Share This Page

Alle-Kiski Laurels & Lances

| Thursday, April 18, 2013, 8:55 p.m.

Lance: To the Cheswick Council. We guess cutting the cost of police services almost in half isn't good enough for the council. It rejected Springdale Borough's offer to take over policing for $182,000 — that's $161,000 less than it's currently paying. Hopefully, the council will revisit this decision.

Lance: To Westmoreland County Sheriff Jonathan Held. We understand why the sheriff was adamant about proceeding last week with drug testing for himself and his 12-member management team — he was facing a serious public relations problem after one of his deputies was arrested for heroin possession. But the county commissioners — via Solicitor Mark Gesalman — suggested delaying the tests because of questions they would breach the employees' rights and invite litigation. Smart public officials know when the solicitor says “whoa,” it's time to pull back on the reins.

On the “Watch List”: Leechburg Area sports. The Blue Devils are forsaking the WPIAL for PIAA District 6, where they will play other tiny, rural schools in Westmoreland, Indiana and Cambria counties. Essentially, Leechburg is surrendering its long legacy in the WPIAL in search of football victories. We shudder at the thought of kids, parents and fans making a trip back from a basketball game at Northern Cambria High School — it's 59 miles — on hilly, snow-covered, two-lane roads.

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.