HARRISBURG -- Area lawmakers are at odds over a proposal to shift about $1.6 million in funding from Allegheny County libraries, recreation and cultural programs to fund Pittsburgh tourism.

The hotly debated proposal passed through the House Urban Affairs Committee last week on a 15-7 vote.

Sponsored by state Rep. Thomas Petrone, D-Crafton Heights, the bill calls for VisitPittsburgh, Allegheny County's official tourism agency, to get 2 percent of funds that the Allegheny Regional Asset District receives each year as its share of the county sales tax.

The 1 percent tax raises about $155 million a year. Half of that revenue goes to the asset district. The rest goes to the county and municipal governments for tax reductions and intergovernmental cooperation programs.

Rep. John Maher, R-Upper St. Clair, opposed Mr. Petrone's bill, saying libraries and parks, particularly those outside the city, need all the funding they receive.

Beverly Morrow-Jones, VisitPittsburgh's director of marketing and communications, declined to comment on the bill and would not say how the agency would spend the additional money.

Its annual report shows the agency took in $10.9 million in revenue last year and spent $9.5 million on convention services, marketing and its Web site. Most of its revenue, $5.8 million, came from the county hotel tax while $2.4 million came from state tourism and regional marketing grants. Other income sources include advertising and merchandise sales.

Mr. Petrone said the proposed 2 percent share of the asset district's allocation would provide a dedicated source of revenue that would ensure VisitPittsburgh's future.

That shouldn't come at the expense of groups currently being funded by the asset district, said asset district Executive Director David Donahoe.

"It surprises me that people think monies should come from parks and libraries to help tourism when they already get a huge amount of funding from the hotel tax," Mr. Donahoe said.

That concerns Mr. Maher, too.

Mr. Petrone's legislation would "take money away from the arts and away from community efforts to fund VisitPittsburgh, when I haven't seen any evidence that Visit Pittsburgh needs $1.5 million," he said during last week's committee meeting.

VisitPittsburgh is eligible to apply for funding through the asset district, just like the 104 other groups did last year, Mr. Donahoe said. About 80 of them received funding.

Mr. Petrone's bill would allow VisitPittsburgh to skirt requirements other groups have to meet, Mr. Donahoe said.

"It stands what we do on its ear," he said. "It would give one organization preference. Everyone else who comes to us has to submit an application to us, appear before us, prove their case and submit reports on what they did with the money."

In 2001, the tourism agency applied for $500,000 in funding to develop a Web site and photo bank, but its request was denied, Mr. Donahoe said.

This year, the asset district funded such organizations as the Allegheny County Library Association, City Theater, New Hazlett Theater, Pittsburgh Opera, Silver Eye Center for Photography, the Western Pennsylvania Conservancy, the August Wilson Center for African American Culture, the Sports & Exhibition Authority, the Pittsburgh Symphony Society, the Pittsburgh Zoo and Renziehausen Park in McKeesport.

If Mr. Petrone's bill passes, funding would be reduced for some or all of those groups, Mr. Donahoe said.

"Two percent of our budget is a lot of money, and it would have to come from somewhere. There would have to be decisions made about who is going to lose funding," he said.

Mr. Petrone's bill also would increase the size of the seven-member Regional Asset District governing board by adding members appointed by state legislative leaders and change the status of a governor's appointee to the board from nonvoting to voting.

Currently, six voting members are appointed by the mayor and county chief executive, and they elect a seventh member.

Mr. Maher said the change would allow the state to usurp local control over taxes collected in the county.

"It's a power grab, nothing more," he said.

Mr. Donahoe said he was not consulted about the bill.

"I don't understand the motivation for such dramatic changes," he said. "We were created to provide a secure and stable source of funding to parks, libraries and organizations previously funded by the city and county. We've made significant improvements at the zoo and the aviary. I think we've carried out our mission."