Jefferson Hills to give budget funds thorough review
Jefferson Hills Borough Council members have given themselves additional time to review the 2014 budget.
“This is an option we have during election years,” said Christopher King, council president, as the group plans to take a closer look.
Having reopened the budget on Jan. 14, members will review the funds allotted to ongoing and upcoming projects and consider amending the budget by January's end. Council must meet a Feb. 15 deadline to make changes and reopen the budget.
But just because the budget has been reopened doesn't mean there will be changes or a millage increase, King said.
Residents haven't had an increase in the property-tax rate in 10 years.
“We've tried to increase services to borough residents and not raise taxes,” King said.
For 2014, the $400,000 in capital-improvement funds might not be enough to keep the borough moving forward, especially on plans for recreation and the continuation of the public-works building project, King said. From a community survey, council learned residents were interested in upgrades to the parks, more fields and better parking, he said.
If officials stick to the recreation comprehensive plan, improvements would be completed in an eight- to 10 year phase-in, at a cost of $3 million to $4 million.
This additional time will allow Wayne Jones, the borough's relatively new financial officer, to review the numbers. To balance the 2014 $8.7 million budget, $900,000 was taken from the reserve fund. Jones said. Approximately $3 million is left.
Yet, going forward, options need to be reviewed, King said.
“We want to deliver on improving the borough,” he said. “We want to look at everything.”
Dona S. Dreeland is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 412-388-5803 or email@example.com.
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.
- Baldwin-Whitehall superintendent gets new contract
- Brentwood man chronicles battle with haunted house
- Baldwin-Whitehall expects to shine with milestone school year
- Volunteers help organizations keep local history alive in South Hills
- Baldwin enrolls in program to help transform vacant property
- Brentwood OKs plan to contract bus service with Baldwin-Whitehall