[Newsbot]

Title: Canada's soaring police costs are unsustainable: Toews
Category: Law & Order
Posted By: Curtman
Date: 2013-01-16 12:45:04
Canadian

[Curtman]

$1:

Speaking at the start of a national summit on the economics of policing, Vic Toews suggested the current system is unsustainable and said police services need to look at options for reform.
...
�I�ll be blunt. Police services face two options: they can do nothing and eventually be forced to cut drastically, as we have seen in some countries,� Mr. Toews said. �Or they can be proactive, get ahead of the curve and have greater flexibility in designing and implementing both incremental and meaningful structural reforms.�

Dumb on crime...

Canadian Drug Policy Coalition Canadian Drug Policy Coalition:

No analysis of the contribution of the criminalization of drugs to this statement on how policing costs are unsustainable by Vic Toews. His government's policies are driving up police costs by saddling municipal and regional police resources with increased enforcement on non-violent low level drug offenses, dealing with organized criminal gangs selling illegal drugs and refusing to consider regulation of cannabis which accounts for 61,400 police incidents in 2011 - a 16% increase from 2001, a 7% increase between 2010 and 2011.

[peck420]

I wonder how much population density of a given area plays into this?

I don't even want to think about what it will cost to police Edmonton if the city continues to expand at the pace (and distribution) that it is.

You will never afford quality law enforcement at 4 families/acre (1/4 acre lots), hell, even at 8 (1/8 acre lots), which are the standard development sizes for Edmonton.

That is a massive amount of extra area to cover with very little extra resources to do it with.

[andyt]

Saw a thing on DaVinci's Inquest where the plan was to cross train firefighters and cops, instantly adding more 'cops' to the mix. Even tho DaVinci is mostly based on real events in Vancouver, I've never heard of this proposal before. Maybe there's something there tho.

[Zipperfish]

Surprised to hear Toews say this. He's usually Mr. Law and Order.

[bootlegga]

peck420 peck420:

I wonder how much population density of a given area plays into this?

I don't even want to think about what it will cost to police Edmonton if the city continues to expand at the pace (and distribution) that it is.

You will never afford quality law enforcement at 4 families/acre (1/4 acre lots), hell, even at 8 (1/8 acre lots), which are the standard development sizes for Edmonton.

That is a massive amount of extra area to cover with very little extra resources to do it with.

Your worries are unfounded - Edmonton is going to run out land in its planned developments in 15 years, and another 20 after that, all land in the city will be fully developed. After that, it'll be up or not at all. By 2050, Edmonton will be far denser than it is now.

I don't really like posting a link to another forum, but the Journal no longer has the original article online;

http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/forum/sh ... hp?t=22071

Given everything that surrounds us - Ft. Sask, CFB Edmonton and St. Albert to the north; Spruce Grove, Stony Plain and Enoch Reserve to the west; Devon, Leduc, Beaumont to the south and Sherwood Park to the east - even annexation doesn't really look possible. The only thing that would work is amalgamation with Edmonton, and none of these 'bedroom' communities has shown any interest in doing that.

[peck420]

bootlegga bootlegga:

Given everything that surrounds us - Ft. Sask, CFB Edmonton and St. Albert to the north; Spruce Grove, Stony Plain and Enoch Reserve to the west; Devon, Leduc, Beaumont to the south and Sherwood Park to the east - even annexation doesn't really look possible. The only thing that would work is amalgamation with Edmonton, and none of these 'bedroom' communities has shown any interest in doing that.

Um, Edmonton has already taken land (successfully) from the following:
Strathcona County (Sherwood Park)
Sturgeon County (St. Albert & Ft. Saskatchewan)
Parkland County (Spruce Grove & Stony Plain)
Leduc County (Nisku, Leduc, and Beaumont)

Edmonton also successfully had all of those communities designated as part of the Edmonton CMA against fairly strong opposition.

I, honestly, don't think any of those communities will be given much of a choice.

Edit to add:

The last time Edmonton annexed area was in 1982. There has been very recent talks of doing so again. The most notable being an annexation of Leduc County (2008), Leduc County (different area of same county, 2011), and Sturgeon County (2012).

[Xort]

peck420 peck420:

You will never afford quality law enforcement at 4 families/acre (1/4 acre lots), hell, even at 8 (1/8 acre lots), which are the standard development sizes for Edmonton.

EDIT:

31m x 31m lots are too big?

Also that seems rather huge given that most lots are more like less than 10m wide and less than 20m deep.

bootlegga bootlegga:

Your worries are unfounded - Edmonton is going to run out land in its planned developments in 15 years, and another 20 after that, all land in the city will be fully developed. After that, it'll be up or not at all. By 2050, Edmonton will be far denser than it is now.

Edmonton sure looks hard up for space around it... I guess no one will move into the cities and counties around it rather than cramming into Emonton?

[bootlegga]

peck420 peck420:

bootlegga bootlegga:

Given everything that surrounds us - Ft. Sask, CFB Edmonton and St. Albert to the north; Spruce Grove, Stony Plain and Enoch Reserve to the west; Devon, Leduc, Beaumont to the south and Sherwood Park to the east - even annexation doesn't really look possible. The only thing that would work is amalgamation with Edmonton, and none of these 'bedroom' communities has shown any interest in doing that.

Um, Edmonton has already taken land (successfully) from the following:
Strathcona County (Sherwood Park)
Sturgeon County (St. Albert & Ft. Saskatchewan)
Parkland County (Spruce Grove & Stony Plain)
Leduc County (Nisku, Leduc, and Beaumont)

Edmonton also successfully had all of those communities designated as part of the Edmonton CMA against fairly strong opposition.

I, honestly, don't think any of those communities will be given much of a choice.

Edit to add:

The last time Edmonton annexed area was in 1982. There has been very recent talks of doing so again. The most notable being an annexation of Leduc County (2008), Leduc County (different area of same county, 2011), and Sturgeon County (2012).

Yes, they have, way back in the 80s, as you noted. Stelmach even supported it in theory, but said that cabinet would make the final decision.

Then came the Wildrose and it got swept off the table, because it angered a lot of rural voters near Edmonton. It is for the foreseeable future, a non-starter. If the Wildrose forms the next government, then it will take a referendum to decide (at least that was their platform in the recent election).

[martin14]

$1:

Many crimes are also taking more time and resources to deal with, he added.

“The impaired driving trial that took two hours 20 years ago, now takes two days, requiring more time for officers to prepare for and appear in court,” Mr. Toews said.

Well, there is an easy solution for that..


Shoot all the lawyers.


Less time in court, and getting rid of a bunch of criminals as well.


Win - win.

[Zipperfish]

martin14 martin14:

$1:

Many crimes are also taking more time and resources to deal with, he added.

“The impaired driving trial that took two hours 20 years ago, now takes two days, requiring more time for officers to prepare for and appear in court,” Mr. Toews said.

Well, there is an easy solution for that..


Shoot all the lawyers.


Less time in court, and getting rid of a bunch of criminals as well.


Win - win.

Agreed. Who needs lawyers? Just go back to teh days when the judge handed out the sentence and there was none of this bother with a trial.

Twenty years ago, a drunk driving ticket was a slap on the wrist. Now it is much more serious, resulting in jail time, loss of employment, significant fines. Not saying there's anything wrong with that, but clearly increassing penalties is going to increase defendants lawyering up.

That kind of analysis, unfortunately, seems light years beyond the Toews to grasp.

[BartSimpson]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Agreed. Who needs lawyers? Just go back to teh days when the judge handed out the sentence and there was none of this bother with a trial.

All I could think of....

[peck420]

Where have you been shopping?!

Edmonton's NSP's are pretty standard.

Average lot size in Edmonton is 592 sq m (6,372 sq ft), per the City...well, technically, per Edmonton Drainage Services.

Here, I will us Silver Berry as an example (pretty standard spec NSP that was recently completed).

Development size: 506.5 acres
Number of houses: 676 <- usually around 80% 1/8, 20% 1/4 acre lots
Number of row houses: 44 <-these are the 20m fronts, btw.
Number of duplex/tri/quad: 121 <-these can be subbed for apartments

Average taxes collected per housing unit that is dedicated to EPS: $298

Now, how much money does the EPS get to cover this 500 acre, 2,586 person area? Approximately $250,618....almost enough for one police officer and car...if you neglect training and accessories.

[peck420]

bootlegga bootlegga:

It is for the foreseeable future, a non-starter.

City council is submitting another bid for Leduc County area later this year.

Is that outside foreseeable future?

Don't get me wrong, I am not a fan of it, but the crackpots down town have it stuck in their heads that Edmonton requires enough space for 30 years worth of growth at all times.

We are currently between 9 and 17 years, depending on which analysts you believe.

[BeaverFever]

So we need fewer cops because reported crime is down but more prisons because unreported crime is up? Did I get that right, Conservatives? Dumb on crime is right.