Greensburg Laurels & Lances
Laurel (with a caveat): To Jeannette's leaders. While many municipalities have been scrambling to find road salt, Jeannette faced the brunt of winter's wrath “in really, really good shape,” say Mayor Richard Jacobelli. Now, if the cash-strapped city could only budget its finances as well as its road salt.
Laurel: To Gary Caruso. The Westmoreland County judge ruled that an old monk parakeet, deemed an imminent “threat” by the state's parakeet police, should be returned to its Youngwood owner, 63, who, for nearly three decades, has cared for the bird without a single environmental catastrophe. Common sense always trumps the perpetually ham-handed Nanny State.
On the “Watch List”: The Hempfield Area superintendent's medical leave. Citing confidentiality under “personnel matters,” Hempfield school directors have given few details about Superintendent Andy Leopold's absence — only that an acting superintendent has been named. Godspeed to Mr. Leopold but district residents who pay the bills deserve more information on the short-term, and possibly long-term, implications.
An observation: Nearly six months later, Greensburg Salem taxpayers still have no answers on who ordered school district staff to illegally pad the salaries of six former administrators to boost their pensions, according to a state audit. Schools Superintendent Eileen Amato says “legally,” the district cannot yet name the person(s) involved. Then perhaps “legally,” taxpayers should explore their options to compel a straight answer about this alleged pocket-diving.
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.