ShareThis Page

Greensburg Tuesday takes

| Monday, Sept. 9, 2013, 9:00 p.m.

Where credit's due: Along with apprehending and prosecuting those who, without too much difficulty, reportedly racked up $31,173 in fuel purchases on Fayette County's Pacific Pride credit card, perhaps commissioners can also find out why, according to state police, the card wasn't canceled after a county employee reported it lost or stolen. That was in April 2012. Bad as government's fiscal accountability is, such mindless disregard is outrageous.

The overtime dispute: In the latest controversy involving Westmoreland County Sheriff Jonathan Held, county Controller Jeff Balzer says Mr. Held's office failed to properly document $124,000 in overtime pay to deputies and $314,000 to part-timers last year. Held says Mr. Balzer's wrong and has no bite to go with his bark. We trust county commissioners will figure out who's right and, more importantly, whether any laws were trampled before this blows up into a county embarrassment.

More “community” communication: Westmoreland County Community College officials make a valid case for providing armed security at the campus near Youngwood. But given the cost involved, the move to hire the county's park police could have benefited from more public discussion along with a detailed review of the alternatives. Especially for the “community,” which ultimately will pay the estimated $316,000-plus tab for police services in 2014.

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.