Speak Outs
Speak Out
How should local governments pay for police protection in a troubled economy?

When towns are small and revenue is thin, municipal governments have to stretch their budgets as far as they can. Often this means going without certain public services; sometimes those public services are major ones – such as the police. Many towns in Pennsylvania have given up managing their own local law enforcement force over the years, turning instead to the state police for protection.

With the troubled economy, this is happening more frequently.

The Pennsylvania State Police says that it handles full-time protection for 1,314 of the state’s 2573 municipalities, and fills in part-time at another 402. Some of these communities are so small that they have never had a local police force. Others maintained a police force at one time but decided to discontinue service.

Locally managed law enforcement has been dissolved in 65 municipalities across the state since 2002. These include Elizabethville and Williamstown in Dauphin County, and New Bloomfield in Perry County. Of those 65 switchovers to state protection, 18 have occurred in the past year since the national economy began its downward slide.

As more local governments disband their police forces and turn to the state for enforcement, lawmakers and others have grown worried that the state police could face a manpower shortage. In Harrisburg, a bill under consideration as part of the 2009 budget would require municipalities without local police to pay a fee for state protection. Currently, no extra money is required when state patrols fill in on the local level. Community leaders, however, say that the extra cost is unfair, extending their already-stretched budgets even further and paying extra for a police force that is already funded through their tax dollars.

A service fee for state police

Some municipalities that require state police protection have small budgets; their residents are lower income, and they don’t have enough tax revenue in their government coffers to support a local police force. Other municipalities choose not to have police, even though they could afford them.

State Sen. Sean Logan of Plum Township in Venango County suggests that the latter group is creating a problem. In a Pittsburgh Tribune-Review interview, Sen. Logan points to Hempfield in Westmoreland County. There, the median household income in 2007 was $53,572, which tops the state median by over $5,000. Yet Hempfield does not have a local police force.

“I think there is inherently something wrong with that,” said Sen. Logan. “They are able to pay for a police force. They just don't want to.”

As more municipalities decide to dissolve their local police, the state police become overwhelmed as they are forced to take on routine duties of a municipal force rather than focusing on their core duties: broader investigations and traffic control on state roads and highways.

“We're moving resources around to address the demand, but the bottom line is if this keeps going like it has been going, it's going to start to hurt,” State Police Commissioner Frank Pawlowski said in a Patriot-News interview.

Pawlowski backs a bill proposed by Rep. John Pallone of New Kensington and supported by Gov. Ed Rendell - House Bill 2563 - that would create a State Police Protection Fee. The legislation would require communities with more than 10,000 residents and without police to pay for state patrols at the rate of $100 per resident. Pallone estimates that the fee would generate $40 million, allowing the state to hire 4,000 more troopers to cover the shortage.

Some residents like this plan; in a discussion board on the Patriot-News website, they criticized police force-free municipalities as “riding the coattails of every taxpayer in the commonwealth” and called Pallone’s proposal a step towards balancing the scales of contributions made versus services used.

Double-taxing and compromise

Rep. Pallone’s bill is not favored by the local leaders who are affected, however. The communities without police forces argue that the reason for dissolving them is to save money; charging them extra for state protection defeats the purpose.

“There's absolutely no way we could do it without raising taxes,” said Bryan Gembusia, chairman of the South Middleton Township Board of Supervisors in Cumberland County, in a Patriot-News interview. His township does not have local police. “Any municipality asked to raise that type of capital would be better served if they start their own force.”

Gembusia also said paying for state police is the same thing as double-taxing residents; state taxes already fund the state police, he argues, so local taxes should not go toward the same thing. He suggests that if the state absolutely must charge municipalities for state police protection, it should be done on a case-by-case basis. In other words, a township would only pay the state police when they are called in for an incident, rather than paying an annual fee when relatively little crime might occur in a year.

Sen. Logan is working on a bill that would do something along those lines; his idea is to create a sliding scale by which communities would pay the state policed based on the constraints of their own budget. For instance, a local government already struggling to fund basic services like trash pickup or street maintenance would pay less than a community that simply chooses not to have local police in order to stockpile money for construction projects.

Commissioner Pawlowski has suggested yet another approach. He told the Patriot-News that it might be easier to allow money generated from state police citations (fines) to return entirely to state coffers. Right now, the state police get half, and the municipalities where the citations were written get half. However, this could still be a problem given the  toll that troubled economy is taking on local budgets.

“It's tough because what you are asking us to do is shift the burden to somebody else,” Pawlowski said. “And honestly speaking, everybody's broke out there.”

What do you think?

How should the state police handle communities without local police? Should they patrol them at no extra charge? Should they assess local municipalities a flat annual fee, as Rep. Pallone proposes? Should they charge them on a sliding scale based on ability to pay, as Sen. Logan suggests? Should municipalities only be charged when the state police have to visit, as Supervisor Gembusia says? Or should the difference be made up through Commissioner Pawlowski’s idea of changes in citation fee revenues? Join the discussion and let us know what you think!
Join the Discussion
 
 
 
limited to 2000 characters including spaces  



Thank you for commenting.
Your comment is awaiting approval.
Click here to view all Speak Outs
Comments
11/12/2016
Port Orange, FL
Brandon
VVS
Local governments shouldn't have to pay for police protection. The police are part of the local government, so the protection should be included

5/14/2016
Deltona/FL
Miesha Harden
Hristakopouloos/Pine Ridge High School
Ever community needs police there. Without them it will be complete caps. For the communities without police I fell the state should hire police to be there. I agree mostly with Gembusia

5/7/2016
ormond beach, florida
john scotti
Hristakopouloos/seabreeze virtual
I think that the fee is a great idea because 100 dollars per person isn't very bad at all and the price to pay would probably be much worse if the tax had to be reformed in order to create more revenue to fund police. But towns that can afford afford to pay for police should be forced to because they're are just making it even harder on the stater police who are trying to help the towns who really need them

5/7/2016
Deltona
Derreasha
Hristakopouloos/Government
Without an established public law enforcement, citizens will feel as if they can make their own rules. Crime rates may increase substantially without the police and justice cannot be ensured.

5/4/2016
Ormond beach, FL 32174
Amanda pool
Hristakopouloos\mainland high
All local governments need police force.without police the crime will go up.they need to come to an equal agreement to fund police officers.there are definitely a shortage of polce officers,I think they deserve a higher pay for risking their lives everyday.protecting citizens and keeping crime down should be a priority

4/28/2016
Deltona/FL
Madeline
Hristakopouloos/Virtual
I think the police force is necessary to keep crime rates down. I don't think it is unreasonable to tax the citizens to pay for the police force. The police should not have to meet a quota for tickets given just to keep the police force funded.

4/22/2016
Daytona Beach/ FL
Taylor
Hristakopoulos/Virtual Spruce Creek High
Local governments need to have police departments. The city/town and the citizens should both have to split a fee for the state police department to be able to come and help. The state and local police departments should also work together to help make their force grow so you get more protection and don’t have to pay as much of the fee if the local force is combined with the state.

3/31/2016
Deland/FL
Sabrina
Hristakopouious/VirtualDelandHigh
I agree with Gembusia, i feel that it will save a lot of money, and would better solve this terrible situation. No one is really losing out on much and this can maybe lower incident rates also.

3/21/2016
Daytona Beach, Florida
Steven
Hristakopouious/Virtual Seabreeze
If local governments are struggling to pay for police protection, there should be a higher form of government such as the state or federal government to subsidize what they cannot pay. After all, it's the government's duty as a whole to ensure domestic tranquility.

2/29/2016
New smyrna Beach, FL
Ray
Hristakopouious/Virtual NSBHS
I feel it would fair to tax rather than give out tickets. Police are necessary but I wouldn't want them to have to meet quotas.

2/9/2016
DELAND
GABI
H
a police force is necessary in order to make sure citizens are being protected and that crime is not wide sprung.

3/25/2013
CT
Amanda
Galante
The State should help the local governments with paying for police protection. Not only are the people who work around us losing jobs, but that also means that the states have to cover a bigger surrounding. The local police department has the time to come into schools and safeguard them. They can come in and talk to the elementary students about drugs. If the government does not help fund the police department, then it will disband. I feel that more crime may happen as criminals see that there are fewer cops on the streets to stop them. Recently in our town, they have decided to get rid of the local dispatch (which is part of the police force). Those people are losing their jobs. They also have the authority to take someone elses job who is under them, such as animal control or the DARE officers. If the government would help fund the police forces, then we would not be having this problem.

10/16/2012
Ledyard/CT
Chris G.
Mr. Galante/ Ledyard High School
Local governments shouldn’t discontinue their own police departments; they should collaborate with the state police to form a larger and better-funded force. By leaving all of the police work up to the state police, towns may run the risk of leaving themselves undefended if the state police force becomes short-staffed. However, the state police can’t help everyone for free. The best way to keep protection for citizens but to balance budget costs is to have the town and the citizens pay a certain fee to have the state police help patrol and such. By paying this fee, the state police department doesn’t completely lose its funding, and the towns can get more help with protection without being entirely dependent on the state police. Local governments can and should set up a system involving the partnership of state and local police forces to maximize the amount of police coverage and protection they can get out of the limited budget many towns now face.

11/10/2010

Morgan
Springfield Highschool, Springfield, Pa
I think that it is wrong for local governments to break up their police forces and for them to turn to the state for protection. I think this is a terrible idea because protection is the most important thing for everyone,people like to know that they are safe and that they have some one to help them if they need help at all times. I also do not think that it is right for people to have to pay taxes or a charge to have policemen in their cities or communities, because having a police force in your community should be a necessity, besides people already have to pay so many other taxes it is unfair make them have to pay more. In conclusion I think that Police forces should be something that is funded by the government not by citizen because safety always comes first, other wise the towns or cities with out police forces will be in mayhem.

10/28/2009

Gabe
Stephen A. Douglas High, Philadelphia, PA
I think that anything that will help our State Police maintain an exceptional number of people will benefit us. There can be problems in any part of the community and we need to be able to report any danger that can occur in our neighborhood. It's very important that we try to help bring money to them so they can continue to do their job.

9/23/2009

Patrick R (frankPD5)
Northeast High school, Philadelphia PA
I think that there should be a special tax that funds money for police and fire men. These are two of the most important careers. I dont think its far for them to get there job and hours cut.These are the people who protect us. a small tax that everyone in the state would have to pay. the money earned from the tax should then be divided by need to each city.I dont know if my way would be effective but i know anything is better than these people losing there jobs.

6/5/2009

Thott
Trinity, Washington,PA
Troubled economic area typically have a higher higher crime rate. a police force is one of the necessities that the area needs. The government needs to keep up with the local police or having a higher influence of the state police in the area

5/27/2009

Greg B
Trinity high school, washington, PA
The police force is a necessity for a city to have. No matter how bad the economy is there has to be a force to control the people and keep the crime down no mattter how it is payed for.

5/27/2009

Misber
THS, WashPA
There should be a county police force composed of one head captain that would organize those places that do have police and spread things around for those who do not. Everyone would be paid the same. All townships would be charged the for protection.

5/26/2009

Derek
Trinity, Washington
Well they dont really have any choice they have to pay for them either way in a troubled economy or not so they should just find a way on their own.

5/26/2009

Troy
Trinity High School, washington pa
All communities need local police. These police should be assessed a flat annual fee.

5/26/2009

Megan B.
Trinity High School, Washington PA
All cops should be State cops they just happen to be assigned to different areas. They make a pre determined fee and get paid based on the hours they work.

5/19/2009

Valient Pd 5
Northeast , Philadelphia
That should be out of the question. How should state police handle communities without local police. The local police can barely keep our communities crime rate down and there are many police stations located in our area. We should just leave it as it is before they create more confusion then it already is. Instead of taking local police away how about you add more. Ofcourse it will cost more but shouldnt the protection of our communities come first. Cost for more officers x amount of $, Happy proteceted communities priceless!

4/20/2009

Riorge A
Northeast High School, Philadelphia,Pa
Well, in my opinion the local gov't needs to find some kind of solution to this problem , because it is very important that we have a strong police force in order to protect and secure the people. Without police protection things will go extremely sour soon. And especially in this economic situation that the whole country is facing .

3/31/2009

Sara H.
Springfield High, Springfield
I think a police force is very important in each town. It is shocking that in 65 municipalities, locally managed law enforcement has stopped due to the tough economy in our nation. In areas where the municipal police forces are ending, the state police are needed to step in and take over both duties and I don’t think that is fair for the state police to have to handle all the responsibilities. Rep. John Pallone’s House Bill 2563 is a way for the households with a greater income to help pay towards hiring more state troopers to aid in the loss of local police officers, but I agree with Sen. Logan and Bryan Gembusia about how state taxes already fund the state police, so why should some of our local taxes now go to the same thing? I like the idea of paying for a police force on a case-by-case basis. This makes more sense in a time of economic trouble.

3/31/2009

Jamal E
Springfield High School, Springfield
I feel that police protection is extremely important in any state of economy. I would say that the government should spend more money on police protection in inner cities. Living in Springfield most of the laws broken revolve around underage drinking or driving under the influence. In inner cities police officers have to worry about drug dealers and corruption within there own department. Today’s society no longer shows the same respect to officers as done in the past. Officers are getting shot on duty and I feel the state of our economy is a huge reason for this increase in violence. Police protection is always needed but in this current economy help is needed more than ever.

3/19/2009

Jennifer M.Pd 5
NortheastHigh School, PhiLa/PA
I know that were suffering from are bad economy and everthing but less money for police protcetion means less protection for us as the individuals who need the protection from the police. In my opinion I beileve theres some way that the local government could pay for police protection because there are alot of places in are communities that need the protection.

3/18/2009

Kimberly M. pd 5
Northeast HS, Phila/Pa
No matter what, every area should have proper poilce enforcement. After all they are the ones that protect and keep us safe. However, state police officers cannot afford to cover the entire Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The federal goverment should step in and give some money towards the community that needs officers. And how the ecomony is heading right now, a sliding scale payment fee might be neccessary to help get officers to patrol those certain areas once in a while.

3/17/2009

Jurida R 2nd Period
NEHS, Philadelphia PA
This issues should be view very carefully especially with how our economy is going. I think that the people already pay for police funds in the taxes but I think that the community should pay at least some time of fee. Communities are not all the same, some are worst then others, and there should be police protection. As well I don’t think they should be shortages on police forces. The citizens need to feel they are safe in their communities, and maybe some people are willing to pay for it.

3/17/2009

ilva l. pd.2
NEHS, Philadelphia, PA
I believe that police is most important in the environment. The people need to be secured and they also need a nice environment. If we are going to have less police in the city, there are going to be more crimes and the city is going to be more damaged. And then, we are going to spend more money on fixing the city. Therefore, I believe that we should not cut them short because they are really important in our city. So, the more police we have, the better it will be, however, we need most of the police on the areas were crime are mostly occurred.

3/15/2009

Tatiana Pd 2
NEHS , Phila, Pa
All communities are different. Some need frequent police outlook while others don’t, but every citizen does have the right to feel secure. I think that it all comes to how rich or poor a community is. Communities should be charged depending on the population and crime rate. Federal funding is needed because not everyone will be able to pay for such security. Local police officers should be around the areas that most need it and not depend too much on state police unless necessary.

3/14/2009

Jessica B /pd5
northeast highschool, philadelphia
Even though times are hard right now, I feel like the police are the last group of people that shuold be cut short of their money. If the goverment has to protect them then so be it. To me, the police deserve it all because they do everything they can to protect us. What ever idea they come up eith to give them money, the police force should get it all.

3/12/2009

Mabinty K. Pd.5
NEHS, Philadelphia, PA
I think that extra funding for the protection of police is needed but the communities shouldn't have to pay for services. State and local police should patrol the communities without extra pay. Some communities really need the extra protection so if they say that money is needed before they can be provided with protection then there is no need for the police. What the point of joining the police force if you can't help sometimes without being paid extra? I also think that they can charge patrol based on the ability to pay because that way it almost like a win win situation.

3/12/2009

Samantha S. 2nd per
Northeast HS, Philadelphia
I think that the cities should not rely on the state police. I think that they should put more money into the local police. If it is easier to use the state police, then the cities should help pay for the state police.

3/11/2009

Alexanda P. pd.2
NEHS, Philadelphia
I think that the state police should patrol communities without local police based on the community's ability to pay. If a community can only afford to pay a certain amount of money, they should be allowed to pay only that amount. It is understandable that the state police don't want to work for free, who does? Therefore, I believe the smartest thing to do right now is to allow communities without a local police force to pay the state police according to what they can afford.

3/11/2009

Valient
Northeast High School, Philadelphia, PA
My opinion on this situation is that local government should be who pays for police protection. Although the economy is suffering a major depression, governtment shouldn't lose sight of whats important. Without police protection it will lead our communities to an even more worse time. Less money, more violence, crime and overall more murders. With the a decrease in authority in an already crucial city will only lead to disaster. Over what, money? Personally i think that it is a possible way for the government to find money to finance out state police, and that is what should be done.

3/10/2009

Delgr Y. Pd 2
Northeast High School, Philadelphia
Since the people already fund state police through taxes, I think that the state police should patrol communities at least once in a while, but for every time they are called out the community should have to pay a fee.

3/10/2009

Ashely V. Pd2
Northeast High, Phila, PA
I think the state police should cover be doing something. They can cover and watch the areas that don't have local police. If they are getting paid in general to already be a police officer then why should it matter where they are at. I don't think anyone should have to pay for services that should be provided. A lot of citizens already don't think the police do anything or help, and with all these cuts even more people feel like that. They chose the profession! It's either do you job or don't. These are very bad times to be trying to get more pay out of the services that you are supposed to provide when there's no money to give. I think the state police should patrol without any extra pay. Now if they are not receiving pay at this moment, then sure try and pull money out and pay them.

3/9/2009

Raven T.PDF5
NEHS, Phila.,PA
I think the leaders of the police force should look for ways to keep people in the local police forces such as giving certain benefits to those who are apart of the local police force.

3/7/2009

Ricky S. pd2
NEHS, Phila,PA
I think the local government needs to pay for police protection even though the economy is troubled. But state police should charge the communities whenever there is an incident that the state police have to come out. I think that would be a good idea because then if they aren’t that many calls then they don’t have to go out as much and they should have to pay as much money.

3/7/2009

Ricky S. pd2
NEHS, Phila,PA
I think the local government needs to pay for police protection even though the economy is troubled. But state police should charge the communities whenever there is an incident that the state police have to come out. I think that would be a good idea because then if they aren’t that many calls then they don’t have to go out as much and they should have to pay as much money.

3/6/2009

Martin S
SJHS, Stroudsburg PA
I think they should enforce the law there just as much as anywhere else. I think they should just make the people in that area pay a little extra toward their taxes to go for the state police. I like Sen. Logan’s idea and think it would work out well.

3/6/2009

Will
SJHS, Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania
The state police should keep patrolling these areas until the local government starts up a local police force to keep these areas safe. No the people should have to pay a tax to keep the police patrolling, after all the police need to be paid somehow and patrolling extra areas should get them paid more.

3/6/2009

James
Stroudsburg jr. high, stroudsburg
The state police can handle communities without local police by either asking the government to put a police station in or they can watch over the communities by themselves. No, the people should pay taxes for their help because the state police has bigger stuff to worry about then a little community so their giving up their time to help the community. Yes, because it helps the community. No cause its cost to much. No only if the state police have to do something. Yes.

3/6/2009

Laura H.
Stroudsburg Junior High, Stroudsburg, PA
I think that local areas without their own police force should not be permitted to have the state police fill in for them free of charge. The money to stretch these police to cover the increasing towns who are dropping local police forces cannot come out of thin air. However, I do agree that there should be some discretion with this. Towns who can afford to have a local police force but simply choose not to should have to pay this extra tax. However, smaller towns that simply cannot afford to have a local police force should be allowed to have the state police fill in. I think that it would make the most sense to charge the communities on a case by case basis, why should the taxpayers have to pay more when they aren’t getting more services?

3/6/2009

Yianni
S.J.H.S, Stroudsburg, PA
The local government needs to pay for police protection for several reasons. Even though there are some small townships, there are still some crimes that happen in them. A police officer is supposed to protect and enslave criminals. What could be done about not having police protection is to have citizens on patrol. There could be some citizens with experience who could take up the police protection to help out and protect some of the small townships or large townships with no protection at all.

3/6/2009

patrick a
SJHS, stroudsburg
I think the state police should charge the communities whenever there is an incident that the state police have to come out. I think that would be a good idea because then if they aren’t that many calls then they don’t have to go out as much and they should have to pay as much money.

3/6/2009

Timmy K.
SJHS, Stroudsburg PA
The local government needs to pay for police protection even though the economy is troubled. Places with zero local police forces can be a very troubled place. Even though some of these places are not overly populated, people can get away with things that they may not be able to get away with in a place with a local police. Citizens safety is the single most important thing that state governments and the national government need to take care of. So even though it may cost more in the short run, in the long run it will secure the safety of citizens so it is very important.

3/6/2009

JC
Stroudsburg, Stroudsburg PA
States police should still patrol communities without local police. The state police should charge them a slightly extra to patrol the area. They should assess local municipalities. The municipalities should only be paid when the police have to visit because they shouldn’t have to pay if they aren’t doing anything. The difference should not be made up by citation revenues.

3/6/2009

Josh
SJHS, Pennsylvania
I think that the state police should handle areas without local police by patrolling those areas. I don’t think they should give them an extra charge for patrolling because it wouldn’t be fair to them because they’re the ones without local police. Although they shouldn’t be charged for the state police patrolling the area, I think they should charge them for every incident that occurs within the area.

3/6/2009

Hannah
Stroudsburg Jr. High School, Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania
I think the state police should handle communities without local police by going with the proposition that Supervisor Gembusia had. He said that there should only be a fee when and incident happens. Sometimes in these local communities there are relatively low crime rates. I also think that if there are no police patrolling the area it gives free reign for criminals to get away with things. The state police already get paid by the state so if the state police provide policeman to patrol it should be for a good cause and money shouldn’t be a big deal. Despite that I do still think that people should pay extra on taxes when a huge incident or crime occurs because it’s sort of like giving back to those that vouch to protect these local communities.

3/6/2009

Donnie
sjhs, Pa
I think that the state police should take a couple of units and go make sure nothing bad happen to the little towns. Yes, because they already watching us and they are getting paid for doing it so the should have no problem patrolling the area for free. I don’t know, because these officers are risking their life to go and protect a different town.

3/6/2009

Josh
SJHS, Pennsylvania
I think that the state police should handle areas without local police by patrolling those areas. I don’t think they should give them an extra charge for patrolling because it wouldn’t be fair to them because they’re the ones without local police. Although they shouldn’t be charged for the state police patrolling the area, I think they should charge them for every incident that occurs within the area.

3/6/2009

Eliseo
SJHS, Stroudsburg PA
I believe that local counties and even small towns should have their own police force. The residents should enlist and volunteer to patrol and safeguard their own communities. The state government has to be a bit more conservative in this recession. Instead of thinning an already slim budget, the state can use the money for other important things.

3/6/2009

Nikolas
Stroudsburg JH, PA
I think that the solution should be a mixture of two ideas. The first is to only have the residents pay when the state police have to visit their township. I live in Hamilton Township, and there’s a low population out there. There is also a low crime rate, so charging the whole township a standard fee, wouldn’t be fair. When there is a fee, you should charge the township based on the average income and. A low income area wouldn’t do very well if you broke their banks every time police went out there.

3/6/2009

Josh
SJHS, Pennsylvania
I think that the state police should handle areas without local police by patrolling those areas. I don’t think they should give them an extra charge for patrolling because it wouldn’t be fair to them because they’re the ones without local police. Although they shouldn’t be charged for the state police patrolling the area, I think they should charge them for every incident that occurs within the area.

3/6/2009

Kevin S.
Stroudsburg JHS, Stroudsburg PA
The state police should be able to handle different communities without the local police. Because the local police doesn’t fall into the all of the jurisdiction of all of Pennsylvania like the state police does, it would be easier to add local police to the state police department. The police officers should be paid for patrolling the area because they would be keeping the community safe. The idea of charging municipalities a flat annual fee is a good idea because then the tax payers wouldn’t have to pay for it out of their own pockets, it would come out from the taxes from their income. The municipalities should be charged every day that they patrol much like a salary because if people don’t require the state police, no money would fund the project and they would later have to shut down. I think for lower class Pennsylvanians who don’t have the ability to pay for the assistance of the state police.

3/6/2009

Kaila D.
SJHS, Stroudsburg
I think that the state police should handle communities without local police by, first hiring more people, but since there isn’t enough money for local police; the state police should still handle the communities. I know many people disagree, but I believe that there should be an extra, small tax that is paid by communities that don’t have the police. After all, police are a necessity and should be kept in all communities. I think the taxes should incorporate that extra charge, they have to watch over very big areas and it takes a lot of work to do that, not to mention, there could be a lot of crime in certain areas that don’t have the local police. I think that they should be paid as long they are working; I think that when they do have to visit, they should receive extra money. It’s also a good idea though, to incorporate some of the money earned from the police citations into their pay, or the savings towards more local police.

3/6/2009

Amneris H.
NEHS. SSADV PD. 5, Philadelphia, PA
During critical economic periods such as the one our nation is experiencing, this situation must be dealt with carefully as our communities cannot be left exposed or unprotected. I believe local governments should have police forces as it is important in keeping order and providing safety for communities. Local governments should decide on these matters cautiously and put more important necessities first. If for any reason a local government can absolutely not afford a police force, which they should be paying for with individual's hard earned money... taxes, the state should provide protection at a sliding scale fee according to the local government's ability to pay. However, this should be done in a reasonable manner in which our State force does not experience shortages as well.

3/6/2009

Amneris H.
NEHS. SSADV PD. 5, Philadelphia, PA
During critical economic periods such as the one our nation is experiencing, this situation must be dealt with carefully as our communities cannot be left exposed or unprotected. I believe local governments should have police forces as it is important in keeping order and providing safety for communities. Local governments should decide on these matters cautiously and put more important necessities first. If for any reason a local government can absolutely not afford a police force, which they should be paying for with individual's hard earned money... taxes, the state should provide protection at a sliding scale fee according to the local government's ability to pay. However, this should be done in a reasonable manner in which our State force does not experience shortages as well.

3/6/2009

Delgr Y. Pd. 2
Northeast High School, Philadelphia
I think that since the communities already fund them through taxes, the state police should be patrolling there regularly. However, for every time they are called out the community should have to pay a reasonable fee for their assistance.

3/5/2009

Susmitha T. PD.5
Northeast High school, Philadelphia PA
Minimizing the wages of police can increase growth of criminal population because the chance of officers getting a compromise with criminals to balance their deficits, cannot be ignored. State police is very often unaware of the local developments of inhabitants in the community. No attempt from the part of the government to be made to demotivate the sinciere and effective functioning of police forces (9-1-1) existing at present. The safety and security of public and politicians are purely governed due to their existence. In the troubled economy like this it can be enforced a sliding scale based on ability to pay.

2/28/2009

Kurt N pd.2
Northeast High School, Phila. PA
I think that it is hard to charge municipalities that decided to rely on the state police for their only source of protection, but it needs to be done. The state police cannot afford to cover the entire Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The money needs to come from somewhere. Even though the municipalities are really that poor their citizens still deserve the right to be safe. For this reason, some money should come from the federal government. One way to fund the state police might be to charge the municipalities for each time they are summoned. There also must be some type of payment for the amount of state police patrolling that is needed in that area. A sliding scale payment fee might be appropriate for basic patrolling with an added fee for each 911 call responded to.

Related News
2/20/2009
Should towns pay protection money?
The Patriot-News

Related Resources
Share