New grant program aims to help municipalities with infrastructure projects

Yahoo

11-04-2025

NORTHERN CAMBRIA, Pa. – A new Cambria County grant program approved by the commissioners at Thursday's meeting in Northern Cambria is aimed at assisting municipalities with infrastructure improvements that target mobility, safety and quality of life.
The Municipal Infrastructure Assistance Program will be funded through revenues from state Act 89 – a $5 vehicle registration fee – and Act 13, which is a fund to improve municipal bridges in poor condition.
'This will allow a lot of municipalities around our communities to fix up critical infrastructure,' Cambria County Planning Commission transportation planner Jacob Zerby said.
The planning department will administer the new program through a competitive application and vetting process.
Staff will rank the municipal projects based on a variety of criteria, such as road or bridge conditions and detours, before advancing them to the commissioners, who will work with PennDOT to determine how to award the funding, Planning Commission Executive Director Mark Lazzari said.
Each project must be PennDOT-approved and can apply to road and bridge repairs, sidewalk improvements, traffic signal updates and stormwater management.
The grants cannot be combined with the annual distribution of county-supplied liquid fuels money, which topped $433,000 in 2025 for every municipality in Cambria County, except the City of Johnstown.
President Commissioner Scott Hunt lauded the new program and said there would be roughly $350,000 available for grant awards under Act 89 alone. Act 13 revenues have yet to be determined.
'By doing it as a grant program, we will be able to give small, medium and large municipalities a fair shot at funding, which will complete much-needed road and bridge projects that they otherwise would not be able to complete,' he said.
Hunt added that the program would also include the City of Johnstown.
The board voted on each resolutions for each act separately, but passed both.
Commissioner Thomas Chernisky voted against the Act 89 funding, but agreed to the Act 13 proposal.
He said he cast a dissenting vote for the local use grants because he would prefer that these funds be shared with all municipalities using the same county formula as liquid fuels.
'For many years, we told people once all bridges are fixed that the (funds) should go back to each municipality in addition to liquid fuel dollars using the same formula,' he said in a statement. 'I do not want to pick winners and losers.'
He and former Commissioners William 'B.J.' Smith and Mark Wissinger enacted the Act 89 fee in 2016 as a way to address 10 structurally deficient county-owned bridges and one that was closed.
Those have since been fixed and reopened, and the pair voted in December 2023 to remove the fee before it was brought back in January 2024 due to its success and potential future use, such as the new grant program.
More information about the assistance program can be found at www.cambriaplanning.org.
The first round of grants will be open Friday to May 12, and the second round will open May 13 and close June 16.
In other business, Chernisky requested Thursday that his objection and comments at the March meeting regarding a broker fee agreement with Pittsburgh-based MGI Risk Management for $3,750 per quarter from April 1 through Dec. 31, 2027, be officially included in the minutes.
'A commissioner who requests to have a segment of his discussion on a no vote preserved should be permitted to have that dissenting opinion reflected in the minutes accurately,' he said.
Chernisky had raised concerns with the deal at the March gathering because the business was not awarded through a request for proposal, which Hunt told him isn't required because it's a professional contract.
Chernisky noted similar objections in April 2024 when Gallagher and Co. became the new broker of record for the county's insurance policy.
Hunt said in March that the switch to MGI Risk Management was simply the county's business following the broker from Gallagher to MGI.
As for the comments being recorded, Hunt denied the request, stated it would be inconsistent with past practices and questioned if every conversation during the meeting should be recorded verbatim.
Ronald Repak, county solicitor, supported this evaluation.
Ed Cernic Jr., county controller, suggested if someone wants their words recorded exactly in the minutes to supply a written statement for the record, which Chernisky agreed with.