A community safety officer program proposed by Mayor John Henderson at a cost of $750,000, was denied by District of Sechelt Council at a regular council meeting Sept. 4, following some contentious discussion.
The proposed program would have included at least four full-time positions, including a coordinator to implement and manage a community Block Watch program in cooperation with the RCMP. If approved, the proposal would have authorized the mayor and at least one councillor to travel to Victoria and elsewhere to “advocate with provincial political and senior bureaucrats for funding for these projects.” As well, the mayor and one councillor would travel to Ottawa in November to advocate with federal government ministers and senior staff regarding changes to the criminal code.
The proposal came just weeks after council, lead by councillors Brenda Rowe, Donna Bell and Adam Shepherd, held a community safety meeting, which was attended by 200 Sechelt residents concerned with a rise in crime. (Dozens more residents were turned away at the door due to capacity regulations.) As the result of the input gathered at that meeting, a report is being compiled, which will be discussed at a second community safety meeting, tentatively scheduled for October.
At the council meeting, Henderson acknowledged the work already being done around public safety by council.
“I do want to highlight… what council and especially you, Councillor Rowe and some of the other councillors and the public did a couple of weeks ago was extraordinary,” said Henderson. “And I just want to make sure we keep moving, because this is so important to our community and I think we can make a real difference quickly."
Asked if she wished to comment, Rowe responded, “I'm wondering why this came this week and basically right in the middle of the process that we laid out to the public on August 21." She said they told the public they would have a "what we heard" report for the community ready by Sept. 10, which Bell had nearly ready.
Rowe added that “might sound odd” for her to vote against such a proposal but noted the community has not really been informed about what it all entailed.
“This kind of surprised me at this point," said Rowe. "I'm not sure what you were trying to accomplish with this notice of motion. Because I thought we had a plan and this was not in the plan.
"If we're going to spend this much money, we need to carefully consider what we're going to spend it on," she said. "Our plan actually aligns with budget and we could end up with probably the best public engagement on budget items that the District of Sechelt has ever seen.
"I want to see that play out.”
Rowe said dedicating that amount of money to a community safety officer program, would affect the overall community safety budget and would take other options off the table. She said with more than 800 comments and 84 online engagements from the public to sift through, it’s important to use that information and bring options back to council for discussion. She noted one option could be a staff restructuring, which would allow for the creation of a block watch coordinator position.
Henderson said his fear was that “the wheels of government tend to move slowly,” so he wanted to ensure action was taken against rising crime as quickly as possible. As for the $750,000, Henderson said he was confident the money could be found — without a 10 per cent tax increase.
The other five councillors echoed Rowe's sentiments and balked at "playing fast and loose with three quarters of a million dollars outside the budget process," as Coun. Alton Toth put it.
Rowe reiterated that council is committed to the ongoing process and working with the public.
“I'm sorry your worship, but you've done this before, where you bring your solution, if you will, that actually hasn't involved anyone else,” said Rowe. “Yes, you asked everyone else to become involved with this notice of motion exactly on the deadline after it was already written.
"So, you want to do things differently. This is not an example of doing things differently."
Addressing the public, "Do not confuse [not supporting the motion] with not being committed," said Rowe. "We are committed to this project.”
