Letter to the editor: Paying for police, roads & bridges | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Paying for police, roads & bridges

The editorial “Gas tax covers police for areas that won’t” (April 26, TribLIVE) included great comments about the current situation in Pennsylvania.

I have a solution: If your municipality doesn’t have a police force, it should fix roads and bridges without state help.

Great and wonderful Hempfield Township is one that doesn’t pay for police coverage and sponges off the rest of us. How much gas tax money is going to Hempfield to fix roads and bridges? It should stop immediately.

Gov. Tom Wolf proposed a per capita assessment that was shouted down by cries that “We can’t afford it,” especially in Hempfield Township.

I live in South Greensburg, home to just over 2,000 people, and we have a police department. Our borough owns up to its responsibilities and provides first-class services to its residents.

It’s time that “second class” Hempfield Township and others step up and provide first-class services like police protection or pay for their own bridge and road repairs.

And the rest of the municipalities need to go after Wolf and the Legislature to take appropriate action.

John A. Waite

South Greensburg

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.