Enough stuff packed in here that I'll do the table of contents again:CorrectionCity Council Hearing (June 17) scheduled todayNews articles and blog links/videoPublic Hearing (June 16)
Talking points (feel free to add)***************************************************** Whoops, incorrectly attributed something to Jill Weiss in the last email -- the thing about city council came from a different source! Sorry about that; it’ll teach me to try and save time by using an old letter as a form.
********************************** City Council has scheduled a public hearing about the Schenley High School closing
on Tuesday, June 17 at 6 p.m. The hearing will be held in council chambers downtown
at the City-County Building. The hearing will also be televised. People who wish to testify
will be allowed a three minute presentation; appointments can be scheduled by calling
the council clerk's office (412-255-2142) no later than 5 pm on Tuesday, June 17th.
We are going to try to organize our presentation among the first ten to twelve speakers, after an initial presentation. We need to plan a meeting in the next couple of days to get this started. Testimony will center on the value of the building itself to the city, the value of the school (and of a transparent and open school administratin) to city life, etc.If you are willing to meet, organize, and write AND/OR to be one of the speakers of the prepared presentation, please email. Perfect opportunity for people who work downtown to have a chance to speak up for Schenley. Students may also speak (as part of the main presentation or on their own) but again, the emphasis should be on issues relevant to the city/city life as a whole.
If you can’t make this, please send a letter to your city council member:Mayor Luke Ravenstahl
mayorcompl@city.pittsburgh.pa.us City Controller Michael Lamb
michael.lamb@city.pittsburgh.pa.us District 1, Darlene Harris
darlene.harris@city.pittsburgh.pa.us District 2, Dan Deasy
dan.deasy@city.pittsburgh.pa.usDistrict 3, Bruce Kraus
bruce.kraus@city.pittsburgh.pa.us District 4, Jim Motznik
james.motznik@city.pittsburgh.pa.us District 5, Doug Shields
doug.shields@city.pittsburgh.pa.us District 6, Tonya Payne
tonya.payne@city.pittsburgh.pa.us District 7, Patrick Dowd
patrick.dowd@city.pittsburgh.pa.us District 8, Bill Peduto
bill.peduto@city.pittsburgh.pa.us District 9, Rev. Ricky Burgess
reverend.burgess@city.pittsburgh.pa.us
****************
Is today the last day of classes at Schenley? - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review
Hard numbers haunt district: City schools' debt $476 million - Pittsburgh Tribune-ReviewFinal days at Schenley High School video from the Post-Gazette websiteReader Forum: Share your memories of Pittsburgh's Schenley High School on Post-Gazette websiteBlogging Schenley:TV show about Schenley HS and the ‘sky is falling falsehoods’ -- listen to the broadcast from Friday, hear what’s in those reports.
*************************
Board of Education Public Hearing on Monday, June 16th
Call 412-622-3600 to register. As of noonish today, there were 25 signed up to speak. Many talking points/unanswered questions directly below.
*************************Short version of the message -- stop, look, and listen before you do anything else as a board! The school board needs to have a clear idea of the vision and plan for the future before voting in any more spending or changes!There are big changes coming to every high school in this district (being closed, having an influx of students, the "streamlining" of electives, new feeder patterns and a new lottery system, to name just a few), but no one has a clear idea of the big picture. In the meantime, money is being spent in bits and pieces as parts of this plan go forward. At some point, enough will have been spent that it will seem as though there's no turning back.Why are we beginning reform by moving and changing currently attractive and successful programs? Innovation and change are great, but they should be aimed where there is failure and bad programming first.What is going to happen to the currently underenrolled and underperforming high schools? How are those students helped by these plans?Will it really save taxpayer's money to split students, faculty & staff into four different physical locations - all of which will require significant renovation costs?If Reizenstein is not being renovated and Frick is supposed to be renovated next year with 4 grades there -- why is it again that the 9th graders aren't going to Reizenstein? Who is going to teach the 9th graders at Frick? No one wants to lose building seniority by moving for a year!If Schenley is closed will we pay anyway to abate the asbestos if it is sold? (think South Hills High School: “The board of education recently completed a $3.5M site remediation, which included removing asbestos, replacing the roof and removing an addition.” April 2007 -- http://www.popcitymedia.com/developmentnews/shhs0418.aspx )What are going to be the effects of dispersing a highly effective faculty & staff from a high school that most students want to go to?How will all of these new schools be staffed without pulling good teachers from current programs?Are smaller high schools equipped to provide full complement of athletics, arts, and after-school programs and extracurriculars? If the goal is college ready, all of those things are important. Roosevelt has implied that "comprehensive high schools" are obsolete. The suburbs don’t seem to have gotten this memo.Parents and students will have to make "choices" about their educational track in fifth grade for these 6-12 schools. Do these themed schools also make later choices more difficult – what about kids that are a bad fit for the school, how limited will their choices be then?Jen Lakin
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
school recap from Jen
Heated words, again, in council about North Shore -- time is up!
kdka.com - Heated Words Over North Shore Amphitheater: "Heated Words Over North Shore Amphitheater"Great story from KDKA TV News. Good job citizens!
It is fifth, or sixth down. Steelers play football. They know that they only get fourth down. They punted. Time ran out. The clock has been at 00:00, time expired, for more than a year.
We should demand a new bid process. An OPEN BID process. Seek bids, not private deals from behind smoke filled rooms.
We don't need the Steelers to get a kickback from PA Governor Rendell again.
Good job KDKA and great job citizens.
Want to hear the public hearing, click the button below. The first part, a presentation from SEA boss, Mary C, was not included. This starts as the councilmembers question her after her presentation. Then come the citizens.
Schenley High School and public hearing
Date: Tuesday, June 17 at 6 pm in City Council Chambers and it will be on city cable.
Call 412-255-2138.
The idea from Tonya Payne and Jim Motznik was to hold the meeting at Schenley High School auditorium. That failed as Council President, Doug Shields, didn't want to make too many waves.
I called to get onto the speakers list. My comments: Save Schenley. Save money.
As to holding the meeting within the public building that Mark Roosevelt wants to abandon, Shields said it would be the wrong signal to send to the school board. Walking onto their turf and getting in their face. Sheilds does not want to position the council to help all parties. This is our venue, our chamber.
We talk about the parents of Schenley. What does that mean. There are others being involved as you talk about blah, blah, blah.
Setting off on a bad foot.
Doug Shields won't put others on the spot. He has little spine.
Patrick Dowd read the homerule charter. He is not a fan of blocking public commentary. He does want to be mindful that this body has zero authority on how to act on school governance. Dowd says we have no authority, no jurisdiction.
We could make a public comment, so says Dowd. We could offer solutions. They would be irresponsible until we were able to comprehend the deep, deep, deep conditions.
To second guess at any way would be reprehensible, until and unless we spent the time requred to know intimately those positions.
What a scolding professor.
Dowd wanted to make a cut-off of speakers. That was not well recieved by both Peduto and Shields. If you RSVP -- up to 5 pm -- you will get to speak for 3 minutes. Others who show up to speak at the meeting you'll be able to get one minute.
Call 412-255-2138.
The idea from Tonya Payne and Jim Motznik was to hold the meeting at Schenley High School auditorium. That failed as Council President, Doug Shields, didn't want to make too many waves.
I called to get onto the speakers list. My comments: Save Schenley. Save money.
As to holding the meeting within the public building that Mark Roosevelt wants to abandon, Shields said it would be the wrong signal to send to the school board. Walking onto their turf and getting in their face. Sheilds does not want to position the council to help all parties. This is our venue, our chamber.
We talk about the parents of Schenley. What does that mean. There are others being involved as you talk about blah, blah, blah.
Setting off on a bad foot.
Doug Shields won't put others on the spot. He has little spine.
Patrick Dowd read the homerule charter. He is not a fan of blocking public commentary. He does want to be mindful that this body has zero authority on how to act on school governance. Dowd says we have no authority, no jurisdiction.
We could make a public comment, so says Dowd. We could offer solutions. They would be irresponsible until we were able to comprehend the deep, deep, deep conditions.
To second guess at any way would be reprehensible, until and unless we spent the time requred to know intimately those positions.
What a scolding professor.
Dowd wanted to make a cut-off of speakers. That was not well recieved by both Peduto and Shields. If you RSVP -- up to 5 pm -- you will get to speak for 3 minutes. Others who show up to speak at the meeting you'll be able to get one minute.
Registry, live blog
Doug Shields teamed up with Bruce Kraus to make a natural extension of a benefit for the management of benefits.
Doug has another amendment that he'll offer in the future about joint loan obligation, lease, deeds and so on as to the proofs necessary for the registry.
The grandfather provision is in the bill. That's funny. Everything kosher, so said Doug. There are less than 10 people who have been getting this benefit, offered from the city since 1998. The ones already getting benefits only need to make sure that the existing mutual commitment affidavit.
Breaking up is hard to do. The new changes make for fiscal responsibility.
Shields said that this does not open the door to gay marriage. The intent here is an orderly administration of benefits for the public and private employees.
There are 72 cities that offer a registry process. You must be a resident of the city to get into this registry. Red tape.
Cleveland Heights has names on a list and that is a right of self government. So, why would you want to make new lists and gather new names and keep them within governmental offices.
This registry does nothing with private employers. Nothing.
Companies in the city that offer benefits to domestic partners have employees that may or may not live in the city. Hence, to call this registry one-stop shopping, as Shields did, is a big over-reach in the real world. Non-city residents are NOT going to be a part of this registry.
The cost is $25 for those that register. There won't be an expense to the city above the fees collected.
They don't know if this is public record or not.
Under HIPPA -- give me a break. This is NOT medical information. This registry has nothing to do with medical information.
To register yourself in the registry, you're name has to be 'on the books.' That is a public statement, a public action, a public record, a public act.
Who knows the right to know act.
They say that this bill isn't going to cost the city any money. Meanwhile, the conversation in city council has already gone more than an hour. The lawyers are sitting at the table.
Dowd has to be honest. He is 100% supportive. But.... I would like to some day perhaps to see a way in which we can see this more than a list and confer rights. So Patrick wants to begin to think of ways to confer rights. Patrick wants to open a bigger can of worms. He is sad that the city isn't going far enough.
Once rights are confered, then he'll think that people will be required to register. But really, Professor Dowd, that isn't how rights are granted. You should not need to apply for rights. Rights are granted by law for everyone. I have a right to free speech -- without getting a stamp from the free speech registry before I stand on my soapbox or post to the blog.
Toyna says go no further unless we know if the names are going to be open records. Wedding licenses are public record.
Tonya wants to be able to accept applications from an online form, without the need of the people needing to come into the office.
Tonya wants to give benefits to mothers, aunts, and so on. The health care insurance companies do not offer benefits to those people under those relationships.
Folks -- the benefits and the registry are different. The best case is the pool pass example that I blogged about last week. If a couple with two kids want to get a $60 pool pass each year, they should be able to do so if they are on the registry. Otherwise, the pool passes would cost $30 extra per year.
The registry is a singular function -- except for pool passes within the city.
Bill Peduto wants to move the meeting along at 12:54. There is still a pre-agenda and a meeting with a new board member. No lunch again!
Bill Peduto said it seems very 1930s Germany for me! Then he realized about the type of world we live in. This is a first step. If we get to the first step. Pittsburgh can change. It is going to require an incredible amount of courage. Take progressive steps. Create the 8th largest city, merger, knowlege workers. That's all I have to say about this.
This bill means a lot to Mr. Kraus. Two staffers were invaluable tools.
Two women brought the idea to Doug Shields after getting him at a charity auction item.
All voted to approve it except Rev. Burgess.
Doug has another amendment that he'll offer in the future about joint loan obligation, lease, deeds and so on as to the proofs necessary for the registry.
The grandfather provision is in the bill. That's funny. Everything kosher, so said Doug. There are less than 10 people who have been getting this benefit, offered from the city since 1998. The ones already getting benefits only need to make sure that the existing mutual commitment affidavit.
Breaking up is hard to do. The new changes make for fiscal responsibility.
Shields said that this does not open the door to gay marriage. The intent here is an orderly administration of benefits for the public and private employees.
There are 72 cities that offer a registry process. You must be a resident of the city to get into this registry. Red tape.
Cleveland Heights has names on a list and that is a right of self government. So, why would you want to make new lists and gather new names and keep them within governmental offices.
This registry does nothing with private employers. Nothing.
Companies in the city that offer benefits to domestic partners have employees that may or may not live in the city. Hence, to call this registry one-stop shopping, as Shields did, is a big over-reach in the real world. Non-city residents are NOT going to be a part of this registry.
The cost is $25 for those that register. There won't be an expense to the city above the fees collected.
They don't know if this is public record or not.
Under HIPPA -- give me a break. This is NOT medical information. This registry has nothing to do with medical information.
To register yourself in the registry, you're name has to be 'on the books.' That is a public statement, a public action, a public record, a public act.
Who knows the right to know act.
They say that this bill isn't going to cost the city any money. Meanwhile, the conversation in city council has already gone more than an hour. The lawyers are sitting at the table.
Dowd has to be honest. He is 100% supportive. But.... I would like to some day perhaps to see a way in which we can see this more than a list and confer rights. So Patrick wants to begin to think of ways to confer rights. Patrick wants to open a bigger can of worms. He is sad that the city isn't going far enough.
Once rights are confered, then he'll think that people will be required to register. But really, Professor Dowd, that isn't how rights are granted. You should not need to apply for rights. Rights are granted by law for everyone. I have a right to free speech -- without getting a stamp from the free speech registry before I stand on my soapbox or post to the blog.
Toyna says go no further unless we know if the names are going to be open records. Wedding licenses are public record.
Tonya wants to be able to accept applications from an online form, without the need of the people needing to come into the office.
Tonya wants to give benefits to mothers, aunts, and so on. The health care insurance companies do not offer benefits to those people under those relationships.
Folks -- the benefits and the registry are different. The best case is the pool pass example that I blogged about last week. If a couple with two kids want to get a $60 pool pass each year, they should be able to do so if they are on the registry. Otherwise, the pool passes would cost $30 extra per year.
The registry is a singular function -- except for pool passes within the city.
Bill Peduto wants to move the meeting along at 12:54. There is still a pre-agenda and a meeting with a new board member. No lunch again!
Bill Peduto said it seems very 1930s Germany for me! Then he realized about the type of world we live in. This is a first step. If we get to the first step. Pittsburgh can change. It is going to require an incredible amount of courage. Take progressive steps. Create the 8th largest city, merger, knowlege workers. That's all I have to say about this.
This bill means a lot to Mr. Kraus. Two staffers were invaluable tools.
Two women brought the idea to Doug Shields after getting him at a charity auction item.
All voted to approve it except Rev. Burgess.
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
LA arts high school brings prestige, but high cost - Yahoo! News
LA arts high school brings prestige, but high cost - Yahoo! News: "LA arts high school brings prestige, but high cost
The veto came on this campaign finance reform legislation
Ordinance supplementing the Pittsburgh Code, Title One, Administrative, by adding a new section, Article XIII, entitled, “Campaign Finance Regulations.”
Be it resolved by the Council of the City of Pittsburgh as follows:
Section 1. The Pittsburgh Code, Title One, Administrative, is hereby supplemented by adding a new section, Article XIII, entitled, “Campaign Finance Regulations,” as follows:
Chapter 198: Campaign Finance Regulations
§198.01 Definitions
For purposes of this Chapter, the following definitions shall apply:
(1) Candidate
(a) An individual who files nomination papers or petitions for City elective office.
(b) An individual who publicly announces his or her candidacy for City elective office.
(2) Political Committee.
Any committee, club, association, political party, or other group of persons, including the candidate political committee as required by §198.03, for the purpose of influencing the outcome of a covered election.
(3) City elective office
The offices of Mayor, City Controller, or City Council.
(4) Contribution
Money, gifts, forgiveness of debts, loans, or things having a monetary value incurred or received by a candidate or his/her agent for use in advocating or influencing the election of the candidate.
(5) Covered election
Every primary, general or special election for City elective office.
(6) Person
An individual, partnership, corporation, sole proprietorship, or other form of business organization permitted under the laws of the Commonwealth to make political contributions.
§198.02 Contribution Limitations
(1) Except as provided in subsection (3), no individual shall make total contributions per covered election, including contributions made to or through one or more political committees, of more than two thousand dollars ($2,000) to a candidate for a City elective office.
a. On the Wednesday following a municipal general election, the contribution limit shall increase by the percent difference in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Customers (CPI-U) for the previous two years.
(2) Except as provided in subsection (3), no political committee shall make total contributions per covered election of more than five thousand dollars ($5,000) to a candidate for a City elective office.
(3) The limitations imposed by this Chapter shall not apply to contributions
from a candidate’s personal resources to the candidate’s political committee. However, if such contributions total $250,000 or more (regardless of the time period over which such contributions are made), then the contribution limits set forth in this Section for all other candidates for that City elective office shall double.
(4) The limitations imposed by this subsection shall not apply to volunteer labor, but they shall apply to the value of in-kind contributions.
(5) No candidate for City elective office, and no political committee, shall
accept any contribution which exceeds the contribution limits set forth in this Chapter.
§198.03 Candidate Political Committee Accounts
A candidate for City elective office shall have no more than one political committee and one checking account for the city office being sought, into which all contributions for such office shall be made, and out of which all expenditures for that office shall be made. If the candidate for office maintains other political or non-political accounts for which contributions are solicited, such funds collected in these accounts shall not be used for the purpose of influencing the outcome of a covered election
§198.04 Competitive Bidding and Disclosure
(1) Any person who makes a maximum contribution during an election cycle may not be awarded a contract relating to City affairs, without going through a competitive bidding process.
(2) Any candidate seeking an elective office in the City must submit a disclosure form for every contributor who makes a contribution of five-hundred dollars ($500.00) or more:
Does business with or has a contract with the City, its Authorities, Boards or Commissions and the nature of said business or contract for the past five (5) years;
Is employed by the City, its Authorities, Boards or Commissions or was employed by the same in the past five (5) years;
Has an appointment to any Authority Board or any other Board or Commission of the City or has held one in the past five (5) years;
§198.05 Public Record of Reports
All candidates submitting campaign finance reports to the Allegheny County Department of Elections shall simultaneously file copies with the City Controller for the City of Pittsburgh. The Department of City Information Systems shall be responsible for maintaining an up-to-date and public database that is searchable based on the following
categories: candidate name, contributor name, contribution level, and, where applicable, employer.
§198.06 Required Notice of Contribution Limits
The Ethics Hearing Board shall annually arrange for the publication of a notice setting forth the contribution limits set forth in this Chapter, together with a plain English explanation of the provisions of this Chapter and the penalties and remedies for violations. Such notice shall also appear at all times on the City’s official website.
§198.07 Penalties, Injunctive Relief & Wrongful Acts
(1) Any person residing in the City of Pittsburgh, including the City Solicitor may bring an action for injunctive relief in any Court of competent jurisdiction to enjoin any violations of, or to compel compliance with, the provisions of this Chapter. The Court may award to a prevailing plaintiff in any such action his or her costs of litigation, including reasonable attorney’s fees.
(2) A person who brings an action or causes or precipitates an action for injunctive relief alleging a violation of this chapter is subject to liability for wrongful use of this Chapter if the complaint was frivolous, as defined thereby, or without probable cause and made primarily for a purpose other than that of reporting a violation of this Chapter.
(a) A person who brings an action for injunctive relief alleging a violation of this Chapter has probable cause for doing so if he or she reasonably believes in the existence of the facts upon which the action is based and either:
(1) Reasonably believes that under those facts the action may be valid under this Chapter; or
(2) Believes to this effect in reliance upon the advice of counsel, sought in good faith and given after full disclosure of all relevant facts within his or her knowledge and information.
(b) Allegations of wrongful use shall be investigated in the manner set forth in § 197.12.
(c) When the essential elements of an action brought pursuant to this section have been established, damages may be assessed by a court of appropriate jurisdiction considering the following:
(1) The harm to reputation by a defamatory matter alleged as the basis of the proceeding;
(2) The expenses, including any reasonable attorney fees, that the person has reasonably incurred;
(3) Any specific pecuniary loss that has resulted from the proceedings;
(4) Any emotional distress that has been caused by the proceedings; and
(5) Any punitive damages according to law in appropriate cases.
(3) The provisions of this Chapter shall be subject to the jurisdiction of the Ethics Hearing Board.
§198.08 Severability
If any provision of this Ordinance shall be determined to be unlawful, invalid, void, or unenforceable, then that provision shall be considered severable from the remaining provisions of this Ordinance, which shall be in full force and effect.
§198.09 Effective Date; Implementation
(1)This Ordinance shall take effect on January 1, 2010.
(2) By June 1, 2009 the City Controller shall provide City Council with a report on the City’s preparedness of the implementation of this ordinance.
King Solomon, my ass. Here is the deal -- you don't have a plan nor a clue
At the start of the 90-minute meeting Mr. Kraus said he felt he was in a King Solomon position where the choice he would make would not make one group happy.The tail wags the dog these days in the South Side.
Pet owners should be safe with their dogs in their back yards or else on leashes. If you want to be unsafe, then let's talk about dogs in a tiny park space without leashes.
Does dog socialization trump kid socialization?
I understand, in the world of Bruce Kraus, how he values the promotion of cats and dogs before people as they have been a 'pre-agenda' on Wednesdays at city council before citizen public comment.
The large, enclosed grass area is for kids, first. People second. Thirdly -- for other uses.
The adjacent children's playground is part of the park and not a place to confine the kids.
Mr. Kraus provided written material for the residents, explaining that it is against the law to allow dogs to run unleashed unless they are in one of four designated areas of the city: Upper Frick Park, Lower Frick Park as well as West Park and Observatory Hill on the North Side. The Frick parks both serve the Shadyside/Squirrel Hill communities. There are not designated dog parks on the south or west areas of the city. The residents at the meeting want to change that and Councilman Kraus has pledged to help although he admitted that it may be difficult to do it in a timely manner.Mr. Kraus had no 'dog plan' when he ran for the city council seat. I've thought about this problem for a while. He is welcome to my talking points.
There is a locked park with lots of green space in the South Side. There is a stretch of land around the river's edge by the rail road tracks that can be put into use for a dog run too.
Kraus needs to think out of the box. And, he can't be expected to do that quickly. Mr. Kraus is very busy now trying to get a new governmental registry for unmarried couples. And, Mr. Kraus is slaving over the new sign ordinance plan as the six month moratorium on all new signs is getting ready to expire. Plus, Bill Peduto isn't going to be around much in the months to come to tell him what to do.
If Armstrong Park turns into a designated dog park I wonder how Mr. Kraus is going to tax the dogs.
Suitable nearby alternatives are called hamster, fish, in-house cat, backyard and leashes. Plus there is the South Side Park ice rink and river's edge dog-run.
The current park is, so they say, not conducive to ball playing. Bull shit. Err, dog shit on them. It most certainly is an ideal place for ball playing. We played and do play on those grounds in most successful ways for decades.
That field was home to a semi-pro football team.
That field was home to the biggest Rookie Ball program in the city -- for kids ages, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and older.
When the city cut out the Rec Centers and Swim Pools -- we suffered some massive blows to our opportunities with the kids. Holding baseball practices at places where the rest rooms can't be opened sorta sucks. The pitching machine and equipment departed, to gather dust perhaps.
Then there was South High School! They used to play high school softball on that field -- without problems. Not suitable is wrong as can be.
We could let dogs to run on the lawn of South Vo Tech and the lawn of the Pgh Federations of Teachers buildings.
Mr. Ashley, who lives in one of the city�s southern neighborhoods, said that before his pet recently died, he would take his dog to run loose across town at West Park. Thank you Mr. Ashley for being the gentleman and responsible, good neighbor that you are. West Park! A good place for dogs.
Is today the last day of classes at Schenley? - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review
Is today the last day of classes at Schenley? - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review: "For many students, the finality of the occasion has not yet sunk in.The finality has not sunk in yet, because it isn't final. There has not been a final vote. This isn't a done deal.
Seems that the students are smarter than the media.
By the way, I talked today with Chelsa Wagner about the schools and the urgency. She needs to get into the game, now, even while the state budget efforts are happening.
A change in a vote from, say Jean Fink, school board member, on Schenley, could mean that the school gets some attention to the ceilings this summer and is open again for next school year -- as it should be.
Chelsa should be calling Mrs. Fink to talk about the plans there and all the costs of moving the students.
Chelsa should care because Schenley is a city-wide magnet. Students from Chelsa's district attend Schenley. And the money that Mark Roosevelt burns with the madness of his high school reform crisis is sure to take away other opportunities for others throughout the city.
You are right, Brooke. It is sad. But, it isn't just. It isn't only sad. It is also 'mad.' And, it is very bad.
"It's kind of sad -- the fact that we'll never be back here again," said Brooke Baumbeck, 15, a freshman from Lawrenceville. "It's just sad."
Council fails to override veto of campaign reform bill
Council fails to override veto of campaign reform bill Mr. Shields said the vetoed legislation 'begins to build a house of reform. . . . The great thing about politics and baseball is that there's always tomorrow.'Doug digs deep to come up with that expression. "There is always tomorrow."
Doug sums up the best of what happens in Pittsburgh's political scene.
There is always a tomorrow -- except when you die. Sadly, there will not be a tomorrow for the mom of Rev. Ricky Burgess. So sorry about the loss. Funeral is slated for 11 am on Thursday.
There will be no tomorrow for Schenley High School -- after graduation on Saturday -- if Mark Roosevelt has his way. Gone. Extinct.
The hope of tomorrow is burning less bright for the city itself. The city may die. It already has two sets of OVERLORDS.
So, in politics, there is not a guarantee of tomorrow.
Back to the news to sustain the discussion:
Here is the deal, Luke. There should NEVER be ANY no-bid contracts. I'd outlaw all no-bid contracts. The public funds need to be protected. Bids insure honesty and value for the spending.
The mayor said he supports the posting of all contributions, and of big donors' relationships with the city, online. He said he would also back a ban on no-bid contracts for anyone who contributed more than a certain threshold amount to a campaign.
"I have no plans currently, or haven't necessarily worked on it, but I think it's something that we would be willing to do," he said. "Full disclosure, 100 percent transparency, is something that we could do, or work towards doing, as quickly as tomorrow." He said he could work with council to get new rules in place in time for next year's city races.
He said council's legislation -- hatched in January and the subject of a public hearing, a special meeting, and repeated council discussions -- was passed prematurely. "Maybe they were interested in just passing something before they went on their summer vacation, just to pass it, to say that we were a city that had campaign finance reform," he said.
Every contract that the city enters into should be supported by a bidding process.
As to the full transparency, the solution to that is called transparent PAC accounts. If a local bank wanted to help the situation by offering TRANSPARENT PAC ACCOUNTS as a product offering to candidates, campaigns and political action committees, we'd have a most elegant, private market solution.
The legislation from Bill Peduto was NOT hatched in January. We worked in past years on this bill. The work with the experts began in 2004.
Council fails to override veto of campaign reform bill
Council fails to override veto of campaign reform bill: "Council President Doug Shields said the mayor's four-page veto message, delivered yesterday, was 'somewhat misdirected' and called some of its contentions 'balderdash.'"I think the memo with the veto is gibberish.
Hard numbers haunt district: City schools' debt $476 million - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review
Hard numbers haunt district: City schools' debt $476 million - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review: "Hard numbers haunt district: City schools' debt $476 millionReactions welcomed in comments. My thoughts later today.
Running to city council now.
Monday, June 09, 2008
Mayor vetoes campaign finance reform
Forced. That was the word Luke used in his description ... labor would be 'forced to' blah, blah, blah.
If Luke wants to talk about 'force' -- let's talk about it.
Furthermore, and more to my core of being, is the feeling that unions would be forced to match up to a wealth opponent in the spending department. The amount of money raised does not guarantee votes.
If 50 PACs each donate the limit to a candidate to match, dollar for dollar, what the wealthy opposition has invested / spent, so what. Money can't guarantee votes. The boots on the street and the people going to the polls are much more valuable than the capital in the check book of a wealthy opponent.
Finally, the PAC can give the limit and then pass the word that each of the members of the PAC give from personal accounts. The members of the union can write a check for $50 or even up to $2000 each.
The donation from the PAC to the candidate is just the tip of the point. The wood behind the arrow's point is the additional donations from individuals to the candidate directly.
Mayor vetoes campaign finance reform: "Under the current bill, the labor community, whose funds are raised at the small dollar level from working men and women, and distributed through PACs, would be forced to find 50 PACs to contribute at the maximum levels proscribed by this bill to match the wealthy, anti-labor candidate.'First of all, many labor unions force their members to give to their political action committees. Unions often extract money by force from the ranks of the union's membership. Some of those incomes are spend in PACs.
If Luke wants to talk about 'force' -- let's talk about it.
Furthermore, and more to my core of being, is the feeling that unions would be forced to match up to a wealth opponent in the spending department. The amount of money raised does not guarantee votes.
If 50 PACs each donate the limit to a candidate to match, dollar for dollar, what the wealthy opposition has invested / spent, so what. Money can't guarantee votes. The boots on the street and the people going to the polls are much more valuable than the capital in the check book of a wealthy opponent.
Finally, the PAC can give the limit and then pass the word that each of the members of the PAC give from personal accounts. The members of the union can write a check for $50 or even up to $2000 each.
The donation from the PAC to the candidate is just the tip of the point. The wood behind the arrow's point is the additional donations from individuals to the candidate directly.
Pittsburgh mayor vetoes campaign finance limit bill - Pittsburgh Business Times:
The expected veto by Luke Ravenstahl o campaign finance reform arrived. I asked via a note to the mayor for him to to sit with me and consider some counter-proposals to come along with his veto. I didn't want him to veto it. And, even if he signed the bill, he could have offered further, different suggestions for election reform.
The mayor has nothing to say, except offer four letters?
The Trib says that the veto came with a four page memo. I would love to see it. I'll post it here as soon as I get a copy.
The mayor has nothing to say, except offer four letters?
Pittsburgh mayor vetoes campaign finance limit bill - Pittsburgh Business Times:: A bill that would have limited political contributions to candidates for public office in Pittsburgh was vetoed Monday by Mayor Luke Ravenstahl.Update:
Pittsburgh City Council last week voted 5-4 to limit candidates for a city office to a $2,000 donation from an individual and $5,000 from a group, corporation or union.
But Ravenstahl rejected the bill, which Councilman Bill Peduto, the measure's primary sponsor, said was disappointing.
'This is just emblematic of a backward thinking, old-school political town, and it's embarrassing, frankly, that Pittsburgh can't enact progressive legislation like almost every other city and state in this country,' he said.
'(Ravenstahl) said this isn't real reform. (Then) why was it supported by Common Cause, the League of Women Voters, Democracy Rising, and other reform-minded organizations?
'This has been in process for five months, and the mayor never spoke a word until he vetoed it,' Peduto said.
A spokeswoman for Ravenstahl did not immediately return a call for comment.
The Trib says that the veto came with a four page memo. I would love to see it. I'll post it here as soon as I get a copy.
Ravenstahl vetoes campaign finance limits - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review: "'The ordinance before me is fraught with problems,' Ravenstahl, whose recent mayoral campaign benefited from unregulated contributions, wrote in a four-page veto message to council members. 'It provides an unfair competitive advantage for the wealthy and will have a chilling effect on the labor movement.'"
Swim coach: Jack Pidgeon: Hundreds honor Kiski headmaster's life
Hundreds honor Kiski headmaster's life: "Hundreds honor Kiski headmaster's life"
I wish I would have known him. Always wanted to meet him. He was coaching in recent years with Indiana Univ. of Pa.
I wish I would have known him. Always wanted to meet him. He was coaching in recent years with Indiana Univ. of Pa.
Saturday, June 07, 2008
Help us reach out to the city -- and in turn -- the world
If you can send out this pointer, it would be great.
http://AforAthlete.Wikia.com/Olympicpedia
Mark Rauterkus, a dad, coach, publisher and community activist is holding a day camp in June and July as a lead-up to the Beijing Olympics, called Olympicpedia. We'll work on wiki content in a computer lab M-F from 11 am to 1 pm and drop ins on a day-by-day basis are welcomed. Mark@Rauterkus.com 412 298 3432 or see http://AforAthlete.Wikia.com/Olympicpedia.
Thanks!
http://AforAthlete.Wikia.com/Olympicpedia
Mark Rauterkus, a dad, coach, publisher and community activist is holding a day camp in June and July as a lead-up to the Beijing Olympics, called Olympicpedia. We'll work on wiki content in a computer lab M-F from 11 am to 1 pm and drop ins on a day-by-day basis are welcomed. Mark@Rauterkus.com 412 298 3432 or see http://AforAthlete.Wikia.com/Olympicpedia.
Thanks!
HealthCare4All-Downloads
HealthCare4All-Downloads: "Single Payer for Business (.pdf) NEW!
Legislative Action Letter (.pdf)
Single Payer Brochure (.pdf or .zip)
Latest Single Payer Presentation (.ppt)
Two Plans for Pennsylvania comparison sheet (.pdf)
The plans versus what we have now comparison sheet (.pdf)
101 reasons balanced health care reform works for Pennsylvania (.pdf)
Senate Bill 300, Mar. 2007 (.pdf)
Senate Bill 1085, Feb. 2006 (.pdf)
Presentation explaining SB1085 pros and cons (.pdf)
House Bill 2722, June 2006 (.pdf)
Universal Single Payer Health Care presentation (.pdf)
House Bill 700, Mar. 2007 or the governor's Prescription for Pennsylvania plan (.pdf)"
Draft Chelsa 2009
A new blog on the Pittsburgh political landscape.
Chelsa-target-polling - Fix PA: "Chelsa-target-polling"
Draft Chelsa 2009: "This blog is dedicated to building a grassroots movement to draft State Representative Chelsa Wagner for Mayor of Pittsburgh in 2009.I have nothing to do with that blog. I did call Chelsa the other day and I'm waiting for her return call about some serious school matters, however.
Chelsa-target-polling - Fix PA: "Chelsa-target-polling"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
