Cobourg Council – Mayor and Police Chief Locking Horns
(Today’s Northumberland file photo)
By Cecilia Nasmith/Today’s Northumberland
Both Cobourg Police Chief Paul VandeGraaf and Mayor Lucas Cleveland are both confident that theirs is the impregnable position on the department’s 2026 budget ask.
Given that this amounts to a 20.5% increase – significantly above the 5% increase Cleveland had limited them to under a directive issued by virtue of his Strong Mayor Powers – Cleveland fielded a motion at this week’s special council meeting to return it to the board for further review and consideration.
Cleveland termed the increase “untenable, unacceptable and needs to be reconsidered by those sitting on the board.”
“I agree,” Councillor Adam Bureau – who chairs the Cobourg Police Services Board – concurred.
“20.5% – my gosh! I can’t picture anybody who wants to bring 20.5% to the council and ask for their permission. But my question is this – if any other department had an increase of that and we didn’t even give them the opportunity to explain why…”
The budget has already had several reviews and significant consultation. VandeGraaf has stated publicly that the services it funds are all mandated under existing legislation and are therefore not discretionary.
Furthermore, concessions made in previous years have resulted in expenses that can no longer be deferred.
The chief also stated, at a recent Police Services Board meeting, that Strong Mayor Powers may not be a factor.
“Strong Mayors can direct the overall municipal budget under act, but that directive has no legal bearing on this process,” he said at the time.
“There’s absolutely no legal mechanism for Strong Mayor Powers to direct the Police Service Board on its estimate. The police estimate is founded in Section 50 Subsection 2 of the Community Safety and Policing Act,” he added, dismissing the 5% directive as “nothing more than performative.”
The 2026 budget, he said, “is what we need to provide 24/7-365, as every other police service does, to be determined to be adequate and effective,” especially at a time when calls for service and work complexity have increased due to such issues as homelessness, poverty and addictions.
“There is no discretionary spending in this budget,” VandeGraaf declared.
“The police board and police services are willing to come to council at any time to do an open meeting and a closed meeting, explain every single thing with the business unit, the operating budget,” Bureau said.
“We had the finance committee, we had public engagement, we had the board go over it again, and it’s not my opinion – we had zero cuts. But I would like the opportunity for this council to get a presentation before it gets sent back. That’s all I’m asking.”
“20.5% is an unrealistic expectation in my opinion,” Cleveland insisted.
“It’s unacceptable to the average tax base, it’s unacceptable to me, and I won’t be presenting it to this council,” he added, referring to the new Strong Mayor Powers that enable the mayor to set the budget.
“I’m not saying don’t be concerned,” Bureau said.
“Absolutely, be concerned at 20.5%, 100%. But I think we should hear it out first so everybody gets to understand why it’s 20.5%.”
Deputy Mayor Nicole Beatty, who also sits on the police board, said it will have a heavy impact.
“However, I just want folks to know the chief and the board have asked, ‘do we have an opportunity to present to council, because we usually do that exchange of information and dialogue.’”
“Have you had a request from the police board to present?” Councillor Brian Darling asked the mayor.
“That would be a no-sir,” Cleveland replied.
“This is a no-brainer – we have to send it back,” Councillor Randy Barber insisted.
“I think we are doing the police board due respect, giving them another chance to take a look at it, knowing it’s exorbitant.”
In the end, council voted in favour of Cleveland’s motion.
