Greensburg Tuesday takes
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Monday, Sept. 2, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
Curtain call: What California University of Pennsylvania will “save” by firing the company that manages its overblown convocation center is chump change. Reportedly, the center lost about $400,000 from nearly 100 events in its first 16 months. But even that pales in comparison to its outrageous $59 million price tag. Cal U's “showcase” underscores an intolerable regard for taxpayer dollars, which, in the halls of academia, is far removed from any economic reality.
Loosey-goosey lockup: It defies comprehension that in a county with insufficient prison space, some Fayette County inmates are held longer than they should be. Reportedly one inmate wasn't released even after posting bond. In other instances, inmates have been mistakenly released, according to a deputy court administrator. Note to Fayette's prison board: If the county's correction clerks can't perform the minimum responsibility of their job, fire them.
Smooth at last: Even before gas-line replacement work turned many Greensburg streets into a rutted mess, East Pittsburgh Street, a primary gateway into the city, was a jarring ride. But finally, to the considerable relief of Greensburg commuters, PennDOT has gotten around to repaving this badly degraded thoroughfare. But how long will it be before a utility or some other agency finds cause to dig up a segment of the repaved road?
Show commenting policy
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.
- ‘Un-American’? That’s Harry Reid, the Senate’s lowly smear artist
- The new SAT: Rigor gets a pass
- THE BOX
- Big Labor’s losses
- The Thursday wrap
- The IRS scandal: Compelling Lerner
- Fixing Ford City’s water leaks: Time is money
- Greensburg Tuesday takes
- Saturday essay: The gardeners’ etiquette
- Sunday pops
- Another EPA crock: Sulfur silliness