Township of Esquimalt council has voted down an additional 2022 budget request from VicPD, ushering in dismay from the area’s top cop and policing union.
With the exception of funding for restorative justice, the township said on Tuesday that it had declined a request from VicPD to fund six additional officers and four additional civilian employees.
While Victoria city council had recently approved VicPD’s presented budget, Esquimalt council is also required to give two thumbs-up.
That’s because both communities are in a policing partnership, first established in 2003 by then-BC Solicitor General Rich Coleman.
“From an operational perspective, I am disappointed that VicPD’s budget was not approved in its entirety,” said Chief Del Manak.
“Our police board, over an exhaustive budget process spanning several months, arrived at this budget based on the best available information relating to resource demands, operational requirements, and public safety trends.”
The department had requested a 2022 budget of $63.4 million, up 7.05% from 2021’s $59.2 million. The salaries of the 10 new positions together totalled $1.08 million.
Manak says it was the “minimum budget” required to offer adequate policing, noting staff shortages continue to plague VicPD’s ability to provide the level of service expected by locals.
But Esquimalt is pointing to the Ministry of Public Safety’s 2020 review of policing costs, which found the township was overpaying for these services as the area’s crime rate declined.
“We made further budget decisions this year—including the supplemental requests—that we believe are more in line with our use of resources from VicPD,” said Barbara Desjardins, Esquimalt mayor and Victoria and Esquimalt Police Board co-chair.
“For instance, we know that overtime and other costs are increasing due to the number of protests we’re seeing downtown,” she continued.
“While police presence is important for these types of events, Esquimalt should not be the only municipality in the region contributing to these costs simply because VicPD provides policing in our township.”
In 2021, Esquimalt paid $8.4 million for policing, or approximately $479 per capita. However, recommendations from the ministry’s report led council to reduce this year’s policing budget from 14.7% to 13.67%.
“Public safety is top of mind, as is appropriate spending for our services. Our goal is to be adequately policed while fiscally responsible to our residents and businesses,” added Desjardins.
VicPD resources running short
“The ten additional positions for 2022 were not a supplemental request,” said VicPD Chief Manak, echoing concerns from the Victoria City Police Union.
The union says Esquimalt’s decision to decline VicPD’s budget request will further hamper and only combat efforts to enhance staffing levels.
“Although the Victoria Police Department is the largest agency in the region, we are a department in crisis,” said union president Len Hollingsworth on Wednesday.
“The staffing allotted to our department cannot sustain policing the increasing number of protests, extensive shelter beds and numerous other issues that the region has left Victoria to struggle with alone.”
The union, which represents 250 plus members, says it’s disappointed in the township and finds council’s vote is “a blow to the morale” of the many officers dedicated to both communities.
Esquimalt’s decision comes as the current Police Framework Agreement, which governs the Victoria and Esquimalt amalgamated service delivery, nears its expiry with a July renewal deadline.
Township staff say they’ll be reaching out to locals over the next few months to gauge their satisfaction with the current combined policing model.
The Victoria Police Union also asks the provincial government to take responsibility for the situation they created in 2003 and establish a sustainable long-term policing solution.
“We urge the residents of Victoria, Esquimalt, and the greater community to speak out to their MLAs and demand action that will ensure public safety and a healthy community for years to come,” added Hollingsworth.
