A new city staff report, prompted by The Sarnia Journal’s investigation, clarifies that the Police Service Board bears the statutory responsibility for justifying the scope and cost of the proposed $91 million headquarters.
City of Sarnia administration has officially responded to The Sarnia Journal’s forensic audit of the police headquarters proposal, issuing a report that incorporates the Journal’s findings into the public record and clarifies the legal responsibilities for the project.
The report, authored by CAO Chris Carter, is a direct response to the December 15 Council resolution triggered by the Journal’s investigation. That investigation challenged the Police Service’s narrative that their current building is in critical failure—a narrative used to justify a $91 million expansion.
The staff report explicitly references the Sarnia Journal’s analysis and the engineering reports cited in our audit, confirming a critical discrepancy in the police’s proposal.
Significantly, City Staff confirmed the Journal’s assessment that the 2017 “High-Level Building Condition Assessment” was never intended to justify a new build. The CAO’s report states that the 2017 document was “very high level” and intended only for basic “asset management purposes,” not as a definitive statement on the building’s operational viability.
This admission is a major blow to the “crisis” narrative. It confirms that the urgency regarding the building’s physical state was overstated to push for a massive capital expenditure.
The review draws a sharp line between the municipality’s role and the Police Service Board’s obligations. Staff emphasize that under the Community Safety and Policing Act (CSPA), the burden of facility compliance lies with the Police Service Board—not City Council or staff.
The report notes that the CSPA requires the Board to:
By enforcing this statutory division, City Staff have effectively concluded that they cannot validate the police’s request, stating that “any further analysis related to facility needs should be directly sought from the Sarnia Police Service Board.”
By formally attaching the Sarnia Journal article to the agenda, City Staff have ensured that the questions raised regarding inflated costs, the “commitment trap,” and the precinct model alternative are now part of the official legislative conversation.
The report returns the burden of proof to where it belongs: The Police Service Board. They must now justify why a $91 million facility is the only option, without the cover of City Staff endorsement.
We encourage residents to read the full independent report that sparked this review and exposed the flaws in the proposal.
Read the full report: Forensic Audit and Strategic Review of Sarnia Police Service Facilities
