Would you be in favor of a "regional" police force in the South Hills?
Tags:
1. Yes, if it cut my tax burden.
18% (18 votes)
2. Yes, if public safety was improved as a result.
17% (17 votes)
3. Yes, only if it cut taxes "and" improved public safety.
42% (43 votes)
4. No, I would never support the merger of police epartments.
24% (24 votes)
Total votes: 102
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer friendly version
- send to friend
- 1077 reads
We all can wish for number 3, but the fact remains that this will NEVER happen. Mergers and regionalism are terrible mistakes, forever removing citizen input from the mix. Those who think otherwise are naive.
Well it already works pretty well with the North Hills Regional Dept. Then look to the Mon Valley where some of part time police won't take reports or even get out of their cars to investigate possible crimes.
- I don't think I would either if I was being paid $10 - $12.00 an hour with the possibility of being shot... is this public safety, and this is the case in many communities.
How many communities have the resources they need? - training, equipment, and detectives to do investigative work?
118 police departments in one county, and with the independent forces added in the number is around 140!
It will only make sense to other communities to have Brentwood merge with them if Brentwood can make it worth their while. That means in dollars and cents (and common sense). The other communites still have their own policing to do so their costs are somewhat fixed. Taking on Brentwood would not significantly alter their costs. And remember that it would not be a merger of equals.
It's very clear that if three, five, or even more communities would combine to provide public safety, the size of the new force would be much smaller than all of the individual forces standing alone. Not that there would have to be a mass lay-off, retirements could be encouraged through incentive packages and those with little or no seniority could be given buy-out packages.
Training, equipment, and comprehensive services could be provided to all communities in a uniform manner.
I envision the county eventually forming "regional" police departments that will offer public safety to communities at a greatly reduced cost compared to individual community policing, - similar to the 911 service.
It would be a hard deal to pass up considering the financial challenges that currently abound, and the fact that public safety runs 50%-60% of the standard municipal budget.
Communities can simply initiate this process themselves or wait for it to be done for them.
I don't see how the County could force communities to join a County-wide police force as you suggest. Regionalization of services may not have saved tax money as you suggest. Look at the County's examples of regionalized services. The Port Authority is in a shambles, overly costly, and inefficient. County 911 service is constantly over budget in spite of funding from each of us on our telephone and cellphone bills and budget money from the County.
I think what you suggest is nice for discussion, but I think unworkable in the political atmosphere and patronage sytem that runs rampant in all governments and agencies in Allegheny County.
Cat:
The county could not "force" consolidation, what I was suggesting was that they will "offer" police services to communities at a significantly reduced cost than they can do it themselves, as is done with 911 dispatching services, which by the way did produce a "significant" cost savings for municipalities across the county, and continues to function extremely well under Dan Onorato's leadership. Even those who were against it originally eventually recognized the savings to be gained and joined the system in the end. This will probably be the same program with police services. The county will offer to do it at a rate that is much less than what communities currently pay and the service will also be better. In the end those who are against it will see the savings and be forced (in a manner of speaking only, not literally) to take advantage of it.
As to the Port Authority, the "county" doesn't run it. The Port Authority is a separate organization, as is ALCOSAN, and the Airport Authority. Transit systems were created in the 1960s by way of a Federal mandate which bought-out and did away with all private transit companies - (you may remember the Pittsburgh Railways Co. and the Brentwood Bus Co.) - bought out by the Federally mandated "Port Authority Transit System." This was done nationwide to create transit systems that offered good service to "all", especially Blacks whose communities weren't always served very well and in many states they were forced to sit in the back of the buses.
Well this mandate was also designed to prevent competition from the private sector and also designed the funding mechanism to the county authorities in such a way that gives those counties very little leverage and/or flexibility when it comes to negotiating contracts. But this isn't to say that our Port Authority wasn't poorly managed by its boards through the years. It was, and probably has the most generous contracts for their employees of any similar system in the U.S.
Dan Onorato is the first county official who has the position and clout to begin to fix this problem and he is to be given the utmost credit for it. (He appoints the board members.) Dan is "the man" in my eyes, this guy really "gets it" when it comes to keeping the cost of government low, as well as our tax burden.
Now, as to the efficiency of the "county government". County taxes haven't been increased in over 15 years!! And they are still at the level of the significant cut (20%) that was made by the last board of commissioner in 1996!
I challenge you to find any "major" government in the entire United States that can put forth such a record. Keep in mind that the government of Allegheny County is larger than about 15 state governments as well. Rudi Giuliani boasts that he passed the largest tax cut of the 1990s, he didn't, it was done right here in Allegheny County, and that rate is still at the same level!
Allegheny County can fix this inefficient mess of municipal governments if it is done in a "cooperative manner", saves money and improves services (not forced, using carrot and stick approach) - which is the ultimate goal. Brentwood doesn't have to be dissolved, but its police services could be provided in a more efficient manner. If this was the case maybe council could muster up a plan to build that long-awaited "skate park!"
Wesley,
Please don't tell me how efficient county government has been. I've been around long enough to remember that while PROPERTY taxes weren't increased in the past, the game was to increase PROPERTY ASSESSMENTS. That was simply a back-door tax increase. I also know quite a few county workers and they are by no means overworked but they are overpaid.
I've heard the regionalism mumbo-jumbo before. I also don't buy the part about the county not "running" the Port Authority. Since the County has a funding responsibility and appoints board members to the Authority, the County Executive and the former Commissioners had a responsibility to see that it was running efficiently. The former Commissioners failed miserably. It is up to your man, Dan the Tax Man, to fix it. He has talked a lot about it but I'm waiting for him to make good on his rhetoric.
We could go on and on but the Port Authority is not the focus of this poll. Also I am confident that the County Executive is on the right track and will do his best to "fix" the problem...even though he doesn't manage the Port Authority. Dan is my man; I just wish he'd stay with the county for another term before running for Governor.
I realize that this path has been about taxes and consolidation of services,but I am also concerned about where Dan Onorato would stand on Health Care issues for Penna residents.Rendell is making an attempt to provide health care coverage for uninsured or under-insured residents of our state.He has been fighting an uphill battle on this issue.It is an issue that requires every bit as much attention as tax savings and consolidation of services.I wish Dan Onorato would stay in the county for another term so that Rendell can continue what he has started in this area.
CL:
This term is it for the Gov, two terms and his time is up, just like the President. I too support what he has been trying to do and what it means to a many folks who just can't afford quality health care.
Consolidation of services has some good points,but there are some negatives as well.You would have a smaller number of officers covering a larger area,so would response time to calls be longer?Some previous blogs have stated that they don't believe that officers who live outside of the borough are committed to the borough and the residents.The majority of officers with consolidated services would not live in the borough.The residency requirement would not apply here either.Do the areas that have already gone in this direction still provide programs like the DARE program?
It seems to me that the issues that are repeatedly brought up here on this web site would receive less attention than they do now.Community specific concerns would not be addressed in the same manner as they are now.Less officers,larger area.Parking complaints,speeding on specific side streets,and park issues would be even less of a priority.It seems to me that the voice of the people would be lost for certain.
I have never lived in an area with a large consolidated police department.I have always known a borough police department,known the officers,known the Chief.It would be interesting to hear from someone who has lived in one of the areas that has given up their own.
CL:
There is a standard formula which is used to determine the number of "full time" patrol officers required to cover different types of communities and levels of population. (Investigators and S.W.A.T. included as well.)
It's a "science" of sorts. (Your husband I'm sure knows all about it.) The problem is that in many cases some communities are well over that required level and then many (i.e. Mon Valley) can't come close to meeting it. The county would be required to make certain that these required levels were met and maintained for all communities.
It appears that you are very knowledgeable about this issue.As I have stated,I am not.I grew up in a community where you knew all of the officers,knew the police chief.The police chief used to give us "tickets" when we were little-a stick of gum! Can you see that happening today?He would probably be arrested as a child molester.
I understand the formula process,but I can't help but thinking that there is no standard formula for a community keeping its' identity.
CL:
But it's all about dollars and cents now days; unfortunately we live in an expensive competitive world . Binding arbitration has made for mighty expensive police contracts!
I'll never forget the day when I and another kid were fighting on the sidewalk of Brownsville Rd. after school. I was on top and all of a sudden I found myself picked up in mid-air by the hand of Officer Bob Hartshorne. He took us both to the station, made us sit there for a while, lectured us and then let us go without calling our parents! You're right; I wonder what would have happened today...
You are right,it is an expensive world out there.The police contracts are all a part of the cost today.Expensive at times,but necessary to keep salaries in line with what other departments are paying.The people in these jobs have to keep up with the expensive world.
I can picture Bob Hartshorn doing just that.He was a great guy.He represents to me what we cannot go back to- a simplier way of life.
I forgot about the 2 term limit in our state.That would explain the urgency with which he is attacking this issue across party lines.He has been very supportive to the Nurse Practitioners in the state and utilizing them as primary care providers in his plan.He has given us great support in issues with the Penna. Medical Association.In the end,it will benefit those who can't afford health care.I would find it very important that the person who follows him continues this cause.
A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.
-Thomas Jefferson