One complaint that we hear from time to time is that poor neighborhoods often get the leftover trashcans from other neighborhoods.  One example taken earlier in the year (Kevin Acklin used this particular example in the second mayoral debate, back in October): a trashcan behind the Homewood-Brushton YMCA labeled “Bloomfield”.

Here’s a photo taken today:

Problem solved?  Glad to see that the mayor is still getting it done.

And yet, I continued to wonder, as my husband was winding his way through this design-flaw filled space, how have we managed to do it again?  The Steelers have invited the very same developers, the same poor designers, to do their “magic” on a piece of public land central to our city’s north side.  Talking bad about the Steelers is kind of like insulting your mama in this town, but let me just point out that the Steelers are a privately owned commercial enterprise.  Why would a sports team have so much power and leverage in decision-making about public land?  After all, they are not elected, are they?  And why would this publicly owned land be sold for a song to a commercial enterprise with little to no public oversight or accountability?  Especially without any clearly defined benefits to people living in the surrounding communities the development will affect.  Aha!  you say what about about the over site boards, the Planning Commission and the Sports Authority– aren’t they publicly accountable?

Well, let’s just see:  The mayor appoints individuals to the Planning Commission, the Sports Authority, the Water and Sewage board, Port Authority oversight, and the Urban Redevelopment Authority, not to mention the the Zoning Board of Adjustment, the Historic Review Commission and the Shade Tree Commission. Millions, if not Billions, of dollars are in the hands of these individuals — not to mention the long term political and economic implications of their decision making.  Their appointments are supposed to be given rigorous scrutiny by City Council, and yet in the last July 2009 go-round, the Council gave the mayor 5-4 support without any hearings or review of his appointments.

At a May 2009 Planning Commissionmeeting, 170 people showed up, in the middle of a work day, to give testimony regarding the negative impact proposed development will have to their neighborhoods in Pittsburgh’s north side.  We are talking about the afore mentioned, Steelers proposed development designed by Continental Development of Columbus Ohio, the authors of the Waterfront.  Do you think the voices of 170 people made a bit of difference to the unelected, appointed members of the Planning Commission?  And do you think they made a difference to the mayor?  (who was essentially appointed and never has had to work his way through the rigors of an election campaign cycle, that is, be responsive to voters)  In the words of John Belushi, “noooooooooooooo”

I guess I shouldn’t be surprised by what we are capable of tolerating, myself included. But there is some part of me that has to beg the question to my fellow participants in democracy, “Why are we putting up with this condition as a city and as a region?” We won’t tolerate pushing aside the democratic process of public accountability in our national government.  We proved that as a nation in our last election cycle.  But somehow, when this top-down, Executive dominant way of doing things that we associate readily with Bush-Cheney is at our own back door, we easily hold our collective nose and look the other way.   Just why, oh why, are we putting up with this condition?

The Acklin campaign posted a video of Kevin Acklin’s remarks:

Kevin Acklin: CBA Remarks Before City Council from Acklin for Pittsburgh on Vimeo.

Last Week

It has been an interesting frew weeks in Pittsburgh.  Last week Northside United staged a protest to demand better jobs for the North Side outside of one of the buildings managed by Continental Real Estate on the North Shore – click here to read the previous blog post about last week.

Friday at the City County Building

• Morning – Over 100 protesters arrived on the 5th floor of the city county building to talk to Mayor Ravenstahl about jobs
  • From WPXI - The protesters said they want the mayor to address the problem that many of the new developments, subsidized by taxpayer money, have created low-wage jobs, keeping Pittsburgh families in poverty.
• Doors to the Mayors office were chained-  A city worker chained and padlocked the door to the mayors office from the inside – the mayor WAS NOT inside the office
  • From PGH City Paper - A half-dozen city police officers showed up, insisting on clearing a path to the door — even when the door itself was padlocked. (The lock was eventually removed.)
• Protesters Leave City hall, promise to return at 2pm
• 2pm Protesters return to City Hall, No Luke RAvenstahl
• City Councilman Doug Shields invites protesters into city council chambers
  • From PGH Comet - Reportedly at some point Council President Doug Shields swung open the doors to City Council chambers with the announcement, “Your government is ready to listen.” Thereafter began an impromptu unofficial hearing participated in by Shields, Bruce Kraus, Darlene Harris, and Bill Peduto chief of staff Daniel Gillman, in addition to representatives of the coalition.
  • Video is available here
• Yarone Zober makes a statement on behalf of the mayor
  • PGH Comet has 2 youTube clips of Yarone Zober’s statements
• Mayoral Candidate Dok Harris Releases a Statement

The City needs to develop a comprehensive policy to ensure that development that is publicly funded or subsidized in any way provides good, family-sustaining jobs.  It is imperative that the community has a seat at the table to guarantee that development benefits the city residents and neighborhoods; not just the developers, politicians, and their supporters.

From day one of my candidacy I have expressed my life long views that workers deserve fair wages and fair treatment. In my administration it will be a priority to guarantee good jobs in all publicly-funded developments. We will work with community leaders to protect the needs of our neighborhoods and to improve Pittsburgh’s economy by protecting the middle class.

• 2 Political Junkies has a summary of media coverage of today’s events

Some questions

• Where was Luke Ravenstahl today? If President Obama can take the time to talk to the white house press corps about the Cambridge, MA police, then why isn’t Luke Ravenstahl available to talk to Pittsburgh citizens
• Have any of the members of Continental Real Estate contributed to Luke Ravenstahl’s campaign?
  • Walnut Capital – one of Ravenstahl’s biggest campaing contributors
    • From the Trib - Ravenstahl’s biggest donors run Shadyside development company Walnut Capital. President Todd Reidbord and manager partner Gregg Perelman donated $10,000 each. Reidbord is a member of the city Planning Commission.
  • Walnut Capital has received public funding for Bakery Square Project
    • From PGH Comet - 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.
• Is all of this developer driven development, supported by public money really good for Pittsburgh?  Is there another model that might work better to move Pittsburgh forward.  Is it possible that continued retail, office and hotel development isn’t really what is needed.
  • From the Post-Gazette in Feb 2009 - The gloomy retail climate prompted one expert, Burt P. Flickinger III, managing director of SRG Insights, to predict 2,000 to 3,000 shopping malls and shopping centers nationwide could go belly-up this year
    • Even in the city – there is vacant retail space in every business district from the new South Side Works, to Walnut Street, to the East Side development to Downtown – yet we continue to develop more retail spaces – who is going to rent these spaces and open up shop?

A+ Schools and PUMP believe that the City and the region rely on an excellent public school system in order to prosper. But the school system will only be as good as its leadership demands.  Board Watch is an effort to engage and inform the community about school board governance in order to insure that improved student achievement is the number one priority for the Pittsburgh Public Schools.

Board Watch is a grassroots effort established by A+ Schools involving volunteers who are trained to observe Pittsburgh Public School Board meetings.   All Board Watch volunteers participate in a training session that includes an overview of the state policies that created school boards, the structure and function of our local board and gain knowledge of how to recognize good governance in action.  Board Watch volunteers are then asked to observe one school board meeting per month for at least six months.

A+ Schools welcomes all concerned citizens who are residents of the City of Pittsburgh and share our commitment to student achievement and our expectations for effective School Board governance. A+ Schools is working with partner organizations, such as PUMP, to recruit volunteers who reflect the diversity of the city’s population – including racial, socioeconomic, gender and geographic demographics.

If you are interested in learning more about Board Watch and/or in becoming a volunteer please contact A+ Schools (412)258-2660 , info@aplusschools.org, or www.aplusschools.org.  Or contact Erin Molchany erin@pump.org for information on PUMP’s collaboration with A+Schools.

While PUMP‘s civic engagement activities have not always passed muster with this progressive, this joint effort with A+ Schools is a unique, positive, and engaging approach to local government accountability and transparency. Additionally, it draws attention to elected positions that don’t get much of it; the people in those positions make important decisions, not only about how our children are educated, but also about how our communities develop. This gets an A+ for effort. It will be interesting to see the results.

The issues involved with digital billboards are as follows:

• Where should they be allowed? They have a greater impact on their environment than traditional billboards because they glow rather than being flat images.
• How many should be allowed? They are being used to replace traditional billboards because they bring in more revenue and cost less to operate than traditional billboards.

Please consider voicing your opinion on LED billboards on Wednesday, March 11 at 5:30 p.m. in the first floor conference room of 200 Ross Street. Think about is this way: would you want to see an LED billboard from your house?

For more information, see this post.

Mayor Luke Ravenstahl‘s idea to lease the city’s parking garages (more here) has generated quite a bit of buzz in Pittsburgh and beyond.  The article from the PG was also picked up by Harvard’s Kennedy School here and on the blogs Milwaukee Talkie and Planetizen.

This idea has also been covered by some local bloggers:

• Cognitive Dissonance – Ed notes that this idea never took off in Harrisburg
• The Huddler – thinks this is a good ideas and that pensions in PA are out of control
• The Pittsburgh Comet – Is leasing the garages an idea that sounds too good to be true?
• Matt H – is worried about the parking prices going up
• Pittsburgh is a City – asks if parking rates make a difference, and if this plan makes sense during a recession.
• The Allegheny Institute – thinks that Ravenstahl is really thinking oursite the box with this idea.
• The Angry Drunk Bureaucrat – is not sure if this is a good idea or not and maybe having less expensive parking is a good thing.

Yesterday, Councilman Patrick Dowd addressed this issue – expressing concern that no one from City Council sits on the Parking Authority board. (PG article here).

What no one is mentioning…

Many of these articles about leasing the parking garages have quotes from Merril Stabile, who owns Alcoa Parking.

That’s doubtful, said parking magnate Merrill Stabile, owner of Alco Parking Corp., Pittsburgh’s largest private parking operator.

“No private entity that comes in to run these things is going to raise the rates to a point that it chokes out business,” he said.

Anyone who knows local politics knows that Mr. Stabile is a frequent donor to local politicians.  In 2007 he gave $10,000 to Ravenstahl’s campaign (PG  article here.  See this PG article which notes that Stabile benefits from parking tax cuts.

Merrill Stabile, whose Alco Parking manages some city garages and benefits from parking tax cuts.

So this is a win win for Ravenstahl, Luke gets to claim he is addressing the pension issue while working on a project that might likely benefit one of his campaign contributors.  Even if Stabile isn’t the one who leases the garages – he would probably prefer to compete with another business than a public authority who is willing to not put profit first.

Would leasing the parking garages put David Onorato out of a job?

The other issue… Cost of Parking vs. Cost of Downtown Revitalization

We have spent and are spending tons of money trying to get people to live and work downtown.  Like some of the other bloggers, I would like to see more people drive less and take public transit.  The fact of the matter is that Downtown Pittsburgh is competing with all of the other developments in the county and almost everywhere else has free parking.  It is a waste of money to spend money promote downtown as a destination and to ignore the parking factor.  Pittsburgh needs to stop spending money in a vacuum.  All of these things are connected and it would be nice if some of our elected officials would talk about how each of these things impacts the other.

If any neighborhood needs a beat cop, it’s not Squirrel Hill. However, because the neigbors and businesses there fussed (and have a lot of money…to contribute to political campaigns) (and turn out to vote), it looks like a distinct possibility.

This is just another example of how community and economic development decision-making in this city is based on politics, not what’s best for the City. Police allocation decisions should be made on crime data. Yes, it’s that simple. And someone should tell Squirrel Hill that it’s got the safest, wealthiest neighborhood in the city and it doesn’t need a beat cop. Oh, wait, they know:

“We don’t have any big, bad issues,” said Mr. Sigal.

Don’t punish transit workers

Perhaps local corporations should make ‘concessions’

I read with interest the rantings of Ken Zapinski of the Allegheny Conference on Community Development titled, “A Time for Concessions” (Forum, Aug. 31). For four decades, I have proudly served as the attorney for Local 85 of the Amalgamated Transit Union and I negotiated and arbitrated the two most recent contracts between the Chicago Transit Authority and the unions to which Mr. Zapinski alluded in his article. Let’s get the facts straight….. (read entire article)

Mr. Pass confirmed some ideas that were being suggested elsewhere on the internets in recent days. (see: nullspace transit 1 ; nullspace transit 2 ; bram 1 .

I’m so happy to finally hear some analysis of the situation from the workers’ side.  The messages that have dominated the public discourse around the Port Authority budget so far have been so obviously engineered by the Port Authority board and executives (and the corporate and political leaders who put them there.)  I just can’t believe that it’s either the full story or that their positions are in the best interest of my community and my family.

As a city resident who supports a strong, better!, public transit system, I’m deeply suspicious of any proposal to save transit that will end up hurting the families of all of the unionized Port Authority workers.   I’ve been suspicious that there’s been a whole other side to the story than what we’re getting on PAT’s websites: pghtransitinfo.com and portauthority.org (PR which we, taxpayers, are footing the bill for).  Messages pernicously mimicked in and around all things Allegheny Conference for Comm. Development.  http://www.alleghenyconference.org  and nocommuterleftbehind.wordpress.com/

More commentary later from me, for now I’ll just agree with Mr. Pass when he writes:

In the meantime, if the Allegheny Conference is interested in the development of this community, it ought to seek ways to fund transit other than on the backs of workers. Since public transit is vital to the economic growth of this community, as recognized most recently by the fact finder appointed to analyze Port Authority contract issues, perhaps the conference should urge local corporations to buy bus passes for their employees. Better yet, when corporate America and/or its CEOs make exorbitant profits or wages, perhaps we could tax them to subsidize transit. Their backs are bigger and better able to sustain “concessions” than those of the working men and women who provide transit service to our community.