ShareThis Page
Letter to the editor: Hempfield supervisors do great job | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Hempfield supervisors do great job

The 2019 primary election season is fast approaching, and the spring always promises us daffodils, weeds and yard signs. Regardless of your party, you will be choosing between candidates for local positions.

Our choices are not always clear, as many candidates are inexperienced and have no record, or experienced and have a track record not published. As voters we need to recognize between a job well done and needless jabs to manipulate political favor or party dominance.

As a resident of Hempfield Township, I can attest our current supervisor board and those seeking re-election have done a magnificent job — from road paving and maintenance, storm water projects, fire protection, community parks and recreation, public safety, securing grants, and many other local services with not one cent in raised property taxes.

Don’t be distracted by fake news about votes taken on the wrong day or in the wrong room promoted by political ambition or sour grapes. What better way to besmirch a candidate than “ask for an audit” (“Hempfield to review past votes, but supervisors balk at state audit,” Jan. 31, TribLIVE)?

Vote for good government with a proven track record of success, and ignore the weeds of spring politics. In Hempfield for supervisor our choice is Doug Weimer and Tom Logan. It matters.

Thomas K. Methven

Hempfield


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.