January 6, 20000
To: Administration Committee, City of Toronto
From: Norman Gardner, Chairman
Subject: Toronto Police Service Response to the Recommendations of the Coroner's Inquest into the Death of Edmond
Wai-Kong Yu.
Purpose:
To provide the Administration Committee with a copy of the Toronto Police Service response to the recommendations of
the Coroner's Inquest into the death of Edmond Wai-Kong Yu.
Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
References to the financial implication of any changes that may occur as a result of responding to the inquest
recommendations directed to the Toronto Police Service are contained in the following report.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1) the Administration Committee receive the following report for information.
Background:
At its meeting on December 09, 1999, the Toronto Police Services Board was in receipt of the following report
NOVEMBER 12, 1999 from David J. Boothby, Chief of Police:
"SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO CORONER'S INQUEST RECOMMENDATIONS INTO THE DEATH OF EDMOND
WAI-KONG YU
RECOMMENDATIONS: (1) THAT the Board approve the responses contained in this report to each of the inquest jury
recommendations
(2) THAT the Board Administrator forward a copy of this report to the Office of the Chief Coroner for Ontario
(3) THAT the Board Administrator forward a copy of this report to the City of Toronto Administration Committee
(4) THAT the Board Administrator forward a copy of the Use of Force Committee's December 1999 report "Update on
the Internal Review of Use of Force" to the Office of the Chief Coroner for Ontario
BACKGROUND:
Mr. Edmund Yu was a 35 year old male of Chinese Canadian heritage. In 1985 Mr. Yu was admitted as an involuntary
patient at a psychiatric facility and diagnosed as having "paranoid schizophreniform disorder". In 1988 and in 1992 Mr. Yu
was admitted to psychiatric facilities for treatment following incidents where he assaulted someone. In one incident Mr. Yu
was diagnosed with being in a "paranoid psychotic state".
From 1992 up to June 1995 Mr. Yu received care at a community mental health clinic. Mr. Yu resided at a boarding house
that met his ethno-specific needs during this time. Mr. Yu was confronted on different occasions for unusual or
unacceptable behaviour. In December 1996 Mr. Yu was threatened with eviction from a rooming house for behaviours that
were disturbing to other residents.
On 20th February, 1997, shortly before 5:00p.m., Mr. Yu assaulted a woman for no apparent reason while waiting for a bus
at the Spadina Ave and Lakeshore Blvd. TTC loop. Toronto Police were called and responded to the site to investigate.
The officers encountered Mr. Yu sitting at the rear of a bus. They attempted to engage him in conversation and after several
minutes of interaction with the officers, Mr. Yu became agitated and stood up. Shortly thereafter, Mr. Yu reached inside his
coat and withdrew a steel hammer, which he proceeded to raise above his head. The officers withdrew their service
revolvers and challenged Mr. Yu to stop and drop the weapon. One of the officers discharged their revolver, striking Mr.
Yu three times. Mr. Yu was pronounced dead at the scene at 5:26p.m. after failed resuscitation attempts by paramedics.
SUMMARY OF CORONER'S JURY RECOMMENDATIONS:
A Coroner's inquest was called and the Coroner's jury reviewed 73 exhibits and heard testimony from 47 separate witnesses
over a period of 38 days. There were a total of 24 recommendations made, of which 12 apply to the Toronto Police
Services Board, the Toronto Police Service and the Chief of Police.
Of the 12 recommendations made by the Coroner's Jury, eight deal specifically with Crisis Resolution training and related
training issues as they pertain to Police Officers having contact with persons suffering from mental illness.
Two of the remaining recommendations, specifically #20 and #21, were aimed at improving support services to assist
Police Officers having contact with persons suffering from mental illness.
The last two recommendations, #14 and #22, deal with funding for implementation of the Jury's recommendations and the
endorsement of a previously released Use of Force report and the implementation of it's recommendations.
RESPONSE TO CORONER'S JURY RECOMMENDATIONS:
Recommendation 11
The Solicitor General should amend the Police Services Act to require annual Crisis Resolution training, of at least one
day, in addition to annual use of force training. Priority should be given to front line officers; however, this training
should be delivered to command officers and senior managers as well.
Response
Recommendation 11 has been implemented in part. The Toronto Police Service has undertaken to train all Police Officers
in Crisis Resolution. The current Crisis Resolution / Officer Safety Course is offered as a five day course for first time
attendees. Priority has been given to frontline officers. #14 Division (due to its proximity to several mental health facilities)
has been allotted two delegates to be trained per session.
New recruit police officers receive all the components of the Crisis Resolution / Officer Safety Course as part of the
Recruit Training at the Ontario Police College and C.O. Bick College. It is anticipated that it will take three and a half
years to completely train all frontline officers (this includes anticipated recruit classes).
The Ministry of the Solicitor General has not amended the Police Services Act or Regulations to require the one-day
annual Crisis Resolution refresher program described in this recommendation. Members of the Training and Education
Unit have met with staff of the Ontario Police College to discuss this issue which may be addressed as part of the soon to
be implemented Adequacy and Effectiveness Regulations. Every front-line member of the Toronto Police Service will
receive the five-day Crisis Course during the next three years. Therefore, we do not intend to adjust the Toronto Police
Service's use of force re-qualification course to include crisis material until the Ministry addresses this recommendation.
Recommendation 12
The Crisis Resolution Course should have the input of mental health professionals, consumer survivor and multicultural
groups, and should include, but not be limited to, the following issues:
A. Every opportunity should be taken to convert an unplanned operation into a planned operation.
B. Unless impractical to do so, a "cordon and containment" approach should be adopted.
C. That the aim of crisis resolution should be de-escalation and the resolution of situations without physical force.
D. That the "first contact" and time talk and tactics" approach be used by police whenever possible and that "active
listening" be stressed as a skill that officers must develop.
E. The fear and apprehension experienced by officers as a result of previous experiences, stereotyping or lack of
knowledge, whether about mental illness, race, culture or other factors.
F. The fear and apprehension which persons involved with the police may feel as a result of previous experiences,
stereotyping or lack of knowledge, particularly due to mental illness, racial or cultural background.
G. That police officers, whenever possible, should maintain a sufficient reactionary gap to give them the time to disengage,
tactically reposition themselves and or react in such a way which prevents a situation from escalating from the verbal to
the violent.
Response
Recommendation 12 has been implemented. All of the components identified in items A - G have been incorporated into
the current Crisis Resolution / Officer Safety Course.
The Toronto Police Service developed the current Crisis Resolution / Officer Safety Course in conjunction with input from
various community partners/stakeholders. The course also utilizes members of Consumer Survivor groups to deliver
modules of training specific to their respective areas of expertise.
The following Doctors contributed:
Dr. Choy
Dr. E. Brunet
Dr. Peter Collins
Dr. Kornbloom
The following Community Agencies contributed:
Wellesley / St. Michaels Hospital
Crisis Prevention Institute
Centre for Addiction and Mental Health
The Clarke Institute, Queen St. Mental Health Centre
Youthdale Treatment Centres
Recommendation 13
That the five day Crisis Resolution course be offered as a training course at C.O. Bick College until all existing officers
are trained.
Response
Recommendation 13 has been implemented. The Toronto Police Service has begun training all Police Officers in Crisis
Resolution.
The current Crisis Resolution / Officer Safety Course, which commenced on March 11th, 1999, is offered as a five day
course for first time attendees. New recruit police officers receive all the components of the Crisis Resolution / Officer
Safety Course as part of the Recruit Training at the Ontario Police College and C.O.Bick College.
By year's end 1999, over 500 officers will have been trained. It is anticipated that it will take three and a half years to
completely train all frontline officers of the Toronto Police Service (this includes anticipated recruit classes).
Recommendation 14
The Toronto City Council provide adequate funding to allow the Toronto Police Service Board and the Toronto Police
Service to implement the recommendations of the Coroner's Jury.
Response
Recommendation 14 will be implemented pending the approval of Toronto City Council.
Chairman Norman Gardner of the Toronto Police Services Board sent a letter to the City of Toronto Clerk's Department on
June 16th, 1999 advising them of the recommendation.
The City of Toronto Policy and Finance Committee met on September 16th, 1999 and referred this recommendation (items
#8 & #8a on committee's agenda) to Toronto City Council.
At the September 28th, 1999 meeting, Toronto City Council adopted the recommendations of the Chief Financial Officer
and Treasurer (Clause No. 16 refers) that
(a) (2) the Toronto Police Services Board submit a detailed cost report on this matter to the Policy and Finance Committee,
including in such report how this item can be accommodated as part of its 2000 Operating Budget submission; and
(b) the Toronto Police Services Board submit a report to the Administration Committee outlining the progress of its
implementation of the recommendations of the Coroner's Inquest.
At the time of writing, the Training and Education Unit is evaluating the cost implications of current Crisis Resolution /
Officer Safety training and potential impact of mandatory training as described in the Coroner's jury recommendation 11.
Recommendation 15
That officers who work in divisions with higher concentrations of persons suffering from mental illness be given priority
on the list of officers entering the Crisis Resolution course.
Response
Recommendation 15 has been implemented.
The Toronto Police Service has undertaken to train all Police Officers in Crisis Resolution. With regard to the current
Crisis Resolution / Officer Safety Course, priority has been given to frontline officers. #14 Division (due to its proximity to
several mental health facilities) has been allotted two delegates to be trained per session.
Recommendation 16
That the C.O. Bick College evaluate the Crisis Resolution training to determine its effectiveness. The evaluation should
include survey research, detailed interviews and/or performance appraisals of a proportion of graduate officers.
Response
Recommendation 16 has been implemented in part. The Training and Education Unit at C.O.Bick College has examined
the area of evaluation with respect to the Crisis Resolution / Officer Safety Course and will evaluate the course based on
the four-level Kirkpatrick Hierarchy of Evaluation.
The four levels are Reaction, Learning, Transfer and Impact:
· Reaction: Did participants find the program positive and worthwhile? This question has many sub-parts relating to the
course content, format, the approach taken by the facilitator, physical facilities, audio-visual aids and so on.
· Learning: Did participants learn? Training focuses on increasing knowledge, enhancing skill, and changing attitudes. To
answer the question of whether participants learned involves measuring skill, knowledge and attitude on entry and again on
exit, in order to determine changes.
· Transfer of Learning: Did the learning translate into changed behaviours in the 'real-world'? This question asks if
learners have been able to transfer their new skills back to the workplace or community. Often it is in this area of transfer
that problems occur. There may not be opportunity or support to use what was learned. This may reflect on the course itself
but it may also be due to other variables.
· Impact of Learning: Did the program have the desired impact? Assuming that the training program was intended to
solve some organizational problem, this question asks, "Was the problem solved?"
The four categories of evaluation are carried out at different times during and after the program:
· Reaction: occurs during and after the program
· Learning: occurs prior to, during, at the end of training program
· Transfer: occurs back in the 'real-world' within six or eight weeks
· Impact: cannot be measured for at least six months and may not occur for considerable time after the delivery of a
program
Every training program offered by the Training and Education Unit has a systematic evaluation strategy based on the
above. Each is evaluated to at least the first two levels (Reaction and Learning). The information derived is used by the
section heads and training teams to continuously improve the programs. Transfer and Impact are much more difficult to
evaluate, and such evaluations are infrequently conducted regarding adult education delivered in the public or private
sectors.
This evaluation system will be applied to the Crisis Resolution / Officer Safety Course as follows:
· Reaction: Officers are asked for their opinion, via a survey, on the relevance, quality and effectiveness of the training
· Learning: Officers are given an incoming and an outgoing exam
· Transfer: Six months after attending a course, participants will be surveyed. Questions will be directed toward whether
they have used the skills or knowledge from the course and to what extent the training met their needs. Depending on what
the survey tells us, we may also conduct interviews and focus groups.
· Impact: 1 1/2 to 2 years after the course a more in-depth evaluation occurs. The process includes surveys to course
attendees and interviews with stakeholders. The evaluation tries to determine the impact of the course on the overall
organization and community stakeholders.
The Reaction and Learning components have been implemented. Class evaluations for the Crisis Resolution / Officer
Safety Course are completed by the officers at the end of the session. The evaluations consistently indicate high approval
for the course. Thus far, all participants agree the course has improved their decision-making and tactical skills, giving
them the self-confidence they need to manage potentially violent situations with added restraint.
On May 5th, 1999, the Training and Education Unit received correspondence from a constable who had completed the
course just one day before, crediting the training with helping the officer achieve a peaceful conclusion to a gun call.
The Transfer and Impact components have not yet been implemented because insufficient time (six months is suggested)
has passed since the training was delivered. Training staff of C.O. Bick College, under the direction of Deputy Director
Chuck Lawrence are finalizing the process to measure transfer and impact of the learning.
Recommendation 17
Continue decentralized training, using Live-Link or other approved methods, at those divisions that are determined to have
a proportionately high concentration of emotionally disturbed persons.
Response
Recommendation 17 has been implemented. Given the large number of emotionally disturbed persons in the Toronto area
and the ease with which individuals travel around the city, it is inappropriate to direct this training to specific divisions.
Rather the Toronto Police Service will continue to provide "LiveLink" decentralized training to all members of the Service.
Recommendation 18
That the Toronto Police Service follow the lead of the 57 other police forces in Ontario who have joined the Video
Training Alliance in order to provide better decentralized training to it's officers.
Response
Recommendation 18 will not be implemented. The current decentralized training system developed and utilized by the
Toronto Police Service is superior to that of the Video Training Alliance (VTA).
During the mid-1980s the Toronto Police Service distributed training videos to units and divisions in a method similar to
that now used by the VTA. Experience has shown that while this is an inexpensive method of making material available (in
house distribution of in house produced materials), it is not an effective means of conducting training.
Membership in the VTA carries with it a user fee for materials based on the total number of members being trained at a
respective agency. This was seen to be cost prohibitive for a large agency such as the Toronto Police Service.
The Toronto Police Service invested in a microwave television broadcasting network ("The LiveLink Television Network"
/ "LTN") with supporting infrastructure. This is the type of communication/training network which is used by major
corporations and government agencies around the world.
Training and information programming is available on the LiveLink Television Network every hour, 24 hours a day, every
day of the week. This training is supported by Intranet and Internet material and is being made available by microwave to
other Services and agencies in the GTA and by satellite across Canada.
Unlike the VTA product, the Toronto Police Service Decentralized Training Program includes a live interactive video, a
panel of experts who are able to answer questions immediately, an evaluation mechanism, detailed training records,
handouts, reference material and resource contacts. The material is presented by Toronto Police Service members. The
Decentralized Training Program supports and in many cases builds upon other types of training initiatives such as unit
specific programs or C.O.Bick Police College courses.
Topics are identified based upon their importance to the members of the Toronto Police Service and to the citizens of the
communities in Toronto. The topics are consistent with Toronto Police Service goals and objectives and community needs.
Rather than purchasing "off-the-shelf" videos which have been developed for general consumption across the province, the
Toronto Police Service produces training material relevant to their specific needs.
Development time for LiveLink programming is significantly shorter than for traditional video. This means topics can be
delivered to officers within days or weeks rather than months or years. (Search of persons was identified as an issue in
December of 1998 and was broadcast in January 1999). The LiveLink Television Network is also able to repeat subjects
with a different focus as required rather than waiting for the topic to come up again as a provincial concern (Emotionally
Disturbed Persons - 1997, 1998, 1999, proposed 2000).
The Toronto Police Service currently has a library of over 1500 professionally produced training videos similar to those
produced by the VTA. Selected training videos from this library are replayed on LiveLink as issues arise. There is no cost
involved.
The Toronto Police Service has access to law enforcement training programs by satellite from agencies across North
America (California POST, FBI, US Department of Justice, etc) and replay them "live" for Toronto Police Service
members on LiveLink.
Recommendation 19
That the Toronto Police Service and the Ontario Police College establish a closer working relationship to facilitate the
sharing of information, training expertise, and professional exchanges to avoid unnecessary duplication or delivery of
conflicting training programs.
Response
Recommendation 19 has been implemented. The Toronto Police Service has seconded Mr. Chuck Lawrence from the
Ontario Police College as Deputy Director of C.O.Bick Police College for a two-year period. Mr. Lawrence is very familiar
with the programs, processes and people at the Ontario Police College. Formal links and informal relationships have been
established and communication at all levels between these two training institutions is improving. Here are some specific
examples:
· December 12th - 14th, 1998 a member of the Toronto Police Service C.O.Bick College Officer Safety Section attended the
Ontario Police College as part of a focus group to help the Ontario Police College Officer Safety Section assess and better
meet the needs of partnering police services. It was noted that a positive interagency relationship was developed and
progress in Officer Safety training was made at this meeting.
· From February 1st - 25th, 1999, a member of the Toronto Police Service C.O.Bick College Officer Safety Section worked
in partnership with the Ontario Police College to deliver a 1 month Use of Force Instructors Course at C.O.Bick College.
This course was delivered to personnel from the Toronto Police Service along with 7 other agencies.
· During the summer and fall of 1999 the Ontario Police College made significant improvements to recruit simulation
training. The staff of the Training and Education Unit were invited to assist in this process and were very pleased with the
result.
Recommendation 20
The Toronto Police Service Board should direct the Chief of Police to ensure that the Toronto Police Service assembles a
list of available crisis teams with telephone numbers according to police division in the Toronto area. Such information
should be available to front line officers through their dispatchers.
Response
Recommendation 20 has been implemented. The Toronto Police Service's Community Policing Support Unit has
collaborated with several community based mental health support agencies to design a pamphlet entitled "Mental Health
Issues - What To Do After the Police Leave".
The pamphlet lists the telephone numbers of six (6) 24 hour services providing both mobile and telephone crisis support.
The catchment areas of these agencies are included. The pamphlet has been printed and distributed to every police division
as well as the Toronto Police Service Communications Centre for the use of dispatchers. A copy of the pamphlet is
appended to this report.
It should also be mentioned that the Victim Services Unit, located in Toronto Police Headquarters is also available to all
members of the Service on a 24-hour basis. This unit can relay information about or make referrals to, a variety of
community agencies. This service is not limited to mental health issues and can be reached by a dedicated phone number
for police personnel.
Recommendation 21
That representatives of consumer survivor groups, in consultation with the Community Policing Support Unit should
develop a pamphlet for police to give to persons in crisis on how to access services. The pamphlet should be prepared in
several languages to serve our diverse community.
Response
Recommendation 21 has been implemented. The Toronto Police Service's Community Policing Support Unit collaborated
with several community based mental health support agencies and designed a pamphlet entitled "Mental Health Issues -
What To Do After the Police Leave".
The pamphlet describes how to respond to a person suffering a mental health crisis and what options are available pursuant
to the Ontario Mental Health Act. It further includes the telephone numbers of six (6) 24 hour services providing both
mobile and telephone crisis support. The catchment areas of these agencies are included.
At the time of writing this response, the pamphlet was sent to the Community Liaison section of the Community Policing
Support Unit for translation into six languages - Cantonese, Italian, Portuguese, Spanish, Polish and Tamil. As indicated in
the response to recommendation 20, a copy of the pamphlet is appended to this report.
The following Community Agencies contributed to the development of the pamphlet:
The Gerstein Centre
New Dimensions in Community Living
St. Elizabeth Health Care
Queen Street Patients Council
Mood Disorders Association of Toronto
Canadian Mental Health Association - Toronto Branch
The Distress Centre
Wellesley/St. Michaels Hospital - Crisis Intervention Team
Houselink Community Services
Community Resource Consultants of Toronto
TPS-Training and Education
Recommendation 22
The jury endorses the Use of Force report and recommends that the Toronto Police Service implement the
recommendations contained in the report.
Response
On June the 18th, 1998, Staff Inspector Ken Cenzura, Inspector Mike Federico and members of the Toronto Police Service
Use of Force Committee presented to the Toronto Police Service Board the Internal Review of Use of Force Final Report.
Contained in the report were 31 recommendations, separated into categories that corresponded to the report's terms of
reference, and directed to the Chief and specific units.
The Toronto Police Service has implemented to varying degrees all 31 of the Use of Force Report recommendations. As
recommended in the final report, The Toronto Police Service has established a standing committee which will continue to
examine, on an ongoing basis, the Use of Force and related issues.
The Use of Force Committee will be presenting their Update Report at the same Toronto Police Services Board meeting
this report is being presented at. A copy of the Use of Force Committee's December 1999 report to the Toronto Police
Services Board entitled "Update on the Internal Review of Use of Force" will be sent along with this response to the Office
of the Chief Coroner for Ontario.
Acting Superintendent Douglas Mottram (808-4800) and other members of the Training and Education Unit, along with
Constable Scott Maywood (808-7826) of the Community Policing Support Unit and Sergeant Brian Keown (808-7762) of
Corporate Planning will be in attendance to answer any questions if required."
The Board was also in receipt of the following report NOVEMBER 12, 1999 from David J. Boothby, Chief of Police:
"SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS REGARDING THE
INQUEST INTO THE DEATH OF EDMOND WAI-KONG YU
RECOMMENDATIONS: (1) THAT the Board approve the responses contained in this report to each of Daina
Groskaufmanis' recommendations
BACKGROUND:
The Board was in receipt of a report May 5th, 1999 from Daina Groskaufmanis, Torkin Manes Cohen & Arbus which made
recommendations to the Board with respect to the recommendations issued by the Coroner's jury at the inquest into the
death of Mr. Edmund Yu.
At its May 20th, 1999 meeting, the Board approved recommendations no. 3, and 4 which were contained in the report from
Daina Groskaufmanis (Board Minute #C150 refers). These recommendations direct the Chief of Police to take certain
actions. The results of the actions taken are reported herein.
RESPONSE TO RECOMMENDATIONS:
Recommendation 3
The Toronto Police Services Board direct the Chief of Police to investigate and report back as to whether the Toronto
Police Service requires Directives and / or Rules dealing with the proper police response where a non-police officer is shot
or suffers serious bodily harm as a result of police action.
Response
Recommendation 3 has been implemented. The Toronto Police Service has various Procedures and Rules that deal
specifically with responding to medical emergencies, regardless if the persons injured are Police Officers, suspects or
innocent victims.
The Procedure entitled "Medical Emergencies" #10-06 directs members as follows:
Police Officer upon arrival at a medical emergency shall:
· assess the situation in its entirety
· check for a Medic-Alert tag/identification to determine whether the person's condition is the result of a pre-existing
medical ailment
· comply with the Service Rule entitled 'Ambulance to be called' (4.17.1)
· perform Cardio-Pulmonary Resuscitation and/or the required Standard First Aid treatment, as deemed necessary
· protect the scene in incidents involving life threatening injuries
The Procedure entitled "Special Investigations Unit" #13-16 directs members of the Toronto Police Service with regards to
tending to injured parties. The Procedure is quoted as follows:
"Injured parties, whether victims or suspects, shall be assisted as per the established practice outlined in the PSA and the
Rules and Directives of this Service. Of primary importance is the medical assistance rendered for the safety and well
being of all injured parties."
Rule 4.17.1 entitled "Ambulance To Be Called" directs members as follows:
"When members come upon an unconscious, semi-conscious, injured or apparently ill person who appears to require
medical attention, such members shall call an ambulance to the scene. Members qualified in standard first aid treatment
shall, if deemed necessary, perform first aid until the arrival of the Department of Ambulance Services or Fire Department
personnel."
Recommendation 4
The Board, in addition to directing the Chief of Police to respond to the recommendations of the Coroner's jury, have a
"reporting back" mechanism whereby the continued implementation of jury recommendations can be monitored. Such
monitoring could be implemented through a review process that is already in place to review the recommendations in the
Use of Force Report. Specifically, recommendations 7.2 in the Use of Force Report provides that the Chair of the Review
of Deadly Force Committee in conjunction with Corporate Communications ensure that the public is kept informed of the
development and implementation of the recommendations contained within the Report. The mandate of this Committee
could be expanded to address the recommendations of the Coroner's jury.
Response
Recommendation 4 has been implemented. The Toronto Police Service currently tracks the status of the implementation of
Coroner's Jury Recommendations.
Upon completion of the Response to the Coroner's Jury Recommendations Report, which is presented to the Board and
forwarded by the Board to the Office of the Chief Coroner, Corporate Planning sends an internal memo to those units
tasked with the implementation of the specific recommendation(s), advising them of such. A copy of this internal memo is
sent to Policing Standards Review (formerly Internal Audit) for the purpose of tracking the status of implementation. A
status report is prepared by the Policing Standards Review Unit on all outstanding recommendations and is presented to the
Executive Review Committee on a quarterly basis for any actions deemed necessary.
With regard to the latter part of Recommendation 4, the Service has expanded the scope of the former Use of Force
Committee refered to in recommendation 7.2 from the Use of Force Report, to include a review of equipment, technology
and practices. To reflect the enhanced mandate, the committee has been renamed the Operational Practices Advisory
Committee (OPAC). The committee is chaired by the Superintendent of Professional Standards, Paul Gottschalk and
consists of representatives from the Field Commands, Traffic Support Services, ETF, and the Training and Education Unit
(Traffic, Officer Safety and the Armaments Sections).
The focus of OPAC is use of force and related issues. Due to the overlapping nature of the Use of Force Report
recommendations and the recommendations made by the Coroner's Jury at the inquest into the death of Mr. Edmund Yu,
Inspector Michael Federico as Co-Chair of the Use of Force Committee, participated in the review of the recommendations
made by the Coroner's Jury from the inquest into the death of Mr. Edmund Yu. Both the Update Report on the Use of
Force and the Response Report to the Coroner's Inquest into the death of Mr. Edmund Yu will be presented at the
December 1999, Toronto Police Service Board meeting.
The Response Report to the Coroner's Inquest into the death of Mr. Edmund Yu will be forwarded, pending Board
approval, to the Office of the Chief Coroner and will be filed as a public document.
CONTACT PERSONS:
Inspector Michael Federico (808-5713) as Co-Chair of the Use of Force Committee, Ms. Dana Styra of Policing Standards
Review (808-7789) and Sergeant Brian Keown (808-7762) of Corporate Planning will be in attendance to answer any
questions if required."
Conclusions:
The Board was also in receipt of correspondence (DECEMBER 8, 1999) from the Queen Street Patients Council and the
Chinese Canadian National Council (Toronto Chapter). A copy is appended to this Minute for information.
Sergeant Brian Keown, Corporate Planning, was in attendance and discussed this report with the Board.
The Board approved the following Motions:
1. THAT the reports from the Chief of Police be approved; and
2. THAT the joint correspondence from the Queen Street Patients Council and the Chinese Canadian National Council be
referred to the Chief of Police for review.
Contact:
Inspector Mike Federico, Co-Chair of the Use of Force Committee, Toronto Police Service, telephone no. (416) 808-5713
or fax no. (416) 808-5702.
Norman Gardner
Chairman
a: yuinquest.doc
October 12, 1999
TO: City of Toronto Corporate Services Committee
FROM: Norman Gardner, Chairman
Toronto Police Services Board
SUBJECT: CONSOLIDATION OF THE FORMER SEVEN MUNICIPAL BY-LAWS RELATING TO DISABLED
PARKING PERMITS
Recommendation:
It is recommended that:
the City of Toronto Corporate Services Committee expedite the consolidation of the former seven municipal by-laws
relating to Disabled Parking Permits.
Council Reference/Background History:
At its meeting on September 23, 1998, the Toronto Police Services Board was in receipt of the following report AUGUST
30, 1999 from David J. Boothby, Chief of Police:
>SUBJECT: DISABLED PARKING LAWS, REGULATIONS AND BY-LAWS
RECOMMENDATION: 1. THAT the Board receive this report,
2. THAT the Board forward a copy of this report to the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario and request that they conduct
a comprehensive review of Provincial Disabled Parking Permits with regard to:
a) Issuance criteria
b) Renewal criteria
c) Legislative considerations, and
3. THAT the Board forward a copy of this report to the City of Toronto Corporate Services Committee and request that
they expedite the consolidation of the former seven municipal by-laws relating to Disabled Parking Permits.
BACKGROUND:
At the Police Services Board meetings June 18, 1998, October 26, 1998, April 22, 1999 and August 2, 1999 (Board
Minutes 264/98, 460/98, 192/99, 347/99 refers, attached as appendix AA@), the Board received reports on a number of
issues surrounding parking as they relate to Persons with Disabilities in Toronto.
Disabled person parking has been an ongoing issue for many years and continues to be a contentious one. According to the
1991 Canadian census, over 18% of Ontario residents are disabled. By applying this percentage to the Toronto population
one can estimate that Toronto=s disabled community represents about 500,000 people. As the population ages this number
will continue to increase.
In order to better understand and identify the issues and problems relating to disabled parking, members of Operational
Support Command commenced a review. Consultations took place internally with members of Parking Enforcement,
Traffic Services and the Community Policing Support Unit. External consultation took place with the Accessibility &
Ageing Issue Policy Branch of the Ministry of Transportation, City of Toronto Mayor=s Office, City of Toronto Parking
Tag Operations, Beyond Ability International and Perival & Taylor Consulting.
Additionally, as a result of the widespread media coverage of this issue many disabled members of the public contacted our
Service and advised of their concerns and possible solutions to problems they encountered.
As a result of these consultations it was determined that there was widespread misuse and abuse of the current system by
both the general public and permit holders. It was also determined that problems with the administration and issuance of
Disabled Parking Permits and a lack of knowledge of the Disabled Parking legislation were the main causes of the abuses
identified.
This report outlines changes that are required and changes that are taking place in order to rectify some of the problems
identified. The report is broken down into three different sections. The section entitled Ministry of Transportation Ontario
recommends a provincial review of the Disabled Parking Permit system. The section entitled City of Toronto, recommends
consolidation of the Disabled Parking By-laws of the former seven municipalities. The section entitled Toronto Police
Service contains information about what is being done at the Toronto Police, Parking Enforcement Unit to address disabled
parking issues.
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION
a) Issuance Criteria
Current issuance criteria allows for a wide range of medical professionals (physician, chiropractor, occupational therapist,
osteopath or physiotherapist) to sign an application that recommends a Disabled Parking Permit be issued. The province
has no control or accountability mechanism to ensure the validity of applications.
Information was received from the ministry that all Disabled Parking Permits are processed by one person at the MTO and
entered into a database by a few data entry personnel. Entry of the permits is not a high priority and the database is not
purged on a regular basis. Permits that are returned by permit holders or those seized, lost, destroyed and expired remain
active until the purging process is updated. There is a need for the Disabled Parking Permit database to be purged on
regular basis. Purging should take place on a quarterly basis
Currently permits that are reported lost, stolen or destroyed are automatically re-issued. New permits are issued with the
original permit number. Permit holders can apply for a second permit on the pretext that the initial permit was lost and
obtain a second valid permit which can then be used by a person who is not disabled. It is recommended that the Ministry
require the permit holders to sign an affidavit prior to re-issuance.
b) Renewal Criteria
The Disabled Parking Permits are valid for 60 months. Renewal is automatic and new permits are mailed to the permit
holder=s last known address. It is recommended that the Ministry change the current procedure and require that permit
holders apply for renewal and require that renewal applicants have their application signed by a medical practitioner.
Temporary permits are issued and can be valid for up to 24 months. However, they are entered in the Ministry database and
when checked appear as valid permits even after their expiry date.
The only identification that appears on a Disabled Permit is the permit holder=s name and address. Due to the advances in
colour copying, permits are easily duplicated and used fraudulently. In order for officers to check on the validity of a permit
they must make a phone call to the Ministry office in Kingston. The Disabled Parking Permit information should be
entered on the Police Automated Registration Information System (P.A.R.I.S). This is the same system that contains
information about Provincial Drivers Licences.
c) Legislative Considerations
The Municipal Act gives each municipality in the Province of Ontario the authority to pass by-laws. Inconsistencies exist
from municipality to municipality as to the exemptions that a holder of a Disabled Parking Permit are entitled to. As an
example, in the City of Toronto a Disabled Parking Permit allows for a vehicle to be parked at a meter without depositing a
fee. However in Stratford the permit holder must attend the Travel and Tourism office and receive a visitor permit for the
same entitlement.
It is unreasonable to expect that permit holders and caregivers be aware of the exemptions in different jurisdictions. It is
recommended that a standard province-wide set of parking exemptions be developed.
CITY OF TORONTO
There are numerous inconsistencies between the Disabled Parking by-laws of the former municipalities within the City of
Toronto. It is recommended that the City of Toronto, Corporate Services Committee consolidate the seven by-laws to
ensure uniformity and consistency. Currently the by-law covering disabled parking in the area of the former City of North
York is not valid and unenforceable.
TORONTO POLICE SERVICE
To address concerns over problems with Disabled Parking Permit misuse and parking tag issuance, a new parking tag has
been designed. The new tag contains a box that must be marked to indicate that the issuing officer checked to see if there
was a clearly visible permit displayed before issuing a parking tag.
This additional information will not only remind parking officers that they must check for a Disabled Parking Permit prior
to issuing a tag but it will also be used by Parking Tag Operations personnel to make a determination as to whether a
parking tag should or should not be withdrawn on the basis of a Disabled Parking Permit exemption.
The Toronto Police Service is also establishing a section within Parking Enforcement which will be designated as the
ADisabled Parking Section@.
The Disabled Parking Section will be responsible for identifying, co-ordinating and resolving parking issues that are
encountered by persons with disabilities. The section will also be responsible for co-ordinating enforcement of Disabled
Parking by-laws. The section will be encouraged to work in partnership with the disabled community and all other
stakeholders to ensure that through enforcement and education disabled parking issues are being properly addressed.
It is the intent that some of the staff assigned to the section will be disabled members. It is recognized that disabled
members, due to their own disability, will be most effective in dealing with disabled parking issues.
Superintendent Doug Reynolds, Parking Enforcement Unit and Detective Sergeant Brian Raybould, Special Investigative
Services will be in attendance to answer any questions.=
Conclusions:
Gerald Parker, President, Beyond Ability International, was in attendance and made a deputation to the Board. Mr. Parker
also provided a written submission that included five specific recommendations. A copy is appended to this Minute for
information.
The following persons were also in attendance and responded to questions by the Board:
Supt. Doug Reynolds, Parking Enforcement Unit
P.C. Scott Baptiste, C.O. Bick College
Sgt. Brian Keown, Corporate Planning
The Board approved the foregoing report and the following Motions:
1. THAT the deputation from Mr. Parker be received; and
2. THAT, with regard to Mr. Parker=s written submission, recommendation no.s 1, 2, 3 and 4 be referred to the Chief of
Police for a response in a further report to the Board and recommendation no. 5 be referred to the City of Toronto Works
Committee.
Contact Name and Telephone Number:
Superintendent Doug Reynolds, Parking Enforcement Unit, Toronto Police Service, telephone no. (416) 808-6653
Respectfully submitted,
Norman Gardner
Chairman
A:\disblpar.doc
