Murphy rebuffs oversight board's threats Tom Murphy yesterday sent the city's fiscal oversight board a missive with a message about the firefighters new contract: Back off or we will beat you in court.
In a strongly worded letter to the board, Murphy defended the cost cuts in the contract and vowed the city will win any court battles with the oversight board, which criticized the plan and voted to sue the city.
In the most simple terms, Murphy does not play well with others. On another level, he is happy to fight it out in court.
We don't need to go to court like he has done. And, we need to work much harder at working it out.
I'm willing to deal well with others that are not willing to deal well with me.
I'm not a push over that is full of agreement, just to make nice. I can stand fast in my resolve in matters where I justifications. However, throughout, I stay with an open mind.
I can be proven wrong. I can listen to those that are in disagreement. And, I don't give up.
Posts
1 comment:
Murphy rebuffs oversight board's threats
Saturday, April 02, 2005
By Timothy McNulty, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Mayor Tom Murphy yesterday sent the city's fiscal oversight board a missive with a message about the firefighters new contract: Back off or we will beat you in court.
Oversight dispute on firefighters contract heads to court (3/30/05)
In a strongly worded letter to the board, Murphy defended the cost cuts in the contract and vowed the city will win any court battles with the oversight board, which criticized the plan and voted to sue the city.
Murphy claimed the board -- officially called the Intergovernmental Cooperation Authority -- is choosing to pursue a "hostile legal strategy" with the city rather than to meet to discuss the contract. He cited a list of four meetings on the fire union contract to which the board's director was invited, but did not attend.
"Unfortunately at this critical juncture, the ICA's actions do nothing to move the city toward our goal of fiscal stability and in fact only undermine the tremendous progress we have made," Murphy wrote.
" ... Should you choose to pursue your costly taxpayer-funded strategy, we will meet you in court and fully expect that your action will be summarily dismissed."
The board's attorney, Glenn Mahone, said Murphy's complaints were "silly" and "petulant," and he could have avoided battles with the board if he had just issued information earlier.
"If the information in this letter is availing, why in hell didn't we get it before? We've been asking for it for months," Mahone said.
Three members of the five-man oversight board voted Monday to sue the city, saying its approval of a five-year contract with firefighters violated the city's Act 47 recovery plan and the state's Municipalities Financial Recovery Act statute.
The city's separate Act 47 recovery team has ruled the contract met the required cost cuts in the city's recovery plan, so the board may sue the recovery team too. Mahone plans to file suit early next week.
The oversight board also complained that the city did not provide it enough information on Fire Bureau spending, which the board said varied from the city's accepted five-year spending plan. It authorized board chairman William Lieberman to trigger a mechanism that will block the city from receiving its new payroll and occupation tax revenues.
The city is depending on collecting $54 million from those taxes to balance its $417.5 million budget.
Mahone told the city March 7 that using January and February numbers, the city was on track to overspend in the Fire Bureau by $16 million this year.
Murphy responded yesterday that the new contract terms will stamp out that excess spending. He said if the city's spending is projected over 12 months Pittsburgh will only overspend by $312,000.
Murphy said the board's calculation is flawed and "makes clear that [the] ICA is not fulfilling its role as overseers of the city's finances."
Mahone stood by the board's calculations.
The Act 47 plan called for the city to cut $10.7 million in Fire Bureau spending in 2005 and $55.4 million over the five-year life of the plan. The administration attached a memo from new Fire Chief Michael Huss that says the new contract will allow the city to cut only $8.8 million this year, but a total of $61.9 million over five years, or $6.5 million more than the Act 47 total.
The new contract allowed the city to close six stations, cut 108 vacant firefighter positions, freeze wages for two years and increase health care and retiree costs.
The oversight board complained that the Act 47 plan called for nine stations to close and that the new contract will shield firefighters from layoffs.
(Tim McNulty can be reached at tmcnulty@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1542.)
Post a Comment