1

Dear Members of the Media and the Community:

Our relationship with the community we serve and our members is of the utmost importance.
We always strive to be accountable and transparent.
The arbitrator, Dr. Richard McLaren, has released us from any confidentiality clause.
It is at this time that we can provide factual information to the arbitrators recent decision
regarding my contract and the contract of Deputy Chief Tim Farquharson. This information is
part of the public record.
In our contract is a very specific clause relating to the dissolution of a Police Service.
This clause is not unique.
It is in the contracts of other Police Chiefs and Deputy Chiefs across Ontario. It is there to help
avoid political interference. It is intended to have the political parties of the day think very
carefully before dissolving a police service.
Dissolving a police service is not just a simple re-branding exercise as it has been characterized.
It has financial, contractual and legal implications.
These implications and the costs were known well before the dissolution took place. I voiced
both the financial and contractual obligations associated with the dissolution of the Service many
times before midnight on December 31, 2014.
Chronology of Events:
On December 3, 2012 the Peterborough City Council voted to dissolve the Peterborough
Lakefield Community Police Service and end the 15 year policing partnership with Lakefield
that was mutually beneficial. That decision was ratified on December 10, 2012.
By ending the policing agreement with Lakefield our Service will lose $2 million over five years.
We are aware of attempts by the Police Services Board to bring the contractual matter to the
attention of Council from as early as November 2013, in May of 2014 and in the fall of 2014.
On June 30, 2014 the new Peterborough Police Services Board was ratified.
At the first Board meeting on September 29, 2014 all current employer agreements and
collective agreements were accepted.
On December 17, 2014 the Deputy and I signed contracts with the new Peterborough Police
Service.

At midnight on December 31, 2014 the Peterborough Lakefield Community Police Service
dissolved and the newly formed Peterborough Police Service came into effect.
On May 4, 2015 a private, contractual matter became public.
On May 6, 2015 the arbitrator ordered a publication ban and a gag order and excluded media
from the hearing. Allowed to stay at that meeting was the Deputy and myself, our lawyers, with
one City Councillor in attendance, the City Solicitor, the Finance Manager for the City and one
Board member.
On June 22, 2015 the Arbitrator issued his decision in favour of the Deputy and my contracts.
Our contracts are not a surprise.
The Police Services Board was well aware of this clause in our contracts.
This clause has been in my contract since 2008. It was written into my contract again and
approved by the Boards in 2010, 2011, 2012 and again on December 17, 2014.
The Chief and Deputies contracts have mirrored each other historically.
All parties involved knew full well what they were signing. The Police Services Board approved
the severance clause 5 times.
These were known costs associated with the dissolution of the Service.
The employment contract is free from doubt or confusion.
These known costs were ignored.
We did not invoke the clause. Council invoked the clause on Dec. 10, 2012 when the Service
dissolved.
We fought for the Peterborough Lakefield Community Police Service. We expressed numerous
times the costs associated with dissolving the Service.
If we could reverse time and have Lakefield back as partners we would.
The Arbitrators ruling confirms that the terms of a contract in Peterborough should be upheld
and honoured.
The Arbitrators ruling confirms that the Police Services Act applies in Peterborough.
The Arbitrators ruling confirms that a contract is a contract.

I was serious when I signed my contract and I assumed they were serious too. That has been the
case since 2008.
I expect a contract to be upheld in Peterborough. I expect the Police Services Act to apply in
Peterborough. I expect that our members know who their employer is. I expect when parties sign
a contract they know what they signed.
It is vital that when our members come to work every day, 365, 24/7 they know that their
contract means something. That their contracts will be honoured, regardless of the clause.
If you sign it. You mean it. It will be honoured.
If the contract of the Chief and Deputy dont mean anything, then nobodys contract under our
roof means anything.
Weve been asked many times what we intend to do with any financial award.
The entire dissolution of our Service has cost taxpayers millions of dollars.
Again, we fought for our Service.
We have accumulated substantial legal fees during this process and will be putting any financial
award toward paying those fees. If there is any money left over there are charities that both the
Deputy and myself are proud to support.
We went through this process because we felt it was crucial that it is made clear that a contract is
a contract and needs to be honoured and upheld.
The arbitration process was entered into mutually by the Board, Chief and Deputy to resolve the
outstanding obligation of the previous Board. It is in fact a contract clause in and of itself.
We want to publicly thank those members of our community and service for their support. We
are here to serve you. We are here to protect you. Our members need to know that when they
come to work every day, 365, 24/7 their rights and their contracts are also protected.
Murray C. Rodd
Chief of Police

Tim Farquharson
Deputy Chief of Police