Shirley says she appreciates how deeply the Councilman from the East End gets involved with all city communities like hers’.
I bet that also has something to do with his travel outside the City of Pittsburgh. It hit me recently how many of Peduto’s policy papers include ideas he has picked up from other cities. Nice to think of a mayor who is always on the hunt for what’s working. It’s another part of making a city capable of true transformation, qualitative transformation.
State Rep. Ed Gainey has a couple of great testimonials out…
The Swiftboat folks went with a message that could tie all this unrelated oppo research together – that Bill’s politics are too parochial, I guess. But is that something voters actually think about Bill? Does that describe his actual record? No, it doesn’t. Bill’s got good attainable ideasforallthedifferent neighborhoods. He cares about regional issues. Calling him a parochial politician just isn’t believable.
Here’s my prediction: the main thing Democratic voters will remember about this ad is that the “Swiftboat” people made it. The Jack Wagner shadow campaign hired a notorious Republican firm to do a nasty Republican-flavored ad hitting the guy that every progressive politician and advocacy group you like is supporting. And one reason Democrats are going to remember that is because it feeds right into the negative message that the Peduto campaign has already developed about Wagner – that he’s too much aligned with the Republicans. Reading about the Swiftboat people’s ad in the news will reinforce Wagner’s negatives more than Peduto’s. (Jon @ KP)
Since Bram was honest enough to state his support of Bill Peduto, I’ll state mine for Jack Wagner.
[Much obliged. This blue and italicized text is the words of the Comet’s editor, Bram Reichbaum. Due to a miscommunication coupled with a violation involving house rules, I am annotating Shawn’s work. I hope this serendipitous dual-format provides for an excellent read.]
Having said that, Team Peduto hurried out this press release in response to some dark money group who had the temerity to exercise their Citizens United-given rights to employ paid political speech, which is protected, as per the Supreme Court, by the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
[Of course the ad’s genesis is interesting. Why an anonymous group? And why one connected both to Ravenstahl and to Republican campaigns like the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, in this Democratic primary? Its authorship does not entail that its contents are false, but certainly entails we must approach with a high degree of skepticism. [The ad’s sweeping theme merits making explicit: “Peduto doesn’t like African-Americans and poor people.” Peduto has cast a truly massive quantity of up-or-down votes over 8 years as a City Councilor, and the Committee has cherry-picked four of them, devoid of any context and described in reductive terms, to illustrate that point. Fair enough as far it goes, but we must weigh even these charges if any of them pass muster against Peduto’s entire body of work.]
First up, new senior housing in Homewood.
The single most important rule I’ve learned as I’ve worked for candidates and on campaigns is something an old political hand shared with many, many moons ago:
“When you do opposition research, the FIRST person you do opposition research on is YOUR OWN CANDIDATE. Don’t ever assume that your candidate’s memory is as good as a trip down memory lane courtesy of Lexis-Nexis. Or Google. Or even the Post-Gazette’s website.”
Some outfit called “Pittsburghers for a Better Pittsburgh” accused Bill Peduto of “being the only Council member who voted against using $12 million dollars in funds given by the state’s Housing Finance Agency to build senior-citizen housing across the street from the East Busway in Homewood.”
In fact, Bill Peduto WAS the ONLY Council member to vote that way.
Councilman Peduto wants you to believe that after speaking to DOZENS of Homewood residents, he concluded that there wasn’t enough “community engagement.”
Wow. Because spending 4 years, $100,000 in taxpayer funds and bringing in the best design firms in Pittsburgh (Studio for Spatial Practice, Rothschild Doyno) didn’t indicate the City’s interest in REAL community engagement wasn’t sufficient, there is also THIS and THIS:
Here’s what Elwin didn’t mention: The community started this process in 2008. Every community group in Homewood and Point Breeze North was brought to the table. The City didn’t select the consultants, the community groups did. The City didn’t didn’t oversee the process, the community groups did. That’s why it took four years, because, yes, community consensus does take time. (this is a large document.)
[Shawn links first to a post at Elwin Green’s Homewood Nation in which residents in 2010 “were informed” about Bridging the Busway, and then another post in 2012 in which he notes to one of his commenters that plans were not in fact “secret”. Very good. I can attest to the fact that a large-ish number of area residents constantly brought forward grievances relating to gentrification… yet I’m sure that others did not.
[More importantly we realize that “community processes” and “engagement” can mean a lot of different things. Green readily admits the organizers “did fall short” publicizing meetings, and allows for the possibility that the plans might be seen to have issues. Personally I wonder if the whole initiative was top-down and coerced through, or bottom-up and responsive to input in any serious respect — and Peduto reminds us he is a “strong advocate for community-based development.” I hope Elwin chimes in to our discussion for his take both on the merits of the specific dispute, and on his sense about Peduto regarding these issues in general — his community having been requisitioned by the mysterious Committee as ammunition.]
One of the stated goals, from day one, was that we were going to protect our most vulnerable population. Yes, our seniors.
So the state shows up with $12 million dollars and says, “You can have this money if you build senior-citizen housing right THERE.”
[I often wonder who gives the state these specific ideas, that are always presented as one-time only ultimatums; use it this way or lose it all! We encounter so many. Surely this is some function of how the Administration operates, perhaps most administrations.]
The community said, “Okay, we have a plan for that.”
The Zoning Board was no pushover. Despite 4 years of meetings, meetings and more meetings, they demanded yet MORE community process before granting the variances. Even after the Zoning Board granted the variances, the City still had to defend the process, successfully I might add, in Court.
[Nine variances, right?]
Only after all of that, at the final step, did Bill Peduto try to derail the community’s wishes.
[I don’t know anything about time-line. It seems like a decision Bill made, and is defending. Moving on…]
Don’t be fooled by campaign talking points.
Next, Peduto was accused of voting against the City’s Living Wage Ordinance in 2002 as a rookie Councilman. Also true.
Now I know Peduto wants you to believe that all he did was vote for legislation that took a law that was set to go in effect in a few days and say, “Unless County Council passes the same law, ours won’t take effect.” But this is the same logic that was employed with the City’s Campaign Finance Ordinance. You know, the one that the County said they couldn’t enforce because County Council refused to even take up the matter.
In fact, the easiest way to pass a law in City Council that will never take effect is to condition it on the County doing the same.
Here’s the rub: In 2006, the state Legislature passed a law updating the state’s Minimum Wage. That law stated that ANY municipal Ordinance in effect on the day of the passage of the state’s Law was legal and enforceable. So, because of Bill Peduto’s vote, our Living Wage law wasn’t in effect, and as a result, cannot be legally enforced even if we removed the County provision now, despite Bill Peduto’s statements last year that he would now vote to remove the provision.
What was his stated reason for this? That it would hurt the business community, of course. You know, the same reason Ravenstahl gave for his opposition to the Prevailing Wage Law Peduto holds up as a defense.
Speaking of Prevailing Wage…
Why was Luke able to kill off Prevailing Wage on New Year’s Eve in 2009? Because Peduto can’t read a calendar. If you pass a law with less than ten days before the end of the session, and the Mayor has ten days to decide whether or not to veto it or sign it, you leave yourself at the Mayor’s mercy. Seems to me like any member of Council with 7 years on the job would factor that into the equation.
[First of all, Peduto fought for what seemed like ages and ultimately passed the Prevailing Wage ordinance, which raises wages in service and other industries to a certain standard on projects that are underwritten by taxpayer subsidies. As Shawn notes, this benefit was opposed vehemently by the sponsor of the commercial we are discussing, Mayor Luke Ravenstahl. I really don’t care who plays calendar games better, Bill Peduto triumphed, working class families in Pittsburgh are owed more stability, and taxpayers would be getting a better bang for their buck… if the commercial’s sponsor, Luke Ravenstahl, wasn’t being obtuse in holding up implementation.
[To be perfectly honest, I don’t understand any of the machinations behind city’s dormant Living Wage efforts. I can tell you despite the rhetoric of a hundred thousand pious Democrats, we still do not have it. Jack Wagner’s spokesperson pointedout that the candidate recently said he supports“a” living wageand“the” living wage, but I’m still not clear on whether that refers to mere moral support for higher wages generally, or amending or enacting any specific City law. *-UPDATE: Wagner “supports current law” on both Living (as dormant) and Prevailing wage, spox tells Comet. By the Identity Property then it appears Peduto and Wagner agree on living wage, making this accusation doubly hypocritical.]
Not that he learned that lesson. Less than 2 years later, he tried to amend the City’s Home Rule Charter with a referendum that would take the City’s Drilling Ban Ordinance and make it a part of the Home Rule Charter. The problem? They waited to pass the bill until 8 days before the deadline. Ravenstahl just sat on his hands. He had ten days to do it. Bill had only 8. Luke won, again, because Bill, after 8 years in office (and 6 as a staffer) still hadn’t learned how to read a calendar.
[Thank you for reminding us that Bill Peduto is against natural gas drilling in dense urban environments like Pittsburgh, doesn’t care who knows that we feel that way, and is not going to be among the abundant surplus of industry cheerleaders in government.]
In 2011, Bill Peduto introduced a law that would extend the tax breaks on commercial construction in the City. He even told Joe Smydo that it was his intention for there to be NO cap on annual savings.
[Clearly the central thrust of this section’s accusation is that Peduto has been robbing poor neighborhoods in order to give stuff like this to the district he has represented, parts of which are more affluent. But note even in the “give” column, the bill’s benefits were to be applied citywide. Peduto had led a tax-abatement proposal which the Mayor took as his own and expanded a bit during what was… uh… their “last contest” in 2007. It passed and was very popular. This other bill might have spurred even more development at a time the economy was still pretty clunky. It did not pass. I assume some economic development project in his district may otherwise have benefited, along with the others across the city. Peduto may have to wear that for the rest of his life, but I doubt he’ll be ashamed of it.]
In other words, if some billion-dollar corporate entity, like say, PNC, decided to build a $400 million skyscraper Downtown, that they could save 100% on their tax bill.
ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY-MILLION DOLLARS over 10 years. You read it correctly. Bill Peduto introduced a law that would have given PNC $150 million in taxpayer money to PNC. That PNC not only didn’t need… but didn’t even ask for.
So I guess that’s pay-to-play, only in reverse. Instead of the developers paying politicians for preference, he’s paying the developers for preference.
[This stuff about a Downtown development wasn’t even in the ad. This is why reporters should take a pass on working through Carter unless it’s actual Burgess business. He always provides more disarming answers (and if it must come to it, more fluid misdirection) than the actual people and offices you are writing about. Then when you’re done talking to him, he’ll advise all your follow-up sources on what to say before you get to them. You will get better quotes and develop more important stories working through persons who are more directly accountable for the subject matter of your investigations. [I can only guess since the bill that is being criticized by Shawn got nowhere fast, a historical footnote, it probably didn’t receive the kind of vetting and tune-up that would catch things like unexpected $400 million Greenormous skyscrapers.]
Well, obviously, City Council called#%^&*() on that one. They refused to give billionaires that kind of money, so Peduto revised the legislation to only give a few million dollars to developers that, in his own words, “needed that money to complete developments in Oakland.”
More if I get another crack at this…
[Possibly. This is what’s up. Stay tuned, ask around, and keep doing your own research.]
Best news yet: to read KP’s analysis, KA’s poll’s model might be skewing unfavorably against younger demographics — indeed, relative even to recent elections. And you’ve got to figure if this is being considered, either Wagner or Ravenstahl is convinced the prospects for Peduto look good.
PRESCRIPTION: No change. Letters to the editor. Yard signs. Buttons on shirts and bags. Conversations with friends and new acquaintances. Positive visions. Sound science.
There’s an excellent article on the mayor’s race in Urban Media Today under “features”:
[PA Sen. Dem Leader] Jay Costa says he has worked closely with Peduto on a number of issues during the past 12 years. “I’ve never seen anyone make such a commitment to seeing our city grow. We look forward to an ongoing working relationship with Bill Peduto and a city administration that participates in the conversations we have in Harrisburg to advance the city of Pittsburgh.” (UMT, Nancy Hart)
Councilman Peduto here attributes many of the problems in City government to an inherited, legacy regime that has grown too insular, arrogant and stagnant — where only a few interests have grown out-sized, and many others not seriously represented.
Jack Wagner, meanwhile, attributes problems such as years of theft and agenda-mixing in the Police Bureau, favoritism in contracts and services, a BBI that hardly functions, and obtuse resistances to transparency and open communicationlargely to a City Council that does not play nice enough among itself. To hear Wagner tell it, Peduto should not have criticized the “leadership” of Mayor Ravenstahl over the years, which thereby forced Ravenstahl’s yes-men on Council to take constant pot shots at him in return — fomenting just the kind of “bickering” meant to distract from holding a Mayor’s administration accountable.
That much is still going on. Business as usual.
Speaking of Ravenstahl allies and favoritism, it’s a shame that shots-fired detection cameras aren’t already set up today across Pittsburgh — they might comein handy — but Councilman Ricky Burgess is applying one of his full-court presses to allege we’re all murderers if we don’t rush to purchase these cameras, today.
Doing what Mr. Burgess proposes might get the devices in place more quickly, but it would subvert the competitive bid requirement. There are already too many local examples of government contracting abuses — scandals involving the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission and the city’s own police bureau are among the most recent. (P-G, Edit Board)
The Dollar A Car Parking Benefit District is a fair, legal way to make sure that Hill residents and businesses share in the prosperity of redevelopment efforts. Let’s make it happen. (Songs of Policy, Bill Peduto #25)
It almost sounds as though it’s a zoning district. Exquisite.
The Comet has been on board with the idea of structuring community benefits to actually trickle from highly subsidized, public-land seizing, elephantine developments into our actual neighborhoods since our adolesence. It has also been certain that a healthy, mainly residential, and presently existent Greater Hill (and geographically, it alone) is vital to the ceiling for the economic vibrancy, and the floor to economic weakness, of Pittsburgh’s proper Downtown. This sounds like a responsible, grassroots and very appropriate way to go about reconstructing a vibrant Hill.
And it’s about time we all came together and did that.
The injury occurred against Oregon on Halloween in 2009. By all accounts, it was a routine hit, but after staying on the turf for a few seconds, he was removed from the game. Within days, he found himself in the hospital, where a specialist told him he had a “mild” case of spinal stenosis, a narrowing of the spinal column. “I’ve seen this over and over again,” Jones remembers the doctor saying. “If you play the game long enough, things like this will happen.”
The doctor told Jones he would be fine and he could play again. But the Trojans’ team doctors thought the injury was much more serious and refused to clear him for contact; they eventually recommended that Jones retire from football. So the then-20-year-old spent his days wandering from class to the basketball gym to the weight room. “Just like a regular student,” he says. Just a 6’3″, 241-pound student who considered trying out for USC’s basketball team.
“But in my head,” Jones says, “I never let go of the fact that the first specialist told me I’d be okay.”
In fact, he’s been better than okay. Now an All-American for the No. 5 Georgia Bulldogs, Jones is arguably the best defender in college football, a master of technique with a sixth sense for tracking down quarterbacks. (ESPN, Jordan Conn)
Just as there must always be a Stark in Winterfell, the Pittsburgh Steelers must have dominating linebackers. The organization wasted no time. When it can, it also has a prejudice in favor strong character qualities enhanced by overcoming adversity. A lucky and suitable draft choice.
Confidential to Mr. Jones: you can sponsor sandwiches, shoes or designer sports drink to your heart’s content, but despite the obvious temptation I wouldn’t be in any great rush to market hair products. That way flies Icarus. Welcome to the City of Champions.
The 12% figure from over the weekend conjures Wagner’s last run for Pittsburgh mayor. In that contest, despite his alleged ability to forge great relationships and demonstrate awesome leadership, Wagner somehow got shellacked 72-28% in a two-man race. How could Pittsburghers have failed to notice Wagner’s relationships and leadership?
According to coverage, even back in 1993, Wagner failed to be seen as “the candidate for change”. He lost by greater than a 2-1 margin to an opponent “derided as a reformer without a power base,” whose lame proposals included spooling out a citywide riverfront trail system, upgrading City Hall technology, and partnering with universities to invest in environmental science and industry.
Jack Wagner today is emphasizing the feats of 45 years ago while eliding over whatever may be his “mission”. We are left to assume that mission is to ease the sting of a 44-point loss to Tom Murphy twenty years ago, when Pittsburghers knew him better.
The Wagner team responded indignantly that his opponent is being petty and unfortunate — and, of course, the media more or less bought it without digging deeper.
After all, the Ravenstahl administration (now disgraced and on the lam) and its allies have been telling us Peduto is whiny and petty for years. We’re accustomed to hearing it. And I mean, just look at him. Peduto’s never worked in Harrisburg. Peduto’s never been to Vietnam. Peduto’s not supported by the entirety of the Ravenstahl administration. Peduto started standing up to them six years too early, and in this town being ahead of your time is no virtue.
Jack Wagner, meanwhile, operates on a totally different playing field. When the AG’s office technology and backlog issue broke, the chief political scribe in the newspaper of record took a break from transcribing a Wagner advertisement (usually, you have to pay to air those) to mention curtly and in the third person that Peduto “seized on” the revelation… but only as a way to go back quoting Wagner’s flack at 50-words strong, at the end of the article, explaining what a cad Peduto is for daring to mention his opponent’s record in office.
When Wagner first embarked on his mission, Pittsburgh had an easy time shunting him into the “discard” bin. After a long absence from City issues and an expensive political makeover, Wagner is attempting to campaign from a pedestal so high that Pittsburgh can’t even make out his features. With thirty days remaining until election day — and a stodgy media easily impressed by sonorously-intoned fluff and the support of a shamed regime — it falls to the rest of us to knock Wagner off his fabricated block.
The great news is, wearealreadymostlythere. We hardly needed to write this post, but we didn’t want to seem derelict.
We have to continue the great work of the Pittsburgh Promise and supplement it with a new program to offer free, universal high-quality early childhood education to every child in Pittsburgh…
I will pull together the stakeholders and the funding to make it happen when I am Mayor. (BP#34)
The Councilman says that “thanks to state leaders” and the “infrastructure” that is available, we can make it happen. If half of the things they say about qualityearlychildhoodeducation are true, this could provide Pittsburgh with several levels of benefit at once. And since it’s early childhood education, nobody would be left out due to enrollment in private or parochial systems.