ShareThis Page

Greensburg Laurels & Lances

| Thursday, June 19, 2014, 8:55 p.m.

On the “Watch List”:

• Commissioners' cost savings. A proposal from Westmoreland County Democrat Commissioner Ted Kopas to hire a county manager, which would replace the commissioners' chiefs of staff, is DOA. Republican Commissioners Charles Anderson and Tyler Courtney won't go for it. But that puts the ball in the Republicans' court: What cost-saving measures do they propose to help close the county's recurring multimillion-dollar deficit?

• The Jeannette fire department ballot question. The city council has approved a resolution to ask voters in the fall whether they want to continue funding paid firefighters or switch to a volunteer department. A public vote is required to disband the paid department. But the decision is best assessed by local leaders, who (we trust) have access to more information than the average voter. And as a cost-saving measure, is it worth a “huge safety” risk, as one councilman put it, to discontinue a paid department that accounts for only 5 percent of the city budget?

Laurel: To drug-addiction treatment. The spike in drug-overdose deaths in Westmoreland County has been shocking. Yet the last county-based detox center closed in the 1980s. So news of a new treatment unit at Excela Health Frick Hospital is most welcome. Kudos to Gateway Rehabilitation of Beaver County, Westmoreland County's Drug and Alcohol Commission and everyone else who helped make this happen.

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.