The Pittsburgh planning process is not fair. UPMC and South Side -- go figure

Exact date unsure.

The Process of Planning Is NOT Fair, NOT Democratic and NOT Understood by Most

The South Side Forum, a facist organization, fails in the following test of political fairness.

This opinion is based upon first person observations by someone who has attended all the meetings since November.

Furthermore, the proposed plans for UPMC to build a sports performance compound is not fair, not democratic, nor understood.

Three Tests of Political Fairness

from Lani Guinier
1. Does the system mobilize or discourage participation?
2. Does the system encourage genuine debate or foster polarization?
3. Does the system promise real inclusion or only token representation?

Vibrant Democracy Action Makes Us Great!

Vibrant democracy action does not occur at the South Side Planning Forum. Other pages can discussion the merits and faults of that charter and their conscious districting, but for now, think of fascism in all mentions of seeing either the South Side Planning Forum and the LTV Steering Committee.

Fascism

A system of government characterized by rigid one-party dictaorship, forcible suppression of opposition, private economic enterprise under centralized governmental control, belligerent nationalism....

We need all voices to have a reasonable influence throughout the extended political process. There are many systems and schemes to choose among to insure that this occurs, and a strict consensus operation isn't among the suitable alternatives.

The planning process should reward and champion the highest and best use, rather than be a series of binary decisions that cause a regression to the mean or lowest-common denominator effect. With a consensus operation at the helm, our future is flat.

As is the present case, the South Side Planning Forum does not offer even a modest level of checked and balanced to the planning process. Rather, the URA, as a part of the executive structure (Mayor's Office), advances plans to the South Side Planning Forum, much like the President of the U.S. might advance plans to the Cabinet. The Cabinet is hand chosen. So too is the URA and in turn the South Side Planning Forum.

Cabinet

A body of official advisers to a president, king, governor, etc. In the U.S. comprised of the heads of the various governmental departments.

Cabinet members should agree with the executives and should work as a sounding board for fine-tuning ideas and policy decisions. Renegade cabinet members might hurt the administration, as there are times for agreement and times for democracy.

URA Official, but, but, but, but....

A URA official, Jermoe Detore, was at the table with City Council on March 17 at a discussion session that was on the city cable network. He was present for a short discussion as City Council had just given a preliminary vote for the sale of the IBEW site.

The reading of the petitions that was a call from the citizens of Pittsburgh to hold a public hearing on this matter was made. Rightly so, the members of council quickly approved the matter. And, Mr. Detore said, "I'm not sure what this is all about."

He said, "But, we've been working with the South Side community."

"You want to have a public hearing?

"There will be a public hearing before the Planning Commission."

Dan Cohen (city council) said that this was a request of the citizens and City Council did not have any choice.

Meanwhile Jim Ferlo (city council) said that there will be plenty of Public Hearings on this matter.

Yes, the URA has been working with the South Side Planning Forum. Yes, the South Side Planning Forum has a LTV Steering Committee that has held a number of special meetings on this topic. Those meetings are important to the URA and help to uncover some additional information. But do not equate an approval by the South Side Planning Forum as any type of grass-roots approval by the citizens of the South Side. Their approval comes under a cloud of facist control.

Ignorance: The Most Dangerous Assumption

City Council can not assume that the plans that advance out of the U.R.A. and are filtered by the South Side Planning Forum have any inkling of community-wide support. The Planning Forum's model of resentation is invalid and the Planning Forum's operational dignity confirms this bias.

The plans that advance out of the U.R.A. are bounced to a selected few in the neighborhood. The plans might get tweeked about, sorta like window dressings. Furthermore, the delivery of the plans to the selected few in the neighborhood gives the U.R.A., its developers and its partners ample opportunities to refine presentations and rehetoric.

The salesmanship is finly tuned, but the wolf is still under the nicly pressed sheep's clothing.

City Council can't shrug its duty to represent the people by bestowing false credtabilty on the flawed process.

The only governmental body to serve as a check to the planning process as instigated by the URA is City Council. This is a grave responsibility that needs to be realized. Do not think that the citizens of an area are in strong support or even of marginal support of what is being done by the URA because the local groups say its okay.

The local planning groups are really cabinet level supporters of the U.R.A. Nothing more.

It seems that the South Side Planning Forum can please only one entity per meeting each month. Citizens, this month is not yours. Next month isn't looking good either.

Needing a Planning Forum and a Steering Committee is like needing a parachute. If the outfit isn't there the first time its called upon, chances are people won't be needing those avenues again.

Smoothing the Harshness

To be sure, the South Side Planning Forum does serve a purpose. The purpose is to be a sounding board to the URA. The purpose of the South Side Planning Forum is not to speak for the people. The purpose is not to prop up the creditability of the URA's plans in the mind's eye of City Council, the School Board, nor the County officials.

The South Side Planning Forum should go about its ways and should not be terminated. These good people do good work. Do not be fooled into thinking that this good work is anything close to good work based upon a democratic process.

Wrongly Named Organizations

The LTV Steering Committee might want to change its name, so as to not confuse additional people, to the LTV Back-seat Committee. The steering has ended.

More Input to Come

As things progress, the sale of the properties to the respective developers from the URA is going to occur. At that time, there is ample opportunity to make sure that the design forum folks insure that colors of the curtins don't clash. That authority for after-sale conditions is questionable.

Haste Makes Waste --- Rushing!

The urgency of the sale of properties on the South Side Works looms very large for a number of reasons. Urgent deadlines seem to be self-imposed places in time that are managed by strange forces in nature.

When it comes to hiring employees, the City of Pittsburgh lets its deadlines slip. The Mayor can't seem to hire a Fire Chief, week after week goes by and nothing happens. The hiring delays are unmatched only by the seemingly strong love for deadlines on development projects.

Ya gotta love the deadline mentality, especially the whooshing sound deadlines make as they go flying by.

In early Feb 99, UPMC started to move earth with the graders, on behalf of the URA, without closing the benefit of a signed deal.

Rushing Ahead While Looking Backwards

Community members need to get smart with our presentations about the South Side Sports Performance compound. Let's get smart and tell the world, the School Board, the City Council members, and the County officials as such. The Pitt leadership won't know otherwise. To explain Pitt's disregard to urban planning and its neighbors is epic. We could tell you everthing that has happened in Oakland, but your brain would explode.

There are very few personal problems that cannot be solved through a suitable application of high incentives for community access program facilities.

To champion community access goes way beyond program decisions. Facility requirements and constraints are important issues that need to be fully explored before the foundation gets laid in steel, brick and concrete.

The line-up of community facilities in Pittsburgh has a number of serious shortcommings. Our needs are grave in some areas. The specific areas of need are covered by other sections of this paper and are subect to some additional speculation.

Realize that 90% of all of C.M.U. graduates depart the Pittsburgh area upon graduation. That type of human-resource retention is unacceptable. Needs exist, undoubtably.

So, we're working among ourselves to prioritize and express various needs and concerns. We'll tell Pitt what is needed, and Pitt will tell us how to get along without it. Pitt has done this over and over again when it comes to employee fitness, recreation opportunities and other quality of life issues with structured community play -- things that need facilities.

Nursing School Fitness Center

A new fitness certer was built in the ground floor of the Pitt Nursing School. The clamor to get that facility built lasted for years before the space was found. The need still exists for 10 additional sites, just for students on campus. The need for 10 or more additional sites is also exploding with the faculty, staff and employess.

Pitt wants the community to accept that some days we're the pigeons, and some days we're the pigeon droppings.

I don't have an attitude problem. You have a perception problem.

Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star

In the fall of 1999, we'll take a walk along the river banks and looking up to the stars in the sky and think to ourselves, "Where in the heck are the stars?!" The flood of lights will wash-out the night sky.

In the fall of 2000, we'll be working out in the weight room, and looking up to push out some of the reps on the bench press and think to ourselves, "Where the heck is the ceiling?!"

UPMC officials boasted by saying, "Pitt turns off its lights at night. We don't run the lights in the parking lots." That comment was to sound sensative and very neighbor-friendly. Well, it might be in other places, like in Cannonsburg. Downtown goes to sleep at night too. The South Side isn't elsewhere. If UPMC comes to the South Side, there is a great chance that we'll want you to keep the lights of the parking lot ON at night. We use our spaces beyond the 9-5 business hours, as we live, play and work here. That is balance. --- My Reality Check bounced. --- On the keyboard of life, as we plan with UPMC, let's always keep one finger on the escape key. --- People in Pittsburgh don't suffer from stress, obesity, back aches, and other wellness issues. We're carriers. Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.

Given a City Council Defeat, Then What?

Given a City Council Defeat, Then What?

Should City Council vote to NOT sell the land from the URA to UPMC for the football compound, what might happen next?

Back to the Drawing Boards

1. UPMC, Oxford Developers the Steelers, and the URA would do well to go back to the drawing boards and re-tool a facility plan that fits and is fair.

2. Or, UPMC might opt to turn up the political heat, with or without the Mayor's office help. Then the site plan can be better crafted in its presentation, and re-submitted.

3. Or, UPMC might try to tip the scale in its favor with a better suite of buy-outs to the community groups. A $30K offer went to $75K, and the amount might need to go much higher. Everything has a price.

4. Or, UPMC might opt to move to a suburban site. Fine. UPMC can't take the land with them. UPMC is not going to move to Florida, to North Carolina, to Columbus, Ohio. And, Pitt athletes are not going to go far from Oakland.

Watch for Pitt's Rounds of Settlement Overtures

Pitt should settle this mess. The problem comes as to who is going step up and attempt to broker the deal to settle.

Pitt could have tried to settled various concerns months ago. But Pitt was too arrogant to admit any wrongdoing or pig-headed thinking and planning. Pitt is too deep into its 'we are innovators, top job-providers, know-what's-best' posturing to backtrack.

As much as the citizens of the South Side and the region want to get this over and move beyond Plan B, we can't. We won't be able to avoid another long string of embarrassing rounds of blunders. Developments in the past months don't offer much hope.

Settlement from Pitt are described as "minimalist" and "nowhere near" acceptable. Those scraps don't sound like the makings of a settlement to us.

Best Interests Should Not Be Egos

Fighting against SUN Corporation and a coke oven is one type of foe. The corporations have the foregone conclusions that actions are geared to the shareholders best interests.

Pitt has no shareholders. UPMC is not a corporation that trades stock on the big boards. Pitt's top shareholders are students, faculty and the academic ethics of knowledge discovery and sharing.

Pitt has its pride on the line. UPMC is not driven by the share-holders interest, rather by the interest of its management.

Will UPMC and the Pitt AD come up with settlement terms that are acceptable to all? Or, has the Pitt PR ploy worked?

Pitt's Athletic Department, its students and our communities will fare better when Pitt's leadership gets in sync with the community, its roots and its vision of what sports are.

Pitt's arrogance is taking a back seat to that of UPMC's.

Prepared Statement to South Side Planning Forum on Feb 23, 1999

Prepared Statement to South Side Planning Forum on Feb 23, 1999

From Mark Rauterkus, South Side Market House Association, and Convener's Chair of the sports and recreation coalition.

The following was submitted to the Planning Forum Chair a day following the evening meeting on February 23. A prepared statement memo was utilized so as to be a part of the minutes, but to not occupy the time of those present at the meeting. Furthermore, because a seat at the FORUM table is not designated to the Market House Association, nor the new Nonprofit Coalition, nor any other agency with a primary mission for the sports, fitness or recreation industry, there isn't a suitable representative to pass along these messages. Hence, Mark Rauterkus, a frequent visitor to the South Side Planning Forum Meetings since at least the time of the announced plans of UPMC Sports Performance Compound, submits the following:

Update after the fact: To the best of my knowledge, this information was not made available to the various members of the South Side Forum. The approval of the reading of the minutes at those meetings occur without reading, postings or handouts.

Thanks for the Invite

The LTV Steering Committee extended an invitation to Mark Rauterkus, concerned citizen, for a January 1999 meeting with officials from UPMC, Oxford and the U.R.A. Thank you.

In my opinion, access to the closed steering committee meeting was granted after repeated one-to-one requests for additional information and additional meetings were made to each committee member, the URA and UPMC. Attendance at the meeting was a gesture, as a number of specific requests were not forthcoming before, then or since.

For example, as of Feb 23, a map or site plan has not been forthcoming after repeated requests since November.

Nebbier Than Others

Since November, 1998, investigation, talking and side-line planning has occurred, including the formation of a new coalition for sports, fitness and recreation. Listening comes first as the UPMC plans are revealed, however, it is fair to say that red flags are being waved for the UPMC Plan.

It is disheartening that we all are not on the same page and working for the best interest of the community in these matters. I feel that UPMC, the Pitt Athletic Department, Oxford Development, the URA, the Steelers, our City Councilman, the South Side Planning Forum (perhaps the Mayor) and grass-roots sports and recreation participants are NOT in harmony. Obviously the bigger players can team together and overpower the citizens.

Improved collaboration to enhance every one's position and relationship sounds fine, but serious dialog and effort is necessary. The powers that be are not interested in slowing down their development process to engage.

Disgruntled Nonmember

The South Side Planning folks have much different opinions from myself and those who I'm representing.

Mark Rauterkus does not have a seat at the table with the forum. The fact that I am an outsider to these groups with no official role or capacity granted herein makes a small hurdle compared with the roadblocks of idea input opportunities. The most staggering disappointment to me comes from the Chair of the Planning Forum who wants to distance myself from the process, and sums it up when he said, "Mark, you are being too global!"

Now Swimming Uphill

In Mark's opinion, opposition appears justified for selected aspects of the proposed UPMC Sports Performance compound. Furthermore, opposition to the planning process and its integrity of a dynamic forum to champion a free-flow of ideas is certain.

---

Global Sticking Points

The biggest sticking point is community access opportunities.

Many concerns exist.
• The UPMC plans do not fit into the associated sporting communities:
  1. the NCAA,
  2. student-athletes in the area, and
  3. everyday participants.

• The UPMC plans are not fair:
  • unjust allocation of resources/assets, and
  • decisions grossly favor mega institutions

• The UPMC plans are substandard in that better-integrated solutions that stretch our imaginations are possible.
  Living with these decisions for days on end in the future is not wise nor prudent when viewed in light of alternatives and additional ramifications.

---

Quotes:

Mentions to Mark:
• Carrie Harris, South Side Local Development Committee, Forum Member, Steering Commitee, said about the NCAA rule restrictions for member institutions that prohibits professional and college athletes from sharing the same facility at the same time, "That is Their Problem."

• Hugh Brannon said at a LTV Site Steering Committee Meeting, "Mark, You're Being Too Global."

---

Petitions Circulating South Side as of Feb 23

Petition A

Request for a public hearing on the URA's sale of land on the LTV site to UPMC for a Football Compound.

Petition B

City Pool Fees for Adults, Kids and Pending Policies - or lack thereof.

Update: This petition was not submitted to the City Clerk's office. No public hearing is needed as there is no pending legislation and a new aquatics planning process is slated to being with the Parks Department.

Petition C

Save Our Stadium, Univ. of Pittsburgh Student Government to save Pitt Stadium. To sign that petition, go to the sixth-floor of the Wm. Pitt Student Union and go to the reception desk at the Student Goverment office.

---

Coalition Meeting Where Everyone is Welcomed

The Market House's convened coalition for Sports, Fitness and Recreation welcomes anyone interested to a gathering on Tuesday, March 9, 7:30 pm, and/or 9:00 pm. The meeting will include a presentation and discussion of "The Position Paper for Developments in Pittsburgh and the South Side -- Logical Happenings in the Shadows of PLAN B."

---

See the Web Site or Send Email for Specifics

• http://www.SportSurf.Net/backyard

• Backyard@SportSurf.Net

---

Closing Frustrations

It seems that a grant offer from UPMC is climbing in its total amount. UPMC started by offering to build a new ballfield. The ballfield could have been built, so said UPMC officials, on space other than the space slated to be purchased by UPMC. That offer was bogus, and was shot-down on the spot as there is not enough room on the LTV site for a ballfield. The space does not exist. If the space did exist, why would UPMC need to build non-regulation sized fields?

Then UPMC said that the donation of a ballfield could be made in other parts of the South Side. Perhaps an existing ballfield could get an upgrade. Ballfield donations, such as that being considered here would cost about $30K. So, a $30K grant for any fitness and sports location was mentioned by UPMC officials.

Then on Feb 23, 1999, the $30K grant grew to an amount of $75K. This money, seems to me, to be a way to sway the opinions of the concerned citizens.

The offers of "community access opportunities" at the planned UPMC compound are slim and tiny. UPMC knows it, and UPMC can try to buy support with an offer of a grant.

The offer from UPMC can be listened to, for now.

However, the gall of the South Side Planning Forum to even discuss the notion of a role with that grant as some type of funding agent, or even to brokering some type of transactions along with a needs review issick.

Get this: All money for community-based sports and recreation for local citizens needs to go directly from UPMC to the Market House Athletic Association, if not its convened coalition.

Shared facilities between Pitt and the Steelers, NCAA and NFL -- a rule breaking arrangement

Header

Received: from ncaa-bh.ncaa.org (ncaa-bh.ncaa.org [205.227.50.66]) by sportsurf.net (8.8.5) id PAA26639; Tue, 16 Feb 1999 15:11:49 -0700 (MST)
Received: (from uucp@localhost) by ncaa-bh.ncaa.org (8.8.8/8.6.11) id QAA06452 for ; Tue, 16 Feb 1999 16:11:50 -0600 (CST)
Received: from unknown(10.0.0.4) by ncaa-bh.ncaa.org via smap (4.1)
	id xma006360; Tue, 16 Feb 99 16:10:53 -0600
Received: by NCAA_04 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9)
	id ; Tue, 16 Feb 1999 15:57:20 -0600
Message-ID: <31B3718F1371D1119E4800805F6F209F01EB284F@NCAA_04>
From: "Batson, David" 
To: "'mrauterkus@sportsurf.net'" 
Cc: "Cuka, Kathy" 
Subject: RE: Planning Issues: NCAA & Professional Facilities
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 15:57:19 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-UIDL: a4d3621d299931a17279657477807c83

From: "Batson, David" dbatson@ncaa.org

	Mark,

	Thanks you for the e-mail.

	Question 1 and 2:

	The NCAA National Office does not compile a list of institutions
sharing facilities with a professional team.  You may want to contact the
appropriate professional sports association to see if they can provide such
information.

	Question 3:

	You are correct that the NCAA wants to maintain a line a demarcation
between college athletics and professional sports along with maintaining the
amateur status of the student-athletes by limiting their involvement with
professional teams and agents.  However, legislation permits some limited
involvement between a member institution and a professional sports team such
as permitting a professional team to rent institutional facilities subject
to normal institutional contractual agreements and permitting Institution's
to host and promote an athletics contest between two professional teams as a
fund-raising activity for the institution.  However, the former
Interpretations Committee had determined that the member institution's team
and the professional team may not use the facility jointly at the same time.

	I hope that this information is helpful in your research.





> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Mark Rauterkus [SMTP:mrauterkus@sportsurf.net]
> 
> Sent:	Saturday, February 13, 1999 7:27 AM
> To:	csmrt@ncaa.org
> Subject:	Planning Issues: NCAA & Professional Facilities
> 
>     
> Dear NCAA Enforcement Folks,
> 
> I need some clarifications, please, on some general rules issues about the
> build in measures that are in place to create some distance (firewall, if
> you will) between PROFESSIONAL athletes/organizations and Div. I NCAA
> programs.
> I gave a few calls on the phone to you all last week, bouncing between
> enforcement and membership voice mail boxes-to no satisfaction. Thanks for
> your attention to this email.
> Who am I? This is always one of your first questions-so I'll tell you.
> I'm a publisher of many sports releated titles (books, etc.) as well as
> Internet Journalist-as well as local advocate for some community issues as
> per sports/fitness and such. I'm also leading a non-profit coalition of
> sports agencies in the tri-state area, meeting with school boards and
> such.  So, I'm not affiliated with any NCAA member institution-and it is
> okay to treat me as a media person as what is discovered will be reported
> upon in different position papers and perhaps news releases or public
> committee meetings.
> Mark Rauterkus, 412-481-2540
> 108 South 12th Street
> Pittsburgh, PA 15203-1226
> email: mrauterkus@sportsurf.net
> 
> 
> Questions:
> 1.	What Div. I football programs share PRACTICE FACILITIES on a day to
> day basis with PROFESSIONAL (NFL) FOOTBALL Teams?  Are there any?
> 
> 
> 2.	We realize that there are some NCAA programs that share stadiums
> with pro teams:
> 	Tampa Bay NFL & Univ. of South Florida
> 	Army/Navy Game at Veterans Stadium
> 	Rutgers Univ. at Meadowlands
> 
> What others am I missing? 
> 
> 3.	We realize that there are some strong rules in place with NCAA
> institutions to distance themselves, their athletes and even the recrits
> from PRO teams, agents, and such. With this in mind-does it make sense to
> share practice facilities on a day to day basis with pros and college
> athletes? Would it be permitted or not by the NCAA?
> 
> Thanks.
> Mark Rauterkus
> 412-481-2540
> mrauterkus@sportsurf.net

Interesting email from the NCAA

https://dystopia.4rs.org/ncaa-confirmed-issue/

Don't beat yourself!

Pitt's Problems are Pitt's Doings

Pitt want to buy a 18-acres site on the South Side and get itself into another land-locked position again. Why?

Pitt's move to the LTV site gives Pitt more of the same headaches it already has. The football fields don't fit. There is no elbow room within those 18 acres. The LTV site is a long-thin strip of property. A rail-road right of way pinches the space to the river's edge and there isn't suitable room.

The entire LTV site is 130-acres. Today, in its brownfield conditions with one ugly UPMC building in another parcel, the space looks big. But, the look is an illusion that is temporary.

The LTV site isn't as dense as Oakland, but it is tight. The apartments, the entertainment places, the other buildings are coming.

Face the Facts

The 18-acres of space UPMC wants to purchase is a long, thin strip of space, suitable for a bike path and a dog run. But this space isn't okay for football facilities. This space, for sure, is not suitable for TWO football facilities, as we'll be hearing in an effort to end-run the NCAA rules.

Pitt is going to go to lots of trouble to make two facilities, when one does not even fit. Pitt officials and UPMC officials are really jazzed about their ownership and their master-mindedness.

---

Sports Coaching Prime Mission

As a coach, one of the biggest responsibilities within the art and science of coaching, is to allow the athletes to NOT beat themselves. Sometimes a team is beaten by superior competition. Other times a team gets beat by its own actions. This is sportscaster's jargon, but the idea does make sense.

On a more technical note, in the sport of swimming, coaches instruct the athletes to get out of their own way. You can't flail around and go at the highest speeds.

The principles apply to Pitt, sad to say. Pitt's loss is Pitt's fault. UPMC tripped and did itself a face plant.

---

Pitt has other Options -- Better Solutions Loom Much Larger

To build a Sports Performance development, UPMC should be seek 50 acres. Or, UPMC should grow where it is now. Both are talked about here.

UPMC Could Move to Quarry Field, Behind UPMC South Side Hospital

UPMC owns South Side Hospital now. There is plenty of room behind South Side Hospital that would be a perfect location for a UPMC expansion.

UPMC has an employee parking lot behind the rail-road tracks behind the Brew House and UPMC South Side Hospital. That is land that UPMC already owns. UPMC has employees park in that lot and get onto a bus to go to Oakland for their day jobs.

Directly across the street from the UPMC parking lot, and directly behind UPMC South Side Hospital is another parking lot that is the home of Courier Express delivery trucks. That small business owner would be willing to sell the property to UPMC for the right price.

Further behind UPMC South Side Hospital is Neville Ice Rink. The Ice Rink has a large parking lot.

Further behind Neville Ice Rink is another open space, park area, Quarry Field. This is the current home to the South Side Sabers youth football teams. A football field no less. This has lights, and room for expansion by taking over the ancient swing set at the far end of the property or taking over the crumbled basketball courts, nearer to Neville.

South Side Hospital Upside

Dr. Freddie Fu operates in a hospital. Surgery isn't going to be done at the Sports Performance Center -- unless the Sports Performance Center is moved to a hospital location. We can get the best of both world for everyone by putting the proposed UPMC site next to the existing UPMC site.

Dr. Fu, if he and his fellow doctors, move into the LTV site, they will need to drive to the hospital to do their other work. Why not position Dr. Fu and the medical team next to a hospital and get more for less?

Capacity is Ready at South Side Hospital

South Side Hospital was a community hospital that was purchased by UPMC in recent years. South Side has infrastructure and capacity to spare. The hospital was designed in another era and has many less beds than what it can handle. The S.S. Hospital could double in its capacity, if not triple, without needing an extra operating or examination room as it is under-utilized.

Lower Costs at South Side vs. Oakland for Operational Procedures

South Side Hospital has better economics for charges for services such as operations. To operate or do a procedure in an Oakland hospital costs a certain amount, and the costs are less at South Side Hospital. If South Side Hospital gets better utilization, then the citizens, health care, city employees and so on are going to benefit.

Others have said that Pitt should build a new stadium or the new convocation on the LTV site. It is a nice idea, but it doesn't work. There is not enough space in a square, round or rectangle condition to allow for those types of facility.