It appears that a member (or members) of the Vancouver Police Board is sticking his or her nose in a place that has rankled someone in power at the Vancouver Police Department.
How else to explain a sudden amendment to the police board’s policy and procedure manual that says as much?
Check this out:
“It is important for the board to have well-understood protocols to ensure that board members are not interfering in operational matters; bypassing the Chief Constable’s need to be aware of board concerns; unreasonably consuming VPD members’ time; or inadvertently giving the impression they are speaking on behalf of the board.”
Well, that’s kind of pointed and specific.
I pulled that quote from a report going before the eight-member police board Thursday that outlines the need to amend the policy. It is authored by board member Sherri Magee, the chairperson of the board’s governance committee.
Magee’s report points out the “safest way to ensure effective, transparent and appropriate communications” is to go through board executive director Patti Marfleet. She will ensure that a question or comment is shared with Police Chief Adam Palmer, board chairperson Mayor Gregor Robertson or other board members and answered “by the right personnel and in the right forum.”
“This will ensure that expensive staff time is not utilized individually briefing board members on various issues at various times,” the report said. “It will also ensure that the Chief Constable is aware of concerns or questions from his board.”
The report says the same protocol should be practised by board members when contacted by city councillors.
“Councillors may, from time to time, direct questions to individual board members. If questions from councillors are referred to the board office, it ensures transparent communications with the chair and the chief, and also reduces the possibility, or perception of, political interference in police operations.”
So, yeah, something is going on.
But the report doesn’t indicate any one board member or event triggered the need to amend the policy. Instead, the rationale is this: “With the board comprised largely of new members, it is opportune for the board to consider the protocols around communications by board members with members of the department and to clarify these protocols in the board’s policy and procedure manual.”
The board is comprised of eight members, including the mayor, who doubles as chairperson. All but one of the other seven members is appointed by the provincial government; city council gets to appoint one member to the board.
I won’t name all of the members here but they include a lawyer, a doctor, an oncology researcher and successful business people. All were appointed over the last year-and-a-half.
I’d like to hear more from Magee on the need to amend the policy but that’s pretty much impossible until Thursday’s board meeting. That’s because all media requests have to be directed to the mayor, who then has to contact Magee, who then has to contact me.
It’s a ridiculous policy because I can never get the mayor on the phone on the same day I make a request. And probably the last thing on His Worship’s daily agenda is dialing up a board member who may or may not be available to speak to me.
Sounds like a policy that could use some amending.
But I digress.
I’ll provide an update Thursday, if there is one.
UPDATE:
Just returned from Thursday's board meeting.
I asked the chief and the mayor what was going on.
Chief Adam Palmer characterized the changes as “formalizing something that’s always been there.”
“The board does not dip into operational matters,” he said. “The board provides governance and they look at things like strategic planning, budget, policies and procedures. But they’re not telling me how to run the day-to-day operations of the police department. It’s never been an issue, it’s just more of an administrative procedure.”
And the mayor:
“No, there’s no interfering going on to my knowledge. We have a whole new board and, regularly, there are tune-ups and administrative steps taken to clarify policy. So this was just to make sure all the new board members understand how we deal with communications as a board and department – and keep it efficient and upfront.”
So there wasn’t an incident that triggered this?
“No, it’s new board members learning how it works and clarifying our overall process."
@Howellings
