ShareThis Page
Article missed several points about DJ’s office |

Article missed several points about DJ’s office

| Thursday, June 10, 2004 12:00 a.m

This is a resident’s response to the Neighborhoods article of May 20 titled, “Businesses complain about DJ’s office.” I have no role or stake in the matter.

While I can certainly sympathize with nearby business owners, there are several points that were not mentioned in the article that may provide a broader understanding and appreciation of the matter:

  • The location of the current district justice office was established prior to the election and assumption of office by Blaise Larotonda.

  • The term of the lease for the office is contractually fixed for a long period of time — I’ve heard 10 years.

  • While the district justice is, I believe, a state employee/function, the operating budget for the office is established and controlled by the Allegheny County court system.

  • Allegheny County was encouraged and offered space in Mt. Lebanon’s new Public Safety Center during and following its design phase. It was a site preferred by the then-district justice, police and local public officials. Allegheny County declined the opportunity, allegedly because of costs.

    William F. Lewis
    Mt. Lebanon

    Categories: News
  • TribLIVE commenting policy

    You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.