#2 Pencils, a Creative Commons Attribution (2.0) image from kungfubonanza’s photostream

On August 4th, Pittsburgh Public Schools Superintendent Linda Lane announced a proposed District Realignment Plan. The new plan would close seven schools (Fort Pitt PreK-5, Langley High School, Murray K-8, Northview PreK-8, Oliver High School, Shaeffer K-8, Stevens K-8) and seven buildings and open one new school. (click here to view the proposed changes). School Board approval is required to make these changes which would not take effect earlier than the 2012-2013 school year. The earliest the Board can vote on the District Realignment Plan is November 22, 2011.

The reasons for the proposed school closings are due to both declining enrollment and huge budget deficits. From their website:

Pittsburgh Public Schools, like districts across the Commonwealth and the country, is facing daunting financial challenges. When the District adopted the 2011 budget, the problem was smaller but still there – and showed an $8.7 million deficit for 2011 and forecasted a $53.6 million deficit for 2012.With the announcement of the Governor’s proposed funding cuts in March 2011, the District’s projected budget deficit grew to $68 million for 2012 and nearly $100 million in 2015.

There will be a Special Public Hearing on August 22, 2011 at 6:00 p.m. to receive public comment on the District Realignment Plan. This is your chance to make your views known. If you want to speak at this hearing, you must register with the Office of Superintendent of Schools by calling 412-622-3600 by Noon on August 22, 2011. You may also submit written testimony in lieu of appearing at the hearing via email to publichearing@pghboe.net or by fax to 412-622-3624 no later than 5 p.m. on August 22, 2011.

Pittsburgh Public Schools Special Public Hearing
August 22, 2011, 6:00 p.m.
Conference Room A, First Floor
Board of Public Education Administration Building
341 South Bellefield Avenue
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213

Paisa Vasool!, a Creative Commons Attribution (2.0) image from .aditya.’s photostream

Last month, there was good news regarding the city’s pension system. An independent analysis conducted by the City Controller showed that actions by Council at the end of last year will enable the fund to be over 50% funded as was required under the State’s Act 44 legislation. There are several key factors to remember. The Council Plan, which was worked on in cooperation with Controller Lamb and the Oversight Board, does not require the city to give away its parking asset or the revenue from it. It does not, as the Mayor’s plan proposed, raise the cost of meters to the highest in the country. It does rely on additional revenue from the Parking Authority that required some increases to meters and these rates were raised effective June 1st, however, more needs to be done. Although it is disappointing that for the first six months of the year nothing had been administered, a majority of City Council has begun looking much further along than this year’s budget in order to analyze how the pension plan will affect future budgets for the next 15 years.

Solving the city’s financial future requires much more than stabilizing the pension system. In April, Council hosted three special meetings to discuss what is required to create a sustainable future for the city’s finances. This Progressive Majority of City Council believes we owe it to the residents and businesses of Pittsburgh to present a vision and a financial plan of action. The meetings were separated into three missions:

1) Our Immediate Situation
The first meeting took place on April 5th and focused on the 2011 Budget. It provided an analysis of both the operating and capital budgets and addressed any confusion from recent reports. In addition, it contained a series of recommendations for good government reforms to provide a more transparent and responsible budget process this year and in the future. You can view the PowerPoint presentation here.

2) The Next Six Years
The second Post Agenda was held on April 12th. This presentation focused on the next six years, 2012-2017. Many governments work to create 6-year capital plans in order to plan for major needs. We’ve created a 6-year “Capital-Plus” plan which incorporates the city’s Operating Budget along with future pension payments, needed capital improvements and coordinate these costs with the city’s present debt structure. View the PowerPoint report from this Post Agenda here.

3) The Long Term Financial Health of the City
The third — and final — Post Agenda was held on April 19th. This meeting concentrated on long-term financial planning (2018-2025). It coincides with the city’s “debt-cliff” — when expected debt payments lower significantly. It builds off of the findings of the first two meetings which addressed the 2011 operating and capital budgets and examined the needed actions of the city to assure a sustainable financial plan for 2012-2017 (including a funded 6-year capital plan). This final meeting has provided the groundwork for City Council to continue to take financially responsible actions that protect the taxpayers of Pittsburgh now and far into the future. Here’s the PowerPoint presentation from that meeting.

If you only have time to read one of the PowerPoint reports, read the third one — it explains where we are presently and the course and actions that will be required to assure a sustainable future for Pittsburgh into the year 2025. While most cities are trying to find ways to balance current and next year budgets, Pittsburgh City Council is taking a unique approach in using the next few years as building blocks in order to create a financial future that will serve the people of Pittsburgh well after our days in city government have passed.

In order to better understand the financial situation of the city and the Mayor’s demand of a student tax, it is essential to see the bigger picture. These documents provide the details of what the city can and cannot do – they also shed light on missed opportunities. Councilman Peduto and Controller Lamb have outlined an alternative plan to the Mayor’s proposed student tax – you can read all the documents here – including the Lamb/Peduto alternative.

Mayor Ravenstahl’s 2010 Budget – Understand who is paying and what you are getting.

Pennsylvania Local Tax Enabling Act – Understand the rules of what municipalities can tax and what we cannot.

Act 47 Five Year Recovery Plan – Understand the changes that were approved in July and then look at the Mayor’s proposed budget to see if we are doing it.

PA Act 55 Public Charity Act -Understand the limitations placed on municipalities in PA to receive voluntary payments in lieu of taxes from non-profits and the restrictions to tax non-profits.

Peduto/Lamb Alternative – Another option for our City.

City Councilman Peduto and Controller Lamb today presented a list of potential budget changes that will make up the $15 million shortfall in the city’s 2010 proposed budget. The ICA rejected Mayor Ravenstahl’s proposed student tax, leaving a $15 million hole in the budget. Controller Lamb and Councilman Peduto believe that this shortfall can be made up through other means – through recommendations approved during the Act 47 process and through other good government proposals that will stregthen the city budget and make it more transparent for years to come.

Their plan is available here.

Today Mayor Ravenstahl presented his 2010 budget proposal to City Council.

View the Mayor’s Budget Proposal Here

Last Saturday, Councilman Bill Peduto spoke to the Allegheny County and Western Pennsylvania Township Commissioners Association, presenting to them his plan for LED street lights in Pittsburgh.  The organization is made up of council members and other government leaders from local boroughs, whom come together to discuss issues within their respective boroughs.

Councilman Peduto’s goal is to make Pittsburgh a model for LED lighting, which can then spread to the boroughs around the City.   Read more about Councilman Peduto’s plan for LED lighting in Pittsburgh in A Bright, Green Idea for Pittsburgh

View Councilman Peduto’s presentation here.

Last Friday, City Council was given its first look at the G20 budget.  The Mayor’s Office outlined a $16 million plan that would include $10 million from federal grants, $4.3 million from state grants and an additional $1.7 from the city’s capital budget.  The obvious question to everyone in the room was, where is the county?  Upset by this characterization of the budget and the comments from Council – myself included – the County Executive called for a meeting of City and County Council on Monday.  What he presented was a different budget – one that called for $25 million in spending and an unfunded mandate of over $7 million dollars that would have to be made up by the city and county.

Read County Executive Dan Onorato’s the Letter to City Council

Obviously, there was a problem.  The Mayor had submitted to Council a balanced budget of $16 million.  Council was told he had to take action no later than Tuesday in order to make the needed public safety preparations – the clock was ticking.  But, the County Executive told Council that the real budget was $25 million.  Both sides claimed to be correct, but there was little time and a vote was needed to provide the needed resources and minimize any additional costs to the taxpayers.

The Tale of Two Budgets

Late Monday evening, early Tuesday morning and into the afternoon, City Council worked with the Mayor and the Public Safety Director to create one budget for the event.  Because all of the money being spent upfront is being provided by the city, the Administration believes the reimbursement of funds from the G20 will come through the city.  In order to stay disciplined to a set budget and not wind up with several million dollars in unfunded expenditures, City Council and the Mayor amended the budget – raising it to $18 million and adding a line item of all expenditures and budgets for each.

The G20 Budget Solution

The new budget is balanced through a $10 million federal grant, a $4.4 million state grant, a $2.5 homeland security grant and $1.7 million from the city’s capital budget (in case it is needed).  Moments before Council had to take action, there were two competing budgets being proposed.  Through the actions yesterday, we now have a budget, a plan and the funds to make it happen.

Check out this short clip from a keynote address “Going Green Makes Economic Sense,” given by David Gottfried at Stanford University.  David Gottfried is the founder of the U.S. Green Building Council.  Gottfried discusses how green building is being linked to the bottom line. He says that bankers and Wall Street will eventually begin to demand green certification standards because of the value of investments in green building.

Today, Pittsburgh City Council gave final approval to Councilman Bill Peduto’s legislation to create the Stimulus Oversight and Reinvestment in New Growth (SOARING) Commission.  This commission will oversee the spending of money that Pittsburgh will receive from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

If you are interested in becoming a part of this committee, you can apply online starting today!

Apply Online 

Today, Pittsburgh City Council voted unanimously to give preliminary approval to the creation of the Stimulus Oversight and Reinvestment in New Growth (SOARING) Commission.  This commission, introduced by Councilman Bill Peduto, would oversee the spending of the federal funds the Pittsburgh will receive through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

For more information about this commission, visit www.reformpittsburghnow.com.