Share This Page

Alle-Kiski Laurels & Lances

| Thursday, Jan. 31, 2013, 8:55 p.m.

Lance: To the “small picture.” The discussion should not be whether Cheswick should contract out its police service to a neighboring town and which one. It should be how the borough will join with Springdale township and borough and Harmar and East Deer and form one police department. These communities combined are a mere 12.3 square miles and their population totals fewer than 12,000, quite comparable to Lower Burrell. Are we so parochial that we require five departments to handle police services? Ridiculous.

On the “Watch List”: The Municipal Sanitary Authority of New Kensington. It's still a few years away, but the authority will be undertaking a federally mandated project to separate its sanitary and storm sewers, preventing raw sewage from flowing into the Allegheny River. This will be expensive for customers in New Ken, Arnold, Lower Burrell and parts of Allegheny Township and Plum.

Laurel: To digitizing the past. A three-year project by Westmoreland County to transfer 55,000 naturalization records (dating back to 1906) from antiquated record books will allow folks to access their family roots from their home computers. But more than the added convenience, this worthwhile endeavor preserves these vital records for future generations.

Happy birthday!: To a legendary Pittsburgh DJ. The “Bossman,” Porky Chedwick, turns 95 on Monday. Amazingly, Pork the Tork is still spinning stacks of wax online from his home on the pittsburgholdiesradio.com Internet station.

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.