Allegheny Institute Blog

In today’s Post Gazette an op-ed appeared that described the sorry state of transportation in Pennsylvania and the Pittsburgh region. Signed by 18 members of the Allegheny County House delegation, the piece details how their efforts will fix the decrepit situation in highways, bridges, and the Port Authority.

The piece mentions that if the legislative package had not come together, Allegheny County’s “only alternative would have been a property tax hike” in order to hold off on the proposed second round of cuts proposed in September. This is not true: nowhere has it ever been mentioned that the County was going to hold off on cuts by instituting a property tax increase. In fact, the County Executive and members of council have often boasted of their ability to avoid a property tax increase even in the face of County financial difficulties that resulted in the layoffs of 500 employees a few years back. The legislature could not mandate that the County raise property taxes, so it was at the discretion of the County to do so.

In that way, the optional car rental tax and alcohol tax—options that have been floated before for either covering the deficit of the convention center or the City of Pittsburgh’s finances—are really not that much different than putting the County in the box of deciding what to do with the property tax rate.

The County currently cuts a $25 million check to the Port Authority and that money comes from property taxes. If the County views mass transit as a public good that is on par with health and human services, parks, or public safety, then the County should shed some of its non-essential functions to free up the money.