Contentious issue in Kent

The concept of a resident state trooper program is one that is foreign even to neighbors as close to Connecticut as New York and Massachusetts. In those states, the structure of town law enforcement includes small police forces or sheriff’s offices in addition to state police barracks. In Connecticut, however, small towns such as Kent and the other towns in the Northwest Corner have the option of employing resident state troopers to be responsible for law enforcement in their jurisdictions. Newcomers to North Canaan, for instance, might be surprised to learn the town employs a resident state trooper despite the fact that a state police barracks, Troop B, is located there.

    Connecticut’s plan for municipal protection has led to a contentious and ongoing discussion in Kent on the pros and cons of a resident trooper program. (See the article by Shaw Israel Izikson in last week’s Lakeville Journal.) The town discontinued its resident trooper program last year, in part because this step saved about $100,000 from the town budget. This was seen as a significant savings, with the additional possibility that law enforcement coverage out of the state’s Troop L in Litchfield would still meet the town’s needs.

    As part of the budget planning for the new fiscal year, there was a public hearing to re-evaluate the need for a resident trooper program at the Town Hall on March 11, drawing a crowd of town residents of varying opinions on the subject. While their viewpoints varied, however, they shared a common strong emotional connection to the method of law enforcement for the town.

    There’s good reason for this. When a person is in need of help from the police, when one has to put in a 911 call, it’s as a result of a real, intense and very possibly life-changing emergency. For all those who spoke at the meeting, this was a personal issue, and whether one believes the best police service to the community has historically come from the state police barracks or the resident state trooper can depend entirely on one’s experience with one or the other at the time of a single, difficult incident.

    It also becomes more meaningful on a personal basis when town residents don’t associate a name and a face to their law enforcement, when there’s a disconnect because of distance to a central office such as to Troop L. For instance, the DARE (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) program was suspended last year in Kent along with the resident state trooper program. While there is some disagreement over whether the program itself has merit anymore, one of its better results is that the young people in town become familiar with their resident state trooper as a friendly and supportive community leader. When children meet a police officer in their elementary school atmosphere, whether for DARE or through some other program, it’s more likely they’ll be willing to see him or her as a person, not a threat, as they go forward into high school and beyond.

    This is a tough budget season with still-shrinking revenue streams. Kent will have to make its decision, however, taking into account not just the money, but the many other real-life factors that were raised at the March 11 meeting. Residents of Kent pay their taxes in the expectation that they will feel safe and protected in their homes and on the streets of their town. This is not too much to ask.