Drink, Property Taxes May Appear on Fall Ballot

July 30th, 2008, posted by Greg Palmer

Allegheny County Council yesterday approved a referendum question asking voters if they want to reduce the 10 percent drink tax, but only in exchange for a property tax increase.

Critics said the question was phrased to ensure its defeat. It reads: “Shall the county enact an ordinance to increase real estate taxes in order to repeal the alcoholic drink tax?”

Council approved the question, which could be one of two referenda on the drink tax in November, in a 10-5 vote.

Councilman Jim Ellenbogen, D-Banksville, joined the Republican caucus — Vince Gastgeb, R-Bethel Park, Chuck McCullough, R-Upper St. Clair, Jan Rea, R-McCandless, and Matt Drozd, R-Ross — in opposing the measure pushed through by the majority Democrats.

“This gives voters a choice of which revenue source they would like us to use [to fund mass transit],” said council President Rich Fitzgerald, who sponsored legislation creating the referendum question.

Filed under:

Pittsburgh

What a fraud! Once again,

On July 30th, 2008 Anonymous said:

What a fraud! Once again, a few hundred unionized bus drivers make Allegheny County look like their wholly-owned subsidiary and show to all that Mr. Onorato and the Democrats on Council are their well-paid waterboys.

And your solution to Mass

On July 30th, 2008 Anonymous said:

And your solution to Mass Transit is? I’m sure the always popular Conservative answer is…get rid of it. But even in Republican held territories around the country that never seems to happen. Republicans talk a good game, but when it gets behind closed doors it’s the same old political game. Dem or Rep…its all the same. Your taxes are not going down, farm subsides are not going away, corporate tax breaks will never end. Its politics, Bub and you’re going to pay no matter is running the show.

By what authority

On July 30th, 2008 Anonymous said:

A reading of the Home Rule Charter seems to state that Council cannot propose a referendum question. The only mechanism that the Home Rule Charter allows is a referendum proposed by voters and signed by 5% of the propulation. Nor can Council amend the Home Rule Charter to give themselves such power.

What a sham!

And the issue is not who pays for mass transit, rather, the issue is to see that it is run efficiently and that the cost is shared equitably by all residents .