Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Harrisburg, Pa., Votes to File for Bankruptcy


 By National Journal Staff
Updated: October 12, 2011 | 4:41 p.m.
October 12, 2011 | 9:29 a.m. 
Pennsylvania's capital city voted to file for Chapter 9 bankruptcy protection on Tuesday as it faced a state takeover, according to media reports.
The City Council voted 4-3 to seek bankruptcy protection for Harrisburg, which has a debt burden five times its general-fund budget "because of an overhaul and expansion of a trash-to-energy incinerator that doesn’t generate enough revenue," Bloomberg Businessweek reported

The bankruptcy means the city will lose state aid, but that is better than the proposed recovery plans, Councilwoman Susan Brown-Wilson said, according to Bloomberg. But State Sen. Jeffrey Piccola, a Republican from Dauphin County, where Harrisburg is located, said the council's vote is against the law.
“I have been on the record as saying that bankruptcy is simply not an option. It’s illegal under Pennsylvania law, which prohibits third class cities from filing for bankruptcy,” Piccola said, according to PennLive.com.

Patty Kim, who voted against bankrupcy protection, said the city cannot afford the high cost of litigation that will likely ensue.

“The problem still exists that we still don’t have money, and we still haven’t moved one foot forward,” Kim said.

Pennsylvania's capital city voted to file for Chapter 9 bankruptcy protection on Tuesday as it faced a state takeover, according to media reports.

The City Council voted 4-3 to seek bankruptcy protection for Harrisburg, which has a debt burden five times its general-fund budget "because of an overhaul and expansion of a trash-to-energy incinerator that doesn’t generate enough revenue," Bloomberg Businessweek reported

The bankruptcy means the city will lose state aid, but that is better than the proposed recovery plans, Councilwoman Susan Brown-Wilson said, according to Bloomberg.

Read more...

Submitted by Jim Alex

29 comments:

Anonymous said...

This is just the beginning. Prepare.

Kathy Meeh said...

"The bankruptcy means the city will lose state aid, but that is better than the proposed recovery plans..." from the Article.

Another city that is "Too small to fail!" Congress where are you, our people need a jobs and stimulus strategy, not political gamesmanship, austerity and a 3rd world nation ruled by a wealth concentrated few.

Anonymous said...

A Congressional rescue? What would that look like? Those are the same morons and/or thieves who de-regulated the financial industry. How's that working out? There's no easy, painless fix for our problems. It's going to take real austerity on many levels to recover, whether we like it or not. And a quality of leadership we haven't seen in decades. Harrisburg PA, a US state capitol, and flat-assed broke. Unbelievable.

Anonymous said...

Vallejo filed for bankruptcy and they are surviving. As far as I know, no one has died and business is prospering. All union contracts have been re-negotiated and plenty of public union workers were laid off. Vallejo also lost their credit rating. The new City Manager is doing a great job. San Jose is in deep doo doo right now. They are next.

Kathy Meeh said...

"It's going to take real austerity on many levels to recover, whether we like it or not."

Oh, just like another "beautiful" outsourced day in Pacifica.

todd bray said...

In Pacifica we do not have a financial crisis but rather a paying senior staff, fire and police too much money. If bankruptcy will get us out from under these unsustainable contracts then lets file today.

Anonymous said...

Plenty of people, even in silly Pacifica, are learning what real austerity is and it's not outsourcing. The services continue and jobs are rarely lost-the commute just changes. That's a hardship? In today's shattered economy? Get real.

Jim Alex said...

Todd

Ever read the book.

How to win friends and influence people?

todd bray said...

Great article in VANITY FAIR that features Mayor Chuck Reed of San Jose and his thoughts about the public sector. Chuck is my hero.

Anonymous said...

I don't think the ca.democratic politicians want californians to read that article, todd.

Anonymous said...

Most of those mentioned are Dems. Chuck Reed is. This state and our cities are on the brink of real disaster unlike anything this country has ever seen and it's about time that state and local government take a stand and focus on the real problem. Read the article, check the info. It's not the usual union bashing crap. Last year CA spent $65 Billion on emp salaries and benies. That number is up a staggering 65% over the past ten years. Simply unsustainable, in any economy. By comparison in the same time frame spending on CA education was down 5%, spending on parks and rec was flat, health and human services up only 5%. Adjust for scale and you see the same problem here in Pacifica. What the hell is going on? This is the real problem. This is why we're broke.
Nothing else comes even close.

jim alex said...

Todd, Why isn't Chuck Reed's salary grand larceny?

San Jose City Council Cuts Salaries Of Mayor, Members

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
News Date: 2011-06-08 14:29:37
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

San Jose City Council on Tuesday voted to reduce the salaries and benefits of its members.

The Council approved a recommendation to cut down the salaries of ten of its members, and that of Mayor Chuck Reed, to help in efforts to bridge the city's $115 million deficit.

In an 8-3 vote, the City Council accepted a 10% reduction in the salaries of the Mayor and ten council members. The salaries of the council members will now be $81,000, down from $90,000. There will also be a reduction in their monthly car allowance from $600 to $350. Mayor Chuck Reed's salary will be cut from $127,000 to $114,000.

The reduction in the remuneration will save the city $103,000.

However, three council members opposed the salary reduction. Kansen Chu, Xavier Campos and Nancy Pyle voted against the Council's decision to reduce the salaries of its members, opining that reducing salaries and benefits would allow the rich to run the office effectively.

Anonymous said...

So what? Pacifica made a similar move by eliminating cafeteria cash for council. Saved a few bucks and satisfied a little blood lust but it won't balance the books and neither will cutting $103,000 from SJ salaries. This kind of grandstanding is calculated to distract from the real issue and guarantees nothing gets done about the runaway debt load of public employee salaries and benies.

Anonymous said...

Reed's salary is far less than a similar CEO job in private industry would pay. Far less. And no stock options!

Anonymous said...

Why can't we do this; 1) Remove Over-Regulated Laws That Prohibit Business 2) Lower Permit Fees For Small Business or Eliminate Them Altogether.

Not only is our government spending - continuing to go up, business is leaving the state. Baby Boomers are retiring and drawing on their pensions, and business is leaving the state. Illegal Aliens, continue, receiving welfare and free education, and business ,continues, to leave the state.
Unemployment keeps rising, foreclosure rates creep up, and business is fleeing the state. Illegal Aliens that want to continue their education need to pay for it themselves like the rest of us. Get a job and go to a JC, like the rest of us. Our universities only brainwash the youth and turn them into little marxists that call themselves the 99%. Give me a fucking break. All the while business leaves for China, India and Africa.

Anonymous said...

Don't believe everything you think.

Anonymous said...

Great idea! Deregulation sure worked well in the mortgage industry, investment banking, insurance, Wall Street. Damn we actually brought back the robber barons! A little bit more of that and we'll be living in caves and trapping our food. Blaming the immigrants, legal, illegal, extraterrestrial, what have you...is customary, isn't it, when things get tough? A little anti-education bias going on, too? Damn those intellectuals.
Things are scary these days but people with your attitudes are the real danger.

Anonymous said...

anon1015, Council had to give up cafeteria cash first so the city could then end that secret little goldmine for the rest of the employees and close up the loopholes during new contracts. Wonder how that went? Hard to reverse years of sweetheart contracts just because we're headed for bankruptcy. Or, so they say. I say try harder, your jobs depend on it.

Kathy Meeh said...

"Our universities only brainwash the youth and turn them into little marxists that call themselves the 99%."

Anon (137), did you miss the part where you are not part of the 1% controlling wealth? You might think you are, but really you too are part of the 99%.

Universities are defined as schools of higher education. They exist to provide disciplined people with higher intelligence: skills, learning, certificates and degrees. Qualified "California Dream Act" students (who graduated from our high schools) will be eligible for the same university loans and scholarships as other students. These productive adult immigrants with higher intelligence will benefit our society. And, if foreign students educated in our universities could have a path to citizenship that would also be a larger community asset.

From your comments, it seems clear enough our country needs more intelligence and moderation than it has. But, I'm annoyed that you keep posting depressed, misleading, fascist propaganda, and you cannot seem to grow in humanity and reason beyond that.

Tea Party Patriot said...

"These productive adult immigrants"

They are illegal immigrants.

Anonymous said...

Less Regulation. Not every industry needs so much regulation. You need to know the difference. Right now, in California, we have TOO MUCH REGULATION IN THE WRONG PLACES.

Government created the environment for the banks. Pres Clinton De-Regulated Banking policy. Rahm Emmanual De-Regulated Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Gov of NY Cuomo -Democrat, was the director of HUD and strong armed banks to lend money to people who could not afford to buy homes, along with Pres Obama, our community organizer. He knew, Cuomo states in a you-tube video, that 30% of those homes would foreclose. The democrats wanted to socialize housing. It blew up in their faces. Democrats are good at propaganda. Do the research and you will see in their own words how they wanted illegals and poor to own homes they could not afford. They knew , they did it, they said it, now they are spinning and trying to hide the truth from you.

We need business to stay in California. The way you do this is to stop OVER-REGULATING BUSINESS. Lower fees. Get off of their backs. I am not talking about the Walgreens and Walmarts, who can afford Government. I am talking about small and median size business, is over-regulated.

And another thing, this protecting illegal aliens is more bullshit propaganda. If you want them to stay they have to earn their keep. Bring skills and pay for their own education. Enough. When did the laws in california change to letting illegals gain entitlements right away and free college education? Gov Brown, thank you. Enough, is what I say.

Anonymous said...

I never went to college cause I refuse to be in debt just to be inculcated with marxist propaganda.

I never whine about the rich just because I'm in the 50k or under bracket.

If I protest I am unambiguous.

I love all people-even those who attempt to impugn me by claiming 'I hate'

I am 100% Truth-Loving, God Loving, Responsible-For Myself

Proud American Capitalist

Anonymous said...

Here is why S&P downgraded the US credit rating.

• U.S. Tax revenue: $2,170,000,000,000
• Fed budget: $3,820,000,000,000
• New debt: $ 1,650,000,000,000
• National debt: $14,271,000,000,000
• Recent budget cut: $ 38,500,000,000

Now let’s remove 8 zeros and pretend it’s a household budget.

• Annual family income: $21,700
• Money the family spent: $38,200
• New debt on the credit card: $16,500
• Outstanding balance on the credit card: $142,710
• Total budget cuts: $385

Kathy Meeh said...

Deregulation big-time began 30 years ago with President Ronald Regan, as did cutting the top tax bracket in half to benefit the most wealthy. And in current history, within the prior 12 years we find ourselves in the position described by Anon (845), if the financial statistics are correct, (there is no reference link on that information).

Congress continuing to keep taxes too low (over 12 years) for the top 1.5% tax bracket, not closing strategic tax loop holes, failing to increase jobs through stimulus-- all continue to prolong the weak economy and play havoc with human lives. Yet, this political gamesmanship continues.

Anon (834) you need more structured education. Classes are available cheap just over the hill off Skyline Blvd. As for "Godisms", is capitalism even a compatible idea unless shared? I don't remember the "I got mine" scripture in any of the major religions.

Anonymous said...

Who's the idiot who lit up the Tea Bagger bat signal?

Isn't there a Fox News site you people can go bother?

Anonymous said...

Once again Meeh is deflecting. Pres Clinton De-Regulated Banks. That is a fact. In his own words he regrets doing it. Things got out of control, so he says. Glad he noticed.

Anonymous said...

Here is a video of a fine Columbia Unv Graduate who is now one of the Flea Baggers at OWS.

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/10/16/video-ows-meltdown-star-a-columbia-grad-student-with-a-trust-fund/

Kathy Meeh said...

Banker Anon (325), I have zero interest in "deflecting" anything. Your deregulation focus is specific to banking and investment, whereas what I described was a broader trend: industry. And, the highest taxation rate was chopped in half during the Reagan administration. Over 30 years that has caused the already rich to grow richer, while the middle and lower-middle class have not shared generally in such increased wealth.

With regard to Banking (your focus) here's the progressive time-line and history of savings and loan, thrift, banking and investment system mergers and regulation failures leading to various financial meltdowns: Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR).

As described, negative-impact changes in the Glass-Steagal Act regulations (1932, 1933) began to occur as early as the 1960's. And by 1999 President Clinton did sign into law the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act passed by Congress, known as the Financial Modernization Act. This was a full repealed Glass-Steagal, which allowed formation of mega banks with combinations of banking, securities and insurance.

In 1982 restrictions were lifted on adjustable and interest only loans. Savings and loan/thrift were deregulated, by 1987 there were broad monetary Savings and Loan failures. In the 1990's derivatives began to appear which were not regulated (see page 12).

There is a wide range of "looking the other way" and regulation failures that has occurred in the financial industry over 30+ years, with traceable deregulation cracks for 45-50 years. The rating agencies, the SEC, the Financial Institution analysis and compliance oversight, and the Fed all failed. The moral to this story is likely the usual: Follow the money.

Having been involved in the securities industry as a Registered Principal with a small Branch Office, needless to say, similar to you in Banking, I was not happy with any of this progression.

Kathy Meeh said...

Anon (404) nutcases exist, including right-wing Andrew Breitbart and his skewed imagination video of a distorted freak, playing a 99% wall street protestor. Disgusting!

Breithbart's allegiance to the now 1% most wealthy capitalists is of interest. How does he get paid?