I received this timely letter to the editor from a former elected official who would like to remain anonymous.
It's Your Turn
In local politics everything is personal. All decisions at this level of government affect our children's education, our traffic patterns, our First Friday's, the quality of the streets on which we drive. Local officials also determine the levels of income and property tax we pay to our school district and municipality.
These decisions impact each and every one of us every day. That's why I am hoping that more of us take these issues personally.
It's personal when my home appraisal goes up 50% but my neighbor who bought their house at the same price as mine is underassessed by 30%. It's personal for some people when a Commission decides to let high powered rifles be fired literally feet from our homes. It's personal for parents when their children are being taught a math curriculum with which they disagree.
So here is my challenge to the everyday residents of Mt. Lebanon. If you get the sense that things are a bit off kilter and that you might have some ideas on how to change local government for the better, then consider a run for school board or commission.
Run if you think math needs to change,
Or if it makes you feel deranged.
Run if you want to shoot deer with high powered rifle
Run if you want deer over for after-dinner trifle
If you think the school board is competent
Or if you think the board is incontinent
RUN!
If you want to fill our fields full of plastic
or if you think that kind of money is too drastic,
RUN!
Whether you want things to be the same
Or you just want someone else to blame
RUN!
Don't sit down and let people question
"Why only these same people up for election?"
Ten signatures gets you on the primary ballot
At times you may feel as if struck by a mallet
But the rewards of lifelong friendships are great
The people you meet and affect will appreciate
That you spend all your spare time
Trying to save them that dime.
February 19th comes quick
Give me somebody new to pick!
Go to the County Elections Page
And just maybe you will become all the rage!
http://www.alleghenycounty.us/elect/cal.aspx
55 comments:
Anyone who runs for school board can cross file by circulating two petitions, one for the Republican ballot and one for the Democratic ballot. So if any of the math parents decide to run and are Democrats, for example, I could sign their Republican nomination petition.
Elaine
I can think of a couple of people that would be good candidates. Maybe they need prodding.
Perhaps Elaine a wish list might convince them to try it.
Two of my choices would be Mr. Gideon and Mr. Mathews. Based on their contributions here I think both could be a breath of fresh air on the board or commission if they're eligible. There are others, but these gentleman come immediately to mind.
Here is a suggestion. Matt Kluck for County Council. He is our highest elected Republican. He should submit his resume.
I asked Richard Gideon and he declined. I have asked concerned parents involved with the math program. The response? NO THANKS! That is exactly how I got the response. All in caps.
If we get four candidates for school board who are fiscally responsible like Scott Goldman, we could stop the administrative raises. There would be five votes.
For commission, Dave Brumfield is running again in his ward. We need somebody to run against him. Matt Kluck is not running again, so we need a strong Republican from Matt's ward to run the race. I know there are some people who are thinking about running. You need a thick skin. You see what I put up with here. But the people who give me grief, don't have the guts to run. At least I gave it a shot.
Elaine
I forgot to add this. Matt Kluck going on County Council would be good for Mt. Lebanon. It would mean that my commissioner would have a shorter term as president.
You know, I am going to stop saying that Kristen Linfante is my commissioner. She is not.
Elaine
That's a shame, Richard's lineterian views would be a welcome change.
As for the school board, no one wanting it is understandable. The damage has been done - who wants to inherit that mess.
To all who have called, E-mailed, or posted on this Blog asking me to run for public office: Thank you!
Believe it or not, I have put a great deal of thought into the subject. I immediately rejected running for a seat of the school board. To run for a seat on the MLSB one must believe in public education. I do not; at least in the public education system as it currently stands in Pennsylvania. Therefore it would be both immoral and hypocritical of me to run for that office. I then put a great deal of time running the numbers of past elections for seats on the Mt. Lebanon Commission, and it became clear to me that libertarians stand little chance of winning in my Ward; although I do think the odds would improve if a YOUNG, dynamic candidate were offered, or a libertarian ran under the cover of the Democratic or Republican labels - something I am not willing to do.
The best thing I can do for the community, for the time I'm still here, as I see it, is to employ my talent as a writer to advance the cause of free minds and free markets, individual liberty, self-ownership, and limited government. This is were change begins; by appealing to the minds of the people by advancing rational ideas.
PS: I think Bill Matthews would make a great candidate for the school board.
Correction....
Make that "...seat on the school board."
Age and eyesight!
I wish that Dr Ben Carson lived in Mt Lebanon.
As usual, it is always easier sniping from the sidelines than actually getting into the fray. I don't always agree with everything done by either the school board or the commission, but I have a great deal of respect for every one of the people who have the courage to participate. It's easy to complain. It's difficult to actually try to accomplish something.
11:46 AM, I am not that easy. The elected officials have to earn my respect. Take the commission, for instance. The Ward 3 commissioner SHOULD be my commissioner. But my adopted Ward 5 commissioner, Kelly Fraasch has earned my respect. She is phenomenal! Look at her latest accomplishments:
http://www.kellyfraasch.com/2013/02/07/public-safety-in-mt-lebanon-is-top-notch/
Elaine
11:46 you're correct in your platitudes for the people that stepped into "the fray." They do deserve respect for their involvement. But, being involved doesn't make them omnipotent!
Just being there doesn't make them right.
The board went to great lengths to assure us the high school project would likely come in around $95 million dollars. A number of residents, some construction professionals, stepped into the fray to offer their expert opinions and advice, tried to tell them not to pursue their plan.
Did the official give these community volunteers the same respect they demand/expect for themselves?
Does Elaine get the same respect and admiration. How about Mr. Houston, Ewing, Lewis, Matthews, Fraasch and Hart. All of the above, and more, stepped into the fray one way or the other. Most offering advice, counselor or just observations and then fully expecting to fade away or at least sit on the bench ready to serve if called upon.
There are 9 seats on the board and 5 seats on the commission. I doubt that all 33,000 residents can sit in them at one time.
What unfortunately has developed in our local government is the perception by our local officials that they never get it wrong. That they don't need to answer question and never, ever apologize for anything. Even when they miss a building estimate by $17 million+.
From the Governor’s budget message;
“ . . .the commonwealth’s growing pension obligations are crowding out funding for basic and higher education, public safety, health, human services, maintenance and repair of roads and bridges, environmental protection and other core governmental programs.
The fiscal reality is that absent meaningful structural pension reform, the state’s budget is on a very predictable path that will force a choice between either fully funding pension obligations or making cuts to the core functions of government on which our citizens rely.
Just as it impacts at a state level, increasing pension contribution obligations will claim a greater and greater share of school district budgets, crowding out funding for classroom instruction, extra-curricular activities, facilities and/or maintenance. District officials will have to make tough decisions that include either cutting services or raising taxes to balance their budgets.”
I'll give you two guesses - and the first one doesn't count - what the board's first choice will be.
It'll either be higher taxes or some empty classrooms. They cannot stay on the path they've been on forever.
In 2009 expenditures were $72,000,000 - the up coming budget proposal is $84,000,000 and we still don't know the outcome of the teachers grievance.
5:03 you define the problem. Your idea of who deserves admiration and respect explains why this blog is thought to be a joke. If the individuals you name are representative of your heroes, then we know a lot about you. Huston, who only has one agenda, flags; Ewing a discredited former school board member who was forced to resign, Lewis and Mathews, two pundits whose analysis of anything is so tedious that eyes glaze over; Fraasch who made a career of ignoring the rules of confidentially so consistently that the board finally isolated and ignored him; and last but not least, Hart; a bully who not only ignored all normal civil discourse, but also allowed his personal behavior to embarrass his family, the school district and the community. In case you did not notice, none of these people are in a position to change anything, (thank goodness) nor are they likely to ever be in that position. It proves that the people in this community are much smarter than anyone on this blog would acknowledge.
8:17 AM, you were dangerously close to not being published. You are the reason why the new MTL blog will not take anonymous comments. You are in the position to know better, doncha think? I revised my comment policy yesterday and am seriously considering changing it back. You are a bully. You are the reason why good people won't run for office. If you are so unhappy with this blog, why are you so obsessed with it? Get a life and clean up your act. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Elaine
8:17, wow, school board member. Not sure in your rapid and emotional response you know how much you revealed about your identity.
Odd how the people singled out by the brave writer at 817 somehow some way all had views that ran counter to the establishment. Hmm...now why would someone take the time to single out independent thinkers?
Contrary to your silly post, Anon 817, i would sumbit the real joke is anyone in our community believing the school board is acting responsibly. More of the same after several years of disresepect for residents. Further, if you have such strong views and actually believe what you write, sign your name. Let's have a real debate (but to Elaines point, if this blog is so awful why are you reading it?)
To: 8:17
Hope you understand that most know exactly who you are because of this post. Keep posting anonymously but the truth can be seen from a mile away. Oh and slanderous statements might bump you right out of office and your current race.
8:17 you are full of it. You called Hart a bully, prove it!
If Mathews and Lewis presentations cause your eyes to glaze over perhaps you shouldn't comment on anything you can't stay awake for.
As for Fraasch, he didn't put out anything that one didn't hear in his very public, AUTHORIZED, audit & finance meetings. Plus they were no more actionable than a certain school board member's lies about a certain resident's professional credentials. Remember too, this is an organization that claims its all for transparency.
On Huston, you are a bold faced liar. Let me repeat that... YOU ARE A LIAR!!!
He has stood at the podium and addressed many issues other than flags. You my not like his comments or his delivery but he still deserves respect.
You 8:17, in my opinion is what is wrong in this community.
Anonymous 8:17 AM sounds like the poor dejected rejected Dave Franklin angrily pounding his keyboard in his sorry office in the early morning hours.
Hopefully we don't spend too much time on 8:17.
Here's the thing about the Board packet. Other than legal information and collective bargaining, all material from board packets is subject to right to know. At some point it becomes public information.
My belief is that Board packets except for legal and negotiation matters should be completely open to the public. Why can't the public be as informed as the school board members are? The board has instituted a policy about "pre-deliberative" information not being subject to being released to the public. However, that makes no sense. What it does guarantee (or try to guarantee) is that no school board member will seek counsel (personal or professional) outside the central office.
That kind of narrow-mindedness and lack of transparency is what this crop of school board members and central administration want but it is not the right way to run a publicly run school district.
I remember Mr. Fraasch going outside the school district to seek counsel on the Build America Bonds. What he found was that they would save literally millions of dollars over what our bond adviser was recommending. The "pre-deliberative" policy in effect now would have disallowed that kind of investigation.
8:46 I generally don't care whether comments are made anonymously here or not. In some instances I believes name actually gets in the way of forming an opinion on what the author wrote.
In 8:17s case, I'm making an exception. If they are a board member, I want to know because I sure as hell don't want them running our school district.
I guess the only way to assure they don't get reelected is to not vote for any incumbents.
8:17 is a prime example of why we can't get good to people to run for office.
Rob Gardner once posted that some people are hijacking our community.
I submit Rob, 8:17 is your hijacker!
Elaine,
I want to thank you again for you relentless dedication to provide our community with this platform.
I also want to encourage anyone with an ability to make a meaningful contribution to either the municipality or the school district to run for elected office. Mt Lebanon needs you now more than ever.
9:36 makes a brilliant observation and suggestion.
That might be the best one I've ever read on any of our local blogs! Why shouldn't the public receive the same info as the board sans those items that are truly protected?
The school district isn't the Manhattan Project. It's not at war with the stakeholders. How can reddened be involved, participate if they don't have all the facts.
Your suggestion 9:36 is brilliant, absolutely brilliant!
On the subject of Mr Ewing, I attended the Republican Committee meeting many years ago when John presented a credible actuarial model of population growth. The heated discussion throughout the meeting involved population growth and whether or not to invest heavily in expanding capacity in the community schools.
Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but I remember John presenting a growth model that was developed by an actuarial associate whose AIA credentials appeared on the chart. John professionally presented an argument that the birth rate in his actuarial forecast was not consistent with the population growth model that was being pushed by the school district. John presented evidence that his forecast was a more accurate model and then argued that it would be a mistake to make the heavy investment in the facilities.
All of this transpired about 19 years ago. What we now know is that John Ewing was right.
Unfortunately, the expenditures on the facilities moved forward and John resigned from The Board.
I remember reading an interview that John gave in The Almanac shortly after he left. John made an analogy between the teachers union and the employment matters concerning the railroad workers union. John also warned of the ultimate doom that would result if nobody changed our course.
We never changed course.
John Ewing was right.
-and here we are.
8:17's comment about one individual - it is so malicious I refuse to repeat it - can only be described as "awful, bad-natured, baleful, beastly, bitter, catty, cussed, deleterious, despiteful, detrimental, envious, evil, evil-minded, green, green-eyed, gross, ill-disposed, injurious, jealous, low, malevolent,malign, malignant, mean, mischievous, nasty, noxious, ornery, pernicious, petty, poisonous, rancorous, resentful, spiteful, uncool, vengeful, venomous, vicious, virulent, wicked."
What is troubling is that they are so blind and truly believe they represent and are the guardian of the community.
Now I'm done with 8:17.
Mr. Kendrick,
You have an excellent memory.
John
8:17 Your attack on Mark Hart clearly makes me think you are PTA. The Council PTA went after him with a vengeance, even involving the Devils Advocate to slander him. The problem with many of the leaders in that organization is they think everyone in this community thinks like them, as clearly do you. Where you do get the right to say that he was an embarrassment to his family, school board and the community? Act like and adult and speak for yourself. You have done nothing but embarrass yourself.
I wonder if 8:17 here and 12:51 2/8/13 in the library photo post are the same person?
There seems to be a propensity to brand people as ignorant or to try and define their moral character as beneath that persons "high" standards.
In fact reviewing a number of post, there is always a contributor that doesn't present compelling evidence to support their position. They always close with a personal slur or insult to try and control the conversation.
5:38 Wasn't the Council PTA run by Mary Birks during that time?
@6:47 Mary Birks popped into my head.
I have received emails asking about 8:17 AM. Most suspect 8:17 AM to be Mary Birks. I got a couple believing it is Jo Posti while others suspect her father.
Mary is running again. I hear that Josephine is not. All I will say is that comments like 8:17's could cost Birks votes regardless of who sent them in. You may want to think twice before you send in your next comment.
Elaine
If either didn't return to the board it wouldn't be a great loss, in my book.
Elaine: I know it would be a hard decision, but all this nonsense on both (all) sides would stop if you'd insist that people put their names on their comments. I rarely agree with Mr. Cannon, but it appears we agree on this. People would stick so much more to substance and depend so much less on personal innuendo if they had to put their names on it. And you wouldn't have to waste your time speculating on who said what or piecing things together from ISP addresses. As Mr. Kendrick said, this blog is a public service, and I understand it's your call as to what to do on this. However, I'm really convinced that getting rid of the anonymous comments (again, on both sides) would raise civility, increase substance, and get people actually talking with one another about real solutions to local problems.--Neil Berch
For the Ds it will be
Mary Birks
Mike Reimer
Ian Black
William McCullough
At least those are the petitions that I have seen/signed.
For the Rs all I know of is Dan Remely. Maybe one of the Rs here knows more?
Ahem, the first day to obtain signatures for candidates' nomination petitions is February 19. I appreciate the information, but right off the bat, the Democrats are not following the rules.
Elaine
Sorry, petitions was the wrong word.
Those are the candidates that have been circulated as running in emails in the D circles. No petitions signed on my part as of yet! But I will sign them when I see them.
Two more points Neil.
9:36 suggested making the board packet contents available for review by the public. I think that's a great idea!
It would get everything out on the table and eliminate suspicion that back door deals are being made. Transparency in government and all that.
Second, when groups like the PTA are prosecuted for sending out emails under fake names that break the rules on participation in elections, I'll considering signing my name.
Two other things off of Anonymous 8:22's comment:
1. Regardless of party affinity, it is likely that most school board candidates will cross-file (Mr. Cannon was the only exception to that the last time around). This is a strange and largely Pennsylvania-oriented tradition. It doesn't happen in most states. In fact, in many places, local offices like school board and city council are nonpartisan. People run without party labels, the logic being that, in local offices, ideology is less important, and the emphasis should be on competence and honesty. In many places, this logic is also applied to judicial offices and sometimes to other offices. Indeed, when I lived there, both Salt Lake City and Seattle elected their mayors in nonpartisan elections.
2. If Mr. Remely runs for both the School Board and the State House and wins both offices, presumably he would have to (or at least would, I presume) give up the school board seat, creating a vacancy. I don't think (though I'm not sure) that would trigger another special election; instead, I would guess that the school board would get to fill that seat as it normally does when someone resigns from the board. In any event, regardless of what one may think about the particular merits of Mr. Remely or Matt Smith, the law that allows people to run for two offices at the same time is not a good one, I believe.
And it's not only a Pennsylvania law. Some (but not most) other states allow it as well. The two most famous recent examples are Joe Lieberman running for VP and his Senate seat at the same time, and Paul Ryan running for VP and his House seat at the same time. Both lost their VP bids, but had they won those, more cost and/or less democracy would have ensued. In the Ryan case, Wisconsin would have had to hold a special election for his House seat (similar to the Smith situation here), and the seat would have remained vacant (and the district's residents unrepresented in the months between a Ryan resignation and a special election). In the Lieberman case, the Connecticut Governor would have appointed someone to fill the seat for a few months, followed by a new (and costly) election to fill the remainder of the term (similar to what's happening now in Massachusetts, but different from how Hawaii and South Carolina filled their vacancies, where the governors appointed someone to serve until the 2014 midterm election; under the 17th Amendment, each state gets to decide on its own how to fill Senate vacancies). All of these are examples of how letting people run for two offices at once either increases costs, decreases democracy, or both.--Neil Berch
Neil, I agree with your opinion on running for two offices simultaneously, it shouldn't be allowed.
Concerning whether Remely could hold a position in the state house and be a board member, wouldn't doing so cause a large number of his votes in either office to be a conflict of interest?
Just a thought.
This comment preceded the one at 9:39 so they are out of order.
Mr. Berch:
You do make some good points, but it is not that simple.
First, I'll offer:
http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20121231/NEWS03/312310023/Survey-will-allow-teachers-speak-up
"Delaware public school educators have a new way to make their voices heard with a program starting next month that allows them to give feedback anonymously on conditions at their schools.
Delaware joins about 20 other states that are using surveys to determine conditions at schools by asking educators in those buildings to provide feedback. Questions on the survey will seek information on a variety of topics, including school leadership, use of time, new teacher support and professional development."
"It is important for teachers to know that information they provide will be anonymous, Jenner said. There have been many steps taken to ensure that an individual educator’s response can’t be traced back, she said."
Neil, why would the state of Delaware feel it was necessary to protect teacher's anonymity? I'll bet some of the other 20 states do also.
In a perfect world, Neil I 'd agree with your position. Unfortunately, its not perfect. Delaware understands that.
Neil, you work in an environment where you are protected by tenure, and I presume a union. Many don't have that luxury.
Seriously, we live in a community where you can't even put up a political lawn sign without fear of reprisal like late night phone calls, theft and vandalism. It shouldn't happen but it does.
And third, some of our greatest leaders throughout history had no qualms penning anonymous papers or using fake ones.
Yes, you are correct signing would probably eliminate some of the most vicious comments. On the other hand it's my opinion most of us are mature and adult enough to discern the value in them.
Neil,
We do indeed agree on this. I think the law that allows simultaneous pursuit of seats, be it in Pennsylvania or anywhere else, is awful. Personally, I think it desecrates the democratic process in our republic. But we keep electing the same exact types of people to office so I don't know why we hold out hope it will ever change.
The other issue is cross-filing. I did not cross-file because (contrary to the line distributed by my detractors about not getting signatures) I mistakenly and naively thought it would be refreshing to have someone make a principled run at local elected office. As is the trend everywhere, though, we no longer have distinct parties but rather ideologies. It would be great if the state would bring itself into the new century and make local seats non-partisan. Might even garner more interest by the community and thus, force the board to be transparent.
As usual, the R party is dropping the ball. So, Lebo, here we go again. Don't be surprised if the school board starts talking about a subway system between the school and the field so the little kiddies don't get cold.
Elaine, pleas remove the comment at 10:04.
I resubmitted it with a revise to the fifth paragraph because I don't want the comment to be construed as an attack on Mr. Birch.
10:56 (anonymous, as opposed to 10:56 Mr. Cannon!): Thank you for your civil disagreement (and for the 11:04 comment, which I assume is yours as well--I missed the 10:04 comment before it was taken down, so no harm there at all). Two quick responses:
1. I agree that there are times where anonymity is required to get honest responses. Usually, that's when there is a power differential. The Delaware example you cite is exactly that sort of case. Or, since you brought up my job, my teaching is evaluated by students at the end of every course I teach, and those evaluations are of course done anonymously (with the University taking great precautions to protect that anonymity). I'm not sure that such power differentials exist in the community discussions here
2. Yes, I have tenure (though college professors in WV are not allowed to unionize), but I don't have tenure in the Muncipality of Mt. Lebanon. Some of the things I've said (on this very blog) go against the views of those who hold office and lead local organizations. I've never felt any retribution against me or my family (maybe I'm just naïve on that). While anonymity might be useful in protecting municipal and school district employees and allowing them to speak freely on this blog and in other formats (and I hadn't considered that argument; perhaps there should be an exception in those cases, but, again, that's Elaine's call), I'm not convinced that everyone who posts anonymously here is in that situation. And, BTW, I've had a political sign stolen from my lawn, too. It can happen to anyone.--Neil Berch
Neil, I'm not quite sure why you would find a differential between your university community and the Mt. Lebanon community. Why would your students need protection for their opinions, but a parent, student or taxpayer or staffer not need the same cover of anonymity here.
Human nature is human nature. There are good and bad people everywhere.
Critiques of anonymous post here have caused me to rethink my post, even after submitting a post I thought long and hard about, after reading it on the blog I considered it too harsh and had Elaine pull it.
I'll make every effort to be proper, polite and respectful. That's all I'll promise and that in almost every instance I've followed up contacting the proper governing body with my opinion and by name.
12:32: I think you do make a case for some allowance for anonymity here. Students (who probably don't post comments very often) and staff of the municipality or school district certainly have that power differential issue. Parents (through their kids), maybe, but parents (through the political process) also have some power over the officials. Taxpayers who aren't parents or employees? Are they going to appeal your assessment? I think that's a weaker case.
Still, I think you make a good case for anonymity being allowed. I still think it's the case that anonymity leads to more vitriol on both sides. If you want to argue that's the necessary price to pay in order to allow more folks to participate, I guess it's up to Elaine to weigh the tradeoffs.
One question, though: why do you worry about retaliation for posting comments here, but not when you contact the officials directly?
Again, thanks for the civil dialogue (and for helping me to at least partially reconsider my position on anonymity).--Neil Berch
We had a case right here where about as malicious, hateful comment was made about another resident as has ever been posted here.
It gave me pause to re-evaluate my position on anonymous comments. Based solely on writing on a blog, maybe anonymous post shouldn't be allowed.
But it also prompted me to consider, if this mean spirited person is in a power position what actions did they perpetrate from their pedestal against the person they wrote about in the past.
And that would justify allowing them.
I have been weighing the trade offs and have decided to continue accepting anonymous comments. While you get bonus points for signing your real name, I feel that this is the only venue left in Mt. lebanon for truly anonymous comments. I debated about publishing that hateful comment. I felt that the author was so obvious that I don't have to out them. They did a good job on their own.
What is ironic is when the author becomes a guest blogger on the new Lebo Life blog. That is when the real fun begins.
I am sorry that we will all feel the consequences. I respect all of those who were named and value all of their opinions. Bill Lewis, I don't blame you for your position. It is unfortunate that some of our neighbors are bullies. As I said in a previous post, the bullies are winning and that makes me quite sad.
Elaine
I do have some options in the settings for this blog. I could only have it available to registered users, anyone with a Google account, or to members of this blog. I don't want to do that just yet because I have readers who are following certain topics all over the US. There are school districts interested in TERC Investigations. There are government agencies who are following the shenanigans of the District. And there are people who are considering a move here. For these reasons, and more, I am staying with this format. Thanks for your patience.
Elaine
Elaine: one more thought, and then I'll butt out and get back to work: maybe the solution is for you to have a higher threshold for anonymous comments than you do for those with names attached. So, if someone offers an anonymous comment that is largely (or significantly) personal attack, regardless of where on the political spectrum it falls, maybe you reject that comment. But if someone is willing to say the same thing and attach their name to it, then you publish it. So, with that sort of policy, you could have said to 8:17, "I won't publish that comment anonymously. If you're going to name people in this fashion, I'll only publish it if you put your name on it." That would preserve the ability to comment anonymously (since it appears that most anonymous comments are not personal attacks, but most personal attacks are anonymous comments), but probably still increase civility. Anyway, it's your blog; I'm done for now.--Neil Berch
Neil,
I do that already. I get quite a few comments that are just over the top. Didn't one person say you have about a 70% chance of getting something published? If you are reasonable and the comment doesn't get lost in the blogosphere, as some do, you have much greater odds.
I know it frustrates the heck out of those who do sign their names. Believe me, I do appreciate those who sign their names. For one reason, from a reader's perspective, it is less confusing.
Enough about anonymous comments. So who is going to run for office here in Mt. Lebanon and get us back on track? Now is the time.
Elaine
Neil, a good suggestion and I'm comfortable with Elaine having that control. Contrary to the bullys' attacks directed at her, she has been fair IMO.
The suggestion does heap more work and responsibility on her though.
Thank you Elaine, you deserve some kind of medal!!!!
Nobody stepped up to accept my $100 offer.
Sad, people. Sad.
A lot of people on this blog want to see change. It is much harder to change an organization from afar rather than from within.
Post a Comment