Archive

Alle-Kiski Laurels & Lances | TribLIVE.com
Editorials

Alle-Kiski Laurels & Lances

On the “Watch List”:

• Route 28. Before the five-year-long project to reconstruct Route 28, we were told it would spur residential and economic development along the corridor, particularly in southwestern Armstrong County because the commute to downtown would take less time and aggravation. We hope so, but we also have our doubts.

• The Ford City Council. The council is pulling the old “Scare the taxpayers; that way you can fleece ’em” trick over its threat to disband the police department. Disbanding will occur the day after Councilman Jerry Miklos sprouts wings and flies to Cadogan. This “controversy” is nothing but an effort to get political cover so the council can hike taxes to cover its $600,000 grant default and pay off other debts due to its financial incompetence.

• Westmoreland County employee retirements. From senior managers to rank-and-file workers, this year’s retirements have set a new record. And that’s an opportunity, not only for finding so-called “new talent” but for effecting better efficiencies in county departments. Let’s see some savings.

Lance: To fishy smells. There’s an odor of dead carp emanating from Clinton Township. Two energy companies want to build a gas metering station there. So whose property are they planning to use? The farm owned by the husband of Clinton Supervisor Kathy Allen. And, we’re told, “That meter station will have little impact to residents (and) blend into the rural environment.” And who told us that? Supervisor Allen told us. Sniff, sniff?


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.