ShareThis Page
News

Burns again unhappy with job appointment

| Saturday, Aug. 11, 2001

WASHINGTON, Pa. - Not all of the Washington County Commissioners are happy with the new appointee on the Washington County Redevelopment Authority Board.

Commissioner J. Bracken Burns voted against the appointment of Canonsburg Mayor Anthony Colaizzo to the authority, claiming the former state representative has a plan to annex the Western Center site in Cecil Township for his hometown's use.

Commissioners John Bevec and Diana Irey, however, voted on Thursday to have Colaizzo serve on the board until July 2006. Burns was in favor of reappointing Pat O'Brien to the authority.

Burns claimed Colaizzo showed a 'prejudice' when making statements in the past regarding the Western Center. Western Center is a former state-run home for the mentally retarded that the state closed last year. It is located near the Southpointe development and the property has been appraised at $9.5 million.

'My hope (for the property) is that it will be turned over for the county's disposition,' Burns said following Thursday's commissioner's meeting.

Burns also feels the authority board member should be someone 'who wants to represent all of Washington County.'

Colaizzo had suggested that the Western Center property be annexed to Canonsburg, an idea is says is not illegal, but unlikely, as the Cecil Township supervisors would have to approve it.

Responding to Burns' claims, Colaizzo, who is also a former redevelopment authority employee, says he has the county's 'best interest at heart' and says he has proven his integrity over the years.

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