[PRCo] Re: Rail?!.?!.?!.......

[John Swindler]

So what's new about the City of Pittsburgh claiming to be a financially 
distressed area?

For example, why do you think Allegheny City was annexed to the City of 
Pittsburgh, and why the state legislature finally changed the laws on 
annexation to make it happen?

Just because someone wins a popularity contest for an elected position, 
doesn't mean.....  well, lets just not go there.  But I suspect Fred the 
third and a few others will grasp the implication.

John



>From: Fred Schneider <fschnei at supernet.com>
>Reply-To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
>To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
>Subject: [PRCo] Re: Rail?!.?!.?!.......
>Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 17:20:27 -0500
>
>I read it too.  It pointed out something you did not, Roger, that being 
>three or so years with an unbalanced budget.  (Feds can print more money 
>but Pittsburgh can't.)
>
>Philly has taxed commuters for years.  The City of Philadelphia wage tax 
>takes precedent over that in surrounding counties.  And its administration 
>is enough to drive one mad.  If, for example, your Philadelphia employer 
>has assigned you to work in Boston for the entire year as a transit 
>consultant ... you are exempt from the Philly wage tax while you are in 
>Boston.  But when you take two weeks vacation, you will be taxed by 
>Philadelphia.  It probably has the effect of moving jobs out of the city 
>and into the suburbs, if only because the president of the company dislikes 
>the tax as much as you do.  .  If you look at the P&W (Red Arrow Division 
>route 100) today, riding is predominantly outbound in the morning and 
>inbound in the afternoon.   I wish I can remember the whole picture in 
>detail ... about 2000 there was finally a slow down in the job hemmorage
>from Philadelphia ... monthly estimates were showing a gain while 
>benchmarked data showed almost no year to year change.  (I supervised the 
>man who did the Philadelphia estimates.)
>
>Another point needs to be made and that is that I don't really know if 
>Pittsburgh's job loss is any different than that in Philadelphia. So I 
>could simply be blowing fog around.   The reason is because we have job 
>data for the City of Philadelphia but we don't have it for Pittsburgh.  
>Reason is that actual benchmark counts come from data on unemployment 
>insurance tax returns, and UI tax account numbers are county based.  We are 
>99% sure that a job reported by an employer with a Philadelphia County tax 
>return is in Philadelphia, but a county 02 employer cound be in Pittsburgh 
>or Homestead or Braddock or East Pittsburgh ... you get the picture.  The 
>best that can be done for Pittsburgh is share the city out of the county 
>based on ratios from the last dicennial census.
>
>Of course there is one other issue ... we need the taxes to pay for the new 
>stadium (stadii?) that Pittsburgh voters said they didn't want.
>
>rogertrolley.1 at juno.com wrote:
>
> > One of the major reasons for the San Jose ridership drop was the fact 
>they cut the line in half,forcing people to change cars at a transfer 
>station at Tasman, which adds 10 or 15 min. to the trip waiting for the 
>next car to Mountain View!!!      In todays paper, the state of Pa. 
>declared Pittsburgh a financially distressed area, opening the way for the 
>appointment of an outside overseer who will draw up a recovery plan for the 
>city. This was requested by Mayor Tom Murphy to avoid bankruptcy. 
>Pittsburgh is forcasting a 42 million deficit for next year and the credit 
>rating hit junk bond status.The city has laid of thousands of employees and 
>shut swimming pools and police stations ! This status will allow the city 
>to tax commuters that come into the city to work. Sometrhing the mayor has 
>tried to due before !    cheers and happy NEW YEAR from rogertrolley
>
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
Working moms: Find helpful tips here on managing kids, home, work —  and 
yourself.   http://special.msn.com/msnbc/workingmom.armx