We are happy to announce today that Allegheny Court of Common Pleas Judge Judith Olson heard our arguments and granted the injunction that will stop the County from expending Drink and Car Rental tax monies for anything but the Port Authority.  Click on the links below for more news coverage:

Judge: Drink Tax Revenue Must Go to Mass Transit, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Judge: Drink Tax Surplus is for Port Authority, KDKA-TV

Judge Grants Drink Tax Injunction Against Allegheny County, WTAE-TV

Mr. Onorato is shocked.

On behalf of everyone from FACT we wish you all a very happy and safe holiday.

While the Drink Tax issue has been heavy on all our minds, now is a good time to let the matter rest for awhile and focus on what is truly important in our lives: our family, friends and all of the loved ones that make each day special.

Enjoy your holiday and thank you for all of your hard work and loyalty this past year.

“Drink and car rental fee collections above the $32 million budgeted for 2008 will be used for debt service related to roads and bridges in my 2009 budget, as allowed by Commonwealth law,” – Chief Executive Dan Onorato, 2009 Budget Address

Mr. Onorato may have to find a different way to fund bridge and road repairs.

What Commonwealth law was the Executive referring to in his address? 

Here’s another Policy Brief from the Allegheny County Institute for Public Policy explaining why Allegheny County is about to lose yet another lawsuit!

Today, FACT and County Councilman Chuck McCullough filed a lawsuit to stop Executive Dan Onorato from using surplus drink and car rental tax revenues for road and bridge repairs.

Earlier this month, Mr. Onorato and county council passed the 2009 budget which noted that extra revenue from the drink and car rental tax would be used help pay for bridge and road improvements EVEN THOUGH state law requires drink tax revenue to be used on mass transit only.

When Executive Onorato realized that the Drink Tax and Rental Car Tax would collect more money than expected for Port Authority (for 2008, the County needed $27.5 million, budgeted $32 million, and will collect at a minimum $44 million), he decided that the County could use the interest on Drink Tax collections, along with any monies collected over the amount needed for the Port Authority subsidy, on non-Port Authority expenses. The County budget for 2009 reflected this wish.

Mr. Onorato and council members promised when they passed the 10% Drink Tax, the revenue raised would be exclusively used for the Port Authority and that they would search for other sources of revenue to subsidize it. Well, they have done neither and their reckless political actions have crippled the Pittsburgh region’s hospitality industry in an already tough economy, so our fight continues.

Look for a lawsuit in the near future…

It isn’t everything anybody wanted, but it’s better than nothing.  Facing criticism from Allegheny County citizens, County Council passed a budget this week which reduced the Drink Tax from 10% to 7%, representing a year’s worth of hard work by advocates working to reduce or eliminate this harmful tax.  Here are some stories from the press concerning this news:

Allegheny County Cuts Drink Tax to 7%, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Drink Tax Cut Passes County Council, KDKA-TV

Cheers, Drinks to Cost 3 Percent Less, WTAE-TV

We applaud the county for this action; however this is only the first step.  We will continue to pursue the repeal of this irresponsible and unfair tax.  And we will maintain a vigilant oversight on how these monies are used.

And so The Whiskey Rebellion II continues…

In honor of Thanksgiving, here are just a few things we are thankful for:

1. ALL OF YOU for your wonderful support and hard work during our fight against Allegheny County’s Drink Tax.
2. To live in a country where we, the people, are able to have a say in our government and how it is run.
3. And of course, all of our families, friends and loved ones who have been by our side from the very beginning!

We hope you have a great holiday.

After we all worked tirelessly to get our referendum on the November ballot, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has issued no directive and therefore both drink tax referenda will remain off of the ballot.

No word from the PA Supreme Court about the Drink Tax referenda.

While this is disheartening news, it is in no way, shape or form going to stop our fight against this unfair tax.  If the Supreme Court rules on the issue later this week, we will demand all ballots be reprinted with our referendum.

Keep checking back for updates.

Over-collection of Drink Tax funds must not be used to prop up county budget

Pittsburgh, PA – Tonight, Allegheny County Chief Executive Dan Onorato delivered his 2009 proposed county budget to council.  This budget proposal includes a modest Drink Tax reduction while again failing to deal with the county’s structural deficit.

Allegheny County businessperson and Friends Against Counterproductive Taxation (FACT) board member Kevin Joyce said, “Let’s be honest, the Drink Tax was proposed and instituted not solely for the benefit of mass transit, but as a backhanded way to deal with the county’s structural deficit.  The budget looks good on paper – no new property taxes and a reduction in the drink tax – the problem is that this county is not solvent for the long term and our leaders know it.  The Drink Tax is and always has been simply a way to mask these larger issues regarding the fundamentals of the budget.  As you might expect, this plan very simply plays politics for short term gain, neglecting the long term viability of our region.

Kevin Joyce continued, “There was much talk this evening of how to spend the “over-collection” of the Drink Tax.  First, Act 44 dictates that all monies collected as a result of the Drink Tax should be used for mass transit.  Second, we take issue with the premise that this is the county’s money to spend as it sees fit.  This money is being taken out of the pockets of local businesses and the customers who support them, supposedly to subsidize the Port Authority, and our government leaders are treating it as if it’s a rainy day fund to address all that ails this county.  Our industry has been hit particularly hard by the economic crisis, businesses are closing in droves and people are losing jobs, yet our county government continues to bludgeon the hospitality industry with this tax while drawing up an over-collection Christmas list at the expense of countless local families and businesses.  Everyone is being forced to tighten their belts during this economic crisis, except on Grant Street.  The $29.5 million that has been collected through 8 months of 2008, which is already $3.25 million more than the $26.25 million purportedly needed for the 2008 transit match, has been left unspent and collecting interest while our leaders plan their Christmas list.  This budget guarantees it’s going to be a nice Christmas on Grant Street, but I’m not so sure about Main Street.”