This weekend, I hope to post a podcast of my Q&A with Mayor Ravenstahl on his decision not to rescind the controversial police promotions. The video was to be added to The Pittsburgh Channel website this evening, but at last check it hasn't appeared. If the video isn't available, I'll provide the audio here on The Busman's Holiday blog.
Friday, June 29, 2007
Podcast Coming--Mayor Q&A On Decision
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
Police Promotions Fallout
Mayor & Women's Commission Chair Q&A With ReportersMayor Ravenstahl and Cynthia McCormick, the chair of the Women's Commission, fielded reporter questions after meeting for more than an hour about the controversial police promotions. You can catch the raw video of the question-and-answer session online at The Pittsburgh Channel.
Meanwhile, credit to Maria of 2 Political Junkies for being the first to publish Police Commander Catherine McNeilly's letter touching on this story.
The commander e-mailed a letter to the editor in response to the Post-Gazette's mayoral report card story. That letter also addresses the promotions controversy.
Channel 4 Action News reporter Gus Rosendale quoted from the commander's letter in his story on Monday. He also reported on the Mayor's comments Tuesday. I've held off on posting the entire letter, while waiting to see if the PG was going to print it. (Predicting publication dates can be a tricky business, as you can see in this post.) Since her letter is now already in the burghosphere, here goes.
With permission from the commander and from Gus, I'm quoting her e-mail provided to Channel 4 Action News. Note that it was sent prior to the latest developments.
Mr. Rosendale,
[A]n article appeared in Sunday’s Post-Gazette titled “Mayor Meeting Most Goals.”
In this article, the Mayor is "graded" by the Post-Gazette on 38 pledges in 6 categories he made since taking office 10 months ago.
In the category of "Diversity," the Mayor was given a “C” because in September, 2006, he created a “Women’s Commission” intended to bring “concerns of women to the city and improve gender diversity in top staff.” This goal has stalled, however, because his chosen co-chair has moved out of town and, 10 months later, has yet to be replaced.
If the Mayor were truly sincere about his commitment to the “concerns” of women, he had a valuable and unique opportunity back in September, 2006 to tout the Command Staff of the Pittsburgh Police as a “model” of female representation in “top city staff” when 7 out of 12 people (or 58%) who held the rank of Commander or higher were female.
Since becoming Mayor, there have been seven promotions made to the Command Staff of the Pittsburgh Police. Six of those promotions were male. Today, 6 of the 14 people (or 43%) of the Command Staff is female. Sadly, Mr. Ravenstahl missed a golden opportunity, and as of the date “Ravenstahl’s Report Card” was published, the same Command Staff of the Pittsburgh Police is no longer the “model” that it was just 10 month ago.
One of the most recent males promoted to the Command Staff jumped over a number of females (and males) who have rank, formal degrees, higher degrees and well-respected police management training which highly qualifies them for such a move upward – but they were not even considered for such a move.
Additionally, as has been widely reported, the last three promotions have raised concerns to a number of women’s groups in the Pittsburgh area because of allegations of domestic abuse; however, Mr. Ravenstahl will not even address the “concerns" of these women.
My opinion is the Post-Gazette has been much too lenient in giving the Mayor a “C” in these areas. If I were his professor in “Women’s Studies” and he were my student, it would be obvious by this time that he just isn’t getting it - he would have failed my course miserably.
Catherine R. McNeilly
(The writer is a Commander with the Pittsburgh Bureau of Police)
Meanwhile, credit to Maria of 2 Political Junkies for being the first to publish Police Commander Catherine McNeilly's letter touching on this story.
The commander e-mailed a letter to the editor in response to the Post-Gazette's mayoral report card story. That letter also addresses the promotions controversy.
Channel 4 Action News reporter Gus Rosendale quoted from the commander's letter in his story on Monday. He also reported on the Mayor's comments Tuesday. I've held off on posting the entire letter, while waiting to see if the PG was going to print it. (Predicting publication dates can be a tricky business, as you can see in this post.) Since her letter is now already in the burghosphere, here goes.
With permission from the commander and from Gus, I'm quoting her e-mail provided to Channel 4 Action News. Note that it was sent prior to the latest developments.
Mr. Rosendale,
[A]n article appeared in Sunday’s Post-Gazette titled “Mayor Meeting Most Goals.”
In this article, the Mayor is "graded" by the Post-Gazette on 38 pledges in 6 categories he made since taking office 10 months ago.
In the category of "Diversity," the Mayor was given a “C” because in September, 2006, he created a “Women’s Commission” intended to bring “concerns of women to the city and improve gender diversity in top staff.” This goal has stalled, however, because his chosen co-chair has moved out of town and, 10 months later, has yet to be replaced.
If the Mayor were truly sincere about his commitment to the “concerns” of women, he had a valuable and unique opportunity back in September, 2006 to tout the Command Staff of the Pittsburgh Police as a “model” of female representation in “top city staff” when 7 out of 12 people (or 58%) who held the rank of Commander or higher were female.
Since becoming Mayor, there have been seven promotions made to the Command Staff of the Pittsburgh Police. Six of those promotions were male. Today, 6 of the 14 people (or 43%) of the Command Staff is female. Sadly, Mr. Ravenstahl missed a golden opportunity, and as of the date “Ravenstahl’s Report Card” was published, the same Command Staff of the Pittsburgh Police is no longer the “model” that it was just 10 month ago.
One of the most recent males promoted to the Command Staff jumped over a number of females (and males) who have rank, formal degrees, higher degrees and well-respected police management training which highly qualifies them for such a move upward – but they were not even considered for such a move.
Additionally, as has been widely reported, the last three promotions have raised concerns to a number of women’s groups in the Pittsburgh area because of allegations of domestic abuse; however, Mr. Ravenstahl will not even address the “concerns" of these women.
My opinion is the Post-Gazette has been much too lenient in giving the Mayor a “C” in these areas. If I were his professor in “Women’s Studies” and he were my student, it would be obvious by this time that he just isn’t getting it - he would have failed my course miserably.
Catherine R. McNeilly
(The writer is a Commander with the Pittsburgh Bureau of Police)
.
Sunday, June 24, 2007
iPhone & Leopard
Click image to check out the iPhone tour page.... and so is this funny satire on YouTube.
As neat as the iPhone is, I'm not sure I'm up for changing carriers just yet. I'm also not sure about spending money that could go towards buying a new desktop computer soon. I'm trying to get more mileage out of the aging hard drive in my iMac, until the next Mac OS X--Leopard--is released this fall.
Click image to see Mac OS X Leopard features.Leopard itself is promising some great new features and flashy graphics. The one thing I'm not sure I like is the new set of folder icons for music, movies, and other items in Leopard's Home Folder. I've only spotted a glimpse of them, but they strike me as subdued when compared with the eye candy of the new Dock, Cover Flow, and Quick Look.
Judge Sends Wecht Dispute to Discipline Board
Judge SchwabThank goodness for electronic filing. I'm not talking about tax returns, I'm talking about electronic filing of court documents in the Wecht case. The policy has saved many trees from sacrificial deaths as quintuplicate copies filed in Pittsburgh federal court.
The Wecht case may be eons from coming to trial, but the parties have already generated 488 court documents. That's documents--not pages. Each of the documents may be dozens of pages, some with attached exhibits running for many pages themselves.
I blogged about "Crouching Lawyer, Hidden Attorney" and "Wecht Defense Team Strikes Back". I sat out coverage of the government's response-to-the-response (Document 486), and the defense's request to file a response-to-the-response-to-the-response (also known as "motion to file sur-reply to motion for sanctions", Document 487).
That brings us to Document 488--the judge's response to the flurry over U.S. Attorney Buchanan's call for Wecht's attorneys to be punished.
Judge Arthur J. Schwab has filed a court order referring this side-dispute to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's disciplinary board.
The judge writes:
• the question of whether or not comments by Wecht's lawyers violate court rules "is also of significant interest to attorneys admitted to practice in the state and federal courts of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and to the public."
If the disciplinary board agrees to take over refereeing the sanctions battle, the inevitable Document 489 may move on to other issues in the Wecht case.
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Judge Manning & The Grand Jury
Judge Manning & Attorney CerasoOnce again, a federal grand jury is looking into the activities of an Allegheny County official. This time, federal authorities are asking questions about Judge Jeffrey Manning.
The grand jury called at least one attorney--Robert Stewart--as a witness to answer questions under oath about Judge Manning. Stewart's lawyer Tom Ceraso says he believes that federal authorities have been asking questions concerning the judge for about a year. Ceraso says it appears one focus is on whether or not the judge gives favorable treatment to lawyer friends.
You can see my Channel 4 Action News report on The Pittsburgh Channel, and the I'm including links to the stories from The Trib & the PG.
Here's a transcript of a portion of Ceraso's Q&A with reporters on the steps of the federal courthouse in downtown Pittsburgh.
Click the "read more" link to expand this post.
Q: "Explain what brings attorney Stewart here today, what your understanding is (of) what they're focusing on."
A: "That's a great question. You know, I have no idea, I have no insight as what the United States Attorney's office is looking for. I can tell you that with regard to my client--with regard to Bobby--the inquriy is, he did share Steeler tickets with Judge Manning and did what a lot of people in Pittsburgh do in regard to Steeler tickets. But over and above that, in terms of attempting to look at this, in terms of any illegality, I very frankly don't see any."
"Now, as I said before, the United States Attorney's Office may not like the way that business is conducted down the street. That doesn't make it a federal crime. And I'm very concerned that what they're doing is--they're looking at this from a very personal aspect, and not assessing what is occurring. Because, as I said, they're talking about a very, very good judge, they're talking about good attorneys, and I think they're putting them all in a very awkward position."
Q: "Is there any kind of quid pro quo?"
A; "There is no quid pro quo whatsoever. And if you get down and you take a look at Judge Manning's record, and if you take a look at what Judge Manning has done and what these attorneys have done, there simply is no quid pro quo in any of this."
Q: "What sort of items have they subpoenaed from Mr. Stewart?"
A: "Records, checkbooks, checks. Checks back and forth between he and the judge. Campaign material, that type of thing."
Q: "What is Pat Thomassey's involvement here? Because you represent him as well."
A: "Pat Thomassey has no involvement right now. He and the judge are friends. They've done things together. You know, for some reason, there seems to be the atmosphere that you cannot be friendly with a judge, being an attorney--and that is just wrong. That relationship has lasted for a long time. Pat is a very ethical and a very good attorney. He would not expect anything from the judge, and the judge wouldn't give him anything because of that friendship. It just isn't happening. It's an unfair assumption that because they know each other, there's something wrong with it. That's unfair."
Q: "Tell us a little bit about the trips that the two have taken."
A: "They took trips, with another judge, with other attorneys. They shared expenses. They did what people do that are friends. That doesn't make it wrong."
Q: "Is the thrust of their questions such that they are looking for some suggestion that in some way the judge's rulings are influenced by these personal relationships?"
A: "That apparently is what they're looking for. But if they take a look at how this judge has handled himself. I think that anybody that looks at the way Judge Manning has handled that courtroom knows that simply has not occurred. It hasn't occurred, and I don't believe that there's any evidence whatsoever that they're going to going to uncover that there's was ever any favoritism on the part of this judge with regard to any attorney. It just simply doesn't happen if you look at their records."
Q: "Based on their inquiries to Mr. Stewart, Mr. Thomassey, how long has this probe been going on?"
A: "It's been going on an awfully long time, with a lot of innuendo, and I see no end to it at this point. It's continuing to go on."
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Wecht Defense Team Strikes Back
As covered in this earlier post, U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan is urging the judge presiding over former Coroner Cyril Wecht's public corruption trial to throw Wecht's lawyers into jail and suspend them from practicing law in federal court.
She's accusing Mark Rush and Jerry McDevitt of having "repeatedly lied to the court, lied to the media, breached their ethical obligations as lawyers and flaunted the orders of this court.
Wecht's lawyers argue that if their talking to the media deserves punishment by the court, that the U.S. Attorney's office could be subject to the same thing. In their response to Buchanan, McDevitt and Rush tell the judge:
• "The Motion is baseless. It is a hatchet job that is not worthy of the United States Attorneys office. We respectfully request that it be denied in its entirety. "
• "The prosecution's initial media blitz put Dr. Wecht in a devastatingly negative light..."
"The Motion seems to be utterly blind to the fact that if defense counsel's statements are regarded as sanctionable, the Government and its representatives are surely subject to the same or greater sanctions in light of their own conduct" ... "and their eagerness to put this case in the media spotlight at the earliest possible moment." "...Dr. Wecht reserves the right to file a cross motion for sanctions as appropriate..."
They also write that the prosecutors:
• "...are not attempting to jail counsel for telling lies. They are attempting to do so because it is the truth they fear."
Former U.S. Attorney general Dick Thornburgh is a member of Wecht's defense team. He's filed an affidavit under oath backing up statements made by McDevitt and Rush to the PG that triggered Buchanan's motion. Thornburgh says Buchanan had wanted to have Wecht arrested because she claimed he was "a flight risk to Israel". He also swears he had to go over Buchanan's head to a Justice Department official in Washington in order to keep Wecht from facing a 'perp walk' before news cameras. Click the image below to read that page from his sworn statement.
The Post-Gazette has already posted Thornburgh's complete affidavit online.
Wecht's attorneys say their public comments are protected free speech. The U.S. Attorney's office had no comment Friday on the latest filing by Wecht's lawyers.
Friday, June 15, 2007
Mayor's Shakeup 2: The Summer Sequel
Update: Click here for my Channel 4 Action News story,
"Ravenstahl Wants Department Heads To Resign".
(I've also reposted this blog entry to repair some software-related missing text.)
"Ravenstahl Wants Department Heads To Resign".
(I've also reposted this blog entry to repair some software-related missing text.)
When he launched his first multi-player shakeup, I blogged that "the mayor hints he's not done, saying there could be 'perhaps a reshuffling of the entire fifth floor.' "
Looking back, we now see that late April was an especially eventful week for Mayor Ravenstahl. That Monday, he made his much-discussed trip to Oakmont to meet Tiger Woods. That Friday, he removed then-Press-Secretary Dick Skrinjar from his role as the mayor's top communications advisor .
At the start of May, I noted that it was unusual to vacate such a high-ranking post without having someone waiting in the wings. Days after the change, the Mayor said Skrinjar's permanent replacement would be in place within four weeks. So far, it's been more than six weeks and the mayor says he's more than a hundred resumes have crossed his desk. The city website now lists December 31st, 2007 as the last day to apply.
Councilman Jim Motznik tells me: "I've heard the rumor of the street that I wanted to be the public works director and the mayor has offered me the position, and that's not correct. I haven't been offered the public works director job, and I'm not interested in it."
Last night, after 7 pm, the mayor's office issued this news release:
Mayor to Conduct National Search for City Director Candidates
Ravenstahl Asks For Resignation of All Directors Not Appointed on His Watch
[PITTSBURGH] June 14, 2007 Mayor Luke Ravenstahl asked for resignation letters from current City of Pittsburgh departmental directors and board chairs of the Pennsylvania Water and Sewer Authority, the Urban Redevelopment Authority and the Pittsburgh Parking Authority today in an effort to take a new look at how our city departments and authorities can better serve Pittsburgh. All directors not appointed by Mayor Ravenstahl have been asked to serve the City in an acting capacity and are encouraged to reapply for the position in order to prove they are the best person for the job.
“All Directors are admirable colleagues of mine who have been working very hard,” said Mayor Ravenstahl. “However, I am not satisfied with the condition of City government. As Mayor, I owe it to the people of Pittsburgh to build our government with the best people who are capable of doing the best job. Leadership may need to change, but I am making a tough decision in order to ensure that this City is heading in the right direction.”
A national candidate search will take place effective today in order to put the best possible team in place to serve the city. The process will take a period of time. The market will dictate the level and scope of applicants and in turn create the timeline.
The following directors were already appointed by the mayor: City Planning Director Noor Ismail; Fire Chief and Public Safety Director Michael Huss; Police Chief Nathan Harper; Personnel Director Barbara Trant; Budget Director Scott Kunka."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
