community-based, non-corporate, participatory media
Pittsburgh's Financial Rescue
by R Field
Friday, May. 28, 2004 at 2:29 AM
envirowork_2000@yahoo.com
city government, incomes, taxes, fiscal oversight, Act 47, public comment period, June 4 public meeting, women, minorities
Hopefully, the reviewers for Pittsburgh IMC did not review published items yesterday. If they did not, what does it mean for indy media that this is the first post on yesterday's mainstream news item about the tax realignment plans made by a fiscal oversight board?
Studies released by the University of Pittsburgh's University Center for Urban and Social Research in the past three months based on data from the 2000 U.S. Census show that women working part-time in the Pittsburgh area are paid lower than similarly-employed women in other major metro areas in the nation. Full-time working women and African Americans also are lowly paid in comparison to other cities. An article in the Post-Gazette quoted a person who said the low wages cannot be explained by a lower cost of living since Pittsburgh's cost of living is only 5% below the national median for major urban areas, but women's wages are 20% below that same national median.
While professionally-employed white males may not feel the squeeze of a 120 dollar occupation tax, women and minorities will feel the extra burden. The plan for a payroll tax, based on number of employees and wages, also needs to be carefully examined. Other governments have discovered that certain payroll tax structures will reward companies with a select few highly-paid executives and many lowly-paid workers. Any payroll tax for Pittsburgh should be structured to encourage companies to raise wages and salaries for the lowest paid, i.e., women and minorities. (This will have the added benefit of making Pittsburgh a more desireable location for people other than professional white men and their wives.)
The website for Channel 4 news yesterday noted a 15-day comment period; however, the Post-Gazette does not seem to have details on how to comment.
At 4:00 p.m., on June 4, 2004, a public hearing will be held at Schenley High School. Would someone please supplement this post with information on where Schenley High School is located (cross streets) and which bus lines are convenient to it? Also, information needs to be shared on how public comment will be taken (e.g., pre-register? sign-up at the hearing? time limit for each speaker? total time limit?).
The Act 47 report is on the city's website: http://www.city.pittsburgh.pa.us/Pittsburgh_Recovery_Plan_Filing_May_26_2004.pdf.
Given how difficult it is for dial-up connections and older software to download a 233-page report, does anyone know if the report is available in hard copy at library branches or other public venues?
- 30 -
text file
by david
Friday, May. 28, 2004 at 9:04 AM
here's the text of the plan, in case its helps. its not the easiest to read but the d/l will be faster than the pdf.
http://indypgh.org/~david/pgh_recovery_plan.txt
schenley
by margot
Sunday, May. 30, 2004 at 3:26 PM
margot_tova@myway.com
schenley high school is located on bigelow ave. in north oakland. i don't know the address, but it's on the intersections of center ave. and bigelow ave. and also at center and bellefield. any bus that goes to oakland is probably going to go within a couple blocks of the place. the 81B, 77C, 54C and 71 busses go very close to the school. also, bigelow is chopped up in a pretty nonsensical way right around the school, so i would suggest getting there via center or bellefield. if none of that makes sense just mail me and tell me where you're coming from and i'll probably be able to give more concise instructions. also, i think the school website is schenleyhs.pghboe.net and they might have instructions.
update
by R Field
Saturday, Jun. 05, 2004 at 1:43 PM
envirowork_2000@yahoo.com
Three City Councilmen attended the June 4 public hearing on the Act 47 proposal, according to the Post-Gazette: Shields, Peduto, and Udin. When I spoke with another councilmember's office earlier in the week trying to find out details about how long the hearing was expected to last and the procedure for commenting, the office, although helpful in trying to track down the information, did not have the information easily accessible. Moreover, when I asked for the councilmember's stand on the issue and offered my own opinions, the office staff member, while very cordial, seemed to be disconnected from this important matter.
The news media have been reporting that 10 written comments have been received so far, mostly from suburbanites who do not want to pay $120 per year, and that about 40 people, mostly union leaders and city workers, were signed up to speak at the June 4 public hearing. The video tape shown by Channel 4 showed a hearing room scattered with people who looked white, both male and female, and non-blue or pink-collar. The people receiving time for quotes on air were all men.
A word search through the text version of the plan, as posted by David (thank you), reveals that comments are to be directed to the Coordinator of the Act 47 plan. The Coordinator is defined as two firms, one of which is in Philadelphia. Deadline for comments is June 10, 2004. The addresses, websites, and phone numbers, as listed in the plan, are posted below. No guidelines were offered by the Coordinator as to how best to identify the subject line when submitting comments, nor was an e-mail address provided.
Is it any wonder that no one is commenting?
Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, LLC
600 Grant Street, 44th Floor
Pittsburgh, PA 15219
Public Financial Management
18th & Arch Streets, Suite 1600
Philadelphia, PA 19103-2770
215 567 6100
412 566 6000
http://www.pfm.com
http://www.escm.com
e-mail June 10 comments
by R Field
Monday, Jun. 07, 2004 at 2:52 PM
E-mail comments on the Act 47 proposal to klh@escm.com, that is the e-ddress for the person at the Pittsburgh law firm that is coordinating the plan. Remember that June 10 is the deadline for comments.
And the proposal goes to Council
by R Field
Friday, Jun. 11, 2004 at 12:30 PM
First off, credit is due to Channel 4, which put an e-mail address on its website for comments to be submitted to the Act 47 Coordinators. I do not know when it went up on the site, though. Credit and thanks is due to all the people who added comments and new threads on this issue to Indy Pittsburgh. Even if no one else found the information useful, it helped me to formulate my responses to the proposal.
I have not read the complete details of what was sent to City Council today, but I did note in the Post-Gazette's online story that the proposed $120 occupation privilege tax, despite several comments in opposition, rose to become a $145 annual tax burden by the time the proposal was submitted to Council.
# # #
![[masthead]](/images/masthead_140.png)