It is certainly a rational position to take that this is all old news, dressed up in bloggerific histrionics.
The Cost Recovery Plan was unpopular from the start, faced trouble with implementation, and was ultimately rejected by new city leadership -- without very much public outcry.
Yes, yes. We may have shrugged at the initial story. But the city was preoccupied with the unexpected passing of one mayor, and inclined to offer a honeymoon to our new one.
We have little on which to judge the brief Ravenstahl administration -- and so much less to contrast it from that of O'Connor, or even Murphy. This is the best opportunity we have seen yet.
Our hackles have also been raised a smidge:
1) Isn't it illegal to pay people under the table? What message does that send?
2) Isn't it also grossly unwise, given our financial condition? Haven't we made a bigger deal out of far less waste?
3) Is it the position of our sports franchises that taxpayers owe them free security? We may love them, but they were never welcome very far into our pocketbooks.
4) Are we comfortable with the present system's method of oversight? When a clique of senior officers gets to hand out these plush, tax-free assignments, isn't that an incredible invitation for quid-pro-quo, or worse?
5) Having purchased the software to manage this program, is that money now wasted?
6) Most importantly: how did City Council respond to the program's cancellation? How did particular city councilors respond? How will they now respond?
We would love to urge you all to go 'round demanding answers from this party and that party, just out of sheer overwhelming civic indignation ... but will you be provided with a casus belli?
There is more than one challenger, for more than one office in town. Somebody should at least take a crack at this. Look alive, Pittsburgh.