• Ernest Rosenberger, 10, goes to Ford City Council to alert borough leaders that trash tossed onto a hillside near Boulder Park could injure children playing there.
• Some 65 children spent part of a summer day at the Armstrong County Courthouse, learning about law enforcement from District Attorney Scott Andreassi, about impartial application of the law from District Judge J. Gary DeComo and Common Pleas Judge James Panchik, and about creation of the laws from state Rep. Jeff Pyle and Sen. Don White's Chief of Staff Joe Pittman.
These seemingly innocuous events also are clear indications that we live in a community where children are getting the message that we all have civic duties. We hope such lessons continue for them throughout their lives.
Some adults should revisit the teachings.
Most of us “get involved” only when we have a specific concern — higher taxes, a rundown neighboring property, noise ordinance violations, etc. In Ford City, Councilman Jerry Miklos this week said there should have been more public dialogue on setting a special tax zone for land on which the to-be-closed high school sits or on the issue of leasing the former landfill site for gas well drilling. Public dialogue is wise, but would anyone have come out to talk?
It's easy to lose track of what local leaders are doing, and perhaps some of them would like it that way. But they need direction from their constituents.
This is a municipal election year — and a good time for “wise” adults to speak up.
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.