Mayor "Withholding Signature" on Marcellus Drilling Ban Referendum

MAD UPDATES, see below.

... effectively smothering it*, by means of running out the clock.

I have several reasons for this action. Chief among them is the message that we are sending when we are essentially blocking an industry from investing in our City and region. Additionally, legal concerns have been raised about the language proposed by this ordinance and I have reservations about incorporating a drilling ban into our City's Home Rule Charter. On top of these standing issues I must note my grave concern for the expedited process that was utilized as the state-created statutory timeframe for referenda neared. (Mayor Ravenstahl)

The line for scheduling gas extraction industry events begins to the left; for opening corporate headquarters, to the right.

MUCH MORE: City Paper Slag Heap.

*-UPDATE: Or not; see P-G Early Returns. Council's majority in favor of the ban may try to obviate the deadline by means of sending an "interim letter" to the county Elections Division. Of course the County Executive is chairman of the Board of Elections and no fan of the referendum either.

SO MUCH MORE: Slag Heap. And. There is yet another possible outlandishly contentious world developing: one in which the County Elections Division, on the advice of its Law Department, rejects the attempt to put the referendum on the ballot for either process or specifically inherent concerns. City Council's issue-specific supermajority then appeals that ruling in Common Pleas court. Since the City's Law Department is already conflicted (having spoken already on the issue) Council would have to hire an attorney for this task -- by interim approval of course, during the recess -- and at a weird time to do such a thing to boot. The judge would then invite objectors against this appeal to the bench -- the most conspicuously aggrieved of which during this process might be our Mayor himself, inasmuch as his Charter-given prerogative to smother legislation for the good of the City would be under challenge.

Talk about your blazes of glory.

**-UPDATE (Orange): The Allegheny County Elections Division does in fact deny the drill ban referendum, stating that the bill was not made a valid ordinance by the deadline, and that the interim approval is "legally inconsequential". The letter is silent on the matter of the propriety of the ballot question at issue. In related news, the Elections Division officially approved the library funding property tax referendum.

Later came this Facebook posting from Councilman Shields, which does not make a legal challenge sound particularly likely:

The Comedian: Rodney Dangerfield

The bit: What else? No respect.

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

The POTUS on "First-Ever Default" Avoision*

... and you could call this a liveblogging.



BEST ARGUMENT = starts at 2:25. Most of the previous might have been sent out in code.

In this coming (we hope) "process" to come up with real deficit reduction, it would be fantastic if these two bipartisan study commissions (on Tax Reform and Spending Reduction) each had to come back with draft bills no later than six months from now. No, better make that four months from now. We'll need another two months at least, to amend and improve them for enactment by the (symbolically critical) deadline.

Now in terms of optics -- it might be time for President Obama to alter the tone of his voice from that which has been his favorite (placid, exasperated calm) to something else. Emoting fear and passionate resolve are two ways of convincing people you see things their way.

*-UPDATE: A compromise breaks late in evening between the President and Congressional leaders (LINK) There is a degree of apparent confusion over what it would preclude in terms of the deficit-reduction approach. **- UPDATE II: POTUS explains himself, and rallies his troops again towards a "balanced" prescription. (LINK)

The Music: U2

The visual material: Lauren Faust

So! We have these 'Property Taxes'...

It should be starting to occur to people:

A 0.25 mil increase in the property tax would cost individual property owners $25 annually per $100,000 of assessed value, while raising $3.25 million annually, in this case for Carnegie Libraries of Pittsburgh (source).

As of this early date, nobody is indignantly recoiling from the concept. There is a comprehensible rationale for the tax increase, after all, and the cost is not very onerous compared to it.

So hypothetically and presumably, a 1.00 mil increase in property taxes would cost owners $100 per $100,000 in assessed value and raise $13 million annually for, let's say, the City of Pittsburgh.

$13 million with which the City might be enabled to pave a few streets, demolish some rat traps, and fix some pools -- that is, here and now, during the 3 to 5 years it will take before our pension fund runs out NO GOD NO WAIT I MEAN while we all address meaningful pension reform, maintain our pay-as-you-go capital budget and approach our debt drop-off in 2017.

The take we might generate from a one mil property tax hike is just a bit shy of the $15 million we hoped to generate with the 1% tax on college tuition. That $13 million also lies roughly in line with figures quoted in the recent past for various budget gaps, capital budget reductions, final solutions, forever elusive non-profit PILOT arrangements, pledges of diverted future revenue et cetera.

$100 on the other hand is a couple new tires, or a frightfully austere night for the family at PNC Park (bringing-a-flask austere), or a fraction of one's insurance deductible should the deterioration of public services lead to a problem in one's home.

The conventional wisdom has been that, "If we raise property taxes, there will be a 'whoosh' as the city empties out and collapses." However when contemplating sums like $100, one begins to wonder if that is really code for, "If I agree to raise property taxes, my next opponent will have something easy and interesting to say against me."

Thus for most who are in a position to decide, it's preferable to see taxes raised only upon a deus ex machina forcing us -- that is, a "state takeover", legal ruling or similar. Problem is, awaiting the arrival of an outside force takes much longer -- time during which problems fester, deterioration becomes decay, decay becomes disease, and real emptying-out might actually be occurring more subtly as a result.

Mayor Ravenstahl deserves credit for having actually advocated raising revenues -- via a tuition tax, yes, and via an infrastructure lease (no plan for parking rate increases was contemplated prior to the Mayor putting higher rates on the table in that way). However the easiest, most forthright, and perhaps the most painless way to collect more revenue remains a strict taboo, a ghost story.

It may not have to be property taxes, but there are not a plethora of options. If we understand that we need more money, it might be best to commence doing what is necessary to assemble more money -- rather than jockeying around the periphery and politically gaming the endgame, the deus we all sense is coming. It might even be a good way to be remembered -- ultimately -- as the one who was serious.

Monday: ISO a Balanced Approach

With the clock ticking closer towards financial Armageddon and no political compromise in sight, the federal government is starting to look and sound a lot like Pittsburgh. That's not good. (Wall Street Journal)

Infinonymous alerts us to the fact that a debt refinancing proposed by Mayor Ravenstahl which it is said will save 3 million precious dollars is not without controversy (Infinonymous). There was indeed a long discussion about it at the table last Wednesday, but I wasn't really tuned in and the video isn't up yet **-UPDATE II: The video is now up, and it appears Infi's speculations mirrored the amount of public due diligence applied to all such issues -- but as it turned out, there was nothing to worry about in the decision over whether to go after this financial opportunity (either generally or right now instead of "March"). It was preliminarily approved by the Council. *-UPDATE I & III: The City withdrew its pursuit of this high-to-low bond deal refinancing after all, due to investor uncertainty regarding interest rates pertaining to the aforementioned debt ceiling issue, Greece, Ireland, pension uncertainty and other things. "The numbers didn't work."

Target opened in East Liberty and it's a pretty big deal, judging by the amount of SQUEE! in my Facebook feed. (P-G, Mark Belko; Boring Pittsburgh; Null Space)

Councilman Shields asserts that his own party's County Executive nominee Rich Fitzgerald, as well as members of the ICA board, are lobbying Council to kill his Marcellus drilling ban referendum. (City Paper Slag Heap)

It seems like it's getting harder to recruit black police officers, or to retain and develop black applicants through the long hiring process. (P-G, Sadie Gurman)

One Pittsburgh -- the "recruiting campaign of Pittsburgh United" -- helped organize 600 people to attend a town hall to tell Congressional staffers that they want "good jobs". (P-G, Ann Belser)

Sue Kerr reminds / urges us to sign a petition asking the Pirates to create a video and join the It Gets Better campaign (the Pirates would know about getting better) (Change.org)