News from over the weekend (read here and here) highlights the developments in the debate over a proposed fee for state police coverage in municipalities that have no local police and are not part of a multi-municipal police force.  It has divided municipal associations representing different types of municipalities, with townships not in favor and boroughs for.  As noted in a previous blog based on a 2014 report on police consolidation, state law requires cities of the first class (Philly), second class (Pittsburgh) and second class A (Scranton) “to provide police service within their jurisdiction”.  It is optional for all others (third class cities, boroughs, and both classes of townships).

The report noted “the [state police] provides part-time service for those municipalities that have a police department but do not have police on duty 24 hours a day and seven days a week. Collectively, these municipalities comprise 66 percent of the municipalities in the Commonwealth, 82 percent of the land area, and 26 percent of the total population. Based on the 2010 census figures, that equates to approximately 3.3 million residents.”

As the debate continues, one legislator mentioned the possibility about a “…distinction made between communities of differing size” which hearkens back to where the proposal was around a decade ago, when a legislator at the time proposed charging only communities of 10,000 or more residents a fee of $100 per capita.