Billboard Ballistics: Councilwomen Draw Fire From Lamar

Pittsburgh Councilwoman Natalia Rudiak may be joking about the attack billboard in her district targeting her, but Lamar Advertising is deadly serious about it. The billboard company's sign shows her smiling with the caption "Worst economy in 50 years, Natalia Rudiak says: Let's raise taxes".  (The billboard doesn't elaborate that what the councilwoman is proposing to tax is billboard advertising.) 

Rudiak responds on Twitter "All politicians want free advertising. Thanks Lamar. I finally hit the big time!"

The PG reports Lamar has put up similar signs targeting the bill's co-sponsor Council President Darlene Harris and plans on placing more these billboards across town.  Reporter Joe Smydo quotes Lamar's attorney Jonathan Kamin as saying "we just wanted to raise public awareness about the tax that the city of Pittsburgh is looking to impose on businesses that choose to advertise".

Scenic Pittsburgh is firing back at Lamar Advertising, describing the billboards as a "misleading, unfair, and bullying tactic". Its Executive Director Mike Dawida says "billboards lower property values by 30% and pay almost no taxes; home and business owners pay thousands of dollars in property taxes while billboards pay nearly nothing".  The group previously framed the issue by claiming on it's website that an "Out-of-State Corporation Makes Millions off of the City Skyline –  (and) Pays Less than $10 in Local Taxes".

Here are links to previous PG and Trib coverage.

The public hearing on the proposed billboard tax is set for October 30th.

I'll have more on past clashes between City Council and Lamar Advertising in an upcoming blog post.

Read More...

Summary only...

News Notes: Drilling in the City

In the Twitter stream this morning:

Councilman Patrick Dowd tweets that his legislation to regulate drilling inside Pittsburgh city limits lands on the desks of Planning Commission members today.


Pittsburgh City Paper has reaction from the sponsor of the complete ban on drilling in the city -- a ban which still stands unchallenged in court.  Notably, former Councilman Doug Shields posted two comments on the City Paper story which, combined, are longer than than Chris Potter's story itself.

Read More...

Summary only...

Q&A - Mayor's Plan for Paramedics Strike: Use Firefighters & Suburban EMTs as Replacements

Mayor Ravenstahl tells me he's prepared to use Pittsburgh Firefighters, suburban EMTs (emergency medical technicians) and EMS managers to fill the gaps, if the paramedics union goes on strike.  Here's a transcript of my question and answer session with the mayor.

Q: On the negotiations with paramedics, should Pittsburghers be worried -- are you worried -- about what impact this may have if things turn more sour in these talks?

A: "I'm not worried and residents shouldn't be worried.  I have talked with our public safety folks and am adamant about the fact that we will keep people safe.  If they decide to strike, we have a plan in place to respond to that. And we should not see any interruption of service and I believe that we'll be able to keep people safe."

"So, we're going to hold the line.  We believe that we've negotiated a fair deal.  And we believe we've negotiated a deal that will actually make residents safer in the long term.  That will put more ambulances on the street. It will transfer the rescue work from EMS over to Fire, to use some of those firefighters that have that ability, and free up paramedics and ambulances to do more work. That'll put two more ambulances on the street. Our response times already are not good enough. They need to improve, and this will improve the overall delivery of services in public safety."

"They want to make it about our union versus their union, that's not what this is about. This is about delivery of safety services for all residents. Whether it's a firefighter, a paramedic, a police officer, the resident doesn't care. The resident doesn't care. The resident wants to be safe and this is going to make our city safer."

Q: What about the paramedics union suggesting that somehow the best medical care or response isn't adequately addressed under these changes that you want?

A: "Well, we disagree with that, (number) one, because when you look at the history of rescue work.  First of all, we have a large number, I think it's over 300 firefighters who are trained EMTs. So, these individuals have expertise and training to do it.  And a large number of rescue calls, in fact, don't even require medical service.  A lot of the times they are people who are stuck in elevators. Or, you know, they find themselves in a situation where they can't get out of some place. So these are not emergencies in a lot of cases.  These are not issues that need medical attention. In some cases, do they? Yes, but in that case we have EMTs and others that can do it."

"So, we're not putting this on the table in any way to jeopardize pubic safety. In fact, we're going to enhance it, and that's why we're so adamant about it. Previous studies, Tri Data, for example, called for this to happen. The Act 47 team (the city's financial overseers) put it in their plan, and now here we are, attempting to implement it and we think we're doing the right thing by the taxpayers."

(While discussing the history of the paramedics contract talks, the mayor added this next comment, which prompted my follow up questions.)

A: "…If they go on strike, we're prepared to deal that."

Q: If there's a strike, would EMS managers be sufficient to cover, or would you pull people from the Fire Bureau to cover?

A: "We would do a combination of both. We believe the EMS managers and the paramedics that are there now would team up with a trained EMT that happens to be a firefighter now, and that's how we would handle the situation.  We believe we have enough manpower, at least in the short term, to do that.  It's not uncommon, even under the current system for us to call  mutual aid and have others come in and help. So, if we need to do that, we'll do that just like we do now."

"The pubic safety director and I have had numerous conversations about this.  Obviously, we are concerned if a strike happens, but we are also prepared. And he has given me his word and I believe, just given what he's shown me, that we're prepared to do this in the event of a strike. We hope that doesn't happen, but if it does, we're prepared for it.

Q: So, suburban EMTs and paramedics could wind up responding to Pittsburgh emergencies under this cooperative deal, existing cooperative deal?

A: "Well, and people may be surprised to know, they do now.  They do now in a lot of cases, so that wouldn't change. That happens. It's called 'mutual aid' in the event that we are, you know, our ambulances are out and we don't have the ability to get to a call, suburban communities come in now and help us.  So that's not different.  There are times where we do the same for them, and it's called mutual aid. So, that may happen.  But I want to be clear that that's not any change in current practices.  That happens currently under our existing agreements."

Q: And the firefighters union wouldn't balk at the idea of being pressed into service?

A:  "We've had discussions with them and we expect that they would be cooperative, yeah."

Read More...

Summary only...

The Busman's Holiday: Please Stand by...

Powering up.

There's more to come.

Read More...

Summary only...

UPDATED with Council Reaction: Mayor Ravenstahl's Budget Message Breakout Quotes

UPDATE 2: Reactions from City Council members to Mayor Ravenstahl's address which warned of a coming "financial nightmare" in 2016 :

Council Finance Chair Bill Peduto:

• "Under his scenario which he presented today which is using one sided numbers, sure you can make that argument. But is it reality? No. Not unless we choose to go down that path. That's a path I will never travel."

• "We had a scolding, if nothing else,of city council -- and it wasn't even based on reality."

• "He's still trying to push an idea, even at the point of today, which was harmful to Pittsburgh."

Council President Darlene Harris (via written statement):

• "We have no intention of selling ourselves short, and no plan to initiate debt that will destroy future generations."


• "We also have no intention of foregoing billions of dollars of revenue over the next 50 years so that investment bankers can drain the life out of our City."

•"...In the coming weeks we will be actively working - day and night - to produce a decent, working solution to the immediate crisis, and thereafter this body intends to address the very core of the issue - the pension funds themselves.

Councilman Doug Shields:

•"I was little chagrined, to say the least, to hear that it's all council's fault, number one. Number two, there is a viable plan that the council enacted on the table."

• "I never saw a mayor come into the chamber and essentially insult the council."

• "It was like, 'okay, I'm coming into council to yell at the council about something, to basically throw this in the council's face, and blame them for everything."

Councilwoman Natalia Rudiak:

• "He said the actions of a few. I think there was clear majority that rejected the one option. there are still other options on the table."

UPDATE 1: Here are some key quotes from Mayor Ravenstahl's budget message delivered to City Council. (I posted a version of this earlier via mobile e-mail, but thumbtyping via BlackBerry leaves something to be desired in the way of formatting.) I've also expanded some quotes.

Mayor Luke Ravenstahl:

• "It appears that Pittsburgh must return to the years of deficit spending..."

• "Council...is forcing us into a financial culture that looks too much like our past".

• "I submit five year plan today that does not raise taxes. That does not make draconian cuts to basic city services."

• "...makes sure that Pittsburghers can get through the next five years unharmed, even when confronted by pension payments that double and triple..."

• "We will do that by using our fund balance to ensure that we survive through 2015."

• "In 2016, the first year following the five year plan, our fund balance will be depleted."

• "(In 2016) we will be forced to make a $91 Million payment to the state pension system.."

• "...that is a quarter of our city's entire budget...more than it costs to operate any city departmentt."

• "After 2016, I cannot tell you how Pittsburgh will..deliver..core services without severe cuts & tax increases."

• "Pension payments after 2016 are even more staggering."

• "With a fund balance that is dried up, Pittsburgh will have to make a $127 Million pension payment in 2017. "

• "...our city walks with its eyes wide open into a fiscal nightmare."

• "I saw this day coming and prepared city for it as best I could."

• "...presented City Council with a solution that could have saved us from this..."

• "...some members of City Council chose the short term, irresponsible approach..."

• "...it is not too late to prevent an eventual Pittsburgh bankruptcy."

• "...if five members of council choose to do the right thing."

• "We can still avert pension crisis by making a large cash infusion into our pension fund immediately..."

• "...and fighting for a new revenue stream to increase our pension payments..."

• "...ignoring these solutions...will in time force us....back to the dark days..."

• "That is not what I wanted. It is not what is best for Pittsburgh..."

• "Nonetheless, if that is the path Council chooses, we must live with it, regardless of how disastrous the long term consequences will be."

• "The budget and five year plan I present today balances."

• "It maintains services without raising taxes through 2015".

• "...but Pittsburgh will not be able to absorb the costs of state takeover in 2016 or beyond."

--
Sent from my mobile device

Read More...

Summary only...

Notes & Quotes: From My Interview with Targeted Tweeter, ACLU

First, here is a link to my Channel 4 Action News story on my interview with "Signor Ferrari", one of the anonymous tweeters -- along with BFBarbie -- targeted by PA Attorney General Tom Corbett's grand jury subpoena. It's a follow-up to this story in which I asked Republican gubernatorial candidate Corbett about the the case.

I should also note that Attorney General's office spokesman Kevin Harley tells me:

"This matter will be more fully explained (Friday) morning in Dauphin County Court at the sentencing hearing of convicted felon Brett Cott, who was one of the principals who was convicted in March as part of the bonus (Bonusgate) investigation that we did."

Now the notes from the Q&As.


The person who goes by the alias Signor Ferrari is behind the targeted Twitter account CasablancaPA; here are my notes of what blogger Ferrari said in our phone interview:


Reaction to the subpoena:

Ferrari: "We consider it a violation of the First Amendment… The right to criticize public officials anonymously is constitutionally protected."

On tweeting and blogging:

Ferrari: "We have very closely followed Corbett's investigation of the legislature. We've examined some of his other actions as Attorney General, and we've simply pointed out instances where we feel that he has basically not lived up to his responsibilities."

Target of criminal investigation?

Ferrari: "That's not a question I'm prepared to answer. We intend to remain anonymous and we will not confirm or deny who we are, whether we're connected to the defendants."

Anything to say to Tom Corbett?

Ferrari: "What we have to say to Tom Corbett we have said in our blog and we will continue to say it on our blog."

Why should anyone care about this case?

Ferrari: "Because what happens to us could happen to anyone. This is really not about the identities of these particular bloggers. This is about the right of an american to anonymously criticize a public official."

Closing comment:

Ferrari: "I'm just extremely grateful to the ACLU and very encouraged by the support we've gotten from fellow bloggers and tweeters on the internet."

.

Vic Walczak, the Legal Director of the American Civil Liberties Union Pennsylvania Chapter tells me the ACLU is now representing both Signor Ferrari and the other targeted blogger who goes by the name BFBarbie. Here are some quotes from that interview:


Q: He wants to know who the two tweeters are. What's wrong with that?

Walczak: "The tweeters are individuals who have been criticizing Attorney General Corbett and the whole Bonusgate prosecution as being overly political."

"It is a prized American possession not only to only to criticize the government, but to criticize the government anonymously. This is a tradition that goes back to the founding of this country, when you think about Thomas Paine handing out his leaflet ' Common Sense', that was done anonymously. The Federalist Papers, perhaps the most important documents written about government, were written anonymously. It's a right that the Supreme Court has recognized time and time again. …You know, the right to criticize the government anonymously is very, very important in this country."


"If the Attorney General sees this as being somehow criminal, then he's in for a huge first amendment fight, because that would be tantamount to criminal libel, which we got rid of decades ago. …I mean you don't throw people in jail because they criticize you. And that is a very scary thought when you think about somebody who's been nominated by one of the major political parties for governor of this state. If the view is that you can throw critics in jail, or somehow use the criminal justice system against them, that's kind of a scary notion."

On the specific legal concerns:

Walczak: "This would appear to be a misuse of the grand jury process to get information in aid of sentencing. The theory seems to be that the A.G.'s office believes that one or both tweeters are a legislative aide, Brett Cott who has been convicted and is to be sentenced tomorrow. They've filed a pre-sentencing report saying that if Mr. Cott is the one who is the one who is tweeting these criticisms of the A.G. and the prosecution, that that means he's not showing sufficient remorse and that in fact the sentence should be enhanced. So, is this an appropriate use of the grand jury process? We think not."

"The second is it's just a frontal assault on the First amendment. You don't just go and unmask your political critics. You're got to have an awfully good reason to do that, and we certainly we haven't heard one in this case."

What if such a tweeter were, in fact, a convicted criminal?

Walczak: "We don't believe that changes the legal analysis at all here. I mean even if it's a person who has been convicted, they don't give up their constitutional rights. They will give up their liberty at some point, but they certainly don't give up their right to criticize the prosecutor or anybody else."

What's next?

Walczak: "Right now we're in discussions with the attorney general's office and we are hoping to convince them to withdraw these subpoenas. If that doesn't work, then we'll be filing papers, probably a motion to quash the subpoena. And then we'll see what happens."

If I'm someone who doesn't know about Twitter and barely cares who's running for governor, why should I care about this?

Walczak: "I think everybody should care about whether or not the government can somehow punish you or retaliate against you if you say things critical of the government. I mean it's a prized right to be able to criticize your elected officials."

.

Read More...

Summary only...

UPDATED: New City Government Web Design Lowers City Council Profile

[UPDATE 1 : The city's now changed its website since this blog post -- and I have some new information. I've added my e-mail exchange with Mayor Ravenstahl's Press Secretary Joanna Doven to the end of this post. A hat tip to Tim McNulty of the PG's Early Returns, who spotted the website change as of 11:15 AM.]

The "Emergency Information Page" on the City of Pittsburgh's website is apparently a sneak preview of a site re-design in the works -- one that literally takes City Council down a notch.

You can compare the before and after looks at these links.

Blogger-on-hiatus Bram Reichbaum and Pittsburgh Councilwoman Natalia Rudiak were discussing it recently via Twitter.


In the old website design, the link to City Council appears immediately to the right of the link to the mayor. (You can click on any of this images to enlarge them.)


The new design replaces the "Council" link with a generic "Government" link.



The link to City Council only appears if you hover your cursor over the word "Government".


Curiously, the link to the mayor's office appears both immediately after the home page link and as the first link under "Government", above City Council -- a sort of first among equals.

UPDATE 2 : Here's my e-mail exchange with Mayor Ravenstahl's Press Secretary Joanna Doven since my original blog post. At some point during this e-mail exchange the city restored City Council to the new website masthead. The Howard Stern mentioned in the cc: heading is the the city's Director of Information Systems.

-----Original Message-----
From: Mayo, Bob
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 10:27 AM
To: Stern, Howard; Doven, Joanna
Subject: City website changes

...Is this arrangement final? What went into the decision to drop City
Council down in the web link hierarchy?

Thanks.
Bob Mayo

----- Original Message -----
From: Doven, Joanna
To: Mayo, Bob E
Cc: Stern, Howard
Sent: Tue Feb 23 10:31:07 2010
Subject: RE: City website changes

I will consult with our web designer on this "concern" I assume council has. If Council has a concern, they may also consult with him. Nothing has been brought to our office's attention regarding arrangement yet.
The redesign is still in its infancy stage.

Thanks,

Joanna

-----Original Message-----
From: Mayo, Bob
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 11:47 AM
To: Doven, Joanna
Cc: Stern, Howard
Subject: Re: City website changes

No one from council pointed it out to me or expressed a concern. I noticed the change and am asking questions based on observation. Was the web designer instructed to make that change or did he/she do it without guidance? Was it done in house or contracted out?

Bob

----- Original Message -----
From: Doven, Joanna
To: Mayo, Bob
Sent: Tue Feb 23 11:55:16 2010
Subject: RE: City website changes

In-house. No instruction from this office.

According to web designer...

The idea for Government was to have a page that describes city government (the elected bodies) to citizens. This page was an exploration of the concept:
http://redesign.city.pittsburgh.pa.us/government/


The drop-downs were a more recent addition in the latest design, allowing us to have links to all of the most prominent resources.

Here's an image from the updated city website.

.

Read More...

Summary only...