Frack me? No, no! Frack you!

Anyone who has spent any time listening to the pro fracking crowd knows that pretty much the first thing out of their mouths is the assertion that there's never been a proven case of fracking contaminating underground drinking water -- it's been their mantra. I maintain that that is pretty much a red herring as you do not need to pollute groundwater to harm the water supply. The water used in fracking has to go somewhere and very little is being recycled. Aside from illegal dumping and leaching from fracking pools, water treatment facilities simply aren't equipped to handle even the legal disposal of the witches' brew of toxicity found in the "flowback" water.

That said, guess what? Turns out there is a very well documented case of this very thing and the EPA has known about it for decades. Count me not shocked that they've all been lying to us this whole time.

In Pittsburgh, the City Council voted 6-3 to allow residents to decide if they want fracking in the city, but even though that's a veto-proof majority, the Mayor could simply sit on the bill making it too late to get on the November ballot as a referendum. Council requested that Lil Mayor Luke return it to them by the 8th at 4:30 PM, but we know how well the Mayor listens to Council -- the majority anyway -- so if you believe the citizens should have a say, contact the Mayor now:

Email: luke.ravenstahl@city.pittsburg​h.pa.us
Phone: 412-255-2626

Lastly, Allegheny County Executive Dan Onorato has poked his head above ground to weigh in on the referendum. Via the Trib:

Allegheny County Executive Dan Onorato said Wednesday he has "serious concerns" about the legality of Pittsburgh City Council's proposed ballot referendum banning natural gas drilling within city limits.

Council on Monday approved legislation that would ask voters to decide in November whether to add the ban to the city's Home Rule Charter. Council banned Marcellus shale gas drilling within city limits in November.

Councilman Doug Shields proposed the bill, saying a charter amendment would make the ban harder to overturn. Mayor Luke Ravenstahl, who said he has concerns about the legality of the ban, is considering a veto.

In a written statement, Onorato said he directed the county solicitor and Elections Department to review and analyze the referendum.

[sigh]
.

Burgess to vote YES for anti fracking referendum

Last week Councilman Ricky Burgess abstained from voting on having a referendum to amend the city's Home Rule Charter to include a ban on fracking.

He just said in council chambers that he would vote yes on the final bill (even while questioning the motives of Council members who were for the referendum).

He said he was voting yes because he favors letting the people decide and in hopes that his bills for referendums would be able to go through.

So, that would be six yes votes -- making it veto proof from Lil Mayor Luke.

Yes!

Dowd to vote NO on having fracking ban referendum in Pittsburgh

Pittsburgh City Councilman Patrick Dowd just said he was going to vote no again on giving Pittsburghers the ability to vote on amending the city's Home Rule Charter to include a ban on fracking. Dowd had received numerous emails and phone calls asking him to reconsider his vote.

The bill received five yes votes last week in a preliminary vote (Shields, Peduto, Kraus, Rudiak, Harris).

Lil Mayor Luke Ravenstahl has already said that he would consider vetoing a proposal.

Council would need six votes to overturn that veto.

Looks like we don't have them.

UPDATE: Burgess to vote yes -- that's six votes.
.

Pittsburgh City Council Races -- It's getting really ugly out there!

First, if you haven't already, you should read this article by Joe Smydo in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. In it, incumbents Darlene Harris and Bruce Kraus allege that there's been mayoral interference and "improper use of city resources" in this year's primary races. Harris notes that street paving and pothole filling has been delayed and that PWSA workers have been seen removing her campaign signs. Kraus brings up "Ravenstahl's decision to hold up a $100,000 study of problems in the South Side entertainment district" and that "the administration allowed city police Chief Nate Harper last week to address a meeting organized by one of the councilman's opponents, Jeff Koch, a city public works supervisor who's backed by the mayor." There's also the matter of a stop sign on Pius St. that was disallowed before the race, but suddenly appeared when Koch contacted his public works colleagues.

So what's the latest?

First, from the Lucille Prater-Holliday campaign:

11th Hour Trickery Clouds Race in District 9

With two days until the Election Day, and the campaign of Lucille Prater-Holliday gaining momentum, illegal campaign tactics are apparently being used to cloud the campaign.

A series of outgoing calls have apparently been made with the return number masked so that it appeared as if the calls were made from the Prater-Holliday campaign office.

Multiple calls are going out to the same individuals. Anyone who received a call that may have contained inaccurate or offensive information is asked to contact the campaign office at 412-259-3866.

A police report has been filed.

We are asking the campaigns of Phyllis Copeland-Mitchell and Ricky Burgess to repudiate any illegal or deceptive campaign tactics that are being used to harm the campaign of Ms. Prater-Holliday, and to let the campaign know if they have any information about the calls.

Then there's this -- Darlene Harris' campaign headquarters were vandalized:




(Click to enlarge)
Hmmm, what does this remind me of? The accompanying press release also says that items have been thrown at Harris' personal vehicle while she was driving at night.

Lastly, the previously mentioned P-G article notes that Lil Mayor Luke's buddies Koch, Tony Ceoffe (running against Patrick Dowd), Vince Pallus (running against Harris), and Ricky Burgess (running against the world) have all made allegations of improper campaign financing. Now, these charges have been looked into repeatedly by Chris Potter at the Pittsburgh City Paper (here, here, and here) and found wanting. You can also read Bill Peduto's detailed explanation of the city's campaign finance reform law here*. It's worth noting that the biggest critic of how others follow this law -- the Rev. Ricky Burgess -- wants to scrap it altogether.

Not surprisingly, Jeff Koch has come out with a new flyer that mostly slams Bruce Kraus on the false allegations of failing to follow the campaign finance law:




(Click to enlarge)
We already addressed the raise increase and redecoration "issues" here. And, Kraus is not "fighting bars." He's trying to get businesses and residents to exist in harmony for which, as noted above, Koch's buddy, the Mayor, is holding up money to do.

*Note: I posted that piece at Reform Pittsburgh Now.
.

Ugh!

I guess that this is not exactly unexpected, but still, yeesh!
.

I do declare!

It must be that time of year as my inbox has been full of candidates declaring a run for office this past week. As the Post-Gazette pointed out, Dan Onorato's decision to not seek a third term for Allegheny County Executive has started a game of musical chairs. Pittsburgh Controller Michael Lamb and County Council President Rich Fitzgerald may run for his seat; County Controller Mark Patrick Flaherty has already declared. Flaherty's decision to run for County Executive leaves the door open for county Real Estate Manager Valerie McDonald Roberts and State Rep. Chelsa Wagner to declare their candidacies for his current position with State Rep. Matt Smith also considering a run.

Then, there's half of Pittsburgh City Council up for re-election this year and State Auditor Jack Wagner hinting at a challenge to Lil Mayor Luke in 2013...

Here are the candidates who have sent us press releases so far:

....Valerie McDonald Roberts
Currently Manager of the Allegheny County Department of Real Estate, Valerie McDonald Roberts has announced her intention to run for Allegheny County Controller. She has a long record of public service including: Pittsburgh School Board Director, Pittsburgh City Council Member, and Allegheny County Recorder of Deeds. I was a poll watcher for her race for Lt. Governor (she was endorsed by the Philadelphia Inquirer and the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette). I miss her extremely rational and intelligent commentary on the now defunct offQ show.

From her press release (full version here):

Ms. Roberts states, “I have been blessed to have had many years of corporate, legislative and administrative experiences to make me uniquely qualified to be the best candidate for County Controller in addressing Allegheny County’s challenges. The breadth of my career experiences prepares me to handle the essence of the County Controller’s job – independent fiscal responsibility for Allegheny County. ‘Good government’ and ‘reform’ are great concepts, but I have actually implemented them, and will always strive for nothing less than excellence in government.”

....Bruce A. Kraus
Bruce Kraus is seeking a second term on Pittsburgh City Council for District 3. This is my district and I'm a longtime supporter of Kraus (poll watcher, heck, I've stuffed envelopes at his house) and I couldn't be happier with my choice. He's a solid member of the progressive alliance on Council. I can't count the number of times I've seen him walking my district. I also greatly appreciate his efforts to get a handle on the vandalism and violence that have unfortunately become features of the South Side's nightlife.

From his press release (full version here):

In a letter to constituents, Councilman Kraus cited—among other accomplishments—a few examples of the many successes that he has had in his first term:

Protecting libraries in our district—we will soon see a renovation of our South Side branch library. In addition, efforts are underway to bring a new state-of-the-art library building serving Knoxville, Carrick, and our other Hilltop communities

Responding to our neighbors’ needs more efficiently with the opening of our Hilltop District Office on Arlington Avenue

Working to reduce gun violence through responsible gun ownership legislation that requires reporting lost and stolen guns

....Patrick Dowd
Patrick Dowd is also seeking a second term on Pittsburgh City Council for District 7. He was formerly a high school history and economics teacher and a member of the Pittsburgh Board of Education. I've had my ups and downs with Dowd (supported his mayoral bid; had some issues with his actions on Council), but I thought he acted admirably during the parking-pension crisis.

From his press release (full version here):

As a councilman, Dowd has also worked hard to address the city’ legacy issues. With his colleagues, he was able to find a solution for the city’ pension crisis that maintained important public assets, and worked to address debt and infrastructure problems that have been kicked down the road for too long. On a regional level, Dowd was instrumental in the creation of the Council of Neighboring Communities, also known as CONNECT. CONNECT is the first serious effort to bring together the City and its 35 adjacent municipalities to solve problems in an organized and collaborative way.

....Lucille Prater-Holliday
Lucille Prater-Holliday is challenging Rev. Ricky Burgess for Pittsburgh City Council for District 9. I'm not familiar with Ms. Prater-Holliday so I'm especially glad that she sent me a press release.

From that release (full version here):

“I’m looking forward to running a campaign focused on addressing the needs of low- and moderate-income families,” Prater-Holliday said. “We deserve a representative who will focus on increasing community and economic development opportunities and actively work to empower communities by giving ordinary people a voice in our political decisions.”

Pittsburgh Pension Bill Passed...Vetoed...Veto Overridden

Pittsburgh Pension Bill Passed.
Pittsburgh Pension Bill Vetoed.
Pittsburgh Pension Bill Veto Overridden.

Gots to go now...
.

Pittsburgh Pension Problem: Almost There

Those of you listening to 80's pop on the City Channel for a couple of hours today probably were wondering what the holdup was. We understood that Pittsburgh City Council was to hold a Legislative Session at 1:30 today to overturn Mayor Ravenstal's "cooperative" veto to attempt to stave off state control of the city's pension. The meeting actually started around 2:00 and almost immediately was recessed until after 3:00 PM.

Here's why:



(Click to enlarge)

Council did overturn the Mayor's veto today (8 to 1; Rev. Burgess being the only dissenting vote), thus putting the new Council/Controller plan into place which dedicates the asset of future parking taxes to the city pension fund to bring that up to 50% funded.

The hold up -- the reason why Council must meet again tomorrow -- is that upon further reflection by everyone (PERC, ACT 47, ICA) it was decided that the City must dedicate $735,680,000 over 31 years instead of $414.7 million (the difference between a 5% and 8% discount rate).

New legislation is being drawn up to amend the Pittsburgh Code, Title Two - Fiscal, Article XI (I believe).

The Mayor will need to "cooperatively" veto this new legislation quickly so that Council may then override that veto. Council did note that the Mayor and his Administration have been very forthcoming in providing whatever Council has needed these last 24 hours or so. And in an email exchange between Council President Harris and Yarone Zober, Zober indicated that the Mayor will quickly veto this latest round so that Council may overturn the veto in time to meet the Midnight December 31st deadline.

Council will hold a Legislation Session tomorrow at 1:00PM (followed right after with a Standing Committee Meeting) and another 11:00PM Legislative Session -- yes, 11:00 PM on New Year's Eve -- followed by another Standing Committee Meeting.

Um, Happy New Year, City Council?
.

Good Lord

I am watching a mic aimed at a speaker phone on my teevee for several minutes now.

I also have spent part of my morning listening to our mayor explain his plan to do a "non obstructionist" veto.

My brain hurts.

Good thing I will need to turn away from the City Channel soon.

.

Confidential Letter to Pittsburgh City Council

(NOTE: This letter is meant only for the members of Pittsburgh City Council. I would ask everyone else -- this means you, Yarone Zober -- to please read no further and I thank you in advance for your cooperation.)


Dear Pittsburgh City Council,

In times past, I've written some confidential advice to Mayor Luke Ravenstahl and it looks like you're now overdue for some of the same.

In watching your hearings this past week, it's become apparent that you have some issues getting the attention of our Mayor. You say he won't take your calls, he won't answer your questions, he won't take your meetings, and he won't sign your legislation.

I see that you have even felt it necessary to compel him to meet with you. I propose that with just a little bit of ingenuity on your part, you can get Mayor Ravenstahl to rush to your side without the need for any extreme legal measures:

Have Councilor Rudiak don a long blonde wig and some mismatched clothes -- tell Luke she's the new Sienna Miller.

Put Councilor Lavelle in some sweats, shades and bling and tell Luke that TMZ has proclaimed him a hot new rapper who's destined to be "bigger than Snoop."

Hold your meetings on a golf course.

Hold your meetings at Seven Springs.

Two words: Tiger Woods. Compel him to attend a meeting -- Luke is sure to follow.

If all else fails, pool your resources (CBG monies?) and hire a private jet stocked with lingerie models. Tell Lukey if he inks your deal, he'll get a night in NYC that he'll never forget so good he won't be able to remember.

Sincerely,
Your Friend at 2pj

Pittsburgh City Council Compels Mayor Ravenstahl To Show Up Today

§ 11.3-310. Powers of Council.
Council shall have the following additional powers:
. . .
f. to call a meeting at any time between council and the mayor jointly to discuss legislation or the business of the City in general, and to compel the attendance of the mayor at a council hearing;

Frustrated members of Pittsburgh City Council voted yesterday to compel Mayor Luke Ravenstahl to show up to today's Council meeting at 10:00 AM to try to help avert a state takeover of the the city's pension plan. As surely everyone reading this must know by now, a majority of Council soundly rejected the Mayor's plan to privatize the city's parking assets. That was back in October and the Mayor has basically rejected any alternative plan by City Council.

You can read about Council's contentious meetings with Finance Director Scott Kunka (in lieu of the Mayor) in the City Paper, two articles and an editorial in the Post-Gazette, and even a piece at Bloomberg.com.

Perhaps most distressing is the Tribune-Review's article which contains the following quote:

"It's too late," said James McAneny, executive director of the Pennsylvania Public Employee Retirement Commission. "Even if they got $500 million next year, it wouldn't change the takeover, unless the General Assembly changes the law."

.

Last Plan Standing?

As we blogged last night, a new Pittsburgh City Council/City Controller plan was unveiled today to address our city's pension crisis. It too incorporates the assets of the Pittsburgh Parking Authority.

The difference between the new plan and the Mayor's plan and the old Council/Controller plan is thus:

It does not provide a windfall for Wall Street.

It does not create debt -- interest payments -- for the city.

Instead, it solves the problem of needing to bring the pension fund (currently 29.3% funded) to the needed 50% funded by dedicating 30 years of Parking Authority revenues to the pension (guaranteed backed by the city's general fund). The pension fund must be 50% funded by December 31 to avoid a takeover by the state. It uses the current value of these assets to cover the $220 million needed.

The huge question remaining is where Mayor Luke Ravenstahl stands in all this and if any action is needed on the part of his administration. If today's appearance in Council's Chambers by Finance Director Scott Kunka is any indication, he won't be with it...And according to Jon Delano he isn't.

Council's now back in session, but I'll be off to work soon. Who knows if anything will be resolved by the time I get back...
.

"Potential Resolution of Pension Funding Possible"

(Click to enlarge)

The press conference:

· tomorrow morning, December 28, 2010

· 9 a.m.

· Outside City Council Chambers

· 5th Floor City-County Building, 414 Grant Street

Bad Boys, Bad Boys (Local Edition)

Just in time to get a lump of coal from Santa:

CasablancaPA has the goods on PA Rep. and Majority Leader Mike Turzai's double dipping when it comes to per diems here.

Father Duquesne (formerly The Parkway Left) has a post up on Allegheny County Councilman Matt Drozd titled "Portrait of an ignorant bigot."

Infinonymous blogs on LeRoy S. Zimmerman (longtime friend and close political ally of PA Gov.-elect Tom Corbett) who oversees the Hershey Trust and who is under investigation by Corbett's office for using $12 million in "funds intended to educate impoverished children" to purchase a money-losing golf course and then spending another $5 million to bling the course out. (Full story in the P-G here.)

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette has a story on Michael Jasper. Jasper is a PNC vice president and finance manager who was a Pittsburgh Parking Authority board member. "Was" as in he was the only board member who voted to study a pension bailout plan opposed by Lil Mayor Luke and "was" as in he's no longer a board member because his employer asked him to resign from that body. You figure out who the bad boy is in this case (Hint: it ain't Jasper.)

“This is not a story.”

According to Lil Mayor Luke, the fact that his four city police bodyguards are "on pace to earn $200,000 in overtime for the past two years" is "not a story."

So, according to Ravenstahl:

Even though the mayor has threatened the city with police layoffs, the $200,000 in overtime pay "is not a story."

Despite stopping the highly successful sweeps on the South Side after only four weeks with no reason given, the $200,000 in overtime pay "is not a story."

And, while it's completely inexplicable that there could be any overtime when his bodyguards work in shifts, the $200,000 in overtime pay "is not a story."

Hat Tip to Ginny @ That's Church for picking up on the story which most missed when it was broadcast on the eve of Thanksgiving and thanks to KDKA for their original report!
.