Monday, August 1, 2011

Not Too Little, But Too Late?


The drilling ban referendum bill passes 6-3, but...

But if [the Mayor] waits the full 10 days, council members said, they won't get the referendum to the Allegheny County elections office in time to be on the November ballot. Council members said legislation authorizing the referendum must be at the elections office Aug. 9, eight days from today. (P-G, Joe Smydo)


You get the feeling, he'd have found a way to raise the debt ceiling cleanly if these guys were in Congress.

MORE: City Paper Slag Heap, Chris Potter

27 comments:

  1. What a schmuck. If Rape'n Steal had any balls, he'd veto it immediately and quit playing schoolyard politics.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I know that finding a way to blame the Mayor for the failure of poorly written legislation was probably the larger part of the agenda all along, but holy crap, can you at least wait until the deadline is closer before going all pottymouth?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Bram, please help us all. the alleged progressives have gone off the reservation and are destroying the City and its economic resurgence. Someone needs to stop these people.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous:

    They seem to do a bang-up job erecting their own obstacles...

    ReplyDelete
  5. Drilling within the city limits was never an option to begin with, so what's the harm in making anti-drilling legislation part of the HRC? If you look at the areas in which companies would be legally permitted and physically capable to drill within the city, they are few and far between and are generally in the outskirts of Theresa Smith's district. Companies purchased leases to be able to go back to their shareholders and say 'We've got all these acres in Pittsburgh.' They leave out that most of these properties, like those in Lawrenceville, are undrillable.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Huh. I thought that Lincoln Place--Shields' district--was the focal point of possible drilling.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'm not super familiar with the area since I have to cross a bridge to get there but unless there's a large piece of property -- 5 acres or more -- that also far enough away from homes and near both a state road and a water source it's not gonna happen.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I just spoke to Councilwoman Kail-Smith about the reality of actual drilling and where, if anywhere, it could occur. We barely thought it could happen in the outer skirts of District 2, and if anything else, maybe, possibly, District 5--maybe Hays? Lincoln Place? Im sure this would be interesting conversation amongst the relevant parties involved.

    ReplyDelete
  9. (And I live in the outer skirts of District 2, and I can't recall or visulize, even between East Carnegie, Fairywood and Esplen, where there is site space for this...)

    ReplyDelete
  10. It fashion choice. As a City, do we want to dress in jeans and leather, or do we want to suit up.

    Not that style can't be important, that it can't influence opportunities and even outcomes.

    On balance I personally think the City stands to gain more by standing out (I take the long view of history when it comes to energy companies) while fully repping as the rebellious smart-alecks we Pittsburghers authentically are. Then again, if you happen to be an aggressive type-A conformist, you probably stand more to gain by leaving your house dressed a bit differently.

    So yeah, sorry to be insensitive to people who feel strongly about this issue, but this one really isn't about safety OR prosperity. It's about what sorts of people and energies we're going to attract to the region -- will it be the types likely empower US as individuals with OUR OWN swagger, or SOMEBODY ELSE with THEIRS.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Shields who spent his entire political career as comic relief
    for those of us who follow council is now an advocate of all left leaning progressive causes.Having no marketable skills he's hoping his newly scripted progressive positions will land him a job his skill set can not fill... sorta like the magistrates office he was unqualified to fill!

    ReplyDelete
  12. And to the folks insisting "never in a million years will they drill here": if I was say, Range Resources, I'd absolutely love to put ONE measly drill pad SOMEWHERE in Pittsburgh -- and make sure it's the Cadillac of drill pads -- just so I could bring out the camera crews and say, "Look at this safe-as-milk gas extraction in a vibrant metropolis in the heart of Marcellus Country. Look at the happy Senior Center and After-School Activity it's helping to fund." Style points at stake all around.

    ReplyDelete
  13. anonymous 1:34 - Doug is over you; you should get over him.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I admire Doug's energy on the shale issue. I think it's a mistake to let that energy overwhelm him, and by extension, overwhelm the patience of those who have begun to regard him as a prominent voice in the debate - people who are casting about for the next actionable step.

    It's one thing to make your wife and her friends happy by going all facebook activist ninja, it's quite another to actually sit down and craft succinct, effective, useful legislation. The conclusion seems imminent that the latter is a bit out of his grasp.

    At very least, it's not cool to lash out and flail at fellow council members who are voicing quite well-founded and reasonable objections to the amendment idea - objections they are perfectly willing to stand by and patiently explain. And, as Chris Potter just now mentioned, if the referendum idea ends up failing, it does so mostly because it came to the table too late, too late.

    ReplyDelete
  15. If the drillers really, cross my heart & hope to die have no intention of drilling in the city of Pittsburgh, isn't it curious that they still hold over 100 signed leases within the city limits? And I find it curious that they bleated all during the drama of Council's veto last fall. But, yeah, I trust the drillers, I think all of those nutjobs in Washington County, North east PA and in the Susquehanna region are griping just to gripe, who needs clean, drinkable water coming out of their kitchen and bathroom taps anyway? As for where they'd drill in the city, we have some big cemeteries & a number of them leased acreage to the drillers last year...Are all yinz Allegheny Conference folks getting paid to write on blogs while you're at work?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Point of fact, the Catholic Cemeteries Association of the Diocese of Pittsburgh signed that lease in 2008 (a 5-year option, by the way), not "last year". While some of their property indeed is in the city, none of that city property is or was included in any drilling plans. Also, no right-of-way was obtained by industry to move gas out of these cemeteries - further indication of the lack of intention to drill.

    The fact that some city leases are held means nothing. All sorts of leases were signed in those days, prior to the seismic testing (which revealed that the drilling conditions in the city basically suck anyway). A lease represents a nominal amount to an energy company, because they are based on gas production - which means the company doesn't pay squat until gas is flowing.

    So, it's fairly easy to see that all Shields was doing was rattling the cages of folks who have buried people there. I am sure most of those people immediately contacted the Cemetery association for an explanation, and got one right away - that they had no drilling plans. So, whatever political bump Doug might have gained with those folks was probably small, and probably two-edged. I know I don't take kindly to someone who is looking to play upon my emotions for political gain. Perhaps this is why Shields was unsuccessful in his judge bid...but then again maybe voters who were familiar with him simply knew he's about the last person in the city who should be considered judge material.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Perhaps this is why Shields was unsuccessful in his judge bid...

    No. That was because he was running against a lawyer.

    P.S. If you are always the same person, and I think you are, you could take a pseudonym and this would be less confusing. I can make suggestions.

    ReplyDelete
  18. anon 234pm looks like the County Exec thinks Dougie's legislation doesn't cut the legal mustard with the election dept!! another "hahaha" from the Dougster!!

    ReplyDelete
  19. Anon 1:18 AM - I don't get it. Maybe you should stop commenting after midnight.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Get ready for another spastic round of venom from Doug and his buddies now that County Executive Dan Onorato is questioning the legality of the proposed referendum (as he must, it's his JOB to make sure it's legal before it goes on the ballot).

    MH - set aside the identity sleuthing and work harder on your reading comprehension, which might lead to you posting less nonsense. Or not, your call...

    ReplyDelete
  21. I sign my nonsense with the same name each time. That way people reading can easily tell the source of the nonsense. Common courtesy and, if you don’t mention any personal details, it makes it no easier for anybody to figure out who you are.

    ReplyDelete
  22. So when I sign my posts MH, you'll know it's you? Got it.

    ReplyDelete
  23. If the referendum is found to be inadmissible, it'll probably be because of subsections G2 - G4:

    G2. Corporations in violation of the prohibition against natural gas extraction, or seeking to engage in natural gas extraction shall not have the rights of “persons” afforded by the United States and Pennsylvania Constitutions, nor shall those corporations be afforded the protections of the commerce or contracts clauses within the United States Constitution or corresponding sections of the Pennsylvania Constitution.

    G3. Corporations engaged in the extraction of natural gas shall not possess the authority or power to enforce State or federal preemptive law against the people of the City of Pittsburgh, or to challenge or overturn municipal ordinances or Charter provisions adopted by the City Council of Pittsburgh.

    G4. No permit, license, privilege, or charter issued by any State or federal agency, Commission, or Board to any person or any corporation operating under a State charter, or any director, officer, owner, or manager of a corporation operating under a State charter, which would violate the prohibitions of this Charter provision or deprive any City resident(s), natural community, or ecosystem of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by this Charter, the Pennsylvania Constitution, the United States Constitution, or other laws, shall be deemed valid within the City of Pittsburgh.

    There is also some interesting language in the proposed Charter amendments regarding the people of the city being "sovereign". In searching for possible intellectual forebears for this idea, I mainly came up with Anarchists, Libertarians, Christian fundamentalists, European leftist philosophers, or perhaps in the extreme, everywhere.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I watch the comments closely enough to note that MH at 1:14 pm is not the same as the MH who usually comments.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I heard on the radio the problem revolves around the mineral rights of property owners....that the law would deny those property owners of utilizing those mineral rights

    ReplyDelete
  26. MH - I wonder if you think previous anon was me, but nit wasn't. Although I agree with what he/she said.

    ReplyDelete