State Senate Majority Whip Jane Orie says she's preparing a letter to Pittsburgh's oversight board, asking it to warn City Council: by freezing the parking tax rate, council risks a cutoff of all state funds to the city. The ability to impose that penalty is one of the powers granted to the oversight board by state lawmakers. Pittsburgh's financial recovery plan approved by the Pennsylvania legislature requires that the parking tax be scaled back. That was part of the trade-off in exchange for additional taxing powers granted to the city, including the annual $52 emergency municipal services tax.
Councilman Jim Motznik, the sponsor of the legislation, had hoped that council's passing of the freeze would provide the basis for a conversation with state lawmakers in Harrisburg next week. Orie's reaction does not bode well for that conversation.
Motznik argues that parking lot and garage operators did not pass along this year's parking tax cut to consumers. His bill would lock in this year's parking tax rate at 45 percent instead of lowering it to 40 percent for 2008. His legislation dedicates revenues from the five percent difference to making payments on the city's debt and pension fund obligations. [PG & Trib coverage of the issue.]
You can watch video of my Channel 4 Action News report on the Pittsburgh Channel.
Here are some key quotes from my interviews with Orie and Motznik. They were conducted separately on Tuesday.
Orie:
• "It violates the spirit and letter of the law. It's in complete violation of the state law. This was negotiated in a bi-partisan fashion."
• "Right now,what Councilman Motznik is doing is a back door tax on the backs of the commuters."
• "It's irresponsible for them to have passed this. I believe there is no support in the legislature to do this."
• "There are ramifications for violating the law, and they could lose state moneys. That alerts them them, you are taking an action in violation, this is what is at risk."
• "Under state law, if they want to play this game---and it's really sad, because they're violating the letter of the law--not only can the state withhold funding. The state, because it's a state created city parking authority, we can force them to reduce the rates."
Motznik:
• "I don't feel that it's illegal. We here on council control old taxes, new taxes, what tax rates are going to be."
• "I think it helps the cause in Harrisburg, because it shows that we're being fiscally responsible with the funds that we would have lost."
• "It gives us a few months to take something to Harrisburg and try to work out an agreement."
• "Worst case scenario, we don't agree, then we're headed for probably some legal problems. But the idea is not to fight with the legislature."
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Parking Tax: Orie Warns of Penalties
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
An Audio Footnote
This quick post is an audio footnote to Monday's entry, "Ravenstahl In The New York Times".
You can listen in to the 22 second mp3 file to hear the mayor confirm that there never was a "flip-flops" controversy.
Monday, October 8, 2007
Ravenstahl In The New York Times: UPDATED
The New York Times revisits Pittsburgh Mayor Luke Ravenstahl in this story by Ian Urbina headlined "In Media's Eye, Young Mayor Says He's Learning." It follows another profile in the New York Sun by Seith Gitell just last week. The ironic twist here is that the Mayor's announced intent to maintain a lower personal profile until election day was launched as the lead story in the 'National Report' section of one of America's most prominent papers. In the interview, Ravenstahl himself recounts several of his controversies for the national readership.
You can see Mayor Ravenstahl's comments about his planned lower profile in my Channel 4 Action News report. The video is available on the Pittsburgh Channel.
The appearance of two New York newspaper profiles of the mayor within seven days gives rise to this question: did someone pitch interviews with the mayor to the New York media? The answer is "no". Times reporter Ian Urbina tells me no one pitched his story to him; it was a follow-up to his earlier profile of Mayor Ravenstahl. I also spoke with Seth Gitell, who says his story idea was his own; his wife has family ties to Pittsburgh that brought them here recently.
Given the focus of its story on Mayor Ravenstahl's "intense news media questioning", I was curious about whether the New York Times interviewed any local journalists for their perspective. I was surveying local political and government reporters via e-mail when Times reporter Ian Urbina himself graciously responded directly. He tells me he did not speak to any local reporters who actually cover the mayor. As you'll see in the Times story, commentator John McIntire is quoted--but misidentified as a KDKA Radio talk show host, a position he left six months ago. When I asked Urbina if he interviewed any other media source beside McIntire, he said he had also contacted the satirical website "The Carbolic Smoke Ball".
Here's an unusual tidbit in the Times story:
“I like him because the city runs,” said Eliza Wiles, 54, waiting for a bus several blocks from City Hall. Ms. Wiles added that she could not care less that the mayor was younger than her son or that Mr. Ravenstahl wore flip-flops on a plane to Los Angeles — an episode that drew criticism. “The abandoned cars get gone, street lights get fixed. The place is safe,” she said. “That’s what matters to me.”
Flip-flops criticism? Really? The only references to this I can find stem from one talk show host who was sympathetically joking with the mayor about the media attention by bringing up whether he'd worn flip-flops on a plane. Mayor Ravenstahl admitted to that when I asked him about it today.
Mayor Ravenstahl: "That was just part of our casual conversation that we had. No, you're correct."
Q: "No one's grilling you about that?"
Mayor Ravenstahl: "No.... You are now, though. (Laughter)."
Times reporter Urbina was not let in on the joke. Urbina tells me that when he pressed the mayor to elaborate on the sort of media queries that trouble him, Ravenstahl cited the "flip-flops" example. The Times reporter--trusting the account--used the mayor's description to elicit the comment from Pittsburgher Eliza Wiles quoted above.
The mayor has used the "flip-flop" story as though it was real at least twice before. It occurred in passing during the course of radio interviews here and here.
Friday, October 5, 2007
Digging Deeper: The Money & The Car
My review of the city's grant and the federal homeland security guidelines shows that the money used to buy the city police intelligence squad's GMC Yukon appears to have strict strings attached. It's specifically for protecting infrastructure from terrorists. (See video link in this Pittsburgh Channel story.)
The city's grant agreement to get the homeland security money makes it clear. The money used to buy the car that sometimes transported Mayor Ravenstahl was intended for the 'Buffer Zone Protection Program'. That means it's to be used to "protect and secure critical infrastructure and key resource sites across the country".
City officials signed a pledge that "The City of Pittsburgh agrees that all equipment received shall be used only for the purposes set forth".
Homeland security guidelines show examples of the suggested types of equipment and uses intended for the money. They include:
• biological, chemical, and radiation detection,
• explosives mitigation,
• and security systems.
The homeland security guidelines go a step further and spell out what it describes as "unallowable costs". It specifically says "unauthorized program expenditures.. include... general use vehicles".
The federal documents caution that the list of protected sites "will remain classified for security purposes". It makes no secret, however, that the intended use of the money is to "make it more difficult for terrorists to conduct surveillance or launch attacks".
[You can browse through the Program Guidelines and Application Kit here. I should caution you that it's a very large .pdf file.]
The homeland security department warns that:
• "it is the responsibility of the recipient to fully understand and comply with these requirements."
• "failure to comply may result in the withholding of funds, termination of the award, or other sanctions."
The city also agreed to provide federal and state agencies "the right to examine all records and documents that are related to BZPP equipment", and that "all equipment received is subject to audit by federal or state agencies". The city also agreed "to retain all cost-supporting records and documentation for a period of three years".
Public Safety Director Mike Huss responds that "the vehicle was part of the application and purchased by PEMA (the Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency) [for the city]. They would not have purchased it if it were unallowable."
PEMA tells me that it's just a "channel" for the money. It also says that other policing assignments cannot share the car with the anti-terrorism effort, as Chief Harper has been suggesting.
I interviewed United States Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan Friday afternoon. She says:
• "Allegations of the mayor's alleged misuse of a vehicle have just come to the attention of my office. We're going to take a look at the purposes for the grant: what the specifications were, whether the purchase was an allowable purchase, and exactly what uses are permissible under the grant. Once We've had an opportunity to do that, we'll be in a much better position to determine whether there were any violations of the grant agreement."
• "There are a number of issues that my office could look at. We do play a role in coordinating homeland security functions within the region. ...The grants that have been made available to law enforcement and to municipalities around the country are very important and we must make every effort to make sure that these funds are being utilized properly. There are a number of issues that we're going to look at, and again it is premature to get into precisely what we'll do once we gather all the facts in this matter."
Thursday, October 4, 2007
Q&A: Mayor & Chief On The Yukon
Thanks to Chris Twomey of The Pittsburgh Channel for posting this raw video from reporters' Q&A with Mayor Luke Ravenstahl and Police Chief Nate Harper. You can look in by clicking here. I was going to post it as a podcast, but Chris kindly agreed to offer up the video.
One way or the other, I'll be blogging more about this story tomorrow. (I was off sick today.)
While not it does not pass judgment, the language in the statement from U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan is striking. Because the Homeland Security grant for purchase of the Yukon was federal funding, the United States Attorney's office has jurisdiction to examine whether there were violations of the terms of the grant.
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
Sirk On Blogging No More
Excerpts From An E-Mail Exchange:
From: Bob Mayo [Reporter, WTAE]
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 4:49 PM
To: Sirk, Alecia [Press Secretary, Mayor's Office]
Subject: Blog request
[ Excerpt ]
Would you be willing to send me an e-mail sharing your thoughts about your personal blogging and about what went into your decision now to stop?
From: "Sirk, Alecia"
Sent: 10/02/2007 02:17 PM AST
To: Bob Mayo
Subject: RE: Blog request
[Excerpt In Response ]
There’s not much to tell. I loved blogging and certainly had fun with it – I hope folks took it that way. On stopping? Not only do I not have time now, but people would certainly be reading things into it that weren’t my intent in posting, and that might hurt someone else. Don’t ever want to do that.
As has been said on the blogs around the City – who have made me feel so great with their kind posts and comments – it’s just the price of my current business – along with regular lunch hour!
Thanks for the inquiry,
A
Alecia Sirk
Press Secretary
Office of Mayor Luke Ravenstahl
When Dick Skrinjar was Mayor Ravenstahl's press secretary, I'd occasionally encourage him to consider taking up blogging. He never did, though I've sometimes wondered if that suggestion led indirectly to Councilman Jim Motznik's brief venture into the burghosphere that ended as abruptly as it began.
In response to my posts here, Skrinjar would sometimes (jokingly, I think) preface his comments to me with the question "now, is this for a blog or is this for a TV news story?"
By now, you've read on The Burgh Report and the PG's Early Returns that Alecia Sirk, who was named as Dick Skrinjar's successor, has given up her blog.
Sirk's "Love of Chair" vanished suddenly on Sunday evening, following a Post-Gazette profile of her husband, URA Director-designate Pat Ford. The online version of the PG story had added a link to her blog shortly before "Love of Chair" disappeared. Fragments remain in Google's caching of its contents. Early Returns' Rich Lord posted this farewell memorial.
Monday, October 1, 2007
Guest Blogger Jon Greiner on "Bodies"
Guest BloggerA while back I offered a couple of my fellow Channel 4 Action News reporters an invitation to share their guest blog posts here. Reporter Jon Greiner is the first taker. Jon's post appears below.
"Recently my wife and I traveled to Columbus, Ohio and saw the "Bodies" exhibit coming soon to the Carnegie Science Center. While it's generated a lot of controversy for issues connected to ethics, I'd like to offer an opinion I don't believe I've seen yet. It's overpriced! It costs $22 for adults and $16 for children. I know that the demand is there and that the exhibit will draw a couple hundred thousand people here, allowing the Science Center to make a lot of money for its worthwhile projects. But that doesn't change my mind that it's overpriced by about fifty per cent."
"It's not that we had a bad experience at the exhibit. In fact, since the display had been in Columbus since June, there were only about twenty people in all of the seven display rooms, so we could spend as much time viewing as we wanted. We finished in just under two hours. They'll issue tickets at fifteen minute intervals to spread out the crowds. But there's a lot to see and read, and it could get very frustrating standing two or three deep to take your turn at it."
"With regard to the controversy over the display of real human bodies, I can say that it was, in a word, strange. You can't help but wonder who these people were. But I wouldn't think to advise you on whether you should go. In my opinion, it wouldn't hold the attention of young children for long, but that's your call."
"I just wanted to suggest you try to find a way to get a discount on tickets, and especially to try to go during off peak hours. You'll be able to spend a lot more time at it that way, which you'll appreciate, especially if you've paid $76 or so for a family of four."
"Thanks to Bob for allowing me to borrow his blog space. If you have any specific question, pleas e-mail me at jgreiner@hearst.com. Hope you enjoy it!"
I'm happy to welcome Jon as our guest in the burghosphere. I'll be bringing you some fresh posts of my own soon.
Posts
