Regarding the news story “Baldwin-Whitehall School Board votes against donation to charity for Franklin Regional” : Why don't these elected officials get that the funds at their disposal are not theirs to be given for any purpose they deem? They are meant for a very specific purpose. These are taxpayer-provided funds.
If Martin Michael Schmotzer, the Baldwin-Whitehall board member who proposed the donation, feels that the Franklin Regional fund is a worthy cause (and it is), he is free to donate as much of his personal money as he wishes. And that is true for any residents of the B-W district.
I am “shocked and ashamed” that Schmotzer does not understand the district's funds are not his personal stash. He said he got the idea from his daughter. I am sorry he missed a teachable moment with her. He could have told her it was a great idea to show concern and want to help. She could have donated some of her savings. Perhaps she could have held a fundraiser to help them out.
But he should have made clear to her that taxpayers funds are not for that purpose. What a shame!
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.