The Township of Esquimalt has created a new position called Director of Community Safety Services. It sounds like an amazing opportunity for the right person:
“Providing management expertise and advice to the Chief Administrative Officer and executive team, you will plan, coordinate and manage policing and law enforcement liaison; community policing and crime prevention initiatives; bylaw enforcement; emergency planning; and building inspection.
You will lead a team of qualified and committed staff to ensure that “best practices” are continuously reviewed and, where appropriate, adapted to Esquimalt’s benefit. In consultation with community stakeholders you will be responsible for long range planning and policy development in these areas and your efforts will improve the quality of life of Esquimalt’s residents ensuring that Esquimalt remains a livable, sustainable community.
Your abilities and knowledge include the identification and prioritization of community policing and emergency management; familiarity with the principles, practices and methods of community policing, emergency management and disaster preparedness; proven skills in effective communication; and the analysis, evaluation and design of operational policies and programs. Supported by a relevant Baccalaureate, you possess at least 10 years of senior experience in community policing, law enforcement and bylaw and emergency management. In addition, you possess, or are eligible for, Canadian Federal Government security clearance sufficient to interact effectively with policing agencies.”
The application deadline is July 31, 2013.
This is interesting for local government watchdogs: a one minute in-camera meeting of Esquimalt Council. Held on November 26th, 2012, they went in-camera at 9:46pm and adjourned at 9:47pm. My assumption here is that, due to the late hour, they decided to table the agenda items for another time.
An alternative explanation is that these Councillors are very, very efficient.
I would like to clarify a few points in Simon Nattrass’ column for Monday Magazine.
First, I acted independently in filing the Freedom of Information request with Esquimalt. I filed the request because I believe in transparency and accountability. To imply that the request was submitted to benefit my employer is simply wrong. Secrecy hinders good governance and this is why all citizens have the right to request information using FOI legislation.
Second, I don’t support the retention of non-hit data from Automatic License Plate Recognition surveillance cameras in British Columbia. My personal view is that storing random data is not a useful investigative technique for law enforcement. It is also a civil liberties issue and so I look forward to seeing the results of the ALPR investigation by the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner.
I do enjoy reading Monday Magazine and so I was surprised by this column. Many people in Victoria know that I am a passionate advocate for criminal justice reform while off-duty. I wish Simon had contacted me before writing this piece, but he didn’t.
A big thank you to Katie DeRosa and Rob Shaw for their excellent article in the Times-Colonist. CFAX, CTV, Victoria News and Victoria Vision also covered this issue, and I am grateful for their efforts as well.
I’ve filed a “Request for Review” against Esquimalt with the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner.
This is in regard to an access request I submitted to the Township of Esquimalt on July 6th. I asked for a copy of the RCMP proposal received by Esquimalt in response to its RFP for policing services.
Esquimalt denied the request.
In a nutshell, their position is that they “cannot release the requested report in its entirety, or reasonably sever exempted information to disclose any part of it” as the proposal is exempt from disclosure under sections 12, 13, 15, 16, 17 and 21 of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
These sections of FIPPA deal with serious matters including Cabinet confidence, government relations, the investigative techniques used by law enforcement, the financial and economic interests of various public bodies, the ability of the government to manage the economy, trade secrets and other issues.
My position is that Esquimalt does not genuinely believe the proposal is exempt, nor do they believe that harm will result if the proposal becomes public. If this were the case, Esquimalt Council never would have passed an in-camera resolution asking the RCMP to release its proposal.
Another concern is that the Township has informed me that it will not release any information without an actual Order from the Commissioner. Often these “Request for Review” disputes get resolved through mediation with the OIPC. However, after a statement like that, it is difficult to believe that Esquimalt will participate in mediation in good faith.