RE: Annual Update on Provincial Offences Act Administration

Transcription

1 HALDIMAND COUNTY Report CS-CL of the General Manager of Corporate Services For Consideration by RE: Annual Update on Provincial Offences Act Administration OBJECTIVE: To provide a comprehensive update on Provincial Offences Act (POA) administration, fine enforcement activities, prosecutions and future direction. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. THAT Report CS-CL Re: Annual Update on Provincial Offences Act Administration dated September 19, 2013 be received as information. Prepared by: Reviewed by: Jennifer Shaw Deputy Clerk / POA Supervisor Date: September 19, 2013 Respectfully submitted: Evelyn Eichenbaum Clerk Approved: Karen General General Manager Corporate Services Department Donald G. Boyle Chief Administrative Officer Date of Meeting: October 08, 2013 Page 1 of 16

2 BACKGROUND: Responsibility for the administration of Provincial Offences Court, for prosecuting fines issued under the Provincial Offences Act (POA) and for collecting fine revenue for the Cayuga Catchment Area has rested with Haldimand County since March 26, The County s assumption of this service was a result of Bill 108, the Streamlining of Administration of the Provincial Offences Act, 1997, which provided the framework for the transfer of responsibility and administration of parts of the POA and POA Courts from the Ministry of the Attorney General (MAG) to select municipalities in Ontario (Municipal Partners). While the responsibility for Provincial Offences Courts has fallen to Municipal Partners, the Courts continue to operate under the pre-transfer framework as a branch of the Ontario Court of Justice. Therefore, similar to other Provincial Courts, POA Courts are accountable to MAG by way of its role to oversee the administration of justice throughout the Province. In this regard, MAG ensures its Municipal Partners are carrying out their responsibilities under the POA in accordance with the terms and conditions of their established Memorandum of Understandings (MOU s) and Local Side Agreements (LSA s). Through the MOU and LSA, Municipal Partners are required, at a minimum, to provide the same services and level of service delivery as was provided by the Ministry before the transfer occurred. To ensure this service level is met, the County must submit an annual performance report to the Ministry and is subject to random audits in order to review accounts, records and other data. ANALYSIS: The purpose of this report is to provide a comprehensive profile of POA administration, collection and enforcement efforts, in addition to prosecutions. It will also provide an overview of recent changes that have or will impact operations, common challenges facing POA Courts in Ontario and an update on proposed legislation in the form of Bill 34. It is staff s intent to provide regular annual reports to Council as a means to ensure more timely reporting on POA operations, statistics and major issues impacting Court Administration. Future reports are not anticipated to be as detailed as this initial report but staff felt it was important to provide Council and the public with a thorough overview of the POA function due to past issues and concerns. The provision of POA statistical reporting, in particular, has been difficult to date due to the limited scope and capabilities of the Provincial Integrated Courts Offences Network (ICON) database as it does not allow data to be easily extracted or manipulated. This has traditionally made the process of quantifying and analyzing most POA data a very manual and time consuming process. The integration of new software, The Court Administration Management System (CAMS) into the day-to-day operations of Cayuga s POA, as approved in the 2013 Operating Budget, will provide enhanced data for future reporting to Council. A: General Administration Matters The POA is a procedural law for administering and prosecuting provincial offences including those committed under the Highway Traffic Act, the Compulsory Automobile Insurance Act, the Trespass to Property Act, the Liquor Licence Act and other provincial legislation, municipal bylaws and minor federal offences. Provincial Offences include but are not limited to: Date of Meeting: October 08, 2013 Page 2 of 16

3 Speeding, careless driving, or not wearing a seat belt (Highway Traffic Act). Driving without insurance or failing to surrender your insurance card (Compulsory Automobile Insurance Act). Having open liquor in a vehicle or being intoxicated in a public place (Liquor Licence Act). Entering premises when entry is prohibited or failing to leave premises after being directed to do so (Trespass to Property Act). Smoking in an enclosed workplace or selling tobacco to a person under 19 (Smoke Free Ontario Act). Occupational Health and Safety violations. Violations falling under the Ministries of Environment, Transportation, Natural Resources, Labour, or Finance. Municipal By-laws (noise, zoning, parking). Haldimand County Provincial Offences Office The POA governs all aspects of the legal prosecution process, from serving an offence notice to a defendant, to conducting trials, including sentencing and appeals. Additional services provided by the County s POA office include: Processing / accepting payment of Provincial Offences fines. Accept filing of Provincial Offences Act matters including re-opening of cases, motions and extensions of time to pay fines. Handling general inquires about Provincial Offences matters. Providing Court Clerk / Monitor staff for Provincial Offences court proceedings. Options Available to Defendants Where an individual has received a Provincial Offence Notice (Part I Ticket), they have three options available to them as set out in the notice. A defendant has 15 days from the receipt of a Provincial Offence Notice to exercise one of the options below, failing which they are deemed not to dispute the charge and a guilty plea may be entered in their absence. Option #1 - Plea of Guilty - Voluntary Payment of Total Payable Fine Option #2 - Early Resolution - Meet with Prosecutor Option #3 - Trial Option The administration of Parking Tickets (Part II Offence) is handled through a different process which will be addressed later on in this report. A Part III offence is considered a more serious offence and one that requires the offender to appear in court before a Justice of the Peace. A Part III offence is served on an offender by way of a summons to Court on a specified date and time and is supported by way of an Information that sets out the details of the offence (i.e. who it was committed by, where the offence occurred and what the specific charges are.) Failure by a defendant to appear in court may result in a warrant for their arrest, or the court may proceed to trial in their absence. Defendants do not have the option to see a Prosecutor prior to their court date. Date of Meeting: October 08, 2013 Page 3 of 16

4 Judicial Resources In 2009, the County, along with other Provincial Offences Court locations within the Central West Region (including the Tri-County area of Haldimand, Brantford and Norfolk along with the City of Hamilton, Niagara, Halton and Peel Regions) petitioned the Ministry of the Attorney General to appoint more Justices of the Peace as a result of a shortage created by retirements and other vacancies. The Ministry responded and there are now six Justices of the Peace who regularly preside within the Tri-County area over POA Court, bail court, criminal court and family court. In addition to the six regular Justices, there are three retired Justices who provide Per Diem services and are, therefore, limited in the number of hours they can preside. The Local Administrative Justice of the Peace (LAJP) for the Tri-Counties is responsible for the scheduling of judicial resources between the three Provincial Offences Courts and works very closely with Provincial Offences court staff and other stakeholders to address any issues that arise. Staff have found that the enhanced judicial resources allocated to the Cayuga Provincial Offences court have been sufficient to meet scheduling needs and Justices of the Peace are now hearing matters within a reasonable length of time upon a defendant s request for a trial date. Designated Court Days The Council Chambers serves as the Provincial Offences courtroom for the Cayuga catchment area every Wednesday and Friday. Part I matters are heard on Wednesdays at 9:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. Part III matters are heard on Fridays at 1:00 p.m. The Municipal Prosecutor (Sullivan-Mahoney) is assigned all Part I matters, while a Provincial Prosecutor is assigned all Part III matters. Certain agencies, i.e. Ministry of Transportation and Ministry of Natural Resources send their own prosecutors to address their matters. Court matters are scheduled by POA staff through ICON utilizing OPP officer availability to ensure police officers are not unnecessarily incurring overtime for their appearances. Intake Court Outside of the designated Court days, a Justice of the Peace is available on Monday afternoons for Intake Court. It should be noted that the County does not reimburse the Province for Justices of the Peace attending Intake Court. During Intake Court, enforcement agencies and the public have the option to appear before the Justice of the Peace for the purpose of swearing of Informations commenced under Part III of the Act. Justices of the Peace will also hear and make decisions on any requests from defendants who are in need of an Extension of Time to pay their fine(s) and may also be on site for pre-trials, as required. Fail to Respond proceedings may also occur during Intake Court. During these proceedings, the Justice of the Peace reviews all Part I Offence Notices where defendants have failed to exercise one of the three options available to them within the prescribed 15 day period. Defendants who fail to select an option are deemed not to dispute the charge and are convicted in their absence (in absentia) by the Justice of the Peace, after which they will receive a Notice of Fine and Due Date in the mail. Defendants who are convicted in their absence for Failing to Respond or for Failing to Appear at their trial date, maintain the right to request a Reopening within 15 days of becoming aware of their conviction. A defendant who wishes to have their matter reopened must attend the court office to formalize their request. Reopening Requests may also be heard by the Justice of the Peace during Intake Court. Date of Meeting: October 08, 2013 Page 4 of 16

5 Courtroom Utilization Trends As Council is aware, 2010 marked the lowest number of Provincial Offences filed within the Cayuga Court Office since the County took over POA administration responsibility. The below chart illustrates the full year totals for operating hours from 2004 to Courtroom Operating Hours by Year Hours Based on current ticket volumes and court scheduling, it is anticipated that the court room hours for 2013 will reach approximately 270 by the end of this year. This projected 2013 courtroom operating hours would be in line with 2009, which was the highest recorded to date. The steady increase in 2013 courtroom operating hours may be attributed to several factors that include an increase in the number of offences (both Part I and III) issued by enforcement agencies, an overall increase in the number of Parking Tickets issued by the OPP and County By-law Enforcement Officers, combined with the County s opting into the new Early Resolution process that began in the Spring of The impact of increased Parking Ticket volumes and the Early Resolution process are discussed in further detail later in this report. One of the greatest challenges that POA staff face in scheduling matters for court dates is the inherently unpredictable character of the judicial process. Often staff will schedule enough matters on a docket to make for a full day of court only to find out that pleas are made or matters are adjourned to another day. Within a very short period of time, the entire schedule for court can be altered. On this note, it is important to point out that the County is only billed by MAG for the time that a presiding Justice of the Peace and Provincial Prosecutor spend in the Courtroom while Court is in session. Involvement in Professional Associations / Regional Peer Meetings Outside of the day to day operations of the Provincial Offences office, Court staff and the POA Supervisor are actively involved in various associations and groups. The Municipal Finance Officer s Association s (MFOA) POA Committee focuses on POA Collections and meets annually. POA staff also regularly attend and participate in Central West Region Court Manager s meetings. The largest of the associations that POA staff are involved in is the Municipal Court Manager s Association (MCMA). Established in 2002, the MCMA provides advice and training on various court practices, its mission being to provide excellence in the delivery of court administration services within the administration of POA Courts. MCMA members are actively engaged in promoting best practices and many members contribute their time and expertise to its various committees. MCMA representatives have provided input into the Law Commission of Ontario s report, streamlining changes that culminated in the Good Government Act and associated new processes such as Early Resolution. Date of Meeting: October 08, 2013 Page 5 of 16

6 Stakeholder Meetings Outside of their involvement in professional associations, POA Administration staff are involved in quarterly meetings with court stakeholders within the Cayuga Catchment Area. These meetings include the Local Administrative Justice of the Peace, the POA Supervisor (Deputy Clerk) and Manager (Clerk), the Municipal and Provincial Prosecutors as well as OPP Security Officers and occasionally staff from the Provincial Court House. Similar stakeholder meetings are conducted within all POA Court locations in Ontario and provide opportunity for those involved in the administration and oversight of the Provincial Offences Courts to address common issues and concerns and serve as an information sharing platform. B: Statistical Overview of POA General Operational / Administrative Statistics for 2012 The below figures are intended to provide a high level overview of some of the most common types of requests and transactions that are dealt with within the POA Office in a given year. Summary of 2012 POA Transactions Transaction Type Totals/Occurrence Pay tickets processed in ICON 577 Requests to reopen matters 15 Appeals by defendants of decisions rendered 26 Interpreters scheduled 15 Most commonly requested interpreter languages Mandarin, Cantonese, Punjabi, Tamil, Korean, Hungarian and Croatian Most common type of offence received Speeding and OPP Blitz related (i.e., seat belts, cell phones, drinking and driving, etc.) Offence Issuance Statistics Profile As of the writing of this report, the County has received 3,398 charges in 2013 for the period of January to August, illustrating an upward trend in the number of charges issued by the OPP and other enforcement agencies. If current trends continue to the end of 2013, it is anticipated that offence volumes will reach approximately 4,300 for the year, falling in line with 2004 offence totals. Offence Issuance Statistics by Year # of charges Note: 2001 represents only 9 months of County POA administration. Date of Meeting: October 08, 2013 Page 6 of 16

7 It is important to note that the above offence issuance statistics do not include Parking Tickets (Part II) offences given out by OPP and County By-law Enforcement Officers, which have increased significantly in 2012 and 2013 over previous years. Outcome of 2012 Charges In review of the total Part I charges received in 2012, the below chart illustrates the outcome of those that did not go to trial. In these instances, the defendants either plead guilty to the charge and paid their ticket (5%) or selected the Early Resolution option and, after meeting with the Prosecutor, decided not to pursue the matter further by way of a request for a Trial and simply paid the fine (66%). The POA Office experienced a non response rate of 27% on Part I charges laid in 2012 wherein defendants received a charge but failed to select one of the three options available to them within the 15 day period set out in the Act. Charges Disposed Before Trial in 2012 Withdrawn Charges 1% Quashed Charges 1% Other 0% Plead Guilty 5% Failed to Respond / Convicted 27% Pre Paid Fines 66% Cost of Administering POA As Council is aware from previous reporting, 2010 was the first year where the direct costs of administering POA Court exceeded revenues. Recent statistics illustrate an upward trend in fine revenues for 2011, 2012 and 2013, which is attributed to an overall increase in Offence Issuance Statistics during this same period. Summary of Fine Revenues & Court Costs Year Gross Fine Gross Expenses Net Revenues 2001 (9 months) $374,916 $158,847 $216, $695,493* $181,381 $514, $810,065* $211,429 $598, $330,361 $245,313 $85, $353,118 $236,669 $116, $468,611* $261,212 $207, $563,081 $287,505 $275, $761,666 $433,113 $328, $767,465* $396,988 $370, $410,396 $418,957 ($8,561) 2011 $445,410 $438,507 6, $452,640* $406,762 45, YTD (as at September 16) $333,946 $179, ,641 *includes extraordinary revenue caused by a large fine. Date of Meeting: October 08, 2013 Page 7 of 16

8 C: Collection and Enforcement The Issue of Unpaid Fines Outstanding POA fines continue to grow annually across the Province of Ontario. In November 2011, the Ontario Association of Police Service Boards, in collaboration with municipal and professional association stakeholders issued a White Paper entitled Provincial Offences Act Unpaid Fines a $Billion Problem. This report illustrated the current situation of unpaid POA fines in Ontario and identified possible reasons for the constant continual growth. It also highlighted the various challenges and limitations faced by municipalities in the collection of fines. The report concluded with several recommendations for improvement of the current situation, all of which are currently under consideration by MAG. Haldimand County s situation with respect to POA arrears has mirrored that of other Courts, albeit on a much smaller scale. At the time of the 2001 transfer by the Province, fines in arrears for the Cayuga Catchment area totaled over $1.6 million. As of December 2012, the POA arrears for Haldimand County had risen to approximately $6 million. The below chart illustrates the growth in arrears for Haldimand County through time from 2004 onwards. The gap in years prior to 2004 is attributed to a lack of data available from the Province. $ Value 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 Haldimand County POA Arrears $ Value 2,408,4 2,776,4 3,042,7 3,961,7 4,535,0 4,853,5 5,482,2 5,697,2 6,038,2 Available Collection Methods While there are various methods available to municipalities to assist with enforcing and collecting outstanding POA fines, legislative changes would be required to allow for the use of any additional methods not currently prescribed. The enforcement and collection methods presently available to municipalities in Ontario include: 1. Collection Agencies 2. Internal Collections 3. Suspension of Driver s Licence / Denial of Vehicle Plate Renewals 4. Adding Unpaid Fines to the Tax Roll 5. Civil Enforcement Measures Date of Meeting: October 08, 2013 Page 8 of 16

9 Collection Agencies In an effort to collect on the arrears downloaded by the Province as well as outstanding fines and arrears that have accumulated since then, the County has entered into contracts with firms to provide collection services since While these collection agencies have experienced some success in collecting on delinquent accounts, the overall arrears for the County have continued to increase as previously illustrated. As part of an effort to curb Haldimand County s growing POA arrears and in review of the County s short and long term needs with respect to collections, in the Spring of 2013 the County opted into Niagara Region s Collections Contract which includes the services of three collections providers ARO Inc., A.R.C. Accounts Recovery Corporation and Credit Bureau Services Canada. The move to Niagara s contract was seen as the most beneficial to the County as it would increase flexibility with collections and create a more competitive situation among providers who are aware that if they fail to collect on assigned accounts they may lose them to one of the other two providers. The below table includes data relevant to internal collections work by staff as a means for comparison. Internal Collection Efforts In January 2012, POA staff began an internal collections program targeting overdue accounts that have been a combination of: Suspendable offences - overdue fines relating to a driving offence that could result in a driver s licence being suspended; Defaulted fines - charges that are non-driving related such as trespassing and liquor related charges; or Unpaid Parking tickets where a conviction has been entered. The program has involved the sending out of letters to defendants with accounts that are 30 days past due. The letters provide a reminder to defendants that they have overdue POA fines and advise that failure to pay the fine may result in the account being turned over to a collection agency or licence suspension. The results of these internal efforts have proven more successful than the efforts of external collection agencies, as evidenced by the revenues recovered. Since focusing on these newer files, staff have been able to intercept defaulted accounts that would otherwise have gone straight to a collection agency and result in the addition of a collection fee for the defendant. This has ensured that only the most problematic of accounts are going to collection agencies, where the expertise exists to track down defendants who may have moved or left the Province. The below table illustrates a 28% success rate on accounts targeted by internal collection efforts. Between January 2012 and September 2013, staff collected a total of $57,823 in outstanding fines totaling 7.35% of Gross Fines Revenues as compared to the $20,513 (2.6%) total recovered by external collections during the same period. The below table provides a summary of internal collections efforts with a breakdown of account types. Date of Meeting: October 08, 2013 Page 9 of 16

10 Year Gross Fine Revenue ($) Summary of Collection Related Revenues External Collections ($) Outside Collections as % of Gross Revenue Internal Collections ($) Internal Collection as % of Gross Revenues ,396 11, ,410 22, ,640 11, , (Current YTD) 333,946 9,148.68* , *includes collections to date by Credit Bureau Services Canada (CBS) and A.R.C. Accounts Recovery Corporation in amount of approximately $5,000 as at September Note: 3% is the typical average collection rate by outside collection agencies. Summary of Internal Collection Results Type of Account Total Value of Overdue Accounts (30 days past due) ($) Total collected to date ($) Suspendable Fines 205, , Defaulted 5, Parking Fines Grand total 211, , (28%) External / Internal Collections Efforts CAMS Update As Council is aware, the implementation of Niagara Region s CAMS (Court Administration Managements System) POA collections software was approved through the 2013 Operating Budget. This software was installed within the POA Office in May and has been in use by staff since that time. While POA staff are still receiving training on the system and becoming comfortable with its work flow process and other capabilities, staff have already begun to transition the administration of overdue accounts from what has traditionally been a manual process, into a fully automated platform that enables staff to forward accounts and receive payments electronically to and from Collection providers. CAMS will be integral to the successful management of numerous accounts for both internal and external collections efforts in the future. Utilizing the features of CAMS, it is the intention of staff to provide a more detailed breakdown of the County s POA arrears in future reports to Council so as to provide more data on the types of offences that are going unpaid and adding to the arrears, i.e. Highway Traffic Act, County Bylaw related charges, etc. Staff will also be able to provide Council with a better idea as to the age of overdue accounts. As the reporting capabilities of CAMS are based on the date of installation and forward, it will take some time yet before Staff are able to provide this more detailed breakdown. Date of Meeting: October 08, 2013 Page 10 of 16

11 Suspension of Driver s Licence / Denial of Vehicle Plate Renewals Where a fine has gone into default, The Highway Traffic Act permits the suspension of the defendant s licence or the denial of Vehicle Plate Renewals as a method of enforcement. There are limited and specific instances where these methods may be applied, which primarily concern driving related charges. Under these provisions, the defendant s licence is not reinstated or the plates are not renewed until any outstanding fine(s) have been paid. While this tool is frequently utilized as a method of fine enforcement, it has been observed across the Province that defendants will continue to drive their vehicles while under suspension or with expired plates and that these same drivers often have multiple fines owing to different court locations. Adding Unpaid Fines to the Tax Roll In 2010, the Province enacted changes to the Municipal Act that enabled municipalities to begin adding the amount of outstanding POA fines to local tax collection rolls providing that specific criteria were met in so doing. These criteria require that the property owner to which the fine is to be attached is the same as the defendant, and that the defendant is an owner of property within the subject municipality. A fine that is owed to Haldimand County by a resident of Toronto, for example, could not be added to the City of Toronto s tax roll for collection. While larger municipalities like the cities of Brampton and Toronto have experienced some success in applying this tool to eligible POA accounts, they have faced the same challenges as in Haldimand County whereby the legislation currently does not permit fines to be attached to properties with joint or multiple owners. To illustrate the difficulties in applying this tool, utilizing a threshold of $500, POA and Finance staff reviewed and identified five delinquent POA accounts that were thought to be good candidates for addition to the tax roll in Haldimand County. After filtering through the eligibility requirements however, it was determined that only one account actually met the criteria. Although the criteria for adding fines to the tax roll have greatly limited the number of eligible fines that can be pursued in this manner, staff will continue to monitor for accounts where this tool may be applied. Civil Enforcement Measures Unpaid POA fines are subject to enforcement in Small Claims Court and Superior Court of Justice. This method can be expensive as municipalities must pay the filing and issuing costs which can amount up to $165 per case, plus the legal costs for pursuing the civil claim. Writs of Seizure and Sale of Lands and Garnishments of Wages are the civil enforcement methods most commonly utilized by municipalities. These actions can be taken when it is identified that the offender owns property or is currently employed and the fine in arrears is sizable enough to warrant the court and legal costs. POA staff continue to monitor large unpaid accounts where Civil Enforcement tools could be applied, however action is often not possible on these large accounts due to appeals and other legal loop holes which must be disposed of before fine collection can be pursued. For this reason, Civil Enforcement will be pursued on a case by case basis, subject to consultation with the County s Solicitor. Date of Meeting: October 08, 2013 Page 11 of 16

12 D: Parking Ticket Administration A Parking Infraction may be issued by a County By-law Enforcement Officer or an OPP Officer through the completion of a Parking Infraction Notice / Certificate of Parking Infraction. From the date of receipt of an Infraction, a defendant has 15 days to pay the set fine or request a Trial date through the Provincial Offences Office by completing a Notice of Intention to Appear (NIA). As noted earlier within this report, there has been a significant increase in the number of Parking Tickets issued by County By-law Enforcement Officers, as well as the OPP, within the 2012 and 2013 time period. The below table provides a summary of parking ticket trends for the 2012 / 2013 timeframe. Year # of Regular Parking Tickets Issued Summary of Parking (Part II) Statistics # of Winter Control Tickets Issued Total Tickets (regular & winter) # of Convictions Registered Non Response Rate (%) # of Requests for Trial % of Parking Tickets to POA YTD (as at September 16) The increase in the number of parking tickets issued has impacted the Clerk s Division on two fronts, as explained below. In the summer of 2013, Clerks staff took over the responsibility for administering the parking ticket process from By-law Enforcement staff. This responsibility includes the handling of administrative steps associated with the processing of parking tickets from the point after which they are issued by the officer up to payment or a request for a trial date. Where no response is received from the defendant, Clerks staff will process the ticket according to the prescribed steps and timeframes and a Certificate Requesting Conviction is signed. At this point, the ticket is filed in the POA Office and is entered into the ICON System from where the ticket is picked up by internal collections staff that will pursue payment with the defendant. POA staff pursue the collection of unpaid parking tickets through the methods outlined previously. It is worth noting that internal collections efforts have experienced an 89% success rate in collecting on defaulted parking fine related accounts. E: Prosecution Matters Municipal Prosecutor Pursuant to the terms of the MOU with the Province, Haldimand County is responsible for the prosecution of proceedings commenced under Part I of the Provincial Offences Act (POA). Through the Request for Proposal (RFP) process, Sullivan Mahoney LLP has been retained for prosecution of Part I POA offences for a two year term commencing July 1, The 2013 Council Approved Budget for POA Legal Fees is $69,000, which includes costs related to prosecution of Part I matters and related appeals, plus prosecution of Part III Building, By-law and Fire Code matters and related appeals. The County s prosecutor will also handle parking related matters that go to court where a Trial request is made. The budgeted figure was based Date of Meeting: October 08, 2013 Page 12 of 16

13 on tickets issued over 2011 and 2012, and on the results of an arrangement with Sullivan Mahoney LLP to provide prosecution services to an upset limit of an average of $5,000 per month, plus appeals, disbursements and applicable taxes for the first six months of Prosecution Services The prosecutor presents the evidence in the courtroom on behalf of the County (municipal prosecutor), the Province (Part III provincial prosecutor) or on behalf of a particular enforcement agency (i.e. Ministry of Transportation). This involves questioning witnesses in order to provide the court with the information that is needed for a decision to be made by the presiding Justice of the Peace. The prosecutor works closely with the courtroom monitor in calling the cases for the court and in scheduling trial dates where the matter is to be adjourned. Staff from the Clerk s Division also assist the prosecutor with the processing of requests for disclosure whereby a defendant is provided with evidence that the prosecutor and the officer have collected to prosecute the matter. In 2012, staff processed 109 such requests and as of the writing of this report had processed 102 disclosure requests to date in A significant change within the last year and a half that has impacted the Municipal prosecutor has been the implementation of the Early Resolution (ER) process which took effect on March 31, 2012 at POA Court locations across Ontario, including Haldimand County. The process itself is discussed in greater detail below. For the purposes of prosecution, however, it is important to note that the process is intended to create service efficiencies by providing the option to defendants to schedule a meeting with the municipal prosecutor to discuss their Part I charge(s). Defendants can use the Early Resolution meeting to ask the position of the prosecutor, to discuss the time to pay a fine, to request disclosure for the charge(s) or to discuss the possibility of pleading to a lesser offence supported by the facts. In selecting this option, the defendant maintains their right to request a trial should no resolution with the prosecutor be possible. Statistics relating to the municipal prosecutor s involvement in the ER process are provided below. Summary of Early Resolution Appearances Year Total In Person Meetings Total Phone In Meetings Total ER Appearances 2012 (Apr Dec) (Jan Aug) Of note is that the ER process requires that those court locations that have opted in provide the option for defendants to meet with the prosecutor via telephone if they live more than 75 km away from the court office. In addition to these ER appearances, the prosecutor also attended court for 112 trials in 2012 and 73 as of the end of August in It is anticipated that the number of trials attended by the municipal prosecutor will surpass those from 2012 by the end of this year. F: What is New in POA Early Resolution As previously noted, requesting an ER meeting with a prosecutor is one of the three options now available to a defendant upon receiving a Part I Offence Notice. The option was created with the intention of better assisting court staff and prosecuting agencies with scheduling of resources to ensure that only truly contested matters go to trial, thereby resulting in better court room utilization. Although the move to Early Resolution has achieved MAG s goal to streamline Date of Meeting: October 08, 2013 Page 13 of 16

14 preexisting processes and has made for a more accessible justice system by providing greater options to defendants, the changes have also created additional paper work and processes for court staff and the prosecutor. One of the main concerns discussed by POA Court Managers across the Province upon the implementation of ER was that the number of requests for reopenings and appeals would increase due to the fact that defendants who did not show up for their meeting with the prosecutor could now be convicted in their absence. Staff have been monitoring Cayuga s reopening and appeal statistics and have not detected any significant changes since ER has taken effect, although the uptake on the ER option has been quite high. The main challenge that POA staff have faced related to ER is that they have had difficulty in scheduling the many requests they are receiving and have had to set aside additional time for ER meetings to meet the demand. This is likely attributed to a corresponding increase in Offence Issuance volumes. Overall, the implementation of the new process has gone relatively well as Cayuga s POA location has not faced the same issues that are surfacing with the process in the much larger court areas. The success of ER in Cayuga is attributed to the collaboration between POA staff, the prosecutor and the Judiciary. While many defendants were hesitant about the process when it first took effect, it appears that many are now seeing the benefits of the process and are requesting to meet with the prosecutor instead of going directly to trial. Update on new/proposed legislation On March 20, 2013, Bill 34, an Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act in respect of permit denials and out-of-province service and evidence in certain proceedings and to make a consequential amendment to the Provincial Offences Act was tabled in the Ontario Legislature. If passed, the Bill will allow the use of plate denial for additional specified offences in order to assist municipalities in collecting defaulted fines. The instances where plate denial could be used would include Highway Traffic Act and Compulsory Automobile Insurance Act related offences such as speeding and careless driving. Under this expanded framework the following changes are proposed: Expansion of vehicle plate denial option as a fine enforcement tool for all offences which result in driver licence suspensions (currently only parking offences are eligible for plate denials); Maintenance and improvement of single plate denial option for vehicle owner-liability related offences (i.e., parking tickets where the driver is not specifically identified); Multiple plate denial option (all plates registered to a driver) for offences that currently result in licence suspension and where the driver is specifically identified (i.e., speeding tickets). In addition, the Bill includes provisions that would permit the above mentioned tools to be used on defaulted fines dating back in time, at the municipality s discretion. The Bill had its second reading in the legislature on April 16, 2013 and, at the date of this report, was still in the second reading phase awaiting referral to a committee for further discussion. Royal Assent is not anticipated to occur until later in 2013 with a spring/summer 2015 implementation timeline due to software integration issues that will need to be addressed between various provincial databases. Date of Meeting: October 08, 2013 Page 14 of 16

15 Defendant s Guide In the Spring of 2012 the Ontario Court of Justice issued a resource entitled: Guide for Defendants In Provincial Offences Cases. The guide is intended to provide defendants with general information about the court process and procedures involved in Provincial Offences cases, including the options available upon receipt of an Offence Notice or summons and how to prepare for a trial date. The guide is not intended to be exhaustive, but to enhance public access and understanding of the Justice system in Ontario. The Guide is available on the County s website under the Provincial Offences page and is available to defendants in hard copy, upon request, through the Provincial Offences Office. BUDGET/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS: Enhanced collection efforts combined with an increase in ticket revenues are anticipated to have a positive impact on revenues in The 2013 Tax Supported Operating Budget includes estimated revenue of $515,000 related to POA fines in 2013, and approximately $393,000 for the direct costs to administer POA court. If current trends continue, gross revenues are expected to exceed the budget projections for On the other hand, expenses payable to third parties (such as prosecutorial fees, Provincial court related payments, etc.) are expected to exceed the 2013 budget due to the higher volume of offences being processed this year. INTERDEPARTMENTAL IMPACTS: Staff have had discussions with the OPP Staff Sergeant of the Haldimand County OPP. Our understanding through those discussions is that the number of tickets issued should remain fairly constant at current levels given the proactive enforcement approach now being taken within the Detachment. LINKS TO STRATEGIC PLANS: In keeping with the strategic objective of Corporate Image and Efficient Government, this update is provided on POA administration, fine enforcement activities, prosecutions and future direction. CONCLUSION: It is staff s intention to provide annual reports on POA operations to Council in the future. As this report has indicated, a number of changes have taken place within the past year affecting POA administration, fine enforcement, prosecution activities and the future direction of POA operations. While these changes have come with challenges, from a long term perspective they will bring about service efficiencies that will benefit internal operations and enhance public access to the Justice System. ATTACHMENTS: None. Date of Meeting: October 08, 2013 Page 15 of 16

16 REQUIRED AND RECEIVED COMMENTS FROM: Yes or Clerk s Community Services Department Finance Health & Social Services Department Human Resources Information Systems Legal Public Works Department Planning & Economic Development Department Support Services Other Yes CLERK S DIVISION REVIEW - Annual Update on Provincial Offences Act Administration COUNCIL IN COMMITTEE: RECOMMENDATION NO Approved Approved with Amendments Defeated Deferred Other COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO: Approved Approved with Amendments (Noted below) Defeated Deferred Other Amended Recommendation(s): Council Direction: Clerk s Division Action Taken: Date of Meeting: October 08, 2013 Page 16 of 16