Does Thunder Bay Need More Police Officers or Redeployment?

 

The Thunder Bay Police Services Board (TBPSB) in response to a resolution tabled at a recent City council meeting by Mayor Mauro has asked the police service to “produce a report on a possible redeployment of existing resources to get more officers on the front line.”  The mayor was motivated to make the request based on feedback from residents who have been complaining about crime in the city. 

 

The police in Thunder Bay appear to be facing increasing service calls on a variety of fronts while crime rates in the city along with homicide rates are not exactly in the middle of the distribution when it comes to comparably sized CMAs across the country.  Meanwhile, an additional half a dozen officers have been hired since 2018 so the mayor wants to increase front-line deployment of officers.  However, apparently the TBPSB annual report for 2019 does not specify how many of its 227 officers are considered front line – hence the request.

 

In the absence of direct information, we are left with comparisons and assessments based on the data available.  A question one can ask is how does Thunder Bay’s policing strength per capita look compared to other cities?  The accompanying chart using data from Statistics Canada provides police officers per 100,000 population for a dozen Ontario cities including the five northern Ontario cities.  The numbers are for 2000 and 2019.  Except for Toronto and Peterborough-Lakefield, since 2000, all of the cities have seen an increase in police officers per 100,000.  In percentage terms the largest increases have been for Barrie at 38 percent followed by Timmins at 28 percent, then Kingston at 23 percent and Thunder Bay at 18 percent. 

 

 

 

Of the five northern Ontario cities, Thunder Bay in 2019 had the most officers per 100,000 population coming in at 205.  This is followed closely by Timmins at 199 and then the Sault at 177, North Bay at 160 and then Greater Sudbury at 155.  Of the southern Ontario cities, Windsor comes in at the top at 205 per 100,000 followed by Barrie at 163 and Toronto at 162.  The average number of police officers per 100,000 is generally greater in the five northern Ontario cities at 179 compared to the seven southern one here at 159.  That staffing requirements might be larger in the north given the geographic spread of its major municipalities as well as unique local issues is not in question.  In the south, Windsor is also an outlier and can probably base its numbers on the unique challenges of being a border city.

 

Nevertheless, in per capita terms, Thunder Bay is at the top of the distribution whether it is being compared to its northern counterparts or others in the rest of the province.  The mayor is correct in asking whether there is potential for redeployment of existing police resources to the front line especially given the increases of recent years.

Sorting Out the Day After

 Well, the results are in and little has changed at the federal level at least on the surface.  What was viewed as an unnecessary election has yielded the anticipated result - a minority Liberal government with little to show for the effort aside from the expenditure of over $600 million dollars to run a pandemic election. The distribution of seats has changed little.  It may be tempting to conclude that little has changed and it is business as usual but the election does have a number of longer-term implications.  

First, it has introduced Canadians to Erin O'Toole in a major way.  He is now a more visible leader and does position him well for a second run.  He did not do better partly because of the upsurge in support for the People's Party, partly because in the GTA voters decided the Liberal child care plan was more to their liking and partly because the Ontario conservative political machine essentially stepped back.  He now has the opportunity to work at remedying that state of affairs.

Second, all of the three major parties have essentially been weakened and being weak creates insecurity and the prospect of a more fractious and unstable parliament at a time when the pandemic is still on.  The Liberals may indeed argue that we now need to work together to finish off the pandemic but the counter will be that despite a pandemic we had an election anyway so the prospects of being punished for a pandemic election grow weaker as a threat.  Pulling the trigger will be easier the next time for both the liberals as well as whatever party is propping up the government.

The Liberals wanted a majority and did not get one and the acrimony of the campaign means a less civil climate for working together with the other parties.  While the NDP party will still support them, the price for their support will inevitably move upwards but at the same time, given that they did no better than last time, the NDP will not have as much leverage as they might imagine.  And the Conservatives will have a lot of regrouping and thinking to do given their platform in the end did not make the inroads into the urban areas that they would have wanted.

Interestingly enough, in the dying days of the campaign, the Prime minister noted he was willing to consider electoral reform - again.  Of course, why he would now want to abandon a first past the post system that allows him to form a government with barely one third the popular vote is something that remains to be seen.

So, that is where we are at for the time being.

 

Is a Tax Revenue Bonanza Coming to Thunder Bay?

 

Things have been relatively quiet of late at Thunder Bay City Council all things considered.  Indeed, for the most part, this will be a relatively subdued year barring any unfortunate issues rearing their head because we are moving into the final year before an election next fall.  Among the items that have emerged over the past few weeks include a new community well-being plan, piloting work from home projects, recognizing the National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, awareness campaigns for incident reporting in anti-racism matters, and vaccine policies for city workers.  

 

In terms of direct services and expenditures, Thunder Bay is moving forward with the curbside collection for organics by initiating the process for studying the matter – that should take the better part of a year – and is also going to spend an additional $1.5 million for the Boulevard Lake Dam.  And as a bonus, there was the debate over whether residents be allowed to continue using plastic bags for garbage pick-up or garbage bins made mandatory.  None of these have been exceptionally attention getting but then it is summer and Thunder Bay's camp culture means a lot of people have gone to the countryside and are not paying much attention.

 

What issues have been rather quiet?  Well, after a discussion about the multi-use turf facility being back on the agenda in June to solicit private sector proposals little has been said since.  After a vote to move forward with a plebiscite to reduce its size and forwarding the matter to administration for a report, again little more in terms of what has been done since.  There is also the matter of the budget – one expects some type of report soon on the budgetary position and the size of a likely surplus as we approach year end.  And of course, there is the matter of the ongoing leaky pipe scenario which is still seeing homes dig up their front lawns as corroded service pipes are replaced in the wake of the addition of sodium hydroxide – not to mention interior pipes leaking and the resulting damage.  Which brings me to the main event.

 

The damage that is being done in literally thousands of homes across the city by leaky pipes is resulting in repairs and often substantial renovations.  Another unintended fringe benefit to all this – aside from water connection fee revenue to the city and a lot of employment for trades people and landscapers – is the potential of a rising property tax base in the wake of the property renovations.  Even if property tax rate stays the same, the expanding base due to higher valuations on residential properties reflecting enhanced value due to renovations may be a factor in increasing the City of Thunder Bay’s property tax revenues. With increases in the tax rate, revenue increases could be greater.  Far-fetched? Maybe and then maybe not.

 

The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) establishes the value of properties for taxation purposes using a method known as current value assessment.  The most used valuation method for residential properties is what is known as direct comparison which analyzes the recent sales of comparable properties.  However, it is not just the sale price that is used in the multiple regression models assigning a residential property but up to 200 factors using data from land title documents, building permits, on-site inspection and communications with property owners and reviews of sales transactions.  In the structural features segment of the variable sets there is included the renovation and year of renovation.

 

The five major factors as reflected by ultimate weighting of results are the age of the buildings, the square footage of the living area, the location (reflected by recent sales in your area), lot size and construction quality.   However, renovations do enter into the formula, and it remains to be seen if the increase in renovations as reflected by building permits issued to properties to conduct their renovations and repairs and any onsite inspections will ultimately also be a factor in increasing the total value of the assessment in Thunder Bay.

 

Homeowners in Thunder Bay affected by the leaky pipes fiasco have had to contend with disruption and repairs to their property, the inconvenience of having their water supply interrupted for a period, the stress of worrying about future leaky pipes, the cost of repairs if insurance coverage is inadequate, and future increase in home insurance costs as insurance companies re-calibrate their rates to deal with the higher risk of insuring properties in Thunder Bay.  Now to all this is the prospect that if future budgets begin to raise rates at historic levels of 3-4 percent, some of the increase in taxes will inevitably reflect the effect of the leaky pipe repairs on property values. And of course for the average homeowner, it will be difficult to separate any effect of leaky pipe renovations on assessed values from the increase in home prices that has occurred over the last year.

 

True, City Council has directed administration to restrain increases to 2.25 percent for 2022 and that will probably happen given the election coming in Fall 2022.  However, once a four year mandate has been granted after next fall, be prepared for much higher rate increases with the increase in assessments a potential additional factor.

 

 

Northern Economist Federal Leadership Debate Prizes

 Last evening's federal leaders debate was indeed a performance worthy of commemoration  in an epic poem.  In response to each question, each of them was able to effectively parry, dodge, thrust and spin in a flurry of verbal movement that employed words to soar into a vacuum and then return to equilibrium in exactly the same state before the exchange.  In politics, words are merely a transition from one fixed political point to the same fixed political point without losing anything in the journey.  In other words, rolling politicians gather no moss.

While no one came off particularly badly in the exchanges, no one did particularly well either.  Their deflector shields held up reasonably well in the face of repeated political phaser blasts and photon torpedos and they all managed to limp back to Starbase with their warp drives intact.  Still, each of them managed to convey a lasting impression that can be best summarized by the awarding of prizes to recognize the salient point of their performance.

The I Am the Moderator and You are Not Prize

This of course goes not to any of the leaders but to Shachi Kurl of Angus Reid who as moderator asked most of the questions and was rather zealous in asking questions and enforcing the time limits.  At times it appeared as if she was one of the debaters.

The Deer Caught in Headlights Prize

This goes to Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau for expressions that managed to convey that the debate world around him was not unfolding as it should.  All of a sudden, the idea dawned that perhaps an election in the middle of a pandemic given the government was already able to do whatever it wanted was not the best of ideas.

The Drunken Uncle at Sunday Dinner Prize

This goes to Bloc Quebecois leader Yves-Francois Blanchet for what was probably the most candid and entertaining performance of all, as he said whatever he wanted because after all, despite being at a federal leader's debate, he does not want to lead Canada. 

The Cheshire Cat Prize

Well, the winner here is Conservative leader Erin O'Toole for interspersing his delivery with a wide and constant ear to ear grin. The smile was not enigmatic at all however but an indication that he felt relieved the universe was indeed unfolding as best as it could be expected to under the circumstances.

The Enemy of Billionaires Prize

Who else can this be but NDP leader Jagmeet Singh who believes all of Canada's fiscal needs can be met by taxing billionaires.  To his credit, Mr. Singh is numerate and he knows that there are currently 44 billionaires in Canada.  I would expect the number to decline should his party form the government.

The School Teacher Prize

And finally, this prize goes to Green Party Leader Annamie Paul who in cool calm and measured terms tried to calm the room of errant school children with educating answers.  One wonders if this approach will work with the rest of the Green Party?

And there you have it.  It really is the end of civilization as we know it.

Do the Liberals Deserve a Majority?

 

This election is only about whether the current governing party deserves a majority.  It is not about who is the best steward of the economy, who has the best housing plan, who can manage the pandemic best or even issues like what should Canada’s foreign policy or trade policy be in the currently fractured world.  It should be about all these things, but these things are only a veil for what is the real issue.  Given a minority government that appeared to be working, was an election during a pandemic for the sake of trying to get a majority something the current governing party should be rewarded for?

 

That is a good question.  The answer really depends on what happens after this election.  If the Liberals get their majority – a prospect which currently appears problematic– then the federal business of government will continue pretty much as it has whether you like it or not. The rolling of the dice will have been rewarded with the anticipated prize and the universe will unfold as Liberal strategists desired. 

 

If there is a Liberal minority, then all was for naught, and we are back to a minority government that requires the support of at least one of the other parties - but the mandate of the Liberal minority will be weaker.  While they are still the government, they did not get their majority and the prospect for good relations with other parties after the rancor and rhetoric of an unnecessary election will shorten the life of the next parliament considerably.  It is a recipe for more unstable government, but with some continuity in dealing with the resurgent fourth COVID wave given the Liberals will still be in charge at least for a short time.

 

Suppose there is a Conservative or for the sake of argument an NDP minority government.  Then once again we have a prospect for unstable and short shelf-life government and probably a fair amount of chaos during the transition.  As the fourth wave grows, we will be busy watching to see who the new cabinet will be and what the policies transpire and who is going to be supporting the government and who is not.  Will the Liberals swallow their pride and support a conservative or NDP government?  Or will they simply retreat into sniping mode and leave the heavy lifting to the Bloc?  It is not a good prospect.

 

There is of course the possibility of a Conservative majority which solves the problem of the instability of a minority government.  However, there is still the prospect of transition. Ministers will be learning their portfolios and there is always the risk that if you change horses mid-stream, Canadians will simply fall into the creek.  In the end, one might argue it does not matter what happens.  After all, Canada’s political parties are really all middle of the road or centrist parties and all of them in the end will do pretty much the same thing but with differences in speed and intensity.  The NDP are simply Liberals in a hurry and the Conservatives are slower Liberals and Liberals are whatever they think Canadians want them to be. 

 

Moreover, politicians are merely actors on a stage and the real decision making and business of state is done by the civil servants, and they are not going anywhere. Still, in the end, political leadership matters.  Vision and inspiration matter.  Prime Ministers matter because even if scripted some deliver their lines better than others while others interpret the role in unique and uplifting ways. Or at least they should.

 

I guess, the real question is should you reward the Liberals for going to the polls during a pandemic and risking the aftermath of chaotic instability of government and transition during a rising fourth pandemic wave?  Should they be rewarded for opening such a can of worms? The answer to that is invariably complicated and can best be summarized as simultaneously both Yes and No.   Think of it as an election variant of Schrodinger's cat.

 

 

 

 

Vaccine Take-up and Free Riding Behaviour

 

Based on evidence from other countries, which are often  ahead of the curve when it comes to COVID, a fourth wave fueled by the Delta variant in Canada is inevitable.  It has also become increasingly evident that, the simplest way to ensure the fourth wave does not exceed the third wave is to doubly vaccinate the entire population and as an added precaution retain the wearing of masks in indoor public places.  Yet, indifference, lack of compliance and outright resistance to these measures has been an increasingly troublesome feature of the pandemic. 

 

Our medical experts now maintain that for herd immunity to stamp out the pandemic, double vaccination rates need to approach 90 percent.  To date, we are still well short of that in Canada.  While much is made of the statistic that 75 percent of the population is fully vaccinated that figure only refers to the population aged 12 and older.  When it comes to the total population, we are only at 66 percent – not really much more than where we were several months ago. 

 

Even if you factor in that 14 percent of Canada’s population is under age 14 and the vaccine has not been approved yet for 12 and under, that still means that about 20 to 25 percent of Canada’s population above age 12 has still not been fully vaccinated and shows little interest in doing so.  When broken down by age, the highest vaccination rates are in those aged 60 and over and range from 87 percent (60-69) to 92 percent (80+).  They then fall dramatically by age group from 78 percent in the age 50-59 category to 67 percent by age 30-39 to 60 percent by age 18 to 29. 

 

Getting your shot is essentially a public good.  While the shot protects you it also protects others by breaking up the cycle of transmission.  This is what is known in economics as an externality.  Now in public finance theory, a pure public good is a good characterized by a consumption externality.  That is, everyone must consume the same amount of the good because once it is provided for one individual it is provided for all.  However, a problem results in terms of how this good is to then be paid for.  If there is no way to exclude individuals from consumption, then individuals can be tempted to enjoy the benefit of the public good without contributing to the cost.  This is known as free riding behaviour.

 

Free riding is the outcome of the self-interest which economists assume drives individual behaviour coupled with the characteristics of public goods.  Once a public good is produced, it is difficult to prevent others from consuming it and their consumption does not diminish the satisfaction of other consumers.  If the financing of this public good were to rely on voluntary contributions, the presence of free riding behaviour would result in no one contributing to it in the anticipation that someone else would.  The result would be zero provision of the public good.  Because of free riding behaviour, there is essentially a market failure in the provision of the public good by voluntary or private means.  The solution is for government to provide the public good.  Since government has a monopoly on coercive force, it can levy taxes to finance the public good.

 

So how does this apply to vaccinations and anti-vaxxers? Well, it is tempting to argue that anti-vaxxers are either extreme libertarians or do not understand science or that they are mainly short-sighted younger people who think they are immortal, but the problem is probably more insidious than that.  What we are seeing aside from a small minority who are more ideologically driven is more traditional free riding behaviour.  These individuals essentially cannot be bothered to take the time to go out and get their shot because they figure that if everyone else gets their shot then they will be protected anyway.  They do not really care about the externality they provide by getting the shot and view the benefits to themselves as small given the risk of severe complications from the disease relative to the inconvenience of getting a shot. 

 

Put another way, free riding is more selfish behaviour while not free riding is more cooperative behaviour.  Free riders are the same type of people who throw their coffee cups out of windows while driving or let their dogs bark incessantly outside in the middle of the night or do not contribute to charity.  They do not do anything unless there is an incentive or direct benefit to themselves to do so which is why in the end the government mandated solution of vaccine passports is the only way forward if you want to get this particular externality dealt with.  Once access to activities is curtailed in the absence of being double vaccinated, the benefits of getting a vaccine will rise providing the necessary incentive.

 

Are young people more likely to free ride?  No.  Free riding cuts across all age groups but given the lethality of the disease as you get older, older free riders are quicker to see the light and eventually get their shots.  In the case of vaccines, the benefits of free riding are simply greater for younger demographics which means they will persist in their behaviour longer in the absence of incentives to do otherwise.  Moreover, the percentage of free riders can grow over time if it becomes apparent that others are not following the rules.

 

Indeed, some of the economics literature I’ve seen suggests that the percentage of chronic free riders in any human population can range from 20 to 30 percent.  Most of the time, society manages to function well just the same because the vast majority engage in more cooperative behaviour.  At the same time, 20 to 30 percent free riders pretty much matches the current statistics of vaccination non-take up rates in Canada.  It also suggests that the proportion of free riders in a population is not set in stone and can vary based on local conditions.  After all, the United States which traditionally has had a more individualistic society than Canada has even lower vaccine take up rates.