City Council Rubber-Stamps 12 **

Since it was a surprise maneuver, and I don't care for it, would it be too much to call it a Pearl Harboring?

Pittsburgh City Council divided sharply today before taking the unusual step of opting not to interview 12 nominees to city boards prior to approving them. (P-G, Rich Lord)

It's only the Planning Commission, the Zoning Board of Adjustment, and the Historic Review Commission. Nothing controversial. ;->

Voting to go without interviews, and then to approve nominees, were Ricky Burgess, Darlene Harris, Mr. Motznik, Tonya Payne and Theresa Smith. (ibid)

So much for those fantasies.

*-UPDATE: F. Dok Harris urges the Mayor to reverse "this dangerous course of action".

**-UPDATE, THE DEUX: Councilman Peduto tweets in righteous indignation:

And as much as I'd like to leave it at that, a full accounting of the record demands that I point out that he tweeted on...

Public Works Land: Open Thread

Inconsistency of personnel discipline, accusations of selective enforcement, a lack of any domestic abuse policy -- and of course the end of Guy Costa's roller-coaster ride -- go!

Think there is anything interesting about the timing of the resignation announcement and the raft of investigative reports?

RESOURCE: Busman's Holiday (Oct. '08): "Costa: I feel blindsided"

The Week in Review, Part II: Dollars and Sense

Continental Real Estate, the Henry Clay Frick to the Steelers' Andrew Carnegie, once again postponed its application to the City Planning Commission for approval of its proposed and creatively subsidized North Shore Uglitheater for another two weeks.

This time the application was pulled at around 10:30 AM Tuesday, the very day of its scheduled 2:00 PM hearing -- so North Side United members and other conscientious community objectors actually assembled at 200 Ross St., paying for parking, perhaps calling off of work, for nothing.

In response to general grumbling that this is probably being done intentionally in order to wear down opposition and dampen public interest, even a camera operator from the MSM declared, "They do this all the time! For everything like this!"

However, forty or so North Side United members had something else on their agenda -- a quick march around the corner to the City County Building so as to attempt "to demand that [the Mayor] intervene and make Continental come to the bargaining table."

Thanks to Comet ShakyVision, you can now experience the drama of the protest action in five acts:

1) Press Conference at 200 Ross St.
2) March Gets Started
3) Crossing the Rubicon from Bureaucrats to Electeds
4) As much waiting around as YouTube allows in one clip
5) A Final Thought

Mayor Ravenstahl was in meetings for the 20 - 30 minute duration and not available. Michael Glass of N.U. attempted to get an appointment on his schedule for some point in the next two weeks but was apparently unsuccessful.

Mr. Glass told the Comet that he has in fact spoken with the Mayor on two occasions in the past -- long enough to learn, in his words, that the Mayor firmly opposes pursuing any community benefits agreements in any neighborhoods, or in conjunction with any developments, at any time in the future, period.

Asked if the Mayor provided any sort of rationale for that position at the time, Glass said His Honor did not. Asked if the subject of the much-celebrated Hill District CBA arose as a counterexample, Glass quoted Ravenstahl as saying that the Hill situation was treated specially because of "a different set of circumstances" -- those being, said the Mayor according to Glass, "the history of how that land was taken from them."

Glass then asserted, "But the same thing was true on the North Side", which is an interesting proposition.

I asked mayoral spokesperson Joanna Doven about this alleged position of the Mayor on CBAs in general. After clarifying that she can't speak to a conversation at which she was not present, she said that although "the Mayor is open to discussions" with community groups, she knows he is "not in favor of resources" going to neighborhood groups as part of any deal.

##

In other news, it looks as though Walnut Capital, with the City's active assistance, is about to recieve $4 million from the State of Pennsylvania for a privately owned parking lot adjacent to its Bakery Square development.

The grant, already green-lighted by the state and by the URA, originally cleared its hurdle at City Council with a preliminary 3-1 vote with an unusual 5 abstentions -- then got "recommitted" at Final Action back to committee -- then re-won its preliminary approval by an 8-1 margin, apparently after additional urging by at least State Sen. Jim Ferlo. The politics of how this all came to pass look to be dense and multi-layered, interpersonal to an extent, and in some senses irrelevant to my own concerns.

I guess I just do not understand how such large pools of economic development cash can be so willingly deployed to large, well-financed corporate organizations for projects that are already well underway, whereas much more modest resources are explicitly forbidden from going to home-grown neighborhood organizations on many occasions. Even in the Hill District, wherein special circumstances made a formal commitment for community benefits necessary, the Hill had to scrape its few hundreds of thousands together through the generosity of BONY-Mellon together with tax credits.

Yes, projects like Bakery Square create jobs and are likely to increase the tax base. Yet wouldn't refocusing our scarce development resources instead on many more small-scale, ground-up projects accomplish that very same goal? Perhaps the jobs would even be better (these large developments excel at creating minimum wage opportunities) and would more importantly be even more empowering to Pittsburgh residents.

Walnut Capital already qualified for public Tax Increment Financing for its Bakery Square project without even the usual strings attached in regards to labor agreements. It is a fact that Walnut Capital is the City of Pittsburgh's number one campaign contributor, and that one of its two owners, Todd Reidbord, sets development policy as a senior member of the City Planning Commission.

Talk about a special set of circumstances - to me that seems like a few too many overlapping layers of involvement all at once. Campaign donations are what they are, but if it were up to me, Mr. Reidbord could get his enormous government grants whilst ordinary Pittsburghers cry out for basic assistance, OR he could remain on the Planning Commission as a policymaker -- but not do all three things at once.

As Peter Griffin might say, that's just morbidly obese.

Thursday: The Week in Review, Pt. 1

Hola, amigos. I know it's been a long time since I wrapped at ya.

Without navel-gazing for too terribly long: I had every sincere intention of executing a shift in the Comet's editorial content after the primary election, towards greater clinical disinterest and even-handedness. That turned out to be like training a bear to ride a bicycle: you can do it, but not without arousing some concerns. Then after the Lestitian / Mitinger / et al purge, some mixed impulses culminated in what you might call a full-on blogdentity crisis. I almost wrote "midblog crisis" but that doesn't feel accurate. I think we can all sense that the Comet is likely to pass the ball for victory while it's still 2009. At least a couple of wise bloggers once told me, "Three years is about good". However there are still several high-profile items of unfinished business on the agenda -- so in the meanwhile, I don't see how it's going to be anything other than rock and roll.

##

This afternoon will see a signing ceremony and celebration for the new Allegheny County ordinance establishing a Human Relations Commission, AKA in many quarters the LGBTQ non-discrimination bill. It will be held at the Andy Warhol Museum on the North Side.

The initiative passed by a slender 8-6 margin. In offering an amendment to Councillor Amanda Green's bill which very likely made its passage possible, Councillor Jim Burn donned what he called his party "Chairman Hat" to urge his Democratic colleagues specifically to rally behind the measure.

This exhortation was lost on Democrats Jim Ellenbogen and Michael Finnerty, who joined the Council's four Republicans in citing every conceivable excuse for voting against the ordinance except those reasons cited by just about every public comment and letter in opposition: it would prompt expensive litigation, it would cause disinvestment and hardship, the people aren't sufficiently aware of what the Council is contemplating. If any member in opposition was representing their constituents' oft-stated concerns, the closest they got was when one councillor dramatically stated, "I hold in my hand a letter ... a letter from the head of the Catholic Diocese!"

I take this as a good sign. Our local Republicans aren't particularly fundie or wingnutty; they just fear for their jobs like everybody else.

Councillor Chuck McCullough, clad for the occasion in a black dryfit New Balance t-shirt, offered a motion to put the issue up for public referendum, citing the Democrats' recent maneuver to "grant themselves the authority" to place ordinances on the ballot in support of the Drink Tax. The prospect of an extended, all-out, infantry-versus-infantry Culture War must have been as terrifying to the councillors as it was to me, since it failed by an even greater margin than the new law ultimately succeeded.

During post-session festivities, Burn offered an acknowledgement "to progressives" that sometimes the party "moves slowly"; he said that "As Chairman, my job is to bring everybody along." Nonetheless he said that that day was "his proudest moment as Chairman". He also lauded Green as one of the Democratic party's "rising stars" and "one to watch".

Council President Rich Fitzgerald spoke in praise of the members who resisted some intense pressure to vote against the measure, particularly Robert J. Macey, who experienced what he called not political pressure, but ominously, "the ultimate pressure".

The occasion also marked the targeting of District 1 Republican incumbent Matt Drozd in November's general election in favor of Democratic challenger Tom Michalow, who issued a "furious" statement in response to Drozd's objections to the bill.

A final note: while there is some disappointment out there about the "compromise" that was reached enabling some loopholes for religious or charitable organizations, I'm not particularly upset. Number one: the major stakeholders in the legislation didn't seem at all upset, at least not after a somewhat-improved version of that comprise had been secured. Everyone seemed determined to celebrate an at-least 2/3 victory and a 100% positive statement across what could be considered challenging terrain. Number two: for whatever reason, the injustice of housing discrimination tugs at my heartstrings worse than employment discrimination, and its hard for me to see how the exceptions will apply to the overwhelming majority of landlords and home sellers.

So that looks to be a real solid gain. But in addition to cementing quantifiable gains, people need to win once in a while, and feel as though their participation and efforts are valued.

SO LATER TODAY: More on the unmet demand for community benefits in the North Shide, and a bit on the continuing supply of corporate benefits headed to a developer in ShadyEastLarimer.

This is What the Overlords Look, Sound Like

Just so you're aware if you ever run into one. Apparently big chief overlord George E. Cornelius, the state Secretary of Economic Development, was personally working the halls yesterday. And Council President Shields says he got a call late yesterday from the Governor's chief of staff -- so we're clear on who the real overlord is.



"Part of the plan is a pathway out of Act 47 oversight for the city. We want to see that happen by the end of the term of this plan" ... Dean Kaplan

LIVEBLOGGING FINAL ACTION ON ACT 47 *

*-UPDATE: By a 6-3 margin (Dowd, Harris & Shields voting no), Council passes an Amended & Revised 5-Year Recovery Plan with 30 amendments from the previous version, all of which are either crucial or meaningless depending on who you ask. Public safety labor leaders are not happy at all and the politicos aligned with them are not particularly happy either. But we have a plan and Pittsburgh will not crash into the sun, the end, unless Doug Shields sues everybody.

Follow along with my coverage via Twitter. Updates will appear in reverse-chronological order, most recent appearing on top of the screen. Keep refreshing. I'm sure @bobmayo will be providing coverage as well.

The changes that the 9 councilors are attempting to include in Pittsburgh's 5-year Recovery Plan can be found HERE. Overnight reportage has been quite interesting: see the Trib's Jeremy Boren and the P-G's Rich Lord.

Monday: Stay Cool When it Gets Hot

First of all, there's Wednesday:

Allegheny County Council will be voting on an amended version of Councilor Amanda Green's legislation forbidding LGBTQetc discrimination in employment and housing, between 5 and 7 PM at the Allegheny County Courthouse.

Amended version, you say?

Anyway, the ordinance was heard in the Government Relations Committee last week and an amendment offered by County Councilmen Burn, Macy and Robinson added a complicated loophole that will give some religious organizations preferential treatment by allowing them to discriminate.

Essentially, it creates a registry... (PghLesCor 1)

We know our friend Sue the blogger is known to take a harder line than most, but here is the ACLU's response to these developments:

There are a number of problems with Section 215-31(H)(1) of the proposed ordinance. These problems are so endemic that this section should be removed from the ordinance in its entirety. First, the language of this section creates a preference for some religions over others... (PghLesCor 2)

Four (4) problems are identified -- some of which point toward unintended consequences, most of which concern the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

I have thoughts:

1) The ACLU has interest and experience in seeing substantive legislation get passed and progress get made, right? I would not expect them to throw roadblocks in front of a new proposal for just any old reason.

2) I think we all remember the individual who spoke at the public hearing who was born "gender ambiguous", and the real travails of that person finding a job and a place to live. We in the United States do not stand pat on a simple right to life, but also stand upon rights to LIBERTY and THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS. Hard to pursue those without a roof over your head, a fair shot at gainful employment, and loving companionship come what may. Remember that not all of Allegheny County is dense with options for homes and jobs if one's nonconformities are abruptly "discovered" by an employer or landlord.

3) Religious and religiously-minded organizations have rights of their own, but once they start employing people, taking part in the regulated economy, accepting public resources ... well, even sorting through the applications for the registry sounds dicey. When it comes to fundamental individual rights, I'm more comfortable Keeping-It-Simple-Stupid.

Looks like this one got a tad over-processed in the old sausage factory. Maybe Democrats should capitalize on their majority and enact their immensely popular stated agenda with less fuss.

##

Might want to pin this one to the cork board:

A pair of juvenile detention centers at the crux of a bribery scandal in Luzerne County also were charging counties like Allegheny and Butler too much for their services, according to a state audit. (P-G, Karen Kane)

Oh, man.

Counties were billed $314 a day for secure treatment and $255 a day for shelter services. Auditors determined the fees could have been $64 and $60 less, respectively. Mr. Zappala contended in his response to the draft audit that the lower numbers do not allow any profit margin. (ibid)

That, together with a few conspicuous expenditures, is what we know before any "extensive" audit is performed. Perhaps this proposed "extensive" audit might even develop into a "comprehensive" one.

Meanwhile, in DeWeeseville:

A state grand jury is poring over the contents of a recently discovered box of files from a Capitol office, a find that has triggered renewed prosecutorial interest in longtime state Rep. Bill DeWeese, D-Greene. (P-G, Roddy and Mauriello)

So what's up?

Sources close to the investigation say the documents appear to suggest widespread campaign activity inside Mr. DeWeese's Harrisburg and district offices during state work hours. (ibid)

Well, if you guys say so.

"It is totally appropriate and understandable that the attorney general's office would be speaking with staff people to learn what they can to respond to the allegations Mr. Veon raised in the 590-page document he filed," [DeWeese attorney] Mr. Cohen said. (ibid)

This is a clinic on how to act when you are under the microscope and so are others.

##

AND FINALLY:

WPXI's Rick Earle did a report on the Lestitian and Mitinger removals, wherein he interviewed some folks during Wednesday's North Side bus tour. I recognized the fellow who got major league face time at the end of Rick's report as one of my personal favorite speakers at the public hearing on the Master Plan some weeks ago.

Here's that clip:



The North Shore Master Plan won its approval over the gentleman's objections -- but the amphitheater should again appear on the agenda on Tuesday, July 7. And of course development debates in Pittsburgh shall continue.