►
From YouTube: Pittsburgh City Council Post-Agenda - 9/11/19
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Hello
and
welcome
to
the
Pittsburgh
City
Council's
post
agenda
for
Wednesday
September
11th
2019,
my
name
is
Louise
Chris
and
with
us
today
is
Logan
Showalter,
our
sign
language
interpreter
at
the
request
of
councilmember
Teresa
Kael
Smith,
a
discussion
on
the
Pittsburgh
Parks
Conservancy
partnership
with
the
city
of
Pittsburgh.
Thank
you
and
have
a
wonderful
day.
B
Good
afternoon
and
welcome
to
Pittsburgh
City
Council's
cablecast
post
agenda
regarding
the
pittsburgh
parks
Conservancy
in
the
agreement
with
the
city
of
pittsburgh,
I'm
Councilwoman,
Teresa,
Kelly,
Smith
I'm,
chairing
the
meeting
I
called
for
the
meeting
and
will
be
joined
by
additional
councilmembers.
We
do
have
some
tight
timeframes
here,
so
we're
going
to
start
right
away
with
announce
that
we
are
joined
by
councilman
Cory
O'connor
at
the
moment
and
others
are
expected
out.
Councilman
Coghill
is
unavailable
he's
at
a
funeral.
However,
he
did
give
me
some
questions
that
he
would
like
answered.
C
B
C
You
councilman
I
really
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
be
here.
I
wanted
to
start
first
with
maybe
clearing
the
air
on
a
few
misconceptions
that
I
think
put
out
there
through
different
sources
as
well.
As
you
know,
some
of
the
reasons
that
the
mayor
believes
a
is
supportive
of
a
referendum
to
the
people
on
this
issue.
First
of
all,
I
want
to
be
clear.
There
is
no
agreement
between
the
city
and
the
Pittsburgh
parks
Conservancy
about
spending
these
dollars
this.
C
If
the
public
were
to
vote
for
a
tax
increase
on
referendum,
every
penny
of
that
is
city
tax
dollars
and
comes
to
the
city.
No
dollar
could
then
go
out
without
a
vote
of
City
Council.
That's
a
fundamental
rule
for
any
dollar
coming
in.
So
people
who
have
talked
about
how
it
the
money
would
go
and
go
away
from
councils
is
not
accurate.
C
If
there
were
to
be
an
agreement
like
we
have
on
other
existing
relationships
with
the
parks
Conservancy,
which
certainly
Jane
and
I
have
been
talking
about
for
well
over
a
year
about
ways
to
partner
more.
That
agreement
would
have
to
come
before
City
Council
and
you
would
have
to
have
annual
votes
of
City
Council
to
do
it.
Nothing
could
ever
circumvent
this
very
public
process
and
public
opportunity.
Second
of
all,
we
have
said
from
day
one
that
any
agreement
that
could
be
developed
would
never
ever
take
a
union
job
away
from
the
city
of
Pittsburgh.
C
We
are
not
looking
at
transferring
union
jobs
to
the
parts
in
service
fee,
we're
not
looking
at
taking
away
union
work
and
giving
it
to
the
parks
Conservancy.
If
this
referendum
were
to
pass
and
dollars
would
come
in,
we
would
be
hiring
more
union
workers,
particularly
laborers,
in
our
parks
to
support
our
parks,
enterprise.
So
I
think
you
know,
people
like
to
throw
around
a
term
of
privatization
and
I
want
to
very
make
make
it
clear.
C
First
and
foremost,
parks
are
our
greatest
public
owned
public
maintained
and
public
managed
spaces,
and
it
will
always
be
the
government's
responsibility
to
do
that.
That
being
said-
and
you
know,
some
members
have
been
around
this
table
for
a
long
time
or
in
you
know,
community
organization,
for
a
long
time.
We
know
we
are
not
putting
into
our
parks
what
we
used
to
going
back
to
the
90s
and
earlier.
Nor
are
we
doing
what
other
cities
do.
C
I
just
came
back
from
a
trip
from
Minneapolis
who
wins
best
parks
every
year,
and
it's
not
even
comparable.
They've
had
a
taxing
authority
since
the
1860s
or
1870s.
So
it's
certainly
not
the
same.
They
spend
about
$300
per
capita
on
their
parks.
We
spend
about
I
think
at
nineteen
eighty-three
dollars
per
capita.
C
So
when
you
talk
about
putting
in
three
and
four
times,
you
get
the
results
of
it
and
we
saw
it
there
with
just
incredible
space
really
looking
at
equity
and
what
happens
in
all
neighborhoods
and
I
also
want
to
clarify
that
this
conversation
we're
having
and
the
referendum
would
not
just
go
to
traditional
park
space,
but
it
includes
recreation.
So
we're
talking
about
our
rec
centers,
we're
talking
about
opportunities
for
rec
to
tech
and
job
training
and
computer
labs
in
our
recreation
facilities
as
well.
C
Also
and
I
think
everyone
at
this
table
knows
it,
but
the
city
has
had
a
long
partnership
with
the
parks
Conservancy
projects
across
the
city
like
the
Frick
Environmental
Center
in
councilman,
O'connor's
district
or
the
Shanley
Visitors
Center,
the
Westinghouse
mountain
and
councilman
Strasburg.
There's
countless
things
in
Highland
Park
with
mrs.
grose
and
certainly
most
recently,
the
beautiful
restoration
of
the
fountain
that
councilman
Harris
and
mrs.
Rooney
champion
projects
that,
just
quite
honestly
without
the
parks,
Conservancy
and
their
ability
to
leverage
private
funds
would
not
have
happened.
C
When
you
look
at
our
need
to
invest
in
fixing
basketball
courts
and
keeping
our
baseball
fields
up-to-date,
investing
in
our
rec
centers
and
mowing
the
grass
and
all
the
stuff
that
Tom
Paulin
and
his
crew
try
to
do,
we
didn't
have
the
money
to
invest
in
a
historic
fountain
like
we
did
in
the
North
Sider
like
we
did
in
councilman
Strasburg,
there's
district
er
to
build
a
world-class
Environmental
Center.
The
parts
Conservancy
allowed
us
to
leverage
private
funds
and
partner
all
still
publicly
owned
all
still
through
this
body.
C
No
agreements
no
dollars
going
without
it,
but
it
creates
that
partnership
that
allows
you
to
leverage
and
bring
in
outside
funds
in
a
different
way.
I
also
want
to
just
directly
respond.
There
there's
a
common
comment
out
there
of.
How
can
we
ask
the
taxpayers
for
this
when
the
nonprofit's
don't
pay
and
two
things?
First
of
all,
this
is
a
democratic
process.
It's
going
to
the
people
and
the
people.
Willfully
have
a
say
of
course.
C
The
second
thing
is,
it
sounds
good
I
do
get
it
I'm
a
pitch
burger
and
a
tax
fair
and
one
who's,
trying
to
figure
out
my
own
personal
budget.
The
reality
is,
it
sounds
good,
but
it's
an
real.
We
have
seen
it
for
years.
The
idea
that
all
of
a
sudden,
the
corporate
community,
the
nonprofit
community,
is
suddenly
just
gonna
write
checks
to
the
city.
It's
just
not
not
gonna
happen
at
the
level
we're
talking
about
we're
talking
about
the
ability
to
bring
in
10
million
dollars
a
year
to
go
into
our
park
system.
C
He
would
not
reduce
what
we're
already
putting
in
so
this
is
10
million
above
and
beyond,
plus
whatever
extra
dollars
we
can
leverage
into
it
and
that's
not
gonna
come
from
other
sources
realistically
and
in
the
last
piece
I
would
point
out
on.
That
is
if
there
were
anything
that
goes
to
the
city.
Of
course,
it
comes
to
council
and
a
budgeting
process,
but
you
couldn't
earmark
it
just
for
parks,
I
mean
if
City
Council
wanted
to
say
we're
gonna
vote
to
raise
taxes,
and
it's
just
gonna
go
to
parks.
C
We
could
not
do
that
as
we
learned
with
the
Housing
Opportunity
Fund,
where
we
had
to
commit
10
million
dollars
and
then
raise
the
D
transfer
tax
as
a
disjointed
dual
action.
So
this
is
a
way
to
guarantee
it
actually
all
goes
to
the
park
system
and
cannot
be
rated
if
the
going
gets
tough
in
the
city
of
Pittsburgh,
again
like
we
saw
in
2000
1
2,
&
3,
you
know
we
couldn't
waive
that
to
fix
this
building
or
whatever
it
may
be.
It
would
be.
B
So
we're
gonna
hear
from
everyone
else,
but
I
think
before
we
do,
since
you
have
to
leave
we're
going
to
hear
from
Council
first
and
let
them
ask
any
questions
that
they
have
a
view.
We're
also
joined
by
Councilwoman
Deb
gross
and
Councilwoman
Erica,
Strassburger
and
I
already
mentioned
councilman
of
corner
and
council
person.
Harris
and
I
would
just
say
that
I
called
for
this
post
agenda,
because
I
do
have
some
serious
concerns.
B
I
do
not
like
the
way
that
this
entire
process
rolled
out
I
feel
that
there's
a
lot
of
misinformation
also
being
distributed
even
as
you're
trying
to
clarify
I
feel
that
there's
a
lot
that
could
be
said
for
some
of
the
comments
and
I
do
have
a
hold
the
administration
in
a
high
regard,
but
at
the
same
time,
I
I'm.
Not
supportive
of
this.
In
the
way
that
we're
doing
this
I
think
everybody
here
on
council
I
think
we
all
cared
very
deeply
about
our
parks
and
I.
B
Don't
think
that's
a
question
about
our
parks
and
our
level
of
concern
and
care
for
our
parks.
Our
concern
is
more
for
taxing
or
residence
again
and
what's
going
to
happen
with
that
funding
and
the
accountability
that
comes
with
it,
and
currently
some
of
the
projects
that
Pittsburgh,
Parks
Conservancy
has
been
working
on
or
should
have
been
working
on
and
the
status
of
those
projects
and
I'll
get
into
that
as
I
get
into
my
conversation
and
I
actually
have
some
copies
of
agreements
and
I'll
get
into
those
as
well.
B
H
B
H
B
H
H
We
spent
a
year
here
at
this
table
talking
about
only
the
governance
structure
for
the
Housing,
Opportunity
trust
funds,
and
it
was
long
and
we
got
mad
at
each
other.
We
had
a
lot
of
input
from
public
citizens
and
we
had
a
lot
of
long
public
hearings
and
we
craft.
We
struggled
over
the
language
and
it
took
about
12
months,
and
then
we
we
figured
that
out
and
then
we
started
talking
about
the
sources
of
funding
that
trust
fund
and
the
same
thing.
It
took
a
long
time.
H
People
were
very
aggravated
with
us,
we're
taking
so
long.
We
had
a
lot
of
public
input,
we
we
differed
from
each
other.
We
came
to
final,
you
know
resolution
and
we
started
collecting
that
tax,
as
you
mentioned,
and
so
we're
now
just
present
saying
those
funds,
and
now
we
have
a
chance
to
kind
of
revisit
and
see
if
we
want
to
make
changes.
H
H
H
E
E
H
E
H
H
E
The
current
commercials
are
solely
about
parks,
the
relationship
between
the
city
and
the
Conservancy,
and
work
that
the
Conservancy
has
done
over
our
history.
So
they
are
not
campaign
related
they're,
not
promoting
or
trying
to
influence
the
vote
for
a
referendum,
there's
no
reference
to
a
referendum
and
the
current
commercials.
Okay,.
H
C
C
H
H
Chief
Gilman
I'm
gonna
cut
to
the
chase,
then
so
I
can
save
my
time
that
I
am
constantly
reminded
of
the
discussion
we
had
about
the
water
system
and
keeping
public
assets.
Public
and
Councilman
Strassburger
last
year
hosted
a
post
agenda
on
privatization
and
we
had
really
great
information
from
a
variety
of
speakers,
but
especially
Donald
Cohen,
whose
non-profit
think
tank
is
called
in
the
public
interest.
H
Where
you're
not
really
seating,
you
don't
have
accountability
or
transparency
issues.
It's
a
it's
a
kind
of
healthy
partnership
building
it
for
us.
Let's
you
know
we're
working
right
now
on
restoring
a
tunnel
that
was
an
original
in
the
original
Highland
Park
plan
that
the
neighborhood
is
very
excited
about,
so
doing
the
actual
construction
like
who
would
some
contract
out?
You
know
roadwork
bond
PennDOT
or
something
like
that.
H
H
It
had
crossed
the
line
over
into
not
just
it
into
operating
and
maintaining
that
and
even
had
their
own
employees
in-house
and
those
kinds
of
things
so
that
you
get
very
uncomfortable
there
and
obviously
you
really.
We
really
lost
control.
I
mean
Councilwoman.
Smith
was
championing
the
issue
around
billing
and
they
just
lied
to
our
faces
right.
I
mean
I
think
we
can
say
that
right.
They
sat
right
here
and.
B
H
Along
with
Austin,
so
you
know
we
had
to
fight
them.
We
had
to
sue
them
to
work
that
contract
and
they
still
walked
away
with
millions
of
dollars,
and
it's
it's
been
better
since
so
that's
I
think
where
that
was
still
always.
It
was
always
was
public
asset.
We
had
never
seated
our.
We
had
never
sold
off
an
inch
of
pipe,
but
it
was
still
a
loss
of
control
that
damaged
public
health,
public
trust
and
cost
the
taxpayers
money
so
and
that
we're
still
spending
hundreds
of
millions
now
to
rectify.
H
It's
really
a
hard
lesson
to
learn,
and
so
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
have
all
the
transparency
and
that
we
also
have
the
sophisticated
understanding
of
the
partnerships
that
we're
working
into.
So
that's
those
are
my
lines
of
questions
but
I'll.
Let
you
go
at
this
point.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
No.
C
I
appreciate
councilman
and
I.
Wouldn't
disagree
with
a
single
word.
You
said
I
think
full
agreement
from
the
administration
with
you
I
think.
One
key
difference,
I
would
point
out
is
for
profit
versus
nonprofit
partners,
which
I
think
does
make
a
very
big
difference
in
fpw,
say
clearly.
We
this
city
learned
a
very
bad
lesson
about
when
for-profit
entities
looking
to
increase
their
bottom
line,
use
public
assets
to
do
it
and
do
things
quote
unquote
on
the
on
the
cheap
I
would
say
you
know
in
our
existing
relationship
with
the
Parks
Conservancy
on
your
scale.
C
There
are
some
things
that
shift
over
that
line
and
that's
why
I
think
a
little
different
and
with
others
I'm
looking
at
councilman
O'connor
with
the
big
golf
tee
firsties,
which
is
make
there's
a
lease
with
them
there
is
they
operate
it
they're,
building
it
they
fundraise
for
it
and
again
a
reality
too.
Sadly,
with
all
of
our
needs
in
the
city
from
you
know,
fixing
the
bathrooms
in
this
building
to
putting
female
quarters
in
our
fire
stations
running
a
Golf
Center
is
unfortunately
I.
Don't
think
for
most
always
counsels
decision.
That's.
H
C
C
So
there
are
those
and
there's
you
know
Schenley
Plaza,
which
I
will
always
point
to.
As
a
you
know,
to
me,
one
of
the
best
prod
I've,
seen
in
my
15
years,
taking
a
surface
parking
lot
and
turning
into
a
beautiful
park.
Is
there
no
public
money,
City
money,
I
can't
MuRF,
none
or
close
to
none
when
it
was
done.
C
That
is
maintained
primarily
by
the
parts
to
insurgency
with
support
from
Public
Works,
but
things
like
the
carousel
are
run
by
the
parks
Conservancy,
the
restaurant
spinner
in
there
are
leased
and
the
dollars
that
come
into
that
help
go
into
it.
That
is
the
type
of
relationship
we
see
continuing,
and
it
has
also
led
to
some
master
planning
attempts
that
it
has
run
being
a
prime
example
or
Arsenal
to
in
your
district.
I
know
you
care
deeply
about
where
the
parks
Conservancy
jointly
led
efforts
with
the
city
of
master
plan.
Those
types
of
Park.
C
We
see
the
existing
relationship
continued
and
expanded.
In
that
same,
like
we
do
not
know,
one
is
certainly
selling
any
assets,
but
turning
over
decision
making
and
again
all
those
dollars
would
come
to
this
table
every
year.
These
are
public
tax
dollars.
If
we
then
said:
hey
parks,
Conservancy
and
I'm
making
this
up.
This
is
not.
This
is
not
a
thing.
C
This
is
an
example,
but
if
we
said
hey,
we
want
you
to
do
in
Arsenal
Park
what
you
do
in
Schenley,
Park
for
us
or
Emily
Plaza,
and
we'll
give
you
a
million
dollars
a
year
to
do
it.
That
would
be
an
agreement
that
this
board
this
body
would
have
to
talk
about
approve
transparently
through
a
public
process
just
the
way
we
do,
but.
H
Since
you've
done
down
my
path
but
I'm
gonna
have
to
respond
a
little
bit
because
one
of
the
issues
that
you
have
we
remember
when
you
were
studying
at
this
table
and
since
is
that,
when
you
say
under
those
agreements,
sometimes
they
are
pre
authorized
by
this
body
and
I've
had
issue
with
that.
Because
then
they
lack
transparency.
I.
Think
a
good
example
is
how
we
just
attached
the
coop
agreement
to
PWSA
and
so
that
everybody
could
read
it.
It
was
very
public,
and
that
was
a
great
example,
so
I.
Thank
you
for
that.
H
When
we
don't
see
the
coop
agreements,
I
think
it
gets
more
problematic
and
so
I
would
like.
If
we're
going
to
go
down
that
path.
I
am
feeling
you
know
less
enthusiastic
about
that.
Until
there
are
safeguards
in
place
right,
I,
don't
think
I
have
the
coop
agreement
at
first
Schenley
Plaza.
Is
it
attached
to
the
legislation
and
when
would
that
have
been
I.
H
H
I
Set
right,
there's
no
money
out
there
right
now,
but
just
so
everybody
knows
because
when
you
said
it,
I
was
shaking
like
no
I
thought,
I
heard
the
opposite,
and
then
my
only
other
thing,
because
we're
just
talking
to
the
chief
of
staff.
Now
nobody
else
presented
yet
I'm.
Sorry
I
think
the
biggest
thing
is
you
know
we
have
to
make
it
clear
that
if
the
residents
vote
for
this,
this
is
not
privatizing
parks
and
my
fear
with
that
is
all
of
a
sudden.
I
Okay
I
go
to
rent
skates
at
Schenley
ice
rink
and
all
of
a
sudden,
it's
$25.
Now
people
aren't
getting
opportunities
to
do
something
that
should
be
relatively
inexpensive.
So
I
just
ask
that
if
we're
going
down
this
road-
and
obviously
it's
up
to
the
residents,
if
they
vote
for
this-
that
we
at
council
also
acknowledge
that
there
will
be
more
funds
out
there.
If
this
passes
that
we
who
set
rates
and
I
know
you
know,
we've
raised
rates
at
certain
places
before,
but
we
have
to
make
sure
that
the
parks
are
available
for
everyone.
J
I
C
I'll
just
say:
okay
with
you
completely,
you
know
again,
I
would
imagine
like
we
do
in
first
tea,
where
we
have
great
control
on
that.
If
there's
such
an
example,
I
could
tell
you
I
can't
think
of
any
such
example
right
now.
It's
out
that
you
know,
there's
not
some
secret
plan
to
build
a
water
park,
but.
C
Run
or
something,
but
you
never
know
what
the
future
holds,
but
I
would
think
first,
he
would
be
a
model
where,
yes,
we
need
the
help
running
it,
but
we
need
to
control
it
and
I
will
say
and
I
said
this
to
miss
Miller
and
to
director
gable.
Things
like
you
know
any
concern
out
there
that
something
we
wouldn't
be
deciding
what
Little
League
teams
use
our
fields
and
give
them
the
free
fields
which
we
do
now.
That
is,
that
is
not
changing.
That
is
a
city.
I
Function
that
we're
I
just
want
to
make
that
because
I
know
director
does
a
very
good
job
of
it
and
I
just
you
know
a
lot
of
people
hear
that
privatization
and
no
more
funds.
Okay.
Well,
if
this
passes-
and
you
get
10
million
well
now
all
of
a
sudden,
you're
gonna
charge
me
X
amount
for
something,
and
it's
like
well
wait.
No,
that's
not
anybody's
goal!
Here
we
want
to
make
the
parks
as
affordable
as
they
can
be
for
everybody.
A
J
C
C
G
So
we
already
get
seven
million
dollars.
That's
allocated
just
for
our
parks
who
started
this
campaign.
C
G
K
C
G
G
K
G
Driven
to
the
yeah,
we
can
say
with
our
smallest
nonprofits
in
the
kept
it
where
we
didn't
know
who
they
were,
but
the
money
was
coming
in
and
we
have
it
in
each
one
of
our
budget
books.
I
have
all
the
old
budget
books,
so
I
could
show
you
so
now
we
get
a
zero
amount
from
any
of
them.
Well,
excuse
me,
I,
think,
there's
a
side
deal
where
it
don't
come
into
the
city.
G
G
G
I'm
just
saying
there
was
yep
okay,
and
that
would
be
a
better
afternoon
to
go
because
50%
of
this
city,
actually
the
real
estate
they're,
not
paying
taxes,
there's
no
taxes,
correct
they're
using
our
fire,
our
police,
our
paramedics
I,
could
go
on
and
on
and
on,
but
that
would
be
a
better
afternoon.
I
would
say
to
go,
then
I
mean
as
soon
as
we
said.
We're
gonna
put
a
tax
on
them.
They
were
here
donating
and
Mayor.
Peduto
would
remember
that
and
then
how
much,
how
much
right
now
I.
G
Around
two
hundred
million
dollars
and
the
interest
in
that's
pushed
back
this
year
is
the
lowest
year,
and
if
you
look
at
where
we
had
the
highest
year,
we
actually
had
52
million
dollars
extra.
If
you
take
it
from
when
we
had
the
highest
bonds
and
it
took
forever
to
pay
that
off
and
further.
You
push
these
bonds
out
the
more
it's
gonna
cost
and
we
just
got
out
of
back
forty
seven.
G
D
G
G
C
G
They
don't
have
equal
cost
of
living.
Their
Social
Security
is
not
going
up,
their
pensions
aren't
going
up.
What
are
they
going
to
choose,
because
this
is
on
the
homeowner?
What
are
they
going
to
choose?
Are
they
going
to
choose
what
medicine
they're
not
going
to
take
and
some
of
them
not
already
and
died?
Have
you
ever
watched
these
people
and.
J
G
G
G
I'm
talking
about
way
before
the
community
Richmond,
okay,
there's
gonna,
be
clear:
okay,
I
guess:
I
go
back
a
little
bit,
but
I
I
just
don't
know
how
this
could
be
justified
to
put
this
on
the
homeowners
again,
when
we're
not
asking
anyone
that
this
is
not
paying
taxes.
I
mean
this
is
gonna,
be
on
the
homeowner
and.
G
G
G
C
G
Mean
I'm
not
gonna,
go
much
further
on
this
other
than
I
like
I
love,
the
parks
Conservancy
now
better
than
ever.
They
do
a
great
job
and
to
raise
money
instead
of
for
commercials
to
raise
money
for
the
parks.
I
think
is
an
excellent
deal
and
if
you
remember,
when
you
talked
about
the
fountain
in
my
Park,
the
five
members
of
council
that
are
usually
a
yes
vote,
voted
down,
$5,000
to
start
a
campaign
for
that
thought,
I
put
in
the
first
10
million
dollars
and,
thank
goodness
for
the
Rooney
family,
who.
D
G
G
Then
the
homeowners
I
think
maybe
that's
a
little
bit
of
an
exaggeration,
but
they
use
quite
a
bit
and
I
I
was
watching
in
DC
and
on
channel
2
I,
don't
know
if
you've
seen
that
story
where
he
said
since
mayor
Peduto
became
mayor,
taxes
have
increased
eighty-four,
dup
million
dollars.
How
much
that
has
gone
to
the
parks
projects
again.
C
G
G
G
G
They
said
it
was
for
all
the
parks,
the
Connie
everywhere,
nothing
about
paying
taxes
or
your
taxes
going
up
and
that's
not
the
way
to
do
it.
I
mean
Carnegie.
Library
could
deal
okay,
but
now
every
year
and
other
cities
getting
into
it,
and
this
is
a
tax
tax
on
anyone
that
owns
a
home
in
this
city,
and
this
hurts
some
of
us,
our
most
vulnerable
people
that
live
here
so
I
have
to
say.
Thank
you.
Thank.
B
J
You
I
want
to
respect
your
time
chief
Gilman,
so
please,
if
there's
anything
that.
J
Other
two
others
here
at
the
table,
please
just
let
me
know
but
I'm,
curious
and
digging
in
on
when
you
say
that
that
the
council
will
retain
control
of
the
flow
of
money.
What
would
that
actually
look
like
how
you
know
if
this
this
referendum
passes?
If
there
are
matching
funds
that
then
to
do
come
from
outside
sources
in
addition
to
rad
dollars?
What
does
that
actually
look
like
when
it
comes
together
and
end
to
council
to
to
approve
or
to
vote
on?
Do
you
know?
That's.
C
A
no
I,
don't
know
at
this
point
I
can
can
say
that
what
I
would
envision
would
be
some
sort
of
agreement
that
came
before
Council
that
laid
those
ground
rules
and
again
I'm,
surely
making
up
numbers
for
an
example.
I'm
not
not
saying
this
at
all,
but
I
would
envision
some
sort
of
event
where
council
says
of
the
ten
million,
roughly
ten
million
that
is
expected
to
raise
eight
million
just
goes
directly
into
the
operating
budget
for
DPW
and
Parks
and
Recreation.
C
Two
million
goes
into
doing
these
ten
twelve
thirteen
hundred
eighty
things
with
the
parks,
Conservancy
and/or
other
partners.
I,
do
want
to
be
clear
that
the
referendum
legislation
is
not
about
the
parts
insurance.
A
there's
about
part
nonprofit,
Parks
partners,
I
think,
is
the
right
language.
So
it
may
very
well
be
that
you
could
have
some
partnership
with
the
western
Pennsylvania,
Conservancy
or
others
as
well.
C
It
does
not
have
to
be
limited
to
one
at
all,
but
that
those
agreements
would
be
something
the
council
proof
so
in
terms
of
the
flow
Council
would
define
that,
but
no
matter
what
the
money
always
would
come
into
the
city.
First
and
foremost,
and
presumably
some
would
go
top
rating
and
some
into
any
sort
of
special
agreement
about
maintenance
of
a
specific
part
or
certain
functions
that
would
be
provided.
Mm-Hmm.
J
Okay
and
then
would
the
kind
of
determination
of
the
leadership
and
the
management
be
wrapped
up
into
that,
or
would
that
be
sort
of
a
separate?
This
is
partially
me
not
knowing
the
process
of
what
this
would
look
like
this,
partially
being
a
newer
council
member,
not
knowing
how
you
know
what
existing.
C
J
C
A
C
J
J
Then
I
guess
what
I'm
getting
at
is
there?
Is
there
anything
that
changes?
You
know
I'm
not
so
worried
about
if
this
passes,
but
it
looks
like
the
next
year,
the
next
two
years,
I'm
a
little
concerned
about
you,
know
the
possibility
of
it
changing
ten
years
down
the
line
20
years
down
the
line.
When
many
of
us
might
not,
you
know,
be
in
the
same
roles.
C
We
have
any
dollars
that
didn't
directly
go
into
the
city
budget
went
into
another
agreement
would
be
part
of
an
approved
agreement
by
City,
Council
I
would
imagine
such
an
agreement
would
expire.
It
would
not
be
something
that
had
no
no
expiration
I
can't.
Imagine
that
being
proposed
or
approved
by
council
could
have
milestones
where
things
are
react
in
it,
but
you
would
not
have
a
in
perpetuity
situation.
J
C
You
right
now
the
only
thing
I
would
say-
and
you
know
I
think
I
do
have
a
little
bit
of
a
unique
having
been
on
on
both
sides,
not
that
other
people
previously
haven't
I
will
tell
you
the
most
eye-opening
thing,
I
think
to
me
in
this
new
position
and
is
around
how
we
spend
our
dollars
in
a
most
equitable
fashion.
I
was
very
fortunate
for
15
years
to
represent
and
work
in
the
district
you
represent
and
see
mostly
because
rad
and
large
parks.
C
You
know
where
I
grew
up
plan
was
Highland
and
Schenley
and
Mellon
and
Frick
Whiteman,
which
wasn't
so
great,
but
will
be
again
really
good
facilities.
I've
spent
a
lot
of
time
working
with
residents
and
communities
that
just
have
not
seen
that
and
when
you
know
just
the
latest,
where
I
spent
a
lot
of
time
with
the
lemming
today,
Lincoln
lamington
community
at
Chadwick,
where
those
dollars
have
just
not
been
invested
from
a
capital
person
I'm
not
talking
about
the
operating
water
to
men
and
women
who
work
for
some
time,
a
capital
prioritization.
C
It
did
not
happen
and
one
of
the
the
things
that
we
envision
is
doing
is
really
going
to
a
more
equitable,
a
more
data-driven
recomm,
a
Shinto
council,
still
councils
control
of
the
budget,
but
from
an
equity
standpoint.
What
does
this
do
from
an
environmental
and
stormwater
standpoint?
Are
we
making
the
investments
you
know
as
councilman
girls,
I
say
if
we're
doing
this,
how
does
it
impact
day
22
or
are
we
just
putting
in
more
asphalt?
J
D
C
But
we
wanted
to
add
a
hundred
percent,
and
so
some
of
this
will
be
trying
to
get
those
dollars
into
those
parts.
Councilman
Harris
rightly
pointed
out
we're
getting
millions
of
dollars
for
our
rad
parks,
which
is
just
you
know,
not
representative,
we're.
A
huge
chunk
of
our
our
city
plays
there's
no
rat
Park
in
the
West
there's
one
in
those.
That's.
C
D
C
And
we're
talk
about
five
that
we
fund
through
rad,
that's
160
and
I,
would
say
to
you
know.
The
other
thing
I've
learned
is
how
many
parts,
small
groups
you
know
and
of
our
divisions,
are
responsible
for
maintaining
it's
a
tremendous
lift.
And
yes,
you
know
we
can
always
reprioritize
councilman
Harris
rightly
pointed
out,
we
borrowed
more,
you
know
dollars.
Revenue,
thankfully,
is
up.
I
think
you
know,
and
we've
been
very
fiscally
responsible
in
keeping
with
the
support
of
all
of
City
Council
the
bond
ratios
and.
A
C
Ratios
in
the
right
place,
with
the
count
with
the
city
controller
as
well,
who's
helped
champion
that
coming
out
of
ak47,
but
when
you
look
at
the
needs
and
we'll
really
get
into
this
in
the
coming
weeks,
we've
desperate
firetruck
needs
right
now
we
have
desperate
facility
needs.
We
have
desperate
storm
water.
C
Paying
our
workers
who
haven't
been
paid,
what
they
should
have
you
know
since
2003
the
list
goes
on
and
on
I
know
you
all
have
them
in
your
own
districts.
The
reality
is
without
additional
revenue.
The
parts
that
I'm
talking
about
where
we're
not
seeing
the
investment
are
not
gonna,
see
the
number
of
Labor's
hired.
We
need
to
maintain
them
better.
They're,
not
gonna,
see
the
dollars
going
into
the
green
infrastructure
or
the
redoing
of
the
baseball
field
or
the
playgrounds
to
make
them
safe
or
spray
park.
B
Thank
you
so
I
know
that
everyone
here
I'm
going
to
give
you
all
a
chance
to
make
a
comment
at
an
opening
statement.
I
apologize,
it's
taking
so
long,
but
I
just
really
want
to
ask
just
a
few
questions.
You
had
mentioned
that
the
money
would
come
through
the
city
and
through
city
council.
I've
also
heard
that
there
would
be
a
committee
in
place
and
I'd
like
to
know
a
little
bit
more
about
that.
C
Myself,
it's
critically
important
I
will
said
we
have
talked
about
that.
If
there
are
dollars
that
council
would
allocate
to
the
partisan
Surrency
in
these
new
partnerships,
that
would
not
just
go
directly
to
the
Conservancy,
where
the
Parks
Conservancy
board
controlled
it,
but
it
would
be
separate
where
there
would
be
a
group
that
had
a
majority
city
employees,
including
council
representation
overseeing.
We
wouldn't
want
those
funds
in
our
mix
where
it
just
goes
into.
C
You
know:
a
quote-unquote
parks,
Conservancy
bank
account
that
I
think
that
is
the
committee
that
you've
heard
about
that
is
not
structured.
That
is
not
set,
but
that
is
something
we've
talked
about.
Could
there
be
a
almost
a
part
discovering
board?
That's
appointed
confirmed
involves
City
Council
is
a
majority
public
they'd
oversee
some
of
that
as
well,
but
still
they
would
not
have
funding
without
Council's
allocation.
So.
B
What
my
concern
is,
you
know:
I've
sit
on
the
Housing
Opportunity
Fund
and
the
land
bank
board
and
I
know
that
you
know
you
structure
a
board
to
get
the
results
you
want,
and
so
I
don't
know
how
much
we'd
actually
have
a
say.
You
know,
even
though
the
board
would
be
structured
in
such
a
way.
I,
don't
know
how
long
that
would
excuse
me,
especially
with
the
new
council
coming
up.
B
B
But
according
to
this
agreement
that
it
was
supposed
to
be
the
responsibility
of
Pittsburgh,
Parks,
Conservancy
so
and
I
have
the
agreement
here
and
also
in
the
agreement.
It
talks
about
how
there's
a
nondisclosure
statement,
how
you're
not
allowed
to
share
it
publicly.
So
why
would
we
even
enter
into
an
agreement
with
an
organization
with
that
disclosure
number
one
number
two.
What
was
your
understanding.
B
B
You
know
either
and
yet
I've
seen
Pittsburgh
Parks
Conservancy
budget
and
the
director
making
more
than
double
what
our
director
makes
and
more
more
than
both
our
city
parks
director
and
our
public
works
director
combined,
and
so
when
I
see
that
it
makes
me
think
that
there's
a
lot
to
be
questioned
here
and
I
feel
that
this
is
being
rushed.
I,
don't
know
that
I
would
oppose
it.
If
I
had
more
time
to
look
through
things
and
and
and
hear
from
the
public.
It's
the
way
it's
been
done
from
the
very
beginning.
B
I
oppose
I
I,
don't
like,
though,
that
we
are
pushing
it
forward
for
this
election,
and
you
know
the
residents
had
really
just
heard
about
it.
We're
having
these
community
meetings.
These
listening
tours,
but
it's
more
the
residents
listening
to
the
presentation,
then
I,
listen
to
the
residents
and
so
I'm
thinking
about
calling
for
a
public
hearing
as
well.
So
we
can
actually
hear
from
the
public,
but
I
don't
know
that
I.
You
know,
I
think
that
the
public
should
be
attending
these
meetings
and
they
should
be
bringing
up
their
concerns.
So.
B
C
The
abundant
there,
that
is
an
absolute
100%
bold-faced
lie
that
would
never
come
out
of
anybody
in
the
administration's
mouth
and
it
is
backed
up
quite
frankly
by
the
work
you
see
being
done
and
I
can
go
through
every
district
from
Townsend
to
Whiteman
to
Lewis,
with
Councilman
O'connor
and
McBride.
There's
more
capital
work
being
done
in
our
parks
this
year
than
in
the
last
20
years.
So
it's
not
backed
by
data.
C
It's
not
backed
by
what
we
see
on
the
ground
and
it's
you
know
and
not
towards
you,
because
you
and
I've
talked
about
this,
but
to
the
people
saying
at
who
you
and
I
it's
insulting,
I,
think
politically
motivated
and
just
nonsense.
We
would
never
ever
anyone
in
this
administration
give
such
a
directive
that
hurt
people
in
Arkham.
B
C
C
B
B
So
I
have
seen
yeah,
but
what
I'm
saying
but
I
my
concerns
are
I've,
seen
steps
that
are
falling
apart,
I've
seen
railings
coming
down,
trees,
which
we
know
have
been
an
issue
across
the
city,
so
those
are
some
of
the
things
that
I
see
and
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I
mean
if
we're
having
a
difficult
time
getting
to
those
things.
That's
one
thing:
if
we're
giving
a
directive
to
not
do
those
things
to
start,
you
know
having
a
response
from
the
public
different
than
what
they
would
be.
B
C
B
B
Longer
than
you
had
anticipated
four
five
minutes
later,
you
had
anticipated.
Thank
you
very
much.
I'm
gonna
start
with
the
controller,
if
you
don't
mind
and
then
work
our
way
down
with
opening
statements.
Is
that
okay,
thank
you
very
much
and
I
would
say
we're
also
joined
by
the
solicitor,
so
she
could
address
councilman
Harris's
concerns
solicitor.
If
you
could
come
to
the
table.
K
Let
me
first
thank
you.
Michael
Lam
city
controller
I
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
be
here
today
and
let
me
make
a
couple
of
comments.
First,
I
think
everyone
agrees
that
parks
need
resources
and
that
we
don't
give
enough
resources
to
parks,
but
that
could
also
be
said
for
streets
and
for
storm
sewers
and
for
slopes
and
for
facilities
and
just
about
everything
else.
K
In
this
city,
I
mean
we've
gone
through
a
long
time
of
deferred
maintenance,
and
so
everything
in
this
city
we're
finally
coming
out
of
a
horrible
financial
situation
to
a
much
more
stable
financial
situation
that
allows
us,
for
the
first
time
to
have
a
real
capital
budget
and
to
start
to
do
a
capital
projects
and
the
fact
that
the
parks
are
gonna
have
to
catch
up.
Just
like
everybody
else
is
it's
just
the
reality.
K
I'm
not
doubting
for
a
minute
that
ten
million
dollars
isn't
even
the
right
number
and
and
I,
certainly
don't
doubt
the
or
or
have
questioned
the
work
of
the
parks.
Conservancy
I've
been
a
longtime
advocate
for
the
parks,
Conservancy
and
a
financial
supporter
personally,
and
so
I
support
the
work
that
they
do.
The
problem
with
this
tax
to
me
is
that
the
timing
is
wrong.
K
You
know
we
live
in
a
city
that
is
among
the
most
highest
tax
for
real
estate
purposes
in
the
country,
and
so
now
we're
throwing
another
tax
on.
We
raise
taxes
in
2012
for
the
library
we
raise
taxes
in
2014
as
a
millage
adjustment.
Here
at
City
Council,
we
raise
the
realty
transfer
tax
last
year,
we're
raising
it
again
next
year.
K
K
Since
then,
we're
six
years
in
now,
zero
dollars
unconscionable
that
we
would
now
go
to
our
taxpayers
and
ask
them
for
more
money
and
and
what
I
learned
today
is
even
maybe
even
more
troubling
the
idea
that
there
is
now
went
about
reality.
The
idea
that
there
is
a
saturation
buy
on
television
right
now,
promoting
the
parks,
Conservancy
and
its
relationship
with
the
city
and
to
suggest
that
that's
not
part
of
this
campaign.
K
Now
that
may
be
some
strained,
legalese
and
I'm
sure
there's
a
great
legal
opinion
to
suggest
that
that's
true,
but
we
know
that's
not
reality.
We
know
that
you
know
we
know,
as
we've
all
run
campaigns.
You
know
the
first
ad
you
do.
Is
you
introduce
yourself
and
let
people
know
who
you
are
and
if
you're
incumbent,
you
tell
them,
maybe
remind
them,
who
you
are
that's
what
this
ad
is.
K
This
ad
is
reminding
people
who
what
parts
Conservancy
has
done
the
great
work
that
they've
done
and
reminding
them
that
they
have
a
partnership
with
the
city
it's
to
set
up
the
next
ad,
which
will
be
the
advocacy
ad
for
this
was
questioned
to
suggest
that
that's
not
campaign
related.
Now,
that's
what's
not
reality
and
the
fact
that
we
I'm
running
this
year,
I'm
on
the
ballot
this
year,
I
have
to
file
report
every
month
telling
you
everybody
who
gave
me
money
every
and
where
I
spent
that
money.
K
K
K
But
what's
gonna
happen
over
the
next
two
months?
Is
that
there's
going
to
be
a
massive
campaign
on
television
and
no
counterweight
to
that
campaign?
And
so,
while
they
can,
they
can
go
out
and
say
who
knows
what
what
will
be
in
those
ads
and
what
will
be
said
in
those
ads?
I
can
tell
you
this.
The
track
record
is
not
very
good
because,
with
the
campaign
they
did
to
get
the
signatures
was,
it
was:
was
misinformation
upon
misinformation,
the
people
who
are
circulating
those
petitions?
K
You
know
if
that
kind
of
thing
goes
unchallenged
how's
that
fair
I
mean
how's
that
house
it
will
just
let
the
voters
decide,
leave
it
on
the
ballot,
we're
talking
about
likely
a
record
low
turnout
in
November
and
a
campaign.
You
know
if
it's
not
a
million
dollars,
it's
going
to
be
close
advocacy
campaign,
particularly
when
you
adding
this
money
that
that's
being
suggested.
It's
not
part
of
the
advocacy
campaign
and
so
I'm
concerned
about
it.
K
I
really
do
believe
that
I
really
hope
that
that
we
can
enlighten
voters
across
the
city
as
to
what
this
vote
really
means.
I
still
stand
by
what
I
said
earlier
in
the
year,
which
is
we're
generating
the
kind
of
dollars
we
are.
We
have
the
ability
to
direct
a
lot
more
money
into
parks
than
we're
doing
right
now
and
I
still
find
the
the
increase
unnecessary.
Thank.
F
Good
afternoon,
thanks
for
allowing
me
to
be
here,
I
think
that,
if
I
put
on
my
city
parks,
director
hat
would
I
like
to
see
an
influx
of
additional
monies,
regardless
of
the
source
to
improve
programs
and
outreach
for
youth
and
teens
and
families
and
Senior
Program.
Of
course,
I
would.
As
a
chief
mentioned,
our
trip
to
Minneapolis
was
enlightening.
The
structure
there
is
completely
different,
but
the
results
of
what
you
see
are
really
tangible
to
the
controller's
point.
F
I
think
it's
it's
important
that
this
process
play
out
night
and
for
some
it
doesn't
seem
like
it's
been
transparent
enough,
but
the
voters
will
decide
I.
Think
that's
important,
I
think
everyone
at
the
tables
realizes
that
the
library
tax
was
a
quarter
mil.
This
is
a
little
bit
more
than
that.
Those
of
us
that
are
fortunate
enough
to
consider
voting
for
this.
F
Perhaps
that's
not
a
strain
on
our
monthly
budget
or
annual
budget,
but
for
some
it
might
be
I
guess
my
vote,
I've
always
treated
kind
of
privately
I.
Think
that's
my
right,
but
for
certain
having
grown
up
in
a
community
that
is,
that
has
been
surrounded
by
neighborhood
parks
and
not
having
direct
direct
access
to
rad
parks,
of
which
my
departments
receives
rad
rad
monies,
those
monies
weren't
trickling
into
the
neighborhood
parks
for
some
time
again
to
the
controller's
point
to
the
chief's
point.
F
Perhaps
that
will
happen
in
time
and
perhaps
it
is
with
existing
city
tax
dollars
that
are
coming
in
now.
But
we
all
know
that
there's
a
need
for
it
and
if
there's
some
an
equity
kind
of
matrix
that
gets
us
there
I
think
that's
an
important
consideration.
So
I'm
for
park
improvement,
I
I
mean
there's,
there's
no
one
that
isn't
and
to
echo
everyone's
sent
them
and
I.
F
Think
the
work
that
the
PPC
does
and
has
done
is
really
admirable
in
working
closely
in
tandem
with
director
gable
and
his
team
you're,
starting
to
see
some
results,
you're
seeing
the
the
influx
of
money,
that's
committed
through
capital
monies
from
the
mayor
and
the
administration
make
a
difference.
It's
happening
so
I
hope
that's
helpful
in
some
way.
To
give
you
my
perspective,
I
mean
I
kind
of
have
to
look
at
it
from
a
citizen
standpoint,
but
from
someone
that
manages
the
city
parks
department.
F
Yes,
we
don't
really
do
much
as
far
as
maintenance
and
and
public
support
in
the
parks
that
falls
more
to
the
Department
of
Public
Works
in
to
PPC,
but
it's
certainly
something
that
is
passionate
for
me
personally
and
for
the
I
think
the
whole
of
the
city
parks
department,
so
neighborhood
parks
have
been
ignored.
It
would
be
really
great
to
see
an
investment
in
parks
for
these
people
and
I
guess
the
voters
will
decide.
Thank.
E
You
know
I
I
am
one
of
the
first
people
who,
whenever
I
talk
to
people,
I
talk
about
the
work,
the
city
staff
does
to
take
care
of
the
system
with
the
resources
they
have
it's
incredible
what
they
do
with
the
limited
resources
they
have
and
I
know.
The
city
has
struggled
for
decades
financially
and
it's
amazing
to
me
what
they
do
with
the
resources
that
they
have
a
limited
resources.
E
Our
position
is
a
Conservancy
and
mine
as
a
CEO
is
how
do
we
improve
those
parks?
How
do
we
do
it
in
a
stronger
partnership
with
the
city?
It
is
not
about
us
as
a
Conservancy
driving
what
the
city
does
it's.
How
do
we
work
together
and
partnership,
and
that
has
been
the
work
that
we've
done
over
a
twenty
three
year
history
we
have
raised
over
124
million
that
has
gone
back
into
the
city
parks.
Any
of
the
improvements
we
do
are
owned
by
the
city.
E
We
don't
own
a
single
asset
of
all
the
dollars
that
we
bring
in
and
has
all
gone
back
and
owned
by
the
city.
Yes,
we
may
manage
and
operate
elements
of
the
park
system,
but
we
don't
own
anything.
They
are
publicly
owned
by
the
residents
and
owned
by
the
city,
and,
yes,
parks
are
for
everyone.
I
am
a
public
sector.
Employee
person
I
have
worked
in
the
public
sector
over
30
years
in
my
career
I'm,
a
firm
believer
that
parks
are
public
spaces
and
need
to
be
retained
as
public
spaces.
E
Absolutely
critical
I
also
believe,
as
director
Chapman
said,
that
the
history
of
investments,
not
only
here
but
in
every
urban
system
in
the
country,
is
that
neighborhood
parks
don't
have
the
resources
that
regional
parks
have
the
ability
for
them
to
generate
revenue
from
other
sources
and
neighborhood
parks
simply
isn't
there.
You
know
and
I
think
a
good
descriptor
of
the
differential
here
is
the
resources
that
are
available
to
maintain
our
regional
parks.
We
have
69
mike,
has
69
full-time
maintenance
employees
to
maintain
five
regional
parks.
E
He
has
33
full-time
employees
to
maintain
a
hundred
and
sixty
parks,
which
are
the
non
regional
parks.
That
disparity
is
striking
of
the
need
for
investments
in
our
neighborhood
parks.
The
work
that
we
have
been
done
have
been
doing
throughout
the
time
that
I
have
been
in
here
has
been
absolutely
in
partnership
with
the
city.
E
We've
worked
closely
with
DPW
staff
city
park
staff,
OMB
planning
throughout
the
whole
process
in
terms
of
analyzing,
the
data
making
sure
if
there
were
discrepancies
that
we
would
work
through
those
so
that
the
information
that's
going
out
to
the
public
has
been
done
in
partnership.
Yes,
I
may
be
leading
the
presentations,
but
at
every
meeting
there
is
a
city
staff
person
and
in
in
deference
to
Mike,
you
know
before
we
started
the
meetings.
I
asked
him
he
wanted
to
present
with
me.
E
He
said
no,
he
would
rather
just
be
there
to
answer
questions
so
I
just
want
to
provide
that
clarification
as
well.
I
also
believe
really
strongly
that
parks
and
urban
communities
are
critical
to
the
well-being
of
residents.
Documentation.
Research
demonstrates
the
importance
of
how
important
it
is
that
people
live
with
an
in
10
minute
walk
of
a
park
that
their
health
is
better.
Their
ability
to
connect
with
their
neighbors
is
better.
E
I
can
provide
you
ton
of
research
about
that
how
it
improves
environmental
sustainability,
improves
air
quality
water
quality,
which
are
major
issues
in
the
city
because
of
investments
in
parks.
There
was
a
study
done
in
Philadelphia
of
two
neighborhoods
one
neighborhood
that
had
had
tree
canopy
in
their
neighborhood
another
that
had
very
little
tree
canopy.
The
temperature
difference
in
the
summer
in
those
two
neighborhoods
was
twenty
degrees,
so
parks
are
not
just
about
people
but
they're
also
about
what
they
do
for
communities
and
neighborhoods.
E
They
drive
economic
development
in
cities,
they
strengthen
a
city,
and
so
from
that
perspective,
parks
are
really
integral
to
the
livelihood
of
a
city
and
how
well
cities
do
and
how
residents
how
well
residents
do
in
cities,
and
so
our
attempt
and
our
work
from
the
very
beginning
when
Meg
Cheever
started
the
Pittsburgh
parks
Conservancy
was
how
can
we
improve
the
parks
in
the
neighborhoods
that
people
live
in?
How
can
we
assist
the
city
with
making
the
parks
what
they
used
to
be?
E
You
know
one
of
the
things
I
hear,
often
and
all
the
public
meetings
that
go
our
seniors,
who
remember
the
parks
when
they
were
in
great
shape
and
remember
what
they
did
as
kids
and
want
the
parks
for
their
kids
and
their
grandkids
to
be
what
they
were
when
they
were
kids,
and
so
that
really
is
all
of
our
attempt
is
to
make
these
improvements
in
our
parks
so
that
people
have
resources
that
are
make
their
lives
better.
Director.
D
I
was
only
going
to
come
to
answer
some
questions,
though
there
being
be
directed
in
my
way,
but
I
think
I
need
to
speak.
To
some
of
the
comments
made
is
that
we've
had
a
great
relationship
with
the
parks
Conservancy
over
the
years.
I
would
not
say
that
the
tail
wagging
the
dog
we
we
are
the
driving
force
behind
most
of
the
capital
work
and
other
projects
take
off
until
both
parties
bring
the
funding
to
the
table.
D
Yes,
there's
a
few
projects
where
the
Conservancy
had
a
real
initiative,
a
to
start
with
their
signature
projects
in
each
of
the
parks,
but
you
know
the
the
projects
don't
happen
until
we
both
agree
on
the
scope
of
work
and
the
funding
is
there,
so
you
know
Westinghouse
memorial
stands
out.
You
know
we
had
the
funding
in
place
but
needed
that
the
Conservancy
raised
the
other
million
dollars
it
took
a
while
to
do
that,
and
that
project
did
not
happen
until
they
raised
the
money.
So
we
believe
it.
F
D
Addition
to
other
things
was
to
help
raise
the
capital
dollars
to
help
improve
our
parks
and
we
believe
they're
continuing
to
do
that.
Additionally,
they've
provided
so
many
other
things
with
regards
to
our
staff.
They've,
taken
our
staff
on
to
other
cities,
the
city,
how
other
maintenance
operations
work,
they've
taken
our
employees
have
gone
to
ogle
B
to
be
educated
in
terms
of
a
parks,
maintenance
management
school.
So
they
helped
in
so
many
ways
where
the
city
wasn't
able
to
help
provide
that
funding.
B
H
H
H
E
H
H
I
mean
so
this
is
I
mean
you
know
we
can
call
the
Allegheny
County
actually
looked
on
the
Allegheny
County
Elections
department
site
now,
because
it's
now
they're
in
charge
of
it
right,
because
the
petitions
were
collected
and
submitted
so
elegant
county
elections
has
to
put
it
on
the
ballot
exactly
the
way
it
appeared
at
the
top
of
every
petition.
Yeah
and
I've
actually
was
like
texting.
My
staff
and,
like
somebody,
get
me
the
sentence
or
two,
because
this
is
I,
think
it's
important.
You
know
we
we
typically
read.
B
H
H
Great
yeah,
if
we
don't
mind,
I
wrote
down
a
couple
effects
that
I
thought
were
also
kind
of
worthy
of
repeating
I
think
miss
Miller.
You
said
five
rad
parks
have
sixty
nine
full-time
employees
director
and
then
there's
like
185
neighborhood
parks
and
we
only
have
39
full-time
employees.
A
assigned.
H
So
I
just
want
to
you
know
I
think
also
be
sure
to
say
that
we
do
all
feel
the
need
every
day,
the
the
under
resourcing
of
our
state
of
our
parks,
the
lack
of
support
for
recreation
programming,
I,
not
only
think
we
should
be
maintaining
our
ball
fields
better
I
wish.
We
could
support
these
citizen
leagues,
right,
I,
think
it's
a
shame
that
the
onus
and
all
the
budget
and
the
fundraising
and
the
volunteer
time
is
on
the
sports
leagues,
who
provide
so
much
important.
Programming,
councilman,
Smith
and
I
also
always
share
this.
H
For
those
parks,
but
it
is
the
job
of
this
table
to
make
decisions
about
what
is
the
right
use
of
funds
not
just
for
parks
but
also
for,
for
example,
other
kinds
of
Public
Health
like
replacing
lead
water
service
lines,
creating
public
safety
around
issues
with
policing,
creating
affordable
housing
opportunities,
making
sure
that
we
have
equity
across
a
variety
of
social
issues,
and
that
is
why
we
have
local
government
and
if
you
are
not
elected,
then
the
citizen
doesn't
have
the
right
to
come.
Yell
at
you
right
and
they
do
have
the
right
to
come.
H
Yell
at
us.
That's
why
we're
here
right?
They
elect
us
or
they
unelect
us,
and
that's
why
we
have
this
room
and
that's
why
we
have
these
kinds
of
hearings,
and
so
it
gives
me
pause
to
say
that,
like
any
other
advocacy
group-
yes,
you,
your
job
is
to
advocate
for
the
parks,
and
we
have
grateful
for
the
many
years
of
again
the
design-build
and
fundraising
that
has
been
a
great
partnership
and
for
the
park.
The
acreage
of
park
that
we're
very,
very
proud
of
that
is
really
an
asset.
H
It
really
is
an
asset
for
the
whole
region
and
it's
a
it's
an
asset
for
the
city
for
generations.
To
come.
I
will
reiterate
that
I
am
cautious
about
what
I've
heard
today
about
their
already
existing
operate
and
maintain
leases.
Basically,
the
franchising
in
a
way
of
park
space
that
is
beyond
City
Council
control,
right
I,
don't
think
that
City
Council
or
any
city
city
employee
issued
the
permit
for
the
Schenley
Plaza
to
close
for
a
wedding
recently
right
was
that
part.
Was
that
permitting
or.
E
H
H
So
this
is
them
this
is.
This
is
new
information
to
me.
I'm
glad
I
asked
the
question
so
again.
So
if
you
want
to
have
your
wedding
in
any
public
building
or
place
or
Street
or
any
place,
then
you
go,
it
would
be
like
just
to
the
submitted.
You
can
find
it
on
the
city
website.
The
Special
Events
Committee.
D
J
D
K
H
Right
so
this
is
maybe
part
of
the
confusion,
then
again
I,
don't
think
and
again
I'm
gonna
ask
our
clerk's
office
right.
There's
their
job
is
to
keep
all
public
record
preserved
for
in
perpetuity
right.
We've
got
the
records
from
200
years
ago,
and
we've
got
the
records
from
yesterday.
So
I'm,
assuming
or
maybe
I
will
ask
here
publicly.
Do
they
have
a
copy
of
that
coop
agreement?
H
H
D
I
mean
we
have
brought
very
minor
agreements
up.
We
believe
it's
it's
councils
right
to
know
who
are
entering
into
agreements
with
I
can't
speak
for
prior
administrations.
I
can
only
speak,
I've
only
been
the
director
since
2014
and
I
can
assure
you.
We
are
bringing
our
agreements
up
to
Council
for
you
to
all
approve.
H
No,
we
have,
but
we
can
take
this
offline,
but
it
is
an
avenue
that
I
don't
want
to
have
entirely
offline.
We
don't
have
to
cover
it
all
today,
but
there
have
been
many
resolutions
that
I've
been
uncomfortable
with
because
it
said
pre
authorizing
the
administration
to
enter
into
a
cooperative
agreement
and
I've
said
I'm
I'm,
asking
I'm
uncomfortable
with
this
and
again
I.
There
is
a
there's.
H
I've
been
harping
on
this
a
little
while
about
kind
of
contracting
and
how
these
decisions
are
made
and
sure
if
it's
just
about
like
which
face
painter,
is
going
to
show
up
at
what
time?
For
the
art
cart,
we
don't
need
to
be
all
that
nettie
to
use
a
Pittsburgh,
we're
right.
That
is
not
the
role
of
City
Council,
but
when
it
is
about
leasing,
if
we're
going
to
have
this
threshold
that
needs
to
be
aired
and
discussed
about
how
far'd?
H
Where
are
we
putting
this
line
in
the
sand
between
what
a
partner
does
and
what
it
the
public
needs
to
know,
then
those
agreements
need
to
be
on
the
record
and
if
they
are,
and
we
just
haven't,
been
able
to
find
them,
then
let's
find
them
and
and
know
all
know
where
they
are.
I
also
have
off
of
the
perks
Conservancy
website
just
placed
in
front
of
me,
but
a
wonderful
council
Stafford
from
councilman
cog,
Hills
office,
the
actual
language
so
I
have
the
clerk,
read
the
staff
real.
H
A
My
name
is
Lee's
Chris
supervisory
clerk.
This
is
from
the
PPC
website.
Shall
the
Pittsburgh
homeroom
charter
homeroom
charter
be
amended
to
establish
a
dedicated
Parks
trust
fund,
beginning
in
the
2020
to
improve,
maintain,
create
and
operate
public
parks
improve
park
safety
equitably
fun
parks
and
underserved
neighborhoods
throughout
this
Pittsburgh
be
funded
with
an
additional
0.5
mill
levy,
$50
on
every
100,000
of
assessed,
real
estate
value,
secure,
matching
funds
and
services
from
a
terrible
city,
parks,
Conservancy
and
a
sure
citizen
participation
and
full
public
disclosure
of
spending.
A
H
J
Just
say
a
few
things
I'm
happy
for
anyone
to
respond
or
not
it.
These
aren't
really
questions
but
I'm,
not
someone
who
will
talk
and
not
let
you
respond
I'm
happy
to
have
you
respond,
because
this
is
the
conversation
so
generally
I
I
really
believe
in
the
power
and
and
the
importance
of
parks.
I
am
privileged
to
live
in
a
location
where
I
have
and
I
chose
to
live
in
a
location
and
buy
a
house
that
has
access
to
green
space
and
parks.
J
They
happen
to
be
regional
parks,
and
so
you
know,
they're
beautiful
is
gently
and
Frick
Park.
It's
incredible
that
I
get
to
spend
four
to
five
days
a
week
there
and
I
understand
that
this
referendum
asks,
for
you
know
in
some
ways
the
most
privileged
it's
an
equalising
effective
for
those
who
are
the
most
privileged
and
have
the
most
to
be
able
to
help
those
with
the
least
and
to
provide
increase
in
funding
to
parks
that
that
are
don't
receive.
J
We've
really
really
want
those
families.
Here
we
really
want
that
constituency
here
and,
and
it
does
hurt
our
attractiveness,
so
I
get
all
of
these
things,
and
so
I'm
just
gonna
have
to
continue
to
to
look
at
the
numbers.
Think
about
this
talk
to
as
many
people
as
possible,
because
I
see
both
sides
here.
I'll
also
just
say
that
I
do
wish.
The
process
had
been
a
little
bit
different.
It's
echoing
a
little
bit
of
what
Councilwoman
Kael
Smith.
You
were
saying
and
the
started
as
a
listening
session,
and
it
was
a
listening
session.
J
We
heard
you
here's
what
we're
reporting,
but
here's
also
us
selling
you
on
the
idea
of
a
ballot
initiative,
even
if
it
was
sort
of
unspoken
it
to
me.
You
know
I
think
it
would
have
been
really
helpful
had
it
had
the
listening
session
played
out
in
in
full
and
then
perhaps
you
know
an
effort
to
raise
as
much
money
outside
of
taxpayer
dollars
as
possible
and
then
perhaps
a
future
election,
this
being
raised
as
a
possibility
when
all
other
options
were
exhausted,
understand
I,
don't
know
Ivan
party
to
these
discussions.
J
I
understand
Oh
doesn't
always
work
that
way
that
sometimes
you
know
trying
to
leverage
funds
from
one
place
results
in
the
need
for
action
now
in
another
way.
So
I
understand
that
that
could
have
been
the
case,
but
that's
just
kind
of
my
view
from
the
outside,
but
ultimately
I'm
a
champion
of
parks
and
I
want
every
child
in
this
city
to
be
able
to
have
access
to
green
space
and
beautiful
parks.
J
I
want
every
person
in
this
city
to
have
access
to
parks,
so
I'm
going
to
be
thinking
long
and
hard
about
this
I
understand
that
it's
not
council's
vote.
It's
the
public's
vote,
but
I
also
understand
that
you
know
our
constituents
are
looking
to
us
to
ask
the
question
than
to
make
decisions
and
to
represent
them
in
a
vocal
way.
So,
thank
you
all
for
being
here.
I
really
appreciate
your
time.
K
J
And
that's
you
know,
that's
why
I
was
sort
of
getting
to
the
nitty-gritty
of
in
asking
Chief
Gilman
for
answers
around
safeguards.
You
know
what
there
could
be
all
of
the
best
intentions
now
and
I
actually
fully
trust
that
this
administration
in
the
parks,
Conservancy
and
everyone
you
know
represented
in
this
effort
today-
would
prioritize
equity
I,
don't
have
a
concern
about
today.
I
have
you
know,
potential
concerns
about
the
future
and
an
other
leadership
in
the
future
and
whether
equity
would
be
front
and
center
say
15
20
years
from
now.
That's
that's
my
that's.
B
So
I'm
it's
my
turn
now.
So
thank
you
both
for
being
here
and
for
all
my
colleagues
that
were
here
today
and
thank
you
for
sitting
through
all
this.
But
for
me,
when
I
hear
the
comments
about
equity
and
how
all
neighborhoods
should
have
great
parks.
Well,
some
of
my
most
poor
neighborhoods
have
the
best
parks.
You
know.
Sheridan
has
a
great
huge
Park.
Elliot
has
the
great
overlook.
Mount
Washington,
which
is
CDBG
eligible,
has
a
great
Park
in
with
the
trails
in
Emerald
view
and
ferry.
B
Wood
has
a
great
park,
and
so
those
are
some
of
my
neighborhoods
that
struggle
a
little
bit
more
financially
than
others.
So
I.
Don't
necessarily
think
that
this
is
all
about
equity,
because
I
think
you
have
to
know
the
neighborhood
and
you
have
to
know
the
city
of
Pittsburgh
and
the
district
that
I
represent
to
know
that
there's
some
some
neighborhoods
that
have
some
really
great
parks
and
some
are
more
wealthy.
Neighborhoods,
don't
even
have
a
park,
so
you
know,
like
Ridgemont,
doesn't
even
have
a
playground
or
anything
like
that.
B
B
That's
their
opportunity
to
speak
up
and
have
their
voice
heard,
and
now
you
can
say
that
okay,
your
neighborhood
did
not
your
area
that
you
represent
did
not
vote
for
so
you're
not
voting
for
it,
but
for
you
to
vote
for
a
council
member
to
vote
against
a
referendum
is
saying
we're
not
listening
to
our
constituents.
So
if
you
care
about
this,
you
need
to
get
out
and
vote
one
way
or
the
other.
B
However,
you
feel
about
it
so
because
it's
not
solely
up
to
Council,
because
you
know
I
could
vote
no,
but
eight
other
members
could
vote
in
favor.
So
just
so
you
know
you
have
to
get
out
and
vote,
and
my
concern
is
with
the
library,
tax
I
think
a
lot
of
students
voted
and
we
knew
to
target
the
students
and,
when
Suffolk's
came
into
a
meeting
with
you
director
into
my
office
or
in
to
meet
with
councilman
gross
and
I
and
was
lobbying
in
support.
Well
seem
to
be
lobbying
in
support
of
the
tax.
B
I
think
that
you
know
that
we
know
that
the
university
students
do
use
the
parks,
but
if
the
universities
aren't
paying
for
it,
they
really
want
this
great
park
and
they
really
want.
It
then
put
some
money
up.
I
mean
it's
that
simple.
We
would
be
glad
to
accept
the
money,
I'm
sure
and
I
think
without
our.
B
B
D
K
E
B
E
Have
and
again,
as
chief
of
staff
Gilman
said,
we
have
not
at
all
talked
through
any
of
those
details
again.
That
is
part
if
the
referendum
passes,
we've
talked
through
some
elements
of
an
agreement,
but
that
would
have
to
come
to
City
Council
on
four
key
City
Council's
approval.
If
there
were
any
allocation
of
resources
to
the
Conservancy.
E
B
And
I
do
want
to
say
again:
I
think
that
Pittsburgh
Parks
Conservancy
has
done
a
lot
of
great
things
for
the
city
of
Pittsburgh
and
I.
Think
they
do
a
lot
of
great
things
for
the
parks.
I
would
voluntarily
donate
to
its
purpose,
and
I've
said
this
before
that.
I
think
that
this
is
something
we
should
have
on
the
10.
The
back
of
the
taxes
allow
people
to
voluntary
donate
or
to
have
the
conversation
that
we
need
to
raise
taxes
in
the
city.
B
If
we
really
have
all
these
issues
instead
of
coming
back
and
nickel
and
diming
people
to
death-
and
we
talk
about
the
health
of
people
and
how
great
it
is
to
have
a
park,
there's
there's
no
more
stress
than
having
somebody
ill
or
having
to
worry
about
financing
and
finances.
Your
personal
finances
and
that's
a
stress-
a
park
isn't
going
to
relieve
necessarily
and
so
I
think
that
you
know
we
really.
We
really
have
to
worry
about
our
residents.
We
have
an
aging
population
and
we
have.
B
B
Instead
of
having
the
conversation
that
you
know,
listen,
if
you
want
this
this
and
this
it's
going
to
take
us
to
do
this
with
our
taxes
and
having
an
honest
caught,
an
open
conversation
I'm
not
opposed
to
us.
Having
that
conversation
I
think
we
actually
should
be
talking
to
our
business
about
what
the
real
cost
are
associated
with
some
of
the
things
people
want
to
see
happen.
We
have
a
lot
of
slope
remediation
issues
in
in
district
to
you,
know,
controller
and
you
live
in
the
area
and
it's
going
to
cost
a
lot
of
money.
B
I
think
it's
like
seventy
million
dollars
I'm
like
that
for
that
for
all
the
slope,
remediation
issues
that
we
have
that
money
is
going
to
come
from
somewhere,
and
so
you
know
it
to
me
if
you're
gonna
raise
taxes,
I
want
you
to
raise
it
right
now
to
stabilize
neighborhoods.
You
know
I'd
like
to
see
it's.
You
know
to
stabilize
the
hillsides
that
are
coming
down
all
around
and
I.
B
Think
a
lot
of
our
residents
would
like
to
see
that
too
and
I
think
they
would
probably
be
more
supportive,
but
I
really
think
that
this
is
not
not
the
first
time.
It's
not
the
last
time
that
we're
gonna
see
these
efforts
to
raise
taxes
through
a
referendum
and
I
I.
Think
that
I
like
having
the
longer.
B
The
more
transparent
you
are,
the
better
and
then
I
think
if
presidents
don't
feel
like
they're
being
railroad,
that's
happening
so
quickly.
They
may
actually
be
more
supportive,
but
I've
said
from
the
very
beginning,
I
think
that
residents
have
a
lot
of
questions,
they're
not
being
answered,
and
you
know
accurately
and
they're
not
being
answered
openly.
I.
Think
a
lot
of
them
want
to
have
a
public
conversation
about
this,
and
not
necessarily
where
Pittsburgh
parks,
Conservancy
or
the
city
of
Pittsburgh
is
directing
the
whole
conversation.
I
think
they
want
to
have
have
some
televised
converse.
B
I'll
call
for
it
because
we
have
to
more
than
one
person
sings
saying
something
about
it,
but
I
just
want
to
say
that
for
me,
I,
the
whole
conversation
has
been
how
this
has
rolled
off
in
the
very
beginning,
I
thought
that
it
was
less
I
didn't
think
that
the
numbers
I'd
like
to
know
about
the
numbers
that
you're
presenting
to
the
public
and
where
those
numbers
came
from,
because
when
I
hear
about
Emerald,
View,
Park
and
master
plans,
and
some
of
those
things
are
already
done
and
I'm
thinking.
B
How
are
those
numbers
being
included
and
the
numbers
that
you're
presenting
to
the
public-
and
we
know
we
know
that
there's
some
of
those
projects
are
done
and
so,
when
you're,
giving
numbers
you're
not
giving
to
me
I,
don't
think
they're,
accurate
numbers
and
I
think
I'd
have
to
more
refer
to
the
controller
about
some
of
that.
But
that's
my
biggest
concern
so
I
think
that
we're
probably
gonna
end
up
with
a
public
hearing.