ShareThis Page

Greensburg Tuesday takes

| Monday, July 8, 2013, 9:00 p.m.

A painfully long cleanup: The longtime New York “owner” of the decrepit Jeannette Glass plant has cleaned up most of the site's environmental waste, a state official says, but only after decades of neglect. The struggle to achieve this “accomplishment” sends the wrong message to other absentee landlords. Never mind the legal mess over the property's disposition since its tax sale last year. Zion Bullitt Avenue, which is challenging the sale, reportedly owes more than $300,000 in delinquent taxes.

Flooding & flood control: As sure as flood waters rise, so, too, do questions about long-unrealized flood-control projects. In Dunbar Borough, Fayette County, 14 homes were damaged when Dunbar Creek overran its banks. Council President Norman Gordon says the flooding might well have been mitigated had a “creek channeling” project been completed. The state says the project is in the planning phase. In fact, it's been in the works for decades, Mr. Gordon says. No doubt its “progress” will be addressed again — next time Dunbar Creek floods.

A more user-friendly government: The Westmoreland County Prothonotary's Office joins others that are offering later, more convenient “customer” hours — in this case, to accommodate the public's demand for passports. Yes, it's an election year. But the evolution of courthouse services — rethinking “public service” on the public's dime — has been in evidence for the past couple of years. And making these services more accessible deserves credit.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.