Dormont passes on solar idea at rec center
Dormont Council turned down one member's request to consider adding solar panels to the recreation center at the borough's swimming pool, noting that officials had bigger priorities.
Councilman John Maggio requested council seek contractors' proposals for installing solar panels on the roof of the Thomas Lloyd Recreation Center and possibly on a series of canopies that would be built over the pool's parking lot. Contractors would pay for installation of the panels, then sell the electricity they generate back to the borough, Maggio said.
“It would save us money, it would decrease our carbon footprint, and it will make us a community leader,” Maggio said. “If we had a more progressive council, maybe that would have been a better time.”
But Council President Bill McCartney, who was reappointed by council on Monday, said the borough had other capital projects that should take priority.
A larger renovation of the rec center, for example, would need to be done before the solar installation so the panels wouldn't need to be removed and reinstalled, he said.
“We've got too much on our plate to move off and do something else without a lot of planning,” McCartney said. “It doesn't preclude us from doing it sometime in the future, just not this year.”
The motion to issue a request for proposals failed, 1-6, on Monday with Maggio casting the only vote in favor.
Collier installed a similar system at the township's Department of Public Works building in late 2012 after about a year of discussions. Scalo Solar Solutions of Thornburg installed the panels and charges the township a reduced rate for the power they produce. Officials said the building is capable of producing more power than it consumes.
Matthew Santoni is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-380-5625 or email@example.com.
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 â 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.