Council has voted against the adoption of an alternative recommendation from staff which would see the implementation of a naloxone policy for city workers employed at the Peterborough Public Library, Transit Terminal, and Social Services. The vote took place during a meeting of the General Committee on April 11th on a motion put forward by Town Ward councillor Alex Bierk.

The recommendations appear in a staff report which had been requested by council on February 27th in recognition of the “devastating amount of loss due to a public drug supply” in the city, and the fact that city workers often find themselves on the front line of the drug poisoning crisis. 

The report, submitted by interim Chief Administrative Officer Richard Freymond, recognizes the realities of the opioid and drug poisoning crisis in Peterborough but falls short of advising the city to adopt an overarching policy which would allow city workers to administer naloxone themselves.

In the report, Freymond notes the steadily increased rates of opioid poisonings in Peterborough alongside the fact that “Peterborough has had consistently higher rates of opioid poisoning emergency department visitings compared to Ontario since 2007.”

“Medical calls for service are highest at the library with weekly incidents involving unconscious persons suspected of opioid poisonings,” the report continues, noting that the average response time for opioid related calls was about five and half minutes. 

The alternative recommendations introduced to council in the report contain six main points which include the sourcing of an appropriate naloxone trainer for city staff as well as a list of employees who would wish to volunteer to be trained to administer naloxone. Additionally, staff would need to report back to council with a draft naloxone policy by June of 2023. 

Significantly, the report also noted that the city would need to procure medical malpractice insurance for no less than $5M and that the estimated cost to implement this program would be $75,000 which staff suggests could be sources from the City’s Insurance Reserve for 2023, but would need to be a part of future budget discussions if renewed.

During discussion of the motion to adopt the alternative recommendations, Bierk asked for clarification about a line in the report which suggested that providing naloxone training would result in more drug use in city-run spaces.

Manager of Emergency and Risk Management for the city, Jodi DeNoble, could not provide a clear answer on the reasons behind this claim but did re-iterate a finding in the report which found that medical calls for service have gone down since the implementation of the Consumption and Treatment Services (CTS) Site on Alymer.

Bierk, however, was concerned at the fact that this suggestion appeared in the report at all as it had the potential to further stigmatize people who use drugs as well as mislead councillors who are being asked to make informed policy decisions.

This training, Bierk said, is meant “to empower city staff on a volunteer basis” in what he describes as an “all hands on deck situation.”

“The status quo is not acceptable,” he said. “What’s being presented in this report is the status quo.”

During discussion on the motion, Mayor Jeff Leal noted the quick response time of paramedics as a heartening finding in the report and warned against the adoption of a policy that could potentially place city workers in legal jeopardy. 

“If you don’t have a watertight core policy you potentially run into very serious problems,” Leal noted, stating that in his view of the situation, there is enormous liability for a person alongside the potential for lost careers. 

While the data was not immediately available, Leal felt confident that “our response time to overdose is probably one of the best in Ontario.”

Despite the report repeatedly noting the voluntary nature of this training, some councillors seemed to believe that this would be a compulsory task for city workers at the identified locations to undertake.

Otonabee Ward councillor Lesley Parnell noted that she herself had voluntarily taken naloxone training. “I took that upon myself, but I can’t take that on for our public employees.”  

The report itself goes so far as to state that the city “cannot arbitrarily add this responsibility to a unionized employee’s job description and consideration should be given to the potential impact on regular business operations” and that any policy would need to clearly set out who is authorized to administer naloxone. 

Bierk went on to highlight the fact that this recommendation from staff would not compel anyone to administer naloxone. Rather, the possibility would exist that they could take the training on their own time and choose to carry a kit. 

“City staff are already on the front lines of this,” he said, “and many have had to take time off of work because of the stress this has caused them on the job.”

The motion to adopt the alternative recommendation failed 7-3 with councillors Bierk, Joy Lachica, and Matt Crowley voting in favour. Ashburnham Ward councillor Gary Baldwin was absent during this meeting.

In an interview with Arthur following the meeting, Bierk stated that he remained concerned about the misinformation in the report and his disappointment at not receiving clear answers back from staff on why it was included. 

“It's problematic that misinformation is found within a city report. And then when asked about it, there's no real substantiating data to back it up. So my question is, how did it make it in there?”

Bierk proceeded to reiterate his stance on ensuring city employees have the necessary tools and training to help save lives in the face of overwhelming evidence that the situation will arise, and that this was not meant to compel workers in any way.

“This was meant to empower people that, under policy, are not allowed to carry and administer naloxone on a volunteer basis,” Bierk said.

When asked for comment on what message he thinks this decision by council sends to the city and its residents, Bierk was candid stating that “the message we're sending to the community by not supporting these things that we have the power to support is we don't care about drug addicts. We don't care about people who are dying from overdoses.”

“My dream would be to have a more proactive approach to actually make this happen.”