Re-elect Mayor Kish
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Friday, May 10, 2013, 8:57 p.m.
Re-elect Mayor Kish
Re. the Brackenridge mayor's race: I question how accurate challenger Joe Nasser's views are regarding the borough police department's spending and what influence he believes the mayor has on this spending. The mayor does not vote to hire police or approve spending — only the council does.
I've attended at least 10 of the last 12 council meetings, but seen Mr. Nasser only at the last three. Is he so well informed on borough matters that he feels he should be mayor? Does he understand the needs of the residents outside of the police spending issue?
In the May 8 article “Police costs issue in Brackenridge race,” Nasser says he views the mayor's role as being a watchdog and “would voice my opinion.” I heard his voice at only one meeting and it was a complaint, one corrected by borough workers.
There is more to Brackenridge than our police force — the ATI construction project issue, for example. Mayor Tom Kish has an established relationship with ATI. He's in constant contact with ATI and the residents living next to the project, which includes me. Why would we jeopardize what's in place by electing a new mayor?
Tom is available by phone and in person to all residents 24/7. If someone has an issue, Tom is there to assist. He calls the council member for that ward and together they work to rectify the situation. I am very satisfied with our mayor and how seriously he takes the job.
It would not be prudent to elect a new mayor.
David C. Marchese
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.
- Knives vs. guns II
- Bloomberg & coal
- Knives vs. guns I
- Resurrection? Yes, really
- Consequences in space
- Valley musical superb
- Tragedy sensationalized
- Sign on to save Springdale
- Weighty issue
- Stop currying Saudis’ favor
- Tragedy’s ramifications II