ShareThis Page

Greensburg Laurels & Lances

| Thursday, Feb. 13, 2014, 8:55 p.m.

Lance: To school salary insanity. In a graphic illustration of where public school dollars go, consider the Greensburg Salem's School Board's deliberations over whether to hire a custodian. Why is this a big deal? Well, because the job, per union contract, reportedly pays about $78,000 annually with benefits. No doubt, this most generous union-bargained compensation is “for the children,” right?

On the “Watch List”: Snow days. As the number grows, expect local school boards to take up the dicey discussion of where to make up the time. To be clear, lost instruction time should be made up with instruction time — not with any state-sanctioned exemptions that shortchange students' learning.

Laurel: To a vested interest in police dogs' safety. North Huntingdon K-9 officers Vegas, Colt and Nero recently received Kevlar protective vests — each with a retail value of approximately $2,000 — through the nonprofit Vested Interest in K-9s foundation and a retired New York City police officer. Especially after the stabbing death of Pittsburgh's K-9 officer Rocco, it's a wise investment in K-9s whose singular focus is to serve.

Laurel: To good Samaritans in the snow. Too often the jerks who tailgate during horrible conditions or those who shovel snow back into cleared streets draw the most attention. Here's to all the good folks who clear elderly residents' walkways or plow neighbors' driveways. These warmhearted souls take some of the chill out of what's been an especially bitter winter.

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.