ShareThis Page
Editorials

Greensburg Tuesday takes

| Monday, March 2, 2015, 9:00 p.m.

Delmont's “dummy-up” policy: A new rule that prevents employees from publicly discussing borough business and threatens termination could trample their free-speech rights. In Pickering v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court ruled that school officials violated the First Amendment when they fired a public school teacher for speaking out as a citizen on an issue of public concern. Whenever officials at any level of government push the envelope on protected rights, the public must push back.

Planning Jeannette's future: Rather than look back on past problems, city officials and residents recently took a different perspective — by looking ahead in preparation for a comprehensive plan. Initially embraced with enthusiasm, these expensive plans oftentimes end up gathering dust once they're completed. It doesn't require a plan for citizens to take pride in their city and help move it forward (from private property upkeep to volunteer opportunities). City pride, citizen involvement and fiscal discipline: these are the tools that will help Jeannette “reinvent” itself.

Park upkeep: Communities like Hempfield are fortunate to have volunteers willing to help out. So when a group like Fort Allen Volunteers of Recreation come to the township to address maintenance needs of St. Johns Park, supervisors should at least meet residents halfway. Regardless of any prior issues, it's better to have residents willing to step up than those who simply don't care.

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