Seriously?

"Seriously?"  That is my question to the Township Council. 

It's often been said, "Desperate times lead to desperate measures."  Well, in this case, I think a few people have gotten it a bit mixed up.

These are difficult times, but not desperate times, and as a community we should never allow our Township's fiscal well-being to deteriorate to a point where public safety is viewed as dispensible.

I have said it before and I will say it again, "Public safety is the interest of the community."  Or in case those words aren't clear:  Public safety is the interest, a priority interest, of voters and taxpayers in this Township.  The people elected and sworn to oversee the administration of the Township need to remember that they are not to replace the judgment of the voters with their own judgment.  They should be representing the priorities and interests of the community that elected them, not the special interests of some or the politically comfortable interests of themselves.

Let's place this proposal into a real life context.  Lawrence Township has just over 60 police officers.  The elimination of five positions would bring the number to under 60.  Imagine that!  As Officer Lee noted in his testimony before Council last week, as reported by The Patch, the force at one point numbered approximately 70.  So imagine that as the population of Lawrence Township has grown, the Police Department -- the force of officers who protect us around the clock daily -- has been reduced. 

The Township is quick to point out (and I will so note for accuracy) that there won't be five layoffs -- one position is currently vacant due (I believe) due to a previous retirement and one position is the position is held by the Deputy Chief (recently named as a co-defendant in a federal lawsuit filed by several officers against the Township), so that leaves "only" three patrol positions to be eliminated. 

Let's think about that for a minute.  Officer Lee testified that typically there are six officers patrolling the Township at a given moment with four being out in the field.  So, I view, as an illustration, the elimination of three patrol positions as potentially reducing one officer per shift (Yes, Officer Lee noted that probably detectives would be reassigned to patrol duties, but that is not my point right now).  The point is there is a material and tangible impact in the reduction of force, a reduction that is nearly 10 percent of the current police force!  Seriously?

The community here in Lawrence Township has been fortunate to have a proactive professional public safety/law enforcement force.  Yet Lawrence Township is not a gated community so, unfortunately, crime and emergencies happen, and as readers are well aware, crime has increased lately and even officers have found themselves in high risk dangerous situations requiring back up because of the nature of the individuals they have encountered in performing their duties.  So I ask again, Seriously?

There's been reference to the recent "Matrix Study" in which a paid consultant found, in their professional opinion, that the police department at its current level is appropriately sized.  But I think we need to be realistic -- such a finding assumes a "normal day."  But what happens when a serious emergency occurs, requiring increased police involvement?  Well, I can tell you something I learned from personal experience.  Last summer, late one night, I heard a teenage girl screaming for help in the dark recreational areas in our community so I called the Police Department and asked them to follow up.  After some time passed, I heard two officers walk through my property and make their way to the area from which the screams had come.  When I looked out my window I saw the two cruisers and realized that these were West Windsor police officers.  Later on, I found out the reason why another municipality's police had responded to my call in Lawrence Township -- there had been an armed robbery in Lawrence Township which required "all hands on deck." 

Through an existing mutual aid agreement, my call that night was answered by professional patrolmen, but I think it's not quite the same as having officers who know the geography of the development respond and know the exact location where the problem may have been.  I also wonder, Is there a cost to taxpayers when police officers (or other emergency personnel) respond through a mutual aid agreement? If so, shouldn't we anticipate an increase in these mutual aid calls and shouldn't we consider whether we are just shifting the expense from one column to another?

So, Seriously?  The Township keeps noting that it's the 2 percent tax cap that is the problem.  But let's be honest:  The tax cap is NOT the problem; the costs of administering this Township and the ways in which Council in recent years in particular have made the more comfortable choices such as taking from the surplus/reserve funds are the problems. 

In all these budget discussions, there has been reference to preserving the quality of life in Lawrence.  This point in particular was made regarding potential cuts in or the addition or increase in user fees for recreation department programs.  So, Seriously, Councilmembers, you see laying off cops as the way to preserve the quality of life in Lawrence Township?

Seriously?