ShareThis Page
Greensburg’s Nevin Arena loses Pens’ ‘Renovate the Rink’ contest | TribLIVE.com
Westmoreland

Greensburg’s Nevin Arena loses Pens’ ‘Renovate the Rink’ contest

Jacob Tierney
| Wednesday, March 13, 2019 7:28 p.m
878293_web1_gtr-NevinFinal-020119
Christopher Horner | Tribune-Review
A speed skater makes his way around the track at Kirk S. Nevin Arena during the 2018 Winter Special Olympics in Greensburg.

The votes are in, and Greensburg’s Kirk S. Nevin arena lost the competition for a $100,000 grant from the Pittsburgh Penguin’s Foundation.

New Castle’s Hess Ice Rink won the Penguin’s first “Renovate the Rink” contest by getting the most votes from fans.

Nevin Arena Manager Trudy Ivory said she wasn’t told the final vote count — only that Nevin ranked second out of the three competitors.

“Everybody in our organization of course was very disappointed,” Ivory said. “I think everybody was hoping it would work out for the best.”

She had hoped to use the money to replace rubber flooring that was damaged in a flood last year, to modernize the lockers, showers and restrooms, refurbish the bleachers and add some new storage areas.

It doesn’t look like any of that will happen without the grant, she said.

“It was the only way,” she said. “My budget this year just does not have any of those items on it.”

The city budgeted $57,000 for routine arena maintenance this year.

Ivory said it’s too early to tell whether Nevin will be in the running for “Renovate the Rink” next year.

She said she is “beyond grateful” to the fans who supported Nevin during the voting.

“The people were just fantastic, the constant positive comments I got every day,” she said. “It was nice to see the community come together.”

Jacob Tierney is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Jacob at 724-836-6646, jtierney@tribweb.com or via Twitter .

Categories: Local | Westmoreland
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.