Letter to the editor: No free ride on police protection | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: No free ride on police protection

An open letter to Sen. Don White, Rep. Jeff Pyle and fiscally responsible legislators:

I was pleased to read the letters “Hempfield should share casino wealth” (Dec. 23, TribLIVE) and “Hempfield needs police” (Jan. 18, TribLIVE). I request that you require the $25 per capita tax that Gov. Tom Wolf suggested to subsidize the Pennsylvania State Police, who provide police protection in municipalities where a local police department is not paid for by its own residents.

I was quite surprised to hear that for my Kiskiminetas Township and any other township that has a police department paid with local residents’ taxes, police are required to provide free police service protection to other local areas without a paid police department, if state police are not going to show up.

There is no compensation to replace the tax dollars used to take care of another municipality’s problems, because areas where people have their own police do not get subsidized by those using the services. Why should this be happening? Hempfield and others are getting a free ride if legislators and the governor continue to allow this.

Stop allowing it now. Get this changed in the 2019-20 budget.

Regina Liermann

Kiskiminetas


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.