House Bill 2018---Write Your Local Politicians! (Philadelphia, Pittsburgh: private schools, university, calculation)

[ScranBarre]

DISCLAIMER: This message mainly applies to residents of Scranton and Wilkes-Barre (of which we have about a dozen of on this forum between both cities), but it is worth a read for anyone with an interest in the revival of either city. I'm sure WeLuvPA in particular will find this to be an especially interesting topic.

In 1936 a massive flood decimated a large portion of the city of Johnstown, in Western Pennsylvania, about 45 minutes east of Pittsburgh. That same year the state passed the Johnstown Flood Tax, which was intended to only be temporary in order to aid flood victims. However, believe it or not due to some sort of administrative oversight this tax is still in place, and it generates an annual $240,000,000 in revenue for the state. A new bill being proposed would divide that revenue amongst the state's cities that are overburdened with a large percentage of tax-exempt properties---at least 17% to be exact. No single municipality could receive more than 10% of the revenue, and city-owned buildings are not included in the calculation.

At least 22% of Scranton is considered "tax-exempt," which means that the other 78% (mostly residential tax payers) must bear the burden of providing municipal services to the other 22%, which includes three instutitions of higher learning, three major regional hospitals, public schools, private schools, churches, and various state, Federal, and county government offices, amongst others. All of these entities consume city resources, yet they don't pay for them (those that do make an annual payment in lieu of taxes make meager contributions, including a stingy $106,000 figure from the massive University of Scranton).

City Council Solicitor Amil Minora was quoted in today's Scranton Times-Tribune as saying "When they ripped down 19 buildings this year for the university to expand, that was another 19 properties coming off the tax rolls. We certainly want to see the university expand because it is a great asset to the city, but the taxpayers have to make up for those buildings, and this bill recognizes those losses."

Scranton would qualify for at least $2,000,000 annually. Allentown could receive $3,200,000. Bethlehem might get $1,700,000. Easton would receive $970,537. Pittsburgh would get $24,000,000, the maximum permitted for any single municipality (I'd assume Philadelphia would get the same), and Harrisburg, our state capital, would receive a whopping $11,500,000.

Since most of the state's major tax-exempt cities have already been accounted for, and the total is FAR less than that $240,000,000 figure, it stands to reason that cities like Scranton could even get much more than just $2,000,000 annually. As a suburbanite, I can recognize that many of my fellow suburbanites rely heavily on the city for medical care, education, government business, etc. while the city's taxpayers pick up the tab. I'm completely in support of that $240,000,000 going to benefit our state's aging and overburdened cities, and I'd urge others who are interested to please write to your legislators to let your voices be heard. According to this same article, Luzerne County's State Representative John Yudichak is the only local congressman working to build support for this bill, which means we have our work cut out for us in convincing the others to vote to support this measure.

What do others think?