ShareThis Page
Police merger floated for Cheswick and Springdale Township |
Valley News Dispatch

Police merger floated for Cheswick and Springdale Township


The state Department of Community and Economic Development has recommended a merger of the Cheswick and Springdale Township police departments in a move the agency said could save the municipalities about $200,000 a year.

“I think it’s a great opportunity for the communities to save money,” said Springdale Township police Chief Mike Naviglia.

He said a merger would improve coverage in the area and allow for better training of part-time officers.

“I think there’s also a great opportunity for the younger guys to have more on-the-job-type training with seasoned police officers,” Naviglia added.

The state’s recommendation comes after a months-long study of the two municipalities’ police departments that was requested by local officials earlier this year.

The study was done at no cost to the borough or township through the Governor’s Center for Local Government Services program.

The recommendation includes:

• The creation of a 24-hour police agency consisting of three full-time officers and four part-time officers;

• The creation of a three-member board or commission to govern the department composed of one elected official from each municipality and one additional member who would be either rotated on an agreed-upon basis or appointed at-large;

• The department would be housed at the Springdale Township station until other facilities can be agreed upon;

• One municipality should be designed as the administrative municipality and perform the duties of maintaining police payroll and personnel records, titles to equipment, insurance policies and financial records;

• The estimated cost is just under $500,000 a year, which would be split between Cheswick and Springdale Township.

According to the study, Cheswick and Springdale Township spend just under $700,000 combined for their police services. The municipalities could see a savings of about $200,000 that would be split between them if they merge.

Both municipalities have previously cited cost savings as an incentive for merging.

Some residents have voiced concerns about not having adequate police coverage with a merger, but Naviglia said that wouldn’t be the case.

“There’s absolutely no lack in police coverage,” he said. “It’s still going to be the same police coverage they have right now.”

Cheswick Councilman Michael Girardi said council voted this month to move forward with exploring the merger and create a committee to review the study’s findings and evaluate the borough’s needs.

“We’re not rushing into it. We’re evaluating it,” he said. “There will certainly be several opportunities where the public’s going to have a chance to review what we’re proposing.”

Springdale Township Commissioner Shirley Redman, who is the police commissioner, said she hadn’t had a chance to review the study and didn’t want to comment yet.

The concept of splitting the cost of services among municipalities is gaining popularity in Pennsylvania, and there are now 36 regional police departments across the state, according to the Department of Community and Economic Development.

A message left for Cheswick police Chief Bob Scott wasn’t returned Wednesday.

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.