A day after Allegheny County Chief Executive Dan Onorato said the 10 percent drink tax is here to stay, County Councilman Chuck McCullough proposed legislation to scale it down and then eliminate it.

"The power to tax is the power to destroy. The drink tax is destroying the tavern industry in Allegheny County," Mr. McCullough, an at-large Republican from Upper St. Clair, said yesterday.

He proposed to scale the drink tax down to 5 percent by July 1 and then repeal it in January because initial returns show the levy is on pace to exceed the $28 million it was expected to raise.

Implemented together with a $2-a-day tax on car rentals this year, the drink tax is part of a dedicated funding structure for the county's $30 million subsidy of the Port Authority.

Both levies, were estimated to collect $32 million in revenue when they were approved within the county's $727.6 million budget.

Yesterday, Mr. McCullough said the drink tax alone is on pace to bring in more than $40 million in revenue based on receipts of the first three months of the levy.

By reducing the drink tax from 10 percent to 5 percent in July, Mr. McCullough said the annualized rate of the drink tax will be 7.5 percent, "which will clearly generate more than the $28 million budgeted for the Port Authority."

On Thursday, Mr. Onorato said he would not adjust or eliminate the drink tax because its opponents have not shown him a "serious alternative" to the levy that would not include raising the county's property tax rate by up to 25 percent.

Yesterday, Kevin Joyce, proprietor of The Carlton restaurant and other members of the lobby, Friends Against Counterproductive Taxation, said Mr. Onorato has essentially "declared war on us."

"He is trying to pit the hospitality industry against homeowners by telling them that without the drink tax, their property taxes will go up," Mr. Joyce said.

"The fight is on," Mr. Joyce added.

The lawsuit, which members of FACT are asking the court to certify as a class action on behalf of all liquor license holders in the county, is one step of what is unfolding as "a political fight," he said.

Mr. McCullough argues that the county should look to other cost-saving and revenue-generating measures such as downsizing county government, privatizing Pittsburgh International Airport, the Allegheny County Sanitary Authority, and the Port Authority.

The county should look to other revenue sources, instead of using the excesses of the drink tax to fund itself, Mr. McCullough said because "it was never meant to subsidize other county operations."

Mr. Onorato has consistently said that his critics, who call for downsizing government and using other measures to create other funding instead of the drink tax, don't have an appreciation for the county's financial woes.

"Many people keep telling me to lay off county workers or let the Port Authority raise fees to get the $30 million it needs. But that is ridiculous," he said. "You can't cut government or raise fees to the tune of $30 million like the drink tax will give us every year."

By his own measure, Mr. McCullough conceded yesterday that his proposal will face an uphill battle on County Council, where he is one of four Republicans on a 15-member panel whose Democrats supported the drink tax.

In December, council rejected legislation that sought to repeal the drink and car rental tax, even before both levies were implemented in January.

"This is the first day of the sales pitch," Mr. McCullough said. "I hope that I will start a dialogue with my brethren on council to scale down this drink tax and then repeal it next year."