Municipal policing contracts opposed by state police
By Richard Gazarik
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Friday, February 5, 2010
A bill that would allow municipalities without police departments to hire and pay for state troopers to patrol their streets drew mixed reviews at a state Senate committee hearing Thursday in Hempfield.
The proposal elicited praise from some municipal officials in Westmoreland and Fayette counties, who said it is a less-expensive option than two other pending proposals and would permit communities to decide whether they need the additional police coverage.
But a top state police official told members of the Senate Law and Justice Committee that his agency opposes Senate Bill 984 proposed by state Sen. Kim Ward of Hempfield because it “raises a number of unanswered questions.”
Robert Schiffbauer, a township supervisor in South Union, Fayette County, said local officials should determine public safety needs in their communities. He called Ward’s bill a “viable option.”
While Ward’s bill would require municipalities that contract with the state police to pay for troopers’ wages and benefit costs, according to state police Lt. Col. Tedescung L. Bandy, he said it does not address other costs.
“Troopers in the field do not work in isolation; they receive essential support from state police resources in their direct chain of command,” he said during a full morning of testimony in the Courtyard by Marriott hotel. “This does not address the criteria for determining how many troopers are necessary to effectively patrol a municipality at any given time.”
“The bottom line is that troopers should be assigned based on need rather than how many troopers a municipality is able or willing to pay for,” he said.
Ward’s measure would create a State Trooper Services Contractual Program that would permit municipalities without police departments to decide whether they need to contract with the state police for an additional number of troopers.
“(The bill) has the potential to enhance the state police’s ability to provide more regional assistance and help all of our communities because it increases the number of troopers available at all times,” Ward said yesterday.
In another pending bill, Rep. John Pallone, D-Arnold, proposed a $100-per-resident tax in communities that do not have local police forces. Rep. Mike Sturla, a Lancaster Democrat, has proposed a fee schedule based on population.
Although Ward’s bill drew criticism from the state police hierarchy, members of the Pennsylvania State Troopers Association support it because it could lead to the hiring of more state troopers.
Bruce Edwards, president of the troopers association, said the number of troopers decreases with retirements each year. There are 214 vacancies, and he expects that figure to increase to 332 by June 30.
He said troopers are spread too thinly.
“We could be nearly 600 troopers short,” Edwards said. “This is a time bomb, a ticking time bomb, that no one wants to address. We’re in a lot of trouble if something isn’t done. This is a huge problem. It must be looked at by the Legislature. We are at a breaking point.”
Elam Herr, assistant executive director of the Pennsylvania State Association of Township Supervisors, testified that Ward’s bill is a “much improved version” of a bill enacted in the late 1980s but never implemented.
[Snip]
