Council was told security hired to prevent encampments wouldn’t make arrests. One councillor is questioning why city documents say otherwise

The city has said it followed all proper procurement rules for the security work, and in a statement to the Star Wednesday, Brad Ross said staff’s statements to council and the media about the role of the guards have been “truthful” and “accurate.”

Thestar.com
Sept. 8, 2022
Ben Spurr

A city councillor is demanding to know why senior municipal staff told council that security guards being hired to prevent homeless encampments in municipal parks wouldn’t be tasked with making arrests -- when city documents listed arresting people as one of the guards’ main responsibilities.

The plan to hire security to help avoid a resurgence of the encampments that sprung up early in COVID-19 has faced criticism since it was first reported in May, with some council members and advocates warning it amounts to criminalizing homelessness, and arguing the money would be better spent on housing.

A city tender for the contract closes Sept. 20 and, based on previous city procurements, could be worth more than $1 million.

During a May 12 council debate on the issue, staff addressed concerns about the plan, and in response to questions from Mayor John Tory, then-deputy city manager Tracey Cook said the guards wouldn’t make arrests.

“These security guards, I assume, don’t have and can’t have and won’t have the power to arrest anybody .... They’re not going to have the power to arrest, is that correct?” the mayor asked.

Cook responded “that is correct,” and said the guards’ role would be to “observe and report.”

Her answer was consistent with statements she and other staff made throughout the meeting, which stressed the guards would be responsible for patrolling parks and quickly connecting homeless people they encountered with social services and housing supports.

It also aligned with statements made to the media by Brad Ross, the city’s chief communications officer, who told the Star in May the guards wouldn’t be tasked with any enforcement activity.

“They’re not enforcing. They’re not engaging,” Ross said.

However, a request for proposals the city issued on May 6 for the security work lists “arrest(ing) individuals” and surrendering them to police as among the guards’ “major responsibilities.”

Additional duties listed included enforcement of the Trespass to Property Act, “including physically removing individuals,” and “observing, investigating and acting on possible attempted encampments.”

The language about arrests, enforcement, and removing people wasn’t presented to council during the May debate or widely publicized. It came to light after the city included it in an Aug. 24 public posting for a new RFP it issued for the park patrol work, after the first tender failed to yield an acceptable bid.

After the new RFP was published, the Star obtained a copy of the original tender from the city. It included the same language about arrests, removals and enforcement.

“The things that were said in the council meeting do not match what the written documents say, and I am very concerned about that,” said Coun. Gord Perks (Ward 4, Parkdale-High Park), a critic of the security plan.

He said staff and the mayor, who supports the city’s use of hired security, “owe council and the public an explanation.”

Perks said staff’s statements at the council meeting are part of “a consistent pattern” of council not being properly informed about the city’s response to encampments.

He noted that staff never brought the security contract to council for approval, and instead the May 12 debate was prompted by a motion he put forward that advocated cancelling the contract. After hearing from city staff, council voted 15 to six to block the motion.

Perks previously criticized staff for not making explicit to councillors at the May 12 meeting that the city had already issued interim contracts for park security worth $1 million while it sought a permanent provider.

The city has said it followed all proper procurement rules for the security work, and in a statement to the Star Wednesday, Ross said staff’s statements to council and the media about the role of the guards have been “truthful” and “accurate.”

He said the “primary” responsibility of the guards “is to report and observe on encampments.” But there could be circumstances when guards encounter someone committing a crime and may need to perform a citizen’s arrest, he explained.

In such cases, Ross said, guards would call both the police and Toronto corporate security for help. Any trespassing enforcement would be initiated by the city’s encampment office.

Ross said the guards “will not physically intervene in the establishment of an encampment,” and it was “in this context” that he and Cook addressed questions about their duties.

In a statement, Tory’s spokesperson Don Peat said it was the mayor’s understanding that the guards’ job is to “observe and report,” and on Wednesday Tory had again confirmed that position with Cook, who in July was appointed interim city manager.

Peat said the city is investing significantly in housing and its Streets to Homes outreach teams have “helped thousands of people come safely indoors” since the start of the pandemic.

But he added that encampments are “unsafe, unhealthy, and illegal” and prevent other residents from using park amenities, and the mayor supports staff “doing everything they possibly can” to avoid the establishment of “large out-of-control encampments like the ones we saw at the height of the pandemic.”

Critics of the security plan say there is a shortage of housing and emergency shelter space, and breaking up encampments will only force vulnerable people into less visible outdoor locations.