Cranberry Township shouldn’t be seen as a villain if it opts not to release Seven Fields from the municipalities’ current police contract. A contract is a contract, and without just cause for Seven Fields to bolt from the deal, Cranberry has the right to block an early exit by Seven Fields.

The current police services contract runs through 2014, with a two-year option beyond that. Seven Fields wants to set aside the agreement in time to work with Evans City to launch a regional police force by Jan. 1.

Understandably, money is at the heart of the issue.

Seven Fields envisions a savings of $90,000 next year if a police agreement with Evans City were to come about — a significant sum for Seven Fields.

But Cranberry can be excused for not wanting to voluntarily give up the more than $700,000 that Seven Fields will pay to the township in the next couple of years under the current agreement. That money would significantly benefit the Cranberry Police Department, whose responsibility increases as the township’s growth continues.

For Evans City, the proposed agreement with Seven Fields would be of great help in handling growing police expenses.

From Seven Fields’ perspective, if there’s a silver lining in the belief that Cranberry won’t allow an early exit from the contract, it’s that Seven Fields and Evans City can work toward a smooth police-services transition when there is no roadblock to an agreement.

The potential downside to delayed implementation of the Seven Fields-Evans City plan is the uncertainty over whether future council members might change their minds. Opinions could change in Evans City as well.

Cranberry and Seven Fields officials are scheduled to meet Nov. 14 to discuss Seven Fields’ proposed departure. Tom Smith, Seven Fields manager, said he’ll ask for a final answer from Cranberry by the end of November.

The township’s supervisors tabled the police services issue about three weeks ago, saying questions and concerns needed to be addressed first. Last week, Smith said the township had not yet presented any concerns and that the township’s reluctance to give its blessings to what Seven Fields is proposing seemed to be rooted in the revenue Cranberry stands to lose.

From Cranberry’s perspective, that concern is reasonable.

Seven Fields can be faulted for agreeing to the length of its pact with Cranberry if it intended to seek an alternative that might require early contract dissolution.

Cranberry residents would not be unreasonable in opposing dissolution because of the negative impact it could have on their property tax bills.

Meanwhile, Seven Fields and Evans City property owners are hopeful that the proposed agreement comes to pass because of the help it could offer their communities’ future budgets.

Cranberry rightly holds the upper hand in deciding what transpires — even regarding whether to offer a sweeter deal to Seven Fields.

Cranberry won’t be wrong, no matter what it decides, as long as it can justify its action to its residents.

Meanwhile, Seven Fields and Evans City can continue looking ahead to a police pact, even if it will be several years before it can be implemented.

A buyout by Seven Fields from the current contract seems out of the question.