Allegheny County Executive Dan Onorato and Pittsburgh Mayor Luke Ravenstahl yesterday announced plans to implement in the city and county a comprehensive campaign finance law that they say is unlike any other in Pennsylvania.

The legislation, which they plan to introduce to the city and county councils on Thursday, would take effect in January 2010 if it is approved by both councils and then signed into law. Right now, there are no contribution limits.

Much like federal campaign finance guidelines, this law would limit personal donations to political campaigns to $4,600 per election cycle and Political Action Committees donations up to $10,000 per cycle -- or per four-year period.

The proposed law also would prohibit candidates from using money from before the law goes into effect for future campaigns. That money can be used to support other candidates or causes, or their own bids for higher office outside Allegheny County.

"We hope that we can create an even playing field when it comes to financing local elections," said Mr. Onorato. City and county officials are still reviewing the proposed law, however, to determine how it will deal with the so-called "millionaire's exception" -- wealthy individuals who may choose to self-fund their political campaigns.

Mr. Ravenstahl said he supports the proposal since it would apply to city and county candidates and include provisions for self-financed campaigns.

"I believe this is a strong piece of legislation and it answers a lot of the questions I had when I vetoed the city version of the campaign finance bill," he said.

Mr. Ravenstahl vetoed proposed campaign contribution limits in June, arguing they would curtail labor union political action committee donations while leaving untouched the ability of wealthy people who run for office to pour unlimited amounts of their personal fortunes into their campaigns.

Yesterday, the mayor's aides argued that the new bill addresses that, by requiring that any "millionaire candidate" declares the intention to personally fund a race early on, which would lift contribution caps for others. Allowing both individual and political action committee contributions to rise if a rich candidate enters a race keeps labor from being marginalized, they said.

City Council supporters of last year's campaign finance reform bill were skeptical of the motives behind the emerging bill.

"I haven't read of such a great conversion since St. Paul's journey to Damascus," said Councilman William Peduto, author of last year's vetoed bill. "Six months ago, campaign finance reform was ridiculed."

He said he would oppose any proposed limits that were higher than those in other cities and media markets the size of Pittsburgh, and wants a "provision that anyone who contributes to an elected official's campaign would be barred from receiving any no-bid contracts."

"I want stronger [reforms], and I will go directly to the people of the city of Pittsburgh to get it," he said, promising a referendum drive to put campaign caps on the ballot if the legislation isn't tough enough.

County Councilman Vince Gastgeb, R-Bethel Park, aired similar sentiments, arguing that campaign finance reform needs to be coupled with efforts to end pay-to-play practices in local government.

"I think we're missing the boat. You could limit contributions, but we should be looking at who is making the donations and who is getting no-bid city and county contracts," said Mr. Gastgeb.

Mr. Onorato and Mr. Ravenstahl said they will only sign onto an identical law for the city and county.

"We're looking forward to seeing the bill," said County Council President Rich Fitzgerald. "There's no question we need some kind of campaign finance reform."

"I don't understand how the mayor can be against campaign finance reform, and all of a sudden be for it," said Council President Doug Shields, who is considering a mayoral bid. "It sounds to me like somebody has been reading poll data out there."

Philadelphia -- which is a combined city and county -- passed campaign finance reform that survived court challenges and got the state Supreme Court's stamp of approval in late 2007. The first candidate to embrace the limits in that city's 2007 mayoral race was Michael Nutter, and he won.

The Philadelphia law allows candidates to take no more than $2,600 a year from any individual, and $10,600 a year from any political action committee. Like the emerging local proposal, it bars candidates from using war chests they built up prior to the legislation's passage.

Its version of the "millionaire's exception" holds that if someone puts $250,000 or more of their own money into a race, the campaign contribution caps on other candidates in that race double, so they can take $5,200 from individuals and $21,200 from PACs.

In 2007, a competitor put in millions of dollars of personal wealth into the Democratic mayoral primary contest, but Mr. Nutter won it anyway. Philadelphia also bars anyone who contributes at the top level from getting no-bid city contracts.

"The two bills working together have had the effect of driving pay-to-play out of government," said Zack Stalberg, president and CEO of the Committee of Seventy, a reform group. "It definitely looks like it's gone a long way toward cleaning up the political environment in Philadelphia."

Los Angeles limits contributions to citywide candidates at $1,000 in the primary and $1,000 in the general election, and council candidates can only take $500 per election.

If someone puts more than $30,000 in personal funds into a campaign checking account, other candidates in that race can then take contributions above the normal limits in a matching amount.