Public Hearing on Bill 2026-0518: East Carson Street Improvement District – July 8, 2026

On Wednesday, July 8, 2026, at 1:30 PM in Council Chambers, Pittsburgh City Council’s Committee on Hearings and Policy held a public hearing on Ordinance 2026-0518, which would establish an East Carson Street Neighborhood Improvement District (NID) and a Neighborhood Improvement District Management Association (NIDMA) for the South Side business corridor. The hearing was chaired by Council Member Charland and attended by Council President Lavelle, Council Members Coghill, Salonetro, and Gross (who joined later). The proposal, drafted by the East Carson Street Business District Advisory Committee, would assess commercial property owners based on linear frontage to fund enhanced maintenance, marketing, economic development, and public space improvements. The hearing featured a presentation from the project sponsors, testimony from over 20 registered and unregistered speakers, and closing remarks from Council Member Charland outlining next steps.

Public Comments & Testimony

Supporting Testimony (Registered Speakers):

• Representative Jessica Benham (State House, approximately half the district in her jurisdiction) – Acknowledged the extensive planning process and the four focus areas (maintenance, brand, economic development, events). Urged council to weigh opportunities and equity concerns, including assessment structure and performance evaluation over the five-year term.
• Marie Rotondo Senko (Banksville resident, South Side property owner) – Opposed. Cited 88 years of family history, rising taxes (county, city, school, library, park, transfer tax), and argued the NID would be an additional financial deterrent. Stated public safety is the root issue, not window dressing. Urged using existing resources (RAD funds, chamber, real estate agents) instead.
• Peter Morgataye (President, South Side Chamber of Commerce) – Supported. Recalled the success of the South Side Local Development Company (SSLDC) which reduced vacancy from 45% to 13% before funding ended in 2012. After closure, vacancy rose to 23% by 2024. With a part-time district manager funded by a grant, vacancy dropped to 15%. Warned that without permanent resources, progress will stall.
• Anna Campbell (15-year resident, business owner on 20th block) – Supported. Noted net positive changes under the current district manager: filled vacancies, boarded buildings turned into art, graffiti removal. Emphasized that stakeholders will comprise the majority of the NIDMA board and that the NIDMA will attract matching grants.
• Kristen Kovasik (156 South 19th Street) – Supported. Described South Side as an ideal walkable neighborhood for retirees. Feared that without focused investment, undeserved reputation and media alarm will further erode the commercial core.
• James McNeil (Managing Director, City Theater) – Supported. City Theater chose to remain independent and on the South Side. The proposed NIDMA would help create a South Side Arts Alliance and Creative Corridor. Stated that a stronger business district increases theater audiences.
• Rebecca Kasovich (Owner, Copies on Carson, 1315 East Carson) – Supported. Expressed frustration with outsiders causing problems and media portrayal. Argued the NIDMA puts control in the hands of the community, is not a tax but a managed assessment, and can be eliminated after five years if not working.
• Jimmy Hoffman (Owner, Mario’s on East Carson) – Supported. Met his wife at Mario’s, raised children because of the business. COVID decimated momentum. A dedicated district manager (Susan Anderson) has improved coordination. The NIDMA would make investment sustainable for future generations.
• Don Carlson (Former first Executive Director of SSLDC) – Supported. Recalled the Titans of the South Side who built the business district. The NIDMA would replicate the success of the 1980s and 1990s.
• John DiMarro (Property owner, resident, chair of East Carson Street Advisory Committee) – Supported. Emphasized that 94% of respondents in the latest survey supported contributing to a management association, and 91% supported boundaries. The city has limited resources; self-investment is necessary.
• Dr. Barbara Rudyak (1908 Jane Street, former President of South Side Community Council) – Supported. Described eight years of volunteer efforts that failed to secure grants. The current district manager has shown what can be done; without the NIDMA, volunteers are burned out.
• Clay Lynn Nassar (Resident since 1992, property owner) – Supported. When SSLDC was active, the South Side was the safest neighborhood. After funding was withdrawn, empty storefronts and unruly bars emerged. The NIDMA would restore the historic Victorian district.
• Michelle Margatai (138 South 15th Street, real estate owner) – Supported. Even though her property is outside the district, she would voluntarily contribute. Argued the city lacks resources; other Pittsburgh neighborhoods (Oakland, Downtown) have successful improvement districts. Doing nothing will lead to more vacancies and declining property values.
• Don Berman (58 South 17th Street, President of South Side Community Action Network) – Supported. Called the NIDMA an insurance policy on a billion-dollar asset. The successful pilot with a business district manager proved the model works.
• Jackie Kaiser (President, South Side Community Council) – Supported. Quoted Jane Jacobs. Stated that a successful corridor requires intentional management. The NIDMA would transition from short-term fixes to long-term stewardship.
• Chris Furman (Owner, Enclave, 1602 East Carson) – Supported. Opened Enclave in 2022; saw improved coordination after the district manager was hired. Stressed that volunteers alone cannot sustain the momentum.
• Dina Clavon (48 South 15th Street, resident, business owner) – Supported. Her commercial property was initially outside the boundary; she asked to be included to participate.
• Amy Camp (3106 Jane Street, former SSLDC employee) – Supported. Attended PA Downtown Conference; recalled East Carson Street receiving the Great American Main Street Award in 1996. The NIDMA is the next step in stewarding the historic district.
• Laura Stewart (South Side Slopes, spoke via video late) – Supported. New business owner and former public servant. Stated that safety investments are cost-effective ($21,000 per incident prevented vs. $60,000 cost of one crime). Public art can change street perception.
• Scott Kramer (Property owner on Carson Street) – Supported. Owned multiple businesses over 30 years.
• Jeff Gubauer (17th Street) – Supported. Emphasized retaining momentum.

Opposing Testimony (Registered and Unregistered Speakers):

• Unregistered speaker (first) – Opposed. Challenged the 94% support figure, claiming 40% are against. Questioned the need for multiple district managers and studies. Stated public safety is the core issue, not taxing. Accused supporters of failing to deliver results.
• Lynn Gable (1509 East Carson Street) – Opposed. Presented a bill for unauthorized use of her sidewalk during a festival (July 4, 10 PM–2 AM). She had denied permission but a vendor was placed regardless. Criticized festival management: residents were told only two beer tents with fenced areas, but open containers were allowed from 18th to 12th Street. She stated her property has been damaged by stray bullets, fights, vandalism, and drug activity. Called the NIDMA a “money grab” and “HOAT” (Homeowners Association Tax).
• Dan McSwiggin (Owner, Cambod-ican Kitchen, 1701 East Carson) – Opposed. Recounted saving lives from stabbings and overdoses. Police allegedly told him they would not respond to his address unless he paid extra. Argued taxes already cover public safety; this is another tax with no guarantee of services.
• Bob Zilch (CMS Housing, 2850 East Carson – Carson Street Retirement Residences) – On the fence/expressed concerns. CMS manages affordable housing units. Their property has the highest assessment in the district, but it is farther from the core commercial area. Questioned the front-foot methodology and whether assessments are fair.

Discussion Items

Presentation by Sponsors:

• Susan Anderson (East Carson Street Business District Manager) and Mary McKinney Flaherty (Deputy Director of Economic Development for Mayor O’Connor) presented the proposal. Key points:
  • East Carson Street is the nation’s largest Victorian Main Street but has fallen behind: vacancy rate approached 24% early last year, commercial values dropped, and public safety is a concern.
  • Over two years, a 25-member advisory committee was formed, two surveys were conducted. Support grew from 66% to 94% in favor.
  • The NIDMA is a self-funded improvement district like the Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership (founded 1997) and Oakland BID. Property owners pay assessments based on linear frontage (average $1,000 per year). Only commercial properties are assessed; residential and government properties are exempt.
  • The assessment cap: increases no more than three times over five years, never more than 5% each time, and never above inflation.
  • The NIDMA would focus on four priorities identified by stakeholders: cleaner sidewalks/graffiti removal (68% priority), district brand/image (68%), economic vitality/storefront activation (62%), and events/marketing (50%).
  • The proposal is a draft; feedback will be incorporated, and a second mailing and public hearing will occur.
• Mary McKinney Flaherty added: This model works across Pennsylvania (Philadelphia has over a dozen, all renewed). No new cost to the city; protected tax base; five-year term with sunset. The NIDMA would be a new accountable partner for coordinating city resources.

Council Comments:

• Councilwoman Salonetro – Noted the passion in the room and wished everyone the best. Her district does not have such a long business corridor.
• Councilwoman Gross – Thanked attendees for their time and effort in providing solutions and counterpoints.
• Council Member Charland (Chair) – Thanked all for participating. Stated that the neighborhood works together and that he is privileged to represent it. Announced next steps: the legislation will come back to council next week, can be amended, a second mailing will go out, and a second public hearing will be held.

Key Outcomes

• Public hearing held on Bill 2026-0518. The hearing was conducted as scheduled; the legislation will be referred to the Committee on Finance and Law (per meeting minutes).
• Council Member Charland confirmed that the proposal is in draft form and will be revised based on feedback from this hearing and future input.
• A second mailing and a second public hearing will be scheduled before a final vote.
• Council will consider amendments when the bill returns next week.
• No vote was taken at this hearing.