Good morning and welcome to the standing committee's meeting for Wednesday, July first, twenty twenty six.

All council meetings will be live streamed on the city's website, and for guest speakers joining us at the table, please do not turn off your microphones.

Down in the right corner, how it's like the speaker is X.

Okay.

Okay.

Yes.

That's what I'm talking about.

Yes.

Yes.

Okay, so to update those who are tuning in or who are on joining us by Zoom.

Those who are joining the Zoom meeting outside of Council Chambers are able to hear the Council members joining by Zoom.

For some reason, we're working a troubleshoot.

We cannot actually hear those joining by Zoom currently.

And we are um we are working on it and also working to identify members on the hallway who can join us.

But we cannot just we cannot proceed until we know we can have the participation from those joining by Zoom.

Councilperson Charlotte or Council President Lavelle.

If you can speak now, we'll test this.

Can you hear me?

This is Daniel.

We can hear you.

Thank you very much.

And apologies for the tactical difficulties.

So I'll also hear Council Charlotte said that there are about ten times.

We can hear you.

Thank you very much.

Sorry, this is the browser.

Thank you.

Members present.

Thank you.

We have quorum.

All right.

Our next order of business is to amend the agenda.

Can I have a motion to amend the agenda?

Motion to amend the agenda.

I have a second, please.

Second.

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Agenda is amended.

Our next order of business is public comment.

I would like to remind all speakers that the rules of council state that comments are limited to matters of concern, official action, or deliberation, which are or may be before city council.

Profanity will not be permitted.

Please state your name and neighborhood for the record, and you will have three minutes to speak.

Can you hear me?

We can hear you.

Oh, hi.

Yes.

Um I'm here.

Should I be with the with speaking?

Please proceed, we can hear you.

Okay.

Good morning, um members of uh Pittsburgh City Council.

My name is Gilnar Jones, and uh I'm a Pittsburgh president living in Bluefield neighborhood.

Um years ago, I purchased uh at home, that's where I live, and I rented other units that's short-term rental.

Like many Pittsburgh rentants, I've used this income to help pay my mortgage, cover my bills, and maintain my property.

Uh I support reasonable regulations.

I believe every short-term rental should be licensed, inspected, and uh required to meet fire and safety standards.

In fact, um my property recently passed to the long-term rental inspection and uh the inspector complemented the condition of the property.

Responsible homes have nothing to fear from from usable regulation.

What I cannot support are those proposed caps on the on the number of short-term rental units allowed within a building.

I actually ask, um, what problems do these cats actually solve?

Uh if a property is safe, well-maintained, properly licensed, and does not create issues for the neighborhood.

Why should it matter whether there are one, two, or three short-term rental units?

Responsible operators should be judged by how they manage their property and not by an arbitrary numerical limit.

Uh, trips and rentals also benefit our community.

I hire local handyman and local cleaner, and every extra piece recommendations for neighborhood restaurants, coffee shops, and small businesses.

But I guess support build businesses every time they visit Pittsburgh.

This issue also affects my family.

Uh, my retired parents live in Pittsburgh Shadowside area and own a small multiplier where they live in one of the units and rent the other one for short-term rental.

It has become their retirement project, and they enjoy multiple businesses and sharing everything Pittsburgh has to offer.

Under the proposed caps, they too would be significantly affected despite operating responsibility.

I think we asked City Council to work with responsible hosts to do well-balanced regulations, focused on enforcement on operators who repeatedly create new concerns, allow disruptive parties, or fail to follow safety rules.

Um, those are the operators who operators who should lose their licenses, not responsible holds who consistently follow the law.

We do not penalize the overwhelming majority of responsible codes because of the actions of a handful of fat hosts.

Working up to create regulations that protect our neighborhoods while allowing reasonable property owners to contribute to continue contributing to Pittsburgh's economy and welcoming visitors to our city.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Patricia McHenry.

It's Patricia with us.

In that case, we will move on to Ellie Harvard.

Good afternoon, council members.

My name's Ellie Howard.

My homes are in the north side.

I have two side-by-side row houses since being last year.

Here last I got married next door in the courthouse.

I'm a Pittsburgh homeowner, small business owner, and a short-term rental host.

This is not my first time coming before you as a small business owner to plead our case.

You've heard from hosts, you've heard from those opposed, but I don't really think that you've heard from Pittsburgh.

Um you've not truly heard from the families that travel here for weddings, funerals, graduations, medical care, sports, concerts, and family gatherings.

This decision will not just affect hosts.

It won't majorly affect anyone traveling to our city.

Pittsburgh's growing, still rising and still being discovered.

We've major companies seeing an opportunity here.

We have professional sports, universities, hospital, hospitals, tech, culture, and neighborhoods that people want to experience.

And yet with this proposal, we're moving backwards in how we allow people to travel here.

People choose how they stay based off what fits their lifestyle, their family, their budget, and their reason for coming.

And by eliminating that option, you're not just eliminating hosts.

You're eliminating people that may not choose to come to Pittsburgh at all.

You're not affecting one small business.

Even those running multiple Airbnb rentals are employing so many other businesses.

You're affecting hundreds of small businesses, homeowners, cleaners, contractors, maintenance teams, landscapers, photographers, designers, and local vendors connected to this industry.

You're affecting people who use hosting as a main income and supplemental income in an economy that's really harder and harder to survive in.

So for many residents, this is a mortgage money, this is utility money, child care money, retirement money, and I want people to understand it's not an easy business.

I have incredibly small months.

It's not just opening a door and collecting money.

There are slow seasons, constant maintenance, taxes, insurance, cleaning, repairs, guest issues, emergencies, and we make it work.

And these bookings are never guaranteed.

We do it because we love it, and we love hosting people.

We love sharing Pittsburgh.

We love creating places where families can gather, celebrate, grieve, recover, work, and experience the city.

This is your current agenda.

This is not a vote that will solve homelessness, gun violence, or the housing market.

These are issues are serious, and this legislation doesn't fix them.

Homes will still be expensive, developers will still buy property, and investors will still exist.

What this will do is take away options from guests, income from residents, and support local businesses without proving that it solves a problem.

Responsible hosts are not asking for no rules.

We support accountability, safety, occupancy standards, noise enforcement, and consequences for bad operators.

But regulation is not the same as removing responsible people from the market.

Please do not use short-term rentals just as a stand-in for every larger issue Pittsburgh is facing.

Slow this down and listen behind the loudest sides of this debate.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Bridget Marizel.

Good morning.

My name is Brigitte Marisol.

I live on Pittsburgh's North Side, where I manage a number of short-term rental properties.

I'm also a mother of two children who attend Allegheny Traditional Academy and Urban Impact's After School program.

This is my neighborhood.

This is where my family lives, where my children are growing up, and where I've chosen to build my business.

Before this, I spent 15 years as a college professor.

I left higher education to spend more time with my children while operating my properties full time.

I want to begin by saying that I support responsible regulation of short-term rentals.

I support registration.

I support inspections.

I support clear safety standards and accountability.

I believe responsible operators should be held to a high standard because our neighbors and our guests deserve that.

What I cannot support is legislation that goes far beyond regulation and effectively eliminates responsible locally owned short-term rentals.

I understand the concerns that bring us here today.

No one wants unsafe properties, nuisance houses, or absentee operators who don't care about their neighborhoods, and neither do I.

Every day I work hard to be a good neighbor.

I respond quickly when issues arise.

I maintain my properties and I know my neighbors.

Beyond my business, I've helped raise more than 10,000 for neighborhood projects and organize the installation of five public murals to beautify our community because I believe businesses should invest in the neighborhoods that support them.

The people staying in my homes are also often misunderstood.

Most are not here for parties or weekend vacations.

They are families relocating to Pittsburgh, traveling professionals on month-long assignments.

People whose homes have become unlivable because of fire or flood, or families staying near Allegheny General Hospital while a loved one receives medical treatment.

During some of the most difficult moments in their lives, they need something.

A hotel cannot often provide a safe private home where they can cook meals, do laundry, care for children, and feel a sense of normalcy amongst tragedy.

As a local operator, I am proud to provide that.

My concern is that the bills before you do not simply create reasonable guardrails.

They risk eliminating responsible operators like me while doing little to distinguish us from the problems they are trying to solve.

I respectfully ask council to consider regulations that target behavior, not business models.

Require registration, require inspections, require local accountability, enforce the noise, occupancy, parking, and safety standards.

Thank you very much and hold that actors accountable.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Chief Icahana Helmakina.

We don't see Chief Icahana here.

We will move on to Michael Subkoyak.

Subcovia.

Subcoviac, thank you.

It's a good Irish name.

Good morning, Council.

Thank you for uh listening to all of us today.

My name is Michael Subkoviac.

I have a series of uh small Airbnbs in Oakland.

I live in Oakland.

I've lived there for 30 years.

I've been hosting for 15 years.

I've hosted over 2,500 different guests from around the world.

And so to me, the existing environment that we have created here in Pittsburgh is a vibrant part of the community.

Short-term rentals are part of that mix of businesses that support small business owners like myself.

It allows me to live here, reinvest in my community.

I've spent thousands of dollars repairing homes, helping the neighborhood out, and having the entire neighborhood lifted by what we do in the neighborhood.

We have plenty of regulations on the books currently that protect the community.

From noise abatement, trash regulations to parking, short-term rentals are already managed through the regulations that we have.

I know I got a note if my trash was out uh two hours early, right?

So we have regulations in place to keep us as functioning as a neighborhood.

This the new regulations that we're proposing here will kill short-term rentals.

Uh, it's looking like 75% of short-term rentals might be killed off by this regulation here.

The current system now allows seamless transition also between short-term and long-term rentals.

So a lot of my guests will come in for a few weeks, end up staying for months, years, whatever.

So we need a way that we don't wreck this ability for guests to come here and transition through the different things that they're going through in their lives.

Um, the other thing I was thinking about, short-term rentals really are part of the what makes a vibrant community, just like the arts are, just like outdoor activity, just like coffee shops.

And if we start to play with this ecosystem here, we really damage what potential we're trying to create here in Pittsburgh.

And so I think that's what we need to take a look at.

Of when we try to place this regulation in here, what are going to be the cause and effects that will happen down the down the end of the road?

And I don't think that part has been looked into well enough before we make these decisions.

So thank you very much for considering those.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Joseph Ostroski.

Morning, everybody.

My name's Joseph Ostroski.

I uh was born in Beachview, grew up there my whole life, but I own a couple short-term rentals in Mount Washington.

Um, I'm a sergeant for the city of Pittsburgh Police, and I respectfully urge the city council to reject the proposed restrictions on short-term rentals.

Um, I want to quick disclaimer, my views are not.

Um they do not represent the position of Pittsburgh Police.

Um, they're my own views.

They don't represent the city of Pittsburgh at all.

Um, I write from unique perspective as a sergeant with the city.

Um, if the goal of the legislation is to improve public safety, I believe these proposed restrictions are aimed at the wrong people.

The overwhelming majority of short-term rental hosts are responsible business owners who work hard to maintain safe properties.

They contribute to the neighborhood, provide supplemental income for their families.

I think broad restrictions would disproportionately harm the responsible hosts who are doing little and while doing little to address the individuals who actually create the public safety concerns.

As a police officer assigned to zone one on the north side, I witnessed firsthand the tragic shooting that occurred at a short-term rental in 2022.

Nobody wants to see an incident like that happen again.

However, since that incident, Zone 1 has adopted an informal zero tolerance policy towards large short-term rental parties.

When police officers receive complaints regarding these gatherings, police respond quickly and shut them down before they escalate.

As a result of the proactive enforcement strategy, violence directly associated with large short-term rental parties has dramatically reduced.

I encourage the city council to follow this strategy instead of implementing policies that will effectively cripple the short-term rental community in Pittsburgh.

Police should be given the resources and directions as respond swiftly and to unauthorized large parties and shut them down immediately.

Hold the individuals organizing the disruptive or dangerous parties accountable rather than imposing sweeping restrictions on thousands of short-term rental hosts.

A zero tolerance enforcement policy of shutting down large parties is immediate and effective.

A great example of the effectiveness is the specific enforcement that we've seen on the South Side.

After years of violence that plagued the area, the city council and police have worked together to help dramatically reduce the violent crime in that area.

Several years ago, there are shootings almost every single weekend.

Now they're very infrequent.

I think responsible short-term rental owners are investing in Pittsburgh's neighborhoods.

They're supporting local businesses, paying taxes, providing quality accommodations for visitors.

They should not be penalized because the actions of a small number of bad individuals.

I respectfully asked city council to focus on these individuals organizing the parties causing the problems while allowing responsible hosts to continue to operate and contribute to our city.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Chad Weiss.

Good morning, members of council.

My name's Chad Wise.

I live in Manchester, and I'm resenting uh representing both Steelstra and my business host wise.

I'm here again because the latest version of these short-term rental bills is not a compromise.

It's not even a regulation.

With the special exemption process removed, council has shifted from regulating short-term rentals to destroying them.

The bill introduces some of the most restrictive language in the country, functionally eliminating residentially zoned STRs with severe caps on what little could remain in commercial areas.

Based on initial data, it would eliminate at least 75% of the short-term rental nights in the city, putting more than 350 million dollars in annual local economic activity at risk.

That's not regulation.

That's a wrecking ball.

Look at how the city responded to Market Square.

After serious public safety concerns involving younger crowds, the city didn't ban everyone from Market Square or close the restaurants.

It didn't say no one could gather there anymore.

Instead, the city created a targeted role for a specific issue.

Now young people need to be accompanied by an adult during certain peak times.

That's regulation.

You identify the conduct causing the issue and you target that conduct.

With short-term rentals, council's doing the opposite.

Council has not presented any data showing that short-term rentals are causing issues at a rate that justifies a citywide ban.

Yet this sledgehammer of a bill would force responsible owners and local managers out of business and hurt cleaners, contractors, visitors, tourism, and tax revenue, all while introducing no ordinances to the actual bad actors and the handful of guests causing the problems.

And the supposed safety logic doesn't add up.

To be clear, I'm all for primary residence hosts.

They're part of the short-term rental community too.

But there's flawed logic in assuming that primary residence rentals are safer.

In the primary residence whole home rental, the guest is there because the host isn't there.

If a party starts or something goes wrong, the person council is relying on is gone.

Meanwhile, many responsible non-owner occupied hosts have local contacts, 24-7 support, noise monitoring, guest screening, and other systems designed to prevent problems before they happen.

So this bill doesn't reward safety.

It rewards a political category.

We've said this repeatedly: license us, require 24-7 responsible contact, enforce noise, trash, parking, and safety ordinances, shut down repeat problem properties based on trackable data.

Do not use a few incidents as justification to ban an entire category of responsible property owners.

And let's not pretend to ban eliminate short-term rentals.

It only pushes operators underground away from licensing, away from tax collection, and away from accountability.

The zoning bill is poorly written, economically destructive, and legally vulnerable.

If council passes it, we'll do nothing to solve the problems you claim to care about.

It will instead punish responsible operators, strip rights from property owners, damage the local economy, and invite years of litigation.

Move forward with licensing and enforcement instead.

For four years now, four years, we have offered to help craft responsible regulation, and that offer still stands.

But we will not quietly accept a backdoor ban dressed up as public policy.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Dylan Base Q.

Thank you, Council.

My name is Dylan Bisescu.

I live in the Southside Flats on East Carson.

I want to tell you a tale of two streets, East Carson during Saturday's street lockdown, and the same East Carson during Sunday's open streets event.

I had the chance to see both firsthand.

Biking back from viewing the World Cup on Saturday the 27th.

I saw a street with foot traffic decimated by security fences.

Well, I normally can bike back home safely along a well-lit main road designed for cyclists.

This TSA told a force forced myself and other passers-by onto poorly lit, poorly maintained side streets where there was objectively less safety than on the busiest weekends in the south side before.

And all of this for a pittance of the business on weekends past.

If we want to hold a night market on the south side, let's actually have one.

Look at Allentown's night market for ideas, where they don't turn the street into cell block one, where everyone in this city of neighbors is welcome.

But if you don't really want that, at least don't pretend this is anything more than tragedy repeated now as farce.

But what my neighborhood could be, I saw this too on Sunday.

I saw it when the walls came down and gave way to children and families of all ages who enjoyed the outdoors, rode their bikes, and learned more about our community the way it ought to be.

That is what we can be and what it should be.

It turns out safety didn't mean spy drones to keep out teenagers.

Cops could direct traffic instead of directing discrimination.

We have the tools to create safety in this city already.

We just need the courage to use them consistently.

They are not walls, not in Berlin, not on our southern border, and not here.

What they are are our people, all of us.

All I demand is equal respect and dignity for your people, my people in this city, in all our streets and at all times.

I hope to work with you if you can be brave enough to end the age discrimination in my neighborhood, tear down these walls for good, and restore equal dignity to my home.

Show me that you have that in you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Corey Deedhorn.

Morning, Council.

My name is Corey Thorn.

I'm the son of Pittsburgh.

I grew up in the West End, was raised there my whole life.

Currently own a business based on Mount Washington in Pittsburgh.

I'm also a local real estate investor.

I invest in short-term rentals.

I invest in long-term rentals.

I invest in affordable housing, so I know the gamut.

Um I'm here to comment on the recent amendments to the Bill 2609, which eliminates that special exception for existing hosts.

Um the bills written would effectively eliminate 75% of the short-term rentals in the city.

The amendment goes further than regulation.

It really takes a local economic engine out of Pittsburgh and pushes it away.

My company, Mega Clean, separate from my real estate investing.

We manage about a hundred Airbnbs.

Not a lot, a sizable number.

We support about eighty thousand dollars a month in payroll.

This is directly, that's a million dollars a year of direct payroll that goes to city residents, people spending their money that live in our neighborhoods.

That goes away the minute this ban goes into effect.

If you take that, that's eight hundred dollars a month per listing, okay.

If we eliminate 1,500 Airbnbs in the city, $15 million in payroll goes away.

Okay?

These are real jobs.

They're not theoretical.

They're cleaners.

They're maintenance, they're guest service staff, they're my autistic brother who drops off uh towels and toilet paper when a guest asks.

These are contractors that we call landscapers.

They generate millions of dollars in economic income and host revenue, make for capital improvements.

They allow me to buy the house that needs fixed up that brings an affordable housing unit online in the West End on the Wrench Street.

I'm looking at houses from the PA Blan Bank.

I can make those affordable houses if I have my Airbnb income.

The guest staying here, I'll get into a uh scenario.

If I'm from St.

Louis and I plan a trip, I have a family of three, I want to bring my grandparents.

I'm like, let's go to a ball game.

I'm looking at Cleveland, I'm looking at Pittsburgh.

I'm not staying in a hotel with my seven, eight, and six-month-old and my grandparents.

I'm looking at Airbnbs.

I go on Airbnb, I can't find one in Pittsburgh, I can find one in Cleveland.

I'm going to Cleveland.

And I know as Pittsburghers, we don't want to lose the Cleveland.

And that's the way that the bill's written.

It could have over a hundred million dollars of economic income by eliminating short-term rentals.

People spend $264 for every hundred dollars of housing or lodging.

If people are spending $1,500 Airbnbs, do the math, okay?

It's a hundred million dollars in economic income that would impact the city.

So let's not lose the Cleveland.

Let's make the regulations that we're monitored, that hosts have resources to work with public safety, that when we have problems, there's a path forward, not what's written.

Thank you.

Our final registered speaker is Robert Wilson.

Robert with us.

So we will move.

We don't see um Robert online.

We will move on to our to those in the audience wishing to speak and come back to any other speakers who might have joined us.

Carlino Giampolo, Panther Hollow.

Yesterday I had asked seven the seven council members, other than Council members Barbara Warwick and Bob Charlin, to contact Mayor Corey O'Connor with the message shut down the Oakland do-it-yourself skate park.

I hope that each of you have done so.

In previous testimonies, I talked about the tragedy of individuals who label people or issues and then love or hate the label.

These individuals don't look deeper into the character of another individual and the contents of their minds or look deeper into the injustice of an issue.

This mindset has brought horrific pain and suffering to black Americans, the LGBTQ community, women seeking equality, and to the Jewish community, especially here in Pittsburgh.

I trust that none of you have labeled these two council members as colleagues.

That would prevent you from looking deeper into the injustice of this issue against our community.

Please contact the mayor and ask, and in the shame that this skate park has brought to this council, the mayor and the his administration, and the city of Pittsburgh.

On September 3rd, 2025, Councilmember Warwick spoke to the dozens of skateboarders and their supporters who came here to testify in support of the skate park.

She mentioned that the park's maintenance manager told her and A.J.

Haddon, the Pitt student who led the construction of the skate park, quote.

If there's ever any vulgar graffiti, or if I ever see any garbage in the playground, I'm ripping it down.

End of quote.

Again, the statement was, quote: if there's ever any vulgar graffiti, or if I ever see any garbage in the playground, I'm ripping it down.

End of quote.

Today, the skate park has massive amounts of graffiti, somewhat vulgar and crude language that encourages underage drinking and recreational drug use.

Councilmember Warwick, have you spoken to the parks maintenance manager about the current conditions at the skate park?

If not, why not?

Councilmember Charlin, have you done so?

If not, why not?

Neither you have ever answered the question.

Who gave the skateboarders permission to build the skate park?

Is it the parks maintenance manager?

If so, does a park maintenance manager have the authority to unilaterally and forever alter lives and bring harm to an entire community?

There is still more to be said about Councilmember Warwick's September 3rd remarks.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

Hi, my name is Sarah Wilson.

I'm in the Mount Washington area of Pittsburgh.

I own a cleaning company.

We work with hosts who continually want to host guests here in a safe environment in a clean environment and a comfortable environment.

We have guests that come to this city for so many reasons.

It's not the bad things that you see on the news.

We're the people who are in the homes after the guests.

These people are here for their kids' graduation.

They're excited because they just graduated Pitt or they just got a law degree.

They're here for a funeral because they're from Pittsburgh and their mom passed, and now they have to clean out a house, but they just can't bear to l stay in the house.

And so they have a place to stay that's safe, that they can cook their own meal if they need to.

These are also the people who are coming to see our sports games.

And it's the first game that they've ever been able to bring their son to, and they can't wait, and they're gonna get the memorabilia, and they're gonna buy all the things, and they're gonna eat at JJ's diner.

These are the people that are putting money into this economy, and most of the guests are great, but the problem is you don't hear about the great guests.

You just hear about the people who traumatized a neighborhood and blew up a house or whatever.

Like you hear about the bad ones, but there's so many good people that would be affected by this that I know travel with families.

And it also brings me to my people.

I have a much smaller company than maybe some other people, but I have 28 people on my team, most of which are part-time, and they work with me because they need to make ends meet.

They already are working full-time jobs, and they still need some more money to just make it work.

They're Pittsburgh people, and this will severely affect them.

I also have people who go to college here in the city and are trying to help pay for their education.

I have single moms who that is an expensive task and need a job that has availability and flexibility to work at different hours and work when a little more flexible, because I don't know how much you know about children and childcare, but it can be traumatic.

So they need this type of job and they need this availability.

And again, I hope that you don't let the sins of a few ruin what is a great opportunity for both Pittsburgh and for the people who live here in Pittsburgh.

I think that we need to take a scalpel approach rather than a hatchet.

Instead of just saying, well, we're just gonna cut the whole leg off.

Maybe we just look into treating the injury and fixing the small problem.

There is regulation that can be implemented and has been in other cities that has helped with these types of problems.

We should have safety inspections.

I know all of my clients would be on board for that.

They have safe houses.

They would be happy to register.

They're already paying taxes and doing these things.

Regulations are great, noise ordinances, even parking regulations.

I think should definitely be a thing.

Inspections of the property to make sure it looks like the listing.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

Hi, everyone.

My name is Dorna Palsick, and um I'm not a good speaker, public speaker, but I am in a Southside resident and um a tax player, optometrist, owner of several short-term rental in Pittsburgh.

And I hope you guys reconsider this and uh I'm not an out-of-state investor.

I operate responsibility, employee property manager, but on top of it, I micromanage every single reservation to make sure they agree with my policies and quiet times and party rules and everything, uh, just to make sure they they follow it, and they will be fined if they don't.

And my business supports local jobs, generate tax revenue, and brings visitors who spend money throughout Pittsburgh.

And every guest has to tell you exactly what they're coming, and I agree that they will not party.

And we have devices that is called minutes device on every property.

And if it doesn't record people what they're talking about, but it knows uh if there's crowd, it takes crowds, and it lets us know if it's number uh or increasing, and it's it looks like it might be too many people or the noise is too high.

And we immediately contact the guests and they write away quiet down and everything's good.

And I completely understand about your concerns, but however, responsible hosts should not be punished for the action of small number of bad actors.

Um, the property involvement in North Side shooting that started all this issue was not a standard short-term rental alone.

It was also listed on events rental platform called Peerspace.com, and was marketed for gathering and rental per hour.

And it was just for events and parties.

Uh, it is also important to recognize that in incidents such as parties or even crimes can occur in long-term rentals as well.

We don't respond by banning long-term rentals, um, be enforced better rules and hold bad actors accountable.

The same approach should apply here.

And short-term rentals are an important part of Pittsburgh tourism economy.

Visitors staying in Pittsburgh, like and all different neighborhoods, get to learn the neighborhoods, love it, and a lot of people actually move here.

A lot of people from New York City are moving here now.

Hotels can't always meet demand during major events and short-term rentals, help keep Pittsburgh accessible and competitive as a destination.

This increases activity in our neighborhood and generate tax supports our city infrastructure and public safety.

And my income stays in Pittsburgh.

I hire local cleaners, contractors, purchase supplies locally, pay taxes, and reinvest in my properties and community.

I respectfully ask the council to distinguish between responsible hosts and bad actors and focus on targeted informants rather than broad restriction.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

Good morning, everyone.

My name is Dennis Matzak, and I could be a little nervous when I speak.

Uh I'm a uh 68-year Pittsburgh resident.

I've been an executive chef in the Pittsburgh market since 1976.

I know hospitality well.

I run the uh historic day house uh short-term rental in the Mexican War Street.

I'm right on the park.

Uh I can see Lake Elizabeth right outside the front of my home there.

And we create an experience for our guests and visitors that come from all around the world.

Not everyone leaves a review.

As of today, we have 1,818 five-star reviews.

Wow.

We have one four-star, and that's it.

It's remarkable.

The visitors that come into the city.

They come in for Steeler games.

That second week of May, when the schedule comes out, my Airbnb blows up because the Steeler fans want to come to Pittsburgh.

They want to experience Pittsburgh.

Everyone that has said prior to me speaking about the revenues and everything, I concur with that.

We do need some regulations so that we can control the bad actors.

There are bad actors in all different walks of life.

Please don't punish all the good people that are doing good things for the city.

I had guests come in last Friday, a young couple.

They love historic buildings.

The house that I use for my Airbnb was built in 1871.

Mr.

Day built it.

He had 10 children that lived in the house.

And he was a boat and shipbuilder for the steel industry.

The history just goes on and on.

I had a the couple came in last Friday.

They flew in from Nashville.

We know what the expense of that is.

They took an Uber from the airport to my home.

They went to dinner.

They went to a nightclub.

They spend lots of money.

In the morning, I supply a free continental breakfast for the guests that come in.

And then, since it's 4th of July weekend, they got on a train to see Pennsylvania to go to Philadelphia to look at the Liberty Bell and learn more about our history.

So Pittsburgh is home for me and home for a lot of visitors.

I hope this bill does not pass in the form that it's in that we can reconsider what should come and be responsible on it.

If this bill does pass, I'm 68 years old, I will have to sell my home because I cannot afford the upkeep on everything that we have to do.

So thank you for taking time and listening.

Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

Good morning, my name is Yvonne Brown.

I live at 715 Mercer Street.

That's the high rise up on Befford, 190 apartments, senior citizen um building.

I wanted to say about the Airbnb.

My daughter took me to Atlanta to see Bears Hammond, who's a Jamaican singer.

We stayed in the A B Airbnb because she said she wanted to be close to the the center, and then she also wanted to be able to we could drive and not go a long way.

But it was it was something because it's all the hotels were full full.

So the Airbnbs, if they're the upkeep, if they kept up, they are beautiful.

It was a home, and we cooked our own food and we slept like we want.

We we um were able, we were able to enjoy Atlanta.

Um, so I can say I agree with the the Airbnb owners that they are the majority of them do take care of the property.

Now, with the what happened on the north side, they were saying the police actually sat and watched what they were doing, and then everybody ran in the building.

Now I felt that the police should have gone or either called the cops and they ran around, keep riding.

They would see that.

But when they went away, the same way when they shot up in the funeral, I mean in the church.

They were there, told it was going to be trouble, and then they the police leave.

As soon as they leave, they run into the church and kill people.

We need the police to be more proactive.

And I'm not mean not mean violently, but if you see something happen, then watch.

I mean, you could be around, you don't have to actually um run up to them or even go in the building if it actually looks like that.

Then also I listened to 90.5, that's W S C S E A.

And I actually heard today, Rosa Parks, when she was explaining about how she was treated when they um arrested her because she would not uh get up out the seat that only white people were to sit in.

And another thing, remember this.

Rose, and they were speaking about that the buses would have seats that would be empty.

But because it's for white people, we would have black people have to stand up.

Now, these are things that you shouldn't know about your history.

We were fighting just to be able to sit down in empty seats.

Imagine that.

Well, they would have beaten me because I was said down.

Okay, I'm gone.

Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

Good morning, special agent sunshine, the missing child Ceres Taylor.

First Lord, I want to apologize to Chair Strasberger for the accusations I made against her, which were not against you.

I apologize.

They were against this councilwoman right here at the inn.

Um who attempted to murder me using an intern who tried to do loodle on me and stopped me from breathing in Jesus' name.

Title 18, USC, Section 242, says whoever under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom willfully subjects any person in any state, territory, commonwealth possession or district to the deparation of any rights, privileges, or immunity secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States shall be fined under this title or in prison.

Not more than one year, or both.

And if bonding injury injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section, or if such acts include the use attempted use or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives or fire, shall be fined under this title, or in prison, not more than 10 years, or both.

And if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or in prison for any term of years, or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

The prohibited acts in 18 USC 1028, I want to focus on, come from Section E and F.

Section E states, possession, possessing an identification document, other than one issued lawfully for the use of the possession or a false identification document with the intent such document be used to defraud the United States.

This is the fraud that I'm attached to.

Identity theft fraud, insurance fraud, community uh computer fraud, uh fraud by someone becoming my conservatory illegally, guardianship illegally.

F possession identification document that is an identification document of the United States, which is stolen, knowing this such document was stolen, like my identity.

Y'all know my identity was stolen as a child.

I was granted a house.

Two of them.

Y'all stole them, sold them, and now I'm being forced to be homeless in Jesus' name?

I think not.

Whoever's in my house will be removed by force in Jesus' name.

Amen.

Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

Are there any further speakers?

There being no further speakers speakers, we will move on to the standing committee's agenda.

First committee is the Finance and Law Committee.

We have deferred papers, Bill 39.

Ordinance directing the Allegheny County Board of Elections to place before the qualified voters of the City of Pittsburgh at the 2026 May Primary Election of Referendum Question.

Shall the Pittsburgh Home Rule Charter, Article 3, legislative branch be amended by changing the budget approval rules to ensure timely passage at the end of legislative sessions?

Motion hold four weeks.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of a four-week hold for Bill 39, please say aye.

Aye.

Bill will be held.

New Papers, Bill 654.

Resolution amending resolution number 723 of 2022, effective December 27, 2022, entitled Resolution Adopting and Approving the 2023 Capital Budget, the 2023 Community Development Program, and the 2023 through 2028 capital improvement program by reducing play area improvements by $60,000 and increasing public safety equipment by $60,000.

Oh sorry, second.

Discussion?

Councilmember Salonetro.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of a four-week hold on bill 654, please say aye.

Aye.

Bill will be held.

Bill 655.

Resolution amending resolution number 857 of 2023, effective December 27th, 2023, entitled Resolution Adopting and Approving the 2024 Capital Budget, the proposed 2024 Community Development Program, and the 2024 through 2029 Community Improvement Program by increasing PJ McCartell Roadway Bridge Over Hillside Preliminary Design Tip by $500,000 to account for additional federal highway administration funding being received at no cost to the city of Pittsburgh.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 655, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 656.

Resolution amending resolution 775 of 2025, which authorized an agreement or agreements and lease or leases by and between the City of Pittsburgh and First Vehicle Services, a transdev company to manage and maintain the city's vehicle fleet by decreasing the approved spend by 988,402.29 cents for a new amount not to exceed 78,260,941.46 cents over a six-year period.

Discussion.

Oh, yeah.

So just to clarify in our agreement with TransDev, we have two categories that we use.

There's our target category, and that's for everyday maintenance, and we pay that monthly.

And the non target is what goes and goes above and beyond our number and certain fees not covered in our contract.

That captures things like working on vehicles that are very, very old, as well as things like preventative maintenance or inspections.

It would be a normal price for able to do it on time, but we are occasionally very late.

Um the issue with that lateness is that we always don't have enough spare vehicles.

So say uh garbage truck, even if it's overdue for maintenance, we can't necessarily take it off the street because then there's no one to do that work.

Um, I think some folks from OMB have also joined.

If I could ask your professional.

This is related to Bill 656, the um agreement or agreements and lease between the city and first vehicle.

Okay, thank you.

Hello, I'm Braunwin Turnage.

Um, I'm the acting fleet manager currently for the city of Pittsburgh.

Um, so this legislation for the Transdev contract.

What we've done is PWSA has requested to have their invoices directly invoiced to them.

Previously, the city was doing one invoice and then doing an internal process to make PWSA whole.

Moving forward, there will be two invoices.

So therefore, we're reducing the budget line on the target target budget, and we've decided to then move those funds to the non-target side in order to um assist with those non-target costs.

Okay, thanks.

Can you clarify you said PWSA?

Yeah, so PWSA has a portion of our fleet at the or they have a part of their fleet within this contract.

So they are requesting to have their portion of the contract that they are responsible for to be invoiced directly to them.

So we were getting one invoice for all target costs.

So now we're separating it into two.

So therefore our budget line for that target cost would come down, and that has been then moved over to the non-target side to cover those maintenance costs.

Okay, so PWSA is paying directly to the transdev instead of paying us, and then we're paying that.

Yeah, kind of more of efficient process for them.

Okay.

Um I was hoping you were to say because we got all these new vehicles.

No, not quite.

I think we're at that precipice where we're gonna see those maintenance costs come down because of all those new vehicles.

But unfortunately, it really wasn't thank you.

I'm sorry.

Um it really wasn't uh forecasted appropriately at the beginning of the year.

So we are averaging close to around 440 a month, and that wasn't really uh like I said, forecasted appropriately in that non-target budget.

So being able to move that two million over is really helpful right now.

Well, maybe we'll see that decrease later on.

Yes, I hope so six months or so.

Okay, thank you.

That's all for me.

Thank you.

Further questions.

Seeing none, all in favor of bill 656, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Thank you both.

Thank you.

657 resolution authorizing the issuance of a warrant in favor of the Cincinnati Specialty Underwriters Insurance Company for legal services in connection with a litigation matter in the Allegheny County Court of Common pleas for an amount not to exceed $10,000 over one year.

Second, discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of bill 657, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation, Bill 667.

Resolution further amending resolution number 924 of 2024, effective December 18th, 2024 as amended and titled resolution adopting and approving the 2025 capital budget, the proposed 2025 community development program, and the 2025 through 2030 capital improvement program by removing unencumbered funds from projects pending closure pursuant to chapter 218 of the city code.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 667, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation, Bill 668.

Resolution further amending resolution number 834 of 2025, effective December 21st, 2025 as amended and titled resolution adopting and approving the 2026 capital budget, the proposed 2026 community development program and the 2026 through 2031 capital improvement program by reappropriating and reallocating funds closed due to the requirements of chapter 218 of the city code.

Second, discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 668, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation, Bill 669.

Resolution further amending and supplementing resolution number 675 of 2008 entitled Adopting and Approving the 2009 Capital Budget and the 2009 through two third 2013 capital improvement program by reducing park reconstruction program by 19,5376 cents.

What's to approve?

Second.

Discussion?

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 669, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

That takes us to invoices.

Is there a motion on invoices?

To approve.

Is there a second?

Discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of invoices, please say aye.

Aye.

Invoices are approved.

That moves us on to interdepartmental transfers.

Is there a motion on transfers?

Most to approved.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of interdepartmental transfers, please say aye.

Aye.

Transfers are approved.

That moves us to P cards.

Is there a motion on P cards?

To approved.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of P cards, please say aye.

Aye.

P cards are approved.

That takes us to Public Safety and Wellness Committee chaired by Councilman Cockell.

Supplemental new papers, Bill 680 resolution authorizing the mayor and the director of public safety to enter on behalf of the city of Pittsburgh into a professional services agreement or agreements with Operation Better Block to conduct the Safe Passages Youth Violence Prevention Program at a total cost not to exceed $250,000 over one year.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Second.

Discussion.

Councilmember Warwick.

Yeah, I just wanted to quickly um thank the administration for moving forward on this.

So Safe Passages program is a really great program that's happening in our schools and um our some of our PPS high schools and um it's been very effective over I think the past two years in um reducing disciplinary incidences in the schools.

Um and you know, it it you know it's difficult with these programs, money begins to run out, and then you're sort of like, you know, in a holding period, like, oh no, what's gonna happen, right?

Like, and so that I'm glad that we were able to step in as the city.

I don't think this is all that they need, but um it certainly will keep the program going, make sure that folks can keep working through the summer and um and uh I also very much hope that um PPS can step up as well, and um you know be a partner, a funding partner, right, to to keep this program going because it is certainly a partnership uh between uh operation better block, the schools, and the city.

So, you know, if everybody could pitch a little a little bit in, but I am very glad that we are keeping it keeping the you know, keeping this operational um for the immediate future with this, so very appreciative to the administration for getting that done.

Thanks.

Thank you, Council President Laval, just quickly um briefly to piggyback on Councilman Warwick's remarks.

Um, one I'm glad we're actually doing this as is a great program, but to her point, it is actually within Pittsburgh Public Schools, and so we do need Pittsburgh Public Schools to participate because this program started as a three million dollar grant from the state, which means it's not sustainable if the city has to pick up that entire tab to maintain the program moving forward.

So we will have to work over the next six months or so to figure out what the sustainable model for the program is, but I'm glad we're able to continue this through the end of the at least this year.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Councilman Mosley.

Yeah, I like to echo my esteemed colleagues' remarks uh about this program.

Um it's hosted by Operation Betterblock, which is in my district, and I know two of the schools that they operate in are in my district, but uh I believe they also um operate um in council personal's district and councilman Coll Hill's district, as well as in Councilman Warwick, and I think in Councilman Wilson's district.

So this is even though um it's housed by organization in District 9.

Um, it it represents um activity throughout uh the majority of the city.

And and as Councilman Labell said um, you know, the importance uh of taking this step and and kudos to the administration for you know responding um to the outreach uh you know from the organization itself as well as our our advocacy uh as members of council about the importance of this program because we know you know um you know uh, you know, oftentimes activities that start in the neighborhood, spill into the schools and vice versa sometimes they start in school and spill into the community so you know there's no really arbitrary lines when it comes to public safety uh you know those who have uh nefarious purposes you know they don't adhere to the arbitrary lines between uh the uh city government of the city of Pittsburgh and the and the Pittsburgh Public School District.

So I think this is a step of us um understanding uh the the importance of of our role in in ensuring public safety and and as Councilman Label said it's going to be important over the next six months to find a sustainable funding model of working with Pittsburgh public schools as well as the philanthropic community and and other partners to ensure that you know um that in our efforts to keep our streets safe you know a direct pillar of that is keeping our schools safe um so uh again I want to thank everyone for for their involvement and it's a truly truly a worthy cause I spent about a week and a half ago uh a couple hours um at the ambassadors retreat and met with the folks who actually work in the schools and got to meet them personally and was really moved uh by um their dedication uh to the work that they do which isn't always easy um but you know um it was a really a great um experience so again kudos to Tylee Thompson uh who leads the effort as well as uh Jay Gilmer over at uh Operation Better Block for all their work um to make uh this stop gap happen and hopefully we can figure out sustainable long-term solutions moving forward thank you any further comments first round second round council member warwick um yeah so uh it's not very interesting just to record to talk a little bit about the nature of the program and how council member your microphone is off sorry and how the young people are engaged in um in the work themselves if just briefly just for for anyone who isn't familiar yeah I appreciate that appreciate everyone's support with this program this is huge and I know all of you a lot of you have been really supportive to this process um you know these young people actually if you look at there were sixty four kids that were part of this program last year and um in 10 in each school six sites 22 graduates right there and when you're looking at the young people that are part of this program um these are young people that are are trained to be violence intervention violence interrupters understanding the disease of violence and as um councilman mostley was sharing like this these are like young people who because of what happens in the community ties into the schools and what ties into the schools happens in the community that are on the front lines of being able to interrupt that disease of violence and are getting consistent training and a stipend to be able to uh be key uh pieces of the puzzle of being able to intervene uh when we're talking about violence prevention so um I'm excited that the city is um is actually gonna is supporting this this and um you know as it was shared earlier we'll find out other sustainable ways to be able to find money uh for this with their these young people on the front lines being able to help counteract a lot of different things and but we're uh we're actually tapping into their genius to be able to help you know find ways that we could tap into the community issues where they're on the front lines to be able to give us information that helps us to be able to be more effective in what we're doing community wise.

So I wanted to make sure I came up and said thank you to you all for that appreciate it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Further discussion Councilman Cogham thank you madam chair welcome thank you appreciate you yeah no problem um so this is reach working with the school district safe this is through operation better block so who what what resources does the city bring to the table here I guess for them yeah so this is a partner partnership between between the um the city of Pittsburgh and Operation Betterblock um this is something that they work hand in hand with the outreach workers with uh so they have a team that gets trained and actually does violence intervention, violence interrupting, uh in the schools, and they work with us to be able to to um when I say when you say us, you mean you think Tommy Thompson with our team.

Um so we're constantly in in communication, right?

Uh they're part of our ecosystem.

Right.

Um, they've gone to some of the national conferences.

I'm talking about the these young people, uh they've been on the front lines of a lot of things and actually have been leading a lot of these conversations that we've had with um with uh Chief Lando about ways to be able to um deal with everything from the takeovers to um community building to be able to keep people safe.

So they're gonna trust your instincts.

So you're saying you saw this, this is a very positive looking.

And I'm excited.

I'm excited to do it.

I was worried that we were gonna lose it, and I'm excited that it's here.

So that's why I wanted to make sure that's a thank you to everyone because this is a key piece, and this is keeping young people busy, but it's also pouring into their in bringing out their expertise to be in how they're gonna have a schools and get them at that young age.

It's uh you know, very important.

Very um and councilman Mosley uh mentioned uh not my district, is that Kerrick?

Yeah, you know what I know they're in um uh share.

I think Kerrick was the one school that they weren't able to get.

More decentral.

But um they they weren't able to get that was the only school, so that's the that was the only school that they high school that they weren't able to get into.

But uh, there's gonna be a new principle.

It would be great to be able to talk to the principal and see if we can get in there.

Yeah, right.

Okay, well, thank you.

Appreciate you being here, and um, you know, again, I trust your instincts and your experience.

That's a good thing.

I do too, so very much so.

Thank you so much.

Appreciate you all.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Uh, yeah, a third round third round, Councilmember Warwick.

Just to quickly say also, um, if anybody is you know, once more, we had a we had a really nice post agenda where we had some of the ambassadors come and speak it was really informative, kind of gave a really uh deep dive into the whole program and and how it works and and whatnot.

So anyway.

Definitely.

Yeah, I was just gonna say uh that that was an illuminating post agenda.

I want to appreciate I want to say thanks for hosting that and um to all members who and and uh participants who came because on our side, if we're not in working hand in hand with you know all aspects of either reach roots, you know, um safe passages, it's some you sometimes need that direct communication to understand how everything is divided up, who is working with whom, um, the whole ecosystem of stop the violence, um, and this is one piece of it.

So that was incredibly helpful and um agree with what others have said about continuing to move it forward and getting Pittsburgh public schools to support it as well.

True.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um seeing no further discussion, uh all those in favor of Bill 680, please say aye.

Aye, aye, affirmative recommendation.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

That moves us to public works and infrastructure committee chaired by councilwoman Salonetro.

New papers, Bill 652, resolution providing for an agreement or agreements with STV Incorporated for costs associated with the preliminary engineering phase of the McCartell Bridge over Hillside Project, providing for the payment of the costs thereof not to exceed 997,407.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 652, please say aye.

Aye affirmative recommendation.

Bill 653.

Resolution providing for an amended reimbursement agreement or agreements with the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation for costs associated with the preliminary design phase of the PJ McCardo Roadway Bridge over Hillside Project, providing for the payment of the costs thereof not to exceed $1,250,000, an increase of $500,000 from the previously executed agreement, reimbursable at 100% at no cost to the city of Pittsburgh.

Future resolutions will authorize the project specific service agreements motion to approve second discussion seeing none, all in favor of bill 653, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

That moves us to land use and economic development committee chaired by Councilman Wilson.

New papers, Bill 664, resolution amending resolution number 245, approved April twenty first twenty fifteen providing for the implementation of a residential parking permit program area h in the central north side community council district one to expand the district to include an additional address pursuant to Pittsburgh code chapter 549 approved second discussion seeing none all in favor of Bill 664 please say aye aye aye affirmative recommendation that moves us to recreation youth and senior services committee chaired by council member warwick new papers Bill 658 resolution authorizing the mayor and director of the department of parks and recreation to enter into a facilities usage agreement or agreements with Macedonia face for use of the Ammon Recreation Center located at 2217 Bedford Avenue in order to provide senior services activities with quality programming congregate meals and supportive services for older adults maximizing shared community resources starting in September through April for a term of up to two years at no cost to the city.

Motion to approve brief discussion discussion you want to come up yeah sure good morning council uh Luanne Haran assistant director of parks and recreation um so what we are doing is we are offering and partnering with Macedonia face to allow them to come into Ammin Rec Center and operate senior programs from September to May after that for summer they have another place to go.

So this is we don't have children that much in the center during that time of year they're like later in the afternoon so um they approached us about needing space and we said we could help them right now we have five facility usage agreements with other uh partners already so this would be the six one um and they're finding that where they are now YMCA or YWCA um that they increase their rent so high that they can no longer provide services in the community there it's too expensive.

They don't have the money to do it.

So we'd offer them to come and participate at AM and provide programming there which benefits all of us because there's not a senior center around there so the services will continue to take place for the seniors.

Yeah that's great and um I'm glad that that this is something that uh a partnership that we're able to um take advantage of so we don't have so this kind of and you know and and you know I'm very glad that this is happening and appreciative of our partners and glad that we can help alleviate their costs right by offering them a free space I assume right yes we offer it free for all the centers that we are a partnering with you know this is sort of and then this is something we've talked about in other contexts before but you know with parks and rec is that um you know these days with our kids and our seniors right um these types of human services that we provide at the city right for our kids for our seniors are needed more than ever right on you know the one side with our kids we have families that are struggling with rent and groceries and you know just the the cost of everything that any type of uh cost-free child care is, you know, incredible, and then also on the side with our seniors, same thing, lots of pressures with um with uh cost of living, so you know, meals that we provide at our senior centers, and also just the uh community, right?

So, not not kind of being stuck at home alone, especially when transit is difficult, right?

Having a community center in your neighborhood, and so the issue is I think uh or an issue is that at the city of Pittsburgh, our department of parks and rec does an outstanding job of providing these services if you have a location in your neighborhood.

But if you don't, then you don't get these services.

And um, and parks are you know, and I know that every year, and I I'm just sort of saying this as we're heading into to budget season, you know.

Um, every year, Parks and Rec comes to the table, and at council we say, wow, it is amazing how much you all do with so little money, right?

It is amazing how much good work you do with so little money.

And I think that it's really time as a city that we start to reevaluate how that works and and um elevate how critical these service, not not only how critical these services are for the communities that receive them, but also um start to grapple with how unequitable it is for all of our Pittsburgh taxpayers that if you do not have one of these locations that we run in your neighborhood, then we're relying on, I mean, you know, so so you know, then we're relying on some outside group to come in and do that work, you know, on their own dime, basically.

And that may work, that may work for a little while, not for two, you know.

I mean, we we can't control um what what other groups have the capacity to do.

Um, so I think that um, you know, this partnership is great, um, but and and I'm not proposing that we build rec centers in every single net, right?

That is not feasible, right?

But I do think that as a city we need to start um getting more creative and you know increasing the funding so that we can expand our services really to everybody in the city so that you know everyone in the city of Pittsburgh has access to, you know, the same way that regardless of where uh regardless of where the DPW division is, you still get your streets plowed, right?

Um, you you know, you still get no matter where the the garbage trucks sit, you still get your garbage picked up.

The city of Pittsburgh is very good at providing these services to seniors and to kids, and uh we should be uh really taking a hard look at ways that um, and and I think that it's actually in line with this this idea that we want families to come to Pittsburgh, and let me tell you, there is nothing more appealing to a family coming, you know, to picking a neighborhood, right, than the fact that there is a rec center in that neighborhood where their kids can go after school, or or you know, maybe if there's a you know, if they have a uh a senior in their household, right, a senior center where they can go and um and take advantage of those services.

So, I agree, councilwoman.

So we we need to get you more money, Luan, is what I'm saying.

That'd be great.

We'll find a way to spend that for sure, but I know programs.

Um can I just mention something that we I want to put it out there?

We are operating our cooling centers right now, and we're gonna extend that through the weekend all the way through Sunday.

Um Sunday, the weekend hours are gonna be 12 to 6.

They're not our regular, you know, all day eight to seven.

So I just wanted to put that out there, and we're gonna get up hosting done shortly.

So the public knows that they have a place to come to co-op all the way through Sunday with this heat.

That's all for me.

Thank you so much.

Any any other questions or comments from members?

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 658, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

That moves us to intergovernmental and educational affairs committee chaired by Councilman Mosley.

Deferred papers, Bill 412 resolution authorizing the Pittsburgh Land Bank to acquire all the city's right, title, and interest, if any, in and to the publicly owned properties in the 12th ward of the city of Pittsburgh, designated in the deed registry office of Allegheny County as Block 125A, lot 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, and 133, 0 Lincoln Avenue and Zero Mayflower Street, Council District 9 at no cost to the city.

A motion to approve.

So discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 412, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

New papers, Bill 651.

Resolution amending resolution 37 and 126 of 2026, which authorized an amendment to the cooperation agreement or agreements with the City of Pittsburgh Equipment Leasing Authority for the purchase and leasing of vehicles, equipment and accessories, equipment support infrastructure, and professional services in fiscal year 2026 by increasing the authorized amount by $85,000 to purchase vehicles for the Department of Public Safety, OCHS, and decreasing the authorized amount by $1,983,750 for the Department of Public Safety EMS for a new not to exceed total of $26,289,269.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Councilmember Warwick.

Yeah, thanks.

Do we have someone to come speak?

Thanks.

Okay, so this uh legislation is going to be $85,000 for a van, which is going to be wheelchair accessible for OCHS.

Uh they have voiced their concern that there are limited options in terms of vehicles that can help with individuals who have disabilities who need a wheelchair.

Um, and this vehicle is smaller, it's supposed to be able to work uh more effectively within our landscape.

Um, and they would like to move forward with that purchase.

The other element of the legislation is the removal of the EMS operating funds, which you all are aware, operating was reopened, it was reallocated to other projects.

So this is more of a clerical um process of amending the co-op to align with the reallocation of those funds.

Um, yeah, so do we know then because we did talk about this before as far as the um where those funds are going to go?

So operating has not provided me specifically exactly.

I think there was a variety of projects, and we can look into that for you if you need specifics in terms of where those funds were specifically uh reallocated.

Um, but I do not have those specifics at this time.

Yeah, I think for for me, what what is um most important and is that that the funds stay continue to be used for vehicles, that we don't divert funds to other things, right?

Because we have gotten these fantastic, you know, council was able to bring 10 million into the EL, you know, put 10 million toward vehicles.

We're getting these these gifts from UPMC and um high mark, etc.

etc., which is all great, but um those gifts are targeted, right?

They're specific that we can only use them for certain types of vehicles, but we have lots of vehicle needs um across the board as you well know.

And so um uh I am of the mind that that this money should remain in the in the vehicle pot, so to speak.

Do we know if that's the plan or I mean, even even prior to the most recent announcement, the previous announcements of partnerships or nonprofits led us to about like a three million net increase for vehicle funding.

So not only does that supplement the two that's reprogrammed, but in addition to that, like you said, some of it is targeted too.

This has to go towards DPW vehicles.

This pod has to go towards ambulance.

That does help us then free up.

I don't want to say money is fungible, but then if we were already planning to purchase an EMS with uh an EMS vehicle with existing funds, that then frees it up to still go towards other fleet needs within what remains what's budgeted for ELA.

Yeah, that's so that that for me at least is is the important part is that it stays within the fleet, right?

I mean, I know that it is you know, to that it uh and we have lots of needs across the city, but you know, our fleet need is ongoing uh every year, right?

And and even with these gifts, we are not at where we need to be, you know, for next year or the year after the year after, so to make sure that those dollars stay within fleet, whether even whether they're able to be spent in you know calendar year 2026 or not.

Um, so I'll I'll I'll leave it at that.

That's just just thoughts from me, so thanks.

Thank you.

Further discussion.

So do I.

Seeing uh, Councilman Call.

Thank you, Valencia.

Uh first, let's introduce yourself, Braun Windley, because I believe it's the first time you were at the table with me, at least.

Oh, with you, yes, I was here to start.

A little few minutes ago, but I missed it.

But thank you.

I appreciate that.

Okay, okay, but Rowan, you are acting fleet manager, fleet manager.

Okay, and we all know you, Jen, of course.

We know our chief over here.

So, um, yeah, basically, you know, it was a good ELA meeting last time.

Um identifying the new monies that are the administration, which did a wonderful job working with our nonprofits, and so it's just exactly how I anticipated it.

I hope I had hoped for, I guess.

And um, you know, it's good to see the mayor going out making good on it.

I mean, we have it creates problems for us in ways, which like well, how many vehicles?

What vehicles, which we have all of our directors kind of identifying, and you all are just taking their advice and seeing what makes sense, what doesn't make sense, and we're gonna come up with our list and start purchasing vehicles.

Is that right?

That is the plan.

Yeah, buying the land.

We have been, yes.

It has been a very busy purchasing year, and it's been exciting just because you know, as we were discussing earlier, we have maintenance costs that are rising, and having that new fleet in place is really gonna hopefully see those prices decline.

Yeah, no doubt.

And it's gonna take a year or so to really see absolutely any sort of significant decrease.

But I mean, we're already knowing that we have like these new dump trucks coming in from the PNC gift, um, you know, there's already, you know, dumps that we're like we're not fixing this.

We're chasing good money and we're decommissioning them already, knowing that in the fall, they're gonna have new ones.

So this will eventually end up helping with our expenses with trans debt.

This will eventually help out in many ways.

Um again, there are challenges.

We can't just go buy a whole new fleet for EMS or anybody in particular, but it is good that we have certain parameters we have to go by, and that helps us prioritize what we can spend.

But money is outside of the nonprofits that we could spend on the vehicles um that are that are needed.

We spoke specifically about fire uh at the last meeting, and um they're in a pretty bad situation.

We gotta hope that you know, certain vehicles stay or ladder trucks, I believe, uh stay running.

I don't think that Ralph and the unions too confident that that will happen.

But that's a tricky situation because it takes so long to get the fire apparatus and to get it equipped and geared for what they need as Pittsburgh firefighters.

So, you know, we'll figure it out.

But again, we're not without challenges, just because we're flushed with cash now, um, does create any challenges.

Do you want to say anything about the fire?

I mean, I I feel comfortable that we're we're gonna be ordering in the future.

What they need in five years from now, it'll be ancient history, I hope, but uh fire we have to worry about specifically, I feel like for the next couple of years.

We have multiple RFPs for multiple types of apparatus already on the street.

Um, the ladder trucks and the pumpers will be closing next week, so we'll have an idea of cost, then to see, you know, like with the roughly seven million that we have left from council moving that extra money over.

Um now that we know how much all the snow stuff is gonna cost, and once we get that pricing, and we'll have a much better idea of what we can and can't buy for fire, how much, how many.

Um we're looking at all options, all options are on the table, um, for you know, especially now with this new um gift of uh four million a year for five years.

Um, what's the best?

You know, how are we gonna get the most bang for our buck in in making the most out of that?

I trust you will.

I you know, you've we're looking at everything, we're gonna look at all angles, you know.

So it's a good problem to have, but you know, it's um exactly.

We knew problems, but they're not terrible problems to have.

Yeah, right, no doubt, no doubt.

Okay, well, thank you again.

Uh thank you, madam chair.

That's that's it for me.

Thank you.

Any further discussion?

Second round, Councilmember Warwick.

Uh just one thing, correct me if I'm wrong, but just to kind of put it into context, is um at the ELA, the meeting before last, right?

We got the list from all the departments for the replay for like what they would like to replace, right?

Vehicles that that are ready to be replaced.

And I think the total added up to like 50 million.

It was actually more than that after you included the additions.

It came to 62 million.

Yeah.

The ask was close to 157 vehicles.

Yeah.

So, yeah, so it was like 50 million of just replace like that's just the vehicles that departments are like, we need a new one of these, and and then an additional to and like you know, new additional vehicles to do more work, right, to improve services.

Um, and you know, we had to request just so that just to not send something ridiculous over to the to the to the you know, the budget, the capital budget committee.

Um, we had to ask that your team pare that down to 20 million, I believe.

Yeah, and we actually kind of kept it more reasonable than that.

We try to keep it closer to 15, right?

Because it was what was realistic in terms of actual submissions and their time and and whatnot.

We had to be considerate of that.

Um, but yeah, we felt like that was a good anchoring number to start from.

Yeah, so so just to be clear, like if you know, if we could do uh, you know, if we could really meet the need, we would have we would be spending sixty million dollars next year on vehicles, right?

But we had to pare it down to you know, just an ask of fifteen, and you don't get what you ask for necessarily.

So I just to kind of keep it clear for everybody what we're talking about, uh, you know, running a city, like the amount of vehicles that you need to run a city is significant, and it's definitely not not sexy, but um, but it's necessary for those basic city services and for every department, every department that that we have here at the city of Pittsburgh.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Further discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 651, please say aye.

Aye, aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Thank you all.

Bill 659.

Resolution authorizing the Pittsburgh Land Bank to acquire all the city's right, title, and interest, if any, in and to the publicly owned properties in the 18th ward of the City of Pittsburgh, designated in the deed registry office of Allegheny County as block 15 M.

Lots 249, 250, 251, 252, 254, 255, 265, 266, 0 Shelfont Street, Council District 3, at no cost to the city.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of bill 659, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 660.

Resolution authorizing the Pittsburgh Land Bank to acquire all the city's right, title, and interest, if any, in and to the publicly owned properties in the 12th ward of the city of Pittsburgh, designated in the deed registry office of Allegheny County as block 125A, lot 375, 169 Auburn Street, Council District 9 at no cost to the city.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 660, please say aye.

Hi, hi.

Affirmative recommendation.

That exhausts our standing committee's agenda.

We do have announcements.

This afternoon at 1 30 p.m.

Council will hold a cable cast post-agenda on the downtown Pittsburgh Transit Revitalization and Investment District Implementation Plan chaired by Council Member Mosley.

This Friday, July third, City Clerk and Council Offices will be closed in observance of the Independence Day holiday.

Next week, Council will hold their regular meeting on Tuesday, July 7th, and Standing Committee's meeting on Wednesday, July 8th, both at 10 a.m.

Speaker registration will close at 9 a.m.

Tuesday and Wednesday mornings.

To register to speak at any of these meetings, please complete the sign-up form on the council meeting webpage or contact the clerk's office at 412-255-2138 by the applicable registration deadline.

Is there anything from members?

Seeing none, I'll take a motion to excuse the absent members, approve the minutes and adjourn the meeting.

So moved.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Meeting is adjourned.