Maintaining constables, more aggressive collection of fees, cooperative court scheduling and better use of technology are among the recommendations proposed by police chiefs in Northumberland County as ways of reducing the $11 million owed to the county by criminal defendants.
The police chiefs met at various times to study the ramifications of curtailing the use of state constables to transport prisoners to and from arraignments
and preliminary hearings after the county commissioners rescinded in May their April decision to approve the action. But on Nov. 20, Commissioners Vinny Clausi and Stephen Bridy once again voted to stop using the constables for transporting prisoners, effective Jan. 1. Commissioner Richard Shoch opposed the move.
In a press release, the police chiefs said they believe the action will have far-reaching and dramatic effects on the cooperative law enforcement effort to protect county citizens.
Milton Police Chief Craig Lutcher, who along with Point Township Police Chief Joshua Van Kirk, spearheaded a committee to research the constable issue, stated in the release issued to The News-Item Friday, "Cutting constable services in the county will have an adverse effect on the local municipal budgets and law enforcement services, and bear unnecessary financial strain on the taxpayers. We believe that it is in the best interest of the county residents to maintain the constable services."
Lutcher said the committee was given several months by the commissioners to study the issue and present their findings and recommendations to the board. But according to Lutcher and other police chiefs in the county, that opportunity never arose because they claimed Clausi and Bridy already had their minds made up not to use constables no matter what alternatives the police chiefs came up with.
Lutcher outlined the following ramifications of the move (the police chief's release reported here verbatim, as indicated):
- Current services effective - Lutcher said constables provide prisoner transportation from various secure facilities around the state to local courts and back again when necessary. "This service must be provided. Taxpayers expect all government officials to work together to provide essential services in the most efficient and cost effective manner. The county has a unique opportunity in this case to work with the local government bodies to help protect the taxpayers, and the county has the legal capabilities to assure that the prisoners are paying for their ride instead of the taxpayers. This is accomplished through the permitted reimbursement that the county can charge, whereas the local police departments have no such legal capability, which means the cost would be passed directly to the taxpayers."
- Safety and compounding costs - The task of prisoner transport is not as simple as a drive to the courthouse, prison or magisterial district justice offices and back, Lutcher said. "On many occasions, there is more than one prisoner at a time scheduled for court. On some occasions, these multiple prisoners are co-conspirators and must be separated. This would require multiple police officers for a single court case because the officer who is busy with the court appearance will not be available to guard the other prisoners. This is again compounded by the current court schedules, where all hearings are scheduled at the same time and have left the local courthouses or magisterial district justice offices jammed full of prisoners, victims and witnesses in close quarters."
Lutcher said some police departments require multiple officers on any transport detail. Most police officers receive two hours minimum overtime when attending court. "It was previously expressed by some of the commissioners that two hours would be sufficient to cover a transport detail. If the police agency, prison and courthouse are in close proximity, two hours may cover the detail. Unfortunately, that is seldom the case.
"When considering all the compounding issues just described, departments are already seeing overtime increases from court scheduling alone and this will only get worse if burdened with transport functions. This cost will quickly reach into thousands of additional dollars borne by the taxpayers if performed by a police officer as opposed to the current constable services."
- Constable revenue - Lutcher said the magisterial district judges submit checks to the county on a regular basis that result from constable services, but that would not continue without their services.
- Long-term effect on county criminal justice system - "It is no secret that every government entity has had to make difficult decisions with regards to services due to strained budgets. It is hard to know what the long-reaching effects of this will be on our communities. What is known now is that there are qualified professionals capable of completing required tasks and these resources must be used in the most efficient manner.
He said police are legally qualified and capable of performing constable functions, but constables are not legally permitted to complete many law enforcement functions. "This relationship supports the decision to keep constables active in their current roles. Their removal from this function will result in the minimizing of law enforcement by pulling police officers away from their primary duties. The solution for police departments to overcome this will be more officers, more hours and more money, none of which are currently available."
- Recoverable budget items - When reviewing a four-year history of the county budget, Lutcher said the annual costs for constable services totaled $130,090.90 in 2008, $104,237.84 in 2009, $94,098.25 in 2010, and $80,527.41 in 2011.
"This is an average cost per year of $102,238.60. Considering the overtime pay rate of a police officer with tenure is higher than that of these recoverable constable fees, this total could be double when considering all the aforementioned issues. Whether this figure is $100,000 or $200,000, the fact that it is recoverable when performed by a constable seems to be a guiding factor in maintaining their services by the county."
- Countywide service - Lutcher said some commissioners have made statements regarding municipalities that do not have local police services suffering an unfair burden by having to pay for constable services, warrants, etc. "The reality is that local police departments do not only arrest their own local residents or serve warrants exclusively in their respective territories. Arrest warrants, transports and other processes that are executed by constables may stem from local police services, but often stem from acts perpetrated by criminals from those very communities without local police services. Criminals are often transient and this is why it is widely accepted that the best approach to criminal investigation and apprehension is widespread cooperation by law enforcement."
Recommendations:
- Collections - Lutcher said one immediate solution would be to actively begin collecting the outstanding fees due to the county that currently total nearly $11 million. "We have discussed this issue with different regions in the commonwealth and in many cases, the constables and/or sheriff's office collect these fees. This collection process must be aggressive and timely. Like any other fee or restitution the government handles, it is typical that large amounts of these fees will come in on payment schedules and lag several years behind until paid in full. However, county government will be here indefinitely and as long as the money is coming in year after year, it is dollars that are being sent in by the criminal subjects and not by the innocent taxpayers."
- Court scheduling - Lutcher said the current scheduling has made an immediate impact on police overtime budgets. With regard to constable fees for transports and guarding, some cooperation by the courts in consolidating all hearings with incarcerated defendants into a cluster would allow for less man hours charged in guard fees, he said.
"Additionally, there may be upwards of 30 cases on 'criminal day' at a given magisterial district judge's office. On most occasions, only one or two hearings may occur with most cases being either waived or ending in guilty pleas. We would suggest that some cooperation may occur on a larger scale to have many of the defendants handle their cases ahead of time. If their intention is to waive their case or plead guilty, there is no need for the defendant, victims, witnesses, officers or subject matter experts to waste time and money to attend. This has the potential to save thousands of tax dollars annually, but will require cooperation and perhaps a new line of thinking on how cases are processed."
- Advanced communication technologies - Lutcher said there is a need to explore the opportunities to have incarcerated persons awaiting preliminary hearings and other court functions to attend them via approved simultaneous audio/visual communication. "It is understood that defendants have the right to appear in person, face their accuser, etc. However, they also have the right to waive those rights, possibly as part of a plea agreement, bail considerations, etc. This would not only eliminate the transport fees for those subjects, but would also enhance the public safety of all people crammed in local courts on 'criminal day,' with an average of 25 to 30 cases running simultaneously, by reducing the overall number of people present.
"There have been too many American incidents involving mass casualties in congested areas and we feel an appropriate use of technology is required in a collective approach to minimize this risk to the public."
Potential tax increase - Lutcher said a half-mill county tax increase will currently bring in approximately $375,000 in revenue. He said almost all police officers who work in the county also live in and pay taxes in the county.
"We are very much aware of the public view on tax increases and share those concerns. We understand that it may require a tax increase at the county level to maintain an effective and operational government. However, it would be unfair to say that the constables are the reason for this increase. We are concerned that pushing this tax burden to local municipalities will compound into a much higher tax burden to county residents."