Ford City's police recommendation: Cops or not?
If you're a Ford City resident who wants to maintain a police force in the borough, now would be the time to start attending council meetings and letting your voice be heard.
There was a rumor in June that the police department would be disbanded. In July the rumor became a police committee recommendation. Sometime soon, the council is likely to vote on whether to accept the recommendation and move forward with eliminating its force of two full-time and about a dozen part-time officers.
It is a recommendation rooted in finances. Maintaining a police force is costly, and Ford City officials no longer think it is an affordable expense. The borough needs a new water plant. It has aging water pipes, wells and pump stations in need of repair. And it has a nearly $600,000 federal debt for defaulting on a grant received for economic development years ago.
It is easy to see that the borough needs money. It is tougher to determine whether disbanding the police department is the right way to get it.
The three members of the council who make up the borough's police committee think so. Councilman Gene Banks and Mayor Marc Mantini believe disbanding the force would lead to more crime. But all council members seem to agree that they want public input before taking any action.
The council meets 6 p.m. Monday at the Ford City Public Library. If you have an opinion about eliminating the police force, this is the place you need to be. The council wants to know what you think.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- The Thursday wrap
- State of Corruption: Jim Short’s plea
- Wilmerding’s gamble
- U.N. Watch: More propaganda
- Sunday pops
- The DHS crackdown
- Thou shalt not parse the First: The Connellsville Ten Commandments decision
- The Box
- Trumpeting ObamaCare: The Medicaid factor
- Hogtying a terrorist: Heroes step up
- The Solyndra scandal: Government culpability