tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1588280325775325323.post8713564212866672891..comments2023-12-24T05:26:48.861-05:00Comments on The Pittsburgh Comet: Monday: The CPRB; the CELDF; & the PMRSBram Reichbaumhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05620172942925293407noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1588280325775325323.post-63942038928851558292010-10-20T00:10:06.959-04:002010-10-20T00:10:06.959-04:00Anonymous 10:30 - Thank you for engaging.
The ver...<b>Anonymous 10:30 -</b> Thank you for engaging.<br /><br />The very fact that details of the Council-Controller plan were released a mere hour after the lease deal was rejected, tells me that its sponsors were afraid it would have a hard time competing side-by-side with that lease. To argue at this point that the lease was so obviously, recognizably valueless that a side-by-side public analysis would be "pathetically ill-conceived" is just ... well it's intellectually dishonest, I'm sorry to say.<br /><br />And now I notice we've arrived at the mirror-image "Chicken Little" scenario; the parking lease would have been like shooting ourselves in the face.<br /><br />The compensation events couldn't be triggered exactly "at the drop of a hat"; these were fairly well-defined in the lease. If the scope of these had to be tightened or negotiated further they could have done so. I'm not convinced neighborhood business districts would crumble if meter parkers were asked to pay $2 hourly instead of $1 for a host of reasons. And it is certainly breaking news that "most cities" have lived to regret infrastructure P3's. Chicago was notably controversial only because its mayor executed the arrangement in a way this mayor must justifiably wish that he had, and that future Pittsburgh mayors will remember to unleash after witnessing this haughty political show trial.<br /><br />The lease wouldn't have been good for pensioners? Putting an extra $100 million or so into the fund wouldn't have been good for them how? And not good for TAXPAYERS? Eschewing new debt now and canceling out old debt besides, and strengthening an existing revenue stream (via the parking tax) is bad for taxpayers how? I'm not following at all.<br /><br />Even "success" for the Council-Controller plan has been defined way down now, aside from the other questions surrounding it. It's little more than a State Takeover Avoidance Measure anymore -- and a band-aid solution as far as that goes. Maybe tape and gauze.Bram Reichbaumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05620172942925293407noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1588280325775325323.post-27328148063534697042010-10-19T22:30:22.085-04:002010-10-19T22:30:22.085-04:00This idea that Council needs to consider all plans...This idea that Council needs to consider all plans all at the same time is just pathetically ill-conceived. The parking lease assumed an incredible amount of risk when you consider the lost opportunities for economic development, the "compensation events" that would be triggered at the drop of a hat, or the huge increases in parking fees in our neighborhood business districts. It was not a "risk free" plan--far from it. Not only that, but most other cities that have entered into these recent PPP arrangements have come to regret them in a big way.<br /><br />Saying that the City needed to keep it on the table to consider it with the other two options is just like saying, "Well, its Friday night and I can do three things: Go see a movie, go out to eat, or shoot myself in the face. I think I will leave all three options on the table because any one of them could be a good option."<br /><br />The mayor's parking lease was clearly a highly controversial option, that had many unsatisfactory components that ultimately made Council sour on supporting it. Not to mention that it was HUGELY unpopular. But it isn't about politics, its about making the best decision for pensioners and for taxpayers. The lease plan was good for neither.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1588280325775325323.post-8646661303931710182010-10-19T12:21:55.592-04:002010-10-19T12:21:55.592-04:00Infinonymous's comment on this was actually pr...Infinonymous's <a href="http://infinonymous.blogspot.com/2010/10/week-begins-with-lucid-intelligent.html" rel="nofollow">comment</a> on this was actually pretty hysterical.<br /><br />To be fair, Monk chimed in but it was mostly a laundry list of borderline personal cheapshots at council folk. Might have passed if he weren't interned in the Comet gulag.Bram Reichbaumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05620172942925293407noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1588280325775325323.post-87874620320787128062010-10-19T00:14:44.184-04:002010-10-19T00:14:44.184-04:00Funny - when you write a well thought out and even...Funny - when you write a well thought out and evenhanded post you get no comments. Maybe you should go back to pushing the Burgess agenda. ;)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1588280325775325323.post-8409491382418388872010-10-19T00:02:38.988-04:002010-10-19T00:02:38.988-04:00link<a href="http://oldcoyote.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/tumbleweed_004.jpg" rel="nofollow">link</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com