Allegheny County Council on Tuesday passed a $799.4 million budget for 2013 that lowers the tax rate to 4.73 mills, offsetting the rise in property values because of the court-ordered reassessment.
The budget, which passed 13-1, closely mirrors the one that Executive Rich Fitzgerald presented to council last month. Fitzgerald said in a prepared statement that he is glad the budget passed and “that we are able to move into 2013 with no tax increase and a lower millage rate and that we did so without using one-time revenues to balance our budget.”
The budget includes a $447,000 cut to Controller Chelsa Wagner's office — the only row office that lost funding. Council restored $200,000 in funding to the controller from Fitzgerald's proposed $647,000 cut but defeated a proposal from Councilwoman Heather Heidelbaugh, R-Mt. Lebanon, to restore more funding. Heidelbaugh voted against the budget.
Wagner and Fitzgerald have clashed on several issues. She said the cuts will force layoffs in her office, while Fitzgerald said his cuts do not affect personnel.
“It's about me not being a good little girl. This is the oldest style of politics there is,” Wagner said.
The 17 percent millage decrease means that a person whose home is assessed at $100,000 would pay $473 under the lower millage rate, instead of $569. Under state law, taxing bodies cannot reap more than 5 percent more in revenue as a result of reassessments and must adjust tax rates accordingly.
Bobby Kerlik is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-391-0927 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 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.