ShareThis Page
Editorials

Greensburg Laurels & Lances

| Thursday, Feb. 12, 2015, 8:55 p.m.

Lance: To the solicitor salary follies. Westmoreland County commissioners hired part-timer Melissa Guiddy, presumably at a salary of $55,600. But because an incorrect base figure was used — “a math error,” according to Commissioner Charles Anderson — her salary has since been “corrected” and set at $69,610. All told, that amounts to more than $14,000 in egg left on the county's face.

On the “Watch List”:

• Greensburg Salem's aging buildings: The district is showing its age, according to a $10,000 study of school properties. And surely Greensburg Salem is not alone. But how the district keeps the lights on and the boilers running will be increasingly challenging amid other costs, not the least of which are unsustainable pensions.

• Jeannette's windfall: The proposed $22 million sale of the city's sewage system to the Municipal Authority of Westmoreland County could be Jeannette's ticket out of debt. But before any back-slapping, city fathers must resolve the underlying fiscal problems that landed Jeannette at the brink of bankruptcy.

• Public safety's helper: If Guy Frank Rubei wants to be a public safety volunteer, he should do so by the book. Police charged him with impersonating a public servant after he patrolled Hempfield neighborhoods, allegedly acting as a fire policeman. This is a job for dedicated, trained volunteers, not freelancers.

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.

click me