Pennsylvania's experience already has demonstrated that Gov. Ed Rendell's goal of increasing the amount of solar-generated power statewide, from just 0.5 percent to 1.5 percent by 2021, is very doable.

A recent installation of a 40,000-panel solar array at Pocono International Raceway, for example, provides enough power for that sprawling sports complex and for 1,000 nearby homes.

An array planned for Carbon County would be the state's largest, providing power for 1,500 homes.

Increased solar generation alone will not eliminate the need for power produced with fossil fuels or by nuclear fission. But it is far more reliable than many people think, and during hot weather it is especially valuable in meeting demand.

Solar produces no greenhouse gas emissions and, as the governor argues, it can help to drive the state's economy. More than 600 companies in the commonwealth produce, distribute or sell and install solar power systems.

Alternative energy development is a growing industry that the state would be wise to continue to support. Penn State University has a $129 million federal grant to develop energy-efficient buildings, and many universities across the state are engaged in energy research.

The Legislature should join the governor in driving that industry by adopting the new solar energy standard.

At the same time, they have not attempted to assess the value of the services provided by those institutions to the community. And in the case of the University of Scranton, which some members of Scranton City Council seem to view as a potential cash cow, politicians have scoffed at or ignored the institution's own analysis of its economic contribution to the city and region.

But there are two sides to every ledger. Any attempt to extract payments or, in the case of the U of S higher payments, from nonprofit institutions must include an analysis of the value of the services they provide.

While members of city council and the Scranton School Board have attempted to calculate the value of property acquired by the university, for example, they have not weighed that against the institution's contribution to the local economy - valued by the school at more than $400 million a year - or the value of other contributions.

Since 2007 the Leahy Clinic at the U of S, for example, has provided millions of dollars worth of free medical care to uninsured local residents - large numbers of them from Scranton - at no cost to the city or any other government.

And what of services provided by nonprofits that otherwise would have to be provided by some level of the government? Is the average city taxpayer more comfortable with a trauma center operated by the tax-exempt Community Medical Center or the city government?

Tax-exempt institutions are indeed a service burden for the city government. But there are examples large and small of how they mitigate that burden, from thousands of service hours contributed by high school and college students to city residents through medical, social and community services performed at no costs to the government.

It is inherently unfair that city taxpayers bear the costs of nonprofit services that serve a substantially broader area, but it's also true that the city reaps the major share of the economic activity generated by many of those institutions.

The best way to spread those costs is through shared services among governments and initiative that promote growth in Scranton. But, since Scranton City Council has rejected cooperative planning with 10 other communities in Lackawanna County, its apparent preference is to attempt to shake down the institutions themselves.

Before it attempts to do so, it at least should conduct a comprehensive analysis of the institutions' contributions, rather than lamenting costs alone.

The 70 proposed fee increases, across the broad spectrum of registration and license classes, are projected to generate about $434 million a year.

Increases would be significant and would be felt by individual motorists and companies. But, for the most part, they represent the first increases in most fees in a minimum of 13 years and, in some cases, for up to 30 years. The increases are calculated to match the increases in inflation that have occurred since the last time each fee increased.

The largest vehicle class is passenger cars, for which the annual registration fees would climb to $49 from the current $36, producing $100 million a year in revenue. Truck registration increases would produce another $100 million.

Fee increases are among the fairest way to ensure that the costs of improving highways and bridges are spread as fairly as possible. Another is through a modest gasoline tax increase, which is not on the table, even though a final tax package might include a modest increase in the tax on the wholesale price of oil products.

Such increases always are unwelcome among hard-pressed residents, but they must be weighed against the vast economic costs of neglected infrastructure and the impact of inflation on making the repairs while the fees have remained stable.

The issue is not whether to increase the revenue for infrastructure safety; it's how to do so as fairly as possible. The fee increases are a good step that lawmakers should approve.

A host of transportation issues, including stabilizing the state's struggling mass transit systems, will have to wait for a new legislative term, when politicians have a two-year comfort zone.

One issue that should be on the table is allowing local mass transit agencies to collect nominal fares from older passengers, who now ride for free due to subsides from the state lottery.

Under the free-ride mass transit program, and another program that subsidizes door-to-door service for older riders, the lottery provides about $155 million a year in subsidies. Any Pennsylvanian 65 and over is eligible for free transit rides.

Lawmakers should authorize transit agencies to establish modest, capped fares in addition to the lottery subsidies.

Transit agencies statewide provide about 115,000 free rides each day to older residents. Enabling those agencies to collect even 50 cents per ride would help alleviate the pressure to maintain service and fund improvements.

The concept already is in place for some aspects of transit. Older residents or sponsoring agencies pay 15 percent of the cost of the shared-ride program, and older residents pay $1 per ticket to use commuter rail lines. Establishing modest fares for all transit would more fairly distribute the agencies' costs, and boost their revenue without excessively driving up fares for all other riders.

Older residents receive free rides now because many are on limited incomes. But many other riders who pay full fares also are on limited incomes, including low-wage workers and students.

Back in 1993, the County of Lackawanna Transit System asked older riders to contribute, voluntarily, by dropping any amount they chose into the fare box. Many of them responded until the state curtailed the practice because it violated the lottery subsidy rules.

The Legislature should allow local transit agencies to charge older riders a fixed percentage of the local full fare without jeopardizing lottery income. Doing so will preserve service while fairly distributing its costs.

The suit, filed Monday against Lackawanna County and its stadium authority, is based on a 1986 agreement between the counties. Luzerne County put up $1 million, half of the money needed to acquire the International League franchise that became the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Red Barons and now, the SWB Yankees. Lackawanna County put up the other half.

That agreement does not confer any ownership rights upon Luzerne County, however, making it a very shrewd deal by the former Luzerne County commissioners.

Because the county did not have an ownership stake, it also did not have ownership responsibilities. While the issue at the time of the agreement was distribution of potential profit from the enterprise, over the years Lackawanna County taxpayers have borne substantial costs associated with the team and stadium for a very good reason - the Lackawanna County Multi-Purpose Stadium Authority owns both. Luzerne County has no seats on that authority's board of directors, and no say in operating the franchise or the stadium - hardly the posture of an owner. Financing obtained by the authority has been based on two revenue streams: income from the franchise and Lackawanna County's taxation power.

Lackawanna County on hook

Over the last several years, Lackawanna County taxpayers have paid off the last portion of the stadium's construction debt, installed two new fields and built several new structures at the stadium, including a state-of-the art home clubhouse. According to the Lackawanna County commissioners, the stadium authority owes the county government between $13 million and $15 million.

Rather than sharing in ownership, the Luzerne County commissioners in 1986 struck a deal by which the county contributed to the purchase of the franchise, but not to the construction or operation of a stadium - costs of which were left to Lackawanna County.

The only consideration in the deal was that Luzerne and Lackawanna counties would equally share proceeds from any sale of the franchise.

"In the event that the professional baseball franchise above is sold ... LA (Lackawanna) and LU (Luzerne) shall share equally in the distribution of any such proceeds ...," the agreement states.

Now the valuable franchise could be sold to a consortium of Mandalay Baseball Properties and the New York Yankees for as little as $13 million. The current Lackawanna commissioners claim that sale proceeds first would have to be used to cover the stadium authority's debt to the county government, but that does not account for the original deal with Luzerne County, which has not been altered in any way since its inception.

Lackawanna County likely will contend that "proceeds" means net proceeds after payment of debt, but the agreement refers only to proceeds.

Bad deal even without split

Selling the franchise for $13 million would be a lousy deal even if Lackawanna County could keep all of the money. If it has to give up $6.5 million, which is highly likely given the unambiguous wording of the 1986 agreement, the deal is utterly preposterous.

Attorney John McGee, the driving force behind the rebirth of pro baseball here who negotiated the 1986 agreement between the counties, wants the stadium authority to file an anti-trust suit in an effort to block the franchise sale.

Meanwhile the current Lackawanna commissioners, who originally vowed not to sell the franchise, appear to be negotiating to do just that. Their objective seems to be a comprehensive agreement with the Yankees consortium that would result in a franchise sale, with proceeds going to a rebuilt or new stadium, aided by $20 million pledged by Gov. Ed Rendell.

The statutory deadline for an anti-trust suit falls in September. The sale deadline at the $13 million price is Oct. 1, after which it rises to $14.6 million.

Now the Luzerne County suit adds a further time issue, in that Mr. Rendell will leave office in January.

So it's decision time. The best result is retention of public ownership of the franchise, the only way to ensure its continued presence in Northeast Pennsylvania.

The plight of 33 miners in a Chilean copper mine is especially harrowing. Trapped since early August in a cavern a half mile below the surface, the men might not be freed until Christmas.

So far the crew has shown a remarkable collective resilience that bodes well for the long ordeal ahead.

As the miners and their families endure, they are in the thoughts and prayers of people in areas around the world that too well know the perils of mining, including Northeast Pennsylvania.

It's a lesson that several local governments should take to heart in several different ways.

The nonprofit agency uses state and federal funds to rehabilitate houses in blighted neighborhoods and then sells them, usually to low-income buyers. So far in Scranton, the agency has sold 30 rehabilitated houses, helping to establish bulwarks against blight in neighborhoods and increasing the city's tax rolls by $12,000 a year.

It also has rehabilitated 24 houses in Carbondale and Plymouth.

Some of the rehabilitated houses are in South Scranton, where United Neighborhood Centers Inc. has targeted 10 properties on and near Cedar Avenue for redevelopment, under a similar program.

Scranton City Council, which wants nonprofit agencies to make payments in lieu of taxes to the city government, should take note that nonprofits such as the two housing agencies contribute much more through their work than they ever could afford to pay directly to the government. Whereas council has focused on the University of Scranton - the largest of the nonprofits and the only one to make a substantial annual payment in lieu of taxes - the housing agencies demonstrate that nonprofits are not a one-size-fits-all proposition.

Council and the Lackawanna County commissioners also should note the substantial physical progress that has been spawned by the housing programs, and end their opposition to a major project proposed by the Doherty administration and the Scranton Public Library, which would accelerate that progress.

The proposal is to construct a new, $17 million library headquarters on Cedar Avenue, about three blocks from the downtown.

A new headquarters for the library is well-warranted based on the library's own performance and needs. Putting it on Cedar Avenue would have the added benefit of providing a major institutional anchor for the stressed neighborhood. That would enhance the work already being done to arrest blight by providing a high-traffic catalyst for further business development and housing rehabilitation.

Members of city council who - rhetorically, at least - profess to be champions of the city neighborhoods have opposed the project primarily because the administration backs it.

The county commissioners cite budgetary concerns for their refusal to consider a modest increase in the dedicated library tax in furtherance of the project. Lackawanna County has one of the state's best public library systems because several predecessor administrations took just that risk. Those risks panned out because they were able to demonstrate to taxpayers that the dedicated tax produced true value. Participating in the new library project would have the same result.

The situation has not produced any problems and, largely because the Democratic governor is not about to bestow any true power upon a Republican lieutenant governor, the post in effect has been empty.

One result of the situation is that the office's cost to the taxpayers has declined from about $1 million a year under Ms. Knoll to less than $200,000 a year under Mr. Scarnati.

That, in turn, has some members of the Legislature talking about eliminating the lieutenant governor's office. Rep. Seth Grove, a York County Republican, has introduced a bill for such a constitutional amendment. He would simply have the president pro tem of the Senate replace a governor who cannot finish a term.

This indeed is a good time to discuss the lieutenant governor's office, but in terms of structure rather than elimination.

First, the governor is elected by all Pennsylvanians while the president pro tem of the Senate is elected only in his senatorial district. The person who replaces a governor midterm also should be elected statewide.

In order to make the lieutenant governor's office more relevant, the Legislature should move to change how the lieutenant governor is elected. After the primary, the nominees of each party should select a running mate. That would ensure, at least, that the governor's replacement is of the same party, keeping with the expressed wishes of the voters.

The method also would help to ensure some geographical and other diversity at the top of the ticket, since the gubernatorial nominee obviously would attempt to use the pick to expand the ticket's appeal.

Lawmakers also could mandate some constitutional duties for the lieutenant governor, beyond serving as president of the Senate. Several lieutenant governors have headed the state's emergency response preparedness, for example, which could become a mandated duty.

The issues isn't just cost, but value. Ensuring that the voters select their governor is reason enough to keep the position. Lawmakers should seek to increase its day-to-day relevance.

It seems more certain, however, that the pressure of the campaign has gotten to Mr. Kanjorski's Republican opponent, Lou Barletta.

After Mr. Kanjorski's announcement about the possible State Department facility in Luzerne County, which would create up to 1,000 jobs, Mr. Barletta announced that he is against it. His concern, he said, is the potential for the facility to include explosives and firearms training that could be noisy and dangerous for neighbors. He noted that the State Department is looking for a site because its first choice, in Maryland, was rejected because of the potential for noise.

Someone on Mr. Barletta's staff should tell him that there is an Army base already in the district, which also is the region's largest employer.

Assuming that Mr. Kanjorski is not just blowing campaign smoke, Mr. Barletta ought to at least take a look at any plans that result before opposing such a project. Northeast Pennsylvania's unemployment rate is over 10 percent; it's possible that some accommodation can be made to mitigate potential noise in pursuit of 1,000 permanent jobs.

Mr. Kanjorski, as Mr. Barletta said, has pursued some projects that have not come to pass - an inflatable dam on the Susquehanna River, thankfully; and a magnetically levitated high-speed train to the New York area, unfortunately.

But, at least the guy's thinking. Pie in the sky beats a pie in the face.

Most debris is long gone. New Orleans is now surrounded by a $15 billion system of levees and flood walls designed to protect the city against the conditions caused by Hurricane Katrina, which put 80 percent of it under water. Some new housing sprouts amid the barren lots of devastated neighborhoods in towns all along Katrina's path.

There remains no telling how long it might take for the region to fully recover from the economic, cultural and psychological damage wrought not just by the storm and its floods, but by the dismal governmental response.

Whether governments at all levels have learned from the Katrina disaster will be known for certain, unfortunately, only by their responses to another major disaster. But federal advanced planning certainly has improved, and officials at all levels know the need for communication and cooperation.

And there are long-term issues yet to be resolved. Flood protection lies not just with new man-made barriers, but with restoration of natural barriers that have been eliminated to facilitate industry and shipping in the region. The recent gulf oil disaster further highlighted the need to restore those barrier islands, marshes and swamps.

The scope of the Katrina disaster ensured that there would be no instantaneous recovery. Five years out, the results remain mixed.

At a meeting last week, several current and former board members helpfully provided an answer to that question: they didn't read the contract.

And not only didn't they read the contract, they voted on it before it was even complete.

As it turns out, the contract made for extremely interesting, if expensive, reading. It lifted caps that had been placed on Dr. Rosetti's accrued vacation and sick days, allowing him to claim accumulated time over the course of 40 years, at his current pay rate of $663 per day.

The deal also included a provision that enabled Dr. Rosetti to claim, in addition to the accrued days atop his $10,000 monthly pension, anything that was included in the NEIU teachers contract. So, he claimed an early retirement incentive calculated at $143,000. The board - with the single exception of Louise Brzuchalski, a CPA and member of the Abington Heights School Board - failed to notice a somewhat significant detail: Dr. Rosetti had not retired early and, therefore, was not entitled to the early-retirement incentive.

The board since has rescinded that $143,000, leaving Dr. Rosetti with a parting gift of "only" $480,000, even though the NEIU administration has yet to provide details on the accumulation of that fund while issuing payments to Dr. Rosetti of more than $427,000.

There are elements of active and passive menace in the situation. Even though many board members did not read the contract or ask questions about it, someone in the administration and on the board had to craft it. Taxpayers should know, in detail, how the contract came to be. Ideally, the state auditor general will get an answer.

Generally, the exposed incompetence of the NEIU board calls for sweeping reforms. The board agreed last week to tape its future meetings for the sake of an accurate record, which falls into the category of ... well, duh.

It also should adopt specific rules mandating introduction of proposed contracts and other crucial business at one meeting, in the form of complete publications, and passage at a subsequent meeting. That would provide interested parties - theoretically even board members - a chance to actually read the information.

The NEIU should mandate searches for executives that look beyond the current administrative suite, actually evaluate current executives' performance and enact policies against nepotism.

This isn't a situation that calls for the board and administration to hunker down until the scandal passes. It's a cry for sweeping reforms that the board must enact.

While the fundamental debate about execution often is framed around the question of whether the state has the moral authority to conduct executions, the practical issue is whether the death penalty fairly can be applied.

Now, for example, Pennsylvania lawmakers are considering whether judges, rather than juries, should decide whether an intellectually challenged defendant should be exposed to execution.

The debate arises from a U.S. Supreme Court decision, eight years ago, that criminals with mental disabilities may not be executed for their crimes.

It's up to states how to implement that prohibition, and Pennsylvania still has not decided. A bill proposed by Sen. Mary Jo White, a Venango County Republican, would transfer responsibility from juries to judges, who would decide on the defendant's mental capacity prior to the trial.

She contends there is little sense in adding to the expense of a trial by putting the death penalty question to a jury that ultimately decides on life imprisonment due to the defendant's mental condition.

It would indeed be less expensive for a judge to rule in advance, but it's not clear that such a method would best serve justice. A jury given the awesome responsibility of determining guilt or innocence also should be capable of ruling on the punishment. And while a judge presumably is an expert on the law, that does not necessarily ensure a superior decision regarding the degree of a defendant's mental incapacity.

The issue is one of many examples of the doubt inherent in the ultimate, irreversible punishment. That doubt does not lie primarily in the question of whether the defendant is guilty or innocent, even though more than two dozen condemned convicts subsequently have been found innocent.

Greater doubt lies in the system's ability to ensure fair consideration of the death penalty. Rather than tinkering around the edges, lawmakers should be talking about the innumerable variables from case to case that put one inmate on death row while another, convicted of the same crime under similar circumstances, is spared.

A plan announced this week by Al Flora, Luzerne County chief public defender, is a major advancement.

Mr. Flora plans to establish a multi-disciplinary, juvenile-specific unit that would be well-suited to precluding the abuses that occurred during the tenures of former Judges Michael T. Conahan and Mark A. Ciavarella Jr.

The unit will include three full-time assistant public defenders, a social worker, an investigator and a secretary.

That represents a vast departure from the era in which Mr. Ciavarella ran roughshod over juvenile defendants' rights. Juveniles often appeared in court without counsel as public defenders and prosecutors stood by, watching the renegade judge ship teenagers off to jail at a rate far higher than in any other jurisdiction in the commonwealth. Meanwhile, he and Mr. Conahan allegedly collected $2.8 million in kickbacks from developers of privately run juvenile detention centers.

More broadly, the new unit recognizes the fundamental philosophy that should govern juveniles. The objective is to keep as many juveniles as possible out of detention, and to help them get on paths to productive citizenship.

"Our goals are high. … No child in this county will ever be denied or lose the right of representation when charges are filed against them," Mr. Flora declared.

Mr. Flora's approach is a serious answer to the question of how the court system would right its own ship. It deserves support from all quarters of the county government and court system.

While attending to vital business - hiring a lawyer to deal with anticipated civil rights litigation arising from the incident and asking for an investigation by the state Department of Corrections - the board failed to correct a blunder by the prison administration after the assault.

After the beating the Rev. William Pickard, who conducts a prison ministry, attempted to see the injured inmate, Nicholas Pinto, in the intensive care unit at Community Medical Center. There, corrections officers prevented him from seeing Mr. Pinto.

Remarkably, Warden Janine Donate then banned Father Pickard from visiting the prison itself because, she said, there is an investigation into whether he "pushed" a guard at CMC. Apparently, the administration is not sufficiently embarrassed. A potential assault charge against a priest would fill that deficit.

The prison board should recognize that the prison, which often is in a state of damage control, needs transparency. Father Pickard, as an advocate for inmates' safety and welfare, is an important conduit for transparency. Banning him from the jail is a means of battening the administration's hatches against outsiders.

Prison board members should get together for another 30 seconds and direct Ms. Donate to lift the ban on Father Pickard's visits.

Mr. Taylor is a politician by the conventional definition and the full-time elected mayor of Carbondale.

But he seeks to somehow segregate Justin Taylor, "private citizen," from Justin Taylor, politician and mayor.

The Lackawanna County commissioners were on the mark this week in precluding the mayor/private citizen from trying to establish that dual role for his own financial benefit.

Mr. Taylor, sole proprietor of Lapera-Taylor Development, applied to the county for a $1 million public loan subsidy in furtherance of a $2.5 million development project his company is pressing in Carbondale - Justin Taylor, mayor.

He was miffed when the commissioners decided not to wade into such a quagmire.

"I don't think the public could have any confidence in a program that a public official could see direct benefit from. I would think a public official would know in advance that he or she should not apply to a public program that would enrich them," said Commissioner Michael Washo.

According to Mr. Taylor, however, the commissioners are just playing politics.

"They don't like me because they're worried I'm going to run against them, so they don't want to give me a loan," Mr. Taylor said .

If the commissioners were playing politics, of course, they could have given him the loan guarantee as a means to cool his apparent ardor to run against them.

But as long as Mr. Taylor is pondering the prospect of being a commissioner, here's a question for him. Would he, as a county commissioner, approve a loan guarantee for Lapera-Taylor Development, for a project in Lackawanna County? Let's hope not.

The project is to convert a former Department Store in Carbondale into an office for a mental health services provider - an entity that receives millions of dollars of funding through the county.

Such a project might well be good for Carbondale. Mr. Taylor should find an independent private developer for it, or become one himself.

As the recall has escalated, the Senate has continued to sit on a bill to significantly improve food inspections and safety. The bill easily passed the House in July 2009 and unanimously cleared the Senate Health, Education, Welfare and Pensions Committee in November.

Inadequate elements of the 70-year-old law covering food safety are at play in the egg recall. Most of the salmonella-based illnesses reported were between May and June, but the first in a series of recalls did not begin until mid-August.

Now, the FDA lacks even the authority to mandate a recall or to access producers' records in order to help determine the severity of a particular problem.

The bill would remedy those failings. Rather than negotiating a recall with the egg producers, for example, the new bill would authorize the FDA to mandate one, saving substantial time.

The bill also would mandate inspection frequency, require "trace-back" procedures that would enable the FDA to quickly find the source of contamination, establish stronger enforcement provisions as deterrence for careless producers, provide training and grant money to state-level health officials in order to expand their inspection and enforcement capabilities, and protect industry whistleblowers who inform inspectors of a producer's unhealthy practices.

The measure does not include the other major player in food inspection and safety, the Department of Agriculture. But the enhanced FDA power will create pressure for the USDA to increase its own effectiveness.

Because the bill already has passed the House and its Senate committee, it gives Congress a rare opportunity to act almost immediately relative to a major current problem.

The Senate should act before Congress adjourns in October.

So it should be pretty clear to Scranton City Council's lawyer, Boyd Hughes, that he has a choice to make.

Mr. Hughes recently filed a lawsuit against the city government and the Scranton Sewer Authority in behalf of Olde Good Things. The company contends that action by the city in the wake of a 2007 fire further damaged its property, while the city government contends that it's not at fault.

Mr. Hughes also has represented other parties against the city government, including in one active eminent domain case against the Scranton Redevelopment Authority.

City residents have the right to expect that the lawyers in their government's employ will work for that government rather than against it.

Mr. Hughes should decide whether he wishes to work for or against the city government's interests because he can't represent both. No lawyer should be in a position of suing a government while advising that government on policy decisions.

If Mr. Hughes declines to make that decision, city council should make it for him. The situation presents council President Janet Evans, who often contends that the city's executive branch lacks integrity, to demonstrate her commitment to those principles on the legislative side.

Unfortunately, they also seem not to notice the huge increase in the student population at this time of year instead of working to make it an even larger cash cow for the private economy and, therefore, for the general tax base.

Nearly 12,000 students are enrolled this year at colleges and universities in Lackawanna County alone, including record-sized freshman classes at several institutions. Across Northeast Pennsylvania, about 50,000 students are enrolled, according to the regional association of college and university presidents.

That influx is more than a traffic jam around the campuses. It is a huge market and, too often, lost opportunity for the short and long terms.

Local governments should strive to tap economic potential inherent in so large a population. The opportunities are open-ended, from policies that support commercial and retail business development near campuses, to incentives that promote entrepreneurship. The latter, in turn, help to create long-term opportunities that convert college students into permanent, well-paid, tax-paying residents.

Several industrial areas of the Northeast have remade their economies on the "meds and eds" model, perhaps best illustrated by Pittsburgh. With a new medical school and institutions that serve every niche on the higher education spectrum, Northeast Pennsylvania is well-positioned for similar development. Local governments should help to drive the transformation by embracing the potential of local universities and their student populations, rather than worrying about shaking them down.

The tragedy led to bridge inspections nationwide. According to PennDOT, the commonwealth owns 5,646 structurally deficient bridges, the most of any state, and has more than 10,000 miles of roadway in need of repair.

Because of federal rejection of a plan to toll Interstate 80 as a means to raise revenue for highway and transit funding, the state government faces a $472 million transportation funding hole in the current and future budgets.

The I-35 bridge settlement is a reminder that the greater cost lies in inaction, but that is the course to which lawmakers seem dedicated.

Gov. Ed Rendell called a special session of the Legislature to consider transportation funding. His plan, centered on increases in vehicle registration fees and an 8 percent tax on oil companies, would raise about $1 billion a year, according to Mr. Rendell's estimate. It includes an increase in auto registration fees from $36 to $49, and increases in other vehicle fees equal to the rate of inflation since the last time they were raised. License fees, which drivers pay every four years, would rise by $4, from $21 to $25 (the $7 photo charge is unchanged).

Mr. Rendell's proposals are inherently controversial. No one likes government fee increases, all the more so in a down economy. And the oil tax, which is meant to capture revenue from companies that largely do not pay the corporate net income tax, probably would have to withstand a constitutional challenge because it also would seek to prevent the companies from passing on the cost to consumers.

But proposals they are. The Legislature thus far has offered little because the full House and half of the Senate will be on the Nov. 2 ballot. Given the state's infrastructure needs (most of the transit funding also will go to capital projects), that is an appalling lack of leadership.

Lawmakers should swallow hard and move now to fund infrastructure safety. If it doesn't, there is no guarantee that future civil court settlements over safety failures can be reached only in non-election years.

The ruling is a substantial victory for local governments across the vast Marcellus Shale gas field, in that it preserves local power regarding drilling sites. Under the case that arose in Western Pennsylvania, drillers contended the state Oil and Gas Act superseded local zoning.

While preserving local zoning power, the ruling creates a challenge for local zoners to be judicious, rather than simply restrictive, regarding drilling. The ruling does not authorize them to simply exclude drilling operations from their communities. Rather, it empowers them to regulate whether wells may be located in certain areas.

Like many industries, drilling produces harms and benefits where it occurs. It infuses money into communities and, as a result, into government treasuries. But it also creates infrastructure and environmental burdens even for community members who do not benefit from it. Mitigating those impacts is the purpose of zoning, and that local prerogative should not be waived.

Government zoners must comply with state law, which forbids them from excluding valid land uses. Drillers who believe that local officials have misused zoning regulations to preclude drilling still have recourse through the courts.

Because Pennsylvania rushed into the natural gas boom without first examining adequacy of its legal and regulatory framework, legal challenges regarding the gas enterprise are likely. It's unfortunate that much of the framework will be constructed by case law rather than forward-looking legislation and regulation, but it is encouraging that the court, in this case, has maintained some local prerogatives.