Mt. Lebanon commissioner to enter race for county exec
D. Raja, a businessman and Mt. Lebanon commissioner, is poised to enter the Republican race for Allegheny County executive.
Mr. Raja, who could not immediately be reached for comment, has called a variety of senior county Republicans to alert them to his interest.
According to an associate, he plans to make a formal announcement some time next week.
The news of Mr. Raja's plans for the race circulated as Patti Weaver, an architect of the Pittsburgh Tea Party movement, was about to formally launch her bid for the Republican nomination at a rally today at the City-County Building.
"My only comment, is, let the best person win," Ms. Weaver said of the news of Mr. Raja's prospective candidacy.
County Councilmen Matt Drozd and Chuck McCullough have also said that they are considering bids for the GOP nomination, but neither has announced a final decision.
Mr. Raja's decision sets the stage for contested races on both sides of the primary ballot for executive. County Controller Mark Flaherty and county Council President Rich Fitzgerald have announced their candidacies for the Democratic nomination to succeed Dan Onorato, who chose not to run for a third term.
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11040/1124153-455.stm
24 comments:
But he's told people he would run for re-election for 1st. Ward Lebo commissioner....can you run for both ?
I heard the County R Committee chose not to endorse Raja for County Exec.
Bill Lewis
THAT'S IT!!! I'M VOTING DEMOCRAT! EVEN IF IT'S A BBB-III-GGG UNION DEMOCRAT!!!
Hey, maybe...well, we'd have to change the constitution but how does President Raja sound? ... Excuse me, I need to vomit!
In an earlier thread today, Dave Franklin and I were engaged in a discussion about my credibility and backing up my big statements with facts. Here is a link that both Dave and Raja may be interested in. Republican Committee of Mt. Lebanon Survey Results 70% of the respondents voted against a $114 million HS project, and about 70% wanted an electoral referendum. I am really bad with numbers, Dave. Would you consider 70% a majority? Raja, why did you vote the project through when you produced this survey? Why did you have unquestioning support for this nightmare?
Elaine
And, I seem to recall that Raja's principal campaign promise was to reduce Lebo taxes by 20%.....lets see now, so far in 3 years millage has been reduced by a whopping 4%, so it looks like he will pull the rest of the rabbit out of his hat this fall for the 2012 Muni budget and his County election prospects ?
Bill Lewis
Elaine, I'd agree that 70% represents a majority of those who responded, but that does not necessarily equate to a majority of Lebo citizens. I also seem to recall widespread criticism over that survey from Rs and Ds alike. But whatever.
If a majority of our community saw it your way, perhaps there would be more than the 3 or 4 regular commenters on this site. Perhaps there would have been a greater number of anti-project attendees at the meeting. Something doesn't add up I guess.
I sense that in your opinion, no good can ever come from this project and I'm done trying to convince you otherwise.
Dave Franklin
Sorry for the delay, but I went to bed, Dave. You bring up many valid points, so I will address them one at a time. I have tried to support my statement that the majority of Mt. Lebanon residents have been ignored. Four thousand signatures mean nothing to you. The School Board is right there with you. According to you, Raja’s survey drew widespread criticism. I hope you can back that up. I had not heard that. The only measurable support from the proponents of the high school, in my mind, would be the SOS signs that have been littering our community since September. They had four and a half months to get the word out. I don’t believe those signs show a majority, do you? Have you seen many in your neighborhood? I doubt it. There are no signs on my street. The highest concentration of VOICE signs is on Roycroft. Why is that?
As far as not adding up, I am not a numbers person either, Dave. Would I like more than 3 or 4 regular commenters on my blog? Sure. But the number of commenters is not a measure of readership. How many comments are on Blog-Lebo? Does that mean that nobody reads it? Hardly. How about the Posti Gazette? Do you see many comments or letters? Do the letters to the editor equal readers? I don’t think so. Since you were not at the meeting, let me explain who the “pro-project” attendees were. Most of the School Board attended. Legal counsel representing the District filled many seats. District Administration and Staff were present. Tom Celli, with his entourage, and the firm that did the traffic study were sitting there with bated breath. The media, representing newspapers and television, were in the room. Of course, representatives from the Municipality attended. I think I mentioned everyone that had to be there, which leaves the residents. There were a few of us “anti-project attendees” but since the Commissioners are all about transparency, the agenda was posted on the Municipal website on February 4, so there were no surprises. I am estimating that there were ten or twenty “pro-project attendees.” The only reason why I went was to record the Discussion and Commission meetings. I hope that helps you with the numbers adding up.
Finally, Dave, I appreciate your effort to convert me, but I am a firm believer that this project is ruining the community. Call me a lost cause, but at least I am consistent in my beliefs. As with any decision I make, I weigh the facts. As an attorney, Dave, I hope you can appreciate that. I just don’t see any facts that would cause me to change my mind.
Thank you for taking the time out of your busy day to comment. I do appreciate hearing from you.
Elaine
P.S. to my prior post about Raja and his tax reduction pledge...the Paul Harvey "rest of the story " here is that the entire 4% total millage reduction over 2 budget years occured by....please hold your applause....drawing down from the general fund balance. In other words, using savings account funds to balance the budget....now all you pro-HS and R groupies can applaud. Lets hear it !
This sort of bait & switch should play well in the County way of doing business....except they really have no savings accounts.
Bill Lewis
Elaine, I just want clarify something. You can count me in the group that believes that $113 million is too much to spend. Based on their statements on the record during the Act 34 hearings, I have to assume that the SB members agree with that too. I'm also inclined to believe that a large section of our population (perhaps not a perfect majority) would prefer a lower number as well.
Where I think we differ is the assertion that a majority of our residents "don't want" this project or that it is ruining or will ruin our community. I tend to believe that a majority do want this project, including many of the 4,000 who signed the petition. All of us recognize the need to rehabilitate, update, eliminate and/or add to significant portions of the high school facility. Where we diverge is on the issue of cost and certain aspects of the project (yes, including athletic facilities).
However, I would prefer that the project move forward. To date, we've heard very little on the issue of cost (or controlling costs), and have instead focused on zoning issues, which in my opinion, shouldn't really drive the conversation. Let's face it, given the location and size of the high school facility, there are going to be parking and traffic issues that we need to face and address - that's just part of the process. However, they shouldn't serve as a reason to delay or stop the project.
We can't even address the issues of cost until we move forward. If the costs start to ballon or skyrocket, I predict you'll see people coming out the woodwork to complain. In my opinion, that is and should continue to be where the SB needs to focus its efforts. Their strong individual statements in support of bringing this project in under $113 million won't soon be forgotten. If decisions (including hard decisions re: deducts) need to be made to get to that result, so be it. But we can't even entertain those discussions until we move forward.
I can't accept the proposition that this project is ruining our community. Not yet, any way. I do however appreciate your effort to shed light on the project, and I would simply offer that if you do so with good intentions and a positive spin, people will respond.
Dave, the majority don't want the current plan. It is a bad plan as seen by all the dollars and time wasted defending it. As I have said in the past, it has become unaffordable to live in Mt. Lebanon, thanks to the School District. Not everyone lives in Virginia Manor.
So I guess we both agree that $113 is too much to spend and I am going out on a limb here, Dave, but I believe that represents the majority of Mt. Lebanon.
Elaine
Anyone outside of the bubble would probably have a good chuckle over your last comment. Here's a NEWSFLASH - Mt. Lebanon has always been "unaffordable" by comparison. Our taxes and property values have long outpaced many other neighborhoods in our area. I'm sure many people would love to live in Mt. Lebanon if they could afford it.
Elaine, people who live here choose to do so for a variety of reasons, but rarely has anyone used affordability as a selling feature.
So, should we do nothing? Whose tolerance level for higher costs should we apply? I'm not suggesting I know the answer to that question, but how can we expect to keep everything we like about Lebo without increasing the cost to live here? Our public safety costs are considerably higher than other communities. In fact, they're huge! Should we cut those to save money? Our parks could be bulldozed for development which would raise much needed tax dollars and in turn keep future increases in check for a while. Should we do that? We could slash our teacher's salaries and eliminate the many extracurricular programs that make our district unique. Should we do that?
The high price of maintaining Mt. Lebanon existed long before the high school project.
And please, having an address in Va Manor does not equal immeasurable wealth or a lust for unchecked spending.
Dave
Dave, I was hoping you would go for that. On page seven of the pdf of the Mt. Lebanon Comprehensive Plan or page 1-3 of the very thick book that probably a handful of residents have read, it states:
The following community
development objectives were identified by Mt. Lebanon as the vision for the Mt. Lebanon
Comprehensive Plan.
· To provide affordable, accessible and adequate housing that will meet diverse needs
and protect the integrity and character of Mt. Lebanon neighborhoods.
That was the first bullet point. And before you ask for proof, the link is on lebocitizens.com, under "The Facts" or here Mt. Lebanon Comprehensive Plan
I would still like to hear about "the widespread criticism over that survey."
For starters about cutting costs, the School District should have listened to the MAJORITY of Mt. Lebanon residents and build what we could afford, not what we would like to have.
Dave, I can do this all day. One of the advantages to being unemployed.
Elaine
Oh for heaven's sake Elaine the 10 year old Comprehensive Report also says this:
"High cost of housing is a concern in Mt. Lebanon in addition to the level of taxes that residents pay. HOWEVER, MANY PEOPLE STATED THAT THE LEVEL OF SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE MUNICIPALITY OFFSET THIS CONCERN AND THAT THE QUALITY OF EDUCATION PROVIDED BY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT FAR OUTWEIGHS THE RATE OF TAXATION."
I couldn't find any Objective, Goal or Action Item in the Report that says stop all development and spending, hunker down and make Lebo the Blue Light Special of Allegheny County.
As for the survey, perhaps its strongest criticism stemmed from the fact that ANYONE was allowed to take the survey over and over again on the GOP website. I took it twice myself just to demonstrate/prove this flaw. There was also a bunch of criticism regarding the less than artful manner in which the questions were drafted. People much smarter than me raised that concern.
But like I said before Elaine, whatever. I'm not going to convince you.
Dave
Elaine,
Dave Franklin publicly stated on Blog Lebo that he does not feel that anyone has a right to own a home in Mt Lebanon. Dave Franklin said that home ownership is a privilege that comes with responsibilities - apparently Mr Franklin thinks that one homeowner responsibility is supporting the proclivities of the Athletic Community.
Our norms, standards, and values differ sharply from Mr Franklin. I also feel in my heart that our values are sharply different that Raja. We believe in the right to own private property and we have tremendous respect for owners of private property. Franklin stated his position; Raja voted his! Raja's horrible actions speak louder than words.
At the end of the day I thank God that I am an American, because I still have the right to own property, carry a gun, defend my home, and express my opinions in a very open and candid manner - and frankly, that's what separates America from countries like India, Egypt, Iran, etc where the values that they hold are a sharp contrast to our own.
No, you're not, Dave. But I gotta give you an A for trying.
Ten years ago, when the Comprehensive Plan came out, we were number one in education, if I remember correctly. We have since dropped to number three. And to back up that statement, you can look on lebocitizens.com for documentation. It is all there. I really don't want to keep repeating myself.
Oh, before I forget, do you remember how you voted on Raja's survey? Was it the same way both times? I want to adjust the numbers for my records.
Elaine
Mr. Kendrick, if I have a right to own a home in Mt. Lebanon, can you please help me find out if similar rights apply in Hilton Head or South Florida. That would make working and saving for it a helluva lot easier!
And perhaps you can use the same self-righteous tone to remind Elaine that the right to express one's opinions "in an open and candid manner" probably includes an SOS yard sign.
Dave
1.Dave, I have to disagree with your assumption that school board members believe that $113 million is too much to spend. Those statements at the Act 34 hearing were nothing but empty promises, known at the time by those making them to be BS. Many board members wanted to spend much more than this amount, but knew that thwy could not win a referendum so they went for the maximum allowed without a vote by residents.Well after the Act 34 hearing, at a board meeting Mr. Remely did a slight-of hand white-board presentation showing everything that would be lost if "only" $75 million was spent. What was truly amazing was how much that extra $38million gets us - it appeared to be more than half of the total project. I can't cite the source (not because I am protecting someone, but because I can't remember where I saw it) but not long ago one board member mentioned a $122 million cost, so it appears that they are going the wrong direction. How much over budget did the elementary school renovations end us costing us, and why would anyone think that this project will be managed any better?
2.John Kendrick, I bet that I am not the only person who got tired of your never ending tirade about Mr. Franklin and the "athletic community" long ago.
Joe Wertheim
Perhaps Joe, but I can't wave a wand and make this Board disappear. What I can do is task them to make good on that promise. I don't go to meetings, but believe me I let them know how I feel - as do others. I think they know the pressure they are under. If not, I'll remind them again.
Dave
John Kendrick, I heard the source of the $122,000,000 cost figure for the High School was a statement by Elaine Cappucci.
If that information is correct the deduct/ alternates will fly hot and heavy when bids come in.
Stay tuned, folks!
Dave, I'm glad that you continue to express your opinions to the board, but I'm not convinced that they feel any pressure. I am convinced that when I attempt to correspond with board members that the messages are deleted without being read, except by Ms. Posti, who is always able to point out the flaws in any argument I might make. Only time will tell what the total cost of this boondoggle will be, and my bet is it exceeds $113 million by a great deal.
Joe W
Joe S, please resubmit your comment again with your full name. Thanks.
Elaine
So how does Remely deliver on his promise to come in under $95,000,000 without raising the 2015-16-tax rate?
Where the 3rd gym?
Where is the new furniture?
Harkness tables would be nice to promote small class size and student-centered discussion and learning but I am betting the Board has not been told about that aspect of 21st century learning!
Are we going to have tennis courts?
Will we still have a tennis team?
Bring in the whole project under the $95,000.000 limit with the cost at $122,000,000? You are kidding, right?
We got a glimpse of what could happen when Remely wanted to plan on 2 gyms but Birks wasn't going to allow him to cut her deadbeat Blue Devil buddies plans.
I don't think the Board can make the $95,000,000 limit without poking the union, the special-interest parents, or other staff.
Please sign your comments with your first and last name, so that I can publish them. Thanks.
Elaine Gillen
I've received a variety of emails suggesting how I should respond to Mr. Kendrick's last comment. Some from people I don't even know.
However, I've elected not to lower myself to his level. I do find it fascinating though how some folks expect a level of conduct, courtesy and decorum from their neighbors and elected officials, but have no similar expectations of themselves.
Yes Mr Franklin, it is quite shocking. I suppose that is why they email you...8)
Post a Comment