Politics

10.17.11

Harrisburg’s First Appearance in Federal Bankruptcy Court

This morning at 10:00am, Federal Bankruptcy Judge Mary France began the first formal proceeding of more to come in the City of Harrisburg’s Chapter 9 Municipal Bankruptcy odyssey.

Judge France opened by saying things are “a little bit awkward in this particular case,” because the Mayor and City Councl have taken different positions. She then said, “That’s the understatement of the year.”

Chuckles filled the room, but we all knew she was right. The Mayor and City Council haven’t seemed to ever agree, yet even when it seems that they do or might, the Mayor has this way of saying that it’s not so much that they all agree, but rather that City Council has seen the righteousness of her position, thus, she proclaims, Council is siding with her. On her side. In a year and a half, when has the Mayor ever said City Council was right about anything?

Alas, she wasn’t in the Federal Bankruptcy Courtroom today to fight about anything. Nor were any of Harrisburg’s City Council members. City Council was represented by Mark Schwartz, Esquire, and the Mayor was represented by four attorneys from Tucker Arsenberg P.C. A team of four tax-payer funded attorneys led by Kenneth Lee and Beverly Mann.

The Commonwealth of PA was represented by two attorneys from Cozen O’Connor, a Philadelphia-based firm. Dauphin County had one McNees Wallace & Nurrick attorney in the room, Clayton Davidson.

Then there were all of the other lawyers there and on the phone. High powered attorneys from high powered law firms like Reed Smith, Saul Ewing, Winston & Strawn, and Ballard Spahr stood in line in front of the Judge and one after the other introduced themselves and their clients–National Public Finance Guarantee, Syncora Guarantee, TD Bank, M&T Bank, and Covanta.

The Harrisburg taxpayers members group, Debt Watch Harrisburg, was present, having filed a Motion to Intervene last night after a members poll supported the move. (see that Motion here).

Before she heard from anyone, Judge France was sure to clarify that despite what had been broadcast on the radio that morning, this was not a hearing to decide in this matter if Harrisburg’s Chapter 9 petition should continue. Rather it was a Status Conference with the intention of setting “a roadmap on how to deal with this procedurally.” The Judge asserted it would be “premature” to delve into the depth of the matter at this time. Now was the time just to take note of who’s involved and what the timeframe for the next phase of this process should be.

The Mayor and the State (with Dauphin County “echoing” the State’s position) asked for expedited scheduling, with the State requesting for movement twice as fast as the Mayor’s Office. Both parties feel this whole Chapter 9 petition will be found “not valid,” and they want that declaration as soon as possible.

The City suggested a timeframe and the Judge agreed. She dismissed the State’s request to hurry up even moreso. The State argued that it was necessary to get this done and over with because of a) debt payments to creditors being impaired and b) the negative impact Harrisburg’s Chapter 9 filing has on bond insurers.

It is the State’s belief that if the Judge hears and decides on the State’s argument before the City’s argument, then there’s no need to proceed to the “controversy between the City Council and the Mayor.” It is the State’s position that no one in the City has any right to file a Chapter 9 Municipal Bankruptcy petition because of the existing statute—the just-this-past-June-passed amendment to the Fiscal Code making a Third-Class City filing of Chapter 9 unlawful until July of 2012. So, as far as the State is concerned, if the Judge expedites the State’s matter—which the State and County contend is a purely legal matter—then Harrisburg’s Chapter 9 petition can be thrown out of the Court and no need to have a hearing on the City’s in-fighting.

No, no, no, no the Judge said. Pointing to an earlier statement made by City Council’s attorney Mark Schwartz, Judge France agreed that Chapter 9 filings are rare and thus, this case deserves careful attention. She stated that there are many issues in regard to the State’s position such as the fact that the State’s legislation in question is new and has not yet been discussed or examined. She called it “a very discrete issue” which indeed could decide the whole case, but she does believe Mark Schwartz should have fair opportunity to make his argument that the petition filed by City Council was indeed done within the law. She looked at Schwartz and said, “That burden is on you, of course.”

Schwartz nodded, made a comment about the State admitting that it’s protecting bond insurers, then said there are “mixed messages and mixed concerns” about what is really being argued here. “In order to respond, Your Honor, I have to respond to something.”

The Judge agreed. Due process should occur. She agreed to the City’s suggestion for an expedited process, which was very much like the one the Court had issued last Friday except of a couple adjustments.

Any and all parties who wish to object to the City of Harrisburg’s Chapter 9 filing submit those objections and briefs by October 28th. Responses must be received by November 7th with rebuttals to those responses in by November 12th. Then the day before Thanksgiving on November 23rd at 9:30am, the hearing on the validity of Harrisburg’s Chapter 9 petition is scheduled.

At this juncture, the Mayor has yet to file an Objection to the Chapter 9 filing. Judge France noted that in the Mayor’s request for the Status Conference, there was a “titillating suggestion that a pleading was coming but I haven’t seen one.”

The Mayor’s attorney’s nodded and said, yes, one would be coming, but really what the Mayor’s Office is hoping for is for the parties to mediate some of these issues. Beverly Mann for the Mayor said, “This would be in the best interest of the parties to avoid hard-core litigation.”

Judge France responded that she is “always here to encourage parties to mediate and I’ll do anything I can to facilitate that.” But then she did point out to the Mayor’s attorneys that there was a bit of contradiction in the two suggestions they brought to the Court—1) expedite the hearing process and 2) mediate. How much mediation can realistically take place when briefing due dates were quickly approaching?

The Mayor’s attorneys indicated that the two suggestions work together to assure mediation would actually take place.

Was Mark Schwartz open to mediation?

“Yes,” he said, “I would be happy to engage in mediation. It’s the first I’ve heard of it.”

Would the State agree to mediation?

The State’s attorneys could provide no commitment from the State but did say as legal counsel, they would be amenable to discussing the case with the other parties’ counsel. The State’s attorneys did emphasize mediation can go only as far as what all parties could agree to mediate. “What gets mediated? That’s the question,” they said.

At this point, the Judge talked mediation and how it could proceed. As far as what gets mediated, well, the four principle parties would have to decide that (four principle parties being the State, Dauphin County, the Mayor, and City Council). Would the mediation involve broad discussion that must include creditors? Or would mediation be focused on the narrow issue of intergovernmental relations? What’s the scope?

“Well this is what you need to educate me on, Mr. Grover, and you will have the opportunity to do so.”

The scope can be decided informally amongst themselves, Judge France told the parties, then they can get back to her and let her know if they would like to proceed to formal mediation. If formal mediation was decided upon, she told them they could suggest mediators or the Judge could suggest mediators. “The Court is happy to work with you on this.”

And this is when Debt Watch Harrisburg’s representative Neil Grover stepped up. First he spanned his arm over the attorneys of the four principle parties and said, “We’d like to point out, Your Honor, that each of these parties say they speak for taxpayers, yet they disagree with each other.”

Grover went on to say that anyone who thinks an expedited process will yield a clear and easy result is wishful thinking. “The law is clear as mud.”

Referring to the Mayor’s and the State’s preliminary issues, he exemplified his point by rhetorically questioning the question of the lack of authority of City Council to file Chapter 9 in the absence of the Mayor’s agreement to do so. Is not the Mayor obligated to file legislation passed by the majority of City Council?

In regard to the State, he asked if the amendment to the Fiscal Code could not be considered Special Legislation. On the day of the vote, Grover said there exists a video of the Senate’s pre-vote talk on the amendment, and while it’s introduced as “not being just for the City of Harrisburg,” the Senate Chamber breaks into laughter then votes “yes.” Is there evidence to declare this Special Legislation? “Special Legislation is prohibited by the State Constitution,” he points out.

Judge France looked at the Debt Watch Harrisburg attorney and said, “Well this is what you need to educate me on, Mr. Grover, and you will have the opportunity to do so.”

Then right before he stepped away from the mic, Neil Grover said, “On the issue of mediation….” and proceeded to quite frankly tell the Federal Judge this is just what the City of Harrisburg needs—seasoned, impartial experts to “bring very challenging parties together.”

After a few reiterations of the schedule, the Judge ended the proceedings, and the lawyer-laden crowd filed out of the small Federal bankruptcy courtroom.

So for now, the City of Harrisburg is still in Chapter 9 until otherwise declared.

10.12.11

Chapter 9 Bankruptcy

Number nine, number nine, number nine.

Harrisburg’s lucky number or its hex?

It depends on who you’re asking.

Last evening, Tuesday October 11th, the State of PA’s capital city voted to file a petition for Chapter 9 Municipal Bankruptcy protection. Immediately afterwards, the petition was filed with the Federal Bankruptcy Court. Right from City Hall.

The Acting City Solicitor Jason Hess and City Council President Gloria Martin Roberts tried to stop it, saying the Resolutions to a) hire Mark Schwartz, Esquire to represent City Council in Chapter 9 and b) file Chapter 9 didn’t follow proper procedure. There’s a way to introduce Resolutions, they said almost yelling. Hess was distraught in the disrespect he felt was bestowed upon him. Roberts was incensed at the manner in which four members of City Council approached the situation. Arguments ensued. Scoffing. Eye rolling. Sighs. Indignation. Exaggerations. Disclosures. Claims. City Council Rules and the Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure were thumbed through and cited. Brad Koplinski, Wanda Williams, Eugenia Smith, and Susan Brown Wilson held their ground, noting and nodding to the disagreement between them and the Solicitor and the President.

At one point Gloria Martin Roberts bawled out, “You can’t change the rules in the middle of the game!”

As if on cue, together Koplinski, Williams, Smith, and Wilson exclaimed, “That’s what the State did!”

And that is indeed what the State did. When the City of Harrisburg became the first municipality ever in PA to reject an Act 47 Plan, the State began to realize that the statute was a bit ambiguous about the next step, the Mayor’s Plan, but then concerns heightened when the real conundrum became apparent–the Act 47 Statute was outright silent once Council voted the Mayor’s Plan down, too.

Leaders of Act 47-stuck municipalities across the State quietly applauded Harrisburg for doing what so many of them didn’t do, but wished they would have–called out and rejected the Act 47 process.

Now some say Harrisburg should’ve just given it a chance. Pass the Plan, let the coordinator implement it, and let the City move on. For many City citizens, that type of “move on” didn’t make sense because the Act 47 Plan didn’t make sense–either version. There were too many places where information was declared “Not available.” There were too many numbers that just didn’t add up. There was oversight. There were conceded mistakes. Conceded confusions.

Then there was the significant line about the City’s union contracts, “If the contract extensions continue in effect, there will be zero financial impact and zero cost savings from the initiatives in this chapter as well as other initiatives in this Recovery Plan, since none of these initiatives can be implemented under the existing collective bargaining agreements” (page 81, Mayor’s Final Act 47 Plan).

In an obscenely short period of time, an erroneous roadmap was given to the City of Harrisburg to navigate through a precarious, pitted, terrain with no guarantees of what would be found along the journey except tolls, the relinquishment of goods, and pain.

Of course, the argument exists, “It’s a starting point. A living, breathing document.”

Let the bureaucracy ride.

In supreme bureaucracy and politics, the State began to change the rules. In June, it passed a contradictory Fiscal Code amendment proclaiming Harrisburg can’t file Chapter 9 for one year (and any other 3rd Class City), but if it were to, then all State funding would be revoked.

And we all know of Senate Bill 1151 and its Grell Amendment. Despite the profession that SB 1151 must happen in order to change 3rd Class PA Cities Act 47 process, the fact that it was prompted by Harrisburg’s course is lost on no one. Representative Glen Grell said he was compelled to do something about the Act 47 statute because Harrisburg had triggered the Statute’s weaknesses. Thus, it is necessary that Act 47 have teeth to make a municipality behave during the process.

When asked what he thought about Harrisburg’s particular Act 47 Plan, Representative Grell declared, “I don’t know if it’s a good plan or not a good plan.” He admitted he hadn’t read it.

He did know, though, who he was protecting–his constituents, naturally. Cumberland County. They had nothing to do with the City’s financial problems or the City leaders who created it, he said (his amendment disallowed for a so-called “commuter tax”).

That’s what the Dauphin County Commissioners proclaim, too. It’s the City’s problem. It’s not the County’s problem. Never mind the fact that the County guaranteed a decent portion of “the City’s problem.”

So, Chapter 9. A scarlet letter or an amulet.

That’s left for opinion, theory, and prediction right now, of which there is a lot. Only time will tell us what’s true.

**The resolution to file for Chapter 9 passed 4-3. Gloria Martin Roberts, Patty Kim, and Kelly Summerford were the “no” votes. Brad Koplinski, Wanda Williams, Eugenia Smith, & Susan Brown Wilson were the “yes” votes.

The City of Harrisburg’s officially filed bankruptcy petition: City of Harrisburg Chapter 9 Petition.

harrisburg pa municipal bankruptcy Chapter 9

Here are some facts about Chapter 9 Municipal Bankruptcy Protection:

the City must be insolvent to seek municipal bankruptcy
to be eligible for Ch. 9 protection, the City is to show that it attempted to “negotiate in good faith” and ultimately it must submit “a plan”
the City files for bankruptcy protection, forced collections and lawsuits are “stayed”
the City is required to have qualified, experienced, and independent legal counselors and financial advisors to coordinate a financial plan to deal with the debt
contracts and pension benefits can be selectively renegotiated (or will be left alone)
only the City can propose a financial plan to the Court
the governing powers of the Mayor & City Council cannot be taken away
a bankruptcy judge cannot force the City to sell property or to liquidate assets
a bankruptcy judge cannot force the City to raise taxes

Sites that yield information:

United States Courts, “Chapter 9: Municipality Bankruptcy”

Allegheny Institute for Public Policy, “What Happens in Chapter 9 Bankruptcy?”

self-evident,“Default and bankruptcy in the municipal bond market (part two)”

09.26.11

What We Need

In a series of Town Hall Meetings entitled, ‘THE CITY OF HARRISBURG, MOVING FORWARD’, Mayor Linda Thompson is going around the City with a mic, a lectern, costly blown-up charts, her Administrative directors, the Ombudsman, and cameras in order to give a talk on why the City is where it is today.

In a press statement, the Mayor announced, “I think this is an appropriate time to pause and clarify what has happened over the last year and half leading up to the so-called ‘take over’ of the City of Harrisburg by the Pennsylvania House and Senate and Governor Tom Corbett.”

Thus, she’s decided now’s the time to go out and about to educate City residents on why Harrisburg is a broken city. One meeting down and her game plan seems pretty clear—she’s striving to make any who are willing to listen that the City’s financial mess isn’t her fault. At all.

It’s same ole same ole.

Few facts, many inaccuracies, a lot of accusation, and tons of story telling.

In a high-pitched audacious timbre, Linda Thompson presents a litany of ”He said, she said, but then she said that he said, and here’s what I say.” Way too many details about stuff that doesn’t really matter to the majority of us Harrisburg residents.

To sum up her harangue the Mayor declared, “You’re not getting the full story, ladies and gentleman.”

What’s the story?

The story is that the City of Harrisburg owes a lot of money, has a diminished tax base along with a crumbling infrastructure, and a populace that is frustrated, tired, confused, and at our wits end.

At this point, more of us are looking at the State Capitol, shoulders shrugged, “Take us over. Who cares? Anything has to be better than this.”

We have no true leader. No one to unite us, bring us together, and give us hope. Such a strong, capable, experienced, and skilled leader as the City of Harrisburg needs right now is no where to be found. We have a Mayor who is so taken with “being history” that the City residents are barely a thought on her mind except as part of her vain equation about what it means to be The Mayor. We have a City Council president who continuously scolds the crowd as if she were talking to children rather than to grown adults who are practicing civic duty. And when Gloria Martin Roberts isn’t admonishing, she’s having tête-à-têtes about “Plantation Politics” and “those people in Midtown” rather than managing Council’s business, like seeing what’s happening with all those sitting bills Thompson keeps going on about. Yes, even GMR is guilty of neglecting “revenue-generating legislation,” too, Miss Linda, never mind she’s President and should be minding the People’s Business by making sure committee meetings are scheduled and bills are moving through the legislative process. Yet, on top of a frantic, vain Mayor and a condescending, negligent City Council President, we have an underperforming, unclear, and unfocused group of Council members who at times rise strong and fill onlookers with hope, but then at other times have us scratching our heads and wondering, “What’s the strategy?”

Who’s the stand out? Who’s stepping forward to establish a lucid course for the City? We the People are waiting. The Governor’s waiting, too. He doesn’t actually want to sign legislation that “takes over” Harrisburg. He has enough to worry about without being cornered into usurping local governance. In case it’s gone unnoticed, Corbett’s been deliberately giving the City a chance. The Act 47 Plan was rejected weeks ago. Fine. Now what? There’s an opportunity here that shouldn’t be discounted. The Governor certainly didn’t listen to Senator Piccola’s iron-fist demand to withhold all monies, withhold all help to Harrisburg. “The law is the law,” Piccola preachified. That being said by him, the $2.6 million pension reimbursement came nice and early as requested. Just in time to make the bond payment just in case City Council didn’t pass the disgraceful loan-shark-like loan. They did and Harrisburg got that $7.4 million plus the State money.

It’s all so tiresome. It’s hard to follow. Made all the more complicated and exhausting by a Mayor on tour uncensored and unproductive. Please stop telling your tale, Mayor Thompson. It doesn’t matter.

What matters is trash, blight, and crime. Citizens’ quality of life. The basics.

We’re frustrated. We’re fed up. And it’s not all about what’s going on at City Hall. It’s about what’s going on right outside our front doors. On our streets.

If the Thompson Administration is going to travel the City and conduct Town Hall meetings on the City’s future, there’s a more noble way. Educate the citizens on taking care of our City. Tell us what we can do to make it better. Produce blown-up posters and discuss ordinances—trash receptacles, vector prevention, noise considerations, blight. Talk about what’s already on the books. What already exists as codified ordinances of the City of Harrisburg. Educate the public on community safety. On residential duties whether a homeowner or a renter, a landlord or a business. Generate responsibility, good-will, action, and hope during these bleak times.

That’s what the citizens of the City of Harrisburg need. Hope. We need it so badly.

trash ordinance receptacles noise ordinance Harrisburg PA

All drawings by Ammon Perry: Doodletillomega: Illustrations and Drawings by Ammon Perry

09.15.11

True, not true?

The explanation from the Thompson Administration was a strange one.

Is Brad Koplinski telling the truth? Is Brad Koplinski lying?

Is the Thompson Administration telling the truth? Is the Thompson Administration lying?

What’s true and what’s not true?

During caucus before the City Council Legislative Session on Tuesday, September 13th, Councilmembers were presented with the Harrisburg Parking Authority loan terms. It was a quick conference for a pressing decision. The details were put forth rapidly, complicated and confusing, but the end result had to be a determination from them. On the spot, City Councilmembers had to decide if they would okay a step in the move towards the Parking Authority securing a $10.65 million loan at 10.75% taxable interest for 15 years. The one shred of hope was that the Parking Authority’s financial advisor, PFM, would get the interest rate tax-exempt at 8.50% by March 2012. Possibly. Maybe. Perhaps.

Brad Koplinski argued this was ridiculous. Wanda Williams exclaimed this is what the City of Harrisburg has always done, borrowing to pay off its debt. Each time digging the hole of the debt deeper.

Koplinski brought math and brought information to the table. He had done research and found out how much was in the City’s coffers. He had talked to the Controller and the Treasurer, contacted the PA Auditor General. He announced that he had word that the next day–in time for the bond payment–the State would forward $2.5 million to Harrisburg, so he suggested we didn’t need to go through with this $7.4M the Parking Authority was charged with acquiring for the City. If Koplinski’s math and information was right, he declared the wretched loan with its wretched terms was not necessary. Not just yet. We could make the General Bond payment and make payroll without it. Table the vote. Wait, he said, try to get more reasonable terms.

Did Koplinski find a way to give the City just a bit more time to find a better loan?

If he did, we’ll never know.

City Council ended up moving the loan forward. In a 5-2 vote, City Council voted yes to take the next step to close the loan.

Brad Koplinski and Wanda Williams were the two no votes, parting ways from their typical allies Susan Brown Wilson and Eugenia Smith, both who said they voted yes because they didn’t want to see the city default or miss payroll.

Where’d they get that idea if Koplinski did the math and had the Auditor General’s word?

We’ve known long enough that the City’s broke. It’s bankrupt, financially and executively. And now its even more in debt.

From the City’s Finance Director. When called to the caucus table to corroborate what Brad Koplinski was claiming, Director of Finance, Bob Kroboth, didn’t hide his surprise when he heard that the Councilman had talked with the Auditor General’s office. However, Kroboth did recover well. In no time at all, he was back in his bureaucratic groove. He told Council it had been an arduous process up until that point trying to get an advance on money from the State. At last word Kroboth heard, there was no guarantee the State money would come the next day. He made it seem bleak, unlikely, and doubtful. The Thompson Administration needed that Parking Authority money and Kroboth was doing his job for his sovereign, just as he had done for his sovereign before. An excellent servant.

Koplinski shook his head, Williams scorned, and the rest of Council watched unsure. When it came time to vote, Council perpetuated the move towards same ole, same ole moving the debt on down the road, like a snowball growing in size. Susan Brown Wilson proclaimed she had to vote the way she did even though in the past she had promised she would never make this same mistake twice, using the incinerator bond issue of 2007 as example. This time, Wilson said she had to vote to borrow again because the State money wasn’t coming in time.

It did.

And the Thompson Administration knew it would. That night, in fact. Immediately after the City Council meeting, the Mayor held a press conference and thanked the Auditor General for working with her to get the State money advanced the next day. She expected it by midday.

On Wednesday, September 14th, the PA Treasury Department wired $2.6 million to the City of Harrisburg at noon, before the Parking Authority loan closed (yes, Koplinski was wrong about the amount. He said $2.5 million).

Also on Wednesday, September 14th, the Thompson Administration launched a public relations crusade against Councilman Koplinski renouncing his claims that the desperate loan wasn’t necessary in order to pay the General Obligation bond payment or to make payroll in September.

In a statement put out Wednesday morning, the Administration said they still didn’t know if the State money would come later that day. After it came at noon, the Thompson Administration put out another statement with another argument stating it was the Council’s fault that the Parking Authority got such bad terms. Neverminding the fact that the City’s coffers had accepted millions from the state merely hours before, the Thompson Administration pulled a red herring. The new finger pointed back to Council’s voting down the Mayor’s Act 47 Plan on August 31st, stating that’s why the two traditional lenders refused the lending. That’s why the interest rate was so high. That’s why the terms were so bad.

Thompson’s statement: “Indeed, the interest rate is outrageous and had Mr. Koplinski, Ms. Brown-Wilson, Ms. Smith and Ms. Williams thought through the ramifications of their voting down the Mayor’s Act 47 Recovery Plan two weeks ago, the Harrisburg Parking Authority would have been able acquire financing for their $10 million loan at a much lower bank interest rate without having to rush Council’s decision on this matter.”

However, that’s disingenuous. It’s not the whole story.

As reported on this site on 8/11 (in “heard said”), it was disclosed that the Parking Authority was already having trouble getting a loan from traditional lenders. On August 9th, PFM Managing Director, Glen Williard sent an email to the Parking Authority notifying them that Wells Fargo had already turned them down for a $2.1 million loan request. Working through some of the kinks on it, that loan amount started to look more possible, but once the Parking Authority asked for an additional $6-8 million based on the Mayor’s request (which wasn’t made until the beginning of August), that just complicated matters.

In the meantime, charged by the desperate Administration in the midst of writing an Act 47 Plan that counted on the pre-paid rent of the Parking Authority, PFM sought loans with Metro Bank.

Buzz amongst financial mavens sounded of scoff at the idea that local Metro would touch such an amount for such a purpose. It seemed a futile attempt from the start.

Fact is, traditional lending wasn’t really an option and hadn’t been for awhile. Surely, if the City was going to try, it should’ve started trying long before the first week in August. Like was said at the Parking Authority on Monday, this HPA loan to get money for the City would have had to happen whether or not City Council had voted yes on any of the Act 47 Plans. The loan process should have started months ago. Months and months ago.

We’ve known long enough that the City’s broke. It’s bankrupt, financially and executively. And now its even more in debt.

If nothing else, we can count on that being true.

Access the Thompson Administration’s & Brad Koplinski’s press statements here.

UPDATE: Roxbury News– video montage of the Tuesday night conversation about the State money–“Brad Koplinksi, Bob Kroboth, Susan Brown Wilson, Patty Kim, & Mayor LInda Thompson & the $2.6M”

09.13.11

The Time Has Come

Hard money loan. A last, desperate resort.

Begging, if you will, for money now whatever the terms. Just get it. The Mayor needs it now. To pay the General Bond payment. To pay the vendors from this year and last. To pay the City’s employees.

At last night’s Harrisburg Parking Authority (HPA) Board meeting as members pondered the refreshed terms of the 15 year $10.65 million dollar loan–$7.4 million which the City would like delivered to it by Wednesday, please–board member Corky Goldstein asked, ”Is this the best deal?”

Harrisburg PA Parking Authority Corky Goldstein General Obligation Bond Payment Mayor LInda Thompson

by Ammon Perry

If we only we had more time, then something else, something better could be done.

At one point, there was more time. Linda Thompson took office in January of 2010. As she campaigned for the Mayor’s seat, her common dictum was to “Ready on day one.” She wasn’t. Nor was she ready with “a plan” by March or June of 2010, other declarations she gave. Then City Council got involved and time consuming fights ensued over who would sit on the Harrisburg Authority and who would give financial advice to the City. Plans emerged and were ignored. There were tales of a Forbearance Agreement. Then last September came and Linda Thompson said there wasn’t enough money in the City’s coffers to make it through the year . Exactly one year ago, Governor Rendell presented the City of Harrisburg with a $4.2 million package to pay the City’s General Bond payment as well as general operating expenses including payroll.

Second year in a row.

Deja vu.

Except it’s not deja vu.

There’s a new Governor in town, only blocks away from the crippled City Hall, and Corbett was quite clear in letting the Mayor know that she could not expect any bailouts this time ’round. In fact, he’s not even willing to expedite the pension reimbursement and fire protection payment due to the City in October. October will be the anniversary of Mayor Thompson’s request to be designated a “financially distressed municipality.” The only truly clear, tangible move she’d made since taking the lead in Harrisburg’s financial crisis. Applying for Act 47. And she even did that too late to do any good, as if it could anyway.

During HPA’s meeting Corky Goldstein asked (he was full of questions), “If City Council had passed the Act 47 Plan or the Mayor’s Plan, would we still have to do this?”

Yes, the HPA solicitor and PFM both confirmed. This outrageous loan would have had to be done no matter if either one of the Act 47 Plans had already been passed (not to mention the fact that this very proposal to borrow money for these very reasons was in the Mayor’s Act 47 Plan…..this is her plan, to borrow.) There was no way getting around the need to do this in order to inject money into the City’s coffers to–just like last year–make the General Bond payment, make payroll, pay operating expenses through the rest of this year. An Act 47 Plan wouldn’t have prevented this.

So using similar tactics as her predecessor, whose handbook she vowed to never use, Mayor Thompson is left to this. Repeating. Borrowing more. Pushing off the real issues, the real problems down the road.

Down the road the Harrisburg Parking Authority won’t be able to make the same payments to the City it has in the past. Each year the City receives a little over $4 million from HPA. If, when, once, this loan is closed, HPA will start making loan payments in March of 2012 and in the future, transfers to the City will be less the loan payment amount. So what is that? Well, while the loan interest is taxable at (cross your fingers) 10.75%, the payments will be $1.1 million/yr, going up to $1.6 million/yr in 2016 once the principle becomes amortized.

However, within 6 months, the HPA hopes to move to a tax exempt interest rate of (keep your fingers crossed) 8.5%. Then the HPA’s loan payments will be $900,000/yr going up to $1.5 million a year in 2016. That’s less to the City each year.

Moving it on down the road.

The loan terms are so stark because HPA is so rushed to get the money. In the one year since the Parking Authority attempted to refinance its debt thereby removing the City as Guarantor of HPA’s debt and transferring over tens of millions of dollars to Harrisburg, Mayor Thompson has done little but remove those Board members who voted on the refinance plan and appoint new ones who have been contradictory and delayed in coming up with a reasonable alternative. It’s only a little over a month and a half ago that the Mayor gave them this order–do it now. Get the money now. Since last time HPA had a financial advisor propose a plan, Moody’s downgraded $16 million of the Parking Authority’s bonds, rates have gone up, and the fiscal mess of the City has gotten worse. “Now” is not a good time for Harrisburg to need the money so quickly.

If we only had more time…..

No more time. Time is running out. Days are undoubtedly being counted in hours in the Mayor’s Office. Despite the Mayor’s fluff that all was almost complete, despite a Patriot News headline last week stating, “Harrisburg Parking Authority secures loan allowing city to make debt payments, pay employees,” it hasn’t secured the loan yet. And things have changed in those 6 days since then. The interest rate is no longer tax exempt. And the interest rate cap is no longer 8%, which even the Mayor admitted was high. It’s higher now.

But what are the alternatives? Defaulting on the General Obligation bond, not paying bills, not paying City workers? These are not what is being referred to as acceptable.

In order to move this loan forward, City Council must vote on an amendment to the Cooperative Parking Agreement. If they vote “yes,” then the HPA hopes to close this loan with the “broker dealer,” Kildare Capital on Wednesday. They hope to. Glen Williard of PFM said it’s “a lot to do,” but that’s the goal, the need. What will City Council do? What’s their plan? The question that HPA’s solicitor Tim Anderson thinks Harrisburg City Council will be asking itself is “Whether this is worth doing given the amount of debt service that has to be paid that comes out on a recurring basis in the future from the amount available to the City.”

Glen Williard said, “It’s a business question.”

Indeed it is.

Expensive money for an expensive quandary.

em>Below is the summary Harrisburg Parking Authority Board members were given. Note that at this time, the loan amount is anticipated to be $10, 645,000. The original cap when seeking traditional lending was $10 million. Last week, the Board was informed with expenses, a total amount of $11.5 million may be necessary. The interest rate is now taxable. The numbers, rates, and terms in this summary are not yet secured. HPA Board did not adjourn the Monday meeting, but rather suspended the rules, left the meeting open with a call back time of 5:00pm Tuesday, September 13th incase more amendments (more increasing of term parameters) must be voted on before City Council’s Legislative Session at 6:00pm.

UPDATE: See also the Resolution adopted on 9/12/11: HPA Borrowing Resolution 09-12-2011 & Exhibit A to HPA Borrowing Resolution 09-12-2011, 11th Amendment to Cooperation Agreement For Downtown Coordinated Parking Agreement (which Harrisburg City Council will vote on 9/13/11 @ 6:00pm).

09.08.11

Harrisburg Underwater

A tornado, an earthquake, and now a flood. Never mind the City of Harrisburg’s (wo)manmade disasters, natural ones are burdening us as if some balance of the universe is exercising poetic comment.

Our majestic Susquehanna is topping its banks and already Harrisburg neighborhoods have been directed to evacuate. Projections of crest keeping getting bumped up–25 feet, 26.5 feet, 28 feet, 29 feet….over 30 feet?

So much like our City’s financial crisis, no one really seems to know how bad this flood will be.

As handicapped as it is, the Thompson Administration seems to be doing the best that it can to notify and inform City citizens about the rising Suskie.

Fortunately, we also have National, State, and County resources:

If you’re on twitter, follow these groups, agencies, & people for updates (undoubtedly there are more, especially as more people venture out to witness the flood action):

As of this post, the neighborhoods of Shipoke, parts of Uptown, and parts of Olde Uptowne have been evacuated with power and electricity being shut off to Shipoke in anticipation of the high waters. A shelter has been established at John Harris High School with Red Cross & River Rescue Volunteers. The Harrisburg Humane Society is offering emergency assistance for evacuated pets (717-564-3320).

Linda Thompson has asked downtown businesses to close throughout the weekend.

At 12:31pm Thursday, September 8th, the National Weather Service recorded the Susquehanna River at Harrisburg at 22.39 feet. And may sound extreme but the latest reports are projecting that the Susquehanna River will crest Friday night/Saturday morning at 30 feet. Here’s what The City of Harrisburg looks like at 30ft flood stage: Map.

To access City of Harrisburg Flood Level Maps: here.

So that’s where Harrisburg’s at, as it is now. A rising river of flood waters shutting down streets, bridges, and neighborhoods. It’s almost as if an urban island is swiftly becoming smaller and smaller as encroaching waters determine the City’s fate.Best of luck to all of us in Harrisburg and beyond. Stay alert, be ready to pitch in, and try to keep the calm.

Again words we in the City have been chanting even before this flood came a flowin’.

Updates will be added to this post as they come in and will be clearly marked, so keep checking back. Please feel free to send any information to todaysthedayhbg@gmail.com.

08.29.11

Under Pressure

Harrisburg City Council is under great pressure right now.From the Governor and the State. From the Mayor. From the County. From the financial world. From the people.

In two days, City Council is scheduled to vote on the Mayor’s Act 47, and with a confusing, contradictory chronicle of the Mayor’s Best Plan in front of Council members, that is including the document itself along with every presentation and presser Mayor Thompson has given on it, well, let’s just say it’s not going to be very easy to get everyone who is waiting and watching to understand they’re decision when they make it. Somebody’s bound to be upset.

Perhaps that’s the way City Council should look at this—on a metric of who and what gets upset.

If they upset the Governor and the State, then what? Corbett’s come out and said what. In a letter to the Mayor (not addressed to Council members), Corbett has said that it’s “crucial” a Plan is passed and that thus far, the City has engaged in “irresponsible economic decision-making.” He doesn’t elaborate on what he thinks that is, but the implied message is there: he doesn’t agree with the virtue in City Council voting down the Coordinator’s Act 47 Plan and he certainly doesn’t agree with any virtue in voting down the Mayor’s Plan. He punctuates this message with the threat of legislative action that will take away the City’s control to make its own decisions. Piccola and Grell are working hard to make it happen should City Council upset the State. It’s been made clear–heavy hands and no bailouts from this Administration.

So the next up is the Mayor. Well, City Council has upset Mayor Thompson straight from the beginning of her mayoral reign. She and most of them don’t seem to get along too well. As far as she’s concerned, they’ve upset many of her plans, her moves, and her intentions for the City of Harrisburg. Sometimes–like last week when she stared Eugenia Smith down during a particularly tense moment at the City Council meeting when Smith asked what Thompson’s plan was for getting Harrisburg out of Act 47–there’s outright hatred in the Mayor’s eyes for the Legislative Body that she feels stands in her way of conducting a supreme Administration. But that Linda Thompson gets angry fast. Upsetting her is common and will continue to happen whether they pass her Plan or not. And the consequence in this matter if they don’t pass her Plan? During her press conference, she issued two veiled threats of political demise of those City Council members who vote against her Plan, but I’m not sure how she can accomplish that if this last primary election was any indication of her current influence in the City.

The Dauphin County Commissioners will sue and chastise as they have been. They’ll push forth hard with any suit they have against the City, and they’ll applaud State legislation to take control of the City finances via a Board of Control. In fact, if the bill makes it to Corbett’s desk, he’ll sign it, and the Commissioners get to appoint one person to that Board. Word is they have that person picked out already–former County Commissioner Nick DiFrancesco. So much chatter of Dauphin County Commissioner Jeff Haste talking openly about the possible Harrisburg Board of Control it makes one wonder if he’d be upset more if City Council did pass the Mayor’s Act 47 Plan and he lost his chance to see such a Board in place.

Looking at the financial world, we get mixed signals and possibilities. The financial world is vast and filled with many types–creditors, advisors, analyzers, attorneys. To be sure, some of them will be quite upset if City Council votes down the Mayor’s Act 47 Plan. They believe it’s a step towards a stabilizing of the system, a return of money and a making of money, specifically through the City’s move to sell or lease assets ASAP. From this direction, the pressure is silent but probably the most menacing. It seems to be hitting City Council in the form of contingencies and law suits–The Harrisburg Parking Authority loan (not yet), AGM’s concession (not yet), and the TD Bank suits (imminent). However, it’s important to realize that there are others in the financial world who don’t think like some of those, yet their pressure, influence, and advice isn’t nearly as felt.

Then there’s the people. Us. Residents, taxpayers, businesses, and neighbors. And in all actuality, we’re the ones City Council should be considering the most. After all, they represent us. What do the majority of the people want to see happen? What will upset us the most? What upset do we want to see? Some of us know so much and are prepared and ready to call out the many errors, contradictions, and downright inaccuracies in the Mayor’s Plan. People there to speculate on strategy and viability. Upset the system. The Mayor herself referred to it as imperfect and says we all know it. But some of us don’t know that. Some of us just want something, anything. A plan, please. Even some people who do know how unworkable the Mayor’s Plan is and must be just want a “yes” vote for the sake of a semblance of steadiness, no more upset. Then there are some of us who just don’t care. Those who can’t be bothered, don’t make it their business, are plumb utterly overwhelmed by the effort of it all, or who just don’t think it matters. Does it matter anyway? These are the people to be upset the least by City Council’s decision–the disengaged, the beleaguered, the down trodden, the apathetic. Perhaps this is what needs to be upset the most.

At her Friday afternoon press conference, Mayor Linda Thompson said about City Council, “The future of this City will be up to them when they vote next week.”

Indeed, yet not just the future, but the hope, the morale, the integrity, the dignity, the attitude, and the innovation of the City of Harrisburg is wrapped up in City Council’s vote.

The pressure.

Who and what to upset.

08.16.11

Public Input on the Mayor’s Act 47 Plan

Never mind that the Mayor told City Council President that she was ready for the vote on her Act 47 Plan the day after she presented it to Council, she has respectfully given the public time to submit comments on her plan so that she can take them into account for revision. We have until tomorrow, Wednesday, August 17th to do so.

At the public meeting on Thursday, August 11th, she declared that she would send her plan to City Council on August 23rd and the vote would be on the 30th. She said she wasn’t waiting any longer.

Well, she’ll end up waiting one day longer, because a Special Legislative Session has been scheduled for Wednesday, August 31st at which time City Council will presumably vote on the Mayor’s Act 47 Plan.

So here’s the timeline:

August 17th is the last day for the public to submit comments on the Mayor’s Act 47 Plan. Mail or drop off comments: Office of the City Solicitor, Suite 402, Rev. Dr. Martin L. King, Jr. City Government Center, 10 North Second Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, 17101. Email comments: ckline@cityofhbg.com
August 23rd is the day Mayor Thompson said she will deliver her Revised Mayor’s Act 47 Plan to City Council for review.
August 31st is the day City Council is scheduled to vote on the Revised Mayor’s Act 47.

Or do more than vote. At this juncture, with very few requirements outlined in the Act 47 Statute, the process is in the City’s hands. With an ordinance in front of City Council sent down by the Executive Branch, City government is in its normal legislative process. Thus, City Council can act within the paramters of that process. That means introducing and voting on amendments to the plan. It’s not an up and down vote any longer. There are process and procedures and opportunities. Of course, the Mayor can veto an ordinance, that is, if City Council amends the Mayor’s Act 47 Plan and passes it as ordinance with the amendments–which could be undesirable to the Mayor–then she has the power of veto. Unless, 5 of the City Council members vote in agreement. Then that’s a veto-proof ordinance. Once this legislative process is complete, then it goes to the Secretary of PA DCED for approval.

One thing at a time. For now, we need to be sure the people’s comments, ideas, and suggestions are known, recorded, and publicized. There’s only one more day to make and submit suggestions to the Mayor. However, all submissions can also be sent to City Council members for their consideration. They have the power and the ways to include them in an Act 47 Plan.

Contact information for City Council members can be found here.

Please consider sending in your submissions to todaysthedayhbg@gmail.com to be posted.

Bill Cluck’s Act 47 Comments

Additional comments on the Southern Gateway/TIGER III Funding

08.02.11

Act 47: The Mayor’s Plan

The Mayor has delivered her plan. Finally. Of course, she was forced to, by statute. Still, we have a Mayor Linda Thompson Plan after more than a year and a half of her Administration.

Harrisburg Mayor Linda Thompson Act 47 Plan Chapter 9 last resort

An hour late to her own media presentation of the alternative Act 47 plan, Mayor Thompson was seemingly making edits, copies, and sending off the requisite emails right up to the end of her allotted 14 days. When she finally made her appearance, she was unapologetic in her tardiness but did give quick thanks to the patience of the impatient crowd who waited and waited for her to come to them with her plan.

She began with, “Well, when you gotta carry the football no one wants to stand around ya. So, I guess I’m carrying the football today. Hopefully, everybody on the sidelines will just be just that, on the sidelines.” She continued this game talk as she laid out how she would lead the victory of Harrisburg’s fiscal solvency. She referred to “all of us working together like a championship team.” She referred to players–City Council members, the State, Dauphin County officials, the Harrisburg Authority, the Harrisburg Parking Authority, and Assured Guaranty. She referred to the “champion team of the Mayor” versus the “failing team of Senator Piccola.”

Lest we forget, Linda Thompson was sure to tell us that her plan had to face the two problems she inherited: 1) the incinerator debacle 2) the structural deficit resulting from years of mismanagement.

While it was quite confusing to follow the Mayor as she read aloud from the script in front of her, a mesh of sentences and mispronunciations, in the end, here are the keys points of the Mayor’s Plan which Thompson did her best to articulate:

sale of the Incinerator to Lancaster County Solid Waste Management Authority
lease of Harrisburg’s parking

present the RFP for the garages in such a way that calls for various combinations of years and terms

elimination of stranded debt through the sale/lease of City assets along with greater concessions from the State, Dauphin County, and AGM.

increased Fire Protection Service Payments from the State to the HBG from $497K to $3-5M
increased Dauphin County Gaming Fund aid to the HBG from $10-$15M ($2M/yr for first 5yrs, $1M/yr for 5 more yrs)
request AGM to eliminate any leftover stranded debt after State & Dauphin County concessions

if the State, County, and AGM do not agree to the above or should more than $26M stranded debt remain after sale/lease of City assets, then petition courts for a 2.2 or 2.5% “commuter tax”
receive $6-8M from the Harrisburg Parking Authority to address 2011 budget shortfalls (by extending leases on land under Walnut, Chestnut, and Fifth Streets Garages and collecting sum as “prepaid rent.” The HPA will have to take out a loan to do this)
property tax increase
a forensic audit of the Incinerator “debaco” (her word, not mine)
removal of the Home Rule Charter as in the Coordinator’s Act 47 Plan
request to the State to provide “technical and financial support” to the Mayor so that she can implement her Plan. She called for the Novak Consulting Group to be hired
Chapter 9 is the last resort
encouraged City Council to continue using the pro bono services of Cravath, Swaine, and Moore (although she called them Cravath and Swan)

Fortunately, these points were more clearly demonstrated in a letter given out to the press towards the end of the conference.

Along with the above, these other notable points are part of her plan:

replacement of suggestion of a 10 year tax 100% abatement with a 5 year tax abatement
collect PILOTs from The Harrisburg Authority, the Harrisburg Parking Authority, and the Redevelopment Authority
>any parties involved in the Incinerator 2003 and/or 2007 bond transactions cannot participate in any transactions of the Mayor’s Plan

Cohesiveness was definitely hard sought during the presser, but the strangest (and most political) digression in Thompson’s press conference was when she made her Ombudsman run upstairs to retrieve the blown up copies she had made of the RFP her Administration issued last summer which ended up in the proposal to hire Scott Balice Strategies as financial advisor to the City. She stated she was proving herself right despite the attempted assassination of her character by her opponents who blocked that hiring. Thompson declared it was because Scott Balice was not hired that the City is where it is today, in Act 47. Her hand was forced.

She specifically called out Councilman Brad Koplinski saying if he says one more time that her Administration did not follow a legitimate RFP process to hire Scott Balice Strategies, then “All of you should arrest him. His character, that is.”

Hopefully, this type of political rancor is not the norm as the City of Harrisburg works through this next phase of the Act 47 process. At this point, it’s really about the Mayor working with City Council and the people of Harrisburg to make sure her plan is satisfactory to all. One thing is for sure, more concessions did come from the Mayor’s negotiations over the past couple weeks since City Council determined the Coordinator’s Plan to be unsatisfactory. I’ll give her and City Council that.

Read: Mayor’s Proposed Act 47 Recovery Plan

Read: Mayor’s City Recovery Plan Remarks

Drawing by Ammon Perry: Doodletillomega: Illustrations and Drawings by Ammon Perry

07.29.11

Act 47 Fatigue

I’m going to have to agree with Councilman Kelly Summerford. He’s right. This is tiring. This whole City of Harrisburg financial mess thing is tiresome, and the Act 47 process has provided no relief.

Gloria Martin Roberts Harrisburg City Council Todays the Day Harrisburg and Act 47 The latest news of this saga.

As was reported last Friday, three days after Harrisburg City Council voted down the Coordinator’s Act 47 Plan, three days after various City Council members and the Mayor touted attitudes of cooperation and congeniality, City Council President Gloria Martin Roberts scheduled a Special Legislative Session for August 1st in order to reconsider the Revised Act 47 Plan. A re-vote.

That definitely threw a kink in things. Instead of making steps towards working together, City leadership braced itself for battle against one another. Again.

Monday, City Council members Brad Koplinski, Susan Brown Wilson, and Eugenia Smith held a press conference to reiterate their stance against the Coordinator’s Plan along with their intentions to work with the Thompson Administration to develop innovative solutions to Harrisburg’s unique situation.

As Gloria Martin Roberts told WHTM 27, this presser took place much to her chagrin.

However, the press conference seemed to drill home a hard and true fact—no one was going to vote “yes” to the Coordinator’s Act 47 Plan at the Special Session.

Obviously, it became clear to Ms. Roberts that there was no way any of the four members who voted against the plan was going to change their minds. The Council president seemed to realize that any notion that someone would switch his or her vote on the Coordinator’s Plan was a vain notion.

She cancelled the re-vote.

A Living, Breathing Document

The Mayor’s Plan is due on Tuesday, August 2nd. Within 10 days, she must schedule a public meeting for review and comment on her plan. Then she may revise it before City Council votes to adopt or not to adopt it.

There’s a great public worry that the four City Council members who rejected the Coordinator’s Act 47 Plan are ready and set to reject the Mayor’s Plan. It’s the topic of conversations inside and outside of the city as well as the parley of neighbors. The fatigue of this process is making many of us jumpy and impatient. We just want a plan for Harrisburg’s financial woes. To know that it’s in the Mayor’s hands is very little comfort to many of us. Councilwoman Patty Kim surely echoed the sentiment of a majority of Harrisburg residents and taxpayers when she said, “I don’t want to wait for another plan, especially one from the Mayor.”

A dominant argument in the debate about why City Council should have just voted to adopt the Coordinator’s Act 47 Plan is that it was a “living, breathing document” that could have been altered and changed as the process unfolded. By the day of the vote, we had heard not only the Act 47 Coordinator Julia Novak use this phrase several times, but also the Mayor, City Council members, and people in the crowd.

Catchy phrase, but what was never discussed or elaborated upon was exactly what such a process and procedure for change was. After all, when a plan is passed in the Act 47 process–whether it is the Coordinator’s Plan or the Mayor’s Plan–it becomes ordinance. It is the law of the City and the City alone is bond to it. Adjustment would be a process. If it is the Coordinator’s Plan to be adjusted, it would be at the discretion of the Coordinator and all challenges to the Plan would go through her.

Now, the benefit of the development of the Plan being in the Mayor’s hands is that the Plan does actually take on more of the characteristic of a living, breathing document. The process of adjustment happens here, on the City’s turf, at the City’s discretion, so it would seem. Remember, Act 47 is silent in many places. No matter that Secretary Walker has proposed a makeshift timeline for Harrisburg, in all actuality, there is no mandated timeline for Council’s vote or presentation of the Mayor’s Plan to the Secretary himself. After the public meeting on the Plan, the Mayor and Council will be in the normal legislative process from the point the ordinance is introduced at Council until its final passage.

Of course, no one around here is naive to the fact that if the City should attempt to engage in that process too long, well then, the takeover by the State comes.

Gloria Martin Roberts Rules of Order

In order to have fair, concise, and direct negotiation to develop a plan that will satisfy the Mayor as well as satisfy the majority of City Council, the legislative body of the City will need to work deliberately and parliamentarily.

As it is currently, one thing could stand in the way of such a process.

The City Council President.

The day after the Act 47 vote, Councilman Brad Koplinski attempted to start the works. He sent an email to all of City Council, Mayor Thompson, and the City Controller calling for a meeting as soon as possible:

When I cast my vote last night, I knew that we put not only a responsibility on the Mayor, but also a responsibility on all of us as well. A responsibility to work with her to get a strong and viable plan. Any successful plan must be one in which all the parties are in a room discussing the potential options and remedies. Putting our thoughts in writing is a good step, but I don’t believe it will get us to where we need to be – even with discussion afterwards. We do not have a day to waste in this effort. I am proposing that we have a public meeting of all city elected officials to discuss the various options available to us. I believe this meeting should take place this week if at all possible – (obviously, we may have Sunshine Law concerns to work through – although there is not a formal piece of legislation at issue currently).

In reply, on Thursday, July 21st, City Council President Gloria Martin Roberts sent this:

Mr. Koplinski and all members of Council; Mr. Koplinski on Tuesday evening after our council meeting, I was in the Mayor’s reception area when you entered. This was during her conference with the press. After the press conference, I heard you tell Mr. Philbin that you wanted to speak with the Mayor relative to meeting with her the next day. Let’s be reasonable, the same day that council voted down the Act 47 Plan and you wanted to meet with the Mayor the next day to discuss what exactly, your plan? Allow me to remind you that during this Act 47 process, and the process is still on-going, it is the Mayor’s process now to provide a plan to the community and the Commonwealth. It is not council’s process and one that you, I or any other elected official to dictate. You espouse wanting to work with the Mayor, but only on your terms and time-lines. You have already started your media blitz to discount the Mayor’s process. You haven’t proven me wrong yet. This is why I commented at our council meeting indicating that I have no confidence that certain council members want to work in collaboration with the Mayor. Over the past day and a half you have proven me right.

I submit to you that since “council has a plan” quoting Mrs. Brown-Wilson, at our meeting on Tuesday night, input from the majority of council should be relatively swift. Why not submit the majority council plan to the Mayor for consideration and discussion? Unfortunately, the plan was not made available to the Act 47 Team and three council member’s so perhaps it is time to be transparent and share said plan with all in the open. You see transparency has several meanings. Is your meaning clearly recognizable as what you really want or with distortion?

I also find it confusing and unacceptable that the majority of council not only rejected a viable recovery plan costing tax payers approximately $600,000 and cutting off financial support for the implementation of a plan, to now recommend that the Mayor have council’s selected attorney’s be involved in the Mayor’s Recovery Plan. What is the purpose because where are we getting the funds to pay for their service? Majority council rejected state funding support by not approving the Act 47 Plan. In addition, these attorneys are not from our state, they are from New York. I can remember several months ago council rejecting the Mayor’s hiring of a consulting firm from Chicago to do just what you want Craveth, et al to do. Some council member’s remarked that they were tired of having “outside people come to Harrisburg and take our money.” I suggest you go back and review council meeting tapes to remind yourself and a few other council members of their position on having out-of-state contractors participate in our recovery process. By the way, this wasn’t an issue for three us, the out-of-state issue, but since the majority of you had an issue with this, why is it different now? Is Cravath going to offer free and absolute free service to our city until the process is concluded? Cravath is ” a great resource”, and I quote you. So I guess this is your opinion and the majority of council, it must be a mandate. Can you justify why the negotiations with the County and the bond holders, made by the Act 47 Team, was so forcefully questioned with almost suspicion by majority of council, but you believe Cravath from New York can do better? Mr. Koplinski, what a plan, you influence the majority of council to reject the Act 47 Plan so that you can attempt to force the Mayor in hiring legal counsel and a financial team that you and the majority of counsel feels most comfortable, how transparent. I can and did see through this from the beginning.

A reminder again when the Administration let an RFP, Alvarez and Marcel (from New York) participated in the RFP process and were not selected by an independent review committee. Would you and the majority council have supported their hiring if the Mayor had submitted their firm rather than Scott-Balice from Chicago?

I am certain that the Mayor will remain inclusive and will seek input even from other elected officials. However, your backdoor politics are unacceptable. You want to drive a train of which you are not the conductor or engineer. I suggest that you take this opportunity to submit your input to the Mayor as she has requested and set up a meeting with her next week where she has communicated being open to any day next week. Why not meet her half-way? After all, we should be working for the greater good of our citizens, not personal agendas. Thank you.

A day after she sent this email, she called for the re-vote.

Much to her chagrin.

An End of Her Era

While not all Ms. Roberts’ observations are absolutely incorrect, her delivery gets the best of her, and thus, any legitimacy of her argument is lost. She’s too angry, too condescending, too facetious. At the same time her wrongness is so grossly wrong which just plain makes her ineffectual as a leader.

If City Council is serious about working towards an agreeable plan, is serious about working towards working cooperatively with the Mayor, then it’s time to change horses in midstream. Change the presidency. The City of Harrisburg needs as many elected leaders as possible in place who are able to rise above and beyond the emotional turmoil that all too often drags our City down even deeper into the quagmire of problems it faces.

City Council must show democratic wherewithal. The end of Ms. Roberts’ reign as President must happen before the end of her term in January. Call the vote.

The plan is in the Mayor’s hands. Yet contrary to what Ms. Roberts states about this being the “Mayor’s process,” the fact of the matter is this is the people’s process, and what we need is for our leaders to come together. Now. Levelheaded, agreeable, and skilled steps.

No more turmoil of temperamental tantrums. No more digressive disorder. No more exchanging blows.

It’s all just too taxing and we’re tired of it.

;

Drawings by Ammon Perry: Doodletillomega: Illustrations and Drawings by Ammon Perry