ShareThis Page

Sloppy bookkeeping complicates Trafford's 2015 budget process

| Wednesday, Nov. 19, 2014, 9:00 p.m.

Trafford's finances are in disarray again.

Two years after overspending on a public-safety building drained the borough budget, Manager Virginia Finnegan estimates that the borough might have as much as a $215,000 deficit to cover spending from the general fund next year.

Council members were baffled Tuesday night by the shortfall Finnegan outlined during her first budget presentation since her hiring over the summer. Among the issues, she said, was the past miscoding of many budget line items when former manager Jeff McLaughlin was on the job.

An auditing firm determined that Trafford ended 2013 about $259,000 in the red, Finnegan said.

Somebody should have caught the problem sooner than this fall, said Council President Henry Schultz.

“Shame on us because now we have to fix it,” he said.

Even small things — such as the borough's collection of amusement taxes — are in question. Shaky record-keeping doesn't reflect which businesses have paid the tax, Finnegan said.

There isn't much wiggle room for a property-tax increase by Trafford Council. The Pennsylvania Borough Code limits boroughs to 30 mills worth of property-tax revenue for general purposes, and Trafford already charges 28.5 mills.

Besides trying to cut costs, council could seek a tax-anticipation loan until tax revenues are paid in the spring.

Councilman Jay Race suggested council could consider imposing a tax on a specific service, like for street lights.

“I'm not advocating raising taxes,” he said. I'm just throwing it out there.”

Chris Foreman is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-871-2363 or

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.