A day after County Exec Fitzgerald announced he would be asking for $3 million from the Regional Asset District (RAD) board to help fill a hole in the Port Authority’s (PAT) budget and further ask that the funding be made a permanent annual commitment, Pittsburgh’s Mayor Ravenstahl pushed back. Paraphrasing, the mayor said that any excess revenue above RAD’s forecast might be welcomed by RAD recipients and that he would not support making any diversion of funds to PAT permanent.
Two questions arise. Should transit be considered by the RAD board as a legitimate use of the one percent County sales tax proceeds? Why doesn’t the County Exec go to Harrisburg and seek legislative authority to place a referendum on the ballot to get a 0.2 percent increase in the local sales tax to be used exclusively for transit? That should bring in about $25 million per year.
Because it takes 6 of 7 members of the RAD board to vote in favor of shifting or appropriating funds, the County Exec could face a hurdle in view of the fact that he has only 4 and a half of the appointments to the board. Consider too that the County receives 25 percent of RAD tax revenue already. Further, the County can impose drink taxes and car rental taxes that at their max could generate millions more than the current level. The drink tax was lowered from 10 percent but could be put back up if the Exec and Council are willing to take the political heat. Thus, the RAD board might not acquiesce to County Exec pressure and push back themselves.
Apparently after boasting of no county property tax increase for years and then boosting the tax 20 percent this year, the Exec is wary of asking for more or higher taxes. But he cannot have it both ways. The County and its residents are the primary beneficiaries of PAT’s transit services and the huge majority party in the County favors the status quo with regard to the power of unions to drive public sector entities into financial crisis (e.g., the City, the City school system, PAT). Therefore, by any reasonable standard, the County residents should bear the brunt of paying for the outrageous labor compensation and benefits at PAT. But rather than look for ways to curb PAT’s costs in a serious way, all eyes turn to Harrisburg and the lobbying begins for more state aid-which, unfortunately has always been forthcoming.
Back in the early 1990s when the concept of RAD was being developed, there could have easily been a provision included to have a part of the revenue dedicated to mass transit. At the time, the lobbyists and proponents dismissed the idea. Of course, the RAD tax was imposed by the County Commissioners who studiously avoided any notion of having the voters decide whether to adopt the one percent tax. Sadly, the Legislature, as it often does, yielded to the wishes of elected officials and civic leaders and ignored the will of the public.
And that is what the Exec hopes to achieve this time. Rather than asking County residents to decide if they are willing to more heavily subsidize PAT through a higher RAD tax, the state is being asked to put in additional funds and RAD will be importuned to contribute as well.
Coddle the unions because they are politically powerful but don’t ask residents to chip in more to pay for the coddling. That’s government at its worst, but what can one expect?
