While the Police Board claims a new facility is a legal mandate for adequacy, independent engineering reports suggest the current station remains structurally sound with basic repairs.
On February 9, 2026, the Sarnia Police Service Board shifted its approach toward the City from collaboration to litigation. In a formal demand letter, legal counsel for the Board argued that Mayor Mike Bradley’s recent budget veto was an improper act. The Board is relying on a provincial directive which states that Strong Mayor powers do not include the authority to veto police board budget estimates.
However, a review of the Board’s timeline reveals a series of procedural changes and a reversal of recent public statements. The aggressive tone of the legal demand follows a January 29 meeting where newly appointed Board Chair Kelly Ash stated a desire to keep the facility project on good terms, telling the public, we don't want to antagonize Council.
The Board’s legal argument hinges on the assertion that the $5 million for a new headquarters is a requirement for adequate and effective policing. Yet, the Board’s own engineering reports provide different context. Independent assessments from WalterFedy and Dillon Consulting found that the current headquarters is structurally sound and requires 4.43 million in essential repairs to remain operational and code-compliant. The full report is available here.
If adequacy can be maintained for $4.4 million, the Board's demand for a significantly larger capital project appears to be a discretionary policy choice rather than a strict legal mandate. There is also a procedural question regarding the Board's claim. The provincial directive protects estimates submitted by police service boards, but this $5 million was not part of the formal estimates submitted by the September deadline.
The request was introduced as a compromise during a public input session on November 17, after the draft budget process had begun. Because this was a Council amendment to borrow money, rather than an original Board estimate, it may remain subject to the Mayor’s veto power under the Municipal Act. By offering the $5 million figure as a compromise, the Board suggested the funding level was a matter of negotiation rather than a fixed legal requirement.
The push for legal action has also highlighted internal uncertainty. During recent deliberations, Board member Anne-Marie Gillis noted she was confused by the various budget actions and questioned the lack of direct guidance from the Ministry. By using the Community Safety and Policing Act to pursue long-term debt, the Board is attempting to commit Sarnia taxpayers to significant financial obligations.
As the City prepares its response, the community must weigh the Board's legal demands against the existing $4.4 million assessment for building safety and repairs.
