Irwin tables proposed amusement tax |

Irwin tables proposed amusement tax

Joe Napsha

Irwin Borough officials this week decided to delay any decision on starting an amusement tax.

Options for the proposed tax, which has stirred controversy, include a levy of 5 percent or a flat 50 cents on the price of tickets sold at entertainment venues in the borough, such as The Lamp Theatre.

The potential tax drew heavy criticism from Lamp supporters, who contend it would hurt the theater’s ability to offer a variety of programming. The renovated Lamp reopened in 2015 after being closed since 2004.

Council discussed the issue during a workshop session this week, but council President Rick Burdelski said the borough shouldn’t make any decision at its March 13 meeting because two members — Ron Romeo and Michael Yunn — were absent from the workshop. The proposed tax has been off council’s agenda since October.

The Lamp attracted about 25,000 patrons last year, according to a recent theater newsletter. If the 5 percent tax had been implemented in 2018, the estimated $572,000 in ticket sales would have generated about $28,600 for the borough. If a 50-cent fee per ticket had been in place, about $12,500 would have been generated for the borough.

Joe Napsha is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Joe at 724-836-5252, [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: Local | Norwin | Westmoreland
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.