Councillors eagerly hacked and slashed city programs to reach the target 3.9-per-cent tax increase at a budget committee meeting recently, but their eagerness blinded them to strategy when they cut funding for Crime Prevention Ottawa, says Somerset Ward Coun. Diane Holmes.
“The seven people who voted to cut this program, it seemed, would have cut any program to get to the magic 3.9 per cent,” says Holmes. “I can live with a 4.2-per-cent increase if the program makes our city safer.”
In early November, the program received nothing but positive feedback when it presented its three-year-plan to the community and protective services committee, says Nancy Worsfold, head of Crime Prevention Ottawa.
“The plan was adopted by council last Wednesday, and it was eliminated from the budget on Friday,” she says.
Crime Prevention Ottawa pulls together community partners such as youth, police, landlords, United Way, Children’s Aid Society, and school boards to discuss strategies to lower crime, says Worsfold.
Now if a Centretown group wants to publish a crime prevention pamphlet it will not be able to get city money, says Holmes.
“It’s a valuable resource for myself as a police officer who works with the community to prevent crime,” says Somerset communty police Const. Nathan Hoedeman.
Some councillors may not see the value of the program because their communities are already safe, says Hoedeman.
“But everyone should invest in this program even if you already feel safe in your own backyard,” he says.
Although cutting the program saves the city money in the short term, Holmes says she agrees with crime prevention advocate Sheila Arthurs that it was false economy because the program offsets future costs.
“You’re not really saving money because you’re going to see increases in other areas such as kids getting into trouble,” says Arthurs, who co-founded Informed Opinions, an Ottawa crime prevention advocacy group.
“Crime prevention is so essential in dealing with justice issues before they get too serious,” she says.
The cuts to Crime Prevention Ottawa were a small part of the city's budget savings. Compared with the overall $58 million in cuts, only $510,000 was cut from the program and it has been able to raise almost twice that – $930,000 – from the provincial and federal governments for community programs such as the Youth Services Board and the Boys and Girls Club, says Arthurs.
“It doesn’t sound like the city’s contribution is so steep that it’s going to save much money,” she says.
Cutting this program will also cut the funding for the community that it solicits from senior governments, says Worsfold.
While the committee was eager to cut services such as Crime Prevention Ottawa, it did not budge when Gloucester-Southgate Ward Coun. Diane Deans proposed a motion to freeze spending on the $2.1-billion light rail and rapid transit projects.
This left David Jeans, the president of Transport 2000, wondering if the transportation plan is too expensive given all the other services the city has had to cut to keep it within the city's budget, Jeans says.
The city will only pay one third of the $2.1-billion for the 3.2-km light-rail track which will run underneath downtown, but even that is a lot of money for the city, says Jeans.
“Essentially, it means not dealing with a lot of other issues,” he says.
A transportation solution is essential for the city, says Jeans, but it would be much cheaper and more environmentally friendly to run the trains above ground.
“There are much more affordable solutions than trying to copy the Toronto or Montreal subway systems,” he says.
But Holmes says comparing the light rail budget pressure with the other service cuts is like comparing apples and oranges.