Owen Sound: A Four-Year City Business Plan

Home › People, Care and Belonging › Chapter 28

People, Care and Belonging

Chapter 28Community Safety

7,113 words · Mike Seiler · Owen Sound, Ontario

Open in the reader →

Vote on the proposals, hear the audio, read the reviews, search the whole plan.

In this chapter

A safe city is not simply a city with more enforcement.

It is a city where:

The original plan proposes a Safety Dividend.

The idea is that if successful prevention and better community systems reduce avoidable demands on policing over time, police capacity can increasingly shift toward community and youth work. Any actual financial savings would occur only through responsible long-term workforce planning and voluntary retirement or attrition, not by laying off officers simply to create a budget claim.

That principle should remain.

But it needs to be stated carefully.

The City cannot promise:

Crime will fall by a particular percentage.

It cannot assume:

Every social program prevents police calls.

And elected officials should never pressure professional emergency services to manipulate staffing or statistics in order to create a political "dividend."

The objective is broader:

Put the right problem in the hands of the people best equipped to deal with it.

Police should police.

Firefighters should respond to fire and emergency responsibilities.

Paramedics and healthcare professionals should handle health responsibilities through the organizations responsible for them.

Social-service agencies should handle the work within their expertise.

Municipal operations should fix municipal problems.

Community organizations should contribute where they have appropriate capacity.

Residents should understand where to turn.

The safest system is not necessarily the one where police do everything.

It is the one where serious danger receives a strong professional response and preventable problems are addressed before they become emergencies.

28.1Safety Begins With Reality

Community safety debates often become ideological very quickly.

One side may say:

The City is unsafe.

Another may say:

The problem is exaggerated.

Neither statement is useful without evidence.

The City's first responsibility should be to understand:

The Safety Standard

Measure the problem before choosing the solution.

28.2Safety Is More Than Crime

Residents may describe something as a safety problem when the underlying issue is actually:

These problems may involve different organizations.

A good system identifies the problem correctly before assigning the response.

28.3The Right Responder Principle

For every recurring community safety issue, ask:

Who is best equipped to address this?

Possible answers may include:

Police should not become the default because nobody else answered the telephone.

28.4Police Are Essential

Nothing in the Safety Dividend changes the fundamental need for professional policing.

Police responsibilities include serious matters involving:

A community safety strategy should give police the ability to focus on the situations where their:

are actually required.

28.5Elected Officials Do Not Direct Individual Police Operations

The Mayor and Council should not attempt to direct:

Elected officials can debate:

Operational policing remains professional work.

The Rule

Political leadership sets public priorities through lawful governance. Professional policing makes professional operational decisions.

That separation protects residents and officers.

28.6No Political Police List

No Mayor should ever create:

Police power is not political power.

That principle should be absolute.

28.7The Safety Dividend

The Safety Dividend begins with a hypothesis:

If prevention, better service routing and stronger community systems reduce avoidable police demand, some police capacity may be available for more proactive community work.

That must be proven.

Not assumed.

Measure First

Before claiming a dividend, understand:

Only then can the City and appropriate police governance bodies understand whether workload is changing.

28.8A Dividend Is Not a Police Cut

The original Safety Dividend specifically rejects officer layoffs as the mechanism for producing savings.

That should remain.

No police officer should be involuntarily removed simply so the Mayor can announce:

We saved money.

The first objective is better safety.

Financial effects come afterwards.

28.9Voluntary Attrition Only

If long-term workload genuinely changes and professional service planning supports a different staffing model, financial savings should arise only through responsible mechanisms such as:

Any staffing decision must respect:

The campaign does not pre-decide the number of officers required four years from now.

The evidence does.

28.10Never Manufacture a Dividend

The City should not:

simply to claim savings.

A Safety Dividend exists only when:

service need genuinely falls or operations genuinely improve.

If demand remains high, say so.

28.11Capacity Can Be the Dividend

The most valuable dividend may not initially be money.

It may be time.

If officers spend fewer hours repeatedly dealing with an avoidable issue, that capacity can potentially support:

That may create greater public value than immediately trying to remove dollars from the budget.

28.12Community Policing

Residents often say they want to:

see officers before there is a problem.

Where operationally appropriate, proactive police presence can include:

The goal is familiarity without surveillance.

A resident should be able to know local officers as public servants rather than only encountering police during crisis.

28.13Youth Relationships

The original Safety Dividend specifically proposes shifting available police capacity toward community and youth work as prevention succeeds.

That does not mean police become youth-program employees.

It means appropriate positive contact may help young people understand:

Youth should not know police only through enforcement.

28.14Police Are Not Social Workers

Positive community policing should not lead to police absorbing every social-service role.

Officers may encounter:

Where another professional response is more appropriate and safely available, that partner should be involved.

The officer should not become the permanent substitute for a missing health or social system.

28.15Repeat Calls

One of the most important safety questions is:

Which problems generate repeated calls?

If the same:

produces recurring demand, examine the root cause while protecting privacy and due process.

The answer may require:

Repeatedly responding without addressing the cause can be expensive for everyone.

28.16Root Cause Without Excusing Conduct

Understanding a cause does not mean excusing harmful behaviour.

A person may:

A property owner may face genuine difficulty;

and still be required to address a dangerous property condition.

Community safety can hold two truths at the same time:

Understand why it happened.

and

Protect people from it happening again.

28.17Serious Violence

Violence should never be minimized as merely a social symptom.

Threats and violence require appropriate professional response.

The City should support a culture where residents understand:

Public policy should protect victims without turning every difficult social interaction into a criminal matter.

28.18Domestic and Family Violence

Domestic and family violence is a serious safety issue requiring specialized professional and community responses.

The City's proper role may include:

Police, healthcare, shelters and specialized organizations have roles beyond normal municipal operations.

Do not create a City program simply to duplicate organizations already doing specialized work.

28.19Sexual Violence

Sexual violence also requires:

Municipal government should support appropriate partnerships and public information without claiming expertise it does not possess.

Safety policy should respect:

28.20Victims Matter

Community-safety debates sometimes become so focused on the person causing disruption that the person harmed disappears from the conversation.

Public policy must remember:

Compassion belongs on both sides of a difficult situation.

Helping the person in crisis should not require ignoring the person who was harmed.

28.21Due Process Matters

Likewise, an accusation is not automatically proof.

Community pressure should not replace:

Municipal government should never encourage public shaming as a substitute for justice.

Safety and civil liberty belong together.

28.22Public Space Is Shared Space

Parks, sidewalks, streets and civic spaces belong to everyone under the applicable rules.

Residents should be able to:

The standard should focus on conduct.

Not status.

28.23Behaviour-Based Rules

Public-space rules should address behaviour such as:

They should not target someone simply because they are:

The Rule

Regulate harmful conduct. Do not criminalize existence.

28.24Dignity Does Not Eliminate Rules

Likewise, dignity should not become an argument that public rules cannot be enforced.

A person experiencing homelessness can still be expected not to:

A business owner can still be expected to comply with public rules.

A housed resident can still be expected to behave lawfully.

Rules apply to behaviour consistently.

28.25Downtown Safety

Downtown safety requires coordination.

Possible issues may involve:

The Downtown Operating Plan should identify which organization is responsible for which issue.

Do not label every downtown concern a police problem.

28.26Downtown Safety Walks

Conduct regular safety walks involving appropriate combinations of:

Ask:

What exactly feels unsafe?

Is there evidence of actual incidents?

Is the problem lighting?

Is the problem visibility?

Is it a recurring behaviour?

Is it traffic?

Is it property condition?

Then assign the right response.

28.27Perception Is Information

A resident feeling unsafe is not irrelevant simply because no police report exists.

Perception affects whether people:

But perception should not automatically become proof that a crime problem exists.

Measure both:

reported incidents

and

resident experience.

They answer different questions.

28.28Lighting

The original plan identifies low lighting as one of the managed work streams in the Standing Work List and notes that a lit street can itself contribute to safety.

Lighting issues should therefore feed directly into First to Action.

Audit

Check:

Fix infrastructure before assuming every dark area requires a larger enforcement response.

28.29More Light Is Not Always Better

Safety lighting should avoid:

The objective is:

Design should reflect location.

A downtown walkway and a natural trail do not need identical lighting.

28.30Graffiti

Graffiti may involve:

The City should distinguish them.

Unauthorized property damage should be addressed.

Commissioned art should not be treated as vandalism because someone dislikes the style.

28.31Rapid Graffiti Response

Recurring unauthorized graffiti can create:

The Standing Work List should track:

Where a site is repeatedly targeted, examine:

Fixing the pattern may be more effective than endlessly repainting.

28.32Litter and Disorder

Litter is not the same as violent crime.

It can still affect:

The City's litter work should be managed primarily through:

Do not send police to solve a garbage problem.

28.33Broken Infrastructure

A:

can create a real safety concern.

That is why the First to Action system is part of the community-safety strategy.

Municipal maintenance is prevention.

28.34Vacant Buildings

Poorly secured vacant buildings may create:

The City should use appropriate property, fire and building authorities to address actual hazards.

Do not assume vacancy itself is criminal.

The condition is the issue.

28.35Fire Safety

Community safety includes fire prevention and response.

Municipal planning should support professional fire-service work through:

The Mayor should not attempt to dictate professional emergency tactics.

The public role is to ensure the system is:

28.36Fire Prevention

Prevention may include:

Professional fire staff should determine operational priorities within the proper governance framework.

The City's plan should support their expertise.

28.37Hydrants and Water Infrastructure

Fire safety depends partly upon infrastructure residents rarely think about.

That includes:

The Infrastructure and Systems Index should connect these assets to emergency resilience.

Maintenance behind the scenes may matter more than a visible new safety initiative.

28.38Emergency Access

Street pilots, patios, events, snow and parking must all preserve emergency access.

This principle has already appeared throughout the plan because it applies everywhere.

The Fire and Emergency Access Test should be included in major public-space changes.

28.39Addresses

Clear addresses help:

As additional housing units are created, the City's addressing system needs to remain understandable.

A beautiful garden home is of little use during an emergency if responders cannot determine where it is.

28.40Paramedics and Community Safety

Paramedic services and community paramedicine involve Grey County responsibilities rather than ordinary City policing.

The City should partner where useful and appropriate.

It should not blur jurisdictions for political simplicity.

The No Wrong Government principle applies:

Residents deserve coordination even when governments have different responsibilities.

28.41Mental Health Crisis

Some emergency calls involve a mental-health crisis.

The right response depends upon:

The City should work with:

to identify opportunities for better routing and partnership.

Do not promise that one response model fits every crisis.

28.42Immediate Danger Comes First

When someone presents an immediate serious risk to:

the priority is safety.

After the immediate danger is controlled, the system can address:

Prevention should never be used as an argument against necessary emergency response.

28.43Addiction

Addiction may contribute to:

The City cannot solve addiction through municipal by-laws.

Ontario, healthcare providers, community organizations and other partners carry major responsibilities.

Owen Sound's municipal role may include:

Be clear about the boundary.

28.44Treatment Is Not a Police Program

Police may interact with people experiencing addiction.

That does not make police the treatment system.

Likewise, municipal government should not market itself as an addiction-treatment provider.

Connect the person to the appropriate service.

Protect the public where conduct requires intervention.

Both can happen.

28.45Homelessness

Homelessness intersects with community safety but should not be defined as a safety offence.

A person lacking housing is not inherently dangerous.

Actual harmful behaviour should be addressed through ordinary rules.

Housing and homelessness work requires partnership with Grey County and other responsible organizations.

28.46Encampments and Public Space

Public-space conflicts involving homelessness can become difficult.

The City should approach them through:

Do not make absolute campaign promises about future enforcement without knowing:

Every action should receive appropriate legal review.

28.47Businesses Need Predictability

Businesses should be able to expect the City to respond when serious public-space problems repeatedly interfere with:

The response may involve more than police.

The business should still receive:

No owner should be passed endlessly between departments and agencies.

28.48Residents Need Predictability Too

The same standard applies to residents.

If someone repeatedly reports:

they should understand:

Even when the answer is:

The City cannot lawfully do what you are requesting,

the resident deserves an explanation.

28.49Property Crime

Property crime affects:

Police handle criminal investigation within their professional mandate.

The broader prevention system may also involve:

The City should amplify practical prevention information from qualified sources.

28.50Bicycle Theft

As Owen Sound encourages cycling, it should also consider:

Encouraging cycling without somewhere reasonable to secure a bicycle creates an avoidable problem.

Public infrastructure can support prevention.

28.51Theft Prevention Without Surveillance

Not every theft-prevention solution requires:

Start with:

Use intrusive technologies only when a clear need and lawful justification exist.

28.52Cameras

Public cameras can sometimes support legitimate safety or security objectives.

They also create:

Before installing or expanding cameras, ask:

What exact problem are we solving?

Is there evidence?

Is a camera likely to help?

Is there a less intrusive option?

Who can access recordings?

How long are they retained?

Is signage required?

What happens when the system is no longer needed?

Technology does not eliminate governance.

28.53No Facial Recognition by Default

Ordinary public-space safety should not automatically lead to automated identification of residents.

Any proposal involving highly intrusive biometric technology would require:

The default should remain:

Do not identify people when counting or observing conditions is enough.

28.54Public Wi-Fi Is Not a Tracking Network

The Safe Information Program later in the plan proposes public connectivity.

That network should never become an invisible system for tracking where residents move through the City for policing, marketing or politics without lawful justification.

Connectivity serves residents.

Residents do not become sensors.

28.55Data Minimization

Community safety data should be collected for legitimate purposes.

The City does not need:

to understand public safety.

Use aggregate information whenever individual identification is not necessary.

28.56Public Crime Data

Where appropriate authoritative aggregate safety information is published, make it understandable.

Distinguish:

where applicable.

These are not interchangeable measures.

A call does not automatically mean a crime occurred.

Precision prevents unnecessary fear.

28.57No Crime Heat Map of Individuals

Public mapping should avoid creating tools that effectively identify:

when that information is not lawfully and appropriately public.

The purpose of mapping is to understand patterns.

Not expose people.

The public should be able to understand whether selected safety indicators are:

Use multi-year context where possible.

One unusual month should not become a political crisis unless the events themselves warrant urgent action.

28.59Do Not Cherry-Pick

A Mayor should not select whichever safety number makes the administration look best.

If:

publish both.

The quarterly scorecard should include:

What improved

and

What got worse.

Public confidence depends on honesty.

28.60Response Times

Emergency response times can be important.

They must be measured carefully according to the service's professional definitions.

Do not compare incompatible measures.

If a response target is missed, understand:

The data should support improvement.

Not simplistic blame.

28.61Emergency Resilience

Community safety includes preparation for:

Section 13 established the broader resilience system.

Community Safety should integrate:

Preparedness reduces confusion during crisis.

28.62One Official Information Source

During an emergency:

One official source, many channels.

Residents should receive consistent information through:

Conflicting official messages create risk.

28.63Rumours

During an emergency, misinformation can spread quickly.

The City's role should be:

Not censor ordinary disagreement.

Sometimes the most trustworthy official statement is:

We do not yet know. We will update you when we do.

28.64Traffic Safety

Community safety includes the road.

Important issues may include:

Police may be one part of the response.

Engineering may be another.

Infrastructure may be another.

28.65Engineering Before Enforcement Where Appropriate

If drivers repeatedly behave dangerously at the same location, ask:

Is the street itself contributing to the problem?

Enforcement may still be necessary.

But permanent design improvement can sometimes address behaviour continuously.

Again:

Fix causes where possible.

28.66Enforcement Before Redesign Where Appropriate

The reverse can also be true.

A road may be properly designed and a small number of drivers may simply be acting dangerously.

Do not spend millions rebuilding infrastructure when targeted enforcement is the more appropriate response.

Diagnose first.

28.67School Safety

Safe Routes to School from Section 21 should connect directly to the Community Safety system.

Recurring school-zone issues should involve appropriate combinations of:

Do not treat every concern as a request for another sign.

28.68Senior Pedestrian Safety

Older residents may require more time to cross.

Important routes near:

should be reviewed with lived experience.

Community safety should include people moving at different speeds.

28.69Cycling Safety

As cycling grows, safety information and infrastructure should reflect actual conditions.

Potential issues include:

The City should not encourage an activity without considering the route people must use.

28.70Winter Road Safety

Snow and ice change:

Winter safety should be part of:

Canadian safety planning cannot stop in November.

28.71Events

Large events may require:

Requirements should be proportional to event risk.

A small community gathering should not receive the same security framework as a major festival.

28.72Alcohol

Alcohol can increase risk at some events.

Where alcohol is permitted, the event must comply with:

Many public events should remain alcohol-free simply because alcohol is unnecessary to the event.

The City should not build community life around drinking.

28.73Night Economy

Restaurants, music and evening activity can strengthen downtown.

They can also create:

The Downtown Operating Plan should balance:

Predictable rules are better than repeatedly improvising after complaints.

28.74Safe Ride Home

Private and community transportation providers can be part of responsible nightlife.

The City can help residents find:

Do not create a municipal ride service if the private sector already provides the function effectively.

28.75Impaired Driving

Police and appropriate provincial systems handle impaired-driving enforcement.

Municipal prevention can support:

A city with a strong event economy should plan how people get home safely.

28.76Fireworks

Fireworks may involve:

Any municipal rules should clearly identify:

The City should periodically review whether rules reflect actual local problems.

28.77Dangerous Properties

A severely unsafe property may require action through:

The process should include:

Public safety and procedural fairness can coexist.

28.78Hoarding and Complex Property Conditions

Some property conditions may involve:

The City should avoid public humiliation.

Use the appropriate professionals and authorities.

The objective is a safe condition.

Not a spectacle.

28.79Bylaw Enforcement

By-law officers often encounter situations residents describe as safety concerns.

Their role should be clearly understood.

Possible issues include:

By-law staff are not police officers.

Police are not by-law substitutes.

Use each service properly.

28.80Compliance First Where Reasonable

For many non-emergency municipal violations, the first objective should be:

Correct the problem.

That may involve:

Serious or deliberate violations may require stronger enforcement.

The approach should reflect:

28.81Repeat Offenders

A correction-first system cannot become:

Ignore every notice forever.

Repeated deliberate non-compliance should lead to appropriate escalation.

Fairness requires both:

28.82Complaint-Based Enforcement

Complaint systems can identify problems.

They can also be abused during neighbour disputes.

Where possible, verify the actual condition.

Do not assume:

three complaints means three separate problems

if all complaints come from the same personal dispute.

Evidence matters.

28.83Anonymous Complaints

Anonymous reporting may sometimes be necessary.

It can also make verification difficult.

The City should establish clear policies concerning:

Protect legitimate complainants.

Do not create a weapon for harassment.

28.84Retaliation

Residents should not fear retaliation for legitimately reporting:

The whistleblower and anti-retaliation principles established earlier should apply appropriately.

Likewise, knowingly false malicious reports should not be protected as civic participation.

Good faith matters.

28.85Community Mediation

Some disputes do not require:

Where appropriate mediation resources exist, residents may be directed toward them.

The City should not force mediation where:

makes it inappropriate.

Use judgement.

28.86Neighbourhood Safety Groups

Residents may want to organize around neighbourhood safety.

The City can provide:

It should discourage:

The Rule

Observe responsibly. Report appropriately. Do not become the police.

28.87No Vigilante Culture

Community safety should never become permission for residents to decide who:

Suspicion based on:

is not a legitimate safety system.

Behaviour and evidence matter.

28.88Youth Belonging

Community Safety connects directly to the Civic Corps and youth sections.

Young people need:

These are good community investments.

They should not be sold with simplistic promises that:

Every youth program reduces crime.

Build them because they strengthen the community.

Measure safety effects separately.

28.89Paid Youth Work

Young people performing useful community work can gain:

Potential roles include:

That creates a stronger relationship between youth and the community.

Paid work is not a crime-prevention slogan.

It is opportunity.

28.90Youth and Police Programs

Where police professionals believe appropriate, youth engagement may include:

The program should focus on:

Youth should not feel that ordinary participation places them into an intelligence database.

28.91Business Safety Education

Businesses may benefit from practical education about:

Use appropriate professional sources.

The City can convene.

Experts teach.

28.92Cybersecurity Is Community Safety

A modern community can be harmed by:

Municipal cybersecurity belongs in the Infrastructure and Digital Sovereignty sections.

Public education can help residents and businesses protect themselves.

Safety increasingly includes the digital environment.

28.93Municipal Cybersecurity

City systems may contain:

A cybersecurity failure can disrupt:

Therefore:

Digital resilience is emergency resilience.

Backups, access control and continuity planning are community-safety investments.

28.94No Security Theatre

A system should not appear safer merely because:

were installed.

Every security measure should answer:

What risk does this reduce?

If nobody can answer, reconsider the spending.

Visible equipment is not the same as effective security.

28.95Firearms and Weapons

Municipal government should remain within its actual legal responsibilities.

Criminal prohibitions and major weapons regulation generally involve higher levels of government.

The City's responsibility is to work with police and other authorities on local public safety rather than promising municipal law can solve every national criminal-law question.

Jurisdictional honesty matters even when the issue is emotionally difficult.

28.96Protests

Peaceful protest is part of civic life.

Public safety planning can regulate legitimate operational issues such as:

It should not regulate demonstrations according to whether the Mayor agrees with the message.

The Test

Same safety rule, different viewpoint.

28.97Counter-Protests

When opposing groups gather, public authorities should focus on:

Government should not decide which lawful opinion deserves the public space.

The Goodwill Standard applies to government too.

28.98Public Meetings

A resident criticizing Council should not be treated as a safety threat merely because:

Actual:

are different.

The Respectful City Hall section already established this distinction.

Democracy requires officials to tolerate criticism.

28.99Staff Safety

Municipal employees also deserve safe workplaces.

The City should have clear protocols for:

These protections should not be misused to avoid legitimate public accountability.

Protect workers.

Preserve access to government.

28.100Restricted Access

In rare cases, a resident's conduct may require modified methods of communication or building access.

Any restriction should have:

A difficult resident does not lose citizenship.

Safety restrictions should be proportionate.

28.101Officer and Responder Well-Being

Police, fire and emergency workers routinely encounter:

Workforce well-being belongs in the Labour Partnership framework.

Supporting employees appropriately is part of maintaining reliable service.

It should not become promotional rhetoric.

The professionals themselves should help define what support is useful.

28.102Training

Safety personnel require ongoing training.

The public does not need every operational detail.

Council should understand:

Training is not optional overhead.

It is part of professional readiness.

28.103Equipment

Police, fire and emergency services require equipment that may be expensive.

The Financial Standard still applies.

Ask:

Emergency equipment should receive serious professional weight.

It should still receive lifecycle planning.

28.104Technology Procurement

Public-safety technology deserves particularly strong review.

Potential systems can involve:

Before purchase, know:

Safety does not exempt technology from good governance.

28.105Mutual Aid and Regional Partnership

Major emergencies may require resources beyond Owen Sound.

Regional and provincial emergency arrangements are therefore important.

The City's role should be to maintain working relationships and plans with the responsible partners.

Residents do not care which government owns the truck when the emergency requires help.

Coordination matters.

28.106Saugeen Ojibway Nation Relationship

Emergency resilience and regional safety may also benefit from stronger relationships with Saugeen Ojibway Nation.

Any cooperation should be based on:

The broader plan already commits to building a formal relationship and listening first.

Safety partnership can be one part of a much larger relationship.

28.107Businesses as Resilience Partners

Businesses may possess:

Emergency planners may benefit from understanding local capacity.

Participation should be voluntary and appropriately structured.

A business appearing in a capability directory does not create an unlimited emergency obligation.

28.108Faith and Community Organizations

Churches, service clubs and community organizations may assist during:

They should participate under clear, equal partnership standards.

Emergency support should not require participation in religion.

Faith organizations also should not be excluded from helping merely because their motivation is religious.

28.109The Safety Partnership Table

Create a periodic Community Safety Partnership Table focused on recurring cross-system problems.

Potential participants may include appropriate representatives from:

Purpose

Not to discuss individual residents publicly.

Not to create another bureaucracy.

The table asks:

What recurring problem is falling between systems?

Then assigns a partner to investigate the gap.

28.110Protect Personal Information at the Table

Cross-agency collaboration does not give everyone permission to exchange personal files casually.

Share:

unless lawful and necessary information-sharing authority exists for a specific case.

"Partnership" is not a privacy exemption.

28.111Safety Improvement Register

Create a public register of major community-safety improvement projects.

Examples:

Dark pedestrian route

Status: lighting review.

Recurring dangerous crossing

Status: traffic study.

Repeat property-standard problem

Status: enforcement process.

Emergency route concern

Status: engineering review.

Protect information that should remain confidential.

The public should still be able to see whether recurring community issues are being worked on.

28.112Safety Spending

The annual budget should explain major safety spending in understandable categories.

Possible areas:

Do not use financial comparison alone to decide the appropriate level.

A service may cost more because:

requires it.

The point is transparency.

28.113Cost of Repeat Calls

Where recurring situations generate substantial demand, attempt to understand the system cost where reasonable.

The purpose is not to publish:

This person cost taxpayers $50,000.

That would be invasive and dehumanizing.

The purpose is to identify patterns such as:

This category of repeated crisis generates significant emergency demand. Is there a better intervention?

Aggregate the analysis.

28.114Savings Must Be Verified

Any Safety Dividend financial saving must be verified through the City's Financial Standard.

Show:

Baseline cost

New cost

Reason for change

One-time or recurring

Service impact

Workforce impact

No estimated savings presented as actual savings.

28.115Where Safety Dividend Savings Go

Any verified operating savings should follow the broader financial rules established in the plan.

The Safety Dividend should not create an off-books political fund.

Council approves the budget.

Savings are shown transparently.

If there is a community reinvestment, identify:

28.116Do Not Cut Prevention First

If prevention appears to reduce demand, do not immediately remove the very program associated with the improvement merely because calls fell.

Understand causation first.

A successful system may require ongoing maintenance.

Likewise, do not preserve a prevention program indefinitely if evidence shows it is not producing value.

Measure.

28.117Safety Pilot Standard

New prevention programs should normally begin as pilots where practical.

Define:

At the end:

Continue

Modify

End

A safety label does not exempt a program from evaluation.

28.118No Promise of Zero Risk

A Mayor cannot guarantee:

Government should not create an illusion of complete control.

The promise is more realistic:

Prepare well. Respond professionally. Learn from patterns. Reduce preventable risk where we can.

28.119Safety Scorecard

The quarterly and annual scorecards should use carefully defined measures.

Possible categories include:

Police Demand

Violence and Property

Fire

Traffic

Infrastructure

Downtown

Youth

Crisis Partnerships

Finance

Public Experience

Every measure should have a definition.

28.120Public Perception Survey

Ask consistent questions over time.

Do you feel safe in your neighbourhood during the day?

At night?

Downtown during the day?

Downtown at night?

Are there locations you avoid?

Why?

Possible reasons might include:

This is more useful than a single:

Do you feel safe?

28.121Business Safety Pulse

Ask downtown and other businesses:

Do you know who to call?

Does the City close the loop?

What issue has the greatest effect on your business?

Report aggregate results.

Do not turn individual business complaints into public accusations against specific people.

28.122Youth Safety Pulse

Ask young people:

Adults may define safety differently from young people.

Listen.

Then determine what belongs within municipal authority.

28.123Senior Safety Pulse

Older residents may identify concerns involving:

Those are sometimes overlooked when safety conversations focus entirely on crime.

Include them.

28.124Accessibility Safety

A person using a wheelchair may define a dangerous route as:

That is community safety too.

Safety policy should see the City through more than one body and ability level.

28.125First 100 Days

The first 100 days should build an honest baseline.

1. Safety System Map

Identify which organization is responsible for:

2. Meet Police Leadership and Appropriate Governance Representatives

Ask:

What demand is repeatedly falling on police that another system might handle better?

3. Meet Fire Leadership

Ask:

What preventable municipal or community issue repeatedly creates risk?

4. Meet Grey County and Health Partners

Identify recurring cross-jurisdictional gaps.

5. Downtown Safety Walk

Include:

6. Review Repeat Municipal Safety Complaints

Look for:

7. Establish Safety Baseline

Use existing authoritative data rather than creating new numbers for the campaign.

8. Define the Safety Dividend

Publish the rules before claiming any savings.

9. Establish Privacy Principles

Define what safety information should and should not be publicly mapped.

10. Publish the First Community Safety Work Plan

Identify:

Problem

Responsible partner

Action

Measure

Review date

28.126Year One

During Year One:

28.127Year Two

During Year Two:

If no verified dividend exists:

Say so.

28.128Year Three

During Year Three:

28.129Year Four

By Year Four, publish the complete Community Safety Report.

Ask:

Are residents safer?

Do they feel safer?

Are violent and serious incidents moving in the right direction?

Are police spending less time on problems another system could handle better?

Did community and youth engagement increase?

Did downtown businesses experience improvement?

Did traffic safety improve?

Did lighting and municipal maintenance reduce recurring concerns?

Did crisis partnerships work?

Was any Safety Dividend actually verified?

Were any officer layoffs required to create it?

The answer to the last question should be:

No.

28.130The Safety Dividend Decision

At the end of the term, one of several outcomes may be true.

Demand Fell and Capacity Improved

The Safety Dividend hypothesis has evidence.

Demand Changed but No Financial Saving Exists

Capacity may still have improved.

Demand Remained Similar

Continue professional staffing and improve prevention.

Demand Increased

Do not pretend the original hypothesis succeeded.

Adjust.

Every outcome provides useful information if reported honestly.

28.131What This Is Not

Community Safety is not:

It is a system for matching problems to the right response.

The Community Safety Commitment

A safe community needs strong emergency services.

It also needs strong systems around those services.

The commitment is:

Measure actual safety conditions before prescribing solutions.

Keep police focused on work requiring police authority and training.

Keep elected officials out of individual police operations.

Protect officers from political pressure.

Protect residents from political use of police power.

Treat violence and serious threats seriously.

Protect victims while preserving due process.

Regulate public-space behaviour, not social status.

Treat homelessness as a housing and social issue until actual conduct requires another response.

Connect mental-health and addiction crises with the appropriate professional systems.

Use police when immediate danger requires police.

Fix lighting, sidewalks, traffic and property problems through the services responsible for them.

Treat municipal maintenance as prevention.

Strengthen positive youth and community relationships.

Do not claim every youth program is a crime-prevention program.

Identify repeat demand and look for root causes.

Create a Community Safety Partnership Table without creating a database of vulnerable residents.

Use cameras and surveillance only where a defined need justifies them.

Collect the minimum safety data required.

Never build political profiles from public-safety systems.

Integrate traffic, winter and accessibility into the definition of safety.

Prepare for emergencies before they happen.

Report good trends and bad trends.

Verify every claimed Safety Dividend.

Never lay off an officer simply to manufacture a dividend.

Use voluntary attrition and professional workforce planning only where actual long-term demand supports change.

Let capacity become the first dividend where more proactive community work provides greater value than an immediate budget reduction.

Change course when the evidence changes.

The objective is not:

more police

or

less police.

The objective is:

the right professional, responding to the right problem, at the right time.

When serious danger occurs, the response should be strong.

When a preventable problem keeps returning, the system should learn.

When a streetlight is broken, fix the streetlight.

When someone needs healthcare, connect healthcare.

When someone commits violence, protect the victim and apply the law.

When a young person needs somewhere to belong, create opportunity before crisis.

And when prevention genuinely reduces demand, let the public see exactly what changed.

Strong response when danger is real. Strong prevention where problems can be prevented. Honest measurement always.

← Chapter 27: Seniors, Independence and Aging in Owen SoundChapter 29: Community Partners →