The year ends on a sour note for Pittsburghers pining for good governance that leads to sound public policy. To wit:

City Council has passed a bill that outlaws the use of tools commonly used – and according to many experts, commonly required by federal and insurance regulators to ensure public safety – to guide and control wild animals used in circus and zoo settings.

The measure, because it is so broad, essentially serves as a de facto ban of circuses in the city while making zoo handlers, employees and visitors less safe.

Particularly galling is that, if signed into law by the mayor – and he is expected to do so this week — it very well could mean the end the nearly 70-year run of the Shrine Circus in Pittsburgh, a charity that has done so very much to aid ill children.

Animal rights activists pushed for the legislation. But circus and zoo officials said that advocacy, and the council’s acquiescence to them, was based on “outdated bias and untrue statements” regarding treatment of animals.

What’s next, legislation to ban zoos?

Or perhaps the city council will attempt to “redeem” itself by creating a new tax to make up for the Shriners’ losses? Ahem.

Speaking of taxes, Pittsburgh City Council has passed a bill that raises, in two phases, the realty transfer tax by 25 percent by January 2020.

The “rationale” employed for the hike – from 4 percent to 4.5 percent effective Feb. 1, then to 5 percent come 2020 – is that the proceeds would be used to for “affordable housing.”

While making housing less affordable?

“This is about permanently changing the lives of Pittsburgh families,” said Celeste Scott, described by the Post-Gazette as “the housing justice organizer at Pittsburgh United,” an “activist coalition.”

She can say that again.

Ah, there seems to be a common thread emerging in city governance – “progressives” are more and more running the city show, winning the day with regressive policies that make the city more and more expensive and less and less attractive to existing residents and potential newcomers.

In a most cogent email to the council last week, City Controller Michael Lamb panned the move for the bad idea it is:

“You continue to make home ownership more expensive and living in Pittsburgh more difficult and somehow act surprised when Census data shows (sic) continued drops in city population.”

Continued the controller, “Your actions will only serve to worsen an already-existing housing glut in the city while doing very little, if anything, to improve affordable housing options.”

Bingo.

Once fully implemented, real estate-types lament that Pittsburgh will have the highest realty-transfer tax in Pennsylvania. It’s pretty doubtful that such a statistic will be much of a selling point for newcomers.

Uh-oh. Astute people are starting to get a queasy stomach about what Greater Pittsburgh’s super-duper, hush-hush, none-of-your-business and top-secret bid to lure Amazon’s second headquarters might be.

A business newspaper in Detroit got its hands on part of the Motor City’s bid (which appears to be a quasi-joint bid with adjacent Windsor, Ontario, in Canada).

While the total value of the bid – tax credits and incentives – was redacted, Crain’s Detroit reports Amazon would be eligible to keep all of the state income taxes generated by its employees for 10 years and 50 percent for the following decade.

Additionally, Amazon would not pay real estate taxes for 30 years, in addition to not paying some other city taxes.

The bid of at least one other city had very similar tax-forgiveness provisions. And if it is part and parcel to others, it’s a good bet such forgiveness was part of Amazon’s demands.

There’s a highly technical term for this – giving away the store.

Regional Sky says it will begin nonstop flights between Pittsburgh International Airport and Wilkes-Barre Scranton International Airport in April.

The airline cites demand for the service.

The Allegheny County Airport Authority, which has made a rather large cottage industry out of paying airlines a public-money premium to entice such “progress,” says it has yet to discuss whether it will pay Regional Sky anything.

Consider that a true Christmas miracle.

That said, if there’s a true demand, public tax dollars should not be part of the equation.

Colin McNickle is a senior fellow and media specialist at the Allegheny Institute for Public Policy (cmcnickle@alleghenyinstitute.org).