne Police Services and Ontario Provincial Police costs; • reviewed applicable legislation • assessed operational provision of services; • attended public information sessions in Shelburne; • conducted a survey of 21 municipalities that have services provided by the OPP (seven responses); and, • examined governance and organizational structures of the municipal and provincial police services. We did not let personal opinion play a part in our assessment. Our practice is to disregard comments and personal positions and to remain committed to objective assessment supported by evidence. As a result of our review we have come to the conclusion that evidence indicates that the same quality and level of service currently experienced by the Town of Shelburne will continue if the town decides to contract with the OPP, but at a much lower cost. As a result, we recommend that the Town of Shelburne contracts for policing services with the Ontario Provincial Police. i A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police Introduction and Background This study and analysis of policing services and costs comparing the Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police was precipitated by the desire of the Shelburne Police Service and the previous police services board to renovate the existing police services facility or move to a new building. In 2015 the Shelburne Police Services Board retained WalterFedy, an architecture, building engineering, civil engineering, construction, and project management company, to complete a police facility assessment to aid the Board in forecasting facility growth needs and the associated financial impact through 2035. WalterFedy explored three options: 1. Renovate and expand the existing 5,000 square foot facility to 8,000 square feet. 2. Acquire and adapt another existing facility with square footage between 8,500 and 9,000 square feet depending on the configuration. 3. Construct a new 8,500 square foot, one storey building. As a result of their examination WalterFedy arrived at an order of magnitude Class D cost estimate for each option that ranged from approximately $2 million to $4.1 million. The estimates did not include land acquisition costs, realtor fees, development charges, cost of employee relocation, furniture and equipment, temporary facilities or future cost escalations. A Class D estimate is based on a client’s broad requirements and can range plus or minus 50%. It is used for developing long term capital plans and preliminary project discussion. Updated estimates indicate that renovations and an addition to the existing facility will cost approximately $3 million to $3.5 million and a new facility will be $7 million or more. No locations have been identified for a new police facility. In September 2018, the previous Shelburne Police Services Board passed a motion requesting “Council prepare an RFP for the design and build of a 10,000 square foot police station which would be sent out quickly should Council vote in favour of keeping the Shelburne Police Service”. Council received this request for information at a November 2018 meeting and no further action was taken. On January 14, 2019 the town received a costing proposal from the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) to provide policing to the Town of Shelburne. The Town has 6 months to respond to the OPP or by July 14, 2019. Subsequent to the proposal from the OPP Council passed a motion to hire a consultant to study, analyze and compare policing services and costs between the Shelburne Police Service (SPS) and the Ontario Provincial Police. Pomax Consulting successfully responded to a request for proposals issued by the town. Page | 1 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police Methodology In arriving at our conclusions and recommendations, Pomax took into account ▪ expected population and dwelling change in the municipality; ▪ the Ontario Provincial Police transitional costing proposal; ▪ calls for service costs using the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) billing calculation method; ▪ capital expense forecasts for the Shelburne Police Services; ▪ capital expense estimates for the OPP for the first three years (the transition) and application of capital expectations within the billing method years to the end of 2029; ▪ amortization schedules for loans of $3 million and $7 million from Infrastructure Ontario for possible renovation of the SPS facility; ▪ estimated operational costs for the Shelburne Police Services for each year of the 10-year period, 2020 – 2029, using three staffing scenarios; ▪ revenue expectations for each scenario; ▪ asset disposal for each scenario; ▪ severance, and pension protection costs for Shelburne Police Services staff members if a decision is made to accept the OPP policing proposal; ▪ adjustments to account for the most recent Ontario Provincial Police arbitration awards for uniformed and civilian employees retroactive to 2019; ▪ expected salary increases for Shelburne Police Service uniformed and civilian employees for the period 2020 to 2029; ▪ applicable legislation; ▪ a survey of municipalities receiving service from the OPP; and, ▪ comments and concerns expressed by residents of Shelburne through the media, an online survey conducted by the municipality, and at public meetings. Pomax also had several discussions with the Chief of Police, municipal officials and council, and extended an invitation to Shelburne Police Services Members, through the Police Services Board Chair, to offer their thoughts and opinions via confidential telephone calls. We found that, throughout this project, there was a very high level of cooperation and assistance from all parties and offer our thanks to everyone for that support. Page | 2 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police The Costing Analysis Seven comparative policing scenarios, outlined in Table 1, were assessed for the period 2020 to 2029. Each scenario has been considered for the probability of being implemented and have been classified ranging from “low probability” to “most probable” but are not presented in any order. The scenarios • include 10-year capital and operational cost models of the Shelburne Police Service compared to the OPP costing proposal; and • take into account two possible Shelburne Police Services staffing models and three possible SPS capital cost (station renovation) models, plus the status quo, resulting in seven possibilities. The Shelburne Police Services Chief, in his budget forecast, has requested complement enhancements to include, between 2020 and 2025, an Inspector’s position, two additional sergeants’ positions, and an additional constable’s position which would increase uniformed and civilian complement from the current 17.25 to 19.35 by 2024. The complement positions and implementation timing are dependent upon year to year assessment by the Chief but we have used the latest estimates as of April 17th, 2019 in our calculations. The scenarios and probability of coming to fruition if the Shelburne Police Services continues to provide policing are described in Table 1. Table 1: Scenario Descriptions Scenario Description Probability Scenario A Shelburne Police Services complement remains at 2019 levels for the 10-year duration - no staff enhancements; no renovations to the Low police facility. Scenario B-1 Shelburne Police complement increases as requested by the Chief; $150,000 renovation to the police facility. Moderate Scenario B-2 Shelburne Police complement increases as requested by the Chief; $3 Most million renovation to the police facility. Probable Scenario B-3 Shelburne Police complement increases as requested by the Chief; $7 million capital expense for a police facility. Low Scenario C-1 Shelburne Police complement increases as requested by the Chief except for the Inspector's position; $150,000 renovation to the police Low facility. Scenario C-2 Shelburne Police complement increases as requested by the Chief except for the Inspector's position; $3 million renovation to the police Probable facility. Scenario C-3 Shelburne Police complement increases as requested by the Chief except for the Inspector's position; $7 million capital expense for a Low police facility. Page | 3 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police 3.1 Scenario Comments The scenario cost summary shown in Table 2 indicates the cumulative net cost of each of the seven scenarios, compared to the Ontario Provincial Police proposal, on a year by year basis for the period 2020 – 2029. Appendix A offers line by line financial information for each of the seven scenarios and a background and explanation for the three primary – and most telling – scenarios is offered in subsequent pages. • Figures in red in Table 2 denote the amount by which the cost of transitioning to an OPP policing model, including all severance and pension conversion costs, exceeds the forecast cost of remaining with the Shelburne Police Services for each year. • The year in which amounts are in black, where the previous year’s amounts were in red, is the cost recovery year, which means that all costs associated with severance, pension, and other disbandment costs – if the town decides upon policing by the OPP – would be recovered due to lower costs in the OPP model. Table 2: Shelburne Police Services Staffing and Capital Cost Scenarios Compared to OPP Proposal Costs Ontario Provincial Police Provide Policing Services RECOVERY PERIOD CUMULATIVE GAIN (LOSS) OVER 10-YEARS Shelburne Police Services Scenarios 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Scenario A: Shelburne Police Services complement remains at 2019 levels for the ($2,834,015) ($3,064,778) ($3,288,122) ($2,252,317) ($1,200,181) ($168,650) $838,101 $1,849,444 $2,870,341 $3,903,181 10-year duration - no staff enhancements; No renovations to the police facility Scenario B-1: Shelburne Police complement increases as requested by the Chief; ($2,553,887) ($2,545,550) ($2,514,210) ($1,162,835) $325,863 $1,841,352 $3,374,610 $4,933,583 $6,518,371 $8,131,620 $150,000 renovation to the police facility Scenario B-2: Shelburne Police complement increases as requested by the Chief; ($2,603,606) ($2,394,706) ($2,162,804) ($610,865) $1,078,394 $2,794,446 $4,528,267 $6,287,803 $8,073,153 $9,886,965 $3 million renovation to the police facility Scenario B-3: Shelburne Police complement increases as requested by the Chief; ($2,469,898) ($1,993,581) ($1,494,261) $325,093 $2,281,770 $4,265,239 $6,266,476 $8,293,429 $10,346,196 $12,427,424 $7 million capital expense for a police facility Scenario C-1: Shelburne Police complement increases as requested by the Chief ($2,713,368) ($2,867,524) ($3,001,757) ($1,819,096) ($502,310) $838,000 $2,192,748 $3,569,813 $4,969,227 $6,393,566 except for the Inspector's position; $150,000 renovation to the police facility Scenario C-2: Shelburne Police complement increases as requested by the Chief ($2,763,087) ($2,716,680) ($2,650,351) ($1,267,127) $250,221 $1,791,095 $3,346,405 $4,924,033 $6,524,009 $8,148,911 except for the Inspector's position; $3 million renovation to the police facility Scenario C-3: Shelburne Police complement increases as requested by the Chief ($2,629,378) ($2,315,555) ($1,981,809) ($331,168) $1,453,597 $3,261,887 $5,084,615 $6,929,659 $8,797,052 $10,689,371 except for the Inspector's position; $7 million capital expense for a police facility Page | 4 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police 3.2 Scenario Explanations In Section 1 we summarized the history that lead to the current analysis and costs of policing services. We noted that the WalterFedy corporation explored three options with respect to a police facility: 1. Renovate and expand the existing facility 5,000 square foot facility to 8,000 square feet; 2. Acquire and adapt another existing facility with square footage between 8,500 and 9,000 square feet depending on the configuration. 3. Construct a new 8,500 square foot, one storey building. As a result of examining the three options WalterFedy arrived at an order of magnitude Class D cost estimate for each that ranged from approximately $2 million to $4.1 million. The estimates did not include land acquisition costs, realtor fees, development charges, cost of employee relocation, furniture and equipment, temporary facilities, or future cost escalations. Updated estimates indicate that renovations and an addition to the existing facility will cost approximately $3 million to $3.5 million and a new facility will be $7 million or more. No locations have been identified for a new police facility. Pomax combined the updated estimates for a renovated or new police facility and the increased police complement identified by the Shelburne Police Chief to arrive at seven possible operational and capital cost scenarios, and compared those to the OPP policing proposal over a ten-year period. Scenario A in Table 1 and Table 2 is the status quo. Every analysis must consider the present circumstances because accepting and continuing the current situation is always an option. In this option we evaluated the OPP costing proposal over ten years compared to a Shelburne Police Service that remains at the current complement level for the evaluation period, although staff members would receive annual collective agreement increases and uniformed members would continue advancement steps from 4th to 1st class constable levels. The assumption is also that no funds would be spent on the existing facility other than routine maintenance. We concluded that the probability of this scenario coming to fruition is low because there would be internal police service pressure, somewhere in the next 10 years, to increase staff complement and make substantial changes to the facility. Nevertheless, this scenario offers the lowest possible cost of operating the Shelburne Police Service in its current configuration. In this scenario comparison, and all that follow, we costed the 10-year Ontario Provincial Police option at full costs. In other words, the cost evaluation took into account recent arbitration awards for the OPP uniformed and civilian staff of 2.15% and 1.5% respectively retroactive to January 1st, 2019. It also added the severance, pension adjustment, and other costs such as accrued sick time payout of $2.36 million that Shelburne Police Service staff members will receive if the town accepts the OPP proposal, and it includes factors for escalation of cost per property and calls for service costs in years four to 10, even though there has been a slight decline in cost per property in recent years. In Scenario A (please see Table 2) cost recovery – the recouping of costs such as severance, pension adjustment, and other outlays as a result of transitioning to the OPP – will take place in early 2026, and by 2029 the Town of Shelburne will have realized a savings of $3.9 million over the 10-year period. Page | 5 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police This scenario comparison illustrates that the Ontario Provincial Police could provide policing, today, at a significantly lower cost than the Shelburne Police Services’ current operating configuration. Scenario B-1 assumes that the Shelburne Police Service complement increases to 19.35 staff by 2024 as identified by the Chief, but the police facility is allocated only $150,000 for critical improvements. Other than $150,000, no other funds are allocated to facility renovations. The probability of this option is considered to be moderate although internal pressure to renovate the facility would be expected to arise before 2029. In this scenario, cost recovery will take place in 2024, and by 2029, the Town of Shelburne will have realized a savings of $8.13 million over the 10-year period if it chooses the OPP policing proposal. Scenario B-2 assumes that the Shelburne Police Services complement increases to 19.35 staff by 2024 as identified by the Chief, and the police facility is allocated in excess of $3 million for renovations and expansion. This scenario is the one most likely to occur if the Shelburne Police continue to provide service to the municipality. It recognizes the increased staffing identified by the Chief and strikes a balance between what the police service suggests is required for a new police facility, and what the town may consider. In this scenario, cost recovery will take place in 2024, and by 2029, the Town of Shelburne will have realized a savings of $9.886 million over the 10-year period if it chooses the OPP policing proposal. Scenario B-3, like B-2, assumes that the Shelburne Police Services complement increases to 19.25 staff by 2024, but in excess of $7 million is allocated for renovations and expansion. There is a low probability of this situation occurring due to the cost of borrowing $7 million. In this scenario, cost recovery will take place in 2023, and by 2029, the Town of Shelburne will have realized a savings of over $12.4 million if it chooses the OPP policing proposal. Scenarios C-1 to C-3 are in all aspects the same as B-1 to B-3 except in these options we assessed whether foregoing the Inspector’s complement enhancement would have any effect on the overall cost of operating the Shelburne Police Services in comparison to the OPP’s proposal. It doesn’t. Although foregoing the Inspector’s position results in a slightly lower year to year and 10-year cost of operating the Shelburne Police Services, by accepting the OPP’s proposal, the town will save between $6.39 and $10.69 million dollars over 10 years and cost recovery will occur in 2024 or 2025. We found that even comparing the lowest cost Shelburne Police Services operating scenario (Scenario A), which has a low probability of taking place, with the Ontario Provincial Police’s proposal, by accepting the OPP proposal the town would • save over a million dollars a year starting in 2023; • recover all severance and transition costs by early 2026; and, • by 2026 the comparative cost saving would increase year over year. Page | 6 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police Table 3 indicates the cumulative 10-year average gain (loss) per property, by Scenario, if the OPP provides police services, in comparison to Shelburne Police Services costs. Table 3: Cumulative 10-Year Gain (loss) per Property - OPP Service Provision 10-Year Saving Scenario Per Property Scenario A 2029 Shelburne Police Services complement remains at 2019 levels for the 10-year duration - no staff enhancements; no renovations to the police facility $878 Scenario B-1 Shelburne Police complement increases as requested by the Chief; $150,000 renovation to the police facility $1,987 Scenario B-2 Shelburne Police complement increases as requested by the Chief; $3 million renovation to the police facility $2,447 Scenario B-3 Shelburne Police complement increases as requested by the Chief; $7 million capital expense for a police facility $3,121 Scenario C-1 Shelburne Police complement increases as requested by the Chief except for the Inspector's position; $150,000 renovation to the police facility $1,524 Scenario C-2 Shelburne Police complement increases as requested by the Chief except for the Inspector's position; $3 million renovation to the police facility $1,985 Scenario C-3 Shelburne Police complement increases as requested by the Chief except for the Inspector's position; $7 million capital expense for a police facility $2,659 Appendix A includes calculation details for all scenarios. Depending upon the Shelburne Police Services’ model to which the OPP’s policing proposal is compared, accepting the OPP’s proposal will save from a minimum of $878 to a high of $3,121 per property over a 10-year period compared to the cost of service provision by the Shelburne Police Services. Chart 1 indicates the expected 10-year cumulative savings to the Town of Shelburne as a result of accepting the OPP’s policing proposal, compared to the Shelburne Police Services scenarios discussed herein. Page | 7 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police Chart 1: 10-Year Cumulative Gain (Loss) to the Town of Shelburne if the OPP Proposal is Accepted 10-Year Municipal Cumulative Gain (Loss) if OPP Provide Services $14,000,000 $12,000,000 $10,000,000 $8,000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $2,000,000 $0 Cumulative 10-Year Gain (Loss) if OPP Provide Police Services Scenario A Scenario B-1 Scenario B-2 Scenario B-3 Scenario C-1 Scenario C-2 Scenario C-3 Chart 2 indicates the expected average 10-year cumulative savings on a per property basis, in the Town of Shelburne, as a result of accepting the OPP’s policing proposal, compared to the Shelburne Police Services scenarios discussed herein. Chart 2: 10-Year Cumulative Gain (Loss) Per Property if the OPP Proposal is Accepted Average 10-Year Cumulative Gain (Loss) Per Property if OPP Provide Services $3,500.00 $3,000.00 $2,500.00 $2,000.00 $1,500.00 $1,000.00 $500.00 $0.00 Cumulative 10-Year Average Gain (Loss) Per Property if OPP Provide Police Services Scenario A Scenario B-1 Scenario B-2 Scenario B-3 Scenario C-1 Scenario C-2 Scenario C-3 Page | 8 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police 3.3 Most Economical SPS Model Comparison with OPP Proposal Chart 3 (below) compares policing costs between the most economical Shelburne Police Services operational and capital model (Scenario A) and the OPP’s costing proposal. The lower the costing line on the chart, the greater cost saving advantage to the town. Scenario A Shelburne Police Services complement remains at 2019 levels for the 10-year duration - no staff enhancements; no renovations to the police facility. The initial peak expenditures shown in Chart 3 and Chart 4, and in other charts, in the year 2020, are attributable to severance fees and pension adjustments estimated at $2.156 million that would be paid to Shelburne Police Services staff members, and year-1 start up cost of $414,000 for the OPP. The balance is the actual OPP operating cost in the first year. Chart 3: Annual Policing Cost Comparison: Scenario A Annual Policing Cost Comparison Scenario A Shelburne Police Services Ontario Provincial Police $5,500,000 $5,000,000 $4,500,000 $4,000,000 $3,500,000 $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Chart 4 compares policing costs between the most economical Shelburne Police Services operational and capital model (Scenario A) and the OPP’s costing proposal on a per property basis. The lower the costing line on the chart, the greater cost saving advantage to Shelburne’s property owners. Page | 9 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police Chart 4: Average Cost Per Property Comparison: Scenario A Cost Per Property Comparison Scenario A Shelburne Police Services Ontario Provincial Police $1,600 $1,500 $1,400 $1,300 $1,200 $1,100 $1,000 $900 $800 $700 $600 $500 $400 $300 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Chart 5, page 11, demonstrates the annual gain or (loss) when comparing costs between the OPP’s proposal and the most economical Shelburne Police Services’ operating and capital cost model (Scenario A). The initial loss in the year 2020, is attributable to severance fees and pension adjustments estimated at $2.36 million that would be paid to Shelburne Police Services staff members, and year-1 startup cost of $414,000 for the OPP. The OPP policing proposal offers the municipality a saving of over $1,000,000 a year in operating and capital costs starting in 2023 compared to a Shelburne Police Services model that maintains the same staffing model as today for the next ten years, and that does not receive any funds for facility changes. Page | 10 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police Chart 5: Annual Gain (loss) if the OPP Provide Police Services compared to SPS Scenario A Annual Gain (Loss) if OPP Provide Police Services Scenario A $1,500,000 $1,035,804 $1,052,137 $1,031,530 $1,006,751 $1,011,343 $1,020,897 $1,032,840 $1,000,000 $500,000 $0 ($500,000) ($230,762) ($223,344) ($1,000,000) ($1,500,000) ($2,000,000) ($2,500,000) ($3,000,000) ($2,834,015) ($3,500,000) 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Chart 6 illustrates the cumulative ten-year gain or loss to the town, if the town decides to accept the OPP’s proposal, compared to the most economical Shelburne Police Services model (Scenario A). Chart 6 indicates that the town would realize a saving in excess of $4 million dollars over 10-years as a result of accepting the OPP’s proposal. Chart 6: Cumulative 10-Year Gain (loss) to the Municipality if the OPP Provide Police Services compared to SPS Scenario A CUMULATIVE 10-YEAR GAIN (LOSS) IF OPP PROVIDE POLICE SERVICES SCENARIO A $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,903,181 $3,000,000 $2,870,341 $2,000,000 $1,849,444 $1,000,000 $838,101 $0 ($168,650) ($1,000,000) ($1,200,181) ($2,000,000) ($2,252,317) ($3,000,000) ($2,834,015) ($3,064,778)($3,288,122) ($4,000,000) 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Page | 11 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police 3.4 Conclusion: Most Economical SPS Model Comparison with OPP Proposal Our conclusion is that the Ontario Provincial Police Costing Proposal compared to the most economical, but least probable, Shelburne Police Services 10-year operating and capital model will save the town in excess of $4 million by 2029. The savings include all severance and transition costs attributable to the Shelburne Police Services staff, and the year-1 initial costs for the OPP. Because Scenario A is the most economical Shelburne Police Services model, and because the OPP proposal remains constant when compared to any Shelburne Police Services operational and capital model, the OPP proposal will offer the town even greater savings when compared to any of the other scenarios described in Table 1. 3.5 Comparison: Scenario B-2 and the Ontario Provincial Police Proposal Although it is clear that the town will accomplish a minimum saving of over $4 million by accepting the Ontario Provincial Police’s proposal, and that other options indicated earlier will result in savings of various but greater amounts, we thought it reasonable to complete a comparison between the Shelburne Police Services operational and capital model that includes increased complement numbers as identified by the Chief, and capital costs of over $3 million for renovations to the existing facility. This model, scenario B-2 in Table 1, is one of the two most likely to be acceptable to the Shelburne Police Services. The other scenario that is likely acceptable to the police service is B-3 (Table 1) which is the same as scenario B-2 except that $7 million, rather than $3 million, is identified for a new police facility. Scenario B-2 includes complement enhancements requested by the Chief that include an Inspector in 2020, an additional sergeant and first-class constable in 2021, and an additional first-class constable in 2024. Total complement of 19.35, including civilian administrative staff, is expected by 2025. The complement request and timing are dependent upon year to year assessment by the Chief. Table 4 provides detail on Shelburne Police Services’ complement enhancement requests. Table 4: Shelburne Police Services Complement Changes to 2025 as Identified by the Chief of Police Uniform and Civilian 12/31/2019 7/1/2020 7/1/2021 7/1/2022 7/1/2023 7/1/2024 7/1/2025 Complement Chief 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Inspector 1 1 1 1 1 1 Sergeant 2 2 3 3 4 3 4 1st Class 8 8 9 9 9 10 9 2nd Class 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 3rd Class 1 1 1 1 4th Class 1 1 1 1 1 New 1st Class - Joined 1 March 2019 Special Constable 0.25 0.25 0.3 0.25 0.35 0.35 0.35 (Cadet); guard Total Uniform Positions 15.25 16.25 16.3 16.25 17.35 17.35 17.35 Civilian 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Page | 12 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police Uniform and Civilian 12/31/2019 7/1/2020 7/1/2021 7/1/2022 7/1/2023 7/1/2024 7/1/2025 Complement Total Complement 17.25 18.25 18.3 18.25 19.35 19.35 19.35 Chart 7 compares policing costs, on a year by year basis, between the most likely Shelburne Police Services operational and capital model (Scenario B-2) and the OPP’s costing proposal. The lower the costing line on the chart, the greater cost saving advantage to the town. Chart 7: Annual Policing Cost Comparison: Scenario B-2 Annual Policing Cost Comparison Scenario B-2 Shelburne Police Services Ontario Provincial Police $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $0 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Chart 8 (next page) compares policing costs between the most likely Shelburne Police Services operational and capital model (Scenario B-2) and the OPP’s costing proposal on a per property basis. The lower the costing line on the chart, the greater cost saving advantage to Shelburne’s property owners. Average savings for property owners range from $443 to $451 annually starting in 2024 if the town accepts the OPP policing proposal. Page | 13 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police Chart 8: Average Cost Per Property Comparison: Scenario B-2 Cost Per Property Comparison Scenario B-2 Shelburne Police Services Ontario Provincial Police $1,800 $1,600 $1,400 $1,200 $1,000 $800 $600 $400 $200 $0 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Chart 9 (next page) demonstrates the annual difference in costs between the OPP’s proposal and the most likely Shelburne Police Services operating and capital cost model (Scenario B-2). The initial loss in the year 2020, is attributable to severance fees and pension adjustments estimated at $2.156 million that would be paid to Shelburne Police Services staff members, and year-1 startup cost of $414,000 for the OPP. The OPP policing proposal offers the municipality a saving of over $1.55 million a year in operating and capital costs, starting in 2023 and climbing to $1.8 million by 2029, compared to a Shelburne Police Services model that incorporates complement enhancements and facility renovations of $3 million. Recovery of severance and all transition costs will occur in 2024. Page | 14 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police Chart 9: Annual Gain (loss) if the OPP Provide Police Services compared to SPS Scenario B-2 Annual Gain (Loss) if OPP Provide Police Services Scenario B-2 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $1,813,812 $1,500,000 $1,689,260$1,716,052 $1,733,821 $1,759,536 $1,785,350 $1,551,938 $1,000,000 $500,000 $208,900 $231,902 $0 ($500,000) ($1,000,000) ($1,500,000) ($2,000,000) ($2,603,606) ($2,500,000) ($3,000,000) $2,020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Chart 10 (next page) illustrates the cumulative ten-year gain or loss to the town, if the town decides to accept the OPP’s proposal, compared to the Shelburne Police Services model that includes staff enhancements and capital costs for facility renovations (Scenario B-2). Chart 10 indicates that the town would realize a saving in excess of $10 million dollars over 10-years as a result of accepting the OPP’s proposal. Page | 15 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police Chart 10: Cumulative 10-Year Gain (loss) to the Municipality if the OPP Provide Police Services compared to SPS Scenario B-2 CUMULATIVE 10-YEAR GAIN (LOSS) IF OPP PROVIDE POLICE SERVICES SCENARIO B-2 $12,000,000 $10,000,000 $9,886,965 $8,000,000 $8,073,153 $6,000,000 $6,287,803 $4,528,267 $4,000,000 $2,794,446 $2,000,000 $1,078,394 $0 2020 2021 2022 ($610,865)2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 ($2,000,000) ($2,162,804) ($2,603,606)($2,394,706) ($4,000,000) 3.6 Conclusion: Most Probable SPS Model Compared to the OPP Proposal Our conclusion is that the Ontario Provincial Police Costing Proposal compared to Scenario B-3, which is the most probable Shelburne Police Services operational and capital model to occur absent of an OPP proposal, will save the Town of Shelburne in $9.887 million by 2029. The savings include all severance and transition costs attributable to the Shelburne Police Services staff, and the year-1 initial costs for the OPP. By strict interpretation, accepting the OPP costing proposal will save the town almost $4 million in 10 years compared to the existing Shelburne Police Services operational and capital model, and avoid the expenditure of another $6 million or more over the same period by not having to borrow funds for building renovations or increase payroll costs due to police staffing enhancements. But no matter how the amount is interpreted – whether savings or savings combined with avoidance – the Ontario Provincial Police’s proposal is significantly less expensive than the current SPS policing model. Page | 16 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police An Operational Comparison of Policing Provision This section addresses the operational comparison of the Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police. The Town of Shelburne wants to ensure that should it accept the OPP’s proposal the town will receive a comparable level of service as it currently receives from the town’s police. 4.1 Ontario Police Services Legislation – Service Standards In Ontario, the Police Services Act and related regulations set the standards for police services and spell out who is responsible for police services and how they will operate. The legislation • gives municipalities the responsibility for providing police services; • gives the Ministry of the Solicitor General the responsibility for interpreting the act and regulations, as well as the responsibility for inspecting the activities of Ontario’s police services; • identifies core activities for policing in Ontario; • describes six principles for police services to follow in carrying out those activities. Municipalities can provide police services for their citizens in several ways. They can • set up their own police service; • arrange with one or more municipalities to have a joint police service for the area; • hire the police service of another municipality; • hire the Ontario Provincial Police. The Ministry of the Solicitor General has a wide range of responsibilities for policing in Ontario. Under the Police Services Act, the ministry • writes and updates the Policing Standards Manual which explains in detail the standards Ontario’s police must follow. The manual also provides guidelines on how to follow the standards; • inspects police services to make sure they comply with the Police Services Act; • is responsible for the Ontario Police College, which trains police recruits and offers advanced training for experienced police officers and civilian employees of police services; • is responsible for the Ontario Provincial Police, which provides police services in some municipalities plus police service on the province’s highways, trails and waterways; • researches criminal justice trends that affect policing; • oversees the Ontario operations of the Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC). This is a national database of information on wanted and missing persons, stolen vehicles, and other crime-related issues. The standards that Ontario’s police services must meet are set out in the Police Services Act and regulations such as the Adequacy and Effectiveness of Police Services regulation. Page | 17 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police The ministry’s Policing Standards Manual contains guidelines to help municipalities and police services, including the Ontario Provincial Police, understand and know how to follow the Police Services Act and regulations. The manual • explains the ministry’s position on policy issues; • gives information and advice on how to manage and operate a police service; • makes recommendations for local policies, procedures and programs; • helps police services coordinate their activities; • encourages community-oriented police services; • promotes professional police practices, standards and training. The core activities for police services in Ontario include preventing crime; enforcing laws; helping victims; keeping public order; and’ responding to emergencies. And, in Ontario, police services are committed, by legislation, to six principles. They are 1. Ensuring the safety and security of all people and property in Ontario. 2. Safeguarding the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Ontario Human Rights Code. 3. Working closely with the communities they serve. 4. Respecting victims of crime and working to understand their needs. 5. Being sensitive to the diverse, multiracial and multicultural character of Ontario society. 6. Ensuring that police services are representative of the communities they serve. Because of Ontario’s legislation, the role of the Ministry of the Solicitor General with respect to police service monitoring and inspection, guidelines and legislation such as the Adequacy and Effectiveness of Police Services, police services’ core activities, and the six principles of policing in Ontario, it would be very difficult to suggest that one police service is more capable than another. Certainly, there is no evidence to suggest that the Ontario Provincial Police is not as capable as the Shelburne Police Services in providing a high policing standard. Therefore, from a standards point of view, the Town of Shelburne would experience at least the same standard of policing from the OPP as received from the town’s police services. 4.2 Service Level Even though citizens and visitors of Ontario and Shelburne can be confident that legislation, regulations, policies, and procedures ensure a reasonably stable standard of service throughout Ontario and, except for rare circumstances, will be properly protected by law enforcement in Ontario no matter which Page | 18 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police shoulder patch a police officer is wearing, the residents of Shelburne have commented on and questioned the ‘level’ of service if the Ontario Provincial Police provide policing. Areas of concern include • How quickly will a police officer arrive? • How many police officers will be in town at any time? • Is there a guarantee that there will always be three police officers in town? • Will the Police Services Board have any authority to set service levels? • We need police officers that know our town. • Will there be foot patrols? • Shelburne police officers visit our schools almost every day; will the OPP do that? These are realistic questions and we will do our best to provide realistic answers. 4.3 The Role of the Police Services Board Currently, the Shelburne Police Services Board is responsible for all matters that pertain to the provision of police services in the town. These include governance and oversight of the police department; setting and approving a strategic plan, policies, procedures, objectives, and priorities; selection and evaluation of the Chief; monitoring and controlling cost; deciding upon an adequate level of service; and ensuring that the Chief and police service have adequate tools and equipment to properly perform their jobs. If a municipality contracts policing services with the Ontario Provincial Police it is done within Section 10 of the Police Services Act (PSA) and a police services board must continue to operate, albeit with slightly different responsibilities than within a municipal police service. There is also sometimes confusion as to whether municipalities can sign a contract within Section 10 or Section 5.1 of the Police Services Act. Section 5.1 is not a contract. It comes into effect when a municipality does not provide police services by one of the ways described in Section 5 of the Act and states If municipality fails to provide police services 5.1 (1) If a municipality does not provide police services by one of the ways set out in section 5, the Ontario Provincial Police shall provide police services to the municipality. Section 5.1 of the Act would not apply to Shelburne as a contract would be signed with the Ontario Provincial Police if a decision is made to provide police services through the OPP. If such a decision is made the local Police Services Board would continue to have similar responsibilities as it has currently with a few differences. These are: • Although the Police Services Board can participate in the selection of a local detachment commander, other Police Services Boards served by the detachment also participate. The final decision is made within the OPP. Page | 19 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police • Policies with respect to management of the police force is made in concert with the Detachment Commander. • The OPP is responsible for all hiring and associated costs. The local Police Services Board would have little to no participation. • The level of service such as number of hours of foot patrols, school visits beyond those normally provided by the OPP, and stringency of traffic enforcement would be negotiated between the Police Services Board and Detachment Commander if required. • Service enhancements such as additional hours of foot patrol or traffic enforcement can be negotiated at an additional cost. Some municipalities contract for an additional traffic enforcement officer and find that the resulting revenue pays for the contracted officer and ads revenue for the municipality. Table 5 summarizes local Police Services Boards’ responsibilities within a Section 10 contract. Table 5: Police Services Board Responsibilities Within a Section 10 Contract LEGISLATED / FUNDING DIFFERENCES S. 10 PSA - CONTRACT 1. Civilian Governance Model Police Services Board – mandatory pursuant to 10(2) PSA 2. Objectives and priorities for delivery of police Determined by Board after consultation with the services within the Municipality Detachment Commander – 10(9) (b) (PSA) 3. Policy for the effective management of the police Local policy established by Board after consultation force with the Detachment Commander - 10(9) (c) PSA 4. Selection of the detachment commander/chief of Participate in the selection of the Detachment police Commander- 10(9) (a) PSA 5. Evaluation of the Detachment Commander/Chief Monitor performance of Detachment Commander of Police 10(9) (d) PSA 6. Maintenance of a complaints system Review the Detachment Commander’s administration of the complaint system and receive regular reports – 10(9) (f) PSA 7. Appoint the members of the force All hiring cost are covered under the agreement with the OPP, members are selected using the criteria of 43 (1) PSA 8. Monitor secondary activities of the police force The Detachment Commander provides regular members reports to board on decisions made on secondary activities – 10(9) (e) PSA 9. Ministry Support Funding CPP & 1000 Officers Program, RIDE grants 10. Revenue from sale of found / recovered property Provided directly to municipality / board in a method and Fees recouped from sale of reports, security agreed to locally checks 11. By-law enforcement By-law enforcement as specified in a contract - 10(6) PSA 12. Level of Service - Cost As negotiated / Costing Schedule appended to agreement Page | 20 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police 4.4 Response to Incidents Response to incidents is one of two most concerning issues for residents when policing by the Ontario Provincial Police is being considered. The other can be categorized as local knowledge and involvement and is addressed in Section 4.5. ‘Response to incidents’ comments are usually expressed in the form of questions such as • How quickly will a police officer arrive? • How many police officers will be in town at any time? • Is there a guarantee that there will always be three police officers in town? or as statements of satisfaction with the speed of response from the local police service based on personal experience. At public meetings in Shelburne, through the media and opinion editorials, and in response to the municipal survey, some residents have questioned whether the OPP can guarantee a specific number of officers will be available and whether the OPP will state a specific response time to incidents. Residents have also related that when they have had to call for police assistance in the past that the local police service has arrived within minutes. There is an apprehension that speedy response will be a casualty of contracting with the Ontario Provincial Police. To answer these questions, it is first important to review zone policing and emergency response. Zone policing is thought of by some as detachment policing. In other words, the local OPP detachment may be responsible for five or six zones and some are under the impression that provincial police resources may be moved from one zone to another at any time for the purpose of patrol or other reasons. That is, Shelburne may have three officers within the town limits but it is thought that sometimes there may be only one, and the others could be sent to patrol, for example, Mulmur or Mono. This is not true except in rare circumstances. Emergency services, including the police, assign resources based on need supported by data. That means that each zone is assessed for frequency of incidents and type, and the time required to respond, investigate, and follow up each incident and type. Resources are assigned to a zone based on these parameters. Under normal circumstances; for example, other than major emergencies, police resources stay within their assigned zone. This practice is not unlike the current circumstances where the Shelburne Police will respond outside the town limits to assist the OPP, or the OPP will assist within Shelburne. Those circumstances are infrequent but there is no guarantee, at present, that the Shelburne Police Service will always have three officers on duty within the town limits. For the first three years of an OPP contract (the transition years) municipalities pay the full cost of police services in the community and the resources are usually the same as the municipality experienced prior to an OPP contract. Those three years also provide the OPP with the time to gather data specific to the community and have first-hand qualitative familiarity with community needs. The OPP and the Police Services Board can then discuss objectives and priorities for delivery of police services within the municipality and how it is provided. Page | 21 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police In addition to the number of officers that may be assigned to Shelburne within an OPP contract, residents have questioned speed of response and have expressed some frustration that the OPP indicates that it does not measure response time. We also find the OPP’s answer to be somewhat confusing because all emergency services measure response times. However, we don’t blame them for not revealing response times because there is no easy answer to the question. The answer to the question about response time depends on the location of an incident, the type of incident, weather conditions, and several other factors. When residents pose the question of response time to the OPP they usually mean “How long do you think it will take you to respond”? But, upon answering, the public may consider the OPP to have offered a de facto guarantee of response and there will be times the commitment cannot be met. The local police can indicate that it usually takes less than six minutes to respond anywhere in town. But that is not a commitment; it is simply an answer that describes normal circumstances. It is reasonable to assume that under normal circumstances, the OPP would be able to respond within Shelburne in a time frame similar to the local police force. But there will be times when that will not occur. Emergency services measure response times based on the incident type and within percentiles. For example, Dufferin County Paramedic Services may endeavor to achieve an eight-minute response to cardiac arrests in 50% or 80% of cases. Other paramedic services establish different parameters depending on the area within which they operate. Fire departments will endeavor to meet National Fire Protection Association standards for the speed of response and number of firefighters arriving in 80% or 90% of incidents. But there are no guarantees. There is also no evidence to indicate that the level of service provided by the OPP, under contract, would vary from that being experienced by residents at the current time. Finally, residents of Shelburne and the province have been provided with ‘zone’ paramedic services since the early 1970s and are mostly comfortable with that service delivery. However, the Ontario Ministry of Health describes it as ‘borderless’ meaning any ambulance can respond to any area as is most appropriate so that a patient and family can receive the quickest possible service. But, under normal circumstances, ambulances will be assigned to their home station. 4.5 Local Knowledge and Involvement Residents also question whether there will be a loss of local knowledge resulting from a transition to a different police service. This is a reasonable concern but one that is unlikely to come to fruition. For the most part, local police officers are transitioned to the OPP and assigned to their former geographic area. So, Shelburne police officers will be hired by the OPP and assigned to patrol Shelburne. Therefore, local knowledge should remain. It is possible that, over a period of time, local OPP officers may ask for a reassignment and a new officer who is not as familiar with Shelburne will arrive. That is not unlike the current situation since several Shelburne police officers are recent hires in the past two or three years. There will not be wholesale changeout of officers under an OPP policing scenario. Page | 22 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police What about school patrol and foot patrol? Foot patrol is part of the proactive service provided by the OPP along with traffic enforcement and school visits. The local OPP detachment, like many police forces, have a community services officer and part of his or her responsibility is relationship building with school and students. In 2018, Shelburne Police Services records indicate that officers performed school detail/foot patrol for 151 hours and 25 minutes. There are approximately 200 school days in a year, fewer in high school because of exam days. According to the SPS records, school detail/foot patrol entailed approximately 45 minutes a day, on average. We expect that the OPP will be able to maintain the current standard although the Police Services Board will be able to review the need for additional school detail and foot patrol with the Detachment Commander. Residents have also stated the need for traffic enforcement to reduce speeding in town. Certainly, traffic enforcement is the most frequent incident type found within the Shelburne Police Services data. The three most frequent incidents are indicated in Table 6 Table 6: Most Frequent Incidents Shelburne Police Service 2016 - 2018 EVENT TYPE 2016 2017 2018 Routine Traffic Stop 2244 2772 3176 Community Services 814 799 899 Traffic Enforcement-Other 559 618 781 Routine traffic enforcements incidents have increased by over 900 from 2016 to 2018. This could be due to a greater volume of traffic flowing through Shelburne or more assertive enforcement. Nevertheless, the level of enforcement desired by the community can be discussed between the Police Services Board and the provincial police Detachment Commander if the municipality decides to contract with the OPP. Routine traffic stops and enforcement is part of proactive policing by the OPP and does not represent an extra cost. Data relating to other incident types can be found in Appendix B. 4.6 Municipal Survey To determine the experience of other municipalities who have contracted with the Ontario Provincial Police, Pomax surveyed 21 communities as to whether costs have been in line with expectations and asked them to comment on their experience with OPP policing. Seven responses were received and can be found in Table 7. The survey indicated that we would not identify the municipalities which is why no names are included. Page | 23 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police Table 7: Municipal Survey Costs Comments Municipality 1 Have always been No comments provided Response from a member of the Police Services Board “Response times are better policed by OPP because municipal officers are confined to the boundaries of the municipality. Dispatchers are local and recognize place names that have been used in the past, e.g. “The restaurant where Granny’s used to be”, Yeland’s Hill, etc.” Municipality 2 Year 1 of transition Costs are comparable to Receiving the service levels expected. completed what was quoted Municipality 3 Not in transition Post transition costs are Receiving the service levels expected. period lower than expected Municipality 4 Not in transition No cost comments “The Staff Sergeant is great to work with and reacts quickly to any concerns that we may period provided have. We are kept in the loop about issues through our quarterly meetings with the OPP as well as media alerts. As well, their Community Safety Officer is available for Town Hall meetings, Public Events as well as being in the schools etc. As we are contracted with the OPP, we also have access to the use of traffic helicopters, paid duty officers, targeted enforcement, snowmobile patrol, canine unit, weigh scales, automatic license plate reader vehicle etc. If we chose, we can up our level of service and pay for additional full-time officers.” Municipality 5 Not in transition Satisfied with costs “We have been very satisfied with our OPP, there is a strong feeling of community with period them and the town and they work closely with our fire team. We do have a OPP headquarters in Alliston which may help with that. They also provide strong statistics to inform the Town of the calls that have been made and the trending of issues.” Municipality 6 Year 8 of OPP One million annual savings Receiving the service levels expected. policing compared to municipal police service Municipality 7 Transitioned from $150,000 per year less “When we left the OPP we were paying $1.15 M per year, without any guarantee of local OPP January 1, than OPP coverage. Now we are paying about $1.0 M per year to Stratford and have a patrol officer 2019 24/7 plus a community resources officer 9-5 during weekdays.” Page | 24 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police Conclusions and Recommendations 5.1 Conclusion Our conclusion is that the provision of police services by the Ontario Provincial Police is a reasonable option for the town. Evidence also indicates that the same quality and level of service currently experienced by the Town of Shelburne will continue if the town decides to contract with the OPP, but at a much lower cost. 5.2 Recommendation We recommend that the Town of Shelburne contracts for policing services with the Ontario Provincial Police. Page | 25 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police Appendix A: Line by Line Assessment of Comparative Policing Scenarios A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police Scenario A: Shelburne Police Service Complement Remains at Current Levels until 2029; No Staff Enhancements; No Funds for Renovations Shelburne Police Services and Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) - Scenario A Comparison Shelburne Police Services complement remains at 2019 levels for the 10-year duration - no staff enhancements Shelburne Police Services staff continue to receive salary increases estimated at 2% Shelburne police capital equipment replacement, such as vehicles, continue as planned No renovations to the existing Shelburne police facility The OPP estimate includes recently awarded salary increases of 2.15% for uniform officers and 1.5% for civilian staff Base Year 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Shelburne Police Services Operating Expenses $2,535,763 $2,630,511 $2,683,085 $2,746,661 $2,798,817 $2,850,177 $2,900,478 $2,951,837 $3,004,160 $3,057,523 $3,112,020 Shelburne Police Services Capital Expenses $93,000 $78,000 $57,500 $58,000 $55,500 $90,000 $71,000 $46,000 $45,000 $45,000 $46,000 Revenue Adjustment ($124,544) ($123,068) ($123,919) ($124,788) ($125,673) ($126,577) ($127,498) ($128,438) ($129,397) ($130,375) ($131,373) SPS Total Capital and Operating Cost $2,504,219 $2,585,443 $2,616,666 $2,679,873 $2,728,643 $2,813,600 $2,843,980 $2,869,398 $2,919,763 $2,972,148 $3,026,647 Property Counts - Private Dwellings & Commercial / Industrial 3115 3338 3501 3581 3662 3744 3804 3894 3969 4024 4079 Cost per Property $803.92 $774.55 $747.41 $748.36 $745.12 $751.50 $747.63 $736.88 $735.64 $738.61 $742.01 OPP Provides Police Services $2,851,249 $2,907,631 $2,963,915 $1,754,040 $1,823,179 $1,874,689 $1,925,421 $1,971,740 $2,015,127 $2,058,251 Uniform & Equipment Adjustment - Year 1 ($29,160) Estimated Year 1 Policing Costs $2,822,089 Total Uniform, Equipment & Vehicle Costs - Year 1 $414,249 Total Policing Costs - Year 1 $3,236,338 Total Severance & Pension Adjustment $2,360,079 Revenue Adjustment ($176,959) ($60,203) ($60,697) ($61,201) ($61,715) ($62,240) ($62,774) ($63,320) ($63,876) ($64,444) OPP Total Capital and Operating Cost $5,419,458 $2,847,428 $2,903,217 $1,692,839 $1,761,463 $1,812,450 $1,862,647 $1,908,420 $1,951,251 $1,993,807 Property Counts - Private Dwellings & Commercial / Industrial 3338 3501 3581 3662 3744 3804 3894 3969 4024 4079 Cost per Property $1,623.56 $813.32 $810.73 $462.27 $470.48 $476.46 $478.34 $480.83 $484.90 $488.80 Annual Comparison 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Shelburne Police Services $2,585,443 $2,616,666 $2,679,873 $2,728,643 $2,813,600 $2,843,980 $2,869,398 $2,919,763 $2,972,148 $3,026,647 Ontario Provincial Police $5,419,458 $2,847,428 $2,903,217 $1,692,839 $1,761,463 $1,812,450 $1,862,647 $1,908,420 $1,951,251 $1,993,807 Annual Gain (Loss) if OPP Provide Police Services ($2,834,015) ($230,762) ($223,344) $1,035,804 $1,052,137 $1,031,530 $1,006,751 $1,011,343 $1,020,897 $1,032,840 Cumulative 10-Year Gain (Loss) if OPP Provide Police Services ($2,834,015) ($3,064,778) ($3,288,122) ($2,252,317) ($1,200,181) ($168,650) $838,101 $1,849,444 $2,870,341 $3,903,181 Cost Per Property 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Shelburne Police Services $774.55 $747.41 $748.36 $745.12 $751.50 $747.63 $736.88 $735.64 $738.61 $742.01 Ontario Provincial Police $1,623.56 $813.32 $810.73 $462.27 $470.48 $476.46 $478.34 $480.83 $484.90 $488.80 Average Annual Gain (Loss) Per Property if OPP Provide Police Services ($849.02) ($65.91) ($62.37) $282.85 $281.02 $271.17 $258.54 $254.81 $253.70 $253.21 Cumulative 10-Year Average Gain (Loss) Per Property if OPP Provide Police Services ($849.02) ($914.93) ($977.30) ($694.45) ($413.43) ($142.26) $116.28 $371.09 $624.79 $878.00 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police Scenario B-1: Shelburne Police Services Complement Increase as Identified by the Chief; $150,000 Allocated for Critical Facility Upgrades Shelburne Police Services and Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) - Scenario B-1 Shelburne Police complement enhancements requested by the Chief include an Inspector in 2020, an additional sergeant and first class constable in 2021, and an additional first class constable in 2024. Total complement of 19.35, including civilian administrative staff, by 2024. The complement request and timing is dependent upon year to year assessment by the Chief. Shelburne Police Services staff continue to receive salary increases estimated at 2% Shelburne police capital equipment replacement, such as vehicles and radios, continue as planned Renovations to the existing Shelburne police facility are constrained to $150,000 The OPP estimate includes recently awarded salary increases of 2.15% for uniform officers and 1.5% for civilian staff Base Year 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Scenario 1: $150.000 Rennovation expense for current Police Station Shelburne Police Services continues to provide policing $2,535,763 $2,760,639 $2,922,185 $3,001,345 $3,114,388 $3,286,737 $3,384,437 $3,478,343 $3,551,790 $3,621,414 $3,692,429 Capital Costs if Shelburne continues to provide police services $93,000 $78,000 $57,500 $58,000 $55,500 $90,000 $71,000 $46,000 $45,000 $45,000 $46,000 Rennovation Costs for current Police Station $0 $150,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Revenue Adjustment ($124,544) ($123,068) ($123,919) ($124,788) ($125,673) ($126,577) ($127,498) ($128,438) ($129,397) ($130,375) ($131,373) SPS Total Capital and Operating Cost $2,504,219 $2,865,571 $2,855,766 $2,934,557 $3,044,215 $3,250,160 $3,327,939 $3,395,905 $3,467,393 $3,536,039 $3,607,057 Property Counts - Private Dwellings & Commercial / Industrial 3115 3338 3501 3581 3662 3744 3804 3894 3969 4024 4079 Cost per Property $804 $858 $816 $819 $831 $868 $875 $872 $874 $879 $884 OPP Provides Police Services $2,851,249 $2,907,631 $2,963,915 $1,754,040 $1,823,179 $1,874,689 $1,925,421 $1,971,740 $2,015,127 $2,058,251 Uniform & Equipment Adjustment - Year 1 ($29,160) Estimated Year 1 Policing Costs $2,822,089 Total Uniform, Equipment & Vehicle Costs - Year 1 $414,249 Total Policing Costs - Year 1 $3,236,338 Total Severance & Pension Adjustment $2,360,079 Revenue Adjustment ($176,959) ($60,203) ($60,697) ($61,201) ($61,715) ($62,240) ($62,774) ($63,320) ($63,876) ($64,444) OPP Total Capital and Operating Cost $5,419,458 $2,847,428 $2,903,217 $1,692,839 $1,761,463 $1,812,450 $1,862,647 $1,908,420 $1,951,251 $1,993,807 Property Counts - Private Dwellings & Commercial / Industrial 3338 3501 3581 3662 3744 3804 3894 3969 4024 4079 Cost per Property $1,624 $813 $811 $462 $470 $476 $478 $481 $485 $489 Annual Cost if Shelburne Police provide policing service $2,865,571 $2,855,766 $2,934,557 $3,044,215 $3,250,160 $3,327,939 $3,395,905 $3,467,393 $3,536,039 $3,607,057 Annual Cost if OPP provide policing service $5,419,458 $2,847,428 $2,903,217 $1,692,839 $1,761,463 $1,812,450 $1,862,647 $1,908,420 $1,951,251 $1,993,807 Difference: Shelburne Police cost minus OPP annual (loss) gain for the town ($2,553,887) $8,338 $31,340 $1,351,375 $1,488,697 $1,515,489 $1,533,258 $1,558,974 $1,584,787 $1,613,249 Cumulative 10 year (loss) gain if Shelburne chooses OPP for policing ($2,553,887) ($2,545,550) ($2,514,210) ($1,162,835) $325,863 $1,841,352 $3,374,610 $4,933,583 $6,518,371 $8,131,620 Cost Per Property 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Shelburne Police Services $858.47 $815.70 $819.48 $831.30 $868.10 $874.85 $872.09 $873.62 $878.74 $884.30 Ontario Provincial Police $1,623.56 $813.32 $810.73 $462.27 $470.48 $476.46 $478.34 $480.83 $484.90 $488.80 Average Annual Gain (Loss) Per Property if OPP Provide Police Services ($765.10) $2.38 $8.75 $369.03 $397.62 $398.39 $393.75 $392.79 $393.83 $395.50 Cumulative 10-Year Average Gain (Loss) Per Property if OPP Provide Police Services ($765.10) ($762.71) ($753.96) ($384.94) $12.69 $411.08 $804.83 $1,197.62 $1,591.45 $1,986.95 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police Scenario B-2: Shelburne Police Services Complement Increase as Identified by the Chief; $3 Million Capital for Renovations to the Existing Facility Shelburne Police Services and Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) - Scenario B-2 Shelburne Police complement enhancements requested by the Chief include an Inspector in 2020, an additional sergeant and first class constable in 2021, and an additional first class constable in 2024. Total complement of 19.35, including civilian administrative staff, by 2024. The complement request and timing is dependent upon year to year assessment by the Chief. Shelburne Police Services staff continue to receive salary increases estimated at 2% Shelburne police capital equipment replacement, such as vehicles and radios, continue as planned $3 million capital expense for police facility addition and renovation The OPP estimate includes recently awarded salary increases of 2.15% for uniform officers and 1.5% for civilian staff Base Year 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Shelburne Police Services continues to provide policing $2,535,763 $2,760,639 $2,922,185 $3,001,345 $3,114,388 $3,286,737 $3,384,437 $3,478,343 $3,551,790 $3,621,414 $3,692,429 Capital Costs if Shelburne continues to provide police services $93,000 $78,000 $57,500 $58,000 $55,500 $90,000 $71,000 $46,000 $45,000 $45,000 $46,000 Amortization Schedule for $3 million loan: Beginning Balance $3,000,000 $2,944,719 $2,831,656 $2,715,176 $2,595,175 $2,471,548 $2,344,183 $2,212,969 $2,077,790 $1,938,524 Scheduled Payment $100,281 $200,563 $200,563 $200,563 $200,563 $200,563 $200,563 $200,563 $200,563 $200,563 Principal $55,281 $113,063 $116,480 $120,001 $123,628 $127,364 $131,214 $135,180 $139,266 $143,475 Interest $45,000 $87,500 $84,083 $80,562 $76,935 $73,198 $69,349 $65,383 $61,297 $57,088 Ending Balance $2,944,719 $2,831,656 $2,715,176 $2,595,175 $2,471,548 $2,344,183 $2,212,969 $2,077,790 $1,938,524 $1,795,049 Revenue Adjustment ($124,544) ($123,068) ($123,919) ($124,788) ($125,673) ($126,577) ($127,498) ($128,438) ($129,397) ($130,375) ($131,373) SPS Total Capital and Operating Cost $2,504,219 $2,815,852 $3,056,329 $3,135,120 $3,244,777 $3,450,723 $3,528,502 $3,596,468 $3,667,956 $3,736,601 $3,807,619 Property Counts - Private Dwellings & Commercial / Industrial 3115 3338 3501 3581 3662 3744 3804 3894 3969 4024 4079 Cost per Property $804 $844 $873 $875 $886 $922 $928 $924 $924 $929 $933 OPP Provides Police Services $2,851,249 $2,907,631 $2,963,915 $1,754,040 $1,823,179 $1,874,689 $1,925,421 $1,971,740 $2,015,127 $2,058,251 Uniform & Equipment Adjustment - Year 1 ($29,160) Estimated Year 1 Policing Costs $2,822,089 Total Uniform, Equipment & Vehicle Costs - Year 1 $414,249 Total Policing Costs - Year 1 $3,236,338 Total Severance & Pension Adjustment $2,360,079 Revenue Adjustment ($176,959) ($60,203) ($60,697) ($61,201) ($61,715) ($62,240) ($62,774) ($63,320) ($63,876) ($64,444) OPP Total Capital and Operating Cost $5,419,458 $2,847,428 $2,903,217 $1,692,839 $1,761,463 $1,812,450 $1,862,647 $1,908,420 $1,951,251 $1,993,807 Property Counts - Private Dwellings & Commercial / Industrial 3338 3501 3581 3662 3744 3804 3894 3969 4024 4079 Cost per Property $1,624 $813 $811 $462 $470 $476 $478 $481 $485 $489 Annual Comparison 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Shelburne Police Services $2,815,852 $3,056,329 $3,135,120 $3,244,777 $3,450,723 $3,528,502 $3,596,468 $3,667,956 $3,736,601 $3,807,619 Ontario Provincial Police $5,419,458 $2,847,428 $2,903,217 $1,692,839 $1,761,463 $1,812,450 $1,862,647 $1,908,420 $1,951,251 $1,993,807 Annual Gain (Loss) if OPP Provide Police Services ($2,603,606) $208,900 $231,902 $1,551,938 $1,689,260 $1,716,052 $1,733,821 $1,759,536 $1,785,350 $1,813,812 Cumulative 10-Year Gain (Loss) if OPP Provide Police Services ($2,603,606) ($2,394,706) ($2,162,804) ($610,865) $1,078,394 $2,794,446 $4,528,267 $6,287,803 $8,073,153 $9,886,965 Cost Per Property 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Shelburne Police Services $843.57 $872.99 $875.49 $886.07 $921.67 $927.58 $923.59 $924.15 $928.58 $933.47 Ontario Provincial Police $1,623.56 $813.32 $810.73 $462.27 $470.48 $476.46 $478.34 $480.83 $484.90 $488.80 Average Annual Gain (Loss) Per Property if OPP Provide Police Services ($779.99) $59.67 $64.76 $423.80 $451.19 $451.12 $445.25 $443.32 $443.68 $444.67 Cumulative 10-Year Average Gain (Loss) Per Property if OPP Provide Police Services ($779.99) ($720.32) ($655.56) ($231.77) $219.42 $670.54 $1,115.80 $1,559.12 $2,002.79 $2,447.46 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police Scenario B-3: Shelburne Police Services Complement Increase as Identified by the Chief; $7 Million Capital for Renovations to the Existing Facility Shelburne Police Services and Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) - Scenario B-3 Shelburne Police complement enhancements requested by the Chief include an Inspector in 2020, an additional sergeant and first class constable in 2021, and an additional first class constable in 2024. Total complement of 19.35, including civilian administrative staff, by 2024. The complement request and timing is dependent upon year to year assessment by the Chief. Shelburne Police Services staff continue to receive salary increases of an estimated 2% Shelburne police capital equipment replacement, such as vehicles and radios, continue as planned $7 million capital expense for a police facility The OPP estimate includes recently awarded salary increases of 2.15% for uniform officers and 1.5% for civilian staff Base Year 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Shelburne Police Services continues to provide policing $2,535,763 $2,760,639 $2,922,185 $3,001,345 $3,114,388 $3,286,737 $3,384,437 $3,478,343 $3,551,790 $3,621,414 $3,692,429 Capital Costs if Shelburne continues to provide police services $93,000 $78,000 $57,500 $58,000 $55,500 $90,000 $71,000 $46,000 $45,000 $45,000 $46,000 Amortization Schedule for $7 million loan: Beginning Balance $7,000,000 $6,871,010 $6,607,197 $6,335,411 $6,055,409 $5,766,945 $5,469,761 $5,163,595 $4,848,176 $4,523,223 Scheduled Payment $233,990 $467,979 $467,979 $467,979 $467,979 $467,979 $467,979 $467,979 $467,979 $467,979 Principal $128,990 $263,813 $271,787 $280,001 $288,465 $297,183 $306,166 $315,420 $324,953 $334,775 Interest $105,000 $204,166 $196,193 $187,978 $179,515 $170,796 $161,814 $152,560 $143,026 $133,205 Ending Balance $6,871,010 $6,607,197 $6,335,411 $6,055,409 $5,766,945 $5,469,761 $5,163,595 $4,848,176 $4,523,223 $4,188,448 Revenue Adjustment ($124,544) ($123,068) ($123,919) ($124,788) ($125,673) ($126,577) ($127,498) ($128,438) ($129,397) ($130,375) ($131,373) SPS Total Capital and Operating Cost $2,504,219 $2,949,561 $3,323,745 $3,402,536 $3,512,194 $3,718,140 $3,795,918 $3,863,885 $3,935,373 $4,004,018 $4,075,036 Property Counts - Private Dwellings & Commercial / Industrial 3,115 3,338 3,501 3,581 3,662 3,744 3,804 3,894 3,969 4,024 4,079 Cost per Property $804 $884 $949 $950 $959 $993 $998 $992 $992 $995 $999 OPP Provides Police Services $2,851,249 $2,907,631 $2,963,915 $1,754,040 $1,823,179 $1,874,689 $1,925,421 $1,971,740 $2,015,127 $2,058,251 Uniform & Equipment Adjustment - Year 1 ($29,160) Estimated Year 1 Policing Costs $2,822,089 Total Uniform, Equipment & Vehicle Costs - Year 1 $414,249 Total Policing Costs - Year 1 $3,236,338 Total Severance & Pension Adjustment $2,360,079 Revenue Adjustment ($176,959) ($60,203) ($60,697) ($61,201) ($61,715) ($62,240) ($62,774) ($63,320) ($63,876) ($64,444) OPP Total Capital and Operating Cost $5,419,458 $2,847,428 $2,903,217 $1,692,839 $1,761,463 $1,812,450 $1,862,647 $1,908,420 $1,951,251 $1,993,807 Property Counts - Private Dwellings & Commercial / Industrial $3,338 $3,501 $3,581 $3,662 $3,744 $3,804 $3,894 $3,969 $4,024 $4,079 Cost per Property $1,624 $813 $811 $462 $470 $476 $478 $481 $485 $489 Annual Cost if Shelburne Police provide policing service $2,949,561 $3,323,745 $3,402,536 $3,512,194 $3,718,140 $3,795,918 $3,863,885 $3,935,373 $4,004,018 $4,075,036 Annual Cost if OPP provide policing service $5,419,458 $2,847,428 $2,903,217 $1,692,839 $1,761,463 $1,812,450 $1,862,647 $1,908,420 $1,951,251 $1,993,807 Difference: Shelburne Police cost minus OPP annual (loss) gain for the town ($2,469,898) $476,317 $499,319 $1,819,355 $1,956,677 $1,983,469 $2,001,238 $2,026,953 $2,052,767 $2,081,228 Cumulative 10 year (loss) gain if Shelburne chooses OPP for policing ($2,469,898) ($1,993,581) ($1,494,261) $325,093 $2,281,770 $4,265,239 $6,266,476 $8,293,429 $10,346,196 $12,427,424 Cost Per Property 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Shelburne Police Services $883.63 $949.37 $950.16 $959.09 $993.09 $997.88 $992.27 $991.53 $995.03 $999.03 Ontario Provincial Police $1,623.56 $813.32 $810.73 $462.27 $470.48 $476.46 $478.34 $480.83 $484.90 $488.80 Average Annual Gain (Loss) Per Property if OPP Provide Police Services ($739.93) $136.05 $139.44 $496.82 $522.62 $521.42 $513.93 $510.70 $510.13 $510.23 Cumulative 10-Year Average Gain (Loss) Per Property if OPP Provide Police Services ($739.93) ($603.88) ($464.45) $32.37 $554.99 $1,076.41 $1,590.34 $2,101.03 $2,611.16 $3,121.39 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police Scenario C-1: Shelburne Police Services Complement Increase as Identified by the Chief Except for the Inspector’s Position; $150,000 Allocated for Critical Facility Upgrades Shelburne Police Services and Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) - Scenario C-1 Shelburne Police complement enhancements requested by the Chief include an Inspector in 2020, an additional sergeant and first class constable in 2021, and an additional first class constable in 2024. Total complement of 19.35, including civilian administrative staff, by 2024. The complement request and timing is dependent upon year to year assessment by the Chief. Shelburne Police Services staff continue to receive salary increases estimated at 2% Shelburne police capital equipment replacement, such as vehicles and radios, continue as planned Renovations to the existing Shelburne police facility are constrained to $150,000 The OPP estimate includes recently awarded salary increases of 2.15% for uniform officers and 1.5% for civilian staff Base Year 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Scenario 1: $150.000 Rennovation expense for current Police Station Shelburne Police Services continues to provide policing $2,535,763 $2,601,158 $2,759,691 $2,835,772 $2,945,674 $3,114,826 $3,209,259 $3,299,833 $3,369,882 $3,436,039 $3,503,520 Capital Costs if Shelburne continues to provide police services $93,000 $78,000 $57,500 $58,000 $55,500 $90,000 $71,000 $46,000 $45,000 $45,000 $46,000 Rennovation Costs for current Police Station $0 $150,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Revenue Adjustment ($124,544) ($123,068) ($123,919) ($124,788) ($125,673) ($126,577) ($127,498) ($128,438) ($129,397) ($130,375) ($131,373) SPS Total Capital and Operating Cost $2,504,219 $2,706,090 $2,693,272 $2,768,984 $2,875,501 $3,078,249 $3,152,760 $3,217,395 $3,285,485 $3,350,664 $3,418,147 Property Counts - Private Dwellings & Commercial / Industrial 3,115 3,338 3,501 3,581 3,662 3,744 3,804 3,894 3,969 4,024 4,079 Cost per Property $804 $811 $769 $773 $785 $822 $829 $826 $828 $833 $838 OPP Provides Police Services $2,851,249 $2,907,631 $2,963,915 $1,754,040 $1,823,179 $1,874,689 $1,925,421 $1,971,740 $2,015,127 $2,058,251 Uniform & Equipment Adjustment - Year 1 ($29,160) Estimated Year 1 Policing Costs $2,822,089 Total Uniform, Equipment & Vehicle Costs - Year 1 $414,249 Total Policing Costs - Year 1 $3,236,338 Total Severance & Pension Adjustment $2,360,079 Revenue Adjustment ($176,959) ($60,203) ($60,697) ($61,201) ($61,715) ($62,240) ($62,774) ($63,320) ($63,876) ($64,444) OPP Total Capital and Operating Cost $5,419,458 $2,847,428 $2,903,217 $1,692,839 $1,761,463 $1,812,450 $1,862,647 $1,908,420 $1,951,251 $1,993,807 Property Counts - Private Dwellings & Commercial / Industrial $3,338 $3,501 $3,581 $3,662 $3,744 $3,804 $3,894 $3,969 $4,024 $4,079 Cost per Property $1,624 $813 $811 $462 $470 $476 $478 $481 $485 $489 Annual Cost if Shelburne Police provide policing service $2,706,090 $2,693,272 $2,768,984 $2,875,501 $3,078,249 $3,152,760 $3,217,395 $3,285,485 $3,350,664 $3,418,147 Annual Cost if OPP provide policing service $5,419,458 $2,847,428 $2,903,217 $1,692,839 $1,761,463 $1,812,450 $1,862,647 $1,908,420 $1,951,251 $1,993,807 Difference: Shelburne Police cost minus OPP annual (loss) gain for the town ($2,713,368) ($154,156) ($134,233) $1,182,661 $1,316,786 $1,340,311 $1,354,748 $1,377,065 $1,399,413 $1,424,340 Cumulative 10 year (loss) gain if Shelburne chooses OPP for policing ($2,713,368) ($2,867,524) ($3,001,757) ($1,819,096) ($502,310) $838,000 $2,192,748 $3,569,813 $4,969,227 $6,393,566 Cost Per Property 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Shelburne Police Services $810.69 $769.29 $773.24 $785.23 $822.18 $828.80 $826.24 $827.79 $832.67 $837.99 Ontario Provincial Police $1,623.56 $813.32 $810.73 $462.27 $470.48 $476.46 $478.34 $480.83 $484.90 $488.80 Average Annual Gain (Loss) Per Property if OPP Provide Police Services ($812.87) ($44.03) ($37.48) $322.96 $351.71 $352.34 $347.91 $346.96 $347.77 $349.19 Cumulative 10-Year Average Gain (Loss) Per Property if OPP Provide Police Services ($812.87) ($856.90) ($894.39) ($571.43) ($219.73) $132.61 $480.52 $827.48 $1,175.24 $1,524.43 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police Scenario C-2: Shelburne Police Services Complement Increase as Identified by the Chief Except for the Inspector’s Position; $3 Million Allocated for Facility Renovations Shelburne Police Services and Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) - Scenario C-2 Shelburne Police complement enhancements requested by the Chief include an Inspector in 2020, an additional sergeant and first class constable in 2021, and an additional first class constable in 2024. Total complement of 19.35, including civilian administrative staff, by 2024. The complement request and timing is dependent upon year to year assessment by the Chief. Shelburne Police Services staff continue to receive salary increases estimated at 2% Shelburne police capital equipment replacement, such as vehicles and radios, continue as planned $3 million capital expense for police facility addition and renovation The OPP estimate includes recently awarded salary increases of 2.15% for uniform officers and 1.5% for civilian staff Base Year 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 $3 million capital expense for major rennovations to Police Station Shelburne Police Services continues to provide policing $2,535,763 $2,601,158 $2,759,691 $2,835,772 $2,945,674 $3,114,826 $3,209,259 $3,299,833 $3,369,882 $3,436,039 $3,503,520 Capital Costs if Shelburne continues to provide police services $93,000 $78,000 $57,500 $58,000 $55,500 $90,000 $71,000 $46,000 $45,000 $45,000 $46,000 Amortization Schedule for $3 million loan: Beginning Balance $3,000,000 $2,944,719 $2,831,656 $2,715,176 $2,595,175 $2,471,548 $2,344,183 $2,212,969 $2,077,790 $1,938,524 Scheduled Payment $100,281 $200,563 $200,563 $200,563 $200,563 $200,563 $200,563 $200,563 $200,563 $200,563 Principal $55,281 $113,063 $116,480 $120,001 $123,628 $127,364 $131,214 $135,180 $139,266 $143,475 Interest $45,000 $87,500 $84,083 $80,562 $76,935 $73,198 $69,349 $65,383 $61,297 $57,088 Ending Balance $2,944,719 $2,831,656 $2,715,176 $2,595,175 $2,471,548 $2,344,183 $2,212,969 $2,077,790 $1,938,524 $1,795,049 Revenue Adjustment ($124,544) ($123,068) ($123,919) ($124,788) ($125,673) ($126,577) ($127,498) ($128,438) ($129,397) ($130,375) ($131,373) SPS Total Capital and Operating Cost $2,504,219 $2,656,372 $2,893,835 $2,969,547 $3,076,063 $3,278,812 $3,353,323 $3,417,958 $3,486,048 $3,551,227 $3,618,710 Property Counts - Private Dwellings & Commercial / Industrial 3,115 3,338 3,501 3,581 3,662 3,744 3,804 3,894 3,969 4,024 4,079 Cost per Property $804 $796 $827 $829 $840 $876 $882 $878 $878 $883 $887 OPP Provides Police Services $2,851,249 $2,907,631 $2,963,915 $1,754,040 $1,823,179 $1,874,689 $1,925,421 $1,971,740 $2,015,127 $2,058,251 Uniform & Equipment Adjustment - Year 1 ($29,160) Estimated Year 1 Policing Costs $2,822,089 Total Uniform, Equipment & Vehicle Costs - Year 1 $414,249 Total Policing Costs - Year 1 $3,236,338 Total Severance & Pension Adjustment $2,360,079 Revenue Adjustment ($176,959) ($60,203) ($60,697) ($61,201) ($61,715) ($62,240) ($62,774) ($63,320) ($63,876) ($64,444) OPP Total Capital and Operating Cost $5,419,458 $2,847,428 $2,903,217 $1,692,839 $1,761,463 $1,812,450 $1,862,647 $1,908,420 $1,951,251 $1,993,807 Property Counts - Private Dwellings & Commercial / Industrial $3,338 $3,501 $3,581 $3,662 $3,744 $3,804 $3,894 $3,969 $4,024 $4,079 Cost per Property $1,624 $813 $811 $462 $470 $476 $478 $481 $485 $489 Annual Cost if Shelburne Police provide policing service $2,656,372 $2,893,835 $2,969,547 $3,076,063 $3,278,812 $3,353,323 $3,417,958 $3,486,048 $3,551,227 $3,618,710 Annual Cost if OPP provide policing service $5,419,458 $2,847,428 $2,903,217 $1,692,839 $1,761,463 $1,812,450 $1,862,647 $1,908,420 $1,951,251 $1,993,807 Difference: Shelburne Police cost minus OPP annual (loss) gain for the town ($2,763,087) $46,406 $66,329 $1,383,224 $1,517,348 $1,540,873 $1,555,311 $1,577,628 $1,599,976 $1,624,902 Cumulative 10 year (loss) gain if Shelburne chooses OPP for policing ($2,763,087) ($2,716,680) ($2,650,351) ($1,267,127) $250,221 $1,791,095 $3,346,405 $4,924,033 $6,524,009 $8,148,911 Cost Per Property 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Shelburne Police Services $795.80 $826.57 $829.25 $840.00 $875.75 $881.53 $877.75 $878.32 $882.51 $887.16 Ontario Provincial Police $1,623.56 $813.32 $810.73 $462.27 $470.48 $476.46 $478.34 $480.83 $484.90 $488.80 Average Annual Gain (Loss) Per Property if OPP Provide Police Services ($827.77) $13.26 $18.52 $377.72 $405.27 $405.07 $399.41 $397.49 $397.61 $398.36 Cumulative 10-Year Average Gain (Loss) Per Property if OPP Provide Police Services ($827.77) ($814.51) ($795.99) ($418.27) ($12.99) $392.08 $791.49 $1,188.98 $1,586.58 $1,984.94 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police Scenario C-3: Shelburne Police Services Complement Increase as Identified by the Chief Except for the Inspector’s Position; $7 Million Allocated for a New Facility Shelburne Police Services and Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) - Scenario C-3 Shelburne Police complement enhancements requested by the Chief include an Inspector in 2020, an additional sergeant and first class constable in 2021, and an additional first class constable in 2024. Total complement of 19.35, including civilian administrative staff, by 2024. The complement request and timing is dependent upon year to year assessment by the Chief. Shelburne Police Services staff continue to receive salary increases estimated at 2% Shelburne police capital equipment replacement, such as vehicles and radios, continue as planned $7 million capital expense for a police facility The OPP estimate includes recently awarded salary increases of 2.15% for uniform officers and 1.5% for civilian staff Base Year 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 $7 million capital expense to fund new Police Station Shelburne Police Services continues to provide policing $2,535,763 $2,601,158 $2,759,691 $2,835,772 $2,945,674 $3,114,826 $3,209,259 $3,299,833 $3,369,882 $3,436,039 $3,503,520 Capital Costs if Shelburne continues to provide police services $93,000 $78,000 $57,500 $58,000 $55,500 $90,000 $71,000 $46,000 $45,000 $45,000 $46,000 Amortization Schedule for $7 million loan: Beginning Balance $7,000,000 $6,871,010 $6,607,197 $6,335,411 $6,055,409 $5,766,945 $5,469,761 $5,163,595 $4,848,176 $4,523,223 Scheduled Payment $233,990 $467,979 $467,979 $467,979 $467,979 $467,979 $467,979 $467,979 $467,979 $467,979 Principal $128,990 $263,813 $271,787 $280,001 $288,465 $297,183 $306,166 $315,420 $324,953 $334,775 Interest $105,000 $204,166 $196,193 $187,978 $179,515 $170,796 $161,814 $152,560 $143,026 $133,205 Ending Balance $6,871,010 $6,607,197 $6,335,411 $6,055,409 $5,766,945 $5,469,761 $5,163,595 $4,848,176 $4,523,223 $4,188,448 Revenue Adjustment ($124,544) ($123,068) ($123,919) ($124,788) ($125,673) ($126,577) ($127,498) ($128,438) ($129,397) ($130,375) ($131,373) SPS Total Capital and Operating Cost $2,504,219 $2,790,080 $3,161,251 $3,236,964 $3,343,480 $3,546,228 $3,620,740 $3,685,374 $3,753,464 $3,818,644 $3,886,127 Property Counts - Private Dwellings & Commercial / Industrial 3,115 3,338 3,501 3,581 3,662 3,744 3,804 3,894 3,969 4,024 4,079 Cost per Property $804 $836 $903 $904 $913 $947 $952 $946 $946 $949 $953 OPP Provides Police Services $2,851,249 $2,907,631 $2,963,915 $1,754,040 $1,823,179 $1,874,689 $1,925,421 $1,971,740 $2,015,127 $2,058,251 Uniform & Equipment Adjustment - Year 1 ($29,160) Estimated Year 1 Policing Costs $2,822,089 Total Uniform, Equipment & Vehicle Costs - Year 1 $414,249 Total Policing Costs - Year 1 $3,236,338 Total Severance & Pension Adjustment $2,360,079 Revenue Adjustment ($176,959) ($60,203) ($60,697) ($61,201) ($61,715) ($62,240) ($62,774) ($63,320) ($63,876) ($64,444) OPP Total Capital and Operating Cost $5,419,458 $2,847,428 $2,903,217 $1,692,839 $1,761,463 $1,812,450 $1,862,647 $1,908,420 $1,951,251 $1,993,807 Property Counts - Private Dwellings & Commercial / Industrial $3,338 $3,501 $3,581 $3,662 $3,744 $3,804 $3,894 $3,969 $4,024 $4,079 Cost per Property $1,624 $813 $811 $462 $470 $476 $478 $481 $485 $489 Annual Cost if Shelburne Police provide policing service $2,790,080 $3,161,251 $3,236,964 $3,343,480 $3,546,228 $3,620,740 $3,685,374 $3,753,464 $3,818,644 $3,886,127 Annual Cost if OPP provide policing service $5,419,458 $2,847,428 $2,903,217 $1,692,839 $1,761,463 $1,812,450 $1,862,647 $1,908,420 $1,951,251 $1,993,807 Difference: Shelburne Police cost minus OPP annual (loss) gain for the town ($2,629,378) $313,823 $333,746 $1,650,641 $1,784,765 $1,808,290 $1,822,727 $1,845,045 $1,867,392 $1,892,319 Cumulative 10 year (loss) gain if Shelburne chooses OPP for policing ($2,629,378) ($2,315,555) ($1,981,809) ($331,168) $1,453,597 $3,261,887 $5,084,615 $6,929,659 $8,797,052 $10,689,371 Cost Per Property 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Shelburne Police Services $835.85 $902.96 $903.93 $913.02 $947.18 $951.82 $946.42 $945.70 $948.97 $952.72 Ontario Provincial Police $1,623.56 $813.32 $810.73 $462.27 $470.48 $476.46 $478.34 $480.83 $484.90 $488.80 Average Annual Gain (Loss) Per Property if OPP Provide Police Services ($787.71) $89.64 $93.20 $450.75 $476.70 $475.37 $468.09 $464.86 $464.06 $463.92 Cumulative 10-Year Average Gain (Loss) Per Property if OPP Provide Police Services ($787.71) ($698.07) ($604.87) ($154.12) $322.58 $797.94 $1,266.03 $1,730.89 $2,194.95 $2,658.87 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police Appendix B: Frequency and Type of Incidents 2016-2018 A Study and Analysis of Policing Options Shelburne Police Services and the Ontario Provincial Police The most frequent incidents (traffic stops, community involvement, and traffic enforcement are not included in this chart. Table 8: Frequency of Incidents by Type 2016 - 2018 Appendix 6 to CAO2019-08 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey Survey Report March 28 - June 09, 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey PROJECT: Shelburne Policing Survey Have your say Shelburne Page 1 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey Shelburne Policing Survey Q2 Do you live in Shelburne? 43 (8.3%) 43 (8.3%) No Yes 477 (91.7%) 477 (91.7%) Question options Yes No (520 responses, 0 skipped) Page 2 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey Shelburne Policing Survey Q4 What is your age? AGE 75+ AGE 18-24 13 (2.5%) 17 (3.3%) 46 (8.8%) 13AGE (2.5%) 6 17 (3.3%) 101 (19.4%) 5-7 67 (12.9%)46 (8.8%) 4 AGE 25-34 101 (19.4%) AGE 55-64 67 (12.9%) AGE 45-54 AGE 35-44 121 (23.3%) 155 (29.8%) 121 (23.3%) 155 (29.8%) Question options 18-24 years 25-34 years 35-44 years 45-54 years 55-64 65-74 75+ (520 responses, 0 skipped) Page 3 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey Shelburne Policing Survey : Q5 How important are these services to you, when considering policing services? 550 5 2 7 18 13 24 31 41 39 52 58 5 452 7 500 18 13 46 24 31 41 58 39 53 52 58 45 54 49 46 61 89 58 53 54 450 65 113 49 61 89 91 102 51 65 113 150 102 400 91 51 141 150 143 189 141 119 350 143 103 183 154 189 119 103 183 154 168 300 192 168 192 250 139 174 153 139 174 200 148 368 153 368 320 Shelburne 148 163 of 276 150 75 320 163 253 Town 276 75 the 204 253 100 within 204 153 knowing yo ur police officers 125 128 office a 107 99 153 ou r availability 50 125 128 74 RIDE enforcement Police service boards Police service Officers in the schools 24 h Foot Patrol enforcement Speeding Reducing Cost of policing Response times to calls Cost of policing Having Personally 107 99 74 nt Question options Not important at all Of little importance Of average importance Very important Absolutely essential (520 responses, 0 skipped) Page 4 of 29 Summary of Responses Q5: How important are these services to you, when considering policing services? March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey Q6 Please list additional services that you feel are important Date Comment Received 3/28/2019 10:00 AM School programs on drugs, violence etc. 3/28/2019 10:15 AM We need to keep our police force 3/28/2019 10:29 AM Nighly checks of downtown doors, 3/28/2019 11:11 AM surveillance of businesses after hours 3/28/2019 11:32 AM COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT 3/28/2019 11:34 AM Police presence 3/28/2019 11:39 AM Positive interaction with community to promote positive attitudes, respect and approachability 3/28/2019 11:42 AM patrolling at nite for vehicle theft patrolling the parks for drugs 3/28/2019 12:03 PM Traffic enforcement on long weekends 3/28/2019 12:03 PM Traffic enforcement on long weekends 3/28/2019 12:19 PM Shelburne Police are able to provide the number of officers needed for a growing community. 3/28/2019 12:26 PM The way that our local officers are involved in the community 3/28/2019 12:54 PM More people more crime and this town seems to want more people 3/28/2019 01:03 PM Dare, 3/28/2019 01:05 PM Community and resident familiarity 3/28/2019 01:10 PM cruiser patrols. Page 7 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey 3/28/2019 01:37 PM Community awareness programs, teaching kids safety and responsibility, community involvement. 3/28/2019 02:00 PM Generally speaking what is important is remembering that this needs to be a business decision 3/28/2019 02:14 PM Bringing in undercover drug enforcement officers into the high schools. Impossible currently. 3/28/2019 02:46 PM Having them live in Shelburne themselves. 3/28/2019 02:52 PM Parpicitation in Remembrance Day, parades, community involvement 3/28/2019 02:52 PM We do not need our own police. OPP are what many larger center are doing successfully. Better op 3/28/2019 03:42 PM Why doesn’t the OPP and SPS share a building? 3/28/2019 03:44 PM Quit wasting money on non-essential your wish list. Provide what we NEED to make the town function. 3/28/2019 03:51 PM public access to station & officers,in town presence at all times not pulled elsewhere 3/28/2019 04:44 PM DARE program. 3/28/2019 05:01 PM Foot patrol, bicycle patrol 3/28/2019 05:03 PM Shelburne Police Service, Shelburne Fire Department, Dufferin Paramedics. What we have is perfect. 3/28/2019 05:08 PM Na 3/28/2019 05:10 PM Police being present will deter crime, OPP will not be present 3/28/2019 05:33 PM Having an officer available with in minutes! And always in town close by!! 3/28/2019 05:37 PM Community Involvement( seeing the police conversing and involved with our youth!) 3/28/2019 05:51 PM We need the opp to take over policing Shelburne Page 8 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey 3/28/2019 06:03 PM Feel the OPP will do just as good a job as long as there is substantial presence in the community 3/28/2019 06:10 PM I want the Shelburne Police Force to stay ..... important for response times and community safety. 3/28/2019 06:11 PM Being involved in the community events fundraisers 3/28/2019 06:12 PM Auxiliary, mental health officers, alcohol drug gang specialists, canine, victim services 3/28/2019 06:26 PM Lock it or lose it/policing of town events ie: parades, fundraising events/DARE/local police checks/ 3/28/2019 06:29 PM Police education to the community, and volunteering 3/28/2019 06:33 PM RIDE, quick response when called, 24hr availability 3/28/2019 07:21 PM Very fast response times to 911 calls. Short response timed save lives! 3/28/2019 07:36 PM A small hospital or clinic or after hours, night service and weekends! 3/28/2019 09:58 PM Visible presence of police 3/29/2019 04:15 AM Being able to walk to the police station if I need to. I can’t walk to the OPP station. 3/29/2019 07:21 AM Extended support services 3/29/2019 08:14 AM Knowing what the OPP Services are comparable to shelburne police 3/29/2019 09:00 AM Adequate and accessible anal control services 3/29/2019 09:03 AM Having an active force interacting with our community is ALL ways!!! 3/29/2019 09:44 AM Community service. Attending events to get to know people in the community. 3/29/2019 10:26 AM Reducing public harassment 3/29/2019 12:21 PM n/a Page 9 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey 3/29/2019 02:10 PM School program in the high school by local officers 3/29/2019 04:54 PM Police should be in town and part of the community they serve 3/29/2019 04:56 PM Anti Racisim program. My kids are being made fun of and attacked. Police and school refuse to help 3/29/2019 05:37 PM Undercover patrols, more visual presence 3/29/2019 06:59 PM Community presence 3/29/2019 08:03 PM I think having the Town Police is essential for Shelburne - one of the fastest growing communities. 3/30/2019 04:56 AM Police having a connection with the community is essential. We want splash pads, two ice surfaces. We also want to keep 3/30/2019 06:20 AM police.population i rising so will crime 3/30/2019 08:05 AM We need to look at the existing pool. Open it all year round. Oville pools are too busy now. 3/30/2019 08:26 AM Access to Station & Officers by seniors & non driving people 3/30/2019 01:51 PM Lock it or lose it, DARE, community involvement, polar plunge 3/30/2019 05:17 PM Everyone knows our police and that is the way our a small town should be. Everything they do is impo 3/30/2019 06:49 PM It is extremely essential that Shelburne retains its service as visibility is important. 3/31/2019 12:32 AM Roaming patrol 3/31/2019 05:40 AM Crime and vandalism are down when police patrol and interact with people and businesses within the t 3/31/2019 06:23 AM Contributing to antibully in our schools 3/31/2019 06:25 AM Resource officer at Cddhs 3/31/2019 03:44 PM Immediate response times Page 10 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey 3/31/2019 04:20 PM Auxiliary, community events, special events 3/31/2019 07:11 PM Ability for investigative and crime prevention and solving. Access to resources 3/31/2019 08:25 PM Being the face of the community 4/01/2019 07:04 AM Checking business at night to ensure safety, car checks, elemen school visits with familiar officers 4/01/2019 08:00 AM Community events and school presence 4/01/2019 08:26 AM The local PD no and interact with the community. . Opp turn over especially in duffrin is unaccept 4/01/2019 08:47 AM traffic control (MVA and social events), mobile patrol though out the town 4/01/2019 09:11 AM SAFETY OF THE COMMUNITY IS UTMOST IMPORTANT. Keep Shelburne Police 4/01/2019 10:30 AM Access to officers that know and are known in the community. Local knowledge. 4/01/2019 11:30 AM Community Policing Initiatives 4/01/2019 11:30 AM Community policing initiatives are important and SPS does a great job of them. 4/01/2019 08:26 PM Transit 4/01/2019 09:11 PM Community dedicated officee 4/01/2019 09:17 PM Experience, Specialized resources, transparency and accountability, current training 4/02/2019 08:17 AM Money saved could build a bypass for transport trucks 4/03/2019 06:57 AM Event security, traffic infractions enforcement, public engagement, event participation 4/03/2019 09:19 AM officers who can respont and complete drug, robbery, and violence reports Checking parked cars, checking teenagers walking about, checking business Page 11 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey 4/03/2019 03:40 PM doors, being visable speed 4/03/2019 05:59 PM I like it that our local police went out of there way to have a program of lock it or loose it ! 4/03/2019 06:20 PM Community service helping with the service clubs 4/03/2019 06:32 PM Seeing SPS at community events is important!!! This will be an added cost w/ OPP! 4/04/2019 03:10 PM Local police are more available to support small town residents 4/04/2019 06:20 PM Tennis courts 4/04/2019 07:07 PM The building a multi million dollar police building is insanity, 15-20 years 1/2 million per year? 4/04/2019 07:26 PM That council as stewards of our tax dollars spend only as much as necessary for policing 4/04/2019 07:27 PM That council as stewards of our tax dollars spend only as much as necessary for policing 4/05/2019 11:01 AM Town police services are required more than ever for a Town that is growing exponentially! 4/05/2019 03:09 PM Keeping the cost down for tax payers 4/07/2019 08:11 PM A town staff member committed to event organization 4/09/2019 04:22 PM Our our police force only have one responsibility to look after. 4/09/2019 07:10 PM The ability of council to have a say in the how what why and when of our policing instead ofOPP boss 4/09/2019 07:15 PM Officers participating in community events 4/10/2019 10:44 AM Stop changing everything for new people in town remember Shelburne history and roots simple is good 4/11/2019 04:01 PM Enforce Stop signs and parking violations and speed in town. 4/11/2019 04:09 PM Enforce STOP signs, stop means stop. Enforcing no motorized vehicles in parklands. Page 12 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey 4/12/2019 04:25 PM "Traffic Control" via police vehicles on main roads at/below speed limit, esp. at peak traffic flow 4/13/2019 09:45 PM I am extremely unhappy with mayor n town council for thinking of getting rid of Shelburne police 4/14/2019 08:23 AM Hospital 24 hour access to timely law enforcement needs but not at the expense of 4/14/2019 10:17 AM pulling people over to fund 4/17/2019 02:00 PM What ever services are available that’s good no need more services but we need our shelburne police. 4/19/2019 12:46 PM Police presence around town 4/19/2019 01:32 PM The area needs to be upgraded to include a basketball court 4/19/2019 02:01 PM Screening city folk moving to Shelburne is important. Stop the gangs/drug problem before it starts. 4/19/2019 02:39 PM Keep our shelburne police department 4/22/2019 12:31 PM Police officers and community engagement 5/03/2019 12:25 PM I worry about reports that OPP officers aren’t treated well inside the OPP organization. 5/04/2019 03:49 AM patrolling our neighborhoods and businesses 5/04/2019 03:57 AM patrol all neighborhoods and businesses 5/10/2019 08:35 PM They stop and give the kids a lift to school or help you shovel your driveway in winter 5/22/2019 11:13 AM strong presence in community and schools, 24 hours, timely responses, RIDE, DARE, foot/car patrol 5/28/2019 07:21 PM Full time - domestic violence officer, community officer, drug officer, trained detectives. 6/04/2019 06:36 AM Cheaper policing 6/05/2019 08:56 PM Community events Page 13 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey Optional question (122 responses, 398 skipped) Page 14 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey Q7 Based on the 2019 budget 36 cents of every $1 paid in taxes is spent on police services. Are you aware that based on the approved 2019 Budget the average cost of Shelburne Police services is $828 per property? Label all charts 219 (42.1%) No 219 (42.1%) Yes 301 (57.9%) 301 (57.9%) Question options Yes No (520 responses, 0 skipped) Q8 The estimated costs to build a new police station is in the range of $4 million to $7 million. Borrowing $6 million, based on a 20 year loan, will increase the Townʼs existing debt repayments of $586,551 by an additional $451,546 per year. Based on the current 2019 cost per property of $828 for policing, how much more per year (for about 20 years) would you be willing to pay in taxes to fund a new police station? $200-$249 47 (9.0%) 73 (14.0%) $150-$199 Willing to 34 (6.5%) 47 (9.0%) 73 (14.0%) pay any $125-$149 amount 34 (6.5%)32 (6.2%) 32$100-$124 (6.2%) Not willing to pay 47 (9.0%) extra taxes $50-$9947 (9.0%) 195 (37.5%) $50- 55 (10.6%) 195 (37.5%) $20-$50 37 (7.1%)55 (10.6%) 37 (7.1%) Question options $200 - $249 $150- $199 $125- $149 $100 - $124 $50 - $99 $20 - $50 Not willing to pay extra taxes Willing to pay any amount (520 responses, 0 skipped) Page 15 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey Q9 Rather than a new police station, one option is to renovate the existing police station at an estimated cost between $2 million to $3 million. Based on the current 2019 cost per property of $828 for policing, how much more per year (for about 20 years) are you willing to pay in taxes to fund a renovation of the existing police station? $200-$249 32 (6.2%) 78 (15.0%) $150-$19931 (6.0%) Willing to 32 (6.2%) 78 (15.0%) pay any $125-$135 (6.7%)49 amount 31 (6.0%) 35$100-$124$100-$1 (6.7%) Not willing 57 (11.0%) to pay extra taxes 163 (31.3%) 57 (11.0%) 57$50-$99 (11.0%) 163 (31.3%) $20-$5067 (12.9%) 57 (11.0%) 67 (12.9%) Question options $200 - $249 $150- $199 $125- $149 $100 - $124 $50 - $99 $20 - $50 Not willing to pay extra taxes Willing to pay any amount (520 responses, 0 skipped) Page 16 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey As part of our Community Improvement Project (CIP), many residents have shared their vision for buildings, public spaces and mobility within Shelburne. The 2009 parks master plan also recommended a number of projects. These ideas and potential projects will require funding in future Q10 years. Rank the initiatives below that you feel could be removed to help fund a rebuild or renovation of the Shelburne Police station (with Not important at all - being you feel the project could be removed and Absolutely essential - being the project should not be removed, to fund a police station) . This list does not include the estimated additional $17 to $20 million in debt funding required for water and sewer related infrastructure as these infrastructure costs are not optional. 550 34 60 58 500 76 34 93 102 104 111 47 58 60 128 119 125 140 76 93 167 102 104 450 111 47 177 119 191 183 128 125 82 205 140 81 217 167 223 177 231 191 183 94 82 205 81 400 217 106 68 96 231 223 108 94 106 117 68 96 108 122 350 117 148 145 137 122 165 148 145 300 145 137 123 141 165 229 92 137 146 189 145 162 163 123 141 92 137 250 143 229 168 146 189 163 162 165 143 164 168 195 165 173 200 164 195 168 114 160 164 173 147 130 143 126 168 150 132 114 160 164 130 104 147 143 116 126 113 132 119 114 97 187 104 100 116 101 113 71 98 119 114 97 187 77 75 57 59 101 63 43 71 52 54 98 86 50 30 68 35 64 77 75 45 57 59 63 35 38 52 54 20 42 23 2243 26 21 20 86 24 27 22 25 Truck by-pass Replace old playground equipment in parks Improve back lanes to accommodate a range of uses including parking, servicing/loading, and pedestrian/cycling facilities Community garden at Fiddle Park Basketball Courts Improve East Commercial Corridor with sidewalks, trails, and landscape/pavement treatment Outdoor skating rink Add a splash pad/water feature to park Redevelop Community entrance/gateway- through a combination of landscape/pavement treatment, built form, and signage to welcome residents visitors 17 16 Restore Downtown buildings’ facades to reflect Shelburne’s heritage New parks signage Fund a Mural Program as part of public art program Connect Shelburne through trails and sidewalks to promote a connected healthy community Redesign Fiddle Park as a community hub Create Dog park (off leash) Enhance Main Street and downtown Add tennis courts and pickle ball to a park Incentive programs to promote the improvement of houses in historic residential neighbourhoods Redesign Jack Downing Park 30 68 Add parking lot for the soccer field at Greenwood park 35 64 45 38 42 23 35 20 27 g rink 17 22 16 26 21 20 24 22 25 Question options Not important at all Of little importance Of average importance Very important Absolutely essential (520 responses, 0 skipped) Page 17 of 29 Summary of responses for Question 10 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey Q11 Additional Survey Comments Date Comment received I have lived in this town for my whole life and it hurts to see my once small 3/28/2019 09:48 AM town grow so big. I understand the need for growth, but I feel as though we need to keep the “small town vibes” to prevent Shelburne from losing its original culture. Speeding is such a huge problem, especially at cottage season. Traffic is 3/28/2019 09:48 AM chaotic, and SPS helps to enforce speed limits. SPS ride programs are also key during all seasons, holidays. Both are key to keeping me & family safe in our town Sell Fiddle Park, Bulldong owners should be responsible for the upkeep of 3/28/2019 10:03 AM their own properties and combine police station and Fire Station. Do not raise taxes, taxes are already high! OPP great option, we can still get 3/28/2019 10:08 AM to know OPP officers they are very friendly and helpful! I believe that having local emergency services is vital for public safety. 3/28/2019 10:10 AM With the town still growing, Shelburbe Policing services are esstential to our 3/28/2019 10:38 AM town. As there is little to do in town for teens/ preteens, there needs to be a strong 3/28/2019 10:44 AM community policing presence for deterrent and education. Shelburne is growing very fast and with that comes growing pains. The town police have an advantage withvisibily I work for the Provincial Offences office and I have dealings with SPS and 3/28/2019 10:54 AM with Dufferin and Caledon OPP. Surrounding detachments are short staffed and I hear from local OPP officers that policing without borders doesn’t work. dangerously understaf I feel we wouldn't have NEAR the coverage with OPP that we do with 3/28/2019 11:11 AM Shelburne Police Service. Our taxes are higher than most communities around, with the exception of 3/28/2019 11:22 AM Orangeville. Constant increases only push existing residences out on favor of ones from the city for lower home prices. That doesn't seem fair to the people that grew up here. A new police building or improvements on an existing building become a 3/28/2019 11:32 AM capital asset. Wording the question as you have implies a zero sum gain. Inaccurate and misleading to the general popluation Feel very safe in our GROWING community knowing Shelburne Police will 3/28/2019 11:39 AM respond to all nature of calls quickly. Dufferin OPP response times are terrible - very concerning if there was a serious emergency - especially having 4 schools within town limit Local police who has a quick response time, understand our community and 3/28/2019 11:40 AM its needs and above all, are familiar with the residents of our community is essential for our town. Save our Shelburne Police Service! Page 18 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey 3/28/2019 11:52 AM Please please please get a bypass for trucks. Main street residents have suffered enough! Please keep police in town as crime is on the rise! Thankyou for all you do for our little town, sadly growing much too quickly for what we can handle. 3/28/2019 12:54 PM Most of those things can be done by volunteerg like the gardens and murals dog park not nessary with all the new builds use should be making the builders give money towards that stuff the money thwy are making off or these homes is rediculas 3/28/2019 01:10 PM Please keep Shelburne Police Department. 3/28/2019 01:16 PM Do not raise taxes pls 3/28/2019 01:23 PM A closed in year round swimming pool would be a absolute must do. 3/28/2019 01:24 PM All the above questions need money to be done and am not willing to gave increased taxes 3/28/2019 01:35 PM Clean up the downtown is a priority. Need more street vendors e.g.. Tonys street meat...Build a canteen ice cream from Blitzzfull treats at Greenwood park with splash pad..families will stay in town on weekends. Sports people will buy from canteen. 3/28/2019 01:37 PM Improving the local business community and encouraging jobs and retail as well as restaurant development in and around the downtown core is essential. Bring shoppers in from other areas. Downtown Fergus as an example of something to aim for. 3/28/2019 01:45 PM With the town growing the way it is we need our own police force 3/28/2019 02:00 PM These last questions are somewhat misleading - in many cases I feel that they are unnecessary expenses as is the police station. The town needs to be frugal with our money and more reluctant to spend and tax 3/28/2019 02:32 PM We need police to protect the improvements!! 3/28/2019 03:12 PM Youth programs - or for anyone actually at the rec centre 3/28/2019 03:18 PM I have children that attend school in Shelburne. I like the peace of mind knowing that if there are any issues at the school or anywhere in town for that matter, that there are police stationed right in town and are minutes away from helping. 3/28/2019 03:27 PM Arena improvements, more restaurants/bar&grills, sports bar 3/28/2019 03:42 PM None of those are important at this time. We need good policing to combat the rising crime and gang population that is growing in our town. Shelburne Police services does that job very well Page 19 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey Don’t spend money that we don’t have. We have enough sidewalks to walk 3/28/2019 03:44 PM on. Dog park is a crazy idea. By laws needs to do his job with all violations. Complaint driven only policy is a joke. Take a look at after hours especially unleashed dogs. 3/28/2019 03:51 PM Thanks for trying to intimidate people into believing they could possibly pay $249 extra on their taxes all because they want to keep the police Service in town. Holding other items hostage at the expense of keeping the police is not right. Awful 3/28/2019 04:30 PM Keep Shelburne Police! 3/28/2019 04:44 PM Thank you for this survey. Please switch to the OPP and save money- if service is good enough for the rest of the province it will be good enough for us. 3/28/2019 04:48 PM We need crosswalk lights infront of library and in front of school days cafe. 3/28/2019 04:59 PM If Shelburne police require assistance they call the opp. Why can’t the opp use the existing offices as a staging office. No need to come from primrose 3/28/2019 05:08 PM Na 3/28/2019 05:10 PM You will have an uprise in crime, if you have no local police presence, the town has grown at a rapid rate and is contimuing to do so, crime rate has already risen,..OPP will not be present for crimes commited in the community parks. 3/28/2019 05:24 PM With the amount of new houses, and the taxes that they bring in, I am surprised that the upgrade for the sewage system is still being talked about. 3/28/2019 05:33 PM Restoring downtown buildings that should be at a cost to building owners! Not tax payers... 3/28/2019 05:46 PM All of the ideas here are great ideas and it would be great to have them all in Shelburne...... but as a long time resident of this great town the most important asset to our town is our police force no need to be cheap on our safety 3/28/2019 06:03 PM Shelburne PD could have purchased Dufferin Mutual building and renovated it - much lower costs than new building - entire downtown core needs update - not attractive to outsiders or locals - get rid of permit parking / just a cash grab for the town 3/28/2019 06:26 PM Should the Town of Shelburne renovate or build a new police station and keep the current police force, the Town may need to invest in restoring the officers morale to where it was before requesting an OPP costing. 3/28/2019 06:29 PM Save our police, keep the kids active and out of trouble 3/28/2019 06:32 PM Keep shelburne police. They are great with our youth and keep our town safe Page 20 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey Keep SPS. They are valued members of our community, the live in shelburne 3/28/2019 07:21 PM just like I do. Their kids go to school here. We need to keep our police service that we have. 3/28/2019 07:36 PM All police cost the same across the province if managed right. OPP will not save any money for the town and will reduce the service 3/28/2019 07:36 PM We need more distractions to our youth! A movie teather, bowling ale and more jobs! We don't want just to be a bedroom community! We are sticker back on time! 3/28/2019 08:16 PM PLEASE KEEP SHELBURNE POLICE SERVICE! 3/28/2019 08:58 PM Don’t want to pay more taxes to keep local police . We’re paying way to high right now per household 3/28/2019 09:58 PM If we don’t have good policing in place the items listed will be difficult to do and maintain to top standard. We need a strong police presence. 3/29/2019 12:26 AM Thank you for asking our opinion 3/29/2019 04:15 AM We need to keep our police service!!!! 3/29/2019 07:21 AM Please go OPP to save my tax dollars 3/29/2019 07:26 AM Need more spaces for family time so splash pad and dog park and other things for our you g families! Still love shelburne! 3/29/2019 07:52 AM All budget decisions need to be based on ranking of importance- community safety will also supersede an upgrade parks, etc... sponsors should be requested for the less priority! Keep the Shelburne Police! 3/29/2019 08:02 AM There is no mention of the use of collected development charges to fund the growth related costs of expansion of police, fire, recreational, library uses. Approved developments should have provided opportunities for traffic/truck bypass alternatives. 3/29/2019 08:14 AM Reach out to large corporations for funding of a lot of the above to at least subsidize the costs 3/29/2019 09:01 AM If the above are the options in how to spend tax dollars to “improve the town” then town council and the mayors office have failed before they’ve begun. What a disgrace. Look around and realize there’s no sustainable employment. Figure it out. 3/29/2019 09:03 AM KEEP SHELBURNE POLICE 3/29/2019 09:08 AM How about a drive to bring in more jobs Keep our Police. OPP may be cheaper but service level and interaction with Page 21 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey 3/29/2019 09:44 AM residents will suffer. Not worth the cost savings. 3/29/2019 10:20 AM Please do not allow Nkompas group to renovate anymore downtown building or build a new police station. 3/29/2019 10:26 AM Reduce costs by eliminating police services. 3/29/2019 10:58 AM Half of these suggestions I have seen in other communities - especially the tennis court and community garden - waste of money and the Dog Park is a liability suit waiting to happen ! 3/29/2019 11:27 AM We need to consider our aging community members as well. Having some activity for them 3/29/2019 12:21 PM n/a It's time to get rid of the shelburne police and their brand new vehicles every 3/29/2019 12:42 PM year. Such a waste of tax payers money. They just harrass innocent people. 3/29/2019 01:46 PM OPP could use existing Shelburne station as an office. RIDE programs already involve OPP. Seldom see Shelburne police other than enforcing speed limit. All calls currently routed through Orangeville, which is farther away than Primrose. 3/29/2019 01:50 PM OPP would do a good job. Town of Shelburne can dictate services. 3/29/2019 03:04 PM Murals are attractive but need to be kept up in order to stay that way. In the past the town has commissioned murals then not looked after them after Shelburne police have been vital to our community. They are some of the 3/29/2019 03:17 PM most respectful and helpful officers and I would not like opp in a small community as it usual does not work well. Shelburne police are fantastic 3/29/2019 04:55 PM Year round swimming pool. Fiddle park is in a horrible location and cannot be used the way it’s intended. 3/29/2019 04:56 PM Most people who want to use a park, would like to walk there. Waste of good space that cannot be properly utilized 3/29/2019 06:02 PM we need our police to be in TOWN where the people are for fast help 3/29/2019 08:03 PM Perhaps the new developers should foot the bill for Community Involvement Projects 3/29/2019 08:34 PM We definitely need more stores such as pharmacy and big box stores and definitely more doctors with walk in clinics. Go transit or public transportation to Brampton/Mississauga/Toronto is essential especially for students going to college. 3/29/2019 08:50 PM even the court system dose not like shelburne cops. they are just bad from sweeping steve philips sexual asualt of minor(s) under the rug to many other Page 22 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey things just get rid of them 3/29/2019 09:18 PM OPP as a smart financial decision for the town. 3/30/2019 04:56 AM Proactive community policing is essential, please keep the local police force We want splash pads. And a bigger arena with two ice Sudafed. And in door 3/30/2019 06:20 AM pool. All surrounding towns have these things. We also want to keep the police. With the population rising crime will too 3/30/2019 07:40 AM Post yhe average police officers annual salary vs the average shelburne residense annual salary ! Unreal descrepency !!!!!!!! 3/30/2019 08:05 AM Bottom line, it’s vital we keep SPS. OPP response times will be longer 3/30/2019 01:51 PM I believe with Shelburne Police we get proactive policing and fear that we would be receiving reactive policing if we went to OPP. 3/30/2019 02:10 PM a combination emergency services building/hub would be ideal--shared between police/fire and possibly EMS--this could potentially provide surplus (land/facility) and maybe with this combination the county could contribute? 3/30/2019 03:40 PM More retail stores in Shelburne 3/30/2019 05:17 PM This survey is very misleading to the public. What you are asking to give up on certain things when service clubs have not been involved. You need to give the big picture and you gave not at all. 3/30/2019 05:45 PM Just remember we get what we pay for...sometimes saving money comes with a price 3/30/2019 05:45 PM Get rid of fiddle park, build more homes and build more stores for more local businesses 3/30/2019 05:51 PM Believe local Policing is the best. We use Fiddle Park daily (year round) but the vehicular access gates are usually locked. We also use the walking trails daily but find them flooded and in poor condition with little or no maintenance ever occuring. 3/30/2019 06:49 PM Policing is of paramount importance over other community development. SPS is an essential service and the town is doing a disservice by even considering the adoption of the OPP. OPP Are not an adequate service. 3/30/2019 07:12 PM I would much rather have OPP instead of SPS. More laws would be enforced and therefore benefit the community. We have allowed this town to grow in which crime has increased we can live 3/31/2019 11:50 AM without dog parks and pickle ball courts. What we need is police that are here for us to protect ourselves in a quick and respectful manor as they have always done 3/31/2019 12:39 PM SHELBURNE POLICE IS more important than the things listed above. Please keep our SPS - we will NOT be nearly as well policed with OPP. If Page 23 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey OPP take over, I will move as I'm on a back alley, and the crime back there is frustrating. SPS helps, OPP wont 3/31/2019 03:26 PM Putting costs aside let's ask for the honest numbers from the OPP on their success on community policing by offences.Money is everything when it comes to the safety of families. 3/31/2019 03:29 PM Opp great option 3/31/2019 03:44 PM Chief Moore runs a good organization. The OPP will not discuss the 4th year which should be a warning sign. Opp are woefully understaffed and won't admit it. Don't fall for the Wal-Mart of policing. Other communities regret going OPP, don't be 1 3/31/2019 03:47 PM Investment in our safety and our infrastructure.Stop being led by special interest groups. 3/31/2019 04:20 PM Keep the Shelburne Police Service or merge with OPS and get a regional PS started. 3/31/2019 05:03 PM What I would love to see is a dog park seems like everyone other person in Shelburne has a dog If we can find a way to use resources currently spent on policing to improve 3/31/2019 07:11 PM community it should be pursued 3/31/2019 07:47 PM The OPP can not provide the level of service a Municipal service can. Don't lose it to save a few bucks now. It will cost more with OPP in a few years. 4/01/2019 04:48 AM Please keep our Shelburne police officers and build a new facility. It's worth it for.our community 4/01/2019 07:04 AM I’ve grown up in Shelburne and also work there now. My family is all located in town. Losing the SPS would be a huge loss and a step in the wrong direction for our community. Preserve what we have instead of always trying to get “more”and “new”things Development fees and infrastructure restructuring should be placed more on 4/01/2019 08:26 AM developers. If they want to build in shelburne pay up. Build the station, opp only have 2 members that have been here 10 years. They dont no the town and wont patrol ot the sa 4/01/2019 08:47 AM some of the above items could be funded by service clubs etc. and through provincial/federal government grants. As for restoring downtown buildings, should the owners not be responsible for this, 4/01/2019 09:11 AM the downtown buildings would be the responsibility of the owners of the buildings. what is wrong with Jack Downing park now? no one uses it. Parking lot for soccer field and community garden really?? I feel this is a very UNFAIR SURVEY Downtown building improvements should be responsibility of property 4/01/2019 09:21 AM owners. Playgrounds are in working order and safe with new equipment. Park signage is not an issue. There is already parking at soccer field. Jack Downing park not used. Everything is important and if taxes have to refelect this than so be it. Not Page 24 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey 4/01/2019 09:27 AM willing to spend money on renovating the town hall when new construction is more cost- effective and piecemeal additions will be a waste of money in the long run. Paying over $800.00 per property tax for policing when there is an alternative 4/01/2019 09:59 AM for half the cost for an equal service with much better specialized and support service is an absolute wise alternative. Council must manage Tax Payer burden wisely. 4/01/2019 10:30 AM If OPP is an option, then big box stores should not be a surprise in future for local merchants. Stay local (police), shop local. Everyone will pay a little more to support local!! 4/01/2019 10:30 AM Found it odd that there is a range of 4 to 7 million to build new station. Know for a fact it wouldn’t be much more than 4 million to build based on recently constructed new stations in the province. You will have “drive by” policing with OPP. 4/01/2019 11:30 AM The OPP does not provide adequate service and takes an extremely long time to get to calls. They are not visible and crime rates will increase while solve rates decrease if they retain control of Shelburne. This is a terrible idea. 4/01/2019 12:04 PM reduce the speed limit to 40 km on main & owen sound st 4/01/2019 05:58 PM Very concerned with how the town is in this much debt. Where have all the tax dollars been going. Someone needs to answer this question. 4/01/2019 08:57 PM I believe the Shelburne Police Services are better the way they are now. Of the handful of times i have had to deal with the OPP, I only have negative reviews when dealing with them, their response times and their treatment of civilians. 4/01/2019 09:08 PM If I don’t agree with the projects it doesn’t mean I agree with the police station 4/01/2019 09:11 PM It's time to say goodbye to SPS. Money spent to enhance Shelburne includes welcoming an OPP takeover as they deal with anything big anyway. 4/01/2019 09:17 PM Upgrades needed to the pool, full service community centre (YMCA) 4/02/2019 08:17 AM A town this small does not need it's own police force. It is costing tax payers way too much money. I have need to reach the Shelburne police in the past and they either dont pick up the phone or when they do we were told to call OPP 4/02/2019 01:37 PM Any Main Street improvement is dependant on getting a truck bypass first. Many improvements facilities, trails, etc. would be best financed through sponsorship programs - saves financing through taxes and likely promotes better utilization.. The old yellow house that everyone sees as soon as they come into 4/03/2019 09:19 AM Shelburne is an eye sore and should be made to be taken down . The Besley drain was to be cleaned out every 3-5 years and has not been touched for 20 years or more, Poor works dept. I feel that the above can be done through fund raising you cannot be without Page 25 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey 4/03/2019 03:15 PM your police as the town is growing fast and if we lose our police in Shelburne we will never get them back . Keep our police 4/03/2019 03:40 PM I feel your survey is inappropriate to have the other items on here, this is saying parks over police, Is it a police survey or go along with staff recommendations survey , I put Not important at all because this is a Police Survey 4/03/2019 04:21 PM Our police service does an amazing job at keeping our community safe. They are approachable and easy to talk to. You won’t find a police service that’s respectful as well as respected any where else in the GTA. 4/03/2019 04:47 PM Improve parking downtown - very important 4/03/2019 05:43 PM I think as the population increases in our town safety should be a priority. Esthetics will be temporary without police presence grafitti and damage will spoil money spent on new signage and gardens. 4/03/2019 05:59 PM The town is growing so more tax money is coming 4/03/2019 06:14 PM We need to keep Shelburne police. I called in a DUI on a Saturday afternoon and the man drove across my front lawn, police were there within 2 minutes! Response time is critical! 4/03/2019 06:32 PM I believe that the revitalization of our downtown is critical. I love the idea of an improved trail system and promoting the preservation of historic architecture. A TRUCK BYPASS IS ESSENTIAL! 4/03/2019 06:46 PM I feel the SPS have a good handle on the intimate workings of the town and people’s of interest which couldn’t be beat by switching to OPP. It is completely understandable that a bigger facility is required in the “fastest growing town in Canada”. 4/03/2019 06:47 PM I like how involved the Shelburne Police are with the community(especially Jeff McLean) and I don’t think that Shelburne would get that from the OPP. 4/04/2019 08:47 AM Find new location for other things in town hall and police take over the building. Save a lot of money doing this. No need to build a whole new building. Even the quoted amount to help fix up the current is way to much. Look more explore more. 4/04/2019 07:07 PM The opp would provide the same policing as is now provided by Shelburne Police.resources available through the opp is endless. I firmly believe that small police forces in Ontario will one day become extinct. I hope some one visits many of the munic 4/04/2019 07:26 PM No multi million dollar police building 4/04/2019 07:27 PM No multi million dollar police building 4/05/2019 11:01 AM Lets look after OUR community ! Policing it must come first 1 As a past residence (17 years) and living in such close proximity I am still Page 26 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey 4/05/2019 10:04 PM very interested in how Shelburne spends taxes as it does affect household decisions in the future based on these numbers 4/07/2019 08:11 PM Re hire a town staff member for event organization and get rid of volunteer event committees and BIA members With our town growing so rapidly, it is even more important to retain our own 4/08/2019 06:57 AM police force. Adding the cost of police building to the issue is unfair, that's a capital expense. Talk to other small towns that have switched to OPP; they regret it. 4/09/2019 04:22 PM Without great policing like we have now none of the above are worth doing. Keep your good base and build the rest second. 4/10/2019 09:59 AM Shelburne population is growing We need to grow with it Families need to be safe and healthy which is the first priority ! You can recruit volunteers and ask people for help. There are always solutions to things. We have to work together 4/10/2019 10:44 AM Let’s make what we have work and stop living beyond our means sometimes less is better. Would like to see more apartments/condo housing, stop developing cheaper looking houses, less vinyl siding and more brick or stone. Stop alway trying to change To 4/12/2019 07:19 AM It does not make sense to spend money on a building that doesn’t increase the quality of service we have, or improves our lives. Especially when there is an option at less cost and would not increase our taxes. We should go with the OPP 4/13/2019 09:45 PM You should care for Shelburne residents as we need our Shelburne police to keep our families safe as most of us has to leave our families at home and work in Toronto. Please keep our kids n families safe we need our Shelburne police. Thank you 4/14/2019 08:23 AM We need more Amenities for the amount of taxes we already pay!! 4/14/2019 10:17 AM I'm not willing to pay more taxes because this town has probably had more money in tax revenue than its ever had. There's no way that's not the case... I'm a transplant and so are all these new house people. 4/17/2019 02:00 PM Shelburne is growing and the population is approximately 10 thousand, all the facilities are available right know is enough for next five years , if next five years population will grow then think about redesign and renovate the facilities,. 4/19/2019 08:51 AM By pass first no point in anything else until this is done 4/19/2019 01:32 PM For those who want to keep the shelburne police they need to come up with the options to fund the police station. 4/19/2019 02:01 PM First and foremost...... do the bypass! It’s been 10 years since we’ve been pushing for it. Make it essential that summer cottage traffic should use it too. I don’t like wait hours to get to my own home coming from work in Alliston 4/19/2019 02:39 PM How about more restaurants and weekend activities for young kids and youth. Page 27 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey 4/20/2019 05:09 AM Is there more crime that we need more policing. Seriously the town should not spend money it does not have. The residents of shelburne do not need more police, they need more infrastructures. Brampton, mississauga do not even have local police. 4/22/2019 12:31 PM Many of these items are not necessities, i.e. a new signs. Many of these items could be accomplished via community engagement and partnerships with schools and businesses, i.e. community gardens, murals. 5/03/2019 12:25 PM Very good community ideas listed in these survey questions. How exciting for all of us!! 5/04/2019 03:57 AM we want to keep our town police 5/10/2019 07:00 AM As a West Indian living in Shelburne I want a cricket pitch at provided Fiddle park for cricket. This is very inexpensive and mostly requires keeping the grass low at the park and would provide a community hub for our and the East Indian community 5/10/2019 04:57 PM Water and sewage problems should have been addressed prior to all the housing development. The water and sewage costs should have been absorbed by the developers. 5/10/2019 05:43 PM Dufferin OPP is constantly understaffed. Policing without borders has extreme flaws. The Ontario Police Association wrote an article on how it doesn’t work and why it’s a flawed system but OPP still continues to use it and praise it. 5/11/2019 03:18 AM Keep shelburne police in and keep the new developing areas of crime out! With a growing community comes deviant behaviour. Keep our community safe with our police in place! 5/11/2019 10:50 AM I will be new to Shelburne, but I feel like spending $$ ons comepletely new police station vs a lot of other initiatives that can better a fast growing community seems an easy decision: community comes first. Especially given the growth. 5/12/2019 02:33 PM the town needs more commercial and industrial development 5/22/2019 11:13 AM cosmetic improvements shouldn't trump the safety of our community and my children! and a dog park - seriously there is no comparison of how I want my tax dollars spent - I want to preserve the Shelburne Police Services 5/23/2019 10:50 AM Indoor swimming pool is absolutely essential to the residents of Shelburne 5/28/2019 07:21 PM Downtown needs to be addressed with a truck bypass to assist. Tennis courts have been missing for years. Community needs to have trails and places to go - parks. Moved to the OPP and you can hire part-time offices for low cost foot patrol. 5/28/2019 07:44 PM Paying more tax for the same police services makes no sense to me. At the cost of losing our town police I feel the only thing if importance would Page 28 of 29 March 28 - June 09 2019 Shelburne Policing Survey 5/29/2019 07:45 AM be the by pass. With new subdivisions coming to town policing is of the utmost importance. We need our town police. 5/29/2019 12:47 PM Traffic congestion is bound to become worse with the new builds in town. Many questions regarding truck bypass need to be addressed to understand it’s importance I.e. location, impact to communities etc. 5/29/2019 05:56 PM I’d like to see more foot patrols in the neighbourhoods especially after school more than just parked on the side of 124 playing candy crush 6/04/2019 06:36 AM Fix sewage plant need bypass 6/05/2019 08:56 PM The local police SHOULD NOT be compared to a pickle ball court or a community garden. With the town growing as quick as we are, it is critical to have our own police service This decision affects us all Let the service clubs worry about other things! Optional question (169 responses, 351 skipped) Page 59 of 59 Page 29 of 29 Appendix 7 to CAO2019-08 Long Term Debt Town of Shelburne Debt Capacity Update February 11th, 2019 Purpose To provide Council with an up to date analysis of the Town of Shelburne’s Debt and Financial Obligation Limits as outlined in Ontario Regulation 403/02, as amended. 2 Annual Debt Repayment Limit - ARL • The Province of Ontario gives Municipalities the authorization to incur long term debt for Municipal infrastructure as long as the annual debt repayments do not exceed 25% of own source revenues • Own source revenue includes taxes and user fees, but does not include grants or subsidies, proceeds from the sale of real property, or contributions from reserves or reserve funds (including DC’s), or donated assets such as subdivisions • The Ministry provides Municipalities with their Annual Debt Repayment Limit (ARL) statement each year in writing to the Treasurer • Council needs to be aware that the Town’s ARL “includes” revenues from the consolidated Boards of the town 3 In 2018 the 5 year loan for Jane & Marie Streets came off making the Total Debt Charges be $586,550.52 from $850,452 Assuming the same Net Revenues – this would change the room left in the Town’s ARL to be $2,097,693 – up from $1,833,792 4 Analysis – Current Debt Numbers Infrastructure Ontario Long Term Debt Summary for 2019 2019 2019 2019 Loan Original Loan Remaining Opening Total Ending Name Debenture Term Years Balance Payment Balance Principal Interest Matures Sewage Treatment Plant $1,750,000.00 20 $ 812,729.38 $ 113,501.16 $ 92,414.06 $ 21,087.10 $ 720,315.32 2026 7 Phase II Sewage Treatment Plant $1,549,625.00 20 $ 1,078,388.92 $ 115,392.04 $ 70,728.53 $ 44,663.51 $ 1,007,660.39 2030 11 Phase III Water Meter $1,071,948.18 20 $ 845,631.24 $ 74,507.80 $ 45,892.83 $ 28,614.97 $ 799,738.41 2033 14 Loan Well #7 $1,229,396.82 20 $ 1,113,790.34 $ 82,942.42 $ 48,790.14 $ 34,152.28 $ 1,065,000.20 2036 17 Sister Streets $1,760,000.00 10 $ 1,442,348.83 $ 200,207.10 $ 164,892.22 $ 35,314.88 $ 1,277,456.61 2026 7 TOTALS $7,360,970.00 $ 5,292,888.71 $ 586,550.52 $ 422,717.78 $ 163,832.74 $ 4,870,170.93 5 ARL COMPARISON LEVEL OF $2,684,244 Current Debt Payment Additional Debt Payment Capacity Unused Debt Payment Capacity $1,342,122 $1,610,546 $2,097,693 $755,571 $487,147 $586,551 $586,551 $586,551 PROVINCIAL ARL 50% OF ARL 40% OF ARL 6 What does this mean in terms of borrowing? • The amount of money that you “could” still borrow depends on how much you borrow, how long you borrow it for and the interest rate at the time of debenture. • Recent examples during the budget process have shown the following scenarios: • 15 Year Loan for $1,770,000 for Well 3 would mean an additional debt of $149,922.34 annually • 20 Year Loan for $6,000,000 to build a new police station would mean additional debt of $415,546 annually • The next slide shows the difference in the chart if these were added to our existing debt making our outstanding loans total $12,640,171 7 ARL COMPARISON – LEVEL OF $2,684,244 Current Debt Payment Additional Debt Payment Capacity Unused Debt Payment Capacity Exceeded Debt Capacity $78,321 $1,342,122 $1,532,225 $1,610,546 $190,103 $1,152,019 $1,152,019 $1,152,019 PROVINCIAL ARL 50% OF ARL 40% OF ARL The additional debt capacity left over of $190,103, as shown in the 50% option would mean a an additional loan of approximately 1.7 million over 10 years – however under the 40% option, you will have exceeded level by $78,321 and any further borrowing would be going against the policy. 8 Acceptable Debt Comparison Levels • Studies in Municipal Debt always start with the question……… “how much debt is too much?” 9 Fiscally Responsible • The Provincial “rule of debt capacity” has been recognized as being generously high since maintaining debt payments at 25% of self raised revenues would require tax increases in order to maintain core service levels. • For this reason many Municipalities and Counties have implemented their own Council adopted Debt Policy to limit their borrowing to a level well under the Province’s 25% rule. In fact, a generally accepted best practice level of debt is no more than 10% of self raised revenues. • The maximum permitted amount of long term debt for the County of Dufferin was set at 40% of the Province’s ARL or 10% of self raised revenues through a Debt Management Policy set in September of 2013 • When it comes to both long term financial sustainability and tax payer affordability, both lenders and municipal treasurers consider a maximum of 10% of own source revenues a municipal best practice – which is 40%. 10 Where Do We Want to Be? • The previous Council passed a motion in 2016 that read as follows: BE IT RESOLVED THAT Council receives the report from the Treasury Department dated May 30th, 2016 as presented and circulated AND FURTHER THAT Council directs staff to prepare and bring forward a Debt Management Policy for the Town of Shelburne for consideration at a future meeting with a recommended debt limit of 50% of the Province’s 25% rule to be incorporated into the policy. Carried 11 In Conclusion • A Debt Management Policy is a tool to ensure that the Town will be able to continue to meet its obligations in a fiscally responsible way. • The previous Council recently adopted an Investment Policy and a Reserve Fund Policy so that in the future the Town will be less reliant on debt. • Senior Management recommend that a Debt Policy would be the next component to ensure a stable financial foundation for the future of the community. A formal report will be forthcoming from staff with respect to a Debt Policy and it will be recommended in the report that the level be set at 40% of the Province’s 25% rule. 12 Prepared and Presented by Treasurer Carey Holmes [email protected] Appendix 8 to CAO2019-08 LOAN AMORTIZATION SCHEDULE ENTER VALUES LOAN SUMMARY Loan amount $3,000,000.00 Scheduled payment $123,593.52 Annual Pymt (x2) $ 247,187.03 Annual interest rate 2.85% Scheduled number of payments 30 Loan period in years 15 Actual number of payments 30 Number of payments per year 2 Total early payments $0.00 Start date of loan 6/4/2019 Total interest $707,805.52 Optional extra payments $0.00 LENDER NAME Infrastructure Ont. May 14/19 Rates PMT BEGINNING SCHEDULED TOTAL ENDING CUMULATIVE PAYMENT DATE PRINCIPAL INTEREST NO BALANCE PAYMENT PAYMENT BALANCE INTEREST 1 2019 $3,000,000.00 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $80,843.52 $42,750.00 $2,919,156.48 $42,750.00 2 2020 $2,919,156.48 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $81,995.54 $41,597.98 $2,837,160.95 $84,347.98 3 2020 $2,837,160.95 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $83,163.97 $40,429.54 $2,753,996.97 $124,777.52 4 2021 $2,753,996.97 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $84,349.06 $39,244.46 $2,669,647.91 $164,021.98 5 2021 $2,669,647.91 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $85,551.03 $38,042.48 $2,584,096.88 $202,064.46 6 2022 $2,584,096.88 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $86,770.14 $36,823.38 $2,497,326.74 $238,887.84 7 2022 $2,497,326.74 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $88,006.61 $35,586.91 $2,409,320.13 $274,474.75 8 2023 $2,409,320.13 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $89,260.71 $34,332.81 $2,320,059.42 $308,807.56 9 2023 $2,320,059.42 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $90,532.67 $33,060.85 $2,229,526.75 $341,868.41 10 2024 $2,229,526.75 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $91,822.76 $31,770.76 $2,137,703.99 $373,639.16 11 2024 $2,137,703.99 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $93,131.24 $30,462.28 $2,044,572.75 $404,101.45 12 2025 $2,044,572.75 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $94,458.36 $29,135.16 $1,950,114.40 $433,236.61 13 2025 $1,950,114.40 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $95,804.39 $27,789.13 $1,854,310.01 $461,025.74 14 2026 $1,854,310.01 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $97,169.60 $26,423.92 $1,757,140.41 $487,449.66 15 2026 $1,757,140.41 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $98,554.27 $25,039.25 $1,658,586.15 $512,488.91 16 2027 $1,658,586.15 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $99,958.66 $23,634.85 $1,558,627.48 $536,123.76 17 2027 $1,558,627.48 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $101,383.08 $22,210.44 $1,457,244.40 $558,334.20 18 2028 $1,457,244.40 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $102,827.78 $20,765.73 $1,354,416.62 $579,099.93 19 2028 $1,354,416.62 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $104,293.08 $19,300.44 $1,250,123.54 $598,400.37 20 2029 $1,250,123.54 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $105,779.26 $17,814.26 $1,144,344.28 $616,214.63 21 2029 $1,144,344.28 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $107,286.61 $16,306.91 $1,037,057.67 $632,521.54 22 2030 $1,037,057.67 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $108,815.45 $14,778.07 $928,242.23 $647,299.61 23 2030 $928,242.23 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $110,366.07 $13,227.45 $817,876.16 $660,527.06 24 2031 $817,876.16 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $111,938.78 $11,654.74 $705,937.38 $672,181.80 25 2031 $705,937.38 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $113,533.91 $10,059.61 $592,403.47 $682,241.40 26 2032 $592,403.47 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $115,151.77 $8,441.75 $477,251.70 $690,683.15 27 2032 $477,251.70 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $116,792.68 $6,800.84 $360,459.02 $697,483.99 28 2033 $360,459.02 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $118,456.98 $5,136.54 $242,002.04 $702,620.53 29 2033 $242,002.04 $123,593.52 $123,593.52 $120,144.99 $3,448.53 $121,857.05 $706,069.06 30 2034 $121,857.05 $123,593.52 $121,857.05 $120,120.59 $1,736.46 $0.00 $707,805.52 LOAN AMORTIZATION SCHEDULE ENTER VALUES LOAN SUMMARY Loan amount $3,000,000.00 Scheduled payment $100,281.31 Annual Pymt (x2) $ 200,562.61 Annual interest rate 3.00% Scheduled number of payments 40 Loan period in years 20 Actual number of payments 40 Number of payments per year 2 Total early payments $0.00 Start date of loan 6/4/2019 Total interest $1,011,252.20 Optional extra payments $0.00 LENDER NAME Infrastructure Ont. May 14/19 Rates PMT BEGINNING SCHEDULE TOTAL ENDING CUMULATIVE PAYMENT DATE PRINCIPAL INTEREST NO BALANCE D PAYMENT PAYMENT BALANCE INTEREST 1 2019 $3,000,000.00 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $55,281.31 $45,000.00 $2,944,718.69 $45,000.00 2 2020 $2,944,718.69 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $56,110.52 $44,170.78 $2,888,608.17 $89,170.78 3 2020 $2,888,608.17 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $56,952.18 $43,329.12 $2,831,655.99 $132,499.90 4 2021 $2,831,655.99 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $57,806.47 $42,474.84 $2,773,849.52 $174,974.74 5 2021 $2,773,849.52 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $58,673.56 $41,607.74 $2,715,175.96 $216,582.49 6 2022 $2,715,175.96 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $59,553.67 $40,727.64 $2,655,622.29 $257,310.13 7 2022 $2,655,622.29 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $60,446.97 $39,834.33 $2,595,175.32 $297,144.46 8 2023 $2,595,175.32 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $61,353.68 $38,927.63 $2,533,821.65 $336,072.09 9 2023 $2,533,821.65 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $62,273.98 $38,007.32 $2,471,547.67 $374,079.41 10 2024 $2,471,547.67 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $63,208.09 $37,073.22 $2,408,339.58 $411,152.63 11 2024 $2,408,339.58 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $64,156.21 $36,125.09 $2,344,183.37 $447,277.72 12 2025 $2,344,183.37 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $65,118.55 $35,162.75 $2,279,064.81 $482,440.47 13 2025 $2,279,064.81 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $66,095.33 $34,185.97 $2,212,969.48 $516,626.45 14 2026 $2,212,969.48 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $67,086.76 $33,194.54 $2,145,882.72 $549,820.99 15 2026 $2,145,882.72 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $68,093.06 $32,188.24 $2,077,789.65 $582,009.23 16 2027 $2,077,789.65 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $69,114.46 $31,166.84 $2,008,675.19 $613,176.07 17 2027 $2,008,675.19 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $70,151.18 $30,130.13 $1,938,524.01 $643,306.20 18 2028 $1,938,524.01 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $71,203.44 $29,077.86 $1,867,320.57 $672,384.06 19 2028 $1,867,320.57 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $72,271.50 $28,009.81 $1,795,049.07 $700,393.87 20 2029 $1,795,049.07 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $73,355.57 $26,925.74 $1,721,693.50 $727,319.61 21 2029 $1,721,693.50 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $74,455.90 $25,825.40 $1,647,237.60 $753,145.01 22 2030 $1,647,237.60 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $75,572.74 $24,708.56 $1,571,664.86 $777,853.57 23 2030 $1,571,664.86 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $76,706.33 $23,574.97 $1,494,958.53 $801,428.55 24 2031 $1,494,958.53 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $77,856.93 $22,424.38 $1,417,101.60 $823,852.92 25 2031 $1,417,101.60 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $79,024.78 $21,256.52 $1,338,076.82 $845,109.45 26 2032 $1,338,076.82 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $80,210.15 $20,071.15 $1,257,866.67 $865,180.60 27 2032 $1,257,866.67 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $81,413.31 $18,868.00 $1,176,453.36 $884,048.60 28 2033 $1,176,453.36 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $82,634.50 $17,646.80 $1,093,818.86 $901,695.40 29 2033 $1,093,818.86 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $83,874.02 $16,407.28 $1,009,944.84 $918,102.68 30 2034 $1,009,944.84 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $85,132.13 $15,149.17 $924,812.70 $933,251.86 31 2034 $924,812.70 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $86,409.11 $13,872.19 $838,403.59 $947,124.05 32 2035 $838,403.59 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $87,705.25 $12,576.05 $750,698.34 $959,700.10 33 2035 $750,698.34 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $89,020.83 $11,260.48 $661,677.51 $970,960.57 34 2036 $661,677.51 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $90,356.14 $9,925.16 $571,321.36 $980,885.74 35 2036 $571,321.36 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $91,711.48 $8,569.82 $479,609.88 $989,455.56 36 2037 $479,609.88 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $93,087.16 $7,194.15 $386,522.72 $996,649.71 37 2037 $386,522.72 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $94,483.46 $5,797.84 $292,039.26 $1,002,447.55 38 2038 $292,039.26 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $95,900.72 $4,380.59 $196,138.54 $1,006,828.14 39 2038 $196,138.54 $100,281.31 $100,281.31 $97,339.23 $2,942.08 $98,799.32 $1,009,770.21 40 3039 $98,799.32 $100,281.31 $98,799.32 $97,317.33 $1,481.99 $0.00 $1,011,252.20 LOAN AMORTIZATION SCHEDULE ENTER VALUES LOAN SUMMARY Loan amount $7,000,000.00 Scheduled payment $288,384.87 Annual Pymt (x2) $ 576,769.75 Annual interest rate 2.85% Scheduled number of payments 30 Loan period in years 15 Actual number of payments 30 Number of payments per year 2 Total early payments $0.00 Start date of loan 6/20/2019 Total interest $1,651,546.22 Optional extra payments $0.00 LENDER NAME Infrastructure Ont. May 14/19 Rates PMT BEGINNING SCHEDULED TOTAL ENDING CUMULATIVE PAYMENT DATE PRINCIPAL INTEREST NO BALANCE PAYMENT PAYMENT BALANCE INTEREST 1 2019 $7,000,000.00 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $188,634.87 $99,750.00 $6,811,365.13 $99,750.00 2 2020 $6,811,365.13 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $191,322.92 $97,061.95 $6,620,042.21 $196,811.95 3 2020 $6,620,042.21 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $194,049.27 $94,335.60 $6,425,992.93 $291,147.55 4 2021 $6,425,992.93 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $196,814.47 $91,570.40 $6,229,178.46 $382,717.95 5 2021 $6,229,178.46 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $199,619.08 $88,765.79 $6,029,559.38 $471,483.75 6 2022 $6,029,559.38 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $202,463.65 $85,921.22 $5,827,095.72 $557,404.97 7 2022 $5,827,095.72 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $205,348.76 $83,036.11 $5,621,746.96 $640,441.08 8 2023 $5,621,746.96 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $208,274.98 $80,109.89 $5,413,471.98 $720,550.98 9 2023 $5,413,471.98 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $211,242.90 $77,141.98 $5,202,229.09 $797,692.95 10 2024 $5,202,229.09 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $214,253.11 $74,131.76 $4,987,975.98 $871,824.72 11 2024 $4,987,975.98 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $217,306.22 $71,078.66 $4,770,669.76 $942,903.37 12 2025 $4,770,669.76 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $220,402.83 $67,982.04 $4,550,266.93 $1,010,885.42 13 2025 $4,550,266.93 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $223,543.57 $64,841.30 $4,326,723.36 $1,075,726.72 14 2026 $4,326,723.36 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $226,729.07 $61,655.81 $4,099,994.29 $1,137,382.53 15 2026 $4,099,994.29 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $229,959.96 $58,424.92 $3,870,034.34 $1,195,807.45 16 2027 $3,870,034.34 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $233,236.88 $55,147.99 $3,636,797.45 $1,250,955.44 17 2027 $3,636,797.45 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $236,560.51 $51,824.36 $3,400,236.94 $1,302,779.80 18 2028 $3,400,236.94 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $239,931.50 $48,453.38 $3,160,305.45 $1,351,233.18 19 2028 $3,160,305.45 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $243,350.52 $45,034.35 $2,916,954.93 $1,396,267.53 20 2029 $2,916,954.93 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $246,818.27 $41,566.61 $2,670,136.66 $1,437,834.14 21 2029 $2,670,136.66 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $250,335.43 $38,049.45 $2,419,801.23 $1,475,883.59 22 2030 $2,419,801.23 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $253,902.71 $34,482.17 $2,165,898.53 $1,510,365.75 23 2030 $2,165,898.53 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $257,520.82 $30,864.05 $1,908,377.71 $1,541,229.81 24 2031 $1,908,377.71 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $261,190.49 $27,194.38 $1,647,187.21 $1,568,424.19 25 2031 $1,647,187.21 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $264,912.46 $23,472.42 $1,382,274.76 $1,591,896.61 26 2032 $1,382,274.76 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $268,687.46 $19,697.42 $1,113,587.30 $1,611,594.02 27 2032 $1,113,587.30 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $272,516.25 $15,868.62 $841,071.04 $1,627,462.64 28 2033 $841,071.04 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $276,399.61 $11,985.26 $564,671.43 $1,639,447.90 29 2033 $564,671.43 $288,384.87 $288,384.87 $280,338.31 $8,046.57 $284,333.13 $1,647,494.47 30 2034 $284,333.13 $288,384.87 $284,333.13 $280,281.38 $4,051.75 $0.00 $1,651,546.22 LOAN AMORTIZATION SCHEDULE ENTER VALUES LOAN SUMMARY Loan amount $7,000,000.00 Scheduled payment $233,989.71 Annual Pymt (x2) $ 467,979.42 Annual interest rate 3.00% Scheduled number of payments 40 Loan period in years 20 Actual number of payments 40 Number of payments per year 2 Total early payments $0.00 Start date of loan 6/20/2019 Total interest $2,359,588.48 Optional extra payments $0.00 LENDER NAME Infrastructure Ont. May 14/19 Rates PMT BEGINNING SCHEDULE TOTAL ENDING CUMULATIVE PAYMENT DATE PRINCIPAL INTEREST NO BALANCE D PAYMENT PAYMENT BALANCE INTEREST 1 2019 $7,000,000.00 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $128,989.71 $105,000.00 $6,871,010.29 $105,000.00 2 2020 $6,871,010.29 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $130,924.56 $103,065.15 $6,740,085.73 $208,065.15 3 2020 $6,740,085.73 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $132,888.43 $101,101.29 $6,607,197.30 $309,166.44 4 2021 $6,607,197.30 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $134,881.75 $99,107.96 $6,472,315.55 $408,274.40 5 2021 $6,472,315.55 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $136,904.98 $97,084.73 $6,335,410.57 $505,359.13 6 2022 $6,335,410.57 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $138,958.55 $95,031.16 $6,196,452.02 $600,390.29 7 2022 $6,196,452.02 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $141,042.93 $92,946.78 $6,055,409.09 $693,337.07 8 2023 $6,055,409.09 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $143,158.58 $90,831.14 $5,912,250.51 $784,168.21 9 2023 $5,912,250.51 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $145,305.95 $88,683.76 $5,766,944.56 $872,851.97 10 2024 $5,766,944.56 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $147,485.54 $86,504.17 $5,619,459.02 $959,356.13 11 2024 $5,619,459.02 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $149,697.83 $84,291.89 $5,469,761.19 $1,043,648.02 12 2025 $5,469,761.19 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $151,943.29 $82,046.42 $5,317,817.89 $1,125,694.44 13 2025 $5,317,817.89 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $154,222.44 $79,767.27 $5,163,595.45 $1,205,461.71 14 2026 $5,163,595.45 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $156,535.78 $77,453.93 $5,007,059.67 $1,282,915.64 15 2026 $5,007,059.67 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $158,883.82 $75,105.90 $4,848,175.85 $1,358,021.53 16 2027 $4,848,175.85 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $161,267.07 $72,722.64 $4,686,908.78 $1,430,744.17 17 2027 $4,686,908.78 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $163,686.08 $70,303.63 $4,523,222.70 $1,501,047.80 18 2028 $4,523,222.70 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $166,141.37 $67,848.34 $4,357,081.33 $1,568,896.14 19 2028 $4,357,081.33 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $168,633.49 $65,356.22 $4,188,447.84 $1,634,252.36 20 2029 $4,188,447.84 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $171,162.99 $62,826.72 $4,017,284.84 $1,697,079.08 21 2029 $4,017,284.84 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $173,730.44 $60,259.27 $3,843,554.40 $1,757,338.35 22 2030 $3,843,554.40 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $176,336.40 $57,653.32 $3,667,218.01 $1,814,991.67 23 2030 $3,667,218.01 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $178,981.44 $55,008.27 $3,488,236.57 $1,869,999.94 24 2031 $3,488,236.57 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $181,666.16 $52,323.55 $3,306,570.40 $1,922,323.49 25 2031 $3,306,570.40 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $184,391.16 $49,598.56 $3,122,179.25 $1,971,922.04 26 2032 $3,122,179.25 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $187,157.02 $46,832.69 $2,935,022.22 $2,018,754.73 27 2032 $2,935,022.22 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $189,964.38 $44,025.33 $2,745,057.84 $2,062,780.07 28 2033 $2,745,057.84 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $192,813.84 $41,175.87 $2,552,244.00 $2,103,955.93 29 2033 $2,552,244.00 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $195,706.05 $38,283.66 $2,356,537.95 $2,142,239.59 30 2034 $2,356,537.95 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $198,641.64 $35,348.07 $2,157,896.31 $2,177,587.66 31 2034 $2,157,896.31 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $201,621.27 $32,368.44 $1,956,275.04 $2,209,956.11 32 2035 $1,956,275.04 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $204,645.59 $29,344.13 $1,751,629.45 $2,239,300.23 33 2035 $1,751,629.45 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $207,715.27 $26,274.44 $1,543,914.18 $2,265,574.67 34 2036 $1,543,914.18 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $210,831.00 $23,158.71 $1,333,083.18 $2,288,733.39 35 2036 $1,333,083.18 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $213,993.46 $19,996.25 $1,119,089.72 $2,308,729.64 36 2037 $1,119,089.72 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $217,203.37 $16,786.35 $901,886.35 $2,325,515.98 37 2037 $901,886.35 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $220,461.42 $13,528.30 $681,424.94 $2,339,044.28 38 2038 $681,424.94 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $223,768.34 $10,221.37 $457,656.60 $2,349,265.65 39 2038 $457,656.60 $233,989.71 $233,989.71 $227,124.86 $6,864.85 $230,531.74 $2,356,130.50 40 3039 $230,531.74 $233,989.71 $230,531.74 $227,073.76 $3,457.98 $0.00 $2,359,588.48 Appendix 9 to CAO2019-08 Scenario A - Shelburne Police Services Complement Operating Comparison & Savings Year 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Property Counts 3338 3501 3581 3662 3744 3804 3894 3969 4024 4079 SPS Total Capital & Operating Cost $ 2,585,443 $ 2,616,666 $ 2,679,873 $ 2,728,643 $ 2,813,600 $ 2,843,980 $ 2,869,398 $ 2,919,763 $ 2, 972,148 $ 3,036,647 Cost per Property $ 775 $ 747 $ 748 $ 745 $ 751 $ 748 $ 737 $ 736 $ 739 $ 744 OPP Total Capital & Operating Cost $ 2,645,130 $ 2,847,428 $ 2,903,217 $ 1,692,839 $ 1,761,463 $ 1,812,450 $ 1,862,647 $ 1,908,420 $ 1, 951,251 $ 1,993,807 Cost per Property $ 792 $ 813 $ 811 $ 462 $ 470 $ 476 $ 478 $ 481 $ 485 $ 489 10 Year Cumulative Saving Savings per Year - $$ $ (59,687) $ (230,762) $ (223,344) $ 1,035,804 $ 1,052,137 $ 1,031,530 $ 1,006,751 $ 1,011,343 $ 1, 020,897 $ 1,042,840 $ 6, 687,509 Savings per Year - per Property $ (18) $ (66) $ (62) $ 283 $ 281 $ 271 $ 259 $ 255 $ 254 $ 256 $ 1,712 1% 3.31% 3.21% 5.41% 5.65% 14.83% 14.48% 14.54% 14.68% 14.99% increase* increase* increase* savings** savings** savings savings savings savings savings *this increase would be experienced with either choice 10 Year **the savings in these years is lowered due to the reserve repayments related to the severance costs Cumulative Saving Repayment Plan After Repayment Severance Costs $ 2,360,079 Repayment Portion $ 1,198,940 2023 $ 659,200 $ 5,369,066.00 Plus: Interest on 5 year Loan $ 119,503 2024 $ 659,243 Total Repayment $ 1,318,443 $ 1,318,443 I:\Treasury\Clerk-Treasury Master\OPP Costing\Summary of Consultant Option A Scenario B - Shelburne Police Services Complement Operating and Comparison Savings with OPP Enhancement Year 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Property Counts 3338 3501 3581 3662 3744 3804 3894 3969 4024 4079 SPS Total Capital & Operating Cost $ 2,585,443 $ 2,616,666 $ 2,679,873 $ 2,728,643 $ 2,813,600 $ 2,843,980 $ 2,869,398 $ 2,919,763 $ 2,972,148 $ 3,036,647 Cost per Property $ 775 $ 747 $ 748 $ 745 $ 751 $ 748 $ 737 $ 736 $ 739 $ 744 OPP Total Capital & Operating Cost $ 2,645,130 $ 2,847,428 $ 2,903,217 $ 1,692,839 $ 1,761,463 $ 1,812,450 $ 1,862,647 $ 1,908,420 $ 1,951,251 $ 1,993,807 OPP Enhancement 0.75 $ 101,129 $ 103,151 $ 105,214 $ 107,319 $ 109,465 $ 111,654 $ 113,888 OPP Total Cost with Enhancement $ 2,645,130 $ 2,847,428 $ 2,903,217 $ 1,793,968 $ 1,864,614 $ 1,917,664 $ 1,969,966 $ 2,017,885 $ 2,062,905 $ 2,107,695 Cost per Property $ 792.43 $ 813.32 $ 810.73 $ 489.89 $ 498.03 $ 504.12 $ 505.90 $ 508.41 $ 512.65 $ 516.72 10 Year Cumulative Saving Savings per Year - $$ $ (59,687) $ (230,762) $ (223,344) $ 934,675 $ 948,986 $ 926,316 $ 899,432 $ 901,878 $ 909,243 $ 928,952 $ 5,935,688 Savings per Year - per Property $ (18) $ (66) $ (62) $ 255 $ 253 $ 244 $ 231 $ 227 $ 226 $ 228 $ 1,518 1.00% 3.31% 3.21% 3.96% 4.17% 13.32% 12.93% 12.97% 13.07% 13.36% increase* increase* increase* savings** savings ** savings savings savings savings savings *this increase would be experienced with either choice 10 Year **the savings in these years is lowered due to the reserve repayments related to the severance costs Cumulative Saving Repayment Plan After Repayment Severance Costs $ 2,360,079 Repayment Portion $ 1,198,940 2023 $ 659,200 $ 4,617,245.27 Plus: Interest on 5 year Loan $ 119,503 2024 $ 659,243 Total Repayment $ 1,318,443 $ 1,318,443 I:\Treasury\Clerk-Treasury Master\OPP Costing\Summary of Consultant Option B with OPP Enhancement Appendix 10 to CAO2019-08 OPP Policinq Gosts - Year over Year Cost Comparison Ghart Municipality Adjala-Tosorontio/Essa/New Tecumseth Tp Agreement Section 10 - Group Detachment Nottawasaga Year over Year Per OPP Average Gost Property TotalCost Gost Property Year Cost Variance Gost per Status Count Before Gap Capped Before Cap Before Cap Capped Property 2015 Reconciled 22,923 9.063.448 10,211,056 395.39 445.45 354 2016 Reconciled 24,025 9,543,050 9,543,777 5.3Yo 397.21 397.24 350 2017 Reconciled 24,527 9,668,025 9,668,025 1.3Yo 394.1 8 394.1 I 350 2018 Estimate 25,426 10,089,935 10,089,935 4.4Yo 396.84 396.84 355 2015 Estimate 26,541 10,401,554 10.464,741 3.1% 391.91 394.29 359 Cost per Property Ssoo s44s s4so s397 $rsq $3s7 $3e4 s400 $gsa $3so S3so s3ss 53s9 S3so s3oo Capped Cost s2s0 s200 E OPP Average Slso sloo Sso 2015 2016 2077 2018 2019 OPP Policinq Costs - Year over Year Gost Comparison Chart Municipality The Blue Mountains T Agreement Section 10 Detachment Collingwood Year over Year OPP Average Cost Property Total Gost Cost Per Property Year Gost Variance Gost per Status Count Before Gap Capped Before Gap Before Cap Capped Property 2015 Reconciled 7.468 2.652,305 2,652,305 355.16 355.16 354 201 6 Reconciled 7,747 2,674,489 2.674.489 0.8% 345.23 345.23 350 2017 Reconciled 7,808 2.625.837 2,625,837 -1 .8To 336.30 336.30 350 2018 Estimate 8,104 2,781,429 2,781,429 5.9Yo 343.22 343.22 355 2019 Estimate 8,221 2.799.752 2,799.752 Q.7Yo 340.56 340.56 359 Cost per Property s36s S3s9 s36o S3ss $3ss S3s4 SEss $3so S3so S3so $34s s34s s341 Capped Cost S34o )J5b r OPP Average >335 s33o s32s s32o 20rs 2016 2077 2018 2079 OPP Policinq Costs - Year over Year Gost Comparison Ghart Municipality Clearview Tp Agreement Section 5.1 Detachment Huronia West Year over Year Cost Property TotalCost Gost Per Property Year Cost Variance Status Gount Before Cap Capped Before Cap Before Gap Capped 2015 Reconciled 6,435 2,218,454 2,218,454 344.75 344.75 354 201 6 Reconciled 6.526 2.207.021 2.207.021 -0.5% 338.1 I 338.19 350 2017 Reconciled 6,560 2,223.964 2.223.964 0.8% 339.02 339.02 350 2018 Estimate 6,548 2,227,399 2.227.399 0.2% 340.16 340.16 355 2019 Estimate 6,575 2,277,359 2,277,359 2.2Yo 346.37 346.37 359 Cost per Property s36s S3se 536o $sss $gss I s3so $3so S3so s346 $34s I I I Capped Cost s34s S34o OPP Average s34o r s33s Ssso s32s 2015 2016 2017 IU 16 2019 OPP Policinq Gosts - Year over Year Gost Go moarison Chart Municipality Gollingwood T Agreement Section 10 Detachment Collingwood Year over Year OPP Average Gost Property TotalCost Cost Per Property Year Gost Variance Cost per Status Gount Before Cap Gapped Before Gap Before Cap Gapped Property 2015 Reconciled 11,331 4.755,863 4,962,865 419.72 437.99 354 2016 Reconciled 11,927 4,900,673 4,900,673 3.0o/o 410.89 410.89 350 2017 Reconciled 12.063 4.901.504 4,901,504 0.0o/o 406.33 406.33 350 2018 Estimate 12,189 5,118,352 5,118,352 4.4Yo 419.92 419.92 355 2019 Estimate 12.294 5.235.535 5,235,535 2.3To 425.86 425.86 359 Cost per Property ssoo s438 S4so S406 s4oo -s3sv-- $ssa S3so $sso sisf"-- S3so S3oo Capped Cost s2so s2oo e OPP Average slso s100 Sso (_ 2015 2076 2017 2078 2019 OPP Policinq Costs - Year over Year Gost Comoarison Ghart Municipality Grey Highlands M Agreement Section 10 Detachment Grey County Year over Year Gost Property TotalCost Gost Per Property Year Cost Variance Status Count Before Cap Capped Before Gap Before Cap Gapped 2015 Reconciled 5.683 1,760,439 1,760,439 309.77 309.77 354 2016 Reconciled 5,798 1,791,805 1.79'1.805 1.9Yo 309.04 309.04 3s0 2017 Reconciled 5.825 1.803.460 1,803,460 0.7o/o 309.61 309.61 350 2018 Estimate 5,835 1,836,391 1,836,391 1.8o/o 314.72 314.72 355 2019 Estimate 5.848 1,886,998 1.886.998 2.8Yo 322.67 322.67 359 Cost per Property S37o $3se S36o )5)4 I $3so $3so I s3so I I I I s34o Ss:o I I I I Capped Cost s32o $310 S3o9 $310 r OPP Average s31o Ssoo 5290 s28o 2075 2016 2017 2018 2019 OPP Policinq Gosts - Year over Year Gost Gomparison Ghart Municipality Kincardine M Agreement Section 10 Detachment South Bruce Year over Year Cost Property Total Cost Gost Per Property Year Cost Variance Status Gount Before Gap Capped Before Gap Before Cap Gapped 2015 Reconciled 6.314 2.245,612 2.245,612 355.66 355.66 2016 Reconciled 6,424 2,224,993 2.224.993 -0.904 346.36 346.36 350 2017 Reconciled 6,471 2.236.155 2.236.155 0.50h 345.57 345.57 350 2018 Estimate 6,428 2.325,653 2,325,653 4.0% 361.80 361.80 355 2019 Estimate 6,451 2.351.168 2.351 ,168 11% 364.47 364.47 359 Cost per Property s370 Sroq s36s $rsg Sseo 53s6 Ssss Sgss Capped Cost $3so $3so Ssso r OPP Average $346 S34s s340 533s 2015 2076 2017 2018 2019 OPP Policinq Gosts - Year over Year Gost Comparison Ghart Municipality Mono T Agreement Section 10 Detachment Dufferin Year over Year OPP Average Cost Property TotalGost Cost Per Property Year Cost Variance Cost per Status Gount Before Cap Capped Before Gap Before Cap Gapped Property 2015 Reconciled 3,023 1,076,324 1.104.332 356.04 365.31 354 2016 Reconciled 3.127 1 ,081 ,135 1 ,081 ,1 35 O.4o/o 345.74 345.74 350 2017 Reconciled 3,232 1,114,345 1.114.345 3.1o/o 344.78 344.78 350 2018 Estimate 3.342 1.161,045 1,'161,045 4.20h 347.41 347.41 355 2019 Estimate 3,455 1,'195,510 1 .'195.510 3.jYo 346.02 346.02 359 Cost per Property S37o S36s s36s $ssg Saoo Sgss $3s4 53ss $3so $3so Capped Cost S3so S346 $sqs x OPP Average s34s S34o S33s S33o 2075 2016 2077 2078 2019 OPP Policinq Gosts - Year over Year Cost Gomparison Ghart Municipality Orillia C Agreement Section 10 Detachment Orillia Year over Year Cost Property Total Gost Gost Per Property Year Gost Variance Status Gount Before Gap Capped Before Gap Before Gap Capped 2015 Reconciled 14.410 7,736,800 8.237.188 536.90 571.63 2016 Reconciled 14,716 7,955,837 7,955,837 2.8o/o 540.62 540.62 350 2017 Reconciled 14,776 8.054,726 8.054.726 1.2o/o 545.12 545.12 350 2018 Estimate 14.840 8,314,942 8,314,942 3.2o/o 560.31 560.31 355 2019 Estimate 14,935 8.459,830 8,459,830 1.7Yo 566.44 566.44 359 Cost per Property s700 s6oo Ssoo S400 -93ss-- +)JU )55U Capped Cost s3oo r OPP Average s200 s100 ( 2015 2016 z017 20t8 2019 OPP Policinq Costs - Year over Year Cost Comparison Ghart Municipality Port Hope M Agreement Section 10 Detachment Northumberland Year over Year OPP Average Cost Property TotalCost Gost Per Property Year Cost Variance Gost per Status Gount Before Gap Capped Before Cap Before Cap Capped Property 2015 Reconciled 1,693 552,230 712,956 326.18 421.12 354 2016 Reconciled 1.731 562,803 623,697 1.9o/o 325.13 360.31 350 2017 Reconciled 1,728 561,787 561.787 -0.2Yo 325.11 325.11 350 2018 Estimate 1.718 569.693 569,693 1.4Yo 331.60 331.60 355 2019 Estimate 1,745 580,315 580,315 1.90h 332.56 332.56 359 Cost per Property S4so 5400 S3ss $gsa 5360 $3s0 $3so Srss s3so s3oo S2so Capped Cost s2oo n OPP Average 51so sloo Sso (- 2075 2016 2017 2018 2019 OPP Policinq Costs - Year over Year Cost Gomparison Ghart Municipality Southgate Tp Agreement Section 10 Detachment Grey County Year over Year OPP Average Cost Property TotalCost Gost Per Property Year Gost Variance Cost per Status Count Before Gap Capped Before Cap Before Cap Capped Property 2015 Reconciled 3,162 1,054,444 984,Q14 333.47 311.20 354 2016 Reconciled 3.214 1,061,685 1,061,685 0.7o/o 330.33 330.33 350 2017 Reconciled 3,252 1 ,090,716 1 .090.716 2.7Yo 335.40 335.40 350 2018 Estimate 3.263 1,096.522 1,096,522 0.5% 336.05 336.05 355 2019 Estimate 3.284 1,127,007 1,127,007 2.8o/o 343.1 8 343.18 359 Cost per Property s37o $3ss s36o $3so $3so S3so $340 s33o S33o Capped Cost Sszo s3u x OPP Average S31o S3oo s2eo s280 2015 2016 2017 2018 2079 OPP Policinq Gosts - Year over Year Cost Gomoarison Ghart Municipality Wasaga Beach T Agreement Section 5.1 Detachment Huronia West Year over Year Per Property OPP Average Cost Property Total Gost Gost Year Cost Variance Gost per Status Count Before Gap Gapped Before Gap Before Cap Capped Property 2015 Reconciled 12,388 4,412.209 4.219,724 356.17 340.63 354 2016 Reconciled 12,765 4,579,320 4.579.320 3.8o/o 358.74 358.74 350 2017 Reconciled 12.860 4,680,485 4,680,485 2.20h 363.96 363.96 350 2018 Estimate 13,0'10 4,749,314 4,749,314 1.5o/o 365.05 365.05 355 2019 Estimate 13,259 4,913,162 4,913.162 3.4Yo 370.55 370.55 359 Cost per Property s37s S37L s37o $ge+ s36s S3se Sseo s3ss S3s4 s3ss $gso Sgso Capped Cost S3so 534s x OPP Average S34o $33s s33o S32s 20ls 20t6 2017 2018 2019