"There is an internal number that has been bandied about," said Mr. Kunka, refusing to provide it. "Let me say we are disappointed with the amount they are willing to contribute over the next three-year period."The fund gave nearly $14 million over three years, with the final payments coming in last year, but applicable to 2007. There will be no nonprofit payment for 2008. (P-G, Rich Lord)
$14 million between them all over three years = $4.66 million per year = never particularly sufficient to begin with, given what the sprawling institutions consume.
"They have to approve the agreement that was drafted. We had reason to believe that everyone was OK with that draft," [Ron Lenguin, fund spokesman] said.
That's interesting.
The special meeting is one in a series designed to influence a new long-term recovery plan to be written under state Act 47.
When would we have found this out had the Council not undertaken such uncommon initiative? I wonder what else we will learn.
The non-deal deal with the nonprofits was a wet dream from the start. Too many on Grant Street like to live in that world. That is no way to run a city nor government.
ReplyDeleteFolly.
Wonder if the hits all businesses, foundations & non profits are taking will also affect the Pittsburgh Promise.
ReplyDeleteAny reduction in nonprofit contributions would come on the heels of Gov. Ed Rendell's proposal to cut the state's subsidy to the city from $6 million to $3 million.
ReplyDeleteWhy is the city taking orders (Act 47 and the ICA) from Harrisburg when they only contribute 3 million a year?
They disallow taxation of the "non-profits", force the city to reduce the parking tax and jeopardize public safety with overreaching restrictions.
For 3 million a year?!?
The city should jack the parking tax through the roof.
The Truth, I never understand when people say we should either defy the State (or more properly the Commonwealth) or force it to give us more money. We know the State controls almost all forms of taxation. This was the deal with the drink tax, that Onorato had to go to Harrisburg to ask the legislature to grant him other ways of raising money to match the State grants for PAT, and the legislature only gave him drink tax and car rental surcharge. We know that the State subsidy to the City was part of the Act 47 original five year plan. We know the plan is running out of years, so until a new five year plan is written and approved, the Governor can decide to reduce the subsidy. And we also know that non-profits have historically not been taxed by government. Now, it may be unfair that UPMC or Highmark or the Catholic Church is a non– or not–for–profit, but lots of things in the world are unfair and most of us conveniently complain only about the unfairness that affects us today (that we decided to notice).
ReplyDeleteOf course, the spokesman for the Catholic Diocese is telling us that the Mayor’s office held without signing for too long onto an agreement that would have gotten the City some money from the non-profits this year. In fact, it is not clear from the PG article whether the City has yet signed the thing. Perhaps the Mayor can use part of his 800 grand in his campaign fund to explain to us why this was done.
The mayor should take his $800k and put it into the Pittsburgh Promise and offer to have 88 candidate debates / candidate forums / meet the candidate nights throughout town.
ReplyDeleteI think the debates might get a bit repetitive after say a dozen.
ReplyDeleteSure, the debates could get repetitive if the candidate does the same-old-same-old over and over again. That would be dumb. That would be telling. That would NOT be sustaining a conversation to improve our city.
ReplyDeleteAny candidate who tried to do something new in every debate would be handicapping themselves, since most voters are only going to catch little snippets of the campaign. The reason there is no sustained conversation to improve the city is because there is only one organized political entity and all of its adversaries are either ridiculously weak or temporary or both.
ReplyDelete