The restaurateurs and bar owners opposed to Allegheny County's 10 percent drink tax yesterday challenged Chief Executive Dan Onorato to a series of public debates, saying he's trying to portray them as property tax raisers.

"This is really about drink tax versus real leadership," said Kevin Joyce, proprietor of The Carlton restaurant.

Flanked by a number of his colleagues in the group Friends Against Counterproductive Taxation, Mr. Joyce said that Mr. Onorato has declined to debate him in public on issues not only concerning the drink tax, but about the county's finances.

"[Mr. Onorato] doesn't want to engage with us at the same table. But we're not going anywhere. We're going to be fighting at every step and in every election until we repeal this tax," said Mr. Joyce.

He added that Mr. Onorato has canceled two television appearances where both men were scheduled to debate the drink tax in recent weeks.

But Kevin Evanto, Mr. Onorato's spokesman, disputed the contention, saying that "the chief executive will debate anyone on this issue because he is committed to not raising property taxes."

Noting that Mr. Joyce and his colleagues are a small number of people in the local hospitality industry who are fighting the drink tax, Mr. Evanto said Mr. Onorato would participate in debates on the drink tax because "it will be an opportunity to correct the misinformation [about the drink tax] being put out there."

As the fight over the drink tax continues, players on both sides of the levy claim the other side is misinforming the public on how the drink tax came to pass and why it is needed. FACT has filed a lawsuit and is collecting signatures in an attempt to hold a referendum on the issue in November.

Standing in a dimly lit corner of The Carlton restaurant yesterday, Michele Burchfield, executive director of FACT, outlined the "top 10 untruths," that Mr. Onorato and supporters of the drink tax have put forward since the levy was proposed and approved last year.

"The untruths have been mounting, and this is the first installment of our challenges to Dan Onorato," said Ms. Burchfield, claiming that Mr. Onorato has never fully disclosed how he went about securing enabling legislation from the state Legislature to implement the drink tax and a $2-a-day tax on car rentals.

Among the key untruths, Ms. Burchfield said, is that Mr. Onorato has sought to portray opponents of the drink tax -- which he implemented as part of a dedicated funding stream for the county's $30 million subsidy of the Port Authority -- as being in favor of a property tax increase.

"A property tax increase is not necessary or likely. Several alternatives have been identified ... in meetings with Dan Onorato and his allies on [County] Council, none of whom ever mentioned a property tax increase," said Ms. Burchfield.

Mr. Evanto said he has transcripts from County Council hearings last year at which Mr. Joyce encouraged council to raise property taxes rather than impose a drink tax.

Mr. Onorato, who on Tuesday announced that the county's bond rating has been upgraded by two Wall Street firms partly because of revenues from the drink tax and a $2-a-day tax on car rentals, has consistently said that if the drink tax is eliminated the county would be forced to raise property taxes by as much as 25 percent.

But Mr. Joyce and Mr. Baron yesterday cited alcohol sales figures from the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board to make their case that the drink tax is hurting small businesses in the county.

Since January, they said, the PLCB's sales to liquor license holders in Allegheny County have dropped by 4.7 percent, while the surrounding five counties have increased alcohol purchases by 6.5 percent.

"We speak for the hospitality industry here," Mr. Joyce said. "This drink tax is hurting our business in Allegheny County."