Penn Hills crossing guard numbers remain, equipment reduced
After taking a look at Penn Hills intersections regulated by school crossing guards, Penn Hills police and school district officials decided to make no change in the number of guards.
This past April that there was a “mutual desire” between police and district officials to make changes with the 79 guards who work two daily 90-minute shifts at bus stops throughout Penn Hills, school district Business Director Richard Liberto said.
Police Chief Howard Burton, however, said recently that no changes have been made to the number of guards or intersections.
“It wasn't a formal study,” Burton said. “Just more or less a brainstorming session looking at the number of students at the stops and the traffic during certain times of day.”
Burton said that there has been a change in the amount of equipment guards are issued, less than in the past.
Crossing guards are a unique group in Penn Hills: they are hired by the municipality and are part of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees union, but they negotiate their contract with the school district, and their cost is split equally between the municipality and school district.
Previous attempts to reduce the number of crossing guards have been unsuccessful.
During the municipal budget process heading into 2005, the guard positions were scheduled to be reduced, but ultimately were not. During a particularly difficult budget process in 2008, the idea of cutting the guards completely was floated, but not carried out.
Patrick Varine is an editor for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-320-7845 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.