Map of Pennsylvania highlighting Schuylkill County (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
MINERSVILLE, PA – Superintendent M. Joseph Brady responded Monday night to a June 18 article that ran in The Republican-Herald and the Scranton Times-Tribune that a proposed Senate Democratic Caucus plan may declare Minersville Area as a distressed school district.
“Minersville Area School District has never been distressed in all of the time I’m here and I assure you, it’s not distressed now,” Brady said Monday. “We are financially sound and solid.”
The article states the Senate Democratic minority is proposing to provide special state aid to distressed school districts for a second year in a row in the next budget for six districts in Northeastern Pennsylvania, including Minersville Area in Schuylkill County.
According to a quote by Senate Appropriations Chairman Jake Corman, R-34, Bellefonte, senators are looking at how much aid would be provided, how to define which of the 500 school districts are considered distressed and the aid distribution formula.
Map of Pennsylvania highlighting York County (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
When a bill is working its way through the Legislature, the specific details should often be taken with a grain of salt as they are fine-tuned and tweaked on the way to being implemented.
But when several of York County‘s state legislators recently outlined some projects that could be funded through Pennsylvania’s transportation bill, we couldn’t help but cross our fingers and toes, and pull out the lucky rabbit’s foot in hopes of one project coming to fruition:
State Sen. Rob Teplitz and state Rep. Mike Waugh released several projects that could be funded through a $2.5 billion transportation bill that has already passed the state Senate. It will now be discussed by the state House and would need approval from Gov. Tom Corbett.
Map of Pennsylvania highlighting Luzerne County (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
WILKES-BARRE — City police are investigating a deadly shooting that occurred late Tuesday afternoon at 32 N. Sherman St., across from the Heights-Murray Elementary School.
One man with an apparent gunshot wound to the head was removed from the house by city paramedics just before 4 p.m. He appeared unresponsive and was transported to Geisinger Wyoming Valley Medical Center in Plains Township, where he was pronounced dead at about 5 p.m. Police did not release the victim’s identity.
Two men were handcuffed and detained in the driveway. They sat on the ground before they were placed in two cruisers and taken to police headquarters for questioning. Their names also were not released.
Police Chief Gerard Dessoye said he believed the community was not in danger. “We feel we have all the participants involved,” he said.
Despite her teary mea culpa on NBC’s “Today” show, two additional companies decided to part ways with Paula Deen Wednesday afternoon.
Caesars announced its decision to strip Deen’s name from four of its buffet restaurants, while Wal-Mart Stores Inc. disclosed shortly after its plans to sever ties with the culinary figure. The world’s largest retailer said it will not be placing “any new orders beyond what’s already committed.” The Bentonville, Ark.-based company has carried a range of products under the Paula Deen moniker since 2011.
Smithfield Foods dropped Deen on Monday, while the Food Network announced Friday that it was not renewing Deen’s contract after she had skipped her initial “Today’ show appearance that morning and released a series of apology videos via YouTube that afternoon.
The celebrity chef dissolved into tears during Wednesday’s interview with Matt Lauer as she attempted to explain how she wasn’t a racist- although a deposition filed and leaked last week revealed her use of racial slurs in the past. It was an odd disparity between the Paula Deen known for her cheery, comforting disposition, and the Paula Deen who appeared on the “Today” show, defeated, exhausted and “heartbroken.
Editor’s note: I think the headline says it all. Pottstown leadership needs to take the bull by the horns and get tough on crime. The incident happened while there was a group of community leaders gathered at the Ricketts Center trying to form a plan to clean up the core neighborhood. How ironic.
Here are some comments from Facebook on the subject:
WE WERE AT THE RICKETTS CENTER when the shooting happened, for that CARES Pottstown meeting – the Let’s Clean Up Ward 1 meeting???? Yeah…let’s do. Is the boro going to hand out bullet proof vests to all the good people cleaning up? It’s the least they could do.
All other efforts to make things better in this ward pale and seem superficial by the fact that there appears to be no real effort to clean up the root cause of the problems.
The mentality is-cite the property owner for a crack in the sidewalk. All else doesn’t matter.
I’m beyond irritated by this. We heard what we thought was illegal fireworks (again) last night. Didn’t look out the window until we went out last night. Opened the door to find the intersection of Beech and Washington roped off and multiple police cars and officers out and about. They were talking to people on my block. We didn’t see anything but were told that it stemmed from an earlier incident that began at the Ricketts Center in the afternoon.
WASHINGTON — In a major victory for gay rights, the Supreme Court today struck down a provision of a federal law denying federal benefits to married gay couples and cleared the way for the resumption of same-sex marriage in California.
The justices issued two 5-4 rulings in their final session of the term. One decision wiped away part of a federal anti-gay marriage law that has kept legally married same-sex couples from receiving tax, health and pension benefits.
The other was a technical ruling that said nothing at all about same-sex marriage, but left in place a trial court’s declaration that California’s Proposition 8 is unconstitutional. That outcome probably will allow state officials to order the resumption of same-sex weddings in the nation’s most populous state in about a month.
In neither case did the court make a sweeping statement, either in favor of or against same-sex marriage. And in a sign that neither victory was complete for gay rights, the high court said nothing about the validity of gay marriage bans in California and roughly three dozen other states. A separate provision of the federal marriage law that allows a state to not recognize a same-sex union from elsewhere remains in place.