The first in a series by Cliff Lewis

As Lancaster Township officials iron out the final details of a new police contract with Manheim Township, it may be easy to forget about the most far-reaching and provocative proposal raised during last month’s contract negotiations: The possibility of a consolidated, regional police force in the Lancaster metropolitan area.

The idea of regional police consolidation has existed since as early as the 1940s, when the UK Parliament provided for the consolidation of borough-level police forces into county constabularies. Stateside, in 1967, the President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice released a report that recommended the consolidation of local police departments.

By 2009, a number of larger metropolitan regions have formed consolidated police forces in the United States. Las Vegas, Charlotte, Louisville, and Indianapolis are among those areas that have combined their city and county departments.

Arguments in favor of regionalization lean heavily upon the potential for improved service and public safety enhancements. A consolidated department allows for more time-intensive officer training, which is easily neglected in small, low-staffed departments. Specialized services—such as accident reconstruction and juvenile detective work—can be shared by urban centers with their smaller municipal neighbors. Likewise, a regionalized department offers all parties access to expensive police technology that may not have been otherwise affordable.

An obvious benefit of consolidation is improved coordination. According to a report on regionalization by the Pennsylvania Governor’s Center for Local Government Services, “It is not uncommon within any given area of Pennsylvania for five or six police officers to be investigating a series of criminal offenses all committed by the same person when the investigation could be handled by one officer….Consolidation improves coordination of police efforts.”

Though the potential of regionalization to improve police operations is generally unquestioned, its potential to reduce expenses remains a point of debate. Julie Hill, a spokeswoman for the regionalized Charlotte police department, told the Memphis Commercial Appeal, “I don’t think we ever did it for cost savings.” Police Commissioner Mike Carpenter, an advocate for consolidation in the Memphis area, was quoted as saying, “Anybody trying to sell (a merger) on the basis of cost-savings is not being completely honest about it.”

Ron Stern, a PA local government policy specialist, is convinced that regionalization results in reduced costs. Stern, who specializes as a consultant for police consolidation efforts, told NewsLanc that he never promises first-year savings to the municipalities that he works with; however, he is “99% sure” that overall costs are reduced within 10 years. Stern said that long-term studies have consistently demonstrated a 24%-25% cost reduction.

Local officials will face considerable hurdles should they choose to pursue a regionalized department. From the sensitive opinions of the local masses to the tight State-level restrictions on police officer contracts, the process will not be easy. But, considering the potential benefits of this institutional reform, it may be worth the effort. As Mayor Rick Gray put it, “It’s the way things are going, and it gets around lines that were drawn in the 1700s….”