Pittsburgh Tuesday takes
Assessment games: Allegheny County's failure to produce and maintain a fair and regular system of property tax assessments — and, in some instances, actively working to undermine that system — has produced what you might expect: local municipalities and school districts attempting to use the appeals process to engage in nothing less than spot assessment. This end around is dubious public policy and has the perverse effect of not only pitting neighbor against neighbor but perpetuating unconstitutional taxation. All of this nonsense must stop.
Staffing questions: Pittsburgh International Airport no longer is a hub airport. And passenger traffic has been cut in half over the past dozen years. But the Allegheny County Airport Authority employs about the same number of people. The authority defends the employment levels, saying it has the same amount of infrastructure to maintain. Yet operations at comparable airports employ fewer people. It's food for thought as airport officials struggle to turn around Pittsburgh International's fortunes.
Another success: Nearly 24,000 runners. Tens of thousands of additional spectators. Logistics that would make the heads spin of the most adroit planners. And a safe race with no serious problems. That was Sunday's Pittsburgh Marathon in a nutshell. Kudos to the organizer in chief, Patrice Matamoros, who is the first to thank the hundreds, if not thousands, of people who worked just as hard to implement a plan that works quite well.
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 â 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.