Ihaven't written anything about the goings-on in Wrightsville for a few months. It wasn't because the nonsense had stopped at the top of the political heap, however. It was more a case of my pretending not to notice.

But I can only do that for so long -- eventually the pressure builds up, and I just have to let some steam escape.

The town drama for the last week or so has been a decision by some members of borough council to drop its 20-month-old police department like a hot potato and put the job of public safety back in the hands of a neighboring police department.

This time the borough council wants to consider options from Hellam Township (again) or Columbia Borough (across the Susquehanna River in Lancaster County) to provide police coverage. Last Monday, the council voted 4-1, with one abstention, to send letters of inquiry to both municipalities.

Naturally, the very thought of another reversal of field with the police department has the whole town in an uproar.

The Wrightsville Borough Police Department has been a case of on again, off again, on again and now maybe off again for as long as I can remember. It's driving me crazy, and I don't even live there. And it's compounded by the fact that the political shenanigans between the borough council and Mayor Steven Rambler have kept the pot at a constant boil for more than a year.

Politics aside -- if that's possible in this case -- you have to wonder how the citizens of Wrightsville feel about their

Advertisement
police force. Looking back a decade or more, it seems they've had a difficult time making up their minds whether they wanted their own police force or not.

One got a sense for that last week, when about 100 rivertowners showed up at a hearing held by the council in the borough's municipal building. The topic of interest -- disbanding the borough's police force.

A lot of people spoke up on both sides, some in favor of the present arrangement, some not. It did seem, however, that most residents were in favor of keeping the police force they now have.

Several council members made a point of saying their decision to look east or west for police coverage wasn't political, had nothing to do with its constant bickering with the mayor, but was intended to indicate a concern about costs and receiving 24-hour police coverage. They didn't want to raise taxes to provide home-grown police protection if they could get less costly service elsewhere.

Frankly, I have trouble believing that is their primary motivation. What better way to stomp on the mayor's neck one more time than to strip him of the police department he worked so hard to put in place?

Maybe council members are out of touch with the community's wishes. Maybe, in their haste to do battle with Rambler, they've lost their grip on the town's pulse. Clearly, their actions were at odds with the majority of townspeople who attended last week's hearing.

It could be, I suppose, that the majority of those who attended the hearing weren't speaking for the
entire town, either. So who really knows?

Perhaps a voter referendum, as suggested by council President Sharon Young, could play a role in resolving this latest skirmish. Surely it couldn't hurt. According to Director of York County Elections Nikki Suchanic, however, there'd be a lot of hoops to jump through before that could happen. So if she's serious about it, she'd better get moving.

It's not exactly how our system of democracy is supposed to work, but maybe a question on the November ballot would provide a community voice on the subject that the borough council would benefit from hearing.

In the meantime, though, that would leave police protection hanging in limbo.

And that's never a good thing.

But it might be better than making a decision in haste today that they'd all regret six months down the road.

Columns by Larry A. Hicks, Dispatch columnist, run Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. E-mail: lhicks@yorkdispatch.com.