This is in response to the May 5 article "SR council rejects police service deal for township."

As with any decision, there will be those who disagree and — in this case — brand it as callous.

Borough council members need not take offense at such rumbling, nor should they rue the course taken. I support and applaud their action.

Being that Slippery Rock is the epitome of a larger unity, the council's action can be justified on the basis of two premises:

• The interest of the taxpayers, which was kept foremost in mind.

• For the greater good, cop welfare must stop, not only locally but statewide.

On a statewide basis, there has been growing frustration with how police services are funded. Currently, more than 1,000 municipalities rely solely on the state police for protection, and take comfort in knowing state police will — on an as-needed basis — forward a call to local forces to assist with backup, or, at times, to act as first responders. This has the effect of sticking state taxpayers with the bill for their protection — while entities with a police force struggle with budgets to support and maintain a very expensive operation.

In Slippery Rock, that amounts to using nearly all the money from real estate taxes to keep a local force employed. This scenario plays out in many communities across the state.

Very simply, that is not fair.

Given that the state police are front-line protectors for many, their funding is crucial. Speaking to that point, the president of the Pennsylvania State Troopers Association, Bruce Edwards, paints a dire picture. He warns that the ranks of police are thinning and gradually reaching a breaking point.

Typically, a state trooper class contains 150 to 200 new recruits. There is no cadet class this year because the state budget doesn't contain money to fund one.

Without newly trained troopers, there will be no replacement personnel to fill existing vacancies and voids created through retirements.

Allowing a trend of no funding for cadet classes to continue, Edwards fears, "would create a crisis like we've never faced before." This would compromise the ability of the state police to serve and protect, endangering citizens and troopers alike.

Entities without a police department need to step up to the plate and accept the responsibility for protecting their citizens. Likewise, state legislators need to find creative ways to ensure that funding for police protection is on an equitable basis.

Of all the bills I have read that propose to resolve the issue, I have found only one that will do the job, and that is House Bill 1500, which would impose a fee on municipalities for patrol services provided by the state police.

If it takes a mandate to move the recalcitrants who can well afford it, so be it.