BCT Editorial – 9/18/06

This page was last updated on September 21, 2006.

As time goes by; Editorial; Beaver County Times; September 18, 2006.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“Freedom’s financial bind over police services is one more communities will face

“Eighteen years ago, Freedom couldn’t afford to maintain its own police department, and the borough contracted with neighboring Rochester to provide coverage.

“Eighteen years later, Freedom can’t afford Rochester’s service, and the borough is forming its own department.

“President John Kaercher said Freedom Council had to make the move because Rochester wanted to increase its contract from $120,000 to $160,000. Because one mill in property tax brings in $7,100 in revenue, Freedom would have had to raise taxes 9 to 10 mills in 2007 to cover the increase.”

[RWC] An increase of $40,000 would require a tax increase of 5.6 mills. Where did the “9 to 10 mills” come from? Nine to 10 mills would raise $63,900 to $71,000.

“Kaercher said the 40 percent increase didn’t include court costs or major crime investigations.”

[RWC] Where did the author learn math? A $40,000 increase from $120,000 is a 33% increase, not a 40% increase.

“This understandable decision is disheartening because it marks another step backward for voluntary regionalization. Something similar to this happened with Chippewa Township and the neighboring communities to which it provided police coverage a few years ago. Chippewa couldn’t continue to provide coverage at the current rate, and the other municipalities couldn’t afford the higher rate Chippewa said it needed.

“Just as back then, Freedom had to do what it had to do, and Rochester had to do what it had to do. However, it’s hard to see how Freedom can sustain a full-time, viable police force given its small tax and population bases. It’s going to have to rely largely on part-timers.

“This problem goes beyond Freedom and Rochester or even our region, and House Speaker John Perzel recognizes that. The Philadelphia Republican has proposed that the state spend $225 million to fund half the cost of hiring 10,000 new police officers in municipalities across Pennsylvania by 2010.

“As we editorialized last Friday, Perzel is on the right track. However, this matter is too important to rush through in the lame-duck session that is coming up.

[RWC] I covered this proposal in my critique of the cited editorial.

“Outside of major population areas, this problem is rooted in the fact that Pennsylvania has far too many municipalities, a number of which have such small tax bases that they provide few, if any, governmental services. They are governments in name only.

“As times goes by, municipalities that continue to offer what were once essential services - from Coraopolis to Beaver Falls, from Ambridge to Ellwood City and all points between and beyond - are going to see their costs climb.”

[RWC] I have two points on this. First, perhaps what was once considered essential never was.

Second, let the communities address their needs on their own. If they have to join forces to do so, eventually they will. We don’t need the commonwealth to shove “solutions” down their throats.

“Perzel recognizes that providing police services in these times requires local, county and state funding. To that end, if his proposal is approved, the state would pick up 50 percent of the tab, the county 30 percent and the municipality 20 percent. That requires a new way of thinking about police services and how they operate.”

[RWC] Mr. Perzel’s proposal is nothing more than pandering.

“For that reason, whatever legislation emerges in Harrisburg must look beyond merely putting more police on the street. It also needs to find ways to do so more efficiently and effectively through regionalization and merger of police departments.”

[RWC] With each editorial, the Times wants more and more from Mr. Perzel’s misguided proposal.