If you connect the dots between several recent Eastern Connecticut news stories, you might perceive that the state police, and especially the resident state trooper program, may be in trouble. But far from reflecting a lack of appreciation or value from residents or public officials, the situation rather reflects a growing inability for localities and, to a certain extent the state itself, to bear the relatively high cost of state troopers.

But troopers and the union representing them may be at an opportune moment — with the governor negotiating givebacks and adjustments with state employees generally — to show some flexibility on costly perks that local and state government can no longer afford.

Local towns have been exploring alternatives to the resident state trooper program, under which they pay a portion of the cost of a trooper or staff of troopers assigned to patrol them. As the state has shifted more of the cost to towns — with Governor Malloy proposing that they pay 100 percent of the expense starting next year — towns are increasingly concluding that they can do just as well with local officers, and with more bang for their buck.

Look no further than Killingly, which recently approved and has started staffing a constabulary of certified officers. It plans to phase out its resident trooper force from four to one. While the cost of those troopers was set to rise to $1 million or more per year, a constable force or 10 or 11 officers is expected to cost $1.2 million.

More recently, Jewett City voters opted to cut one of the two resident troopers covering their borough. Keeping both would have jacked up the Jewett City mill rate, while cutting one of the troopers will lower the rate.

Meanwhile, Malloy’s plan to balance the state’s budget includes layoffs of troopers, sergeants, lieutenants and a civilian worker for a total of 12 positions. And for the second year in a row, an incoming class of recruits — including a Griswold 27-year-old whose life is on hold waiting for training to begin — may be deferred.

All this paints a picture of a state police force that’s falling out of favor. But the hard truth behind that is not that folks don’t value or respect law enforcement, but that their perks and benefits are no longer sustainable.

A prime example is the longstanding practice of allowing state troopers to drive their cruisers during off time, for personal purposes. Moreover, according to a 2009 report from the state Office of Legislative Research, “Each of the state's 12 police barracks has a gas pump that the officer may use at anytime to fill up the vehicle.”

This is an incredible perk for the police who get it — and an extremely costly one for the taxpayers who foot the bill, be they state residents funding general state police operations or local property tax payers helping fund their resident trooper. And according to OLR, Connecticut stands alone among its neighboring states, most of which permit state police to keep their vehicles while off duty but prohibit them from putting the cars to personal use.

Former Gov. Jodi Rell’s administration in 2008 tried at least to prohibit the free gasoline perk. The union resisted and won out. This perk has officially been in place for 36 years, and unofficially so for decades more. It is long past time for it to end.

Another consideration is the state police retirement benefit, which awards a pension after 25 years of service, or 20 years if the officer is age 50. While it makes sense to take older troopers off of hazardous patrol duty as they age, the state ought to employ them in administrative or low-risk functions until they reach a normal retirement age.

If the state police want to stay relevant to towns, and generally held harmless during tough state budget years, they should be open to common-sense adjustments — and demand the same posture of their union leadership.