$11,000 legal bill still in dispute in billboard case - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review 'I represented them in their official capacities,' said McGough, of the Downtown firm Ward McGough. 'I have difficulty seeing how that's in their personal interests.'Hugh McGough is with his own blind spot. This bill is all about his personal interest. If he did the work, gratis, then this would be fine.
McGough can end this chapter in the saga by making his bill ZERO. McGough's act of grace would save the face and reputation of Peduto, Kraus, Burgess and Shields.
It was Mr. Kraus who was so keen to ask that the corporation known as Lamar would suspend its own ill gotten permit in a voluntary action, if you will.
Posts
1 comment:
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review Back to headlines
Larger textLarger text Smaller textSmaller text
$11,000 legal bill still in dispute in billboard case
By Jeremy Boren
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Saturday, May 10, 2008
Pittsburgh City Councilman Patrick Dowd amplified his opposition Friday to a proposal that would make taxpayers cover an $11,000 legal bill incurred by four of his colleagues.
Dowd asked City Solicitor George Specter to determine if councilmen Bruce Kraus, the Rev. Ricky Burgess, Bill Peduto and council President Doug Shields must refrain from a final vote set for Tuesday that would require the city, instead of the lawmakers, to pay the bill.
"They have a personal financial interest in this," Dowd said of the four, noting that Pittsburgh's Home Rule Charter states that council members must refrain from voting on proposed legislation in which they have a "personal or private interest."
Dowd wants Specter to determine by Monday whether that private interest exists.
It doesn't, said Hugh McGough, the attorney the four council members hired to represent them in an appeal of the city Zoning Board of Adjustment's approval of an electronic billboard Downtown. The billboard was not the subject of a public hearing, as is normally required.
Billboard owner Lamar Advertising then sued the four councilmen, accusing them of improperly using their authority to meet in private and filing the appeal past deadline.
McGough again represented them, this time in a counter lawsuit against Lamar that sought to expose Lamar's written and telephone communications with city officials regarding the billboard. The move led to Lamar's decision to settle the matter and submit the billboard application for public review.
"I represented them in their official capacities," said McGough, of the Downtown firm Ward McGough. "I have difficulty seeing how that's in their personal interests."
Each of the four council members has said their appeal and counter suit against Lamar properly represented taxpayers' interests.
Dowd said they should have sought approval from the entire council before incurring the legal fees. McGough said it was necessary to file the counter lawsuit quickly.
Dowd filed a separate appeal as a private citizen. He is paying his legal fees personally.
Jeremy Boren can be reached at jboren@tribweb.com or 412-765-2312.
Back to headlines
Post a Comment