Is it possible to have a budget vote that isn’t about money?

That question may be answered tomorrow when Monmouth voters try for the fifth time to pass a 2009-10 Police Department budget. The proposal before voters is $25,000 less than last year’s police budget, but it’s $15,000 more than another recently rejected budget.

So, why are voters turning thumbs down on a budget that has been significantly trimmed from the previous year? And why is the town adding money to a budget proposal that has already failed?

There are two possible reasons:

First, the previous budget eliminated Saturday and Sunday patrol officers, which naturally upset some citizens. Those patrols have been restored in tomorrow’s version, which explains the $15,000 increase.

But here’s the second possible explanation: The “no” votes have less to do with money than with dissatisfaction with the department and its personnel.

That’s probably what Planning Board member Ray Simond was trying to prove when he placed a survey in a local paper and opened a private post office box to receive responses.

The outcome of that survey was telling in more ways than one. According to Simond and his lawyer, police chief Robert Annese filed a false form with the Post Office to obtain Simond’s name as the owner of the box.

The names of box owners are confidential unless police seek them in connection with a criminal investigation. Simond and his lawyer claim the chief had no such investigation going and that he even used a phony incident report number on the Postal Service form.

“This is something right out of the 1950s — law enforcement using official powers to investigate critics,” said lawyer Walter McKee, who is representing Simond.

He’s got a point. The heavy-handed use of power will quickly erode public support for even the best of police departments, a contention that seems to be supported by the results of Simond’s mail-in survey.

According to a WGME-TV story on the dispute, only 24 percent of respondents said the budget was too high. Only 9 percent felt services were inadequate and only 35 percent objected to police department policies.

Meanwhile, 60 percent said they voted against the budget because of “department personnel.”

Which, if true, means city officials can keep increasing and decreasing the total forever and still fail to pass a budget.

The budget vote, in effect, has become a referendum on the chief or the officers themselves.

Naturally, in any town, cops are going to have a few enemies. That’s the nature of the work.

But, while doing a difficult job, a police department needs to maintain the confidence of the town’s law-abiding citizens.

Monmouth selectmen have already added a question to an upcoming warrant asking voters if they want to convene an open town meeting if the police budget fails again. That’s a good idea.

Failure at the ballot box tomorrow would certainly show that the town needs a public airing of police department issues other than money.