Tuesday, September 11, 2007
Let County Voters Decide
There is some steam picking up in the movement to allow voters in Allegheny County have a say on whether they want to permit new taxes on drinks and car rentals to bail out the Port Authority. A radio personality is pushing a petition to get the issue on the ballot. A County Council member will also introduce a bill to put the taxes on the ballot.
Predictably, there is resistance. The Council president, who says he favors referenda “on large, large policy issues”, is hesitant because he thinks it will take away Council’s decision making power.
He is wrong on many fronts—aside from assessments and the additional 1 percent sales tax (neither of which had any exposure to referenda), the enactment of new taxes to fund the Port Authority is a large, large issue. It might be the biggest faced by County Council since its formation. It touches upon the most fundamental aspects of County government, which currently writes a $25 million check from property taxes to PAT every year. If the new taxes are passed, the $25 million won’t be returned to the taxpayers: it will go to fund the County’s escalating health care costs. If the taxes are denied, then the message is that voters don’t want more money spent on transit. The decision making power goes back to Council to work on how to extract $25 million in savings from the existing budget.
The referendum process will allow both sides of these issues to be aired before the vote. The Home Rule Charter obviously intended for issues a chance to get on the ballot rather easily given the fact that only 500 signatures are required to petition Council.
The president also noted that “I don't know if you can put every single question on a referendum”. That’s just hyperbole: this is not like California’s liberal petition system. In fact, there have only been three referenda votes to date, twice on whether Council members ought to be allowed to keep their seat while running for another office. Surely, whether to impose new taxes is just as important.
Predictably, there is resistance. The Council president, who says he favors referenda “on large, large policy issues”, is hesitant because he thinks it will take away Council’s decision making power.
He is wrong on many fronts—aside from assessments and the additional 1 percent sales tax (neither of which had any exposure to referenda), the enactment of new taxes to fund the Port Authority is a large, large issue. It might be the biggest faced by County Council since its formation. It touches upon the most fundamental aspects of County government, which currently writes a $25 million check from property taxes to PAT every year. If the new taxes are passed, the $25 million won’t be returned to the taxpayers: it will go to fund the County’s escalating health care costs. If the taxes are denied, then the message is that voters don’t want more money spent on transit. The decision making power goes back to Council to work on how to extract $25 million in savings from the existing budget.
The referendum process will allow both sides of these issues to be aired before the vote. The Home Rule Charter obviously intended for issues a chance to get on the ballot rather easily given the fact that only 500 signatures are required to petition Council.
The president also noted that “I don't know if you can put every single question on a referendum”. That’s just hyperbole: this is not like California’s liberal petition system. In fact, there have only been three referenda votes to date, twice on whether Council members ought to be allowed to keep their seat while running for another office. Surely, whether to impose new taxes is just as important.
