Why the town refuses to expand police coverage to the entire town?

Question:

Why does the town refuse to expand police coverage to the entire town?

Answer:

Because they can. It is really that simple.

I believe the town will refuse to expand local coverage as long as there are no repercussions OUTSIDE THE DISTRICT. There is no law, no minimum population, which requires local coverage.

As long as enough town voters Just Say No, I think they will. The town knows the village PD will respond in town under the current arrangement. 

Why vote for more? They have the best of both worlds. 

The town is convinced local coverage is a village problem, and for them, that is all there is to it. 

In fact, as the 2007 Joe Voci petition noted, town residents would prefer village residents just shut up about it.

That was 17 years ago. Times have changed, but the attitude stays the same.

Joe Voci is on the Police Services Committee with the express purpose of opposing any town wide expansion, no matter what evidence is presented. The opposition seems indifferent to the plight of village voters and only seems to care about their personal tax bill. They do not seem at all sympathetic to the village voters tax bill.

The irony here is town and village residents are both complaining about higher taxes! But the town is complaining about taxes they refuse to pay, while the village is complaining about paying taxes twice what they would be if the town shared the burden with the village.

What can the village voters do about it?

The village voters can also Just Say No.

Refuse to approve any budget, and force disbanding the entire department. The town would then have to decide to either initiate (and vote on) town wide coverage, or do without.

Or village voters could insist on a reduced budget with coverage from 7 am to 7 pm, Monday - Friday. No weekends. See what happens next year.

In either case, there are potential risks to public safety if it leads to no local coverage.

Is it a risk worth taking? 

That is the decision facing village voters: put our foot down and say enough is enough, after 40 years, times have changed?

Or go along for another year and "hope" the town expands the district?

We need strong leadership and a plan for action, not more kicking the can down the road. It seems 40 years is long enough for this experiment.

Village voters are tired, the results are clear: the outcome for the village has been dismal, while the town, and neighboring towns, have prospered in comparison.

What are the comments and questions on this issue people ask most often?

Comment about property taxes from town voter:

I think property taxes are way too high as it is, and I would not be in favor of anything that raised them further. I think if Randolph wants to fund/expand a PD, maybe we can look at cutting back on spending somewhere else instead of raising taxes. 

Answer:

First, taxes are high everywhere in Vermont, not just Randolph. However, taxes are even higher in the village due to the police tax. So whatever your taxes are, in the village taxes are significantly higher because they are paying taxes YOU DO NOT PAY! That is the “best of both worlds” I wrote about this week. No one wants to pay taxes, I get it. But without taxes, we have no public services. 

Comment from town voter:

I think the cost of property taxes is something people look at when deciding where to buy a house, and if Randolph property taxes are going to be even higher than they already are, I think that is going to cause many homebuyers to look elsewhere. 

Answer:

The demographic post this week was all about the difference in median income, property values, children in school, poverty and educational differences between the village, town, Braintree and Brookfield. It’s not even close! The town residents have median household income 40% higher than village residents, and property values are much higher as well. That means people with less money, lower home values, and higher poverty, are funding - almost entirely - the police budget. 

Question:

Why does this disparity exist? 

Answer:

It’s because of the police district. Do you really think that is fair?