Share This Page

Harmar: No trouble

| Saturday, Jan. 18, 2014, 9:00 p.m.

I am responding to Harmar Supervisor Bob Exler's comment in the story “Harmar secretary-treasurer out after 6 years” in which he stated it was appropriate to appoint his son-in-law and neighbors to township boards.

“When you're in trouble,” he said, “you fall back to the people you know ... trying to get the most honest people we know ... .”

Harmar is not in trouble. The township is fiscally sound. It provides sound services within a professionally managed budget and hasn't raised taxes in six years. We have no pending lawsuits.

Unlike many surrounding communities, we have zero debt. There is a professional office staff and continuity of personnel.

Our police department, led by Chief Jason Domaratz, may be the most professional police department in the region. Our public works department regularly receives commendations, especially in the winter months.

We have the ongoing $20 million Pitt Ohio trucking terminal and a $500,000 grant to repave Rich Hill Road. This business will provide jobs and tax revenue to Harmar and the Allegheny Valley School District.

So who's in trouble?

Perhaps if Mr. Exler hadn't missed six of 16 public meetings in 2013 — including the last five and all of the budget meetings – or if he had picked up his mail from June through August, he might know what he's talking about.

Linda H Slomer

The writer is a Harmar Supervisor

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.