Buffalo Township plans vote on $1.9M spending plan
Buffalo Township real estate taxes are scheduled to remain the same for next year.
Supervisors on Wednesday night announced a proposed $1.9 million budget that would keep the township's property tax rate at 3.38 mills. Next year's spending proposal is about $250,000 more than this year's. The largest expense is a $325,000 outlay for police wages. Supervisors plan to vote on adopting a final budget on Dec. 11.
Residents can review the budget posted at the township building for the next 20 working days.
The township will pursue a $75,000 tax anticipation loan to serve as a financial bridge during the early part of next year.
In other business
• Supervisors approved a proposal from Joe Worthington to establish Joe's Auto Sales along Route 356 (South Pike Road).
The township's planning commission had Worthington allot eight more parking spaces in a revised site plan to conform with township requirements.
Worthington has to get access to Route 356 from PennDOT.
• A proposal from Advanced Communications in Lower Burrell to upgrade and modernize the township's website will be considered by supervisors on Dec. 11.
Office personnel will be trained to make website changes whenever necessary.
• Supervisors will enter into an agreement with SSI Computer Services to buy software security for two police computers for $20 per computer monthly.
George Guido is a freelance writer for Trib Total Media.
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 â 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.