Road signs eat up part of stimulus
PennDOT has spent $60,000 to create large green road signs telling motorists that funding was secured by the federal stimulus package.
Agency spokesman Eric Waters said the signs will be visible at 30 projects across the state. The signs will cost about $2,000 each.
"We received $1 billion for roads and bridge projects; not all of the 242 projects will have signs," he said.
Four Western Pennsylvania projects have signs, said spokesman Jim Struzzi. They are: a maintenance project on the Fort Duquesne Bridge, Downtown; an interchange project on Routes 2 2⁄30 in Robinson; a project on the Rochester-Beaver Bridge in Beaver County; and repair work on Route 422 in Lawrence County.
Lori Irving, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Department of Transportation, acknowledged the department strongly encouraged states to use stimulus funding to develop the signs.
"The signs are not required," she said.
Some states, like Virginia, chose not to erect signs.
"Personally I think it is ridiculous that any of the stimulus money is used by government entities to make signs," said Mike Cupp of Morgantown, W.Va.
West Virginia is placing signs on projects. The state received $210 million for 115 road and bridge projects, said Karen Zamow, spokeswoman for the West Virginia Department of Transportation.
But Cupp wondered how many jobs the signs will create.
"Explain to me how that is stimulating?" he said.
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.