Published: November 08, 2009 11:03 pm      

Area lawmakers wary of state police levy

JOHNSTOWN — An initiative to charge Pennsylvania municipalities that do not have full-time local police departments and rely on state police – entirely or partially – appears to have stalled amid the state budget brouhaha of recent months, but the author of House Bill 1500 says he is not giving up.

“It got lost in the shuffle of the budget, but it will now start to percolate again,” state Rep. Mike Sturla, D-Lancaster who wrote the bill. “It’s not dead.”

Termed the Pennsylvania State Police Municipal Patrol Services Act, Sturla wants to charge municipalities relying on state police for protection a per capita fee of $52 the first year after enactment, $104 for the second year and $156 for the third and subsequent years.

That fee would apply only to those that rely solely on state police; a lesser fee would be charged for those municipalities with part-time police departments.

“Initially, people said I was doing this to fill the budget. But it’s a fairness issue,” Sturla said in an interview with The Tribune-Democrat. “Seventy-five percent of the population have municipal police. If they have even part-time departments, they realize the need.”

The bill passed the state Government Committee by one vote and with no Republican support. It was referred to the Appropriations Committee, where it remains, and it could sit indefinitely, said state Rep. Carl Metzger, R-Berlin, who opposes the measure.

“We already pay for police protection through our state taxes,” said Metzger.

“I don’t think there is a single municipality in my district that can afford this. People can’t afford to heat their homes.”

State Sen. John Wozniak, D-Westmont, understands Sturla’s concern about municipalities such as Hempfield Township, Westmoreland County, which has a population of 40,000 and no local police department.

“There’s a number of them throughout the state, in the large urban areas, and it’s not right,” Wozniak said.

But there has to be a break point on the population, he said.

“Fair is fair, but where do we set the line?” Wozniak said.

This latest bill to charge for state police on a per resident basis is one of a number introduced during the past

15 years, including an earlier one by Sturla and one by Gov. Tom Ridge.

The impact on small communities with already insufficient tax bases has impeded any type of broad support, said legislators from this region.

“I don’t think that bill has much chance of making it onto the House floor,” said state Rep. Gary Haluska,

D-Patton. “For smaller townships, the price they would pay exceeds their budgets.”

State Rep. Frank Burns, D-East Taylor Township, agrees that communities such as Hempfield Township are keeping their property taxes low while the rest of the state is paying for its police patrols. But hitting small, rural municipalities where little service is required with huge bills is equally unfair.

“I would have a hard time putting it on some of the small townships in this region,” Burns said.

Sturla’s bill has opened a discussion on local police service in northern Cambria County, where Hastings, Carrolltown, Patton and Northern Cambria boroughs are considering a study on sharing services.

“I applaud municipalities who say they want to get their act together and start developing better police departments,” Sturla said of the northern Cambria County talks.