Pittsburgh is faced with major financial problems; among them is an underfunded pension plan for municipal workers. Many other cities face similar financial troubles with pension funds and structural deficits that might require major operational changes. Butler is among the many cities facing pension and broader financial troubles.

To ease Pittsburgh's problem, Mayor Luke Ravenstahl backs a plan to sell a 50-year lease on all of the city's parking garages and lots. The highest bid, from a group headed by Wall Street firm JPMorgan Asset Management, is offering the city a lump sum payment of $452 million.

A study by Pittsbugh's city council says the parking operations would earn $2.4 billion over the 50 years of the lease.

JPMorgan and its partner, LAZ Parking Ltd., say while parking rates will go up, there will be major investments in upgraded parking garages, adding conveniences and also creation of an additional 1,800 parking spaces. An engineering firm says some city parking garages are structurally deficient and require major improvements or razing.

Ravenstahl wants to put $200 million from the deal into the troubled pension funds and is pushing the council to approve the deal by Nov. 1.

The wisdom of such a deal should be studied carefully. In August, Businessweek magazine published an article titled "A windfall for investors, a loss for Chicago" about a similar deal in which that city sold a 75-year lease for all city parking buildings and 36,000 meters to a group led by Wall Street investment bank Morgan Stanley for $1.15 billion in 2008.

The latest analysis suggests the investors will make a profit of $9.58 billion on the deal over 75 years. It's estimated that the city will lose out on $11.6 billion in revenue in exchange for that one-time cash infusion of $1.15 billion.

Was it worth it? Most analysts say no. Chicago city officials defend the deal as the best option at the time, saying the $11.6 billion is about equal to the value of $1.15 billion over 75 years.

Other officials call the deal "dubious," saying a fair price would have been $2.13 billion.

Given Chicago's experience, Pittsburgh officials should be careful before entering into the JP Morgan deal. The mayor appears desperate to plug a pension fund shortfall and that desperation might put JPMorgan into a position of being able to get the city's parking assets at a fire-sale price.

No matter what is decided in Pittsburgh, this parking-lease proposal is part of an effort to correct the city's financial woes.

Despite failures to make progress on the expenses side of the equation, Pittsburgh is grappling with its financial crisis. Can the same be said for Butler?

What have Butler officials done in the past few months since the city's dire financial situation made front-page news?

Has the city formed a financial advisory committee to study the books, including all budget items and public safety expenditures as well as pension and insurance costs? Something similar was done at the county level in 2008 and that effort was helpful in bringing about some change. Getting outside guidance is no guarantee of a fix, but neither is it admission of shortcomings on the part of city leaders. The city faces serious problems, and having extra eyes and brains exploring possible solutions could be helpful.

City officials should be visible in their efforts to explain to taxpayers what can be done to bring city finances under better control — to either cut expenses, find ways to increase revenues without burdening taxpayers, or both.

Butler has faced a structural deficit for the past four years, but the sense of urgency such a situation deserves is not yet evident. Officials are now working on the budget, but there should be simultaneous, and visible, efforts to address the city's long-term problems.