Pittsburgh has a "president" -- of city council. Yawn....

Background from another post here and another blog post elsewhere.

Mark Rauterkus & Running Mates ponder current events: Comments from another blog as to a post from another person as to what Patrick may have written Get a grip on this concept, that came from, so we are to think, Patrick Dowd, a new guy due to take the oath to uphold the consitution, on Jan 7, 2008.

My distilling of Patrick's email about decision that might come about on or after Jan 7, 2008, as to the picking of a president of city council.

First, reversing population decline.

Improving the quality of life.

Financial challenges. Debt. Pensions. Not leaving these problems unresolved.

Look at other governments, the Pittsburgh Public Schools, to see where operational efficiencies can be achieved.

Examine the question of city-county merger.

Move from patronage to performance.

Determining how to utilize data in decision making.

Green up the city.

Transportation and parking are core issues yet council has no committee dedicated to examining these.

Housing and economic development need a clear agenda.

Leadership brings together individual concerns of the members and articulates and acts as a body.

Beg for “The Pittsburgh Agenda.” If ... not policy, then popularity. Hence, population shrinks.

Humm...

My top priorities, the advancement of the constitution (and laws) and an expansion of freedom isn't even hinted upon. Enslaved people will depart. Many vote with their feet. Pittsburgh is shrinking because liberties are not valued.

Pittsburgh's population decline is a result of governmental employees (especially mayor, council members) pressing their quality of life action agendas onto that of the public.

Their approach as illustrated by Patrick Dowd doesn't wash with everyone.

In 2008, the goal is to 'green up' the city. 'Redd up' is so 2006.

Sure, city council lacks specific committees concerning transportation and parking. However, authorities do the same. PAT (PORT AUTHORITY TRANSIT) and the PARKING AUTHORITY have boards and a mission that tackle those issues. By the way, I hate the authority mindset and the specific authorities. Authorities are without accountability. Authorities zap freedom.

But worse than the parking authority and the transit authorities would be TWO entities with those missions. I don't want city council to focus on authority duties while those authorities exist. That's an expansion of government.

Get rid of the Parking Authority. Then make a parking committee on city council. I've been calling for reduction of authorities, such as the PARKING AUTHORITY, for many years.

More over-reaching comes as he calls for city council to jump into the business of the school board. I don't want city council to look at other governments. Look within. Look at what council is to do. If he was worried about Pittsburgh Public Schools operational efficiencies -- Patrick Dowd should have stayed on the school board. And, as a school board member he he did plenty to hurt operational efficiencies when he moved to hire consultants to dismantle better performing schools (Schenley, Frick, Rodgers) and ignore troubled schools (Oliver, Vo Tech, etc.).

On the topic of city-county merger, the aim is to "examine the question."

Navel gazing AND over-reaching. My oh my. It is going to be a long year.