It’s starting to appear that the Allegheny County Airport Authority can’t land new airlines for Pittsburgh International Airport without paying them.
Witness the authority’s latest double exercise in corporate wealthfare.
It will pay Air Canada $50,000 over two years to help market a daily roundtrip nonstop flight between Pittsburgh and Montreal beginning May 17.
“Adding another international destination like Montreal is important for both business and leisure travelers alike and adds to the momentum at Pittsburgh International Airport,” authority CEO Christina Cassotis told the Post-Gazette.
It might be. But taxpayers have no business being tapped for 50-grand to pay Air Canada to “market” the flight. That’s what the public subsidy will be used for.
Since when are John and Jane Q. Taxpayer responsible for underwriting an airline’s advertising campaign?
The same goes for a deal cut with Elite Airways, which plans to begin twice-weekly flights to and from Sarasota-Brandenton, Fla., International Airport on Feb. 23.
It’s ballyhooed as a convenient way for Pittsburgh Pirates’ fans to take in spring training games. But it will be taxpayers taken in on this deal. The authority will pay Elite $30,000 to market the new flights.
Said John Pearsall, Elite’s president: “The amount of enthusiasm the airport and the principles and the economic development board, and Sarasota and Bradenton officials have [for the flight] has just been unbelievable. Without their persistence and support, we wouldn’t even be looking at it.”
Translation: Without yet again forcing the public to become venture capitalists, Elite would not be flying from here to there.
But Pearsall, addressing future expansion, offered this dichotomy: “We do believe Pittsburgh is underserved.” Which suggests a pent-up demand. So, again, why are taxpayers being forced to have skin in Elite’s game?
Once again, class, it’s not up to taxpayers to assume the risk of Elite’s expansion, or the expansion of any airline. That should be Elite’s risk alone. The fact that it would not have considered such flights without public money is telling. But it’s also telling that Pearsall talks of an “underserved” market. “Underserved,” but only for a public price, perhaps?
Over the last year, the county Airport Authority has dished up millions of dollars to essentially bribe airlines to fly in and out of Pittsburgh. And with each new subsidy, it only perverts the marketplace more, making it all the more difficult to attract airlines without handouts.
The greatest public policy tragedy of this behavior is that those responsible insist it is “the way business is done.” Never mind that such recidivist market perversions are a horrible way to do business – for the marketplace and for taxpayers alike.
The Tribune-Review and the Post-Gazette have joined the Allegheny Institute’s call for Pittsburgh and Allegheny County officials to make public their bid to secure Amazon’s planned second headquarters outside of Seattle.
Those officials have cited a changing rationale for keeping the bid under wraps, from a confidentiality agreement with the Internet giant that doesn’t exist, to the need to protect Pittsburgh’s competitive advantage, which is nonsensical given the bid deadline has long passed.
Regardless, none of the cited reasons for opaqueness supersede the public’s right to know how government officials propose spending public money.
“This is the public’s business writ large,” we noted last week.
And as a Trib editorial put it, echoing an Allegheny Institute sentiment:
“Companies like Amazon expect ‘a candidness in the conversation,’ according to a joint statement issued by Pittsburgh officials. And taxpayers who’ll pay the freight should expect less? … Silence is not golden when the ‘gold’ at stake is the public’s.”
Neither did the P-G – in an editorial a day later, and in another on Monday — mince any words:
“One of government’s most maddening qualities is its fervent belief that it works best when it can work in secret,” calling it the “timeworn, misguided notion” that “is at the heart” of the cloak that has been pulled over the Amazon bid.
It called this official lack of transparency “an affront to taxpayers,” which it most certainly is.
In Monday’s editorial, the P-G said public officials “have little regard … for the public’s right to know.”
Thus, with no credible rational to keep secret the Amazon bid, reasonable people should be asking this question: “What are our government representatives hiding?”
Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Peduto further rationalized the secrecy by saying public disclosure/input will have to happen eventually if the city is chosen as a finalist.
After all, he offered, governing bodies such as City Council, County Council and the state Legislature will have to sign off any expenditure of public dollars on Amazon’s behalf.
Sorry, but no. Allowing the public to consider its business just before rubber stamps are applied, as too often happens, only mocks transparency.
Transparency breeds legitimacy, it once was written. That Pittsburgh’s top leaders are so adamant to avoid the former regarding the Amazon bid seriously suggests there is none of the latter in this matter.
Colin McNickle is a senior fellow and media specialist at the Allegheny Institute for Public Policy (cmcnickle@alleghenyinstitute.org).
