Armstrong commissioners OK sewer line project contract
KITTANNING — Armstrong County Commissioners approved a number of agreements on Thursday including a contract for a sewer line project in Parks.
Carmen Johnson, assistant director of the county's planning and development office, said the lowest bid for the Garvers Ferry Road Sewer Line Extension project came in at $294,324.
That bid, by Klingensmith Enterprises Inc., was over budget by $21,000, said Johnson. She noted, however, that Parks Township Municipal Authority has agreed to pay that additional amount for the project which is expected to be around $331,000.
The bulk of funding was awarded through a competitive Community Block Grant, said Johnson.
She noted after the meeting that the project's service area includes four households as well as the Pine View Personal Care Home, which houses 26 residents.
Commissioners David Battaglia, Robert Bower and Richard Fink voted to award the contract to Klingensmith.
In other business, the commissioners voted 3-0 to approve an agreement between the county and INFOCON Corp. for user license upgrade in the prothonotary's office.
Prothonotary and Clerk of Courts Brenda C. George did not attend the meeting, but Battaglia explained the cost of 25 licenses at $200 each would be purchased from a prothonotary's fund and would not affect the general fund.
The license purchase will allow George to update her processing system in an effort to go paperless since the judges have bought laptops for use on the bench.
Brigid Beatty is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 724-543-1303 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.