The city of Williams Lake wants to have more say in the justice system when it comes to what they call "prolific offenders."
Mayor and council wrote a letter on behalf of the city to Crown counsel in Williams Lake regarding the possible release on bail of Travis Storoschuk. The letter was copied to Premier David Eby, the provincial attorney general, the minister of public safety and solicitor general, and local RCMP. The city said it has sent other letters to crown counsel regarding other cases but an exact number of letters and what triggers a letter was not specified.
The most recent letter argued Storoschuck and the police actions in response to Storoschuk was a strain on police resources, put residents and property at risk and "caused profound upset of families and students in the area" as well as damaged Williams Lake's reputation.
The city has taken a policy position to call for keeping serious offenders in custody, after a prompting to do so by Coun. Scott Nelson.
"We vehemently oppose Travis Storoschuk's release into Williams Lake," stated the letter to Crown counsel from the city and signed by Mayor Surinderpal Rathor.
Storoschuk was the focus of police action which resulted in a block of Western Avenue in Williams Lake being closed down for a day. He was facing a number of charges, and more after the police action, most related to breaching conditions. The Williams Lake man did not appear to have a significant criminal record prior to the RCMP operation.
The organized response to the residence, involving RCMP in combat attire, police dogs and the use of drones and an armoured vehicle, and multiple days of activity in the area resulted in increased public attention. City staff, in a public council meeting, attributed significant costs to the city for the RCMP overtime and additional manpower involved in the operation.
RCMP said as the investigation is ongoing, the final costs of this have not been fully established.
A response from the BC Prosecution Service (BCPS) and the Ministry of Attorney General, attempted to clarify the role of the BCPS and minister's role. The minister is a member of the provincial cabinet, a member of the Legislative Assembly of B.C. and appointed by the premier.
"The Attorney General, except in the most extraordinary circumstances, is not involved in individual prosecutions; the daily, discretionary decision making regarding prosecutions is a function that belongs to Crown counsel," explained the letter.
"Crown counsel must act fairly, impartially, in good faith and in accordance with the highest ethical standards. Political, personal, and private considerations must not affect the manner in which prosecutors or prosecutions proceed," said the letter.
The letter went on to provide some clarification on the role of Crown counsel in deciding whether an accused is released on bail, stating the judge is the person who determines whether someone is released or remains in custody and under what conditions they are released if they are.
But the letter provided no satisfaction for Coun. Scott Nelson, who asked for the letter to be brought forward for discussion to a committee of the whole meeting.
"There's no responsibility," said Nelson, frustrated the letter was attributed only to "Headquarters" of the BC Prosecution Service and Ministry of Attorney General.
Nelson is calling for more accountability on the part of the BCPS for the impacts on the community, and said the letter "points the finger" at judges.
He called for the city to purchase GPS monitoring devices to help the Crown, and asked for all what he called "prolific offenders" to have GPS monitoring devices if released.
Nelson took exception to the letter's suggestion it is inappropriate for Crown counsel to communicate with the city on specific prosecutions before the court.
He suggested the city's request for Storoschuk to remain in custody equates to a victim impact statement. However, victim impact statements in B.C. require victims in criminal matters to describe only emotional, physical and financial impacts and not to make any sentencing recommendations and avoid personal attacks.
"As we've gone along we've created such clarity and we've had a good grasp and the more that they send us, the more that the silos are building," said Nelson.
"South of the border, they're knocking the silos down."
The city said they refer to RCMP for a definition of "prolific offenders" and said in the case of Storoschuk, the trigger for the city was related to the high overtime costs and implications for the city's crime statistics when the accused man returned to Williams Lake, despite being on conditions to remain in Big Lake.
A cost breakdown of the police operation to bring Storoschuk back into custody was not provided, with the city estimating a cost to taxpayers of $30,000 to $50,000 for the operation. Were the operation to have taken place outside city limits, the city would not have been responsible for the 70 per cent of the RCMP costs. If the incident had taken place in the regional district, the cost would have fallen to the province.
Coun. Angie Delainey echoed Nelson's frustration with the system but suggested lobbying the federal government to help push for system reform.
"It's broken, the system doesn't work," she said.
"In my opinion, the whole basket needs to be dumped out and then put back together."
She also suggested people who are incarcerated have to do community work.
"We should give them a garbage can and a litter picker," she said.
"I know they still, in some parts of the United States, they have the chain gang."
The council passed a resolution and moved to return to the conversation at a future committee of the whole meeting in order to strategize their approach to lobbying other levels of government.
The resolution, which was adopted at the Jan. 28 regular meeting reads:
That pursuant to Committee of Whole Council Report #02-2025, Council:
1) Reaffirm its position that prolific offenders out on bail should be tracked using GPS monitoring; 2) Send a letter to the attorney general of Canada outlining council's concerns with regards to prolific offenders and their impacts and costs on the community (copied to relevant provincial cabinet members, local government advocacy entities and the local MLA and MP); 3) send a response from the mayor's office to Crown counsel inquiring how a local government may provide victim impact statements on matters that impact the community; 4) discuss a potential resolution to NCLGA regarding the prolific offender issue at their next committee of whole council meeting; and 5) direct that Crown counsel, the attorney general of Canada and the Ministry of Attorney General (B.C. Prosecution Service) be advised that the city of Williams Lake is not prepared to use taxpayers dollars to fund the increased policing and community costs resulting from the revolving door of repeat prolific offenders being released into our community on bail conditions, and that the city will be reviewing options such as refusing to pay costs resulting from Crown counsel’s decision to continually release repeat prolific offenders into Williams Lake.
RCMP said they define a "prolific offender" as "an offender with an established pattern of persistent Criminal Code and/or Controlled Drugs and Substances Act offences; who is identified by current intelligence to be criminally active; and assessed by police or partner agencies as medium to high risk to re-offend."
The city did not provide specific triggers for a letter to be issued by the city, but said they had sent a number of letters already in regards to other people before the courts.
"The police and the courts operate independently of the various levels of government and should not be seen to be influenced by external forces so as to preserve the integrity of the court process and the accused’s right to a fair trial," said Staff Sergeant Kris Clark, a senior media relations officer for the RCMP in an emailed response.
This story has been updated to include definitions and response from the RCMP.
