Pa. constables would be disqualified from serving if convicted of a serious crime: bill

• By Chloe Nguyen/ LNP | LancasterOnline

Under current state law, people who have committed serious crimes can be elected constables in Pennsylvania.

Rep. Tom Jones wants to change that.

Last month, the East Donegal Township Republican introduced a bill to modernize the regulations governing constables and clarify their roles in the court system and law enforcement. The proposed legislation would require criminal background checks for candidates and disqualify anyone convicted of a felony, sex offenses, second-degree theft or more than two DUI’s in a 10-year span.

The bill also would require county commissioners or president judges to create county-level review boards to oversee the constabulary, set clear policy standards and manage constable-related issues. The review boards would include district judges, attorneys and district attorney-appointed constables.

Last month, President Judge Leonard G. Brown III filed an administrative court order to establish a constable advisory board in Lancaster County.

“It’s a people bill, not a partisan bill,” Jones said.

Democratic representatives Jim Prokopiak, of Bucks County, and Benjamin Sanchez, of Montgomery County, are co-sponsoring the bill, along with several Republican representatives including East Earl Township Rep. David Zimmerman.

Alex Farganis, president of the Lancaster County Constable Association, a local nonprofit fraternal organization, said this bill “represents a long-overdue and much-needed step forward in both modernizing and professionalizing the role of constables.”

Constables are elected officials who serve six-year terms. They commonly assist the court system by serving warrants and provide security at polling places during elections, when state law prohibits police officers from coming within 100 feet of polling places.

Constables are paid flat fees for services rendered to the courts, yet some fees have not been updated in more than 30 years. Jones’ bill would double many of the fees paid by the court to constables. A constable providing courtroom security as ordered would be paid $25 per hour instead of the current $13 rate.

Jones said the bill aligns with broader efforts to address law enforcement recruitment challenges across the state.

Impetus for the bill

The issue first came to Jones’ attention through discussions with constables and local police. His experience as a police commissioner for the Susquehanna Regional Police Department informed his perspective. Jones said the bill would help coordinate law enforcement throughout Pennsylvania, from state police to county sheriffs, to local police and constables.

“In modernizing the statute, it would establish those lanes of operation,” Jones said. “We want them to be interactive and efficient.”

Unlike police officers, who have agencies overseeing their training, constables have reported difficulty accessing required instruction, Jones said. Constables must complete 80 hours of basic training in deescalation, defensive tactics and arrest procedures at a cost of $1,485. For an additional $1,485 cost, they can be trained to operate firearms.

Jones’ bill would expand opportunities for prospective constables by allowing trainees two years to complete training instead of one and allowing for reduced training hours.

Still, Jones excluded from the bill certain provisions he knew some constables wanted. For example, constables would continue to lack access to the Pennsylvania Justice Network, or JNET, a criminal justice database that allows officers to check for warrants based on a vehicle license plate.

Additionally, constables still would not be assigned an Originating Agency Identifier number, which allows law enforcement to formally process and document arrests.

Nevertheless, constables would retain the authority to detain individuals without a warrant in cases of disorderly conduct — for example, if a person punched someone.

The bill had been scheduled for a vote in the House Judiciary Committee on June 30, but that vote has been indefinitely postponed in favor of a hearing on the bill, which has not been scheduled.