Allegheny County and community development officials are stooping to a new low in keeping details from the public about their bid to lure Amazon’s “HQ2” second headquarters to Greater Pittsburgh.

Bombarded with Right-to-Know Act requests from local media for the release of what clearly is public information, three top officials have issued an outrageous statement that not only defends the indefensible but thumbs their collective nose at taxpayers, the people who always end up paying a premium for such subterfuge.

“We routinely meet with companies looking to invest in this region,” said Allegheny County Chief Executive Rich Fitzgerald, Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Peduto and Stefani Pashman, CEO of the Allegheny Conference on Community Development.

Continued the trio: “Such meetings often include detailed discussions about economic growth and jobs, and proposals – if appropriate – are specifically tailored to what the economic impact of such a location would be to our region.

“Those companies expect a candidness in the conversations that they have, and that those discussions will be kept private. Without that discretion, many would not even consider this region.”

Where does one begin to discredit this kind of public policy buncombe?

This is the public’s business writ large. Companies bellying up to the bar of corporate wealthfare “expect a candidness”? Good grief, what about the public being kept in the dark being expected to pay for it all, proposals signed, sealed and delivered with absolutely no transparency?

Given some of the dubious “incentives” that some locales have offered Amazon in pursuit of the Internet giant’s second headquarters, it’s imperative that Pittsburgh officials release what kind of corporate wealthfare it is expecting taxpayers to cover should it “win” the bidding war.

As but one example, Seattle Times columnist Danny Westneat says “Chicago has offered to let Amazon pocket $1.32 billion in income taxes paid by its own workers.”
“This is truly perverse,” he reminds. “Called a personal income-tax diversion, the workers must still pay the full taxes, but instead of the state getting the money to use for schools, roads or whatever, Amazon would get to keep it all instead.”

The columnist cites a report by the group Good Jobs First that says “The result is that workers are, in effect, paying taxes to their boss.”

So, again, what exactly is Greater Pittsburgh’s offer? Clearly, the public has every right to know, not only as a matter of sound public policy but as a matter of law.

This kind of behavior by public officials no longer can be tolerated.

Pittsburgh International Airport, which has been using hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars in an attempt to subsidize its way to greater success, appears to be losing the competition to lower its fees.

The Tribune-Review cites an analysis by Moody’s showing that, in 2016, 69 airports charged lower airline fees (technically known as “cost per enplanement”) than the Findlay Township airport. That’s up from 66 in 2015.

As the Trib reminds, such fees “are a key factor for some airlines in deciding where to add or expand service.”

Pittsburgh International now charges airlines $12.85 for each departing passenger. The charge was $12.89 in 2015 and $12.86 in 2016.

The airport wants to lower that fee to $11.30 in 2018. And it hopes to charge $9.73 per departing passenger in 2023. That’s when a $1.1 billion replacement of the current landside terminal with a new facility will be completed, the Trib reminds.

But an industry analyst told the Trib in October that Pittsburgh International could have lowered the cost per departing passenger to about $5 “without the project, freed of debt payments.”

There’s talk anew of establishing a “public-private partnership” that would create a better governance model for the troubled Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority (PWSA).

According to one report, the City of Pittsburgh would continue to own the assets of the PWSA but the new board would oversee management and operations.

The long-running rap against current authority management is that board members, appointed by politicians, do the bidding of those polls, which makes the authority’s “independence” a farce.

Additionally, an audit questioned, as it should, the propriety of some board members holding paid positions in city government as a conflict of interest.

But a better governance solution would be for those who appoint board members to actually honor the independence of those they chose (as those appointees are supposed to be) and to also not appoint those who are automatically conflicted.

Surely, following existing rules and eschewing conflicts would be a better tack first, would it not? Or is the existing system so broken — and those who control it so unwilling to cede control — that the only alternative is to create a new governance structure?

Allegheny County Controller Chelsea Wagner garnered more than a modicum of attention for producing a video spoof of “The Price is Right” game show to draw attention to non-“street prices” at Pittsburgh International Airport.

Vendors at the Findlay Township airport’s mall are supposed to charge “street prices,” market prices found elsewhere, in an effort to avoid “gouging” captive travelers.

A Wagner audit found overcharges for a number of items – from 19 cents too high for a McDonald’s breakfast sandwich, to nearly $70 too much for a leather motorcycle jacket.

The controller’s video spoof was titled “Is the Price is Right?” and described as an “in-house, low-cost” production. And Wagner was the first to admit (to KDKA-TV) that the video is “more than a little cheesy,” by design and to, supposedly, better make the point.

But “in-house, low-cost” does not mean no cost, in money and in time. And this question arises. Was the video’s production the most efficacious use of taxpayer dollars to publicize the airport mall pricing audit? Or could the message have been delivered just as effectively and at a lower cost by sending out a news release?

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