ShareThis Page

9 Penn Hills students recognized for anti-litter posters

Dillon Carr
| Saturday, Oct. 7, 2017, 12:33 a.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.

Allegheny County Treasurer John Weinstein has recognized nine Penn Hills students for their winning anti-litter posters.

Andrea Getsy, with the Crescent Hills Civic Association, worked with the Penn Hills School District last year to create an anti-litter program, and by May, middle and high school students had made 57 posters with anti-littering messages.

Those posters were passed out to 80 businesses in Penn Hills.

Awards for the top three posters in three age categories were given out during a recent ceremony at the Penn Hills Library.

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.

“You have used your creativity to spread the message that littering is harmful to the environment,” read Weinstein's letter sent to the nine students. “Protecting the health of our planet is important. Keeping our neighborhoods clean can be an easy way to help the earth. You have taught your friends that littering stops the planet from being as beautiful as it can be.”

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.