Arnold must cut police force
Arnold is broke and another property tax increase may start a revolution. At 43.5 mills, we already have the highest tax rate in the Valley.
Things aren't going to change until we get serious about reducing our biggest expense, the police department. Arnold can no longer support its department at its current size.
Our choices are limited:
• reduce the department's size
• combine forces with another neighboring town or two
• hire part-time officers
• disband our department and let the state police provide security.
I wonder why the city council hired a replacement officer for the one who left. This was an opportunity to cut costs.
It appears our neighboring cities have no interest in combining departments. The state made Arnold and New Kensington combine school systems to cut costs — why can't the same occur for police departments?
In 1940, the Arnold police department was half its current size and its fleet was one police car and a motorcycle with sidecar. Uniformed officers often walked the beat. We didn't have the drug and other crime problems of today and judges sent criminals to jail instead of giving them probation or house arrest.
I also have a few words about nepotism. In the last 10 years, former Arnold Mayor John Campbell promoted City Clerk Oscar Doutt's brother, Joe, to police chief. When Joe Doutt retired, Oscar's son, Eric, was promoted to chief. John Pallone, who lost his re-election as a state representative, got hired as New Kensington-Arnold superintendent; his brother, Bob, is president of the school board. Now Arnold Councilwoman Karen Peconi's son, Wesley Biricocchi, is hired as a city police officer. Maybe all of these hirings are not nepotism. However, they sure give the appearance of nepotism.
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.
- Fighting for Ford City II
- Control borders
- Liberals & illegals
- Fighting for Ford City I
- Incumbents’ edge?
- Warming’s evidence clear
- Challenging cops stupid