AntiRust

Enough is Enough: Convention Center Reality Settles In

Remember when a shiny new convention center was supposed to salvage Pittsburgh's ailing economy? Like, er, yesterday? Looks like that might not pan out, according to today's Post-Gazette. In part, the paper is reporting:

Allegheny County Controller Mark Patrick Flaherty assailed the authority that runs the David L. Lawrence Convention Center, saying at last night's County Council meeting that it is approaching "financial disaster."

The Sports & Exhibition Authority faces a $2 million deficit and yesterday won council's approval to undergo a debt refinancing that would help balance the books at the convention center, but not before some council members joined Flaherty in scolding the authority for relying on projected annual revenue from slot machines when drafting its budget.

"This is usually the first sign of financial disaster," Flaherty said. "That's ridiculous, to put [gambling money] in there and say they've balanced their budget. Enough is enough."

That, of course, is a pipe dream. Enough is NEVER enough for these facilities. Look at Balimore, where the city is all of a sudden building a $305 million hotel designed to save the convention center that was supposed to "revitalize" downtown on its own but didn't.

How long before people in Pittsburgh start making the same arguments? "Come on," they'll plead. "How can we compete without a hotel? It's not fair. Build us a hotel and and we'll be rolling in it. OK, no one is willing to invest in one. But we have already poured a gazillion dollars into the thing. What's a few more zeroes? It's all about synergy."

Yeah? Well, that's absurd. It would be throwing good money after bad. And it could be on the table soon. So prepare yourself.

The Erie Times-News is Right On Booze

The Erie Times-News editorial board agrees with AntiRust. About booze. Sweet.

Here's part of what was posted here the other day:

In my experience, the one exception to this willful ignorance is a sincere sense of flabbergasted awe regarding the state's bizarre liquor laws. New residents and tourists that I encounter always have the same questions: What's a "distributor?" Why can't I buy beer at the grocery store? And the ever popular, "State store?"

I therefore propose an index: Perhaps we should rank states by how easy it is to buy a beer.

Now here's the kicker from today's ETN editorial:

The bureaucrats who run

Pennsylvania

's liquor business believe they're entitled to some credit for such bold moves as allowing some state stores to open for business on Sundays.

Sorry.

Pennsylvania

consumers won't begin delivering pats on the back until the day finally comes when the LCB is out of business, the day when they can actually buy a six-pack without going to a tavern.

That day can't come soon enough for Pennsylvanians, who are sick and tired of the state's babysitting.

Of course, I am sick of the state's babysitting with regard to drugs, economic development, etc. Oh well, at least it's a start.

Kudos to the Erie Times-News!

Free Beer: The Politics of Alcohol Regulation

Pennsylvania's byzantine regulations can make for a pretty hostile business environment. But these are things people normally reserve for discussion at the local chamber of commerce. Most people simply go on with their lives--although they might occasionally wonder what happened to all the jobs.

In my experience, the one exception to this willful ignorance is a sincere sense of flabbergasted awe regarding the state's bizarre liquor laws. New residents and tourists that I encounter always have the same questions: What's a "distributor?" Why can't I buy beer at the grocery store? And the ever popular, "State store?"

I therefore propose an index: Perhaps we should rank states by how easy it is to buy a beer.

Or sell one. This story in the Tribune-Review indicates that it ain't as simple as it might be.

Just what, exactly, do these laws accomplish? Does PA have fewer drunks than other states? Less drunk driving? My observations argue otherwise.

The Future of American Steel?

Looks like they struck a new labor agreement at a steel mill in Baltimore. Here are the details.

Hmm. Interesting.

Activist Predictions: Life Imitating AntiRust

A few weeks ago, AntiRust predicted that Jim Kleissler, new leader of the Thomas Merton Center, would make waves as Pittsburgh's newest activist. A refresher:

Jim Kleissler, the fellow who ran the zero-cut activist group that has been suing to stop logging on the Allegheny for the past decade, has now set up shop in Pittsburgh. He'll be running the Merton Center. Check him out. And check out the Merton Center. According to its website:

We are people from diverse philosophies and faiths who find common ground in the nonviolent struggle to bring about a more peaceful and just world.  We work to raise the moral questions involved in the issues of war, poverty, racism, and oppression.

You can read more about Kleissler, ahem, in the book. Or just keep checking out the paper. He's an interesting guy. And you'll be hearing a lot about him, I suspect.

Well, here's an editorial in today's Post-Gazette regarding last week's anti-war fracas. Guess who plays a starring role?

According to James Kleisser, executive director of the Thomas Merton Center, "To respond to messages of peace with outright violence is absolutely outrageous." For our part, however, we will contain our outrage to that already expressed.

Messages of peace? Not to condone the police over-reaction, but it is said the trouble started when a TV cameraman was assaulted by a protester. Any media outlet is going to feel sensitive about that and so should every American. If that incident occurred as alleged, it wasn't just a cameraman who was attacked; it was the First Amendment -- and it was no message of peace being conveyed.

That will not be the end of it. Guaranteed.

More Convention Center Politics

Uh oh.

Remember when Baltimore sealed the deal for its publicly financed, $305 million convention-center hotel? The Baltimore Sun is reporting that--surprise!--the politics are getting a bit nasty.

Billionaire Robert L. Johnson, initially touted as the lead player in Baltimore's convention center hotel but consigned to a lesser role when the city decided to develop the hotel itself, could end up with no role at all.

And Johnson's company, RLJ Development LLC of Bethesda, and partner Quadrangle Development Corp. might not be paid for $700,000 worth of preliminary work if it isn't retained in some capacity, city development officials now say. The $700,000 is a portion of the $1.8 million fee the developers are requesting to oversee construction of the $305 million publicly financed hotel.

More than a year after Mayor Martin O'Malley and development officials endorsed the Johnson team, pinning their hopes for the city's future convention business on plans for a first-class Hilton hotel, Baltimore Development Corp. officials insist that Johnson, the co-founder of Black Entertainment Television, has never had a guaranteed role and knew that from the beginning. Several City Council members, however, say they are surprised that Johnson is not assured an ongoing role.

The BDC continues to recommend RLJ and Quadrangle for the role of owner's representative, otherwise known as construction monitor, and are negotiating the fee, said M.J. "Jay" Brodie, BDC president. But he said that decision is up to a nonprofit hotel corporation that has yet to be formed. The hotel corporation could negotiate a contract with the RLJ team or bring in someone else, Brodie said.

Imagine that. Political connections matter. You can expect more of this. In Baltimore and everywhere else municipal governments get involved in hotels.

Is this really the best use of $305 million?

Light Posting

Again. No one is complaining, I see.

Either way, the relative silence is due to my recent final move to Swissvale (this past Saturday), more getting acquainted with the twins (who are two weeks old today) and my grad school/TA orientation.

Throw in the fact that I do not currently have e-mail access at home (Thanks, Verizon!) and you can see the situation.

At any rate, that's the score. More later.

Word.

Run to the Hills: Heavy Metal Lives

Quick: Who's Lemmy Kilmister? And why is he smiling?

You might not understand this post if you did not grow up in a rural area in the late 80s and early 90s. See, with only two radio stations--one that played classic rock and one that played Warrant and the New Kids--there were few musical options. And none of them was "alternative." The closest record shop was, I don't know, 45 minutes away. So unlike our urban counterparts, we did not have a lot of choices.

Some, like me, took solace whatever solace we could in Zeppelin and the Doors. But others took a different route. A louder route. And I say unto those wise, hardy souls: Retribution is yours.

This is the real stuff. Not kids slumming with a tin of Copenhagen and a $60 "trucker hat" from some preapproved, jackass hipster dump. Not people who like metal because they think it is funny, or that it offers an interesting comment on the post-colonial construct of oligarchical gender roles, or any other such blather.

Today belongs to people who love speed, wailing guitars and foot-on-the-monitor lyrical bombast.

Sweet.

Forget the Payraise: THIS Might Be the Most Contentious Issue in PA Politics

Pennsylvania has a deer problem. Whether you think that means there are too many deer or not enough is a matter of opinion. But no other issue cuts to the very heart of Pennsylvania's uniquely combustible mix of rural, urban, industrial and cosmopolitan cultures.

This is not just about forest management. It is a gut-wrenching drama that will impact the way people live their lives, what forests are for and who should control the countryside. In short, this gets medieval pretty darn quick.

So now there is a lawsuit that might bring some of this into the open. From today's Centre Daily Times:

A hunters' organization has sued the state over its deer management, saying the whitetail population is being reduced to increase timber sales by improving the health of forests.

The Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania's lawsuit said the number of deer across the state has fallen in the past five years from 1.5 million to fewer than 750,000.

It warns that current hunting regulations "might lead to the irreparable decimation of the commonwealth's deer herd."

The lawsuit was filed Tuesday against the state Game Commission, the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources and Gov. Ed Rendell. It is part of a campaign by some hunters to increase deer numbers, pitting them against the wildlife officials, foresters, farmers and conservationists who warn of the environmental dangers of overpopulation.

See, even given recent reductions, most people agree that there are a lot more deer than there were when Columbus sailed the ocean blue. And a lot more than there were in 1900, when there were basically none due to overhunting and deforestation. People got accustomed to the subsequent rebound, however, and grew up hunting in forests that supported--or seemed to support--an gargantuan herd of deer. And four or five generations of good, honest hunters have come to prefer that sort of herd. But many good, honest foresters argue that so many famished Bambie's are killing the forest.

Again, this goes beyond hunters versus non-hunters and deer versus Big Timber. How did this happen, and where do I stand? Well, it's hard to say... Try here.

Smoking Ban Victory: Light 'Em Up In St. Louis, or, Who's the Nanny Now?

Ban the Ban, a group committed to fighting a proposed ban on smoking in Washington, DC, bars and restaurants (a complete ban with no room for compromise), shares word of a victory in St. Louis. Seems the county council there is willing to let business owners decide.

Look, it would be great if more places offered a smoke-free environment. Lots of people abhor smoke. But there is a legitimate dispute about whether second-hand smoke poses a significant danger to workers. About what the bans would do to small businesses. And an even more fundamental one about whether workers should be allowed to work in that environment even if it is proven to be dangerous. We allow people to drive race cars, after all, and that's dangerous.

But that's a debate for another day. For now, Ban the Ban offers an intriguing bit about which party is really guilty of the "nanny-state" activism conservatives often hurl at liberals:

Also of interest is that three of the four Republicans on the council voted for the ban, while all three of its Democrats voted against. Let’s hope that the Democrats who dominate DC’s city council have as much respect for personal freedom as Democrats in St. Louis do.

The party of Clinton is correct in this instance. The party of Bush is in the wrong.