Grants from gaming money could be a boost for Aspinwall
Aspinwall should focus its attention on getting grants from gaming money available through Allegheny County, according to the leader of the Allegheny Valley North Council of Governments.
Tom Benecki, the executive director of the COG, met with borough officials last week to discuss how they can better use the borough's membership in the organization.
The borough is not eligible for some programs, including Community Development Block Grants, Benecki said.
“The problem with the CDBG is that you either have to have low to moderate income census tracks or you have to do household surveys to establish low to moderate income neighborhoods,” he said.
Money from gaming revenue — through the Community Infrastructure and Tourism Fund and Gaming Economic Development Fund — does not have any income requirements for communities. Aspinwall received one of those grants last year for intersection improvements at the riverfront park.
That is the type of project that would appeal to the county because it has regional appeal.
Benecki said it would benefit communities to focus on getting that money for projects.
Councilman Kevin Gordon said he wants to make sure the borough gets more than salt from its membership. Mayor Joe Giuffre said the borough receives $20,000 every other year from the COG for use in the borough.
Giuffre said the money is mostly used for park improvements and to make the borough better suited for people with disabilities.
Benecki said the COG wants to start organizing meetings between municipal managers so they can communicate and share ideas. Other meetings could be organized in the future, including ones for police and fire chiefs, he said.
Tom McGee is an associate editor for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-856-7400, ext. 1513, or firstname.lastname@example.org.
Show commenting policy
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.