Officials of the Allegheny County Airport Authority might want to change the locks on their offices. That's because the king of diverting public resources to uses proscribed by law is on the hunt again.
Allegheny County Chief Executive Dan Onorato had his heart -- not to mention his 2011 budget -- set on siphoning money from royalties from Marcellus shale natural gas drilling at Pittsburgh International and the county airport. The only problem is, federal rules require such income to be reinvested in the airports.
But don't expect a silly thing such as rules -- or the law -- to stop the Democrats' gubernatorial nominee from five-fingering from others to cover his numbers, so to speak. He's attempted to do it before and he's trying to do it again.
Mr. Onorato had the audacity to claim a legal right to divert drink tax money to non-mass-transit uses. He has none. In fact, the "ruling" he cited said just the opposite . And Onorato's already diverted tens of millions of dollars in gaming money intended to reduce Pittsburgh International's bond debt. He ignored state law in doing so.
Airport authority officials allowed Onorato to get away with what should be investigated as a misapplication of public dollars. Now Onorato is back for more, attempting to tap another kitty to which he has no warrant.
Will the diversion king be thwarted• Or will by hook or by crook once again rule the day?
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.