2026-10-21 - City Council - Standing Committees

00:18Good morning and welcome to the pre

00:20agenda interviews for Wednesday, October

00:2221st, 2026 for the Housing Opportunity

00:25Fund Advisory Board. Will the clerk

00:26please read the title of the bill?

00:28>> Bill 853, resolution appointing Jennifer

00:31Cashwell to the Housing Opportunity Fund

00:34Advisory Board with a term to expire

00:36September 6th, 2030.

00:39>> Thank you. For the record, we are

00:40currently joined by Councilman Warwick.

00:42What we'll do is we'll turn over to Ms.

00:45Cashwell. If you will simply introduce

00:47yourself, tell us a little bit about

00:48yourself, and why you want to serve on

00:50this board, and then we'll open it up

00:53for questions.

00:53>> Perfect.

00:54Good morning. Thank you for allowing me

00:58to

00:59uh participate in this and to introduce

01:02myself. I am Jennifer Cashwell.

01:05I am a resident, lifelong resident off

01:08and on of Beltzhoover.

01:10I'm very happy to uh

01:13serve on the Housing Opportunity Fund

01:16Board. I think I bring um

01:19uh some housing experience that would

01:21probably be most helpful and

01:24uh promoting the uh opportunity at the

01:27Housing Opportunity Fund's agenda.

01:30I currently sit on other housing boards

01:33in across this city.

01:36Uh the Pittsburgh Housing Development

01:38Corporation, the Land Bank. I'm a

01:41realtor. I've been a realtor for 26

01:45years. So, I'm familiar with um

01:48you know, real estate, the buying and

01:50selling of it

01:52in that on that level. I worked for 9

01:56years as first the assistant operations

01:59manager, then the operations manager

02:02at the Department of Real Estate,

02:04formerly of course the Recorder of

02:06Deeds. So, that gave me a whole other

02:09side, if you will, a look at the other

02:12side of how real estate is transferred

02:15and

02:16preserved in the city of Pittsburgh. So,

02:19I'm I'm

02:20we in Beltzhoover we are doing some

02:23rehab to bring rehabs and new builds in

02:27an effort to revitalize our community.

02:31The citizens, the residents of

02:33Beltzhoover are um

02:36I'd say we have 70%

02:3875% of the community are homeowners. And

02:42so, we are very interested in

02:44bringing Beltzhoover back to what it

02:47once was. It's been overlooked for

02:49years, like so many other inner-city

02:52neighborhoods. And so, we want to

02:54restore

02:57the our housing stock. We want to bring

03:01resources in the into the community. And

03:04so, me participating on different boards

03:08and learning different things

03:10about how the the city programs operate,

03:13how funds are

03:15acquired, how they're distributed, how

03:18they're intended to be used is I think

03:20very helpful to help promote development

03:23in my community. So, that's why I'm very

03:26interested in serving on the Housing

03:29Opportunity Fund board.

03:32>> Thank you very much. With that, I'll

03:33open it up to questions from members.

03:35Councilman O'Rourke?

03:36>> Um yeah, thank you. And thanks for your

03:38willingness to serve and sit on the sit

03:41on this advisory board. Um

03:45I'm not sure if you've heard, but sort

03:46of in in the news and with the the

03:48city's financial situation, there has

03:50been um

03:52there's been talk of not funding the

03:55Housing Opportunity Fund next year and

03:58also even

04:00potentially eliminating it all together,

04:02which is very concerning to me

04:05given the

04:07the really critical

04:09programs that it that it supports,

04:12right? Everything from gap financing for

04:14affordable housing products. It's really

04:16enabled us to get a huge number of LIHTC

04:18deals here in the city over the past

04:21years. Um

04:23as well as um

04:27you know, emergency rental assistance,

04:30help for homeowners with home repairs

04:34and and eviction prevention. So, I guess

04:37I just wanted to I'm curious

04:40in in your experience well, whether you

04:43have experience directly with

04:45neighbors who have taken advantage of

04:47these funds or just generally though if

04:49those

04:50your perspective on those issues and the

04:52need for the city to continue providing

04:55support in in Belt Uber.

04:58>> Yes, I definitely have. There are uh

05:04several I was going to say many, but but

05:06there are

05:07many there are several residents in the

05:10community that have taken advantage of

05:15different housing programs that are

05:16currently operating in the city.

05:20We have

05:22they there is of course

05:24the Housing Opportunity Fund, the funds

05:27that the other funding sources that the

05:29URA provides that have allowed residents

05:33to purchase homes that have been

05:37rehabbed

05:38and I'm sure that some of the funds that

05:40were used for the rehab were

05:43HOF funds uh, and other sources of

05:46funds,

05:47through the URA, through um, state

05:50grants, through, you know, other local

05:53grants. So, yes,

05:55to have those funds available for

05:57communities such as Beltzhoover is, uh,

06:01it's it's imperative because, uh, we

06:04partnered with, uh, the

06:07Pittsburgh Housing Development

06:08Corporation to rehab five houses in our

06:12community that sold very quickly and

06:15that would not they could not the rehab

06:19could not have occurred without, uh, the

06:22support of the different funding sources

06:25and the buyers certainly could not have

06:27been able to purchase the house. The

06:30homes are all, um, uh, the pricing is

06:35they're affordable and by that there

06:37are, you know, certain income levels

06:39that you must be in to be eligible to

06:42purchase the homes and the whole, uh,

06:46you know, purpose is to, uh,

06:49give folks who might not ordinarily be

06:53able to purchase and not because they

06:55don't have good credit, not because they

06:58don't have, you know, uh,

07:00jobs, um,

07:02some very well-paying jobs, some, you

07:05know, just kind of living paycheck to

07:07paycheck like so many, but because there

07:11are, uh, closing costs that are very

07:14expensive, there are down payments that

07:16are required and those have been, we

07:19found, stumbling blocks to a lot of

07:22people who have the money, who are

07:24paying an enormous amount of rent and

07:27paying their own utilities, they're

07:29doing everything but paying taxes and

07:32paying homeowners insurance. So, to

07:35transfer them into home ownership, I

07:38mean, it's just a a kind of a natural

07:40thing and to have small things prevent

07:44them from being able to do that is um

07:48you know, it's a travesty. And so,

07:50programs like Housing Opportunity Fund,

07:53like the URA's for sale development

07:55project, like um you know, support from

07:58the Housing Authority, all of those

08:00programs benefit both communities and

08:04residents.

08:06>> Yeah, absolutely. I'm glad you mentioned

08:07that. That's also another important

08:09piece of the Housing Opportunity Fund is

08:10the is the homeowner the down payment

08:12assistance program. That's been a very,

08:13very popular program and it's done done

08:16very well with those funds.

08:18Um

08:19I think too, it's uh you know, when we

08:21talk about this uh

08:25sort of this idea that, you know,

08:30the Housing Opportunity Fund is like an

08:32extra uh or somehow something that we're

08:35doing extra. That's not actually the

08:36case, right? Because if my understanding

08:38is correct, I

08:40Council President can correct me, but um

08:42is we increased Was it the deed transfer

08:45tax? In order So, we So, we actually

08:47increased the deed transfer tax in order

08:49to create the Housing Opportunity Fund.

08:50So, to eliminate that funding is

08:52actually is actually the city taking

08:56from the Housing Opportunity like taking

08:58from something in order to to to fill

09:01its own budget holes, right? Not the the

09:04Housing Opportunity Fund never took out

09:06of the city's budget, right? There was

09:08actual new funding created ex-

09:11specifically for it. So, I think that's

09:13that's sort of an important uh thing to

09:16to realize, you know, going in

09:17especially as as a member of the board

09:19and and uh

09:21hopefully fighting for this for this to

09:23for for us in the city to to continue

09:25this funding, which is really so vital.

09:27>> Absolutely. And And having seen once

09:29again how these funds

09:32totally facilitate

09:34uh uh, you know, individuals uh in

09:37becoming homeowners, it would absolutely

09:39be devastating to take them away.

09:43>> And I think too, there's also the

09:44aspect, and I don't

09:46I don't suppose that we have a a clear

09:48cost analysis, although it would be nice

09:50to have one is, you know, especially

09:51around the eviction prevention services,

09:53you know, if someone is evicted, that is

09:55an unhoused person on the street, and

09:57what is the cost of that, right? Like,

09:58what are we what you know, what are we

10:00paying as a city just to to to manage

10:03that? So, so this fund is actually

10:06you know, a preventative measure that is

10:09that I think ultimately would save

10:10taxpayers money by making sure that

10:12folks can stay

10:14>> Exactly.

10:15>> Yes.

10:16Well, I I appreciate you being here, and

10:19you know, and your your willingness to

10:20serve. It's

10:22you know, it's a lot of work, and it's

10:24and it's a a tough time to to join the

10:27board, but I'm glad to have you. So,

10:29thank you very much.

10:30>> Thank you, Councilwoman Warwick.

10:34>> Thank you.

10:36I don't have any questions for you. I've

10:38known you for a very long time now.

10:42We serve on the Land Bank Board

10:44together. I know your work from PHDC and

10:47your advocacy there. So, I think you'll

10:49be a welcomed addition to the HOF.

10:53I will simply reiterate what

10:55Councilwoman Warwick has said, which is

10:57I believe this is a critical tool

10:59for the city of Pittsburgh

11:01if we're going to work to grow our city.

11:04Then that actually means adding

11:05residents, that means adding

11:07homeowners, that means adding to the tax

11:09base, which this actually does that,

11:11right?

11:13And so, it is a critical tool, but I

11:15also acknowledge that we are in very

11:19tough times financially as a city. And

11:21so, how and

11:23when and if and where we find money to

11:26send to the HOF, I will certainly be

11:28looking under every single pillowcase um

11:31help find resources to send there and

11:33hopefully as a body we'll be able to do

11:35that and be able to continue this

11:37important work. I do know the work will

11:39continue at least for another year or

11:41two um based on what I know is in the

11:43actual account itself. Um but

11:46nonetheless, we I will

11:48absolutely advocate for it through our

11:50budget season this year. Um so with

11:52that, I just want to thank you for your

11:54willingness to serve. Um

11:56your background speaks for itself and

11:58you'll be a welcome addition.

12:00With that, I believe we've exhausted all

12:02our business for this pre-interview and

12:04we are adjourned.

12:06>> Thank you so much.

12:07>> Thank you.

12:20>> Good morning and welcome to the Standing

12:21Committee's meeting for Wednesday,

12:22October 21st, 2026.

12:25All council meetings will be live

12:27streamed on the city's website and for

12:28guest speakers, please do not turn off

12:30your microphones. Our first order of

12:32business is roll call. Will the clerk

12:33please take the roll?

12:34>> Mr. Charland

12:36Mr. Coghill

12:38Ms. Gross

12:39Mr. Lovell

12:40>> Here.

12:41>> Mr. Mosley

12:42>> Here.

12:42>> Ms. Salinetro

12:44>> Here.

12:44>> Ms. Warwick

12:45>> Here.

12:46>> Mr. Wilson

12:47Ms. Strasburger, chair

12:48>> Here.

12:49>> Five members present.

12:50>> Thank you.

12:51Our next order of business is to amend

12:53the agenda. Is there a motion to amend?

12:55>> So moved.

12:55>> Second.

12:56>> All in favor?

12:57>> I.

12:58>> I.

12:58>> Agenda is amended.

13:00Our next order of business is public

13:02comment. I would like to remind all

13:03speakers that the rules of council state

13:05that comments are limited to matters of

13:07concern, official action, or

13:09deliberation which are or may be before

13:11city council and profanity will not be

13:13permitted.

13:14Please state your name and neighborhood

13:16for the record. You will have 3 minutes

13:18to speak.

13:19Our first registered speaker is David

13:21Fisher.

13:27>> Good morning.

13:29My name is My name is David Fisher. I'm

13:31from zip code 15221, which is

13:33Wilkinsburg. I'm proposing that solar

13:36energy garden parks be be be

13:39installed at Penn and Negley Avenues,

13:43the large open urban lot there in East

13:46Liberty, as East Liberty was voted one

13:49of the 10 most urban redeveloped areas

13:53for a city in the United States by USA

13:57Today newspaper about a dozen years ago,

14:01and that lot of land has been vacant

14:06since before that, and it is a wasteland

14:09over there. The solar energy garden

14:11parks would reduce crime. They would

14:14create better ecosystems for the area,

14:17make it less humid in the summertime,

14:20create a quiet environment,

14:23um and there's other benefits. There

14:25could be a one-room schoolhouse put on

14:28the facility,

14:30made of log cabin or adobe. There could

14:34be a small practice facility for sports

14:36for kids, which would convert into a

14:39concert venue.

14:41Also, I'm proposing

14:44pollinator-friendly agrivoltaics for a

14:47long or ecovoltaics it would be called

14:51because it's with bees and beneficial

14:53insects and pollinators for a long I-79

14:58in Allegheny County, southwestern

15:01Allegheny County,

15:02and that is a prime area. I learned that

15:05from Trish Pittman on Channel 11 traffic

15:09report that the Scott Township area is

15:12very good for ecovoltaics.

15:15Also, I have ran a campaign on my own to

15:19ban some of the abuse of neonicotinoids,

15:23better known as neonic pesticides,

15:26in Pennsylvania, the Commonwealth. I've

15:29written to the likes of John Fetterman's

15:31Erie office, Dave McCormick's Erie

15:34office on South Park Row in that complex

15:38up there in Erie, four or five times

15:41each. I have called them. I've called

15:43their Pittsburgh offices. I've called

15:45their Harrisburg offices. I have

15:47contacted La'Tasha Mayes in state level.

15:51I have contacted

15:53uh others about the banning of neonic

15:56pesticides, which are very harmful and

15:59toxic in the Commonwealth of

16:02Pennsylvania. The

16:04Lieutenant Governor Austin Davis's

16:06office, I was in contact with them a few

16:09years ago. They said to contact them on

16:12any matter that I find important for the

16:15Commonwealth, and I have contacted the

16:18Lieutenant Governor's office.

16:20I've contacted uh

16:22uh

16:23Abigail Salisbury, who is a conservation

16:25leader. I've contacted her Braddock

16:28office. Uh

16:29thank you.

16:31>> Thank you.

16:34Our next speaker is Genevieve Jerome.

17:00Genevieve, we see you online, and we see

17:02you that that you are off of mute. You

17:04can proceed if you're with us.

17:15>> Can you hear me?

17:16>> We can hear you.

17:18>> Okay.

17:19Um

17:20So, let me start over. I was talking. Uh

17:23my name is Genevieve Jerome. I live in

17:24Mount Washington. I have been there

17:26since 2015, and I have owned a home on

17:28Ulysses Street since 2017.

17:30I'm here regarding bills 2026-8 and

17:332026-9

17:35to ask the city to adopt strong

17:36short-term rental regulations and

17:39meaningful licensing enforcement. Most

17:41importantly, please do not uh

17:43grandfather in the existing short-term

17:45rental um

17:47rental uh

17:49do not grandfather in short-term

17:50rentals.

17:51Uh when I bought my home,

17:53uh my street was uh residential

17:55neighborhood full of homeowners and

17:56long-term rentals. Over the last few

17:59years, I have watched many of these

18:00become full-time Airbnbs and Vrbos. Um

18:03today, I have identified at least seven

18:05short-term rentals on my street,

18:07Ulysses, alone, with many more

18:09surrounding my home.

18:11Um

18:11there's I think believe uh 200 in uh the

18:14Mount Washington area alone.

18:16Um

18:18We didn't just gain many, many

18:19short-term rentals over the last couple

18:21years. We've lost so many neighbors. Um

18:23in their place, there's a constant

18:25rotation of strangers, cars, cleaners,

18:27parties, garbage, disturbances.

18:30Um it's out of control. It keeps

18:32continuing.

18:33Um

18:34daily uh any property that goes for

18:36sale, I would say many, many, many of

18:39those turn into short-term rentals, and

18:40it's

18:41um completely out of control. Um I've

18:43had short-term rental guests enter my

18:45property and curse at me. I have swept

18:47up broken glass um after a guest threw

18:50uh a glass at my home. I have had call

18:53911 many, many times for fights and

18:55parties lasting late into the night,

18:572:00 a.m. Um intoxicated short-term

19:00rental guests passed out on sidewalks.

19:02Um the need for EMTs and police to um

19:05deal with those situations. I've had to

19:07call 311 over garbage and debris,

19:09including incident where over 50 bags of

19:11garbage were accumulated outside of uh

19:14the short-term rental literally across

19:16my house.

19:17These are not hypothetical concerns that

19:19might happen. These are things that

19:21happen constantly and have been

19:22happening for years.

19:24The greatest impact is something that

19:25cannot be captured by a 311 report. I

19:28have fewer neighbors. There's less

19:30people on my streets who report these

19:32things. I mean the city runs on 311s. So

19:34it's me alone because there's seven

19:36other properties that are short-term

19:38rentals making these calls constantly.

19:40Please do not grandfather these in.

19:43Please do not.

19:44Um

19:46Sorry. This is just it's an out of

19:48control situation.

19:50Even with respectful short-term guests

19:52that can

19:53cannot replace permanent residents. They

19:55don't know me. They don't watch over our

19:57homes. I can't ask them to

19:59go to my home when I'm away.

20:01They don't represent the community. They

20:03don't contribute to the community. They

20:05come, they stay, they leave.

20:07The things that people use short-term

20:10rentals for are not acceptable in things

20:13like hotels. I'm in a hotel right now

20:15actually. There was an incident where

20:17the hotel staff had to call

20:20the local police where I'm at right now

20:22and deal with this a situation. That

20:24doesn't happen with short-term rentals.

20:26It's me, the neighbor, that has to do

20:28that. And there's no

20:30there's no repercussions.

20:32Um

20:33The the owners

20:35are off in a different state, a

20:37different city, a different country.

20:39And it's me.

20:42>> Thank you. You've exhausted your 3

20:44minutes, but we did receive your written

20:47comments to council. Thank you.

20:49Our next speaker is Chris Basil.

20:57>> Members of council, thank you for having

20:59me.

20:59My name is Chris Basil. I live in

21:01Grandview Avenue in Mount Washington.

21:03I support the goal of Um, my comments

21:05are about council Bill

21:07uh 834. Um, I support the goal of Mayor

21:10O'Connor's executive order and most of

21:12this bill is the initial phase of

21:13cleanup. Um,

21:15I have one request. Um, defer the

21:18residential compatibility setback um, in

21:20this bill until later phases of the

21:23citywide rezoning.

21:24Um, this bill cuts the setback to homes

21:27from 15 ft to 10 and 5 across the street

21:30and allows 55 ft just 25 ft from a

21:33home's lot. And this is in here is where

21:35there's a residential um, area um,

21:38bordering a business or mixed use. Um,

21:41city planning said this aligns with peer

21:43cities like Austin, Columbus, and

21:45Portland. I read their codes. Um,

21:47Austin, even after loosening its rules

21:49in 2024, holds buildings to 40 ft within

21:5250 ft of a home and require a 25-ft

21:54buffer.

21:55Um, Portland holds them to 35 ft within

21:5825 ft of single-family homes and with a

22:0010-ft set-setback plus a landscape

22:03bu-buffer.

22:04And then And Columbus uses a 10-ft rear

22:06setback and pushes anything over 35 ft

22:08back to 20 uh 20 ft. Um, on height, this

22:12bill is looser than than Austin and

22:14Portland. Um, in um, in addition, those

22:18cities aren't our peers from what I've

22:20looked at. Those are two to three times

22:22our size and they grew 12 to 22% in the

22:25last decade, while we didn't and we've

22:26been mostly flat. Um, I know our goal is

22:29to to grow and I think um,

22:31you know, we should we should make

22:33substantive changes to to achieve that.

22:35Nearly half of Pittsburgh's homes were

22:37also built before 1940 and all three of

22:39these, most of it is newer developments.

22:42Our pi- our peer cities, in my opinion,

22:44are closer to ones like Cincinnati,

22:45Cleveland, St. Louis, Buffalo, and

22:46Philadelphia, which are older, denser,

22:49and with tighter lots and are hilly and

22:51not flat. Um,

22:53the they these have checks to keep

22:55taller buildings away from homes um, and

22:57Phil- and Philadelphia caps neighborhood

22:59commercial buildings at 38 ft, about row

23:01row house height.

23:02Um as you can hear this is complicated

23:04and any changing to setbacks in

23:06residential um compatibility should be

23:08data driven and backed by research.

23:11Right now all we all the bill does is

23:13rep reference pure cities um without any

23:16of the foundational data to back it up.

23:19Um

23:20section 2 922.05.f

23:22says the zoning code says

23:24um city council shall consider

23:25compatibility with neighborhoods and the

23:27effect on nearby property. The planning

23:29commission's of report never applies it

23:31to this change. Um so I would um would

23:34request keep the keep the bill intact

23:36just defer that specific residential

23:38compatibility change and setback change

23:40to later later phases when we can um

23:43when we can talk to neighborhoods and

23:44work with neighborhoods and have an

23:46actual data driven decision to make.

23:48Finally, the Grand View public realm. It

23:50protects one of the region's signature

23:52views. Key please keep it entirely

23:54intact through the full zoning rewrite

23:56and in any other bill that comes before

23:58council and um

24:00thank you.

24:01>> Thank you.

24:02>> Thank you very much.

24:05>> Our next speaker is Jay Newsom.

24:14Is Jay Newsom with us?

24:17Okay, we will move on to Bill

24:19Schlechter.

24:25>> Good morning. Uh my name is Bill

24:26Schlechter. I also live on Mount

24:28Washington. I would like to echo some of

24:31uh my community members thoughts on

24:33Airbnbs. I've spoken to this council

24:35many times about this issue. It has

24:38become a plague on the city. Um

24:41Chad Wise who

24:43has the most properties in this city

24:46left Denver because uh they called for

24:49primary residences to be the Airbnb

24:52regulation.

24:53And so he came here which is now the

24:55wild wild west. And as you heard,

24:57there's been all sorts of nonsense, not

24:59just in Mount Washington, but in other

25:01communities.

25:02But I'm also here to talk about uh bill

25:052026-0834.

25:07Um we touched briefly earlier about the

25:10Grandview public realm. It's created in

25:12the late 1990s from a community study

25:15involved lots of community members.

25:17Uh the zoning codes as why.

25:20On Grandview, there's large-scale

25:22development is often immediately

25:23adjacent to smaller-scale residential

25:26development. And the landscape is, as we

25:28all know, regionally significant. It's

25:30also a very geologically challenging

25:33space to do development.

25:35So, the district holds buildings to 40

25:37ft. Anything taller than that needs a

25:39special exception and only on the

25:41hillside of the street near existing

25:44tall buildings stepping down with the

25:45slope and after a zoning board review

25:48against the Grandview studies.

25:50I'm here because the signs say, quite

25:52frankly, that this district is at risk.

25:55And the many years of folks working on

25:57this community to protect Grandview

25:59public realm are all very distraught in

26:01the community right now, quite frankly.

26:04Uh there's a lot of nonsense going on up

26:05there right now.

26:07The mayor's executive order, which is

26:09good for um efficiency, calls for

26:11replacing special districts with

26:13citywide standards where feasible. The

26:16planning director has said flexible

26:18zoning means less need for special

26:20districts.

26:21And this bill shows what that looks

26:23like. It removes the Oakland public

26:25realm district in its entirety. It

26:27removes the view protection overlay

26:29entirely. After this,

26:32there's only Grandview and Uptown are

26:33the only two public realms remaining.

26:36This bill also changes Grandview's

26:38height language.

26:39It strikes nine stories and leaves only

26:42the 100-ft cap. Elsewhere in the same

26:45code, the RM district treats nine

26:48stories as 85 ft. So, why does Grandview

26:52um the district mean to protect the view

26:54keep the higher number? So,

26:57odd odd odd thing where one nine stories

27:00is one thing in one part of the bill and

27:02nine stories is something else.

27:04Um but here's why it matters to the

27:06people who live there. Home zone

27:07Grandview public realm are not covered

27:09by the citywide residential

27:11compatibility protections in this bill.

27:13Those apply to other residential

27:15districts, not ours. Today, that's fine

27:17because Grandview's own rules protect

27:19us. But if this district is replaced by

27:21citywide standards, those homes lose

27:24Grandview protections and still don't

27:26get the citywide ones. They'd have

27:28neither.

27:31>> Thank you.

27:34Our final registered speaker is Ikhana

27:37Halmakina.

27:44I don't see them with us today, so we

27:47will move now to those in the audience

27:49wishing to speak. You will have 3

27:51minutes to speak and you can approach

27:52the podium.

28:03>> Good morning. My name is Yvon F. Brown.

28:06I live at 715 Mercer Street. That's the

28:10um high-rise at the top of Bedford.

28:14Um

28:17I've been coming down

28:20to try to fight

28:22for some rights for the seniors in the

28:25building.

28:26When I first moved in there, I thought

28:29that the bus We live at the top of the

28:31hill, Mercy at the bottom. I thought

28:33there was a bus that went that way. One

28:36of the seniors asked me, "Where do they

28:37catch the bus?" I told them. She came

28:39back and said, "There's no bus that

28:41takes us to to the hospital. We have to

28:43go all the way through town." Well, I

28:45started then coming down and asking

28:49well, stating to Mr. LaBelle, who was

28:52not the president at that time, that we

28:55don't have a bus. I I would talk and he

28:57would never answer. But, one time we got

28:59caught on the bus on the elevator

29:01together and he said to me, "Mrs. Brown,

29:04you keep coming down talking about the

29:05bus. Go to County Council."

29:08Okay, when I go to County Council

29:11uh Mr. DeWitt Walton is our county

29:15councilman. I don't know what he is cuz

29:17they said he wasn't running last time,

29:18but he's still

29:20up there at the table.

29:22I want you to understand I had asked

29:25about the bus.

29:26At that time, there was the Mr. Carone,

29:29that who has just stepped down, the

29:31president. He's just stepped down.

29:34He

29:35heard me speak and when I got finished,

29:37he said, "Members, now we have a citizen

29:40that came with a concern. Now, what

29:42should we do? Should we each write a

29:44letter

29:46individually or collectively I would

29:48write it and we all sign it." Then he

29:50said, and he realized he said, "Oh,

29:52DeWitt, I'm sorry. This is your

29:54community. Will you write a letter,

29:56too?" He said, "No." He said, "Can't

29:59nobody come down and tell me what I need

30:04in my community. That's my community."

30:06He said they don't need a bus, that they

30:09need security.

30:11Now, Mr. uh LaBelle, I have asked Mr.

30:15Wood, "I want a letter

30:17stating that you told me to go over

30:20there cuz he told me I have no business

30:22and it's been at least three times this

30:24man actually ran and was screaming and

30:26hollering at me what he's going to do

30:28and I should I can't come down. I MEAN,

30:31YOU TOLD me that I could go there and I

30:33thought that was the the the hall for

30:35the people to come and to bring their

30:38problems or ask questions. This man has

30:42came to my building and screamed and

30:44hollered that they put my ass out of

30:47county council and I asked county

30:49council for a letter. I want a letter.

30:51I'm an activist. I have been fighting to

30:54save lives for over

30:57how many years?

30:5821 is when they let my son die. I've

31:01been fighting so another person won't

31:03have to go through this. Do you

31:04understand? YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO LISTEN

31:07TO us and him, too. I want the letter.

31:10I'm going to ask for Mr. Wood again.

31:13>> Thank you.

31:16Next speaker, please.

31:28>> Good morning, children.

31:31My name is Unique Brown.

31:34And today we're going to talk about

31:36human nature.

31:40There's two distinct facts when it comes

31:44to human nature.

31:46Either you care or you don't.

31:49It doesn't matter what color you are or

31:52how you were raised. You can be raised

31:55by the best

31:56and end up the worst

31:58or vice versa.

32:01And in very few cases, some people can

32:05actually change from bad to good.

32:10But you know you care

32:12when you can listen to a room full of

32:15100 or more people

32:19as council

32:21county, though obviously

32:23council president and council members

32:27without getting tired of hearing

32:29someone talk for 3 minutes

32:32about human pain.

32:34When you don't need to look

32:37at your phone,

32:38you can actually look at every single

32:40person with empathy and truly listen

32:44without looking away.

32:47However, when you do the opposite of

32:50that,

32:52you know, actually, and they only make

32:5410 to $15,000

32:58a year.

32:59But, however, when you do the opposite

33:01of that,

33:03when you make your job just about the

33:05power you have without actually using

33:09any of it,

33:11when you can't

33:14make donation to places, wash your car,

33:17park your car,

33:19or even buy a cup without getting paid

33:22back,

33:23and you make over 90,000 a year,

33:26that shows true human nature.

33:31If God gave you the power to actually

33:33change things, why not change

33:36something right? Except for something

33:39that's going to get you a picture.

33:43And when you don't do the right thing,

33:44though,

33:45shows your true human nature.

33:49You don't want your eulogy to just talk

33:51about

33:52all the degrees you got, different hats

33:55you wore, different seats you sat in.

33:59It should talk about the lives you

34:01actually changed because you had the

34:04power to.

34:06Like this man keep asking about the the

34:09uh

34:10park. Go, close it the hell down. Tell

34:14them to close it down. WHAT DO Y'ALL

34:16WHAT DO YOU YOU DON'T LIVE THERE. YOU

34:18DON'T CARE ABOUT IT. They care about it.

34:21Get the cops to close it down.

34:26Like there's little stuff that y'all can

34:27do.

34:29Just do it.

34:36>> Thank you. Next speaker, please.

34:43>> Good morning, Special Agent Sunshine.

34:46Thank you, Lord, for

34:48every trial and tribulation.

34:52I know you would never give me more than

34:53I can bear.

34:57Today's title of my message is the

34:58strength of compassion companions.

35:01Walking with like-minded believers

35:04provides us with counsel and support to

35:06do great things for the Lord.

35:09Thank you for all my companions that are

35:12unseen, yet eternal,

35:15like Joyce Meyer. Thank you for your

35:17devotion today

35:19screaming at me to stop running

35:22from my calling. That is crazy. I I love

35:25you. Thank you, Dr. Jeremiah, also for

35:28using

35:29the story of Jonah to screen the same

35:31message. I love you as well.

35:34I'm not going to give up. I'm going to

35:35keep fighting. I promise you.

35:381 John 4:4 says, "You dear children are

35:42from God and have overcome them because

35:45the one who is in you is greater than

35:48the one who is in the world."

35:59A few announcements. If you're homeless

36:01and you live on the street, it's going

36:02to get cold.

36:04So, if you need a sleeping bag,

36:06tomorrow, every Thursday at 2:00 in the

36:08Smithfield Street Library upstairs, they

36:10have sleeping bags that have pillows in

36:14there this big.

36:15They also have book bags that have phone

36:18and computer chargers in them.

36:21A lot of people have a phone, but they

36:22don't have a charger. It's so crazy. So,

36:25So go to um Smithfield Street Library

36:27every Thursday at 2:00 upstairs. It's

36:29Pitt and UPMC that have collaborated and

36:32made a mission. They're doing a lot up

36:34there and I'm kind of advocating for

36:36them out here boots on the ground. I'm

36:38having fun doing and meeting a lot of

36:40people who are in need of a lot of

36:43things that you guys are just not

36:44helping us without here. There's no way

36:47I should be out here. I was born with a

36:48house and y'all know it. You know where

36:51my house is. Somebody died left me a

36:53house. That makes me have two houses,

36:55y'all, but I'm homeless on the street.

36:57Imagine that. And this is what Jesus is

37:00doing. I'm so healthy

37:02and I'm vibrant and I just love life out

37:05here in the cold. Imagine that.

37:09Thank you, Lord, for my health and my

37:10strength and for using me as a vessel to

37:12do your will, not mine.

37:14It's hard, you know, to stand here and

37:17take the fiery darts

37:19and the rocks and be spit on, you know,

37:22just like Jesus was. It's hard to stand

37:24here and take it, but I have to.

37:27He told us turn the other cheek.

37:30If somebody need a coat,

37:32give them yours. Moseley.

37:36LaBelle.

37:38Be who you are.

37:40The truth really will set you free.

37:43And I return all my energy back to me

37:45one trillion fold.

37:48>> Thank you.

37:50Next speaker, please.

37:53Are there any further speakers?

38:10>> To be honest, I never knew what city

38:12council was until it had a direct

38:15connection to ripping away resources

38:16from my neighbors.

38:18I still don't really understand what a

38:19city council is, what a standing

38:21committee is, or the difference in

38:23meetings on Tuesdays and Wednesdays. Um

38:26what I do know is that I love my

38:28neighbors.

38:29Isn't that the slogan of Pittsburgh,

38:31Fred Rogers, you know?

38:33One of his quotes is, "Always look for

38:35the helpers. There will always be

38:37helpers."

38:38Another important quote of his is, "Try

38:41your best to make goodness attractive.

38:43That's one of the toughest assignments

38:44you'll ever be given."

38:47One month ago today, on September 21st,

38:49Public Source posted an article about

38:51Allegheny County District Attorney

38:53Stephen Zappala.

38:55Um none of the allegations made in the

38:57affidavit have been proven. His office

38:59declined comment on an unsealed search

39:01warrant

39:02um

39:03investigation about former Pittsburgh

39:05Mayor Ed Gainey's administration. Um the

39:08city improperly gave out no-bid

39:10contracts and dealt grants to

39:11politically um aligned groups.

39:14Um no-bid contracts would give money to

39:17unions and political groups tied to

39:18Gainey, and he would then provide

39:20political support back to the candidates

39:22that assisted in issuing the no-bid

39:24contracts.

39:25Um Gainey's staff abused a part of the

39:27law that allows for no-bid contracts in

39:29a sole-source situation where only one

39:31vendor could practically do a job. The

39:33city's legal department failed to

39:35fulfill its duty to ensure that the city

39:37was following contracting procedures,

39:38which is convenient for them because

39:40nonprofits and people who really help

39:42have to reach impossible standards for

39:44funding, contrastingly.

39:47Um

39:49Councilor Coghill um believed this to be

39:52a slush fund for Mayor Gainey. Um

39:54defending stop the violence sounds bad

39:56in general. Why would you Why wouldn't

39:58you fund the stopping of violence?

40:01Um with the new mayor, how can we hold

40:03him more accountable?

40:05Um

40:07So

40:09when we cut funding

40:11that doesn't mean we have to become less

40:13accountable. It means we need to become

40:15overly accountable. We need to have

40:17direct resources for people who need

40:18housing and who need violence to stop.

40:21This isn't about a photo op for press.

40:25This isn't about a program to save face

40:27after doing wrong. This isn't about

40:28appearing morally correct. This is about

40:30being morally correct or correcting

40:33yourselves morally.

40:35If the people at the bottom need to be

40:36overly accountable, the people at the

40:38top need to be even more accountable

40:40than them with even higher standards for

40:42themselves. The standards you set for

40:44yourself to gain resources need to

40:46reflect the standards you use to take

40:47away resources. Programs Programs like

40:51eviction prevention, emergency home

40:52repairs, legal assistance for tenants,

40:54and first-time home buyer down payment

40:56aid face uncertain futures. Applications

40:58outpace available resources. On Monday,

41:00we ran out of food at the food pantry at

41:02Community 525 East Ohio Street where I

41:04volunteer in 1 hour. We need more

41:06donations. We need more funding. We need

41:08roots to open back up. Um we have to

41:11question the organizations that help us.

41:14>> Thank you.

41:18Next speaker, please.

41:21Are there any further speakers?

41:25There being no further speakers, we will

41:26move on to our standing committee's

41:28agenda.

41:31And we will move on to the Finance and

41:33Law Committee for

41:34um

41:35one deferred paper and then we will move

41:37on to uh

41:39jump down into the agenda to the uh Land

41:42Use and Economic Development Committee.

41:44>> Deferred paper is Bill 847, resolution

41:47authorizing the issuance of a warrant in

41:49favor of Vibrant Pittsburgh for 1-year

41:51membership dues in an amount not to

41:53exceed $50,000.

41:55>> Motion to approve. Second.

41:57>> Discussion?

42:10Council Member Warwick.

42:13>> This is for the Vibrant Pittsburgh.

42:16>> Yeah, um I you know, I I I appreciate

42:18that Vibrant Pittsburgh came and and

42:20spoke with us.

42:22Um I was on the on the Zoom for that.

42:25I just um you know, for $50,000 and you

42:28know, I'm I'm I'm sure their services

42:30are great. I just you know, I have to

42:31say I have a I have a playground in

42:34Hayes that's being decommissioned

42:37because it's so old that it's dangerous

42:39for kids to play on, but you know,

42:43we're just in uh such a financial state

42:45that there's just no money to re- And

42:47it's a tiny, it's like a little tot lot,

42:49right? Like it would cost maybe 150,000

42:52to put something new in there, right?

42:54And there's just not I mean, I didn't

42:56even

42:58you know, I'm actually calling around to

43:00to local businesses to see if I can if I

43:03can raise some money for this to to put

43:05this little playground back in this in

43:07this small neighborhood um that's you

43:10know,

43:11very underserved. So,

43:13$50,000 is just so much money and um my

43:17understanding is that we actually

43:18haven't been using this service. You

43:20know, we've been paying for it for for a

43:21number of years, but it's um unclear

43:24that we've even been using it. So, um

43:27you know, much appreciation to the to

43:29the folks at Vibrant Pittsburgh for

43:31coming and talking with us. I I really

43:33do, you know, and and um

43:35um

43:36I'm sure it's a great service, but I'm

43:38going to I'm I'm not supportive today.

43:41>> Thank you. Councilman Coghill followed

43:43by Councilperson Charland, Council

43:45President.

43:46>> Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh

43:49I I tend to agree with you, Councilwoman

43:51Warwick. Uh

43:52$50,000 at this point and and I we made

43:55it clear to Vibrant that um

43:58we're not being singled out. We're

43:59looking at every dime we spend at this

44:01point.

44:03Uh the $50,000 and

44:05again, they're professional, nice

44:06people, but I felt like

44:09you know, there were some overlapping

44:10services

44:12for what we do in HR and as to them

44:14working together and

44:16um yeah, no offense to Vibrant

44:18Pittsburgh, but at this point time uh

44:20$50,000 is

44:22hard to justify for a membership that I

44:25personally do not know, you know, it's

44:27still unclear to me as to how and

44:30how it's advantageous to us.

44:32So, I would have been willing to

44:33negotiate a

44:35$5,000 membership if

44:37people feel like it's important and if

44:39HR or, you know, um anybody that they

44:42work with.

44:43But at this point, I agree that uh yeah,

44:46it's not an expense that I think we

44:48should take on. So, thank you, Madam

44:50Chair.

44:51>> Thank you.

44:52Council Member Charland.

44:54>> Yes, uh thank you. So, I after we met

44:56with Vibrant Pittsburgh uh

44:58last week, I guess it was,

45:00uh

45:01or maybe maybe a little bit longer ago,

45:03um

45:04talked to HR, um and and there's no

45:07doubt that there are efficiencies that

45:09Vibrant Pittsburgh uh can provide for

45:12us. Um

45:14however, I you know, I I've got to agree

45:16with

45:17um my colleagues here that although

45:20there are efficiencies that they do

45:21provide, for $50,000, I mean, that

45:24that's almost a

45:26uh salary position there. Um I I again

45:29would be

45:31open to a conversation if if they were

45:34willing to propose a um a smaller,

45:38you know, cost for a membership in the

45:41future here,

45:42but

45:44after my discussion with them, I I can't

45:47really justify this cost

45:50for the efficiencies that they provide.

45:51We're in a time where every department

45:53is going to be losing some of those

45:55efficiencies.

45:56It looks like our printing budget is

45:58doing okay.

46:03But I mean that that being said I yeah I

46:06I can't support this today and we'll be

46:08open to conversations in the future.

46:13>> Thank you.

46:14Councilman

46:16Council President followed by Councilman

46:17Mosley. I think I saw you first.

46:19>> Thank you.

46:21So I respectfully disagree with my

46:23colleagues on this one. I wasn't I was

46:26at a groundbreaking the first uh meeting

46:29where this was voted down. So I didn't

46:31have a chance to

46:33have partake in the conversation. So

46:36what what I'll first say is

46:38when we talk about $50,000

46:41being an expense out of our operating

46:43budget, it's literally 0.0075%

46:49of our budget.

46:51So

46:53Two,

46:57everyone at this

46:58everyone at this table has been having a

47:00conversation about the fact that the

47:02city needs to grow.

47:04It needs to grow population and needs to

47:07add to our tax base.

47:09I have repeatedly said at this table on

47:12numerous occasions,

47:13there's no city in America

47:16that is growing simply because white men

47:20are doing well there. That's just not

47:21the reality of our country.

47:23In order for this city to grow, we have

47:26to have a diverse pool of citizens.

47:30Vibrant Pittsburgh's job is to literally

47:33and I don't know their technical

47:36uh

47:41I can't think of the word. Mission

47:42statement, thank you. I don't know their

47:43technical mission statement, thank you.

47:45But what I do know is their job is to

47:48literally be be an economic development

47:51agency by

47:53recruiting,

47:56retaining,

47:57and growing a diverse pool of talent

48:00within our city. And that is literally

48:02the only way this city will grow, by

48:04doing exactly that. And so for me, a

48:0750,000 investment into the growth of our

48:10city is well needed and well spent. Now,

48:14what I will also say

48:16is the fact that the city of Pittsburgh

48:18may not have been utilizing their

48:20services.

48:22That's not on them, that's on us.

48:24And that's on us to do a better job. But

48:28again, a $50,000 investment into helping

48:31grow a diverse pool of candidates, a

48:34diverse pool of residents for our city

48:38is the only way that we watch you grow

48:40our tax base, which we all openly

48:42acknowledge we need to do. So to me, to

48:45vote against this is to literally be a

48:49contradiction of what we've all claimed

48:51is important to us as a city.

48:53So I will be voting for it. Thank you.

48:57>> Thank you.

48:59Councilwoman Sall Nutall. I'm sorry,

49:01Councilman Mosley followed by

49:02Councilwoman Sall Nutall.

49:03>> Thank you. Thank you, Council President.

49:04I'd like to echo uh

49:06Council President's uh

49:08eloquent remarks on the topic,

49:11understanding that we are in a in a very

49:14uh tough fiscal situation, you know, as

49:16a city, and I do

49:19not uh

49:20I I I can't not, you know, see the

49:22direct correlation between

49:25the

49:26challenges that we're facing fiscally

49:28and the fact of that we, you know, bleed

49:32young people

49:33every year.

49:35Um I was just at uh the Youth Vote

49:37Summit uh at uh the Heinz History

49:40Center. And it was about 300 incredibly

49:43smart, you know, young people, and many

49:45of them you know, are planning on, you

49:48know, getting their four-degree

49:49somewhere, sometimes here in

49:50Southwestern Pennsylvania. Oftentimes

49:53other places, and then, you know, the

49:55moment they get their college degree,

49:56they will be, you know, making their way

49:58to Austin, Charlotte, DC, California,

50:03Florida,

50:04and many other places that are diverse.

50:07And one thing we know about, you know,

50:09cities that are competitive in the 21st

50:11century are cities, regardless of what

50:14continent your ancestors came from, you

50:17know, have the type of diversity that

50:19unfortunately we do not have here in in

50:21Southwestern Pennsylvania, and I think

50:23that is, um,

50:25you know, a great benefit that Vibrant

50:27Pittsburgh does and and strategically

50:30and intentionally focused on making our

50:32region

50:34more diverse. I think that is one of the

50:36key pillars of over the next 25 years as

50:41we look at the comprehensive plan, as we

50:42look at growing the city, so that we do

50:45have the resources in our coffers to do

50:48the work that that our city needs to do,

50:50and to,

50:52you know, really reclaim,

50:54um, the our city's place as one of the

50:57great cities in this country. Um,

50:59and directly tied to that growth is

51:02growing the diversity and making uh the

51:04diverse communities

51:06that are currently here

51:08uh feel welcome and feel like they have

51:10opportunities to thrive, uh but also

51:13welcoming um diverse communities and us

51:16being competitive in that competition uh

51:19with

51:20cities all over the country uh to

51:22welcome uh diverse folks um into the

51:25Pittsburgh region, and I think that is

51:27going to be

51:28uh a key uh cornerstone

51:31of our city growing. So, I I I will be

51:33joining uh the council president in

51:35support of uh Vibrant Pittsburgh today,

51:39and you know, hope that um we can

51:41continue to support their work into the

51:43future uh on an issue that I think is

51:45very important for our region, and and

51:48and not only uh you know for today but

51:50to really position our region over the

51:52next 25 50 years to be as competitive as

51:54possible. Thank you Madam Chair.

51:56>> Thank you. Councilwoman Salenetro.

51:59>> Yeah, I appreciate

52:02Vibrant Pittsburgh coming and and

52:04speaking with us but I thought that you

52:06know the one thing that was missing in

52:08that briefing was HR.

52:10I would have liked to hear from HR how

52:12they use the service

52:14and

52:15um it was hard to uh

52:19figure that out exactly in the

52:20presentation they presented as to what

52:23you know they do on a daily basis with

52:25HR.

52:26Um so I I'll be glad to look at it again

52:29next year but I think this year I'm I'm

52:31a no.

52:33>> Thank you. Thank you.

52:35Thank you.

52:36Further discussion?

52:39Seeing none, I'd like to take a roll

52:40call vote.

52:45>> Mr. Chaplin?

52:46>> No.

52:48>> Mr. Coghill?

52:49>> No.

52:50>> Ms. Gross?

52:51>> I.

52:53>> Mr. Lavelle?

52:54>> I.

52:55>> Mr. Mosley?

52:57>> I.

52:59>> Ms. Salenetro?

53:01>> No.

53:03>> Ms. Warwick?

53:04>> No.

53:06>> Mr. Wilson?

53:07>> I.

53:09>> Ms.

53:10Strassburger Chair?

53:11>> I.

53:13>> I's five, no's four.

53:17>> Affirmative recommendation.

53:19Thank you very much.

53:21Um we will now move away from the agenda

53:24or move further down on the agenda to

53:25the land use and economic development

53:27committee.

53:29And after we finish that committee then

53:31we'll return back to the the top of the

53:33agenda.

53:39>> We're starting with 1011?

53:41>> Starting with 10-11.

53:42>> Okay.

53:43>> Land use and economic development here,

53:46Mr. Wilson. Supplemental new paper bill

53:4810-11. Ordinance amending the Pittsburgh

53:50code title nine zoning code article one,

53:53introduction and establishment section

53:5590203 zoning map to rezone 1070

53:59Banksville Avenue parcel 0016E

54:0200025

54:04from NDI neighborhood industrial

54:06district and P parks to entirely NDI

54:09neighborhood industrial district in the

54:11Banksville neighborhood.

54:14>> Um

54:16Motion to We're on 1555

54:18>> Public hearing.

54:19>> Public motion for

54:21cable cast public hearing.

54:22>> Second.

54:23>> Discussion?

54:25Seeing none, all in favor of holding

54:27bill 10

54:2820

54:2910-11 for a cable cast post

54:32public hearing, excuse me.

54:34>> Aye.

54:35>> Aye.

54:35>> Aye.

54:39>> Bill will be held for a public hearing.

54:41That moves us to deferred papers.

54:45>> Bill 2025 1545.

54:49Ordinance amending the Pittsburgh code

54:51title nine zoning article one,

54:53introduction and establishment chapter

54:55902 zoning districts in general to add

54:59inclusionary zoning and zoning article

55:01three, overlay zoning districts to add a

55:04sunset clause to 90704A

55:07IZO inclusionary housing overlay

55:10district article four, development

55:12standards to amend 91507

55:16performance point system article two,

55:19base zoning chapter 905 special purpose

55:23districts article four, planning

55:25districts chapter 908 public realm

55:27districts chapter 909 planned

55:30development districts article five, use

55:32regulations chapter 911 primary uses

55:36chapter 912 accessory uses and

55:38structures, chapter 9 13, use exceptions

55:41and conditions not listed in use table,

55:44article 6, development standards,

55:47chapter 9 14, parking, loading and

55:50access, chapter 9 16, residential

55:52compatibility standards, article 8,

55:55review and enforcement, chapter 9 22,

55:58development review procedures, to remove

56:01minimum off-street parking from the

56:02zoning code, article 5, use regulations,

56:05chapter 9 12, accessory uses and

56:08structures, article 9, measurements and

56:10definitions, chapter 9 25, measurements

56:13and chapter 9 26, definitions.

56:17>> So, if we can get a motion and then I'll

56:18walk through the procedure here.

56:20>> Motion to approve.

56:21>> Motion to approve.

56:22>> Second.

56:24>> Okay, on discussion. Um,

56:26I think the most helpful version of the

56:28bill, although we have it printed in

56:30yellow as well, is the one that's sort

56:31of color-coded up top that shows which

56:34color amendments pertain to which

56:37portions of the bill. The green ones

56:39being the most and you were provided

56:42this by uh virtually um last Friday as

56:45well, uh but to have the hard copy

56:46version. The most The green ones being

56:49the most recent version of amendments,

56:51the blue and the yellow color-coded ones

56:53being

56:54associated with parking reform or

56:56accessory dwelling units, which occurred

56:58um

56:58early on in 2025, so are not new to us.

57:02Um, so we will need to first take up the

57:07this bill as an amendment by

57:08substitution since it's come back from

57:10planning, vote on that, and then there

57:13are three separate other amendments that

57:15we will vote on separately after

57:18this amendment by substitution, after

57:20which we will pass everything fine um

57:22you know,

57:23uh preliminarily.

57:25So, if I could have someone make a

57:26motion to amend by substitution.

57:31>> So moved.

57:32>> Second.

57:33>> Okay, now we're in discussion and I'm

57:37I'm actually happy to open

57:39this portion of the bill without the

57:41three amendments up to discussion with

57:43um

57:44with council members.

57:46There's any discussion on the on the

57:47amendment by substitution as it stands.

57:55Okay, seeing none, all in favor of

57:58amending bill 2025-1545

58:01by substitution, please say I.

58:04>> I.

58:04>> I.

58:05Bill has been amended by substitution.

58:07So, now we're working off of this bill.

58:10Um

58:11there are, like I mentioned, three

58:13distinct amendments and we'll take the

58:15one that that indicates up top amendment

58:19to section 41 to amend the affordability

58:21period from 20 years to 35 years.

58:25So, can I please get a motion to amend

58:29um

58:29>> Motion to amend.

58:30>> for that amendment.

58:31>> Second.

58:31>> Discussion.

58:34Is there discussion on this amendment?

58:36>> upping it to 35 years?

58:39>> Brief discussion. I just want to thank

58:40you for offering up the amendment. Um we

58:43heard numerous public testimony that

58:46spoke to the fact that the affordability

58:48needed to be extended out

58:51and we've seen it work in other cities

58:53as well. So, I just want to thank you

58:54for bringing forth the amendment.

58:57>> Thank you.

58:59Councilman Mosley.

59:00>> Yes, I'd like to echo Council President

59:03and thank you for for your leadership on

59:05that and also like to request to be

59:07co-sponsor of the amendment to extend

59:09the affordability period from 20 years

59:12to 35 years.

59:13>> Thank you. So noted.

59:17Further discussion.

59:19I'll just say in addition to I think it

59:21being the the right thing to do here,

59:24um

59:25right,

59:26if something is if someone moves into a

59:28unit and they're and they hope it that

59:30it's affordable,

59:32um

59:33eliminating the

59:34possibly being eliminated as an

59:36affordable unit after 20 years feels

59:38difficult. Um

59:41and um I know that there were some

59:43concerns about potential

59:46gap financing

59:48um and the the longevity of that and

59:50matching it to to be exactly 20 years,

59:53but um I'll also just note that 35 years

59:56allows this to be then in line with our

1:00:00other affordability terms and other

1:00:03bonus programs throughout the city. So,

1:00:04it kind of keeps it in alignment.

1:00:06Okay.

1:00:08Unless there's any further discussion,

1:00:10all those in favor of amending

1:00:13the

1:00:15amended bill 1545

1:00:18um with this with this language,

1:00:21please indicate by saying I.

1:00:24>> I.

1:00:24>> I.

1:00:24>> I.

1:00:25>> Opposed? Abstentions?

1:00:29Okay, amendment is approved. We will now

1:00:31move on to the second amendment of

1:00:33three,

1:00:35which um is titled amendment to section

1:00:38two to remove the option to receive four

1:00:41bonus points for providing at least 20%

1:00:43of units at the affordability rates

1:00:45stated in 915.07D4E

1:00:51and 915.07D

1:00:53F

1:00:54F from the NDO neighborhood office and

1:00:58LNC local neighborhood commercial zoning

1:01:01districts.

1:01:03Is there a motion?

1:01:04>> Motion to amend.

1:01:05>> Second.

1:01:06>> Discussion.

1:01:08Councilwoman Gros.

1:01:09>> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um so, these

1:01:13sections especially are um important to

1:01:17some of the constituents um that I heard

1:01:19from in District 7 and I think from

1:01:21other of our neighborhood small business

1:01:24districts.

1:01:26Um there are a lot of these LNC,

1:01:28especially across the city. So, mostly I

1:01:31always like to think of it like any

1:01:32place where there used to be a trolley

1:01:34car um and trolley car stops are tend to

1:01:37be zoned LNC. It's where you see lots of

1:01:39little shops all crowded together that

1:01:41are in walkable distance from most of

1:01:43the housing that's around them um around

1:01:46the entirety of the city. Um the fear

1:01:53that from the proposal from the planning

1:01:55commission, the fear from constituents

1:01:58was that

1:02:00it would incentivize those districts to

1:02:02be gentrified by large out of town

1:02:05development companies.

1:02:06So, in it providing the extensive height

1:02:11bonus, more than double the current

1:02:12height going up to something like a

1:02:14potential of 13, 14, 15 floor buildings

1:02:18in those kind of historic trolley car

1:02:20neighborhoods

1:02:22would um incentivize

1:02:25large out of town companies to buy up

1:02:27the whole block

1:02:30to tear it down to build high. You can't

1:02:32really build up 12 stories on a 20-ft

1:02:36wide parcel.

1:02:38But you can on a 200-wide parcel, 200-ft

1:02:41wide parcel, right? So, that um and

1:02:45there are this is already happening,

1:02:47right? We already have um

1:02:49a Brooklyn-based developer who's bought

1:02:51an entire block of Butler Street.

1:02:54Um and so, that increase in height

1:02:59that was feared would have them kind of

1:03:01mow down all those old storefronts and

1:03:05build up. And it's not the fear of

1:03:08housing cuz

1:03:10in the neighborhoods I represent,

1:03:11there's already a really, you know, a

1:03:13high population density, lots and lots

1:03:15and lots of housing.

1:03:16Um, but that

1:03:20then you just end up with those like if

1:03:21if you've seen the new construction in

1:03:23my district and around other places,

1:03:24right? You see a lot of big empty

1:03:26storefronts.

1:03:28Because they're giant.

1:03:30And if you're the little baker or

1:03:34store or new restaurant, you can't

1:03:37afford, right? You're not a big

1:03:41um, stock traded restaurant group. You

1:03:44can't pay that rent. And so then it's in

1:03:48effect commercial gentrification.

1:03:51Um, so while the fear in a lot of this

1:03:53package has been about

1:03:56um,

1:03:58residential gentrification and making a

1:04:01any certain neighborhood too much for

1:04:03just rich people and pushing out poor

1:04:07people,

1:04:08um, similarly commercial gentrification

1:04:11is about eliminating the potential for

1:04:15your local small business, your next

1:04:17door neighbor from being able to start

1:04:18their own bricks and mortar business.

1:04:21So, um, by by bringing these heights

1:04:24down, I think we accomplish, um, the

1:04:27goal of incentivizing housing,

1:04:31um, and yet not

1:04:34kind of creating the financial

1:04:36incentives for big out of town

1:04:38gentrification. So,

1:04:39that that's the concern that we heard

1:04:41and so these amendments are basically

1:04:44doing that. So, it it allows the height

1:04:46to for to go up 30 ft. So, let's say,

1:04:49you know, right now you you'll have like

1:04:50that three-story building or four-story

1:04:52building and you could add another three

1:04:54or four stories, but it's not going up

1:04:56triple what is there now.

1:04:59So,

1:05:00I'm supportive of this amendment. I

1:05:01appreciate, uh, Councilwoman

1:05:02Strawsberger working on it including

1:05:04some of the residents in my district.

1:05:07>> Thank you. Uh, Councilman Mosley.

1:05:09>> Yeah, also, uh, want to share the

1:05:11sentiments that uh Councilwoman Gross uh

1:05:14just shared. I know there was uh much

1:05:16like in Highland Park, there was a

1:05:18concern uh particularly in Point Breeze

1:05:21and in the in the Reynolds Street, but I

1:05:22think they could, you know, um

1:05:25uh it would be apropos in

1:05:28in in various uh business districts

1:05:31throughout District 9 as well. Um it as

1:05:34one of the unintended consequences of

1:05:36the effort um you know, to provide

1:05:40incentives for developers

1:05:43um to to to create the kind of scale

1:05:45that might be necessary for more

1:05:47affordable housing uh to pencil out. So,

1:05:49as we try to balance

1:05:51uh you know, those dynamics of

1:05:54uh growing more housing, you know,

1:05:57across typologies and price points uh

1:06:00for for the growth that we need at a

1:06:01city, but also um you know, having a

1:06:04laser focus on bringing more

1:06:05affordability that we could create um

1:06:08so, you know, some business districts

1:06:09that are out of scale um you know, uh

1:06:13you know, with the current residential

1:06:15areas and even create other unintended

1:06:18consequences like Councilwoman Gross

1:06:20mentioned uh where folks could buy up

1:06:23you know, whole city blocks. Out of town

1:06:25developers buy whole city blocks, tear

1:06:27those down, and then have 12-story

1:06:29buildings, you know, on Penn Avenue and

1:06:31Garfield or um you know, you know, on

1:06:34Frankstown Avenue in Homewood or on

1:06:36Reynolds in in in Penn Avenue. So, I'm,

1:06:39you know, you know, in in in support and

1:06:40also request to be a co-sponsor of this

1:06:42amendment and um you know, and thank you

1:06:45uh uh for uh you know, listening to the

1:06:47concerns that we've heard uh from

1:06:50uh stakeholders in business districts

1:06:51across the city to ensure that um in our

1:06:54efforts to grow the population and and

1:06:57create incentives for more affordable

1:06:59housing that we don't have these

1:07:00unintended consequences of negatively

1:07:02impacting our business districts.

1:07:05>> Thank you very much.

1:07:07And so noted. I the clerk um will add

1:07:09you to the

1:07:10the list of co-sponsors.

1:07:12Further discussion on this amendment.

1:07:16Okay.

1:07:18Seeing none, all in favor of amending

1:07:20the bill to reflect this amendment

1:07:21language, please say I.

1:07:23>> I. I.

1:07:25>> Uh bill is amended. Now we'll move on to

1:07:28our third and final stand-alone

1:07:30amendment.

1:07:32This one is entitled amendment to

1:07:34section 19 to correct the current code

1:07:37language to the multi-suite

1:07:39residential use specific criteria. This

1:07:42section was originally drafted with the

1:07:43assumption that bill 2024-0984

1:07:48would have passed first. The highlights

1:07:50call out what the text from the current

1:07:52zoning code was added back in or

1:07:54corrected.

1:07:57Is there a motion?

1:07:59>> I move.

1:08:01>> Motion to amend.

1:08:02>> Second.

1:08:03>> Second.

1:08:04>> So the just as a reminder, 2024 bill

1:08:062024-0984

1:08:09was the fair housing legislation and

1:08:11because that was not

1:08:13finally passed by council, this removes

1:08:16language that would have been assumed to

1:08:17be needed because of that legislation.

1:08:21Is there further discussion on the

1:08:22amendment?

1:08:25Seeing none, all in favor of amending

1:08:28the bill with this new language, please

1:08:30say I.

1:08:31>> I. I.

1:08:32>> Bill is amended.

1:08:34Is there further discussion on bill

1:08:372025-1545

1:08:39as amended now?

1:08:43Councilmember Gross.

1:08:44>> Um thank you, Madam Chair.

1:08:46I just want to acknowledge what a

1:08:50long discussion this has been over this

1:08:53bill.

1:08:55I've lost track of the years. I really

1:08:57was convinced it was 3 years. Now I'm

1:08:59not actually even not if it was 2 years

1:09:01or 3 years.

1:09:03It felt like three.

1:09:05Um so, I

1:09:09I really struggled over various I don't

1:09:12know how many times we've amended

1:09:13either. I can have to admit.

1:09:15Um I think all of us agree we wish it

1:09:19weren't a giant lump-together zoning

1:09:22package.

1:09:23Um the parts we never talk about

1:09:27are the parts I'm the most supportive

1:09:28of.

1:09:30Which is that we are allowing accessory

1:09:33dwelling units in far more places of the

1:09:35city. You've heard me talk about

1:09:36accessory dwelling units for years.

1:09:38Um I think we had a unanimous support on

1:09:41exploring um a resolution asking

1:09:43planning to explore accessory dwelling

1:09:46units some five or six years ago. I've

1:09:48lost track of that as well.

1:09:50Um we know I have a letter of support

1:09:52from AARP National. They've done

1:09:55mailings in the Pittsburgh area. They

1:09:57have held discussion sessions in the

1:09:59Pittsburgh area advocating for

1:10:02those backyard granny flats or um easy

1:10:06conversions within a house to add one

1:10:08more unit. And that's because for AARP,

1:10:12this is a place where seniors can

1:10:14continue to live in the neighborhoods

1:10:16that value them and that they value

1:10:19um while also um aging in place.

1:10:22Maybe it'll be me that has to you know,

1:10:25when I build an ADU in my backyard that

1:10:27I move into because there's no not three

1:10:29sets of steps

1:10:31um in the house. Or um it allows a way

1:10:34to get more income if you are staying in

1:10:36the house and you have a granny flat in

1:10:38the backyard to get rental income.

1:10:41And it also I think comports with the

1:10:42spirit of what we're trying to do here,

1:10:44which is to add more housing in

1:10:46neighborhoods. Um certainly

1:10:50um there was a time in um my district

1:10:52where even our county executive lived in

1:10:54a backyard house.

1:10:56Um right? Because in Bloomfield and

1:10:58Lawrenceville and other parts of my

1:11:00districts,

1:11:01uh, more than a hundred years ago,

1:11:04when those neighborhoods were rapidly

1:11:06growing, houses were built on the alleys

1:11:08facing the alleys. So, when you drive

1:11:10down the alleys in Bloomfield, you drive

1:11:11down the alleys in Lawrenceville, um,

1:11:14you're seeing address that has the word

1:11:16way at the end. No, not Nutrena Way.

1:11:19That is a, um, alley house. So, that

1:11:23house was built in the backyard.

1:11:26Um, and so, um, they, it's a, it's a

1:11:29form that we're familiar with that

1:11:31Pittsburgh has had wide experience with,

1:11:34but before there was zoning.

1:11:37Um, and then so for many years our

1:11:38zoning just made it more difficult to do

1:11:40so. And so I, I think this is a really

1:11:42valuable correction.

1:11:44Um, secondly, I, I want to point out how

1:11:48important the parking reform is.

1:11:51There are

1:11:53hundreds of millions of dollars of new

1:11:56development that have been wasted on

1:11:58housing for cars instead of housing for

1:12:00people

1:12:01already in the last seven, eight years

1:12:03in Pittsburgh.

1:12:05Hundreds of millions.

1:12:07Because each one of those parking

1:12:09spaces, the performer for building it

1:12:11are something like a hundred thousand

1:12:12dollars each.

1:12:14Right? So, do that in multiples. Now,

1:12:16multiply that times a hundred, multiply

1:12:18it by two hundred, five hundred. When

1:12:20we're requiring five hundred parking

1:12:22spaces for a five hundred apartment unit

1:12:23building, it's absurd.

1:12:26Um, and a lot of those are sitting

1:12:27empty.

1:12:29Um, so, we, I think it, it's time that

1:12:31we make sure that we allow the market to

1:12:34judge how much additional parking is

1:12:36needed.

1:12:37Um, and by doing these reforms, we also

1:12:39allowed shared parking. Those parking

1:12:42spaces currently can't be leased out

1:12:45even if they're empty

1:12:46because they're sitting there empty

1:12:47required for that apartment.

1:12:51And that's absurd. So, we're losing out

1:12:52on parking tax revenue.

1:12:54And someone who could be leasing that

1:12:57spot is fighting for parking on the

1:12:59street.

1:13:01So, by doing these reforms, we really, I

1:13:04think, um,

1:13:06catch up to the times. Certainly, lots

1:13:08of cities around the country have

1:13:09already done this. And we're really

1:13:10going to make construction of all kinds

1:13:13easier to do and, um, have a more

1:13:16rational,

1:13:17um, I think system for,

1:13:19um,

1:13:22managing construction costs.

1:13:23So, um, I'm supportive of those. It's

1:13:26been a, uh, those those are the two I

1:13:28wish were separate. I wish they were

1:13:30separate pa- on their own,

1:13:32um, instead of being lumped together

1:13:34with the housing affordability,

1:13:36um, debate. Because, while all of us

1:13:42want to see more housing,

1:13:46uh, we have very, very polar opposite

1:13:50views of how to accomplish that.

1:13:52Um, I I think we started off at the

1:13:55beginning of this bill under previous

1:13:57mayor with a an emphasis on

1:14:01making sure

1:14:03that neighborhoods

1:14:05preserved mixed-income housing.

1:14:10And in the struggles, I think, we went

1:14:12back the other way,

1:14:14um, to

1:14:16just say build anything, even if you

1:14:19push everyone out of a neighborhood that

1:14:21can't afford it, even if you create a

1:14:22playground for the rich.

1:14:23That's some people think that's okay.

1:14:26I don't.

1:14:27Um, and certainly that I think the

1:14:29residents that I represent don't, cuz

1:14:31they have seen an incredible amount of

1:14:34development pressure, um,

1:14:36in the housing numbers that we've gotten

1:14:38so far, even though the dashboard isn't

1:14:40live, but it will be live due to

1:14:42Councilman Charline's,

1:14:43um,

1:14:45work.

1:14:48I think my district has seen double

1:14:50the amount of new units of the nearest

1:14:53council district, right? Councilman

1:14:55Charbonneau's district and Councilwoman

1:14:56Strawsberger's district have seen

1:14:57something like 1,200 and mine's seen,

1:14:59you know, well over 3 and 1/2

1:15:02um thousand

1:15:04units constructed in the last whatever

1:15:06it is, 8 years that we're looking back.

1:15:08Uh so,

1:15:12we had to fight

1:15:14to be sure that some of those new units

1:15:18were even in the range of affordability

1:15:20and not even that many.

1:15:22But, we have seen hundreds of new units

1:15:24built that are affordable um because

1:15:26there have been thousands that have

1:15:27built that are unaffordable.

1:15:30Um

1:15:31and so, I really struggled. I don't I

1:15:32was really it before the amendments

1:15:34today,

1:15:36I didn't think that it was worth

1:15:41uh

1:15:41a yes vote from me

1:15:43um because of my struggles over

1:15:46the affordability package. Um but, I

1:15:48want to thank Councilwoman Strawsberger

1:15:50and all of the citizen input that led us

1:15:52to these because I really had um

1:15:55good very detailed readings. Thank you

1:15:59and shout out to the residents in my

1:16:00council district who, you know, sent us

1:16:03comments, sent us feedback, and

1:16:04literally read this legislation line by

1:16:06line and it is giant and there's I don't

1:16:10know how many versions of it.

1:16:12Um so, that was a difficult task in

1:16:14order to really

1:16:16make it better. I was it was hard work

1:16:19to make it better. Um but, I feel like

1:16:21that that has been accomplished. So, I

1:16:22will be voting yes on this today.

1:16:25I do feel like

1:16:27it is now, it wasn't before, but it is

1:16:29now one of the situations where it's a

1:16:31compromise and no one's really that

1:16:32happy, but you know, you know, that's a

1:16:35good compromise when everybody

1:16:38has had to give up something.

1:16:40Um

1:16:42and um and we've we've I've seen that

1:16:44before here at this council. So, I do

1:16:46appreciate that everyone has put that

1:16:48time and effort into it. So,

1:16:50I didn't expect to be voting yes today.

1:16:52>> Yes.

1:16:53>> But I will be voting yes.

1:16:55>> Yes.

1:16:57>> Thank you.

1:16:59Further discussion?

1:17:02Council President, Councilman Mosley.

1:17:03>> I just want to echo Councilwoman Gross's

1:17:06sentiments and thoughts. So, thank you.

1:17:08I won't try to re- restate what you

1:17:11articulately stated. So, thank you.

1:17:13>> Thank you. Councilman Mosley.

1:17:15>> Yeah,

1:17:15you know, absolutely again, I you know,

1:17:17I echo

1:17:18Councilwoman Gross and Council

1:17:20President, you know, Lavelle. Yeah, I do

1:17:23I do agree with, you know, from a

1:17:25strategy perspective, you know, I think

1:17:27the last 18 months, if not longer, you

1:17:31know, uh

1:17:33you know, it may have gone um

1:17:35you know, a lot smoother and not as

1:17:37tense around around this table if was

1:17:39not an omnibus package, if we did

1:17:41separate um

1:17:43the various elements,

1:17:45you know, of this bill into separate

1:17:47bills, but, you know,

1:17:49you know, we are here today and and I

1:17:51and I do think this is

1:17:53you know, you know, a testament to

1:17:55um you know, while we do have different

1:17:57views around this table, you know, I've

1:17:59always, you know, felt that, you know,

1:18:00we all

1:18:01you know, have the best interests in in

1:18:03the city and we may have, you know,

1:18:04different ideas of how we get get there,

1:18:07but I think that today, you know,

1:18:09represents,

1:18:11you know, the type of compromise that I

1:18:12do think um you know, will move the city

1:18:17forward in a positive way in the effort

1:18:19to, you know, have the growth and and

1:18:21again, create the housing across various

1:18:23typologies and price points that we know

1:18:25we need, you know, but also continue our

1:18:28laser focus

1:18:29on the anxiety that Pittsburghers feel

1:18:31all over the city and um you know, our

1:18:34fellow neighbors throughout the region

1:18:36feel around the rising cost of housing

1:18:39through throughout the Pittsburgh region

1:18:40and addressing

1:18:42the affordability you know while doing

1:18:45so

1:18:47as some critics would say that could

1:18:49stifle development across the board. So

1:18:52so hopefully you know we have found a

1:18:54vehicle today that

1:18:56you know um

1:18:58helps stimulate growth while also

1:19:01allows us to continue to be laser

1:19:02focused you know on affordability as

1:19:05well as addressing

1:19:06other things that you know people talk

1:19:10about sometimes how affordability you

1:19:12know cuts into

1:19:14the costs and and and make things not

1:19:16pencil out when it comes to development

1:19:18but also you know addressing parking

1:19:20minimums as as Councilwoman Gross spoke

1:19:23to you know you know also does that and

1:19:26also I think it's so important you know

1:19:28for us to understand that you know you

1:19:31know Americans under the age of 40 are

1:19:33probably the first you know generation

1:19:35of Americans that don't have the love

1:19:38affair with automobiles like Americans

1:19:41have had since the 1950s.

1:19:43So you know I don't think it's the same

1:19:46you know level of interest in in in

1:19:48owning uh

1:19:50motor vehicles at the same clip that

1:19:53that we seen in past generations. So I

1:19:54think

1:19:55eliminating those parking minimums

1:19:57looking into the future you know not

1:20:00only I think

1:20:02you know connect with what we think is

1:20:03going to be the future you know

1:20:05attitudes and interests of future

1:20:07American generations but also allow us

1:20:10to again thread that needle

1:20:12you know between growth and making sure

1:20:15that we are laser focused on creating

1:20:18enough affordable housing to make sure

1:20:21that the least among of us are living

1:20:23with dignity as well. So I want to thank

1:20:26everyone for continuing to come to the

1:20:28table even on those days

1:20:31um,

1:20:32know when when when emotions ran high,

1:20:34understandably, you know, because, you

1:20:36know, housing is such a visceral thing.

1:20:38Um,

1:20:39you know, as human beings, I do believe

1:20:41it is a human right, and um

1:20:43and and nothing, you know, uh

1:20:46uh

1:20:47creates those visceral reactions, you

1:20:49know, such as housing. So, this has been

1:20:51a tough issue, but I think overall,

1:20:54um, this is, you know, a positive day

1:20:56for the city, and I look forward to

1:20:58seeing,

1:20:59uh, you know, all types of housing

1:21:01across typologies and price points, you

1:21:04know, particularly a more affordable

1:21:06housing coming online in the near

1:21:07future.

1:21:10>> Thank you.

1:21:11Councilmember Cockayne.

1:21:12>> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um

1:21:14I'm happy to support your amendments,

1:21:17Councilwoman Grosso. I've learned a lot

1:21:18about housing.

1:21:20I'm sorry?

1:21:20>> For Councilwoman Strasburger's

1:21:21amendments.

1:21:22>> Oh, oh, okay. Okay, but you're

1:21:24supporting them, right? So, now, I'm

1:21:25happy to support these amendments. I

1:21:27think, uh, they make sense

1:21:29moving forward with our housing crisis,

1:21:32and, uh

1:21:33I'll be voting yes. Thanks.

1:21:35>> Thank you. Councilmember Warwerk,

1:21:37followed by Councilperson Charland.

1:21:39>> Um, yeah, so, just, um, you know, I'm

1:21:42supportive today. Uh

1:21:46I do think it's, you know, worth

1:21:47acknowledging that, you know, this

1:21:50this all started over,

1:21:52um,

1:21:53a push for mandatory inclusionary zoning

1:21:55citywide, and that was something that

1:21:57this council rejected, that lots of

1:22:00people, lots of residents came out in

1:22:01support of. Um, we have seen success

1:22:04with the mandatory inclusionary zoning

1:22:05program that is currently in, um,

1:22:08Councilwoman Grosso's district. Um, you

1:22:10know, the most most building has been

1:22:12going on in that district, right, of any

1:22:15other, I believe. Um

1:22:18more than just affordable housing, which

1:22:20it does create affordable housing, it

1:22:22also ensures, um,

1:22:24uh um,

1:22:25uh a a diverse city, right? Economically

1:22:28diverse, racially diverse, um, by by um

1:22:33by making sure that uh that there are

1:22:36all all types of price points within a

1:22:38given new project, right? Um, so, you

1:22:41know,

1:22:43we will see if if this

1:22:45uh um

1:22:48you know, if this um

1:22:50voluntary program works. Um, I hope it

1:22:53does. I hope that the incentives are are

1:22:56strong enough that it that it does uh

1:22:58result in affordable projects happening.

1:23:01Um, I think it's a shame that we have

1:23:03massive you know, hundreds and hundreds

1:23:06of units being built at a time without a

1:23:07single affordable unit. And that's

1:23:08happening now in um in um

1:23:12uh

1:23:13neighborhoods without IZ, right? Uh and

1:23:16that's a shame, right? And when you go

1:23:17to those neighborhoods, you can see it,

1:23:19right? You can see the difference

1:23:20between

1:23:21uh what, you know, sort of

1:23:24you know, that that's one of the the

1:23:25kind of cool things about Pittsburgh is

1:23:27that you can live in a neighborhood uh

1:23:29and have folks of all different income

1:23:31levels and all different um you know,

1:23:34backgrounds and whatever living in in

1:23:36one in one

1:23:38shared space. So, um

1:23:41uh

1:23:42I I am I am hopeful for this. I think

1:23:45that it'll be interesting to see in in

1:23:47in two years or so, right? And and also

1:23:50just the sort of that this is something

1:23:52and that is more than than not having

1:23:53any affordability requirements at all.

1:23:56So, um I hope that

1:23:59um our developers

1:24:01uh

1:24:02see the advantage here and take

1:24:04advantage. Uh but but what I will say is

1:24:08that going forward, you know, when we're

1:24:09looking at other other votes coming

1:24:12ahead, we're looking at things like the

1:24:14housing opportunity fund and the

1:24:16critical critical gap financing that

1:24:20that that fund provides in order for us

1:24:23to to win light tech deals of which we

1:24:25have been winning many over the the past

1:24:28years. Um, and and you know, those deals

1:24:32really do and that that is actual deeply

1:24:34affordable housing, right? For for

1:24:37much more than just a 10% um,

1:24:40uh, in in and so so that is that is

1:24:42making sure that that um,

1:24:44um, our lower income folks are able to

1:24:47stay in the city as the city grows. Uh,

1:24:50so I hope that um, you know, with in in

1:24:52light of all this in this, you know,

1:24:54grand compromise uh,

1:24:58that you know, when we get to those

1:24:59votes and we are really talking about

1:25:01deeply affordable housing and and what

1:25:03that is worth to us as as a council and

1:25:07as a city that uh, that we keep this

1:25:09compromise in mind and um, make sure

1:25:12that we adequately fund uh, the projects

1:25:17that we need to fund so that we can

1:25:18continue to build

1:25:20lots of affordable housing which we have

1:25:22been doing, right? Lots of projects, um,

1:25:24lots of ribbon cuttings happening now as

1:25:26well thanks to those light tech deals.

1:25:28So, um, yeah, anyway, thank you

1:25:30Councilwoman. I know it's been a rough a

1:25:32long road. So, thank you for for

1:25:34sticking with it and um, and all the

1:25:37work I've I sort of feel like I've been

1:25:38on the sidelines a little bit, but you

1:25:40know, just kind of watching it happen.

1:25:42So, I really appreciate uh, you sitting

1:25:44down and grinding through this with our

1:25:47with our zoning team and with planning

1:25:48commission and with Councilwoman Gross

1:25:50and and everybody. It's been an enormous

1:25:52amount of work. So, thank you.

1:25:54>> Thank you.

1:25:55Councilperson Charlien.

1:25:56>> Yes, uh, so I'm I'm not actually going

1:25:58to comment on the substance of the bill.

1:26:00Um, I think everybody knows where I

1:26:02stand on that. But I do want to

1:26:05um,

1:26:05thank you Councilperson Strassburger for

1:26:08I think we've a lot of us have played

1:26:10roles in various parts of this saga and

1:26:13you are the the one that is, you know,

1:26:15putting the ball into the hole. So,

1:26:18thank you for taking this to the finish

1:26:19line. And I I know this is not

1:26:22necessarily

1:26:24what you wanted to spend the year on,

1:26:26but I I do appreciate you uh finally

1:26:29finishing this and working with planning

1:26:30and ironing out details and uh getting

1:26:33to the point where

1:26:34we can

1:26:35move on to the next thing. So, thank you

1:26:37so much for for doing that.

1:26:39>> Thank you.

1:26:40I'll just say quickly, look, this is

1:26:42this is

1:26:43if there was ever a team effort with all

1:26:45of council, this is it, right? Like as

1:26:48you just said, councilman, every single

1:26:50council member

1:26:52has played a role here in this I mean

1:26:56whether we love the final package or

1:26:58not, this is this is this is our you

1:27:01know, this is what we've been able to

1:27:02accomplish together. Um and I think that

1:27:06predates the bill even. That's um

1:27:09you know, councilwoman Gross championing

1:27:11the IZO and the photo and the

1:27:13inclusionary zoning and was started in

1:27:16District 7 and has now moved to to

1:27:18Oakland as well, right? To

1:27:20um have mandatory inclusionary zoning

1:27:22and um championing um accessory dwelling

1:27:26units long before this bill even came to

1:27:28be. Um those of us who have worked on

1:27:31parking reforms and parking minimums and

1:27:34um transportation demand management

1:27:36policy. I mean, yeah, if there's any

1:27:39third rail of politics at the local

1:27:40level, it's

1:27:42housing, zoning, and parking, right? So,

1:27:44we're we're kind of touching all of

1:27:45those here. Um but and then everyone

1:27:48who's been

1:27:50a part of this throughout um it's it's

1:27:52long

1:27:54and winding process. So, I think we all

1:27:56own this and various parts of it in

1:27:58various ways and I think should be proud

1:28:00of it. Um

1:28:02I

1:28:03I'm very especially proud of the of the

1:28:06parking minimums uh like piece of this.

1:28:09Uh we our office had worked on that for

1:28:10probably at least 3 years, right? And um

1:28:13it's a part of this and I'm proud to

1:28:15support the accessory dwelling units. I

1:28:17think I've spoken before individually

1:28:19with people, but um

1:28:22you know, I have family and friends who

1:28:24live in other states where there's

1:28:25statewide zoning reform around ADUs and

1:28:28the number of people who have now like

1:28:29have generational living because they're

1:28:31able to

1:28:32uh move into um and downsize into an

1:28:35accessory dwelling unit and be able to

1:28:37see their kids and families move into

1:28:39the main house or whatever it looks

1:28:41like, be able to afford a mortgage

1:28:42because they can now move into the ADU.

1:28:45It's It's really important. Um on the

1:28:48the affordable housing bonus program,

1:28:50the sort of um compromise on IZ

1:28:53um

1:28:55I really do truly see it as something

1:28:58that we can learn from and and it

1:29:01something iterative. I I don't think

1:29:04that I'm I'm not at all confident that

1:29:06we're going to have the

1:29:09uh mental, emotional, or even spiritual

1:29:12energy to attack this again anytime real

1:29:14soon, but I'm I'm very grateful to

1:29:18Councilmember Charland for offering to

1:29:21um work on a companion piece of

1:29:23legislation that will mandate that we

1:29:25look back at this again and again. If we

1:29:27look at the gold standard out there, I

1:29:29guess the silver lining for me is that

1:29:30I've learned all about affordable

1:29:32housing policy all across the country in

1:29:34the very many different forms that it

1:29:36takes.

1:29:37One gold standard is Montgomery County,

1:29:38Maryland, and I'm reminded again again

1:29:41that

1:29:42took them 8 years to pass their original

1:29:44inclusionary zoning bill, but it has

1:29:46been iterated on for like 40 years now,

1:29:4930 years maybe. Um

1:29:52and

1:29:53it has it has evolved, and my hope is

1:29:58that

1:30:00again, like Councilmember Person Warwick

1:30:02said, that this that this works, and if

1:30:04it doesn't, that we take a look at it

1:30:06and figure out what we need to tweak.

1:30:08Where you know, is there an opportunity

1:30:10to further expand the mandatory portion

1:30:12of this? Is there more that we can do to

1:30:15fund gap financing if the payment in

1:30:17lieu isn't enough to fund, you know, to

1:30:20to fund the gap financing that's needed

1:30:22for

1:30:23mandatory 50% AMI district or units. Uh

1:30:28What more can we do with the county and

1:30:31the school board to make Alurda just

1:30:33easier at tri-party Alurda easier to

1:30:36obtain? Any number of issues, new

1:30:39housing authority director coming in who

1:30:41I'm very excited to work with to see not

1:30:44only how they can

1:30:46interact with with this bill in

1:30:47particular and sort of the oversight of

1:30:49of units and and ground truthing it, but

1:30:52also um

1:30:54what I think could potentially be as

1:30:56consequential as as Councilmember

1:30:58Warbreck mentioned, LIHTC deals, the

1:31:01conversion of already existing housing

1:31:03into affordable housing simply by um

1:31:06changing the way that people pay for

1:31:08those units. So, there's just so many

1:31:09opportunities to see how this interacts

1:31:11with the future of the comp plan, the

1:31:13future of zoning changes, the future of

1:31:15the city as we're building more housing,

1:31:17and I do truly, honestly look forward to

1:31:20seeing

1:31:21how it pans out in the next few years um

1:31:24and then how we need to

1:31:26um address it if it if it's not living

1:31:28up to what we intended.

1:31:31Yes, Councilmember Carlieon.

1:31:33>> I just have a clarification question

1:31:35about two of the amendments. The The

1:31:36housing from 20 to 35 years,

1:31:39those that are already built and

1:31:41I think I know the answer to this. Um

1:31:43they're locked in at the 20 years that

1:31:46the ones that have already are already

1:31:48built, the however many hundreds of

1:31:50units.

1:31:52Correct?

1:31:52>> 35.

1:31:53>> What was the question?

1:31:54>> They're locked in at 35, I believe.

1:31:56>> Well, the question is this. Those who We

1:31:58We've already built

1:32:01in places, mostly in your district,

1:32:03Councilwoman Gros, where they're locked

1:32:05in a 20 years for affordable units. They

1:32:08have to stay online for 20 years,

1:32:09correct?

1:32:10>> 35.

1:32:10>> 35. Oh. I mean, that's today's

1:32:12amendment, though, right?

1:32:14>> But the um may I?

1:32:17When we passed like the Lawrenceville

1:32:19first was the first neighborhood to do

1:32:22the inclusionary zoning overlay, it was

1:32:2435.

1:32:25>> Okay. Okay.

1:32:26>> Those ones Those ones built right 35.

1:32:28>> Okay. And and the parking requirements,

1:32:30um those who um were required as you

1:32:33said parking lots, can they now revert

1:32:35back and take that off as a parking

1:32:38>> I don't know the answer to that.

1:32:41>> I don't want to answer for planning. We

1:32:42certainly have Assistant Director Dash

1:32:44here, but I did I did ask the question

1:32:46to I think Councilwoman Gros's really

1:32:48apt observation that if you built

1:32:50parking because you had to adhere to a

1:32:52this arbitrary standard that exists to

1:32:54saying

1:32:55Yeah, it's gone. You You're building and

1:32:56you have to have this many integral

1:32:58parking spaces. That after the fact now

1:33:01that it it would then be eligible to not

1:33:05just your own

1:33:06Not I mean, you can't like remove

1:33:08parking spaces, but you could like lease

1:33:10it out to non-residents potentially.

1:33:12>> call it shared parking, and we haven't

1:33:14been able to do it where the parking was

1:33:16built to be required for those

1:33:18apartments. So

1:33:18>> it at least lifts the restraints of

1:33:21the current

1:33:22>> We hope. Yeah.

1:33:23>> Okay.

1:33:24>> Technically.

1:33:25>> Okay. That That's all. Any other, you

1:33:26know, clarification I can get offline.

1:33:28Thanks.

1:33:29>> Thank you. Uh

1:33:30Not to and then um have me to take other

1:33:32questions, but not to confuse things too

1:33:34too much,

1:33:35but there will need to be some other

1:33:37companion bills attached to this, right?

1:33:40And I'll just name a couple of them now.

1:33:41They will be introduced in the coming

1:33:42weeks.

1:33:43Um I believe by, you know, through

1:33:45planning and the administrative side,

1:33:47but um

1:33:50if those

1:33:52building

1:33:53if those wishing to take advantage of

1:33:55this sort of um

1:33:58affordable housing bonus program

1:34:01um wish to pay make a payment in lieu of

1:34:04building on site

1:34:06we need a trust fund legislation to be

1:34:08able to collect that funding and then

1:34:10there are draft light guidelines that

1:34:12you've all been sent that we need to

1:34:13discuss I think as a council it's going

1:34:14to be really important to decide how and

1:34:17where those are used. Right? One of the

1:34:19I think draft

1:34:21provisions of that says if you're if

1:34:23you're

1:34:25if you're

1:34:26paying in lieu of building on site there

1:34:28on that in that district or I'm sorry in

1:34:30that building it must be used in in the

1:34:33same neighborhood

1:34:35as the building.

1:34:36Um I think those are going to be future

1:34:37questions that we need to

1:34:39attack in addition to

1:34:41um

1:34:42some other ancillary um

1:34:45uh

1:34:46but necessary accompanying language. So

1:34:49we'll be seeing those in the coming

1:34:50weeks but wanted to preview that as

1:34:51well. I don't think we're done fully

1:34:53addressing all the different aspects of

1:34:55this very very large bill but it's

1:34:57coming soon.

1:34:59Yeah.

1:35:00>> Just

1:35:00>> Ms. President

1:35:01>> a very quick thought because you

1:35:03mentioned the need to create a trust

1:35:05fund for the payment in lieu of.

1:35:07It's just an interesting idea to create

1:35:10a trust fund for a payment in lieu of

1:35:12for affordable housing

1:35:14while we're also having a potential

1:35:15conversation about eliminating the

1:35:18affordable housing trust fund or the

1:35:19housing opportunity fund.

1:35:21Um

1:35:22and what I don't know is if we could

1:35:24keep the housing opportunity fund and

1:35:26allow the payment of lieu to come in

1:35:29obviously it comes to the city coffers

1:35:30first but then be directly transferred

1:35:32to the HOF at whatever appropriate time.

1:35:35So it just for a future conversation but

1:35:37it just came to mind we we mentioned the

1:35:39need for the new trust fund. That's all.

1:35:41>> That's a great point.

1:35:44Further discussion. Councilwoman Grosso.

1:35:47>> Uh one last one also because it's on

1:35:49today's agenda that

1:35:51um

1:35:53myself and my co-sponsors introduced

1:35:55zoning legislation for short-term rental

1:35:58in January, which is long past time to

1:36:01have been voted on, and we have to give

1:36:03it extensions over and over and over

1:36:04again because it is important for some

1:36:07neighborhoods that if we um allow the

1:36:11accessory dwelling units, they also

1:36:13really want to see restrictions on

1:36:14short-term rental use. Again, in

1:36:17fighting gentrification, in fighting the

1:36:19incentivization of more financialization

1:36:21of housing and outside um investors and

1:36:24real estate speculators, that we should

1:36:26be passing that bill as well. So, just a

1:36:29little bit of a of uh

1:36:31a shout-out there to the planning

1:36:33commission which has not

1:36:35um sent us back a report or

1:36:37recommendation on the short-term renting

1:36:39bill that we have um co-sponsored. Thank

1:36:42you.

1:36:42>> Thank you.

1:36:44For further discussion?

1:36:46All right.

1:36:48Seeing none, we will take a vote on

1:36:52bill 2025-1545

1:36:54as amended. We've amended it, and we've

1:36:56amended it three more times. So, all

1:36:58those in favor of the bill as amended,

1:37:00please indicate by saying I.

1:37:02>> I.

1:37:02>> I.

1:37:03>> I.

1:37:04>> Affirmative recommendation.

1:37:07Thank you very much. We will now move on

1:37:09to bill 2026

1:37:110008.

1:37:13>> Ordinance amending and supplementing a

1:37:15Pittsburgh code

1:37:16Excuse me, title seven business

1:37:18licensing, article seven service

1:37:20businesses, adding a new chapter 768

1:37:23short-term rental housing.

1:37:25>> Motion to approve. Discussion?

1:37:27>> Second.

1:37:28>> So, um we intend to pass Oh, sorry. You

1:37:32didn't defer to I think. Sorry,

1:37:33Councilman. I just I imagined you saying

1:37:36it. Um the um

1:37:38we are hoping to take this the licensing

1:37:41bill up when we get the short-term

1:37:44rental back zoning back from the

1:37:46planning commission. Again, we're eager

1:37:48to get it back from the planning

1:37:49commission with a report or

1:37:50recommendation. So,

1:37:53uh I'll say motion to hold 6 weeks.

1:37:56>> Second.

1:37:57>> Discussion?

1:37:59Seeing none, all in favor of a 6-week

1:38:02hold for bill eight, please say I.

1:38:03>> I.

1:38:05>> Bill will be held 6 weeks.

1:38:09Bill 834.

1:38:13>> Ordinance amending

1:38:14>> the Pittsburgh code title nine zoning

1:38:16code article one introduction and

1:38:18establishment chapter 901 general

1:38:20provisions chapter 902 zoning districts

1:38:23in general article two base zoning

1:38:25district chapter 903 residential zoning

1:38:28district chapter 904 mixed use zoning

1:38:31districts chapter 905 special purpose

1:38:33districts article three overlay zoning

1:38:36district chapter 906 environmental

1:38:38overlay districts chapter 907

1:38:41development overlay districts articles

1:38:44four planning districts chapter 908

1:38:46public realm districts chapter 909

1:38:48planned development district chapter 910

1:38:51downtown districts article five use

1:38:53regulations

1:38:55chapter 911 primary uses chapter 912

1:38:58accessory uses and structures chapter

1:39:00913 use exceptions and conditions not

1:39:02listed in use table article six

1:39:06development standards chapter 915

1:39:08environmental performance standards

1:39:10chapter 916 residential compatibility

1:39:12standard

1:39:14chapter 918 landscaping and screening

1:39:16standards chapter 919 signs chapter 920

1:39:19child care regulations

1:39:21article seven nonconformities chapter

1:39:23921 nonconformities article eight review

1:39:27and enforcement chapter 922 development

1:39:29review procedures article nine

1:39:31measurements and definitions chapter 925

1:39:33measurements chapter 926 definitions.

1:39:36>> Motion to approve discussion.

1:39:39Second.

1:39:40>> Discussion?

1:39:42>> Yes, uh

1:39:43So, before we discuss the bill, there is

1:39:45an amendment to the bill

1:39:47that the administration was looking to

1:39:49get done.

1:39:50I'll do my best to explain it.

1:39:53Uh but I want to make a motion to

1:39:55uh amend bill

1:39:58uh 834.

1:40:00>> Second.

1:40:02With discussion, yeah.

1:40:03>> Discussion?

1:40:05>> Uh thank you. So,

1:40:07yeah, right at the front here

1:40:09uh with

1:40:10the compatibility standards.

1:40:13So,

1:40:15uh

1:40:16basically,

1:40:18the existing setback standards in these

1:40:21compatibility standards

1:40:23uh would

1:40:24means that, you know, if you're

1:40:27if the house um

1:40:29so, it doesn't apply whenever the rear

1:40:31of the subject property is across a

1:40:35street or way from the residential

1:40:38zoning district.

1:40:40So, if the backside of the house,

1:40:42you know,

1:40:43I don't know how

1:40:44easy I could say that other than just

1:40:46you know, the backside of the house if

1:40:47it's if you're seeing the backside of

1:40:48the house,

1:40:50um

1:40:51next to

1:40:54uh

1:40:55an area where there could be some

1:40:56compatibility standards, there is um

1:41:01there's there's no need for that.

1:41:04A house that's on the backside to comply

1:41:06with that. So, this amendment restores

1:41:08the existing condition that residential

1:41:10compatibility setback standards don't

1:41:12apply

1:41:13to the properties in that orientation

1:41:15and alignment with the intent to

1:41:17simplify residential compatibility

1:41:19standards.

1:41:20So, it really just

1:41:22like there the intention was was this

1:41:24initially.

1:41:25And uh

1:41:26you know, there was

1:41:28this is a little too large to be a

1:41:29scrivener's error, but it was it was an

1:41:31error.

1:41:32So,

1:41:34you have it in front of you with the

1:41:35white paper on it, there's a lot of

1:41:36amendments.

1:41:38Um

1:41:40here, but it's the one that has the

1:41:41white paper

1:41:42few white papers on top of the the

1:41:44yellow papers.

1:41:49>> Further discussion?

1:41:52Questions?

1:41:55Seeing none, all in favor of amending

1:41:59bill 834 with said amendment, please say

1:42:02I.

1:42:02>> I.

1:42:04>> Bill is amended. Further discussion on

1:42:06the bill as amended, Councilwoman

1:42:07Grosso.

1:42:08>> I have a verbal amendment and I talked

1:42:10to the bill's the amendment sponsor and

1:42:12I talked to the planning department and

1:42:14it's just deleting five words and I'm

1:42:17kind of waiting for confirmation from my

1:42:19staff to make sure I've got the right

1:42:21section number.

1:42:23Um

1:42:24yeah, it's 911.

1:42:27So, um Madam Clerk,

1:42:30this is in the your big yellow copy on

1:42:32page 26. Thank goodness you've numbered

1:42:35the pages.

1:42:37Since we have like a thousand pieces of

1:42:38paper in front of us right now.

1:42:41So, for colleagues at section five

1:42:45in the use regulations,

1:42:48chapter 911,

1:42:50um section 911.02,

1:42:53subsection B is about multi-suite

1:42:55residential and these are literally just

1:42:57like lifting old definitions from like

1:42:59the 1970s and we were just intending to

1:43:01plop them in, but um I believe that for

1:43:05this multi-suite residential, like

1:43:09it's where there are kind of shared um

1:43:14amenities in the building,

1:43:15um but it just seemed odd to me that we

1:43:19um in said words like

1:43:22meals may be provided

1:43:26for compensation on a weekly or monthly

1:43:28basis cuz this is exclusive of

1:43:30fraternities and exclusive of

1:43:31dormitories, It's It's not that kind of

1:43:34thing.

1:43:35Um and I've actually had developers kind

1:43:37of interested in building these types of

1:43:39buildings where you a a portion or the

1:43:41whole building would be areas where

1:43:43there'd be like smaller apartments, but

1:43:45more shared things, even shared kitchen

1:43:47space.

1:43:48Um so uh I thought this would just be

1:43:51cleaner. So, Madam Clerk, in that

1:43:52section, if you found it,

1:43:54>> Yes.

1:43:55>> I would like motion to amend after the

1:43:57word lodging

1:43:59to strike out or meals or both are.

1:44:05So, that's just five words.

1:44:09But then insert is, since I've struck

1:44:12out the verb are, I just put is. So,

1:44:14lodging is provided for compensation on

1:44:17a weekly or monthly basis is how the

1:44:19sentence would read.

1:44:22So, again, the the whole definition

1:44:24would be multi-suite residential means a

1:44:27building or portion thereof containing

1:44:30rooms rented as sleeping or living

1:44:32quarters without private kitchens or

1:44:34without private bathrooms.

1:44:36Lodging is provided for compensation on

1:44:38a weekly or monthly basis.

1:44:41Multi-suite residential uses shall not

1:44:44include dormitory and fraternity or

1:44:46sorority.

1:44:47So,

1:44:48um I think I've I've talked to a variety

1:44:50of members. I think tried to get every

1:44:52member.

1:44:53Um

1:44:54So, I need a second.

1:44:56>> Second.

1:44:57>> Further discussion?

1:44:59Seeing none, all in favor of the verbal

1:45:02amendment, please say I.

1:45:03>> I.

1:45:03>> I.

1:45:05>> Bill is amended.

1:45:07Further discussion on the bill.

1:45:11Council Member Warwick.

1:45:12>> I don't actually I just wanted to

1:45:13register an I vote for the previous cuz

1:45:16I was

1:45:16>> Oh, thank you.

1:45:17>> Yeah.

1:45:17>> Okay.

1:45:19I'll just while we're waiting for any

1:45:21other comments, um

1:45:24one I wanted to thank city planning

1:45:26staff, um some of whom are here today,

1:45:28but amazingly have not been called to

1:45:30the table. I thought that would happen.

1:45:33On on this bill and those who are here

1:45:36today not here today

1:45:37and for the presentation

1:45:40who

1:45:42might be speaking the nature reality I

1:45:44don't know.

1:45:46But who have who have created I think a

1:45:48very helpful and informative

1:45:51presentation on this bill that that I

1:45:53have found to have answered all of my

1:45:54questions. So therefore I don't have

1:45:56questions of this. I did want to move

1:45:57back to 1545 for a minute cuz I

1:46:00neglected to thank our planning staff

1:46:02past and present on that bill that has

1:46:04just been such a long process for them

1:46:08as well. Um

1:46:10not just understanding the details but

1:46:11literally writing the details of these

1:46:13bill of that bill and so if it

1:46:16should have gone without saying but I

1:46:17wanted to say thank you to

1:46:20our planning staff for and our zoning

1:46:22staff who

1:46:23spent so much time and energy on that

1:46:25bill as well.

1:46:26Thank you.

1:46:29Further discussion on bill 834

1:46:31as amended.

1:46:33Seeing none, all in favor of bill 834 as

1:46:36amended, please say I.

1:46:37>> I.

1:46:38>> Affirmative recommendation.

1:46:40New papers, bill 993.

1:46:43>> Petition received in the city clerk's

1:46:45office requesting a public hearing

1:46:47before city council regarding the return

1:46:49of the workplace accidents and the law

1:46:51historical marker to market square. The

1:46:53petition is valid in accordance with the

1:46:55home rule charter.

1:46:59>> Motion to approve.

1:47:02>> Second.

1:47:04>> I hold for public hearing.

1:47:07>> Motion hold for cable cast public

1:47:08hearing.

1:47:09>> Second.

1:47:11>> Discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of

1:47:13holding bill 993 for a cable cast public

1:47:15hearing, please say I.

1:47:16>> I.

1:47:17>> I.

1:47:18>> Bill will be held.

1:47:20Okay, we will move back to the top of

1:47:21our agenda.

1:47:23Moving past the deferred paper to new

1:47:25papers, bill 982.

1:47:31>> Resolution authorizing the issuance of a

1:47:33warrant in favor of Patrick Goodfellow

1:47:36in an amount not to exceed $3,615.93

1:47:40over 1 year in full and final settlement

1:47:42of a claim for damage to his parked

1:47:44vehicle near 54 Carrick Avenue from a

1:47:47city ES recycling vehicle on February

1:47:492nd, 2026.

1:47:54>> Is there a motion?

1:47:55>> Motion to approve.

1:47:56>> Second.

1:47:57>> Discussion?

1:47:58Seeing none, all in favor of bill 982,

1:48:01please say I.

1:48:02>> I.

1:48:02>> I.

1:48:03>> Affirmative recommendation, bill 983.

1:48:06>> Resolution authorizing the issuance of a

1:48:08warrant in favor of Tomer Elbaz in an

1:48:11amount not to exceed $3,600 over 1 year

1:48:14in full and final settlement of a claim

1:48:17for damage to his parked vehicle near

1:48:183815 Rustic Avenue from a city ES

1:48:21vehicle on January 8th, 2026.

1:48:24>> Motion to approve.

1:48:27>> Discussion?

1:48:29Seeing none, all in favor of bill 983,

1:48:31please say I.

1:48:32>> I.

1:48:32>> I.

1:48:33>> Affirmative recommendation, bill 984.

1:48:36>> Resolution transferring the amount of

1:48:38$4,768.87

1:48:41within the 2026 operating budget from

1:48:44city council district supplies postage

1:48:46to the department of finance supplies

1:48:48postage to account for the cost of

1:48:50postage meter usage and stamps for the

1:48:52months of July through September.

1:48:54>> Motion to approve.

1:48:57>> Second.

1:48:57>> Second.

1:48:58>> Discussion?

1:49:00Seeing none, all in favor of bill 984,

1:49:03please say I.

1:49:04>> I.

1:49:04>> I.

1:49:05>> Affirmative recommendation, bill 985.

1:49:08>> Ordinance supplementing the Pittsburgh

1:49:09City Code title two fiscal article one

1:49:12budget by adding a new chapter 222

1:49:14budget training.

1:49:16>> Motion to approve.

1:49:18>> Second.

1:49:21>> Second.

1:49:22>> Discussion?

1:49:24So,

1:49:25this and the next couple of bills are

1:49:27items that um

1:49:30you're part of, you know, the sort of

1:49:32fiscal package that we all

1:49:34um many of us spoke to or stood behind

1:49:37um in announcing a few a few weeks ago.

1:49:41Doesn't could be implemented without

1:49:44legislation, but wanted to codify it.

1:49:46So, this one simply uh allows for the

1:49:49work that's already starting to happen

1:49:51with our budget office in creating sort

1:49:53of a municipal Pittsburgh budgeting 101,

1:49:57you know, training for new council

1:49:59members, new staff as we approach budget

1:50:02budget season and the budget all year

1:50:03round um

1:50:05understanding the sort of quirks of our

1:50:09Pittsburgh budget and um

1:50:13I think budget director Walmsley

1:50:15>> Mr. Walmsley

1:50:16>> uh has been working on this with her

1:50:18team and I think should be able to share

1:50:21with all of us what that might look like

1:50:23in the beginning of the year so that we

1:50:25could um

1:50:27provide feedback and then as we have new

1:50:29members and staff that are on our

1:50:30hallway, they can get fully trained and

1:50:33and ready to go on the budget for their

1:50:35first budget year.

1:50:36So, that's the purpose of this.

1:50:41Seeing no further any further

1:50:42discussion, seeing none, all in favor of

1:50:44bill 985, please say I.

1:50:46>> I.

1:50:46>> I.

1:50:48>> Affirmative recommendation, bill 986.

1:50:50>> Ordinance amending the Pittsburgh City

1:50:52Code title one, administrative article

1:50:54seven, procedures chapter 161 contracts,

1:50:57161.14

1:50:59purchasing cards.

1:51:02>> Motion to approve.

1:51:03>> Second.

1:51:04>> Discussion?

1:51:06Uh same here. This is really an internal

1:51:08policy for our hallway. Um it's not does

1:51:11not apply citywide, but it's clarifying

1:51:14when we should use P-cards, when we

1:51:15should you use reimbursement, when we

1:51:17should use invoices, and um, recognizing

1:51:21once again that individual council

1:51:23members and offices do not have their

1:51:24own P-cards, but guiding us and all of

1:51:27the teams that we work with as to how we

1:51:28spend money on the hallway. Um, the

1:51:31actual policy is attached here for the

1:51:34record, so it is publicly available, and

1:51:37it's something that we can refer back

1:51:39to, but of course, if ever we have

1:51:41questions, we have many knowledgeable

1:51:42people on the hallway who can help guide

1:51:44us as well.

1:51:45So, that's the intent here.

1:51:47Further discussion here.

1:51:50Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 986,

1:51:53please say aye. Aye.

1:51:55Affirmative recommendation.

1:51:59Uh, Bill 987.

1:52:00>> Ordinance amending the Pittsburgh Code

1:52:02of Ordinances, Title 1, Fiscal, Article

1:52:041, Administration, by amending Chapter

1:52:07219, Operating Budget, to add publicly

1:52:09broadcast a quarterly financial

1:52:11reporting requirements on the condition

1:52:13of the City of Pittsburgh's financial

1:52:14outlook.

1:52:18>> Second.

1:52:18>> Discussion.

1:52:21And this one is simply, um, to codify

1:52:24what we've been doing already this year,

1:52:26which is when quarterly

1:52:28financial, um, reports are released,

1:52:32making sure that we have a post agenda

1:52:34to associated with them, so we can all

1:52:36discuss together as a council.

1:52:40All in favor of Bill 987, please say

1:52:43aye.

1:52:43>> Aye.

1:52:44>> Affirmative recommendation.

1:52:47Bill 991.

1:52:48>> Ordinance amending and supplementing the

1:52:50Pittsburgh Code of Ordinances, Title 2,

1:52:52Fiscal, Article 1, Administration,

1:52:54Chapter 219, Operating Budget, by adding

1:52:57a new subsection 219.09, entitled City

1:53:00of Pittsburgh Organizational Chart,

1:53:02requiring the submission and maintenance

1:53:04of current organizational charts for

1:53:05city offices and departments.

1:53:10>> Move to approve.

1:53:11>> Second.

1:53:12>> Second.

1:53:13>> Councilmember Warwick.

1:53:14>> Just a quick question on this and I

1:53:17this is great. I mean, having updated

1:53:19org charts is helpful just sort of

1:53:20knowing who to contact. Um my question

1:53:23is about

1:53:25is whether this would be available to

1:53:28the public

1:53:30and then

1:53:31if it

1:53:33is

1:53:35um

1:53:37just sort of

1:53:39raising the potential issue of you know,

1:53:41I mean, we have a 311 system that is

1:53:43intended, right, to you know, to

1:53:45contact, you know, if if you have issues

1:53:47with the city. Sort of the idea that

1:53:49directors and managers would be getting

1:53:52emails from constituents.

1:53:55And then would they be

1:53:57responding to those I just just sort of

1:53:59wondering how how that

1:54:02could work.

1:54:04>> Yeah, happy to happy to address. I also

1:54:06just wanted to note I will be asking for

1:54:08someone to make a motion to hold for 1

1:54:10weeks as we work out a couple of

1:54:11details, but yeah, really the intention

1:54:13here is not to have every single

1:54:15employee of the city attached to an org

1:54:17chart. In some bureaus, that would just

1:54:18be untenable. But especially those that

1:54:20are public-facing and those that look

1:54:23incredibly, you know, um opaque to the

1:54:25public and to even like internal staff

1:54:28who are in our department or um

1:54:31at uh at 311 or um

1:54:35community services or or whatnot who who

1:54:37need to be able to bounce around to

1:54:39different and understand who does what

1:54:41in in what department. Having something

1:54:43that's more than just like administrator

1:54:45two attached to their you know, title uh

1:54:48would be helpful. So,

1:54:50um while there are some sort of

1:54:52functional challenges here with the

1:54:54software that we have and and also

1:54:57timing-wise, it's a little late in the

1:54:59year to be introducing this and

1:55:00expecting it to be part of our budget

1:55:02for our OMB staff to pull this together

1:55:04with the sort of clunky software that

1:55:05they have. I will be making a motion I I

1:55:08I'd like a motion to hold for 1 week to

1:55:11um make some changes to the timing and

1:55:12implementation of this.

1:55:14I think that to answer your question

1:55:16though that intention

1:55:18would be to continue to

1:55:20yeah, to have it publicly available so

1:55:22so people are aware and not just in our

1:55:25budget package as we usually have org

1:55:27charts but also publicly available on as

1:55:30we've seen in other cities main pages of

1:55:32each departmental website. That said, I

1:55:35think we can be um

1:55:38we can

1:55:39afford some leeway in terms of what

1:55:42information is posted and

1:55:45um for instance

1:55:46I personally think that for some

1:55:48departments

1:55:50um like PLI and plan and some planning

1:55:52departments that people are interacting

1:55:54with for the very first time having a

1:55:56photo would be beneficial, right? It

1:55:58humanizes what's otherwise seen as a

1:56:00bureaucrat that's just like reviewing

1:56:02your permit. We don't want to mandate

1:56:04that because in an age where public

1:56:07security and safety is um

1:56:11sometimes a worrying factor in public

1:56:13office or in public service um we don't

1:56:15want to mandate that people have to show

1:56:16their faces or you know their their

1:56:19their information um when they don't

1:56:20want to but so it's a balance between

1:56:23providing information to the public and

1:56:25internal staff and um and not

1:56:29having unintended consequences like

1:56:32people going straight to the directors

1:56:33of a certain department rather than 311.

1:56:37So it's going to be a balance. I think

1:56:38that we don't necessarily have to attach

1:56:40um

1:56:41all of the um currently stated

1:56:44information to every single member of

1:56:47the team of each team.

1:56:50>> All right, Linda.

1:56:51Cuz I don't know what

1:56:52>> But with that I'd love to um if somebody

1:56:53can make a motion to hold for 1 week.

1:56:55>> for 1 week.

1:56:56>> Second.

1:56:57>> Discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of

1:56:59a 1-week hold on bill 991, please say I.

1:57:02>> I.

1:57:05>> Bill be held for 1 week. Bill 994.

1:57:08Ordinance amending the Pittsburgh City

1:57:09Code, Title 1, Administrative, Article

1:57:117, Procedures, Chapter 161, Contracts,

1:57:15Section 161.01A,

1:57:17required approvals from City Council for

1:57:19designated City contracts to require

1:57:21approval by City Council for certain

1:57:23contracts done through cooperative

1:57:25purchasing.

1:57:28Motion to approve. Discussion.

1:57:30>> Second.

1:57:31>> Discussion.

1:57:33Yeah. So, um thank you. So, uh just a

1:57:36little bit of background about um this

1:57:38bill. So, this bill would put um

1:57:42would require that co-op purchasing

1:57:45agreements, known as piggyback

1:57:47agreements, um

1:57:49uh start coming through council when

1:57:50they're for for large amounts of money.

1:57:52So, just to briefly explain what that

1:57:54is, that is when um another body of

1:57:57government already has a contract for a

1:58:00thing or a service, right? And we, as

1:58:03the City of Pittsburgh, rather than go

1:58:05through the whole RFP process, etc.,

1:58:08etc., we just um sort of ta- you know,

1:58:12piggyback, that's where the word comes

1:58:14from, onto that existing contract with

1:58:17another government entity, right? So,

1:58:19just to sort of you you know, if if, you

1:58:21know, if the Allegheny County has

1:58:24a contract to buy staplers at a bulk

1:58:27rate of a certain amount, right? We

1:58:29could rather than getting our own

1:58:30stapler contract, we can just

1:58:32piggyback onto that contract. Um so, um

1:58:36how did this bill come about? So, if

1:58:39members uh recall,

1:58:42way back in 2024,

1:58:45um uh we voted to um expand our

1:58:50ShotSpotter contract to Carrick. And uh

1:58:53that started a discussion about

1:58:56ShotSpotter, right? So, ShotSpotter is

1:58:58this um tool that detects sound that uh

1:59:01you know, when when an alert goes off,

1:59:03police come to the location, you know,

1:59:07um

1:59:08you know, because there was an alert

1:59:09that there may have been a shooting. Um

1:59:12at any rate, at the time that we

1:59:13expanded that contract to Carrick, there

1:59:16were a lots of cities around the country

1:59:18that were ending their ShotSpotter

1:59:20contracts because really ShotSpotter uh

1:59:23doesn't work very well, right? And the

1:59:25data supporting ShotSpotter's being a an

1:59:28effective tool is not strong. Um at any

1:59:31rate, so that started a conversation.

1:59:34So, um at that time,

1:59:36um

1:59:37the discussion that we had, or at least

1:59:39that I I had with public safety, the

1:59:41administration, other members of council

1:59:43was, "Look, we're about to expand

1:59:45ShotSpotter to a new neighborhood." Uh

1:59:48we had zero data on efficacy of

1:59:50ShotSpotter prior to that, right? So,

1:59:52prior So, we had there were there was no

1:59:55um

1:59:56no information about how well it was

1:59:57working for us. Uh so, we sort of had

2:00:00this expansion into Carrick is like,

2:00:02"Okay, well, we could do like an

2:00:03apples-to-apples comparison." Um the

2:00:06following year, uh uh Controller

2:00:08Heisler's office did an audit of

2:00:11ShotSpotter. Um and uh that data showed

2:00:14that there was a slightly faster

2:00:16response time to 911, although there was

2:00:18no distinction about whether or not 911

2:00:22was also called, right? So, you could

2:00:24have an incident, and we didn't know if

2:00:26it was the 911 call or the ShotSpotter,

2:00:29but at any rate, there was a slightly

2:00:30faster response time with uh uh um

2:00:33with ShotSpotter. However, there was a

2:00:36huge number of false alarms, right? So,

2:00:39we had our our officers coming out to

2:00:41nothing, right? Just coming out to

2:00:43finding nothing. At any rate, all of

2:00:45that said, um you know, that audit came

2:00:48out. Interesting information worth

2:00:52discussing, right? And I was working

2:00:55with public safety, the public safety

2:00:57director at the time to try and set up a

2:00:59city council post agenda on ShotSpotter

2:01:03so that we could talk about this. And

2:01:05throughout this entire you know, all the

2:01:07way back to 2024, the idea was we want

2:01:10to have this conversation, this public

2:01:12conversation about ShotSpotter, whether

2:01:15it works, whether it's worth the money,

2:01:17before

2:01:18we renew the contract, right? Before

2:01:22because it's very expensive, right? So,

2:01:24before we renew the contract. At any

2:01:26rate, um

2:01:29this post agenda kept getting pushed

2:01:31off, pushed off, right? Scheduling

2:01:32issues, this and that, and I had

2:01:34conversations with uh the public safety

2:01:36director at the time saying, "I'm very

2:01:38worried that we're not going to be able

2:01:40to get this post agenda done

2:01:43in time for the contract

2:01:46getting renewed. And I was assured, "Oh,

2:01:48don't worry, don't worry, don't worry.

2:01:49We'll we'll definitely do it." Well, it

2:01:52turned out that in November of 2025,

2:01:59the ShotSpotter contract

2:02:01was not not renewed, but we had a new

2:02:03ShotSpotter contract. It was one of

2:02:05these piggyback agreements, one of these

2:02:08um

2:02:09for $1.3 million a year through 2030

2:02:14for a total of $6.5

2:02:17million. A contract for ShotSpotter

2:02:24willfully signed

2:02:27without the knowledge of Well, I can't

2:02:30speak to I without my knowledge as as

2:02:32the council member who was asking for a

2:02:34public conversation about this contract,

2:02:38willfully signed

2:02:40and and you know,

2:02:42sort of done quickly, I will say in the

2:02:45dark of night without council knowledge

2:02:48before this council and the public had a

2:02:50chance to talk about ShotSpotter and

2:02:54whether or not, you know, it's it's a

2:02:56tool that we that that we should be

2:02:57using as a city, regardless of your

2:02:59stance on that, right? I know that that

2:03:01folks have different opinions on the

2:03:03value of ShotSpotter itself. So, um, all

2:03:06that to say, I was very shocked to find

2:03:08that out and I wanted to know, of

2:03:10course, how did that happen? And it

2:03:13happened through one of these um,

2:03:15piggyback agreements. So, um, you know,

2:03:18and we talked with the law department

2:03:20and and and the way that it happened was

2:03:23legal, right? It was legal. And so, that

2:03:26is what this bill is about is to um, uh,

2:03:29to require that these contracts

2:03:33be approved if if they are multi-year

2:03:35contracts that they that they come

2:03:37through council like like everything

2:03:39else that we do, so that council can

2:03:40discuss it and vote on it. Um, and so,

2:03:45uh,

2:03:45um,

2:03:47and I do have an amendment. I'd like to

2:03:48motion to amend.

2:03:50Uh,

2:03:51second. Okay, so so for the amendment,

2:03:53so the the initial bill that we wrote

2:03:55said that um, we would vote on

2:03:57multi-year contracts that were over

2:03:59$30,000. However, we did sit down uh,

2:04:02with Controller Heitzler and um,

2:04:05uh,

2:04:06were made to understand that you don't

2:04:08always know, right? So, these can be

2:04:09agreements that go that we are sort of

2:04:11buying a thing over time. So, this

2:04:13amendment

2:04:15changes that to say, let me get

2:04:20um, to say that, you know,

2:04:23if it is an estimated total, right? If

2:04:24the estimated total of the contract is

2:04:28um,

2:04:29is estimated to be at at $30,000 or

2:04:32more, that that contract would come

2:04:34through council

2:04:36um, for a vote. Um, I do

2:04:39uh,

2:04:40want to mention that Councilman Wilson

2:04:43also has an amendment

2:04:45which I was not made aware of prior

2:04:49to this meeting.

2:04:53And so clearly it was not discussed with

2:04:55the controller either because it doesn't

2:04:58it doesn't include this you know the

2:05:01it doesn't include the language that's

2:05:02in my amendment. So

2:05:04in this one the recommendation is to

2:05:07only do this for contracts that are

2:05:09million dollars or more and then just to

2:05:11have written notice

2:05:14of um

2:05:15of purchases that are a total value of

2:05:18$30,000 or more made through the

2:05:20purchasing agreement. So

2:05:23first of all written notice to council

2:05:25is not a council vote.

2:05:28Right? So I

2:05:30that's important to say and also I want

2:05:33to clarify for Councilman Wilson this is

2:05:35not about the value of the individual

2:05:39purchases, right? Although we do vote on

2:05:42on individual purchases all the way down

2:05:44to P-cards like we vote on a $5 P-card

2:05:47purchase and we can strike that, right?

2:05:49In in a standing committee meeting. So

2:05:52but this isn't about the value of a

2:05:55given purchase in a week or a month or

2:05:58whenever. It is about the contract

2:06:00itself. It is about whether or not we

2:06:03are entering into a contract

2:06:07to

2:06:08to buy good or service X whatever that

2:06:11may be and spending

2:06:14and this is you know $30,000 or

2:06:16estimated to spend

2:06:19more than $30,000

2:06:21a year over multiple years. That's what

2:06:24this bill is about. It is about making

2:06:26sure that that goes through council and

2:06:30Um, you know I know that the procurement

2:06:32team

2:06:33uh and this is something that we hear

2:06:35sometimes from from departments that um

2:06:38oh, well, this is slow us down. It takes

2:06:40so long to go through, you know,

2:06:42council. It takes so long.

2:06:46Here at city council, there is an 8-day

2:06:48turnaround if you if you wave rule

2:06:50eight, right? If something is a rush and

2:06:53needs to get done quickly, there is an

2:06:558-day from a Tuesday to a Tuesday,

2:06:57right?

2:06:58Enter it on Tuesday, talk about it

2:07:00Wednesday, you know, wave rule eight,

2:07:02talk about it Wednesday, vote on it the

2:07:03next Tuesday. So, that is base a week

2:07:05and a day.

2:07:06So, I think that it is reasonable that

2:07:09if we are about to sign a contract

2:07:12for $30,000 or more per year for

2:07:16multiple years,

2:07:18that that contract come before this

2:07:21council and we vote on we we talk about

2:07:24what is the contract, what is it for,

2:07:26right? Who are we contracting with?

2:07:30And um

2:07:32and and and you know, and if everything

2:07:33is fine, then it will go quickly just

2:07:35like 99% of the things that we vote on.

2:07:38Um

2:07:39so, at any rate, that is

2:07:41you know,

2:07:42that's this and I'm happy to answer any

2:07:43questions that I can. I see that uh we

2:07:46have um

2:07:47uh Deputy Controller McDevitt.

2:07:50If if anybody's interested in asking him

2:07:53questions about this,

2:07:54um but anyway, that's that's the bill. I

2:07:56I I really, you know, in this day when

2:07:59we are talking so much in the public

2:08:01about the contracts that we're entering

2:08:03in in the city and transparency and what

2:08:06council is able to see and what council

2:08:08isn't able to see, right? This has been

2:08:10so much discussion about this around the

2:08:12budget and you know, where we haven't

2:08:14had insight and where we should have had

2:08:16insight and um and so on and so forth

2:08:19that um our, you know, that And and by

2:08:22the way,

2:08:23there are departments that do bring

2:08:25their their co-op agreements to us,

2:08:28right? So, it's not unheard of that a

2:08:29co-op agreement comes before council,

2:08:32but it's sort of at the

2:08:33you know, at the

2:08:36desire of the of the department or the

2:08:38director. So,

2:08:40um I think that for for $30,000 or more

2:08:45for multi per year per month for

2:08:46multiple years, I think that those are

2:08:48contracts uh that absolutely should come

2:08:51before this body so that we can

2:08:53um

2:08:54look at them, talk about them, and vote

2:08:56on them, and that the public can have

2:08:58insight into those as well. Um so, I'll

2:09:01I'll leave it at that. Happy to answer

2:09:02any questions.

2:09:04>> Thank you. So, the motion is is

2:09:06currently to amend um

2:09:08Bill 994 with

2:09:11Council Member Warwick's amendment. I

2:09:13saw Councilwoman Wilson first and then

2:09:14Councilwoman Gross.

2:09:16>> I have no comment on this one.

2:09:17>> Okay. Councilwoman Gross.

2:09:20>> Thank you. I really want to appreciate

2:09:21um Councilwoman Warwick to bringing this

2:09:24um to our attention and working on it

2:09:26for so long. Um I'm just thinking in

2:09:29terms of of

2:09:31basic math. We just had a very long

2:09:34conversation about I think it's prior

2:09:36year encumbrances. About it was tens of

2:09:39millions of dollars.

2:09:41Um and that we're working and the

2:09:43controller's brought it to our attention

2:09:44and we're all working to solve that

2:09:46problem. Many of those kinds of

2:09:48contracts were multi-year contracts that

2:09:50were in um innovation and performance,

2:09:52our big technology contracts for

2:09:54example, and that that was such a big

2:09:57budget problem.

2:09:59Because the money was being expended

2:10:02um

2:10:04and it was kind of throwing off our cash

2:10:06balances.

2:10:08Um because it wasn't budgeted for the

2:10:09current year, but it had been approved

2:10:11in a prior year. So, those were ones

2:10:13that the public knew about and we knew

2:10:14about and are all in our system and

2:10:17um and yet they're so big that they're

2:10:19throwing off our for

2:10:20These we may not even know about.

2:10:23Right? And so, what if there's What if

2:10:26there's a hundred of them?

2:10:28You know, that's that's $3 million if

2:10:31if there's a hundred $30,000

2:10:34tiny piggyback contracts.

2:10:37Um so, I don't think 30,000 is too low

2:10:39of a number.

2:10:41Um

2:10:42and certainly, you know, we just had an

2:10:44entire posted agenda I I sponsored on

2:10:48surveillance technologies. And it was

2:10:50able to see the kinds of technologies

2:10:53that are being used um that we can see,

2:10:56right? Whether that's flat cameras,

2:10:58which we don't have, but we have other

2:10:59kinds of cameras,

2:11:01um software, cell phone tracking, all of

2:11:05these things we want them to be publicly

2:11:08um knowable.

2:11:10Um so, that we can discuss them and

2:11:12discuss what the policies should be

2:11:13around them. We don't want them to be,

2:11:15as Councilwoman Warwick said, kind of

2:11:17like

2:11:18contracts that are being done in the

2:11:19dark.

2:11:20Where Where city council doesn't know

2:11:23about them and the public doesn't know

2:11:25about them. We don't know whether

2:11:27they're in the millions, we don't know

2:11:28whether they're in the hundreds of

2:11:29thousands, we don't know whether they're

2:11:31in the tens of thousands, we don't even

2:11:32know how many there are

2:11:35if they're not known.

2:11:36Um and so, maybe maybe they're all

2:11:39perfectly fine.

2:11:41Maybe there aren't very many.

2:11:43Maybe they don't add up to a lot of

2:11:45dollars, or maybe they do.

2:11:47Um and so, I think this is a fantastic

2:11:49first step. So, thank you again for

2:11:50bringing us to our attention,

2:11:52Councilwoman.

2:11:54>> Thank you. Further discussion on the

2:11:55motion to amend.

2:11:58>> Sure.

2:11:58>> Council President LaBelle.

2:12:00>> Thank you. Um

2:12:02I'm I'm trying to read through this to

2:12:04make sure I understand, but so, a couple

2:12:07things. One, I understand uh

2:12:09Councilwoman Warwick's concern about the

2:12:11ShotSpotter contract. Um and just for

2:12:14the record, I haven't spoken to

2:12:15Councilman Wilson or Councilwoman

2:12:16Warwick about this bill. So, I'm sort of

2:12:18thinking out loud.

2:12:20Um

2:12:22and I was equally looking forward to

2:12:23that conversation cuz she and I disagree

2:12:26on Shot Spotter a little bit. So, I was

2:12:27looking forward to that sort of public

2:12:29public debate. Um and nonetheless, it

2:12:31didn't occur. But, what I will say, and

2:12:33maybe this is a question for Director

2:12:35Gula, to the best of my knowledge,

2:12:39we don't typically, to the best of my

2:12:41knowledge, we don't use cooperative

2:12:43purchasing agree contracts or purchasing

2:12:45agreements for anything that's

2:12:47multi-year. Like, they're normally a

2:12:49fixed thing that we're trying to

2:12:51acquire,

2:12:52um to the best of my knowledge. And so,

2:12:54while yes, technically legal, I do

2:12:56understand her concern around that. With

2:12:58that being said, as I read through the

2:13:01bill itself, the bill does not speak to

2:13:04multi-year contracting. What it speaks

2:13:07to, and she said this is not about the

2:13:09value, what it speaks to is the actual

2:13:11value of the contract because we're

2:13:13putting a number in the bill itself.

2:13:16>> That's right.

2:13:16>> Um

2:13:18and so,

2:13:19my concern, and to Councilman Gross's, I

2:13:23actually believe probably last year, we

2:13:25probably did do at least 100 of these

2:13:27contracts. Um to your point, we actually

2:13:29probably did.

2:13:31I know for speaking for myself,

2:13:34as an example of one such contract was

2:13:37Emma Recreation Center. We had to fix

2:13:39that roof, and that roof needed to get

2:13:40done quickly.

2:13:42I wouldn't want to spend an additional 4

2:13:44weeks trying to get that roof fixed

2:13:47un- under cuz it got done under one of

2:13:49these type of contracts. And so, for me

2:13:51personally, no, I don't want to have to

2:13:53have that contract come back before City

2:13:56Council. Um I prefer that work actually

2:13:58just get done. Um

2:14:01so, again, I haven't spoken to either

2:14:04member. 30,000 seems low to me.

2:14:08Um

2:14:10I don't remember what it cost to do the

2:14:11M&M roof, but I know it was above

2:14:13$30,000.

2:14:14Uh Um

2:14:16So, that's just me thinking out loud.

2:14:19Um if this were strictly about

2:14:21multi-year cooperation contracts, I

2:14:24think that would be different, but

2:14:25that's not what the bill speaks to. It

2:14:27speaks to the value of the contract.

2:14:29Councilor

2:14:31>> So, it it does. It says notwithstanding

2:14:33any other

2:14:34um provision of law, all multi-year

2:14:37contracts with an anticipated total

2:14:39spend of more than $30,000.

2:14:41So, that would be multi-year contracts

2:14:44with an anticipated $30,000 a year being

2:14:47spent.

2:14:49So, not just one $30,000,

2:14:53but a contract that will go for multiple

2:14:56years and be more than $30,000. So, we

2:14:59really were trying to get to a place

2:15:01where we weren't

2:15:03>> Got you.

2:15:03>> creating too much admin, but where we

2:15:06were catching large-scale

2:15:09um payments

2:15:12over multiple years.

2:15:16>> Okay.

2:15:17Fair enough. Thank you.

2:15:21>> Councilor President Charland.

2:15:24>> Yeah, so I

2:15:25uh

2:15:26I've heard this a couple different times

2:15:29from members, and it was also um

2:15:32an important question that I had. The

2:15:34idea that we move something through

2:15:37council, we can move it through as

2:15:39quickly as eight days, um you know,

2:15:43day or so after for the mayor's

2:15:44signature. Um and that was really the

2:15:46only delay. And I asked this question to

2:15:48the administration,

2:15:50um

2:15:51and uh Chief Gilman got back to me on

2:15:53this, and it isn't just our process that

2:15:56gums up the works here. It is then all

2:15:58the signatures that are required after

2:16:00that. So, when we talk about the the

2:16:03things that we're purchasing here,

2:16:05things like rock salt or um

2:16:08you know, emergency repairs to a roof.

2:16:10We're not talking about, you know, a

2:16:12month delay from council. We're talking

2:16:14about a much longer delay to get all the

2:16:16contracts signed, you know, in addition

2:16:20to this. And and again, these are these

2:16:22are

2:16:24by gumming up the works, uh

2:16:27as the the phrase, uh you know, about

2:16:29this has been,

2:16:31we're really hurting, you know, our

2:16:32kids. We're hurting the rec centers.

2:16:34We're hurting slider replacements. We're

2:16:36hurting

2:16:37uh lifeguard chairs in a you know,

2:16:39aquatics. Th- Those are the things that

2:16:41are are purchased, you know, through

2:16:43these these contracts here. Um so,

2:16:46by making it harder, we are

2:16:49delaying services that we're giving to

2:16:52the residents that that we so so dearly

2:16:55care about. Um so, you know, I I just

2:16:58think it's an important clarification,

2:16:59though. It is not just the council

2:17:01portion that delays this. It is all of

2:17:04the work that has to be done,

2:17:06um you know, with the law department and

2:17:08the controller's office after

2:17:10we go through our process, which, you

2:17:13know, we're right. We can do this in as

2:17:14quick as 8 days in kind of an emergency

2:17:16situation.

2:17:18I- I- It is the extended period of

2:17:21getting finding everyone, getting

2:17:22everyone's signature to move things

2:17:24through here. Thank you.

2:17:26>> Thank you. I didn't see any further for

2:17:28first round, second round. Council

2:17:29Council Member Warwick.

2:17:30>> So, again, just to clarify, these are

2:17:32contracts that we are entering into

2:17:34anyway. The only thing that isn't

2:17:36happening is that they're not coming to

2:17:39council in front of the public.

2:17:42So, again, like we enter into a

2:17:45contract, the process is the same to

2:17:47enter into the contract,

2:17:49but it has to come through council.

2:17:52So, I just don't for for $30,000 a year

2:17:55for multiple years,

2:17:58right? It seems reasonable to me in a in

2:18:01a you know, when when we have talked

2:18:03about you know,

2:18:07charges what you know, whether they

2:18:08should be on a P-Card or an invoice and

2:18:11that these things need to be correct and

2:18:13they need to be clear and they need to

2:18:14be public

2:18:16that that we you know, that that we

2:18:17would talk about you know,

2:18:20voting on whether or not to spend $6 or

2:18:23or whatever on literally we can

2:18:25literally hear it Council we can strike

2:18:28a P-Card charge because we say I you

2:18:31know, this this this charge is doesn't

2:18:33feel right. I want to hold it for a

2:18:35week. We want to find out more

2:18:36information because that's our job here

2:18:38at Council is to keep track of every

2:18:40dollar

2:18:42and that we would say that that these

2:18:43contracts which the contracts are

2:18:45getting signed right? The contract

2:18:48agreements are being made with whatever

2:18:50the other body is that we're that we're

2:18:51piggybacking onto. The issue here is

2:18:54whether or not it comes before this

2:18:55body.

2:18:59And again,

2:19:008 days is the turnaround is the is the

2:19:03you know, that's that's the rush right

2:19:04let that's the rush service here at

2:19:06Council is you know,

2:19:07put it in on a Tuesday wave rule 8 vote

2:19:10on it

2:19:118 days later.

2:19:15At any rate I I I I'll leave I'll leave

2:19:17I'll leave it at that. I'm happy to

2:19:18answer any other questions.

2:19:20>> Thank you, Councilman Mosley.

2:19:21>> Yeah.

2:19:23I'd like to request an interrogatory.

2:19:25>> Yes.

2:19:25>> Uh yeah yeah Councilwoman I I just had

2:19:28one question just out of just pure um

2:19:31curiosity.

2:19:32Um was there any particular significance

2:19:34to the 30,000 number you know, in the

2:19:37process of you developing this?

2:19:39If you could just explain like how you

2:19:40just arrived at that number and it's out

2:19:41of just just sheer

2:19:43>> Yeah, so we were we were uh working with

2:19:45the procurement department, right? So

2:19:46the initial conversations were like oh

2:19:48we should just do this for all these

2:19:49contracts and the immediate response

2:19:51from procurement was oh no, that that

2:19:53will gum up the works, right? If we have

2:19:55to do if if Council has to vote every

2:19:57single one of these agreements, uh that

2:19:59is why

2:20:01we landed on

2:20:03$30,000 multi-year agreements, meaning

2:20:06not one agreement, not one roof, not

2:20:09one, you know,

2:20:10and you know,

2:20:11I think we mentioned lifeguard chairs. I

2:20:13mean, I feel like we just voted on

2:20:15something for lifeguard chairs just just

2:20:17last week. So, you know, this is not

2:20:19unheard of that we vote on small

2:20:20purchases. So, this would just be

2:20:22contracts that are estimated to be

2:20:25$30,000 or more in a given year

2:20:29for multiple years, and that we would

2:20:31vote on whether or not to enter into

2:20:33those contracts.

2:20:34>> Thank you, Councilwoman.

2:20:35>> Yeah.

2:20:37Further discussion?

2:20:39Okay, so the

2:20:41motion before us is an amendment

2:20:43amendment the Councilmember Warwick's

2:20:45amendment to Bill 994. All in favor of

2:20:47amending Bill 994 as

2:20:50indicated in the amendment, please say

2:20:52I.

2:20:52>> I.

2:20:52>> I.

2:20:53>> No.

2:20:53>> No.

2:20:54>> No.

2:20:54>> Okay, can we please do a roll call?

2:21:00>> Mr. Charleton.

2:21:01>> No.

2:21:01>> Mr. Coughlin.

2:21:02>> No.

2:21:03>> Ms. Gross.

2:21:04>> I.

2:21:05>> Mr. Lavelle.

2:21:07>> No.

2:21:09>> Mr. Mosley.

2:21:11>> I.

2:21:13>> Ms. Salinetra.

2:21:14>> No.

2:21:17>> Ms. Warwick.

2:21:18>> I.

2:21:21>> Mr. Wilson.

2:21:22>> No.

2:21:24>> Ms. Strassburger, Chair.

2:21:26>> I.

2:21:27I's four, no's five.

2:21:35>> Uh so,

2:21:36I

2:21:37no's have it. Motion fails.

2:21:42I believe we have another amendment

2:21:44before us.

2:21:48Is there a motion to amend Bill 994?

2:21:53>> Yeah, I have a motion to amend bill 994.

2:21:55>> Second.

2:21:57>> Discussion?

2:21:58>> Yeah, so this amendment as you see in

2:22:00front of you

2:22:01um as some of you got rid of your

2:22:04paper so you could see your desk a

2:22:06little better

2:22:07uh with all the amendments going on

2:22:09today.

2:22:10But the uh amendment before you um is

2:22:14one that requires council approval for

2:22:17cooperative purchases over 1 million,

2:22:19requires OMB to send council a weekly

2:22:22report of cooperative purchases over

2:22:2430,000.

2:22:26And then it also keeps purchases between

2:22:28$30,000 and $1 million from

2:22:31needing uh individual council approval.

2:22:34Also to note, OMB plans to resume

2:22:37enforcing its existing policy requiring

2:22:39departments to get OMB approval before

2:22:42using cooperative purchasing.

2:22:44And that's going to be a separate

2:22:45administrative step.

2:22:47And um but that's not in

2:22:50in these changes in the bill, but or I'm

2:22:52sorry, in this amendment. But just to

2:22:54know um

2:22:56you know, sitting here listening to

2:22:58uh the discussion uh prior to

2:23:01introducing this amendment

2:23:03it's been um you know, I think I think

2:23:05it's good that we put some

2:23:07you know, some bumpers on this. Uh I

2:23:09know that

2:23:10I've been one to in my district have

2:23:12benefited uh just like Councilman or

2:23:14Council President uh Lavelle mentioned,

2:23:17whether it's a roof. Uh currently there

2:23:19was uh

2:23:21a small playground that had to be taken

2:23:22out and we were able to we're going to

2:23:24get that in before the

2:23:27before the weather changes too much and

2:23:30uh really looking forward to

2:23:32to that addition to the neighborhood. So

2:23:34I've really seen this work in a very

2:23:35positive way.

2:23:37And I have to say sitting here

2:23:39I don't want to name any names, but I I

2:23:41do see people that uh work in

2:23:43departments that

2:23:45uh do uh see the benefit of of having

2:23:49these cooperative agreements.

2:23:51Uh,

2:23:52uh, just

2:23:54really kind of uh,

2:23:56you know, show an interest to um,

2:24:01uh, what I want to say, you know, it's

2:24:02like you're looking at the crowd and

2:24:03you're like you don't want to

2:24:05call anyone out, but you know, people in

2:24:07the departments know how this benefits

2:24:09uh, communities and they're able to do

2:24:11their job easier and really get things

2:24:14done for Pittsburgh. So,

2:24:16uh, I think that's also very telling.

2:24:18So, I'm looking forward to

2:24:21having some some better action in the

2:24:23future. I think this all kind of got a

2:24:25little misunderstood whenever the last

2:24:26administration uh, did a, you know,

2:24:29multi-year contract um,

2:24:33with ShotSpotter, which uh, this isn't

2:24:36what uh,

2:24:38you know, this this action was

2:24:39historically like the council president

2:24:42said, wasn't historically uh, the move

2:24:44in the past. So, you know, we should

2:24:46continue on to do the good work of of

2:24:49trying to provide uh, services as fast

2:24:51as possible to the residents of the city

2:24:53of Pittsburgh without too much red tape.

2:24:55Thank you.

2:24:58>> Council

2:25:00member Warwick.

2:25:02>> Um, yeah, so I think uh, here since, you

2:25:06know, we do have folks in the room. This

2:25:07has been an ongoing conversation now for

2:25:10a number of years. Uh, and and by the

2:25:12way, the administration also has had

2:25:13this bill for quite a while um, without

2:25:16comment. So,

2:25:17um, I think that it would be worthwhile

2:25:20um, to

2:25:21hold for

2:25:24two weeks, maybe three weeks if needed

2:25:26uh, so that the administration, the

2:25:28controller's office, myself, Councilman

2:25:30Wilson,

2:25:31uh, can sit down to better understand

2:25:34the nature of these contracts. And um,

2:25:37and uh, you know, I what while I

2:25:39appreciate, you know, that

2:25:42there's faith that this administration

2:25:44that you know, that the ShotSpotter

2:25:45situation wouldn't happen again in this

2:25:48administration.

2:25:50Uh

2:25:51I I I would actually like that to be um

2:25:54to be codified. Um and again, I I think

2:25:58that a million dollars multi- multi-year

2:26:00contracts that are

2:26:03you know, I think a million dollars a

2:26:04year seems quite high

2:26:07to not not go through a council vote,

2:26:09which is what which is what um

2:26:10Councilman Wilson's uh amendment says.

2:26:13And then also again, I think that the

2:26:17the the written notice is just sort of a

2:26:19fundamental misunderstanding of the

2:26:21issue. It's about the contract, not

2:26:23about the individual amount that we are

2:26:25paying for a given thing, right? It's

2:26:27It's not about knowing how much we're

2:26:29paying for a given stapler or a given

2:26:31you know, piece of equipment for um

2:26:35for a

2:26:37firehouse or something like that. It is

2:26:38about the contract that we are entering

2:26:41into with another body of government.

2:26:44So, um

2:26:46anyway, I don't know if now is the time

2:26:48to motion to hold for

2:26:512 weeks or after the amendment. I I

2:26:54would not vote on this amendment because

2:26:56it doesn't It will for one thing

2:27:00It doesn't It doesn't um

2:27:02address the issue that the controller

2:27:04raised about the the original version of

2:27:06my my original version of the bill. And

2:27:08also there seems to be a sort of a

2:27:09fundamental misunderstanding in this

2:27:11second piece about the written notice.

2:27:14Um so, I I would motion to to hold for

2:27:18let's say 3 weeks just to give us enough

2:27:21time. I know that things are busy.

2:27:23>> That's allowed and second. Discussion on

2:27:25the on the motion to hold for Sorry,

2:27:28what was it? 3 weeks? 3 weeks.

2:27:30Discussion.

2:27:31>> I think you should explain the rule. We

2:27:32have a motion on the amendment on the

2:27:33table. Motion to hold supersedes it.

2:27:36>> Yes.

2:27:36>> Yeah.

2:27:37All right. Well, I request that we don't

2:27:39hold this, that we

2:27:40you know, continue on.

2:27:42Um

2:27:42you know, I think it puts in place some

2:27:44good rules immediately and

2:27:46you know, delaying the hold only just,

2:27:48you know, delays the good work that we

2:27:49can continue to do.

2:27:51>> Councilwoman Gross.

2:27:53>> Thank you. Um I want to acknowledge that

2:27:55Councilwoman Warwick seems to put in

2:27:56several years of work into this and um

2:27:59Councilman Wilson does, you know, seems

2:28:01to have

2:28:03something to say, but hasn't put the

2:28:05amount of work into it and it seems

2:28:07reasonable to us to suggest that the

2:28:10members work together

2:28:12and and meet with procurement and the

2:28:14controller's office who seems to have

2:28:16chimed in um to see if there's some

2:28:21mutual

2:28:23um language

2:28:25that would accomplish both their goals.

2:28:27Um so, I'm happy to support a motion to

2:28:30hold. Um the again, it just it it

2:28:34doesn't seem fair to a council person

2:28:37who's put many months at least, many

2:28:39many months, more than a year maybe, of

2:28:41work into this this notion this language

2:28:44that she's put on the table. Um so, uh I

2:28:48I think that's the best course forward

2:28:49for council.

2:28:51Thank you.

2:28:52>> Thank you. Further discussion on the

2:28:54motion? Uh Council President followed by

2:28:56Councilman Cockrell.

2:28:58>> Thank you. So,

2:29:00again, I'm trying to make sure I

2:29:02understand this correctly.

2:29:03I think we all universally agree this

2:29:06manner in which the ShotSpotter contract

2:29:08was handled was not sort of the most

2:29:10appropriate way despite it technically

2:29:12being legal, right? Like we want to see

2:29:14contracts like like that come before

2:29:15council. I think we can all agree upon

2:29:17that.

2:29:18If I'm reading this correctly,

2:29:20this would force that contract to come

2:29:22before council.

2:29:24I also agree with Councilwoman Gross

2:29:26that there's no harm in spending some

2:29:29extra time to work this all through. So,

2:29:31for me, this this is just me, and I'm

2:29:33not exactly sure how Councilman came to

2:29:35the $1 million figure either. But, I'd

2:29:38be willing to vote on the amendment, um

2:29:41and then also vote to hold this for 3

2:29:43weeks so that we can have further

2:29:45conversation. And hopefully this could

2:29:47all be worked through.

2:29:50>> Okay. Councilman Coghill.

2:29:52>> Thank you, Madam Chair.

2:29:53Uh

2:29:54Yeah, my thoughts are I I I really

2:29:56appreciate

2:29:57your your willingness to oversee every

2:29:59dime. I really do. I I think that's

2:30:01important for us. I try to do it within

2:30:03my committee. I'm actually going through

2:30:05all the expenses that we have now, and

2:30:07coming through every expense, and many

2:30:09that never really come to our table.

2:30:12Uh however, I'm not a micromanager, I

2:30:14will tell you. And you know, I don't

2:30:16want to uh

2:30:17there's got to be a certain amount of

2:30:19trust in our department heads,

2:30:21and in the people who make these

2:30:22decisions at

2:30:25uh times when it's

2:30:27you know, the the availability of time

2:30:29is is hurtful to the project. So,

2:30:35So, yeah. And And then I know we can

2:30:36push everything through in 8 days, but

2:30:39often it doesn't happen. Often, you

2:30:41know, there's a hold if there's a

2:30:42concern to a member, and then that 8

2:30:44days turns into 28 days. So,

2:30:47So, just for

2:30:49you know,

2:30:51in my opinion, just not

2:30:53clogging up our desk. Uh we To me, I

2:30:56feel like we need to show a certain

2:30:58amount of trust in our department heads

2:31:00and people make these decisions.

2:31:02And you know, all these expenses should

2:31:03be available and readily available to us

2:31:06at some point or another, but um I don't

2:31:08want to micromanage it. So,

2:31:11That's it. Thank you.

2:31:12>> Thank you. Third

2:31:14round. I think I saw Councilman Wilson

2:31:16Okay, so Council President

2:31:18>> Yeah, sorry. In In my comments, I was

2:31:20assuming we were still voting on the

2:31:22motion to amend, but it There priority

2:31:25motion that was made to hold it for 3

2:31:27weeks, and so because of that I will

2:31:29then vote to hold it for 3 weeks. So, I

2:31:32just wanted to clarify I was

2:31:34talking through the motion to amend, not

2:31:36the motion to hold.

2:31:37>> Thank you. Okay.

2:31:39So, the motion on the table is a motion

2:31:41to hold for 3 weeks.

2:31:43Um can we take a roll call vote, please?

2:31:49>> Mr. Sharland.

2:31:50>> No.

2:31:51>> Mr. Coghill.

2:31:52>> No.

2:31:53>> Ms. Gross.

2:31:53>> Aye.

2:31:54>> Mr. Lavelle.

2:31:56>> Aye.

2:31:57>> Mr. Mosley.

2:31:58>> Aye.

2:32:00>> Ms. Salinitro.

2:32:01>> No.

2:32:03>> Oops.

2:32:04>> Sorry.

2:32:07>> Ms. Warwick.

2:32:10Mr. Wilson.

2:32:11>> No.

2:32:13>> Ms. Strasburger, Chair.

2:32:14>> No.

2:32:16>> Ayes no.

2:32:17Ayes four, noes five.

2:32:20Motion fails.

2:32:22>> So, we have the motion to amend before

2:32:25us. Any further discussion on the

2:32:26amendment?

2:32:31Any further discussion on the amendment

2:32:33before us?

2:32:39Seeing none, all in favor Let's take a

2:32:41roll call vote on the amendment, then.

2:32:43Thank you.

2:32:50>> Mr. Sharland.

2:32:51>> Aye.

2:32:52>> Mr. Coghill.

2:32:53>> Aye.

2:32:54>> Ms. Gross.

2:32:55>> No.

2:32:56>> Mr. Lavelle.

2:32:57>> Aye.

2:32:58>> Mr. Mosley.

2:32:59>> Aye.

2:33:01>> Ms. Salinitro.

2:33:02>> Aye.

2:33:03>> Ms. Warwick.

2:33:04>> Abstained.

2:33:07Because it doesn't make sense.

2:33:09>> Mr. Wilson.

2:33:10>> Aye.

2:33:12>> Ms. Strasburger, Chair.

2:33:13>> Aye.

2:33:15>> Ayes seven, one no, one abstention.

2:33:19Amendment passes.

2:33:21Further further on the bill as amended?

2:33:26Seeing none.

2:33:28All in favor of bill

2:33:31994

2:33:34as amended.

2:33:36Please say I.

2:33:37>> I.

2:33:40>> It's a motion on the bill as amended. Is

2:33:42there other abstentions or no's?

2:33:48Affirmative recommendation.

2:33:50Okay, that moves us to

2:33:54invoices. Is there a motion on invoices?

2:33:56>> Motion to approve.

2:33:57>> Second.

2:33:59>> Discussion?

2:34:02Seeing none, all in favor of invoices,

2:34:05please say I.

2:34:07>> I.

2:34:08>> I.

2:34:09That moves us to interdepartmental

2:34:11transfers. Is there a motion on

2:34:13transfers?

2:34:13>> Motion to approve.

2:34:14>> Second.

2:34:15>> Discussion?

2:34:19Seeing none, all in favor of transfers,

2:34:21please say I.

2:34:22>> I.

2:34:22>> I.

2:34:27>> Transfers are approved. That takes us to

2:34:28P-cards. Is there a motion on P-cards?

2:34:30>> Motion to approve.

2:34:31>> Second.

2:34:32>> Discussion?

2:34:33Seeing none, all in favor of P-cards,

2:34:36please say I.

2:34:37>> I.

2:34:38>> P-cards are approved. That moves us to

2:34:40Public Safety and Wellness Committee

2:34:42chaired by Councilman Coghill.

2:34:43>> Bill 974, resolution amending resolution

2:34:46789 of 2025, which authorizes the mayor

2:34:50and director of the Department of Public

2:34:51Safety to enter

2:34:54Excuse me. To enter on behalf of the

2:34:56City of Pittsburgh into an amended

2:34:57agreement or agreements with Humane

2:34:59Animal Rescue of Pittsburgh for

2:35:00detention, care, and or euthanasia of

2:35:03domesticated animals by increasing the

2:35:05approved amount by $151,295

2:35:09for an amended total cost not to exceed

2:35:11$2,521,594.94

2:35:16over 3 years.

2:35:21>> Is there a motion?

2:35:23>> Motion to approve.

2:35:26>> Motion to approve.

2:35:28>> Second.

2:35:28>> Discussion?

2:35:34So, just quickly

2:35:37apropos of the last bill,

2:35:422 million 521,000

2:35:45over 3 years. So, if this

2:35:48were a piggyback agreement with

2:35:50Allegheny County. So, if Allegheny

2:35:52County had an agreement already with

2:35:53Humane Animal Rescue,

2:35:56and

2:35:57we wanted to join that,

2:36:00this would never have come before us.

2:36:02So, we would not be voting on it.

2:36:04>> be we, it'd be them.

2:36:06>> Right. So,

2:36:07you know, yes, so the administration.

2:36:08So, this is just one example. So, I feel

2:36:10like maybe now I should I should be

2:36:13highlighting that. So, anything under

2:36:16999,000

2:36:19999 dollars a year

2:36:22for multiple years,

2:36:25any piggyback agreement, we we will not

2:36:27be voting on or we do not have to vote

2:36:29on. The administration can choose

2:36:30whether or not they feel like council

2:36:32should see it or not.

2:36:34So, I just want to I'm just I'm just

2:36:35going to state that for the record,

2:36:37right?

2:36:41Anyway, but I mean,

2:36:42you know, that just to keep in mind for

2:36:44Tuesday.

2:36:47That's all for me.

2:36:49>> Further discussion.

2:36:55Seeing none, all in favor of bill 974,

2:36:57please say I.

2:36:59>> I.

2:36:59>> I.

2:37:01>> Affirmative recommendation.

2:37:03Public Works and Infrastructure

2:37:04Committee chaired by Councilwoman Sala

2:37:06Netro.

2:37:07>> Bill 979, resolution authorizing the the

2:37:10and director of finance to enter into an

2:37:12easement agreement or agreements with

2:37:13Columbia Gas of PA MD Inc. NiSource and

2:37:17Frida Rome Living Trust for the

2:37:19installation and maintenance of a gas

2:37:20line through city-owned parcel ID 16K17.

2:37:25>> Motion to approve.

2:37:26>> Second.

2:37:28>> Discussion?

2:37:30Seeing none, all in favor of bill 979,

2:37:33please say I.

2:37:34>> I.

2:37:34>> I.

2:37:35>> Affirmative recommendation.

2:37:37Bill 981.

2:37:39>> Resolution amending resolution 561 of

2:37:422026 entitled a resolution authorizing

2:37:45taking, appropriating, and condemning by

2:37:47the city of Pittsburgh of certain

2:37:49property rights and temporary

2:37:51construction easements and public

2:37:52right-of-way necessary for the

2:37:54completion of the Swindell comprehensive

2:37:55rehabilitation project for the Swindell

2:37:57Bridge in the 26th Ward for public

2:38:00transportation purposes through eminent

2:38:02domain in further authorizing the

2:38:03payment of just compensation and

2:38:05necessary and incidental acquisition

2:38:07costs related thereto at an amount not

2:38:10to at an amount to be distributed

2:38:12amongst property owners that in

2:38:14aggregate shall not exceed $5,400

2:38:17reimbursable at 95% in order to correct

2:38:20identification of the subject property.

2:38:23>> Motion to approve.

2:38:24>> Second.

2:38:25>> Discussion?

2:38:27Seeing none, all in favor of bill 981,

2:38:30please say I.

2:38:31I. I.

2:38:32Affirmative recommendation.

2:38:35That moves us past land use and economic

2:38:37development committee cuz we already

2:38:38covered that to recreation youth and

2:38:40senior services committee chaired by

2:38:41council member Warwick.

2:38:48>> Bill 988, resolution authorizing the

2:38:51mayor and the director of the Department

2:38:53of Parks and Recreation to enter into an

2:38:55agreement or agreements with the

2:38:56Pittsburgh Board of Public Education for

2:38:58the purpose of providing meals in

2:39:00connection with the 2026-2027

2:39:03food service program. The total cost

2:39:05shall not exceed $750,000 over 1 year.

2:39:11>> Motion to approve.

2:39:13>> Second.

2:39:14>> Discussion?

2:39:18Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 988,

2:39:21please say I.

2:39:22>> I.

2:39:23>> I.

2:39:24>> Affirmative recommendation.

2:39:26That moves us to in innovation

2:39:28performance asset management and

2:39:29technology committee chaired by

2:39:31Councilwoman Gross.

2:39:32>> Bill 975, resolution authorizing the

2:39:35issuance of a warrant in favor of OPEX

2:39:37Corporation for the purchase of two

2:39:38Windows 11 in enabled Falcon PCs in an

2:39:42amount not to exceed $11,470.

2:39:46>> Motion to approve.

2:39:48>> Second.

2:39:51>> Discussion?

2:40:00Um this is a very small point, but I

2:40:02think that as it was introduced

2:40:04yesterday,

2:40:05it was called the title was called

2:40:08Falcon scanners and not Falcon PCs. And

2:40:11this was brought up by an interested

2:40:14follower of our public um meetings who

2:40:17wanted to point out that the title um

2:40:20that because they are actually scanners

2:40:21and not PCs that probably the title

2:40:23should be moved to be scanners and not

2:40:25PCs.

2:40:28So, would if anyone agrees with that,

2:40:30would someone like to make a voice

2:40:31amendment to the title?

2:40:33>> I'm sorry, you're proposing a verbal

2:40:35amendment of the title to

2:40:37>> Strike replace strike PCs

2:40:39>> and add scanners.

2:40:40>> Scanners.

2:40:41>> It was It was It seemed to be the

2:40:44correct version

2:40:46I think last week or

2:40:48>> I thought it was all PCs honestly, but

2:40:50it may be different than the text file.

2:40:58>> Please.

2:40:59>> Can I come to the table?

2:41:00>> Yes, sorry for something so small, but I

2:41:03Maybe there are

2:41:03>> two different pieces of legislation

2:41:05here.

2:41:06>> They might be the same. They just might

2:41:07be confusing.

2:41:11>> Introduce yourself, please.

2:41:13>> Jennifer Gullah, the finance director

2:41:15for the city of Pittsburgh.

2:41:16>> Thank you. Director Gullah, would you

2:41:17like to clarify?

2:41:18>> Yes, these are exactly PCs that are

2:41:22adjoined to the scanners, the OPEX

2:41:25scanners. So, we did buy

2:41:28PCs. We had to upgrade to a new version

2:41:31of Windows, and the PCs that

2:41:34that came with the scanners were

2:41:36obsolete and could not be updated. So,

2:41:39we had to buy new PCs to adjoin to the

2:41:42Falcon Red scanners in order for that to

2:41:44occur.

2:41:45>> How old were those other PCs?

2:41:46>> Oh, probably

2:41:49Well, when we bought the scanners, I

2:41:51guess the original scanner was purchased

2:41:54prior to

2:41:562020, probably around 2018. So, that

2:41:59far. And then, the newer one was

2:42:02purchased, I think, in 2020 ahead of

2:42:04bringing in library tax. So, yeah, at

2:42:08least 6 years old, if not

2:42:10>> Yeah, I think it's worth it's okay that

2:42:12we spend $11,000 to get you PCs that

2:42:15work with your scanners.

2:42:17>> And the scanners basically bring in all

2:42:19the I mean, that's where all the tax

2:42:21revenue is collected, most of it.

2:42:23>> You're bringing $700 million, we'll

2:42:24spend the $11,000.

2:42:26Thank you, ma'am. Thank you.

2:42:28>> Thank you. And I think that we've had a

2:42:30public discussion about this now, so

2:42:31it's now public record that these We are

2:42:33spending $11,470

2:42:35on

2:42:36very specific PCs that must then connect

2:42:38to scanners. And I hope that satisfies

2:42:40our interested um constituent.

2:42:43Thank you. You're welcome.

2:42:46>> Just glad somebody's watching us.

2:42:50>> One of the best.

2:42:52Um further discussion, seeing none, all

2:42:54in favor of bill 975, please say I. I.

2:42:58I.

2:42:59Affirmative recommendation. Bill 976.

2:43:02>> Resolution amending resolution 125 of

2:43:052023, which authorized the mayor and

2:43:07director of the Department of Public

2:43:09Safety to enter on behalf of the city of

2:43:11Pittsburgh into a professional services

2:43:13agreement or agreements with Open

2:43:15Innovation Plans LLC for records

2:43:17management software services by

2:43:19increasing the approved amount by

2:43:21$75,237.50

2:43:24for the remainder of the total cost not

2:43:26to exceed $206,930.42

2:43:29over 10 years.

2:43:31>> Motion to approve.

2:43:34Discussion?

2:43:36Seeing none, all in favor of bill 976,

2:43:39please say I.

2:43:41>> I. I.

2:43:42>> Affirmative recommendation.

2:43:46Bill 992.

2:43:47>> Resolution authorizing the issuance of a

2:43:49warrant payable in favor of E-Docs

2:43:51Technology for the one-time purchase of

2:43:54a compatible scanner and warranty for an

2:43:56amount not to exceed $8,845.

2:43:59>> Motion to approve.

2:44:00>> Second.

2:44:01>> Discussion?

2:44:03Seeing none, all in favor of bill 992,

2:44:06please say I.

2:44:07>> I.

2:44:08>> Affirmative recommendation.

2:44:10That takes us to our final committee of

2:44:12the day, Intergovernmental and

2:44:13Educational Affairs Committee chaired by

2:44:15Councilman Mosley.

2:44:16>> Bill 977, resolution adopting plan

2:44:19revision to the city of Pittsburgh's

2:44:20official sewage facilities plan for 7119

2:44:23Hamilton Avenue at no cost to the city.

2:44:27>> Motion to approve.

2:44:29>> Second.

2:44:30>> Discussion?

2:44:31Seeing none, all in favor of bill 977,

2:44:34please say I.

2:44:35>> I. I.

2:44:36>> Affirmative recommendation. Bill 978.

2:44:40>> Resolution adopting plan revision to the

2:44:42city of Pittsburgh's official sewage

2:44:44facilities plan for 1 21st Street at no

2:44:47cost to the city.

2:44:48>> Motion to approve.

2:44:50>> Second.

2:44:50>> Discussion?

2:44:52Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 978,

2:44:55please say I.

2:44:56>> I.

2:44:57>> I.

2:44:58>> Affirmative recommendation.

2:45:01That exhausts our standing committee's

2:45:02agenda. We do have meeting

2:45:04announcements.

2:45:05Next Monday,

2:45:07and we do have uh our regular meetings

2:45:10on Monday,

2:45:11October 26th at 10:00 a.m.

2:45:14I'm sorry. Scratch that. That's not next

2:45:16week. Um

2:45:18on Monday

2:45:19October 26th at 10:00 a.m., Council will

2:45:21hold pre-agenda interviews for the Chief

2:45:23of Pittsburgh Fire Bureau, Director of

2:45:25Council of Management and Budget, and

2:45:27Director of Department of Innovation and

2:45:29Performance. Also next week, the regular

2:45:32meeting on Tuesday, October 27th, and

2:45:34standing committee's meeting on

2:45:36Wednesday, October 28th, will both be at

2:45:3810:00 a.m. Speaker registration will

2:45:40close at 9:00 a.m. Tuesday and Wednesday

2:45:42mornings. On Tuesday, October 27th at

2:45:451:30 p.m., Council will hold a cablecast

2:45:47public hearing on Bill 917 as it

2:45:49pertains to a liquor license transfer

2:45:51application for Adda Gelato. Speaker

2:45:55Adda Gelato. Speaker registration will

2:45:57close at 11:30 a.m.

2:46:01Tuesday morning. To register to speak at

2:46:04these meetings, please complete the

2:46:06sign-up form on the Council meeting

2:46:08webpage or contact the Clerk's office at

2:46:10412-255-2138

2:46:12by the applicable registration

2:46:14deadlines. Is there anything for

2:46:16members? Council Member Warwick.

2:46:18>> Yes. Um so, I I want to talk some more

2:46:21about this about this bill and this uh

2:46:24So, I just want to make it clear

2:46:26that Council members

2:46:29are talking about allowing the mayor

2:46:32to enter into contract, multi-year

2:46:35contracts, for up to 9,999

2:46:39$99.99

2:46:43a year

2:46:44for multiple years

2:46:47with zero

2:46:49council

2:46:50input or oversight.

2:46:53That is what That is what is being

2:46:56That is what we voted, you know, to to

2:46:59positively recommend.

2:47:01Was allowing the mayor to in secret

2:47:05with no notice to anybody at this table

2:47:07to enter into and and he can enter into

2:47:10as many as he wants.

2:47:13Essentially million dollar a year

2:47:15contracts for multiple years with zero

2:47:18We have completely

2:47:20given away

2:47:23the job that that the people elected us

2:47:26to do, which is to oversee the finances

2:47:29of this city.

2:47:30So, I just want to make that clear. And

2:47:32I also want to clarify for the $30,000,

2:47:35right, which is in the original the

2:47:37original bill.

2:47:39$30,000 is is the the cap where it

2:47:42requires a bid, right? We have to go out

2:47:45to bid. It's it's for transparency. It's

2:47:47to make sure that taxpayer dollars are

2:47:49being spent appropriately and that we

2:47:51are getting the best price that we can

2:47:53get.

2:47:54Right? $30,000 is the is is the cap

2:47:58there where we must go out to bid.

2:48:02Right? That is why I put this at 30,000

2:48:04to to put that same cap on

2:48:09co-op agreements

2:48:10on piggyback agreements. But instead,

2:48:13this council is proposing

2:48:16to increase that amount

2:48:19to 900,099

2:48:23or

2:48:23999 dollars, right?

2:48:26>> 999,000.

2:48:27>> $999,000.

2:48:32No council oversight, in secret, and

2:48:35then and then the mayor's office would

2:48:36just send us a little FYI

2:48:39on on on any individual purchase over

2:48:42$30,000 that kind of fell within that

2:48:45contract. I just wanted to be clear to

2:48:47members what they are agreeing to do,

2:48:51what the administration is asking them

2:48:52to vote on next Tuesday, and what they

2:48:55are agreeing to do. I think that should

2:48:57be clear for everybody.

2:49:00Completely seating our jobs as the

2:49:05fiscal stewards of this city.

2:49:09It's what happened last year if you know

2:49:12and and I and I promise you

2:49:14if it hadn't have been November of last

2:49:17year, right? I you know, this took time.

2:49:19This took working with procurement. This

2:49:21took understanding what happened, how

2:49:23this possibly could happen, and I

2:49:26absolutely would have you know, if if I

2:49:29had if I had had time in the end in the

2:49:31last month of 2025, and if I had put

2:49:34this on the table in the last month of

2:49:362025, I think it would have passed. But

2:49:39I like to do my due diligence.

2:49:42I like to work with departments to

2:49:44understand their processes,

2:49:47right? I don't like to just throw bills

2:49:49on the table that will gum up the works

2:49:51of what people do in their day-to-day.

2:49:54So, when I found out in November of 2025

2:49:57that

2:49:58our public safety department and our OMB

2:50:01department, right?

2:50:02had

2:50:04you know

2:50:05sort of pulled the wool over our eyes on

2:50:07the ShotSpotter contract that's when my

2:50:10team got to work on this and and it is

2:50:13you know, taken up to now and now in

2:50:14this moment of budget and all these

2:50:16other transparency, you know, bills that

2:50:19we have on the table making sure that

2:50:20we're talking about quarterly reports

2:50:23and having, you know

2:50:25having trainings on the budget and and

2:50:28you know, having

2:50:30org charts and stuff like that for the

2:50:31public, right? This this felt like a

2:50:34good fit and I'm very surprised and

2:50:37disappointed

2:50:39that this council would recommend to

2:50:41just just let the mayor spend

2:50:45anything shorter, you know, a million

2:50:47dollars a year without any council

2:50:49oversight for multiple years. Just sign

2:50:51on to any contract

2:50:54with the county, with the state, with

2:50:55the feds, who knows? And who knows what

2:50:57the contract would even be for. So,

2:51:00it's not a great look.

2:51:02It's not a great look.

2:51:04Thank you.

2:51:08>> Yeah, I know you're I don't know what

2:51:11you're really trying to do, if you're

2:51:11trying to bash this vote here or you're

2:51:14trying to bash the current

2:51:16administration, but

2:51:18you know, there wasn't a problem, you

2:51:20know, until you found out that the last

2:51:22administration, you know, your who you

2:51:25had a good relationship with,

2:51:27did this multi-year contract with Shots

2:51:29Fired. So, I know you don't like Shots

2:51:30Fired.

2:51:31And uh probably,

2:51:33you know,

2:51:34doesn't look great that, you know,

2:51:37the relationship you had with the last

2:51:39administration, they did this, but

2:51:41you know, we're not going to

2:51:43stop, you know, the good work that we

2:51:45need to do in emergency times to whether

2:51:48we got a

2:51:50you know, put a roof on or what have

2:51:52you, but

2:51:53you know, I mean, I just

2:51:56I wish we wouldn't have gone on this

2:51:56road at the end of council meeting, but

2:51:59you know, I'm also privy to

2:52:02that you weren't really listening to

2:52:04everyone,

2:52:05um

2:52:06you know, in certain offices that you

2:52:08asked for recommendations from. So,

2:52:11you know, this is city government,

2:52:12people talk, and I'm familiar with,

2:52:15you know,

2:52:17people who work on uh these agreements

2:52:19that you reached out to, and

2:52:21that you weren't really listening. Um

2:52:23so, you're really stuck on the

2:52:26Shots Fired thing. Sorry about that,

2:52:27but, you know,

2:52:29I have uh confidence in, you know, a lot

2:52:31of other administrations to do the right

2:52:33thing and to do one-time purchases on

2:52:36these piggyback contracts. Thank you.

2:52:43>> With that, I will take a motion to

2:52:47Council McCauley, sorry. Mr. Andrews.

2:52:49>> Thank you. Now, I just wanted to clarify

2:52:51um

2:52:52in no way do I feel like we're giving up

2:52:55our ability to scrutinize contracts. I

2:52:57really don't.

2:52:59When we approve the budget, we approve

2:53:01those monies. So, it's a matter of trust

2:53:04in the department head that's going to

2:53:06you know, use that money accordingly for

2:53:08whatever project that they might use.

2:53:11But, you know, we can scrutinize

2:53:12everything. At the end of the year, we

2:53:14can ask each department what they spent

2:53:15their monies on and

2:53:18accountability. But, I don't feel like

2:53:20uh we're giving up our ability to

2:53:22oversee this money. It's just a matter

2:53:24of

2:53:26you know, making it convenient for

2:53:29um

2:53:30department heads to make

2:53:33emergency expenditures

2:53:35that don't need to be bogged down on by

2:53:37council. So.

2:53:40>> Is it a motion?

2:53:41>> Thank you.

2:53:42Anything further?

2:53:44Okay, I'll take a motion to approve the

2:53:46minutes and adjourn the meeting.

2:53:49>> Second.

2:53:49>> Second.

2:53:50>> All in favor?

2:53:51>> Aye.

2:53:51>> Aye.

2:53:52>> Meeting is adjourned.

2:54:39>> Mhm.