Blairsville proposes boosting taxes by 1.9 mills
Blairsville Council on Tuesday approved a tentative 2013 budget that totals $1,747,662 and includes a 1.9-mill property tax increase.
Even with the tax hike, which will increase millage to 23.91, the budget total represents a decrease of about $25,000 from the 2012 budget.
Borough officials noted the amount generated by one mill has decreased over the past year — from $22,108 to $21,793.
Also, liquid fuels funding, received through the state gasoline tax, is expected to decrease from $81,436 to $73,658.
“We cut a lot out of this budget,” said council member Ron Evanko, who chairs the finance committee. “The government is not reimbursing us what they used to.” But, he added, “The hardest thing to do is to raise taxes.”
“We pretty much lost almost 2 mills from the state,” said borough manager Tim Evans. He pointed out the borough has not increased taxes since 2009.
The 1.9-mill hike would cost the average household about $14 extra per year.
Evanko said the borough was able to trim expenses in a number of areas including administrative costs while keeping a lid on others.
He noted public works spending is increasing by $6,730, to $173,341, and police expenditures are slated to rise by about $21,000, to $330,542. He cited a new police car and new radios for officers as big ticket items that will be needed.
Jeff Himler is an editor for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 724-459-6100, ext. 2910 or email@example.com.
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.