More than 50 Kidder Township residents turned out Thursday evening for the normal monthly meeting of the township's board of supervisors, to protest the rumored layoff of three Kidder Township police officers. No officers have been released from the force yet, but a preliminary spending plan calls for a reduction in the 2011 police department budget that would likely require the cuts.

There were a few items on the agenda related to projects under construction or recently completed by Vacation Charters, but Supervisor Chairman Larry Polansky moved quickly through those items in order to get to comments from the community, of which there were many.Before he opened the floor to visitors, Polansky took a moment to walk the audience through a prepared presentation in an attempt to explain the current budget crisis and the board's recommended budget cuts.He explained that in 1987, Kidder Township only had $6,326 left in the bank at the end of the year. By the end of 2007 various boards of supervisors had increased that fund to $1,367,570. But the last three years have been tough, each year taking away some of the township's reserve. By the end of last year, the township has a reserve of only $504,116. Next year's projected budget shortfall will take away an additional $400,000.To make matters worse, the township has not been able to put the $150,000 into the emergency services budget it promised fire and ambulance workers in order to help fund new equipment. Next year will be the fourth year the township has failed to make that payment.Last month the board began combing through the budget in an attempt to make cuts. Polansky noted that of the township's $1.2 million budget for 2011, about 75 percent of it would be going to the police department.Polansky shared an analysis of area township police departments with the audience. With 10 full-time officers and about 1,200 full-time residents, Kidder Township has the highest ratio of police officers to residents in the area at 8.44 officers per 1,000 residents. The nearest township, Penn Forest Township, has nearly 5,500 residents and no police force. Most other departments in the area are between one and five officers per 1,000 residents.Consequently, the board is currently considering reducing the police force by three officers and increasing the property tax by 1 mil. This would drop the police budget to about 50 percent of the township's total budget and cost homeowners about $100 more per year per $100,000 of assessed property value.Township residents heaped praise on their police department, with many speakers starting their comments with positive statements. Most argued that cutting staff was unthinkable. One resident called laying off police officers a crime."How much is your safety or the safety of your family worth?" he asked. "You can't put a price on that."But apparently, township residents can. Though few complaints were heard when Polansky mentioned a one mil increase in taxes to cover some of the 2011 budgetary shortfall, when one resident suggested that the township just double the local taxes to keep the police force intact, the audience erupted and cries of "fixed income!" were heard from around the room.Despite their unwillingness to pay more taxes, township residents some of whom were retired from other police forces argued that cutting staff would put township residents at risk, increase long term crime rates and ultimately cause property values to drop.Some called on township Chief of Police Joseph Protasiewicz to provide crime statistics to justify the staffing, but he explained that the local department does so much more than fight crime, they provide community service. Polansky pointed out that the service was exemplary, but asked if the residents can afford it.At one point, an angry resident blurted out that big government was to blame for the township's inability to afford more policemen, apparently not realizing that the police department is a division of local government and that he was fighting to prevent his own local government from getting smaller.Many residents were confused about how the township had come to such dire straights, even after seeing the presentation and hearing Polansky answer the question repeatedly. He explained that cash reserves were intended to be used during hard times, which is what the supervisors had done with the township's reserves. But the downturn had lasted longer than anticipated and the supervisors now feel they must take more aggressive action.After being asked again why they hadn't seen this coming, Polansky seemed to lose patience."OK, assume you have a bunch of stupid supervisors up here and we made a mistake. Now that's water under the bridge and we have to decide what we're going to do now," he answered.Aside from repeating that laying off police officers would be unthinkable, there were few ideas offered by residents. There were some, however, including asking volunteers to help the remaining police officers provide the omnipresence required to keep crime rates low, levying a tax on temporary residents, vacationers or homeowners who rent their properties, and charging realtors for renting properties in the township. Some residents proposed charging more to entertainment providers in the township, but Polansky explained that those taxes were set by the state. Some residents even offered to chip in more money to cover the loss.Polansky said that all suggestions would be considered, but pointed out even if residents could get together and raise $1,000 or even $10,000, it wouldn't come close to covering the $400,000 budget shortfall the township will face next year.The supervisors will take the budget up again in a workshop scheduled for Nov. 4 at 7 p.m., which is open to the public. The board urged residents to attend. The board will make final changes to the budget during the workshop and consider the budget at the November regular meeting in the hopes of having a final budget approved by the December meeting.Polanksy pointed out to the residents that the supervisors were attempting to navigate some very dangerous budgetary waters."We're just talking about breaking even here, keeping our heads above water and we don't have an answer yet."