Tuesday, September 25, 2007
More Double Talk on Parking Tax
We have written on what may amount to a showdown over the City’s parking tax. Under the terms of the state’s reform package, the parking tax is on a scheduled reduction path which will bring the tax down to 35% in 2010. For the 2008 budget year, the tax is supposed to go from its current 45% to 40%. Some council members don’t want to implement the reduction, because in their opinion last year’s reduction did not lead to a reduction in parking rates.
“The revenue we lost [with this year's cut] isn't going where it was supposed to, which is into the hands of the people who park Downtown”, said one council member. The City Controller also noted that “the whole reasoning of lowering the parking tax was to give something back to the people who are paying a higher [EMS tax] and it's not going to them.”
So what does the Council member plan to do if the tax rate stays at 45%? He wants to redirect it to debt and pensions, which, while we agree are massive problems, aren’t going to be solved by $20 million over the next three years. And it goes counter to returning the money to the people that park Downtown—it uses that money to pay for Pittsburgh’s past promises to its workers and for its dalliances into “growing the City” without addressing core problems.
And forgive us for questioning this concern for the Downtown parkers and workers. Where was this concern in 2004 when the rate jumped from 31 to 50%? Where was the concern when Pittsburgh decided to take a lump sum $52 from every worker under the terms of the EMS tax provisions and make them fight for a refund if they were in fact exempt by virtue of not earning $12,000? The City certainly did not initiate changes to the EMS tax which go into effect at the beginning of this year—it was the General Assembly (after many missteps) who fixed the tax that will finally get it right for low income workers.
As we have stated many times before, Council should start with prodding on its Parking Authority to roll back its rates. Until that happens, it is the height of hypocrisy to complain that parking tax rates are not responding to tax reductions.
“The revenue we lost [with this year's cut] isn't going where it was supposed to, which is into the hands of the people who park Downtown”, said one council member. The City Controller also noted that “the whole reasoning of lowering the parking tax was to give something back to the people who are paying a higher [EMS tax] and it's not going to them.”
So what does the Council member plan to do if the tax rate stays at 45%? He wants to redirect it to debt and pensions, which, while we agree are massive problems, aren’t going to be solved by $20 million over the next three years. And it goes counter to returning the money to the people that park Downtown—it uses that money to pay for Pittsburgh’s past promises to its workers and for its dalliances into “growing the City” without addressing core problems.
And forgive us for questioning this concern for the Downtown parkers and workers. Where was this concern in 2004 when the rate jumped from 31 to 50%? Where was the concern when Pittsburgh decided to take a lump sum $52 from every worker under the terms of the EMS tax provisions and make them fight for a refund if they were in fact exempt by virtue of not earning $12,000? The City certainly did not initiate changes to the EMS tax which go into effect at the beginning of this year—it was the General Assembly (after many missteps) who fixed the tax that will finally get it right for low income workers.
As we have stated many times before, Council should start with prodding on its Parking Authority to roll back its rates. Until that happens, it is the height of hypocrisy to complain that parking tax rates are not responding to tax reductions.
