ShareThis Page
Library should survive on what it already has |
Letters to the Editor

Library should survive on what it already has

| Monday, October 23, 2017 9:00 p.m

The Greensburg Hempfield Area Library is failing financially, just as libraries across the United States are failing, because of technology.

Nearly 22 percent of Greensburg citizens’ earnings are below the poverty line. They are strapped with a school tax that’s been raised 16 times in 17 years because of unsustainable pension costs. It’s a good bet landlords pass these costs on to their tenants.

They are represented by a city government that didn’t have the courage to say “no” to this boondoggle they call the library referendum ( “Fate of Greensburg Hempfield library system soon to be decided by voters”) and who look for ways to spend tax dollars instead of saving them. Now we are being asked to create another bureaucracy to sustain 25 employees’ jobs at more than $400,000 — over 50 percent of the library’s budget.

I say let the library survive on the tax dollars it’s already being given and the merit of the product it’s producing, or follow the Pony Express and the telegraph as a nostalgic part of American history. Our grandchildren can read about it on the internet.

David Goughnour


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.