BurghReport-comments-44321

* http://www.haloscan.com/comments/theburgher/4432171698496304759/?src=hsr#315697
Gravatar Rick Swartz tried to mount a grassroots campaign. I see your point about Ms. Robinson *maybe* being a perfect candidate. Clearly she *should* get the black vote, although Luke might be able to invoke the Hillary like claim that he has done so much for the African American community.
I don’t know anything about Ms. Robinson either, and I am hesitant about supporting an ABL candidate. On the other hand, if she can demonstrate support from some local figures, starting with the Judge she is or was clerking for, Dwayne Woodruff. He would have great cross-racial appeal. She should try to get Larry Davis from Pitt’s School of Social Work to at least talk to her in a visible way, and it would be nice for her to have Rick Swartz connect with her campaign visibly too. She should get somebody to work her up some aggressive policy positions on getting Pittsburgh’s pension funds addressed, and maybe getting us set up with some green initiatives. For example, Bill Green (on Off-Q) last night asked why there couldn’t be some money from the Obama administration to tear down abandoned houses, putting skilled workers on the federal payroll temporarily (instead, perhaps, of giving them unemployment). Maybe have some plans done in connection with CMU on solar or wind power for city facilities. Maybe put some cops on electric bikes.
These would all be things she would do to impress the East End and Universities district. To get the South Side, the West Hills and the North Side, she would have to do other things. Get Steelers to appear with her, maybe go door to door, I dunno. We’ll see how serious she is.
Ed Heath | Homepage | 12.06.08 - 1:20 pm | #
Gravatar Crawford Square, eh? Today's accounts are all bio. Can't wait to hear her first issues.
Bram R | Homepage | 12.06.08 - 2:24 pm | #
Gravatar You have got to be kidding, out of nowhere she is a legit canidate and will save the city, pleazzzzzzze
rico | 12.06.08 - 3:16 pm | #
Gravatar Interesting candidate. With her background, I wonder if she will appeal to the public safety unions?
TheTruth | 12.06.08 - 4:07 pm | #
Gravatar Dwayne Woodruff can't campaign for her. Judges can't do that.
This candidate would have a very hard time running. She will spend way too much time just trying to get her name out there.
Matt H | Homepage | 12.06.08 - 4:37 pm | #
Gravatar Perhaps she is simply attempting to build some name recognition . . . for a special election, maybe.
Infinonymous | 12.06.08 - 4:50 pm | #
Gravatar Rico - we don't know anything about her beyond what the papers have already printed, so it's too early to say she is "legit" or not, but her being an outsider with a 15+ years in public service makes her candidacy intriguing, to say the least. If she has serious ideas and and plans on how to address things like bankruptcy and violence, and if she is a good public speaker, it could get interesting.
Schultz | Homepage | 12.06.08 - 5:56 pm | #
Gravatar THIS IS GOING TO BE GOOD. Get ready for a full airing of Luke and Associates dealings with women and dealings with police.
"In Robinson, there was substantial evidence that Carmen Robinson, a police officer, was sexually harassed by her supervisor and that the police chief and assistant chief knew it and took no corrective action. Robinson also claimed she experienced coworker retaliation after she complained. She sued using the 14th Amendment and Title VII, and the district court granted summary judgment for the city on all charges. Alito, overturned on sexual harassment under Title VII but not under the 14th Amendment and affirmed on retaliation under both the 14th Amendment and Title VII. Frankly, I think each of Alito’s rulings in this case were consistent with prior precedents.
The harassment and retaliation claims failed under 14th Amendment rules for technical reasons. The alleged harasser was an immediate supervisor, not the higher ups. Carmen Robinson sued the higher ups and the city, but the higher ups and the city are not liable because the 14th Amendment permits such claims only if the harasser is a high policymaker. Clearly, Carmen Robsinon’s supervisor was not a high policymaker, and neither were her coworkers. To put it in perspective, in Jones v. Clinton (199, Bill Clinton was the alleged harasser (of Paula Jones), and he was also a high policymaker (he was governor). Therefore, he and the State of Arkansas were vulnerable.6
6 Under Constitutional law, public officials are also vulnerable in their personal capacity, but this was not a factor in Robinson. It was a factor in Jones v. Clinton, but not a relevant one for present purposes."
SHE IS GOING FOR HIS ACHILLES'...
Anonymous | 12.06.08 - 6:07 pm | #
Gravatar Ed - policy positions do not matter, haven't you read the book "The Political Brain" ?? The DeSantis campaign was heavy on policy and light on the things that make most Americans fired up to get out and vote. The pension, the green stuff, microlending, yada yada yada, that catches the attention of
Ms. Robinson will have to pull a Ravenstahl on the Ravenstahl campaign if she is to win in the primary. What does that mean, you ask? In the '07 general election, the Ravenstahl campaign, along with Jim Burn, basically ran a Republican campaign against their Republican opponent. They played to the fears and emotions of the electorate, just like Karl Rove and Rick Davis during the last two Republican presidential campaigns. They focused on two key issues: DeSantis made a quid pro quo deal with the FOP and "sold the city down river" to get the endorsement. The residency requirement was a very emotional issue to many city residents, and DeSantis lost at least a few percentage points due to his support of lifting the residency requirement. Also - Rove and Bush, I mean, Burn and Ravenstahl, translated small and insignificant donations by DeSantis to George W. Bush and Rick Santorum into DeSantis wanting to govern and bring the policies of those two to the city of Pittsburgh. This was all BS - but it was effective and if you recall the literature sent out to all the residents and the ads on the radio they focused on this connection.
Here is how the contender could go after the incumbent:
1. The mayor is running the city like George W. Bush ran this country the past 8 years. He tells us things are fine and that he is going to do this or that, but when it comes to address things like our pension deficit and violent crime problem there is little action to back up his talk. If things do not change the city of Pittsburgh will suffer a financial collapse like the one that wreaked havoc on Wall Street. The only difference is that there will be no one there to bail us out. We can either take another change and hope that the mayor will start doing something besides holding out for a bailout from Harrisburg, or we can vote for change and a candidate who has a plan to put the city's finances back on track.
2. The mayor supports city and county consolidation. This means the city that we love and live in today will cease to exist. The issues that matter to you and your neighborhood will now be in the hands of voters in towns like Fox Chapel and Upper St Clair. Do you really want to give Republicans like Jim Roddey and Tim Murphy the ability to vote to make cuts to public safety in your neighborhood? Minorities in the city should be especially concerned about the consolidation plan that the mayor and his boss are supporting.
3. Did I mention that the mayor is the Pittsburgh equivalent of George W. Bush?
Schultz | Homepage | 12.06.08 - 6:20 pm | #
Gravatar She won't win, but she alters the dynamics of the race--and makes it a three way race. That will allow somebody else to be far more of a challenge to Luke than he currently is.
Anonymous | 12.06.08 - 6:22 pm | #
Gravatar She could do some real damage to Luke on his mishandlings and shenanigans with the police and crime and also with women's issues. She could open the door for a serious candidate to do some damage. Or she could be a plant from the Ravenstahl/Onorato team to split the East End-African American (Obama) vote. Who knows?
Schultz, I thought Luke's Press Secretary said he was "Pittsburgh's Britney Spears". I like that title more. It is much more appropriate for "Our Mayor".
Larryville | 12.06.08 - 6:29 pm | #
Gravatar Luke is popular within the African American community. The Obama vote is NOT the anti-Luke vote. They are two separate things. There's no way Luke would plant an African American challenger, as that would only siphon off votes from him.
Anonymous | 12.06.08 - 6:31 pm | #
Gravatar There is 1 scandal continuing for round 2 and 1 new one to break during election season. This might be good.
Anonymous | 12.07.08 - 12:38 am | #
Gravatar I WILL DESTROY HER
Dread Lord Zober | Homepage | 12.07.08 - 1:01 am | #
Gravatar Danny "the Tax Man" Onorato will protect his boy Luke from any challenges. Onorato needs Luke as his submissive boy as he prepares for Governor. All Onorato money will go to Luke and all political support that Onorato has will also go to Luke. This woman has absolutely no chance at all against the Onorato-Ravenstahl machine. They are here to trample the individuals and people movement in this town and replace it with the machine. She might as well give up now.
anony | 12.07.08 - 2:54 am | #
Gravatar Nice find, Anonymous | 12.06.08 - 6:07 pm. It seems she's already got a compelling story: Pittsburgh cop is sexually harassed, sues the city, takes her case to Circuit Court, loses there thanks to Judge Scalito, gets a law degree herself (to help right the wrongs of the justice system?), runs for Mayor. I don't know if that's accurate, but it sure sounds good.
The only thing that would make it better is if Ravesntahl had been Mayor at the time of the alleged harassment. But since her case was in 1997, the Mayor at the time was Murphy, or maybe Masloff.
Jerry | 12.07.08 - 3:36 am | #
Gravatar Schultz, regarding the consolidation angle -- I'm not sure that's a winner. Earlier tonight I drove from my home in the city to a home in O'Hara. Every road in O'Hara, even the little cul-de-sac I wound up on, was plowed and salted. Right now, 12 hours after the snow stopped, my street (a major street in the city, not some little side street) has not been touched. Hell, I'll bet you dollars to donuts that Fifth Avenue in Oakland hasn't been touched.
I know this issue is narrow, but the point is that there are a number of quality-of-life issues like this where surrounding municipalities do a better job than Pittsburgh. These could make a lot of people prefer to give up our city government, which seems inept, to merge with municipalities that seem to do a better job.
Of course, the fiscal realities of the city make this a more complicated argument, but as you pointed out, the phrase "fiscal realities" doesn't win elections. The phrase "Did your road get salted?" DOES win elections. Thus I think there's a good argument IN FAVOR of pro-merger politicians like Ravenstahl.
Of course, I'd still vote for AABL (almost anybody but Luke) for a whole bunch of other reasons.
Jerry | 12.07.08 - 3:46 am | #
Gravatar Chris, I mentioned policy because that is what captured the attention and affection of East Enders with DeSantis (along with the ABL factor). Perhaps East End Democrats will be happier voting for a Democrat instead of having to vote for a Republican. Plus, hitting the Mayor with his negatives and then proposing policies to get us out of our messes and also make Pittsburgh a city known for innovation could be attractive to at least a few of the other Democrats she needs to get the nomination. It will look that much worse if Robinson runs a campaign that actually involves real hope for the city for the Allegheny Democratic party to endorse Ravenstahl for the nomination. Not the the party, including Onorato, has shown any shame recently.
Ed Heath | Homepage | 12.07.08 - 9:28 am | #
Gravatar I do sometihng about Ms.Robinson....like she was on the brink of being fired from the Pittsburgh police for taking those law school classes while ON DUTY. Yep, getting paid by tax payers for going to school when she should have been protecting the citizens of this city. She's no "outsider" -- she's all about "what's in it for me..." much like our current politicians.
Been there, done that | 12.07.08 - 10:08 am | #
Gravatar I can't wait till the rest of Carmen's personnel file issues come out. Not only are there issues about taking classes on duty but working side jobs while on duty too. My brother worked with her when she was a sargent and I can tell you that she has no fans in the force.
Let me also tell you that I adore how you white bloggers think that the black community will rally behind her just because she shares the color of our skin. Barack Obama earned our vote but so has Luke Ravenstahl, especially on his work with Reverend Burgess on crime.
Ujima | 12.07.08 - 10:42 am | #
Gravatar Ujima said:
"Let me also tell you that I adore how you white bloggers think that the black community will rally behind her just because she shares the color of our skin."
I can't object to the brute characterization, but I don't think anybody's that naive. The black vote, like every vote everywhere, tends to follow the power. If you hadn't noticed, we were discussing ways Carmen might capture votes based on policy positions (for which maybe we ought to be ridiculed). Thanks for the unwarranted racial condescension though.
She's an attorney and a former police sergeant. What would you have us do, shoo her away?
Bram R | Homepage | 12.07.08 - 11:21 am | #
Gravatar Ujima-
Did Luke Ravenstahl earn you vote when he skipped the hill district CBA meeting to fly to NYC with Ron Burkle?
Or Did he earn you vote when he signed over valuable URA owned hill district land to the Penguins in exchange for the promise of a grocery store and some minimum wage jobs?
Or maybe he earned your vote when he agreed to pledge a large portion of gaming revenue to build an arena for Ron Burkle instead of using it for its intended purpose - property tax relief for those on a fixed income?
Which one is it Ujima?
BTW, I believe it was you who brought up voting for a candidate based on skin color, not the "white bloggers"
TheTruth | 12.07.08 - 1:09 pm | #
Gravatar Well, in Ujima's defense, the suggestion was actually raised by the very first commenter on this story. But I would like to hear how Ravenstahl earned his vote.
Jerry | 12.07.08 - 1:45 pm | #
Gravatar Note to Mike Seate - see just how wonderful these blogs can be? We not only get to speculate on current and potential candidates but we also get an early jump on the vetting process, thanks to the anonymous commenters here at The Burgh Report.
We now need a South Hills candidate and have to cross our fingers that someone from the east end (read - Peduto or Shields) does not enter the race. Since Wagner said she is out of the running, how about you, Mike Lamb?
Here are two formulas for beating the machine candidate, the mayor in this case:
1. The Obama effect
East End + African American neighborhood vote > Ravenstahl vote
2. The Wagner / Lamb effect
The South Hills vote + East End vote > Ravenstahl vote.
Any others?
Worse Case Scenario is we have 2005 all over again, but then again I'll take a tough challenger who will put chinks the the mayor's armor (and war chest) than no race at all like 2007:
2005 Primary
BOB O'CONNOR 28812 49.0%
WILLIAM PEDUTO 14344 24.4%
MICHAEL E LAMB 13114 22.3%
LOUIS KENDRICK 1726 2.9%
LESTER LUDWIG 402 0.7%
GARY W HENDERSON 288 0.5%
DANIEL F REPOVZ 157 0.3%
Schultz | Homepage | 12.07.08 - 2:32 pm | #
Gravatar "...Ms. Robinson, if she is serious about winning, may be the perfect candidate to unseat the incumbent." DUHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!
smittyfromtheflats | Homepage | 12.07.08 - 5:10 pm | #
Gravatar Blessed evening to you, TheTruff (The only TheTruth that I recognize is my Lord and Savior)
Your version of those events only would offend the small number of individuals who had their hands out for most of the last two decades, like a certain former councilman and his disciples. Black men and women don't need to beg for scraps or make threats if we don't get our way, unlike some of what was visible from the outside troublemakers involved in the process you mentioned. In fact, my community has seats at the table with Luke and Luke listens to them as equal partners. Luke has a strong working relationship with Rev Burgess, Ms Payne and many non-elected leaders who will run to endorse him. Watch and see.
And thank you, Jerry. TheTruff can recite incomplete versions of the Hustlers Bible, but is so anxious to tear down Luke that he or she didn't read the previous comments. (And Jerry, I'm a woman.)
Ujima | 12.07.08 - 6:49 pm | #
Gravatar Ujima: "In fact, my community has seats at the table with Luke and Luke listens to them as equal partners."
Seats at the table. Listens to them as equals. In 2008, anyone should be impressed by this?
Do help me out, because I may be unaware: what exactly has "your community" secured for itself through your "seats at the table" or whatever you call your political strategy?
Ujima, you've cited Rev. Burgess twice already in as many comments, apparently in an effort to make your position sound serious. Well, the Rev first had to go toe-to-toe with the Mayor on Take-Home cars, on the zoning code, on campaign finance, and endlessly on Council's role in government -- publicly, forthrightly. Even nastily on occasion. That's what a POLITICIAN does -- show those people "at the table" you mean business and are not to be trifled with. Then you can do real business with them.
Others in Mr. Burgess's situation, through the years and to this day, have chosen to roll over for the Mayor when he signals ... and they get very little in return except that SWEET, SWEET DOWNTOWN MONEY for their ownselves. Oh, it's a "cooperative" arrangement, that's for sure.
Bram R | Homepage | 12.07.08 - 8:28 pm | #
Gravatar Ujima-
See the 8:17 point of this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F...h? v=F_ipdZCJWRs
TheTruth | 12.07.08 - 9:09 pm | #
Gravatar "Ms. Robinson, if she is serious about winning, may be the perfect candidate to unseat the incumbent."
Are you high?
Anonymous | 12.08.08 - 6:26 am | #
Gravatar Can you re-read what I wrote? When I say "may be the perfect candidate" I was not referring to her per se, because I knew nothing about her (obviously) beyond what was printed by the local media. Her bio is what makes her candidacy compelling. Outsider, public servant, etc.
Schultz | Homepage | 12.08.08 - 7:45 am | #
Gravatar Luke has not earned one black vote - he bought it.
Now comes the challegne can Carmen Robinson earn the black vote?
I think she can if she can remind the black community that they sold thier vote cheaply.
My vote is not for sale | 12.08.08 - 12:26 pm | #
Gravatar Ms. Robinson
I have made my decision, I pledge my vote to you.
To the City of Pgh
The score is one to zero right now Ok
For Mayor-elect Carmen Robinso | 12.08.08 - 12:36 pm | #
Gravatar Check my blog right now to view a letter Ms. Robinson has sent out to people. There is also a picture of her.
Matt H | Homepage | 12.10.08 - 12:45 pm | #
Gravatar Wow, the Mayor should be ashamed of himself for mailing out that letter signed by Carmen Robinson. (Go to Matt H's blog)
Unless...wait...it can't be...what? She wrote that herself? hahahahhahaha Yep, you bloggers sure know how to pick 'em. LMAOOOOOO
GoodStuff | 12.10.08 - 2:59 pm | #
Gravatar Laughing My A$$ Off Off Off Off Off Off?
DumbStuff | 12.10.08 - 5:25 pm | #
Gravatar Ya right Matt. I like your editorial surrounding it. And your crack investigative skills. Better call Marty.
Anonymous | 12.10.08 - 9:41 pm | #
Gravatar I don't claim to be an investigator. I just posted some facts about her and what she has been involved with.
If you don't like it don't read it. There must be some interest because a ton of people viewed it today.
Matt H | Homepage | 12.10.08 - 10:42 pm | #
Gravatar Whatever, The first thing you did was to look and see if she paid her taxes. I see how you roll, low and dirty. I'm sure the Mayor's race will bring out the best in you just like last time.
Anonymous | 12.10.08 - 11:27 pm | #
Gravatar Link to Carmen Robinson material at WTAE
Bram R | Homepage | 12.10.08 - 11:52 pm | #
Gravatar U motherfuckrs should be ashamed of yourselves!!! all of you, whatever you do, whatever u extract from whoever, mind your own fucking business and keep ur assumingly scatterred opinions to yourselves, bastards, coz I take every one of y'all Ip address and then take your names and put it on the radio in a christmas list form!
Jingle bellz motherfuckas!!
R.E.D. | 12.11.08 - 12:25 am | #
Gravatar Can you elaborate on Maslof, JERRY??
R.E.D. | 12.11.08 - 12:35 am | #
Gravatar R.E.D is insane.
Matt H | Homepage | 12.11.08 - 1:36 am | #
Gravatar "Whatever, The first thing you did was to look and see if she paid her taxes. I see how you roll, low and dirty. I'm sure the Mayor's race will bring out the best in you just like last time."
No it was the 2nd thing I did. Why not? Isn't it a fair question? Would you want someone to lead our city who hasn't paid their taxes?
How is that low & dirty??
I think it's a fair question.
Matt H | Homepage | 12.11.08 - 1:38 am | #
Gravatar Based on writing style and facility with the English language, it looks like R.E.D. is none other that Atty. Carmen herself.
I got the letter yesterday too, Matt. It went to all committee people I believe. I just couldn't get over the load of spelling and grammatical errors, missing words, incorrect titles, on and on. And this from a Duquesne Law School graduate. No wonder they canned the dean yesterday!
I edited it and mailed it back to Robinson. Hope it helps.
For some reason, she found it relevant to highlight her trip to Vatican City in 2004, where she closely studied Cannon (sic) and Roman law, and met the Pope. Clearly, she's got the Catholic vote all tied up.
You know, I'm happy that she's running--a black woman, fresh face, and all--but come on. If she cares so little about the job that she can't even proofread her introductory letter, then she's got no business being in the race.
ESL | 12.11.08 - 9:08 am | #
Gravatar Just read your "Hoagie" post about Carmen, Matt. You rule, muthafucka! Sometimes would-be politicians make it too easy. Not to sound racist, but Robinson reminds me a lot already of Twanda Carlisle. Do you think they know each other?
Bra Snapper | 12.11.08 - 9:20 am | #
Gravatar I support freedom of speech, but do we really need the foul talk to get a point across?
rico | 12.11.08 - 12:55 pm | #
Gravatar Bra Snapper---thanks...I guess.
Matt H | Homepage | 12.11.08 - 1:31 pm | #
Gravatar R.E.D.: No elaboration. I was following out a timeline. If the suit made it to circuit court in 1997, it is possible that the deeds resulting in the suit occurred prior to Masloff leaving office at the end of 1993. That's all.
P.S. Your threats are just a little bit silly.
Jerry | 12.11.08 - 1:32 pm | #
Gravatar I think it's a fair question. - Ya, that's beacuse you roll dirty.
Anonymous | 12.11.08 - 4:56 pm | #
Gravatar "Ya, that's beacuse you roll dirty."
How so?
Matt H | Homepage | 12.11.08 - 7:38 pm | #
Gravatar At least you don't think I ride dirty cause that would mean
"Driving in an automobile while having at least a felony charge worth of illegal drugs and or unregistered firearms with you."
Matt H | Homepage | 12.11.08 - 7:39 pm | #
Gravatar So THAT'S what "riding derrty" means! I was way off...
Bram R | Homepage | 12.11.08 - 7:50 pm | #
Gravatar Did you look that up in Websters? Or the New Elliott/West End Dictionary?
Anonymous | 12.11.08 - 10:28 pm | #
Gravatar Ohhh a good one from the peanut gallery named anonymous!
Matt H | Homepage | 12.12.08 - 12:54 am | #
Gravatar I saw nothing in Matt's lengthy but unfocused material that struck me as a serious flaw in Ms. Robinson's candidacy, but if it develops that she is not a strong candidate, the serious question appears to be: Why does Pittsburgh find it so difficult to attract a single solid candidate for mayor?
There is not a single qualified, capable, worthwhile person willing and able to be elected in the entire city?
If so, perhaps -- at 300,000 and change, and falling -- the population of Pittsburgh is no longer up to the job of being the political centerpiece of our region. Are we approaching the point at which Pittsburgh should be disincorporated?
As the city's population, performance and credibility continues to fall, should we consider whether Mt. Lebanon, Ross, and similar municipalities should be encouraged to annex parts of Pittsburgh? Mt. Lebanon, for example, with one-tenth the population of Pittsburgh, uniformly generates better candidates and operates more effectively.
Or maybe, just as Pittsburgh is offering to collect trash for neighboring municipalities, Mt. Lebanon could offer to run the city.
Infinonymous | 12.12.08 - 9:19 am | #
Gravatar There is not a single qualified, capable, worthwhile person willing and able to be elected in the entire city?
There was last time, DeSantis.
Anonymous | 12.12.08 - 10:58 am | #
Gravatar Whatever. Is Nicole still dancing at the club?
Anonymous | 12.12.08 - 11:00 am | #
Gravatar I don't think the problem is that there are no qualified candidates in the city, I think it's just that those who are qualified are smart enough to know that the Democratic machine will target them, during the race and ever afterwards, if they get out of line. There's currently no reason for the machine to target people from Mt. Lebanon and Ross, so they're not afraid to stick their necks out.
In addition to DeSantis, in the last election both Lamb and Peduto were (at least arguably) qualified. They wound up canceling each other out, and now they both seem to be in a good spot for them that they don't want to give up. So what is needed is someone who is
(A) qualified
(B) strong enough to go against the machine
(C) not currently holding a job where they feel they can be effective regional leaders.
I think there are a few people in Pittsburgh who meet one or two of those criteria, but I don't know of any who meet all three. (Except Paul O'Neill, but then you have to consider (D), willing to put up with the nonsense to take a job that is a massive demotion from his previous high-profile jobs.)
Jerry | 12.12.08 - 11:09 am | #
Gravatar There are hundreds of able, qualified, wonderful people in the city . . . but, apparently, no one among them is willing and able to seek office and be elected.
A sad situation . . . the political landscape as well as the city in general.
Infinonymous | 12.12.08 - 11:45 am | #
Gravatar "Are we approaching the point at which Pittsburgh should be disincorporated?"
The point was approached and passed ten years ago and while many of us pointed it out others are just now coming to realization while a few continue to remain in denial.
There are plenty of qualified, capable, worthwhile people willing to be elected to city government it's the "able" part that gets them hung up as Mark Desantis showed.
In order to be able to run for office in the city and have any chance you have to align yourself with, pay tribute and make promises to the very people causing the problems. By the time you're time done sloshing around in the muck with them and accepted into the inner circle you're as dirty and corrupted as they are.
The city's government is broken beyond any hope of repair, has been for a very long time, and continuing to believe that "your" favorite machine player is in any way different that the other guy's machine player is shear insanity.
The only way to move forward is to dissolve the city government in such a way as to strip its current members of all their power and make sure they never have the opportunity to regain it.
Having the state and county pull out the supporting structures and letting it crash so the surrounding communities can pick up the pieces with annexation might not be such a bad idea.
Anonymous | 12.12.08 - 12:22 pm | #
Gravatar "in the last election both Lamb and Peduto were (at least arguably) qualified."
Yeah because my favorite machine cog is better than your machine cog ...
They learned at the feet of the "bad guys" worked in their offices, socialized with them, helped them get elected, made the same promises to the same entrenched interests to get themselves elected, but they'll fix everything.
If you see one wit of difference between Murphy, O'Connor, Ravensthal, Peduto, Lamb, Wagner etc it's something you've conjured up in your imagination and nothing else.
Anonymous | 12.12.08 - 12:28 pm | #
Gravatar Do the people who are talking about disincorporation for the city live in its boundaries? Do they vote?
I mean, I agree that tens of thousands of democratic voters feel the Allegheny County Democratic Committee represents their interests despite evidence that the City's government is trying very hard to ignore long term problems. There are lots of corrupt and inept politicians around (see Illinois). The City desperately needs someone competent at the top, but that is not likely to happen without Jim Burn anointing them.
But I don’t see disbanding city government or having the State take control of the City as any kind of answer, partly because the County and State governments seem no more competent than the City’s. I certainly don’t know what the answer is, which probably means I won’t like the eventual answer. But taking a hatchet the City to satisfy the fantasy of some suburbanites would only make things worse.
Ed Heath | Homepage | 12.12.08 - 12:58 pm | #
Gravatar "Do the people who are talking about disincorporation for the city live in its boundaries? Do they vote?"
Does it matter? Do the basic facts about what's going on in the city change depending on the residency of the people commenting on them?
Perhaps even, the opinions of those who don't live within the boundaries should carry more weight since it's more apparent every day that they're ultimately going to be the ones who pick up the tab.
It pretty evident to me that it's the people living in the city who vote that should be quite and start listening or just be ignored since election after you can't seem to figure out what's going on and keep making the same mistakes again and again.
The original sentiment expressed was essentially that since the perpetual screw-ups in the city can't seem to change their trajectory towards disaster, maybe instead of them barking out orders and calling the shots it's time for those regional leaders with a proven track record should to be in the lead.
How that happens I'm not entirely sure, but clearly nobody, and I mean NOBODY, currently in city government knows what the hell they're doing so why give their opinions any consideration at all?
Anonymous | 12.12.08 - 1:38 pm | #
Gravatar Which regional leaders with a "proven track record"? Who are they? If they are so competent, why don't they move inside the city limits and run for office? Meanwhile, when you say the people in the city should be *quiet* (I assume you mean instead of *quite*) do you mean the city should simply stop having elections and throw itself on the mercy of those with a "proven track record"? How would that even work?
Ed Heath | Homepage | 12.12.08 - 1:54 pm | #
Gravatar The original poster mentioned Mount Lebanon and Ross I'd add Shaler, Hampton, McCandless - all communities that have managed to provide excellent public services with less money and have avoided the typical scandals of pay to play politics that infect the city. And I'm sure there are others people can name.
As to why the don't move to the city and run: because many of them moved from city after realizing the futility of trying to participate in let alone fix a system so closed and and utterly broken as that which controls the city.
And whether you realize or not the city stopped having elections thirty years ago. When there's only one party participating and the nominees from it are those people who've cut back room deals with the public service unions and party bosses to receive their anointing the charade that follows is just for show.
How it would work, don't know really. Any orderly transition that's been mentioned or discussed seems to be a non-starter as they all lead to the villains in the city having the ability to wreak the same havoc on a county wide scale and the 900,000 non-city residents aren't going to accept that.
I imagine we're just going to keep limping along until the city collapses under its own weight and the surrounding communities agree to pick up share of the pieces on their terms and not those dictated by and for the benefit of the public saftety, public works and teacher's unions of the city.
I can see communities like Ross, Shaler, McCandless and Hampton merging in to one larger government body and as suggested annexing the northern city neighborhoods. Mount Lebanon, Dormont, Bethel, Scott etc doing the same in the south and so on.
Anonymous | 12.12.08 - 2:37 pm | #
Gravatar You've named no names, only communities. And though I am sure you will disagree, running a suburban community is a different experience than running a real city. Ross, Shaler, McCandless, Hampton, Mount Lebanon, Dormont, Bethel (Park), Scott and etc would not now exist if Pittsburgh weren't here. If the City declares bankruptcy and the remaining private corporations move out, people will move from those suburbs to what ever new state the corporations relocate to. They will be followed by small businesses (who would be seeing their customer base erode), and those employees who are not being relocated but never the less have the skills and wherewithal to find employment elsewhere. I realize suburbanites like to pretend their communities are so much better, but if the City runs into significant financial trouble (and it clearly may), then the suburbs will suffer as much if not more than the City, because they depend on the City and other suburbs for employment and a customer base for the suburban businesses.
Meanwhile, while it is fun to say that there have not been "real" elections in the city in the last thirty years (as if there wasn't a Democratic machine in the 60's, 50's, 40's etc), its not as though Jimmy Carter has been by to declare Pittsburgh's elections invalid, so you are not actually saying anything. In fact, that kind of talk is absolutely counter productive. We need to find ways to get Pittsburghers to think about their vote, which is why I wonder if a Paul O’Neill might consider taking a job that is much lower in stature than he is used to, but at least as hard as what he has done in the past. He might be popular with the elderly as well as the University district.
Finally, I will admit I don’t know, but my impression is that Ross, Shaler, McCandless, and Hampton in the north and Mount Lebanon, Dormont, Bethel (Park), and Scott in the south are not all that likely to agree on anything, much less to join up and become their own little cities. By the way, what happened to Fox Chapel, Sewickley, Upper Saint Clair, etc? Not that I am saying I object, any kind of consolidation around here, even of relatively wealthy suburbs, would be welcome. But I don’t particularly see signs of cooperation in these various townships.
If the City does declare bankruptcy and wants to default on its debts, I wouldn’t be surprised if the rest of the state didn’t want to force the County to pick up the tab (except I can’t see Jane Orie not fighting that). But I don’t see anyone doing anything to prepare for that possibility.
Oh and by the way, I think the residency of the commenter does matter. I think some of the people who live outside the city simply want to destroy it. I think some of the people who live within the City limits, while disgusted with the Mayor and to a lesser extent with the City Council, still do not think destroying the City would accomplish anything good.
Ed Heath | Homepage | 12.12.08 - 3:15 pm | #
Gravatar A collapsed downtown need not doom the region -- Detroit (and Pontiac, Bloomfield Hills, etc.) is a useful example. The point is that if the city seems destined to collapse because it refuses to change, the rest of the region might be better off devising and implementing a strategy to manage the transition instead of trying to salvage a city that won't change.
I would prefer to see the city pull out of its tailspin, but the evidence in that direction is scant.
I mentioned Mt. Lebanon and Ross because I believe they adjoin the city, and consequently might annex portions of the city. There are many other properly managed Allegheny County municipalities -- wealthy and not-so-wealthy -- in which the elected officials are educated, accomplished, experienced, altrustic residents; desired and needed services are provided efficiently; and dysfunction is not tolerated.
County government has its problems -- structural financial problems, an indefensible assessment system, a lack of political courage, severe opacity, etc. -- and saying that it is better than city government is no great compliment. But the real strength of this region, at least with respect to government, is in its non-city municipalities, about the only thing currently following a sustainable trajectory in these parts. Of course, we need about 75% fewer municipalities, but that is another show . . . .
Infinonymous | 12.12.08 - 7:08 pm | #
Gravatar Ed,
I would suggest reading a bit more of Monsieur Briem. His comparison to Vallejo, CA or Orange County, CA, highly suggests that a federal bankruptcy judge would have to declare that the City still had the ability to tax its way out of its debt and would deny Pittsburgh Chapter 9.
I wish it were different, but I believe that is true. I have to agree with Infi..... the County's real-estate assessments are indefensible....... and I think the state Courts are bound to address that soon enough... Uniformity of Taxation and all.......
www.alleghenyinstitute.org
Anonymous | 12.12.08 - 10:59 pm | #
Gravatar Well, I certainly agree the County's real estate assessments are indefensible. The funny thing is that Dan Onorato's calculation appears to be that the State Supreme Court will invalidate all real estate assessment systems across the state, (as you say) because they are not uniform and thus will violate an equal protection kind of thing. Onorato lucked out with the result of the Port Authority negotiation (I assume he has released the money by now), he may be depending on luck to save him from bad publicity in the assessment thing.
I disagree about the City having the power to tax its way out of bankruptcy. What additional taxing powers the City has had over the last five years came from Act 47. the State maintains a tight hold on almost all types of taxation, and only gives out taxing powers in small amounts and temporarily. If the City tried to go into bankruptcy, I don’t think a federal judge would hold us up because we could tax our way to solvency (although the judge could refuse to let us go into bankruptcy for other reasons). What I do think is (slightly) most likely is that the State will extend Act 47 for Pittsburgh. It will provide slightly more assistance for our debt, give us slightly more taxing powers, and make us beat up on our own citizens again. The State seems to play a delaying game with these five year plans, doing just enough to make it look like they are helping the City and keeping it out of bankruptcy, while not doing so much as to inconvenience the rest of the state with increased taxes. Meanwhile, an extended Act 47 would mean that the public safety unions would once again lose the ability to hold the City up in binding arbitration, which might mean that the fire or police union might strike or take the City and/or State to court or both.
But again, this nonsense from previous commenters about the suburbs being better run, by smarter people just irritates me. I will say it again, if there are these talented leaders in the suburbs who could run the City better, than can move into the City limits and run for office. Otherwise shut up about the damn suburbs. It’s easy to run a suburb when the city provides employment for your citizens, as well as access to superior services than what some bedroom or mall-filled community could offer. And I don’t see Mount Lebanon or Ross wanting any part of the City, especially the parts they adjoin (to the extent they do).
I don’t agree Detroit is a useful example, I don’t think we are anything like Detroit. Yes. Pittsburgh absolutely has problems, but a failed downtown is a symptom, not the disease. The sickness is in a highly segregated African American community, in a City surrounded by rednecks who like to fly the confederate flag and make sure that African Americans know they are not welcome in the workplace or even anyplace outside the Hill or Lincoln Larimar, Garfield or several other African American neighborhoods. If all (or at least most of) the people who want to work, especially from the poor neighborhoods, can get good jobs, then the parents will feel a stake in their neighborhoods, they will push the kids to do better in school, and that would truly turn Pittsburgh around. But commenters writing here that Pittsburgh should just sink into a hole and die is not useful.
Ed Heath | Homepage | 12.13.08 - 12:50 am | #
Gravatar Ed,
I have to say I agree with most of your opinion. But unforunately, a federal judge could force us to raise our real estate millage rates.
It would probably hurt us, but then, considering the housing market, a shockingly high number of Pittsburghers would find it difficult to sell their homes.
It would be the worst of all situations, which is why Act 47 vehemently opposed any increase in property taxes, and that is probably why they haven't been increased in five years.
Anonymous | 12.13.08 - 6:22 am | #
Gravatar since I see my name invoked and possibly misinterpreted a bit. Nothing I said should imply I think a federal judge would deny a Pittsburgh bankruptcy filing. Quite the opposite. Lots of other issues before we get to that point, but what I have tried to say is that Pittsburgh is by almost any financial metric far worse off than Vallejo and a federal judge has indeed allowed their bankruptcy filing to proceed. It is hard to believe that the city has the ability to tax it's way out of current situation for a lot of reasons (it's too easy for taxpayers to move just outside the city proper for example). Thus the reason the Vallejo ruling could potentially be quite a precedent. In the early 1990's just when Murphy took office is when they should have declared bankruptcy, and probably could have.. but at the time the Bridgeport, CT case (where the city was not allowed to declare bankruptcy) was fresh on the minds of everyone. So even though the administration at the time considered the bankruptcy option, they were advised it was not legally feasible. I am not sure a new mayor really wanted to have bankruptcy be the very first thing he pushed forward which would certainly have been traumatic for everyone. Could have left Murphy a single term wonder... but a reorganization of the city's debt and finances at the time could have made for some very different history in the city and region since then.
Lots of history in the intervening years, let alone in the last 6 months, that make bankruptcy ever more conceivable at some point.
CB | 12.13.08 - 8:37 am | #
Gravatar Hi Chris, hope I wasn’t misrepresenting you too much. My sense is that Ravenstahl is not going to want to consider bankruptcy for the City, and it doesn’t look like Luke is going anywhere for at least a few years (not that bankruptcy is Ravenstahl’s decision alone, but he has the biggest part in it). Bankruptcy would mean that Ravenstahl’s administration had failed, and it seems more important to Ravenstahl to avoid the appearance of failure than to deliver the best government his constituents need. Since Act 47 has been around and hasn’t killed the City yet, I suspect Ravenstahl would sign on to Act 47 again.
For taxing our way out of our problems (in bankruptcy) to work, a federal bankruptcy judge would have to order the City to assume powers State law forbids. Act 47 is already a precedent that allows the State to grant those powers to the City while under State supervision. So I could see a judge leaning towards Act 47 as a means of dealing with revenue shortfall for us. Of course, that assumes we want to actually try to pay off our debts.
In addition, I believe under Act 47 State aid to the City was increased somewhat. If we declare bankruptcy I see no reason for the State to send us additional money. On the other hand, our creditors wouldn’t be able to demand payment (including retired municipal workers), so we might not need additional state aid or even higher taxing power. That would be the deciding to not pay off our debts option. Of course, a City in bankruptcy might not be able to float a bond issue for a public works project for quite a while.
I agree with “North of the City”, the North Hills don’t particularly want to help the City. Besides the fact it is not legally feasible that I can see.
Ed Heath | Homepage | 12.13.08 - 10:11 am | #
Gravatar Remember Ravenstahl fought against Act 47 and every cost cutting measure. Now he wants to squirrel with $45 million in funds that need to be dedicated to debt reduction. Guess that money can buy a lot of votes. He has done nothing with the pension problem, other than his standard do-nothing press conferences. But, he also had press conferences to celebrate his own birthday and snow storms. He keeps saying that he saved the city's finances and there is nothing to worry about. How exactly is he going to fix our problems when he doesn't even understand they exist? Is he really that stupid, are his advisors and supporters that stupid? Or does he think we are that stupid?
Anonymous | 12.13.08 - 12:48 pm | #
Gravatar Yeah, Anon 12:8, you are absolutely right, Ravenstahl was one of the leaders in fighting against Act 47 status for the City. But I suspect Ravenstahl prefers Act 47 to bankruptcy, even though Act 47 accomplishes nothing for our long term problems (or maybe that's why he prefers Act 47). I also suspect this is not written in stone for Ravenstahl, more like on an Etch a Sketch. Which is to say Ravenstahl might change his mind quickly if the parameters of staying in Act 47 change negatively for some constituency in the City (say both the firefighters and police have to take a pay cut, and Lamb runs in the Primary on a no pay cut for them platform). As for Ravenstahl being dumb or thinking we're dumb, it's hard to tell. But at the moment, it doesn't really matter. All things being equal, Ravenstahl can take the Mayorship for granted (as many commenters have noted here).
Ed Heath | Homepage | 12.13.08 - 2:01 pm | #
Gravatar So Ed, Chris or others:
I know Mayor Luke is primarily responsible for the City's finances.
Which members of Council seem most able to be prudent and fiscally responsible?
a lovely lady | 12.13.08 - 3:13 pm | #
Gravatar Ed, that was not directed at you. I was refering to the anonymous comment that seemed to say I had argued the city would not be allowed to go into a Federal bankruptcy is all. I thought I had been saying the opposite for some time.
prudent and fiscally responsible? I don't think I would touch that even it were an order of magnitude less vague.
CB | 12.13.08 - 3:54 pm | #
Gravatar Chris,
I didn't mean to assume you stated that Pittsburgh wouldn't be allowed to file for bankruptcy. I do think that we would have our hands full if we wanted to. I'm pretty sure the Governor would have to approve such a move, given our status as a distressed municipality, and depending on who was the Governor at that point, or who is the Mayor at that point, it may or may not happen.
I do, however, wonder, politics aside, as a purely business related financial question, if Pittsburgh wouldn't be better off bankrupt.
But what politicians would want to have that on their campaign mailers.
Anonymous | 12.13.08 - 7:30 pm | #
Gravatar Does anyone have a realistic approach for Pittsburgh other than (A) pay its bills or (B) file a bankruptcy petition?
Treading water may buy some time, but at great expense, particularly for retired city employees and city taxpayers of the future.
I'm not asserting that it would be impossible to devise a third course, but can anyone point to evidence that city leaders and voters are capable of doing so?
For the rest of the region, continuing to direct resources toward the city seems to be a bad bet. The money already sunk into stadiums and the convention center and Lazarus and Pittsburgh Brewing and Lord & Taylor and the North Shore Connector and Finnegan's Wake and the like has been revealed to have been a dopey bet that will not pay off. What is the point of continuing to follow that path?
If the city will not act in a responsible manner, the remainder of the region may be required to save itself by cutting the anchor. That would be unfortunate, but the city has had plenty of chances to avoid its predicament.
Infinonymous | 12.14.08 - 12:23 pm | #
Gravatar Present politicians in Pittsburgh have shown little hope of fixing the region.
I say, "Think again." There can be a third course, not "A" and "B" as stated above.
But the region can't save itself by cutting its anchor. That's just as foolish an option. That's just as sure to get poor results.
We are all connected.
Mark Rauterkus | Homepage | 12.14.08 - 1:57 pm | #
Gravatar The problem, Infin, is that the region isn't directly (ie legally)connected to the City, although the indirect connection is a bitch.
It strikes me that the way for parts of the region, say (eg) Fox Chapel or Braddock, to anchor themselves to the City would be for them to merge (a la the Nordenberg Report) with the City. Can they do it piece meal? Does it matter, for why would they want to?
I think we can say that obviously the surburbs of our region (or at least the residents there of) are quite tired of the City, and really, who can blame them? But I'm not sure there is anything the region can do to shed themselves of us.
The only way I can see a third way for the City (besides bankruptcy and denial) is for the State to devise an Act 47 plan that does raise taxes, it does give us some direct payments, but mostly it develops a sober plan to negotiate with our creditors and the pension plans to slowy repay our debts. I suspect anything else will ruin our City's credit rating. But of course this is all fantasy on my part.
Ed Heath | Homepage | 12.14.08 - 3:58 pm | #
Gravatar Raising city taxes, even if appropriate, wouldn't solve the problem.
Increasing taxes would not stop ill-equipped city officials from engaging incompetent hacks to mismanage pension funds. It wouldn't stop incompetent city officials from wasting millions on yet another misguided decision to prop up hopeless management at Pittsburgh Brewing. It wouldn't stop ham-handed city officials from losing millions in botched eminent domain proceedings. It wouldn't stop incompetent city officials from pouring millions down dopey dry holes labeled Lazarus, Lord & Taylor and Finnegan's Wake. It wouldn't prevent overmatched city officials from losing millions in mishandled legal proceedings.
Pittsburgh's principal problems appear to be incompetence, corruption and wasteful spending. The overarching problem, of course, is the refusal to make necessary changes in the way city voters and officials operate. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, particularly when the few are culpable. We need to focus on salvaging the region for the responsible majority.
We should have done it years ago. Our region -- millions of people -- would be better off today had the hard decisions about the city'd unacceptable trajectory been made years ago. Had the PNC backoffice building been built in Pitcairn or Plum. Had Mellon's complex been subsidized in Monroeville or Marshall. Had the Steelers stadium been subsizidized at Southpointe or Cranberry. Had Reed Smith been enouraged to build satellite offices -- Robinson, Franklin Park, Forest Hills, Mt. Lebanon -- rather than adding yet another office building to a low-occupancy downtown market. Had the Pirates been required to stay at a remodeled Three Rivers Stadium rather than been handed a publicly subsidized stadium in which, 200 million taxpayer dollars later, the team has a lower payroll, lower attendance and a lesser record on the field. Had transit dollars been spent serving the airport or the North Hills or Oakland or the Allegheny Valley rather on that ridiculous tunnel under the Allegheny. Locating those dollars and projects in the city was a grave miscalculation. Is there a reason to continue to make that type of mistake?
Unless and until Pittsburgh begins to act in a responsible manner, the rest of our region should direct its attention -- and its dollars -- elsewhere.
This tide is bigger than any single person or office, but the next mayoral election strikes me as a pivotal event. I'd be willing to give Pittsburgh one more chance if it elected a mayor such as Paul O'Neill. I'd pull the plug overnight if the current mayor is elected again.
Infinonymous | 12.14.08 - 5:19 pm | #
Gravatar I agree that "the tide" is bigger than any single person or office. That's why I've been known to run for more than just a single office. (giggle)
(insert clever tide & swim coaching pun here)
The mayor's race isn't pivotal. The rise of a bunch of candidates in a tide of teamwork to battle the status quo is pivotal. Breaking one party dominance in pivotal. But, that crack needs to be with a team builder -- not a Jim Roddey type.
Paul O'Neill as a lone wolf, as was DeSantis, is mostly worthless.
If you think Paul O'N is going to play well with others, then let's talk some more.
Mark Rauterkus | Homepage | 12.14.08 - 6:13 pm | #
Gravatar I've been calling for Bankruptcy for years now. This forum visits that subject periodically and the majority of contributors say "NO" it'll be the end of Pittsburgh.But now as the nation and the world slips into the grips of a serious recession or maybe even a depression, cities like Pittsburgh,
already fiscally distressed, are on the edge of the abyss.File now;be first.
smittyfromtheflats | Homepage | 12.14.08 - 7:16 pm | #
Gravatar When I read Matt H' comments, that could have, indeed, been drawn from A's West End or so, I wonder, are y'all really discussing the City of Pittsburgh and its to-be-elect mayor?
Or is it mayorette with multiple tassels?
R.E.D. | 12.22.08 - 1:29 pm | #
Name:
Email:
URL:
Comment: ? 
Notify me of followup comments via email
 
Commenting by HaloScan