Alle-Kiski Laurels & Lances
Lance: To the North Apollo Council. The council enacted an $80 per household and business ($40 per apartment) fee to fund the volunteer fire department. That $80 fee is approximately the amount a 3-mill tax increase — a 25-percent hike — would've raised. That's a lot. We're all for supporting the VFD, but reaching into the pocket of every property owner is not the answer. At the very least, this should've been put to a referendum for the voters to decide.
On the “Watch List”:
• Apollo-Kiski Township sewer talks. The sides are trying to reach an agreement regarding the township's use of the borough's new sewer lines. The formula should be simple — Kiski should pay for whatever percentage of flow enters the lines. But this is Apollo, where nothing is ever simple.
• The Allegheny Valley Joint Sewage Authority says the odor problem from its treatment plant on Freeport Road in Harmar has subsided, as it has found the right chemical combination to use in the digesters. Gee, does this sound familiar? This stink problem has existed for years — particularly in the summer months. We'll literally be “holding our breath” to discover if the solution truly has been found.
Break a leg: The spring musical season in our high schools is winding down, but there are still seven on tap in the coming month. Do yourself a favor and go to one. These kids put untold hours of effort into these plays and the talent at some of our schools is awesome.
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.