Good afternoon, and welcome to the preagenda interview for Wednesday, March fourth, two thousand twenty-six for Alcassan and Pittsburgh Water.

Would a clerk please read the title of the bill?

Bill one twenty-eight, resolution appointing Shatar Murphy as a board member of the Allegheny County Sanitary Authority for a term to expire January one, twenty thirty-one.

And Bill One Thirty Six Resolution appointing Scott Conka as a member of the Board of Directors of Pittsburgh Water for a term to expire January one, twenty thirty-one.

For the record, we are currently joined by Councilman Schlossberger, Councilman Warwick.

I know Councilman Gross is on her way, and others may join us as well.

If you would first introduce yourself, tell us who you are, tell us why you're willing to serve in this position.

And then once you both have presented, we'll turn over to members for questions.

Now we can.

All right.

Good afternoon.

I'm Chatara Murphy.

I currently serve as the Assistant Vice Chancellor and Executive Lead for Community Connected Economic Strategies at the University of Pittsburgh.

But the focus of my career has really been working in critical roles at the intersection of government, large institutions, and community, and helping to be one of the individuals that really break down systems and policies and help to drive them into outcomes that really improve the quality of life for our residents.

Prayerfully, I will be done in April of 2027.

But I believe that my background and community impact, um, economic stability and economic resilience will make me a good fit for the board.

Um that governance um lens that I bring from my other board service, as well as my time in government and large institutions will be very beneficial as well.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh my name is Scott Kwonka.

I live at 525 Lloyd Street in Point Breeze.

Uh I'm a constituent of Councilman Mosley.

Um I thank you, and I thank the mayor for the consideration for this position.

Uh I've lived in the city since 1974 when I came here to go to the University of Pittsburgh.

I've raised three kids, all of whom went to the Pittsburgh Public School System, and they've all graduated uh from this public school system.

Um I care deeply about the city, and I did spend several decades working here with the city and with the county in various positions, and I hopefully was able to make some sort of an impact during that time, uh almost 30 years with the city, seven years with the county.

And uh I have been retired for almost five years now, and I really would like to continue contributing.

It's something that I missed uh during the retirement.

And um uh when the mayor asked me to join the board, I jumped at the chance.

Um just a way of background.

I retired from the city as a finance and budget director in 2014, and I spent the next seven years at the uh Allegheny County as the chief investment officer.

And some of you may know I also spent seven years as City Council's budget director in a previous iteration.

Um with this appointment, I will have work for seven mayors during my career uh with the city.

Uh I also served on the PWSA board previously for seven years.

Um, and so I'm very familiar with the operations of the authority.

But it has been 12 years since I've been on the board, so there's been plenty of changes, I'm sure, and uh plenty of um changes to the operation.

So what I do pledge is to do my due dil due diligence to study and learn about the current situation.

I think I can offer a fresh set of eyes for the board and for the authority itself.

And I do I don't have any preconceived notions about what is going on.

Uh as I said, I would like to learn, uh study and do what's best.

But the one thing that I have learned during my government service is that the financial means always are less than the needs than the resources that are needed to do uh what's necessary for the city and for the authorities, and in particular with the PWSA, the ratepayers' ability to defund the various items that are that are necessary for the authority in the future.

So having said that, I'm just available for questions at this point in time.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

With that, I will turn over to Councilman Schlossberger.

Thank you very much much, Mr.

President.

Thank you both for your willingness to serve in your respective roles in different agencies and authorities.

And um I you know I welcome both of you at to the table and your um again, thank you for your for the time that you will be putting into these these endeavors.

Um Ms.

Murphy, I will start with you and um understanding that uh uh regardless of the issue area at hand, your understanding of big systems and you know, larger, larger entities, as well as um particularly any entity that has the power to I would imagine, much like Pittsburgh Water, whose board I serve on Alcassand's um meetings will be focused on um the approval of contracts, procurement, and but given your built by build higher local experience in your current um role at the University of Pittsburgh, if you could talk a little bit about um what experience you think you might bring from that to an entity like Alcassan, who I would imagine, I don't want to speak for them, but I would imagine is constantly working to empower the newer um uh bidders, entities, you know, um organizations that could potentially bid on a project and struggle with um the ability to do so with our current sort of ecosystem that we have.

And but given your built by build higher local experience in your current um role at the University of Pittsburgh, if you could talk a little bit about what experience you think you might bring from that to an entity like Alcassan, who I would imagine, I don't want to speak for them, but I would imagine is constantly working to empower the newer bidders, entities, you know, um organizations that could potentially bid on a project and struggle with the ability to do so with our current sort of ecosystem that we have.

What's your vision for helping the organization as an entity not only meet its own standards and goals and meet a you know a quota or percentage, but actually go beyond that and start to to work to build up the capacity of these vendors to bid on projects that could grow in size and grow in in uh in cost to um allow diverse diverse business owners to thrive?

Great question.

Uh, one thing I'm very passionate about is the regional economic stability.

And um I sat through an Augustan board meeting, did not vote, just observed, and you are correct.

There are a lot of procurement contracts that come across the table, and one thing I'm really um focused on is local procurement.

How do we make sure that we are contracting with businesses in our region to make sure that money is staying in Allegheny County, Southwestern Pennsylvania?

And so also too, awareness.

And so people don't know right now what opportunities are available with Alcassan.

And so, how can I, in the seat that I would sit in on the board, make awareness around those opportunities more visible?

And for those that might be struggling in capacity, infrastructure, resources, once that awareness is created, connecting um local vendors with other entities around the county that can help with those capacity building needs.

They are there, the resources are there, they can help them with back office infrastructure, uh, you name it, it's there.

One of the entities is the Institute for Entrepreneur Excellence at the University of Pittsburgh.

They really prepare our businesses, our regional businesses to do business in this region.

And so going at it with that lens, I would just want to make sure that we are really being impactful in how we take our procurement efforts and localize them.

And aside from that, are there any um lenses through which you will approach this role as a board member you think might be additive to the existing board as it stands or or different or um or or the same as others, but something that you're gonna be sort of like this is my the lens through which I'm gonna view my role and my questions and my a lot of workforce and community impact, those are two areas that I'm really focused on as well.

It's great.

That's great.

Um Mr.

Kunka, I uh uh we had the pleasure of meeting recently, I think uh in person, you know, for the first time this last year, and that said, I had heard your I can't tell you how many names of times I've heard your name come up from your successor at uh your immediate successor as a council budget director, and um you know, many of the um many of the ways that we operate um in terms of our budget season has come out of the work that you've done as a council budget director.

So thank you for all your years of service to the city and to various boards and authorities in the past as well.

And um glad to see you uh nominated for this position.

And as a as mentioned as a Pittsburgh Water Board member, you're gonna have to that's gonna be the first thing you get used to is the name change.

But as a Pittsburgh Water Board member myself, um look forward to having all of our seats filled and look forward to, you know, uh, or was happy to see your your nomination.

Um there are you're you're right, you're correct in naming that the there are in the public sphere, there are never enough resources relative to the challenges out there.

And I think one that we see at Pittsburgh Water is despite diverse, you know, significantly diversifying the funding streams, PANVES loans, grants, EPA grants, you name it, to allow for major generational infrastructure projects, um, Aspenwall Pump Station, the Brecken Pump Station, the Clearwell, like the ABC project, the major efforts to eliminate all lead lines throughout the city.

Um there are trade-offs, right?

When you focus on the above ground and underground infrastructure, you know, what are we what are we not able to do?

What are we not able to pursue?

Um as you have talked to current leadership there, as you have maybe witnessed board meetings if you as you've talked to any board members.

So part of the part of the problem has always been that the again that the resources that are needed outweigh the the the funds that are that are available.

I mean the the authority I do know has various programs for people who are unable to pay their bills and and maybe need some help that kind of a situation but I it seems to me that that uh in many cases just spreads the uh the increases over a broader area of other people who may not have paid as much are paying more going forward.

I think that from a front from the financial standpoint where I come from I'm also I also have a degree in science so I do understand the scientific aspects that's that are going on at the authority that the way the authorities budget might be constructed is sort of um maybe it needs to take another another step that where uh rather than looking at what the expenses that are necessary and trying to get the rate structure to to fit into that we need to look at maybe look at more as what resources are available to the authority and then construct the operational expense budget in in that particular fashion.

Again, I mean the Clearwell project we were talking about that 14 years ago and they were talking about that before that kind of a situation.

So I don't um know enough about some of the the the the current um issues let's say that are going on like the uh the consent decree uh uh what what's necessary on the lead lines um even the PUC designation as a sort of a civilian in the last couple of years I I've been unclear as to the pros and cons of that designation and what it what it does and so that's something I'd like to look into.

I don't know that one would one I would imagine and again I don't know all the details for this the the sale of the water system from the city to the authority uh whether there are any opportunities for um um maybe not cost savings but for uh revenue enhancements that go with that and I do know that uh in the past the um the funds exchange between the city and the and the authority at least when I was on the board was from the authority to the city.

And my understanding now that that's that's been changed a little bit that the city is paying for the water and um although I did read something yesterday that maybe the city's kind of uh in arrears in the payments to the authority.

I don't know that uh that was just something that came up.

Um so I I I think that first off the the way the the authority goes about constructing a budget would need to have a need to I would need to take a look at that to see what what can be done in that particular fashion.

I don't know the current um I guess status of the consent degree program and some of the other ones that are there.

So I mean as I mentioned I will do my due diligence and figure out exactly what the best way of going about it is.

I mean I think um myself and other people that I've worked with over the years we've been successful in in in uh being able to squeeze out to squeeze the resources as as much as we can in order to get the most out of what we can do going forward.

So I the the the idea of the I'm torn that I am trying not to have those consistent rate increases every year to the to the to the customers of the authority um I don't know um I can't say exactly what I would do at this particular point in time I have to say that I do know that something that that that came to mind before uh before the hearing here today or the interview was that at the time there was about we conservatives a 50 percent loss of the billable water that came out of the treatment plant.

And then we had uh instituted a program uh to try to identify what where that was coming at and again uh as you well know this the the some of the some of the system is a hundred years old 120 years old there's leaks everywhere and as uh it is apparent you don't know what's happening until something goes wrong and that's when you dig into it and that's why you have all the change orders and things like that that come with uh with the contractors.

It's been a it's been a problem for decades.

And it's particularly with the uh water authority in that the contractors need to have grand skill.

They need to have equipment, they need to have uh employees and to to do this kind of work, and so it kind of uh uh puts the small contractor out of out of the bidding process because they don't have that kind of a scale.

And so how do you do that?

And I think in a lot of cases the programs that are designed or designed to try to alleviate that are going after owners of the businesses rather than it seems to me, who are the businesses employing.

And so it's not just who who who ultimately is is is the the uh uh uh the owner of the company, but if that company is employing uh uh uh uh workers of diversity of of inclusion and they're being paid the fair wage, that that is something that is is I wouldn't say just as good, but it's something that helps alleviate that problem moving forward, and maybe that's something that can be done.

I mean, I I was looking at the um uh I think it was just the agenda.

Maybe on last Friday you had a meeting, maybe it was agenda before that.

Um independent contracting was was on there, I think, and some of the other vendors, they're the same vendors, the same, the same size, the same scope, and so it doesn't uh uh trying to maybe we're trying to go about it in the in a in a maybe it makes sense to go about it in a different fashion.

Now I'm not sure uh how that can be done.

I don't think there should be any problem with the authority asking who these people who the contractors are employing.

Um so maybe that's something as uh at the very least a temporary stopgap to try to address that issue moving forward.

And um I don't know uh again I'll have to um really analyze the budget.

I haven't had a chance to do that to see where savings can be made, where where things can be done um and that's basically it at this point.

Sure, sure.

I um you know we we have just lost a l a lot of institutional memory on our board uh with the retirement of Alec Shuly, who of course was, you know, um engineer at the City of Pittsburgh, ran the water department, and then you know, consulted with Pittsburgh Water before becoming a board member.

Um I'm wondering if there's anything that you uh you're not Alex Shrewley, and that's okay.

But is there anything that you think you bring from your experience both at the city and and and board that you could apply to uh in terms of institutional memory or an uh I I hear what you're saying about no preconceived notions and that there's been a 12-year gap and that's I think that's sometimes helpful, but um is there anything that you think you're gonna do.

Yeah, I mean, I thought I wanted to mention here.

And the man the main thing was from from the financial standpoint was a sort of uh uh uh topsy turvy way of of of budgeting, and that is you know, what are our needs, and then we'll we'll set our rights structure in order to handle that.

And I think it really, and we did that with the city for many years in the city budgets, uh what is what are the resources that you do have available to you and how do you do the best that you can with those particular resources?

Uh the the water loss problem, I'm not sure whether that's that's ever been addressed or it's been addressed uh um satisfactorily at this particular point in time.

Um, Alex was a professional uh engineer and and had a grasp of running the authority.

When I first went on to the board some years ago, um it really wasn't that uh um uh there was a there was it wasn't professionally run, and we were trying to get to a situation where we can make that happen.

We tried to learn how to run a water authority.

And that was uh uh something that we tried to do um for for whatever whatever reasons we weren't able to continue at that particular point in time and there was a new administration came in and and there was uh uh changes going forward.

Um I think sometimes it might be uh that that in my case that I will remember what it was that was going on.

Now that I have a chance to learn and find out what the new systems are, that maybe there's some ways to go about it.

I don't have I haven't had a chance to analyze the budget that completely yet at this particular point in time.

But I think that that understanding that the authority and the authorities of the city are not they're quasi-independent, they're not independent agencies, that they're part of the they're part and parcel of the city government, and ultimately that they are responsible or are and should be responsive to city council and to the mayor of the city.

And that's something that uh I think sometimes gets lost at the authority level as to who the ultimate beneficiaries are of their of their services.

Um I'm gonna ask this question because I want to make sure to have it on on the record um because it's something I care about.

And I know that that my colleagues will be asking about this too, um, maybe in more detail.

But so for the record, there one of the biggest threats to water authorities, potentially more so smaller authorities in more rural areas across the state and those who have are not on the financial footing that Pittsburgh Water finds itself on, the strong financial footing, I would say.

That said, one of the biggest threats still remains this sort of march of privatization, acquire acquisition or state laws that would force acquisition or force privatization by some authorities to larger privatized.

Can you clarify for us where you stand on privatizing water authorities?

I'm not for that.

I don't think it's necessary, and uh I would be against that moving forward for sure.

I think it ought to remain in the hands of the uh uh of the citizens of Pittsburgh.

Okay.

Thank you.

That's uh there's all my questions for now, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilman Woolworth.

Yeah, thank you.

Thanks both of you for for being here.

So um I'll um I'll start out.

Well, I'm just just sort of have like some topics, and I think that they maybe apply to both I mean apply to both in some cases and not and not in others, but I'll let you answer.

So um the the um the first one just overall is stormwater management and flood mitigation, right?

I live in four mile run, I represent Greenfield Hazelwood, right?

And we we have um in in my neighborhood in particular, we've had you know extensive flooding issues.

Um uh PWSA is currently doing some mon so we had a very large flood mitigation project that then was defunded um in after that, um, which would have been nice if it had happened before, but at any rate, so now they're um PWSA is monitoring there was a um an outfall rebuild in Hazelwood or uh off off into the Mon that may have helped fix the problem, we don't know.

But at any rate um so I wanted to ask about that just in terms of of your understanding of kind of the needs, right, that need to be met.

And I know that Alcassan, of course, has the clean water plan, which is with the tunnel system.

One of those the project is also going to be on the Mon, right in in Hazelwood.

Um I know that that's way down the line, 2030 or so, but comes sooner than you think.

And um, and then sort of as part of that, you know, there's this stormwater fee, of course, that everyone's paying.

And my understanding is that the store and to you know, it is part of their PWSA bill, uh, but that that stormwater fees like goes in, my understanding is goes into the general fund is not actually directed towards stormwater.

So just on the overall topic, and I'll let you both speak to that.

It's not really a question, but more just to hear what you have to say.

Yeah.

So when it comes to major projects like that, uh the first question that I asked, and um we will have a follow-up meeting myself and the uh executive director.

I wanted to know what was the community input process.

Um if there was any feedback that was given, can I review it?

Uh what are they doing with that feedback?

What leaders have they spoke to?

How are we being responsible with the community voice as we prepare to take on these larger projects?

So once I get that information, I think I'll have more of an opinion on the clean water project.

Okay.

Um the four mile run problem predates everybody on at this table at this particular point in time.

My understanding is, as you mentioned, that there is no funding in it in there that it's in the capital budget, but it's not funded at this particular point in time to get there.

So I don't know exactly what the details are behind that, why why that came to be or whatever the situation is.

The I I I call it the consent decree.

Uh well, let's go to the stormwater management fee.

That was always something that we spoke about.

Um glad it was implemented.

I'm not sure where uh how how it's determined at this point in time or where the money goes.

That's something that I'm more than willing to look at and see as we move forward in the budget, uh, whether it should be used one would think that it would be specifically if it's specifically charged for that purpose, it would use be used only for that purpose.

But I don't know exactly how the budgetary system works at this particular point in time.

And from a um uh from the standpoint uh I call it the consent decree.

I think you use a different uh uh term for it.

Um my understanding is that the ultimately the solution is to build big tunnels on both sides of the river to hold the waste product until until the rivers go down and can be sent to Alcassad.

And it seems to me that maybe there could be better or there might be better ideas to make that work.

And uh rather than uh I think the city had just spent the last 30 years, 40 years developing the the side the on both sides of the river, the river fronts and everything like that to come in and dig these gigantic holes, these like gigantic tunnels.

Um it seems to me that we might we should be able to come up with something a little bit better.

I don't know all the details.

I don't know where the the um the progress on the plan currently is.

So that's something I'll have to look at.

Pardon me?

I understand that there, you know, so um okay, yeah.

Well, so I mean I will definitely ask.

So I mean, as far as the the four-mile run project itself, right.

So it was funded, then it the money was moved elsewhere.

Uh again, currently it is um the monitoring is being done to see if the if the M29 outfall actually helped resolve the problem, right?

We don't know that yet.

But I I will say there has not been a severe flood since 2021.

But there also hasn't been the type of storm right above, right?

Right, you know.

Um I will say uh over the years um as far as the community input, it it has really evolved, right?

I mean, there's but been lots of community input, but it sort of evolved from back when I first moved to Pittsburgh, just kind of being like, fix it, you know.

That was the input, fix it.

But um but now, you know, there's actually a whole group.

I'll introduce you to Annie Quinn at the Mon Water Project if you haven't met her already.

Both of you, you know, you should meet with her.

She has lots of ideas around just um stormwater mitigation and all and and you know making our rivers cleaner and all that good stuff.

Um so I'm uh happy to make that connection.

Um project that I wanted to just highlight for for both of you.

And and also, you know, as far as the Alcassan project I again I recognize this is 2030, this is down the road, but definitely to to have the community engaged in how how that's you know, how that's progressing would be a good thing.

You know, just just to kind of I don't think that to be honest, I don't think that folks are really keyed into that at all.

It's sort of maybe they've heard of it, but they don't know, you know, so so as that as that moves forward.

Um I'd like to ask about Panther Hollow Lake.

So there is a lake in Shenley Park.

You know, it's Panther Hollow Lake.

It is um, you know, back in the day, everyone had, you know, sort of old school Pittsburgh has very fond memories of like, you know the boathouse and all this cool stuff that was down there.

It's like a nice asset in Shenley Park.

Uh but it also was part of this original stormwater mitigation plan.

Um, which by the way, my understanding is that plan is the the design for the plan is like 90 percent done.

It just didn't get you know, the the funding just went away.

And and and I know that Alex Shuly had said that it is perhaps that perhaps the plan was more complicated and more expensive than the results.

That you know, like as bang for your buck was sort of the concern there.

But at any rate, um Panther Hollow Lake uh feels to me like a project that you know, in addition to, you know, if we fix the lake, whatever needs to happen.

I mean, in and in it and it might be complicated, right?

But um fixing the lake could both improve the storm, you know, stormwater issues and also bring back an asset to the city.

Uh but it will take a lot of collaboration, right, between PWSA and the city.

So it it it it we and with our state partners in terms of funding and all of that, but there is lots of movement around that project right now.

So I don't know if you have any thoughts, but I just wanted wanted you both to be aware of it.

I I don't know that I don't know the current state of that situation, so I'd have to study it, yes.

Yeah.

So I mean right now the lake is the dam is blocked and it's you know the fish all die.

I mean it's you know, and when it rains heavily the lake overflows.

It's it's a bit of a mess.

So clearly any water that is stopped before it gets the it gets the the run is going to be better for the for the community.

Right.

And even the outfalls, the the I under my recollection of the problem was you can have the outfall, the the outfall that sends the water to the river, but if the river is high, then basic physics says the water can't come back out.

You know, so I don't know that there's been any further progress on engineering solutions in that fashion.

So I don't know what the current state of those those projects are at this point in time.

Yeah.

I mean the outfall, again, I don't be I'm not obviously an engineer, but um in that repair was also something to keep the river water from going backwards into the system when the river then you would you would you would block the river water, then it blocks the other water coming back from the from the run itself.

So at any rate, I mean the the city's built in hills and valleys, so that's always going to be a problem.

Yeah.

And um and I I actually watched the hearing here yesterday or the interviews yesterday, and it was mentioned several times and it's it's always been the city's built for six hundred thousand people.

The infrastructure of the city is built for six hundred thousand people, but there's only three hundred thousand people that are they're paying the bills.

And so that obviously is a disconnect right there to get to go there.

Yeah.

Yeah.

But um at any rate though, but Panther Hollow Lake has been uh uh you know, at least the community also sort of the water experts around kind of see that as like low-hanging fruit, something that could be fixed, beautified.

I mean, but again, in partnership with Parks Conservancy and the city and everybody, you know, if if everybody could kind of come together, including our state partners for for for funding, you know, um that that could be a beginning to the solution, at least.

Um I also have Oh yeah.

Um so one thing, and I I think this actually applies both to to Alcastan and PWSA since the bills come together, correct?

Both the bills come through via PWSA, but it's correct.

Both bills on the same bill.

Um so this is something I've said uh a few different times, and um I'll I'll let you respond.

But again, as board members, it's something I think that you may have yeah, well that you s certainly would have some control over.

So right now we are seeing folks who are getting evicted for not paying their water bill.

And uh the reason for that is that unlike the electric bill or or even the gas, you know, the gas bill, the w the water bill is attached to the property.

So if the tenant isn't paying the bill, the landlord is getting the you know what I mean, and getting notices and like oh the bill's going up and up and up, and so it becomes a dispute between the landlord and the tenant about paying the water bill.

And um, you know, we're putting so much money and effort into making sure that people can stay in their homes and fighting it, you know what I mean, eviction prevention and all of this stuff.

Um and the other aspect of that is that the or or sort of the other um result of that is that because the tenant because of this issue of the water bill, oftentimes the landlord is just saying, I'll pay the water bill.

You don't pay the water bill, like I don't want to deal with a tenant who isn't paying their water bill, and I don't want to deal with PWSA and you know an unpaid water bill.

So the landlord is just saying, I'll just pay the bill, it'll be in my name, and then they're of course passing the cost on in terms of rent, but then the tenant is not getting the rebate, or lower income tenants are not getting the rebate.

Yeah, they're not getting the I mean they can, but the landlord has to sign up and it's kinda and they just it just doesn't happen much of the time.

So I wanted to just sort of present that dilemma to you.

If you have any thoughts, but you know, as board members.

Uh I just feel like it's another system that has been designed to set people up for failure.

You know, and how do we go about making that change?

And so is there a way that we can utilize the income of the tenant of the house, you know, for a different application.

And maybe if the water bill has to stay in the landlord's name, but they can prove that this is a rental property.

How do we then show that the tenant who lives there is low income and does actually qualify for these programs?

They are there.

The programs are designed to support the people, but the barriers are in place to prevent individuals from actually taking advantage, taking advantage of programs that were designed for them.

I mean, I think sometimes it's that the you know the landlord calls and says this is the and then the you know PWSA says, well, your tenant should sign up for this thing.

But the I mean, much of the time, especially in is that the tenant and the landlord are this is not like a always uh friendly relationship, right?

The landlord's just like I you know what, I just want to do that.

And if the water bill paid, like what do I have to do?

And oftentimes the response from PWSA is you have to file for eviction, in which case everybody goes down to the magistrate.

And that just isn't, you know.

Yeah, and you have to actually show the bills in for some of these programs.

And if the bill is not in your name, if it's in your landlord's name, again, it's another barrier.

So again, it's just system design, and we have to advocate for redesigning the system.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Okay.

Well, thank you.

I just wanted to bring that up because I, you know, when when when we talk with it's something I uh I bring up over and over.

It does feel like something that should be adjusted, right?

If the other utility I mean, it just feels like the bill, and I understand like that is PWSA's kind of it's the lean on the property.

That's the ultimate, that's like the end.

The end is is having that lien on the property.

Um, but i I it would be curious to even analyze like what are those property, I mean, what what does that bring to PWSA versus just having a bill that goes with the tenant and then you know, if the tenant moves saying, okay, well, if you want to turn your water on, then you'd have to connect with PWSA and like figure out a payment plan for this bill, and you know, um research project.

Yeah, thanks.

And uh the last question I have is um because there was uh there was an article in this past December in public source.

This was uh uh around PWSA, and I don't know actually the process at Alcassan.

Um, but it was around transparency in the budget process.

Um so there were concerns, you know, of course, at the city, well, we have city council, so you know, there's like a preliminary budget, and then everybody talks about the budget and it's out there and people give comment and like all this, you know what I mean?

And then um, and then the final budget so um is passed by count but but also would be the board in this situation.

So um if you haven't read the article, I recommend it, but I just wanted to know if you had any thoughts about ways that we could increase transparent because with rates going up, you know what I mean?

People want to know, you know, like as rates go up, they really do, you know, whether they look at it or not, it's just knowing that it's there and to be able to say, you know, we all get to give input into this budget.

Well, I think that the budgeting process will be as transparent as the board members want it to be.

And uh if the board members aren't asking for the details that are necessary to understand that budget, then they need to do that.

Then that would be my idea on the board.

And I'm not sure exactly how the budgeting process has worked in the last few years, um, whether it's done through subcommittees or things like that.

But the board's small enough, just like city council that uh everyone can be involved, I believe, in uh um th those budget processes.

And and it it's it I think it's best for everyone not to have sort of a sub-area of expertise because one will need to understand not just the finances but the but the engineering, but the customer service, but the billing, everything needs to go into that particular plot.

So um I don't I have not read that article, but as I said, I think the transparency uh can be as transparent as the board members want, which is something that I would be advocating for.

Yeah, I mean I think that was the gist of the article was that like at the board meetings, which are of course public, right?

Like it the discussions had clearly already happened, right?

Like before inside and so that it was just like here's the budget, and um without I mean, and and really to go back to the formal, you know, that that money being moved, it it was it was a done deal before anybody had a chance to comment on it, you know, um from the public, even even uh for myself.

But um, yeah, so I I definitely recommend taking a look at that article, just especially with the rates going, you know, as as rates go up.

Um it the public should have a chance to at least see what's being proposed and and understand the conversations rather than just like you know, a yes vote.

I mean, to the extent they want to, but you know.

Right.

Um I think that's it for me.

Uh I don't know if I'll think of anything else, but I'm I'm glad to have you both or uh you know, I was sorry, we we just met, but I know we know each other well from um you know working in Hazelwood and obviously constituent.

Are you still constituent?

Yeah, still constituent.

Okay.

Um anyway, that's it for me.

Thank you very much.

Housewoman Gross.

Hi, thank you both for being here.

Um I'm glad we talked a little bit about stormwater.

I'm glad we talked a little bit about privatization.

I'm glad we talked a little bit about kind of like what are the remaining infrastructure challenges and the complicated kind of relationship between both City Council and PWSA and Al Cassan and the consent decree and what to do about these issues.

When I first took office, it was actually in December of 2013.

So I was here with Councilman Bill Peduto sitting right next to me for one month while it was still the rate the last month of the Ravenstall administration.

And then I was appointed to the PWSA board um, I think my first board meeting was maybe April or May of 2014.

So there had been no board for a few months.

I think they had asked all of the previous board members to step down and they did, and then there were no board meetings for several months, and then we kind of got to our first board meeting as all new board members, Paul Leger and myself and others.

And Veolia.

I think the executive director was a direct employee of Veolia.

The chief engineering officer was a direct employee of Violia.

The chief operating officer was a direct employee of Violia.

It was like the top five people of the org chart, the entire, you know, top of the org chart, because we are still under that Ravenstall lease.

Um and um or Ravensdall era lease, where Mr.

Kirko, you were on the board that signed that lease.

Yes.

I mean it wasn't a lease, it was um it was a firm, a management firm to help us.

It's technically an operate and maintain lease where you are asking a private corporation to run your system to run the organization.

Um that was not the intention at the time.

That was the result.

Well, well, that the that the intention at the time was, as I I was alluding to it earlier, was that there was a lack of management capability at the authority with the employees that were there.

Well, I'm talking about 2014.

So what we what the idea was that it's not really actually the question.

Okay.

So the question is um when we have privatization of operations, right?

The result from that lease was that we had crumbling infrastructure because they did not invest in the infrastructure that the the board and the the authority during the Veolia operated maintain lease, um, did not invest in infrastructure, did have a kind of um incentives structure in that contract where if they had money savings, then they got to take like 20% of the money savings, right?

So save a million dollars off the operating costs, they get 200,000 of it.

It wasn't just savings, it was uh protivity improvements and national improvements.

Absolutely was.

And um and so what they did was like fire the water quality department.

So that was a cost savings that they claimed um profit from.

Basically, it was a giant mess.

We all spent as a board several years um cleaning it up.

So there was um you know, crumbling infrastructure.

There was an entire mess of an implementation of smart metering that ended up with thousands of inaccurate bills across the system.

Uh thousands.

I was getting hundreds of them from my own council district where people were getting charged, you know, in the thousands, right?

So there were thousands of constituents getting bills in the thousands.

Um and they were inaccurate because it was literally just gobbledygook data being sent and the the reading of the water, the data from the water bills.

We've had entire post agendas on it.

You feel free to watch them.

Um, you know not translating into the accounting and billing system.

Um so then there was um we as we roll into kind of 2016, we had the Flint water crisis um where we learned that people in Flint, Michigan were being poisoned by their water quality.

Veolia was in control of that water system.

Um the state of Michigan had put Veolia in charge of that water um authority.

And they had switched the water source, created alkalinity throughout the system, which leached the lead out of the water pipes and um caused you know outrageously high parts per billion lead.

And we we lived through that same crisis and had to clean that up.

And so we sued the Vilio and got rid of them.

So I am wondering what is what do you think is the lesson.

The idea behind the contract with the Violia was that we did not have the expertise to run a water system.

And that was the problem with the crumbling infrastructure and the uh behind the times sort of operation.

The contract, the original contract with Violia was for them to teach us how to run a a water authority, how to run a water system and to bring in subject matter experts to that the that the PWSA did not have at that particular point in time.

And there was a problem with the uh uh the director of the PWSA that he needed to resign and there wasn't any succession plan that was was in place from a previous administration.

So the idea was to bring in someone, a company that and we there was a robust uh PF uh uh RFP process, uh all the members of the board, including uh I think your predecessor, Councilman Dowd, um uh at the time, who was not a uh um i it was Councilman Dowd was a man who uh uh was not shy about his opinions and we all came to an agreement that we did not have an uh the proper personnel to run the authority and we wanted to be taught how to do that.

And the contract itself, if you go back to the original contracts was for them to produce operating manuals for each section of the authority, whether that was the billing, whether that was customer service, whether it was the engineering for us to have as as templates for city employed authority employees to run the system after they left.

There was a temporary contract that was supposed to be there at the particular point in time.

When the new administration came in, the Violia was then that's when they became the r the operators of the system, when the executive director, he he was uh employee of the authority, but he but he was uh made the director by of the PWSA.

I'm not sure about whom that was after I left the board.

Um and that's where I believe a lot of the problems came to fore at that particular point in time.

So just stepping back, the idea of the of the company was to try to get subject matter experts to teach us how to run the operation because in the past the PWSA had some directors that were not um did not have the experience or weren't particularly qualified in that particular area.

And so what is the lesson that was learned?

The lesson was that when you have a change in administrations and the the fund there's a fundamental change in what the outcome of the contract was supposed to be, then that's where you have a problem.

We w there wasn't a chance to finish what the original idea was, and that was to produce operating manuals for all of the authorities' functions.

It was too big, too wide, too.

I don't remember I was seeing any manuals.

The the con the contract was never the contract was never finished.

That's right.

Let me try another scenario.

Okay.

When you served on the parking authority board as, I believe chairperson.

That's correct.

Did you not put forward the plan to privatize the city's parking assets?

Uh no, it was a uh it was a lease of uh parking assets.

Okay, so that was an all another operating maintain lease.

No, that was and if you del uh dive a little bit further, there was a unfunded mandate from the state that the city's pension funds needed to be.

We all know about that.

And well, so the city was putting an untenable.

The city council did not approve the plan that you put forward.

That's correct.

And can you tell that plan was with Morgan Stanley?

Um they were the they were the investment advisor.

They they did not participate in the actual AX maybe was the operator who was gonna operate it.

LAS was the was actually the parking lot.

The parking operator.

Okay, the parking operator.

Right.

Now that deal is was structured, the one that city council did of Pittsburgh did not approve, was approved in Chicago.

Not that deal, a different deal.

So it's about 75,000 for was this you know to lease 36,000 in Chicago to lease the parking meters to the same consortium.

No, it wasn't.

No, that's not correct.

It's Morgan Stanley, I believe.

And um for 75 years.

How do you remember how long the lease would have been in Pittsburgh?

50.

So 50 years.

You know, I mean, this is 20 years later practically.

Um and you know, just the the random internet considers it one of the worst privatization deals in U.S.

history.

So, you know, my colleagues on County have always been uh proud of themselves that they fought off that proposal from you.

Well let's talk about the Pittsburgh proposal.

The Pittsburgh proposal was completely different than the Chicago proposal.

We learned everything that we could that what went wrong in the Chicago proposal and uh incorporated that into the deal into the deal here in the city.

Um what would have occurred had that particular deal went through, right now there'd be four new parking garages that the parking authority owns.

It would also be empty like the other ones right now because there's no downtown office.

Right.

I mean I don't think anyone could have foreseen the pandemic at that particular point in time.

Well, it's fortunate that City Council did.

So or avoid that deal at least.

Okay.

So there would be there would have been four parking garages.

You said it's the was the Pittsburgh.

Yeah, I'm not sure.

The reason that that idea was formulated was because there was an unfunded mandate from the state in order to increase uh that really made no sense, but uh to get the pension fund above 50 percent.

I think it was 50 percent at the particular time, I don't remember.

And so the the city as a whole was scrambling as to what ways that could be done.

It was actually thought at the time that it was necessary for the pension funds to be kept within the city itself.

Um in hindsight, it might have been better to let the state take over the pension funds at that particular point in time.

But that's that's not what happened.

So what we were looking for were ways in order to meet that state mandate.

And one of the ways of doing that was to the only way that we could do that within that two-year time frame, we needed a uh uh a chunk of cash up front.

And the only way to do that at that particular point in time it came out was we needed someone to give us the money in advance, and then they would recoup their money just like private businesses do over the course of the lease of the system itself.

And we felt that the And so you would have taken the money and then what would have you given them?

The money would have gone into the pension fund, which is what was necessary to do.

Well, but what would LAZ and Morgan Stanley be getting?

They they were they would have got a portion of the parking taxes and the parking rates, not the parking taxes, I'm sorry, the parking rates that people pay for the next 50 years.

Whereas the parking taxes would still come to the city of Pittsburgh.

The other portion of the rates that people were paying would come to the city of Pittsburgh, and the city would basically be reaping the same revenue that it does now.

So one of the problems with the Chicago one was that um the city had signed away control of its curb, basically.

Yeah, we didn't do that.

And so well, yeah, because the you didn't do the deal at all.

Well, no, that's what I'm saying.

For the record?

Yeah, I'm sure there is.

The the the there was two lease agreements.

They were about 400 pages each.

One was for the um parking garages and one was for the meters that were there.

And um so those those lease proposed those lease terms were studied as to what went wrong in the city of Chicago, and those same kinds of things were not in those lease proposals.

Uh they were they the all of the ideas that were there that um um no parking on Sunday, you know, in order for them to make it, that there's not parking on Sundays throughout the city, that when when various community groups wants to have their festivals that they would be able to close the streets down without incurring any financial penalties.

So all those items uh and many more were taken care of um inside those leases.

And we did learn we had uh uh top people on it, and that was a situation.

Again, all of this was something that was forced upon the city because of the uh um theoretically the pension fund uh uh problem.

Whereas, you know, um I don't know where the where the pension fund stands at this particular point in time um because it was it was I think it was called the parking asset.

So the so right now the parking rates have gone up, uh they've gone up dramatically, and the um uh the revenue is coming back to the city for for the I think it's fifteen million, maybe seventeen million at this point in time going into the pension fund.

So that that was the the genesis of the of this of the uh program and the the rationale behind it.

Right.

Again, just for it it would be great if you could uh if we knew where to find those proposals.

I mean, I uh I mean I don't have them.

I didn't think that's they're on the legislative record or something.

Well, yeah, I mean they're part of the part of the city's records.

I mean, they for sure.

I mean, I where they're where they're currently at, I I I couldn't tell you.

I mean, I don't have them.

Right.

Um, they're they're they're city property.

So I'm assuming those.

Because it sounds to me like you're still enthusiastic about these kinds of privatization schemes.

No, not at all.

That what I'm saying is we were faced with a situation that we're needed to come up with several hundred million dollars in two years.

And we tried to come up with the best thing that we could do.

It wasn't a sell the parking system, it was a lease of the parking system.

All of the revenue that the city would have gotten would still have come, except we would have got a lump sum.

The lump sum would have been that portion of the the amortization that the companies that gave us the money.

I mean, there was talk at the time about well, these the the the uh uh the the private sector is interested in making a profit.

Well, of course they are.

And so the idea was that we needed money up front, and then they would they would make their profit over the course of a 50-year period.

And again, it wasn't something that just came out of the blue that it was an idea, let's do this.

It was something that needed to be done in order to um uh to meet the unfunded mandate, the the unfunded mandate from the state.

And we still never real figured out why that was important to the state.

Okay, so I think it's the Chicago version has been widely studied, and again, it's reported as just kind of like a lesson in like worst practices.

It was a lot of people.

And that's why we didn't follow it.

That's right, you're exactly right.

Yes, Councilwoman.

Um so but I am I I heard councilwoman Strasberger kind of ask in a broad way, right?

Are you in favor of privatization?

And you said no.

That's right.

Um but when I called the Veolia Lisa, like privatization of operations, you it seems like you objected.

Do you not see it that way?

No, I do not.

No.

That the we the board hired Violia to teach the authority how to run a water system.

That was the idea behind it.

Do you consider that the parking plan that you had a privatization of operations?

No, that would that was a plan in order to get a lump sum of money that was required by the state that the city did not have in order to maintain the operation of the city's pension funds.

So it's not something it the it wasn't organic that let's try to find a way to make some money or to make a big big pile of money.

The idea was here's a mandate from the state.

Does the city want to maintain control of its pension funds, which the leadership, the the elected leadership at the time decided, yes, that's in fact what we want to do.

So they charge me and other people to work together.

How can we avoid that?

Sure.

That was a long time ago.

Um and there have been now, I think, a lot of lessons learned from a lot of cities over a a lot of decades.

Looking at these kinds of um contracts.

Um they were both leases, in my opinion.

And um we've had a post agenda here at this table that was chaired by Councilwoman Strasberger on lessons about privatization that's already, I feel like it could be even updated because it's it's been a while.

And um the thing that is the mnemonic that I recall is DBFOM.

So there are various kinds of ways that you can contract as a government with uh you know a private corporation.

You mentioned uh enterprise uh or uh independent uh what do they call it again?

Independent contractors, the ones who do a lot of our excavation work and things like that.

Um, design, build, finance, and then operate and maintain.

And as you get down that list, because you get to operate and maintain, you've basically de facto privatized operations.

Uh because you you don't have any of your own employees uh running the system.

Or at least, you know, in our cases in the leadership with the Violia contract.

Uh so it's a little distressing that you you kind of don't think of these contracts as privatization, um, or and also that you don't think they're problematic.

Because I do.

I I don't think I said either of that.

Either of the they're not problematic.

The the parking lease situation was because of an unfunded mandate from the State.

It wasn't something that organically came up that, well, this is a better way to go about business.

The water authority, as we found it at that particular point in time, had no expertise in running a water authority.

And we did the best we did our brainstorming to try to what's the best way to teach us the city, the the authority, the citizens of Pittsburgh, how do we run a water authority properly?

And so we took at that particular point in time, and there was a and I'm sure those are available too.

There was a robust RFP process.

I think there were seven firms that bid on uh bid on the uh uh proposal.

Um all of that was done.

There was a um the board of directors and city council had there was a wide range of uh uh opinions and and and and ideas as to what's necessary, and everybody came to the the consensus that the Viola at that particular point in time was the best to teach us and had the expertise to teach us how to run a water authority, and they were working hand in hand with the authorities' own employees.

After the Ravenstall administration left, I resigned from the board and the others.

Um I'm not sure what happened, but uh how uh but Violia was not running the authority at that particular point in time.

They would they had we had expertise from them to do that.

The executive director, they worked with we in fact had two executive directors that were co-executive directors were were uh uh authority employees at that particular point in time.

One had expertise in engineering and the other one had expertise in finance, which we thought that that at that time uh made some sense.

Because it is, you know, as was mentioned earlier, the authority does have, you know, uh there's a gigantic uh engineering operational component, and there's also uh uh administrative component and finance components that goes with it.

Right.

Another thing we did early on was break up the Chester no bid contract that had been not bid for 20 years.

Uh I I I don't recall that.

Yeah, I know I know who Inchester engineering is.

Do you remember that they were running the entire program?

The engineering program?

Well, they were the authorities engineer.

The authority I'm sure has engineer an engineering firm now.

No, there's no they don't?

No, it's broken up into many contracts.

Yeah.

Well, but they're still private engineering companies, right?

Yes, but they are competitively bid and scoped out at a much smaller scale.

Because again, that that contract hadn't been bid out uh for 20 years, if I'm not sure.

I I yeah, um I don't think that's the case.

It's uh look in fact check that as well.

Yes.

Um, I I haven't asked any outstand questions, but since um Mr.

Kunka brought up the the kind of concept I think you were proposing, Mr.

Kanka, that pipes be built in the rivers to catch the outfalls.

You were saying when we were talking about four-mile run.

No, that well, that particular one was the the outfall was going into the river, but if the river is higher than the outfall, then you can't the then uh the the water that's coming down through Panther Hollow and through four-mile run can't get into the river.

So councilman Councilwoman Warwick mentioned there could be some, I don't know if there's like gates or whatever that can stop it from doing.

I I don't know what the engineering solution to that is.

So Ms.

Murphy, are you familiar with the big dig program at Al Qassam?

I am vaguely familiar, but that's actually a part of my orientation.

I will be learning more about that project if I am elected on the board.

So that there's already been, I think it's a three billion or four billion dollar project that we will all be paying for on our water bid and tour bills, right?

On the portion that goes to El Cassand.

Um and I believe a lot of the drop shafts have begun.

And I had a lot of questions.

How did we get there?

Uh it's a long and sorted story.

Yes, it is.

Yes, it is.

The portion that I know that went on for years before me, that's for sure.

Yeah, no, it was ordered by the EPA.

So again.

Um so in the way I've been briefed on it over the years that we we had resisted settling or or uh we'd been not uh had a kind of open consent decree that was being negotiated for like 20 years.

And do what was like a gray plan.

Uh well, the first Trump administration just gave the order.

So that's been a while also now.

Um and I believe some of the first draft shafts are already under construction at the head of the Ohio.

Does anybody nobody's here that represents the that river bank?

So I know the ones for the Allegheny River are projected to start in a couple of years.

Um and it's it's a little insane.

You know, it's the tunnel boring machine.

We'll be drill, you know, drilling 150 feet straight down.

Yeah.

Um and we'll leave behind a manhole cover 30 feet in diameter, not even diamond, yeah, in diameter.

Right?

I don't know.

How big is that?

From here to the wall.

Um, and so and so I, you know, and it takes a long time for them to be drilling down, and yes, it will be right by people's homes.

Yeah.

And yes, it will be right by all of the new construction on the Allegheny River and in Lawrenceville and in the strip district, at least, you know, those are the ones I'm more familiar with, and along each of the rivers.

And then so all of that outfall instead of falling will, you know, like again, fall down like a giant manhole, right?

And so then we'll transfer and they're gonna put giant pipes under each river to tr convey all of that.

So 150 feet under each river will be a giant tunnel.

So that's what's happening.

Um and it's it'd be great for someone to figure out how that we do something else to divert our water and sewer overflow.

Um because that's gonna cost a lot of people on their bills.

Right?

It's it's no one else is paying for that.

It's the people in the Alkassan system that are paying for that straight out of our wallets, straight out of our monthly bills.

Um, so do you have any experience with infrastructure?

Not to that degree, but I always um I say this all the time, affordability is a responsibility, and so you are right.

This is gonna be passed on to the residents.

And so, you know, these plans are already in action.

And so what do we do at this point to mitigate any further harm that our residents uh would endure from these decisions that were made.

Yeah, well, so for example, at PWC, when we we did raise rates by a lot, and I've the PDP says continue to raise them, or the PUC now has the authority to raise them.

And um, so I did help start the customer assistance program.

We had never had one.

Um, so there is some need space um relief that can be applied for.

Um, and Alcassan has had one for a while, but as we were hearing from Councilwoman Warwick, it they're not perfect.

And so it would be nice to problem solve how to um, you know, a lot of times the answers, I mean it was years ago now, we're like, well, we don't know how to do that with our software, right?

It's the parcel number, and so we just have the property owner, and we can't figure out how to get the tenant on there or something silly, right?

And it may take time and it does take staffing and investment of resources, but we have to keep it.

People do fanciers easier than that, yeah.

I mean, that's like some, you know, that's something that is should we should be able to work at and figure out.

I agree.

Yeah, so I appreciate that.

Um we also have um gone back and forth with Alcassan over the years about the um in this giant multi, multi-billion dollar plan that we again will be paying for, no one else is paying for it.

Um, how to also leave behind community improvements, right?

So if you've got, I mean, I I feel like there are 10 or something drilling sites along the Allegheny River.

Um, you know, once the drill and the trucks and all of their truckloaded, truckloaded, truckloads of rocks leave after nearly a year, then what?

You know, that's public space now, even if it was private space before Alkazan got there, which is also gonna happen.

Um, and so how is it maintained?

What does it look like?

We've had a many, many year vision.

Some of them started under the Ravensall administration of Riverfront Park.

Um, there was a Tiger Grant, a federal grant of two million dollars that started the Allegheny River Boulevard Vision.

There have been there's been progress made.

Right?

So we have both traffic calming on some of the streets parallel to the river, but there's many sections of River's River Trail that are in place, not completely, there's gaps that we need to work to fill, but you know, we would love support from Al Cassan to prioritize that and the green um investments that go with them.

Clearly, again, the EPA ordered us to do not a green infrastructure plan.

Um the current EBA is basically the same one as the one that ordered us.

So um but to the extent that we can find ways to invest in the things that um assets for the citizens.

I would love your partnership to do that.

Because it's very sensitive.

You know, we again the constituents in my district have been organizing around these concepts well before I got elected, and I've been here twelve years.

Um so it they are really you know, put a lot of time, energy and effort in their own to these beautification and these recreational um visions.

Um it's it's it's a great it's a great vision to be able to go from like the city line, city border, and now beyond it because they're gonna bring the brilliant line railroad trestle the county has bought so you can go far upriver in up in Allegheny County on the northern side of the Allegheny River.

Um and then you'll be able to come across on river those riverfront trails that are around over a railroad trestle, rail to trail bridge.

And so to be able to get into place we don't have it, you know, river trail that could get to if you can get all the way to the point, then you can get all the way to Washington DC off trail.

Because right now already, if you get on your bicycle at the point, you can get to Washington, DC, not on road.

Which is really cool.

So to be able to do that.

Uh uh program around that.

They do a biking program from City to DC.

Oh, wonderful.

I'm glad to hear that.

So yeah, the people in my district are really wanting to see kind of more movement.

I guess we've had some.

We changed zonings and now that there are setbacks and new construction and there are public easements.

Um even in the strip district, even in the bunch of property, there's public easements now, so there's river trail there, um, which was a you know took ten years to negotiate.

Um, but we we still have gaps to fill in and infrastructure to build and then figure out who's maintaining that and you know how how we can add more park basically to the city.

So I'd look forward to your partnership there.

Um Mr.

Cuca, I'm not sure we agree on things.

I'm not gonna take any more time in this hearing, but I may need to maybe we should talk further.

Sure.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

Um don't really have many questions regarding the Al Kasan.

Um you answered Councilwoman Strasberger's first question for you.

Um but just to piggyback on what the councilwoman was saying, I think the Ohio River tunnel is currently under construction.

Um the whole project is like two billion dollars.

Um I think that four okay.

Um I think the Allegheny is under underway.

So my real interest is saying of all this work that's going to be spent in the water treatment facilities being expanded to take in all the water, um, how do we break apart those contracts and get more local contracts as a part as a part of this system?

Um but that's more of a comment than a question.

Um we need to do that across the board.

I mean, debundling of contracts.

I don't know, you know I have my work in procurement only spans for about ten years, but there are so many opportunities where we can debundle these contracts, get more uh vendors per contract.

We'd actually get things done a lot faster by debundling some of these contracts.

So that is something that I'm interested in.

And I guess minority businesses an opportunity to bid on these contracts.

Absolutely.

Umka?

Yes.

Not really a question, but a thought, an idea, and I'm just curious of your thought.

All across the city when I drive, um, most recently on Wilkins Avenue when I turned on the Wilkins the other day.

Um at some point, my car is sort of like this because in the middle of the road is has been dug up, has been fixed, but not to the specifications of the city.

Therefore it's sh it shrinks and cars are swerving or you're ha you're driving somewhat erratically.

I don't know this for a fact, but this is my assumption.

That the utilities and I'm picking on all utilities at this point, but PWSA also, when you all dig up and have to repair, my assumption is it probably costs you more to repave a road than it would the city.

And so my idea would be, and we could create a pilot, um, would be would the authority be willing to say here that's not really what we do, right?

We're good at the digging up, we're good at replacing pipes.

We're clearly not good at finish off the pavement and the infrastructure portion of it.

Here's and I'm making this up.

Here we spend one million dollars buying the paving equipment, per performing out work.

I would argue the city could probably do the same for about 500,000.

We'll give you that money, and you can just build it into your paving system.

What would your thought be about something like that?

And I think that's a good idea.

Um I I just for my own I live in that area.

Wilkins, I think, was people's gas.

Oh, okay.

I'm going to say does it also or Peter Pittsburgh water?

That's correct.

And they will tell you that they can't redo the road in the winter time because the asphalt plants are not open, so that's why they're just the uh the temporary pavement, that whole kind of a situation.

Uh this has been a problem since I started with the city years and years ago.

Uh one it's a rental street in the same area with a little business district, you know, tree line streets and everything like that.

Um I think it was like late August.

City came in the contractor, but it was the city who did it.

Beautiful job.

Tore it down, put it up with all the bike lanes on it, put out all the all the markings or whatever.

I went to visit my daughter who lives in San Francisco for about a week.

I came back, people's gas was there, completely ripped up.

It was all completely ripped up.

And so that coordination, there's supposed to be coordination.

Uh and it it clearly it hasn't happened for all this particular point in time.

I don't know whether the the the Pittsburgh Water has a better or less better contract than the city does to do these uh uh uh repavings, but having one set of people doing it, I think makes a lot of sense for sure.

Uh I don't know what the current state is as to how I mean I think that at least my understand my previous understanding that it like someone like people's gas, they don't even have to do the whole road.

They they only have to do half of the road, and that doesn't really make a whole lot of sense when you when you do that.

So having one contractor do it for the city, I think makes a lot of sense is something that should be looked at for sure.

But it has been a you know, the the the um Yeah, I mean the problem of a lack of city doing something and then the utilities coming in afterwards are supposed to be coordination there.

I'm not sure.

I guess it hasn't been resolved at this point.

It has not been resolved.

It's something that comes up almost every single year, especially around budget season.

Um but nonetheless, this is something that came up like a week ago when I was talking with a one of the contractors who does work for the city and just trying to get a sense of how they deal with it.

And as we were just talking it through, that's where this idea of, well, wait a minute.

And he suggested again that the utilities pay more in expenses to do the same work.

And I was like, well, if that's the case, then give us the dollars, let us and then we can even expand our footprint of the amount of roads that we're actually paving.

Um so anyway, just a thought.

Absolutely.

If there are no further questions, I believe we've exhausted the business of this uh meeting, and we are done.