Harmar officials don’t support proposed Allegheny County police review board |
Valley News Dispatch

Harmar officials don’t support proposed Allegheny County police review board

The Harmar Township municipal building.

Harmar officials have decided to not support Allegheny County’s efforts to create a citizens police review board.

The board would look into incidents of possible police misconduct and would be modeled after the police review board the City of Pittsburgh has had in operation since it was authorized by city residents in a 1997 referendum vote.

Township supervisors discussed the idea Thursday but, ultimately, felt like the extra review board isn’t necessary.

“We are the oversight board,” said Supervisor Bob Seibert. “We do not need a new bureaucracy.”

Seibert said there already is a chain of command when investigating a police matter. He said the township supervisors would be first, followed by the district attorney and then the state attorney general, if necessary.

Supervisor Bob Exler said he doesn’t feel the board would solve any issues.

“It’s a waste of time,” he said. “My suggestion is, stay the heck out of it.”

Officials also said the proposal was lacking information about how the board would be funded and more details about how it would function.

The supervisors will send a letter to the county officials with their position on the matter.

“We need less government in Allegheny County, not more,” said Supervisor Lee Biermeyer.

Springdale Council also decided this week to opt-out of participating. Brackenridge, Tarentum, East Deer and West Deer are among those that have not yet taken up the issue.

Emily Balser is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Emily at 724-226-4680, [email protected] or via Twitter @emilybalser.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.