I would like to commend the three courageous members of the Port Authority of Allegheny County board who did not capitulate to the ruthless efforts of Allegheny County Executive Rich Fitzgerald in pressuring the board to fire Steve Bland as CEO.
I do not know Mr. Bland and I have no involvement of any kind (not even as a rider) with Port Authority. However, as a resident of Allegheny County, I have followed the various problems that the agency has had to deal with over the years.
Fitzgerald's policy of appointing individuals to county boards who promise to do whatever he wishes is unethical, immoral and illegal. It is most regrettable that so many seemingly intelligent, decent people are willing to go along with such a vindictive megalomaniacal policy in order to be appointed to (or remain a member of) a county board.
Pusillanimity is a sad and shameful form of behavior for any would-be community leader in the pursuit and performance of official governmental matters. When such obsequious, passive conduct results in an action that causes substantial harm to a victim of a political tyrant, then public exposure and condemnation are required.
The board members who voted against the motion to remove Mr. Bland can always be proud of the fact that they stood tall and did not bow to pressure from Fitzgerald, unlike their colleagues who voted to dismiss him not because of any legitimate, substantive policy disagreement, but simply because they were ordered to do so by a paranoid, power-hungry, intellectually limited county executive.
Cyril H. Wecht
The writer is a former Allegheny County coroner.
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.