ShareThis Page

Penn Hills students win awards for work on anti-litter campaign

Dillon Carr
| Thursday, Sept. 14, 2017, 4:18 p.m.
Emily Ruperto, 8, receives her first-place award in an anti-litter poster competition from Andrea Getsy (right) of the Crescent Hills Civic Association and Penn Hills Mayor Sara Kuhn.
Dillon Carr | Tribune-Review
Emily Ruperto, 8, receives her first-place award in an anti-litter poster competition from Andrea Getsy (right) of the Crescent Hills Civic Association and Penn Hills Mayor Sara Kuhn.

Nine Penn Hills students have been awarded for crafting winning posters urging people not to litter.

About 80 posters that were made by the students were given out for display at businesses, the library and council chambers. Awards for the top three posters in three age categories were given out during a recent ceremony at the Penn Hills Library.

Mayor Sara Kuhn presented each winner with a printed congratulatory statement, and Andrea Getsy of the Crescent Hills Civic Association, which sponsored the poster contest, gave each child an award of art supplies and gift cards.

“As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words,” Kuhn said to a room filled with parents of students who participated in the competition. “I just want to congratulate everyone that was involved. We should be proud of our students.”

First-place awards were given to Simon Moyer, 6, Emily Ruperto, 8, and Peter Sprecher, 12. Second-place winners were Evey Sherbo, 5, Jacey Bell, 9, and Kelsey Zera, 11. Third-place awards went to Zion Sprecher, 7, Breanna Kenny, 10, and Jordan Graham, 13.

Dillon Carr is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 412-871-2325, dcarr@tribweb.com or via Twitter @dillonswriting.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.