PLCB Compromise Proposal

We get it. Lots of workers are going to lose their jobs if the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board (PLCB) is abolished and there are lots of arguments for the state control of liquor.

But what about wine?
Only 3 other states (New Hampshire, Utah, and Wyoming) control the sale of wine (as opposed to the 18 states that control liquor). In New Hampshire, you can buy wine at grocery stores, but the state is wholesaler of wine. If the state were to sell wine licenses, they would still make a windfall profit as many entrepreneurs entered this new market. The state liquor stores could continue to sell wine and not waste the time and effort that they've spent on forging relationships with wineries.

In terms of annual profits, liquor sales account for more than 60% of the annual retail sales income which would maintain a steady supply of dough to the state coffers. The 6% State and Local sales tax would still bring $112 Million dollars to the state's coffers. And the 18% State Liquor tax would still bring $271 Million to the state's coffers.

So how about we exercise some bi-partisanship and compromise on this issue? Let's keep union jobs, expand options for entrepreneurs, make a windfall of profit, and maintain a fat revenue stream while still excessively monitoring the sale of liquor.

And maybe while we're at it, we can get a refund on the pathetic, malfunctioning waste of millions of dollars that are the wine kiosks? For those keeping track at home, the wine kiosks are back in action after over a month of being out of service.

Dedicated Funding Streams 101

You may (like me) have spent the last week gorging on Christmas treats and entertaining travelers stranded in Pittsburgh because of the crippling East Coast snowstorm. However, Pittsburgh City Council has been spending their holidays coming up with last-minute solutions to avoid a potentially disastrous state take-over of the city's pensions at the end of the year.

The latest political buzzword is "Dedicated Funding Stream." The idea is as old as dirt, though. Many of us set aside money every paycheck to contribute to our 401Ks. That's a simple dedicated funding stream. Instead of getting your whole paycheck, plopping it into one big checking account, then deciding how to divvy things up, you set aside a fixed percentage every month to your future retirement that you can't change without lots of annoying paperwork.

Allegheny County's Drink Tax
Back in 2007, County Executive Dan Onorato and his council passed the extraordinarily controversial Drink tax, dedicating 10% of every tipple consumed in the county to pay for the County's share of Port Authority expenses. Now, when it's time to pay Port Authority, the Council doesn't have to slice a piece of the budget pie - that money is already set aside.

City Council's Proposal?
Pittsburgh City Council wants to dedicate future parking rate increase profits to funding the Pittsburgh pensions. I, for one, am a fan of this method. Much like we don't sell our house and put the profits in our 401K and hope for the best, just to get all our savings wiped out in a bad market downturn, we regularly contribute to our future, exercising "Dollar Cost Averaging." If you need an extra reminder why plopping a giant wad of cash onto the problem doesn't fix the problem, you need to only look back to the year 1998 in Pittsburgh. That's when then-Mayor Murphy sold over $250 Million in bonds to shore up the pension fund. All that money has since disappeared in stock market dive after stock market dive while the city continued to contribute the minimum amount possible each year.

What's Next? Will Harrisburg also jump on the dedicated funding stream bandwagon? One can only hope. As it stands now, the Pennsylvania state legislature can barely pass budgets on time while it attempts to divvy up its giant general fund. Most of the time, Port Authority gets the shaft. Let's take the control out of the hands of selfish state legislators and add some transparency to the budgeting process instead of last-minute shady deals to pass the budget. Heck, maybe the Federal government could even learn some lessons here? If I can manage my own budget, surely our governments with their teams of Ph.D. degree-holders and economists should be able to as well.

Happy Hanukkah from Governor Rendell!

Governor Rendell has put me in the holiday spirit! He just announced funding for averting catastrophic Port Authority service cuts in March.

Once again, a one-time emergency fix has bailed out the long-suffering public transportation agency. Once again, the ball is back in the State's court to come up with a dedicated funding stream for transit. Perhaps Governor Corbett can rename the Johnstown Flood Tax, which has been making a mockery of that catastrophe for decades in the name of slush funding, to the Public Transportation tax, making a strong stand in this state that if you buy liquor you're funding the drunk buses. Perhaps, they can also start issuing busperks for each case of beer you buy?

Honestly, not only did Rendell save my bus line (and dozens of others) with his dogged attempts to not give up on public transportation even in his final days of office, he also saved this blog. There's only so much defeat this blogger can overcome. So you have one more year of decent bus service, and one more year of me blogging.

Happy holidays!

Bye-Bye Buses, Hello Bikes

Port Authority of Allegheny County (PAAC) is planning record cuts in bus service largely due to a reduction in state funding this year and going forward. With a new conservative Governor-elect, Port Authority funding is likely to only continue its decline at the state level and our illustrious local officials seem perfectly content to face the demise of public transportation while claiming it's not their problem.

But all is not lost. There's no time like the present to start biking in Pittsburgh. Next Fall, thanks to a final grant from the Richard King Mellon Foundation, all Port Authority buses will be equipped with bike racks. Currently, about 80% of the buses have bike racks. While your local bus stop (and entire line) may be cut, at least you can reliably bike between home and a further away bus stop. Perhaps it's Allegheny County's long-term plan to reduce its obesity rate which is sitting significantly higher than the national average? Personally, I'd prefer a tax on sugary drinks. A Carnegie Mellon University study last spring showed that a 1% county tax on the drinks would cut usage by 8% and generate $54 Million annually. If we can put the alcoholic drink tax toward Port Authority, why not share the burden with our sugar-guzzling friends? After all, obesity causes more deaths than just drinking alcohol.

But it's not too late for the state to at least restore some of its previous funding and stop shirking its responsibility. Go to keeppghmoving.com and make your voice heard.

4 Tuition Tax Myths and 1 Suggestion

I feel the need to dispel some myths regarding the "fair share" tax.

1. Income tax, property tax, and sales tax are not sin taxes. Don't we still tax text books?

'Councilman William Peduto took the same tack, saying that taxes are often placed on "sin" products, like alcohol or tobacco -- but not on self-improvement. "Why would we ever tax education, where somebody is trying to better themselves?" he asked.'

2. College students are not the only ones who pay the drink tax. Many, many non-college students visit the many bars and restaurants throughout the county and share this burden. It is also important to mention here that the aforementioned drink tax is a county tax.

"Let's face it, we [college students] are the ones that pay the drink tax"- graduate student, Mackenzie Farone

3. Non-profits are not totally exempt from all taxes everywhere. Just like when I donate to a non-profit, and I can deduct that donation at the Federal level but not at the city level, cities and states (within their own laws) can decide how to tax institutions. Non-profit is simply a Federal status granted after an application to the IRS. I don't know exactly how the city of Pittsburgh's laws are worded or the state of Pennsylvania, but as far as I can see, there is nothing at the Federal level stopping Pennsylvania or Pittsburgh from enacting their own tax laws regarding non-profits.

4. College students do cost the city money. From the extra police for couch-burning Super Bowl bonanzas to the general paving of roads on which they drive and sidewalks on which they walk. Yes, college students also contribute to the city through the property tax paid on their rented abodes. But no one should claim that those benefits outweigh the city's expenses without an extensive study to the contrary. Considering that the universities would benefit from such a study if it were in their favor, and the universities are the source of every major local study, I'm going to jump to the conclusion that it would not be beneficial for them to perform this study.

For more myth debunking, check out PGH Comet. For the words of the college students, watch this video.

Suggestion:

If you owe income tax to the city of Pittsburgh, you can deduct the amount you paid on your tuition tax against your income tax. This would serve city residents in two ways. First, it would prevent any ridiculous double-taxing and calm fears of anyone working their way through college while living in the city that they will be taken advantage of. Second, it might encourage city dwellers to take a class at a local university with the inherent 1% discount. Not much of a discount, you say? Not much of a tax, I say, but every little bit helps.

Summary:

No one wants to pay taxes, but the city is desperately running out of money and is running out of methods they can use to tax because of antiquated state laws. The city would love to tax non-residents who work in the city, like New York City and many other cities, but the state of Pennsylvania won't allow it. The city would love to slap a property tax on non-profit buildings, but once again the state won't allow it. Heck. The state will probably crack down on this tax as well, but the city has to keep trying to come up with innovative solutions in a hostile environment.

What can I say? I love this city, and I don't want it to run out of money. I want to keep all of our libraries open. I want our roads to be paved and our trash to be collected, and most importantly I want all the police officers and other city workers who have put their time in over the years, to continue to have their pensions paid. So if we need to come up with creative taxes that don't further stress our residents, I'm for it. Because when it comes down to it, if it's a choice between me paying 4% on my income tax or the college students coughing up another 1% on their $50,000 per year education, you're not going to find too many residents (who also manage to pay property taxes and income taxes and county taxes and state taxes) shedding a tear for the college students.

Request:

Can someone actually figure out if this tax is legal or not, so we don't have to waste any more time debating it?

Drink And Let Live

As I feared, Saturday's drunken revelry ended in tears and bloodshed. Unlike Councilman Kraus, though, I believe that there were plenty of police. There is a dangerous culture of drinking and driving prevalent throughout this city. If drinking and driving were not acceptable from a young age, then this problem would not have happened. Unfortunately, Mr Haniotakis had a clear history of drinking and driving and aggression. Less bars on Carson Street would not have changed the outcome Saturday night. Taking away Mr Haniotakis' license might have helped. Drinking and driving is not acceptable. There should be harsh penalties in place for those who do and plenty of alternatives for those who choose not to. I'll re-iterate my plea from Saturday - cut back on a few billy-club-shaking overtime cops in riot gear and instead, let's have some real leadership in Pittsburgh broker a deal with Port Authority that all buses after 10pm are free. And make sure there are actually buses running until after the bars close on Friday and Saturday nights. Re-institute the party shuttle down Carson Street. Teach kids in school that it is NOT okay to drink and drive. Teach kids to drink responsibly. While we're celebrating St Patrick's Day, why don't we splash some bloody ugly commercials on TV like in Ireland?



How do you pay for these things?

Ever hear of the drink tax?

Or maybe instead we can just add more police? I understand treating the immediate symptom, but this is getting ridiculous. Soon, we'll have more police than bar patrons on Carson Street. Let's treat the root of the problem by stopping drunk driving. Excessive binge drinking is next on the list.

Back to Priorities

Like Obama listed his 3 priorities for the nation, I list my 3 major talking points on this blog: drinking, public transportation, and general political idiocy with a bit of my questionable morals thrown in to spice things up.

Back to the number one priority - drinking.

Pittsburgh is a drinking city. This guy chronicled bars in all 90 of our neighborhoods. We have a brewery in a church. Hofbrauhaus picked Pittsburgh as their 3rd location in the country. And from football games to art galleries, beer drinking goes with the territory. With proper precautions (i.e. drunk driving education and enforcement), I'm all for it.

For such a city, though, why do we put up with the yoke of the PLCB and the case law?

Oftentimes as a city we look to the East for inspiration. Is that it? We want to resemble the liberal state of Massachusetts (who historically didn't allow beer and liquor sales on Sunday) or Connecticut (who physically places tarps over the beer in grocery stores after 9pm and on Sundays ) or perhaps live-free-or-die New Hampshire (who runs a similar state-run liquor store plan yet somehow manages to have the cheapest prices in the region). If so, we need to start looking West to California, where if you want a bottle of vodka, you pick it up with your orange juice.

Do we really believe deep down inside that drinking is evil? And that we need the PLCB to protect us? After all the wording of the law which created the PLCB says the following:

This act shall be deemed an exercise of the police power of the Commonwealth for the protection of the public welfare, health, peace and morals of the people of the Commonwealth and to prohibit forever the open saloon, and all of the provisions of this act shall be liberally construed for the accomplishment of this purpose.

Or perhaps it's because our state continues to make money hand over fist because of the aforementioned slick setup? In this year of economic downturn, the only bright spot in the economy appears to be liquor sales. PLCB reported record sales last year. They're making so much money they've even hired an image consultant to make us like them more. Fat chance. Personally, I feel if the PLCB is going to pillage my wallet, they should at least turn their excess profits over to the state instead of working on their branding.

Is it really a surprise that when the state gave Pittsburgh options for funding Port Authority their only viable option was a drink tax? No. What's surprising is that we continue to put with it.

Or Why Councilors and Lawyers Don't Mix

Disappointed is an understatement for my opinion on County Councilor McCullough's fraud case. He allegedly spent tens of thousands of dollars of a 91 year old woman with dementia to use for his own political causes. This accusation was from April 2007 and the case was before a grand jury in October. Mr McCullough was actually elected to Council after this case was revealed.

This is pretty messed up. First, why did this case take so long to come to fruition? We're talking more than 18 months from the accusation to the arrest. Second, does this mean yet another special election? At what point will he be forced to resign in spite of being elected while the case was on-going?

Third, why did I have to like this potential crook? This is the only man who responded to my drink tax emails. This is the man who helped fight the legal battle that the drink tax collections are actually used for Port Authority. He is also the man who initially recommended lowering the drink tax to a reasonable percentage.

As 2 Political Junkies (and American law) says though, innocent until proven guilty. And at this rate, McCullough will be up for re-election before the case is finished.

Woooooo!

Tonight, I'm just happy we're going to the Super Bowl.

Screw you, Wall Street Journal.

I paid my drink tax tonight.

UPDATE:
It's hard to take sportsmania as a negative sign. There was so much goodwill and happiness (and drunkenness) last night. Who said sportsmania was a substitute for economic success? Can't we just like our sports?

And we do have a sweet football stadium.

Less Than $20 Million

According to the Steelers and VisitPittsburgh, the home AFC championship game should bring in $20 million to the city on Sunday. That's on top of the $18 million for last week's game.

And how much extra are these games adding to the drink tax coffers alone? I'm going to make an educated guess and say that if you take the drink tax profits from Steelers Sundays, that alone will easily land you $1 Million per year.

The North Shore Connector is costing the county 3.33% of its total cost - or about $15 million. Even if it balloons to a $600 million project, that's still less than $20 million in local funds.

Don't you think a new subway line is worth 1 home Steelers championship game?

I can go over the Port Authority spiel that this paves the way for future T lines. Or that this will add yet another fringe parking area alleviating traffic and parking woes downtown. Or that this will encourage more development on the North Side which needs some help right about now.

But instead I'll tell you why I think it's not a horrible idea.

When out-of-towners or former Pittsburghers come back to visit in droves, it's for one of two things. The holidays and Steelers games.

Theoretically, we want to give these people a good impression. We want them to think their city is improving. We want them to go back to where they live and say good things about Pittsburgh. We want them to tell their friends, so that when they get a job offer and they're deciding between Houston, Texas and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, they remember that they heard Pittsburgh was sweet. They choose Pittsburgh.

How do we impress these people? We give them slick public transportation where they're going to use it. To the Steelers game and to the airport. Assuming this risky bet works, then those people will get up and move here. Then we'll have some money in our pockets and we can do more practical less flashy things like actually get people between Oakland and Downtown.

And all for less than $20 million.

But the most important thing to realize is that this is just a piece of the puzzle. If we actually want a world-class transportation system (which we do, right?), then this is a necessary piece of that puzzle. Might as well build it first if we have the money and it can attract and impress some people. We just can't stop here. I don't care if it takes another 50-100 years. (I have faith that Pittsburgh and this country will still be around then.) But we need to keep building and planning and thinking big and we will get there.

Break the Yoke

What do my favorite Mexican tienda and my favorite 50s style diner have in common? They're in blighted neighborhoods along light-rail tracks. Between tax dollars for transit-area development, the drink tax, and a general scare of gasoline prices, public transportation and these potentially vibrant areas are getting even more attention.

Not surprisingly, people are discovering it's fun to break the yoke of the car. Even if they have to commute to work during the week, they're excited to walk to their quaint neighborhood market on the weekend and not deal with the evil demon of Penn DOT road-closings. Or maybe after sitting in rush hour traffic to get home, they just want to walk over to the neighborhood bar for happy hour. Personally, I learned this lesson after a month of driving in NYC-area traffic.

Up until now, the transit-center focus in Pittsburgh has been on East Liberty. Target, Whole Foods, and the East Busway are proving to be a sound marriage. Now is the time to learn from our lessons and expand. The money is flowing and our neighborhoods need help. Our love affair with strip malls and McMansions can come to an end or at least learn to co-habitate with pedestrian-friendly fun urban environments where going for a walk doesn't have to be on a treadmill and where going out for a night-on-the-town doesn't involve any parking headaches or traffic and where buying a house still can cost less than $50,000.

On second thought, don't redevelop these neighborhoods. I don't want my favorite businesses driven out from high rent prices or over-run with band-wagoners. (Yes, that was a joke.)

A Good Spin

I've got to hand it to him, Dan Onorato took the drink tax loss in stride. He's not appealing the court case (on the taxpayer's dime) and he's making some sense in his smarmy way.

The county budgeted $6.3 million for Port Authority projects this year, money from the county's general bond sales. Onorato wants to add $3 million to that because the authority successfully negotiated a contract with its unions, he has said.

I'm perfectly fine with Dan spending the money on Port Authority capital projects instead of Port Authority operating expenses (if just because it includes my pet project.) I'm even okay with Dan withholding an extra $3 million this year because Port Authority did only request $9 million for capital projects, and I don't exactly trust Port Authority to make the best decisions as to what to do with the money either.

Of course, neither does the state. A year ago, the auditor general said we "can no longer wait" on reforming Port Authority's board of directors. Yet nothing has happened. Might as well put the money where something is actually being done with it, inefficiently though it is.

Judge Olson is My Hero

The drink tax funds are only to be used for Port Authority.

(The busman already posted this news, but I still needed to express my gratitude.)

Just to make this more than a 2-line post, I'll add some justification on supporting this decision besides just wanting Mr Onorato to lose and my smart card fanaticism.

If Mr Onorato can decide to use this money on anything "related to transit", what's to stop him from habitually collecting more than he needs and just adding another meaningless tax? We will never have "enough" money for repairing roads and bridges in this county. And aren't sidewalks related to transit? And water drainage? And snow plowing? Doesn't the County Executive need his own H2 to drive around the county and inspect transit issues? Would it really surprise you if next year similar items showed up under ways to use the excessive drink tax? Would it surprise you in 5 years if they raised the drink tax to pay for more and more road repair while limiting the amount of money to Port Authority.

The Port Authority last month [October] asked Allegheny County for $9.9 million to leverage more state and federal funds for capital improvements, but County Executive Dan Onorato said the agency will get $6.3 million "and not one penny more" next year.

No, Dan, not "one penny more", how about a few million more? Or do you want to drop the drink tax to 5% now? Not that I'm gloating.

Oh, wait, I'll wipe that shit-eating grin off my face while the county wastes more money that won't be given to Port Authority while appealing this ruling.

Pgh Is My City

I started this blog a little over a year ago angry about the county's ineptness involving the drink tax. Anger quickly followed about the highly-anticipated but shamelessly inept report about merging the city and the county. I wanted merging of city services (for instance dog licensing) but I thought and still think that Pittsburgh is a city. Pittsburgh is my newly adopted city. Pittsburgh is where I've fallen in love with the Steelers and the library, where I've been to baseball games and gallery crawls and seen countless magnificent fireworks displays.

But Pittsburgh is different for everyone. Some fight for it. Some are just learning about it. Some have given up on it, but they all have an opinion.

Pgh is a city of hills and ours looked down on the Allegheny R...

Pittsburgh is a city of hills, breakneck curves, complex intersections and lousy drivers. ...

I know Pgh is a city.....I know it's not in the middle of small-town Iowa...so where exactly is the diversity?...

Pittsburgh is a city that "stands up and looks you in ...

pgh is a city that is losing population and is DESPERATE for new people ...

Pittsburgh is a city with character unlike any other. ...

In closing, I guess, you can say PGH is a city where you can afford your dreams. ...

My New Year's blogging resolution? Keep doing it.

Rigging the Lottery

I'm not big on lots of quotes in my posts, but I couldn't pass up all the juicy whining tidbits I've included below.

The only justification when the drink tax was instituted was to give the County a way to pay for their share of transit system expenses. Period.

Roads may be "transit-related" but they are not "transit systems." The drink tax was not instituted to pay for road repairs.

County Solicitor Mike Wojcik argued that if the Legislature meant the Port Authority specifically, it would have said so, and bridges and roads can be defined as transit-related.

Laws in this state stay on the books for decades longer than they should (Johnstown Flood Tax for example) and if Harrisburg could envision a time when this Pennsylvania county might have more than one "transit system", or god-forbid change the name of their "transit system", then god bless them.

The drink tax was not instituted to add money to the county's fund balance, unlike what Amy Griser wishes.

County budget director Amy Griser testified that a $21 million hole in the budget would wipe out the county's fund balance and make it more difficult and costly for it to borrow money.

The drink tax was not instituted so that the county would never again have to raise property taxes, unlike what Rich Fitzgerald is dreaming of.

Council President Rich Fitzgerald, a Democrat, said that if Mr. McCullough and his allies win the suit, it would amount to a "straitjacket" on county spending and force a property tax hike to fund crucial infrastructure improvements.

Poor planning is no excuse to break the law and take advantage of taxpayers. Please, Judge Judy, don't let the whiners in the county rig the lottery. I want smart cards.

Eat Those Words

Once again the controversial drink tax is in court.

As I've mentioned in my previous rantings, Onorato and his team have repeatedly said that we should be proud to join the ranks of other cities with a dedicated tax to support public transit.

Clearly, when County Council regretfully passed this tax, they were under the impression that the drink tax was intended to support public transit (and its only incarnation in the county - Port Authority.) Similarly, when I complained about the unfairness of the drink tax, Erica Cohen personally responded to me on behalf of Onorato to say:

While the drink tax and rental car fee were not
the County Executive's preferred options, they were the only options
provided by state lawmakers as a dedicated funding source for mass
transit. With the approval of the 2008 County budget, we have joined
other metropolitan areas in creating a dedicated funding source for mass
transit that does not include property taxes.

Now, Dan wants to use it to repair roads and bridges. Unfortunately, I do believe that there is probably a loop-hole in there for him in the wording of the state law. I also believe that Dan the Tax Man was well aware that the drink tax would bring in excess monies and was hoping for this budget boon. Thankfully, Mr Onorato does not get to be the final judge in this case. Judge Judith F. Olson will determine it for us.

While, the County Council is lowering the drink tax this year, I can only hope someone on County Council has the brains to learn from their mistakes and detail explicitly in triplicate exactly how the money is to be spent and exactly how the money is to be distributed.

It's About Time

Pending paperwork, the "controversial" drink tax will be lowered from 10 percent to 7 percent for 2009.

The controversial drink tax, which took effect in January, is to be dropped from 10 percent to 7 percent, but that could force the county to raise property taxes as soon as next year, said Councilman William Robinson, chairman of the Budget and Finance Committee.

I understand that the economy is sinking nationally and there may be some concern that a tax based on consumption is not reliable in a poor economy. However, one thing I'm willing to bet on is that when people are down in the dumps, they buy more liquor. My gut says that we'll see an increase in liquor spending in 2009. Of course, we may not be going out as much so the County may want to consider an extra tax on store-bought beer and wine in order to capitalize on the recession.

Finally, Mr Robinson, I have to ask you a question. You made an extra unexpected $8 million this year from the drink tax!!! If you were so concerned about the county having enough money next year, why not save some of that money instead of voting to spend it anyway Dan the Tax Man chose?? Also, why shouldn't property taxes increase as expenses increase?? Why the insistence that bar drinkers in this county should pay for any and all cost increases in this county???

EDIT: Make that an extra $12 million and counting...

Smart Cards Need More Funding

"But county officials say they can't afford to give the transit agency the extra money for the new fare cards."

It must be true because I read it un-refuted in two sources. Thanks to Channel 4 and the Trib. Can we have some journalistic integrity that at least asks the following questions:

Where is the money from the 10% drink tax is going? The drink tax that was created to pay for Port Authority? The drink tax whose proceeds have still not made it to Port Authority after 10 months of being collected? Interest earned on $28 million at 4% over one year is $1.1 million - exactly how much Port Authority is asking for.

I know I just can't stop beating this dead horse...

I just want to get on a bus and wave a card and ride in peace - no fumbling, no questions about how much I owe, more speed when I'm driving behind a bus, no more former Pitt students abusing their expired school IDs.

Smart Cards Dumb People

And in more news of the maniacal moron who controls the County...

Remember that 10% drink tax that was supposed to be dedicated to the funding of mass transit in the county??

Remember how that drink tax brought in about $8 million more than was needed?

Remember how that maniacal evil-doer Onorato decided he didn't need to spend that extra $8 million on Port Authority?

Remember how he hasn't actually given ANY of that drink tax money to Port Authority yet and will force a shut-down in the next month by continuing to withhold the money?

Imagine smart cards. Imagine that Port Authority has lined up 96.66% of the money needed to implement smart cards in 2010. Imagine walking on the bus and waving a little card and NOT fumbling in your pocket for exact change.

"If the authority can somehow provide the $1.1 million local share over a two-year period, officials said, installation of 1,100 fare boxes could begin on buses and trolleys by August and the system could be operational by January 2010."

Where oh where would they find $1.1 million? Wonder why I voted for Mickey Mouse in the last County Executive vote? Can someone please run against this man in the next election?

Happy Halloween!

City told to fix police station it is vacating. Perhaps they should leave it as it is and open it up for an annual Halloween party. What's better to scare kids with than cockroaches and mold? They might also consider doing some work on the place they're moving into up in Allentown.

In other construction news, after a long delay, the Hofbrauhaus Pittsburgh is well on its way. Perhaps they will actually meet their latest grand opening date of January 20, 2009. Something tells me that if the drink tax stays at 10% instead of dropping to at most 7%, there will be some more delays. Luckily, they're at least brewing most of the beer on the premises and can side-step the notorious Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board.

Houses appear to be getting worked on or demolished thanks to the neighborhood sweep program. That translates to one less eyesore on my street. If only progress didn't pair with corruption...

And straight from the horse's mouth, the Ravenstahl's have welcomed their baby Cooper.